Special Episodes Archives - The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies

We love it when we get to chat with some of our podcast friends, and this week we got to catch up with the hilarious Liv Albert from ‘Let’s talk about myths, baby!’ to talk about relationships between gods and mortals.

Please be warned, this episode does contain references to sexual assault.

Special Episode – Gods and Mortals with Liv Albert

The lovely Liv Albert herself!

When we get together with Liv, we pick a theme and compare the Roman and Greek myths on the topic. This episode, we decided to compare what each civilisation had to say about gods and mortals get involved with each other.

We found some interesting points of divergence as we delved into the tales of Rhea Silvia and Mars, Servius Tullius and Fortuna, and Aphrodite and Anchises.

Join us for this mini-myth conversation!

Our music is by Bettina Joy de Guzman.

The post Special Episode – Gods and Mortals with Liv Albert appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

We sit down with Casie Vogel, VP Publisher at Ulysses Press to talk about the process of bringing an ancient Roman history book into the world and some of the cheeky details about the past that Casie learnt along the way.

To celebrate the publication of ‘Your Cheeky Guide to the Roman Empire’ this special episode is even in video form!

Join us as we talk about books, publishing, and ancient Rome (of course)!

Your Cheeky Guide to the Roman Empire is out now! We hope you love it as much as we enjoyed writing it. Have a chat to your local independent bookstore about getting a copy or two in or let your library know that you’d love them to keep a copy in their collection.

Libraries are a bastion of hope and a refuge for so many and surely a joy-filled exploration of Rome is just the ticket!

This is what the tome looks like it in all its glory!

US – You can read more about the book as well as how to order it at Ulysses Press.

UK – If you’re based in the UK, check out Bookshop.org

Australia – If you’re based in Australia, check out Abbey’s Bookstore, Booktopia, or check in with your local independent bookseller.

Our music is by the amazing Bettina Joy de Guzman.

The header image includes the highly detailed, but very idealised imagining of ancient Rome at its height by Thomas Cole. This painting dates to 1836 and is part of the series The Course of Empire. This painting in particular is entitled The Consummation. There are vibrant crowds of people on a bridge crossing the Tiber surrounded by white buildings with hints of gold everywhere.

The post Your Cheeky Guide to the Roman Empire with Ulysses Press appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

We are thrilled to release the final cheeky preview from our new book, Your Cheeky Guide to the Roman Empire. The final chapter from our ‘With a Rebel Yell’ bonus material is entitled ‘Last Man Standing: Masada’. This bonus episode is coming out on the very same day that our book officially hits the shelves. Huzzah!

The Final Cheeky Preview – Last Man Standing: Masada

We hope you enjoy listening to the fascinating tale of the final stand in the First Jewish Revolt (or Great Jewish Revolt). The literary and archaeological sources for this event pose just as many questions as they answer!

Want to hear about our other favourite rebels? Check out the chapters on Spartacus and Zenobia!

And of course, if you enjoy this chapter, you might like to grab yourself a copy of the book! It is available on Amazon, or ask at your local independent bookstore.

Our music is by Bettina Joy de Guzman.

The post The Final Cheeky Preview – Last Man Standing: Masada appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

We are in shock that it has taken us this long to cover the cult classic that is Monty Python’s Life of Brian (1979). We have Rslaugesen over on Patreon to thank for pointing out this glaring oversight.

Special Episode – Monty Python’s Life of Brian (1979)

Once we got started, it was hard for us to stop talking about the Life of Brian. British comedy was a staple of our childhoods and Monty Python was one of our favourites. It was a treat to follow the development of this movie from Jesus Christ: Lust for Glory to a Sliding Doors-style story of Brian Cohen, born in the manger over from Christ.   

A still from Life of Brian showing Brian’s followers admiring his sandal, one of the sacred objects he unwittingly bestows upon them. Courtesy of FM Cinema.

Whilst Monty Python were probably trying to make a parody of 1970s Britain rather than a historically accurate portrait of first century CE Judea, we still found this film intriguing. From wolf’s nipples to imperialism, we take you through all the best Roman scenes… and perhaps a few non-Roman scenes as well. Who can resist talking about the Virgin Mandy?

Part of the appeal of Life of Brian is the fact that it is not afraid to make fun of the Romans (or anyone) and shows a much less glamorous side of the empire. Quite the contrast to the epics of the 1950s and 1960s.

Things to Look Out For:

Comedies don’t always stand the test of time. We can spot some awkward moments in the film, but overall, we think Life of Brian stands the test of time. Forty-five years after it’s release, we would love to know whether you agree!

Our music is by Bettina Joy de Guzman.

Dr Rad 0:15
Music. Welcome to the partial historians.

Dr G 0:18
We explore all the details of ancient Rome,

Dr Rad 0:23
everything from political scandals, the love affairs, the battles waged and when citizens turn against each other. I’m Dr Rad and

Dr G 0:33
I’m Dr G, we consider Rome as the Romans saw it, by reading different authors from the ancient past and comparing their stories.

Dr Rad 0:44
Join us as we trace the journey of Rome from the founding of the city.

Hello and welcome to a special episode of the partial historians. I am one of your hosts. Dr Rad,

Dr G 1:07
and I am. Dr G, we are thrilled to be here.

Dr Rad 1:12
We are because today we are returning once more to my home, away from homes, Hollywood. Well, not really, Hollywood, actually,

Dr G 1:21
really, do you do you holiday in Hollywood? Actually,

Dr Rad 1:24
No I hate Hollywood, but we are returning to Rome at the movies, which is my safe space.

Dr G 1:32
I do like this space as well, and over the years, I feel like I’ve learned a lot from you and your expertise in this area. So I’m super excited for this episode.

Dr Rad 1:42
It is very kind of you to say, especially because I cannot understand Latin

Dr G 1:48
comes and goes.

Dr Rad 1:51
All right, so Dr, G, today we are actually looking at a British version of Rome on screen, and that is Monty Python’s Life of Brian, and I cannot believe we have not talked about it until this point.

Dr G 2:08
I know this is very exciting, and this has come about because of a Patreon request, which I think is excellent as well. Interested in the depiction of Rome on screen in what is essentially a satire of the period, but also the broader question of, what has Rome ever done for the provinces? I

Dr Rad 2:29
make so many Monty Python puns, it is actually insulting that we haven’t talked about these films at all. I mean, look, okay, I’m gonna, I’m gonna set the scene personally a little bit here. Dr, G, so. Dr G, you and I are Australian. Oh, God. Now because we’re Australians of a certain age, I don’t know about you, but I grew up watching a lot of British television. I think these days British culture is maybe less of a thing for anyone growing up in Australia. And obviously a lot of Australians don’t grow up here. And even even for our age group, it was probably because of my background being like Anglo background as well. That’s why I was watching that kind of stuff. But it was also because they were like four television channels, and I feel like the British influence was fairly strong, along with American influence and that sort of thing. I certainly watched American TV as well, but there were a lot of reruns on television that you would watch after school, and so I watched a lot of 50s, 60s, 70s television as a child born somewhere in the 80s, I won’t tell you where. I don’t know, is it the same for you?

Dr G 3:42
Yeah, by and large. So my father is English, so I think that has stronger,

Dr Rad 3:48
yeah, the force is strong with this one.

Dr G 3:51
Ah the imperialism. But this meant that there was a preference for British shows when I was a child, growing up in our household over American TV programming, yeah? So there tended to be rules around what you could watch that came out of America, whereas for English things and British things, it was much more sort of open slather, yeah, and the family was happy to oblige if you wanted to watch some Monty Python, yeah. And

Dr Rad 4:18
look, I think there’s something to be said for still to this day, there’s a certain brand to Australian humor that I think will always have a bit of a legacy in the British connection, in the sense that, if I think about the sort of reruns I would watch from America, they were very much like, Oh, darling. Did you get sauce on your tie again? Canned laughter. Whereas the British shows that I tended to watch growing up were, I think, a little bit more tongue in cheek, more absurdist,

Dr G 4:47
yeah, less canned laughter. It was really just waiting for you to laugh, and you got to choose when,

Dr Rad 4:54
yeah. So that’s my personal background. So I think that’s why Monty Python was very much a part of. Of my upbringing, along with other things that I consider to be classics like Black Adder. Ah,

Dr G 5:06
yes, another a love story. Yes, exactly

Dr Rad 5:08
like Black Adder, Are You Being Served Dad’s Army? I mean, the list goes on and on and on.

Dr G 5:15
And look, I was a great fan of red dwarf as well. I

Dr Rad 5:19
see I never actually watched that one anyway. I definitely was aware of it, even though I didn’t watch it myself. So yeah,

Dr G 5:27
yeah, there is a tendency in British humor from these periods to lean into class critique, which might be somewhere to start with. This film

Dr Rad 5:38
might be relevant indeed. All right, so let’s maybe start, I thought, with a basic overview of what this film is even about. And warning to you all, this will contain spoilers, but you’ve had decades to see in the film, because it came out before I was born.

Dr G 5:52
It came out in 1979 so we’re definitely younger than that.

Dr Rad 5:56
And look, there is a very quick way to sum up the basic premise of this film. So it is a film about Brian Cohen, a young man who happens to be born in the manger over from Jesus, and from there on, kind of lives a somewhat parallel life to Jesus Christ, in that he lives in the same area, in the same hood. This is the sliding doors of Jesus. It is, it is the sliding doors of Jesus. And so we basically follow the life story of Brian Cohen and see what happens in the time period in which he’s living, which is around, you know, somewhere in the 30s, CE, because it is in the year of our Lord, obviously. And so it kind of starts with the Nativity and goes through to Brian’s death in his sort of mid 30s, which is obviously around the same age that Jesus presumably was, if we take those dates to be accurate.

Dr G 6:50
Well, there’s some reasonable historical evidence for a man called Jesus, there is in this time period, and we’re in your favorite Imperial time period as well. This is Tiberius. I know time to shine. I

Dr Rad 7:02
know. I know not many people I think know that Tiberius was the emperor in charge when Jesus Christ was

Dr G 7:08
crucified. I think more people would dislike Tiberius if they knew that well. I

Dr Rad 7:12
mean, look, I’m gonna say something controversial here, but to be honest, I don’t think he was deeply involved with what was happening. I think that’s kind of part of the problem.

Dr G 7:21
Look, the man at the top of the pile who’s ostensibly in charge of everything, says it’s not his responsibility. He doesn’t hold the hose.

Dr Rad 7:28
Well, look, I’m just gonna say there are a lot of people that were crucified underneath Roman imperial rule, and even before the Empire existed, and Jesus is just one of them. In my book, controversy, but that’s because I should say I am not a Christian, so

Dr G 7:48
neither am I, although I think this film is quite respectful of religion, a lot of people agreed consider it to be blasphemous and to be a film that is heretical in nature, but they generally don’t touch the story of Jesus at all. In this film, it is very much focused on Brian and his adventures, yeah, and, but I just think is more to do with fanaticism. And, yeah, how people get into sort of cults of belief,

Dr Rad 8:16
exactly? And I just said, I should say, as my own personal perspective, I’m not a Christian. So I’m not coming at this subject with any particular reverence. I know of Jesus because of obviously being raised in a at the time, largely Christian country, and also because the culture around me when I was growing up was largely Christian. And also because, you know Rome, you know the more that you study Rome, the more you come into contact with it. But I wouldn’t identify wouldn’t

Dr G 8:43
identify as a Christian. The deeper get into Roman history, the more you get into early Christianity. That

Dr Rad 8:47
is true Exactly, exactly, anyway. So to give a bit of background to people who might be less familiar with Monty Python, I thought maybe we could give a little bit of a pitted history of Monty Python. So Monty Python are a beloved to most people. I think comedy troupe and they kind of came about in British society. I think a really interesting time, you know, as like the landscape, I think was changing in terms of cultural values, cultural criticism and comedy and that sort of thing. But they’re actually very highly educated men. You know, a lot of them came from degrees at Oxford and Cambridge, where they were studying things like medicine, law and, of course, history. And while they were there, though, they got involved in comedy. Obviously, those particular universities are known to have pretty legendary comedy groups like the footlights, and they ended up getting involved in writing and performing the various comedy shows that were seen as being kind of at the forefront of comedy at the time, like being quite cutting edge. So, for example, Do Not Adjust Your Set, The Frost Report. And at last, The 1948 show. And these were all kind of, a lot of them were kind of sketch shows, and that sort of. Where they were working on things for the BBC. They ended up teaming together because they had encountered each other either at university or they met each other working on these sorts of shows. And they came together as Monty Python’s Flying Circus, where they produced a television show for the BBC between the years of 1969 and 1974 and the men involved, of course, being Graham Chapman, Terry Jones, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, John Cleese and Michael Palin. And something to note, perhaps, is that I don’t believe that Monty Python’s Flying Circus as a show was actually screened in the USA until 1974 so it kind of be started to be shown in sort of the mid 70s across the pond as this

Dr G 10:45
interesting. Okay, so they get a late start into the US. Yeah,

Dr Rad 10:49
a little bit of a later start. Yeah, exactly. And they always, I think, therefore, appealed to people who were because of their style of comedy, which was really as it came out of a lot of a lot of these shows, and also was influenced by people like Spike Milligan and his brand of comedy. But it was different in the way that they would set up a sketch. It didn’t have to have a punch line. It was it was absurdist, as you said before, that was kind of their sense of humor. It was very much satire of British society and particularly the British class system, that’s a lot of what their sketches sort of focused on, and that sort of thing when they were making the television show. And so as a result, I suppose, given that they’re coming about, sort of like the late 60s, early 70s as a group, I think we can kind of see how that’s obviously a key time in society where we know that there are people who are starting to be more questioning and critical of the status quo,

Dr G 11:47
and this is the post war generation that are now hitting adulthood, and they’ve got some hard questions to ask about the society that has been built around them in that landscape and as a consequence of those war the 20th century. So,

Dr Rad 12:02
yeah, exactly. So Monty Python as a group started to transition away from television and into making motion pictures together. I don’t think they ever had like necessarily the hugest audience when they were on TV, but they certainly had a very decent sized audience, and they were tending to be more like appealing to like intellectual people or people with a slight intellectual bent, because their comedy is very clever, to be honest. They’ve actually been criticized for, I think, bringing a little bit too much of their sort of university level of education to their types of sketches. But anyway, so they started making movies, so perhaps the biggest hit that most people would have heard of before Life of Brian is, of course, Monty Python and the search for the Holy Grail, a classic. Indeed it is. But a lot of their films still reflected their background in sketch comedy. And the interesting thing about Monty Python, I always thought is that when I watched them as a younger person, I kind of always thought that they were very clever people who were getting together and riffing, you know, and that’s kind of how their stuff came about. But actually, because they were all highly experienced writer performers, and they had that background before they even got together, but then obviously together, they sort of brought that stuff from their background. They actually were extremely, I think, methodical in that they tended to really write things and rehearse them, and it was all very carefully planned so that obviously the humor and the joke that they were aiming for would sort of come through in the final product. So I think they sort of give the impression sometimes that they were improvising, but actually it was all quite planned out, yes.

Dr G 13:40
And I think if you watch, go back and watch Monty Python’s Flying Circus, it is very, I would say today, hit and miss, oh yeah, at the time was uniquely constructed, yes, for things that were emerging in that time period, the idea that they didn’t really care about plot. For instance, no Life of Brian is considered the first film that they do which is plot driven, because while holy grail comes out a few years earlier, and it does have something of a plot, there is also insertions of random sketches and chaotic bits and pieces. So there is a sequence that leads you to understand a plot, but Life of Brian is scripted and does seem to have a very clear narrative arc. Yes,

Dr Rad 14:29
absolutely and but even so, I think, I think that reflects something in their style of writing. So because they were all writer performers, Terry Gilliam, obviously, is more known as he was a performer, obviously, with the group, and he did contribute, but he more contributed, I think, in terms of his animations, which are obviously a huge part of Monty Python’s esthetic. But, yeah, but most of the rest of them, they are writer performers, and I think that the way that they would approach things is that they would go away and just write. You know, they would go. And write. And they tended to sometimes, I think even split off into particular grouping within the wider troupe. Like, I think Graham Chapman and John Cleese worked quite closely together a lot of the time. And I think think Terry Jones and Michael Palin might have worked together a lot of the time, but nonetheless, they would sort of go away and write bits and pieces and then start to come back and sort of compare notes and bring it together. So you can kind of see how, even when they’re writing a narrative film, I think it still kind of starts with, like sketches and scenes that they can use as a basis of something, and then bring it together. Yeah, so Life of Brian, it is universally, I think, accepted. Had it through in this moment where they were asked, after Holy Grail, what was going to be their next project? And they replied, Jesus Christ, lust for glory, which was a pun based on a film that had come out in 1970 pattern, lust for glory. But it did obviously germinate. Yeah, there was the seed

Dr G 15:56
had been planted. One facetious remark, I believe, by Eric Idle, yes, exactly. Then gets expanded into like, oh, maybe we should consider an angle on the life of Jesus and the sorts of things that might be up for critique and lampooning here,

Dr Rad 16:14
yes, exactly. And they actually went away and did their research. And when they did their research, they found that Jesus Christ is actually not terribly funny.

Dr G 16:24
This is a very serious subject matter and not one to be laughed at. Because, actually, as far as I understand it, they came to the conclusion that the message that Jesus is offering is genuinely a good one, yeah, and there’s not much to be laughed at. There, no,

Dr Rad 16:38
no, exactly. And so because they didn’t find that Jesus himself or his message was necessarily anything to be laughed at. They started playing around with ideas of what was happening around him that we could possibly work with. And they had a few ideas. I believe one of them was having a 13th disciple, and Brian would be that particular character who was always the one who unlucky, yeah, he was always the one that missed the miracle. So they played around with that idea, but eventually they decided on the idea of having a parallel life set up for their particular narrative. Thus Brian Cohen was born, and I think the idea as well was that they found, as you said earlier, the way that people engage with religion, particularly the way that people were engaging with various cults at this time, was what was funny, not necessarily like it was easy enough to make fun at people who, you know, take things too far or take things too seriously, rather than the person that the religion is based around. So it’s more the Messiah fervor that they decided to make fun of.

Dr G 17:44
Yeah, yeah. So that real interest in that there, there is some sort of Savior figure that they can be identified, and then, once identified, must be followed, yes, and how you go about demonstrating your loyalty to a messiah. All of this is up for a little bit of a joke in this film. Yes, exactly.

Dr Rad 18:02
So they were able to use the sets from a TV show that had been filmed by Franco zifarelli on Jesus of Nazareth as the basis for their sets, because that’s convenient. That saves money. Yeah, and they decided to film in Tunisia. Legendarily, they were going to be making this film with EMI, but EMI decided that it was way too

Dr G 18:24
blasphemous. Do not want to get in trouble with Christians. Exactly.

Dr Rad 18:29
Basically, there was, like a Roman Catholic friend of like the chief executive, a guy called Lord Bernard del font, yeah, who said this is way too close to blasphemy, or indeed, is blasphemy, and so EMI pulled the financing because Eric idol and George Harrison, yes, that George Harrison were friends. George Harrison helped them to get financing, as well as putting up a million pounds himself. I

Dr G 18:55
kind of love that, like one of the Beatles is involved and is crucial to the story of this film. I love that exactly.

Dr Rad 19:01
And ended up making a small cameo as the owner of the mount in the film. And he did that just because he was a fan of Monty Python, and he just kind of wanted to see what they did with his particular story. And so that’s how they ended up being able to go off to Tunisia and film this particular movie, which happened, I think it was written very quickly. I think it was filmed quite quickly. And this is because, again, as I said to you, like the way that Monty Python do things they do, I think actually plan things out far more than people might realize. As a result, a lot of their stuff was put together relatively quickly for a movie. But

Dr G 19:35
yes, yeah, I think there was a couple of years there of preparation and definitely some delays when EMI pulled out absolutely and then they got back on track after George Harrison got involved. And then

Dr Rad 19:46
so the film is obviously set in the province of Judea, a province of the Roman Empire at this point in time. And obviously it’s meant to be around the 30s, where most of the action takes place, or it. It for the manger nativity scene, obviously, where Brian and Jesus have won right at the beginning.

Dr G 20:06
I mean, it’s still in the same area and still kind of under Roman control at that time as well, although probably the client King Herod is in charge around

Dr Rad 20:16
that time, I was gonna say it’s a bit of historical setting for you all. So Herod, the great, was in charge of Judea. Well, sorry, was in charge of a whole region until about four BCE, which is when he died, which obviously would be around the time that Jesus were born, or maybe a few years before. The Dating is obviously a bit speculative. And Augustus had been in charge at that point in time, and he ended up splitting the kingdom of Herod, the great between his sons. So Herod Antipas was set up in Galilee as the tetrarch, and he would be there until around 39 CE. So just after the events that we’re focusing on transpired, Philip was set up as the Tetrarch of Golan Heights until around 3040, and Herod Archelaus was the leader of Judea at around, well at first, but see, the thing was, I believe that he became a bit of a problematic leader and was removed. And this is, this is what kind of started to stir up trouble in this region, like his removal and the rival factions that existed within Judea at this point in time, which weren’t actually initially, necessarily hugely anti Roman, which is kind of the impression you might get from watching Life of Brian. There certainly were anti Roman groups by the time. But you know, as you, as you travel through, but really the around the time of Jesus, I’m not sure how many anti Roman groups there were. I think there was a lot of more factional, regional fighting going on and rivalry. I

Dr G 21:50
think you’ve got a lot to think about when you get to the fallout of Herod, the great so a client King inserted by Rome in order to ensure stability that is a product of the Roman education system, so coming into an area of which he is local too. And so this is something that the Romans tended to do quite a lot, is that they take families of high significance, politically as hostages, then raise their children in Rome and then send them back out to rule as a friend of Rome in their place. And so trying to secure regions like this, from a Roman perspective, was all about, well, how can we make the local politics work in our favor? Absolutely, yeah. And so I think there is a sense underlying that kind of activity, which suggests that Rome understood that this was a little bit far out of their reach, that they needed somebody on the ground to do Roman work in a Roman way that wouldn’t be completely offensive to the local people, and understood the local cultural norms and things like that. So when we think about this region, and I feel like it stands out for me really pertinently in this time period when we’re recording, having seen what is happening in Palestine and what is happening with modern Israel, and the horrific amount of death that is going on there that these complexities have a very, very long history, absolutely,

Dr Rad 23:25
yeah, yeah, because Judea is roughly modern Israel, Palestine together, like roughly, roughly, yeah, yeah.

Dr G 23:33
It doesn’t map on exactly, but this whole area has a very long history of complex relationships and also a sense in which who has a priority over areas of land exactly. And when you split something like a client Kingdom amongst it was supposed to be four sons, that’s why we’re calling them tetrarchs, but one of them ends up having half of the region. Yeah, that’s a bit of a problem already. And he’s the problematic one that gets removed, right? And then you have to bring in, then Rome’s like, Okay, well, we’ll send in some real we’ll send in Romans. Yes, you know, we’ll have a visual Roman presence in this region of the province of Judea. We’ll turn it into a province. It’s no longer a client king. You guys cannot look after yourselves. We’ve got too much at stake in this area. Yeah, we want to have control of it. We’ll send our own people. And so by the time we get to the really key parts of the narrative that are the Life of Brian, we’re dealing with Pontius Pilate.

Dr Rad 24:38
We are better known to everybody who’s seen Jesus Christ Superstar as Pontius Pilate.

Dr G 24:44
Pontius Pilate, well, I like calling him Pontius Pilate as well, because it makes me think of airplanes. But the Latin is Pontius Pilate, yes.

Dr Rad 24:55
And he was a prefect of Judea from around 26 CE to. Be 36 CE.

Dr G 25:01
So he sees all of the key political things that are going to make the Christians very mad, like

Dr Rad 25:08
there for it all. So he is there underneath, as you said, the Anthro Tiberius is,

Dr G 25:15
keep that in mind, everybody Tiberius was in charge,

Dr Rad 25:20
not gonna deny it good. Now, of course, the background of all of this is that there’s also a very powerful high priest who’s also important to this Jesus story, who’s in power from around 18 CE to 37 CE, and that is Caiaphas. So Caiaphas is someone who will have contact with Pilate as a man on the ground who Pilate will consult when making decisions. And it’s between these two guys that we see the Jesus story unfolding, really, in the sense that Jesus is obviously arrested, he is tried before Caiaphas, and this is something that’s recorded in all four of the Gospel accounts and the Sanhedrin, which is the Jewish religious council Jesus, is given over to the Roman powers by the high priests and their council. And it is the Romans who decide to crucify Jesus Christ, and that’s kind of the background to what is happening. Yeah.

Dr G 26:24
So in this background, what we can see already is that there is complex interrelationships between the political and the religious. And yeah, I think there is a tendency, from a Western perspective, to separate out state and church. Yeah, people like to do that. It is a fallacy. It doesn’t matter where you live. Those things are very entwined. So think about where you live and how the politics operates, and how spiritual beliefs actually have a great deal of influence on how those political actions and beliefs get

Dr Rad 26:58
Yeah, because I believe that Pilate actually gave Jesus to Herod, Antipas and and this particular Herod was like, no, no, I’m

Dr G 27:04
not doing anything about

Dr Rad 27:06
that you deserve.

Dr G 27:08
I don’t want to get involved. Yeah,

Dr Rad 27:10
and Pilate. Therefore, Pilate was like, Okay, fine, crucifixion, it is so, yeah, it is interesting to sort of look at, like the very high level involvement of church and state, as you say, like the Jewish powers in the region in a political sense, Jewish power in the region in a religious sense, and also the Roman powers in the region to this whole thing that’s happening. And

Dr G 27:29
the Romans, For all of their vaunted pragmatism, are a highly religious people themselves. So it’s not like they’re above any of that, no. And it’s just trying to figure out, from their perspective, how can they get the best leverage on a population that they’re seeking to control for their own ends? Yes. So I mean, in short, the answer to the question, What have the Romans ever done for people in the provinces? The answer is,

Dr Rad 27:54
not much. Ouch.

Speaker 1 27:56
It’s it’s devastating, and it is a process of sort of cultural wiping out over time. Yeah, it is imperialism in its very core form. Life of Brian. Definitely engage with that in really interesting ways. So, but

Dr Rad 28:11
before we get into that fully, I guess we have to obviously acknowledge that it is intended to be a satire. I have as a film scholar, I therefore have questions about, obviously, what do you do with something that’s not necessarily trying to be historically accurate, but is set in a historical period? Because, quite frankly, the men involved enjoy dressing up in costume.

Dr G 28:32
Well, you know, they saw an opportunity, and they really took it, yeah, but as

Dr Rad 28:36
you said before, I think this is where we obviously have to acknowledge like their goal is, obviously to produce a comedy that is what they are. They are a comedy troupe. And I kind of think that comedy is obviously one of those mediums that is naturally going to be taking risks, perhaps more than other formats, even tragedy. I think comedy kind of takes risk, and I think it also does, to a certain extent, obviously reflect the time in which it is made, because obviously people are going to find things funny that are relevant to their to their lives. I think kind of the genius of Monty Python is that some of their stuff has stood the test of time and that we still find it really funny. And I will go out and say, right now, I’m a huge fan of life for Brian, I think it is hysterical, in spite of the fact that I can obviously see there are certain things that may not have dated as well as others, but I still think overall, it’s a really funny film. But of course, like any movie, it reflects the time in which it was made and what was considered funny then. And also, I suppose what even is what was considered cutting edge back then. You can, you can see it, obviously, but that’s something I think is true of any film, yes, and

Dr G 29:39
I think you’re totally correct in terms of thinking about like context is so relevant. So there are some jokes in this film that would not fly today, I would think. And there are some moments that I think in hindsight if, for instance, John Cleese knew i. The future when he was making this film. Some of the some of the lines that he’s given in this script that he reproduces, I think, are really they’re foreshadowing of certain things that we see later in his life, and that, I think is quite interesting as well. I’m going to leave that a complete mystery. I’m not going to go.

Dr Rad 30:18
Are you going to tell me what these moments are. Well,

Dr G 30:22
look, let me see how I feel later on, we can return to that subject. So I don’t know about you, but I’ve gone through this film, and I’ve sort of gone chronologically, looking at ways that Romans and Rome is kind of represented, and thinking about what could that mean, and not thinking about necessarily the humor of it, because I don’t know that I, I am not worthy to comment on the humor of the film. And clearly they’re doing something which is ahistorical and a make believe fictional story set in a historical time period which obviously has all sorts of potential issues associated with it. So anything you might say could be dismissed. Yeah, look absolutely. But I have things to say nonetheless. I’m

Dr Rad 31:04
very happy to move in that direction. But before you start, I feel like there’s some filmy stuff that I’m going to use for additional context. So we’ve had some context now about Monty, Python, the group, I think we obviously have the context of the satirical nature of the film. And as you said, the satire is not even necessarily of life in the 30 CE in Judea, Monty, Python, in all of their historical films, and also in their TV show. As we said, it’s about British society at the time. So basically, they are plucking British characters out of the 1970s and plunking them in 30 CE. And you can see this in many, many ways, because that’s basically what all of their characters are. And these are some of my favorite moments, which I’m just going to mention in terms of examples. So you’ve got the liberal bureaucrat in Michael Palin, who’s organizing the crucifixion. Crucifixion, yes, one crossmeres down to the left.

Dr G 31:58
Next. Good, yeah, good, good. That

Dr Rad 32:02
is absolutely one of my most favorite moments in the entire film. You’ve also, of course, got the working class often represented in characters played by Eric Idle. They’re sort of cheeky, pulling everyone’s leg every moment. Oh, and also, again, one of my other favorite aspects is the way that Monty Python makes fun of the working class trade unions in the People’s Front of Judea, as well as the Judeans Popular Front and all those sorts of groups, as well as the style of bureaucrat that you see in like John Cleese’s high priest at the stoning, all of that kind of stuff. As well as the women. Obviously, they’re not huge characters, but they are there as well. And also, of course, in scenes like Sermon on the Mount, you can see it. I’m sure we’ll get into that in a bit of into that in a bit of detail, but in terms of the film context. So one thing I wanted to highlight in particular, because it’s not something that people from outside of Britain or British Dominions might be aware of, is that there is in British comedy a really strong tradition of drag, yes, yeah, as a style of comedy, which people might not be aware of. So I guess I flag that drag has a really big part in British music hall comedy, and that’s gonna say it’s a staple of pantomime. Yes, it’s still exactly and to this day it still is a really big thing. So that’s just something to be aware of in terms of where Monty Python is coming from in the way that they do their comedy and the way that they often have men obviously dressing up as women rather than getting women to play those particular parts. But in terms of feel more generally, I’m sure that anyone who’s listening to this podcast is aware of this. But just in case you’re not, here it goes. Obviously, by the time we get to 1979 when Life of Brian comes out, the golden age of epics has peaked and gone. But those films, I think, are still very much there in that people of that time period, like in the 1970s would be familiar with the big blockbusters of the 1950s in particular few in the early 60s. So for example, your Quo Vadis, you’re Ben Hur those sorts of big biblical epics. And Monty Python was certainly very aware of those films. And so I think there’s sometimes deliberately playing on or playing up to those biblical epics. I know that Terry Jones in particular, like basically sat in a room for a while and re watched a lot of those sorts of movies. And you can see that right from the get go in, that the nativity scene is definitely very similar to the nativity scene that you see in Ben Hur even the way that Terry Gilliam has illustrated the credits. It’s obviously a play on the types of credits that you get in even Spartacus, which is obviously like a weird kind of it’s not a biblical epic, but there are those weird Christian elements to it, as well as some of the other big blockbusters of the time, like Ben Hur and King of Kings. So you can definitely see them playing with that. And even the idea of having someone in this time period leading a parallel life to Jesus is obviously very famous from other movies like Ben Hur. That’s literally what Judah Ben Hur is often up to. You know he’s what I know he’s. His life is intersecting with the Christ as he goes. As we get out of the 1960s though, we’ve obviously seen like the collapse of the studio system in America, and we start to see slightly more irreverent films coming out about Ancient Rome in general. So you have in 1966 movies like A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. And as we move into the 1970s because the studio system has been truly dismantled by then, there is this brief period where you get a lot of, I suppose, what we would call more realistic films, like the audience wanting to see things that aren’t maybe so stage managed and escapist in nature, things that are more gritty, more about real life and real problems and that sort of thing. So you can obviously think of these are American examples, but you can think of movies like, you know, the godfather and Midnight Cowboy, Easy Rider, films that are more reflective, I suppose, of 60s and 70s culture in multiple facets, films that are dealing more with issues like race. Again, I am thinking of America here, but the influence, obviously, is out there that that’s the way film is going, as a sort of context for Life of Brian, gritty realism, yeah. Anyway, just that, I’d sort of say that the other thing that we can obviously see that’s very much influencing this film, in the credits, anyway, is James Bond, Brian. His name is Brian.

Dr G 36:22
Yeah. I thought it was a great Shirley Bassey. Impression

Dr Rad 36:24
it is. I actually thought, I actually checked, because I was like, Oh, my god, is this Shirley? I

Dr G 36:28
don’t think it is. It wasn’t, no, it

Dr Rad 36:29
was like, some 16 year old. Oh,

Dr G 36:31
wow, yeah, yeah, no, but I picked up that reference straight away. I was like, Oh yes, I see where this is going. But I do like starting with the opening credits. Yeah, there’s a few things that I quite enjoyed about them, in terms of nods to Rome. Some of them are the Christian references. So we get the giant head of Constantine, which is smashing through everything. He won’t be alive for another few 100 years. So he is out of place. Good for him, though, we also see the Mouth of Truth, the bocca della Verita, yeah. Okay, you know, just like an odd, quirky thing. And the original purpose of that piece is unclear, and so it’s set up in Rome, and most famously in Roman Holiday. I

Dr Rad 37:22
was gonna say, I think I can tell you what the purpose is. The purpose is to have a delightful moment between Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck in a reality comedy,

Dr G 37:31
Roman Holiday. Everybody, but that popularity of that particular stone, which we think might be the head of Neptune, maybe, but it has the open mouth, and it looks a bit like a theatrical mask as well. So the identification is not at all clear, and people line up to stick their hand in the thing and whatnot. And we think it might be related to the Temple of Hercules, which is across the way. Okay, yeah, just across the square. But the fact that it’s there, I think is cute. I mean, it’s ancient, but we don’t know from when, but it’s a very visual symbol of Rome. Yes, well, so I imagine this is something that,

Dr Rad 38:07
again, particularly by this time period, because, again, Roman Holiday we came out in the middle of the 1950s

Dr G 38:12
Yeah, exactly. So this is something that, like, even if you didn’t know much about Rome, you’d never been there, you would have recognized it. Presumably you get some nods also to the Arch of Constantine as it’s going along. And

Dr Rad 38:23
I was like, wait a minute, he was the first Christian.

Dr G 38:27
And then the other part that I really enjoyed, and I’m sorry, Tiberius, but it’s the Prima Porta Augustus just whacked in there, which is on trend. That’s fine. You could easily have run into a statue like that in this period, maybe not in Judea. To me, this is,

Dr Rad 38:45
again, this is like, one of those things where I’m like, okay, yes, if we’re being super accurate a lot of these things, you’re like, anachronistic, not the right setting at all. But it doesn’t matter with Monty Python, because they are anarchic in the way that they play with things. And so I kind of feel like it’s one of those things where it’s like, well, of course,

Dr G 39:02
well, I think that’s fine actually, because one of the things that I think comes across in this, and you’ve touched on it earlier, yeah, is that because of their university education, their humor is both absurdist and for some considered too highbrow, like the references are just out of touch. You have to have already known a whole bunch of things to get them, which might be the very reason why you and I quite enjoy these kinds of films, because it’s like, they’re kind of full of little easter eggs for people who have studied history and are aware of some of this stuff. Because I’m like, I understand that these things are that are out of touch, but I also recognize them, and I’m excited to have seen them, and I know that at some point they had to decide what was going to be in there. Yeah, you don’t become an illustrator and an animator without making really clear decisions about what’s included and what’s not included, and so those choices really matter. And I love the way that this opening credit sequence sets us up really nicely for what is both. Both a historical light touch for people who get it and absolutely bonkers for people who enjoyed the Absurdism of it.

Dr Rad 40:07
Yes, yeah, and that’s the thing, like Spartacus credits are so memorable with all the bits and pieces of sculpture and statuary. I mean, it was such a big film, people who were seeing this would mostly, I think, be very familiar with that particular thing. And so, yeah, the way that they take that and then twist it, yeah.

Dr G 40:29
This leads me to, I don’t really have much to say about the nativity scene, like, it’s fine, it does its job, but I was focusing on, like, Where do I see Romans? And so then I end up at Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, I

Dr Rad 40:39
would say I love the Nativity in the way that she’s like, well, what is he there?

Dr G 40:45
They’re like, Oh no. They take back all the gifts, and she’s like,

Dr Rad 40:47
Oh, wait, yeah, and the Virgin Mandy, I enjoy it. That’s, that’s, I suppose, one of those moments. So where we I can highlight something that would be considered problematic by these standards, but wasn’t considered maybe as problematic in the day is that there is a brief moment of blackface in that particular scene. There is. It’s very brief. And obviously it’s one of those things where, knowing Monty Python, it’s one of those things where I think it’s just because they play all the characters at the time, they wouldn’t have thought about it, whereas it might be different these days, obviously, in terms of both the makeup of the group, potentially, but also in how they would handle that kind of thing. But it’s one of those things where you could easily miss it because of the way that they’ve got the three wise men, yeah,

Dr G 41:29
the way the costumes are done. Yeah, yes, there is black face. So content warning, not ideal, to be honest, I’d

Dr Rad 41:35
actually never noticed it before, because their faces are so covered up, but because I was paying more attention, I suppose this time, I suddenly realized that, of course, it’s one of the Monty Python group who’s playing the three wise men. I just I’d never even thought about it before, because my attention is always on the Virgin panty.

Dr G 41:52
So Jesus’s servant on the mount. This is like the one time in this film where we we clock Jesus, the man himself.

Dr Rad 41:58
And I will note, it’s actually very unusual to have Jesus Christ shown directly in that when you think about again films like Ben Hur, they tend to avoid it just like a shaft of sunlight, yeah, like, like a hand, or, like, you see the back of his head, or something like that. A lot of these, he’s

Dr G 42:18
like a dentist. We can’t show his face on television.

Dr Rad 42:22
Nine out of 10 dentists recommend, but I don’t, because they’re owned by a company that does on animals. It happens, but it’s unusual, although, of course, again, there was kind of like a bit of a slew of Jesus stuff that was coming out at this point in time. The biggest hit, obviously, being Jesus Christ Superstar. So superstar. So it just depends what you’re looking at, I suppose. But Jesus Christ Superstar is something that people would have seen, obviously, in the theater. Okay?

Dr G 42:50
So he does make his appearance, and he’s going to increasingly make his appearance in cultural representation from this point onwards as well. So we do get to get a glimpse of Jesus. He is saying things that he is purported to have said, so they don’t change his script. But the real focus of this whole scene is what is essentially British class, absolutely infighting at its best, where right at the back of the crowd there is some quibbling going on about what is being said and then how it’s being said, and then people starting to insult each other in various particular ways. And you can tell who’s supposed to be the upper class, and you can tell who’s supposed to be middle class, and you can tell who’s supposed to be working class from the ways in which they engage with each other. Yeah,

Dr Rad 43:39
so we’ve got Mr. And Mrs. Gregory the upper class rather, rather.

Dr G 43:45
And I think what’s great is that there’s a lot of mishearing of the of the sermon itself. Blessed are the cheese makers? Okay, we got

Dr Rad 43:53
Mr. And Mrs. Big nose, who are meant to be like the up and coming middle class and then Mr. Cheeky working class. So in the bickering, as you say, there’s the mishearing of stuff, but funnily enough, it actually highlights something which is hugely relevant to historians, which is, where did the Gospels get their material? How reliable are eyewitnesses? Yeah,

Dr G 44:13
and this is a huge challenge, because as far as we can date the Gospels. So these are the four books which are considered to be interconnected with each other and accredited to different people, but seem to have been written together. Perhaps the earliest date that people can put to them is probably about the 70s and 80s. CE.

Dr Rad 44:34
I think even, I think even 60s has been given for one of them, just one of them. I think, I think Mark from memory, which

Dr G 44:40
we’re talking Well, after, oh, yeah, like a good generation or so

Dr Rad 44:44
absolutely. And that’s the earliest, as you say, in most people, earliest that

Dr G 44:48
people were willing to accept based on the evidence. Yeah. So if you can mishear things when you’re at the venue, in the moment, I mean, just think about when you’re out and about or you. Go somewhere and you’re like, Excuse me, or you’re like, you turn to the person they say that all the time, or you’re at an event and you turn to somebody like, what did they just say? And the amount of misreporting and the mishearing that happens, generally speaking, the idea that there’s some sort of coherency to these texts is perhaps the biggest question we should have

Dr Rad 45:20
absolutely and I mean, even I’ve actually read. I was reading in preparation for this. Some people who identify as Christian, who teach this kind of material, as in, like, teach about historical Jesus and that sort of thing. And even they were saying that Life of Brian also kind of highlights one of those things, which is, how on earth were the three wise men supposed to have followed a star to figure out what tiny little manger somebody was in. There obviously are elements to these stories which don’t make like a logical sense, and that’s not necessarily what they’re obviously meant to be doing, just the same way that life of Ryan isn’t meant to be providing a super historically accurate version of Judea. What do you mean? This

Dr G 46:03
is clearly what was going on. I mean, there are Roman soldiers in attendance at this sermon. So I think for me, this was the key part of the reason why I noted down this scene at all. Yeah, because they’re standing around and they’re just sort of glancing over their shoulder and shaking their heads while the class warfare plays itself out in the background, and they only start to intervene when it comes to a physical altercation, when people start trying to punch each other, and then they’re like, Okay, break it up. But

Dr Rad 46:32
I think that the hilarious thing, of course, is we start to see, obviously, that whole idea of it’s what people make of it that’s funny in that when they think they’ve heard Blessed are the cheese makers. They say, well, obviously they don’t just mean the cheese makers. They mean manufacturers of any sort of dairy product.

Dr G 46:51
It’s not meant to be taken literally,

Dr Rad 46:52
yeah, and all the classic ones, where we get a lot of classic lines, you know? Oh, Blessed are the meek. Oh, that’s nice, because they get so little, I have such a hard time.

Dr G 47:03
From there, I jump ahead to the stoning scene, which I think might be the next scene. Anyway, it

Dr Rad 47:07
is because, of course, the virgin Mandy and Brian, they decide,

Dr G 47:11
they decide to leave the sermon of the mountain because it is getting out of hand in the background with the fights that are happening. So they decide that they’re going to attend the local stoning instead. And wouldn’t you know that there’s a whole bunch of bureaucratic rules around Stoney, and it’s really quite unfortunate, because women are forbidden to participate. And what this has led to is an underground market for fake beards so women can dress up as men and then attend stonings. And I suppose the part of the humor here, which is, in a way, quite parallel to the way that ancient humor operated as well, if we think about Greek comedy, sure is that we’ve got Monty Python, a male comedic troupe dressing up as women who are dressing up as men to attend stoning. So the layers upon layers of this kind of the drag, meta drag moments that are happening here, I

Dr Rad 48:14
think it allows the voices to be funnier, because then they can do the whole high pitched imitation of a woman. Are

Dr G 48:21
they ready with women here. Apologies. I mean, if you’re listening, I mean, we’re obviously just doing the film as we’re doing it as we analyze. So this puts me in mind of the way that ancient Greek comedy often sets up some of these things, and certainly, if we think about English traditions of comedy as well, this is very much something that Shakespeare would have lent into as well. Definitely the way in which characters try to hide their identity, by assuming the dress of another gender and then having to maybe go into hiding again, all of this kind of thing we have seen. It’s very English and in that sense, also very ancient. So I quite enjoyed that aspect of this scene. I note that there are some Roman soldiers there as well. They don’t seem to be quite as impressive as some of the other Centurions. They seem to be more low level infantry, and they just watch as the crowd eventually turns on the priest who is leading the stoning,

Dr Rad 49:25
which, and this is, I think, one of the things that I sort of lighted on as being the funny moment, because I love John Cleese’s priest. But again, the humor is so much that he is meant to be a kind of British bureaucrat slash schoolmaster type of figure in the way that he deals with the crowd, oh, there’s always one, and making sure that rules are being followed and that sort of thing. The way that he is dressed is very anachronistic. The idea of a stoning actually even taking place, is very debatable in terms of historical accuracy. It might seem like something you. SPECT in a biblical era film, but it is actually really uncertain whether such things would have been taking place in Jesus’s time. There’s like these weird references where it’s almost like they’re talking about stoning, but it’s almost like, are they saying that zonings actually happen? Or is this or are they just making a reference, because could maybe happen. It’s very unclear, but yeah, definitely highly debatable, but the fact that he is wearing something that’s so overly religious, again, kind of taps into criticisms that are made of certain Jewish groups in this society, of trying to advertise their piety, perhaps by wearing particular types of clothing. So I believe the Pharisees are sometimes critiqued by other Jewish people for overly advertising their dedication to religion and the type of clothing that they wear. So even though it’s anachronistic, it kind of potentially is highlighting that about this particular character. Yeah,

Dr G 50:55
and certainly, I think when we think about religious dress, there is a sense in the ancient world and even today, that the visual distinction is one of the ways in which you establish the authority of the Church, regardless of which church it might be. So style of dress and being visually recognizable from a distance is super important. And John Cleese is a tall man, and he’s wearing a very tall hat in this scene, which makes him even taller than he needs to be. So he definitely does stand out. So I’m

Dr Rad 51:25
guessing that your next scene that you liked was, of course, the children’s matinee.

Dr G 51:29
So in the lead up to that, though, yeah, I mean, yes, definitely the children’s matinee at the arena, which is a horrifying sort of take on, like, what is gladiatorial combat and the games of the hunt and things like that, as if they might be okay for children while people are dragging bits of meat out of the arena. But important in the lead up to this moment is the moment that Brian understands that his father is a Roman Ah,

Dr Rad 51:55
yes, okay, see, I didn’t think you’d talk about this one because there are no Roman characters present until, but till the end, it does become

Dr G 52:04
important later on, so as a Roman reference, but also like that happens in their home. So they and there is a Roman there. That’s true, yeah, they return home from the stoning and find that there is a Roman Centurion in their house. Brian’s bit put out by that, and his mom’s like, well, you know, maybe you shouldn’t be so worried about those sorts of things, because maybe your dad was a Roman so this is like an earth shattering revelation for Brian to learn that his father was a man called Nautius Maximus, and he understood understands in that moment that perhaps his life isn’t what he thought it was. It certainly calls into question, what has ever what was happening in the nativity scene with the Virgin mangy? Yes,

Dr Rad 52:54
well, even his name. I mean, I didn’t actually know this, but the last name Cohen, whilst it is quite a common name. Now, for people who have Jewish backgrounds, it actually indicates priest like, if you have the last name Cohen, your ancestors, presumably at one point, were from one of the priestly families. So it’s obviously not only a common Jewish name nowadays, which I’m sure is what they were playing on a little bit there, but it also has this connection to a very special group within that Jewish community that were setting this movie in and Brian was just chosen because, apparently that was the name that the Monty Pythons like to give to anyone who was seen as being very ordinary and kind of a bit stupid. Well,

Dr G 53:34
his character does live up to that in some respects. So he finds out his father is Nautius Maximus, and this puts him into a little bit of a tailspin. He makes a quip about his nose being Roman, and me like that. Explains

Dr Rad 53:53
I’m a Hebe, a Kike, a Red Sea pedestrian.

Dr G 53:58
And so, you know, he has this realization which frustrates him. It doesn’t really he doesn’t seem fixated beyond the fact that he’s noticed that there’s a Roman Centurion there because he wanders off because he’s now he’s got his own existential issues to deal with. But it turns out that his mother is also entertaining the Roman troops in a sexual way, perhaps, and she does make the point that they perhaps owe more to the Romans than he realizes, yeah, and he doesn’t seem to clock what that means, no, but the audience is allowed to see through that sort of veil and get a sense that this is a difficult life for her, yes, and that the Romans are part of the oppressive structures that she is navigating personally, while the province of Judea is navigating at large. Yes, absolutely. So yes, that leads us to the arena my favorite.

Dr Rad 54:53
So the subtitle children’s matinee is obviously, again, a play on something from British culture. Yeah. Dear the children’s madness that we provided pantomimes and theater and that sort of thing. I actually love this, though, because you do tend to get, I think, quite glorified, obviously, images of the arena in your more traditional epics. And this is kind of looking at, well, what happened when it was just an ordinary Saturday?

Dr G 55:21
And it’s like the arena isn’t particularly full. There are Brian’s there trying to sell some snacks, which, uh, he’s told that they’re just Roman tat.

Dr Rad 55:32
But again, even, like, even the types of things that he’s trying to sell, like the the wolf sniffles and that kind of stuff that, again, is kind of a play on the main evidence that we have of Roman food, which is typically by the elite, for the elite. So they are these ridiculous delicacies that we have preserved for us. And we, when we look at the recipe thing, we’re like, Oh my God. What you know the Romans love to think of all these new kind of delicacies, which, similarly to these days, I suppose, had to do with what was rare, what was hard to procure, and and so they did kind of eat sometimes things that we would look at as being absurd, but that would have been the very, very elite who were all caught up in this desire to impress one another. The average person would have been eating far more basic but

Dr G 56:23
I do like the idea that it’s playing into the idea of stadium culture and the sort of snacking that goes on there. But the arena is like the original Stadium in this sense. And so it makes sense that if you’re there and you’re out in the sun and you’ve been there for a few hours, you’re probably peckish, yeah, it would not be beyond imagination that nobody would be trying to sell you

Dr Rad 56:45
some just maybe not quite the fair that Brian is selling. But yeah, this

Dr G 56:49
is a super important scene for Brian, though, because it’s when he finally gets to meet the People’s Front of Judea love, and he’s already seen one of the members, at least when he was at the sermon of the mount, and because he spied Judith off in the distance, and was kind of like, and she was engaged in a very sort of intellectual conversation with another member of the group, yes,

Dr Rad 57:14
where they ridiculing my Jesus.

Dr G 57:18
And he’s seen her, he’s taking a look at her and being like, I’ve got a crow. And so it’s in this moment that he gets to meet her, because members of this group are attending the arena, mostly to criticize it and to lampoon people that they’ve exiled from their group or have defected to a different group. Spears, all of these people seem to be swilling around this idea that in order to get out from under the oppression of the Romans, they need to find a way to eliminate the powerful structures at play that are ruining the province so they can claim it back as their own.

Dr Rad 57:57
And this is the kind of thing that I like about Monty Python, because they’re making fun of every single class that they come across. So they make fun of the working class, they make fun of the middle class, they make fun of the upper class like no one is off limits because it’s really about institutions and authority that they are. That’s who they’re taking aim at really a lot of the time. So but I do, I just love their take on the trade unions. You’re like, you have to really hate the Romans to join our group, but I do,

Dr G 58:25
all right, we’re in and so this is the moment that Brian, you know, joins one of these groups, and he’s led into a new world. And this is on the back of him finding out about his own Roman heritage. So he’s running away from that in some respects, and fighting against it. And can he prove to himself, you know, how loyal he is to the local cause? Yeah, and

Dr Rad 58:50
this is, this is where we get into that interesting conversation, I suppose, about the presence of Rome in this area. So it’s hard to completely, I think, understand Jesus’s death at this distance, particularly because, as we talked about, the Gospels are written sometime after and they’ve obviously got a very particular agenda in mind. Even the Roman sources that mention Jesus Christ are again written a couple generations later, decades later. So whilst I definitely believe that there was a person who identifies as Jesus, it’s really hard to know I think exactly what was happening, but I don’t necessarily think that, as I said to before, I think it’s there’s often a lot of factionalism in this area, and there’s a lot of internal tension. And actually, I feel like it’s some time later that we get more anti Roman, more widespread anti Roman sentiment. And even then, it’s not universal and it’s not unified. I’m sort of thinking of in the sort of 60s and 70s, where we get the first udayan revolt. That’s when we tend to see really anti Roman sentiment springing up. But it’s not universal in Jesus’s lifetime. I’m not really sure. And I’m not an expert in this period, obviously, but I’m not really sure how widespread the anti. Roman sentiment would have been. It flares up a little bit under Caligula, because Caligula is a bit of a douche towards towards certain things that they hold dear. But otherwise, I’m really not, I’m not sure.

Dr G 1:00:09
I think this gets into the broader question of the history of the whole region, and so I’m not going to give too much away about something that comes up later in the film. I think we’re almost there, yeah, sure. But having thought about like we think about the layered history of this region, yes. And this area, broadly, what is now known as the Middle East, is considered, in many respects, cradle of civilization. This is where we understand agrarian culture to develop in a profound way. What about 6000 6000 7000 years ago? So this is an area that has always been populated. It has always had a multitude of societies. And this group that sits along this eastern edge of the Mediterranean are known for being traders. So the Punic peoples come from the Phoenician peoples. Yeah, the Phoenicians are just to the north of this region. But it’s not the case that the people to the south are not also traders. They are plenty of archeological evidence to suggest that there are social structures at play, that there is trading at play, that they are very involved in the broader Mediterranean community in which they sit. The Romans are just another player within this in that respect. So the idea that the Romans are necessarily terrible depends very much on how the Romans are behaving,

Dr Rad 1:01:44
and sometimes they can be behaving in ways that works for the people that live in that region.

Dr G 1:01:50
And in this time period, we are not yet at the conquest of the area by the Romans. No, we are certainly at a period of high levels of influence by Rome? Yeah, definitely. They’re doing some imperialism, for sure, sure, but they are not necessarily trying to wipe people out. No, and they do not have full control of this area, no,

Dr Rad 1:02:13
and that’s exactly it, like there’s and they’re not going to for quite some time. No, that’s what I mean. Like, I feel like there’s it. There’s more tension between various groups in this area. And I don’t just mean within Judea. I mean also more wider

Dr G 1:02:27
this whole area is, is complex already, the part of which we suffer from, I think, as historians who specialize in Rome, is that we are not Near Eastern specialists, and there are Near Eastern specialist, and we should get some of them on the show. We should talk about that region, because there is a lot going on here, and this, this film, is kind of touching on some of it. And I think maybe inadvertently, because I’m not sure how much Monty Python I know about some of I

Dr Rad 1:03:00
think they did a lot of research, but it’s the kind of material that they would have access to in the 1970s it’s obviously different scholarship, different time, and I don’t know how deep and they were influenced, definitely, I think, by more medieval things as well, like medieval passion plays as well as, obviously contemporary stuff. But even, I think, in terms of understanding this area, one of our major sources to sort of focus on relations between the people of this area and the Romans is, of course, Josephus. And Josephus is notoriously a hugely problematic source because he was someone who was captured by the Romans, or so he claims, during the first Judean revolt, and ends up becoming associated with flavians, because they are, of course, involved in the more troublesome time in Judea, with the first the destruction of the temple. Yeah, they are, and then they be, but then at around the same time that that happens, they obviously also become the next Imperial dynasty, everyone which allows them to allows them to control narrative somewhat. And Josephus is their client. He becomes like a Freedman of their family. And so his loyalties are all over the shop, all over the shop, and it’s so complex, like, it’s not to say that he’s like, Oh well, I’m I’m with the Romans. Now, he definitely doesn’t, but it’s so hard to tease out at any one moment what is going on in Josephus account of things, yeah,

Dr G 1:04:26
and his work is really important for our understanding of what is happening in this sort of Flavian period. And again, it’s that sort of thing where it’s like our sources just outside of the timeline, yes, that we’re interested in, like he does refer back to this period of history in the region totally, but it’s also the case that he wasn’t necessarily compos mentis there, no,

Dr Rad 1:04:49
and he’s also Jewish. He’s not Christian, so Jesus is going to mean something different to him. Anyways, yeah, it’s just a very, very complicated source to use. And. Yeah. Well, we

Dr G 1:05:01
love our complexities. We do. This leads us to the Latin scene.

Dr Rad 1:05:05
Okay. Now this is a scene that I laugh at whilst crying, as I have had so many, so many issues of Latin over the years.

Dr G 1:05:13
So I think one of the things that came out maybe on Twitter a few years ago, was like, you can tell the difference between a classic student and an ancient history student from their favorite from their favorite scene in Life of Brian. Yes, because the classic students will pick the Latin scene and the ancient historians will pick, well, What have the Romans ever done for us 100%

Dr Rad 1:05:33
and I am 100% true to that. The What have the Romans ever done for us is my favorite, but

Dr G 1:05:38
the Latin scene really does some special things. And I think it does some special things for classic students in particular, because it basically replicates the British education system for teaching classics to students at that time. Yes, yeah, in that moment. And so the play seems to be that Brian is put up to this moment by the People’s Front of Judea. They’re like, You got to prove your loyalty you want to be part of this group, you know, you’ve got to go and write a message on the Roman palace. Romans go home. Yeah. So Romanos

Dr Rad 1:06:12
ahaan rocks

Dr G 1:06:17
up and he’s he’s painting in big red letters. Romanes eunt domus and it’s kind of like twilight. He doesn’t realize that some Roman soldiers are marching up behind him, and they kind of watch him, and then they start correcting his grammar. They’re like, people call the Romans, They go to the house? and I was like, What are you doing? And then it goes through all of this thing where they’re trying to basically inculcate the rules, you know, like, you know, will it be accusative, you know, to place, it’s the locative, you know, blah, blah, blah, on all of these sort of like crazy grammatical terms, which you would only ever encounter if you had had to study Latin. Yes, it ends up being that they end up changing the phrase to Romani ite domum. Romans go home, and then they tell him that he has to paint it 100 times, which is one of those sort of classics of like the school system, where it’s kind of like you now have this really repetitive, boring task on your hands, and he does do it, like he takes him all night, but he Brian finishes this task. But you do get that sense that the play here is on the importance of form over everything else. This idea then gets linked to this Roman fetish for mindless punishment, which is something that runs through this whole film as well. And then as soon as Brian completes this task, it’s like there’s been a changeover of the group, and new guards show up. Don’t realize that this has been a task that has been set by the Romans to Brian. Look at what he’s written on the wall, and it’s huge, and it’s all over it, and then he has to run away very, very quickly to get himself out of trouble,

Dr Rad 1:07:58
yeah. Which I think, as you say, this perfectly highlight the educational background of the Monty Python group and the way that they would have had to study Latin because of the type of school they went to, which, again, is kind of interesting, because in the 60s, there had been a big shake up of the British education system, and there were definitely people that by the time that They, I suppose, were going through their education, there were definitely schools that were breaking with the tradition of having to learn Latin, and that was maybe seen as something a little bit old fashioned. But the Monty Python group, because the nature of their education, definitely would have had to learn Latin and learn it this way. And in fact, it wasn’t just trying to think when they would have been at university. I suspect that for a lot of them, they actually would have had to have studied Latin in order to get into the universities

Dr G 1:08:45
that they went to. So I assume so as well. And it’s pretty clear from the way that this scene is done, that they understand Latin, yes.

Dr Rad 1:08:52
And you’re like, okay, that I never will,

Dr G 1:08:56
and that they have been educated in very particular way about it. Yes, exactly. So the idea that they’re giving that experience to Roman soldiers in itself is quite funny, absolutely. Yeah, so the People’s Front of Judea, my favorite. I don’t know if you’re gonna like what I have to say about them. So these are just one of the many groups, the PJ, PFJ, as they’re known, one of the many groups seeking to liberate the area from Roman control and oppression, which

Dr Rad 1:09:27
is what I think I find so funny about it, because it taps into what I think is accurate to this period. The factionalism might not have been in this exact way, and it might not necessarily been directly anti Roman, but I think the factionalism is kind of oddly accurate.

Dr G 1:09:39
Yeah, definitely. And I think we can see this in many movements where it’s like, you can have broadly similar goals and yet be pursuing it in very different ways. Absolutely, yes. And certainly there are times and I think this happens, particularly you see it in online culture, where the discussion is around. And leftist groups being more challenging to each other than they are to tackling the cause itself. Yes, and this kind of thing can be a real hindrance to getting things done. Absolutely. The People’s Front of Judea sits in this category really quite nicely. Yeah, they spend a lot of time talking and writing notes and minutes and whatnot. They have a plan to kidnap the wife of Pontius Pilate. That’s their plan. They’re going to enter through the underground heating system the hypercoast. Good on them. I quite like that. So you know, they’re playing into like, what do we know about what the Romans had? And then we get to What have the Romans ever done for us? Now I

Dr Rad 1:10:41
think I think I know what you’re going to say about this scene. Wow, I’m

Dr G 1:10:44
going to say it, and then you can tell me whether your assumption was correct. Okay, this is the classic justification of imperialism. I

Dr Rad 1:10:51
knew you were going to say that. Yeah, you’re right. It’s not accurate to the situation in this area. It’s

Dr G 1:10:57
not accurate to the situation, and it’s hugely problematic. And what we have is the English playing the oppressed people and then selling back to them the idea that they were civilized by the arrival of their oppressors. This is British imperialism writ large in a single scene, which is ironic in its placement in this film. And I don’t know that Monty Python necessarily are aware of it. Well,

Dr Rad 1:11:29
I think they probably are now. I think the thing is that, again, this is where context, I think, is important. I think what people broadly would have thought about Rome and the Roman Empire back in that time when they were making this film, is that they would have looked at Rome as the great civilisers As much as we might question that critique it now that’s with the benefit of over 40 years of hindsight and new scholarship and also people looking into things from the point of view of the people that do live in the provinces, looking at the archeology that comes out of that area, not privileging the Roman perspective. You know, there’s a lot that has happened in the last 50 years of academia that has enabled us to look at that scene and recognize that it’s not accurate that the Romans did not invent aqueducts, that there were roads before they came, and all of that kind of stuff. What I wouldn’t like. I obviously haven’t looked into it in the sense of saying there definitively was no academia out there that could possibly have disproven this. But I do think that I know enough to say that widely speaking, I feel like the point of view would have been way more positive in terms of imperialism, and Roman imperialism in particular, but that’s, that’s the way I kind of look at it. Yeah, I

Dr G 1:12:48
think there’s an interesting parallel to be drawn between the way that British imperialism justifies itself and the way that we now have British people justifying Roman imperialism within the context of this film. So I think that’s an interesting point of note. So the things that get mentioned as benefits of what the Romans have done for us, aqueducts, roads, medicine, sanitation, irrigation, education, wine, public baths and law and order. Now, objectively speaking, all of these are incorrect. Just as a point of note, all of these things predated Rome in the area,

Dr Rad 1:13:31
and Rome was not particularly sanitized. I mean, like sure they would have, they had certain aspects of their culture which may have been more hygienic than otherwise at that time in other places. But certainly, when you think about things like the bars, I think they would have just been germ soup. I was

Dr G 1:13:49
gonna say, are you calling into question my beloved cloacker maxima, yeah,

Dr Rad 1:13:53
sure. They had certain things like the aqueducts, which they adopted. I mean this. And this is the thing about the Romans. I think the thing about the Romans I think the thing about the Romans is that a little bit like America, I suppose, oh, that parallel again, they’re very good, I think, at adopting things and then rolling them out. They adopt things and because they ended up having control over wide amounts of territory, they can organize, like mass manpower, for example, or whatever, in order to build these things or create this infrastructure. It’s not that they came up with the original idea, and it may not be that they’re the only ones doing it, but once they’re in charge, I feel like they are relatively good sometimes at rolling it out when it’s in in their interest to do so to like, have an aqueduct or have a theater? Yeah.

Dr G 1:14:41
So I mean, notably, if we’re going to give the Romans any credit in this region, and we can, I suspect it is the fact that under Herod, there was an aqueduct constructed into the port city of Caesarea, Maritima, Caesar’s maritime port. And the reason for that is that there was no access to fresh water at that location, and there was still evidence of that ancient aqueduct, which was then sort of enhanced a few generations later. So that exists. So, yes, I mean, we could say that, you know, they brought some aqueducts, yeah, but they

Dr Rad 1:15:19
didn’t. They didn’t invent aqueduct. They didn’t invent paved rows. They did not invent wine. Law and order. I certainly did not

Dr G 1:15:26
invent wine. And arguably, it’s more likely that this region invented wine and irrigation. This is

Dr Rad 1:15:35
what I mean. I think the Romans are kind of like the inheritors, in the sense that they’re bringing the infrastructure, I suppose it’s in like, the ability to act on it at that moment in time, yeah.

Dr G 1:15:45
And so I suppose this is the idea of the increasingly militaristic influence of Rome in this area, yeah. And the fact that they’ve decided to go in, and people have not yet been able to throw them out or to throw them off. We

Dr Rad 1:16:00
obviously don’t know what would have been here if the Romans weren’t here. That’s not to say that the people in this area were incapable of doing such projects without the Romans. I just think it’s the Roman army, Roman slavery. Those systems mean that you can potentially have these large scale building projects, as sad as that is,

Dr G 1:16:24
indeed. And so they the PFJ decide that they’re going to enter through the Caesar Augustus Memorial. Sewer, excellent. And I do really love the scene where we get the footage of them entering, and it’s like they come through a floor mosaic lifting up a little leaf that’s covering somebody’s private parts. The Romans wouldn’t have bothered to have a leaf there in the mosaic. They would have just left it open. So that was a cute little nod, I think as well.

Dr Rad 1:16:52
See, this is where I love the kind of non Roman stuff, in a sense. So I love the fact that they encounter rival groups and they start fighting each other rather than concentrating on the task.

Dr G 1:17:03
Oh, yeah. So, I mean, the PFJ managed to run into this rival liberation group who have happy to dance people front, yeah, who have happened to have the same plan to execute on the same evening. Absolutely hilarious. And they all managed to kill each other inside the villa, and Brian’s the last one left standing when the Roman soldiers notice that anybody has infiltrated.

Dr Rad 1:17:28
And this, of course, brings us, I suppose, to one of the most notorious scenes, which is the Pontius Pilate scene. Oh,

Dr G 1:17:35
we’re calling it that, are we? I call it the biggest sticker scene. That’s right, yeah. I really liked this scene. I feel like I have an academic paper to write, because this scene is full of frescoes.

Dr Rad 1:17:48
Ah, okay, that’s what caught your eye. See, I was, as usual, very focused on Michael Palin, who is probably my favorite of the pythons. He is very good, and this is perhaps with his loose

Dr G 1:18:01
one of his star turns in this film as the most objectionable Roman, Pontius Pilate. And so Brian, having been arrested by the Roman guards and doing a bit of a tour of the jail, gets brought before Pontius Pilate himself. And this is where, in order to try and avoid punishment, Brian reveals his half Roman identity, yes. And he’s like, Well, my father is Nautius Maximus, at which point the Roman guard is like, convinced that this is a joke name. And Pontius Pilate is like, what are you talking about? And this leads the guard to say, well, you know, it’s a, it’s a joke name, like Biggus Dickus, or, yeah, and Pontius Pilate is like, Excuse me, because Dickus is a great friend of mine. And this scene is just, it plays out for like, you know, a good while. Yeah,

Dr Rad 1:18:56
it’s the accent that sells it as well, the way that Pontius Pilate has this absurd list. And of course, when we eventually meet him, bigger stickers will have an even more exaggerated speech impediment. And the lyric thing, of course, is that nobody can understand him, not even the Romans.

Dr G 1:19:12
Yeah, so people keep responding back to him as if he’s asked a different question. Which,

Dr Rad 1:19:16
Look, I get that because of someone who’s hard of hearing. I do do that sometimes, where I respond completely inappropriately, because I have 100% miss her what someone said to

Dr G 1:19:24
me, the joys of this podcast. So what is happening in the background with these frescoes is that they can be cross referenced quite distinctly to frescoes from the villa of mysteries. Oh, actually, you

Dr Rad 1:19:41
know what? I did notice that. I actually did notice it, and I totally forgot, you’re right, the red like the red, the red ones like so the red ones, the ones with the predominantly red color in the background.

Dr G 1:19:53
You know those red fresh skirts.

Dr Rad 1:19:56
But no, like it is the red color, the red background. Is what makes them so distinctive to me. And it’s

Dr G 1:20:02
not just the red background, it’s the fact that they’ve replicated key panels from that fresh Yeah. So yeah, I’ve started to go through and collate the parallels visually from the villa of mysteries for my own edification. Yeah, hi. I paused the film

Dr Rad 1:20:23
research. Hello, pot. It’s kettle here. Hi.

Dr G 1:20:29
So what I like about this is one it suggests that somebody on set knew enough. So this is like a little easter egg for people who know enough. Well, this

Dr Rad 1:20:40
would be where it would be curious for you, because I don’t know enough about the set design to know this. But as I said before, they did make use of the sets that were there for the TV series that have just been made. But I know that they what they describe the processes that they built their sets into those sets. So it would be interesting whether that was a set that already existed, or whether it was something that they, as you like, that they made their own. Yeah,

Dr G 1:21:06
yeah. So it makes me think I’m gonna have to go and watch what Zeffirellis. Yep, definitely go and have a watch. So, I mean, part of me thinks maybe not in zephyrellis, partly does seem too common, partly because the villa of mysteries is from Pompeii, so maybe doesn’t make a lot of sense, but also because of the potential time period and dating of these frescoes. Yeah. Anyway, yeah, that was besides the things that are very funny about this scene, which I enjoy. It’s one of my favorites. I did get distracted with my Roman historian hat on,

Dr Rad 1:21:46
so I believe that there is a very random scene that comes after this one, which is, of course, the alien sequence. Oh,

Dr G 1:21:54
yes. Well, I didn’t include any notes on that because I was like, there were no Romans. Well, Brian

Dr Rad 1:21:59
is being pursued by the Romans, I guess in this chase sequence. Now, I’ve heard various explanations for this. So 1979 that’s around the time that Star Wars is coming out. So it’s possible that they’re referencing like, the, you know, mania for science fiction. I have heard that the pythons just didn’t know how to get Brian out of this situation where he’s like, running up a very tall building find someone working on the top of it and really can’t figure out how to get down. Instead of decided just to insert this. I also read an academic who felt that it was a play on a book and documentary which came out of Germany, and then, I think, was adapted into English, the Chariots of the Gods, showing the aliens sort of interfering with life on Earth. I’ve also heard that it’s meant to be some sort of allusion to Brian’s ascension. Oh,

Dr G 1:22:53
yes. I mean to me, that makes the most sense. Yeah,

Dr Rad 1:22:56
yeah. So to be honest, there are so many explanations of what is going on in here. I have to admit, I kind of would go with the Python explanation of they just didn’t know how else to get him out of here. Well, I

Dr G 1:23:07
mean, part of me finds that hard to believe. I mean, they put him there, I guess so.

Dr Rad 1:23:11
But yeah, it could. It could have been a play, obviously, on the idea of Jesus being taken into the heavens. This is Brian’s moment to do that. And of course, it happens in a ridiculous fashion, as everything does in Brian’s life, as opposed to Jesus’s life,

Dr G 1:23:25
certainly. And I mean, the key thing for Brian, I guess, and for the film, is that he does escape set back down in a slightly different location, which allows him to get back to Matthias’ house. Now, Matthias’ house, is where the People’s Front of Judea meet, yes,

Dr Rad 1:23:44
and hides so well.

Dr G 1:23:47
And unfortunately, it seems like the guards are just close enough to Brian to spot which house he goes into, which causes all sorts of trouble.

Dr Rad 1:23:57
And there is a very tiny scene, which I do appreciate, though, when the Romans are like, storming into the house, and you see, like, 1000 Roman soldiers storm fast into this tiny, little house.

Dr G 1:24:06
Yeah. And I like, I do enjoy this sequence, because I think it gives us a sense of one how much Rome does. Rome things where you’re like, okay, just always send all of the guards all the time. And it’s like, this is how they managed to dominate everybody. It’s through this sheer numbers. Yeah, impressive numbers. Yeah. And it also seems to be a play on the classic sort of, how many clowns can you fit in a car kind of joke? Exactly. Matthias house is not that large, and there are many men running into it.

Dr Rad 1:24:40
I love it.

Dr G 1:24:41
So this leads me, from a Roman historian perspective, I suppose, straight to the crucifixion. Okay, you’re

Dr Rad 1:24:52
gonna skip right over the nude scene and the he’s just, he’s not the Messiah. He’s just a naughty boy.

Dr G 1:24:57
It’s got nothing to do with the Romans. Oh. Haha, by all means. I mean, now’s your chance.

Dr Rad 1:25:03
Obviously, that this is one of my other favorite scenes. It’s also obviously gives us one of the most well known quotes, I think, from the scene. And the thing I’ve the reason why I find it interesting, and I thought you might as well, is that it’s probably the most woman heavy, even though the women in question is, in fact, Terry Jones Indra, but it kind of did maybe think about things a bit differently here. So basically, Judith and Brian hook up at this moment in time, and we get very big full frontal nudity from both Brian and Judith in this scene. But to be honest again, this is where I feel like Monty Python and just say general measles. Saying they kind of are maybe unintentionally accurate. Number one, I kind of think the way that they’re just so at ease with being nude in like a small space in a family situation. I think that kind of is how people would have had to have been in the ancient world, you know, just more at ease with nudity, more used to bodily functions and things happening around them. I think the the dirtiness of this world, the you know, the smallness of this world, you know that like the way that the average person lives, I think is actually kind of more accurate than the gleaming marble we tend to see in a lot of Roman epics. But I do also like the way that they are, again, playing up with a character that’s probably more familiar to modern audiences, in that the way that Brian and his mother have a relationship. It does seem to be playing on the trope of maybe the Jewish mother, the way that she’s disapproving, that sort of thing which we see in modern shows like The Nanny, that line coming out of that depiction of, again, like a very modern character, but put in an ancient world, definitely.

Dr G 1:26:40
And the the way in which that this is like the the climactic point for the Messianic journey, exactly

Dr Rad 1:26:51
so funny, the way that the crowd, and this is where we see the crowd reacting in ways where the pythons are making fun of prophets springing up and preaching on corners, and the way people are responding to them, and the way that Brian’s like, just think for yourself. This is essentially the message of Life of Brian, as far as the pythons were concerned. It’s about thinking for yourself. Yeah,

Dr G 1:27:12
so to backtrack slightly, how did Brian even get here? So the Roman troops went into Matthias’ house. Brian was trying to hide, but he was hiding on a little balcony outside. That balcony eventually gave way, and he ended up standing on a strip of various other sort of wise prophets who were sort of promulgating a crowd. So it’s a bit like people are on their soapbox and people are gathering around, you know, the person who’s talking, who they think is most interesting? Yeah,

Dr Rad 1:27:40
with my favorite one of and there shall be a time where all things will be lost, and the little bits and pieces will be very hard to find. And Brian

Dr G 1:27:50
ends up in this situation. He’s knocked somebody off their plinth. Now he’s in front of a crowd, and he starts sort of making some stuff up. And there are some biblical references in there, stuff that has been attributed. And then he sort of trails off because he’s really waiting for that coast to be clear of the Romans, to be able to get back into the house and all of that. So once he sees that the moment has arrived, he just sort of trails off and doesn’t reveal anything. And it’s the mystery that is set up by him not finishing a sentence that prompts people to start to follow him, because they want to know what the message is, yes, which, when he was completing his sentences was of no real interest to any of them, but because they can’t and they don’t know what is the next thing he’s going to say, they become obsessed with him. Start following him around. Anyway, he ends up with this huge crowd around him, and when he wakes up the next morning at mum’s place with Judith, he is unprepared for how many people are outside his house. Yeah,

Dr Rad 1:28:52
but the crowd scene, the interaction between Brian and the crowd and the Virgin Mandy and the crowd, is just hilarious. The whole idea of Yeah, thinking for yourselves, doing your own thing. And they’re all like, yes, we’re all individuals. I love it, and I kind of love to be as well. A bit later on, not not too long before the crucifixion scene, we also see, obviously, like the fetishizing of objects associated with Brian, the gourd and the sandal. And the way that you you see factions forming around these two different objects, which is exactly the kind of stuff you see happening in Christianity in real life. I mean, this is, you know what? Relics, 101, yeah, but, but also the idea that, like, tiny details about the faith are what cause factions to form within Christianity, and leads to a lot of bloodshed, to be honest, in the later Roman Empire, as people are fighting for their particular brand of Christianity and their particular interpretation of things, which I think is what still rings true, because obviously we still see that factionalism between Christian groups. It might not be quite as extreme, but we certainly still see different and not just Christianity. Obviously in other religions as well, there are obviously different groups which are sprung up, and we still see infighting between those groups. And that, again, is one of those things that I think is just kind of timeless, even the absurdity of the kind of ascetic that Brian accidentally knocks out of his hole, which, again, is kind of, I feel like an allusion to the Desert Fathers. I feel like there has to be an illusion. I

Dr G
feel like it must be, yeah, he gets very upset. The poor man who’s been out in the desert in his little hole for a long time keeping silent and eventually makes a sound, because Brian accidentally steps on his foot or

Dr Rad
something. But that’s exactly the kind of his vow of silence is over. Yeah. That’s exactly the kind of extreme esthetic behavior we end up seeing a bit later, I was gonna

Dr G
say they just this is a historical as far as where or where from, from a Christian perspective, certainly those sorts of figures don’t start to pop up until we’re in the depths of sort of like Christian belief on the rise.

Dr Rad
Totally. The things that they do are pretty extreme, pretty extreme, yeah, when they get to them, yeah, yes, now is not the time. No, all right, the crucifixion, the crucifixion, just one crossbears, yeah,

Dr G
well, you’ve alluded to it already. I really, I do love this, this sort of like the the empathetic bureaucrat, yeah, next crucifixion, good, out the door, line of the left one cross each next crucifixion, good, sort of plays out. And I was like, oh, there’s that sense in which you can also see the character, the bureaucrat here, sort of getting to the point where they’re kind of like, Oh no, that’s, that’s not okay. You know that has to do their job anyway, yeah, and just keeps doing their job. And this feeds in nicely to something that happens to Brian later, where he says to one of the Roman guards, as they’re putting his cross up, you don’t have to take orders. The guard immediately replies, I like orders. And I think for you, this is the moment where we also get the beautiful reference to Spartacus. Yes,

Dr Rad
absolutely, yes.

Dr G
And so as it turns out, one of the scenes that’s playing against this scene is that we’re back with bigger stickers and conscious

Dr Rad
who, to be fair, again, I’m just going to pipe in and say to be historically accurate, the reason why Pontius Pilate probably actually deserves a bad reputation is history is that he does not seem to have been very skilled at negotiating the Jewish cultural beliefs and laws and practices in this region. He does not seem to be very respectful of them, and therefore probably does deserve a poor reputation as a governor for the things that went down. And probably was not a very soft and cuddly person, but being played by Michael Palin, I love him.

Dr G
Yeah, look, and I don’t think the Romans would expect anything less from themselves in this situation than to enforce Roman attitudes and beliefs. Yeah, so the things that Pontius Pilate gets accused of probably all quite deserved. Yeah.

Dr Rad
I mean, it seems like yeah, he probably wasn’t the best person for the job at this point in time, which probably is kind of why things got out of hand with Jesus. But was he any different to any other Roman governor? Yeah? Like, I

Dr G
can’t see a timeline necessarily where a Roman governor wouldn’t have gone yeah. Obviously they need to be executed, yeah. And from a Roman perspective, Jesus is not someone special, no. And in this moment, this cross cutting scene in the sort of lead up to the crucifixion of Brian is this scene where Pontius Pilate has said that he will squeeze someone, he will save one of the of the people to be crucified. There’s apparently going to be 140 crucifixions as a special celebration, and one of them will be released. And the crowd just goes wild because they’re aware of his speech impediment, and they just offer him names that he’s going to mispronounce. Watcher. Is there a watcher? And so they just keep going on on this path, and eventually somebody suggests Brian, in which Yeah, conveniently also doesn’t work for the speech impediment, and a messenger does get sent to the site of the crucifixion like, you know, we need to release Brian. And Brian is currently distracted having, he’s in a chat with somebody else. I don’t know, he’s not across, but he is like, you know, and somebody hears this, and one of the Mr. Cheeky,

Dr Rad
yes, Mr. Cheeky, yeah. Mr. Cheeky, telling him that it’s all right, my brother’s gonna come and rescue me.

Dr G
And then they have this moment where a guard turns up and says, you know, we are to release Brian. And so then the people organizing the crucifixions are like, well, who’s Brian? I’m

Dr Rad
Brian, and so is my wife. I’m Brian.

Dr G
And so the parody of the Spartacus scene writ large absolutely to enjoy. But

Dr Rad
again, what is historically accurate is that Jesus was not alone at his crucifixion, and he certainly was not the only person to be penalized this way under the

Dr G
Romans. No, although apparently some of the initial critique. Of this film was that there were too many people getting crucified at one time. Absolutely.

Dr Rad
Look, I think, I don’t think the Romans would have generally crucified this many people at one time. But then again, if you think about the aftermath of Spartacus war, allegedly 6000 of the surviving slaves, 6000 that is, were crucified up and down the Appian Way, so they were capable of it. Oh, yeah.

Dr G
So yeah, this is basically the end of the film. It is

Dr Rad
where we get to Always Look on the bright side of life. Now this is this actually segues nicely to thinking about the fact that this scene, in particular, I think, was one of the ones that aroused a lot of controversy when this film was released. So it did do very well this film, it made a huge amount of money. I think it was something like $60,000 in its first five days. I presume that means $60,000 in like 1970s money. It did do very well at the box office, but it was considered controversial by some people, and it was banned in certain areas. So it was banned in Norway. It was banned in the Republic of certain parts of the Republic of Ireland. I believe it was even maybe banned in parts of America. I think so. Definitely. It was a controversial film, and this particular scene was notorious because people felt like they were making fun of the crucifixion and, you know, Jesus’s death, something that’s hugely important for Christians. So if you, if you watch, and we will link this in the show notes, because it’s fairly available on YouTube, if you watch the BBC Two appearance of John Cleese and Michael Palin on Friday night, Saturday morning, which I have to say, my favorite part of watching that whole show was the fact that that show starts with a couple in bed having sex, and they turn to watch the program. That’s like the opening credits. But anyway, they were basically responding to criticisms from Malcolm Muggeridge and an Anglican bishop called Mervyn Stockwood, and the thing that they kept coming back to was that crucifixion scene. They felt like it was making light of death. They felt like it was really attacking a core moment for their belief. With the crucifixion, they kept coming back to that scene so you can kind of see how some people react, if you want to watch that YouTube thing, my favorite part of that whole episode is that, in terms of standing the test of time, those men don’t come across well nowadays the way that they I mean, you want to talk about being central to like Western culture and British culture, the way that they prioritize Christianity and that as being the basis for Western culture, the only thing that ever inspired anybody, completely ignoring the way that Christianity was forced upon people at the point of being burnt to death, completely ignoring all the negative conflict that has come with religions like Christianity, but it doesn’t stand the test of time. What you can see as well on YouTube, which I will also link, is the not the Nine O’Clock News sketch starring a very young Rowan Atkinson. I was gonna say that was one of his first Yeah, where? So about two weeks after that, initial debate appeared on television, not the Nine O’Clock News decided to do their own sketch making fun of the debate, where they have a bishop played by Rowan Atkinson coming on. He’s just made a movie about the life of Christ, and he’s being accused of lampooning Monty Python, particularly our Lord on high, John Cleese. And that might be a good moment, I suppose, to wrap up. Dr, G, yeah. Look, I

Dr G
think so. So I would encourage you, if you haven’t watched this film, to go and do so. It’s currently on Netflix, but it might be in other places as well. It is definitely worth thinking about as you also enjoy it. And yeah, I’m just in my mind, I’m just, I’m excited about the prospect of learning more about this historical period from non Roman material and and I think that’s one of the challenges that we always face as Roman historians, is that there is that element of the victor leaves the record, and that has definitely flow come down to us, and we can see it manifesting in this film. But there’s also like things to think about, in terms of imperialism generally, and ways in which we engage in decolonizing as we go. So yeah, and

Dr Rad
look, I think the thing that will stand the test of time about this film, I say, I do like that. It’s probably a bit more I lived in kind of Roman world, and I actually do like the fact that a lot of the characters we’re engaging with are more ordinary, I suppose, than a lot of the people we see in films about ancient Rome, who tend to be more emperors and generals. And we actually get to know these sorts of characters who, funnily enough, probably were the kinds of characters that. Jesus was moving around. You know, amongst us, that’s kind of why Brian and his mother are so perfectly placed to have that sliding doors kind of life with Jesus Christ. They’re exactly the kind of people that he probably would have been associating with. So I do kind of like that. But I think the thing that really stands the test of time is the fact that the characterizations like we all know people like the characters that Monty Python plays even 50 years later, including one that we didn’t really mention, but the leper, the X leper, without so much as a buy your leave, the people like that, who are kind of timeless characters, I think, and I think that’s what makes Life of Brian stand out so much, but perhaps also the fact that it is a bit of a riff on biblical epics, which some people might still be very familiar with, and I obviously number amongst those people.

Dr G
Well, it has been an absolute joy to learn more about this film with you.

Dr Rad
It certainly has, let’s say, arrivederci to Brian. His name is Brian.

Thank you for listening to this special episode of the partial historians, you can find our sources sound credits and an automated transcript in our show notes. Our music is by Bettina Joy De Guzman. You too can support our show and help us to produce more fascinating content about the ancient world by becoming a Patreon. In return, you receive exclusive early access to our special episodes, and you get to make suggestions for future episodes. This one was one of our Patreon requests. So of course, we’d like to thank all of our wonderful crew over at Patreon and also our ko fi supporters for helping us to cover the costs of making the show and taking it in new directions. However, if you’re experiencing a serious lack of sisters, please just tell someone about the show or give us a five star review that goes for our book as well. You can now purchase Rex, the seven kings of Rome, right from our Patreon store as well as through Gumroad and Amazon. Until next time we are yours in ancient Rome, you

Transcribed by https://otter.ai

Transcribed by https://otter.ai

The post Special Episode – Monty Python’s Life of Brian (1979) appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

In our latest special episode, we welcomed the talented LJ Trafford to the show to discuss her latest book, Ancient Rome’s Worst Emperors (2023).

Special Episode – Ancient Rome’s Worst Emperors

You may very well have encountered some of LJ’s wonderful earlier works, including her historical novel series: The Four Emperors. These books cover a turbulent time in the early imperial period with Nero’s fall from power (and life) in 68 CE and the subsequent chaos that followed in the year 69. 

She has also published nonfiction works on ancient Rome including How to Survive in Ancient Rome (2020) and Sex and Sexuality in Ancient Rome (2021). And just in case that didn’t keep her busy, LJ is a contributor to The History Girls blog, writing about all sorts of fascinating subjects involving the ancient world from Pliny the Elder’s concerns about the dangers of sponges to handy tips to avoid assassination as a Roman emperor.

Our conversation allowed us to talk about the qualities that define ‘good’ and ‘bad’ emperors. And yes, Augustus and Tiberius were mentioned, but we kept it civil! LJ then took us through some of the characters who qualified as one of the WORST emperors, including Caligula, Didius Julianus, Silbannacus, and Petronius Maximus.

Image of Caligula, courtesy of Carole Raddato on Flickr.

You will definitely want to grab a copy of LJ’s book to hear about all the other terrible emperors of Rome after this episode. You should be able to pick up a copy at your local independent bookstore, as well as the usual corporate giants.  

Our music was composed by Bettina Joy de Guzman.

Dr Rad 0:15
Music. Welcome to the partial historians.

Dr G 0:18
We explore all the details of ancient Rome,

Dr Rad 0:23
everything from political scandals, the love affairs, the battled wage and when citizens turn against each other. I’m Dr Rad and

Dr G 0:33
I’m Dr G, we consider Rome as the Romans saw it, by reading different authors from the ancient past and comparing their stories.

Dr Rad 0:44
Join us as we trace the journey of Rome from the founding of the city.

Dr G 0:55
Hello and welcome to a brand new episode of the partial historians I am Dr G

Dr Rad 1:03
and I am Dr Rad,

Dr G 1:05
and we are thrilled today to be sitting down and chatting with LJ Trafford. Now you may have heard of this author before. LJ Trafford studied ancient history at the University of Reading and is famous for her historical novel series the four emperors. These books cover a turbulent time in the early imperial period with Nero’s fall from power and from life in 68 CE and the subsequent chaos that followed in the year 69 LJ is also a contributor to the history girls blog, writing about all sorts of fascinating subjects involving the ancient world, from Pliny the elders’ concerns about the dangers of sponges to handy tips to avoid assassination as a Roman emperor, a goal to which maybe none of us aspire these days, but you never know, those of you out There, there are hints and tips for how to do it. In addition to this, LJ has published three accessible and immensely readable non fiction works on ancient Rome. How to survive in ancient Rome from 2020 sex and sexuality in ancient Rome, 2021, and most recently, ancient Rome’s worst emperors in 2023 and it is this latest work on those troublesome emperors that we’ll be discussing today. Thank you so much for joining us. LJ,

LJ Trafford 2:32
thank you so I’m delighted to be here. Huzzah. Huzzah,

Dr G 2:35
we’re very excited. This is a great topic, and I think there’s going to be some nice surprises in here for people as well. Oh, that’s good. So before we delve into some of the gruesome details, we’d like to start with your perspective on what makes people in power so fascinating. So some of these stories are told, and they’re retold many times, and yet we continue to return to them. And I’m interested in what makes them compelling. From your perspective,

LJ Trafford 3:05
I think from our perspective, I think our kind of politicians look slightly kind of impotent in comparison to kind of Roman emperors. You know, if you’ve got a parliamentary system, our kind of politicians are kind of curtailed, aren’t they, by kind of law, international laws and regulations, and used to be in Britain, certainly UK, European laws and regulations. And they’re also constrained by, you know, having an opposition party who might block everything they want to do. So you kind of vote for some your party, and they don’t fulfil their potential because they’re forever blocked and they and, you know, I think in most societies, there’s these kind of big, looming issues that nobody seems to want to deal with that just get kicked down the road as a can down the road for somebody else to pick up later. So I think kind of in comparison looking at Roman emperors, where somebody can just walk in and go, Hey, let’s just call September Germanicus, and then it’s done. And everybody does. I think there’s something quite compelling about somebody who can come in and just make a change and just say, I’ve decided today we’re going to do this, and it happens. And I think it kind of plays into that kind of childhood game of, what would I do if I ruled the world, kind of thing, that kind of imagining how you generally imagine that you’d be the benevolent dictator. You know, you never think you’re going to go the full Caligula, do you? But so I think in comparison, it kind of appeals for that. And I think also the stories that Roman historians have collected for us on the Emperors is what makes them so compelling, because they can collect all the worst bits and all the most kind of gruesome bits and all the most kind of sexy bits. So they they’ve created really the compelling story for us. It’s, you know, it’s not, it’s not a tale of kind of laws being passed and kind of dreary business. It’s all you know, who’s sleeping of who, who’s done the most outrageous thing, who’s decided, you know, to call every month after themselves, who’s built a, you know, 60 foot gold statue of themselves. So I think it’s that, I think that’s what compels us, just the the power, the ability of one man to decide so much and for people to to act on that. I think, I think we’d all like a kind of a horn to people around us. Just act on every whim, wherever that may be. I think that. I think that’s what makes them so attractive and makes us, yeah, I think it makes this question, what would we do if we had that power? Would we have a 60 foot gold statue of ourselves created?

Dr G 5:11
Definitely, the

LJ Trafford 5:13
answer is yes, of course. Why wouldn’t you? I know, why wouldn’t you name every month after yourself? Because you know you can, I

Dr Rad 5:22
must admit, I’m really enjoying the idea of you saying to someone like Donald Trump that he is impotent.

LJ Trafford 5:30
Oh, yes, I’d like to see his reaction to

Dr Rad 5:33
that. You feel impotent. Yes, exactly.

Dr G 5:38
I think he has aspirations in the Imperial sense, though, if he could be a Roman Emperor, I think he definitely would try. I think he

LJ Trafford 5:45
talks like one a lot, doesn’t he? He comes in as I’m a lot of his rhetoric on the previous election was, I’m the guy who can change this. It’s the eye. It’s not the we, the Republican Party, can come in and change Americans. I Donald Trump, I alone can clean out the swamp. I alone can do this. So he talks a bit like a Roman emperor, because it’s a it’s about him. It’s not about, you know, the kind of administration and their aims. It’s all about him. So, yeah, I can, I can see there’s a comparison there.

Dr Rad 6:11
Well, I think, I kind of think that’s why we are so intrigued by these sorts of figures, because we, in some ways, they seem so alien and different to us for exactly the reasons that you’ve outlined. But then when you look at some of the political figures of the 20th and 21st century that still loom very large, you can kind of see how they would enjoy that level of absolute power. And I think

LJ Trafford 6:34
there’s a kind of fascination, isn’t there, a bit recently, with kind of Putin and his kind of power, and lots of people in, kind of in America, which, you know, given that American Russians history, kind of admiring Putin, because he kind of does stuff as such. So whereas, opposed to their political system has maybe got a bit kind of paralysed in recent years, so there’s still this fascination of one man with with absolute power, I think. And I think, yeah, I think we look at our own times, and we forever looking back and comparing, aren’t we generally wrongly? It’s

Dr G 7:03
one of those dangers of the attraction of the strong man, isn’t it? It’s sense that it’s aligned with a kind of efficiency of purpose and outcomes which you just can’t get in the bureaucratic grind of day to day government.

LJ Trafford 7:17
Yeah, the danger of the strong man is when they stay too long, isn’t it, and then people forget what it was like before there was the strong man, and then they start to not appreciate the strong man. And then it all goes horribly wrong, the kind of thing. But

Dr Rad 7:28
yes, we’re not advocating dictatorship on those podcasts.

LJ Trafford 7:31
She just doesn’t like that. Not advocating dictation, not advocating, not advocating anything like that. We

Dr Rad 7:37
always have to make that very clear, you know, as Roman historians, because sometimes it sounds like we actually are getting swept up in Roman values.

LJ Trafford 7:46
I do not share any values of ancient Roman I can’t think of it

Dr Rad 7:50
exactly yes. So let’s talk about your book a little bit. You take the reader through the imperial period in the Roman West, and you provide examples from the first century all the way down to the fifth century, which means there’s a huge amount of ground to cover in your book, and it means that you have to be a bit selective about which emperors you focused on, but it is also an opportunity to draw attention to some emperors that are less well known, perhaps to general readership. So what kinds of qualities or defects were you keen to include that maybe helped you decide who you were going to focus on?

LJ Trafford 8:24
Yeah, kind of first of all, I probably naively didn’t realise what a huge task this was when I agreed to write this book. Because generally I get given a book title and a book brief, like, kind of sex and sexuality, and I get like the chapters, and they say, write a chapter on contraception, write a chapter on marriage, write a chapter on this. And I did the brief for this, and I kind of randomly said, Oh, I’m going to write about, you know, worst emperors, you know, over 500 years. And and then when I went to research it, I realised what a huge task is, how much reading there is. And then I thought, well, maybe I could do it by dynasty, and I’ll just pick, like, the worst one from each dynasty. And then I looked at, and there’s loads of dynasties, just like, far too much, you know. And I got a kind of, I got a work count of, like, 85,000 words. And there was no way I could pick an emperor from each dynasty and write about them in depth. And I wanted to go in depth on some and kind of pull them apart. So I had to kind of go back to drawing board and go, Okay, how am I going to choose these worst emperors? And I kind of took a few things into consider. I took Augustus’ Res Gestae, the kind of story of his life, because it’s quite a good blueprint for what a good emperor should be, because it’s all about I’m brilliant. This is what I did. This is what makes me brilliant. So I kind of took that, because he would talk about, I built this temple, I built this. I defeated this enemy. I did this. I brought in these laws. I gave this money to these soldiers. I gave so much to the people. So it gave me kind of blueprint of what a good emperor should be. And I took kind of Suetonius 12 Caesars as well to help a bit, because he he does a biography of the first 12 emperors. Well, the first 11 and Julius Caesar, we don’t count but, but he splits his biographies into they. Deeds and their bad deeds, which again, gave me a bit of a basis to have a look at what a good emperor should be doing and what a bad Emperor did. So I kind of used them vaguely as my kind of back blueprint for picking them. And then really, I chose ones that I thought were quite interesting as well, kind of randomly, but I wanted to show right across those 500 years show kind of how the role of Emperor changes and the kind of people holding it change as well. And I wanted to do, I wanted to look at some more unfamiliar ones, because it’s very easy to go, okay, worst emperors, and we just go, okay, Nero, Commodus, Elagabalus, and the kind of the usual people. And I wanted to, kind of, I wanted to find out some more about some different ways in which you could be a worst emperor that didn’t necessarily involve kind of sexual depravity and kind of spending lots of money and excess. Because, you know, that I thought as a book, it would get a bit samey, if that’s like every chapter, oh yeah, and they bankrupted the Treasury. Next chapter, oh yes, and he bankrupted the Treasury. Next Oh yes. Incest with who, you know, Mother, incest, sister, you know, I thought it’d be a bit samey, so I wanted to pull out some kind of alternative ways where people could be worst. And I found, you know, numerous ones where they, you know, they didn’t have these kind of big personalities, like the kind of colleagues and the Neros of the world, but actually, they got the top job, and they just, they just weren’t very good at it, and they just weren’t up to it, you know. And there’s a series of people who kind of become emperor, and at the first sign, the first kind of, kind of barrier, they first the first problem they face, they just completely fold, which I thought was quite interesting. So it was a whole series of people who kind of got the job and then realised they weren’t good enough, which is that, you know, I think must be a terrible realisation that you’re like, I’m emperor, wow, and everybody’s praising you, and you suddenly realise I’m not good enough. I can’t cope with this. And there’s no kind of like, no resign, and there’s no like, handing in your month’s notice again, sorry, chaps, not the job I thought it was going to be, you know, I’ll let somebody else do it. You know, that’s not how you stop being an emperor. You stop being an emperor because somebody kills you, basically, or you die naturally. So there’s no resigning. So yeah, I was looking for kind of people like that, people other reasons why you might be worse. And I think, yeah, not having the qualities you need to be an emperor is certainly one. Being weak is certainly one, not being the kind of strong one. And, yeah, just being kind of ineffectual, being promoted above your kind of ability level and and I thought that was a more interesting way to pull people out. And it pulled out some emperors that I hadn’t, didn’t really know much about, apart from just their names, people like kind of Valentinian the second and kind of Gordian. It pulled out some more interesting people I wanted to have a look at and explore a bit further in detail. But yes, I mean, it’s a bit it’s a book to for people to debate. And I was thinking that I was going to get a lot of a lot of them shouting at me for including various emperors or not including various emperors. And various ones didn’t get in because I, you know, had 85,000 word counts. So some got cut out. And, yeah, some got included because I wanted to write about them, because I thought they were quite interesting. So people like Domitian, I don’t necessarily think he was terrible emperor, but I think he’s a good illustration of what being Emperor does to you, in a sense, the paranoia and that what you have to do as emperor in the sense of holding on to power, and how the actual kind of things that came with being Emperor for Domitian are the things that kind of undid him. So he, you know, his paranoia gets worse and worse and worse, and he kind of undoes himself. So I thought he was an interesting one to look at as to what kind of being, what being Emperor does to you, does to your mindset, and can lead you down a worse path that you wouldn’t necessarily have followed had you been, I don’t know, a bit of a stronger character or less paranoid, but it deservedly paranoid. You know, he got assassinated. So you could say he was deservedly paranoid. So

Dr Rad 13:48
I was going to say that, you know, the saying is, it’s not really paranoia if they’re actually out to get you. Yeah.

Speaker 1 13:54
I think Domitian even said Himself to me that nobody believed in conspiracies unless they were successful. So he was, you know, he was well aware of it.

Dr Rad 14:03
Listening to you talk about that, it again, gives me some sort of modern vibes with people like Louis XVI and Nicholas II, who kind of knew from the get go that they weren’t up to the job and didn’t turn out too well for either of them, either,

Dr G 14:19
certainly. But yeah, there’s a lot to be said for character. Isn’t there? Because for somebody liked mission, perhaps, like, if he had never gotten into that job, chances are he would have lived a perfectly regular kind of elite Roman life. And yet, being thrust into power sort of brought out all of those characteristics in him that maybe he didn’t have a good chance to manage on his own, and then all of a sudden, here we are, and he’s assassinated. Yeah? I mean, he’s

LJ Trafford 14:45
very, you know, he would have, yeah, lived a good Roman elite life. He was a tremendous administrator, a tremendous guy for the details guy. So you can imagine he’d be the guy you’d want on every committee, because he’d, you know, you’d pull out all the details you hadn’t thought of, like, oh, cool, cool. Thanks to mission. Thanks. Yeah, forgotten about that. Gotten about that. That’s really important. But yeah, I mean, he’s paranoia probably built before then, because, you know, he was involved in the year 69 CE, and can thrust to the forefront there. So he’s paranoid probably started in his teenage years, when his father was declared emperor, and his father is in, you know, Syria so safely out the way of Rome. And Domitian, who’s only about 18 at the time, is in Rome, and he’s the kind of the front of the kind of Flavian dynasty. So everything’s kind of centred on him. So I think he’s kind of paranoia probably started from that moment there watching kind of emperors fall and rise right in front of his eyes. But, but, yeah. But I think being emperor, yeah, didn’t improve upon his kind of personality. Probably brought out the kind of worst in him, and that he’s a good example of, you know what you do to try and hold on to power, and his attempts to hold on to power completely undoing. Because the more extreme he becomes, the more plots there are. And then there’s a successful one, and you only need one to be successful. Yes, the

Dr G 16:02
dangers, yeah. And I think this sets up nicely, thinking about the first emperor that you discuss in the book, which is Caligula, which, I mean, it would be hard to pass him over, I think, because he’s almost like the what would be the word

Dr Rad 16:21
the OG terrible,

Dr G 16:24
the OG terrible, yes, the OG terrible emperor, because we’ve kind of got this blueprint that’s kind of offered by Augustus through the Reyes guest. Then we’ve got the struggle street that is Tiberius, who’s really trying to sort of make it happen. Is maybe not quite sure whether he really wants it, but he still seems pretty competent overall. I think that’s a compliment for you. Dr, rad. And then we get Caligula, and he seems to have some pretty devastating qualities that do make him unfit for rule. And I’m interested in what stands out for you when you’re thinking about caligula’s life and his reign. Yeah, he’s

LJ Trafford 17:04
a, yeah, he’s a kind of poster boy of what you would think of as a worst emperor. He’s a kind of shorthand, you know, even today, for what worst Emperor is. You know, anyone who goes slightly extreme is going, Oh, it’s all going a bit Caligula. He’s become that kind of shorthand. He’s like, you say, he’s the first kind of Emperor who’s really kind of unqualified for the job, in the sense of Augustus. Had, you know, this way, created the role of Emperor, though it’s not really a role, it’s kind of nebulous, a nebulous thing, but he created that, and he’d, you know, he’d fought civil wars, he’d held, you know, government posts, he’d got a big and long kind of background in in kind of administration. So he, you can say he was kind of qualified to do that. And Tiberius coming in his emperor in his 50s, he’s got a long history of, you know, being in the military and and holding public position. So again, he’s a very qualified person. And we have colleague who comes in at 25 and he hasn’t got that kind of background, he hasn’t got that kind of training, and he’s the kind of the last minute heir to who suddenly decided upon so I think he goes in with the kind of disadvantage of not knowing how things work. Probably he goes in with the advantage of a lot of public support, because he’s the son of Germanicus and Agrippina, who were very, very popular with the people, and who his father, Germanicus, had died when he was very young, and Agrippina had been exiled by Tiberius and later, kind of killed. So he goes in with a lot of good feeling. But yeah, I think, I think it stands out with kind of Caligula, is there’s a kind of a pushing of how far he can take things. And maybe that’s because, you know, as we said, he hasn’t. He’s got that kind of unqualified feel about it. He’s pushing what the word Emperor means and what he can do with it. And underlying it always is this kind of sense of hum, a kind of a very dark sense of humour that comes out in some of the things he does, you know, kind of famous joke about, oh, I’m going to make my horse a senator, you know, kind of disparaging the whole senatorial class and and, you know, on the crawler stage, you know, there was equestrian he was thrown to the beasts and was protesting his innocence, so Caligula had him taken out of the arena. Guy probably thinks he’s going to be saved instead, he has his tongue cut out and thrown back in with the beasts. So this is kind of sick, kind of humour and kind of delight in kind of pushing what it means to be emperor and what he can do, you know, to the extent of wanting to put his, um, his statue in the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, which does not go down well. And in the extent of, you know, he doesn’t dress like an ordinary mortal. We’re told he dresses in very fine clothing. Um, he’s kind of, kind of crossing the boundaries of what’s acceptable in Roman society, kind of sex wise. And like we’re saying, kind of clothing wise. So you know, sex wise, he’s breaking all the taboos, all the things you shouldn’t do. He allegedly held dinner parties where he would with senators and their wives, where he would take their wives away, have sex with them, and then take them back to their husbands and give. Long kind of die trait on how great or bad they were in bed, and that kind of thing, that kind of pushing the envelope of, you know, sleeping obviously, with freeborn women is not, not acceptable if they’re married. He’s he’s kind of pushing and pushing what he how, how much he can get away with almost, and when somebody’s going to say no. And that kind of spreading of kind of terror and humiliation. You know, famously invited a group of people at the dead of night to the palace Who all think they’re going to be executed, and then he just does a little dance for them and sends them home. So there’s this kind of, there’s a kind of thing about pushing the envelope and kind of torment and humiliation and enjoying that, that kind of runs through kind of Caligula reign that he enjoys exercising this power, and he enjoys the effect it has on people, and he enjoys watching, you know, people being tortured, etc, which we can kind of say all kind of stems from a very, very troubled childhood, to put it mildly, where he’d watched his family being picked off one by one around him by the Praetorian prefecture, Janus. So his mother had been exiled and died horribly, and his brother, two brothers, had been exiled and died horribly. And he was kind of next on the list and was saved and then becomes the kind of heir to the to the guy, Tiberius, who’s bumped off his family and is sent to kind of live with him on Capri, the island of Capri where Tiberius has kind of retired to and is forced to kind of keep up this front of being nice to Tiberius whilst knowing what he’s done to his family. So you can kind of see, with that kind of troubled background that it might make you slightly slightly unhinged, and when given the opportunity to kind of take revenge on those senators who signed those kind of those papers that damned his family, you could kind of see that he would kind of push it as far as he could go. Well,

Dr Rad 21:47
that’s definitely the thing, I think that always is intriguing about Caligula, because when you as you say, look at the actions that are recorded, it seems like no question this is a bad guy, but there is that possibility that he is specifically targeting a group of people who have legitimately caused him a lot of pain and grief in his life, and that that’s where this comes from, and this is him sort of unleashing all of that pent up aggression that may have been building up for years and years because The drama of his family is unfolding throughout his entire childhood.

LJ Trafford 22:23
Yeah, I think it’s true. I think there seems to be a point at which he realises and he comes in as a kind of the darling of the Roman people, and they call him chicken and Sweetie, and, you know, the senses he preys upon him. And there seems to be a point when he realises that they don’t mean it, that this is just words and words being thrown at him. And from that kind of point on, yeah, he starts to kind of target them deliberately, deliberately to humiliate them. And, yeah, I think you’re right. I think it is that kind of pent up rage that you know, when the kind of wool is lifted from these eyes, when there’s a plot and he realises these people don’t love him, they don’t adore him. He Yeah, it’s revenge, and it’s revenge against them and and you can kind of see that kind of unfolding, and he’s and obviously the people writing the history are the kind of senatorial class, so any kind of humiliation or kind of undermining of them is going to rank very personally with their kind of personal pride. I mean, Augustus was the one who walked that kind of tightrope between keeping the Senate on side and happy and feeling like they’re in power whilst not actually having much power anymore. And Caligula kind of can’t do that, and won’t do that. He won’t pretend. He won’t work with them. He won’t pretend that they have the power. He is the one with the power, and he unleashes it on them. So, yeah, it’s, it’s, it’s revenge, isn’t it? Really, it

Dr G 23:41
does seem like that, yeah. I think it creates a sense of empathy as well for him, this idea that he’s operating primarily from a position of pain, yeah, and thinking about that trauma of his childhood, and then how that sort of manifests when he has the opportunity. And I’m not saying it’s a good thing. I think some of the obviously, he did terrible things, but all of a sudden you’re kind of like, okay, this is somebody who’s gone through incredible amounts of hurt and frustration, and now they’re in a situation where they have the opportunity to make a choice about how they navigate that, and no one can stop them.

LJ Trafford 24:19
Yeah, that’s, that’s the kind of frightening thing about illegally. Yeah, no one can stop him. And you know, the person who does stop him is not one of these senators who’s been targeting. It’s not a Brutus character who makes a grandstand, you know, for liberty and all this. It’s um, one of his guards because he made fun of his voice. It’s, you know, it’s a very personal assassination. And this guard had got a very high pitched, slightly girly voice, so Caligula had been giving him ever more kind of embarrassing kind of watch words, you know, something like Venus or something like that, evermore kind of just taking the mickey out of him, and he’s the one that kind of snaps and sets up a plot against him. It’s not actually the kind of Senators with grand noble. Lofty ambitions to rid themselves of a tyrant. They don’t kind of turn against him, because, I guess it’s the fear factor. And, you know, going back to Domitian, you can kind of see that, because we have the writings of Pliny and Tacitus, who served a mission, you know, and both of both of whom did very well under Domitian and got promoted, and, you know, moved up the ranks. But they give us an insight into what it’s like to kind of serve an emperor who’s, you know, who is that kind of, not great, you know, it’s terrifying. It’s terrifying to stand in a room and face them when they lose their temper. And I think for Caligula, it must be even more terrifying, because there’s no limits to what he might do. It seems he could do anything. And he does, you know, his whole kind of military campaigns, where they go, think it’s to Germany, and there’s nobody to fight. So they just get some people to hide in the forest for him to capture so he can have his own triumph, you know, the kind of thing. So the it feels like there’s no, kind of no limits to what he will do. But they still don’t turn because they’re just too, too frightened, I guess. But, but, yeah, I mean, it’s coming It’s coming, it’s coming from his child, it’s coming from pain, and it’s full out revenge and, you know, and it works, yeah?

Dr Rad 26:06
Well, I mean, I suppose comparing him to Augustus and Tiberius, again, they’ve both obviously experienced their own pains and setbacks in their lives, but you don’t get the sense that they were ever shielded from that. They kind of grew up in a very sort of realpolitik kind of world, whereas Caligula, because he was so young when things started going wrong for his family, and then you have that allusion to the papers that he had access to when he became emperor, it’s almost as though he maybe did not know the full extent of complicity potentially, in this senatorial class, and you know, people who were involved in powerful circles against his family, and maybe he was sort of kept a bit in the dark, and it wasn’t until he became emperor that he sort of had the wall lifted from his eyes. And maybe that’s partly where this, this pain and sense of revenge comes from, the fact that he maybe didn’t have the full picture, and then all of a sudden, you know, it was kind of like this light, light bulb going off, and he’s like, oh, okay, so this is how it all went down. And this is who really testified against my mother, and this is what really happened. Yeah, I

LJ Trafford 27:16
think you’re absolutely right, because I think, you know, when you read the sources, you know, the person who gets responsibility for the death of all colleague of his family, oh, it’s also Janus fault. You know, there’s this kind of thing. Sejanus is executed, and then, you know, everybody’s kind of like, oh, yeah, nothing to do with us. It was, yeah, it was Sejanus. He did everything. He did everything. Everything is blamed on him, and he’s dead, conveniently dead, so he can be that kind of scapegoat. But, yeah, the papers show that it you know, Sejanus didn’t act alone. He needed people to sign things. He needed things to get passed. And they, they did, and they, they aided the death of his family. And I think you possibly right that he maybe didn’t know. Maybe he he was shielded from it being so young and be and was probably told, Oh, it was sejana. Sejanus bumped off your family with Tiberius. They’re the villains in this piece, and the wool is lifted from his eyes with these kind of papers, and kind of finally realising that these, these are the people who are involved in it as well. Well, that’s

Dr Rad 28:11
why it’s so interesting, because listeners of this podcast will be aware that I have a slight fondest for Tiberius, and one of the things that I have been struck by is that Caligula actually doesn’t seem to have that much of a grudge against Tiberius, which you think he would if Tiberius was really the man he held to be responsible for the downfall of his of his entire family, ultimately, as the Emperor during that time. You know, there are serious some digs. There are some comments, but he also seems to admire Tiberius. Yeah, there are also some positive things that come out of that. So it’s, it’s kind of a weird relationship that those two must have have, but I certainly never get the sense that he truly hated Tiberius. No,

LJ Trafford 28:55
it doesn’t, yeah, like you say, it doesn’t come out much. There’s not, kind of like a complete damning of Tiberius memory and, you know, kind of ripping up statues as what happens of Emperor’s kind of deaths, you know, he kind of keeps it, keeps it going, yeah, yeah, I would grieve you. It doesn’t seem to be the hatred. It doesn’t, yeah. I’m trying to think, no, what he says about Tiberius is not much that comes out of you,

Dr Rad 29:17
like, as you say, dark jokes that. But he says that kind of stuff about everybody,

Dr G 29:21
and they did spend some time together, so they would have had a personal relationship. So I imagine that would play into it for him as well.

LJ Trafford 29:33
Maybe he was won round by Tiberius’ winning personality though, Tiberius was not well known for his kind of winning kind of charm. And I

Dr G 29:41
was gonna say charisma is not really strong suit

Dr Rad 29:45
in the charisma, uniqueness, nerve and talent. I think he only has the last two. So let’s move along now to one of my other favourites, because I love movies, love gladiator so we of course. Us have to go all the way down to Commodus, who ruled between 180 to 192 he’s been made very famous by Joaquin Phoenix, okay, and I think we can get sort of Caligula vibes from that portrayal in Gladiator. But not many people would be aware that actually, right after him, there was some pretty dud emperors as well. So let’s get into one that I bet nobody’s heard of before, Didius Julianus. What made him so terrible, Didius

LJ Trafford 30:30
Julianus is a joy. We have to say that gladiator kind of underplays, Commodus, somewhat Commodus is way more extreme than anything they ever showed on screen Gladiator, yeah, but I suppose that’s down to you know, the whole thing Commodus is very big on the beast hunts, and he’s doing decapitate ostriches with kind of curved arrows, which the Romans loved. But today, in our kind of animal loving society, possibly wouldn’t go down so well as a film. So they glossed over a lot of that. But yes, after Commodus is assassinated, there’s a guy who steps in, who’s a guy called Pertinax, who is an older, older guy. As what seems to happen after a lot of assassinations and dodgy times in ancient Rome, you tend to get a kind of older person who kind of steps in as a kind of safe pair of hands. Afternoon goes. You have, you have Galba, who’s in his 70s, who’s held a lot of positions. He’s very well esteemed. He kind of steps in, you know, after Domitian is assassinated, we have Nerva, who’s similarly elder statesman, who steps in. And after Commodus, we have Pertinax, who’s that kind of older statesman who kind of steps in and to everybody’s and he starts to mop up what come with us is left, which is a big old mess. And everybody says he’s doing a really great job, and everybody’s very happy with personax, and the Praetorian Guard assassinate him pretty quickly into his reign.

Dr G 31:51
So he was, he was going all right with everybody else, but not with the people with the swords. Yeah.

LJ Trafford 31:57
And the reasons given are kind of one that they couldn’t because Pertinax was a very good emperor, they couldn’t profiteer in various ways, unspecified ways, that they had been under Commodus. And secondly, that their Praetorian Prefect, Clarus wasn’t a very good keeper of secrets, and this was their kind of justification for murder.They burst into the palace, and you know, Pertinax gave a series of arguments of why they shouldn’t assassinate him. And some of them were, you know, pretty good well. They were all pretty good arguments. And some of the guard were a bit, well, yeah, he’s right, you know, but they killed him anyway,

Dr G 32:31
because maybe we should let him live. I’m quite persuaded

LJ Trafford 32:34
by that argument. But we’ve come all this way. We’ve burst in, we’ve got our swords out. We may as well well, you know, as well. Now we’re here do what we set out to do. It’s the kind of least well thought out assassination in history, probably because they have no idea who’s going to take over. They haven’t planned it beyond we’ll just kill pertinax and then something will happen. I don’t know if they’re hoping the Senate will step in and appoint an emperor, but what happens is that most of Senators suddenly disappear to their country estates, I presume, to get out the way because they don’t want to be picked as emperor. The people who like pertinax, are rioting so much so the Praetorian Guard have to then go hide in their barracks up on the rumen or Hill, with kind of riots going on outside. So it’s a big old mess. And obviously the patron Guard are the Emperor’s private bodyguard and no emperor, no Emperor’s private bodyguard. So they need to find a new emperor. So they hit upon this scheme of, um, selling it. They’ll sell the post of Emperor to the highest bidder. People can come bid, and then they can become emperor. Which is, um, to

Dr G 33:37
our shiny auction guys, is going to be great. Which is the kind

LJ Trafford 33:42
of lowest? I mean, the Pretorian God have been the kind of Kim makers for a long time. They’ve helped people into the role of Emperor, and they’ve helped people out of it, shall we say, with swords. But this is the kind of lowest they sink. They’re kind of like we’re going to sell it to the highest bidder. And this kind of word reaches various people, and it reaches a dinner party, which a certain Didius Julianus is attending. And I’m assuming it’s towards the end of this dinner party when everybody is a bit tipsy, because it’s really the only, only explanation for what follows. And everybody’s Dinner Party says, Hey, DidiusJulianus, why don’t you go for it? Why don’t you go bid to be emperor? Come on, you’d be great in it. And he, you know, he’s got a pretty good background. He’s done all the relevant positions, and looked after Belgium for a while, and he was favoured by Marcus Aurelius. So he comes across on paper as not too bad, but yeah, listening to these kind of people at the dinner party, he thinks, yeah, why not? I’m going to be emperor. So they all chopped off, working their way through these riots that are going on somehow, up to the kind of touring barracks and stands outside, and he says, I want to be emperor. I’ll offer you all this money. And I think, I think the killer line is he offers the Pretorian Guard more gold than they had asked for and more gold than they expected.

Dr Rad 34:52
That sounds like a lot, an awful lot, which

LJ Trafford 34:55
should have sounded fishy, because the Praetorian Guard are notorious for demanding payment. Huge. Kind of bounties that don’t actually exist after Nero kind of died, and the Praetorian guard Nymphidius Sabinus demanded 30,000 sesterces for each one of his guards off Galba. They didn’t have the money for that. You know, there was no money to pay them. So they were renowned for asking for more than, you know, the most physically possible. But the fact that Julianus is promised to them more than they even expected, you know, should ring alarm bells that this is a bit fishy, but they they were just delighted, and they hauled him up into the Praetorian barracks and declared him emperor. You know, job done. Brilliant. Got new emperor. It’s all sorted. Only problem is, didis Juliana’s didn’t have that money. He didn’t have the money to pay them. He didn’t have the money to buy the emperorship. He was pretty much broke. It was all it was all bravado and wine. One has to assume,

Dr G 35:47
I was gonna say, maybe he’s been put up to it like, as the dinner party has progressed, people have been like, you know, pushing each other forward, and in the end, like he’s the one they all get behind. And he feels he has to go with it. I don’t know, but it seems like madness. It

LJ Trafford 36:01
seems like madness. And you have to wonder what he thought when he woke up the next day with a kind of killer hangover. I was like, What did I do? What did I say? And it comes back, it kind of flashbacks. Maybe, you know, kind of, oh yeah, I was at that party. Then what, what, you know, wakes up, maybe in the palace, where am I? And then suddenly realises that, you know, he’s emperor, the

Dr Rad 36:20
equivalent of the 90s, late night shopping via credit card, over the telephone, ordering, ordering sets of Ginsu knives and that sort of thing.

LJ Trafford 36:30
Yeah. What did I do last night? Oh, I brought the role of Emperor. Um, so he’s now emperor, which doesn’t go down well with anybody, because, um, everybody liked person act. So the people are still, when he goes down to, you know, be officially ratified, the people are kind of throwing stones at his head, you know. So from day one, I usually have to work to be unpopular, to be a Roman emperor, you know, Caligula, it took five years for it to completely unravel. You know, Commodus, it took many years to unravel. But from day one, you know, Julius did the honest is being kind of booed by the people, and there’s still riots going on and and then he finds out that in the provinces, several other people have declared themselves emperor as well. So he’s also, it’s another kind of oops moment, equivalent to kind of Otho after Galba, after he assassinated Galba you know, jogging up to the palace, the slaves hand him the correspondence. And, you know, he finds out there’s another emperor in Germany marching his direction, and you know, so Julianus is facing not one, but several. He’s got Septimius, Severus, and he’s got Niger, and I’m going to forget the other guy’s name. There’s no one. There’s three of them, and they’re all declared themselves emperor, and they’re all going to be heading his direction, all right,

Dr G 37:38
so he’s got some competition on his hands, on a number of fronts, it’s going to be a problem, good,

LJ Trafford 37:43
promise. So this is a point at which, you know, this is the point at which you find out what emperors are made of, what a man is made of. You’re facing adversity. Everybody hates you. You could turn this round. You could, you know, he’s got he’s got the background, he’s got the experience. He could turn this round. But he doesn’t. I think Herodian describes him as dumb and witless. He did not know how to resolve the situation. So he sends off um several envoys to me, Severus who, um, promptly changed sides, um. And this keeps happening. He keeps sending people to, you know, kind of negotiate with these other would be emperors. And they decide, Oh, this guy’s going to be a better one than Didius Julianus. And they stay so he keeps losing more of his army each time he tries to make situation better, he decides to have an army of elephants in Rome, and he puts except the elephants aren’t very well trained, and they don’t like their drivers, and they just keep tossing off the drivers that are riding them. So that doesn’t work. Cassius, Dio, who’s in he’s a senator at the time, is and he’s there in Rome, says the Senate were frequently overcome with laughter at kind of Didius Julianus’ attempts to kind of secure the city. So, yeah, everything he tries, just fails miserably. And Septimius Severus comes into Rome, bursts into, you know, the palace, and you know, he’s, he’s off, basically, he doesn’t last very long, but I think he definitely is up there with the worst emperor, just just for being, just for the way he became emperor shows moral fibre,

Dr G 39:15
that whole process of being like, well, if It’s for sale, yeah, I’ll buy.

LJ Trafford 39:22
I can do this.

Dr Rad 39:23
I think Duddius Julianus sounds like a better way of remembering him.

LJ Trafford 39:29
Just, and just yeah, just everything he tries is ridiculous and doesn’t work, and he can’t inspire loyalty in his own troops, in his own envoys, who are going off to negotiate. They’re kind of like, Oh yeah, you know, they’re very easily swayed by the other side. Yeah, you’re right. Probably we’ll stay here. I will stay here. So, yeah, it’s, it’s unintentionally hilarious, although Cassius Dio says it was hilarious, but he’s just not up to the job he failed. You know, he’s facing a difficult situation. Yeah, that would test any man, but he does not at all rise to the occasion. And. And produce anything of any work. It

Dr G 40:01
is a real challenge in this situation as well, because we’re dealing with the late second century, and by this stage, if you do not have, like, pretty strong military support, it’s very hard to sustain a power position. And Didius Julianus goes in and doesn’t have anybody at best, he’s got the Praetorian Guard, and then he has to build from there. And so that’s a bit of an issue, I’d say, because everybody else who’s coming at him from all of those different angles, have supported the troops. They’ve been elevated as Imperator from that sort of idea of the general ship being the basis of imperial power. And he doesn’t, and I, I wonder what he thinks, you say at best,

LJ Trafford 40:46
he’s got the Praetorian girl. This is the same Pretorian gone. He’s, he’s promised money to that he doesn’t have. So they don’t, yeah, exactly. He doesn’t even have them, you know, whereas, you know, someone like Otho was able, you know, against vastly superior odds, was able to inspire he had a ramshackle army of praetorian guards, new recruits and Gladiators, but they loved him, and he had the charisma, and he rose to the occasion, and he kept fighting for as long as he could against vastly overwhelming odds. Whereas Didius Julianus, he doesn’t have that same charisma. Clearly, he can’t get an army together. He hasn’t got any great ideas, and he’s got, even the elephants

are against him. But, I mean, it’s, I mean, that just sounds ridiculous. I didn’t argue with elephants as if that’s gonna stop, you know,

Dr G 41:33
I do like it, though it’s got that very, sort of, like, you know, what would work a real hark back to the days of Carthage and, like, you know, the Punic triumphs and things like this. So I can see where, like, the attraction might be in that idea. But obviously, you need to train those elephants quite well for them to be effective,

LJ Trafford 41:51
yeah, just, you know, they may as well have just said, Oh, it’s just cities, cats on them. Get cat on. It’ll work.

Dr G 42:02
That is an underrated, yeah.

LJ Trafford 42:07
Probably be more fate of elephants, I

Dr G 42:09
think, yeah. So we’ve got this sort of, like chaotic and short rule of Didius Julianus. And in a way, you would think that maybe nothing could top that. But then we get to one of the most intriguing emperors. And there is so little to be known about this guy that it’s it is worth mentioning. And I think you pronounce his name, Silbannacus. Silbannacus rules for a really, really short time. And this is in the third the mid third century CE so and this is a pretty unstable time for the Roman emperorship in general. There’s a whole lot of turnover when it comes to this top job. And I’m interested in what we know about Silbannacus, and how does he earn his place as a worst emperor? Well,

LJ Trafford 43:01
what do we know about Silbannacus? Almost nothing about Silbannacus. What we know about him comes from two coins that have been found, one in the 1930s and one in the 1980s and that is all the evidence we have for him ever being emperor. It doesn’t appear anywhere else now. You I mean, this could debate whether you usurp or was he an emperor, but looking at the coins, they look as if they’ve got similarities to coins that were minted in Rome. So they think he must have had some kind of ratification with Rome to be an emperor. But this is all we know about him. And it’s kind of like, how little do you have to do that nobody remembers you.

Dr G 43:40
Nobody remembers you. You don’t get mentioned in a written source that we know at all

Dr Rad 43:45
bitch about you. Yeah,

LJ Trafford 43:49
this is the kind of the crisis of the third century where we get Emperor after Emperor after emperor, and the kind of average rule of reign is something like 1.3 years or whatever. But they do all get a mention, at least for the way they died, or, you know, at least that they how they became emperor and how they died. Most of them get a mention, but he doesn’t appear anywhere. So I have to think, you know how insignificant a ruler you were, that nobody even cares how you died, even, you know. I mean, did he, yeah, was it a pleasure, you know, did was it a natural death, maybe, and that’s why it’s not worth recording. Or was it, was he assassinated by his own troops? Was he, you know, people care so little that it’s not recorded anywhere. And that’s kind of, I call him the book. I call him the Phantom Emperor because we were, you know, we’ve only known about him since the 20th century. But he makes his place as kind of worst Emperor because he’s so insignificant, so so nothing. He can’t have done anything of any note, not even died in any way of any note. Not even become emperor in any way of any note, because nobody notes it down, not even in passing, or, you know, in any other kind of document. When we may yet dig up a big chest somewhere in France and find, you know, all of all of this entire. Life story for all we know, but at this point in time, we know nothing about him. And I think if you leave that little imprint as emperor, then yeah, what was the point of you being emperor? You know, if a tree falls in wood and nobody hears it, did it ever fall? If you exactly nobody heard of it, were you ever emperor? And yeah, I wanted to include him, just because it just shows how reliant we are in certain periods on archaeological evidence, because there isn’t written evidence, because everything’s very chaotic. And yeah, I just think if nobody even records how you died or how you became emperor, you just you can’t have been any good. You must have been getting

Dr Rad 45:37
older. Yeah, it is kind of hard to believe that you could have someone who was emperor of the Roman world. And no details, nothing,

LJ Trafford 45:47
yeah, nothing, yeah. I find it. I find that staggering. And so I wanted to include him, just to show that, you know, it’s so chaos in the fifth century, you could become emperor. Nobody can

Dr G 45:58
notice. It’s also that sort of thing that makes me sort of start to speculate as well, where I think Did he sort of preemptively get some coins done up, but then died before he actually became emperor, like he was getting prepared for it. He knew it was coming, and then he died in the interim? Did he rule for like, two days or something like this? And something happened all of a sudden there was sort of outside of anybody’s control. But you would think even then, that might generate some sort of story that historians at the time would be interested in. And yet, nothing,

LJ Trafford 46:31
nothing. Yeah, it’s just yeah, it’s just Tumbleweed. Yeah, just just Tumbleweed. And like I said, that is intriguing itself. Why? Why do they not mention him? You know, maybe there is a an interesting mystery at the heart of that, but we will never know what it is unless there is a sudden discovery of a new coin that all kind of document explains everything,

Dr G 46:50
all right, archaeologists, the task has been set.

LJ Trafford 46:54
We need to know.

Dr Rad 46:56
So let’s now turn to the final emperor that makes the cut in your book, and that is Petronius Maximus, who, I think sounds like a delicious cocktail, but he holds power in 455, CE, he rates a description in your book as an evil genius. So we have to know what makes him both of those things, evil and a genius.

LJ Trafford 47:22
He’s a fascinating fellow, Petronius Maximus, because he he was one of those guys who seems to be very, very successful everything he turned his hand at he was brilliant. He’d held every single post possible. He’d had been in consul twice because he was so good at it. He was renowned for his dinner parties and for his literary pursuits. He was a man right at the top of his career, a man who’d done everything except being emperor and this. And the problem is, there already is an emperor at this time, a guy called Valentinian in the third who, um, he’s only in his 30s, I think, at this point. So he’s not likely to drop dead anytime soon. And there, and there are other people who are maybe a little bit more well respected than Petronius Maximus, but only just. There’s a general called Flavius Aetius, who’s very famous general who’s defeated Attila the Hun, no less, and so is held in very high esteem by Valentin the third. And is kind of intermarriage between those families. But for some reason, Petronius Maximus decides he wants to become emperor. And there’s kind of two, there’s kind of two stories behind this. One is that it’s revenge, because Valentine the third slept with his wife, or something like that. It’s all very vague and confusing. And the other is that he, he was just, he just wanted the crown. It was the one thing he hadn’t done. And I kind of, I kind of get it there. I get this because, yeah, I think, you know, as a writer, when you start writing, you kind of think, Oh, if I can just get published, that’s all I want. I just want to get my book published. And then that, you know, I’ll feel fulfilled then. And then it’s like, I just want one person to like my book, and then I’ll feel fulfilled. And then, you know, and then it goes on to, well, I want merchandise and a theme park based on my books, you know, an HBO 20 part TV series. And I want you kind of your ambitions grow with every small step you take, your ambitions grow. So I do kind of get why he thought he wanted to be emperor. But he goes about this in a very clever way. So the first thing he does is he gets um Flavius Aetius, a very famous general out of the way so he can step further closer to the throne. And he does this, and he’s not involved, and he doesn’t do the actual getting rid of Flavius Aetius. He somehow gets Valentinian, the third the Emperor, to kill Flavius Aetius. And it happens very suddenly. Aetiust is in a meeting, and it’s just an ordinary meeting about budgets and budgetary concerns and the finances and probably troop deployment, and just a general normal meeting, when suddenly the Emperor gets out his sword and goes running full pelte at Aetius and just murders him there and then in the middle of a meeting.

Dr Rad 49:54
That’s so Roman. That’s so Roman

LJ Trafford 49:57
with the help of his kind of standby eunuch as well, and they just hack him to death, you know, in the middle of a meeting. Oh,

Dr G 50:03
which is guys,

LJ Trafford 50:05
I mean, you know, I mean, we all know these meetings are boring about budgets and that, but made it a bit more exciting, it does

Dr Rad 50:12
give a whole meaning to the idea of cutting the budget.

LJ Trafford 50:18
So the prelude to this is Petronius Maximus, has spent a long time talking to Valentinian the third and kind of building up Aetius as a traitor, of somebody who was looking to overthrow him, who was a danger to him. And because Aetius was very popular, because he’s a very successful general. And so Valentinian the third, you know, is maybe quite right to be a bit worried about this. And it’s built up, and it’s built up, and his paranoia built up to this bit where he murders atheists, and so that gets him a bit closer to the throne. And then the next stage is getting rid of the Emperor himself. And this is made easier by Valentinian the third having killed Aetius because Aetius was very popular. So there was people there that he could hire or persuade to kill the Emperor because they wanted revenge. So it was a couple of guys who’d serve Aetius, who persuades to murder Valentinian the third, which they do, take him out, I think it’s a hunting trip, and they stab him to death, and that’s the end of him. So again, Petronius Maximus is not involved in this. He hasn’t got his hands dirty at all. So Valentinian the third is now dead, but it doesn’t naturally go to Petronius Maximus. He still has to bribe his way into power. So he still has to bribe a load of people, and then he’s made emperor. So he’s basically been made Emperor by offering two people and not getting his hands dirty at all. He’s got other people to do it for him, which is where, you know, like, kind of super, like a kind of Bond villain, you know, kind of sitting there with his minions doing the work for him. He’s managed to do, he’s managed to assassinate someone without getting his hands dirty and without being involved, and now he’s emperor. And you think that’s a very clever way of doing it, because he’s nobody’s blaming him for the death of both of those people. He’s got away with it, and he’s emperor, and then this rule just completely falls apart, like just overnight, so quickly and so disappointingly. Because you think, if he’s that clever, that he’s managed to get himself to this position by getting other people to his dirty work for him, you think, Oh, he’s going to be great emperor. He’s going to have lots of ideas. But he’s in a moment when he gets there, he’s not actually up to the job, and, oh no, he makes a fundamental error. And what he does is he marries um Valentinian the third’s wife, widow, widow, which now is widow, which she’s not happy about and also, also not happy about. This is the king of the vandals, um, whose name I’m probably going to butcher, Geiseric, because they’ve been, they’ve been, um, all kinds of battles between the vandals and the Romans. And they negotiated, Aetius negotiated peace. And Geiseric’s son was going to marry Valentinian the third’s daughter. So the murder of Valentinian the third is a kind of family matter to him now, so and an excuse, presumably, as well. Valentinian the third’s widow writes to Geiseric to ask for help, because she doesn’t want to be married to Petronius Maximus. And Geiseric sees an opportunity, and he launches the vandals. And the Vandals come and they sack Rome. This is one of the famous sackings of Rome. And Petronius Maximus are hearing this news the Vandals are heading towards responds even worse, and did his duty, honest. He doesn’t even try to muster a defence. He just legs it. He just hits on his horse and he legs it. But he’s spotted by people and some Imperial freedmen who are so disgusted at him doing a runner that they stone him to death there and then. So it’s, it’s an intriguing story, because it starts off so well, and you think he’s going to be a brilliant emperor, because, I mean, he’s very well qualified to be emperor. He’s got wonderful background. Everyone agrees he’s very clever, he’s very talented, he’s brilliant. And where he gets there, he’s brilliant. But first sign of trouble, he just folds. He just completely folds, and in the kind of sources, one of the things to say that he just didn’t realise what a step it was from being a senator to being emperor, and it’s compared to a story of a guy sitting at a beautiful banquet of all the best food you can imagine in your life, the best movie ever going to eat, but above your head is swinging an axe that could fall on your head at any minute. And that’s what being Emperor is like. And he didn’t know that. He didn’t realise, I think, that he would be the target that the minute he set took that step up from being an ordinary politician to being the head everything is your fault. You’re the full guy. You’re the guy that everybody’s heading for. And I think that that completely undid him. I mean, you think he would realise that if he’s been around kind of Imperial politics that long, but

Dr G 54:33
you would assume so, but, and he’s obviously got a lot of talent behind the scenes, so very much, one of those sort of people that is able to pull the strings of other people, so a great sort of, like, second in command, if you like, but maybe that step out into the sort of top gig itself. You can’t be in the shadows anymore. It’s much more difficult to be somebody who’s pulling the strings you are now the one whose strings are being pulled. Yeah,

LJ Trafford 54:58
you it was a. He was exposed. Essentially, he was exposed, and all eyes are on him. And, yeah, like you say, he works best in the shadow. He’s a manipulator. He’s, you know, he’s somebody who can pull the strings of other people, and work very has done very well there. But yeah, being exposed and then realising that everything is heading for him, personally, just him, not anybody else. It’s that hatchet, yeah, and that’s what being Emperor’s like that, you know, again, going back to paranoia of Caligula and Domitian, that hatchet are constantly above your head all the time. It can fall. And, yeah, he just met, I guess you got to say kind of mentally. He didn’t have the mental strength to cope with that.

Dr Rad 55:36
I can understand me, just because I think Game of Thrones has shown us this very well. There are some people that are suited to be the front man, and there are other people that are very good at being the helpers of the front man.

LJ Trafford 55:50
Yeah. And I think, yeah, I don’t think he realised, till he took that step, that fatal step, that he was an emperor material. And he didn’t realise what it meant to be emperor, it, yeah, until he took that step. And then, I guess he just panicked, panicked and, yeah, didn’t even try to try to rule in any sense. He just legged it

Dr G 56:12
was panicked, yeah, panicked and ran away. He panicked and

LJ Trafford 56:16
ran away. Yeah, which is, you know, which is even worse than Didius Julianus. At least, did his Julianus tried. He tried badly with elephants, etc, but at least he made an effort. He didn’t run away from the messy, mess he’d made, possibly, because he’s surrounded by Praetorian Guard at all times, he weren’t going to let him go without that gold. I was

Dr G 56:34
going to say, yeah, you always buddy. You got to stick around.

LJ Trafford 56:37
But yeah, he just, he just likes it. Just likes it. And it’s, yeah, I think it’s such, I think it’s such a surprising story of the kind of build up, the two assassinations that he engineers, and then yeah,

Dr G 56:49
for what they’re definitely expecting him to flourish, you know, yeah,

LJ Trafford 56:53
yeah, to have some really top ideas. But yeah, he just, he just folds. And I think that’s, I think that’s really interesting. And I think yeah, and that’s why I wanted to include him as a kind of worst emperor, because it’s that kind of like realisation of what being an emperor is, and realising that you don’t want a part, that you don’t want, that you thought you did, but it’s Be careful what you wish for. Is the message of Petronius Maximus. He got what he wished for and then immediately regretted it. Yeah,

Dr G 57:20
fair enough. I mean, I feel like I would be the same, to be honest, I would probably also run away. I’d be out of there. I’d be like, this was I’ve made a mistake, guys. So thinking about how all of these different characters that have come through the Roman emperorship lead us to gain some insight into the nature of being human. There’s certain strengths, there’s certain frailties that can be read and understood through those who hold power. And I’m interested in the lessons that you’ve taken away from studying these people, lessons,

LJ Trafford 57:59
I think in my conclusion, I think, in my book, I say I don’t have much of a conclusion. I think, I think what changes is what kind of person becomes Emperor over time. So you need a different skill set depending on what period of history you’re in. You know, we talk about Caligula, having them having to make up battles for him to fight, because there aren’t any, because it’s relatively, relatively kind of calm during that period. You know, you get onto the era of Petronius, Maximus and Valentinian the second it’s constant fighting third century crisis. Yeah. And like the kind of third century crisis, the people who come become emperor, people who have armies and who can inspire armies. And so that is a very different kind of skill set to what your Augustus and your Tiberius needed, which were kind of good administration, and kind of keeping the Senate, keeping the Senate on side, that becomes less and less important as kind of the the armies and the soldiers become more and more important. But yeah, I think what I learned from it, I think, yeah, I think there’s a lot of ways in which you can be worst. I think there is a kind of the unqualified way of you know people who, you know, Valentinian the second becomes Emperor when he’s about four, or something, you know, he’s clearly not qualified for the post. So there’s people who come in with no qualifications and no kind of background in what, what the job is, I would think, feature. Then there’s a people like Petronius Maximus, and then people like Gordian, the first to get the top job, and then at the first sign of trouble, just fold, who aren’t, kind of mentally prepared for it, I think, as well. Then you get the people that kind of the flaws in their personality, like kind of Caligula, that kind of fatal flaw of his awful childhood, that’s kind of influences how he behaves as emperor, and kind of do mission simile, having that, that kind of teenage years in Rome in a very tumultuous period, very frightening period, and his increasing paranoia influences how he behaves emperor. And then there’s the ones you know that on paper look like they’re going to be great emperors, but then just just aren’t. So people like Galba, who looks he’s got all the right qualifications to be emperor, but. All falls apart quickly. So there’s, there’s all manner of ways in which you can be a worst emperor. I’m not sure there’s one way, but, yeah, I think it, it’s about personality, I think, at the end, and that is set up by kind of Augustus, who has the charisma and the strength of personality to build this thing called emperor and to hold it together. And then down to Tiberius. He’s got the skill set, you know, even if he’s not got the charisma, he’s got the administrative ability to kind of, and the fear factor of keeping people in line. But then when later on, you get people who just are not the right personality for the times. So I think, yeah, you need a different personality for a different each of the eras, kind of, in ancient Rome, you need to be the strong man, the hard man, the general in the kind of third century you need to be the acute, charismatic politician in the first century, it kind of changes as Rome changes, which is a bit a very waffling answer to, I don’t really know.

Dr G 1:00:55
I think, I think it’s good, because it gives us a sense that it is about the context, like everything is affected by that first and foremost, and then it is what you’re bringing to the table as an individual. And it’s like, if there is a good marriage between what that context requires and the strengths of your character and your background, you might be able to make it work, but it’s a risky thing every single time, every Emperor is always in that delicate balancing act across the whole course of their rule to make it work, because there’s so many things that they’re trying to hold together, and so many people have to fall in line. So it’s,

Dr Rad 1:01:36
it’s a yes, yeah.

LJ Trafford 1:01:39
I think I also I kind of learned, is that you can, I think the line between being a worst Emperor best Emperor is really quite thin. You can spin a lot of people either way, and the historians certainly do. And I think you could probably make a case for any emperor as the worst emperor. If you look at it, you could take Augustus and say, Well, you know, he dismantles the kind of Republic. Let’s enter the report. Republic, you know, if his morality, legislation, you know, kind of bites him in the bum with his own daughter, and he’s ruthless, he’s, you know, he’s not very nice. Morally, he’s deflowering virgins in his 70s. That’s not very, you know, Roman morality, is it? Um, you could take anyone like you take Trajan, you know, oh, he drank too much. You’re like boy boys, you know, you can take anybody and you can spin it and make them a worse temper. And I think that’s what’s interesting as well. I mean, the way in which you become a Western Emperor is basically but having nobody to write up your story well. So you need that successor, that person who’s going to write your story up well and kind of gloss over the lesser aspects of your personality and beef up the bigger ones. But I think, yeah, I think it’s a fine line between the good and the bad. I like

Dr Rad 1:02:46
the idea that the historians are the ones with the real power here. Yeah,

LJ Trafford 1:02:53
they can spin the story. Yeah, they’re spinning the stories and deciding who’s best and worst. So we shouldn’t really believe them over

Dr Rad 1:03:01
We’re all liars, as our name suggests, the partial historians. So on that note, where can people find your book?

LJ Trafford 1:03:14
Usual book outlets, Amazon, etc, online. Just Yes, ancient Rome’s worst emperors, available. And

Dr Rad 1:03:20
tell us. Do you have any exciting secret, upcoming projects? Maybe the eldre Trafford theme park coming up.

LJ Trafford 1:03:30
If only I want, yeah, I want merchandise is what I want. I think I’m coming actually. I’m stepping out of Hmong for the next book. Briefly, I’m doing sex and sexuality in ancient Greece. Oh, that would be exciting, which you’ll pair nicely with the one I did in ancient Rome, which is interesting, very interesting. And it’s very different. And there’s some good differences there. So good differences. And, yeah, I kind of think the Greeks get away with too much. I think

Dr G 1:03:59
because you’ll rein them in, I’m sure, with your whole democracy

LJ Trafford 1:04:02
and politics and art being the cradle of civilization, I think we give them, I think we rose tint them, and then we look at Romans, and we go, oh, geez, emperors, soldiers, gladiators. And yeah, I think it’s time to it’s time for the ancient Greeks to be to be exposed. I was gonna

Dr G 1:04:19
say, pull away the veil and reveal Ancient Greece. Well, that sounds exciting. I’m looking forward to that one coming out so we can delve in. Well, thank you so much, LJ, for joining us and taking us on a potted tour of the worst emperors. This is by no means all the Emperors that mentioned in your book, and so we definitely encourage people to seek out your excellent work and to enjoy some of these fascinating tales.

LJ Trafford 1:04:50
Thank you for having me. It’s been a ball.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai

The post Special Episode – Ancient Rome’s Worst Emperors with LJ Trafford appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

Neil returns to discuss more about some of the major sites of interest in the regal period of Rome. We recommend his podcast Ancient History Hound to you. You can also find out more details about Neil’s work at his website: The Ancient Blogger.

Special Episode – Exploring Place in Regal Rome with Neil, The Ancient Blogger – Part 2!

It’s time to take a tour of Rome’s most infamous subterranean chamber, the Tullianum, aka the Carcer.

Of course, we’re talking about the Cloaca Maxima!

Water, human waste, rats, and methane – is the Cloaca Maxima just a little more dangerous than generally thought? We take a tour with Neil to find out.

There aren’t many flat places in Rome, so the natural valley that is home of the Circus Maximus marks it out as special. The natural contours shape the space and set the scene for how the Romans then adapted that space into an early sporting arena. Major sporting events included horse racing (in various configurations) and boxing, though in a very different style than you’d see today.

It wasn’t just about the sports though – it was also about being seen. Social standing takes on a new meaning when only some people get chairs.

Well, a harbour can be a great asset to a developing city! Neil takes us through some of the important details associated with the site of Ostia, as the location of the early castrum, and the engineering modifications of the salt lagoons.

Horrea (storehouses) at Ostia Antica. Photograph by Jean-Pierre Dalbéra via Flickr.

Our theme music was composed by the amazing Bettina Joy de Guzman

Lightly edited for Latin terminology and to support our wonderful Australian accents!

Dr G 0:15
Welcome to The Partial Historians.

We explore all the details of ancient Rome.

Dr Rad 0:23
Everything from political scandals, the love affairs, the battles wage, and when citizens turn against each other. I’m Dr. Rad.

Dr G 0:33
And I’m Dr. G. We consider Rome as the Romans saw it by reading different authors from the ancient past and comparing their stories.

Dr Rad 0:44
Join us as we trace the journey of Rome from the founding of this city.

Dr G 0:57
Hello, and welcome to this very special episode of The Partial Historians. I am Dr. G.

Dr Rad 1:06
And I am Dr. Rad.

Dr G 1:08
And we are really, really excited to welcome back, Neil, for what is part two of our extravaganza exploration of regal Rome in terms of its layout and what’s going on with like, the landscape and things like this. So as you know, Neil is the founder of the popular Ancient Blogger website, and is also the host of the Ancient History Hound podcast. So welcome back now.

Neil – History Hound 1:43
Hello, thank you very much for for having me back on again, you just don’t learn is what I’m getting at

Dr G 1:51
It is very few rare guests who get to come back for a second time.

Dr Rad 1:55
That’s true, that’s true

Dr G 1:56
Consider yourself in excellent company.

Neil – History Hound 1:59
When a teacher says when you meet up with a teacher later on in your life, and they say I remember you from school, and that’s rarely a good thing.

Dr G 2:08
Often, that is the presage of some nasty stories. Oh wow, I was that kid

Neil – History Hound 2:14
Oh, I thought I was quiet. But thank you very much for having my back on apologies to everyone listening, I’ve decided to I visited London recently to go to the British Museum to see an exhibition there, which had great fun out. And of course, I’ve picked up the lurgy or a cold or something. So if I’m sounding a bit sinusy that is, I’m fighting against it with rapid amounts of various lem sippy type things. So I’ll try and be as cogent and as clear as I can be, but stick with me if you can.

Dr Rad 2:44
I think you sound very smooth.

Dr G 2:48
I was gonna say as Australians we tend to like we really quite enjoy the English accent it does have a has a bit of a historical resonance for us. So you really can’t do any wrong.

Neil – History Hound 2:57
Well, I actually got some feedback on I get some occasional feedback on my YouTube channel. And someone give me feedback the other day. Couldn’t couldn’t last one minute with his voice. A fair enough. I just didn’t know my mom was on YouTube. A bit harsh.

Dr Rad 3:18
Like you can’t please them all. We’re constantly told our fellow laughing cackling and being immature so…

Dr G 3:24
How dare you do history and have fun at the same time. I take umbrage.

Dr Rad 3:30
This is very serious stuff.

Neil – History Hound 3:32
Yeah, I can very lightly I gotta be honest with you. I don’t have much in the way of criticism. I have nice comments, which is always nice. But I appreciate that people sometimes get some real unfair, unfair stuff come their way. Just remember if you’re listening to this, most people who do your podcast do it because their hobby. They do it because they love the subject. And all they’re trying to do is share that subject with you. They’re just trying to get ideas across topics across helping you think about a particular area. No one’s charging you necessarily anything. And so sometimes just bear that in mind because I always think of it like shops if I’m walking along a parade of shops. And I don’t need to go into a particular shop to buy an item. I don’t go into that shop and tell them they’re wrong for stocking that item. I just go past the shop. And I think with podcast sometimes we have I think it’s because culturally we’re not yet. fine tuned. We haven’t worked out to critique podcasts correctly. So you can go into these as I said, the shops and think about it again. I go past things all the time. I’m not interested in buying I do not go into that shop and go you know what? That those those size nine high heels you’ve got in the window? Useless. I’d never wear those or not. Not only that, I don’t even like them. I think you’re wrong for having them the shop window. People will be just looking at you going. “Yeah, okay. Do we Do you need some help?” But that’s the way sometimes.

Dr Rad 4:53
And ‘=they’d also be saying, Neil, come on. We know you want their shoes

Neil – History Hound 4:58
With those calves? Probably not? Yeah.

Dr Rad 5:03
Maybe Maybe wax first. Yeah, but no, you know, you’re very right. I don’t think everybody does understand podcasting, particularly for independents like ourselves. I’ve certainly talked to some very intelligent friends of mine who’ve never really put it together that we don’t necessarily get paid per se. Like, we’re very lucky to have patreon supporters as I think you probably are as well. But it’s still not like a paid job. And it’s certainly not enough that we can quit our full time paying jobs to you know, to go into the podcasting.

It’s

Neil – History Hound 5:39
It’s certainly one of the biggest misnomers most people do podcasting. In fact, they sort of 99.9% are doing it. It’s a hobby, they’re not making money out of it. And they’re just trying to create something that people like, so when you’re listening to it, if you can give back criticism, and I’m always up for constructive criticism, I’m fine with that. And people have come back and said, Actually, I’ve had some in the past, that might work better, or I enjoyed this. But you know what, that wasn’t so good. Great. It’s just that kind of mindlessness sometimes in the comment that What are you trying to do? What What’s the achievement value for you by submitting me that anyway, I apologize. But if you are listening, and you are listening to podcasts, currently, you know, sometimes it’s just nice to tell people that you really enjoy their stuff. And if you’ve got constructive, constructive criticism, give it but just just making constructive because, you know, we just, we just want to live our lives and go on with it. Because it’s pretty tough sometimes. So yeah. Anyway, there we go.

How

Dr Rad 6:30
How dare you refuse to change your voice for a listener, Neil?

Neil – History Hound 6:33
Oh yeah, you’re right. On another one, I did have someone call out that I was a bit heavy to be a hoplite. Because I was showcasing a shield.

Dr G 6:43
Ouch

Neil – History Hound 6:43
Oh no, to be fair, I was like, I didn’t have any color that I’m like, Yeah, you know what? I’m a bit overweight, and I’m a bit over age. I’m not a live 19 year old leaping around the battlefield.

Dr G 6:54
But yeah, so also, we just have so much more access to food.

Neil – History Hound 6:59
Yeah, yeah, exactly. Yeah. Like the world feeds is very well, indeed. And it’s like your chances of looking like a hot plate from the ancient world. Slim to none, when they’re eating a very different diet. Well, actually, that’s one of the things that often comes up. So there was a point that came out recently about Roman soldiers. And this is the whole thing about this height requirement for Roman soldiers. And it gets bandied around a lot. And it’s, it works at a roughly five foot seven. And this comes from a source, which is late fourth century ideas for jetties who, who writes this treaties on the Roman army, he says, Well, you need to be this height. And people take from that, that was an absolute given out across all of the entire territory of the Roman army. And in fairness, I did see it when I went up to the Legion exhibition of the British Museum, which is great, and even at a photo taken at meet with of me next to the thing, not making the height requirement. People

Dr G 7:51
You’re out, I’m sorry.

Neil – History Hound 7:52
Yeah, I was out. And what people don’t realize is that I’ve had it sometimes people said, well, you know, everyone was just short about them. And it wasn’t people were shorter. I mean, yes, they probably were, it was just they didn’t have the ability to fulfill their, you know, they weren’t exposed to the kind of diet that we are. Many people are not everyone, many people are in the Western world, as it were now, or just across the planet where you can eat, you’re not starving, you’re not nutritiously deficient anyway. So you could have plenty of people who may have been over six foot kicking around ancient Rome, as it were, but they never had the diet when they were children to be able to reach that, you know, genetics can set you up in terms of your physiology, as I understand it. But what you do to achieve that doesn’t mean it’ll always happen. So if you can get somebody might be six foot two, but if you don’t feed them, right, they might, you know, their growth is going to be incapacitated in some way. You put blockers on that. But anyway, yeah, so there we go. We’ve brought it back to ancient Rome. So I’m happy.

Dr Rad 8:51
Indeed, I’m always happy to talk about the vertically challenged army of ancient Rome. All right, so let’s let’s go back to the geography of early room, if we may. And I’m going to kick it off with something that is quite near and dear to my heart, because I am going to openly admit, Dr. G, that I wrote the chapters on the kings Tullus Hostilius and Servius Tullius in our book, just in case there’s people hadn’t realized, just in case, somehow my unique style and never-ending popular cultural references were lost on you. And so that brings me to ask you about a particular building, the Tullianum, which may be named after either of those kings that we were just talking about. We’re not really sure which one so Livy claims that these may have been constructed by Ancus Marcius, but I don’t believe that Dr. G, because you wrote about him.

Dr G 9:55
No, I was gonna say that was my chapter.

Dr Rad 9:57
Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Now archaeologists have done their darnest, but the exact location of this structure is still a bit of a mystery. There has been a theory put forward that the Tullianum might be the ancient vault that was found under the Church of St. Giuseppe dei Falegnami. However, even the dating of this space seems to only go back as far as the second century BCE. So can you tell us what is the Tullianum? And what tales from regal Rome are connected to it?

Neil – History Hound 10:33
Well, I don’t incite chapter wars. But obviously, if anyone’s read the book, they can get back to both of the authors and tell them who wrote the better chapters. Don’t just, I’ll leave it there. But thank you very much about the Tullianum. Yes, the way to think about Tullianum and I did think about, the best way to understand it is almost starting at the wrong end of things. So we want to start around the time of Livy. And think what Livy was saying. So again, we’ll work on the premise that it is under that church that you mentioned. So we’ll take that, again, these all kinds of caveats of further things may give us more clues and more ideas. And we always have that. That’s why whenever I’m talking about anything, I’m always very, very delicate about given an absolute because, you know, two days after you released an episode, you’ve written something incredible discovery, scotch is everything. Now, when Livy’s was looking around, he would have noticed there was a structure and the structure by his point was quite famous this was and it’s known in the modern, more modern time is the moment I’m present. Now, that’s a much later reference to it. You had apologies, my pronunciation again, but you had two structures, the one above ground, which was the carcer or car-ker. And then you had one below it. And it’s the underground structure, that’s the one that interests us, Sometimes this is referred to as part of the carcer. But we also know it as already referred to as the Tullianum. Now for Livy, it made perfect sense, he had this structure above ground, so that must have come first. And the structure below ground presumably was was was later. So he retrospectively seems to apply the structure of the above ground structure to anchors. And then he sort of suggests that the second one was built later by, by Julius and and it makes sense, because after all, Look, Look, it’s called the Tullianum. So it must be linked, because, again, naming conventions in ancient Rome, very often things are named after a person, or they’re given that backstory, that’s something that can be easily attached to them. And he is writing a story, let’s never forget that with Livy. You know, he’s trying to make his reader interested in things that have happened in the past. And he’s also not going to conduct extensive archaeological interest or excavations into these buildings.

Dr G 12:39
Oh, come on, Livy. You got to work on your method.

Neil – History Hound 12:41
Yeah, get your trowel out, Livy. I’ve always said it. So what we’re looking at there. So the Tullianum, and I thought of another way of considering it, and I daresay both your good selves, and everyone listening here, would have walked around, and they would have seen a building that’s changed us. In the UK, there’s a sort of chain of development that seems to occur, suddenly, it used to be a bank that turns into a pub, that gets shut down many years later, that becomes a block of flats, or become something else. And so if you Look at some of these buildings and go, well hang on a sec, that, that must have been always, it’s just an odd looking building. But it must always have been an office or a block of flats, you actually know it’s been repurposed, it’s been rearranged. Originally, it was built like this. And there are famous examples, then it’s the Louvre, the museum in Paris, that was originally a palace, and then it got changed. And that’s not a huge, I suppose a huge leap of change for a particular building, particularly in France, where they didn’t really have many kings kicking around after a certain point to have buildings for. But with Tullianum, it’s really interesting, because what Livy’s trying to do is make sense of what he’s seen and retrospectively fit that but what we have is a bit of a bit of a curiosity. So the idea was that the to Leon was this underground or Livy’s, time underground, called I say, dungeon. I don’t like calling it that. But it was kind of a holding cell. And it was a holding cell for the famous peoplecert such as Vercingetorix. All of those people who were involved in the Catiline conspiracy were apparently held there. And after which they will they will be executed on sometimes there will be ritually strangled down there, such as I think it’s pheasant gettering. So if that occurs, too. But the issue with it is that that’s what Livy was saying, an archaeology and other sort of works. And again, with the caveat of more things will come out as determined there was probably a very different use. And this use seems to have been that of a spring or a system. And the rationale behind that is because it’s an odd structure. This is and it’s been changed a lot because in the modern, even in the Save the ancient Roman times, the later building of the car-ker or carcer, which I think dates to around the second or second century BC or there bout’s, that seems to have changed the structure below it quite a bit. So they think it’s several meters, two meters high. Also, circular building, I think it’s .about seven meters in diameter, or there abouts. And the premise seems to have been that this was a third last type design, which if you if anyone who’s listened or knows much about ancient Greek architecture, will immediately think of this as a circular thing with a dome sometimes. And it was a cistern. And not only was it a cistern, like many cisterns in ancient Rome, it was linked to a deity, it would have been sacred, it would have been given some religious provenance on some level, which is actually ironic, given what I’ll come to in a bit. And so that’s what they thought the original design was. And when they looked at a section of the walls, they actually came across the type of wall structure, where it seemed like ancient the way it was, was built, they said, This is archaic. This looks pretty much like a cistern, which has been found elsewhere on the Palatine. And around that time, it’s a common pattern of the way that the wall was structured. However, when they looked at the stone, and I read a paper with incredible amounts of letters after numbers, because they did sort of various isotope stuff on the walls of the remaining structure where they could get to because again, it is a religious, it has a religious connotation now. So you can’t just go around and start chopping these things up and removing and excavating. They found that the stone dates to probably around the fourth century BC, is a particular type of stone that Rome doesn’t get access to around that time, seems to pop up a lot. And so the question is, why would you have an older structure with newer stone, and one argument which sort of appears is this, and I think works quite well is this wasn’t really important religious or spring that had religious prominence to it. And therefore, it had been reclad rebuilt, which isn’t an unusual thing. You’re just using more recent and better tools and better construction materials to rebuild it. And you do that because it was important. So the idea was that this, in fact, was, as I said, a spring sacred spring, that filled the cistern. And then you go, Well, hang on a sec, you know, you’ve both said, Tell us, you know, we got we got totally us there, you know, we’ve got Servius, and we got Hostilius. So, where does that link in? Well, it’s been argued that actually the word ‘Tullus’ is Latin or comes from the Latin to mean spring or jet of water. So again, this links into Livy trying to find a way to connect dots, which may not be there, but building a logical picture, and I’m not going to criticize him for it, because I think it’s a relatively good way of considering what he saw. There’s also another element to all of this. And that’s the power of there was a gate in the serving boards called the porta fontinalis. And this was a lead this allegedly gave access to a sacred spring. And it’s thought that this gate was near to where the current site is. So this might be the sacred spring that was linked to that gate. And that there is an I’ll finish up with what I finish up with actually three things of note. First of all, the Romans had some really, really, really, really cool, horrible stuff. But sometimes, as we’ll see later, particularly, they had some quite fancy festivals that just in kind of, yeah, that seemed like a nice thing. But October 13, at the Fontanella, which was where wells were adorned with flowers, and I think that’s really quite nice. Sort of, obviously, a celebration of how important these things were, and again, need to remember that flowing water often had this religious connotation to it springs are often where people I wondered actually, I couldn’t find anything linked this in, but numerous. The nymph Egeria, whether or not she was linked possibly, to this to this spring, again, I don’t know because she was said to hang around a spring, but I am now going to give you well, a bit of controversy and I can kind of see that the finger of Damocles is sort of hovering above the edit button on this one, because I’m going to say one thing, lemons. So there is quite a controversy in ancient Rome about lemons and when lemons became introduced. Now I know full well that there are some lovely frescoes from Pompeii. And they seemed to depict lemons or do they some people have argued that they depict the citron fruit as – I see Dr Rad looking around going, Hang on a second. I thought that was definitely a lemon is quite a controversial thing, believe it or not, because and again, things that you end up reading that you don’t necessarily you end up going down rabbit holes. There’s a whole there were various papers done on evidence of sausage from fruit now to identify some fruit particular lemons is really quite difficult because different pips you got to look at pollen, and it can be difficult to distinguish these and they have found evidence of citron pollen in and around Naples. Not enough apparently is in in quantities that are dense enough to suggest there was farming going on. But there was certainly citrons. And an argument has been lemons were around in the time of Pompeii. And that’s probably true, because the only piece of definitive or the earliest piece of definitive lemon lemons being anything in Rome is found in the Tullianum where they found lemon seeds. They were able – and this dates to the Augustan period – they were able to specifically date or not date them, but identify them because citron pollen, citron seeds can often look very similar to each other. And they had this so there we go, in case you’ve you’ve got that gap in your life, it’s now well and truly filled, you know that lemons were certainly a thing around Augustan Rome. And we know that from the Tullianum. The other thing is the fact that this whole idea of a spring and having religious connotations is shifted across. Because there is again, this is the I don’t know enough about the Catholic Church to know whether or not this is fully endorsed, but I suspect it is in some way. But you can apparently visit St Peters, it was a site rather of one of St. Peter’s miracles when he was held at Rome. He wanted to baptize a bunch of people. And guess what he’s struck the earth of the Tullianum and a spring emerged. And from that, he was able to baptize a bunch of people. So again, you have this link of a spring being based within the the Tullianum, and you can’t get away from that being a central function to it. It’s just interesting how Rome again, adapted and evolved, what was already there to possibly something very separate. It was a by the time of Livy, possibly a holding cell. And it may have been this whole sacred spring thing that was lost in the memory. And then again, it points to something I’ve mentioned we spoke about in the the first episode, where even within ancient Rome, things got lost things got remember, things got reinvented, it wasn’t this monolithic block of time where everyone is considering what happened in Oh, yeah, fifth century BC, that was just a week ago. You know, first century BC, nothing’s changed. Everything’s changed. So we always need to remember that, you know, there was within ancient Rome, there was an ancient or more ancient Rome that it knew of and try to work out. Anyway. So there’s my thoughts and some things about the Tullianum.

Dr Rad 22:15
Oh, Look, I’m very intrigued by the lemon seeds. It makes me wonder what on earth was going on in that holding cell? Was it something nice like them saying, Yes, I’d like some water with just just a slice of lemon, please.

Dr G 22:29
Well, I’m down here, I’m gonna make some lemoncello. Why not?

Dr Rad 22:32
Exactly. What was it more like? Yeah, you made too bad life decisions. Here’s some lemons, try and make lemonade out of them, I dare you!

Dr G 22:43
Classic Romans, I would say, Yeah, Look, I think that’s really fascinating. There are so many springs in and around Rome. It’s just the nature of the geography. And all of them are considered sacred in particular ways. So it’s interesting to try and tease out particular details relating to a singular one. But I think this actually leads in really nicely this idea of springs into my question for you. And I know this is a topic dear to your heart, the Cloaca Maxima. So thinking about things that might be watery, but in a less pleasant way,

Neil – History Hound 23:21
I’m actually gonna throw a question back to the both of you good selves, it’s more of a mental exercise. And for anyone listening, I suggest you do this as well. And the question is this, could Rome have developed and achieved what it did without the forum? So if it didn’t have access to the forum, could it have achieved what it did? It might have done. But if after considering that question, your your answer, your conclusion is, no, it couldn’t have done, then the Cloaca Maxima is possibly the most important structure in ancient Rome, certainly the early development of it, because without the Cloaca Maxima, you do not have the Roman forum. And I can get into the whys of that in a moment.

Dr G 24:02
Ah excellent, excellent, setting up the mystery.

Neil – History Hound 24:08
The mystery of something that I spoke about prior and this relates to flooding, and here we come with some numbers. So the problem that we have with the forum or the area that came to become the forum is it’s it’s in a in a valley, and it’s between the Capitoline and the Palatine Hill. Now, being in a valley, it was prone to flooding. The bigger problem was quite extensive flooding. At the time before it was developed. It sat at around 6.9 meters above sea level, which sounds quite high up. You think that’s not too bad, except the problem was that the seasonal floods from the Tiber could reach up to 9 meters above sea level. So what we seem to have at play then, and again, this is this is more identifiable through some of the archaeology that’s done because we can sort of see what the work has been able to see has been these layers of material that have been laid on the forum. And it raised it up by around three meters. And it seems this work undertook a lot of time between the seventh century was probably discontinued and then carried on. And the amount of material required was around 20,000 cubic meters. Now, I don’t know what 20,000 cubic meters Look like, I don’t know how big that is. But I did some basic sums. And if you’ve got a wheelbarrow in your garden, I can average wheelbarrow, it would take 235,000 trips with that wheelbarrow to move that amount of material.

Dr G 25:34
Dear lord.

Neil – History Hound 25:35
Yeah, that’s a lot of movement. Now, of course, the problem with raising this is that you had the issue of drainage, because in this area, it suggested that there was a narrow stream, but also you would have the floods. Now, you can go about raising the level of that area. But the problem is minute floods, the minute you’ve got that stream running through the middle of the forum, what he just wrote everything, all your good work, and completely gone. So what’s been suggested that early on the Cloaca was simply a way of redirecting that drain. And as they raised the level of fluid, so it grew, so you build up beside of it. So what you seem to have had was a double channel. So we had parallel channels of a parallel channel, about three meters wide, or just over three meters with a wall in the middle. And three meters high by the time it was finished. And this seems to have done the job and be unable to redirect water away from the forum. So you then you could pave it over. The big kind of controversy over this is whether or not it was open or paved, because again, this wasn’t a sewer, I’ll get to that in a moment. This wasn’t assuming that sewer in the conventional sense, this was just a way of draining the area. So it’s been argued that the the fact that it was uncovered at one point with just some areas that were being covered, so you could move across it. Others say this didn’t happen till the second century BC Some have said no, actually, this was from day one was always covered. And that was the standard because we can see drainage channels elsewhere. In fact, there was an interesting drainage channel that seems to have occurred a bit later on in Cumae. And that’s funny enough, where the last Roman king ends up in exile. So this idea is that there’s, there’s this the technology is well known about. And it’s something that people are quite proud of having. In fact, it’s something you showcase, it was a mark of distinction to have this kind of engineering fee, because that’s what it was within your city within your, your well, the city that you boasted of. So this is what this did. And it’s it’s quite, it’s quite fascinating thing, because people and I’ve had chats with people since on this in the later Roman imperial period, it’s really quite difficult to get across just how much surface water there was kicking around in the Cloaca Maxima. By the way it gets expanded. I mean, it gets really expanded it by the time of Livy, you had I mean, again, the the analysis and modern analogy I’ll give is, think if you’re old enough, like me, you can remember when the internet was about four websites. And you can remember when there was Ask Jeeves, and Netscape or whatever it was, that was the pre-Google times and all of this kind of thing. And obviously now you see, it’s completely different. This was a very basic advanced in itself, but very basic structure that was then added to so now what you have is you have when people Look at it, and they excavate it, you’ve got these different parts of it that much newer than other parts of it, because it’s had to be developed and changed, rebuilt, extended everything in subsequent periods, which can make things more difficult because how do you see what the original bid was? So that’s what you have with the Cloaca. And it’s, it’s absolutely, I’d say absolutely fascinating, particularly in regards to how it functioned as a sewer because it was generally there to take away surface water. You’ve got by the time of the imperial period, you’ve got a lot of water that’s coming from fountains, off rooves. There’s been extensive repaving. So you’ve got this runoff, all this stuff. One of the big things that come out, and again, I was talking to kids in schools always loved this is the idea that they weren’t. The toilets might have been connected, but largely weren’t based on the evidence that we have, particularly at Pompeii, where there’s quite a lot of surviving structures that you can see that toilets weren’t connected to the sewer. They weren’t connected to the Cloaca Maxima. Did did human waste end up there? Yeah, yeah, it did. But the thing was, we think of it slightly different for a Roman was certainly the Roman period. The idea of using water to flush away human waste wasn’t really the most obvious way of dealing with it. Because human waste can be used in a number of ways. A main one was as fertilizer and you had people who would come along and collect it and actually buy it from people. Now imagine if you’re someone who lives in a if you’re a poor Roman, so the majority of Romans probably and you live in an incident live in a small building where you probably have a chamber pot, and your chamber pot with tea into a larger, I suppose larger pot or some container, that container might be taken, taken away, dumped outside, that seems to be the case at Pompeii, but also, the owner of the instalay might have a deal, and you might be selling it as fertilizer. If you were someone who had a house with a, with a toilet in it, it wasn’t a toilet, this was a sort of waste disposal, often in the kitchen as well. The idea would be that solid waste would be put in there, it could then drain through the rock, and people would then come around and they would buy it off you you would have slaves if you had a toilet. I mean, most people had slaves anyway. But you’d certainly have a suite of slaves as it were, if you had a private home with a sewing home with a private toilet. And that will probably be one of the jobs, one of the things you wouldn’t have occurred to Romans would be to use water to flush it away. Because why would you now this there’s a separate arguments you made in the case of bards and things like that, but you got to think about Roman bards is quite an unusual, even though there are a lot of them. This is where later sort of Imperial time, when Roman Baths really become a thing in ancient Rome. Obviously there are summer, Pompeii, and there are some that day a bit earlier than they did we think that Rome in either case, just flushing and having that as the equation of dealing with waste just didn’t make sense to Rome on many levels. And you know, you could do other stuff with it. And there was fine one final story. Well, actually, there are a couple reasons why you wouldn’t want your toilet connected. If you did live in Rome to the sewer. The first would be well, if the type of floods you’ve got a lot of fun coming your way. The second one was rats, you’ve basically got a super superhighway for any kind of rats or anything to come back up through the toilet. And the other one and please don’t laugh at this when I say the words gas traps. So you’d have a lot of methane building up. You’ve both been put on mute, but you’re laughing like children I’m I’m disgusted, I thought distinguished academic discussion, Stop having fun, we’ll get complaints. And the idea was that if you had buildup of methane in it’s gonna come back up through that particular receptacle. And it’s in a kitchen. Well, you know, Romans are quite big on candles. So you got to watch out for that. And one final one is one that I get similar reaction from telling kids is that do adult and it is a very much an outlier. Very much an outlier. So don’t take this as a reason. But Elian gave a great story on animals. And I know if you’ve either of you heard this, it’s a bit of a mystery. There’s this merchant who owned a stockroom or a storeroom or something. And it wasn’t in Rome. It was on the, he was a Spanish merchant and I think it’s I forget so it was somewhere in Italy, but it was near the coast. And he had he had his stock room and one day he goes into the sock room and his pickled fish have been raided. There’s bits of pot everywhere. And he’s he’s just baffled by it because the locks no one’s going through the door. The locks fine. What’s happened there? Well, he then hires, or he takes one of his slaves, and says why you’ll stand up tonight. I just wanted to see anyone comes in, scare them off. Here we go. So he did. Slave come back the next morning slaves absolutely terrified, terrified, can’t get many words out of him. Invariably they do because you know, he’s a slave. And he talks about the fact that early in the morning, he was looking over in the corner, and the toilet was connected to the sewer. And out of the sewer came this huge octopus, who then continued to help himself to the all the pickled fish and everything else. And then went back. Yes, yeah. And unfortunately, they they end up getting octopus doesn’t end too well. And it’s one of those stories which you think sounds good, doesn’t it? Until more recently when there was those number of those stories of octopus escaping various aquariums and ended up you know, getting into a you an Uber and going downtown having a good time event coming back home for in the morning. Oops, got to go back home. It they were just incredible. And perhaps something

Dr Rad 34:02
And telling the future as well.

Neil – History Hound 34:04
Yeah, they could do all sorts of things predicting elections, they can do pretty much everything.

Dr Rad 34:10
Yeah, yeah, he was gonna be anything, I believe that it was an octopus.

Neil – History Hound 34:14
I would, I would definitely be definitely a fan of that. So with the Cloaca Maxima, what you’ve got there to go back to it is originally this would have been built as the form has been developed. Because again, as this as you’re raising the level of the forum, you’ve got to keep this drainage ditch intact and to do its job and to take away that surface water. You don’t have the forum. Simply you do not have a forum because you do not have the ability to reclaim that land, which is a huge thing. Because when you walk around Rome now, you don’t quite realize how different it was. And I don’t mean the obvious things. I mean, just the topography. So I think the not the archaeological level for ancient Rome as it was around 10 meters below the current level or there abouts and obviously it’s going in different places. Since, but it was far higher and far lower in certain areas than it is now. In fact, you’d be quite surprised if you could do that there is a model, I believe in Rome, which I’ve, I’ve seen a few times. And it’s absolutely fascinating, where they’ve, they’ve got archaic Rome. And it’s just a place of these hills and just hills and valleys. You don’t get the sense of that as much now, but it would have been back then. So drainage was really important. And as such, the Cloaca Maxima was really important.

Dr Rad 35:28
And I definitely believe you, Rome does have a reputation for being a bit swampy at times.

Neil – History Hound 35:34
Well, that was one of the reasons they didn’t all Rome had real problems with the Campus Martius. You know, they had this issue around there. It was really swampy. And it was they did have a big problem with drainage and Rome, certainly in the early early stages of it.

Dr G 35:50
No, I always think of Campus Martius. And I know it’s named after Mars, but I always think what Marsh is in its name as well.

Dr Rad 35:57
Yeah, exactly. Yeah, the marshy Martius.

Dr G 36:01
Exactly.

Dr Rad 36:02
So switching gears, a little bit from gas, and all sorts of delightful things that you might find in a sewer. Let’s talk a little bit about the Circus Maximus. So it’s not necessarily the thing that springs into people’s minds when they think of Rome that usually goes to the Colosseum, which is now seen as a symbol of ancient Rome in the city. However, the Circus Maximus is much much older than the Colosseum, and therefore definitely worthy of our attention. So what made the Circus Maximus so special? And why is it an important structure to think about when were exploring the geography of the regal period?

Neil – History Hound 36:42
Okay, so I explained my boo to start with, I liked the Colosseum, I’ve been there, I’ve walked around, I’ve gone in it. But for me, I’m old school. I’m Circus Maximus. In fact, I thought about my dream job. And my dream job would have been marketing consultant for the Circus Maximus around AD 80. And it would have I would have had things on the wall saying, Yeah, Circus Maximus, but the clowns are at the Colosseum, that kind of thing I would have gone full in there would have been hashtags everywhere. So the Circus Maximus is actually linked in before I before I go in even more circus maximum is linked in to declerck maximum because it’s thought that says similar technology that was being exchanged there because this is in a valley between the Aventine and Palatine hills. So if you’re walking, again, we used our clock analogy. In the previous previous episode, if you’re looking at Rome, and you’ve got the the forum Boarium at the center of the clock, you’re looking at sort of between four and five o’clock here. And that valley is between, that valley runs sort of south, southeast or east southeast that that in that kind of general direction. It was prone to drainage. And there are elements of it, which seemed to have been forgotten, but sort of remembered in some of the rituals and associations I’ll come to in a moment. But the initial problem they had was, how do you how do you get hold of this really nice piece of land again, Rome as it’s trying to develop and expand, you can’t just live on hills you need flatland to do stuff on and what you have in what is not I think it’s a Mercier – Mer-kier Valley is actually the technical term for where the Circus Maximus is, is you have an alluvial plain, apparently, which was seems to be like an old flooding on the flooding plane or used to be a river there or some some such, and what you have two channels, and you have a sort of buildup of material between those two channels. And so what Rome does is it takes those, that physical topography and amends it slightly and creates the creates the Circus Maximus, those two channels become the tracks, that central buildup of material becomes the Spener, that bit in the middle of the track, where in later periods, you have all those fancy statues and whatnot. And so what they’re doing is they’re taking advantage of what’s already there, but they’re slightly rebuilding it. And it’s also involved, by the way, drainage, it’s thought that there was a drainage channels, either side of that central bank, and going around the edges of the tracking. If you were to Look at, Look at it above, think of a cartoon where you have a magnet, you know that it’s like that big C shape, that elongated C shape, that’s what you have sort of Circus Maximus. Now, obviously, at the time of the Regal period, you’ve got to get rid of any any thoughts of how it looked like when you probably think about it in its heyday, when it’s got 250,000 people allegedly been able to turn up there. And all of this kind of thing. It was simply a track where you could run various events and there was one particular event that they they had there. And what they what they did was they took the track and they started to understand that you can have let’s say contest there things which people like to watch. So what I found really interesting is a niche Surely, you have this social standing literal. So social standing, because early on, you’ve got Livy and Dionysius both explaining that you have temporary seating allocated. But you’ve got only only certain classes could do this. So you’ve got a space in Rome by which people can be seen. And they can be marked out as distinguished. So it’s really important early on, because people get to show how important they are, because they can have temporary wooden seating. But if you’re really poor, you don’t get that. And there’s in terms of dating it, we’re looking at the, I’d say we’re looking at the legal period, certainly, the earliest piece of that was a physical evidence, there is a stepping stone seat, which dates to 494 BC, and apparently was for Manius Valerius Maximus. So we have a definitive date there of something being and of course, you won’t have a stone seat just overnight, that had to be as a result of further development. The early games they had there were horse racing, and boxing, both very important and very popular. You think of the funeral games at metropolis. You think of the Olympics, you know, these were events which which were central to both of those, both of those things. And these are also apparently from Etruria. So again, these this seems to be an important thing. And it was also it also was apparently the location of the Sabine women, the instance involved in the Sabine women. So I don’t probably need to go over that I’m not sure that people will realize or understand that. One of the things Romulus arranged was a sort of mass abduction, hijacking and worse of women from the Sabine group at an event. And this event was said to have occurred at the Circus Maximus or the site of the Circus Maximus, and apparently it was the Consualia, which was a, in itself, a really nice festival. So to distance what happened at it, it was a really nice festival because the Romans as I said, as an animal level, one of the reasons I could never go to ancient Rome, and people How would you like to go about that? No, I couldn’t. Most people, I think, wouldn’t they say, I’d love to go to the Colosseum and watch. No, you wouldn’t. Because most people, and I say this with a big caveat of most people haven’t seen the sort of horrors that you’d see that you’ve seen it in films, not seeing it in real life, you’d be traumatized. I would be equally as traumatized by the way that animals are treated in certain instances. I know there’s a recent thing that they found at Pompeii, where you had mules that were basically just walking around in circles for their entire lives. So yeah, there was there, this element of horrible treatment of animals, which I’ll move away from, but this is a really nice instance of animals being treated nicely, because the Romans recognized how nice horses and mules were. And they decorated them. They gave them garlands, they had a kind of little My Little Pony festival for them, and they had little races for them. And all that all that sort of thing. And there’s actually what’s interesting is later on the Olympic Games, I’ll just bring the Olympic Games in, because that’s the other big famous games, that becomes the Olympic Games, incorporates equestrian events, because they’re primarily about wealth. Originally, Olympic games weren’t Olympic Games, they were a single foot race for I think it’s a good few 100 years, or variations of it raises the question events start occurring a bit later on. And they’re there purely because people realize that it’s a really good place where they can showcase their wealth. So this is a good way of again, showcasing your wealth and everything else. And they did have events for horses, we always think of the big chariot races, but they used to have like mule races and little carts and traps, I think trap racing that sort of similar similar events to that they used to go and they even had one where you went, the last lap, you ran. So you would you would you would go on your horse around. And this again, is gonna make games. And the last event you get off and you’d run with your horse.

Dr G 43:59
We’ve got – I’ve got to buy myself some advantage by getting the horse out the front real quick. So…

Dr Rad 44:05
That also sounds like a fast track to being trampled.

Neil – History Hound 44:07
Well, the origins of this that it’s thought that this is actually related to cavalry covering engagement. That’s because one of the things that sometimes, again, isn’t fully realized is that we think of cavalry engagements in antiquity. And there’s some confusion exactly how they undertook. So you think of Alexander the Great, and you think of knights and you think of people charging around on horses, fine people? Well, that that didn’t happen, but earlier on, certainly, it didn’t. And there was definitely a school of covering engagement, which seems to indicate I think it’s Livy who mentioned in one engagement where people would get off so it’d be like dragoons I think it is you draw you use your horse to get to the location neutral and then you fight on foot. Very often, you’d be you’d be using the horse to chase down or where you had full advantage needed mobility, but the idea that everyone was charging around and the horses fighting horses and not necessary, not necessarily the case, for a number of reasons. And when you look at some of the Equestrian Games in the Olympic Games, you see that there’s a lot of I mean, there are other ones where you’ve got the dancing in the running Racing, racing armor, at the Olympic games and things like that. So there’s a lot of sort of military virtue exposed there. And I suspect, that’s a similar thing that’s going on Circus Maximus, you’ve got boxing, which was brutal. If it went by the rules of the Olympic Games, then there weren’t rounds, you just basically punched each other until, and there was some horrible stories of people swallowing their teeth, so they wouldn’t Look like they’ve been hit too hard. And I even remember reading one instance was when when if it went on too long, they just had a punch off. So it’s the case if you punch me, I punch you and whoever it thinks. So it was pretty brutal. But again, it was highly, this was a highly, this is a high cultural moment, which occurred at the at the Circus Maximus early on, and you’re getting you’ve got that you’ve got the involvement of, of the horses, you’ve also got a bit of a and this is what I refer to earlier, with a mixture of things going on, because you have the mystery altar. So at the end of the other one in the turning points, the terme – so you had a simple track, if you’re in you’re in Rome, at this point, you’ve got a simple track with drainage channels on it. And you’ve got some people are able to stand on wooden seating. And of course, you wouldn’t have wouldn’t you wouldn’t have anything permanent up, why would you have something permanent up, when it could flood when it could rock the rest of it now just put up when you need to. And there seems to be a god associated here called Consus. And Consus was apparently god of the grain and harvest. But he apparently also had an altar underneath that final turning point. And it was buried. And the way it was, it was unearthed and it seems to be of a secret nature, and it’s interesting. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, actually, and I’ll quote here that he says, “the subterranean altar was erected later to a certain divinity whose name may not be uttered, who presides over and is the guardian of hidden counsels.” Now, this might be because he can’t say Consus, because apparently weren’t meant to. If you consider he’s the god of secrets. Not a very good god of secrets if you tell everyone your name, but even so there’s something going on there. And people thought, well, what’s the association with wheat and grain there, and it’s the or perhaps prior to the prior to the Circus Maximus being being established there, it could have been a location where wheat was grown, which we also have possibly again, at the Campus Martius, you know, have these low lying areas where you can grow, you can have some agricultural projects going on, because again, Rome doesn’t have many flat places. So it needs to find its growing things anywhere that it can do. And of course, by the time of living dynastic Vanek analysis, they’ve kind of mixing things up. So originally the Consualia is meant to be for Neptune, who is Poseidon for the Greek or he’s a version of him, I should underline that heavily a version of him in the Greek pantheon is beside always associated with horses. So again, it’s this weird crossover. So possibly, there could have been something earlier there involving concepts involving wheat, which apparently could also be stored underground, which is why they may have had this auditorium underground. And then later, it’s absorbed and rolled into this wider festival that’s held there at the Consualia, which is then allocated to a particular event with the sidelines. And this wouldn’t be the first instance that Rome does that Roman religious system, which is quite ironic given how small c conservative Roman religion could be in some instances, loves, loves accommodating other elements to it. With it with the you have the Saturnalia, which incorporates the Lectisternium in the end of the third century BC, which was a Greek Festival. They there is this often enrichment of the Roman religion with other elements, so they quite happily repackage and roll things up.

Dr G 49:07
They certainly do. Yeah, so I think the this idea of the Circus Maximus is being part of a multipurpose space, I think, is really useful to think about, particularly for this early period. So there’s the theory that is put out in some of the written sources that the Circus Maximus was kind of created by the Etruscan King par excellence Lucius Tarquinius [Priscus] and that may or may not be just a bit of a story trying to connect that cultural element. But the fact that we’ve got all of this sort of layered meaning over time, I think is really key and crucial for appreciating what is happening as Rome progresses through its own history, as you say, and also thinking about what might have been the touch points for the really early stuff as well.

Neil – History Hound 49:56
Just one final thing on there and I’ve just because I want to sell it even more. If something big happened in ancient Rome, it happened at the Circus Maximus. That’s where most likely you had gladiator fights. That’s where you had ceremonies. People think of the Colosseum, as being this big centralized it almost until Rome had a Colosseum. They just didn’t put anything on. No, all the stuff used to go on at the Circus Maximus again later on. But if you’re a general and you’ve got a you’re looking to have a big ceremony or a big pomp and you know, triumph, that’s where it’s going on. Julius Caesar has big fights there between various sort of sections of his arm, or not his army, but kind of gladiator fight things going on there. It was a major, major cultural event. And it’s weird, because when you go to Rome, you don’t see it as prominent as other sites, because again, other sites steal the eye a bit more, because when you go to it, it looks a bit more like it does now was done back then. So flat piece of ground, but when you go to it just know that is real, old school, Roman.

Dr G 51:06
Yeah. And I think I think one of the things to keep in mind for people who are traveling to Rome and seeing it today is that the Circus Maximus retains some of its amazingness simply because that space continues to this day to be utilized for big events. So if there is a big concert happening, and a huge band comes to Rome, they will often be performing at the Circus Maximus, it is the perfect location for giant events where you want lots of people, the way that it’s laid out, the way that it has this gentle sort of sloping area to it allows you to accommodate a whole bunch of people who are able to still have a view on whatever it is that’s been put on. So it is actually continues to be a really multifunctional space for Rome in that sense. So leading to thinking a little bit further outside of Rome now. Ostia so austere is the spot that crops up at the mouth of the Tiber River as it hits the Mediterranean Sea. So Rome, as we know, is a little bit inland. It’s even more inland today than it was in the ancient period, because ancient Ostia is about six kilometers inland now from where the mouth of the river is now. So there’s that whole shifting way in which soil moves around because of river movements, means that austere is now inland. But I would highly recommend anybody go to Ostia Antica, it is incredible. I don’t think I’m done exploring that site. But it becomes pivotal to Roman power, and pivotal to thinking about power in the region, in this early regal period, as well. So there are some traditional stories associated with Ostia crediting the founding of it to the fourth king Ancius Marcus. And this sort of initial colony seems to be based around control, but also maybe the potential for harvesting salt as much as anything else. But Rome is not the preeminent power in the region, when we’re thinking about the Regal period. So I’m interested in your thoughts on why Ostia is important? And what sort of conflicts they may have faced trying to come to grips with controlling this region?

Neil – History Hound 53:30
Yeah, well, thanks. I think that you’ll see some that you’ve hit across a number of really important points when you’re considering Ostia. So the first thing is that you mentioned is about, again, I keep saying typography, but it is quite inland is four or six kilometers, or there abouts inland from where it would have been. And when again, when you’re considering the ancient world, consider coastlines consider how much they changed. If you’ve been to Pompeii, it’s it was thought that Pompeii was by the coast, a few I went to Richborough in Kent last year. And Richborough was a beachhead for the Roman invasion, or the Claudian invasion. It’s around, it’s a good couple kilometers inland. But if you look at how it was when Claudius it was, it was this little island, this little island of just on with a with this narrow connection to the mainland, and Ephesus, places like that these are places which would look very different. And when I spoke about how the Tiber moved as well, again, the Tiber does move in this instance as well, which kind of confuses things, or makes things more difficult to understand what really went on. So the points that you make about it being strategic are pretty much the rationale if you wanted to boil down. Why does Rome need Ostia? Well, it needs it for three main reasons. The first is that it has access to salt. There are a couple of salt lagoons there which are really important, very nice resource. It means that it can get access to wider trading networks. Because if you’ve got a port that sits just just inland that you mentioned, I think you described it really well, that this wasn’t a port on the coast. This was a was a river port, but it was just in the mouth. In fact, Ostia, I believe comes from mouth of it’s sort of association of that word, meaning that it was the mouth of the river. And it sits or would have sat just as you came in the river would have sat on the south bank. It was a natural harbor that they developed into a port, which makes perfect sense. And the the final reason why this is the third reason why why Rome needed this was because if you’ve got access to who comes in and out of the Tiber, then you’ve, you’re far more secure, because after all, you are downriver of it, or up river or whichever way the tide goes, you needed it for three main reasons really security, you needed it for commerce, and you needed it for a second reason for commerce. So and again, I know we spoke about Civilization [the game] and the importance of salt. So yeah, this was really important for, for Rome, the difficulty with it all is putting together anything, which really builds up a picture of what osteo could have lived before the fourth century BC, mainly because there’s one main building at Ostia that dates to that period, it’s the earliest building to be dating, it’s known as a sort of tower. It’s the castrum, though that said, there is debate about what it did. And the reason I say that is because the the Tiber River changed its course, between the I think it’s between the eighth and sixth centuries, or there abouts it changed its course quite heavily. And so where we think of the castrum being located now to the river, but then it would have been about 600 meters away from the river. So the idea that it was this defensive tower, protecting the river doesn’t really seem to add up. So it’s, it’s not confused, but it’s unsure, perhaps the classification of that building initially, may not be what it was originally intended for. So there’s a bit of debate over as to what that was. But the the central to this is you have these sorted lagoons, you have these lagoons, which become enclosed by natural processes. Now, these obviously can get soaked from sorts very important. Determining, again, determining activity, human activity, there’s quite difficult mainly because there isn’t greater archaeological evidence that goes back. However, there again, there was a paper which I read and looked at some of the drainage channels that were dug, but connecting the salt lagoon to the sea. And it’s, it seems strange that there had been a couple of drainage channels that are made maintained, or no one maintains channels naturally, they have to be done by people and the dating of this maintaining of these drainage channels to ensure that the canal, the canal is connected to salt lagoon, to the sea could date as far back as the ninth century BC up till the sixth century BC. So what I think we probably had, if we were, if we were forced to come up with a speculative suggestion about what’s going on here is that you probably had peoples who were using that lagoon for salt. And what Rome did was early on, it seemed to have got hold of that resource. Exactly when we’re not sure. But again, we got the earliest building as fourth century BC, but prior to that, it’s highly probable that you had something there because again, stone buildings when it comes to Roman fortifications, stone buildings for the latter, you don’t rock up and just build a stone thing. Generally speaking, that is crazy.

Dr G 58:35
You telling me the Romans didn’t come fully formed out of the womb as world dominators?

Neil – History Hound 58:42
Nah nah, you’re mixing it up because it’s Swed- it was the Vikings who had IKEA so they could just have flat pack everything over to build it Romans didn’t have that didn’t have they didn’t have there. Although they did do obviously that when I say flat pack, I’m immediately I’m thinking of the the Punic Wars where they make the boat design from the Phoenicians. But anyway, from Carthage anyway, that aside, what generally happens developments and we see this I did some work and I did a podcast with Dr. Andrew Tibbs. And he was speaking about Roman fortifications in Scotland. And what people don’t realize is most of the time, due to drone technology, you can see these things far easier now because you see the pattern on the ground. Because otherwise from a you could be walking across one and not realize it’s there. Because they would have been originally would the anti wall. A wall never got past the turf stage. It was just originally made of earth. It never is you’d make something of earth or word. And then you’d build it up if you needed to. Because again, sometimes fortifications were temporary. What seems to have happened the Tiber is it’s changed course. So again, you don’t have access to perhaps the areas which would give us evidence. So again, it’s not that we don’t have the evidence there. There could be some fantastic archaeological evidence to determine which day activity around this area. Problem is because the Tiber has moved course it might be directly under the Tiber now, or it could be under some houses near the Tiber. But locating exactly where everything was at this period is still a bit speculative. It’s not where necessary, it is now, what you have now with Ostia, again, it doesn’t suffer so much because it is a site which I’d love to visit, and I’ve heard is wonderful. And it annoys me that I haven’t been there. So stop bringing it up is that you have a much more modern, and by that you have later Republic period, they go all in on Ostia because it’s such an important location. It’s so integral, particularly I think it’s that’s where the fleet for, again, Punic Wars, it’s with the fleet space. So it’s so important to have that developed. So you look at it then and think, yeah, but that probably wasn’t what it looked like 400 years before fact, it might have been in a different place. And Roman port design on way that Roman linked up. Eventually Ostia is – not abandoned, because it’s still kept there – but then move it you have Claudius who sort of redevelops the site. And then you have the basin, the famous basin, which is this – I think it’s an octagon [hexagon], you can actually see from from the sky, if you look, apparently, if you’re flying into one of Rome’s airports.

Dr G 1:01:09
Portus

Neil – History Hound 1:01:09
Yeah, the Portus you can actually see it, it’s there. It’s this perfect, again, I don’t know If it’s an octagon, it’s got a lot of sides to it. And it’s not a circle, but it looks like a circle. That’s my maths for you, you can actually make that out. And that was on the changing. Yeah, that’s right. Yeah, it has lighthouse as well, which is very nice, if you like that kind of thing. But anyway, going back to Ostia, again, it’s one of those places which we know is strategically very important to Rome for a number of reasons. But our hands are tied somewhat in understanding more about it because of the way it sits now. And because the structures that are on it now. And this is always a problem. Because if you’ve got a site in antiquity that becomes really popular. It’s usually popular for a reason that that resonates, and later ages. So again, you don’t have that you have that issue. I visited Bath, Roman Bath, good few years ago, and under under it, you can go up, go downstairs, and you look around the Roman remains. And they got the I think was this front of this temple. It looks amazing. And they said we can’t, can’t excavate it. We’ve got this fantastic [building], but we can’t excavate it, because that will probably bring down Bath Cathedral, which would be I understand a bad thing.

Dr G 1:02:20
That would be a shame.

Neil – History Hound 1:02:21
I’ve been to Bath because lovely building it is I think it’s a cathedral, I’m pretty sure. But it doesn’t have great foundations. So you’ve got this. And you’ve got this in modern, modern Rome now and again, with the Tullianum. It’s a great example, if I wanted to go and excavate the Tullianum now, it’s probably not going to happen, because it’s now sitting above a church. So how do you go about that it’s got all of these not restrictions, but blocks to me being able to do that. So we have to go on what we know, which is again, limited, but frustrating. But yeah, Ostia,

Dr Rad 1:02:55
Ah, it’s the curse of regal Rome.

Neil – History Hound 1:02:57
Yeah, they just did it too well. So you almost sympathize. And again, we’re in a so this is great, because we’re in a similar place to Livy. We’re trying to work things out. It’s just that we’re a bit more responsible to our methods than Livy was, though he was obviously a very nice guy. He he’s quite happy to say, Yep, it was named that. Stick it to a king who can reallocate it. Pick a number, any number, oh, you’ve had-

Dr Rad 1:03:21
The best kings, naturally.

Neil – History Hound 1:03:24
Stick to that and then we could talk about how great the Republicans in terms of you know, reshaping it. But these were important spaces, both culturally, and early on in Rome’s development, they were they were developed early for a reason. There was a great importance placed on efficiency. You didn’t just go, you know, fancy developing that area, because it’s nice. And in a few 100 years, 800 years, 900 years, 1000 years, well be worth quite a few quid. People want to build flats? You’re doing it because the immediate generation requires that that resource.

Dr Rad 1:03:57
We’d like a little less malaria, please.

Neil – History Hound 1:04:00
Yeah, a bit less.

Dr G 1:04:03
These hills are nice and all, but man, the mosquitoes

Yeah, too much. It’s too much.

Well, thank you so much, Neil, for sitting down with us and taking us through some of these fascinating details, because I think it’s always a useful exercise to go into that sort of exploratory space, like the intersections between what we can possibly know from an archaeological perspective, what we cannot possibly know because of the limits of that sort of understanding with continuous habitation and just our own inability to get come to grips with the changing nature of the topography over time, which is a natural process and also a human interference process, the further you go along, and to keep in mind that maybe we are all a bit like Livy, I really quite like that.

Neil – History Hound 1:04:57
Yeah, we’re trying to make the best of it. It’s a bit like when you have these detective, they they retrospectively find a detective in, you know, the medieval period or whatnot. And you’re like, okay, they’re working to the same methods, it’s just different technologies. And okay, they may not be doing the same way that we would do it. So I forget the name of there’s a, there was a brilliant show, Cadfael. So there’s Cadfael kicking around. And if anyone’s watched Cadfael, you know,

Dr G 1:05:25
I loved Cadfael.

Neil – History Hound 1:05:27
He’s not got CSI Miami, you know, he’s not, he can’t do a zoom into someone’s genetics on a Coke can or anything. But he’s applying a simple metric that sort of works. And that’s what Livy ultimately is doing. Because there is a lot of pride here. But also, I think the other tricky thing we need to remember. And it’s something which, again, you cover and touch upon in your book – dunno which chapter though – and it’s about – I’m still stirring – and it’s just about how we how we think of the spaces back in antiquity, and how we understand what we can possibly know about them. And I said, that’s something that I’m always I wouldn’t say, tortured by, but you live in hope that something’s going to pop up, that’s going to give you a bit more of an understanding, you know, these are people trying to make decisions. And we’re just going back to the point I made earlier, with Livy, I think there’s a tension there, because how can you have all these great, fantastic things that were built by kings, who were the worst. I mean, one of them was okay. But they were the worst.

Speaker 1 1:06:35
Hey! Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, only one of them was really terrible.

Neil – History Hound 1:06:40
That could have been that could have been, this was the sort of bit of your book ‘Rex’ the worst, just the worst. Because actually, again, it is an internal tension within the whole narrative of the regal period is this that yeah, so and so started it, and they built it. And Livy often takes potshots at people going oh, yeah, but they will you know, they it did for them. But you know, there were uncouth. They didn’t mind their manners and the rest.

Dr Rad 1:07:06
Uncouth, my goodness. Shots fired, Livy.

Neil – History Hound 1:07:08
Absolutely. Livy’s dead, right? He’s dead. He’s not coming for me. I’m gonna get someone pop

Dr Rad 1:07:13
Well, you’ve certainly given me a lot to think about. I know that I’m definitely going to go to sleep tonight imagining how Livy’s history be different if he’d had access to drone technology.

Neil – History Hound 1:07:25
Yeah, and if nothing else, think of the My Little Pony show at the Circus Maximus where they dressed up their horses and and paraded them around and made them feel special.

Dr Rad 1:07:35
Well, listeners we hope that you have enjoyed listening to Neil’s absolutely mind blowing knowledge of the early geography of Rome. As you can tell it is well worth listening to Ancient History Hound, if you haven’t already started already. And Neil, thank you so much for joining us. It’s actually a very special episode, not just because it’s a part to a sequel, which we don’t often do, but because it’s actually technically Dr. G’s in my 11 year anniversary today.

Dr G 1:08:04
Oh, today!

Dr Rad 1:08:07
It’s actually on the first of March, but it’s almost the first of March in our time, and it is also a leap year.

Dr G 1:08:11
Oh that’s true.

Neil – History Hound 1:08:13
And if you hear a knock on the door, and there’s someone with a present, that wasn’t me, that’s purely coincidence. But I just want to say thanks very much. I really appreciate you having me on and been able to talk and I hope the listeners have really enjoyed it. Feel free to blame me.

Dr Rad 1:08:31
Oh, the pleasure is all ours.

Neil – History Hound 1:08:32
If you haven’t enjoyed it, If you haven’t enjoyed it, you can find me on social media.

Dr Rad 1:08:38
I think we’ve established that we don’t appreciate these sorts of comments.

Dr G 1:08:42
Five star reviews only.

Dr Rad 1:08:43
Thank you. Yeah, yes, exactly.

Dr G 1:08:46
Yeah, you can write whatever you want in the comment – five stars.

Dr Rad 1:08:49
You want to take your rage out anyone aim at the podcast on the massive networks. We’re independents.

Dr G 1:09:08
Thank you for listening to this episode of The Partial Historians. A huge thank you to our Patreon supporters for helping make this show spectacular. If you enjoyed the show, there’s a few ways that you can show your support. You can write a review wherever you listen in to help spread the word. Reviews really make our day and help new people find our podcast. Researching and producing a podcast takes time. If you’re keen to chip in, you can buy us a coffee on Ko-Fi or join our fantastic patrons for early releases and exclusive content. You can find our show notes, as well as links to our merch and where to buy our book wrecks the seven kings of Rome at partialhistorians.com Until next time, we are yours Ancient Rome.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai

The post Special Episode – Exploring Place in Regal Rome with Neil, The Ancient Blogger – Part 2 appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

It is not often that we get to say that there is a new translation of a classical text that has taken the world by storm. But that was exactly what happened when Professor Stephanie McCarter released her 2022 translation of Ovid’s Metamorphoses. We were honoured that Professor McCarter agreed to talk to us about the mysterious Ovid and her process of translation.

Stephanie McCarter is currently a Professor of Classics at the University of the South in Sewanee, Tennessee. She published a monograph entitled Horace between Freedom and Slavery: The First Book of Epistles in 2015 and a translation of Horace’s Epodes, Odes and Carmen Saeculare in 2020.

We would like to warn our listeners that this episode will touch on instances of violence and sexual assault. This is not one to listen to with the kids in the car.

Special Episode – Ovid’s Metamorphoses with Professor Stephanie McCarter

Ovid is one of our favourite Latin poets over at the Partial Historians. This is partially due to his work, which can be touching but also highly comedic. However, it is also because Ovid himself is hard to figure out.

He lived and worked during the reign of Augustus but claimed to have been exiled in approximately 8 CE. Academics are still trying to figure out what Ovid did that was so terrible… or whether he was making it up entirely!

Whatever he was up to, Ovid’s back catalogue is pretty impressive. He composed the Amores, the Heroides, the Fasti, the Ars amatoria, and his masterpiece, the Metamorphoses.

Translation is an immensely difficult and often underappreciated task. We don’t mean getting out your dictionary and figuring out a passage here and there. We delve into the technique of translating an entire work, trying to make it accessible and enjoyable for a new generation, whilst staying true to the voice of the original author. Whew! What an undertaking.

Professor McCarter’s translation of the Metamorphoses is the first English translation of the work by a woman in many decades and it seems to have struck a nerve. There are many episodes of sexual violence in this work that have been softened or glossed over in previous translations. McCarter’s work aims to be more accurate and direct in the language, not shying away from the troubling aspects of these myths. This has allowed themes to emerge more clearly from text.

It was a delight to talk to someone as passionate and dedicated to their work as Professor McCarter. Her work highlights the way that translations often reflect the values of their creator and their context, hence the need for fresh interpretations.

Our music is by Bettina Joy de Guzman.

Generated by Otter AI.

Dr Rad  00:15

Welcome to the partial historians,

Dr G  00:18

we explore all the details of ancient Rome.

Dr Rad  00:23

Everything from political scandals, the love affairs, the battles waged, and when citizens turn against each other. I’m Dr. Rad. And

Dr G  00:33

I’m Dr. G. We consider Rome as the Roman saw it by reading different authors from the ancient past and comparing their stories.

Dr Rad  00:44

Join us as we trace the journey of Rome from the founding of this city. Hello, and welcome to a special episode of the partial historians. I am one of your hosts, Dr. Rad,

Dr G  01:06

and I’m Dr. G.

Dr Rad  01:09

Now, Dr. G, you know that I break out in a cold sweat at the thought of translating anything. It’s

Dr G  01:16

true. I think I do as well at this point, I feel Yeah. So I’m

Dr Rad  01:20

super excited to have an expert in translation on our show. Today, we are going to be chatting to Stephanie McCarter, who is currently a Professor of Classics at the University of the South in Sewanee, Tennessee. She published a monograph entitled horrors between freedom and slavery, the first book of epistles in 2015, and a translation of Horace’s oppose, owed and calm and secular era in 2020. However, she has recently been spending more time with a man named of it, her 2022 translation of his Metamorphoses has received much acclaim, and this is what we will be focusing on today. However, before we start, we would like to warn our listeners that this episode will touch on instances of violence and sexual assault. Welcome, Stephanie

Stephanie McCarter  02:25

Thank you so much. This is this is a great treat. I’m super excited to be on this particular podcast because I spend so much time in Australia, my husband’s and Aussie. So I sometimes try to my kids are all these. So this is exciting. It

Dr Rad  02:42

is very exciting for us to have you on the show and to talk about this particular translation. But before we get into the actual translating stuff, just so I can, you know, ease myself into it, not have too many nightmares. Let’s start with a brief biography of of it, who is this guy? Well,

Stephanie McCarter  03:01

he is who he we think if he was who he would like us to believe he is. So most of what we know from him comes from his own poetry, we know very little about him outside of that. And you know, part of constructing his biography means picking and choosing the bits you want to believe, right. But we in terms of who he is, we know he was the last of the major Agustin poets, who were living in writing during the rise and reign of Augustus, along with Virgil and then Horace I tend to think of Virgil, Horace and Ovid is the big three. We need to be really careful with what he tells us because most of it comes from one poem, trusty 410, which he writes when he’s in exile, and he’s clearly trying to frame himself in a particular kind of quasi heroic light. So it’s hard to know what’s poetic fiction and what is fact. He was born in Salmo Italy in 43 BCE, but a year after the assassination of Julius Caesar almost to the day, March 20. Caesar, of course, famously killed on the Ides of March. And so he was about 12 or so when I guess this came to power. So when he really came of age during guesses rise, and then he died about a year after Augustus. So his life really straddles this period of Rome’s own metamorphosis, right from a Republic into an empire. And so I think that might be one reason he’s interested in the idea of transformation because one of the things he brings out in the metamorphosis is how states transform. So I think some of this is tied into his own experience in Rome. Um, his family was equestrian so that he was not from a super elite family, but certainly wealthy enough to send him to be educated in Rome along with his brother, who died when he was young. He clearly He received a stellar oratorical education which he put to great use in the poem. But he ultimately decided not to embark on a career as a politician or an order, and he decided that poetry was where he wanted to proceed instead, we know that he married according to what he told us three times, the last marriage lasted for many years, he had a daughter and he was a grandpa to which we don’t really think of all of it as you know, a grandpa. But he tells us that he was. And perhaps the biggest event in his life was his exile. This is the one that we are spilling a lot of ink over. He was exiled probably the same year that Metamorphoses was published the year eight, he tells us that he was exiled because of a carmen et error, or a poem and a mistake. Most people would agree the poem was the Ars amatoria. Cause you could very easily if you wanted to argue that that’s a manual for picking up married women and adultery was a crime under Augustus. But he wasn’t exiled until eight years later. So the mistake is probably what really got him exiled. Nobody knows what that was. We know he saw something. I don’t speculate because I think that’s playing of its game. He wants us to speculate and he’s never gonna tell us and He wants us to keep talking about this for 2000 years. And he wrote many poems in exile wanting to be recalled to Rome wasn’t and so died, still in exile in Thomas on the Black Sea. So that’s a very quick overview of his of his life.

Dr Rad  06:40

I would just like to highlight for our listeners that it is Augustus Yes. Augustus who is responsible for keeping this poetic genius and

Stephanie McCarter  06:52

some people think it has It has been speculated that maybe he’s making the entire thing up. Oh, scandal. I actually I’m quite drawn to I don’t think that’s necessarily true, but I like the idea that maybe he’s just, yeah, this is a persona. I don’t we don’t really think he was a pickup artist, do we? Even though he purports to be in the mores and ours on materia so it’s the kind of funny thought that maybe we’ve been speculating for about something that he just just saw.

Dr Rad  07:21

The biggest prank? Yeah, I do. I do enjoy visiting him as like a creepy grandpa type of guy, the one that tells all the inappropriate jokes, and it’s like, hugely embarrassing.

Dr G  07:33

Absolutely, that would be for sure. Don’t invite him to family lunch, just in case. So the metamorphoses is a hugely influential text through time, and partly because it’s so mythologically based tales of the gods tales of mortals. These are the stories that really draw people in to the ancient world in many cases for the first time. But it’s more than that. And I’m interested in your view about what is the metamorphoses about and you kind of touched on that idea of the transformation of Rome itself? And I’m wondering if there’s other ways into the text that are like that, or build from there as well?

Stephanie McCarter  08:12

This is such a difficult question to even start to ponder, because I begin to think, what is it not about? Right? It’s, you know, it is about everything from the creation of the universe to have its own day, this is what he tells us the various transformations that have happened throughout all time, right? And so transformation brings us does is it simple, you know, it’s sort of most straightforward theme. He tells us in the opening line, he’s going to talk about shapes changed, right? New Task formats, that’s metamorphosis. But it’s about so much more like what changes forms, right? That’s the big question. It’s time. So it’s about time and its movement, power changes, forms, frequently in this poem, and also, so much of it just focused around the body, right? This the probably the most important word, and the opening poem is corpora, which is bodies, its shapes transformed into new bodies. And so you think that’s weird, because it should be body’s changed into new shapes? And so, you know, he invites you to ponder, you know, what is a body? What does that mean? So this is why you can kind of think of the universe is a body, the state is a body. And then, of course, we as humans having bodies that are really subject to change and transformation. So it’s about you know, what does it mean to have a human body? What does it mean to exist in a world that it changes the language of the body? And, and then it also invites us to think about identity. So it’s about that what is the relationship between a body and the identity that inhabits it? Right when the shape is changed into a new body? What happens to the being that inhabited the body to begin with? Is it lost? Okay? So yeah, it’s about so many different things. It’s about gender, right? There’s and and the way that that might relate to a body, you have so many characters in this epic who transform in terms of gender, and you have a big focus on female characters as well. And so how does an epic itself transform? When you shift the focus on to women? Right, this is I think, something that Ovid is really interested in, you know, so many of the epics that we think of the need the Iliad, the Odyssey, the Odyssey opens with the word man, right? It is a male focused genre for sure. And so just by changing that, that focus, he transforms the genre in so many interesting ways. So I could go on forever about what the metamorphosis piece has been about. But I think maybe what it’s fundamentally about is how the force of change and transformation then connects us in so many ways, right? How all these things are connected, and you can’t stop change. And that’s actually a pretty good thing.

Dr G  11:05

It does mean that there’s a sense that the text resonates continuously through time, because change is the one thing that we always are feeling and understanding. And even though we might resist change, there’s a real compulsion to try and understand it better. And I think of it has done something supremely clever by tapping into this as that thematic focus.

Stephanie McCarter  11:27

Absolutely, absolutely. Well, it means he can he can be changed to write his texts can be changed and transformed through translation through art through adaptation in ways that will make him stay relevant always. It

Dr Rad  11:44

is kind of ironic, isn’t it? That change is a constant in all of our lives. How important would you say this text was in his own time? And then in subsequent centuries?

Stephanie McCarter  11:58

Oh, goodness, I mean, from the very beginning, it was, it was important. I mean, he you can’t have any of the epics that follow in the wake of it without this text. You know, one of my favourite epics is Statius is the by it, I absolutely love it. But it wouldn’t exist without all of it, and Virgil. And so he’s sort of folding both of those epics into the by it, you see its influence in art pretty immediately because of I mean, the frescoes you see in Pompeii that are clearly based on all of its metamorphosis, not just in Pompeii, you see this across the ancient world. And then of course, in our own time, and we, you know, in the English speaking world, he has resonated across the centuries. I mean, you have Shakespeare’s most famous play arguably is Romeo and Juliet, you wouldn’t have that without of its pyramids and Thursby you wouldn’t have huge chunks of Midsummer Night’s Dream without pyramids and Thursby as well. You know, I’m thinking of in terms of art, famously, art of it has inspired more art than any text apart from the Bible, and continues to one of my favourite painters working right now is a woman named Elizabeth colomba, who very often works with Ovidian material. She has a fabulous painting of Daphne that’s responding powerfully to Bernini’s Daphne and Apollo sculpture. So I mean, in some ways, because of it is so malleable, we can use him as something of a mirror in which we can see our own literary and artistic tastes change and react to what went before. So we’ve been using him for so long, I’m thinking also of, you know, his influence on you know, operat his influence on the stage in general, his influence on so many rewritings of myth that are coming out right now, I mean, you wouldn’t have Madeline Miller’s Circe, without all of its Circe, for example, you know, Mary Zimmerman’s play the metamorphoses I’m reading right now another new play at Polaroid stories by Naomi Iizuka. I’m sure, I may not be pronouncing her name correctly, but you know, there’s so many wonderful theatrical productions of all of it. Yeah, he’s everywhere. He’s absolutely everywhere.

Dr Rad  14:24

It sounds good that we’re talking about it, then if it’s such a crucial text from the ancient world, I think this is

Dr G  14:29

the sort of thing as well, well, this is like a small anecdote, but I was out yesterday with some friends from a broader circle of people. And they were kind of like, well, what are you doing tomorrow? And I was like, oh, you know, I’m going to interview this wonderful academic about Ovid’s Metamorphoses. And they’re like, what’s that? And I was like, You will be surprised about how much you have already engaged with his text through one of the variations and adaptations that have happened over time. And I was like, I went straight to Shakespeare and I was like, Look, and then we move out from I’m there. And I want to, first of all just stand in all of you for a moment, because translation is a gargantuan task. And I think the further we go through time, the more history we have of translation and engagement with ancient texts as well. So every scholar of each new generation who engages in translation kind of has this whole history of what has come before, in order to encounter all of that before they get to their own translation, and how they’re going to position things. And not even all academics get the chance to really engage in in depth translation work. So I’m wondering if you can walk us a little bit through your process as a translator? Oh,

Stephanie McCarter  15:41

goodness, this is, it’s a little tricky to explain. I love my new shop. I love working in minutiae. I’ve always liked that. And I always was drawn to poetry. And so even from the time I was in high school, I loved poetry as a sort of secret poetry nerd. And I had to leave a lot of the English poetry I really liked behind when I chose classics over English literature. And so I guess about in the summer of 2016, I just sat down and started translating, but I had no process, I had no idea what I was doing. Really, what it took for me was to figure out that I wanted to write formal poetry in translation. And that became a real guide and friend, to me, because like a lot of classes, I was not terribly good at literary translation, we tend to be trained to do a hyper literal kind of translation, that doesn’t sound so great to somebody who’s reading the text for its literary quality. So it just, it took me a long time to work out any kind of process at all. With this particular translation I translated it’s in iambic pentameter, I made it my full time job, I actually lived in Australia for most of the time, I was translating the initial draft of this, we were in Brisbane for the year. And, you know, woke up every day nine to five translating into iambic pentameter, so much that I started thinking. And then I, it took me several years to get the draft complete. A lot of that was due to COVID. And having two small kids. And then I one thing I always do, once I have a translation, as I always teach it, because I want to see how it goes with my students and how they react to it, where things are not working for them. And so I taught it. In a class, I was teaching on women’s adaptation of Ovid, and they gave me great feedback. And then I spent months revising, and revising and revising and revising. But yeah, it’s very mature. It’s a meticulous process. So I’m sitting down with, I don’t feel like translation for me is like a process of being inspired or anything like that. I’m using commentaries, I was having a conversation with somebody the other day about how I love concordances. I don’t know if you know what concordance is, are, but they’re the most boring possible, but so good. It’s wonderful. Like, it’s like every time, you know, an ancient author. So I was talking about my Horace concordance, and how much I loved it. But you know, you can Look up every time he uses the word good. Yeah. It’ll tell you everywhere. So when it’s really old fashioned kind of tools, like commentaries, dictionaries, concordances, spreading them all around and turning yourself into a bit of a, you know, maniac for buy, but I

Dr G  18:41

kind of love this. There’s like the word nerd comes out, like, yeah, Look at this, and then it appeared here, and then it didn’t appear for another 50 years, like what’s going on? It must be special.

Stephanie McCarter  18:53

What? That’s true. And so then how do you translate that word? That is a weird word that Ovid only uses? Once right? Then you have to reach for a weird word in English that that works there. So you know, just getting yourself into that space where you’re kind of inhabiting lots of different roles at once it strangely so you’re a scholar, right? You’re using really scholarly tools where you’ve, you know, you’re using your tools for literary criticism, so you’re having to interpret the poem, always. And then you’re also having to be an artist where you are trying to transform that into workable English literature. So it’s a strange thing to try to do. But it’s, I mean, it’s I it’s, it’s a pleasurable thing. So I won’t stop translating anytime they kind

Dr G  19:43

of love this as well, the idea of translation as another metamorphosis as well. I’m just going to put that out there. So are there particular translations that you that you that resonated for you when you were approaching your own translation?

Stephanie McCarter  19:56

Well, I think that I knew several of the translations pretty well. I mean, I’ve taught avid so many times over the years. And yeah, so I wouldn’t say that I was committed to any translation I knew them. And because I had taught out of them so much I knew where the limitations of each one was, in the classes that I was teaching him in. It was mainly, I teach a course on women and gender in the ancient world. And then I teach another course on sexuality in the ancient world, so two separate courses. And then I also teach of it in like a Latin seminar where we are dissecting the Latin together very slowly. And so in the Women and Gender and Sexuality courses, I wasn’t able to find translations that dealt with the aspects of sexual violence and what was going on in terms of gender in the body. I needed translations that brought those issues to the fore, and I just wasn’t finding them. And then on the other hand, in my Latin seminars, I just wasn’t finding translations that did poetically, what I needed them to do in order to teach the students who were dissecting the Latin and finding ways for them to see that reflected in the translations we were also looking at. So that meant that my goals became twofold. I really wanted to use a poetic translation. So this is, you know, formal poetry. It’s iambic pentameter. I wanted it to be really success, like accessible rather, I, I tend to like poetry that is really accessible. And so my favourite poet is Philip Larkin. And he’s, so straightaway, he’s so accessible. And so much of the power of his poetry comes from its seeming simplicity of language. But then when you dig in, and you see how he’s handling, metre, and alliteration, and all of these wonderful things, you can see it’s artistry. And so it is, I think it’s, it works, because it is so seemingly simple, but really artistically refined. And so I wanted to try to make something highly readable. But when you dug in, you can actually see the cool poetic stuff that Ovid is also doing. So you know, it’s not hard to read, I don’t think my translation I wanted to make something that you could read rather quickly, but then you can go in and it’s okay, there’s all this alliteration. Here’s this enjambment. She’s working with this Juras in the meeting, the line kind of like all of it is doing here’s the reversal of this metrical foot that mimics what Ovid is doing. So that was one goal. So it’s poetic readable. On the other hand, I want it to be really straightforward with with the sexual violence, and we’ve nothing ambiguous because it’s not ambiguous in the Latin. And so I think a lot of that was me, being motivated through the feminist lens through which I had taught all of it for so long, and not wanting to know why I don’t think that a lot of the previous translators were actively wanting to euphemized it, they just didn’t have that goal. Right. It wasn’t a goal that they had set out for themselves. And so they ended up you for maizing it for whatever reasons.

Dr Rad  23:09

Yeah, this is probably a great opportunity for us to delve in a little deeper and allow you to give us an example or two of how your new translation does allow for a more nuanced understanding of the meaning suggested by the Latin. So can you tell us a little bit about like one or two instances where you were, you know, meeting those goals about dealing with the sexual violence, you know, in a way that was probably needed in this sort of day and age, I suppose. Sure.

Stephanie McCarter  23:37

I mean, there are various ways in which this comes comes out, I think in the translation. First of all, I should say that it’s an important thing Ovid wants us to wrestle with, right? I mean, he’s really interested in the way power exerts itself on the body and causes it to transform. And I think he recognises that for for a lot of people. Rape is a transformative force that exerts itself on the body, and so it’s part of the theme, and so you can’t hide it. You shouldn’t hide it, you shouldn’t euphemized it, a lot of this is just in the link in the language he uses for rape. So, the basic word the Ovid uses to indicate rape is the Latin word for force, which is vis, V I S. and um this is a legal charge you could bring against somebody, and he uses two formulations of this one is to experience force that is, we would say, to be raped. The other word he uses is to inflict force, so when in theory, and that would be to rape they so there’s no word in Latin that we can translate literally as to rape. I mean, this means only that and the way that the English word does, but his words are very clear he is clear Latin legal terms that would matter. add on to our word, or to rape and to be raped. So here’s an example of that. This comes in Book Three. This is the mother of Narcissus. Her name is Liriope. She’s a nymph. And obviously, he uses this formulation he at the river god Cessiphus inflicts force on her. So this is what we’re, we’re talking about, he raped her. I wanted to keep language of force in there because for me, it’s really important to connect these things with other moments when Ovid discusses vis are force because it’s not just rape, it’s it’s throughout the epic and it’s just rape is one type of force that the Ovid designates with this term. They’re all transformative. Right? So my translation says, kiss thesis once had trapped her there eIope in his curved stream and raped her forcibly is current snaring her. So I tried to use language so he raped her forcibly that’s how I translated like he inflicted force. But also words that would suggest that this wasn’t an embrace, right? He snake he ensnared her, he trapped her the word one word the Ovid uses in the Latin there is he wears it here implicavit, which means like, he entangled her right and, and then we have Yeah, vim tulit. So it is a very clear indication that he raped her. Some translations do this fine. David Rayburn, for example. He writes that the Cessiphus the river god caught her in the folds of His sinless stream, and then proceeded to rape. So it’s clear right? Then you get other translators who are less less clear. So for example, we have Mandelbaum who says that within his waves he snared the Azure nymphs and had his way his way you’re getting into very you can mystic territory with Yeah, then you get the one that is the most common way to translate a Ovidian rape and Humphries demonstrates this. This is Ralph embraces 1955. TRANSLATION were total denial of the river, the Liriope, whom the river guide Cessiphus embraced and ravished right in his and his watery dwelling, and you just get so many translations like that. So it’s not about trapping, it’s about embracing, and then ravishing, no longer means to re write when you can Look at the covers of a million romance book, not romance books, and they’re gonna have the word ravish. in them. There’s one I always show my students it’s called ravish me completely or something like that you the in that way anymore. So to me, it just it becomes a comfortable way that translators can translate the language of rape without actually having to say, right, yeah,

Dr Rad  28:08

it’s funny you say that because as soon as you said ravish, immediately, my mind went to a romance novel cover.

Stephanie McCarter  28:15

Absolutely. One thing I do all the time when I’m translating, I mean, all the time, several times a day is when I want to figure out what the nuances are of the words that I’m choosing. I’ll go to Google Images and I’ll type them in just to see what pops up. So if I want to avoid like language, that’s too feminised thing or something for a character who’s not in it’s not in the Latin feminising language, I’ll go type it in just to make sure. And so that brings me to a second way that I have tried to do things differently in my translation. And that is to avoid like gendering language when it’s not present in the, in the Latin. So let me see if I can find an example of this. There’s a couple of ways this happened. One is in the figure of Callisto, who you may know is a is a virginal Huntress who models herself on Diana and Diana is famously gender non conforming, right. And so Callisto also is gender non conforming in so many different ways. Not only is she taking part in masculine pursuits like hunting, she’s also refusing to get married and have children she wants to say, a virgin forever so often describes her as as having messy hair. The Latin word is words are neglect toasts copy loose, so her neglected hair is really what this means. And the word copy loose with the word capillary from this, it has no gender connotation. She’s just got neglected hair. So I translated this as messy hair. And I did a Google image search and I got lots of masculine presenting people and feminine in presenting people and I was like, okay, that works. When you Look at other translators, we have things like here’s David Rayburn that she has loose, flowing tresses, right?

Dr G  30:12

Yes, men never dresses do they

Stephanie McCarter  30:16

never do. So if you go into Google Images and you type in loose flowing dresses, you’re gonna get so many super feminine presenting hairstyles, right? So I was just being very careful with things like that. The way translate the body. What is this character wearing? If it’s a female character R is her clothing. gender specific. Usually it’s not so trying to avoid that it’s very important for a character like Callisto. Right? Who doesn’t embrace her femininity at all. She has no femininity to embrace. The other thing is little additions sometimes that translators will make. This is one I’ve talked about quite a lot. So Daphne’s very similar to Callisto. She’s a virginal Huntress. She wants to spend her time in the woods, and she actively rejects things that are associated with femininity, and Apollo attempts to rape her. Prior to this. He’s looking at her body. And when he’s looking at her, Ovid doesn’t give her body any adjectives that would be feminising at all. He’s just looking at her, her eyes and tells us that they gleaned it. They’re kind of bright like stars. He mentions her lips, fingers, hands, arms, shoulders, so I didn’t give them any adjectives. So I translated that as he sees her eyes gleaming like stars, her lips but those it’s not enough to kiss to see. he marvelled at her fingers, her hands, her arms, her shoulders nearly bear the parts he cannot see he thinks are better. Other translators will add little things to end to feminise her. So for example, Ella Mandelbaum says that she has fingers hands and wrists that are unsurpassed. So he throws in an extra body part and gives it an adjective. David Weyburn says that he has that she has teasingly tempting lips, delicate fingers, shapely arms. And so it’s just little things like that. That really does, they do make a huge difference. So it was not just the scenes involving the language of sexual violence, but also the way the bodies are described and the way that gender and sexualities are presented. I’ve

Dr Rad  32:36

just seen or the amount of effort that goes into this translation Sorry, I’m just like gobsmacked, I always suspected that this is what it was like. Hearing you talk about it, I won’t even tell you how

Stephanie McCarter  32:46

many times translators mentioned breasts that are not there.

Dr G  32:51

I guess the temptation is real for some but so I think this is all really, really interesting, because it’s allowing a way into the Latin through translation that maybe has not been available up until now. And part of this way of thinking about gender, I think, is also like, what sort of consciousness and experiences and ideas are translators bringing to the work that they do. And to segue slightly, you’re the first woman to translate Ovid metamorphoses into English first in many, many years, there was Mary ins translation, which goes back to 1955. And more broadly speaking, how do you think your own perception and that you bring as a human being to translation? How do you think that has factored into the way you’ve approached this?

Stephanie McCarter  33:47

I think so much of this is to do with the fact that I teach young people who won’t let me get away with anything else. I really think that that is what so much of it has boiled down to. There are, there are, there are women who translate who translate ancient texts all the time and replicate exactly some of these same things. So I don’t and this is something Emily Wilson has talked about, as well. I think that one of the interviews she gave, I was just reading where she talks about, you know, she didn’t arrive at her interpretations of these texts via the superpower of being a girl right?

Dr G  34:28

What No.

Stephanie McCarter  34:30

Women can women can replicate these these things as well. However, I think that for me, my own experiences, inhabiting my body and my identity as a woman, I think they have played in to my experience of the world that has led me to, to, to try to read and translate all that with a particular set of goals. Right. And so I just laid out clearly from the very beginning what my goals were. But so much of these goals have been formed by teaching young women, men, and I see what they go through in this world. And, and so there has been a real feeling of responsibility toward them. And so not just toward myself, but toward the young women who have had to live in a world that sees their bodies in certain ways that insists on seeing their bodies in certain ways that frames their experiences of coercion in certain ways. And, you know, I’ve been teaching women and men for, you know, it’s awanee, for almost 16 years now, before that for a long time. And my motivations, were pretty much for my students and wanting to give them a text, no matter their gender, that would help them think more clearly about, you know, what is the relationship between their identities and their bodies? Like? What did you know? How can they see reflections in this text of what they’re going through in this world, and I just felt they needed the tools to do that. And a really good, accurate translation that tried to capture those nuances was something I felt I could give to the young people who are going to be reading this epic, I hope for a long time to come.

Dr Rad  36:24

I think that’s a really interesting thing. I think one of the things I like so much about your translation and reading about your translation is that you’re not trying to hide your goals, as you say, you know, they’re very much at the forefront. And I think I mean, personally, I believe that it’s really hard for historians, Classicist translators to be completely objective when they’re doing anything. And so I think being transparent about what it is you’re trying to do with your work is important, because if you’re not, it might lead people to maybe think that, you know, that you’re maybe straying into the territory of say, inaccuracy, or something like that. But when you’re when you’re clear about, Look, this is what I’m trying to do. You know, I mean, they’re you given some really great examples of where people you feel are being inaccurate to the Latin. But if you think about their context, it’s probably their context that is leading them to make those choices, isn’t it? Absolutely.

Stephanie McCarter  37:17

I mean, this is why I have felt fairly confident in calling it a feminist translation. Because I think that feminism has actually given me a modes and strategies through which to produce a more accurate translation. And I think that that inverts people’s expectations in some way, we tend to think that a feminist translator is going to alter the text. But I think and again, this is something that Emily Wilson has also talked about, that a translator who is more kind of ideologically motivated, might better be better empowered to scrutinise their own biases in a way that a translator who automatically assumes that they, that they have no biases won’t. Right. And, and I think that the to think of translation as ever being something we can do, completely, objectively is, is the kind of dangerous thing to do, right? We always need to recognise that any kind of interpretive framework is going to be shaped by culture, or whatever, we’re gonna be able to exist outside of our culture and what we’ve, what we’ve learned, I think that what we should do is become not only good critics of ancient literary texts, but also good critics of our own culture, so that we can be aware of how we’re being shaped by it. Oh,

Dr Rad  38:44

and you’re juggling so many things when you’re doing your translation that you’re not necessarily doing when you’re say, writing a history, which is not only being conscious of your own potential biases, but also the fact that you’re juggling, as you said earlier, that artistic angle as well, you know, trying to translate that and it’s a totally different language, you know, it’s, yeah, it’s just so many things you have to keep in so many balls in the air. That’s

Stephanie McCarter  39:10

where the pleasure comes from. For me, it is the artistic process of translation, you know, so much. So much of my motive for doing this is, you know, to think about the themes of the gender and sexual violence and all of this, but on a day to day basis, I was wrestling with iambic pentamer.

Dr G  39:28

Like how am I gonna make this line work?

Stephanie McCarter  39:33

Why does it have to use this strange parenthesis here that sentence apart? You know, it’s like you’re

Dr G  39:38

ruining it for me over it’s stuff that I think there’s sort of like the technical elements of like playing with language because obviously, the way that Latin flows in its cadence is completely different from the way English operates. So the task is, is math to sort of go from the epic metre that of it is using one language to the kind of metre that works in English that is well established that people think of as naturally poetic and also mimicking natural a speech to a certain extent. Thinking about the modern reader of it, because I remember approaching of it for the first time in translation, and not being particularly enamoured of the text. And and I think so translation has a huge, influential role in the way that people get into texts like this. And for me, personally, the little historian inside me, I love the fastI because so it’s packed with so much detail for the sorts of things I’m interested in, which means I haven’t spent as much time with the metamorphoses. So what can modern readers gain from engaging with Ovid’s Metamorphoses? Well, I think

Stephanie McCarter  40:49

for for any of his text, but especially the metamorphoses, I mean, the primary thing is going to be pleasure, right? He’s a masterful storyteller. And probably, to my mind, some of his stories are the most delightful stories from the Roman world and the Greek world, you will read. And he’s clever, right? His wordplay is something that drove me completely bonkers trying to reproduce, that’s again, part of the pleasure. So so much of it is just going to be the sheer pleasure. We love stories, we love old stories we love. We love seeing that the playfulness with which all of it tells them and in those strange, inventive ways with which he connects them. So just the sheer joy of reading that. But I think probably more than in any other ancient work, we can think with all of it. I think he, he also, he challenges us continually across the ages, because they’re always going to appeal no matter what the age is, that’s reading them to the sense of abilities of that age, because he is so malleable. And so I think for some of my students, it’s so shocking, that they will read this ancient text and you know, he has transgender characters, right? He has characters who are non binary, I mean, so explicitly, so if an incident can see that we haven’t just invented certain concerns, right, that these have been here, we’ve been thinking about these things for so long. And so I think for a reader coming to this text, just you’ll be blown away by the fact that we have the word we are still in our most current discourse, part of a conversation that’s been going on for 1000s of years. And I think you can really see that with all of it pretty much more than with anybody, because I mean, in some ways, Ovid is so interested in exploring the experiences of characters who aren’t going to be the centre, right in other stories. So the other epics that we have in the ancient world, as I was saying, they have, you know, a male protagonist at the very centre, they have a clear goal. Oh, it isn’t interested in any of that. There’s no protagonist in this story. There’s no clear goal. And the most interesting characters are women. And so he’s going to constantly be saying, well, what if we don’t turn the lens on and do this, but we turn the lens on the people, the women around him, right, and we see the story through their eyes. So we see this in the Heroides, right, which is a series of letters that are written by mythological women who are often very victimised by these male heroes. And so from the very beginning of his poetic output, he’s interested in in thinking, Well, what if we told this story through this side character’s point of view. And so I think he’s very good. As a storyteller of reminding us that there are more than one ways to tell every story, there’s so many ways you can tell the same story and every single character involved in any event is going to have their own version. So he helps us to resist the idea of the singular authoritative tale. And so that’s so fun to think with he, he leaves open so many alternatives. And so I think this is one great reason we returned to him again and again, because we are doing the very sorts of rethinking reframing that he himself has modelled for us. You know, so one carrot. One reason I love Elizabeth Columba’swork so much. She’s the painter that I mentioned before, is that she is taking off his stories, and in completely reframing them, I think, in a way that he would love right? So he gives us a death or he No, He gives us a Daphne who has been shot by Cupid’s arrow. Well, Elizabeth colomba has her standing there with Cupid’s arrow. And so anybody who’s listening to this, just go do a Google Image Search for Elizabeth colomba has Daphne. And so I think that he has he models how to be playful with stories and how to, you know, to see ourselves as as part of an ongoing dialogue in ways that no other ancient author to my mind quite does.

Dr Rad  45:12

You’ve definitely inspired me to spend the rest of the day perusing his work. Okay. So let me I have to finish off with another little peek behind the curtain in terms of this new translation. Because one of the things that struck me straight away when I first saw it was the cover art and the way that the text was formatted and that sort of thing. It just made me curious about how much input you actually had as to translate it into the publication and the formatting that went into this work and how you think the layout might affect the way that people engage with it. Sure,

Stephanie McCarter  45:47

I want to talk can I talk about the cover for a moment because I love I love I love the cover so much. I wish I were the person who would come up with the cover, but I am not. However, when I thought I was gleeful. What I told them was I didn’t want an image of a woman being victimised on the cover. That was really important to me. Because again, it’s how do we frame these stories becomes so important and so I wanted a way to frame it around women’s agency rather than women’s victimisation. So the one directive I gave to the art team at Penguin was I’m more interested in Philomela’s Tapestry than her rape. And then they came back with this wonderful cover by it feature it features a tapestry by a Japanese artist, her name is Aiko, Tezuka. And she uses tapestry as a way to explore metamorphosis. So she’ll often take old tapestries and weave them and re weave them, which is just wonderful for all of its perfect, perfect, and he uses tapestry so much is a metaphor. So his even from the very first lines of the epic, he asks the gods to spin out a song for him. And so it’s a process of spinning, and he’s going to weave it together. And then you have so many wonderful female artists in the epic. You have Philomela, who uses tapestry as a way to narrate her rape when she’s lost her tongue because her rapist cuts it out. You have arachnid who weaves a tapestry in competition with Minerva, you have the mini ads, who are these wonderful set of sisters who tells stories while they’re weaving. So it really I think it pits women’s are in particular front and centre. And it’s such an important theme. Because the colours are red and white. Those are the dominant colours on the cover. And those colours are so important throughout the metamorphoses,  Philomela’s Tapestry is red markings on a white background. And so that colour combination was important to me. As well, it doesn’t Be sure its central myth, just as of its doesn’t In fact, the middle is kind of wiped out by the and weaving of the tapestry that’s happening. So it kind of shows you there is no central myth here that we’re going to be dealing with. And also it features some wonderful modern images. There’s like a DNA double helix. There’s also a uterus, I don’t know if you notice that

Dr Rad  48:20

there’s a huge I do not see that.

Stephanie McCarter  48:24

So I like this idea of the undoing of the body that the cover kind of evokes. So I just I love the cover. So much. I can’t even tell you how much. I just am so happy.

Dr Rad  48:35

It’s gorgeous. It is gorgeous. Yeah, the formatting inside, it’s

Stephanie McCarter  48:40

probably a bit different from us other translators of the Metamorphoses because it kind of sets each tale apart, like it separates them and gives each like its own big title, those big titles are invented by me. Those are not in the Latin text. And that’s a little bit different. And on the one hand, it kind of breaks up the narrative in a way that maybe other translations don’t. And, and I can see how some people might be frustrated with that I had no input into that. On the other hand, there’s something really good about it and that I think it highlights stories that could easily get lost. I was talking with somebody I can’t remember who who mentioned to me that they had never noticed that after Niobe’s children are all killed. We are told that pilafs mourns for her. And pilafs is famously the victim of the gods as well he or sorry of his own father, he was kidnapped by his own father and has the average shoulder and he was said to the gods, and when the gods figured out what his father was up to, they put him back together. And so he, I don’t know he’s just it’s an interesting moment where this character can find sympathy for now be he’s the son of an impious father and she’s an hurt impiety led to her own kids getting to destroyed, but he can find space in himself to sympathise with her. And in my version that set apart like it gets its own title Pelops mourns for Niobe. And this person mentioned to me they’d never even noticed it before until they read my translation. So maybe it does that formatting can highlight stories that can easily be lost otherwise. Well, in

Dr Rad  50:21

terms of what you said about your goal being accessibility, readability and also thinking about the fact that as you say, you use this text as a teacher, and therefore you kind of approach it, I think through a teacher’s lens. I think it does assist people who are using it in an educational sense and might be wanting to dip in and out of it. So yeah, I must admit, I personally liked that aspect of it. Yeah. I’m

Stephanie McCarter  50:44

good. And some of my titles that I give the different episodes are very different from the way other people have entitled those episodes. So I think that the episode with Callisto I just simply call that story. Jove rapes Callisto. And other I know, at least one other translator calls it like Jove in Arcadia.

Dr G  51:08

Okay. Yeah.

Stephanie McCarter  51:12

So I was very influenced by feminist criticism of newspaper headlines that want people to say upfront exactly what has happened. And I have gotten a little bit of pushback by people saying, when you say rape, it implies the author is making a judgement. And I’m thinking to myself, well, he is clearly telling a story about rapes, if they were stories about murders, could I not use the word murder? Because that would imply a judgement? Yes,

Dr G  51:38

definitely. Yeah. It’s interesting, isn’t it. And I think I found the Section Breaks really useful, actually. Because it does allow a sort of a bracketing off. And it can also, I think, be an overwhelming kind of text to approach. This is true for any epic, but when you see the translation that laid out on the page, and it’s like, I think to myself, what’s my commitment to getting through the text, you know, like, how long before I get a real break. And sometimes when you’re thinking about something like the Aeneid, or we’re thinking about the Odyssey, you’re like, I got a whole book of poetry to get through before I get a break. And it’s like, if I if I don’t sit down and make a commitment, we are in trouble. Whereas this allows for a more sort of a dipping in moment, a dipping out moment. And so yesterday, I was sitting down, I was like, You know what I’m interested in how Medea’s story is being told here. And so I could go to that section and go through that part. It’s in specifics, and that would be obviously good for me to contextualise later by going out and looking at the whole book and doing that. So we had approach but he didn’t have to read the whole book in order to get there, which I think was really handy.

Stephanie McCarter  52:48

That’s good to know. I mean, sometimes you need to catch your breath to I mean, it gives you horrific things happen here, right? It gives you a moment to death.

Dr Rad  52:59

And let’s face it, researches and historians, they don’t always have the time to read an entire text just for the one reference that they really need. And so I’m really I’m really pulling back the veil here on what we do. Yeah, I mean, if you’re given a deadline for an article or book or something like that, you know, you only have so much time and when you’re looking at an epic text, you’re like, oh my god, I just want this flooding reference. I hate this whole thing.

Stephanie McCarter  53:27

You know, having taught Ovid many times I can say I had never read the entire epic through before, of course I had and someone who sits down is even taller, but in poetry. So this is another reason to become a translator. It’s going to compel you to read carefully, all the things translating Catullus right now and I realised as I’m going through like they were poems I know so well. I basically have them memorised. And there are some poems. I didn’t even know this. So it’s nice to be compelled to read more. Absolutely.

Dr Rad  53:57

That’s that’s exactly what we all do. Let’s be real.

Dr G  54:02

So heading towards the wrapping up phase of this interview. I’m interested in rewarding or interesting reactions to your translation that have touched you.

Stephanie McCarter  54:14

I think the most touching one was the book was reviewed in the in the New Yorker by DANIEL MENDELSOHN, which was wonderful, shocking. I’m still in disbelief that it was reviewed there. This was a letter that came in to the New Yorker after Daniel Mendelssohn reviewed it and this anonymous letter writer writes, I appreciate it no Mendelssohn’s consideration of Stephanie McCarter’s new translation of all of its metamorphosis, which presents the sexual violence that appears in the poem clearly. I reread the metamorphosis earlier this year 19 years after I was raped during the summer of my high school graduation. After a decade of therapy, I was struck by avid sensitivity to the complex social and familial dynamics that follow in the wake of sexual violence. As in his poetry, victims aren’t simply transformed into other bodies they are abandoned, exiled and sometimes punished. She goes on to talk about Medusa. Medusa story is especially illustrative after Neptune rapes her in the nervous temple, the goddess turns her hair into snakes and banishes her to the farthest corner of the world to live with the monstrous Gorgon sisters, all who Look upon her who witnessed her in shame turned to stone. I know this phenomenon well. I have felt isolated in my biological and chosen families and have lost friends and romantic relationships because I stopped pretending. Even briefly that nothing had happened to me. People often turn away from what they prefer not to see McCarter’s translation with its attentiveness to these elements of its poem is a gift to those who are ready to reflect on their experiences as victims of and bystanders to rape. I hope that it helps people learn to talk about this trauma and softens hard hearts. So that having that letter published by The New Yorker and being able to read that was something I mean, I wept afterwards. That’s good to say on tearing

Dr G  56:02

up just hearing that letter. That’s

Dr Rad  56:06

really powerful. Yeah. So that was,

Stephanie McCarter  56:08

for me the most. Still the the I can read that and know that all the effort I put in was, without a doubt, or every

Dr Rad  56:20

bit of it. Well, I think it just goes to show that you have certainly reached those goals that you set for yourself at the beginning of the translation. And it’s so touching for all of us who are involved in studying the ancient world to think about the power that an ancient texts can still have in somebody’s life these days. Absolutely.

Stephanie McCarter  56:40

And I think a good translation does show you that, you know, all of it isn’t. He’s not revelling in these characters, victimhood, right. And he’s, he’s, he’s very interested in, in analysing what they’ve gone through and their trauma and to, to see that happen across millennia, is, I think, quite powerful. And it’s been very powerful for my students. And it’s been very powerful for me personally, as well, to know that there is this connection there across time.

Dr Rad  57:08

Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, I’ve had a growing appreciation, I think, the translation and I hope that this particular episode, really highlights for our listeners in an age of increasing discussion of AI and Google Translate and those sorts of features. I think it just goes to show that these sorts of things really can’t replicate what you do with a translator of any text. But I think, particularly these sorts of ancient texts, you have to become, as you say, so familiar with the metre, the person, you have to think about their context, your context, you have to think about how the audience is going to respond. There’s just so much, and so much careful choice that goes into a translation. I mean, as I say, I’m always in awe of translators, because language never came easily to me. And once I, once I started looking into it, the more I learned about it, the more I was just utterly gobsmacked it, I think it’s something that we sometimes take for granted that we can just have translations of things into the language that we want. But it’s really not an easy task by any means.

Stephanie McCarter  58:09

Absolutely, which is why it’s been so great for me to see more classical translators getting some recognition and attention. So there I am with you, for many years, I didn’t I didn’t think about them, I took them for granted until I became one. And now Now I, I really hope that the field will start to recognise translation a lot more, I’m hoping that, you know, I’m hoping that we’re really embracing it. And not just, you know, popularly but also, you know, through things like tenure and promotion, which translation has not always counted towards. And

Dr G  58:43

I think this is incredible that this field that sits right at the heart of a lot of the ideas of the university as well in its sort of historical formation, that translation, still, in this modern era is not necessarily considered the kind of work output that is relevant for the discipline. And it’s like, and it’s so essential, so absolutely essential. Absolutely.

Stephanie McCarter  59:07

I think I think for so long, a lot of that is because we embrace the languages so much that if you know, to be a real classicist, you had to set up Greek and Latin, right? And rather than there being a group of Classicist who could produce translations so that these can be broadly accessible, right? Classes, classics has not always been a field that embraced accessibility. It embraced exclusivity. And I think that’s played so much into the way that we think have thought historically about translation. And it’s not unique to classics, but I think it’s been especially prominent in the field of classics. Oh, Look,

Dr Rad  59:47

at USP, you’re preaching to the converted, but the more I learned about translation, the more I was like, why would one person ever take this on? It’s like, it’s massive. You clearly need more than one brain working on this or you need here. Huge amounts of funding because the time that effort that goes into it is insane. I mean, this is the thing, when Dr. G and I are working on things sure, like if you know, if we sit down and really put our minds to it, we can do a translation. But is it going to be any good? Is it going to really capture what that person is released

Dr G  1:00:18

one episode every six months, maybe?

Dr Rad  1:00:22

Yeah, it’s just, it’s just like, oh my god, like, why would we even bother if we don’t have expertise? Like we rely on people out there to produce really great translations, you know, who have given their heart and soul to it as you have, and who loves delving into the minutia. Because otherwise, as you say, it’s just a literal translation of the Latin. And so yeah, I’ve often thought this is clearly something that calls for a group effort, rather than one person slaving away, you know, translating the text every, like 20 years when something’s changed in the context, and we need to do translation.

Stephanie McCarter  1:00:58

But then there’s so many texts that have no good translations like, yeah, at all. And I have been told I was told when I embarked on translation for the first time by a colleague not in classics, but in a different field. But in an r1 Institute. We in the US, ICANN R1 institution, so it’s primarily research based university. So we wouldn’t give you gratitude not tenure. For

Dr G  1:01:25

and I’ll never forget this. So telling.

Stephanie McCarter  1:01:27

Telling, yes, absolutely. But I am lucky that I’m at a and I get I don’t think that this phenomenon exists so much in Australia, but at a liberal arts college. And so we are dedicated teaching undergraduate students and have a very broad view of what contribution to the field looks like. And the stars on campus are the creative writers. So we have a great creative writing programme. We have the Swanee review, which is the oldest continuously published literary quarterly in the United States. The Sewanee writers come Conference, which is a few weeks every summer where I sort of hide in my office because all of these wonderful writers I’m intimidated by come to town. Oh, no,

Dr G  1:02:12

you’ll have to be in there next. Come on.

Stephanie McCarter  1:02:16

This is this is what I realised that novelists weren’t actually gods that they were real people. Just be walking around and I’d see some amazing novelists. So we have you know, our have been I’ve benefited enormously from the context of my institution, they’ve been very supportive. That

Dr Rad  1:02:33

is good to hear. And Look, we’d love to wrap up with a final question. Are you working on something new at the moment? Or are you taking a well deserved break by the sounds?

1:02:45

There’s no well deserved break. So I have a few things. So I have a book book that’s coming out in September, called women in power. It’s also published by Penguin. And it is a it’s kind of an anthology, not a source book, but an anthology about ancient women, both mythological and real. And so we have a variety of existing translations, and then some new translations, but the women that you can expect to read about are people like Dido and Hypsipyle, and Omphale, and Semiramis. So legendary women, I translated Aristophanes assembly women in full for that, which is a lot of fun. And we have historical women. So we have Boudicca, we have Alexandra Salome, we have Amanirenas, Queen of Kush, we have a wide array of real women and historical or and literary women. And then so that’s coming out in September, I’m also translating khatola. So that will be at some stage.

Dr Rad  1:03:46

That’ll be interesting, because he’s language is certainly a feature.

Stephanie McCarter  1:03:51

Gonna be fun. And then I just signed a contract to translate the Ars amatoria, yes.

Dr G  1:03:57

Oh, this is gonna be very exciting.

1:04:01

I’m gonna be returning both to Ovid and to Australia, because I will be coming to spend another year to there in 2025 2026 to translate the Ars amatoria.

Dr G  1:04:11

I feel like we’re gonna have to take a flight to Brisbane.

Dr Rad  1:04:14

I was gonna say I think if you’re up for it, we’ll have to do an in person episode on your latest work if you’re up for it. That

Stephanie McCarter  1:04:21

sounds wonderful. You know, you could always twist my arm and get me to come down to Sydney. You’re in Sydney says

Dr Rad  1:04:27

oh, sorry. Sure. Cool down here. Not today, but in general.

Dr G  1:04:33

Don’t right now. This summer has been just moist and awful.

Dr Rad  1:04:39

Yeah, throughout the entire interview, I’ve been like dabbing my my heart and my athletic going. Oh my god. Oh, well, Professor Stephanie micarta. Thank you so much for your amazing translation and for speaking to us about it today. listeners. I’m sure you’re all dying to run out and pick up a copy of the gorgeously A decorated of his Metamorphoses for yourself. Thank you for listening to this special episode of the partial historians. You can find our sources, sound credits and an automated transcript in our show notes at WWW dot partial historians.com. Our music is by Bettina Joy De Guzman, you too can support our show and help us to produce more fascinating content about the ancient world by becoming a Patreon. In return, you receive exclusive early access to our special episodes, just like this one. You can also pre order our new book right now. Your cheeky guide to the Roman Empire will be out later this year. However, if you lost all your money betting on a chariot race, please just tell someone about the show or give us a five star review. Until next time, yeah yours in ancient room

The post Special Episode – Ovid’s Metamorphoses with Professor Stephanie McCarter appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

We are thrilled to sit down with Neil, The Ancient Blogger and host of the Ancient History Hound podcast to explore space and place in the Roman regal period.

Neil, or ancientblogger as he’s more commonly known, studied ancient history at degree level and then completed an MA in Classical Civilisation. Though he has a full time job he spends most of his time creating content on  Instagram, X, YouTube and TikTok – just search for ancientblogger. He also has a website ancientblogger.com and several years ago started what is now the Ancient History Hound podcast, where he covers a wide array of topics from ancient history.

He also gets the chance to volunteer at schools around Brighton where he helps students with Greece and Rome, the latter usually whilst  wearing his legionary armour. As his website states – he’s all about ancient history and passionate about making the topic accessible to one and all.”

Special Episode – Exploring Place in Regal Rome with Neil, The Ancient Blogger – Part 1

Neil seems to have found himself in a museum of ancient vases while wearing a tshirt of ancient vases!

There’s no doubt that the topography of ancient Rome was very different to what we are able to see today. With the restraints around archaeological work you can expect in a city that is still as important and vibrant as the capital of Italy, it is partly through evidence on the ground and partly through reading the ancient sources that we can come to grips with what ancient Rome may have been like in its very early iterations.

Neil takes us through the importance of hills in general, in Italy, and for Rome in particular. Romulus has a connection with the Palatine hill and Remus is connected with the Aventine. Neil delves into the details of the wolves in this area including the development of the Lupercalia rites and the significance attached to blood sacrifice in cultivating the meaning of place.

How did it the sacred boundary of Rome work? Where was it? What were the implications for trying to cross it with early armies? None of these questions can be answered definitely because evidence is thin on the ground archaeologically speaking, but considering later written sources offers some ways into the topic. Looking to read more on this topic, consider Koortbojian, M. 2020. Crossing the Pomerium: The Boundaries of Political, Religious, and Military Institutions from Caesar to Constantine (Princeton University Press)

The campus Martius ‘Field of Mars’ was the site of the potential murder of Romulus, Rome’s first king. The area covers a fair amount of land next to the Tiber and we consider some of its historical details.

Bound up with the early defence of Rome is the Capitoline Hill where the earliest defences of the city were thought to have been built. We explore the stories that the Romans told about how the rock got its name. This leads into a consideration of how death was treated in respect to place.

The Pons Sublicius was the first bridge recorded to cross the Tiber. Not only was the bridge of strategic importance, but it was also connection with rituals. Neil takes us through some of the geographical features of the Tiber and how understanding the ancient river is quite a different proposition to understanding the Tiber as it can be observed today.

The importance of the Janiculum being on the far side of the Tiber as far as the Romans are concerned and the etymological possibilities for the names of some of the hills. The Caelian hill is often overlooked, but maybe it needs to find its spotlight especially for its connection to Numa, the second king.

Our theme music was composed by Bettina Joy de Guzman.

Map of ancient Rome showing the theorised extent of the Servian Walls built by Rome’s sixth king.
The various hills and significant gates (porta) are also indicated. Note that the Janiculum is on the far side of the Tiber from Rome proper. Source Flickr.

Automated transcript lightly edited for our wonderful accents and the tricky terms in Latin!

Dr Rad 0:12
Welcome to the Partial Historians.

Dr G 0:15
We explore all the details of ancient Rome.

Dr Rad 0:20
Everything from political scandals to love affairs, the battles waged, and when citizens turn against each other. I’m Dr. Rad.

Dr G 0:30
And I’m Dr. G. We consider Rome as the Romans saw it by reading different ancient authors and comparing their accounts.

Dr Rad 0:41
Join us as we trace the journey of Rome from the founding of the city.

Dr G 1:03
Hello, and welcome to this special episode of the partial historians. I am Dr. G.

Dr Rad 1:10
And I am Dr. Rad.

Dr G 1:13
And we are super thrilled to be joined by a special guest today. Welcome, Neil.

Neil – History Hound 1:21
Hello, thanks very much for having me on and call me special, which is something I haven’t heard for years.

Dr G 1:27
We meant it in a good way.

Neil – History Hound 1:28
Oh I’m sure it was.

Dr G 1:31
So Neil holds a MA in classics and history from Birkbeck, University of London, and is the founder of the popular Ancient Blogger website. And for the last six years, he has also been the host of the Ancient History Hound podcast. So Neil has experience in ancient Roman reenactment. And yes, he does own a suit of legionary armor, we’re so glad you’ve already asked. And he also engages in school outreach programs, bringing the ancient Roman world to life for the next generation. And we’re super thrilled to be sitting down and talking today about a little bit of typography when it comes to ancient Rome, and thinking about exploring place, and particularly going right back into the Regal period of ancient Rome to do it. So welcome, Neil.

Neil – History Hound 2:23
Thank you. Yeah. Just on that, yeah. It’s great to be able to go out and visit schools and do some volunteering work at schools wearing Roman armor. My back does not forgive me. Oh, it’s, it’s great fun. And it does make a difference. Because sometimes, I think if you introduce history, ancient history, to new people in a different way, that whatever age, I think it disrupts some preconceptions, because one of the questions I’ve asked, I asked, when I’ve had guests on my podcast, how did you get into ancient history? And for the most part, people tend to think, Oh, I was translating Cicero at the age of five on my father’s knee. The reality is, I think, I think the one of my guests that she said that it was because she watched ‘The Mummy’. And it can be it can be stuff like that. So it’s so important that people realize that it’s somewhat the sometimes the incidental actions and events in your life that can lead you to becoming really fascinated by a particular subject. And so yeah, so it’s good to be able to try and help with that. This is my only my second time I think I’ve ever been on a podcast that first time was right at the beginning. So I hope I’m a I’m a good guest. Anyway. So thanks again.

Dr Rad 3:33
Well, we’re predisposed to like you is to teachers, I think it’s very admirable that you are volunteering your time in such a way.

Dr G 3:41
Yes, I really hang out with children when they pay me.

Neil – History Hound 3:44
The I got to be honest with you, I don’t know how the teachers do it. I always say that to them. But I get bossed around by a bunch of kids for the best part of sort of three hours or so. I’ve got I’m visiting a school in a couple of weeks. And we’ve got to the invasion of Britain for a bunch of nine year olds, which is easy and difficult, because there’s some really interesting stuff there. But at the same time, it’s quite difficult because you want to avoid the gruesome things, which is fundamental to what the Roman army did. So it’s talking about other areas, and also try and develop extension exercises and things that different kids will do, generally trying to spread the enjoyment of the subject. And that’s something I’ve always tried to do through my podcasts and everything else is just trying to get people who haven’t necessarily come across the topic interested in the topic, and they can feel like an input because after all, ancient history is about people. And we sometimes forget that there. We have our basic emotions, and they would have been exactly the same in antiquity. People got up in the morning, they got worried about their jobs people had, you know, loves their breakups and everything else. And I’m just finishing on that there was an episode. I’m not gonna keep plugging my episode, by the way, but I went I just went I went through the oracle at Dodona. They found a bunch of lead sheets and the where people had written down their questions. And the questions, generally speaking, though, came from all sections of society, including women, which is great, because we don’t have a great deal about that kind of information. But it was questions such as did, should I get a new job? Should I change my career? Should I move? Should one of them we should have an affair? There was quite a lot of can I? Who do I pray to to make my kids better? But these were genuine questions that people have today. So again, it’s about trying to tie in what was ancient or what is modern and sort of shortening the distance between the two? So yeah, there we go. Anyway, we’ll be we’ll be talking about, as he said, about Rome, early Rome, about the typography and how important the typography was, and some of the spaces and areas in that and some of the discussions we can probably have that might throw a different perspective on things. So yep, looking forward to I’ve got my notes, and I’d be doing lots of research. So fingers crossed.

Dr G 5:54
Excellent, excellent. Well, we’re pretty excited to explore this topic. Because as you know, we wrote a book recently on the Roman kings, and we’re really focused on the human character side of it. So very much like you were saying, engaging with school children and bringing that curiosity to the subject. It’s the people factor that really drives a lot of the work that we do as well. And so I think taking this different geographic angle is really interesting way to think about the whole thing from a totally different perspective. So one of the things that stands out when you think about Rome, and usually something that people tend to know about Roman geography, if they know anything at all, is that it’s got seven hills. This is apparently a very special number gets bandied about a lot. But in the traditional foundation story, we have Romulus and Remus, and they start on different hills. And there are only two guys, one of them set up on the Palatine Hill, and one of them set up on the Aventine Hill. And I’m interested in what might be the significance of these two locations? And what could we know about them in this really early period, if anything at all.

Neil – History Hound 7:06
A great start, great place to start. Just before I go any further, I should say I bought your book downloaded onto my Kindle and loved it, it was very, very good. So if anyone’s listening out there, this is not a promo, this is a genuine review, I really enjoyed it, because it does that thing of engaging people. It’s got some really interesting stories in there. And it’s got some interesting questions as well, which I think you should always be able to take away from a book. Before I start on the whole seven hills thing. I want to just cover a few basics about that, because people always think of hills and Rome, but not necessarily in the context of the causality and the importance of them. So to start with having hills was generally a good idea, because hills mean hillside forts, or hill forts, which means you’ve got a very good defensive position. That was a really popular thing. At that time the Etruscans are on it, you can pretty much go anywhere around the Mediterranean people like higher places because they’re easy to defend. You can stick a wall around them, you can stick the important buildings in there, hey, presto, life is good. Where it becomes even more interesting and significant for Rome, or the area which became Rome is the actual location of Rome, because Rome is in Rome, it is at a affordable part of what you could fold the river Tiber around Rome. Why is that important? Well, if you think of the Italian peninsula, the Italian peninsula is quite narrow. It’s around 180 kilometers, which is about 111 miles. I did a bit of working this out. And apparently that’s the distance from Sydney to Mollymook. And it’s also the distance from-

Dr Rad 8:39
Wow, thank you for the local reference.

Neil – History Hound 8:41
That’s right. Yeah, I looked it up. And I always liked spending time on maps. And it’s also if you’re in Chicago, that’s a distance from Chicago to Lafayette. So it’s that it’s quite narrow. And the problem or advantage the Italian peninsula has is down the center of that you’ve got the Appenine Mountains. So generally speaking, if you’re traveling up and down Italy, you either do it on the eastern coast, or you do on the western coast, if you’re doing on the western coast. At some point, you will have to pass and and traverse as it were the Tiber River. So just to just come back to it all. You’ve got a set of defensive positions right next to an incredibly strategic, important location. On that side on the western side of the app and ions. This is a great place. People sometimes ask why did Rome develop? Well, it developed for a number of reasons, and it achieved what it did for a number of reasons. But these were all fundamentally underpinned by the fact of where it was at this great starting location. And if anyone’s listening who has ever played Civilization, the computer game…

Dr G 9:41
I was gonna say I was just having a Civ 6 moment.

Neil – History Hound 9:45
This is this is the ideal start position. This is riverside, plains, hills, your part is great. You’ve even in theory got some salt then nearby, which just makes yeah, the ears will be picking up for anyone who plays civilization on any of the versions. It’s just a great start position. So that was really important. And we’ll come shortly to the whole issue of the Tiber and how that changed and shifted, because that’s really important to understand with early Rome. So you’ve got these these two hills, you’ve got the Aventine and the Palatine. So we start with the with the Palatine. The Palatine is very interesting in the way that it’s handled. mythologically speaking, because it seems to have a prequel because it’s linked to a number of events that happen prior to Romulus and Remus. But it also stitches in nicely with certain points in their lives. It stitches in with sort of Rites of Passage, which I’ll get to shortly. So what you have, apparently, according to I think it’s both Dionysus Halicarnassus and Livy. They both refer to Pallantium. Pallantium was a city or a small settlement whatnot, in Arcadia in central Greece, and it said that originally, Evander and some other Greeks came over, and they settled there. And I completely agree with the point you made in your book, Dionysius of Halicarnassus sees Greeks everywhere. He just did to him everything is greek.

Dr Rad 11:05
I see Greek people…

Neil – History Hound 11:07
Yeah, totally. Totally. He’s, everything is great. Yeah, they just did it with a different language a bit later on. And in Pallantium, you have this initial settlement. Now that ties into Pallantium and Arcadia. Why is that interesting? It’s interesting because Arcadia in the Peloponnese was an odd place. And it had some odd characters, even by the standards of Greek myth. One of them was King Lycaon. Now, people might have heard of him. King like Rome was famous because he did that one thing that you should rarely never ever do. And that’s try it on with a God. He invites Zeus round for lunch, and to test if he’s really that clever, he feeds in human flesh, which is just the more I mean, if you think that’s a bad idea, just a map, just remember that Zeus was Zeus Xenia was an aspect of Zeus whereby he was the god of good good guests and hosts. So incredible amount of importance was based on being a good guest and a good host, presumably serving them human human flesh, bad idea that somewhat sort of crosses the line a bit, and you’re doing it with a God who is in charge of that particular element. Zeus does not take this well, as you might imagine, changes him into a wolf. Now on Mount Lycaon, which is in Arcadia you had as an altar to Zeus, which was an a very long ash altar. And there were lots of things said about it. Without trying to go on a tangent. If you’ve ever listened to episodes on any podcast I’ve done by myself on werewolves, and werewolf myth. That is the that is the point that you always arrive at because people say, well, that’s where you had some sort of wolf based ritual. Now tying that back in, why is that? Why do you tie that in with with Rome? Well, it’s not necessarily just a tangent. It’s because Rome obviously itself has some form of wolf cult, it has a wolf association, and in fact, I think it’s living again who says that Lupercalia the festival where men would run around naked and hit people with goat hide thongs originated from the Lupercal, the cave of the wolf on the Aventine. And in fact, there’s the Lupercalia is a very interesting festival because it seems to be one that existed prior to Romulus and Remus. It probably had them both of them grafted on to it. It has two functions. It seems to be a lustral rite, that is a purification, rite. But it also has some sort of fertility basics to it. So it was one of these, one of these things that by the first century BC/AD, people are trying to work out what it may have looked like but the reality is, like many Roman things, including the Saturnalia, for example, it started out in something very different, and ended up with something quite, quite divorced or estranged from its origin, shall we say? And yeah, so you’ve got this right before Romulus and Remus rock up. When they do. That’s where they, they end up as babies. They’re washed up there in their basket, which was a bit of a trope in antiquity, and also speaks to the point of flooding in ancient Rome, which again, is an important thing that we’ll come to. It’s also the place where they have their auguries, so you may have heard of the story where Remus goes the Aventine and sports has many eagles he can. Romulus does it on the Palatine, he spots more he wins, he gets to found Rome, it’s possibly the location as well of where Remus is killed. What is interesting is there are a number of different myths. We have different versions for it. We have the version where it’s just a straight out fight, because the two brothers are just not going to go on mainly because they’re brothers and that’s what brothers tend to do, though probably not that extreme. But also because their Romans and Romans were very good at civil war. They were very good at infighting and again, we have to remember that many of these myths have been created and worked on in the later periods or several centuries afterwards. We have Fabius Pictor at the end of the third century BC as the first acknowledged Roman historian who’s writing in Greek. And then you have Livy’s and Dionysius of Halicarnassus writing centuries after that. So the reality is they’re getting to a point where they’re trying to work everything out retrospectively, and they’re seeing what what works for them in the modern world. Rome was a place of a lot of inner tension. And we have a lot of civil wars. So of course, it made sense that brothers would fall out and perhaps that would lead to a very nasty end. So there’s a fight there, where Remus ends up, ends up it ends very badly for him. But there’s also an element there of and this is something I’d like to check in with with either of your good selves of the pomerium, of this sacred boundary, because it’s one of those things that sometimes it’s a bit of an overreaction. Romulus killed his brother, because he jumped over his wall. And he mocked his foundations when I’ve been around. I’ve been round to relatives’ new conservatory. I wasn’t that impressed? I was not that impressed with it. But they didn’t murder me. And so why is that? Why, why did you have this extreme reaction? And I think the thing is, we don’t get the context. So foundations, particularly those associated walls had a sacred element to them. You didn’t, You didn’t mock them, it was it would be the equivalent mean there is no great equivalence, but perhaps it would be going to a cultural location where you just considered it on its as a physical presence. So for example, going to Uluru and just go and ask just a sandstone feature without realizing that that is Uluru. That’s that’s much more than what it is. Perhaps, I was thinking of the Statue of Liberty, you know, that’s just a statue. But you don’t get the cultural connotations, or the cultural connotations around those around that wall around that area. What’s that it was incredibly important. And so by Remus mocking it and jumping over, it was committing a real crime, which, you know, instigated that response from Romulus, in that context, it doesn’t sound too bad, again, extreme, but Romanus, as well, as you’ll find, as you well know, wasn’t, wasn’t the most temperate of individuals, he often reacted-

Dr G 16:57
He was not a chill dude, Not a chill guy at all.

Neil – History Hound 17:00
But bearing in mind how he grown up, I mean, his entire existence, and the myth prior to them, it’s basically family members falling out and hurting each other in various ways. So again, this sits within this whole myth of, if you’ve got a relative, it’s gonna go Game of Thrones at some point, it’s as simple as just a case of when rather than if. And yeah, so we have that there’s also and something I always go to, and I, I apologize for this, because I got obsessed with human sacrifice after doing an episode on it. Not so much obsessed. Actually, that’s probably that might get that

Dr G 17:30
That doesn’t sound like a great way to phrase it.

Dr Rad 17:34
I was gonna say, Yeah, I’d stop, right there.

Neil – History Hound 17:36
Yeah, yeah, probably need to rephrase that. The, I found when I started looking and researching it, I saw it occurring more. Now, it occurs a lot in Greek myth, but they try and tidy it up. Great example, is Iphigenia, who’s stolen away by Artemis, when she said to be sacrificed, and that was the idea of substitute sacrifice. So, you know, the Greeks do a kind of a good job of tidying up, though, occasionally leave it right in the open and just move on, such as Achilles in the Iliad, where he gets rid of the Trojan princess, and where Achilles is involved in the sacrifice of effort, you know, at the beginning, and where Achilles’ involved in the sacrifice of Polyxena at the end of the Trojan War. So Achilles, yeah, he wasn’t he wasn’t particularly nice, or he had that element to him. But there is something of an argument to talk about how Remus dying is almost an essential requirement. Now, you can move that out into a conversation about how sometimes when cities were established large settlements, there is an argument that someone was ceremonially sacrificed to ensure the health of it, particularly around walls, Particularly around those liminal spaces. But I don’t want to go into that too much, because I’m not entirely comfortable with the research on that I’m not that well acquainted to it. But when you look at the myth, and obviously, this is where I move fully within the realm of your respective expertise on this, the founding of the of the Republic, well, that was bloodshed that was that you have the death of Lucretia. You also have the death of Brutus’ sons, you have these sort of repeated actions of if you’re going to find something big, if you’re gonna have this big, big setup, it requires a great cost. And that great cost can often be an individual being killed or being moved on as it were. So I think that’s an important thing to notice about the Palatine. But there’s also a good one Plutarch, Plutarch, it gives a more sort of amusing, and I wouldn’t say he’s throwing a bit shade but Remus gets annoyed at Romulus because he thinks he’s cheated.

Dr G 19:38
I love that version of the story. That’s my favorite one.

Dr Rad 19:41
I say I guess. Make sense. Yeah. Yeah.

Neil – History Hound 19:46
Yeah, it’s a bit of a strange competition. It’s like me going right? That we’re going to win a car. The three of us gonna win a car, you just got to think of the highest number, but we’ll say in order and I get to go last. I’m not saying one. I’m just gonna say the highest and yeah, so it’s also interesting as vultures will often we have associations of eagle with ancient Rome, particularly with Tarquin when he gets his cap snatched by an eagle. But these were vultures, which again, is it? People may not know that much, but a trivia impress your friends stand stand your relatives. So we have that the so that’s where we come to the Palatine. It was obviously pretty much where Rome is founded, and it becomes an incredibly important location. And before I go to the Aventine. Have I missed anything on that you think? Or is there anything?

Dr G 20:33
No I don’t think so. I think there’s something quite interesting about the idea of the blood sacrifice as a necessity, in terms of like establishing a sacral border. And what that means for other rituals that the Romans then participate in later on, for sure. And I think this extended narrative that has a way of connecting Rome back to Greece is something that Greeks across the ancient world would be very keen about, for sure.

Neil – History Hound 21:09
Yeah. Yeah, it’s very difficult to really understand Rome without considering it through the filter of Greece and the Mediterranean was a real cultural melting pot, people were constantly exchanging ideas, cultures, you had Greeks in the south of Italy, and Magna Grecia, the Etruscans, who were heavily influential on Rome, big Greek fans. In fact, if you’re, I guarantee, if you’re listening to this, and you have a favorite Greek vase, the chances are, it was found in an Etruscan tomb. That’s why it survived.

Dr G 21:37
They did love that stuff. It’s everywhere there.

Neil – History Hound 21:39
Yeah, when I, when I first started studying I just studied all those years ago, I couldn’t get my head around it: But this is an Attic vase, but it was found … what the heck was going to be? How did that work? And obviously, there’s cultural transmission. But the stuff in Athens didn’t necessarily survive as much. Or rather, if you’re looking for, for an object to survive, you need to it needs to be in a tomb or somewhere away from everyone for a long time, and hopefully, dodge tomb robbers, and hopefully gets excavated, and it’s still there in one piece. So the other thing about the Palatine is, when you’re looking at the topography of Rome, it’s quite important to understand where the hills were. Now I’m going to do a really basic thought experiment here, which is either going to fail or do well. You could see the looks on your faces. So when you think of the hills of Rome, the way that I try and do it is a clock face. And sort of, if you think at 12 o’clock, and going up north, you’ve got the field of Mars, that kind of thing. In the center of the clock face, you’ve got the Tiber which winds round from around 11 o’clock disappears around seven o’clock, and intersects with the Forum Boarium, which that’s the main crossing point into Rome. At nine o’clock, you’ve got the Janiculum Hill, at six o’clock, you’ve got the the Aventine. And then you’ve kind of got that the Palatine just to the center just to the right sort of three o’clock ish, if you think of it like that. So if you’re on the Palatine Hill, the Palatine Hill strategically is really important because you’re right dead center on that crossing. So again, it is the most one of the most important hills, I mean, the Capitoline Hill is close as well. So is the Aventine Hill, they’re not going to the Janiculum. These are not far from that that crossing. But if you’re going to choose one first, you’d probably choose the Palatine Hill as being that initial place that you’d want to be. So again, we need to tie this in the myths into the sort of pragmatism of it all. Now I’m going to move to the Aventine. The Aventine Hill is interesting, mainly because it will it has an association with an unnecessary it’s known right, so feel free to laugh with Cacus or Cacus, the giant who Hercules fights, and it’s associated with him because again, you have a Hercules at Rome quite early on was certainly prior to Romulus and Remus. It also became a bit of a staging post, it became an emptying this is where people settle the Latins who were defeated on the anchors the third, fourth, fourth Roman king was given mixed up, a settles in there because he can’t stop them anywhere else. So it’s sort of a bit of a staging post overspill, that’s where people are going to go and live. But the weirdest thing I found out about this when I there was something I hadn’t realized. And again, I’m gonna defer to your expertise on this until the reign of Claudius in the first century AD. It was outside of the City’s pomerium. This was not inside this, it was in there’s discussion, it might have been enclosed by walls, but it wasn’t inside the pomerium. And could you just for a moment just given because I’ve tried to find good definitions of what the pomerium was, but you able to just distill that if you can?

Dr G 24:48
Yeah, so the pomerium is, because it’s the sacral boundary, it is marked out physically in certain ways. But it is is not something that is a physical barrier as such, so there’s marker points for it. We understand it through archaeological evidence. And in order to shift, it becomes a huge deal, because that would be expanding the sacral boundaries of the city. So that has to be a very deliberate choice. The Romans are fundamentally a highly religious and God fearing people. So they don’t make decisions without consulting the gods on any level, it doesn’t really matter what it is. Whether it’s in your home, whether it’s in public, whether it’s going to war, the gods have to approve, they need to feel that sense that their relationship is right with the gods. And so the pomerium is both an indication of what is inclusively believed to be part of sacral Rome, versus what is considered to be foreign and outside. So in the worst case scenario, it’s not the physical walls of Rome that ultimately need to be upheld and defended, although they’re very important, but it’s making sure that that sacral boundary is never violated. So having the Aventine outside of that for a very long time, is conducive to the sorts of things that you’re saying in terms of people coming into Rome, when they’re slightly foreign. And they’re considered to be migrant populations, they settle in the Aventine, because they’re allowed to be there. And they’re allowed to worship their own gods there without any problems. As soon as they cross that sacral boundary, it becomes an issue. You can’t have foreign gods inside the pomerium. So everything to do with a multicultural life, which Rome increasingly becomes known for is going to be happening at those bleeding edges around the outside of the pomerium. And so having the Aventine outside of that for a long time super useful and will become super useful for the Struggle of the Orders. And I’m using my flash rabbits.

Dr Rad 26:57
I was I was going to say I remember thinking about this when we were talking about the second secession, the Aventine as a place in that particular narrative where there’ll be an answer like, “You know what, screw you guys, we’re not going to be proud of this thing anymore,” became important.

Dr G 27:13
“We’re just gonna leave this whole town!”

Dr Rad 27:16
“We’re just gonna leave and we’re going to go to the Aventine,” Yeah.

Dr G 27:19
Yeah, “This is not Rome anymore. The Aventine is its own place, thank you very much.”

Dr Rad 27:27
“Yeah, it’s its own thing. It’s got different vibes, guys.”

Neil – History Hound 27:31
I live in Brighton. And there’s a bit of a thing with Brighton because it’s alongside Hove. And I know if you’ve you might have heard of this. But there’s a sort of thing where people, whenever they say, Oh, you live in Brighton people would always say I actually, Hove actually. And “Hove, actually” became its own little thing. It got printed on T shirts. And I didn’t grow up. I didn’t grow up in Brighton, so I’m not aware of it all that much. But when I first started to talk to people, where do you live? Well I live in Brighton but I actually live in Hove. But I’m not saying that to be that person who’s “Actually, Hove,” you know, that sort of thing. So we should get “Aventine, actually” T shirts. There we go.

Dr G 28:08
Yeah, probably!

Neil – History Hound 28:10
The idea of and I did a bit of obviously digging to work out why this might be so why wasn’t wasn’t included. And the general consensus in the sources seems to be no one actually knew. But they had some ideas. And there was a sort of historian who wrote called Aulus Gellius who write “Attic Nights”, which sounds like sounds like saying you find on Netflix and not know if she’d watch in front of your parents. I don’t know. It’s not quite sure when there’s and he said he wasn’t sure he said there are a number of reasons however, he quoted Messala who was a consul back in 53 BC, and apparently according to Messala he said that it was because of ill owned birds. The point of when that augury was taken.

Dr G 28:52
Right from the beginning Remus was wrong.

Neil – History Hound 28:55
Yeah, it was it was abandoned, and the whole hill that he did, and somehow that that had some association with it. But there is probably a more practical reason for this. And for this, I need to go back to that clock face I did earlier. So as you remember, you’ve got Field of Mars around 12 o’clock. And then you’ve got around nine o’clock, you’ve got the Tiber, and then you’ve got the Aventine at around sort of six o’clock. Now, when it came to moving troops around the field of Mars was where you marshal troops early on in Rome. At that point, Rome was obviously conducting military activities in a number of locations, but a lot to the south. If you take your soldiers from that point south, you face a big problem. Because if you have to cross the pomerium, as I understand it, and again, this is this is something I’m not entirely aware of. You’ve got to do a bunch of sacrifices and general rituals to cross over the pomerium. So you’d be it’s a bit like when I suppose in some cities where you have a zone where you have to you can’t you know, drive between these certain hours or whatnot or your car needs to be this type of setup or perhaps it’s just pedestrianized, so you need to cross it, you’d be crossing it twice. And that could really forestall an army because it could take time. However, if the Aventine wasn’t in the pomerium, then you can kind of take your men down the side of the eastern bank of the Tiber. And they don’t have to worry about that. And they don’t want to go the other routes because the two other routes from the Field of Mars if there was a pomerium immediately to the South would mean well, you’ve got across the Tiber, well, you can’t cross the Tiber south, you’ve got to go all the way north and finding a decent crossing point. If you want to go east you’ve got to loop north and east around the hills. It that that when you’re moving a large number of individuals, and again the logistics the Roman army is always an interesting thing, perhaps more so than what they actually did. On the battlefield though (I never said that). You move the slowest move the slowest thing in your army is the fastest you move. And often this will oxen, oxen, don’t sprint, they don’t move very quick. So you could lose a good day or two just making that progression, albeit if you have to cross the pomerium. If the pomerium isn’t to the south, you’ve got easy dibs going. It’s much easier to move troops. So why does Claudius do it? Well, apparently Claudius does it for a couple of reasons. Primarily because he’s so amazing and he’s expanded the Empire. Also it doesn’t really matter it no one apparently really was that bothered by it. Because Rome at that time if you’re an army you weren’t stationed at Rome you weren’t station really near Rome, you were stationed on the on the borders. So it didn’t really have that same impact in terms of army and I think it’s one of those things he he has his his big thing that he does or a big thing and everyone’s like Yeah, cheers. Thanks for that. Yeah

Dr G 31:31
Whoooo

Dr Rad 31:34
New area code – yay

Neil – History Hound 31:36
Yeah, a really sad kind of a sad popper everything goes up in the background. And it’s kind of just yeah, thanks for that. So yeah, so that’s, that’s primarily the to the to hills, or rather, that’s the Aventine and that the Palatine. And it’s interesting to see how I wouldn’t say they necessarily take on the characteristics of their, of their forbearers, as it were, but there is something there to them. One is associated with everything about Rome, and how great it was. The other one is, yeah, well, and he’s a bit weird. It’s a sort of a black sheep of the Roman hills.

Dr Rad 32:11
I like that idea. So this is actually a good segue for us because we were going to ask you a bit about something to do with Romulus and to do potentially with troops and that sort of thing. So as you know, Romulus seems to come to a sticky end on the Campus Martius. So let’s think about how the Romans might have understood Romulus as connection to this place and his legacy later on, because as you as you’ve already hinted at, the Romans are kind of trying to sometimes fit pieces together retrospectively.

Neil – History Hound 32:46
Yeah, it’s really difficult as well, I think this is why I find the story of love the kings of the Regal period, so fascinating. Because it’s a big disaster movie. That’s what it is. It doesn’t you know, it’s not going well, you know, what’s going to happen? They’re not getting off the plane, it’s, that’s what’s gonna happen. It’s just how are they not gonna get off the plane? And sorry, if that sounded tasteless, by the way, but if you’re gonna, if you’re gonna put it within the context of modern day disaster movies, that kind of thing, this doesn’t end well. And it’s weird, because you have this internal tension in the narrative of isn’t Rome, fantastic? Wasn’t it founded, by the way, it’s amazing. But also, it’s not very good, because it ends really badly, because the thing that starts at all is ultimately a very bad thing, come come the seventh King. I mean, even if you make a good case for Servilius, the sixth king, he he’s he does things, but he still acts in a sort of pseudo dictator fashion at points, because he does cheat the system. He doesn’t have the proper elections and the interregnum and whatnot. It’s just because everyone likes him that it’s okay. So if you look at it from that the process is pretty broken by that point, in terms of how you elect a monarch, and what the monitor should be doing. And the idea of supreme power, and how it’s wielded becomes a, you know, an issue, then it’s not always just that when it’s with the bad guys, and particularly the seventh King, it’s more obvious because you were automatically not liking him. But it’s one of those things that if your friends doing something that isn’t morally good, you can be a bit more forgiving. But obviously, if somebody don’t like doing it, well, then you’re going to be entirely damaged. And I think that’s that’s what you have here. So it’s interesting with a narrative of how how we move across with Romulus, and then you mentioned the Field of Mars, I find it and I again, it’s laugh out loud funny when you hear the story of how he goes missing in the Field of Mars or alternatively is hacked to pieces depending on which you think’s more likely, given that it’s Rome, or we have Rome, where you never have political violence where it’s always everyone’s really happy with each other. And then afterwards, you have that senator appearing and telling the masses who are a bit worried about it. Don’t worry, the ghost of Romulus appeared to me just mean no one else and told me don’t worry, everyone, it’s all good. Life is good. Don’t kick up a fuss I’ve gone now be happy and that’s it. But in terms of the actual location itself, nothing much happens. The Field of Mars in terms of have been developed until the late Republican period, simply because it’s this big, marshy land, it’s got lots of mosquitoes, very difficult to drain. And it’s also useful. It’s a useful kind of area where no one really knows what to do with it. Because you can have horse riding events there. They have some, they have a festival called the October Horse, which comes in later, I think, I don’t think we can really date it to this period. But that that’s linked to sort of horse races, and it doesn’t enter work too well, to the winning horse. I should add, so I won’t go much further than that. But in either case, it’s a space that I think you’ve you’ve you said about how the promotion was important. This is outside so you can kind of anything, anything goes that you can get up to stuff.

Dr G 35:44
Oooo you can get away with hacking someone.

Neil – History Hound 35:45
Yeah, yeah. In theory, allegedly, allegedly, though, he know, he went up to heavens in a storm, because that’s what you do. And I also found it interesting, because I think there and I haven’t been able to get into going into this, but that’s where you have the Theatre of Pompey, which is where Caesar met his end. So I think again, if someone listen to this, and they’re tutting, I apologize. I didn’t get a chance to look into this too much. But I know obviously, Caesar assassinated in the Pompey’s Theatre, and I think that’s where Pompey’s Theatre was based. So if so you have two distinct events in Romans history where a a person in charge meets a rather unfortunate end, both in the Field of Mars. And it’s also the only other thing that I can think of or found within the Regal period is it seems to have been the property of the seventh Quinctius Tarquinius Super-bus. Superbus obviously to have super bus because he’s got a cape on.

Dr G 36:41
Superbus, I believe is how the Latin would would take it, but

Dr Rad 36:45
he’s always Superbus to us.

Neil – History Hound 36:49
Put a cape on him, he’s fine. It that’s apparently that’s that was his land. And when we’re gonna call it Livy says the after he was dealt with, they took it back and dedicated it to Mars. So exactly what he was likely to do with that began perhaps that’s, that was his land, perhaps had something to do with the the army perhaps it had something to do with controlling. It’s not an area around really needs to develop at that point, certainly within a legal period, they’ve got more important places, which we’ll, we’ll speak about in a moment. Yeah. So that’s the that’s the I think, the Campus Martius or as much as we can, much as I’ve got anyway to talk about it.

Dr G 37:23
I mean, it’s an interesting place, because it does have this famous sort of idea about it as this sort of area where people get together. And it’s where a lot of voting happens later on. And things like that be precisely because it’s outside the pomerium. But yeah, it’s interesting that for the Romans, this idea that people could potentially be murdered, there doesn’t necessarily mean that it changes the way that you engage with the space. And perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised by something like that. I mean, that’s true in the modern world, as well. as horrifying as that is if somebody is murdered in their home, for instance, it’s not like the property will stand empty for all time, eventually, somebody will buy it, and it will be used again. So keeping on this sort of topic of violence for a moment, I think it’s the Romans, it’s not us, that’s for sure. There is also the Tarpeian rock, which is this sort of infamous ledge that juts out from the Palatine [correction Capitoline!]. And you can still kind of make it out today, you certainly wouldn’t want to be pushed off the top of it, it would definitely hurt. But it We’re interested in how it comes to have that name. And this might be a bit of a Dorothy Dixer question, because I love the Tarpeian Rock. But also, why does it become so infamous?

So you just done that thing of asking me a question or a subject you’re an expert in and I’m gonna fail horribly. Now. I’m gonna fall from that ledge.

You’re not You’re not.

Neil – History Hound 38:50
Okay.

Dr Rad 38:50
Not at all.

Dr G 38:53
If you if you get close, we’ll catch you don’t worry.

Dr Rad 38:56
Yeah, we also wrote that book a while ago. So the details are getting fuzzy.

Neil – History Hound 39:00
Just gesture at me wildly, no one can see. Yeah, when we got the Tarpeian Rock, I think the Capitoline as I think it’s as alleged that’s it’s on the the Capitoline, which is interesting, because where it’s located is also near a couple of other places that we’re talking about, which are also to do with imprisonment or disposal, as it were. The story goes back and the story is the I mean, when you talk about stories in ancient Rome, and you say that doesn’t really add up there a plotholes. The story of Tarpeia is one of the more bizarre ones because it really doesn’t add up. So the story goes that you’ve got the Sabines who’ve taken the Capitoline Hill, and they’ve taken the Citadel, this is a really important defensive position. There’s lots of problems, and they’ve done so by being betrayed to the Sabines. And the person who does that is Tarpeia. It depends which version, the myth you read, but she’s either the daughter of the main man or who’s in charge there, or she, I think, in some instances been referred to as a Vestal. I think that’s, that that might be another version of it. And she basically says that she likes what the signs have on the left arms, which are bracelets, golden bracelets. If you give me some of those, I’ll let you in. And so it happens. But she is then crushed by the shields because the [leader] Titus Tatius at the time, he’s got the best name second best name in the Regal Rome after Mettius Fufetius. Who’s who should be in the cast of Cats. I don’t know why. But when you read a name, something pops up. I visioned him as some someone from Cats. So yeah, Titus Tatius, he ends up – treats her as a traitor – because she is so betrayed that she doesn’t want to pay her also could be because he’s not gonna give her the golden arm bracelets. And he’s, she then gets sort of crushed by shields, and then that that location takes its name from her traitor, being a traitor. And that’s where people who betray their own state and do very, very, very bad things are held from it. What’s quite bizarre about this story, even within the context is that there was actually a version which I think Dionysus of Halicarnassus talks about Lucius Piso. And he says, actually, they got it wrong, because she was what she was trying to do was disarm the Sabines. And so she was kind of doing, she was acting as double agent, “I’ll let you in, but you just dropped the shields, lever shields, and I’ll let you in.” And then she would have presumably then told her father, whoever they were in command, and they would have been able to take out the sidelines easily. But it’s a bit it’s just a very odd. It’s very odd myth by mythic standards, because there’s so much internal tension. And there is a history of this sort of thing, in terms of people giving away unfortunately, betraying as it were, and being punished for betrayal, there was an individual forget their name who have betrayed a city to Achilles and she was killed. She was stoned to death because it’s a case of well, you betrayed to me it’s I can’t trust you. So there are these sort of it belongs, I think white to a wider morality, tale of betrayal never ends well, as opposed to anything else. But I think it’s also linked to an important point that you make in the book about how women are used, or women appear at really, really important moments within the legal history to make a statement about something or they use to make a statement.

Dr Rad 42:23
Moments of crisis. Yes.

Neil – History Hound 42:26
It can’t Yeah, it can’t be a man wouldn’t betray them. And it had to be a woman who had betrayed and why would a woman betray them? Because of shiny things. And you look at that and just thinking, oh my gosh, it’s just really?

Dr G 42:38
Thanks, Rome. Thanks. Yeah, establishing the patriarchy in such a visceral way for us all.

Dr Rad 42:43
It’s a real vote of confidence.

Neil – History Hound 42:46
Even even people from 1970s British TV would look at that and go, “Well, that’s bit That’s a bit harsh. We can’t do that. That’s, that’s, that’s too much for us.” It’s what the misunderstood heroine aspect, which I think is an important thing. We’ve also got this concept of bloodless execution. Now, one of the things that that is important, both that Rome and more so I think Greece that that’s probably reflects more my study of it is the concept of pollution, miasma. The idea was that if you murdered someone, you are both polluted by the act, and this act could even extend to the objects themselves. In Athens, there was actually a law court that would prosecute objects used in murder. And those there were elsewhere. There’s a story of a I believe it’s in thesaurus or face us an island where there was a statue of a famous athlete. And it was a bronze statue. And every night, this guy turned up who hated this person, and hit it with sticks. And one day, it falls on him and kills him.

Dr G 43:52
Serves him right, stop hitting it with sticks, man.

Neil – History Hound 43:54
Yeah. There’s a sort of it get out sort of, again, I don’t know if people thought this might be a very nice reference, but Basil Fawlty, hitting the Mini with the branches. It’s kind of a thing, and that they took the statute and got prosecuted by the deceased brother, and he got thrown into the sea. And we know about this because afterwards, they started suffering from various problems, harvest problems. And the Oracle of Delphi said, Well, that’s because you need to recall all the exiles, and they recall the exiles, but it still kept happening. And then they said, Well, it’s actually the athlete, you need to bring the athlete back. So they had to get fishing nets, go and find the statue and bring it back and stick it back into place. The point is that certain acts were both manifested pollution at Rome, not just and when we think of pollution, we think of it in the modern context, you think of fumes, you think of bloodstains, things like that, but it could be the act itself and having a top end rock, if someone’s thrown from it, no one’s actually killing you. Which sounds weird because obviously, you know, if I was to push someone off a cliff, I’d be convicted of murder. But the but the way it was seen so differently, it wasn’t that you were sticking a sword in someone’s head. or doing it in a more up to up close and personal manner. And it’s also extended to how the how the Romans would sometimes deal with the defeated enemies that bring in that strangle them. So a lot of the execution What strange and so it What’s strange in all of this is that you have the sort of the gladiators, you have the Colosseum and you have before it the Circus Maximus or other locations where you know, bloodshed is absolutely required. But it’s a very different context. It’s a very different space. So you’ve got this, this strange thing, and I again, I’ve got a question about the pomerium for you. Because technically, are you above the pomerium if you’ve been pushing a rock? So does this act still occur within and that’s a thought exercise more anything else? Because there was paper, one paper I read and it suggested that you have these two spaces in Rome where people are disposed of or could be disposed of one of them is the Tarpeian Rock the other one is later becomes the Cacer or Tullianum, which we’ll speak about. And in the in the one that’s underground, people could be strangled in the one that’s above ground people thrown from it. So, again, how does that interact with a pomerium? Because it’s not happening on the ground? Is it still? Is it still affecting it or interacting with someone? I’m not gonna answer necessary expecting the answer on that. I just it was one of the things that came up and I thought, can I just throw them that one? They’ll probably hate me for it. But

Dr Rad 43:56
I look, I think this ties into Dr. G’s interest in the sense of the way that Vestals are disposed of when they’ve been thought…

Neil – History Hound 45:26
Oh, sorry. Yeah, of course. Yeah. Sorry. That was the best example. Why didn’t I think of that? Sorry? No, no,

Dr Rad 45:41
No, there was really no, I was just saying, Yeah, I think it’s very much in Dr. G’s realm of interest. Yeah.

Dr G 46:39
Yeah. And I think it is a really interesting question. And it is one that I would want to think about more as well, because there is that sense in which the Romans do like creating scenarios where they can say that the gods kind of made the decision about that person’s outcome, rather than themselves. And if you manage to convince somebody, either when you’re putting them at a spear point, or whatever, to jump off that rock that’s now in the gods’ hands. And that would be then considered a naturally occurring death rather than one in which life has been taken by another human, and therefore the pollution doesn’t happen. strangulation, I think would be a more challenging one to get the vibe, right for in terms of the moral justification. So I’m intrigued by that, because certainly, as a parallel to that, the situation with the Vestal Virgins was that the burial spot was always outside the pomerium, just just outside, so like, right on that edge, okay. And by having that underground chamber and providing a little bit of food and beverage, and then locking those women in, they could reasonably and morally claim that no person in Rome had killed that woman, the gods had decided that she had to die.

Neil – History Hound 48:05
I know in theory as well, I suppose you’re, you’ve got the world if the gods really liked her, they’ve come and saved her.

Dr G 48:10
Well, exactly. She would have gotten out of there and presumably run away from the city, not come back. So did any survive? We don’t know.

Neil – History Hound 48:19
Yeah. There is there is a philosophical exercise or an exercise that was done by in rhetoric, apparently relating to this. So there, you have Quintilian, apparently, who talks about what happens if someone survives the form? And the argument is, do you take them back up and ask for them? And ask them? Do you mind? Would you take them back up and redo it again?

Dr G 48:48
Yeah. Could you quite possibly, I’m sorry?

Neil – History Hound 48:50
How awkward for us. This is really embarrassing from us. So can you help us out here? And there’s also these types of sort of, I don’t know if there’s necessarily an answer to that thing. It was just one of those sort of rhetorical discussions that you had as part of training, because another one that was similar to this was that tyrants were forbidden to be buried in in the city. But if you’re struck by lightning, apparently, you had to be buried wherever you were struck by lightning. So if a tyrant was struck by lightning in the forum, they would have to be buried in the forum, or don’t you? And again, it’s one of those there’s probably not a right answer. It’s just a sort of how you how you would argue and how you don’t argue counters and stuff like that. So again, the other thing about the Tarpeian is that apparently that’s what the hill was called before it was called to cancel. Yeah, and it was only changed. I left this, they they changed the name because they found ahead when they were digging for the temple, the foundation of the temple.

Dr G 49:48
That head’s pretty important. I think we need to change the name of this place.

Dr Rad 49:53
It’s a sign that Rome was meant to be the dominant place in the whole world…

Neil – History Hound 49:58
I like the idea that it was found by someone and they’re like, “Oh, I found this head.” “Yeah, it looks like the guy you had an argument with in the pub last night.” “Might be, no idea. I think what we do is obviously come from the gods we obviously meet need to change the name – doesn’t look anything like that guy I had an argument with at the pub last night? No.”

Dr Rad 50:14
it’s clearly a symbol of our domination.

Neil – History Hound 50:18
Yeah. So yeah, that’s I mean, I think I’ve covered some of the aspects to it. But it’s just the way it looks. Now, I understand is very different, because again, it wasn’t something that should be said, if you’re walking around Rome, now you’re walking around in incredibly different Rome, even to the point of going back to say, the first century AD, I think the current archaeological level is around 10 meters below the current level, in most obviously. So in some places, it won’t be, but in other places it will be. And in fact, when we want to come to talk about the Tiber, even the Tiber itself is in a very different place to when it was and this changed throughout the Republican period as well, which is a point again, that I’ll come to I got obsessed by the Tiber River after a while. I read so many reports and geological surveys and gosh knows what.

Dr Rad 51:05
Well, you’ve given me a perfect segue here because the next thing we wanted to ask you about were bridges. So Rome’s second king Numa is generally given the credit for building the first permanent bridge over the Tiber, known as the Pons Sublicius. Now, obviously, there are practical reasons that one would build a bridge over a river. However, this particular one also seems to have had very significant religious connotations for the Romans. So how was the Pons Sublicius entwined with Roman ritual practices in this early period?

Neil – History Hound 51:46
Thank you. Thank you, right. Yeah, I got obsessed by the Pons Sublicius, because when I was reading up and doing research on it, to talk about the bridge, you have to talk about the river to talk about the river tie, but you’ve got to make a couple of points about it. The first is the river Tiber now is in a very different course to where it was even in archaic Rome. So in archaic Rome, the likelihood was that it was around 100 meters, where it bends round and comes into what is the Forum Boarium in that area, it was 100 meters further to the east. So if you think the Via Petrocelli that was pretty much the riverbank of the time, if you look on a modern map, if you stood by the bank, now you’d be underwater. That’s important for a number of reasons. Firstly, the Tiber was wider, therefore slower. The type of the course of the type of changes and it changes for a number of reasons it changes because of human activity, it changes because of natural mechanics such as siltation. There’s also other things apparently are going on it’s do with tectonic features, and whatnot. And everything else far too complicated for my for my shallow mind, pun intended, when it comes to that kind of thing. So that explains one practical – because I wanted to what the practical aspect of the bridge first – because it’s famous because it’s a wooden bridge built without iron. And it takes its name Sublicius, apparently, from piles, which are what it’s built on. Now, anyone who’s lives near river will realize that bridges are very dangerous. If the rivers starts misbehaving, if you’ve got a permanent bridge, a stone bridge, that can really cause problems, if the rivers changing if the rivers changing, cause if it’s widening or shortening. If it’s flooding you can cause it can cause you some serious problems. And it’s not until the second century BC that you have the Pons Aemelius, which is the first stone bridge, possibly reconstructed from a wooden one. If you’ve got this little wooden bridge, and it’s on piles, and it can be its mobile, you can do a lot with it, you can make it longer, you can make it shorter, if you think you can raise it, it gives you much more mobility, which is essential when you’ve got the Tiber which is changing, the Tiber seems to narrow at this point. So when you have a narrowing River as a general rule, said with my geography GCSE how often it gets faster, it gets deeper, so it becomes more dangerous. And that’s why that’s why we have the bridge in its form. And again, I can’t overestimate just how much this does change. For example, the Tiber Island builds up apparently due to sortation in this period, so it’s not that and I did read one, one account one myth, I don’t know if this links in necessarily, because I’m not sure if it was this they were speaking about. But the myth related to the field of Mars, and apparently some wheat was grown there, because it was sacred to the god Mars, they couldn’t, they couldn’t eat it or do anything with it. So they will throw in the river and throw it in the river. And it’s so cool, so big that it built up over time. And that’s how you get the type of river type Tiber island. So I think I think that’s one explanation that the Romans had. But in any case, even and this is really important, even if you you were living in the time. If you live for 300 years in from the Regal period onward, you’d have seen the type of move massively so there’s something that I try and get across to people and it’s very difficult because I I always thought of it as we think of ancient history as monolithic. So the people in 500 BC are the same as the ones in first century AD got the same taste, same technology, they’re all ancient. Whereas the reality is, even in sort of between centuries, you’ve got big changes going on. You’ve got big change in attitude. When Martial has epigrams he does a guest he does a list of the gifts in the Saturnalia in those includes ancient vases. So what’s an ancient vase? Well, well yeah, because it’s not it’s 300 years old 400 years old, it’s gonna be ancient it’s we don’t have this one advantage for looking or one privilege looking now backwards and going everything before you know the year doll year zero as it were, was ancient and it belong to the same thing people within that period considered time as we do in the same way that we might look back and go the industrial revolution that was a long time ago, people in Republican Rome were looking back and going Romulus a long time ago. Or in theory anyway, if if we knew what they were thinking because bearing in mind that myth doesn’t start coming around till later on. Anyway, I’ll get back to the bridge. So you have the you have the bridge, which is said is built wooden, and I got it I got a question for your good selves on this. During – and this is where it links in because we have Numa as linked into the bridge, because he was said to have brought in the pontifex or the pontifices – pontifys – pontifesses. It doesn’t sound right, it’s probably the way I’ve done it isn’t a scientific case. I’m stuck. I’m so gonna mispronounce that and make it a swear word. So I’ll just I’ll just say priests, I’m just gonna say priests from now on the so you have the priests that are associated with a bridge and the repair. And Plutarch speaks about this. But he says, I don’t believe it, everyone else does. But I’ve I’ve got I have a thought. And it’s not going to be an original thought. It’s like many thoughts I have, I think they’re really, really good. And then I googled them, it turns out, someone wrote a book about it in the 1920s. But at this time, you have Rome, really, really creating ritual associated to so many things. And one of the things is warfare, you have the doors at Temple thing is Janus, which are opened, close, depending on when Rome is at war, you have the fetiales the priests that you have to declare were in a rich war in a ritualized way, and Livy and Dionysius of Halicarnassus both tell us that this bridge was removed in times of war, primarily for practical reasons, it made sense, because that’s the front door to Rome, they’re not going across that if you leave the drawbridge down, problems are going to happen. So if you think about the declaration of war, and then you’ve got a move an object, and they’re shutting doors, and they’re dancing to declare war, why wouldn’t that be as part of some sort of religious ritual? I mean, again, I’m asking the both of you if you you’ve probably read books on this already. So it’s not a new thing. But could it be in that that declaration of war in the movement of the bridge was was a religious or brought into the religious sphere?

Dr G 57:51
Yeah, I think so. And look, you’re not alone. It is, I think the bane of every researcher of the ancient world to come to the sad realization that a German scholar in the 19th century has gazumped you. And, really, you’re playing a tough game of catch up. But yeah, certainly this idea of the bridge as being one in the caretakership of the pontifices. So already, there is a ritualized aspect to it, it’s something under their purview, they need to think about it. And the idea that a waterway wouldn’t have huge symbolic and ritual significance, in any case, I think would be misplaced. There’s nothing quite as fundamental to ensuring that urban life is successful, then making sure that you’ve tended to the river and you Look after it, and it’s part of the care and concern. And so having rituals developed around this kind of thing is super important and useful. Water is a cleansing agent. In many respects, it’s one of the ways that you shift pollution away from the the sort of the urban area. So it’s not a great idea necessarily to put heaps of stuff into your river. But if you’d need to it moves, and that’s great, it’s probably the fastest way to get it away. And in that sense, having something that traverses that space, allows you to open up one powerful opportunity ahead of you on the other side. But also, as you say, that’s that really profound sense of the defensive quality that comes with a waterway and what a bridge does to sort of counteract that. So I think there is ways in which having rituals built up around a wooden bridge that you can shift and move and perhaps adapt to the situation. Super useful and important. And there’s certainly no way that I can think of that that wouldn’t be a religious thing from the Rome’s perspective, from the Roman perspective. They see gods in water, they see gods on land, they see gods in the sky. It’s all happening everywhere all the time.

Neil – History Hound 1:00:01
Thanks very much for that. And I’m glad that I wasn’t having a moment just thinking that that was something and I completely understand what you’re saying about how, when you have these fantastic ideas, you find out that someone has written a book in German in 1912 about it. That happened to me quite a few times. I remember when I was at uni, and I was coming up with great ideas and then finding various books written about it. No, it’s quite, it’s great, because on one level, you think you’ve made a real achievement. On the other hand, you get that that dashed quite quickly. But going back to the bridge, there is an episode the bridge is associated with, that falls out just outside just after the recall period. It involves a great name, another great Roman name, and I apologize for my associations when I read this name. Its name is Horatius Cocles. But I read it as a right when I first read it, it’s Horatius, Horatius Cockles, made me straightaway, I was thinking of that he’s in Dickens, he feels like he should be a chimney sweeper in Dickens or something. But he’s, he’s a he performs a heroic act. So what happens is you have the Etruscans, who are being led by Lars Porsenna. And they’re attacking Rome, they take the Janiculum Hill, which I’ll speak about in a moment. And then they look to attack Rome and get through the front of it through that bridge. And Horatius is still on the bridge. And he’s defending against all of these individuals. And he asked that the bridge is dismantled behind him, so they can’t make they can’t make progress. He successfully defeats a few of them and then jumps in the river and swims to the side after being injured a few times.

Dr Rad 1:01:38
Excuse me, we have to mention that he was injured in the buttocks.

Neil – History Hound 1:01:42
Oh I didn’t want to say anything? Well, actually, I didn’t want to say anything about that. It links in if when I thought of that. I don’t know if you familiar with the Battle of Stamford Bridge?

Dr Rad 1:01:53
Ah, yes, I think I am. Is that are we talking about something to do with 1066?

Neil – History Hound 1:01:59
Yeah. 1066. So prior to the Battle of Hastings, you have the Battle of Stamford Bridge, which is up in the north of England, where you have an invading sort of caught this army. Forget the name of it, is it Harold Bluetooth? Someone.

Dr Rad 1:02:12
Harold, Harold Hardrada, I think yeah. Yeah,

Neil – History Hound 1:02:15
Sorry, yeah. And they, they, they were attacked, and you have one individual defending against all of the, the the English as it were army on a bridge. And he puts up a heroic performance until someone goes under the bridge and stabs him from underneath it, and presumably in the groin, stroke, buttock area again. So, if just a just a general thing, if you ever find yourself defending against superior forces on a bridge, where everyone’s got pointy things – just watch your backside, that’s all I’m gonna say. That’s a big weakness. Yeah, just handy hint there, you know, do what do what you will with it. And this, this became a huge, hugely important thing. And again, to the credit of your book, you write about exemplar, you write about the idea of particular events in Roman history being held up as this is how we do it. This defines this as a culture. This is how Rome saw itself, this is a defining moment, it I think, in a way it kind of gets overlooked, because that’s at the time where you’ve got the Republic, being sort of born, you’ve got lots of things going on. It’s like one of those years where you see what won the Oscar and you think my god that won the Oscar and all these other amazing films didn’t win the Oscar, you think that would have won the Oscar any other year, but you had like four of them on you. And around 509 BC, you have all these big events are some big events going on, they they kind of almost, they take, they steal the attention from each other. But Rome was very, very keen on this becomes a sort of household thing within Rome. You have later emperors, using the imagery to announce how they’re taking Rome back to traditional values, and how they’re going to defend our own and things like that. So again, it’s it’s really important that bridges ultimately associated with that, because how you define that visually, is with a bridge. Because otherwise it’s just someone stood there with a spear. You have to have something else in the image. Presumably you’re not gonna have his buttocks being stabbed. You’re gonna –

Dr G 1:02:42
Make sure you’ve got a strong pair of underpants.

Neil – History Hound 1:04:22
Well, yeah, that the artists were so limited, you got coin, I’ve got a coin. That’s all I’ve got. So it becomes a really defining moment for for Rome, and that bridge is part of that. So it can and it’s also when we talk about space, in a way we have to talk about time. And when you have somewhere like and I should have mentioned this about Tarpeian rock, and about the bridge. These are both places that Romans can go to and feel and connect with the past as it were now not saying that we will kind of doing nice, guided tours of Rome getting in touch with it in a row. Humans, but at the same time, culturally, you have these points where you can say, this is where this happened. We have that now, you know, we have pretty much you can go to any city and it will have this is where so and so lived or this is where this particular event occurred. And the the actual location might look very different to how it did back then. But you can still, in theory, connect with it. So I think this is very important for Rome on a couple in a couple of ways. The only other thing I can mention about the bridge was because I’m gonna speak about how it linked in with the Janiculum. But the expansion, you know, the bridge allowed the broom to expand past its initial borders, it was that that thing which allowed it to get past the Tiber, which was ultimately there’s something that hugely defined it, you know, the hills, keep it there, but the type is the thing that really defines Rome, or that’s how I, that’s how I perceive it. And you also have the, again, my pronunciation with Argive, the Argives, which has a ritual of purification that finished on the bridge, where they threw straw doles into the water as a part of purification of the city. So yeah, the bridge is really, really important. And it’s something which doesn’t necessarily underlooked think there’s a lot of things to consider it right. But if you’re thinking about Rome, perhaps think about the bridges next time we visit Rome, think more about the bridges as a way of going somewhere, just you know, go and stand and have a Look round. Think what what might have been,

Dr G 1:06:22
I was gonna say, you know, you’re not going to have him like bending over showing his butt cheek to everybody. Disappointing Rome, you had a choice and you missed it.

Dr Rad 1:06:33
What would happen if you weren’t wearing steel underwear at that very moment?

Dr G 1:06:43
Think of what would happen if they were made of wood and how difficult they would have been to cross? So we’ve been thinking about the major hills of Rome, we’ve been thinking about the Tiber River. And we’ve talked a little bit specifically about the Palatine and the Aventine because they sort of stand out in that sort of foundation moment for Rome. But there’s definitely more than to the fabled seven. And you’ve mentioned already the Janiculum. A little bit. And I’m also wondering maybe about the Caelian Hill as well. And how did these hills start to feature into the Regal history as it starts to expand out and we get further into the Kings?

Neil – History Hound 1:07:29
Okay, yeah, I mentioned the Janiculum. So the Janiculum is inherently linked to Rome, because of that bridge. And it’s the other side of the Tiber. The Janiculum in a sense is there for one reason, and it’s there because you want to get it before anyone else gets it. And again, if you’ve if you’ve replaced civilization, you’re thinking that big hill, it’s near my city, I’ve got to put some units on that. Because guess what will happen if I don’t. And it’s, it’s justified. Partly, and I think this is the this is interesting, because the other things about the hills is they get much more of a sort of cultural feel to them. With a genetic, you know, it’s there. The sources pretty much say it’s there because of trade. Because then if you’ve got that hill, you can govern what goes on on the river. And now the trade routes the other side of the Tiber, which apparently could be exposed to banditry, which is very common. It’s also defense because if you’ve got the hills, someone else can’t win. Interestingly enough, when you’ve got Horatius the reason that the advancing Etruscan army are able to do that and take the bridge or try and take the bridge is because they took the Janiculum first, it’s the first place they went. So it’s really important purely from a strategic point. Other Hills tend to be more cultural. The Caelian Hill is was settled by Tullus Hostilius from those people that he took from Alba Longa, which is where yeah, where he devastated it more or less after some thorough betrayal by Mettius Fufetius, who was torn asunder by horses. I think it’s even even Livy’s says that was wrong. Yeah, that was not a good time You crossed the line.

Dr Rad 1:09:04
That’s one of my favorite names.

Neil – History Hound 1:09:09
Yeah, what again, I just think of him as the Cowardly Lion type character, but he wasn’t; he was very – he was an ardent politician and, and a treacherous one at that. Which surprised really, because you would have thought you could have gone to the Tarpeian rock instead. But hey, you got horses, what are you going to do? Now in terms of it being named, it was named after apparently an Etruscan soldier called Caelius Verbena, or my personal favorite – and I like this more – it could have been named after oak trees. And if you think why would you name somewhere after oak trees I did. Did read that the Aventine apparently in association with the myrtle tree so that could have been a reason why it took its name. Esquiline Hill was apparently named after chestnut trees or could have been, and the Viminal after willow trees.

Dr G 1:09:56
That’s a beautiful way to think about Rome. Just yeah, that’s surrounding forest and much more peaceful but other options.

Dr Rad 1:10:03
Yeah, I was gonna say it sounds too much. It sounds uncharacteristically gentle.

Neil – History Hound 1:10:08
I know, it did stick out when I was reading. And I thought, that will be nice. I don’t believe it. But that would be nice. It’s more likely that we’re going to name this hill after someone we through from after someone we cut in half, or it’s, you know, doesn’t always seem to be the most pleasant way that they find their names, but, but also considering just think of how Romans considered their space. And it was dominated by woods, forests, and trees. And obviously, you don’t get that so much. If you go to Rome. Now, obviously, even they got some wonderful plane trees. And they they do have some, some lovely shrubbery, too. But as a general, you forget just how much it would have been dictated by so far, we spoke about hills. So far, we’ve spoken about geographical features, topological features, as it were. But we’re also talking about sort of, you know, woods, trees, things like that.

Dr G 1:10:59
And I think this is ties in very much to what you’ve been saying earlier about, like that sort of monolithic approach to history. And the mistake in doing that, and it’s like, this is a place that’s just starting out as a place where people have settled and decided to build a life for themselves. It is immersed in nature, they’re surrounded by it. And it’s not like when you go to Rome today, and it’s obviously a very urban place. And they do have a lot of big and beautiful gardens, but they’re very contained. This is much more sprawling wildness. And the thing that is unusual is the fact that there are people living here.

Neil – History Hound 1:11:32
Yeah, yeah. The only other thing that I could really come into when it’s talking about the calean is something that is, is I can find a great deal of evidence behind it. But the link to possibly Egeria or Egeria, she was the nymph who advised Numa Pompilius, the second Roman king, and who apparently helped him do anything there was there’s a sort of shrine, apparently, or, or, or something near the Porta Capena, which was on the foot of the hill. And it for those that don’t know, you can look at numerous in two ways. You can look at him this kindly, old man, or you can look at him as a bit of a bit of a traveling salesman. I always think of kind of those those in those films where you have the sort of preacher from the self in the United States, and they’re sort of they’re gonna cure you, and you know, all of that kind of stuff. And he feels a bit of light at times, mainly because he sorts of does things like, he convinces people to come around, look at his place and say, look, I’ve got nothing to serve anyone for a feast? Come back in a couple hours. Wow, look, I’m magic. There’s, there’s lots of food. And apparently people in Rome said, well, that that must be magic, as opposed to just knowing the caterer, which is more plausible response. But he was very much linked into this sort of spiritual mythology of Rome, he gave Rome or furnishes Rome, with a set of really religious, religious spaces where they just compete, because he seems to have taken root, he didn’t want a job as king, he turns up, and then he realizes that you’ve got this really, really gruesome band of highly undesirable people who are being very violent to each other. Rather than keep it you’ve got to keep them away from declaring war. So we just give them a space where they can compete with that when he does that through setting up all the magistracies all the all the presets and stuff like that. So people can now sort of, I suppose, work out how they can graft across those that that competitive element into the religious element. And so presumed now people just getting annoyed that didn’t get the right priesthood as opposed to running across and chopping someone’s head off. So he kind of contains that. So you got to feel from that respect, but apparently he has a nymph, who teaches him lots gives him lots of special advice and information. She was linked in some way to this hill, or has a possible association with this hill.

Dr G 1:13:49
Numa he’s one of my favorite characters from the Regal period, I have to say, and the fact that he spends what seems to be at least 50% of his time hanging out with imaginary friend in the forest is just fantastic.

Neil – History Hound 1:14:03
Well, one of the things I don’t, I don’t won’t get the chance to talk about is Jupiter Lisius, or Licius the, the the magical sprats that he had, which would stop him getting hit by lightning and the fact that he could use an altar to Jupiter to conduct a storm and then read portents from it. I just think that’s wonderful. That’s just such a fantastic myth that you had him or rather in association with him, it sort of moves more to the whole of trust and brontoscopy, which is how you read the portents through through storms and I’ve actually got a copy of the brontoscopic calendar and I put it up on my Tiktok whenever it storms or go out and I read what it portrays do what it you know, it says weird stuff. Sometimes it’s like, everyone will die. The crops will be ruined. Sometimes it’s some sometimes it’s it’s nice. Most of the time it’s not. Sometimes it’s nice saying anyone called Clive, they probably need to check their their car insurance. It goes from the big to the really, really incidental, because presumably you’ve got 365 entries. So once you get the big things done,

Dr G 1:15:08
you just got to fill out the rest of the thing. You’re like, okay, all right,

Neil – History Hound 1:15:12
Check. If there’s Thunderhead check the back of the fridge, something might be off. It’s that sort of a thing.

Dr G 1:15:20
Well, thank you so much for sitting down with us. And taking us through some of these sort of sprawling landscapes that make up this early, early period of Rome’s sort of typography, the way it thinks about itself. And the way people might be engaging with those sorts of spaces. I think it’s really great food for thought, to start to reimagine what this place Look like, how it operated, and how people operated within those spaces. And obviously, the modern city today inspires your imagination for some of those sorts of things. But when we’re thinking about the Regal period, we’re going back well before all of those ruined pieces of architecture that you spot in the forum, for instance. So it’s like, we really have to get ourselves into a whole different zone to start thinking about the Regal period. So thank you so much.

Neil – History Hound 1:16:11
No pleasure, thank you very much for letting me come on give you weird analogies. jokes that probably to do well, and tangents, which is generally what I do.

Dr G 1:16:19
Oh no, I’m always up for a good shrubbery reference, you know.

Dr Rad 1:16:26
And I think that you have showcased to our audience if they aren’t already avid listeners of your podcast, that in spite of the fact that you keep calling us experts, your level of research is amazing. And people should definitely go and check out your wonderful work.

Neil – History Hound 1:16:42
That’s very kind of you. You’re not expecting money for that. Are you? I have no, I have no budget. I can’t.

Dr Rad 1:16:48
Well, naturally I don’t want to have to pay you for plugging out book earlier, obviously.

Neil – History Hound 1:16:52
Yeah, obviously. Yeah. Well, thank you very much. I really appreciate being being on a on a podcast such as yourselves, which is obviously very, very helpful very well in high esteem.

Dr G 1:17:22
Thank you for listening to this episode of the Partial Historians. A huge thank you to our Patreon supporters for helping make this show spectacular. If you enjoyed the show, there’s a few ways that you can show your support. You can write a review wherever you listen in to help spread the word. Reviews really make our day and help new people find our podcast. Researching and producing a podcast takes time. If you’re keen to chip in, you can buy us a coffee on Ko-Fi, or join our fantastic patrons for early releases and exclusive content. You can find our show notes, as well as links to our merch and where to buy our book “Rex: The Seven Kings of Rome” at partial historians.com Until next time, we are yours in ancient Rome.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai

The post Special Episode – Exploring Place in Regal Rome with Neil, The Ancient Blogger – Part 1 appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

It is not often that we are fortunate enough to get to chat to one of our amazing guests a second time, but sometimes the gods are just that kind. We sat down to speak to the one and only Dr Victoria Austen about Augustus’ mausoleum.

Special Episode – Augustus’ Mausoleum

Dr Victoria Austen holds a MA and PhD from King’s College London. She has lectured in the Classics at the University of Winnipeg and is currently the Robert A. Oden, Jr. Postdoctoral Fellow for Innovation in the Humanities and Classics at Carleton College, Minnesota. Her monograph Analysing the Boundaries of the Roman Garden: (Re)Framing the Hortus’ was released in 2023 as part of the Bloomsbury Ancient Environments Series. Vicky has recently been speaking for the American Institute of Archaeology on gardens and commemoration.

‘The Mausoleum of Augustus’ from Pietro Santi Bartoli, Gli antichi sepolcri ii, 1727. courtesy of Carleton College Special Collections.

Augustus did not rest on his laurels after winning the Battle of Actium against Cleopatra and Mark Antony. He set about consolidating his political position and figuring out exactly what that would entail.

Augustus set about transforming the city itself as part of his political machinations. Some of his key monuments include the Ara Pacis, the Horologium Augusti (think giant sun dial), and the mausoleum.

He started construction on this tomb in 28 BCE and positioned it on the Campus Martius (Field of Mars). This is much earlier than you might expect. Augustus’ position was not unchallenged and there was still much to be decided regarding his status in Rome. Nonetheless, Augustus set about building this large circular mausoleum, intending to use it not just for himself, but his family.   

Eventually the tomb would house the remains of numerous members of Augustus’ family, as well as the princeps himself. Names you might recognise include Agrippa (his BFF and the husband of his daughter Julia), Marcellus (his nephew), Octavia (his sister), and Gaius and Lucius (his adopted sons).

After Augustus’ death, his family continued to use the mausoleum. Livia (his wife), the emperors Tiberius and Claudius, Germanicus, Antonia Minor and Britannicus would all find their way to this monument.

However, there was not an open-door policy for anyone with Julio-Claudian blood. The mausoleum became a sort of litmus test of who had fallen from grace and would be punished with exclusion… forever! You might already have spotted that Julia, Augustus’ only biological child, and her daughter Julia, did not make the cut. Ouch! Nor did the emperors Caligula and Nero. You had to earn your spot.     

Donati, A. (1584-1640) Roma vetus ac recens, courtesy of Carleton College Special Collections.

As with so many ancient monuments, the mausoleum has been repurposed many times. Tune in to hear about the Soderini family and their resurrection of the space, as well as good old Mussolini, who just loved to forge connections between himself and figures like Augustus.

Our music is by the highly talented Bettina Joy de Guzman.

Dr Rad 0:12
Welcome to the partial historians.

Dr G 0:15
We explore all the details of ancient Rome.

Dr Rad 0:20
Everything from political scandals to love affairs, the battles waged and when citizens turn against each other. I’m Dr. Read. And

Dr G 0:30
I’m Dr. G. We consider Rome as the Roman saw it by reading different ancient authors and comparing their accounts.

Dr Rad 0:41
Join us as we trace the journey of Rome from the founding of the city.

Dr G 1:01
Hello, and welcome to a very special episode of the partial historians. Dr. Rad and myself, Dr. G are thrilled to welcome back Dr. Victoria Austen to the show. And you might remember her fantastic conversation with us a little while back now about Augustus and temporal space and representation. And today we’re going to be looking at Augustus his mausoleum. So a quick bio. Dr. Victoria Austen holds an MA and a PhD from King’s College London. She has lectured in the classics at the University of Winnipeg and is currently the Robert A Odin Junior Postdoctoral Fellow for innovation in the humanities and classics at Carleton College Minnesota. Her research interests span the Latin literature of the late Republic and early empire, ancient Roman gardens and landscapes race and ethnicity in the ancient world, the reception of classical myth and the integration of digital humanities into the classroom. Austen’s monograph Analysing the Boundaries of the Roman Garden: Reframing the Hortus was released in 2023, as part of the Bloomsbury ancient environment series, and coming up, Vicky is currently partway through a series of talks for the American Institute of Archaeology on gardens and commemoration. Welcome back, Vicky.

Dr Victoria Austen 2:34
Yeah, it’s so great to be back. I’m so so excited to talk more things, Augustus as we know, I’m a big fan.

Dr G 2:41
Me too. Dr. Rad is already

Dr Victoria Austen 2:44
Eye roll already.

Dr Rad 2:46
I was I was going to say, Look, I’m very happy to see you again, but less happy to see your friend. Look, you know what, I am going to embrace it because I have some fantastic dad jokes here. So Augustus is mausoleum, you might say that everyone in the Julio Claudian period is just dying to get in.

Dr Victoria Austen 3:14
I mean, I

Dr Rad 3:20
so Look, let’s start with the basics. Dr. Austen, or Vicky, if I may be so what is this thing? How did it come about?

Dr Victoria Austen 3:30
Yeah, so this is basically where Augustus wants to be buried. bold move in that, you know, he creates it when he’s still living like this is very much his project. It’s not like something that people put up for him. He’s like, No, I’m gonna create my own team structure. And I’m gonna model it on potentially one of the seven ancient wonders of the world. Because, you know, he never He doesn’t do anything small. So this is why it’s called the mausoleum of Augustus, because it’s based on we think maybe the Mausolus tomb, which was one of the seven ancient wonders of the world. So timewise it was finished in 28 BCE. So this is, you know, still kind of pretty early on actually, in his principle, you know, when you think he was there for you know, good, good more 30 years or so. So he was he was thinking about his afterlife, very concerned about his commemoration.

Dr Rad 4:26
Yeah. Like, yeah, like an Egyptian ruler. Yeah, thing. He’s just very focused on that end goal.

Dr Victoria Austen 4:34
And kind of like structurally as well. It’s obviously it’s very impressive. It’s like this huge kind of concrete structure, which and concrete in itself is a kind of Roman innovation, which was kind of relatively still new at this time period. You know, they’re still experimenting with oh, we can use this new material. So we can do round things instead of like, oh, square things. So it’s this big kind of dark, circular structure. domed and it’s planted kind of all the way around, we think to kind of emulate what create a kind of monumental version of a traditional elektrischen type tomb, which is called a timless, which is, you know, in its most primitive form, that would be kind of like just a mound of earth. That was kind of your tomb spot. So August just kind of seems to have taken that idea, and then just done it, you know, huge, huge monumental scale as as he likes to do with everything.

Dr Rad 5:29
It sounds extremely presumptuous. Yeah. Within keeping of his character, yes.

Dr G 5:36
Very much. So. And I’m particularly thinking about the date of 28 BCE, because this is right before 27, which is usually considered a landmark for him in terms of like sealing the deal on his power. And he’s already out there being like, oh, no, guys, I am a big deal. I know it, you guys know it, I’ve killed everybody who hates me by now.

Dr Victoria Austen 5:57
And I think particularly because there’s this idea of it’s such a big structure that clearly he was thinking of it in terms of it wasn’t just going to be for him, it was going to be for other family members. So it’s like, it’s going to be like a dynastic kind of monument in itself. And I think, like you said, the fact that he’s creating that so early in his principles that kind of speaks to, oh, he may have been doing all of his, I’m just restoring the Republic schtick. But, you know, I’m beside he’s like, No, actually, I’m going to create this huge monument to the my family, or my heirs. So like that idea of like the family, dynastic structure, I think is very telling that he’s already creating a very obvious building and structure like super early.

Dr Rad 6:48
Really to be fair, he wasn’t a well man. Well, no,

Dr Victoria Austen 6:52
I think I think that’s part of it. He had so much anxiety over death. And you know, then all of his heirs keep dying, as we know, along the way,

Dr Rad 7:01
it came in handy.

Dr Victoria Austen 7:02
He didn’t die, you know. So I think I think it also the early day also represents a bit of that anxiety over you know, I’ve got to start thinking about my death and what happens when I die. Like, pretty early on. Really? Yeah,

Dr Rad 7:18
definitely. Yeah, Look, that’s

Dr G 7:20
tough, isn’t it that anxiety and and also that monumental ism, what a fascinating character. Yeah, I don’t understand Dr. Rad while you’re not so interested. I

Dr Rad 7:29
am intrigued, but it’s more of a fact that I’m like, Why can’t people just see through him?

Dr Victoria Austen 7:37
This last time, like I like I love him to study. But doesn’t mean I think he’s a great guy. I also see through him.

Dr Rad 7:47
Yeah, I think it’s well, I think it’s more Dr. G. I’m talking to me, she she genuinely likes him.

Dr G 7:56
I think it’s just because in the portraiture, he comes across as being relatively good looking. So I’m willing to forgive him from things. So, but that’s just me being really basic. Yeah. But thinking about the mausoleum and its location, like To what extent is it sort of part of his broader sort of sense of building sort of like a topographical thing for himself in a Gustin sort of way of thinking about Rome? Yeah.

Dr Victoria Austen 8:20
And so I think I was actually talking about this very topic with my students, actually, last week, because we were, we were doing the Augustan period, and Roman Art and Archaeology. And I was, I was saying that one of his innovations really is, you know, late Republican building projects, like kind of Pompey’s theatre complex, Julius Caesar had his forum. You know, it’s this idea that you’re kind of entering a bit of a zone that is, it’s like the Pompey zone, or the Julius Caesar zone, and we’re kind of entering those spaces, and it’s framed by that individual power. But what Augustus does is he’s like, all of Rome is now my zone. It’s not just a small bar. It’s like, I’m doing this everywhere. So again, like in terms of scale, that’s what’s kind of innovative and the mausoleum is part of the Campus Martius which he is one of his kind of three main areas in the city that he really focuses on for his redevelopment. So we have the mausoleum, but we also have the our pockets, which I spoke a lot about on the last time I was with you. And then there’s also this monumental sundial as well the heartland and they’re all very close together in this Campus Martius area and I think again, it speaks to this kind of projection of a new type of power, because you know, you have your mausoleum, which is thinking about kind of commemoration long term, but at a family kind of dynastic level, you’ve got the altar of peace, the our parkas eventually, which is, you know, commemorating I’ve bought peace to Rome for the first time. And then with the sundial, I think that’s, that’s particularly interesting because it kind of I think it’s also symbolic that he is kind of not just In charge of space, but also his controlling time, as well as all these three monuments, kind of we’re all working together kind of past, present, future, there’s like this temporal element. And I think so you can’t just think of the mausoleum, you know, as a static kind of isolated entity in itself, I think a lot of its meaning also comes from the fact that it’s connected to these other very important Augusto monuments. And you have to imagine, if you’re a Roman, you’re walking through the Campus Martius, like, you’re gonna be able to see all three of these things within a very short walk, you’ll be able to see them from each other, like they’re very, very close together,

Dr G 10:40
and this association with the Campus Martius, in particular, this idea that there is a whole Augustan precinct and there is a really long history of how the Campus Martius is used. And now it’s being sort of it’s evolving under Augustus is sort of building regime as well.

Dr Victoria Austen 10:56
Yeah, absolutely. And I think what, what I think is fascinating, and also just kind of very telling about the building project in the campus. Martius is it’s very representative of so many things that will go sisters in that he’s kind of seen kind of political figures kind of use art and architecture and space and these building projects, to project their own individual power, but they never had the opportunity to kind of extend that on mass scale. And so now he’s in this position where he can start to do this, in a way he kind of takes all of the seeds that have been done at an individual level. And he’s just putting it all together, doing it to a huge, huge scale, and just really hammering it home, like everywhere you go. There’s this sense of Augustus kind of framing your experience of the city like you have to imagine that there’s not many places like right in the core, where you’re not far from an Augusten building project because if you’re not in the Campus Martius you might be near the Palatine Hill, that’s where his house is, or you’re in the forum and he redevelop the forum. So there’s like, everywhere you go, there’s this kind of just presence of him. And kind of framing your experience of the whole city, I think, which is very, very innovative. I

Dr Rad 12:14
think of him. It sounds like my waking nightmare.

Dr G 12:19
You’re surrounded on

Dr Rad 12:21
escape. But I do appreciate I do appreciate that long before Doc Brown and Marty McFly, Augustus was thinking about the space time continuum and how to disrupt it. Yes,

Dr Victoria Austen 12:31
he really was. And I think there’s there’s a famous that kind of famous theory, I suppose about these kinds of three, three monuments, or kind of like working together in the campus. Martius is it has been suggested that the shadow of the sundial would go directly through the entrance of the Ara Pacis on Augustus’ birthday. So it’s like, yeah, it’s basically I have conquered time, like I am in charge. And I think, you know, Julius Caesar, his uncle had her redone the calendar. And so the sundial was now with the Julian calendar in mind. And so again, it’s just this Yeah, it’s the way that space and time and with the mausoleum, there’s then this idea of like an afterlife. Like, even though I’m not there, you’re going to still be thinking about me. And it’s the same with our parkas. You know, it was set up with this annual sacrifice in mind, and that’s going to keep going on even when Augustus dies. So there’s this again, it’s like a kind of cyclical, eternal presence. I think that he’s trying to establish there.

Dr Rad 13:37
I’ll give it to him. He certainly does pay attention to detail and it suddenly hit me that Dr. G being an absolute Virgo. This must be what appeals to her. Oh my god.

Dr Victoria Austen 13:47
This is this is the connection. It’s I’m

Dr G 13:54
it is all beginning to make sense. I use just so organised. He’s thought of everything.

Dr Rad 14:01
I get it now and I will stop giving you crap about it.

Dr Victoria Austen 14:06
We can’t help it. It’s in the stars. Absolutely.

Dr Rad 14:09
Yeah. And I Look, this is probably my favourite part of Augustus has more saline to talk about because I mean, I’m sorry, there’s no other way to say it. But he’s such a dick, in that it’s very much about who’s allowed in who’s not. It’s my club. I’m gonna control that. Are you on the VIP list? Or are you not So who gets buried in this thing in the end and who gets left out because they’ve done something to upset him?

Dr Victoria Austen 14:35
Oh, that’s a really good question. I’m trying to think exactly. Who was in there. I know the last person that is in there is Nerva actually, but in terms of in terms of like the Julian accordions, I don’t know who is who

Dr Rad 14:49
we know that famously Julia obviously,

Dr Victoria Austen 14:53
does not. I bet she doesn’t get in there.

Dr Rad 14:55
She does not say for those of you who haven’t listened to our Millions of discussions about Augustus Julia is his one and only actual child, you’d think she’d be a shoo in. But no,

Dr Victoria Austen 15:08
yeah, but no, she’s, she’s morally Not, not on. Yeah, you would

Dr G 15:13
think in the end that, that in depth that he might allow it, you know, like, there’ll be some sort of forgiveness, but he’s absolutely no.

Dr Victoria Austen 15:21
And I think it really speaks to like the harshness of that like relationship and that he like, the the ability to, like, cut off the personal from the political that like, I’m, again, this speaks to its a dynastic monument, which is different from a family monument. And obviously, there are times when that overlaps, but the fact that as you said, it’s not a, it’s not by default that you get in there, like there are choices being made.

Dr G 15:53
And we see some like tragic moments, because obviously, Augustus is thinking about his own mortality, but he’s also spending a lot of his time trying to figure out who’s going to sort of come into place after him and a whole bunch of them die early. So like, my seller sends up in their Gaius and looses end up in there, you know, and it’s like, in a way, despite the fact that Augustus is probably a terribly power hungry kind of individual, you have to feel a little bit of compassion for the fact that he’s burying a lot of his young, male relatives that he had great hopes for. Yeah. And

Dr Victoria Austen 16:26
I think there is this sense that, you know, again, this may be speaks to why this was such an important building for him and that anxiety over the succession, you know, his entire project, it was only ever going to reach its complete fruition, if there was some kind of succession because the, you know, if that had not been secured, then there’s nothing to say that you couldn’t have just like gone back to a republic system, like, you know, it’s not until that moment that Tiberius actually comes in, and he becomes like the next emperor, that it’s like, oh, we can actually say now that we’re doing something different here than just like a one man thing. So I think I think it’s kind of possibly underestimated the amount of anxiety around that and just pick Yeah, he keeps picking these people, and then it’s like a curse and then they die. Like, I choose you, and now you’re dead. Like

Dr Rad 17:26
at the touch of death is like when Augusto says you’re gonna succeed me.

Dr Victoria Austen 17:30
And then he’s just left with Tiberius by the end.

Dr G 17:33
So it says explains Tiberius is reluctance you’ve seen the pattern. And he’s like, just say, No,

Dr Rad 17:38
yeah, don’t don’t Look at me. Yeah. But I mean, it to be fair, to be fair, because I suppose it functioned in this way during Augustus lifetime. It’s not just during Augustus, his lifetime that it is used as like a who’s in favour and who’s not kind of monument, that whole dynasty continue to use it in this way. Yeah.

Dr Victoria Austen 18:01
Yeah. So again, it’s like that idea of so much. It’s when we’re thinking about commemoration. And I think this idea of like memory, and who is allowed to be part of that memory, like so many, that is a political choice that is being made along the way. And I think I think that’s why I’m kind of fascinated with this temporal aspect and the the playing of time, because, you know, commemoration in general, it’s something you’re you’re doing in the present, but it obviously engages with the past, because it’s about kind of ancestors, but it also looks, Augustus is kind of looking to the future when he creates it, because it’s this idea of any kind of ironically ends up burying their, like, who would have been the future and then the future is kind of like changing in real time. And so I think there’s this really interesting, dynamic there with time. And, you know, one of the things that I’m particularly interested in, obviously, thinking about Gardens is that, you know, it’s created with lots of plants and greenery around it, which I think, again, speaks to this temporal kind of cyclical aspect that, you know, the plants are always there, but they, so they kind of are the same, but they’re not because they’re continuing because nature is continually evolving. So it’s like, it kind of appears to be this ever present feature, but that that feature isn’t itself kind of always moving. It’s not static. And so I think, again, he kind of taps into the power of plants, I suppose in that way to really enhance that kind of temporal aspect of the commemoration.

Dr Rad 19:38
Yeah, and it is kind of interesting to think that a lot of the people that end up getting buried in there are younger members of the of the dynasty, which I think kind of speaks to the fact that if you’re if you grow up to be an adult, if you live long enough, you’re gonna tick somebody off. Someone’s gonna

Dr Victoria Austen 19:57
Yeah, all the all the young ones, it’s just like didn’t have enough time to do anything?

Dr Rad 20:01
No, no, they were like, Well, you were five. We didn’t. We

Dr G 20:06
didn’t hate you. Yeah, except for Agrippa Postumus. Yes, you know, there’s always the exception.

Dr Victoria Austen 20:12
He’s, he’s, you know, he’s, he’s okay. He doesn’t annoy anyone.

Dr G 20:19
But I getting back to this aspect of plants. So when we think about the Roman architectural landscape, it tends to be the case that people talk about the buildings a lot. And sometimes trees get mentioned. So in people’s like, sort of imagination of that space of Rome, it’s kind of like marble structures, clean streets, you know, it’s all happening. There’s carts and everything everywhere. And there’s not necessarily a lot of room or space to think about how nature is incorporated into some of that, but with Augustus is mausoleum, there is a deliberate incorporation of nature into parts of the structure. And I’m wondering if you could speak a little bit to that. Yeah.

Dr Victoria Austen 21:00
And I think the mausoleum is like a microcosm of what is going on in the Campus Martius, in general, in that there’s this idea of, rather than how our modern eyes might see it, as you said, it’s like a series of individual monuments and the monuments that comes first. And that’s the kind of thing that you focus on. And then maybe ideas of plantings and stuff are more peripheral, or you’re like, Oh, sure, they planted some trees. But I think we need to kind of invert that idea. And think of the Campus Martius itself is this huge kind of landscaped green kind of Park, almost like a kind of sacred grove, the sacral Adeleke type landscape, and within that are dotted a series of monuments. So I feel like actually, we need to think of it as the monuments are kind of part of this broader, kind of sacred esque type landscape, as opposed to, there are these monuments, and then there happens to be a few plantings around it. And I think that’s really crucial to kind of understanding the experience of the Campus Martius in general, because, you know, Augustus wants people to experience the sights and be there. And so you, you’re giving this kind of broad, open green space to a population who if you’re living in the city of Rome, you know, you don’t have your own garden. I mean, I think you have Roman Gardens is like from Pompeii, where you’ve got these individual houses, and they each have their own little nice courtyard garden. If you’re living in Rome, you’re in a stuffy apartment complex, sharing one room with, you know, 10,010 other people, and you don’t have access to nature in that way. And so these kinds of more, quote, unquote, public areas become really important. And I think Augustus really understood the importance of like, putting greenery and kind of open space as part of that, because it creates this distance, I suppose, from their very urban, maybe small scale reality. And then suddenly, you can go to this wide open space that you’re very much aware, I presume that Augustus is kind of its public, but you know, he’s allowing us to be here, in that he’s opened it up in this way. But it’s just dotted by all of these reminders of Augustus being there. So I think, I think the plantings are actually, we shouldn’t think of them as being, you know, marginal, I think actually, that’s kind of like, that’s the main thing. And then the monuments are within that. Interesting,

Dr G 23:39
interesting. All right, I will hold on to these thoughts because you’re giving me food for thought. And now and, and I’m thinking about the kind of potential for a natural fallacy to emerge that somehow Augustan power is immersed and is part of and it’s coming from nature. And but I won’t go too far down that path that is an unformed thought. No,

Dr Victoria Austen 24:02
I completely agree because like so much of his imagery, and like we spoke about this on the previous episodes, so much of his imagery and kind of this connection to the gods he he created through the use of symbolic plants like plants were plants as symbols were so central to his kind of image image making in that way. And in fact, on the mausoleum, we don’t have much of the kind of decoration that would would have gone on the exterior. It wasn’t just like plain concrete, there would have been kind of marble decoration. And we know that either side of the entrance way. There were kind of carved marble panels that featured Laurel and like this is very probably symbolic of the fact that he has two Laurel trees either side, you know either side of the entrance to its house, which itself is meant to mimic the use of Laurel trees outside of religious buildings. And you know, the Laurel is associated with Apollo Augustus sees himself as Apollo. You know, even on coins, there’s just these two Laurel trees and it’s like that’s an Augustan coin, like that’s a symbol for him. And so I think the fact that it’s like consciously on his mausoleum, like flanking the entrance, again, it kind of speaks to this idea that he’s kind of harnessing these planty symbols. And and it’s not by accident. There’s like these repeated patterns. And so, yeah, with these two Laurel trees, it’s like they’re at my mausoleum. They’re at my house. They’re on coins. I wear them in my trial for crowns. You know, it’s like, this is my plant. It’s effing everywhere.

Dr Rad 25:39
Yeah, Branding! Well, I mean, this, this is this is not quite the same thing. But there is also that idea that comes through or Gustus that urban city life is not what made room great, it’s an eight shades, the rural existence, it’s being connected to the land and agricultural practice and that sort of thing as well, which is not quite the same thing. But

Dr Victoria Austen 26:05
But I think it’s part of it, because I mean, the fact that he’s doing this in the Campus Martius, which in itself is like representative of this kind of like it’s like original kind of public type land. There’s a lot of kind of literary by, say a lot, there’s pieces of literary evidence from this kind of late Republican into the Augustan period, where one of the kind of moral tropes that kind of comes up is, there’s a lot of anxiety about the loss of kind of sacred landscapes in the context of the Civil War. And so I think he plays a you know, he’s a smart move, he’s creating a new sacred landscape within his marshes, and he’s like, I am at the centre of it. So my guess is, and again, that’s, you know, about as close to declaring yourself a god as you can get.

Dr Rad 26:54
Like, I think I think I’m also sensing one of the reasons why I’ve perhaps instinctively disliked Augustus and that’s the Australian in me is very uncomfortable with someone who’s so openly being like, yeah, I am at the centre of everything. I am the shit.

Dr G 27:10
You want to some tall poppy syndrome.

Dr Rad 27:14
There is actually honestly, it is a cultural thing that Australians aren’t comfortable with ambitious people.

Dr Victoria Austen 27:22
Interesting. Okay. Yeah. But I think yeah, Augustus would not fit in there then.

Dr G 27:29
Definitely not.

Dr Rad 27:31
I actually to come back to our earlier thing, I just thought her out of interest, I would have a have a Look at the list of people that ended up making it in his lifetime. So obviously, we know Marcellus Yeah, he’s, yeah, he he’s intended as numero uno, who unfortunately died very, very young and unexpectedly, the son of his sister Octavia Octavia. Of course, yes.

Dr Victoria Austen 27:56
There is in there. Yeah. So it’s not just limited to men as well. We know it’s quite like they allow he does allow some women in there. Yeah. Well, I

Dr Rad 28:03
mean, I get Octavia because after all, she’s like the opposite of Julia the elder his daughter, and that she’s very dutiful. Does what what is asked of her, you know, does her bid for the succession? Agrippa who is not a blood relative? Of course.

Dr G 28:21
No, but they’re like brothers in that. Yeah. Say?

Dr Rad 28:24
Anyone deserves it. Yeah. Yeah, I don’t think I’ve asked this would have been Augustus without Agrippa. But he acknowledged that that much. And then of course, my man, Tiberius after Augustus. His death obviously, yeah. ends up in there, but so do people like Germanicus? Yeah. Yeah. Who we might expect as well. And Antonia Minor, huh? Yeah. Mother of Claudius Britannicus.

Dr G 28:55
Oh, yeah. Poor Britannicus.

Dr Rad 28:57
Tragically murdered by one of his own relatives, which is why it’s kind of weird that he ends up in this really

Dr G 29:01
well, first I killed him. And then I put him in the mausoleum because that’s the right thing to do.

Dr Rad 29:06
Exactly. Yeah. And, of course, of course, Claudius himself. Now I’m just going to point out, we are missing Of course, yeah. Nero, and he doesn’t he’s not in there. No, no, he’s definitely not.

Dr G 29:21
So being a relative is not enough to get you in there it is, being an emperor

Dr Rad 29:25
isn’t enough to get you on.

Dr Victoria Austen 29:27
And again, this is this is the point about that. A dynastic monument. We think of it because I think we’re so maybe skewed by our idea of like modern monarchy, which is very kind of like family oriented, oriented and this idea that then it’s the family and the dynastic part, they’re not one in the same and obviously when it ends as well overlap, but you know, no one is there’s no father son succession in the junior accordions, it seems, it’s that’s true. He’s alive and who would we not want to merge I think you’ll be the next one.

Dr G 30:02
Congratulations, you survived. Yes.

Dr Rad 30:05
It would be fascinating if the modern British monarchy was run along the same lines who’s alive? And who do we not want to? Pick? Yeah, yeah. Oh,

Dr G 30:15
that would open up the field goodness not really worth it. So thinking about the mausoleum, not just in the Augustan period, but it does have a huge legacy over time. Like there’s obviously part of the structure still remains to this day. And it’s not like people after Ancient Rome or like, you know what, never going in there don’t know what that’s about. It was definitely it had many afterlives if you. And I’m wondering if you can take us through some of the ones that have really appealed to you when you’ve been thinking about this structure.

Dr Victoria Austen 30:47
I mean, I think this is this is what I found so fascinating. And this, this really started as a very small I was like, Well, what did kind of happen after the Augustan period, and it has opened up this whole new world of research to me, and now I’m looking at Pope’s, and Who’s In Who’s in charge of Rome in the pre modern period. And it’s, it’s fascinating, it’s but it’s not like a linear kind of journey. It, yeah, it kind of comes and goes in these cycles in a really, really fascinating way. So as I think I just said, like the last burial that we can kind of officially associate with it is Nerva in 96 CE, and then it kind of, we have very, very fragmentary and limited evidence from when from that kind of peak use period as a burial plot. And then it really kind of like drops off. And we don’t have like a tonne of information, it pops up in the 10th century. It’s called the mons Augusta. By Gregorius, I think it is. And he refers to the site as this, like Mons Augusta. And then in the 12th century, we have this really interesting reference in the Mirabilia. Urbis Romae, which is essentially like a guidebook to the ancient city. And it’s referred to as the Augustan. But it also includes this really interesting legend, which is actually not found in the ancient sources, but it’s described in the Mirabilia, and it says that the mound itself has been is special, and people still, like kind of go to it and worship it. And it’s still a special site, because he talks about the author of the memorabilia of that Augustus bought mounds of earth from all different parts of the empire, and put it on top of his put it as part of the plantings of the cool, so fascinating. And like, I wish we had any kind of hardly any hint of this in the ancient sources, but I mean, the, they obviously got this idea from somewhere in the mirror, but it’s discussed as something it’s like, this is the well known site that you’re gonna go visit and you know, said that Augustus bought these mounds of earth from all over and like, that is such an imperial statement, again, this like, control of space and time, he’s like, I’m literally bringing the Earth from all of the places and putting it on my tomb where

Dr Rad 33:13
I was gonna say sounds so on brand

Dr Victoria Austen 33:16
on land. And so I think it’s also just really interesting that in the mirror abelia, it’s like, the earthy part, is seen as the most kind of famous part of the commemoration. It’s not the structure, he like talks about the Earth as being like, this central thing that they’re gonna Look at, which again, when I think about these kind of the temporal aspects of plantings is and why people use them in commemoration, again, it’s like it’s always there. But it’s changed over time. So yeah, that’s a really fascinating little reference in the 12th century. And then we basically have like, nothing, and we don’t really know what happened. This is a contentious time and in pre modern Rome, you know, the city in itself goes through various phases or kind of decline, and then people try and, you know, put more effort into it and all this kind of stuff. And you know, there’s lots of anxiety kind of from the 12th to the 14th centuries about, oh, Rome, it was so great. And now we’ve let it go to ruin and, and you can kind of think about the mausoleum in that way. What we do then know is that then in the 16th century, when you know the Pope’s they’ve been away in France, and then they come back to Rome, and they start to like really rejuvenate the city. And so as part of that kind of regeneration in the 16th century, it gets the site in itself gets bought by an elite gentleman called miss your Soderini is part of this Florentine family. And they’re like, We want to invest in Rome and so we’re gonna buy we’re gonna buy some ancient sites. We’re gonna make our mark in Rome and and The Soderini family they buy the mausoleum. And this is the kind of thing that I’ve been looking at the most is that they then Soderini turns it into his own sculpture gallery slash garden. So he kind of uncovers it. And there’s this amazing letter, I’m going to bring it up so I can read it to you from 1549. And there’s an Italian Giovanni Battista Vicini, and he writes to his friend, and he says, I am writing this letter to you in the middle of the tomb of Augustus, which my once in your Soderini has undertaken to redo and he has transformed it into a rather lovely garden with some rooms there for eating. And this is his past time, this place called the mausoleum is now a vegetable garden. And there are some fine salad leaves here. He’s using the language of like a vegetable garden and leaves, but he’s talking about the sculpture. So he’s like, again, super interesting for me in terms of the language because he’s playing on that dynamic, which Augustus did as well, of like, we’re being all rustic, and, and old school, and we’re tapping into old school nature. And he’s describing these very aesthetic kind of sculptures, as like the rustic salad leaves. And so in terms of like commemoration, for me, this is really interesting as well, because by turning it, he has his like, private collection of ancient sculptures, and then they’re being displayed inside the tomb. So it’s like, it becomes like a site of commemoration to the ancient world in general, but also still to Augustus, because they still refer to it as the mausoleum of Augustus. But then it’s also now starting to commemorate sort of renew his own identity, as well as like this elite kind of culture, like, I can collect all of these ancient sculptures. And again, it’s a private collection, but then he opens it up to the public, and it becomes this site, it then again, it gets featured in a load of guidebooks from like the 16th to the 18th century. As like, this is a place to go like you got to go to the mausoleum. You got to see the sculptures. And yeah, so just think that’s really fascinating that he like, kind of took took the outside plantings from the Augustan period. It’s kind of turn the concept inside out to some extent now the gardens inside, and it’s got all of his quote unquote salad leaves for us to Look.

Dr Rad 37:33
Well, you Look, I’m gonna thank you, because you’ve just given me a great idea for Dr. G’s next birthday, so I’m going to start saving so that I can buy the mausoleum and turn it into a little place for her, you know, little thing with you. Honestly,

Dr Victoria Austen 37:47
I want someone to buy the mausoleum that will actually let me in there because I had such high this summer when I was there. And I met Dr. G. And we were like, yes, we’re here. We’re gonna do what Augustan things. And then once again, the mausoleum was closed, it’s close to the public, because they are doing even more renovation work. I was gonna

Dr G 38:07
say there was a moment a few years ago, pre COVID, where it had reopened. Ah, I’m so excited because I was just about to go. And then I had to cancel the trip because of COVID. Thank you very much. And then by the time I could get back, it was closed again. I was like, Oh, no.

Dr Victoria Austen 38:23
I was like, This is my moment. And, and what’s really fascinating though, one thing I did notice, when I was there in the summer is around the kind of construction they obviously have kind of barriers and on the barriers they have highlighted, like key dates in the mausoleum’s history. And they’ve got dates related to Augustus. Obviously, they’ve got dates related to Mussolini, which we can come on to. But then also one of the key dates in this timeline is this 1549 day they actually have it as as a key kind of date. So this Soderini garden, I’m kind of interested when it’s reopened if they’re going to make a bit more of that part of its history in terms of like exhibitions or something like that, because there is like not a lot written on this. The kind of want one kind of key article kind of speaks more about trying to identify the sculptures that were in it, as opposed to like thinking about it as I am as this kind of continuation of garden, space and commemoration. But I think yeah, I was really surprised to see that the government or the kind of museum like it had this 1549 date on as part of like, the kind of key timeline and I was like, because I’m pretty sure not many people know about that. So yeah,

Dr G 39:41
I think it speaks to what is this broader legacy because there is something about circular buildings. It sounds like a segway. But there is something about the attraction of circular buildings or oval shaped buildings, which because they’re quite rare. In terms of the architecture, generally speaking, they tend to stand out and they tend to garner attention. But this also affects how they might be repurposed and how people think about their repurposing as well. And so there is something about the visual of having a circular gallery, that you can kind of wind your way through and around. And that allows sort of ready to do this moment where he’s like, Look, I’m a bit like Augustus here, and I’ve created this space, which allows you to engage with time and, and all of this kind of stuff as well. And perhaps there are some replanting is going on, who knows.

Dr Victoria Austen 40:37
And again, we don’t have any evidence for this particular like the remnants of how Santorini had utilised it, there’s no physical evidence of it, because as we can go on to like, it’s then it goes through other phases of redevelopment, and it gets buried and built on and attached to and all of this stuff, but we do have a lot of engravings from these guidebooks are very consistent in terms of the imagery. And so I think we do have a pretty good idea of what it may be Look like. And so like, I’m looking at one on my screen now, and I can send you on for the for the website, is this idea of you’ve got this kind of walkway up to the front, and it’s flanked by ancient statues, and then you kind of go in through the entrance way. And then the interior, it kind of looks like the sculptures were kind of round the edge. And then you’ve got like a planted series of kind of walkways, and like box hedges in the interior. And as you said, it’s like you’re guiding, you know, different pathways. And you’re maybe you know, leisurely strolling round. And yeah, I just think it’s, it’s really, really fascinating I and yeah, just the kind of consistency of the engravings, I think, from this couple of centuries, I think we can get a fairly good idea of what it maybe looks like. But for some reason, from the 18th, kind of century onwards, it goes into another period of decline. And we don’t really get much going on then until kind of, we get a period of like 100 years of kind of decline. And then we’ve got the next kind of key, infamous phase, I think, is when Mussolini comes along. I’m again, in terms of like commemoration and memory and identity. You can see this building is being used by different people at different times. You know, Augustus does it. Santorini is doing it in his own way. And then you’ve got Mussolini coming in. And his whole shtick is that, oh, it’s gone into disrepair. Again, this idea of it being like buried and earthen. It’s like undercover. And then miscellaneous thing was he comes along, and he’s got his pickaxe, and he’s like, I am uncovering or revealing the ancient city and it’s like a make Rome, great, again, kind of idea. He’s like, we have let our history go into disrepair. And so the Campus Martius area for him, become central to his whole kind of reorganisation of Rome. And like, this is an area that had been kind of turned into almost like a residential district. And he basically just cleanse like cleared it out completely. You know, people didn’t get a choice. It’s like, No, I’m going in there. I’m getting rid of all of the residential stuff. And yeah, I actually went down a rabbit hole a few weeks ago on YouTube and found some amazing YouTube footage of, I guess they were kind of like those, like Italian Government, like type newsreel type things that would have been shown. And it’s like, here’s Mussolini, like going and he’s like walking up this what looks like this kind of mound of earth. And he’s got his pickaxe, and it’s like, Mussolini is revealing the mausoleum of Augustus. And it’s like, caught on camera. And this is one of the things that he goes to and it becomes part of his whole kind of memory and, and his use of the ancient city, and recovering quote, unquote, the ancient city to regain this kind of power for himself, kind of again, shows this idea of like, the space time continuum.

Dr Rad 44:22
Well, Look, this will be familiar to many students of ancient history in Australia, and probably other places, but I know the syllabus in Australia, because we have close Look at the way that Mussolini and his cronies are involved in Pompeii and Herculaneum. Okay, so yeah, that the idea that Mussolini obviously is connecting to ancient rumours, propaganda, basically for his own regime will be will be familiar territory to them. Yeah,

Dr Victoria Austen 44:51
um, I mean, I don’t think it’s not unsurprising that he also really wanted to uncover Augustan monuments, like He’s my guy like, yeah.

Dr Rad 45:03
Like, you’re-a speaking my language. Yeah.

Dr Victoria Austen 45:05
You know, he would probably have called him a fascist, it doesn’t come as a surprise to me that like, that is that is a particular area and like he wanted to do with the Ara Pacis as well, like he actually bought. He’s the, I mean, he’s the reason why we have it all nicely kind of reconstructed in the nice, beautifully air conditioned museum that it’s in now. I mean, it’s, it’s just kind of fascinating to me that, that Augustus, these Augustan, monuments are kind of they keep being reused, repurposed. And for different forms of memory and kind of like tapping into memory, I think. Yeah.

Dr Rad 45:44
And like, it seems obviously objectionable that someone like Mussolini would be able to do this. But at least as you say, there is some preservation and interest involved, because I remember the only time I’ve ever been able to see it, it had fallen, as you say, into one of those states of disrepair. When I was there, which would have been in the early 2000s. It was covered in rubbish, I was told it was even unsafe to be in the area, because it was used as kind of a temporary refuge for people who maybe didn’t have anywhere else to go. And so yeah, I mean, not that I’m saying Mussolini was a good thing, or that Fascism is a good thing. Yeah, he’d be very clear on that. But there is some good ideas behind the idea of governments investing in heritage. Yeah.

Dr Victoria Austen 46:30
And I think I’m, I’m kind of fascinated by the fact that, I don’t know whether it’s because of the size, or it’s just kind of so unwieldy, or people don’t really know what to do with it. But you would think, as such a key Augustan monument, that it would not have maybe gone through these periods of decline. I feel like it’s one of the least well known Augustan monuments, probably because so few people have actually been able to like engage with it in any way. But it was like so sent like, To him, it would have been so central, he had been very disappointed at the lack of the deterioration. But, but then not

Dr G 47:11
to mention that Hadrian’s mausoleum on the other side sort of now has precedent.

Dr Victoria Austen 47:18
So there’s this idea that like, why, why did it fall into disrepair? And this is kind of the frustrating thing about this kind of gap in the evidence that we have from, I guess, like from the Imperial period, up until when it kind of crops back up in the in the pre Modern Period. I’m just kind of intrigued as to why why was it allowed to get into that state? Yeah, that compared to other buildings, that that’s what doesn’t make sense to me? No, I mean, part of me wonders, one thing I do want to Look into is that, I think as well, possibly the area that it’s in the Campus Martius obviously, one of the things that good older gripper did was, you know, putting in this drainage system, which allowed them to build there in the first place. So close to the river. But it does, it has suffered over time from a lot of flooding. And I have to wonder, like, was a famous flood, I think, in the 11th, or the 12th century of the Tiber. And I have to wonder, like, whether that’s part of why it got into this state of disrepair because of its location, and then if there was flooding and that kind of thing. So that might be part of it. But But yeah, it’s kind of interesting how when it does get rejuvenated, it’s always in the same kind of way like this. They’re kind of using the Augusto model, but then doing their own kind of thing with it, which I think is really interesting

Dr Rad 48:48
evidence. It is really weird, as you say, because if we think about what Agassiz is doing here, as being a little bit similar to like, what an Egyptian Pharaoh would do is tend to thinking about, you know, long term, where am I going to end up what kind of monument do I want? You know, how am I going to use it design etc. I mean, the Egyptian government does not neglect that, you know, the pyramids, you know, to be on those are all the tombs in the Valley of the Kings like it’s, if I mean, if I think about we’ve just had the Ramses exhibit, what sort going on actually at the time of recording to the Australian Museum here and going to that it was like being in a mosh pit. There were so many people crammed in to see this stuff. And it’s like people care about this kind of stuff. And it certainly not neglected. So it is a weird thing to overlook, especially because I’m something we haven’t really mentioned. It was weird to have people buried inside the city of Rome to have to have human remains inside the city that is rare in this particular culture.

Dr Victoria Austen 49:48
Yeah, I think that is again, that kind of speaks to this kind of bold, the initial bold statement that Augustus is making in is just it’s not just in The location in relation to his other monuments, which we’ve already talked about, but as you said, the fact of having this, like grand burial monument, so, like, so close to the centre of like the central air, like, I mean, people kind of still want to think of the Campus Martius it’s like, oh, it’s like a little bit out there, but I’m like, it’s still very set. Like it’s not, it’s not the suburbs like, it’s

Dr G 50:24
like, Guys, it’s an easy walk from the forest. You’re gonna be fine.

Dr Victoria Austen 50:29
Yeah, you know, you can have a nice, you can have a Sunday stroll at the Campus Martius no problem. But But yeah, just kind of that in itself of that statement of, again, it speaks to his arm doing things differently, that he places it so centrally, you know? Yeah. Very interesting. Definitely.

Dr Rad 50:50
So broadly speaking, after having looked at the mausoleum and the Augustus context, and then looking about the legacy of that and the reuse of it over time, what do you feel we can learn by looking at this particular monument? Yeah,

Dr Victoria Austen 51:04
I mean, I think it for me, it’s interesting on many levels, but I think currently the kind of things that I’m most interested in this idea of the kind of reuse of ancient monuments in lighting, and how, how they in themselves, can take on new ideological meanings, whether that be on a personal level, like Santorini, or a political level, like Mussolini, this idea of monuments in themselves, the kind of multi valence and the ever changing nature of like, how these monuments are received and what they mean. And I think this is like such an interesting, neat case study in how you’ve got this one thing. And it’s like so many different things all over. I mean, I haven’t even said like, it was also the site of a bullfighting ring at one point, I mean, that

Dr G 52:02
how did we skip over that,

Dr Victoria Austen 52:05
that kind of like continual reuse, and, and this, this kind of cyclical nature of like decline and regeneration of monuments and reuses, I think, is a really nice case study of of that. And then also my, my idea, my focus on on gardens and landscapes. Again, it really speaks to me of this need to not think of the kind of monuments as like physically monumental structures, and then kind of maybe plants or plantings or landscape as being this kind of marginal kind of nice to have thing. I think we really underestimate the importance of the collaboration of those two things. And I think we tend to think of things that have that relationship hierarchically, with monuments, like the thing. And then, oh, we’ve got some nice, like gardens and stuff that we may be looking at. Whereas I think the more I’m looking at the ancient world, and even kind of later receptions, the more I think that we shouldn’t be thinking about these hierarchically, and instead in conversation with one another, and again, I just think the Muslims are really fascinating example of, of that trend. And so I think it can teach us, you know, quite a lot about those two broad ideas.

Dr Rad 53:27
Well, I mean, that’s a very good point, because I think what we see increasingly in modern eras is a neglect of the natural world and the importance of that to ourselves, to our peril, basically, I

Dr Victoria Austen 53:40
mean, you have to think about, I mean, when I, when I lived in Winnipeg, a lot of a lot of people would always comment like, the downtown it had like, no trees or like plantings and like that, that conversation around like urban forestry. And like that idea of, we need to we, we created these urban environments that were like so devoid of nature. And now everyone’s recognising the need that we actually need to put it back in. And I think the Romans were ahead of the game in that in that they, you know, they were not, they were not afraid to kind of just because it’s an quote unquote, urban area. That doesn’t mean it’s devoid of nature. And I think, again, we’ve kind of thought of these two things as in our modern frameworks with thinking of these things very separately. But I think I’m kind of hopeful that with this idea of replanting, and kind of urban forestry and putting plants back into more traditionally urban environments, I think is a move a move in a in a more positive direction, because I think we kind of lost that idea that we can have both at the same time.

Dr Rad 54:48
Yeah, well, I think that’s comes to that. That very popular idea of room being a city of marble and it’s, no, that’s just one part of it. And it’s the same thing for us in Sydney. I mean, there are places like in Western Sydney and that sort of thing where we’re recognising increasingly for mental health to help with, you know, heat waves and that sort of thing, it’s really important to integrate nature into, you know, places where people are living, you can’t just have brick and concrete. No,

Dr Victoria Austen 55:15
I don’t mean Yeah, thinking about, like, the heat in itself. I mean, like, when you’re just surrounded by concrete it is, it’s like so much more oppressive than Yeah, if there’s like, the minute you get into a bit of nature by some trees. And so you got to think of like the climate of Rome, like, this is part of the enjoyment of this area that Augustine created in like, it wouldn’t have been nice if it was literally just like, I’m like, You’re not gonna pave the entire Campus Martius in marble, and I mean, like parts of it were, but it just makes so much more sense to have this kind of collaboration of the natural and the, the ornamental.

Dr Rad 55:54
Yeah, I’m just picturing a lot of Romans like, you know, running along in their sandals and slipping around when it rains.

Dr G 56:03
Certainly, there was some grass around here. So to wrap this conversation up, and thinking about the way in which there is a tendency today, and maybe through time as well, the desire to restore structures to honour their original purpose, why they were first built. So Augustus is mausoleum has never been forgotten as being related and connected to Augustus through all of that time. And though people have reused it in various ways, such as the galleries and the bullfighting, and things like that there was that recognition that it did have this original purpose, it was related to Augustus. And now when we see the restoration work that’s underway today with the structure, it is really about that gustan period of its history, and not so much about the things that came after it, or at least, it doesn’t seem to be that way. However, I’d be curious to see what it looks like if they ever let me. So I’m interested in what are some of the implications you see in this sort of contemporary desire for restoration to original purpose? Well,

Dr Victoria Austen 57:09
I think there’s such a fine line to be worn with that, particularly with the Mausoleum of Augustus, again, it’s kind of an interesting case study for that conversation, because we actually don’t know what it really looked like in its original format. Like, we have an idea, but because of all of the many layers of rebuilding and reuse, like it is actually impossible from the archaeological record, to actually figure out what the structure would have been like. And so most of the time, we’re relying on the description from strijbos geography, which talks about that there’s this monumental structure, and it’s planted and, and all of this kind of stuff. And then there are these kind of all of the reconstructions have been based on that. And also, on its relationship, potentially as a model for then Hadrian’s mausoleum. So, originally, like, there’s this idea of it being this kind of multi tiered structure. And that’s what people think of when they they try and trying to kind of recreate the original Augustan context. But we don’t actually have we can’t definitively say, based on the archaeology, if it was a multi tiered structure, because we’ve only got the base level of it. So I think it’s a really interesting study and like projection of when we can’t know the original, like, what then are we trying to create? Like, what? I struggle with them? Like, why do we need to actually know what it may have exactly Look like, I think there’s often like this idea of like, we need to know what it actually looked like. So we can reconstruct it or like, show what it was, and you’re getting that, quote, unquote, original sense of the monument. But we will never know the original like, because it’s framed in the landscape in a completely different type of way, like the way we are engaging with it. We now are engaging with these, with these monuments, based on all of the layers of history, and we’re coming to modern lens, like I said, very hard for people to think about it as nothing more than like a monumental structure. Like they’re not thinking about the trees. And I mean, part of my research is like, you know, we’re trying to if we are obsessed with the original, then we need to try and get back to well, like, how would they actually be viewing it? So I think sometimes we can get a bit caught up in trying to find some kind of essence, to individual pieces that we’re like trying to hold on to and I think, you know, I think as humans we want that certainty and stability of like, we can say, this is what it looked like for people walking around in the Augustan period, and this is what they would have, quote unquote I experienced but you know, when we’re moving through space and time, like that’s a, we’re just totally different individuals in that way. So. So I think it’s important to recognise or try and figure out what it would have originally been like. But I think it’s also important to recognise that these things are always evolving, and that there’s not like this one static way of viewing.

Dr G 1:00:29
Yeah, and there’s kind of like an impossibility embedded in that isn’t there? It’s like, I mean, I would love to know what it originally looked like, the chances of that ever. And

Dr Victoria Austen 1:00:41
then also, we limit ourselves by if we only focused on, but what did it Look like? I’m like, that’s one part of investigating these monuments. But also, there are so many other questions that we can ask and, and interesting things we can kind of think about when it comes to monuments and memory and kind of what they mean. And, and yeah, I think just just focusing on like trying to reclaim some original purpose is, it’s just kind of missing the point, I think of monuments and memorialization in general, because the whole point is that it’s a continual process. So like, why would we want it to be exactly the same? Well,

Dr Rad 1:01:24
I think we can safely say that without modern technology, Augustus would not be averse to us making some improvements if it would make him even grander. So by all means, build it up, make it a frickin skyscraper.

Dr Victoria Austen 1:01:38
Yeah, it’s interesting, we still we still kind of, even though it is rundown, and there’s still a desire to reclaim it, even now that they’ve not given that no one’s given up hope, like there have been these periods of decline. But it’s like we should, we should do something with this, because it’s kind of that implicit recognition that this is important, but we’re not entirely sure why it’s important, but we’re gonna do something with it.

Dr G 1:02:06
And it has a substantial footprint in the spot where it is like, it’s huge to try and walk around it, it takes a little while. And you’re like trying to peek in through the gates being like, what’s going on in there guys. Like it’s a whole blocks worth in size.

Dr Victoria Austen 1:02:19
Yeah, the best view you can get it actually from inside the Ara Pacis is museum because you’re a bit raised. And then, I mean, it’s still blocked. Now it’s blocked now because of all of like the scaffolding, but from the inside of the museum, you can at least kind of Look a bit over into what it is. But yeah, you’re right. Like this is huge. It’s not something you can never take it in in one go. Really, because this is like like the Colosseum, like you’ve got to like you’re experiencing it from multiple angles and ways. And you can’t just it’s not a small thing that you can just stand there and Look at, like, you got to experience it in space. So

Dr Rad 1:02:57
well. And I think this also speaks to something about people. I mean, obviously, we’ve increasingly got digital areas and spaces for ourselves. But at the end of the day, much like we can’t lose our connection with the actual natural world, we can’t lose our connection with physical spaces, they still really matter to us. Because of the way that we’re wired. We’re not wired to exist only in a digital space. And so you’ve given me a lot of hope that I will be able to repurpose this as a space for people to come and ponder the greatness of people like Dr. G. Dr. Austen and also reflect on what a manipulative evil son of a bitch Augustus was.

Dr G 1:03:40
I knew it was coming and

Dr Rad 1:03:46
End episode. Exit stage left.

But it’d be Yeah, I mean, I think having a space to go and and yeah, and think about Augustus and all the things that he did. It’s, it’s good.

Dr Victoria Austen 1:04:05
I agree. One of these days, you know, the last conversation we had we manifested that we would meet in Rome, and Dr. Jean did meet in Rome. So now if we manifest that we’ll be able to go in the mausoleum of Augustus. Maybe it will happen. Maybe this.

Dr G 1:04:22
Oh, yeah, we’ll get Dr. Right over there. Yeah. surreptitiously record that conversation.

Dr Rad 1:04:28
Dr G and I are saving away for a partial historians expedition.

Dr Victoria Austen 1:04:34
So we will, we will hope that the mausoleum is part of that experience for you.

Dr Rad 1:04:40
Yeah, like I want to I want to Look at the remains of Augustus.

Dr Victoria Austen 1:04:44
Look him In the eye and tell him what you think.

Dr Rad 1:04:50
I see what you were doing. You didn’t fool me.

Dr G 1:04:54
Goodness me. Well, on that note, thank you so much, Vicky for joining us and chatting all about the mausoleum, it has been fabulous to have you.

Dr Rad 1:05:09
Thank you for listening to this special episode of the Partial Historians. You can find our sources, sound credits and an automated transcript in our show notes. Our music is by Bettina Joy to Guzman. You too can support our show and help us to produce more fascinating content about the ancient world by becoming a Patreon. In return, you receive exclusive early access to special episodes just like this. Today, we would like to say a special hello to Roman, Jesse and Dillon some of our recent Patreon members. Thank you very muchly for your support. However, if you just got mugged out in the dangerous streets of ancient Rome, please just tell someone about the show or give us a five star review. That goes for our book as well. Until next time, we are yours in ancient Rome

Transcribed by https://otter.ai

The post Special Episode – Augustus’ Mausoleum with Dr Victoria Austen appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.

This is a very exciting special episode all about the Roman military. We were incredibly fortunate to speak to an expert in the field about the Roman army in the early and middle republic. 

Special Episode – The Early Roman Military with Dr Bret Devereaux

Dr Bret Devereaux is a historian specialising in the ancient world and military history. He holds a PhD in ancient history from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and an MA in classical civilizations from Florida State University. He teaches at North Carolina State University. 

His research interests include the Roman economy and the Roman military. Key to this is considering how the lives of people were shaped by structures of power, violence and wealth and the ways these factors shaped military capacity.

His monograph Why the Romans Always Won: Mobilizing Military Power in the Ancient Mediterranean is under contract with Oxford University Press. We cannot wait to get our hands on a copy, and we’re sure you will want to put this on your wish list too! 

Dr Devereaux is an incredibly passionate and eloquent scholar, and he was very generous with his time. In this episode we were able to explore the evolution of Roman warfare from small-scale, localised conflicts to epic clashes with civilisations like the Carthaginians. 

Dr Bret Devereaux

You can follow and support Bret at his blog A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry: A look at history and popular culture. Here you will find fascinating blog posts, book recommendations and collections of resources that you might find useful if you are a teacher.  

If you are keen to learn more about the academics mentioned during the interview, you can find a list of the scholars mentioned below: 

Our music is by the wonderful Bettina Joy de Guzman.

Dr Rad 0:12
Welcome to the Partial Historians.

Dr G 0:15
We explore all the details of ancient Rome.

Dr Rad 0:20
Everything from political scandals to love affairs, the battles waged and when citizens turn against each other. I’m Dr. Rad. And

Dr G 0:30
I’m Dr. G. We consider Rome as the Roman saw it by reading different ancient authors and comparing their accounts.

Dr Rad 0:41
Join us as we trace the journey of Rome from the founding of the city.

Dr G 1:03
Hello, and welcome to a brand new episode of the partial historians. I am Dr. G,

Dr Rad 1:11
and I’m Dr Rad

Dr G 1:13
and we are super thrilled to be joined by Dr. Brett Devereaux. Hello.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:19
Hello. Great to be here.

Dr G 1:21
Thank you so much for joining us. We are going to be talking today all about Roman military things, which I think is a super interesting topic and one that Dr. Rad and myself confess that we know not so much about so we wanted to bring in somebody who was a specialist. So Dr. Brett Devereaux is a historian who specialises in the ancient world and military history. He holds a PhD in ancient history from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and has an MA in classical civilization civilization from Florida State University, and He currently teaches at North Carolina State University. His research interests include the Roman economy and the Roman military. Key to this study is considering how the lives of people were shaped by structures of power. How violence and wealth are factors that influence and shape military capacity. He currently has a monograph under contract with Oxford University Press, which will be entitled Why the Romans Always Won: mobilising military power in the ancient Mediterranean. And he is also very famous online for running the popular blog, A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry: A Look at history and popular culture. So this is super exciting. Thank you.

Dr Bret Devereaux 2:43
So I’m excited. Thanks for having me on.

Dr G 2:46
I feel like our first point of controversy is going to be setting up the periods which might be under discussion. So I have said that we’re going to be talking about things possibly from the early republic, likely from the middle Republic, and we might touch on some things from the late Republic. And I feel like if you’re listening to this show, you might be like, Okay, that’s cool. The Republic has different phases. And you will be unsurprised to learn that historians don’t necessarily agree about these. And only some of the dates are on fuzzy. So the early republic, I’m going to say, start in 509 BCE, when they chuck out the kings, and takes us all the way down to around about 264 BCE, which is the start of the First Punic War. But I will defer to you, Brett, what would you say about that?

Dr Bret Devereaux 3:41
I mean, I think that’s a defensible end date. It’s the mark of when Roman military activity begins to push outside of Italy. And the First Punic War is the first moment where we get because our sources are improving over time, we get to see the Roman military machine very clearly. Because we have Polybius all of a sudden, and so I think that’s a defensible date. I would be tempted to push the transition to the middle Republic earlier, probably in the late fourth century, something like 338 340 Because I think the military system is functioning more or less the same way that far back but the evidence is is weaker, but but somewhere in that space. Yeah. And then the middle Republic runs question mark, question mark. 133? 107? 101? Somewhere in there. Before we begin the Late Republic.

Dr Rad 4:34
Somewhere with the Gracchi. And Marius.

Dr G 4:36
Yeah it gets a little bit dicey as soon as Tiberius Gracchus is elected tribune of the plebs. Yeah, so around about 133 anywhere down to about 101 is the bulk of the end of the middle Republic and the start of the late Republic. And then you get into the controversy of when does the late Republic end and that depends on how you feel about Augustus. So you know, I know I know you have some feelings about it. So do I. Strong feelings about Augustus, I’m going to say that I think the late Republic is fully over in 27. When he gets the title Augustus, it’s at that point where it’s like, he basically owns the whole of the Senate and anybody who’s willing to say anything. And at that point, I think we can say that functionally, the Republic is no longer doing its thing. It’s doing something else now.

Dr Bret Devereaux 5:32
But Augustus told me he restored the Republic, are you telling me he lied to me?

Dr G 5:38
This dude that would have guessed this lie? I mean, I wouldn’t want to say yes to that.

Dr Rad 5:44
Brett, I hate to break it to you on this podcast, but never leave believe anything a man says.

Dr Bret Devereaux 5:51
That’s, that’s gonna be my role in this podcast very difficult.

Dr G 5:55
This is gonna get tough as it goes along. Alright, so with that sort of chaos of periodization, somewhat resolved. Let’s jump into the first sort of topic. And we’re going to start broad and hopefully narrow in as we go through. Brett, what does it mean, to talk about military force when it comes to ancient Rome?

Dr Bret Devereaux 6:18
So this is an excitingly open ended question. Obviously, we are, for the most part, talking about armies. But already I think when I use that word, especially when we’re talking about the early Republican, especially when we’re talking about the first century of the early republic, as moderns we are incorporating ideas when we use that word army that we should maybe be sceptical about like we say army, we are imagining a formal military institution with things like regular issue weapons and uniforms and standardised trainings. And oh, boy, are the Romans not doing that this early. Some of these, you know, military forces that we’re going to talk about in the late regnal period in the early republic, are not state run armies, they are clan militias. You know, the whole extended family can go to war with your neighbours. We’re talking about states that are or that dispersed in power. We also are going to get centralised armies, as we’re going to see one of the major debates about the warfare in the early republic is really when can we understand that Rome actually has a centralised army under central leadership? I think at no point in this podcast, will the Romans get a uniform?

Dr G 7:38
This is very disappointing.

Dr Bret Devereaux 7:42
Roman soldiers are expected to acquire and supply their own equipment through the middle Republic and then there is argument as to when exactly in the late Republic, we start to see state issued equipment, you will sometimes see arguement that Gaius Gracchus does this but I would say that the textual support for that is functionally non existent. That is not what Plutarch says. And so no, he doesn’t. And so we don’t know, we know that by the Imperial period, there is state issued equipment, and it is being manufactured by the state, but we don’t know when that starts. So for most of this period, people are bringing their own kit, there are eventually regulations as to what kit they should bring, we’ll get into the arguments about when those regulations are made. Not as early as Livy thinks. So you might like okay, you have to have a shield and has to be kind of like this, but like the shields you bring is like whatever you want, you’ve decorated it how you want maybe you want it a little heavier, a little lighter, a little bigger, a little smaller, that’s fine. On these aren’t uniform like that. And then there’s a whole sort of secondary question of okay, what does that mean for how these guys fight? How tactically uniform are they? Certainly by the time we can see this army, clearly which, you know, I mean, I would say Polybius, I think you could push this back to the Punic Wars, the Romans have a tactical system. And it’s fairly sophisticated, how far back you can push that tricky, as we’ll get into, but also the kinds of military activity they’re engaged with. Our sources are for the most part writing in the first century, we’re talking about the early republic, because we have cut the early republic off 10 seconds before Polybius shows up, which is fair. And those first century sources have a nasty habit of reading the army of their own day into the evidence they have in the army of their day, is a sophisticated, well funded, well equipped, semi professional, centrally controlled force. It is, by ancient standards, a highly sophisticated and centralised army. And so, you know, Livy will read about battles happening in the four hundreds, and he conceives of these as like, Oh, we’re besieging this town for five years and he is thinking of a high intensity cedar, the centralised army and like that could be cattle rustling, that could be raiding. This could be little more than brigandage. The Army may not be this centralised. And it’s clear in some cases that it wasn’t, we’ll get this is going to be a repeated touchstone to the battle of the Cremera. In in 477 Sure major episode that I’m going to come back to over and over again, but like, what the famiIy were clearly doing here was like raids. They’re not he’s like, you know, they’re like laying waste and seizing the place. And like, there’s 300 of them. They’re not doing anything of the sort. There’s like stealing cattle, and like pillaging barns, you know. And so, it becomes really tricky to identify moments of increasing sophistication. Because Livy or, you know, Dionysius or Diodorus, or Cassius Dio, other universal history writers that are even later, like, they read, like the army went here, and they think the army of their day, and you know, so you know, it’s, it’s, there’s a huge range, and it’s, this is a continually changing institution, that we get snapshots up, and then those snapshots are distorted. With lots of blanks.

Dr Rad 11:08
Yeah, it’s very reassuring to hear an expert say that, because I must admit, we’ve been quite shocked to see how much our sources are reading backwards, when they’re talking about the army and the fabulous Fabii.

Dr Bret Devereaux 11:25
Notice how notice how unwilling Livy generally is to give army numbers in his early books, when Livy’s Gonna pop back up right when we Livy’s surge is back to us in 218. And we get that wonderful stretch from 218 to 167, where we have a continuous narrative from Livy’s. And his sources don’t suck, he loves army numbers, and they are precise. He’s like, there were this many men, and every year the legions were filled up and everything and he’s very, and he is nothing like that early on. And that’s a clear signal. He doesn’t have that information. He has no idea how big these armies are. I mean, ironically, the baby’s an exception, he thinks there are 300 of them. Though, that’s a number which should immediately make us sceptical because, of course, there are lots of famous bands of 300 warriors.

Dr Rad 12:15
gonna say that feels like a selective choice.

Dr Bret Devereaux 12:20
right, that’s a number that we should not believe. But it’s clearly been communicated to Livy. And so, yeah, the sources here are, are rough. Livy to his credit, is doing his best. Not fully credulous. He is occasionally sceptical. He occasionally indicates things he doesn’t know. He complains about invented triumphs and consulships. There are points where he is just clearly confused in ways that perhaps a savvy writer would have concealed. But on the other hand, you know, he’s mostly what we have. And, you know, we’re talking about the four hundreds in the three hundreds, the Romans only start writing their history themselves at the end of the third century Ennius and Fabius Pictor are a long way away. And so Livy doesn’t have a lot to work with. And that makes it really hard to know what’s going on.

Dr Rad 13:14
Yeah, it’s kind of like history is Mad Libs.

Dr Bret Devereaux 13:18
And then, and then the sources Livy’s does have, he doesn’t always understand. Or he has sources that don’t understand their sources. And the classic example for this is this battle. This is in book four of Livy. The the capture and then recapture of Fidenae in Latium. Ah, yes, the notes it’s it’s 434 that he’s like, and some analysts say that there was a fight cum classem, between fleets. And he’s like, but that’s ridiculous. There’s no water here. What we know from some of our other sources, what is confused living in his sources? Is that a classis in Livy’s de means a fleet, but in early Latin, it means an army. In particular, it means the whole citizen body is an army, when his sources are trying to tell him is that were once like the central army, the army that is controlled by the consoles or the king like the big army showed up and had a fight with the other guys big army, not just a cattle raid or something. We had a big fight, but live he doesn’t understand that and so he’s like, a battle with fleets like what on this stream? Are you joking? And so he is counted. He’s like, that obviously didn’t happen. This is a made up battle, because he’s misunderstood how the word classes is being used because its meaning has changed. There’s a similar sort of, we can get to the train wreck of Livy’s Eight Eight, and his description of the Roman army, but a similar problem with like, what is you know, what does it mean for someone to be before the spear antepilani? What are the Ordines? What are these units? What the hell are a accensi and what do they do? These were have changed their meanings, in some cases between Livy in his sources, and he is just terribly confused. And you feel bad for the fellow he’s doing his best.

Dr Rad 15:10
You know, and I feel empathy with Livy. Because I feel like that a lot of the time.

Dr Bret Devereaux 15:16
We’re doing our best.

Dr Rad 15:17
So Look, obviously, as as we’ve just hinted out in that conversation there, you know that we’re following the ancient written sources for the early republic, because that’s where we’re at in our episodes right now. So we’re mostly focusing on Livy’s, Dionysios, and Diodorus. And that sort of thing. And we can see that they, they did at least understand that Rome’s rise to world domination was gradual, and that they obviously have to do stuff, you know, to stop and explain some of these military things, as you were saying, without necessarily understanding them fully, or really appreciating how they worked in this early period. One of the things we keep coming up against is this idea of the levee, because this is often used as a weapon in the conflict of the orders, where we have tribunes of the players who are like there’s not going to be a military levy. I don’t care how severe the military situation is, and consuls who are like, Oh, you don’t understand there’s a crisis going on. We have to deal with it. Now. We didn’t have time for this crap. So how do we understand the levy of the soldiers in this very early period and the sixth in the fifth centuries BCE? Right.

Dr Bret Devereaux 16:24
So And here’s one of those are going to be like our sources say, and then I’m going to tell you that they’re full of it. So our sources and this is Dionysius and Livy’s, present the creation of a formal and centrally commanded system for the raising of Roman levy as originating with the semi legendary King Servius Tullius. This is the Servian constitution. I know you’ve discussed it, that would put it in the mid sixth century. We know the Serbian constitution, as described to us cannot date from the mid sixth century. The the most obvious issue is, are the wealth classes based on currency amounts. Now, the good news, this is one of these rare moments of good news, Dionysius, Livy, and Polybius all provide a wealth figure for the cut off for the first class of the infantry in the Roman army. And even better yet, though, they all give it in different currency units. They have given us the same figure, I think Dionysius is in minae, Polybius is in drachma and Livy’s in asses. And you’re like, Wow, a fixed piece of data reported by multiple sources, this must be good. Bad news. The currency conversion only works if Livy is giving it with the sextantal asses, which is the the the as, the bronze Roman currency goes through a long series of permutations. The first bit of bad news is that it straight up doesn’t exist in the fifth in the fifth or sixth century, the Romans developed currency late. But the really bad news is that the currency standard Livy’s Clearly using is the sextantal as, and what must be happening, of course, because the Romans did not lay out their wealth classifications in Greek currency figures, the real number must be an asses that Polybius and Dionysius have converted. But the sextantal asses introduced in 212

Dr G 18:15
are no, that’s nowhere near the sixth century. So this is Livy’s. What do you do unto us?

Dr Bret Devereaux 18:23
What are you doing? And so all three sources, their system, at least their numbers, must date to the Second Punic War. And I think for reasons we don’t need to get into here that Polybius is describing the army of the Second Punic War, which is the army of about 40 to 50 years before he’s writing. And Polybius is savvy enough to know that and tell us that, because he’s occasionally like, they used to do this, and now they do this. But obviously like, then that raises all sorts of questions for the entire system. Does it even make sense, for instance, for Servius Tullius, to lay down a wealth system based on monetary units at all? No, there’s no coinage in Italy at this point. Um, the Greeks have barely adopted coinage. It hasn’t made it this far. Ironically, glanced over at Athens in the same century, and you will see so long crafting wealth classes and not defining them by coinage but by bushels of wheat that your farm produces, which might make a lot more sense. But of course, that’s not what our sources tell us. So the Servian constitution is like, is this later and retrojected? it’s clearly something that the earliest Roman historians believe existed way back then. Are they anachronism, the wealth requirements? Is this later if it’s later, how much later? And so there’s sort of all of these, all of these problems. And here, I’m going to break and I’m going to make this distinction repeatedly. There is a sort of traditional interpretation, and then I’m going to note A specific scholar who has recently taken issue with this, which is Jeremy Armstrong, who is effort to push all of the dates I’m going to be kind of budget Jeremy Armstrong for you all, for most of today. The traditional reading is to Look at the Servian constitution and say, okay, the wealth classes are kind of nonsense. But the equipment described could actually be right for the sixth century, especially the implication that the wealthy who aren’t super rich and on horses, don Greek style equipment, and everybody else has local style equipment. Yeah, that’s what we see in artwork. That’s what we see in elite grave depositions. That makes a lot of sense. And so the traditional view is to say that what Livy and Dionysius have done is they have taken and probably not them, but their predecessors have taken a military system that did exist and embellished it into something more organised, but that there is some kind of central levy that the king is in charge of arguing against this right, Jeremy Armstrong pushes back at this and says, No, what you want to understand here is no centralised army. What there is, is a collection of elite gentes of these clans, and that if there is a centralised Roman army under the Kings, what’s happening here is that the king has gotten the heads of all of the gentes together, and those gentilic armies, which is like these elite patrician families and all of their clients. Those are the compositional units of the army. It is certainly the case that we have evidence in our sources, that Roman army sometimes work like that. I will note that Livy’s certainly doesn’t think the Royal Army works like that. He, for instance, thinks that the Brutus that founds the Republic is a tribune of the Celeres, he thinks that there is an office of cavalry commander, that it is an office that is like a military Tribune and has that title. Interesting because military tributes aren’t going to pop up in Livy’s narrative until much later and under weird circumstances. And what’s also striking is that this unit is called the Celeres, a term that I think it’s a term Dionysius also uses, and which is not the name of a later Roman unit. So Livy is probably not inventing this, there probably really were Celeres, the Swift ones. And that was the name for the cavalry before they were the equites. And so my own view and here I fall somewhere between the traditional view and the kind of Jeremy Armstrong revisionist view, because he’s convinced me on some points, is to imagine a kind of hybrid military under the kings, that there is sometimes this kind of centralised military and the king could appoint officers to it though, evidently, he always appoints them out of these elite patrician gentes who, of course, the leaders of which are the guys in the Senate, and the Senate advises the king. So you can see how these institutions locked together. But we definitely have what we might describe as gentilic warfare, a clan based warfare that is happening in the background that might not involve the king. And we should also keep in mind that the Kings authority here is not maybe as absolute as we think when we hear the word King. It’s worth noting that the semi legendary and legendary Roman kings we have don’t tend to come from the same family. This office isn’t hereditary, they seem to be picked by the aristocracy, they do seem to have the job for life. But that makes the transition from King to elected magistrate a lot less stark. We have gone from the aristocracy picks a war leader for life to the aristocracy picks a world leader for a one year limited term. In either case, he’s drawn from the aristocracy. And he has this set of powers. And in fact, he has this legal power called Imperium, which is the same power, unlike the Greeks who when they kick out there kings, abolish royal power and split up those jobs. The Romans are like you can’t do that. Imperium is indivisible. So theoretically, I think the levy is sort of kind of working this early, at least occasionally. There is the secondary question, how far down does the levy reach? And I think here, the answer cannot be very far. The Romans aren’t paying their soldiers. And we certainly don’t get the sense early on in Livy, that the resource in manpower steamroller of the middle Republic, is in any way in operation. So when we’re imagining this army, under the kings are the early republic, the centralised army, the non gentilin army, we’re probably still imagining a pretty aristocratic institution where the elites roll up with their fancy imported style Greek arms and armour. Their clients have shown up with local italic stuff, and that’s probably it. It is really striking for instance, levy imagines that the Roman census has been conducted continuously from The dawn of the Republic. But then he sheepishly admits this is Livy’s four eight that the censorship is created in 443. And he’s like over the consuls were doing it before then he doesn’t give a census figure before 465. And we know at least in the middle Republic, when our evidence gets better, the census was the vital tool for general conscription, that the Census provided the documents by which the Romans decided who was in the Army this year. So if the census isn’t happening for the first 40 or 50 years of the Republic, this army must be quite narrow indeed, because there’s no way to draw the full body of the citizenry into it.

Dr Rad 25:40
It sounds almost feudal in nature.

Dr G 25:42
Yeah, it does. I mean, it took it does resonate with the sorts of things that we’ve been drawing from what Livy and Dionysius and Diodorus have been suggesting, because it does seem like we’ve got a situation where it’s like it’s family based, that this sort of the conflict of the orders that keeps coming up and dominates the narrative of this early Republic is a bit of a mishmash of various things that we know are going to be happening later on. And this levy sort of allows them to introduce a conflict within the citizen body about the direction of Rome. So it kind of allows for a character development, if you like, like, what are Romans and how the Romans come to the Romans. And I think reading it through that kind of lens is really quite helpful. Now, you said that the they don’t get paid. And then we get this really interesting moment, both Diodorus Siculus and Livy’s mention that they get paid for the first time in 406 BCE. This is a spoiler for any listeners, Justin had to cover it. Because we have literally not recorded that episode yet. So I’m not gonna I’m not gonna say all of my thoughts on 406 BCE yet, but it might be influenced by what you tell us, Brett. This idea that the soldiers get paid, all of a sudden appears and when I came across it and the source materials like, oh, my god, somebody paid them. And I was like, What are the chances. But this is a massive year for the Romans. As far as our annalistic sources are concerned, they’re facing trouble on multiple fronts. This is an issue that Rome seems to be facing a lot during this period, where they’ve got conflict coming up from the south, from the Volscians, and the Aequians, to the more to the east, they’ve also got this pressure coming down from the Etruscans. And that seems to be hotting up again for them. And now all of a sudden, there’s this sense in which they need a large a reasonably large force in order to be able to be on all of those fronts at the same time. But we

Dr Bret Devereaux 27:47
don’t a couple of decades out from having serious Gallic problems.

Dr G 27:56
Just know, people aren’t ready to do that they haven’t watched the whole series.

Dr Bret Devereaux 28:01
Romans aren’t ready for it either. So we’re all on the same boat here.

Dr G 28:05
Definitely not. So I think it is reasonable to assume that 406 is maybe a bit of a furphy of a day. But I am interested about when and how we know that payment of soldiers develops for Rome.

Dr Bret Devereaux 28:21
I mean, so we are, are this substantially reliant on the reports of our sources, but we have this from Livy and Diodorus, and Plutarch. And I mean, like, Plutarch is like a quarter of a source when it comes to these kinds of things. And they all put it on the same date. And so there might be something to it, I think, sort of the traditional scholarship, because I’m gonna get to Jeremy Armstrong in a second. Because I do think that contrast is useful for listeners to hear and it’ll give them a sense of like the range of what we think the traditional scholarship sees 406 Sometimes scholars will get spooked and they’ll just say, circa 400. Ish, but our sources are really clear that it’s 406 that see this as a key moment of development in a process that has probably be gone way back in the 470s. And is going to culminate again, massive spoilers after the Gallic sack of Rome, probably. And, and so if we sort of wind back, right, we want to ask, Okay, where did the gentilic armies go? Because obviously, you don’t need to pay your soldiers if they’re all your family members and clients, right? There’s a relationships are governing this. The traditional answer to this is to point at the Battle of the Cremera and 477, which I know you’ve discussed Livy’s to dot 49 and following where we get like the one point where Livy’s Like, here is some gentilic warfare that is happening. The Fabii go out, start their own war and then lose it catastrophically. And then just to, you know, add on, like the Roman state then intervenes and also does poorly for a number of years. So things are not going well, the traditional view has been to see this sort of catastrophic defeat. And the fact that our sources never mentioned against doing warfare like this ever, again, is to say, this is the moment gentilic warfare stops. And to see this in the context where Look, states and communities in Italy are getting more sophisticated over time. Italy is a rough neighbourhood, the warfare here is is getting increasingly no holds barred. You can sort of see that with the rough way that the nascent Roman Republic treats its flattened neighbours to the south and like we’re going to inflict a pretty unequal treaty on you. Obviously, they’re going to resettle that treaty in the 3340s and 330s, which we’ll get to because that’s going to change the military system, and so to see is like the Fabii go out thinking that it’s still like the 560s. And a single gens can do this kind of warfare, and are rudely informed by Veii that no, you can’t stay. It’s become too centralised, and they get steamrolled by a major state army of Etruscans. And the Romans are like, let’s not do that ever again. Now, what Jeremy Armstrong will point out is that that neat divide is too neat. The Fabii start their war in 479, when it is worth noting that the head of their Gens Caeso Fabius is the consul or praeter, maybe later. So this may have in fact been a Roman war. This Fabian clan army may have been a consular army people can’t see but I’m making sneer quotes to begin with. And so this is sort of this is sort of tricky, and Armstrong uses this in some other evidence to argue that gentilic, warfare may actually be continuing later than this and Livy may just not know it. That said, as noted, shortly thereafter, we start to get census figures from Livy. Notably, compared to our other sources that give us earlier census figures Livy’s census figures do not round off tonight’s neat numbers, his figure for 465 is 104,714. The other convenient thing, you if you Look at the demographic math, you think about the size of the Roman state, that number is possible. That could be a real number. some level of undercounting, surely, presumably the very poor not being counted, it’s definitely only counting men, all those issues. But civium capita tote right which is the formula Livy’s always gives the census figures with that could be the real number. So Livy may not be kidding that the Census is started up at this point, that would suggest a greater desire to expand the army. And we’re of course, seeing that Rome is under a lot of military pressure in this period. And as that pressure intensifies, the Romans reach for manpower, you need to get more guys. And as you know, 406 is a gnarly year, the security situation in Italy is getting rough. And it’s only about to get rougher. And so the Romans may have felt like we need to make this move. And so again, the traditional scholarship sees this as the break point where the army is now beginning to incorporate the plebeians generally, is of course gonna matter for the struggle of the orders, but even poor plebeians, and that certainly fits with when we see the army of the middle Republic. One of the things that is very striking about it is that Roman recruitment clearly reaches very far down the socio economic ladder, while you still have to have some property to qualify for the Roman army. It’s not a lot in the middle Republic, you know, probably somewhere in the neighbourhood of 85 90% of the citizen male body are wealthy enough to be eligible for the army, right, the capite censi those who are too poor to serve seems to be a very small slice of the Roman citizen body. And he Nathan Rosenstein sort of tackle this question, and I think proved it. And so the introduction of pay is kind of a necessary step along this road. Now, of course, immediately Livy’s says they introduce pay the stipendium Militarum. And then he doesn’t give us any details. We know how legionary pay works in the Second Punic War, because Polybius tells us but we’re immediately questions can we retro eject them? In the Second Punic War, we know that Roman soldiers get paid a daily wage, but that the cost of their food and supplies is subtracted from it, if they are missing any equipment or lose any of it that is also docked from their pay. And we can certainly assume the clear implication of the system is described is that most of this pay is is booked pay. It’s being kept in the coop quaestor’s logs, they’re not getting handed money very often. Sometimes. Clearly. When Rome sends armies they feel the need to send coinage with them at that late date. They certainly can’t be doing it in 406 because they don’t have any coinage yet. So once again, how are they paying these eyes, it could be interesting grain. What Livy’s may understand is military pay may just be the state now feeds you.

It could be something that simple, and therefore the poor can come along. Because they don’t need to bring an allowance in may be something that simple. Conveniently for us, like the reason we can be sure that Polybius isn’t blowing smoke about the Roman pay system is that the Roman pay system continues to work exactly that way into the imperial period, when the Romans politely send soldiers to Egypt, where their pay stubs written on papyrus can survive. And so we can read them and we can be like, Oh, that’s how they did the accounting, which is really, which is really fun. And you see the same deductions, deductions for food deductions for clothes. This guy wore out his sandals like minus 15 denarii there, that kind of thing. But is it working that way? In 406? Is it that sophisticated God, I’d be shocked if it was. I mean, it would be startling because again, this is not yet really a coinage society. This early Jeremy Armstrong would I think except most of what I just said, but he would kind of push the dating of the implications further back and he would want to see like the incorporation of poor plebeians eeehhhhhh. Let’s Let’s date that a little later. He sees the formation of a kind of centralised Roman Army as a process as he puts it that runs the incorporation of the plebs that runs from 450, all the way out to 390. And a little bit further. Whereas I think traditional scholarship is like 406, like, dot dot done. And I’m pretty sympathetic with Jeremy’s arguments here, that this is perhaps a longer process, but it’s still an important breakpoint. And it’s setting the groundwork for what is what is to come. I would also know here, there are a bunch of other really interesting things that are happening in the late fifth and early fourth century when it comes to warfare in Italy. And here, I will note an extraordinary frustration created by the Romans. It is the case that we’re ever the Romans expand, starting in the three hundreds at least. So as they begin to pull Italy under their control, wherever they go. Warrior burials and elite warrior artwork stop. This is extraordinarily obnoxious, like you get the third Samnite war, Samnium is finally Roman territory and like boom, the Samnites are not burying aristocrats with their armour anymore. And so Rome is this creeping gap in our evidence. Nevertheless, from what evidence survives, we can see that the early three hundreds are evidently a period of pretty radical, tactical and equipment change, whereas elite equipment prior to this, the wealthiest guys are mostly using Greek style stuff, which is both the big Greek shield the Aspis, Greek style body armour, both Greek style helmets and then also like local interesting variations of Greek style helmet, he had some really wacky looking like apulo Corinthian helmets, some of which I doubt that anyone ever actually wore. I mean, some of them really do Look like display pieces rather than real armour. Always something to be worried about. Armies create parade equipment in all periods. Folks who know the Roman army somewhat later may be familiar with Imperial period cavalry masks where you get these helmets that has like a full face mask on no one wore that to fight that was that was for parade that was not a battlefield piece of equipment that was that was you know,

Dr G 38:36
you don’t you don’t want to you don’t want to see things when you’re on the battle field. No. Madness

Dr Rad 38:42
It would help me go into battle if I couldn’t see what was laying ahead. That’s true.

Dr Bret Devereaux 38:47
But so we have that sort of system. And what we see in the three hundreds is the clear in blocks of a lot of external we might say military material culture, the the round Greek style aspis drops away. Livy explicitly says that this happens with the introduction of military pay, it is replaced by the cheap guys shields, which are these larger rectangular shields. We know from artwork that rectangular central boss shields like this existed in Italy earlier, but it’s also pretty clear from the structure of the Roman shield once we can see clearly later that the Romans have borrowed design elements from the Latin shield the Gallic or Celtic shield from the north. So this is a sort of a fusion of an Italian shield shape, with design elements that are Gallic to create a kind of distinctly Italian riff on the Latin oval shield. At the same time we get Greek sword forms, the corpus and the syphilis begin to vanish, replaced by our evidence is really thin, but it seems like Gallic Sword forms. We have one really neat sword from this period that God bless it is inscribed. And it Smith has said, I made this in Rome. Nice, beautiful Look after that.

Dr G 40:17
offer a better piece of evidence really.

Dr Bret Devereaux 40:19
I know it’s beautiful. And then someone deposited it in a sanctuary so that we can have it. What’s striking is its form. If the inscription wasn’t on it, we would have said this is an early Latin sword. A Latin one sword and so we’re like, okay, so the Romans have picked up a Gallic style shield. They’re picking up a Gallic style sword. This is not yet the Gladius to be clear, or let me rephrase. This is not yet the Gladius Hispaniensis it’s not the famous Gladius Gladius itself is not a native Latin word that looks to be a Celtic word. The Romans have imported a word to describe the sorts they’re picking up. Latin has its own perfectly serviceable word for sword Ensis which becomes poetic and very archaic, and no one uses it. In addition, at the same time, we see some of these fancier Greek style helmets beginning to get pushed out by the montefortino helmet type, which is also an Italian take on a Gallic helmet, and by the First Punic War, montefortino was replastered. This is just what the Romans were all of them everywhere. You can tell when the Romans have shown up because suddenly you have a tonne of montefortinos in the archaeological record and every other helmets vanishes.

Dr G 41:35
Look, it sounds like they learnt a lot from whatever happened when they lost to the Gallic when they

Dr Bret Devereaux 41:41
deed, and so, so you have a number of things that are happening. I should note also the pilum, the Roman heavy javelins seems to be adopted in this period too. And I think Jeremy Armstrong is right to say probably also from the Gauls. The Romans think it’s from the Samnites. And Jeremy thinks they’re wrong. And I think he’s right, that they’re wrong. It’s probably from the Gauls. And so you have military pay is introduced in 406. The Romans lose badly to the Gauls in 390. By 338, Livy’s Describing a military system that has begun to Look like the one we’ll see later, although again, Livy’s terribly confused. And it is predicated on a lot of Gallic kit. And it does now seem fully centralised state run based on a mass conscript, levy. So this seems to be the critical period where the sort of Polybian Roman army that we know and love is coming into being. Now, the great news is, hey, we finally know what’s going on. The bad news is, suddenly, we have to question any retro rejection of any of these things earlier than this point. Because they’re like, Wait, there’s clearly from like, for tannish to like, 380 ish, a period of significant change, not just in, in how they’re paid in who serves in how they’re organised and how they fight in the stuff they use to fight. So what can we know before that? And Jeremy argues that actually, the Servian constitution probably dates to this period. He is a break from older scholarship in this regard. But you can see why that argument would be seductive, but it would render us even more blind to what’s happening in the earlier four hundreds.

Dr G 43:28
Now, now, we’re missing a whole 100 years where we don’t know anything.

Dr Rad 43:33
And not saying anything is actually

Dr Bret Devereaux 43:37
right. No exact exactly what I’m seeing is Roman history starts in 264. And I mean, really, like you guys are a myths podcast.

Dr G 43:43
New tagline, mythology brought to you by

Dr Rad 43:51
Let’s end the interview now.

Dr Bret Devereaux 43:54
I know right now, I’m never getting invited back.

Dr Rad 43:58
The next question I’m about to ask you seems like a really stupid question, given what you’ve just said. I mean, obviously, when people are writing about these sorts of periods, they have to come up with some numbers sometimes to get an idea of, you know, the scale of the battles and all of that kind of stuff. And given everything you’ve just said, that seems nigh on impossible. But can you give us any idea about the size of the army? Like how big do you think it would have been in the early republic? How big is it in, you know, where we get to the more of the reliable periods like later on in the middle Republic? And even maybe, how on earth do you get to this? This is just so terrible,

Dr Bret Devereaux 44:40
right? And so for the early republic, like any answer has to lead with, we don’t know. You know, as noted, we only get census figures that I think are remotely reliable in 465. And even then, I think a lot of scholars would not trust anything before the 300 census wise, but with it, you know, if the Romans do enforce 65 have a citizen body of like 100,000 adult males, well, not all of those are going to be some of those are going to be old people. So, you know, that’s a pretty limited manpower pool, you’re not calling all those guys out all at once. Or if you are, then you can’t keep them out. Because they somebody needs to form. And so I mean, that implies a Roman army that is radically smaller, I would be shocked if the Roman army of the four hundreds could feel more than five or 10,000 men at a time. It is really striking that when our sources start talking about the Legion, it sure seems like there must have been a point where there was just one legion and the etymology of the Legion, literally the people picked out sure sounds like there’s just one of them. And then later, they have multiples. And the Legion standard size later is around 5000. And the Romans stick to that standard size throughout their whole history. And so one wonders if like the early Republican Army was a legion. Like, here’s like, 5000. Guys, this is about what we have. Now, of course, that suggests something a lot more regular than than we should probably imagine. But maybe that kind of scale. But the broader answer is we don’t know. And so much of this military activity must have been much smaller scale cattle rating and and pillage. It

Dr Rad 46:17
does sound like that. There’s a lot of mention of they raided us we raided them, they stole some cows.

Dr Bret Devereaux 46:23
Right? Well, and there’s a lot of there’s a lot of battles where it’s like there was a battle, and the Romans were utterly cut to pieces. And then next year, it’s like nothing happened. Yeah, like, well, that couldn’t have been that big.

Dr Rad 46:34
Yeah, that’s what we find. We find these dramatic statements like the Volscians were wiped from the face of the earth. And then it’s like, and the next year, the Volscians are fielding an army. Right?

Dr Bret Devereaux 46:44
And you’re wondering if what your sources are looking at is like, there was a fight between maybe a few 100 Volscians and few 100 Romans and the Romans utterly crushed those guys. But that this is just one episode in a larger conflict. And then Livy comes to this description. And all Livy has is some sources, we met the Volscians. And we killed all of them. Yeah. And so Livy is imagining huge army, he’s imagining like second Punic War 80,000 Man armies wiping each other out. And it has not occurred to him that like that cannot be the case. As we move into the three hundreds, the Roman citizen body is getting bigger, in part because Roman territory is expanding. And as noted, we’re imagining they’re reaching a lot further down into into the sort of manpower pool. We might by this point beginning to something like the system we’re eventually going to have where each console normally raises two legions. I mean, conveniently 367 is when we’re finally gonna get to the point where we get to consoles every year with any regularity mean like God only knows how the army when you had military tribunes with consular powers how that was even structured, like we don’t know live, he doesn’t know. Chaos, I say, yeah. But, but you might have something like that if each consul has two legions that would imply maybe about 20,000 troops. The Romans in the early three hundreds, the Roman alliance system doesn’t really exist yet. So the enormous resource advantages that it provides it probably not kicked in. The Romans sort of have control over relation. But the Latins are still at this early point understood as like quasi independent allies, they fight under their own armies and have their own leaders, that’s going to change in the 340s and the 330s. The Romans gonna have another Latin war, we’re not told. But the general assumption is that this is the point where the Romans shift and I believe he actually does kind of say this, that this is the point where the Romans choose to shift from their old system of alliances, which federal leagues and alliances like this were very common in Italy, to the souci system that we’re gonna see them conquer the world with where all of the allies only have a bilateral treaty with Rome. They are required to supply soldiers to Rome’s armies, those soldiers serve in small units under their own officers, but those are just attached straight to the Legion. And the number of Allied troops is roughly equal to the number of Roman troops in Scenario Okay, so if both consoles are out, it’s not 20,000 men. It’s like 40,000, man. And now you’re starting to get like the beefier Roman armies as we move into the two hundreds and uses sort of armies and then sometimes the Romans double up these armies, so maybe you put both consoles in one place, you know, before you 1000 man field army. Right, that’s quite sizable by ancient standards. That’s about as large as Alexander the Great’s army invading Persia, that sizable, and that might be the kind of thing that the Romans are throwing around in, say, the second and third Samnite wars as we get into the Punic Wars. And then of course, when we get into the Punic Wars, we watched the Romans deploy absolutely still aggroing mobilizations estimates I think the peak mobilisation for the Romans in 214. I think it is, is 185,000 men under arms in a single year. Wow. Which is and what I would just stress is, you do not want to imagine that the early republic can do something like the Romans can do something like that because they’ve constructed a system to draw the resources of all of Italy together. For more about this, see my book project in a year or two. Because this is what I’m, this is what I work on. You can hear me get excited. But that system is coming into being in the three hundreds, and we probably want to imagine it as an even longer process of state centralization pulling the plebeians into the army, probably Rich will be in first, poor plebeians later, through the four hundreds into the early three hundreds are motivated by increasing security pressures. And we’re certainly seeing in Italy increasing security pressures, the Etruscans are cooperating more, they will eventually make one big alliance to try to contain the Romans in the third Samnite war. The Samnites are forming tribal confederacies that seem to work together, even the Greek states and my god to get Greeks to cooperate. But even the Greek states seem to be occasionally working together. And then you have the Gallic threat, which obviously, post 400 is clearly intense, occasionally large armies of golds from Northern Italy rolling and wreck everyone’s afternoon. And that’s going to remain a threat, right? The Romans are going to subdue Cisalpine Gaul in the 220s. And then Hannibal is going to roll over the Alps in 2 8. And unsubdue Cisalpine Gaul, and then the Romans are going to spend the next two decades re subduing Cialpine Gaul before the sort of Gallic threat kind of finally recedes, although it’s going to explode back into focus at the end of the first century with the Cimbians, the Teutones. So those those tricksy goals are never gone. They’re just they’re just over the Alps, with their dastardly oval shields and long, long swords waiting. Your day. Just

Dr Rad 52:11
makes me long for written material from them so badly.

Dr Bret Devereaux 52:14
God, you have no idea how much I wish we knew more about their about their society. I mean, the fact that their societies only described from the outside our most sustained description is from Julius Caesar while he’s genocide. And you’re like, yeah, that’s, that’s not great. Okay. Yeah, similar frustrations about how little we know about what’s happening in pre Roman Spain. But that’s sort of neither here nor there. For this, I come back for the Punic Wars. And then we talk about paying for,

Dr G 52:45
I think, what you’ve set up with thinking about, like, you know, there’s this kind of influx over time of Roman expansion, the way that Rome brings other peoples underneath it sort of ages, and then start to draw upon those resources for its own ends. This is something that is increasing in pressure over time. And I think you’ve touched on this already. But I’m interested in some of the sort of details, the size and composition of the Legion in the early and middle republics, if we can even talk about it in early, you’re saying about 5000 is probably where it sits. And he was like,

Dr Bret Devereaux 53:25
wild guesstimate there. Mm, right. Right. I mean, it’s based on almost nothing.

Dr Rad 53:31
Welcome to our podcast.

Dr G 53:34
Welcome to history, where it’s like, we’ve just got gaps, and we’re trying to figure out what to do with them. And but the Roman legion becomes hugely famous, for many reasons, particularly because of its success, I would say,

Dr Bret Devereaux 53:48
I was gonna say it does a lot of winning, it does a lot of winning. And

Dr G 53:51
people really hold on to that. And I, it turns into this whole sort of modern masculinity element as well, where people see that kind of like victory element, and they accrue that to themselves, which I think is really fascinating. But maybe a bit odd as well.

Dr Bret Devereaux 54:05
Often they accrue it to themselves in ways that would be utterly alien to the Romans. It’s very, it’s very striking. There

Dr G 54:15
are there are many byways that this conversation could go there right now, and I’m gonna resist those. But is there anything that we can say about the internal organisation of a legion? And when might we be able to say that at its earliest point, do you think?

Dr Bret Devereaux 54:30
Yeah, so looking back to the Servian constitution, although remember question marks about when that suggests a kind of army in in what we might say, it’s like three tactical components. You have really rich guys on horses and there aren’t very many of them. You have the regular elite on foot equipped as hoplites older historians assumed that they also fought like Late Archaic Greek hoplites that has come under a lot of question now. The kid does not require the fighting style, so this may not be a failing Thanks. And and Lord knows, like arguing about what a phalanx even is this early as a tar pit. And so we can just not go there.

Dr G 55:08
I was gonna say let’s, let’s resist that too,

Dr Bret Devereaux 55:11
which is certainly an equipment that implies that this is what we would call a shock formation these guys expect to march into Spears reach and stab you up close and personal. By contrast the lighter infantry of the poor guys, they certainly seem to pick up javelins really quickly. That fits with what we see in artwork and archaeology across Italy. We see lots of of infantry with javelins, so you’ll have a shield and a sword and maybe a spear and then one or two javelins also. And so you could imagine these guys, you could put them in close combat, and they have that big shield for a reason. But probably they’re also peppering each other with javelins. And so that’s a lighter infantry component. And if we understand the army of say the four hundreds as they think we should, as a predominantly aristocratic element, then we should probably imagine that the guys with the Greek style stuff are the centrepiece and that the poor soldiers are a screening and supporting element, though again, how much this is guesswork? Certainly, we get no indication and livie that cavalry is ever central to the Roman way of warfare. So the really rich guys on horses never accomplish a whole lot unless they devote themselves and die gloriously so that the infantry can win.

Dr Rad 56:29
And they get to charge Yeah, and you know, unexpectedly

Dr G 56:31
makes Lucius Tarquinius’ rise to power through his leadership of the cavalry somewhat questionable now,

Dr Bret Devereaux 56:38
well, but of course, the cavalry are the wealthiest in the most elite are the social upper crust. But tactically are they the most important guys? Of course, in the regnal period? Who the hell knows? Maybe But, but by the four hundreds? No, I mean, warfare in Italy really does seem to be an infantry first military system. Similar to what we see in Greece, were also the very rich in Greece right into battle sometimes, but like, nobody expects the cavalry to win battles, unless your Thessalians. As we sort of move forward, the as I noted, the first moment where we get an organisational description of the Roman army is Livy’s, eight, eight, which he places in 338, though he’s not saying that this organisation is created in that moment, he’s just like, This is what the Army looks like in 338. So it may have looked like that for a while. The equipment that makes that army function the way it does, has been around for several decades by this point. Livy thinks the shield has been around since 406. So maybe it’s been this way for a while. The traditional Yes, is that the military reform happens in the immediate aftermath of 391 tells us this, so it is a guess, put no weight on that leg. It’s plausible, though. The army that Livy describes in 338 clearly does not derive from the Servian Constitution. It is a heavy infantry based force. There are three key lines in heavy infantry, they are hastatii, principes, and triarii. And we’re like, ah, we know those from Polybius. The hastatii may have already lost their spears, but they clearly must have had them because they’re hastitii and the hastis is a spear. The hastis is a spear. So they’re they’re naming spearmen. And yet, the moment they’re visible to us, historically, they no longer have spears, which tells you they once did. And then there are other kinds of troops in this picture that confuse Livy’s There are rorarii, he doesn’t know what they are, and neither do we. And then there are the accensi. Livy’s imagines the accensi, as like he’s trying to fit them into like the battlefield deployment of the Army, that would probably mean something like attendance. And we generally assess that these guys are non combat. It’s your butler, you brought your butler to the battlefield, this guy carries your stuff, or they’re the cook or the carpenter or what have you. And we know, the later comitia centuriata, gives the accensi their own century, grouped with the musicians and the artisans, as groups that don’t serve as combat soldiers in the army, but do get their own century. So they’re not all slammed into the century, the very poor, suggesting that these maybe are like professional, non combat support personnel, something like this attendance.

Dr G 59:27
I love this though. You’re on the battlefield, you’ve just hit somebody with a sword. You’re like, I need a drink. Somebody

Dr Bret Devereaux 59:32
named me my friend, you’re probably so I must say you’re probably not doing that the cancer you’re probably hanging back at the camp when you’re actually fighting the battle. And in some of these battle narratives, and of course, I don’t have the citation to hand for this. When the camp comes under attack, it seems like then the Kensi may fight and defend the camp. So they’re not frontline guys, but maybe they’re like logistics troops. Yeah, they know how to hold Livy’s Battle narratives also attack us two guys that he describes as low as militates, light troops. And if those of you who know the later Roman army are like, Why aren’t you just calling these guys will lead hates? That’s what Polybius calls them, because the elites don’t exist until 212. When Livi actually stops to tell us that this body of troops called will the tasers come into existence. The general kind of consensus of the scholarship is to imagine that the rivalry II probably are the lowest militates the light troops, probably drawn from the lowest classes in Rome that still have enough property to fight and that they probably have a similar role to the willie tastes. And then the question becomes, what exactly is the reorganisation that leads to the name change? And the answer is we don’t know. irritatingly Livy does not tell us how the rorarii are equipped, which would answer a lot of questions. But he doesn’t give it to us.

Dr G 1:00:55
But no wonder he’s confused and he doesn’t know what they’re holding. So he can’t come up with a way

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:01:01
to do it. didn’t exist by the time his sources did. So he’s like, these guys are there.

Dr Rad 1:01:09
I imagine it’s their job to go RARRRR.

Dr G 1:01:15
That whole job? Yeah, to be scary. Luckily.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:01:18
There’s been some arguments about the etymology of rorarii and maybe like what this word means and that, that maybe it’s it’s a word that kind of indicates like, essentially, like something little more than a mob, just like you’ve grabbed some peasants with their pitchforks and you’re going at it.

Dr Rad 1:01:34
I think I just settled that debate.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:01:36
The guys that go RARRR right. And now I just want to note because I realised I haven’t given this caveat. But I’ve spent the last five minutes talking about Livy’s, eight, eight, the amount of confidence we can put on the Livy eight eight is not great, generally speaking, so. So there are layers of problems here. I’ve already indicated Livy doesn’t understand his sources. You know, he has Polybius. He clearly has some other sources. He seems like he might be trying to harmonise sources that do not harmonise, because he’s got maniples and ordines, antepilani, and he does not know how these units fit together. And it may be because they don’t. The other problem with Livy’s eight eight, because you know why not? Is that the text is also clearly corrupted points. This is a case where there are clear scribal errors in the text that we have, which just adds so Livi is confused. And then we don’t even really have a perfect sense of what Livy’s wrote. As a results. Most scholars will put Livy’s eight eight and say apart from like really general information. Even this form of the Roman army is beyond salvage. Roman military history really begins with Polybius and Polybius dates his army to 216. And obviously by then we’re we’re really late. I think the last person I can think of who made the sort of sportsman like effort to salvage Livy, as Peter Connolly tried back in the 1980s. Lawrence Keppie, by contrast, looks at Livy’s eight eight and is like no, cannot be done. And most scholars have have sort of discretion is the better part of valour. No we can’t know very much about about this source. But there are a few things we can say the three lines of Roman heavy infantry exist, that speaks to a different tactical system. If you’ve got your Servian constitution then you probably have one body of heavy contact infantry and Greek style equipment in one line. That’s you know, probably like six 8, 12 Men deep something like that. By contrast, by Livy’s eight eight we have a Roman army in a triplex acies in the three Roman battle lines that we see layer later. That presumably means that the manoeuvre method of changing out one battle line for the next exists, which is attested in our later sources, that probably means that the Romans are fighting in smaller units with intervals between them, because that’s how they do that interchange later. So the implication is that the Romans have, by the late three hundreds discovered the tactical system, that they will then ruin everybody else’s day with and interestingly living notes. The Latins opposite the Romans for the battle is about to happen. He says fight exactly the same way with exactly the same kit. Lord knows this will be true later, the Roman allies the souci fight exactly the way the Romans do, they are tactically indistinguishable. And so this process of convergence of homogenization seems to be well underway at this point. And the archaeological evidence seems to back that up that the sort of what becomes whatever becomes the standard Roman equipment pushes out all other forms, and those forms vanish. And so that that seems to be seems to be happening there, but more broadly for organisation, I mean, it’s hard to say the organisational element Of the Livy eight eight is the part that is the worst of a mess. I mean his math doesn’t work he’s like there’s this many guys in this many guys and this many guys and that leads to this many guys hold on like Livy, I added your numbers together, and they don’t give me that number.

Dr G 1:05:18
Dammit, the math doesn’t work.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:05:20
And the question is, has Livy’s made a math error possible? Or has a scribe made a math error because we know the text is damaged. And so you know, Lord only knows. Presumably this army is commanded by consuls. Now, if you if you read Livy’s somewhat on a surface level, which I know we don’t do here, you’re gonna be like, Oh, the moment the Republic is formed, we have two consoles in the very first year. This is great. If you read a little bit more closely Livy’s admits and our other sources note that the earliest Roman officials were not consuls but prateors. But then Livy turns around and says the praetorship is established in 367.

Dr G 1:05:58
So it does create some confusion, I will have

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:06:01
some confusion. And of course, you’ve also been working through already the problem that the Romans start deciding to also have years where they don’t have consoles, but they have a variable number of military tribunes with consular powers. The name is almost wholly obscure. Yeah, and then dictators as well. And dictators, yes, we have dictators flying, you know, working around to. Um, so the Romans have like at least three different speeds for Chief Magistrate that they seem to pick almost at random on a year to year basis. What we know about the military tribunes is that after 367, they stopped getting consular powers. Interestingly, the standard number of them the most common number seems to be six. When we get to Polybius, we are told every Legion has six military Tribune’s assigned to it. And so that’s suggestive like is this, the Republic has one legion in this early point, and it is either led by a consul, or if we don’t have a consul, then his power devolves onto the six military tribunes he would have had otherwise. That’s how it works later. Is that how it works earlier? In any case, you later on these military tribunes, they do come in sixes though, of course, six is not a consistent number in the Livy and you have years and years with three and years with nine and like, it’s usually six. And this is another case where we’re confused Livy’s confused the consular fausti is confused, right? The Fasti Capitolini, which proudly lists consuls in those first years when we know they must be praetors. Yeah. And so like it’s one of these cases where like, we know our sources are wrong and and undermines what we can tell. And

Dr Rad 1:07:47
then the military tribunes with consular power, so often represented as being selected as an option because of internal politics. They’re very rarely connected to the military stuff and your like.

You said, not some connection, perhaps some to some of the time. What

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:08:08
you wonder is a situation or these guys, just Tribunes, that is, tribal officers. Yeah, yeah, exactly. And after 367 When Rome is off, Roman officer will then becomes regularised. These tribal officers pick up that military nature. And there’s also a need to distinguish them from the other tribal officers that from the interviews. Yeah. And so you start calling the military tribunes? Are they even called that this early? Or are they tribal officers? Because remember, we also had a tribal officer for the celers in the last days of the kingdom. So you can have a lot of different kinds of tribunes? And the and the answer here again, is we don’t know. The The other question I always want to throw out here because we mentioned dictators, that I just want to say the other problem out is living in our sources understand the dictatorship. And thing to understand is, the Romans have the dictatorship from between 501 and 202. The Romans have, I think, 85 dictatorships, involving about 70 individuals some excitement and trying to figure out when they’re the same guy or when they’re not. After two between 201 and 84, the Romans appoint zero dictators, the office ceases to exist. Sulla then reinvents the dictatorship and it is a completely different bag. It is clear that it functions radically differently. Sulla has way more powers he has the ability to legislate by fiat which dictators don’t seem to have earlier on. He can’t be countermanded by attribute which dictators do seem even people in the first century seem to have been aware that dictators should be the tillable by attribute but Sulla is not. And so and the appointment process is completely wrong too. So Sulla recreates the dictatorship as a much more absolute, much more powerful office. And that’s the dictatorship that Livy knows. Because of course, Caesar uses it again then subsequently, but it is almost unrecognisable from what we see earlier on. And so every time you see a dictator, you also have to ask, is this position anywhere near as powerful as Livy thinks it is. Because the image of the dictator he has in his head, or these late Republican figures where it’s a very different institution, separated by more than a century, from what I term, the customary dictatorship, as I like there’s, there’s a mos maiorum dictatorship, the customary dictatorship, and then there’s the Civil War, dictatorship, the sort of late Republican dictatorship, and we should think about these as separate institutions, but the Romans definitely don’t. And so you have to ask, how much anachronism Are you getting out of that, too,

Dr Rad 1:11:01
I kind of love the early dictatorships and Livy, because he’ll describe, you know, the amazing things that they managed to accomplish, and then he’ll be like, and seven days after being appointed dictator he laid down his house, you’re like, that was seven days.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:11:15
Right? Well, remember, it’s a much smaller community. I know. And as it’s funny, is much more tightly entwined, it seems around around the elites around a handful of elite families. So yeah, I mean, like, when there are like 30 families that matter in this society, and you’re one of them, and you’re given the other 29 gives you absolute power, and everybody can meet on a soccer pitch. Yeah, you can get everything done really quickly. Yeah.

Dr Rad 1:11:41
Bob, it’s you for the next few weeks, and then you’re done.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:11:45
And the military crisis that you have to resolve is maybe that there are like 600 Guys from that town over there that had been stealing cattle. And so you roll out and you beat them up? And then you’re like, and Look what I’ve done, you know, right, levy again, levy imagines this as major wars, but they aren’t necessarily major wars.

Dr Rad 1:12:05
I don’t know if you’ll get this reference. And I apologise because I’m not sure how familiar American audiences are with Blackadder. Uh, but whenever I talk, okay, good, excellent. Whenever we talk about some of these conflicts, I always imagine that scene in Blackadder are where they have the chunk of turf in the office, and they’re like, this is how much territory we won today. What’s the scale? 1:1

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:12:26
Yes. No, I mean, and and, I mean, it has to be because Rome is fighting these wars and winning them and losing them and what have you. But the radical Roman expansion doesn’t happen until the three hundreds, right? Yeah, Rome, in 406 is not much stronger, wider, more controlling than Rome was in 509. And so like, these conflicts cannot have been very decisive, or there would be no one left.

Dr G 1:12:58
Yeah, this is one of those things where it’s like, there’s there’s must be this bootie exchange going on, where it’s like you do some writing, you pick up the stuff that you lost last year? And you’re like, Yeah, we got our stuff back. And then they come and raid you. And they steal stuff. Again, you’re like, Oh, no. And so this is sort of perpetual, inter neighbour warfare that is going on. So Rome is really small on the Mediterranean stage at this point, that’s really clear. And there are some big players, and they are not one of them. But and I think this

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:13:26
moments, the big players are far away. Yes.

Dr G 1:13:29
Yeah. And they’re not interested in them.

Dr Rad 1:13:33
Tiny area?

Dr G 1:13:35
Well, I think they they actually want to be big in their tiny area. That’s what’s clear, but they’re not like they’re constantly having issues from their literal next door, neighbours. It’s not even the guys like one tribe over the hill away. It’s the guy on the hill, who’s looking down at me

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:13:51
is right there. Exactly. Veii is inside the urban boundaries of the city of Rome as it exists today. Yeah. And like, it’s not particularly close. Yeah, Rome is the leading city of Leishan, but lation is not like the hub of Italy. So, you know, Rome is like, you know, we’re like, the biggest town in like the third largest region.

Dr G 1:14:16
Wow, guys. Wow.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:14:19
Right. Like, yeah, the real action is clearly either in the Greek states clinging to the southern coast, or the Etruscans. To the north, you know, at this early point, and, and there actually had been, I should note efforts to sort of understand like the early Roman Army as a sort of imitation Etruscan army. This is certainly the lens. I mentioned, Peter Connelly’s the lens Peter Connelly takes Jeremy pushes back a little bit on this, which is fair, but the Etruscan influence is clearly not nothing. And it’s like well, yeah, their cities are bigger than you and they’re stronger than you, like the Etruscans at this point, are telling the Greeks in the Carthaginians to piss off out of their waters pardon my language. and something the Romans are doing, and won’t be doing for a while.

Dr G 1:15:04
Yeah. And I think that the idea that somehow Rome is somehow unique, even though it’s sitting directly on this sort of southern tip of a curio and a trust and influence. And there’s clearly inter crossovers and cultural exchange going on. And if a trust and warfare is something that is happening in a way that they’re getting to win, obviously, you’re going to adopt that kind of style and tactics in order to combat that.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:15:34
Yeah, it’s clear, one thing that we have in in Italy is what the fancy political scientists will call convergence under conditions of interstate anarchy. When you have a whole lot of states that are all fighting in a kind of winner take all brawl. They’re in a kind of arms race of militarism, where every successful military innovation is almost immediately copied by all of your neighbours. If folks want to think about more, more recent period, like think, early modern Europe, for this kind of like cockpit of fighting, where like, if that guy now has cannon, you need cannon, and you needed them yesterday, and part of what we see and we see this borne out in Livy’s narrative, and I think we may be questioning the particulars, I suspect we can trust the theme is that the Romans are repeatedly put under conditions of military duress, and forced to alter significant social structures to maximise military potential. Yeah, we’ll say if there was one genius of the Roman Republic, it is that the Roman ruling class seems never to have missed an opportunity to develop military power. When their neighbours have good weapons, they adopt them. If you need to see it, a little bit of power to the plebeians in order to get their guys in your army. You do that, when the Romans do begin expanding in Italy, what’s really striking is most empires conquer their neighbours, and are like, I’m going to get rich by imposing tribute on you, I’m going to put taxes on you. And then I’m going to spend lavishly. And the Romans are like, actually, we’re not going to do that we’re going to keep our very minimal state budget, we’re going to continue funding our own army through our own land tax. So like nothing empires do. Instead, what we want from you is troops, and we want them to arrive equipped, and we would like you to pay them so that you handle all of that. So what we’re asking for is like a unit of military power, pre processed for us so that we can use it immediately. And as the Romans expand in Italy, they repeatedly make this decision to structure their arrangements internally and externally in ways that maximise military potential. And in the end, of course, produce the preposterous Roman war machine of the middle Republic that becomes absolutely unstoppable and the Romans bowled over the other great powers. With the exception of Carthage, it ends up looking almost effortless, like only the Carthaginians put up a halfway decent fight. You know, when it comes down to it, outside of Italy, obviously like Paris can get some credit here too. But all of the Romans just like they just drown Paris, in men and equipment, there’s like we will keep losing armies until you lose interest. And we we will definitely you will definitely run out of interest before we run out of armies. And I do want to stress because iron arms and armors guide do not think about those kinds of decisions purely in terms of manpower and men. It’s not just people, they’re throwing out this. It is money. It is equipment, it is animals, horses and Pack Mules. It is supplies for these camps. They are mobilising economic resources on a preposterously staggering scale. But that is all the product of 100 100 decisions, most of which are invisible to us, often presented to us in like these Livy’s. And just so stories about Roman virtues that we probably shouldn’t trust. But I think the underlying process is clearly happening. And it’s a strikingly different decision making process than many other states made. I mean, my mind always jumps to when the Athenians found themselves in possession of an empire. They taxed it and built really big temples in Athens and created social welfare programmes like jury pay. When the Romans find themselves in possession of an empire, their first question is, how can I turn this into more armies to get more empire? Which comes down, of course, I think, to the political motivations. If you’re the console, you don’t get a triumph for bringing in tax revenue, you get a triumph for winning battles. So your question, whatever resources you have is like, How can I turn these into winning battles? Because that is what my political system rewards and

Dr Rad 1:19:40
even has to be even certain types of battles, right, like ones that are going to be in glory. Like if like, if you’re like Crassus and fighting a bunch of slaves, they’re like, Oh, good. Thanks for taking care of that.

Dr G 1:19:53
triumph for that one.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:19:54
And the other thing I would note is that by all indication, Rome in Italy is not unique in this militarism race, everybody else is doing this too. And Rome’s last big shattering wars before it completes his conquest of the peninsula are against giant federal entities like it the Etruscans all band together to try and stop the Romans, they get a whole bunch of Gauls and Samnites in their coalition to try and contain the Romans. And the moment the Romans are done with that all of the Greek cities pool together invite Pyrrhus of Epirus over and also make a kind of combined effort. Because the same pressures that are working on Rome are working on everybody else. Rome just happened to be the state that mastered the system. But I’m not sure if it had been an interest in state, if it had been another Latin state, if it had been a Samnite. State, I’m not actually sure the system would have looked very different. The one thing I will say is probably unique about the Romans is precisely because they sit on this meeting point of cultures with Latins and Sabines and Etruscans. They do seem to be better at handling Multicultural Alliance systems than just about anybody else. And I suspect that cultural competence comes from their geographic position. Hmm, interesting,

Dr G 1:21:10
interesting. So I think this taps in nicely to the idea that you’ve touched on, which is the logistics side of things. So one of the things that happens in this early Republican period that we’re navigating is they they talk about the way that drawing people out into the Army is maybe a recipe for leaving the fields, which need to be tended by somebody open to becoming fallow to not being harvested properly. And the consequence down the line in the first year is that you don’t get a great crop. But the consequence in the second year is that you haven’t grown anything at all. And feeding an army is obviously a massive undertaking, as Rome gets bigger and bigger. But these early periods suggests that maybe this is a lesson that they’re learning gradually as they go along.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:21:59
Yeah. Although, of course, we also want to be on guard against our sources. This idea of manpower shortage and of leaving the fields on tended, or at least untended by free labour is a major theme in our late authors. And so one wonders is Livy reading the civil wars into his sources and like, well, they’re going to war all the time. So clearly, the fields must be empty, this must be the problem. On the other hand, if you’re going to war all the time, yeah, you may be straining your labour reserves. And now an army on the march is not supplied from home. Usually in this period. The problem is what I refer to as the tyranny of the waggon equation, although the Romans aren’t using waggons. For this, they’re using mules, anything in the ancient or indeed, anything in the pre 1800s ad world that moves food eats food, except for sailboats. And so at some point of distance, your army you can’t ship food from base to supply them, at least not without tremendous expense. You have to set up magazines and relays and it’s a whole thing. And the Romans certainly aren’t doing that yet. They will later. The Romans you know, again, by the middle Republic, the Romans are shipping grain across the Mediterranean to support military operations, their logistics become staggeringly sophisticated, not this early though. So instead your armies you can carry a bit of food with you, but not a lot. Who does heavy. So what you do is you pillage the farmlands, you’re moving over, you take their food, we know that by the middle Republic. Again, the Roman legion is incredibly sophisticated in this regard that the Roman legion can do the entire wheat processing cycle within it. Um, the Roman soldiers, they carry threshing tools and sickles and portable mills and these are hand Mills there. They are hand mills in my hand.

Dr G 1:23:51
Yeah, it’s a bit like a coffee grinder with you. Yes,

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:23:55
it’s about a 50 pound stone object though you keep it on the mule. And so Roman army can turn a field of enemy grain into bread on its own. Which is a remarkable logistics advantage. And that capability is clearly central the Roman army and it had to have emerged at some point, would you have needed it to fight ve in 406? No, because you can just bring a lunch. I was gonna say rather than

Dr G 1:24:24
a day’s walk away, there’ll be fine

Dr Rad 1:24:27
Crunch and sip as you go.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:24:28
But clearly is Roman warfare spreads out the logistical sophistication builds. On the flip side, especially if you’re trading raids back and forth with Veii over and over again. You raid their fields, they raid your fields, you’re both pulling people out of the fields, and at the same time, you’re both wrecking each other’s farming. You can see how this would produce food shortages, and I can believe that it did it it is it is worth noting this is a really long standing argument mostly in Greek historiography. That is the story of ancient Greece not the historiography. be written in modern Greek, it is really hard to permanently damage ancient farms. But it is really easy to disrupt them for a year. And so you can absolutely see how this kind of warfare when its high intensity would become disruptive enough to become inconvenient, though, again, having doubts about Livi reading manpower shortages, when these armies may not be large enough to pull that many men, most societies can’t get enough people into an army to cause leader labour shortages. The Romans certainly can by the Second Punic War, and that’s shocking. But most societies can’t. They’re simply there, they, they’re not well organised enough to recruit that hard. Well, and

Dr Rad 1:25:43
as you highlighted, again, as far as we can tell, from the references we get in source material, slavery was a thing, you know, from very early on, and so the slaves wouldn’t necessarily obviously been going off to fight rather not. And so if you’re leaving them behind, presumably, Daikon tend to feel?

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:26:02
Yeah, though, of course, awkward questions about how many are exactly? Generally speaking, so one, straight up before like, 225? We don’t know. But But generally speaking, and here, there’s a lot of scepticism, but I’m Walter Scheidel, and a few arguments kind of laid out like here’s got to be what the range is. Italy is, weirdly enough, it seems in in the middle Republic, it is definitely a slave society, but it is perhaps less so than Greece, we might assume maybe about a third of people in Greece are enslaved versus maybe 10 15%, in Rome, in Italy. So you can imagine that not being enough to keep the economy running, that figure will rise dramatically as a result of Roman conquests to something like maybe even 20% 25% By the early Empire, which is probably the peak and then the figure then would begin to fall again, we think, but yes, this is definitely a slave society. And so you do have, you do have labourers who are viewed as unfit for military service. And this is a clear theme for the Romans. If in a crisis, you want to put slaves in the army, you must free them first. Which is really interesting, because you have a lot of other societies that will enrol slaves in the army with the promise of freedom at the end of the campaign. And the Romans are like, no, no, no, no, no. Before you hand, anybody a weapon, they have to be a free person. You cannot have enslaved people in the Army or the Navy, you have to free them first. And you know, that’s a sort of striking Roman cultural quirk that probably fits with I mean, the Romans are also a more Manumission slave society than most they be more slaves than most, though, again, so that people don’t get the wrong idea, ancient slavery saw, and I just, I don’t want people to walk away with too rosy a picture of what was a very ugly institution. Oh, definitely.

Dr Rad 1:27:55
Yeah. All right. Well, this has been absolutely fascinating. I have learned so much, and I do believe you. So just when I say that, to wrap up, we thought it might be a good idea for you to tell us maybe like your top three misconceptions about the early Roman military that you’d love for people to have a more accurate view of,

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:28:20
I’m actually I’m gonna I’m going to have consuls rather than military tribunes with consular powers. Because I think there’s sort of twin pitfalls for the Roman army in almost every period. And it’s even more true when your evidence is weak. And to the right, the pitfall is excessive modernism, it is the assumption that the Roman army looks like modern armies, and has the values of modern armies. And you get a lot of popular facing stuff, both supposedly nonfiction, but also a lot of historical fiction that reads into like, well, the Romans were basically like Marines, right? Like they had the values of like the US military. I’m going to call it an offer Steven Pressfield. Books are awful for this. Um, he does it to the Greeks too. And it’s nonsense. The man has very little grasp on ancient value systems, I’m afraid I’m sorry if you enjoy his books. So that’s sort of one pitfall is assuming excessive modernity uniform equipment, that they have values like modern soldiers, as I have been arguing about lately that they view gender issues the way moderns do. And then of course, the other danger is excessive primitivism. That is that falls off on the other side is like, well, these are just kind of like disorganised warrior bands and like no, I mean, these are intelligent thinking human beings who are trying to organise armies and win battles and not die, and they are doing their best to organise that and, you know, at least by the time we get to the middle Republic, the level of sophistication here is significant and it has been developing for some time. And so you I want to resist the idea that these guys are just banging rocks together. And so I mean, I sort of see those as like the twin pitfalls. And then the question is, how do you navigate the difficult space in the middle? And the answer is, I think, to let the sources guide you as much as they can, albeit with your healthy dose of scepticism. Away always.

Dr G 1:30:23
Look, thank you so much for taking the time to sit down with us. Oh, thanks

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:30:28
for thanks for having me. This

Dr G 1:30:29
was great. This was a real pleasure. And yeah, it’s one of these areas, which it is so full of information on the one hand, and so full of questions on the other, that it obviously has this propels a sense of curiosity about like, how do these people live their lives, how is the Roman world really working, and it becomes such an increasing part of what they do and what they ended up having leaving as a legacy. So to be able to understand it better to see where these gaps are emerging? To know what we don’t know, I think is really, really, really useful. So thank you so much, again, for coming on the show. Well, and

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:31:08
I don’t know, in another 10 or 15 years, when you guys get to the middle Republic, I can come back and talk about that army.

Dr G 1:31:15
Yeah, we’ll be so confused by them. They’ll be like, oh, man, another battle.

Dr Rad 1:31:22
Talking about like troop movements, my eyes just like glaze over.

Dr G 1:31:26
I think it’s pretty clear that from where we’re coming from, like our background is more like social history. And and Fiona’s is reception. And so thinking about how this really intricate and really sophisticated, important element of the Roman world operates is really useful. So yeah, it’s been great.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:31:47
And, and as I as I repeat over and over again, when I talk about military and when I teach military history, social history and military history are not separate, because no army can help but recreate the structures of its societies on the battlefield. Every army does it. Ours, there’s all of them. So you have to understand both.

Dr Rad 1:32:09
No, that’s a very good point. You made me may be more inspired to learn about military history. I am going to preorder your book

Dr G 1:32:20
Oxford University Press, please put me on your waiting list.

Dr Bret Devereaux 1:32:26
I have to get them a manuscript first. Easy peasy, right? Just a simple thing Yeah.

Dr Rad 1:32:39
Thank you for listening to this episode of the partial historians. You can find our sources, sound credits and an automated transcript in our show notes. Our music is by Bettina Joy de Guzman, you too can support our show and help us to produce more engaging content about the ancient world by becoming a Patreon. In return you receive exclusive early access to our special episodes. If monthly patronage is just not your style, we also have merch, a book or you can buy us a coffee on Ko-fi. However, if your Imperial coffers do not overfloweth, one of the easiest and most important ways to help us is to tell someone about the show or give us a five star review. Why not both? Until next time, we are yours in ancient Rome.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai

The post Special Episode – The Early Roman Military with Dr Bret Devereaux appeared first on The Partial Historians - Ancient Roman History with smart ladies.