CLAS/HIST 4091/5091: The Roman Empire

Reading for Friday Sept. 23, 2011

Reading

Historia Augusta Life of Hadrian (on e-reservs at Norlin Library: password "romanempire"

P. Aelius Hadrianus, Roman Emperor AD 117-38, was born in 76 probably at Italica in the Spanish province of Baetica. His paternal grandfater (a senator) had married Ulpia, aunt of the emperor Trajan. When his father died in 85, Hadrian became the ward of Trajan and Attianus and was taken into Trajan’s childless household. He served in a variety of military and administrative posts under Trajan and became very cozy with him and his wife, Plotina. Not until the end of Trajan’s reign, however, did it become clear that he would be adopted and made Trajan’s successor and this ambiguity angered many of Trajan’s confidants. When Trajan died, he had been attempting to live out the long standing Roman fantasy of conquering Parthia. Faced with military and administrative difficulties (including another Jewish revolt) Hadrian was forced to abandon the new provinces Trajan had established in the former Parthian territory and return to Rome in 118. Quickly a conspiracy of Trajan’s old cronies broke out and executions followed which, together with the abandonment of Parthia and the discomfort over his accession, tarnished Hadrian’s reputation. Despite efforts to win back the affections the masses (including the remission of 900,000,000 HS in debts) Hadrian always struggled to win support from the Senate and people of Rome. Perhaps in response to their distaste, he turned to the provinces, visiting most of them between 120 and his death in 138. There he undertook major building projects, enacted military and civil reforms, and sponsored a cultural revival across the empire. Despite his efforts to integrate Rome’s provinces into a world union, the Romans of Rome never regarded him as an ideal emperor and today we will ask ourselves why not.

The second century AD is a period filled with documentary and literary sources for a variety of questions. Ironically, however, no truly reliable historical narrative of the emperors in this century exists. The life of Hadrian can be reconstructed only from the abbreviated account in Cassius Dio and the full length biography of the Historia Augusta which we are reading today. The Historia Augusta purports to be a collection of imperial biographies (in the vein of Suetonius) written in the early fourth century AD by a group of six different authors. In fact, however, it has been shown to be the creation of a single author who wrote in the 390s with a distinctly polemical, anti-Christian message. This message mars the accuracy of the later lives in the collection, but the early ones (like that of Hadrian) are generally genuine, if not always accurate. Even so, the author has a definite purpose: to paint certain qualities in emperors which should be idealized and others which should be avoided.

Questions

1. Can you pick out inaccuracies or misrepresentations in the Historia Augusta’s presentation of Hadrian?

2. How do you think Hadrian’s (non-Roman) origins may have affected his later policies?

3. How had the empire changed since the days of Augustus? How had the role of the emperor changed to accommodate the new empire?

4. Keep track of the territories which Hadrian visited and the sorts of things he did while he was there. Why do you think Hadrian felt compelled to tour the provinces? Do you think this had a positive effect on his reputation as emperor? Do you think it had a positive effect for the Roman empire?

5. What sorts of cultures did Hadrian cultivate and appreciate? Would it be fair to characterize him as a “multi-cultural” emperor? Support your answer with examples. What about Hadrian’s treatment of the Jews: how does the Jewish question reflect on his openness to different cultures?

6. What steps did Hadrian take to improve his reputation and standing among the Senate and people of Rome (reforms, building projects, donations etc...)?

7. Why might Hadrian not have been regarded as an ideal emperor by the Senate and people of Rome? What would the assessment of the provincials have been? What is your assessment?