Bandits in the Roman Empire
by Drakus Domitius
Banditry in the ancient world was a common occurrence. It was, in fact, common enough to cause anxiety among many ancient Romans. A number of inscriptions indicate that travelers were well aware that they might encounter danger. One such example comes from the Alps at a shrine to Jupiter Poeninus. The text reads:
“Poenino pro itu et reditu C. Iulius Primus v.s.l.m,” (ILS 4850)
which in translation reads: “To Poeninus, for a safe going and a safe return, Caius Julius Primus willingly and deservedly fulfilled his vow.” St. Paul, too, referred to the presence of bandits stating, “In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers . . .” (II Corinthians, 11:26). While bandits were not the only source of anxiety for a traveler, they undoubtedly caused much concern for the average unprotected wanderer.
But how common was banditry? Common enough that the laws of Rome make regular mention of the phenomenon. In fact, banditry occurred so regularly that it seems to have been considered, along with earthquakes and storms, as a natural disaster. (Codex Justinianus, 6.46.6) Banditry then could affect life in all its varied aspects, and was therefore considered an act of the gods.
In his wide ranging and impressive article on the subject, Brent Shaw states that banditry appears to have been perceived as marginal to central Roman society. (“Bandits in the Roman Empire,” Past and Present, v. 105 (1984) 3-52). His argument is that the labeling of banditry as an act of god or a natural disaster indicates that it was not ever-present enough to be important to Roman society. He states: “One would not presume to claim that banditry is ubiquitous in the same was as the institution of slavery.” Yet the very abundance of laws deal with banditry would indicate that banditry was an everyday occurrence and one that was most likely on the minds of many Romans, especially those who might go beyond the safety of their hometown.
The Romans had a very broad definition of banditry. It is a definition of banditry that must be narrowed down in order to deal with the subject matter which we today would label banditry. To the Romans, any kind of violent opposition to the authority of the state, its citizens and its officials, short of war, was considered an act of banditry, or latrocinium. A bandit (latro, latrones) was anyone who used physical force in order to achieve his ends. Like Shaw, I believe that certain types of actions labeled latrocinium by the Romans need not be discussed here. Among these are feuds between villages or families, raiding, communal resistance to Roman expansion and urban crime.
Before any discussion of banditry can truly commence, it is necessary to investigate who became bandits. In his seminal work on bandits, E. J. Hobsbawm sets out the main recruiting grounds for banditry. These are people who live in areas that have relatively small labor demands or are too poor to employ their entire workforce. Often, peasants were unable to provide for themselves and their families through farming. Galen provides a reason they were not able to provide for themselves, for those in the cities took all the food they could and the peasants were left only with what the city dwellers passed over. Dio Cassius relates a similar topos in the story of Bulla Felix, a very successful bandit captain. “Tell your masters that if they would put a stop to brigandage, they must feed their slaves.” (Dio Cassius, 77.10.2). In antiquity, the safety valve for those so afflicted was a turn to violence, either legitimate violence (ie the army) or illegitimate forms of violence, banditry. (Keith Hopwood, “Bandits Elites and Rural Order”)
Another source of bandits was slaves. Escaped slaves would have naturally sought a form of protection, and the bands of brigands were possibly safe haven. Other slaves need not be fugitives in order to take up the life of a bandit. Shepherds migratory nature allowed them the opportunity to engage in banditry. Largely outside the control of their owners, they moved about with their herds, far away from centers of governmental control. Their need to be armed in order to protect the herd also made it easy for them to turn to banditry. This move from shepherd to bandit became so common that the identification of shepherds with latrones became common in Roman literature. Not only literature attests to this, but an inscription from Caria ordering local officials to “flog shepherds who commit their accustomed acts of banditry.” (MAMA 4.297, emphasis added).
Retired soldiers and deserters were another group of men easily lured into the life of brigandage. For many such men, violence was the only life they knew. They had spent their lives as professional soldiers whose job was the use of violence for the state. Retirement from the military did not necessarily bring financial security. Often the bonuses and grants of land were not enough or the lifelong soldier had neither the knowledge nor the inclination to become a farmer. Cicero pointed out that the urban mob no longer knew how to farm or indeed even desired to return to the land. (On the Agrarian Law, 2.27) Tacitus records the feelings of the men themselves:
“If a soldier survives so many risks, he is still dragged into remote regions where, under the name of lands, he receives soaking swamps or mountainous wastes. Assuredly, military service itself is burdensome and unprofitable.” (The Annals 1.17)
Surely not all soldiers were unhappy with the land they were given, but enough of them were that the pattern of soldiers into bandits likely intensified during times of large-scale demobilization. Such periods occurred after times of civil war, for instance.
Deserters, on the other hand, left the army for any number of reasons. Serving in Rome’s army was not an easy task. The life of a Roman soldier was harsh, full of danger, the deep-rooted system of bribes, exactions and brutal treatment by superiors. Tacitus again provides a glimpse into this life:
"Ten ases a day is the value set on life and limb; out of this clothing, arms, tents, as well as the mercy of centurions and exemptions from duty have to be purchased. But indeed of floggings and wounds, of hard winters, wearisome summers, of terrible war, or barren peace, there is no end." (Annals 1.17)
To some, undoubtedly, the thought of desertion was a welcome one. Once they deserted, however, they were outside the law, and this led them quite naturally into a life of banditry.
Finally, soldiers may become bandits through no fault of their own. In cases of civil war, whole units or legions could find themselves classified as deserters and bandits following the successful bid for the throne of a claimant. Such men were most plentiful during times of great civil war and strife, but Shaw argues that this was happening all the time on a smaller scale. (Shaw, "The Bandit" in The Romans, ed. Andrea Giardina, 301)
The last group of men who may find themselves as bandits are those men who will not willingly submit to the yoke of the conquering power, Rome. These men find themselves at odds with the authorities and so turn to banditry. One such group, Isaurians, found themselves opposed to Roman rule when certain numbers of them had been captured and thrown to the wild beasts for public entertainment. They considered this treatment to be beyond normal bounds, and so swept out of their lairs to raid and plunder. Another example is the bandit chief Caracotta who flourished in Spain under the nose of Augustus. While Augustus was eventually able to buy Caracotta, the bandit chief’s opposition to Roman rule initially enraged Augustus. Augustus originally offered a million sesterces to the man who captured Caracotta alive. When Caracotta came over to Augustus, the emperor gave Caracotta the money. (Dio Cassius, 56.43.3)
Bandits then came from a wide variety of sources. They operated within the boundaries of the Roman Empire, but operated outside the rules and laws of empire and society.
Cleopatra and the Pearl
byLucius Aelius
"There have been two pearls that were the largest in the whole of history; both were owned by Cleopatra, the last of the Queens of Egypt -- they had come down to her through the hands of the Kings of the East... In accordance with previous instructions the servants placed in front of her only a single vessel containing vinegar, the strong rough quality of which can melt pearls. She was at the moment wearing in her ears that remarkable and truly unique work of nature. Antony was full of curiosity to see what in the world she was going to do. She took one earring off and dropped the pearl in the vinegar, and when it was melted swallowed it... With this goes the story that, when that queen who had won on this important issue was captured, the second of this pair of pearls was cut in two pieces, so that half a helping of the jewel might be in each of the ears of Venus in the Pantheon at Rome.”
Pliny, Natural History (IX.59.119-121)
Already treasured in the East, by the first century BC pearls had become fashionable in Rome, a craze that Pliny (XXXVII.12) says was introduced by the victory of Pompey over Mithridates. His third triumph was celebrated in 61 BC and included, much to Pliny's disapprobation, a portrait of Pompey rendered in pearls. Indeed, Pliny criticizes all such ostentatious display, whether by women dangling two or three pearls from their ears so they could hear them rattle as they moved (IX.114) or the vulgar presentation by Lollia Paulina (IX.117), who was to become the third wife of Caligula. Once, at what was to have been a modest engagement party, Pliny actually met Lollia, who arrived wearing emeralds and pearls on her head, neck, ears, wrists, and fingers. They cost forty million sesterces and she carried the receipts to prove it!
There were other critics of such ostentatious luxury. Seneca (On Benefits, VII.9) complains that womens' ears are trained to carry pearls in pairs, with another fastened above, and are not content unless the value of two or three estates hang from each ear. Martial (Epigrams, VIII.81) chides a Roman matron who swears, not by the gods, but by her pearls, which she loves more than her own sons. And Tibullus (Elegies, II.4) bemoans his lover's greediness for emeralds and pearls.
Suetonius relates that Caesar had attempted to restrict the wearing of pearls, a symbol of wealth and prestige, only “to those of a designated position and age” (XLIII). His invasion of Britain was said to have been for the fresh-water pearls found there and that, "in comparing their size he sometimes weighed them with his own hand" (XLVII). Indeed, a breastplate dedicated to the goddess in the Temple of Venus Genetrix was made of pearls from Britain (Pliny, IX.116). The temple was dedicated by Caesar in 46 BC, as part of his triumphal return from Egypt. Next to the cult statue, in a position of honor, was placed a gilded statue of Cleopatra, herself (Dio, LII.22.3).
The value of Cleopatra's pearl was said by Pliny to be worth ten million sesterces (a hundred thousand gold aurei). Horace tells of a similar incident in his Satires (II.3.239), where an expensive pearl was impetuously dropped in vinegar, a word that derives from the Latin vinum (wine) and acer (sour). Mostly calcium carbonate, a pearl is susceptible to a weak acid solution. Wine, if it still is to be drinkable, is not more than 0.1% acetic acid and not sufficiently acidic to dissolve a pearl, at least not quickly enough to have impressed Antony. Wine vinegar, on the other hand, is approximately 5-7% acetic acid, a concentration necessary if the calcium carbonate is to be dissolved. The crystals of calcium carbonate are converted by acetic acid into calcium, which dissolves in the residual water, and carbonate that effervesces as bubbles of carbon dioxide, the formula for which is CaCO3 + CH3COOH → Ca + H2O + CO2.
How Cleopatra could manage to drink her vinegar-and-pearl concoction can be explained by the acid-base reaction that takes place, the acid being neutralized by the calcium carbonate, much like an antacid. Intriguingly, there is a name for the residue obtained from the precipitate of an acid solution: magistery. Cleopatra’s magistery of pearl, offered in toast to Antony, was thought to be an aphrodisiac, probably because pearls were associated with Venus and both were born of the ocean.
Pearls are created when an irritant, trapped in the fleshy mantle of a mollusk such as a pearl oyster or fresh-water mussel, becomes coated with the same nacre or mother-of-pearl that lines the shell, itself. This nacreous secretion is composed of alternating layers of aragonite (a crystalline form of calcium carbonate) and conchiolin (an organic protein that binds the crystals together). It is the concentric layers of translucent aragonite that both reflect light to give a pearl its luster, and refract or disperse light to produce its shimmering iridescence or orient. A pearl is approximately 85-90% calcium carbonate; the remainder, conchiolin and a small percentage of water. Although not very hard, pearls are strong, and their composition and shape make them difficult to break. For a pearl to be readily soluble in vinegar, it likely would have to be crushed.
The Etruscans: An Introduction
by Tanaquil Sergius
Origins There are three theories which seek to explain the obscure origin of the Etruscans. Their language and culture differed markedly from that of other ancient peoples of the Italian peninsula at the time-Villanovans, Umbrians, and Picenes. As a result, many scholars long upheld the tradition of Herodotus that the Etruscans migrated to Italy from Lydia in the 12th century B.C. to escape a severe famine. Other scholars have argued that the Etruscans are an ancient people, indigenous to Italy, whose customs are merely distinct from other Italian peoples. The third theory-that the Etruscans came down from the north through the Alpine passes-has been largely discredited.
Rise and Fall Regardless of the obscurity of their origins, it is clear that a distinctive Etruscan culture evolved about the 8th cent. B.C., developed rapidly during the 7th century, achieved its peak of power and wealth during the 6th century, and declined during the 5th and 4th century Etruria had no centralized government, but rather comprised a loose confederation of city-states.  Important centers were Clusium (modern Chiusi), Tarquinii (modern Tarquinia), Caere (modern Cerveteri), Veii (modern Veio), Volterra, Vetulonia, Perusia (modern Perugia), and Volsinii (modern Orvieto). The political domination of the Etruscans was at its height c.500 B.C., a time in which they had consolidated the Umbrian cities and had occupied a large part of Latium. During this period the Etruscans were a great maritime power and established colonies on Corsica, Elba, Sardinia, the Balearic Islands, and on the coast of Spain. In the late 6th century a mutual agreement between Etruria and Carthage, with whom Etruria had allied itself against the Greeks c.535 B.C., restricted Etruscan trade, and by the late 5th century their sea power had come to an end. The Romans, whose culture had been greatly influenced by the Etruscans (The Tarquini rulers of Rome were Etruscans), were distrustful of Etruscan power. The Etruscans had occupied Rome itself from c.616 B.C., but in c.510 B.C. they were driven out by the Romans. In the early 4th century, after Etruria had been weakened by Gallic invasions, the Romans attempted to beat the Etruscans back. Beginning with Veii (c.396 B.C.) one Etruscan city after another fell to the Romans, and civil war further weakened Etruscan power. In the wars of the 3rd century, in which Rome defeated Carthage, the Etruscans provided support against their former allies. During the Social War (90-88 B.C.) of Sulla and Marius the remaining Etruscan families allied themselves with Marius, and in 88 B.C. Sulla eradicated the last traces of Etruscan independence. Etruscan Culture Much of the actual work in Etruria was done by the native population, who were subject to, though probably not slaves of, their conquerors; the nobility of Etruscan birth formed an exclusive caste. Etruscan wealth and power were in part based upon their knowledge of iron working and their exploitation of iron deposits that were abundant in Etruria. They brought the older art of bronze working to a new level of achievement, and Etruscan gold work was among the finest anywhere in the ancient world. Extant examples of their craftsmanship are the large bronze portraits Brutus (Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome) and Orator (Museo Archeologico, Florence) as well as many fine tomb paintings. 
flute player; Tarquinian tomb fresco The Etruscans were also noted for their black bucchero pottery and were experts with the potter's wheel. Etruscan art, formally dependent upon Greek art, is quite complex for, while the forms are recognizably Hellenized, the underlying spirit retains an energy difficult to achieve in the Greek search for precision. The Etruscans kept up a large commerce with the East, and many of their art motifs are from the East. Fond of music, games, and racing, the Etruscans introduced the chariot into Italy. The Etruscans were also highly religious. Seeking to impose order on nature, they established strict laws to govern the relations between people and gods. Lacking the scientific rationalism of the Greeks, they superstitiously tried to prolong the lives of the dead by decorating their tombs like houses. While religion is perhaps the best-known aspect of Etruscan civilization, even it remains quite enigmatic. The Etruscan language also presents difficulties to the scholar. It can be easily read (the alphabet is of Greek extraction, and the sound value of the signs is known), but, with the exception of only a few words, the vocabulary is not understood. 
The Etruscan alphabet Although the language seems to contain both Indo-European and non-Indo-European elements as well as traces of ancient Mediterranean tongues, it cannot be classified into any known group of languages. Etruscan is known from some 10,000 epigraphic records dating from the 7th century B.C. to the 1st cent. A.D.; most are brief and repetitious dedications. One of the mysteries of Etruscan civilization is why the written record is so sparse and why the Romans wrote almost nothing about the Etruscan language or its literature. 
part of the Liber Linteus of Zagreb, an Etruscan ritual book Bibliography and Links: M. Pallottino, The Etruscans(tr. 1955) O. W. von Vacano, The Etruscans in the Ancient World (tr. 1960, repr. 1965) E. Richardson, The Etruscans: Their Art and Civilization (1976) O. J. Brendel, Etruscan Art (1979) M. Grant, The Etruscans (1981) E. MacNamara, Everyday Life of the Etruscans (1987). 
the sarcophagus of the spouses
|
Page I
Bandits in the Roman Empire
by Drakus Domitius
Cleopatra and the Pearl
by Lucius Aelius
The Etruscans: An Introduction
by Tanaquil Sergius
Page II
Sumeria: Part III
by Leah Enkidu
Bilingual Inscriptions in Etruria
by Tanaquil Sergius
Copper and Tin, Mining and Smelting: Part I
by Apiladey Apilsin
Page III
The exhibition of the Benaki Museum in Athens
by Axiothea Cleomenes
Phylakopi Project 2003.
by Axiothea Cleomenes
Aifa's Archaeology Notes
by Aifa Niafer
ADVERTISEMENT
 On 8 Cuauhtli, 14 Teotleco, the Phoenix will be
arriving again to the ports of Machu Picchu. This means there will be lots of tourists around, looking for souvenirs, things to eat, things to wear - an ideal oppourtunity
for all citizens of Machu Piccu to make a modest profit by tendering
their wares! Reserve your place on time, limited trading space available.
The first 8 applicants will receive a premier location in the
middle of the square. Reservations to be sent to: Dinnsear
Ayaatl Tupac (Market Master) within 14 days of publication,
please, to ensure preferential treatment
|
