Christian apocalyptic sentiments of the late seventh century produced the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius, a Syriac composition which proposes the immediate downfall of the Arab dominion at the hands of a last Roman emperor. This notion of the Last Roman Emperor who – after having defeated the Arabs – would usher in a time of prosperity, face the eschatological people of the North, and ultimately abdicate to God at the end of times developed into an apocalyptic motif of ubiquitous (...) influence. Out of its long-standing and wide-ranging tradition the present article deals with the afterlife of the Pseudo-Methodian Last Roman Emperor motif in the earlier Byzantine apocalyptic tradition. By means of conceptual comparison I map the use and the adaptations of this literary topos, thereby learning how this motif was accommodated to the Byzantine audience and how it became one of the most prominent motifs of Byzantine apocalyptic thought. My source material comprises the original Syriac Apocalypse, two Syriac apocalypses that are closely related to it, its first Greek redaction, five apocalypses from the Visions of Daniel group, and the Andreas Salos Apocalypse. Among others, I conclude that these apocalyptic texts show a tendency to fragment the Last Roman Emperor motif and delay the ultimate end of the world by prolonging the eschatological decline of the Roman Empire. (shrink)

I venture to call the attention of classical scholars to two legends about Roman Emperors gleaned amid the arid waste of theological nonsense which passed for literature among the Copts, in the hope that they may have better luck than I have had in tracing them to some classical source. The first is taken from MS. Par. Copte 131, fol. 40, a single leaf of what seems to be a geographical and historical encyclopaedia.1 The writer who is treating (...) in a very discursive way of Ethiopia, states that Nero or Domitian—a strange pair to run in double harness—caused an island in the Red Sea to be watered with oil. The description of that island is mixed up with a mention of the original divisions of the Indians—a term which as usual in early days embraces both Indians and Ethiopians,—and their subsequent changes; and as that too may be of interest to students of ancient geography, I will translate the passage in full. (shrink)

A review of Donald Robertson, How to Think Like a Roman Emperor: The Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius. St. Martin's Press, 2019.

Caesarism is contrasted with medieval monarchies, and the emperor is evaluated as a citizen who is in charge of the Republic and is all-powerful. However, two-thirds of the Augustuses and the Caesars died a violent death, often at the hands of close family members. Nobility is a ruling caste, in which bloody rivalries, usurpations and political romanticism are rife as it struggles to retain its social pre-eminence. The Senate, though, does not itself want to govern and eventually degenerates into an (...) Academy. The imperium, with its patriarchal nature, remains very popular among the people/citizens. Though the imperial cult would lead to tyranny, it continued to express both the stature and love accorded to the individual emperor, and the power of tradition, of charisma and the institution. (shrink)

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

The life-changing principles of Stoicism taught through the story of its most famous proponent Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius was the final famous Stoic philosopher of the ancient world. The Meditations, his personal journal, survives to this day as one of the most loved self-help and spiritual classics of all time. In How to Think Like a Roman Emperor, cognitive psychotherapist Donald Robertson weaves the life and philosophy of Marcus Aurelius together seamlessly to provide a compelling modern-day guide to (...) the Stoic wisdom followed by countless individuals throughout the centuries as a path to achieving greater fulfillment and emotional resilience. How to Think Like a Roman Emperor takes readers on a transformative journey along with Marcus, following his progress from a young noble at the court of Hadrian--taken under the wing of some of the finest philosophers of his day--through to his reign as emperor of Rome at the height of its power. Robertson shows how Marcus used philosophical doctrines and therapeutic practices to build emotional resilience and endure tremendous adversity, and guides readers through applying the same methods to their own lives. Combining remarkable stories from Marcus's life with insights from modern psychology and the enduring wisdom of his philosophy, How to Think Like a Roman Emperor puts a human face on Stoicism and offers a timeless and essential guide to handling the ethical and psychological challenges we face today. (shrink)

The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius are treasured today--as they have been over the centuries--as an inexhaustible source of wisdom. And as one of the three most important expressions of Stoicism, this is an essential text for everyone interested in ancient religion and philosophy. Yet the clarity and ease of the work's style are deceptive. Pierre Hadot, eminent historian of ancient thought, uncovers new levels of meaning and expands our understanding of its underlying philosophy. Written by the Roman emperor for (...) his own private guidance and self-admonition, the Meditations set forth principles for living a good and just life. Hadot probes Marcus Aurelius's guidelines and convictions and discerns the hitherto unperceived conceptual system that grounds them. Abundantly quoting the Meditations to illustrate his analysis, the author allows Marcus Aurelius to speak directly to the reader. And Hadot unfolds for us the philosophical context of the Meditations, commenting on the philosophers Marcus Aurelius read and giving special attention to the teachings of Epictetus, whose disciple he was. The soul, the guiding principle within us, is in Marcus Aurelius's Stoic philosophy an inviolable stronghold of freedom, the "inner citadel." This spirited and engaging study of his thought offers a fresh picture of the fascinating philosopher-emperor, a fuller understanding of the tradition and doctrines of Stoicism, and rich insight on the culture of the Roman empire in the second century. Pierre Hadot has been working on Marcus Aurelius for more than twenty years; in this book he distills his analysis and conclusions with extraordinary lucidity for the general reader. (shrink)

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

The opening pages of the annals of the Roman monarchy tell of long-lived rulers and thriving families. Augustus lived to the ripe age of seventy-six, survived by his wife of fifty-one years, Livia, who died at eighty-six, while her son Tiberius bettered his predecessor's record by two more years. Augustus’ sister Octavia gave birth to five children, all of whom lived long enough to get married; Agrippa left at least half a dozen children, and perhaps more; Germanicus, despite his (...) tender age at death, was survived by no fewer than three sons and three daughters. At the same time, longevity and abundant offspring went hand in hand with early death and misery. More than a few luminaries of Augustus’ court were less fortunate than their elders: Marcellus died at twenty-three, the elder Drusus at twenty-nine, Augustus’ heirs Gaius and Lucius Caesar at twenty-three and eighteen. Drusus had lost a number of children save three that survived; Germanicus buried three of his six sons as infants. (shrink)

Summary The article examines unofficial imperial nicknames, sobriquets and appellatives, from Octavian Augustus to Julian the Apostate, in the light of traditions of Roman political humour, and argues that in the political field during the Principate there were two co-existing competing modes of emperors’ naming: along with an official one, politically loyal, formalised and institutionally legitimised, there existed another – unofficial, sometimes oppositional and even hostile towards individual emperors, frequently licentious, humorously coloured and, in this regard, deeply (...) rooted in Roman Republican traditions of political humour. Many of the known imperial nicknames and appellatives belong to a specific kind of folklore and express popular public opinion. They survived for us because of ancient authors’ interest in using such material for their literary and ideological intentions, particularly to express better the individual characteristics of the historical personages. But, for the very same purposes, Greek and Roman writers could invent some names and sobriquets, following special rhetorical and moralising principles, or mere love of ridicule. All in all, most imperial nicknames, both authentic and made-up, reveal a rather good quality of humour and mockery constructed by expressive linguistic devices and various rhetorical tropes. An apt derisive nickname marked anti-values, mocked the ruler’s badness and could vilify his reputation to the extreme, stigmatise his personality, or else become a widely-used quasi-cognomen. Many nicknames and appellatives were of ephemeral, ad hoc nature, their sense and effect largely dependent on the particular context; but, taken as a whole, they demonstrate the possible scope of and common trends in naming practice. The political system of the Principate and its very atmosphere of hypocrisy did promote double meaning and double thinking reflected in the double system of the rulers’ nomenclature. Imperial nicknames were a counter-hegemonic transcript and a weapon in the struggle for symbolic capital. All the efforts which many emperors took to control their nomina were ultimately powerless against the strength of the inevitable humorous counter-naming by the ruled. (shrink)

The consilia which will be examined here were written in the vicinity of the papal Rota at Avignon by Oldradus da Ponte. Educated at Bologna, he appears to have arrived at the Lateran in the entourage of Peter Colonna just before the Colonna fled from the wrath of Boniface VIII, and after a short spell as assessor for the Capitano del Popolo at Bologna and then as a teacher at Padua, to have migrated to Avignon where he was still active (...) in 1337. Initially, Oldradus' consilium 69 will be examined on the assumption that even a document which has long been described as �famous�, �important�, �celebrated� and �interesting�, will reward reconsideration. It will be argued that Oldradus did in fact sound a discordant note which failed to harmonizewith what has been presented as a contemporary consensus, namely that Justinian's legislation ought to be treated with a �veneration similar to that accorded to Holy Scripture�. This will be followed by a broader analysis of the deployment and nature of biblical and other extra-legal authorities in his consilia. An epilogue examines the wider significance of Oldradus' consilia. (shrink)

_Experience the world of Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius and the tremendous challenges he faced and overcame with the help of Stoic philosophy_ This novel biography brings Marcus Aurelius (121–180 CE) to life for a new generation of readers by exploring the emperor’s fascinating psychological journey. Donald J. Robertson examines Marcus’s relationships with key figures in his life, such as his mother, Domitia Lucilla, and the emperor Hadrian, as well as his Stoic tutors. He draws extensively on Marcus’s own _Meditations_ (...) and correspondence, and he examines the emperor’s actions as detailed in the _Augustan History_ and other ancient texts. Marcus Aurelius struggled to reconcile his philosophy and moral values with the political pressures he faced as emperor at the height of Roman power. Robertson examines Marcus’s attitude toward slavery and the moral dilemma posed by capturing enemies in warfare; his attitude toward women; the role of Stoicism in shaping his response to the threat of civil war; the treatment of Christians under his rule; and the naming of his notorious son Commodus as his successor. Throughout, the _Meditations _is used to shed light on the mind of the emperor—his character, values, and motives—as Robertson skillfully weaves together Marcus’s inner journey as a philosopher with the outer events of his life as a Roman emperor. (shrink)

This article defends my claim, first presented in "identity and trinity," "journal of religion" (1978), that the doctrine of the trinity is consistent. drawing upon tertullian's defense of the doctrine in "adversus praxean", i argue that the logic of the trinity is similar to the logic of emperorship. at various times, two persons, for example, diocletian and maximian, were the same emperor of the roman empire, just as three persons are the same god.

The question of the documentary value of the last statues of Late Antiquity has been much debated in many recent publications. This article contributes to this debate and addresses emperors’ statuary and its relation to the development of a Christian theology of the Late Roman emperorship. Traditionally, statues demonstrated the military, legal and economic power of Roman emperors, who were depicted as generals, judges or benefactors. Surprisingly, the Christianisation of imperial power seems to have had a (...) limited influence upon the official iconography of emperors. The religious dimension rarely appeared on statues even though they became rarer in Late Antiquity. Whilst literary sources, especially Christian sources, increasingly mentioned emperors’ personal piety and demonstrative humility, particularly in the monumental context of Constantinople, imperial statues remained faithful to the traditional iconography of power that obliterated physical weakness and embodied autocratic power. (shrink)