Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T05:45:12.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

IMPERIAL JUSTICE? THE ABSENCE OF IMAGES OF ROMAN EMPERORS IN A LEGAL ROLE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2020

Olivier Hekster
Olivier Hekster*
Affiliation:
Radboud Institute for Culture and History (RICH)
*
o.hekster@let.ru.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

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.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 70 , Issue 1 , May 2020 , pp. 247 - 260
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This article is part of the project ‘Constraints and Traditions’, financed by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research. Most of the research and writing was done during a productive stay at the University of Chicago. My thanks to Cliff Ando for inviting me, and to audiences at Chicago, Nijmegen and Vienna for their questions and suggestions on papers closely related to this article. Comments by Ben Kelly, my Nijmegen colleagues, two anonymous readers for CQ and Bruce Gibson on earlier versions of this article have much improved the argument. My thanks to them all.

References

1 On imperial representations in public spectacles, see Benoist, S., Rome, le prince et la Cité. Pouvoir impérial et cérémonies publiques (Ier siècle av. – début du IVe siècle ap. J.-C.) (Paris, 2005)Google Scholar; the number of official inscriptions surrounding the Romans is discussed by Eck, W., ‘Öffentlichkeit, Politik und Administration. Epigraphische Dokumenten von Kaisern, Senat und Amtsträgern in Rom’, in Haensch, R. (ed.), Selbstdarstellung und Kommunikation. Die Veröffentlichung staatlicher Urkunden auf Stein und Bronze in der römischen Welt (Munich, 2009), 75–96Google Scholar; on Roman central coinage as a mode of imperial communication, see Noreña, C., Imperial Ideals in the Roman West. Representation, Circulation, Power (Cambridge, 2011)Google Scholar. For Roman emperors and war images, Hölscher, T., ‘Images of war in Greece and Rome: between military practice, public memory and cultural symbolism’, JRS 94 (2004), 1–17, at 17Google Scholar; for the emperor as supreme priest, Cameron, Alan, ‘Pontifex maximus: from Augustus to Gratian—and beyond’, in Kahlos, M. (ed.), Emperors and the Divine—Rome and its Influence (Helsinki, 2016), 139–59Google Scholar. The most recent overview of the emperor in his legal capacity is Tuori, K., The Emperor of Law (Oxford, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Millar, F., The Emperor in the Roman World (London, 1992 2), especially 465–77Google Scholar on access to the emperor and 537–49 on petition and response, with Tuori, K., ‘Greek tyrants and Severan emperors: comparing the image’, BICS 55 (2012), 111–19, at 113–14Google Scholar. See now also Färber, R., Römische Gerichtsorte. Räumliche Dynamiken von Jurisdiktion im Imperium Romanum (Munich, 2014), 67–122Google Scholar.

3 Dig. 1.3.31 (cf. Dig. 32.23 Paulus). On the emperor as lex animata, see Coriat, J.-P., Le prince législateur (Rome, 1997), 8–11Google Scholar on emperors and legal integration, 657, 662.

4 On the various ways in which the emperor was the basis of Roman law, see Harries, J., Law and Empire in Late Antiquity (Cambridge, 1999), 15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the Edictum Perpetuum, see Tuori, K., Ancient Lawyers and Modern Legal Ideas. Studies on the Impact of Contemporary Concerns in the Interpretation of Ancient Roman Legal History (Frankfurt am Main, 2007), 136–144Google Scholar with references.

5 Sautel, G., ‘Usurpations du pouvoir impérial dans le monde romain e rescissio actorum’, in Volterra, E. (ed.), Studi in onore di Pietro de Francisci, vol. 3 (Milan, 1956), 463–91Google Scholar; Bono, F., ‘The value of the stability of the law. A perspective on the role of the emperor in political crises’, in Hekster, O. and Verboven, K. (edd.), The Impact of Justice on the Roman Empire (Leiden and Boston, 2019), 68–85Google Scholar.

6 As is clear from the material assembled in Millar (n. 2). There is a separate discussion about the extent to which the emperor himself created law, or did so through lawyers, set out in Honoré, T., Emperor and Lawyers (Oxford, 1994 2), 1–32Google Scholar. Still, as recognized by Honoré ([this note], 1), emperors needed to authorize law for it to be valid. Certainly his subjects expected the emperor to be responsible.

7 Herodian, 1.11.5; SHA, Verus 8.9; Dio Cass. 68.10; Menander Rhetor 2.375.

8 Coriat, J.-P., ‘L'empereur juge et son tribunal à la fin du Principat: un essai de synthèse’, in Haensch, R. (ed.), Recht haben und Recht bekommen im Imperium Romanum. Das Gerichtswesen der römischen Kaiserzeit und seine dokumentarische Evidenz (Warsaw, 2016), 41–61Google Scholar; Millar (n. 2), 228–59 and 507–16 on appeals to the emperor, and 516–27 on substantial evidence for the emperor as judge in the first instance.

9 SEG 17.759, with Tuori (n. 2), 116–18 supplying analysis and translation.

10 Hurlet, F., ‘Justice, res publica and empire. Subsidiarity and hierarchy in the Roman empire’, in Hekster, O. and Verboven, K. (edd.), The Impact of Justice on the Roman Empire (Leiden and Boston, 2019), 122–37Google Scholar.

11 Bablitz, L., Actors and Audience in the Roman Courtroom (Abingdon and New York, 2007), 13–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; de Angelis, F., ‘Ius and space: an introduction’, in id. (ed.), Spaces of Justice in the Roman World (Leiden and Boston, 2010), 1–27Google Scholar, especially 2–3 on how ‘ius moved and stood with the magistrate’ and 11–14 on the lack of distinct references to justice in the basilica and the fora. Cf. Neudecker, R., ‘The Forum of Augustus in Rome: law and order in sacred spaces’, in de Angelis, F. (ed.), Spaces of Justice in the Roman World (Leiden and Boston, 2010), 161–88Google Scholar, who argues at 176–7 that with the Forum Augustus aimed ‘to found his own place for legal practice’. This may be true, but that does not mean that people, looking at the Forum, would think of imperial justice. Other connotations were clearly dominant.

12 Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano inv. no. 56230 (Augustus); Merida, Museo Nacional de Arte Romano, inv. no. 7129, 34661 (Tiberius); Gortyn, Antiquarium (Caligula); Parma, Museo Nazionale di Antichità, inv. no. 1952.834 (Claudius); Paris, Musée du Louvre, inv. no. MA 1210 (Nero); Parma, Museo Nazionale di Antichità, inv. no. 1952.826 (Nero); Rome, Museo Torlonia, inv. no. 372 (Nero); Vid, Archaeological Museum, inv. no. 267, 1136 (Vespasian). I owe these references and numbers to Sam Heijnen, who discusses them in his forthcoming PhD thesis: ‘The emperor's portrait: dynastic changes and political innovation in the Roman empire (50 b.c.e. – 565 c.e.)’ (Diss., Radboud University, Nijmegen).

13 Hölscher, T., ‘Historical representations of the Roman Republic: the repertory of coinage in comparison with other art media’, in Elkins, N.T. and Krmnicek, S. (edd.), ‘Art in the Round’. New Approaches to Ancient Coin Iconography (Rahden, 2014), 23–38, at 25–6Google Scholar. On ‘the increased stability of image use’ as a method to communicate with various groups in the empire, see Trimble, J., ‘Communicating with images in the Roman empire’, in Naiden, F.S. and Talbert, R. (edd.), Mercury's Wings. Exploring Modes of Communication in the Ancient World (Oxford, 2017), 106–27, at 113Google Scholar.

14 See still Ryberg, I. Scott, Panel Reliefs of Marcus Aurelius (New York, 1967), 61–6, with Plates 43–7Google Scholar. Similar scenes on Marcus’ column are 62 and 67, with Gabelmann, H., Antike Audienz- und Tribunalszenen (Darmstadt, 1984), 176–7, no. 81Google Scholar. On Trajan's column, scene 75 on the south-eastern side of the column depicts Trajan seated on his tribunal, but the submission image is echoed in scene 118 on the same side, where Trajan is standing: Galinier, M., La colonne Trajane et les Forums impérieaux (Rome, 2017), 71–2, with Plates 4–5Google Scholar. On the sarcophagi scenes, see Gabelmann (this note), 182–8, nos. 84–8.

15 MFA Boston, 24.971; Gabelmann (n. 14), 126–7, no. 40; Foresta, S., ‘La coppa argentea di Meroe. Spunti iconografici per l'interpretazione della scena di giudizio’, Prospettiva 130/131 (2008), 147–53Google Scholar with further references.

16 Loerce, W.C., ‘The miniatures of the trial in the Rossano Gospels’, The Art Bulletin 43 (1961), 171–95, at 177, 179–82Google Scholar.

17 Schäfer, T., Imperii Insignia. Sella Curulis und Fasces. Zur Repräsentation römischer Magistrate (Mainz, 1989), 50–5, 63–9Google Scholar. The sella could, however, also be given to a foreign king as sign of Roman recognition, as noted by Schäfer (this note), 56–63.

18 Translation LCL, slightly adapted. Cf. Plin. Pan. 59.2, 61.7 showing that the theme of iustitia is relatively little addressed in Pliny's panegyric, as noted by Benoist, S. and Gangloff, A., ‘Culture politique imperial et pratique de la justice. Regard croises sur la figure du prince “injuste”’, in Hekster, O. and Verboven, K. (edd.), The Impact of Justice on the Roman Empire (Leiden and Boston, 2019), 19–48Google Scholar.

19 Stat. Silu. 4.1.1–8, 4.1.34–7, Pan. Lat. II.9.6, III.21.4.5, X.3.1, X.6.4; Symmachus, Or. 3.2; Auson. Grat. act. 1, 18; Claud. Cons. Hon. IV.9–13, IV.153–8, VI.431–3, VI.640–8; Sid. Apoll. Carm. 7.7–9, 2.205–9.

20 Octavian's use of Caesar's sella: RRC nos. 491.1.a–b; 497.2.a–d; App. B Ciu. 3.28; Dio Cass. 43.6.5; Plut. Ant. 16.1 with Schäfer (n. 17), 114–25 for discussion and references to Caesar's honours at 115 nn. 4–5 and at 130–5 on the symbolism of the empty sella, and on imperial statues placed on a sella.

21 Kuttner, A.L., Dynasty and Empire in the Age of Augustus. The Case of the Boscoreale Cups (Berkeley – Los Angeles – Oxford, 1995), 37–44Google Scholar. The superior position of Augustus in the image becomes even clearer when noting the similarities to the image on the Gemma Augustea.

22 Schäfer (n. 17), 135–41; Gabelmann (n. 14), 189–95, nos. 89–93.

23 Kiilerich, B., ‘The image of Anicia Juliana in the Vienna Dioscurides. Flattery or appropriation of imperial imagery’, SO 76 (2001), 169–90, at 177CrossRefGoogle Scholar with further references.

24 Gabelmann (n. 14), 178–81, no. 83.

25 Galinsky, K., Augustan Culture. An Interpretive Introduction (Princeton, 1996), 80–90Google Scholar with references.

26 Wallace-Hadrill, A., ‘The emperor and his virtues’, Historia 30 (1981), 298–323, at 300–7Google Scholar.

27 Fast. Praen. IIt 13.2.17, 113, with Ov. Pont. 3.6.23–5. Cf. CIL 9.5890 from Ancona. The presence of the statue in the Forum is discussed by Lichocka, B., Justitia sur les monnaies imperiales Romaines (Warsaw, 1974), 77–8Google Scholar. Galinsky (n. 25), 86 even suggests that Augustus established ‘a cult of Iustitia Augusta’.

28 Already noted by Lichocka (n. 27), 60–1, arguing that the coins still show an important role of (imperial) justice in the social and political life of the Empire.

29 Noreña, C., ‘The communication of the emperor's virtues’, JRS 91 (2001), 146–68, 156–7Google Scholar, with 155 Figure 1 for an overview of the relative frequency of uirtutis-coins; Noreña (n. 1), 59–71. On the meaning of aequitas, see Wallace-Hadrill, A., ‘Galba's aequitas’, NC 141 (1981), 20–39Google Scholar and still Lange, H., ‘Die Wörter AEQVITAS und IVSTITIA auf römischen Münzen’, ZRG 52 (1932), 296–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On aequitas and the idea of fair dealing, see now Elkins, N.T., ‘Aequitas and Iustitia on the coinage of Nerva: a case of visual panegyric’, NC 177 (2017), 93–106Google Scholar. Cf. Wolters, R., ‘Remissio. Die Ankündigung von Steueraufhebungen in der römischen Kaizerzeit’, Althistorisch-Epigraphische Studien 5 (2005), 507–20Google Scholar on coin messages discussing just taxations.

30 The dates follow from the available coin types on the OCRE website (http://numismatics.org/ocre/). I owe the table and the underlying information to Sven Betjes, who discusses numismatic patterns in his forthcoming PhD thesis, ‘Communicating power through traditions: the image of leadership on the coinage of Roman emperors (50 b.c.e. – 565 c.e.)’ (Diss., Radboud University, Nijmegen).

31 British Museum, 1995.0401.1 with Rich, J.W. and Williams, J., ‘Leges et iura P.R. restituit. A new aureus of Octavian and the settlement of 28–27 b.c.’, NC 159 (1999), 169–213Google Scholar and Abdy, R. and Harling, N., ‘Two important new Roman coins’, NC 165 (2005), 175–7Google Scholar on a second specimen of the same type. Cf. RIC 12, Augustus, no. 165a, a denarius from 15 b.c., depicting a togate Augustus in a curule chair on a tribunal, receiving laurel branches by soldiers. The image combines the imperial role as a magistrate with that of a military leader—but the justice aspect is wholly absent. For an overview of pre-Augustan coins depicting the sella, see Schäfer (n. 17), 72–101 with Plates 9–10.

32 See Suet. Vesp. 2.14, etc. (overview in Betjes [n. 30]). Cf. Scott Ryberg (n. 14), 71–6 for further representations of the liberalitas / congiarium motive.

33 RIC II, Trajan, no. 666, with Gabelmann (n. 14), 171–5, no. 71.

34 Noted in the comments of Roman Gold from Finstock (Ashmolean Museum Exhibition 2003).

35 As found through queries in the OCRE website (http://numismatics.org/ocre/). An analysis of bronze coins from hoards shows a similar percentage, with 99 out of 140 coins minted under Hadrian: Noreña (n. 1), 349.

36 Cortés-Copete, J.M., ‛Governing by dispatching letters. The Hadrianic chancellery’, in Rosillo-López, C. (ed.), Political Communication in the Roman World (Boston and Leiden, 2017), 107–36Google Scholar; Honoré (n. 6), 12–16. Hadrian was also named nomothetēs on public monuments of Cyrene (SEG 17.809) and Megara (IC 7.70–2); Boatwright, M.T., Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire (Princeton, 2003), 91–2Google Scholar.

37 Goette, H.R., Studien zu römischen Togadarstellungen (Mainz, 1989), 45–9Google Scholar, 155, no. M 31, Plate 66.2. Cf. 132, nos. Bb 35–42 for seven further over-life-size togate statues, from Rome, that are dated to Hadrianic or Trajanic times.

38 Dio Cass. 69.6.3. Similar stories are told by Plutarch about Philip II (Mor. 179C–D) and Demetrius Poliorcetes (Dem. 42.3–4).

39 Millar (n. 2), 3–4.

40 http://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/ with ‘curule chair’ as search term. The Hadrianic coins (one in bronze and one in silver) are in vol. 3, nos. 5167 and 5260. The dedvctor coins are in vol. 1, nos. 5432–3. For the curule chair as a gift to foreign kings, see n. 17 above.

41 http://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/ with ‘scroll’ as search term. There are 63 matching types, with 26 showing Homer 11, Asclepios 3, Zeus 3. The Tarsos coins are in vol. 4, nos. 3584 and 5034. The Corinth coins are in vol. 1, nos. 1205–6.

42 http://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/, with ‘Dikaiosyne’ as search term, with 215 types issued at Alexandria.

43 Lichocka (n. 27), 17. Alternatively, one could argue that the problematic legal basis of Augustus’ judicial powers was a reason for the absence of ‘justice images’, yet that would make the references in the RGDA, the literary texts and the clipeus uirtutis hard to explain.

44 Wallace-Hadrill (n. 29), 37 followed by Noreña (n. 29), 157. Noreña also tentatively suggests that there was ideological tension between ‘clemency’ and ‘justice’, which may have resulted in their under-representation in ‘an official medium of communication’. Even if that is the case (and Noreña himself is already doubtful) it would not explain the absence of more symbolic representations of legal administration on coins, or in monumental art. Cf. also J. Béranger, Recherches sur l'aspect idéologique du principat (Basel, 1953), 270–1 who argues that in the Principate there is a shift from strict justice to clemency.

45 Hekster, O., Emperors and Ancestors. Roman Rulers and the Constraints of Tradition (Oxford, 2015), 316–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Noreña (n. 29), 157 n. 58 raises this as a possibility.

47 Garnsey, P., Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire (Oxford, 1970), 67–90Google Scholar.

48 Kelly, B., Petitions, Litigation, and Social Control (Oxford, 2011), 150–9, 167–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Connolly, S., Lives Behind the Laws. The World of the Codex Hermogenianus (Bloomington and Indianapolis, 2010), xiii–xv, 67–80Google Scholar; Huchthausen, L., ‘Herkunft und ökonomische Stellung weiblicher Adressaten von Reskripten des Codex Iustinianus (2. und 3. Jh. u. Z.)’, Klio 54 (1974), 199–228Google Scholar.

49 See n. 35 above.

50 P.Coll.Youtie 2.66; P.Oxy. 4.705.15–53, 4.705.65–90; SB 16.12509. This information was kindly supplied to me by Ben Kelly on the basis of his database of petitions on papyri.

51 P.Col. 123; Turpin, W., ‘Imperial subscriptions and the administration of justice’, JRS 81 (1991), 101–18, at 106–7Google Scholar; Haensch, R., ‘Apokrimata und Authentica. Dokumente römischer Herrschaft in der Sicht der Untertanen’, in Haensch, R. and Heinrichs, J. (edd.), Herrschen und Verwalten. Der Alltag der Administration des römischen Reiches in der Kaiserzeit (Vienna, 2007), 213–33Google Scholar.

52 Garnsey (n. 48), 67. This last point may also have applied to the plebs urbana in Rome. In all likelihood, the courts of the praetorian and the urban prefects were of more direct importance for ordinary Romans. This may have taken some of the legal limelight away from the emperor, and consequently made the emperors’ legal role less relevant as a representational category.

53 This might explain why references to legal roles are rare in non-imperial self-representations. Religious duties and military results seem to have been highlighted far more frequently in images and (funerary) inscriptions.

54 Cf. Elsner, J., Art and the Roman Viewer. The Transformation of Art from the Pagan World to Christianity (Cambridge, 1995)Google Scholar and Clarke, J.C., Art in the Lives of the Ordinary Romans: Visual Representations and Non-Elite Viewers in Italy, 100 b.c. – a.d. 315 (Berkeley, 2003)Google Scholar on how what types of messages are depicted and excluded (and how they are depicted) helps us understand Roman communicative practices.

55 See on this subject most recently Elkins, N.T., The Image of Political Power in the Reign of Nerva, a.d. 96–98 (Oxford, 2017), 93CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cf. Wolters, R. and Ziegert, M., ‘Umbrüche—Die Reichsprägung Neros und Domitian im Vergleich’, in Bönisch, S. et al. (edd.), Nero und Domitian. Mediale Diskurse der Herrscherrepräsentation im Vergleich (Tübingen, 2014), 43–80, at 64–6Google Scholar and Wolters, R., ‘Nachrichten ohne Publikum? Münztypübergreifende Darstellungsformen in der Denarprägung der römischen Republik’, in Haymann, F., Hollstein, W., Jehne, M. (edd.), Neue Forschungen zur Münzprägung der römischen Republik (Bonn, 2016), 125–43Google Scholar, with further references on different groups being addressed by centrally issued coinage.