Roman Imperial Policy from Julian to Theodosius by R. Malcolm Errington

204 PHOENIX (251) . By Trajan's time, "hostage-taking of the benevolent, pacifying sort, itwas decided, was not in the Roman blood after all" and the Roman "attitude toward the periphery ... shifted from one of welcoming condescension to that of stampeding military ambition" (252) . Allen does not fully answerthequestionofwhether alteredrhetoric or the military ambitions ofDomitian and Trajan came first;most likely, they were contemporary. A full "Bibliography"(255-279), an "Index of Passages Discussed" (281-285) and a "General Index" (286-291) completethevolume. As should be clear, Allen's book presents a detailed and highly interesting account of the different language and ideology employed by ancient sources in reference to hostages, with the rhetoric often divorced from the reality of hostages' situations. While one may wonder, for example, whether the Romans themselves (rather than moderns) recognized that their use of sexual imagery emphasized the powerlessness of the hostages' communities and provided gratification to Rome (180), there is no doubt that sexual metaphors were occasionally employed. Though not everyone will agree with every interpretation, no one who has read this book will subsequently approach the question of hostages at Rome without a more nuanced grasp of a source's ideological approach. For that reason alone perusalof thisbookwould be highlyrecommended, butgiven thatitoffers far more than this single point, it is instead enthusiastically recommended. University of Calgary John Vanderspoel Roman Imperial Policy from Julian to Theodosius. By R. Malcolm Errington. Chapel Hill: UniversityofNorth Carolina Press. 2006. Pp. xii, 336. At first blush, the conventional chronological scope delineated by R. M. Errington needs no justification: from the division of empire by Valentinian and Valens (364a.d.) followingthedeathofJuliantothedeathof Theodosius i (395a.d.). For inthose three decades a richness of sources?the relationes of Symmachus, the Codex Theodosianus, and the Res Gestae of Ammianus Marcellinus, among others?permits detailed study of the return to the vision of Diocletian and Constantine, to an empire permanently divided between East and West under two augusti. At the heart of this work, however, is an aspiration that Errington makes explicit in his preface, the implications of which reach well beyond the book's announced scope: that the study will be a modest contribution towards extending to these important years F. Millar's contention that the emperor was fundamentally reactive in governing, a thesis articulated in his formidable The Emperor in the Roman World: 31 b.c-a.d. 337 (Ithaca 1977). The result is a trenchantly argued work by a historian tested in the vicissitudes of Roman republican history that, even if unconsciously, provides a refreshing change from the sociological and cultural bent that has dominated the recent study of late antiquity; a quick scan of the endnotes show that primary sources, not modern scholarship, dominate in a way that invites comparison with A. H. M. Jones's monumental The Later Roman Empire, 284-602 (Norman 1964). In section one, "Actors and Events," Errington reviews principles of imperial succession in the second half of the fourth century. The evidence is clear that tetrarchic conventions of imperial collegiality?that the senior augustus was to appoint his junior colleague?, though tested, were followed, with only a few exceptions proving the rule. In short, in only two instances was an emperor created without the approval of the senior augustus: the proclamation of Valentinian's infant without the assent of his older son, Gratian, in BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 205 November of 375; and the recognition of the usurper Magnus Maximus, who had deposed and killed Gratian, by Theodosius from 386 to 387. In the case of the accession of Jovian at the death of Julian in the night of 26/27 June 363, and Valentinian's accession after the death of Jovian in 364, there was no senior augustus tomake an appointment. If dynastic succession functioned relatively well, challenges from outside the empire beset the college. In discussing Roman frontier policy (43-75) Errington shows that the behaviour of the emperor and army was unmistakably reactive. In the three most important events for foreign policy in the period?Jovian's treaty with Persia, the Battle of Adrianople on 9 August 378 and Theodosius' settlement with the Goths of 382?it is easily demonstrated...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.