12.06.2013 Views

The Roman Army, 31 BC–AD 337: A Sourcebook

The Roman Army, 31 BC–AD 337: A Sourcebook

The Roman Army, 31 BC–AD 337: A Sourcebook

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

3 <strong>The</strong> Emperor as<br />

commander-in-chief<br />

When Octavian adopted the designation imperator as part of his name,<br />

probably in 38 BC, he was making a claim to be the outstanding military<br />

leader in Rome. In his campaign against Sextus Pompey he needed the<br />

aura of authority and the prestige associated with victory which it<br />

imparted (Syme 1958). Once established in power, Augustus tied the<br />

army closely to his person, and it was his legacy that all emperors bore<br />

the attributes of a <strong>Roman</strong> general (by the 70s imperator was the usual<br />

designation of emperors). Since all campaigns were conducted under<br />

their auspices, the glory belonged to them, and acclamations as general<br />

were added to their titles, while other names and epithets expressed<br />

the humiliation of Rome’s enemies (e.g. Parthicus—‘Conqueror of the<br />

Parthians’), and aggressive military prowess (e.g. ‘extender of the<br />

empire’). In public images imperial military responsibilities played a<br />

significant role and the emperor was depicted wearing military dress<br />

on statues, reliefs, triumphal arches, and coins, often as a conquering<br />

hero or a dignified but firm military leader, most strikingly illustrated<br />

by the statue of Augustus from Prima Porta (see Zanker 1988:190–1).<br />

Moreover, every emperor was personally associated with his troops—<br />

as paymaster, comrade, benefactor—and sought to demonstrate that<br />

he was a worthy and courageous fellow-soldier, deserving of their<br />

complete loyalty. Not surprisingly therefore emperors increasingly<br />

assimilated to their role as military leaders and by the end of the first<br />

century AD were taking personal command of all major campaigns.<br />

<strong>The</strong>y could, therefore, spend more time with their troops, but this made<br />

the conduct of administration more difficult since the whole apparatus<br />

of government had to follow them. In one sense the imperial role as<br />

commander-in-chief was in keeping with <strong>Roman</strong> ideology, which held<br />

military prowess in high esteem and associated military command with<br />

the leading men in the state; but emperors also saw their successful

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!