The conventional understanding of Rome's pomerium recreates a sacred boundary between the civil and martial spheres of ancient Rome, demarcating Roman political traditions and Roman relationships with the gods (M. Beard, J. North and S. Price, Religions of Rome [1998]). Dating back to Rome's mythical foundations, the changing route of the pomerium did not always follow the city's walls, which K. elegantly describes as monumentalising the ‘legal and religious idea’ (p. 11) of the pomerium, but acted instead as a conceptual limit between home and abroad, domestic and martial, domi and militiae. K.'s book, which is concerned not with the pomerium as a shifting geographical line, but as a religious and political concept, challenges multiple aspects of our traditional interpretations. Using a combination of text, image and architecture, each chapter presents a distinct argument, but all are linked by the complex rituals of crossing the pomerium when leaving and returning to Rome and by imperial attempts to reinterpret the political and religious significance of the ancient boundary. The scope of the book is large (spanning the period from Julius Caesar to Constantine), and so K. focuses on critical figures whose behaviours subverted and altered the norms of the Roman pomerium.
After a short introduction outlining ancient historical interpretations – and reinterpretations – of the pomerium (Plutarch, Livy, Tacitus, Dionysius), K. turns to the first of four discrete studies. Chapter 1 addresses material evidence, beginning with the now-lost statua loricata of Julius Caesar, which is attested in his forum by Pliny the Elder (HN 34.18). Fashioned of bronze and representing Caesar in a cuirass, this statue confirms that in the late Republic – if not earlier – elite men in Rome were being represented in armour inside the pomerium. K. proposes that Caesar's choice of statue format within the pomerium did more than just declare him imperator, it pointedly reminded the senate and the people that, as dictator, he was legally entitled to cross the pomerium into the city where he could bear arms and employ his imperium. K. suggests that within the context of the unsettled political events of 47–46 bce, particularly the mutiny of Caesar's Gallic legions in 47, the meaning of this statue would have been obvious. He also speculates that Caesar's statue served as a model for the statuary of Augustus, including, but not limited to, the famous Prima Porta. Among many other options (triumphal, togate, equestrian) Augustus’ choice of this same military type underscored both his connection to Caesar and his own position after 23 bce as a privatus holding imperium, a role that gave Augustus exceptional powers on both sides of the pomerium.
Chapter 2 delves into the religious significance of the pomerium, focusing on public auspices for magistrates and promagistrates assuming new commands. K. begins with a summary of how imperium was traditionally conferred before casting doubt on the long-held view (inspired by T. Mommsen) that Roman magistrates practised auspices of departure before leaving the city. He underscores that there is an absence of evidence for this ritual in the sources and suggests that auspices were, in fact, simply taken before any state action. K. ends the chapter by returning to Octavian and his status as a privatus cum imperio. Unlike consuls with regular imperium, privati were restricted to taking auspices only when they had entered their province. K. outlines how Octavian transformed this norm to allow himself the right to take public auspices, thereby illustrating how long-standing conventions associated with the pomerium shifted throughout Roman history.
Chapter 3 is a significant contribution, wherein K. overturns the traditional dichotomy between religious rites performed within and outside the pomerium. Urging scholars to reconsider the long-standing view that the counterpart to Roman ritual (ritus Romanus performed with covered head or capite velato) was Greek ritual (ritus Graecus performed with uncovered head or capite aperto), K. argues for a new Roman-centred structure that contrasts civic ritual with military ritual (the latter labelled ritus militaris by K.). This carefully crafted argument is based on depictions of rituals from a range of material evidence, including numismatics and state relief (such as the columns of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius and the Boscoreale Cups). K. presents a persuasive new logic, suggesting that Roman rites associated with civil action were performed capite velato, whereas ritus militaris was performed capite aperto. Significantly, this is an ideological rather than a geographical distinction: it was the ‘sphere of human action that determined what was sought from the gods, and thus fixed the proper ritus for the practice of the cult’ (p. 95). For example, since the nuncupatio votorum (departure rite) shown on the Boscoreale Cup is a military ritual, Tiberius is depicted in military attire and capite aperto even though he is clearly within the boundary of the pomerium. By the same logic, coloniae deductio (rites associated with the foundation of colonies) were civic in nature and, thus, were performed capite velato even though they took place outside of the pomerium. The lucidity and comprehensive scope of K.'s argument demands a significant reinterpretation of Roman depictions of rituals and liberates the field from a forced dichotomy with Greek religion.
The final chapter focuses on the Arch of Constantine, its reliefs and attic inscription. K. underscores how this prominent monument offered ancient viewers manifold ideological links to the pomerium: via its location (‘alongside the pomerium at its northeast corner’ [p. 166]), its relief and its architectural form. K. challenges the well-established view that the arch specifically glorified Constantine's triumph over Maxentius by arguing that the iconography of its relief does not conform to depictions of a triumph and the inscription is unconventional in both language and message. At the same time, he contends the monument still conveyed a general message of triumph, linking the monument to other free-standing arches in Rome, such as the arch of Septimius Severus, which had also been used to promote institutional ‘fictions’ of triumph. His argument could be bolstered further by highlighting that the free-standing arch first developed in the Middle Republic as an alternative victory monument for individuals who were not voted a triumph (A.H. Kontokosta, JRA 26 [2013]). Throughout this chapter K. addresses the important – and often neglected – topic of agency in imperial monuments, suggesting that Constantine promoted a wholistic military theme in his imagery (sculpture, relief, numismatics) to underscore his sole right to rule and to remind the senatorial class of their inferior relationship with the emperor. The meaning-laden architectural form of the free-standing arch, significantly located alongside the archaic line of the pomerium, augmented this theme.
This book is meticulously researched and clearly written. K. does not merely challenge long-held dogma; he also offers cogent alternatives. There are a few minor typographical errors (i.e. Vitellius’ arrival at Rome is dated twice to 69 bce), but they do not affect K.'s argument. The chapters engage with the concept of the pomerium to unequal degrees, yet still form a coherent narrative about ritual and art in ancient Rome. At times, as K. confronts complex religious and political topics and offers nuanced readings of their reflection in Roman art, the reader is left wishing he would also tackle – or at least more thoroughly address – the difficult topic of ancient viewer reception. Overall, this is a weighty contribution to the study of Roman religion, political history and art.
