This volume, part of the Cambridge Key Themes in Ancient History series, offers students an introduction to the rapidly growing field of Roman political thought. A. summarises recent scholarly trends in a useful bibliographical essay at the end of the volume, but prioritises the discussion of ancient texts and their reception in key works of political philosophy. He frequently draws on examples from American history to demonstrate Rome's lessons for contemporary liberalism. The result is an accessible resource for students that foregrounds the relevance of Roman political thought to the present day.
A. begins his introduction by defining the scope of Roman political thought, which he takes to include any and all thought ‘prompted by reflection on the Roman politeia’ (p. 5). He locates republicanism at the centre of this intellectual tradition. His guiding question is how principles of republicanism were articulated under the historical republic and subsequently transformed by imperial and Christian thinkers. He organises his discussion thematically, devoting chapters to the constitution (Chapter 1), liberty (Chapter 2), citizenship (Chapter 3), corruption (Chapter 4), rhetoric (Chapter 5), religion (Chapter 6) and international relations (Chapter 7). The structure works well for an introductory volume, emphasising points of contact between thinkers ranging from Ennius to Augustine. While such an approach tends to downplay historical context, it also illustrates how republicanism remained normative long after the transition to autocracy.
Chapter 1 opens with the familiar truism that the Romans did not have a constitution. Or at least not one that would be recognisable today. A. follows B. Straumann, Crisis and Constitutionalism: Roman Political Thought from the Fall of the Republic to the Age of Revolution (2016), in arguing that a constitution need not be a single codified document; it can be a set of entrenched principles that govern the operation of political institutions. According to this definition, the Romans had a constitution that was formed over centuries and preserved in the mos maiorum. A. contrasts Polybius, whose Greek model of a constitution dictates his portrayal of Rome, with Cicero, whose De republica seeks to restore the constitution to its former glory. He then considers how this discourse changed after the transition to the principate. Drawing on Dio Chrysostom, an underutilised source of political thought, he shows how defences of monarchy were framed as responses to the failure of the republican constitution.
Chapter 2 takes on the concept of liberty, the element of Roman political thought that has received the most attention from contemporary political theorists. A. reviews the three definitions of liberty that dominate current debate: negative liberty, or freedom from intervention; positive liberty, or freedom to fulfil one's potential through political participation; and neo-republican liberty, or freedom as non-domination. Reviewing the Romans’ own definition of liberty, he argues that it is a concept more complex and contradictory than any of these models allow. Moreover, he emphasises that this ideal was developed in a hierarchical, slave-owning society ruled first by an aristocracy, then by an emperor. As he points out, one of the most important lessons Rome has to offer contemporary political theory is that ideals of equality can thrive in the most unequal of regimes.
Chapter 3 delves into citizenship and civic virtue. Contemporary definitions of citizenship focus upon three dimensions: the ability of citizens to participate in politics, the legal protections afforded to citizens, and the social status and identity conferred by citizenship. A. asks to what extent Roman citizenship reflected each of these three dimensions. He argues that all three were relevant under the republic, but that the legal aspect came to predominate under the empire. He then shows how Roman civic virtues were calibrated to encourage the status-driven competition at the heart of Roman political culture. Although such virtues were developed in the context of republicanism, they proved adaptable in both imperial and Christian texts.
Chapter 4 addresses the problem of political corruption. For Roman thinkers corruption referred not only to the misbehaviour of politicians but to the overall character of the body politic. It was intertwined with the political passions, particularly greed and the desire for glory. When these passions went unchecked, honourable competition devolved into a contest for domination. Sallust comes to mind as the foremost thinker on this issue; A. puts him in conversation with Lucretius and Plutarch. Whereas Lucretius tries to limit the passions by urging readers to accept the limits established by nature, Plutarch demonstrates how gratitude can serve as a check on ambition. Following the argument of D. Hammer, Roman Political Thought and the Modern Theoretical Imagination (2008), he stresses emotions as central to political culture.
Chapter 5 examines the role of rhetoric, deliberation and judgement in the creation and communication of republican values. How was republican oratory able to avoid the pitfalls of manipulation and pandering, which hamper the capacity for civic judgement? Drawing primarily on Cicero's rhetorical treatises, A. suggests that the orator and his audience were both bound by a common ‘script’ that dictated what arguments were acceptable and persuasive. This script enabled them to participate in the creation of a shared political culture. Roman oratory might not have approached J. Habermas's ideal speech situation, but it did allow public deliberation. This situation changed under the principate, as judgement was co-opted by the princeps and oratory eventually lost its civic function.
Chapter 6 borrows the term ‘civil religion’ from J. Rousseau to emphasise the importance of religion in Roman political culture. A. argues that religion and politics were mutually reinforcing. Under the republic, the decentralisation of power between different priesthoods supported the mixed constitution; under the principate, the concentration of religious authority into the hands of the princeps reflected the rise of autocracy. The bulk of A.’s account, however, focuses on religious toleration. To what extent does this contemporary value have Roman precedent? The results are mixed; the imperial government's concern for maintaining civic order led to both the toleration and persecution of religious minorities, while early Christian apologists laid some of the groundwork for the idea of freedom of religion.
Chapter 7 interweaves themes of imperialism, just war theory and cosmopolitanism to articulate a Roman theory of international relations. I was surprised that Caesar's Gallic Wars was not included in this section; Caesar's justifications for the conquest of Gaul would have helped illustrate the brutal underbelly of Roman ‘international relations’. Rather than focus on the violence of conquest, A. uses Cicero and Tacitus to foreground the honour code in Roman conceptions of empire. Because Romans tried to achieve honour and glory through military action, they were bound individually and collectively to act honourably in the conduct of war. This emphasis on honour led Romans to anticipate key elements of contemporary just war theory. It also explains why the model of realism has limited value when applied to Rome.
A.’s emphasis on the aristocratic honour code, apparent not only in his discussion of international relations but throughout the text, is indicative of his approach to Roman political thought more generally. Because the Roman conception of honour seems foreign to us today, it has received little attention from political theorists, who tend to prioritise continuities between past and present. Yet by discounting those elements of Roman political thought that challenge contemporary liberal ideals, we risk losing sight of what makes its study valuable. It is not only that differences can be just as revealing as similarities. ‘In some cases’, A. writes, ‘the unfamiliar Roman concepts may actually provide a richer vocabulary for capturing familiar modern political experiences’ (p. 198). In demonstrating how this is so, his book offers a rich resource for students of political thought today.
