Search Results

This chapter focuses on 1st-century CE Roman historical narrative, with a view to understanding to what extent Josephus may have been influenced by such writing. It is argued that works such as Valerius Maximus’ Memorable Words and Deeds, Tacitus’ Annales, and Frontinus’ Strategemata all displayed a similar tendency towards the use of exemplarity (exempla) as a principal technique of understanding the past. The increasing emphasis on ‘great figures’ by 1st-century Roman historians, a phenomenon catalyzed by and pulled towards the figure of the Emperor, was a literary tactic which underlined individuals as unique actors in history. It also, however, portrayed individuals’ actions and behaviours as relatively fixed paradigms, to be imitated or eschewed by posterity. This chapter maintains that this technique of exemplarity is to be seen as inextricably linked with the increasing influence of biography on Roman historical writing, sometimes, as in the case of Tertullian’s and Jerome’s references to Tacitus’ work, actually becoming conflated with it.

The closing chapter examines the military techniques of Muhammad, both in insurgency and conventional operations, by placing him within the known military science of his era and beyond. His field craft, organization, training, and logistics are evaluated in relation to ideas posited by the best military minds of the era, among them Frontinus, Polyaenus, Maurice, Onasander, and Sun Tzu. Additional comparisons are made of Muhammad's techniques to those calculated by more modern observers of the military art, such as Carl von Clausewitz, Waldemar Erfurt, and Hugo von Freytag-Loringhoven, while analyses by Eric Hoffer and Saul Alinsky are marshalled to an evaluation of Muhammad's political acumen. Chapter 8 concludes with a final assessment of Muhammad as a military commander and of why he ranks among the other great leaders of his era.

This chapter provides detailed information about the Roman aqueducts, ranging from the position and importance of the water sources to the course and volume of the aqueducts and the number and organization of the personnel employed in this critical branch of the Roman public administration. It presents the summary created by Frontinus about the history of how Rome's citizens obtained water during the centuries stretching from the city's foundation to the creation of the aqueducts.

This chapter examines the extent to which Hellenistic compilations were known at Rome and whether these literary forms were imitated in Latin. It considers the Memorable Words and Deeds of Valerius Maximus and the Stratagems of Frontinus, which combine features of the Hellenistic collections into a thematically arranged handbook of historical material apparently unknown in the Hellenistic era.

The strong correspondence between laudatory rhetoric in poetry and panegyric and the images that appear on Nerva’s coins allows a reinvestigation of the age-old debate regarding the agency behind the creation of Roman imperial coin iconography. The evidence available, at least in Nerva’s reign, suggests that the emperor was not the agent; instead, a prominent individual in charge of the mint was responsible for the selection of the imagery. By attending to Trajanic records, it appears that such individuals were very close to the emperor and known to him. This suggests that prominent equestrians in charge of the mint thus were part of the emperor’s inner circle and walked in the same social circles as the people who inked praise directed at the emperor: Martial, Frontinus, Tacitus, and Pliny. These prominent equestrians were thus in a position to visualize the rhetoric used to praise the emperor.