Imperialism and localism in provincia Asia: The development of Roman provincial administration, 133 BCE - c. 20 CE

This thesis contributes to the study of Roman imperialism, providing an investigation of the development of Roman provincial administration in western Asia Minor in the period between 133 BCE and c. 20 CE. It investigates the evolving institutional and ideological frameworks put in place by the Roman state and its representatives and local reactions to them. Chapter 1 focuses on the institutions which the Roman state established in the province of Asia. Employing models of institutional dynamics from the social sciences, it argues that Roman approaches to provincial administration were initially ad hoc and situational and that ‘governance’ developed in an unplanned fashion. The critical role played by individuals such as L. Cornelius Sulla and C. Iulius Caesar, whose influence and power allowed them more flexibility in dealing with institutional constraints, is emphasised. Chapter 2 examines the role of Roman official communication in creating an imperial ideology. It stresses that the establishment of Roman hegemony interrupted long-standing modes of interaction between poleis and Hellenistic rulers and argues that structural factors hindered the establishment of a new framework for negotiating power. Chapter 3 shifts the perspective to the responses of Asian communities to these institutional and ideological realities of Roman rule. It argues that in the absence of a secure discursive framework and faced with an evolving institutional landscape, poleis experimented to maximise their own agency. Addressing the specific strategies of issuing honorific decrees, engaging in diplomacy and monumentalising Roman normative documents, it suggests that communities played a critical role in integrating themselves within a Roman administrative framework. Overall, this thesis makes the case that the Roman state had minimal administrative ambitions vis-à-vis provincia Asia. Consequently, institutional and ideological developments establishing governance were driven by combination of individual Roman actors and, in the longer term, local responses to empire.</p