Review of (K. J.) Hölkeskamp Rekonstruktionen einer Republik. Die politische Kultur des antiken Rom und die Forschung der letzten Jahrzehnte (Historische Zeitschrift Beiheft 38). Pp. 146. Munich: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 2004. ISBN: 3-486-64439-4

Arena, V

English

UCL Discovery

The Classical Reviewhttp://journals.cambridge.org/CARAdditional services for The Classical Review:Email alerts: Click hereSubscriptions: Click hereCommercial reprints: Click hereTerms of use : Click here(K. J.) Hölkeskamp  Rekonstruktionen einer Republik. Die politische Kultur des antiken Rom und die Forschung der letzten Jahrzehnte (Historische Zeitschrift Beiheft 38). Pp. 146. Munich: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 2004. ISBN: 3­486­64439­4.VALENTINA ARENAThe Classical Review / Volume 56 / Issue 01 / April 2006, pp 168 ­ 170DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X05000879, Published online: 24 March 2006Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X05000879How to cite this article:VALENTINA ARENA (2006). Review of (K. J.) Hölkeskamp 'Rekonstruktionen einer Republik. Die politische Kultur des antiken Rom und die Forschung der letzten Jahrzehnte ' The Classical Review,56, pp 168­170 doi:10.1017/S0009840X05000879Request Permissions : Click hereDownloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 144.82.107.23 on 11 Sep 2012THE ROMAN POLITICAL SYSTEMH (K. J.) Rekonstruktionen einer Republik. Diepolitische Kultur des antiken Rom und die Forschung der letztenJahrzehnte (Historische Zeitschrift Beiheft 38). Pp. 146. Munich:R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 2004. ISBN: 3-486-64439-4.doi:10.1017/S0009840X05000879This extremely reµned book, published in the supplementary series to HistorischeZeitschrift, discusses previous contributions to the debate on the nature of theRoman political system and successfully steers the subject in new directions. Theauthor’s stance in the debate on Roman democracy, also presented in the collectionof articles Senatus Populusque Romanus. Die politische Kultur der Republik –Dimensionen und Deutungen (Stuttgart, 2004), seems to originate from a very learnedand analytically detailed critique of Millar’s ideas, as presented in a succession ofarticles and culminating in The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic.168   The Classical Review vol. 56 no. 1 © The Classical Association 2006; all rights reservedStrongly arguing the case for the aristocratic character of Roman political culture,the book aims at articulating the responses presented to Millar’s arguments and atlaying out new theoretical, methodological and practical perspectives to further theinvestigation of Republican politics (pp. 16–17).The µrst chapter sets the debate in motion, pleading for a more nuanced picture ofthe so-called ‘orthodoxy’, the ‘traditional’ view of the Roman political system centredon the aristocracy’s role in the conduct of politics. In Chapter 2 H. convincinglycriticises Millar’s constitutional approach. Constitutional history, it is argued, issomething di¶erent from political history, and its deployment leads to the use of thesame meta-historical categories as those applied by the criticised orthodoxy. The authorunderlines how Ch. Meier, in his neglected Res Publica Amissa, had shifted the focus tothe so-called ‘grammar of Roman politics’ (p. 22), while Wieacker had stressed theimportance of moral perceptions such as auctoritas, dignitas, grauitas, gratia and, aboveall, mos maiorum in the shaping of Roman politics. In Chapter 3, H., referring onceagain to Meier’s studies, advocates the cause of ‘structural history,’ where politics isanalysed as closely interdependent on social, mental and cultural factors. The criticalissues of the creation of consensus and of the aristocratic ethos binding the whole ofRoman society are investigated in the next chapters, and a strong case is made for theneed for an interdisciplinary approach (pp. 50–3). Concepts such as imperium, honos,dignitas and auctoritas are part of the ‘political culture’ of the Republic, and this, H.maintains in Chapter 5, should be at the centre of our investigation. The symbolicforms of Roman political culture (e.g. theatre performances, games, civic ritualstogether with monuments) serve to reproduce the legitimacy of the political system andthe reinforcement of the sense of politics (here H. refers to Muir’s as well as toHölscher’s and Zanker’s studies). Implicitly in opposition to Millar’s dismissal of thesenate’s central role, H. analyses in Chapter 6 Roman senatorial aristocracy. Althoughthis is the least original of the nine chapters, it is important for H.’s argument toreproduce these well known results: the senatorial aristocracy was competitive andexclusive at the same time; war and political achievements granted success, but the µnalhonours were bestowed on the aristocracy by the populus Romanus. Introducing inChapter 7 the sociologist Simmel to his analysis of the Roman political system, H.underlines the people’s function as third party awarding the prize amongst thearistocratic competitors. As underlined in Chapter 8, an essential element of suchcompetition was ‘symbolic capital,’ an important notion borrowed from the sociologistBourdieu. Although the introduction of such a concept is not particularly innovative,its centrality to aristocratic competition and, ultimately, to the collective tradition ofthe mos maiorum enables H. to cast a very clear light on Roman political culture. Theauthor takes a militant stance in the conclusion, advocating the importance – which cannever be stressed enough – of moving ancient history beyond its traditional boundaries.For H., the way forward lies in a combination of theoretical reasoning, systematicempirical research, and interdisciplinary practice. The book concludes with anup-to-date and excellent bibliography.One of the essential features of H.’s book is that his analysis of Roman politicalculture is conducted through the careful investigation of modern authors’contributions and their theoretical assumptions. In this way, not only are works inother disciplines applied to the study of ancient history, but also the book µnds itsunique feature: it is neither a book about modern historiography only nor yet a bookof pure theory to be applied to the study of ancient history. It is both of these andmore. Its main achievement consists in presenting well-known facts in a new andexciting form o¶ering considerable stimulus to further discussion. At times, however,   169the author appears rather monolithic in his approach, paying exclusive attention tothe top of society, and hence partly losing the nuances of that structural history whichhe himself advocates so convincingly (see, for instance, his particular attention to theanalysis of the mos maiorum on pp. 24¶., 68¶.).If, as H. persuasively argues, Polybian constitutional history, as re-evaluated byMillar, is now superseded, H. himself seems unable, on occasion, to escape the sameframework. The claim that the assembly as a legislative body does not constitute a signof people’s participation in the decision-making process is not entirely convincing: if itis true that an increase in legislative activity indicates a certain erosion of consensus, it isnot so clear why such activity cannot be considered a ‘kind of democracy’, according toMillar’s deµnition. Although H. suggests that we leave behind the dichotomy betweenaristocracy and democracy, it would have been helpful if he had clariµed his ownworking deµnition of democracy against which he judges Millar’s approach.Although it is not expressly stated, the book is clearly aimed at the initiated: there isno discussion of primary material (few sources are presented in Chapters 6 and 8,which have chie·y an explicative function) and a certain level of prior knowledge isassumed. It is a pity that the book does not make very smooth reading for anon-German reader, since the author rightly laments the neglect of Germanscholarship by participants in the current debate. None the less, it is to be hoped thatreaders will make the e¶ort, as they will be richly rewarded.University College London VALENTINA ARENAucravar@ucl.ac.uk170   The Classical Review vol. 56 no. 1 © The Classical Association 2006; all rights reserved

Reconstructions of a Republic. The political culture of ancient Rome and the research of the last decade.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UCL Discovery