Lex de imperio Vespasiani is the conventional, contemporary name defining the only legal act from... more Lex de imperio Vespasiani is the conventional, contemporary name defining the only legal act from the period of the early Roman Empire regulating the foundations of imperial power to have survived until our times. The inscription is currently kept in the Capitoline Museums in Rome. Together with the Res Gestae Divi Augusti (Monumentum Ancyranum), it is one of the two most important public inscriptions from the Principate era. Dated at the end of 69CE or the beginning of 70CE, the inscription confirms the granting of some or all of the imperial powers to Vespasian and the legality of his actions (the name Vespasian was mentioned three times - lines 25, 28, 30). Although this document regulated the legal position of the new emperor and legitimized his decisions as "useful for the state", in the case of most of its clauses, it referred to the prerogatives of his three predecessors (the divine Augustus, Tiberius and Claudius, who had a privileged position). However, it was not so much a legislative as an ideological exercise. Its aim was to emphasize explicitly a kind of continuity in the strong political position of the “good” emperors from the Julian-Claudian dynasty, especially Augustus, and Vespasian's superior position with regard to the Senate. This distinction of the founder of the principate should not come as a surprise, since the ideology of Vespasian power was characterised by the creation of a second Augustus.
In the article I am making an attempt to interpret one of the extracts of The Roman History by Ca... more In the article I am making an attempt to interpret one of the extracts of The Roman History by Cassius Dio in which the author gives us a relation of a meeting of Augustus with the most important magistrates, senators and knights at the time of princeps’ serious disease, which he started to suffer from in 23 BC. What I am basically trying to do is to set up how we should understand handing over Augustus’ personal ring to Agrippa. I do not agree with existing interpretations which assume that giving the ring to Agrippa was related to his appointing to be a political successor or a private heir to the princeps. In my opinion Augustus wanted his long standing friend and associate just to tidy his private matters in case of death, at the same time appointing him to execute his final will. Another problem that appears in the context of the analysis of the upper extract is a question of planned succession of Marcellus, princeps nephew and son-in-law. Relying mainly on the testimony of numismatic and iconographic sources I challenge a picture of Marcellus as a planned successor to Augustus, which has become established in ancient literature. Moreover, Augustus` actions show that we do not have any significant tips to think that princeps was creating his son-in-law to become his political successor. The last question I discuss is a problem of alleged rivalry between Agrippa and Marcellus, which was mentioned by a few ancient historians. The conflict was believed to finally lead to Agrippa leaving Rome for the East. However, accepting such a version arouses serious doubts. Most of our authors suggesting the existence of an open conflict between Agrippa and Marcellus were the most probably inspired by the later rivalry of Tiberius with young Caesars, which was finally to make Augustus’ stepson remove from political life and go away to Rhodes in 6 BC. From that perspective they also perceived Agrippa`s earlier going to the East. Relying on Josephus Flavius`s words we might however assume that Agrippa`s journey to the East was mainly aimed at ordering a few things in the region (a Parthian question, Rome`s relation with the rulers of vassal kingdoms, control of the administration system in provinces).
Palamedes. A Journal of Ancient History (Studies dedicated to Professor Adam Ziółkowski), 2019
Domitian's damnatio has been looked into many times and from many angles; following the path of s... more Domitian's damnatio has been looked into many times and from many angles; following the path of senatorial historical writings, researchers have often emphasized the totality of the results of the senate decree which ordained it. Based on an analysis of narrative sources, epigraphic evidence, images and statues of Domitian, monuments, and coins, the authors tried to verify that simplistic opinion, pointing out his posthumous popularity in some social circles.
W ostatnich latach dużą popularnością cieszą się studia nad pamięcią, które w historiografii zach... more W ostatnich latach dużą popularnością cieszą się studia nad pamięcią, które w historiografii zachodniej uzyskały nawet status odrębnych badań naukowych i wypracowały własną metodologię. Istotnym elementem tych studiów są również badania nad pamięcią czy też polityką pamięci w antycznym Rzymie. Niniejszy tekst poświęcony jest praktyce potępienia/pohańbienia pamięci, którą w antycznym Rzymie stosowano najczęściej w odniesieniu do cesarzy, których rządy uznano za tyrańskie, oraz osób, którym zarzucano zdradę stanu (perduellio, crimen laesae maiestatis). Bardzo często osoby takie były wcześniej uznawane za wrogów państwa (hostis publicus/hostis populi Romani).
The article offers a critical analysis of the source accounts which present the circumstances sur... more The article offers a critical analysis of the source accounts which present the circumstances surrounding the election of Claudius for princeps. Among other things, I attempt to answer the question whether his appointment to the imperial throne resulted from a sheer concatenation of circumstances or was perhaps due to planned action of a substantial group of soldiers of the praetorian guard.
Lex de imperio Vespasiani is the conventional, contemporary name defining the only legal act from... more Lex de imperio Vespasiani is the conventional, contemporary name defining the only legal act from the period of the early Roman Empire regulating the foundations of imperial power to have survived until our times. The inscription is currently kept in the Capitoline Museums in Rome. Together with the Res Gestae Divi Augusti (Monumentum Ancyranum), it is one of the two most important public inscriptions from the Principate era. Dated at the end of 69CE or the beginning of 70CE, the inscription confirms the granting of some or all of the imperial powers to Vespasian and the legality of his actions (the name Vespasian was mentioned three times - lines 25, 28, 30). Although this document regulated the legal position of the new emperor and legitimized his decisions as "useful for the state", in the case of most of its clauses, it referred to the prerogatives of his three predecessors (the divine Augustus, Tiberius and Claudius, who had a privileged position). However, it was not so much a legislative as an ideological exercise. Its aim was to emphasize explicitly a kind of continuity in the strong political position of the “good” emperors from the Julian-Claudian dynasty, especially Augustus, and Vespasian's superior position with regard to the Senate. This distinction of the founder of the principate should not come as a surprise, since the ideology of Vespasian power was characterised by the creation of a second Augustus.
In the article I am making an attempt to interpret one of the extracts of The Roman History by Ca... more In the article I am making an attempt to interpret one of the extracts of The Roman History by Cassius Dio in which the author gives us a relation of a meeting of Augustus with the most important magistrates, senators and knights at the time of princeps’ serious disease, which he started to suffer from in 23 BC. What I am basically trying to do is to set up how we should understand handing over Augustus’ personal ring to Agrippa. I do not agree with existing interpretations which assume that giving the ring to Agrippa was related to his appointing to be a political successor or a private heir to the princeps. In my opinion Augustus wanted his long standing friend and associate just to tidy his private matters in case of death, at the same time appointing him to execute his final will. Another problem that appears in the context of the analysis of the upper extract is a question of planned succession of Marcellus, princeps nephew and son-in-law. Relying mainly on the testimony of numismatic and iconographic sources I challenge a picture of Marcellus as a planned successor to Augustus, which has become established in ancient literature. Moreover, Augustus` actions show that we do not have any significant tips to think that princeps was creating his son-in-law to become his political successor. The last question I discuss is a problem of alleged rivalry between Agrippa and Marcellus, which was mentioned by a few ancient historians. The conflict was believed to finally lead to Agrippa leaving Rome for the East. However, accepting such a version arouses serious doubts. Most of our authors suggesting the existence of an open conflict between Agrippa and Marcellus were the most probably inspired by the later rivalry of Tiberius with young Caesars, which was finally to make Augustus’ stepson remove from political life and go away to Rhodes in 6 BC. From that perspective they also perceived Agrippa`s earlier going to the East. Relying on Josephus Flavius`s words we might however assume that Agrippa`s journey to the East was mainly aimed at ordering a few things in the region (a Parthian question, Rome`s relation with the rulers of vassal kingdoms, control of the administration system in provinces).
Palamedes. A Journal of Ancient History (Studies dedicated to Professor Adam Ziółkowski), 2019
Domitian's damnatio has been looked into many times and from many angles; following the path of s... more Domitian's damnatio has been looked into many times and from many angles; following the path of senatorial historical writings, researchers have often emphasized the totality of the results of the senate decree which ordained it. Based on an analysis of narrative sources, epigraphic evidence, images and statues of Domitian, monuments, and coins, the authors tried to verify that simplistic opinion, pointing out his posthumous popularity in some social circles.
W ostatnich latach dużą popularnością cieszą się studia nad pamięcią, które w historiografii zach... more W ostatnich latach dużą popularnością cieszą się studia nad pamięcią, które w historiografii zachodniej uzyskały nawet status odrębnych badań naukowych i wypracowały własną metodologię. Istotnym elementem tych studiów są również badania nad pamięcią czy też polityką pamięci w antycznym Rzymie. Niniejszy tekst poświęcony jest praktyce potępienia/pohańbienia pamięci, którą w antycznym Rzymie stosowano najczęściej w odniesieniu do cesarzy, których rządy uznano za tyrańskie, oraz osób, którym zarzucano zdradę stanu (perduellio, crimen laesae maiestatis). Bardzo często osoby takie były wcześniej uznawane za wrogów państwa (hostis publicus/hostis populi Romani).
The article offers a critical analysis of the source accounts which present the circumstances sur... more The article offers a critical analysis of the source accounts which present the circumstances surrounding the election of Claudius for princeps. Among other things, I attempt to answer the question whether his appointment to the imperial throne resulted from a sheer concatenation of circumstances or was perhaps due to planned action of a substantial group of soldiers of the praetorian guard.
Imperium i provinciae Agryppy w latach 23-12 p.n.e. Agrippa's imperium and provinciae between 23 ... more Imperium i provinciae Agryppy w latach 23-12 p.n.e. Agrippa's imperium and provinciae between 23 and 12 BCE Streszczenie: W artykule podejmuję szeroko dyskutowany w nauce problem zakresu i cha-rakteru imperium Marka Agryppy, na podstawie którego działał on jako specjalny wysłan-nik cesarski na terenie różnych prowincji Imperium Romanum. W tekście spróbuję m.in. ustalić: kiedy Agryppa uzyskał specjalne imperium w prowincjach? jaki był jego zakres terytorialny? oraz czy było ono maius, czy też aequum wobec władzy innych namiestników prowincji? Kluczowa w kontekście odpowiedzi na te pytania będzie analiza-obok przeka-zów autorów antycznych-tzw. papirusu kolońskiego, który dostarcza nam w tej materii niezwykle ważnych informacji. Summary: In the paper, I shall take on the matter, widely debated in scholarship, of the range and nature of the imperium held by Marcus Agrippa as the emperor's special envoy within a few provinces of the Imperium Romanum. The questions I shall try to answer include the following: when did Agrippa receive the special imperium in the provinces? What was its territorial extent? And, was it maius or aequum relative to the powers of other * Wydział Pedagogiczno-Artystyczny UAM, ul. Nowy Świat 28-30, 62-800 Kalisz, sawinski2@yahoo.com, ORCID: 0000-0001-8730-7272. Klio. Czasopismo poświęcone dziejom Polski i powszechnym PL ISSN 1643-8191, t. 47 (4)/2018, s. 93-110 http://dx.
W 2018 r. w prestiżowej serii wydawniczej MFNP ukazała się książka Marka Węcowskiego (dalej M. W.... more W 2018 r. w prestiżowej serii wydawniczej MFNP ukazała się książka Marka Węcowskiego (dalej M. W.) pod tytułem Dylemat więźnia. Ostracyzm ateński i jego pierwotne cele. Autor jest uznanym na świecie specjalistą z zakresu historii Grecji w epoce archaicznej i klasycznej oraz historiografii greckiej. Ma w swoim dorobku liczne publikacje, które ukazały się w renomowanych periodykach i wydawnictwach zarówno polskich, jak i zagranicznych 1. Prezentowana monografia dotyczy jednego z ważniejszych komponentów ateńskiej demokracji, jakim była procedura ostracyzmu, która działała w Atenach nieprzerwanie przez okres ponad dziewięćdziesięciu lat. Książka została podzielona na dwie zasadnicze części, które z kolei dzielą się na rozdziały oraz podrozdziały. Na końcu znajduje się kilka ilustracji, świadcząca o dużej erudycji autora bibliografia oraz niezwykle pomocny przy lekturze pracy indeks główny oraz indeks cytowanych w tekście źródeł. W części pierwszej (s. 37-223), którą możemy określić jako historyczno-faktograficzną, M. W. dokonuje rekonstrukcji ateńskiego ostracyzmu na podstawie różnych kategorii źródeł, koncentrując się przede wszystkim na badaniu jego dwustopniowej procedury. W drugiej części (s. 227-287) z kolei podejmuje próbę odpowiedzi na najważniejsze w kontekście założonych celów badawczych pytanie o pierwotny cel i sens ostracyzmu. Dla rozstrzygnięcia tego problemu stosuje oryginalny model interpretacyjny zaczerpnięty z tak zwanej teorii gier autorstwa Roberta Axelroda. We wstępie (s. 19-31) autor skrupulatnie prezentuje dotychczasowy stan badań nad ateńskim ostracyzmem oraz omawia specyfikę zachowanych przekazów źródłowych. Zwraca uwagę, że do tej pory większość badaczy skupiała uwagę głównie na ostrakach, koncentrując się tym samym na analizie drugiego etapu procedury ostracyzmu, a mianowicie na głosowaniu skorupkami (ostrakophoria), * Marek Węcowski, Dylemat więźnia. Ostracyzm ateński i jego pierwotne cele, Wydawnictwo UMK, Toruń 2018 (Monografie Fundacji na rzecz Nauki Polskiej), 339 s.
Uploads
Books by Paweł Sawiński
Papers by Paweł Sawiński