This research examines how, when and why the Romans assigned and defined the tasks of preparing and commanding fleets during the Republic. In doing so, it brings new evidence to bear on the wider debates about the nature of the prouincia and the institutional and administrative development of the Roman empire. The communis opinio is that a prouincia originally represented a functional “sphere of operation” that was allotted or assigned to a magistrate and that it only later developed a geographical meaning with territorial connotations through the process of “provincialisation.” This research challenges that view through an analysis of the evidence for the definition, assignment and practical use of the prouincia classis and other prouinciae connected with the command of fleets. Drawing upon and analysing the lists of administrative arrangements to be found in the “annalistic” sections of the surviving books of Livy’s History, it argues that prouinciae were defined in specific geographical and functional terms long before the development of permanent territorial empire. This offers a new perspective which points to and elucidates the flexible use of the prouincia as a means of separating magistrates and promagistrates in space or by function in space. It argues that the rationale for this was to limit conflicts between commanders over command and triumphal rights. By combining evidence from a wide range of sources after the loss of Livy’s History from 167, the research shows that the above rationale for demarcating prouinciae still applied in the first century B.C. However, it also demonstrates that there were significant changes with the assignment of vast Mediterranean-wide naval prouinciae in the first half of the first century B.C. It argues that the definition of these prouinciae was made possible by the development of a singular collective Mediterranean-wide ora maritima, which was brought about by the Romans’ increasing “acknowledgement of empire.” The negative political and institutional implications of these developments are also assessed. Finally, in discussing the above, this research also provides new insights into the role and auctoritas of the Senate, the function and freedom of magistrates, and the Romans’ conceptualisation of their empire.

No description available.

Le duché de Milan durant le Quattrocento est marqué par le règne des deux familles dominantes de la Lombardie, les Visconti et les Sforza. Pendant une période marquée par les conflits territoriaux et les disputes pour le titre ducal, l’art du gothique international se fait essentiel dans la propagande politique. Parmi les diverses œuvres de cette période qui soulignent le pouvoir et la position hiérarchique de la noblesse, les paquets de tarot le plus anciens qui nous sont parvenus sont les jeux Visconti-Sforza, datés de la première moitié du 15e siècle. Nommés ainsi selon leurs commanditaires présumés, la nomenclature est utilisée pour désigner quinze jeux, dont trois sont analysés dans ce mémoire : le jeu Pierpont Morgan-Bergame (réparti entre l’Accademia Carrara, à Bergame; le Pierpont Morgan Library, à New York; et la collection privée Casa Colleoni, à Bergame), le Brera-Brambilla (Pinacoteca di Brera, à Milan) et le Cary-Yale (Beinecke Library, à New Haven). L’étude de ce corpus nous permet de comprendre l’histoire de pouvoir des Visconti et des Sforza, ainsi que les traditions de la littérature poétique et des processions triomphales de l’époque. Par une analyse iconographique de ces jeux, notre objectif a été de cerner et de comprendre le contexte socioculturel dans lequel ils ont été créés. Cette analyse met également en lumière les importantes questions concernant les attributions aux artistes, les dates de réalisation et l’identification du mécénat de ces jeux de luxe. / The Duchy of Milan in the Quattrocento is marked by the reign of two powerful families in Lombardy, the Visconti and the Sforza. During a time full of territorial conflicts and disputes for the ducal title, art in the International Gothic style became essential to political propaganda. Among the various works of this period that emphasize the power and the hierarchical position of the nobility are the oldest sets of tarot that have survived to the present day: the Visconti-Sforza tarot decks, dating from the first half of the 15th century. Named according to their supposed patrons, the nomenclature is actually used to designate fifteen separate decks, three of which are analyzed in this master’s thesis: the Pierpont Morgan-Bergamo deck (divided between the Accademia Carrara in Bergamo, the Pierpont Morgan Library in New York, and the private collection Casa Colleoni, in Bergamo), the Brera-Brambilla (Pinacoteca di Brera, in Milan) and the Cary-Yale (Beinecke Library, in New Haven). The study of this corpus enables us to unravel the struggle for power between the Visconti and the Sforza, as well as the traditions of the literature and the triumphal processions of the time. Using an iconographic analysis, our goal is to identify the sociocultural context in which these decks were produced. This work's analysis also highlights questions about the attributions, the dating and the patronage of these luxury playing cards.

This dissertation brings the Ancient Near Eastern practice of the wheel, hanging, impaling, placarding, and crucifixion (WHIPC) into the scholarship of crucifixion, which has been too dominated by the Greek and Roman practice. WHIPC can be defined as the exposure of a body via affixing, by any means, to a structure, wooden or otherwise, for public display (Chapter 2). Linguistic analysis of relevant sources in several languages (including Egyptian hieroglyphics, Sumerian, Hebrew, Hittite, Old Persian, all phases of ancient Greek, and Latin) shows that because of imprecise terminology, any realistic definition of WHIPC must be broad (Chapter 3). Using methodologies and interdisciplinary approaches drawn from art history, archaeology, linguistic analysis, and digital humanities, this work analyzes scattered but abundant evidence to piece together theories about who was crucified, when, how, where, and why. The dissertation proves that WHIPC records, written and visual, were kept for three primary functions: to advertise power, to punish and deter, and to perform magical rituals or fulfill religious obligations. Manifestations of these three functions come through WHIPC in mythology (see especially Chapter 4), trophies (Chapter 5), spectacles, propaganda, political commentary, executions, corrective torture, behavior modification or prevention, donative sacrifices, scapegoat offerings, curses, and healing rituals. WHIPC also served as a mode of human and animal sacrifice (Chapter 6). Regarding the treatment of the body, several examples reveal cultural contexts for nudity and bone-breaking, which often accompanied WHIPC (Chapter 7). In the frequent instances where burial was forbidden a second penalty, played out in the afterlife, was intended. Contrary to some modern assertions, implementation of crucifixion was not limited by gender or status (Chapter 8). WHIPC often occurred along roads or on hills and mountains, or in in liminal spaces such as doorways, cliffs, city gates, and city walls (Chapter 9). From the Sumerians to the Romans, exposing and displaying the bodies consistently functioned as a display of power, punishment and prevention of undesirable behavior, and held religious and magical significance. Exposure punishments have been pervasive and global since the beginning of recorded time, and indeed, this treatment of the body is still practiced today. It seems no culture has escaped this form of physical abuse.