No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The fullest and most comprehensive unpacking of the term finis has yet to be achieved. Studies have narrowly focussed on the idea of border, boundary or frontier, without even entertaining the prospect of interpreting the study from the ancient point of view. This investigation considers the use of the word finis in Livy and attempts to recreate a conception of finis which mirrors as closely as possible that of a Roman of the Republic up to the very Early Empire. Besides the remarkably high usage of the term by Livy, the author’s work is also useful due to its chronological nature, which allows for broad investigation throughout the Republican Period, as well as shedding light on the Early Imperial concept of finis. The main aim of this dissertation is to provide a collective analysis of diverse cases, which together can help build a complete picture of the detectable features related to the term finis. As well as this, the analysis of the contexts – in which the term finis is used has also cast light on those features of finis – that have remained fixed despite the different historical contexts in which they appear. For example, throughout my study, two fundamental concepts will continue to pop up in front of the reader’s eyes: a) the inapplicability of modern conceptual categories to the idea of finis and b) finis – if translated as border, boundary or frontier – as a concept applicable not to a line, but to a spatial element. On the basis of Livy’s evidence – drawn from his work Ab Urbe Condita – this study attempts to present a reconstruction of the term through the identification of an entirely new concept. This study is conceived in terms of a crescendo, which begins with the basic definitions attached to finis and evolves, adding an increasing number of evidences until it reaches a climax, whereby the reader can see both those invariable features of finis in Livy’s account and the 4 Introduction: Research guidelines evolution of the term as fines are applied within different political contexts. Rome – a city that rose on a finis, the Tiber River – reinvented or remodelled the concept of finis, demonstrating behaviour antithetical to the notion of confining herself behind a ‘single line’. Once identified as a finis, the natural features helped the Romans to exert their imperium, which was itself an embodiment of the features contained within the concept of finis. The establishment of the fines provided an ‘imaginary’ subdivision of the territory subjected to the Roman imperium in a series of land strips. This is documented by Livy through Rome’s expansionist ‘finis-system’, from a single occupation of the Janiculum Hill to the scientific approach and setting of the treaty of Apamea. Although the lacunae in Ab Urbe Condita – from 168 B.C. onwards – do not permit a direct connection between the Late Republic and the Early Empire, some elements can be used to evidence an intimate relationship between Livy’s and Augustus’ thinking and terminology. To some extent, this common intent has made possible this attempted reconstruction of the ‘bordering practices’ used in the last 150 years of the Republic, as well as the possible evolution of such practices in the first 150 about years of the Empire.

Orientador: Ivan Esperança Rocha / Banca: Renata Lopes Biazotto Venturini / Banca: Andrea Lucia Dorini de Oliveira Carvalho Rossi / Resumo: No primeiro livro de sua obra, o historiador romano Lívio se dedica ao período lendário da fundação de Roma e ao período monárquico que se sucede. A publicação deste volume ocorre paralelamente aos primeiros anos do principado de Augusto. Ao caracterizar sua época como um período de decadência da sociedade, o historiador incita seus contemporâneos a recuperarem o respeito às antigas tradições através da sua história de Roma. Esta pesquisa visa analisar a construção das personagens históricas dos reis e identificar as influências do presente do historiador na sua composição, principalmente no que tange à defesa de um modelo de identidade romana calcado nas tradições do mos maiorum. / Abstract: In his first book, the Roman historian Livy dedicates himself to the legendary period of the foundation of Rome and to the monarchic period that follows on. The publication of this volume takes place in the first years of Augustus' principality. In characterizing his age as a period of society decadence, the historian incites his contemporaries to recover the respect for the old traditions through the history of Rome. This research aims to analyze the construction of historical characters of kings and identify the influences of the historian's present in its composition, especially regarding the defense of a model of Roman identity based on the traditions of the mos maiorum. / Mestre

Este trabalho almeja identificar a maneira pela qual o historiador romano Tito Lívio estruturou a narrativa do terceiro de seus Ab urbe condita libri, tendo em mente a dicotomia entre a moderação e a imoderação enquanto fio condutor das ações individuais e dos eventos abarcados nesta parte da obra liviana. Analisar-se-ão, portanto, os episódios basilares do livro III considerando-se a intersecção estabelecida pelo autor entre virtudes, personalidade e poder em seu relato, articulando-a às concepções historiográficas e à tradição histórica observada por Tito Lívio no exercício de seu ofício, assim como ao contexto em que floresceu a própria composição. / This work aims to identify by which way the Roman historian Livy has structured the narrative of the third of his Ab urbe condita libri, bearing in mind the dichotomy between moderation and the lack of it as a guiding link of the individual actions and events comprised in this portion of the livian work. It will be analized, then, the basic episodes of book III considering the intersection established by the author amongst virtues, personality and power into his report, articulating it to historiographical conceptions and to historical tradition observed by Livy in the practice of his task, as well as to the context in which the composition itself flowered.

Este trabalho almeja identificar a maneira pela qual o historiador romano Tito Lívio estruturou a narrativa do terceiro de seus Ab urbe condita libri, tendo em mente a dicotomia entre a moderação e a imoderação enquanto fio condutor das ações individuais e dos eventos abarcados nesta parte da obra liviana. Analisar-se-ão, portanto, os episódios basilares do livro III considerando-se a intersecção estabelecida pelo autor entre virtudes, personalidade e poder em seu relato, articulando-a às concepções historiográficas e à tradição histórica observada por Tito Lívio no exercício de seu ofício, assim como ao contexto em que floresceu a própria composição. / This work aims to identify by which way the Roman historian Livy has structured the narrative of the third of his Ab urbe condita libri, bearing in mind the dichotomy between moderation and the lack of it as a guiding link of the individual actions and events comprised in this portion of the livian work. It will be analized, then, the basic episodes of book III considering the intersection established by the author amongst virtues, personality and power into his report, articulating it to historiographical conceptions and to historical tradition observed by Livy in the practice of his task, as well as to the context in which the composition itself flowered.

This dissertation discusses the interaction of mythology and power in the Roman Republic and early Principate. It identifies a mythological paradigm that has not been recognized in previous scholarship ("pairs") and traces the use of this paradigm by Roman writers of the second and first centuries BCE. It argues that pair stories problematize the relationship between Roman elite ambition and the Republic's political ideals of equality and cooperation among magistrates. It further argues that these stories evolve over the course of the two centuries under discussion, from tales that are relatively optimistic about the potential of reconciling the tension between individual ambition and elite collegiality to tales that are extremely pessimistic. This evolution is tied to the political turmoil visible at Rome in this period. Several stories are identified as pair stories. The first and most well-attested is the foundation myth of the city, which is discussed at length in chapters two through six. In chapters seven and eight, the pattern is established through the analysis of Amulius and Numitor, Brutus and Collatinus, and the men known as affectatores regni. The historical development of these tales is discussed as thoroughly as possible. The argument throughout is that narratives from second-century writers depict pairs as representatives of productive rivalry. This rivalry encourages the elite to achieve beneficial results for the city, and can be set aside for the public good. Such depictions become less prevalent by the later first century, when the pair narratives instead tend to illustrate destructive competition. This destruction must be understood in the context of its times; the third quarter of the first century BCE saw the establishment of Rome's first monarchy in centuries. It is under the Principate that the tales again become clearly different: competition disappears. Soon afterwards, so does the use of these stories as a tool to think with.

This dissertation discusses the interaction of mythology and power in the Roman Republic and early Principate. It identifies a mythological paradigm that has not been recognized in previous scholarship ("pairs") and traces the use of this paradigm by Roman writers of the second and first centuries BCE. It argues that pair stories problematize the relationship between Roman elite ambition and the Republic's political ideals of equality and cooperation among magistrates. It further argues that these stories evolve over the course of the two centuries under discussion, from tales that are relatively optimistic about the potential of reconciling the tension between individual ambition and elite collegiality to tales that are extremely pessimistic. This evolution is tied to the political turmoil visible at Rome in this period. Several stories are identified as pair stories. The first and most well-attested is the foundation myth of the city, which is discussed at length in chapters two through six. In chapters seven and eight, the pattern is established through the analysis of Amulius and Numitor, Brutus and Collatinus, and the men known as affectatores regni. The historical development of these tales is discussed as thoroughly as possible. The argument throughout is that narratives from second-century writers depict pairs as representatives of productive rivalry. This rivalry encourages the elite to achieve beneficial results for the city, and can be set aside for the public good. Such depictions become less prevalent by the later first century, when the pair narratives instead tend to illustrate destructive competition. This destruction must be understood in the context of its times; the third quarter of the first century BCE saw the establishment of Rome's first monarchy in centuries. It is under the Principate that the tales again become clearly different: competition disappears. Soon afterwards, so does the use of these stories as a tool to think with.