de Nicolay, René, Théorie et pratique de la πίστις chez Polybe: Rome, l’Achaïe et le monde méditerranéen, 386-443

Pour Polybe, la πίστις est une spécificité de la πολιτεία romaine (6.56). Or c’est cette πολιτεία qui explique la conquête romaine de la Méditerranée (1.1.5-6). D’autres États pratiquent la πίστις (l’Achaïe sous Aratos et Philopoemen, la Macédoine au début du règne de Philippe V) mais de façon moins durable et efficace. Le présent article étudie la conception polybienne de la πίστις et montre les avantages comparatifs de la πίστις romaine pour la conquête (cohésion intérieure et fiabilité internationale). Il mesure enfin le rôle de πίστις dans le jugement polybien sur la valeur de la domination romaine.

Daveloose, Alexis, A Roman Matron as Figure of Memory: Social Memory and Cornelia, Mother of the Gracchi, 444-468

Using the frameworks of ‘social memory’ and ‘figure of memory’, this paper argues in favour of Flower’s hypothesis about the statue of Cornelia. She suggested the statue was placed in the Porticus Metelli to support a new elite alliance including the Metelli and Scipiones. This statue was used as a lieu de mémoire and Cornelia as a figure of memory, transforming the memory of herself, her descent, and her sons. Social memory made it possible to erase incongruent elements of past and present. This way, the statue gained an important forward-looking quality, one claimed by Augustus.

Stewart, Owen, Civitas Sine Suffragio: Appellation and Its Inconsistency, 469-478

This article argues that the coining of the term ‘civitas sine suffragio’ was a product of post-Social War historiography. By analysing the inconsistency surrounding citizenship grants found within Livy and Velleius Paterculus, it contends that both civitas optimo iure and civitas sine suffragio were originally recorded under an identical descriptor. The annalists of the Late Republic sought to separate these forms of citizenship to facilitate the narrative of the Social War and the unification of Roman Italy.

Gross, Simcha, Hopeful Rebels and Anxious Romans, 479-513

In accounts of the Jewish “Great Revolt” against Rome, the basic narrative is clear: the Jews were weak, the Romans were strong, and the outcome was inevitable. This simple narrative schema, however, raises critical questions: Why did the rebels undertake what scholars continually assert was a “doomed” enterprise? Why did the Romans undertake a commemorative campaign that cast the victory over a provincial population as one over a foreign nation, and why did Jews across the empire bear responsibility for what was ultimately a local uprising? This paper argues that both rebels and Romans believed that the revolt had the potential to escalate into far more than a local provincial uprising. Both Romans and rebels anticipated the same possibility: that Jews east of the Euphrates might come to the aid of their brethren in Judea, flooding Jewish ranks and overwhelming Roman troops with their size and strength. The paper shows how the conjunction of prevalent ideas about Jews, historical memory, and broader geopolitics could shape the perception and actions of various actors both in the Great Revolt and beyond it.

Gutachter, 514-514