It
is a true pleasure to see this paperback version of Professor Beard’s
monumental 2007 text. Plenty has been written about the great contribution
that the 2007 edition made to the fields of classics and military
history. However, it should be said that this 2009 paperback edition
makes Professor Beard’s arguments and theories accessible
to a new set of readers who will appreciate the more affordable
format. The paperback does not differ from the original. In addition
to the plan, abbreviations, notes, bibliography, acknowledgements,
illustration credits, and index, the 2009 edition keeps the chapters
almost as first written:
- prologue, “The Question of Triumph,”
- 1 “Pompey’s
Finest Hour?,”
- 2 “The Impact of the Triumph,”
- 3 “Constructions and Reconstructions,”
- 4 “Captives on Parade,”
- 5 “The Art of Representation,”
- 6 “Playing
by the Rules,”
- 7 “Playing God,”
- 8 “The Boundaries
of the Ritual,”
- 9 “The Triumph of History,”
- epilogue, “Rome, May 2006.”
In
the first chapter Beard grapples with Pompey’s triumph of
61 BC: do we get the truth about what happened on September 28th and
29th of that year? The data is confusing, obscure, and
misleading (intentionally or unintentionally). On the other hand,
the “accuracy” of the event and the details related
to it are put into context: it is the story about the triumph and
its telling that matter. “The exaggerations, the distortions,
the selective amnesia are all part of the plot” (41) of this
ritual’s story as this book shows. It is not only the event
that matters to Professor Beard since just as important is the
way in which Pompey’s triumph is recalled, exaggerated, debated,
deprecated, and “incorporated into the wider mythology of
the Roman triumph as a historical and institution and cultural
category”
(41). In the second chapter one can read about the vast effect that
the triumph had on Roman life: the memorials that celebrated triumphs
that dominated the Roman cityscapes with the quadrigae and
arches to the linguistic, rhetorical, and philosophical usage of
things
“triumphal.” In “Constructions and Reconstructions,” Professor
Beard brings to the forefront one of the most interesting questions
connected to the triumph: where does the list of triumph move from
the mythical to the historical (or vice versa)? These questions
are posed: “How far back in time can we imagine that
the compilers of the inscribed Fasti,
or other historians working in the late Republic and early Empire,
had access to accurate information on exactly who triumphed, when
and over whom? And if they had access to it, did they use it?
To what extent were they engaged in fictionalizing reconstruction,
if not outright invention?”
And, “Why believe what writers of the first century BCE or
later tell us?”
(74) The
answers to these questions are difficult to formulate and may, of
course, not be correct the at all. For example, it may be the
case, Professor Beard suggests as a possible answer, that the historians
included or excluded certain triumphs form their narratives because
triumphs were in their lists or priorities, or not. One thing
is definitely firm: uncertainty is present when creating any
answers to this imprecise topic or analyzing the data at hand. All
the same, it can be stated that when it came to this ritual “it
is likely to have been more conservative in theory than it was in
practice” (105).
Chapter
four, “Captives on Parade,” focuses on the defeated
that were marshaled ahead of the triumphant general as he entered
the city (it should be noted that the processional order varied
and that the conquered did not always go before the victor). Yes,
it is true that the captives were symbols of his victory, but they
also served as potential moral lessons to the conquering general. “The
Art of Representation” in some measure continues the theme
of the procession in how it was produced in the triumphal display
often publicized in art (some lavishly; some defying reality and
historical data). By and large triumphal illustrations share
the message that wealth was flowing in to the capitol of the new
empire from all parts of the conquered world. Chapter six
discusses the varied, fragile and changing rules that applied to
the structure of the ritual (with special emphasis on Cicero’s
account on the triumph); one rule held firm: the general was to
remain outside of the city walls before the commencement of the
triumphal procession. Professor Beard also notes in the following
chapter that the main character in the triumph, the successful
general, was not always viewed as “divine”; in fact,
the divine general “is essentially a late republican creation” (238). The
other accoutrements (dress, banquet, location, paraphernalia, etc.)
associated with the triumph are further discussed in the following,
penultimate chapter. In the last chapter, the reader is made
once again aware of the purpose of the book: to review the
historical intricacies of this well-known part of Roman history. However, “no
single history of this ritual ever existed…ancient writers
told the story of the triumph and explained its development and
changes in more—and more varied—ways than modern orthodoxy
would allow” (305). Even the origins of the ritual
are murky; one cannot even state when the “first” triumph
was held with 100% accuracy.
A
word of caution is perhaps in order: the author makes it very clear
that what she intends to do in her text is to present a “manifesto
of sorts”
(5). This is not to say that Professor Beard’s personal agenda
gets in the way of or detracts from serious and deliberative historical
research. In fact, the opposite occurs: The Roman Triumph is
one of the most well-planned, easily approached, and, yet, challenging
reads that I have encountered in my professional career. This book
presents the facts, yet tests them; gives us the proper design and
intent of the triumph, but makes the reader stop and ponder if what
has been offered over the millennia regarding this ritual is what
actually took place in ancient Rome; and works its way through the
complex and multilayered strata of literary, artistic, and religious
evidence in a straightforward and uncomplicated manner.