Introduction

1From around 200 BCE onwards a new kind of festival made its appearance in the Greek world. Alongside the familiar festivals for established gods, and the relatively recent festivals for Hellenistic rulers, new but traditionally styled festivals were celebrated in honour of Rome, the rising dominant power in the Mediterranean. These so-called Romaia are attested in more than 35 cities and sanctuaries.1 Their floruit was in the last two centuries BCE, but they appear as late as the 3^rd century CE. Romaia have until now been studied in context with the wider cult of Thea Romē and the development of the imperial cult,2 yet with little attention to their specific agonistic character. On the other hand Romaia are also mentioned in studies of Greek athletics in the Roman period, yet these are not concerned with their particular role in the crucial period of Roman empire foundation. In this paper we propose to see the Romaia as flexible ingredients of a complex process of intercultural communication between Greek cities and the new hegemonic power of Rome. Greeks used the familiar language of cult and festivals to explore and experiment with their relationships with the Romans. The aim of this paper is to understand the specific role that agonistic festivals, i.e. festivals with athletic and other competitions played in this context.3

Background

2The name of the new festival was not a direct reference to the city of Rome, but the Romaia were part of the wider cult complex of a deity on the rise: Thea Romē.4 This goddess took her name from the city, and her rise was presumably aided by the fact that the word rōmē in Greek means force or power, a fortuity which must have given the Romans a special aura in the eyes of the Greeks.5 This goddess was, however, not fully new. Her name was mentioned in some – obscure and fragmentary – accounts already in the 5^th century BC.6 Her initial appearance was as the daughter of Aeneas. In this form she may stand as an exemplary product of the genealogical thinking that was so important in the way that the Greeks tried to make sense of the interconnectedness of the world, and of their own place in it.7 To be connected to the Greeks meant to have a share in their mythological ancestry. For powerful connections whose ancestry was wanting, a suitable link could always be found. Initially, Romē would have been considered as a distant relative at best, who will have been most relevant to the Greeks of Sicily and Southern Italy. Her promotion to a divine personification of the city was connected with the rise of Rome as a Mediterranean power. From the beginning of the 2^nd century, the cult of Thea Romē is attested in the Greek world.8

3The cult of Romē did not stand on its own, however. It was only one manifestation of a broader range of Greek religious responses to the steady rise of Roman power. Greek cities discovered, invented and explored several ways to express their new entanglements. Having learned to deal with Hellenistic kings through the medium of cult,9 Greek cities offered exceptional honours and festivals to individual Romans, starting with the first Roman conqueror of Greece, Flamininus.10 Other victorious generals and Roman officials in the course of the next two centuries were honoured similarly with cult and associated festivals.11 This practice remained a popular option until it was superseded by the rise of the imperial cult from Augustus onwards.12 Variations on this theme are also attested. The Romans could be honoured collectively, as Common Benefactors13, but cults and honours could also be extended to personifications and abstractions that stood for Rome, including the Populus Romanus (Dēmos Rōmaiōn), or the Hearth (Hestia) of the Romans. All these Rome oriented cults were variations on the same theme, using a fixed repertoire that had been exploited in Greek foreign policies for centuries.14 These cults belonged to an experimental middle ground where Greeks operated along similar, but not identical lines to deal with Roman power in the light of experience and local expediency.15

Romaia from 200 BCE to 14 CE

4If we plot the festivals out on a map (Fig. 1 below) we can see that the phenomenon was especially strong in Greece and the Aegean area, although some festivals were found further afield. It is also clear that foundations came in waves that responded to the progress of Roman advances in the East.16 Smyrna was the first city to establish a cult – and presumably a festival – in 195 BCE. Other Romaia that were first set up during, or in the aftermath of the Seleucid war are attested in Delphi, Chios, Magnesia on the Maeander, Alabanda, Xanthos and possibly Chalkis. These early adapters were followed by a number of cases that were linked to the Third Macedonian War. After 168 BCE we find new Romaia in Kos, Athens, Delos, Stratonikeia, Kaunos and Araxa, and on the island of Rhodes. The Achaean war gave the next impetus: new Romaia were founded especially in mainland Greece: Mantineia (now known as Antigoneia), Megara, Messene, Opous, Thebes, and possibly in Chalkis and Oropos.17 A particularly active period was the immediate aftermath of the Mithridatic wars, when a new balance had to be struck between Greek cities and their Roman overlords. Especially Asia saw a strong rise in the number of festivals that were founded or re-founded including Ephesos, Kibyra, Lagina/Stratonikeia, Kyzikos, Thespiae, and possibly, Oropos and Kition. New festivals were still being added until the reign of Augustus (including Didyma, Pergamon, Thespiae, Naples, and Jerusalem), but then the stream apparently dried up. No new foundations seem to be attested afterwards, although this does not mean that the Romaia disappeared altogether. The reign of Augustus was clearly a transitional phase leading up to gradual integration of the Romaia within the imperial cult. Sometimes the Romaia were also known as Sebasta or Kaisareia, or sometimes they were simply replaced by the latter, and the name Romaia was dropped. Yet, we keep finding attestations of Romaia well into the 3^rd century, which suggests that they had not completely merged.18 The Romaia were still identifiable entities, which were proudly commemorated by victors in their inscriptions.

Fig. 1 – Distribution map of the Romaia.

5The Romans themselves preferred to look at these festivals as examples of adulatio graeca – Greek flattery – which they accepted with the disdain of the conqueror. An opposing view would see these festivals, and the cults to which they are connected, as a top-down propaganda measure required by Rome from its subjects.19 However, the motivation behind the festivals cannot easily be reduced to a single factor. In many cases Greek agency will have been the most important factor, but in other cases Romans or pro-Roman authorities may have taken the initiative.20 Romaia were often organised by cities that had recently received Roman support or a major benefaction, others will have set up the festival in the hope of such support or an alliance.21 Some Romaia celebrated a Roman victory, or were generic celebrations of Roman success.22 These festivals were typically organised by Roman subjects, although free cities could also take the initiative. In some cases the festival may be explained as an expression of relief, after having been spared a terrible fate in wartime, in others the festivals were in fact set up in the aftermath of having suffered such a fate.

6It is clear that blanket explanations like ‘gratitude’ or ‘honour’ do not go far enough in giving meaning to these festivals. Agency must often have been shared between the Greek elites and the representatives of Rome in ways that are difficult to disentangle. In this paper we will not try to reduce our analysis to a single factor. We prefer instead to consider the festivals as a flexible and creative medium through which a whole range of political relations could be framed. In this light, they were part of the process of Roman empire formation. When we insist on the political background of festivals, we do not want to imply that we consider the religious background as irrelevant, nor that we conclude that the cult of Romē was merely a cynical exploitation of religious channels for popular forms of mass entertainment. In his study of the later imperial cult, Simon Price has argued that we should not apply modern – Christianizing – notions of a separation between religion and politics to the ancient world.23 In antiquity religion and politics were not separate spheres, but were mutually implicated. Ruler cults gave something in religious terms to those who practiced it. For the Greek cities the cult of Rome was a sensible way to construct the reality of the Roman hegemony.

The festival setting

7The success of these cults depended of course on their ability to find acceptance by the local populations, as well as on their ability to establish a meaningful connection with Rome. We suggest that in both cases the festival setting of the cult was of crucial importance. The Romaia would have been immediately recognisable as stemming from a tradition of collective practices that had for ages given shape to public life in Greek cities.24 It is now widely accepted that in Greek (and Roman) societies membership of a community could be expressed, and even created by, communal ritual activity and shared practices. Traditional Greek festivals offered several opportunities for the display of communal identity, and the Romaia were no exception. The festival processions that are frequently attested at the Romaia provided an opportunity for the organisers to ‘put their world in order’ by having the citizens parade in honour of Rome, according to a predetermined hierarchy.25

8Communal sacrifice provided a second moment. Sacrifices were the high points of the festivities, and often had a central position in the schedule of events – which was closely connected to their political relevance. According to Vernant and Detienne: "sacrifice derives its importance from […] the necessary relationship between the exercise of social relatedness on all political levels within the system the Greeks call the city. Political power cannot be exercised without sacrificial practice".26 Sacrifices were followed of course by the sacrificial banquets which provided a further opportunity for communal self-display and for the renewal of intra-communal ties and internal hierarchies, as the participants shared in the distribution of the sacrificed and cooked meat.27 Participation in collective activities and communal rituals were a way to indicate who belonged to the community, and on what terms. Citizens will have had a privileged position, but cities also consisted of individuals without citizen rights, who could in this way join the community symbolically. Schmitt-Pantel has pointed out that in this respect the borders of Greek polis communities appear to have become more porous as time went by, and it should come as no surprise to find Romans, either Roman settlers or traders and officials, listed among those invited.28 Needless to say, Romaia festivals were also among these occasions.

9The most impressive and enduring aspect of the festivals, however, would have been the contest. Impressive, because the athletic and musical contests that formed their pièce de résistance were performed in front of an audience of thousands, and enduring not only because of the huge theatres and stadia that dominated the cityscapes, but also because of countless monuments and memorials that were dedicated to successful athletes and other performers. It would be no exaggeration to state that for the greater part of ancient populations, the agon was the defining element of a successful festival.

10Agonistic festivals with athletic and other contests had always been a central feature of Greek polis culture, but their role became particularly prominent after Alexander the Great, when the polis as the main form of social and political organisation spread over a large part of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Near East. It is a striking indication of the priorities set by these cities that they invested much time and effort in the construction and maintenance of purpose built theatres and stadiums that were to provide the main settings for athletic and other contests. This was not limited to new cities; existing cities also invested in the construction of permanent stone buildings. These buildings were not merely a convenient setting for public entertainment – they were also used for assembly meetings and other mass-gatherings. Theatres and stadiums thus became closely associated with key aspects of civic life.29

11Festivals are counted among the most important settings of civic life. They harboured the symbolic weight of their communities through their monuments, through ritual action and the traces left behind, e.g. the many inscriptions commemorating the successes of athletes and performers. They were thus a major factor in the process of ‘place-making’ that gave the citizens and other inhabitants of the city a sense of identity and belonging. The architecture of theatres and stadiums was of particular significance in this context. Their semi-circular shape not only provided a clear view of the spectacle or contest, but also allowed spectators to see and observe each other. This collective inter-visibility played an important role in the creation of ‘common knowledge’ – a prerequisite for coordinated action. In his work on rational rituals, the social scientist Michael Suk-Young Chwe explains that people are more likely to take a common course of action, adopt an ideology, or make the same practical choice when they are located in such an ‘inward facing circle’:

One specific way to generate common knowledge, is eye contact. For larger groups the closest thing to eye contact is for everyone to face each other in a circle, which enables each person to see that everyone else is paying attention. This is a reason why inward-facing circles help in coordination.30

12Festivals achieve common knowledge through an intensity of image, feeling, and interaction among spectators who could not only see and hear other spectators but also had the certainty that they themselves were being seen and heard by others.

13This phenomenon is of course most intensively experienced in a circular setting, like a Roman amphitheatre, or a modern football stadium, where it lies beneath the sudden changes in the mood of the crowds, leading at times to mob chanting and even acts of hooligan violence. It is not the anonymity of the stadium, but rather the fact that the spectators are in full view of their peers, that explains such actions.

14At the same time the theatre setting also offers the opportunity to organise displays of mass political loyalty and collective identity. This was precisely why circular forms were considered the ideal setting for political festivals during the French revolution, and why stadiums have appealed to rulers from Roman emperors to modern dictators.31 The effects of common knowledge are also clear in less tense surroundings such as the Royal Albert Hall, which during the last Night of the Proms becomes a prime site for the celebration of British identity.32

15Theatres and stadiums had in fact been the preferred setting for the celebration of civic identity, as well as for presenting the public face of political transactions throughout the Greek world. But these settings were now also exploited to express the links between Greek cities – and the Greek world at large – and Rome. The first Roman conqueror of Greece, Flamininus chose the Isthmian Games as the setting for making the paradoxical announcement that Roman conquest actually meant Greek freedom. Polybius’ description of the scene well conveys the impact this meeting had on the assembled Greek audience:

The celebration of the Isthmian games arrived. […] while people were still in [a] state of uncertainty, all the world being assembled on the stadium to watch the games, the herald came forward, and having proclaimed silence by the sound of a trumpet, delivered the following proclamation: “The senate of Rome and Titus Quintus, proconsul and imperator, having conquered King Philip and the Macedonians in war, declare the following peoples free, without garrison, or tribute, in full enjoyment of the laws of their respective countries: namely, Corinthians, Phocians, Locrians, Euboeans, Achaeans of Phiotis, Magnesians, Thessalians, Perrhaebians”. 33
Now as the first words of the proclamation were the signal for a tremendous outburst of clapping, some of the people could not hear it at all, and some wanted to hear it again; but the majority feeling incredulous, and thinking that they heard the words in a kind of dream, so utterly unexpected was it, another impulse induced everyone to shout to the herald and trumpeter to come into the middle of the stadium and repeat the words: I suppose because the people wished not only to hear but to see the speaker, in their inability to credit the announcement. But when the herald, having advanced into the middle of the crowd, once more, by his trumpeter, hushed the clamour, and repeated exactly the same proclamation as before, there was such an outbreak of clapping as is difficult to convey to the imagination of my readers at this time.34

16The declaration at Isthmia was of course exceptional, and the intensity of this meeting may not have been matched at other celebrations of Roman power, but it is clear that such mass events would have provided everywhere a highly effective setting for mobilising support for Rome, firmly anchored in local traditions.

17The traditional style of the festivals ensured that they could easily be embedded in local structures. An inscription from Rhodes, consisting of a long list of priests and the festivals for which they were responsible, shows how Romaia could be included in an – already busy – festival calendar.35 More detailed information about the way in which a new cult and festival for Rome were integrated in a local framework is found in Miletos. This city had been a long standing ally of Rome, but was, of course, also part of the Attalid network. Full blown contests in honour of Rome were only organised after 133. An inscription of c. 130 BCE lists the duties of the priest of Rome:

With good fortune. The man who buys the priesthood of the Demos of the Romans and of Romē will register straightaway a priest with the treasurers and the basileis; this man should be not younger than twenty years old. The man registered will act as priest for three years and eight months, starting in the month of Metageitnion when Kratinos is stephanophoros, or he will put forward another man who will act as a priest instead of himself for the same period of time, once he has been consecrated to Zeus Telesiourgos, and each year on the first day of the month of Taureon he will get sixty drachmas from the treasurer and on the first day of the month of Taureon he will sacrifice a fully-grown animal to the Demos of the Romans and to Roma. On the eleventh day of the same month let those gymnasiarchs who are entering office, together with the ephebes sacrifice a fully-grown animal and let each give to [the priest] the prescribed perquisites (i.e. the share due the priest).
[…] and for the other athletic events distributing to each the appropriate prizes and setting up prizes for dedication, namely the arms of a warrior, no fewer than three sets, with the contest inscribed on them, and making the most glorious effort concerning these in accordance with our people’s respect for the divine and gratitude towards the Romans. And, together with the priest, the gymnasiarchs of the young men are to share the responsibility and organization so that the contests might be as impressive as possible. On the eighth day at the close of the same month let him hold a contest in the children’s palaestra, including to torch race and the other athletic events, and conduct it in the proper manner. And, together with him, the paidonomoi are to share the responsibility and organization. There is to be a dedication of the arms that were set up in the Roman games, for the present taking place in the gymnasium of the young men but later, when the temple of Romē is finished, in the Romaion. Let the priest sacrifice, on the first day of each month, a fully-grown animal to the Demos of the Romans and Romē, having been given by the prytany treasurer ten drachmas for the sacrifice. (This is followed by instructions for additional sacrifices.)36

18Romaia – and all Rome-oriented cults for that matter – continued to build on Greek experiences with the cults for Hellenistic rulers that had spread over the Greek world from the 4^th centuries BCE.37 It would seem, however, that a simple substitution was not very common, which belies the assumption that such cults were cynical political ploys, devoid of any religious meaning.38 On the contrary, Rome oriented cults were regularly anchored in existing cults. This provided the Rome oriented cult with a readymade setting and a place at the heart of the city, and this must have served to overcome any hesitation on the part of the locals to accept this religious innovation.

19The Romaia also provided a conduit for creating, maintaining and advertising links with Rome. While this link was already clear enough from the name of each festival itself, solidarity with Rome could be further emphasised and strengthened in different ways. One sensible measure was of course to ensure the presence and ideally the participation of Romans. An agonothete in Chios undertook "to receive Romans who were visiting during the festival of the Theophania Romaia […] and invited them also to a banquet".39 An inscription from Kyzikos records an honorific decree issued by the demos and the Roman traders to be announced at the occasion of the Romaia – there can be no doubt that these ‘Romaioi’ would have been present at the occasion.40 To secure the participation of Roman competitors would not have presented a major obstacle, as Roman settlers were increasingly integrated in the world of the gymnasia and the contests.41 In other cases we find that Romans were involved as sponsors or as agonothetes, as happened already to Flamininus in Nemea and Aemilius Paullus in Amphipolis.42 Sometime between 6 BCE and 2 CE the Thespians managed to recruit Tiberius Claudius, son of Tiberius Claudius (none other than the future princeps) for their Erotideia Romaia – surely this would have ranked as a major PR success.43

20In other cases the organisers opted to integrate the pro-Roman message into the programme itself. We have seen above how the theatrical setting would be ideal for organising mass declarations of loyalty. We know that Flamininus’ declaration at Isthmia was followed by cults, celebrations and other acts of homage throughout the Greek world. In Chalkis such celebrations included the hymn that was still sung by the population during festivals in Plutarch’s day:

And the Roman faith we revere, which we have solemnly vowed to cherish; sing, then, ye maidens, to great Zeus, to Rome, to Titus, and to the Roman faith: hail, Paean Apollo! hail, Titus our saviour!44

21Another example of a hymn, which was sung in honour of Romē is the one attributed to the poetess Melinno, which is normally dated to the second century BCE.45 It addresses the goddess as a "war loving queen" and "the daughter of Ares", who was given "invulnerable rule by the Fates". But the hymn also emphasised the beneficial elements of Roman rule: Romē was hailed for safely steering the subject cities, and for offering a "fair wind of rule".

22The mass singing of such hymns in the stadiums and theatres at the occasion of festivals would have presented an impressive display of pro-Roman feelings among the Greek populations, which could not have left the members of the singing public themselves untouched.

23However, the pro-Roman message of Romaia could also be underlined by other means, e.g. by introducing changes in the programme. A striking example is found in Oropos. When the local festival of the Amphiareia was ‘restored’ and revived as the Amphiareia Romaia, a new event was added to the programme: the euangelia tēs Rōmaiōn nikēs (the good tidings of the victory of the Romans).46 There is some debate about the contents of this event, but it is clear that it occupied a conspicuous position in their festival programme. The Euangelia would have reminded those present that they enjoyed the freedom to celebrate Greek games to the victory of and protection by the Roman army.

24Another subtler way to connect Rome to the Greek world was to mobilise the resources of mythical and historical past. It was probably no coincidence that dramatic contests in the Romaia of Magnesia on the Maeander were dominated by themes related to the Trojan wars – one of the central conduits along which links between Greece and Rome were forged.47 Another example of this use of the past is found on Chios where the above mentioned agonothete did his best to placate the Romans by including references to their own past:

[…] wishing in every [way to make clear the] goodwill and gratitude of the demos and to have [the citizens maintaining] and increasing that which [pertains] to glory and [honour, he caused to be made from] his own resources a dedication to Roma, costing [a thousand?] Alexandrian [drachmas] containing an account of the founder of Rome, [Romulus and] his [brother] Remus – on which occasion it happened that they [were begotten by Ares himself], which may be reckoned to be true on account [of the bravery of the Romans].48

25Deeming a conspicuous monument not enough, he also made sure that there were portable mementoes for the participants to take home:

And he took care of the [fashioning] of the weapons [offered by the] demos to the victors in the athletic contests [and he ensured that there should be] engraved upon them legends (tending) to the glory of the Romans […]

26Every time that the victorious athletes would look at their trophy, they would also be reminded of the links between Chios and the Romans. The result must have been a successful blend of Roman history and Greek cultural practice. In this way we can understand how the new power of Rome was experienced – or at least meant to be experienced – in local contexts. Festivals organisers used symbolic gifts, mass expressions of gratitude, collective hymn-singing, and other means to mobilise the local populations behind the leadership of Rome.

27But festivals also catered for wider audiences: the festival setting also helps to understand how this pro-Roman message was spread throughout the Greek world. To this end it may be fruitful to approach the Greek festival culture from a network perspective. It is not difficult to see how festivals can be seen in network terms. Each polis was the hub of its own local network, created by festivals that were open to the population of center and periphery. However, as soon as festivals were open to participants and audiences from other cities and regions they began to operate as nodes in a wider, de-centralized festival-network.49

28The use of network theory has had an impact in the field of ancient studies. Ian Rutherford was one of the first to apply social network analysis to the world of Greek festivals. His study focused on the theoria, a formalised system of delegated festival viewing that was important in maintaining the links between Greek cities in the Hellenistic period.50 Festival networks are also at the center of a project at the University of Groningen. We focus on the activities of participants (athletes, artistic performers) as well as theoroi and other officials and organisers as the network agents who maintained the links between the festivals nodes in the network.51 This project, which is still in its initial stages, is centred on the construction of a database designed to capture mobility between festivals for a network analysis from the Hellenistic period to the end of the Roman period. Its aim is to understand how the Greek festival culture was a central globalising force that connected the Hellenistic world and laid the foundations for the successful integration of the Hellenistic world in the Roman empire. We expect that Romaia – and the festivals of other Rome-oriented cults – played an important role in this process. A full assessment of how effective such networks were can only be conducted after the completion of this database. What we can offer here are some reflections on how this connectivity may have taken shape. We want to conclude with a brief discussion of two case studies that illustrate the potential of our approach.

Stratonikeia and Assos: creating a link through Romaia

29For our first case study we turn to the city of Stratonikeia in Caria. The city was a Hellenistic foundation, created from a synoecism of four smaller communities that continued to play a part in its history, and contained the important sanctuaries of Panamara and Lagina. The city became the centre of the Carian Chrysaoric League. It became entangled with Rome’s presence in the East from an early stage: in the 190’s BCE Antioch III and his son Seleucus appear to have ‘given’ the city to Rhodes, but in 167 BCE after the war against Perseus, Rome granted the city its freedom.52 From that moment onwards Stratonikeia became one of the strongest supporters of Rome in the region. Around the same time the Stratonikeians also seem to have initiated a festival in honour of Rome to express their gratitude, but certainly also to remind their neighbours of their powerful protector. Our evidence for this festival does not come from Stratonikeia itself, but from another ally of Rome: the city of Assos in the Troad, several hundreds of kilometres away.

30The document that is now in Boston is a long honorific inscription in honour of the city of Assos, issued by the city of Stratonikeia. It commemorates the dispatch of a certain Amynamenos, son of Bresikles, who was sent as a judge by the Assians to the city of Stratonikeia:

To good Fortune: the people of Assos shall be praised and crowned with a golden crown, because they sent a virtuous and good man to both of our cities. […] And let contest presidents make proclamation of the crowns, in the musical contest which is celebrated in honor of Rome (τῶι ἀγῶνι τῶι μουσικῶι τῶι συντελουμένωι τῆι Ῥώμῃ), in the following words: “The people of Stratonikeia crown the people of Assos and Amynamenos, son of Bresikles, the judge sent to us, with a golden crown, on account of their excellence, justice, and good-will towards our people.” And in order that the Assians also may know the gratitude of our people, let an ambassador be chosen, and let the ambassador-elect, immediately upon his arrival at Assos, present himself to the senate and the assembly of the people, and make known the honours herein voted to them, as well as the justice which was meted out by their judge, and let him request them, as they are already well-wishers and friends of our people, to increase their friendship, knowing that the people of Stratonikeia will ever preserve their good-will for the Assians. Let him request that the honours be proclaimed at Assos also every year at the celebration of the games, and that a prominent place be set apart in which a stone stele having this decree engraved upon it may be set up.53

31The Stratonikeians advertised their links with Assos in the context of the new festival for Rome thus ensuring maximum exposure to this new alliance. As to Assos, we see that the announcement of the honours for their fellow citizens was also to take place at a festival, although we do not know at which particular festival. The inscription shows how festivals were used to advertise ties between two cities – and two festival networks. However, the stone did not simply serve as a monument of the friendship between the two cities, but also placed this friendship in a wider – Roman – context. The explicit condition that the announcement was to be made at the celebration of the Stratonikeian Romaia suggests that the power of Rome lay behind this particular alliance, which was an important message to get across to friends and foes alike. It is striking that both cities would stress their privileged relationship with Rome at a later stage.

32The history of the Stratonikeian festival in the second century is not very clear. We cannot say how often these Romaia were celebrated, if they were celebrated at all. It is clear however, that the Roman links were re-emphasised at a later stage. During the Mithridatic wars Stratonikeia’s loyalty to Rome was severely tested, but the Stratonikeians remained steadfast, an outcome that was certainly not wasted on the Romans.54 In a letter to Stratonikeia of 81 BCE,55 Cornelius Sulla refers to the continuing loyalty of the polis and her pivotal role in the war against Mithridates. The Stratonikeians are rewarded with a number of privileges and with a considerable extension of their territory. They responded to this stroke of good fortune by the reorganisation of the festival at Lagina, where the celebration of the festival of their main goddess Hekate was now merged into the Hekatesia-Romaia, for which they sought recognition from a wide circle of Greek cities, and formal confirmation by the Roman senate in the 70’s. The list of Stratonikeia’s network has not survived intact, but it is clear that the city sought support from a number of its neighbours from some cities in Old Greece, and as well from new Greek cities further afield.56 The Stratonikeians mapped out this web of connections in a monumental inscription, which they placed in the sanctuary of Hekate, and which formed the dramatic backdrop of the celebration of the games. Rome’s presence must have been felt throughout the celebrations. Assos also appears to have continued siding with Rome. In contrast to Stratonikeia, most of the evidence for Assos’s support of Rome dates from the early imperial period, when the city and the community of Roman businessmen, who had apparently built up quite a strong position in the city repeatedly declared their loyalty to Rome, the imperial house, including Livia, who as Thea Livia Nea Hera now occupied Thea Romē’s place.57

33It may be suggested, therefore that the common friendship with Rome was used to frame the friendship between these two cities. From a network perspective: if we consider the two cities as nodes in their own, separate pre-Roman networks, it was their shared connection with a third city, Rome that may have bound them, and their regional networks together – Rome thus acted as broker even between Greek cities.

The Erotideia and Mouseia of Thespiae

34Another example of the way that festivals were used to anchor Roman power on Greek soil – and in a festival network – is to be found in Boiotia. The cities in this region had a strong agonistic tradition going back to at least the Classical period. It is clear, however, that the coming of Rome had a major impact on the ways that these festivals developed and interacted with each other.58

35The dense festival calendar of Boiotia shows several events in honour of Rome – though admittedly not all were equally successful. The city of Thebes seems to have set up Romaia in the middle of the second century BCE. Denis Knoepfler suggests that they were first organised in or soon after 146, when the city of Thebes was spared by Metellus in the Achaian war.59 The limited information we have suggests that their catchment may have remained largely local. Knoepfler argues that the low turnout may have been connected to a schism inside the Dionysiac association, which took place around 120-110 BCE.60 However, the festival played a role in promoting connectivity, as the performers who were also active at other places will have spread the news. The victor in the contests for heralds was a certain Polemon son of Polemarchos from Delphi, who was probably a councillor in his home town, and also served as its ambassador. Another victor who is known from other sources is Abron son of Philoxenos, who was also a victor in the rhapsodia at the Mouseia of Thespiai in c. 110 BCE. These men provided a link between this local festival and the wider world of Boiotian agonistics. At any case, the festival does not seem to have survived the Mithridatic wars, when Thebes was severely punished by Sulla.61

36A more successful case is presented by Thespiai. A passage in Plutarch shows that in the imperial period Thespiai was famed for a combined festival of Eros and the Muses.62 At least, that is how Plutarch presents it, but in fact the situation is more complex. It is now agreed that in the Classical period Thespiai had one major festival for the Muses (who resided on nearby Mt. Helikon) that was strong in cultural disciplines (i.e. contests in music, oratory and poetry). The festival must have had a long tradition as a local event but it became epigraphically visible only in the course of the Hellenistic period. An important moment was at the end of the 3^rd century BCE when Thespiai won Panhellenic recognition for the Mouseia, after which it was celebrated as a stephanitic and pentaeteric festival.63

37In the 2^nd century another festival was added to the festival calendar: the Erotideia set up for the city’s main god Eros. It was also pentaeteric, and it was mainly dedicated to athletic contests. In this way, the festivals complemented each other perfectly. The exact foundation date is not known, nor is the date that the title of Romaia was awarded. Most scholars assume a date in the second century BCE, and Graf even suggests a date soon after the battle of Pydna in 168,64 but a later date has been suggested by Knoepfler. He has made a strong case for dating the (re)foundation as Erotideia-Romaia to the early 1^st century BCE.65 Thespiai appears to have suffered in the Achaean revolt, as it was treated badly by the Roman victor Mummius, who took away the famous statue of Eros by Praxiteles, and placed it in the theatre of Dionysos in Athens. The festivals of Thespiai may have been in the doldrums as well.66

38Agonistic life was revived again after the Mithridatic war when Sulla who – as the self-proclaimed favourite of Venus – restored the Eros statue, and thereby its cultural and religious identity, to Thespiai. The festival for Eros was now re-instated as the Erotideia Romaia and stephanitic status was claimed. Theoroi were invited: a fragmented Athenian inscription mentions theoroi reporting back home "that the sacred things had gone well" (ta hiera kala) should probably be dated around this period.67 We may assume that the relations with other cities were maintained in a similar way. The epigraphic evidence for the resurrection of festival life comes largely from victory lists that show the success of Thespiai in attracting competitors from further afield.68

Fig. 2 – Mouseia before 100 BCE.

Fig. 3 – Mouseia and Erotidaia after 100 BCE.

39At this point in time the history of the two Thespian festivals is actually getting somewhat opaque, but one important development was that the Thespians played their Roman card much stronger than before. For one thing, the nomenclature of the two festivals was easily adapted in response to political and dynastic changes.69 The Erotideia were ‘advertised’ as the Erotideia Romaia, and the Kaisareia Erotideia Romaia; whereas the Mouseia could be listed as the Megala Kaisareia Sebasteia Romaia, or the Megala Traianeia Hadrianeia Sebasteia Mouseia. It would also seem that the festivals got entangled. As we saw above, Plutarch was actually of the opinion that there was in fact one joint festival for Eros and the Muses, and a passage in Pausanias may also be read in a similar way.70 Some inscriptions from the imperial age show that the same sets of agonothetes were responsible for the organisation of the two contests71, which suggests that they were closely linked, if not celebrated together. Combined celebrations are suggested by joint victory lists from the Augustan period, which record the victors in the musical and athletic contests together, although it was more common that the victors in either category were listed separately.72 Their pro-Roman character became more marked in the imperial period when the Roman imperial cult was integrated into the festival protocol.73 In an inscription from the early Augustan age we find a special category of encomia for Eros and the Romans, alongside other more traditional topics.74 In later editions competitions were included to praise Rome, and its emperors, in poetry and prose.75 For the style of the orations we may think of Aelius Aristides’ Roman oration, and we may get some idea of the nature of the poetry from a fragment of the Corinthian poet Honestus that was identified by C.P. Jones as a probable prize winning entry.76 It addresses Livia as an Augusta who "boasts two sceptred gods" (Augustus and Tiberius), who "has illuminated the lights of peace", and "has saved the entire world through her wisdom".

40The case of Thespiai shows that the integration of local festivals in the wider festival network and imperial power relations could be accelerated by a festival programme that anchored the representation of the imperial house in local cultural traditions. Initially, this cocktail must have been effective – and crucial to all parties in times when loyalty to Rome could waver. But it remains to be seen how successful Thespiai was in the long run. A brief look at the surviving victory lists gives us an idea of the changing fortune of the Thespian festivals. In the late Classical/early Hellenistic period Thespiai’s network remained to a large degree regional. Although the festival did attract some contestants from far away corners of the Greek world, most contestants described themselves as Boiotians. However, victory lists from the first century BCE suggest that the Thespians were much more successful in attracting foreign agonistai. Boiotia still remained important, but it was less dominant than before. We suspect, on the basis of preliminary analyses of the material, that in the Roman period (from the 1^st century BCE onwards) there may have been much more mobility between the festivals, with athletes and artists travelling from one site to another.77 This would parallel developments in other parts of Boiotia, and is a sign of the growing integration of the Greek festival networks under Rome.78 But this growth may also have led to increased competition by other contests from all over the Greek East. In the course of the first three centuries CE all Greek cities seem to have got the message, that festivals were a good way to connect with Rome, and imperial festivals cropped up all over the place. The Thespian organisers did the sensible thing, and added money prizes to attract strongest competitors. In the process they seem to have been downgraded, and according to some scholars may thus have lost their ‘stephanitic’ status, although stephanitic status and money prizes were not incompatible.79 With this the inventiveness of the Thespians seems to have reached its limits, and the Erotideia/Mouseia seem to have ended their days as inconspicuous prize contests. The last celebration of the Kaisareia Sebasteia Mouseia that we know of, took place in 212 CE; after that date they were not heard of again.80

Conclusion: Romaia as an ingredient to Rome’s success

41In this brief paper we have looked at the way the Roman empire was perceived and experienced in the Greek world between the first conquest by T. Quinctius Flamininus, and the early empire. As our main vantage point we have not taken the battlefields, where the fate of the Greek world was decided in military terms, nor the headquarters of generals and Roman officials, but the settings of that archetypical Greek cultural practice, the agonistic festival. The rise of Rome was quickly followed by a new type of festival, the Romaia, a traditionally styled festival with athletic and other contests in honour of the new goddess Thea Romē.

42Such festivals occupied a middle ground, where the relations between the Greek cities and Rome were negotiated against the background of tried and tested practices. We argued that the Romaia should not be seen as an epiphenomenon, i.e., as the natural result of Roman conquest, but rather as a driving force that played a crucial and active role in the cultural and political transformations that connected the loosely integrated Greek world to the new global empire. Festivals offered a suitable medium for a flexible response to this new power. We have drawn attention to the capacity of festivals as collective rituals to capture audience attention through spectacle where the power of Rome was experienced en masse, making them exceptional coordinating mechanisms for the rapid transfer of ideas and information at a local level. Moreover, we have suggested that approaching festivals from the perspective of network theory helps us to understand how they contributed to the spread of Roman influence.

43The Romaia linked Rome to the Panhellenic festival network, which played a major role in the constitution of an imagined community of Greeks from southern Italy to the deserts of the Near East. In this way the foundations were laid for later developments in the imperial period. From the age of Augustus Romaia were integrated in the Roman imperial cult, which would become a crucial component of the construction of power of the Roman emperors by their subjects.