[Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review.]
This volume, stemming from an Ancient History seminar series at the University of Oxford, presents a nuanced reassessment of key aspects of the early Roman Principate, addressing enduring questions about the nature, exercise, and perception of imperial authority. Scholarship on the Julio-Claudian period has often emphasised narratives of absolute power, inevitable tyranny, and the Republic’s demise, frequently shaped by hindsight and selective readings of sources. Such interpretations risk obscuring the subtle mechanisms through which emperors navigated institutional constraints, negotiated with elites, and balanced personal ambition with public expectation. By bringing together a range of interdisciplinary approaches, this volume situates the early Principate as a dynamic and adaptive political system. Its essays illuminate not only the exercise of imperial power but also its reception, representation, and legitimisation, offering fresh perspectives on debates often cast in oversimplified or deterministic terms. In doing so, the collection demonstrates the continuing relevance of revisiting early imperial Rome: understanding these formative decades is essential not only for reconstructing political history but also for appreciating how authority, prestige, and ideology were enacted and communicated in a rapidly transforming society.
In the opening chapter, “Caesar Augustus: A Call to Order”, T. P. Wiseman advocates a return to fundamental empirical principles in the study of the early Principate, prioritising contemporary evidence over later interpretations. He challenges the pervasive portrayal of Augustus as a revolutionary usurper or disguised monarch, arguing that influential scholars (such as Syme, Pelling, Levick, Beard, Cartledge, Wallace-Hadrill, and Zanker) have often perpetuated assumptions of illegality and autocracy by relying on inherited scholarly traditions rather than re-examining the contemporary evidence. Wiseman claims that these interpretations often rest on hindsight, selective readings of sources, and misidentified material evidence, such as the supposed symbolic ramp connecting Augustus’ house to the Temple of Apollo. In contrast, many contemporary sources present Augustus as a stabilising figure who restored consensus and protected the Roman state from oligarchic domination. Wiseman emphasises that the overwhelmingly positive assessments of Augustus by his contemporaries cannot be dismissed in favour of later pejorative narratives. His chapter calls for a careful reassessment of Augustus’ life and policies based on the evidence available to those who actually experienced his rule, proposing a potentially provocative corrective to long-standing historiographical assumptions about the end of the Republic and the emergence of imperial authority.
Eleanor Cowan’s chapter, “Velleius Paterculus, the Rule of Law, and Transitioning to Justice in Post-Conflict Rome”, reconceptualises the period from 49 BCE to 29 CE as a post-conflict society, rather than simply tracing Republican, Triumviral, Augustan, or Tiberian phases. Applying the modern framework of transitional justice, Cowan reads Velleius’ narrative as a reflection of Rome’s efforts to restore law, order, and stability following two decades of civil war. She shows how Velleius portrays the civil wars as a period of profound disruption, emphasising the reconstitution of political and legal institutions under Augustus and the gradual return of justice. In this reading, the princeps emerges as the guarantor of community security, overseeing the delicate balance between the enforcement of law, accountability, and reconciliation. Cowan highlights the importance of memory and historical narrative as mechanisms for processing collective trauma: through the reconstruction of recent events, Velleius simultaneously legitimises the Augustan regime and frames the early Principate as a morally charged resolution to civil conflict. Her study demonstrates how post-conflict rhetoric, legal concepts, and the figure of the princeps intersect in shaping Roman perceptions of justice, authority, and social stability.
Annika B. Kuhn (“Tiberius and the Prestige Paradox: Honour, Auctoritas, and Political Strategy”) explores the intricate dynamics of prestige and honour under Tiberius. By deliberately avoiding ostentatious titles and honours, Tiberius was able to reinforce his own auctoritas and highlight the enduring authority of Augustus. His selective engagement with the Senate’s honorary apparatus, alongside strategic honouring of family members, created a subtle system of negotiation that preserved his influence while navigating the tensions inherent in the early Principate. Crucially, Kuhn shows that the very act of proposing honours (whether accepted or declined) was sufficient to sustain imperial auctoritas, while also offering senators a subtle yet meaningful way to demonstrate loyalty and respect. She emphasises the psychological as well as political dimensions of this approach, showing how Tiberius’ policies maintained authority, constrained senatorial ambitions, and shaped an unwritten ‘manual of power’ for the Principate.
John F. Drinkwater’s contribution, “Sejanus, Macro, and the ‘Plastic’ Principle”, offers a reassessment of Sejanus’ career, portraying him not as a scheming villain but as a capable and opportunistic operator within the flexible structures of the Julio-Claudian Principate. Drinkwater argues that Sejanus’ apparent loyalty to Tiberius, combined with his exploitation of available opportunities, exemplifies the ‘plasticity’ of imperial power – an experimental flexibility in which formal Republican norms coexisted with emergent monarchical realities, but which ultimately also contributed to Sejanus’ downfall. Drinkwater further shows how Sejanus’ successor, Macro, extended this model, safeguarding Caligula’s accession and setting precedents, most notably the significance of Praetorian support, that shaped the long-term operation of the Principate. Drinkwater thus situates Sejanus and Macro as key agents in the transition from procedural flexibility to established precedent within imperial succession and authority.
Chris Mallan’s chapter, “Not Learning from the Master: Dio, Caligula, Tiberius, and Imperial Paradeigmata”, examines Cassius Dio’s portrayal of Caligula as both successor and pupil of Tiberius. Mallan shows how Dio presents Caligula as licentious, cruel, and a threat to senatorial dignity, framing him as a paradigmatic tyrant. The chapter focuses on two key compositional strategies in Book 59: Dio’s use of kata genos and Caligula’s speech on the reintroduction of the crime of maiestas. The kata genos sections, especially at the start of Caligula’s reign, operate outside the annalistic sequence to introduce major themes, foreshadow the emperor’s conduct, and underscore his inconsistency and failure to follow Tiberius’ cautious example. Caligula’s speech illustrates how an emperor might interact with the elite and exposes the structural power imbalance between emperor and Senate, highlighting the risks of ignoring lessons from predecessors. Together, these techniques allow Dio to construct a nuanced account of tyranny, portraying Caligula not only as the anti-Augustus but in many ways also as an anti-Tiberius, while offering instructive insights into the exercise and abuse of imperial authority.
In his chapter, “Herodians in Rome in the Julio-Claudian Period”, Martin Goodman examines the presence and influence of Herod the Great and his descendants at the imperial court. He shows how Roman fascination with royalty, understood as a marker of status rather than a threat, shaped the reception of foreign dynasts. From 23 BCE onwards, the Herodians cultivated ties with Augustus and Agrippa, projecting an aura of exotic royalty that enhanced their influence while remaining fully dependent on imperial favour. Crucially, their performance of subordination, such as wearing Roman togas during visits to Rome or the provinces, was striking precisely because it demonstrated that legitimate monarchs had voluntarily subordinated themselves to the emperor. Goodman argues that the Herodians’ role exemplifies the broader logic of the Augustan revolution, in which client rulers were integrated into the imperial network to consolidate legitimacy. His analysis highlights how personal charisma, Roman citizenship, and performative royal identity intersected with political and ceremonial practices at the early imperial court.
Werner Eck’s chapter, “The Development of the Consulship from Augustus to Nero”, traces the transformation of Rome’s highest magistracy throughout the early Principate. He shows that, while the consulship retained its formal prestige, its practical political power steadily declined. During the late Republic and the era of the triumvirs, the office was subordinated to extraordinary commands, and multiple suffect appointments were used to reward supporters and display factional influence. Under Augustus, the annual consulship was restored, although he initially maintained continuous personal tenure, consolidating authority alongside provincial imperium. Eck demonstrates how the systematic return of suffect consuls allowed wider senatorial participation while preserving the princeps’ control. Tiberius largely continued this pattern, establishing a stable convention, whereas Caligula’s brief deviations reflected his personal drive for dominance. Claudius expanded the number of suffect consuls, with the privilege of a full-year consulship becoming exceptional, a practice largely continued under Nero. Eck shows that, despite its diminished political potency, the consulship remained the highest honour of the senatorial order, with suffect rotations illustrating both the retention of Republican forms and their irreversible transformation under imperial rule.
Josiah Osgood (“Senatorial Women in the Early Principate: Power Without Office”) shifts focus from sensational narratives of consorts, lovers, or conspirators to the substantive roles of senatorial women in elite society. Drawing predominantly on Tacitus, he shows that women connected to senators were not passive observers but actively safeguarded their positions, acquired knowledge of senatorial culture, and helped perpetuate the senatorial order. Although barred from formal office, they could gain wealth, assert status through family ties and nomenclature, and maintain a visible presence in public ceremonies. As Osgood argues, the emergence of the imperial court further integrated them into political life. While their agency was limited, senatorial women nonetheless competed for resources and engaged in the political and social discourse of the early Principate. Overall, Osgood demonstrates that these women functioned both as symbols of Rome’s moral concerns and as active participants in debates over imperial conduct and senatorial honour.
The volume concludes with two numismatic contributions. Andrew Burnett’s chapter, “Two Emperors who Reformed the Coinage: Augustus and Nero”, examines the reforms of the Roman monetary system under the Julio-Claudian emperors, with particular emphasis on Augustus and Nero. Prior to Augustus, the empire repeatedly faced shortages of small change: as bronze coinage ceased to be produced during the first century BCE, circulation relied on imitations and foreign issues. Augustus responded, from 20 BCE onwards, by introducing new copper and orichalcum denominations, thus offering temporary relief. Under Claudius, however, shortages resurfaced and were again met with imitative coinage. A more durable solution came under Nero, who, in AD 64, established a major mint for bronze at Lugdunum to secure supplies, while simultaneously reforming precious metal coinage in response to a chronic silver shortage.
Clare Rowan’s chapter, “Lead Tokens in Julio-Claudian Italy and the Development of Imperial Ideology”, explores how lead tokens contributed to the shaping of imperial image and the practice of euergetism. Produced by diverse groups, tokens functioned alongside coinage and other media, often for single events or distributions, and were frequently melted down afterward. Rowan highlights the inventive imagery on tokens, which sometimes prefigured official coin designs, allowed freer representation of imperial family members, and operated as a medium akin to provincial coinage. She demonstrates that tokens illuminate the localised, momentary deployment of imperial ideology, fostering communal identity and linking rulers with benefactions. Her study underscores how these ephemeral objects furnish micro-histories of Julio-Claudian political culture, revealing multiple, context-dependent ways in which the imperial image was received, adapted, and circulated across Roman society.
Taken together, the chapters in this volume underscore the complexity, subtlety, and dynamism of the early Principate. Admittedly, the work’s title may suggest a more comprehensive treatment of “The Julio-Claudian Principate” than is ultimately provided, as the focus falls primarily on the formative decades under Augustus and Tiberius, with less attention to the later Julio-Claudian period or to the systemic tensions that culminated in 68–69 CE. Similarly, the volume privileges questions of ideology, representation, and elite interaction over broader social, administrative, or military dimensions of imperial rule. The absence of dedicated discussions of the army, provincial governance, or mobility below the senatorial level suggests a tilt towards the dynasty rather than the Principate as an evolving political system. Nevertheless, its contributions are consistently insightful, illustrating how imperial authority, prestige, and influence were exercised through personal relationships, institutional forms, literary representation, and material culture rather than through sheer coercion alone. The essays collectively reassess established narratives, reconsider the agency of actors across social hierarchies, and reveal the nuanced mechanisms through which the Julio-Claudian emperors navigated the tensions of political, social, and cultural life. By integrating primary evidence with modern theoretical frameworks, the volume provides a richly textured, critically informed understanding of the early Roman Empire. It not only offers scholars a nuanced reassessment of traditional accounts of imperial power but also exemplifies a rigorous, evidence-based approach to historiography. By challenging long-standing assumptions and highlighting the interplay between institutional structures, personal agency, and ideological construction, it provides a methodological model for future research. For students and scholars of the early Empire alike, this collection serves both as a corrective to traditional narratives and as a stimulus for further inquiry.
Authors and Titles
Introduction (Christina T. Kuhn)
Caesar Augustus: A Call to Order (Timothy Peter Wiseman)
Velleius Paterculus, the Rule of Law, and Transitioning to Justice in Post-Conflict Rome, 29 BCE–29 CE (Eleanor Cowan)
Tiberius and the Prestige Paradox: Honour, Auctoritas, and Political Strategy (Annika B. Kuhn)
Sejanus, Macro, and the ‘Plastic’ Principate (John F. Drinkwater)
Not Learning from the Master: Dio, Caligula, Tiberius, and Imperial Paradeigmata (Christopher T. Mallan)
Herodians in Rome in the Julio-Claudian Period (Martin Goodman)
The Development of the Consulship from Augustus to Nero (Werner Eck)
Senatorial Women in the Early Principate: Power without Office (Josiah Osgood)
Two Emperors who Reformed the Coinage: Augustus and Nero (Andrew Burnett)
Lead Tokens in Julio-Claudian Italy and the Development of Imperial Ideology (Clare Rowan)