Ancient Rome's Castra Praetoria

The Castra Praetoria was the fortified military camp of the Praetorian Guard, who were the elite force charged with protecting the Emperor of Rome. The Castra stood for nearly 300 years as the physical manifestation of the Guard’s strength.

It originated in 23 CE during the reign of Emperor Tiberius, who was persuaded by Sejanus, Prefect of the Praetorian Guard, that the Guard’s cohorts should have a central base from which to respond rapidly to any sudden emergency.

The Castra was situated on high ground just outside the city walls. It had the pattern of a regular military camp but was permanent, being composed of pink and red brickwork. Later enhancements included improvements to the living quarters and heightening of the external walls.

Notable events that took place at the Castra Praetoria included:

·        In 41 CE, after the assassination of Emperor Caligula, his uncle Claudius spent several days there while the Guard debated his fate and finally agreed to make him the next Emperor.

·        In 54 CE, Claudius was poisoned by his wife Agrippina, with the possible assistance of Burrus, the Prefect of the Guard. This was done so that her son Nero could became Emperor, in preference to Britannicus, who was Claudius’s son by a previous marriage. Burrus was able to prove his loyalty to Agrippina by taking Nero to the Castra and gaining the approval of the Guard.

·        In 69 CE Emperor Galba was assassinated and his head was carried around the Castra on a spear while the next Emperor, Otho, was declared his successor.

However, Otho’s reign was a short one and he was killed in battle against the forces of Vitellius. The Praetorian Guard were split between those loyal to Otho and to Vitellius. A siege of the Castra took place and much of it was destroyed.

·        In 193, after the murder of Pertinax, an extraordinary event took place when rival candidates for the imperial throne held what was virtually an auction for the job. The Praetorian Guard, which had become lazy and self-indulgent under Pertinax’s predecessor, Commodus, made it clear that their approval would go to the man who promised them the highest pay. The candidates, Sulpicianus and Didius Julianus, both went to the Castra and stood either side of the external wall. They then shouted their bids across the wall until Sulpicianus was forced to concede to the wealthier man.

This charade so annoyed the citizens of Rome that they laid siege to the Castra, the walls of which proved to be too strong. Hundreds died in the fighting that followed.

When a second siege failed, the citizens cut off the Castra’s water supply, after which the Praetorians charged out of the Castra and created mayhem in the city with a great deal of burning and looting, leaving much of the metropolis in ruin and chaos.

The Castra Praetoria survived until 312, after Constantine’s victory at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. He marched on Rome, rode to the Castra and decreed its destruction. The walls were torn down brick by brick, with hardly anything left for later archaeologists to explore.

© John Welford

Amenhotep III: Pharaoh of Egypt

There cannot be many people who have not heard of Tutankhamun, the boy pharaoh whose tomb contained a dazzling array of treasures. However, more attention should probably be paid to his grandfather, Amenhotep III, who was pharaoh during a golden age for ancient Egypt, the 18^th dynasty, when it was the most powerful nation on Earth.

Amenhotep reigned for about 60 years, ending in 1352 BC. He increased the wealth of Egypt by controlling the gold mines of Nubia, making himself the world’s richest man, with the result that neighbouring powers were keen to pay tribute to him. He was a consummate politician and diplomat, which ensured the peace of the whole region.

Wealth and security enabled Amenhotep to become Egypt’s most prolific builder of all time, although his reign was long after the Pyramids had been built. He became known as “Monument Man”, with projects such as the temple at Karnak that had walls studded with gold and gems and a statue of himself that was over 20 metres tall.

Amenhotep’s funerary temple, at Kom el-Hatan, was the largest royal temple ever built in Egypt. It was fronted by two statues known as the Colossi of Memnon, and originally contained hundreds more, examples of which have only been discovered relatively recently by archaeologists. This temple must count as the largest sculptural programme in history.

The reign of Amenhotep III was one of peace and prosperity. He well deserved the self-conferred title of “living sun god”, and all subsequent pharaohs sought to model themselves on his legacy.

© John Welford

King Herod the Great

According to the Gospel of Matthew, King Herod is the villain of the piece in the Christmas story. It was he who received the Magi - or Three Kings or wise men, depending on your preference - and became very upset when they told him that a new king had just been born in Bethlehem. His response was to order the slaughter of every newborn baby in the town, an event that is generally known as the Massacre of the Innocents.

But does he deserve the reputation for cruelty that he has had down the centuries?

Herod was certainly a remarkable monarch in that he was able to retain his position as King of Judea for a very long time - from 37 to 4 BC - which he could certainly not have done if he had been a weak monarch or one who was not prepared to use strong-arm tactics when it suited him.

But he also had to be a considerable diplomat, not least because the real power in the land was the Roman Empire. He had to cultivate good relations firstly with Mark Anthony (of "Anthony and Cleopatra" fame) and then with Emperor Augustus.

He was thus able to act as Rome's "puppet king" and reaped lavish rewards in terms of extra territory and Roman cash, which in turn allowed him to undertake lavish building projects such as the port of Caesarea on the Mediterranean coast. Kings who spent money on their country - even puppets of Rome - were always likely to earn a certain amount of popularity.

Herod's court was renowned for its high degree of culture and refinement, being peopled by artists, poets and philosophers. Not for nothing was he known as Herod the Great.

But that did not stop him from also being cruel and tyrannical. In later life he became paranoid and possibly mentally unhinged.

Matthew's description of the Massacre of the Innocents, despite being written around 70 years after the presumed event, may well have been inspired by a historical event that was very much in keeping with Herod's character.

Having already executed his wife Mariamne he also killed two of his sons, whom he suspected of plotting against him. These were certainly not the only victims of his tyranny, which extended to anyone whom he suspected of disloyalty. His death in 4 BC was mourned by very few.

A king who was in the pocket of the hated Romans, who welcomed philosophers to his court, and who thought nothing of slaughtering people, however young, who threatened his position, was excellent source material for the King Herod who forced the Holy Family to flee to Egypt.

Just for good measure, there is even a theory that Mariamne was actually Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Herod was his father. Make of that what you will!

© John Welford

Corinth rebuilt by the Romans

The Greek city of Corinth, on the northern shore of the Peloponnese peninsula, west of Athens, was an important trading centre long before the Romans arrived. When they did, in 146 BC, they destroyed the city and left it as a deserted shell.

The revival of Corinth came about as a result of Julius Caesar’s policy of settling retired and discharged legionary veterans in colonies distributed throughout the Empire. The first colonists arrived after Caesar’s assassination in 44 BC and they set about constructing a city very much on Roman lines.

Some Greek elements were retained in the new city, such as the Agora (forum), several stoas (covered walkways) and the Temple of Apollo, but the impression conveyed by what can be seen today is that this was a Roman city that would in time become suitable as the capital of a province, in this case Archaea.

Roman Corinth was very much a commercial centre, with a number of the buildings relating to mercantile activities.

Commerce clearly brought wealth to Corinth, as evidenced by the buildings devoted to leisure and entertainment. The original Greek theatre was converted to accommodate Roman pleasures, such as gladiatorial contests. There was also an odeum – a small theatre designed for musical performances.

Corinth was a religious city, with six temples built to revere the Roman gods during the second century AD. We know that Corinth had a small but active Christian community, from the fact that St Paul wrote two of his best-known epistles to the Corinthian Christians during the mid-first century. Paul is known to have stayed at Corinth for 18 months, during which he worked as a tentmaker and preached.

However, during the third century the fortunes of Corinth went into decline as commercial activity decreased. The Roman city was itself abandoned, with the centre of modern Corinth lying a few miles to the northeast. This has made it possible for extensive archaeological work to be done on the Roman remains, with the result that much has been learned about how a typical colonial capital operated.

A notable feature a few miles away from the Roman city is the Corinth Canal, cut through the narrowest point of the isthmus (four miles wide) to provide easier access to the port of Piraeus. Several projects to build a canal were proposed in classical times but abandoned for various reasons, including the difficulty of cutting down through up to 250 feet of solid limestone.

One attempt was made by the Emperor Nero in 67 AD, when on a visit to the region. He instructed the Praetorian Guard to begin work immediately and joined in by shovelling up a bucketful of dirt and carrying it away on his back. However, he soon lost interest in the idea, which was not revived until long after his assassination in 69 AD. The current canal, which follows the same course that Nero had in mind, was begun in 1881 and completed in 1893.

© John Welford

The Battle of Marathon, 490 BC

The Battle of Marathon took place in August or September 490 BC, the combatants being the city-state of Athens and the Persian Empire under King Darius. The details are quite well known thanks to the Greek historian Herodotus, although the battle happened several years before he was born. That said, the reason why the battle is best known to history is one of the less trustworthy parts of the account.

Darius was determined to bring the city-states of Greece under his control, having already conquered Turkey and Macedonia, and to that end he landed an army of 20,000 men on the shore of the Bay of Marathon, 25 miles from Athens. The Athenians sent a force of 10,000 “hoplites” to meet them. These were infantry troops, armed with a large shield and a long stabbing spear. 

With the armies in full view of each other, nothing happened for five days as each side waited for the other to make the first move. Eventually it was the Greeks who attacked, advancing at a run and being met by a hail of arrows. 

The Persians were astounded that the Greeks could hope to win given that they had no cavalry nor archers, and at first it looked as though they would be proved right. However, when the battle turned to hand-to-hand fighting it was the Greeks who triumphed.

The Persian ranks broke and they fled back to the safety of their ships, having lost about 6,000 casualties. By contrast, the Greek losses – according to Herodotus – were around 200.

And did Pheidippides run all the way to Athens with news of the victory, dying after his mission was accomplished and bequeathing the “Marathon” to the world of athletics? Well, not according to Herodotus, who described Pheidippides as taking the news to Sparta, which he reached two days later before returning to Athens and not expiring when he did so. It was the much later writer Lucian who gave voice to the generally believed myth.

© John Welford

The Temple of Apollo Epicurius, Bassae, Greece

Although it was built during the 5th century BC, the Temple of Apollo Epicurius near Bassae in western Greece was virtually unknown until 1765 when a French architect happened upon it when he was in the area building villas – he had the misfortune to be murdered by bandits when he went back for a second look. 

The temple has features in common with those of the much more famous Parthenon at Athens, and they may even have been designed by the same architect. However, the Temple of Apollo Epicurius is much smaller, measuring around 38 by 14.5 metres, and it is in a remote location high up a mountain slope, which is why it was virtually lost for many centuries, with only a handful of references being made to it by ancient writers. 

The temple’s dedication to Apollo Epicurius – “Apollo the Healer” – was due to the gratitude of local people who escaped the worst ravages of a plague after praying and sacrificing to the god. 

The temple is notable for several features, not least the fact that it includes features of all three classical orders of architecture – Ionic, Doric and Corinthian. The outer columns (the peristyle) are Doric, the inner ones are Ionic, and there is a single Corinthian column at the centre. The capital of the Corinthian column (typified by the use of decorative stone acanthus leaves) is the earliest example of the order known to exist. 

Another unusual feature is the combined use of limestone and marble in the construction. 

The temple was originally decorated with 23 sculptured plates on the frieze of the Ionic interior, but these were removed in 1812 by British antiquaries. These plates soon found their way to the British Museum in London, where they remain to this day, not far from where the much better-known Parthenon frieze is housed (the “Elgin Marbles”). The frieze depicted battles between Greeks and Centaurs and between Greeks and Amazons. 

There has been considerable argument about whether the Parthenon frieze should be returned to Greece, but maybe the Bassae frieze has a better claim to be taken back to its original home? For one thing, it might be possible to return the plates to their exact original position, which is out of the question in the case of the Parthenon frieze due in part to the destructive influence of pollution in Greece’s capital city. 

On the other hand, the remote location of the Temple of Apollo Epicurius, which is well off the normal tourist trail, means that far fewer people would be able to see the frieze were it to be returned than is now possible in the British Museum. 

The Temple of Apollo Epicurius was declared a UNESCO World Heritage site in 1986.

© John Welford

Izanagi, Izanami and the birth of Japan

Every ancient civilization has its own creation myth – its story about how the world and its own people started out. Given that they are all myths, with absolutely no relation to reality, no one myth can claim precedence over any other.

This is the mythical story about how the island nation of Japan came to be.

In the beginning, there was nothing except sea and sky. A reed grew out of the sea and turned into a cloud, this being the first god. Other reeds then sprouted and became cloud-gods.

The youngest gods were a male named Izanagi No Mikoto and a female named Izanami No Mikoto. 

Izanagi saw no point in just floating above the sea and wondered if he could find something solid to stand on. He plunged his spear into the sea, searching for a point of contact, but was out of luck. However, when he withdrew his spear a drop of water fell back and turned into an island.

Izanagi and Izanami used a rainbow to descend to the island, which they decorated with trees and flowers. When Izanagi thrust his spear into the centre of the island a large palace was created.

The two young gods then decided that they could create more islands. They were inspired by the mating dance of two small birds and realized that they needed to do something along the same lines. 

Their dance consisted of walking round the island in opposite directions until they met again.

Izanami spoke first. “Good day”, she said. “You are a very handsome young man.”

Izanagi replied in similar vein. “Good day”, he said. “You are a very beautiful young woman.”

This was enough to cause Izanami to fall pregnant, and she duly gave birth to her first island child. However, this was nothing like as beautiful and fertile as the original island and the couple had no choice but to push it away into the sea. They sought advice from the older gods as to why things had gone wrong.

“You made a fundamental mistake”, they were told. “You allowed the woman to speak before the man did. Unless the man speaks first, there will always be bad luck”.

So Izanagi and Izanami went through their courtship dance again. This time, when they met after walking round the island in opposite directions, Izanagi spoke first.

“Good day”, he said. “You are a very beautiful young woman.”

Izanami replied. “Good day”, she said. “You are a very handsome young man.”

This time, when Izanami gave birth, she became the mother of eight beautiful islands, which formed the country of Japan.

There is more to the Japanese creation myth than this, involving the births of other gods, the sun and the moon, and the emperors of Japan. However, this story of the creation of Japan does contain one very interesting factor that can be seen in other creation myths including that of Judaism as found in the Book of Genesis. This is the god-given dominance of the male over the female. One can only assume that these myths were first invented by men, not women!

© John Welford