Ronald Syme LecturesProf. David Mattingly‘Vulgar & Ugly’ Roman Imperialism21 OctoberAll over Oxford this week, TV roomswill be occupied by classicists in eageranticipation of the new BBC drama,Rome, with all the opportunities itwill provide for the quibbling whichconstitutes such an enjoyable part ofstudying Classics. This drama hopesto capture the contrasts inherent inlate republican Rome, and it is thisdichotomy within the empire, betweenthe glassy magnificence of theforum and the slums of the street,which formed a key part of ProfessorDavid Mattingly’s lecture.Speaking to a capacity audience atWolfson College hall, Professor Mattinglypresented the 2005 RonaldSyme lecture, held in commemorationof the great Roman historianRonald Syme. His damning criticismof the concept of blanket Romanisationas ‘vulgar and ugly’ providedProfessor Mattingly not just with histitle, but also much of his inspiration.Professor Mattingly convincinglyargued that the concept of ‘Romanisation’is an outdated one, colouredby our own colonial past andincapable of comprehending the truecomplexity of culture in the Romanworld. Instead he claimed that a newapproach to Roman culture is needed,which analyses a broad spectrum ofevidence drawn from throughout thegeography and society of the empire.This was an expression of his theoryof ‘divergent experience’ in which hesought to discuss the many responsesto empire, on the part of both theconqueror and the conquered,revealing the darker side of Romanimperialism.Yet despite the considerable intrinsicinterest of his lecture, one cannotescape the feeling that ProfessorMattingly’s theory is by no meansas innovative and revolutionary ashe claims. Historians such as GregWoolf have for several years nowbeen discussing the question ofdivergent experience, and have longrecognised the damage done by ourown colonial past to the historiographyof antiquity. Seen in this contextProfessor Mattingly does not havethe air of one breaking fresh ground,but rather of one restating a neworthodoxy.In style his lecture could be bestdescribed as competent rather thaninspired. While nobody expects arespected academic to start throwingsweets into the audience, a greaterattempt to avoid the appearance ofsimply reading a thesis aloud wouldhave increased the impact of hislecture.Overall, Professor Mattingly’slecture was well thought out andcontained several interesting andsignificant concepts. I do not feelthat this was a bad lecture; indeedI enjoyed it, but with a little morepolish it could have been far better.ARCHIVE: 3rd week MT 2005
