A Conversation with "Medicus" series author Ruth Downie

I have enjoyed Ruth Downie's "Medicus" series since I read her very first novel in the series "Medicus: A Novel of the Roman Empire" ("Medicus and the Disappearing Dancing Girls" for you UK readers).  I've followed her hero, Gaius Petreius Ruso, from Roman Britain to Gaul and back again, reviewing his latest adventure, "Semper Fidelis" just a few weeks ago.  Whenever I read a book with a Roman setting and a captivating protagonist, a number of questions about the author's interest in ancient Rome, some of her challenges in character development and research sources invariably arise.  This time, the author has generously offered to answer some of my questions and has allowed me to share her responses with you.

Ruth Downie, author of the "Medicus"
series of novels set in Roman Britain.
Image courtesy of Amazon.

Mary: What aspect of Roman civilization do you find most interesting?

 Ruth: What fascinates me is the contrast between the way Roman culture seems very familiar to us and the ways in which their thinking was so completely different. We can identify with the use of technology, the political bickering, the complex administration, the vast gap between rich and poor – and yet how could they accept slaughter as entertainment? And while there was some tinkering with the law to make the lives of slaves more bearable, the right of one person to treat another as ‘property’ was the basis of the economy and never seriously questioned.

Mary: Why did you choose the early 2nd century CE as the setting for the "Medicus" series?

Ruth: It was a trip to Hadrian’s Wall that sparked my interest in Roman Britain, so it seemed natural to write about the time when it was built. The first novel really didn’t work, but Ruso and Tilla evolved from two minor characters in the backstory. That’s why they ended up meeting some years before the wall appeared. In fact it’s worked out quite nicely, because in SEMPER FIDELIS they can slot into history and meet Hadrian on his only recorded tour of Britannia.

Mary: As a female author what aspect of your male protagonist do you find most challenging to capture?

Ruth: I’ve been racking my brains to remember the instance where I discussed a plot point with my husband, who said, “No, a man wouldn’t do that. A man would…” but I’m afraid neither of us can remember what it was!

Somebody once observed that when a man looks in the mirror he sees a person, whereas when a woman looks in a mirror she sees a woman. I don’t know how true that is now but it was certainly true for the male-dominated ancient world, and I do try to bear it in mind.

Mary: Did you use an historical Roman as a model for Ruso or a modern acquaintance? Who?

Ruth: The character of Ruso is imaginary but his meeting with Tilla was inspired by a real-life dilemma faced by two medic friends. They were stuck in traffic and realised there had been an accident on the motorway ahead of them. They had to decide whether to stay where they were and leave it to the ambulance, or abandon the car, run to the scene and try to help. The trouble was, they were only students, they knew very little emergency medicine and they had no equipment or backup (I left that part out of the novel). Fortunately in real life the ambulance got there first. I didn’t give Ruso that option.

Mary: Do you share particular character traits with Tilla? If so, which ones?

Ruth: Her cooking is possibly slightly worse than mine. Well, somebody’s has to be. Apart from that, she fulfils all my fantasies of one day becoming confident, assertive and decisive.

Mary: Now that Ruso and Tilla are married, how will you maintain the sexual tension between them?

Ruth: Whilst they are indeed man and wife, that’s not irrevocable - divorce was readily available in both their cultures. I think the cultural differences between them will continue to give rise to tensions and while Tilla is married to Ruso, he owes his first allegiance to the Emperor and the Legion. So in a sense she always has to compete for his attention, while he’s torn between his loyalty to the Army and his loyalty to his wife – and of course his duty to his patients.

Mary: In "Semper Fidelis", Ruso is temporarily demoted from an officer to a ranker. This was surprising to me since officers were typically of a higher social class and Roman society usually strictly observed social hierarchy in spite of legal infractions. Did you find an historical precedent for this type of disciplinary action during the imperial period? If so, could you describe the example you found?

Ruth: That’s an interesting point: certainly people of patrician status seem to have been regularly banished rather than suffer a more plebeian punishment. I haven’t found a specific example of demotion of legionary officers, but much of our evidence for military careers comes from tombstones, where failure is unlikely to be recorded. However commanders were able to use their discretion and one of the punishments available to them was demotion.

Secondly, although officers were generally of a higher social class than the men, doctors were an anomaly. Like many skilled trades, medicine was seen to be the province of slaves and Greeks, and its practitioners were rarely held in high esteem in civilian society. The elder Pliny had some very scathing things to say about them, and Ruso’s father was appalled when Ruso was desperate to go and learn medicine from his Uncle Theo rather than be a gentleman farmer. So although Ruso is in a position of authority because he has valuable skills, his social rank isn’t typical of officers – he would have more in common with centurions who had worked their way up through the ranks.

Another point here is that our sparse evidence on military doctors suggests that senior medics may have been appointed on short-term commissions as officers rather than having to serve the 25 years demanded of men in the ranks. There’s some dispute about this but the joy of being a novelist rather than an academic is that you can choose whichever interpretation works best for your story. So I’ve gone with the one that enables me to get Ruso and Valens very conveniently in and out of the Legion. 

Mary: You mentioned on your blog that you have participated in archaeological site excavations. What has been the most interesting site you have helped to excavate and why?

Ruth: Most of my time in the trenches has been spent on a long-term dig of a Roman villa in a scenic location in Northamptonshire – you can see the photos and read more about it at www.whitehallvilla.co.uk. Over the years, what had once been a stony field on a sheep farm was revealed as a large Romano-British villa site. We know from excavated bones that even then, the farm was breeding some very fine sheep.

My favourite day was when we finally dug below what appeared to a mass of rubble from a nearby bath-house and realised the tiles we were beginning to find were the tops of buried stacks. We had found the first heated room of a second, completely unexpected bath complex. Geophysics is a marvellous science but you never really know what you’re going to find until you start scraping away the mud with a trowel. 

Mary: What is one of the most surprising facts about the Romans or early Britons you have discovered in your research?

Ruth: Well, one of the medical textbooks regularly used in the Roman empire offers a cure for earache that involves popping in a boiled cockroach. I can’t say I’ve tried this. Nor have I yet tried to get rid of toothache by shattering the offending tooth with the sting of a stingray. If anyone does, I disclaim all responsibility.

Mary: Who is your favorite author and why?

Ruth: I fear I’m rather fickle – it tends to vary depending on who I’ve just been reading. But Martin Cruz Smith is a firm favourite. His Russian detective, Arkady Renko, is just so cool.

Mary: What Roman (besides Ruso) do you most admire and why?

Ruth: Hadrian. After a wild period in his youth he turned out be an intelligent, ambitious and hugely hardworking man. He was never liked by the Senate – the rumours of a faked succession and the murders of several opponents can’t have helped – but he was respected by his troops and made the effort to travel and see and improve the Empire he governed. Instead of embarking on crazy expeditions into territories Rome couldn’t hold, he drew back and tried to bring peace by consolidating what they already had.

 In the end he became bitter and unpopular, but that was the fate of most Emperors anyway. And I’m mightily grateful to him and his wife for saying insulting things about each other – marital tension is always a wonderful gift to a storyteller.

Related articles

• Roman Strategy -- Defending the Frontier 20 B.C. to 300 A.D.

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Concussion and PTSD in the Ancient World

The Ludovisi Battle Sarcophagus depicting Roman conquest

of Barbarians, 2nd - 3rd century CE.  Photographed at the 

Palazzo Altemps, Museo Nazionale Romano, in Rome Italy

by Mary Harrsch.

After I suggested in my review of "Semper Fidelis"  that the antagonist in Ruth Downie's novel, a brutal Centurion named Geminus, may have been suffering from PTSD, Ruth sent me a link to a very thoughtful post by Dr. Dorothy King  entitled  "PTSD in Antiquity."  (Sadly, it is no longer online.)

In my review, I cited a post by Dr. Jonathan Eaton who had generally dismissed the probability that many ancient soldiers suffered from PTSD because modern research points to PTSD being most prevalent in soldiers experiencing explosive events (like IEDs, land mines or booby traps).  He theorizes that since gunpowder or other explosive material was generally not used in ancient warfare, such explosive events did not occur so the probability that PTSD could develop was quite low.  He also pointed to the death-filled environment of the ancient world as something that he felt would desensitize ancient peoples to the trauma of warfare.

Dr. Eaton's viewpoint may have reflected a study done in 2011 by C.W. Hoge. In it, the researchers followed 2,525 soldiers and questioned them three to four months after their return from a year-long deployment in Iraq.

"Of the majority of soldiers who suffered no combat injuries of any sort, 9.1 percent exhibited symptoms consistent with PTSD. This allows a baseline for susceptibility of roughly 10 per cent of the population.  A slightly higher number (16.2 per cent) of those who were injured in some way, but suffered no concussion, also experienced symptoms. As soon as concussive injuries were involved, however, the rates of PTSD climbed dramatically. Although only 4.9 percent of the troops suffered concussions that resulted in complete loss of consciousness, 43.9 percent of these soldiers noted on their questionnaires that they were experiencing a range of PTSD symptons.  Of the 10.3 per cent of the unit who suffered concussion resulting in confusion but retained consciousness, more than a quarter (27.3 per cent) suffered symptoms. This suggests a high correlation between head trauma and the occurrence of subsequent psychological problems." - Aislinn Melchior, Caesar in Vietnam: Did Roman Soldiers Suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

 Melchior admits that concussion is not the only risk factor for PTSD but says it is so strongly correlated that it suggests the incidence of PTSD may have risen sharply with the arrival of gunpowder, shells, and plastic explosives.

"In Roman warfare, wounds were most often inflicted by edged weapons. Romans did of course experience head trauma, but the incidence of concussive injuries would have been limited both by the types of weapons they faced and by the use of helmets." - Aislinn Melchior, Caesar in Vietnam: Did Roman Soldiers Suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

In his footnotes, Melchior speculates that the Romans designed their helmets with an eye to blunting the force of the blows they most often encountered.  Although Peter Connolly argued that the helmet design in the Republican period suggested a crouched fighting stance, Melchior disagrees suggesting the change in helmet design at that point may have signaled instead a shift in the role of troops from performing assaults on towns and fortifications when the empire was expanding and the blows would more often rain from above to the defense and guarding of the frontiers.

Melchior, like Eaton, also speculates that death was so common in the ancient world that it desensitized many of its residents to the prospect of unexpected death.

But in his 1999 paper entitled "The Cultural Politics of Public Spectacle in Rome and the Greek East in 167-166 BCE"  Jonathan C. Edmondson points out that when King Antiochus IV introduced Roman-style gladiatorial combats in Syria in 166 BCE, the Syrians were terrified rather than entertained.

"In time gladiatorial contests came to be accepted and even popular, but only after Antiochus had instituted a local variation whereby fights sometimes ended as soon as a gladiator was wounded."

This hardly sounds like people desensitized to death.

Dr. King also disagrees pointing to the fact that she, a diagnosed victim of PTSD, had never experienced an explosive event and she knew of a military general diagnosed with PTSD that had never been near explosive devices either.  She was particularly impressed with the research of Jonathan Shay summarized in his book " Achilles in Vietnam: Combat Trauma and the Undoing of Character . 

Shay's work has now been made into a poignant documentary entitled "Odysseus in America." 

In another of King's articles, "The Rage of Achilles and PTSD". King discusses what she feels (and I concur) are clear examples of PTSD in the ancient texts.  Her post opens with a moving passage from Homer:

Then said Achilles, "Son of Atreus, king of men Agamemnon, see to these matters at some other season, when there is breathing time and when I am calmer. Would you have men eat while the bodies of those whom Hector son of Priam slew are still lying mangled upon the plain? Let the sons of the Achaeans, say I, fight fasting and without food, till we have avenged them; afterwards at the going down of the sun let them eat their fill. As for me, Patroclus is lying dead in my tent, all hacked and hewn, with his feet to the door, and his comrades are mourning round him. Therefore I can think of nothing but slaughter and blood and the rattle in the throat of the dying."

Iliad 19.226

Then she goes on to examine descriptions of the behaviors of such ancient military men as a Greek warrior at Marathon, Leonidas at Thermopylae, Alexander the Great and Gaius Marius, all supported by quotes from the ancient sources.

So, I was gratified to find another scholar with personal experience with PTSD who also disagrees with Eaton and Melchior.   

Recently, scholars studying cuneiform medical texts left behind by ancient Mesopotamians point to passages describing mental disorders expressed by soldiers and even a king during the Assyrian Period (1300–609 BCE) when military activity was extremely frequent and brutal. The King of Elam is said to have had his mind changed.  Soldiers were described as suffering from periods where they were forgetful, their words were unintelligible, they would wander about, and suffer regular bouts of depression.

"If in the evening, he sees either a living person or a dead person or someone known to him or someone not known to him or anybody or anything and becomes afraid; he turns around but, like one who has [been hexed with?] rancid oil, his mouth is seized so that he is unable to cry out to one who sleeps next to him..." - Translation by Scurlock and Andersen, Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine

"As seen in the cases of military casualties, the signs and symptoms of the victim were attributed by the ancient Mesopotamians to ghosts, as was the case with many mental and psychosomatic disorders seen during that period. It looks as if, in the case of military casualties, the responsible ghosts were usually assumed by the treating ašipu to be the ghosts of the enemies whom the patient had killed during military operations..."

"...Generally, the symptoms described fit the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder as we understand them now. The flashbacks of images of dead people, particularly those occurring at night (in the form of nightmares) and accompanied by fear, are an important symptom. The changes of mental state with fear, forgetfulness and depression are also symptoms that we see often in
clinical practice. - Walid Khalid Abdul-Hamid and Jamie Hacker Hughes, Nothing New under the Sun: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders in the Ancient World (2015)

I would like to take all of their observations just a few steps further and point to even more recent findings that I feel call into question the "explosive events as the primary cause of PTSD" theory.

I think the results of the autopsy of one of the NFL players who recently committed suicide is particularly significant.  The news reported that the individual had significant brain damage from repeated concussions suffered not from explosive events but from the impacts experienced during a series of football games.  If you consider the repeated impacts ancient soldiers experienced in set piece battles where tight formations were used, such as Greek or Macedonian phalanxes or Roman maniples, the probability of the occurrence of repeated concussions similar to those experienced by modern football players is quite high.  The news program went on to interview the football player's family and they discussed how he had deteriorated mentally from an outgoing, very social individual to a sullen, withdrawn person who no longer found life fulfilling.  As the spouse of a war veteran who has been permanently disabled by severe PTSD, I found the symptoms described by the football player's family all too familiar.

I also think Eaton and Melchior dismiss too readily the psychological aspects of PTSD in the ancient world because of their observations that the ancient world was a far more brutal environment than we have now (outside of inner city ghettos).  They point out how people were surrounded by death because of disease, accidents without proper medical treatment, and entertainments that featured the orchestrated deaths of both people and animals.  I propose that observed deaths occurring in a venue where the observer and the participants are separated both by physical barriers and social hierarchy (most human victims were criminals, prisoners of war, "Others" so to speak, or slaves, those whose social status separated them from the vast number of citizens in the audience) are distinctly different when compared to violent deaths of friends, family members, and comrades, your "band of brothers," fighting right beside you in a person-to-person battle scenario.

Furthermore, ancient executions were designed to further distance the audience from the victim through the use of mythological reenactments or by placement outside the city.

"Crucifixions were usually carried out outside the city limits thus stressing the victims rejection from the civic community. Because of the absence of bloodshed out of an open and lethal wound, which evoked the glorious fate of warriors, this type of death was considered unclean, shameful, unmanly, and unworthy of a freeman. In addition the victim was usually naked. Essential, too, was the fact that the victim lost contact with the ground which was regarded as sacrilegious." - J.J. Aubert, "A Double Standard in Roman Criminal Law?" from "Speculum Juris: Roman Law as a Reflection of Social and Economic Life in Antiquity"

We also cannot forget the medical personnel either.  Following the Vietnam War, many veterans (both male and female) who served in a medical capacity were later found to be suffering from PTSD.  The medical environment of an ancient treatment facility following a major ancient battle was far worse than in a modern field hospital.  Ancient surgeons attempted to treat often thousands of wounded in a relatively short time compared to only handfuls at a time during the Vietnam conflict.  Ancient physicians were surprisingly quite skilled, especially Roman military surgeons, but they had little but herbal compounds (and honey if the Romans listened to the Egyptian physicians) to ward off infections.  Their patients' mortality rate was much higher than the relatively low mortality rate experienced in Vietnam.  So, how could they have escaped the effects of PTSD, often after years of service, not "just" 6 - 12 months - more than enough to trigger PTSD in modern warfare?

Psychotherapist Alan Greaves in his paper, "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in Ancient Greece: A Methodological Review" points out that identifying the characteristic behaviors associated with PTSD in an ancient culture is particularly problematic because of socio-cultural factors such as social taboos on men crying or the abrogation of suicide.

"...we do not know how common or acceptable somatisation or the outward expression of any of the other psychological symptoms of PTSD would have been in ancient Greece, which in itself was made up of many differing local cultures or communities."

Greaves does acknowledge, though, that there is enough description in historical sources to point to a recognizable human response to traumatic stress in earlier ages.

"...the fact that PTSD has been identified, to various degrees and variously expressed, across different ethnic and cultural groups does indicate that the human species is naturally predisposed towards reaction formation following episodes of traumatic stress. As discussed above, there would appear to be some evidence that Conversion Disorder was present in Greece in the 1st millennium BC, even if finding similar evidence for PTSD is a more complicated matter because of the nature of our sources and its symptoms and definition. The sheer  prevalence of PTSD across modern populations adds further weight to the argument that it has  been a feature of human experience for a considerable  period of our history, even if the precise form of its expression has varied across contemporary and historical cultures." - Alan Greaves, "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in Ancient Greece: A Methodological Review"

However, in a 1996 study of emotion, Fischer and Manstead argue: ‘there are both cross-cultural similarities and differences in emotion.’ There is, therefore, no universal human reaction that can be predicted in all circumstances of traumatic stress, but neither are our reactions entirely culturally determined. Bearing in mind the very different incidences and presenting symptoms in different cultures, can we  possibly ever know what PTSD, or any of the other post-traumatic conditions discussed above, would have looked like in ancient Greece?

Perhaps, not. I sometimes wonder, though, if modern scholars think that ancient people just didn't value their lives as much as we do, since they did not shrink from casualties as high as 50,000 in a single military engagement or investment of an enemy city.  But if you've ever looked at some of the poignant grave goods found in ancient burials or studied the reliefs and inscriptions on ancient funerary monuments, I think you will conclude that we are only separated by time, not by our shared human nature.

References:

Abdul-Hamid, W. K., & Hughes, J. H. (2014). Nothing New under the Sun: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders in the Ancient World. Early Science and Medicine, 19(6), 549-557. doi:10.1163/15733823-00196p02

Aubert, J.-J, & Sirks, A. J. (2002). A double standard in Roman criminal law? In Specvlvm ivris: Roman law as a reflection of social and economic life in antiquity. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Cook, J. (2012). Crucifixion as Spectacle in Roman Campania. Novum Testamentum, 54(1), 68-100. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.uoregon.edu/stable/23253630

Edmonson, J. C. (1999). The cultural politics of public spectacle in Rome and the Greek East in 167-166 BCE. Studies in the History of Art, 56, 76-95.

Fischer, A. and Manstead, A. H. 1996. Emotions. In A. Kuper and J. Kuper (eds.), The Social Science  Encyclopaedia 2nd ed., 239-240. London, Routledge.


Greaves, A. M. (2008). Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in Ancient Greece: A Methodological Review. Warfare and Society in the Ancient Eastern Mediterranean. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/6897230/Post-Traumatic_Stress_Disorder_PTSD_in_Ancient_Greece_A_Methodological_Review

A. Melchior (2011). Caesar In Vietnam: Did Roman Soldiers Suffer From Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Greece & Rome, 58(2), 209-223. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.uoregon.edu/stable/41306157

JoAnn Scurlock and Burton Andersen, Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine: Ancient Sources, Translations, and Modern Medical Analyses (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2005), Pp. xxiii + 879.

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Review: Semper Fidelis by Ruth Downie

A history resource article by Mary Harrsch © 2013

Assimilating conquered warriors into the vanquishing army has been a problem for military commanders for thousands of years.  When Alexander the Great attempted to form an elite cavalry unit composed of the sons of conquered Persian nobles, his own officer corps was so enraged it led to the tragic death of Cleitus the Black, a longtime loyal officer to both Phillip II and Alexander, who was slain by Alexander himself after heated words about Alexander's efforts to incorporate Persians into positions of authority within his army.

It is this issue that forms the foundation for the plot of Ruth Downie's latest novel "Semper Fedelis".  We find our heroic medicus, Gaius Petreus Ruso, trying to find out what is happening to native Briton recruits at the hands of an apparently sadistic much-decorated centurion in second century Eboracum (modern day York).

As is usually the case, his native-born wife, Tilla, tries to help by questioning some of the local townspeople but ends up causing Ruso even more trouble with the commanding tribune who happens to be related to the family-honored centurion.  Ruso is summarily ordered to keep his nose out of things that don't concern him and Tilla receives a less subtle warning in the form of a severed pig's head found between her bedsheets.

But a recruit shows up at the hospital with a nasty infected arm after the young man had attempted to carve off a tribal tattoo to avoid any more abuse.  Then Ruso is further appalled when the man's friend turns up asking Ruso if he could remove the tattoos that embellish his arms as well.

With Tilla's urging, Ruso takes matters into his own hands when the emperor Hadrian shows up to inspect the fort, and Ruso attempts to explain the problem directly to Hadrian.  After all, Hadrian and Ruso served together in Antioch where Ruso was instrumental in saving the life of the emperor Trajan, Hadrian's adopted uncle.  Meanwhile, Tilla is called into the presence of the empress Sabina who thinks conversing with a colorful local would be amusing and Tilla attempts to bring the recruits plight to the empress' attention.

Interesting image of Mars the God of War with the face
of the Roman Emperor Hadrian and a female companion
whose face was resculpted in 170-175 CE to resemble
the Empress Lucille (according to The Louvre), wife of
the Roman emperor Lucius Verus (???) Photographed at The Louvre in Paris, France by Mary Harrsch

Then things take an even more nasty turn and the centurion in question is found murdered.  The related tribune throws Ruso into chains, more out of outrage that Ruso went to the emperor over his head than truly believing Ruso had anything to do with the murder. So Ruso and Tilla must scramble to discover the truth before Ruso is marched off to Deva for what is believed will be a summary trial and execution on the orders of the legate there.

The exciting conclusion involves Praetorian guards, conspiratorial royal secretaries, Tilla's less expert use of one of Ruso's scalpels, near mutiny of the recruits of the 22nd Legion and an ultimate solution devised by a very wise man who happens to be the most powerful ruler of the known world.

Again Downie has given us a mystery with twists and turns that keep readers guessing until almost the very end.  The characterizations of Ruso and Tilla are consistent with previous novels and, as I mentioned in a recent post to the Roman History Reading Group on Facebook, Downie offers each character's thoughts to us to flesh out their personalities.  She also provides a little backstory for tribune Accius letting us imagine his rather lonely childhood and the social importance of having an uncle publicly decorated for valor.  We can then understand, at least partly, the rational for what would normally be seen as outrageous behavior towards a respected medical officer.

The only thing I didn't understand in the plot was why Hadrian, who remained at the fort for several days during the time that tribune Accius imprisoned Ruso, did not act to prevent the mistreatment and possible loss of a valued medical officer who had proven himself in the Antioch earthquake?  Of course, our hero is ultimately saved but Hadrian's apparent indifference earlier in the story does not seem consistent with his obvious longtime respect for Ruso expressed at the end.

Of course, we don't know when Hadrian's knowledge of all of the events that occurred was realized, but as astute as Hadrian was, I can't imagine him not knowing that the tribune was blaming Ruso before Hadrian had left Eboracum for his next port of call.  If the tribune had simply locked up the native deserter, Victor, and blamed him from the beginning, it would have been more understandable that Hadrian would have been reticent to get involved.  Hadrian was a soldier's soldier and would not have intervened in a matter that should have been handled by the existing chain of command in circumstances that did not involve a professional officer held in high esteem by the emperor.  Perhaps this was Downie's way of developing events that would lead up to Russo's offer to sacrifice his own life to preserve order on the frontier and the emperor's continued successful reign.  Such an offer would then justify the size of the favor Ruso requests at the end of the story.

As for the supporting history behind the abuse of native recruits to the legions in Britain, we can look to the Vindolanda Tablets that include correspondence from the professional  auxiliaries from the Tungri tribe of the Aardennes region (Belgium/France/Luxembourg).  Although these men were not originally Romans from the Empire's heartland, they still  used a disparaging nickname for their British hosts: Brittunculi.

"In Latin, the suffix -unculus is both diminutive and pejorative: the term translates as "pathetic little Brits" (Vindolanda Tablet 164). The author was probably not referring to the provincial population as a whole, but specifically to young trainee recruits to the regiment. - Roman auxiliaries in Britain, Wikipedia

The Vindolanda Tablets, dated from 85 - 122 CE, also reveal that the military was understrength at the time of Hadrian's visit in 122 CE. The I Tungrorum listed its strength at 752 instead of the official 800 men expected to fill its rolls.  So, it would have been a time that recruits would have been sought, even from the local tribes.

Originally, Rome did not deploy auxiliary units in their home country or region but this policy relaxed to some degree as military shortages became more acute in the second century.

Centurion abuse of young recruits, outside the demanding regimen of basic training, is also documented in the ancient sources, although the most prominent record involves the Germanic Batavians.  In the "Year of the Four Emperors" (69-70 CE), the governor of Germania Inferior was ordered to raise more troops.  The Batavians  were regarded by the Romans as the very best (fortissimi, validissimi) of their auxiliary so the governor attempted to conscript more Batavi than the maximum stipulated in their treaty.  This action was compounded by the brutality and corruption of Roman recruiting-centurions including reports of sexual  assault on Batavi young men.

A Batavian helmet with remnants of blonde wig,
Courtesy of the Nijmegen museum.

Then, Julius Civilis, himself a decorated veteran of 25-years service in Britain and prince of the Batavi people, led his people in open revolt.

"... the uprising soon became a bid for independence.  Civilis exploited the fact that some legions were absent from the Rhine area due to the civil war, and the rest under-strength. In addition, the Roman commanders and their rank-and-file soldiers were divided by loyalty to rival emperors. Civilis quickly won the support of the Batavi's neighbours and kinsmen, the Cananefates, who in turn won over the Frisii. First the rebel allies captured two Roman forts in their territory, and a cohort of Tungri defected to Civilis.  Then two legions sent against Civilis were defeated when their companion Batavi ala defected to his side. The Classis Germanica (Rhine flotilla), largely manned by Batavi, was seized by Civilis. Most importantly, the eight Batavi cohorts stationed at Mainz with XIV Gemina mutinied and joined him, defeating at Bonn a Roman force that attempted to block their return to their homeland. By now, Civilis commanded at least 12 regiments (6,000 men) of Roman-trained and equipped auxiliary troops, as well as a much larger number of tribal levies. A number of German tribes from beyond the Rhine joined his cause. Several other German and Gallic units sent against him deserted, as the revolt spread to the rest of Gallia Belgica, including the Tungri, Lingones and Treviri tribes. He was able to destroy the two remaining legions in Germania Inferior, (V Alaudae and XV Primigenia). 

By this stage Rome's entire position on the Rhine and even in Gaul was imperiled. Their civil war over, the Romans mustered a huge task force of eight legions (five dispatched from Italy, two from Spain and one from Britain) to deal with Civilis. Its commander Petillius Cerialis had to fight two difficult battles, at Trier and Xanten, before he could overrun the Batavi's homeland. Tacitus' surviving narrative breaks off as he describes a meeting on an island in the Rhine delta between Civilis and Cerialis to discuss peace terms. We do not know the outcome of this meeting or Civilis' ultimate fate. But in view of his former friendship with Vespasian, who had already offered him a pardon, and the fact that the Romans still needed the Batavi levies, it is likely that the terms were lenient by Roman standards." - Roman military Auxiliaries, Wikipedia

So, the situation described in the novel could have been equally disastrous for Hadrian, who would have been keenly aware of the outcome of the Batavian revolt just 50 years before.  Furthermore, by Hadrian's time auxiliaries outnumbered legionaries by 2.5 to 1 in Britain.  Unfortunately for Ruso, Tribune Accius was far more nearsighted, thinking only of his family's social standing and not the welfare of the empire.

I also though Downie accurately portrayed the relationship between Hadrian and his wife Vibia Sabina.  Downie's townspeople mention rumors that Hadrian preferred to spend more time with his mother-in-law than Sabina.  Although that sounds strange, Hadrian's mother-in-law was actually his second cousin and only eight years older than Hadrian.  Furthermore, they were raised together in Trajan's household.

Sabina, as portrayed in the novel, was known to be independent minded and by the time of the novel, she had already had an affair with the historian Suetonius, secretary to Hadrian.  So, it would be totally in character for her to admonish Tilla by saying "Don't pray too hard" when Tilla said she would pray for the empress to be fruitful.

As a war veteran's spouse, another issue I always ponder when I read about a character being particularly brutal to other characters is whether the brutal character may be suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.  Geminus was described as a valorous, much-decorated veteran about to retire when he finishes training this particular batch of recruits.  Although scholars like Dr. Jonathan Eaton question a diagnosis of PTSD in members of the Roman Army because of a lack of explosive or concussive events in a typical Roman battle (PTSD and the Roman Army ), I would point out that heroic epics like those of Homer formed a foundation of source material used in the formation of the Roman heroic ideal.  In Chapter 3 of "From Melos to Mylai: War and Survival", Lawrence Tritle asserts that the heroes portrayed in Homer, Tyrtaeus, Archilochus, and Aeschylus share the characteristic of being someone who takes revenge for the death of his friends and strongly believing a good man is a brave man.

Not only may Geminus have been subconsciously seeking revenge for friends lost in past campaigns but as the recruits quaked from the centurion's actions, he may have dismissed the lot of them as not worthy since they apparently displayed no bravery in his eyes.

Tritle further points out that in war, officers are taught to instill in the troops an image of the enemy as foreign and different.  "[these] emotional factors... were greater inducements to carry out brutal acts of violence than racially or culturally based perceptions of the 'Other'."

So despite his horrendous behavior, perhaps we should reserve at least a little sympathy for Geminus just as Ruso expressed for Geminus' dog, Bella.  She may have attacked Ruso because of her training, but in the end she waited calmly beside the body of her beloved master, unaware that she, too, would be struck down for her learned behavior and share his funeral pyre.

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Pewter Calathus featuring scenes of Vespasian's Legio II Augusta unique holiday gift

A few days ago I received an email from Calix Imperium, a new giftware company in the UK, that is offering, just in time for the holidays,  a beautiful pewter beaker called a Calathus after a vase-shaped basket often found in Greek painting and sculpture that represented fruitfulness.  The company's first release depicts three members of Vespasian's Legio Augusta - a centurion, an aquilifer and a legionary dressed in an Imperial Gallic helmet and the famous lorica segmentata body armor.

"He [The centurion] is depicted wearing the Imperial Gallic helmet (Cassis) surmounted with the insignia of his rank, the transverse crest. His body armour is mail (Lorica Hamata) with strips of leather (pteruges) protecting his upper arms and groin."

"Over his mail he wears a harness, on which are attached his various medals (phalarae). The large shield (Scutum) with a central boss is adorned with the Legion emblems, the CAPRICORN and the edge of the PEGASUS. These shield emblems where found on the Arch of Orange in France and deemed to be associated with Legio II Augusta." 

"The Centurion is seen wielding his principal weapon, the short sword (Gladius); his secondary weapon, the dagger (Pugio) is shown on his right side. To complete his body armour he is wearing greaves (Ocrea), in this case with decorative embossed Lion heads." - Calix Imperium

More pictures and descriptions may be viewed on the Calix Imperium website.  These 5 1/2" beakers are exceptionally detailed and would be a great addition to any Roman history buff's collection!  I wonder if my husband is listening??!!

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Review: "Gods of War" by Jack Ludlow

Note:  Contains historical references that may be considered spoilers if the reader is unfamiliar with this period of Roman history

In the third book of Jack Ludlow's "Republic" trilogy, the protagonist, Aquila Terentius, having gained battle experience in the Servile War on Sicily, returns to Italy and makes his way to Rome where he hopes his adoptive brother may help him in his quest to achieve the destiny foretold by his adopted mother and the ancient soothsayer, Drisia.

Background and story up to now

Aquila is the bastard son of a Druid chieftain named Brennos and the wife of Aulus Cornelius Macedonicus, the Roman proconsul charged with putting down a revolt of Celts in Iberia led by Brennos.  The Lady Claudia is captured by the Celts in an ambush and when she is rescued two years later, Claudia is found pregnant.  Her husband, Aulus, assuming the child to be a product of rape, exposes the child soon after it is born.  But Claudia has wrapped a golden amulet shaped like an eagle in flight around the child's foot in hopes that the child will be found and reared by some other loving Roman family.

That family turns out to be an old legionary named Clodius Terentius and his wife who name the boy Aquila after the gold charm they found wrapped around his foot.  Clodius, a poor excuse for a farmer, barely scrapes by  as an occasional day laborer  but loves the little tot with red gold hair and bright blue eyes.
One day Clodius is duped into another stint in the legions by a wealthy neighbor who promises to care for Clodius' family if Clodius would serve in the legions in his stead.  So little Aquila is left to wander the fields around the tiny Terentius hut alone until one day he meets a Celtic slave named Gadoric.   Gadoric pretends to be crippled so he will be left alone to watch over a wealthy neighbor's flock rather than sent off to hard labor on the Roman's large latifundia on Sicily.  Gadoric suspects Aquila may be at least part Celt because of his tall stature and coloring.  So, Gadoric teaches Aquila his language and how to use a spear.  He also teaches him all the secrets of hunting and reading the signs of life in the forest and hills which ultimately proves quite useful when Gadoric's deception is discovered and he is shipped off to Sicily and Aquila is left alone once more.  (End of Book 1: "Pillars of Rome" - see full review here)

After his adoptive mother dies, Aquila falls in with a motley cadre of ex-gladiators led by a former Centurion in his father's legion named Flaccus.  Flaccus has stopped by the wealthy neighbor's farm to bring the news of Clodius' death at the battle of Thralaxas in Illyria.  The group sails to Sicily where they are contracted to serve as overseers of a large farm there.  But Aquila becomes entangled in the Servile War when he finds Gadoric and helps him and a Greek slave named Hippolytas to escape.  But Hippolytas, a charismatic fellow who claims to have visions, is convinced all the slaves can unite and drive the Romans back to Italy and sets about organizing a slave army to pillage the surrounding countryside.  Aquila, given command of a number of the men, tries to limit the brutality of the slave army.  But, he becomes increasingly uncomfortable with the slaves' hatred for Romans since Aquila considers himself Roman.   So Aquila eventually retreats to the mountains to avoid any further conflict with them.

The treacherous Greek, Hippolytas, secretly sends an envoy to the Romans to negotiate a peace that includes betrayal of Gadoric and the slave army in exchange for wealth and a large villa on the Italian mainland.  When Gadoric is ambushed and meets a warrior's death, Aquila follows the Greek and the co-conspirators back to Italy where he wreaks his bloody revenge upon them for the death of his friend.  (End of Book 2: "Sword of Revenge" - see my full review here)

Now a seasoned warrior, Aquila heads towards Rome, wearing the eagle amulet proudly around his neck.  Aquila is unaware that the amulet is the original talisman worn by the rebel Celt Brennos with a mystical destiny attached to it.  The Celts in Iberia believe the man who wears the amulet will one day bring down Rome.

In Rome, Aquila is not given any encouragement by his step brother Demetrius but befriends his "nephew" Fabius.  After some dubious adventures, Aquila talks Fabius into joining the legions with him.  Unknown to Aquila, his legion is on its way to Iberia to fight the rebellious tribes being led by Brennos, Aquila's real father, who has taken over a hill fort named Numantia.

The events of what became known as the Numantine War are the focus of this third (and last) novel of the series.

Aquila's 18th legion first serves under Quintus Cornelius Macedonicus, the oldest son of Aquila's stepfather, Aulus Cornelius Macedonicus, although neither man knows of the relationship.

Historically there really was a Quintus Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus who fought in Spain.  But I think the character of Quintus Cornelius Macedonicus represents Quintus Fabius Maximus Aemilianus, the adopted son of Lucius Aemilius Paullus Macedonicus, the model for Aquila's step father, Aulus Cornelius Macedonicus (see my original analysis of character models in my review of the first book in the trilogy, "Pillars of Rome").

The Roman senate sent Quintus Maximus to quell an uprising of the Lusitani, a Celtic tribe inhabiting what is now modern day Portugal, led by a chieftain named Viriathus.  In the novel, paralleling actual history, Quintus brought two legions that had never engaged in warfare before, as well as inexperienced staff officers that were brought along for political reasons.  Despite repeated provocation of the surrounding Celtic tribes, Quintus just dig in and concentrates on exercising and training his men.

"But Maximus declined an engagement with the whole army and continued to exercise his men, frequently sending out skirmishing parties, making trial of the enemy's strength, and inspiring his own men with courage. When he sent out foragers he always placed a cordon of legionaries around the unarmed men and himself rode about the region with his cavalry. He had seen his father Paullus do this in the Macedonian war." - Appian, Roman History, The Spanish Wars

In the novel, one of the skirmishing parties, led by one of Quintus' inexperienced greedy and ambitious junior officers, marches into the territory of a tribe allied to the Romans.  He has been told by an informer from a non-allied tribe that the friendly Celts were planning to lure the Romans into a trap and kill them.  Why the officer would believe a non-friendly Celt over his allies is a mystery but he figures he can turn the tables and plunder the properous friendly village that sprawls out before him like a plum ready to be picked.

The village elders come out and greet the Romans warmly and offer hospitality.  The Roman officer appears to accept their welcome but under his breath issues orders to kill all the males as soon as they enter the village.

This incident sounds very much like an actual event recounted by Appian:

"... the elders of the city came out wearing crowns on their heads and bearing olive-branches, and asked Lucullus what they should do to establish friendly relations. He replied that they must give hostages and 100 talents of silver, and furnish a contingent of horse to the Roman army. When all these demands had been complied with, he asked that a Roman garrison should be admitted to the city. When the Caucaei assented to this he brought in 2,000 soldiers carefully chosen, to whom he gave orders that when they were admitted they should occupy the walls. When this was done, Lucullus introduced the rest of his army and ordered them at the sound of the trumpet to kill all the adult males of the Caucaei. The latter, invoking the gods who preside over promises and oaths, and upbraiding the perfidy of the Romans, were cruelly slain, only a few out of 20,000 escaping by leaping down the sheer walls at the gates. Lucullus sacked the city and brought infamy upon the Roman name. The rest of the barbarians collecting together from the fields took refuge among inaccessible rocks or in the most strongly fortified towns, carrying away what they could, and burning what they were obliged to leave, so that Lucullus should not find any plunder."  - Appian, Roman History, The Spanish Wars

Aquila attempts to dissuade the officer but the officer angrily dismisses him and orders Aquila and his men to return to base camp.  But as Aquila travels back through the narrow defile leading to the little valley where the friendly village is located, he notices large number of horse tracks that were not there when the skirmishing party passed through earlier.

He finds the non-friendly Celts preparing to ambush the Romans after they have plundered the friendly village.  It takes all of Aquila's skill to avert the ambush and rescue the foolish  officer and rest of the Roman force.  Aquila uses tactics that sounded similar to those described by Appian in another engagement.

"When he discovered the ambush he divided his horse into two bodies and ordered them to charge the enemy on either side alternately, hurling their javelins all together and then retiring, not to the same spot from which they had advanced, but a little further back each time. In this way the horsemen were brought in safety to the plain." - Appian, Roman History, The Spanish Wars

Quintus is furious when the skirmishing force finally returns to base camp but goes ahead and claims the body count so he may enjoy a triumph when he returns to Rome at the end of the year.  But Quintus does not return to Rome with his troops.  Aquila's 18th legion must remain behind to continue the struggle to pacify the Celts.  However, Aquila receives a silver Spear for his bravery and courage, the first of many honors, and a promotion to Centurion.

A reconstruction of an early Celt-Iberian House courtesy
of About.com

As the years pass, Aquila becomes increasingly more frustrated as each year a new consul from Rome appears to plunder the territory and gain enough of a body count to claim a triumph in Rome.  Aquila finds their greediness and foolishness totally inexcusable but rescues them from certain defeat time after time, garnering even more honors and a promotion to Primus Pilus in the process.

Finally, a real commander with military experience and integrity arrives on the scene.  In the novel, he is named Titus Cornelius Macedonicus, the younger son of Aulus Cornelius Macedonicus.  Historically, the commander was Scipio Aemilianus, the actual son of Aemilius Paullus Macedonicus.

Titus decides to lay siege to Numantia, the most powerful hill fort in central Iberia, to finally bring an end to the Celt-Iberian Wars.  But first he must restore strict discipline to the troops that had been left in Spain and had grown demoralized and out of shape over the years .   With Aquila's help, Titus orders the expulsion of all of the legions' camp followers and sets about retraining the legions to bring them back into fighting condition.  This coincides exactly with the preparations of Scipio Aemilianus.

"When he arrived he expelled all traders and harlots; also the soothsayers and diviners, whom the soldiers were continually consulting because they were demoralized by defeat. For the future he forbade the bringing in of anything not necessary, or any victims for purposes of divination. He ordered all wagons and their superfluous contents to be sold, and all pack animals, except such as he designated, to remain. For cooking utensils it was permitted to have only a spit, a brass kettle, and one cup. Their food was limited to plain boiled and roasted meats. They were forbidden to have beds, and Scipio was the first one to sleep on straw. He forbade them to ride on mules when on the march; "for what can you expect in a war," said he, "from a man who is not able to walk?" Those who had servants to bathe and anoint them were ridiculed by Scipio, who said that only mules, having no hands, needed others to rub them." - Appian, Roman History, The Spanish Wars

Under Aquila's guiding hand, the Romans once more become a formidable force and Aquila is promoted to second in command.  Titus' legate, Marcellus Falerius, son of the ruthless politician that was the childhood friend of Titus' father, resents Aquila, claiming such a low born plebian has no social right to such an elevated position.  But Titus stands firm on his decision.

I found it ironic that Marcellus was so haughty to Aquila.  In the first book we discover that Marcellus is really the bastard child of a barbarian slave and the wife of Lucius Falerius Nerva, a ruthless politician who paid the slave to have relations with Falerius' wife because the politician was apparently sterile but wanted an heir.  Of course Marcellus does not know and never learns of the deception.

Titus does respect Marcellus, though, and finds him to be a promising officer.  So Titus grants Marcellus the command of an attack force against the Lusitani  to keep that formidable tribe busy so they cannot come to Numantia's aid.

Marcellus accomplishes this by building a fleet of ships and launching his attacks by sea. The sea battle passages in the novel are thrilling and extremely well written.  However, I could not find any historical references to indicate the Lusitani were defeated in this way.  But, after all, this is a novel, right?

I was really tense reading the sea battle passages, though, because I remembered that in the end of book 2, Marcellus visits the Sybil and receives what he thinks is a mundane prophecy saying he will inherit his father's fortune.  As the sole heir to Lucius Falerius Nerva, Marcellus does inherit his "father's" financial fortune but Sybilline prophecies are never what they seem.  Marcellus' real father was betrayed by Falerius who hired assassins to kill him.  The ex-gladiators succeed in wounding the slave but he escapes by leaping into the Tiber River.  However, the river's current is too swift and the barbarian is eventually pulled under and drowned.  So, every time Marcellus gets into a sea battle I was always afraid he would end up wounded and drowned.  I really liked the character of Marcellus so I didn't want him to suffer that fate.

Anyway, back to the story!

Titus lays siege to Numantia.  To prevent the inhabitants from escape or from bringing in provisions, Titus has the men build a boom of logs across the Durius River that courses through the hill fort.

This, too, parallels history quite closely.

"... the river Durius, which took its course through the fortifications, was very useful to the Numantines for bringing provisions and sending men back and forth, some diving and others concealing themselves in small boats, some making their way with sail-boats when a strong wind was blowing, or with oars aided by the current." 

"As he was not able to span it on account of its breadth and swiftness, Scipio built two towers in place of a bridge. To each of these towers he moored large timbers with ropes and set them floating across the river. The timbers were stuck full of knives and spear-heads, which were kept constantly in motion by the force of the stream dashing against them, so that the enemy were prevented from passing covertly, either by swimming, or diving, or sailing in boats." - Appian, Roman History, The Spanish Wars

To prevent the nearby Arevaci tribe from coming to the aid of the Numantines, Titus sends Aquila as his envoy to dissuade them.   During his years in Iberia, Aquila, who already knew some of the Celtic language from his years with Gadoric, taught himself to speak the local dialect so was the perfect candidate for an envoy.  When Aquila meets Masagori, the chieftain of the Arevaci, the leader spots the golden eagle amulet around the neck of this Roman with the red-gold hair who resembles a younger version of Brennos, the old Druid leading the Numantines.  Recognizing Aquila as the manifestation of the ancient prophecy, the Arevaci agree to withdraw.

But, as the Numantine plight becomes desperate, one night Brennos orders a group of his men to assault the Roman log boom as a distraction so he and a handful of horseman can ride to the Arevaci for help.

"...a man of the greatest valor, induced five of his friends to take an equal number of servants and horses, and cross the space between the two armies secretly, on a cloudy night, carrying a bridge made in sections. Arriving at the wall he and his friends sprang upon it, slew the guards on either side, sent back the servants, drew the horses up the bridge, and rode off to the towns of the Arevaci, bearing olive-branches and entreating them, as blood relations, to help the Numantines. - Appian, Roman History, The Spanish Wars

But Masagori refuses Brennos and tells him of the tall red-haired Roman with an eagle amulet.  He says Brennos has brought on his own destruction by planting his seed in the belly of his enemy.

However, some of the younger warriors of the Arevaci, hoping to gain personal glory in this monumental struggle, voice their support of Brennos even though their chieftain will not relent.

"The chiefs of the Arevaci, fearing the Romans, would not even listen to them, but sent them away immediately. There was a rich town named Lutia, distant 55 kilometers from Numantia, whose young men sympathized with the Numantines and urged their city to send them aid. The older citizens secretly communicated this fact to Scipio." 

"Receiving this intelligence about the eighth hour , he marched thither at once with a numerous and well-equipped force. Surrounding the place about daylight, he demanded that the leaders of the young men should be delivered up to him. When the citizens replied that they had fled from the place, he sent a herald to tell them that if these men were not surrendered to him he would sack the city. Being terrified by this threat, they delivered them up, to the number of about 400. Scipio cut off their hands, withdrew his force, rode away, and was back in his own camp the next morning." - Appian, Roman History, The Spanish Wars

Brennos then seeks help from the Lusitani but Marcellus has done his work well and the Lusitani fear they no longer have the favor of their gods.  So Brennos returns to Numantia where he meets a grisly fate and the mighty hill fort of Numantia falls.

The present day archaeological site of Numantia
courtesy of About.com

"Many, directly after the surrender, killed themselves in whatever way they chose, some in one way and some in another." 

"The remainder congregated on the third day at the appointed place, a strange and shocking spectacle. Their bodies were foul, their hair and nails long, and they were smeared with dirt. They smelt most horribly, and the clothes they wore were likewise squalid and emitted an equally foul odor. For these reasons they appeared pitiable even to their enemies. At the same time there was something fearful to the beholders in the expression of their eyes - an expression of anger, grief, toil, and the consciousness of having eaten human flesh." 

"Having reserved fifty of them for his triumph, Scipio sold the rest and razed the city to the ground." - Appian, Roman History, The Spanish Wars

So, do the visions described by the old crone, Drisia those many years ago come to pass at last?  You'll have to read the book yourself to find out.  But, Ludlow leaves several loose ends at the end of the novel.  Will Aquila use his newly acquired status to enter the political arena and support reforms that will eventually lead to the destruction of the Roman Republic?  Will Marcellus oppose Aquila and lead the opposition into a civil war?   Will the prophecy of the amulet totally come true and Aquila or his descendants eventually bring down the Roman Empire? I'm afraid we'll never know since Ludlow has moved on to other historical time periods and settings.

I still found this final installment of Ludlow's Republic Series offers enough resolution along with excitement and vibrant characters to be a very gratifying read, though.

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!