"Rome is the emporium of the world. Here all things converge; trade, shipping, agriculture, metallurgy, all the arts and crafts that have ever existed, all things whether man-made or grown from the earth. If it is not found at Rome, it does not exist." Thus spoke the Greek orator, Aelius Aristides, of the city of Rome at the height of its power in the second century AD. At this time, Rome truly was the focal point of a huge empire. It was not only the political capital, but the center of culture and the economy as well. The resources from the entire empire were marshaled together and redirected to Rome in order to feed its gigantic population, to construct the lavish buildings that adorned its hills and valleys, and to provide ever more exotic and extravagant entertainments for its inhabitants. All lesser cities aspired to be like Rome, and local elites poured out their own capital to transform their towns into smaller-scale marble imitations of the capital, replete with baths, amphitheaters, and aqueducts. The Roman Empire encompassed an enormous diversity of geographies, ethnicities, and languages, but what gave the empire its overall identity was its cities. These were the nodes from which administration disseminated, and the Romans were remarkably successful at instilling Roman culture in these key points. Roman civilization was an urban culture, and one whose presence was instantly recognizable through its architecture. Rome itself was the model, but the hundreds of other cities were the ones that gave the empire cohesion. Whether these were new foundations established by the Romans or preexisting cities that were taken over by them, once incorporated into the empire, they all sprouted the telltale structures that identified them as part of the empire.
The three cities studied in this book demonstrate the uniformity that characterized Roman cities as well as some of the range of their differences. In their development, all show the importance of geography. Rome and Pompeii grew up at crucial communication crossroads, while Ostia owed its very existence to the need for a port to serve the capital city. In this respect, Ostia almost has to be considered as a satellite of Rome rather than as a separate city, and its fortunes waxed and waned with those of Rome. Ostia's initial purpose was to guard the route of communication between Rome and the sea. It expanded most dramatically when it served as Rome's primary port, and it not only declined, but was actually abandoned when Rome no longer needed its services. While this close association with Rome makes Ostia unique, in other respects its history is typical of many Roman cities. Like innumerable cities, it began as a Roman military outpost that eventually expanded into a civilian town. Like thousands of other such foundations, its street grid reflects this origin and focuses around a forum that is itself surrounded by the principal political and religious structures of the city. As the city grew, it acquired the standard Roman urban amenities, including baths and a theater as well as homes, apartment buildings, taverns, and shops. Pompeii, on the other hand, existed as a prosperous city long before it fell under Roman dominion. Its history reflects a fusion of Roman and indigenous traditions, but as soon as the city acquired a substantial population of Roman citizens, its transformation into a thoroughly Roman city was ensured, and it too acquired all the architectural trappings of Roman culture.
These three cities also illustrate some pronounced variations on the basic Roman city. Ostia was perhaps one of the most thoroughly industrial Roman cities due to its special purpose as a key transportation waypoint for much of the vast quantities of supplies destined for Rome. It was a port city, and its economic life focused on maritime transportation. It possessed a physical economic infrastructure of warehouses and docks far out of proportion to its actual populace. A dense concentration of shippers, merchants, and middlemen were based there, and it was also the seat of an extensive administrative structure to oversee all this economic activity. With its many associations of tradesmen and laborers it was a solidly working-class city. This working population lived predominantly in modest yet well-built apartments; the number of lavish individual homes was relatively low, at least during the prime of the city as an active port. Pompeii, by contrast, had an economy based on local agriculture whose important products were olives, wine, and wool, all of which were grown or nurtured on the slopes of Vesuvius. It was also located in a prime resort area, and as a result the city boasted many luxurious mansions and probably a relatively large population of wealthy families. Despite the dramatic differences between Ostia and Pompeii in terms of their economy.
History, and purpose, they are in many respects more similar than disparate. What gives them their similarity is what bound together all cities across the empire: a uniformity of Roman culture and architecture that was derived from the capital city.
Ancient Rome boasted gold-encrusted temples, stadiums holding hundreds of thousands of cheering spectators, fabulous palaces, extensive aqueduct and sewer systems, and sumptuous bath complexes, all built so soundly that much of it still stands today. On the other hand, the city was the site of bloody gladiatorial contests and spectacles and was haunted by all the ills of a modern big city, including poverty, crime, injustice, disease, and overcrowding. This book has not focused exclusively on one aspect or the other because both visions of Roman urban life are true. Roman architectural wonders should not be admired without considering their cost, and the glories of Roman civilization have to be balanced against the experiences of the many who did not share in them, or who suffered to provide them. Above all, this book has tried to give a balanced sense of what it would have been like to be an average inhabitant of an ancient Roman city. It has attempted to offer a glimpse of the rituals, buildings, and people that collectively would have shaped and formed that person's life and experiences.
World History
