From the earliest extant occurrence of patria in Latin literature through to the late-imperial period and beyond, the concept is frequently presented as an object that demands service and devotion.84 According to Cicero and Lucretius, patria was regarded as taking precedence over everything else. This theme, however, is not confined to Latin literature. Latin inscriptions from across the Roman Empire provide unique evidence of the desire of its inhabitants to record examples of their devotion toward their various patriae.85 What we would today describe as expressions of patriotism are not only an important defining theme of patria in its own right but they also offer additional evidence that reinforces the overall definition of the concept as an expression of collective identity. These frequent expressions of devotion and affection toward the concept of patria serve to stress further the collective nature of various communities via
84 The earliest example of this theme in a Latin literary context is Ennius 1.105-108.
In this passage, Romulus is the subject of praise owing to his god-like guardianship of the Roman patria (Qualem te patriae custodem di genuerunt). Consider also the passages discussed above from Cicero’s De Republica. The symbolism of patria as an object of devotion was most famously recognised by Wilfred Owen in his Great War poem Dulce et Decorum est Pro Patria Mori. Owen adapted this now immortalised phrase from the statement in Horace’s Carmina 3.2.13. For a detailed discussion of
patria and patriotism see Bonjour (1975a).
85 Although such inscriptions are found across the empire, the Italian peninsula,
North Africa and Spain are the areas that contain the greatest number of examples. The question as to which patria these inscriptions refer to is a question that will be answered in Chapter Five of this study.
the presentation of a single and universal primary focus; to illustrate the values that were regarded as being central to collective identity; and to highlight the existence, at least by the time of the Late Republic, of the conceptualisation of a reciprocal relationship between patria and its members.
The theme of devotion to patria and its significance is effectively demonstrated in Nepos’ biographical Liber de Excellentibus Ducibus Exterarum Gentium, in which it is used to highlight the attainment and demonstration of individual virtus.86 A good initial illustration of this is provided by his account of the life of Thrasybulus. In the opening paragraph, Nepos states that he believes Thrasybulus should be placed first amongst men owing to his virtus sine fortuna, that is virtus based on its own merits without any consideration of the effects or influence of fortune (1.1: si per se virtus sine fortuna ponderanda est, dubito, an hunc primum omnium ponam). This judgement rests on four qualities: his sense of honour (fides), his steadfastness (constantia), his greatness of spirit (magnitudo animi) and his love of patria (in patriam amor). It is this last quality, love of patria,
86 Patria occurs in a total of sixteen of the twenty-three Lives of foreign generals. It
also occurs in the biographical account of Atticus from Nepos’ Atticus. For the connection between patria and virtus see Lucilius, unassigned fragment, 1342-1354 (Krenkel). Recent changes in attitude towards ancient biography have shifted scholarly debate away from historical accuracies and stylistic problems towards the interest that existed in antiquity in the development of character and the bearing that this had upon the actions of individuals. For the varied debate of the function, genre and value of Nepos’ writings see Horsfall (1982); Geiger (1985), 66-115; Wiseman (1987), 250; Dionisotti (1988), 36, 48-49; Moles (1989), 230-233; Schepens (1989), 214-216; von Albrecht (1997), 479-480; Tuplin (2000), 151; Titchener (2003); Stadter (2007), 524-540; Beneker (2009); Przywansky (2009), 101-102; Stem (2012). The theme of patria in relation to individual character is a theme that is explored in further detail in Chapter Three.
which arguably carries the most weight with regard to Nepos’ assessment of Thrasybulus’ virtus. This is owing to the fact that it is described as being the directing force behind his greatest achievement and thus characterises him as one of the greatest of all non-Roman political leaders:
Nam quod multi voluerunt paucique potuerunt ab uno tyranno patriam liberare, huic contigit, ut a triginta oppressam tyrannis e servitute in libertatem vindicaret.87
Quare illud magnificentissimum factum proprium est Thrasybuli. Nam cum triginta tyranni, praepositi a Lacedaemoniis, servitute oppressas tenerent Athenas, plurimos civis, quibus in bello parcerat fortuna, partim patria expulissent, partim interfecissent, plurimorum bona publicata inter se divisissent, non solum princeps, sed etiam solus initio bellum iis indixit.88
Devotion to patria as a means by which to attain and display individual virtus is a theme that is evident within the lives of Alcibiades and Epaminondas. It is within the context of Alcibiades’ first exile from Athens that Nepos introduces the importance of patria to Alcibiades’ character and its influence in directing his actions. Having been driven from his patria on a charge of sacrilege by his political enemies, Alcibiades takes refuge with the Spartans, going so far as to aid them in their war against his fellow countrymen. Nepos argues, however, that although Alcibiades offers his assistance to the Spartans he does
87 Nep. Thras. 1.2: “For while many have wished, and a few have been able to free
their patria from a single tyrant, it was his good fortune to restore his patria from slavery to freedom when it was under the heel of the thirty tyrants.”
88 Nep. Thras. 1.5: “This most noble action, then, is entirely Thrasybulus’; for when
the Thirty Tyrants, appointed by the Lacedaemonians, kept Athens oppressed in a state of slavery, and had partly banished from their patria, and partly put to death a great number of the citizens whom fortune had spared in war, and had divided their confiscated property amongst themselves, he was not only the first, but the only man at the commencement, to declare war against them.”
not wage war against his patria but rather in its interests (4.5-4.6): Lacedaemonem demigravit. Ibi, ut ipse praedicare consuerat, non adversus patriam, sed inimicos suos bellum gessit, qui eidem hostes essent civitati.89 Nepos’ explanation for this apparent paradox is personal antagonism. Nepos states that the driving force behind Alcibiades’ exile was the threat that his political and military competence posed to his political rivals (4.6): Nam cum intellegerent se plurimum prodesse posse rei publicae, ex ea eiecisse plusque irae suae quam utilitati communi paruisse.90 Alcibiades’ political enemies are thus presented as being motivated by personal gain rather than by an interest in the affairs and general welfare of the collective. As such, these individuals can only be identified as a direct threat to the security of their patria. It is for this reason that Alcibiades’ personal alliance with Sparta is to be understood as patriotic, as having been directed by his love of patria.
Alcibiades’ domestic political enemies are not the only ones to be threatened by his patriotic fervour. Although he provides the Spartans with the upper hand in the war against Athens, Alcibiades is distanced from his temporary allies by timor (5.1): Neque vero his rebus tam amici Alcibiadi sunt facti quam timore ab eo alienati.91 This
89 “There, as he was accustomed to declare, he carried on a war, not against his
patria, but against his enemies, because the same persons were enemies to their own
city.”
90 “For though they knew that he could be of the greatest service to the res publica,
they had expelled him from it, and consulted their own animosity more than the common advantage.” For a discussion of the political context surrounding Alcibiades’ exile see Smith, S.D. (2007), 38-40.
91 “Yet by these proceedings they were not so much rendered friends to Alcibiades,
timor is a direct consequence of Alcibiades’ unpredictable nature, an unpredictability that stems from his love of patria (5.1): Nam cum acerrimi viri praestantem prudentiam in omnibus rebus cognoscerent, pertimuerunt, ne caritate patriae ductus aliquando ab ipsis descisceret et cum suis in gratiam rediret.92 Whilst their interests align, Alcibiades’ patriotic fervour is an instrument that helps Sparta to attain military superiority. However, should Alcibiades succeed in his personal struggle against his domestic political enemies his love of patria would direct him to reconcile himself with his home and thus to devote himself to its cause against Sparta. That the thought of such an eventuality is enough to cause timor on the part of the Spartans implies that Alcibiades’ patriotism alone would be enough to make Athens a more difficult and dangerous opponent.
The potential danger that Alcibiades’ patriotism poses to the Spartans is revealed in a third illustration in Nepos’ biographical account of how ‘love of patria’ was a primary force behind his military actions. Having been forcibly estranged from his patria for a second time, Alcibiades uses his military skills to his own advantage, acquiring three fortresses and a private army (7.4: tria castella communiit, Ornos, Bizanthen, Neontichos, manuque collecta). Rather than use this private army to extract revenge upon his political rivals at Athens, Alcibiades advances into Thrace and enriches himself through plunder (7.4): primus Graecae civitatis in Thraeciam introiit, gloriosius existimans
92 “For when they saw the singular intelligence of this most active-minded man in
every way, they were afraid that, being motivated by love for his patria, he might at some time revolt from them, and return into favour with his countrymen.”
barbarorum praeda locupletari quam Graiorum. It could be argued from this statement that Alcibiades abandons any concern for the welfare of the collective, and instead focuses his energies upon furthering his personal interests. Nepos states, however, that this is not the case. Despite attaining a vast amount of personal wealth and power (7.5: Qua ex re creverat cum fama tum opibus, magnamque amicitiam sibi cum quibusdam regibus Thraeciae pepererat) Alcibiades is not satisfied. This is owing to the fact that his loyalty to Athens as a result of his love of patria remains undiminished (8.1): Neque tamen a caritate patriae potuit recedere. Alcibiades’ continuing loyalty to Athens is, however, presented by Nepos as extraordinary in an exchange between Alcibiades and the Athenian general Philocles. Acting on his enduring love of patria, Alcibiades approaches Philocles and suggests a strategy by which the war against Sparta can be ended in Athens’ favour.93 Alcibiades’ offer of assistance is rejected by Philocles on the grounds that it might result in a dramatic reduction in personal glory (8.4):
Id etsi vere dictum Philocles animadvertebat, tamen postulata facere noluit, quod sentiebat se Alcibiade recepto nullius momenti apud exercitum futurum et, si quid secundi evenisset, nullam in ea re suam partem fore, contra ea, si quid adversi accidisset, se unum eius delicti futurum reum.94
93 Nepos, Alcibiades, 8.2-3.
94 “Although Philocles noticed that what was said was true, he was unwilling,
however, to do what was requested, since he felt that if Alcibiades received command he himself would be of no importance in the presence of the army, and that if any success occurred his part in it would be nothing, whilst alternatively if anything adverse were to befall he only would be guilty of having failed.”
Philocles is thus characterised by Nepos in the same light as Alcibiades’ domestic personal enemies. He is more motivated by personal gain than by the interests of the collective. Consequently, as a reader we are immediately aware that Philocles poses as great a threat to his patria as do the Spartans. By rejecting Alcibiades’ offer, Philocles is accused of hindering his patria’s chance of success (8.5: victoriae patriae repugnas), an accusation that is proven valid with Lysander’s subsequent victory at Aegospotmoi.95 Nepos’ message throughout this account is clear. It is implied that had Philocles accepted Alcibiades’ plan, a plan that was inspired and controlled by Alcibiades’ strong sense of patriotism, Athens would have been saved from defeat and thus Sparta’s timor of 5.1 would have been entirely justified.
The final example of Alcibiades’ devotion to patria occurs in the context of the immediate aftermath of the Peloponnesian War. Fleeing Greece, Alcibiades offers his services to Pharnabazus and rapidly finds himself in an advantageous position.96 Further gains in personal wealth and influence, however, are still not enough to distract Alcibiades from his primary motivation, namely the welfare of his patria (9.4): Qua fortuna Alcibiades non erat contentus neque Athenas victas Lacedaemoniis servire poterat pati. Itaque ad patriam liberandam omni ferebatur cognitatione. Thus, Alcibiades continues to put all his energy into ensuring that the concerns of his patria are met, despite the personal consequence to himself. Determined to free Athens from
95 Nepos, Alcibiades, 8.6. 96 Nepos, Alcibiades, 9.3.
Spartan domination, Alcibiades attempts to obtain the assistance of the Persians.97 By now, however, the danger that Alcibiades poses as a result of his extreme patriotism is well recognised by the Spartans and they arrange his eventual murder.98 Thus, even at his end, Alcibiades is made to stand as the perfect example of the Roman notion of an individual forsaking everything else in favour of his patria. Indeed, this quality is arguably the defining aspect that Nepos uses to enable the Roman reader to understand the character and actions of Alcibiades.
Love of patria is also presented by Nepos as an important feature of the character, and hence actions, of Epaminondas.99 Two examples are identifiable. In the first (4.1-2), Nepos uses Epaminondas’ caritas patriae to explain his incorruptibility and general indifference towards material wealth. In the passage, Diomedes of Cyzicus attempts to bribe Epaminondas with both a sum of gold and the affection that Epaminondas possesses for a certain Micythus (4.1): Hic magno cum pondere auri Thebas venit et Micythum adulescentulum quinque talentis ad suam perduxit voluntatem, quem tum Epaminondas plurimum diligebat. Epaminondas, however, is not moved. In response to Diomedes’ offer Epaminondas states that only service in the name of the collective is strong enough to stir him into action (4.2): Nihil […] opus pecunia est; nam si rex ea vult quae Thebanis sunt utilia). Neither wealth nor personal connections are adequate substitutes.
97 Nepos, Alcibiades, 9.5. 98 Nepos, Alcibiades, 10.2.
99 For a discussion on the parallels between the moral messages of Nepos’
Epaminondas’ concern for the collective is further highlighted by his lack of concern for personal advancement. Not only is his patriotism not for sale (4.2: Namque orbis terrarum divitias accipere nolo pro patriae caritate), but even when he undertakes services on behalf of his patria he does so without expecting any personal reward in return (4.2: gratiis facere sum paratus).100
The precedence that Epaminondas gives patria over his own interests is highlighted further at 7.1-2:
Fuisse patientem suorumque iniurias ferentem civium, quod se patriae irasci nefas esse duceret, haec sunt testimonia. Cum eum propter invidiam cives sui praeficere exercitui noluissent duxque esset delectus belli imperitus, cuius errore eo esset deducta illa multitudo militum, ut omnes de salute pertimescerent, quod locorum angustiis clausi ab hostibus obsidebantur, desiderari coepta est Epaminondae diligentia; erat enim ibi privatus numero militis. A quo cum peterent opem, nullam adhibuit memoriam contumeliae et exercitum obsidione liberatum domum reduxit incolumem. Nec vero hoc semel fecit, sed saepius.101
In being passed over for the command of the Theban army, Epaminondas suffers a moment of public humiliation. Although taking a knock to his personal standing in the community, he does nothing to retaliate, either against the community as a whole or the orchestrating
100 Stem (2012), 168, also identified the role of caritas patriae in this passage of the
life of Epaminondas: “The scene is imagined to have occurred privately, among three men, but it demonstrates Epaminondas’ patriotism as well as any public act could. The direct speech and face-to-face confrontation (coram) add drama whilst numerous characterizing details intensify the overt exemplarity of the scene”.
101 “That he was patient and endured the injustice of his fellow citizens, because he
felt that it was wrong to be angry towards his patria, is proven. The citizens of Thebes had not wanted to place him in command of the army on account of their jealousy and had chosen a commander who was unfamiliar with war, whose error resulted in that great number of soldiers being led so that all of them were afraid for their safety, since they were hemmed in by the enemy in a narrow, enclosed space. They began to wish for the diligence of Epaminondas, who was there privately as one of the soldiers. And when they sought help from him, he did not hold onto any recollection of injury and freed the army from the blockade and led it back home safe. And truly he did not do this a single time, but often.”
faction of his misfortune. The lack of retaliation is directed by a single factor, his caritas patriae. Not only would such a course of action be impious, as stated above in the passage, but it would also go against his character and personal philosophy of service. That his patriotism is central to his personal philosophy is evident in his actions in the subsequent crisis. Having accompanied the army as a regular soldier, the army turn to Epaminondas to take command when the army finds itself cornered by the enemy. Acquiescing their request, Epaminondas preserves the Theban army and in turn ensures the security of his patria.
Although these biographical accounts recall the achievements and lives of non-Romans, the fact that they were written by a Roman writer specifically for a Roman audience leads us to the conclusion that either Nepos is addressing pre-existing and strongly enshrined Roman cultural ideas of service towards patria or attempting to develop them on Greek literary foundations. Although there are clear thematic links between patria and the Greek concept of πατρίς, the prevalence of the theme of service to patria in Latin writings that pre-date Nepos make the former more likely to be the case.102 Thus, although the patriae referred to in Nepos’ writings of foreign generals are likewise foreign, the themes attached to them can be interpreted as being inherently Roman and could be interpreted as having been intended to
inspire Rome’s political and moral leadership to emulate and eclipse the patriotic fervour of their Greek historical equivalents.