Home > The Magazine > The Week

Saturday 22 November 2008

Dare to dream and make your ultimate trip a reality

The latest culture as recommended by our staff

Michael Henderson

Michael Henderson suggests

Email registration

Free weekly email update

Great products and special offers for Spectator readers

Click here for great value events

Click here for exclusive articles, offers, tasting notes and discussion

Ancient & Modern

Peter Jones

Wednesday, 16th January 2008

‘Change’ is the latest buzzword of contemporary politics.

But the idea of kingship was anathema to Romans; indeed, it was hatred of the Etruscan kings that had led them to found the Republic some five hundred years earlier. Had they regressed to where they started? Not a bit of it. Augustus — sole ruler? What an absurd idea, he proclaimed. Far from ushering in a new order, he said, his victory in 31 BC over the forces of evil in the shape of Antony and Cleopatra announced not the demise but the restoration of the Republic. To prove it, in 27 BC he handed his (purely temporary, of course) powers and territories back to the Senate, and put in place the usual machinery of Republican government, election of officials, senators, consuls and so on. Admittedly, he was given permanent consular power, but when Augustus came to summarise his position he said ‘I excelled everyone in influence (‘auctoritas’), but had no more power (‘potestas’) than others of my colleagues in their various positions.’

No, dear, of course you didn’t: you were only emperor for over forty years, clinching the settlement once and for all by handing full imperial power to your nominated successor Tiberius. But it was what the Romans wanted to hear.

The fact, of course, is that Rome was changing constantly throughout its history. But it was more a matter of paying attention to, and bending with, the changing winds than dreaming up fatuous initiatives to impose on an amazed world, which then had to be dismantled five years later. Alteration without change: that’s the secret.

Previous page 1 | 2

More articles from: Peter Jones | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comment

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

A child of our time

From the economic and psychological bedlam of the global downturn has emerged a particularly dangerous false dichotomy: namely, that there is somehow a choice for ministers over the next few years between economic reconstruction and the repair of Britain’s broken society, and that the government (whether Labour or Conservative) must prioritise the former at the expense of the latter.

Diary

Anne Robinson

The daughter and I spent the last few days before the American election in Arizona.

Politics

Fraser Nelson

Fraser Nelson reviews the week in politics

The Spectator's Notes

Charles Moore

‘A money-financed tax cut is essentially equivalent to Milton Friedman’s famous “helicopter drop” of money.’ So said Ben Bernanke, now the chairman of the Fed, in a speech about how to ward off the ‘extremely small’ chance of deflation, which he delivered in 2002.

Diary of a Notting Hill Nobody

Tamzin Lightwater

Tamzin Lightwater's unique take on the week

Diary

Mary Wakefield

Mary Wakefield writes her diary from Monrovia, Liberia

Your chance to vote in the Spectator awards

James Forsyth

After a gripping week of political theatre in Manchester, James Forsyth invites readers to submit nominations for a new category in our Parliamentarian of the Year Awards: the prize for the Readers’ Representative