Riots are difficult enough for us to deal with, let alone for the ancients, who had neither police nor prisons; and only late on housed troops in cities.
Since Athenian citizens – the poor – made all political decisions, and the state and the rich funded them, there was little for them to riot about. The two riots organised by oligarchs to destroy democracy failed.
But in republican Rome, political tensions between the rich and the poor could produce serious rioting, often designed to disrupt the voting. Tiberius Gracchus’ Bill (132 bc) forbade anyone from owning more than 120 hectares of public land (50 soccer pitches), the excess being distributed among the poor at 30 hectares per family. After blood-soaked rioting, it was passed. As the republic collapsed, riots organised by elites competing for power multiplied.
After voting ended under the imperial system, the emperor was in total control. Like governors and the wealthy across the empire, he was expected to deal with famine, financial problems (debt, taxes), natural disasters, even unpopular political appointees, whose statues were smashed and homes burnt. On big public occasions such as games, he took special pains to listen to the crowd’s concerns. It gave him a chance to show he cared, even on trivial matters: e.g. complaints that the water in the public baths was too cold.
When it came to riots – we hear of professional political ‘stirrers’ – the emperor first made a personal appeal to the rioters, stressing his clemency. If that failed, he would warn that troops might be called in; if they were, he would publicly urge moderation on them.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in