1 IMAGINING CRIMINALS IN THE ROMAN PROVINCES Forthcoming in A. Lanni (ed.), A Cultural History of Crime: volume 1, Antiquity (Bloomsbury Academic, forthcoming 2019) Ari Z. Bryen (Vanderbilt) Introduction: A Theory of Punishment? In his oration To Rome, the second-century Greek rhetorician Aelius Aristides could proclaim that the Roman world fulfilled its historic destiny of pacification and the creation of order: …the entire inhabited world cries out together, with more precision than a chorus, all praying that this empire should last for all time—so well trained it is by its chorus-master, the emperor. Everywhere is equally subjected to rule, and those who live in the hills are more humble than those who live in the widest plains, at least so far as not presenting any opposition. The landholders and colonists in the most blessed plains are your farmers. There is no distinction between continent and island, but like a single, continuous landmass populated by a single race in all respects they obey in silence. (Or. 14, p. 206 Jebb) It has now become cliché to quote Aristides’s praises of the Roman Empire. He was, to say the least, an interested party, with his own ideas about government. But he nonetheless echoed an important theme in the self-understanding of Roman and provincial elites alike: the Roman Empire represented a positive historical development, insofar as it managed to keep the peace and promote orderly social relations (that is, where people would “obey in silence”). A central part of that endeavor was the upholding of law and order, and, in particular, the apprehension and punishment of criminals. Cities might be allowed some limited freedom to decide court cases (so long as the stakes were low and the offenders unremarkable),