Alex Imrie
My primary research interests revolve around the emperor Caracalla and the Severan dynasty. My first book has examined the famous 'Constitutio Antoniniana', investigating the rationale behind the edict. I am currently working on a biography of the emperor (under contract with Bloomsbury), and a number of smaller articles. I will also be collaborating on a monograph in 2020, examining the Severan era through lenses of masculinity, ethnicity and religiosity.
I completed my PhD in Classics at the University of Edinburgh in 2015, an institution from which I have also been fortunate enough to gain both an MA (Hons) in Ancient History and a research MSc (Distinction) in Classics. I became a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy in 2019.
I am currently employed as the Classics Outreach Co-ordinator for Scotland by The Classical Association of Scotland and Classics for All. In this position, I facilitate links between schools, universities and local authorities to reinvigorate Classics within the Scottish state school system. I also work as a Tutor in Classics at the University of Edinburgh and a Research Associate at the University of St Andrews. Through all of my academic work, I am dedicated to widening participation in Classics with students from non-traditional backgrounds.
I have recently worked as a Teaching Fellow in Greek and Roman History and Culture at the University of Edinburgh, and a Tutor at the University of St Andrews, and am interested in further work of an academic nature.
I completed my PhD in Classics at the University of Edinburgh in 2015, an institution from which I have also been fortunate enough to gain both an MA (Hons) in Ancient History and a research MSc (Distinction) in Classics. I became a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy in 2019.
I am currently employed as the Classics Outreach Co-ordinator for Scotland by The Classical Association of Scotland and Classics for All. In this position, I facilitate links between schools, universities and local authorities to reinvigorate Classics within the Scottish state school system. I also work as a Tutor in Classics at the University of Edinburgh and a Research Associate at the University of St Andrews. Through all of my academic work, I am dedicated to widening participation in Classics with students from non-traditional backgrounds.
I have recently worked as a Teaching Fellow in Greek and Roman History and Culture at the University of Edinburgh, and a Tutor at the University of St Andrews, and am interested in further work of an academic nature.
less
InterestsView All (42)
Uploads
Books by Alex Imrie
Controversial since its discovery, it is depicted here as a keystone in Caracalla’s attempt to revolutionise the public image of the Severan dynasty after murdering his brother.
There is an inherent paradox between the apparently progressive nature of the edict, and the volatile emperor responsible for it. The enigma is only heightened by a dearth of ancient evidence relating to the legislation. By combining literary and material evidence with the surviving papyrological record, Alex Imrie shows that Caracalla’s rationale is best understood in an embedded context.
Chapters by Alex Imrie
Peer-Reviewed Articles by Alex Imrie
Full article available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-classics-teaching/article/coronavirus-pandemic-exams-crisis-and-classics-in-scottish-schools/4AF25DFA90DE6D5E266A8B9E6B5262BB
This article is due for release in G&R in autumn 2021. Before that time, please email [email protected] for more information
Encyclopedia Entries by Alex Imrie
For EAH, see: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781444338386
For EAH, see: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781444338386
Reviews by Alex Imrie
Talks by Alex Imrie
The figure and mythos of Alexander was a particularly important element in the competing narratives and propaganda of the Severan emperors and their rivals. The pretender Pescennius Niger apparently revelled in being dubbed a new Alexander, while Septimius Severus chose to lock the Macedonian’s tomb, lest others make claim to his legacy. Chief among these figures, however, is Caracalla, whose adulation of Alexander provoked scorn and derision from Dio. Questions remain, however, regarding how unusual Caracalla’s hero-worship actually was, and what prompted such an apparently pathological obsession.
This paper will consider Caracalla’s behaviour against a wider historical backdrop, in an attempt to discern the sources from which the emperor’s concept of the Macedonian was derived. By setting Dio’s critiques against the literary Alexander found in the work of Plutarch, I will attempt to show that Caracalla’s Alexander-mania can in fact be seen as his response to the literary context into which he was raised.
This paper considers Dio’s presentation of Rome in the context of civil war, in an attempt to identify how far the author provides readers with a Roman perspective on civil conflict, or rather employs the city as a potent, but ultimately conventional, literary device. The city of Rome is always prominent in the author’s narrative when describing periods of civil war. This is understandable, to some degree, as the capital represented the ultimate prize to be taken or defended by the various protagonists in each case. Nevertheless, Dio offers us a number of small insights during civil conflicts from Caesar onwards, describing the mood of the populace and the state of the city. In addition, even when Rome is not directly affected by military action, it appears to represent a canvas upon which the author can project omens and prodigies to advance his overall narrative. This paper will examine the purpose behind Dio’s presentation.
Controversial since its discovery, it is depicted here as a keystone in Caracalla’s attempt to revolutionise the public image of the Severan dynasty after murdering his brother.
There is an inherent paradox between the apparently progressive nature of the edict, and the volatile emperor responsible for it. The enigma is only heightened by a dearth of ancient evidence relating to the legislation. By combining literary and material evidence with the surviving papyrological record, Alex Imrie shows that Caracalla’s rationale is best understood in an embedded context.
Full article available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-classics-teaching/article/coronavirus-pandemic-exams-crisis-and-classics-in-scottish-schools/4AF25DFA90DE6D5E266A8B9E6B5262BB
This article is due for release in G&R in autumn 2021. Before that time, please email [email protected] for more information
For EAH, see: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781444338386
For EAH, see: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781444338386
The figure and mythos of Alexander was a particularly important element in the competing narratives and propaganda of the Severan emperors and their rivals. The pretender Pescennius Niger apparently revelled in being dubbed a new Alexander, while Septimius Severus chose to lock the Macedonian’s tomb, lest others make claim to his legacy. Chief among these figures, however, is Caracalla, whose adulation of Alexander provoked scorn and derision from Dio. Questions remain, however, regarding how unusual Caracalla’s hero-worship actually was, and what prompted such an apparently pathological obsession.
This paper will consider Caracalla’s behaviour against a wider historical backdrop, in an attempt to discern the sources from which the emperor’s concept of the Macedonian was derived. By setting Dio’s critiques against the literary Alexander found in the work of Plutarch, I will attempt to show that Caracalla’s Alexander-mania can in fact be seen as his response to the literary context into which he was raised.
This paper considers Dio’s presentation of Rome in the context of civil war, in an attempt to identify how far the author provides readers with a Roman perspective on civil conflict, or rather employs the city as a potent, but ultimately conventional, literary device. The city of Rome is always prominent in the author’s narrative when describing periods of civil war. This is understandable, to some degree, as the capital represented the ultimate prize to be taken or defended by the various protagonists in each case. Nevertheless, Dio offers us a number of small insights during civil conflicts from Caesar onwards, describing the mood of the populace and the state of the city. In addition, even when Rome is not directly affected by military action, it appears to represent a canvas upon which the author can project omens and prodigies to advance his overall narrative. This paper will examine the purpose behind Dio’s presentation.
It is noteworthy, then, that Dio ends his account of the life of Sejanus by claiming that he had exercised greater power as prefect than any other individual, with the solitary exception of Plautianus. While the senator implicates Caracalla as the architect of Plautianus’ downfall, his dislike for the emperor being well-known, the reference to Plautianus at the end of the earlier episode suggests that a direct comparison between the two prefects was intended.
If Dio’s accounts of Plautianus and Sejanus are compared, clear similarities between the two narratives emerge. Both men experience incredible influence with the emperor in the aftermath of assuming sole command of the praetorians, both are given a multitude of honours, and both suffer catastrophic downfalls, following a range of bad omens and prodigies. This paper will explore why Dio might have drawn such parallels, considering specifically whether this couplet should be seen as one in a larger pattern, or something truly unique. In addition to improving our understanding of Dio’s methodology when writing about the Severan period, this will also potentially alter our perception of Sejanus’ downfall, for which, in the absence of a Tacitean account, scholars are reliant on Dio’s prose.
Despite an increasing number of publications advocating a more balanced view of his reign, continued acceptance of Caracallan inadequacy can be observed in connection with his introduction of the constitutio Antoniniana: ‘a decision that has never been plausibly explained on practical grounds, but Caracalla was a shocking megalomaniac and the sheer grandiosity of the gesture may be explanation enough’. This paper offers a more considered assessment of Caracalla and his edict. Rather than an exercise in vanity, the Antonine Constitution should be viewed as a legislative response to a crisis in which the emperor’s position was vulnerable, his legitimacy debatable.
That emperors would seek mass popularity to bolster their position is undeniable. This paper argues, however, that we must look beyond the bread and circuses mentality: Caracalla’s constitutio represents, in one respect, an attempt by the emperor to forge a lasting and personal connection between himself and his populace via a de facto patron-client relationship. The final section of this paper will consider the implications of this initiative for subsequent emperors. Against this backdrop, the figure of Julian stands out as an emperor who followed a Caracallan precedent, in his case using religious reform, rather than constitutional, to consolidate his reign at the point when it might have seemed in most doubt.
The potency of Alexander’s legacy was no less significant during the Roman imperial period, with emperors from Nero to Julian seeking to forge parallels between themselves and the king. Caracalla is renowned as one of the most obsessive exponents of this image. Cassius Dio, Herodian and the author of the Historia Augusta accuse the emperor of a variety of increasingly peculiar attempts to depict himself as a new Alexander, from dressing like his idol to claiming that his body had become a conduit for the king’s soul, so that Alexander might live once again through him.
Of the many accusations directed at Caracalla regarding his obsession with Alexander, his levying of a phalangite formation inspired by the king’s army remains one of the most intriguing. Whilst it is tempting to dismiss the account of this regiment as hyperbole or fiction on the part of our authors, little thought has been given to the potentially tactical impetus behind its creation.
This paper will discuss details of Caracalla’s ‘Alexander-mania’ before examining the phalanx within the broader context of the emperor’s sole reign and preparations for the Parthian war. It will argue that the ‘Macedonian Phalanx’ might, in fact, be symptomatic of an evolution in the Roman military that had been underway since before the Antonine period. Rather than an exercise in vanity, we might instead view this initiative as an attempt by Caracalla to gain a tactical advantage over his eastern enemies prior to his eventual invasion.
"
This paper aims to offer a third reading of the conspiracy that led to the death of Plautianus. In addition to comparing the accounts of Dio and Herodian, focusing on the appearance of a mysterious letter detailing the plot in both versions, epigraphic and numismatic evidence will be employed to suggest that the conspiracy might have been far wider than Plautianus himself, and better interpreted as an initial attack in the fraternal rivalry between Caracalla and Geta that was to characterise the latter half of Severus’ reign."
This paper will challenge the historically accepted view of Julia. In addition to exploring the possible reasons that Septimius Severus may have had for promoting Geta himself, it will question the notion that Julia would have attempted to promote her younger son to imperial power when Caracalla had been established as the heir apparent for over a decade. I will argue that the image of Julia as a manipulator is based upon little primary evidence and a problematic analysis of that which does survive – namely the erroneous and often contradictory account of the Historia Augusta.