202 The Imperial Government
theemperor,asitoftenwas,wherewashetobefound?Theremarkablemo-
bilityofemperors,whosejourneysarethesubjectofavaluablerecentstudy,^11
isacrucialandunderestimatedaspectoftheEmpireasapoliticalsystem.
But,wherever the emperor happened to be, the leaders of most groups
frombeyondthebordersoftheEmpireunderstoodfromthebeginningthat
itwastohiminpersonthattheyshouldgoondiplomaticbusiness.Atthis
pointweencounterfurtherambiguities.Itisbynomeansclearthatanycon-
ceptofthebordersoftheEmpireprevailed,orthattherewouldhavebeen
anyagreementaboutwhichregionsorpeopleslaywithintheEmpire,and
which outside it. Fixed and visible frontier installations (walls, pallisades,
linesofforts)werecreatedinsomeareasinthecourseoftheimperialperiod,
forinstanceintheformofHadrian’sWall,orthedefencesofsouthernGer-
many. But it is not certain even that thesewere regarded as marking legal
bordersbetweenRomanandnon-Romanterritory.Theywereinanycasean
exception.Inmanyareastherewillhavebeennodefinablemomentwhen
the traveller will have known that he was entering or leaving the Roman
Empire.Moreover,theEmpire,especiallyasitwasunderAugustus,incor-
poratedalargenumberofregionsruledbyalliedkings(theso-calledclient
kings),forinstance,intheAlps,Thrace,EasternAnatolia,theSyrianregion,
Arabia,andMauretania.^12 Thereisnounambiguouswayofsayingwhether
suchregionsformedpartoftheRomanEmpireornot.Insomesensethey
clearlydid. Strabo, bringing hisGeographyto a closewith a description of
thedivisionoftheprovincesbetweentheRomanpeopleandtheEmperor
(i.e.,thoseprovinceswhosegovernorsheappointed),endsbysayingcate-
gorically ‘‘kings and dynasts and tetrarchies belong to his part, and always
havedoneso’’(18,3,25,840).Butifthecriterionof belongingtotheEm-
pireweretakenasthepaymentoftribute,thenthese‘‘client’’kingdomsdid
notbelongtoit.AsasubjectofthetetrarchHerodesAntipas,andlivingin
Galilee,JesuspaidnotributetoRome.Theissueofwhetherornottribute
shouldbepaidbyJewsarose,astheSynopticGospelsagree(Mark12:13–17;
Matt. 22:17–22; Luke 20:21–26),when Jesus visited Jerusalem, now under
directRomanrule.Butitwouldbeanover-simplificationtosaythatJesus
wasnotasubjectoftheEmpire.
Nonetheless,thestep-by-stepabsorptionofthe‘‘client’’kingdomswasa
significant,ifprotracted,process.Notuntila.d.46couldanyonehavewalked
- H. Halfmann,Itinera Principum: Geschichte und Typologie der Kaiserreisen im römischen
Reich(Stuttgart,1986). - Onthesekings,seeD.C.Braund,Rome and the Friendly King: The Character of Client
Kingship(London,1984).