of the Empire, powerfully expressing the relationship of Rome to its loyal subjects. A collection of privileges, honours, even historical or-in at least one
case-philosophical texts could be a source of pride even to those who could not read them. For although there are pieces of evidence that the inscription
was a source of information to the public-it was a tyrant's trick to hang savage edicts out of clear sight-it is revealing that published Roman laws
sometimes contained the provision that the text was to be read aloud at regular intervals. Similarly we may assume that it was the moment when herald,
ambassador, or magistrate first read the Emperor's letter to the city that it had its effect: the inscribing was a symbol of the city's gratitude and
appreciation, and of the measure's permanence.
Depositing a document in an archive was not so different an act. The record depository might be in a significant temple (at Rome death registrations were
kept in the grove of the goddess of funerals). The main Roman archive was part of a prestigious complex of buildings on the sacred Capitoline hill, high
above the Forum. The close connection between the perishable documents and the public inscription, and the purpose of preserving the text, is excellently
shown by an epigraphic version from an Italian town, page by page with chapter headings, of a section of the town-council minutes relevant to the
honorific purpose at hand (ILS 5918a). It emerges that the minutes themselves were less practical in purpose than a part itself of civic ceremony; it seems
that a new roll would be formally started each year on Augustus' official birthday. The keeping of such records had very little to do -with future practical
utility.