Anyone any thoughts on who's job this might be in 197AD??
Say the friend / relative has vanished from his usual haunts and is living quietly, but is not actually going into exile outside the Empire. Would anyone come looking for him?
Say the friend / relative has vanished from his usual haunts and is living quietly, but is not actually going into exile outside the Empire. Would anyone come looking for him?
Page Summary
bghost : (no subject) [+8] - (Anonymous) : (no subject) [+5]
- wellinghall : (no subject) [+0]
Comments
He could also be a she, by the way, though it would be safer for a man to travel. A woman would be unlikely to risk going in search of someone by herself, for fear of rape and kidnap.
I would suggest a man with some military background. Depending on whether you want a conflicted hero or a villain, he could be someone blackmailed to protect his family, or someone ambitious seeking to climb the social ladder. A slave would have different conflicts of course - his master would have to trust him implicitly to send him alone, lest he think of escaping. But he might well be tempted to flee.
So, your choices:
Mercenary - doesn't have to be a Roman citizen. Could be someone who has chosen to be a professional spy.
Blackmail victim - probably Patrician.
Social Climber - Patrician or Plebeian. Different motives and backgrounds for each.
Slave. Not necessarily Roman - any ethnicity or original background is possible, but must be trusted by his master.
If you do go for a woman, either have her travelling with a protector, or make her a convincing cross-dresser.
The traitor in question was a Patrician supporter of a rival Emperor, Clodius Albinus, who was beaten by the emperor Septimius Severus at the battle of Lugdunum. Severus is now in charge, Albinus is dead, and Severus is rooting out his supporters.
So military background for the hunter definitely makes sense. I had been thinking vaguely that he would be an out and out villain, but I like the idea that he might himself be under pressure and feeling conflicted. Probably not blackmail victim, but social climber or mercenary-type... Hmm!
I went and read the bit in Tacitus that you suggested, and that led me to what seemed like a similarly relevant bit in Cassius Dio, and that was very helpful.
My traitor is not a senator himself, but a senior member of a provincial governor's staff - I think probably a broad stripe tribune or someone of that sort of level. He supported his governor's bid to become Emperor and they got defeated in battle: now the victorious Emperor is wiping out his surviving family. I think a centurion is about the right person to be leading that campaign.
EVERYONE seems to be vague once you get much after the 1st century! It's amazing how much stuff there isn't for the 2nd and early third centuries. I guess surviving/maintaining empires are less Memorable (in the 1066 sense) than expanding/developing ones.
I was never that into Romans, for I erroneously considered them too well documented. Only in recent years have I realised how delightfully minimal is the evidence for the second century onward.