From ancient Egypt to the present day, the colossal size of buildings has been considered to reflect political power. For Herodotus, architecture was an expression of dominion; the Periclean monuments of Athens seemed visibly to encourage the Athenians to reclaim their Aegeanwide political ascendancy, since, as Isocrates remarked, ‘democracy had so adorned the city with temples and sacred images that even today visitors think it is worthy to rule not only the Greeks, but also all other peoples’. The Circus Maximus, rebuilt by Trajan, was ‘a seat worthy of the nation that conquered the world’. The correspondence between Trajan and the younger Pliny, his appointed legate in Bithynia, reveals the ideological purpose of provincial architecture. Pliny pointed out such meanings, although Trajan himself modestly affected to address only practicalities. For instance, Pliny remarks that a proposed canal near Nicomedia was ‘worthy of your greatness and your concern’. Architecture was as important in constructing imperial ideology as an emperor’s portraits or the legends and images on his coins; it legitimated his regime by promoting a particular ideal that commanded respect. It is generally agreed that buildings continued to play this role under Hadrian. The preceding discussion of Antonine buildings in the province of Asia now provides grounds to modify the view that, during the middle of the century, festivals or shows replaced public buildings as the major indicator of imperial ideology. One should, of course, be wary of using modern labels like ‘message’, ‘persuasion’, ‘propaganda’, or ‘ideology’ to describe the purpose of ancient forms. But in the present context the term ‘ideology’ seems particularly appropriate. As J. B. Thompson defines the concept, it highlights: . . . the ways in which meaning is mobilized in the service of individuals and groups, that is, the ways in which the meaning constructed and conveyed by symbolic forms serves, in particular circumstances, to establish and sustain structured social relations from which some individuals and groups benefit more than others, and which some individuals and groups have an interest in preserving while others may seek to contest. . . .
