Heraclea Analysis

If we are to operate under Bispham’s thesis that the processes of municipalization were welcomed and not forced onto the municipia then we are left with an interesting reality. The power that is mandating these laws is indirectly the Roman state, but it appears that no coercive or direct administrative leverage is being held over Heraclea, which certainly raises the question of enforcement. If these laws are simply being coopted out of desire to conform to a rather unobtrusive outside-state, then is the local government to enforce them, or are they simply to be ignored by the populous as many of laws are for the Urbs Roma and do not even apply to Heraclea let alone the average person in the township. These are questions that could only be …show more content…
Scott’s framework can allow us to examine the “visibility” question once more, did the people of Heraclea wish to be seen by the state or as Scott frequently assumes did they want to avoid it. A municipality would have to have a reason to compile these rules, the costly engraving process and size of the bronze tells us that much. It appears that they were either being forced to do so as Scott would find satisfying, or Bispham would be happy to find that Heraclea wanted to be a part of the Roman fold and did this out of a desire to be coopted. Again, many scholars would weigh in on this attempting to root out linguistic keys or diction within the Tabula that might suggest one reality versus another, but Crawford’s translation of this document seems to lead the reader more towards Bispham’s argument, that the colony willingly produced and coopted this tablet of law. For that reason, Scott would be irritated to see that the community in Heraclea was, in fact, attempting to make itself visible in order to gain the benefits of Roman