Locked Away for Life

[Fulvia]

Please forgive me if this topic has been discussed before; some of you are like local librarians who know every thread ever made! (That'd be a compliment :)/>)

 

Rome's Carcer, or "prison" as it often gets misleadingly referred to in English, has been a small fascination for me but I have been having some difficulties pinning down it's use as differentiated in the Republic and the Empire. There must have been a shift in its use from the Republican era (a place to await execution), to something more since in the 4th century AD there had to be some rules put in place and interventions used due to abuses happening in the Carcer; what these rules were, I can't say for sure. Between it's original set-up design and this one book-end piece of knowledge for the late Empire it seems to me that its use, or the extent of its use, changed as Rome's influence spread.Or maybe it just became a lazy way to deal with someone with whom, "I'll just deal with later", much like paperwork stuffed to the side of your desk you couldn't be bothered with until you have to. Can anyone shed some light on the evolution of the Carcer specifically contrasting the Republic vs. Empire?

Edited December 7, 2012 by Fulvia

[caldrail]

I must admit I've never looked closely at this point. I'm curious to know why you see a differentiation, since the Romans tended toward immediate punishments for crimes (or exile for the upper classes) and their prisons were always holding cells in some way or other, even if just forget the poor individual so incarcerated. Could you point us toward specific mentions that brought you to this idea?

[Fulvia]

My initial understanding was much of the same- exile or physical punishment and the prison as holding cells. But I first began to think it as being otherwise when I ran into these two points:

 

First, that Rome had an alternative to these options with an in-city forced labor camp essentially:

 

The Lautumiae were tufa quarries that became a topographical marker in ancient Rome. They were located on the northeast slope of the Capitoline Hill, forming one side of the Graecostasis, where foreign embassies gathered prior to appearing before the Roman senate. The quarries themselves were used as dungeons,(Livy 32.26.17, Seneca Constroversiae 9.4) primarily for low-status prisoners such as slaves. They were adjacent to or near the Tullianum or Carcer,forming with it a penal complex that included the Tarpeian Rock and Gemonian stairs.( Samuel Ball Platner, The Topography and Monuments of Ancient Rome )

 

Livy also references the Lautumiae when he talks about a successful revolt of Carthaginian POWs in 198. There were too many of them to all be in the Tullianum and revolt. This suggests to me that the word "carcer" is interchangable with the Tullianum and other penal facilities. This then suggests to me that the Romans had more than just death and exile as options for punishment. From this thought process, it wouldn't take much to see a melding of the two types of prisons, from one being just a holding cell to something more.

 

Edward Peters in his "Prison before the Prison: The Ancient and Medieval Worlds," made notes this( my paraphrase):

Justians

[Fulvia]

Allow me throw this out as well since my current side reading has been increasing my questions! So I will toss my current dilemmas out and maybe inspire some other people's thoughts.

 

A number of years ago I once heard a lecture given to a general knowledge audience introducing them to the Tullianum mostly through a physical description. One of the descriptions he gave was the tendency for the spring beneath the carcer to flood backing up the water from the cloaca maxima, with which it is joined, into the Tullianum filling the room with sewage laced water. He seemed to insinuate that these gross waters rose high in the Tullianum and tended to stay for a long time. Not too sure on that part since he gave no evidence. Having originated as a water well of sorts, being filled with water makes sense but not when there are high profile prisoners literally rotting away in stinky water. While I am aware of the bad habit the Forum Romanum had of flooding, to anyone more familiar with the cloaca maxima itself and the flooding problems of ancient Rome, do you have anything you could add that would prove or disprove this description?

 

There is also the question of how the executed bodies of prisoners were disposed. Jack Finegan in his book, "The Archaeology of the New Testament" says that the bodies were tossed through a door into the cloaca maxima though rather unhelpfully tells nothing about what led him to say that or where this door is. I have been inside the Tullianum in Rome, so unless that little water-spring hole in the floor used to be bigger, there is no way a body could currently fit through it. But then it would have to be gated so a prisoner wouldn't just jump in and escape "Shawshank Redemption" style! So, a bit more helpfully, Donald G. Kyle in "Spectacles of Death in Ancient Rome" says instead that executed prisoners were displayed on the Gemini Stairs (presumably the high profile prisoners) and then tossed into the Tiber after three days. Perhaps both methods were used, perhaps even others, but again, no source was given for what led Kyle to make such a statement.

 

 

And finally,(for this round anyway, lol)I have read a few sources that have hypothesized, insisted even, that Rome itself must have had more than one prison, their logic being simply that a city the size of Rome could not be properly serviced by just the Tullianum. The only source given to support this belief comes from Juvenal's Satire 3 where he laments the days when only one prison (carcer) was enough to satisfy the needs of Rome. But I can't find any further evidence of these prisons?

 

Thoughts?

[caldrail]

I see two problems. Firstly our lack of archaeological evidence for multiple prisons, and secondly, the lack of explicit mentions of them in the sources. I'm also wondering if our modern context is inappropriate, since the population of prisons today is higher than previous eras, especially in the US which is very fond of locking people up, but of course I have to accept this may be a phenomenon linked to cultural development which the Romans shared to a lesser degree.

 

We know that bodies were indeed thrown into sewers where possible - an unknown number of mugging victims were gotten rid of this way (and that still happens today, witness the behaviour of a russian serial killer in recent times) and Nero is noted in Suetonius as hiding the evidence of his youthful adventures in this way.

 

Whether escaping along the cloaca maximus was possible is another matter. It was large enough - the Romans proudly tell us how large the sewer was - but incarceration wasn't necessarily easy to escape in this way. Were prisoners chained to prevent escape? Was the sewer gated? Were the roman prisoners given to superstition toward dark tunnels of human excrement, not least since unwanted babies were routinely discarded in such places and therefore regarded as a burial place? (though in fairness, since prostitutes used tombs as places to ply their trade, respect for the death was somewhat circumstantial).

 

You raise interesting points but unfortunately there's a great deal to consider.

[Onasander]

There was a well used as a prison in the eastern Empire as well, in The Tale of the Four Dervishes, in the section dedicated to 'the dog-worshipper'. The storyline played between Cynic and Old Testament themes. The princess who rescued the man (wrong man, one of three in it) was not a muslim, therefor was a byzantine princess.

 

The vatican had a nice website dedicated to the matyrdom there, that throws reasonable doubt onthe idea that people were crucified or hung upside down, as well ad noting the theory where exits (sounded like basement exits to me) faced the temple across the walk. I also remember they recently excavated one of these stairwells.

 

I think either the temple of jupiter or isis was across from it. I remember foreign dignitaries were brought to the temple. Im guessing it was the temple of jupited as isis was hated by the roman government in the pre christian era in roman city limits. But if it was the temple of Isis, then Im guessing yes, water left the prison and watered the crocodile exhibit in the temple. Its a assumption, but a reasonable one if it was indeed the temple of Isis. I literally cant remember which.

 

From the description of the prison I remember from the vatican website, it was for short term holdings or torture. Screaming could be heard from the windows.

 

Romans really didnt need prisons, they were more into executions, enslavement, and ostracism. Boethius got a one year prison term before he died by execution, but the prison sentence to me, purely on a hunch more than anything else, seemed pragmatic more than anything.

 

Think about it, he was provided with ink and parchment, had enough time to sulk and recover, writing the classic 'the consolation of philosophy', apparently wasn't tortured..... and then after a year was killed. Why? Neither his trumped up charges nor his actual treason gave good reason to keep him alive, much less provided with a means of communication with the outside world.

 

I figure he was held in hopes of extorting the roman senate to pay up for his release, or the fainhope the byzantines would ransom him.

 

That, or Boethius was sentenced to death, and Boethius said 'hold off for a year and let me write a book incriminate you, telling you and the world why I dont give a flying f'ck your about to chop my head off, it will at the very least make a good read' with the king saying 'well, I was and still am pretty cross with you, but enjoy a good cheeky, defiant and yet spiritually uplifting chastisment, so Ill give you the time to do this, it better be good'

 

It makes no sense to be. I have my doubts as to the logic of imprisoning Boethius. It was obvious the treasonous faction was the Senate itself, why bother holding for intel or any other clever reason beyond financial motivations?

 

Hence, Boethius was treated fairly until his execution, almost like a modern prisoner of war.

 

Romans had little use for prisons, they were temporary detainment centers at best, torture chambers at worst. People not politically important were enslaved, those important, such as foreign hostages for peace treated well.

 

I was reading Tonybee's selections of the greek historians the otherday mention a hellish rock quarry on Sicily the unransomed defeated Athenians were imprisoned in.

 

I also know during the Christian era you could get sentenced to a monastery. The anchorite trend wasnf fill 5th century Egypt, and being bricked into a small space always seemed voluntary and non lethal. Only suggestion Ive come across anchorite prisons being in existence was the heavily hypothetical king arthur movie that came out a few years ago. It might have a basis in fact, but more likely is a influence inserted by modern anti christian sentiment in Europe. Though the collapse of western rome and the collapse of modern europe has many parallels, I dont think its right to insert european intellectual prejudices of the early 21st century on Christian trends in the british isles immediately before the anglo saxon conquest. They had different priorities then, and though similar mental makeup to today, had different personality and cognitive specializations due to cultural conditioning.

 

Having been a paratrooper deployed from the south of the US to Alaska, I can get a little of the average mindset of the average roman soldier being dragged from italy, north africa, syria, etc..... it was a constant wonder at the weather, trying to do your stupid, pointless patrols on the edge of the far north of the world, and trying to keep the peace and not angering the locals, because you could die if they grow to hate you, and half your unit is contemplating retiring there after they get out, taking local chicks for wives. The religion of christianity then would of been a simple, portable soldiers christianity, mixed in with friendly traders trying to make a trade profit with locals.

 

Nobody wanted to antagonize the locals. Rome was in a defensive holding pattern, and prisons dont win the hearts and minds of the people, especially the woads. I doubt Christianity, of all the Roman religions present, in this era went rambo and went so starkly against its founding principles. Remember, the dark ages didnt yet arrive yet. But its not improbable, as today as in the past, improbable and moronic things do happen despite all good logic.

 

Im remembering Gaius Marius was imprisoned, and chained, the soldier sent in to kill him pooped himself and fled from the attempt.

 

Jesus spent some time in custody, not long. No prison seen in the Satyricon beyond the ritualistic reenactment of the Labyrinth and the Minataur. If imprisionment was common long term, it would of been noted.

 

Im Catholic, my Spiritual Mother is greek orthodox..... I recall many arrests, tortures, and executions of saints, but no long term imprisonments. Showing up to the local arena or market in chains never lead to surprise long term imprisonment to my knowledge.

 

Oh wait, The Anti-Pope Hippolytus, the head of the greek faction of Rome's christian population, was enslaved in a mine of some sorts in Rome. If juvenile was mocking Rome for having too many prisons, it was probably that hellhole.

 

I'll come back to this list if I recall more roman prisons.