The Final Curtain

[Nephele]

Gladiators were spared for popularity, not for humanitarian concerns.

 

Again, Caldrail, I think you're missing the point. I said: It's familiarity that breeds concern.

 

I'm not talking about "humanitarian concerns", but the concern, interest, attention, solicitude, etc. that comes from identification and personal connection. Our modern-day society's concern for suicidal, cult-status celebrities (an example I gave previously) has little to do with humanitarianism, much to do with popularity, and is comparable to that same concern that the ancient Romans exhibited for their own cult-status celebrities of the arena.

 

I have never denied that Roman culture was "hard-hearted" in comparison to our own. I don't think FG was denying that either, in saying that she doesn't believe the Romans placed less value on life than we do (with social status not always being the defining feature of valued life, as in the example of Martial's slave child). And that: "We also put a value on life. Are we honestly as moved by the death of another [anonymous] baby in Africa as we are by a [familiar] great artist or statesman?" (Words in brackets are my additions, which I've taken the liberty to add for clarification of my own point here, which is: familiarity = concern.)

 

And, again, the epigram of Martial's that was quoted illustrated Martial's concern for a slave child that he had known by name and association. A child whose circumstances of birth did not lead to exposure, but rather a child who had the fortune to live long enough in this household (six years) to interact with the family and for the master to have come to know and to learn to care about.

 

It is not at all inconsistent with perceived Roman character to envision many Roman households such as Martial's, and for many of Martial's fellow Romans to have been moved by his words. Martial knew whereof he wrote.

 

You might say that these sentiments are understandable and necessary for survival.

 

No, actually, I might not say that at all. As this is not a discussion about what is or is not necessary for the survival of a species, but rather a discussion of how the Romans may have viewed death.

 

-- Nephele

[caldrail]

I agree that such concern existed - of course it did, the romans were human beings after all. However, this concern is modifed by society as a whole. You see, in general, if someone shows concern and gets laughed at by his peers as a softie, its likely he won't show that concern again whether he feels it or not. Whether that person continues to act on his concerns afterward without the knowledge of his peers is another matter, and that depends on his personality.

 

We see in the romans a society that has mixed influences. On the one hand, there is a democratic element, on the other, personal power sometimes verging on the absolute. We see a society that derides romantic illusions, that regards love as a form of mental slavery, yet retains a strong family virtue. We see men who keep little children as pets, and despite their complete familiarity, these same men quickly sell the child when it gets older and potentially scandalous. We see slaves as trusted followers, personal friends, or more usually - as 'talking tools'.

 

One thing to be said about this testerone rich culture is its virility. The romans do seem to have this sense of achievement and pleasure in life, almost as if they know it could be so short and should therefore make the most of it. And so they should know it was short. Much is made of the romans medicinal care but this was costly and unavailable to common citizens outside of the legions. Disease was ever present, there was always a risk of death or injury in the active lifestyle of romans, even the competitiveness of Rome caused casualties.

 

Death was something the romans were familar with. In fact, they make it a virtue to be contemptuous of it. Honourable suicides are recored in ancient sources and what comes across is that some senior romans would prefer that to scandal and dishonour. Perhaps this shouldn't suprise us. Such a man who falls from grace can often be treated with utter contempt by those who instigated his fall, or even torture, public ridicule, or even a staged execution if it suited the purpose.

 

It shouldn't come as a suprise then that the romans made courage a virtue, that they applauded those who did not bow to fear. Like Caractacus, who stood in the senate and gave them a piece of his mind whilst his family cowered and pleaded for mercy. A certain death sentence commuted to life at Rome as an ordinary citizen, something I note that was accorded to Zenobia too.

 

This contempt for death has another side, the nasty side that sees people murdering each other readily. Nero, as a young man, joins his friends in late night violence in the streets of Rome, something considered usual for young men and never really dealt with. In Nero's case of course, he delights in stabbing the victim and depositing the corpse in sewers. Is that only typical of Nero? Not really. Whilst it may not have been so commonoplace, such killings were known to occur in the darkened streets, and its entirely possible that watcmen, whose job was to deter such behaviour, may have been bribed at times to be somewhere else. Money was preferable to justice it seems, and surely this indicates not only contempt for death, but something approaching indifference to it?

[DecimusCaesar]

Really!? You wouldn't happen to have any sources on this?

 

I ask because this is very similar to the Aztecan approach; when the Spaniards imposed Catholicism and moved the Aztecan 'day of rememberance' from the summer to All Souls' Day (2 November), it created this incredible mix of rituals, which in my opinion is quite beautiful. The main 'symbol' is a calavera ('skull') or esqueleto ('skeleton'), which is dancing around and making merry. The image is meant to represent the belief that life is no longer bad for these now defunct souls...so they're enjoying themselves now. It's also meant to laugh at the face of death, that it's not so bad.

 

 

I'm sorry I'm a bit late with this Doc.

 

My source for this comes from Kathryn Welch and Estelle Lazer's book - The Romans. It says:

 

The Romans co-existed with death in a way foreign to us. Not only were funeral feasts held inside the burial chamber, but the concept, "Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die" was commonly expressed in literature and art. Dining rooms featured skeleton-like butlers carrying in the wine*, or skulls and other deathly features as patterns for mosaics as the table top."

 

* as seen in Flavia Gemina's photograph.

 

Similar sentiments can be seen in some scenes of Petronius' Satyricon.

[Faustus]

My source for this comes from Kathryn Welch and Estelle Lazer's book - The Romans. It says:

 

The Romans co-existed with death in a way foreign to us. Not only were funeral feasts held inside the burial chamber, but the concept, "Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die" was commonly expressed in literature and art. Dining rooms featured skeleton-like butlers carrying in the wine*, or skulls and other deathly features as patterns for mosaics as the table top."

 

Similar sentiments can be seen in some scenes of Petronius' Satyricon.

 

I am reminded of the skull in the opening credits of HBO's ROME. I'm not sure in which order I had seen that skull; first I think in Tom Holland's Rubicon. But it can be found there (plate-38). described thus: "a mosaic found in Pompeii. A skull is balanced precariously on a butterfly and a wheel: death haunts life, and fortune is endlessly mutable. (Museo Nazionale, Naples/Scala, Florence) "

Oddly enough that skull seems to be hanging from what I perceive as being a roof truss (set of rafters).

[Nephele]

I am reminded of the skull in the opening credits of HBO's ROME. I'm not sure in which order I had seen that skull; first I think in Tom Holland's Rubicon. But it can be found there (plate-38). described thus: "a mosaic found in Pompeii. A skull is balanced precariously on a butterfly and a wheel: death haunts life, and fortune is endlessly mutable. (Museo Nazionale, Naples/Scala, Florence) "

Oddly enough that skull seems to be hanging from what I perceive as being a roof truss (set of rafters).

 

Nice connection, Faustus!

 

Yes, it does look a bit like a roof truss, but I think you'll agree (after seeing the picture below) that this is actually a carpenter's level from which the skull is hanging. Presumably showing death as being "The Great Leveler".

 

 

The following description comes from vroma.org:

polychrome table-top mosaic from Pompeii; Roman, first century CE

 

[Faustus]

 

Excellent Find Nephele

 

In that design of a level the skull is the plumb-bob, with the line crossing some scribed center line mark not shown in the artists depiction. But I can still see how it would function. (I've been tempted to purchase a plumb-bob-and-line called a "Plumb-Barbara", which would describe quite another side of life) That triangle, then would be set on the edge of a piece of stone or other material to be set, and would thus find level. Great Leveler indeed!

[Nephele]

In that design of a level the skull is the plumb-bob, with the line crossing some scribed center line mark not shown in the artists depiction. But I can still see how it would function. (I've been tempted to purchase a plumb-bob-and-line called a "Plumb-Barbara", which would describe quite another side of life) That triangle, then would be set on the edge of a piece of stone or other material to be set, and would thus find level. Great Leveler indeed!

 

Thanks for the additional description, Faustus. As a person with a lot of experience in the construction trades, I thought you would especially appreciate (and expand upon) the symbolism in that mosaic. Well done!

 

-- Nephele

[M. Porcius Cato]

I respectfully disagree that human life was valued any less than it is today. One small example among a plethora of epigrams, epitaphs and laments is the moving poem written by Martial about a female child slave, surely the 'lowest of the low'.

 

I tend to agree with the broader point, but do you think Martial shows any greater sorrow than did Catullus for Lesbia's dead sparrow? I'm rather haunted by the thought that the Romans viewed their slaves as no more than pets, and on that premise, Catullus 3 can be seen as another instance of how familiarity breeds concern that is out of all proportion to general ideas about the worth of a life. Maybe...

[Nephele]

I respectfully disagree that human life was valued any less than it is today. One small example among a plethora of epigrams, epitaphs and laments is the moving poem written by Martial about a female child slave, surely the 'lowest of the low'.

 

I tend to agree with the broader point, but do you think Martial shows any greater sorrow than did Catullus for Lesbia's dead sparrow? I'm rather haunted by the thought that the Romans viewed their slaves as no more than pets, and on that premise, Catullus 3 can be seen as another instance of how familiarity breeds concern that is out of all proportion to general ideas about the worth of a life. Maybe...

 

Good point, MPC. I know you directed this question to FG, but since I started the whole "familiarity breeds concern" theme here in this thread (deliberately inverting the old adage of "familiarity breeds contempt"), I hope you don't mind me cutting in here with my two sestercii. (I look forward to FG's input, as well.)

 

I agree with you that there were Romans who viewed their slaves as pets. In fact, I think the reforms enacted by the Emperor Hadrian, to protect slaves from abuse, were more comparable to our modern society's animal welfare laws than to laws enacted out of any actual humanitarian concerns. (Which I'd previously stated in another thread on this board.)

 

But while Martial has been described as a poet who could occasionally be the most brutal of Romans, actually, I did get the impression that Martial not only showed greater sorrow for Erotion than did Catallus for Lesbia's sparrow, but that Martial also viewed Erotion as a human being "equalized" by death (as depicted in that Pompeiian mosaic of death as the Great Leveler).

 

In his poem, Martial respectfully commended Erotion's ghost to his own dead parents for gentle caretaking. Why should Martial's ghostly parents be concerned about this mere slave child, if not for the fact that their son regarded this child as being worthy of their attention in the afterlife? Catullus, on the other hand, winds up his own little poem in what appears to be almost a peevish reproach to the dead bird. While Catullus notes the effect of the loss on his girl, the extent to which his girl's dead bird has affected him personally amounts to no more than the fact that his girl's otherwise lovely eyes are now red and swollen from weeping.

 

-- Nephele