Posted on 02/29/2004 4:36:28 PM PST by blam
Analysis of Roman epitaphs alters concept of 'family'
February 11, 2004
If ancient Romans observed Family Day, their celebrations would have included wet nurses, slaves and possibly many others who had no blood relationship, according to new University of Calgary research.
A landmark analysis by classicist Dr. Hanne Sigismund Nielsen of more than 4,500 inscriptions on Roman tombstones shows that our concept of the Roman family needs to be broadened to include much more than just parents, grandparents and children.
"Roman families did not at all look like our family structure today," says Nielsen, who spent more than 10 years examining the Latin inscriptions. "Quite a few family relationships existed by choice and were not at all contained in the biological family." For example, slaves were often related to their masters by choice, families frequently included foster parents or children, and wet nurses were especially honoured.
"Whereas we might say, 'He has a face only a mother could love,' the Romans would have said, 'He has a face only his wet nurse could love'," Nielsen says. The bond was so strong with wet nurses because mothers surrendered their children to them for the first three years of a child's life.
Nielsen has written a book about her research titled Roman Relationships: The Evidence of the Epitaphs, which is currently under review for publication. Although the epitaphs have been documented and compiled in reference books, until now nobody has comprehensively described and analyzed them. Nielsen assembled a database of 4,500 complete inscriptions out of a total of 40,000 epitaphs, many of which are only fragmentary.
"It's not just accidental that you put up a tombstone for someone," she points out. "These people weren't millionaires and the stonecutter charged for each letter. I think it reflects real emotions and real attachment." The reason Roman families probably included so many individuals who were unrelated by birth was because the mortality rate was extremely high. With a life expectancy of not much beyond 45, a small family unit could not have survived.
"If you were a woman and you were 15 years old, you would be married to a man who was 10-15 years older than you. Then, because you had actually succeeded in living that long, you stood a good chance of living until you were 45. In that period you would give birth to five or six children, and half of them would die."
Nielsen says the most affecting inscriptions were always related to young children. "The grief is tangible: 'Here lies So-and-so, He was such a sweet little boy.' The proximity of death was so close in those times and these families probably had other children who died - it is always very touching."
Although it's expected Nielsen's book will have a major impact within the discipline by dispelling commonly held assumptions about the epitaphs, her research also tells us something about who we are now." Because our way of understanding the world is in many ways derived from the Romans, it's important that we know something about their culture. Even if we don't care about history, we can learn something about ourselves by looking at a culture where they did some things differently."
There are comparatively few researchers specializing in Roman social history, and even fewer who work with the epitaphs. One of the assumptions that Nielsen's research dispels relates to women and marriage. "Most of the textbooks we have on Roman social history will say it was normal to demand chastity from wives and that it was generally praised everywhere in the epitaphs. But the evidence points to a different conclusion."
It wasn't until about 300 CE when Christianity began to dominate that the idea of chasteness was cited in the inscriptions. Although Roman marriages before that time were monogamous, it wasn't something that was memorialized. Before then, up to about the middle of the 3rd century, wives tended to be described as 'very dear'.
In my father I observed mildness of temper, and unchangeable resolution in the things which he had determined after due deliberation; and no vainglory in those things which men call honours; and a love of labour and perseverance; and a readiness to listen to those who had anything to propose for the common weal; and undeviating firmness in giving to every man according to his deserts; and a knowledge derived from experience of the occasions for vigorous action and for remission. And I observed that he had overcome all passion for boys; ...Just regular folks, those latter Imperial Roman ruling class families.-- Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book I
Just as Bill Clinton is not a proper indicator of our nation's morality - by no means were the actions of the "God kings" of Rome that most of the Roman world would never hear about.
And Mom was the wet nurse.
Does anyone else find this quite strange?
Practice makes perfect : )
No, it's done so that scholars and researchers can use a common frame of reference in research. Different religions (cultures) have different calenders. In the Muslim and Jewish calenders it's not 2004, they measure from different starting dates. So it makes a lot more sense to have a common neutral frame of reference that everyone can use regardless of their religion.
For one thing, it's been 10+ years since I had a TV in my house, and I have never seen Caligula OR Sparticus.
For another, you keep citing emperors and senators, then saying that's how the common man was. Then you say we have no writings about the common man, but its okay, because we have a wealth of written records about day-to-day life and the common man.
*Now* you're babbling irrelevant crap about mortality rates as if showed anything but your own pompous propensity to bluster loud wet farts from your mouth!
Shut up! Read Pliny the Elder or Plutarch or someone and *decide* what you think, or just have another scotch and go to freaking bed.
BCE = Before the Christian Era
That's not really accurate, since the Christian Era doesn't begin with the death of Jesus- if anything, it would begin when Christianity became the dominant religion in the Empire, centuries later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.