Social Status and Cultural Identity in Roman Thrace (Grave Stelai and Altars)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
doi: 10.2143/AWE.7.0.2033256 AWE 7 (2008) 135-150 SOCIAL STATUS AND CULTURAL IDENTITY IN ROMAN THRACE 135 SOCIAL STATUS AND CULTURAL IDENTITY IN ROMAN THRACE (GRAVE STELAI AND ALTARS) Mario IVANOV Abstract Study of grave monuments shows that the basis of ancient provincial society was the nu- clear family. The erection of a stele for a deceased child indicates the same level of urbanisa- tion and also reveals the existence of very few middle to large towns. Relations of friendship between soldiers are often related to the right of inheritance; relations of dependence are rarely in evidence. Most of the grave monuments are in honour of military men, gladiators and craftsmen – people who formed the middle-class of provincial urban society. Before AD 212 the status of civis Romanus is rarely mentioned, and mostly related to military men. The onomastic data reveals a predominance of Greek and Roman names. This study of cul- tural identity through grave epigrams confirms the subjects’ integration into the urban cul- tural model. Grave monuments from the Roman provinces provide great opportunities for re- search into different social and cultural processes current in provincial Roman soci- ety. The information, which concerns the juridical, social, ethnic and family status of the deceased, is contained mainly in inscriptions on monuments. This is because relief images offer less material for analysis, even though most of them are consistent with the family tradition and social position of the deceased. The numerous stelai and altars from the province of Thrace (Fig. 1)1 provide a good opportunity for ana- lysing certain aspects of the life of provincial society. Although but a single category monument, they may be taken to represent developments in the whole of society. Categories of Social Relationships In epitaphs we find various categories of relationships: family, friendship (including military inscriptions) and dependence. The largest is that mentioning family rela- tionships – husband and wife, children mentioning parents, parents mourning chil- dren, brothers, sisters, etc. Inscriptions which indicate relationships of other types are rare, representing a small proportion of our database. 1 This article is part of the author’s PhD thesis, which examined 305 grave stelai and altars found in the territory of the Roman province of Thrace. The analysis excludes monuments known only by their epigraphic data. References here to Thrace are to the Roman province. 1197-08_Anc.West&East_07 135 12-18-2008, 11:26 136 M. IVANOV Fig. 1: Map of the province of Thrace with Roman cities and settlements, mentioned in the text. Thrace with Roman of of the province 1: Map Fig. 1197-08_Anc.West&East_07 136 12-18-2008, 11:26 SOCIAL STATUS AND CULTURAL IDENTITY IN ROMAN THRACE 137 In provincial society in Thrace, family relationships are indicated mainly by those who ordered the tombstone and their relationship with the deceased. On many stelai such relationships are not mentioned (especially in Thasos), or the in- scription may be heavily damaged or not engraved on the stele. Nevertheless, suffi- cient examples provide material for research and yield results which might be ac- cepted as representative of the provincial population. The large number of instances in which family relationships between the de- ceased and the one who erected the grave monument are revealed, expose the major role of the family in provincial (mainly urban) society. Of stelai and altars mention- ing family relationships, the largest group is that concerning husbands and wives – 48. Of these, 37 monuments were by husbands for their wives,2 for themselves and their wives,3 or for themselves, their wives and their child/children;4 the other 11 are from wives for their husbands,5 for their husbands and themselves,6 or for their husbands, themselves and their child/children (Fig. 2).7 Monuments put up by both parents for their children are fewer;8 most were set up by one parent for a deceased child, regardless of that child’s sex. The number of monuments put up by fathers9 is almost equal to that by mothers.10 The number of monuments prepared by children for their parents is smaller.11 Furthermore, it must be mentioned that sons more commonly accepted this obligation,12 in most cases preparing a monu- ment for their father,13 rarely for their mother.14 Only three monuments were pre- pared by a daughter for her father15 or mother.16 Our examination of family rela- 2 IGBulg 1, 340 bis; IGBulg 3.1, 1005, 1095, 1512; IGBulg 3.2, 1667, 1862; IGBulg 4, 2088, 2347, 2112; Sayar 1998, 320-21, 364-65, 404, nos. 162, 218, 283; Bakalake 1937, 18-20; Dunant and Pouilloux 1958, 141, no. 282; Kalinka 1906, 293-94, no. 374. 3 Sayar 1998, 293, 300, 301, 320-22, 427, nos. 123, 132, 134, 135, 162-164, 314; IGBulg 3.1, 1010, 1787. 4 IGBulg 3.2, 1653, 1849, 1863; IGBulg 4, 2346; IGBulg 5, 5585, 5930; Sayar 1998, 295, 303- 04, 315-16, 322-23, 426, nos. 126, 137, 155, 165, 312; Babritsas 1965, 482-85. 5 Sayar 1998, 327-28, no. 171; IGBulg 4, 1955; IGBulg 5, 5465; Dunant and Pouilloux 1958, 139, no. 273; Kazarow 1938, 62-63, no. 283; Dobruski 1901, 784. 6 Sayar 1998, 317-18, no. 158; IGBulg 3.2, 1604. 7 Sayar 1998, 316, 326, nos. 152, 169; Kazarow 1938, 165, no. 971. 8 IGBulg 3.1, 1006, 1022; Sayar 1998, 314, no. 153. 9 IGBulg 3.1, 1021; IGBulg 3.2, 1611; IGBulg 5, 5464, 5468, 5863; Sayar 1998, 304-05, 307- 08, nos. 139, 144; Launey 1934, 495-500. 10 Dunant and Pouilloux 1958, 174, no. 339; Sayar 1998, 306-07, 311, 362, nos. 143, 148, 216; IGBulg 3.2, 1605, 1610, 1673, 1698, 1828. 11 Dunant and Pouilloux 1958, 157, no. 321; IGBulg 3.2, 1846. 12 Sayar 1998, 316, no. 156; IGBulg 3.2, 1632; IGBulg 4, 1957. 13 IGBulg 3.1, 1014; IGBulg 5, 5467. 14 IGBulg 3.2, 1701. 15 IGBulg 4, 2011, 2228. 16 Sayar 1998, 305-06, no. 141. 1197-08_Anc.West&East_07 137 12-18-2008, 11:26 138 M. IVANOV Fig. 2: Stele of L. Titovius Diadumenus – libertus, found in Aquae Calidae, last quarter of the 2nd-beginning of the 3rd century AD (author’s photograph). tionships, exposed in funerary epigraphy, includes monuments put up by brother for brother as well.17 Their number is not inconsiderable, considering the lack of monuments prepared by a sister for a brother or sister, or by a brother for a sister. In more than half the cases (five of nine monuments), a military commitment ex- 17 Sayar 1998, 260-61, 268-70, 327, 355, 403, nos. 74, 81, 82, 170, 208, 282; IGBulg 3.1, 1521; Gerasimova and Martinova 1994, 29-30; V. Velkov 1991, 28-29, no. 37. 1197-08_Anc.West&East_07 138 12-18-2008, 11:26 SOCIAL STATUS AND CULTURAL IDENTITY IN ROMAN THRACE 139 ists as well as a brotherly relationship (Fig. 3). Military service often sent men away from home and bred even stronger relationships between brothers serving in the same military unit. Fig. 3: Stele of M. Ulpius Statius – eques singularis Augusti, found in Philippopolis, AD 131 (author’s photograph). 1197-08_Anc.West&East_07 139 12-18-2008, 11:26 140 M. IVANOV Family relationship is heavily concentrated on the so-called nuclear family of parents and children.18 In only two cases are persons mentioned who belong to the third or fourth generation – grandfathers and great-grandfathers.19 Two particular stelai deserve attention:20 one prepared for a father and mother-in-law, the other for a son-in-law. Such relationships are exceptions. The rare mention of grandpar- ents may be explained, on the one hand, by the comparatively short average life expectancy, and on the other by the late marriage of men, so that fewer children had living grandparents.21 The data about family relationship (mostly within the nuclear family) present similar results to those from other provinces. The nuclear family is everywhere asso- ciated with cities and urban culture. The family represents the main unit of social reproduction in the Roman world. So family relationships indicated in the grave inscriptions of civil citizens considerably exceed all others.22 Monuments of great importance are those erected by parents for their deceased unmarried children. Their number is 29 – a comparatively high proportion of the funerary epigraphic material in Thrace. The number of stelai erected by fathers for their children23 is almost equal to that of stelai erected by mothers.24 Smaller is the number of monuments erected by both parents.25 To these monuments we can add some fragmentary artefacts, erected for young people by their parents, which bear relief decoration.26 A considerable number of stelai point to the high rate of infant mortality, but they also bear witness to the prevalence of urban culture. Research on different parts of the Roman empire reveals that erecting a grave monument for children is related to the degree of integration into the urban cultural model. In small towns, with a close resemblance to villages, monuments to children form only 1%-2% of all grave monuments, but in middle-sized urban centres it is higher – up to 10%. In the big centres, such as Carthage and Ostia, children’s monuments form up to 40%. The conclusion to draw is that urban populations paid more attention to honouring children.27 According to the data of grave monu- 18 Saller and Shaw 1984, 124. 19 IGBulg 4, 2147; Dunant and Pouilloux 1958, 166, no. 331. 20 IGBulg 3.1, 1011; V.