3 :i ^jr s; Book 1x^2^ FI^ESKNTHJ) liY / SOCIAL AND PRIVATE LIFE AT ROME IN THE TIME OF PLAUTUS AND TERENCE BY GEORGIA WILLIAMS LEFFINGWELL, M. A. Sutro Fellow in History, Vassar College SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE Faculty of Political Science Columbia University NEW YORK I918 Copyright, 1918 BY GEORGIA WILLIAMS LEFFINGWELL em OCT 25 mu o THE MEMORY OF ^ PROFESSOR GEORGE WILLIS BOTSFORD AT WHOSE SUGGESTION THIS WORK WAS BEGUN AND WHOSE KINDLY GUIDANCE AND HELPFUL CRITICISM MADE POSSIBLE ITS COMPLETION CONTENTS Introduction » 9 CHAPTER I Dwelling, Town and Country (a) Town-house and Furniture . • , 20 (b) Country Estate 34 CHAPTER n Women and Marriage 39 CHAPTER, HI Children and Education (a) Children 57 (b) General Education • 62 (c) Higher Education—Cultural Studies (yj CHAPTER IV Slaves 'jz CHAPTER V Freedmen and Clients • 91 CHAPTER VI Finance and Industry 98 CHAPTER VII Religion 113 CHAPTER VIII Morals and Character „ 128 Bibliography * 138 7] 7 INTRODUCTION To assemble as far as possible the source evidence on social and private life at Rome during the first half of the second century B. €., and from this evidence to draw cer- tain conclusions which will give a clearer understanding of the habits of thought and the feelings of the average citizen of the time is the purpose of this study. i While literary sources for Roman life in this period of the Republic are less available than for the Ciceronian age or for the Empire, a knowledge of the earlier period is of importance not only for its own sake as a critical moment in the history of Graeco-Roman civilization, but as a basis for comparison with later developrrients. The very fact of the scarcity of material and the consequent lack of informa- tion in regard tO' this subject may be given as the chief reason for the present work. Roman life in the Imperial period has received a large amount of attention and been treated in exhaustive detail by modern writers, but the question of Roman life in the period of the Republic has been comparatively neglected. Warde Fowler in his Social Life at Rome in the age of Cicero embodies in his chapters, a series of delightful sketches of conditions at the close of the Republican period, but the book throws little light on the century preceding the Ciceronian age, and in any case is of little value for refer- ence purposes. The larger works on Roman life, such as Marquardt's Privatlehen der Romer, devote some attention to Republican conditions. The statements, however, are scattered and more or less general, and the source references given are far from complete. 9] 9 lO SOCIAL AND PRIVATE LIFE AT ROME [lo r ^ Contemporary literary sources for the period consist of the Histories of Polybius, the De re rustica of Cato, but most important, the dramatic works of Plautus and Terence. Any use of the plays of these two authors, as a source, neces- sarily involves a careful consideration of the question how far the material of the comedies is Roman, and how far it is simply a reproduction of the Greek, a fact which explains perhaps more than any other the absence of modern works dealing with the Roman life of that age. The generally recognized intermingling of both Greek and Roman elements in the comedies has resulted in a rather confusing habit on the part of many writers. The plays are drawn upon indiscriminately to illustrate or affirm various points of either Greek life or Roman life without any systematic attempt to define the reason for this arbi- trary choice. Modern writers differ in their judgment, but the general impression would appear tO' be that the plays are so largely Greek that they are of comparatively little value for infor- mation on Roman life and habits. Sellar voices this senti- ment in the definite statement that Plautus " had no intention of presenting to his audience the outward condi- tions of Roman or Italian life." In support of this he emphasizes the absence of all gentile designations among the richer personages of the comedies as in itself a sufficient proof. ^ The explanation, however, of this absence is both possible and easy. The contemporary poet was given very little license along certain lines. To mention Roman citizens by name or to allude to specific gentes involved considerable risk, vide the imprisonment which overtook the poet Naevius for his attacks on the Metelli. Doubtless it was safer and 1 Sellar, Roman Poets of the Republic (Oxford, 1905), p. 169. : Il] INTRODUCTION II more advisable, therefore, to avoid as far as possible any reference which might possibly be interpreted as a libelous reflection upon some sensitive citizen, and to adopt the avenue of safety offered by setting the scene ostensibly far from Rome. Wallon, who' draws extensively on Plautus as a source for Roman conditions, apparently has much this idea in " mind when he says : Le peuple romain voulait bien qu'on le jouat, mais seulement sous le costume grec; et il ne se fachait pas de voir soulever un coin du manteau, quand le rideau allait couvrir la scene." ^ The choice of the spot in which the action took place, moreover, did not rest en- tirely with the poet. As Oldfather tells us, " so far were the police from allowing the dignity of a Roman citizen to be diminished that, to all appearances, not even the fabtda togafa might be set in Rome, but only in some town of the Latin Confederacy." ^ The second argument of Sellar is based upon the fact that there is no distinction in station among the personages except that of rich and poor, freeman and slave, and hence no recognition of " those great distinctions of birth, privi- lege, and political status, which were so pervading a charac- teristic of Roman life." This statement will be referred to again in the chapter on " Finance and Industry." It is sufficient to say at this point that the division of the charac- ters of the comedies on a basis of wealth and poverty is a reflection of one of the most striking characteristics of Roman society of the time. To quote from Duruy The strife of classes sprang up again, and as in early times the city contained two distinct peoples. If time and law had ^Wallon, Histoire de I'esclavage dans I'antiquite (Paris, 1879), vol. ii, p. 231. ^Classical Weekly (1914), Oldfather, "'Roman Comedy" p. 218. 12 SOCIAL AND PRIVATE LIFE AT ROME [12 almost effaced the distinction between patrician and plebeian, a higher barrier was now rising between rich and poor, the former growing prouder and more insolent, the latter more wretched and submissive.^ Furthermore the statement as to the lack of recognition of any political distinctions may be met by a citation of a few of the references in Plautus: dictator (Pseud. 415-6), quaestor (Bacc. 1075), praetor (Poen. 584-5), aediles {Men. 590), tresuiri (Aul. 416, Asin. 131), senatus (Asin. 871, Cas. 536, Epid. 189), comitia (Aul. 700, Pseud. 1232, True. 819), praefectura {Cos. 99), prouincia (Cas. 103, patriciis Capt. 474), de foro . m tribu {Capt. 475-6), pueris {Capt. 1002). Legrande brings up another point of objection when he " says : De fait, les scandales et les exploits gallants qui en sont de frequents episodes, les courtisanes, prostitueurs, parasites, artistes en cuisine qui y jouent communement un role devaient etre, durant le He siecle avant notre ere, presque ignores a Rome ". This argument, however, is very clearly not supported by fact. Numerous references from the sources attest indubitably that such conditions were in the most striking way characteristic of the Rome of the time. Compare the passage of Polybius describing the average " Roman youth wasting himself on favorite youths, . on mistresses, on banquets enlivened with poetry and wine, and all the extravagant expenditure they entailed." Com- pare the statement of Livy " then the cook, whom the an- cients considered as the meanest of their slaves, both in esti- mation and use, became highly valuable, and what was considered as a servile office began to be considered as an art." Compare the complaints of Cato that it was difficult to ^Sellar, loc. cit; cf. Duruy, History of Rome (Boston, 1890), vol. ii, sec. i, p. 260. INTRODUCTION j^] 13 save a city in which a fish was dearer than an ox, or in which a cook brought a higher price than a horse/ Judg- ing from their attitude we can hardly agree with Legrande that the elements, he refers to were " presque ignores a Rome " in the second century B. C. It is undeniable that there is much in the plays that is without question Greek, but this may be taken in part as evidence that the Roman pubHc of the time had made con- siderable progress in the knowledge of the Greek language and had even acquired a certain amount of Hellenic culture. Greek titles, Greek words in the text itself, Greek endings attached to Latin roots such as prritribaces {Most. 356), legends of Greek mythology (Bacc. 275, Merc. 469, Men. y4^, Stick. 305) are introduced not with any explanation but simply as casual allusions. The fact that they are present in great number in poets who were essentially popular, sug- gests that the spectators in general must have been capable of grasping them. This is especially true when we consider the character of the Roman audience, and their impatience with spectaclesi which were incomprehensible or foreign to their tastes.^ The poets are careful to heed this attitude on the part of their hearers.