Our View Of Rome

[phil25]

I take my title literally.

 

How do we perceive life in Rome? How far is that influenced by films and TV documentaries; and how much by ancient sources?

 

If we could go back in time - would we be surprised by what we found/

 

I take as my example the Urbs of thre early principiate - roughly the period of Graves' Claudius novels.

 

TV and films gives us a world of tailored garments and vivid colour, soldiers in uniform, sinister Praetorians, great, rigidly organised processions and ceremonials, gorgeous palaces of while marble and gilt... one could go on...

 

As most people know, first of all, the marble wasn't always white - pillars were painted sometimes, statues certainly were; temble pediments would have glowed with colour. Walls were often painted in complex designs - almost surreal sometimes - and symbolism was everywhere.

 

Next, uniforms as we know them, probably didn't exist per se in ancient Roman times - soldiers might have worn roughly similar clothing and armour - but I suspect patterns/models and dates of issue might have been different. But in any case, in Rome, uniform and armour was banned - even in triumphs soldiers marched in their belted tunics, not in full kit . The Praetorians on duty on the palatine, or escorting the princeps, would have worn civil dress - togas with their swords concealed under the folds.

 

This is where this examination gets interesting and relevant. Because once we recognise that the praetorians did not stand out like the SS, or the Grenadier Guards in easily recognisable uniforms, the reasons why Sejanus could concentrate the cohorts in the City without too much fuss perhaps becomes apparent.

 

Moreover, right up until the time of Nero - perhaps even to Titus - I have the impression that the princeps went around the city pretty much as a private citizen: on foot with an escort of clients and guards. But Augustus or Claudius going to the Curia (senate house) must have been a scene much unchanged since the days of Ceasar. The elaborate imperial ceremonial beloved of Hollywood would have been absent. So differences between the republican period and the early empire might have been less apparent than we are sometimes led to believe.

 

The route from the palace on the Palatine hill to the Curia is not a long one and would have best been done on foot - maybe in a litter for the lame Claudius. But routes down the steps that lead out via the Atrium Vestae; down the slope to the Temple of Jupiter Stator (or the later arch of Titus) and then via the Via Sacra ; or perhaps following a route which now exists as a slope to Domitian's grand entry behind the temple of Castor (where Gaius may have had a residence) are all possible and easy.

 

So princeps and public would have been in close proximity on many occasions.

 

As for the palace - Augustus seems to have lived in a modest domus (at least equivalant to the house of an aristocrat but not the vast edifice that Domitian began) in a street possibly made grand by the facade of the temple of Apollo. Laurels over the door would have marked it out as special, but until Nero's Golden House, there would have been no major break with republican tradition.

 

And talking of the Golden House, Rome from Caesar to Domitian must have been a mass of scaffolding. The Curia Julia was being built on a new site to replace the old Curia Hostilia burned down when Clodius was cremated. The Basilica Julia was being built - as well as the rostra being moved. Indeed until early in Augustus' reign the rostra end of the Forum Romanum must have been being constantly restructured.

 

Behind the Curia the Forum of Augustus then had to be built, with additional building works for new Fora under Vespasian/Titus and Domitian/Nerva. Further afield, Agrippa was a great builder (with baths and the pre-Hadrianic Pantheon to his credit. Augustus' projects on the Campus Martius must also have involved massive disruption and made the place look like a building site over decades - one thinks of the massive sundial, his tomb, the altar of peace to name but a few.

 

Until a late date - I think offhand the construction of the Flavian amphitheatre - Rome had no permenent amphitheatre for gladiatorial or other fights. Either wooden ones were built as happened under Augustus, or the Forum Romanum was roofed in with awnings. For those who have visited the site, I am sure the picture of the bright sun shining through multicoloured cloths and making the pavement seem like a mosaic must be a visid one. But a continual sight in Rome must have been public slaves erecting and dismantling barriers, stands and tribunals.

 

For the magistrates (such as prateors) and the courts both did their business in public. The noise, the commotion, the distraction must have been incredible.

 

But then senior magistrates also appear to have done their work at home in their own mansions, and we have to imagine the atriums of these town houses bustling. The morning leveees must have meant large numbers of people on the streets before dawn making their way to their patrons homes - one wonders how they decided who to visit first, if their patron was expected to call on a greater man in his turn, and he to a yet greater... timing must have been a nightmare - people had to remember that X had to go to the senate with his clients in tow to impress everyone, but if X was waited on by Y, did Y's clients go too? organisation and pre-planning must have been essential.

 

How did the romans ever agree on WHEN to meet anyway with hours (of day or night) that changed their length with the seasons? Did everyone meet at noon or dawn? If so it must have meant a LOT of waiting about. Or did they have more sophisticated ways of knowing when the sixth hour was (depending on when it was given changes between, say, winter and summer)?

 

I have given just a few examples of the things that I have come across in reading the sources which don't seem always to be reflected in visual reconstructions.

 

I'd be fascinated to know if others have thought about this aspect of ancient Rome, and to know of other instances of things that would have impacted on daily life that have occured to you.

 

Thanks in anticipation, and for reading this,

 

Phil

[Primus Pilus]

Just a short note to express general agreement.

 

This is exactly one of the reasons I am so greatly impressed with HBO/BBC Rome. Despite various elements of inaccuracy in the show, which I see more as interpretation for the time constraints of television (though the Cleopatra episode was distressing), the attention given to the detail of the city is exceptional.

[frankq]

Until a late date - I think offhand the construction of the Flavian amphitheatre - Rome had no permenent amphitheatre for gladiatorial or other fights. Either wooden ones were built as happened under Augustus, or the Forum Romanum was roofed in with awnings. For those who have visited the site, I am sure the picture of the bright sun shining through multicoloured cloths and making the pavement seem like a mosaic must be a visid one. But a continual sight in Rome must have been public slaves erecting and dismantling barriers, stands and tribunals.

 

 

There was the Vatican Circus, first started as a race course by Caligula on his Vatican estate, then built into an arena of some kind under Nero. It was here that the Christians were persecuted. I've never seen a depiction of the structure, but I think that part of the present Vatican was built on the site.

[phil25]

Until a late date - I think offhand the construction of the Flavian amphitheatre - Rome had no permenent amphitheatre for gladiatorial or other fights. Either wooden ones were built as happened under Augustus, or the Forum Romanum was roofed in with awnings. For those who have visited the site, I am sure the picture of the bright sun shining through multicoloured cloths and making the pavement seem like a mosaic must be a visid one. But a continual sight in Rome must have been public slaves erecting and dismantling barriers, stands and tribunals.

 

 

There was the Vatican Circus, first started as a race course by Caligula on his Vatican estate, then built into an arena of some kind under Nero. It was here that the Christians were persecuted. I've never seen a depiction of the structure, but I think that part of the present Vatican was built on the site.

 

I believe that you are right when you say the Vatican structure was a circus (for chariot racing) - originally built by Gaius Caligula on land that had belonged to his mother (as I recall). I was not aware that it was ever converted to an arena (for gladiatorial combat). Can ayone else shed light on this - Ill check my references.

 

Rome had several circuses in republican times - the Circus Maximus (still there) being the greatest. I think there was also a Circus Flaminius, Pompeius Magnus built the first permanent theatre for drama, but had to disguise the purpose by pretending the seating were the steps of a temple. As late as Augustus' reign, Statilius Taurus (I think) still had to construct a wooden amphitheatre for gladiatorial fights as no permanent structure existed.

 

My point related to gladiatorial arenae, not circuses.

 

Phil

[Skarr]

I would echo what Primus has already stated.. The HBO Rome series was pretty accurate in its depiction of the city, especially the area around the Forum, which is how I imagined it, based on my research (mostly pre-Caesar) of the Republican times.

 

There were a few buildings that I did not recognize and I think the arch shown in the triumphal scene was added much later. Apart from that, I think the production design was quite good, very impressive.

 

Coming to the princeps / public contact, in Republican times, dictators like Sulla walked alone in the streets of Rome, unaccompanied by even clients (Sulla preferred to walk alone). However, people feared the old Sulla, almost a superstitious fear and gave him a wide berth when he roamed about the city on foot. Caesar also liked to walk rather than be carried in a litter and so did many of the other powerful men.

 

The senators' red shoes and broad purple stripe on the borders of their togas were enough authority to sway most Romans, who would automatically defer to this and yield way for their betters, without any need to announce their presence or shove people out of the way in Rome's narrow and crowded streets.

 

Iron weapons were forbidden and soldiers in uniform were not allowed inside the city but had to camp outside the walls. Most of the 'heavies' inside the city were gladiators or ex-gladiators, who were employed by various senators - from bodyguard work to intimidation of speakers in the Rostra. These guys sometimes carried hidden clubs in the folds of their tunics, which were useful during a riot or other melee.

 

In imperial times, of course, things were a little different and many emperors rarely ventured outside the palace, except to go to the games or to the theater.

[Lex]

The streets apparently didn'thave names either. So without an accurate way to tell the time and using landmarks for directions, it must have been quite difficult to meet-up with someone or find where they live.

[frankq]

I believe that you are right when you say the Vatican structure was a circus (for chariot racing) - originally built by Gaius Caligula on land that had belonged to his mother (as I recall). I was not aware that it was ever converted to an arena (for gladiatorial combat). Can ayone else shed light on this - Ill check my references.

 

Rome had several circuses in republican times - the Circus Maximus (still there) being the greatest. I think there was also a Circus Flaminius, Pompeius Magnus built the first permanent theatre for drama, but had to disguise the purpose by pretending the seating were the steps of a temple. As late as Augustus' reign, Statilius Taurus (I think) still had to construct a wooden amphitheatre for gladiatorial fights as no permanent structure existed.

 

My point related to gladiatorial arenae, not circuses.

 

Phil

 

 

My sources on this are Balsdon and Barrett in their section on Caligula's career as a builder. Both state that the Vatican race course was converted into a circus and both state that it was here that the Christian purges took place under Nero.

 

How great a difference is there exactly in the definition of circus and arena? Were there not chariot races later on at the Flavian structure?

[Primus Pilus]

How great a difference is there exactly in the definition of circus and arena? Were there not chariot races later on at the Flavian structure?

 

Yes, but the Circus was still vastly larger than the "Colosseum" with 150,000 to 250,000 seats vs. 50,000. Perhaps more could have viewed the events in the Circus by standing. Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Pliny the elder give conflicting numbers on seating.

 

Interestingly, the Circus continued to be used for its original purpose long after the Flavian Ampitheatre was not (mid 6th century). However, because of the distinctive size and attributes (as well as the nature of the "blood games") it's the colosseum that draws the most attention despite the extreme and enduring popularity of the races.

 

At any rate, circus literally means circle whereas arena refers to the surface area (sand) rather than a specific structure. Amphitheatre is much more in line with Circus by definition than Arena is.

[Pantagathus]

The streets apparently didn'thave names either. So without an accurate way to tell the time and using landmarks for directions, it must have been quite difficult to meet-up with someone or find where they live.

 

This problem found it's way into many Roman satires of the age...

 

For the most part directions to one's home or a meeting place would be to start with a well known landmark and count hosues and doors from there.

[phil25]

I think Skarr is probably right about the deference of at least some Romans. But might that not have made periods such as that gang warfare between the followers of Clodius and Milo the more shocking?

 

The memories of Marian and Sullan purges, with dripping decapitated heads on the rostra, must have lingered long. many in Caesar's hayday must have wondered whether he would resort to similar methods, having lived through the previous bloodbath.

 

Sulla was probably safe because people feared him, and wondered whether he had henchmen within call.

 

But for both Sulla and Caesar (I don't know what the source is for him walking alone) it is the exception that proved the rule - almost everyone else went surrounded by followers (clients) on public occasions.

 

My belief that the Vatican circus always remained of its original shape is based on the fact that the tombs/cemetary found under St Peter's basilica, appears to follow the outer wall of the stands. It remains, as I understand it the long narrow shape of the classic chariot-racing stadium. There is an excellently preserved, late version, just off the Via Appia Antiqua, built by Maxentius c 300 AD. It is part of a complex that included a palace and the tomb of his son.

 

Within the Palatine palace (Domitian's version or later) there is a stadium, probably too small for real chariot races, but constructed to the same plan. There is a much later (post C5th) oval structure built within it, which perhaps shows how a circus could be adapted to an arena (I'll stick to the term) without much difficulty or physical damage to the original edifice. (Before anyone asks, I don't claim that the later oval area was used for fighting - but that's not my point.)

 

Has anyone wandered the streets of Pompeii? It certainly shows how one can get lost in a Roman town (even a small one). But one also starts to notice landmarks - even small ones - a bakery; an inn, a well/fountain. As many of the exterior walls were painted, finding one's way may not have been THAT difficult, unless a complete stranger - perhaps a dangerous thing in it's own right.

 

Thanks for the additional points folks - all noted.

 

Phil

[frankq]

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gaze...C/3*.html#sec16

 

 

PLAN OF OLD S. PETER'S,

SHOWING ITS RELATION TO THE CIRCUS OF NERO

 

You may have to scroll down...

[phil25]

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gaze...C/3*.html#sec16

 

 

PLAN OF OLD S. PETER'S,

SHOWING ITS RELATION TO THE CIRCUS OF NERO

 

You may have to scroll down...

 

Thanks Frankq - that's precisely what I had in mind.

 

Phil

[frankq]

I remember bookmarking it and went back to find it.

 

Of course, my own personal memory of Nero's Circus is vague at best, I was very young at the time and...LOL.

 

That was the day Nero was singling out Methodists.

[phil25]

I always knew there was something good to be said about Nero.

 

Phil

[Kosmo]

Rome was also very crowded with maybe an oriental air rather then a geometric modern one. Streets were winded, dirty, crowded and narrow. Sometimes dangerous as people were throwing "things" from the upper levels. There was no urban zoning and people from very different classes will be neighbours. Quite different from how provincial cities with wide streets in a grid plan looked.