This is the operational website for the Classical Studies department at DePauw University. It contains student- and public-facing resources for displays and reproduction artifacts, our library catalogue, a research hub, information about our alumni/ae, and opportunities for jobs and advanced study.
You may also visit our official DePauw department pages.
You can find our department faculty directory here.
Banner image: ancient theater at Termessos, Türkiye (photo: P. Foss)
The Dept. of Classical Studies owns a number of reproductions of ancient artifacts, as well as a few actual artifacts donated to the university by soldiers returning from Italy after World War II, having found them while digging trenches.
Posts in this section discuss those professional reproductions (some purchased from Children’s Museum of Indianapolis shows), as well as models of buildings and objects made by students for CLST 264: Hellenistic Art and Archaeology over the years.
The rudus/rudis was a ceremonial sword very similar to a training sword that a gladiator would use to practice their fighting. It resembles the gladius, which was the sword most often used in the arena. The material was not made out of any special type of wood, but rather wood that they would have had excess of. We do not know the type of wood that the swords were made out of, however based on a study of shipwrecks from Rome, we do know that common types of wood would most likely be pine, cypress, elm, and oak. This is because “[t]he choice of wood in the past was also conditioned by its easy availability in the nearby surroundings or by its commercial supply.”(Giachi, Lazzeri, Lippi, Mariotti, Macchioni, Pacia 2003, 275)
These are the dimensions of the rudus that is located at the department. The pommel is 2 inches. It puts weight on the sword so that it is balanced. The handle is 4.6 inches, and the quillon (which is the hand guard) is 1.5 inches. This makes the hilt about 8.1 inches long. The rest of the sword is 20.5 inches long, making the total sword about 28.6 inches (72.6 cm).
Avē Imperātor, moritūrī tē salūtant
(Suetonius, Claudius 5.21)
In Ancient Rome, these words were said by gladiators that were addressing the emperor before engaging in combat in the arena. In English, this phrase means “Hail, Caesar, we salute you, we that are about to die,” which reflect the stoic mindset that the gladiators who faced near-certain death often had. (Suetonius, Claudius Book 5) The men who stated this were to participate in a mock sea battle for Claudius on Fucine Lake, that ultimately made Claudius to say, “Aut nōn,” which roughly translated to “Or not, as the case may be.” (Suetonius, Claudius Book 5) The phrase is often said to be an acknowledgement of their death in battle, with Claudius potentially showing mercy due to their stoicism. A trait for which gladiators are famous for and is attributed to their ability to fight so well.
Gladiators were highly known in the ancient world (especially the good ones), like celebrities, but they were of no higher status than that of a slave and were often people that had been captured from Rome’s conquests. In essence, they were entertainers, and therefore classified as infama, which meant “lacking in reputation.” (Edward 1998, 66) These people were either captives from Rome’s conquests, or a “…free man reducing his life to the lanista,” where lanista means a “trainer of gladiators.” (Baker 2000, 38) They were used for dangerous and often brutal entertainment spectacle that captivated audiences in the Roman world. Through trial by combat, with its inherent risks and sacrifices, these men would earn money for their masters, based on how well they performed in a fight. The amount of money they earned could eventually earn them their freedom, however it would usually take about a decade of service in order to do so.
On attaining their freedom, they would be given the rudus. This acted not only as their symbol of independence, but also their survival. The profession was considered extremely dangerous, and “[t]he lives of gladiators were mostly all too brutally short.” (Grant 1995, 100) Many did not live long enough to see themselves be rewarded. However, when one did live long enough to earn their freedom, sometimes the emperors themselves would bestow the rudus. One such example is when four brothers pleaded with Emperor Claudius to discharge their father, who was a chariot rider, in which Claudius respected their wish and gave their father a custom sword (Suetonius, Claudius Book 5).
Gladiators were not forced to give up fighting if they did not want to. A gladiator could earn multiple rudi. A Syrian gladiator named Flamma was recorded to have received up to 4 wooden swords (Grant 1996, 101). As such, many of them would continue working for their old master, however some would prefer to work as an instructor for the new warriors, rather than continue fighting. These people were called doctores (Baker 2000, 45). Both of these options were eligible to earn more rudi over time.
Baker, Alan. The Gladiator. Massachusetts: Da Capo Press, 2000. The Gladiator: The Secret History Of Rome’s Warrior Slaves – Alan Baker – Google Books.
Edward, Catherine. “Unspeakable Professions: Public Performance and Prostitution in Ancient Rome.” In Roman Sexualites, edited by Judith P. Hallett and Marilyn B. Skinner. New Jersey: Princetown University Press, 2003. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780691219547/html.
Giachi, G., Lazzeri. S., Lippi, M. Mariotti, Macchioni, N., Pacia, S. 2003. “The wood of “C”and“F” Roman Ships found in the ancient harbor of Pisa (Tuscany, Italy): the utilization of different timbers and the probable geographical area which supplied them.” Journal of Cultural Heritage, no. 4 (October-December): 275. main.pdf (sciencedirectassets.com).
Grant, Michael. Gladiators. New York: Barnes & Nobes Inc, 1995. Gladiators – Michael Grant – Google Books.
Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Translated by Robert Graves, Revised by Michael Grant. New York: Penguin Classics, 2003. The Twelve Caesars – Suetonius – Google Books.
Amidst the turmoil of civil war and the consolidation of his power, Julius Caesar issued a coin depicting the legendary figure Aeneas and his mother, Venus, the goddess of love. This coin, which was minted between 47 BCE and 46 BCE, holds significance in understanding Caesar’s political ambitions and the ideological landscape of the time. By examining the coin itself as well as ancient texts such as Virgil’s “Aeneid,” it is possible to see Caesar’s greater desires in politics.
Silver denarius, DePauw Classics Department, by Katie Lorenz, 2027
This denarius, one of which is now housed in the British Museum, depicts the head of Venus with a border of dots on its obverse as well as Aeneas on its reverse, carrying palladium in his right hand and Anchises on his left shoulder. The reverse has an inscription that reads CAESAR, as well as the same border of dots as the obverse (British Museum, n.d.). These images are deeply rooted in Roman mythology and literature, particularly in Virgil’s epic poem, the “Aeneid.” In Book 2 of the Aeneid, Aeneas is portrayed as a noble hero escaping the destruction of Troy, guided and protected by his mother, Venus. This story resonated powerfully with the Romans, as it connected their origins to the heroic deeds and divine lineage of Aeneas, thus elevating Rome’s status and legitimacy (Virgil 29-19 BC, 316-371). Caesar’s decision to mint a coin featuring Aeneas and Venus must be understood within the context of his political ambitions. By aligning himself with Aeneas, Caesar sought to present himself as a heroic leader, favored by the gods, and destined to guide Rome through its own turbulent times. The association with Venus further reinforces this narrative, emphasizing divine protection and favor bestowed upon Caesar, much like Aeneas was aided by his mother throughout his journey (Rocca 2018).
Enée et Anchise fuyant la ville de Troie, Hendrick van Cleve III (1525–1589)
Multiple scholarly studies shed light on the significance of this coin and its impact on Roman ideology. In his article about the coins of Julius Caesar, Mike Markowitz discusses how Caesar strategically utilized the figure of Aeneas to bolster his own claims to authority and divine favor. He argues that Caesar’s choice of imagery was a calculated political move aimed at appealing to Roman sentiments and legitimizing his rule through the lens of mythological heroism (Markowitz 1993). Similarly, in the context of civil war and the struggle for power, Caesar’s depiction of Aeneas and Venus on coinage served as a potent form of propaganda. It communicates Caesar’s vision of continuity and renewal, drawing parallels between his leadership and the legendary deeds of Aeneas. This coin, which was created soon after the battle of Pharsalus, where Caesar defeated Pompey, would have had a great impact on the Roman populace, reinforcing Caesar’s narrative of restoring order and stability after years of turmoil. Furthermore, the use of mythological motifs on Roman coinage during this period reflects a broader trend in Roman political symbolism. As discussed in studies such as one by Thomas S. Duncan, Roman rulers often employed mythological narratives and divine imagery to assert their authority and shape public perception. Caesar’s coinage featuring Aeneas and Venus exemplifies this trend, highlighting the interplay between politics, mythology, and religious symbolism in the Roman world (Duncan 1948, 15-29). Julius Caesar’s decision to mint a coin featuring Aeneas and Venus in 47-46 BCE was a deliberate and calculated act of political propaganda. By invoking the heroic legacy of Aeneas and the divine protection of Venus, Caesar sought to position himself as a transformative leader, favored by the gods and destined to guide Rome towards a new era of prosperity. This coinage not only reflects the ideological landscape of the time but also underscores the profound influence of mythology and symbolism on Roman politics and society.
British Museum. n.d. “Coin.” Accessed April 17th, 2024. coin | British Museum.
Duncan, Thomas S. 1948. “The Aeneas Legend on Coins.” The Classical Journal 44, no. 1 (October): 15-29. The Aeneas Legend on Coins on JSTOR.
Markowitz, Mike. n.d. “CoinWeek Ancient Coin Series: Coins of Julius Caesar.” Coins_of_Julius_Caesar-libre.pdf (d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net).
Rocca, Samuele. 2018. “Denarius Depicting the Head of Venus and Aeneas Leaving Troy (47/46 BCE).” Last modified May 15, 2018. Denarius depicting the head of Venus and Aeneas leaving Troy (47/46 BCE) | Judaism and Rome (judaism-and-rome.org).
Virgil. 29-19 BC. The Aeneid. VIRGIL, Aeneid | Loeb Classical Library (loebclassics.com).
When observing the specifics of this bronze coin, two images are recognized on the obverse and reverse. A deity and a ship. The obverse, which bears the principal design of coins, illustrates Janus who is regarded as the two-headed god of all beginnings and endings (Mac Mahon Ardle 2003, 58). His symbolic role is emphasized in the opening book of Ovid’s Fastii where he clarifies his duty as a ‘door-keeper.’ He explains that his positioning near the threshold of the building he resides at enables him to witness both goings in and goings out (Mac Mahon Ardle 2003, 58-59). He has additionally been associated with the commencement and conclusion of military campaigns, offering the interpretation that he holds the authority to determine the outcome to soldiery operations.
Due to the close stylistic link with other coins administered during the Second Punic War, it can be inferred that both the image of Janus and minting of the coin is a tribute to the battles. To better understand the significance of employing the image of Janus, it is important to understand the context of the Second Punic War. The Second Punic War was the second of three wars fought between Carthage and Rome from 218 to 201 BCE. It was distinguished by effectively ending Carthage’s reign which once held the title of being one of the main military powers of the Western Mediterranean in the 3rd century BCE, therefore reinforcing Rome’s overwhelming influence. It is interesting to note here that the distinct off-struck detailing of Janus’ broad, square profiles suggests that it was struck at a different mint from the main bronze mint at Rome. The manufacturing techniques align with an engraver who used a completely opposed style to coins that appeared to be a continuous series from a Rome mint at that specific period (McCabe Andrew 2015, 141). It is possible that it was minted by one of the ‘provincial’ mints in the east including Alexandria, Antioch, and Caesarea in Cappadocia who produced silver and bronze coins on behalf of the central state. These mints did not conform to a uniform standard that would normally be seen in the main central mint located in the city of Rome (Noreña Carlos 2011, 258-260).
The reverse, more commonly known as the ‘tails’ side of coins, captures a prow that further mimics stylistic factors similar to other coins from the era of the Second Punic War. It additionally captures small flat-topped deck structures and curved keel lines with a downward pointing rostrum that acted as a ram to strike and sink enemy ships. Aside from these factors, the fundamental design of the prow underwent slight changes from previous coins to accommodate for the actual changes made on ships throughout time (McCabe Andrew 2015, 142-143).
Definitions:
The process of minting began with two dies being cut into, below the surface and one of the pieces, generally the one that displayed the head of a god or monarch, was secured in a hole in a small anvil. A piece of metal [flan] of the corresponding weight, which was heated to make it malleable, was put on top of it. The second die, placed in a hand-held punch, was placed on top of the flan. The process concludes with one or two blows with a hammer (Van Stekelenburg 2012, 10). Because the lower die was made slightly concave and the upper one slightly convex to guide the force of the hammer to the center of the flan, the coins appeared curved on one side and hollow on the other.
As in the modern age, the primary function of coinage in the ancient Roman world was for economic transactions. Still, it could additionally serve to accumulate material wealth, indicate value, or be an exchange for goods and services. Rome was prompted into issuing coins due to its conquests in central and southern Italy as a way to traditionally establish its independence and power (Van Stekelenburg 2012, 11). Compared to other fiscal systems, two distinct features differentiated ancient coins in Rome from other forms of money: their adherence to a monetary standard and the addition of designs that indicated a minting authority (Noreña Carlos 2011, 248). The revolutionary development of employing iconography to the coins to convey a wide range of messages became a defining characteristic of Roman coinage. These images acknowledged various factors of Rome’s identity such as military victories, successors to the throne, or immediate imperial predecessors.
In commemoration to Rome’s successful military expansion in the Mediterranean, this bronze coin captures two distinct images that emphasis the vital implications of conquering Carthage. The combination of a deity and a ship establishes a message that enforces the conception of Rome’s divine rise in power. It not only insinuates the empire’s growing influence in this era but serves as a reminder to what Rome is capable of achieving militarily.
Figure 1: Roman, Imperial Period, ca. 1st to 3rd century CE. Size: 3″ W x 2.8″ H (7.6 cm x 7.1 cm) (Photo: Artemis Gallery)
Figure 2: Replica Size: 10″W x 7.9″ H (25.4 cm x 20.6cm)( Image of a tribulus replica on display in DePauw University’s Classics Department). (Photo: Sophia Patrey)
A caltrop( tribulus )has four metal spikes surrounding a solid base allowing it to stand always with a spike projecting vertically. The caltrop found from the 1st to 3rd century BC has the dimensions of 3″ W x 2.8″ H (7.6 cm x 7.1 cm). Most caltrops have a metal ball in the center of the object, and were used primarily to stop enemy cavalry attacks. The upright spike would insert into an animal or human foot and incapacitate them. This tactic worked on a variety of different animals including horses, elephants, camels, or even humans. The animal would stumble and fall, then the rider would be thrown or killed. This simple, but useful, weapon inspired chaos and disarray (O’bryan, 2013, 69). Although the Romans did not create the caltrop, they were avid users of the invention.Vegetius, a later writer of the Roman empire states in his book De Re Militari,“They strewed the field of battle with caltrops, and the horses that drew the chariots, running full speed on them, were infallibly destroyed” (Vegetius, 1473, 105). Such a small object was able to completely shift the military tactics on each side of the battle and cause havoc. Although few sources have been recovered regarding the object.
The earliest known record refers to the Battle of Arbela in Persia 331 BC fought by King Darius III and Alexander the Great. King Darius III used caltrops referring to them as “crow’s-feet” (Reid,1998). If the “crow’s-feet” were actually caltrops, they must already have been familiar for some time. Alexander the Great was able to maneuver through caltrops and saw that these weapons should not be overlooked. However, during the time of Gaius Julius Caesar caltrops were not as prominent (Reid 1998). While there are examples of caltrops working successfully there are also times that it seems unnecessary and not as practical. During an attack of the Carthaginians, Scipio (a Roman general) was advised to use caltrops, but said they were ridiculous due to having possession/control over the enemy walls (Babbitt,1931,187). The Romans were successful in battles by using their own military tactics coupled with strategies borrowed from other armies. Therefore, utilizing these tactics allowed for success within the empire.
Furthermore, successes of the caltrop for Rome were seen against the Parthians during the 1st century BC shortly after Caracalla’s (a Roman emperor) death. Parthians had a very sufficient calvary and utilized camels and horses primarily when they fought. They also thought of attacking Romans from above. Romans would pretend to retreat and instead they hid caltrops under the sand, making them unseen by the enemies. These short but dangerous iron spikes quickly mauled the Parthians. Those who did survive would quickly become weakened and not have the ability to fight at their full potential. Many were unable to fight hand-to-hand after being injured or were easily captured by the Romans (Herodian, Book Four; Chapter 15, 2-3). This proves the versatility of Rome and how their military tactics separated them from other ancient civilizations of that time.
The Romans were keen observers and were able to utilize what others used to make their own military stronger and figure out what course of action was the most appropriate. Overall, their flexibility was truly a distinction compared to the military scene of the time. The caltrop is an example of the utilization of previous weapons. A small but effective weapon was able to completely take down large amounts of calvary and armies.
Echols, Edward . n.d. “Herodian of Antioch, History of the Roman Empire (1961) Pp.108-134. Book 4.” Www.tertullian.org.
O’Bryan, John, and Internet Archive. 2013. A History of Weapons : Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things That Can Seriously Mess You Up. Internet Archive. San Francisco : Chronicle Books.
Plutarch, Frank Cole Babbitt, and Robarts – University of Toronto. 1957. Moralia, in Fifteen Volumes, with an English Translation by Frank Cole Babbitt. Internet Archive. Cambridge Harvard University Press ; London : Heinemann.
Reid, Robert W. 1998. “Diabolical in Its Simplicity, the Ancient, Durable Caltrop..” Military History 15 (3): 20.
Vegetius . The Military Institutions of the Romans [de Re Militari].Pdf (PDFy Mirror). Internet Archive, 1 Jan. 2014
.
Works Cited
Aiden Schaefer
Pedar Foss
Ancient Roman World
May 12, 2024
Schaefer, Aiden. Images. February 27, 2024.
Schaefer, Aiden. Images. February 27, 2024.
Schaefer, Aiden. Images. February 27, 2024.
The pieces of blown glass that are displayed above were found in Licenza, Italy. In the first image, we can see that there is some type of corrosion on the glass giving the piece the blue type color. In the research I’ve come across most glass was made for products like household items. With this being the case the first items seem to have been a part of some type of jewelry that was worn back then. The second image has a curving edge which would symbolize it being a part of a cup or bottle. The third image has come across as a piece of a window since it is clear rather than the other two similar artifacts that are shown above.
When the Romans found out about the manufacturing of blown glass, they began to create blown glass around the early 1st century BCE. The earliest vessels were core-formed, where glass in a molten state was wound around a clay core attached to a metal rod (Root 1982). The making of glass became a process to blow during the first half of the 1st century B.C. In Syria, this led to such a rapid development of the industry that by the middle of the 1st century A.D. Glass was being made throughout the empire (Harden 1969). Glassblowing was executed by a technique wherein a furnace’s heat is used to soften glass, mold it into forms, and then blow air through a tube onto the finished piece of glass. Once the Romans figured out the technique of glass blowing that was their main way of producing glass. The three images above are examples of what they have made with this technique.
In the first part of the first century A.D., the Roman glass industry emerged from near unawareness and developed over a few generations (Trentinella 2019). Early on, the Romans relied mostly on imports of finished glass objects from areas such as Egypt and Syria. Emperor Augustus was the one who ruled at this time and he believed that he didn’t have the craftsmen to do the job of glassmaking so he brought over Syrian and Judaean craftsmen as slaves to work on the production of glass since they were experienced (Fleming 1997 p.28). Since the glass was a luxury material, more and more people wanted to acquire it. The Romans practiced the free-blowing technique once they had mastered it and it marked a significant advancement in the industry. This developed sometime in the late 1st century B.C. and this being the case with this production style glass is easier to have as a household object. The main concept behind glassblowing was the recycling of shattered glassware, which began with markets and businesses repurposing glass fragments for new applications like mosaic work and ornamentation. For example, with glassblowing, the glass product became lighter so it would be easier to use as glass storage containers, drink from glass vessels, and look through crude glass window panes (Brill 1963 p.120). Also this new technique glass-making workshops became areas for creativity, attracting multiple people from all areas of the empire which led to cultural exchanges.
The high production of glass led to the Romans reduce their dependence on very expensive imports by creating a thriving industry that generated wealth and employment. In 62 and 30 B.C., respectively, Rome proclaimed its dominance over the two major glass-making, which were Egypt and Syro-Palestine (Root 1982). The whole thing about the glass being a luxury item is thrown out the window because once the Romans started making mass production it became an item that was used in everyday life by anyone. Now the way it generated wealth was by the Romans exporting their items to distant lands, like Britain, North Africa, and the Middle East, showing signs of global trade and cultural exchange. Even Romans did this in the 1st century, the legacy of their work has been passed down through generations. The Romans’ inventiveness, creativity, and spirit of industry were shown by their contribution to the widespread marketing of glass production. Through their proficiency in glassmaking, the Romans turned glass from a luxury good into an essential commodity that was used in every part of everyday life.
Works Cited
Brill, Robert H. 1963. “ANCIENT GLASS.” Scientific American 209 (5): 120–31. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24935940.
Cummings, Keith. 2002. A History of Glassforming. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Fleming, Stuart J. (Stuart James), and Internet Archive. 1997. Roman Glass : Reflections of Everyday Life. Internet Archive. Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. https://archive.org/details/romanglassreflec0000flem.
Harden, Donald B. Ancient glass. Dublin: Royal Archaeological Institute, 1969.
Root, Margaret Cool. Wondrous glass. Accessed May 12, 2024. https://exhibitions.kelsey.lsa.umich.edu/galleries/Exhibits/WondrousGlass/RomanGlass-Making.html
Trentinella, Rosemarie. 2019. “Roman Glass.” Metmuseum.org. 2019. https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/rgls/hd_rgls.htm.
Rings are a staple jewelry item for a multitude of reasons. People wear rings as an emblem of marriage, in order to make a fashion statement, or to boast their social status. For most people, wearing a ring is purposeful in some way or another. So what was the reason someone might have chosen to wear the ring in our collection? In analyzing the material, shape, and size of the ring, it is possible to make an educated guess.
Firstly, the ring is made of bronze. Bronze was one of the cheapest metals available in ancient Rome, such that casting rings out of bronze was an effective way for the poorer classes to keep up with the cultural trends (Marshall 1907, xxxiv). This particular ring may then have belonged to a member of the plebeian, poor, class because it was a more affordable option. Members of the senate or those traveling on business for the republic preferred to wear rings made of gold, which was prominent during the early republic (Kunz 1917, 11).
(Image of DePauw Classics’ 998.01.12, Justin Benes, 2024)
Secondly, the ring is about 18-19 mm in diameter. The average ring diameter for a male hand ranges between 18.8 to 19.4 mm and 16.8 to 17.5 mm for females (Kiernan 2023, 79). The evidence points to the fact that this ring was made for men; more specifically, a male plebeian who wore the ring simply for looks or social conformity.
Rings were especially important to citizens in the patrician class because they served distinct functions. One of its main functions was to serve as a signet, marking items with a distinct seal (Marshall 1907, xv). Additionally, rings could show off the wealth of the elite. Pliny the Elder states, “This fashion like everything else luxury has diversified in numerous ways, by adding to rings gems of exquisite brilliance, and by loading the fingers with a wealthy revenue and then by engraving on them a variety of devices, so that in one case the craftsmanship and in another the material constitutes the value.” (Plin. Nat. 33.6, 22).
However, by looking at the bronze ring, in the display case, it doesn’t seem as if this ring would be used for either of those two functions. Primarily, the ring is simple, made of bronze, and doesn’t have a seal. For the most part, the ring is dull and doesn’t have much character. However, this ring would still be very important to someone of the plebeian class. Bronze rings were cheap ways for plebeians to show affection to their partners or provide as gifts to those they loved. (Kiernan 2023, 87). Another possible function of the bronze ring is that it was a symbol of a plebeian trying to take part in Roman culture (Kiernan 2023, 89). Pliny states, “Not even at that period did all members of the senate possess gold rings, seeing that in the memory of our grandfathers many men who had even held the office of praetor wore an iron ring to the end of their lives”(Plin. Nat. 33.6,21). Simple rings were initially an important part of Roman culture for officials as well as the regular citizens. Eventually, elegant rings became too expensive for the commoner and bronze rings were an easy way to show their love for Rome.
(Image of DePauw Classics’ 998.01.12, Justin Benes, 2024)
I argue that a male plebeian would have worn this ring to potentially signify his love for a partner or was a gift he received. Pliny mentions that simple iron rings were home life fashion for Romans; “this is the reason why even now an iron ring and what is more a ring without any stone in it is sent as a gift to a woman when betrothed”(Plin. Nat. 33.4,12) As a band of marriage, the bronze ring would have been a sleek image of a partners’ love. Another possibility was that he was trying to look the part of a typical Roman citizen and wear the ring to signify Roman fashion. Juvenal mentions Roman officials such as “with that of Canopus Crispinus tearing Tyrias back with his shoulder let the gold be fanned by the sweaty fingers of summer, nor suffer the greater weight of the jewel”(Juv.1.28). Wearing rings was a fashionable way for the rich to show off their wealth. Without money, cheap iron and bronze rings were ways in which the poor tried to make fashion statements.
Sources:
Juvenal. Satires 1. Michael Hendry. 2005. Iuvenali Satira 1. https://www.curculio.org/Juvenal/s01.html
Kiernan, Phillip, and Klaus-Peter Henz. 2023 “Henz. “Rings from the Forbidden Forest: The Function and Meaning of Roman Trinket Rings.” Journal of Roman Archaeology 36, no. 1: 73–95. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1047759423000211.
Kunz, George Frederick. 1973. Rings for the finger; from the earliest known times to the present, with full descriptions of the origin, early making, materials, the archaeology, history, for affection, for love, for engagement, for wedding, commemorative, mourning, etc. New York: Dover Publications
Marshall, F. H. 1907. Catalogue of the finger rings: Greek, Etruscan and Roman in the Department of Antiquities, British Museum. London
Pliny the Elder. The Natural History. ed. John Bostock and H. T. Riley, in the Perseus Digital Library. 1855. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/textdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D33%3Achapter%3D1
Today, our society is greatly influenced by the ancient Roman republic. While we try our best to update technologies from the ancient world, some ancient innovations have been left alone. The Romans did an excellent job efficiently utilizing their resources, and because of this we still see traces of the Roman world in our everyday lives. A good example of this is this bronze fibula. The bronze fibula was hand crafted by romans who specialized in working with metals. The size of the fibula is relatively small, fitting comfortably in an open hand. Looking at the object, it is clear that the bronze fibula served a similar purpose to the modern-day safety pin. This fibula was most likely used by the romans to pin a variety of different cloaks worn by roman soldiers, citizens, and members of the roman elite.
(DePauw Univ. artifact 2024).
This artifact shows us that the safety pin, or rather the bronze fibula, was being used by the Romans over 2000 years ago. This clever design hasn’t been significantly updated since! This cloak pin, or fibulae, served the same purpose as it does today: A convenient way to hold pieces of clothing together. The complete bronze fibula includes a pin and a clip, making the design practically congruent to the modern safety pin.
(Metropolitan Museum of Art. 1991)
This artifact alone reveals a connection between ourselves and the Romans, but this ancient safety pin plays a second, more symbolic role. Whether it is military strategy, art, government, clothing, or culture, Roman influence can be seen in the largest and smallest details of life on earth today. This safety pin is a great example of the little things from Roman culture that influence modern daily life.
The clothes we wear today say a lot about who we are and where we come from. Certain articles of clothing, especially accessories are often glamorized to be used as symbols of wealth for those who can afford it. Oftentimes, fibulae and other ancient Roman accessories included “inscriptions or decorations, which link them to the imperial sphere”(Johansson 1994 223-242). Fibulae belonging to members of the roman elite were often inscribed with Latin proverbs that were meaningful to these elite members of Roman society. Today, the wealthy may wear necklaces, watches, glasses, or other articles of clothing from expensive “name brands” in order to show off their wealth. In ancient times, fibulae with inscriptions served the same purpose. Senators, consuls, and other elite individuals could afford to have their fibulae inscribed, and wore them with pride; showing off their achievements and wealth.
Roman influence can surely be seen today in our society. The bronze fibula serves as a symbol of the great impact that the Roman Empire has made on our world. The Roman Empire’s ability to have such an impact so far removed from its time can be greatly attributed to the power and influence the empire had in its glory days. The bronze fibula is also a great example of the Romans influence back then. Bronze Fibulae “were glamorous enough to be appreciated and imitated in the lands far away from the Danube frontier of the Empire” (Curta/Gândila, 51-81, archeology Bulgaria, 2011). Existence of Roman fibulae in lands far from the empire can be linked to Roman military campaigning in other lands. Consequently, the Romans’ use of these fibulae as status symbols also spread throughout the ancient world widening their sphere of cultural influence. This far reaching cultural influence is what ultimately led to the Empire’s legacy surviving for thousands of years, and it’s what’s lead todays society to be so similar in many ways to the Romans.
sources:
Metropolitan Museum of Art. 1991. “One Hundred Twenty-first Annual Report of the Trustees for the Fiscal Year July 1, 1990 through June 30, 1991.” Annual Report of the Trustees of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 121: p. 32. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/256014
Johansen, Ida Malte. “Rings, Fibulae and Buckles with Imperial Portraits and Inscriptions.” Journal of Roman Archaeology 7 (1994): 223–42. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1047759400012587.
Curta, Florin, and Andrei Gândilă. “Too much typology, too little history: a critical approach to the classification and interpretation of cast fibulae with bent stem.” Archaeologia Bulgarica 15, no. 3 (2011): 51-81. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/AndreiGandila/publication/289464374_Too_much_typology_too_little_history_A_critical_approach_to_the_classification_and_interpretation_of_cast_fibulae_with_bent_stem/links/651b141a3ab6cb4ec6b494c8/Too-much-typology-too-little-history-A-critical-approach-to-the-classification-and-interpretation-of-cast-fibulae-with-bent-stem.pdf
This bronze coin dates back to the reign of Tiberius and was manufactured between 22AD to 30AD. On the observed side, you will notice that there is a man’s head; the person on the coin is identified as Augustus, with the letters DIVVS AGVSTVS PATER surrounding the head. On the reverse side of the coin, you would see an altar on the back with the letter S on the left and C on the right, and the word provident is shown in capitals underneath. This coin was for everyday use, such as buying food and clothes, and what a coin would be used for nowadays. The difference between this coin and other coins is that there is a lot more symbolization on this coin.
The most important part of this coin would have been the altar on the back and what that altar symbolizes and means to the Roman people. The Are Providentiae is the altar on the back of the coin. This altar would have been constructed sometime between 14AD and 17AD. This altar would also have been located in the Roman forum, but we are unsure of the exact location. The purpose of this structure was to commemorate Augustus’s wisdom in choosing the full line of successors to his throne as emperor. This means that Augustus had complete plans for the future of Rome and who their emperors after him would be.
An example would be when, in 38 AD, a sacrifice to the altar was held on the day Augustus adopted Tiberius, and very well, it could have been the same day that Tiberius adopted Germanicus(Duncan Fishwick 2010). This would also explain why the word provident was under the altar, as that means making preparations for the future. Another reason they used Provident and named the altar Are Provendentia was because of the Goddess Providentia. The Goddess was the God of foresight and the God of the imperial cult, meaning the Goddess looked after the imperial family and protected them.
What would have been the reason for putting this altar on the coin with the letters and, of course, Augustus’ head? Well, if you look at society today and even earlier, we put the heads of famous people on coins, such as Abraham Lincoln on the one-cent coin. The reason is to commemorate them and let them be known for history. You do not want leaders like Abraham Lincoln or Augustus to get lost in history because you do not want the values that those people had to get forgotten. This is the same thing in Ancient Rome; Augustus is seen as almost a godly figure to ordinary people since he saved Rome and won the civil war after Caesar’s assassination. Tiberius wanted to put Augustus on the coin to show the values of Augustus and commemorate all that he had done. This plays into the altar as it is supposed to show how Augustus had the foresight of who should be after him and how Augustus chose Tiberius to lead the people of Rome (Duncan Fishwick 2010). So not only was the coin meant to commemorate what Augustus had done, but also to make sure people knew Tiberius was the one chosen after him and he was the powerful one now.
In conclusion, the main use of this coin was, like any other coin, to pay for things such as food and necessities. It was also used to commemorate Augustus, remind the people of the best leader and emperor Rome had seen, and show how smart he really was. Last, it was used to show how he shaped the imperial family and the future emperors and to show that emperors such as Tiberius were hand-picked by Augustus.
(Jackson Mires 2024)
(Jackson Mires 2024)
Sources
Belgrade, Serbia. 53 Concept of Providentia Deorum within The …, 2016,
“Bronze as of Tiberius, Rome, AD 22 – AD 30. 1960.170.205.” American Numismatic Society,
Fishwick, Duncan. “II. the Altar of Providentia on Coins of Emerita.” Brill, Brill, 1 Oct. 1993
Fishwick, Duncan. 2010. “Agrippa and the Ara Providentiae at Rome.” Zeitschrift Für Papyrologie Und Epigraphik 174: 251–58.
Scott, Russell T. 1982. “Providentia Aug.” Historia: Zeitschrift Für Alte Geschichte 31 (4): 436–59.
This bone stylus, appearing in an elongated and tapered shape and made from real bone dates back to Ancient Rome. It is 10cm in length and 0.7cm wide at its widest point and 0.1cm at its most narrow point. It has a smooth and reflective surface, with a sharp pointy end that would have been used to inscribe on a wax tablet. While the characteristics of the stylus itself could be examined, a much more interesting approach could be exploring the role of styluses in general in Roman society. In Ancient Rome, styluses played an essential role in everyday life. They were writing tools used for a range of different purposes including personal correspondence, keeping of records, and education. The use of styluses was common among both men and women, however, their role in education and record-keeping played a very significant role for elite women in Roman society.
The poses of women in Campanian wall paintings indicate how they aimed to be portrayed (Meyer 2009,). Female figures are sometimes depicted with writing paraphernalia like styli and tablets. Initially, these figures were often assumed to be portraits of real women, highlighting their literacy and possibly their social status. However, these attributes might not indicate a literal portrayal of real women engaging in literate activities (Meyer 2009,
Instead, Meyer argues that these depictions could be more symbolic or mythological, representing Muses or women depicted as Muses. This interpretation suggests that while these images may convey ideals of female literacy and education, they might not necessarily reflect the everyday reality of women’s lives in ancient Rome. In terms of education and status, these depictions could be seen as aspirational or idealized representations, emphasizing cultural values related to learning and creativity. Overall, the depiction of women with styluses and tablets in Roman art can be interpreted as reflecting societal attitudes towards education and creativity, but may not always accurately represent the lived experiences of women in ancient Rome.
The fresco of the Pompeiian couple (Fig. 2) is said to be an indicator of literacy. “This couple, who did not come from the very highest ranks of the Pompeian aristocracy, probably chose to be depicted in this way as a mark of their status—they belonged to the ranks of those who were literate, and they wished to display the fact” (Ward-Perkins, The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization [2005] 162-63, plate 7.10). The quote serves as evidence that styluses or other writing items were associated with higher status and people wanted to be represented in that light. Could it therefore be inferred that ownership of styluses in Ancient Rome was equal to having more power in society. Therefore, it may have been thanks to styluses that women were able to have a standing, in contrast to many other ancient societies.
On the other hand, using other illustrations of women with styluses, an opposing argument could be made that most depictions of the females are not real, but rather as Muses. Figure 3 shares a similar composition as other illustrations, showing a woman holding a tablet in her left hand with a stylus pressed to her lips. Due to the similarities, it is believed by the author that the drawings were made based on a model. Based on the portraits themselves Meyer discusses the possibility that the women in them are not actually real and not “writing poetry or thinking great thoughts” (Meyer, 2009). Meyer calls it “roleplaying”, and therefore this may act as evidence that women in Roman society did not actually use styluses as often.
In general, regardless of gender, a stylus does symbolize social class and political standing. The materials used to craft styli, such as bone, metal, or ivory, often indicated the social status of the owner; for instance, those made of precious metals or ivory were likely owned by the wealthy elite, while a bone stylus, like the one being examined, was more common among the lower classes. Furthermore, the intricacy of the design on the stylus would also denote status and wealth. In the case of the bone stylus here, it is smooth with no design or markings on it, meaning the person who owned it was likely a lower-class citizen. This is because a bone stylus is easier to make than a metal stylus for instance, “bone is considerably more advantageous than metal.
They can be reduced to the proper form simply by means of chisel and saw and eventually smoothed with an abrasive material” (Michele Cammarosano 2014, “The cuneiform stylus”). Also, education and literacy were both harder to access compared to modern times and therefore were viewed as highly valued qualities in Roman society.
Styluses while often being an object that may be overlooked when examining Ancient Roman history, was actually a very important part of it, with many complex themes. Exploration of those allows us to learn how citizens valued literacy and education, compared to today, and how that affected their social status.
Works Cited
Cammarosano, Michele. “The cuneiform stylus.” Mesopotamia 49 (2014): 53-90.
McDonald, Katherine. n.d. “Education and Literacy in Ancient Italy: Evidence from the Dedications to the Goddess Reitia.” JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26817659?
Mcdonnell, Myles. 1996. “Writing, Copying, and Autograph Manuscripts in Ancient Rome.” The Classical Quarterly 46 (2): 469–91. doi:10.1093/cq/46.2.469.
Meyer, Elizabeth A. 2009 “Writing paraphernalia, tablets, and muses in Campanian wall painting.” American Journal of Archaeology 113, no. 4 : 569-597.
A significant aspect of Roman military strength was the effective utilization of the scutum, a shield that transcended its role as a piece of defensive equipment to become a symbol of unity and duty among Roman soldiers. There is a multifaceted significance of the scutum in Roman military culture, from its design and tactical role which evolved over time.
At the core of the Roman military organization, the scutum serves as more than just a tool for protection. Its rectangular shape, crafted from wood and hide, shows symbolic decorations that reflect the pride and identity of Roman soldiers. The scutum has a profound impact on the troops, beyond its tangible role, as it signifies identity and unity among Roman soldiers, influencing their sense of camaraderie and shared purpose (Tomczak, 2013, p. 5). The intricate labeling and decorative elements on the scutum hold symbolic significance for Roman soldiers and their military units. For example, the symbols and insignia painted on the shield could indicate the specific military unit to which a soldier belonged, such as a legion or cohort. By indicating affiliations these labels not only distinguish friendly forces but also help commanders coordinate tactics and strategy amidst the chaos of combat. Additionally, these decorations might include imagery associated with Roman mythology, history, or victories, serving to inspire and motivate soldiers in battle. By visually identifying specific units or cohorts, the scutum facilitates strategic maneuvering and tactical decision-making, contributing to the overall effectiveness of Roman military operations. Moreover, they instill a sense of pride and loyalty among soldiers, reinforcing their connection to their unit and the broader Roman military tradition (Stiebel, 2014, p. 56-57).
The large size and rectangular design of the scutum provide ample coverage, facilitating formations like the “testudo” or tortoise formation. This defensive arrangement renders Roman legions nearly impenetrable to frontal assaults, showcasing the scutum’s strategic importance in ensuring battlefield dominance (Campbell, 2013, p. 419).
The evolution of the scutum mirrors the dynamic nature of Roman warfare. From its humble beginnings as oval-shaped, smaller shields in the Republican period, the scutum underwent significant transformations. During the imperial era, it evolved into larger, curved versions, equipped with additional features such as the umbo for enhanced durability and offensive capability through bludgeoning opponents (Kopf, 2018, pp. 15-34). These adaptations were responses to the ever-changing tactics of Roman adversaries, such as the adoption of more organized infantry formations by enemy forces. For instance, the introduction of the manipular tactics by the Samnites prompted the Romans to modify their shield design to better suit the needs of their new battle formations. Additionally, encounters with cavalry-heavy foes like the Parthians led to innovations in shield design to provide better protection against attacks from horseback (D’Amato & Sumner, 2009, p. 229).
Beyond its physical function as a defensive tool, the scutum encapsulated a profound concept ingrained within Roman culture – the principle of pietas. This principle, deeply rooted in the Romans, instilled a sense of duty and reverence towards their nation, family, and gods. Under the guiding force of pietas, Roman soldiers were driven by a collective responsibility to safeguard their homeland and uphold the values of their society. Thus, the scutum became more than just a shield; it became a tangible embodiment of the unrelenting commitment and sacrifice demanded by the Roman principle of pietas (Ward, Riess, & Fagan, 2017, pg. 312).
The scutum evolved beyond being merely a shield to symbolize Roman military prowess, unity, and duty. Its design, functionality, and evolution highlight the adaptability and strength of the Roman military. As a significant element of Roman military strategy, the scutum serves as a testament to the enduring spirit of an empire that once dominated the known world.
References:
1. Campbell, Duncan B. “Part II Arming Romans for Battle.” The Oxford Handbook of Warfare in the Classical World (2013): 419.
2. D’Amato, Raffaele, and Graham Sumner. Arms and Armour of the Imperial Roman Soldier: From Marius to Commodus, 112 BC–AD 192. Frontline Books, 2009.
3. Kopf, Julia. “An Assemblage of Roman Military Equipment from Brigantium/Bregenz (Austria): Artefactual Evidence for the Rare Rectangular Scutum.” Gladius 38 (2018): 15-34.
4. Stiebel, Guy D., Danny Syon, Shua Amorai-Stark, Yoav Arbel, Chaim Ben-David, Baruch Brandl, Deborah Cassuto, et al. “Military Equipment.” In Gamla III: The Shmarya Gutmann Excavations 1976-1989, Finds and Studies: Part 1, 56:57–108. Israel Antiquities Authority, 2014.
5. Tomczak, Juliusz. “Roman military equipment in the 4th century BC: pilum, scutum and the introduction of manipular tactics.” Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Archaeologica 29 (2013).
6. Ward, Graeme, W. Riess, and G. G. Fagan. “The Roman Battlefield.” The Topography of Violence in the Greco-Roman World (2017): 299-324.
7. James, Simon. The Excavations at Dura-Europos Conducted by Yale University and the French Academy of Inscriptions and Letters 1928 to 1937. Final Report VII: The Arms and Armour and Other Military Equipment. Oxbow Books, 2004.
8. Simkin, John. “Military Tactics of the Roman Army.” Spartacus Educational. Spartacus Educational Publishers Ltd. September 1997.
Krmnicek, Stefan. RIC V Gallienus 618a. Silver, 21mm. Institute of Classical Archaeology at the University of Tübingen. https://www.ikmk.uni-tuebingen.de/object?id=ID2605.
This is a silver Roman coin minted in Asia between 266 and 268 AD. On the obverse (front) side of the coin is a bust (side view) of Gallienus with a cuirassed neck wearing a radiate crown. Additionally, this side displays the legend (lettering) “GALLIENUS AVG” around the edges of the coin. On the reverse (back) side of the coin Gallienus is wearing a toga and performing a sacrifice out of a patera held over a tripod. Gallienus is also holding a spear or scepter in his other hand, and the legend “PIETAS AVG” can also be seen recorded around the edges of the coin (American Numismatic Society).
Cole Jacob. February 27, 2024. Silver, 20mm. DePauw University Classics Department.
The standardized currency of the Roman Empire facilitated trade and exchange. However, Roman emperors such as Gallienus (Publius Licinius Egnatius Gallienus) recognized the potential these coins held beyond a unit of currency. In particular, through images hammered on coins, emperors were able to spread and communicate ideas throughout the Roman Empire in hopes of gaining or maintaining power (Claes 2017, 253-285). For example, this silver coin (RIC V Gallienus 618) minted by Gallienus, who reigned as emperor from 253-268 AD, held this same goal with the more specific intention of boosting his public image by displaying himself as an exemplar of pietas (duty to gods, nation, and family) who fulfills his militaristic and religious responsibilities (Mennen 2011, 255).
In order to effectively understand different aspects of the coin it is important to first understand the political environment during Gallienus’ rule. During his sole rule, starting in 260 AD, the empire was in danger of splitting up, and it became clear that Gallienus was no longer organizing military conflicts (i.e., pursuing conquest), but was instead only reacting to events (Mennen 2011, 32). As a result, his passive approach was noticed by others in power as well as by the empire’s inhabitants. This had a negative impact on Gallienus’ image as people began to view the emperor as less of a problem solver (Mennen 2011, 241). With questions of his legitimacy as an emperor, it became increasingly important for Gallienus to project a strong image. The images displayed on this silver coin (RIC V Gallienus 618) reflect these motivations (Mennen 2011, 241).
By the end of the reign of Augustus, coins of the Roman world had two stylistic variants. First was verism which is extreme naturalism. This means depicting the image of the emperors with hyper detail. The other, classicism, emphasized the ideal aspects of an emperor’s image. This method was used to depict emperors in their ideal form both physically and symbolically. Gallienus, aiming to better his public image, chose the classicizing portrait for many of his coins including this one (Salmon 2022, 130). On the obverse side of the coin in fig. 3, Gallienus’ portrait contains no imperfections. These could come in the form of exaggerations like a prominent chin or ears, or that of aging, such as shaggy hair or wrinkles. Additionally, his name is hammered around the edges of the coin (“GALLIENUS AVG”). Both of these elements serve to remind citizens of his position as supreme ruler.
Another important element to notice in the portrait of Gallienus is his neck. He does not have a bare neck, as seen by the design at the bottom of his portrait in fig. 3. Instead, his neck is covered with a draped cuirass (torso and neck armor). First emerging during Nero’s reign, this draped style stressed Gallienus’ militaristic duty as an emperor. This militaristic role is also highlighted on the reverse of the coin in fig. 4. On this side Gallienus is depicted holding a spear/scepter which also serves as a reminder of the authority of physical coercion. Additionally, this acts as another representation of pietas through fulfillment of his imperialistic duties such as sacrifice for his nation (Salmon 2002, 132).
On the reverse, the coin displays Gallienus possibly performing a sacrifice with a tripod to his left. By demonstrating himself performing a religious ceremony of some kind, Galleinus aimed to express his pietas through his commitment to the gods. (Salmon 2002, 129) Religious references displayed on coinage were a common imperial strategy by emperors to advertise their rule and maintain religious and political power. This theme is echoed by the legend “PIETAS AVG” (Augusti) which surrounds the edge of the coin and translates as “duty of the emperor.” Influenced by Augustus’ reign, hence “Augusti,” this legend attempted to emphasize Gallienus’ commitment to his virtue-based responsibility toward his nation (pietas).
Inspired by and reflective of styles created by Augustus, this Gallienus coin has many intentionally designed images and phrases intended to elevate his public image and maintain power by displaying his pietas. To do this, the coin features images that contain imperial and religious symbolism, as well as reminders of Gallienus’ authority through its classicism design and the legends displayed on both sides of the coin.
Bibliography
American Numismatic Society. “RIC V Gallienus 618.” Accessed May 6, 2024. http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.5.gall(2).618.
Claes, Liesbeth. 2015. “Coins with power? Imperial and Local Messages on the Coinage of the Usurpers of the Second Half of the Third Century (AD 253-285).” Jaarboek voor Munt- en Penningkunde.
Luce, T. J. 1968. “Political Propaganda on Roman Republican Coins: Circa 92-82 B. C.” American Journal of Archaeology 72, no. 1: 25–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/501820.
Mennen, Inge. 2011. Power and Status in the Roman Empire, AD 193-284. Leiden: BRILL. Salmon,
Edward Togo, Michael Lerardi, and George M. Paul. 2002. Roman Coins and Public Life Under the Empire. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
The tabula cerata, Latin for “wax tablet”, was made up of two rectangular pieces of wood fastened together by tying packthread through man-made drillings in the wood. The insides of the wood were then layered in real beeswax to be written on by scratching the sharp tip of a stylus along the surface. The outsides of the wood acted as a cover for the wax messages on the inside panels of the wood “so that they opened and shut like our books; and to prevent the wax of one tablet rubbing against the wax of the other” (Smith 1891, 1091).
Wooden Writing Tablets. 500–700. Wood and wax, Overall (with mount): 10 1/2 x 11 7/8 x 5 1/2 in. (26.7 x 30.2 x 14 cm); Overall (together): 9 5/16 x 5 7/8 x 2 1/4 in. (23.7 x 14.9 x 5.7 cm); Overall (each leaf): 9 5/16 x 5 7/8 x 7/16 in. (23.7 x 14.9 x 1.1 cm). Wooden Writing Tablets [14.2.4a–d]. The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Members of the Roman Republic used the tabula cerata to record information and send messages. During government gatherings, certain administrators and officials acted as scribes to write down the contents of the meeting. All writing on wax tablets was written horizontally to prevent the hinges holding the tablets together from getting in the way of the scribe’s hand. Though the small size of the tablets made them portable, sending messages was more complex. Message senders were adamant about letter security if a message needed to be transported. Letters written on these tablets would take weeks or even months to send and faced a high risk of reaching the wrong hands or being poached along the way. Therefore, senders would apply a seal for the messages. After writing messages, senders drilled two holes at the top of the letter’s cover, and then a string and wax through the holes to form a seal. If the seal was broken before reaching the recipient, it was a sign that the message had been opened or tampered with. The sender of the message would write their name to the “right of the seals, which were impressed in wax dropped when hot upon the binding cord” (Kelsey 1923, 188). Recipients were also able to write the original sender back using the same tablet. To write on the tablets, scribes used a “stylus of metal, bone, or wood, the ends of which were often expanded into triangular terminals which, when heated, were used to erase and smooth the wax for reuse” (Brown 1994, 4).
As wax tablets became more common, merchants and tradesmen utilized them as well. Due to the tablet’s portability, it was easy for merchants to keep account of their transactions, tracking items they were trading. Putting information in writing made it more convenient to understand and to negotiate the asset value of specific trades. The ability to visualize the information by writing on the tabula cerata while traveling consistently made it easier to conduct business on the go.
Students commonly used wax tablets as a tool in their educational endeavors. Education was very important to the Romans. Though only boys of rich families usually received a full formal education, many youths, rich or poor, learned how to read and write. The tabula cerata was a focal point in the education of young minds and “until quite late in the Middle Ages, virtually everyone who learned to write did so on a wax tablet” (Rouse 1990, 12). As youths progressed in their literacy, the wax tablets were convenient when they made mistakes. Being allowed to erase mistakes allowed for quicker, more efficient learning. In fact, the English phrase “a clean slate” is derived from the Latin expression “tabula rasa”.
In conclusion, the overall versatility and portability of the tabula cerata allowed for diverse groups of people in the ancient Roman world to reap the benefits of its uses. Using a cheap, portable and re-usable writing implement further advanced Roman societal growth through imporved communication, education, and international affairs.
Brown, Michelle P. “The Role of the Wax Tablet in Medieval Literacy: A Reconsideration in Light of a Recent Find From York.” The British Library Journal 20, no. 1 (1994): 1–16. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42554375.
K. Painter. “A Roman Writing Tablet from London.” The British Museum Quarterly 31, no. 3/4 (1967): 101–10. https://doi.org/10.2307/4422971.
Kelsey, Francis W. “A Waxed Tablet of the Year 128 A.D.” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 54 (1923): 187–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/282850.
Rouse, M. A., and R. H. Rouse. 1990. “The vocabulary of wax tablets”. Harvard Library Bulletin, Fall (1990): 12-19.
Smith, William. 1891. “Tabulae.” Essay. In A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiques, 1091–92. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Tabulae.html.
By Sean Lawless
Figure 1 (Sean Lawless)
Figure 2 (Sean Lawless)
Introduction
The spatha was a Roman longsword, used primarily by cavalry in the Roman military. Spathii are longer than infantry swords, this replica is approximately 98 centimeters (Figure 1), whereas typical gladii in ancient times ranged from 36 to 60 centimeters (Lang 1988, 200). The blade is also double edged, but with a short tip. The short tip helps to protect the soldier’s legs while they are on horseback. The hilt of this replica (Figure 2) is in the Celtic style and features a heavy pommel that balances the long blade (Bishop 2023, 108). The metal top nut on the pommel could also be struck down on an opponent’s head in the event of a close quarter combat situation.
Figure 3 (David Friel – Flickr)
The Spatha in the Cavalry
Around 200 BC, long swords used on horseback became common in the Roman military. This was influenced by the addition of Gallic cavalry to Rome’s military force during the Second Punic War (Bishop 2023, 7). During this period the Roman military developed new fighting styles that emulated techniques used by Gallic and Germanic tribes. These changes in equipment and techniques led to the Roman Auxiliary Cavalries’ brutal attack strategy. In battle the cavalry would sit on the wings of the infantry’s formation. As the infantry broke through the enemy formation, the cavalry would rush in from the outside and kill as many fleeing soldiers as possible so the enemy could not regroup (Bishop 2023, 4). During these assaults the spatha’s length was important as a shorter sword would not have been able to reach fleeing opponents. When an enemy was approached on horseback the soldier would swing the spatha downward rather than attempt to stab the enemy. This was easier because of the lack of flexion the soldier had due to their hand guards. Attempting to stab also increased the chance of the soldier dropping their weapon (Bishop 2023, 102). During these pursuit scenarios lances or spears could be used as well, but the typical gladius would never have the length to strike down the enemy (Shotter 2007, 108). The auxiliary cavalry’s other duties primarily involved scouting enemies and quickly skirmishing with enemy patrols, for both tasks a longer blade would be necessary (Bishop 2023, 51).
The Spatha’s Versatility
The spatha could also be used in the infantry and there were times during the Roman Empire when it was. As the Romans expanded their empire to northern provinces in Europe, Germanic and Sarmatian barbarian tribes created a need for a longer sword because these enemies had different fencing techniques (Vaday 2023, 288). Variations could also allowed for two handed grip techniques, maximizing the weapon’s versatility against different types of opponents (Vaday 2023, 282). Some soldiers simply enjoyed the reach advantage it gave them, allowing them to fight more conservatively (Imrie 2021, 226). Roman soldiers often stood in battle with their left foot forward, a shield protecting them in their left hand and their weapon in their right hand. This position made it very difficult to have a reach advantage on an opponent with a typical gladius (Bishop 2023, 106). The spatha also differed from some other weapons because it could stab and cut while being used on the ground, making it a very desirable choice for infantry (Bishop 57, 2023).
References
Bishop, M.C. 2023. The Spatha: The Roman Longsword. Osprey Publishing.
Imrie, Alex. 2021. Caracalla and Alexander’s Phalanx: Caught at a Crossroads of Evidence. Greece and Rome 68 no. 2: 222–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017383521000048.
Lang, Janet. 1988. Study of the Metallography of Some Roman Swords. Britannia 19: 199–216. https://doi.org/10.2307/526199.
Shotter, David. 2007. Cicero and The Treveri: New Light on an Old Pun. Greece and Rome 54 no. 1: 106–10. https://doi.org/10.1017/S001738350700006X.
Vaday, Andrea. 2023. A Late Roman Spatha. Slovenska Archeologica v. 71: 281-289. https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=4&sid=7f038e5b-d3d5-4fbd-b38b-f8215e6f0a3f%40redis&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPWlwLHNzbyZzaXRlPWVob3N0LWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=176326545&db=aft
This is a cosmetic applicator from Ancient Rome. The Applicator was made from carved bone, although it is incredibly smooth. The applicator is 7.5 cm long and nearly 0.6 cm wide. Similar objects also have been identified as “pins”, although they were likely used for cosmetics (Burke 2018, 524 -525).
A cosmetic bone applicator isn’t only a tool used for applying makeup, but a magnifying agent that allows us to take a closer look at life in Ancient Rome. For the women of Ancient Rome, makeup, or rather cosmetics, played a large role in day-to-day life. Roman women applied white lead to make themselves paler, brightened their cheeks with rouge, and darkened their eyebrows, eyelashes, and eyes with kohl to frame them and make them look more prominent (Falk 2022, 8)(Phillips 2020, 201-218). These practices weren’t only used to lure men into love or lust, but were a wider expression of societal pressures and norms. Romans loved youth and natural beauty, placing a considerable toll on naturally aging women (Falk 2013, 115). Getting old was feared, not for the idea of death, but the idea of looking like it. “Beauty culture flourished in Rome as much as it flourishes today” (Hammer 1940,18-20).
From the ever-unachievable cover of Vogue or Victoria’s Secret’s Angels to the women with “A beautifully developed body, giving a sense of power and freedom,” of Ancient Rome women were and are held to widely unattainable concepts of beauty (Hammer 1940, 18-20). The women of Rome used cosmetics to try to obtain these high standards, placing the burden on these individuals to conform to a specific standard of beauty. What’s more, keeping up with these guidelines was seen as taboo. Women were in fact not encouraged to alter their appearance, and cosmetic products were not advertised. Many Roman writers (all men) criticized women and young girls who altered their natural state, mainly writing arguments for women to not use cosmetics and warning men to stay away from those that do (Falk 2022, 10). When women ignored this advice and performed cosmetic alterations, like applying their makeup using a cosmetic applicator made of metal or bone, they did this in secret; husbands and sons were not to know, much like the 1950s housewives who hid hair rollers and night cream. This practice exemplifies a tension between the want to be beautiful and the want to be seen as virtuous and modest, all caused by the pressures of societal norms. Relying on cosmetic tools and concoctions that were oftentimes dangerous, although that wasn’t known at the time, is representative of the unattainable standards women were held to, not only in appearance but also virtue. White lead was applied to the skin to lighten it, but wasn’t known was that lead can effect all aspects of health including: reduced cognitive ability, impaired nervous system function, miscarriages, reduce fertility, and more (Falk 2022, 8)(Wani 2015). Many other substances were used that had similar effects and also were not known to cause harm in antiquity. Putting the body at risk is a standard not unique to ancient times, but is reflected in modernity; specifically in plastic surgery, disordered eating, and more.
Social pressures to keep up with achievable beauty practices and standards aren’t confined to Ancient Rome. Societal pressures to maintain unachievable beauty standards are still very real today. Social media platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat are filled with advertisements for products of all kinds, especially those marketed towards women, or female-identifying people, like makeup and skincare items. These ads offer an idealized image of what a woman should look like, which is typically impossible to achieve naturally. This is reflective of the pressures that plagued Roman women, in a different form. They faced these pressures in person, through literature, and word of mouth, while modern women receive criticism through a screen in the privacy of their own homes.
Examining the use of cosmetic tools and cosmetics themselves found in antiquity while looking at the societal implications and pressures that forced women to seek out cosmetic aides. We can gain insights into the daily life of Ancient Rome, their beauty ideals and application methods, and how they have evolved through time. Exploring the items that seem so minuscule, can bring forward major questions about modern society, and force the reconsideration of the institutions and practices that burden the modern era – hopefully leading to a more inclusive society in the next 2000 years.
References
Burke, Aaron. Peilstöcker, Martin. 2018. “Ancient Jaffa from the Persian to the Byzantine Period
Kaplan Excavations (1955–1981).” 525. Zaphon, Münster: The Jaffa Cultural Heritage
Project Series.
Falk, Sara. 2022. “The made-up woman: Women’s daily use of makeup in Rome.” 6-24. Uppsala
Universitet: Department of Archaeology and Ancient History.
Hammer, Jacob. 1940. “Beauty Culture In Ancient Rome.” 18-20. American Classical League: The
Classical Outlook.
Phillips, Jacke. 2020. “Kohl Kit.”: 201-218. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean.
Wani, Ab Latif. 2015. “Lead toxicity: a review”. : Interdiscp Toxicol: National Library of Medicine.
When Mount Vesuvius erupted in 79 CE, it buried the Roman cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum. Objects under the volcanic material were excavated and found to be very well preserved. One of the known recovery sites was the House of the Surgeon in Pompeii, named because of the collection of items that were discovered here. According to one source, “The collection is one of the best surviving examples of the tools at a surgeon’s disposal in the first century CE. Since there was relatively little innovation in surgery and surgical tools from the time of Hippocrates (5th century BCE) and Galen (2nd century CE), this collection is typical of surgical practice for nearly a millennium and illuminates the practice of medicine in ancient Rome.”
Over the course of human history, one small tool has withstood the test of time: the sewing needle. This seemingly simple object has been fundamental not only in everyday life but also in the broader scope of technological advancements and social structures. The journey of the sewing needle, from bone and wood to metals like bronze and iron, offers an interesting look on the occupational uses of the needle.
Different Types of Needles
Many bone and metal needles have been recovered on Roman sites, many of these needles were likely used for cloth production and maintenance, although arguably not all. Based on the size of the needles, inferences can be made about the use of it. For example, large iron needles ranging from approximately 110 to 200mm in length could have been used as packing needles. A large metal needle, around 150 mm, could have been used for medical practice like surgeries. A cruder bone needle of the same size may have been used for netting or weaving. The smaller needles, ranging from 50 to 135 mm- were likely to have been used for medical activities or hair arranging (Allison 2015).
Roman Women Occupations
One of the Roman freedwoman occupations involved the needle, “The occupations attested for freedwomen are varied. Most have occupations traditionally held by Roman women, such as needle-working, (and) clothing production” (Holman 2015). With the discovery of a bronze needle in the turrets of Hadrian’s Wall, this would mean that soldiers were likely responsible for mending and taking care of their clothing. This is evidence that the needle was not only used by the freedwomen.
The Roman Contribution
The Roman Empire, known for its innovations, made its mark on the evolution of the needle. Roman needles, often crafted from bronze, were not just tools for domestic sewing but also played a role in medical practices. These needles were typically small, durable, and capable of detailed work, ideal for surgical stitches and the intricate sewing required in Roman attire (Wild, John Peter, 2002).
In addition to their attire, sometimes the Romans would have specific hairstyles that would require an additional shar piece to hold the updo together. The tools were either, “a sharp weapon or a needle used to sew women’s updos into place” (Pandey 2018). These uses of the needles demonstrate the practicality and versatility of Roman innovations.
The Roman Use
A blog posted by the University of Kent describes the Roman’s dressmaking techniques, noting that Romans often wove fabrics directly on looms into the shapes needed for garments, rather than cutting from larger pieces of cloth. This method required significant skill in both spinning and weaving, suggesting that sewing needles were likely used for more detailed garment finishing, such as sewing up side seams after weaving.
Ancient Romans used sewing needles in medical practice primarily for suturing wounds. A pertinent quote reflecting this usage can be drawn from discussions about Roman medical tools: “Roman surgical instruments, particularly needles, were crucial for stitching up wounds, showcasing their advanced approach to medical care.”
In addition to the needles themselves, the Romans used various types of thread, including those made from linen, wool, and silk, to cater to different purposes from everyday clothing to luxurious garments. The stitches they used had to be functional for the variety of fabrics they handled, from sturdy repairs on heavy togas to delicate work on fine tunics. They employed stitches that we still use today, such as running stitches, backstitches, and overcast stitches, demonstrating a high level of skill and understanding of garment construction.
Modern Implications
Today, the humble needle continues to hold its value in industries and crafts. Its evolution mirrors the technological advancements and cultural shifts throughout human history. The modern sewing needle, now predominantly made of steel and manufactured with precision engineering, is a testament to centuries of incremental improvements and innovations. The flawless design of the sewing needle was able to withstand the test of time by maintaining its design.
Conclusion
The sewing needle, a seemingly simple tool, has played a significant role impacting various aspects of society from domestic life to medical practices. From its early forms made of bone and wood to the sophisticated metal needles of the Roman Empire, this tool exemplifies the enduring nature of practical innovations. Roman needles, crafted with precision for both everyday and specialized uses, highlight the versatility and ingenuity of ancient craftsmanship. They serve as a testament to how even the most humble of tools can influence and enhance the daily lives and technological advancements of a civilization. As you view this needle, consider the hands that once used it- what stories might this needle tell if it could speak of its journeys through the hands of Roman artisans and medics?
Bibliography
A key part of carrying out good research is using reliable sources. AI may be able to scrape the internet and compose a summary of what it finds, but it can’t distinguish peer-reviewed scholarship from the claims of “some guy” who posted their opinions somewhere. Here we have collected the best starting places for your online research.
*DPU* marks a resource as accessible (i.e., subscribed) through the DPU library system.
PRIMARY SOURCES (ancient texts):
MATERIAL CULTURE SOURCES (art, artifacts, architecture, and inscriptions):
DePauw Classical Studies alums have highly varied and accomplished careers. Here are a few profiles of recent graduates.
Since 2015, Profs Rebecca Schindler and Pedar Foss have co-operated an archaeological field school in partnership with the Umbra Institute (Perugia, Italy) in the territory of Castiglione del Lago, Umbria (Italy).
The team is exploring the nature and organization of human settlement in the area, especially in the Etruscan and Roman periods. We are currently excavating a massive multi-level structure on the south hillside of the modern town, overlooking Lake Trasimene, hoping to understand the complex relationship amongst ancient peoples and between them and their natural environment.
In 2024, the program will run from 30 May to 13 July; it can be accessed via:
The purpose of this program is to instruct undergraduates in the practicalities and skills of field archaeology, while providing them with essential historical and cultural background knowledge. Several DePauw alums currently engaged in Advanced Study began their careers on this project.
DePauw students can transfer 2 courses worth (= 1.5 total credits) from the Umbra Institute towards their DPU degree. They also receive a $1500 discount on the program cost, and can apply for funding support from the DePauw Asher Funds. Accepted students will also automatically qualify for a small grant from the Department of Classical Studies Mercury Fund (subject to clearance from the University Financial Aid Office).
APPLY through the DePauw Off-Campus Study portal to join the team! The name of the program is: Umbra Institute – Trasimeno Archaeology Field School
DePauw University Classics World 