Brynn
Summary:
The section’s title, “Domination”, does a great job of summing up the focus of the chapter. Emma Dench runs through a variety of power relationships, and emphasizes the social and financial inequality of the Roman Empire. One overarching theme seems to be the oversimplification of certain classes of people within Roman society by modern historians. For instance, some women were able to move beyond their role as housekeeper and enter the public eye through a display of masculine characteristics (“androgyne”, p.114) or by wealth (p. 115). Similarly, there is a hierarchy among slaves. Mine workers and agricultural slaves receive less attention from elite writers and are less likely to be freed (p. 133). Domestic slaves (and some agricultural slaves who are given control over others) are characterized as more civil and appear more frequently in Roman literature (although Dench notes that their inclusion is primarily intended to describe relationships between the poor and the Roman elites, p.136). In order to protect against revolt, Roman authorities seemed to deliberately avoid classifying the whole slave population as a collective group. The achievement of a superior “job-title” and the hope for “career progression” among slaves supports Dench’s assumption about the complexity of the social hierarchy (p. 130). The slave-master relationship is also representative of the Empire as a whole, and its dominance over its conquered territories. Dench sees signs of this in the rhetoric of the powerful and the dissident, pointing out the use of the words “freedom” and “slavery” used to describe the same thing; Roman authorities claim that they are freeing the newly conquered people, while some of them see it instead as an act of oppression (p. 128). The desire for Roman citizenship, among many other sought after signs of superiority, emphasizes the achievement of social status as a prime motivator and source of meaning for ancient Romans.
Analysis:
It is clear by the Augustus reading, and his many assertions of his triumphs over others, that the domination (both politically and militarily) exemplifies some of the most significant indicators of high social status. Some examples of Augustus’s accomplishments in enacting authority over less powerful individuals are his passing of laws, his success in war and punishment of the disobedient, the naming of popular athletic events in his honor, his perceived adoration from the senate and ordinary citizens, and the worship of “the Divine Augustus” as leader of the “imperial cult”. Because of these accomplishments, sacrifices are made to the gods and his name is immortalized in the “Augustalia” day. Echoing Dench’s point about “freedom” and “slavery”, Augustus says, “peace had been secured through victory” (p.2). And it isn’t just his threatening command of the senate and the military that gives him power, but also his generosity (seen in his many donations), which conforms to the ideal Roman man of humility and authority.
Summary:
The section’s title, “Domination”, does a great job of summing up the focus of the chapter. Emma Dench runs through a variety of power relationships, and emphasizes the social and financial inequality of the Roman Empire. One overarching theme seems to be the oversimplification of certain classes of people within Roman society by modern historians. For instance, some women were able to move beyond their role as housekeeper and enter the public eye through a display of masculine characteristics (“androgyne”, p.114) or by wealth (p. 115). Similarly, there is a hierarchy among slaves. Mine workers and agricultural slaves receive less attention from elite writers and are less likely to be freed (p. 133). Domestic slaves (and some agricultural slaves who are given control over others) are characterized as more civil and appear more frequently in Roman literature (although Dench notes that their inclusion is primarily intended to describe relationships between the poor and the Roman elites, p.136). In order to protect against revolt, Roman authorities seemed to deliberately avoid classifying the whole slave population as a collective group. The achievement of a superior “job-title” and the hope for “career progression” among slaves supports Dench’s assumption about the complexity of the social hierarchy (p. 130). The slave-master relationship is also representative of the Empire as a whole, and its dominance over its conquered territories. Dench sees signs of this in the rhetoric of the powerful and the dissident, pointing out the use of the words “freedom” and “slavery” used to describe the same thing; Roman authorities claim that they are freeing the newly conquered people, while some of them see it instead as an act of oppression (p. 128). The desire for Roman citizenship, among many other sought after signs of superiority, emphasizes the achievement of social status as a prime motivator and source of meaning for ancient Romans.
Analysis:
It is clear by the Augustus reading, and his many assertions of his triumphs over others, that the domination (both politically and militarily) exemplifies some of the most significant indicators of high social status. Some examples of Augustus’s accomplishments in enacting authority over less powerful individuals are his passing of laws, his success in war and punishment of the disobedient, the naming of popular athletic events in his honor, his perceived adoration from the senate and ordinary citizens, and the worship of “the Divine Augustus” as leader of the “imperial cult”. Because of these accomplishments, sacrifices are made to the gods and his name is immortalized in the “Augustalia” day. Echoing Dench’s point about “freedom” and “slavery”, Augustus says, “peace had been secured through victory” (p.2). And it isn’t just his threatening command of the senate and the military that gives him power, but also his generosity (seen in his many donations), which conforms to the ideal Roman man of humility and authority.