After further study of the amphitheater in Pompeii, I came upon a certain instance that is signature to strictly Pompeii and does not overlap into Roman gladiator events. When I say I came upon it, our kind professor gladly pointed me to it. To enhance my idea of the gladiator games being the first version of professional sports, I learned there was an all out brawl between FANS that broke out one fine day in the amphitheater.

First, I must set the scene. It was a sunny, picturesque day back in 59AD, when the crowd was filing into their respective seats for the gladiator games of the day. The gladiators fighting that day turned out to be one from Pompeii and another from the nearby Roman settlement of Nuceria. Midway through the fight, various taunts and gestures were exchanged between some of the audience. What started as a harmless discussion, quickly escalated into a complete riot. Immediately stones were thrown and swords were drawn in attempt to completely dismantle those fans of another settlement. It is said that the people of Pompeii won the fight. Many wounded and mutilated Nucerians were then taken to the capital. As a result, the emperor instructed the senate to investigate the incident. After such deliberation, the senate decided to ban Pompeii from holding said gladiator events for ten years. In addition to that, the hosts of the show and potential instigators of the riot were exiled.

It is suspected that the reason for this skirmish is not solely due to the gladiator games. Unfortunately. As the aftermath of the social war settled out, Nuceria did not rebel along the same lines as Pompeii. As we know, Pompeii tried to rebel break free from the Roman control but ultimately fell to Sulla. Nuceria, as a reward for not fighting back, was given territory confiscated from a neighboring town that had been destroyed during fighting. Less than two years before the riot, Nero settled a veteran colony at Nuceria which no doubt inflamed old resentments, especially if assigned lands were disrupted by the Pompeians.

Knowing these various facts, there are definitely mixed reasons as to why the riot occurred. Not withstanding this debate, I view the riot as the first sporting event where the fans got into it. I love the dedication and passion that spoils over into play during sporting events. These emotions and outbursts can easily stir people the wrong way as they are highly controversial moments. I can not wait to dive further into detail for my final paper.

As I just realized this post is my last for the class, I take a brief second to think back and reflect on my various posts. I have genuinely covered all different angles of Pompeiian history. From the very minute details to the more broader themes of adopting Greek and Roman culture, this class has taught me a lot in terms of analysis and reasoning behind trying to understand various cultures in antiquity. Lastly I’d like to give a big shoutout to the few readers that followed me to the end. You know who you are.

So I’ve been thinking about my end of the year paper and all the potential topics. I really enjoyed the brief traffic reading because I like thoroughly enjoy walking new streets. However, in reality how would I be able to get a lot of information and data on that subject. Secondly, I liked the reading on what was essentially plumbing and the water/sewer system. The reason for this topic is the concept that most homes had one private bathroom. I can not even fathom that being the case in my household. Thank god for improvements in this category. Lastly, what do I always fall back on, arguably my true passion in life, sports. Classic for a white man right. Ergo, I find the gladiators and amphitheater in Pompeii to be extremely intriguing. I view it as ancient professional sports. Which is cool. So I read next weeks readings on entertainment and so long story short I believe my topic is gladiators and the amphitheater. Not only will I look into the actual history of the building and its architecture, but also I will look into the various type of fighters and its inclusion of women and the potential/inevitable influence on Pompeii’s economy. If Professor Valentine likes this idea lol.

Immediately, I found quite a bit of information on the different types of gladiators back in Pompeii. It turns out that the gladiators and their prestige or skill level is based by their armor. I will describe the various gladiators due to their weaponry and shields:

Samnites- Samnites are the oldest known gladiators. They were very heavily armored. They carried large round/rectangular shields. On their left leg only, they wore a leather legging for protection. Their weapon was that of a short sword with a straight pointed blade. Their helmet was one with a visor and a crest. It was until Augustus was ruling, did the Samnites eventually become Roman Allies. A picture is provided below.

Hoplomachus- A second type of gladiator is said to resemble a Greek hoplite. (An example of an adopted piece of culture?) They would wear a bronze helmet with a brim and feathers out the top. They only weapons they fought with were a spear and a small sword (a longer knife). The protection on his body with the leg and arm sleeves are the distinguishing elements of this fighter

.

The Thracian- This fighter is derived from warriors of Thrace (Bulgaria). They were normally scheduled to fight against murmillos (another type of fighter) or other Thracian fighters. They used a manica, a small armband, to protect the arm the sword was in. They wore high protective leggings on both legs. Their sword was another short sword known as a Sica.

Secutor- Fought with an average sword but longer and wider rectangular shield. Their helmets were intricate with only two small holes in the eyes. Historically these fighters would tire out quicker due to the limitations in breathing with the heavy helmets.

Retiarius- This gladiator is a Poseidon imposter. Fighting with a net, a small shield, and literally a trident, these fighters basically wish they had control of the lightening and the oceans. They have an intricate piece of clothing named a galerus. A galerus (extended shoulder piece) is a huge bronze rectangular plate put on the shoulder to protect the head.

Murmillo- These gladiators were known for the intricate helmet. The modern day mesh looking equivalent front of the helmet leaves the fighter with an intense presence. They normally fought against Thracian and Hoplomachus fighters.

Lastly there were two inferior types of gladiators: the provocators and the eques. The provocators only fought other provocators. Their armor was much lighter weighing 14 to 15 kilos in comparison to the heavy pieces worn above. Lastly, the eques were clearly fighters that fought on horseback. These two fighting group were essentially the “leightweight” divisions.

I enjoy looking at the different fighters for two reasons. First, I create the scene in my mind of cheering these people on in battle in the amphitheater. I wonder if citizens of Pompeii had favorites and potentially developed personal relationships with the gladiators. I assume they did, unlike today where you have to be famous to interact with the celebrities. I also look at this post to further investigate into potential women gladiators. Did they ever fight? If so what clothes did they use. Second, I view each outfit with creativity. How does one optimize their armor to be functional yet safe and capable of absorbing many hits and attacks.

Please give me possible areas I can take this study into! I’m signing off and going to watch Gladiator myself :).

For my blog this week, I decided to look up my house, the House of Vettii, and interpret the paintings demonstrated in that house. I firmly believe paintings are an important item to interpret when learning about domestic home life in Pompeii. I will be looking at two paintings: ‘Punishment of Dirce’ and ‘Infant Herakles strangling the snakes’. One key element to remember when studying the House of Vettii is that the house was presumably owned by slaves. Ergo when one is interpreting mythological scenes like the following, he or she has to do so within the context of Roman Slavery. More specifically all physical abuse say lashings or beatings was done to slaves, not freed people. The twist these paintings have is the element of eroticism.

‘Punishment of Dirce’ (artist unknown, 62-79CE) is located in the southern triclinium on the South Wall of the house of Vettii. In this daring picture, Dirce, the wife of Lykos, is being punished by Amphion and Zethus. Amphion and Zethus were twins bore by Antiope, niece of Lykos, who was engaged in an affair with Zeus. In hopes of covering up the affair, Lykos left the twins on a mountain to die. Instead, a shepherd found them. As a result, Lykos got very upset and allowed Dirce to cruelly treat Antiope. Little did Lykos know that the twin boys were now men and came back to free their mother. Amphion and Zethus put Dirce through the punishment of being dragged around by a running bull. (The same punishment Antiope went through). Clearly Amphion and Zethus are the two guys in the painting. Dirce is the woman in the middle physically tied with a rope to the bull. The nudity of the exposed breast ties in the social norm of slaves being heavily involved in sexualized punishment and activities. Slaves no matter their gender were involved as sexual pets.

‘Infant Herakles strangling the snakes’ (artist unknown, 62-79CE) is exactly what the title states. It contains a baby Herakles, a mere child, strangling the snakes Hera sent to kill him. Herakles is the son of Alkmena and Zeus. Zeus, the man himself, father of seemingly all mythological children, is the husband to Hera. Once again as a result of being Zeus, Hera found out about the relationship and sent snakes to the kill the product of the affair, Herakles. The items depicted in the painting are of course all the relevant people. The eagle in the background represents Zeus watching over this whole situation. (Kind of reminds me of a Pompeiian episode of Maury). Alkmena is behind the man sitting in the throne and of course she is fleeing the horrible scene. The man in the throne is Amphitryon, the actual husband to Alkmena. Herakles is in the middle killing and fighting off the snake attack. The columns and alter in the background symbolize the implied social class of the citizens in the picture. I believe it is safe to assume the wealthy upper class was subject to many affairs. Or at least, more problems are produced because of them. These two intricate paintings are honestly very well drawn. Excited to see what other artifacts and houses everyone else is looking at!   

When I think of prostitution today, a couple different scenarios come to mind. The first, is walking through Amsterdam in the Red Light district. That was a very strange trip. The second is the horrific scenario of human trafficking. Lastly, is the adult film industry that has escalated into the powerhouse it is today. All of the actions associated with these thoughts are in one form or another deviant behavior. When reading about prostitution in Pompeii, it was intriguing to see the naturalization of it. As Rousselle points out “the purpose of marriage was reproduction rather than sexual love. Sexual love between husband and wife was disastrous for the woman because she would die from repeated child bearing” (Laurence, 61). In essence, there was a need for the husband to have sexual relations outside of marriage. (What about women??) Comparing that culture and norm to today excites me as I dive into the various methods and locations for prostitution in ancient Pompeii.

Murals and graffiti played a major role in brothels. Murals located inside brothels were thought to serve a couple purposes. First, they could have been pictorial menus. Second, they could’ve been instruction manuals for more inexperienced customers. Last, they might’ve been designed for titillation as most pictures include strong, athletic men engaging with fair skinned white women. An example is as follows:

The graffiti also reveals intricate information about prostitution. I found three examples: “thrust slowly”, “Euplia was here with two thousand beautiful men”, and “Euplia sucks for five asses”. These three inscriptions reveal information ranging from names to prices for various activities. I wonder if these writings brought any shame upon the women? I know that prostitutes had to be registered but I’m curious to know if the stigma today (of say working in a strip club) is similar to that of Pompeii.

As for location, cells without doors were found in excavation sites. It is assumed that drapes or curtains were used to enclose the activity inside. The rooms were also windowless, implying a general sense of darkness and lack of airflow. Inside the cells was a narrow bed. They probably did not have Tempurpedic mattresses either. Pompeii was assumed to have about 9 brothel sites. 7 of which were single celled. In addition, the brothels were located outside the main sites of the city in attempt to protect those of elite status. Below is an example of an individual cell:

The reason I wrote this post is to fulfill a big idea of the class in being able to  compare the ancient times of Pompeii to those of today. So adultery was outlawed back in the day. Adultery is still outlawed today. Prostitution is now illegal in the majority of the United States. However, the societal norms behind the need for making love and reproduction have not changed. The president got caught with an extramarital affair. Professional athletes, Hollywood stars, and many other people in the spotlight have hardly held marriages or relationships together due to sexual curiosity. I challenge the whole premise behind the difference between sexual love and reproductive love. Especially with todays modern medicine, I view it as a copout for not wanting to commit to something and always seeking a way out. Being from Tennessee, moving out to California (especially for college) has opened my eyes to this distinction. In this instance, I strive to keep my eyes closed.

http://theconversation.com/the-grim-reality-of-the-brothels-of-pompeii-88853

Safe sex is great sex! Throughout high school and college, this message has been reiterated over and over again. With good reason! One should definitely take caution to prevent the possible spread of diseases and the conception of a child. “Biological reproduction, necessary to the survival of the species, is commonly understood to be one of the most universal and “natural” aspects of human sexuality. Yet for most primates, including hominids, reproduction constitutes a relatively small aspect of sexual activities and relationships” (Voss, 320). In order to prevent the birth of many children back in the day, Pompeii and Rome had it’s own mechanisms for controlling reproductions whether through contraceptives or abortion. I seek to further elaborate on these methods. The reason being is that modern medicine is so advanced today that I’m curious to know how it was done in the past.

It is important to distinguish early on that these methods were practices by the Roman upper elite. Little evidence remains describing those methods of the lower classes. When studying how Romand kept their families so small, the first result from this scholarly article is motivation and will. “A general fall in fertility is a product of will plus technique, but the will is prior, if not the discovery of contraceptives, at least their use” (Hopkins, 126). I honestly laugh at the notion that will power is the strongest, most consistent method. I could make numerous sexual innuendos and jokes, but I will refrain. Other suspicions on how the elite kept their family so small revolves around being unfaithful. Apparently, the idea of a faithful husband has not yet been established (Hopkins, 127). It is commonly assumed that the husbands engaged in sexual activities with prostitutes while the wives engaged in activities with salves. What a healthy marriage! At least it kept fertility down!

In terms of actual methods, it is known that Romans practiced abortion with little or no sense of shame. There is some evidence of practicing infanticide, but it can not be deemed a commonly practiced method. The contraceptive method which Greek and Roman doctors did suggest included the application before coitus of cedar gum, vinegar, brine, or olive oil to the vagina or male genitals and a gamut of vaginal plus and occlusive pessaries, mostly with wool base soaked in honey, alum, white lead or olive oil (Hopkins, 141). It gets better. Written by Soranus, was the following passage with a full-proof methodology of contraception: “For it is much more advantageous not to conceive than to destroy the embryo, one must consequently beware of having sexual intercourse at those periods which we said were suitable for conception. And during the sexual act, at the critical moment of coitus when the man is about to discharge the seed, the woman must hold her breath and draw herself away a little so that the seed may not be hurled too deep into the cavity of the uterus” (Hopkins, 134). I want to leave the blog post with that quote as I might’ve found a fun research topic. To conclude, we should be forever grateful for modern medicine.

 

Hopkins, K. (1965). Contraception in the Roman Empire. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 8(1), 124-151. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/177539

 

When studying religion in ancient Pompeii, there were numerous angles I could use to approach this blog post. From the temples themselves, to the cults of the emperor, to the fact that a human could simply make himself a god, all of these were appealing, no doubt. However, I found the actual practices more interesting, specifically the animal sacrifices. We’ve seen many a image on portrayals of the sacrifices to the gods. However, what the book subtly includes is the job of a specific person after the ceremony. A haruspice is a person who’s job is to study the internal organs of the recently sacrificed animal in hopes of finding signs for the gods. As a result, I chose to further investigate this position. My initial suspicion is that it is of vital importance but I had the following questions: how is one chosen for the job? Is it synonymous to priesthood in political elites choosing themselves? Is there school for learning the omens and what they mean exactly?

First, lets discuss the definition of the job and what they were actually doing. The job of a haruspice was a form of divination called hepatoscopy. Divination is simply “the practice of determining the hidden significance or cause of events, sometimes foretelling the future, by various natural, psychological, and other techniques”. In particular, Hepatoscopy is examining the liver or gallbladder in search of said signs. So my hypothesis is that they look at the liver maybe poke it a few times and expect some energy to flow out and interpret a divine omen. Rather, the haurspice looks at the structure of the organ. Examining various deviations in forms or shape, one is able to translate and interpret what the gods had written. The writings were messages about the future looked at in the present.

The Etruscans were the first to start this job. In fact, an Etruscan model of a liver was found in Piacenza survived in the 21st century. Side note, I am quite unsure how a liver was denoted Etruscan, but I digress. In addition to examining livers and gallbladders, haurspices examine all phenomena of nature in search for omens of the future. Everything from thunder, lightening, and monstrous births(?) haurspices are always at work. There was a collegium of 60 haurspices. The title was technically never a priesthood but was a salaried position none the less. Fun fact, a famous haurspice is known for examining an animal Ceasar was sacrificing just before his assassination. The animal allegedly had no heart…could be another interesting blog post! I find the haurspices extremely interesting people. I wish there was record about why one got into the profession!

Cites:

Park, George Kerlin, and Robert Andrew Gilbert. “Divination.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 20 July 1998, http://www.britannica.com/topic/divination.

Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Haruspices.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 1 Apr. 2018, http://www.britannica.com/topic/Haruspices.

 

So I’m not sure about what y’all were doing, but I was probably doing basic 6 year old things: attending first grade, trying to read at a below average level, attempting to play sports, and repeating these activities daily. Allegedly, according to Cooley, Numerius Popidius Celsinus, the son of Numerius, rebuilt at his own expense from its foundations the Temple of Isis. Our boy Numerius, was casually rebuilding temples at age 6. As a result, I have decided to further investigate.

A salve by the name of Numerius Popidius Ampliatus,  was freed as of 1st century CE. Upon getting freed he was able to acquire a significant amount of wealth and climbed the economic ranks.  After the Temple of Isis crashed in the earthquake, father Ampliatus rebuilt the temple in his son’s name, Celsinus. (makes much more sense now). This declaration of the temple in his name was not by coincidence. The declaration ensured a prestigious place in politics for his son and the rest of Numerius’ heirs. He and his family had gained a new socio-political standing in the city. So now that the story is up and the 6 year old didn’t make the temple. This story does tell us a lot about the power public writing in the city.

The fact that the name Numerius Popidius Celsinus was written above the temple signified a couple of things. First, the name was written larger on the temple than the goddess, Isis, herself. Which not only disrespects Isis, but also it speaks to the civic patronage in the city. Times were clearly changing to where name and reputation were becoming of importance and superseding the meaning behind the building. Lastly, the public writing was a source of contract or law. The inscription of Ampliatus’ name not only demonstrated his wealth but solidified a contract for his son to be in the political sphere. It was evidently an old form of decree. This episode highlights the effects of the social war and how things were changing in Pompeii after the earthquakes before the eruption. Below is an image of the inscription on the Temple.

I found the Guzzo reading to be the most interesting. Not only did I enjoy saying Guzzo, but also I found the transgression of Pompeii being a settlement to a city to be quite unique. First, in the 7th c B.C. Pompeii is a settlement and not a city due to the fact archaeological documentation only found huts to be present. Why discriminate against huts? Just because they don’t have a town hall doesn’t mean they’re not a city. It’s very feasible that the settlement of Pompeii could’ve been diverse culturally with a smaller internal power structure.

In the 6th century B.C. Pompeii earns the title of city. As he writes, “a city, in its simplest form, is defined as a stable settlement in which the inhabitants recognize some kind of authority that is capable of commanding, or at least organizing, the activities necessary for maintaining the community’s structures and functions” (12). Due to the resurrection of the Doric Temple, the temple of Apollo, and the defensive wall in the pappamonte, Pompeii finally received a title of being a city. Allegedly the defensive wall was  a cornerstone piece. Except for Berlin and China, I can’t really remember another wall having such a formidable impact on a cities well being. Maybe that was just way back in history.

A side point to which I found interesting that helped distinguish cities were the cemeteries present. Guzzo weighed in heavily on the impact of cemeteries. Not only did the cemeteries show the growth and development of a civilization, but they also helped provide evidence as to what cultural identities were present due to the epitaphs and such. Guzzo also points out how cemeteries show hierarchical social structure. I’m not sure I entirely agree with this notion, because burial rituals are and have always been different for different cultures. I simply never thought of using cemeteries as a benchmark for distinguishing a city.

 

 

 

Hello all! My name is Geoffrey Holland and I’m a senior (can’t believe it) at Pitzer. I am pursuing a major in Mathematical Economics. Born and raised in Nashville Tennessee, my mother was a math teacher so I guess that skill ran in the genes. When it comes to the classics, I genuinely lack knowledge and exposure. Whether it’s the Greeks or Romans, I have never dived into the material. That being said, I assume everyone is curious as to why I’m in the class. Evidently that is the reason.

Majoring in math, I have been conditioned to think linearly. One step to the next, 2+2=4 and proving various theorems through sequential steps. I wanted to challenge myself to a different way of thinking. A more open ended, conceptual way of thinking. Even the first few days of class, I realized I got exactly what I signed up for. I mean we’re talking about Pompeii and how we don’t have all the facts and objects from archeological discoveries to unveil the real truth about Pompeii. Next step for me is to contribute more to the conversations and put my thoughts into words for debate and discussion.

A random relevant interest of mine that relates to this class in a way is that I want to go live abroad in Italy post graduation. Funny fact, I did not think of this goal upon registering for the class. It kind of worked out that way. I chose not to study abroad, but I’m feigning for a new adventure. I’m hoping to secure a job in Italy (doesn’t matter what kind) to go live abroad and experience something totally different.