The First Ladies of Rome:
The Women behind the Caesars
Annelise Freisenbruch studied Classics at
The main
text is divided into nine chapters which follow a chronological line from the
Julio-Claudian dynasty founded by Augustus and Livia in the first century BC
until the Theodosian dynasty in the fifth century AD. At the end of the book there are notes with references, a bibliography and an index.
What about
illustrations? In the beginning of the book we have a map of the Roman Empire and some useful charts (family trees
of six imperial dynasties). In the middle of the book we have a picture section with 34 photos, most
of which are in colour. Each object in the photos is mentioned in the main
text. Unfortunately, there is no cross reference from the main text to the
photo (or the other way: from the photo caption to the main text).
The book is
well written and well organised. It is based on ancient literary sources and modern scholarship.
Archaeological evidence - such as coins, statues and portraits - is also used
extensively.
The book presents a large gallery, men as well as women, but the focus is on the women, as far as this is possible. Here are some examples:
** In chapters 1-4 we meet some of the women who are connected with the Julio-Claudian dynasty: Livia, Octavia, Julia, Antonia Minor, Agrippina Minor, Livilla, Messalina, and Poppaea
** In chapter 5 we meet some of the women who are connected with the Flavian dynasty: Julia Flavia, Domitia Longina, and Berenice
** In chapter 6 we meet some of the women who are connected with the adoptive emperors: Plotina, Vibia Sabina, Anna Galeria Faustina (married to Antoninus Pius), and Faustina (married to Marcus Aurelius)
** In chapter 7 we meet some of the women who are connected with the Severan dynasty: Julia Domna, Julia Maesa, and Plautilla
** In chapter 8 we meet some of the women who are connected with the Constantine dynasty: Helena and Fausta
** In chapter 9 we meet some of the women who are connected with the Theodosian dynasty: Galla Placidia and Eudocia
After they died, Livilla and Messalina were both victims of the decision that is known as damnatio memoriae. This means the authorities decided that all official memories of them should disappear. Statues and portraits should be destroyed, and official inscriptions which mentioned them by name should be erased or re-written (pp. 118 and 133).
Some of the men presented in this book were also victims of this decision, for instance Domitian (pp. 176 and 184) and Geta (pp. 217, 226, and 237). However, the decision was not always carried out in full. Therefore we still have some portraits of Domitian where we can see that he looks like his brother Titus and his father Vespasian.
Freisenbruch
got some good reviews. On the U.S. edition of the Amazon website there
are excerpts from several highly positive reviews. But one of them, Publishers
Weekly, includes a negative observation. It says the book is:
“Weakened only by a slight tendency to compare and contrast events with the modern media versions ofRome .”
Actually, I think it is a good idea to explain how the history of ancientRome has been – and is being – used by
modern media such as film, television and books. I am more annoyed with the
modern parallels which pop up from time to time. They are not necessary and
sometimes rather far fetched. Thus we hear about:
“Weakened only by a slight tendency to compare and contrast events with the modern media versions of
Actually, I think it is a good idea to explain how the history of ancient
** Martha Washington (page 8)
** Nancy Reagan (page 85)
** Traditions in the White House (page 94)
We even hear about “the cookie-bake-off competition held every four years between potential American presidential spouses” (page 50).
These modern parallels cannot be described as a big problem. In my opinion they are just a case of poor judgement. But there are other problems, and, as far as I can see, they have not been mentioned by other reviewers. Let me explain:
# 1: Several
times the author reports a rumour that a member of an imperial family was
murdered (e.g. by poison). Each time the reader must raise the question: what
about this case? Is it true? What is the answer? Is it yes? Is it no? Is it maybe?
But the author never gives a clear answer. On page 196 she tries to deal with
this matter in the following way:
“Given the regularity with which such episodes recur in both ancient and later historiography and with such convenient similarities, the case for treating them with caution would seem particularly strong.”
[There is an almost identical passage on page 85.]
To say we
must proceed with caution is just to state the obvious. By saying this and no
more than this she simply evades the question, which is not fair.
# 2: On
page 195 we hear about Trajan’s death in 117:
“… he fell seriously ill off the coast of southernTurkey , was forced to draw into harbour at
Selinus on the south-west coast of Sicily , and died there on 8 August…”
There is indeed a Sicilian town Selinus. The Greek name is Selinunte. But Trajan did not die there. The Selinus where he died is inCilicia in modern Turkey .
“… he fell seriously ill off the coast of southern
There is indeed a Sicilian town Selinus. The Greek name is Selinunte. But Trajan did not die there. The Selinus where he died is in
# 3: On
page 196 we hear about the birth of Hadrian:
“Born in the late 70s in the same
region of Spain as his predecessor…”
Hadrian was born on
Thorsten
Opper, whose book Hadrian: Empire and Conflict is listed in the bibliography,
says Hadrian was born in Rome (pp. 32 & 34). Opper quotes the
Historia Augusta. But as Freisenbruch explains several times, this ancient
source is not always reliable (pp. 189, 201, and 214).
For the
modern historian the only safe option is to say we do not know where Hadrian
was born.
# 4: On
page 218 we hear about Septimius Severus who was born in 145 in the Libyan town Lepcis Magna
(sometimes spelled Leptis Magna ):
“Septimius Severus was to be the first emperor to celebrate his provincial origin in public building projects.”
This is not true. As emperor from 117, Hadrian organised a huge building project in Italica. He built a new town next to the old one. Today most of the old town (urbs vetus) is covered by the modern village Santiponce (except for the theatre). But the remains of the new town (urbs nova) are still visible.
[For more
information on this topic see Mary Boatwright, Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire , Princeton University Press, 2000,
pp 162-167.]
[Boatwright
appears in Freisenbruch’s bibliography with two articles. But the book about
the cities of the Roman Empire is not listed.]
# 5: On
page 228 we hear about Caracalla’s wedding to Plautilla in 202:
“The wedding took place in April as part of the celebrations marking the tenth anniversary of Severus’s rule…”
Severus’s rule began in 193, so he could not celebrate his tenth anniversary in 202. He could (and did) celebrate the beginning of his tenth year as emperor. The Latin word is decennalia.
[This
mistake is repeated on page 231.]
In spite of
these unfortunate mistakes I have to say this is an impressive and interesting
book which is highly recommended.
No comments:
Post a Comment