below is my roman world portfolio, finally landing on around the 7/8000 word mark with pics and headers/footers... the pics arent up here, but if you reeally wanna look at the pics, look at the sites in the bibliographies!!!
opinions appreciated.





Chapter One:
Roman religion
– Principal Gods and Goddesses and their origins.
The Romans as a people were highly polytheistic, and their religion was not based upon any beliefs of their own, ‘but on a mixture of fragmented rituals, taboos, superstitions, and traditions which they collected over the years from a number of sources.’ These sources included the Greeks (from which much of Roman culture can be linked to), the Etruscans, the Latium tribes and the Egyptians.
Because the Romans had so many gods and goddesses, there is not adequate time or space to consider all of them, so I am going to consider what is seen to be the Roman pantheon, which is the major gods and goddesses associated with ancient Rome.
Saturn is considered as being at the head of the genealogy of the religion of the Romans. Few details remain about him, except that he was the god of sowing and the father of Jupiter, Neptune and Pluto. He was the original king of the gods but was soon overthrown by Jupiter. Saturn was one of the oldest existing gods of the Romans and was celebrated each year with the festival ‘Saturnalia’ which was a week long and brought normal life to a standstill for the Roman people. The king of the Roman gods was Jupiter (also known as Jove), who can be closely identified with Zeus in Greek mythology. Jupiter was god of the heavens, and was greatly feared by the Romans as he was rumoured to throw thunderbolts down to earth in his anger. His wife was Juno (Greek name Hera) and she was Queen of the gods, and was also the goddess of women, marriage and childbirth. She was prayed to especially with regards to things such as safe birth of a child, or a happy and long lived marriage.
The next god worth noting in this section is Neptune, the god of the sea and earthquakes, and brother of Jupiter. Neptune was an important god to the Roman people as he had the power to ensure a ships safe passage and return, and would often be beseeched, as sea travel was dangerous in those times.
Pluto was the god of the dead and death. He is very closely associated with Hades, his greek predecessor and it is suggested that ‘the Romans had no god of the dead before they came into contact with Greek culture in the 700's B.C.’
Venus was the goddess of love, and beauty. She was also the goddess of fields. She was an important figure in Roman mythology, associated with the building of Rome and as a result some of the major Roman temples were dedicated to her. She was married to Vulcan, the god of fire and also referred to as the ‘blacksmith of the gods’ however, it was rumoured that she fell in love with Mars, and as a result of an affair, gave birth to a son Cupid, who is well renowned throughout history for his arrows of love.
Mars was the god of war. He was given special significance by the Romans, who believed that he was the father of Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome. Prior to being the god of war, he was the god of farmland and fertility, and it was only after the Romans came into contact with Greek mythology that he took on the character with which he is best associated today.
Mercury, the son of Jupiter was seen as the ‘messenger’ of the gods. He was also the god of roads and travel and merchants in Roman mythology and as such would have been a regular person worshipped and prayed to by the Roman people, especially travellers and soldiers wanting safe passage down the roads. He was also considered a protector of criminals and some Romans regarded him as crafty and deceptive. He carried a winged staff with snakes curled round it, which is often associated with medicine today.
Apollo was the god of the arts, especially music and poetry, and was also regarded as a god of healing and prophecy, and as such would have been very important to the Romans. He was also deemed responsible for the daily passage of the sun across the sky. He was the twin sister of Diana, the goddess of light, especially the moon, and unity. She was also the goddess of the hunt and protector of children. In this respect she would have been an important figure to all Roman mothers.
Minerva was the goddess of crafts, industry, the arts and wisdom. She was also known as the goddess of war and the protector of heroes and as such would be an important figure to the Roman army on both a corporate and individual level. She would also have played an important part in the religious life of a craftsman.
Ceres was an important goddess to all Roman people. She was the goddess of agriculture, and as such would be worshipped so as to ensure a good harvest for the people, and thus enough food with which to live and trade. The ‘Cerealia’ was held in her honour, and ‘There was a women's 9-day fast and festival when women offered the first corn harvest to Ceres, originally celebrated every five years, but later - by the time of Augustus - held every October 4.’
Another intrinsically important goddess to the Roman people was Vesta, the goddess of the hearth and fire. She was worshipped daily, and was of particular importance to women ‘for the hearth was where the food was prepared and cooked, and beside it the meal was eaten.’
During the meals a portion of the food would be thrown into the fire as an offering to Vesta. Her temple was situated in Rome, and was attended by the Vestal Virgins, whose job was to keep the sacred eternal fire burning. The Vestal Virgins were ‘priestesses who were dedicated to the Goddess' service for thirty years, and who were headed by the Virgo Maxima, the eldest Vestal.’ Vesta was so well respected that if a condemned man were to find a Vestal, he would be pardoned of his crime, however, if a Vestal Virgin was found to have broken any of the laws given whilst in service, her punishment would be that of being buried alive.
The final god to be considered here is Janus, another god of the utmost importance to the household. Janus was the god of doorways. He had two faces, which looked in opposing directions, and there are many interpretations as to why this is: ‘that it represents opening and closing a door, going in and coming out, or viewing (and thus guarding) both the inside and outside of a house.’ Janus is also considered to be the god of beginnings, and it is therefore unsurprising to find that the first month of the Roman calendar is accredited to him. ‘He was invoked at the start of each new day and often referred to as the Porter of Heaven. He particularly presided over all that is double-edged in life and represented the transition between the primitive and civilisation.’



These are pictures of Roman deities.


Bibliography:
Books:
- Kamm, Antony ‘The Romans: An Introduction’ (London: Routledge 2003)
Websites:
- Gods and Goddesses, http://www.novaroma.org/religio_romana/deities.html

- Janus: Roman god of beginnings. http://www.novareinna.com/festive/janus.html

- Roman and Latin: Roman Gods: http://www.geocities.com/EnchantedForest/Fountain/5832/gods.htm

-Roman Mythology and Solar System. http://www.nashville.k12.tn.us/CurriculumAwards/Roman_Myth.html

-The Gods of Old http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Ring/5382/gods.html

chapter two

Chapter Two:
A Roman Soldier
I am going to focus on two main areas in this chapter. The first is the dress i.e. uniform and armour of a Roman soldier, and the second is the weaponry he would have.
Because there were several types of soldier within the Roman Army at its height, I am going to consider the generic Roman Infantry soldier.
The first and one of the most important pieces of uniform to consider is the footwear of the Roman soldier. He wore caligae, a type of sandal. A picture of what they would look like can be found at the end of this chapter. Whilst they look as if they would not offer much in the way of protection or tread, they were actually quite cleverly constructed. The tops were made from leather straps, and the shape of the shoes themselves, and the open design helped in the prevention of blisters forming on feet which were expected to walk up to 25 miles a day.
On the underside of the shoe were iron studs, which were not supplied by the Roman Army, and a soldier would have to buy these himself. These helped the soldier’s feet grip when walking over rough terrain, and were also useful for stamping on the enemy in the midst of battle.
The soldiers garments consisted of linen underclothes covered by a short sleeved tunic which was knee length. ‘Although the Romans had originally considered the wearing of trousers (bracae) a foreign and effeminate habit, legionaries in cold climates were allowed to wear trousers made of wool or leather which were skin tight and reached just below the knee.’
On top of the tunic came the breastplate, or the ‘lorica segmentata’ ‘(The expression 'lorica segmentata' is an expression created by scholars to describe the armour, rather than being the term necessarily used by the Romans themselves.)’ This consisted of several overlapping iron strips fastened together by leather straps, and offered good protection to the soldier whilst retaining freedom to move and yield weaponry. There were several different versions of this kind of armour ranging from very simple, to quite complex designs. Again a picture of this can be found at the end of the section.
Around the waste of a roman soldier you would find a belt. This was housing to the dagger carried and also the apron. The belt was made of leather, and the apron consisted of numerous leather strips with metal discs attached to them, almost a medal holder, as often the discs would represent the different battles the soldier had fought in. The apron was seen to be mainly decorative, although it would have offered some protection to the lower stomach and groin area, but this would be limited, and the soldier was much more likely to rely on his shield.
The shield, or scutum was carried on the left side by the soldier and was curved to enhance its protective qualities. The shield was constructed of small flat pieces of wood, quite similar to plywood to make the shield light enough to carry when on the march. This was edged in bronze or iron, and the outside covered in leather. The handle was situated on the inside of the shield. The shield could also be used offensively as well as defensively, as in the middle, was the umbo, an iron covering for the hand grip, which was a solid raised piece of iron or bronze, and could be used to hit an enemy in the face causing them quite substantial damage.
Often the soldier would wear a woollen scarf around his neck to prevent the breastplate or helmet rubbing against him. The helmet (cassis or galea) was constructed from bronze and shaped so that it touched the soldiers head only at the rim. This would make the soldier seem taller, thus intimidating his enemy, and offer protection against otherwise potentially fatal blows to the skull. On the picture at the end, it is possible to see a protrusion from the front of the helmet, which prevented a sword blow from splitting the helmet. On the back on the helmet was a section that covered the neck from both swords and rebounded or deflected objects from shields. On the sides of the helmet were two hinged sections, which protected the cheeks and jawbone of the soldier and fastened together with a leather tie at the bottom.
We now move on to examine the weapons of a Roman soldier.
The first of these weapons is the dagger, or pugio. This was carried on the left hand side of the body and attached to the belt. It consisted of an ergonomically designed handle and a pear-shaped blade, made from iron or bronze. The dagger was occasionally used in warfare, especially in close combat, but was also used as a general multi-purpose knife, just as a pen knife might be used today.
The next item of weaponry a soldier would possess would be the gladius or sword. It is described as a ‘a double-bladed weapon two feet long and two inches wide, often with a corrugated bone grip.’ This was located on the right hand side of the soldiers body, regardless of which hand he was naturally inclined to use. The soldier was trained to draw the sword with his right hand and use a thrusting motion, which could be repeated very quickly, and was tactically sound as the Romans fought battles in units of men stood with their sides touching, not individually, and thus using the sword in this way caused the least interference with the person at the side of them.
Each soldier also had in their weapon range ‘two javelins of different weights, each two metres long and with a metal head.’ These pilums were used primarily for disarming the enemy, and were thrown as soon as the enemy was in range. The heavier of the two were most likely reserved for defence against cavalry forces.
A soldier fighting in the light infantry section of the army would also carry missile weapons such as bows and arrows, javelins and slings, and these would be targeted at the oppositions light infantry section in an attempt to divert any fire upon their heavy (more close combat) infantry away towards another area.


These pictures were all taken from the same source- see the bibliography.

Bibliography:
Books:
- Kamm, Antony. ‘The Romans: An Introduction’ (London: Routledge, 2003)

Websites: Text references:

- Legionary Equipment: http://www.roman-empire.net/army/leg-equip.html
- Romans in Britain http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_dagger.htm
- Romans in Britain: http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_footwear.htm

Websites: Pictures:
-Romans in Britain: [http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_belt.htm]
-Romans in Britain: [http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_breastplate.htm]
-Romans in Britain: [http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_dagger.htm]
-Romans in Britain: [http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_footwear.htm]
-Romans in Britain: http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_helmet.htm
-Romans in Britain: http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_shield.htm
-Romans in Britain: http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/mil_roman_soldier_sword.htm

chapter three



Chapter Three:
Roman Women
In this chapter I intend to examine the what the life of a Roman woman might have been like as a Matrona which is defined as: ‘a legally married Roman woman of respectable background (not someone infamis, "disreputable")’. After this, I will go on to look at the subject of betrothal and marriage in a more in depth fashion.
To begin, it must be stated that in Roman times, the social status of the world was biased severely in favour of men. Women had few rights of their own, and were very much seen as being of a lower class than Roman men, and as such were often treated accordingly.
In general, the new-born Roman child had a battle for survival, but this dramatically increased if the baby was female in gender as a female was unable to continue the family line.
The life of a Roman girl began with an inspection by the midwife. The midwife made the first decision as to whether the child would live or die at this point as she checked the child for abnormalities and deformities. If the baby was deemed healthy, they then faced another life or death decision. Because a girl was seen as having little to contribute to the family, the father of the child made the decision as to whether they could afford to raise a girl, as continuity of the family line was deemed more important to the Romans. This was decided soon after the midwife’s decision that the girl was healthy. The baby was placed on the floor and if the father picked the child up this was a symbol of the father’s acceptance of the child into the household. Many girls however were not accepted, and they would be left to die by means of exposure. This was deemed a perfectly normal thing to do in Roman times, as it was simply a practical solution to a family’s problem of not having the money or food to keep them.
If the baby girl was accepted into the family, on the eighth day of her life, a ceremony called the ‘dies lustricus’ (day of purification) took place, at which the child would be named, and the family would celebrate.
As the girl grew, she would be taught basic reading writing and arithmetic skills, and also be instructed as to how to speak Latin correctly. The mother of the household would generally be in charge of this task. Whilst intellectual development was encouraged by the parents, the main emphasis on a child’s development would be moral. It was considered most important that a child should develop ‘reverence for the gods, respect for the law, unquestioning and instant obedience to authority, truthfulness, and self-reliance.’
At the age of 7 a girl would begin to learn the skills of housekeeping in preparation for marriage, which for a roman girl, took place at a young age, and this learning also took place at home.
A roman girl was generally married at around ages 12-14, and whilst marriages were arranged between parents around political and financial gain from funerary inscriptions we can see that many of these marriages tended to happy. (The subject of marriage will be examined in greater depth afterwards.)
Once married, the matron, or domina, as she was now known carried power in the household, and was also recognised on a social level, as she was in charge of the children and slaves. She also had influence in both family and state affairs, as can be seen in the repeal of the Oppain Law (195 BCE). After the end of the Punic War matrons demanded the return of their former luxuries quite forcibly:

‘Neither modesty nor the persuasion or authority of their husbands could keep the women indoors. They blocked all the streets and entrances to the forum, vociferously arguing that at a time of prosperity, when men’s personal fortunes were increasing daily, women too should be restored to their former splendours. The press of women increased day by day, as they came in from the towns and outlying districts. They even grew so bold as to waylay and interrogate the consuls, praetors and other officials.’ – History of Rome XXXIV. 1

The Roman matron did not involve going out to work. ‘The woman’s place was firmly in the home: even queuing for the little wooden token entitling a family to the monthly corn dole appears to have been a male prerogative.’
Women were able to wok as wet nurses, midwives, hairdressers, and seamstresses, however the main role of the Roman women was the upkeep of the house, overseeing the education of the children, and of course, producing an heir in order to continue the family line. This was a dangerous task, and it was reported that as many women died in childbirth as men died in war.
Women who survived these things generally had happy lives, and ‘had a place at public games, at theatres and at great religious ceremonies of state. She could testify in court and until late in the Republic, might even defend a case.’ Her birthday was sacredly observes, and every year the ‘matronalia’ was celebrated on the first day of March. When she died she would have been buried, and her respects may have been paid with a public eulogy.
I will now go on to look at a typical arranged marriage, which was the normal thing to happen in Roman times. As stated before, marriages were generally arranged for political and financial or status gain, but in spite of this, were generally contented and successful.
Once a girl was deemed to have reached womanhood, which was usually sometime between the ages of 12-14, she would be formally betrothed to her future husband. Whilst this was not a legal requirement for marriage, it was considered to be good form and practice to do so. During this time a dowry would be arranged between the two families, as this was a point of high honour to the Romans and the bride’s family would provide this. In return the groom would present his bride with a gift, generally that of a ring which ‘was worn on the third finger of the left hand because there was a belief in Roman times and for centuries later that a nerve or sinew ran directly from this finger to the heart.’
The next thing to consider was the choice of date. This was very important, as ‘The Kalends, Nones, and Ides of each months, and the day following each one, were unlucky. So were all of May and the first half of June, because of certain religious ceremonies observed in these months, the memorial days (February 13-21), and the days when the entrance to the lower world was supposed to be open (August 24, October 5, and November 8)’
These dates would have been avoided where possible. It was considered best to be married in the second half of June as Juno was considered the protectress of marriage.
On the night before her wedding, the girl would bring a dedication to the Lares, the household gods, and these included: her bulla (locket), and if she was young, her childish toys’
On the day of her wedding, she would be dressed in her wedding clothes, which generally consisted of a long white dress with a belt, and a flame coloured veil. Her hair would be parted into six locks, which were then coiled and held in place with ribbons, in the same style as the vestal virgins wore their hair.
The ceremony itself would vary between households but centred on the sharing of a wheaten cake. The matron of honour would join the right hands of the bride and groom and silent vows were undertaken. The cake would be blessed by a priest. A procession to the house of the groom then followed, during which the wedding hymn was sung, and upon arrival the bride was carried over the threshold by the groom and given fire and water as symbols of the life they were to live as a married couple, and to formally acknowledge her as domina or matron.. On following nights would be many frivolities and activities, including a feast, and the throwing of the wedding torch to the guests of the wedding.




Bibliography:
The following sources were used in quotes and references:
- Kamm,Antony. ‘The Romans: An Introduction’ (London: Routledge 2003)
- ‘Rome Exposed’ [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/marrcustwom.html]
- ‘Rome Exposed’:[http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/romechildren.html]
- ‘Diotima’: [http://www.stoa.org/diotima/syllabi/skinlecs10.shtml]
- Sheffield University: ‘Handout from lecture on Roman Women’ 2002/3
The following sources were used in research:
- Kamm, Antony. ‘The Romans: An Introduction’ (London: Routledge 2003)
- Carcopino, Jerome.’Daily Life in Ancient Rome’ (London: Penguin 1991)
- ‘Rome Exposed’ [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/marrcustwom.html]
- ‘Rome Exposed’:[http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/romechildren.html]
- ‘Diotima’: [http://www.stoa.org/diotima/syllabi/skinlecs10.shtml]
- Sheffield University: ‘Handout from lecture on Roman Women’ 2002/3
- ‘Feminae Romanae’ http://dominae.fws1.com/Forgotten/Index.html

chapter four


Chapter Four:
Roman Housing
In this chapter, I will be examining the interior layout of a typical roman villa and the furnishings and decoration of these rooms.
The influence of Greek architecture can clearly be seen on more wealthy Roman housing.
Below is a plan of a typical Roman residence, Each number refers to a different section of the house and I will in turn go through each of the areas denoted explaining them.
The classic roman residence was divided into two parts, each grouped around a different area. On the left of the plan one can see the area which is grouped around the atrium (denoted by number 1 on the plan). The atrium was a room that generally contained an opening in the roof, which allowed the circulation of fresh air and helped to regulate the temperature. The rectangle denoted by the number 5 on the plan indicates the impluvium which was a pool set in the floor of the atrium to catch the rainwater which fell into the room. Because the opening in the roof meant a weakening of the overall structure of the house, there needed to be some means of support for the roof. As a result, there are known to be at least five styles of atrium each employing a different means of support for the roof. These are:
‘atrium tuscanium: this type had no columns. The weight of the ceiling was carried by the rafters. though expensive to build, this seems to have been the most widespread type of atrium in the Roman house.
atrium tetrastylum: this type had one column at each corner of the impluvium.
atrium corinthium: this type was similar to the atrium tetrastylum but had a greater opening in the roof and a greater number of columns.
atrium displuviatum: the roof actually sloped towards the side walls, a large rainwater therefore ran off into other outlets than the impluvium.
atrium testudinatum: this atrium had no opening in the roof at all and was only seen in small, unimportant houses.’

The atrium was considered to be the centrepiece of the house and as such was the most decoratively furnished. The atrium also contained the lararium, which was the household chapel dedicated to the ancestral spirits and gods and goddesses of the roman family.
The second part of the house was centred around the peristylum (2) which was an open area in which plants would grow, and was sometimes home to a fountain in the middle. This was also an area open to the sky, and the natural rainfall would water the plants. The impluvium also contained an underground tank, which would store excess rainwater collected.
The house generally contained no windows, but gained its light and air circulation from these two areas. Each room was designed with a specific purpose and were generally all on floor level.
As the house was entered through the vestibulum(3) and fauces (4), on the immediate left and right were the Taberna (10). These were generally accessed from outside the house, and were probably used as shops. Access from the house enabled the tabernas to be used as other things, for example storage purposes if necessary. This wasn’t decorated in a grand manner, and sometimes split into two floors.Travelling in an anti clockwise direction around the atrium, we then arrive at a cubiculum (11). These were the bedrooms of the Roman houses. The Romans did not consider these to be important rooms in the house and were generally the smaller rooms in the house. The ceiling was low, and gave a cramped appearance. The floor was mosaiced and often a rectangular pattern would mark out the position of the bed on the floor.
The next kind of room reached is denoted by the number 6 on the plan and is entitled the Ala (pl. Alae). The function of this room is widely unknown, although in earlier houses where the atrium was covered, it is thought that these areas had windows which allowed in light and air, and later were included purely for traditional purposes.As we continue around the residence, you pass through the andron(12), which was simply a passage way between the atrium and peristylum. The pavimentum, or floor is made from concrete and richer houses would have mosaic on the surface.On the right as we continue the posticum (13)is passed. This was a back entrance used by servants, slaves, and people wishing to leave the house unnoticed. The next two rooms that are seen as we pass around the house are the bathroom (14), and the cucina,(15) or kitchen, both of which are situated on the right hand side as they are passed.
The next area noted on the plan is the exhedra/oecus (9). Both names seem to have been common names for this room. This was a large dining room or lounge, and before the intoroduction of the triclinium the family would have eaten their meals here, and the children would have learned how to read and write in here also. This room would have had a mosaic floor and sometimes columns lining the walls also, in which case it was referred to as the oecus corinthium.
As we circle the peristylum we then reach the tablinium (8). This is situated between the atrium and peristylum. It was the main reception area of the house, and it was here that the family would receive guests, it was separated from the atrium by a curtain, and from the peristylum by wooden screens or doors, which on hot days could be opened fully to increase ventilation in the house. This area was also used as a study for the paterfamilias. The family also ate here in the summer, as it was the coolest place in the house due to the air flow between the two ventilation openings. As we exit the tablinium and turn right, we arrive at the next room, the triclinium(7). This was a room specifically set aside for dining in, and the family would have entertained guests in this room. This room was introduced to the house as the Greek practice of reclining whilst eating became commonplace. Continuing around the atrium brings us back to the entrance of the house.
The ceilings of the roman house were painted bright colours and were vaulted. The doors were panelled and carved or plated with bronze. The floors were made from marble slabs , or in richer households mosaic flooring.
The Romans furnished their houses quite simply, with just what was seen to be the essentials: ‘Even wealthy homeowners had mostly essential articles: couches, chairs, tables and lamps. There was an occasional chest, wooden cabinet with doors, brazier for coals, and a water clock (seldom).’
A couch acted as both a sofa and a bed and mattresses and cushions were used. Tables were ornately designed and were made using stone or wooden tops, and on occasion, thin sheets of metal. The main storage device was the chest, which came in varying sizes and materials. They provided the house with heat using charcoal stoves and artificial light was brought into the house by the means of oil or melted fat lams. Torches were also another common method of providing light to the Roman home.



Bibliography:
Sources quoted in this chapter:
- Rome Exposed [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/intdecor.html]
- The Roman House [http://www.roman-empire.net/society/soc-house.html]

Sources consulted whilst researching:
- Kamm, Antony. ‘The Romans: An Introduction’ (London: Routledge 2003)
- Rome Exposed [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/intdecor.html]
- Rome Exposed [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/romehouse.html]
- The Roman House [http://www.roman-empire.net/society/soc-house.html]
- The Roman house(2) [http://abacus.bates.edu/~mimber/Rciv/house.htm]

Chapter five-

Chapter Five:
Roman Entertainment
In this chapter I intend to examine three forms of entertainment which would have been widely available throughout roman times: the Races, the Theatre, and the Amphitheatre.
The Roman Calendar was full of holidays. ‘In the reign of Claudius, 159 days in the year were designated public holidays, on 93 of which shows were offered at public expense.’
Some of these shows were Ludi circenses. They took place in the purpose built circuses ,race tracks, and amphitheatres, the most famous of these being the Circus Maximus.
The main requirement for an ‘arena’ in which to hold a race was a long piece of ground.
‘The name arena is derived from the word harena meaning sand. All arenas where covered by sand, and had seats and barriers surrounding them.’
The seats were made from marble or wood and were raised in order to allow a clear view of the race itself. Located at the front of the seats were a marble platform, podium and boxes where senators, magistrates and the such like would be seated. Between the podium and the track was a large metal screen, which offered some protection against animals crashing into the seating.
The race itself generally consisted of seven laps, and the distance of a lap was determined by the particular venue in which the race was taking place.
A chariot race usually consisted of four horses, of different coloured teams, and there was fierce rivalry between both the teams themselves and the supporters of the teams. The aurigae or participants in the race were generally freedmen or slaves. This was one of the few occasions where low class citizens received very high pay. The participants wore a short tunic and cap in their respective teams colour, and carried a knife on their persons in case of emergency. The races were the oldest and most popular form of public entertainment for the Romans.
Another form of public entertainment which was on offer to the Romans was ludi scaenici or the theatre. The theatre was the least popular of the three main forms of public entertainment, but still drew large crowds. There were four main types of play performed at the theatre, and these were comedies, tragedies, farces, and pantomime. The average play lasted in the region of two hours and were always given in the daytime, as there was no lighting in place to allow performances in the dark.
As few people as possible were involved in the performance of a play. The actors were generally slaves (all male) and would often play more than one part. They were managed by a manager, who was often known to reward his troops after a successful performance.
In order to distinguish between the many characters and few actors playing them several conventions were used to differentiate, including the colour of the actor’s wig: ‘Gray wigs represented old men, Black wigs represented young men Red wigs represented slaves’.
‘The brown or white colour of the tragic and comic masks indicated the sex of the actor, while costumes draped in Greek or Roman fashion gave an immediate clue to the nationality and social status of the dramatis personae: white for an old man, multicoloured for a youth, yellow for a courtesan, purple for the rich, red for the poor, a short tunic for the slave, a chlamys for the soldier, a rolled pallium for the parasite, and a motley for the go-between.’ (ibid. III 4;9.)
The stage was always representative of a street with a temple nearby, and the theatre itself was generally located at the bottom of a hill.
Finally, we move onto the final of the three most popular forms of public entertainment in Roman times, and that is munera gladiatoria , or gladiatorial combat.
This took place in the amphitheatre, and looking back is the most well remembered form of public entertainment in Roman times. Gladiators were generally slaves or condemned criminals who were considered to be expendable by both the state and their owners. As the popularity of the gladiatorials grew throughout Rome, the demand for more gladiators increased dramatically.
‘From the time of Augustus all non citizen criminals were sentenced to combat fighting. Later on in the Empire, those found guilty of treason, arson, or murder were forced to fight with lions. Finally by the end years of the empire there were volunteer gladiators, known as auctorati. The Romans became so desperate that they forced men of petty offences into the arena to fight. The persecution of Christianity was mainly to supply gladiators.’

The rule of gladiatorial combat was that similarly armed men and contestants were not allowed to fight each other. This then meant that a weaker contestant or team would face a better armed, and stronger one. In some cases, the crowd was asked to decide whether a wounded fighter should be killed or released. Waving of handkerchiefs signalled a release while the thumbs down meant death for that individual. Often slaves would enter in order to compete for their freedom. The most famous amphitheater is the Flavian Amphitheatre, or Colosseum in Rome which is described as follows;
‘The Colosseum covers nearly six acres of ground. Its interior and the arena are ellipses. The width of 166 ½ feet all around the arena was allotted to the spectators. Under the floor of the arena were chambers which were used as regiments for the gladiators, for dens of wild beasts, beast elevators. Above all these chambers allowed the arena to be flooded very quickly for mock naval battles. The wall that surrounded the arena was fifteen feet high. It was made of marble and had metal reinforcements. There were rollers hung on this wall to prevent the animals from climbing it.’

Above this was situated the seating. The Colosseum seated approximately 80,000 people who came to watch the various style of fighting displayed which included: man against man, man against animal, heavily armed man against lightly armed man, chariots against animals, and mock naval battles. Weapons and armour varied as to whether you were a Samnite, a Thracian or a net-fighter. ‘A Samnite wore a helmet with a visor, a thick sleeve on his right arm, a greave on his let leg, a belt, a short sword, and carried a long shield.’ A Thracian had a smaller shield and curved sword but was otherwise equipped the same as a samnite, but a net fighter had no protection, and his weapons were a net, dagger, and spear.
A gladiatorial would often begin with fights involving blunt instruments until the crowd became bored and the beginning of the more lethal fights were signalled by trumpeters. Any gladiator refusing to enter the arena would be whipped into obedience, or driven in with the use of red hot irons.

Bibliography:

Sources used in references:

- Kamm, Antony The Romans: An Introduction (London: Routledge 2003)
- Rome Exposed: [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/circusesandraces.html]
- Rome Exposed [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/theatres.html]
- Carcopino, Jerome.’Daily Life in Ancient Rome’ (London: Penguin 1991) pp245-246
- Antony Kamm, The Romans: An Introduction (London: Routledge 2003) p126
- Rome Exposed [ http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/amphiglad.html]

Sources used in research:


- Kamm, Antony The Romans: An Introduction (London: Routledge 2003)
- Rome Exposed: [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/circusesandraces.html]
- Rome Exposed [http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/theatres.html]
- Carcopino, Jerome.’Daily Life in Ancient Rome’ (London: Penguin 1991) pp245-246
- Antony Kamm, The Romans: An Introduction (London: Routledge 2003) p126
- Rome Exposed [ http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/amphiglad.html]
- Society: [http://www.roman-empire.net/society/society.html#holidays]
- RomanArt [http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/as/education/projects/webunits/greecerome/Romeart1.html]

Roman world essay comin up....


How did religion affect the lives of ordinary people?

For the Romans, religion was a very important part of their lives. It influenced everything they did, from whether they left their houses that day or not, to whether or not they went to war.
The beginnings of roman religion can be traced back to their belief in ‘numina’, spirits and powers that surrounded everything and everyone. As the Romans began to conquer and explore, they adopted the religious practices and deities they came across, leading to a vast number of gods and goddesses for every conceivable circumstance and a collation of many different cultures, practices and traditions, all with the common factor of having been adopted into the roman system of religion.

The roman view of religion was quite different to that of our own.
‘To the Romans, religion was less a spiritual experience than a contractual relationship between mankind and the forces which were believed to control people's existence and well-being.’ When engaging with a particular deity, the Romans viewed it much like we would a modern-day business pact, with give and take on both sides, and in giving prayers and sacrifices, the Romans reaped the benefits believed to be offered by that particular deity.
This was a typical expectation by the Romans, even though it sometimes caused problems, as the rituals used in the sacrifices were very specific, for example, in live sacrifices, the practice was to offer female animals to goddesses and male animals to gods, so if the gender of the deity was unknown this sometimes made it difficult to observe the ritual correctly, and doing it wrong meant that one would have to begin all over again. For this reason the prayer often included: 'whether you be god or goddess' and in this way correcting the ritual and pleasing the relevant deity. Not every prayer required a live sacrifice, this was fortunate as there was a prayer for almost every occasion, but prayers generally involved a sacrifice involving a symbol of life, which could be bread, milk, wine, or cheese. The sacrifice also depended upon the kind of ritual being practised, as two clear strands of religion were practised. There was a state religion, dealing mainly with political, military and countrywide festivals, and a private religion, which dealt with religion in the home, fields and family.

The state religion was very grand and demanded ceremony and was carried out by ‘pontifices’, and overseen by the ‘pontifex maximus’. Sacrifices were very elaborate and almost always animal sacrificed. The Romans were so superstitious about everything, that they checked the intestines of any animal which was offered to a state god or goddess (Jupiter, Saturn, Venus, Mars, Minerva, Vesta, Diana, Hercules, Mercury, and Apollo) were checked to ensure that the animal was healthy and fit for sacrifice, and problems, and a new animal would be slaughtered and the ritual begun all over again. Whilst the priests were the perpetrators of the rituals of state religion, everybody attended and took part: parades were help, and people offered their own prayers to the gods.

Household religion was a much less grandiose affair, but just as complex and at least as important to the Romans. Household religion was overseen by the head of the household, or the ‘pater familias’, but he was assisted by the whole family. Each household had its own protecting spirit, or ‘Lars Familiaris’, which in agricultural families was also responsible for the fields. Also found in the household was the ‘genius’ which was representative of the manhood of the household, and was usually represented by a snake. This spirit was associated with the head of the household, and primarily his ability to father children. Each morning, the Roman family would gather at the ‘lararium’, which contained its own ‘lares’ and ‘penates’. Their substance would depend upon the wealth of the household. The lares were symbolic of the families dead ancestors, and the penates supposedly looked after the pantry and its contents. The family would then gather at the hearth, and they would pray and offer sacrifices to the household gods.
There were many, many household gods and goddesses, one of the most important of these was Janus, the god of doorways, who was said to have had two heads, one looking in each direction as he guarded the passageway of the door itself. This was, however, by no means the only god who was involved in a roman doorway, there was also Careda, the goddess of the hinges, Forculus, who was the god of the door leaves, and Limentinus, who was the god of the threshold. Just by knowing this information about the religion surrounding a typical family door, we can see that it is very complex.
Another important goddess was Vesta, goddess of the hearth. Prayers were said to Vesta every day and she was especially important to the women, as it was their job to tend to the hearth, and to ensure that a fire would always be burning in the hearth, just as the eternal flame burned in the temple of Vesta in Rome. As well as daily prayers to Vesta, a sacrificial portion of each meal would be offered to her.

Vesta also had significant importance in state religion, so much so that she had her own priesthood of priestesses. These six young women were known as the vestal virgins, and their duty was to maintain the eternal fire in the temple of Vesta. They were chosen between the ages of six and ten years of age and would serve ten years as novices, learning their duties, and the skills involved, followed by ten years of service in the temple, and finally ten years of teaching the next set of novices their duties. The vestal virgins were held as sacred people by the Romans. If you were to injure one of them, you would be put to death, if you were being put to death, however, and saw them, you were pardoned. The young women themselves were held as sacred, and thus were treated with the utmost respect and regard, but this came at a price. If a vestal virgin broke her vow of chastity she would be beaten and then buried alive, and whipped if she allowed the fire in the temple to go out.

The Romans’ lives revolved around religion and superstition, there were many different offices of priesthood, known as collages. Already mentioned are the pontifices, but there was also the college of Augurs, which had 15 priests who were responsible for interpreting omens of the lives of the powerful. It was their decisions which decided whether or not a person would leave their house that day, or if they would ride into battle. The ‘quindecemviri sacris faciundis’ were 15 priests whose main duty was to look after, interpret and guard the Sibylline Books. They also looked at any new gods which were introduced into roman religion. The college of ‘epulones’ was responsible for overseeing the numerous festivals held as part of Roman religion. Festivals held by the Romans included: the ‘liberalia’ (17th March- the roman calendar began on the 15th March), honouring the god of fertile crops, the ‘fordicia’, held on the 15th April, four days later on the 19th of April, a big festival was held to celebrate Ceres, a goddess associated with agriculture, this included a ritual march round fields to purify them. The biggest festival of all however was Saturnalia held on the 17th of December, which became a time of partying throughout the empire, and there is strong speculation that this is what eventually became the Christian celebration of Christmas.

To summarise, religion for the Romans was an integral part of everyday life for them. They did not have a separate religion to the rest of their lives, like today. For them everything had a spiritual side to it, even as minute a thing as opening a door, and their ‘side of the bargain’ meant that they must observe the practices, rituals and traditions of that particular action or that decision, otherwise running the risk of angering the gods, which would bring down all kinds of bad luck. Religion for the Romans was as much a private affair as it was a public one, and so much of their time was spent following and observing its rules, that it could conceivably be said that religion was the life of the Roman people. It affected everything they did, as a person and as an empire, and as far as they could see, their fate was quite literally ‘in the hands of the gods’.










Bibliography

Information was gathered from the following sources:

http://abacus.bates.edu/~mimber/Rciv/religion.htm
http://www.classicsunveiled.com/romel/html/religion.html
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/romrelig3.html
http://www.realm-of-shade.com/RomanaeAntiquae/religion.html
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/rel-fields.html
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/religion.html
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/superstitions.html
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/rel-home.html
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/sacrifice.html
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/ceres.html
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/saturn.html
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/pics
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/

jesus man/myth portfolio excercise 3


In this exercise we were asked to write up the synoptic exercise from class, however I was not present in class. Because of this, I have therefore instead found some information appertaining to the subject on the Internet, including a method of looking at the synoptic problem, which I will use as my guide for completing this exercise. This can be located at: [http://www.andrews.edu/~jmcvay/puc_classes/relb328/Synoptic.htm]

Having followed the advice given in the web page I observed the following in response to the questions outlined on the website:

 What problems did you encounter in performing the exercise?
One problem I encountered was that of looking at the English translations of each of the gospels as some of the differences could purely have been variation in the translation from the Greek. For example, in the verse which talks about the arrival of the storm , both Matthew and Luke’s gospels have elements of Mark in them, and in the Greek could have quite feasibly said almost exactly the same thing, but the English translator of Luke chose to word this slightly differently to Matthew and Mark
The other main problem I encountered was that or the ordering in the parable. In Matthew, Jesus questions the disciples’ faith before calming the storm, where in the other two Gospels, this is the other way around, but the wordings are very similar.

 Do the parallels you observed require a literary relationship? (That is, does one or more "borrow" from another?) If not, what would explain the similarities you have observed?
I think that the parallels observed definitely required a literary relationship. Matthew and Luke both have more in common with Mark than they do each other, and where they do interact with one another there are places where Mark is not involved in this, perhaps giving rise to another source we don’t have access to?
It is most likely that Matthew and Luke have “borrowed” predominantly from Mark

 Does your comparison of the accounts bring any fresh understanding of the story? Do the unique contributions of a given author stand out? Are the accounts in any way contradictory?
There are places where the unique contributions of an author stand out for example, in Mark: 4.38 it is noted that Jesus was asleep in the stern, and he is the only person to note this, and as such it stands out. The only real point of contention, as previously mentioned is between Matthew’s gospel and the other two, where Jesus questions the disciples before calming the storm. There are other minor points, especially found in the first two verses of all accounts, where each version has a slightly different account of what happened.

 Can you explain any of the "differences"? That is, do any of the variations reflect the interests evident in the wider context of a given Gospel?
In this particular passage there are no real ‘differences’ which could be used to show any of the agendas of the respective authors. The differences can be most likely put down to oral tradition, and the speculated second source Matthew and Luke had access to.

 Assuming there is a literary relationship, what does your examination of this story suggest it to be? Which of these three Gospels camefirst? Second? Third? Why? Or is the relationship a more complex one?
In my opinion I think that Mark was the first of the three Gospels, as both Matthew and Luke seem to be utilising it as a source for their works. It is possible that Matthew also used Luke as a source or vice versa, however, I think that it is much more likely that there was another
source available to both authors, which would account for the other similarities between the texts.
As a result of this exercise I think that the portrayals of Jesus found in the synoptic Gospels are slightly different, as the authors each have their own agendas and motives for writing their particular version, and due to the oral tradition of that time, the story would have several variations to begin with anyway, as well as other sources to consider, for example, ‘Q’. However, I think that they do complement one another as when viewed as a whole in such a way we can see more information than if we were just looking at one Gospel.

jesus man/myth portfolio exercise 2

The gospel I have chosen to carry out this exercise with is the gospel of Mark. Having been asked to read the gospel as one would a novel and then comment upon the main content of the text, the message of the text and the way in which the author has conveyed this in the text, I came up with the following observations.
The gospel begins with a short account of John the Baptist's foretelling of Jesus’ arrival and his purpose once there. It then continues with the story of Jesus’ life from his baptism to his death, resurrection and ascension focussing on three major areas; the miracles he performed (found mainly in chapters 2-8), the teachings of Jesus mainly located in chapters 9-13, although there is crossover between these first two sections), and finally on Jesus’ death, resurrection and ascension in the final chapters of the gospel. Chapters 1-13 of the gospel is seemingly located in the area around Lake Galilee, and the final three chapters are located in the area around Jerusalem.
The message conveyed by the author of Mark is quite similar to the content. The author is documenting the story of Jesus as an adult, communicating his teachings and the authority and victory he seemed to yield, even over death, to the point of his ascension. In my opinion the author of the gospel is bringing both information about Jesus’ activities and life and a sense of hope for their futures to the people who were perhaps previously unfamiliar with the stories of Jesus.
The way in which the author of the gospel of Mark conveys this to his audience is through the use of simple, vivid, shorter stories. These could almost be compared to a collection of ‘news items’ about Jesus, moving between stories quite quickly with each story having quite a dramatic event or message to keep the readers attention, and make them consider the events or teachings which have taken place in relation to their own lives.

Jesus man/myth portfolio exercise 1

Revised commentary.

In the video documentary “Son of God” many questions are raised with regards to the difference between peoples perceived ideas as to Jesus’ identity and the identity of the historical Jesus. Using a team of scientists and specialists in the subject, we were able to see a reconstruction of what the historical Jesus would have been much more likely to look like as a person, and this was quite different to the preconceived ideas of the general public. The general perception of Jesus as a person can be dated back to renaissance, whereupon an image of Jesus as a Caucasian male with a beard, long flowing hair and gentle features was created. In fact the historical Jesus was completely different to this however, in the film following the results of the reconstruction I think that it would have been a lot harder for people to identify with the more historically correct Jesus and also engage with the developments on screen because of this afore mentioned difficulty.
By using a representation of the preconceived Jesus, people are more easily able to identify the character on screen as Jesus and follow the proceedings of the film.
In the film, the “historical Jesus” is wearing clean white clothes throughout, even when performing tasks that would leave anyone else’s clothes dirty and or bloody or torn. In my opinion the purpose of this is again to enable the audience to identify with the character as Jesus is often associated with wholeness and purity, which is often symbolised by the colour white. Personally, I think that often his clothes stay spotlessly clean in order to convey almost subconsciously the idea that Jesus is ‘different’ to the other people in the film.
Overall, I found the documentary interesting to watch and see the differences between the preconceived ideas of who Jesus was and the more historically accurate ideas. I found it quite odd however, that in the second part of the documentary the person chosen to play the character of Jesus was someone who reflected the more general idea of Jesus as a person as opposed to the more historically accurate reflection. In my opinion it would have made more sense to have the second part of the documentary at the beginning as from this there would have been a valid point for both using a preconceived idea of Jesus and as a result of that, opening up a discussion which would give cause to investigate what the “historical Jesus” would have actually looked like.
I was also quite intrigued by the tension that existed between faith and science and how scientific evidence was used to prove things which some people believed by faith, for example, where they investigated the likelihood that Jesus sweated blood as he was crucified, which was consequently proven to be something which could have quite feasibly happened.
This then also created a slightly paradoxical situation for me, as while the conclusions in both faith and science were the same, by using the science to prove what was previously believed by faith, the need for faith was then eliminated as science could prove it, which to me showed that a lot of people feel the need of having a back up to aid them in their ‘belief’, which challenged me personally as to my stance on that particular point of debate.