The Private Life of the Romans Part 2

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 3. PUBLIUS CORNELIUS SCIPIO AFRICa.n.u.s]

--34. Extinction of the Potestas.--The _patria potestas_ was extinguished in various ways:

1. By the death of the _pater familias_, as has been explained in --19.

2. By the emanc.i.p.ation of the son or daughter.

3. By the loss of citizenship by either father or son.

4. If the son became a _flamen dialis_ or the daughter a _virgo vestalis_.

5. If either father or child was adopted by a third party.

6. If the daughter pa.s.sed by formal marriage into the power (_in manum_) of a husband, though this did not essentially change her dependent condition (--35).

7. If the son became a public magistrate. In this case the _potestas_ was suspended during the period of office, but after it expired the father might hold the son accountable for his acts, public and private, while holding the magistracy.

--35. Ma.n.u.s.--The subject of marriage will be considered later; at this point it is only necessary to define the power over the wife possessed by the husband in its most extreme form, called by the Romans _ma.n.u.s_.

By the oldest and most solemn form of marriage the wife was separated entirely from her father's family (--28) and pa.s.sed into her husband's power or "hand" (_conventio in manum_). This a.s.sumes, of course, that he was _sui iuris_; if he was not, then though nominally in his "hand"

she was really subject as he was to his _pater familias_. Any property she had of her own, and to have had any she must have been independent before her marriage, pa.s.sed to him as a matter of course. If she had none, her _pater familias_ furnished a dowry (_dos_), which shared the same fate. Whatever she acquired by her industry or otherwise while the marriage lasted also became her husband's. So far, therefore, as property rights were concerned the _ma.n.u.s_ differed in no respect from the _patria potestas_: the wife was _in loco filiae_, and on the husband's death took a daughter's share in his estate.

--36. In other respects _ma.n.u.s_ conferred more limited powers. The husband was required by law, not merely obliged by custom, to refer alleged misconduct of his wife to the _iudicium domestic.u.m_, and this was composed in part of her cognates (--25). He could put her away for certain grave offenses only; if he divorced her without good cause he was punished with the loss of all his property. He could not sell her at all. In short, public opinion and custom operated even more strongly for her protection than for that of her children. It must be noticed, therefore, that the chief distinction between _ma.n.u.s_ and _patria potestas_ lay in the fact that the former was a legal relationship based upon the consent of the weaker party, while the latter was a natural relationship antecedent to all law and choice.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 4. LUCIUS CORNELIUS SULLA]

--37. Dominica Potestas.--The right of ownership in his property (_dominica potestas_) was absolute in the case of a _pater familias_ and has been sufficiently explained in preceding paragraphs. This ownership included slaves as well as inanimate things, and slaves as well as inanimate things were mere chattels in the eyes of the law.

The influence of custom and public opinion, so far as these tended to mitigating the horrors of their condition, will be discussed later. It will be sufficient to say here that there was nothing to which the slave could appeal from the judgment of his master. It was final and absolute.

CHAPTER II

THE NAME

REFERENCES: Marquardt, 7-27; Voigt, 311, 316 f., 454; Pauly-Wissowa, under _cognomen_; Smith, Harper, and Lubker, under _nomen_.

See also: Egbert, "Latin Inscriptions," Chapter IV; Cagnat, "Cours d'Epigraphie Latine," Chapter I; Hubner, "Romische Epigraphik," pp.

653-680 of Muller's _Handbuch_, Vol. I.

--38. The Triple Name.--Nothing is more familiar to the student of Latin than the fact that the Romans whose works he reads first have each a threefold name, Caius Julius Caesar, Marcus Tullius Cicero, Publius Vergilius Maro. This was the system that prevailed in the best days of the Republic, but it was itself a development, starting with a more simple form in earlier times and ending in utter confusion under the Empire. The earliest legends of Rome show us single names, Romulus, Remus, Faustulus; but side by side with these we find also double names, Numa Pompilius, Ancus Marcius, Tullus Hostilius. It is possible that single names were the earliest fashion, but when we pa.s.s from legends to real history the oldest names that we find are double, the second being always in the genitive case, representing the father or the Head of the House: Marcus Marci, Caecilia Metelli. A little later these genitives were followed by the letter _f_ (for _filius_ or _filia_) or _uxor_, to denote the relationship. Later still, but very anciently nevertheless, we find the freeborn man in possession of the three names with which we are familiar, the _nomen_ to mark the clan (_gens_), the _cognomen_ to mark the family, and the _praenomen_ to mark the individual. The regular order of the three names is _praenomen_, _nomen_, _cognomen_, although in poetry the order is often changed to adapt the name to the meter.

--39. Great formality required even more than the three names. In official doc.u.ments and in the state records it was usual to insert between a man's _nomen_ and _cognomen_ the _praenomina_ of his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, and sometimes even the name of the tribe to which he belonged. So Cicero might write his name: M. Tullius M. f. M. n. M. pr. Cor. Cicero; that is, Marcus Tullius Cicero, son (_filius_) of Marcus, grandson (_nepos_) of Marcus, great-grandson (_p.r.o.nepos_) of Marcus, of the tribe Cornelia. See another example in --427.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 5. MARCUS TULLIUS CICERO]

--40. On the other hand even the triple name was too long for ordinary use. Children, slaves, and intimate friends addressed the citizen, master, and friend by his _praenomen_ only. Ordinary acquaintances used the _cognomen_ with the _praenomen_ prefixed for emphatic address. In earnest appeals we find the _nomen_ also used, with sometimes the _praenomen_ or the possessive _mi_ prefixed. When two only of the three names are thus used in familiar intercourse the order varies. If the _praenomen_ is one of the two, it always stands first, except in the poets for metrical reasons and in a few places in prose where the text is uncertain. If the _praenomen_ is omitted, the arrangement varies: the older writers and Cicero put the _cognomen_ first, _Ahala Servilius_ (Cic. Milo, 3, 8: cf. _C. Servilius Ahala_, Cat. I., 1, 3). Caesar puts the nomen first; Horace, Livy, and Tacitus have both arrangements, while Pliny adheres to Caesar's usage. It will be convenient to consider the three names separately, and to discuss the names of men before considering those of the other members of the _familia_.

--41. The Praenomen.--The number of names used as _praenomina_ seems to us preposterously small as compared with our Christian names, to which they in some measure correspond. It was never much in excess of thirty, and in Sulla's time had dwindled to eighteen. The full list is given by the authorities named above, but the following are all that are often found in our school and college authors: _Aulus_ (_A_), _Decimus_ (_D_), _Gaius_ (_C_), _Gnaeus_ (_CN_), _Kaeso_ (_K_), _Lucius_ (_L_), _Manius_ (_M'_), _Marcus_ (_M_), _Publius_ (_P_), _Quintus_ (_Q_), _Servius_ (_SER_), _s.e.xtus_ (_s.e.x_), _Spurius_ (_SP_), _Tiberius_ (_TI_), and _t.i.tus_ (_T_). The forms of these names were not absolutely fixed, and we find for _Gnaeus_ the forms _Gnaivos_ (early), _Naevos_, _Naeus_, and _Gneus_ (rare); so also for _Servius_ we find _Sergius_, the two forms going back to an ancient _Serguius_. The abbreviations also vary: for _Aulus_ we find regularly _A_, but also _AV_ and _AVL_; for _s.e.xtus_ we find _s.e.xT_ and _S_ as well as _s.e.x_, and similar variations are found in the case of other names.

--42. But small as this list seems to us the natural conservatism of the Romans found in it a chance to display itself, and the great families repeated the names of their children from generation to generation in such a way as to make the identification of the individual very difficult in modern times. Thus the Aemilii contented themselves with seven of these _praenomina_, _Gaius_, _Gnaeus_, _Lucius_, _Manius_, _Marcus_, _Quintus_, and _Tiberius_, but used in addition one that is not found in any other gens, _Mamercus_ (_MAM_).

The Claudii used six, _Gaius_, _Decimus_, _Lucius_, _Publius_, _Tiberius_, and _Quintus_, with the additional name _Appius_ (_APP_), of Sabine origin, which they brought to Rome. The Cornelii used seven, _Aulus_, _Gnaeus_, _Lucius_, _Marcus_, _Publius_, _Servius_, and _Tiberius_. A still smaller number sufficed for the Julian gens, _Gaius_, _Lucius_, and _s.e.xtus_, with the name _Vopiscus_, which went out of use in very early times. And even these selections were subject to further limitations. Thus, of the _gens Claudia_ only one branch (_stirps_), known as the _Claudii Nerones_, used the names _Decimus_ and _Tiberius_, and out of the seven names used in the _gens Cornelia_ the branch of the Scipios (_Cornelii Scipiones_) used only _Gnaeus_, _Lucius_, and _Publius_. Even after a _praenomen_ had found a place in a given family, it might be deliberately discarded: thus, the Claudii gave up the name _Lucius_ and the Manlii the name _Marcus_ on account of the disgrace brought upon their families by men who bore these names; and the Antonii never used the name _Marcus_ after the downfall of the famous triumvir, Marcus Antonius.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 6. CAESAR]

--43. From the list of names usual in his family the father gave one to his son on the ninth day after his birth, the _dies l.u.s.tricus_. It was a custom then, one that seems natural enough in our own times, for the father to give his own _praenomen_ to his firstborn son; Cicero's name (--39) shows the name _Marcus_ four times repeated, and it is probable that he came from a long line of eldest sons. When these names were first given they must have been chosen with due regard to their etymological meanings and have had some relation to the circ.u.mstances attending the birth of the child: Livy in speaking of the mythical Silvius Aeneas gives us to understand that he received his first name because he was born in a forest (_silva_).

--44. So, _Lucius_ meant originally "born by day," _Manius_, "born in the morning"; _Quintus_, _s.e.xtus_, _Decimus_, _Postumus_, etc., indicated the succession in the family; _Tullus_ was connected with the verb _tollere_ in the sense of "acknowledge" (--95), _Servius_ with _servare_, _Gaius_ with _gaudere_. Others are a.s.sociated with the name of some divinity, as _Marcus_ and _Mamercus_ with Mars, and _Tiberius_ with the river G.o.d Tiberis. But these meanings in the course of time were forgotten as completely as we have forgotten the meanings of our Christian names, and even the numerals were employed with no reference to their proper force: Cicero's only brother was called _Quintus_.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 7. AUGUSTUS]

--45. The abbreviation of the _praenomen_ was not a matter of mere caprice, as is the writing of initials with us, but was an established custom, indicating perhaps Roman citizenship. The _praenomen_ was written out in full only when it was used by itself or when it belonged to a person in one of the lower cla.s.ses of society. When Roman names are carried over into English, they should always be written out in full and p.r.o.nounced accordingly. In the same way, when we read a Latin author and find a name abbreviated, the full name should always be p.r.o.nounced if we read aloud or translate.

--46. The Nomen.--This, the all-important name, is called for greater precision the _nomen gentile_ and the _nomen gentilicium_. The child inherited it, as one inherits his surname now, and there was, therefore, no choice or selection about it. The _nomen_ ended originally in _-ius_, and this ending was sacredly preserved by the patrician families: the endings _-eius_, _-aius_, _-aeus_, and _-eus_ are merely variations from it. Other endings point to a non-Latin origin of the gens. Those in _-acus_ (_Avidiacus_) are Gallic, those in _-na_ (_Caecina_) are Etruscan, those in _-enus_ or _-ienus_ (_Salvidienus_) are Umbrian or Picene. Some others are formed from the name of the town from which the family sprang, either with the regular terminations _-a.n.u.s_ and _-ensis_ (_Alba.n.u.s_, _Norba.n.u.s_, _Aquiliensis_), or with the suffix _-ius_ (_Perusius_, _Parmensius_) in imitation of the older and more aristocratic use. Standing entirely apart is the _nomen_ of the notorious _Gaius Verres_, which looks like a _cognomen_ out of place (--55).

--47. The _nomen_ belonged by custom to all connected with the gens, to the plebeian as well as the patrician branches, to men, women, clients, and freedmen without distinction. It was perhaps the natural desire to separate themselves from the more humble bearers of their _nomen_ that led patrician families to use a limited number of _praenomina_, avoiding those used by their clansmen of inferior social standing. At any rate it is noticeable that the plebeian families, as soon as political n.o.bility and the busts in their halls gave them a standing above their fellows, showed the same exclusiveness in the selection of names for their children that the patricians had displayed before them (--42).

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 8. NERO]

--48. The Cognomen.--Besides the individual name and the name that marked his _gens_, the Roman had often a third name, called the _cognomen_, that served to indicate the family or branch of the _gens_ to which he belonged. Almost all the great _gentes_ were thus divided, some of them into numerous branches. The Cornelian gens, for example, included the plebeian Dolabellae, Lentuli, Cethegi, and Cinnae, in addition to the patrician Scipiones, Maluginenses, Rufini, etc. The recognition of a group of clansmen as such a branch, or _stirps_, and as ent.i.tled to transmit a common _cognomen_ required the formal consent of the whole _gens_, and carried with it the loss of certain privileges as _gentiles_ to the members of the _stirps_.

--49. From the fact that in the official name (--39) the _cognomen_ followed the name of the tribe, it is generally believed that the oldest of these _cognomina_ did not go back beyond the time of the division of the people into tribes. It is also generally believed that the _cognomen_ was originally a nickname, bestowed on account of some personal peculiarity or characteristic, sometimes as a compliment, sometimes in derision. So, we find many pointing at physical traits, such as _Albus_, _Barbatus_, _Cincinnatus_, _Claudus_, _Longus_ (all originally adjectives), and the nouns _Naso_ and _Capito_ ("the man with a nose," "with a head"); others refer to the temperament, such as _Benignus_, _Blandus_, _Cato_, _Serenus_, _Severus_; others still denote origin, such as _Gallus_, _Ligus_, _Sabinus_, _Siculus_, _Tuscus_. These names, it must be remembered, descended from father to son, and would naturally lose their appropriateness as they pa.s.sed along, until in the course of time their meanings were entirely lost sight of, as were those of the _praenomina_ (--44).

--50. Under the Republic the patricians had almost without exception this third or family name; we are told of but one man, Caius Marcius, who lacked the distinction. With the plebeians the _cognomen_ was not so common, perhaps its possession was the exception. The great families of the Marii, Mummii, and Sertorii had none, although the plebeian branches of the Cornelian gens (--48), the Tullian gens, and others, did. The _cognomen_ came, therefore, to be prized as an indication of ancient lineage, and individuals whose n.o.bility was new were anxious to acquire it to transmit to their children. Hence many a.s.sumed _cognomina_ of their own selection. Some of these were conceded by public opinion as their due, as in the case of Cnaeus Pompeius, who took _Magnus_ as his _cognomen_. Others were derided by their contemporaries, as we deride the made-to-order coat of arms of some nineteenth century upstart. It is probable, however, that only n.o.bles ventured to a.s.sume _cognomina_ under the Republic, though under the Empire their possession was hardly more than the badge of freedom.

--51. Additional Names.--Besides the three names already described, we find not infrequently, even in Republican times, a fourth or fifth.

These were also called _cognomina_ by a loose extension of the word, until in the fourth century of our era the name _agnomina_ was given them by the grammarians. They may be conveniently considered under four heads:

In the first place, the process that divided the gens into branches might be continued even further. That is, as the _gens_ became numerous enough to throw off a _stirps_, so the _stirps_ in process of time might throw off a branch of itself, for which there is no better name than the vague _familia_. This actually happened very frequently: the _gens Cornelia_, for example, threw off the _stirps_ of the _Scipiones_, and these in turn the family or "house" of the _Nasicae_.

So we find the quadruple name _Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica_, in which the last name was probably given very much in the same way as the third had been given before the division took place.

--52. In the second place, when a man pa.s.sed from one family to another by adoption (--30) he regularly took the three names of his adoptive father and added his own _nomen gentile_ with the suffix _-a.n.u.s_.

Thus, Lucius Aemilius Paulus, the son of Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus (see --53 for the last name), was adopted by Publius Cornelius Scipio, and took as his new name _Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilia.n.u.s_. In the same way, when Caius Octavius Caepias was adopted by Caius Julius Caesar, he became _Gaius Iulius Caesar Octavia.n.u.s_, and is hence variously styled Octavius and Octavia.n.u.s in the histories.

--53. In the third place, an additional name, sometimes called _cognomen ex virtute_, was often given by acclamation to a great statesman or victorious general, and was put after his _cognomen_. A well known example is the name of Publius Cornelius Scipio Africa.n.u.s, the last name having been given him after his defeat of Hannibal. In the same way, his grandson by adoption, the Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilia.n.u.s mentioned above, received the same honorable name after he had destroyed Carthage, and was called _Publius Cornelius Scipio Africa.n.u.s Aemilia.n.u.s_. Such a name is Macedonicus given to Lucius Aemilius Paulus for his defeat of Persens, and the t.i.tle Augustus given by the senate to Octavia.n.u.s. It is not certainly known whether or not these names pa.s.sed by inheritance to the descendants of those who originally earned them, but it is probable that the eldest son only was strictly ent.i.tled to take his father's t.i.tle of honor.

--54. In the fourth place, the fact that a man had inherited a nickname from his ancestors in the form of a _cognomen_ (--49) did not prevent his receiving another from some personal characteristic, especially as the inherited name had often no application, as we have seen, to its later possessor. To some ancient Publius Cornelius was given the nickname _Scipio_ (--49), and in the course of time this was taken by all his descendants without thought of its appropriateness and became a _cognomen_; then to one of these descendants was given another nickname for personal reasons, _Nasica_, and in course of time it lost its individuality and became the name of a whole family (--51); then in precisely the same way a member of this family became prominent enough to need a separate name and was called _Corculum_, his full name being _Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Corculum_. It is evident that there is no reason why the expansion should not have continued indefinitely.

Such names are Publius Cornelius Lentulus Spinther, Quintus Caecilius Metellus Celer, and Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Serapio. It is also evident that we can not always distinguish between a mere nickname, one belonging strictly to this paragraph, and the additional _cognomen_ that marked the family off from the rest of the _stirps_ to which it belonged. It is perfectly possible that the name Spinther mentioned above has as good a right as Nasica to a place in the first division (--51).

--55. Confusion of Names.--A system so elaborate as that we have described was almost sure to be misunderstood or misapplied, and in the later days of the Republic and under the Empire we find all law and order disregarded. The giving of the _praenomen_ to the child seems to have been delayed too long sometimes, and burial inscriptions are numerous which have in place of a first name the word _pupus_ (_PVP_) "child," showing that the little one had died unnamed. One such inscription gives the age of the unnamed child as sixteen years.

Then confusion was caused by the misuse of the _praenomen_. Sometimes two are found in one name, e.g., _Publius Aelius Alienus Archelaus Marcus_. Sometimes words ending like the _nomen_ in _-ius_ were used as _praenomina_: Cicero tells us that one _Numerius Quintius Rufus_ owed his escape from death in a riot to his ambiguous first name. The familiar Gaius must have been a _nomen_ in very ancient times. Like irregularities occur in the use of the _nomen_. Two in a name were not uncommon, one being derived from the family of the mother perhaps; occasionally three or four are used, and fourteen are found in the name of one of the consuls of the year 169 A.D. Then by a change, the converse of that mentioned above, a word might go out of use as a _praenomen_ and become a _nomen_: Cicero's enemy _Lucius Sergius Catilina_ had for his gentile name _Sergius_, which had once been a first name (--41). The _cognomen_ was similarly abused. It ceased to denote the family and came to distinguish members of the same family, as the _praenomina_ originally had done: thus the three sons of Marcus Annaeus Seneca, for example, were called _Marcus Annaeus Novatus_, _Lucius Annaeus Seneca_, and _Lucius Annaeus Mela_. So, too, a word used as a _cognomen_ in one name might be used as a fourth element in another: for example in the names _Lucius Cornelius Sulla_ and _Lucius Cornelius Lentulus Sura_ the third and fourth elements respectively are really the same, being merely shortened forms of _Surula_. Finally it may be remarked that the same name might be arranged differently at different times: in the consular lists we find the same man called _Lucius Lucretius Tricipitinus Flavus_ and _Lucius Lucretius Flavus Tricipitinus_.

--56. There is even greater variation in the names of persons who had pa.s.sed from one family into another by adoption. Some took the additional name (--52) from the _stirps_ instead of from the _gens_, that is, from the _cognomen_ instead of from the _nomen_. A son of Marcus Claudius Marcellus was adopted by a certain Publius Cornelius Lentulus and ought to have been called _Publius Cornelius Lentulus Claudia.n.u.s_; he took instead the name _Publius Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus_, and this name descended to his children. The confusion in this direction is well ill.u.s.trated by the name of the famous Marcus Junius Brutus. A few years before Caesar fell by his hand, Brutus, as we usually call him, was adopted by his mother's brother, Quintus Servilius Caepio, and ought to have been called _Quintus Servilius Caepio Iunia.n.u.s_. For some reason unknown to us he retained his own _cognomen_, and even his close friend Cicero seems scarcely to know what to call him. Sometimes he writes of him as _Quintus Caepio Brutus_, sometimes as _Marcus Brutus_, sometimes simply as _Brutus_.

The great scholar of the first century, Asconius, calls him _Marcus Caepio_. Finally it may be noticed that late in the Empire we find a man struggling under the load of forty names.

--57. Names of Women.--No very satisfactory account of the names of women can be given, because it is impossible to discover any system in the choice and arrangement of those that have come down to us. It may be said in general that the threefold name was unknown in the best days of the Republic, and that _praenomina_ were rare and when used were not abbreviated. We find such _praenomina_ as _Paulla_ and _Vibia_ (the masculine forms of which early disappeared), _Gaia_, _Lucia_, and _Publia_, and it is probable that the daughter took these from her father. More common were the adjectives _Maxuma_ and _Minor_, and the numerals _Secunda_ and _Tertia_, but these unlike the corresponding names of men seem always to have denoted the place of the bearer among a group of sisters. It was more usual for the unmarried woman to be called by her father's _nomen_ in its feminine form, _Tullia_, _Cornelia_, with the addition of her father's _cognomen_ in the genitive case, _Caecilia Metelli_, followed later by the letter _f_ (=_filia_) to mark the relationship. Sometimes she used her mother's _nomen_ after her father's. The married woman, if she pa.s.sed into her husband's hand (_ma.n.u.s_, --35) by the ancient patrician ceremony, originally took his _nomen_, just as an adopted son took the name of the family into which he pa.s.sed, but it can not be shown that the rule was universally or even usually observed. Under the later forms of marriage she retained her maiden name. In the time of the Empire we find the threefold name for women in general use, with the same riotous confusion in selection and arrangement as prevailed in the case of the names of men at the same time.