Produced by Bryan Ness and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This book was
produced from scanned images of public domain material
from the Google Print project.)
ROMAN SEPULCRAL INSCRIPTIONS.
LONDON: PRINTED BY WOODFALL AND KINDER,
ANGEL COURT, SKINNER STREET.
ROMAN SEPULCRAL INSCRIPTIONS:
THEIR RELATION TO
ARCHAEOLOGY, LANGUAGE, AND RELIGION.
+============================+
| DM SIMPLICIAE FLORENTINE |
| ANIME INNOCENTISSIME |
| QVE VIXIT MENSES DECEM |
|FELICIVS SIMPLEX PATER FECIT|
| LEC VI V |
+============================+
FROM A SARCOPHAGUS IN THE YORK MUSEUM.
BY JOHN KENRICK, M.A., F.S.A.
LONDON.
JOHN RUSSELL SMITH, 36, SOHO SQUARE.
YORK:
R. SUNTER, STONEGATE; H. SOTHERAN, CONEY STREET.
M.DCCC.LVIII.
This little work originated in two papers, read before the Yorkshire
Philosophical Society. They were designed to direct the attention of the
members to the monuments preserved in their own Museum, and at the same
time to show how the labours of the antiquary connect themselves with the
history of manners, institutions, and opinions. The subject, I believe,
has not been specially treated of in this country before, and as the
remains of antiquity are now studied with more enlarged views than in a
former age, it may have an interest for a wider circle than that to which
the original papers were addressed.
J. K.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
IMPORTANCE OF SEPULCRAL MONUMENTS AS MATERIALS OF HISTORY 1
GREEK SEPULCRAL INSCRIPTIONS 2
ROMAN INSCRIPTIONS IN BRITAIN, GAUL, SPAIN, AND AFRICA 3
ROMAN SEPULCRES EXTRAMURAL 5
THE USTRINUM 7
ADDRESSES TO TRAVELLERS 8
WARNINGS TO VIOLATORS 9
RIGHT OF INTERMENT 11
PROTESTS AGAINST ALIENATION BY HEIRS 12
APPENDAGES TO SEPULCRES 14
COMMEMORATIVE RITES 15
MENTION OF CAUSES OF DEATH 18
COMPLAINTS OF THE INEFFICACY OF MEDICINE 19
OLD FORMS OF LANGUAGE 20
APPROXIMATION OF LATIN TO ITALIAN 23
RECORD OF TRADES AND PROFESSIONS 24
THEATRICAL PERFORMERS 26
IMPLEMENTS REPRESENTED ON TOMBS 28
AVERAGE LENGTH OF LIFE 30
SIMPLICITY OF ROMAN LAPIDARY STYLE 32
TOPICS OF PRAISE 35
PARENTAL REGRETS 36
FILIAL AFFECTION 38
CONJUGAL AFFECTION 40
LAW OF DIVORCE 45
INSCRIPTIONS ON FAVOURITE ANIMALS 47
RELIGIOUS FAITH AND SENTIMENT 48
TOPICS OF CONSOLATION 50
MORAL REFLEXIONS 51
BELIEF IN IMMORTALITY 52
EPICUREAN SENTIMENTS 54
DOUBTFUL HOPES 55
SUPERSTITION AND SCEPTICISM 56
THE OLD RELIGIONS OBSOLETE 57
WORSHIP OF STRANGE GODS 58
CONTRAST OF PAGAN AND CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS 59
WORKS ON INSCRIPTIONS 60
FORGERIES 61
ROMAN BURIAL CLUBS 65
ROMAN SEPULCRAL INSCRIPTIONS.
The memorials of the dead hold a remarkable place among the materials of
history. The very existence of nations is in many cases attested only by
their sepulcral monuments, which serve to trace the course of their
migrations, and yield us a scanty knowledge of their usages, and of the
state of civilization among them. Where the art of writing has been
unknown, this knowledge must, indeed, be vague and inferential; we may
gather the race from the form of the skull, the rank or occupation from
the contents of the grave; but we learn nothing of the individual
character or social relations of its tenant; he is only one of the
countless multitude who
illacrimabiles
Urguentur ignotique longa
Nocte.
Even among nations who have possessed the art of writing, and used it
profusely for sepulcral purposes, we may be disappointed in the hope of
gaining any idea of individual character from inscriptions on the dead.
From the hieroglyphics with which the Egyptian mummies and funeral tablets
are covered we seldom learn more than the state and function of the
deceased. The Greek inscriptions are more communicative, but their [Greek:
epigrammata epitymbia], of which so large a number are preserved in the
Anthology, are rather poetical exercises than the expression of genuine,
personal sentiment; and those which have come down to us in brass or
marble are brief and meagre.
Roman sepulcral monuments of the republican times are rare; but those of
the family of Scipio,[1] the earliest with which we are acquainted,
exhibit a character entirely different from the Greek. They at once
display the genius of the people, and give a picture of strong
individuality. The following Saturnian verses are inscribed on the tomb of
Publius Scipio, the son of the great Africanus.
Quei apicem, insigne Dialis Flaminis, gesistei
Mors perfecit tua ut tibi essent omnia brevia,
Honos, fama virtusque, gloria atque ingenium.
Quibus sei in longa licuisset tibi utier vita
Facile facteis superasses gloriam majorum.
Quare lubens te in gremium, Scipio, recipit
Terra, Publi, prognatum Publio, Corneli.
In the imperial times sepulcral inscriptions became very numerous,
especially as cremation fell into disuse, and the sarcophagus took the
place of the urn, which rarely exhibits any designation of the person
whose ashes it contains. They have furnished the philologer, the
archaeologist, and the historian, with a multitude of materials for their
respective branches of study. The site of Eburacum has supplied a
considerable number of them, some of which have perished or been
removed,[2] while others are contained in the Museum of the Yorkshire
Philosophical Society. With the exception of one, they are formal and
jejune; yet the fact that the Society possesses so many may lead its
members to take an interest in an attempt to illustrate the whole subject
from the more ample treasures of other collections.
What has been said of the general brevity and dryness of our own
inscriptions is true of those found in England generally. There are very
few in the collections of Horsley and his successors, which are
distinguished either by their execution or their style. For the most part
they are a simple record of the age and status of the deceased, a large
proportion being the tombs of military men. The number and character of
sepulcral monuments are an index of the population and wealth of a
district or country; their language, of the prevalence of the Roman
dominion. Rome, of course, has furnished the largest number. The north of
Italy, when it ceased to be Gallic, became entirely Roman; and its chief
cities, Verona, Milan, Brescia, Padua, have proved more productive of
Latin inscriptions than the south, where the Greek language was
extensively used. The southern parts of Gaul early became a Roman
province; and its cities are full of Roman antiquities, among which
inscriptions bear a conspicuous part. Several classics of the Silver
age--Seneca, Martial, Quinctilian, Silius Italicus--were born in the
southern cities of Spain, and the Spanish inscriptions, though less
important than might have been expected from this circumstance, bear
testimony to the wide diffusion of the Latin language in that country.
Northern Africa was occupied by the Romans, with a temporary interruption
during the conquest of the Vandals, for eight centuries. Though the
country people retained the old Punic language,[3] the Latin must have
been in general use in the cities, for African bishops and writers were
the founders of Latin eloquence in the Christian Church. Since the French
possession of Algeria the ancient sites of Roman colonies have been
explored, and already a copious harvest of Latin inscriptions has been the
result. But Britain was remote and poor, late occupied by the Romans and
early abandoned. Even during its occupation they were rather garrisoned in
the towns, which they built and fortified, than mingled with the conquered
people. We need not wonder, therefore, that our inscriptions are chiefly
military, or that when the Romans withdrew they left few traces of their
occupancy in the language of Britain.
It was the all but universal practice in the ancient world to inter the
bodies or ashes of the dead beyond the limits of the cities. Even in
Egypt, where the practice of embalmment might have rendered it safe to
retain them in the vicinity of the living, the cemeteries of the great
cities were placed on the opposite side of the Nile. Lycurgus, indeed, is
said to have ordered interments to be made within the limits of Sparta,
with the view of producing familiarity with the aspect of death. The
Athenians, on the contrary, devoted the most beautiful suburb of their
city, the Ceramicus without the walls, to the interment of their dead, and
the space beyond the walls of the Piraeus appears to have been occupied
with tombs.[4] If the Romans ever buried within their houses, it must
have been at a time when their territory did not extend beyond the walls
of the city, for the prohibition of the Twelve Tables is precise; HOMINEM
MORTUUM IN URBE NE SEPELITO, NEVE URITO. The principal roads at Rome seem
to have been lined with sepulcres for a considerable distance, especially
the Appian, the "Regina Viarum," as it is termed by Statius.[5] Atticus
was buried at the fifth milestone from the city on this road, Gallienus at
the ninth.[6] No urn or sarcophagus has been found within the walls of
Roman York, but the traces of interment begin immediately beyond the
gates. On the southern side, which was not included in the fortifications
of Eburacum, the ground near the river was occupied by suburban villas,
whose site is indicated by the elaborate pavements which have been dug up;
but at the Mount, half a mile from the river one of the principal
cemeteries of the city began, extending along the road which led to
Calcaria. Sepulcral remains have also been found near the other outlets
from the city. While we acknowledge that in thus banishing the remains of
the dead from the precincts of the living the ancients showed more wisdom
than modern nations, we cannot but wonder that they should have allowed
the disagreeable process of _burning_ the dead to be carried on so near
their habitations. The site of the _ustrinum_ at York has not been
clearly ascertained; if at Clifton, where many urns have been found, it
was at a moderate distance from the gate; but at Pompeii it was only about
a furlong from the gate on the principal road, and at Aldborough close to
the wall.[7] The Romans had, even in their smaller municipia, Boards of
Health--such, at least, I take to be the meaning of _Novemvir_ and
_Triumvir Valetudinarius_;[8] and it may seem extraordinary that they did
not remove the ustrinum to a greater distance. Its effect could scarcely
be neutralized, even by the profusion of odoriferous gums and oils which
were employed at funerals.[9] Augustus forbade the burning of bodies
within fifteen stadia of the city. The only one whose site has been
ascertained in the neighbourhood of Rome is near the fifth milestone on
the Appian Way.[10] The ustrinum at Litlington,[11] the only one of its
kind, I believe, whose site has been ascertained in England, was a
rectangular space enclosed by walls, and not in the vicinity of any large
town. Both here and at Aldborough the ustrinum was also a cemetery. The
cemetery of Roman London was in Spital-fields. (Arch. 36, 206.)
The position of the Roman sepulcres along the great thoroughfares explains
the frequent apostrophe from the tenant of the tomb to the traveller:
SISTE VIATOR; TU QUI VIA FLAMINIA TRANSIS RESTA AC RELEGE; VIATORES
SALVETE ET VALETE; forms which have sometimes been copied, not very
appropriately, in churchyards and cemeteries. The traveller is frequently
addressed with some moral reflexion; VIXI UT VIVIS, MORIERIS UT SUM
MORTUUS; occasionally of rather an Epicurean character, as that of Prima
Pompeia; FORTUNA SPONDET MULTA MULTIS, PRAESTAT NEMINI, VIVE IN DIES ET
HORAS, NAM PROPRIUM EST NIHIL[12]. The tenant of the tomb sometimes
invites the passer-by to offer for him the customary prayer, SIT TIBI
TERRA LEVIS (S.T.T.L.).
Praevenere diem vitae crudelia fata
Et raptam inferna me posuere rate.
Hoc lecto elogio juvenis miserere jacentis,
Et dic discedens, Sit tibi terra levis[13].
The traveller is called upon from the interior of the tomb to halt and
refresh himself, and give a portion to the deceased in the form of a
funeral libation; MISCE, BIBE, DA MIHI. Being placed beside public roads,
monuments were liable to pollutions of various kinds, which the Manes
deprecate, sometimes threatening vengeance on the offenders. One of the
most frequent of these violators was the writer on the wall, to whom the
side of a sepulcral monument offered a tempting field for the exercise of
his vocation. SCRIPTOR PARCE HOC OPUS is not the address of an author to
his critic, but of a husband to the wall-scribbler, entreating him not to
disfigure the monument of his wife.[14] As a frequent purpose of these
placards was to recommend candidates for office, success is promised, on
condition that the monument should not be written upon. ITA CANDIDATUS
FIAT HONORATUS TUUS, ET TU FELIX SCRIPTOR, SI HIC NON SCRIPSERIS.
INSCRIPTOR ROGO TE UT TRANSEAS HOC MONUMENTUM. QOIUS CANDIDATI NOMEN
INSCRIPTUM FUERIT, REPULSAM FERAT, NEQUE HONOREM ULLUM GERAT.[15]
In an early state of society there would be little danger that the site on
which interments had taken place should be converted to ordinary purposes.
The violation of a sepulcre was severely punished by the Roman law, and is
deprecated on grounds of humanity in some inscriptions, threatened with
divine vengeance in others. Fabius Augurinus offers this wish for him who
should spare the tomb of his wife and child;[16] SIC NUNQUAM DOLEAS ATQUE
TRISTE SUSPIRES QUANTUM DOLORIS TITULUS ISTE TESTATUR. Another pleads,[17]
Sacratam cunctis sedem ne laede viator.
Hanc tibi nascenti fata dedere domum.
Another[18] utters the awful imprecation, QUISQUIS HOC SUSTULERIT AUT
LAESERIT, ULTIMUS SUORUM MORIATUR. The act of dedication is often recorded
on the tomb with the addition "Sub ascia," and the figure of an adze or
hatchet[19]. But Roman burial places had no legal sanctity, like that
which our churchyards enjoy; they were taken from out the fields and
gardens which bordered the highway, and the temptation was great on the
part of the heir to re-annex the ground to his property. The inscriptions
on Roman sepulcres indicate the care which those who caused them to be
erected took, to prevent their being either alienated to other purposes,
or taken possession of by others than those for whom they were designed.
The area which the tomb and its appurtenances should occupy, is carefully
defined; HIC LOCUS PATET IN FRONTEM PEDES XX.; IN AGRUM PEDES XXV.;
occasionally we meet with much larger dimensions. If the ground had been
granted by another for this purpose, the words of the grant were sometimes
inscribed on the monument. The right of using the sepulcre for placing
sarcophagi, or urns, is defined commonly by the words, SIBI SUISQUE FECIT;
frequently permission is given for the interment of freedmen and
freedwomen with their master. Sometimes leave is given to introduce into
the columbarium a limited number of _ollae_, or funeral urns,[20] or, on
the other hand, an individual is prohibited by name from sharing or even
approaching the sepulcre; EXCEPTO HERMETE LIBERTO QUEM VOLO PROPTER
DELICTA SUA ADITUM, AMBITUM NEC ULLUM ACCESSUM HABEAT IN HOC MONUMENTO. In
another inscription, SECUNDINA LIBERTA, IMPIA IN PATRONUM SUUM, is
forbidden to be interred in his tomb.[21] The churlish declaration, IN HOC
MONUMENTO SOCIUM HABEO NULLUM is a rare exception, and in general the
sepulcral inscriptions give a pleasing idea of the relation between
masters and their households. The collection of Gruter contains many pages
of inscriptions expressive of the reciprocal feelings of masters and
patrons, slaves and freedmen; and an equally copious and pleasing record
of the feelings of slaves and freedmen towards their fellows.
The heir was the object of especial jealousy; HOC MONUMENTUM HAEREDEM NON
SEQUITUR (H.M.H.N.S.) is a regular formula; the contrary stipulation, that
the monument should go to the heir is most uncommon.[22] The prohibition
to alienate is expressed with all the fulness of legal phraseology; HOC
MONUMENTUM, CUM AEDIFICIO SUPERPOSITO NEQUE MUTABITUR, NEQUE VAENIET, NEQUE
DONABITUR, NEQUE PIGNORI OBLIGABITUR, NEQUE ULLO MODO ABALIENABITUR, NE DE
NOMINE EXEAT FAMILIAE SUAE,[23] and is sometimes enforced by a fine to the
municipality, to the Roman people or the vestal virgins and the
Pontifices, to secure the exaction of which one-fourth is to go to the
informer. Legal chicanery was greatly dreaded as the means of defeating
the purpose of the builder of the monument: hence we often find the
protestation, HUIC MONUMENTO DOLUS MALUS ABESTO; sometimes with the
addition ET JURISCONSULTUS, a combination which, in countries where the
civil law is practised, is a standing jest against the jurisconsults.[24]
To preclude one source of cavil we find a man protesting on his tomb, in
an inscription by which he directs a statue to be erected to him, that
when he made his will, he had "a sound and disposing mind;" SANUS, SANA
QUOQUE MENTE INTEGROQUE CONSILIO, MEMOR CONDITIONIS HUMANAE, TESTAMENTUM
FECI.[25] It is recorded on the pyramid of C. Cestius that the monument
had been erected in 330 days, "arbitratu Pontii Cl. Melae heredis et Pothi
liberti," the heir not having been trusted alone with the execution. So in
Horace (Sat. 2, 5, 105),
----Sepulcrum
Permissum arbitrio sine sordibus extrue.
In one inscription, it is made the condition of inheritance, that the
monument should be begun in three days after the testator's death, and its
model is prescribed. A son apologizes to his father for having erected a
humble monument to him on the ground of the smallness of the inheritance;
"Si major auctoritas patrimoni mei fuisset, ampliori titulo te prosecutus
fuissem, piissime pater."[26] With this distrust of posterity, it was
natural that men should erect their monuments in their own lifetime,
leaving to their heirs only the duty of inserting the years of their age;
for the year of the decease, which the Romans marked by the Consuls, is
rarely given. SIBI VIVUS FECIT (sometimes _se vivo, se vivis_ even _me
vivus, se vivus_) is often found, as on the sarcophagus of M. Diogenes
Verecundus, formerly in York. Mindus Zosimus Senior tells us plainly on
his tomb his reason for not leaving the choice to his heir; he was afraid
of his discharging the duty in a shabby way.
Vivus mi feci, ne post me lentius heres
Conderet exiguo busta suprema rogo.[27]
A body once placed in a tomb could not be transferred to another without
the permission of the pontiffs, nor could the tomb even be repaired, if
the reparation involved the moving of the remains, without the sanction of
the authorities. We find on the tomb of a freedman a copy of the petition
which he had presented to be allowed to remove the bodies of his wife and
son, which he had temporarily placed in an _obruendarium_, or sarcophagus
of clay, to a monument of marble, "ut quando ego esse desiero, pariter cum
iis ponar."[28]
Besides the monument itself, various appendages to it are mentioned in the
Roman sepulcral inscriptions. The area was occupied by buildings designed
to be used in the annual commemorations of the deceased for which his will
provided. We read of a _diaeta_, or summer-house; a _solarium_, or open
balcony; an _accumbitorium_, or entertaining room; an _apparitorium_, in
which the tables and benches used by the guests were kept. The ground
annexed to the monument frequently contained a well, a cistern or a
_piscina_, whence water for the funeral rites might be drawn, and a grove,
whence wood might be cut for a sacrifice. If situated in a garden, the
monument was called _cepotaphium_. A building was erected, sometimes a
permanent _aedificium_, sometimes a simple _nubilare_ or shed, to receive
the person who guarded the tomb (locus habitationis tutelae causa), and
this office was generally entrusted to a freedman, who was called
_aedituus_[29]. The inscriptions often record the sum which the deceased
has bequeathed for an annual celebration at his tomb, commonly on his
birthday. This was variously performed; sometimes by libations of wine and
milk (profusiones), or by the scattering of roses on the tomb (rosalia),
accompanied by a feast. L. OGIUS PATROCLUS, HORTOS CUM AEDIFICIO HUIC
SEPULCRO JUNCTO VIVUS DONAVIT, UT EX REDITU EORUM LARGIUS ROSAE ET ESCAE
PATRONO SUO ET QUANDOQUE SIBI PONERENTUR.[30] We find a testator directing
that an annual feast, for which he leaves 125 denarii, should be held by
the pagani, or rural inhabitants of the district, on his birthday, or, if
this condition were neglected, that the building and the legacy should go
to the College of Physicians, and to his freedmen, that they might feast
on that day. QUOD SI FACTUM NON ERIT, TUM HIC LOCUS, UT SUPRA SCRIPTUM EST
CUM ANNUIS CXXV. (denariis) IN PERPETUUM AD COLLEGIUM MEDICORUM ET AD
LIBERTOS MEOS PERTINEAT, UT DIE NATALE MEO EPULENTUR.[31] We must not
attach ideas of too great dignity to the "College of Physicians." Every
legal incorporation among the Romans was a college, and the medical body
included practitioners of every grade, even to the veterinary surgeon and
the midwife.[32]
Another tribute of honour for which we find testators making provision is
the lighting a lamp in the monument, or feeding it with oil. All who have
explored the remains of Roman antiquities are aware how frequently lamps
are found in connection with sepulcral monuments. The following
inscription invites passers-by to perform this service:[33]--
Quisquis huic tumulo posuit ardente lucernam
Illius cineres aurea terra tegat.
In order that these rites might be duly performed, the monument carefully
secures the right "_puteum adeundi, hauriendi, coronandi, sacrificandi,
ligna sumendi, mortuos mortuasve inferendi_;" as well as of "_itus, actus,
aditus, introitus, ambitus_." Law delighted then, as now, in exhaustive
enumerations. To secure the perpetual celebration of these funeral honours
was one object for which the alienation of the ground was so strictly
forbidden. Titus AElius, a freedman of Augustus, leaves the monument which
he and his wife had erected, to his freedmen, freedwomen, and their
descendants, ITA UT NE DE NOMINE SUO AUT FAMILIA EXEAT; UT POSSIT MEMORIAE
SUAE QUAM DIUTISSIME SACRIFICARI.[34] To these annual commemorative
offerings allusion is made in a poetical inscription by a husband to his
wife, snatched away in youth.[35]
Lac tibi sit Cybeles, sint et rosa grata Diones,
Et flores grati Nymphis et lilia serta.
Sintque precor, meritae qui nostra parent tibi dona
Annua, et hic manes placida tibi nocte quiescant,
Et super in nido Marathonia cantet aedon.
It is not common to find in Roman sepulcral inscriptions specific mention
of the cause of death. A father thus records his son's early death by the
falling in of a well:[36]--
Parva sub hoc titulo Festi sunt ossa Papiri
Quae moerens fato condidit ipse pater.
Qui si vixisset domini jam nomina ferret.
Hunc casus putei detulit ad cineres.[37]
The following inscription records the death of a male and female slave,
crushed by a crowd in the Capitol, who had, perhaps, come together to see
British captives led in chains, in a triumphal procession:[38]--
Ummidiae Manes tumulus tegit iste simulque
Primigeni vernae, quos tulit una dies.
Nam Capitolinae compressi examine turbae
Supremum fati competiere diem.
AElius Proculinus, on the tomb of his wife, bestows an imprecation on those
who had shortened her life by magic incantations. CARMINIBUS DEFIXA JACUIT
PER TEMPORA MUTA, UT EJUS SPIRITUS, VI EXTORQUERETUR QUAM NATURAE
REDDERETUR. CUJUS ADMISSI VEL MANES VEL DI COELESTES ERUNT SCELERIS
VINDICES.[39]
The wounded affections had their victims. P. L. Modestus raises a monument
to Telesinia Crispinilla, CONJUGI SANCTISSIMAE, QUAE OB DESIDERIUM FILI SUI
PIISSIMI VIVERE ABOMINAVIT ET POST DIES XV FATI EJUS ANIMO DESPONDIT.[40]
Of a similar excess of maternal grief, causing the death of his wife,
Cerialius Calistio gently complains; DUM NIMIS PIA FUIT FACTA EST
IMPIA.[41] Communis and Casia inscribe a monument to the memory of a
daughter who died at the age of fifteen, and of a son, QUI POST DESIDERIUM
SORORIS SUAE UNA DIE SUPERVIXIT.[42] The following distich records the
death of Antonia Maura from her attendance on her sick husband:--
Itala me rapuit crudeli funere tellus,
Dum foveo nimia sedulitate virum.
The complaint that "physicians were in vain" is of ancient date.[43]
Ussere ardentes intus mea viscera morbi,
Vincere quos medicae non potuere manus.
Pliny has not preserved the name of the unhappy man whose monument
declared TURBA MEDICORUM SE PERIISSE,[44] that he had died of a multitude
of doctors. Nor do the surgeons escape reproach for their want of skill.
MEDICI MALE MEMBRA SECARUNT; CORPORI QUOD SUPER EST TUMULUM TIBI FECI
appears to be the address of a master to his gladiator, who, though
mangled, had gained the victory, but lost his life from unskilful
treatment of his wounds.[45]
* * * * *
Inscriptions are curious to the scholar, as a record of the changes which
the Latin language underwent in successive ages. Manuscripts imperfectly
answer this purpose, because transcribers were very apt, either from habit
or a desire to render their labours more saleable, to change old forms for
new, especially in orthography. Sepulcral inscriptions, being commonly the
work of private individuals, represent more exactly the language of common
life than public monuments. They serve the same purpose to the philologer,
as provincial dialects, in which the old language of a country is often
preserved, when obliterated in correct and fashionable speech. From the
inscriptions in the tomb of the Scipios in the beginning of the third
century, B.C., down to the establishment of Christianity, after which a
cessation of Pagan formulae gradually takes place, we have a succession of
about six centuries. I will mention a few instances, collected from
funeral inscriptions, which either throw light on the history of the Latin
language, or illustrate that vulgar idiom and pronunciation, which has
influenced the formation of the modern Italian.
The analogy of the Greek, and the form _paterfamilias_, would lead to the
conclusion that the genitive of the first declension had been originally
formed in _s_, next deprived of its final letter and becoming _ai_, and
finally contracted into _ae_.[46] I have not observed in the sepulcral
inscriptions any genitives of common nouns of this declension formed in
_s_, but we find Faustines, Bellones, Midaes, as genitives of proper
names, which, according to grammatical rule, would be formed in _ae_. The
dative feminine in _abus_ is allowed by grammarians in cases where
ambiguity of sex would arise from the use of _is_, as in deabus, filiabus,
libertabus; but we find it used in inscriptions where no such ambiguity
exists, as in nymphabus, fatabus, and even horabus. What is more
remarkable is the extension of this formation of the dative to the second
declension, in such words as diibus and amicibus. Some departures from
ordinary usage may, no doubt, be accounted for by the circumstance that in
Italy, as in England, the Muse of the cemetery was an "unlettered Muse."
"Hic ja_cit_"[47] in a Latin inscription no more proves that there was no
distinction between the neuter and the active verb, than "here lays" in an
English churchyard. Nor can we argue from such constructions as "cum
_quam_ bene vixi," "ab aed_em_," that _cum_ and _ab_ governed the
accusative; or from such a concord as _hunc_ collegium, that nouns in _um_
were once masculine. But in many instances what seem at first only vulgar
solecisms will be found to have a warrant in analogy. _Dua_ as a neuter
for duo[48] is called a barbarism by Quinctilian (1, 5, 15); yet he
acknowledges that every one said _duapondo_, and that Messala maintained
it to be correct. Evento for eventui, spirito for spiritui, show that the
double mode of declension was not confined to domus. Solo for soli has the
authority of Cato, who used soli for solius, and of Terence, who used solae
for the same case.[49] "Fatus suus" on a monument might seem a blunder,
but malus fatus occurs in Petronius Arbiter (p. 270). We find in an
inscription[50]
Diva, precor, Tellus alvo complectere sancta
Ossua quorum in hoc nomina sunt lapide.
and ossuarium, the vase which received the burnt bones, shows that _ossua_
was a legitimate form. The use of _carere_ with an accusative[51] ("Filios
duos caruit:" "Dulcem carui lucem, cum te amisi ego conjunx") has a
parallel in Plautus. The usual construction of _compos_ is with a
genitive, but it is not a solecism, when L. Statius Diodorus inscribes a
tablet to God, "Quod se precibus compotem fecisset;" for Livy (3, 35)
uses it with an ablative. The use of susum for sursum explains the Latin
_sus_ (in susque deque) and the Italian _su_. Meses for menses, senu for
sinu, laguna for lacuna, longitia (lunghezza) for longitudo, _so_ for sum,
all occurring in sepulcral inscriptions, show the inclination of the Latin
language towards the Italian.
The Italian prefixes an _i_ to a word which begins with _s_ and a
consonant, when it follows one ending with a consonant, as iscambio,
iscoglio, ispirito; and we find in inscriptions iscribit, ispiritus.[52]
"Poor letter H" was treated with the same barbarous caprice of old as now,
being omitted where it should stand, and interpolated where it should not.
Thus we meet with ora, ortulus, omo, ospitium, onestus; and on the other
hand, haediculus, helephantus, horiundus, hordini, Hosiris, and post
hobitum. Those who omit the aspirate, however, are always more numerous
than those who insert it; in Italy they ultimately gained the ascendancy,
and it is banished in pronunciation from modern Italian, which follows in
this respect the usage of the old Romans, who said aedos and ircos.[53] The
frequent substitution of _b_ for _v_ on later monuments, bibi for vivi,
bixit for vixit, lebo for levo, habe for ave, was caused by _b_ being
pronounced both in Greek and Latin with a slight aspiration,[54] whence
we find Greek writers representing Varro by [Greek: Barrhon], and Flavius
by [Greek: Phlabios].
* * * * *
The record of the trades and professions of the deceased, which the Roman
sepulcral inscriptions contain, often afford a curious insight into the
differences of manners and customs between the ancient and the modern
world. They supply the deficiencies of the notices in books, or explain
obscure and solitary passages in the classics. One difference is obvious.
There was no false shame in acknowledging the humble station which the
deceased had filled in life. The dealer in pigs is recorded as a
"negotiator suarius;" the female greengrocer as a "negotiatrix frumentaria
et leguminaria," who kept a stall beside one of the flights of steps
descending to the Tiber.[55] It would not be mentioned now on the tomb of
a medical practitioner, that he had begun by practising his art in many
market-places "fora multa secutus."[56] Perhaps the most remarkable
instance of the difference between ancient and modern ideas in this
respect is furnished by the tomb of AEmilia Irene, whose husband calls
himself "stupidus gregis urbani," the clown of the city company of
mountebanks.[57] The profession still finds candidates, but their vocation
would hardly be recorded on their funeral monuments. The difference of
feeling in ancient times may, perhaps, be accounted for from the
circumstance, that these mountebanks exhibited at festivals in honour of
the gods, and so acquired a certain respectability. The Christian writer,
Arnobius, reproaches the Pagans with this practice. "Mimis dei delectantur
stupidorum capitibus rasis, factis et dictis turpibus, fascinorum
ingentium rubore."[58] L. Cornelius Januarius is recorded on his monument
to have been the _fanaticus_ of the temples of Isis, Serapis, and Bellona,
that is, one of those who were hired by the priests to stimulate the zeal
of votaries by wild and frantic gestures, supposed to indicate the
inspiration of the divinity.[59] The Grex Romanus inscribe a monument to
the actor of pantomimes, Pylades, who first brought the Ion and Troades of
Euripides on the Roman stage, and for his admirable acting had received
the compliment of decurional ornaments from the most considerable cities
of Italy.[60] The sepulcral inscriptions bear testimony to the minute
subdivisions of the arts of public amusement. We owe to one of them the
knowledge, that when Greek mimes (farces) were performed to the populace
at Rome, a _viva voce_ explanation in the Latin language answered the
purpose of a translated libretto.[61] Ursus Togatus glorifies himself in
his inscription, as the first who had exhibited feats of graceful
dexterity with a ball of glass, for the amusement of those who frequented
the baths of Trajan, Agrippa, Titus, and Nero.[62] The ancient
sleight-of-hand men appear to have at least rivalled the Indian jugglers.
One of them has even been thought worthy of commemoration by the Byzantine
historian, Nicephorus Gregoras.[63] He could throw up a glass-ball into
the air and catch it as it fell on the point of his finger-nail, the end
of his elbow, and other parts of his body. Another inscription boasts that
the subject of it could transfix an arrow in its flight with another
arrow. Instances are recorded of early proficiency in theatrical arts.
Eucharis, who died at the age of fourteen, declares herself on her tomb to
have been
Docta, erodita paene Musarum manu;
Quae modo nobilium ludos decoravi choro
Et Graeca in scena prima populo apparui.
A still more remarkable instance of precocity is that of L. Valerius, who
in his thirteenth year was crowned in the Capitol in a contest of Latin
poetry.[64] The theatrical inscriptions, which generally relate to Greeks,
are of a boastful character, foreign to the genius of the Romans. The
death of Vitalis, an actor and mimic, must have been a public calamity,
"eclipsing the gaiety of nations," if we believe his epitaph.
Me viso rabidi subito cecidere furores;
Ridebat summus me veniente dolor.
Non licuit quenquam mordacibus urere curis,
Nec rerum incerta mobilitate trahi.
Vincebat cunctos praesentia nostra timores,
Et mecum felix quaelibet hora fuit.
Fingebam vultus, habitus ac verba loquentum
Ut plures uno crederes ore loqui.
Ipse etiam, quem nostra oculis geminabat imago,
Horruit in vultu se magis esse meo.
_i. e._ the person imitated was startled to find the imitation look more
like him than himself![65] One instance, however, of a different kind we
may quote, which for its expressive simplicity might be placed on the
monument of a Macready. INGENUUM COMOEDUM, PROPTER SINGULAREM ARTIS
PRUDENTIAM ET MORUM PROBITATEM. The latter quality appears to have been
rare among theatrical performers, and we can forgive the fierce zeal of
the Christian Fathers against the stage, when we read on the tomb of a
girl who was training for pantomime,--
Cujus in octava lascivia surgere messe
Coeperat, et dulces fingere nequitias.[66]
Before leaving what may be called the external peculiarities of Roman
sepulcral inscriptions, we may notice the custom of placing on the tomb
representations of the implements employed by the deceased in his
occupation. The tomb of a baker, discovered a few years since near the
Porta Maggiore at Rome, was constructed in the form of an oven, and
sculptured on it were the loaves, the kneading trough, and the mill worked
by an ass.[67] From the tomb of Cossutius, a carpenter, we learn the form
of the square, plumb-line, compasses, callipers, and chisel, the last
being exactly in the form of the _celt_, about which antiquaries have
learnedly written. The ornatrix, or tirewoman, announces her vocation in
life by a mirror, with a phial of perfume; the tabellarius, or postman, by
a theca graphiaria, or pen-and-ink case; the mensor aedificiorum, by a
decempeda, or ten-foot rule; the cultrarius, or cutler, by knives. The
occurrence of these emblems on Christian tombs is said to have given rise
to the reputation of unauthorized martyrdoms, the cutler being supposed to
have been flayed alive, the wool-carder to have been torn to pieces with
iron combs, the blacksmith to have been tortured with the forceps, the
carpenter to have been sawn in two.[68] This custom continued in the
middle ages. A tombstone in the museum of the Yorkshire Philosophical
Society has a bell and a melting-pot engraved upon it, indicating that it
covered the tomb of a bell-founder, and similar emblems have been found in
Bakewell Church and elsewhere.[69] At the present day military and naval
monuments alone display professional emblems.
It does not appear possible from the inscriptions on tomb-stones to deduce
any inference respecting the average length of human life in the centuries
which they embrace. They usually record with exactness the age of the
deceased; often with the mention of the months, days, and hours; but they
are only fragments of the record of mortality as it originally existed,
and that record was itself very imperfect. Vast numbers were, of course,
burnt or buried, to whom no monument was raised. There were pits without
the Esquiline Gate, in which the common people were buried promiscuously.
According to the statement of Ulpian, who wrote in the reign of Alexander
Severus, registers of population, age, sex, disease and death had been
kept with exactness by the censors for ten centuries, and from
observations grounded on these, according to Dr. Bissett Hawkins's Medical
Statistics,[70] from which I quote, the expectation or mean term of human
life among the Romans was thirty years; while that of England, according
to Mr. Finlaison, is fifty for the easy classes of society, and forty-five
for the whole population. I do not put much faith in bills of mortality of
the time of Servius Tullius, considering the rarity even of historical
documents in the early ages of Rome. The monuments, too, are, in a large
proportion of cases, to military men, who appear to have been cut off at
very early ages. But many reasons may be given why the average of life
should be shorter than in England. There was no provision for the poor
among them, unless the irregular profusion of _congiaria_ can be called
so; there were no public hospitals; the city was in many parts unhealthy;
their clothing not favourable to cleanliness, though remedied, in some
measure, by the bath; and life was often shortened by suicide, which was
regarded as venial if not meritorious. The average yielded by the
inscriptions would certainly be low; I have noticed one death at 102
years,[71] 90 of which were passed without disease, and one at 100,[72]
one at 92,[73] but these are rare. Valerius Julianus inscribes a monument
to his son, who was three years old, and his mother (mammulae), who was 80.
Dispara damna lege Parcarum et stamina dispara;
Haec ridenda mihi est, hic lacrymandus erit.
Haec namque emeritos bis quadraginta per annos
Vixit; at hic tertio Consule natus obit.
Cur modo tam praeceps, iterum tam sera fuisti
Funeris amborum dic rea Persephone.
Vix lucem vidisse satis qui vivere posset;
Vivere quae nollet vix potuisse mori.[74]
We now approach a more interesting inquiry. What light do the Roman
sepulcral inscriptions throw upon the social relations, the domestic
affections, the religious belief of the people from whom they originate?
The voice of nature speaks more truly from the tomb than anywhere else;
and if monumental phrases at last become formulary and unmeaning, in their
origin at least they carry with them a deep significance, and express a
genuine sentiment. We feel curious to know how a people so different from
ourselves in manners and religion expressed themselves, in reference to
the most solemn event of human existence. For what qualities did they
praise their departed friends? Whether true or false, in reference to the
individual, the monumental panegyric will, at all events, teach us what
was the standard of virtue in the conceptions of the times. In what
language did they express their affection or regret? With what hopes
respecting the future did they bid them farewell?
The Roman lapidary style was well adapted to express feeling or describe
character with energetic conciseness, and in this respect stands in
striking contrast with the diffuse and overloaded epitaphs in which the
moderns delight. A loquacious or boastful epitaph in Latin excites the
suspicion of the critic of inscriptions, unless it is evidently of the
latest age of heathenism.[75] The use of the Latin language has been of no
avail in checking the prolixity of modern composers; the Italians alone
have caught the true spirit of classical antiquity, and can compress much
meaning into a few words. The language of genuine sorrow is simple and
concise. What could convey to the heart the feeling of a mother's grief
and affection more forcibly, than the apostrophe, AVE LUCI, PRAEREPTE
MATRI! or FILI BENE QUIESCAS! MATER TUA ROGAT TE UT ME AD TE RECIPIAS. The
inscription of the sarcophagus in our Museum, D. M. SIMPLICIAE FLORENTINAE,
ANIMAE INNOCENTISSIMAE, QUAE VIXIT MENSES X., SIMPLICIUS PATER FECIT, would
have gained nothing in pathos by the elaborate description of a father's
sorrow. Neither would the inscription placed by her parents on Cornelia
Anniana, who died just when her prattle was beginning to delight their
ears. FILIAE DULCISSIMAE, JAM GARRULAE, BIMULAE NONDUM.[76] The great majority
of records of the dead content themselves with the mention of the name,
station, and age, or with such a brief and modest encomium as is expressed
in the words HOMINI OPTIMO ET SINGULARIS EXEMPLI.
We sometimes, indeed, find in epitaphs a play upon a name, hardly
consistent with our notions of the true style of such compositions. Yet a
genuine sorrow might be struck with the relation between the name and the
character, such as the second of these inscriptions notices, or find
relief in the playful allusion in the third. On the tomb of Aper[77] was
inscribed this distich:--
Innocuus Aper ecce jaces, non Virginis ira
Nec Meleager atrox perfodit viscera ferro.
And on the tomb of Glyconis,[78]--
Hoc jacet in tumulo secura Glyconis honesto.
_Dulcis_ nomine erat, anima quoque dulcior usque.
On that of Floridus, inscribed, it should seem, with a flower,[79]--
Quod vixi, flos est. Servat lapis hoc mihi nomen.
Noli Deos Manes; flos satis est titulo.
What our writers on heraldry call _canting_ and the French, _armes
parlantes_, _i. e._ figures allusive to family names, was not unknown to
the Romans; it is found on their coins; as a steer (vitulus) on the
denarius of Q. Voconius _Vitulus_; a murex, on that of Furius _Purpureo_;
a foot, on that of Crassi_pes_, and a flower on that of Aquillius
_Florus_.[80]
In those inscriptions which enter into a fuller enumeration of public
services, one difference is striking to a person accustomed to modern
ones, namely, the absence in the former of all mention of acts of social
benevolence. It is true that the erection of a fountain, the construction
of a road, the dedication of a temple, the exhibition of gladiatorial and
floral games, the bequest of a legacy for an annual feast, and similar
acts of popular munificence, are often commemorated, as titles of honour;
but I do not remember to have met with a record, originating in pagan
times, of a life devoted to the alleviation of misery, to the relief of
indigence, to the removal of ignorance and vice. Such virtues belong
especially to the school of Christianity. The following inscription would
be proved by its tenor to relate to a Christian woman, even if the date
did not fix it to the middle of the fifth century of our aera. DEO FIDELIS,
DULCIS MARITO, NUTRIX FAMILLAE, CUNCTIS HUMILIS, PLACATO PURO CORDE,
AMATRIX PAUPERUM.[81]
When parents erect a funeral monument to their children, the inscription
very frequently embodies the sentiment of Cato the elder, in Cicero de
Senectute (c. 23), the inversion of the order of nature which the
performance of such a duty by the parent involves. "Catonem, cujus a me
corpus crematum est; quod contra decuit ab illo meum." Thus in an
inscription at Naples by Calvidius to his son, who had died at the age of
20; QUOD FILIUS PATRI FACERE DEBUIT PATER FECIT FILIO; and in another;
QUOD FILIA PATRI FACERE DEBUERAT MORS IMMATURA FECIT UT FACERET PATER. The
sentiment is concisely expressed in the following distich:--
Quod decuit natam patri praestare sepulto
Hoc contra natae praestitit ipse pater.[82]
A mother, burying her son, who died at the age of 35, complains, HUNC
LEGES LETI PRAEPOSTERAE ERIPUERE MATRI, QUAE UT ANNIS MORTE QUOQUE ESSET
PRIOR. Parents not only call themselves _infelicissimi_, for the loss of
their children, but _impii_ and _crudeles_, because they survive them.
Children from their premature grave endeavour to moderate their parents'
grief, by laying the blame upon the Fates.
Nec tibi nec nobis aeternum vivere cessit:
Quod pueri occipimus Fata querenda putes.[83]
A father justifies himself to his daughter, for not having died and
mingled his ashes with hers, by his duty to his surviving children.
Quae tibi cunque mei potuerunt pignora amoris
Nata, dari, populo sunt lacrumante data.
Et volui majora nimis; sed cura meorum
Fida tui prohibet me cinerem esse rogi.[84]
Mothers regret, under the loss of their children, that they had ever
become mothers.
Cernis ut orba meis, hospes monumenta locavi,
Et tristis senior natos miseranda requiro.
Exemplis referenda mea est deserta senectus,
Ut steriles vere possint gaudere maritae.[85]
Haec quaecunque legis, devoto pectore, mater
Da lacrimas, et me sic peperisse dole.
Hic jacet, extinctus crudeli funere, natus
Ultima vivendi qui mihi causa fuit.[86]
The sentiment of the following inscription frequently occurs on monuments,
and has been imitated in modern times. MATER MONUMENTUM FECIT MOERENS
FILIO, EX QUO NIHIL UNQUAM DOLUIT, NISI CUM IS NON FUIT.[87]
We learn from the sepulcral inscriptions that the Romans had the same
familiar substitutes as ourselves for the formal appellations of father
and mother, _mamma_ and _tata_. The following inscription is found at
Rome: D.M. ZETHO CORINTHUS TATA EJUS ET NICE MAMMA. VIXIT. ANN. I. D.
VI.[88] These again had their affectionate diminutives, _mammula_ and
_tatula_. It is probable, however, that the use of them was confined to
freedmen, and to that class of society. In one instance[89] a man erects a
monument to his aged _bonne_, NONNAE SUAE. The word is not found in
classical Latinity; but it is the undoubted original of _nun_, and may
suggest that conventual vows were originally taken chiefly by aged
females. In Italy at the present day it is the familiar name for
grandmother.
The inscriptions of children on the tombs of their parents, as might be
expected, are more brief and general, expressive of gratitude and filial
piety: MATRI DULCISSIMAE, PIENTISSIMAE, or PIISSIMAE, CARISSIMAE, OPTIMAE;
PATRI AMABILI, OPTIMO; or conjointly PARENTIBUS OPTIMIS, is the usual
style of these inscriptions. The monument of Meia records that she was
the mother of seven sons who had joined in raising a monument of Parian
marble to her memory.
Meia fui, felix septem circumdata natis;
Dum vixi adstabat turba tenella mihi.
Ut mihi grata vicem natorum turba referret
Hoc mihi de Pario marmore struxit opus.[90]