[ News
| Homes
| Life
| Entertainment
| History
| Science
| Community
| Shop ]
| Sport
| Culture
| Cars
| Money
| Broadband
| Learning
| Health
| Dating
| Games ]
[ Text Only: Homepage ]
[ Graphical: Channel4 Homepage ]
Introduction | New
research | Status
Patronage and business | The
household | Pleasures of the
flesh
Core values | Find
out more
The reality of Roman society in the early empire did not match the idealised image of the republic to which it constantly harked back. The period saw the rise of self-interest and individualism at the expense of community. This is particularly apparent from divorce rates, law and order concerns and the crisis in family welfare provision.
Commentators of the time insisted that the very foundations of Roman identity were being undermined by the falling standards in education. One symbol of this was Pompeii's palaestrum: once, it was a communal training ground; now it had become a gladiator school.
The rise of the nouveau riche
It appears that much of Pompeii was in a state of considerable disrepair
long before Vesuvius erupted in AD 79. In 62, it had been close to the epicentre
of a major earthquake, with a second perhaps following a few years later.
Some historians believe that the old moneyed families left after the main earthquake – presumably for houses elsewhere – and their place in the town's hierarchy was taken by the nouveaux riches. In his writings, Seneca certainly tried to dissuade the élite from leaving.
The nouveaux riches were busy decking out their mansions in the brashest version of the latest, highly decorated styles. These had originated among the patricians, but cheap copies had quickly spread down through the remainder of Pompeian society. This was the kind of conspicuous consumption that the older nobility would have found in poor taste. But in the early empire, an ostentatious display of luxury in the finest homes was a goal and a means of expressing one's social position.
Some researchers argue that the quality, quantity and type of art existing in Pompeii can show not only which houses were inhabited by the upper class, but whether it was master, slave, tenant or poor relation who lived in given sections of them. In turn, this reveals clues about what happened and who lived in each room of a given structure.
Decay or looting?
Most researchers have believed that Pompeii was almost completely devastated
by the earthquake(s), and rebuilding was only very slowly progressing at the
time of the eruption. Those who were now at the top of the social tree predictably
gave the restoration of public buildings a low priority. By AD 79 – no
fewer than 17 years after the first earthquake – only one building in the
forum had for certain been fully repaired, and Pompeii's civic centre had been
left as a decaying eyesore.
However, an alternative theory is that much of the city centre had been renovated – so expensively, in fact, that its brand-new marble was one of the first targets of the post-eruption looters.
A collapse in morals?
Along with the rise in individualism was a greater tendency towards inwardness,
reflected in the rise of cult religions. The emphasis was now on personal rather
than communal sin and atonement. In Pompeii, the Isis cult (see box)
had an especially strong following among women and slaves. It was one area of
judgement not subject to patriarchal control.
What does all this add up to? Was Pompeii a gangster town? A sexual free-for-all? All we know for sure is that the Rome authorities were sufficiently concerned to send a special envoy to set Pompeii back on the straight and narrow. Yet he could do nothing about the greatest threat to the city, which came from neither ambitious freedmen nor a collapse in morals. It came from Vesuvius, which, in AD 79, turned burgeoning Pompeii into stone.