Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay about fatherhood
Essay about fatherhood
Essay about fatherhood
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay about fatherhood
How the death of a relative in ancient Rome was treated, by the surviving family varied over time and social status. However a common theme seems to be a perceived lack of grieving for their children. There were various social conventions and laws that seem to treat the death of children as less important than an adult. It is the intention of this essay to argue that Roman parents did grieve for the loss of their child but that it is impossible to tell by how much. There are examples of parents both grieving deeply and less so as their modern equivalents. In order to argue this, various primary sources such as epitaphs, letters and histories will be explored to show the hidden grief amongst parents. It will be suggested that although parents generally kept to the roman ideal in public, they grieved deeply in private. However certain economic and cultural factors mean Roman parents attitudes to children will not completely match up to their modern equivalents. Historical opinion on how Romans treated the death of a child has steadily moved towards the belief that parents did indeed care about their child’s demise. The problem for most historians has been that surviving evidence mainly comes from the elites of roman society. As such generalisation about all of roman society is difficult to conclude since the elites made up a small proportion of whole. In a society that was overly concerned with other people’s perception of them it is understandable why so much of the surviving evidence relates the ideal regarding death rather than the reality. That is why it is important to seek out evidence that reveals genuine emotion rather than the public face which is often displayed. As we go further back in time it b... ... middle of paper ... ...hers breaking from the ideal upon the death of their child. Even though these examples are small in number it indicates the true feelings that roman parents felt about their children but expressed in a more private fashion. Epitaphs and commemoration tombs tend to suggest that parents cared less about their children. Yet there was probably a wealth of evidence that is no lost to us and using the narrow focus of the elite to draw conclusion is inadequate. Cost and culture may have lead to less heartfelt commemoration that was actually felt by parents. In the end certain cultural differences mean that perhaps Romans did not grieve in the same way as their modern equivalents. Clearly roman parents tended to avoid expressions of deep grief in public. It does not mean however that in private roman parents did not grieve as deeply as their modern equivalents.
These pages begin with the mortal illness of Octavian’s twenty-nine year old mother, Cassiopeia, from smallpox. Octavian (age 16), is with her until the so-called scientists (or self-styled philosophers), of the Novanglian College of Lucidity chase him away to undertake “cures” that are extremely painful and make the illness much worse. She dies and an autopsy is begun. At this point Octavian forces his way into the room. He fights with one of those men cutting his mother’s body until he understands this is a fight he cannot win. At this point Octavian realizes his “nothingness” and leaves the room. He now knows he is a helpless slave. He feels his helpless condition is worse than death. That night he runs away from his owners.
The Res Gestae Divi Augustus (‘The Deeds of the Divine Augustus’), also known simply as the Res Gestae was a catalogue of the achievements Augustus had made during his life, specifically those that had an obvious positive impact on the Roman people. It was written in 13-14AD (E.S. Ramage, 1987) and presented to the Vestal Virgins alongside Augustus’ will upon his death in 14AD (M.C. Howatson, 1937). The biography, which was carved into bronze pillars outside of Augustus’ mausoleum (M.C. Howatson, 1937), is split into 35 sections; each recognizing a separate part of Augustus’ excellence. The fifteenth, which will be discussed in this commentary, describes the notable largesses donated to the Roman people by Augustus throughout his
In modern society, both the abstract and concrete representations of children are intertwined with the themes associated with happiness, innocence, ignorance, gullibility, and the allure of youth. But, if I may for a moment mimic Caroline Vout’s presentation of her arguments by asking, how does today’s current view of children differ from the non-linguistic representations of children in ancient times? If one was to rewind time while focusing solely on the exemplification of children in ancient Greek and Rome, they would discover that presumably there is a degradation of the importance of the child in society. The previously mentioned Caroline Vout supplies the fact that the great philosopher Aristotle believed that “[children were] virtually denied human status on the grounds of their diminished faculty of deliberation.” This thought process is obviously contradictory to the widely accepted opinion of children in today’s modern society. With the assistance of multiple sculptures, frescos, and drawings, Vout utilizes rhetorical questions to engage the reader in her arguments concerning the portrayal of children during the Hellenistic period.
Two ancient examples of disobedient actions come from different ages revered for standards that hold today and provide a basis for modern law; the Greek and ancient Roman empires. From the Greeks, we have come to know the story of Socrates as memorialized by Plato, and the Roman age was the time of Perpetua, an early Christian woman. The fate of those individuals is the same – a death sentence handed down by the society they lived in. Although the conclusion of their respective lives is the same, the differences that lie in the reasoning of their death run deeper, with several key factors impacting their individual destiny. As we will see, these factors affect their relationship to the states and time periods they existed.
Her family life is depicted with contradictions of order and chaos, love and animosity, conventionality and avant-garde. Although the underlying story of her father’s dark secret was troubling, it lends itself to a better understanding of the family dynamics and what was normal for her family. The author doesn’t seem to suggest that her father’s behavior was acceptable or even tolerable. However, the ending of this excerpt leaves the reader with an undeniable sense that the author felt a connection to her father even if it wasn’t one that was desirable. This is best understood with her reaction to his suicide when she states, “But his absence resonated retroactively, echoing back through all the time I knew him. Maybe it was the converse of the way amputees feel pain in a missing limb.” (pg. 399)
Roman emperor Julian the Apostate and Christian leader Antony both exhibited many qualities of character during their existence. Both of them led very distinctive lives although shared several ethical values. Book 25 of “The Later Roman Empire” and the book “Early Christian Lives” show concrete evidence of this. In the following essay, I will argue how both leaders’ lives were devoted to their religious beliefs and their mutual cardinal virtues.
Livy’s The Rise of Rome serves as the ultimate catalogue of Roman history, elaborating on the accomplishments of each king and set of consuls through the ages of its vast empire. In the first five books, Livy lays the groundwork for the history of Rome and sets forth a model for all of Rome to follow. For him, the “special and salutary benefit of the study of history is to behold evidence of every sort of behaviour set forth as on a splendid memorial; from it you may select for yourself and for your country what to emulate, from it what to avoid, whether basely begun or basely concluded.” (Livy 4). Livy, however, denies the general populace the right to make the same sort of conclusions that he made in constructing his histories. His biased representation of Romulus and Tarquin Superbus, two icons of Roman history, give the readers a definite model of what a Roman should be, instead of allowing them to come to their own conclusion.
Marriage in Classical Athens was inevitable. It was a part of life. Everyone had to get married, just as everyone had to someday face death. Although most people would not see a connection between marriage and death, the Greeks did. Both define an irreversible physical change—the loss of virginity and the loss of life. This idea of loss, rebirth, and renewal are present in both wedding and funeral. This is evident in the way wedding and funeral ceremonies complement each other in character and content. Both ceremonies are interwoven with ritual meaning and overlapping rites.
On that first fateful day, when Romulus struck down his own brother Remus, the cauldron of Rome was forged in blood and betrayal. The seeds on the Palatine hill cultured one of the most potent and stretching empires of human history. Though this civilization seemingly wielded the bolts of Zeus, they were infested with violence, vanity, and deception. Yet, one man—or seemingly “un”-man—outshone and out-graced his surroundings and everyone within it. He brought Rome several victories and rescued his beloved country from an early exodus, thus providing her a second beginning. This man was Marcus Furius Camillus, and against a logical and emotional mind, he was oft less than loved and celebrated. At times he was disregarded, insulted and even exiled—irrevocably an unwarranted method to reward Rome’s “Second Founder.” This contrast of character between hero and people was perhaps too drastic and too grand. The people were not yet ready to see Marcus Furius Camillus as a model of behavior to be emulated—to be reproduced. Hence, much of Livy’s Book 5 provides a foundation for the Roman people to imitate and assimilate a contrasting, honest, and strong behavior and temperament
The primary function of monumental portraits in Ancient Rome was to honor political figures of power through repeating social and political themes. The Romans expressed these themes through a form of “realism”. Relics of this era were found depicting the elderly conservative nobility that lived through civil disruptions and war, elaborately individualized through detail of the face expression. Through the features of grimacing heaviness, wrinkles, and effects of old age, the Romans were able to express the reality of their political situation felt by the people whose faces were sculptured into stone. Furthermore, Nodelman discusses the use of sculpture portraits to depict the ideology behind Roman conservative aristocracy. Artists would portray the virtues of gravitas, dignities, and fides, through the use to physical expression and symbolic meaning, rather than through words. A statue of Augustus, for instance, displays the militaristic, powerful, godly perception of the conservative ideology through the use of symbolic detail. The decorative, rich, military outfit on Augustus, represents the power of the military and Augustus’s role as imperator in it. The freely held masculine arm and pointing gesture towards the horizon are Rome’s expanding dreams, clashing with the overall powerful and sturdy stance of the body. The bare feet bring about the impression
A Roman hero is one who not only displays great pietas, but also acts in accordance with stoic beliefs. To be pious is to show great devotion to the duty of one’s family, the gods, as well as fate. Stoicism is the belief that one should act according to reason rather than personal desires, submitting oneself to the fate predetermined by the gods. In both pietas and stoicism, actions are performed in order to satisfy the needs of the greater good. Dissociating oneself from emotions allows the individual to pursue a state of ataraxia, emancipation from the torment induced by emotions. By adhering to stoic principles, one will not be moved by their passions, allowing for a full investment in one’s pietas. Aeneas...
It is inferred that the parents should take care of their children and have their best interest at heart. This however, is not the case in Greek and Roman mythology. The killing of ones own children, or filicide, was not viewed as negative upon in their era. The contemporary times contrast with the ancient Greek and Roman’s because it was justified to use any means necessary to obtain a higher status. The Greeks and Romans valued keeping a high social reputation and having respect for those of great power. The motherly union between their children conflict with the reality that the father strives to retain or gain control. These circumstances cause a tense bond between the members of the family. The strained parent to child relationship in Greco-Roman myths is prevalent in the fact that the parents are fearful of being overtaken by their children, and endeavor to limit their upbringing.
... Austin: University of Texas Press, 1997. Hopkins, Keith. A. A. Death and Renewal: Sociological Studies in Roman History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983 Johnston, Harold Whetstone. The Private Life of the Romans.
Imagine growing up without a father. Imagine a little girl who can’t run to him for protection when things go wrong, no one to comfort her when a boy breaks her heart, or to be there for every monumental occasion in her life. Experiencing the death of a parent will leave a hole in the child’s heart that can never be filled. I lost my father at the young of five, and every moment since then has impacted me deeply. A child has to grasp the few and precious recollections that they have experienced with the parent, and never forget them, because that’s all they will ever have. Families will never be as whole, nor will they forget the anguish that has been inflicted upon them. Therefore, the sudden death of a parent has lasting effects on those
Bradley, Keith. "The sentimental education of the Roman child: the role of pet-keeping." Latomus, (1998): 523--557. Print.