Inequality is an inherent feature of civilizations and Rome was no different. At the same time, there is a constant tension between the haves and the have nots. When power or wealth imbalances grow too large, strife and social tensions break out until a new social structure emerges. Those in power, want to remain and thus will use different tactics such as comedy to reinforce class structure and violence to draw a line.
Roman life was unequal. A few Roman citizens owned large estates and had houses in the city. On those estates and in the city, slaves captured in battle or in unlucky situations were forced to labor on farms and in homes. Slaves could become manumitted or freed but could never hold political office or become members of the Senatorial or Equestrian class. Those institutions are elitist and allowing slaves to transgress their status would degrade the self-importance they held for themselves. A slave gaining power or being smarter than a freeborn was seen as a joke. In fact, entire comedic plays tied that humorous idea into their story line. In Major Blowhard, Dextero, a slave, was seen as intelligent and cunning. He acquired the military attributes of his commander. He co-opts poses of his master where he is seen as “the intelligent, thinking slave from Athens.” But this character is seen as a satire, which in turn reinforces the interests of the dominant class. The idea of slaves being masters was so funny that it was turned into a holiday. The Festival of the Saturnalia was a reversal in hierarchy. The master would serve the slave and the slave as master. This inversion in the status hierarchy was funny. Humor theory suggests that humor results in any situation where there’s a sudden realization of how much better we are than our direct competition or when two fundamentally incompatible concepts are contrasted.
Rome was a violent place. Institutions seeked to reinforce their power through acts of violence. As was pointed out in Seneca on Gladiators, “Fathers were allowed to expose their children. Husbands beat wives. Lower-class citizens were publicly flogged for criminal offenses. Non-citizens were crucified. Children were whipped by their teachers. And slaves could be maimed, tortured and butchered at the whim of their owners.” Those in power seeked to inflict pain on others in order to establish their authority and gain submission. Rome was a militaristic and masculine society that had gained its dominant position in the Mediterranean by being aggressive. Some viewed the gladiatorial games as an extension of this cultural zeitgeist. The games showed the power of the Roman government to deem a person to be worthless and thus force them out into the arena to face death. This hegemony led from the state served as an explicit demonstration of who is in power and who is, in fact, powerless. As we saw with the public crucifixion of 6000 slaves after the failure of the Spartacus revolt, violence reinforced order.
We have also seen those without ultimate power imitate it. Trimalchio was at one point a slave. This distinction prevents him from ever being able to hold political office. Trimalchio, in response to his ascension being blocked, throws extravagant parties. He was too good to even pick up a ball, “if a ball hit the ground, he didn’t chase it but had a slave.” Trimalchio likely didn’t enjoy being a slave, but given the chance to join the upper class he took it even if that means owning slaves himself. Those in power want to remain there while those without power or wealth will try to join their ranks. We saw though, a safety net must exist otherwise the people might start to riot and threaten to completely destroy the status quo. After some riots did break out in Rome, the government created grain distribution programs which guaranteed a steady and secure supply of calories. While Trimalchio surely displayed some real wealth, he also faked some. For instance he showed off his, “Falernian wine,” which the label said was, “bottled in the consulship of Opimius, one hundred years old.” This display of wealth was a ploy to associate him with the upper class. Yet, historians think this was outlandish and the label must have been fake as wine wouldn’t survive that long. While Trimalchio was surely upper class he was vying and competing to be seen even higher on the social hierarchy.
Trimalchio was not the only one who aspired to a higher social class. Erotic frescos uncovered in Pompeii glorify sexual acts. These paintings were usually found in brothels. Hiring a prostitute in the city was pretty cheap, allowing men to transcend their status, whether freeborn or slave. These paintings likely also served as helping enhance men’s performance. This all served as an aspirational, if unrealistic, status symbol that men across classes aspire to. This was, however, at odds with how those women were treated. While the men were competing to mentally to ascend social levels, the women were forced to work. The distinctions among sex workers also fell on class division. As freeborn women were not prostitutes, only slaves. While men had erotic sexual fantacies the reality was that the prostitutes were stuck in dark cramped rooms at the whims of clients and their pimp owners while most of society was indifferent as the women were treated as untouchables. For context, marriage in elite classes was arranged with the goal of providing children. This led husbands to seek sex from prositites. Sex and class was balanced also in the Augustan moral legislation. It’s goal was to promote social stability but with the ultimate desire of increasing the population. With that goal in mind, rigid class distinctions that separated and banned marriage between freeborn men and freedwomen were allowed to marry. This was a shocking change in the social hierarchy. The morality and purity of political institutions was seen as the bright line, though, and marriage between freedwomen and slaves was still banned. Upholding arbitrary class distinctions was balanced with allowing a cross class fertilization of social groups.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Gaius Verres embodies this axiom perfectly and eventually the people had enough and sought reform and protection. As Governor of Sicily, he used his power to enrich himself at the expense of his inhabitants. When those in power commit crimes egregious enough, they may be pushed out. Verres might not have been a unique example. He might have actually been an example of how many governors acted. In fact this trial was shocking in that a governor was actually held accountable. As Cicero states, “The opinion is that no one who has money can be convicted by the courts as they are now constituted.” As inequity in power grows large, protests by the people were able to force more oversight and in this case expel Verres. Verres used unchecked authority to run the province into the ground. Even legal citizens had no rights. Money was also extorted. All this led to anger and resentment. It built up until something triggered demands for change. Veres perhaps most vile act that likely triggered the trial was when he met Philodemus. The meeting infact was set up to rape Phiodamus’s daugter. This became evident as Verrus says, “I wonder, Philodamus, why don’t you have your daughter called in to see us.” Phiodamuis pleaded for the slaves to forget about him and instead work to save his daughter. This event symbolized the numerous systemic inequities that people were already experiencing, the rape only lit the fuse that led to systemic changes in the power balance.
Social inequity has always existed in Rome. There were few actual distinctions that could be made to separate people into classes. Yet the Romans found arbitrary ways to separate the haves and the have nots anyways. Romans did see some slaves transcend their status such as Trimalchio. However, Trimalchio was not able to crack the ultimate glass ceiling of status by gaining power in a political class. We did see those without power throughout Rome tolerate the inequity to a certain point. When society became too unequal we saw riots and protests that resulted in new accountability for the political class such as the aftermath of Verres’s trial. That change did not come easy as the political class held onto their power with violence and comedy. We saw them assert their dominance in the brutal Roman games and in comedic tales where slaves are shown as intelligent which is seen as a funny joke.