The meaning of life

Reading the newspaper on Saturday I came across an article about the Japanese imperial family. This family is on the throne for a 125 generations, but now, for the first time in history, the family is about to die out. There are only seven males left, of which only one is younger than 45. If Prince Hisahito (now 5) doesn’t have any sons, he would be the last one on the throne. This due to a law which only allows male to sit on the Chrysanthemum Throne and excludes females after marriage. This narrows the line of succession to a minimum.

A Roman family; a relief from the Ara Pacis (Uffizi Gallery, Florence) 

A similar feature happened in ancient Rome. Not all circumstances were the same, but in the end the outcome was similar. Families died out (legally) due to the lack of a male heir. Above all was Roman life dominated by a high mortality and a high fertility figure. The high mortality figure is caused by diseases, bad hygiene and ineffective medical care. Next to these causes the mortality figure is heightened through battle, proscription (legal murder) and civil war. With an expected life expectancy at birth of 25, appr. one third of the infants die before their first birthday. This high mortality had its impact on family life. Due to the high mortality and the wish for the continuation of the family line, many children could be necessary. But due to the Roman inheritance rules too many children were a disadvantage for the family fortune.

Tragedy

Even Roman history isn't deprived of any tragedy. Although we cannot always see the tragedy the same way the Romans did, we feel sympathy. One of the most famous adoption tragedies is linked to the Scipiones:

 
The daughter of the L. Aemilius Paullus, consul in 219 and 216, Aemilia Tertia, married Scipio Africanus. Together they had four children, two boys, Publius (P. Scipio Afr.f.) and Lucius (L. Scipio Afr.f.), and two girls, the Corneliae (major and minor).
Aemilia Tertia's brother – also called L. Aemilius Paullus, consul in 182 and 168 – and his wives (he was married twice) had also four children, four sons this time. Because four sons qua legacy isn't very practical, two sons were relinquished for adoption. The youngest is adopted as P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus by P. Scipio Afr.f.; the oldest as Q. Fabius Maximus Aemilianus by Q. Fabius Maximus, the son or possible grand-son of Q. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, a famous general during the Second Punic War. We do not know their names from when they were still Aemilii. His two remaining sons died in their teens. Poor Aemilius in the end died without any legal (male) heirs. His two adopted sons did inherit, but by testament.

Pomponia

Yesterday, I was reading one of my books on Scipio Africanus. A lot about him is familiair. He is – after all – one of the best documented Scipiones. I think he is even is the most famous. Maybe alongside Scipio Aemilianus. He even had a dinosaur named after him. I found out thanks to the delights of the internet. If you search on "Scipionyx Samniticus", you can find more about this tiny dino.

Fossil specimen, Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Milano

But just like his daughter Cornelia Minor, some things are not known. Information we modern people would like to know. For instance, his birth date, any information about his childhood or his date of marriage. All unknown. We do know he was married to Aemilia Tertia. We do know that they had four (surviving) children, two boys and two girls. We do know the name, carrier and death of his father, P. Scipio (cos. 218). And from his mother, we know nothing more than her name. I didn't include her in my women-blog. I missed her. Actually, her fate is the fate of so many Roman woman. If you're lucky your name survives, but most women remain anonymous. It is so easy to be forgotten, even if you're the mother of one of the most famous men in the Roman republic.

Welcome to the family

One of the greatest worries for an ancient Roman was to die without any male children. Practical as Romans can be, they solved this with – what seems to be – an easy solution: adoption. It is unknown whether this was a common phenomenon, or something more limited. Hopkins in his book 'Death and renewal' claims that adoption wasn't a widespread phenomenon. He based this on an analysis of the names used by consuls. Corbier, on the other hand, says that adoption was not an unknown phenomenon in Roman society. She claims that adoption was linked to the politics of succession and transmission. Independent of who's right, adoption was regulated by strict rules. The only absolute rule was that the child had to born to a legitimate married couple. Other rules apply for the transaction of real and symbolic property. The most important transaction was the family name. The adoptee received the family name of his new family. His old family name is attached as a cognomen, a nick name. For instance: P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus. The cognomen Aemilianus shows that his biological family's name was Aemilius. When do the Romans adopt? Mostly it's because of the lack of a male heir, when the transfer of the family name to a new generation is at risk. A man without any male heirs or no heirs at all has the opportunity to adopt. In most cases adoption involves (blood) relatives, for instance an son-in-law, a stepson or cousin. And the best part is, that through a testament, the adoptee can still inherit from his biological family.

Puzzle

History can be quite a puzzle. This is above all true of Roman – or any type of ancient – history. For so many things historians would like to know the 'how', 'what' and 'why', no sources are available. Sometimes this is due to the passing of time. Not every document, building or inscriptions survives the hands of time. Sometimes this is due to the lack of interest by the historians of that time. Roman history is mostly about men with their great deeds (political or military or both). If something doesn't fit this description, sorry, it's not written. There are exceptions of course. We do have some of the letters of Cicero. There are plays, inscriptions, eulogies or buildings. But unfortunately they don't answer questions like 'why didn't Scipio Aemilianus adopt a son, when he and his wife didn't have any children?' (more on this another day). I can't look into Scipio Aemilianus' mind and can only guess at his motivations. To show you that Roman history can be a puzzle, but a fun one, I will use the following example:

Women… do we need them…

Unfortunately, Roman history is all about males and politics. It's about what they do and how they do it. If you don't do anything interesting or if you're a female, writers and/or historians are usually not interested in you. This attitude is visible in the next quote from Valerius Maximus: "What business has a woman with a public meeting? If ancestral custom be observed, none. But when domestic quiet is stirred by the waves of sedition, the authority of ancient usage is subverted and compulsion of violence has greater force than persuasion and precept of restraint." [Valerius Maximus III.8.6] So besides our 25 male Scipiones, there are only 13 Scipionic female known: seven of them are daughters and six are wives.

And there were 25...

Before I begin with the background and history of the Scipiones, I thought it would be a good idea to start with who they are and very shortly what they have done. So this will be a boring summary of all the 25 Scipiones (males only!) we know of in the period 298-50 BC. I will start with the oldest Scipio and go upwards through history and end with the latest one around 50BC. As always, I will skip the name Cornelius (as all Scipiones used this name). The underlined names are the ones I will use in this blog. The summary below will be short.