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.