Enforcing Social Order in History

Sumptuary Laws in the Roman Empire

The Roman Republic and the Roman Empire were both grandiose and both are a major part of the history of the world. However, they were quite different in many significant ways but they were also similar in some ways as it relates to social structure, the way people dressed and how society proceeded and developed. The major difference between the two was that the Senate and people had a lot of power in the Republic while the Emperor reigned supreme in the Roman Empire. However, the differences are a lot deeper than that in some ways. While some people conflate the Roman Empire and Roman Republic, there is a lot more than meets the eye when it comes to Roman History.

Analysis

The main differences between the Roman Empire and the Roman Republic are fairly easy to list. When it came to the Roman Republic, there are a few things that can be said. First off, this was the Roman history arc that ran from about 500 BC to about 30 BC. This is the time period in which the rule of Rome expanded from the city of Rome to the larger areas in and around the Mediterranean. Some of this expansion was willing on the part of the acquired country while other takeovers were by force. The countries and areas that were included in this expansion included the northern parts of Africa, France, Greece and Spain. The end of the Roman Republic came with leader Octavian naming himself Augustus and Emperor in 27 BC. The creation of the Roman Republic happened when the Etruscans were overthrown in roughly 509 BC. The government of the Roman Republic is the loose basis for the government in the United States right now. Even so, it has to be recognized that a republic and a democracy are not the same thing. In a democracy, everyone is expected to have an active part in the government of a country and this was simply not the case when it came to the Roman Republic. In the Roman Republic, there were varying level of citizenship. A "full citizen" could vote, could marry freeborn people and could practice commerce. However, some citizens were not allowed to vote but were privy to other rights due to their presence in the Republic (U.S. History, 2015).

There were even slaves within the Roman Republic. They were eventually freed and granted citizenship. In 212 BC, the Edict of Caracalla said that all free people could vote. This was followed the fact that all non-Roman allies of the Republic gained citizenship in 90 BC. However, one should look at the earlier Roman Republic. In that day, the rich people (known as the aristocracy) dominated the Roman Republic, its power structure and its actions. These aristocrats were otherwise known as patricians. These people in turn tended to be the two highest leaders in the Roman Republic and they were known as consuls. The consuls were elected by a group of aristocrats so it is easy to see why non-patricians, known as plebeians, would never have power in the Roman Republic. In general, plebeians had absolutely no say in the Roman government. Further, both men and women were considered citizens in the Roman Republic but only men could actually vote. However, this was truer in the earlier times of the Roman Republic rather than later on (U.S. History, 2015).

Over time, there was a separation between the patricians and plebeians that broke down or at least softened over time. At one point, the plebeians started to assert their own power in the form of electing their own representatives that were known as tribunes. The tribunes eventually gained enough power to the point that they could veto measures and laws that were passed by the Senate. However, this was all despite the fact that a man in one class (e.g. patrician) could not marry someone in the other class (plebeian). However, there came a point that the plebeians were eventually able to hold the position of consul, something that was previously only done for patricians (U.S. History, 2015).

The Senate was initially on one hundred people but it later expanded to be three times that. It was indeed the most powerful governing body in Rome and this was an even stronger fact when the kings were expelled. As noted before, the senators were from the patrician class alone for a very long time but that did shift over the years. They gathered in an ornate building called the Curia, which was in the Roman Forum area of the city of Rome. Julius Caesar built an even larger curia at one point. In the latter part of the Senate, things got quite bloody as Dictator Sulla had a large number of senators killed in roughly 82 BC and he also increased the member of the Senate to double its largest prior size, going from 300 to 600. Further, the eventual dictator status that ended the Roman Republic was entered by choice at times. When a war or other major event would come up, the Senate would appoint a single person to be the voice and leader in war for the Roam Republic. What was unique about the Roman Republic is that they would allow the people of the lands they conquered the same rights and opportunities as the people that were already in the Roman Republic. The earlier timeframe of the Roman Republic was full of war and struggle. This period came to be known as the Punic Wars. Punic was basically a reference to the "people of Carthage." After a total of three Punic wars, the people of the Roman Republic were ready to quit fighting and they did so by holding a very long siege of Carthage that ended in the city being burnt to the ground. They went to so far as to put salt on the ground all around the city so that nothing would ever grow there again (U.S. History, 2015).

The shift into the Roman Empire was a bloody one. Julius Caesar was betrayed and in a very nasty, prolonged and multi-faceted way. Indeed, he was stabbed in the neck by one person and then a series of other people did much the same thing. This happened around 44 BCE. Those familiar with the Shakespeare play know the event fairly well already. There was a nasty civil war after that assassination. However, after this bloody period that involved a lot of death and destruction from the likes of Octavian, Marc Antony and others, there was a good amount of peace that ran from 27 BC to about 180 BC. This period was known as the Pax Romana, or Roman peace. Economic prosperity was sky-high and the empire spanned completely around the Mediterranean and Black Seas. The population of the Empire soared to 70 million people and included England, Morocco, Iraq and so on. However, another three hundred years later and the Roman Empire as a whole came crashing down (U.S. History, 2015).

Sumptuary Laws

Before getting into the sumptuary laws, it should be explain what the articles of clothing in the Roman Republic or Empire were and who got to wear them and why. First off, every Roman would wear two to three articles of clothing not counting their shoes. The common dress in the Roman Republic and Roman Empire were pretty much the same. However, it is worth to note that Roman dress was heavily influenced in a positive way by contact with the Greeks and the Etruscans. Even though men and women were held in very different steads within the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, the men and women dressed in a very similar fashion to each other. There were several different levels to each person dressing and they are as follows:

Indutus: This meant to "put on"…generally considered garments that many people would consider underwear

Amictus: This was "wrapped around" and these were the outer garments (T&T, 2015).

The toga is a famous Roman garment but it was actually originally worn by women…not men. The toga became one of the two main garments worn by Romans with the other one being the tunic. The toga was a loose woolen robe of a semi-circular form. It did not have sleeves, was open from the waist upwards and was closed off below the waist. It would wrap around the body under the right arm but would drape over the left shoulder so as to keep the garment up. Togas would come in various forms based on who was wearing it and why and that will be explained below. The tunic was a white woolen vest that would be worn beneath the toga for those that were allowed to wear it. On men, the tunic would come down to about the needs. For women, it would go all the way down to the feet. If a person wearing a tunic was of a certain persuasion or status, they would adorn the tunic with a stripe of a certain color. The color of the stripe would dictate what made that person important or of rank (T&T, 2015).

Then there were the trousers, for those that wore them and when they were allowed to be worn. Initially, Romans did not wear pants of any sort and this include stockings or breeches. They would sometimes wrap their legs with pieces of cloth and they were referred to based on what they covered, either tibialia or feminalia. However, there was an eventual shift to the aforementioned trousers and breeches. The primary foot covering was known as the calceus. This garment covered the whole foot and very much resembled the shoes that are seen in modern life in the world. However, there were some variations from what we commonly see in the modern world, as described below:

The chief coverings for the feet were the calceus, which covered the whole foot, somewhat like our shoes, and was tied above with a latchet or lace, and the solea, a slipper or sandal which covered only the sole of the foot, and was fastened on with leather thongs or strings. The shoes of the senators came up to the middle of their legs, and had a golden or silver crescent on the top of the foot. The shoes of the soldiery were called caligae, sometimes shod with nails. Comedians wore the socci or slippers, and tragedians the cothurni (T&T, 2015).

With the clothing types described, sumptuary laws can now be described. In a nutshell, these laws dictated who should or must dress a certain way and what would happen if people fell out of line with those laws. These laws were in place such as they were so that people could figure out the status of a person based on the clothes they wore. It could indicate the wealth of a person in terms of money or it could also point to their social standing. For example, only Roman citizens were allowed to wear togas. Those that were not Roman citizens were strictly barred from doing so. As part of all that, there is what was known as the Sumtuariae Leges. These were the Roman laws that were passed to help prevent very expensive adornments when it came to banquets and dressing in general and so forth. The Roman government was very sensitive to costs getting too out of line with the resources of the people that had to follow the sumptuary laws. As explained further by Tribunes and Triumphs:

"The clothing materials and choice of color was in part, dependent upon status and wealth, but in the main by the Roman Sumptuary Laws. Public display of status was a very important feature of Roman society. The Romans required that their status and rank was immediately recognized, in order to be meaningful. The clothing of wealthy and upper class Roman males made their rank immediately visible in terms of the materials used, the style of clothing and the color of their clothing. The color and width of the bands, or stripes of color, on tunics were called the clavus. The clavus, together with its style and color, were instantly recognizable as an indication of office or rank" (T&T, 2015).

However, it went a lot deeper than that. Here are some of the rules and regulations that came to pass as it related to sumptuary laws:

Women were only allowed to have an ounce of gold or less on their clothing…but no more.

The Emperor alone was allowed to wear the trabea, which was a toga that was entirely purple in color.

The statues of the Gods were also purple in color

Only the augurs were allowed to wear a saffron toga

Only the consuls engaging in public festivals and Equites during a parade were allowed to wear a white garment with a purple stripe on the tunic

Members of the Senates and their sons (but not daughters) were allowed the privilege of latus clavus, which was a broad purple stripe over a tunic

Roman citizens were permitted to wear the toga but regular and ordinary male citizens were allowed to wear the toga virilis upon reaching the age of seventeen.

The number of stripes on the tunic (known as the clavus) was regulated and based on social rank

Young men under the age of seventeen were allowed to wear a toga that was bordered in purple. This was known as the toga praetexta. However, these togas could also be seen on magistrates during certain ceremonies and other Roman gatherings.

The toga picta or toga palmate was a toga with a gold border. It was allowed to be worn by triumphant generals.

Only the Roman Matrons (i.e. married women) were allowed to wear what was called a stola.

Women who had allegedly engaged in adultery and/or prostitutes were not permitted to wear a stola. In what modern day people would call a scarlet letter of sorts, they were only allowed to wear togatae.

Trousers were actually forbidden starting in 423 AD. Emperor Honorius banned the wearing of trousers as they were deemed to be the garb of Barbarians and thus beneath any Roman wearing them.

Emperor Augustus undertook a similar measure when he banned the wearing of any dark-colored clothing in the media cavea of the theater (T&T, 2015).

More Garment Information

Some other sources found by the author of this report expanded on the garments and so forth mentioned before. There will be pictorial evidence that will drive home the points made from the earlier sources. In this first figure, there is a general diagram of some of the major garments worn in the Roman Empire:

Source: http://www.roman-empire.net/society/soc-dress.html

Above one can see pictorial examples of the toga, the stola, the palla and the cloak. Anyone that has seen the clothing of ancient Greece can see the clear corollaries and commonalities between Greek clothing and Roman clothing. In a bit of a paradox, the finer clothing had to be simple and basic. For example, stitching was not all that common because the fabric available at the time was not amenable to it. For example, a lot of clothing was made of wool and wool is not a material that can be sewn all that easily. Other times, linen was available but the patterns of clothing were usually the same regardless of what fabrics were available. The point is that the options commonly available had a large effect on what was done and what was not done vis-a-vis clothing. Further, the needles of that day were "coarse and unwieldy" as compared to what is commonly seen nowadays. Because needles were not commonly available nor used in that day, there was no way to put in button holes. As such, clothing had to be held together with fasteners such as broaches and clasps (Roman-Empire.net, 2015).

This source notes that the undergarments of the Romans were loin cloths that were knotted on each side. There were several different names for the garment including subligar, subligaculum, campestre, licium and cinctus. Women would be a little different due to obvious anatomical reasons. They would often wear a simple brassiere in the form of a band tied very snugly around the bust or under the bust, depending on the rest of the garments in question. They would commonly use linen from modern-day Spain, Syria and Egypt as it was deemed to be of the best quality. Obviously, those with higher means, status and so forth would have access while those that did not have such means would not have such access (Roman-Empire.net, 2015).

Tunic

The man pictured above is wearing the traditional shoes mentioned in prior sections as well as what is known as a tunic. As partially alluded to before, this was the standard dress in the Roman Empire. Slaves and most Romans would dress in the above and that is it. It would make up the entirety of what they wore while out in public. There were some differences which denoted social rank. As noted before, there was the latus clavus. This is what senators would wear. Similarly, there would be the angustus clavus, which was the mark of the equestrian order. The most ornate form of tunic was known as the dalmatica. In some cases, the dalmatica would replace the toga altogether during the later years of the Roman Empire. About the same time, trousers seeped into the outfit due to Germanic influence (Roman-Empire.net, 2015).

Toga

To add to what was said before, this other source asserts that some Romans would wear the tunic directly on the naked body rather than having underclothes. The toga is expressed in this other sources as basically a blanket being wrapped around the body in a certain way. Also, boys born to affluent families would commonly wear the toga. The toga would be about two and a half to three meters in many instances or up to five and a half meters in other cases. When mourning, there would be a special toga worn known as a toga pulla or a toga sordida. For formal occasions, people that would normally wear a toga would often eschew them in favor of a garment known as a synthesis (Roman-Empire.net, 2015).

Stola

Something mentioned only in passing before but will be covered with a picture this time is the stola, as worn by women. There was also an over-garment called a ricinium. Even with the simplicity of the stola, there were some frills and features to the stola that could be present in women of a certain stature. For example, the richer women would wear silk if they had the means to buy the material. However, it was only used for female vestments and it would never be worn by a man. The aforementioned ricinium was later relapced by a palla. The palla was quite similar to a toga in that it was draped around the body but was not nearly as bulky and "unwieldy" as it was with men's versions of togas and toga-like garments (Roman-Empire.net, 2015).

Children

Children were partially covered before in terms of some of them wearing togas but there is more to tell about them. For those that did not wear togas, there were those that wore simple tunics that were accompanied by a belt. Children also wore an amulet that was referred to as a bulla. Boys would typically wear this and remove it from their wardrobe, along with the other changes mentioned before, when the child reaches seventeen years old (Roman-Empire.net, 2015).

Cloaks

One thing not mentioned thus far but is definitely part of the sumptuary laws and the associated customs would be the cloak. Shown above is the sagum cloak, which was used and worn by soldiers and officers in the Roman army. Sometimes, cloaks in general would be worn on top of togas and other times it would replace the toga entirely. In terms of the cloaks that were worn, some is known about their name but not much else is known in a lot of cases. There was what was known as the pallium. It was worn over a tunic or a toga. It would seem that it was normally a highly-decorated item so it might have been the outer garment worn by the wealthy. The lacerna was a military cloak at one point but it was eventually worn by the middle class in Roman society. The paenula was a simpler kind of cloak as a shield from the weather. The ultimate cloak was the paludamentum which was worn only by the commander in chief of a military unit. The final cloak mentioned in this section is the laena, otherwise commonly known as the duplex, which was later replaced by the aforementioned sagum cloak (Roman-Empire.net, 2015).

Sumptuary Law Summary & Analysis

The question posed for this assignment stated "What were the political and social differences between the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, and how did it influence people's clothes and society at the time? How did sumptuary laws come into playing a role in the evolution of Roman dress and its importance in costume history?." The sumptuary laws and how the clearly stratified the people of the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire are described above. There was clearly a hierarchy of people in the Roman Empire and the Roman Republic and this was entirely clear all the way down to what people wore, how they wore it, what color or colors were on their garments and so forth. How much power and how many rights people had clearly mattered to the Roman people and this was enforced directly and completely by the way people were dressed. As noted before, someone dressing only in deep purple that was not the Emperor was begging for a hurting and punishment from the Empire. Not unlike what can be seen today, clothing in the Roman Empire exuded status and people were required to stick to the hierarchy.

To dig deeper in the sumptuary laws, the author of this report found a source as written by George Long. The applicable translations for "sumptuary laws" would be sumtua'riae leges, which is defined by Long as "the name of various laws passed to prevent inordinate expense in banquets, dress" and so forth. The government put these dress codes in place but the states of antiquity at the time dictated that "it was considered the duty of the government to put a check upon extravagance in the private expenses of persons, and among the Romans in particular we find traces of this in the laws attributed to the kings in the Twelve Tables." (Long, 2015). Indeed, people that were dressing beyond their means and/or beyond what was dictated by the censors fell into great disfavor with the people in power at the time. However, the sumptuary laws seemed to fade as the Roman Republic (and later the Roman Empire) progressed as they were later repealed as the Empire started to collapse (Long, 2015).

What follows next is a summary of some of the major sumptuary laws that were passed over time. Some have been mentioned without name already but some will be new:

Oppia: This one was proposed by the tribune known as C. Oppoius in the consulship of Q. Fabius and Ti. Sempronius in the middle of the second Punic War in roughly 213 BC. This was the law, briefly mentioned before, that said that women should have no more than an ounce of gold on their person. However, they were also banned from wearing dresses of different colors or riding a carriage in a city or town or even within a mile of the same. This law only lasted about twenty years and was later repealed (Long, 2015).

Orchia: This sumptuary law was proposed by C. Orchius in the third year after the censorship of Cato, which occurred in 181 BC. This limited the number of guests that could be present for an entertainment even. Repeals to ban this social order were attempted almost immediately thereafter but Cato was quite strong in keeping up this ban (Long, 2015).

Fannia: This sumptuary law was proposed by C. Fannius in 161 BC. It limited the amount of money that could be spent on entertainment events. For example, one rule was that no more than one hundred asses could be spent on certain festivals and events. On ten other days in each month, no more than thirty asses could be spent. On all other days, only 10 asses could be spent (Long, 2015).

Didia: When it came to Didia, this was passed in 143 BC and it extended the Lex Fannia to all of Italy. It further expanded the just-mentioned Fannia and prescribed penalties that would be due if people were to violate the rules given. There was not a lot of specificity about what would happen when speaking of these penalties but it is presumed that it was not an idle warning as this was consistent with the sumptuary laws and other similar laws in the Roman Empire (Long, 2015).

Licinia: The build-up and upkeep of the Lex Fannia was not consistent as they started to be ignored in terms of enforcement as time went on. It allowed 200 asses to be spent on marriage days. It further said that no more than three pounds of fresh and one pound of salt meat should be spent. The law was brought forth by P. Licinius Crassus but it is unclear when precisely this occurred. However, something that is known is that it was probably around 103 BC and there was a different person by the name of Favorinus that spoke highly of the law (Long, 2015).

Cornelia: Next up was law of a dictator known as Sulla and this was put forth in 81 BC. This related to any opulence and extravagance when it came to funerals. This related less to anyone being overjoyed and wasteful during the ceremony itself and surely related more to how much was spent on monuments, burial sites in general and so forth (Long, 2015).

Aemilia: Aemilia was proposed by the consul Aemilius Lepidus in 78 BC and it broke from the prior sets of laws in that it did not limit expenses on entertainment events held during the Roman Empire. Instead, it focused on the amount and kind of food that could be used. Pily and Aurelius Victor associated this law with the consulship of M. Aemilius Scaurus in 115 BC. There may have been two different laws that had Aemilius as its namesake but this is not known for sure (Long, 2015).

Anita: It is unclear when Anita was proposed or passed. However, it is known that it was proposed by Antius Restio. It took the unusual step of limiting where magistrates and the like could dine while they were abroad. As stated by Long, "besides limiting the expenses of entertainments, enacted that no actual magistrate, or magistrate elect, should dine abroad anywhere except at the houses of certain persons. Even with that law, it was regularly ignored and disregarded. It got to the point that Antius never dined out after that lest he see the law broken right in front of him (Long, 2015).

Julia: Proposed by dictator Julius Caesar himself, this was a further attempt to enforce and reinforce the sumptuary laws that were not being carried and enforced as they once were. Caesar tried to vigorously enforce the law but it was willfully ignored whilst Caesar was outside of Rome. However, this did not stop Caesar from having his goons try to enforce the law. Indeed, he "stationed officers in the provision market to seize all eatables forbidden by the law, and sometimes sent lictors and soldiers to banquets to take away everything which was not allowed by the law (Suet. Jul. 43). Cicero seems to refer to this law in two of his epistles (ad Fam.VII.26, IX.15) (Long, 2015).

Tiberius was famous for his attempted restraints on banquets and such that were grandiose and uninhibited in nature. For example, he forbade gold vases that were not for burial proceedings and the like but the rule was never followed. He also forbade silk garments on men (as mentioned before, it was limited to women) but that also seem to fall away even with the efforts of the leadership and their enforcement personnel. Just as Tiberius had a problem with it, Nero tried to check the opulence of dress and banquets in the Roman Empire but he was equally unsuccessful on the whole. The author that supplied the sumptuary law deails mentioned above had a pretty good quote that cleanly summarized the fact that the Romans were far from beign the only people that tried to limit and inhibit the fancy partying and behavior of its citizens but yet the efforts fall flat. As stated by Long:

"Our own legislation, which in its absurd as well as its best parts has generally some parallel in that of the Romans, contains many instances of Sumptuary Laws, which prescribed what kind of dress, and of what quality, should be worn by particular classes, and so forth. The English Sumptuary Statutes relating to apparel commenced with the 37th of Edward III. This statute, after declaring that the outrageous and excessive apparel of divers people against their estate and degree is the destruction and impoverishment of land, prescribes the apparel of the various classes into which it distributes the people; but it goes no higher than knights. The clothing of the women and children is also regulated. The next statute, 3rd of Edward IV., is very minute. This kind of statute-making went on at intervals to the 1st of Philip and Mary, when an act was passed for the Reformation of Excessive Apparel. These Apparel statutes were repealed by the 1st of James I (Long, 2015).

In other words, the Romans had a problem keeping a check on the festivities and much the same thing happened at the same time or later on when it came to rulers in England and in other places with similar examples (Long, 2015).