Roman Freedmen and Slavery in a Pompeii Epitaph
This paper examines article G32, a funerary epitaph from Pompeii that commemorates a freed slave couple — Marcus Petacius Dasius and Petacia Vitalis — and their freeborn son, Marcus Petacius Severus. Drawing on Cooley and Cooley's Pompeii: A Sourcebook and Seneca's letters, the paper analyzes what the inscription reveals about Roman slavery, the practice of manumission, patron-client relationships, tribal affiliation, naming conventions, and gender hierarchy. The epitaph demonstrates that freedpeople occupied a distinctive and evolving social position in Roman society, and that the status of their children differed significantly from their own, illustrating the complex stratification of citizenship and social mobility in ancient Rome.
- Introduction: The Pompeii Epitaph G32: Overview of the G32 inscription and its significance
- Slavery in Ancient Rome: Structure, origins, and harshness of Roman slavery
- Manumission and the Patron-Client Relationship: Legal ceremony of manumission and ongoing patron ties
- Naming Conventions and Gender Roles: How names reflect hierarchy and gender in Rome
- Tribal Membership and Citizenship Rights: Freeborn son's tribal designation and full citizenship
- Conclusion: Social mobility and stratification among freedpeople
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its analysis in a specific primary source — a real funerary inscription — and unpacks it layer by layer, moving from the textual evidence outward to broader social and historical context.
- It integrates multiple types of sources effectively: an archaeological sourcebook (Cooley and Cooley), a classical literary text (Seneca's Letter 47), and secondary historical scholarship, giving the argument both textual and contextual support.
- Each section connects back to the original inscription, keeping the analysis focused and preventing the paper from drifting into general historical summary.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates close reading of a primary source artifact: it treats each element of the inscription — the sequence of names, tribal designation, freedman/freedwoman labels — as evidence requiring interpretation. This method, common in classics and ancient history, shows how a single brief document can open up broad questions about social structure, law, and daily life.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by introducing the inscription and its scholarly context, then moves through thematic sections covering the institution of slavery, the ceremonial and legal dimensions of manumission, naming customs and gender hierarchy, and finally tribal membership and citizenship. The conclusion synthesizes these themes, showing how the epitaph illuminates social mobility and stratification in Roman society. The structure is broadly thematic rather than purely chronological.
Introduction: The Pompeii Epitaph G32
G32: [Marcus Pe]tacius Dasius, freedman of Marcus. [To Marcus Pe]tacius Severus, son of Marcus, of the Menenian tribe, his son; to Petacia Vitalis, freedwoman of Marcus, freedwoman.
Article G32 in Pompeii is an epitaph from a tomb. As Cooley and Cooley (2004) point out, "inscriptions carved in stone on public and private monuments were intended to perpetuate the memory of the individuals concerned" (p. 1). Tomb carvings like this one can be used to "provide a vivid picture of life in an ordinary town" in ancient Rome (Cooley and Cooley, 2004, p. 2). Although some parts of the original inscription are missing — indicated by Cooley and Cooley (2004) with brackets — the reader can fully understand the context and multiple meanings of the epitaph. The most notable feature of the inscription is that it refers to a freedman, a freedwoman, and their child.
The epitaph therefore raises a range of questions about the role of slaves in Roman society and the specific structure of Roman slavery. For example, it points to the evolving relationship between slaves and masters, and between liberated slaves and their former masters — now their patrons. The epitaph also reveals that the same master, Marcus, owned both the freedman and the freedwoman, which raises questions about gender roles and marriage norms in ancient Rome.
Furthermore, the son of the two former slaves was born free under Roman law. The epitaph mentions the tribe to which the patron Marcus belongs because the son of the freedman and freedwoman automatically becomes a member of that tribe. Thus, the nature of tribal lineage and membership is also called into question. Article G32 triggers inquiry into the political, social, cultural, and demographic dimensions of daily life in ancient Rome.
As Cooley and Cooley (2004) note, Pompeii was a minor town and not especially important within the empire. Even so, this single artifact reveals a great deal about life throughout the empire. Freedmen and freedwomen "were a distinctive feature of Roman society, and became increasingly prominent from the Augustan period onwards," until 212 CE (p. 146). Manumission was a great honor and a significant ceremonial act in ancient Rome. Former slaves were "keen to celebrate their achievement in becoming Roman citizens," and one way of expressing this was by advertising it on their gravestones (Cooley and Cooley, 2004, p. 146). Because of this eagerness to advertise their social status, freedmen and freedwomen are "consequently over-represented in the funerary record" (Cooley and Cooley, 2004, p. 146).
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.