Greetings ladies and gentlemen! From the forested regions of the Pacific Northwest, deep in the heart of tree-hugging hippy territory, comes a man... er, thing, dressed in suspenders and a scruffy beard, ready to present to us his latest assignment! Let’s give a hand for... Rone!
(golf-clapping, light, forced applause)
Rone: Thank you, thank you! For my first trick, I would like to present... a historical argument about Roman marriage using primary sources!
(light applause and some moaning)
*ahem*
YOUR NAME: Brandon Dennis
SOURCES: #51, #55 and #70 in The Roman Household by Jane F. Gardner and Thomas Wiedemann
1) Select two or three pieces of evidence. What significant idea about or interpretation of this evidence are you willing to defend?
Contrary to our discussions in class, I believe these passages demonstrate a clear love—feeling, emotion, genuine love—between the wife and the husband, and that an arranged marriage does not negate the possibility of love between the spouses, even a love that we, in our own society, would recognize as romantic love.
2) What arguments, reasons or evidence of other features support your position?
For instance, in #51 (Eulogy of Turia) her husband mentions that “we wanted children”, not simply he, the husband, but also she, the wife. In furtherance of this aim, since she considered herself unable to bear him children, she offered to divorce him so that he could find a woman who would bear him children, but he disliked this notion immensely for he could not see himself married to anyone else, I believe, because he loved her, and she him. Also in #55, in an epitaph, the deceased’s husband says that they shared “married affection” and that he hopes people will “understand how deeply we loved one another.” Pliny, in one of his letters (#70), mentions that his wife loved him, “even go[ing] so far as to take an interest in literature”, reading his writings and being thoroughly interested in what he does.
3) What is/are the strongest major counter position(s)? What arguments, reasons, evidence or other features support this/these counter position(s)?
I believe the strongest argument against this notion would be that, if there was true love between spouses as we ourselves understand it, it was a fluke, and that the vast majority of women were expected to do the proper things that women did, without the feeling of love, for the sake of the domus. The critic would then cite sources that mention women who hated their husbands or who were eager for their husbands to be jailed for she would consider herself free to fool around. One might also say that the epitaphs were written by men, so surely they would write anything they wanted about their women.
4) How would you overcome these counterpoints?
To overcome this, I would say that in our own society we have people who are married out of convenience, or who get in quarrels that can be sometime harsh, or are only married because they were expected to be married and never loved each other; yet we do not believe that an emotional, romantic love is a fable or that it doesn’t exist between many (or even most) married couples. I would also say that many of the epitaphs recount all the good qualities of their wives, most being that she never quarreled with her husband, was a good worker, bore him children etc.; but comments like “we loved each other deeply” or “she showed herself to love me by being interested in the things I was interested in” were rare on such epitaphs, thus probably not expected to be written. I might also point out the fallacy in assuming that simply because a man wrote the epitaph that he is therefore untrustworthy or that he is lying, for indeed it is quite possible that he is not lying and that she never did quarrel with him, was a superb housewife, and that she truly showed her love towards him. Also, the omission on an epitaph or letter of the wife’s love for her husband or his love for her is no means of concluding that love did not exist; after all, how many gravestones in our cemeteries are rather simple, showing the name and dates of birth and death, simply because a more elaborate stone is too expensive? I believe there is ample evidence that Romans did experience romantic love as we know it, even in arranged marriages under the authority of the potestas.
There you have it folks! Straight from the horse’s mouth! And now you know...
What Rone Is Writing!
(golf-clapping, light, forced applause)
Rone: Thank you, thank you! For my first trick, I would like to present... a historical argument about Roman marriage using primary sources!
(light applause and some moaning)
*ahem*
YOUR NAME: Brandon Dennis
SOURCES: #51, #55 and #70 in The Roman Household by Jane F. Gardner and Thomas Wiedemann
1) Select two or three pieces of evidence. What significant idea about or interpretation of this evidence are you willing to defend?
Contrary to our discussions in class, I believe these passages demonstrate a clear love—feeling, emotion, genuine love—between the wife and the husband, and that an arranged marriage does not negate the possibility of love between the spouses, even a love that we, in our own society, would recognize as romantic love.
2) What arguments, reasons or evidence of other features support your position?
For instance, in #51 (Eulogy of Turia) her husband mentions that “we wanted children”, not simply he, the husband, but also she, the wife. In furtherance of this aim, since she considered herself unable to bear him children, she offered to divorce him so that he could find a woman who would bear him children, but he disliked this notion immensely for he could not see himself married to anyone else, I believe, because he loved her, and she him. Also in #55, in an epitaph, the deceased’s husband says that they shared “married affection” and that he hopes people will “understand how deeply we loved one another.” Pliny, in one of his letters (#70), mentions that his wife loved him, “even go[ing] so far as to take an interest in literature”, reading his writings and being thoroughly interested in what he does.
3) What is/are the strongest major counter position(s)? What arguments, reasons, evidence or other features support this/these counter position(s)?
I believe the strongest argument against this notion would be that, if there was true love between spouses as we ourselves understand it, it was a fluke, and that the vast majority of women were expected to do the proper things that women did, without the feeling of love, for the sake of the domus. The critic would then cite sources that mention women who hated their husbands or who were eager for their husbands to be jailed for she would consider herself free to fool around. One might also say that the epitaphs were written by men, so surely they would write anything they wanted about their women.
4) How would you overcome these counterpoints?
To overcome this, I would say that in our own society we have people who are married out of convenience, or who get in quarrels that can be sometime harsh, or are only married because they were expected to be married and never loved each other; yet we do not believe that an emotional, romantic love is a fable or that it doesn’t exist between many (or even most) married couples. I would also say that many of the epitaphs recount all the good qualities of their wives, most being that she never quarreled with her husband, was a good worker, bore him children etc.; but comments like “we loved each other deeply” or “she showed herself to love me by being interested in the things I was interested in” were rare on such epitaphs, thus probably not expected to be written. I might also point out the fallacy in assuming that simply because a man wrote the epitaph that he is therefore untrustworthy or that he is lying, for indeed it is quite possible that he is not lying and that she never did quarrel with him, was a superb housewife, and that she truly showed her love towards him. Also, the omission on an epitaph or letter of the wife’s love for her husband or his love for her is no means of concluding that love did not exist; after all, how many gravestones in our cemeteries are rather simple, showing the name and dates of birth and death, simply because a more elaborate stone is too expensive? I believe there is ample evidence that Romans did experience romantic love as we know it, even in arranged marriages under the authority of the potestas.
* * *
There you have it folks! Straight from the horse’s mouth! And now you know...
What Rone Is Writing!
Comment