In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • The Material Life of Roman Slaves by Sandra R. Joshel, Lauren Hackworth Petersen
  • Juan P. Lewis
Sandra R. Joshel and Lauren Hackworth Petersen. The Material Life of Roman Slaves. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. xv + 286 pp. 16 color plates. Hardback, £65.00.

This is an original book, even though it is does not contain new research or new findings. The title may be somewhat misleading. Rather than a general study of Roman slaves’ material culture, the reader will find here an anthropology of the architecture of the spaces and built environments in which slaves dwelt and toiled (5). Thus, the focus is not so much on the material conditions in which slaves lived or the artifacts they worked with, but on the layout of a small set of first century c.e. houses, streets and economic units, mostly found in the Bay of Naples, Ostia, and the ager Cosanus. The study of space serves Joshel and Hackworth Petersen as an attempt to reconstruct slaves’ responses, through adaptation and challenge, to the choreography of movements imposed on them by their masters.

Methodologically, this investigation operates on the distinction developed by Michel De Certeau (The Practice of Everyday Life [1988]) between the strategies of the powerful to delimit a space in which power relations can be managed to their own advantage and the tactics of the weak to seize the opportunities to use an imposed spatial order for their own ends (8). The authors see their work as “an act of remembrance” (222). Their aim is to make invisible slaves visible again. Slaves, they contend, have not only been silenced in classical texts written by and from the point of view of slave owners. In the process of collecting and analyzing ancient material, and in the crafting of their historic narratives, modern archaeologists, art historians, and even tourism authorities have “actively, if unwittingly made [slaves] disappear” (3). To redress the imbalance, Joshel and Hackworth Petersen walk away from mere static descriptions of archaeological sites and concentrate on the dynamic of slaves’ movements within those spaces.

Although the authors rely on other archaeologists and historians’ fieldwork and interpretation of the material remains, they themselves visited most of the sites and buildings they describe. The book is profusely illustrated with sixteen plates and 170 figures, among which we find the authors’ own photographs of some of the structures they discuss, such as doorways, storage rooms, stairs, porticos, kitchens, street benches, and fountains. Other illustrations consist of maps of Pompeii, Herculaneum, and Ostia (19–21), street plans of Pompeii (plates VI, VII, and XI), and building plans of the houses, workshops and villae dealt with in the body of the text. Constant cross-reference to these images and drawings helps the reader to see and understand space in three dimensions, something [End Page 709] that it is not always easy to elicit from illustrations and archaeological reports in which findings are presented in a two-dimensional plane.

The book is divided into six chapters. The Introduction (chap. 1) lays out the aims of the book and the methodological approach chosen by the authors. In the next four chapters, the discussion of built environments moves from the inside to the outside and from an urban set-up to the rural world. Chapter 2 focuses on the architectural layout of houses from Campania and Rome’s port-town, Ostia: namely, the houses of the Menander, Julius Polybius, Sutoria Primigenia, the Smith, Lucretius Fronto, the Ceii, the Vetii, and the Gilded Cupids in Pompeii; the houses of the Corinthian Atrium, the Mosaic Atrium, the Alcove, the Beautiful Courtyard, the Samnite, and the Grand Portal in Herculaneum; and the Ostian house of the Muses.

The analysis of the Roman domestic landscape uses Andrew Wallace-Hadrill’s two axes of differentiation between the grand and the humble and the public and the private (Houses and Societies in Pompeii and Herculaneum [1994]:38), but the emphasis is on the slaves’ perspective within this framework, rather than the owners’—even though the latter is not absent. Particular attention is given to doorways and how they helped to choreograph movements through their diverse heights and hierarchical positions...

pdf

Share