In the annalistic tradition ofLivy andDionysius, the distinction between patricians and plebeians was as old as Rome itself, instituted byRomulus' appointment of the first hundred senators, whose descendants became the patriciate.[3] Modern hypotheses date the distinction "anywhere from the regal period to the late fifth century" BC.[3] The 19th-century historianBarthold Georg Niebuhr believed plebeians were possibly foreigners immigrating fromother parts of Italy.[4] This hypothesis, that plebeians were racially distinct from patricians, however, is not supported by the ancient evidence.[2][5] Alternatively, the patriciate may have been defined by their monopolisation of hereditary priesthoods that grantedex officio membership in the senate.[6] Patricians also may have emerged from a nucleus of the rich religious leaders who formed themselves into a closed elite after accomplishing theexpulsion of the kings.[7]
In the earlyRoman Republic, there are attested 43 clan names, of which 10 are plebeian with 17 of uncertain status.[3]
There existed an aristocracy of wealthy families in the regal period, but "a clear-cut distinction ofbirth does not seem to have become important before the foundation of the Republic".[2] The literary sources hold that in the early Republic, plebeians were excluded frommagistracies, religiouscolleges, and theSenate.[2] However, some scholars doubt that patricians monopolised the magistracies of the early republic, as plebeian names appear in the lists of Roman magistrates back to the fifth century BC.[8] It is likely that patricians, over the course of the first half of the fifth century, were able to close off high political office from plebeians and exclude plebeians from permanent social integration through marriage.[9]
Plebeians were enrolled into thecuriae and the tribes; they also served in the army and also in army officer roles astribuni militum.[2]
The Conflict of the Orders (Latin:ordo meaning "social rank") refers to a struggle by plebeians for full political rights from the patricians.[10] According to Roman tradition, shortly after the establishment of the Republic, plebeians objected to their exclusion from power and exploitation by the patricians. The plebeians were able to achieve their political goals by a series of secessions from the city: "a combination of mutiny and a strike".[11]
Ancient Roman tradition claimed that the Conflict led to laws being published, written down, and given open access starting in 494 BC with the law of theTwelve Tables, which also introduced the concept of equality before the law, often referred to in Latin aslibertas, which became foundational to republican politics.[12] This succession also forced the creation ofplebeian tribunes with authority to defend plebeian interests.[10] Following this, there was a period ofconsular tribunes who shared power between plebeians and patricians in various years, but the consular tribunes apparently were not endowed with religious authority.[13] In 445 BC, thelex Canuleia permitted intermarriage among plebeians and patricians.[14]
There was a radical reform in 367–6 BC, which abolished consular tribunes and "laid the foundation for a system of government led by two consuls, shared between patricians and plebeians"[15] over the religious objections of patricians, requiring at least one of the consuls to be a plebeian.[16] And after 342 BC, plebeians regularly attained the consulship.[17]Debt bondage was abolished in 326, freeing plebeians from the possibility of slavery by patrician creditors.[18] By 287, with the passage of thelex Hortensia, plebiscites – or laws passed by theconcilium plebis – were made binding on the whole Roman people.[19] Moreover, it banned senatorial vetoes of plebeian council laws.[20][verification needed] And also around the year 300 BC, the priesthoods also were shared between patricians and plebeians, ending the "last significant barrier to plebeian emancipation".[19]
The veracity of the traditional story is profoundly unclear: "many aspects of the story as it has come down to us must be wrong, heavily modernised... or still much more myth than history".[21] Substantial portions of the rhetoric put into the mouths of the plebeian reformers of the early Republic are likely imaginative reconstructions reflecting the late republican politics of their writers.[8] Contradicting claims that plebs were excluded from politics from the fall of the monarchy, plebeians appear in the consular lists during the early fifth century BC.[8] The form of the state may also have been substantially different, with a temporary ad hoc "senate", not taking on fully classical elements for more than a century from the republic's establishment.[22]
The completion of plebeian political emancipation was founded on a republican ideal dominated bynobiles, who were defined not by caste or heredity, but by their accession to the high offices of state, elected from both patrician and plebeian families.[23] There was substantial convergence in this class of people, with a complex culture of preserving the memory of and celebrating one's political accomplishments and those of one's ancestors.[24] This culture also focused considerably on achievements in terms of war and personal merit.[17]
Throughout theSecond Samnite War (326–304 BC), plebeians who had risen to power through these social reforms began to acquire the aura ofnobilitas ("nobility", also "fame, renown"), marking the creation of a ruling elite ofnobiles.[25] From the mid-4th century to the early 3rd century BC, several plebeian–patrician "tickets" for the consulship repeated joint terms, suggesting a deliberate political strategy of cooperation.[26]
No contemporary definition ofnobilis ornovus homo (a person entering the nobility) exists; Mommsen, positively referenced by Brunt (1982), said thenobiles were patricians, patrician whose families had become plebeian (in a conjecturaltransitio ad plebem), and plebeians who had held curule offices (e.g., dictator, consul, praetor, and curule aedile).[27] Becoming a senator after election to a quaestorship did not make a man anobilis, only those who were entitled to acurule seat werenobiles.[28] However, by the time ofCicero in the post-Sullan Republic, the definition ofnobilis had shifted.[29] Now,nobilis came to refer only to former consuls and the direct relatives and male descendants thereof.[29] The new focus on the consulship "can be directly related to the many other displays of pedigree and family heritage that became increasingly common after Sulla" and with the expanded senate and number of praetors diluting the honour of the lower offices.[30]
A person becomingnobilis by election to the consulate was anovus homo (a new man).Marius andCicero are notable examples ofnovi homines (new men) in the late Republic,[31] when many of Rome's richest and most powerful men – such asLucullus,Marcus Crassus, andPompey – were plebeian nobles.
In the later Republic, the term lost its indication of a social order or formal hereditary class, becoming used instead to refer to citizens of lower socio-economic status.[2] By the early empire, the word was used to refer to people who were not senators (of the empire or of the local municipalities) orequestrians.[2]
Much less is known about the plebeians than the patricians in Ancient Rome, as most could not write, and thus could not record what happened in their daily life.[32]
The average plebeian did not come into a wealthy family; the politically activenobiles as a whole comprised a very small portion of the whole population. The average plebeian child was expected to enter the workforce at a young age.
Education was limited to what their parent would teach them, which consisted of only learning the very basics of writing, reading and mathematics. Wealthier plebeians were able to send their children to schools or hire a private tutor.[33]
Throughout Roman society at all levels including plebeians, thepaterfamilias (oldest male in the family) held ultimate authority over household manners. Sons could have no authority over fathers at any point in their life. Women had a subservient position in the family to fathers and husbands.[33]
Plebeians who lived in the cities were referred to asplebs urbana.[34]
Plebeians in ancient Rome lived in three or four-storey buildings calledinsula, apartment buildings that housed many families. These apartments usually lacked running water and heat. These buildings had no bathrooms and was common for a pot to be used.[33] The quality of these buildings varied. Accessing upper floors was done via a staircase from the street they were built on. Sometimes these were built around a courtyard and of these, some were built around a courtyard containing a cistern. Lower floors were of higher quality while the higher ones were less so. By the beginning of the Roman Empire, theinsulaes were deemed to be so dangerous because of a risk to collapse that Emperor Augustus passed a law limiting the height of the buildings to 18 metres (59 ft) but it appeared this law was not closely followed as buildings appeared that were six or seven floors high.[35] Plebeian apartments had frescoes and mosaics on them to serve as decorations.[36] Rents for housing in cities was often high because of the amount of demand and simultaneously low supply.[37] Rents were higher in Rome than other cities in Italy along with other provincial cities.[33] The owner of the insulae did not attend to duties regarding it and instead used aninsularius who was most often an educated slave or a freedman instead. Their job was to collect rent from tenants, manage disputes between individual tenants and be responsible for maintenance.[38]
Not all plebeians lived in these conditions, as some wealthier plebs were able to live in single-family homes, called adomus.[33] Another type of housing that existed wasdiversorias (lodging houses)[35]Tabernae which were made of timber frames and wicker walls open to streets with the exception of shutters being one to two floors high with tightly packed spaces.[37]
Plebeian men wore atunic, generally made of wool felt or inexpensive material, with a belt at the waist, as well as sandals.[39] Meanwhile, women wore a long dress called astola. Roman fashion trends changed very little over the course of many centuries. However, hairstyles and facial hair patterns changed as initially early plebeian men had beards before a clean shaven look became more popular during the Republican era before having facial hair was popularized again byEmperor Hadrian in the 2nd century AD. Some plebeian women would wear cosmetics made from charcoal and chalk. Romans generally wore clothes with bright colors and did wear a variety of jewelry.[33]
Since meat was very expensive, animal products such as pork, beef and veal would have been considered a delicacy to plebeians. Instead, a plebeian diet mainly consisted of bread and vegetables. Common flavouring for their food included honey, vinegar and different herbs and spices. A well-known condiment to this day known asgarum, which is a fish sauce, was also largely consumed.[33] Apartments often did not have kitchens in them so families would get food from restaurants and/or bars.[40]
One popular outlet of entertainment for Roman plebeians was to attend large entertainment events such as gladiator matches, military parades, religious festivals and chariot races. As time went on, politicians increased the number of games in an attempt to win over votes and make the plebeians happy.[33] A popular dice game among plebeians was calledalea.[41]
Plebeians who resided in urban areas had to often deal with job insecurity, low pay, unemployment and high prices[34] along with underemployment.[37] A standard workday lasted for 6 hours although the length of the hours varied as Romans divided the day into 12 daytime hours and 12 nighttime hours; with the hours being determined based on the seasons. Cicero wrote in the late republican period that he estimated the average laborer working in the city of Rome earned 6 1/2denarii a day which was 5 times what a provincial worker would make. By middle of the 1st century AD this number was higher because of inflation but however the high cost of living in the city of Rome kept the value of real wages down.[33]
Some plebeians would sell themselves into slavery or their children in order to have access to wealthy households and to them hopefully advance socially along with getting a chance to have an education. Another way plebeians would try to advance themselves was by joining the military which became easier after theMarian reforms as soldiers were expected to pay for their own weapons. By joining the military they could get a fixed salary, share of war loot along with a pension and an allotted land parcel.[42][better source needed] There was also the reward of getting citizenship for non-citizens. Potential recruits needed to meet a variety of requirements as well which included: being male, at least 172 centimetres (5.64 ft) tall, enlist before one was 35, having aletter of recommendation and completing training.[43]
Since the construction ofPhilippine Military Academy, the system and traditions were programmed the same as theUnited States Military Academy. First Year Cadets in PMA are calledPlebes orPlebos (short term for Fourth Class Cadets) because they are still civilian antiques and they are expected to master first the spirit ofFollowership. As plebes, they are also expected to become the "working force (force men or"porsmen") in the Corps of Cadets.
The British comedy showPlebs followed plebeians during ancient Rome.[47]
InMargaret Atwood's novelOryx and Crake, there is a major class divide. The rich and educated live in safeguarded facilities while others live in dilapidated cities referred to as the "pleeblands".[48]
^CfCornell 1995, p. 244. "That anyone could ever have thought that the Conflict of the Orders arose from a primordial division of the community into two ethnic groups is almost beyond belief".
^abcSchultz, Celia E.; Ward, Allen M.; Heichelheim, F. M.; Yeo, C. A. (2019).A History of the Roman People. Taylor & Francis.ISBN9781351754705.Unemployment and underemployment caused hardship for many. Housing was in high demand and short supply. Rents were steep for even the worst accommodations. This situation encourage overcrowding. That, in turn, produced serious health, sanitation, and safety problems. People lived in tightly packed rows of flimsy tabernae, one- or two-story buildings with timber frames and wicker walls open to the street except shutters.
^Yavetz, Z. (1958)."The Living Conditions of the Urban Plebs in Republican Rome".Latomus.17 (3): 515.JSTOR41521048.The owner of the insula did not attend to it himself. A so called insularius was installed for that purpose, who was often a freedman, or sometimes an educated slave. The insularius was responsible for the maintenance of good order in the house; he would settle disputes between tenants, and collect the rent at fixed times in the year.
