Patronage (clientela) was the distinctive relationship inancient Roman society between thepatronus ('patron') and theircliens ('client'). Apart from the patron-client relationship between individuals, there were also client kingdoms and tribes, whose rulers were in a subordinate relationship to the Roman state.
The relationship was hierarchical, but obligations were mutual. The patron was the protector, sponsor, and benefactor of the client; the technical term for this protection waspatrocinium.[1] Although typically the client was of inferior social class,[2] a patron and client might even hold the same social rank, but the former would possess greater wealth, power, or prestige that enabled him to help or do favors for the client.
From the emperor at the top to the commoner at the bottom, the bonds between these groups found formal expression in the legal definition of patrons' responsibilities to clients.[3] Patronage relationships were not exclusively between two people and also existed between ageneral andhis soldiers, afounder and colonists, and a conqueror and adependent foreign community.[4]
Benefits a client may be granted includelegal representation in court, loans of money, influencing business deals ormarriages, and supporting a client's candidacy forpolitical office or apriesthood. Arranging marriages for their daughters, clients were often able to secure new patrons and extend their influence in the political arena.[5] In return for these services, the clients were expected to offer their services to their patron as needed. A client's service to the patron included accompanying the patron in Rome or when he went to war,ransoming him if he was captured, and supporting him during political campaigns.[6][7][8]
Requests were usually made byclientela at a daily morning reception at the patron's home, known as thesalutatio. The patron would receive his clients at dawn in theatrium andtablinum, after which the clients would escort the patron to theforum.[9] The number of clients who accompanied their patron was seen as a symbol of the patron's prestige.[6] The client was regarded as a minor member of their patron'sgens, entitled to assist in itssacra gentilicia, and bound to contribute to the cost of them. The client was subject to the jurisdiction and discipline of the gens, and was entitled to burial in its commonsepulchre.[10]
One of the major spheres of activity within patron–client relations was thelaw courts, butclientela was not itself a legal contract, although it was supported by law fromearliest Roman times.[11] The pressures to uphold one's obligations were primarily moral, founded onancestral custom, and on qualities ofgood faith on the part of the patron andloyalty on the part of the client.[12] The patronage relationship was not a discrete one, but a network, since apatronus might himself be obligated to someone of higher status or greater power. Aclient might have more than one patron, whose interests could come into conflict. While theRomanfamilia ('family', but more broadly the "household") was the building block of society, interlocking networks of patronage created highly complex social bonds.[13]
Reciprocity ethics played a major role in the patron-client system. Favors given from patron to client and client to patron do not cancel each other; instead, the giving of favors and counter favors was symbolic of the personal relationship between patron and client. As a consequence, the act of returning a favor was done more out of a sense of gratuity and less so because a favor needed to be returned.[14]
The regulation of the patronage relationship was believed by the Greek historiansDionysius andPlutarch to be one of the early concerns ofRomulus. Hence, it was dated to the veryfounding of Rome.[10] In the earliest periods, patricians would have served as patrons. Bothpatricius, 'patrician', andpatronus are related to the Latin wordpater, 'father', in this sense symbolically, indicating thepatriarchal nature of Roman society. Although other societies have similar systems, thepatronus cliens relationship was "peculiarly congenial" to Roman politics and the sense offamilia in theRoman Republic.[15] An important person demonstrated their prestige ordignitas by the number of clients they had.[16]
 | This sectiondoes notcite anysources. Please helpimprove this section byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged andremoved.(July 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
When aslave wasmanumitted, the former owner became their patron. Thefreedman(libertus) had social obligations to their patron, which might involve campaigning on their behalf if the patron ran for election, doing requested jobs or errands, or continuing asexual relationship that began in servitude. In return, the patron was expected to ensure a certain degree of material security for their client. Allowing one's clients to becomedestitute or entangled in unjust legal proceedings would reflect poorly on the patron and diminish their prestige.[citation needed]
The complex patronage relationships changed with the social pressures during thelate Republic, when terms such aspatronus,cliens andpatrocinium are used in a more restricted sense thanamicitia, 'friendship', including political friendships and alliances, orhospitium, reciprocal "guest–host" bonds between families.[17] It can be difficult to distinguishpatrocinium orclientela,amicitia, andhospitium, since their benefits and obligations overlap.[18] Traditionalclientela began to lose its importance as a social institution during the 2nd century BC;[19]Fergus Millar doubts that it was the dominant force inRoman elections that it has often been seen as.[20]
Throughout the evolution from republic to empire we see the most diversity between patrons. Patrons from all positions of power sought to build their power through the control of clients and resources. More and more patronage extended over entire communities whether based on political decree, benefaction by an individual who becomes the community's patron, or by the community formally adopting a patron.[21]
Both sides had expectations of one another. The community expected protection from outside forces, while the patron expected a loyal following for things such as political campaigning and manpower should the need arise. The extent of a person's client relationships was often taken into account when looking for an expression of their potential political power.[21]
Patronage in the late empire differed from patronage in the republic. Patrons protected individual clients from the tax collector and other public obligations. In return, clients gave them money or services. Some clients even surrendered ownership of their land to their patron. The emperors were unable to prevent this type of patronage effectively.[22] The significance ofclientela changed along with the social order duringlate antiquity. By the 10th century,clientela meant a contingent of armed retainers ready to enforce theirlord's will. A young man serving in a military capacity, separate from the entourage that constituted a noble'sfamilia or "household", might be termed avavasor in documents.[citation needed]
Several influential Romans, such asCaesar andAugustus, established client–patron relationships in conquered regions. This can be seen in Caesar’s relations with theAedui ofGaul wherein he was able to restore their influence over the other Gallic tribes who were once their clients. Hereafter he was asked on several occasions to serve the duties of a patron by the Aedui and was thus regarded by many in Rome as the patron of the Aedui.[21]
Augustus establishedcolonies in all parts of the empire during his conquests which extended his influence to its furthest reaches. He also made many acts of kindness to the whole of Rome at large, including food and monetary handouts, as well as settling soldiers in new colonies that he sponsored, which indebted a great many people to him.[6] Through these examples, Augustus altered the form of patronage to one that suited his ambitions for power, encouraging acts that would benefit Roman society over selfish interests.[21] Although rare, it was possible for women to be patronesses.[23]
Patronage and its many forms allowed for a minimal form of administration bound by personal relations between parties and thus in thelate Republic patronage served as a model for ruling.[21][24] Conquerors orgovernors abroad established personal ties as patron to whole communities, ties which then might be perpetuated as a family obligation.[25] One such instance was the Marcelli's patronage of theSicilians, asClaudius Marcellus had conqueredSyracuse and Sicily.[26]
Extendingrights orcitizenship tomunicipalities orprovincial families was one way to add to the number of one's clients for political purposes, asPompeius Strabo did among theTranspadanes.[27] This form of patronage contributed to the new role created byAugustus as sole ruler after the collapse of the Republic, when he cultivated an image as the patron of theEmpire as a whole.
Various professional and other corporations, such ascollegia andsodalitates, awarded statutory titles such aspatronus orpater patratus to benefactors.
Chronologically:
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
