Social Classes Were Distinct and Followed a Hierarchy in Both Pompeii and Herculaneum

Social Classes Were Distinct and Followed a Hierarchy in Both Pompeii and Herculaneum

Social classes were distinct and followed a hierarchy in both Pompeii and Herculaneum. At the top of the social ladder were senatorial elite. These were usually politicians from Rome who would use Pompeii and Herculaneum as holiday locations. Cicero’s luxurious Villa at Pompeii and a statue of Proconsul Balbus in Herculaneum are examples of the presence of the senatorial elite. Next on the social ladder was the local elite. These were usually privileged citizens who were part of local politics. Examples of this include Source E where a tomb inscription states “ For Aulus..duumvir with judicial power…”. The emphasis of the political roles highlights the importance of such status for local citizens. The high status of the local elite is also emphasised in the distinctions of sating for prominent Pompeiians found at the local Ampitheatre. Freedman were also a social class and were ex-slaves who either bought their freedom or were manumitted from their owners. Evidence from Source W which states ‘Naevolia…freedwoman of Lucius, set this up for herself’, is evidence of the existence of freepersons in Pompeii. The inclusion of ‘freedwomen’ indicate that they were not ashamed of the social standing and also highlights that women could enjoy considerable wealth as she set up the tomb inscription for herself. Another example of the status enjoyed by wealthy women is seen in Source D. Eumachia was a priestess and this reveals the religious roles for women in economic activity. One group omitted in both Source D and E are the slaves and lack of evidence may indicate that they had no social status. Evidence of shackles found reveal that slaves were chained up and might indicate that some attempt to escape.