Vanderbilt University
Clas146/Summer 2002
Vanderbilt University
Clas146/Summer 2002
M - F 10:10-12:00
Wilson 122
e-mail: daniel.p.solomon@vanderbilt.edu
Office hours: M - F after class or by appointment, in Furman 327 (tel: 3-4134).
General infopaper guidelines
Required texts:
1) Jones & Sidwell, The World of Rome (CUP. 1997)2) R. Mellor, The Historians of Ancient Rome (Routledge. 1998)
3) Virgil, The Aeneid: a New Prose Translation (Penguin. 1991)
3) Plutarch, Roman Lives (tr. Waterfield) (Oxford, 1999)
5) Class Pak, available from Campus Copy.
Please bring to each class all assigned texts, which we will be consulting together extensively.
Objectives:
This course aims to provide the broadest possible overview to the civilization of ancient Rome. In considering political, social, and cultural developments between the 7th century BC and the 4th century AD, we shall be exploring to what extent is it helpful to posit a distinct and unchanging Roman "identity." To this end, we will distinguish between four separate phases of Roman history; for each of these, we will compare primary and secondary documents (that is, how they said they lived and how later generations thought they lived). Romans' outlooks over the centuries changed in some respects but remained consistent in others; by the end of the semester, we will have isolated the values that inspired them, and we will better understand the various manifestations of their ideals, whether in artistic achievements, public policies or private interactions.
Your final paper and exams should reflect above all educated criticism of our sources, so that you may reach a conclusion for yourselves as to what made the Romans essentially "Roman." Throughout this semester we will try to abstain from passing value judgments, whether on the excesses of Roman cruelty or on the benefits of Roman empire. Feel free to form your own sympathies or antipathies, but the whole point of Classics 146 is to present the Romans, both as a society and as individuals, in all their complex and contradictory aspects. Our fascination with them rests primarily on the wealth of documentation they left us, of which you will be exposed to representative samples. You will leave this course with your own feelings on the worthiness of Romans to rule, based on their own record.
Either way, there is only so much we can do in class to deal with a course of this range and magnitude; I hope you will feel free to contact me outside of class, either by e-mail or in person, to discuss any doubts, concerns, or unresolved issues. The ultimate purpose of this course is not to give answers but to learn how to pose the right unanswerable questions, and to consider each side of every coin. However frustrating such a task may initially appear, it is our research into the human experience that teaches us how we function as individuals within a collective. By searching for themes and clues as to what made 2,000-year-old Romans tick, we will gain further insight into our own sense of identity - whether national, ethnic, political, religious, or any other way in which we choose to define ourselves.
Happy hunting!
1) Participation in class (10%), both existential and vocal; the relatively short core readings for each session are crucial to developing collective discussion of each topic (the alternative is sitting through an hour lecture by me...). The textbooks are mainly for reference: class notes will be essential to navigating them!
2) Daily quizzes (5%), answering questions to be found on the Course Web Page. They will begin at 10.10 and conclude at 10.15 sharp; the two lowest quiz grades will be dropped.
3) 2 Review quizzes (10%), one on Thu, June 13, covering material of the semester, the other on Fri, June 28, covering material since the midterm; They will begin at 10.10 and conclude at 10.30 sharp.
4) Midterm on Fri, June. 21, in class (30%).
5) 6-8 page paper (15%) due in class Monday, July 1: the topic is up to you, though you should clear it with me: it should provide a comparative study of "old" and "new" Rome, considering a specific issue, person, or event, in the context of developments in Roman culture. Basically, anything goes - as long as you end up relating it to the tension between old and new/conservative and progressive/public and private that unifies our course. Examples include "the political statement of Catullus' love poetry"; "the platform and popularity of Cato the Elder"; "Romulus and Caesar as leaders"; "Romans vs. Greeks: 'these will be your arts'"; "the aims and appeal of Augustan imagery"; "decline of the Imperial Senate"... You are encouraged (though by no means required!) to explore the links suggested on this Web Page; however, the evaluation of the argument of your paper will depend on your awareness, engagement, and application of your class notes and readings.
Late papers will NOT be accepted; start planning ahead!
6) Cumulative Final (30%), on Fri, July 5, 10 a.m. in our classroom
No alternate final will be offered.These policies and requirements are final: no extra credit will be offered.
The paper should be 6-8 pages in length. It must be printed, double-spaced, and titled. Margins on all sides should be set at 1 inch (no more); quotations longer than two lines should be indented, accompanied by full primary citations (i.e., book and verse/chapter of ancient text if available).
I expect you to hand in your paper when you come to class. You are strongly encouraged to complete your assignment earlier, and I will be happy to read over a first draft. In any event please note that the paper must be handed to me in person; I will accept e-mailed papers only for first drafts.
The point of this exercise is to enable you to examine in detail one of the issues, events, or characters we have only had time to introduce superficially in class. As you investigate the topic you have chosen, I expect you a) to adopt a similar approach to that we have employed to the other comparative topics we have studied together, b) to compare and contrast your topic with other topics from the course, and most importantly c) to assess your topic in the light of the continuous themes we have traced to unify Roman civilization - pragmatism, agrarian values, ancestral worship, phobia of tyrants, conservative vs. progressive, or otherwise. Whereas in your exams and quizzes I expect you to balance width with equal depth, in your paper I am encouraging you to focus on depth, exploring one single topic in the light of all you have learned so far.
This paper will not only demonstrate your assimilation of the course materials, it will also prepare you to compose professional written documents in a public context. As such, your numerical paper grade will reflect two separate evaluations, both on content and on style. In your exam and quizzes I intermittently draw your attention to ambiguities or inaccuracies in your choice of English without penalizing you at all; in the paper, this will no longer be the case. The ability to express one's self clearly, coherently, and persuasively in one's mother tongue is not simply a valuable commodity in today's job market, which is saturated with record numbers of college graduates. On the contrary, it is crucial that you distinguish yourself from the pack by developing and exhibiting your skills 1) in analyzing vast amounts of information, 2) in giving shape to your analysis, and then finally 3) in giving a voice to your conclusions.
If a Roman can learn to make a speech, then so can you!
The best approach to adopt in writing your papers is to pretend 1) that I have no idea of what you are talking about, 2) that I have a very short attention span, and 3) that I can barely speak English! Just because you may have a clear idea of what you have in mind does not mean that everyone else will. Before you start writing you need to sketch a detailed structure of your essay, proceeding paragraph by paragraph; when you compose "freeform," your carelessness is always more apparent and more frustrating to your audience than you may realize, because it becomes impossible to see where your argument is headed. It will also prove very helpful if, as soon as you have finished your paper, you first read it through again yourself slowly, and then afterwards you have a non-specialist look through it quickly, in order to assess whether you have articulated each thought in the best possible way.
In your introduction, get to the point: if you give a whole history of the Roman empire, you will distract your reader from your thesis (as well as annoy him or her for having to plod though "fluff"!). In one long or two short paragraphs, you should explain the title of your paper, stating not only your topic but also the particular aspect you intend to cover or problem you intend to address. Experts disagree on the extent to which you should anticipate your conclusion at this point: my feeling is that the introduction should indicate the direction in which you will proceed, giving a taste of what is in store, without spoiling the suspense by giving the whole game away. In this context, your title should be descriptive: not "Julius Caesar," but, e.g., "The industria of Caesar: a vice to some, a virtue to others." You should then preface your essay with considerations to the effect of "x is important [some say for some reasons, others say for another]. I intend to support one side (or even invent my own side!) by adducing evidence from these particular sources or fields."
As you expound your argument, you should craft each thought with the introduction and the conclusion to your paper in mind: how does this point contribute to the main thesis? Each paragraph should present a single step of your argument (and thus should not be too long: three-quarter page max.); each of its sentences should address only the dominant idea of the paragraph. Your tone should be formal and concise:
no superlatives ("-est"; "most...") or absolutes ("always"; "never") unless you can prove it;no redundancies; say something once, and your audience should remember it for the rest the paper!
no colloquialisms, such as:
contractions like "didn't," "isn't," "I'm," can't," etc.;dangling participles like "turning to my next point, Caesar came to power";
idioms like "Caesar kicked butt", "oftentimes," "all in all";
informality (e.g., "when I started this course, I knew nothing about Rome; now I have learned that Caesar exemplified industria, etc."). I am thrilled to hear such sentiments in person, after class; they do not belong in a public document.
Furthermore, remember to
be consistent in your use of tenses (not "Caesar dies in 44; Brutus killed him");use active instead of passive voice (not "this was said by Cicero," but "Cicero said this");
avoid where possible general and weak verbs like "do" (try, e.g., "perform," "accomplish," "achieve,") or nouns like "thing" ("issue," "question," "affair," etc.).
Every point you make should be fully supported by evidence, and very little should be taken for granted. Ideally, every paragraph should include at least one citation (preferably more), which proves that neither you nor I am making this up. Use your World of Rome carefully, for those authors are modern scholars making their own assumptions from much of the same evidence that you are; rather than quote their conclusions (with which you and I may occasionally feel entitled to disagree), quote (and be critical of) the ancient evidence that leads them to their conclusion. Italicize all Latin terms to avoid confusion with the English. Citations must accompany every quote: standard format is, e.g., Livy, 1.1 to indicate a passage from the first chapter of his first book; include in italics the title of his work only if there is some other work of his we may confuse it with. Do not cite simply the modern editorial reference, such as Historians of Ancient Rome, p. 150; after all, Livy is the scholar we are quoting - not Ronald Mellor! Also, there is no need to cite your class notes.
Your conclusion should be roughly as long as your introduction, drawing your paper together without repeating sentences from either your intro or the rest of your paper. It should clearly follow from the arguments and evidence you have cited in your paper; it should not be simply tacked on for form's sake. You may allude to larger or even tangential issues at this point, but the dominant idea of your conclusion must reflect the title of your paper.
Finally, note that this paper requires you to apply your class notes and personal considerations to your assigned readings; class notes will give you width, but you have to supply the depth. Sit back and think about something specific we have dealt with in class; it is not necessary to engage in external research to excel in this paper. I am interested in your suggestions, not in listening to the sound of my own voice played back to me: if you stick to the evidence I have introduced in class - no matter how accurately - you will not be able to display either the detail or the critical analysis necessary to break into the "A" range. Your assigned readings give you plenty of sound-bites to corroborate every issue discussed in class, of which I have rarely had time to cite more than one; you don't have to be a Roman expert to find how many ways Dido resembles Cleopatra, or how Roman gods support the Republican ruling class, or how Tiberius is behind the times in the 20-30 pages assigned for those days. By now, you can make your own educated guesses as to how these Roman would think and act in certain situations: have courage of your convictions, follow up that initial hunch, and tell the world what you think!
Grading scale:
Points are scored out of a total of 100: the top ten constituted the "A" range, the next ten the "B" range, and so forth. The letter is accompanied by "+" or "-" if your score falls within the top or bottom 3 points of each range. Thus, e.g.,
87-89= B+ ; 83-86 = B ; 80-82 = B- .
Good summary of different aspects of Roman history and culture (note especially the link to "biographies"): http://library.advanced.org/11402/
Another collection on the Roman emperors: http://www.ece.arizona.edu/~justin/Emperors/baggin_emperors.html
Comprehensive site on Roman women: http://dominae.fws1.com/
Excellent source for womens' legal status...: http://www.uky.edu/ArtsSciences/Classics/wlgr/wlgr-romanlegal.html
...and examples of political influence: http://www.uky.edu/ArtsSciences/Classics/wlgr/wlgr-publiclife.html
Weird but comprehensive site on Roman religion (by modern worshippers!): http://www.novaroma.org/religio_romana/index.html
Four detailed examples of Augustan imagery: http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/users/morford/augimage.html
Virtual tour of (ruins of) the Forum of Pompeii: http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/pompeii/page-1.html
Etruscan artifacts housed in the Museo Gregoriano Etrusco, in Rome: http://www.christusrex.org/www1/vaticano/ET1-Etrusco.html, and http://www.christusrex.org/www1/vaticano/ET2-Etrusco.html
Comprehensive site on Epicureanism: http://www.atomic-swerve.net/tpg/ (note in particular the general summary: http://www.atomic-swerve.net/tpg/epicurus.html#Epicureanism; more advanced sources for Epicurean themes: http://www.atomic-swerve.net/tpg/themes.html; further excerpts from Lucretius: http://www.atomic-swerve.net/tpg/DRN.html)
Introduction to Stoicism (though a little complicated): http://members.aol.com/Heraklit1/zeno.htm
Cool computer-generated reconstructions of ancient Rome: http://www.taisei.co.jp/cg_e/ancient_world/rome/rome_06.html
Colorful explanation and reconstruction of Roman baths: http://www.bowdoin.edu/dept/clas/arch304/baths/
Roman ball games: http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/w/x/wxk116/romeball.html
You will never look at a Roman arch in the same way again: http://www.tulane.edu/lester/text/Western.Architect/Rome/Rome7.html
If you still can't find what you are looking for, try this search engine which emphasizes the ancient world: http://argos.evansville.edu
