Greece &

Rome,
Vol.
47,
No.
2,
October 2000
'HALF-BURNT ON AN EMERGENCY PYRE':
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
By
DAVID NOY
In an ideal Roman
cremation,
the
body
was carried in
procession
from
the house of the deceased to a
place
outside the
city,
where it was burnt
on a
pyre
until it was reduced to bones and ashes
(cineres'
or
favilla).
The
pyre
should be built
specifically
for the
deceased; having
to use
someone else's
pyre
was a
sign
of
poverty,
or an
emergency procedure.2
The cremated remains
might
be buried where
they
had been
burnt,
usually
in a ditch which was filled in and covered or
marked;
in this case
the tomb was called a bustum.3 More
usually,
the cremation was carried
out somewhere other than the final
resting place,
at a
spot designated
ustrina in Latin literature.4 This
might
be within the same
tomb-precinct
or
columbarium,
as in
many
tombs at
Ostia,s
or at a
separate public
site.
The bones and ashes therefore had to be collected
up
and
placed
in a
container, preferably
a
specially
made and ornamented one (cinerarium,
oss(u)arium,
olla, urna),
to be
placed
in the tomb. The force of the
fire,
the
raking
and
collapse
of the
pyre during burning,
and eventual
quenching
with cold
liquid
would
together normally
be sufficient to
reduce the bones to small
fragments
which would fit
easily
into the
container.6 This sort of burial of the remains is assumed in such wishes
for the dead as:
I
pray
that
you
rest
quiet
and safe in the
urn, bones,
And that the earth is not burdensome to
your
ashes.7
Since the ideal was
widely
known
during
the
period up
to the second
century
C.E. when cremation was the normal rite for
disposing
of the
dead in
Rome, Italy
and much of the Roman
Empire,
its details receive
little attention in ancient literature. It was more
likely
to be commented
on when
something
went
wrong.
Accounts of unsuccessful cremations
provide
a
fairly
consistent
picture
when
compared
to each
other,
although
some of their details have not
always
been
fully
understood.
They
also illustrate how
easily
the
process
could fall short of the ideal.
A Roman cremation would
hardly
have been as
speedy
and efficient
as its modern
equivalent.
Gas-fired crematorium chambers now take
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
one to two hours at an
average temperature
of 900 ?C to reduce a
body
to calcined bone which is then
mechanically pulverized
into 2-3
kg.
of
powder.8
An initial
temperature
of at least 500? is needed to
get
the
body
fats
burning.9
These then
provide
some of the heat
during
the first
part
of the
cremation,
but towards the end of the
process
extra heat is needed
as
only
the less combustible
parts
are left.
1
Most references to cremation
in Roman literature
give
a
misleading impression
of
speed. According
to
Varro, quoted by
Servius
(In
Aen.
6.216),
it was the normal
practice
for
the crowd to remain around the
pyre
'until the
body
was consumed and
the ashes were
collected,
when the
very
last word ilicet was
said,
which
signified
that it was
permitted
to
go
(ire
licet)'.
Yet
McKinley
estimates
that a cremation
by
standard Roman methods would take 7 to 8 hours.11
In an
experimental burning
of a
complete
skeleton
(not
a
complete
body)
on a
pyre measuring
1.8 x 2.0 x 1.3
m.,
the whole
process
from
lighting
the fire to
picking
out the bone
fragments
lasted at least 10
hours.12
Ethnographic
evidence from
nineteenth-century
Tasmania
indicates that
pyres
there were
usually
lit and then left
overnight,
but
corpses
seem often not to have been
completely
burnt
by
this
process,
so that
they
had to be re-fired the next
day.13
This cannot have been
Roman
practice
if Varro is correct about the ritual at the
pyre.
Arce
suggests
that
proceedings
for
public
funerals
normally began
at
dawn,14
which would leave time for a cremation to be
completed by nightfall,
but most of a
day (or
most of a
night)
would be
required.
For efficient
burning,
a
pyre
needs to be stoked and raked
periodically
to ensure a continued
supply
of fuel and
oxygen
and to
prevent
a build-
up
of ash. The
building
and
tending
of a
pyre
must have been a skilled
task,
which would take into account such factors as the wind direction.15
It is a
process
which
largely goes
unnoticed in Roman
literature,
although
Vitruvius
(2.9.15)
observes that
pyres
were built with
layers
of
logs,
each
layer
laid over the
previous
one at
right angles
to it. This
may
also be
implied by
Seneca's
description
of Hercules'
pyre
as
being
built with
'alternating logs'
(alternae
trabes).16
There is
probably implicit
acknowledgment
of the
technique
of
pyre-building
in the
frequently
recurring phrase
'a built
pyre' (rogus
structus),
used
particularly
often
by
Ovid.17 There are several references in the context of funerals to an
ustor, presumably
a
professional pyre-builder (the
word derives from
uro,
to
burn),
but his exact duties are never
explained.18
Professionally
built
pyres
could still behave
unpredictably,
and
might
achieve
notoriety
if someone well known was
being
cremated. The Elder
Pliny
describes how the
corpse
of M.
Lepidus
was thrown off its
pyre by
187
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
the force of the flames, and could not be
put
back on because the heat
was too
great.19
When a friend of Tiberius Gracchus was
allegedly
poisoned,
there was
great difficulty
in
cremating
the
body:
first it 'burst
open
and
discharged
such a mass of
corrupt
matter that the funeral
pyre
was
completely extinguished';
then it would not burn until it was
removed to another
place,
'and it was
only
after a
great
deal of effort
that the flames could be made to take hold.'20 The belief that the
body
of
someone who had been
poisoned
could not be cremated
properly
is
mentioned
by Pliny,
who
says
that one of the
pieces
of evidence used
against
Piso was that Germanicus's heart could not be burnt.21 Other-
wise,
the
inability
to burn a
particular part
of the
body
in normal
circumstances was
regarded
as
something
miraculous: the
right big
toe
of
King Pyrrhus,
whose touch effected miracle
cures,
was
kept
in a
special
shrine when it would not burn.22
McKinley
writes:
'Cremation,
as a
process,
needs
heat,
oxygen
and
time to
complete;
should
any
of these three be
restricted,
complete
cremation
may
not be achieved'.23 The recurrence of the theme of the
'half-burnt
corpse'
in Roman literature can be understood better in the
light
of this information about the
practicalities
of cremation. While
undertakers could in normal circumstances cremate bodies
efficiently,
people
with no
experience
of
pyre-building, acting
in some sort of
emergency,
were liable to end
up
with an
incomplete
cremation.
Meteorological
conditions were one
potential problem,
even at the
best-organized
funerals. This is
graphically
illustrated
by
Plutarch's
account of Sulla's funeral:
The
day
was
cloudy
in the
morning and,
as
they expected
it would
rain, they
did not
lay
the
corpse
on the
pyre
until the ninth hour. Then a
strong
wind came and blew
upon
the
pyre, raising
a
huge
flame.
They just
had time to collect the
bones,
while the
pyre
was
smouldering
and the fire
nearly out,
when rain
began
to fall
heavily
and continued
falling
until
night.
It would
seem, then,
that his
good
fortune never left him and indeed
actually
took
part
in his funeral.24
The
astrologer
Ascletario,
who was executed
by
Domitian,
did not
enjoy
such
good
fortune. His
body
had
only
been half-burnt
(semiustum)
when
a sudden storm
extinguished
the
pyre
and
dogs
tore the remains to
pieces, fulfilling
a
prediction
which Ascletario had made about his own
ultimate fate.25
Lack of time was another
possible
reason for
incomplete
cremation.
This was most
likely
to
happen
when the deceased was a
fugitive
and the
body
had to be burnt
hastily
before it fell into someone else's hands. In
188
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
such circumstances the
people
in
charge
would
usually
be amateurs with
no
knowledge
of
pyre technology,
and
they
were
likely
to be short of fuel
as well as of time. Suetonius' account of what
happened
to
Caligula
provides
one
example
of this. His
body
had to be
disposed
of
rapidly
before his murderers found it:
His
corpse
was taken
secretly
to the Lamian
Gardens,
half-burnt on an
emergency pyre
(tumultuario rogo semiambustum),
and
given
a
light covering
of turf.
Afterwards,
when
his sisters came back from
exile, they
exhumed the
body
and cremated and buried it.26
The
half-burning may simply
have been the best which could be done
by
whoever was
trying
to
dispose
of his remains. It is unclear who this
was: the
body
was
initially
with his wife Caesonia on the
Palatine,
but
after she was
killed,
his friend Herod
Agrippa placed
it on a bier.27
Barrett believes that
Agrippa
carried out the rest of the
proceedings
but
Wiseman
disagrees,
and it
may
be that devoted ex-slaves took
charge,
as
they
did with Nero and Domitian.28 One
consequence
of the half-
burning
would have been to make the
body unrecognizable,29
which
may
have been deliberate if it was feared that
Caligula's
enemies were
likely
to mutilate it
(a possibility
which is discussed further
below).
In a
modern
cremation,
most soft tissue is removed in the first 45 minutes of
the
process,30
so
making
a
body unrecognizable
would be much
quicker
than
cremating
it
fully.
The intention
may
have been to
give
it the
proper
rites
later,
which was what
happened
when
Caligula's
sisters
returned from exile. The
temporary
burial of the half-burnt remains
directly
in the
ground
was the
only option
in the
interim,
since
they
would not have been reduced
sufficiently
to fit into a
cinerarium, even if
one was available.
The fate of
Caligula's
remains
helps
to
explain
two
apparently
contradictory
accounts of what
happened
to Varus'
body
after his
defeat in
Germany
in 9 C.E.
According
to Velleius
(2.119.5):
The
enemy's ferocity
had mutilated Varus' half-burnt
body (corpus semiustum).
His head
was cut off and taken to Maroboduus and sent
by
him to
Augustus. However,
it was
honoured with burial in the
family
tomb.
However,
Florus
(2.30.38) says that,
in order to be mutilated
by
the
Germans:
The
body
of the consul
himself,
which the soldiers'
piety
had hidden in the
ground,
was
dug up.
The two
passages
can be reconciled: the
half-burning
was done
by
the
soldiers,
who did not have time to
complete
the cremation.
They
buried
189
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
the
remains,
which were then
dug up
and mutilated
by
the Germans.
For
Varus,
unlike
Caligula,
an
incomplete
cremation was not
enough
to
save his
body
from further harm.
Another
description
of a similar event
goes
into rather more detail:
Lucan's account of what
happens
to
Pompey's body
after his murder on
the coast of
Egypt.
The freedman
Philippus
and the
'quaestor'
Cordus
take it on themselves to cremate the
body, using
the remains of an
abandoned
fishing
boat for a
pyre
and
getting
a
light
from another
pyre
already burning nearby.
Lucan mentions one realistic if macabre detail:
how the fat
sputters
from
Pompey's body
as it burns
(8.777-8).
The fire
is
kept going
all
night,
but
eventually
Cordus loses his nerve. To save
time,
he takes the bones from the
pyre
while
they
are still half-burnt
(semusta)
and 'full of unburnt
marrow',
douses them in the sea and
puts
them in a shallow
grave (8.785-8).
He
places
a stone on
top
to
prevent
the remains from
blowing away,
and writes
Pompey's
name on a
piece
of wood. Lucan then laments at
great length
how
unfitting
the
grave
is
for such a
great
man. In
Pompey's case,
the cremation was too late to
save the
body
from
mutilation,
since it had
already
been
decapitated;
the
head was
eventually
taken to
Caesar,
who
gave
it a
separate
cremation.31
The detail about the remains of the
fishing
boat is also in several other
writers,
and
may
derive
ultimately
from
Livy.32
Plutarch has the rites
carried out
by Philippus
and an old man who once served under
Pompey.
Otherwise Lucan's account
probably
came
mainly
from his
own
imagination,
but it shows an awareness of the mechanics of
cremation which is found nowhere else in Roman
literature;
he
clearly
knew,
for
example,
that
burning
a
body
all
night
on an
inadequate pyre
would not achieve a full cremation.
Lucan
(8.764-7)
makes the desire to avoid the
corpse being
further
defiled, by
animals or
enemies,
into the reason for
Philippus
and Cordus
being
so determined to cremate
Pompey's body.
Bodies which had been
properly
reduced to cineres were safe from further
damage,33
but the fear
of a
body being
mutilated is a common
literary
theme.34 Sulla's
body
was
cremated, although
his
family traditionally practised inhumation,
specifically
to avoid
any
dishonour
being
done to
it,
as had been
done,
for
example,
to the
corpses
of both the Elder and
Younger
Marius.35
After Commodus'
assassination,
the senate and
people
wanted to
mutilate his
body,
but as it had
already
been
disposed
of
(presumably
by cremation), they
were unable to do so.36
Displaying
the severed head
of an
enemy
became a standard
symbol
of victorious ruthlessness.37
Galba's
decapitated body
was cremated and buried
by
his
dispensator,
190
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
and the head was
only
reunited with it later.38 Nero was anxious for his
whole
body
to be cremated so that his head would not fall into the hands
of
anyone
else.39
A half-burnt
body
therefore achieved none of the
practical purposes
of cremation: it was still vulnerable to further
mutilation,
while
present-
ing
a
gruesome sight
to
anyone
who had to
dispose
of it. The term
sem(i)ustus
when
applied
to human remains was
always
intended to
evoke horror or
pity.
Revulsion at the
appearance
of a half-burnt
body
is
suggested by
a
mock-epitaph
for a slave which is full of insults to the
deceased: it describes him as half-burnt
(
t7LrVpCoro?)
and 'still full of
green
rot'.40 Sidonius
Apollinaris (Ep. 3.13.5)
has a half-burnt
body
as
the foulest
comparison
he can think of in his
description
of a
parasite:
In
fact,
he is fouler and
uglier
than a
corpse
on a
pyre which,
when the torches have been
applied
and it is half-burnt
(semicombustum),
rolls down as the
pile
of
faggots collapses,
so that the undertaker
(pollinctor)
shudders to
put
it back on the
pyre.
Since
people
of Sidonius' time and
background practised
inhumation
not
cremation,
the
image
is almost
certainly
derived from much earlier
literature, perhaps Pliny's
account of the cremation of
Lepidus.
It is clear that an
incomplete
cremation was also sometimes felt to be
an insult to the deceased.41 Cicero twice uses the term
sem(i)ustilatus,
another variation of
sem(i)ustus,
both times in order to attack his
opponents.
He
says
that Clodius's
bloody corpse
was left 'half-burnt
on the most ill-omened
wood,
to be torn to
pieces by
nocturnal
dogs',
and that Caesar's
body
was half-burnt with the same torches which were
used to burn down the house of L. Bellienus.42 The
allegation
is
manifestly
false in both cases:
although
the funerals had
irregular
elements,
as noted
by
Plutarch
(Brut.
20),
there is no reason to think
that either left the
body half-burnt,
and Cicero himself
gives
no
indication elsewhere that this was the case.
Lacey, commenting
on the
Philippics passage, says
that the
charge
is 'untrue unless it had a technical
meaning
of "not
ceremonially cremated"',43
but the
usage
of terms for
half-burnt elsewhere
suggests
that
they
should be taken
literally.
While
Cicero was no doubt
happy
to make claims which reflected
badly
on the
memory
of Clodius and
Caesar,
his immediate aim in both
passages
was
to attack the
people
who took
charge
of the
funerals, Sex. Clodius and
Antony respectively.
He uses the
image
of the half-burnt
body
to show
their failure to do their
duty
to the deceased.
If
half-burning
insulted the
deceased,
then a deliberate
half-burning
was a deliberate insult. There are two
possible
but
ambiguous
references
191
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
to this. One of the
many
curses in Ovid's Ibis
(633-4)
involves
wishing
that the victim should take 'half-burnt limbs'
(membra semicremata)
to
the Underworld like
Alcibiades,
but the reference could be to the
manner of death rather than to
any
lack of a
proper
cremation.44
Philo describes the victims of the
pogrom
in Alexandria as
dying
half-
burnt
(ltu('AEKros),
more
through
smoke-inhalation than actual burn-
ing;45
it is
possible
that this reflects a deliberate exacerbation of the death
in the
eyes
of the Greeks
carrying
out the massacre. There is a much
clearer case of intentional insult with the
popular suggestion (ultimately
unrealized)
about what should be done with Tiberius after his death:
The
body began
to be moved from
Misenum,
with
many people proclaiming
that it
would be better to take it to Atella and half-burn it
(semiustilandum)
in the
amphi-
theatre.46
Lindsay's
comments on this
passage
rather miss the
point:
This relates to his
perceived tyrannical
status. It was notorious that a
tyrant's body
could
not be
totally
consumed
by
the flames ... This is
presumably
because he was considered
polluted.47
He
compares
Cicero on Caesar's funeral and Plutarch on
Sulla's,
but
neither of those cases
provide parallels
to
premeditated half-burning.
In
fact, half-burning
in Roman literature is never associated with the
impossibility
of a
complete burning, only
with the difficulties of
completing
the cremation
or,
as in this
case,
the desire that it should
deliberately
be left
incomplete.
The
suggestion
was intended as a
way
of
dishonouring
the dead Tiberius.
Allara sees cremation as the definitive moment at which the deceased
was
separated
from the
living.48
If this is
correct,
then a
half-burning
which left remains still
recognizably
human would not achieve a
proper
separation.
The remains could not be
placed
in a cinerarium in a
tomb,
because
they
had not been reduced to a small
enough size,
and the best
that could be done was to
place
them in a shallow
grave,
where
they
were
vulnerable to disturbance. Hence the occasional association of half-
burning
with souls
failing
to make a
complete
transition from one world
to another.
According
to
Suetonius, Caligula's ghost
haunted the
Lamian Gardens until his sisters
completed
the rites for him. Prieur
uses this as the basis for a
general
statement about the lack of
purification
which resulted from an
incomplete cremation,49
but other
literary
evidence does not
support
the view of cremation as an essential
rite of
purification.
The idea that some sort of funeral rite was
necessary
192
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
for the soul to
pass
into the Underworld seems to have been
fairly
common,50 but a normal cremation still
required
an act of
symbolic
inhumation before it was considered to be
fully
effective in this
respect.51
Lucan takes a different view from the Suetonius
passage,
since Pom-
pey's
soul is described as
arriving
in heaven
immediately
after his
incomplete cremation, 'leaving
his half-burnt limbs'.52
Similarly,
Silius
Italicus'
description
of the sack of
Saguntum
has a scene where a woman
named Tiburna
lights
her husband Murrus's funeral
pyre
and kills
herself on
it;
a mass of bodies are then
half-burnt,
but the souls are still
described as
being
taken down to Tartarus
(2.681-2, 695).
Nevertheless,
the
people
who saw
Caligula's ghost
no doubt came
from a
very
different
background
from Lucan and
Silius,
and beliefs
may
well have varied. A
body
which had not been
disposed
of
by
normal
methods would
naturally worry
the
superstitious.
If the soul of the half-
burnt deceased had an
ambiguous
status in the minds of
some,
it would
not be
surprising
if the
physical
remains were felt to have
magical
properties.
This would
explain why, among
the human
remains,
lead
tablets and other
magical apparatus
for
consigning
souls to the Under-
world
allegedly
found in Germanicus'
bedroom,
were 'half-burnt
remains
(semusti
cineres)
smeared with
gore'.53
Cineres here should
again
be understood as what was left after
cremation,
i.e. not
just
ashes but also burnt
bones,
which
explains
how
they
could be 'smeared'
with
something.54
If
they
were
half-burnt, they
would be
larger
than the
fragments normally placed
in a tomb. Lucan's
grotesque
witch Erictho
also made use of
'smoking
ash and
burning
bones' which she
grabbed
from funeral
pyres
before the flesh was
fully
burnt off.55 The idea that
witches looked for relics of bodies in the remains of funeral
pyres
is
mentioned
by Apuleius
too.56 Belief in the
magical potential
of half-
burnt remains
may
well have been
widespread.
The half-burnt
body
is a common motif in Roman literature of
various
sorts, appealing particularly
to lovers of the
grotesque,
but it
was based
firmly
on real life and on the
practical
difficulties of cremation
in less than ideal conditions. The historical
examples
are drawn from the
elite,
but in
imaginative
literature the issue is made relevant to a much
wider section of
society. Apart
from the
ambiguity
over the fate of the
soul,
the authors' attitude to the
consequences
of
incomplete
cremation
is
fairly
consistent,
if seen in the context of what was
expected
of a
'normal' cremation. A half-burnt
body
offended the
living
and insulted
the dead. It was
unpleasant
and
potentially dangerous
because it could
not be seen as
having
been
finally
laid to rest.
People
were
willing
to
try
193
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
to
carry
out cremations in unfavourable
circumstances,
but if
they
did
not succeed in
completing
the
process, they
risked
leaving
half-burnt
remains which fell outside all the normal
categories
of Roman
disposal
of the
dead,
and which reflected
badly
on all those concerned.
NOTES
I am
grateful
to an
anonymous
referee for valuable comments on an earlier version of this
paper,
and to members of the Ostia
Mailing List, especially
Michael
Heinzelmann,
for
bibliographical
advice.
1. The
phrase
ossa et cineres
('bones
and
ashes')
is used
fairly frequently
for what is left after a
cremation,
but when cineres is used alone in this context it should be understood to include bones as
well as ashes
(OLD:
'Ashes as the condition of the
body
after
death');
the usual translation of 'ashes'
can sometimes be
misleading.
In
epitaphs,
ossa hic sita sunt
('the
bones are buried
here')
is used
frequently,
but there is no
equivalent
for cineres
apart
from the occasional use of cineribus
(dative)
at
the
beginning
of the
inscription.
2. Lucretius
6.1282-6;
Martial
8.75;
Lucan
5.281-2,
7.803-4.
3.
Servius,
In Aen. 11.201
(at
11.185 he
applies
it to the
extinguished pyre);
Festus 29L
(quoting
Aelius
Gallus).
In
practice,
the word often seems to
signify simply 'pyre'
or 'tomb'. This
type
of tomb is
found,
for
example,
at Ostia: M. Floriani
Squarciapino,
Scavi di Ostia III. Le
necropoli.
Parte I. Le tombe de eta repubblicana
e
augustea (Rome, 1956), 12, 14, 18, 110, 112, 234.
There are also
examples
at Belo (Bolonia)
in
Spain,
where it
represented
a continuation of
pre-
Roman customs: P. Paris and G.
Bonsor,
Fouilles de Belo
(Bolonia, Province de
Cadix) 1917-1921.
Tome II. Le
necropole (Paris, 1926), 28, 34, 43, 69.
4.
e.g. Apuleius,
Met. 7.19; Porphyry,
In Hor. Serm. 1.8.11-12, 14; Servius,
In Aen. 3.22, 6.216.
The form ustrinum is also found
(Servius,
In Aen.
11.201),
but is rarer, despite being the term
usually employed
in modern literature.
5. Floriani
Squarciapino (n. 3):
via Ostiense tombs 5, 20, 22(?);
via Laurentina, tombs 9,
32,
34, 43, 49.
Many
tombs at Belo also had their own ustrinum: Paris and Bonsor
(n. 3),
44-66.
6.
J.
I.
McKinley,
'Bone
fragment
size in British cremation burials and its
implication
for
pyre
technology
and ritual',
Journal of Archaeological
Science 21
(1994), 339-42, at 339-40. Lactantius,
De Mort. Pers. 21.11, refers to the
grinding-up
of bones of Christians who had been cremated
during
executions under
Galerius;
this indicates that
pulverization
after cremation was not normal
practice.
7. Ovid, Am. 3.9.67-8.
8.
J. Musgrave,
'Dust and damn'd oblivion: a
study
of cremation in Ancient Greece', ABSA 85
(1990), 271-99,
at
272; J.
I.
McKinley,
'Cremations:
expectations, methodologies
and
realities',
in
C. A. Roberts,
F. Lee &
J.
Birtliff
(eds.),
Burial
Archaeology.
Current Research,
Methods and
Development (BAR
British Series
211, 1989), 65-76,
at 65. Roman
pyres
could reach
900?,
as
demonstrated
by
C.
Wells,
'A
study
of cremation', Antiquity
36
(1960), 29-37, at 36.
9.
McKinley (n. 8),
65.
10. C.
J.
Polson & R. P.
Brittain, Disposal of
the Dead
(3rd ed., London, 1975),
176.
11.
McKinley (n. 8),
67.
12.
J. Piontek, 'The
process
of cremation and its influence on the
morphology
of bones in the
light
of results of
experimental
research'
(English summary), Archeologia
Polski 21
(1976), 277-80,
at 278.
13. B.
Hiatt,
'Cremation in
Aboriginal Australia',
Mankind 7
(1969), 104-19,
at 104.
14. J. Arce, Funus
imperatorum:
los
funerales
de los
emperadores
romanos
(Madrid, 1988), 22,
cf.
31. Clodius' funeral,
which was not an
officially 'public' one, began
at dawn
according
to
Asconius,
Mil.
p.
28.
15. Piontek
(n. 12),
279.
16. Seneca, Herc. Oet. 1637.
17. Ovid, Tr. 1.3.98, 3.13.21, 4.10.86; Ex.P. 3.2.32.
194
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
18. Catullus 59.5; Cicero,
Pro Milone
33.90;
Lucan
8.738;
Martial 3.93.26. No doubt the ustor
could sometimes be the same
person
as the
pollinctor
who was
responsible
for other
aspects
of the
ritual.
19.
Pliny,
H.N. 7.186.
20.
Plutarch,
Ti.G. 13
(tr.
I.
Scott-Kilvert).
21.
Pliny,
H.N.
11.187; Suetonius,
Cal. 1.
22.
Pliny,
H.N. 7.20.
23.
McKinley (n. 8),
72.
24.
Plutarch,
Sulla 38
(tr.
R.
Warner, adapted).
Some of the same details are also
given by
Granius Licinianus 36.29. Whatever the time of
year (the
exact date of Sulla's death does not seem
to be
recorded),
it is
unlikely
that a cremation started at the ninth
hour,
i.e.
mid-afternoon,
could
have been
completed
before
nightfall, although
the extra heat from the
'huge
flame'
may
have
speeded up
the
process,
as
suggested by
Arce
(n. 14),
22. He also
argues (p. 31)
that this
may
be
intended to
suggest
divine intervention.
25.
Suetonius,
Dom. 15.
26.
Suetonius,
Cal. 59.
27.
Josephus,
Ant.
19.195,
237.
28. A. A.
Barrett, Caligula.
The
Corruption of
Power
(London, 1989),
167; T. P.
Wiseman,
Death
of
an
Emperor (Exeter, 1991), 94. D. Hurley,
An Historical and
Historiographical Commentary
on
Suetonius'
Life of
C. Caligula (Atlanta, 1993), 213, suggests
that 'It should be
imagined
that
Claudius
approved
minimal
decency',
but it seems more
likely that the rites were carried out before
Claudius was in a
position
to influence them.
29. I owe this
point
to Christine Aylott.
30.
McKinley (n. 8),
65.
31. Plutarch, Pom. 80; Appian,
B.C. 2.86; Lucan 8.668-87; Valerius Maximus 5.1.10.
32. Plutarch, Pom. 80; Manilius 4.54-5; Valerius Maximus 1.8.9; J. B.
Postgate (ed.),
M. Annaei
Lucani De Bello Civili Liber VIII
(Cambridge, 1917),
lxi.
33. D. G.
Kyle, Spectacles of
Death in Ancient Rome
(London, 1998), 168-9.
34. See, e.g., Seneca, Ep. 92.5; Valerius Maximus 1.6.11 (on Crassus and the dead of Carrhae).
The issue is discussed by
V.
Hope, 'Contempt
and
respect:
the treatment of the
corpse
in Ancient
Rome'
(forthcoming).
35. Cicero, Leg. 2.56-7; Granius Licinianus 36.25; Pliny, H.N. 7.187.
36. Dio, Ep. 74.2; cf. SHA, Comm. 20.1.
37.
e.g., according
to Dio, Ep. 76.7.3, Severus ordered Albinus's head to be sent to Rome from
Lyon,
and the rest of the
body
to be thrown
away (pAt/vat) (cf. SHA, Sev. 11.6-7). In
contrast,
Marcus Aurelius had Avidius Cassius's severed head buried
(Dio, Ep. 72.28.1), an act clearly
intended to
symbolize his clemency.
38. Tacitus, Hist. 1.49.
39. Suetonius, Nero 49.
40. Anth. Pal. 7.401.
41.
Postgate (n. 32),
123.
42. Cicero, Pro Milone 33, Phil. 2.91.
43. W. K.
Lacey (ed.),
Cicero: 2nd
Philippic
Oration
(Warminster, 1986),
224.
44. Seneca
(Thy. 79-80) makes the
ghost of Thyestes address various
groups
of sinners who are
being punished
in the Underworld. The last such
group
is 'whoever, half-burnt, drive away the
brandished torches
[of
the Furies]'. Does half-burnt refer to the
punishment they are
receiving
or to
their state on
entering
the Underworld? R. J. Tarrant, Seneca's Thyestes (Atlanta, 1985), 100,
suggests
that Seneca was influenced by the Ibis
passage, although
he attributes the
half-burning
to
the Furies' torches.
45. Philo, Flacc. 69, Leg.
130.
46.
Suetonius,
Tib. 75.
47. H.
Lindsay (ed.),
Suetonius: Tiberius (London, 1995), 187.
48. A. Allara, 'Corpus
et cadaver, la
"gestion"
d'un nouveau corps',
in F. Hinard (ed.), La mort au
quotidien
dans le monde romain (Paris, 1995), 69-79, at 70.
49.
J. Prieur, La morte nell'antica Roma
(Genoa, 1991) [Italian tr. of La mort dans
l'antiquite
romaine], 13.
50.
e.g. Pliny, Ep.
7.27.
195
ROMAN CREMATIONS WHICH WENT WRONG
51. 0. Estiez, 'La translatio cadaveris. Le
transport
des
corps
dans
l'antiquite romaine',
in Hinard
(n. 48),
101-8, at 104.
52. Lucan 9.3. Elsewhere
(7.804-24), Lucan,
in his authorial
voice, says
that it does not make
any
difference whether or not the dead of Pharsalus are cremated.
53.
Tacitus,
Ann. 2.69.
54. F. R. D.
Goodyear,
The Annals
of Tacitus,
Books
1-6,
Vol. 2: Annals 1.55-81 and Annals 2
(Cambridge, 1981),
ad
loc., says
that it is unclear how these remains differed from the other
things
used: either
resulting
from cremation if the others did
not,
or not
being recognizably
human.
However,
the
point
about half-burnt remains is that
they
were
recognizably human,
unlike what
would be left from a
complete
cremation.
55. Lucan 6.532-6.
56.
Apuleius,
Met. 2.20.
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
DAVID RAEBURN:
formerly
Grammatikos and
Grocyn Lecturer;
currently college lecturer,
Balliol and New
Colleges, University
of
Oxford.
VINCENT
J.
ROSIVACH: Professor and Director of Classical
Studies,
Fairfield
University,
Connecticut.
RACHEL HALL STERNBERG: Assistant Professor of Classical
Studies,
The
College
of
Wooster,
Ohio.
DAVID NOY: Lecturer in
Classics, University
of Wales
Lampeter.
NEVITTIIE
MORLEY: Lecturer in Ancient
History, University
of
Bristol.
IAN MACGREGOR MORRIS: Research Student in
History,
Uni-
versity
of Manchester.
196