Cui parens non erat maximus quisque et uetustissimus pro parente: Paternal surrogates in imperial Roman literature

Neil W. Bernstein (Ohio University)

Richard Saller’s microsimulation of Roman marriage, fertility, and life expectancy patterns suggests that, by the age of 20, 38% of upper-class men could expect to have lost their fathers (1994, 64). Fatherlessness presented a social challenge to young men who aspired to a political career in a society that emphasized the authority wielded by a father and the emulation of his example by his sons. This paper considers the rhetorical strategies used by two members of the imperial Roman elite to assert the legitimacy of their political aspirations. I examine Statius Silvae 5.2, addressed to Crispinus, the son of Vettius Bolanus, and several letters of the Younger Pliny. In each man’s case, paternal surrogates perform the role of the absent father, enabling the fatherless man to counter charges of immaturity or inexperience.

Though Crispinus’ father Vettius Bolanus left his son a distinguished political legacy, Statius acknowledges that his early death left his son open to the potential criticism of inadequate guardianship. Crispinus’ appointment as tribunus militum two years earlier than expected and the conviction of his mother for poisoning furnish further sources of disapproval (Zeiner 2005, 201-209). In Silvae 5.2, the emperor acts as Crispinus’ praeses and passes judgment on the young man’s mother. Statius also introduces a series of preceptors who supplement Bolanus’ educational role by exhorting Crispinus to emulate his father, shield him from criticism, and attest to his maturity. Statius counters suggestions of scandal, immaturity, and lack of guardianship by presenting Domitian as Crispinus’ paternal surrogate.

In his collection of letters, the Younger Pliny uses the rhetoric of surrogate paternity to present himself as the figurative son of the older men who supported his earlier political career. He honors Verginius Rufus as his tutor and political supporter (Ep. 2.1). Pliny represents his adoptive father Elder Pliny, however, as a model to be surpassed both in literary achievement and in social rank (Henderson 2002, 69-102; Cova 2001). In Ep. 8.14, a letter that idealizes the educational tradition of prior times, Pliny claims that upper-class young men once learned their craft by watching either their fathers or another respected older man if they were fatherless (Ep. 8.14.6). Through his description of a model of education by paternal surrogates, Pliny legitimizes his efforts to honor his predecessors and to serve as an exemplary model to other men’s children.

In a study of shared parenthood in West Africa, Esther Goody (1999, 369) divides the parental role into multiple components, including “biological, nurturance, training, sponsorship, jural.” The focus in the present paper is primarily on the “training” and “sponsorship” components. Statius and Pliny represent interaction with paternal surrogates as offering opportunities unavailable in a biological relationship. In Silvae 5.2, the favor of the emperor Domitian grants incontestable legitimacy to Crispinus’ budding political career, while the mythological comparisons serve to idealize the young man’s lived experience. Surrogates such as Verginius Rufus and the Elder Pliny provide social opportunities for the Younger Pliny that surpass those offered by his biological father. In each case, surrogate paternity transcends biological paternity and permits the young man to overcome the challenges of bereavement.