Up until recently the prevalent line of thought in scholarship on the ancient economy (primarily thanks to M.I. Finley's 1985 book Ancient Economy) was that it was the acquisition of wealth through land ownership that held moral respectability in Graeco-Roman society. This line of thought considered skilled labour to be far from a springboard that would bring prestige to the worker; if anything, it was a deterrent factor to the pursuit of social status – this is, for example, how texts of Cicero and Seneca are often read. The present volume argues for the opposite. This is, perhaps, its greatest contribution to scholarship: it demonstrates through many examples that the social status and prestige of individual workers was related not only to the type of profession they practised, but reflected their skill and competency. The volume makes clear that our understanding of the identity and status of workers in antiquity is inextricably linked with our understanding of the concepts of occupation and skill.
According to the editors ‘within a Labour market all workers are continually engaged in a competition to justify the usefulness of their work and the depth of their knowledge’ (p. 6). This becomes clear from the opening paper. Harris argues, for example, that the rewards bestowed on those involved in those skilled occupations were very high, despite the fact that they monetised their work. There seems to be no ‘social prejudice against this man who earned a misthos’ (p. 55). N. Massar's subsequent paper makes similar observations. This chapter contributes to the debate about the status of professionals by using the differences in the salaries of travelling performers to understand the relative worth of experience among different professionals as well as other factors ‘such as their powers of negotiation, the difficulty of the job as well as the local situation, or their level of responsibility’ (p. 80). All these are factors that can determine the high or the low status of a professional artist. Following the same lines as the first two papers, E. Mayer goes against assumptions in earlier scholarship that see distinct social classes sharing certain ideologies. He argues that there were ‘no universally shared ideologies about the status of professionals, artisans, and traders in classical antiquity that could be compared to nineteenth-century or later political discourses of class and class interest’ (p. 95). Μayer's paper illustrates powerfully that the elite rhetoric of social distinction, for example in Cicero and Seneca, should be seen as a ‘rhetorical trope’ that carried little weight outside their immediate literary and political context (p. 123). The division between farming and ‘sordid professions’ is entirely artificial, and it is now clear that skilled labour was considered an important source of income by senators and even emperors, exemplified in the example of Vespasian (p. 113).
In Part 2 Lewis undertakes the important exercise of examining the extent of horizontal specialisation in the classical Athenian economy. He puts Harris's list of 170 occupation terms – which he increases to 276 – to the test, in order to examine how this list holds against a sceptical reader. Then he presents ‘the most pessimistic picture of specialisation that can reasonably be held’ (p. 133). Even though this ‘attack’ on the list reduces it almost by 40%, the 162 ‘genuine occupations’ remaining demonstrate a remarkable efflorescence in technical specialisation. This observation is complemented nicely by A. Landskron's general overview of the visual remains in Ostia, and the way they help us cast light upon the spectrum of occupation there. This evidence not only attests to a wide range of occupations and specialisations, but, more importantly, the variety of funerary monuments and reliefs of people of several occupations, such as bakers and butchers, shows that individuals ‘wished to be represented in their professional environment in a worthy and positive manner’ (p. 197).
The volume can also be seen as part of a trend in modern research to question the use of the anachronistic terms ‘profession’ and ‘professional’, and warn of their dangers and limitations. Parts 3, 4 and 5 include eight case studies of professions, which illustrate powerfully that these terms are not understood in the same way by everyone and that their meaning can differ depending on the context, although there are many areas of agreement as well. This is also perhaps what is most confusing about this anthology: it is difficult for the reader to keep track of the various and often conflicting views regarding such terms. In the reviewer's opinion, however, this reflects primarily the difficulty of the task in hand rather than the intrinsic merit of each contribution or the competency of the authors. By putting those terms to the test through various examples and cases studies, what the volume does is to expose our limited understanding of the ancient societies and their economies, by underscoring the difficulty of mapping ancient experiences onto modern categories.
H. Hochscheid argues that the high demand for sculpture is evidence that sculptors in Athens were held in high regard. M. Linder's paper (just like B. Russell's that follows) complements Hochscheid's observations on the status of sculptors nicely, by illustrating powerfully that inter-city politics did not affect cities’ and patrons’ decisions to employ artists, even from hostile cities. This applies to both high- and low-status professionals, and also across different ethnicities (for example Greek artists in the service of Persian kings, p. 237). As Linder points out, ‘It seems that the world of skilled and qualified laborers was an open one’ (p. 238). Russell's paper demonstrates that even though literary and epigraphic evidence makes it difficult to categorise stone carving practitioners in the Roman world as professionals in terms of modern definitions, it nevertheless shows that those workers managed successfully to ‘cash’ their knowledge and skills to social and economic rewards, and social status.
Parts 4 and 5 include similar observations, but also provide an even more thorough and systematic examination of the term ‘professional’. Stewart's paper opens Part 4 by showing that it is not the profession in itself but the competency of the performer (and its advertisement to the public) that determined, in most cases, the high or low status of the musician. Even in texts polemic to the technê or certain performers, such as aulos players, it is often other musicians who downplay the expertise of rival professionals in order to augment their own status. It is often the professional integrity that is in question, rather than class credentials. S. Aneziri draws our attention to the fact that professional associations were formed not only to ensure privileges and that contracts were not breached, but because the nature of their professional activities required much collective effort and coordination. ‘The professional character of these associations acquired a religious and civic veneer’, she argues, ‘but it never supplanted the civic identity that was such a crucial element of the world of Greek contests’ (p. 307). C. Mann's paper demonstrates convincingly how terms such as ‘amateur’ and ‘professional’ in the context of athletics are misleading and often downplay important aspects of the subject in question. He suggests avoiding those terms completely, but agrees with H.W. Pleket (Stadion 1 [1975], 80) that they can only serve as ‘heuristic tools’ (p. 329). In the reviewer's opinion the subject of ancient athletics could have had a more prominent role in this volume, perhaps through an additional paper. The athletic synod, for example, which in its early years was limited to victors in sacred contests (contrary to the artistic), could be a fertile ground for further discussion on the subject of acquisition of status through competency and skill.
In the final Part (5) S. Hodkinson and D. Lee warn us about the use of the term ‘professional’ when discussing the archaic and classical Spartiate and the Roman army. According to Hodkinson evidence suggests that, upon closer inspection, the Spartiate army does not meet the criteria for being professional and is not much different from those of other cities. Lee suggests that it is more accurate to describe the Roman army as a ‘paid standing army’ instead of a ‘professional’ one.
What is particularly interesting and new about this book is that its inquiry into whether skill and profession increase a person's social status goes beyond a simple yes or no answer – it is widely known nowadays that both Greeks and Romans valued skill (often referred to in the sources as technê in Greek and ars in Latin), and most readers will expect that there is ample evidence to argue for both yes and no answers. It also identifies why and how skill and profession can be such contributing factors. According to Hochscheid, for example, one of the most important reasons that (accomplished) sculptors could enjoy high prestige is that sculpture – whether public, private, monumental or on smaller scale – was considered a contribution to the welfare of the citizen body. Massar also demonstrates vividly that it was technical competency that in many cases determined status. Stewart argues that in other contexts it was the role of a technê in education; Aristotle, for example, wrote that citizens’ education should include music, but ideally not aulos; it is not the music that is at question here, but the role of certain practices in civic education.
The value of this book is also shown in its invitation for further inquiry. Often readers might wonder how other occupations or categories of technites (for example, non-citizens such as metics, women and slaves) fit into this picture – they will not get an answer. This is, perhaps, the next step: to expand the scope to include more case studies and see if such analyses offer similar conclusions. The editors do not hide their aspiration to encourage further (interdisciplinary) research on the subject. In this pursuit, this volume is a valuable first step.
The editors can be congratulated for having contributed significantly to our knowledge of the history of ancient Greek and Roman professionals. This volume supplements well earlier works, such as K. Verboven's 2016 volume Work, Labour, and Professions in the Roman World, and in the process moves other discussions about elite ideology and identity intelligently forward. Stewart, Harris and Lewis's volume will undoubtedly be of value not only to researchers of ancient economy and professions, but also to anyone delving into the political culture of the Graeco-Roman world.
