This chapter surveys the evidence for the design, commission, and manufacture of prostheses and assistive technology in classical antiquity. It argues that rather than being considered therapeutic and thus the responsibility of a medical practitioner, as is the case today, acquiring a prosthesis or other type of assistive technology was the responsibility of the user, and it was up to them to enlist the services of one or more artisans in order to do so. Consequently, ancient assistive technology was highly individualised and personalised, and was used to make statements about the individual in question's wealth, status, and sophistication. It covers artisans, inspirations, materials, and meanings.

Judging from contemporary public discourse, the nobles of the late republic were routinely denigrated and associated with incompetence, entitlement and other aristocratic vices. Now, resentment towards unpopular rulers is of course nothing new and historically quite unremarkable, but what makes the resentment expressed towards the nobles so paradoxical is the crucial part played by the wider elite in maintaining them in their position. The power of the nobles rested on annual elections in which the combined votes of equites and boni often decided the outcome; certainly, without strong support from these groups no political career would ever get off the ground. To explain the curious disjuncture between the views and the actions of the boni, we may consider the position of the nobiles more broadly. Who were the nobles? How many were there – if they can be counted at all? What kind of power did they wield? And finally, how did they retain their position in the face of such apparent dissatisfaction with their rule? The answers may help us understand better not just the politics of the boni but also the nature of the ‘noble republic’ and the culture that sustained it.

The Romans, or at least those of the elite, tended to associate the ownership of property with personal virtue. As we saw, the connection between wealth and morality was so entrenched that material resources could be invested with intrinsic moral worth, while, conversely, poverty acquired a close affinity to depravity and corruption. Behind this nexus we find the supposition that people of substance – at least in principle – were self-reliant and hence enjoyed a degree of personal autonomy denied those of lesser means. But since the soundness, even the existence, of the boni could be questioned, it follows that wealth alone did not qualify a person for this status. In Rome, as in any other society, the relationship between wealth and morality remained subject to ongoing negotiation which explored its internal contradictions and paradoxes. So, while the association of wealth with virtue may have been commonplace, the issue was nevertheless riddled with ambiguities. On the one hand, wealth was accepted as a fundamental benefit that enabled a person to lead a decent and upstanding life, while, on the other hand, the Romans also realised that not all the rich were good and not all the poor were necessarily bad.

This chapter introduces the subject of prostheses, prosthesis use, and prosthesis users in classical antiquity. It compares contemporary, historical, and ancient historical prostheses and indentifies certain types of continuity across millennia. It undertakes a literature review of the current state of scholarship on impairment and disability in classical antiquity, highlighting how little attention has been paid to assistive technology by scholars to date. It explains the methodology that will be used in this monograph. It provides an overview of the different types of evidence that will be used (i.e. literary, documentary, archaeological, bioarchaeological). It outlines the contents of the monograph, chapter by chapter.

The moral framework constructed around financial conduct mirrored that prescribed for political activities, all operating within a simple binary framework of boni and improbi/egentes/cupidi. The terms may have been used in a wide variety of contexts, but they expressed a single normative code which encompassed the public as well as the private sphere. In economic affairs it stressed financial probity, the preservation of the patrimony and, above all, the avoidance of debt. Although credit has always been an essential part of economic systems throughout history, the Romans never distinguished between economically rational debt for the purpose of investment and debt incurred purely for personal spending.1 And signs are that, irrespective of the moral condemnation it incurred, debt became a growing problem in the late republic. Cicero could, for example, claim that during his consulship the issue of debt had never been more pressing.2 While he may exaggerate its magnitude in order to emphasise his own principled stand against debt reform, the statement is still surprising on a number of levels. Not only was debt condemned as dangerous and immoral, but Rome had on the whole never been more prosperous or secure than it was during this period. The question is therefore who were affected by debt and why they found themselves in such financial difficulty at a time when we would least expect it.

In March of 49, Cicero wrote to his friend Atticus with an update on the situation in Rome after Caesar had taken control of the capital. He described how life was getting back to normal and people settled in under the new regime. Personally, Cicero considered his options and asked, ‘What shall I do? Rush madly for Brundisium, appeal to the loyalty of the municipalities?’. The main obstacle he faced was, as he said, that the boni would not follow and neither would anyone else.1 His reference to a group of people called boni, who were apparently reluctant to come to the rescue of the old political order, is intriguing: who were they, and what lay behind their stance at this critical juncture in the life of the republic?

The Latin dictionaries all identify a distinct socio-economic aspect to the term ‘bonus’. According to Lewis & Short, one usage was ‘the better (i.e. higher) classes of society’, although the editors also implied that this meaning was uncommon. Similarly, in TLL at the very end of section I we find under paragraph 12, ‘i. q. fere q. locuples, dives’, again with an indication of rarity, and the Oxford Latin Dictionary s.v. bonus 6 offers this definition: ‘men of substance and social standing’, with ancient references ranging from Plautus to Tacitus.1 The editors of the OLD suggest this was a secondary derivation and provide only six examples. However, a comprehensive survey of all attestations of ‘bonus/boni’ shows that the usage was considerably more common and in fact may have been integral to its use in public and private discourse; arguably, it was implicit in all references to ‘boni’ outside texts of a strictly philosophical or moralising nature.

Cicero’s death and the formation of the triumvirate ushered in a period of unprecedented violence and instability. The new regime delivered a direct onslaught on the most vital interests of the boni. It happened on a scale and with a severity never seen before, involving proscription of individuals, confiscation of property for veteran settlements and crippling taxation to cover the cost of mass mobilisation and prolonged warfare; at Perusia it even led to armed resistance. As Osgood has reminded us, the trauma of this period stayed long after peace and prosperity had returned, shaping the relationship between the boni and the new Augustan government that would gradually take shape after Actium.1

The regularity with which members of a few families succeeded each other into the highest offices may, as argued, not necessarily be a sign of stability or general consensus. Tensions within the elite appear to have been growing and the power of the nobles came to rest on increasingly tenuous claims to managerial competence and concern for the common weal. This chapter looks at the role of the boni in the process that would eventually bring an end of the traditional form of collective government. As such, it attempts to weave together the various strands of this study into a historical narrative. At key moments during the period between the Gracchi and Augustus the relationship between the constituent parts of the Roman elite seems to have undergone significant shifts. We will therefore focus primarily on the key moments in 50/49 and 44/43, when the position of the boni became most crucial. First, however, a brief sketch of the background to these events.

This chapter surveys the evidence for the use of people and animals as substitutes for prostheses and assistive technology by individuals with a variety of impairments and disabilities. It considers the role that enslavement played in the lives of the impaired and disabled in antiquity, and how the presence of enslaved individuals may have affected the development and adoption of assistive technology, noting that this is a key difference in ancient and contemporary assistive technology usage.