Hey, everyone. Welcome to the show. You know,
I was thinking about this earlier, and it just
hit me. Imagine being a woman in ancient Rome.
Not just any woman, but a woman who's right in
the thick of it. All the political trauma, the
power struggles. And, well, she's not just watching.
She's making things happen. You're talking about
a world where the Caesars and the generals, they're
the names we remember. Exactly. But like we've
seen in other deep dives, women were there too,
right? Pulling strings, fighting for their place,
even when the history books try to forget them.
Absolutely. And their stories often challenge
the simple narratives, the ones where women are
just background figures. Which brings us to the
book we're tackling today, Fulvia by Jane Dracot.
A biography that throws light on one of these
women, one who was married not once, not twice,
but three times to some of the most powerful
men of her day. Clodius Pulcher, Gaius Grabonius
Curio, and the one everyone's heard of, Mark
Antony. Yes. It really does read like a political
thriller, doesn't it? It does. And that's what
I love about this book. Dracut doesn't just dismiss
Fulvia as some ambitious villain. Right. There's
more to her than that. Yeah. It made me think,
how much do we really know about these historical
figures, especially women whose voices were often
silenced? It's so easy to fall into those oversimplified
stories, isn't it? It is. Dracod's book reminds
us to look closer, to question the sources, and
to think about the context. Like The Late Republic,
that was a wild time, right? Absolutely. A period
of incredible instability. Exactly. And this
book doesn't just focus on the big events. It
dives into daily life, too. The customs, even
how people show their status. It's like you're
right there with them. The detail is incredible.
You get a real feel for what it was like to live
in that world. Which leads us to one of the challenges
with this kind of biography. We're dealing with
sources that are often... How should I put it?
Pious. Yeah. They were mostly written by men
and they often had their own agenda. So piecing
together Fervia's story is like... Solving a
puzzle. Yes. A puzzle with missing pieces. Draycott
tackles this head on and forces us to question
everything. Honestly, I think that's what makes
it so interesting. It's what historians do, right?
Unraveling the past. Trying to get as close to
the truth as possible. Exactly. And that's why,
for me, Fulvia is a solid four out of five stars.
I agree. Dreycott's a skilled storyteller. You
get the scholarship, but it's also a really engaging
read, the kind of book that makes you want to
keep digging deeper. So let's dig in, shall we?
One of the first things that struck me, and this
might seem like a small detail, but it's really
fascinating, is how Roman naming conventions
worked. For men, it's pretty straightforward,
right? Yes, the three names. Prenomen, like a
first name, then the nomen, the family name,
and finally the cognomen, often a nickname or
something that set them apart within the family.
Right, like Marcus Tullius Cicero. But for women,
it was usually just the nomen, the family name.
And maybe some descriptors to tell sisters apart.
Think Livia, the sister of Grusus. Yeah, like
a label. What does that tell us about their place
in society? It's pretty telling, isn't it? Women
were defined by their family connections. First
their father's family, then their husbands. As
if their individual achievements didn't matter
as much. It makes you wonder how it impacted
their sense of self, their ability to be seen
as individuals, as agents of their own destiny,
a question Draycott raises throughout the book.
And then there's how we refer to these figures
today. We often use the names that became most
familiar, even if those names changed throughout
their lives. Like, we all know Octavian, right?
He wasn't always Octavian. Exactly. He was Gaius
Octavius Therinus before his adoption by Julius
Caesar. And that change wasn't just a formality.
It was a huge power move, connecting himself
directly to Caesar's legacy. It's amazing how
much a name can reveal about the politics of
the time. Speaking of power moves, let's talk
about Fulvia's first husband, Publius Clodius
Pulcher. This guy was a lightning rod, a real
firebrand. And the late Republic, as the book
describes it, was already a tinderbox. Oh, absolutely.
You had these deep political rivalries, often
fueled by personal vendettas. It wasn't just
about ideas. It was about power, revenge, survival.
And Clodius, he wasn't afraid to use violence
to get what he wanted. His assassination by Milo
near Beauville really highlights how dangerous
Roman politics had become. Imagine, both men
had armed bodyguards, essentially private armies.
It's almost like a gang war, but with togas.
In a way, yes. It shows you how fragile the rule
of law was, how easily it could break down when
personal ambition and political maneuvering took
center stage. And then there's Fulvia's reaction
to Clodius's death. She doesn't just grieve privately.
She puts his body on display right out in the
open for everyone to see. A powerful image. And
a major departure from the usual Roman funeral
customs, which were very controlled, very ritualized.
Why do you think she did that? It's a key moment
in the book, and it really speaks to Fulvia's
character. Draycott suggests that Fulvia understood
how to use public spectacle, how to turn grief
into outrage and outrage into political action.
She wasn't just a grieving widow. She was making
a statement. She was defying expectations. It
makes you wonder why she provoked such strong
reactions, both from people at the time and from
historians later on. Well, some of it was just
plain misogyny, right? Ancient Rome wasn't exactly
known for its gender equality. No, definitely
not. But Dracut goes further, arguing that the
attacks on Fulvia's character were often deliberate
tactics, especially during the propaganda war
between Antony and Octavian. Absolutely. They
were using her as a weapon to attack each other,
painting her as power -hungry, manipulative,
even sexually deviant. Anything to discredit
her and, by association, Discredit Antony. So
was she really as bad as they say? That's the
question Dracaut wrestles with. And it's a tough
one. We have to remember, the sources we have
are often biased. They have an agenda. So we
can't take them at face value. But surely there
must be some truth to the accusations, right?
Maybe. But even if she was ambitious, even if
she enjoyed wielding power, does that make her
a monster? Or just a woman trying to survive
and thrive in a world that wasn't built for her?
It's so easy to judge people from the past, isn't
it? to forget that they were living in a completely
different world with different values, different
pressures. Exactly. And that's what Dracot does
so well. She helps us understand Fulvia in her
own time, in her own context, to see her as a
product of her world, not just as a villain in
someone else's story. Which reminds me of something
we talked about earlier. Roman women couldn't
hold public office. They couldn't lead armies.
So how did they exert influence? It was often
subtle, behind the scenes. Think about social
networks. Women like Fulvio were at the center
of these webs of relationships. They could use
those connections to advocate for their husbands,
their families, or even their own interests.
And religion too, right? Like the Vestal Virgins.
They weren't politicians, but they had enormous
prestige and influence. Absolutely. They were
seen as intermediaries between the gods and the
people. Their pronouncements could sway public
opinion, influence political decisions. And they
weren't the only ones. Roman women often use
religious rituals, omens, even dreams to shape
events. It's like they found ways to work within
the system to bend the rules without breaking
them. And sometimes they broke the rules, too.
Definitely. Draycott gives us examples of women
who went beyond what was considered proper. Women
who spoke out, who took risks, who fought for
what they believed in. And those stories... They
often get forgotten. They don't fit the neat
narrative of the submissive Roman matron. But
they were there, weren't they? Pushing the boundaries,
making their voices heard. They were. And their
stories are just as important, just as fascinating
as the stories of the men who dominated the history
books. Speaking of which, let's talk about Fulvia's
family background. She wasn't born into poverty,
was she? No, not at all. She came from a wealthy,
influential family. Her father was a senator,
I think. Right. And they had a villa in Tusculum.
Sort of like a country estate, a place for the
wealthy to escape the hustle and bustle of Rome.
Yeah, and those villas weren't just about relaxation.
They were centers of culture with libraries,
art collections. Places where ideas were discussed,
where connections were made. It was a different
world from the back alleys and the forum, but
it was just as important in its own way. And
knowing about Fulvia's upbringing, it helps us
understand her later choices, her ambitions.
It gives us context, right? She didn't just appear
out of nowhere. She was shaped by her family,
her social circle, the world she grew up in.
Exactly. And speaking of shaping, let's talk
about marriage in ancient Rome. It wasn't just
about love and romance, was it? No, not for the
elite anyway. Marriage was a political act, a
way to forge alliances, to solidify power. And
the laws surrounding marriage... They were changing
in Fulvia's time. Yeah, I remember reading about
that, the shift from Kumano to Sinmanu marriages.
A big change. Under Kumano, a woman came completely
under her husband's control. But Sinmanu, she
retained more legal and financial independence.
Which would have given Fulvia more freedom to
act, wouldn't it? To manage her own affairs,
to make her own decisions. Exactly. And she had
money of her own, too, from her inheritance.
So she wasn't completely dependent on her husbands,
which is probably one reason why she was able
to play such a prominent role in Roman politics.
It's interesting how even within a patriarchal
system, women found ways to carve out space for
themselves, to exert their influence. It's about
resilience, isn't it? About adapting to the circumstances,
finding ways to make the system work for you,
even when it's stacked against you. And speaking
of stacked against, let's be honest, Roman society
had some pretty rigid expectations for women,
right? Oh, absolutely. There was a very clear
idea of what a virtuous Roman woman should be.
She should be modest, obedient, focused on her
family. And preferably silent. Yes. Her role
was to support her husband, raise her children,
and manage the household, not to meddle in politics
or, heaven forbid, lead armies. And yet, as we've
seen, Fulvia did all those things. So how do
we reconcile those contradictions? Was she just
an anomaly? A one -off? I don't think so. Draycott
makes the point that Fulvia wasn't alone. There
were other women who challenged the norms, who
stepped outside the boundaries of what was considered
acceptable. And they paid a price for it, didn't
they? Often, yes. Their actions were criticized.
Their motives questioned. They were accused of
being unfeminine, of being too ambitious, of
being power hungry. Sounds familiar, doesn't
it? It does. It shows you how little has changed
in some ways. Women who dare to be ambitious,
who dare to seek power, they're still seen as
a threat. But their stories are important, aren't
they? Yeah. They remind us that women have always
been there, fighting for their place, making
a difference, even when history tries to erase
them. Absolutely. And Fulvia's story is a powerful
example of that. She was a woman who replies
to be silenced, who dared to live on her own
terms, even in a world that tried to confine
her. I love how you put that. She lived on her
own terms. OK, so we've talked about her background,
her marriages, the social constraints of Roman
society. Oh, we haven't even gotten to the Perusian
War yet. Oh, you're right. The event that really
solidified Fulvia's place in history, or at least
in infamy. That's the thing, isn't it? The Parisian
War is often presented as the defining moment
of Fulvia's life. The moment she went too far.
The moment she revealed her true nature as a
ruthless, power -hungry woman. But Draycott challenges
that interpretation, doesn't she? She argues
that Fulvia has been unfairly singled out. Exactly.
She compares Fulvia to other Roman women who
were involved in warfare, who led armies, who
defended their cities. And those women were often
praised, weren't they? They were seen as heroes.
So why is Fulvia different? Partly it's because
she lost. History is often written by the victors.
And in this case, the victor was Octavian. And
Octavian had every reason to demonize Fulvia.
Oh, yeah. His propaganda was brutal. I mean,
those sling bullets with the insults. Brutal
and effective. They painted her as a sexually
frustrated, jealous woman who was driving Antony
to ruin. It was a smear campaign, pure and simple.
And it worked. It did. It cemented Fulvia's image
as a villain. And that image has persisted for
centuries. But Dracot's book forces us to reconsider,
doesn't it? To look beyond the propaganda and
see Fulvia as a complex, multifaceted woman who
is trying to protect her own interests, her family,
her legacy. Exactly. She was a product of her
time, just like everyone else. A time of incredible
upheaval and violence. A time when survival often
meant making difficult choices. And she wasn't
afraid to make those choices, even when it meant
going against the grain, defying expectations
and risking everything. That's what makes her
story so compelling. She wasn't perfect. She
made mistakes. But she was a force to be reckoned
with. A woman who dared to challenge the status
quo. A woman who, in many ways, was ahead of
her time. And that, I think, is a fitting way
to end our deep dive into Fulvia. A reminder
that history is never simple. That the stories
we tell and the stories we choose to believe
can have a profound impact on how we see the
world. and how we see ourselves. So keep questioning,
keep exploring, and keep searching for those
hidden stories, those untold truths that can
help us understand the past and perhaps even
guide us in the present. Beautifully said. And
if you want to explore Fulvia's story in more
depth, there's a link to Jane Dracod's book on
Amazon in the description below. Be sure to check
it out. And let us know what you think. We'd
love to hear your thoughts on Fulvia, the Persean
War, or anything else that struck you during
our conversation today. Leave a comment below
or share this episode with your friends. Let's
keep the conversation going. And that's it for
this episode of The Deep Dive. Thanks for joining
us, and we'll see you next time for another journey
into the past. Until then. Bye, everyone. Goodbye.