Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T04:09:14.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Roman Women*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2009

Gillian Clark
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Times have changed for Roman women. To an undergraduate – even a woman undergraduate – reading Greats some fifteen years ago, they were obviously a fringe topic, worth at most a question on the General Paper. There were pictures of dresses and hairstyles, in most of which it looked impossible to move. There were snippets of anthropology from Plutarch, as that a bride had her hair parted with a spear (Moralia 285b): entertaining, but about as relevant to the views of a bride in the late Republic as are wearing a veil (to symbolize being under authority) and being pelted with confetti (in hopes of many children) to a bride in the 1980s. There was an account of forms of marriage, with, usually, a panegyric of a Roman matron and a denunciation of the laxity of the late Republic and immorality of the early Empire; and a handful of brief biographies: Cornelia, Sempronia, Arria. This information would be found somewhere around chapter 15 of a general handbook, once the author had dealt with the serious business of life, like the constitution and the courts and education and the army and the provinces. J. P. V. D. Balsdon's book made a difference, since he never forgot that he was writing about human beings, who worried about their children and ran their households and had long days to fill. But the real change came in the 70s, as the Women's Movement – a decade late – got through to the classics. First there was the new perspective offered by general feminist histories, though their scholarship was second-hand and often wild; then articles and books, though still only a few, trying to answer the sort of questions it now seems so odd we did not ask. What did Roman women do all day, besides getting dressed? How did they feel about it? What else could they have done? Were they oppressed, and did they notice? Why do we know so little about half the human race?

Type
Research Article
Information
Greece & Rome , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , October 1981 , pp. 193 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Balsdon, J. P. V. D., Roman Women (London, 1962)Google Scholar; Arethusa 6 (1973) and 11 (1978)Google Scholar; Pomeroy, Sarah B., Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves (New York, 1975)Google Scholar; Lefkowitz, Mary F. and Fant, Maureen B., Women in Greece and Rome (Toronto, 1977)Google Scholar, a source-collection.

2. Cicero, , Brutus 211Google Scholar; Quintilian 1.1.6; Pliny, , Letters 1.16Google Scholar.

3. Cornelia, Schanz-Hosius 1. p. 219; Sulpicia, ibid. 2. p. 189.

4. Mommsen, , Strafrecht, p. 636 n. 3Google Scholar.

5. Soranus 2.6.10 (ed. Ilberg, Teubner 1927 = Corpus Medicorum Graecorum 4).

6. Balsdon, J. P. V. D., JRS 61 (1971), 18 ffGoogle Scholar.

7. Dio 55.22.5; Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae 1.12.9; Suetonius, , Divus Augustus 31.3Google Scholar; Plutarch, , Numa 10.2Google Scholar.

8. Münzer p. 351–2; CIL 1.2 27881; Hopkins, K. M., Population Studies 18 (1964–1965), 309 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9. Duncan-Jones, Richard, The Economy of the Roman Empire (Cambridge, 1974), p. 288 ffGoogle Scholar.

10. Child mortality: Balsdon, J. P. V. D., Life and Leisure in Ancient Rome (London, 1969), pp. 85 ffGoogle Scholar. Girl babies tougher: Soranus 2.21.48. Food schemes: Hands, A. R., Charities and Social Aid in Greece and Rome (London, 1968), pp. 113 ffGoogle Scholar. See the discussion of infanticide by Brunt, P. A., Italian Manpower (Oxford, 1971) pp. 148 ffGoogle Scholar.

11. Hopkins, K. M., Comparative Studies in Society and History 8 (1965), 124 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.; Noonan, John T. Jr, Contraception (Harvard, 1965)Google Scholar, ch. 1. On conception before the first menstruation, compare Vermes, Geza, Jesus the Jew (London, 1973), p. 218Google Scholar; on amenorrhea, Ladurie, E. LeRoy, The Territory of the Historian (English translation, Hassocks, 1979)Google Scholar. On the time of conception, even Marie Stopes agreed with Soranus: present-day belief is that conception in the paramenstruum is possible but unlikely.

12. Soranus, 1.19.64; Ovid, Amores 2.14.27, Fasti 1.621–4.

13. Digest 48.19.38.5, 47.11.4; foetus not a person, 35.2.9.1, 25.4.1.1. Tacitus, , Annales 14.63Google Scholar does not (pace Brunt, P. A., Italian Manpower, p. 147)Google Scholar suggest that abortion was a crime against the husband in Nero's time: Octavia was accused of aborting someone else's child, i.e. of adultery. Cicero, , pro Cluentio 31–2Google Scholar has to fall back on a law from Miletus.

14. Cf. Pliny, , Natural History 7.42–3Google Scholar.

15. Gellius 12.1; Tacitus, , Dialogus 28Google Scholar, Germania 20.1. Musonius p. 11, and ILS 8541, count breastfeeding a virtue.

16. The fairy-story, Juvenal 6.602 ff.; in real life, Suetonius, , de grammaticis 7 and 21Google Scholar; inscriptions by grateful foster-children, Balsdon, , Life and Leisure, pp. 86–7Google Scholar.

17. Rawson, Beryl, CPh 61 (1966) 71 ffGoogle Scholar. The lex Aelia Sentia (A.D. 4) allowed slaves under 30 to be freed without appeal to a consilium if, among other reasons, they were about to die, or a relative wished to free them: Gaius, , Institutes 1.19Google Scholar.

18. CIL 6.3926 ff. (Livia's household), 6213 ff. (the household of the Statilii Tauri). Factories, Columella 12 pr. 1.

19. Treggiari, Susan, Roman Freedmen in the late Republic (Oxford, 1969), p. 88Google Scholar.

20. Digest 25.7.1 pr., 23.2.44; Ulpian 13.1; Cicero, , pro Sestio 110Google Scholar. See Schulz, F., Roman Classical Law (Oxford, 1951), p. 138Google Scholar.

21. LeGall, J., REL 47 bis (1970), 123 fGoogle Scholar. Doctors, ILS 7802–5; midwives, Soranus 3.1.3.

22. Asconius, , in Milonianam 43CGoogle Scholar; Suetonius, , Divus Augustus 64.2Google Scholar.

23. Bonner, S. F., Education in Ancient Rome (London, 1977), pp. 136 ffGoogle Scholar.

24. Pliny, , Letters 5.16Google Scholar; Plutarch, , Moralia 453dGoogle Scholar; Musonius pp. 13 ff.

25. Statius, Silvae 3.5.63 ff.; Soranus 1.4.23. Dancing; ORF I p. 133; Sallust, , Catiline 25.2Google Scholar; Horace, , Odes 3.6.21–2Google Scholar, with Nisbet, and Hubbard, , A Commentary on Horace Odes 2 (Oxford, 1978), pp. 181–2Google Scholar.

26. Pliny, , Letters 5.16Google Scholar. The epitaph, ILS 1030 says she lived ann.XII men.XI d.VII; Pliny that she died just before her fourteenth birthday, which seems to me a more likely time for her wedding (see below).

27. Amundsen, and Diels, , Human Biology 41 (1969), 125 ffGoogle Scholar.; Soranus 1.4.20, 1.5.25.

28. Digest 23.2.4; cf. Dio 54.6.7; Digest 23.1.9. Republican precedent, Digest 12.4.8; adultery, 48.5.14.8.

29. On the age of Octavia, daughter of Claudius, who is sometimes cited as a pre-pubertal bride, see Geer, R. M., TAPhA 62 (1931), 65–7Google Scholar.

30. Rufus ap. Oribasius (ed. Bussemaker-Daremberg), 3. p. 87.

31. Places to go: Ovid, , Amores 3.633 ffGoogle Scholar., Tibullus 1.6.15 ff., Martial 11.7. Decorum: Seneca, Controversiae 2.7.3. Dinner-parties: Ovid, , Ars Am. 1.565 ffGoogle Scholar., Amores 1.4; Horace, Odes 3.6.21 ff., Varro ap. Nonius p. 372L; Suetonius, , Divus Claudius 32Google Scholar.

32. 1LLRP 973; ILS 8393 line 30; Tacitus, , Annales 5.1Google Scholar.

33. RE Tullius 60; Hopkins, K. M., Population Studies 20 (1966), 245 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34. Williams, Gordon, JRS 48 (1958), 16 ffGoogle Scholar.; Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry (Oxford, 1968), pp. 370 ffGoogle Scholar.

35. Kajanto, I., Arctos 7 (1972), 13 ffGoogle Scholar.

36. Marriage-law, Crook, J. A., Law and Life of Rome (London, 1967), pp. 100 ffGoogle Scholar. Divorce by women married cum manu, Gaius, Institutes 1.137a (against, Watson, Alan, The Law of Persons in the later Roman Republic (Oxford, 1967)Google Scholar, ch. 6); control of property, Gellius 17.6.

37. Digest 24.1.1, 24.1.40 and 42; 48.5.23–4. On changing patterns of marriage and parental control, see Pomeroy, S. B., Ancient Society 7 (1976), 215 ffGoogle Scholar.

38. Dowry problems, Cic. Att. 14.14.1, Fam. 6.18.5; penalties, Cic. Topica 4.19 ff., Seneca Controversiae 2.7.1. Divorce at a lower economic level, Kajanto, I., REL 47 bis (1970), 99 ffGoogle Scholar.

39. Balsdon, , Roman Women, p. 55Google Scholar.

40. Schulz, F., Roman Classical Law, p. 103Google Scholar. The then state of English divorce law does much to explain this remark.

41. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities 2.25.4.

42. Tutela mulierum: Gaius, , Institutes 1.190Google Scholar, Cicero, , pro Murena 27Google Scholar; Schulz, , op. cit., pp. 188 ffGoogle Scholar.

43. Crook, J. A., CQ 17 (1967), 113 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.; Watson, op. cit., chs. 5 and 6.

44. Dio 48.34.3, 55.10.4; 48.44.4–5. Plutarch, , Antonius 54.2, 57.3Google Scholar.

45. Tacitus, , Dialogus 28.8–9Google Scholar; Plutarch, , Tiberius Gracchus 1.4–5Google Scholar, Gaius Gracchus 4.3–4; Pliny, , Natural History 34.31Google Scholar. Suetonius, , Divus Augustus 61.2Google Scholar; Nicolaus, of Damascus, , FGH 70 fr. 127Google Scholar.

46. Jolowicz, and Nicholas, , Roman Law3 (Cambridge, 1972), pp. 246 ff.Google Scholar; Watson, Alan, The Law of Succession in the later Roman Republic (Oxford, 1971), pp. 29 ffGoogle Scholar.

47. Rawson, Elizabeth, Studies in Roman Property (ed. Finley, M. I., Cambridge, 1976), p. 97Google Scholar.

48. Cicero, , Topica 4.18Google Scholar; Digest 4.5.

49. Fifty was taken to be the age of menopause: Amundsen, and Diels, , Human Biology 42 (1970), 79 ffGoogle Scholar. Whether the ius trium liberorum (FIRA p. 457 ff., A.D. 9) was a real incentive to bear enough children to earn freedom from tutela would vary with character and circumstances.

50. Digest 3.1.5; Quintilian 1.1.6, Appian, , Bellum Civile 4.33Google Scholar.

51. Gaius, , Institutes 1.144Google Scholar; Cicero, , pro Murena 27Google Scholar; Seneca, Controversiae 1.6.5; Seneca, ad Marciam 1.1; Valerius Maximus 9.1.3.

52. Compare the provisions of the senatusconsultum Claudianum, which went against the ius gentium by reducing the status of the freeborn mother of a slave's child instead of letting her status determine that of the child. Weaver, P. R. C., Familia Caesaris (Cambridge, 1972), pp. 162 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar. argues that its motive was financial.

53. Motto, A., Classical Weekly 65 (1972), 155 ffGoogle Scholar.

54. Gabba, E. (ed.), Appiani Bellorum Civilium Liber Quintus (Florence, 1969), pp. xliii ffGoogle Scholar. On women at war, cf. Tacitus, , Ann. 1.69, 2.55.5Google Scholar.

55. Syme, R., TAPhA 104 (1960), 323 ffGoogle Scholar. = Roman Papers, ed. Badian, E. (Oxford, 1979), vol. 2 pp. 510 ffGoogle Scholar.

56. On cults, Gagé, J., Matronalia (Paris, 1963)Google Scholar; on the appeal of worship other than the established religion, Cameron, Averil, Greece & Rome 27 (1980), 60 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57. Suetonius, , Divus Augustus 63.1, 64.2Google Scholar; Tacitus, , Ann. 5.1Google Scholar. The ius trium liberorum, Dio 55.2. Scribonia was less tactful than Livia: Suetonius, Divus Augustus 62.1, 69.1. On univirae, see Rudd, Niall, Lines of Enquiry (Cambridge, 1976), pp. 42 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.: but I do not think the main point (p. 44) was that the univira was never divorced. A remarried widow would not be univira (see the instances in Seneca, , de matrimonio 74–7, frGoogle Scholar. 13 Haase).

58. Williams, Gordon, Tradition and Originality, pp. 525 ffGoogle Scholar.