')

ElRENE XXXllI, 1997. . 81-95

Independent Women the Romao East:

WidO\-vs, Benefactresses,

Patronesses, Office-Ho]ders

KONSTANTINOS MANTAS
Athens

1 the last two decades, there has been a continuous sees ofpub!ications
?~ the .subject ofwomen antiquity, as a resuJt ofthe transfonationoffem

mlsm western Europe and . Ameca. from a radical, semi-utopian free

dom moement to a 'respectable', semi-compromised part of the social and
cultural establishment. The shrinkage of other felds for research is due to
the fact that nothiog, or almost nothing new, can be written about areas such
as ciIizens c!assica! Athens or slavery antiquity, and Ihis may hae
helped the deelopmeot of this trend.'
Whereas there is ery lmited material for a proper study of women in the
pre-Hellenistic world (which allows only for the study of imaginary women,
the larger-than-!ife heroines of mythology and drama) the late Hellenistic
and Roman imperial eras proide the social historian with an epigrapbical
record which surprising!y, registers a number of \vomen acting as public
benefactresses and ciic officials. Also. a much larger number of women is
recorded trarsacting business. maoumittng slaes, dedicating statues or,
rare cases. actiog the name of their children as guardians.
S. POMEROY started the trend the mid-seventies with her book, Goddesses,
Whores. Wives and Slaves. Women Cassical Antiquity (New York 1975). Other
boo~s the subject: D. . SCAPS, Economic Rights of fVomen Ancient Greece
(EdInburgh 1979), . . FolEY (ed.). RejTections ofJVomen ; Antiquity (Ne'v York
1981), . CAMERON - . KUHRT (eds.), Jmages offVomen Antiquity (London 1983),
G. ~IGONI (ed.), Donne Grecia (Rome-Bari 1985), . Se:m.UnPANOEl (ed.),
Hlstory ofWomen;n the West I(London 1992), S. POMEROY (ed.), Women 's Histo
ry and Ancient History (London 1991). . FANTHAM - . . FOLEY - . BOYMElJ{AM
- S. . POMEROY _ . . SHAPIRO (eds.). Women the Cssical JYorld (New
Y?rk-Oxford 1994). The abbeviations follo'... the convention set by -Sc
wth the exemption of JGR = lnscriptiones Graecae ad Res Romanas Pert;nentes.
1 See Ch. 3 of my doctoral thesis. Civic Dec/ine and Female Po ...;er: Women 's
Role the Greek World under Roman Ru/e (st! University 1994). A1so see

81

"

KONSTANTINOS MANTAS

\
\

The first problem which arises concems the ndependence ofthes.e wom
en: did they act their own or under the tuteIage of a male relative or a
state-appointed guardian? is a well-known fact that both Greek and Roman
law imposed women's economic transactions the restriction ofa guard
ian's approval. This is the image projected by cJassicaJ and Hellenistic
scriptions and of cOUIse by the Digest. J NevertheJess, Augustus' demograph
ic policy resulted the creation of the ius trilIm /iberorum or
Greek, the grant of emancipation from guardianship for every free
bom woman who gave birth to three children, and for every freedwom~
who gave birth fOUI. 4 The phrase is recorded with pride by aristocratIc
women lke the priestess Claudia Damostheneia Roman Laconia. S such
cases though, the ius trium /iberorum could be granted the people who dld
! meet the law's requirements through personal patronage. 6 Inscriptions
ftom various regions ofthe Roman East record a large number ofwome~ ~f
lower-class status who held the right of three children. Appia Pannychls ls
recorded as a manumission inscription from see
ond century AD Beroia, Macedonia. 7 the region ofLycia, the fODula used
the nscriptions denote \vomen of such status was
.8 The pu.zzlng aspect ofthe problem is that a number of\vomen
ftom the same region and in the sarne era are recorded as acting \vithout a
guardan's penission but also without reference the right of three chil
dren. For nstance, Vlaste, daughter of Hentimos and Armasta, daughter of
~~aeus both being widows, freedwomen and paroikoi (= residents of no
clt~~ status) are recorded as acting n such a manner; and the other charaC
tensIlc ofthe~e ,~omen is that they Jack Roman citizenship as the absence.of
a cognomen IndIcates. 9 This tempts the scholar create a theory whlch
the wornen of some regjons of the Roman empire, who lacked the priiJege
of Roman citizenslp, couJd act without a guardian. And this is renforced
R. VAN BREMEN, Women and Wea[th, : . Cameron _ . Kuhn (eds.), Images of
Wom~n Antiquity (london 1983), . 223-243, and . TAGL!AFERR.o-BoAnRIG~,
P/ancta Magna ofPerge, : S. Pomeroy (ed.), Women's' History and Ancient HIs
tory (london 1991), . 218-248.
, J See C. ~N., Recherches sur [e mariage l /0 condilion de /0 femme mariee
/ ep~que he//enIstIque (as 1970), especial1y . 241-254.
s J. GARDNER, Women Roman Law and Society (London 1986), . 14-22.
. J. S. SPAWFORTH, Fami/ies RQman Sparta and Epidaurus BSA 80 (1985),
. 234.
'
6 See . . SHERWIN-\VHE, The Let1ers of /: Historica/ and Socia/ Com
men;ary (Ox.ford 1966), . 690.

. . ORLANOOS, '-, : . . (1916), . 147.

1.1, at the city ofTermessos, Nos 383, 482,669,705,714.

11.1, at Tennessos, Nos 284 and 384, respective1y.

82

&

INDEPENDENT WOMEN ROMAN EAST

by the fact that some areas of Greece such as Epirus and Thessaly, wom
en acted without a guardian tTom as earJy as the third century BC.
Q The prob
lem is that again there are exceptions: AureIia Eutychia a citizen of s is
recorded as having bought a tomb for herseIf, her husband and her threptoi. 11
She is a Roman citizen but she has neither a guardian the right of the
three children. Similar examples are recorded in Telmessos and Cadyba. I2
second probIem \vhich arises is the effect that maiage had the eco
nomic independence of women. nowing that antiquity the vast majty
ofwomen got maed their earIy teens, is tempting speculate that they
enJoyed economic independence onIy as widows. Of course, theory, a
Roman woman maied Slli illris could keep her own property separate from
her husband's, but the idea that the husband was a quasi-owner of h.is wife's
property was still cunent especially the texts of moraJists such as PJu
tarch. 1J This ideal of joint marital ownership of property is demonstrated by
the enonous amount of inscrptions recording maied couples as co-dedi
cators co-benefactors: Hierocles son of Henophantes, arch-priest and
ste~hanephoros, thrice gymnasiarchos and son ofthe city, and his wife Aris
tonke \vho shared the offces of arch-presthood constructed a ba/aneion
(== bath) in Ceramus, Cara. 14 Aurelia Artemis was ktistria (= founder) ofthe
gynmasiurn at Termessos Lycia as well as co-funder of other public projects
!ogether with her husband. 15 considerable arnount of inscrptions record
ng wives as co-benefactors \Vith their husbands comes tTom second century
AD Ephesos: "The representation of \vomen publc bui/ding projects
Ephesos during the / Roman empire took two forms. / the first. wllich
Was the more common,from the reign ofthe emperor Augustus / the /ate
S~cond century AD, \vomen were portrayed inscriptions throIlghout the
~lty as /akng part the construction, dedica/ion and reslora/ion ofblIi/d
lngs. exp/icit/y as the \IIiVes, and daIlghters ofma/e bulders ofAsia itse/f. "16

10 See . BABAKOS, VormundscJIajim a/tthessa/ischen Recht 3. JJI. . C. -4. Jh.

~7., ZSS 79 (1962), . 311-322.
1i 11, 990, at OIympus.
) 11, Nos 70 and 752.
14 See S. TREGGIARJ, Roman aage (Oxford 1991),.. 365. .
.

JHS 11 (1890), . 126. See also appendix my thesls. SometImes the \vIfe \\'.as
~7 reaI manager of her husband's property. According . PHILOS1AUS the sophIst
. Ipodromus .the ThessaJian gave up the chair of rhetonc at ~thens because of the
Irtlue~ce of~ls \vife and his property; his \ife was an energetIc \voma~ and the tue
gua~~lan ofhIs property ( ), Li~'es oftJle Sophsts, 618.
16 111, 122.
S
G. . ROGER.S, The Construcfion oJtYomen Ephesos, 90 (1992), . 217.
ee aIso tbe appendices of my doctoral thesis, Cc Declne and Fema/e pO~~'er:

11.

83

11

.1-:

. ,
"

'

1 .

"

KONSTANTINOSMANTAS
Other inscriptions reveal that women with Roman citizenship from Greek
regions had have their husband's consent as a de lcto guardian, when
engaging economic transactions. For instance, when Julia Eudia dedicat
ed Asclepius fourteen plethra of vineyard her husband's consent was re
corded, hough he is not called her guardian. 7
Even more problematic is the subject of dowry. According reggia:
"During the marriage, as Cicero said, do~vry be/onged ( the hIIsband. This
remains the view olthe c/assica/jItrists. Late c/assica/jurists tended ( stress
that dowry was on/y temporarily the husband's possession lor the dura
tion ] the marriage, and a/ways potentially rec/aimab/e. "18
Ancient fiction as well as the epigraphic sources present different facets
ofthe problem: . Egger mentions that there is reference legal guard
ians ofadult women the ancient romances and that "indications shared
matrmonial property are lound severa/ couples' agI'eements, IIsually
]avor the bride ".19 W. . Calder comments one Galatian nsctn,
n which Diogneta, daughter ofTektomaros, set her husband's tomb with
money from her pecu/ium. According to him, the pecu/ium belonged to the
bde. 2 He refers to another nsct from the border of Phrygia and Pisi
dia, n which a woman, Aurelia Ammia, set a statue of her husband from
ber own dowry, : / : and he conciudes that ''Ammia
Anabura disposes ] her during the /ifetime ] her husband ''.2\
another Galatian nscrption, a epitaph, a husband sets a curse aganst
the unknown person who exploited his wife's trust and did not give back the
green woollen ganent and the two silver bracelets, which were part of her
dowry.U S. Mitchell, his commentary the nsctn, mentions that
Statilias' dowry became the possession ofher husband only after her death. 23
Wom~n:s New Ro/e Ihe Greek Wor/d under Roman Ru/e (Bristo1 1994), for wom
en as Jolnt officials benefactors with their husbands sons. Also see PHILoSTR
us, Lives o[the Sophists, 23, which the sophist Damianus of Ephesos dedicated a
portico
his wife's
name, second century
17

.
~I Ma~tlnea, south Pe10ponnese,lG VZ, Nos 269, 270. According the law of
BIthynIa a W1fe was permitted enter a contact without the consent of her
husband adu\t 50n, Gaius, i. 193.
:: S. TREGGIARI, Roman Maiage, . 325-326.
.. EGGER, Women and Maiage Ihe Greek Nove/s: The Boundares [ Ro
mance, : J. atum (ed.), The Search for the Ancient Nove1 (Baltimore - London
1994), . 268.
: W. . Cl.DER., U/pian and Ga/aIian /nscription, CR 37 (1923), . 10.
W. . CAWER, . cit., . 10.
n S. MffCHELL, Regiona/ Epigraphic Cata/ogues [ Asia Minor l! (Oxford 1982),
242, . 201.
3 S. MffCHELL, . cit., . 202.

INDEPENDENT WOMEN ROMAN EAST

other words, the husband became full owner ofhis wife's dowry only af
ter her death, although we find n another nsctn, a wife's pecIIlium iS
be confiscated due her husband's debts. 24
So then, the relatively Jarge number of women magistrates or benefac
tresses who are usually recorded as baving paid through their O\V funds for
liturgies and vate benefactions raise a problem: how did they manage
accwnulate such wealth, and how they could spend , without being restct
ed by male relatives? Both R. Van Bremen and . agafe-atwght
bave mentioned Ihis specifc problem, but they do not pursue systemati
~all~.2$ Women antiquity could survive economically their own, work
mg a smaIl number of low-paid jobs or Ihey could even creaIe fTom their
own work, a small estate,26 but Ihey could become \vealthy onIy Ihrough n
hetng Iheir father's property or through marriage. Unfortunately. mosI
scns do specify the status of the female honourands. a very fe\v
cases, we can be sure that the lady liturgist or benefactress \vas a widow: the
benefactress Ata1anta who donated wheat for distribution among the citizens
of the Lycian city of Terrnessos, was a widow, . 27 Tbe \veIl-known
Menodora of Sillyon, a woman who held a sees of religious and civic of
fices n second century AD SiIIyon, Pamphylia, was botb a \vidow and an
child. 28 Nevertheless, the majty of the female donors and /iturgists
se~m to have been maied (there are a few young girls whose liturgies w~re
pald by their parents) ad there is concrete evidence that tbey were wld
Ows at the time of their donations or liturgies. True, a female heir \vas a
frequent phenomenon, but if a wealthy man had onJy daughters one of them
had to be his heir and, under Roman law, a heiress was liable pay munera
for her city, although as Abbott and Chester-Johnson observed, a \voman
who maied a citizen anoher city was under obJigation 10 perfonn the
nunera patrimoniorum. 29 Notwithstanding his, she aiOO a man from

. Udamla, Lydia, SEG 35 (\985), 1267.

R. BREMEN, Women and Wealth, : . Cameron - . Kuhrt (eds.), Images
o~ \Vomen Antiquity (London \ 983), . 230. . AGLIAFERRo-B.OA~ IGHT, Plan
c Magna ofPerge: Women's Roles and Status Roman Asia , : S. Pome
roy (ed.), \Vomen's History and Ancient History (London 199\), . 256-257.
16 ~ee for instance an nsct fom Beroia, Macedoni~ which an o/d wom
an Aagne, who sels fee her fema1e slave is given Ihe advce 10 b\v money
mort~ag.e par of her property by her brolhers, \vho polilely decline 10 help h~r and
als0.ndrect wam her Ihat Ihe manumission ofa slave who could be a help 01d
age I~S l a good idea, SEG 30 (1980), 590, 181 AD.
18 11, 62, line 3.
See R. V BREMEN Family from Sill}'on, 104 (1994), . 43-56.
19 F. F. _ . CHESTER ]OHNSON, Municipal Admintitration the Roman
Empire (princeton 1926), . 97.
l.I

85
1

.........

KONSTANTINOS MANTAS

!
,

thc same city, she \vas stiII obliged perfonn her public duties, her o\n
name: Syntyche daughter of Hegeus set the staue of Tyche which \vas
promised by her father in the tenure of his stephanephorate; the setting-up
of thc inscription \V:1S superised by her husband, Antiochus Epigenus.~o
former Pontarch left his daughter as heir his line and to carry hts
financial duies the city. Although this \voman was a wife and mother of
a young boy was she and her husband who nheed her father's wealth
and subsequent economic obligations the city.JI It is also interesting that
these exceptional \vomen, were honoured mostly as daughters of their fa
thers: in most nsctns the emphasis is the women's ancestry:
;32 ;;
\! '';J3

' . L. Migeotte stresses the empha

.
sis Atalanta's following her ancestors' policy towards the City.H

Of great interest is a story incorporated in Constantine PorphyogenJ~,

De adminis/rando imperio, the story of Gicia, daughter of a prominent cJtJ
zen of Chersonesus. Although Constantine \vas a Byzantine emperor of t~e
tenth century , the story due to its general atmosphere must be placed
the pagan, pre-Byz.antine era: "On /he con/rary.les/ivi/ies \vi/h dancing and
singing. and Gicia's \I'ish be buried \vithin /he \ bu ye/ / church
(the p/ace mos/ honor10r /he buria/ Christian). attest more strong/y
/ime paganism. "36 Gicia, after her father's death decided ask the lead
ing men of the city, consent her organising a la~ish banquet \vith distri
butions of\ine, meat, l and bread an annual basis commemorate her
father. 31 Her husband simply congratulated her her flial st and con
sented rejoice and pour libations. 38 He had an another intention, ho\vever.
Minoa, Amorgos ca. 185 AD, /G 1.7, 243 .
somc regions the public serices \VCrc h.e
rc:d!.:ry for the femalc lrnc: Phtltscus the Thessa\ian was summoned perform l1t
uTgIC:s by t~c Hcordacan Maccdonians \vhose cusloms was elect liturgists form thc
sons oflh~lr fcma!c citizcns, Li"es ofthe Sophists, 622. See also 11, 905, ~I
G. 7580, In, whIc.h O~r.moas the fi1mous bcnefactor is rewarded as being gymnasIar
chos thrcc ttmcs hrs mother's (t.
:: C/G, 4367c, at Tcncssos, Lycia.
J< BCH 16 (1892), . 421 at Pogla, Pisidia.
JI .4 ., ~023, at Thyatira, Lydia.
. MIGE01TE, EmprIInt pub/ic dans Ies cites gecques (Quebec _ as 1984),
. )38.
J' V. . :<, The Coinage ofCJersonesus /V Cenrury BC - Cen/ury
(Oxford 1980), . 70.
HC O)/SA:'>I1NE PORPH....tHX:;Ei'1ruS. De administrando imperio 258 Be-/98 .
Jt Tbid. . 198.
10

.' /GR 111, 115, al Scbas~~boIis.

86

INDEPENDENT WOMEN ROI\IAN EAST

use his wife's banquet order seize the city by trickery. (Hc \'vas Ihc
son of a leading man from the hostile city of Bosporus and his marriage to
Gicia \vas part of a reconciliation scheme.) The interesting aspect of tlle sto
ry is that the lady question presides over the banquet, \vas allo\ved drink
wine liberalIy and, after destroying her husband's Ireacberous plan, \vas re
'oVarded by seIIing-up staues her honour and the promise of being buried
the middle of the city.J9 Gicia's attachment her fatherland was grealer
than that of her husband. She was, above all, the daughter of her father and
his city.
Widowhood, \vhile being a perilous state [ lower-class \vomen, provid
~d patrcian \vomen with the opportunity escape from the defac/o restric
tlons imposed them by the presence of a husband. Melitte, the mey
\vidow Achilles Tatius Romance, C1eitophon and Leucippe, manages her
property alone and travels from Ephesos Alexandria where she finds an

?ther husband. 40 Nevertheless, her new husband, Cleitophon is characterised

another passage of the novel as her lord and master, which implies that

4I
Ih~ end of \vidowhood ! the women again under a kind of tuteJage. The

wldow cou1d sometimes become the sole heir of her husband 's property:

Marciane daugbter of Marcellus, \vife and heir of Gaius Heliophon, fulfilled

her husband's promise the city of Amastris, by set1ing a statue ofthe

emperor Antoninus PiOUS. 42 Another widow, who is recorded as her hus

J
band's heir, \vas Ammia daughter of Zoilus Serres, Macedonia: One of
th~ earlier examples is that of Megiste, daughter of Apollodorus, \vh? was
herr ofher husband's property.44 ! seems though, that a \voman could Inher

"
"

.'

.:!

..
i

,',;'

,,'

/bid., . 209.
AClIILLES TATIus (5.]7): ~ :o~ !. ~
~ , . . ,1(~
~ 6 . Wido\vs \vere infamous for alleged se:v.ual VO.lCIIy (a clIchc
\vhIch s,tiIl surivcs among contemporary Mcdileranean societies). Melittc, hersclf
15 descnbed as amorous, eager have sex \vith her second, yougcr husbad, ACHIL
lES TATlus 5.16. The mother of the sophist Hermocrates, CaJlJsto. becamc estr:ged
from her ~o, because he disapproved of her li~iso \~ith a slave, ,to such.? degrc:
that shc drd shed a tcar \vhe her son dled l the t1o\\'er of hls youth , LO
s~;s. Lives 0/ the Sophists, 610.
.'
'
AOlrLLES TAUS 5.11. \Vido\vs couId act as heads of famrlIes: scc ( Istance
! 1l1.1, 335 which Aurelia Artemisia, citizen oflsedus, wido\v (). TtS
Ide~~ at Termessos, costrcts a tomb for herself, her daughter and son-inla\v.
(J (1991), 1460.
.,
SEG 30 (1980), 615. For another wido\v \vho constrcted a basJIIca 10 ful
ter h~bad's promise, see SEG 31 (198/), 639, 3 Macedoia.
. Pnene, 255, He1leistic era.
J9

"

(Q

87

"'.

KONSTANnNOSMANTAS

her husband's property only if Ihey lacked suriving children; in an;

scriplion from W. Cilicia, daled Ihe second cenlury AD, a woman,

daughler of Calligonus, is recorded as heir 10 her husband and,O herl:~
sons. 45 It seems very unlkely thal she would inheril her husband s \vea
her sons were slill alive. wido\v could manage her children's ~ropertyRas
heir guardian, if she was a Roman cilizen (and so being ou~Ide Ihe ~
man law of guardianship which forbade \vomen 10 act as guardIans) f~' 5 d.
had give Ihem conlrol of the property when Ihey reached adu o~
R. Van Bremen concludes her article Menodora of Sillyon, hal 15
ou
great lady had been an exceplionally wealthy woman only because sheiI1

lived her son. 46 Another woman who acted as epiIropos ofher son \Vas
a,

.
. d con
troI over
daughter ofMoas;47 but she seemed have sImply
exercIse
his property, wihout having claims herself. She must have needed
port for her old age, oherwise, a bequest made by another of her sons ~

support~ng .her until she died, makes little sense. 48 ill~ \vou1d ~' have n~~d

ed the lfe Lnterest of an uncuJtivated estate and an olIve grove If she \v

have inherited her husband's property.

Women could aet as patonesses however, and from the private patrOn
age exercised over freedmen or other indiiduaIs (of usually the lo\ver 50
cial classes) they broke Ihe palronage of whole communities.. pp:~
class wo.men ofhe Geco-Roman world could enjoy a degree of sOC1al. fr :
dom which would have been unhink:able for respectabIe women even f
late Hellenistic era. Both literature and inscriptiors record \Vomen w~o
fered hospitality to men and some of them tansfoned this hospitalIIY. to
political patronage. For instance , Lucius the hero ofPseudo-Lucian's LucIIlS
. :
or the Ass, met a grand lady called Abroea, a friend of his mother d
streets ofthe ThessaliancityofHypata. The woman was sumptuously dres 5e
and \vas accompanied by many slaves. She openly invited the youth to her
house, offering treat him like one of her O\V sons. 49
. the epicurian rscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda, is recorded tha~
Dlogenes was looked after by a \Voman n Rhodes, who was recomrn ende

SU[

45

JHS 12 (1891), . 228.

~ R. B~MEN, FamiIy from Sillyon, 104 (1994), . 53. For a ~vom~

Tagna Q~a~a aI~as.PolIa, \vho I~ ~s heir of her son's property and set hls,to~v

sc;e a Latln lnsc~pIlon from Sellanl, Macedonia . DEMrsA, '

'~~ , ' (Athens 1896) 995.
41 SEG 6(1932), 672.
'
d' SEG 6.( 1932), 673. For the \vomen's ght guardianship usually as Co
or na.rs wIth the official guardian under Roman law see R AUSENSCHL.AG, '[he
Law.,ofGraeco-Roman Egypt illthe Light ofthe Papyri 6Varsa~ 1955), . 158-159.
PSEUDO-LUClAN, Lucius or Ihe Ass, 4.

88

t~
INDEPENDENT WOMEN ROMAN EAST
10 bim by his tiends, Meneas, Carus and Dionysius. 50 Bolh these examp1es
prove Ihat there was an active socia1 nehvork for the patriciale nearby re
gions and a1so that \vomen played a significant part The political impli.
cations of that k.ind of patronage are evident. The welI known Iunia Theo
dora, one ofthe very few women who was repeatedly honoured, and thus left
an impressive epigraphical dossier, aclieved her status through the shrewed
use ofhospitality. The inscriptions - five alI - which honour her have been
da~ed the mid-fust century AD. We are going give a detajled anaI
YSls of the Iady's background, mostly because this has aJready been done. sI
Iunia Theodora was a citZen ofCornth, which was a Roman coIony; so, she
\vas entitled to the priviIege ofbeing a Roman citizen. 5Z She was honoured
by the Lycian city of Patara because she habitua]]y received Lycians her
house and acted behalf of them, thus playing the roJe of an unofficial
ambassador. 53 Although she was l granted Ihe officialljt!e of proxenos,
Iunia Theodora was a real influence both Corinth's loca\ affairs and in the
coJony's relationship \vith the Lycian Federation. 54 As honours became of
less polilical significance, 'proxenia and honorary cilizenship frequenlly
were combined Ihe same grant'.55 Whereas in HeJleruslic times this hon
our was granted rather ftequentIy women,56 surpsingl few ladies ofthe
Roman meal period are recorded as proxenoi. We have managed 10 fmd
l two such cases: Scba Philotera, a Ephesian lady, \vas honoured
~y the demos of the Melians as Iheir proxenos and euergetis. 51 The other case
IS a rather obscure text (due 10 difficu]t syntax), in wlich a man, Megon son
ofDionysius and a \voman, Horatia daughter \vife of Aquilas, \vere granl
ed the proxenia and cilizenship of the city of Ihe Olontus Roman Crete;
a.ccording to one interpretation ofthe text, the woman extends the honorary
tltles to a certain Gnaeus Tudicius Macuius, a Roma citZen, as the use of

f,

'~ .

i'

'

)..

..

~',

'"

~; ~
'-,

10 Fr. 122. See also . FRGUS-S, Diogenes of Oinoanda: The

InsC:tn (Naples 1992), . 36, second century AD.
.'
.
R. . EARSLEY, fVomen ll Publc Life the Roman East, : Anclent So-

Ctety. Resources for Teachers 15 (1985), . 124-137.

S2 This is one which confused R. . KEARSEY, . cit., . 125- 26.

SJ R. . EARSLEY, . cit., . 133 (appendix).

.

s. P.erhaps she \vas granted official titles because Connth \vas ~ Roman colo
ny, whtch meant that its female citizens could hold offices, even lfthey were of
an honoraly nature.
55 J. . . LARSEN, 'proxenos' entry : . G. L. - . . SCULLARD
(e~), Th~ Oxford C/assical Dictionar)' (Oxford 1970), . 893.
. .
For Instance the besto\val ofproxenia, among other honours and pnvtleoes to
the ~arpist Polygnota, at Delphi, 86 BC, FD, 111\ 249.
SEG31 (1981), 743.

,-

89

, i
!
KONSTANTINOS MANTAS
the / nomina indicates, he was probably one ofher relatives through mar
riage. j&
Although most of rhese women seem have been members of rhe land
ed upper-cIass, and thus frequently holders of Roman citizenship, this is
always the case. The status of Iunia Theodora is difficult define. She must
have been the owner of estates Lycia as R. . Kearsiey has suggeste~.j9
but her Latin cognomen Iunia, suggests descent from freedmen. AccordIng
ajanto, "it is in general argued that calendaric cognomina were given
/0 children born (or even slaves bought) dIlring the relevant season. mon/h.
dy. part ] dy or]estival ".60 Ths can be combined with the fact that Cor
inth was reorganised as a Roman coIony, 44 BC, with its new popuiation
deriving from Rome's freedmen and urban poor. 61 Another weH know.n
woman, who offered hospitality the apostle Paul, was the porphyropollS
Lydia in the Roman colony of Philippoi, Macedonia. 61 According G. .
R. HorsIey, Lydia must have been of seriJe origin because (a) most people
the purple trade were freedmen and (b) her name ret1ected her geograph
ical origin. 63 Lower class people, even of freedrnan orgin were always
excluded from beng liturgists benefactors: a slave-trader (somatem
boros), AIexandrus had been market official (agoranomos) Thyarira, Ly
dia;64 a woman calIed LepuscIa, a name derved from the word lepus (= hare)
which indicates serle orgin, constructed a bath n a Laconan town.6~
The marital status of these 'independent' women cannot be easily de
fined. Juia Theodora. clearly must have been a widow a spnster; there is
reference a husband in any of the five texts of her epigraphical dossier
and her heir, SexUs Iulius, is her son a close relative. 66 As for Lydia,
Horsley suggests that she must have been a widow a divorcee; he does
rule entrely the possibility that she might have been a freedwoman witb

:: . DAVARS, c , : . . (1963), . 156-157.

60 R. . WRSLEY. Wo~en Puklic Life in the Roman Est. . 125-126.
61 . 1<.AJNTO. The , CogomIna (Rome 1982, rent), . 61.
D. ENGELS, Romn Corinth (Chicago-London 1990) .67-69.
62 Acts, 16.14.
'
~ New Documents l//ustrting Chrstinity 2 (1982), . 27.
. . W. PLEE!. Urbn EIiles and Business, : . Garnsey _ . Hopkins - C. R.
\Vh~~aker. rnde lhe Ancient Economy (London 1983), . 139.
.
. SEG 39 (1989), 372. For other instances of freedmen honoured [ thelr
seMCC:S see thc: example of a freedman honoured by the gerousia ofCyzicus SEG 40
(1990), 1126 at the end of the first century BC and another who was e;rolled as
mfember of.the gerousia. Also an mpeal freedm~n heJd the office of eirenophylax
the provtnce of Phrygia, 79 AD, SEG 40 (1990) 1232
66S ee R
r
, .
'.
RSLEY, .,omen Public Life the Romn East, . 127.

90

INDEPENDENT \Ol\1EN ROMAN EAST

the requisite number of the children to entitle her certain ghts under the
ius liberonm, but he thinks that the first century AD, Roman law perhaps
co.uld apply non-citizens. 67 He aJso expresses the that Luke
mIght have "accorded 10 her rather than her hl/sband the initiative

vitng Paul et . 10 'her home' because she wos the one who responded
Paul's message".63 For Abroea, we may assume that she \vas a widow, but

we must forget that she was Jiving in ThessaJy which was ntus for
''lax morals" n classical antiquity69 and also the nscriptions fiom both Hel
70
lenistic and Roman periods record women aetng without a guardian. Un
fortunately, we do have sufficient infomation from the Jiterary sources
the role of the atcan women bospitaJity.
.The wife of the rustic who invited Dio Chrysostom their but is de
scnbed as playing an active role as hostess, rubbng with tallow for one of
the strangers, while her husband did the same for the oher, pouring wne to
their cups, etc. 71 But these were poor people, and is certan that ch
h~uses such deeds would have been perfomed by servants. 72 According
VItruvius, the fust century architect tbe rule of J. Caesar and Augustus,
Greek houses were still designed so that the women' s part of the house was
separate from that of the rnen. 73 Roman sociaJ practice enabled women
m with men at dinner parties, and this created a sharp contrast between the
Roman and Greek customs. 74 Undoubtedly, \vas the Roman influence that
enable. Junia Theodora and Lydia act as hosts n the same manner as me~.
Both lved Greek cities which were Roman colonies. 7S Nevertheless, thIs
does explain the 'independence' of well-to-do women n all the regions
of the empire. Widows, for nstance, enjoyed economic fieedom from the
New Documen/s IIlustrating Ear/y Christianity 2 (1982), . 32.
/bid., . 28.

69 See PLAro'S Criton, 53e.

.

70 For instance, see a curious inscription \vhich a slave Stephanos is manumlt

ted by both his mistress, Menecleia and the city of Elateia, 8CH 2 (1 ~87), . 338
3~9. For the Roman period, see SEG 36 (1986), 545C, lines 2-3:
l , 133/4 AD.
71 Or SEVEN. 56.
72 For instance, PSEUDO LUCIAN'S, Lucius or the Ass (3), is the femalc; sIa.ve,
Pal~stra \vho looks after Luciuc when he visits Hipparchus, and ! the host s \vlfe.
7' VRUV1US, Architecture (trans. Frank Granger, London 1962),22-24.
See W. COTTER, Women's Authority Ro/es Paul's Churches, Noum Test~
menUm 36,4 (1994), . 359-360, and . 362-363. For Roman interf:rence thls
~ustom se~ PHlLOSTRAUS, Lives ofthe Sophists,. 529: Mar~us ~hc sophIst persuaded
he ~eganans admit the Athenians the soclety o~ theIr WJves and chlldren..
For the Romanised infJuence Lydia's behavIour see \V. CR, . clt.,
67

68

.364.

91

:-

KONSTANTINOS AS

\,

early Hellenistic era onwards: exarnples of wido\vs acting as their chiIdren's

guardians, jointIy with their own guardian16 or alone11 are recorded from the
third century BC. a fragmented Greek inscription from Sicily, an unnamed
man is recorded as purchasing land from the wido\v of Sosias. 1S S. C. Huro
phreys refers the ncreased freedom of wido\vs 10 live alone and mana~~
their own affairs as shown the papyri of frst century BC Egypt onwards, d
even the rhetorical texts of fourth century Athens she manages to f~d'
evidence for the indirect power of widows. iO \voman, Phaenaret~, the W1
ow ofPasiphilos, is recorded as manumitting a female slave Lassa, Thes
saly, 44 .
d
Some scholars, particularly R. Van Bremen and J. Reynolds, have ~gue
that women could act as office holders only as \idows, Iieu of ther ~e
ceased husbands or their children. S1 is tue that there are a number ofn
sctns which support this thesis,S3 but the overall impression from the
study of the matea is that female office-holders o\ved their position the
fact that they inheted their fathers' wealth and public liturgies. 84 c0t?par~
ison between the benefactresses and patronesses of the East and West n th
sixth century AD may be useful here. s, The first important difference be
tween the customs of the West and East at this time was that women's par
ticipation in the westem variation of euergetism was minimaI: according
. ajava, from the 000 western benefactors, only a handful seem to have
76 See D. . SCHAPS, Economic RighIs ofWomen Ancient Greece (Edinburgh
1979), . 51.
/bid., . 51 = /G JX1, 1654.
SEG 39 (1989), 1012A, ca. 200 BC.
79 S. C. HUMPHRE:YS, The Fami/y, Women and Death (London 1983), . 47.
/bid.

11

/G

545.

R. RE-.I, Family.from Sillyon, 104 (1994), . 43-56; J. ~

NOL~S,. The Social HisIory of Aphrodisias, : . Frezou1s (ed.), Societes urbaIn cs,
socIetes rurales dans l' Asie Mineure et la Syrie hellenistique et romaine (Str.1S bourg
1987), . 107-113, esp. . 112.
11 See my thesis, Appendix , for women acting lieu oftheir children.
. ... Women as well as men paid sums of money as a fee for thier office e.g. Aure
I,an Armasta paid wit~ !?ne left by her father and her O\V \>,BCH
'.6 (I~92) at Pogla PlsId,a. The economic csis of the third century D relnforced
IJturgles upon women and minors, see R. MACMUU.EN, The Roman Governor's Re
spo~e to Crisis (Landon 1976), . 168.
For r~ent work women's participation the Roman West, see J. NICQL.s,
P?trona CIVItatIs: Gender and , Patronage, : C. Deroux (ed.), Studies Lan n
LI.te.rature and Roman History (Brussels 1989), . 117-142; . AAVA, N~
CIYI.c Patroness?, Tyche 5 (1990), . 27-36; . FORBIS, Women's Public /mage In
/talIan Honorary /nscripri01lJ, AJPh 1 1 (1990), . 493-512.
12

92

--J'

INDEPENDENT WOMEN

ROMAN

EAST

been women. 86 second difference is that the Latin West, woman was
ever elevated to a civic office (excluding priesthood). This is commented
upon by J. Nicols: "Regarding the more secu/ar oJfces and honors, both
rde numerous examp/es of~vomen who had reached the highest civic
positions (e.g. archon and gymnasiarch) the East; neither they, nor indeed
any other, have presented evidence offema/e activity the more secII/ar
ojJices (e.g. duumvir) ofany \vestern community. ''87 Dr Forbis, the other
hand, fails to acknowledge the problem, as sbe is attempting to prove that
the West, benefactresses were praised, primarily, for their benefactions, not
for their domestic irtues. 88 It did Dot occur to her that, due to the fact that
?enefactresses were elected to public office, domestic praise was employed
m order to counterbalance deiations from the rigid asymmety between the
sexes. Another difference lay the fact that the West the phenomenoD of
h~noung women as patronesses of municipalities started l n the early
thIrd century ; NicoIs associated with the greater power \vhich the fe
male members of the Seeran couI1 enjoyed and practised,89 whereas n the
East the phenomenon had started n the second centwy BC.
The problem of what these women's actions were, need become bur
densome, since the vast majority of offices were liturgical: they cou1d be
occupied by gods or dead people or children.9Q person who could not actu
ally fulfil the office's executie requirements could be appointed as titular
gymnasiarchos or agonothetes witb another one acting as 'superisor,,91
man is recorded as 'epimeletes' of the agonothesia of a female agonoth
etes, in Attuda, Phrygia. 92 V. Chapot, uses this isolated example order to
93
conclude that women's participation public life was purely financial.
Thougb in a general sense his remarks are alid, we must conclude that
86 . AJAA, . cit., . 28-29. According Nico1s' statistics from 200 \vest
em patrons, only twenty-one were women, . cit., . 118.
87

NIcos, .

c;t.

FORBJS, . c;, . 496-498 and 505-506.

89 NIcos, . c;t., . 122-125.
90 See D. MAGIE Roman Ru/e Asia (ncetn 1950). . 651 .
91 For instace gna the younger was etemal gymnasiarchos Mytilene
~I~ 3 loc31, arstocrat acting as hypogymnasiarchos, ~G ~(\.2, 208; ~ee also a
epImeletes ofthe gymnasiarchia the emperor Hadnan Athens,/G . 3620.
92 LeBasW, 743-744: [}[]i{ ] .- [m:(
.[~ [][. Nevertheless, thc evidence from Egypt Late
Antlqulty a]though proides information for female offce holders, r~cords that they
acted through a male deputy e.g. Flavia Gabla was elected as loglstes, prohedros
and futhcr of Oxyrunchus but sbe acted through her deputy Aurelius Timotheos,
5539~D. P:O.r. 2780.
Provnce Roma;ne ds;e (Rome 1967), . 161.
88

,i

93

"i

,.
J'

'


KONSTANTINOS MANTAS
women who held office did so with male guardians or assistants: Demetria,
the Attuda agonothetis cocld have been a minor. 94
In some very rare cases, women are recorded as members of the gerou
sia,9J or the board of generaIs (),96 as chiefs of a tbe 97 or a vil
iage,98 and fnally as members ofthe ten first citizens board (").99
Roman Egypt we even find a woman who was "bouJetes" and anotherone
who was "father" ofthe city (!!). This fact chaIIenges the common as
surnption made by most schoIars, that "activities requiring action theform
of travelling, de1iberating, voting etc., remained c/osed 10 Ivomen ".101
Some women footed the biII n the name of their children, without hold
ng office themseives: see, for instance, a woman, Arsinoe from second cen
tury AD Egypt who paid for her grandson's Kosmeitia.10 2 Asia Minor, we
fnd that some women were wiIIing accept an office by their own choice
().l) Nevertheless, women were generaIIy unwiIIing hoId ex
pensive Iiturges because, presumabIy they were Iess weII-off than men: the
neocoros Hepie honoured by degree of the demos of Thasos is especially
praised because women usuaIIy avoid the neocoreia as is a heavy liturgy.l04
The estess Aba honoured Moesia, is again praised for discharging .a
heavy liturgy.IOJ The most reveaIing evidence comes from Egypt: in a pel1
the epistrategos, a woman pleads for being exempt from the Iiturgy

94 Although the agonothesia was frequetly held by minors. a number of chil

dren-agonothetes are recorded nsctnsand litterature. For instance see .
Epigraphica l/ (Leiden 1969), and AELIUS ARISTlDES, Bir/hday Speech to Ape//as,

.25.
9!

J. aod L. ROBERT, Carie, 67. . 174: / fO{ul

. Also see BCH (1883), . 454.

. ~ IG X~1.7, 404 Aegiale, Amorgos: ]

,
97 . DIdyma, ?25, Ilne 4: -

- [:11 !1; ] ; .
<>.
91

l.

1.7, 265.

~enodo~ o~ SilIyon, IGR 111,800-802, secondJthird century AD; twO minors,

S~~lon and hls slster PhiloJtena Egypt, PSI, 303.
: J. SIJPESTEIN, Female Bo~, Bullerin ofthe mecan Society ofPa
99

pyologlsts 24 (1987), . 141-142, but the teJtt is dated the sixth century AD.
101 R. VN BREMF.N, Women and ~Vealth, . 236.
101 PSI, 1159, . 91-94.
101/.

l, 1.7, 176.

CI SE~ 18 (1962), 343, lines 4750: -

mc/ .
Ios

SEG.2~ (1,969), 12, sta, sccond century AD, lines 15-20, sbe i,S

pnJsed for ImItatng the arch-esthdsand choregiae of mcn.

94

..

INDEPENDENT WOMEN ROMAN EAST

of epiteresis, which was beld by her late father, the grounds of her sex
~nd .age. 106 early fourth century AD, a priestess, Besis, is recorded as nom
lnatlng a man as her successor in the liturgy of Ktenarchias. I07 According to
. Lewis, this is a situation without parallel. I08 Neertheless, Lewis is hesi
tant \vhen comes the subject of women bolding magisuacies Roman
Egypt, as he believes that magStracies and liturgies were not blended togeth
er,l09 but his own example ofthe woman who paid for her grandson's Kosme
I~, which is a magistracy confirms the fact that Roman Egypt, magistra
cles had acquired a semi-/iturgicaI character. I'O
n surnmary, is ridicuIous assert that women the Roman East had
a~quired a degree of independence economic and poIitical Iife as some
nln~te~nth century scholars believed, \vho were swprised find women in
~DtqU1ty hoIding magistracies and oer-estmated this fact because women
m their own times lacked power the public sphere. 111
From a re-examination of the eidence, we can conc/ude that: (a) there
was an improement the legaI status of women the Roman world from
the se~ond century BC, (b) that there was a great variation in the rights wom
en enJoyed, differing from one region of t.he Roman empire to the other,
(c) that Roman Ia\v which forbade \vomen to hoId pubJic offce or become
~rdi~s of their chiIdren did not apply to non-Roman citizens n parts of
Asla Mmor and in Egypt before the Constitutio Antoniana, (d) tha~ whereas
Roman custom aIlo\ved women great freedom the sociaI sphere, lt exclud
ed then from public life, (e) that ,vomen's access to public o~ce.was a re
sult of the transformation of the majority of these offices to lIturgles.

"Wherefore. my lord, since has been decree~ rhar 1\'o~ shou/d be e.:eml!
such burdens. , being a defenceless ~.-oman 'eIghted 'Irh many years and
danger ofhaving leave my home rhis accounl. .. ", P.Teb, 327, late second
cenUry AD.
:: SB, 11221,332 AD.
. LEW1S, The Compulsory Public Serices ofRoman Egypt (F10rence 1982),
. 78, note 71
109
.
110
EWIS, . cit., . 80-81.
.
,
, .
.. LEWlS, . cit., . 81, note 80. For the tranSfo1latIon ofap~aI In.to.
~op see . . WEGENER The and the Nomination the rhe
~t ofRoman Egypi, Mnemosyne (1948), . 17.
See AGIBM 3 (1890), . 220.
!r

106

Om

,-

95

",

'.

.~,

"