In her introduction to The Erotics of Domination Greene also notes of poets that they all `proclaim in their poems a radically unconventional philosophy of life with their apparently deliberate inversion of conventional sex roles - in which women are portrayed as dominant and men as subservient.... The conventional stance of the elegiast lover is one of enslavement to his emotions and servitude to his mistress'.31 The poems recorded and promoted this behaviour on the part of the `new' women.
On the emergence of new Roman women, Fantham et al. ask, `Why had these noblewomen suddenly kicked over the traces? And why does a well-broughtup son like Catullus disdain the usual casual fooling around and become infatuated with a bored noblewoman and endow their relationship with all the highest values of Roman public and private life?' The reply is given: `In Catullus the trigger may have been a unique conjunction of provincial innocence and metropolitan decadence, but the exaltation of extramarital love that is first found in this poetry becomes the dominant principle of a generation of love-poets - poets who found nothing similar in the Greek model of their formal genre .132
`New' wives pursued wealthy young single men. At the very beginning of his love poems Propertius acknowledges that he has become the slave of his Roman mistress, Cynthia, who was later identified by Apuleius as Hostia.33 Allen comments on his view of love (miser): `love is a violent passion, a fault which destroys the reason and perverts the will, but a power which the lover is helpless to control and from which he can find no release'.34 He was one of the equestrian order who was educated in Rome. There he formed a tempestuous relationship with an older `free' married woman. He was so besotted with her that he neglected for a time the normal career path open to a member of the equestrian order. The poems reflect their stormy relationship with him declaring her `my caring pain'.
His father had died when he was young, and his negative attitude towards Augustus' attempts at social control may well have been conditioned by the Tat- ter's confiscation of most of his family property in Umbria to provide land for returning soldiers -but the pitiless measuring rod took off your wealth of ploughed land'.36 As we will see in the following chapter it was against such young men as Propertius that Augustus introduced penalties for not marrying and also provided a rapid career promotion into the Senatorial class for those fathering children.
The poems reflect the pain of a young man's enslavement to a relationship with a married woman whose own husband's infidelity to her was replicated in her affair with Propertius. His possessiveness demanded exclusive loyalty but she refused to give that. Some poems express love's torture and betrayal.
By means of casual liaisons she, in effect, prostituted herself for gifts. He portrayed himself as being besotted with her, but not her with him. In retrospect he asks -
As Paganghelis comments, `Tears of rage and grief over the loss of puella [his `girl'] (i-6) give place to attempted consolation (7-10) and retrospective realisation of misplaced, poetic and otherwise, donations (11-12); this, in turn, releases a savage indictment of the tyranny imposed by her and endured by him.'39 Griffin notes: `In contrast to the Roman life of prudentia, disciplined action, Propertius claims to live nullo consilio; he renounces the Roman mar- riage.'40 On a broader canvas he encapsulated in verse the sexual activities of a Roman wife who enjoyed this extra-marital affair with a younger man whose strong desires she satisfied, and yet sadly he testified `in my case Venus [the goddess of love] inflicts the pain of bitter nights"' He contrasts his own ex perience with the wish that he has for happy lovers - that they will not experience the pain he had at the hands of Cynthia.
Ovid, after the publication of two books on the Art of Love in c. A.D. 1, added a third volume c. A.D. 8 giving advice to women also.42 At the end of his second book he had indicated: `Lo, the girls are asking my counsel. You will be my next concern.' Towards the end of Book 3 he said that he would deal with `naked matters, which I blush to tell' but then proceeded to give totally uninhibited advice to women.43 It is true that although he specified that his third book was for courtesans who were exempted from the Augustan laws on adultery, he was compelled to justify it. He sought to defend what he had written with The Remedies of Love and noted that `Some people have recently criticised my works as shameless'.44 He tried hard to defend his work from exile.
[My Art of Love] does not contravene the laws, it does not teach the young married women of Rome. Four times have I declared that "I shall sing only of what accords with the laws, of permissible secret loves". But, you say, "the matron can use arts intended for others". Let the matron give up reading then, for every poem can teach her something wrong.45
In spite of his strong protestations, Ovid had scoffed at husbands who were so old-fashioned as to feel injured by their wife's infidelity - `That man is so provincial who is hurt by an adulterous wife'. The implication is that he was so unsophisticated. He went on to argue that Rome was founded on adulterous practices for that husband `does not recognise the character for which Rome is famous. Romulus and Remus, Ilia's Martian twins, were not born without guilt'.46
The second distich of the famous triclinium graffito from Pompeii tells the guests to keep their eyes off other men's wives.47 Horace (65-8 B.c.) speaks of an older woman (matura virgo) wanting to have intercourse with `junior adulterers' at her husband's feasts (inter mariti vina), nor `is she nice to choose to whom she (hurriedly) grants her favours when the lamps are re- moved'.48 Green argues, 'By having the husband to "pimp" for their wives and justify it by alluding to a "heroic" tradition that sanctions brutality towards women, Ovid presents a view of Roman society which includes a persuasive acceptance of deception and exploitation as an inevitable part of amatory relations, including marriage. By constructing an argument in favour of adultery from the perspective of how it will benefit the husband, Ovid reveals a climate in which at least for some it was now easy to rationalise such practice S.149
Ovid's evidence is important for this discussion because of the connection between his highly active political role as a member of the equestrian order and his defiance of Augustus' legislation on adultery. Ovid himself attributed his unfortunate imperial exile to two errors on his part.
The former was his Ars Amatoria and possibly its explication in the Art of Love. It was `the ill-conceived invitation to the matrons of Rome to tread the primrose path with "the girls,"' for Ovid had incited married women to break the law against adultery.
Syme devotes a chapter, "The Error of Caesar Augustus, 1151 to a careful discussion of this issue - one that has provided some two hundred scholars with the opportunity to speculate and to weigh up the evidence.51 He notes three important `failures' on the part of Augustus in his relegation of Ovid. He had been unjust for he chose to incriminate him on the basis of a work of his youth written some twenty years previously. `No law laid down the place of residence when an offender was banished by relegatio.' Since Augustus was a divinity `he ought not to display anger since he is omnipotent'. As far as Ovid was concerned, `Caesar Augustus is unjust: not a true "princeps"; and no gentleman.' It is Syme's view that `The error of Augustus played into Ovid's hands. It gave him something to write about and a reason for waging defensive warfare over long years, although he abated one theme towards the end: the last book has only princeps ira ... showing up illegality and rancour in the rule.'53
Bauman concludes, `Thus the entire corpus of works critical of the puritanical-demographic policy so dear to Augustus belongs to the one decade'. Ovid's third book on the Art of Love was published in A.D. 8 at a time when criticisms of the emperor were at their height.54 Ovid's pleas to secure his return to Rome from his lonely exile failed to move either Augustus or Tiberius. Ovid would not mention the reference to the actual `blunder' for it would `renew your wounds'. Bauman rejects the specific identification of the `blunder' with the adultery of Augustus' granddaughter, Vipsania Julia.
In terms of the focus of Ovid's Book 3 there is a striking similarity between the sexual mores of `new' Roman women w
hich the poet promoted, even though he himself might argue ostensibly that his whole work was meant only for hetairai, and the misconduct of Julia, the daughter of Augustus and wife of Tiberius, and Vipsania Julia, his granddaughter. The former was publicly denounced for her adultery and divorced on the initiative of the emperor in 2 B.C.
The defence of Julia, the daughter of Augustus, reveals a well-educated woman with a taste for literature and `a pungent, if bawdy wit'. Regarding her `rowdy troop (grex) of young men' she boasted, `I will soon make old men of them'; and thus inappropriate familiarity drew negative comments from her father. As the daughter of the divine Augustus she claimed, `I am his true image, born of his heavenly blood, and asserted that whatever she was pleased to do was lawful (quidquid liberet pro licito vindicans). Suetonius also noted, `she did not neglect any act of extravagance or Just'.55 While imperial politics and intrigues over succession were meshed in with her actions, it is clear that she and her circle operated on the extreme of new Roman woman in stark contrast to the modest Livia, Augustus' wife.56 Seneca wrote, `His failing years were alarmed by his daughter and the noble youths who were bound to her by adultery as if by a military oath. She headed a coterie that included adultery amongst its pursuits '.51
This is the background against which the relegation from Rome for adultery in A.D. 8 of Ovid and Julia's daughter, Vipsania Julia, should be considered. In her case her house in Rome was demolished and she was not buried in the mausoleum of Augustus, nor was her daughter permitted to marry Claudius for `her parents had offended Augustus'.58 At the same time Ovid was given the milder form of relegatio, being sent to Tomis in the Black Sea, although he retained his property and did not lose his equestrian status.59
While Bauman admits that aspects of these issues are insoluble,60 it is no coincidence that Ovid opposed the legislation of Augustus on adultery. He also justified and promoted the patterns of conduct that it aimed to restrain, however much in retrospect he sought to be a revisionist of what he had written. For the purpose of our investigation it is clear that at the very heart of Rome's high society there was a pattern of sexual mores of women that openly defied the legislation on adultery and attendant issues.
Before concluding this section it is important to note that there was a significant nexus between extant literature on new Roman women and the reality of their social mores, and none the more so than with the Roman poets. J. Griffin in his important articles on this issue has argued that `much recent scholarship has misjudged the Augustan poets in certain important respects, because it has been thought in principle possible to separate "literature" and "life"; as if they were clearly distinguishable entities; in reality, the two affect each other in a ceaseless mutual interaction'. 61 The literary sources provide evidence of both, and Griffin's examination provides confirmation that poets played a significant role in helping both to promote moral mores and to confirm their legitimacy in the wider society. And the theatre was an important means of spreading them.
The older woman with wealth and sexual prowess became an established character in Roman Comedy.62 She could dominate the marriage because of the size of her dowry.63 Plautus refers to the arrogance of a wife who boasts about her sexual appetite both within and outside the boundaries of marriage, a theme not restricted to the young wives as his Mostellaria shows.64
From the perspective of a social historian, Crisafulli makes a critical observation on New Roman Comedy produced by playwrights such as Plautus and Terence. `In essence, Comedy was a powerful discourse which shaped Roman society.'65 The popularity of Comedy was a reflection of the concerns of society. It dealt with `the conflicts, intrigues and relationships of private life ... the depiction of women in Comedy had an enormous impact on other forms of literature that followed'. She further notes that `we can see that a dynamic relationship developed between the theatre and its audience in Rome. New Comedy not only reinforced, but also influenced society's morals, modes of behaviour and understanding of relationship S1 . 66
The reason for this impact was that, unlike some other cultures, men and women of all classes avidly attended the theatre. It remained popular in the time of Augustus and was a public occasion where his social manipulation of the class system was seen. The equites Romani were now permitted to sit in the front rows of the theatre and, in fact, in his lex Julia theatricalis he assigned seats according to social status, for all were to be well aware of their place within society. E. Rawson says, `... it is becoming more and more widely recognised that even in the imperial period the theatre was one of the central institutions of Roman culture; this is even more true of the Republican period'.67
Theatre-going was common among all classes in Rome and through New Comedy had a moulding influence on social mores.68 Legislation such as lex Julia theatricalis not only heightened class consciousness in public contexts but was also counterproductive, for it was a powerful vehicle which promoted the new values against which Augustus would need to legislate.
That there is evidence for the `new' Roman wife is not in question, but what justification is there for projecting this perception of the `new' woman beyond Rome itself to centres in the East where Christian communities had been formed in the first century? This is an important issue to pursue.
We know that there were Christian letters addressed to Philippi and Corinth, both of which were Roman colonies and centres of Roman culture,69 with Corinth being the centre for the province of Achaia. What do we know of the cultural impact on the remainder of the centres which did not have this status? Did a cultural parochialism reign in the city of Ephesus and on the island of Crete where Christian communities were formed in the first century; were these centres isolated and immune from the influence of the dominant Roman power? This raises the issue of evidence for the penetration of Roman culture generally in the East.
There was something paradoxical about the Roman Empire. It was ruled with a minimum of Roman officials. The governor of a province brought with him a very small number of officials some of whom were legal advisers and friends. Because he exercised the Roman imperium in the province his essential role related to criminal jurisdiction in his capital and to his annual assize where he executed Rome's sword. There might or might not be a standing army depending on the reality of the pax romana but, by and large, the empire enjoyed peace and the emperors promoted themselves as the upholders of this blessing. Taxes for Rome were collected by tax farmers (publicani) and this meant that the revenue process was put out to tender and again did not need a provincial bureaucracy.70 Local cities were, in effect, autonomous in that they were governed by annually elected magistrates and other office bearers who gave their services free of charge as the local elite. Their responsibilities related to civil law and the support of the infrastructure of the city, including the administration of the markets and the collection of indirect taxes. Rome ruled its vast Empire with none of the enormous bureaucracy normally associated with imperial forms of government.71
One would have thought that this structure might have lent itself to cultural isolationism in which there was the minimal impact of Romanization or none at all in cities outside Italy.72 However, Rome skilfully engaged in the transformation of values by highly sophisticated forms of propaganda, and so succeeded that non-Romans embraced Roman values as part of first-century modernity. They achieved this at a provincial level as Ando has well demonstrated.73 Even Athens, the highly influential custodian of Greek culture, absorbed aspects of Roman culture. Even though it resisted absorbing Rome's values fully there are clear indicators that it did not remain culturally isolated from them.74 There a Roman forum was built distinct, but not far, from the Greek one which still functioned at that time, although the latter had curtailed powers following its Roman conquest by Sulla in 86 B.c. The placing and elevation of the Roman forum higher than the Greek agora sent a clear message to the Athenians of Rome's suzerainty. It was not only the imperial cult that found ready recognition in Athens which had a long tradition of `welcoming
' new imperial gods,75 but other aspects pervaded the life of this traditional and proud custodian of Greek values.76
The penetration of Roman culture in the East meant that the transfer of the values of Roman women, both traditional and `new, also occurred. How could this happen, given the isolation of first-century women from society generally assumed by New Testament scholars? C. Nepos writing in the first century B.c. draws attention to the significant differences between Greek and Roman conventions.
No Roman would hesitate to take his wife to a dinner party, or to allow the mother of his family to occupy the first rooms in his house and to walk about in public. The custom in Greece is completely different: a woman cannot appear at a party unless it is among her relatives; she can only sit in the interior of her house, which is called the women's quarters; this no male can enter unless he is a close relative."
It is critical for this discussion to realise that Roman culture had borrowed substantially from aspects of Greek culture some two centuries before Augustus. `The lifestyle [of the Roman elite] was formed by the Hellenisation of Roman society in the second century B.C., the results of which could be seen equally in the luxury and sophistication of their pleasures and in the respect ... they paid to literary culture and the arts'. 71 So the planting of Roman values in the East in the Augustan era was not entirely in the foreign soil of the Hellenistic world .71
Roman Wives, Roman Widows Page 4
