Kampen, Natalie B, “Gender Theory in Roman Art.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 1996. I, Claudia: women in ancient Rome, pp. 14-25. New Haven: Yale University Art Gallery. Distributed by the University of Texas Press, Austin. Kampen presents some central ideas, arising from modern gender theory, on how one might interpret and understand depictions of Roman women. She defines the concepts of “power” and “gender,” how gender is a social construction; and how it is used in analogy. She discusses the representation of ideals and differentiations; the concepts of viewer, object, and desire.
Kleiner, Diana E. E, “Imperial Women as Patrons of the Arts in the Early Empire.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 1996. I, Claudia: women in ancient Rome, pp. 28-41. Kleiner points out that elite women had power through their husbands’ political and social roles. Beginning with Livid, imperial women had significant roles and impact on art in the age of Augustus through their commissioning of private and public architecture, portraits, houses, villas, etc. Imperial women were emulated by elite women of towns in the empire, such as Eumachia of Pompeii. Through their patronage of various artistic and architectural projects and through the official dissemination of their own portraits, the imperial women not only played important roles in the shaping of public policy but in how that policy was presented to the Roman public.
Fittschen, Klaus, “Courtly Portraits of Women in the Era of the Adoptive Emperors (AD 98-180) and their Reception in Roman Society.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 1996. I, Claudia: women in ancient Rome, pp. 42-52. Fittschen examines the official portraits of imperial women that became visual models for elite women who copied their hairstyles. He reviews the changing hairstyles to show how these help date private portraits and suggests some reasons why an imperial woman might change her hairstyle.
Wallace-Hadrill, Andrew, “Engendering the Roman House.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 1996. I, Claudia: women in ancient Rome, pp. 104-115. Hadrill argues that unlike the Greek house, the Roman house was non-gendered and was the locus of the public/private life of both husband and wife. He offers several house plans of Pompeii to show how space was used as a public concourse, entertainment, private and working areas. Through such examination he shows how the Roman house reflects the gender roles of its inhabitants, and indicates that gender relations must be added to the other relations of the house: insider/outsider, young/old, patron/client, family/visitor, owner/tenant, master/slave, Roman/Greek.
Treggiari, Susan, “Women in Roman Society.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 1996. I, Claudia: women in ancient Rome, pp. 116-125. Treggiari discusses a number of factors affecting the lives of Roman women, including demography, law, social context, class, and marriage and children.
Williams, Gordon, “Representations of Roman women in Literature.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 1996. I, Claudia: women in ancient Rome, pp. 126-138. Williams addresses the wide gap in representations of Roman women in literature vs. reality. He points out that in theory Roman women belonged to the private sphere, but in actuality played important roles in the public sphere. In the public sphere, however, they needed to respect the boundaries on their conduct instituted by the ideal of Roman womanhood, or suffer savage criticism that is so often seen in literature. Gordon discusses the male creation of this ideal in literature and contrasts it with the less than ideal lives of some prominent women found in Sallust, Cicero, and other authors.
Matheson, Susan B, “The Divine Claudia: Women as Goddesses in Roman Art.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 1996. I, Claudia: women in ancient Rome, pp. 182-193. Matheson examines the assimilation of empresses to various goddesses, including Venus, Pax, and Pietas, as part of the imperial propaganda. She then shows how non-imperial women followed suit and were depicted in sepulchral portraits in forma deorum. She discusses why a woman or girl might be shown as Diana, Venus, Ariadne, etc.
Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson, “Her Parents Gave Her the Name Claudia.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 1-16. Austin: University of Texas Press. This introduction to the volume explains the symposium whose papers form this volume and discusses in general terms the lives of elite and non-elite women.
Vermeule, Cornelius C. III, “Livia to Helena: Women in Power, Women in the Provinces.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 17-27. Austin: University of Texas Press. Vermeule reviews the lives of various prominent women of the imperial family, and empire named Claudia.
Winkes, Rolf, “Livia: Portrait and Propaganda.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 29-42. Austin: University of Texas Press. Winkes reviews the various portrait types of Livia and their dating and how they reflect events in her life.
Kleiner, Diana E. E., “Family Ties: Mothers and Sons in Elite and Non-Elite Roman Art.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 43-60. Austin: University of Texas Press. Kleiner discusses the power women had through their relationships with the men in their lives and particularly through their sons. This power Kleiner calls “associative power.”
Boatwright, Mary T. “Just Window Dressing? Imperial Women as Architectural Sculpture.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 61-75. Austin: University of Texas Press. Boatwright reviews the different contexts one must bear in mind when viewing Roman art: its original setting; its historical and social context; and the context of the viewer, that is, how s/he viewed the object. Boatwright uses these contexts to analyze four monuments of the second century CE, the Forum of Trajan in Rome, the city gate of Perge (Pamphilia, Asia Minor), the theatre of Vasio (Vaison-la-Romaine, France), and two public baths in Ostia. She concludes by suggesting a new interpretation of the presence of imperial women in the Forum of Trajan and in the theatre of Vasio.
Wood, Susan, “Mortals, Empresses, and Earth goddesses: Demeter and Persephone in Public and Private Apotheosis.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 77-99. Austin: University of Texas Press. One of the most common motifs in Roman art, whether sepulchral or honorific, was the myth of Persephone. Beginning with representations of Livia, Wood demonstrates how and why living women became identified in art with Ceres, who represented the important feminine qualities of fertility and motherhood. In funerary art, the identification of women with Proserpina expressed their hope of a happy life after death.
D’Ambra, Eve, “Nudity and Adornment in Female Portrait Sculpture of the Second Century AD.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 101-114. Austin: University of Texas Press. Given the Roman emphasis on women’s pudicitia, it seems very odd to the modern viewer that portraits of women would depict them in partial or full nudity. D’Ambra reviews some proposed explanations, e.g. that being shown as a (partially) nude Venus attributed fertility and beauty to the woman. She proposes her own theory, viz., that the statue’s nudity is a costume attributing divinity to the woman.
Oliver, Andrew, “Jewelry for the Unmarried.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 115-124. Austin: University of Texas Press. The graves of young girls in Rome usually contain rich jewelry, while the graves of older, married women do not. Oliver argues that the reason for this difference is that the jewelry was part of the dowry of unmarried girls and so belonged with their corpses, while the jewelry of older women was given as inheritance to their relatives.
Matheson, Susan B, “The Elder Claudia: Older Women in Roman Art.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 125-138. Austin: University of Texas Press. Matheson presents several portraits of elderly Roman women and notes how age is presented artistically. Though aged women are satirized in Roman literature, these portraits of aged women emphasize, she argues, respect for the women’s dignity and virtuousness.
Delia, Diana, “Marriage Egyptian Style.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and society, pp. 139-147. Austin: University of Texas Press. Delia presents a survey of translated property contracts devised by Greek immigrants in Egypt and their wives, who might be Greek or Egyptian.
Hanson, Ann Ellis,
“Widows Too Young in their Widowhood.” In Kleiner, Diana E. E. and
Susan B. Matheson (eds.). 2000. I, Claudia II: women in Roman art and
society, pp. 149-165. Austin: University of Texas Press. Hanson uses
census records of Roman Egypt to discuss the social and economic position of
young women and their likelihood of remarriage. She includes translations of
medical writers on the medical problems widowhood could present to young women;
agreement to recovery a young widow’s dowry; and legal arrangements for
the unborn children of the deceased husband.
Close this window after each use.