Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The role of women?
#1
Hello all<br>
<br>
Although the ultimate aim of this thread is for living history and the involvement of women within it, I thought it best to place it in here so we can review evidence etc ...<br>
<br>
I have wondered about the actual professional roles available to women particularly during the Empire.<br>
<br>
Typically women are considered just within the confines of the home, but where there professional women (other than prostitutes) during the Empire? I have seen a woman that looks like an accountant in a butchers shop an dthe following image of a woman in a poultry shop (courtesy of [url=http://www.vroma.org" target="top]www.vroma.org[/url]<br>
<br>
I assume that they must have been employed in some form of professional capabilities in some areas of the Empire at some time, any thoughts, writings or evidence would be great.<br>
<br>
<img src="http://www.vroma.org/images/mcmanus_images/woman_shop.jpg" style="border:0;"/><br>
<br>
All the best<br>
<br>
Graham <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#2
Greetings,<br>
<br>
I glanced through the information in a couple of books I have and it is pretty contradictory. In 'Daily Life in Ancient Rome' by Jerome Carcopino (First published 1941) he says:<br>
<br>
"Among the thousands of epitaphs of the Urbs collected by the editors of the *Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum* I have found scarcely any women earners: one *libraria* or woman secretary, three clerks (amanuenses), one stenographer (notaria), two women teachers against eighteen of the other sex, four women doctors against fifty-one *medici*... In the urban epigraphy of the empire we find women...fulfilling the duties...of seamstress(sarcinatrix), woman's hairdresser (tonstrix, ornatrix), midwife (obstertrix), and nurse (nutrix)...<br>
I have discovered only one fishwife (piscatrix), one female costermonger (negotiatrix leguminaria), one dressmaker (vestifica)--against twenty men tailors or *vestifici*--three women wool distributors (lanipendiae), and two silk merchants (sericariae)."<br>
<br>
From 'Pompeii, The Day a City Died' by Robert Etienne:<br>
<br>
"The wives of artisans and traders were often responsible for running the shop; in a painting of the baker Terentius Neo, the woman at his side holds a stylus and writing tablet for drawing up the accounts. In the shop of M. Vecilius Verecundus, a major manufacturer of cloth and felt, it is his wife who is shown sitting at the counter, while an elegantly dressed young man chooses a pair of slippers from the cupboards full of merchandise that line the walls...It was often women who ran the inns and bars, which were frequented by a somewhat course clientele."<br>
<br>
I propose that whatever women were involved in, they received less recognition than men, and therefore they may have been more numerous in various trades and enterprises than records would indicate. The men were the writers and historians and concerned themselves mainly with the affairs of men. In politics, the most a woman could hope for, it seems, was to be "the woman behind the man." Among the working classes, however, I expect women were frequently employed in various occupations.<br>
<br>
Wendy <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub27.ezboard.com/bromancivtalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rekirts>rekirts</A> at: 4/28/03 1:41:54 pm<br></i>
Reply
#3
I have good treatise from Dr. John de Felice "Roman Hospitality: The Professional Women of Pompeii" which goes into the complexities of the levels of citizenship. Apparently, a woman could own a caupona, for example, but not work in it without losing some citizenship rights. I won't attempt to paraphrase the arguments, but it is worthwhile reading for the technicalities of marriage, ownership, citizenship, etc. <p></p><i></i>
Richard Campbell
Legio XX - Alexandria, Virginia
RAT member #6?
Reply
#4
I have just checked in my copy of Women in Roman Britain by lindsay Allason-Jones. She mentions quite a wide variety of professions for women and writes:<br>
"Evidence from pompeii reveals women working as weavers, waitresses, money lenders, tavern owners, bakers and laundresses, whilst at Ostia female poultry sellers, vegetable sellers, shoe makers, doctors, nurses and barmaids are attested."<br>
She says women were known to have been sellers of grains and pulses, fish, purple dyes, ointments, beans, bottles and resins. Unfortunately she gives no indication of numbers, but speculates that although only a priestess and an actress are known by name from Britain "there must have been multitudes of midwives, wet nurses, bath attendants, agricultural workers and craftswomen." She also mentions that from other provinces there are a number of references to freedwomen joining the professions as accountants, doctors or librarians.<br>
What is interesting is she proposes that many of the women who were practising a trade were actually freedwomen who continued practising crafts they had learnt whilst in slavery and opportunities for some of these professions were not easily available to free women. She gives no reasons why but I did wonder if it anything to with what Rich mentioned about losing some citizenship rights?<br>
She also writes that women in Gaul formed and joined guilds. It would be interesting to know just how independant many of these women were.<br>
As regards to lack of recognition, Lindsay Allason-Jones does point out that in Britain at least, there are very few surviving records of tradesmen at all, though thousands must have existed, so the lack of inscriptions for females isn't too surprising. She states this may well be due to the fact that the lower social orders funerary inscriptions were commonly made of wood rather than stone. She also suggests that the names recorded on artifacts may have been those of factory owners rather than individual workers male or female.<br>
I guess there would have been quite a few female dancers and musicians around too. At any rate there seems to be plenty of scope for living history enthusiasts!<br>
<br>
Jackie. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#5
I came across this site which is linked to Diotima:<br>
dominae.fws1.com/Index.html<br>
There is some interesting imformation in the 'Influential Women' and 'Forgotten Women' sections that is relevant to the issues discussed in this thread.<br>
<br>
Jackie. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#6
It is important to remember that when talking and studying civilian life that slaves are a very big part of life and the labor force! Working woman included a lot of slaves, and slavery was not incompatible with literacy or personal property ownership. When I get back to my library I will try and send some bibliographic citations, but any study of the role of women should not dismiss the non-free workers. <p>"Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987</p><i></i>
Caius Fabius Maior
Charles Foxtrot
moderator, Roman Army Talk
link to the rules for posting
[url:2zv11pbx]http://romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=22853[/url]
Reply
#7
anaten posted<br>
<br>
Quote:</em></strong><hr>Unfortunately she gives no indication of numbers, but speculates that although only a priestess and an actress are known by name from Britain "there must have been multitudes of midwives, wet nurses, bath attendants, agricultural workers and craftswomen."<hr><br>
<br>
In the UK groups what roles / activities do the women do? Do any portray a profession at all ? <p><br>
<img src="http://www.ttforumfriends.com/images/forum/co.gif"/><br>
<br>
<span style="color:red;"><strong>[url=http://pub55.ezboard.com/btalkinghistory" target="top]Talking History Forum[/url]</strong></span></p><i></i>
Reply


Forum Jump: