Thomas Andreas Leibundgut (Stanford University)
While most modern scholars would agree that many Roman women worked both in the field and in production (e.g. Becker 2016; Culham 2014: 138–142; Dixon 2004; Groen-Vallinga 2013; Hemelrijk 2016; Holleran 2013; Larsson Lovén 2016; Medina Quintana 2017; Pomeroy 1995: 150–164; Roth 2007; Scheidel 1995, 1996; Treggiari 1976, 1979), very little is known about the lives and identities of ancient working women. In my paper, I revisit the occupational inscriptions found in Rome and analyse what one might call the meta-data contained in these inscriptions—all non-occupational information transmitted epigraphically about these commemorated women—as well as systematically compare them to the same data gathered about men.
While the above mentioned dearth of information on ancient working women is in no small part due to the élite male perspective, literary interests, and genre-specific conventions of most ancient authors (Dixon 2004), as well as the commemorative character of the Roman epigraphic habit which did not regard women’s lives and achievements as particularly noteworthy (Becker 2016; Caldelli 2014; Eck 2013; Hin 2013: 237–245; Larsson Lovén 2016; Saller 1994: 26–31), it is also true that women in general, and working women in particular, have long been disregarded in ancient Roman scholarship (Bock 1983: 23–26; Feichtinger 2002; Opitz-Belakhal 2018: 156–189; Richlin 2014: 25–34). Nevertheless, it has been particularly through epigraphical research that some light has been shed on working women in ancient Rome (Becker 2016; Groen-Vallinga 2013; Holleran 2013; Joshel 1992; Treggiari 1979). Analyses of the occupational inscriptions have demonstrated that women, while being commemorated as working in a smaller range than men (fewer than 50 occupations compared with more than 200 for men), nevertheless worked as craftswomen, shopkeepers, professionals, artisans, and more. However, while these studies have highlighted the ubiquity of working women in Rome, and have argued that women’s participation in the labour market was more widespread than previously thought, little attention has been paid to other elements of their person and identity.
In my paper, I analyse the occupational inscriptions through the lens of how these women expressed non-occupational aspects of their identity and in what non-occupational terms these women were commemorated. Focussing on the city of Rome, I compare the occupational inscriptions which identify women to a sample of those commemorating men with regard to any and all further information contained on these epitaphs and dedications: details on their legal and social status, age at death, origin, phrasing, spelling, and lettering, as well as any ornamentation of the inscriptions. Connecting this data to the information compiled by other scholars on both the subject of the occupational inscriptions as well as (working) women during the Principate, I present these aggregated information and detail what else we know and can infer about working women and their identities. Thus, my paper not only fills in some gaps we have about ancient labour structures, but also broadens our understanding of Roman women’s lifeworlds.