The Study of Women in Antiquity: Past, Present, and Future

Author(s): Sarah B. Pomeroy

Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 112, No. 2 (Summer, 1991), pp. 263-268
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/294724
Accessed: 03-06-2015 14:01 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American
Journal of Philology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.251.17.168 on Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:01:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BRIEF MENTION
THE STUDY OF WOMEN IN ANTIQUITY:
PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE
PRESENT
The publication of Arethusa 6 in 1973 inauguratedthe serious
study of women in antiquity in our time. Classics was one of many
disciplines to begin developing a subfield of women's studies in the
early 1970s. Since then, has the study of women in antiquitybecome
partof the "mainstream"?In orderto answerthis questionI decided to
examine articles and reviews publishedin currentperiodicals. I spent
one day (October 1, 1990) skimmingthrough the journals on display
racks at the Ashmolean and Bodleian Libraries, assuming that they
constituted a random sample. I looked at all the journals in Classics,
Archaeology,and Ancient History that could conceivably have some
materialon women in antiquity.I checked only the titles listed in the
mainindex of eachjournal;book reviews that were not listed in such an
index were not noted. My criterionfor includingan article or review
was that it could be of special value to someone teachinga specialised
course or doing research on women in antiquityas well as to readers
with a more casual interest in the subject. I do not claim any statistical
significancefor this survey.Nor is it intendedto alertreadersto a dearth
of articles and reviews on ancient women in particularjournals; for
example, Arethusafrequently publishes work in this field, but I happened to examinea special issue on pastoral.I looked at forty-fivejournals. Ofthese, twenty-two didnot haveanarticleorreviewrelevantto the
study of ancient women. Twenty-threejournalscontainedat least one
title and of these Helios had devoted an entire issue to Romanwomen.2
1AAntHung 31, 1-2 (1985-88); ACD 32 (1989); AJA 94, 3 (1990); Antichthon 22
(1988); Apeiron 23, 2 (1990); Arethusa 23, 1 (1990); BStudLat 20, 1 (1990); CP 85, 1 (1990);
Eirene 26 (1989); Epigraphica 50 (1988); GIF 41, 2 (1989); Glotta 68, 3-4 (1990); Gnomon
62, 4 (1990); GRBS 30, 2 (1989); LEC 88, 2 (1990); MH 47, 2 (1990); Phronesis 35, 1 (1990);
Prudentia 21, 2 (1989); QUCC 33, 3 (1989); RhM 133, 2 (1990); RPh 62, 2 (1988); SIFC ser.
3, 8, 1 (1990).
2AJP 111, 2 (1990): Dolores O'Higgins, "Sappho's Splintered Tongue," and a review of Jane M. Snyder, The Woman and the Lyre; AA heft 1 (1990): Michaela Fuchs,
American Journal of Philology 112(1991) 263-268 ? 1991 by The Johns Hopkins University Press

This content downloaded from 195.251.17.168 on Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:01:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

264

BRIEF MENTION

Feminist scholars, including those who are not specialists in classical antiquity, would probably be particularly interested in some of the
articles in Helios and in Larissa Bonfante's study of nudity. The vast
majority of the publications are traditional historical or literary studies.
But I doubt that they would have been so numerous without the inspiration of feminism, however remote from the mind of some of the authors.
This little survey confirmed my sense that the study of women has,
indeed, become part, albeit a very small part, of the mainstream of
Classical Studies.
PAST
Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood recently remarked to me, "I don't
like to fill in the blank spaces in our knowledge of the ancient world with
suppositions, I try to keep the blank spaces blank; for otherwise there is
the danger that the hypothetical status of such suppositions may be
eventually eroded, unconsciously-at least in part."
Frauen um Caligula und Claudius"; AW 21, 2 (1990): Robert R. Stieglitz, "Die Gottin Tanit
im Orient"; Archaeology 43, 5 (1990): Larissa Bonfante, "The Naked Greek"; A&R 35, 1
(1990): M. Salanitro, "La moglie di Trimalchione e un amico di Marziale"; CB 66, 1-2
(1990): Antoinette Brazouski, "Lovers in Elysium"; CJ 85, 3 (1990): review of Suzanne
Dixon, The Roman Mother; CW 83, 6 (1990): J. D. Noonan, "Livy 1.9.6: The Rape at the
Consualia"; Eos 76 (1988): Andrd Hurst, "Les dames du temps jadis: un argument";
Gymnasium 97, 3 (1990): Henriette Harich, "Catonis Marcia"; Helios 16, 1(1989): special
issue Studies on Roman Women containing Marilyn B. Skinner, "Ut Decuit Cinaediorem," Maria Wyke, "Mistress and Metaphor in Augustan Elegy," Ronnie Ancona, "The
Subterfuge of Reason," Judith P. Hallett, "Women as Same and Other in Classical Roman
Elite," Thomas A. J. McGinn, "The Taxation of Roman Prostitutes," and introduction by
the editor Adele Scafuro; Hermes 118, 2 (1990): R. Ferwerda, "Plotinus and the Muses";
Hesperia 59, 2 (1990): Erkki Sironen, "An Honorary Epigram for Empress Eudocia in the
Athenian Agora"; Historia 39, 1 (1990): Linda-Marie Giinther, "Cornelia und Ptolemaios
VIII"; Latomus 48, 4 (1989): C. Segal, "Otium and Eros"; Mnemosyne ser. 4, 43, 1-2
(1990): S. Wiersma, "The Ancient Greek Novel and its Heroines: a Female Paradox"; RF
117,4 (1989): review of P. Mattei, Tertullien, Le mariage unique; PP 249 (1989): Giovanni
Pugliese Carratelli, "Artemis Hyakinthotrophos a Taranto?"; Phoenix 43, 4 (1989): Christopher G. Brown, "Ares, Aphrodite, and the Laughter of the Gods"; Ramus 17, 2 (1988):
S. E. Lawrence, "Iphigenia at Aulis: Characterization and Psychology in Euripides";
RIDA sdr. 3, 36 (1989): Gilbert Hanard, "Manus et mariage a l'6poque archaique"; RSA
17-18 (1987-88): reviews of A. M. G. Capomacchia, Semiramis, G. Pettinato, Semiramide, and H. G. Beck, Kaiserin Theodora und Prokop; ZPE 83 (1990): D. G. Martinez,
"T. K61n inv. 2.25 and Erotic damazein," Jane Bellemore and Beryl M. Rawson, "Alumni:
The Italian Evidence."

This content downloaded from 195.251.17.168 on Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:01:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BRIEF MENTION

265

Having worked for some twenty years on the history of Greek and
Roman women, I've now been invited to designate the blank spaces in
the field, and, what is even more difficult, to point to areas that were
filled in, and are still being filled in, without adequate justification in the
ancient sources. Some of the generalizations about "women" that were
blithely voiced need to be erased, even if it means that we must face
gaps in our knowledge. In my view, there have been two principal, but
interconnected, reasons for defects in our map of knowledge of women
in antiquity. One reason is the wholesale application of theories of literary criticism by scholars who did not distinguish the study of men's
ideas and images of women from the study of historical women. I am
not alone in wondering why some books purporting to be about the
history of ancient women written in French have recently been translated into English. For example, Giulia Sissa, Greek Virginity (translated from Le corps virginal3) states that her subject is: "Did the hymen
exist according to the Greek perception of anatomy (among laymen as
well as physicians)?" (p. 1). Her sources are all male-authored and she
presents them from the male viewpoint. The "physicians" and the "laymen" are all men. Sissa does not discuss how their views might have
influenced the lives of actual women. She ignores sources such as Sappho (LP 105a, 105c, 107, 114) and Archilochus (P Colon. 7511), who do
provide perspectives on how the loss of virginity affected women. For
what audience is the translation of Sissa's book intended? Scholars
interested in this erudite subject can surely read the French version.
One suspects that the translation is an opportunistic attempt to attract
the much larger group of readers who are interested in learning how
women in the past actually lived their lives, but who cannot read
French. Certainly the quality of Sissa's work does not justify the translation. Indeed, the book would have been much improved if she herself
had read more secondary literature that was not in French. In her notes
to Chapter 1, she gives twelve citations to secondary literature in
French and only one to a book published in English, and is evidently
unaware that she is repeating ideas that were published years ago by
other scholars (e.g., in Chapter 6 "The Tortoise and the Courtesan").
A second problem inhibiting the development of this field is that
some would-be historians of women who do distinguish the study of
women's lives from the study of men's ideas about women were trained

3 [1987] trans.

by Arthur Goldhammer (Cambridge, Ma., and London 1990).

This content downloaded from 195.251.17.168 on Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:01:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

266

BRIEF MENTION

in literaryratherthan in historicalmethodology.They call themselves

"social historians," supposing social history to be less rigorous than
political or economic history. But, in fact, social history is often the
most difficultof all ancient histories, because the sources are mute,
sparse, or anecdotal, and the subfields more recently established. A
properlytrainedhistorianwouldpay attentionnot only to gender,but to
otherdistinctionsincludingthose of class, age, ethnicity,regionalspecificity,historicalperiod, and change over time.4A discussion of alleged
conflicts between appearanceand reality concerningthe seclusion of
women in ClassicalAthens is once againin progress. But, as Aristotle
(Politics6.5.13 1322b-1323a)stated, poor men are obliged to use their
wives and childrenas slaves. Seclusionof free womenwas a luxuryand
an indicatorof social and economic status. Thus attentionto social and
economic class and to the principlesconcerningconflicts between ideals and realityestablishedby ErnestineFriedlin 19675would show that
the subject of seclusion is a red-herring.
FUTURE
For this section of my essay I consulted several other scholars
who shared my interest in women in antiquity6Highest on the list of
desideratawas more workon the realiaof women'slives. Specialistsin
women in antiquitybelieve that archaeologists,and to a lesser extent,
arthistorianswill be able to makea substantialcontributionto the field.
Archaeologistsin the past looked into the question of the location of
the gynaikonitisand reportedfinds of loom weights. But historiansof
women would like to know more about women's health and use of
domestic and public space and about women of various ethnicities in
the Hellenistic Kingdomsand Romanprovinces. They would also like
moreguidanceon the interpretationof portrayalsof womenin sculpture

4For a model, see Bellemore and Rawson (note 2 above).

5The Position of Women: Appearance and Reality," Anthropological Quarterly 40,
pp. 97-108. Friedl is cited by Roger Just (see note 9 below), but not by David Cohen,
"Seclusion, Separation, and the Status of Women in Classical Athens," G & R 36 (1989)
3-15.
6I wish to express my gratitude to Suzanne Dixon, Gillian W. Clarke, David Harvey, Natalie B. Kampen, and Barbara Levick for their contributions to this discussion.

This content downloaded from 195.251.17.168 on Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:01:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BRIEF MENTION

267

and vase painting. A need for more work on women in late antiquity
was voiced, especially on law.7
One colleague suggested that editorial boards add to their guidelines for publication an evaluation of whether an article or book on any
subject where it might be relevant had included a consideration of
women and urged that referees should encourage authors to take notice
of this factor. Another aspect of affirmative action would be a recommendation to consider whether the work of women scholars had been
cited where it was appropriate: we must take care lest they become a
"muted group." After "anonymous refereeing" of articles for journals
and of papers for conferences was instituted some fifteen years ago, the
number of contributions by female classicists that were accepted increased. I wonder whether the name of a woman author or speaker still
makes any difference to audiences. Women scholars have certainly
made a substantial contribution to the study of the legal status of Greek
women; but Raphael Sealey, Women and Law in Classical Greece8 does
not refer to the articles of Susan Guettel Cole, or of Claude Mosse, or of
Cynthia Patterson, or to articles published in Helene P. Foley, Reflections of Women in Antiquity (London 1981). The title of Sealey's book is
misleading, and as in the case of Sissa's book, one suspects an opportunistic attempt to attract the large group of readers interested in women's history. Less than half of his book is devoted to the Classical period. His chapters, presented in the following order, are: "Women in
Greek Thought"; "Women in Athenian Law"; "Women in the Laws of
Gortyn"; "Women in Sparta and in Hellenistic Cities"; "Women in the
Roman Republic"; "The Women of Homer"; and "Women and the
Unity of Greek Law." There are two appendices, one tangential to the
subject of the book, the other in dubious taste. Sealey's book will disappoint readers interested primarily in women's legal status. The only
laws on rape that he discusses are those at Gortyn and he ignores the
wealth of evidence from Ptolemaic Egypt. Sealey's proper subject is the
unity of Greek law; but presumably scholars interested in this debatable
topic would not need to be told in the first sentence that Xerxes was
a "Great King," and would not need a glossary of "Athenian Legal

7Jane Gardner, Women in Roman Law and Society (London 1986) covers Roman

Law throughthe second centuryA.D.

8(Chapel Hill and London 1990).

This content downloaded from 195.251.17.168 on Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:01:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

268

BRIEF MENTION

Terms." In contrast to Sealey, Roger Just, Womenin Athenian Law and

Life,9 is even-handed in his use of secondary sources. His discussions
of law are presented sine ire et studio. Just's book can be recommended
to undergraduates, but scholars will not find much that is new in it.?1
Because Just was trained as an anthropologist, it was hoped that he
would be able to construct a new theory or explanation concerning the
relationship of images of women in tragedy to historical women, but he
did not succeed in doing this. This subject is one of many that remain on
our agenda.
Among works in progress, I am particularly looking forward to
Holt N. Parker's study of Metrodora's medical text. Parker is convinced that the author is a woman. The more we can confirm that authors of various works in antiquity attributed to women actually were
women, the less likely it will be that scholars can credibly assert that
Erinna, Sulpicia, Philaenis, and Theano, Perictione and other writers of
Neo-Pythagorean treatises were men who adopted female pseudonyms. Such arguments impose silence on an already "muted group."
SARAH B. POMEROY
HUNTER COLLEGE AND THE GRADUATE SCHOOL, C.U.N.Y.

9(London and New York 1989).

10A. R. W. Harrison, The Law of Athens. I, The Family and Property (Oxford 1968)
is still preferable for advanced students who can be relied upon to examine the primary
sources cited.

This content downloaded from 195.251.17.168 on Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:01:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions