"Female Domestic Financial Managers: Turia, Murdia, and Hortensia"

Female Domestic Financial Managers Turia, Murdia, and Hortensia DIMITRIOS MANTZILAS A Roman matron had four distinct roles to play during her life: a daughter, a sister, a wife or widow and a mother, showing her respect and devotion (pietas) to her father, brother(s), husband and children. The texts we intend to examine reflect Roman society, giving a great deal of information about the Roman family ideology and mentality, related often to Roman law, covering themes as: different types of marriage, scale, style and social standing of the family, divorce and remarriage with a substitute wife, widowhood, guardianship by a tutor, management of family property, will redaction and fair distribution of the heritage after death. Women, single or married had to prove that they were the true guardians (custodes) of the house, even though men officially played the dominant role. Male predominance was always considered perfectly normal in the Roman family although under Roman law the matrons had considerable independence.1 What is even more striking is the preponderance of some exceptional ladies over men, which contrasts with the general status and connubial ideology of Roman women; it was exceptional for them to suffer hardship or to have achievements. In this context, we observe an inversion of the conventional gender-roles.2 Through their actions, these ladies who all belonged to the elite proved to be superior to other – ordinary – women. Furthermore, some of them demonstrate a very dynamic aspect of their character. There is a contrast between the usual view, 1 A. ARJAVA, Women and Law in Late Antiquity, Oxford 1998, 154. In general on the legal position of women and their financial issues, see J.F. GARDNER, Women in Roman Law and Society, London 1986 (3rd ed. 1990); J.F. GARDNER, Being a Roman citizen, London 1993; J.F. GARDNER, ‘Gender-role assumptions in Roman law’, EMC/CV 39, n. s. 14 (1995) 377400; L. PEPPE, Posizione giuridica e ruolo sociale della donna romana in età repubblicana, Milano 1984; S. DIXON, ‘Family finances: Terentia and Tullia’, in B. RAWSON (ed.), The Family in ancient Rome. New Perspectives, London 1987 (2nd ed. 1992), 93-120; S. DIXON, ‘Exemplary Housewife or Luxurious Slut: Cultural Representations of Women in the Roman Economy’, in F. MCHARDY – E. MARSHALL (eds.), Women’s influence on Classical Civilization, London – New York 2004, 56-74; S. TREGGIARI, Roman Marriage. Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian, Oxford 1991. P. SETÄLÄ, ‘Female Property and Power in Imperial Rome’, in L. LARSSON LOVÉN – A. STRÖMBERG (eds.), Aspects of Women in Antiquity, Jonsered 1998, 96-110. 2 E.A. HEMELRIJK, ‘Masculinity and Femininity in the Laudatio Turiae’, CQ 54 (2004) 185-97, in part. 185, 190. 1 i.e. that the woman should stay at home (domiseda),3 and her heroic actions, but this did not disturb the ideals of marriage,4 They acted like men without losing their feminine touch, trying to live with their husband and children in love and harmony. A legal situation mentioned in the texts is that of inheritance: someone's property is equally shared among the children. When the children were boys, there was no difficulty in dividing the inheritance equally. However, a girl (and a woman) was not independent (sui iuris) and had to have a guardian, her husband or fiancé, under whose power (manus or potestas) she found herself. Originally this protection of women (tutela mulierum) was connected with the Roman system of succession. Given the fact that a daughter could inherit a considerable estate from her father as a dowry (collatio dotis), it was in her agnatic male relatives' (agnati) personal interests to see that she did not dispose of any property which would otherwise after her death revert to the family.5 Later on “the husband, as the owner of his own fortune (patrimonium) and guardian (tutor) of his wife's, was formally in control of the whole of the property;6 and handled it outside business relations, while the wife worked on the inside and looked after the administration of the common property”;7 with attentiveness and careful management (diligentia).8 But it should be noted that the husband had neither legal power over his wife nor full ownership of her property; their properties remained in fact separate.9 The passage from the one guardianship to the other was called emancipation (emancipatio).10 Another issue is related to the type of marriage, which determined who had control of the bride. The first one, matrimonium cum manu / in manum, which conferred the bride (sponsa) on the groom's family along with her property and gave the wife equal rights with her children, was divided into three types: a) confarreatio, an elaborate religious ceremony, where the grain far was baked into a special wedding cake, farreum, b) coemptio, where the wife carried a dowry into the marriage but was ceremoniously bought by her husband, to whom her possessions See M. TORELLI, ‘Domiseda, lanifica, univira: il trono del Verucchio e il ruolo e l’immagine della donna tra arcaismo e repubblica’ in M. TORELLI (ed.), Il rango, il rito e l’immagine, Milano 1997, 52-86, who summarizes in three words the women’s main values. 4 N. HORSFALL, ‘Some Problems in the Laudatio Turiae’, BICS 30 (1983) 85-98, in part. 92. 5 ARJAVA, Women and Law, 112. 6 Cf. J. CROOK, ‘His and Hers: what Degree of Financial Responsibility Did Husband and Wife Have for the Matrimonial Home and their Life in Common in a Roman Marriage?’, in K. ANDREAU – H. BRUHNS (eds.), Parenté et strategies familiales dans l’Antiquité Romaine, Roma 1990, 153-72; S. TREGGIARI, Roman Marriage, 365-96, n. 4; L. DE LIGT, ‘De significatione verborum: Romeins erfrecht in de Laudatio Turiae’, Lampas 34 (2001) 45-61, in part. n. 3; HEMELRIJK, ‘Masculinity’, 195. 7 E. WISTRAND The So-Called Laudatio Turiae: Introduction, Text, Translation, Commentary, Göteborg 1976, 39; cf. T.E.V. PEARCE, ‘The Role of the Wife as “Custos” in Ancient Rome’, Eranos 77 (1974) 16-33. 8 E.S. RAMAGE, ‘The So-Called Laudatio Turiae as Panegyric’, Athenaeum 82 (1994) 341-70, in part. 349. 9 On these delicate issues, see ARJAVA, Women and Law, 153-4. 10 LTur I 15, emancupata. 3 2 belonged thereafter and c) usus, where after a year’s cohabitation, the woman came under her husband's manus, unless she stayed away for three nights (trinoctium abesse). In this type of marriage she acquired some freedom. The second one, matrimonium sine manu, meant that the bride was still under the control of her pater familias. This legitimate marriage was conventionally accompanied by a dowry from the wife or her father to the husband in order to underwrite the expenses of the household. This dowry had to be returned if the marriage was dissolved by divorce or death of the husband. Any non-dotal property which the woman inherited after the death of her father remained in her ownership.11 This type of marriage became very popular in the 1st century BC.12 In essence, the wedding was a private ceremony, during which they offered sacrifices to the divinities of marriage in the presence of family and friends and in the absence of any priest or magistrate, and they signed a contract, the instrumentum dotale, as proof of the union.13 In the case of the first text14, because of a break in the inscription, the names of both the husband and the wife are missing. Earlier scholars attributed it to Q. Lucretius Vespillo, consul in 19 B.C., and his wife Turia. That is the reason why it was given the conventional name Laudatio Turiae, which has not been accepted by everybody.15 This bold and virtuous woman,16 R.P. SALLER, Patriarchy, Property, and Death in the Roman Family, Cambridge – New York 1994, 202-24; R.P. SALLER, ‘Symbols of Gender and Status Hierarchies in the Roman Household’, in S.R. JOSHEL – S. MURNAGHAN (eds.), Women and Slaves in Greco-Roman Culture. Differential Equations, London – New York 1998, 85-91, in part. 87. 12 GARDNER, Women in Roman Law, 97, 102, 105; SALLER, Patriarchy, 94. 13 M. DURRY, Éloge funèbre d’une matrone romaine (éloge dit de Turia), Paris 1950 (2002³), LXVI-LXVII; Η. LINDSAY, ‘The Man in Turia’s Life, with a Consideration of Inheritance Issues, Infertility, and Virtues in Marriage in the 1 st C. B. C.’, JRA 22 (2009) 183-98, who deals with complicated legal issues. 14 CIL 6.1527, 37053 = ILS 8393, dated between 8-2 BC. 15 The most important scholars in favor of the identification with Turia are: Th. MOMMSEN, ‘Zwei Sepulcralreden aus der Zeit Augusts und Hadrians’, AAWB (1863) 455 -489 , who invented the conventional name Laudatio Turiae; G. COSTA, ‘Ancora sulla laudatio Turiae’, BCAR 43 (1915) 3-40; G. BARBIERI, ‘Laudatio et Laudatio Turiae’, in E. DE RUGGIERO, Dizionario Epigrafico, 4.15, Roma 1947, 47; A.E. GORDON, ‘Who’s Who in the Laudatio Turiae’, Epigraphica 39 (1977) 7-12; L. PEPPE, ‘Turia. Funzione riproduttiva e funzione educatrice della donna romana’ in Id., Posizione giuridica e ruolo sociale della donna romana in età repubblicana, Milano 1984; A. KALABRUN, ‘De Turia Romani amoris coniugalis exemplo’, VoxP 5 (1985) 75-80; Lindsay, ‘The Man’, 191-2; contra O. HIRSCHFELD, ‘Die sogennante Laudatio Turiae’, WSt 24 (1902) 233-7; DURRY, Éloge funèbre, passim; L. STORONI MAZZOLANI, Una moglie, Palermo 1982; P. CUTOLO, ‘Sugli aspetti litterari, poetici e culturali della cosiddetta Laudatio Turiae’, AFLN 26 (1983-4) 33-65; D. FLACH, Die sogennante Laudatio Turiae: Einleitung, Text, Übersetzung und Kommentar (Texte zur Forschung 58), Darmstadt 1991; A. M. GOWING, ‘Lepidus, the Proscriptions and the Laudatio Turiae’, Historia 41 (1992) 283-296; A. DELLA CASA, ‘Virtù cristiane nella cosidetta Laudatio Turiae’, in Scritti scelti di Adrianna della Casa (Paideia Cristiana: Miscellanea di studi in onore di M. Naldini), Pisa 1994, 305-317; E. S. RAMAGE, ‘The So-Called Laudatio Turiae as Panegyric’, Athenaeum 82 (1994) 341-370; HEMELRIJK, ‘De Laudatio Turiae. Grafschrift voor een uirzonderlijke vrouw?’, Lampas 34 (2001) 62-80; HEMELRIJK, ‘Masculinity’, 185; I. PIRO, ‘Quod emancupata esset Cluvio… Riflessioni intorno ad alcuni passagi della ‘Laudatio Turiae’’ in Studi per G. Nicosia VI, Milano 2007, 155-196; F. LAMBERTI, ‘Donne romane fra Idealtypus e realtà sociale Dal domum servare e lanam facere al meretricio more vivere’, Quaderni Lupiensi di Storia e Diritto 4 (2014) 61-84, in part. 63-4. 16 For Turia's character and deeds, cf. M. LEFKOWITZ, ‘Wives and Husbands’, in I. MCAUSLAN – P. WALCOT (eds.), Women in Antiquity, Oxford 1996, 67-82; P. KEEGAN, ‘Turia, Lepidus, and Rome’s Epigraphic Environment’, SHT 9 (2008) 1-7. 11 3 who lived a highly eventful life, avenged her parents’ murder17 by securing the punishment of the guilty, possibly her parents' servants, which would normally be the duty of the son. After that, she saved her property from her male relatives (gentiles), who wanted to dispute the will on the basis of their legal rights to it (gentilitas), and provided her husband (who was in fact under her protection) with money, servants and provisions.18 She also gave financial support to her sister, who was under legitimate guardianship during the absence of her husband in another expedition. Turia, during the defence of her father’s will (her father remarried her mother by coemptio, in order to be able to leave a will)19 undertook the case as a patron (patronus) and saw it through all by herself. In the event of her husband dying first, under his manus or patria potestas she would be filiae loco; i.e., on his death she would take an equal share of the inheritance with each of the children, as if she were his daughter in the legal sense. 20 Both she and her sister seem to have been married cum manu. Under the father’s will, Turia and her husband were equal heirs, an entitlement granted equally to her sister and her brother-in-law Cluvius, who may have given Turia and Lucretius a feoffment (fideicommissum)21 on behalf of them. She also saved her husband’s life22 during the proscriptions of the triumvirs in 43 BC, which took place in the civil wars, seeking Octavian’s clemency. Their marriage lasted for more than forty years, and came to an end through death, not divorce, which was a rarity. Moreover, due to the fact that she could not bear children (infecunditas), she proposed that she should provide a suitable fertile woman for him to marry so that he would not remain childless, and “even more importantly, she would not force the dissolution of their jointly held property, indicating of how financially damaging a divorce would be”.23 It is obvious that their cohabitation also meant co-operative financial decisions. 17 This action had a double meaning: it was in conformance with the principal of piety towards the parents and with the law that the heirs had to punish the assassins in order not to leave the crime unpunished and therefore lose the inheritance; cf. Cod. Iust. 6.35.6, 9; Dig. 10.3.9; DURRY, Éloge funèbre, 30. 18 LTur 1.3-12; 2.2a-5a. 19 Modern commentators appear to assume that the couple converted usus into a formal conventio in manum; see LINDSAY, ‘The Man’, 191, who adds that “the result of the coemptio would be to alter the sui heredes by changing those under the potestas of the testator. The wife would have become a sua heres, and the will would break the rule that sui heredes must be expressly included or excluded. Intestacy would ensue, hence a role for gentiles, since there are no male heirs”. 20 Cf. WISTRAND, Laudatio Turiae, 62. 21 The fideicommissum was a gift of property, usually by will, to be held on behalf of another who cannot receive the gift directly. 22 LTur 2.6a-18. 23 LINDSAY, ‘The Man’, 196. 4 She was willing to regard any children produced as a result of this as her own, sharing her property with them, a noble act of self-sacrifice that her husband did not accept. In the laudation, he also expresses his wish that he might have been the one to die first, so that she could have been his adopted daughter, who would carry on his name.24 The purpose of this adoption was to strengthen her position against relatives and dependents of the family, as there were many restrictions on women becoming heirs. Before dying, Turia made certain recommendations before her death, which included instructions for her funeral, household directions, manumissions of slaves and gifts to friends.25 A similar case (to which attention has never been drawn until now) is Alcestis Barcinonensis,26 a 4th century AD ethopoeia on Alcestis, a true pious (pia) wife. Even though Alcestis is a mythological feature, the poet, inspired by women of his era, attributes to her characteristics of actual Roman matrons. Just like Turia, Alcestis supported her husband and king of Pherae, Admetus; she even sacrificed herself so that he could live on. She also gave specific instructions for after her death, including the allocation of her property and fortune in her will and her wish for her husband to find a new wife.27 In both texts we find an inversion of the traditional gender roles: both husbands become scared little human beings in the face of death, while their wives escaped from being simple housewives and became heroines, possessing the common stereotypical virtues (piety, honesty of character, modesty, loyalty and obedience to the husband, love and devotion to family and relatives, generosity, ingenuity, courage, kindness, sobriety of attire and others), which appear also in Laudatio Matidiae and Laudatio Paulinae, the other two extant eulogies, in the inscription of Allia Potestas (a parody of laudations) and various funerary inscriptions. The second lady, Murdia, praised in the Laudatio Murdiae,28 had been married twice to worthy husbands that had been provided by her parents.29 After having once been a widow, a status where he was in fact legally in the lowest category of intestate heirs,30 she remarried. She had children from both marriages. She left a will (which the extant portion of this laudation has 24 Cf. Livia's adoption by Augustus. WISTRAND, Laudatio Turiae, 75. 26 For more details, see D. MANTZILAS, ‘Receptions and Genre Cross-reference in Alcestis Barcinonensis’, SPFB (klas) 16 (2011) 61-90, in part. 87-9. 27 Cf. Alc. Barc. 83-103, where we find an alteration of the motif: the heroine's husband can re-marry, as long as he does not love his new wife more than he loves her. Probably the anonymous writer of the laudation had in mind Propertius’ regina elegiarum (4.11). 28 CIL VI 10230 = ILS 8394. For the speech that dates from the Age of Augustus, see N. HORSFALL, ‘Allia Potestas and Murdia: two Roman Women’, AncSoc 12 (1982) 27-33. 29 LMur 14. 30 P. KEEGAN, ‘Faint Praise in Pain(t)ed Phrases: A Narratological Reading of the Laudatio Murdia’, Eras Journal (Reference: 07 January 2016 <http://arts.monash.edu.au/publications/eras/edition-4/keegan.php>), 2002, in part. 5. 25 5 a strong emphasis on)31 settling all her legal issues. At the beginning of this incomplete encomion we learn that she made all her sons equal heirs after she made a bequest to her daughter. According to Roman law, reverence (reverentia) and obedience (obsequium) were owed by children to their mother, who in turn had a duty to look after their interests.32 Murdia also left her second husband a fixed sum, as a dower, hopefully increased eventually by investments. Her son – from her first marriage – (who is here the laudator) would later inherit his deceased father’s property, which had passed into the ownership of his mother on the decision of her husband. This is why she gained the approval of her fellow citizens, since the division of her estate indicated her honourable intentions towards her family. As a woman married sine manu, Murdia was under the potestas of her father (not that of her husband). Since she was at an age that most Roman women had no living father, we may suppose that she was sui iuris (which is the reason that she was able to make the provisions for the laudator for which she was praised in the inscription). This would also allow her to dispense with a tutor under the ius trium liberorum – if she had three or more children – a ruling which did not apply to women under postestas. Hortensia33 was a young lady in her twenties who received an extensive education. As soon as she was chosen as the matrons’ representative, she delivered a famous speech in 42 B. C. in front of the members of the Second Triumvirate, who were waging war against those who killed Julius Caesar.34 To fund the ongoing war, the triumvirs had resorted to selling the property of citizens killed by proscription. But this proved to be an insufficient measure. Hortensia represented 1400 wealthy women on whom taxes were imposed, in order to sponsor the military legions. The tax would amount to one year’s full income plus a special donation (in form of a loan) to the government calculated as a percentage of their properties. The women refused to contribute because they had no participation in the wars, and because their social position would be seriously aggravated if they lost their properties, having already been deprived of the male members of their families. Hortensia also notes that their mothers once rise superior to their sex H. LINDSAY, ‘The Laudatio Murdiae: its Content and Significance’, Latomus 63 (2004) 88-97, in part. 94. S. DIXON, The Roman Mother, London – Sydney 1989, 61-5; SALLER, ‘Symbols of Gender’, 86. 33 App. BC 4.1.32-34; Val. Max. 8.3.3; Quint. inst. 1.1.6. For her personality, the conditions under which she boldly delivered a speech to a public forum where women were strictly excluded, and the reactions she provoked, see f. ex. D. H. GRANADOS DE ARENA, ‘Actitud admirable de dos mujeres en épocas dificiles. La uxor ignota de la Laudatio funebris y Hortensia, la hija del orador’, REC 17 (1986) 93-107; R.A. BAUMAN, Women and Politics in Ancient Rome, London 1992, especially 78-90 on the triumviral period; A. LOPEZ LOPEZ, ‘Hortensia, primera oradora romana’, FlorIlib 3 (1992) 31732. 34 See M.H. DETTENHOFER, ’Frauen in politischen Krisen zwischen Republik und Prinzipat’, in M.H. DETTENHOFER, Reine Männersache? Frauen in Männerdomänen der anriken Welt, Köln – Weimar – Wien 1994, 133-57, for the role of women (Servilia, Fulvia, Hortensia, and Sempronia) during the crisis that followed Caesar’s murder, a theme first dealt with by F. MÜNZER, Römische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien, Stuttgart 1920. 31 32 6 and made contributions when the empire was in danger through the conflict with the Carthaginians. The difference is that then they contributed voluntarily, not from their landed property, their fields, their dowries, or their houses, without which life is not possible to free women, but only from their own jewellery, and even these not according to the fixed valuation, not under fear of informers or accusers, not by force and violence, but what they themselves were willing to give.35 The triumvirs ordered the lictors to drive them away from the tribunal but the crowd supported women. On the following day they reduced the number of the women, who were to present a valuation of their property, from 1400 to 400, and decreed that all men who possessed more than 100,000 drachmas, regardless of nationality and rank, should lend it with the interest calculated as a fiftieth part of their property and contribute one year's income to the war expenses. It is not clear whether or not Hortensia was married and what her relationship to the proscriptions or the Triumvirate was. Maybe she was married to Q. Servilius Cepio, adopted son of Brutus.36 Another possible explanation is that her brother, Q. Hortensius, had been a victim of the proscriptions. When he was the proconsul of Macedonia, he ordered Gaius Antonius’ (Marcus Antonius’ brother) murder.37 A third interpretation sees in her a speaker by nature, being the daughter of the famous orator Q. Hortensius Hortalus.38 Unfortunately her father had already died in 50 B. C. so Hortensia had no male support in her actions and took over the protection of her fortune herself, as did the rest of the 1400 wealthy women. Hortensia’s common point with Turia is that they both challenged the triumvirs' authority, something unthinkable even for a man.39 35 App. BC 4.1.32. F. MÜNZER, RE 8.2481-82, s.v. Hortensius, n. 16; A.G. WOODHEAD, ‘Delos. Honores Q. Hortensii, a. 44a. (17-357)’, in A. CHANIOTIS – T. CORSTEN – R.S. STROUD – R.A. TYBOUT (eds.), Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum, Brill Online 2016. Reference: 07 January 2016 <http://static.ribo.brill.semcs.net/entries/supplementum-epigraphicum-graecum/seg-17357-delos-honores-q-hortensii-a-44a-a17_357>; contra W. DRUMANN – P. GROEBE, Geschichte Roms in seinem Übergang von der republicanischen zur monarchischen Verfassung, Königsberg 1837 (2nd ed. Leipzig 1899; reprint Hildesheim 1964), III, 104, n. 6, who argues that she was not married. 37 Plut. brut. 28.1; ant. 22.1; Val. Max. 8.3.3· cf. F. HINARD, 1985, Les proscriptions de la Rome républicaine, Roma 1985, 475-76. 38 E. GABBA, Appiano e la storia delle guerre civili, Firenze 1956, 183, even though he prefers Hinard’s theory. Two more ladies’ rhetorical performance reflects their fathers’ eloquence. These are Laelia, daughter of orator Gaius Laelius (Cic. brut. 211) and Tullia, Cicero’s daughter (Cic. ad QFr. 1.3.3) 39 DETTENHOFER, ‘Frauen’, 141. On the contrary, the episode of Tanusia (App. BC 4.44.187; Suet. Aug. 27.2) demonstrates an acceptance of, rather than a challenge to, the authority of a triumvir. T. Vinius was proscribed by the triumvirs in 43 BC, and owed his life to his wife Tanusia, who concealed him in a chest at the house of his freedman Philopoemen, and gave out that he was dead. She afterwards obtained his pardon from Octavian, who raised Philopoemen to the equestrian rank for his fidelity to his former master. 36 7 She is one of the examples of ladies who claimed their legal rights, often associated with the cases of Carfania and Maesia.40 Her attitude demonstrates a clear antithesis towards the Roman mentality that forbade women from speaking in public in an assembly. The cultural anthropology of the era dealt on the one hand with the rhetoric of rational and wise men and, on the other hand, with the voices of crazy women, who were considered as being androgynous and monsters, when they tried to speak in publicly.41 This is the reason why the occasions in which Roman women appeared in public and participated in politics were rare.42 Summarising the above, from the socio-cultural and ideological point of view, the aforementioned texts give a unique insight into Roman family structures. In general, all the literary sources offer a sense of the complexities of personal conduct and public ideology, due to the moral revitalization of the upper classes from the age of Augustus onwards, which was introduced in order to restore conservative social values and control social conduct, thereby reinforcing duty and community. The legal regulations had to do with the position of women in the Roman family, the nucleus of Roman society, which was the ultimate moral judge on issues of marriage and reproduction, because women had an effect on the community as a whole. In other words, even though women did not have the dominant role in the family, they were expected to support it by all means at their disposal. The financial aspect was also included in this support, by providing a dowry, by keeping the family’s fortune safe, and by being wise domestic financial managers. A pious attitude always guaranteed society's approval and the family’s eternal gratitude and praise after death, when such a woman would enter into an afterlife period that was full of glory. Conclusion In the Laudatio Turiae, Turia saved her property from her male relatives, and provided her husband (who was under her protection) with money. She also gave financial support to her sister, who was under legitimate guardianship. During the defence of her father’s will, she undertook the case. Being childless, she suggested to her husband to remarry, willing to share her property with the eventual children. In the Laudatio Murdiae, Murdia, had been married Maesia of Sentinum pleaded her own case in court and earned thereby the name of ‘Androgynous’, cf. A. MARSHALL, ‘Roman Ladies on Trial: the Case of Maesia of Sentinum’, Phoenix 44 (1990) 56-68. She defended her case in court bereft of male legal representation. Carfania, wife of the senator Licinius Bucio, repeatedly made public pleadings in court. She is referred to as impudent, a barking dog and a monster. 41 Val. Max. 8.3.1-2; L. PERNOT, ‘Femmes devant l'assemblée en Grèce et à Rome’, Logo 7 (2004) 201-11; E. HÖBENREICH, ‘Andróginas y monstruos: mujeres que hablan en la antigua Roma’, Veleia 22 (2005) 173-82. 42 G.S. SUMI, ‘Civil War, Women and Spectacle in the Triumviral Period’, AncW 35 (2004) 196-206. 40 8 twice to worthy husbands and had children from both marriages. She left a will settling all her legal issues, making all her sons equal heirs after she made a bequest to her daughter. She also left her second husband a fixed sum, as a dower. Hortensia delivered a speech in front of the members of the Second Triumvirate against their decision to impose taxes on 1400 wealthy women, in order to sponsor the military legions. The women refused to contribute because their social position would be seriously aggravated if they lost their properties. These texts give a unique insight into the Roman family ideology and mentality, related often with the Roman law. In this article we try to illuminate the legal aspects dominating Roman society, but also the wife's position as the true guardian of the house. 9 

tr a es tto A C TA I N S T I T U T I ROMANI FINLANDIAE Vo l . 43 THE MATERIAL SIDES OF MARRIAGE Women and domestic economies in antiquity Edited by Ria BeRg ROMA 2016 tr a es tto Direttore degli Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae mika kajava Department of World Cultures FI - 00014 University of Helsinki Comitato scientiico tuomas Heikkilä – mika kajava – mika lavento Redazione simo ÖRmä, Roma Redazione del vol. 43 Ria BeRg Cover illustration Woman with a jewel-box. Ceiling fresco from the Constantinian Palace in Trier (Photo: Courtesy Museum am Dom Trier). isBn 978-88-7140-726-5 issn 0538-2270 © Institutum Romanum Finlandiae Roma 2016 www.irfrome.org tr a es tto Bibliography Bibliographical Abbreviations Titles of periodicals are abbreviated as in l’Année philologique. Other abbreviations: AE ANRW CE ILS PIR RE RIC ThesCRA L’Année Épigraphique Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt Carmina Epigraphica Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae Prosopographia Imperii Romani Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft Roman Imperial Coinage Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum Bibliography adsHead, K., ‘The Secret History of Procopius and its Genesis’, Byzantion 63 (1993), 19-28. agati madeiRa, E.M., ‘La Lex Oppia et la condition juridique de la femme dans la Rome républicaine’, RIDA 51 (2004), 87-99. ago, R., Gusto for Things. A History of Objects in Seventeenth-Century Rome (with a foreword by P. Findlen), Chicago 2013 [trans. of Il gusto delle cose, Roma 2006]. alBanese PRocelli, R.M., ‘La necropoli di Cozzo S. Giuseppe in contrada Realmese’, NSA 36 (1982), 425-632. alBanese PRocelli, R.M., Sicani, Siculi, Elimi. Forme di identità, modi di contatto e processi di formazione, Milano 2003. alBeRtaRio, E., ‘La connessione della dote con gli oneri del matrimonio’, RIL 58 (1925), 85-97. alexandRi, o., ‘Α΄ Argos’, Archaiologikon Deltion 16 (1960), 93. aliotta, g. – de angelis, g. – saleRno, c.R., ‘Il melograno’, in Bevilacqua – amBRosio – aliotta, Ager Pompeianus, 143-48. allason-jones, L., ‘Sexing Small Finds’, in RusH, P. (ed.), Theoretical Roman Archaeology. Second Conference Proceedings (Worldwide Archaeology Series 14), Aldershot 1995, 22-32. allison, P.M., ‘Artefact Distribution and Spatial Function in Pompeian Houses’, in RaWson – WeaveR, Roman Family, 321-54. tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY allison, P.M., Pompeian Households. An Analysis of the Material Culture, Los Angeles 2004. allison, P.M., The Finds. A Contextual Study (The Insula of the Menander at Pompeii III), Oxford 2006. allison, P.M., ‘Engendering Roman Domestic Space’, in Westgate, R. – FisHeR, N.R.E. – WHitley, J. (eds.), Building Communities. House, Settlement and Society in the Aegean and Beyond (British School at Athens Studies 15), London 2007, 343-50. allison, P.M. (ed.), The Archaeology of Household Activities, London 1999, repr. 2013. allison, P.M., ‘Characterizing Roman Artifacts to Investigate Gendered Practices in Contexts without Sexed Bodies’, AJA 119 (2015), 103-23. amBRosini, l., ‘I pesi da telaio con iscrizioni etrusche’, Scienze dell’Antichità 10 (2000), 139-62. amyx, D.A. – PRitcHett, W.K., ‘The Attic Stelai. Part III’, Hesperia 27, 4 (1958), 255-310. anagnostakis, I., ‘Τo επεισόδιο της Δανιηλίδας. Πληροφορίες καθημερινού βίου ή μυθοπλαστικά στοιχεία;’, Πρακτικά Α΄ Διεθνούς Συμποσίου, Ή καθημερινή ζωή στο Βυζάντιο. Τομές και συνέχειες στην ελληνιστική και ρωμαϊκή παράδοση (Κέντρο Βυζαντινών Ερευνών/Εθνικό Ίδρυμα Ερευνών), Athens 1989. andeRsson stRand, E.B., ‘From Spindle Whorls and Loom Weights to Fabrics in the Bronze Age Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean’, in noscH, M.-L. – laFFineuR, R. (eds.), Kosmos. Jewellery, Adornment and Textiles in the Aegean Bronze Age (Proceedings of the 13th International Aegean Conference, Copenhagen, 21-26 April 2010) (Aegaeum 33), Leuven – Liège 2012, 207-13. andeRsson stRand, E.B., ‘The Textile Chaîne Opératoire. Using a Multidisciplinary Approach to Textile Archaeology with a Focus on the Ancient Near East’, Paléorient 38, 1-2 (2013), 21-40. andeRsson stRand, E.B., ‘Sheep, Wool and Textile Production. An Interdisciplinary Approach on the Complexity of Wool Working’, in BReniquet, c. – micHel, c. (eds.), Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean. From the Beginnings of Sheep Husbandry to Institutional Textile Industry, Oxford 2014, 41-51. andReae, B. – kyRieleis, H. (eds.), Neue Forschungen in Pompeji und den anderen von Vesuvausbruch 79 n. chr. verschütteten Städten (Internationales Kolloquium Essen 1973), Recklinghausen 1975. andReau, J., Les affaires de Monsieur Jucundus (Collection de l’École francaise de Rome 19), Rome 1974. aRaPogianni, X., ‘Nekrotapheio Klassikon chronon sto Staphidokampo Eleias’, ΑrchΕph (1999), 155-217. aRjava, A., Women and Law in Late Antiquity, Oxford 1998. ascHeR, R., ‘Analogy in Archaeological Interpretation’, Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 17, 4 (1961), 317-25. astin, A.E., Scipio Aemilianus, Oxford 1967. auReli, P., ‘scheda 347’, in BaRtoloni, g. – delPino, F. – moRigi govi, c. – sassatelli, g. (eds.), Principi etruschi tra Mediterraneo ed Europa (Catalogo della mostra Bologna 2000-2001), Venezia 2000, 278-79. avagliano, A., ‛Tripode con braciere’, in la Rocca, e. – PaRisi PResicce, c. – lo monaco, a. – giRoiRe, c. – RogeR, d. (eds.), Augusto (Catalogo della mostra, Milano 2013), Milano 2013, 270. Bagnall, R.S., ‘Egypt and the Lex Minicia’, JJP 23 (1993), 25-28. tto 8 tr a es 9 BalestRi Fumagalli, M., Rilessioni sulla lex Voconia, Milano 2008. Balsdon J.P.V.D., Romaies Gynaikes. I Istoria kai ta Ethima tous, Athens 1982 [trans. The Roman Women. Their History and Habits, London 1962]. Banaka-dimaki, a., ‘Argos, Parodos Odou Belinou (Oikopedo Photeinis Kontou), Odos Aghiou Georgiou 44 (Oikopedo Pan. Bouboureka)’, Archaiologikon Deltion 46 (1991), 88-89. Banaka-dimaki, A., ‘Argos – Portitses Akova – Zogga – Myloi – Thesi Synoro Maladreniou’, Archaiologikon Deltion 49 (1994), 138-47. Banaka-dimaki, ‘Argos, Odos Papaoikonomou, Oikopedo I. Kotsogianni – Odos Kallergi, Oikopedo Aphon Vlogiari’, Archaiologikon Deltion 53 (1998), 114-17. Banaka-dimaki, Α., ‘Ellinistiki Keramiki apo to Argos’, Ellinistiki Keramiki apo tin Peloponniso (2005), 126-42. BaRakaRi-gleni, K., ‘Oi Nekropoleis ton Archaikon kai Klassikon Chronon stin archaia poli tou Argous’, Praktika E’ Diethnous Synedriou Peloponnisiakon Spoudon, Athens 1998, 509-33. BaRBeR, E.W., Prehistoric Textiles. The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages with Special Reference to the Aegean, Princeton 1991. BaRBieRi, G., ‘Laudatio and Laudatio Turiae’, in de RuggieRo, E., Dizionario epigraico di antichità romane IV, 1 (1978), 471-75. BaRnaRd, S., ‘Cornelia and the Women of her Family’, Latomus 49 (1990), 383-92. BaRRett, A.A., Livia. First Lady of Imperial Rome, New Haven – London 2002. BaRRingeR, J., Divine Escorts. Nereids in Archaic and Classical Greek Art, Ann Arbor 1995. BaRtoloni, G., ‘Marriage, Sale and Gift. A proposito di alcuni corredi femminili dalle necropoli populoniesi della prima età del Ferro’, in Rallo, A. (ed.), Le donne in Etruria, Roma 1989, 35-54. BaRtoloni, G., Le società dell’Italia primitiva, Roma 2003. BaRtoloni, G., ‘Le società e i ruoli femminili nell’Italia preromana’, in von eles, P. (ed.), Le ore e i giorni delle donne. Dalla quotidianità alla sacralità tra VIII e VII secolo a.C. (Catalogo della mostra, Verucchio 2007-2008), Verucchio 2007, 13-23. BaRtoloni, G., ‘La formazione urbana’, in BaRtoloni, Introduzione all’etruscologia, 83-126. BaRtoloni, G., (ed.), Introduzione all’etruscologia, Milano 2012. Bauman, R.A., Women and Politics in Ancient Rome, London 1992. BeaucamP, J., ‘L’Égypte Byzantine. Biens des parents, biens du couple?’, in simon, Eherecht und Familiengut, 61-76. BeaucamP, J., Le statut de la femme à Byzance (4e–7e siècle), II. Les practiques sociales (Travaux et Mémoires du Centre de recherche d’histoire et civilisation de Byzance, Collège de France, Monographies 6), Paris 1992. BeaucHet, L., Histoire du droit privé de la Republique Athénienne, vol. 3, Amsterdam 1969. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY Beazley, J.D., ‘Groups of Mid-Sixth-Century Black-Figure’, BSA 32 (1931/32), 1-22. BecHmann, A.V., Das römische Dotalrecht, vol. II, Erlangen 1867. Beeton, I., The Book of Household Management, comprising information for the Mistress, Housekeeper, Cook, Kitchen-Maid, Butler, Footman, Coachman, Valet, Upper and Under House-Maids, Lady’s-Maid, Maid-of-all-Work, Laundry-Maid, Nurse and Nurse-Maid, Monthly Wet and Sick Nurses, etc. etc. also Sanitary, Medical, & Legal Memoranda with a History of the Origin, Properties, and Uses of all Things Connected with Home Life and Comfort, London 1861. BekkeR, i. (ed.), Theophanes Continuatus, Ioannes Cameniata, Symeon Magister, Georgius Monachus (CSHB), Bonn 1838. Bellelli, V. – BouRdin, S. – castiglioni, M.P. – santoRo, M. (eds.), “Origines”. Percorsi di ricerca sulle identità etniche dell’Italia antica (MEFRA 126, 2), Rome 2014. BeRdoWski, P., ‘Some Remarks on the Economic Activity of Women in the Roman Empire. A Research Problem’, in BeRdoWski, P. – BlaHaczek, B. (eds.), Haec mihi in animis vestris templa. Studia classica in memory of professor Leslaw Morawiecki, Rzeszów 2007, 283-98. BeRg, R., ‘Wearing Wealth. Ornatus and Mundus Muliebris as Status Markers of Women in Imperial Rome’, in setälä et al., Women, Wealth and Power, 15-73. BeRg, R., ‘Donne medico a Pompei?’, in BuonoPane, a. – ceneRini, F. (eds.), Donna e lavoro nella documentazione epigraica (Atti del I Seminario sulla condizione femminile nella documentazione epigraica; Epigraia e Antichità 19), Faenza 2003, 131-54. BeRg, R., Il mundus muliebris nelle fonti latine e nelle case pompeiane, PhD, Univ. Helsinki 2010. BeRg, R., ‘Lo specchio di Venere. Mundus muliebris nella pittura pompeiana’, in BRagantini, I. (ed.), Atti del X congresso internazionale, Association Internationale pour la Peinture Murale Antique (Napoli, 17-21 settembre 2007), Napoli 2010, 289-300. BeRg, R., ‘La casa come cassaforte. Rilessioni sulle zone di attività e zone di deposito nelle case pompeiane’, in álvaRez maRtínez, j.m. – nogales BasaRRete, t. – Rodà de llanza, I. (eds.), Centre and Peripehery in the Ancient World (Proceedings of the XVIII International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Mèrida 2013), vol. II, Mèrida 2015, 1029-32. BeRg, R., ‘Bathing the Inirm. Water Basins in Roman Iconography and Household Contexts’, in kRÖtzl, c. – mustakallio, k. – kuuliala, J. (eds.), Inirmity in Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Social and Cultural Approaches to Health, Weakness and Care, Surrey – Burlington 2015, 201-21. BeRgeR, A., Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law, Philadelphia 1953. BeRnaBò BRea, l. – militello, e. – la Piana, s. ‘Mineo (Catania). La necropoli detta del Molino della Badia. Nuove tombe in contrada Madonna del Piano’, NSA 22 (1969), 210-16. BeRnaBò BRea, L., Pantalica. Ricerche intorno all’anaktoron, Napoli 1990. BeRRino, N.F., Mulier potens. Realtà femminili nel mondo antico, Galatina 2006. tto 10 tr a es 11 BeRRy, J.T., ‘Household Artefacts. Towards a Reinterpretation of Roman Domestic Space’, in lauRence, R. – Wallace-HadRill, a. (eds.), Domestic Space in the Roman World. Pompeii and Beyond (JRA Suppl. 22), Portsmouth 1997, 183-95. BeRRy, J.T., ‘The Instrumentum Domesticum. A Case-Study’, in doBBins, J.J. – Foss, P.W. (eds.), The World of Pompeii, London 2007, 292-301. Bevilacqua, m. – amBRosio, i. – aliotta, g. (eds.), Ager Pompeianus et ager Stabianus. L’esempio della Villa B di Oplontis e della Villa Cuomo di S. Antonio Abate (Istituto per la diffusione delle Scienze naturali), Napoli 2013. Bietti sestieRi, a.m. – de santis, a. – salvadei, l., ‘Maschile e femminile. Dinamiche di genere nel Latium vetus in epoca protostorica attraverso l’analisi delle sepolture infantili’, in guidi – PellizzaRi, Nuove frontiere, 59-76. BinFoRd, L.R., ‘A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design’, American Antiquity 29, 4 (1964), 425-41. Blegen, C.W. – PalmeR, H. – young, R.s., The North Cemetery (Corinth 13), Princeton 1964. BlocH, G., s.v. ‘dispensator’, in daRemBeRg, cH. – saglio, e., Dictionnaire des Antiquités Grecques et Romaines, II, 1 (1892), 280-90. Blundell, S. ‘Clutching at Clothes’, in lleWellyn-jones, l. (ed.), Women’s Dress in the Ancient Greek World, London 2002, 143-69. Blundell, S., ‘Scenes from a Marriage. Viewing the Imagery on a Lebes Gamikos’, in keay, S. – moseR, S. (eds.), Greek Art in View, Oxford 2004, 39-53. Blundell, S. – RaBinoWitz, N., ‘Women’s Bonds, Women’s Pots. Adornment Scenes in Attic Vase-Painting’, Phoenix 62, 1 (2008), 115-44. Boccolini, P., schede, in cHiaRamonte tReRé, C. – d’eRcole, v. (eds.), La necropoli di Campovalano. Tombe orientalizzanti e arcaiche, I (BAR International series 1177), Oxford 2003. Bodel, J., ‘Monumental Villas and Villa Monuments’, JRA 10 (1997), 5-35. Boitani, F., ‘La tomba principesca n. 5 di Monte Michele’, in moRetti sguBini, a.m. (ed.), Veio, Cerveteri, Vulci. Città d’Etruria a confronto (Catalogo della mostra, Roma 2001), Roma 2001, 113-18. Bonamente, M., ‘Leggi suntuarie e loro motivazione’, in Pavan, M. – cozzoli, U. (eds.), Tra Grecia e Roma. Temi antichi e metodologie moderne, Rome 1980, 67-92. BonFante, P., Corso di diritto romano I, Roma 1925. BoRgaRd, P. – PuyBaRet, m.P., ‘Le travail de la laine au début de l’empire. L’apport du modèle pompéien. Quels artisans? Quels équipements? Quelles techniques?’, in alFaRo, c. – Wild, j.P. – costa, B. (eds.), Purpurae Vestes. I Symposium Internacional sobre Textiles y Tintes del Mediterraneo en epoca romana, Valencia 2004, 47-59. BoRRiello, M.R. – d’amBRosio, a. – de caRo, s. – guzzo, P.g. (eds.), Pompei. Abitare sotto il Vesuvio (Catalogo della mostra), Ferrara 1996. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY BoRtHWick, E.K., ‘Two Emotional Climaxes in Lysias’ “Against Eratosthenes”’, CW 84 (1990), 44-46. Bosdas, d., Περί γάμου. Συμβολή εις την μελέτην του γάμου κατά την Eκλογήν των Iσαύρων, Athens 1937. BoulveRt, G., Esclaves et affranchis imperiaux sous Le Haut-Empire Romain. Rôle politique et administratif, Napoli 1970. Boyce, G.K., Corpus of the Lararia of Pompeii, Roma 1937. BoyeR, G., ‘Le droit successorial romain dans les oevres de Polybe’, RIDA 4 (1950), 169-87. BoWes, K. – gutteRidge, A., ‘Rethinking the Later Roman Landscape’, JRA 18 (2005), 405-13. BoWman, a.k. – RatHBone, d., ‘Cities and Administration in Roman Egypt’, JRS 82 (1992), 107-27. BRadley, k. – caRtledge, P. (eds.), The Cambridge World History of Slavery I, The Ancient Mediterranean world, Cambridge 2011. BReglia, L., ‘Circolazione monetale e aspetti di vita economica a Pompei’, in maiuRi, Pompeiana, 41-59. BRizzi, G., Scipione e Annibale. La guerra per salvare Roma, Roma – Bari 2007. BRoWn, T.S., Gentlemen and Oficers. Imperial Administration and Aristocratic Power in Byzantine Italy (AD 554-800), Rome 1984. BRuBakeR, L., ‘Sex, Lies and Textuality. The Secret History of Prokopios and the Rhetoric of Gender in Sixth-Century Byzantium’ in BRuBakeR, L. – smitH, J.M.H. (eds.), Gender in the Early Medieval World, East and West, AD 300-900, Cambridge 2004, 83-101. BRuBakeR, L., ‘The Age of Justinian. Gender and Society’, in maas, M. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Justinian, Cambridge 2005, 427-47. BRuneau, P., ‘Tombes d’ Argos’, BCH 94 (1970), 437-531. BRunt, P.A., ‘The Administrators of Roman Egypt’, JRS 65 (1975), 124-47. BRümmeR, E., ‘Griechische Truhenbehälter’, JDAI 100 (1985), 1-168. BuRdese, A., ‘In tema di convenzioni dotali’, BIDR 62 (1959), 157-84. BuRetH, P., ‘Le Préfet d’Égypte (30 av. J.C.-297 ap. J.C.)’, in ANRW 10, 1 (1988), 472-502. BuRgmann, L., ‘Reformation oder Restauration? Zum Ehegüterrecht der Ecloga’, in simon, Eherecht und Familiengut, 29-42. BuRke, B., From Minos to Midas. Ancient Cloth Production in the Aegean and in Anatolia, Oxford 2010. BuRn, L., The Meidias Painter, Oxford 1987. BuRoW, J., Der Antimenesmaler, Mainz 1989. BüttneR-WoBst, Th. (ed.), Ioannis Zonarae, Epitomae historiarum libri XIII-XVIII, I-ΙΙΙ (CSHB), vol. III, Bonn 1897. caHill, N., Household and City Organization at Olynthus, New Haven – London 2002. tto 12 tr a es 13 caHill, n., ‘Functional Analyses of Ancient House Inventories’, in landstätteR, s. – scHeiBelReiteR, v. (eds.), Städtisches Wohnen im östlichen Mittelmeerraum, 4. Jh. v. Chr. - 1. Jh. n. Chr. (Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums 24.-27. Oktober 2007 an der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien), Wien 2010, 477-96. calci, C. – messineo, g., La villa di Livia a Prima Porta, Roma 1984. calonge, a., ‘Aestimatio dotis’, AHDE 35 (1965), 5-57. cameRon, A., Procopius and the Sixth Century, London – New York 1996. camodeca, G., ‘Le tavolette cerate’, in Pagano, M. (ed.), Gli antichi ercolanesi. Antropologia, società, economia, Napoli 2000, 71-76. camPoReale, g. (ed.), L’Etruria mineraria (Catalogo della mostra Portoferraio – Massa Marittima – Populonia 1985), Milano 1985. candido, m.R., ‘Reletindo sobre as possibilidades de Arqueologia de Gênero’, in candido, M.R. (ed.), Mulheres na Antiguidade. Novas Perspectivas e Abordagens, NEA-UERJ, Rio de Janeiro 2012, 266-76. cantaRella, E., I volti dell’amore, Milano 1998. cantaRella, E., ‘Qualche considerazione sul lavoro femminile a Pompei’, Saitabi 49 (1999), 259-72. cantaRella, E., Passato prossimo. Donne romane da Tacita a Sulpicia, Milano 2012. caPasso, L., I fuggiaschi di Ercolano. Paleopatologia delle vittime dell’eruzione vesuviana del 79 d.C., Roma 2001. caRdon, d. – FeugèRe, m. (eds.), Archéologie des textiles des origines au Ve siècle (Actes du colloque de Lattes, Octobre 1999), Montpellier 2000, 77-80. caRlon, J.M., Pliny’s Women. Costructing Virtue and Creating Identity in the Roman World, Cambridge 2009. caRlsen, J., Vilici and Roman Estate Managers until A.D. 284 (Analecta Romana Instituti Danici 24), Roma 1995. caRteR, J.C., The Chora of Metaponto. The Necropoleis, Austin 1998. caRtledge, P., ‘Spartan Wives. Liberation or Licence?’, CQ 31 (1981), 84-105. caRtledge, P. – coHen, E. – FoxHall, l. (eds.), Money, Labour, and Land. Approaches to Economies in Ancient Greece, London 2002. cassimatis, G., ‘La notion du mariage dans l’Éclogue des Isauriens’, in vallindas, P.G. (ed.), Mνημόσυνα Παππούλια, Athens 1934, 85-92. cassola, F., ‘La conquista romana. La regione ino al V sec. d.C.’, in Pugliese caRRatelli, g. (ed.), Storia e civiltà della Campania. L’era antica, Napoli 1991, 103-50. castagna, L., ‘Teoria e prassi dell’amicizia in Plinio il Giovane’, in castagna, L.– leFèvRe, e. (eds.), Plinius der Jüngere und seine Zeit, München – Leipzig 2003. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY castiglione moRelli del FRanco, N., ‘Le oreicerie della casa di Giulio Polibio’, in de FRanciscis, La Regione sotterrata, 789-808. castiglione moRelli, V., ‘Un gruzzolo dalla stanza degli ori di Oplontis’, RSP 11 (2000), 187-226. castiglione moRelli, V., ‘Lo scheletro 27 e il suo tesoro monetale’, in FeRgola, L., ‘Oplontis. La Villa B’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 2003, 395-99. castiglione moRelli, V., ‘Intervento al dibattito’, in maRRazzo, Presenza e circolazione, 395-99. castiglione moRelli, V., ‘Le monete della Villa della Pisanella di Boscoreale. Dalla schedatura virtuale al mercato globale’, in RSP 22 (2011), 37-48. castiglione moRelli, V., ‘L’indotto economico’, in Bevilacqua – amBRosio – aliotta, Ager Pompeianus, 169-97. castiglione moRelli, V. – RisPoli, P. – samPaolo, F., ‘I pavimenti ritrovati dei praedia di Giulia Felice a Pompei (II,4). Il restauro dei praedia all’interno dei programmi della Soprintendenza Archeologica di Pompei’, in C. angelelli (ed.), Atti del XIV Colloquio dell’Associazione italiana per lo studio e la conservazione del mosaico (Spoleto, 7-9 febbraio 2008), Tivoli 2009, 211-20. castiglione moRelli del FRanco, V. – vitale, R., ‘L’insula VIII della Regio I. Un campione di indagine socioeconomica’, in RSP 3 (1989), 185-221. castRén, P., Ordo populusque pompeianus. Polity and Society in Roman Pompeii, 2. ed., Roma 1983. ceneRini, F., La donna romana. Modelli e realtà, Bologna 2009. ceRcHiai, L., ‘La struttura economica e politica’, in BaRtoloni, Introduzione, 127-60. cesaRetti, P., Teodora. Ascesa di un’imperatrice, Milano 2003. cHamPlin, E., ‘The Testament of Augustus’, RM 132 (1989), 154-65. cHamPlin, e., Final Judgements. Duty and Emotion in Roman Wills, 200 B.C. - A.D. 250, Univ. of California 1991. cHaRles, R.-P., ‘Etude anthropologique des nécropoles d’Argos. Contribution à l’étude des populations de la Grèce Antique’, BCH 82 (1958), 258-313. cHaRles, R.-P., Étude anthropologique des nécropoles d’Argos. Études peloponnesiennes III, Paris 1963. cHausson, F., ‘Amitiés, haines et testaments à Nîmes et en Bétique. Cn. Domitius Afer, Sex. Curvius Tullus et leur descendance’, in cHausson, F. (ed.), Occidents romaines. Sénateurs, chevaliers, militaires, notables dans les provinces d’Occident (Espagnes, Gaules, Germanies, Bretagne), Paris 2009, 191-216. cHiRassi colomBo, I, ‘Funzioni politiche ed implicazioni culturali nell’ideologia religiosa di Ceres nell’impero romano’, ANRW II, 17.1 (1981), 403-28. cHRistoPHiloPoulos, A., Σχέσεις γονέων και τέκνων κατά το βυζαντινόν δίκαιον, μετά συμβολών εις το αρχαίον και το ελληνιστικόν, Athens 1946. cianFeRoni, G.C., ‘Le Principesse d’Etruria’, in stamPolidis, Principesse, 259-75. cianFeRoni, G.C., ‘Vetulonia (GR), Il Circolo degli Acquastrini’, in stamPolidis, Principesse, 277-93. tto 14 tr a es 15 claRk, a.j. – elston, m. – HaRt, m.l., Understanding Greek Vases. A Guide to Terms, Styles, and Techniques, Malibu 2002. claRke, J.R., ‘The Oplontis Project 2005-2008’, in a. coRalini (ed.), Vesuviana. Archeologie a confronto (Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Bologna 14-16 gennaio 2008), Bologna 2010, 427-30. claRke, j.R. – muntasseR, n.k. (eds.), Oplontis: Villa A (‘of Poppaea’) at Torre Annunziata – Italy. Vol. i, The Ancient Setting and Modern Rediscovering, New York 2014. clay, J.S., The Politics of Olympus. Form and Meaning in the Major Homeric Hymns, 2. ed., Princeton 2006. clement, P.a. – tHoRne, m.m., ‘From the West Cemetery at Isthmia’, Hesperia 43 (1974), 401-11. clemente, G., ‘Le leggi sul lusso e la società romana tra III e II secolo a.C.’, in giaRdina, A. – scHiavone, A. (eds.), Società romana e produzione schiavistica, III, Bari 1981, 1-14. coaRelli, F., ‘Pompei. Il foro, le elezioni, le circoscrizioni elettorali’, in AION (Archeol) n. s., 7 (2000), 87-111. coBetto gHiggia, P. (ed.), Iseo. Contro Leocare (Sulla successione di Diceogene), Introduzione, testo critico, traduzione e commento, Pisa 2002. coBetto gHiggia, P. (ed.), Iseo. Introduzione, testo rivisto, traduzione, note e glossario giuridico attico, Alessandria 2012. coHen, B., ‘Added Clay and Gilding in Athenian Vase-painting’, in coHen, B. (ed.), The Colors of Clay. Special Techniques in Athenian Vases, Malibu 2006, 106-48. coHen, B., ‘Les bijoux et la construction de l’identité féminine dans l’ancienne Athènes’, in gHeRcHanoc, F. – Huet, v. (eds.), Vêtements antiques. S’habiller, se déshabiller dans les mondes anciens, Paris 2012, 149-64. coHen, E., ‘Free and Unfree Sexual Work’, FaRaone, C. – mccluRe, l. (eds.), Prostitutes and Courtesans in the Ancient World, Madison WI 2006, 95-124. coHen, E., ‘Juridical Implications of Athenians Slaves’ Commercial Activity’, in legRas – tHüR, Symposion, 211-23. coliviccHi, F., ‘Scheda 129’, in toRelli, M. (ed.), Gli Etruschi (Catalogo della mostra, Venezia 2000), Milano 2000. colmayeR, F., ‘Scheda 3.21’, in celuzza, M. – cianFeRoni, g.c. (eds.), Signori di Maremma. Élites etrusche fra Populonia e Vulci (Catalogo della mostra, Firenze 2007), Firenze 2010. connelly, J.B., Portrait of a Priestess. Women and Ritual in Ancient Greece, Princeton 2007. cooteR, R. – ulen, tH., Law and Economics, 5th ed., Boston 2008. coRBett, P.E., The Roman Law of Marriage, Oxford 1930. costa, G., ‘Ancora sulla laudatio Turiae’, BCAR 43 (1915), 3-40. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY costaBile, F., ‘Nuove luci sul processo di Giusta’, in Studi in onore di Cesare Sanilippo, I, Milano 1987, 185-230. costaBile, F., L’auctio della iducia nelle tabelle dell’agro Murecine, Soveria Mannelli 1992. costaBile, F., ‘Ancilla Domini. Una nuova dedica su armilla aurea’, in Minima Epigraphica et Papirologica, 4, 6 (2001), 446-74. costaBile, F., ‘Contra meretricium ancillae Domini’, Ostraka 12, 2 (2003), 259-62. costin, C.L., ‘Gender and Textile Production in Prehistory’, in BolgeR, D. (ed.), A Companion to Gender Prehistory, Chichester 2013, 180-202. cova, E., ‘Cupboards, Closets, and Shelves. Storage in the Pompeian House’, Phoenix 67 (2013), 373-91. cox, C.A., Household Interests. Property, Marriage Strategies, and Family Dynamics in Ancient Athens, Princeton 1998. cozzo, A., Le passioni economiche nella Grecia antica, Palermo 1991. cRisPino, A. – cultRaRo, m., ‘Indigenous Women in Eastern Sicily during the First Greek Colonization. Current Methodological Approaches and Archaeological Record’, in sojc, n. – saltini semeRaRi, g. – BuRgeRs, g.j. (eds.), Investigating Gender in Mediterranean Archaeology (forthcoming). cRook, J.A., ‘Intestacy in Roman Society’, PCPhS 19 (1973), 38-44. cRook, J.A., ‘Women in Roman Succession’, in RaWson, B. (ed.), The Family in Ancient Rome, Beckeham 1986, 58-82. cRook, J., ‘His and Hers. What Degree of Financial Responsibility did Husband and Wife have for the Matrimonial Home and their Life in Common in a Roman Marriage?’, in andReau, k. – BRuHns, H. (eds.), Parenté et strategies familiales dans l’Antiquité Romaine, Roma 1990, 153-72. culHam, P., ‘The Lex Oppia’, Latomus 41 (1982), 786-93. cultRaRo, M., ‘La cultura di Pantalica Nord in Sicilia nei suoi rapporti con il mondo egeo’, in negRoni cataccHio, N. (ed.), Protovillanoviani e/o protoetruschi. Ricerche e scavi (Atti del III incontro di Studi, Manciano – Firenze 12-14 maggio 1995), Firenze 1998, 301-12. cuozzo, M., Reinventando la tradizione, Paestum 2003. cuozzo, M., ‘Percorsi per una archeologia delle differenze’, in guidi – PellizzaRi, Nuove frontiere, 17-24. cuozzo, M. – guidi, a., Archeologia delle identità e delle differenze, Roma 2013. cuRuni, s.a. – santoPuoli, n. (eds.), Pompei, Via dell’Abbondanza. Ricerche, restauri, nuove tecnologie, Milano 2007. cutleR, a., ‘Uses of Luxury. On the Functions of Consumption and Symbolic Capital in Byzantine Culture’, in guillou, a. – duRand, j. (eds.), Byzance et les images, Paris 1994, 287-327. cutolo, P., ‘Sugli aspetti letterari, poetici e culturali della cosiddetta Laudatio Turiae’, AFLN 26 (1983-84), 33-65. cygielman, M. – Pagnini, l., La Tomba del tridente a Vetulonia, Pisa – Roma 2006. tto 16 tr a es 17 czyHlaRz, C., Das römische Dotalrecht, Giessen 1870. d’amBRa, E., Roman Women, New York 2007. d’amBRosio, A., ‘Gli ornamenti femminili dell’area vesuviana’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 45-55. d’amBRosio a. – de caRolis e. – guzzo, P.g., ‘I contesti di oggetti trovati presso le vittime’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 73-83. d’amBRosio, a. – de caRolis, e. – guzzo, P.g., I gioielli nella pittura vesuviana (Quaderni di Studi pompeiani 2), Pompei 2008. d’amBRosio, a. – guzzo, P.g. – mastRoRoBeRto, m. (eds.), Storie da un’eruzione. Pompei Ercolano Oplontis (Catalogo della mostra, Napoli, Museo Archeologico Nazionale 20 marzo – 31 agosto 2003), Milano 2003. daReste, R., La science du droit en Grèce. Platon, Aristote, Théophraste, Amsterdam 1968. d’aRms, J.J., Commerce and Social Standing in Ancient Rome, Cambridge, Ma. – London 1981. dasen, v. – PiéRaRt, m. (eds.), Idia kai dèmosia: les cadres “privés” et “publics” de la religion grecque antique (Actes du 9. Colloque du Centre International d’Étude de la Religion Grecque Antique, CIERGA, tenu à Fribourg du 8 au 10 septembre 2003), (Kernos Suppl. 15), Liège 2005. d’avino, M., La donna a Pompei, Napoli 1964. de alBentiis, E., ‘Indagini sull’Insula Arriana Polliana di Pompei’, DArch 7, 1 (1989), 43-84. de angelis, F., ‘Re-assessing the Earliest Social and Economic Developments in Greek Sicily’, MDAIR(R) 116 (2010), 21-53. de caRo, S., ‘Le ville residenziali’, in BoRRiello – d’amBRosio – de caRo – guzzo, Pompei, 21-22. de caRo, S., ‘La lucerna d’oro di Pompei. Un dono di Nerone a Venere pompeiana’, in I culti della Campania antica (Atti del Convegno Internazionale di studi in ricordo di Nazarena Valenza Mele, Napoli 15-17 maggio 1995), Roma 1998, 234-44. de caRolis, E., Il mobile a Pompei ed Ercolano: Letti, tavoli, sedie e armadi. Contributo alla tipologia dei mobili della prima età imperiale, Roma 2007. de caRolis, E. – PatRicelli, g., ‘Vittime dell’eruzione’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 56-72. de FRanciscis, A., Il ritratto romano a Pompei, Napoli 1951. de FRanciscis, A., ‘La villa romana di Oplontis’ in andReae – kyRieleis, Neue Forschungen, 9-17. FRanciscis, A., s.v. ‘Oplontis’, in stillWell, R. – macdonald, W.l. – Holland mcallisteR, m. (eds.), The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites, Princeton 1979. de FRanciscis, A. (ed.), La regione sotterrata dal Vesuvio. Studi e prospettive (Atti Convegno Internazionale Napoli 1979), Napoli 1982. de de FRanciscis, A., ‘Oplontis’, in de FRanciscis, La regione sotterrata, 907-25. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY FRanciscis, A., ‘La dama di Oplontis’, in Eikones. Studien zur griechischen und römischen Bildnis, Bonn 1980, 115-17. de de FRanciscis, A., ‘La casa di Giulio Polibio’, RSP 2 (1988), 15-36. delia, D., Alexandrian Citizenship during the Roman Principate, Atlanta 1991. de ligt, L., ‘De signiicatione verborum. Romeins erfrecht in de Laudatio Turiae’, Lampas 34 (2001), 45-61. della casa, A., ‘Virtù cristiane nella cosidetta Laudatio Turiae’, in Scritti scelti di Adriana Della Casa (Paideia Cristiana: Miscellanea di studi in onore di M. Naldini), Pisa 1994, 305-17. della coRte, M., Juventus, Napoli 1924. della coRte, M., ‘Tabelle cerate ercolanesi’, PP 6 (1951), 224. della coRte, M., Case ed abitanti di Pompei (3. ed. a cura di P. Soprano), Napoli 1963. demand, N., Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece, Baltimore 1994. de maRtino, F., ‘Attività economica e realtà sociale’, in Pugliese caRRatelli, G. (ed.), Storia della Campania. L’evo antico, Napoli 1991, 193-233. denissi, M., Θεοδώρα η αγία των φτωχών (Theodora, Saint of the Poor), Athens 1996. de PetRa, G., ‘Degli oggetti di metallo prezioso e dei libelli scoperti a Pompei’, NSA (1887), 415-20. d’eRcole, M.C., ‘Immagini dall’Adriatico Arcaico. Su alcuni temi iconograici delle stele daunie’, Ostraka 9 (2000), 327-49. desideRi, P., ‘Catone e le donne (il dibattito liviano sull’abrogazione della lex Oppia)’, Opus 3 (1984), 63-76. de siena, A. – giaRdino, l., ‘Trasformazioni delle aree urbane e del paesaggio agrario in età Romana nella Basilicata sudorientale’, in lo cascio, E. – stoRcHi maRino, A. (eds.), Modalità insediative e strutture agrarie nell’Italia meridionale in età romana, Bari 2001, 129-67. de’ sPagnolis, M., ‘Una testimonianza ebraica a Nuceria Alfaterna’, in FRancHi dell’oRto, L. (ed.), Ercolano 1738-1988. 250 anni di ricerche archeologiche (Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Ravello – Napoli – Pompei – Ercolano 1988, Monograie SAP 6), Roma 1993, 243-51. de ste. cRoix, G.E.M., ‘Some observations on the property rights of Athenian women’, CR 20 (1970), 273-78. dettenHoFeR, M.H., ‘Die Frauen von Sparta. Gesellschaftliche Position und politische Relevanz’, Klio 75 (1993), 72. dettenHoFeR, M.H., ‘Frauen in politischen Krisen zwischen Republik und Prinzipat’, in dettenHoFeR, M.H., Reine Männersache? Frauen in Männerdomänen der antiken Welt, Köln – Weimar – Wien 1994, 133-57. vingo, P., ‘Églises baptismales, églises et chapelles funéraires dans les zones rurales de la Ligurie occidentale aux premiers siècles du haut Moyen Âge’, in acHón, o. – de vingo, P. – juáRez, t.– miquel, j. – PinaR, j. (eds.), Esglésies rurals a Catalunya entre l’Antiguitat i l’Edat Mitjana (segles V-X) (Round Table Proceedings, Esparraguera – Montserrat, 25-27 October 2007), Bologna 2011, 125-59. de vingo, P., ‘Le trasformazioni insediative urbane nella Liguria maritima tra il V e il VII secolo sulla base delle fonti scritte e delle fonti archeologiche’, in vaRaldo, C. (ed.), Ai conini dell’impero. Insediamenti e de tto 18 tr a es 19 fortiicazioni bizantine nel Mediterraneo occidentale (Conference Proceedings, Genova-Bordighera 14-17 March 2002), Bordighera 2011, 323-407. dickmann, J.-A., Domus frequentata. Anspruchsvolles Wohnen im römischen Stadthaus (Studien zur antiken Stadt), München 1999. dickmann, J.-A., ‘Insula Pertusa. Indizien einer Kriminalgeschichte’, in melleR – dickmann, Pompeji, Nola, Herculaneum, 299-308. di donato, R., ‘Introduzione’, Louis Gernet. La famiglia nella Grecia antica, Roma 1997. dillon, M., Girls and Women in Classical Greek Religion, London 2002. dimakis, N., Social Identity and Status in the Classical and Hellenistic Northern Peloponnese. The evidence from burials (unpublished PhD thesis), University of Nottingham 2012. dimoPoulou, A., ‘Le role des esclaves dans l’économie athénienne. Réponse à E. Cohen’, in legRas – tHüR, Symposion, 225-36. dindoRF L. (ed.), Ioannis Malalae chronographia (Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae), Bonn 1831. dixon, S., ‘Breaking the Law to do the Right Thing. The Gradual Erosion of the Voconian Law in Ancient Rome’, Adelaide Law Review 9 (1983/85), 519-34. dixon, S., ‘Polybius on Roman Women and Property’, AJPh 106 (1985), 147-70. dixon, S., The Roman Mother, London – Sydney 1989. dixon, S., ‘Family Finances. Terentia and Tullia’, in RaWson B. (ed.), The Family in Ancient Rome. New Perspectives, London 1987 (2. ed. 1992), 93-120. dixon, S., The Roman Family, Baltimore – London 1992. dixon, S., Reading Roman Women. Sources, Genres and Real Life, London 2001. dixon, S., ‘Exemplary Housewife or Luxurious Slut. Cultural Representations of Women in the Roman Economy’, in mcHaRdy, F. – maRsHall, e. (eds.), Women’s inluence on Classical Civilization, London – New York 2004, 56-74. dixon, S., Cornelia. Mother of the Gracchi, London – New York 2007. doBBins, J.J., ‘Problems of Chronology, Decoration and Urban Design in the Forum at Pompeii’, AJA 97, 4 (1994), 629-94. donaldson, J., Woman. Her Position and Inluence in Ancient Greece and Rome, and among the Early Christians, New York 1907. dotta, P., ‘I pesi da telaio’, in BaRRa Bagnasco, M. (ed.), Locri Epizeiri III. Cultura materiale e vita quotidiana, Firenze 1989, 185-201. dozio, E., ‘Die Priesterin Eumachia’, in melleR – dickmann, Pompeii, Nola, Herculaneum, 149-51. dRago, L., ‘Aspetti dell’orientalizzante antico a Veio. Dalla tomba a fossa alla tomba a camera’, in caPoFeRRo, A. – d’amelio, l.– Renzetti, s. (eds.), Dall’Italia. Omaggio a Barbro Santillo Frizell, Firenze 2013, 19-44. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY dRumann, W. – gRoeBe, P., Geschichte Roms in seinem Übergang von der republicanischen zur monarchischen Verfassung, Königsberg 1837. ducat, J., ‘La femme de Sparte et la cité’, Ktèma 23 (1998), 385-406. duncan jones, R., ‘An Epigraphic Survey of Costs in Roman Italy’, PBSR, n.s., 20 (1965), 241-45. duRRy, M., Élogue funèbre d’une matrone romaine (Élogue dit de Turia), Paris 1950 (3. ed. 2002). edWaRd, J. – Fossey, j.m. – yaFFe, l., ‘Analysis by Neutron Activation of Human Bone from the Hellenistic Cemetery at Asine, Greece’, JFA 11 (1984), 37-46. edWaRds, M. (ed.), Isaeus, Austin 2007. el aBBadi, M.A.H., ‘The Alexandrian Citizenship’, JEA 48 (1962), 106-23. escHeBacH, l. – escHeBacH, H. – mülleR-tRollius, j., Gebäudeverzeichnis und Stadtplan der antiken Stadts Pompeji, Köln – Weimar – Wien 1993. étienne, R., La vita quotidiana a Pompei (trad. ital.), Milano 1973. evans, J.A., The Empress Theodora. Partner of Justinian, Austin, Texas 2002. evans, J.A., The Emperor Justinian and the Byzantine Empire, Westport, CT – London 2005. evans, J.A., The Power Game in Byzantium. Antonina and the Empress Theodora, London – New York 2011. evans, J.K., War, Women and Children in Ancient Rome, London 1991. evans gRuBBs, J., Women and the Law in the Roman Empire. A Sourcebook on Marriage, Divorce and Widowhood, London 2002. FantHam, e. – Foley, H. – kamPen, n. – PomeRoy, s. – sHaPiRo, H., Women in the Classical World. Image and Text, New York 1994. FaRaguna, M., ‘Aspetti della schiavitù domestica femminile in Attica tra oratoria ed epigraia’, in Reduzzi meRola – stoRcHi maRino, Femmes-esclaves, 57-71. FayeR, C., La familia romana. Aspetti giuridici e antiquari, vol. II: Sponsalia, matrimonio, dote, Rome 2005. FentRess, E., ‘On the Block. Catastae, Chalcidica and Cryptae in Early Imperial Italy’, JRA 18 (2005), 220-34. FeRgola, L., ‘Oplontis La Villa B’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 154-57. FeRgola, L., ‘La casa di Giulio Polibio (IX 13, 1-3)’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 421-23. FeRRaRy, J.-L., Philhellénisme et impérialisme. Aspects idéologiques de la conquête romaine du monde hellénistique, Rome 1988. FeRRucci, S., L’Atene di Iseo. L’organizzazione del privato nella prima metà del IV sec. a.C., Pisa 1998. FeRRucci, S., ‘Gli schiavi nell’oikos ad Atene. La testimonianza delle orazioni di Iseo’, in gaRRido-HoRy, M. (ed.), Routes et marchés d’esclaves (Actes du XXVI Colloque du GIREA, Besançon 27-29 septembre 2001), Paris 2002. tto 20 tr a es 21 FeRRucci, S. (ed.), Iseo. La successione di Kiron, Introduzione, testo critico, traduzione e commento, Pisa 2005. FeRRucci, S., ‘La ricchezza nascosta. Osservazioni su aphanes e phanera ousia’, MedAnt 8 (2005), 145-69. FestugièRe, A.J. – Rydén, l. (eds.), Léontios de Néapolis, Vie de Syméon le Fou et Vie de Jean de Chypre, Paris 1974. Finley, M.I., The Ancient Economy, Berkeley – Los Angeles – London 1973 (2. ed. 1985, exp. ed. 1999). Finley, M.I., Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology, London 1980. Finley, M., Land and Credit in Ancient Athens, 500-200 B.C. The Horos Inscriptions, New Brunswick 1985. FisHeR, E.A., ‘Theodora and Antonina in the Historia Arcana. History and/or Fiction’, Arethusa 11 (1978), 253-79. FlacelièRe, R., La vie quotidienne en Grèce au siècle de Périclès, Paris 1971. FlacH, D., Die sogenannte Laudatio Turiae. Einleitung, Text, Übersetzung und Kommentar, Darmstadt 1991. Fleck, R.k. – Hanssen, F.a., ‘“Rulers Ruled by Women”. An Economic Analysis of the Rise and Fall of Women’s Rights in Ancient Sparta’, Economics of Governance 10 (2009), 224. FloHR, M., ‘The Social World of Roman Fullonicae’, in dRiessen, m. – HeeRen, s. (eds.), TRAC 2008. Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Oxford 2009, 173-86. FloHR, M., ‘The Textile Economy of Pompeii’, JRA 26 (2013), 53-78. FÖgen, M.T., ‘Muttergut und Kindesvermögen bei Konstantin d. Gr., Justinian und Eustathios Rhomaios’ in simon, Eherecht und Familiengut, 15-27. FoRBis, E.P., ‘Women’s Public Image in Italian Honorary Inscriptions’, AJPh 111 (1990), 493-512. FoRsteR, E.S., Isaeus, Cambridge, Mass. – London 1927. FoxHall, L., ‘Household, Gender and Property in Classical Athens’, CQ 39 (1989), 22-44. FoxHall, L., Studying Gender in Classical Antiquity, Cambridge 2013. FRancHi dell’oRto (ed.), L. Eroi e Regine. Piceni Popolo d’Europa (Catalogo della mostra, Roma 2001), Roma 2001. FRanciosi, G., ‘Vita e diritto nella società ercolanese. Le vicende di Petronia Giusta’, in Pagano, M. (ed.), Gli antichi ercolanesi. Antropologia, società, economia, Napoli 2000, 135-38. FRank, R.I., ‘Augustus Legislation on Marriage and Children’, California Studies in Classical Antiquity 8 (1975), 41-52. FRasca, M., ‘La necropoli di Monte Finocchito’, Cronache di Archeologia e storia dell’arte 20 (1981), 11-104. FRasca, M., ‘La necropoli di Cugno Carrube in territorio di Carlentini’ (Cronache di archeologia e storia dell’arte, 21, 1982), Catania 1991, 11-35. FRiedl, E., Women and Men. An Anthropologist’s View, New York 1975. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY FRieR, B.W., ‘The Roman Dowry. Some Economic Questions’ (http://www.law.umich.edu/centersandprograms/lawandeconomics/workshops/Documents/Paper%2012.Frier.Roman%20Dowry-%20Some%20Economic%20Questions.pdf (4/1/2016) FRÖdin, o. – PeRsson, a.W., ASINE: Results of the Swedish Excavations 1922-1930, Stockholm 1938. FRÖHlicH, T., Lararien und Fassadenbilder in den Vesuvstädten, Mainz 1991. FRondoni, A., ‘La cristianizzazione in Liguria tra costa ed entroterra. Alcuni esempi (V-IX secolo)’, in caRRa Bonacasa, m.R. – vitale, e. (eds.), La cristianizzazione in Italia fra tardoantico e altomedioevo (Proceedings of the 9th National Congress of Christian Archaeology, I), Palermo 2007, 765-66. FRondoni, a. – de vingo, P. – gamBaRo, l., ‘La basilica paleocristiana e l’area archeologica di Riva Ligure (Imperia). Gli ultimi risultati di scavo’, in BRandt, o. – cResci, s. – quiRoga, j.l. – PaPPalaRdo, c. (eds.), Episcopus, Civitas, Territorium (Acta XV Congressus Internationalis Archaeologiae Christianae, Toleti, 8-12/09/2008), Città del Vaticano 2013, 1279-302. FuRuBotn, E.G. – RicHteR, R., Institutions and Economic Theory. The Contribution of the New Institutional Economics, 2. ed., Ann Arbor 2005. gaBBa, E., Appiano e la storia delle guerre civili, Firenze 1956. gaBRielsen, V., ‘Phanera and aphanes ousia in Classical Athens’, C & M 37 (1986), 99-114. gaRdneR, E.A., ‘Ornaments and Armour from Kertch in the New Museum at Oxford’, JHS 5 (1884), 62-73. gaRdneR, j.F., ‘The Recovery of Dowry in Roman Law’, CQ 5 (1985), 449-53. gaRdneR, J.F., Women in Roman Law and Society, London 1986. gaRdneR, J.F., Being a Roman Citizen, London 1993. gaRdneR, J.F., ‘Gender-Role Assumptions in Roman Law’, EMC/CV 39, n. s., 14 (1995), 377-400. gaRdneR, J.F., ‘Women in Business Life. Some Evidence from Puteoli’, in setälä, P. – savunen, l. (eds.), Female Networks and the Public Sphere in Roman Society (Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 22), Roma 1999, 11-27. gaRland, R., The Greek Way of Death, Ithaca 2001. geoRge, M., ‘Repopulating the Roman House’, in RaWson – WeaveR, Roman Family, 299-319. geRnet, l., Droit et société dans la Grèce ancienne, Paris 1955. geRnet, L., Anthropologie de la Grèce antique, Paris 1968. geRnet, L., Forme e strutture della parentela nella Grecia antica, AION (Archeol.) (1983), 109-210. geRnet, L., La famiglia nella Grecia antica, Roma 1997. geRnet, L., ‘Sur l’épiclerat’, REG 34 (1921), 337. geRnet, L., ‘La notion de valeur en Grèce’ (1948), published in English as ‘Value in Greece’, in goRdon, R.L. – Buxton, R.G.A. (eds.), Myth, Religion and Society, Cambridge 1981, 111-46. giaRdino, L., ‘Il periodo post-annibalico a Heraclea’, in Atti del XV Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia (Taranto 1975), Taranto 1976, 549-60. tto 22 tr a es 23 giaRdino, L., ‘Architettura domestica a Herakleia. Considerazioni preliminari’, in d’andRia, F. – mannino, k. (eds.), Ricerche sulla casa in Magna Grecia e in Sicilia (Atti del Colloquio, Lecce 23-24 giugno 1992) (Archeologia e Storia 5), Galatina 1996, 133-59. giaRdino, L., ‘Aspetti e problemi dell’urbanistica di Herakleia’, in Siritide e Metapontino. Storie di due territori coloniali (Atti dell’incontro di studio. Policoro 31 ottobre-2 novembre 1991), Napoli – Paestum 1998, 171-220. giaRdino, L., ‘Herakleia. Città e territorio’, in D. adamesteanu (ed.), Storia della Basilicata. I. L’antichità, Roma – Bari 1999, 295-337. giaRdino, L., ‘Herakleia e Metaponto. Dalla polis italiota all’abitato protoimperiale’, in Atti del XLIV Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia (Taranto 2004), Taranto 2005, 387-432. giaRdino, L., ‘Il ruolo del sacro nella fondazione di Eraclea di Lucania e nella deinizione del suo impianto urbano. Alcuni spunti di rilessione’, in osanna, M. – zucHtRiegel, g. (ed.), ΑΜΦΙ ΣΙΡΙΟΣ ΡΟΑΣ. Nuove ricerche su Eraclea e la Siritide, Venosa 2012, 89-118. giBson, R.K. – moRello, R., Reading the Letters of Pliny the Younger. An Introduction, Cambridge 2012. gioRdano, C., ‘Le iscrizioni grafite e dipinte nella casa di Giulio Polibio’, in RAAN 59 (1974), 21-28. giove, T., ‘La circolazione monetale a Pompei’ in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 26-33. giove, T., ‘Il balneum del Complesso delle Terme del Sarno’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 292-97. giuFFRè, V., Il diritto dei privati nell’esperienza romana. I principali gangli, Napoli 2010. giunti, P., Il ruolo sociale della donna romana di età imperiale tra discriminazione e riconoscimento, Napoli 2012. glazeBRook, A., ‘Cosmetics and Sôphrosunê. Ischomachos’ Wife in Xenophon’s Oikonomikos’, CW 102.3 (2009), 233-48. glazeBRook, A., ‘Porneion. Prostitution in Athenian Civic Space’, in glazeBRook, a. – HenRy, m. (eds.), Greek Prostitutes in the Ancient Mediterranean, Madison 2011, 34-59. gleBa, m., ‘Textile Production at Poggio Civitate (Murlo) in the VII c. BC’, in caRdon, d. – goody, M.j. – tamBiaH, s.j., Bridewealth and Dowry, Cambridge 1973. gleBa, M., Textile production in pre-Roman Italy (Ancient Textile Series 4), Oxford 2008. gleBa, m., ‘Textile Tools in Ancient Italian Votive Contexts. Evidence of Dedication or Production?’, in gleBa, m. – BeckeR, H. (eds.), Votives, Places and Rituals in Etruscan Religion, Leiden – Boston 2009, 69-84. gleBa, M., ‘Italy: Iron Age’, in gleBa, M. – manneRing, U. (eds.), Textiles and Textile Production in Europe from Prehistory to AD 400, Oxford 2012, 215-41. goFF, B., Citizen Bacchae. Women’s Ritual Practice in Ancient Greece, Berkeley 2004. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY goldBeck, F., Salutationes. Die Morgenbegrüßungen in Rom in der Republik und der frühen Kaiserzeit, Berlin 2010. gomme, A.W., ‘The Position of Women in Athens in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC’, in gomme, A.W. (ed.), Essays in Greek History and Literature, Oxford 1937. goody, j. – tamBiaH, s.j. (eds.), Bridewealth and Dowry, Cambridge 1973. goRdon, A.E., ‘Who’s Who in the Laudatio Turiae’, Epigraphica 39 (1977), 7-12. goRia, F., ‘Il dibattito sull’abrogazione della Lex Oppia e la condizione della donna romana’, in uglione, R. (ed.), La donna nel mondo antico (Atti del Convegno Nazionale di Studi Torino 21-22-23 Aprile 1986), Torino 1987, 265-303. goWing, A.M., ‘Lepidus, the Proscriptions and the Laudatio Turiae’, Historia 41 (1992), 283-96. gRaeBeR, D., Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value. The False Coin of Our Own Dreams, New York 2001. gRanados de aRena, D.H., ‘Actitud admirable de dos mujeres en épocas diiciles. La uxor ignota de la Laudatio funebris y Hortensia, la hija del orador’, REC 17 (1986), 93-107. gRasso, F., ‘Schede’ in BRagantini, I. – samPaolo, v. (eds.), La pittura pompeiana, Napoli 2009, 502-11. gReco, E., Topograia di Atene. Sviluppo urbano e monumenti dalle origini al III secolo d.C., Atene – Paestum 2010. gRegoRi, G.L., Epigraia aniteatrale dell’Occidente Romano, II, Regiones Italiae VI-XI, Roma 1989. gRiFFitH-Williams, B., A Commentary on Selected Speeches of Isaios, Leiden 2013. gRimaldi, M., ‘Ritrovata la statua di Concordia dall’ediicio di Eumachia a Pompei’, Eutopia, serie III, 1-2 (2003), 33-63. gRoen-vallinga, M.J., ‘Desperate Housewives? The Adaptive Family Economy and Female Participation in the Roman Urban Labour Market’, in HemelRijk, e. – WoolF, g., Women and the Roman City in the Latin West, Leiden – Boston 2013, 295-312. guaRino, A., Diritto privato romano, Napoli 1992. gueRRa gómez, M., El sacerdocio femenino (en las religiones greco-romanas y en el cristianismo de los primeros siglos), Toledo 1987. guidi, A., ‘L’etnicità nella documentazione archeologica delle necropoli italiane dell’età del ferro’, in guidi – PellizzaRi, Nuove frontiere, 25-35. guidi, l. – PellizzaRi, M.R. (eds.), Nuove frontiere per la storia di genere (V Congresso della Società italiana delle Storiche, Napoli 2010), vol. II, Salerno 2013. guilaR PelegRin, C. – salvadoR, j.l. – maR, R. – moReno, m.a. – mostalac caRRillo, a. – sáncHez, m.a., ‘Missione archeologica spagnola a Pompei. La casa-caupona I 8, 8-9 di L. Vetutius Placidus’, RSP 5 (1991-1992), 89-110. tto 24 tr a es 25 guzzo, P.G. – scaRano ussani, V., ‘La schiava di Moregine’, in Les citées enfouies du Vesuve. Nouvelles Recherches iconographiques et archeologiques (Actes du Séminaire de Rome, MEFRA 13), Rome 2001, n. 1, 98-99. Hadas, M., ‘Observations on Athenian Women’, CW 39 (1936), 97-100. Hägg, i. – Fossey, j.m., ‘The Hellenistic Necropolis and Later Structures on the Middle Slopes, 1973-77’, in Hägg, I. – Hägg, R. (eds.), Excavations in the Barbouna Area at Asine, Fasc. 4, Uppsala 1980. HaHn, H.P., ‘Gibt es eine “soziale Logik des Raumes”?’, in tReBscHe, P. – mülleR-scHeessel, n. – ReinHold s. (eds.), Der gebaute Raum. Bausteine einer Architektursoziologie vormoderner Gesellschaften (Tübinger Archäologische Taschenbücher 7), Münster 2010, 107-22. Hälikkä, R., ‘Discourses on Body, Gender and Power in Tacitus’, in setälä et al., Women, Wealth, and Power, 75-104. Hallett, J.P., Fathers and Daughters in Roman Society, Princeton 1984. Hänninen, M-L., ‘Currus avorum. Roman Noble Women in Family Traditions’, in WHittakeR, H. (ed.), In memoriam. Commemoration, Communal Memory and Gender Values in the Ancient Graeco-Roman World, Cambridge 2011, 42-59. HaRRis, E., ‘Workshop, Marketplace and Household. The Nature of Technical Specialization in Classical Athens and Its Inluence on Economy and Society’, in caRtledge – coHen – FoxHall, Money, Labour, and Land, 67-99. HaRRison, A.R.W., The Law of Athens I. Family and Property. Oxford 1968, 52-54. Hase, C.B. (ed.), Leonis Diaconi Caloënsis, Historiae libri decem (CSHB), Bonn 1828. HelBig, W., Wandgemälde der vom Vesuv verschütteten Städte Campaniens, Leipzig 1868. HemelRijk, E.A., Matrona Docta, London – New York 1999. HemelRijk, E.A., ‘De Laudatio Turiae. Grafschrift voor een uirzonderlijke vrouw?’, Lampas 34 (2001), 62-80. HemelRijk, E.A., ‘Masculinity and Femininity in the Laudatio Turiae’, CQ 54 (2004), 185-97. HendeRson, J., Aristophanes. Fragments, Cambridge, Mass. 2007. HenneBeRg, M. – HenneBeRg, J., ‘Skeletal Material from the House of C. Iulius Polybius in Pompei 79 a.D.’, in ciaRallo, A. – de caRolis, e. (eds.), Studi interdisciplinari. La casa di Giulio Polibio, Pompei 2001, 79-91. HeRRin, J., Women in Purple. Rulers of Medieval Byzantium, London 2001. HeRRmann, C., Le rôle judiciaire et politique des femmes sous la république romaine, Paris 1964. HeRRmann-otto, E., Ex ancilla natus. Untersuchungen zu den “hausgeborenen“ Sklaven und Sklavinnen in Westen des römischen Kaiserreiches, Stuttgart 1994. HeRscH, K.K., The Roman Wedding. Ritual and Meaning, New York 2010. HeRscH, K., ‘The Woolworker Bride’, in laRsson lovén, L. – stRÖmBeRg, a. (eds.), Ancient Marriage in Myth and Reality, Newcastle upon Tyne 2010, 122-35. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY HinaRd, F., Les proscriptions de la Rome républicaine, Roma 1985. HiRscHFeld, O., ‘Die sogennante Laudatio Turiae’, WS 24 (1902), 233-37. HÖBenReicH, E. – Rizzelli, g. (eds.), Scylla. Fragmente einer juristischen Geschichte der Frauen im antiken Rom, Wien – Köln – Weimar 2003. HÖBenReicH, E., ‘Andróginas y monstruos. Mujeres que hablan en la antigua Roma’, Veleia 22 (2005), 17382. HoBson, D.W., ‘Women as Property Owners in Roman Egypt’, TAPhA 113 (1983), 311-21. HoddeR, I., ‘The Identiication and Interpretation of Ranking in Prehistory. A Contextual Perspective’, in RenFReW, C. – sHennan, s. (eds.), Ranking, Resource and Exchange. Aspects of the Archaeology of Early European Society, Cambridge 1982, 150-54. HoddeR, I., The Present Past. An Introduction to Anthropology for Archaeologists, London 1982. HoddeR, i. – Hutson, S. (eds.), Reading the Past. Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology, Cambridge 2003. Hodkinson, S., Property and Wealth in Classical Sparta, Swansea 2000. Holum, K.G., Theodosian Empresses. Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity, Berkeley – Los Angeles 1989. Honsel, H., ‘Das periculum nominis in Dotalrecht‘, ZRG 78 (1966), 365-73. HoRak, F., Rationes decidendi. Entscheidungsbegründungen bei den älteren römischen Juristen bis Labeo, Innsbruck 1969. HoRsFall, N., ‘Allia Potestas and Murdia. Two Roman Women’, AncSoc 12 (1982), 27-33. HoRsFall, N., ‘Some Problems in the Laudatio Turiae’, BICS 30 (1983), 85-98. HueBneR, s., The Family in Roman Egypt. A Comparative Approach to Inter-generational Solidarity and Conlict, Cambridge 2013. HumBeRt, M., Le remariage à Rome, Milan 1972. HumPHReys, S.C., The Family, Women, and Death. Comparative Studies, London 1993. ingalls, W., ‘Demography and Dowries. Perspectives on Female Infanticide in Classical Greece’, Phoenix 56, 3 (2002), 246-54. jeFFeRey, L.H., ‘Comments on Some Archaic Greek Inscriptions’, JHS 59 (1949), 25-38. jeFFReys, E. – jeFFReys, m. – scott, R. (with B. Croke, J. Ferber, S. Franklin, A. James, D. Kelly, A. Moffatt, A. Nixon), The Chronicle of John Malalas. A Translation, Melbourne 1986. jeHne, M., Roma nell’età della repubblica (trad. it.), Bologna 2008. jones, W., The Speeches of Isaeus in Causes Concerning the Law of Succession at Athens, London 1779. josHel, s.R., ‘Geographies of Slave Containment and Movement’, in geoRge, M. (ed.), Roman Slavery and Roman Material Culture, Toronto – Buffalo – London 2013, 99-128. tto 26 tr a es 27 just, R., Women in Athenian Law and Life, London 1989. kajanto, I., Supernomina. A Study on Latin Epigraphy (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 40, 1), Helsinki 1960. kajanto, I., The Latin Cognomina (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 36, 2), Helsinki 1965, 243. kalaBRun, A., ‘De Turia Romani amoris coniugalis exemplo’, VoxP 5 (1985), 75-80. kaseR, M., Das römische Privatrecht, München 1971. kastenmeieR, P., Luoghi del lavoro domestico nella casa pompeiana (Studi della Soprintendenza Archeologica di Pompei 23), Roma 2007. katz, M., Penelope’s Renown, Princeton 1991. kazdHan, A., s.v. ‘mime’, The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, vol. 1-3, New York – Oxford 1991, 1375. kazHdan, A., s.v. ‘zoste patrikia’, in kazHdan, A.P. (ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, New York – Oxford 1991, 2231. keegan, P., ‘Turia, Lepidus, and Rome’s Epigraphic Environment’, Studia HT 9 (2008), 1-7. keegan, P., ‘Faint Praise in Pain(t)ed Phrases. A Narratological Reading of the Laudatio Murdia’, Eras Journal (http://arts.monash.edu.au/publications/eras/edition-4/keegan.php) last access 5.1.2016, 2002. keltanen, M., ‘The Public Image of the Four Empresses. Ideal Wives, Mothers and Regents?’, in setälä et al., Women, Wealth and Power, 105-46. kenaan, V.L., ‘Aphrodite. The Goddess of Appearances’, in smitH, A.C. – PickuP, S. (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Aphrodite, Leiden 2010. kiousoPoulou, A., O θεσμός της οικογένειας στην Ήπειρο κατά τον 13ο αιώνα, Athens 1990. knütel, R., ‘Uxores constrictae’, Fundamina 12 (2014), 467-77. kockel, V., ‛Altes und Neues vom Forum und vom Gebäude der Eumachia in Pompeji’, in Lebenswelten: Bilder und Räume in der römischen Stadt der Kaiserzeit (Symposium am 24. und 25. Januar 2002 zum Abschluss des von der Gerda Henkel Stiftung geförderten Forschungsprogramms “Stadtkultur in der römischen Kaiserzeit”), Wiesbaden 2005, 51-72. koscHakeR, P., ‘Unterhalt der Ehefrau und Fruchte der dos’, Studi in onore di Pietro Bonfante, IV, Milano 1930, 3-27. kossack, G., Religiöses Denken in dinglicher und bildlicher Überlieferung Alteuropas aus der Spätbronzeund frühen Eisenzeit (9.–6. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Geb.), München 1999. kossyva, A., ‘The Invisible Dead of Delpriza, Kranidi’, in cavanagH, H. – cavanagH, W.g. – Roy, j. (eds.), Honouring the Dead in the Peloponnese (Proceedings of the Conference held at Sparta 23-25, April), Nottingham 2009, 329-70 (http:// www.nottingham.ac.uk/csps/documents/honoringthedead/kossyva.pdf). kRamPe, Ch., Proculi epistulae. Eine frühklassische Juristenschrift, Karlsruhe 1970. kRauskoPF, I., ‘Eine attisch schwarzigurige Hydria in Heidelberg’, American Antiquity (1977), 13-37. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY kRitzas, c., ‘Argos’, Arch-Delt 28 (1973), 122-35. kulesza, R., Sparta, Warszawa 2003. kulesza, R., ‘The Women of Sparta’, Anabasis 4 (2013), 7-36. kunkel, W., Herkunft und soziale Stellung der römischen Juristen, Weimar 1952. kunst, C., Livia. Macht und Intrigen am Hof des Augustus, Stuttgart 2008. kunstleR, B., ‘Family Dynamics and Female Power in Ancient Sparta’, in skinneR, M. (ed.), Rescuing Creusa. New Methodological Approaches to Women in Antiquity, Lubbock 1987, 31-48. kuRtz, d.c. – BoaRdman, j., Greek Burial Customs, London 1971. küBleR, B., s.v. ‘tabulae dotales’, RE IV A (1932), 1949-55. lagi de caRo, A., ‘Notiziario 1980–1983. Oplontis Villa B’, Pompei Herculaneum Stabiae 1 (1983), 36975. laiou, A., ‘The Role of Women in Byzantine Society’, XVI Internationaler Byzantinistenkongress. Akten, Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 31/1 (1981), 233-60. lamBeRti, F., ‘Donne romane fra Idealtypus e realtà sociale. Dal domum servare e lanam facere al meretricio more vivere’, Quaderni Lupiensi di Storia e Diritto 4 (2014), 61-84. lamBoglia, N., ‘L’iscrizione paleocristiana della Pieve del Finale’, RSL 12 (1956), 226-31. lamBoglia, N., ‘Il recupero dell’iscrizione paleocristiana ancilla tua (CIL V 7795)’, Rivista ingauna e intemelia 20 (1965), 22-24. langdon, S., ‘Views of Wealth, A Wealth of Views. Grave Goods in Iron Age Attica’, in lyons – WestBRook, Women and Property. la Rocca, E. – de vos, m. – de vos, a. (eds.), Pompei. Guide archeologiche, Milano 2002. la Rocca, e. – PaRisi PResicce, c. – lo monaco, a. (eds.), L’età dell’equilibrio. Traiano, Adriano, Antonino Pio, Marco Aurelio 98–180 d.C. (Catalogo mostra, Roma, Musei Capitolini, 4 ottobre 2012 – 5 maggio 2013), Roma 2012. la Rosa, V., ‘Processi di formazione e di identiicazione culturale ed etnica delle popolazioni locali in Sicilia dal medio-tardo bronzo all’età del ferro’, Pelorias 4. Origini e incontri di culture nell’antichità. Magna Grecia e Sicilia. Stato degli Studi e prospettive di ricerca, Messina 1999, 159-85. la Rosa, V., ‘Inluenze di tipo egeo e paleogreco in Sicilia’, Kokalos 39-40 (1993-94), 9-47. laRsson lovèn, L., ‘LANAM FECIT. Woolworking and Female Virtue’, in laRsson-lovèn, L. – stRÖmBeRg, a. (eds.), Aspects of Women in Antiquity (Proceedings of the First Nordic Symposium of Women’s Lives in Antiquity, Göteborg 12 – 15 June 1997), Jonsered 1998, 85-95. laRsson lovén, L., ‘Wool Work as a Gender Symbol in Ancient Rome. Roman Textiles and Ancient Sources’, in gillis, C. – noscH, m.-B. (eds.), Ancient Textiles. Production, Craft and Society (Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ancient Textiles), Oxford 2007, 229-36. laxandeR, D.H., Individuum und Gemeinschaft im Fest, Basel 2000. tto 28 tr a es 29 leFkoWitz, M., ‘Wives and Husbands’, in mcauslan, I. – Walcot, P. (eds.), Women in Antiquity, Oxford 1996, 67-82. leFkoWitz, M.R. – m.B. Fant, Women’s Life in Greece and Rome, London 1982. J. le gall, ‘Métiers des femmes au Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum’, REL 47 bis (1970), 123-30. legRas, B. – tHüR, g. (eds.), Symposion 2011: études d’histoire du droit grec et hellenistique (Paris, 7-10 septembre 2011) = Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte (Paris, 7.-10. September 2011). Akten der Gesellschaft für griechische und hellenistische Rechtsgeschichte, Bd 23, Wien 2012. leigHton, R., Sicily before History. An Archaeological Survey from the Palaeolithic to the Iron Age, New York 1999. leigHton, R., ‘Pantalica. Sicily from the Late Bronze Age to the Middle Ages. A New Survey and Interpretation of the Rock-Cut Monuments’, AJA 115 (2011), 447-64. leigHton, R., ‘La casa 16W del Bronzo Finale sulla Cittadella di Morgantina (Sicilia). Aspetti strutturali, zone di attività e status sociale’, RSP 41 (2011), 197-214. leigHton, R., Prehistoric Houses at Morgantina. Excavations on the Cittadella of Morgantina in Sicily, 1989-2004 (Accordia Research Institute), London 2012. lenaz, L. (ed.), Plinio il Giovane. Lettere ai familiari, Milano 1994. lenel, O., Palingenesia Iuris Civilis: Iuris consultorum reliquiae quae Iustiniani digestis continentur ceteraque iurisprudentiae civilis fragmenta, vol. I, Amsterdam 1889. lenel o. – PaRtscH, j., Zum sog. Gnomon des Idios Logos (Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Bd. 11), Heidelberg 1920. leontsini, S., Die Prostitution im frühen Byzanz, Wien 1989, 123. lePoRe, E., ‘Orientamenti per la storia sociale di Pompei’, in maiuRi, Pompeiana, 144-66. lePoRe, E., ‘Il quadro storico’, in zevi, F. (ed.), Pompei 79. Raccolta di studi per il decimonono centenario dell’eruzione vesuviana, Napoli 1979, 5-23. lezzi-HaFteR, A., ‘Clay, Gold, and Craft. Special Techniques in Three Vases by the Eretria Painter and Their Apotheosis in Xenophantos’, in laPatin, K. (ed.), Special Techniques in Athenian Vases, Malibu 2008, 173-86. lind, H., ‘Ein Hetärenhaus am heiligen Tor? Der athener Bau Z und die bei Isaios (6, 20 f.) erwähnte Synoikia Euktemons’, Museum Helveticum 45, 3 (1988), 158. lindsay, H., ‘The Laudatio Murdiae. Its Content and Signiicance’, Latomus 63 (2004), 88-97. lindsay, Η., ‘The Man in Turia’s Life, with a Consideration of Inheritance Issues, Infertility, and Virtues in Marriage in the 1st c. B.C., JRA 22 (2009), 183-98. ling, R. (ed.), The Insula of the Menander at Pompeii, Oxford 1997-2006. lissaRRague, F., ‘Women, Boxes, Containers. Some Signs and Metaphors’, in ReedeR, Pandora, 91-101. loHmann, P., ‘Idealbild und Lebenswirklichkeit. Literarische, epigraische, archäologische Quellen und Befunde zu den Handlungsräumen der Frau im römischen Wohnhaus’, Thetis 21 (2015), 63-108. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY lóPez lóPez, A., ‘Hortensia, primera oradora romana’, FlorIlib 3 (1992), 317-32. loRaux, N., Les experiences de Tiresias. Le feminin et l’homme grec, Paris 1989. loRenzi, R., ‘Long Undisturbed. A Remarkable Etruscan Burial is Discovered in Famed Necropolis’, Archaeology 67 (2014), 37-41. lynn seBesta, J. ‘Women’s Costume and Feminine Civic Morality’, in Wyke, M. (ed.), Gender and the Body in the Ancient Mediterranean, Oxford 1998, 105-17. lyons, D., Dangerous Gifts. Gender and Exchange in Ancient Greece, Austin, Texas 2012. lyons, d. – WestBRook, R. (eds.), Women and Property in Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern Societies, Centre fo Hellenic Studies 2005 (http://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/article/display/1219). macdoWell, D.M., Spartan Law, Edinburgh 1986. maFFi, a., ‘L’accordo di synoikia fra Orcomeno ed Euaimon (IPArk 15)’, ZRG 115 (1998), 394-403. magalHães, M.M., ‘Le iscrizioni e l’area funeraria dei Q. e C. Poppaei a Stabiae (loc. Calcarella di Privati)’, RSP 10 (1999), 224-35. magalHães, M.M., Storia, istituzioni e prosopograia di Surrentum romana. La collezione epigraica del Museo Correale di Terranova, Castellammare di Stabia 2003. magalHães, m.m. – Russo, m., ‘Iscrizioni inedite di Surrentum: un’obstetrix imperiale e un nuovo classiario’, in Epigraphica 67 (2005), 408-21. magalHães, M.M., Stabiae romana. La prosopograia e la documentazione epigraica: iscrizioni lapidarie e bronzee, bolli laterizi e sigilli, Castellammare di Stabia 2006. magalHães, M.M., De Nuceria Alfaterna a Nuceria Constantia: uma Relexão sobre as Especiicidades do Domínio Imperial Romano, Rio de Janeiro 2016, 84-88. magalHães, M.M., Ordo Populusque Nucerinus. Storia, istituzioni e prosopograia di Nuceria romana. I: Catalogo d’iscrizioni. II: Storia, istituzioni e prosopograia (forthcoming). magoulias, H.J., ‘Bathhouse, Inn, Tavern, Prostitution and the Stage as seen in the Lives of the Saints of the Sixth and Seventh Centuries’, Επετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών 38 (1971), 232-52. maiuRi, A., La casa del Menandro e il suo tesoro di argenterie, Roma 1932. maiuRi, A., L’ultima fase edilizia di Pompei (Istituto di Studi Romani 20), Roma 1942. maiuRi, A., ‘Ginecéo e “Hospitium” nella casa pompeiana’, MemLinc ser. 8, vol. 5, 9 (1954), 449-67. maiuRi, A., ‘Il sepolcro di Eumachia’, in Pompei ed Ercolano fra case e abitanti, Milano 1959, restamped in Belli, C. (ed.), Amedeo Maiuri. Mestiere di archeologo, Milano 1987, 207-13. maiuRi, A., ‘Giulia Felice, gentildonna pompeiana’, Pompei ed Ercolano tra case ed abitanti, 1. edizione, Napoli 1950; edizione 1983, 51-54, ristampa in Belli, C. (ed.), Amedeo Maiuri. Mestiere di archeologo, Milano 1987, 199-206. maiuRi, A., ‘Il “Balneum venerium”. Commento alla proscriptio locationis’, in Saggi di varia antichità, Venezia 1954, 285-99. Repr. in Belli, C. (ed.), Amedeo Maiuri. Mestiere di archeologo, Milano 1987, 555-59. tto 30 tr a es 31 maiuRi, A., ‘Picturae ligneis formis inclusae. Note sulla tecnica della pittura Campana’, RAL ser.VII (1940), 138-60. maiuRi, A. (ed.), Pompeiana. Raccolta di studi per il secondo centenario degli scavi di Pompei, Napoli 1950. mantzilas, D., ‘Receptions and Genre Cross-Reference in Alcestis Barcinonensis’, Graeco-Latina Brunensia 16 (2011), 61-90. maRciniak, P., ‘And the Oscar Goes to…the Emperor! Byzantium in the Cinema’, in nilsson, I. – stePHenson, P. (eds.), Wanted Byzantium. The Desire for a Lost Empire, Uppsala 2014, 247-55. maRgaRitis, a., O Thanatos tis Agamou Kores sten Athena ton Klassikon Chronon (unpublished PhD thesis), University of Thessaly 2010. maRgaRou, E., Τίτλοι και επαγγελματικά ονόματα γυναικών στo Βυζάντιο. Συμβολή στη μελέτη για τη θέση της γυναίκας στη βυζαντινή κοινωνία (Κέντρο Βυζαντινών Ερευνών. Βυζαντινά Κείμενα και Μελέται 29), Thessaloniki 2000. maRkoPoulos, A. (ed.), ‘Le témoignage du Vaticanus gr. 163 pour la période entre 945-963’, Σύμμεικτα 3 (1979), 94. maRkoPoulos, A., ‘Βίος της αυτοκράτειρας Θεοδώρας (ΒHG 1731)’ Σύμμεικτα 5 (1983), 249-85. maRRazzo, V., (ed.), Presenza e circolazione della moneta in area vesuviana (Atti Convegno 2003, Istituto Italiano di Numismatica), Napoli 2007, 395-99. maRsHall, A., ‘Roman Ladies on Trial. The Case of Maesia of Sentinum’, Phoenix 44 (1990), 56-68. maRtelli, m., ‘Sulla produzione di vetri orientalizzanti’, in maRtelli, m. (ed.), Tyrrhenoi Philotechnoi (Atti della giornata di studio, Viterbo 1990), Roma 1994, 75-98. mastRoRoBeRto, M., ‘Origine e distribuzione della ricchezza a Pompei. Una interpretazione’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastRoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 2003, 35-36. mastRoRoBeRto, M., ‘I praedia di Giulia Felice’, in d’amBRosio – guzzo – mastoRoBeRto, Storie da un’eruzione, 2003, 386-94. mastRoRosa, I., ‘Speeches pro and contra Women in Livy 34, 1-7’, Latomus 5 (2004), 590-611. matHisen, R.W., ‘The Christianisation of the Late Roman Senatorial Order. Circumstances and Scholarship’, UCT (2002), 257-78. mele, a., ‘Allevamento ovino nell’antica Apulia e lavorazione della lana a Taranto’, in moggi – coRdiano – Pettinato, Schiavi e dipendenti, 1997, 97-104. mélèze modRzejeWski, J., ‘Gnomon de l’Idiologue’, in giRaRd, P.F. (ed.), Les Lois des Romains, Napoli 1977. melleR, H. – dickmann, j.-a. (eds.), Pompeii, Nola, Herculaneum. Katastrophen am Vesuv (Katalog zur Ausstellung in Halle, Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte, 09.12.2011-08.06.2012), München 2011. mennella, G. – coccoluto, g., Regio IX. Liguria reliqua trans et cis Appenninum (Inscriptiones Christianae Italiae IX), Bari 1995. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY mentzou-meimaRi, K., ‘H παρουσία της γυναίκας στις ελληνικές επιγραφές από τον Δ΄ μέχρι τον I΄ μ.X. αιώνα’, XVI. Internationaler Byzantinistenkongress. Akten, Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 32/2 (1982), 433-44. meo, F., Allevamento e industria laniera tra III e I secolo a.C. in Italia meridionale attraverso le fonti letterarie e i dati archeologici. Herakleia, il suo territorio e la fascia costiera ionica tra Taranto e il Sinni (Tesi di Dottorato, Università del Salento), Lecce 2013. meo, F., ‘New Archaeological Data for the Understanding of Weaving in Herakleia, Southern Basilicata, Italy’, in HaRloW, m. – noscH, m.-l. (eds.), Greek and Roman Textiles and Dress. An Interdisciplinary Anthology (Ancient Textiles Series 19), Oxford 2014, 236-59. meo, F., ‘From Archaeological Finds to High Quality Textile Fabrics. New Data from Herakleia, Southern Basilicata, Italy’, in liPkin, S. – vajanto, k. (eds.), Focus on Archaeological Textiles (MASF 3), Helsinki 2014, 75-85. meo, F., L’attività tessile a Herakleia di Lucania tra III e I secolo a.C. (Fecit Te 7), Roma 2015. miklosicH, F. – mülleR, i., Acta et Diplomata graeci medii aevi, sacra et profana, vol. II, Bonn 1862. millendeR, E., ‘Athenian Ideology and the Empowered Spartan Woman’, in Hodkinson, S. – PoWell, a. (eds.), Sparta: New Perspectives, Swansea 1999, 355-91. millis, B.W., ‘An Inscribed Funerary Monument from Corinth’, Hesperia 76 (2007), 359-64. mingazzini, P., ‘Sull’uso e sullo scopo dei pesi da telaio’, RAL 29, ser. 8 (1974), 201-20. mitsos, m., Argolike Prosopographia, Athens 1952. moelleR, W.O., ‘The Date of Dedication of the Building of Eumachia’, Cronache pompeiane 1 (1975), 232-36. moelleR, W.O., The Wool Trade of Ancient Pompeii, Leiden 1975. moggi, m. – coRdiano, g. – Pettinato, m. (eds.), Schiavi e dipendenti nell’ambito dell’”oikos” e della “familia” (Atti del XXII colloquio GIREA, Pontignano, Siena 19-20 novembre 1995), Pisa 1997. mols, S., Wooden Furniture in Herculaneum. Form, Technique and Function, Amsterdam 1999. mommsen, tH., ‘Zwei Sepulcralreden aus der Zeit Augusts und Hadrians’, AAWB (1863), 455-89. monaco, L., Hereditas et mulieres. Rilessioni in tema di capacità successoria della donna in Roma antica, Napoli 2000. mooRe, M.B., ‘The Princeton Painter in New York’, MMJ 42 (2007), 21-56. moRigi govi, C., ‘Il tintinnabulo della “Tomba degli Ori” dell’Arsenale Militare di Bologna’, ArchClass 3 (1971), 211-35. moRRis, i., Death-Ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity, Cambridge 1992. moscati, P., ‘Pesi da telaio, rocchetti, fuseruole’, in cRistoFani, m. (ed.), Caere 3.2. Lo scarico arcaico della Vigna Parrocchiale, II, Roma 1993, 467-76. tto 32 tr a es 33 mÖscH-klingele, R., Braut ohne Bräutigam. Schwarz- und rotigurige Lutrophoren als Spiegel gesellschaftlicher Veränderungen in Athen, Mainz 2010. mossé, C., La femme dans la Gréce antique, Paris 1983. mould, Q., ‘Domestic Life’, in allason-jones, L. (ed.), Artefacts in Roman Britain. Their Purpose and Use, Cambridge 2011, 153-79. mRatscHek-HalFmann, S., Divites et praepotentes. Reichtum und soziale Stellung in der Literatur der Prinzipatzeit (Historia Einzelschriften 70), Stuttgart 1993. münzeR, F., Römische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien, Stuttgart 1920. münzeR, F., s.v. ‘Hortensius’, RE 8 (1913), 2481-82. muRialdo, G., ‘Conclusioni: il castrum di S. Antonino nell’Italia nord-occidentale in età bizantino-longobarda’, in mannoni, T. – muRialdo, g. (eds.), S. Antonino. Un insediamento fortiicato nella Liguria bizantina, Bordighera 2001, 749-96. musti, D., ‘Pubblico e privato nella democrazia periclea’, QUCC, n.s. 20, 49 (1985), 7-17. naPPo, S.C., ‘L’impianto idrico a Pompei nel 79 d.C. Nuovi dati’, in de Haan, n. – jansen, g.c.m. (eds.), Cura aquarum in Campania. Proceedings on the History of Water Management and Hydraulic Engineering in the Mediterranean Region (BaBesch suppl. 4), Leiden 1996, 37-45. nava, M.L., Stele daunie, I, Firenze 1980. nevett, L.C., ‘Separation or Seclusion? Towards an Approach to Investigating Women in the Greek Household in the Fifth to Third Centuries BC’, in PaRkeR PeaRson, m. – RicHaRds, c. (eds.), Architecture and Order. Approaches to Social Space, London 1994, 98-112. nevett, L.C., ‘Perceptions of Domestic Space in Roman Italy’, in RaWson – WeaveR, Roman Family, 281-98. nevett, L.C., Domestic Space in Classical Antiquity, Cambridge 2010. nicolet, C., Les Gracques, Paris 1967. nikolaou, K., ‘Oι γυναίκες στο Βίο και τα έργα του Θεοφίλου’, Σύμμεικτα 9 (1994), 137-51. nikolaou, Κ., Η γυναίκα στη μέση βυζαντινή εποχή. Κοινωνικά πρότυπα και καθημερινός βίος στα αγιολογικά κείμενα (Εθνικό Ίδρυμα Ερευνών. Ινστιτούτο Βυζαντινών Ερευνών, Μονογραφίες 6), Athens 2005. noRtH, H.F., ‘The Mare, the Vixen, and the Bee. Sophrosyne as the Virtue of Women in Antiquity’, ICS (1977), 35-48. oakley, J.H. – neils, J. (eds.), Coming of Age in Ancient Greece, Hannover 2003. oikonomidès, N., ‘Quelques boutiques de Constantinople au Xe s.: Prix, Loyers, Imposition (Cod. Patmiacus 171)’, DOP 6 (1972), 345-56. oliva, M., La casa di Giulio Polibio. Giornali di scavo 1966–1978, Pompei 2001. olson, S.D., The “Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite” and Related Texts. Text, Translation, and Commentary, Berlin 2012. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY oakley, J. – sinos, R., The Wedding in Ancient Athens, Madison 1993. oRsi, P., ‘Pantalica e Cassibile’, Monumenti Antichi dei Lincei 9 (1899), 33-116. oRsi, P., ‘La necropoli sicula del terzo periodo al Finocchito presso Noto (Siracusa)’, Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana 20 (1894), 37-71. oRsi, P., ‘Nuove esplorazioni nella necropoli sicula del monte Finocchito presso Noto’, Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana 23 (1897), 157-97. oRsi, P., ‘Rapporto preliminare sulla quinta campagna di scavi in Calabria 1910’, in NSA Suppl. (1912), 3-66. Pagano, m. – PRisciandaRo, R., Studio sulle provenienze degli oggetti rinvenuti negli scavi borbonici del regno di Napoli, Napoli 2006. PaPadoPoulou-kanelloPoulou, cH., Iero tēs Nymphēs melanomorphes loutrophoroi, Athens 1997. PaPakosta, l., ‘Anaskaphikes ergasies – Aigio – Odos Aghion Apostolon – Odos Anagenneses 1, Kouloura’, Archaiologikon Deltion 45 (1990), 138. PaPaPostolou, j.a., ‘Archaiotetes kai Mnemeia Achaias – Patra – Nekrotapheia’, Archaiologikon Deltion 31 (1976), 88-97. PaPaPostolou, j.a., ‘Hellenistikoi Taphoi tes Patras, Ι’, Archaiologikon Deltion 32 (1977), 281-343. PaPaPostolou, j.a., ‘Hellenistikoi Taphoi tes Patras, ΙΙ’, Archaiologikon Deltion 33 (1978) 354-85. PaPaPostolou, j.a., ‘Kosmemata Patron kai Dymes. Paratereseis se Typous Kosmematon tou 4ou aiona p.Ch. kai tes Ellenistikes Epoches’, ArchEph 129 (1990), 83-140. PaPaPostolou, j.a., Achaean Grave Stelai, Athens 1993. PaRassoglou, G.M., Imperial Estates in Roman Egypt, Amsterdam 1978. PaRRini, a., ‘Ceramica a vernice nera; a vernice nera sovradipinta; ellenistica a vernice rossa; ellenistica a fasce; varia; analisi paleobotaniche’, materiali nel catalogo, in donati, l. (ed.), La Casa dell’Impluvium. Architettura etrusca a Roselle, Roma 1994, 139-42. PaRRini, a., ‘Strumenti per la ilatura e tessitura’, in camPoReale g. (ed.), L’abitato etrusco dell’Accesa. Il quartiere B, Roma 1997, 197-211. PaRsloW, C.C., Rediscovering Antiquity. Karl Weber and the Excavation of Herculaneum, Pompeii and Stabiae, Cambridge 1998. PaRsloW, C., ‘ Preliminary Report of the 1997 Field-work Project in the Praedia Iuliae Felicis (regio II, 4), Pompeii’, RSP 9 (1998), 199-207; 10 (1999), 190-96; 11 (2000), 238-49. PaRsloW, c., ‘Archaeological Evidence for Dating the Praedia Iuliae Felicis’, AJA 105 (2001), 261. Pasquetti, P., ‘Il melograno nella cultura antica’, in Bevilacqua – amBRosio – aliotta, Ager Pompeianus, 129-39. Peacock, N., ‘Rethinking the Sexual Division of Labor. Reproduction and Women’s Work among the Efe’, in di leonaRdo, M. (ed.), Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge, Berkeley 1991, 339-60. tto 34 tr a es 35 PeaRce, T.E.V., ‘The Role of the Wife as Custos in Ancient Rome’, Eranos 77 (1974), 16-33. PePPe, L., Posizione giuridica e ruolo sociale della donna romana in età repubblicana (Pubbl. dell’Ist. di diritto romano e dei diritti dell’oriente mediterraneo, Roma, LXIII), Milano 1984. PeRelli, L., I Gracchi, Roma 1993. PeRgola, PH. – Battistelli, P. – coccHini, F. – giacoBelli, m. – loReti, e.m. – maRtoRelli, R., ‘Nuove ricerche sul complesso paleocristiano tardoantico e altomedievale di Capo Don a Riva Ligure’, BA 55 (1989), 45-56. PeRnot, L., ‘Femmes devant l’assemblée en Grèce et à Rome’, Logo 7 (2004), 201-11. Pesando, F. – guidoBaldi, m.P., Gli ozi di Ercole: residenze di lusso a Pompei ed Ercolano, Roma 2006. Pesando F., – guidoBaldi, m.P., Pompei, Oplontis, Ercolano, Stabiae, Roma – Bari 2006. PetRoPoulos, M., ‘To Voreio Nekrotapheio ton Archaion Patron: Oikopedo Odou Poukevil’, Hellenistike Keramike apo ten Peloponneso (2005), 59-72. PHilliPs, k.m., ‘Poggio Civitate, Murlo’, in stoPPoni, s. (ed.), Case e palazzi d’Etruria (Catalogo della mostra, Siena 1985), Milano 1985, 64-68, 98. PiRanesi, F., Antiquités de la Grande Grèce, aujourd’hui royaume de Naples, Paris 1807. PiRo, I., ‘Quod emancupata esset Cluvio… Rilessioni intorno ad alcuni passaggi della Laudatio Turiae’, in Studi per G. Nicosia VI, Milano 2007, 155-96. PiRson, F., Mietwohnungen in Pompeji und Herkulaneum. Untersuchungen zur Architektur, zum Wohnen und zur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte der Vesuvstädte (Studien zur antiken Stadt 5), München 1999. PiteRos, c., ‘Odos Herakleous, Ο.Τ.38, Oikopedo Aphon Xentaropoulou’, Archaiologikon Deltion 53 (1998), 109-12. PiteRos, c., ‘Argos, Odos Kalmouchou (Ο.Τ. 19, Oikopedo Α. kai Ι. Boulmeti), Koite Charadrou (Xeria)’, Archaiologikon Deltion 54 (1999), 137-40. Pitzalis, F., La volontà meno apparente. Donne e società nell’Italia centrale tirrenica tra VIII e VII sec. a.C., Roma 2010. Placido, D., ‘Polis y oikos. Los marcos de la integración y de la desintegración femenina’, in RodRíguez, m.j. – Hidalgo, e. – WagneR, C.G. (eds.), Roles sexuales. La mujer en la historia y la cultura, Madrid 1994, 15-18. Placido, D., ‘La mujer en el oikos y en la polis. Formas de dependencia economica y des esclavizacion’, in Reduzzi meRola – stoRcHi maRino, Femmes-esclaves, 13-19. PÖlÖnen, J., ‘The Division of Wealth between Men and Women in Roman Succession (c.a. 50 B.C. – AD 250)’, in setälä et al., Women, Wealth, and Power, 147-79. PomeRoy, S.B., ‘Selected Bibliography on Women in Antiquity’, Arethusa 6 (1973), 125-57. PomeRoy, S.B., ‘The Relationship of the Married Woman to her Blood Relatives in Rome’, AncSoc 7 (1976), 215-27. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY PomeRoy, S.B., ‘Women in Roman Egypt. A Preliminary Study Based on Papyri’, in Foley H.P. (ed.), Relections of Women in Antiquity, New York – Paris – London – Montreux – Tokyo 1981, 303-22. PomeRoy, S., Frauenleben im klassischen Altertum (trad.), Stuttgart 1985. PomeRoy, S.B., Xenophon Oeconomicus. A Social and Historical Commentary with a New English Translation, Oxford 1994. PomeRoy, S., Spartan Women, Oxford 2002. PoWell, A., ‘Spartan Women Assertive in Politics?’, in Hodkinson, S. – PoWell, a. (eds.), Sparta. New Perspectives, Swansea 1999, 412-13. Pozzi Paolini, E., ‘Circolazione monetale a Pompei’, in andReae – kyRieleis, Neue Forschungen, 229-307. PRoskynitoPoulou, R., ‘Small Casket’, in kaltsas, N. – sHaPiRo, A. (eds.), Worshiping Women. Ritual and Reality in Classical Athens, New York 2008. PRotonotaRiou-deilaki, E., ‘Mikra Skaphi Taphon en Mylois Argolidos’, Archaiologike Ephemeris (1955), 1-8. PRotonotaRiou-deilaki, e., ‘Argos’, Archaiologikon Deltion 28 (1973), 94-122. quagliati, Q., ‘Pisticci. Tombe lucane con ceramiche greche’, NSA 29, 5, s. I (1904), 196-208. RædeR knudsen, L., ‘Case Study. The Tablet-Woven Borders of Verucchio’, in gleBa – manneRing, Textiles, 254-63. Rallo, A. (ed.), Le donne in Etruria, Roma 1989. Rallo, A., ‘Fonti’, in Rallo, Le donne in Etruria, 1989, 15-34. Ramage, E.S., ‘The So-Called Laudatio Turiae as Panegyric’, Athenaeum 82 (1994), 341-70. RauBitscHek, I.K., The Metal Objects (1952-1989) (Isthmia 7), Princeton 1998, 111-12. RaWson, B. – WeaveR, P. (eds.), The Roman Family in Italy. Status, Sentiment, Space, Oxford – Canberra 1997. ReedeR, E. (ed.), Pandora. Women in Classical Greece, Baltimore 1995. Reduzzi-meRola, F., Servo Parere. Studi sulla condizione giuridica degli schiavi vicari e dei sottoposti a schiavi nelle esperienze greca e romana, Napoli 1990. Reduzzi meRola, F. – stoRcHi maRino, a. (eds.), Femmes-esclaves. Modèles d’interprétation anthropologique, économique, juridique (Atti del XXI colloquio internazionale GIREA, Lacco Ameno-Ischia 27-29 ottobre 1994), Napoli 1999. ReinacH, T., ‘Un code iscal de l’Égypte Romaine. Le Gnomon de l’idiologue’, Nouvelle Revue Historique de Droit Français et étranger 44 (1920), 5-134. Resinski, R., Cosmos and Cosmetics. Constituting an Adorned Female Body in Ancient Greek Literature (PhD diss., University of California), Los Angeles 1998. RiccoBono, S., Il Gnomon dell’Idios Logos, Palermo 1950. tto 36 tr a es 37 RicHteR, D.C., ‘The Position of Women in Classical Athens’, CJ 67 (1971), 1-8. Riess, W., ‘Rari exempli femina. Female virtues on Roman funerary inscriptions’, in james, S.L. – dillon, s. (eds.), A Companion to Women in the Ancient World, Oxford 2012, 491-501. Riva, C., The Urbanisation of Etruria, Cambridge 2010. Rizakis, a.d., ACHAIE II. La Cité de Patras: Epigraphie et Histoire (Meletimata 25), Athens 1998. Rizza, G. – PaleRmo, d. (eds.), La necropoli di Sant’Angelo Muxaro. Scavi Orsi – Zanotti Bianco 19311932, Palermo 2004. RoBinson, D.M., Excavations at Olynthus XI. Necrolynthia. A Study in Greek Burial Customs and Anthropology, Baltimore 1942. RoBinson, H.S., ‘Excavations at Corinth, 1960’, Hesperia 31 (1962), 95-133. RocHoW, I., Studien zu der Person, den Werken und dem Nachleben der Dichterin Kassia, Berlin 1967. RodRiguez manPaso, j. – Hidalgo, e. – WagneR, c.g. (eds.), Roles sexuales. La mujer en la historia y la cultura, Madrid 1994. RodRíguez-PéRez, d., ‘Evocative Objects. The Attic Black-Glazed Plemochoai (Exaleiptra) between Archaeology and Vase Painting’, in BoaRdman, j. – PaRkin, a. – Waite, s. (eds.), On the Fascination of Objects. Greek and Etruscan Art in the Shefton Collection, Philadelphia 2015, 17-29. Romano, A., Matrimonium iustum. Valori economici e valori culturali nella storia giuridica del matrimonio, Napoli 1996. RostovtzeFF, M.I., The Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire, Oxford 1926, 2nd ed. 1957. RottloFF, A., Lebensbilder römischer Frauen, Mainz 2006. Roussel, P., Isée Discours, Paris 1926. Roussos, G., Θεοδώρα η Μεγάλη (Theodora the Great), Athens 1968. Rydén, L. (ed.), The Life of Andrew the Fool, Uppsala 1995. saBBatini tumolesi, P., Epigraia aniteatrale dell’Occidente Romano, I, Roma 1988. salisBuRy, J.E., Encyclopedia of Women in the Ancient World, Santa Barbara 2001. salleR, R.P., ‘Roman Dowry and the Devolution of Property in the Principate’, CQ 34 (1984), 195-205. salleR, R.P., Patriarchy, Property, and Death in the Roman Family, Cambridge – New York 1994. salleR, R.P., ‘Symbols of Gender and Status Hierarchies in the Roman Household’, in josHel, S.R. – muRnagHan, s. (eds.), Women and Slaves in Greco-Roman Culture. Differential Equations, London – New York 1998, 85-91. salleR, R., ‘Women, Slaves, and the Economy of the Roman Household’, in BalcH, d.l. – osiek c., Early Christian Families in Context. An Interdisciplinary Dialogue, Michigan 2003, 185-204. salleR, R., ‘Household and Gender’, in scHeidel, W. – moRRis, i. – salleR, R.P. (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World, Cambridge – New York 2007, 87-112. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY salleR, R., ‘The Roman Family as a Productive Unit’, in B. RaWson (ed.), A Companion to Families in the Greek and Roman Worlds, Malden, MA – Oxford 2011, 116-28. salzman, M.R., The Making of a Christian Aristocracy. Social and Religious Change in the Western Roman Empire, Cambridge 2002. samPaolo, v., ‘Avviso di locazione’, in donati, A. (cur.), Romana Pictura, Milano 1998, 305-6. sáncHez-moReno ellaRt, C., s.v., tabulae dotales, in Bagnall, R.S. et al. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Ancient History, New York 2012, 6509-10. sáncHez-RomeRo, M., ‘Childhood and the Construction of Gender Identities through Material Culture’, in Childhood in the Past 1 (2008), 17-37. sanniBale, M., ‘La principessa Etrusca della tomba Regolini-Galassi’, in stamPolidis, Principesse, 307-21. saRRi, E., ‘Anaskaphi Tmimatos Nekrotapheiou ton Klassikon kai Ellinistikon Xronon sto Argos’, in Praktika E’ Diethnous Synedriou Peloponnisiakon Spoudon, Athens 1998, 395-413. savunen, L., ‘Women and Elections in Pompeii’, in HaWley, R. – levick, B. (eds.), Women in Antiquity. New Assessments, London 1995, 194-206. savunen, L., Women in the Urban Texture of Pompeii, Helsinki 1997. scHaPs, D., ‘The Woman Least Mentioned. Etiquette and Women’s Names’, CQ 27 (1977), 323-30. scHaPs, D., Economic Rights of Women in Ancient Greece, Edinburgh 1979. scHeFFeR, c., ‘La vita quotidiana nell’ambiente domestico’, in Architettura etrusca nel viterbese. Ricerche svedesi a San Giovenale e Acquarossa 1956-1986 (Catalogo della mostra, Viterbo 1986), Roma 1986. scHenke, G., Schein und Sein. Schmuckgebrauch in der römischen Kaiserzeit (Monographs on Antiquity 1), Leuven 2003. scHiFFeR, M., Behavioural Archaeology, New York 1976. scHiFFeR, M., ‘Is there a “Pompeii Premise” in Archaeology?’, Journal of Anthropological Research 41, 1 (1985), 18-41. scHÖll, R. – kRoll, G. (eds), Novellae, Corpus Juris Civilis, vol. III, Berlin 1895 (repr. 1972). scHWimmeR, E., ‘Objects of Mediation. Myth and Praxis’, in Rossi, I. (ed.), The Unconscious in Culture. The Structuralism of Claude Lévi-Strauss, New York 1974, 209-55. sciacca, F., ‘Per una nuova interpretazione del tridente in bronzo dal Circolo del tridente di Vetulonia’, ArchClass (2004), 269-82. scullaRd, H.H., Scipio Africanus. Soldier and Politician, Bristol 1970. sealey, R., Women and Law in Classical Greece, Chapel Hill 1990. seBesta, J.L., ‘Visions of Gleaming Textiles and a Clay Core. Textiles, Greek Women, and Pandora’, in lleWellyn-jones, L. (ed.), Women’s Dress in the Ancient Greek World, London 2002, 125-42. tto 38 tr a es 39 setälä, P., ‘Female Property and Power in Imperial Rome’, in laRsson lovén, L. – stRÖmBeRg, a. (eds.), Aspects of Women in Antiquity (Proceedings of the First Nordic Symposium of Women’s Lives in Antiquity Göteborg 12 – 15 June 1997), Jonsered 1998, 96-110. setälä, P., ‘Women and Brick Production. Some New Aspects’, in setälä et al. (eds.), Women, Wealth and Power, 2002, 181-203. setälä, P. et al. (eds.), Women, Wealth, and Power in Imperial Rome (Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 25), Roma 2002. seveRy, B., Augustus and the Family at the Birth of the Roman Empire, New York – London 2003. sHanks, m. – HoddeR, i., ‘Processual, Postprocessual and Interpretive Archaeologies’, in HoddeR i. – alexandRi, a. – BucHli v. – caRman, j. – last, j. – lucas, g. (eds.), Interpreting Archaeology. Finding Meaning in the Past, London 1995, 3-29. sHatzman, I., Senatorial Wealth and Roman Politics, Bruxelles 1975. sHeRWin-WHite, A.N., The Letters of Pliny. A Historical and Social Commentary, Oxford 1966. sHumka, L., ‘Designing Women. The Representation of Women’s Toiletries on Funerary Monuments in Roman Italy’, in edmondson, J. (ed.), Roman Dress and the Fabrics of Roman Culture, Toronto 2008, 172-91. sigges, B., Vita cognita. Die Ausstattung pompejanischer Wohnhäuser mit Gefäßen und Geräten, untersucht an ausgewählten Beispielen (PhD dissertation Köln 2000) <http://deposit.dnb.de/cgibin/ dokserv?idn=965959422&dok_var=d1&dok_ext=pdf&ilename=965959422.pdf> (accessed in 26.06.2011). simon, D. (ed.), Eherecht und Familiengut in Antike und Mittelalter (Schriften des Historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien 22), München 1992. skinneR, P., Le donne nell’Italia medievale, Rome 2011. smitH, T.J., ‘Black-Figure on the Black Sea. Art and Visual Culture at Berezan’, in S. solovyov (ed.), Archaic Greek Culture. History, Archaeology, Art and Museology (Proceedings of the International RoundTable Conference, St. Petersburg June 2005), Oxford 2010, 75-88. sÖllneR, A., Zur Vorgeschichte und Funktion der actio rei uxoriae, Cologne 1969. sontis, J.M., Die Digestensumme des Anonymos. I. Zum Dotalrecht, Heildelberg 1937. sPagnuolo vigoRita, T., Casta domus. Un seminario sulla legislazione matrimoniale Augustea, 3. ed., Napoli 2010. sPano, G., ‘L’ediicio di Eumachia in Pompei’, RAAN 36 (1961), 5-35. sPaRkes, B., Greek Pottery. An Introduction, Manchester 1991. staccioli, R.A., Manifesti elettorali nell’antica Pompei, Milano 1992. stagl, J.F., Favor dotis. Die Privilegierung der Mitgift im System des römisches Rechts, Vienna – Cologne – Weimar 2009. stamPolidis, N.C. (ed.), ‘Principesse’ del Mediterraneo all’alba della storia (Catalogo della mostra), Atene 2012. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY stazio, A., ‘Moneta e vita economica a Pompei. Un restauro di conoscenza ed immagine della città antica’, in FRancHi dell’oRto, L. (ed.), Restaurare Pompei, Milano 1990, 83-94. steFani, G. (ed.), Menander, La casa del Menandro di Pompei (Catalogo della mostra, Boscoreale 2003), Milano 2003. steinBy, M., ‘La produzione laterizia’, in zevi, Pompei 79, 265-71. steuRes, D.C., Monte Finocchito Revisited. Part 1. The Evidence, Amsterdam 1980. steuRes, D.C., Monte Finocchito Revisited. Part 2. Seriation and Demography, Amsterdam 1988. stilWell, A.N., The Potters’ Quarter (Corinth 15.1), Princeton 1948. stockton, D., The Gracchi, Oxford 1979. stoRoni mazzolani, L., Una moglie, Palermo 1982. stRatHeRn, M., The Gender of the Gift, Berkeley 1989. stRÖmBeRg A., Male or Female? A Methodological Study of Grave Gifts as Sex-Indicators in Iron Age Burials from Athens, Jonsered 1993. sullivan, D.F. – talBot, A.-M. – mcgRatH, st. (eds.), The Life of Saint Basil the Younger. Critical Edition and Annotated Translation of the Moscow Version (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 45), Washington, D.C. 2014. sumi, G.S., ‘Civil War, Women and Spectacle in the Triumviral Period’, AncW 35 (2004), 196-206. sutton, R.F., ‘Nuptial Eros. The Visual Discourse of Marriage in Classical Athens’, JWAG 55/56 (1997/98), 27-48. sWaRney, P.S., The Ptolemaic and Roman Idios Logos, Toronto 1970. syme, R., ‘Pliny’s Less Successful Friends’, Historia (1960), 362-79. syme, R., ‘Who was Vedius Pollio?’, JRS 51 (1961), 23-30. syme, R., ‘People in Pliny’, JRS 58 (1968), 135-51. syme, R., ‘Correspondents of Pliny’, Historia 34, 3 (1985), 324-59. syme, R., ‘The Testamentum Dasumii. Some Novelties’, Chiron 15 (1985), 121-46. tacoma, L.E., ‘Settlement and Population’, in Riggs, E. (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Roman Egypt, Oxford 2012, 122-35. taddei, A., ‘Diritto e prediritto in casa del Trierarca’, SCO 46, 3 (1998), 833-44. talamanca, M., Istituzioni di diritto romano, Busto Arsizio 1990. talBot, A.-M. (ed.), Holy Women of Byzantium. Ten Saints’ Lives in English Translation, Washington, D.C. 1996. talieRcio mensitieRi, M., ‘Introduzione’, in maRRazzo, Presenza e circolazione, 5-13. talieRcio mensitieRi, M., ‘Ritrovamenti monetali a Pompei. Il caso delle Regiones VII – VIII – IX’, in maRRazzo, Presenza e circolazione, 27-70. tto 40 tr a es 41 talieRcio mensitieRi, M, ‘Considerazioni conclusive’, in talieRcio mensitieRi, M. (ed.), Pompei, rinvenimenti monetali nella Regio IX (Atti Convegno, Napoli 2003, Ist. Studi Numismatici), Roma 2007, 111-66. tassinaRi, S., Il vasellame bronzeo di Pompei, Napoli 1993. tauBenscHlag, R., The Law in Graeco-Roman Egypt in the Light of the Papyri: 332 B.C. - A.D. 640, Warszawa 1955. tcHeRnia, A., ‘Il vino. Produzione e commercio’, in zevi, Pompei 79, 87-96. tHemelis, P.g., ‘O Taphos tes Eleias Philemenas’, G’ Epistemonike Synantese gia ten Hellenistike Keramike, Athens 1994. tHemelis, P.g. – touRatsoglou, g.P., Taphoi tou Derveniou, Athens 1997. tHuRn, i. (ed.), Ioannis Skylitzae, Synopsis Historiarum (CFHB), Berlin 1973. todd, s.c., The Shape of Athenian Law, Oxford 1993. toRelli, M., ‘Donne, domi nobiles ed evergeti a Paestum tra la ine della Repubblica e l’inizio dell’impero’, in céBeillac-geRvasoni, M. (ed.), Les élites municipales de l’Italie péninsulaire des Gracques à Neron (Actes de la table ronde de Clermont-Ferrand, 28-30 novembre 1991), Rome 1996, 153-78. toRelli, M., ‘Domiseda, laniica, univira. Il trono del Verucchio e il ruolo e l’immagine della donna tra arcaismo e repubblica’, in toRelli, Il rango, il rito e l’immagine, 52-86. toRelli, m., Il rango, il rito e l’immagine. All’origine della rappresentazione storica romana, Milano 1997. toRino, M.E., ‘Analisi paleopatologica di una vittima dell’eruzione del Vesuvio’, RSP 11 (2010), 233-34. tReggiaRi, S., ‘Jobs in the Household of Livia’, PBSR 43 (1972), 48-77. tReggiaRi, S., ‘Jobs for Women’, AJAH 1 (1976), 76-104. tReggiaRi, S., Roman Marriage. Iusti coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian, Oxford 1991. tRendall, A.D., Greek Vases in the Logie Collection, Christchurch 1971. tRicomi, A.R., Archeologia tessile nella Venetia romana. Testimonianze materiali per una sintesi storica (Tesi di dottorato, Università degli Studi di Padova), Padova 2014. tRoncHetti, C., Ceramica attica a igure nere, Rome 1983. valentini, A., Matronae tra novitas e mos maiorum. Spazi e modalità dell’azione pubblica femminile nella Roma medio repubblicana, Venezia 2012. valentini, A., ‘Pratiche performative e costruzione dell’identità nella Roma repubblicana. I funerali femminili’, in Baldacci, g. – ciamPini, e.m. – giRotto, e. – masaRo, g. (eds.), Percorsi identitari tra Mediterraneo e Vicino Oriente antico, Padova 2013, 49-66. BRemen, R., The Limits of Participatio. Women and Civic Life in the Greek East in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods, Amsterdam 1996. van van deR leest, W., Eumachia. Livia van Pompeii, Deventer 2006. vandoRPe, K., ‘Identity’, in Riggs, E. (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Roman Egypt, Oxford 2012, 260-76. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY vaRone, A., Titulorum graphio exaratorum qui in CIL vol. IV collecti sunt. Imagines (Studi della Soprintendenza archeologica di Pompei 31), Roma 2012. vaRone, A. – steFani, g., Titulorum pictorum Pompeianorum qui in CIL vol. IV collecti sunt. Imagines (Studi della Soprintendenza archeologica di Pompei 29), Roma 2009. venit, M.S., ‘Alexandria’, in Riggs, E. (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Roman Egypt, Oxford 2012, 103-21. veRnant, J.-P., Mito e pensiero presso i Greci, Torino 1970. vidal-naquet, P., Esclavage et gynécogratie dans la tradition, le mythe, l’utopie. Recherches sur les structures sociales dans l’antiquité classique, Paris 1970. vigneRon, R., ‘L’antiféministe loi Voconia et les Schleichwege des Lebens’, Labeo 29 (1983), 140-53. vilatte, S., ‘La nourrice grecque. Une question d’histoire sociale et religieuse’, AC 60 (1991), 5-29. vivenza, G., ‘Roman Economic Thought’, in scHeidel, W. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Economy, Cambridge 2012, 25-44. vlacH, j.m., Back of the Big House. The Architecture of Plantation Slavery, Chapel Hill 1993. volteRRa, E., ‘In tema di permutatio dotis’, RIL 66 (1933), 295-302. BotHmeR, D. (ed.), The Amasis Painter and his World. Vase-Painting in Sixth Century B.C. Athens, Malibu 1985. von vuolanto, V., ‘Women and the Property of Fatherless Children in the Roman Empire’, in setälä et al. (eds.), Women, Wealth and Power, 203-43. vuolanto, V., ‘Elite Children, Socialization, and Agency’, evans gRuBBs, J. – PaRkin, t. – Bell, R. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Childhood and Education in the Classical World, Oxford 2013, 580-99. WagneR-Hasel, B., ‘The Graces and Colour Weaving’, in lleWellyn-jones, L. (ed.), Women’s Dress in the Ancient Greek World, London 2002, 17-32. WagneR-Hasel, B., ‘Marriage Gifts in Ancient Greece’, in satloW, M.L. (ed.), The Gift in Antiquity, Hoboken 2013. Wallace-HadRill, A., ‘Family and Inheritance in the Augustan Marriage Laws’, PCPhS 27 (1981), 58-80. Wallace-HadRill, A., ‘Engendering the Roman House’, in kleineR, d.e.e – matHeson, s.B. (eds.), I Claudia. Women in Ancient Rome, New Haven 1996, 104-15. Wallat, K., ‛Der Marmorfries am Eingangsportal des Gebäudes der Eumachia (VII 9, 1) in Pompeji und sein ursprünglicher Anbringungsort’, American Antiquity 2 (1995), 345-73. Wallat, K., Die Ostseite des Forums von Pompeji, Mainz am Rhein 1999. WeaveR, P.R.C., Familia Caesaris, Cambridge 1972. WeaveR, P.R., ‘Where have all the Junian Latins gone? Nomenclature and Status in the Early Empire’, Chiron 20 (1990), 275-305. WeBB, R., Demons and Dancers. Performance in Late Antiquity, Cambridge 2008. tto 42 tr a es 43 WeRneR, E., Die Verwaltung des Römischen Reiches in der hohen Kaizerzeit. Ausgewählte und erweiterte Beiträge, Basel 1995. WesenBeRg, G., Verträge zugunsten Dritter, Weimar 1949. WHite, D., ‘Property Rights of Women. The Changes in the Justinian Legislation Regarding the Dowry and the Parapherna’, XVI Internationaler Byzantinistenkongress. Akten, Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 32/2 (1982), 539-48. WHiteHouse, R., ‘Gender in Central Mediterranean Prehistory’, in BolgeR, D. (ed.), A Companion to Gender Prehistory, Chichester 2013, 480-501. WigHt, E.A., Feminism in Greek Literature. From Homer to Aristotle, New York 1923. WillRicH, H., Livia, Leipzig – Berlin 1911. WinteR, B.W., Roman Wives, Roman Widows, Cambridge – Michigan 2003. WiRtH, G. (ed.), Procopii Caesariensis opera omnia, vol. 3, Leipzig 1963. WistRand, E., The So-Called Laudatio Turiae. Introduction, Text, Translation, Commentary, Göteborg 1976. WolFF, H.-J., ‘Zur Stellung der Frau im klassischen römischen Dotalrecht’, ZRG 53 (1933), 297-371. WoodHead, A.G., ‘Delos. Honores Q. Hortensii, a. 44a. (17-357)’, in cHaniotis, A. – coRsten t. – stRoud, R.s. – tyBout, R.a. (eds.), Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum, Brill Online 2015 (http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/supplementum-epigraphicum-graecum/delos-honores-q-hortensii-a-44a17-357-a17_357?s.num=657&s.start=640). WycHeRley, R.E., The Athenian Agora, III. Literary and Epigraphical Testimonia, Princeton 1957. Wyke, M., ‘Woman in the Mirror. The Rhetoric of Adornment in the Roman World’, in aRcHeR, l. – FiscHleR, s. – Wyke, m. (eds.), Women in Ancient Societies. An Illusion of the Night, London – New York 1994, 134-51. Wyse, W., The Speeches of Isaeus with Critical and Explanatory Notes, London 1904. xenidou-scHild, W., Oi Gynaikes stin Elliniki Archaiotita, Athens 2001. zanini, E., ‘Artisan and Traders in the Early Byzantine City. Exploring the Limits of Archaeological Evidence’, in BoWden, W. – gutRidge, a. – macHado, c. (eds.), The Social and Political Archaeology of Late Antiquity, LAA 31 (2007), 373-411. zanini, E., ‘Archeologia dello status sociale nell’Italia bizantina. Tracce, segni e modelli interpretativi’, in BRogiolo, G.P. – cHavaRRía aRnau, a. (eds.), Archeologia e società tra tardo antico e alto medioevo (Documenti di Archeologia 44), Mantova 2007, 23-46. zanini, E., ‘Le città dell’Italia bizantina. Qualche appunto per un’agenda della ricerca’, in vaRaldo, C. (ed.), Ai conini dell’impero. Insediamenti e fortiicazioni bizantine nel Mediterraneo occidentale (Atti convegno, Genova-Bordighera 14-17 March 2002), Bordighera 2011, 173-98. zankeR, P., Augusto e il potere delle immagini, Torino 1989. zeitlin, F., ‘The Economics of Hesiod’s Pandora’, in ReedeR, Pandora, 49-56. tto BIBLIOGRAPHY tr a es BIBLIOGRAPHY zevi, F. (ed.), Pompei 79. Raccolta di studi per il decimonono centenario dell’eruzione vesuviana, Napoli 1979. zevi, F., ‘La casa di Giulio Polibio’, in BoRRiello – d’amBRosio – de caRo – guzzo, Pompei, 73-85. zisa, F., Ceramica Ateniese a igure nere del Museo Archeologico Regionale “Paolo Orsi” di Siracusa, Torino 2007. zWeig, B., ‘The Only Women Who Give Birth to Men. A Gynocentric, Cross-Cultural View of Women in Ancient Sparta’, in deFoRest, M. (ed.), Woman’s Power, Man’s Game. Essays on Classical Antiquity in Honor of Joy K. King, Wauconda 1993, 32-53. tto 44 tr a es tto Female Domestic Financial Managers Turia, Murdia, and Hortensia dimitRios mantzilas A Roman matron had four distinct roles to play during her life: a daughter, a sister, a wife or widow and a mother, showing her respect and devotion (pietas) to her father, brother(s), husband and children. The texts we intend to examine relect Roman society, giving a great deal of information about the Roman family ideology and mentality, related often to Roman law, covering themes as: different types of marriage, scale, style and social standing of the family, divorce and remarriage with a substitute wife, widowhood, guardianship by a tutor, management of family property, will redaction and fair distribution of the heritage after death. Women, single or married had to prove that they were the true guardians (custodes) of the house, even though men oficially played the dominant role. Male predominance was always considered perfectly normal in the Roman family although under Roman law the matrons had considerable independence.1 What is even more striking is the preponderance of some exceptional ladies over men, which contrasts with the general status and connubial ideology of Roman women; it was exceptional for them to suffer hardship or to have achievements. In this context, we observe an inversion of the conventional gender-roles.2 Through their actions, these ladies who all belonged to the elite proved to be superior to other – ordinary – women. Furthermore, some of them demonstrate a very dynamic aspect of their character. There is a contrast between the usual view, i.e. that the woman should stay at home (domiseda),3 and her heroic actions, but this did not disturb the ideals of marriage,4 They acted like men without losing their feminine touch, trying to live with their husband and children in love and harmony. A legal situation mentioned in the texts is that of inheritance: someone’s property is equally shared among the children. When the children were boys, there was no dificulty in dividing the inheritance equally. However, a girl (and a woman) was not independent (sui iuris) and had to have a guardian, her husband or iancé, under whose power (manus or potestas) she found herself. Originally this protection of women (tutela mulierum) was connected with the Roman system of succession. Given the fact that a daughter could inherit a considerable estate from her father as a dowry (collatio dotis), it was in her agnatic male relatives’ (agnati) A. aRjava, Women and Law in Late Antiquity, Oxford 1998, 154. In general on the legal position of women and their inancial issues, see J.F. gaRdneR, Women in Roman Law and Society, London 1986 (3rd ed. 1990); J.F. gaRdneR, Being a Roman Citizen, London 1993; J.F. gaRdneR, ‘Gender-role Assumptions in Roman Law’, EMC/CV 39, n. s. 14 (1995), 377-400; L. PePPe, Posizione giuridica e ruolo sociale della donna romana in età repubblicana, Milano 1984; S. dixon, ‘Family Finances. Terentia and Tullia’, in B. RaWson (ed.), The Family in Ancient Rome. New Perspectives, London 1987 (2nd ed. 1992), 93-120; S. dixon, ‘Exemplary Housewife or Luxurious Slut. Cultural Representations of Women in the Roman Economy’, in F. mcHaRdy – e. maRsHall (eds.), Women’s Inluence on Classical Civilization, London – New York 2004, 56-74; S. tReggiaRi, Roman Marriage. Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian, Oxford 1991. P. setälä, ‘Female Property and Power in Imperial Rome’, in L. laRsson lovén – a. stRÖmBeRg (eds.), Aspects of Women in Antiquity, Jonsered 1998, 96-110. 1 2 E.A. HemelRijk, ‘Masculinity and Femininity in the Laudatio Turiae’, CQ 54 (2004), 185-97, in part. 185, 190. See M. toRelli, ‘Domiseda, laniica, univira. Il trono del Verucchio e il ruolo e l’immagine della donna tra arcaismo e repubblica’ in M. toRelli (ed.), Il rango, il rito e l’immagine, Milano 1997, 52-86, who summarizes in three words the women’s main values. 3 4 N. HoRsFall, ‘Some Problems in the Laudatio Turiae’, BICS 30 (1983), 85-98, in part. 92. tr a es DIMITRIOS MANTZILAS personal interests to see that she did not dispose of any property which would otherwise after her death revert to the family.5 Later on “the husband, as the owner of his own fortune (patrimonium) and guardian (tutor) of his wife’s, was formally in control of the whole of the property;6 and handled it outside business relations, while the wife worked on the inside and looked after the administration of the common property”;7 with attentiveness and careful management (diligentia).8 But it should be noted that the husband had neither legal power over his wife nor full ownership of her property; their properties remained in fact separate.9 The passage from the one guardianship to the other was called emancipation (emancipatio).10 Another issue is related to the type of marriage, which determined who had control of the bride. The irst one, matrimonium cum manu / in manum, which conferred the bride (sponsa) on the groom’s family along with her property and gave the wife equal rights with her children, was divided into three types: a) confarreatio, an elaborate religious ceremony, where the grain far was baked into a special wedding cake, farreum, b) coemptio, where the wife carried a dowry into the marriage but was ceremoniously bought by her husband, to whom her possessions belonged thereafter and c) usus, where after a year’s cohabitation, the woman came under her husband’s manus, unless she stayed away for three nights (trinoctium abesse). In this type of marriage she acquired some freedom. The second one, matrimonium sine manu, meant that the bride was still under the control of her pater familias. This legitimate marriage was conventionally accompanied by a dowry from the wife or her father to the husband in order to underwrite the expenses of the household. This dowry had to be returned if the marriage was dissolved by divorce or death of the husband. Any non-dotal property which the woman inherited after the death of her father remained in her ownership.11 This type of marriage became very popular in the 1st century BC.12 In essence, the wedding was a private ceremony, during which they offered sacriices to the divinities of marriage in the presence of family and friends and in the absence of any priest or magistrate, and they signed a contract, the instrumentum dotale, as proof of the union.13 In the case of the irst text, because of a break in the inscription, the names of both the husband and the wife are missing.14 Earlier scholars attributed it to Q. Lucretius Vespillo, consul in 19 B.C., and his wife Turia. That is the reason why it was given the conventional name Laudatio Turiae, which has not been accepted by everybody.15 5 aRjava, Women and Law, 112. 6 Cf. J. cRook, ‘His and Hers. What Degree of Financial Responsibility Did Husband and Wife Have for the Matrimonial Home and their Life in Common in a Roman Marriage?’, in k. andReau – H. BRuHns (eds.), Parenté et strategies familiales dans l’Antiquité Romaine, Roma 1990, 153-72; S. tReggiaRi, Roman Marriage, 365-96, n. 4; L. de ligt, ‘De signiicatione verborum. Romeins erfrecht in de Laudatio Turiae’, Lampas 34 (2001), 45-61, in part. n. 3; HemelRijk, ‘Masculinity’, 195. 7 E. WistRand The So-Called Laudatio Turiae. Introduction, Text, Translation, Commentary, Göteborg 1976, 39; cf. T.E.V. PeaRce, ‘The Role of the Wife as “Custos” in Ancient Rome’, Eranos 77 (1974), 16-33. 8 E.S. Ramage, ‘The So-Called Laudatio Turiae as Panegyric’, Athenaeum 82 (1994), 341-70, in part. 349. 9 On these delicate issues, see aRjava, Women and Law, 153-54. 10 LTur I 15, emancupata. R.P. salleR, Patriarchy, Property, and Death in the Roman Family, Cambridge – New York 1994, 202-24; R.P. salleR, ‘Symbols of Gender and Status Hierarchies in the Roman Household’, in S.R. josHel – s. muRnagHan (eds.), Women and Slaves in Greco-Roman Culture. Differential Equations, London – New York 1998, 85-91, in part. 87. 11 12 gaRdneR, Women in Roman Law, 97, 102, 105; salleR, Patriarchy, 94. M. duRRy, Éloge funèbre d’une matrone romaine (éloge dit de Turia), Paris 1950 (2002³), LXVI-LXVII; Η. lindsay, ‘The Man in Turia’s Life, with a Consideration of Inheritance Issues, Infertility, and Virtues in Marriage in the 1st C. B. C.’, JRA 22 (2009), 183-98, who deals with complicated legal issues. 13 14 CIL VI 1527, 37053 = ILS 8393, dated between 8-2 BC. The most important scholars in favor of the identiication with Turia are: tH. mommsen, ‘Zwei Sepulcralreden aus der Zeit Augusts und Hadrians’, AAWB (1863), 455-89, who invented the conventional name Laudatio Turiae; G. costa, ‘Ancora sulla laudatio Turiae’, BCAR 43 (1915), 3-40; G. BaRBieRi, ‘Laudatio’ and ‘Laudatio Turiae’, in E. de RuggieRo, Dizionario epigraico di 15 tto 170 tr a es 171 This bold and virtuous woman,16 who lived a highly eventful life, avenged her parents’ murder17 by securing the punishment of the guilty, possibly her parents’ servants, which would normally be the duty of the son. After that, she saved her property from her male relatives (gentiles), who wanted to dispute the will on the basis of their legal rights to it (gentilitas), and provided her husband (who was in fact under her protection) with money, servants and provisions.18 She also gave inancial support to her sister, who was under legitimate guardianship during the absence of her husband in another expedition. Turia, during the defence of her father’s will (her father remarried her mother by coemptio, in order to be able to leave a will)19 undertook the case as a patron (patronus) and saw it through all by herself. In the event of her husband dying irst, under his manus or patria potestas she would be iliae loco; i.e., on his death she would take an equal share of the inheritance with each of the children, as if she were his daughter in the legal sense.20 Both she and her sister seem to have been married cum manu. Under the father’s will, Turia and her husband were equal heirs, an entitlement granted equally to her sister and her brother-in-law Cluvius, who may have given Turia and Lucretius a ideicommissum21 on behalf of them. She also saved her husband’s life22 during the proscriptions of the triumvirs in 43 BC, which took place in the civil wars, seeking Octavian’s clemency. Their marriage lasted for more than forty years, and came to an end through death, not divorce, which was a rarity. Moreover, due to the fact that she could not bear children (infecunditas), she proposed that she should provide a suitable fertile woman for him to marry so that he would not remain childless, and “even more importantly, she would not force the dissolution of their jointly held property, indicating of how inancially damaging a divorce would be”.23 It is obvious that their cohabitation also meant co-operative inancial decisions. She was willing to regard any children produced as a result of this as her own, sharing her property with them, a noble act of self-sacriice that her husband did not accept. In the laudation, he also expresses antichità romane IV, 1 (1978), 471-75; A.E. goRdon, ‘Who’s Who in the Laudatio Turiae’, Epigraphica 39 (1977), 7-12; L. PePPe, ‘Turia. Funzione riproduttiva e funzione educatrice della donna romana’ in Id., Posizione giuridica e ruolo sociale della donna romana in età repubblicana, Milano 1984; A. kalaBRun, ‘De Turia Romani amoris coniugalis exemplo’, VoxP 5 (1985), 75-80; lindsay, ‘The Man’, 191-92; contra O. HiRscHFeld, ‘Die sogennante Laudatio Turiae’, WS 24 (1902), 233-37; duRRy, Éloge funèbre, passim; L. stoRoni mazzolani, Una moglie, Palermo 1982; P. cutolo, ‘Sugli aspetti letterari, poetici e culturali della cosiddetta Laudatio Turiae’, AFLN 26 (1983-4), 33-65; D. FlacH, Die sogennante Laudatio Turiae Einleitung, Text, Übersetzung und Kommentar (Texte zur Forschung 58), Darmstadt 1991; A.M. goWing, ‘Lepidus, the Proscriptions and the Laudatio Turiae’, Historia 41 (1992), 283-96; A. della casa, ‘Virtù cristiane nella cosidetta Laudatio Turiae’, in Scritti scelti di Adrianna della Casa (Paideia Cristiana: Miscellanea di studi in onore di M. Naldini), Pisa 1994, 305-17; E.S. Ramage, ‘The So-Called Laudatio Turiae as Panegyric’, Athenaeum 82 (1994), 341-70; E.A. HemelRijk, ‘De Laudatio Turiae. Grafschrift voor een uirzonderlijke vrouw?’, Lampas 34 (2001), 62-80; HemelRijk, ‘Masculinity’, 185; I. PiRo, ‘Quod emancupata esset Cluvio… Rilessioni intorno ad alcuni passaggi della Laudatio Turiae’ in Studi per G. Nicosia VI, Milano 2007, 155-96; F. lamBeRti, ‘Donne romane fra Idealtypus e realtà sociale. Dal domum servare e lanam facere al meretricio more vivere’, Quaderni Lupiensi di Storia e Diritto 4 (2014), 61-84, in part. 63-64. 16 For Turia’s character and deeds, cf. M. leFkoWitz, ‘Wives and Husbands’, in I. mcauslan – P. Walcot (eds.), Women in Antiquity, Oxford 1996, 67-82; P. keegan, ‘Turia, Lepidus, and Rome’s Epigraphic Environment’, SHT 9 (2008), 1-7. 17 This action had a double meaning: it was in conformance with the principal of piety towards the parents and with the law that the heirs had to punish the assassins in order not to leave the crime unpunished and therefore lose the inheritance; cf. Cod. Iust. 6.35.6, 9; Dig. 10.3.9; duRRy, Éloge funèbre, 30. 18 LTur 1.3-12, 2.2a-5a. Modern commentators appear to assume that the couple converted usus into a formal conventio in manum; see lindsay, ‘The Man’, 191, who adds that “the result of the coemptio would be to alter the sui heredes by changing those under the potestas of the testator. The wife would have become a sua heres, and the will would break the rule that sui heredes must be expressly included or excluded. Intestacy would ensue, hence a role for gentiles, since there are no male heirs”. 19 20 Cf. WistRand, Laudatio Turiae, 62. 21 The ideicommissum was a gift of property, usually by will, to be held on behalf of another who cannot receive the gift directly. 22 LTur 2.6a-18. 23 lindsay, ‘The Man’, 196. tto FEMALE DOMESTIC FINANCIAL MANAGERS. TURIA, MURDIA, AND HORTENSIA tr a es DIMITRIOS MANTZILAS his wish that he might have been the one to die irst, so that she could have been his adopted daughter, who would carry on his name.24 The purpose of this adoption was to strengthen her position against relatives and dependents of the family, as there were many restrictions on women becoming heirs. Before dying, Turia made certain recommendations before her death, which included instructions for her funeral, household directions, manumissions of slaves and gifts to friends.25 A similar case (to which attention has never been drawn until now) is Alcestis Barcinonensis,26 a 4th century AD ethopoeia on Alcestis, a true pious (pia) wife. Even though Alcestis is a mythological feature, the poet, inspired by women of his era, attributes to her characteristics of actual Roman matrons. Just like Turia, Alcestis supported her husband and king of Pherae, Admetus; she even sacriiced herself so that he could live on. She also gave speciic instructions for after her death, including the allocation of her property and fortune in her will and her wish for her husband to ind a new wife.27 In both texts we ind an inversion of the traditional gender roles: both husbands become scared little human beings in the face of death, while their wives escaped from being simple housewives and became heroines, possessing the common stereotypical virtues (piety, honesty of character, modesty, loyalty and obedience to the husband, love and devotion to family and relatives, generosity, ingenuity, courage, kindness, sobriety of attire and others), which appear also in Laudatio Matidiae and Laudatio Paulinae, the other two extant eulogies, in the inscription of Allia Potestas (a parody of laudations) and various funerary inscriptions. The second lady, Murdia, praised in the Laudatio Murdiae,28 had been married twice to worthy husbands that had been provided by her parents.29 After having once been a widow, a status where he was in fact legally in the lowest category of intestate heirs,30 she remarried. She had children from both marriages. She left a will (which the extant portion of this laudation has a strong emphasis on)31 settling all her legal issues. At the beginning of this incomplete encomion we learn that she made all her sons equal heirs after she made a bequest to her daughter. According to Roman law, reverence (reverentia) and obedience (obsequium) were owed by children to their mother, who in turn had a duty to look after their interests.32 Murdia also left her second husband a ixed sum, as a dower, hopefully increased eventually by investments. Her son – from her irst marriage – (who is here the laudator) would later inherit his deceased father’s property, which had passed into the ownership of his mother on the decision of her husband. This is why she gained the approval of her fellow citizens, since the division of her estate indicated her honourable intentions towards her family. As a woman married sine manu, Murdia was under the potestas of her father (not that of her husband). Since she was at an age that most Roman women had no living father, we may suppose that she was sui iuris (which is the reason that she was able to make the provisions for the laudator 24 Cf. Livia’s adoption by Augustus. 25 WistRand, Laudatio Turiae, 75. 26 For more details, see D. mantzilas, ‘Receptions and Genre Cross-reference in Alcestis Barcinonensis’, SPFB (klas) 16 (2011), 61-90, in part. 87-89. 27 Cf. Alc. Barc. 83-103, where we ind an alteration of the motif: the heroine’s husband can re-marry, as long as he does not love his new wife more than he loves her. Probably the anonymous writer of the laudation had in mind Propertius’ regina elegiarum (4.11). 28 CIL VI 10230 = ILS 8394. For the speech that dates from the Age of Augustus, see N. HoRsFall, ‘Allia Potestas and Murdia. Two Roman Women’, AncSoc 12 (1982), 27-33. 29 LMur 14. 30 P. keegan, ‘Faint Praise in Pain(t)ed Phrases. A Narratological Reading of the Laudatio Murdia’, Eras Journal (Reference: 07 January 2016 <http://arts.monash.edu.au/publications/eras/edition-4/keegan.php>), 2002, in part. 5. 31 H. lindsay, ‘The Laudatio Murdiae. Its Content and Signiicance’, Latomus 63 (2004), 88-97, in part. 94. 32 S. dixon, The Roman Mother, London – Sydney 1989, 61-65; salleR, ‘Symbols of Gender’, 86. tto 172 tr a es 173 for which she was praised in the inscription). This would also allow her to dispense with a tutor under the ius trium liberorum – if she had three or more children – a ruling which did not apply to women under potestas. Hortensia33 was a young lady in her twenties who received an extensive education. As soon as she was chosen as the matrons’ representative, she delivered a famous speech in 42 B. C. in front of the members of the Second Triumvirate, who were waging war against those who killed Julius Caesar.34 To fund the ongoing war, the triumvirs had resorted to selling the property of citizens killed by proscription. But this proved to be an insuficient measure. Hortensia represented 1400 wealthy women on whom taxes were imposed, in order to sponsor the military legions. The tax would amount to one year’s full income plus a special donation (in form of a loan) to the government calculated as a percentage of their properties. The women refused to contribute because they had no participation in the wars, and because their social position would be seriously aggravated if they lost their properties, having already been deprived of the male members of their families. Hortensia also notes that their mothers once rise superior to their sex and made contributions when the empire was in danger through the conlict with the Carthaginians. The difference is that then they contributed voluntarily, not from their landed property, their ields, their dowries, or their houses, without which life is not possible to free women, but only from their own jewellery, and even these not according to the ixed valuation, not under fear of informers or accusers, not by force and violence, but what they themselves were willing to give.35 The triumvirs ordered the lictors to drive them away from the tribunal but the crowd supported women. On the following day they reduced the number of the women, who were to present a valuation of their property, from1400 to 400, and decreed that all men who possessed more than 100,000 drachmas, regardless of nationality and rank, should lend it with the interest calculated as a iftieth part of their property and contribute one year’s income to the war expenses. It is not clear whether or not Hortensia was married and what her relationship to the proscriptions or the Triumvirate was. Maybe she was married to Q. Servilius Cepio, adopted son of Brutus.36 Another possible explanation is that her brother, Q. Hortensius, had been a victim of the proscriptions. When he was the proconsul of Macedonia, he ordered Gaius Antonius’ (Marcus Antonius’ brother) murder.37 A third interpretation sees in her a speaker by nature, being the daughter of the famous orator Q. Hortensius Hortalus.38 Unfortunately her father had already died in 50 B. C. so Hortensia had no male support in her actions and took over the protection of her fortune herself, as did the rest of the 1400 wealthy women. Hortensia’s 33 App. BC 4.1.32-34; Val. Max. 8.3.3; Quint. inst. 1.1.6. For her personality, the conditions under which she boldly delivered a speech to a public forum where women were strictly excluded, and the reactions she provoked, see f. ex. D.H. gRanados de aRena, ‘Actitud admirable de dos mujeres en épocas diiciles. La uxor ignota de la Laudatio funebris y Hortensia, la hija del orador’, REC 17 (1986), 93-107; R.A. Bauman, Women and Politics in Ancient Rome, London 1992, especially 78-90 on the triumviral period; A. lóPez lóPez, ‘Hortensia, primera oradora romana’, FlorIlib 3 (1992), 317-32. 34 See M.H. dettenHoFeR, ‘Frauen in politischen Krisen zwischen Republik und Prinzipat’, in M.H. dettenHoFeR, Reine Männersache? Frauen in Männerdomänen der anriken Welt, Köln – Weimar – Wien 1994, 133-57, for the role of women (Servilia, Fulvia, Hortensia, and Sempronia) during the crisis that followed Caesar’s murder, a theme irst dealt with by F. münzeR, Römische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien, Stuttgart 1920. 35 App. BC 4.1.32. F. münzeR, RE 8.2481-82, s.v. Hortensius, n. 16; A.G. WoodHead, ‘Delos. Honores Q. Hortensii, a. 44a. (17-357)’, in A. cHa– t. coRsten – R.s. stRoud – R.a. tyBout (eds.), Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum, Brill Online 2016. Reference: 07 January 2016 <http://static.ribo.brill.semcs.net/entries/supplementum-epigraphicum-graecum/seg-17-357-delos-honores-q-hortensiia-44a-a17_357>; contra W. dRumann – P. gRoeBe, Geschichte Roms in seinem Übergang von der republicanischen zur monarchischen Verfassung, Königsberg 1837 (2nd ed. Leipzig 1899; reprint Hildesheim 1964), III, 104, n. 6, who argues that she was not married. 36 niotis 37 38 Plut. brut. 28.1; ant. 22.1; Val. Max. 8.3.3· cf. F. HinaRd, 1985, Les proscriptions de la Rome républicaine, Roma 1985, 475-76. E. gaBBa, Appiano e la storia delle guerre civili, Firenze 1956, 183, even though he prefers Hinard’s theory. Two more ladies’ rhetorical performance relects their fathers’ eloquence. These are Laelia, daughter of orator Gaius Laelius (Cic. brut. 211) and Tullia, Cicero’s daughter (Cic. ad QFr. 1.3.3) tto FEMALE DOMESTIC FINANCIAL MANAGERS. TURIA, MURDIA, AND HORTENSIA tr a es DIMITRIOS MANTZILAS common point with Turia is that they both challenged the triumvirs’ authority, something unthinkable even for a man.39 She is one of the examples of ladies who claimed their legal rights, often associated with the cases of Carfania and Maesia.40 Her attitude demonstrates a clear antithesis towards the Roman mentality that forbade women from speaking in public in an assembly. The cultural anthropology of the era dealt on the one hand with the rhetoric of rational and wise men and, on the other hand, with the voices of crazy women, who were considered as being androgynous and monsters, when they tried to speak in publicly.41 This is the reason why the occasions in which Roman women appeared in public and participated in politics were rare.42 Summarising the above, from the socio-cultural and ideological point of view, the aforementioned texts give a unique insight into Roman family structures. In general, all the literary sources offer a sense of the complexities of personal conduct and public ideology, due to the moral revitalization of the upper classes from the age of Augustus onwards, which was introduced in order to restore conservative social values and control social conduct, thereby reinforcing duty and community. The legal regulations had to do with the position of women in the Roman family, the nucleus of Roman society, which was the ultimate moral judge on issues of marriage and reproduction, because women had an effect on the community as a whole. In other words, even though women did not have the dominant role in the family, they were expected to support it by all means at their disposal. The inancial aspect was also included in this support, by providing a dowry, by keeping the family’s fortune safe, and by being wise domestic inancial managers. A pious attitude always guaranteed society’s approval and the family’s eternal gratitude and praise after death, when such a woman would enter into an after-life period that was full of glory. Conclusion In the Laudatio Turiae, Turia saved her property from her male relatives, and provided her husband (who was under her protection) with money. She also gave inancial support to her sister, who was under legitimate guardianship. During the defence of her father’s will, she undertook the case. Being childless, she suggested to her husband to remarry, willing to share her property with the eventual children. In the Laudatio Murdiae, Murdia, had been married twice to worthy husbands and had children from both marriages. She left a will settling all her legal issues, making all her sons equal heirs after she made a bequest to her daughter. She also left her second husband a ixed sum, as a dower. Hortensia delivered a speech in front of the members of the Second Triumvirate against their decision to impose taxes on 1400 wealthy women, in order to sponsor the military legions. The women refused to contribute because their social position would be seriously aggravated if they lost their properties. These texts give a unique insight into the Roman family ideology and mentality, related often with the Roman law. In this article we try to illuminate the legal aspects dominating Roman society, but also the wife’s position as the true guardian of the house. dettenHoFeR, ‘Frauen’, 141. On the contrary, the episode of Tanusia (App. BC 4.44.187; Suet. Aug. 27.2) demonstrates an acceptance of, rather than a challenge to, the authority of a triumvir. T. Vinius was proscribed by the triumvirs in 43 BC, and owed his life to his wife Tanusia, who concealed him in a chest at the house of his freedman Philopoemen, and gave out that he was dead. She afterwards obtained his pardon from Octavian, who raised Philopoemen to the equestrian rank for his idelity to his former master. 39 40 Maesia of Sentinum pleaded her own case in court and earned thereby the name of ‘Androgynous’, cf. A. maRsHall, ‘Roman Ladies on Trial. The Case of Maesia of Sentinum’, Phoenix 44 (1990), 56-68. She defended her case in court bereft of male legal representation. Carfania, wife of the senator Licinius Bucio, repeatedly made public pleadings in court. She is referred to as impudent, a barking dog and a monster. Val. Max. 8.3.1-2; L. PeRnot, ‘Femmes devant l’assemblée en Grèce et à Rome’, Logo 7 (2004), 201-11; E. HÖBenReicH, ‘Andróginas y monstruos: mujeres que hablan en la antigua Roma’, Veleia 22 (2005), 173-82. 41 42 G.S. sumi, ‘Civil War, Women and Spectacle in the Triumviral Period’, AncW 35 (2004), 196-206. tto 174 

Summary In the Laudatio Turiae, Turia saved her property from her male relatives, and provided her husband (who was under her protection) with money. She also gave financial support to her sister, who was under legitimate guardianship. During the defence of her father’s will, she undertook the case. Being childless, she suggested to her husband to remarry, willing to share her property with the eventual children. In the Laudatio Murdiae, Murdia, had been married twice to worthy husbands and had children from both marriages. She left a will settling all her legal issues, making all her sons equal heirs after she made a bequest to her daughter. She also left her second husband a fixed sum, as a dower. Hortensia delivered a speech in front of the members of the Second Triumvirate against their decision to impose taxes on 1400 wealthy women, in order to sponsor the military legions. The women refused to contribute because their social position would be seriously aggravated if they lost their properties. These texts give a unique insight into the Roman family ideology and mentality, related often with the Roman law. In this article we try to illuminate the legal aspects dominating Roman society, but also the wife's position as the true guardian of the house.