From Good Goddess to Vestal Virgins: Sex and Category in Roman Religion (24 page)

The manner in which a Vestal
’
s transgression was revealed effec- tively side-stepped the thorny problem of determining whether or not the woman really had lost her virginity. The gods themselves revealed her crime by means of
prodigia
.
17
We do not know the exact procedure of the pontifical court that thereafter tried the sus- pect whose unchastity was thus revealed. It is a reasonable assump- tion that the evidence considered was purely circumstantial. The woman appears to have been present at the trial and allowed to defend herself. One of the criticisms that the younger Pliny makes about the trial of the Vestal Cornelia by Domitian is that it was held in her absence.
18
It is important to note that the
prodigia
which sig- nalled a Vestal
’
s transgression were usually reported in times of serious political instability. As I have already noted, there are only two recorded instances of a Vestal being punished for unchastity between the first Punic war and the end of the Republic.
19
On both occasions the accusations were made in the aftermath of disastrous defeats of the Roman army. The trial of the two Vestals Opimia and Floronia in 216 BC followed the near annihilation of the Roman army by Hannibal at Cannae.
20
The trials of Aemilia, Licinia and Marcia in 114 BC came in the wake of the destruction of the army of C.Porcius Cato by the Scordisci in Thrace.
21
These defeats gave rise to intense and widespread emotional upheaval in Rome itself.
22
The religious measures taken to quell the panic were not merely exten- sive, they were extreme, even to the point of human sacrifice, as we saw. It is against this background of religious frenzy that we must view the accusations of unchastity against the Vestals. In both cases more than one Vestal was involved. This is in itself significant because just one lapse by one Vestal was sufficient to put the secu-

rity of the state in jeopardy. In 114 especially, the women were represented as indulging in veritable orgies of sexual licence.
23

In 216 both women were found guilty by the pontifical college that traditionally tried such cases. One committed suicide and the other was buried alive in the prescribed fashion. One of the alleged seducers was flogged to death and we know nothing of the other. The official proceedings in 114 are even more suggestive of scape- goating. After the traditional pontifical court had acquitted one of the women, the tribune Sex. Peducaeus set up, by popular decision, a court to re-try the Vestals claiming that the decision of the pontiffs had been too lenient.
24
This was an extraordinary measure. The exclusive authority of the pontifical college and especially of the Pontifex Maximus over the Vestal Virgins was an ancient tradition, believed to have been established as far back as the time of Tar- quinius Priscus.
25
The significance of the proceedings in 114 rests in the clear determination to find the Vestal guilty.
26
Seen in the con- text of the political turbulence of the time, and the frantic religious activity that accompanied it, it is not difficult to suggest an explana- tion. The ritual burial of the guilty Vestal, as described by Plutarch
—
repeated three times in 114, or more accurately in the period between 115 and 113
—
would have been a powerful antidote to feel- ings of impending catastrophe. This could also explain why such occurrences were so rare. The execution of a Vestal was a desperate measure, taken in times of extreme crisis, as a last resort. It would have been difficult to sustain the kind of emotion described by Plutarch if the spectacle had been a familiar one.

The Vestal Virgin and the Vestal who had lost her virginity were both, and in equal measure, vital for the welfare of the polity. The sexuality of the Vestal was inseparable from the welfare of the state. If the state was in trouble the spectacle of the burial of an unchaste Vestal would restore hope for its recovery. If the state was peaceful and prosperous the Vestals were clearly chaste. The younger Pliny illustrates this well in his description of the trial and execution of the Vestal, Cornelia, by Domitian. It was a charge trumped up by Domi- tian, said Pliny,
‘
from an extravagant notion that exemplary severi- ties of that kind did honour to his reign
’
. What is significant about this account is the manner in which Cornelia protested her inno- cence:
‘
How could Caesar think I am polluted when as long as I carried out my sacred duties he has conquered and triumphed?
’—
Me Caesar incestam putat, qua sacra faciente vicit, triumphavit?
27

To make a modern analogy, the virginity of the Vestals was the insurance for the welfare of the state.

But it would be belying the complexity of the structure of the priesthood to see in it merely a cynical device to counter political and social upheaval. It was not only in times of crisis that a Vestal
’
s virginity was called into question. A Vestal had not only to be chaste in fact, she had to appear to be so if she was not to incur the danger- ous suspicion of unchastity. For example, Plutarch says that Crassus caused the prosecution of the Vestal Licinia by associating with her too closely.
28
Both Crassus and Licinia were tried and acquitted, for it turned out that all he wanted to do was buy at a bargain price some property that she owned. Livy records that the Vestal Postu- mia was put on trial because her attractive appearance and free and easy manner had aroused suspicions of unchastity.
29
She also was acquitted with the warning to dress and behave in a manner
‘
more suitable to sanctity than coquetry
’
. However, the evidence of 216 and 114 BC shows plainly that the Vestals were used as scapegoats in extreme situations.
30

The functional aspect of the Vestals
’
virginity gives rise to a more fundamental problem however. It is not enough to say that their vir- ginity was intimately related to the welfare of the polity. It is neces- sary to examine the dynamics of that relationship. I shall approach the question through the notion of ideological virginity that I have delineated. For the moment and purely for analytical purposes we must regard this, an artificial construct, as separate from physical virginity. In reality the two were intertwined; the virginity of the Vestals was a single, not a dual phenomenon. Ideological virginity was founded on the fact of physical virginity and was constructed by means of the complex set of rules that governed and bound the priesthood.

One caveat: virginity here must not be understood in terms of chastity or purity or any other concept merely denoting approved sexual behaviour. It must be regarded in the strict physiological meaning of the term.

A complicated and detailed set of rules governed the lives of the Vestal Virgins. To begin with not everybody was qualified to be a Vestal. The qualifications for a prospective Vestal were quite rigor- ous. She had to be aged between six and ten; be free of any kind of physical blemish or impediment; to have father and mother both living
—
patrima et matrima;
and to be in
patria potestas
. This last injunction was further qualified. Her father should not have been

emancipated in any way from the
potestas
of his father, which meant that if the girl
’
s grandfather was alive she would have to be, like her father, in his
potestas
.
31

The rule that required her to be in
patria potestas
and
patrima et matrima
had the effect of placing the potential Vestal within the con- text of a Roman family ideally conceived. This requires clarifica- tion.
Patria potestas
was a legal artifact, as we have seen.
32
It was designed not merely to transmit property and absolute legal author- ity over one
’
s descendants through the male line, but was also a means of providing a male Roman citizen with legitimate children. From a legal perspective the paternal and maternal ties were asym- metrically defined. The maternal bond was natural: a woman
’
s children were hers by virtue of the fact that she had given birth to them. The paternal bond was legal: a man
’
s children were his only if they were born of a wife with whom he had
conubium,
i.e. his
matrona,
within the form of marriage known as
iustum matrimo- nium
. Such children, and they alone, derived their status from their father. Over them, and over their descendants acquired in the same fashion, a man wielded absolute authority
—
patria potestas
. They became his heirs at law
—
sui heredes
—
the males inheriting upon his death not only a share of his property, but also
patria potestas
which they in turn would exercise over their direct descendants. It is impor- tant to recall that
patria potestas
was potential as well as actual. A male Roman citizen acquired the right to exercise
patria potestas
the moment that his
pater
died
—
or the moment he was legally emanci- pated from his
pater
’
s
potestas
—
regardless of his age, and regard- less of whether or not he himself was a father. But that power could not be exercised except over children born in
iustum matrimonium
. Thus
patria potestas
signified legally recognized Roman paternity. This is important. The law appears to have ignored the biological bond between father and child. Children born to a man outside
ius- tum matrimonium
—
for example, the children of his concubine
—
were not automatically subject to his
potestas
. He had to adopt them legally in order to make them his own. Even more striking is the fact that children born to a man
’
s
matrona
automatically came under his
potestas
even if he demonstrably could not have fathered them. A eunuch had the right to marry, and children born to his wife were legally his.

Patria potestas
was also a continuous chain of power, passed down from father to son, linking through the generations the agnatic line. This continuous line of filiation could be deliberately

severed but ideally would continue indefinitely in an unbroken chain. The prospective Vestal had not merely to be in
patria potes- tas,
but in
patria potestas
thus ideally conceived. Strictly speaking even if her father had been emancipated from the
potestas
of his father, she would remain in the
potestas
of her grandfather unless she herself had been formally emancipated. But that evidently was inadequate. It was the ideal that the rule invoked, even if, spanning as it did only three generations, the ideal was expressed symbolically. It is also important to note that the maternal and paternal rela- tionships were mutually exclusive. Depending on the circumstances, one took precedence over the other. The maternal bond, the natural or biological relationship between mother and child, was, to use a concept familiar to contract lawyers, the default rule.
33
A child at birth derived its status
—
including citizenship
—
from its mother, unless it had been born in
iustum matrimonium
. The effect of
ius- tum matrimonium
and its legal corollary,
patria potestas,
was to override the maternal bond or at least the legal implications of it. A
matrona,
especially if married
sine manu,
had no legal claim on her children nor they on her. Yet despite the legal implications, it would be silly to deny the importance of the maternal bond. The biological tie of mother and child was certainly recognized even if considered subordinate in this single instance. The necessity for the potential Vestal to be
matrima
must be interpreted, I suggest, as a recognition of that relationship. The girl needed to fit correctly into the frame- work of paternal and maternal relationship as it was defined socially and legally in Rome. The context of the ideal Roman family from which she had to be removed had to be perfect. She had to be

unblemished not merely physically but socially too.

But from the precise moment that she was admitted to the priest- hood all ties with her family were broken. By removing her from a
‘
perfect
’
family the rule underscored the complete severance of her familial ties. On a purely physical level, she moved from her family home to the
Atrium Vestae,
the official residence of the Vestals, where she would henceforth live. This physical distancing from her own family, however, was symbolic of a much more fundamental removal from the social matrix in which the individual family was embedded. This was effected chiefly by the manner in which she was removed from the
potestas
of her
paterfamilias,
whether father or grandfather.

Virgo autem Vestalis
simul
est capta atque in atrium Vestae

deducta et pontificibus tradita est,
eo statim tempore
sine emancipatione et sine capitis minutione e patris potestate exit et ius testamenti faciundi adipiscitur.

As soon as
the Vestal is chosen, escorted to the atrium
Vestae
and delivered to the pontiffs, she
immediately
passes from the control of her father without the ceremony of emancipation or loss of civil status, and acquires the right to make a will.
34

The change in the new Vestal
’
s status was dramatic. Gellius focuses on two aspects of it: the instantaneous nature of the conversion, and the fact that the change took place without the normal procedures of
emancipatio
or
capitis deminutio
.
35
This apparently simple legal exception had enormous consequences for the Vestal. It made her in legal terms unique. The legal status of the Vestal was designed to set her apart from the common experience of every other Roman citi- zen, male and female.