From Good Goddess to Vestal Virgins: Sex and Category in Roman Religion (25 page)

The Vestal was freed from
patria potestas
without undergoing
capitis deminutio
. There were several ways in which the ordinary Roman citizen could be freed from
patria potestas
. When one
’
s
pater
died or if he
—
the
pater
—
underwent
capitis deminutio
in any of the three degrees, the tie of
potestas
was severed. In the Vestal
’
s case neither of these situations applied. She became free immediately

—
eo statim tempore
—
and not on the death of her father; nor, obvi- ously, had her father undergone
capitis deminutio
as that would automatically have disqualified his daughter. The tie of
patria potes- tas
could also be artificially severed while the
pater
was still alive and had not himself undergone
capitis deminutio
. This necessitated the ceremony of
emancipation
.
36
For a woman, marriage
cum manu
also had the same effect. However, both
emancipatio
and marriage
cum manu
meant that the child underwent
capitis deminutio
. In the Vestal
’
s case the tie was broken without either
emancipatio
or
capi- tis deminutio
. Anybody inclined to think that the legal status of a Vestal was in any way analogous to male status
37
need only com- pare the little girl with her father, who, if his own father were still alive, was still in
patria potestas,
and subject to all its legal incapaci- ties, to see how untenable such a notion really is. The contrast between a Vestal and the average Roman citizen, male or female, could not have been more sharply contrived.
38

The consequences of a Vestal
’
s freedom from
patria potestas
set her apart from all other Roman citizens. There was no fundamental

difference between the legal capacities of men and women as long as they were
in potestate
. The
pater
’
s power over both sons and daugh- ters was, in theory, absolute. However, once they became free from
potestas
the relative legal capacities of men and women changed radically. As far as intestate succession to property was concerned, sons and daughters
in potestate
had identical claims on their
pater
. But it was more than property that a son acquired on his
pater
’
s death. It was only on the death of his father, as I have already observed, not when he himself became a father, that
patria potestas
gave a son both legal autonomy and legal authority over children born in
iustum matrimonium
. It is worth repeating that regardless of age and regardless of whether or not he himself had children, a man acquired this legal capacity on the death of his
pater
. Until he reached puberty he was
in tutela,
subject to a guardian. But there- after his legal autonomy was unrestricted. His children, over whom he had
potestas,
were
sui heredes,
his heirs at law, and they had first claim in intestate succession. A woman
’
s situation was radically dif- ferent. As one of her father
’
s
sui
her claims on his property were no different from that of her brothers
’
, but she did not inherit as they did the power which would have given her personal autonomy and authority over her descendants. A woman could never possess such power. Her children were never in her
potestas
and hence were not her heirs at law. If she had married
sine manu
her property went to her agnates, that is those who had been in her father
’
s
potestas
. If she had married
cum manu
her children might inherit her property not because they were her children, but because she and they were in the
potestas
of the same man. When viewed in this schematic way it becomes clear that
patria potestas
operated on every level of family structure. The implication of the rule as set forth by Gellius is that the Vestal was removed not merely from the sphere of authority of her individual
pater,
but from the whole structure of
patria potestas
to which everybody else was subject in one way or another. That, I suggest, is the explanation of the fact that the institutions of
emanci- patio
and
capitis deminutio
were bypassed in the case of the Vestals. They were required only if a person was leaving the authority of his
pater,
and
—
in the case of a man
—
acquiring that same authority in his own right; they were also required if a person was moving from the authority of one individual to that of another, for example in cases of adoption or
—
for a woman
—
marriage
cum manu
. In the case of the Vestal they became meaningless.
39

From the moment that a little girl was chosen by the
pontifex max-

imus
to be a Vestal Virgin she stood aloof from the rest of Roman citizenry. The legal rules operated to create in her a unique legal entity. Ideological virginity endowed this entity with the correspond- ing ritual uniqueness. The six Vestals could not identify either legally or ritually with any other category in Rome. I shall show that by being excluded from every other category of the collectivity, whether the group was defined legally, ritually or in some other way, a Vestal became a symbol of the whole. Her identity lay only in Romanness. She was and could be nothing else.
40

The rules by which property was transmitted at death were differ- ent for a Vestal and reflected her extraordinary status. It was the Roman state that was a Vestal
’
s sole heir at law; her agnatic family had no legal interest in her property.
41
The collectivity as repre- sented by the state became for a Vestal the surrogate of the agnatic kin, who, had she not been a Vestal, would have been her heirs. For, from the moment that she became a Vestal, she had no kin. The tes- tamentary powers of a Vestal were also consistent with her unique status. A woman who was free from
patria potestas
had no power, theoretically, to conduct affairs of business, including making a will, without the supervision and consent of a
tutor
. A man
’
s auton- omy was similarly restricted only until he reached puberty. There- after he could write his will without the need for it to be endorsed by a
tutor
. So could a Vestal from the day that she entered the priest- hood at six to ten years of age. Although the testamentary powers of a Vestal and a man
sui iuris
were superficially similar they were products of very different legal contexts. A man
’
s testamentary privi- leges were a product of his status within the kinship system based on the institution of
patria potestas
. The Vestal
’
s privileges were a product of her status outside the system. To put it another way, a man
’
s testamentary privileges were positively defined, a Vestal
’
s negatively. To take an analogy from medicine, it is as though two very different diseases were to present with the same symptoms. A physician who failed to make a differential diagnosis could not hope to cure them both.

The legal rules effected a Vestal
’
s separation from the family both individually and institutionally. This
‘
separateness
’
manifested itself in various ways. For example when a Vestal became ill she was sent for nursing not to one of her female relatives but to the home of a selected matron.
42
Similarly at the
Parentalia,
a festival devoted especially to the worship of dead ancestors, it has been plausibly conjectured that the Vestals collectively offered cult at the tomb of a

legendary Vestal, Tarpeia.
43
A Vestal could have no ancestors of her own. Just as the collectivity stood to her in the position of agnates, only former Vestals could be regarded as her ancestors.

None the less a Vestal
’
s natural relationships were sometimes invoked, even exploited. In 143 BC, the Vestal Claudia used her sacred status to protect her triumphing father from the tribune, who would have dragged him down from his chariot and prevented his triumph.
44
Even more significant is the way in which Cicero in defence of Fonteius exploits the fact that Fonteius
’
sister was a Vestal.

A Vestal Virgin casts her arms about the brother of her blood
—
germanum fratrem
—
imploring your protection, gentlemen, and that of the Roman people. She has devoted so many years to propitiating the immortal gods on behalf of you and your children that she may well today propitiate your hearts when she appeals on behalf of herself and her brother. What protec- tion, what comfort is left to the poor lady if he is taken from her? Other women can bear protectors for themselves, they can have in their own homes a companion and a participant in all life
’
s chances; but to this maiden what can be dear or delightful save her brother?

(Cic.,
Font.,
21)

This might have been tear-jerking rhetoric but it could only have worked if a Vestal
’
s natural relationships were generally acknowl- edged. But this does not necessarily undermine the legal effect of a Vestal
’
s status. What it does do is reveal the disjunction between social practice and cultural ideology. Social practice might on occa- sion mask the ideal, but it does not invalidate it. A Vestal was no longer her father
’
s heir, but he could if he chose leave her intestate portion to her in the form of a bequest. That this implied the acknowledgement of kinship did not in any way undermine the rule that artificially denied that kinship. A Vestal
’
s position
vis
à
vis
her family was legally contrived. But as in the case of the maternal bond within
iustum matrimonium,
a legal rule did not necessarily under- mine affective ties nor the acknowledgement of those ties. This tension inherent in a Vestal
’
s situation is illustrated for example by a set of dedicatory inscriptions to a Vestal named Flavia Publicia. Some of the inscriptions record filiation, some do not.
45

As the legal landscape changed over time and relative legal capaci- ties were adjusted, the rules governing the Vestals were adjusted

too, in order that their special status be maintained in the face of change. For example, as a result of the restrictions placed by Augus- tus on the unmarried and childless, the Vestals would have lost some of the legal rights, specifically rights of inheritance, that they had previously enjoyed.
46
Augustus countered this effect by granting the Vestals the
ius liberorum
.
47
A contemporary legal artifice was thus used to maintain the Vestals
’
time honoured status.

The ritual position of the Vestals reflected their legal status. The Vestals as we know were not in any way secluded. They had public religious functions to perform and their social activities did not appear to have been restricted at all, except of course by the injunc- tion to be and appear to be chaste. In appearance however the Vestals were again different, marked out from the rest of society by distinctive dress and appurtenances.
48
The most conspicuous visual attribute of a Vestal as she appeared on the public streets was that she was accompanied by a
lictor
.
49
A
lictor
was a symbol of office. Certain magistrates were accompanied in public by lictors, but not all. The tribunes, for example, were not accompanied by lictors.
50
Priests were generally not accompanied by lictors although we know from Festus that the
flamen Dialis
was.
51
But Festus implies that this was not a traditional privilege of priests. The
flamen
had a
lictor,
he says, on account of his sacred duties, or perhaps, more gen- erally, on account of his sacredness
—
sacrorum causa
. A
lictor
was a symbol of power, secular in the case of magistrates, sacred in the case of the
flamen Dialis
and the Vestal Virgins. From the perspec- tive of common perception a Vestal on the streets, accompanied by a
lictor,
would have been a unique figure, instantly recognizable as a Vestal. Positions of power in Rome were occupied exclusively by men. The Vestals were the only women who were accompanied by a symbol of power.
52
The visual impact of the Vestal in the public streets was similar to the impact of the legal rules on her status. It kept her aloof from the common experience of any and every other category in Rome.

A Vestal
’
s personal appearance was also distinctive. Her hair was always worn in a style unique to the Vestals: the so-called
sex crines
. The only surviving passage on the
sex crines
is partially corrupt.
53
But it suggests that the hairstyle was a very old one, that it was worn by Vestal Virgins and brides and that it had to do in some way with chastity. This is all we know about the
sex crines
. But we do have a fair amount of evidence for the dress of a Roman bride. A bride
’
s dress predictably symbolized in all sorts of ways the fact that she

was undergoing, in Van Gennep
’
s terms, a rite of passage from vir- gin to wife. A bride
’
s traditional tunic, the
tunica recta,
was, for example, identical to that worn by a boy on the day he attained manhood.
54
A bride
’
s girdle was tied with a special knot, the
nodus Herculaneus,
which could only be untied by her new husband.
55
She also wore the
flammeum,
a veil the
‘
colour of Jupiter
’
s lightning
’
which was otherwise only worn by the
flaminica Dialis
.
56
Her hair was dressed in the style known as the
sex crines,
which we know was also the hairstyle of the Vestals. There is an obvious symmetry between the
flammeum
and the
flaminica
and the
sex crines
and the Vestals. Festus says of the
flammeum,
‘
The bride is wrapped in it on account of the good omen because it is always worn by the wife of a
flamen
who is not allowed to divorce
’—
i.e. the
flaminica Dialis
.
57
The bride
’
s dress marked her transitional status by invoking aspects of other rituals which were appropriate to her position. Her tunic was evocative of the male ritual of transition from childhood to adulthood; the
flammeum
of the ideal
matrona,
the
flaminica Dialis
. And the
sex crines
as worn by the bride was meant to evoke the virginity of the Vestals. The
flammeum
and the
sex crines,
sym- bols
par excellence
of virginal and matronal status, announced the ambivalent status of the virgin about to become a
matrona
. But as worn by the Vestals the
sex crines
had a deeper symbolic value. The
sex crines
was the peculiar badge of the Vestals just as the
flam- meum
was the badge of the
flaminica
. It was a permanent attribute of the Vestals and as worn by them it was a marker of both their physical and ideological virginity. Visually it marked out a Vestal as a Vestal and not simply as a virgin, in much the same way as the
flammeum
worn by the
flaminica
served to identify her as the
flaminica
and not simply a
matrona
.