Figure 15.4 Peacock arch with inscription from the church of St Polyeuctus, Constantinople
The justification for including a separate chapter on women, if it is needed, is that they almost certainly constituted more than half the membership of the church during the third and fourth centuries (and probably beyond), and often played an important role in the spread of Christianity within families (15.1) – yet the scope for them to exercise leadership and authority within the church was very limited. As a result, they barely figure in the high-profile controversies of the fourth century considered in Chapters 3–6, and there is no role for them in Chapter 12 on bishops. Any sign of women usurping priestly prerogatives quickly resulted in condemnation by church authorities (15.2; cf. 2.10), though involvement in church life in certain strictly defined and subordinate capacities was allowed (15.3). Some women were in a position to make their presence felt, but usually only when they could draw on inherited wealth (15.4, 15.5; cf. 2.7).
For women more generally, Christianity was not without some positive benefits. Its emphasis on husbands adhering to the same standards of sexual behaviour as expected of wives (15.6) was an important break with the tradition of the ‘double standard’ in Roman society, even if discrepancies between principle and practice persisted on the part of some men. The development of asceticism also offered many women a legitimate alternative to marriage for the first time (15.7) – ‘we have to remember how extraordinary it was, in Graeco-Roman terms, for a woman to opt not to marry’ (G. Clark 1992: 51). On the other hand, more often than not it still left them subordinate to male authority (15.8). Moreover, it is apparent that families sometimes forced young girls to enter a monastery for less than commendable motives (15.9), and even for those who willingly embraced the ascetic life, the highest praise they could expect seems to have been couched in masculine terms (15.10). It remains to note that nearly all the surviving source material relating to women in late antique Christianity was written by men. One exception is Egeria’s account of her travels in the Holy Land and adjacent regions (16.3) – a reminder of the way in which the growth of pilgrimage opened another avenue for female involvement in the wider world, at least for those who could afford travel; another is the fascinating and erudite Virgilian Cento of the aristocratic Proba (Clark and Hatch 1981; Sandnes 2011: ch. 5).
Further reading: E. Clark 1990a, b; G. Clark 1992, 1995b; Elm 1994; Arjava 1996; Cooper 1996, 2013; sourcebook: E. Clark 1983 (Kraemer 1988 and Lefkowitz and Fant 1992, while much broader in coverage, include material on women and late antique Christianity).
15.1 The role of women in Christianisation: CIL 8.12260
The role of females in the penetration of Christianity among the Roman aristocracy has often been discussed (cf. 6.10). This inscription from the north African town of Tepelte, near Carthage (presumed to date from Constantine’s reign or later because of its overt reference to Christianity), reveals an analogous process occurring at the level of local elites in the provinces, and is corroborated by other north African evidence, including the well-known case of Augustine’s mother, Monica. ‘Aedile’ and duovir were two positions of political importance at the local community level. (Because the father had the epitaph prepared when he was still alive, a space was left to fill in his age after he died – but the executors of his will clearly forgot to do so.)
Further reading: Lepelley 1979–81: vol. 1, 361, vol. 2, 167.
Sacred to the eternal shades. Manilius Faustinianus, son of Manilius Victor and Fortunata, a former aedile and duovir, a man of honourable rank, devout, lived for <?> years. While still alive, he had this [epitaph] prepared for himself and his family. Sacred to the eternal shades. Mecenatia Secundula, a faithful [or ‘baptised’] Christian (cristiana fidelis [sic]), a woman of honourable rank, the wife of Manilius Faustinianus, <lived for ? years>, 2 months. Sacred to the eternal shades. Manilius Fortunatianus, son of Manilius Faustinianus, former aedile and duovir, a man of honourable rank, devout, lived for 32 years, 1 month.
15.2 Female clergy? Council of Nimes Canon 2 and Gelasius Letter 14.26
These two items – the first a ruling by a Gallic church council in the late fourth century, the second from a letter by the bishop of Rome to the bishops of the southern Italian regions of Lucania, Bruttium and Sicily in 494 – allude to situations where women had apparently been allowed to assume the role of clergy. The responses of the relevant authorities make clear that this was regarded as unacceptable and contrary to normal church practice (cf. 2.10).
(a) Council of Nimes Canon 2
It has also been suggested by certain people that, contrary to apostolic teaching and unknown until this time, women seem to have been accepted into the priestly ministry (ministerium leviticum) somewhere. Church teaching does not allow this because it is unseemly and such ordination, carried out contrary to reason, should be done away with. Care is to be taken that no one presumes to do this in future.
(b) Gelasius Letter 14.26
Nevertheless we have heard – it is intolerable – that contempt for divine matters has sunk so low that women are encouraged to minister at the sacred altars, and to carry out everything assigned only to the responsibility of the male gender, to which they do not belong.
15.3 Female involvement in ministry: Ancient Statutes of the Church Canon 100
Although excluded from being clergy, women were allowed to be deaconesses, a position sanctioned by the New Testament (Rom. 16.1, 1 Tim. 3.11). Their work including caring for the female poor and sick, but one of their most important tasks was – no doubt due to concerns about propriety – assisting in the baptism of women. This passage, from a treatise of the late fifth century that drew heavily on earlier handbooks about church organisation (cf. 12.4), reiterates their responsibilities in this respect.
Further reading: Gryson 1976.
Widows or nuns who are chosen for the ministry of baptising women should be trained for that responsibility in such a way that they are able to explain in clear and sensible language to uneducated peasant women at the time of their baptism how they should reply to the questions of the person baptising them and how they should live after they have received baptism.
15.4 An eminent female benefactor: the Greek Anthology 1.10 (lines 42–50, 74–6)
Preserved in a Byzantine collection of ancient epigrams and short poems, the poem from which this extract comes is a description of a church commemorating the third-century martyr St Polyeuctus. The church was built in Constantinople during the mid-520s by Anicia Juliana, a prominent aristocratic lady whose family could claim blood ties to a string of fifth-century emperors. This poem was the main source of knowledge about this church until 1960, when construction work in Istanbul revealed its physical remains – including beautiful marble blocks bearing portions of the original inscribed version of the poem which had adorned the walls of the church (Figure 15.4). These and other finds have confirmed that it must indeed have been an impressive and richly decorated structure. Since Juliana’s son, Anicius Olybrius, was a potential contender for the imperial throne on the death of the childless Anastasius in 518 (in addition to his distinguished descent, Olybrius was married to Anastasius’ niece), Juliana’s church has been seen not only as an expression of piety, but also as a pointed reassertion of family pride, badly bruised by the unexpected accession to imperial office of the backwoods-born guards officer Justin. The construction of the even more magnificent church of Hagia Sophia (14.5) in the 530s by Justin’s nephew and successor Justinian can in turn be viewed, at least in part, as the new imperial family’s riposte – a conclusion consistent with the tradition that Justinian exclaimed, on first entering his new church, ‘Solomon, I have vanquished you!’ (Harrison 1989: 40) and with his forbidding anyone thereafter to build a church without imperial sanction (Procopius Buildings 1.8.5).
Further reading: Harrison 1989 (including superb photographs of the excavations).
What choir is capable of doing justice to the achievements of Juliana, who, after Constantine, embellisher of his Rome, and after the holy golden light of Theodosius [II], and after the imperial origins of so many forebears, in a few years brought to completion a project worthy of her lineage, indeed more than worthy? She alone overpowered time and surpassed the wisdom of renowned Solomon by erecting a temple fit for God. An eternity is not sufficient to celebrate the expertly fashioned splendour of its beauty. . . . [A detailed description of the church follows.] After a vast host of exertions, Juliana realised an achievement on this scale for the sake of the souls of her parents and for her own life and the lives of those who are to come and those who already are.
15.5 The largesse of a Gothic lady: P. Ital. 13
Figure 15.4 Peacock arch with inscription from the church of St Polyeuctus, Constantinople
Source: Anthémios de Tralles / Wikimedia Commons
Although papyri are normally associated with Egypt, a small number from northern Italy have been preserved, and this one (the beginning of which is damaged) records the donation to the church at Ravenna of substantial property and other assets by a Gothic lady named Ranilo. Its date, soon after the end of Justinian’s protracted reconquest of the Italian peninsula from the Goths (535–52), explains the reference to ‘these disturbed times’ early in the document. The fact that the donor and her husband are Goths means they are likely to have been Arian in terms of original religious allegiance; ‘the characteristic intertwining of emperor and church [in this document] might just suggest that Ranilo and her husband, wealthy people of high rank, had recently converted [to Catholicism] in accordance with the imperial laws and were making a timely gift to prove their loyalty’ (Amory 1997: 409). On a more technical matter, it is unclear why the gift includes the requirement that the church immediately hand some of it over to Aderit’s illegitimate son, unless perhaps his illegitimacy created some difficulty in Ranilo making the gift directly to him.
< . . . > of my deceased father Aderit, one-time man of glorious rank (vir gloriosus), 50 pounds of silver; 100 solidi of income, that is, six twelfths of the Firmidian property, in the territory of Urbino, and of the < . . . > lian property, in the territory of Lucca, that is a half of each of these properties with all of their equipment and accessories and everything belonging to them, with all adjacent farmsteads and surrounding areas, their boundaries and boundary-markers, with their servants and slaves which are known to be on the specified properties, and if any of these who have run away during these disturbed times can be found, we grant permission for them to be held and brought back, established as you are through this my deed of gift as masters and agents of what is your property. We likewise give jewellery and clothing to the value of 50 solidi, of which your Holiness may claim power of ownership with full legal sanction from this present day. All these things accrued to me as inheritance from my father Aderit, one-time man of glorious rank, on whose instruction I openly declare myself to be acting.
From the aforementioned items, you for your part shall give as a gift to Ademunt, who is also called Andreas, my deceased father’s illegitimate son, 15 pounds of silver, one and a half twelfths of the aforementioned properties with all that belongs to them, and 50 solidi worth of jewellery and clothing. And invoking the day of the fearful Final Judgement and the safety of the victorious emperor who rules the Roman empire, I promise that neither I myself nor my descendants or successors will challenge this gift at any time or for any reason, especially since I have done this on the instruction of my father, and there can be no doubting that your defence and protection shelters me, just as you will also keep me safe from violent attacks in the future. Therefore, we have delivered the things which required delivery, and formally conveyed the things requiring formal conveyance. We promise that there is no bad faith in this legally accomplished gift nor will be. For the formalisation of the transfer we retain for ourselves the right to use and receive revenue from the aforementioned assets for a period of 30 days. With our agreement you also have full power to have this gift entered in the public records that you wish, without needing any further permission from us, and should it be necessary, I also promise that I will provide my response in the records, just as I have also at this time made my declaration to the councillors of this city.
With the full strength of the law and on the basis of considered deliberation, I have dictated [the terms of] this gift to Severus, public notary of the city of Ravenna, and since we do not know how to write, both I and my husband Felithanc, man of distinguished rank (vir sublimis), have imprinted our marks in our own hand, and I have provided witnesses to undersign. Confirmed by the formal request for and giving of a guarantee, I have made over [this gift] to you, most holy archbishop, and to your representatives in the presence of the undersigned, in the 27th year of the reign of our lord Justinian, on the day before the Nones of April, twelve years after the consulship of the younger Basilius, man of senatorial rank (vir clarissimus) [4 April 553]. Done at Ravenna, in the house of the donor’s husband, in the 1st year of the indiction.
Mark + of the aforementioned donor Ranilo, woman of distinguished rank (sublimis femina).
Mark + of the Felithanc, husband of the aforementioned, man of distinguished rank, which I, the public notary Severus, have added.
+ At the request of the donor, Ranilo, woman of distinguished rank, and her husband, Felithanc, man of distinguished rank, to whom [the terms of] this gift have been read out in my presence and who have made their marks, I, Laurentius, man of respectable rank (vir spectabilis), have undersigned as a witness, and the gift has been made over in my presence.
[The same formula is repeated by four other witnesses – Arborius, vir clarissimus, Bassus, vir clarissimus, Amantius, vir spectabilis, and a fourth whose name cannot be deciphered due to damage to the papyrus.]
I Severus, public notary, have completed this gift in full on the day and twelve years after the consulship written above.
15.6 Christianity and the ‘double standard’: Jerome Letter 77.3
The view that different, less stringent moral standards applied to men than women when it came to sexual behaviour was an ingrained feature of traditional Roman values and social practice (Treggiari 1991: 299–309). By contrast, Christianity insisted that men adhere to the same high standards of conduct as women and have sexual relations only with their wives. Although the need for writers and preachers to reiterate this point regularly shows that male behaviour was often resistant to change, the fact that the principle was championed remains a significant innovation from the point of view of women.
Further reading: E. Clark 1990a: 20–21; G. Clark 1992: 38–40.
The laws of the emperors and the laws of Christ are different. Papinian [a famous third-century jurist] advises one thing, our Paul another. Among them the reins of male chastity are relaxed, only sexual relations with respectable women, single or married, are condemned, and sexual gratification is allowed without restriction in brothels and with slave girls, as though guilt were a matter of the social rank [of the female], rather than of the lust [of the male]. Among us, what women are not permitted to do applies equally to men – both sexes serve [God] on the same terms.
15.7 Asceticism as a desirable alternative to marriage: Life of Olympias 2–6
The experiences of Olympias, a young woman of high birth in late fourth-century Constantinople, are of great interest for their illustration of the way the ascetic life could be a welcome alternative to marriage for some women, and the obstacles that might confront a woman of her status in achieving that objective. The identity of the author of the Life is uncertain, but is thought to be someone who knew Olympias.
Further reading: Clark 1979: ch. 3 (including a full translation).
(2) She was the daughter according to the flesh of Seleucus, one of the comites [the emperor’s ‘companions’], but according to the spirit, she was the true child of God. It is said that she was descended from Ablabius who was governor and she was bride for a few days of Nebridius, the prefect of the city of Constantinople, but in truth she did not grace the bed of anyone. For it is said she died an undefiled virgin, having become a partner of the divine Word, a consort of every true humility, a companion and servant of the holy, catholic and apostolic church of God. Left an orphan, she was joined in marriage to a husband, but by the goodness of God she was preserved uncorrupted in flesh and spirit. . . . [Her husband died after less than a year of marriage, and apparently without consummating it.]
(3) . . . Through a certain demonic jealousy, it transpired that her widowhood became the subject of mischief. She was falsely accused before the emperor Theodosius of having dispensed her goods in a disorderly fashion. Since indeed she was his relation, he took pains to unite her in marriage with a certain Elpidius, a Spaniard, one of his own relatives. He directed many persistent entreaties to her and when he failed to achieve his goal, he was annoyed. The pious Olympias, however, explained her position to the emperor Theodosius: ‘If my King, the Lord Jesus Christ, wanted me to be joined with a man, he would not have taken away my first husband immediately. Since he knew I was unsuited for the conjugal life and was not able to please a man, he freed him, Nebridius, from the bond and delivered me of this very burdensome yoke and servitude to a husband, having placed upon my mind the happy yoke of continence.’
(4) She clarified these things to the emperor Theodosius in this manner, before the plot against the most holy John, patriarch of Constantinople [John Chrysostom]. The emperor, when he heard the testimony against the pious Olympias, commanded the man then prefect of the city, Clementius, to keep her possessions under guard until she reached her thirtieth year, that is, her physical prime. And the prefect, having received the guardianship from the emperor, oppressed her to such a degree at Elpidius’ urging . . . so that groaning under the strain, she would meekly bear the option of marriage. But she, even more grateful to God, responded to these events by proclaiming, ‘You have shown toward my humble person, O sovereign master, a goodness befitting a king and suited to a bishop, when you commanded my very heavy burden to be put under careful guard, for the administration of it caused me anxiety. But you will do even better if you order that it be distributed to the poor and to the churches, for I prayed much to avoid the vainglory arising from the apportionment, lest I neglect true riches for those pertaining to material things.’
(5) The emperor, upon his return from the battle against Maximus [391], gave the order that she could exercise control over her own possessions, since he had heard of the intensity of her ascetic discipline. But she distributed all of her unlimited and immense wealth and assisted everyone, simply and without distinction. . . . She followed to the letter with intelligence the divinely inspired teachings of the most holy archbishop of this sacred church, John, and gave to him for this holy church . . . ten thousand pounds of gold, twenty thousand of silver and all her real estate situated in the provinces of Thrace, Galatia, Cappadocia Prima, and Bithynia; and more, the houses belonging to her in the capital city. . . .
(6) Then by the divine will she was ordained deaconess of this holy cathedral of God and she built a monastery at an angle south of it. . . . In the first quarter she enclosed her own chambermaids, numbering fifty, all of whom lived in purity and virginity. Next, Elisanthia, her relative who had seen the good work pleasing to God, which God gave her to carry out, also herself a virgin, emulating the divine zeal, bade farewell to the ephemeral and empty things of life with her sisters Martyria and Palladia, also virgins. Then the three entered with all the others, having made over in advance all their possessions to the same holy monastery . . . so that all those who gathered together according to the grace of God in that holy fold of Christ numbered two hundred and fifty.
(tr. E.A. Clark)
15.8 The establishment of a female monastery: Life of Pachomius (Bohairic) 27
This passage from the Life of Pachomius (cf. 11.2) relates the decision of Pachomius’ sister to emulate her brother and the resulting foundation of a female monastery. Significantly, however, the monastery is effectively under the authority of males, directly through the role of Peter and indirectly through Pachomius formulating their rules.
Further reading: Elm 1994: 289–96.
(27) Pachomius’ sister, whose name was Mary and who had been a virgin from childhood, heard about him and she came north to see him at Tabennesi. When he was told she had arrived, he sent the brother who watched the door of the monastery to tell her, ‘I see you have learned I am alive. Do not be distressed, however, because you have not seen me. But if you wish to share in this holy life so that you may find mercy before God, examine yourself on every point. The brothers will build a place for you to retire to. And doubtless, for your sake the Lord will call others to you, and they will be saved because of you . . . .’ When she heard these words from the lips of the porter she wept, and she accepted the advice. When our father Pachomius had found that her heart inclined to the good and right life, he immediately sent the brothers over to build a monastery for her in that village, a short distance from his own monastery; it included a small oratory. Later on many heard about her and came to live with her. They practised ascēsis eagerly with her, and she was their mother and their worthy elder until her death. When our father Pachomius saw that the number of [these women] was increasing somewhat, he appointed an old man called Apa Peter, whose ‘speech was seasoned with salt’ [Col. 4.6] to be their father and to preach frequently to them on the Scriptures for their souls’ salvation. [Pachomius] also wrote down in a book the rules of the brothers and sent them to them through [Peter], so that they might learn them.
15.9 Asceticism as a family strategy: Basil of Caesarea Letters 199.18
In this extract from a letter written in 375, Basil, bishop of Caesarea and a leading light in the development of ascetic practice, articulates the need for care and common sense before allowing young girls to dedicate themselves to a life of virginity (a decision that the church regarded as irrevocable once made). In particular, he notes the practice of some families dedicating daughters for the wrong motives. He does not elaborate, but one can well imagine its attractiveness as a strategy for avoiding provision of a dowry or, in the case of poverty stricken families, as a way of reducing the pressure on meagre family resources.
Further reading: Arjava 1996: 164–7.
Now we need to agree on this first – a virgin is defined as a female who has willingly offered herself to the Lord, renounced marriage, and preferred the life of holiness. We admit those who make their profession from the time they have reached an age when they fully understand. For it is not proper to regard the words of children as being fully authoritative in matters of this sort, but if a girl is older than sixteen or seventeen and is in possession of her reason, if she remains intent after being questioned at length and persists in her entreaties that she be accepted, then she should be entered on the list of virgins, her profession should be approved, and any violation on her part should be strictly punished. For parents, brothers, and other relatives present many girls [for dedication to virginity] before this age, not because the girl is eager to embrace celibacy on her own initiative, but because the family want to organise some means of living for themselves. Girls in this situation should not be readily admitted until we have clearly investigated their own wishes in the matter.
15.10 Asceticism and gender boundaries: Life of Melania the Younger 15, 39
The life of the younger Melania, a woman from a prominent and wealthy Roman aristocratic family in the early fifth century who pursued an ascetic lifestyle, presents many interesting parallels with the experiences of Olympias (15.7). Melania was unable to avoid marriage, so intent were her parents that she should provide an heir to the family fortune. However, after marrying and bearing two children who died in infancy, she persuaded her husband Pinianus (from another wealthy aristocratic family) to pursue an ascetic life, including marital chastity. Their decision eventually took them to the eastern Mediterranean, with its traditions of ascetic practice. While the first of the two chapters below is of interest as evidence of wealthy Christians divesting themselves of their property and devoting the proceeds to charitable purposes, what is particularly striking is the way in which Melania is presented as a woman of determined initiative. Indeed, in the second chapter (relating to their time in Egypt) the highest praise the author is able to give her for her ascetic discipline is to reclassify her as male (which, intriguingly, is further equated here with a heavenly state).
Further reading: G. Clark 1992: 128–30; Cloke 1995 (and for a full translation of the Life, E. Clark 1984).
15. Concerning their wealth, I have not reported in any detail what I heard from the mouth of the blessed man [Melania’s husband, Pinianus]. For he said that their annual income was twelve thousand [solidi], more or less, without taking account of his wife’s property. As for their moveable goods, they were so great that their value could not be estimated. Promptly and eagerly they began to divide up their wealth, entrusting the administering of this charity to holy men. They sent it to different regions, so to one four thousand [solidi], to another three, to another two, and to another one, and so on as the Lord enabled them. For the holy woman herself [Melania] said to her blessed fellow-worker and brother [Pinianus], ‘The burden of life is very heavy for us, and being caught up in these things, we are not able to take on Christ’s light yoke [Matt. 11.30]. So let us make haste to put aside all our wealth, in order to gain Christ [Phil. 3.8].’ He received these admonitions of the blessed woman as coming from God, and they dispersed their possessions with a generous hand . . .
39. After making this excursion they returned again to Alexandria and had the honour of seeing many holy men. Among others they met the head of the monks of Tabennesi and the very holy abbot Victor, as well as the very devout fathers and monastery heads known as the Zeugetes and another holy priest named Elias and many others who, on account of their number, it is unnecessary to mention by name. The blessed woman was eager to receive the benefit and blessing of each holy man and to partake of their virtue. Leaving Alexandria, they went to the mountain of Nitria and the so-called ‘Cells’, where the fathers of the most holy men there received the blessed woman as though she were a man. For it is true that she had exceeded the limit of the female gender (to gynaikeion metron) and had acquired a masculine – or rather, a heavenly – mentality (phronema andreion mallon de ouranion).