#lang scribble/base
@(require "../Bibliography/cite.rkt"
          scriblib/footnote
          "../Images/image-support.rkt")

@define-cite-footnote[footnote
                      make-footnote
                      cite-footnote]

@title{Ceremonial Associations with Textile Production}
 

Outside of practical production for either domestic or commercial purposes, associations between women and wool-work is most directly associated with three aspects of a woman's life: marriage, childbirth, and death.@cite-footnote[Cottica2006 203] These are, unsurprisingly, the three notable events in a woman's life that are likely to be noted in literary, historical, or epigraphic sources. As rites of passage, these events are also deeply steeped in tradition and ceremony, a potential reason for their continued association with textile production after it had fallen out of the daily routines of the average woman in the Roman world.   

@section{Marriage}

Textile production played a prominent role in no less than three aspects of the preparation for and execution of the marriage ceremony for a Roman bride.@footnote{There is no one primary source that outlines the Roman marriage ceremony. Most fragmentary accounts come from the antiquarians. As of right now, I am having trouble tracking down all of the primary sources, so this account is largely based off of secondary sources, particularly @cite[Treggiari1991 "161-170"]} The bridal attire itself served as an advertisement for the bride's suitability as a wife, as she wove the traditional @italic{tunica reta} and yellow hair net that she would wear in the ceremony herself.@cite-footnote[DAmbra2007 73] She was thus able to demonstrate to her groom her ability to contribute to his household through her craftsmanship.

After the bride and groom's hands had been joined, the bride would be led by three boys in a ceremonial procession, the @italic{deductio in domum mariti,} from her father's home to the groom's home. As part of this procession, either the bride or her attendants would carry a spindle or distaff.@footnote{Varro @italic{LL} 5.61; Plut. @italic{QR} 1; @cite[Treggiari1991 166]} Once the bridal procession arrived at the groom's house, the bride attached woolen fillets to the doorpost and annointed it with oils or fats.@footnote{Pliny @italic{NH} 28.142,29,30; Plut. @italic{QR} 31; @cite[Treggiari1991 168]; @cite[DAmbra2007 74]}

Other aspects of the ceremony reflected the bride's chastity, and firtility. The inclusion of textile production, textile tools, and woolen fillets in the wedding ceremony highlighted her productivity and contributions to the household.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven2013-production 230] In a functional sense, these traditions called on the woman's ability to contribute to the household, even if her role in textile production in the day-to-day running of the household would have been primarily supervisory. Symbolically, spinning and weaving in this context represented the formation of a new family with the bride as the agent.@cite-footnote[Cottica2006 191] This metaphor is expanded on a larger scale as the fabric of society. @;expand on this with citations

@section{Funerary rites}

Textile evidence can be interpreted on a spectrum: a spindle whorl in a domestic context with signs of use was likely a practical tool used in production; a similar spindle whorl with signs of use discovered in a funerary context may maintain the practical past but its presence as a grave good has imbued it with some ceremonial significance; an image of a seated woman spinning on a gravestone represents the further abstraction of the object into a symbol of feminine virtue. Given that funerary practices are inherently ceremonial and imbued with cultural significance outside of practical use, textile references from graves are the most concrete evidence of the symbolic nature of textile production.@cite-footnote[Cottica2006 200] In this role, textile tools as grave goods, depictions of textile tools, and epigraphs are ideologically linked to gender.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven2013-production 122]

@subsection{Grave goods}

Spindle whorls, distaffs, loom weights, needles, and other textile tools are common grave goods throughout the ancient world. To the extent that any artifact can be associated with a specific gender, spindle whorls have long been associated with women to the extent that they are often used in conjunction with objects such as jewelry and cosmetic bottles to indicate women's burial assemblages. This practice can be seen at sites throughout the Roman empire. Grave goods from Rome, for example, include spindle whorls,@cite-footnote[Lipkin2012 25] spools,@cite-footnote[Lipkin2012 38] loom weights,@cite-footnote[Lipkin2012 48] and a distaff.@cite-footnote[Lipkin2012 59] @;find more examples from other sites, maybe Allison on Pompeii?

The funerary assemblage of spindle, whorl, and distaff from a sarcophagus of a woman and her unborn child in Ephesus @figures["Trinkl1994_1"] fits stylistically within the larger set of distaffs found in the Roman terrace houses and other contexts across the city. In its use as a grave good, the distaff maintained the same connotations as those found in domestic contexts while continuing its object-life with a new layer of meaning.

In Roman Pannonia, distaffs made of precious materials and often decorated were frequent grave-goods for adult women.@cite-footnote[PasztokaiSzeoke2011 126] One finger distaff from Pannonia depicts a nude female figure shaded under the branches of a tree, holding an infant @figures["Pannonia1"]. This image can easily be compared to the figural distaffs from Ephesus @figures["Trinkl1" "Trinkl4" "Trinkl2"]. The figural distaff from Pannonia as an object is more directly associated with motherhood. In addition to the baby in her arms, this figure lacks the drapery around her waist therefore displaying a prominant pubic triangle and a line along her abdomen has been interpreted as a scar from a caesarian section.@cite-footnote[PasztokaiSzeoke2011 133] Spindle whorls from Pannonia show little distinction between those found in funerary contexts and those found elsewhere. The distaffs that were used as grave goods, however, are distinctly made of precious materials that were not common in other contexts (ivory, glass, amber, and bronze).

@subsection{Funerary Iconography}

While depictions of women spinning and participating in other stages of wool-work were ubiquitous in Greek art in a variety of contexts, they are rare in Roman art. The most abundant source for textile iconography in Roman art is found in funerary contexts. In contrast to the familiar scenes from Greek vases of women actively engaged in textile crafts, Roman examples tend to be stationary and present the objects more as attributes than tools in use.@cite-footnote[Cottica2006 203]

In the grave relief of Ulpia Epigone, for example, the deceased is depicted in an entirely passive pose, reclining on a kline with a wool basket at her feet @figures["UlpiaEpigone"].@footnote{@cite[LarssonLoven2002] 83 and @cite[DAmbra1989]} In other reliefs, the loaded spindles or distaffs are depicted hovering in the periphery of the portrait unused.@footnote{Get examples from Laarson Loven's dissertation once I can get a copy of the book again} In the funerary relief of Ba'altega from Palmyra, the deceased holds a ring-distaff in her left hand, but is not actively spinning @figures["Harvard1908_3"]. The textile tools in these depictions equate to a symbolic formula denoting domesticity and virtue.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven1997 91]

As seen in epigraphs and written references to textiles, there are distinguishable types of representation between idealized domestic production, typically associated with women's graves, and commercial production, more frequently associated with men's graves. The women, as described above, are generally an inert idealized type, whereas the men are more likely to be depicted actively participating in their work and have more individualized portraiture.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven2007 231] The Igel column reflects both of these aspects of industry-based representation with individualistic portraits as well as genre scenes depicting various actions and transactions in textile trade.

While the majority of these depictions are within the context of funerary portraits, a fresco in the Hypogeum of the Aurelii contains one of the only representations of a Roman two-beam loom in the midst of other mythological scenes @figures["Aurelii"].@cite-footnote[Wild1976] While the loom has been interpreted as the myth of Penelope or Arachne, there is nothing to definitively tie it to any one myth. In fact, the woman standing beside the loom is facing away and clearly not weaving. It does serve as a divider between two scenes in the claustrophobic fresco.@;include more research here... this is seat of the pants


@subsection{Epigraphic References to Textile Production}

Much of our knowledge of specific women and their association to wool working comes from funerary contexts. Epigraphs are divided into two types of associations with wool work. Many commemorations honor the virtuous housewife through the ideal of textile production in conjunction with other domestic or maternal praise.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven1997] These appear on the monuments of upper class women whose role in the actual production of textiles may have been only nominal as well as the monuments of freedwomen who are highlighting their domestic roles over other positions they may have heald. Other funerary inscriptions reveal the slaves and freedwomen who worked professionally in the textile industry and are identified by job titles.@footnote{@cite[LarssonLoven1997]; @cite[LarssonLoven2013-production]; @cite[BiettiSestieri2008]} While idealized epitaphs are only associated with women, funerary inscriptions identifying job titles in textile production include male slaves and freedmen amongst the ranks of women.

@subsection{Virtuous Housewives}

Much like the literary trend discussed above, funerary inscriptions from Rome and elsewhere in the empire follow a formula for female virtues which include textile production tied in with the roles of wife and mother.@footnote{ While there are no epigraphs from any of the three case-studies discussed in this work, I felt that the practice within the empire as a whole was still relevant to discuss in the synthesis chapter.} In the simplest instances, wool-work is merely included in a list of other feminine virtues: "Here lies Amymone, wife of Marcus, most good and most beautiful, wool-spinner, dutiful, modest, careful, chaste, stay-at-home." @footnote{ @italic{CIL} 6.11602 as translated in Aldrete 2004 90} In this case, Amymone is described as a @italic{lanifica} or wool-spinner. Elsewhere, this term is used as a job title,@cite-footnote[Treggiari1976 82] but paired with the term @italic{domiseda,} stay at home, ties it to the domestic tradition.

@nested[#:style 'inset]{Stranger, my message is short. Stand and read it through. Here is the unlovely tomb of a lovely woman. Her parents named her Claudia. She loved her husband with all her heart. She bore two sons; of these she leaves one above ground, but one has already been laid within the earth. She was charming in conversation and gentle in manner. She kept the house, and she spun wool. That is all there is to say. Go now.@footnote{ @italic{CIL} 1.1211 as translated in Aldrete 2004 90}}
@;include dates and locations for epigraphs

An epigraph to Claudia from Rome first highlights her role as a daughter, wife, and mother of sons with an emphasis on the fact that one of her sons predeceased her. Proceeding to describe the deceased herself, it notes that she was charming and gentle, that she kept the house, and she spun wool. This inscription uses the phrase @italic{lanam fecit,} she spun/worked with wool, emphasizing wool-work as an activity that reflects a virtue rather than a virtue itself.

@nested[#:style 'inset]{...Hereby my mother, dearest to me, won the greatest praise of all, in that in modesty, decency, chastity, obedience, woolmaking, zeal, and loyalty she was like and similar to other good women.@footnote{ @italic{CIL} 6.10230, as translated in Horsfall 1982, 30-31}}

An epigraph to Murdia uses @italic{lanificia} as a virtue in a list reiterating many of the same themes seen in the other epigraphs and highlighted in the story of Lucretia: @italic{modestia, probitate, pudicitia, sequio, diligentia, fide.} The epigraph then self-reflectively identifies that this is a formula by noting that these are characteristics common to all good women. 

@nested[#:style 'inset]{Why should I mention your personal virtues - your modesty, obedience, affability, and good nature, your tireless attention to wool-working, your performance of religious duties without superstitious fear, your artless elegance and simplicity of dress? Why speak about your affection toward your relatives, your sense of duty toward your family (for you cared for my mother as you cared for you own parents)? Why recall the countless other virtues which you have in common with all Roman matrons worth of that name? The virtues I claim for you are your own special virtues; few people have possessed similar ones or been known to possess them. The history of the human race tells us how rare they are.@footnote{ @italic{CIL} 6.1527 As Translated by S. Treggiari}}
@;http://www.attalus.org/docs/cil/epitaph.html#6.1527

We have fragments from an epigraph commonly referred to as the @italic{Laudatio Turiae} from multiple locations in Rome. This detailed funerary inscription from a husband to his wife is the longest known private epigraph from Rome. The full epigraph tells the compelling story of a brave woman who not only persisted through the danger of the proscriptions but saved her husband's life as well. The short excerpt cited above both draws on and subverts the formula we see in the epigraph to Murdia. Following his detailed summary of his wife's heroic and brave deeds, he questions whether he needs to follow the standard formula for feminine praise when she has so many unique virtues that set her apart from other women. In questioning whether it is necessary, however, he nonetheless utilizes and expands the standard list. She doesn't just work with wool but had a tireless attention to wool-working @italic{(comitatis facilitatis lanificii studii).}  

Funerary epigraphs, typically provided by the father, husband, or son(s) for a deceased woman, are written by the surviving family and often reflect their priorities.@cite-footnote[Saller2007 90] They frequently name the men in the woman's life -- sometimes even omitting the name of the deceased herself in favor of her husband or father's name. The inscription to Claudia is interesting in that while her parents, husband, and sons are all mentioned, she is the only one named.
@;Do more analysis of the epigraphs as a whole. How do these differ from 'job title' epigraphs, even if it is a 'job title' women are more likely to be identified by their domestic merits than their professional roles based on Roman gender ideologies @cite-footnote[LarssonLoven2007 124] etc. 

@subsection{Job Titles}

While the funerary inscriptions honoring domestic textile skills discussed above appeared exclusively on women's graves, epigraphs listing professional titles include both men and women.@footnote{Unlike the formulaic epigraphs lauding domestic production of textiles, epigraphs with job titles tend to be shorter and include the decedent's name, their job title, and potentially their freed/slave status and their employer/owner's name. Because of this, there is less to parse in the inscriptions themselves and I will present the job titles themselves and include a list of the relevant inscription numbers from the @italic{Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum} for each in the footnotes.} It is important to note that these professional titles span both domestic and commercial production. The majority of the funerary inscriptions that list job titles were for slaves or freedmen/women, many of whom served within a @italic{domus} while others worked in centralized production centers. 

The only job title that was exclusively associated with women was that of @italic{quasillaria}, or spinner.@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6:9495, 9849a, 9840. @cite[Treggiari1976] 82, @cite[LarssonLoven1998] 75} While this task accounted for a large portion of the labor hours invested textile production, it could be done from almost anywhere and was likely often done from within the home even if the product of spun-wool was then sold to more commercial manufactures. The extent of textile production that occurred within each @italic{domus} varied greatly and would have been dependent on size, status, number of servants. The eight spinners listed on the monument of the Statilii suggests either a household that participated in this practice or potentially a centralized production center.@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6:6339-6346 (MS) as cited in @cite[Treggiari1976], 82.} The numbers of spinners attested to in epigraphs is realistically only a small portion of slaves and servants who would have spun wool as part of their domestic service since most households did not have enough servants to have dedicated servants for each specialized task.

The job of weaver, @italic{textor/textrix,}@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven1998 75] could be undertaken by a woman or a man either within the home or in centralized weaving houses. Two of the four weavers on the monument of the Statilii were women.@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6360-6362, @cite[Treggiari1976] 82.} The @italic{lanipendius/lanipenda} was the supervisor of textile production within a @italic{domus} who measured out the daily amount of wool to spin.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven1998 75] Within many households, this was the only textile-related job title commemorated in the epigraphic evidence.@cite-footnote[Treggiari1976 82] Whether this role was a man or woman was apparently dependent on the social class of the household. Imperial residences and those of the wealthiest aristocrats employed male @italic{lanipendii} as a status symbol.@footnote{@italic{CIL} 3976-3977 (ML), 6300 (MS), 37755, 8870, 9495} @italic{Lanipendae} were employed by families that were prosperous but less ostentatious.@footnote{@italic{CIL} 9496, 9497, 9498, 34273, 37721} The @italic{lanipendius/a} worked under the supervision of the @italic{matrona}, and in more modest households, this role would have filled by the lady of the house herself.@cite-footnote[Treggiari1976 83] 

Other roles in the Roman textile market were almost entirely occupied by men in the epigraphic evidence. The task of dying was carried out by the @italic{tinctor,@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6:9936} infector,}@footnote{@italic{CIL} 4:7812; 5:997; 6:33861} or @italic{offector}@footnote{@italic{CIL} 4:864} respectively depending on whether they were dying fleece, new material, or re-purposed cloth. These titles only appeared in epigraphs for men.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven1998 74] We have only a loose idea of the duties of the @italic{lanarius}@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6:9498} and his counterparts the @italic{linarius}@footnote{@italic{CIL} 5:1041, 3217; 6:7468; 11:3209, 6228} and @italic{purpurarius} who were involved in some managerial role in the production or sale of wool, linen, and purple fabrics respectively.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven1998 74] These managerial roles are almost exclusively associated with men, the only exceptions being one female @italic{purpuraria}@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6:9846} and one female @italic{linaria} who is commemorated alongside a @italic{linarius.}@footnote{@italic{CIL} 5:5923. @cite[LarssonLoven1998 75]} 

After the cloth has been produced, dyed, and distributed, the final stage is clothing production. Tailors can be divided into two groups. @italic{Vestarii/vestariae} were tailors working commercially out of shops.@cite-footnote[Treggiari1976 84] In this profession, the majority of epigraphs are for male @italic{vestarii}@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6:2825, 4044, 4196, 4476, 9962-70; 4:3130; 5:324, 3460, 7379-80; 9:1712; 10:3959-60, 3963; 11:868-69, 6839. @cite[LarssonLoven1998 76]} with a few outlying cases of female @italic{vestariae.}@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6:8557, 9961, @cite[Treggiari1976] 85; @cite[LarssonLoven1998 76]} @italic{Vestifices/vestifci/vestificae} were part of a domestic staff that produced clothing for the household.@footnote{@italic{CIL} 5206, 9980, 9744, @cite[Treggiari1976 84]} This role could be filled by either female or male servants. The related role of @italic{sarcinator/sarcinatrice,} who mended existing clothes within a household was more frequently performed by women.@footnote{@italic{CIL} 6:4028 (ML), 9038, 8903, 3988, 4029 (ML), 5357, 4467, 9039, 4434, 4468, 9037, 6349-6451, @cite[Treggiari1976], 85}

From this epigraphic evidence, it is evident that certain jobs within textile production were separated by gender. With the exception of some outliers, this split falls roughly between the division between public and private spheres. Jobs occupied by women could typically be performed in the household, jobs that were occupied only by men required either specialized production centers or contact with larger trade or commercial networks. The jobs that were occupied by both women and men could be performed either domestically or commercially. Within the @italic{domus,} female servants predominated though male servants could be indicators of social status.

@;As discussed in the previous section, women are more likely to be identified by their domestic merits than their professional roles based on Roman gender ideologies.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven2007 124] Therefore, even within a craft that is so culturally associated with women as textile production, professional titles appear in higher quantities of epigraphs for men than women. In the case of a freedwoman who worked as a spinner, it is more  For many domestic servants, tasks like spinning and weaving were likely part of a larger set of duties and therefore their 

@section{Religion}

Since there is little direct evidence between religion and textile production from Karanis, Trier, or Ephesus, I will not belabour this section. However, I felt it deserved some acknowledgment as part of my interpretation of the distaffs from Ephesus. In the Roman empire overall, religious associations of textile production manifested in two forms: the production of textiles for religious purposes or in religious spaces; and the use of textile tools as votive offerings at sanctuaries.

Although textile tools appear in smaller numbers at temples across the spectrum of the pantheon, they are found with most frequency in temples of female deities, particularly Diana.@cite-footnote[Cottica2006] From the archaeological evidence, it is often difficult to discern whether the objects served as votive offerings or evidence of sacred production.@cite-footnote[Meyers2013] The three loom weights found in the temple at Karanis, for example, can be discounted as evidence of sacred production because a much larger set of weights was required for a functioning loom; however, sets of loom weights or spindles could be evidence of either.

@nested[#:style 'inset]{"Gaia Caecilia consort of one of Tarquin`s sons, a fair and virtuous woman, whose statue in bronze stands in the temple of Sanctus. And both her sandals and her spindle were, in ancient days, dedicated there as tokens of her love of home and of her industry respectively."@footnote{Plutarch, @italic{Questiones Romanae} 30}}

Literary sources reference both of these religious connotations for textiles and textile tools. As in the case of Plutarch's account of Gaia Caecilia above, he connects the practice of leaving textile tools as votive offerings as an ancient tradition. Literary sources also indicate that women made votive offerings of home-made textiles at many of the same temples.@cite-footnote[Kleijwegt2002] This does not directly correspond to religious production of textiles, as the work does not occur within the sanctuary, it implies that women crafted some textiles with intent as votive offerings. 

@;"We should not forget that the objects in question were ... conceived, & represented as divine attributes, then transfered to heroines & subsequently adopted to depict aristocratic women."@cite-footnote[Cottica2006 200]



@;Religious finds from Rome include a votive deposit with 25 loom weights on the Palatine Hill as well as spools from a votive deposit of Velia.@cite-footnote[Lipkin2012]

@section{Ceremonial functions of Ephesus distaffs}


The distaffs discovered in the Roman terrace houses and other contexts in Ephesus were not likely created for daily use. Given their precious material and ornate decoration, they likely served some ceremonial purpose but since they were predominantly found in homes, their context does not concretely identify that purpose. Of the fifteen finger distaffs discussed above @figures["Trinkl1" "Trinkl4" "Trinkl2" "Trinkl3" "Trinkl6" "Trinkl5" "Trinkl7" "Trinkl8" "Trinkl9" "Trinkl1994_1" "Trinkl10" "Trinkl11" "Trinkl12" "Trinkl12" "Trinkl13" "Trinkl14" "Trinkl15"], only the distaff discovered in the Damianosstoa has a concrete funerary association as a grave good.

Given their domestic context and the strong association between women and textiles outlined in the preceding chapter, Elizabeth Trinkl concludes that they were intended as opulent status symbols to display the domestic power of the @italic{matrona.}@cite-footnote[Trinkl2004] In her opinion the precious materials, the level of decoration, and the placement of embellishments at the intersection of the shaft and the ring rule out the possibility of use.

Since we have examples of the same object type from both domestic and funerary contexts, I approach these distaffs in terms of changing meanings throughout the object's life. Like many artifact types, textile evidence can be interpreted on a spectrum: a spindle whorl in a domestic context with signs of use was likely a practical tool used in production; the same spindle whorl in a funerary context may maintain the practical past but its presence as a grave good has imbued it with some ceremonial significance; an image of a seated woman spinning on a gravestone represents the further abstraction of the object into a symbol of feminine virtue. The same principal can be applied to the distaffs from Ephesus.

Given the importance of textile-tools to marriage, child-birth, and death discussed above, I argue that these distaffs could have accompanied women through these various milestones in their lives. Their decoration and material, while certainly discounting them for regular use, would not have prohibited them from use for ceremonial purposes.@footnote{Forthcoming: I intend to test this theory by making scale-models of a sampling of these artifacts and testing their usability. Unfortunately, this process is on hold until stay at home orders ease up and I have access to a kiln.} It is possible that they were, as Trinkl suggests, gifted to a bride on her wedding as a symbol of her new status as a @italic{matrona.} The distaffs could be employed for certain ceremonial uses: to create parts of her wedding attire, carry in her wedding procession, as a symbol of fertility, and perhaps for religious production of textiles. The symbolic function of the artifact could shift as the circumstances of the woman's life changed and ultimately accompany her to the grave. 

@;They could have been used in religious production of textiles or as part of a bridal procession.@footnote{@cite[Cottica2006]; Pliny, @italic{Natural History} 8.74} In Roman wedding processions the bride approached her husband's home carrying a spindle and distaff.@cite-footnote[LarssonLoven2007] Women in both Greece and Rome traditionally wove items of their bridal attire themselves as a display of their skill in domestic crafts and as a symbol of their purity and fertility.@footnote{@cite[LarssonLoven2007 7]; @cite[DAmbra2007 94]; @cite[Cottica2006 191]} The association between votive offerings of textile implements and textiles at sanctuaries discussed above appears to frequently coincide with the transition from maiden to matron on the occasion of her wedding.

@;find Bammer image

@make-footnote[]

@(generate-chapter-bibliography)