“…reputable women registered themselves as prostitutes to avoid the punishment for adultery…”
”…the masculinity of a man (penetrator/active) could be asserted by sleeping with cinaedus (penetratee/passive) men…”
When we think of ancient Rome, one of the first images that springs to mind is toga sporting Romans. But, surprisingly, not everyone wore togas. Only free-born Roman men were allowed to wear togas as a sign of Roman citizenship, while Roman women wore stolas.
Strangely, prostitutes were forbidden to wear the stola, so instead they wore togas!
A fresco from Pompei, famous for its brothels in ancient Rome, depicting two men and a woman having sex
Prostitution is often said to be the oldest profession. In Rome, it was a thriving business as well.
According to Ancient Roman laws, legal status of prostitutes was defined as infames (disreputables).
Interestingly, not only was the label of infamis given to prostitutes, but also to gladiators, actors and other public performers. This designation meant that members of these professions were restricted from various aspects of public life, such as standing for election to magistrate or being allowed to speak in a court of law. They were also viewed as symbols of shame and allowed to be beaten, mutilated and violated by others without fear of punishment - so much so that a husband was allowed of to kill his wife’s lover if they were infames on the condition he then divorced her within three days and began the case against her for adultery.
Since the legal restriction on infames overlaps with the legal restrictions already placed on women, it likely had less of an effect on female than on male prostitutes.
A Roman family
However, while the designation of infamia may not appear to have much of an additional effect on a female prostitute in terms of legal restrictions, it was significant in many other ways.
The most important effect is that the label of infamia was carried for life. Other similar punishments, such as those imposed on disgraced soldiers or criminals, had time limits.
This legal status had also an effect on those around infames. Pimps were likewise defined as infames, and if an attempt to convict a woman of adultery failed, the husband could then be prosecuted for pimping and become infamis himself.
Roman tradition ascribed to fathers and husbands great severity in punishing illicit sexual behaviour by daughters or wives. Such misconduct was stuprum in married or unmarried women, an offence against chastity (pudicitia); adulterium described sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband.
Until the legislation of Emperor Augustus, regulation was chiefly in the hands of the family: adultery almost always justified divorce; a family council might advise the paterfamilias (husband or father in whose power the woman was) on this and other sanctions, including honor killing.
The immediate killing of adulteresses caught in the act was considered morally and traditionally permissible but not legally prescribed. Other physical violence against the adulteresses was common.
Adultery in the late republic, like the seduction or rape of an unmarried woman, entitled the father or husband to sue the man for damages for insult and not only to divorce the wife but to retain part of her dowry.
However, the standard judicial penalty for adulterers was relegatio (banishment) to different islands, and partial confiscation of property and dowry. The husband with clear evidence had to divorce or be liable to a charge of lenocinium (tacit encouragement of, or assent to, adultery committed by one's partner) and risk facing similar penalties.
There are some curious cases where some reputable women registered themselves as prostitutes to avoid the punishment and fines for adultery. But, the risk for a husband whose wife admitted being a prostitute, be it true or not, was to be identified alongside her as infamis.
Curiously enough, a female Roman citizen could become a slave if she had a sexual relationship with another man's slave despite the master's objection.
Woman wearing a yellow palla and white stola
An unmarried prostitute could marry a free man, but again he would have to carry the infamis identity once they were married. Emperor Augustus later brought in legislation to ban any woman who was, or had been, a prostitute from ever marrying a freeborn male citizen. This practically meant ostracism of anyone identified as a prostitute.
In Ancient Rome, prostitutes along with actors were seen as the worst of the infames, and were often viewed as being the same. As you would have guessed, both professions were seen as “faking it” for money, and therefore considered being the same in practice.
So, for Romans, the identity of a prostitute was beyond their profession, focus was more on the fakery being essence of their profession. It should be remembered that these legal designations, such as infamia, were in direct correlation with the perceived social attitudes. To prevent nobles from marrying infames or partaking in professions carrying infamia stigma, more severe laws were enacted.
It is apparent that one of the major reasons for defining prostitutes as infames is to create a boundary between them and the rest of society. In a society where honor was held in high esteem, prostitution could be used as an example of negative role model, or what not to be, providing a contrast to the honorable in society.
Another way in which the sex industry is further set aside from Roman society was through the concept of “moral zoning” by deliberately placing them in hidden areas in the cities.
However, moral zoning of a city might be a little simplistic approach. While defining social class was important in Rome, the physical segregation of elites and the poor in city planning was not that clear cut. While most elites tended to live in the same area, they were not totally cut off from other segments of the Roman society.
A deeper aspect of a prostitute’s identity can be understood through Ancient Roman attitudes towards sexuality. Sexuality in a modern Western definition tends to fall into categories of gender preference. In simplified terms, it is defined across an axis of heterosexual and homosexual, although there are many shades within this spectrum.
But, the Ancient Roman definition included distinct rules and role assignments of its own. Their yardstick was that of active (vir) and passive (cinaedus). The role of the vir partner is that of penetration and sexual enjoyment. In contrast cinaedus is a passive role, designed to allow the vir to experience their pleasure through receiving their penetration.
Therefore the definition of someone’s sexuality falls along these lines, regardless of the gender they are having sex with. Bisexuality was allegedly common, although this definition would have made no sense at the time. The idea of a man sleeping with another man did not bring into question the masculinity of either because the penetrator (vir) is still seen as masculine.
Ironically, the masculinity of an individual could be asserted by sleeping with cinaedus men.
On the other hand, a woman who took on the active vir role was seen as unusual and masculine in her enjoyment of sex, and was often identified as a prostitute or adulteress, which was socially unacceptable.
Different types of Roman togas
In order to set them aside from normal female society, a prostitute or adulteress was classed as togata, meaning she wore a toga: another symbol of masculinity.
This adds yet another layer to the identity of the prostitute. The identity of togata in describing a woman did not always make a distinction between adulteress and prostitute, suggesting they may be interchangeable in this regard in a similar way as prostitutes and actors in their given roles of infames.
By the way, Ancient Rome is not the only period or place where female prostitutes wore men’s clothing to represent their masculine sexual appetite. Prostitutes in Elizabethan England and in 16th century Venice also wore men’s clothing for this reason.
A woman wearing a toga, as well as representing masculinity in sexual preference, was regarded as an unconventional public figure, to say the least, because noble Roman women did not go out in public alone, or conduct business in the public eye.
A prostitute stood in stark contrast to the image of honorable Roman woman, being visible in public and always alone. Prostitutes again acted more like a male would have than a female, who would stay at home or go out with attendants.
The term togata represented the identity of a prostitute on two levels: that of a woman with a sexual preference that defied the Roman norms, values and traditions, and that of someone who worked in public and went out unattended.
There are descriptions of elite women discarding the stola to “advertise” themselves sexually. The stola, like the toga, may well have been abandoned over time as an impractical and hot garment, rather than as an attempt to proclaim sexual willingness.
One of the practical reasons for different clothing for noble women and prostitutes was complaints by men regarding moral and immoral women becoming indistinguishable in public sphere.
To conclude, instead of having one simple definition for the identity of the female prostitute in Ancient Rome, there is a multi-layered socio-economic and cultural identity.
Nevertheless, just like today, in an unabashed display of hypocrisy, prostitutes in Roman society were considered dishonorable, disreputable, untrustworthy and deserving segregation from society, and all the while, the “honorables” satisfied their unsavory carnal desires exploiting the “dishonorables.”