This is the tombstone, currently on display at the British Museum:
The accompanying label is a little outdated, though. (Check out that âeven loversâ phrase!)
But this label does add another important piece of information: these two women had been slaves, owned by the same woman, and then were then freed together. We know this not only from their names (Fonteia, a Roman womanâs name, was added onto the Greek names âHelenaâ and âEleusisâ to indicate that the Roman woman Fonteia Gaia had formally freed her Greek slaves) but also from the inscription on the tombstone, which calls both women âL,â for âLIBERTA,â meaning âfreedwoman.â
At the same time, the alteration of the tombstoneâs relief carvings to make the one of the women appear more masculine isnât mentioned at all in the outdated British Museum label. And â for reference â the text in the original postâs photo is a little deceptive about when the tombstone was altered. Most scholars (Walker and Burnett 1981, DâAngelo 1990) agree that the tombstone was altered in late antiquity (specifically around the time of the emperor Constantine), not at or after the time of excavation (likely sometime in the 1700 or 1800s, since the museum acquired the artifact in 1848).
That being said, yes, a range of modern archaeologists have tried to find heterosexual explanations for this tombstone, including the idea that it is a representation of a mother and a daughter (Walker and Burnett 1981, Davies 1985)
Other scholars, however, HAVE suggested that these two women were in a committed relationship (DâAngelo 1990, and, in particular, Brooten 1998), and as a result more recent scholarship is much less likely to dismiss the possibility of a queer relationship out of hand.
So yes, straight historians arenât to be trusted, but thereâs hope, because gender and sexuality scholars like Mary Rose DâAngelo and Bernadette J. Brooten arenât going to let these Roman women (and their love) be forgotten.
titsay
ellievsbear
tangentwithtanner
andulkaphoto
vaporwave
