This is the tombstone, currently on display at the British Museum:
The accompanying label is a little outdated, though. (Check out that āeven loversā 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 womanās name, was added onto the Greek names āHelenaā and āEleusisā 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 āL,ā for āLIBERTA,ā meaning āfreedwoman.ā
At the same time, the alteration of the tombstoneās relief carvings to make the one of the women appear more masculine isnāt mentioned at all in the outdated British Museum label. And ā for reference ā the text in the original postās photo is a little deceptive about when the tombstone was altered. Most scholars (Walker and Burnett 1981, DāAngelo 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 (DāAngelo 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 arenāt to be trusted, but thereās hope, because gender and sexuality scholars like Mary Rose DāAngelo and Bernadette J. Brooten arenāt going to let these Roman women (and their love) be forgotten.
discoholicmusic
jbbartram-illu
origamiaround
germansingergirl
janainaart
kaledo-art
