Priestesses of The Imperial Cult in The Latin West: Titles and Function

L'antiquité classique
Priestesses of the Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Titles and

Function
Emily A. Hemelrijk
Résumé
Prêtresses du culte impérial en Italie et les provinces occidentales de l'Empire romain : titres et fonction.
Sur la base d'un corpus de 258 inscriptions des prêtresses du culte impérial en Italie et les provinces occidentales de l'Empire
romain du Ier au IIIe siècle ap. J.-C, cet article examine les titres des prêtresses du culte impérial et la nature de leur prêtrise.
Sont tout spécialement étudiés l'usage de deux titres différents (flaminica et sacerdos) et les ajouts à ces titres, avec leur
distribution géographique et chronologique, et la relation entre ces titres et la position sociale et la fonction des prêtresses en
question.
Abstract
Emily A. Hemelruk (Utrecht), Priestesses of the Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Titles and Function.
This article deals with the priestesses of the imperial cult in the cities of Italy and the western provinces of the Roman Empire in
the first three centuries AD. On the basis of a corpus of 258 inscriptions set up by, or for, these priestesses the nature of their
priesthood is studied. Special attention is paid to the titles used for them (flaminica and sacerdos) and the various additions to
these titles, their geographical and chronological distribution, and the relationship between these titles and the status and
priestly function of the priestesses in question.
Citer ce document / Cite this document :
Hemelrijk Emily A. Priestesses of the Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Titles and Function. In: L'antiquité classique, Tome 74,
2005. pp. 137-170;
doi : https://doi.org/10.3406/antiq.2005.2568
https://www.persee.fr/doc/antiq_0770-2817_2005_num_74_1_2568
Fichier pdf généré le 07/09/2018

Priestesses of the Imperial Cult in the Latin West:
Function*
Titles and
Though the imperial cult has received much attention in recent years,1 the
study of its priests, especially its female priests, has been more or less neglected.
Some studies have been published of the epigraphic evidence for priestesses of the
imperial cult in the Roman provinces of northern Africa, Gaul, Germania and the
Alps,2 but no comprehensive work has so far appeared. Thus, old opinions and
prejudices on the status of imperial priestesses in Roman society have remained
unchallenged resulting in much uncertainty as regards the nature of their priesthood:
were they priestesses themselves or only the wives of priests (or perhaps both)? And,
if priestesses, how, and on what grounds, were they elected and whose cult did they
serve?
In this article I shall discuss these questions on the basis of the titles used for
priestesses of the imperial cult in the cities of Italy and the western provinces in the
first three centuries AD. Using a corpus of 258 inscriptions set up by, or for, these
priestesses I shall consider the titles used for them, their geographical and
distribution, and their relation to the status of the priestesses and the nature of
their office, paying special attention to the confusion these titles have caused in
modern studies.
According to the lemma on "priests (Greek and Roman)" in the third edition of
The Oxford Classical Dictionary one of the main differences between the religious
practice of Greece and Rome is that Greek cities had both male and female priests
I would like to thank the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) for
the financial support, which allowed me two weeks of undisturbed work at the Fondation Hardt
at Genève- Vanduvres.
1 To mention only some recent studies: I. Gradel, Emperor Worship in Roman Religion,
Oxford, 2002; M. CLAUSS, Kaiser und Gott. Herrscherkult im römischen Reich,
Stuttgart/Leipzig, 1999; for the Latin West see especially the studies by D. Fishwick, The
imperial Cult in the Latin West. Studies in the Ruler Cult of the Western Provinces of the Roman
Empire, vols. I-III, Leiden, 1987-2004 {EPRO, 108 / Religions in the Graeco-Roman World, 145-7)
and for the Greek East: S.R.F. PRICE, Rituals and Power. The Roman imperial cult in Asia minor,
Cambridge, 1984.
2 See L. Ladjimi Sebaï, "A propos du flaminat féminin dans les provinces africaines",
MEFRA 102.2(1990), p. 651-686, W. Spickermann, "Priesterinnen im römischen Gallien,
Germanien und den Alpenprovinzen (1.-3. Jahrhundert n. Chr.)", Historia 43 (1994), p. 189-
240 and, for the same region, A. Bielman and R. Frei-Stolba, "Les flaminiques du culte
impérial : contribution au rôle de la femme sous l'Empire romain", Études de Lettres (1994, 2),
p. 113-126. The second part of the third volume by Fishwick, o.e. (?. 1), which is devoted to
the provincial priesthood, pays little attention to female priests.
L 'Antiquité Classique 74 (2005),

p. 137-170.
138 E.A. HEMELRIJK
whereas in Rome "priests are (with the exception of the Vestal Virgins) males".3 This
view, which is found also in other studies,4 is contradicted by the ample epigraphic
evidence for imperial priestesses in the cities of Italy and the western provinces (and,
in the city of Rome, by, for instance, the priestesses of Ceres5). During the first three
centuries AD priestesses of the imperial cult are well-attested in the cities of Italy and
the Latin- speaking western provinces: I have collected 220 inscriptions mentioning a
flaminica and 38 of a female sacerdos of the imperial cult in Italy and the provinces
of Gallia (especially Narbonensis), Spain, North Africa, the Alps and Germania
Superior.6 Because of these large numbers, the priesthood of the imperial cult is by far
the most widely attested public function for women in the Latin West. By contrast, in
the city of Rome no priestesses of the imperial cult have so far been found, which
may have contributed to their neglect in modern studies of Roman religion.7 Their
local importance, however, is underlined by the numerous public statues set up for
them in the towns in which they held their priesthood, and by the fact that their
priesthood was often mentioned on their graves.
S. HORNBLOWER and A. Spawforth (eds), The Oxford Classical Dictionary, Oxford,

1996J, p. 1245-6 (J.A. North).
4 See J. Scheid, "D'indispensables étrangères. Les rôles religieux des femmes à Rome",
in P. Schmitt PANTEL (ed.), Histoire des Femmes en Occident 1 : L'Antiquité, Rome, 1991,
p. 406 on Roman religion: "les responsabilités sacerdotales publiques étaient toujours aux
mains des hommes", which seems to be regarded as the established opinion on Roman religion,
see R. Osborne, "Women and sacrifice in classical Greece", CQ 43 (1993), p. 402. In a recent
article Scheid slightly qualifies his earlier view on women's public exclusion, but he does not
consider imperial priestesses (apart from empresses serving as such), see J. Scheid, "Les rôles
religieux des femmes à Rome. Un complément", in R. Frei-Stolba, A. Bielman and
O. BlANCHl (eds), Les femmes antiques entre sphère privée et sphère publique, Bern, 2003,
p. 137-151.
5 I here omit the regina sacrorum and the flaminica Dialis, whose priestly duties
depended entirely on those of their husbands. From the late third century BC onwards there
were priestesses of Ceres in the city of Rome, see B.S. Spaeth, The Roman Goddess Ceres,
Austin, 1996, p. 103-123 and M. Beard, J. North and S. Price, Religions of Rome. A history
(vol. I), Cambridge, 1998, p. 70, who consider it to be an innovation due to Greek influence.
Also the Bacchic cult and that of Magna Mater in Republican Rome had priestesses; see
Beard, North and Price, o.e. (n. 5) p. 96-97.
6 No priestesses of the imperial cult have been found in Britannia, Gallia Bélgica and
Germania Inferior. My corpus includes inscriptions of priestesses of the imperial cult in the
Latin-speaking Western provinces only. I have not systematically collected Latin inscriptions
mentioning flaminicae and female sacerdotes of the imperial cult from the provinces to the east
of Italy such as Macedonia and Dalmatia, but for some examples see n. 14.
7 The only inscription set up in Rome for a flaminica of the imperial cult is an epitaph for
a flaminica Augustae (for the living empress, that is) who belonged to a very distinguished
family from Nemausus (the present Nimes) in Gallia Narbonensis and must have exercised her
priesthood in her native town. She probably died in Rome, see CIL VI, 29711 (2nd c. AD):
D.M./ memoriae / patruelis / Sammiae / Honoratae / flaminicae Aug(ustae), with
Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 204-205 nr. 26. I here omit the extraordinary priesthood of Livia
and Agrippina Minor who were appointed as priestesses of their deified husbands.
PRIESTESSES OF THE IMPERIAL CULT IN THE LATIN WEST 139
Main titles: flaminica and sacerdos
Across Italy and the Western provinces various titles were used to denote a
priestess of the imperial cult. First, she was either called a flaminica or a sacerdos
and, second, there is a bewildering variation in the additions to these titles. The
meaning and importance of some of these additions - such as flaminica provinciae -
are quite clear, but others - such as flaminica perpetua or flaminica prima - are more
complicated. What do these different titles and additions mean? Do they point to
differences in religious duties or social status of the priestesses, or is there some other
reason for their use? For priestesses this question has hardly been considered, but the
corresponding titles for male priests of the imperial cult have been debated frequently.
Omitting the extensions to their titles, the basic question is why some priests of the
imperial cult are called famines and others sacerdotes? Various explanations have
been proposed. The difference was believed to be due to a chronological development
(the title sacerdos later being superseded by flamen or vice versa), to the degree of
Romanization of the individual provinces (Romanized provinces using the title flamen
and newly conquered or less Romanized ones sacerdos) or to the related difference in
religious buildings (a sacerdos when the imperial cult centred on an altar; a flamen
whenever there was a temple).9 According to others, it depended on the difference
between the cult of a living ruler (served by a sacerdos) and the cult of a divus (served
by ? flamen)}0 However, the evidence does not support any of these assumptions, nor
is there a difference in the religious function of these titles.11 Therefore, whatever
The third title, pontifex, for a priest of the imperial cult is found almost exclusively in
the Spanish province Baetica, see R. Etienne, Le culte impérial dans la péninsule ibérique
d'Auguste à Dioclétien, Paris, 1958, p. 23 Iff. and D. Lad age, Städtische Priester- und Kultämter
in Lateinischen Westen des Imperium Romanum zur Kaiserzeit, Köln, 1971, p. 44. Since this title
has no female counterpart, it is not discussed here.
9 See Fishwick, o.e. (n. 1), vol. I, p. 165-166 (with references to earlier studies) and vol.
Ill, 2, p. 188, 200 and 213; Beard, North and Price, o.e. (n. 5), p. 357; for the same view see
Etienne, o.e. (?. 8), p. 190-192. This notion is based on the distinction between ?flamen and a
sacerdos in Republican Rome: whereas aflamen served an official state cult, a sacerdos was
restricted to cults of non-Roman origin, such as that of Ceres and Magna Mater, see Fishwick,
o.e. (n. 1), vol. I, p. 132 and M. Beard, "Priesthood in the Roman Republic", in M. Beard and
J. North (eds), Pagan Priests. Religion and Power in the Ancient World, London, 1990, p. 43-
47.
10 See D. Fishwick, "The development of provincial ruler worship in the western Roman
empire", ANRWYL, 16.2 (1978), p. 1214-1215 and Fishwick, o.e. (n. 1), vol. ULI, p. 109-110
(about provincial priests); for the opposite view (female sacerdotes serving the cult of the divae
and flaminicae that of the living empress), see F. Geiger, De Sacerdotibus Augustorum
Municipalibus, diss., Halle, 1913, p. 3-5.
11 For a brief survey - and refutation - of these theories, see J. Deininger, Die Provin-
ziallandtage der römischen Kaiserzeit von Augustus bis zum Ende des dritten Jahrhunderts
nach Chr., München, 1965 (Vestigia, 6), p. 148-149; also LAD AGE, o.e. (n. 8), p. 41-46 and
J. A. Delgado Delgado, Elites y organización de la religion en las provincias Romanas de la
Béticay las Mauritanias: sacerdotes y sacerdocios, Oxford, 1998, p. 83.
140 E.A. HEMELRIJK
their original meaning, it seems best to assume that in the imperial cult they were used
more or less as synonyms.12
Table 1 : Geographical distribution
flaminica sacerdos
Africa 90 0
Gallia 44 0
Spain 43 10
Italy 35 28
Alpes, Germania 8 0
220 38
Geographical distribution
I flaminica
I sacerdos
Africa Gallia Spain Italy Alpes,

Germania
When examining female priests of the imperial cult, however, a clearer pattern
emerges: contrary to what has been stated by D. Ladage13, the title flaminica is by far
the most frequent for a priestess of the imperial cult. Sacerdos is not only more rare,
but also restricted to Italy and Spain (see table l).14 Evidently, the theory that
Also Tac, Ann. I, 10 (about Augustus): per famines et sacerdotes coli vellet ('he
wanted to be worshipped by flamens and priests') and Suet., Tib., 26, 1: templa, famines,
sacerdotes decerni sibi prohibuit ('he forbade that temples, flamens, and priests were decreed
in his honour') mention both titles ex aequo. Also Gradel, o.e. (n. 1), p. 86, n. 33 assumes that
the titles were used synonymously, but his interpretation of the wordsflamines et sacerdotes in
these passages of Tacitus and Suetonius (p. 276-277) seems to me rather far-fetched.
13 Ladage, o.e. (n. 8), p. 45: "Bei den weiblichen Priestern des Kaiserkults ist die
Bezeichnung Sacerdos [--] häufiger als Flaminica", echoed by Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 225.
14 East of Italy female sacerdotes of the imperial cult have also been found in Macedonia
and Dalmatia, see, for instance, CIL III, 651 Philippi (Mac): sac(erdos) divae Aug(ustae); AE
1991, 1428a-d Philippi (Mac): four priestesses of Livia: sacerdoti divae Aug(ustae); AE 1993,
1260 (Zadar, Dalm.): sacerd[oti] / divae AfugustaeJ .
sacerdos was used in less Romanized provinces, does not hold. On the contrary,
female sacerdotes are found in Italy and the highly Romanized provinces of Spain -
though only in Italy and Baetica the number of female sacerdotes of the imperial cult
approaches that of the flaminicae.
Does the geographical distribution of these titles merely reflect local usage or
does it indicate an actual difference in the nature of the priesthood? In other words, is
it a matter of terminology or does it point to different duties or a difference in social
standing of the priestess? As appears from tables 2 and 3, no distinctions can be
detected in the use of these titles. There is no marked difference in their spread over
time or in the social status of the priestesses in question - though, at the provincial
level, only flaminicae provinciae, but no female sacerdotes provinciae, are attested.
Table 2: Chronological distribution
flaminica sacerdos
1st c. AD 45 12
2nd c. AD 98 14
3rd c. AD 48 6
4th c. AD 2 0
unknown 27 6
220 38
Chronological distribution
120 ?
100 - -
80
60 ¦ flaminica
¦ sacerdos
40 - -
20
:
o ¦
1st c. ad :»nd c. AD 3rd c. AD 4th c. AD unknown
142 E.A. HEMELRIJK
Table 3: The social rank of priestesses of the imperial cult
flaminica sacerdos
senatorial 9 5
equestrian 32 3
decurial 65 5
lower class or freedwomen 8 0
unknown 106 25
220 38
Social rank
I flaminica
I sacerdos
senatorial equestrian decurial lower class or unknown

freedwoman
Apart from being restricted to Italy and Spain, the title sacerdos was perhaps
used especially in the earlier period and more exclusively for the elite, but the
numbers are far too small for definite conclusions. Neither do the titles depend on the
cult of the living or the deified empress - though the title flaminica seems to be
slightly more common for the cult of the living empress.15 As for their spread over
As to the connection between the titles and the cult of the living or deified empresses,
modern discussion is confused, cf. Ladage, o.e. (n. 8), p. 45-46: a sacerdos of the living
empress and a flaminica of her deified predecessor(s) and G. Grether, "Livia and the imperial
cult", AJPh 67 (1946), p. 249-250, who believes that a flaminica was "more common for a
priestess of the living" and a sacerdos "for a priestess of the dead and consecrated empress".
Reviewing the evidence it seems that female sacerdotes and flaminicae usually served both
living and deified empresses, but that - when a distinction is made - a flaminica more
commonly served the living empress and a sacerdos her deified predecessor(s): within my
PRIESTES SES OF THE IMPERIAL CULT IN THE LATIN WEST 143
time, it should, of course, be kept in mind that for most inscriptions only approximate
dates can be given and that an increase or decrease in the number of inscriptions for
priestesses may reflect changes in the epigraphic habit rather than in the actual
number of priestesses.16
In regard of a possible difference between the titles flaminica and sacerdos two
inscriptions deserve special attention. In a votive inscription set up by Vibia Modesta
in Itálica, in the Spanish province Baetica, she presents herself as twice flaminica and
sacerdos. Secondly, an incomplete honorific inscription from Castulo (Hisp. Tar.),
honours Valeria Paetina as a sacerdos of Cordoba (Hisp. Baet), a flaminica of her
native Tucci (Hisp. Baet.), and ? flaminica or sacerdos of Castulo (Hisp. Tar.).17
Here, apparently, some effort was made to distinguish the titles. Yet, since nothing is
added to the title sacerdos, we cannot be certain that it refers to a priesthood of the
imperial cult.18 In fact, it seems more likely that Vibia Modesta was ? flaminica of the
imperial cult and a sacerdos of some local goddess, as is the case in a funerary
inscription for di flaminica in Gallia Narbonensis who was also a sacerdos of the local
goddess Diana (or Dea) Thucolis.19 However, this does not account for the expression
corpus of 258 inscriptions of priestesses of the imperial cult 33 inscriptions refer to aflaminica
serving the cult of a living empress and 18 to one serving the cult of her deified predecessor(s),
whereas of the inscriptions pertaining to female sacerdotes of the imperial cult 24 refer to the
cult of the deified empress(es) and 1 1 to the cult of the living empress.
16 The evidence conforms rather neatly to the Roman "epigraphic habit", which had its peak
in the second and early third century AD (but, of course, there were great regional differences), cf.
R. MacMullen, "The epigraphic habit in the Roman empire", AJPh 103 (1982), p. 233-246;
E.A. Meyer, "Explaining the epigraphic habit in the Roman empire: the evidence of epitaphs",
JRS 80 (1990), p. 74-96; G. Woolf, "Monumental writing and the expansion of Roman society in
the early empire", JRS 86 (1996), p. 22-39; S. Mrozek, "A propos de la répartition chronologique
des inscriptions latines dans le Haut-Empire", Epigraphica 35 (1973), p. 1 13-118; S. Mrozek, "A
propos de la répartition chronologique des inscriptions latines dans le Haut-Empire", Epigraphica
50 (1988), p. 61-64; for a survey of earlier studies, see J. Bodel (ed.), Epigraphic Evidence.
Ancient History from inscriptions, London, 2001, p. 6-10.
17 Vibia Modesta: AE 1983, 521= AE 1982, 521= CILA II, 2, 358 (first half of the 3rd c
AD): iterato honore bis flaminica sacerdfos]. CIL II, 3278 = CILA III, 1, 104 = ILER 1662
(2nd cent. AD): Valeriae C(ai) ffiliae) Paetinae / Tuccitanae sacerdoti / coloniae Patriciae /
Cordubensis flaminicae / coloniae Aug(ustae) Gemellae / Tuccitanae flaminicae / sive
sacerdoti municipi(i) / Castulonensis [
18 In inscriptions of the imperial period sacerdos is often used as a generic term for a
(male or female) priest and only the name of the deity (if added) shows us what cult he or she
served. Therefore, I here include only inscriptions of sacerdotes with an addition that
unambiguously proves that a priestess of the imperial cult is meant, for instance sacerdos
Augustae or sacerdos divae Augustae. It is possible that some sacerdotes or sacerdotes
perpetuae were, in fact, priestesses of the imperial cult, but, since this is uncertain, they are
excluded.
19 CIL XII, 5724 = ILN II, al4 (Antipolis in Gall. Narb.; 1st or 2nd c.): Ja C(ai) f(ilia)
Carina / [flajminica sacer(dos) / [Diajnae Thucolis / [test] amento flieri) i(ussit),
Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 195, nr. 5. See also CIL XII, 185 = ILN II, a97 (Antipolis in Gall.
Narb.; 2nd or 3rd c): Marj/fcejlla flamini/ca et sacerdos / viva sibi fecit / et {mejmemoriam /
consummavit, Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 194-195, nr. 4, and, possibly, AE 1988, 422 = Suplt
144 E.A. HEMELRIJK
flaminica sive sacerdos used for Valeria Paetina in Castulo, since sive suggests that
these titles refer to the same priesthood. To my mind, the expression flaminica sive
sacerdos shows that these titles were interchangeable and that their use reflects the
terminological confusion about these titles in the Spanish provinces. Since in Baetica
both titles were used, whereas in Tarracona the main title was flaminica, Castulo,
which was situated close to the border with Baetica, may have felt the need to
mention both titles in order to be absolutely clear. Therefore, it seems likely that the
titles for both male and female priests were synonymous, their use depending on
regional or local preferences.20 Of course, this does not mean that priesthoods of the
imperial cult were identical all across the Empire and throughout the first three
centuries AD. On the contrary, a great deal of variety must have existed.21 Yet, this
variety cannot be connected with the difference between the titles flaminica and
sacerdos.
Flamen and flaminica: husband and wife?
Apart from the question of the difference between the titles flaminica and
sacerdos, flaminica has given rise to problems of a different kind. Earlier studies took
it for granted that flaminicae of the imperial cult were the wives of imperial flamines
and held their priesthood merely in an honorary capacity.22 Although this view has
now mostly been abandoned, the belief that the flamen and flaminica of the imperial
cult were, as a rule, husband and wife, and that the position and office of the wife
depended on that of the husband is still widely held.23 Since the notion that priest and
priestess of the imperial cult formed, as a rule, a married couple has never been
in detail, it has led to great confusion as regards the status of the imperial
priestess, the nature of her priesthood and its degree of dependence on that of her
husband.24
Ill, Co 10 (near Corfinium in Italy, 1st cent. AD): --] / [flaminica] / Iuliae Augustae / sacerdos
prim(a) / [ -J /-- .
20 See also Etienne, o.e. (?. 8 ), p. 247-248.
21 See K. Hopkins, Conquerors and slaves, Cambridge, 1978, p. 208-209 and 215;
Beard, North and Price, o.e. (n. 5), p. 348ff.
22 For an example, see Deininger, o.e. (n. 1 1), p. 41, 109, 125f, 154.
23 See, for instance, Beard, North and Price, o.e. (n. 5), p. 357 and the studies
in the following note.
24 Discussing 75 flamines provinciae and 12 flaminicae provinciae from Hispania Citerior
G. Alföldy, Flamines Provinciae Hispaniae Citerions, Madrid, 1973, p. 49-53 suggests that,
as a rule, the wife of a flamen provinciae received the title flaminica provinciae, although he
allows for exceptions. For a similar view see S. Panzram, Stadtbild und Elite. Tarraco,
Corduba und Augusta Emérita zwischen Republik und Spätantike, Stuttgart, 2002 {Historia
161), p. 53; Ladage, o.e. (n. 8), p. 45 and 117 somewhat half-heartedly assumes
that the priesthood of a flaminica was independent ofthat of aflamen, who was not necessarily
her husband, but that, for practical purposes, wives of flamines were often appointed as
flaminicae; similarly Fishwick, o.e. (n. 1), vol. I, p. 166: "usually, if not necessarily, the wife
of the flamen" , but see p. 293: "there is nothing to show that the flaminica was by definition the
wife of the flamen"; in his vol. Ill, 2 (about the flaminica provinciae), there seems to be a
PRIESTESSES OF THE IMPERIAL CULT IN THE LATIN WEST 1 45
Yet, in view of the evidence, the notion appears to be utterly unfounded: in my

corpus of 258 inscriptions of priestesses of the imperial cult only 26 flaminicae
(mentioned in 32 inscriptions) are known to have been the wives of flamines (see
table 4). Of course, more flaminicae may have been married to flamines whose names
or titles are lost, but the present evidence strongly suggests that flaminicae were not
normally married to flamines. On the contrary, some flaminicae were unmarried when
holding office, or married to men whose career did not include an imperial
Even in the cases that both husband and wife are known to have been priests,
this does not imply that they held office together; they may have exercised their
priesthood in different years or at different places, as some of them certainly did.26
development in his thinking towards an independent office, see p. 97, 147, 208, 226 and 306,
but see p. 228 n. 27. Clauss, o.e. (n. 1), p. 407 without ground believes that the wife of a
provincial priest received the "Rang" of a flaminica suggesting that when the provincial priest
was unmarried, some other woman could be elected to the priesthood. Similarly, Spickermann,
I.e. (n. 2), p. 192 assumes that the wife of aflamen provinciae had the "Rang" of a flaminica
provinciae, but that not every flaminica was the wife of aflamen. In fact, his study shows that
in Gaul, Germania and the Alps only very few {3) flaminicae were married to aflamen, see
p. 228-229. Only Etienne, o.e. (?. 8), p. 169-171 and 246-247 argues that "les flaminiques
municipales possèdent une dignité indépendante de tout lien conjugal".
25 For instance, AE 1993, 1714 = CIL VIII, 211 (Cillium, Afr.Proc, AD 150-175) Flavia
Pacata, flaminica perpetua at Thelepte, died at the age of 15, as it seems unmarried. Her family,
however, had several imperial priests. Also Quinta was apparently unmarried when she was
elected as flaminica perpetua of Sutunurca (Afr.Proc., AD 146), since her father paid the
summa honoraria for her priesthood, ILAfr. 300 = AE 1942/43, 98 = AE 1910, 154. The same
seems to hold for Maedia Lentula, flaminica perpetua at Thugga (Afr.Proc, AD 118). Her
father built a temple on behalf of the emperor and dedicated it in his own name and that of his
daughter: CIL VIII, 26471 = ILTun 1392 = Dougga 136. See also CIL XIII, 2181 = ILS 8098: a
funerary inscription for Iulia Helias, who was a flaminica Augustae in Lugdunum (modern
Lyon) in Gall.Lug. in the 2nd-3rd c. AD. Though 25 years old at her death, she was apparently
unmarried; her sisters had her body returned from Rome (if this is the right interpretation of
urbe), where she died, and buried her in the family mausoleum near Lyon. AE 1967, 94 (It., late
2nd-early 3rd c): the collegium iuvenum set up a statue for Arrenia Felicissima, sacerdos
Aug(ustae) of Herdonia, who was apparently unmarried since the inscription refers to her as the
daughter of L. Arrenius Menandrus. CIL II-7, 197 = CIL ?, 2188 = ILER 6361 (a family tomb
near Sacili Martiales, Hisp.Baet., 2nd cent. AD): of the family members mentioned in the
inscription only Cornelia Lepidina appears to have been a flaminica; her husband was a
duumvir. Unless a flaminate of the husband is known from an other inscription, funerary
inscriptions for a married couple, in which no flaminate of the husband is mentioned, should be
regarded as indications that the husband of a flaminica was not always aflamen himself, see,
for instance, CIL XII, 1868 {pace Spickermann, I.e. [n. 2], p. 207-8 nr. 32); similarly IAMll,
443 = CIL VIII, 21842 = ILM 135 = AE 1891, 1 17 with Fishwick, o.e. (n. 1), vol. Ill, 2, p. 207.
26 According to Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 193 Iulia Decumina held her priesthood in
Forum Claudii Vallensium (Alp.Poen.) after the death of her husband, the flamen M. Pansius
Severus (see CIL XII, 151). The inscription she set up for her own grave is the only one to
mention her priesthood {CIL XII, 150). CIL XII, 140 from Forum Claudii Vallensium
(Alp.Poen.): the title of the husband of the flaminica, flaminicus, suggests that he was an ex-
priest of the imperial cult, see Spickermann, le. (?. 2), p. 192-193 nr. 1, who criticizes the
assumption that a flaminicus was only the husband of a flaminica, not a flamen himself. For
146 E.A. HEMELRIJK
Apart from this, the notion that a priest and priestess of the imperial cult were, as a
rule, husband and wife is contradicted by their numbers. Against the 258 inscriptions
of imperial priestesses in my corpus more than 1,100 inscriptions are known of male
imperial priests in the same area and period.27 This difference between the numbers of
male and female priests cannot be explained only by the hazards of survival, or by the
fact that women, being excluded from local magistracies, were less often honoured
with a public statue than men, for a great number of priests and priestesses are known
to us from funerary inscriptions, dedications and votive offerings. To my mind, it
must reflect an actual difference in numbers in ancient times. We should keep in mind
that the imperial cult was, in the first place, the cult of the emperor - and less so that
of his female relatives. Less female, than male, members of the imperial family were
worshipped; as a consequence, we may expect that fewer priestesses were needed. On
the basis of the present evidence, therefore, we may conclude that, in the Latin West,
priestly couples formed only a small minority among the imperial priests. Why, then,
has it been assumed thai flamen and flaminica were, as a rule, husband and wife and
that the priesthood of the wife depended on that of her husband?
There seem to be three reasons: first and foremost, the supposed analogy
between the imperial flamines and those of Republican Rome, especially the flamen
Dialis and his wife, the flaminica Dialis; second, the example of the Greek East
where priest and priestess of the imperial cult were often presented as a couple28 and,
third, the modern notion of the public exclusion of ancient women, which casts doubt
on any public office held by a woman. All three reasons are unconvincing.
As regards the first one, modern authors seem to have been misled by the
similarity between the titles of imperial flamines and those of Republican Rome. Yet,
though the name of the flaminate of the imperial cult is borrowed from the Republican
priesthood, the similarity is only superficial: like the Republican flaminate the imperial
flaminate is devoted to one specific deity (but a very different one!) and some - but only
some - of the honours, privileges and restrictions pertaining to Republican flamines were
adopted by the imperial flaminate. In support of the analogy between the republican and
imperial flaminate some scholars point to the lex de flamonio provinciae Narbonensis
established by Vespasian in which the privileges and restrictions of the provincial flamen
and his wife are regulated. According to this - unfortunately badly damaged - text the
priesthoods held at different places, see for instance CIL V, 6514 = AE 1999, 763: the husband
was aflamen of the deified emperors Vespasian, Titus, Trajan and Hadrian in Novaria, and the
wife, Albucia Candida, was a flaminica divae Iuliae in Novaria and a flaminica divae Sabinae
in Ticinum, see also CIL V, 6513; in different years: see Fishwick, o.e. (n. 1), vol. Ill, 2, p. 7,
n. 15 and p. 97 who suggests that the husband of Fulvia Celera (see tables 4 and 6 below)
attained the provincial priesthood after his wife's death.
27 See the collections by Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2) for the provinces of Gallia, Germania
and the Alps; M.S. Bassignano, II flaminato nelle province romane dell'Africa, Rome, 1974
for the Latin-speaking provinces of Northern Africa; Gradel, o.e. (n. 1), p. 87 and 376-379 for
Italy and Etienne, o.e. (?. 8) for the provinces of Spain.
For priestly couples in the Greek East, see R. van Bremen, The Limits ofParticipation.
Women and civic life in the Greek East in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, Amsterdam,
1996, p. 117-125 and 136-141.
wife of the provincial flamen was not to swear against her will and she was prohibited
from coming near, or touching, dead persons. Furthermore, there are rules for her dress
and she probably had the privilege of a special seat when watching the public games.29
As is observed by C. Williamson, these rules were mainly modelled on the honours and
privileges of the Vestal Virgins and correspond only partially to the privileges and
associated with û\e flaminica Dialis.20 Nevertheless, in their recent survey of
Roman religions Beard, North and Price remark that the wife of the provincial flamen
of the imperial cult: "was known as flaminica (like the flaminica of Jupiter) and she
seems to have shared at least some of the flamen' s religious duties", thus associating
the flaminica of the imperial cult with her namesake in Republican Rome whose
position depended on that of her husband.31 This is highly misleading: the great
between the flaminica Dialis and flaminica of the imperial cult in social status,
honours, privileges, restrictions, religious duties and in the object of their cult
Zeus and the empress) exclude any such association.32 By confusing these two
priesthoods modern scholars seem to have been misled by the Romans, who adopted
the name and some of the privileges of the prestigious ancient priesthood of the
flamen Dialis to lend prestige to the new priesthood of the imperial cult.
Moreover, by using the word flaminica for the wife of the provincial flamen of
the imperial cult Beard, North and Price confuse two different roles: that of a
and that of a wife oí aflamen. Curiously enough, these two were sharply
by the Narbonese law on which they base their conclusions. The surviving
clauses of the law explicitly regulate the privileges and restrictions of the provincial
flamen and his wife, who is called uxor flaminis to distinguish her from the flaminica,
the priestess of the imperial cult.33 The regulation of the honours and restrictions of the
29 Lines 6-8 of the lex deflamonio provinciae Narbonensis, a bronze tablet found in Nar-
bonne (Gal. Narb., CIL XII, 6038 = ILS 6964). For a revised text, translation and commentary,
see C.H. Williamson, "A Roman law from Narbonne", Λ i/zenaeum 65 (1987), p. 173-189.
30 Williamson, I.e. (n. 29), p. 181-184. For the duties, privileges and restrictions of the
flaminica Dialis, see Aul. Gell., ΝΑ Χ, 15, 26-30, Serv., ad Aen. IV, 518 and 646, Macrob.,
Sat. I, 16, 8 and 30, Plut., Q.R., 50 (Mor., 276 d-e); Ν. Boels, "Le statut religieux de la flaminica
Dialis", REL 51 (1973), p. 77-100 does not convince.
31 Beard, North and Price, o.e. (n. 5), p. 357; for this view see also L.R. Taylor, The
Divinity of the Roman Emperor, Middletown, 1931, p. 210 and Bielman and Frei-Stolba, I.e.
(n. 2), p. 119. A.A. BARRETT, Livia. First Lady ofImperial Rome, London, 2002, p. 160 is even
wider from the mark when he assumes that Livia' s priesthood of the deified Augustus was
modelled on that of the flaminica Dialis. Apart from the fact that Livia was given the title
sacerdos (and not flaminica) and was not bound by any of the restrictions which governed the
life of the flaminica Dialis, the priesthood of the flaminica Dialis depended on that of her
husband, the flamen Dialis: when he died, she ceased to be a. flaminica (and vice versa).
32 For instance, the flaminica Dialis had to be of senatorial rank and held her position until
her death or that of her husband, whereas the rank of the flaminica of the imperial cult, if known,
was mostly decurial (and only very rarely senatorial, see table 3) and she seems to have held office
for the duration of a year. For a detailed comparison of their honours, privileges and restrictions, see
Williamson, I.e. (n. 29), p. 181-184.
33 Contra Panzram, o.e. (n. 24), p. 53 who believes that the titles are synonymous, but on
p. 186 and 281 she contradicts her earlier statement. Flaminicae of the imperial cult were
148 Ε. A. HEMELRIJK
wife of the provincial flamen suggests that the couple shared certain religious
but for lack of evidence this remains uncertain. In any case, by its careful
wording distinguishing the wife of a (provincial) flamen from a flaminica the law
the theory that a flaminica was by definition the wife of a flamen.
As regards the other two arguments, I shall be brief. The well-known priestly
couples serving the imperial couple in the Greek East may have inspired modem
belief that this was the same in the West. At first sight, this view is confirmed by the
occasional flamen that was married to a flaminica. Yet, on the whole, the epigraphic
evidence does not support this view, nor were the priest and priestess of the imperial
cult in Italy and the western provinces regularly presented as a couple, as they were in
the Greek East.35 Rather, the inscriptions of priestesses in Italy and the western
emphasize their individual role and achievements (mostly benefactions) and
often do not even mention the career, or name, of their nearest male relative. Lastly,
the modern notion of the exclusion of ancient women from public life has long been
blind to the evidence suggesting the contrary.36 Thus, the ample epigraphic evidence
for female priesthoods in the imperial cult was ignored, or explained away by assuming
that for female priests the office must have been honorific, the priestess deriving her
title from that of her husband (see note 22).
Though the notion that the priest and priestess of the imperial cult were, as a
rule, a married couple, is untenable, it seems likely that, in some cases, family
played a role in the choice of a priest(ess). As appears from table 4, most
flaminicae who were married to flamines, were of high rank and many of them were
the flaminica prima or flaminica perpetua of their towns or exercised a priesthood in
more than one town. Some even held the most prestigious imperial priesthood: the
provincial flaminate. These women must have belonged to the few most eminent
families of their towns. Sixteen more priestesses (mentioned in seventeen inscriptions,
see table 5) are known to have had relatives (but no husband) who held an imperial
flaminate. They also belonged to families of high social standing. Finally, some
of the imperial cult were married to husbands who held a different municipal
already well-known in Narbonese Gaul at the time the law was drafted, see for instance CIL
XII, 1363 = ILS 6991 a flaminica Iuliae Augustae in Vasio and another one in Baeterrae {CIL
XII, 4249) who probably served the cult of Livia during her lifetime, see SPICKERMANN, I.e.
(n. 2), p. 211 nr. 40 and 198, nr. 12. Also AE 1999, 1033 = CIL XII, 4230 + 4241 = ILGN 558:
a flaminica in Baeterrae in the Augustan period, see Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 197, nr. 10.
34 Williamson, I.e. (n. 29), p. 183.
35 In her chapter on "joint office-holding" Van Bremen, o.e. (n. 28), p. 114-141 argues
that priesthoods of the imperial cult were shared from about the mid- first century AD onwards.
Though the husband and wife had clearly separate duties - the archiereus serving the cult of
the emperor(s) and the archiereia that of the female members of the imperial family -, their
public presentation emphasized the couple rather than the individual.
36 Similarly, the notion that some deities, such as Hercules and Silvanus, were only
worshipped by men has led scholars to overlook the evidence to the contrary, as is shown by
C.E. Schultz, "Modern prejudice and ancient praxis: female worship of Hercules at Rome",
ZPE 133 (2000), p. 291-297, who shows that women's participation in Roman religion was
more wide-spread than it is customarily believed to be.
priesthood.37 This accumulation of priesthoods in certain families should not lead us

to assume that they were hereditary or - in the case of priestesses - merely nominal; it
may be explained by the simple fact that most priesthoods required wealth and that
civic priests were, preferably, chosen from families of a high social standing. Since in
most provincial towns the number of wealthy upper-class families was limited,
priesthoods tended to be passed around in such families.
Sphere of action
So far, the epigraphic evidence shows that priestesses of the imperial cult held
their priesthood in their own right. But for their modest numbers, their priesthood
seems in all respects the counterpart of the male imperial priesthood: like their male
colleagues, imperial priestesses were elected by the local senate (sometimes after
consultation of the assembly of the people) or by the provincial assembly, depending
on whether they held office on the municipal or provincial level.38 After her election a
priestess was called designate^9 until she actually took up office (which, like her male
counterparts, she probably held for the duration of a year). The name of the town in
which she held office, is usually mentioned together with her priesthood.40 Moreover,
her priestly title might have the same additions as those of male imperial priests, e.g.
perpetua, prima or provinciae. Thus, it seems that, in the towns of Italy and the
western provinces, there were two separate but complementary priesthoods that were
37 CIL XII, 3175: the husband of Licinia Flavilla, flaminica Augustae in Nemausus
(Gall.Narb), was himself a pontifex; for more examples, see CIL VIII, 18596 (husband
pontifex), CIL XII, 3242 (husband pontifex, see CIL XII, 3247 = ILGN 405), ILAlg I, 2224
(husband sacerdos Plutonis), ILAlg II, 550 = CIL VIII, 19492 = CIL VIII, 6987 (husband XVvir
sacris faciundis). CIL XII, 2244 and CIL XII, 1363 show flaminicae married to seviri
Augustales.
38 For some examples, Alfia Domitia Severiana was elected as a flaminica perpetua of
Barbesula (Hisp.Baet.) ex decreto splendidissimi ordinis, see AE 1984, 528 = AE 1979, 339
(2nd cent. AD), Sittia Calpurnia Extricata held the same priesthood in Cirta (Num.) ex consensu
populi, see CIL VIII, 7119 = ILAlg II, 693 (3rd cent. AD?) with Ladjimi SebaÏ, I.e. (n. 2), nr.
49 and Bassignano, o.e. (n. 27), p. 249, nr. 20 and Coelia Tertulia, sacerdos divae Augustae at
Larinum (It.), received her priesthood by decree of the decurions: decurionum decreto
sacer/dotium datum est (AE 1991, 514a, 1st cent. AD). For the election of provincial
priestesses, see RIT 327 = CIL II, 4246 = ILS 6939 (Tarraco, Hisp.Tar.; ca. AD 174): the
provinciae Sempronia Placida was elected consensu concili(i) p(rovinciae) H(ispaniae)
c(iterioris) and Rubria Festa in Caesarea (Maur., late lst-early 2nd c.) was "endowed with the
highest honour (i.e. the provincial priesthood of Mauretania) by the great judgement of the
patres" (exornata summo honore magno iudicio patrum), seeAE 1995, 1793.
39 See CIL XII, 690: a marble sarcophagus found in Arélate carrying the epitaph of
Caecilia Aprulla, flaminica designata of the colony of the Vocontii (Vasio) in Gall. Narb., in
the late 2nd or early third century AD, who died at the age of 14 before taking up office, see
Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 210 nr. 37 and CIL VIII, 25490: a badly damaged inscription for an
unknown flaminica perpetua designata.
40 To mention only two examples: Popilia Secunda is called flaminica col(oniae)
Tarrac(onensium), see RIT 350 = CIL II, 4276 (Tarraco, Hisp.Tar., late lst-early 2nd c), and
Iulia Tertullinay/amm/ca col(oniae) Apta(e), see CIL XII, 695 (Apta, Gall. Narb, 2nd c. AD).
150 E.A. HEMELRIJK
neatly divided over the sexes, male priests serving the cult of the emperor and his
deified predecessors and priestesses that of the female members of the imperial
family. However, as regards the details of her office much remains unclear. For
who exactly was the object of her cult, the living empress or her deified
or both? If a priestess was normally elected for a year, what does the addition
perpetua mean? Should we understand the addition prima in a temporal or in a
qualitative sense? In the following I will restrict myself to discussing these matters on
the basis of the titles of imperial priestesses; I shall consider what light the additions
to these titles shed on the nature of their priesthood and on the object of their cult.
First, who was, or were, worshipped by imperial priestesses? Do we, indeed,
find two complementary priesthoods neatly segregated according to gender, male
priests serving the cult of the male and female priests that of the female members of
the imperial family? Remarkably, this seems not to have been the general practice
from the start. Inscriptions show that in the very early period also male priests served
the cult of the empress.41 Yet, outside Rome female priests seem right from the start
to have served only the cult of female members of the imperial family - though the
frequent use of abbreviations in their titles has led to some confusion.42 For instance,
the title flam(inica) Augg. of Annia Aelia Restituía in Calama (Afr. Proc.) has been
supplemented by some as flaminica Augustorum, on the assumption that she served
the cult of the co-reigning emperors Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus or Septimius
Severus and Caracalla.43 This is a mistake, I believe, since the title flaminica
41 CIL II, 194 (Olisipo in Lusitania) in honour of Q. Iulius Plotus _/7a/mm / Germ(anici)
Caes(aris) fla/mini Iuliae Aug(ustae) in perpetum; CIL II, 473 = AE 1946, 201 = AE 1997,
777b (Emérita Augusta in Lusitania): a certain Albinus who was flamen dfivi Augusti et] /
divae Aug(ustae) provinciae Lusitan[iae. In these cases Livia and Augustus were worshipped
together, see also AE 1966, 177, AE 1997, 777a = AE 1999, 870 (Emérita Augusta in Lusitania)
and CIL XII, 1845 (p. 828) = ILGN 265 = AE 1925, 65 = AE 1925, 75 (Vienna in Gallia Narb.),
but in some cases a male priest served the cult of the empress only, see CIL III, 14712 = AE
1902, 60 = ILS 7160 (Salona, Dalm.): in honour of L. Anicius Vaetinas flamini Iuliae Augustae
and AE 1915, 95 (Emérita Augusta in Lusitania): in honour of a Cnaeus Cornelius Severus
[fljamini Iuliae Augustae. In CIL X, 7501 = ILS 121 (the island of Gaulos near Malta) husband
and wife both served the cult of Livia - which is quite unusual - the wife bearing the title
sacerdos Augustae and the husband that oíflamen Iuliae. Throughout this paper I use the term
"empress" to include all women of the imperial family who received a public cult. Most of
them were the wives or mothers of emperors, but some were other relatives, such as Drusilla,
who was the sister of Caligula.
42 Ladjimi Sebaï, I.e. (n. 2), p. 657 suggests that priestesses may have looked after the cult
of the emperors as well. Though this is theoretically possible- since Augustae and Augusti are
both abbreviated as Aug. - it is highly unlikely: whenever the full title is given, it always reads
Augustae or Augustarum.
43 ILAlg I, 287 = CIL VIII, 5366: a statue base in honour of Annia Aelia Restituía in
Calama (Afr. Proc.) in which she is addressed as: flam(inicae) Augg [p(er)]/p(etuae). Ladjimi
Sebaï, I.e. (n. 2), p. 661; Bassignano, o.e. (n. 27), p. 303-304 and G. Wesch-Klein, Libera-
litas in rem publicam. Private Aufwendungen zugunsten von Gemeinden im römischen Afrika bis
284 n. Chr., Bonn, 1990 {Antiquitas I vol. 40), p. 75-76 suggest that Augg should be interpreted
as Augustorum. The Augusti could then either be Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus or
Augustarum is unobjectionable: it may either be an abbreviation of the füll title

flaminica divarum Augustarum denoting a priestess of the cult of the deified female
members of the imperial family collectively, or (like the corresponding male titles
sacerdos and flamen Augustorum) it may have been used for the cult of the living
empress together with her deified predecessors.44 Only four puzzling cases remain, all
from the Spanish province Baetica: Marcia Celsa was sacerdos perpetua domus divi-
nae in Abdera, Aelia Senilla sacerdos domus Augustae prima et perpetua in Ossigi
Latonium, Iulia Laeta was flaminica domus Augustae in Tucci, and the fourth is an
inscription from the late second or early third century which speaks of a father and
daughter who both served the imperial cult, the father as a flamen provinciae of
Baetica and a pontifex perpetuus domus Augustae, the daughter as a flaminica
perpetua domus Augustae.45 These inscriptions do not distinguish between the tasks
of priest and priestess of the domus Augustae; in theory, both may have served the
cult of the entire imperial family. Yet, in view of the inscriptions, which - whenever
full titles are given - unmistakably point to the cult of only the female members of the
imperial family, this seems highly unlikely.
If indeed imperial priestesses served the cult of the female members of the
imperial family, did they then serve them individually or collectively, and - if
- on what grounds was an empress chosen to be worshipped? Are we to
assume that a priestess serving the cult of an individual empress had one or more
female colleagues serving the cult of the other female members of the imperial
family? Or did she serve the cult of this individual empress in particular, while at the
same time serving the cult of the other female members collectively? Unfortunately,
the wide dispersion, the poor survival and the fragmentary state of our evidence do
not allow us to study these questions in depth. In what follows, I shall only discuss
them in as far as they can be connected with the titles used for the priestesses in
question.
Without further addition, the most common title for an imperial priestess,
seems to have been a generic title for a municipal priestess of the imperial
Septimius Severus and Caracalla, which causes ILAlg to date it in the late 2nd or early 3rd cent.
AD.
44 As has been shown by D. Fishwick, "Flamen Augustorum", HSCPh 1A (1970), p. 299-312
priestly titles were often abbreviated and the corresponding title sacerdos divarum Augustarum
is quite common, see CIL 11-5, 1 162 = CIL II, 1471 = ILER 432, CIL Π, 1338 and CIL IX, 2347
{sacerdos divarum Augustarum) CIL II, 1341 = ILER 1770 = IRPCadiz 541 {sacerdos perpetua
divarum Augustarum) and CIL IX, 5068 {sacerdos Augustarum). Fishwick, I.e. (in this note),
p. 305 and Fishwick, o.e. (n. 1), vol. I, p. 274-276 convincingly argues that the corresponding
male titles sacerdos ox flamen Augustorum include both the living emperor(s) and his deified
predecessors (which makes the title useless for dating); the same may hold for the title sacerdos
or flaminica Augustarum. Rather than its earlier reading A ug(ustorum) CIL II, 2416 = ILER 352
= ILS 6924 should be supplemented as sacerd(os) perp(etua) / Rom(ae) et Aug(ustarum), see
Etienne, o.e. (η. 8), p. 184, or perhaps: Aug(ustae).
45 Marcia Celsa: CIL II, 1978 = AE 1917/18, 10; Aelia Senilla CIL II-7, 3a = AE 1997,
994 (late first or early second century); Iulia Laeta: CIL II-5, 89 = CIL II, 1678 (1st cent. AD);
Lucretia Campana and her (deceased) father: CIL 11-5, 69 = CIL II, 1663 = ILS 5080 from
Tucci.
152 Ε. A. HEMELRIJK
cult who served the living and deified empresses collectively. The words Aug(ustae)
or divae Aug(ustae), which were sometimes added to the title flaminica or sacerdos,
seem to point to the cult of the living or the deified empress separately. As for the
ratio between these cults the inscriptions are divided almost equally: forty-four
(33 flaminicae and 1 1 sacerdotes) mention priestesses of the living empress
and forty-two (IS flaminicae and 24 sacerdotes) priestesses devoted to the cult of the
deified ones.46 In some cases the name of an empress is added in the genitive, e.g.
flaminica Iuliae Augustae or sacerdos divae Drusillae, which must mean that the
priestess in question looked after the cult of this particular empress individually. The
usually close coincidence between the - admittedly insecure - date of the inscription
and that of the empress in question suggests that, as a rule, only the living empress or
her immediate predecessor were worshipped individually. The cult of earlier
apparently fell soon into disuse; at least, after a certain time no priestesses
seem to have been appointed to look after their cult.47 Of course, the names of earlier
empresses may have been added to the divarum Augustarum worshipped collectively,
but their individual cult seems to have disappeared. As a rule, the festivities connected
with a particular emperor (or empress) did not survive his dynasty, or even his reign.48
Even for an exceptionally prominent empress such as Livia, whose birthday was still
publicly celebrated with games in the early second century, no individual priestess is
attested after the late first century AD.49
Occasionally, however, a whole line of successive empresses was
with a priestess devoted to their cult. For instance, a statue base, now lost, in
Novaria (Italy) was set up in honour of a priestly couple: the husband was aflamen of
the deified emperors Vespasian, Titus, Trajan and Hadrian in Novaria, and the wife,
Albucia Candida, was a flaminica divae Iuliae (probably Titus's daughter) in Novaria
and a flaminica divae Sabinae in Ticinum. We must conclude that either Titus'
daughter Julia (deified in AD 91) had a priestess of her cult long after her death and
deification, or that Albucia Candida was a priestess of the deified Julia Titi in her
46 Most references to the cult of living and deified women of the imperial family come
from Italy and Gaul. In Germania I have found only priestesses of the living empress and in the
African and Spanish provinces the titles of the priestesses usually do not indicate whether they
served the cult of the living or deified empress.
47 Of course, there are many other signs of imperial worship, such as altars and statues in
shrines and temples, but these do not concern us here.
48 See P. Herz, "Kaiserfeste der Prinzipatszeit",¿NRfFII, 16.2 (1978), p. 1 135-1200.
49 For the celebration of her birthday in the early second century see CIL VI, 29681= AE
1962, \69=AE\99\, 606 (AD 108); for the duration of her cult see also Grether, I.e. (n. 15),
p. 251-252. Being the first empress Livia was an exception. A badly damaged inscription from
Hippo Regius in Afr. Proc. {AE 1958, 144, dated in the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD)
mentions a certain Maria [Honoratjiana or Saturnina who was aflami/fnicae divae Liv(?)]iae
according to Wesch-Klein, o.e. (n. 43), p. 107-108. However, a priestess of the deified Livia
should have been called flaminica divae Iuliae Augustae, which is the title of Cantria Longina
in Aeclanum (It.) in the late first century AD, see CIL IX, 1 153 (we cannot be certain, however,
whether she served the cult of Livia or that of Julia Titi). Therefore, the restoration as
flami/fnicae divae Livjiae is unlikely. To my mind, it should rather be restored as flami/fnicae
Matidjiae.
early days while serving the cult of Sabina (deified in AD 137) in old age.50 Two or
more successive empresses might be worshipped in different towns by the same
priestess; for instance, an unknown woman of senatorial rank was sacerdos divae
Plotinae (deified in AD 122) in Pollentia (where the inscription was found); she was
also sacerdos divae Faustinae Maioris (deified in AD 141) in Concordia and a
sacerdos divae Faustinae (Minor[?] deified in AD 175) in nearby Augusta
Taurinorum (Turin).51 Since priests and priestesses seem to have been elected from a
very young age until well into their sixties, we may assume that such priesthoods
were held successively.52
For the decision which empress was to receive her own priestess, no uniform
rule can be applied, nor did the towns of Italy and the western provinces strictly
follow the lead of Rome. Outside Rome, both male and female members of the
imperial family were worshipped during their lifetime and prior to their official
deification, and some imperial women who were worshipped in the municipalities,
were never even officially deified at Rome.53 The titles of the imperial priestesses,
50 CIL V, 6514 = Λ£ 1999, 763. For her husband, see also CIL V, 6513.
51 Inscrit IX, 1, 130 = AE 1982, 376 = CIL V, 7617 = ILS 6750: sacerdoti / divae Plotinae
/ Pollentiae / divae Faustinae / Taurinis / divae Faustinae maioris / Concordia; see
M. -Th. Raepsaet-Charlier, Prosopographie des femmes de l'ordre sénatorial (fr-lf siècles),
2 vols, Louvain, 1987 (= FOS), nr. 847 and G. Alföldy, "Ein senatorisches Ehepaar aus
Pollentia", ZPE 47 (1982), p. 201-205. The unusual sequence - from a chronological point of
view - may be explained by the relative importance of the towns where she held her
priesthoods: first Pollentia, probably her native town where the inscription was set up, then the
nearby Augusta Taurinorum and finally the more remote Concordia (Colonia Venetiae).
52 Though some scholars, see for instance Gradel, o.e. (n. 1), p. 89 and Etienne, o.e.
(η. 8), p. 238, assume a minimum age for priests of 25 (the age of full legal capacity and the
minimum age for holding municipal office), priests are known to have held office at a much
younger age, see AE 1988, 211: aflamen who died at the age of 12 and AE 1987, 204: at the
age of 18. The same variation in age is found for female priests of the imperial cult: for
instance, Caecilia Aprulla, flaminica desígnala of the colony of the Vocontii (Vasio in Gall.
Narb.), died at the age of 14 before taking up office, see CIL XII, 690; Flavia Pacata, flaminica
perpetua at Thelepte, died at the age of 15, see AE 1993, 1714 = CIL VIII, 211 (Cillium,
Afr.Proc, AD 150-175) and Postumia Aprulla, flaminica of the municipium Suetabaugustanum
(Hisp.Tar.), died at the age of 18, see CIL 11-14, 110 = CIL II, 3782 = ILER 5523 (2nd cent.
AD). For other ages at death mentioned on epitaphs of priestesses of the imperial cult: Z4M II,
505 = ILAfr 646 = AE 1921, 19: died at the age of 72, AE 1993, 1714 = CIL VIII, 211: Aemilia
Pacata died at the age of 53, CIL VIII, 15417: at the age of 67, CIL XIII, 602: at the age of 68,
CIL II, 2427: at the age of 50, CIL II-7, 197 = CIL II, 2188 = ILER 6361: at the age of 61, AE
1995, 1793: died at the age of 36 after giving birth to her 10th (!) child. Of course, we do not
know at what age these women held their priesthood.
53 For instance, though Claudius's mother Antonia was never officially deified, the small
town Ruscino (Gall.Narb) had a priestess devoted to her cult, see ILGN 638: flaminica
Antoniae Augustae; the same holds for Agrippina Minor, who was worshipped during her
lifetime in Aeclanum in Italy, seeAE 1997, 397': flaminica Agrippinae Aug(ustae). For a cult
for Livia during her lifetime or before her deification, see CIL XII, 4249 and CIL XII, 1363 =
ILS 6991: flaminica Iuliae Augustae, Inscrit III, 1, 1 13 = AE 1910, 191 = ILS 9390 and CIL X,
961: sacerdos Iuliae Augustae (but, according to P. CASTREN, Ordo populusque Pompeianus.
154 E.A. HEMELRIJK
however, suggest that the cult centred on the relatively brief list of female members of
the imperial family (not all of them empresses) who received official deification at
Rome: priestesses are attested for Drusilla, Livia (Iulia Augusta), Flavia Domitilla,
Iulia Titi, Marciana, Matidia, Plotina, Sabina, and Faustina (Major and Minor)
That Nero's daughter Claudia (deified in AD 63) and his wife Poppaea
(deified in AD 65) are missing from this list is not surprising: their cult dropped into
oblivion shortly after its inception.54 After Faustina Minor female members of the
imperial family are no longer mentioned individually in the priestly titles; instead they
are indicated collectively as divarum Augustarum or - including the living empress -
Augustarum.
In his recent study of the imperial cult Gradel55 assumes that male priests of
living emperors "updated" their titles — which, to his mind, they kept for life - when
the emperor died. According to this view, imperial priests changed their title from
or sacerdos Augusti to flamen or sacerdos divi Augusti upon the death of the
emperor, not only when actually in office, but also when the emperor died long after
their term of office. However, there is no evidence for this theory and the main
- that most inscriptions mentioning priests of deified emperors can be dated
within a generation after the death of the emperor in question - is not convincing. As
we have seen, the cult of an individual emperor quickly fell into disuse after his own
reign or that of his successor. Therefore, as a rule, only priests (and priestesses) are
attested serving the cult of the living emperor (or empress) and his or her immediate
predecessor individually.
As we have seen, both the living empress and her immediate predecessor could
have a priestess serving her cult individually. Earlier empresses, if worshipped at all,
were part of the collective cult of the deified empresses. Perhaps an individual
required an altar or a temple devoted to the cult of the empress in question. But
what was the relation between the cult of the individual empress and that of the other
female members of the family? Should we understand that aflaminica divae Plotinae
exclusively served the cult of the deified Plotina or that, while serving the cult of the
Polity and Society in Roman Pompeii, Rome, 1975, p. 72, she may have been a priestess of
Agrippina rather than of Livia).
54 E.R. Varner, "Portraits, plots, and politics: damnatio memoriae and the images of
women", MAAR 46 (2001), p. 41-93 lists 17 female members of the imperial family who
were officially deified: Drusilla, Livia, Claudia (Nero's daughter), Poppaea, Flavia Domitilla
Maior (?) and Minor, Julia Titi, Marciana, Matidia, Plotina, Sabina, Faustina Maior and Minor,
Julia Domna, Julia Maesa and Caecilia Paulina (the wife of Maximinus Thrax). The cult of
Claudia, Poppaea, Domitilla, Julia Titi and Caecilia Paulina did not survive the reign of the
emperors who deified them. H. Temporini, Die Frauen am Hofe Trajans. Ein Beitrag zur
Stellung der Augustae im Principat, Berlin/New York, 1978, p. 44 observes that all divae had
been granted the title „Augusta" during their lifetime, except for Drusilla and Flavia Domitilla
Minor, Domitian's sister, and perhaps Caecilia Paulina, see I. Liggi, "Caecilia Paulina: un destin
d'impératrice", in R. Frei-Stolba and A. Bielman (eds), Femmes et vie publique dans
l'Antiquité gréco-romaine, Lausanne, 1998 {Études de Lettres 1998, 1), p. 131-158.
55 Gradel, o.e. (n. 1), p. 87-91. Gradel uses this theory to account for the fact that he
found hundred priests of deified emperors in Italy (outside Rome) against only fifty-six for the
living emperor, whereas in his view the imperial cult in Italy focused on the living emperor.
female members of the imperial family in general, she paid special attention to that of
the deified Plotina? In other words, should we take the addition mentioning the name
of a particular empress in a restrictive or in an additive sense? Certainty cannot be
reached here but, in view of the small number of imperial priestesses as compared to
priests (roughly a proportion of 1 to 4.5), we may suspect that most towns employed
only one imperial priestess at a time, if any. Therefore, the additive sense seems more
likely.
Social status and social mobility
The other additions to the titles of imperial priests and priestesses (such as
perpetua, prima, and provinciae) do not refer to the object of their cult, but to the
status and prestige of the priestesses, or perhaps to the novelty or duration of their
office. In the past, these additions were explained as part of a strict hierarchy among
the priests of the imperial cult, headed by the flamen provinciae. However, such
hierarchic An
rejected.56 distinctions
exceptionare
is made
not supported
for the flamen
by the
(andevidence
the flaminica)
and areprovinciae.
now generally
Since
he served the imperial cult at the provincial level, organising the gladiatorial games at
the yearly festival in the provincial capital and presiding over the annual meeting of
the concilium provinciae, his priesthood was, by far, the most prestigious; a provincial
flamen was usually of equestrian, or at least of decurial, rank.57
Also the majority of the flaminicae provinciae were of decurial or equestrian
rank (see table 6) and, therefore, of slightly higher rank than the average municipal
priestess.58 As we have seen, a provincial flaminica was not necessarily the wife of a
56 For pertinent criticism see H.-G. Pflaum, "Les flamines de l'Afrique Romaine",
54 (1976), p. 152-163.
57 For the provincial flaminate, see Alföldy, o.e. (η. 24); FlSHWiCK, I.e. (n. 10) and o.e.
(n. 1) vol. Ill, 2. The provincial priesthood formed "the culmination of a local career in the
provinces" (Fishwick, o.e. [n. 1], vol. I, p. 135); therefore, provincial priests were usually of
decurial or equestrian rank. Discussing their honours and privileges Williamson, I.e. (n. 29),
p. 185 assumes that they formed "the highest rank of the provincial aristocracy"; see also
Pliny's friend Voconius Romanus, who was an eques and aflamen provinciae of Hither Spain,
Plin. Min., Ep. II, 13, 4. The view of Etienne, o.e. (η. 8), p. 152ff., that a provincial priesthood
formed the hinge between a decurial and an equestrian career, is now generally abandoned; see,
for instance, Alföldy, o.e. (η. 24), p. 28ff. who discusses four types of careers prior to the
provincial flaminate (equestrian, decurial or mixed); in the course of the first two centuries AD
he notices a decline from an equestrian career to a mixed or decurial career prior to the
provincial flaminate. For the provincial concilium, Deininger, o.e. (n. 11) and J.A.O. Larsen,
Representative Government in Greek and Roman History, Berkeley/Los Angeles, 1955, p. 126-
144.
58 One priestess may have been of senatorial rank, but this is not certain: the senatorial
rank of the unknown Calchisia (CIL II, 122 = CIL II, 5189 = AE 1969/70, 214) has been
inferred from the letters C F before her name which, according to some, means c(larissimae)
f(eminae), see Panzram, o.e. (n. 24), p. 279, but according to CIL II, 5189 should be
as C(aii) ffiliae). She was provincial priestess of Lusitania and was exceptional in
serving twice as such.
156 E.A. HEMELRIJK
provincial flamen, but an independent functionary serving the cult of the women of
the imperial family in the name of the province.59 That proportionally more
than municipal, priestesses were married to flamines (not necessarily provincial
flamines) may be explained by the fact that they were elected from a relatively small
group of very high-ranking families. Like their male colleagues, provincial priestesses
must have resided in the provincial capital during their period of office. They had
distinguished careers sometimes comprising both municipal priesthoods and a
priesthood of the province (not necessarily in this order). For instance, Flavia Rufina
was flaminica of the province Lusitania, flaminica perpetua of her native town
and flaminica of Salacia, where she dedicated an altar to Jupiter after having
received permission from the ordo decurionum. Similarly, Porcia Materna was
flaminica provinciae H(ispaniae) c(iterioris) and, after that, flaminica perpetua in her
native Osicerda, Caesaraugusta and Tarraco, and Domitia Proculina was flaminica of
the province of Lusitania and first and perpetual flaminica of her own town.60
In his influential study of provincial priests of Hispania Citerior61, Alföldy
suggests that female provincial priests enjoyed a somewhat lower esteem in
to their male counterparts: less priestesses are known to us, they were less often
honoured with a public statue and, when a statue was set up for them, this was more
often done by private persons, usually relatives, than by the city, the local senate or
the provincial assembly. Though this may be true, the fact that we know fewer
cannot be attributed solely to a lack of esteem. It seems more likely that the
smaller number of female provincial priests known to us reflects an actual difference
in numbers. Moreover, there are great regional differences as regards the inscriptions
for provincial priestesses: nearly all of them are found in the Spanish provinces and
date from the first two centuries AD (see table 6). Though the numerous statue bases
found in Tarraco, the provincial capital of hither Spain - where the public statues of
5 That their domain was the cult of the female members of the imperial family is
explicitly stated in AE 1966, 183 (Munigua in Hisp.Baet, 2nd half 2nd c): Quintia Flaccina is
addressed as flaminic(ae) divar(um) Aug(ustarum) splend(idae) provinc(iae) / Baetic(ae).
60 Flavia Rufina: CIL II, 32 = ILS 6893 = ILER 49 (Salacia, Hisp.Lus. 1st cent. AD), see
Panzram, o.e. (n. 24), p. 278; Etienne, o.e. (η. 8), p. 166f.; JA. Delgado Delgado,
"Flamines provinciae Lusitaniae", Gerion 17 (1999), p. 453. Porcia Materna: RIT 325 = CIL II,
4241 (Tarraco, Hisp. Tar, AD 120-140): [/¡(aminicae)J p(rovinciae) H(ispaniae) c(iterioris) et
postea / Osicerd(ensi) Caesar[aug(ustanae)] / Tarrac(onensi) perpetuae, see Alföldy, o.e.
(η. 24), p. 96 nr. 108 and Panzram, o.e. (n. 24), p. 51. Domitia Proculina: CIL II, 895 = ILS
6895 = ILER 1661 (Caesarobriga, Hisp.Lus., 1st cent. AD): / [fllaminica provin[c(iae)] /
Lusitan(iae) et flamin(ica) / fmjunicipi(i) sui primfaj / et perpetua, see Panzram, o.e. (n. 24),
p. 278; Etienne, o.e. (η. 8), p. 166f.; Delgado Delgado, o.e. (this note), p. 453.
61 Alföldy, o.e. (η. 24), p. 52. According to G. Alföldy, "Bildprogramme in den
römischen Städten des Conventus Tarraconensis: das Zeugnis der Statuenpostamente", Revista
de la Universidad Complutense, 1979 (Homenaje a García Bellido IV) 18, 118, p. 21 Off. not
only the place where the statue was erected, but also the status of the dedicator(s) was an
important signal for the internal hierarchy of the local elites. The greatest honour was a statue
in the forum or another prominent public place set up by the city, the citizens or a civic
collectivity.
provincial priests and priestesses were set up after their year of duty62 - may have
influenced this outcome to some extent, the lack of provincial priestesses in the highly
Romanized province of Africa Proconsularis and their scarcity in Hispania Baetica
and Gallia Narbonensis are striking. To my mind, we have to assume that, for most of
the time, some provinces had only a priest, but no priestess, for the imperial cult at the
provincial level.
The meaning of the remaining additions is less self-evident. To start with the
simplest one: the evidence strongly suggests that, when a sacerdos or flaminica is said
to have been prima, this should be interpreted in a temporal sense, i.e. that the
priestess in question was the first to serve the cult of the empress in her community.63
The common addition perpetuus/a is more puzzling since it seems that priests and
priestesses of the imperial cult were usually elected for one year. There is no reason to
assume that the perpetui/ae were an exception to this rule and held office for life. The
addition is not restricted to certain provinces or regions (though the title flaminica
perpetua is especially frequent in the African provinces: 47 cases out of 72 in total),
nor is it found in one period only (though in the first century AD it is rare). According
to the most plausible explanation of the corresponding male title, flamen perpetuus,
this was a special honour allowing the recipient to keep the privileges of his
after his year of office.64 Similarly, ? flaminica perpetua may have retained the
honours and privileges of her priesthood after her period of office. We may guess, for
instance, that she kept her special seat in the theatre and amphitheatre and was
allowed to wear her priestly costume on festal days, like the ex flamen of the
cult in Gallia Narbonensis.65 It then probably was a special honour granted to a
woman of great merit to the town or of a highly distinguished family.66 Yet, in the
For the statue bases of Tarraco, see Alföldy, I.e. (n. 61), p. 127-275.
63 See CIL XIII, 5064 for Iulia Festilla, flaminica prima Augustae of Aventicum (Germ.
Sup.) in the first century AD, Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 217-218 nr. 49; IAMll, 440 = ILAfr
631 =ILM\30=AE 1916, 44, IAM TI, 439 = ILAfr 630 = ILM 129 = AE 1916,43 andlAMll,
368 = ILM 131 = ILAfr 632 for Fabia Bira, flaminica prima in Volubilis (Maur.Ting.) around
AD 54. As appears from AE 1916, 42 = IAMll, 448 her husband, M. Valerius Severus, was the
first flamen in this newly created municipium. For Fabia Bira see Fishwick, o.e. (n. 1), vol. I,
p. 291-293; Ladjimi Sebaï, le. (?. 2), nr. 64 ; Bassignano, o.e. (?. 27), p. 368, nr. 2 and
Delgado Delgado, o.e. (?. 11), p. 90. See also AE 1988, 422 = Suplt III, ColO for an
unknown {flaminica] Iuliae Augustae who was also sacerdos prima of Corfinium in Italy in the
first century AD.
64 Ladage, o.e. (n. 8), p. 83-85. Pflaum, le. (?. 56), p. 156 adds that provincial priests
who were perpetui kept their place in the provincial assembly after their year of office.
65 For the privileges of the provincial flamen after his year of duty, see lines 9-16 of the
lex de flamonio provinciae Narbonensis {CIL XII, 6038 = ILS 6964) with WILLIAMSON, I.e.
(n.29).
66 See, for instance, AE 1982, 680 for Attia Patercla from Nemausus (Gall. Narb.), who by
decree of the local senate was elected flaminica perpetua without paying the summa honoraria
{gratuita) because of the generous gifts of her father to the city, see also Spickermann, I.e.
(n. 2), p. 205-206, nr. 29, CIL XII, 1378 = ILGN 206 for the unknown wife of L. Duvius Avitus
{consul suff. in AD 56) who was flaminica perpetua in her native town Vasio (Gall.Narb), see
Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 212, nr. 42, FOS 865; and CIL VIII, 12317 + CIL VIII, 23888 for
158 E.A. HEMELRIJK
course of time the priestly titles seem to have suffered from inflation: in the second
century AD the title flaminica perpetua became more common, especially in the
African provinces, and was granted occasionally even to persons of lower status.67 As
a consequence, it may have become less prestigious. The unusual addition annua,
which for an annual priesthood seems superfluous, may perhaps be explained by this
common use of the title perpetuus. ei
Though women could have more priesthoods in different towns,69 an
priesthood was seldom held more than once in the same town: the additions bis,
iterato honore and //, referring to ? flaminica, are very rare.70 An imperial priesthood
required wealth, not only because of the summa honoraria that had to be paid when
entering upon office - a high sum that usually exceeded that for local magistracies71 -
Modia Quintia, flaminica perpetua of Bisica Lucana (Afr.Proc.) in the 2nd cent. AD, who apart
from paying the summa honoraria for her priesthood generously adorned a porticus with
marble slabs, panelled ceilings and columns and built an aqueduct for the city, see
Bassignano, o.e. (n. 27), p. 176, nr. 6; Ladjimi Sebaï, I.e. (n. 2), nr. 39 and Wesch-Klein, o.e.
(n. 43), p. 70-71.
67 For instance, AE 1984, 528 = AE 1979, 339 in honour of Alfia Domitia Severiana,
flaminica perpetua of Barbesula (Hisp.Baet.) in the 2nd cent. AD, who because of the
cognomen of her father, C. Iulius Alfius Theseus, is believed to be of low social status, perhaps
a freedman's daughter, see Bielman and Frei-Stolba, I.e. (n. 2), p. 125. Their precious gift, a
statue of 100 pounds of silver, shows that her family was wealthy.
68 CIL II, 3279 = CILA III, 1, 105 (Castulo, Hisp. Tar.): an unknown sacerdos annua who
from her own money adorned the area in front of the temple of Roma and Augustus with
statues and ornaments. It is not entirely certain that she was a priestess of the imperial cult, but
among male priests of the imperial cult the addition annuus is quite common, see, for instance,
CIL VIII, 17167 = ILAlg I, 1355, CIL VIII, 1888 = AE 1977, 860 = AE 1984, 937 = ILAlg I,
3068 and AE 1968, 591 (the last-mentioned inscription mentions both the annual and the -
more prestigious - perpetual flaminate of the dedicator: his annual priesthood is recorded
before his aedileship, but he seems to have held his perpetual flaminate only after having been a
duumvir).
69 Apart from the examples mentioned elsewhere in this article, Abeiena Balbina was
flaminica of Pisaurum and Ariminum apart from being city patroness of Pitinum Pisaurense:
CIL XI, 6354 = ILS 6655 (Pisaurum in Italy, AD 180-192), see E.A. Hemelrijk, "City
in the Roman Empire", Historia 53, 2 (2004), p. 209-245 and a [Cosjsutia was flaminica
divae Faustinae (Minor) both in Aquileia in northern Italy and in lader in Dalmatia, see AE
1956,232 = ILJugI,210.
70 IAM II, 430 = ILAfr 625 = ILM 123 = AE 1916, 91: Aemilia Sextina from Vienna in
Gal. Narb. was bis flaminica in Volubilis in Maur.Ting. in the early 2nd cent. AD, see Ladjimi
Sebaï, I.e. (n. 2), nr. 66; Bassignano, o.e. (n.27), p. 369; Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 207,
n. 100. CIL XII, 519 = ILN 111, 33: an epitaph for an unknown flaminica Augustae II in Acquae
Sextiae (Gall.Narb.) and AE 1983, 521 = AE 1982, 521: Vibia Modesta was iterato honore bis
flaminica sacerdfosj in Itálica (Hisp.Baet.) in the 3rd cent. AD; CIL II, 122 = CIL ?, 5189 =
AE 1969/70, 214: the unknown Calchisia was twiceflaminica provinciae of Lusitania.
R. Duncan -Jones, The economy of the Roman empire. Quantitative studies, Cambridge,
19822, p. 82-88 mentions payments varying from 5,000 to 10,000 sesterces for a flaminate in
the towns of northern Africa. This is higher than the summa honoraria for most secular civic
magistracies, such as the duumvirate or the aedileship, in the same town. If we take the height
but also because of the numerous festivities in the imperial cult, most of which were
paid for by the officiating priest out of his (or her) own pocket. Holding office in the
same town more than once must have been a sign of exceptional generosity.
Because of the wealth it required, a priesthood of the imperial cult is often
regarded as proof that the person in question belonged to the (decurial or equestrian)
elite.72
However, matters appear to be more complicated. Though most priestesses
whose social rank is known, did indeed belong to the elite (see table 3), in more than
half of the number of inscriptions the social rank of the priestess cannot be
established. Most local priestesses are mere names to us, and so are their husbands
and fathers that are sometimes mentioned in the inscriptions. When no magistracies of
male relatives are known, it is impossible to establish the social rank of the priestess.
To conclude that, because of their priesthood, they must be of a high social rank, is
begging the question. On the contrary, in view of the ancient habit of status-display
the lack of status-indicators seems to point to a rather modest social standing.
Since for an imperial priesthood Roman citizenship was required, we may
assume that, as a rule, priestesses of the imperial cult were Roman citizens.73
as their names indicate, some priestesses stemmed from families that had only
recently been Romanized.74 A priesthood of the imperial cult, by which they showed
their loyalty to the emperor, may have served to display not only their generosity, but
also their Roman citizenship and their adjustment to Roman culture and values. Thus,
it enhanced their prestige. Also for women of modest rank a priesthood of the
imperial cult must have been attractive as a means of social promotion. Very
in this respect, is the small number of inscriptions showing flaminicae - but
no female sacerdotes - of low social rank (see table 3). This group may have been
somewhat larger than noted here, since also some of the priestesses whose social
status is unknown to us, may have belonged to the sub-elite or to freedmen's families.
Some priestesses were married to freedmen and in some cases their cognomen or that
of their fathers, seems to point to a freedman's descent, though they themselves may
have been freeborn.75 Some priestesses appear to have been freedwomen themselves,
of the summa honoraria to be paid for an office as an indication of its importance, the flaminate
was one of the most important offices in the African towns.
72 For instance, Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 192 assumes that, because of her title, the
unknown Iullina, flaminica provinciae of Gall. Narb, must have been of equestrian rank {CIL
XII, 2516).
73 Etienne, o.e. (?. 8), p. 150 (for provincial priests) and 223.
74 See, for instance, Fabia Bira, flaminica prima of Volubilis (Maur.Ting.). Her
cognomen, Bira, and the name of her father, Izelta, are Lybian or Punic. Also Nahania Victoria
flaminica perpetua in Thugga (Afr. Proc.) in the 2nd c AD was of local extraction, ILAfr 516,
517 and 523, CIL VIII, 26483 and 26484 {ILTun 1396), Dougga 34. This probably also holds
for Aemilia Pacata, flaminica perpetua of Cillium and her husband T. Flavius Secundus, who
was flamen perpetuus in the same town. His father was the first to receive Roman citizenship,
see Les Flava de Cillium. Étude architecturale, épigraphique, historique et littéraire du mausolée
de Kasserine (CIL VIII, 211-216), Rome, 1993 {Coll. de l'École française de Rome, 169), p. 219-
227.
75 AE 1982, 680 (Nemausus, Gall.Narb, ca. AD 161-200): Attia Patercla was the daughter
of a sevir Augustalis, Bielman and Frei-Stolba, I.e. (n. 2), p. 125 therefore assume that she
160 E.A. HEMELRIJK
despite the fact that it is usually believed that freed persons were excluded from
imperial priesthoods.76 Spickermann assumes that in the provinces of Gaul at the end
of the second and the early third centuries AD there were not enough female
candidates for the priesthood in the local ruling families, which induced the local
senates to choose members of wealthy sub-elite or freedmen's families, such as the
seviri Augustales .77 Yet, since some freedwomen-priestesses date from the first and
early second centuries AD, their priesthood cannot be explained by a lack of suitable
candidates. It may perhaps rather be explained by exceptional wealth and generosity.
For instance, Licinia Prisca, flaminica perpetua of Thugga (Afr. Proc.) in the first
century AD, and her husband - who both were freed slaves of the flamen perpetuus
and patron of the city, M. Licinius Rufus - generously spent their wealth for the
benefit of the city.78 We may assume that an imperial priesthood brought them the
social recognition they lacked because of their low birth. Thus, it was both an
incentive, and a reward, for civic generosity.
In short, the large number of priestesses whose rank cannot be established,
and the rare examples of priestesses of freed status or of freedmen's families, should
warn us against too facile an identification of an imperial priesthood with membership
of the elite. Though imperial priests were preferably chosen from members of the
elite, also wealthy persons outside the elite were eligible for this priesthood, which
makes it both an indication of high social rank and a vehicle for social promotion.
was a freedman's daughter. AE 1984, 528 = AE 1979, 339 (Barbesula, Hisp.Baet. ca. AD 150):
the name of the father of the flaminica perpetua Alfia Domitia Severiana, C. Iulius Alfius
Theseus, seems to point to a freedman's descent. CIL XII, 2244 (Gratianopolis, Gall.Narb., 2nd
or 3rd c): the flaminica Hilaria Quintilla was married to a sevir Aug. whose name, Sex. Attius
Myrosies, suggests that he was a freedman, see Spickermann, I.e. (n. 2), p. 209, nr. 35 and
Ladage, o.e. (n. 8), p. 45. CIL XII, 1363 (Vasio, Gall.Narb., before AD 42): Catia Servara,
flaminica Iuliae Augustae, was married to the sevir Augustalis (and, probably, freedman)
Q. Secundius Zmaragdus. CIL XIII, 2181 = ILS 8098 (Lugdunum, Gall.Lug., 2nd-3rd c): both
the father and the mother of the flaminica Augustae Iulia Helias were freed; see also CIL VIII,
17831. CIL VIH, 14690 = ILS 4484 from Thuburnica (Afr.Proc.) early 3rd c: the Greek
cognomen of Lucilia Cale may point to a freedman's family and the same may hold for Octavia
Elpidia, flaminica at Augusta Praetoria (It.), see Inscrit XI, 1, 20 = CIL V, 6840/1.
76 Élienne, o.e. (?. 8), p. 246; Ladage, o.e. (n. 8), p. 45; Spickermann, le. (n. 2), p. 209;
contra Y. Burnand, "De la servitude au flaminat: quelques cas de promotion sociale en Gaule
romaine", in E. Frézouls (ed.), La mobilité sociale dans le monde romaine. Actes du colloque
organisé à Strasbourg (novembre 1988), Strasbourg, 1992, p. 203-213.
77 Spickermann, le. (n. 2), p. 227-228.
78 AE 1969/70, 650 = Dougga 26 (Thugga, Afr. Proc., 1st cent. AD); for her generosity to
the city see AE 1969/70, 648-9 = CIL VIII, 26464 and 26603; see also Ladjimi Sebaï, le.
(?. 2), p. 1 1 and Bassignano, o.e. (n. 27), p. 1 16 nr. 3. For other possible freedwomen: CIL V,
7811 (Albintimilium in Italy; date unknown): the flaminica Metilia Tertullina was married to
the freedman P. Verginius Rhodion and seems to have been a freedwoman, or a descendant of a
freedman, of the senator P. Metilius Tertullinus Vennonianus, see A.M. Andermahr, Totus in
Praediis. Senatorischer Grundbesitz in Italien in der Frühen und Hohen Kaiserzeit, Bonn, 1998
{Antiquitas III, vol. 37), p. 340 nr. 341. CIL ?-7, 57 = CIL ?, 2122 (Isturgi Triumphalis,
Hisp.Baet., 2nd cent. AD): because of her name, Porcia Gamice, this flaminica is believed to
have been a freedwoman, see Delgado Delgado, o.e. (?. 11), nr. 129.
Conclusion
We have seen that - in Italy and the western provinces - priestesses of the
imperial cult held their office in their own right. Though some of them were married
to priests, priestly couples formed only a small minority among imperial priests and
there are no indications that they served the imperial cult together. Modern confusion
as to the status of imperial priestesses and the nature of their office appears to be
rooted in a mistaken identification between the Republican flaminate in Rome and the
priesthood of the imperial cult in Italy and the western provinces. By far the most
common title for a priestess of the imperial cult is flaminica, its alternative sacerdos
being restricted to Italy and the Spanish provinces (especially Baetica). Apart from
this geographical distribution, there is no marked difference between these titles,
when used for imperial priestesses, and they are best regarded as synonyms.
A priesthood of the imperial cult brought honour and prestige: in Italy and the
Latin West, it was not only numerically, but also socially the most prominent public
function for women. Its main requirements - Roman citizenship, wealth and,
high birth - caused it to be associated - both in ancient and in modern eyes -
with the elite. This connection, however, is not as strict as is usually believed: if
sufficiently wealthy, also women of lower rank - even women of freedmen's families
- might be elected as imperial priestesses. For them, and for women of families that
had only recently received Roman citizenship, an imperial priesthood formed a means
of social promotion. The presence of women of lower rank among imperial
does not conflict with the prevalent association of imperial priesthood with
membership of the elite: on the contrary, it is mainly because of this association that
an imperial priesthood attracted wealthy persons outside the elite. By holding this
important priesthood they expected to get the social recognition they desired.
Female imperial priesthood was in all respects the counterpart ofthat of men:
like their male colleagues, imperial priestesses were elected by the local senate, or the
provincial assembly, and they seem to have held office for a year, though we should
perhaps allow for local variation. Women's priestly titles show the same additions as
those of male imperial priests and, like them, priestesses could have more than one
priesthood in different towns, but only rarely served for more than one year in the
same town. As for the objects of their cult, imperial priestesses usually served only
the living empress and her immediate predecessor individually; the individual cult of
earlier empresses, like that of emperors, quickly fell into disuse after their reign or, at
the latest, after the end of their dynasty. All this seems to point to the existence of
parallel priesthoods in the local towns that were neatly divided over the sexes. Yet,
the difference in numbers between male and female priests leads us to assume that
some cities had priests, but no priestesses of the imperial cult. Thus, though parallel,
the two priesthoods were not equal: as is to be expected, the greater number of male
priests reflects the greater importance attached to the cult of the emperor as compared
to that of his female relatives.
University of Utrecht EMILY A. HEMELRIJK
Faculteit der Letteren, Instituut Geschiedenis
Kromme Nieuwegracht, 66
NL-3512 HL Utrecht
Table A: flaminicae married Xo flamines
Name Corpus Social rank Find-spot Province Date* Pries
[-- ]A Sabina CIL V, 7788 = Suplt decurial Albingaunum It. (9) late lst-early flaminic
IV, A 12. 2nd c. Augusta
Aemilia Pacata ¿£1993, 1714 = decurial (?) Cillium Afr.Proc. 150-175 flaminic
CIL VIII, 211 perpetua
Albucia Candida CIL Y, 6514 = AE equestrian Novaria It. (11) Hadrianic flaminic
1999, 763 period Iuliae in
and flam
divae Sa
Ticinum
Aurelia RIT 320 = CIL II, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. ?. Aur.-220 flaminic
Marcellina 4198 =AE 1986, [p(rovin
460 H(ispani
c(iterior
Avidia Vitalis AE 1949, 36 =AE near Hadrumetum Afr.Proc. 2nd cent. flaminic
1991, 1639 perpetua
Carthago
Baebia Galla RIT 321= AE 1961, equestrian Tarraco Hisp.Tar. ca. 80-90 flaminic
329; AE 1929, 232 provinci
Hispania
citerions
Caninia Tertia ¿£1951,81 decurial Thuburnica Afr.Proc. late lst-early flaminic
2ndc. Augusta
perpetua
Cassia lustina CIL V, 3923 Arusnates It. (10) flaminic
Name Corpus Social rank Find-spot Province Date* Prie
Cornelia Tertulia CIL XII, 4230 + equestrian Baeterrae Gall.Narb before 4 flamini
4241= ILGN 558 =
AE 1999, 1033
Cornelia CIL VIII, 2396 equestrian Thamugadi Num. early 3rd c. flamini
Valentina perpetu
Tucciana
Cornelia CIL VIII, 2397 equestrian Thamugadi Num. early 3rd c. flamini
Valentina perpetu
Tucciana
Cornelia ¿£1987, 1072 = AE equestrian near Thamugadi Num. first part 3rd c. flamini
Valentina 1992, 1833 perpetu
Tucciana
Cornelia ¿£ 1980, 956 equestrian Thamugadi Num. first part 3rd c. flamini
Valentina perpetu
Tucciana
Fabia Bira IAMll, 439 = ILAfr decurial Volubilis Maur.Ting. c. 54 flamini
630 = ILM 129 = AE
1916,43
Flavia Procilla ¿£1941,45 equestrian (?) Thamugadi Num. 139-161 flamini
perpetu
Fulvia Celera RIT 344 = CIL II, decurial Tarraco Hisp.Tar. late lst-early flamini
4270 2ndc. perpetu
Fulvia Celera RIT'322 =AE 1928, decurial Tarraco Hisp.Tar. late lst-early flamini
197 2ndc. perpetu
Tarraco
flamini
provinc
H(ispan
c(iterior
Iulia Candida CIL VIII, 26071 decurial? Thibursicum Bure Afr.Proc. flamin
perpetu
Iulia Decumina CttXII, 150 decurial Nantuates (Forum Alp.Poen. 2nd-3rd c. flamin
Claudii Vallensium)
Manlia Silana CIL II, 3329 = CILA equestrian Tugia Hisp.Tar. 70-90? flamin
111,2,542= ILER provin
1658 Hispan
citerior
Maria AE 1958, 144 decurial Hippo Regius Afr.Proc. 2nd-3rd c. flamin
Honoratiana?
Saturnina
Minia Procula CIL VIII, 25530 decurial? Bulla Regia Afr.Proc. 2nd-3rd c. flamin
perpetu
Nahania Victoria ¿£1904, 118 Thugga Afr.Proc. 184-192 flamin
perpetu
Nahania Victoria CIL VIII, 26483/4 = Thugga Afr.Proc. 184-192 flamin
ILTun. 1396 perpetu
Nahania Victoria ILAfr 516 + CIL Thugga Afr.Proc. 184-192 flamin
VIII, 26482 = perpetu
Dougga 34 = AE
1914,161 =AE
1906, 12
Paetinia Paterna RIT 323 = CIL 11, decurial Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 140-180 flamin
4233 = ILS 6940 provin
H(ispan
c(iterio
Pompeia RIT 324 = CIL II, decurial Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 150-180 flamin
Maximina 4236 (provin
Porcia Materna RIT 325 = CIL II, equestrian Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 120-140 flamini
4241 provinc
H(ispan
c(iterior
after tha
flamini
perpetu
Osicerd
Caesara
and Tar
Postumia RIT 326 = CIL 11, decurial? Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 150-180 flamini
Nepotiana sive 4242 (provin
Marcellina
Valeria Fida RIT 328 = CIL 11, decurial (?) Tarraco Hisp.Tar late 2nd c. flamini
4252 =ILS 6941 p(rovin
H(ispan
c(iterior
Valeria Paulina CIL VIII, 22695 = decurial Gigthis Afr.Trip. 2nd-3rd c. flamini
ILTun 21 perpetu
Vinia Fusca CIL XII, 140 decurial Seduni (Forum Alp.Poen. 2nd-3rd c. flamini
Claudii Vallensium)
*A11 dates are AD
**(?) = identification uncertain
(....) = priesthood in question known from another inscription
Table 5: Imperial priesthood of other male and female relatives
name corpus social rank find-spot Province date*
[ ]lia Anulla CIL II, 1979 equestrian Abdera Hisp.Baet. 3rd cent.? sacerdos
[Aquia ...]tiola ¿£ 1966, 252 decurial Lugdunum Gall.Lug. ca. 150-180 flaminica
Annia Aelia Restituía ILAlg 1, 286 = Calama Afr.Proc. 161-211 flaminica
CIL VIII, 5365
= CIL VIII,
17495
Asicia Victoria CIL VIII, decurial Thugga Afr.Proc. 205/6 flaminica
26591b =
Dougga 73
Asicia Victoria CIL VIII, 26590 decurial Thugga Afr.Proc. ca. 205 flaminica
= CIL VIII,
1495
Cassia Maximula CIL VIII, 993 = decurial Karpis Afr.Proc. after 121/2 flaminica
ILS 4433
Clodia Secunda ¿£1991,822 = equestrian (?) Brixia It. (10) ca. 117-138 sacerdos
Supit VIII, Br
3bis
Crittia Priscilla ¿£1997,397 equestrian Aeclanum It. (2) 59 flaminica
Aug(usta
Didia Cornelia ¿£1920,115 equestrian Cuicul Afr.Proc. ca. 150-169 flaminica
[In]genua
Flavia Pacata ¿£1993,1714 decurial (?) Cillium Afr.Proc. 150-175 flaminica
(a) = Thelepte
CIL VIII, 211
Flavia Urbica ¿£ 1996, Capsa Afr.Byz. flaminica
1700
name corpus social rank find-spot Province date*
Iulia AE 1968, 588 equestrian (?) Mustis Afr.Proc. 222-235 flaminica
Iulia Bassilia ¿E 1917/18, 23 decurial (?) Thuburbo Afr.Proc. c. 192? or 176- flaminica
= ILAfr 280 Maius 180?
Iulia Celsina Senior CIL VIII, 16910 equestrian Guelaa Bou Afr.Proc. flaminica
= ILAlg I, 562 Atfane
Iunia Saturnina AE 1892, 145 = decurial Numlulis Afr.Proc. 168-170 flaminica
CIL VIII, 26121
Lucretia Campana CIL 11-5, 69 = Tucci Hisp.Baet. late 2nd early flaminica
CIL II, 1663 = 3rdc. Augustae
ILS 5080
Popilia Secunda RIT 350 = CIL Tarraco Hisp.Tar. late lst-early flaminica
II, 4276 2ndc.
Table 6: Provincial priestesses
Name Corpus find-spot province date*
[~]a Iullina CIL XII, 2516 Sales, Haute-Savoie Gall.Narb. end 1st c. equ
[~]na CIL II-7, 298 / 9 = Corduba Hisp.Baet.
CIL II, 2228a / b
Aemília Paterna RIT 319 = CIL II, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 100-120 equ
4190
Aemilia Paterna IRC II, 21 =AE Aeso Hisp.Tar. 100-120 equ
1972,314
Aurelia Marcellina RIT 320 = CIL II, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. M. Aur.-220
4198 = AE\9U,
460
Baebia Galla RIT32\=AE\96\, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. ca. 80-90 equ
329 =Λ£ 1929, 232
Calchisia C/i II, 122 = CIL II, Ebora Hisp.Lus. mid 2nd c. sen
5189 =AE 1969/70,
214
Domitia Proculina C7L II, 895 = ILS Caesarobriga Hisp.Lus. Vesp.
6895 = /I£7? 1661
Flavia Germanilla IAMII, 505 = ILAfr Volubilis Maur.Ting. late 2nd-early dec
646 =Λ£ 1921, 19 3rd c?
Flavia Rufina C7Z, II, 32 = 7L5 Salacia Hisp.Lus. Vesp?
6893 = ILER 49
Name Corpus Find-spot Province Date*
Fulvia Celera RIT 322 =AE 1928, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. late lst-early
197 2ndc.
Helvia AE 1989, 396 Emérita Augusta Hisp.Lus. Flavii- Ant.
Laberia Galla CIL II, 339 = ILER Collipo Hisp.Lus. not later than
1774 2ndc.
Laberia Galla CIL II, 114 Ebora Hisp.Lus. not later than
2nd c.
Manlia Silana CIL II, 3329 = CILA Tugia Hisp.Tar. 70-90?
III, 2, 542= ILER
1658
Ocratiana IAM II, 443 = CIL Volubilis Maur.Ting. late 1 st c.
VIII, 21842 = AM
135 =Λ£ 1891, 117
Paetinia Paterna RIT 323 = CIL II, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 140-180
4233 = ILS 6940
Pompeia Maximina RIT 324 = CIL II, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 150-180
4236
Porcia Materna RIT 325 = CIL II, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 120-140
4241
Postumia Nepotiana sive RIT 326 = CIL II, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 150-180
Marcellina 4242
Pro[~] Nigrina C/Z II, 2427 Bracara Augusta Hisp.Tar. ca. 100-120
Name Corpus Find-spot Province Date*
Quintia Flaccina AE 1966, 183 = Munigua Hisp.Baet. 2nd half 2nd c.
ILER 327
Rubria Festa AE 1995, 1793 Caesarea Maur.Caes. late 1st- early
2nd α
Sempronia Placida RIT 327= CIL II, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. ca. 174
4246 = ILS 6939
Servilla CIL 11, 195 =ILER Olisipo Hisp.Lus. after 69
1660
Valeria Fida Ä/r328 = CttII, Tarraco Hisp.Tar. 2nd half 2nd c.
4252 = ILS 6941

Priestesses of The Imperial Cult in The Latin West: Titles and Function

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Priestesses of The Imperial Cult in The Latin West: Titles and Function

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

L'antiquité classique

Priestesses of the Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Titles and

Citer ce document / Cite this document :

Fichier pdf généré le 07/09/2018

L 'Antiquité Classique 74 (2005),

S. HORNBLOWER and A. Spawforth (eds), The Oxford Classical Dictionary, Oxford,

Main titles: flaminica and sacerdos

Table 1 : Geographical distribution

Africa Gallia Spain Italy Alpes,

Table 2: Chronological distribution

Table 3: The social rank of priestesses of the imperial cult

senatorial equestrian decurial lower class or unknown

Flamen and flaminica: husband and wife?

Yet, in view of the evidence, the notion appears to be utterly unfounded: in my

priesthood.37 This accumulation of priesthoods in certain families should not lead us

Augustarum is unobjectionable: it may either be an abbreviation of the füll title

Social status and social mobility

You might also like