Int class trad (2013) 20:61–82

DOI 10.1007/s12138-013-0322-y
O R I G I N A L PA P E R

Reinventing Lucretia: Rape, Suicide and Redemption

from Classical Antiquity to the Medieval Era

Eleanor Glendinning

Published online: 4 July 2013

# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Abstract This article examines the rape and suicide of the archetypal Roman matron
Lucretia and the representation and appropriation of her story in literature from
Augustan Rome, Late Antiquity and the medieval period. Rape and suicide have
always been highly evocative, topical and controversial actions for scrutinising the
relationship between gender and history, and it is no accident that Rome's first high-
profile victim was later drawn upon by writers from 2,000 years of European history
to explore issues such as appropriate (and inappropriate) female behaviour, sexuality,
guilt, redemption, and the ethics of voluntary death. This article offers a diachronic
perspective on the long afterlife of a single Roman myth and the potency of that myth
as a privileged and effective point of reference for exploring femininity, rape and
suicide in European history.

Keywords Rape . Suicide . Livy . Ovid . St Augustine . Chaucer

Introduction

On a dark night in 510 BC, the noble, virtuous Lucretia, Roman matron and dutiful
wife, was brutally raped by Sextus Tarquinius, the son of the last king of Rome. As
the sun rose the next day, Lucretia gathered her family about her and, after recounting
her horrific experience the previous night, stabbed herself through the heart to end the
pain. Little did she know that her deed would set in motion an uprising that would
drive the kings out of the city forever and establish Republican government in Rome
for hundreds of years to come.

E. Glendinning (*)
University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
e-mail: E.R.Glendinning@leeds.ac.uk
62 E. Glendinning

This is just one version of what happened to Lucretia. The tale of her rape and her
subsequent noble suicide—and its effect on the world of men and politics—has been
recounted numerous times in a variety of genres across the past 2000 years, from the
canonical version in the histories of the Roman historian Livy, to Benjamin Britten’s
1946 opera, The Rape of Lucretia. Yet, Lucretia’s story is not just representative of
the sins committed by one man and the suffering felt by his female victim. These
various narratives continually exploit, appropriate and reformulate the tale in reflec-
tion of the cultural and intellectual climate of their times.
This article analyses the (re)invention of Lucretia’s tale in works of different
genres from three different periods: Livy’s history of Rome and Ovid’s elegiac
Fasti written under the first Roman emperor Augustus (late first century BC/early
first century AD); various writings of Tertullian, Jerome and Augustine from Late
Antiquity (third to fifth centuries AD); Chaucer’s Legend of Good Women alongside
the works of John Gower and Christine de Pizan from the medieval period (late
fourteenth to early fifteenth century). Their versions of the myth reflect its develop-
ments and evolution over the centuries. From pagan to Christian accounts, these
authors’ perspectives reflect the potency of rape and suicide as symbolic actions from
antiquity to modernity: The violated female and her subsequent brave decision to take
her own life has remained a compelling and evocative motif across the ages, her rape
and subsequent suicide told and retold in a self-perpetuating narrative of outrage,
revenge and redemption.
Each account is analysed within its wider social, historical and literary context.
Three key aspects of the story are scrutinised: the representation of the main events
and figures of the story and how this relates to contemporary concerns about the
position of women and gender roles and boundaries (for example, Livy’s engagement
with current concerns about sexuality); the relationship of the rape and suicide of
Lucretia to wider historical events (for example, Augustine’s utilisation of the tale to
broach the recent rape of Christian women); and the appropriateness of Lucretia’s
decision to commit suicide and how the different writers have understood this
decision (for example, Christine de Pizan’s Lucretia kills herself to demonstrate the
horrors of the violation she has suffered). These different elements of the myth are
brought together to show how each author reshaped the story in order to reflect on the
pressing political, historical, social and ethical issues of their day. Ultimately, this
article aims to demonstrate the ways in which writers and thinkers, in different time
periods, found in the story of the rape and suicide of Lucretia a tale that could be
exploited to suit their own literary goals.
Recent studies of sexual violence explore topics such as the motivations of rapists,
the prevalence of domestic violence, sexual harassment and how late twentieth
century/early twenty-first century society has reacted to raped women (for example,
evaluating the responses of hospital workers and members of the police force to
victims).1 Researchers studying historical accounts of rape are not able to consider all
of these questions2 and must formulate their own theoretical framework in order to
1
See, e.g. the “Introduction” in Renzetti and Bergen [74] for a summary of the subjects discussed in that
volume.
2
However, there are some similarities in the topics broached by volumes that study ancient accounts of
rape. For example, the Preface in Deacy and Pierce [19] explains that some of the key questions to be
considered are the motives of the rapists, and the attachment of blame to the victims by society.
Reinventing Lucretia 63

tackle the subject. This can be achieved in several different ways. To quote one
example, the chapters in the 2001 volume edited by Elizabeth Robertson and
Christine Rose examining portrayals of rape in Medieval and Early Modern literature
take as their starting point two main ideas that they view as central to an exploration
of the topic in the time period covered: that ‘stories of sexual violence against women
serve as foundational myths of Western culture’ and that rape stories can be revealing
about the relationships between men and women and the perception of women as
‘subjects’ in a specific society [77, p. 1]. Robertson and Rose acknowledge that there
is no established method by which historical rape narratives are approached and
emphasise at the start of their volume, that ‘feminist analyses of rape have only just
begun’ [77, p. 1].3
Modern scholars examining Lucretia’s story in different historical and literary
settings have developed their own approaches to the myth [41]. Stephanie Jed
explores the rape of Lucretia in the Declamatio Lucretiae of the Italian Coluccio
Salutati. She focuses on the emphasis Salutati places on the violent and repressive
aspects of the story, connecting this emphasis to Salutati’s humanistic agenda in this
work. Melissa Matthes’ study of Lucretia’s rape as portrayed in the writings of
Machiavelli and Rousseau concentrates on the story in relation to political thought,
but nevertheless takes a similar stance to that of Robertson and Rose described above:
‘founding stories’, specifically those of republics, are often linked to the sexual
violation of women [77, p. 3].
This article builds upon these theories, exploring the different manifestations of the
tale of Lucretia as detailed above. In this endeavour, it also refers to the earlier work
of Marilyn Skinner, who has argued that any study of women in (classical) sources
must accept the basic premises of feminist theory, that ‘patriarchy….has served as the
central organising principle of Western European society for over three thousand
years; that from antiquity onwards the European cultural record has systematically
devalued the achievements and interests of females; that gender and sexuality are
social constructs, designed…to reinforce the privileges of dominant groups; that
knowledge about women, whether contemporary or historical, has both a political
and a personal dimension’ [81, p. 3]. If we accept Skinner’s theories, analyses of
literature written hundreds of years before the concept of ‘feminism’ was even
formulated can still reveal much about gender paradigms, expected behaviour of
women and what transpired if they transgressed the boundaries traditionally laid out
for them. These versions of Lucretia’s story can also shed new light upon socially
constructed attitudes towards both sexes and how the educated elite utilised this
within their works of the literature.

Lucretia in Classical Antiquity: Livy and Ovid

The account of Lucretia given in the first book of Livy’s history, written around 27–5
BC, represents the earliest extended account of the myth to survive today. Right from
the very beginning, Livy marks Lucretia out as possessing exceptional characteristics.

3
Mardorossian also comments on the lack of discussions of rape in contemporary feminist theory [56, p.
743].
64 E. Glendinning

In the contest between her husband Collatinus and Tarquinius to decide who has the
best wife, she ‘surpasses’ all the other men’s wives (1.57.7).4 Lucretia is then viewed
in the very heart of her house where a proper wife should be, working her wool with
her maids even though it is late at night (1.57.9). The connection of wool working to
female virtue was a very traditional ideal in Rome [65, p. 222]. Later, Livy makes it
clear that it is not just Lucretia’s appearance that provokes Tarquinius’ desire for her,
but her chastity as well (1.57.11). Tarquinius initially fails to secure Lucretia’s
submission to the rape by the threat of a sword: Even death is not enough to induce
her to yield (1.58.2–1.58.4).
However, Lucretia is forced to surrender to Tarquinius when he threatens to kill her
along with a slave, as though he had found them committing adultery (1.58.4). To Livy,
it was important that he emphasised it was only because of this dreadful prospect of
being caught with a slave specifically that Lucretia justifiably submitted to the rape: her
resolute chastity (‘obstinata pudicitia’) cannot recover from this (1.58.5).5 Langlands
notes that it is her fear of ‘what people might think’ that finally overcomes Lucretia and
not a fear of death or the physical force of being raped. Lucretia is forced to yield and
Tarquinius rapes her: She sacrifices her ‘pudicitia’ in order not to damage her ‘fama’. In
some respects, it could be argued that Tarquinius has gained her consent by forcing her
into making an impossible decision [52, pp. 90–91].
After the rape, Lucretia acts quickly and calmly. She tells her family that although
she has been raped, only her body has been violated, and her death will be testimony
to her ‘innocent’ soul. Lucretia also implores her family to punish Tarquinius (1.58.7–
1.58.8). She also feels that she needs to punish herself so that in the future, no
unchaste woman will ever live using her as an example (1.58.10). After she has
committed suicide, Lucius Junius Brutus takes Lucretia’s bloody knife (1.59.1) and
makes a speech in the Forum, detailing her ‘abominable dishonour’(‘stupro infando’,
1.59.8) and manages to persuade the people to abolish the monarchy and exile the
current royals (1.59.10–12). Lucretia’s body is used as a symbol of the wickedness of
the kings, as the rape she has suffered marks a moment of great political change:
Beard notes that rape is repeatedly used as a marker of such events in the state’s past
[6, p. 2].6. Livy makes it clear that her suicide played a pivotal role in precipitating the
foundation of a new form of government [24, p. 180], and he was also keen to stress
Brutus’ central part in this, too. However, there is no mention of Lucretia’s heroic
deeds at her ‘funeral’.7 She then disappears from the narrative altogether. The silent,
and in the end unnoticed, body of Lucretia represents the role that women were to
play in the Republic.
Livy’s representation of Lucretia’s rape and suicide embodies a complex interplay
of male and female tropes.8 It is difficult to offer a gendered reading of Lucretia’s
behaviour because it destabilises traditional gender roles and characteristics. Lucretia
uses a method, the dagger, usually associated by the Romans with male suicides, and

4
All translations are my own, unless otherwise stated. For the edition used see [55]
5
Bauman argues that Lucretia would legally have been guilty of committing adultery because she
‘consented’ to the rape, as the element of coercion by violence was only allowed for from the early first
century BC onwards [5, p. 552].
6
See also [2, p. 209].
7
As noted by [57, p. 37].
8
See, e.g. [10, p. 168], for the idea that her suicide is neither straightforwardly masculine nor feminine.
Reinventing Lucretia 65

the display of her body was arguably as politically resonant as the display of Julius
Caesar’s corpse was in 44 BC.9 In addition, Lucretia’s suicide represents a ‘moral
triumph’ over the male characters in her story. She is not only superior to Tarquinius,
but even to the foolish Collatinus, who is arguably partly responsible for her rape
because of his bet with Tarquinius.10 Thus, Livy presents to his readers characters in
deviant gender roles, as the men display traits, such as rash behaviour, more suited to
women in a Roman’s eyes. This is furthered when Lucretia has revealed her suicidal
intentions: The men talk of personal and private feelings, whereas Lucretia is
determined to die because of the benefit it will give to society as a whole.11
On the other hand, Livy wants to make a specific point about female chastity here,
and he is careful to construct her suicide with some femininity. For example, he
highlights the fact that she wins the competition of feminine virtues (‘muliebris
certaminis’, 1.57.9), she demonstrates ‘resolute chastity’ in the face of Tarquinius’
threats (1.58.5), and she does not want her tale to be used as an excuse by any future
unchaste woman (1.58.10). There is also an element of eroticism in the suicide scene,
as the dagger entering Lucretia’s body imitates Tarquinius’ penetration of her body.12
The rape itself can be read very much as a male action, an event where Lucretia is
silent (until afterwards) and we are not privy to her thoughts but see her instead as
simply a subject of violation [44, p. 182].13 Lucretia has to perform violence on
herself to ‘cancel out’ the violence done to her by another [21, p. 25]; the knife
‘eradicates unchastity and kills any anomaly in female sexuality’ [44, p. 173]. The
dagger was an appropriate means with which to do this because of its phallic shape.
Thus, it is clear that, although Lucretia can act as bravely as a Roman male in her
death, she nevertheless retains much of the feminine qualities that are so essential to
Livy’s characterisation of her. Another point highlighting this is that her death takes
place in her home. She may commit a seemingly male act, but this is within the confines
of a very female context, a domestic setting. She does not die on a battlefield or in a
public, political place.14 Eidinow explicitly links Livy’s account of women such as
Lucretia with contemporary concerns about uncontrolled female sexuality and its threat
to the state [25, p. 102], and Langlands suggests that Livy wanted to get his readers
thinking about certain aspects of their sexual ethics [52, p. 121]. This argument can be
furthered to include the way Livy presents certain men, such as Tarquinius, acting ‘out of
control’. Langlands also lists the various symbolic and pedagogical functions of
Lucretia’s tale, which, in whatever form it appears, ‘is designed to illustrate some kind
of moral value or ideological statement’ [52, p. 81]. With Livy’s narrative, we can relate
Lucretia’s story to the moral restoration that was taking place under Augustus, which
climaxed in his legislation of 18 BC with his law on adultery particularly affecting
women more than men [26, p. 290].15 The concerns in this period with regulating
9
See e.g. [24, p. 181].
10
As noted by Donaldson [21, p. 12] and Joplin [43, pp. 60–61].
11
As noted by Matthes [57, p. 39] and Vandiver [90, p. 216]; see also Langlands [52, pp. 95–96].
12
As Edwards points out [24, p. 183].
13
This is in contrast to Ovid’s version where he includes details on Lucretia’s experience at this point: see
below.
14
Pudicitia can be seen as a feminine virtue parallel to the masculine virtue won on the battlefield [52, p.
76].
15
There is a wealth of bibliography on the legislation, most of which can helpfully be found at [61, p. 141
n.2]; to this can be added [25, pp. 99–102, 105; 32; 52; 53, pp. 28–35; 82, pp. 206–207; 83, pp. 20–21].
66 E. Glendinning

sexuality, especially that of women, are demonstrated in this part of Livy’s history with
his emphasis on Lucretia’s absolute submission to her ‘pudicitia’.16 Therefore, Livy’s
presentation of Lucretia’s suicide—the earliest account surviving to us—is already a
highly sophisticated one, imbued with a complex set of ramifications for contemporary
morality, gender and politics.
Ovid wrote his Fasti (an elegiac treatment of the Roman religious calendar) in the
early first century AD. His writings are renowned for their subversive nature. Ovid’s
account of the myth in book 2 of the Fasti follows Livy closely in terms of the
sequence of events. We witness Lucretia weaving with her maids by a ‘dim’
(‘exiguum’) light (2.743):17 Ovid presents Lucretia as a good, thrifty housewife.
However, here, we meet the first fundamental change in Ovid’s characterisation of
Lucretia from Livy’s version. Lucretia speaks directly to her maids, whereas Livy’s
Lucretia had remained silent until after the rape. Her voice is described as ‘soft’
(‘tenuis’ 2.744): a feature appropriate to an elegiac heroine.18 Wyke suggests that
because Lucretia has been transferred from a work of history to a work of elegy, Ovid
must depict more of Lucretia in her home, carrying out domestic tasks and showing
concern for her absent husband [93, pp. 89–90]. Indeed, Lucretia is portrayed as
being very anxious about her husband being away at war (2.747–2.754).
Again, Tarquinius is seized with desire for Lucretia. Ovid proceeds to heighten our
sympathies for Lucretia by saying that she is ‘unaware’ (‘inscia’) and ‘wretched’
(‘infelix’) (2.789–2.790), and he even compares her to a lamb when Tarquinius (the
wolf) has come to her with a sword (2.799–2.800). Commenting on Ovid’s description
of the Sabine women in his Ars Amatoria as a lamb fleeing wolves, Hemker notes that
‘these comparisons overtly challenge the validity of the men’s actions by emphasising
the helplessness of those hunted by an overwhelming violent predator’ [39, p. 45].19
Indeed, this traditional image of cruelty vs. powerlessness was also deployed by Ovid
elsewhere, for example, in his portrayal of Philomela in the Metamorphoses. Rapists, on
the other hand, are commonly portrayed as wolves or eagles [76, p. 163, 166].20 Thus,
this reveals much about how Ovid wanted his readers to perceive the event, highlighting
Lucretia’s role as defenceless victim and Tarquinius’ as ruthless predator.21
Then, we are actually given Lucretia’s thought process as a series of questions and
answers shows the chaotic state of her mind (2.801–2.803). As noted above, this
expression of her experiences at this point was lacking in Livy’s version. Again, it is
apparent that in his rape scenes, Ovid often stopped to dwell on the responses of his
rape victims, as he did so for the Sabines in the Ars Amatoria, the violated virgins in
the early books of the Metamorphoses and Rhea Silvia in the Amores [2, pp. 210–
211; 39, p. 45]. However, like Livy’s Lucretia, she eventually yields in order to
protect her reputation as she will not have this destroyed by Tarquinius implicating
her in an act of adultery with a slave (2.810).

16
See [44, pp. 165–166].
17
For the edition used see [67]
18
As noted by [63, p. 37].
19
See also [6, pp. 8–9] on the Sabines in the Ars Amatoria.
20
Richlin comments that ‘the simile of doves and lambs is similarly familiar, and was in fact a common-
place’, evident in Horace also [76, p. 167].
21
On this, see also [76, p. 172].
Reinventing Lucretia 67

Lucretia summons her father and husband to her. Her tears are poetically described
as running like a ‘perpetual stream’ (2.820). She struggles to tell her family that she
has been raped, lacking the firm conviction in her speech that we see in Livy (2.823);
her silence here also stands in sharp relief to her earlier behaviour at the start of the
narrative where she talked to her maids.22 Once Lucretia has eventually told her male
relatives about the rape, they say that they forgive her role in it (2.829). However,
Lucretia denies their forgiveness (2.830). Ovid portrays her suicide graphically, using
the polysyllabic ‘sanguinulenta’ (2.832) to attest to the bloodiness and violent nature
of the scene. This unusual adjective, ‘rare in poetry other than Ovid’,23 is utilised by
Ovid to stress the physical bleeding-out of Lucretia as she falls.24 As Lucretia’s body
is carried out into public, Ovid describes her as an ‘animi matrona virilis’, ‘a matron
of manly courage’, a great compliment to her (2.847). Ovid ends the narrative with
only two short lines on the abolishment of the monarchy (2.851–2.852).
There is much at stake here in terms of traditional gender roles and reversals. Ovid
transferred the call for the royals’ punishment from Lucretia in Livy’s version to
Brutus in his own (2.837–2.844).25 Thus, the role of Lucretia’s suicide conforms to
Roman ideals about femininity in that she does not discuss matters that were not for
Roman women to discuss. But yet again, there is also a reversal of gender roles as
Lucretia dies modestly and with decorum, while her father and husband heedlessly
throw themselves on her body (2.835–2.836). She shows greater resolve in being
unable to forgive herself as opposed to they who seem to readily forgive her.
Furthermore, Ovid’s ‘animi matrona virilis’ is surely an indication that in her final
act she transcended the weakness of her sex. She may be delicate and feminine before
this, but her suffering has led her to an action in which she ‘displays the resolution of
a man’ [54, p. 117].
There is clearly an absence in Ovid’s version of the highly politicised elements of
Livy’s narrative. Ovid does not develop Brutus’ character as fully. Brutus is not
present when she tells her family about the rape, nor at Lucretia’s actual suicide, but
suddenly ‘appears’ in the narrative again afterwards, with no explanation from Ovid
apart from ‘Brutus adest’ (2.837). Furthermore, after Brutus swears over her dead
body to punish the royal family, Ovid remarks that Lucretia ‘moved her lifeless eyes
and seemed with the stirring of her hair to give assent to his speech’ (2.845–2.846).
Ovid therefore distorts Lucretia’s fervent desire to punish the king as presented in
Livy. The hyperbole prevalent here indicates Ovid’s subversive take on the moral
paradigm pushed forward by Livy26: such a distinctive characterisation was typical of
Ovidian elegy, a genre very different to that of Livy’s history. Furthermore, there is
not the same moralistic tone in Ovid’s account. There is no mention by Ovid of
Lucretia killing herself so that future promiscuous women cannot use her case as an
example to hide their own wicked behaviour. Erotic elements are more prominent
here, with Ovid creating a picture of a woman very much like those in his Heroides

22
See above. Conversely, Livy’s Lucretia is silent in this earlier part of the narrative and then more vocal
after the rape.
23
Knox [48, p. 214], commenting on the form ‘sanguinolenta’ used in Heroides 7; there are only three
other known uses of it in classical verse aside from in Ovid, who uses it 15 times.
24
Richlin comments that Ovid takes care in his narrative to emphasise such physical details [76, p. 172].
25
As Newlands points out [63, p. 43].
26
Arieti suggests that this detail is a ‘touch worthy of a Verdi opera’ [2, p. 213].
68 E. Glendinning

[29, pp. 213–14]27: Her elegiac lament is comparable to some of those women in that
work who bemoan their absent husbands or lovers, and when the men spy on her at
the start of the narrative, she is working her wool by her bed (2.742).
Ovid has ‘modernised’ Lucretia’s story, in which the past does not straightfor-
wardly provide a model for good behaviour, as in Livy, but shows instead that the
same immoralities that took place in Ovid’s own day were also current then [29, p.
217]. On the other hand, it could be argued that in Ovid’s portrayal of Lucretia’s
physical beauty he is emphasising the virtue of the women of Lucretia’s day, as he
attributes to her highly idealised physical characteristics, such as her pale colour
(2.763) and demonstrates that she does not use cosmetics (2.772). In this way Ovid,
like Livy, can be viewed as instructing the women of his own day on how to conduct
themselves. Conversely, this could be Ovid parodying traditional morals and ideals
by exaggerating Lucretia’s ‘simplicitas’ to an even greater extent than Livy.
The reasons for the differences between Livy and Ovid’s accounts must lie in the
genre of their works, history vs. elegy, and their aims in representing Lucretia’s story. By
recalling the rape in an account rife with elements more at home in erotic elegy, Ovid
undermines Livy’s version where the rape is politically and historically symbolic [29,
pp. 212, 216]. Moreover, if Ovid’s more eroticised, elegiac version in part reinvents a
Lucretia on a par with his women in the Heroides, this makes his comment on her
‘manly’ death a little confusing. But this is the point: An act of suicide by a female was
ambiguous. However, it is also clear that both authors portray Lucretia’s death as
commendable in many ways. Yet, the differences apparent between the two versions,
even written at roughly the same time, do indicate that Lucretia’s rape and suicide was a
controversial subject and open to multiple retellings.28

Lucretia in Late Antiquity: Tertullian, Jerome and Augustine

There were other mentions of the rape and suicide of Lucretia across the subsequent
three hundred years,29 but our next substantial account comes from Tertullian of
Carthage. Tertullian, along with the other two writers discussed in this section, was a
Christian, and Christianity was now rapidly spreading throughout the Roman empire,
becoming the official religion in the fourth century. Tertullian discusses Lucretia in his
work Ad Martyres (written early third century AD), a work directed towards those of both
sexes who found themselves imprisoned by the Romans in recent persecutions [23, p.
43]. He wants to not only comfort but also motivate his addressees, to encourage them to
embrace martyrdom. Tertullian gives many examples of past figures of both sexes who
have died for lesser reasons than those for which they will die, in the cause of God.
Lucretia’s appearance comes in this series of examples. He describes her as ‘having
suffered the force of violation, [she] drove a knife into herself in view of her relatives, so
that she might acquire glory (‘gloria’) for her chastity’ (Ad Martyres, 4.4) [85].30

27
Richlin notes that Lucretia ‘ends as she began, as object of the gaze’ [76, p. 172].
28
As Beard has pointed out, ‘Roman men talked rape constantly’ and it was ‘one of its [Roman rape’s]
jobs….to debate its own terms and definitions’ [6, p. 10].
29
For example, in the work of the Roman historian Florus written early second century AD (at 1.1.7.11) [28].
30
Tertullian uses ‘castitas’ for Lucretia’s chastity, a word found more in religious contexts than ‘pudicitia’,
and one denoting a more general purity as well as sexual purity (see [52, p. 30]).
Reinventing Lucretia 69

So what is Tertullian doing with Lucretia and the other pagan figures? The
inclusion of exemplary figures not only gave weight to his arguments but also gave
his intended audience something to think about. Tertullian exploited such heroic
examples from Rome’s past so that the Christian prisoners would take heart and try
and emulate the deeds of these noble figures. He might not have intended any
disparagement of these pagan examples. And more than this, as Christians had the
‘support of faith’, surely they could achieve a higher nobility and a superiority over
these pagans in their dignified deaths?31 Barnes argues that Tertullian presents the
pagans as having false ideals, whereas he is telling the Christians that they can do
better and suffer for a true cause, the cause of God, to achieve heavenly glory [4, p.
227]. Amundsen suggests that rather than condemning the pagans directly, Tertullian
shows by his sarcasm what he really thinks of them [1, p. 149, n. 41].
In light of this, Tertullian’s chosen description of Lucretia and the reasons for her
death need some explanation. At first glance, Tertullian seems to be praising her
brave deed. However, he implies that the motive behind her suicide was to achieve
‘gloria’ for her chastity, and so for herself. This glory-seeking does seem to stand in
contrast to the motivations of the Christians, which Tertullian points out are God-
inspired. Lucretia and the other pagans are inferior to Tertullian’s Christian ad-
dressees, who live and die in a superior way to their predecessors.32 Therefore,
perhaps, we are seeing some early signs of disparagement towards Lucretia’s cele-
brated suicide. On the other hand, the positioning of Lucretia as first of the pagan
exempla suggests an alternative reading. She is the one the Christians are told about
first; therefore, this could mean that she is the most important of all Tertullian’s
examples and one he was keen for them to be aware of, and perhaps also, emulate.
Moreover, Tertullian put a high price on chastity. He encouraged modesty in women
and suggested that they should remain at home so as not to let themselves be liable to
fall into sin.33 Therefore, the classical accounts of Lucretia as a modest, stay-at-home
woman, and her suicide committed to prove her chastity, would certainly fit this bill.
Lucretia also appears in two other works by Tertullian: De Exhortatione Castitatis
[14, 86] and De Monogamia (17.3) [87]. Tertullian’s descriptions of Lucretia are
virtually identical in both texts. In both, he describes how Lucretia ‘washed away her
polluted flesh with her own blood’ after being violated. Lucretia’s role here is primarily
as a model of pudicitia—Tertullian used pagan figures in these works to provide models
for contemporary Christian women [15, p. 170]. He could prompt his Christian audience
to consider appropriate female behaviour and, in particular, endorse his view that sexual
activity should only take place within a marriage and that outside of this it was to be seen
as utterly inappropriate and un-Christian like. There does not seem to be a hint here of
any kind of derogatory treatment of her. In fact, one theory put forward has identified
Tertullian as a rhetorician of shame who used the examples of others to shame what he
viewed as his lax Christian audience into greater chastity [14, pp. 224–225]. Of course,
there is an element here of ‘whatever they can do, we can do better’, but it seems clear
that Lucretia is presented by Tertullian as an exemplary figure. 34

31
See [8, p. 63; 24, pp. 209–210].
32
For this line of argument, see [11, p. 96; 34], p. 10; 91, p. 194].
33
See [4, pp. 100–101; 66, pp. 233–235].
34
Edwards also comments on Tertullian’s argument ‘from the lesser to the greater’ [24, p. 209].
70 E. Glendinning

The next major author to mention Lucretia is Jerome. His work Adversus Jovinianum
(written AD ca. 393) comprises the longest polemical treatise of his career. It was a direct
response to the writings of Jovinian that formed a critique of ascetic practices. Jerome
was shocked about Jovinian’s claims that those who remained sexually abstinent were
not superior to those who married and enjoyed a normal sexual relationship and spent
the whole of the first book rebutting this claim. He ended the book by giving notable
examples of pagan females celebrated for their chastity, and it is here where Lucretia,
among others, appears. In fact, this work did not go down as well as Jerome expected:
Many were appalled by the frequent use of violent and crude language, and by Jerome
taking such a derogatory view of marriage.35
Lucretia is described in similar terms to Tertullian’s description of her in his two
works on chastity: ‘unwilling to survive her violated chastity’, Lucretia ‘erased the
stain on her body with her blood’ (1.46):36 the idea of blood as a cleanser of the body
shows a clear link with Tertullian’s presentation of Lucretia in the works discussed
above. Jerome seems to have only praise for Lucretia; she acted as she saw fit after
being raped. Given the context of his work, it would be strange if he had selected
examples he did not approve of if he was so keen to promote his ideal on chastity. On
the contrary, he regarded the exemplary moral values that Lucretia had endorsed
hundreds of years earlier as still relevant to female behaviour in his own day. Jerome
was a great advocate of asceticism, the practice of a modest and frugal lifestyle that
renounced luxuries, which had become a major feature of Christian thought and life
by this point.37 Therefore, his inclusion of Lucretia in his writings should be seen as
indicative that he considered her an appropriate model for chaste and modest behav-
iour and that he interpreted her suicide as appropriate action to take after rape.
Thus far, despite the fact that we are now dealing with Christian writers discussing
a pagan female, we have not really observed any clear disparagement of Lucretia.
However, with the writings of Augustine this was all to change. He gives us the first
surviving account to really put any sort of significantly negative spin on Lucretia’s
suicide, in the context of his masterpiece De Civitate Dei Contra Paganos (written AD
413–426). The work was a response to the sack of Rome by the Goths in 410 and the
criticisms afterwards from pagans that this disaster was final proof of the pagan gods’
displeasure that their religion had been deserted for Christianity.38 Book 1 of this
work dealt with many moral and ethical issues that came about in the wake of the
city’s fall, and Augustine’s apologetic tone in his defence of his religion is obvious.39
For Augustine, Lucretia provided a useful and appropriate way of addressing many of
these issues, especially rape and suicide.40
Augustine brings Lucretia into the narrative by saying, ‘they certainly will bring
out Lucretia with great praises for her chastity’ (1.19).41 Right from the start,
Augustine suggests with his use of ‘they’ that he is not part of the group who praise

35
See [46, pp. 182–184, 187; 9, p. 377; 49, p. 772].
36
For the edition used see [42]
37
See, e.g. [73, pp. 33–34].
38
Menaut comments that Augustine saw it as his duty to rebut these criticisms [60, p. 323].
39
See [35, pp. 636–637; 88, p. 54; 64, p. 74].
40
Like Livy before him, Augustine found Lucretia’s story a ‘compelling diagnostic and tool’ [88, p. 69].
On the likelihood of Augustine using Livy’s version, see [35, p. 650; 88, p. 56].
41
For the edition used see [3]
Reinventing Lucretia 71

Lucretia (as indicated by the use of the third person plural of efferent in this sentence).
Augustine wonders why Lucretia felt she had to punish herself when it was
Tarquinius who raped her and she had done nothing unchaste (1.19). After asking a
mock Roman tribunal why, she therefore had to die if she was innocent, he then
suggests the possibility that Lucretia killed herself because, although attacked by
Tarquinius, she had ‘consented’ to having sex with him. Lucretia may have wickedly
been aware of what was happening and her own desire may have caused her to
consent despite the violent nature of her attacker. Consequently, she felt the need to
punish herself and death was deemed the only way to atone for her sin (1.19).
In Augustine’s mind, Lucretia must be guilty one way or the other: Either she
consented to the rape, and thus killed herself out of guilt, or she did not consent but
committed suicide because she was too greedy for praise to remain alive. This latter
point can be linked to Tertullian’s point that she killed herself in order to achieve
‘glory for her chastity’.42 To remain alive and be thought of as an adulterous was not
an option43: It was not enough to simply be chaste, but Lucretia also believed that she
needed to appear chaste to others. The distinction made between mind and body in
Christian thought would have informed Augustine’s arguments here44: A person
committed to the Christian faith could suffer any bodily suffering and emerge with
an even stronger mind and conviction in the existence of God by doing so. Augustine
was very much concerned with the ‘fallen will’ and sexual desire,45 and to a thinker
like him, strength of mind triumphed over the physicality of the body. As a result,
Lucretia’s rationale for suicide was not fully comprehensible to him.
Augustine’s treatment of Lucretia was subversive and radical, but this was the
point: She was no longer simply being used as a suffering victim or as a model of
chastity, but to provoke reactions from his readers.46 To his pagan audience,
Augustine was belittling and questioning the actions of one of their heroic female
figureheads, as part of his rebuttal of their claims to superiority over the Christians.
To his Christian audience, he was bringing in a pagan example to broach the debate
on the suitability of those women who had or had not chosen suicide to avoid rape in
very recent events.47
During the section that discusses Lucretia, Augustine claims that Christian women
who had suffered similar experiences to her chose not to kill themselves, as they had
not sinned in their own minds, and did not want to add the crime of ‘self-murder’ to
that of rape (1.19): This again links to Christian thought on the mind vs. body. These
points refer to the behaviour of women during the recent sack of Rome. Augustine
claims that none did commit suicide, but his comment (at 1.17) that sympathy and
pardon should be given to those who chose suicide over rape would suggest other-
wise. Therefore, we can conclude that during the sack of Rome, some women either
considered or actually did commit suicide; Augustine does not really condone this but
he urges understanding for those that did.48

42
See above.
43
He saw a ‘human vanity’ in her that he did not look kindly upon [88, p. 62].
44
On this distinction, see, e.g. [70, pp. 11–12, 16, 32, 120–121].
45
See [9, pp. 402–408].
46
Just as Ovid subverted Livy’s Lucretia, although not to the extent of Augustine: see above.
47
O’Daly argues for the potential of readers from both groups [64, p. 36].
48
As noted by Amundsen [1, p. 129].
72 E. Glendinning

Augustine’s general views on suicide were not that dissimilar to other Christian
writers. Droge and Tabor have demonstrated that there is no overt denunciation of
suicide in the Old Testament [22, pp. 53–63]; Amundsen has pointed out that the New
Testament neither condemns nor encourages the act [1, p. 80]. The ways in which the
individual Church Fathers approached the topic usually depended on their own
personal interpretation of the Biblical material, as well as their own experiences
and general outlook on life and their faith.49 However, Augustine’s near-
contemporaries Ambrose and Jerome were unequivocal in their acceptance of the
threat of rape as the only motive for suicide open to Christian females.50 Therefore,
his interpretation of Lucretia’s suicide can be seen as a direct reaction and challenge
to viewpoints such as theirs on the issue.51 Suicide was not to be tolerated, even after
rape, unless there was some sanction from God for it.
Augustine later (at 1.26) mentions more general cases of women in the past who
have committed suicide to avoid rape during times of persecution. He seems cautious
about giving a judgement on these women and accounts for their motivations by
suggesting that they had some sort of ‘divine command’ (‘divinitus iussae’).
Augustine is not trying to make excuses for these women, but trying to make sense
of their actions by offering the only ‘loophole’ he sees in suicide being acceptable. 52
It is difficult to assess his perception of these women. He may have felt some
disapproval of their actions due to the fact that they were now venerated as martyrs:
he comments that he does not want to judge them ‘rashly’ (‘temere’, 1.26). This takes
us back to the motivations behind Lucretia’s suicide. She had been lauded for many
years after her death, and Augustine saw this as the incentive for her suicide. This is
related to his views on martyrdom. Earlier in Augustine’s career, he had been less
concerned with this phenomenon.53 Brown has even argued that Augustine viewed
martyrdom as the ‘highest peak of human heroism’ [9, p. 397]. However, other
writings reflect more adverse attitudes towards martyrs. He believed that they should
not be celebrated too ostentatiously.54 In particular, he targeted the Donatist martyrs,
claiming that many were criminals, false martyrs and embraced suffering and death
too readily.55 Bels has argued that Augustine regarded these martyrs as motivated by
pride and fanaticism [7, p. 157]. This can be linked to how he portrays Lucretia—she,
whose greed for praise was ‘too great’.
Modern commentators often miss the point of Augustine’s work when they make
claims such as, ‘Augustine is obviously sympathetic toward her [Lucretia]’ [30, p. 97,
n.8].56 Lucretia’s behaviour did not sit well with his attitudes towards pride and the
act of rape influenced by his religion. If Lucretia had an innocent mind, suicide was
unnecessary. He could find a possible loophole for those women who killed

49
Amundsen [1] provides a solid overview of the topic.
50
For Ambrose: De Virginibus, 3.7.23-7; for Jerome see above and his Commentary on Jonah, 1.6 (both
written late fourth century before Augustine wrote De Civitate Dei).
51
As Trout argues [88, pp. 67–69].
52
On this, see [22, pp. 176–180; 89, p. 287].
53
See [20, p. 117]. This paper also offers some insights into how Augustine viewed the concept of
martyrdom.
54
Kaufman [45, pp. 4–5].
55
For more information on Augustine’s targeting of the Donatists, see Bels (1975, pp. 156–66); [1, pp.
131–133; 22, pp. 167–173; 34, pp. 49–50; 45, p. 11].
56
See also [69, p. 262].
Reinventing Lucretia 73

themselves to avoid rape or who did so when guided by God, but to him, suicide after
violation and with no divine sanction was pointless and sinful,57 a point he needed to
make clear in light of the defence of this made by Ambrose and Jerome. Lucretia was
a pertinent example to exploit because as a result of recent events, Augustine was
discussing a very real situation in which women had been raped, as opposed to
Jerome who was debating the topic hypothetically. It is important to be aware of the
catastrophic consequences of the sack of Rome, both in terms of the real threats faced
by women and the criticisms faced by the wider Christian community. There could
also be an element here of him taking the Romans’ oldest heroine and throwing her
back in their faces: Pagans had criticised the Christians for the sack of Rome, and so
Augustine responded by challenging the very foundations on which Lucretia’s morals
and chastity had been established.

Lucretia in the Medieval Period: Chaucer, Gower and Christine de Pizan

Augustine posed confrontational questions about female chastity, suicide and com-
pliance in rape. How were the writers of the medieval era to respond to his views on
Lucretia, as well as those of the earlier sources?58 Lucretia was one of many pagan
figures discussed in the medieval period, as many writers of the age were fascinated
with classical stories and figures [62, p. 1; 17, p. 419].59 Lucretia is given her own
‘legend’ in Chaucer’s Legend of Good Women (written ca. 1386).60 The ‘legend’ part
of the title relates to the medieval term for a work concerned with the lives of saints,
and yet Chaucer discusses not Christian martyrs but ten heroines from classical
mythology and history. Chaucer explains in his Preface that the Legend was written
to atone for the grave offence he caused women in his Troilus and Criseyde, where
the female figure betrays her male lover. The Prologue to the Legend takes the form
of a dream vision, where the narrator is told in a dream that he must write stories
about good women. However, the inherent irony in the Legend poem results in a
complex picture of female behaviour. It is likely that Chaucer enjoyed readers from
both sexes of the upper classes, as well as appealing to the literate middle classes. The
expectations of his elite audience would have been centred on issues related to current
ideas concerning chivalry and courtly games. Verses were written on the subjects of
love, seduction and the chivalric male, and there were even literary circles and
societies. Chaucer had to write poetry that considered these topics in order to fully
engage his readers.61

57
As Donaldson notes [21, p. 31].
58
It is highly likely that Chaucer and Gower were able to read and translate Latin (as Chaucer is known to
have done) as they would have been well-educated in the language [see 37, 10–11]. It is thought that De
Pizan could at least read Latin if not write in it [27, 92–93].
59
Although many portrayed her as a figure to be lauded, Augustine’s ideas did have some lasting influence,
e.g. Huguccio condemned her for ‘choosing’ to be raped and therefore appearing to be guilty of committing
adultery (see [31, p. 814]); Thomas Aquinas also implies that she might be guilty in his Summa Theologiae
(at 124.4.2).
60
Both Chaucer and Gower refer to her as ‘Lucrece’, but I will stick with ‘Lucretia’ for the sake of ease.
The bibliography on Chaucer’s portrayal of Lucretia is extensive [17, 30, 31, 38, 47, 51, 69, 84].
61
For more on these ideas, see [69, Chap. 15].
74 E. Glendinning

Chaucer begins his account by describing Lucretia as a ‘verray wif’ and ‘verray
trewe’ (1684–1686).62 She is viewed in a by-now familiar scene, working wool with her
maids (1719–1722). The tears she sheds for her absent husband ‘embelished hire wifly
chastite’ (1737). When it comes to the rape scene, we are again privy to her thoughts as,
like Ovid,63 Chaucer guides us through the anxieties of her mind, and he also keeps the
lamb/wolf simile (1798). After Tarquinius’ threat to frame her for adultery with a
servant, Chaucer inserts a new incident into the narrative: his Lucretia ‘swoons’ and
as a result ‘she feleth no thing, neyther foul ne fayr’ (1815–1818). Following Ovid,
Chaucer’s Lucretia struggles to tell her family what has happened the next day (1833–
1836). She feels ‘gylt’ and ‘blame’, and above all is keen for her husband not to be given
a ‘foule name’ (1844–1845). She will not accept the fact that they attach no blame to her
and stabs herself (1852–1855). Brutus then appears to expose Tarquinius’ deed and
expel the kings from Rome (1862–1870). Chaucer ends with a final comment about
Lucretia’s ‘true’ manner in love (1874).
Critiques of the Legend range from taking ‘at face value its stated subject of
defending women’ to judging it as an ‘unmerciful satire on women’ [69, p. 6]. One
approach, however, is to recognise that there is an inherent ambiguity in Chaucer’s
representation of his women, an ambiguity he deliberately explores and exploits, which
means that neither of these two extremes does justice to Chaucer’s approach. It is clear
that Chaucer goes some way towards a successful defence of women. This is no more
apparent than in the Lucretia legend itself. Indeed, the fact that Chaucer had little to
‘alter’ in her story, unlike the events he had to gloss over in, for example, Dido and
Medea’s lives [47, p. 104; 36, pp. 27–29], would suggest that he presents his reader with
a truly faithful and chaste female. Furthermore, many have seen his ‘invention’ of
Lucretia’s swoon as a direct indication of such a reading, as this absolves her of any
consent to or guilt from the rape in response to such questions raised by Augustine.64
Moreover, Chaucer also creates in Tarquinius a true villain, which further high-
lights the innocence and virtue of Lucretia. He says that the kings were exiled due to
their ‘horible doinges’ (1681). Tarquinius is described as ‘arrogant’ (1745) and is
compared to a thief when he breaks into the house to rape Lucretia (1781): Unlike the
accounts of Livy and Ovid, he is not a welcome guest. Chaucer also points to the
failings of Collatinus as a husband when he guides Tarquinius into his house by a
secret entrance (1715–1718). The one place Lucretia is supposed to be safe is violated
by the oversight of the one man she is supposed to be able to trust.65 In this sense
Collatinus, as well as Tarquinius, transgresses expected male behaviour.
Rose’s reading of this rape tale in Chaucer is that this example, along with the story of
Philomela, are the two instances where Chaucer aims to portray the violated women as
sympathetically as possible [78, p. 36]. However, elsewhere in her paper Rose also
argues that Chaucer’s rape narratives can be viewed as a device by which he emphasises
not the victim and her plight but focuses instead on ‘a male seizing of power’ and a
‘disempowering of the victim (or her possessor)’ [78, p. 30]. The action in the lead up to
the rape is certainly seen from Tarquinius’ point of view. Rose is unsure whether this

62
The text followed for the Legend is from the [12, 13]; the translation used is McMillan’s [59].
63
See above.
64
For example, [38, p. 5, n. 5; 36, p. 110].
65
See also [36, pp. 107–111].
Reinventing Lucretia 75

should be read as Chaucer contributing to the misogynistic traditions of his era, or

whether by utilising such representations of rape and the figures involved, he attempts to
expose that misogyny [78, p. 32]. Does his ‘why have you done offense to chivalry?…
alas! that you have done a villain’s deed!’ (1822–1824), directed at Tarquinius, represent
him condemning Tarquinius’ breaking of the chivalry code (a code relating to virtues,
honour and courtly love that medieval knights were supposed to follow),66 or do these
lines represent one male almost playfully talking to another about his latest sexual
exploits?67 The term ‘villain’ would suggest that Chaucer is not sympathetic to
Tarquinius' actions,68 and yet despite the praise Chaucer heaps on Lucretia, she is still
very much a figure whose story is directed by male characters. Does her ‘swoon’ make
her too (unfeasibly so) passive a bystander in her violation?69
Chaucer does not add to the debate on the justification of her suicide. Frank calls it
‘heroic’, but ultimately a ‘gesture of submission’ [30, p. 97]. Yet, Chaucer seems to
suggest that it was a noble deed in light of the cultural context of her time. He
highlights the fact that in Lucretia’s day, her actions were not out of the ordinary as
Roman women were expected to protect their good name: ‘these Roman wives so
dearly loved their name during that time’ (1812–1813). Unlike Augustine, he
attempts to understand her motivation for suicide within the social and cultural setting
of her own time. At the end, he also remarks that the Romans celebrated her as a
‘seynt’ and that ‘her day (was) held in sanctity by Roman law’ (1871–1872). The
language used here relates her to the saints suggested by the ‘Legend’ title. Moreover,
the time in which Chaucer was living and writing was only the very beginning of
representations of classical suicidal figures. As such, he approaches her tale with
some caution: keen to portray her suicide favourably in the context of her own day,
but holding back from outright admiration of the act as something everyone should be
doing, and distancing himself from Lucretia with his ‘at thilke tyme’ (1812).70
Chaucer did not have an overtly moral purpose to his work. Indeed, he was more
concerned with ‘truth-to-life’ [62, p. 6]. In this sense then, Chaucer freed Lucretia
from the moral dilemmas brought to her tale by Augustine, going some way towards
reinstating her as a tragic victim of male aggression. He endeavours to recognise that
according to the social and moral ethics of her day, Lucretia had little choice but to
commit suicide. However, he too exploited the Lucretia tale for his own literary
purposes. He had to write to please and entertain his wealthy patrons and wider,
predominantly male, audience [38, p. 22; 69, p. 325]. His spin on the Lucretia
narrative is complex and his telling of the story represents to some extent an
ambiguous perspective on those complicit in acts of sexual violence.71

66
As Frank suggests [30, p. 105].
67
Percival suggests that the reader is being invited to empathise with Tarquinius to some extent in the
narrative [69, p. 273].
68
See the glossary on related terms in the Riverside Chaucer (1988, 1302–1303).
69
Delany does not see the swoon’s inclusion as straightforwardly absolving Lucretia, but identifies a sexual
pun in Chaucer’s lines here [18, pp. 145–146].
70
Kiser describes her as ‘saintly only by the standards of her own pagan culture’ (1983, 106); Galloway
suggests that Chaucer sees her decision as ‘valid, that is, in its own historical context of the 'shame culture'
of ancient Rome’ [47, p. 827].
71
Cowen [17], Laird [51] and Percival [69] all appreciate the ambiguity of this account.
76 E. Glendinning

Chaucer’s contemporary, John Gower, utilised the Lucretia tale in his work,
Confessio Amantis, towards a very different purpose. The moralistic angle not that
prominent in Chaucer’s Legend was paramount in Gower’s account.72 The Confessio
was aimed at instruction in the art of correct living. In Book 7, where Lucretia
appears, Gower’s aims were didactic, specifically addressing the duties of Princes
[68, p. 477]. As a result, he is more concerned with Tarquinius’ character than with
Lucretia’s, as he points to the consequences of a licentious ruler [40, p. 265]. Yet,
there are still some interesting conclusions to be made from his portrayal of Lucretia.
Gower inserts Chaucer’s swoon into his tale (7.4986–7.4987).73 However, Hillman
argues that Gower’s swoon is much more natural and straightforward, compared to
Chaucer who makes too much of Lucretia’s passiveness. Gower is prepared to let
Lucretia’s innocence speak for itself and does not overstate her plight [[40], 267]. He
thus gives a more clear-cut picture of Lucretia, and given that Gower also places
much focus on Tarquinius’ sins,74 this uncomplicated picture of Lucretia is all the
more apparent.
Gower does not include the detail of Lucretia’s sanction of Brutus’ vow of
vengeance present in Chaucer, through Ovid. However, Gower may have used
Livy as a source, who did not incorporate this particular detail. Moreover, the
events leading up to the Lucretia narrative concerning Tarquinius and his father
certainly ally with similar events in Livy’s history. This possible connection with
Livy, complemented by Gower’s moral aims, suggests a more politicised reading
of Gower’s version. Finally, as Gower shifts the ‘moral burden from Lucretia to
Tarquinius’ [40, p. 268], the focus is a male figure who is of dubious character, a
male figure who acts wrongly, whereas the female is freed from all blame and
lauded, and recognised for behaviour that was fully appropriate to her
circumstances.
Christine de Pizan’s The Book of the City of Ladies (written early fifteenth century)
allows us to explore a completely original angle on the Lucretia story, that from the
viewpoint of a female writer. This work was designed as a defence of women against
charges levelled at them by male authors, past and present. Her account of Lucretia’s
tale is not lengthy, but nevertheless offers some interesting points, especially as she
was a near-contemporary of Chaucer and Gower. Lucretia is introduced into her
narrative as an example to be used against those who claim that ‘women want to be
raped’.75 De Pizan is ‘troubled and grieved’ that some men argue that this is true.
Lucretia was the ‘noblest’ of Roman women and ‘supreme in her ‘chastity’. This
version does not include the manly contest or Chaucer and Gower’s ‘swoon’. Lucretia
submits to the rape simply out of fear of her bad reputation should she be framed for
adultery with a servant; she would ‘rather die’ than offer her consent.
Just before she stabs herself, Lucretia cries, ‘from now on no woman will ever live
shamed and disgraced by Lucretia’s example’. Quilligan has commented that she
committed suicide, therefore, because she did not want other women to feel shame for

72
See [30, p. 15; 68, p. 475].
73
For the edition used see [33]
74
Gower spends much time discussing the evil deeds of Tarquinius and his father (7.4573 onwards).
75
All the following quotes are from 2.44.1 of Pizan’s City of Ladies [see 71].
Reinventing Lucretia 77

her [72, p. 159]. However, this misses the connection with her similar last words in
Livy,76 and as it is possible most of her audience were only familiar with the more
popular Ovidian version, they too might have missed it.77 Yet, such a link would
downplay the impact of these words, and instead insert De Pizan’s version into
Livy’s politicised, male-dominated account. It is unlikely that De Pizan would have
wanted to create such an effect, but to a modern reader the correlation between the
two here is clear.
Wolfthal argues that De Pizan’s portrayals of rape in the City of Ladies show an
‘unambiguous condemnation’ of the act, highlighting its brutal and utterly immoral
nature [94, p. 59]. De Pizan included these narratives for two reasons: one, because
she ‘lived in a world in which rape was prevalent’, and two, because she wanted to
insert herself into the literary tradition of representing stories of sexual violence [94,
pp. 42–3; 95, p. 128]. Therefore, her complete denunciation of the attack in the
account of Lucretia’s rape was in part a defence of contemporary victims who might
have been accused of somehow ‘enjoying’ rape; it also represented a challenge to
years of misogynistic attacks. Indeed De Pizan, in the context of her own day, can be
described as something of a ‘feminist’ writer. She goes some way towards presenting
her women as being individuals capable of acting outside of the traditional gender
roles assigned to them.78
De Pizan constructs the motivations for Lucretia’s suicide as being designed to
show the full horror of rape [94, p. 64]. Her Lucretia is unable to free herself ‘from the
torment’ and ‘from the pain’ of what she has suffered; her rapist is accused of
perpetrating an ‘outrage’ on her. Like Chaucer, she can understand that Lucretia
needed to commit suicide in order to conform to the social expectations of her day:
She had to die to ‘show my innocence’.79 De Pizan does add her own ‘invention’ to
the tale: after Lucretia’s suicide and the expulsion of the kings, she says that ‘a law
was enacted whereby a man would be executed for raping a woman, a law which is
fitting, just, and holy’. This should be seen as an attempt by De Pizan to bring justice
to all those women who have suffered rape in the past, as she fervently believed in
strict punishments being meted out for rapists.80 Her interpretation of Lucretia’s
death challenges expected gender behaviour: It is the female here who can
enact a law with her death, whereas the male is left powerless afterwards as he
is executed for his crime. The fact also that she displaces the account of the
events leading up to Lucretia’s rape, namely, the manly contest, to a later part
of her book (at 2.64.2) indicates that she wanted the focus to be on female
action earlier on (at 2.44.1).

76
See above.
77
McKinley attests to the increasing number of Ovidian texts in England between 1200 and 1500 in a
‘wide array of types of writing’, and to the deep influence Ovid had on Chaucer and Gower [58, pp. 197–
199], and Clark surveys his prominence from Late Antiquity to the Middle Ages [16, pp. 1–25]. Livy, on
the other hand, was not brought ‘out of the oblivion into which he had fallen’ until the early fourteenth
century, and it seems that the ‘scandalous’ nature of Ovid’s work made him a more popular choice for those
reading the classical authors [see the entry for ‘Classics’ in André Vauchez (ed.) Encyclopedia of the Middle
Ages (2000)].
78
See [51, pp. 62–63; 75, pp. xxviii–xix].
79
Wolfthal also provides evidence for other contemporary views that suicide was the appropriate response
to rape [94, p. 61].
80
As Wolfthal points out [94, p. 67].
78 E. Glendinning

De Pizan was not just responding to criticisms of her sex, but was also reaching out
to those women who would be similarly judged if they were to suffer rape.81 She was
attempting to clear them from any consent or enjoyment in rape of which they might
have been accused by their male contemporaries. De Pizan was not a fully fledged
‘feminist’ in the modern sense of the term. She was not attempting to overthrow the
patriarchal system of her day [75, p. xxx]. She utilised the tale for her own literary
goals [69, pp. 18–19], in an attempt to provide a challenge to a centuries-old literary
tradition steeped in misogyny. Her access to some of the greatest libraries of her day
and work as a scribe meant that she was well-read in what her predecessors and
contemporaries had to say about acts of sexual violence against women [94, p. 43].
She wanted to insert herself into this literary tradition in order to enhance her status as
a professional writer, an ambition that indicates her feministic aspirations.

Conclusion

The accounts of Lucretia’s story did not end with the medieval period. Most
notably, Shakespeare devoted a whole poem to her, The Rape of Lucrece, in
1594; a plethora of Renaissance artists—including such masters as Raphael,
Titian, and Rembrandt—vividly imagined both her rape and suicide; and in the
twentieth century Britten’s opera The Rape of Lucretia (1946) celebrated her tale.
Why has this story endured for over 2000 years now? Why has Lucretia fired the
imagination of so many writers, artists and thinkers over the ages? The answer is
simple: Lucretia provided them with a pertinent and privileged model by which
they could make an authoritative contribution to the moral and social debates of
the time. But rape and suicide were also very real events that happened to real
figures. Indeed, the issue of female suicide precipitated by rape was such a
frequent occurrence that it was a major factor in the condemnation of suicide
under Canon Law at the Council of Nimes in 1184 [95, p. 184]. In recent years,
Al Qaeda’s recruitment of female suicide bombers precipitated by rape has hit the
news headlines.82 Rape and suicide, then, were endemic components of European
social history and it is no accident that writers and thinkers turned to one of
Europe’s archetypal female suicides for inspiration and discussion.
This article has demonstrated that in each account, these writers appropriated
the symbolism of Lucretia’s suicide and chastity for their own literary aims.
The discursive ambivalence inherent in the acts of rape and suicide meant that
Lucretia’s tale could be retold and reshaped over and over again. A specific
approach to the portrayal of rapist and victim could reveal a writer’s explora-
tion of expected gender roles and behaviour: Ovid’s Lucretia is represented at
one time as a tragic heroine and at another praised for her ‘manly’ courage; the
male characters in Livy demonstrate their amenableness to feminine emotions.
The story could be utilised to broach wider historical events or social judg-
ments: Livy’s telling links to the moral reforms taking place under Augustus,
Tertullian told Lucretia’s tale in response to the increasing number of

81
See Schibanoff [79] for the likelihood of female literacy and readership at this time.
82
For discussions of the role of female suicide bombers in recent decades, see [50, 80, 92].
Reinventing Lucretia 79

persecuted Christians in his day, and De Pizan related it in a defence of

contemporary women who were accused of either enjoying or being complicit
in their rapes. Finally, a writer’s interpretation of Lucretia's suicide reveals how
she/he understood this act and thus broached the topic of the desirability of a
female committing suicide after rape: This is most contentious in Augustine’s
reading, as he judges Lucretia not by the morals of her own day, but by the
Christian ethics of his own. Conversely, Chaucer goes some way towards
reinstating Lucretia’s status as a tragic victim and recognised her act as
conforming to the ethical standards of her day, a point highlighted more
emphatically in De Pizan’s work where the focus is on the full horror of rape.
Therefore, these retellings of Lucretia’s story engage readers in ongoing debates
about sexuality, power, corruption, and the violation of women and the propri-
ety of female suicide after this violation.

References

1. Amundsen, D. W. 1989. Suicide and early Christian values. In Suicide and Euthanasia: Historical and
Contemporary Themes, ed. B. A. Brody, 77–153. Kluwer, Dordrecht; London.
2. Arieti, J. A. 1997. Rape and Livy’s view of Roman history. In Rape in Antiquity, ed. S. Deacy and K. F.
Pierce, 209–29. Classical Press of Wales/Duckworth, London
3. Augustine. 1957. City of God: Volume I, Books I–III. Translated by G. E. McCracken. Loeb Classical
Library.
4. Barnes, T. D. 1971. Tertullian: A Historical and Literary Study. Clarendon, Oxford
5. Bauman, R. A. 1993. The rape of Lucretia, quod metus causa and the criminal law. Latomus 52: 550–
66.
6. Beard, M. 1999. The erotics of rape: Livy, Ovid and the Sabine women. In Female Networks and the
Public Sphere in Roman Society, ed. P. Setälä and L. Savunen, 1–10. Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae,
Rome
7. Bels, J. 1975. La mort volontaire dans l’oeuvre de saint Augustin’. Revue de l’histoire des religions
187.2: 147–80.
8. Bowersock, G. W. 1995. Martyrdom and Rome. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
9. Brown, P. R. L. 1988. The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early
Christianity. Columbia University Press, New York, 28th anniversary edition 2008
10. Calhoon, C. G. 1997. Lucretia, savior and scapegoat: the dynamics of sacrifice in Livy 1.57–59. Helios
24.2: 151–69.
11. Carlson, M. L. 1948. Pagan examples of fortitude in the Latin Christian apologists. Classical Philology
43.2: 93–104.
12. Chaucer, Geoffrey. 1987. The Legend of Good Women. Translated by A. McMillan. Rice University
Press, Houston
13. Chaucer, Geoffrey. 1988. The legend of good women. In The Riverside Chaucer, ed. L. G. Benson.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
14. Clark, E. A. 1991. Sex, shame and rhetoric: en-gendering early Christian ethics. Journal of the
American Academy of Religion 59.2: 221–45.
15. Clark, E. A. 1994. Ideology, history, and the construction of “woman” in late ancient Christianity.
Journal of Early Christian Studies 2.2: 155–84.
16. Clark, J. G. 2011. Introduction. In Ovid in the Middle Ages, ed. J. G. Clark, F. T. Coulson and K. L.
McKinley, 1–25. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
17. Cowen, J. M. 1985. Chaucer’s Legend of Good Women: structure and tone. Studies in Philology 82.4:
416–36.
18. Delany, S. 1994. The Naked Text: Chaucer’s Legend of Good Women. University of California Press,
Berkeley, London.
80 E. Glendinning

19. Deacy, S. and Pierce, K. F. (ed.) 1997. Rape in Antiquity. Classical Press of Wales/Duckworth,
London.
20. Den Boeft, J. 1989. “Martyres sunt, sed homines fuerunt”: Augustine on Martyrdom. In Fructus
Centesimus: Mélanges offerts à Gerard J. M. Bartelink à L’occasion de son Soixante-cinquième
Anniversaire, ed. A. A. R. Bastiaensen, A. Hilhorst and C. H. Kneepkens, 115–24. Kluwer, Dordrecht
21. Donaldson, I. 1982. The Rapes of Lucretia. Oxford University Press, Oxford
22. Droge, A. J. and Tabor, J. D. 1992. A Noble Death: Suicide and Martyrdom among Christians and Jews
in Antiquity. HarperCollins, San Francisco
23. Dunn, G. D. 2004. Tertullian. Routledge, London; New York.
24. Edwards, C. 2007. Death in Ancient Rome. Yale University Press, New Haven; London.
25. Eidinow, E. 2011. Sex, religion, and the law. In A Cultural History of Sexuality, Volume 1: In the
Classical World, ed. M. Golden and P. Toohey, 87–106. Berg, Oxford
26. Fantham, E. 1991. Stuprum: public attitudes and penalties for sexual offences in Republican Rome.
Echos du Monde Classique 10: 267–91.
27. Fenster, T. 1998. “Perdre son latin”: Christine de Pizan and vernacular humanism. In Christine de
Pizan and the Categories of Difference, ed. M. Desmond, 91–107. University of Minnesota Press,
Minneapolis
28. Florus. 1929. Epitome of Roman History. Translated by E. S. Forster. Loeb Classical Library.
29. Fox, M. 1996. Roman historical myths: the regal period in Augustan literature. Oxford University
Press, Oxford
30. Frank, R. W. 1972. Chaucer and the Legend of Good Women. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
31. Galloway, A. 1993. Chaucer’s legend of Lucrece and the critique of ideology in fourteenth-century
England. English Literary History 60.4: 813–32.
32. Gardner, J. F. 1986. Women in Roman Law and Society. Croom Helm, London
33. Gower, John. 1980. Confessio Amantis. Ed. R. A. Peck. University of Toronto Press, Toronto
34. Grig, L. 2004. Making Martyrs in Late Antiquity. Duckworth, London
35. Hagendahl, H. 1967. Augustine and the Latin Classics: Volume II—Augustine’s Attitude. Almquist and
Wiksell, Stockholm
36. Hallissy, M. 1993. Clean Maids, True Wives, Steadfast Widows: Chaucer’s Women and Medieval Codes
of Conduct. Greenwood Press, Westport
37. Hallissy, M. 1995. A Companion to Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. Greenwood Press, Westport
38. Hansen, E. T. 1992. Chaucer and the Fictions of Gender. University of California Press, Berkeley
39. Hemker, J. 1985. Rape and the founding of Rome. Helios 12: 41–7.
40. Hillman, R. 1990. Gower’s Lucrece: a new old source for The Rape of Lucrece. Chaucer Review 24.3:
263–70.
41. Jed, S. H. 1989. Chaste Thinking: The Rape of Lucretia and the Birth of Humanism. Indiana University
Press, Bloomington
42. Jerome. 1883. Adversus Jovinianum. Ed. J.-P. Migne. Patrologia Latina.
43. Joplin, P. K. 1990. Ritual work on human flesh: Livy’s Lucretia and the rape of the body politic. Helios
17.1: 51–70.
44. Joshel, S. R. 2002. The body female and the body politic: Livy’s Lucretia and Verginia. In Sexuality
and Gender in the Classical World: Readings and Sources, ed. K. McClure, 163–87. Blackwell, Oxford
45. Kaufman, P. I. 1994. Augustine, martyrs, and misery. Church History 63.1: 1–14.
46. Kelly, J. N. D. 1975. Jerome: His Life, Writings and Controversies. Duckworth, London
47. Kiser, L. J. 1983. Telling Classical Tales: Chaucer and the Legend of Good Women. Cornell University
Press, Ithaca
48. Knox, P. E. (ed.) 1995. Ovid Heroides: Select Epistles. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
49. Krawiec, R. 2008. Asceticism. In The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Studies, ed. S. A. Harvey
and D. G. Hunter, 764–85. Oxford University Press, Oxford
50. Lahnait, F. 2008. Female suicide bombers: victims or murderers? In Suicide Bombers: the
Psychological, Religious and Other Imperatives, ed. M. Sharpe, 71–82. IOS Press, Amsterdam
51. Laird, J. 1995. Good women and bonnes dames: virtuous females in Chaucer and Christine de Pizan.
Chaucer Review 30.1: 58–70.
52. Langlands, R. 2006. Sexual Morality in Ancient Rome. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
53. Lape, S. 2011. Heterosexuality. In A Cultural History of Sexuality, Volume 1: In the Classical World,
ed. M. Golden and P. Toohey, 17–36. Berg, Oxford
54. Lee, A. G. 1953. Ovid’s “Lucretia”. Greece and Rome 22: 107–18.
55. Livy. 1919. History of Rome, Volume I: Books I–II. Translated by B. O. Foster. Loeb Classical Library.
56. Mardorossian, C. M. 2002. Toward a new feminist theory of rape. Signs 27.3: 743–75.
Reinventing Lucretia 81

57. Matthes, M. M. 2000. The Rape of Lucretia and the Founding of Republics. Pennsylvania State
University Press, University Park
58. McKinley, K. L. 2011. Gower and Chaucer: readings of Ovid in late medieval England. In Ovid in the
Middle Ages, ed. J. G. Clark, F. T. Coulson and K. L. McKinley, 197–230. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge
59. McMillan, A. (ed.) 1987. Geoffrey Chaucer: The Legend of Good Women. Rice University Press,
Houston
60. Menaut, L. 1987. Saint Augustin et le suicide des vierges consacrées. Bulletin de Literature
Ecclésiastique 88: 323–8.
61. Milnor, K. 2005. Gender, Domesticity, and the Age of Augustus: Inventing Private Life. Oxford
University Press, Oxford
62. Minnis, A. J. 1982. Chaucer and Pagan Authority. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
63. Newlands, C. W. 1988. The rape of Lucretia in Ovid’s Fasti. Augustan Age 8: 36–48.
64. O’Daly, G. J. P. 1999. Augustine’s City of God: a Reader’s Guide. Clarendon, Oxford
65. Ogilvie, R. M. 1965. A commentary on Livy: books 1–5. Clarendon, Oxford
66. Osborn, E. 1997. Tertullian, first theologian of the West. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
67. Ovid. 1989. Fasti. Translated by J. G. Frazer. Loeb Classical Library 2nd revised edition.
68. Pearsall, D. 1966. Gower’s narrative art. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America
81.7: 475–84.
69. Percival, F. 1998. Chaucer’s Legendary Good Women. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
70. Perkins, J. 1995. The Suffering Self: Pain and Narrative Representation in the Early Christian Era.
Routledge, London
71. Pizan, Christine de. 1982. The Book of the City of Ladies. Translated by E. J. Richards. Persea Books.
72. Quilligan, M. 1991. The Allegory of Female Authority: Christine de Pizan’s Cité Des Dames. Cornell
University Press, Ithaca
73. Rebenich, S. 2002. Jerome. Routledge, London; New York.
74. Renzetti, C. M. and Bergen, R. K. (ed.) 2005. Violence Against Women. Rowman & Littlefield,
Lanham; Oxford.
75. Richards, E. J. 1982. Introduction. In Christine de Pizan: The Book of the City of Ladies, xix–li. Persea,
New York.
76. Richlin, A. 1992. Reading Ovid’s rapes. In Pornography and Representation in Greece and Rome, ed.
A. Richlin, 158–79. Oxford University Press, New York; Oxford.
77. Robertson, E. and Rose, C. M. 2001. Introduction. In Representing Rape in Medieval and Early
Modern Literature, ed. E. Robertson and C. M. Rose, 1–17. Palgrave, New York
78. Rose, C. M. 2001. Reading Chaucer reading rape. In Representing Rape in Medieval and Early Modern
Literature, ed. E. Robertson and C. M. Rose, 21–60. Palgrave, New York
79. Schibanoff, S. 1994. “Taking the gold out of Egypt”: the art of reading as a woman. In Feminist
Readings in Middle English Literature: The Wife of Bath and all her sect, ed. R. Evans and L. Johnson,
221–45. Routledge, London
80. Skaine, R. 2006. Female Suicide Bombers. Cedar Falls
81. Skinner, M. 1987. Introduction. In Rescuing Creusa: New Methodological Approaches to Women in
Antiquity, ed. M. Skinner, 1–8. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock
82. Skinner, M. B. 2005. Sexuality in Greek and Roman Culture. Blackwell, Oxford
83. Treggiari, S. 1991. Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian.
Clarendon, Oxford
84. Sylvester, L. 2000. Reading narratives of rape: the story of Lucretia in Chaucer, Gower and Christine
de Pizan. Leeds Studies in English 31: 115–44.
85. Tertullian. 1878–9. Ad Martyres. Ed. J.-P. Migne. Patrologia Latina.
86. Tertullian. 1878–9. De Exhortatione Castitatis. Ed. J.-P. Migne. Patrologia Latina.
87. Tertullian. 1878–9. De Monogamia. Ed. J.-P. Migne. Patrologia Latina.
88. Trout, D. 1994. Re-textualising Lucretia: cultural subversion in the City of God. Journal of Early
Christian Studies 2.1: 53–70.
89. Van der Horst, P. W. 1971. A pagan Platonist and a Christian Platonist on suicide. Vigiliae Christianae
25.4: 282–8.
90. Vandiver, E. 1999. The founding mothers of Livy’s Rome: the Sabine women and Lucretia. In The Eye
Expanded: Life and the Arts in Greco-Roman antiquity, ed. F. B. Titchener and R. F. Moorton, 206–32.
University of California Press, Berkeley
91. Van Hooff, A. J. L. 1990. From Autothanasia to Suicide: Self-Killing in Classical Antiquity. Routledge,
London; New York.
82 E. Glendinning

92. Victor, B. 2004. Army of Roses: Inside the World of Palestinian Women Suicide Bombers. Robinson,
London.
93. Wyke, M. 2002. The Roman Mistress: Ancient and Modern Representations. Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
94. Wolfthal, D. 1998. “Douleur sur toutes autres”: Revisualizing the rape script in the Epistre Othea and
the Cité des dames. In Christine de Pizan and the Categories of Difference, ed. M. Desmond, 41–70.
University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis
95. Wolfthal, D. 1999. Images of Rape: the ‘Heroic’ Tradition and its Alternatives. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.