Historical Prologue: Women of the Houses of Constantine and Theodosios

  • Anne McClanan
Part of the The New Middle Ages book series (TNMA)


The first centuries of the Roman Empire witnessed important developments in the role and representation of the empress, but the powerful empresses of the Houses of Constantine and Theodosios during the fourth and fifth centuries provide the precedents most relevant to early Byzantine women’s patronage and other public displays of authority. Livia (58 b.c.–a.d. 29), the wife of the first Augustus, looms large as a paradigm for Roman women, whether imperial or not. Livia’s patronage in Rome inspired women’s patronage throughout the Empire, such as that of Eumachia of Pompeii.1 The very presence of women in public monuments is constitutive of the imperial period, for in the Republican era only Cornelia, as the mother of the Gracchi, had a public statue.2 Domitia offers another important first-century example of a Roman empress who wielded authority quite independent of her husband. Eric Varner recently demonstrated that a new diademed portrait type was introduced a mere two weeks after her husband’s accession to the throne. This portrait type continued to be promulgated after her banishment on charges of adultery. After perhaps hastening Domitian’s demise, Domitia escaped the ignominy of her husband’s damnatio memoriae and continued to be represented during the reign of Trajan.3


Imperial Image Imperial Cult Ruler Cult Roman Woman Imperial Period 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Diana E. E. Kleiner, “Imperial Women as Patrons of the Arts in the Early Empire,” in I Claudia: Women in Ancient Rome, ed. Diana E. E. Kleiner and Susan B. Matheson (New Haven: Yale University Art Gallery, 1996), p. 33 [28–41].Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Eric Varner, “Domitia Longina and the Politics of Portraiture,” American Journal of Archaeology 99 (1995): 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 4.
    Simon Price, Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984), p. 56.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    Susan E. Wood, Imperial Women,A Study in Public Images, 40 B.C.-A.D. 68 (Leiden: Brill, 1999), p. 41.Google Scholar
  5. 8.
    Kenneth M. Setton, Christian Attitude Towards the Emperor in the Fourth Century (New York: Columbia University Press, 1941), p. 198.Google Scholar
  6. 12.
    Leslie Brubaker, “Memories of Helena: Patterns of Imperial Female Matron-age in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries,” in Women, Men, and Eunuchs: Gender in Byzantium, ed. Liz James (New York: Routledge, 1997), p. 59 [52–75].Google Scholar
  7. 13.
    Michael McCormick, Eternal Victory: Triumphal Rulership in Late Antiquity, Byzantium, and the Early Medieval West (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986), p. 37.Google Scholar
  8. 16.
    E. D. Hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire A.D. 312–460 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982), p. 37.Google Scholar
  9. 20.
    E. D. Hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire, A.D. 312–460 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1982), pp. 48 and 29.Google Scholar
  10. 24.
    Hiltje E H. Zomer, “The So-Called Women’s Gallery in the Medieval Church: An Import from Byzantium,” in The Empress Theophano: Byzantium and the West at the Turn of the First Millennium, ed. Adelbert Davids (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 296 [290–306].Google Scholar
  11. 27.
    Mango surveys some of the problems in understanding the early Byzantine Augustaion, Cyril Mango, The Brazen House. A Study of the Vestibule of the Imperial Palace of Constantinople (Copenhagen: Arkaeologiskkunsthistoriscke Meddelelser, 1959), pp. 45–46.Google Scholar
  12. 40.
    Sister Charles Murray, Rebirth and Afterlife: A study of the transmutation of some pagan imagery in early Christian funerary art (Oxford: B. A. R., 1981), pp. 25–26.Google Scholar
  13. 41.
    Marie-France Auzépy, “La destruction de l’icône du Christ de la Chalcé par Léon III: Propagande or réalité?” Byzantion 60 (1990): 445–92.Google Scholar
  14. 43.
    Kenneth G. Holum, Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), p. 3.Google Scholar
  15. Dean A. Miller disputes his basic thesis, arguing for the development of this phenomenon much later, Dean A. Miller, “Byzantine Sovereignity and Feminine Potencies,” in Women and Sovereignity, ed. Louise Olga Fradenburg (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1992), p. 251 [250–63].Google Scholar
  16. 46.
    Catia Galatariotou, “Holy Women and Witches:Aspects of Byzantine Conceptions of Gender,” Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 9 (1984–85): 62 [55–94].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 51.
    Jean-Pierre Sodini, “Images sculptées et propagande impériale du IVe au VIe siècle: recherches récentes sur les colonnes honorifiques et les reliefs politiques à Byzance,” in Byzance et les images, ed. Andre Guillou and Jannic Durand (Paris: La documentation française, 1994), p. 64 [43–94].Google Scholar
  18. 53.
    Maria Delivorria, Recherches sur l’iconographie d’impératrice byzantine (Ph.D. diss. Sorbonne, Paris, 1966), p. 6.Google Scholar
  19. 58.
    Glanville Downey, Ancient Antioch (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963), p. 217.Google Scholar
  20. 63.
    Yizhar Hirschfeld, Judean Desert Monasteries in the Byzantine Period (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992), p. 242. Julia Burman points out some of the difficulties in precisely apprising her patronage.Google Scholar
  21. Julia Burman, “The Christian Empress Eudocia,” in Les Femmes et le Monochisme Byzantine, ed. Jacques Y. Perreault, Canadian Archaeological Institute Athens no. 1 (Athens: Canadian Archaeological Institute, 1991), p. 57 [51–59].Google Scholar
  22. 64.
    Judith Herrin, “Public and Private Forms of Religious Commitment among Byzantine Women,” in Women in Ancient Societies: An Elusion of Night, ed. Léonie J. Archer, Susan Fischler, and Maria Wyke (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1994), p. 185.Google Scholar
  23. 71.
    W Ensslin, “Pulcheria,” Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft 23 (1959): 1961.Google Scholar
  24. 73.
    Judith Herrin, “The Imperial Feminine in Byzantium,” Past and Present 169 (2000): 14 [3–35].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 78.
    Kate Cooper, “Contesting the Nativity: Wives,Virgins, and Pulcheria’s imitatio Mariae,” Scottish Journal of Religious Studies 19 (1998): 41–42 [31–43].Google Scholar
  26. 80.
    Laurie Wilson, “The Trier Procession Ivory:A New Interpretation,” Byzantion 54 (1984): 613 [602–14].Google Scholar
  27. 82.
    Suzanne Spain, “The Translation of Relics Ivory, Trier,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 31 (1977): 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 83.
    Kenneth G. Holum and Gary Vikan, “The Trier Ivory, Adventus Ceremonial, and the Relics of St. Stephen,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 33 (1979): 115–33.Google Scholar
  29. 87.
    Leslie Brubaker, “The Chalke Gate, the construction of the past, and the Trier ivory,” Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 23 (1999): 276–77 [258–85].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 88.
    Liz James, Empresses and Power in Early Byzantium (London: Leicester University Press, 2001), p. 148.Google Scholar
  31. 93.
    J. E W. de Salis, “The Coins of the Two Eudoxias, Eudocia, Placidia, and Honoria, and of Theodosius II, Marcian, and Leo I Struck in Italy,” Numismatic Chronicle 7 (1867): 203–15.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Anne McClanan 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne McClanan

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations