Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-sv6ng Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-23T04:15:03.101Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

III. Domesticity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2016

Get access

Extract

But whatever the modifications, in theory or in practice, women continued to be formally excluded from public life. They were ‘citizens’ (Athens and Alexandria called them ‘townswomen’, astai) in the sense that they could make valid marriages with citizens, had legal protection (which had to be invoked by a man), and were liable to tax in states which allowed them to own property. They could not serve as magistrates or administrators, could not vote in elections or lawcourts or policy decisions. Only some religious festivals, or a national emergency, gave them the chance of collective activity. The few women who ruled as widow of a king, mother of a prince or dominant partner of a royal marriage, or who had the title but probably not the power of a magistrate (see section VII), made no difference to the general principle. It was assumed that women could not make rational judgements in politics or law and could not fight in defence of the city.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)