Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:50:47.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 2 - The Haptic Production of Religious Knowledge among the Vestal Virgins: A Hands-On Approach to Roman Ritual

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2024

Blanka Misic
Affiliation:
Champlain College, Lennoxville
Abigail Graham
Affiliation:
Institute of Classical Studies, London
Get access

Summary

This chapter brings the sensory potentialities of material objects used in Roman ritualized activities into discourse concerning the nature and production of ancient religious knowledge. By combining perspectives derived from lived religion and material religion it is argued that religious agency should be understood as the product of the intertwining of human and more-than-human things within assemblages. Lived experiences of this production of agency, in turn, cause people to feel and consequently think in certain ways, ultimately producing what can be categorized as distal and proximal forms of religious knowledge. The chapter uses the example of the frieze of the Vestal Virgins from the Ara Pacis Augustae to argue that different forms of ancient religious knowledge were actively created through a multiplicity of lived experiences of ritualized action that brought human and more-than-human material things together, rather than existing only as something that was expressed through ritual behaviours. Exploring the Vestals’ experience of ritualized encounters with material things makes it possible to establish new understandings of the real-world lived experiences and identities of these priestesses, offering significant insights into how individualized forms of religious knowledge could be sustained even in the context of shared communal or public rituals.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

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.)

References

Albrecht, J., Degelmann, C., Gasparini, V., et al. 2018. ‘Religion in the making: the lived ancient religion approach’, Religion 48(4): 568–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrete, G. S. 2014. ‘Hammers, axes, bulls, and blood: some practical aspects of Roman animal sacrifice’, Journal of Roman Studies 104: 2850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angelucci, S. and La Rocca, E. 1976. ‘Una lastrina d’avorio con scena di sacrificio’, Bollettino dei Musei Comunali di Roma 23: 114.Google Scholar
Arnhold, M. 2013. ‘Group settings and religious experiences’, in Cusmano, N., Gasperini, V., Mastrocinque, A. and Rüpke, J., eds. Memory and Religious Experience in the Greco-Roman World, 145–65. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Bailey, D. 2014. ‘Touch and the Cheirotic apprehension of prehistoric figurines’, in Dent, P., ed. Sculpture and Touch, 2744. Farnham.Google Scholar
Barad, K. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC.Google Scholar
Beard, M. 1995. ‘Re-reading (Vestal) virginity’, in Hawley, R. and Levick, B., eds. Women in Antiquity: New Assessments, 166–77. London.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. 2010. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. London.Google Scholar
Blevins, S. L. 2017. ‘Rhetoric, repetition, and identity in the frieze of sacred objects on the Temple of Divus Vespasian and Divus Titus’, in Blakely, S., ed. Gods, Objects, and Ritual Practice, 233–58. Atlanta.Google Scholar
Boivin, N. 2009. ‘Grasping the elusive and unknowable: material culture in ritual practice’, Material Religion 5(3): 266–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, M. 2019. ‘Votives, fertility, and the integration of women in religious life in Italy in the fourth to first centuries BC’, Papers of the British School at Rome 87: 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaniotis, A. 2006. ‘Rituals between norms and emotions: rituals as shared experience and memory’, in Stavrianopoulou, E., ed. Ritual and Communication in the Graeco-Roman World, 211–38. Liège.Google Scholar
Conneller, C. 2011. An Archaeology of Materials: Substantial Transformations in Early Prehistoric Europe. London.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. and Law, J. 1995. ‘Organisation: distal and proximal views’, in Bachrach, S., Gagliardi, P. and Mundell, B., eds. Research in the Sociology of Organisations, 237–74. Greenwich, Connecticut.Google Scholar
Corbeill, A. 2004. Nature Embodied: Gesture in Ancient Rome. Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crellin, R. J. 2017. ‘Changing assemblages: vibrant matter in burial assemblages’, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 27(1): 111–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crellin, R. J. 2020. Archaeology and Change. Abingdon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crellin, R. J., Cipolla, C. N., Montgomery, L. M., Harris, O. J. T., and Moore, S. V. 2021. Archaeological Theory in Dialogue: Situating Relationality, Ontology, Posthumanism, and Indigenous Paradigms. Abingdon.Google Scholar
DeLanda, M. 2016. Assemblage Theory. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1980. A Thousand Plateaus. London.Google Scholar
DiLuzio, M. J. 2016. A Place at the Altar: Priestesses in Republican Rome. Princeton.Google Scholar
DiLuzio, M. J. 2017. ‘Priestesses in action: ritual instruments employed by Roman women’, in Blakely, S., ed. Gods, Objects, and Ritual Practice, 215–31. Atlanta.Google Scholar
Driscoll, R. 2011. ‘Aesthetic touch’, in Bacci, F. and Melcher, D., eds. Art and the Senses, 107–14. Oxford.Google Scholar
Elsner, J. 1991. ‘Cult and sculpture: sacrifice in the Ara Pacis Augustae’, Journal of Roman Studies 81: 5061.Google Scholar
Elsner, J. 2005. ‘Sacrifice and narrative on the arch of the Argentarii at Rome’, Journal of Roman Archaeology 18: 8398.Google Scholar
Flemming, R. 2007. ‘Festus and the role of women in Roman religion’, in Glinister, F. and Woods, C., eds. Verrius, Festus & Paul: Lexicography, Scholarship and Society, 87108. London.Google Scholar
Fowler, C. 2017. ‘Relational typologies, assemblage theory and early Bronze Age burials’, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 27(1): 95109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankfurter, D. 2015. ‘The great, the little, and the authoritative tradition in magic of the ancient world’, Archiv für Religiongeschichte 16(1): 1130.Google Scholar
Gallia, A. B. 2015. ‘Vestal Virgins and their families’, Classical Antiquity 34(1): 74120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasparini, V., Patzelt, M., Raja, R., Rieger, A.-K., Rüpke, J. and Urciuoli, E. (eds). 2020. Lived Religion in the Ancient Mediterranean: Approaching Religious Transformations from Archaeology, History and Classics. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, E.-J., 2020. ‘Hand in hand: rethinking anatomical votives as material things’, in Gasparini, V., Patzelt, M., Raja, R., Rieger, A.-K., Rüpke, J. and Urciuoli, E., eds. Lived Religion in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Approaching Religious Transformations from Archaeology, History and Classics, 209–35. Berlin.Google Scholar
Graham, E.-J. 2021. Reassembling Religion in Roman Italy. Abingdon.Google Scholar
Hamilakis, Y. 2013. Archaeology and the Senses: Human Experience, Memory and Affect. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hamilakis, Y. and Meirion Jones, A. 2017. ‘Archaeology and assemblage’, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 27(1): 7784.Google Scholar
Harris, O. J. T. 2017. ‘Assemblages and scale in archaeology’, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 27(1): 127–39.Google Scholar
Harris, O. J. T. 2021. Assembling Past Worlds: Materials, Bodies and Architecture in Neolithic Britain. Abingdon.Google Scholar
Harris, O. J. T. and Cipolla, C. N. 2017. Archaeological Theory in the New Millennium: Introducing Current Perspectives. Abingdon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemelrijk, E. A. 2005. ‘Imperial priestesses, a preliminary survey’, in de Blois, L. and Funke, P., eds. Impact of Imperial Rome on Religions, Ritual and Religious Life in the Roman Empire, 179–93. Leiden.Google Scholar
Hemelrijk, E. A. 2009. ‘Women and sacrifice in the Roman Empire’, in Hekster, O., Schmidt-Hofner, S. and Witschel, C., eds. Ritual Dynamics and Religious Change in the Roman Empire. 253–67. Leiden.Google Scholar
Hölscher, T. 2005a. ‘Rom und der Westen des römischen Reiches’, in Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum (ThesCRA), Volume 5, 156–61. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Hölscher, T. 2005b. ‘Libationsgefässe der Vestalinnen’, in Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum (ThesCRA), Volume 5, 209–24. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Hölscher, T. 2005c. ‘Acerra’, in Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum (ThesCRA), Volume 5, 223–24. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Huet, V. 2008. ‘L’Encens sur les Reliefs Sacrificiels Romains’, in Bodiou, L., Frère, D. and Mehl, V., eds. Parfums et Odeurs dans l’Antiquité, 105–16. Rennes.Google Scholar
Jervis, B. 2019. Assemblage Thought and Archaeology. Abingdon.Google Scholar
Jones, A. M. and Boivin, N. 2010. ‘The malice of inanimate objects: material agency’, in Beaudry, M. C. and Hicks, D., eds. The Oxford Handbook of Material Culture Studies, 333–51. Oxford.Google Scholar
Knappett, C. 2004. ‘The affordances of things: a post-Gibsonian perspective on the relationality of mind and matter’, in DeMarrais, E., Gosden, C. and Renfrew, C., eds. Rethinking Materiality: The Engagement of Mind with the Material World, 4351. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Knappett, C. 2005. Thinking Through Material Culture: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
La Follette, L. 2011–12. ‘Parsing piety: the sacred still life in Roman relief sculpture’, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 56/57: 1535.Google Scholar
Lindner, M. M. 2015. Portraits of the Vestal Virgins, Priestesses of Ancient Rome. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Madigan, B. 2013. The Ceremonial Sculptures of the Roman Gods. Leiden.Google Scholar
Mantle, I. C. 2002. ‘The roles of children in Roman religion’, Greece and Rome 49(1): 85106.Google Scholar
McGuire, M. B. 2008. Lived Religion: Faith and Practice in Everyday Life. Oxford.Google Scholar
Misic, B. 2015. ‘Cognitive theory and religious integration: the case of the Poetovian Mithraea’, in Brindle, T., Allen, M., Durham, E., and Smith, A., eds. TRAC 2014. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Reading 2014, 3140. Oxford.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. 2010. ‘The material culture of lived religion: visuality and embodiment’, in Vakkari, J. (ed.) Mind and Matter, 1431. Helsinki.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. 2021. The Thing about Religion: An Introduction to the Material Study of Religions. Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Plate, B. S. 2015. Key Terms in Material Religion. London.Google Scholar
Pollard, J. 2008. ‘Deposition and material agency in the early Neolithic of southern Britain’, in Mills, B. J. and Walker, W. H., eds. Memory Work: Archaeologies of Material Practices, 4159. Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Richlin, A. 1997. ‘Carrying water in a sieve: class and the body in Roman women’s religion’, in King, K., ed. Women and Goddess Traditions in Antiquity and Today, 330–74. Minneapolis.Google Scholar
Rüpke, J. 2011. ‘Lived ancient religion: questioning “cults” and “polis religion”’, Mythos 5: 191203.Google Scholar
Ryberg, I. S. 1949. ‘The procession of the Ara Pacis’, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 19: 79101.Google Scholar
Ryberg, I. S. 1955. Rites of the State Religion in Roman Art. Rome.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, C. E. 2006. Women’s Religious Activity in the Roman Republic. Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Schultz, C. E. 2012. ‘On the burial of unchaste Vestal Virgins’, in Bradley, M., ed. Rome, Pollution and Propriety: Dirt, Disease and Hygiene in the Eternal City from Antiquity to Modernity, 122–35. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Schultz, C. E. 2016. ‘Roman sacrifice, inside and out’, Journal of Roman Studies 106: 5876.Google Scholar
Siebert, A. V. 1999. ‘Römische Opfer- und Kultgeräte. Ein Beitrag zur Sachkultur römischer Opferpraxis’, in Batsch, C., Egel-Gaiser, U. and Stepper, R., eds. Zwischen Krise und Alltag – Conflit et normalité, 125–42. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Stewart, R. 1997. ‘The jug and lituus on Roman republican coin types: ritual symbols and political power’, Phoenix 51(2): 170–89.Google Scholar
Ullucci, D. 2012. ‘Contesting the meaning of animal sacrifice’, in Knust, J. W. and Várhelyi, Z., eds. Ancient Mediterranean Sacrifice, 5774. Oxford.Google Scholar
Vasquez, M. A. 2010. More Than Belief: A Materialist Theory of Religion. Oxford.Google Scholar
Vuono, L. 2005. ‘Gefässe und Geräte der Vestalinnen’, in Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum (ThesCRA) Volume 5, 415–16. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, H. 2002. ‘Modes of religiosity: towards a cognitive explanation of the socio-political dynamics of religion’, Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 14(3–4): 293315.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, H. 2009. ‘Graeco-Roman religions and the cognitive science of religion’, in Martin, L. H. and Pachis, P., eds. Imagistic Traditions in the Graeco-Roman World: A Cognitive Modeling of History of Religious Research, 113. Thessaloniki.Google Scholar
Wildfang, R. L. 2006. Rome’s Vestal Virgins. London.Google Scholar
Zingg, V. E. 2011. ‘Molucrum bei Festus und die Zubereitung der Mola Salsa durch die Vestalinnen’, Glotta 87: 236–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×