• January 10, 2026 | 8:00 AM - 11:00 AM
• Continental 7, Ballroom Level

7E: Queer Roman Archaeology: (Self)-Representations of Queerness in Visual Material Culture (Colloquium)

Join Zoom here: 

https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89669696465?pwd=38zEYu9hJYJbodxPDMbxCu0DKKgwLx.1

Sponsored by:
AIA Roman Provincial Archaeology Interest Group

Organizers:
Tatiana Ivleva, Newcastle University, and Alena Wigodner, University of Maryland

Discussants:
Sarah Levin-Richardson, University of Washington

Overview Statement:
Queer archaeology is no longer new. Efforts to acknowledge gender and sexual diversity in the archaeological record have significantly enhanced our comprehension of ancient identities and societal values, destabilizing normative and binary perspectives. While queer approaches to the Roman world are thriving in literary and historical studies, as seen in regular sessions on queer classics at the SCS annual meeting, queer Roman archaeology still lacks cohesion and thorough study as a discipline and topic. The aim of this session is to kickstart an ongoing dialogue at the AIA about the role of archaeology in enhancing queer perspectives on the Roman world.

This panel embraces a broad definition of “queer” as that which is in opposition to the norm, including but not limited to an orientation towards sex, gender, and sexuality beyond binaries. Theoretically, all papers follow this broad definition, but also examine evidence through various queer lenses such as drag theory, queer time, trans pragmatism, and queer space. Methodologically, the panel explores queerness in visual material culture. Geographically, the panel covers the entire Roman Empire, including provinces like Britain, Gaul, and Egypt.

All papers focus on representation and self-representation to showcase heterogeneity and ambiguity in sex and gender forms across the Roman Empire. The first paper destabilizes the idea of the Roman family in a provincial context by applying a “queer time” framework and presents evidence of “queer unions” on funerary reliefs, suggesting intentional visibility. The second paper uses drag theory to examine self-representations of priests of Magna Mater on funerary reliefs, revealing complexities in gender expression. The third paper examines healing votives without sex and gender characteristics, addressing how modern biases hamper recognition of the nonbinary in material culture and analyzing the meaning behind their intentional visual ambiguity. Following on from this, the fourth paper takes up Roman castration practice by deconstructing the linear binary progression from puer to vir and applying a “queer time” lens to Hermaphroditus statues. The fifth paper challenges binary assumptions about monasteries in late antiquity, posing monastic tombs as spaces of gendered slippage.

Collectively, these papers treat “queer” as a historical and archaeological reality. The categories of sex, gender, and sexuality are historically specific, unfixed, and mutually constituted. This complexity motivates us to center the material and visual traces of queer in the Roman archaeological record in order to refine queer Roman archaeology. This panel affords such stepping stone.