Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian PDF
Preview Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian
ROMAN MARRIAGE BLANK PAGE ROMAN MARRIAGE lusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian SUSAN TREGGIARI CLARENDON PRESS · OXFORD 1991 Oxford University Press, Walton Street, Oxford ox2 6oP Oxford New York Toronto Delhi Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi Petaling Jaya Singapore Hong Kong Tokyo Nairobi Dares Salaam Cape Town Melbourne Auckland and associated companies in Berlin lbadan Oxford is a trade mark of Oxford University Press Published in the United States by Oxford University Press, New York © S. M. Treggiari 1991 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Treggiari, Susan Roman marriage : Justi Coniuges from the time of Cicero to the time of Ulpian. I. Roman empire. Marriage. Legal aspects I. Title 343.7o616 ISBN 0-19-814890-9 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Treggiari, Susan Roman marriage : Iusti Coniuges from the time of Cicero to the time of Ulpian I Susan Treggiari. Includes bibliographical references. Includes index. 1. Marriage (Roman law) I. Title KJA2233.T74 1991 346.3701' 6-dc20 [343. 7o616] ISBN 0-19-814890-9 Photoset by Rowland Phototypesetting Ltd Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk Printed in Great Britain by Bookcraft (Bath) Ltd Midsomer Norton, Avon Coniugi, Filiabus, Sororibus BLANK PAGE Preface germ of this book dates back twenty years and deliberate work THE on it to a sabbatical year spent in Oxford in I 976/7 . It was conceived as an attempt to understand how the marital relationship worked in the late Republic and Principate. The institution of marriage and the complex webs of society, law, economics, morality, customs and feeling in which it is set offer endless scope for exploration. I aim here only to examine the themes which seem to me most important for the Roman experience of marriage. The reader will discern my precon ceptions and interests. But I have tried to concentrate attention on what the Romans themselves tell us. The sources, for this as for most topics of social history in the ancient world, are scattered and diverse. I have tried to let them speak for themselves. Hence the frequent quotations, particularly from texts which readers may not have permanently at their elbow. Except where credited to others, transla tions are my own and as literal as possible, in the hope that the Latinless reader will gain some sense of the flavour of the original. Description and argument rest often on snippets of evidence. Critics may generously assume that I have searched in vain for counter evidence; they are referred to the sources on which I rely so that they may choose. to reject my view if they wish. It would be tedious to spell out in detail the methods I have tried to follow in assessing the usefulness of any particular ancient literary work for the present enquiry. In seeking to exploit any particular passage, one has con stantly to bear in mind the genre in which it is written, the biases and purposes of the author who wrote it, the audience for which it was intended. It will appear that Tacitus often seems to me about as reliable a narrator of facts as the rhetoricians immortalized by the Elder Seneca, and that, although I think Cicero in his letters to Atticus as honest as a man can be in revealing himself to a friend, this does not mean that we have a full picture of his marriage to Terentia or of what led to their divorce. The conscientious work of Justinian's commission in digesting the opinions of earlier jurists, though a model to all later committees, leads to many uncertainties in our attempts to reconstruct the social realities which lay behind the excerpts from the works of the great lawyers. I have not troubled the VIII Preface reader by repeatedly inserting the caveat that conclusions drawn from such data must often be provisional. Emphasis on what the surviving texts say is dictated by an impulse to try to get as close to the minds of the Romans as possible, as well as by the conviction that we must avoid theories which conflict with sources. My last few years are dotted with the corpses of hypotheses which had to be abandoned when they clashed with evidence. The ramifications of the subject have produced a lengthier biblio graphy of modern works than I could wish. I have neither attempted to give a systematic review of the scholarship on any particular topic nor to list all that I have read, but merely to acknowledge authorities whom I have followed, record alternative opinions, or suggest where the reader might look for further discussion. Where possible, I cite work in English, of recent date and of particular interest. If I have omitted items which I ought to have cited, it is by oversight, for which I apologize. Little of the work published after 1988 could be taken into account. I was inspired by J. A. Crook's inimitable Law and Life of Rome (1967) to explore the interaction of law and reality (as far as we can penetrate to the real in Roman history). Since then, scholars working in many different areas of classical literature, history, and law have cast new light on Roman society. It seemed to me that there was a need for a book on the institution of marriage, which would build on but not duplicate the older work on the law of marriage and the newer scholarship on the legal position of women. The only monograph in English on the law of marriage was published in 1930 and remains an excellent guide to the sources. Nor have changing times rendered Corbett's own views obnoxious. He remains more reliable than many of the specialized books and articles which have appeared on the Continent in the last half-century. On law in general and republican law in particular I have been much influenced by Alan Watson. Jane Gardner's survey, Women in Roman law and society, appeared when this book was in its late stages, but I hope I have profited from it, and our aims are similar. On particular topics of law and as examples of how to approach the material and the problems, and of how to set the law in its social context, I acknowledge a special debt to David Daube, J. A. Crook, and Suzanne Dixon. Literary studies are at the centre of classics as the discipline is organized in most of the English-speaking world. Yet paradoxically to move between literature and history is often no easier than to move between history and law. A particular debt is owed to historians who take account of the full range of texts and to literary specialists who Preface IX relate the poets to their social context. I hope the examples of J. H. D'Arms, P.A. Brunt, Peter Garnsey, Ramsay MacMullen, Fergus Millar, Sir Ronald Syme, and T. P. Wiseman among the historians and R. E. Fantham, Jasper Griffin, and Gordon Williams among the Latinists have had some effect on me. Although epigraphic sources are not prominent in this book, I am also grateful to those who have explored the ways of using tomb inscriptions to answer questions of social history, scholars such as M. K. Hopkins, Beryl Rawson, Richard P. Saller, and Brent D. Shaw. Such categorization of scholars is unduly schematic. How can one measure or duly acknowledge the impact of what a friend, in dis cussion of a variety of topics, says, or does not say? They plant the seeds, by casually making a connection which turns out to be import ant or by suggesting an area or source to explore. The germs of ideas may come from other writers, historians in other fields, novelists, journalists, as much as from scholars deliberately studied and cited. I owe an inestimable debt to all my teachers, more especially to Margaret Pinsent, Margaret Freeman, W. F. Hicken, L. H. Jeffery, D. L. Stockton, P. A. Brunt, and David Daube. Over the years correspondence and discussion and support and friendship from many people have enriched my life as well as creating the debt which demands these acknowledgements. I retain memories of constant and generous help from members of the scholarly community and most particularly from ancient historians in Britain, Canada, and the United States, from fellow members of the Universities of Oxford and Ottawa and Stanford University, and those with whom I have worked in several learned societies. Particular thanks are owed to my Ottawa colleague Colin Wells, for sharing his store of reading, his archaeological expertise, and his insight into the nature of the Romans. His stern criticisms have improved several chapters. Suzanne Dixon of the University of Queensland, whose post-doctoral term at Stanford was an inspiration, has been generous in showing me her unpublished work and in giving illuminating comments on vast areas of scholarship. Keith Bradley, Richard Saller, and Brent Shaw have kindly brought their expertise to bear on chapters which caused me particular problems. I am grateful to William Harris, Beryl Rawson, Richard Saller, and David Kertzer for organizing work shops which exposed me to criticism and new ideas. My former students G. W. Pinard, Susan Dorken, Marianne Goodfellow, and Marie Laurence of Ottawa and Judith Evans-Grubbs of Stanford have taught me much. The sound judgement and breadth of vision of David Cherry has helped me on many problems in the law of marriage, most particularly on the Augustan legislation. He criticized x Preface successive drafts of this book. Alice Pellegrino, Livia Tenzer, Andrew Bell, and David Briney of Stanford generously helped me with the verification of references. The editors of the Press gave me firm encouragement and devoted meticulous care to the presentation of the text. · I gratefully acknowledge my indebtedness to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for a Leave Fellowship and grants in aid of research, to the Pew Foundation for a research grant, and to the University of Ottawa and Stanford University. The University of Pennsylvania kindly gave me library facilities for a term. Without the Ashmolean Reading Room and the Bodleian Law Library this book would have been very different and taken much longer to complete. Above all, I am grateful to the Principal and Fellows of the King's Hall and College of Brasenose for electing me to a visiting fellowship for 1976/7 and for continuing hospitality ever since. Several chapters w~re drafted during summers at Brasenose and all bear the mark of hours spent in the common room or library there. Nor would the book have been finished without the support, encouragement, and well-directed help of my family, especially my daughters Joanna and Silvia and my sisters Heather Pegg and Caroline O'Hagan. Heather Pegg supplied wise comment as well as logistical aid. My husband Arnaldo Treggiari has been an unfailing source of inspiration. He has not only tolerated but abetted my absorption in research and composition and has offered practical help beyond the imaginings of classical theorists. · Stanford S.M.T. 1 October 1989
The list of books you might like
