How Did The Pater Affect Roman Women's Rights?

In the ancient days of Rome, women spent their lives with limited independence, with only a few exemptions. From daily living to the day of their wedding the actions of women were under the control of a man, whether that man was her father, husband, or guardian. From the time of her birth to the time of her death, there were rules that a woman was to follow. Some of these were written into the laws of Rome while others were just socially expected. At birth, a daughter or in Latin filiafamilias was subject to the control or potestas of the father or pater. This is the same for the son or filiusfamilias. The pater was the head of the family and his control extended over more than just his children. It also included his sons’ children, his wife, …show more content…
The pater had the ability to refrain from raising a new born child and the mother had no legal right to fight against this decision. Another right of the pater was to inflict severe punishment onto his children and his slaves. This punishment could include even the death penalty. In these times of severe punishment the pater was expected to seek counsel first, but there no laws that demanded it. Sometimes women that had been judged by the state were given over to their families for them to provide a punishment in the privacy of their own home. The lex Julia de adulteriis gave a father a right to kill a daughter that had been found in the act of adultery in his house or the house of his son or son-in-law. Though, if he killed the daughter he was supposed to kill the adulterer as well. Another extent of the pate’s control is that he could sale or surrender a child he had power over. Since he was legally liable for what his children and his slaves did, if one of them got in trouble with the law, he had to either go to court and make himself responsible for the damages or surrender over the guilty child or slave to the court. Sale pertained more to adoption or emancipation from potestas. A son was “sold” three times, but a daughter was only once. When it came to marriage, the consent of the pater was necessary for both sons and daughters. Early on in Roman law the consent of the …show more content…
When a woman was married with manus, she had basically the same position in the family as the adopted daughter to the pater of that family. Just like under her own father, she had no legal independence and ownership over property. In contrast, a woman that entered into a free marriage was known to be legally independent of her husband with particular legal and social significances. In her book Women in Roman Law and Society, Gardner states that “a wife had no legal claim to maintenance by her husband.” Usually in a marriage, a dowry was given by the wife’s family, but nothing was written that that money had to be spent on the wife. In a free marriage, the only choice for a wife that was not being “maintained” by her husband was a divorce. Another implication of marriage for women was that once married, whether it be manus or free, she was viewed as to have the same social status that her husband had. Each social status in Rome had different legal implications. Since women had no right to vote or to hold one of the many public offices the Roman government, the status of the husband was