Citizen ring - wedding ring

[richsc]

I was reading through John De Felice's monograph "Roman Hospitality: the Professional Women of Pompeii" and he goes through great detail in describing what the fully legal and other states of marriages in the Roman world. The ability to have a fully legal marriage as we might see it, or to be in a state of 'conubium' was only available to citizens in good standing. Full legal marriages had the advantage of being able to pass property on to your heirs, among other things, which was one of the real advantages of Roman citizenship.<br>
I was struck by the notion that a Roman citizen had an iron ring on a finger as a symbol of citizenship, and that a gold marriage ring was a symbol of a fully legal Roman marriage in a state of 'conubium', possibly exchanging the iron ring for gold during the wedding ceremony. Could it be that the traditional wedding ring is actually a sign of Roman citizenship?<br>
<br>
I notice in Sander's synopses of the Epigraphy conference one lecture mentioning the granting of both 'citizenship and conubium' to auxiliaries upon discharge. The right of full legal marriage means a lot more than I had realized, and a gold band worn by both spouses was not just a mark of marriage but full citizenship as well (perhaps).<br>
<p>Richard Campbell, Legio XX.
http://www.geocities.com/richsc53/studies/
ICQ 940236
</p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showLocalUserPublicProfile?login=richsc>RichSC</A> at: 5/24/02 5:04:00 am<br></i>

[Catiline]

Roman women can't really be counted as citizens, whixh is I htink the major issue, assuming that there was an exchange of rings in the first place. I don't know whether that was the case in Roman marriage ceremonies off the top of my head. As to the ring being a symbol of Roman citizenship, it's a nice idea, though not good enough to make me propose to Miss Essler "Darling, will you do me the honour of becoming a Roman citizen...." <p></p><i></i>

[Caius Fabius]

The status in regard to citizenship of a woman was important for determining the status of the male offspring. The Roman soldier who was not married to, but fathered children on a non-citizen female would not have his children counted as citizens thus creating a pool of non-citizen males to join the auxiliaries. Several documents where soldiers could not understand the non-citizen status of their children are noted, and the citizenship of the father who served in the auxiliaries was not retroactive to his children (usually). The grant of citizenship for an auxiliary unit's members did not usually change the status of their offspring, either. During the first decades of the empire, the sons of soldiers were not born as citizens, since their fathers couldn't legally marry while they were in the military. If you are interested in Roman law, there is a lot of information about this, and certain emperors made certain grants of limited citizenship or exemptions, to reward soldiers and their families. <p>"Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987</p><i></i>

[Catiline]

You are right. I was thinking in terms that were toonarrow.My meaning was that Roman women held ctizen status, rather than directly being citizens in the turn out and vote sense. <p></p><i></i>