Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The ring of the Roman
#1
Greetings to you all,<br>
<br>
Today I read a post on "Lord of the Rings" in Latin. It made me wonder. What are the sources for the idea that a Roman citizen wore a iron ring ? And what of the gold ones ? Is there a different set of rules for civilian and military rings? Was there one ring to rule them all ?<br>
<br>
Is there anyone who can help me with this?<br>
<br>
Valete,<br>
<br>
Gaivs <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#2
I have been looking for that one too, and also wondering if the modern wedding band tradition comes from the marriage of Roman citizen to Roman citizen. There were many levels of marriage but only a full citizen to citizen conveyed all the protection of Roman law.<br>
<br>
<p>Legio XX<br>
Caupona Asellinae</p><i></i>
Richard Campbell
Legio XX - Alexandria, Virginia
RAT member #6?
Reply
#3
Thank you for your answer. I am looking into Roman weddings too. But I think the ring was only given at the official engagement of Roman citizens. There were, to my knowledge, no rings involved at the traditional nuptia conferiatio.<br>
What's more, I discovered to my surprise that a legal Roman wedding has much to do with protecting inheretence-rights.<br>
How other rights are related to this I still have to find out.<br>
<br>
The ring of the Roman however, so the story tells us, is a sign of citizenschip and rank, as are the toga virilis and the toga praetexta. But where does this story come from?<br>
<br>
Vale,<br>
<br>
Gaivs <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#4
I have no source for this at hand, sorry, but for what it's worth, I have read that members of the Senate in Imperial times wore a particular type of gold ring, although members of the oldest patrician families often preferred the more traditional iron senator's ring of the Republican period.<br>
<br>
This may be what you are thinking of. It was not a universal citizen's prerogative, but something senators seem to have worn to distinguish themselves, as with the laticlavian toga.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
Jenny<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Cheers,
Jenny
Founder, Roman Army Talk and RomanArmy.com

We are all travelers in the wilderness of this world, and the best we can find in our travels is an honest friend.
-- Robert Louis Stevenson
Reply
#5
Yes, there is a book about women and Pompeiian taverns that has a chapter on marriages, since that is so important to understanding who can work in or own property. There were several levels of marriage, but it appears that the full rights of citizenship meant you could pass property along; fewer rights and the property might go to several others. If you were a freed slave, and owned the property, upon your death it reverted to your previous owner, if I am remembering right. I'll try to summarize. It was a very intricate part of Roman law. <p>Legio XX<br>
Caupona Asellinae</p><i></i>
Richard Campbell
Legio XX - Alexandria, Virginia
RAT member #6?
Reply
#6
Salvete alia!<br>
<br>
I too have wondered at the sources, other than the archaeological collections (we're sure of the artifacts but not always the customs for their use) and I checked in Ann M. Stout's article in "World of Roman Costume;" she cites Pliny the Elder's" Historia naturalis" for most ring references; Tertullian, Dio Cassius, Appian and Suetonius for others. There are too many to list here, but she at least gives a cursory tracing of primary citations and in her Notes gives more lengthy articles for other studies.<br>
<br>
Wade Heaton<br>
Lucius Cornelius Libo<br>
[email protected] <br>
www.togaman.com <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub27.ezboard.com/bromancivtalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=togaman>Togaman</A> at: 10/4/03 9:47 am<br></i>
Reply
#7
Thank you all for these remarks.<br>
I have the book you metioned, togaman. I will be back with a short essay on the ring.<br>
And we are working on a Roman wedding too. So there will be something to think and talk about next spring, Rich.<br>
<br>
I will be back soon,<br>
<br>
Gaivs<br>
<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Reply


Forum Jump: