The Private Life of the RomansJohnston, Harold Whetstone
History
The Private Life of the Romans
Johnston, Harold Whetstone
Rome -- Social life and customs
§31. The Patria Potestas.--The authority of the _pater familiās_ over
his descendants was called usually the _patria potestās_, but also the
_patria maiestās_, the _patrium iūs_, and the _imperium paternum_. It
was carried to a greater length by the Romans than by any other
people, a length that seems to us excessive and cruel. As they
understood it, the _pater familiās_ had absolute power over his
children and other agnatic descendants. He decided whether or not the
newborn child should be reared; he punished what he regarded as
misconduct with penalties as severe as banishment, slavery, and death;
he alone could own and exchange property--all that his descendants
earned or acquired in any way was his: according to the letter of the
law they were little better than his chattels. If his right to one of
them was disputed, he vindicated it by the same form of action that he
used to maintain his right to a house or a horse; if one was stolen,
he proceeded against the abductor by the ordinary action for theft; if
for any reason he wished to transfer one of them to a third person, it
was done by the same form of conveyance that he employed to transfer
inanimate things. The jurists boasted that these powers were enjoyed
by Roman citizens only.
§32. Limitations.--But however stern this authority was theoretically,
it was greatly modified in practice, under the Republic by custom,
under the Empire by law. King Romulus was said to have ordained that
all sons should be reared and also all firstborn daughters;
furthermore that no child should be put to death until its third year,
unless it was grievously deformed. This at least secured life for the
child, though the _pater familiās_ still decided whether it should be
admitted to his household, with the implied social and religious
privileges, or be disowned and become an outcast. King Numa was said
to have forbidden the sale into slavery of a son who had married with
the consent of his father. But of much greater importance was the
check put upon arbitrary and cruel punishments by custom. Custom, not
law, obliged the _pater familiās_ to call a council of relatives and
friends (_iūdicium domesticum_) when he contemplated inflicting severe
punishment upon his children, and public opinion obliged him to abide
by their verdict. Even in the comparatively few cases where tradition
tells us that the death penalty was actually inflicted, we usually
find that the father acted in the capacity of a magistrate happening
to be in office when the offense was committed, or that the penalties
of the ordinary law were merely anticipated, perhaps to avoid the
disgrace of a public trial and execution.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account