Roman Law and the Legal World of the Romans

STATUS
Egalitarian Aspects
The text highlights that Roman law, in certain
respects, aimed to be egalitarian, particularly during
trials where the focus was on deciding between
cases rather than individuals. However, it
acknowledges that societal beliefs and open
assertions of superiority existed.
Status Differences
Roman law recognized various status differences, such as the
distinction between free persons and slaves, as well as
differences based on age (minors vs. full adults) and citizenship.
Slavery in Rome
• The text discusses Roman “chattel” slavery, a form
where slaves were treated as property subject to the
laws governing other types of property.
• Unlike modern American slavery, Roman slaves were
often captives from wars, and their ethnicity and culture
varied. Slaves were even recognized for their skills or
cultural background, some even from culturally
advanced regions like Greece.
Recognition of Slavery as
Individual Misfortune
• Roman slavery lacked a racial or natural basis, and it
was generally recognized as a matter of individual
misfortune.
• Though potentially less pernicious in theory, the
individual slave's perspective was harsh, being
considered fully owned property.
• Slave were subject to whatever use and abuse their
owners wished, including hard labor, sexual
exploitation, torture, and summary execution.
Recognition of Slavery as
Individual Misfortune
• While lucky slaves could in practice control or at least
make use of considerable wealth (see the last section of
this chapter for details), they could never be its legal
owner or possessor, and so they could lose everything
at any time at their owner’s whim.
Openness to Manumission
• Manumission, the act of freeing a slave, was common in
Rome. Slaves could be released by their owners,
sometimes as a reward for good service or as an
economic decision.
• Manumitted slaves became Roman citizens,
demonstrating a degree of openness to former slaves in
Roman society.
• Originally, there were no limits on manumission other
than the interests of the owner.
Legal and Social Consequences
of Manumission
• Manumitted slaves were called "freedmen," and they
had social duties towards their former owners (patron).
There were legal agreements about continued labor and
potential inheritance rights.
• Freedmen had limited rights in public law but were
almost entirely normal citizens in private law. However,
their legal personhood began at the time of
manumission, and any previous family ties were not
legally recognized.
Legal and Social Consequences
of Manumission
• The patron also had some rights to inherit from the
freedman. The freedperson had no rights “upward”
against the patron, but might in practice be treated as a
member of the family, especially in common burial.
• The freedperson’s free-born child was a full
Roman in both respects. Note, however, that
the freedperson’s life as a legal person
effectively began at the time of manumission.
Legal and Social Consequences
of Manumission
• Any children or other “family” they might have had
beforehand was not legally connected to them. So, for
instance, freeing a slave would not, by itself, free his
children from the same owner. And even if they were
freed at the same time, they would not (from the point of
view of the law) be their father’s “children.”
Civil and Criminal Liability of
Slaves
• Originally, slaves did not have the same civil or criminal
liability as free persons.
• Options for owners when a slave was accused included
assuming liability or surrendering the slave through
"noxal surrender."
• Slaves accused of “public” (i.e., criminal) offenses were
apparently dealt with summarily by magistrates. Over
the course of the empire, direct trials of slaves for
criminal offenses were introduced, but noxal surrender
remained the norm for civil actions.
Despite hierarchical elements, Roman society
demonstrated a nuanced approach to egalitarianism in
legal proceedings and the treatment of former slaves
through manumission. Understanding these complexities
enhances our insight into the social dynamics of ancient
Rome.
 ROMAN
C i t i ze n s h i p
 CITIZENSHIP

Citizenship is a particularly important

status category because Roman law (like
most ancient systems) was primarily
“personal” rather than “territorial” in its
reach.
 Merely being born in Rome
did not make you a Roman
citizen (civis). The status of
your parents decided the
matter. Thus, Citizenship was
typically inherited from one’s
parents
 Being the child of a Roman
citizen was not necessarily
enough to make you one. Your
parents had to have a Roman
law marriage (iustae nuptiae or
iustum matrimonium) where
both parents possessed
conubium, the right to contract a
legally recognized marriage. All
Roman citizens had that, and
some others were granted that
right.
The main sources of new citizens
were the manumission of
individual slaves and imperial
grants to whole cities or
provinces between the mid-first
century, when all free persons in
the empire were made citizens
Initially, the main distinction was
between citizens of Rome (cives)
and everyone else (peregrini).
But from time to time, political
circumstances led to the
creation of various intermediate
categories
Four classes
of people
Cives
Latins
Peregrini
Slaves
Cives - Citizens of Rome

Cives in Roman citizenship refers

to individuals who held the
status of Roman citizens. Roman
citizenship was a highly prized
legal and social status in ancient
Rome, conferring a range of
rights and privileges upon those
who held it.
 Full Legal Protections
Cives enjoyed the full protection
of Roman law. They had access
to Roman courts and could seek
legal remedies for various issues.
 Full Legal Protections
Cives enjoyed the full protection
of Roman law. They had access
to Roman courts and could seek
legal remedies for various issues.
 Political Rights
Roman citizens had the right to
participate in the political life of
the Roman Republic and later
the Roman Empire. This included
the right to vote in various
assemblies and the eligibility to
run for public office.
 Political Rights
Roman citizens had the right to
participate in the political life of
the Roman Republic and later
the Roman Empire. This included
the right to vote in various
assemblies and the eligibility to
run for public office.
 Military Service
Citizens were generally obligated
to serve in the Roman military
when called upon. Military
service was considered a duty of
citizenship.
 Exemption from
certain taxes
Roman citizens were often
exempt from certain taxes that
were imposed on non-citizens
(peregrini). This exemption
reflected the privileges
associated with citizenship.
 Recognition of Marriages and
Wills
Marriages between Roman
citizens were recognized, and
Roman citizens could create wills
for the benefit of other Roman
citizens. This demonstrated the
legal recognition of the social
and familial bonds among
citizens
 Roman Courts &
Legal System
Roman citizens had the right to
access Roman courts and were
subject to Roman law. They were
entitled to a certain level of legal
representation and protection
 Distinctive Legal Status

The legal rights and obligations

of cives set them apart from
other legal categories, such as
Latins, peregrini, and slaves.
Roman citizenship was a marker
of social and legal distinction.
Latins
The status and identity of the
Latins evolved over time, but they
can be understood as a category
of individuals who held a partial
Roman citizenship. Latins were
not full Roman citizens, but they
enjoyed certain privileges and
legal rights that set them apart
from other non-citizens
(peregrini)
 The Latins occupied an
intermediate position between
Roman citizens and other non-
citizen groups. This indicates a
nuanced approach by the Roman
authorities to accommodate
different groups within the legal
framework of the Roman state
 Legal Rights
Latins enjoyed some but not all
of the privileges of a cives. Cives:
ius commercii and ius connubii
(rights of property and marriage)
Latins: the rights of ius
commercii and ius migrationis
(the right to migrate), but not
the ius connubii unless it is
granted to them.
Peregrini - Non Citizens
In the context of Roman
citizenship, "peregrini" refers to
individuals who were not Roman
citizens. The category of
peregrini was diverse and
included various groups, such as
free inhabitants of the empire
who were not citizens,
individuals from allied states,
and foreigners residing in Roman
territories.
 Peregrini had a legal status
distinct from Roman citizens.
They were not granted the full
rights and privileges associated
with being a Roman citizen.
 Limited Legal Protection

While peregrini were subject to

Roman law, their legal
protections were limited
compared to Roman citizens.
They did not enjoy the same
level of legal rights and
privileges.
 Taxes
Peregrini were obligated to pay
taxes imposed by the Roman
state. However, their tax
obligations might have differed
from those of Roman citizens
 Political Rights
Peregrini were subject to the
authority of Roman magistrates
and officials. They did not
participate in Roman political
institutions and were excluded
from Roman governances
Slaves
The earliest Roman law followed
the personality principle
rigorously, and that rule
continued to have force much
longer in some areas of the law.

Thus, for instance, the whole of

civil procedure was limited to
citizens, as were the formal
modes of transferring ownership
Marriages were recognized only
between Roman citizens, and
wills could be made only by
citizens for the benefit of Roman
citizens. (Romans would not
claim that only their fellow
citizens were married or left
wills, only that Roman justice
was not entitled to pass
judgment on the cases of
peregrini.)
Other areas of the law, particularly
those clearly governed by the
Edict, were available to anyone.
The law of consensual contracts is
the most prominent example, but
even in other areas the praetor
eventually introduced other
devices to bring in noncitizens.
Moreover, Latins and other
privileged groups were given
access to Roman marriage law
(conubium) and/or commercial law
(commercium).
Statuses of the Free
Among free Roman citizens there
were a number of distinctions of
rank. For instance, throughout the
Republic there were sta- tus
groups (“orders”) of “knights”
(wealthy and of free descent) and
“senators” (knights who had
started a political career) at the
top of society.
Members of the elite had special
protection from defamation. of
more importance was a
distinction that evolved primarily
in the second century AD.

Roman criminal law of the

Republic strongly avoided corporal
punishment for Roman citizens.
While slaves and foreigners were
subject to anything the
authorities could imagine
 Over the course of the early
Empire, the privilege of avoiding
torture and execution was
restricted to a more select group.
Perhaps nothing illustrates the
advantage better than the
different fates of the apostles Paul
(a Roman citizen) and Peter (a
Judaean peregrine). When
executed by command of Nero,
Paul was beheaded while Peter
was crucified.
PROJECT

STATUS
AGE, INSANITY, PECULIUM AND AGENCY
DATE
FEBRUARY 6, 2024 PRESENTERS
TIONGSON, TIYANTO, DEARBANTOLO
AGE
ROMAN LAW AND THE LEGAL WORLD
OF THE ROMANS
AGE

Legal Rights: usually received when someone reaches the age of

adulthood.

In Roman Law, the marker of adulthood was not tied to a specific

age.

Concrete example: Authority of a father in the context of ownership of

property and binding transactions.
AGE: authority of a father

A Roman could not own any property or perform any binding

transactions, regardless of age, as long as his or her father was still
alive.

All property of the child became the property of the father.

Inheritance law was so important to the Romans!

The authority of a father over his children was supposedly absolute.

AGE: terminology

Patria potestas or “fatherly power”: father's authority over his

children.

In potestate or “in power”: the state of being under the authority of

the father.

Sui iuris or "in one' own power": the state of not being in power.
AGE: terminology

Pater familias or “father of the family”: a male who is not in power

even if he has no children and even if he is a child in years.

Filius/filia familias or “son/daughter of the family”: children in power

(of whatever age)
AGE: absent of a living father

Below seven years old: by rule is incapable of forming intentions.

They could not make contracts or be liable for criminal activity. They
might own property, but it would largely be in the hands of a guardian
(tutor).

Older than 7 years old but younger than 12(for girls) or 14(for boys):
still have a kind of guardian, but could form intentions. They could
make binding agreements, though these had to be ratified by the
guardian.
AGE: absent of a living father

Up to 25 years old: a person might plead youth and inexperience in

order to have a transaction invalidated if he came to have second
thoughts. Such restitution was not automatic and could be blocked in
advance by the appointment of a sort of pseudo-guardian (curator) to
monitor the young person's transactions.
INSANITY
ROMAN LAW AND THE LEGAL WORLD
OF THE ROMANS
INSANITY
The Law created forms of guardianship for two related classes of
persons:

The insane and the spendthrift.

Family members would have sought the designation of the insane or

spendthrifts person, and (agnatic) family members often served as
guardians.

Judicial officials could make the decision on their own and could
appoint someone they thought would be more trustworthy.
INSANITY: the insane

The insane: people who had substantially lost touch with reality.

e.g. the youngest children. They could not, as a matter of law, form
intents and so were prohibited from virtually any legal activity,
including commercial transactions, marriage, testimony in court, and
even conviction for crimes.
INSANITY: the spendthrift

The spendthrift: merely reckless with their (inherited?) property and

accordingly were less constrained.

They were prevented only from alienating property without approval

from the guardian.
PECULIUM
AND AGENCY
ROMAN LAW AND THE LEGAL WORLD
OF THE ROMANS
PECULIUM and AGENCY

A slave operating a business would presumably be expected to keep

it running in the black after the initial investment.

A grown son or daughter of the political class might be given a more

regular allowance for support.

Anything that was earned by the use of the peculicum was typically
funneled back in (or at least some persentage, as informally agreed
between the father/owner and child/slave).
PECULIUM and AGENCY

The praetor allowed someone who did business with the child or
slave to sue the father or owner for up to the value of the peculium (at
the time of the original deal) to enforce their agreement.

Slaves and children were also useful to help fill a gap in Roman
commercial law.
PECULIUM and AGENCY
Roman law had little in the way of agency.

Only the actual parties to a transaction had any obligations from it.

Roman law did not recognize “artifical persons” (e.g. corporation).

Children and slaves provide a partial exception, since they can make
acquisitions for their father/owner.

Their use as extensions was limited because they still had a limited
capacity to undertake obligations for them.