Corpus-Paul

[David Noy <sj014 AT lamp.ac.uk>]

>Castelli may be correct, but if memory serves me correctly, under Roman Law
>wives could be testamentary heirs of their husbands. However, Adolf Berger,
>Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law, p. 350, points out that one of the
>characteristic features of adoption was to affect a change of families. For
>women, marriage would have served that purpose, for the woman in marriage
>came under the patria potestas of her husband's father if he were living or
>under his potestas if he were head of the family.
>

Actually, in the time of Paul, the sort of marriage which was normal for
Roman citizens (usually referred to as "sine manu") didn't bring the wife
into her husband's legal family.  A sort of testamentary adoption of women
was possible (Livia under Augustus's will is the classic example) but it
was really more a change of name as a condition of the inheritance (Livia
became Julia Augusta) than a full-scale Roman adoption, which was intended
to keep the family name and cult going for future generations and therefore
required a male adoptee.  Roman law eventually caught up with the idea of
adoption for reasons of affection (and potentially therefore with female
adoptees) but I think not until the 3rd century as far as the surviving
evidence goes.

But the niceties of Roman law would probably not be too relevant to most of
Paul's audience!

David Noy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

David Noy
Department of Classics, University of Wales, Lampeter SA48 7ED
Tel: 01570 422351 ext 428  Fax: 01570 423877
http://www.lampeter.ac.uk/~davidnoy