Dissolution of Marriage
The grounds for dissolution of marriage could be: objective, i.e. independent of the will of the spouses due to the absence of one of the conditions necessary for the validity of marriage; subjective, or depending on the will of the spouses due to the absence of maritalis affectio or the will of the paterfamilias.
The objective or involuntary grounds are:
- Death of a spouse;
- Capitis deminutio maxima, if the spouse was taken as a prisoner of war and was sold as a slave;
- Capitis deminutio media, if one of the spouses lost citizenship;
- Incestum superveniens. *
The subjective grounds are:
- Divorce **: it was due to the consequent disappearance of affectio maritalis, which was achieved unilaterally, through repudium or bilaterally, through divorce. Repudium could only be done by the husband (because his wife could not evade manus), who was required to submit his will to iudicim domesticum which could decide in a negative way, even if this decision is would not have prevented the dissolution of the marriage, it was still a judgment that influenced the financial position of both spouses, indirectly causing a lot of pressure on the will of her husband. At the end of the republic, divorce became fashionable, although it was introduced by iudicium publicum de morbus instead of iudicium domesticum. *** Justinian introduced penalties for the divorce without good reason and reiterated the established penalties in the period of Constantine for repudium sine causa: everything to restrain the abuses that were during the divorce.
They were favored by divortium bona gratia and divortium ex iusta causa: the first was a divorce caused by reasons which cannot be charged to either of spouses when the marriage remained childless for three years because of physical deficiency of one of the spouses, or the absence of the husband as a prisoner of war for five years. Ex iusta causa is a divorce caused by the bad behavior of one of the spouses. The culpable spouse was subject to financial penalties such as loss of the dowry or even loss of a quarter of property. ****
The form of the divorce was not solemn, especially in marriage sine manu, in which it was enough for a wife to leave the marital home, while for repudium it was enough the notification of ripudiante made by the other spouse.*****
In marriage conventio manum the form provided for the liberation of the manus of women through contrary ceremonies and opposite to those for which manus was acquired: diffarreatio in the case of confarreatio, remancipatio or emancipatio in the case of coemptio, mancipatio or emancipatio in the case of usus. ******
The will of the pater familias of the spouses: especially in marriages sine manu the paterfamilias of the woman could call the daughter at any time and eliminate the cohabitation of the spouses that is essential element for the formation of marriage. In the case where the spouses were both alieni iuris, one of the patres familias could arbitrarily dissolve the marriage.
- Salvatore Terranova - Noto
* Sanfilippo C., “Istituzioni ecc…”, op. cit., pag 150: quando , mediante adozione, si crea una parentela agnatizia tra coniugi, come ad es. il suocero che adotta il genero: questi diverrà civilmente fratello adottivo della moglie.
** Serrao F., “Diritto privato ecc…”, op. cit. p. 195 e ss. : “nell’età più antica l’esercizio della libertà di divorziare da parte della donna era fortemente limitato e quasi cancellato…..Plutarco attribuisce nientemeno alla leggendaria normazione di Romolo la proibizione di divorzio per la moglie e la statuizione di tre precise cause di ripudio in favore del marito: procurato aborto con farmaci, sottrazione delle chiavi della cantina, adulterio”. Secondo Plutarco se il marito avesse ripudiato la moglie per cause diverse dalle tre indicate, sarebbe stato punito con la perdita dei beni, attribuiti in parte alla moglie ed in parte a Cerere; se il marito avesse addirittura venduto la moglie sarebbe stato immolato agli dei inferi.
*** Sanfilippo C., “Istituzioni ecc…”, op. cit., pag. 151: “Un arguto scrittore romano ci dice che ormai le donne contavano gli anni non più dai consoli, ma dal numero dei mariti avuti!”
**** Cfr. Arangio-Ruiz V. , “Istituzioni ecc”, op. cit. p. 452: “così per parte della donna, l’adulterio, l’essere andata a banchettare o a far bagni con estranei o ad abitare fuori casa con persone a cui non fosse legata da vincoli di parentela, o l’aver frequentato spettacoli senza il consenso del marito; per parte dell’uomo, l’aver tentato di prostituire la moglie , il tenere una concubina, la falsa accusa di adulterio; per parte di entrambi , l’aver teso insidie alla vita del coniuge o l’aver trascurato insidie tesele da altri, e l’aver congiurato o favorito congiure contro l’imperatore o l’imperatrice”.
***** Sanfilippo C., “Istituzioni ecc…”, op. cit., p. 151. La lex Iulia de adulteriis dell’età di Augusto per avere la certezza dello status coniugale prescrisse che il divorzio fosse reso pubblico mediante l’intervento di sette testimoni.
****** Cfr. Serrao F., “Diritto privato ecc….”, op. cit. p. 197 e ss.
READ ALSO:
Marriage and Conventio in Manum
