Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

414 14. the family in the late roman world
western parts – as to be a typically eastern phenomenon. 81 The same can
be said of abduction. 82 Even the tendency to consider betrothal as a
definitive choice has been attributed to eastern, particularly Judaic,
influence; 83 it is more convincingly explained as the result of a combination
of widespread economic, social and moral factors. These examples
clearly show the extent to which historical judgement is conditioned by
ideology, especially in a subject such as this. That one or other of these
customs was more widely spread in one or other part of the empire is
undeniable. What is much more difficult, however, is to distinguish an
eastern anthropology from a western one on the basis of the imperial
constitutions of the fourth and fifth centuries.
From the doctrinal point of view, there are no significant differences in
the records between east and west as regards attitudes to fundamental
issues such as betrothal and marriage, 84 and for many centuries the function
of the religious rites associated with these events remained substantially
the same in Rome and Byzantium. 85
However, from the first decades of the fifth century, in certain respects
western legislation began to take a firmer line than that of the east. This
tendency – which was not absolute and included important exceptions 86 –
is particularly evident not only in the prohibitions of consanguineous marriage
but also in the legislation on both divorce 87 and the inheritance of illegitimate
children. 88 Instead of resorting to the argument of ‘eastern
specificity’, we prefer to see the matter as dependent on the different relationships
existing between the secular and the religious powers in the two
parts. In the east, where the state was stronger, imperial law was able to
withstand the demands of the ecclesiastical authorities and to represent the
sensibilities of the majority of its subjects more effectively. In the west,
exposed as it was to internal and external threats, the state was more amenable
to the pressures of the bishops.
With the fall of Rome and the establishment of the Romano-Germanic
kingdoms, the history of the Roman family was separated into two parallel,
yet interlinked, processes, each of which was further divided into a myriad
81 For a different view, Wolff (1945) 40f.; Evans Grubbs (1995) 299; see in particular Vatin (1970)
204.
82 Evans Grubbs (1989) 67ff. greatly underestimates the importance of the data from the Latin rhe-
83 torical works. On other aspects of this problem, see Volterra (1937). Cohen (1949).
84 See, respectively, Anné (1941) 31 and Gaudemet (1978b) 27.
85 The most significant changes occurred in Byzantium in the ninth century when decisive importance
was attributed to betrothal and the marriage blessing: L’Huillier (1987).
86 See, for example, the provision introduced by the western emperor Majorian in 458: an attempt
to promote marriages between the nobility, to encourage the remarriage of widows and to stop parents
from consigning virgins to convents for patrimonial reasons (Nov. 6).
87 The greater leniency of eastern legislation on divorce can be observed by comparing C.Th. iii.16.2
(421; modified in CJ ix.9.34) with Theod. Nov. 12 (439), CJ v.17.8 (449), Val. Nov. 35.11 (452) and CJ
88 v.17.9 (497). In general, see Volterra (1975). C.Th. iv.6.6 (405); iv.6.7 (426/427); iv.6.8 (428).
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008