rriages dissolved, women had no legal rights concerning the offspring and often never saw them again. Marriages were often without manus, meaning that the father kept the property of his daughter and would therefore, retain a hold over her wealth. A marriage with manus gave power over the woman to her new husband, as well as ownership of her property. In either case, Roman women were not permitted to do anything they wanted with their own money, since personal wealth is always equated with power. Of course, there were some exceptions. Mothers could spend money on their sons' political careers or education. One can also read about Cicero's wife, Terentia, who had personal wealth and made land investments on her own. That was only because she had a very agreeable guardian who gave his permission. It would seem likely that women with wealth would have more power over their lives, but this would very much depend upon her father or guardian or husband. Women were expected to have a legal guardian because they were not considered smart enough to act in their own best interest. When Cornelia, mother of the Gracchi, was widowed, she refused to marry again and as a result, made her own decisions, but this was very rare. The only real power that most women possessed was over their personal interactions within the circle of their friends and family. Women had to know their place, remain modest, be tireless, and both loyal and obedient to their families - emotionally, physically, and financially. That was what Roman men were looking for in a wife. (46)
So it is evident that women had certain prescribed roles to play within Roman society: child bearer, mother, daughter, and wife. They were considered citizens, but they were not permitted to vote or participate in government procedures. If they did try, it was frowned upon. Some women were more educated than others. All had some personal freedoms. Lower class women could work, but upper class women were expected to meet the expectations that their families had set out for them and stay at home. None of the women really had their own identities or an array of personal choices put before them. There are always some exceptions and there must have been women considered very radical in their time. Women were always overshadowed by the men in their lives because Rome was a very patriarchal society, built on a peasant culture and on the old customs of mos maiorum.(47) Quoting Ennius, Cicero said, "the strength of Rome is founded on her ancient customs as much as on the strength of her sons."(48) Roman women might have had it better than Athenian women, but that's not saying much. Rich or poor, most died young. One can only hope they had a few pleasures that were never documented by the men who wrote about them. Some did get involved in the rites of Bacchus(49) and probably did enjoy themselves a great deal for short periods of time, before they were caught.
We will never know what the women of ancient Rome thought about their inferior social position or what they thought about the many layers of separation that existed between themselves and Roman men. The ancient Roman world was a very patriarchal culture, with men holding all the positions of power. Women and children really did not have many rights. In reality, life must have been difficult for the majority of people in Rome considering all the years of war and conquer. Life wasn't very easy for anyone. Although the Romans were not pioneers in social equality, the civilization had a great influence on both men and women who came later. They were building an empire and as the legendary H.I. Marrou stated in his book, A History of Education in Antiquity:
If Greek civilization in its turn had remained the jealously guarded preserve of a few Aegean cities, it too would have disappeared long ago, without renewing, as it has, the face of the earth. And the fact that it has fulfilled its destiny is largely due to Rome. Rome's historic function was to complete the work begun by Alexander, and plant Hellenistic civilization from the Sahara to the 