Hi folks! What do the readings this week suggest about the way ordinary Romans thought about gender, either in real life or in literature?

I chose The Twelve Tables, as they provide a unique insight into daily life and the way in which the Romans provided for the legal status of the non-elite (namely women.) A striking one from Table V is: “Even after the age of majority, women should not be without guardians 49. This shows that women of age were regarded as legally incompetent and subject to lifelong male guardianship. Table VI also contains another amusing detail: a woman could avoid legal marriage with her husband by spending three nights a year away from him. This strange legal shortcut demonstrates not just how much this system tried to bind women, but how women could sometimes use the legal system against itself to maintain a shred of independence in their small role in life. The document makes it plain that Roman society was structured to uphold male dominance among all classes. These laws applied to married and single, rich and poor women and were specifically designed to curtail women's independence through the law and not symbolically. This is also in sharp contrast to mythical or poetic works, where women such as Athena or Isis are wise, powerful beings. There is no room for that sort of symbolic power in The Twelve Tables, just a cold, hard legal structure that reinforced gender hierarchy. This makes me wonder how women, particularly those of low social status, were able to survive under these laws. And were those laws rigorously enforced, or could some women, by means of wealth, social status, or local community networks, find their way around these restrictions? I would like to see more of how all those engravings tangled themselves up in the lives of women during the Roman Republic.

Hello Professor and Classmates,

For this week’s reading, I chose '' The Twelve Tables'' because I was curious to see what the earliest Roman laws looked like and how they reflect the values of that time. It’s interesting to read how formal and strict the rules were, even for everyday situations. One part that stood out to me was the law about debt and how if someone couldn’t repay what they owed, they could be physically held or even sold into slavery. That felt really harsh and shows how seriously Rome treated property and contracts. I think the Roman lawmakers were trying to create a clear, public set of rules so that all citizens, especially the lower class knew what was legal and what wasn’t. It was meant to bring order and make justice more equal, even if many of the laws still favored the powerful. This document shows us that ancient Roman society was very structured and legalistic. It was also very patriarchal, many laws focused on the power of fathers and male citizens. Women, children, and slaves had fewer rights. Compared to other readings, like Livy’s Rape of Lucretia and The Twelve Tables focuses more on laws than stories, but both show a world where honor, control, and status mattered a lot. The legal system helped maintain social order, but also reinforced inequality. From this I’d like to learn more about how these laws were enforced and how they changed over time, especially as Rome became a republic and later an empire.

Which reading did you pick? If there’s a reason it interested you, what was it?

The reading I decided to read was The Twelve Tables. I just wanted to reread the set and laws Romans followed and see if any were unjust or interesting.

What passage or detail in particular from this reading jumped out at you as you read through it?

While reading, Tables X, 1, and 5 stood out to me in the reading. How come women weren't allowed to cry for love I think that's unfair. 

The other one about corpses, does this only follow normal citizens? As I remember, some Roman leaders were buried in Rome.

What do you think the author was trying to communicate?

The Twelve Tablets were essential for Romans, as it was something they followed and respected; it was what helped control citizens and all of Rome from doing something they shouldn’t. 

In your opinion, what is this document telling us about the time and place it comes from?

 I believe the document is telling us about a time when the tablets were praised or talked about, and their influence on Roman society. 

What about this document seems to relate to, support, or even contradict our other readings about this time and place?

This does support and relate to our readings, as the Twelve Tables are something major in Roman history. 

What would you like to find out more about? 

Has anyone ever tried to destroy the tablets? I don't think I've heard anything about that.

I picked the Twelve Tables because it is interesting to read about what regular laws in ancient Rome were like. One of the articles that completely caught me off guard was the one that says that a "dreadfully deformed child shall be quickly killed." It was horrible and says a lot about how cruel Roman society was, physical health and usefulness were more important to them than compassion or kindness. They prioritized their lineage and how strong they were and killed babies if they were born with defects. Another significant law was that women had to stay under the protection of a guardian even as adults, which shows how little freedom women enjoyed, and in a way one can say women were treated like children in this regard.

The Twelve Tables were drawn up to grant order and authority in society, especially among the wealthy (patricians) and the poor (plebeians). The laws were savage and uncivilized and cared more about protecting property and authority than justice. Compared to other readings, like Cicero’s De Oratore, which praises Roman law and speech, the Twelve Tables show the rough, real-life side of Roman justice, like killing deformed babies for example. These readings also make it clear that gender roles were strict, women were treated as dependents and had few rights. I’d like to learn more about how these laws actually affected people’s daily lives and whether people found ways around them.

The passage I chose to focus on was the Twelve Tables. I find it very interesting that within this passage, women are only mentioned twice. I'm not sure of this is the entirety of the rules, but what would be 50% of society being only mentioned twice. I don't think it's fair to write off all ancient societies as misogynistic simply because of our perceptions of the past. This to me feels unintentional, but glaring. I've heard that Romans were fascinated with Greek culture, and greatly admired their traditions. As we saw in Ancient Greece women in the private space were not necessarily oppressed but were seen less relevant in comparison to men in the public space. Is it possible that this influenced the Romans? As a growing empire that we now know as one of the most iconic and grand of its time, it makes sense that they would share similar values with Ancient Greeks. Wanting to better and grow society, and become more and more grand. I feel like it's plausible to say they similarly to the Greeks, began to value the public space more as it furthered the goals of the empire.

The passage and details that jumped out at me was the reading of the Twelve Tables. This document gives us an early insight into Roman Law that I found similarities in today's modern era. For example: in Table I it states that anyone that summons a man before a magistrate, he must go. If the man summoned does not go, (attend) let the one summoned him call bystanders and take him by force. In table III number 1, one who has confessed a debt, or against whom judgement has been pronounced, shall have thirty days to pay it in. Number 3, against a foreigner the right in property shall be valid forever. Table IV, number 9, Should a tree on a neighbors farm be bend crooked by the wind and lean over your farm, you may take legal action for removal of that tree. Table VII number 5, If one shall permit to be summoned as a witness, or has been a weighter, if he does not give him testimony, let him be noted as dishonest and incapable of acting again as witness. These are some of the laws that Romans modeled after the Greeks that the American justice system still uses to this day.

This document was written during the time of Cicero a great orator of ancient Rome. I would have liked to know who wrote the complete laws because these are just fragments of how Roman laws were imposed onto Roman society like the usacapio in Roman history that is used in American legislation.

I chose the reading on the Twelve Tables because it offers a concise foundation for understanding early legal systems, and I noticed parallels to modern civil and criminal laws. For example, the emphasis on formal legal procedures in Table I mirrors today’s courtroom practices. The text states, “If anyone summons a man before the magistrate, he must go,” which resembles modern subpoena rules requiring defendants to appear in court. Trials were also time-bound, as seen in Table I.6-9: litigants had to present their case “before noon” and continue “until sunset but no later,” reflecting today’s deadlines for hearings.

Similarly, criminal laws in Tables VIII–IX outline principles still relevant today. Table VIII.2 introduces fines for bodily harm, specifying, “If one has broken a bone of a freeman… let him pay a penalty of three hundred coins,” akin to modern compensatory damages. The Tables also prioritize due process: Table IX.6 forbids executing anyone “unconvicted,” a precursor to the presumption of innocence.

For civil matters, Tables IV–VII address family and property rights. The patriarchal structure is clear in Table IV.2: “If a father sell his son three times, the son shall be free,” showing early limits on paternal authority. Property disputes were resolved through concepts like usucapio (ownership by possession), where “movable things require one year’s possession… estates and buildings two years” (Table VI.5). Even marital rules, such as Table XI.1’s ban on marriages “between plebeians and patricians,” highlight how class shaped civil rights.

While I’m less familiar with European legal systems now, the Twelve Tables’ focus on codified, accessible laws, like requiring trials to occur publicly in the “comitium of the forum,” clearly influenced later Western legal traditions.

    The reading I chose was “The Twelve Tables”. This interested me because these tables have different intentions in each one but overall the tables have a strict conduct. There seems to be punishment or consequence when handling inheritance, crimes, mental issues, birth defects, displayed gender roles, debts, property etc. A detail that stood out to me was in Table IV, deformed child had to be quickly killed and a child of ten months , after their father passed away, won't receive inheritance. My impression of these tables involving children seems to have the same harsh standards as they do for adults which I find cruel. I believe the author was trying to communicate the meaning of the tables. This document is telling us about a place and time where these tables displayed control. It appears there were so many punishments if certain things were done. The public viewed almost anything that occurred as a crime or unusual.This document is similar to the “Rape of Lucretia”. With a common theme of women being expected to receive a tremendous amount from society. For example one of the tables mention women are expected to not shed a tear during a funeral. In the rape of Lucretia , it’s dicussed women are expected to be presented as pure and with Sextus raping her , that “certain title” a women is expected to have. He dictated how she would be viewed in society by assaulting her. I would like to find out more about how many crimes were committed and how many people disobeyed the tables. 

The reading that I pick was the twelve tables. The reason that it interested to me was how much emphasis was place on social order and control especially through family and class structure. How harsh some of the punishment was, like father had complete control over his children even to the point of being allowed to like them.

The detail that jumped out to me is part about deformed child being put to death quickly. It was shocking and honestly hard to read.

The author was trying to communicate the rules of the Roman society to the public so that everyone at least every male citizen knew where they stand, it was not just about law and punishment it was about reinforcing a very specific social order. Who had the power who did not and what was expected of people at every level of society.

In my opinion this document is telling us about the structured and unequal Roman society was ,it tell us that Rome at the time was deeply patriarchal class based and obsessed with order it show where family honor, property and public control was everything at the expense of personal freedom or compassion. Also that the Romans valued tradition and clarity.

This document really support other reading about the importance of hierarchy and control in Roman society. Some of the other text we see that the Roman family life showing father having absolute authority, but at the same time it contradicts the idea that Rome was always fair or democratic. The laws are supposed to protect all citizen, it's clear that not everyone had equal rights especially women, enslaved people and the poor.

What I would like to find out more about is how the enslave and women work around the system and what kind of resistance within a strict structure, and also was the law really enforced the way it was written.

I chose Ovid's Metamorphoses for its profound exploration of transformation and the roles of women in mythology. The difficulties of the narratives resonate with contemporary issues of identity and agency, making it a compelling read. As I investigated the text, I found myself notably drawn to the story of Daphne's flight from Apollo. This tale richly illustrates the tension between desire and autonomy, a theme that remains extremely relevant nowadays.

A passage that resonated with me describes Daphne's desperate plea to her father to remain a virgin. Her refusal to submit to Apollo's advances accentuates her struggle for autonomy in a world that seeks to define her by her beauty. The imagery of her transformation into a laurel tree functions as a powerful symbol of resistance, yet it also signifies how women's lives are commonly dictated by the desires of men. Ovid seems to communicate the densities of female agency; whilst Daphne's transformation grants her a form of immortality, it also robs her of agency, trapping her in a new form.

This reading delivers insightful perceptions of the Roman world, reflecting societal expectations of women and the consequences of defying patriarchal pressures. It resonates with other readings from this era, such as works by Seneca and Virgil, which similarly portray women as central figures caught in the webs of male desires and societal expectations. Nevertheless, Ovid’s treatment of female characters appears more nuanced, allowing for moments of strength amidst their struggles.

I find myself curious about the historical context in which Ovid wrote Metamorphoses. What societal attitudes towards women and transformation sways his portrayal of these themes? Moreover, I wish to explore how modern adaptations of these myths reinterpret the narratives to confront contemporary issues of gender and identity. Ovid's work undeniably sparks questions that extend beyond its pages, inviting more thorough exploration of its relevance in the current world.

Good Afternoon

• Which reading did you pick? If there’s a reason it interested you, what was it?

I chose Selections from Metamorphoses / Ovid because I found all the stories very interesting because All the stories people became something else (Animals, Plants, river).

• What passage or detail in particular jumped out at you as you read through it?

The passage that stood for me was the following one “our poor parents, mine and his, do not deny us the right to be laid in one tomb, we whom certain love, and the strangest hour have joined. And you, the tree, that now covers the one poor body with your branches, and soon will cover two, retain the emblems of our death, and always carry your fruit darkened in mourning, a remembrance of the blood of us both.” I found it sad and tragic. Besides the other stories in the Metamorphoses where people were transformed due to whim of others, this couple were transformed into a Mulberry tree due their tragic love story and I see it as a reminder of their love.

• What do you think the author was trying to communicate?

I think the author wanted to portray tragic stories and consequences of the actions of people where some can magically transform into different things.

• In your opinion, what is this document telling us about the time and place it comes from?

I think it lets us see the power of men, the consequences of their desire or actions.

• What about this document seems to relate to, support, or even contradict our other readings about this time and place?

In the case of Gods and Goddesses support the idea of no punishment for them but for the community. Also show how women could go against what was expected from them and made history which we also had some examples of.

• What would you like to find out more about?

I would like to know more stories where women went against the expectations of their behavior.

At the end of the day their stories are being told either to be pointed out as a bad example or to recognize women’s power, courage and cleverness.

For this week’s primary source reading, I chose "The Twelve Tables." It’s one of the earliest examples of Roman law, and I was curious to see how it addressed gender. It mostly focuses on non-aristocratic classes. One rule caught my attention. It said that women over the age of consent still needed a male guardian if they weren’t married. This rule shows how male dominance was a big part of Roman society, not just among the rich but also in the general population. Women of all social classes were considered legally dependent and not full citizens. I think the authors (the lawmakers) wanted to create a social order that kept male authority strong in both the family and the state. Even though the Twelve Tables were meant to be fair, they still reflected the prevailing gender norms of their time.

This document shows that in early Rome, gender ideas were a big part of controlling people and managing property. Women’s legal identity was mostly tied to their father, husband, or male relative. This meant women’s role was to keep the home stable and pass on property through male lines. Ovid’s "Metamorphoses" also shows women sometimes as agents, but often in a mythic or tragic context. The Twelve Tables, on the other hand, is much more strict and systematic in its treatment of women. It’s all about their lack of autonomy, which was a big public policy issue.

I’d love to learn more about if there were any exceptions to these laws in practice. Did some women break free from this legal control? Also, how did these laws change over time as Rome went from a republic to an empire?