As the sources in Part A have indicated, the Romans thought of marriage, not as an event, but as a process, one that might take a considerable period of time even when it culminated in a ceremony.

Perhaps for this reason, we have no evidence that Roman couples celebrated the anniversary of their marriage, doubtless because they did not conceive of marriage as occurring at a distinct moment in time (a wedding day).

The first is betrothal (sponsalia), the formal engagement of a couple. This was, as Case 24 shows, frequently arranged by intermediaries rather than resulting en­tirely from the initiative of the couple themselves; and Gaius (D. 23.1.17) indicates that betrothals might last for several years owing to the poor health of either be­trothed party, the death of one of their parents, or other circumstances. Betrothal may have originally been somewhat similar to the modern institution of engage­ment, a purely informal act without specific legal consequences in itself; but it was often accompanied by formal promises that could give rise to litigation for “breach of promise.” Gradually betrothal was “legalized” as a sort of initial stage for mar­riage, and the betrothed parties acquired some of the rights and duties associated with marriage. Nevertheless, in classical law it was no longer possible for one party to sue for damages if the other withdrew, because of the principle that marriage should be “free.”

Still more significant is the second institution, dowry (dos), a contribution from the bride or her family to the marital household. Dowry was often the subject of protracted premarital negotiations between the womans side and the man's: ei­ther their families or the parties themselves if they were sui iuris. Within wide limits, the dowry could take whatever form and amount the parties wished, and accord­ingly the discussion of its amount and form could be extremely delicate; see, for in­stance, Terentius Clemens, in D.

Dowry is therefore one of the more elaborate Roman legal institutions, and the Cases in Section 2 below offer only a brief introduction to some important points that are likely to have been brought up often in negotiations. What these Cases do not clearly indicate, however, is that the dowry was pivotal to the Roman institution of marriage. The size of a dowry was a significant marker of social prestige for both parties. Further, a dowry was often substantial enough to constitute a significant problem for the bride or her family; but once it had been transferred to the husband and the marriage had begun, he could then face major difficulties in repaying it— one good reason, it appears, for his being circumspect in seeking a divorce. Granted the extremely limited state regulation of both marriage and divorce, dowry served as a social and legal institution that deterred the couple from entering and exiting marriage too hastily. Further, the dowry often provided the wife with maintenance during marriage and some hope of economic independence if the marriage were to end through divorce or her husband's death. For further details as to how dowries were managed during a marriage and what happened to them when the marriage ended, see Cases 66-72 and 81-89.