What would happen to a Roman family if the dad was out at war?

So to be clear, throughout the “classic” phase of the Roman Empire, the principate, ordinary soldiers were not permitted to marry during their turn of service. I’m not going to cover the early days of the republic, when the army was largely a volunteer force which would need to return home in time to get the harvest in, or the later days of the republic which are more transitional - someone else may be able to discuss those.

It’s unclear when the marriage ban was introduced, but it was present by at least 44 CE when Claudius grants them the rights of married men without having to marry; Campbell suggests that Augustus brought it in, but there’s no firm evidence. Septimius Severus may have lifted the marriage ban during his rule, probably in 197 CE. This doesn’t mean that ordinary soldiers didn't marry, have long term relationships analogous to marriage or have families and children before then... but it's complicated.

Let’s unpack all that a bit.

The Legal Status

What means is that for much of that period, soldiers could not contract a legal marriage under Roman law. This was a big problem for both children and potential widows, in that they were illegitimate and had no claim on their father’s/husband’s wills, and there could be no reclamation of any dowries, which were usually paid out on death or divorce.

We know that this was a serious problem for many soldiers who produced children from these “unofficial” unions from Egyptian records, where there are cases brought around them and careful testaments to record the birth of children conceived during military service. We have a letter from Hadrian to Rammius Martialis, the Prefect of Egypt, giving soldier’s illegitimate children a claim on intestate succession - something that indicates that it is both a significant problem and that Hadrian gained significantly from attempting to (at least partially) solve it, although these children’s claims would still have been below those of legitimate children and other heirs.

So by 197, soldiers were permitted to marry and produce legitimate children, so long as they married women with citizenship. There is no evidence they were given the right of conubium, i.e. to contract legal marriages, with peregrine women. Children produced with these foreigners would continue to be illegitimate, although citizenship had become much more widely available (and would shortly be extended to almost all freeborn men and women inside the empire). This was a significant grant on Severus’ part, and reflects his stance of keeping the army on side at all costs.

Ordinary Families

So where were these women and what were they doing? Many of them were likely camp followers, or settled in the vici or canabae outside a fort where their husbands had a long standing posting. It’s also possible that some of these women moved into soldier’s quarters, although these would have been crowded communal affairs already. There’s some discussion over whether the switch to chalet-style barracks at Housesteads Fort around 300 CE may have been to accommodate a family life, but it's very much not settled.

The position on women and children inside forts at the moment is very much 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'. Finding archaeological evidence of gendered spaces is extremely tricky. Most objects are not gendered, and the few that are like hair pins don't necessarily indicate that someone lived there - just that they dropped something there while passing through! Likewise the few children's objects found at sites like Vindolanda may belong to ordinary children and suggest their presence... or indicate the children of the elite families on site. Certainly these people existed and lived close by - we have plenty of funerary evidence for women and children - and their status and location probably changed in different periods, especially after the legalisation of marriage.

There were probably a variety of routes into these unofficial marriages, including sex work, romance, or the practicality of marrying a soldier with reliable income. Some of them may also have been slaves or freedwomen who wouldn't have much of a choice to decline such an arrangement. Many of them may have considered themselves married by local law or custom, including Roman. There were multiple methods of obtaining a legal marriage for a citizen, including simply moving your wife in with you and cohabiting for a year, and it seems plausible that many soldiers simply followed one of these practices and considered themselves married. Twenty five years is, after all, an awfully long time to go without family life, and they may not always have understood that their marriage was not legal.

Presumably these families were supported by a combination of money given to them out of their husband’s salary and their own work, but their lives may have been somewhat precarious as they had no legal protection against abandonment or mistreatment. Many discharged soldiers probably went on to form a legally approved union with their unofficial spouse - assuming, of course, that their spouse was a citizen. This new approved marriage, however, did not resolve the problem of any existing children’s illegitimacy.

Along Hadrian’s Wall there is an inscription commemorating the life of Aurelius Concordius, the son of the tribune (a relatively high-ranking military post) at Birdoswald. Whether he was legitimate or not this is clearly an indicator of family life going on, and also of grief at the loss of a very young child. Many of these children went on to be soldiers themselves. For example, RIB 369 is a funerary inscription set up near a fort commemorating Tadia Vallaunius and her son, a soldier, next to the tomb of their father - also a soldier by implication. It is likely that by the end of the period much of the army was drawn from the sons of soldiers who had likely settled with other soldiers close to their final posting.

The Uncommon Soldiers

All of this, naturally, does not apply to high ranking officers, and it’s clear that those on long assignments frequently brought their families or were given permission to visit them. Suetonius mentions that Augustus was very strict and only granted his legates leave to visit their wives in the winter when no campaigns were being waged.

For an actual named person (!), the prefect Flavius Cerialis brought his family including his wife Sulpicia Lepidina when he was stationed at Vindolanda. Her correspondence to other women nearby includes references to their children. There’s some speculation that women like Sulpicia Lepidina may have had in/formal roles in the camp as well - there is a letter addressed to her from (possibly) Paterna which may reference bringing remedies to her. Were these meant for personal or familial use, or were they intended for wider consumption? Certainly she would have been running her household, including children and slaves, who would probably have required such things.

There is also, of course, Caligula - the famous little boots - who as a very young child was brought on campaigns with his father Germanicus and dressed in a tiny version of soldier’s gear. This was not a safe place for Germanicus to bring his family; Tacitus’ account in the Annales (31-49) is very interesting on this account, as it puts Caligula and other members of the Imperial family in the centre of a soldier’s mutiny which is only quelled when the decision is made to send the women and children in the camp away for their own protection.

Conclusion

Any unofficial wife of an ordinary soldier during this period likely lived a fairly precarious life, and her children with him would have been considered illegitimate in Roman law. This would have denied them some important rights around inheritance and dowries. They would likely have traveled if his posting changed, but if they were unlucky they may simply have been left behind with no recourse. It is however important to remember that even if they didn't have legal protection from the state, they likely had some level of social protection and support from others in their community. There were clearly a large number of these relationships and they were a constant problem to the army, and they would be the best place for you to start doing further research.

For the official wife of an officer - someone who comes from the Empire’s elite - their life either settled at their husband’s posting or back at home would have looked very different. Life at a posting may have been relatively lonely and/or dangerous (as the mutiny episode illustrates!), but with the benefit of being with their husband. There is unfortunately little information to go on about their own feelings about this, but it’s worth looking into e.g. Claudia Severa’s birthday letter.

Those left behind may have received visits from their husbands or simply waited it out, as many of these officers had a relatively short military career as it was a stepping stone to other things. Their thoughts on the matter would likely have ranged from missing their spouse to enjoying the relative freedom of running their household without having to contend with them (assuming they don't have to live with their extended family, which is not a given).