Scanned text contains errors.
persons subjected to this incapacity. (Dig. 24. tit. 2. s. 11.)
Corresponding to the forms of marriage by con-fanvatio and coemtio, there were the forms of divorce by diffarreatio and remancipatio. According to Festus (s. v. Diffarreatio), diffarreatio was a kind of religious ceremony so called, " quia fiebat farreo libo adhibito," by which a marriage was dissolved ; and Plutarch (Quaest. Rom. 50) has been supposed to allude to this ceremony in the case of a divorce between the flamen dial is and his wife. It is said that originally marriages contracted by confarreatio were indissoluble ; and in a later age, this was the case with the marriage of the flamen dial is (Gell. x. 15), who was married by confarreatio. In the case referred to by Plutarch, the emperor authorised the divorce. A marriage by coemtio was dissolved by remancipatio (Festus, 6. v. Remancipatani). In other cases, less ceremony was used ; but still some distinct notice or declaration of intention was necessary to constitute a divorce: the simple fact of either party contracting another marriage was not a legal divorce. (Cic. Orat. i. 40.) The ceremony of breaking the nuptiales tabulae (Tacit. Ann. xi. 30), or of taking the keys of the house from the woman and turning her out of doors, were probably considered to be acts of themselves significant enough, though it may be presumed that they were generally accompanied with declarations that could not be misunderstood. The general practice was apparently to deliver a written notice, and perhaps to assign a reason. In the case of Paula Valeria, mentioned by Cicero, no reason was assigned. By the Lex Julia de Adulteriis, it was provided that there should be seven witnesses to a divorce, Roman citizens of full age (puberes\ and a freedman of the party who made the divorce. (Dig. 24. tit. 2.
Under the early Christian emperors, the power of divorce remained, as before, subject to the observance of certain forms. Justinian restricted the power of divorce, both on the part of the husband and the wife, to certain cases, and he did not allow a divorce even by the consent of both parties, unless the object of the parties was to live a life of chastity ; a concession made to the opinions of his Christian subjects.
The term repudium, it is said, properly applies to a marriage only contracted [matrimonium], and divortium to an actual marriage (Dig. 50. tit. 16. s. 101. 191) ; but sometimes divortium and re pudium appear to be used indifferently. The phrases to express a divorce are, mmcium remit- tere, divortium facere ; and the form of words might be as follow — " Tuas res tibi habeto. tuas res tibi agito." (Cic. Phil. ii. 28 ; Plaut. Amphit. iii. 2. 47, Trinum. ii. 1. 43.) The phrases used to express the renunciation of a marriage contract were, renuntiare repudium, repudium remittere, dicere, and repudiare ; and the form of words might be, " Conditioiie tua non utor." (Dig. 24. tit. 2 ; Ulp. Frag. vi. ; Heinecc. Syntagma; Cod. 5. tit. 17, and 24 ; Rein, Das Romiscke Privatrecht; and as to the later Roman Law, Thibaut, System, &c. 9th ed.) [G. L.]
DOCAN A (t& Scfocwa, from sokos, a beam) was an ancient symbolical representation of the Dioscuri (Castor and Poly deuces), at Sparta. It consisted of two upright beams with others laid across them transversely. (Plut. De Amor. Fratr.
1. p. 36.) This rude symbol ot fraternal unity evidently points to a very remote age, in which scarcely any attempts in sculpture can have been made. At a later time, when works of art were introduced into all the spheres of ordinary life, this rude and ancient object of worship, like many others of its kind, was not superseded by a more appropriate symbol. The Dioscuri were worshipped as gods of war, and we know that their images accompanied the Spartan kings whenever they took the field against an enemy. But when in the year 504 b. c. the two kings, during their inva sion of Attica, failed in their undertaking on ac count of their secret enmity towards each other, it was decreed at Sparta, that in future only one king should command the army, and in conse quence should only be accompanied by one of the images of the Dioscuri. (Herod, v. 75.) It is not improbable that these images, accompanying the kings into the field, were the ancient 5<taaj>a, which were now disjointed, so that one half of the sym bol remained at Sparta, while the other was taken into the field by one of the kings. Suidas and the Etymologicum Magnum (s. v.) state that So/ccwa was the name of the graves of the Dioscuri at Sparta, and derived from the verb Se'xojucct. (Mtil ler, Dorians, i. 5. § 12. note m9 ii. 10. § 8 ; Zoega, De Obeliscis, p. 228.) [L. S.]
DOCIMASIA (SoKtjEWMTfa). ^ When any citizen of Athens was either appointed by lot, or chosen by suffrage .(/cATjpwr&s /cat cuperJs), to hold a public office, he was obliged, before entering on its duties, to submit to a dodmasia, or scrutiny into his previous life and conduct, in which any person could object to him as unfit. This was the case with the archons, the senators, the strategi, and other magistrates. The examination, or ana-crisis, for the archonship was conducted by the senators, or in the courts of the heliaea. The docima-sia, however, was not confined to persons appointed to public offices ; for we read of the denouncement of a scrutiny (tirayyeXia doKipcKrias) against orators who spoke in the assembly while leading profligate lives, or after having committed flagitious crimes. This denouncement might be made in public by any one Trpbs doKt^acriav rov /Bi'ov, i. e. to compel the party complained of to appear before a court of justice, and give an account of his life and conduct. If found guilty, he was punished with atimia, and prohibited from the assemblies. (Aesch. Timarc/it p. 5.)
The phrase civSpa. elvai SoKtju,a<r0r}j/o" needs a few words of explanation. At the age of eighteen, every Athenian became an ephebus, and after two years was enrolled amongst the men, so that he could be present and vote at the assemblies. (Poll, viii. 105.) In the case of wards who were heirs to property, this enrolment might take place before the expiration of the two years, on it being established by a docimasia that the youth was physically qualified to discharge any duties the state might impose upon him. If so, he was released from guardianship, and " became a man " (avfyp eyevero.) or So/cjjUaorflT?), being thereby empowered to enter upon his inheritance, and enjoy other privileges, just as if he were of the full age of twenty. (Harpocr. s. v. 'ETnSteres1 ygrtcrai: Dem. c. Aphob. p. 857, c. Onet. p. 865, c. Steph. p. 1135.) We may add that the statements of the grammarians and orators are at variance on this point; but the explanation we have given seems the best way of
£ s 2