The natural tendency to escape from the restrictions of marital _manus_ may be illustrated by a case such as the following: a woman under the _tutela_ of a guardian wishes to marry; if she does so, and passes under the _manus_ of her husband, her _tutor_ loses all control over her property, which may probably be of great importance for the family she is leaving; he therefore naturally objects to such a marriage, and urges that she should be married without _manus_.[211] In fact the interests of her own family would often clash with those of the one she was about to enter, and a compromise could be effected by the abandonment of marriage _cum manu_.
Now this, the abandonment of marriage _cum manu_, means simply that certain legal consequences of the marriage ceremony were dropped, and with them just those parts of the ceremony which produced these consequences.

Otherwise the marriage was absolutely as valid for all purposes private and public as it could be made even by confarreatio itself.

The sacramental part was absent, and the survival of the features of marriage by purchase, which we may see in the form of coemptio, was also absent; but in all other respects the marriage ceremony was the same as in marriage _cum manu_.

It retained all essential religious features, losing only a part of its legal character.

It will be as well briefly to describe a Roman wedding of the type common in the last two centuries of the Republic.
To begin with, the boy and girl--for such they were, as we should look on them, even at the time of marriage--have been betrothed, in all probability, long before.