Ownership is an undefined right in Roman law. It takes its meaning through the claims and actions individuals made for the exercise of the right. Through these claims, several features have been ascribed to ownership including exclusivity and indivisibility. Peter Birks categorized these features either as a part of the concept of ownership or as within the content of ownership. In terms of content, absolute ownership refers to an unrestrained enjoyment of the right as well as an immunity of the right against any restriction. As a concept, ownership could be considered to be absolute if it was exclusive and precluded another person from asserting rights. Additionally, absolute ownership would entail "a unity, or a monopoly, in that it neither had any competitors nor could itself be divided into slices of time".

             Roman law had a complex system of allowing actions and acquiring ownership. There were actions in rem and in personam. Claims following a right in rem were related to relationships between persons and things. In asserting ownership over a thing, the action most commonly used was that of vindicatio, the worded formula which was: "Let Titius be judge. If it appears that the thing which is the subject of this action is Aulus Agerius's by the law of the Quirites, and if that thing shall not be restored to Aulus Agerius in response to the judge's decision, for as much as that thing shall be worth, for so much in money let the judge condemn Numerius Negidius to Aulus Agerius. If it does not appear, let him absolve.".

             Creation or transfer of rights in rem required 'conveyance'- an act recognized by law as appropriate for this purpose. The requirement of a conveyance (form of formal delivery) blurred the line between possession and ownership. Conveyances necessarily required a transfer of possession and therefore, the passing of ownership could not take place without the passing of possession.