diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-21 18:17:06 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-21 18:17:06 -0800 |
| commit | 1c8e2780aeb1dbeafd24ab5d184b6f2d8479c75f (patch) | |
| tree | 4aff6fd843e12ce211d7cb275f63477794c7ffff | |
| parent | 52eb7b7689e86b3129f14f973e0a752a216940d8 (diff) | |
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68419-0.txt | 30255 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68419-0.zip | bin | 550893 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68419-h.zip | bin | 973526 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68419-h/68419-h.htm | 43031 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68419-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 324180 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68419-h/images/macmillan.jpg | bin | 6294 -> 0 bytes |
9 files changed, 17 insertions, 73286 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d25e716 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #68419 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/68419) diff --git a/old/68419-0.txt b/old/68419-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index b52507f..0000000 --- a/old/68419-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,30255 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Roman assemblies from their origin -to the end of the Republic, by George Willis Botsford - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: The Roman assemblies from their origin to the end of the Republic - -Author: George Willis Botsford - -Release Date: June 28, 2022 [eBook #68419] - -Language: English - -Produced by: Tim Lindell and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at - https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images - generously made available by The Internet Archive/Canadian - Libraries) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ROMAN ASSEMBLIES FROM -THEIR ORIGIN TO THE END OF THE REPUBLIC *** - - - - - - -THE ROMAN ASSEMBLIES - - [Illustration] - - THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - NEW YORK. BOSTON. CHICAGO - ATLANTA. SAN FRANCISCO - - MACMILLAN & CO., LIMITED - LONDON. BOMBAY. CALCUTTA - MELBOURNE - - THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD. - TORONTO - - - - - THE - ROMAN ASSEMBLIES - - FROM THEIR ORIGIN TO THE END - OF THE REPUBLIC - - BY - GEORGE WILLIS BOTSFORD - PROFESSOR OF HISTORY IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY - AUTHOR OF “THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ATHENIAN CONSTITUTION,” - “A HISTORY OF GREECE,” “A HISTORY OF ROME,” - “AN ANCIENT HISTORY,” ETC. - - New York - THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - 1909 - _All rights reserved_ - - COPYRIGHT, 1909, - BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. - - Set up and electrotyped. Published September, 1909. - - Norwood Press - J. S. Cushing Co.—Berwick & Smith Co. - Norwood, Mass., U.S.A. - - - - -To MY WIFE - - - Οὐ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ γε κρεῖσσον καὶ ἄρειον, - Ἢ ὅθ’ ὁμοφρονέοντε νοήμασιν οἶκον ἔχητον - Ἀνὴρ ἠδὲ γυνή· πόλλ’ ἄλγεα δυσμενέεσσι, - Χάρματα δ’ εὐμενέτησι· μάλιστα δέ τ’ ἔκλυον αὐτοί. - - - - -PREFACE - - -This volume is the first to offer in monographic form a detailed -treatment of the popular assemblies of ancient Rome. Necessarily much of -the material in it may be found in earlier works; but recent progress -in the field, involving a reaction against certain theories of Niebuhr -and Mommsen affecting the comitia, justifies a systematic presentation -of existing knowledge of the subject. This task has required patient -labor extending through many years. The known sources and practically -all the modern authorities have been utilized. A determination to keep -free from conventional ideas, so as to look at the sources freshly and -with open mind, has brought views of the assemblies not found in other -books. The reader is earnestly requested not to reject an interpretation -because it seems new but to examine carefully the grounds on which it is -given. In general the aim has been to follow a conservative historical -method as opposed to the radical juristic, to build up generalizations on -facts rather than to estimate sources by the criterion of a preconceived -theory. The primary object of the volume, however, is not to defend a -point of view but to serve as a book of study and reference for those who -are interested in the history, law, and constitution of ancient Rome and -in comparative institutional research. - -In the preparation of the volume, I have been generously aided by my -colleagues in Columbia University. To Professor William M. Sloane, -Head of the Department of History, I owe a great debt of gratitude for -kindly sympathy and encouragement in the work. It is an especial good -fortune that the proofs have been read by Professor James C. Egbert. -Many improvements are due to his scholarship and editorial experience. -Professor George N. Olcott has advised me on various numismatic matters, -and I am indebted to Dr. John L. Gerig for information on two or three -etymologies. The proofs have also been read and corrections made by Dr. -Richard R. Blews of Cornell University. It is a pleasure to remember -gratefully these able friends who have helped me with their special -knowledge, and to add the name of Mr. Frederic W. Erb of the Columbia -University Library, whose courtesy has facilitated the borrowing of books -for the study from other institutions. - -Notwithstanding every effort to make the work accurate, mistakes and -inconsistencies will doubtless be found in it, and I shall thankfully -welcome suggestions from any reader for its further correction and -improvement. - - GEORGE WILLIS BOTSFORD. - -MOUNT VERNON, NEW YORK, June 7, 1909. - - - - -CONTENTS - - - PAGES - - PART I - - ELEMENTS OF THE COMITIAL CONSTITUTION 1-118 - - CHAPTER I - - THE POPULUS AND ITS EARLIEST POLITICAL DIVISIONS 1-15 - - CHAPTER II - - THE SOCIAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRIMITIVE POPULUS 16-47 - - CHAPTER III - - THE THIRTY-FIVE TRIBES 48-65 - - CHAPTER IV - - THE CENTURIES AND THE CLASSES 66-99 - - CHAPTER V - - THE AUSPICES 100-118 - - PART II - - THE ASSEMBLIES: ORGANIZATION, PROCEDURE, AND FUNCTIONS, - RESOLUTIONS, STATUTES, AND CASES 119-477 - - CHAPTER VI - - COMITIA AND CONCILIUM 119-138 - - CHAPTER VII - - THE CONTIO 139-151 - - CHAPTER VIII - - THE CALATA COMITIA 152-167 - - CHAPTER IX - - THE COMITIA CURIATA 168-200 - - CHAPTER X - - THE ORGANIZATION OF THE COMITIA CENTURIATA 201-228 - - CHAPTER XI - - THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COMITIA CENTURIATA 229-261 - - CHAPTER XII - - THE COMITIA TRIBUTA AND THE RISE OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY, - TO 449 262-282 - - CHAPTER XIII - - THE COMITIA TRIBUTA AND THE RISE OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY, - FROM 449 TO 287 283-316 - - CHAPTER XIV - - THE JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE COMITIA TRIBUTA, FROM 287 - TO THE END OF THE REPUBLIC 317-329 - - CHAPTER XV - - COMITIAL LEGISLATION, FROM HORTENSIUS TO THE GRACCHI 330-362 - - CHAPTER XVI - - COMITIAL LEGISLATION, FROM THE GRACCHI TO SULLA 363-411 - - CHAPTER XVII - - COMITIAL LEGISLATION, FROM SULLA TO THE END OF THE REPUBLIC 412-461 - - CHAPTER XVIII - - THE COMPOSITION AND PRESERVATION OF STATUTES, COMITIAL - PROCEDURE, AND COMITIAL DAYS 462-472 - - CHAPTER XIX - - A SUMMARY OF COMITIAL HISTORY 473-477 - - BIBLIOGRAPHY 479-498 - - INDEX 499-521 - - - - -THE ROMAN ASSEMBLIES - - - - -PART I - -ELEMENTS OF THE COMITIAL CONSTITUTION - - - - -CHAPTER I - -THE POPULUS AND ITS EARLIEST POLITICAL DIVISIONS - - -I. _The Populus_ - -The derivation of populus, “people,” “folk,” is unknown. Attempts have -been made to connect it with populari, “to devastate,” so as to give -it primarily a military signification—perhaps simply “the army.”[1] -In the opinion of others it is akin to plēnus, plēbes, πλῆθος, πολύς, -πίμπλημι,[2] in which case it would signify “multitude,” “mass,” with -the idea of collective strength, which might readily pass into “army” as -a secondary meaning.[3] Fundamentally personal, it included all those -individuals, not only the grown men but their families as well, who -collectively made up the state, whether Roman or foreign, monarchical or -republican.[4] Only in a transferred sense did it apply to territory.[5] -The ancient definition, “an association based on the common acceptance -of the same body of laws and on the general participation in public -benefits,”[6] is doubtless too abstract for the beginnings of Rome. -Citizenship—membership in the populus—with all that it involved is -elaborately defined by the Roman jurists;[7] but for the earlier period -it will serve the purpose of the present study to mention that the three -characteristic public functions of the citizen were military service, -participation in worship, and attendance at the assembly.[8] In a -narrower sense populus signifies “the people,” “masses,” in contrast with -the magistrates or with the senate, as in the well known phrase, senatus -populusque Romanus. - - -II. _The Three Primitive Tribes_ - -The Romans believed that the three tribes which composed the primitive -populus were created by one act in close relation with the founding -of the city.[9] For some unknown reason they were led to connect the -myth of Titus Tatius, the eponymous hero of the Tities,[10] with the -Quirinal,[11] and with the Sabines,[12] who were generally supposed to -have occupied that hill.[13] Consequently some of their historians felt -compelled to defer their account of the institution of the tribes till -they had told of the union of the Sabines with the Romans, which at the -same time gave them an opportunity to derive the names of the curiae from -those of the Sabine women. Varro,[14] however, who protests against this -derivation, refers the organization of the people in the three tribes to -an earlier date, connecting it immediately with the founding of Rome. -Though he affirmed that one tribe was named after Romulus, another after -Titus Tatius, and the third, less positively, after an Etruscan Lucumo, -Caeles Vibenna, who came to the aid of Romulus against Titus Tatius,[15] -neither he nor any other ancient writer identified the Tities with the -Sabines, whose quarter in the city was really unknown,[16] or the Luceres -with an Etruscan settlement under Caeles whether in the Vicus Tuscus[17] -or on the Caelian hill.[18] Since the Romans knew the tribe in no other -relation than as a part of the state, they could not have thought of -their city as consisting originally of a single tribe, to which a second -and afterward a third were added, or that any one of these three tribes -had ever been an independent community. These views are modern;[19] there -is no trace of them in the ancient writers.[20] Even if it could be -proved that they took this point of view, the question at issue would not -thereby be settled; for no genuine tradition regarding the origin of the -primitive tribes came down to the earliest annalists; the only possible -knowledge they possessed on this point was deduced from the names of the -tribes and from surviving institutions presumably connected with them -in the period of their existence.[21] Under these circumstances modern -speculations as to their independent character and diverse nationality -seem absurd. The proper method of solving the problem is to test and to -supplement the scant sources by a comparative study of the institution. - -The low political vitality of the three primitive Roman tribes, as of the -corresponding Greek phylae,[22] when we first meet with them in history, -points to the artificiality of these groups—a condition indicated -further both by their number and by their occurrence in other Italian -states.[23] Far from being confined to Rome, the tripartite division of -the community belonged to many Greek and to most Italian peoples,[24] -and has entered largely into the organization of communities and nations -the world over.[25] A derivation of tribus, Umbrian trifu, accepted by -many scholars, connects it with the number three.[26] The wide use of -this conventional number, and more particularly the regular recurrence -of the same three Dorian tribes in many Dorian cities—as of the same -four Ionic tribes in many Ionic cities[27]—and of the same three Latin -(or Etruscan?) tribes in several old Latin cities, could not result from -chance combinations in all these places, but point unmistakably to the -systematic imitation of a common pattern. That pattern must be ultimately -sought in the pre-urban populus, ἔθνος, folk. If we assume that before -the rise of city-states the Ionian folk was organized in four tribes -(phylae) and the Dorian and Latin folks in three tribes, we shall have a -condition such as will satisfactorily explain the tribal organization of -the city-states which grew up within the areas occupied by these three -folks respectively. The thirty votes of the Latins may be best explained -by assuming a division of their populus into three tribes, subdivided -each into ten groups corresponding to the Roman curiae. Whereas in -Umbria the decay of the pre-urban populus allowed its tribes to become -independent,[28] in Latium a development in that direction was prevented -by the rise of city-states, which completely overshadowed the preëxisting -organization. - -The Italian city-state grew not from a tribe or a combination of -tribes, but from the pagus,[29] “canton,” a district of the pre-urban -populus with definite consecrated boundaries,[30] usually centering -in an oppidum—a place of defence and refuge.[31] In the beginning the -latter enjoyed no superior right over the territory in which it was -situated.[32] A pagus became a populus at the point of time when it -asserted its political independence of the folk. The new state organized -itself in tribes and curiae after the pattern of the folk. In the main -this arrangement was artificial, yet it must have taken some account -of existing ties of blood.[33] At the same time the oppidum became an -urbs[34]—a city, the seat of government of the new populus. Thus arose -the city-state. In the case of Rome several oppida with parts of their -respective pagi[35] were merged in one urbs—that known as the city of the -four regions.[36] Urbs and ager excluded each other, just as the oppidani -contrasted with the pagani;[37] but both were included in the populus. - -Most ancient writers represent the three tribes as primarily local,[38] -and the members as landowners from the founding of the city.[39] Although -their view may be a mere inference from the character of the so-called -Servian tribes, the continuity of name from the earlier to the later -institution points to some degree of similarity between them. It can be -easily understood, too, how in time the personal feature might have so -overcome the local as to make the old tribes appear to be based on birth -in contrast with the territorial aspect of the new.[40] - -It was probably on the institution of the later tribes that the earlier -were dissolved. They left their names to the three double centuries of -patrician knights.[41] Their number appears also as a factor in the -number of curiae, of senators, and of members of the great sacerdotal -colleges. Other survivals may be found in the name “tribunus,” in the -tribuni militum, the tribuni celerum,[42] the ludus Troiae,[43] and less -certainly in the Sodales Titii.[44] - - -III. _The Curiae_ - -The curia as well as the tribe was a common Italian institution. We know -that it belonged to the Etruscans,[45] the Latins,[46] and several other -peoples of Italy.[47] There were ten curiae to the tribe, making thirty -in all.[48] The association was composed, not of gentes as many have -imagined, but of families.[49] For the performance of its social and -religious functions it had a house of assembly, also called curia,[50] in -which the members—curiales—gathered for religious festivals. The place -of meeting was a part of an edifice belonging to the collective curiae. -In historical time there were two such buildings—the Curiae Veteres[51] -on the northeast slope of the Palatine near the Arch of Constantine, -containing seven curial meeting-places, and the Novae Curiae[52] near the -Compitum Fabricium, containing the others. Their deities were Juno[53] -and Tellus;[54] and their chief festivals were the Fornacalia and the -Fordicidia.[55] As the worship was public, the expense was paid by the -state.[56] At the head of the curia stood the curio—who in historical -time was merely a priest[57]—assisted in his religious functions by -his wife and children,[58] by a lictor[59] and a flamen.[60] The fact -that the curio had these officials proves that he was originally a -magistrate.[61] One of the curiones the people elected curio maximus -to exercise general supervision over the worship and festivals of the -association.[62] - -Another function of the curiae was political. The grown male members, -meeting in the comitium, constituted the earliest assembly organized in -voting divisions—the comitia curiata—in which each curia cast a single -vote.[63] Religious and political functions the curia continued to -exercise far down into historical time; and for that reason they have -never been doubted by the moderns. For the primitive period Dionysius[64] -ascribes to them military functions as well. His idea is that the three -original tribes furnished military divisions each under a tribune, and -the curiae as subdivisions of the tribe furnished companies, commanded -each by a curio chosen for his valor.[65] Doubtless the writer fairly -describes the military system which Rome employed before the introduction -of the phalanx,[66] and which corresponds closely with the system -prevalent among the early Greeks,[67] Germans,[68] and other European -peoples.[69] The military organization was everywhere a parallel of -the civil. The Roman army, however, was by no means identical with the -curiate assembly, for many belonged to the tribes and the curiae who for -various reasons were exempt from military service.[70] - -It is probable, too, that the curiae, as well as the tribes,[71] were -territorial divisions. Not only have we the authority of Dionysius[72] -that each curia occupied a district of the state, but also two of the -seven known curial names—Foriensis and Veliensis[73]—are local. Though -the two mentioned refer to places within the city, the country people -were also included in the associations.[74] - - * * * * * - -Since Niebuhr the opinion has generally prevailed that the curia was -composed of gentes. A passage which at first glance seems to have a -bearing on the question is Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 4: “Romulus divided the -curiae into decades, each commanded by a leader, who in the language of -the country is called decurion.”[75] The word decurion proves, however, -that in speaking of decades Dionysius is thinking of the military -divisions called decuriae, each commanded by a decurion. In historical -times the troop of cavalry—turma—was divided into three decuriae of -ten each, as the word itself indicates. There were accordingly three -decurions to the turma, and ten turmae ordinarily went with the -legion.[76] From Varro[77] we learn that the three primitive tribes -furnished turmae and decuriae of cavalry, the decuriae commanded by -decurions. Dionysius accordingly refers to military companies—either -to the well known decuriae of cavalry or to corresponding companies of -footmen which probably existed before the adoption of the phalanx.[78] -Had he meant gentes, he would have used the corresponding Greek word -γένη. Niebuhr[79] inferred from this passage that each curia was divided -into ten gentes, making three hundred gentes for the entire state; but a -careful interpretation shows that no reference to the gentes is intended. -We cannot infer therefore from this citation that the curia was divided -into gentes. - -The other passage relative to the question is Gellius xv. 27. 4,[80] in -which Laelius Felix states that the voting in the comitia curiata was by -genera hominum in contrast with the census et aetas of the centuriate -assembly and with the regiones et loca of the comitia tributa. Niebuhr -identifies genera with gentes.[81] It is clear, however, that in this -passage Laelius is not concretely defining the voting units of the -various assemblies, but is stating in a general way the principles -underlying their organization into voting units. In the comitia -centuriata the principle is wealth and age; census et aetas is not to -be identified with centuria or with any other group of individuals in -this assembly. In like manner regiones et loca expresses the principle -of organization of the tribal assembly; or if used concretely, it must -designate the tribes themselves, and not subdivisions of the tribes, for -none existed. Correspondingly genera hominum signifies that the principle -of organization of the curiate assembly is hereditary connection; but -so far as the expression is applied concretely, it must denote the -curiae themselves not subdivisions of these associations. The curia, -a religious, social, and political group based on birth, might well -be called genus hominum in contrast with the local tribe and with the -century, composed artificially of men of similar wealth and age. It is -well known, too, that voting within the curiae was not by gentes but by -heads.[82] As no other passage from the sources, besides these two, has -even the appearance of lending support to the proposition advanced by -Niebuhr, and favored by others, that the curia was a group of gentes, we -may conclude that this proposition is groundless. The result is that the -gens had no connection with the comitial organization. - - I. THE POPULUS; the beginnings of Rome: Schwegler, A., - _Römische Geschichte_, I. bk. viii; Peter, C., _Geschichte - Roms_, i. 17 ff.; Niese, B., _Grundriss der röm. Geschichte_, - 16 ff., 28 ff.; Jordan, H., _Topographie der Stadt Rom im - Altertum_, I. i. 153 ff; iii. 34; Gilbert, O., _Geschichte - und Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum_, i, ii; Richter, - _Topographie der Stadt Rom_, 30 ff. (see review by H. Degering, - in _Berl. Philol. Woch._ 1903. 1645 f.); Platner, S. B., - _Topography and Monuments of Ancient Rome_, ch. iv; Schulze, - W., _Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen_, 579-82; Pais, - E., _Ancient Legends of Roman History_, ch. xii; Nissen, - H., _Das Templum_, ch. v; _Italische Landeskunde_, ii. 488 - ff.; Kornemann, E., _Polis und Urbs_, in _Klio_, v (1905). - 72-92; Carter, J. B., _Roma Quadrata and the Septimontium_, - in _Am. Journ. of Archaeol._ xii (1908). 172-83; Deecke, - Wm., _Die Falisker_; Montelius, _Die frühesten zeiten Roms_, - in _Correspbl. d. deutsch. Gesellsch. f. Anthr. Ethn. u. - Urgesch._ xxxv (1904). 122; Pöhlmann, R., _Die Anfänge Roms_; - Schrader, O., _Sprachvergleichung und Urgeschichte_, bk. IV. - ch. xii; _Heer, König, Sippe, Stamm_ in _Reallexikon der - indogermanischen Altertumskunde_; Fustel de Coulanges, _Ancient - City_, bk. iii; Leist, _Graeco-italische Rechtsgeschichte_, - 103 ff.; _Alt-arisches Jus Civile_, i. 319-36; Meyer, E., - _Geschichte des Altertums_, ii. 510 ff.; Mommsen, _History - of Rome_, bk. I. chs. iii, iv; _Röm. Staatsrecht_, iii. 3 - ff., 112-22; Marquardt, J., _Röm. Staatsverwaltung_, i. 3 - ff.; Lange, L., _Röm. Altertümer_, i. 55-284; _Das röm. - Königtum_, in _Kleine Schriften_, i. 77-104; Herzog, E., - _Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. 3-23, - 969 ff.; Willems, P., _Droit public Romain_, 17 ff.; Karlowa, - O., _Röm. Rechtsgeschichte_, i. 30 ff.; Greenidge, A. H. J., - _Roman Public Life_, ch. i; Bernhöft, F., _Staat und Recht - der röm. Königszeit_, 69 ff.; Genz, _Das patricische Röm_, 51 - ff.; Morlot, E., _Les comices électoraux sous la république - Romaine_, ch. i. - - II. THE PRIMITIVE TRIBES: Niebuhr, B. G., _Röm. Geschichte_, - i. 300-321; English, i. 149-58; Schwegler, ibid. I. bk. IX. - ch. xiv. § 2; Niese, ibid. 30 f.; De Sanctis, G., _Storia - dei Romani_, i. 249-55; Gilbert, ibid. ii. 329-79; Nissen, - _Templum_, 144-6; _Ital. Landesk._ ii. 7-15, 496 ff.; Jordan, - H., _Die Könige im alten Italien_, 35-7; controverted by - W. Soltau, in _Woch. f. Kl. Philol._ xxv (1908). 220-3; - Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 95-100, 109-12; _Rom. Tribus_, - 1 f.; Lange, _Rom. Alt._ i. 81-101; Herzog, ibid. i. 23 ff.; - Madvig, J. N., _Röm. Staat_, i. 95-8; Mispoulet, J. B., _Les - institutions politiques des Romains_, i. 3-6; Soltau, W., - _Altröm. Volksversammlungen_, 46-51; Willems, P., _Le sénat - de la république Romaine_, I. ch. i; Bloch, G., _Les origines - du sénat Romain_, 1-16, 32-8; Bernhöft, ibid. 79 ff.; Genz, - ibid. 89-106; Meyer, ibid.; _Der Ursprung des Tribunats und - die Gemeinde der vier Tribus_, in _Hermes_, xxx (1895). 1-24; - controverted by Sp. Vassis, in _Athena_, ix (1897). 470-2; - Kubitschek, W., _De romanorum tribuum origine ac propagatione_ - 1 ff.; Volquardsen, C. A., _Die drei ältesten röm. Tribus_, in - _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. xxxiii (1878). 538-64; Bormann, E., _die - älteste Gliederung Roms_, in _Eranos Vindobonensis_, 345-58; - Holzapfel, L., _Die drei ältesten röm. Tribus_, in _Beiträge - zur alten Geschichte_, i (1902). 228-55; Bertolini, C. I., _I - celeres ed il tribunus celerum_; Zimmermann, A., _Zu Titus_, - etc., in _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. 1 (1895). 159 f.; Schlossmann, - S., _Tributum, tribuere, tribus_, in _Archiv f. lat. Lexicog._ - xiv (1906). 25-40; Schulze, W., _Zur Gesch. lateinischer - Eigennamen_, see index, s. Ramnenses, etc. - - III. THE CURIAE: POTT, A. F., _Etymologische Forschungen_, - ii. 373 ff.; Corssen, W., _Ausspr._ index, s. Curia; Vaniček, - A., _Etymologisches Wörterbuch der lat. Sprache_, 160; - _Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterbuch_, 1116; Niebuhr, ibid. i. - 321-54; Schwegler, ibid. i. 610-12; Gilbert, ibid, index s. - Curia; Richter, ibid. index s. Curia; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr_. - iii. 89 ff.; Lange, ibid. i. 275-84, and index, s. Curia; - Willems, P., _Sén. Rom._ ibid.; Bloch, G., _Orig. d. sén._ 290 - ff.; Mispoulet, J. B., ibid. i. 7-9; Fustel de Coulanges, ibid. - 154-7; Karlowa, ibid.; Genz, ibid. 32-50; Hoffmeister, K., - _Die Wirtschaftliche Entwickelung Roms_, 5 f.; Soltau, ibid. - 46-67; Müller, J. J., _Studien zur röm. Verfassungsgeschichte_, - in _Philol._ xxxiv (1875). 96 ff.; Ihne, Wm., _History of - Rome_, i. 113 f.; Newman, F. W., _Dr. Ihne on the Early Roman - Constitution_, in _Classical Museum_, vi (1849). 15 ff.; - Hoffmann, E., _Patricische und plebeiische Curien_; Kübler and - Hülsen, _Curia_, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1815-26; - Pelham, H., _The Roman Curiae_, in (English) _Journal of - Philology_, ix (1880). 266-79. - - IV. THE GENTES: Fustel de Coulanges, ibid. bk. ii; Leist, - _Graeco-ital. Rechtsgesch._ 11 ff.; _Alt-arisches Ius Gentium_; - _Alt-arisch. Jus Civ._ i. 461-76 (Irish Kin); Hirt, H., - _Indogermanen_, ii. 409-56; Engels, F., _Der Ursprung der - Familie, des Privateigentums und des Staats_, ch. v; Howard, - G. E., _History of Matrimonial Institutions_, I. pt. i; - Levison, W., _Die Beurkundung des Zivilstandes im Altertum_; - Wildebrandt, M., _Die politische und sociale Bedeutung der - attischen Geschlechter vor Solon_, in _Philologus_, Supplb. - vii (1899). 135-227; Kovalevsky, M., _La gens et le clan_, - in _Annales de l’institut international de sociologie_, vii - (1900). 57-100; Ruggiero, E., _La gens in Roma avanti la - formazione del comune_; Schwegler, ibid. i. 612-15; Lange, - ibid. i. 211-59, and see index, s. v.; Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch_, - i. 1-127; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 9-53, and see index s. v.; - Mispoulet, ibid. i. 9-14; Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. chs. i-iii; - Müller, J. J., _Studien z. röm. Verfassungsgesch._ in _Philol._ - xxxiv (1876). 96-104; Bloch, G., ibid. 102 ff.; _Recherches - sur quelques gentes patriciennes_, in _Mélanges d’archéologie - et d’histoire de l’école Française de Rome_, 1882. 241-76; - Soltau, ibid. 58-64, 652-5; Bernhöft, ibid.; Genz, ibid. - 1-31; Bloch, L., _Die ständischen und sozialen Kämpfe in der - röm. Republik_; Holzapfel, L., _Il numero dei senatori Romani - durante il periodo dei rei_, in _Rivista di storia antica_, - ii. 2 (1897). 52-64; Marquardt, J., _Privatleben der Römer_, - 1-26, 353 f.; Deecke, ibid. 275 ff. (on Italian names); Michel, - N. H., _Du droit de cité Romaine_; Köhm, J., _Altlateinische - Forschungen_, 1-21; Lécrivain, C., _Gens_, in Daremberg et - Saglio, _Dict._ ii. 1504-16; Ruggiero, E., _Diz. ep._ iii - (1906). 482-6; Casagrandi, V., _Le minores gentes ed i patres - minorum gentium_; Staaf, E., _De origine gentium patriciarum_; - Lieboldt, K., _Die Ansichten über die Entstehung und das Wesen - der Gentes patriciae aus der Zeit der Humanisten bis auf unsere - Tage_; Botsford, G. W., _Some Problems connected with the Roman - Gens_, in _Political Science Quarterly_, xxii (1907). 663-92. - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE SOCIAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRIMITIVE POPULUS - - -This chapter[83] is primarily an inquiry into the social composition -of the comitia curiata. At the same time it seeks to solve a problem -which is doubtless the most fundamental in the early political and -constitutional history of Rome. The result we reach will determine our -conception of the whole course of constitutional development, and of the -accompanying political struggles, to the complete equalization of the -social ranks. For if we believe, as do many of the moderns,[84] that -the primitive Roman state was made up exclusively of patricians, we are -forced to the conclusion that the constitutional development to the -passing of the Hortensian laws centred in the gradual admission of the -plebeians and the clients to citizenship—perhaps even in the amalgamation -of two distinct peoples. If on the other hand we take the ground that -from the beginning the plebeians and the clients were citizens and voted -in the comitia curiata, we must think of these inferior classes as -struggling through the early history of their country for the acquisition -not of citizenship but of various rights and privileges, social, -economic, religious, and political, formerly monopolized by a patrician -aristocracy. In attempting to solve the problem here proposed it will -be advantageous to consider (1) the ancient view, (2) the conventional -modern view, (3) the comparative-sociological view. - - -I. _The Ancient View_ - -The three social classes of freemen—plebeians, patricians, and -clients—were formed within the citizen body by official recognition of -existing distinctions not of nationality but of worth. The first step -in the process was the differentiation of the patricians from the -plebeians. According to Cicero, Romulus constituted a number of chief men -into a royal council, the senate, whose members he so highly esteemed as -to have them called patres, and their children patricians.[85] Cicero -thinks of the multitude as existing at first without a politically -recognized nobility, yet showing natural distinctions of worth. By -calling into the senate the ablest and best men, the state ennobled them -and their families.[86] Livy’s[87] view is similar: Romulus selected -from the multitude a hundred senators, whom he named patres, and whose -descendants were called patricians. They were chosen because of their -wisdom;[88] on that ground the state granted them nobility,[89] which -accordingly in Rome, as in every early community, was founded on personal -merit.[90] In the more detailed theory of Dionysius,[91] Romulus -“distinguished those who were eminent for their birth and celebrated -for their virtue, and whom he knew to be rich in the account of those -times and who had children, from the obscure and mean and poor. The -lower class he called plebeians, Greek δημοτικοί, and the higher patres, -either because they were older than the others, or had children, or -were of higher birth, or for all these reasons.... The most trustworthy -historians of the Roman constitution assert that owing to these facts -they were called patres and their descendants patricians.” According to -Plutarch,[92] “Romulus, after forming the army, employed the rest of the -people as the citizen body (δῆμος); the multitude he called populus, and -appointed a hundred nobles to be councillors, whom he called patricians, -and their assembly the senate.”[93] - -There can be no doubt, therefore, as to the opinion of the ancient -writers. They believed that from the beginning social distinctions -existed naturally within the populus Romanus, and that these distinctions -were made the basis of an official division of the people into nobles and -commons, patricii and plebs, by the government. This view is not only -reasonable in itself, but is supported, as we shall see, by analogies -drawn from many other states. - -All the sources make the patriciate depend upon connection with the -senate, Dionysius alone showing some inconsistency on this point.[94] -Why the senators were called patres the ancients give various reasons. -Cicero[95] thinks patres a term of endearment; Sallust[96] believes that -the name was applied either because of age or because of the similarity -of their duty; Livy[97] sets it down as a title of honor; Festus[98] -thinks chiefly of their age and wisdom; Paulus,[99] his epitomator, -suggests that they were so called because they divided their lands -among the poorer class as fathers among children; Dionysius[100] gives -three possible reasons, (1) greater age, (2) possession of children, -(3) family reputation. The sources generally agree in representing the -patres as men who in age, honor, authority and duty stood toward the -rest of the citizens as a father toward his children, and in identifying -these social-political patres with the senators.[101] An examination -of the word itself will tend to confirm the ancient view. It seems to -have originally signified “protector,” “keeper,” “nourisher,”[102] hence -“owner,” “master.” Pater familias is nourisher, protector, and master -of a household.[103] In late Roman law the term continued to refer not -necessarily to actual parentage but rather to the legal position of the -head of a household;[104] in fact it is only in a distantly derived sense -that pater comes to signify the male parent. Ideas early attaching to the -word, accordingly, are those of power or authority and age. The senate, -as this word indicates, was originally made up of elderly men, senatores, -maiores natu.[105] It would be natural to call them patres because of -their authority over the community or of their age. As a designation of -rank, pater, excepting in jest, is always plural—an indication that the -authority and dignity did not attach to the individual noble but to the -senators collectively; they were collectively patres of the community, -not individually patres of children, clients or gentes.[106] But when in -time a limited number of families monopolized the senate, the term could -easily be extended to the entire privileged circle, meaning those with -hereditary right to authority over the rest of the community.[107] Though -in the sources the patres are generally senators the word is sometimes -synonymous with patricii.[108] - -Regarding patricius the Romans reasoned with somewhat less care. They -were right in deriving it from pater, but they made it signify “descended -from,” whereas in fact it means “belonging to,”[109] and designates -accordingly the families of the political patres. Probably it was -formed after patres began to be applied to the entire governing class—a -development which would tend to throw the latter word back to its earlier -and narrower sense. - -Had the investigation of these words on the part of the ancients rested -at this point, all would have been well; but an unfortunate guess as to -the derivation of patricii by some unknown antiquarian has brought into -the study of the social ranks unutterable confusion lasting down to the -present day. This conjecture derives patricius from patrem ciere, making -it signify “one who can cite a father.” The attempted etymology, clearly -a failure, would perhaps have been harmless, had it not connected itself -with the ambiguous word ingenuus. Cincius[110] says, “Those used to be -called patricians who are now called ingenui.” Livy has the two ideas in -mind when he represents a plebeian orator as inquiring, “Have ye never -heard it said that those first created patricians were not beings sent -down from heaven, but such as could cite their fathers, that is, nothing -more than ingenui? I can now cite my father—a consul—and my son will be -able to cite a grandfather.”[111] There should be no doubt as to the -meaning of these passages; the antiquarian who conjectured that patricius -was derived from patrem ciere, and therefore defined patricii as those -who could cite their fathers, meant merely those who had distinguished -fathers, and hence were of respectable birth. Ordinarily in extant Latin -literature ingenui are simply the freeborn; and in making Appius Claudius -Crassus in 368 include in the term the whole body of citizens Livy[112] -dates this meaning back to the period before the Licinian-Sextian laws. -Elsewhere are indications that in early times ingenui connoted rather -respectable birth, and so applied especially to the patricians.[113] The -quotations from Cincius and the attempted derivation of patricius from -patrem ciere, accordingly, are sufficiently explained without resorting -to the strange hypothesis, held by some, that in primitive Rome the -patricians were the only men of free birth. - -In summarizing the ancient view as to the origin and nature of the -patriciate, it will be enough to say that the king chose from the -people men who were eminent for the experience of age, for ability and -reputation, to sit in his council, the senate; the men so distinguished -were called patres, whereas the adjective patricius applied as well -to their families—the patricii being those who could cite illustrious -fathers.[114] From this point of view the Roman nobility did not differ -from that of most other countries. - -The plebs,[115] then, were the mass of common freemen, from whom the -nobility was differentiated in the way described above. From the -ancient point of view they existed from the beginning, prior even to the -patriciate itself. - -It is equally true that in the opinion of the ancients the plebs were -prior to the clients. Cicero[116] records that Romulus distributed the -plebs in clientage among the chief men; Dionysius[117] adds that he gave -the plebeians liberty to choose their patrons from among the patricians. -Thus far their view is in complete accord with modern sociology, -which teaches that such class distinctions first arise through the -differentiation of freemen. Although aware of the fact that clientage -existed in other states which were presumably older than Rome,[118] her -historians doubtless felt that the institution could have been legalized -in their own country by recognition only on the part of the government. -They did not, however, work out a consistent theory of the relation -between this class and the plebeians. Certain passages[119] hint, though -they do not expressly assert, that at one epoch all the plebeians were -in clientage, whereas in their accounts of political struggles the -ancient writers uniformly array clients against plebeians almost from -the beginning of the state.[120] The latter view is historically better -founded. - -There must have been various origins of clientage, with corresponding -gradations of privilege. The libertini were citizens with straitly -limited rights; other clients, certainly the greater part of the class, -not only followed their patron to war[121] and to the forum,[122] but -also testified and brought accusations in the courts[123] and voted -in the assemblies;[124] and when the plebeians gained the right to -hold offices the clients were admitted along with them to the same -privilege.[125] In his relation with the state, therefore, the ordinary -client did not differ essentially from the plebeian. - -From the preceding examination of the social ranks it at once becomes -evident that the ancients made the populus comprise both patricians and -plebeians; in further proof of their view may be cited the following -juristic definition: “Plebs differs from populus in that by the word -populus all the citizens are meant, including even the patricians, -whereas plebs signifies the rest of the citizens, excepting the -patricians.”[126] Since the sources generally consider the patricians -the descendants of the hundred original senators,[127] they cannot -help regarding the populus as composed chiefly of plebeians. In common -speech the term, like our word people, often applies to the lower class -as distinguished from the higher, in which sense it is interchangeable -with plebs; often, too, it signifies the people in contrast with the -senate.[128] It is clear, then, as Mommsen has pointed out,[129] that -if populus signifies first the whole body of citizens and secondly the -commons as distinguished from the nobles, it could not possibly have as -a third equivalent the patricians as distinguished from the plebeians. -In certain formulae found in addresses, wills, prayers, and oracles, -populus is so joined with plebs (populus plebesque or the like) as to -suggest the possible meaning patricians.[130] The combination of the -two words with senatus,[131] however, reveals at once the overlapping -of the terms so joined. In these passages reference is to the modes by -which an individual may approach the state; he may address the consuls, -praetors, or plebeian tribunes, and in the same way the senate, populus, -or plebs.[132] Hence in these formulae, merely representing groups of -institutions through which the state is accustomed to act, the word -populus does not apply solely to the patricians, and the same may be said -of its use in all other connections. We may conclude, therefore, that the -Latin language gives no hint of an exclusively patrician populus. - -Regarding the populus as made up of patricians, plebeians, and clients, -our sources necessarily ascribe the same social composition to its -divisions, the three old tribes and the thirty curiae.[133] With perfect -consistency they mention repeated enlargements of the populus and of the -tribes and curiae, through the admission of masses of aliens, most of -whom must have remained plebeian. In fact the sources uniformly represent -all the kings as freely admitting conquered aliens without exception to -the citizenship and to the tribes and the curiae, even compelling some -forcibly to enter this condition.[134] - -Might the plebeians and clients belong in a restricted sense to the -populus and curiae, and yet remain so far inferior to the patricians as -to be excluded from the political meetings of the curiae—the comitia -curiata? There can be no uncertainty as to the answer to this question, -for the ancient writers agree that the comitia curiata included plebeians -and clients as well as patricians.[135] Not only did the lower classes -attend this assembly, but they also voted in it, and constituted the -majority.[136] - - -II. THE CONVENTIONAL MODERN VIEW - -The passages cited above suffice to prove that the ancient writers -thought of the populus, and consequently of the comitia curiata, as -composed from the earliest times of patricians, clients, and plebeians. -Another question, far more difficult, is whether the ancients were right -in their view. - -As none of the authorities on whom we directly depend for our knowledge -of Roman affairs lived earlier than the last century of the republic, -they could have had no first-hand acquaintance with primitive Roman -conditions, but must have drawn their information concerning the -remote past from earlier writers—the annalists—now lost. Niebuhr, who -in the opening years of the last century introduced the modern method -of investigating Roman history, was convinced that writers of the -late republic and of the empire, lacking historical perspective and -interpreting their sources in the false light of existing or recent -conditions, came to wrong conclusions in regard to the primitive Roman -state. He believed he could point to instances of such misunderstanding, -and he thought it within the power of a well-equipped modern historian to -eliminate much of the error so as to come near to the standpoint of the -earlier and more trustworthy annalists.[137] - -The position of Niebuhr has in the main proved untenable. Notwithstanding -all the source-sifting of modern times, pursued most zealously by the -Germans, we are obliged to admit that it is rarely possible with any -fair degree of certainty to discover the view of an annalist on a given -subject excepting in the few cases in which the citation is by name. -We must also admit that though Cicero and the Augustan writers might -misinterpret Fabius Pictor in minor details, it is inconceivable that -they should fail to understand his presentation of so fundamental a -subject as the character of the original populus or the composition of -the earliest assembly. Present scholarship accordingly insists that in -such weighty matters there was no essential difference of view between -earlier and later writers.[138] - -These considerations have simplified but not solved the problem. Scholars -now agree that no contemporary account of the regal period—ending 509 (?) -B.C.—ever existed; and even if it be conceded that the earliest Roman -annalist—Fabius Pictor, born about 250 B.C.—had access to traditional -or documentary[139] information reaching back to the close of that -period, no historian will admit such a possibility for the beginnings of -Rome. It follows then that for the origin and character of her earliest -institutions Cicero, Livy, and Dionysius, or their sources, have relied -wholly on inference from later conditions, in so far as they have not -resorted to outright invention. Though with their abundant material -they were in a far better position for making such deductions than we -are, they lacked the experience and the acute critical method of the -moderns.[140] Of the three writers above mentioned—our main sources for -the subject under discussion—Cicero was essentially an orator, Dionysius -a rhetorician, and Livy, though historian in name, was in spirit -rhetorical and dramatic rather than critical. Naturally therefore they or -their sources, who on the whole were equally uncritical, made mistakes -in the difficult work of drawing inferences as to the history and -institutions of the regal period. Such is the view of historians today. -It was formerly argued that Dionysius, a rhetorician and a Greek, failed -in spite of his twenty-two years of preparation at Rome to understand -the spirit and character of the Roman constitution and has therefore -been an especial fountain of error;[141] but it is now clear that though -in his treatment of early Rome he shows far greater amplitude than Livy -and is for that reason proportionally more liable to error in detail, he -follows good Roman sources for institutions, and is in this field, with -the reservation here mentioned, not essentially inferior to the extant -native writers.[142] - -Considering the sources untrustworthy and following certain clues which -he believed they afforded to a right understanding of the annalists, -Niebuhr came to his theory as to the composition of the primitive -Roman state. Although he asserts that it was made up of “patrons and -clients,”[143] he does not rest satisfied with this view, but proceeds to -trace clientage to the following origins, as though in his opinion this -institution did not exist from the beginning: (1) some native Siculians -perhaps, who were conquered by Latin invaders; (2) strangers settling on -Roman territory and choosing a Roman as protector; (3) inhabitants of -communities which were obliged to take refuge under Roman protection; -(4) manumitted slaves.[144] Logically he goes back to a state made up -exclusively of patricians. - -He sought evidence for this hypothesis in the scheme of tribal -organization of Rome. The primitive city was divided into three tribes, -thirty curiae and, as he believed, three hundred gentes. As no one could -be a citizen without membership in a gens,[145] and as the patricians -alone were active members of the gentes,[146] it must follow that the -patricians alone were citizens. It is doubtful whether he would have -proposed this hypothesis had it not been for the analogy of the Attic -tribal scheme. An imperfect quotation from the lost part of Aristotle’s -_Constitution of Athens_[147] seems to signify that the Athenian state -was once divided into four tribes (φυλαί), twelve phratries and three -hundred and sixty gentes (γένη). On this authority Niebuhr supposes that -the phratry was a group of gentes, and he assumes further that both -phratries and gentes were composed exclusively of eupatrids.[148] But the -suppositions (1) that there were three hundred and sixty gentes, (2) that -the phratry was a group of gentes, (3) that both phratries and gentes -contained only eupatrids are contradicted by well known facts. From the -earliest times the Greek tribes and phratries included commons as well as -nobles. This is true of the Homeric Greeks,[149] and a law of Draco[150] -proves that the early Attic phratry comprised both nobles and commons. -In historical times all citizens belonged to the phratries; whereas but -few were members of the gentes.[151] Most of the gentes were in fact -composed of the old landed nobility, though a few, like the Chalkidae and -the Eupyridae, were apparently industrial guilds, which had received the -privileges of the gentes. So far therefore from supporting Niebuhr in his -peculiar view of the Roman gentes and curiae, the Attic analogy militates -in every way against him. As his assumption that the curia was a group of -ten gentes has already been disproved,[152] it remains only to consider -whether the gens was an exclusively patrician institution. From the -circumstance that patricianism is not given as an element of Scaevola’s -definition, quoted by Cicero,[153] we may at once conclude that in their -time plebeians, too, were gentiles. This conclusion is supported by a -variety of evidence. - -Several plebeian gentes are mentioned, including the Minucia and the -Octavia,[154] the Lutatia,[155] the Calpurnia,[156] the Domitia,[157] -the Fonteia,[158] the Aurelia,[159] and the Licinia.[160] Some gentes -comprised both patrician and plebeian families, as the Cassia,[161] the -Claudia,[162] the Cornelia,[163] the Manlia,[164] the Papiria,[165] the -Publilia or Poplilia,[166] the Aebutia,[167] and the Servilia.[168] Not -only do the sources refer to several plebeian gentes by name, but they -clearly imply in other ways the existence of such associations. Livy[169] -expresses the patrician sentiment that “it would seem an affront to the -gods for honors to be vulgarized and for the distinction between gentes -to be confused at auspicated comitia” (by the election of plebeians to -the consular tribunate). “The distinction between gentes” can only mean -the distinction between patrician and plebeian gentes—an interpretation -confirmed by a similar statement of Cicero[170] to Clodius, who had -passed by arrogation from a patrician to a plebeian gens: “You have -disturbed the sacra and contaminated the gentes, both the one you have -deserted and the one you have defiled” (by your admission into it). To -our other proofs we may add the consideration that the very expression -gentes patriciae[171] implies the existence of plebeian gentes. It is -natural then that Varro[172] should make gentilitas a condition of men -in general. In asserting that there were a thousand gentile names the -same authority[173] must have included those of plebeians, for scarcely a -hundred belonging to patricians could have been known to him. By no means -the weakest argument in favor of the view here presented is the fact that -the laws of the Twelve Tables concerning inheritance, tutelage,[174] -etc.—which apply not to the patricians alone but to the whole citizen -body—assume that every citizen in full possession of his civil rights -belonged to a gens. - -A passage often interpreted against the existence of plebeian gentes -is Livy x. 8. 9: “Vos solos gentem habere.” In this case a plebeian -speaker says the patricians claim that they alone have gens (not -gentes). The context shows clearly, however, that gens does not here -denote an association but is used in the sense of illustrious birth or -pedigree,[175] as is sometimes our word family.[176] Wherever a nobility -exists it necessarily lays greater stress on descent than do the people, -and in all countries the nobles are in a far better position to keep up -family connections than are the commons. Naturally therefore at Rome we -hear more of patrician than of plebeian gentes. But in view of all the -facts mentioned above there should be no doubt as to the existence of the -latter. The result of this discussion is that neither in the composition -of the gens nor in its position in the community can support be found for -Niebuhr’s assumption of a patrician state.[177] - -Other evidence for his hypothesis Niebuhr thinks he finds in a statement -of Labeo,[178] that the curiate assembly was convoked by a lictor, -the centuriate by a horn-blower; while Dionysius[179] says that the -patricians were summoned by name through a messenger, the people by -the blowing of a horn. Thus Niebuhr maintains that Labeo and Dionysius -agree unequivocally in designating the curiae as the assembly of the -patricians. But in fact these two sources refer to the customs of the -historical age, when the curiate assembly was ordinarily attended -by only three augurs and thirty lictors. Horn-blowing under these -circumstances would have been absurd. The summoning of the patricians -by their own name and that of their father, on the other hand, proves -them too few to compose a popular assembly. These citations therefore -are far from supporting his hypothesis. His last and greatest proof is -the identification of the lex de imperio, passed by the curiae, with the -patrum auctoritas. If these are merely two terms for the same act, the -curiae must have been made up of patres. But by establishing the fact -that the patrum auctoritas belonged to the senate or to its patrician -members, Willems[180] and Mommsen[181] have deprived Niebuhr’s hypothesis -of its main prop. - -Niebuhr evidently believed that the curiae continued exclusively -patrician through the whole republican period.[182] This idea, however, -must be dismissed for the following reasons: (1) Our sources agree that -in the early republic the plebeians and clients continued to vote in -the curiate assembly.[183] (2) The plebeians were in the curiae in 208 -B.C., when the first curio maximus was chosen from the plebs.[184] (3) In -the time of Cicero thirty plebeian[185] lictors represented the comitia -curiata, and gave the votes.[186] (4) Arrogations by plebeians took place -in this assembly; in the well-known case of Clodius it must be borne in -mind that it was a plebeian who arrogated him. (5) The extinction of the -patriciate did not involve the downfall of the comitia curiata.[187] -(6) The confirmation by the curiae (lex de imperio) of elections in the -centuriate assembly was conceived as a second vote of the community.[188] -(7) The resolutions of the comitia curiata are always thought of as -resolutions of the populus, which Latin literature nowhere restricts to -the patrician body. (8) In all ancient literature there is nowhere the -slightest hint of a change in the social composition of the curiae or -of the comitia curiata in the whole course of their history. What the -ancients believed to be true of either institution at any particular -period will hold therefore for its entire history.[189] - -Of the arguments in favor of Niebuhr’s hypothesis either added by -Schwegler[190] or brought by him into greater prominence, one only -demands attention. He reasons that if the plebs were in the curiate -assembly, it would be impossible to explain the political advance made -by the institution of the comitia centuriata; and the constitutional -history of Rome would be reduced to an insoluble riddle. Here we have -to deal with a subjective argument—the rejection of sources because -they do not agree with a preconceived theory. Arguments of the kind, -however, which may be easily invented for the support or overthrow -of every imaginable proposition, carry little weight. Besides it is -easy to show by analogies from the history of other peoples that the -presence of the commons in the primitive assembly does not make the -constitutional history of Rome a real enigma. In the primitive German -assembly, for instance, were included all the warriors; and yet in the -more developed German states were monarchies and aristocracies which gave -the people little or no voice in the management of public affairs.[191] -The Homeric Greek assembly included all freemen, who, however, had -little to do with the government in that period, and still less under -the aristocracy which followed.[192] In like manner, although the -plebeians attended the comitia curiata and had a majority of votes in -this assembly, they could not thereby control the government, for they -absolutely lacked initiative.[193] The comitia centuriata, a timocratic -institution, elevated the rich and degraded the poor. Here as elsewhere -the poor lost by the substitution of aristocracy for kingship; but a -real constitutional advance was made in the gradations of privilege, -which were based on wealth and which reached like a ladder from the -humblest member of the proletarian century to the patrician knight in the -sex suffragia.[194] These gradations prepared the way for an ultimate -equalization of rights. We conclude, then, that the presence of the -commons in the primitive assembly is perfectly compatible with a rational -view of constitutional development. - -With Schwegler, who grants however reluctantly that the commons were -received into the curiae before 208,[195] the theory enters upon its -present phase; for the great majority of writers since his time have -accepted his view, yet with varying opinions as to the date of the -change. Mommsen,[196] who more than any one else has made it clear that, -so far back as our sources reach, the populus comprised both patricians -and commons, nevertheless assumes that the latter were originally -outside the populus but were admitted no later than the beginning of the -republic.[197] In his reconstruction of the primitive state he supposes -that the citizens were all patres, in so far as they, and they alone, -could be fathers; or adjectively patricii, in so far as they, and they -alone, had fathers.[198] Added to the citizens and their slaves was a -class of persons termed clients, half way between freedom and slavery—a -class made up from various origins but chiefly by the conquest of -neighbors.[199] These clients belonged, as dependents of the gentes, to -the curiae, but had no vote in the assembly.[200] Later the plebs were -formed from the clients as the bond which united the latter with their -patrons relaxed.[201] The plebs, who were free citizens of inferior -rank, came into being at the moment when the patricio-plebeian comitia -centuriata acquired the right to express the will of the community.[202] - -Although Mommsen knows well the weakness of the evidence offered by -earlier writers, he adopts the hypothesis of an original patrician state, -without attempting a systematic defence. Here and there in his works, -however, he mentions some fact or condition which he would like to have -considered proof. The following are the chief passages of this kind: - -(1) The lack of right to the auspicia[203] and to the imperium[204] on -the part of the plebeians proves that the patriciate was the original -citizenship. - -But we could as reasonably say, with reference to the auspices, that -the two Attic gentes which furnished the sacred exegetes contained the -only Athenian citizens.[205] The auspicia, as Soltau[206] has noticed, -belonged to the ius honorum, as did also the imperium; hence they were -both privileges of the nobility. In brief Mommsen’s reasoning would make -a governing nobility everywhere impossible. - -(2) The cavalry were patrician; therefore the infantry must have -been.[207] - -With the same kind of reasoning we could conclude that because in the -Homeric age of Greece chariots were used in war by nobles only, the -infantry must also have been exclusively noble; whereas we know that the -rank and file were common men.[208] That the Roman army before Servius -was similarly composed is supported not only by this and many other -analogies, but also by the unanimous testimony of the sources. As in -other primitive states the warriors belonged to the assembly and were the -citizens. - -(3) Of the sixteen local tribes named after gentes it can be proved that -ten have the names of patrician gentes, and not one name is known to be -plebeian. This is evident proof that from the beginning the patriciate -was not nobility but citizenship.[209] - -His premises prove no more than that at the time when these tribes were -instituted the patricians were influential enough to give their names to -ten, probably to all sixteen. In all the three cases mentioned, Mommsen -reasons that because the patricians alone enjoyed the honors, privileges, -and influence usually considered appropriate to a nobility, they must -therefore have constituted not the nobility simply but the whole citizen -body. - -(4) He identifies patres with gentiles and assumes that the primitive -state was an aggregate of gentes, thus making the patres the only members -of the state.[210] - -These are not proofs but unsupported assumptions. The only connection of -patres with gentes given in Latin literature is in the well-known phrases -patres maiorum and minorum gentium; and Cicero[211] makes it clear that -these patres were senators. The phrase means senators from, or belonging -to, the greater or lesser gentes. Furthermore it has been proved (1) that -the patricians were not the only gentiles,[212] (2) that the curia, and -hence the state, was not an aggregation of gentes.[213] - -(5) We are informed, says Mommsen, (a) that the body of full Roman -citizens consisted originally of a hundred families, whose fathers, -the patres, regarded more or less concretely as the ancestors of the -individual gentes, composed the senate, and together with them their -descendants, the patricians, made up the citizen body; or expressed -in other words (b) patrician originally meant just what was afterward -included under the term ingenuus.[214] - -For (a) Mommsen cites those passages by which it has been shown[215] -that the Romans looked upon the original hundred senators as the -fathers neither of the “citizen body” nor of the “full citizens,” but -of the nobility. His statement of the case is directly contradicted -by the authorities he quotes. As regards (b) it has been sufficiently -proved[216] that ingenuus when made equivalent to patricius most -naturally signifies not “of free birth,” but “of respectable, noble -birth.” - -Most scholars have wisely avoided bringing the myth of the asylum[217] -into the argument. Pellegrino,[218] however, identifies the refugees -at that place with the entire plebeian body. As the asylum was not -an Italian but a Greek institution,[219] the story connected with it -is doubtless a myth. It seems to have been invented by the Greeks of -southern Italy, most probably in the fourth century B.C. At that time -they began to view with alarm the southward advance of the Romans, and -to disparage them accordingly by falsifications representing their -origin as obscure and disreputable.[220] Similar calumnies against other -peoples were concocted by their Greek enemies.[221] Notwithstanding -the fact that the story had not even a kernel of historical truth the -Romans accepted it with more or less modification[222] and used it to -some extent for partisan objects.[223] They could not oppose the plebs to -patricians as foreigners to natives, however, for (1) they supposed that -plebeians as well as patricians participated in the original settlement -of Rome, (2) they derived patrician as well as plebeian families from -foreign sources.[224] We are warranted in concluding that in adopting the -Greek myth of the asylum they looked upon it as a cause of increase in -the plebeian population without finding in it the origin of the plebeian -class. - -To the theory of an exclusively patrician populus the following -objections may be summarily urged: (1) It is opposed by the unanimous -testimony of the ancient authorities. (2) It rests upon a wrong -explanation of the words patres, patricii, as designations of the nobles. -(3) It is further propped up by reasons so feeble as to testify at once -to its weakness, the more substantial basis having been overthrown -partly by Mommsen himself. (4) The number of patricians is too small for -the theory.[225] (5) It ignores the meaning of the word plebs, which -evidently signifies “the masses,” in contrast with the few nobles, and -hence could not apply to a class gradually formed by the liberation -of clients, or by the admission of foreigners. No one who holds the -theory has attempted to show what these liberated clients were called -when they were but few compared with the patricians—before they became -“the multitude.” (6) It is contradicted by everything we know of Rome’s -attitude towards aliens. So far back as our knowledge reaches, she was -extremely liberal in bestowing the citizenship, even forcing it upon some -communities. Only when she acquired the rule over a considerable part of -Italy did she begin to show illiberality in this respect. Down to 353 the -citizenship thus freely extended included the right to vote.[226] (7) It -assumes the existence of a community politically far advanced yet showing -no inequalities of rank among the freemen—a condition outside the range -of human experience. It aims to explain the origin of the social classes -on purely Roman ground, ignoring the fact that distinctions of rank -are far older than the city, and exist, at least in germ, in the most -primitive communities of which we have knowledge.[227] - - -III. _The Comparative-Sociological View_ - -As social classes belong to all society,[228] they cannot be explained -by the peculiar conditions of any one community. The only scientific -approach to this subject is through comparative study; the inferences of -the ancient historians relative to primitive Rome are not to be displaced -by purely subjective theories, but are to be tested by comparison with -conditions in other communities of equal or less cultural advancement. - -Distinctions of rank depend ultimately upon physical, mental, and moral -inequalities,[229] which differentiate the population of a community -into leaders and followers.[230] The exhibition of physical strength -and skill on the part of young men and of knowledge and wisdom on the -part of the elders are often “the foundation of leadership and of -that useful subordination in mutual aid which depends on voluntary -deference.”[231] In an age in which men were largely under the control of -religion the possession of an oracle or skill in divination or prophecy -might contribute as much to the elevation of an individual above his -fellows.[232] Leadership, once obtained, could display and strengthen -itself in various ways. In primitive society the strong, brave, -intelligent man was especially qualified to take command in war. Success -brought the chief not only renown but a large share of the booty and in -later time acquired land. The same result might be obtained by other -means than by war;[233] but in any case wealth and influence inherited -through several generations made nobility.[234] Primarily grounded on -ability, wealth, and renown, this preëminence was often heightened by a -claim to divine lineage or other close connection with the gods.[235] - -There was evidently a stage of development—before the association of -the nobles into a class—in which chieftains alone held preëminence. -This condition is common in primitive society, as among the American -Indians.[236] Also among the Germans, who had advanced somewhat beyond -this stage, each chief or lord appears to have been noble “less with -reference to other noblemen than with reference to the other free -tribesmen comprised in the same group with himself.”[237] From Brehon law -we infer that the Irish lords were individually heads of their several -groups of kinsmen or of vassals;[238] and in Wales the nobles were a -hierarchy of chieftains.[239] As soon as leadership became hereditary -there arose noble families, in which the younger members were often -sub-chieftains;[240] and finally through intermarriage among these -families, as well as through the discovery of common interests, the -nobles associated themselves into a class. - -Among the ancient Germans,[241] the Greeks of the Homeric age,[242] -and in some early Italian states[243] certain families had become -noble, and others were on the way to nobility. For ancient Ireland the -entire process can be followed. A common freeman enters the service of -some chief, from whom he receives permission to use large portions of -the tribe land.[244] By pasturing cattle, he grows wealthy, becomes a -bo-aire (cow-nobleman) and secures a band of dependents. Supported by -these followers, he preys upon his neighbors and, if successful, becomes -in time a powerful noble.[245] After “a certain number of generations” -he can no longer be distinguished from the blooded nobility.[246] Here -is an instance of a common freeman’s becoming noble through service to -a chief. In like manner among the Saxons who had conquered England the -ceorl who “thrived so that he had fully five hides of land,” or the -merchant who had “fared twice over the wide sea by his own means,” became -a thane; “and if the thane thrived, so that he became an eorl, then was -he henceforth worthy of eorl-right.”[247] “The thanes were the immediate -companions of the king—his comitatus—and from their first appearance -in English history they took rank above the earlier nobility of Saxon -eorls, who were descended from ancient tribal chiefs. Thus the thanes as -a nobility of newly rich corresponded to the cow-noblemen of an earlier -time.”[248] In the way just described many rose from the lower ranks to -nobility. In fact, eminent authorities assert that the inferior nobles, -especially of the middle age, were more often of servile than of free -origin, as the common freemen were inclined to think it degrading to be -seen among the comites of a chief.[249] - -It has now been sufficiently established that even in the tribal -condition people were differentiated into social ranks. We have traced -the beginning of nobility to leadership and have found, in both -ancient and mediaeval society, new noble families forming by the side -of the old. Social distinctions were well developed long before the -founding of cities. When a community, whether a tribe or a city, is far -enough advanced to begin the conquest of neighbors, “it has already -differentiated into royal, noble, free, and servile families.”[250] This -was true of Sparta. In her “the conquerors nevertheless, notwithstanding -great differences among themselves, remain sharply separated in social -function from the conquered.... The conquerors became a religious, -military, and political class, and the conquered an industrial -class.”[251] Even in the case of Sparta, however, which is perhaps our -best example of the exclusiveness of a ruling city, there is evidence -of mingling between the conquering Spartans and the conquered Laconians -before the former became exclusive.[252] In like manner there was much -mixing of the invading “Aryans” with the natives of India—the more -intelligent of the natives rising to the higher classes and the less -gifted of the invaders sinking to the lower—before the crystallization -of the castes.[253] We find the same mingling of conquerors and -conquered in varying degrees in ancient Ireland,[254] in England under -the Normans,[255] and throughout the Roman empire in the period of -Germanic settlements.[256] It becomes doubtful, therefore, whether a -nobility was ever formed purely by the superposition of one community -upon another. The effect of conquest was rather to accentuate existing -class distinctions, and by a partial substitution of strangers in place -of native nobles to stir up antagonism between the classes. Even where -the differences between the social ranks seem to be racial, it would -be hazardous to resort to the race theory in explanation; for such a -condition could be produced in the course of generations by different -modes of life, education, nurture, and marriage regulations of the nobles -and commons respectively.[257] - -The study pursued thus far will enable us to understand how there came -to be social classes at Rome before the beginning of conquest. But for -a long time after the Romans began to annex territory we may seek in -vain for a distinction between conquerors and conquered, like that which -we find in Laconia. We are forbidden to identify the plebs with the -conquered and the patricians with the conquerors by many considerations -mentioned above—for instance, by tradition,[258] by the derivation -of several patrician gentes from various foreign states,[259] by the -fewness of the patricians,[260] and by the fact that the latter show -no differentiations of rank, such as we find among the conquering -Spartans; they were not a folk but a nobility pure and simple. We are -to regard Rome’s early annexations of territory and of populations -not as subjugations, but as incorporations on terms of equality. The -people incorporated were of the same great folk, the Latins, or of a -closely related folk, the Sabines. Accordingly they were not reduced -to subjection, but were admitted to citizenship, to the tribes and -the curiae, and their nobles were granted the patriciate.[261] Only -communities of alien speech, like the Etruscan, or distant Italian -communities like the Campanian, were ordinarily given the inferior -civitas sine suffragio; and this restricted citizenship does not appear -in history before the middle of the fourth century B.C. - -The analogies offered in this chapter, by proving that the conditions -they illustrate are possible for early Rome, tend to confirm the -authority of the sources. By similar comparative study it would be -practicable to illustrate in detail and to corroborate the statements -of ancient writers as to the organization of the plebs, as well as -of the patricians, in tribes and curiae, the participation of the -clients and plebeians in war and politics, and the deterioration of the -free commons through the strengthening of the nobility—all of which -are rejected by eminent modern historians, who merely imagine them -incompatible with primitive conditions or with a rational theory of -constitutional development. The inquiry has been pursued far enough, -however, to indicate that from a comparative-sociological point of view -the conception of early Rome handed down to us by the ancients is sound -and consistent, and that the method of subjective reconstruction of -history introduced by Niebuhr and still extensively employed by scholars -is unscientific. - - I. ROMAN SOCIETY: Niebuhr, B. G., _Römische Geschichte_, - i. 321 ff.; English, 158 ff.; Schwegler, A., _Römische - Geschichte_, I. bk. xiv; Wigger, J., _Verteidigung der - nieburschen Ansicht über den Ursprung der röm. Plebs_; Peter, - C., _Geschichte Roms_, i. 31-3; _Verfassungsgeschichte der - röm. Republik_; _Studien zur röm. Geschichte mit besonderer - Beziehung auf Th. Mommsen_; Ihne, W., _History of Rome_, - i. 109 ff.; _Early Rome_, ch. ix; _Asylum of Romulus_, in - _Classical Museum_, iii (1846). 190-3; _Forschungen auf dem - Gebiete der röm. Verfassungsgeschichte_ (also translated into - English by Heywood); Lange, L., _Röm. Alt._ i. 414 ff., and - see indices s. Patres, Plebs, etc.; Mommsen, Th., _History - of Rome_, bk. 1. chs. v, vi; _Röm. Forschungen_, i. 131-284; - _Röm. Staatsrecht_, iii. 127 ff., and see indices s. Patres, - Plebs, etc.; _Abriss d. röm. Staatsrechts_, 3 ff.; Herzog, - E., _Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. - 32 ff.; Meyer, E., _Geschichte des Altertums_, ii. 515-7, - 521 f.; v. 141-3; _Plebs_, in _Handiwörterb. d. Staatswiss._ - vi. 98-106; Niese, B., _Grundriss der röm. Geschichte_, 36 - f.; Ampère, J. J., _Histoire Romaine à Rome_, i. 440 ff.; - ii. 15 ff.; Zöller, M., _Latium und Rom_, 163; Ridgeway, - W., _Early Age of Greece_, i. 254 ff.; Oberziner, G., - _Origine della plebe Romana_; Conway, R. S., _I due strati - di populazione Indo-Europea del Lazio e dell’Italia antica_, - in _Rivista di storia antica_, vii (1903). 422-4; Hüllmann, - K. D., _Ursprünge der röm. Verfassung durch Vergleichungen - erläutert_; Mispoulet, J. B., _Institutions politiques des - Romains_, i. 14 ff.; Greenidge, A. H. J., _Roman Public Life_, - 4 ff.; Abbott, F. F., _Roman Political Institutions_, 6 ff.; - Naudet, M., _De la noblesse et des récompenses d’honneur - chez les Romains_; Hoffmann, _Patricische und plebeiische - Curien_; Pelham, H., _Roman Curiae_, in (English) _Journal - of Philology_, ix (1880). 266-79; Soltau, W., _Altröm. - Volksversamml._ 58 ff., 625 ff.; Bernhöft, F., _Staat und Recht - der röm. Königsz._ 145 f.; Genz, H., _Das patricische Rom_; - Clason, D. O., _Kritische Erörterungen über den röm. Staat_; - Fustel de Coulanges, _Ancient City_, bk. iv; Pellegrino, D., - _Andeutungen über den ursprünglichen Religionsunterschied - der röm. Patricier und Plebeier_; Hennebert, A., _Histoire - de la lutte entre les patriciens et les plébeiens à Rome_; - Bloch, L., _Die ständischen und sozialen Kämpfe in der röm. - Republik_; Wallinder, _De statu plebeiorum romanorum ante - primam in montem sacrum secessionem quaestiones_; Neumann, - K. J., _Grundherrschaft der röm. Republik, Bauernbefreiung - und Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung_; Holzapfel, L., - _Die drei ältesten römischen Tribus_, in _Beiträge zur alten - Geschichte_, i (1902). 228-55; Heydenreich, E., _Livius und die - röm. Plebs_, in _Samml. gemeinverständlicher wissenschaftlicher - Vorträge_, xvii (1882). 581-628; Christensen, H., _Die - ursprüngliche Bedeutung der Patres_, in _Hermes_, ix (1875). - 196-216; Staaf, E., _De origine gentium patriciarum commentatio - academica_; Terpstra, D., _Quaestiones literariae de populo_, - etc., ch. i; Köhm, J., _Altlateinische Forschungen_, ch. i; - Bröcker, L. O., _Untersuchungen über die Glaubwürdigkeit der - altröm. Verfassungsgeschichte_, 3 ff.; Botsford, G. W., _Social - Composition of the Primitive Roman Populus_, in _Political - Science Quarterly_, xxi (1906). 498-526 (the present chapter - is in the main a reproduction of this article); _Some Problems - connected with the Roman Gens_, ibid, xxii (1907). 663-92. - - II. COMPARATIVE VIEW: Achelis, Th., _Moderne Völkerkunde, - deren Entwickelung und Aufgaben_, (Stuttgart, 1896) 406 ff.; - Ammon, O., _Die Gesellschaftsordnung und ihre natürlichen - Grundlagen_, (Jena, 1895) Teil i; D’Arbois de Jubainville, - _La civilisation des Celtes et celle de l’épopée Homerique_, - (Paris, 1899) ch. ii; Arnd, K., _Die materiellen Grundlagen und - sittlichen Forderungen der europäischen Kultur_, (Stuttgart, - 1835) 444 f.; Barth, P., _Die Philosophie der Geschichte - als Sociologie_, i. (Leipzig, 1897) 382; Bastion, A., _Der - Mensch in der Geschichte_, iii. (Leipzig, 1860) 323-38; - _Allerlei aus Volks- und Menschenkunde_, ii. (Berlin, 1888) - 138-54; _Rechtsverhältnisse bei verschiedenen Völkern der - Erde_, (Berlin, 1872) 8 ff.; Bluntschli, J. K., _Theory of - the State_, (2d ed. from the 6th German: Oxford 1892) bk. - II. chs. vi-xiii; Bordeau, L., _Le problème de la vie: Essai - de sociologie générale_, (Paris, 1901) 95; Brunner, H., - _Grundzüge der deutschen Rechtsgeschichte_, i (Leipzig, 1901); - Bücher, C., _Industrial Evolution_, ch. ix; Buchholz, E., - _Homerische Realien_, II. bk. i (Leipzig, 1881); Caspari, O., - _Die Urgeschichte der Menschheit_, I. bk. ii. ch. 3 (Leipzig, - 1877); Cherbuliez, A. E., _Simples notions de l’ordre social - à l’usage de tout le monde_, (Paris, 1881) ch. vi; Combes de - Lestrade, _Éléments de sociologie_, (Paris, 1896) bk. vi; - Cooley, C. H., _Human Nature and the Social Order_, (New York, - 1902) ch. ix (analysis of leadership); Craig, J., _Elements - of Political Science_, i. (Edinburgh, 1814) 183-95; Duchesne, - L., _La conception du droit et les idées nouvelles_, (Paris, - 1902) 36; Demolins, E., _Comment la route crée le type social_, - i (Paris); Farrand, L. F., _Basis of American History_, (New - York, 1904) see index s. Social organization; Featherman, A., - _Social History of the Races of Mankind_, ii. (London, 1888) - see indices s. Classes; _Thoughts and Reflections on Modern - Society_, (London, 1894) 291-6; Frazer, J. G., _Lectures on - the Early History of the Kingship_ (New York, 1905); Freeman, - E. A., _History of the Norman Conquest of England_, iv (New - York, 1873); Frohschammer, J., _Ueber die Organisation und - Cultur der Menschlichen Gesellschaft_, (Munich, 1885) 84 - f.; Funck-Brentano, Th., _Civilisation et ses lois, morale - sociale_, (Paris, 1876) chs. v-viii; Fustel de Coulanges, - _Ancient City_, bk. iv; _De l’inégalité du wergeld dans les - lois Franques_, in _Revue historique_, ii. (1876) 460-89; - Giddings, F. H., _Principles of Sociology_, (New York, 1896) - bk. III. chs. iii, iv; Ginnell, L., _Brehon Laws, a Legal - Handbook_, (London, 1894) chs. iv, v; Grave, J., _L’individu - et la société_, (3d ed. Paris, 1897) ch. ii; Gumplowicz, L., - _Rassenkampf_ (Innsbruck, 1883); Harris, G., _Civilization - considered as a Science_, (new ed. New York, 1873) ch. vii; - Hellwald, Fr. von, _Culturgeschichte in ihrer natürlichen - Entwickelung bis zur Gegenwart_, 2 vols. (Augsburg, 1876); - Hirt, H., _Indogermanen_, 2 vols. (1905, 1907); Hittell, J. S., - _History of the Mental Growth of Mankind in Ancient Times_, - (New York, 1893) i. 228 f.; ii. 37, 72; Hodgkin, _Italy and - her Invaders_, (2d ed. Oxford, 1892, 1896) ii, iii; Jenks, - E., _History of Politics_ (London, 1900); Kaufmann, G., _Die - Germanen der Urzeit_ (Leipzig, 1880); Krauss, F. S., _Sitte - und Brauch der Südslaven_ (Vienna, 1885); Lepelletier de la - Sarthe, _Du système social, ses applications pratiques à - l’individu, à la famille, à la société_, (Paris, 1855) i. - 329 ff.; Letourneau, Ch., _Sociology based on Ethnography_, - (new ed. London, 1893) chs. vi-viii; Maine, H. S., _Lectures - on the Early History of Institutions_, (London, 1875) ch. v; - Mismer, Ch., _Principes sociologiques_, (2d ed. Paris, 1898) - 63 ff.; Müller-Deecke, _Die Etrusker_, 2. vols. (Stuttgart, - 1877); Rhys, J. and Brynmor-Jones, _The Welsh People_ - (New York, 1900); Ridgeway, W., _Early Age of Greece_, i - (Cambridge, 1901); Ross, E. A., _Social Control_ (New York, - 1901); Rossbach, J. J., _Geschichte der Gesellschaft_, 3 - vols. (1868); Schrader, O., _Reallexikon der indogermanischen - Altertumskunde_, (Strassburg, 1901) 802-19; Schröder, R., - _Lehrbuch der deutschen Rechtsgeschichte_ (4th ed. Leipzig, - 1902); Schurtz, H., _Urgeschichte der Kultur_, (Leipzig, 1900) - ch. ii; Seebohm, F., _Tribal System in Wales_ (New York, 1895); - _Tribal Custom in Anglo-Saxon Law_ (New York, 1902); Seeck, - O., _Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt_, I. (2d - ed. Berlin, 1897) bk. II. chs. i, iv; Seymour, _Life in the - Homeric Age_, (New York, 1907) 106 f; Skeat and Blagden, _Pagan - Races of the Malay Peninsula_, i (New York, 1906) 494-520; - Spencer, H., _Principles of Sociology_, II. (New York, 1883) - chs. iv-viii; Tarde, G., _Laws of Imitation_, trans. from - the French, (New York, 1903) 233 ff.; Traill, H. D., _Social - England_, i (New York, 1901); Tribhovandas, _Hindu Castes_, - in _Journal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay_, v - (1899-1901). 74-91; Vinogradoff, P., _Growth of the Manor_ (New - York, 1905); Waitz, Th., _Anthropologie der Naturvölker_, ii. - (Leipzig, 1860) 126-67; iii. (1862) 119-28; v. (1870) 112 ff. - - - - -CHAPTER III - -THE THIRTY-FIVE TRIBES - - -That among the Romans the conception of property first attached to -movable objects is attested by the words “pecunia” and “mancipatio.”[262] -There was probably a period during which the citizens cultivated the -lots of arable land assigned them by the state without regarding -these holdings as property either public or private. In view of the -well-established fact that the gens was a relatively late institution, we -should for this remote period exclude the idea of gentile tenure.[263] -The land was distributed among the families according to tribes and -curiae; and when the idea of ownership extended to the soil, it took the -form of family ownership of the ager privatus and state ownership of the -public domain.[264] - -The condition of tenure anterior to the conception of property in -land left little trace of itself in the language and institutions and -absolutely none in tradition. The sources declare that family ownership -existed in Rome from her foundation as well as in her earliest colonies—a -view confirmed by the comparative study of language.[265] Each family, -they assume, held two iugera—the heredium[266]—or we may more correctly -say, at least two iugera.[267] This small lot has generally been -explained[268] as the private landed property of the individual, in -contrast with the public land and with the common land of the gens, and -thus it is taken as evidence of a condition prior to the extension of -private ownership to the arable fields. Should we grant this to be the -true explanation, we might still assume that public and gentile tenure -had developed into private ownership of arable land long before Servius, -or that Servius himself converted the fields into private holdings. For -the second alternative we could find apparent support in the sources, -which have much to say of the distribution of land among the citizens by -Servius.[269] For the continued absence of private ownership after the -Servian reforms not even the shadow of an authority can be found. - -But the explanation of heredium given above is by no means necessary; in -fact the sources regard it not as the only private land, but rather as -the smallest share allotted to any citizen, the rich and noble possessing -more.[270] While accordingly the wealthy man owned many iugera, the -poor man, limited to his heredium, was obliged to earn part of his -living by labor as a tenant or as a wage-earner in the field of his rich -neighbor;[271] and in the early colonies the bina iugera were granted -on the same aristocratic principle. If this is the true explanation of -heredium, the strongest argument in support of the theory of public -ownership at Rome in the late regal period is taken away; we must either -abandon the theory or relegate it to a time far anterior to the Servian -reforms. Mommsen’s assumption[272] that the sixteen oldest rural tribes -were instituted some time after the city tribes by the division of -gentile lands is untenable on other grounds. The gens which gave its -name to the tribe could not have owned all the land in the tribe; for in -that case all but the sixteen gentes would have been landless. Again, -assuming, as he does, that all the land belonged to the gentes, which -he supposes to have been exclusively patrician, we should be forced to -conclude that the division left the plebeians landless. And further, if -we bear in mind that the gens developed from the family, we must also -believe that the undivided gentile land was once a family estate, which -according to Roman usage had to be registered in some tribe, even if the -land of the gens was not so registered. Mommsen’s theory proves therefore -not only to be unsupported by the sources but actually unthinkable. In -conclusion we may safely say that though some land remained public, and -though the gens after it had come into existence owned some common land, -individual, or at most family,[273] ownership was in full force in the -earliest times of which we have knowledge. - -The clearest and most detailed account of the origin of the Servian -tribes is given by Dionysius iv. 14. 1 f.: “When Tullius had surrounded -the seven hills with one wall, he divided the city into four parts, and -giving to the parts the names of the hills—to one Palatina, to another -Suburana, to the third Collina, and to the fourth Esquilina—he made the -city to consist of four tribes, whereas up to that time it had comprised -but three.... And he ordained that the men who lived in each of the four -parts should not change their abode or give in their census elsewhere. -The enlistment of soldiers also and the collection of taxes, which they -were to pay individually to the treasury for military and other purposes, -were distributed no longer among the three gentile tribes but among the -four local tribes instituted by him.... [15. 1:] And the whole country -he divided, as Fabius says,[274] into twenty-six parts, also called -tribes, adding to them the four city tribes; but Venonius is authority -for thirty-one rural tribes, which with those of the city would complete -the thirty-five of our own time. Cato, however, who is more trustworthy -than either of these two, says that all the tribes in the time of Tullius -amounted to thirty, though he does not separate the number of parts” -(into urban and rural). - -A great variety of opinion has arisen regarding the original number -of the Servian tribes. Niebuhr[275] believed that Servius created in -all thirty, afterward reduced by unfortunate war with the Etruscans to -twenty. This view found supporters but was refuted by Huschke.[276] Those -who rejected it generally agreed that Servius divided the city into four -tribes and the country into districts, regiones, pagi.[277] Mommsen[278] -gave a new phase to the theory of the subject by assuming that the four -so-called city tribes, which all the sources agree in ascribing to -Servius,[279] included the country as well as the city. According to -this hypothesis Alba[280] and Ostia,[281] for instance, belonged to the -Palatine tribe. His opinion has found wide acceptance.[282] Afterward -changing his mind, he asserted that the four urban tribes were confined -within the pomerium—a view which now seems to be established beyond -doubt.[283] With this final position of Mommsen the creation of theories -as to the number and limitations of the Servian tribes has not been -exhausted; for against the view that Servius instituted only the four -urban tribes may be placed that of Pais,[284] who assigns their origin to -the censors of the year 304. The theory of Pais implies that the sixteen -rural tribes which bore gentile names were far older than the four urban -tribes. - -Light will be thrown on this obscure subject by an inquiry into the -relation of the sources to one another. It seems certain that Fabius -derived his information concerning the tribes and the entire centuriate -organization from the “discriptio centuriarum”—a document in the censors’ -office. Though ascribed to Servius Tullius as author,[285] it set forth -the centuriate system as it existed in reality before the reform—that -is in the time of the first war with Carthage.[286] It was this late -form of the centuriate organization which Fabius had in mind. He must -have been prevented, however, from ascribing to Servius the institution -of all the thirty-three tribes then existing, by the recollection that -two tribes were added as recently as 299 from territory too far from -Rome to have formed a part of her domain under Servius; and perhaps -the curiate organization led him to favor the number thirty. He made -Servius the author of thirty tribes, accordingly, in spite of the fact -that this number was not reached till 318. His error is not more absurd -than the ascription to Servius of the whole centuriate organization as -it stood at the opening of the First Punic War, or the assumption that -in the first Servian census were enrolled eighty thousand men fit for -military service.[287] Cato, who also states the original number as -thirty, without separating them into rural and urban,[288] may have been -influenced by Fabius, though it is likely that he drew from the same -source. Vennonius in making Servius the author of all thirty-five tribes -but slightly exceeds the absurdity of earlier writers.[289] Evidently -Fabius and Cato were the sources for all future annalists. While -depending on them, Varro seems to have noticed the error of ascribing -twenty-six rural tribes to Servius, as there were but seventeen of this -class before 387. To avoid the difficulty and at the same time to retain -the Fabian number, he supposed that the country districts of Servius were -not yet tribes but the regiones from which the tribes were afterward -formed[290]—a superficial explanation in the true Varronian style.[291] -Following Varro, however, later authorities generally speak of the four -urban tribes of Servius without mentioning those of the country.[292] So -Dionysius, after referring to the four city tribes, proceeds to describe -their character and functions, as though these were all the tribes then -existing.[293] Thus far he depends upon Varro. Fortunately, however, -he gained from Fabius the information that there were also twenty-six -rural tribes, his description of which[294] is slightly troubled by the -Varronian notion that these country districts were not so much tribes as -regiones, πάγοι, but which served all the purposes of tribes including -the taking of the census.[295] - -The various contradictory statements of the ancients regarding the -original number of Servian tribes can now be appreciated at their -respective values. In the course of the discussion it has become evident, -too, that Fabius and Cato, the sources of later annalists, had no tenable -ground for their assumption of thirty original tribes. Had they examined -the records, perhaps the succeeding parts of their own chronicles, they -would have found that before 387 there could have been only twenty-one -tribes in all.[296] A less certain indication of the admission of -one or possibly two tribes still earlier in the republic may have -existed;[297] but here we reach the extreme limit of their knowledge. -Any investigation of the number in the regal period, whether by the -ancients or by the moderns, must rest not upon contemporary records but -upon inference pure and simple. We may inquire, accordingly, whether -the view of Mommsen[298] and Meyer[299] that the four city tribes were -created first and existed for a time before the institution of the rural -tribes, having no trustworthy foundation in the sources, can be deduced -from our knowledge of the general conditions of the time. We must by all -means avoid the supposition of Mommsen[300] that in the time of Servius -there was no private property in land outside of the city.[301] If then -we bear in mind two points which Mommsen has himself established, (1) -that the local tribe was an aggregate of private estates,[302] (2) that -the four urban tribes of Servius were limited to the city,[303] we must -conclude that in the time of Servius the country estates were registered -in rural tribes—in other words that Servius instituted rural as well -as urban tribes.[304] The view of Meyer that all the citizens lived -in the city and the dependents in the country[305]—which would afford -a ground for assuming the urban tribes to have been earlier than the -rural—has no basis either in institutions or in tradition. If originally -the country was all-important,[306] and if at the dawn of history we -find the country and city politically equal, as is actually the case, -we have no motive for the insertion of an intermediate stage in which -the city was all-important. There was indeed a tendency toward the -concentration of political power within the city, but it did not advance -beyond the equalization of city and country.[307] To maintain Meyer’s -view we should be obliged to complicate the early history of Rome with -two revolutions—one by which the city gained supremacy over the country, -and the other in which the supremacy was lost. It is mainly to defend the -early history of the comitia, and of the constitution in general, against -this complication that the present discussion of the early land tenure -and of the origin of the Servian tribes is offered. - -The original number of tribes, as has been stated, is unknown. It was -increased by the acquisition of territory. Possibly the annalists found -an obscure trace of the admission of the sixteenth rural tribe—the -Claudia—in 504. To that year Livy assigns the coming of Attius Clausus -with his host of clients, who were formed into the Claudian tribe.[308] -Wissowa[309] suggests that the immigration of the Claudian gens, the date -of which did not appear in the original tradition,[310] was arbitrarily -assigned to the year in which was recorded the admission of the tribe. -This conjecture is supported by the situation of the Claudia, which would -place it among the latest of the twenty. - -With more confidence we may assign the admission of the seventeenth rural -tribe—the twenty-first in the entire list—to 495.[311] It must have been -the Clustumina.[312] We are certain that there were only twenty-one -till 387, when four new tribes were formed, bringing the number up to -twenty-five.[313] The twenty-sixth and twenty-seventh were admitted in -358,[314] the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth in 332,[315] the thirtieth -and thirty-first in 318,[316] the thirty-second and thirty-third in -300[317], the thirty-fourth and thirty-fifth in 241.[318] To the year -90 that number is known to have remained unchanged, and the evidence of -a temporary increase during the Social War is obscure. On this point -Appian[319] states that “the Romans did not enroll the newly admitted -citizens in the existing thirty-five tribes for fear that, being more -numerous, they might outvote the old citizens in the comitia; but by -dividing them into ten parts (?) they made new tribes, in which the new -citizens voted last.” This view of an increase in number is confirmed by -a statement of Sisenna[320] as to the creation of two new tribes at about -that time. Velleius[321] however informs us that the new citizens were -enrolled in eight tribes. In the object of the arrangement he agrees with -Appian. Next he mentions the promise of Cinna to enroll the Italians in -all the tribes. From the connection we should naturally infer that in -the opinion of Velleius the new citizens were enrolled before Cinna in -eight old tribes; and yet it is difficult to understand how the assembly -could be persuaded to visit any group of rural tribes with this disgrace -and political disability.[322] As the authority of Sisenna, if not that -of Appian, compels us to accept the fact of new tribes, it is better to -interpret Velleius in that light.[323] We may suppose then that the -eight tribes which he mentions were provided for by the Julian law of 90; -and we must accept the statement of Sisenna that in 89 the Calpurnian -law “ex senati consulto” created two other new tribes, in which were to -be enrolled the citizens admitted under this law. Thus we could account -for the ten (?) new tribes mentioned by Appian. As regards the Lucanians -and the Samnites, who held out obstinately against Rome, the same -historian[324] states that they were respectively enrolled in tribes, as -in the former instances. He does not inform us, however, that for this -purpose other new tribes were instituted. At all events there seems to be -no essential disagreement among our sources; and we have no reasonable -ground for doubting an increase, though we may remain uncertain as to the -number added.[325] - -The arrangement was only temporary. In 88 Sulpicius, tribune of the -plebs, carried a law containing a provision for the distribution of the -new citizens and the libertini among all the thirty-five tribes.[326] -His plebiscite was annulled by the senate on the ground that it had -been passed by violence;[327] but the provisions contained in it were -afterward legalized by a senatus consultum, and it was finally carried -into effect by Cinna as consul in 84.[328] This settlement of the -question was approved by Sulla[329] for all the Italians excepting -the Marsians and the Paelignians, who were enrolled in one tribe—the -Sergia.[330] - -The nature of the tribes may be inferred from their object. The -intention of the organizer was to introduce the Greek military system, -comprising heavy and light infantry, in which the kind of service to be -performed depended upon financial ability to provide equipments.[331] -Seeing that a classification of citizens with respect to property was -necessary for this purpose, Servius instituted the tribes as a basis -for the census. That they contained the ager privatus only is indicated -by the exclusion from them of the Capitoline and Aventine hills.[332] -Their local character is established by the concurrent testimony of -ancient writers.[333] Yet even in the beginning they could but roughly -be described as districts, for they excluded all public land and all -waters and waste places claimed neither by individuals nor by the -government. They retained the approximate character of districts so long -only as the territory of annexed communities continued to be formed -into new tribes. The process came to an end in 241; and it was as early -at least as this date that the Roman colonies, not originally in the -tribes, were incorporated in them.[334] Thereafter the annexation of -new territory tended more and more to render the tribes geographically -indeterminate.[335] The process was far advanced by the admission (90-84) -of the Latins and Italians with their lands to the existing tribes,[336] -which were further enlarged in the imperial period by the incorporation -of provincial communities.[337] As consisting of lands, though no longer -necessarily adjacent, they were still considered local.[338] - -The tribe was also a group of persons; in fact the word applies far more -frequently to persons than to territory.[339] During the early republic -a considerable degree of harmony was maintained between the two aspects -of the institution (1) possibly by a restriction on the transfer of -residence,[340] (2) by the change in membership from tribe to tribe, -through the censors, on the basis of a transfer of domicile, (3) by the -assignment of new citizens to the tribe in or near which they had their -homes, (4) by the creation of new tribes for new citizens who did not -live in or near the existing tribes. This harmony experienced its first -serious disturbance through the enrolment of the landless, irrespective -of domicile, in the urban tribes in 304,[341] but continued to such -a degree that a hundred years later the rural voters generally still -resided in their own tribes.[342] In the last century of the republic -the personal tribe, emancipated from the local, depended solely on -inheritance and the will of the censors.[343] - -The original composition of the personal tribe is determined by its -purely military object. It comprised accordingly those only who were -liable to service in war. From the early Roman point of view those -citizens were qualified who found their livelihood in agriculture.[344] -Not all landowners were enrolled in the tribes; for Latin residents,[345] -freedmen,[346] widows and orphans,[347] all of whom might possess land, -lacked membership. Those proprietors, too, were excluded whom the -censors assigned to the aerarii as a punishment. Tribesmen were all the -other landowners—adsidui[348] et locupletes[349]—together with the male -descendants of military age under their potestas.[350] - -Another object of the tribes, referred to Servius by our sources, -was the collection of taxes.[351] We know that they afterward served -this purpose; and the ancient writers, who could have had no direct -knowledge of the intentions of Servius but who assigned to him without -hesitation all the later developments of his organization, were in -this case especially misled by their false derivation of tributum from -tribus or _vice versa_.[352] A brief study of the facts in the case will -prove their inference to be wrong. The most obvious consideration is -that had Servius intended the tribes for the levy of taxes as well as -for military purposes, he would have included all who were subject to -taxation as well as all who were liable to service in the army, whereas -in fact he admitted those only who were to serve. It is to be noted -that primitive Rome imposed no regular direct taxes on the citizens in -general. Every man equipped himself for war even after the introduction -of the phalanx;[353] doubtless at first the knights provided their -own horses;[354] and in short campaigns the soldiers carried their -provisions from their own farms.[355] Fortifications and public buildings -were erected by forced task-work. The king supported himself partly by -gifts from his subjects and partly from the public property, including -land.[356] Other early sources of revenue were tolls levied for the -use of harbors, boundaries, temples, bridges, roads, sewers, and salt -works.[357] In time the idea arose, too, that the person who did not -perform military service should help with his property in the defence of -the country. The estates of widows and orphans were accordingly taxed -to support the horses of the knights.[358] Those men, also, who were -exempt from service because they possessed no land[359] and yet had other -property were required to pay on it a regular tax. From this connection -with the public treasury (aerarium) they were termed aerarii. This class -comprised shopkeepers and merchants. Sometimes the censors assigned to -it as a punishment men who owned land. The fact that such persons were -at the same time removed from their tribes is sufficient proof that the -aerarii were originally outside these associations.[360] The cives sine -suffragio, or Caerites, after this class had come into existence in 353, -were like the aerarii in (1) that they did not belong to the tribes, (2) -that they paid a regular tax, (3) that men were placed on their list as -a punishment. They may accordingly be regarded as a special class of -aerarii, enrolled as they were in a distinct list.[361] Whereas the -cives sine suffragio either wholly lacked the franchise, as the phrase -implies, or at most had but the right of the Latins,[362] the other -aerarii must have voted in the proletarian century.[363] - -The ordinary taxes sufficed for the usual light expenses; but in case of -especial need an extraordinary tax was imposed upon the citizens. It was -called tributum from tribuere, “to apportion,” because it was distributed -among the citizens in proportion to their ratable property.[364] We hear -of such a tax levied for ransoming the city from the Gauls[365] and -another for the building of a wall;[366] but the most common use was for -the payment of soldiers, hence the tributum was thought of primarily as -a war tax.[367] For this reason tributum came to be correlative with -stipendium.[368] It was not often imposed before the introduction of pay -in 406.[369] Even then it was not levied every year; it was sometimes -refunded when the condition of the treasury permitted; and it fell into -disuse after 167.[370] As it was imposed on those only who were liable -to military duty,[371] the tribe lists were followed in its collection, -and in this sense we may say that it was collected tributim.[372] The -work was done by state functionaries, as the tribe, so far as we know, -had neither fiscal officers[373] nor a treasury; and possessing no -property, it could not be held financially responsible. - -An epoch in the history of the tribes was made in 312 by Appius Claudius -Caecus the censor, who enrolled the landless citizens, proletarians -as well as aerarii, in the existing thirty-three tribes without -discrimination.[374] Cives sine suffragio were alone excepted.[375] -By giving the landless the upper hand in the assemblies this measure -roused the animosity of the proprietors, and thus endangered the peace -of the state. In order to soothe the excited feelings of the better -class, Q. Fabius Rullianus, censor in 304, supported by his colleague -Decius, removed the landless from the rural tribes; but not to deprive -them wholly of tribal privileges, he registered them in the four urban -tribes. Hence his measure is spoken of as a compromise. Thereafter the -landholding and hence more respectable citizens were preferably enrolled -in the rural tribes,[376] whereas the landless were confined to those of -the city.[377] It was a permanent gain that henceforth tribal membership -was a test of perfect citizenship. The censors still had the power to -transfer a man from one tribe to another, for instance, from a rural to -an urban tribe; but they could not exclude him wholly from the tribes, -for that would be tantamount to depriving him of the citizenship.[378] -There were still aerarii; individuals and sometimes large groups of -citizens were still assigned as a punishment to this class, which, -however, was henceforth included in the tribes of the city.[379] -Although the ordinary urban tribesmen were usually exempt from military -duty, the aerarii were required to serve, at times under especially -hard conditions,[380] and were not disqualified for office.[381] In -registering them in the tribes Claudius made them, like the landowners, -liable to military service and to the tributum according to their means. -To effect this object he necessarily assessed their personal property on -a money valuation; and in order to treat all tribesmen alike, he must -have changed the terms of valuation of the landholders’ estates from -iugera to money.[382] - - Niebuhr, B. G., _Römische Geschichte_, i. 422-50, Eng. 200-12; - Schwegler, _Römische Geschichte_, I. bk. xvii; Huschke, Ph. - E., _Verfassung des Königs Servius Tullius_, ch. iii; Ihne, - W., _History of Rome_, i. 62, 114; Nissen, H., _Templum_, - 144 ff.; _Italische Landeskunde_, ii. 503 f.; Beloch, J., - _Italischer Bund unter Roms Hegemonie_, ch. ii; Soltau, W., - _Altröm. Volksversammlungen_, 375-548; Meyer, E., _Ursprung - des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der vier Tribus_, in _Hermes_, - xxx (1895). 1-24; controverted by Sp. Vassis, in _Athena_, - ix (1897). 470-2; Neumann, K. J., _Grundherrschaft der röm. - Republik_; Siebert, W., _Ueber Appius Claudius Caecus_; - Mommsen, Th., _History of Rome_, bk. I. ch. vi; _Röm. - Tribus_; _Röm. Staatsrecht_, iii. 161-98; _Abriss des röm. - Staatsrechts_, 28-36; Marquardt, J., _Röm. Staatsv._ ii. - 149-80; Willems, P., _Droit public Romain_, 40 ff., 98 ff.; - Mispoulet, J. B., _Institutions politiques des Romains_, i. - 37-42; _Études d’institutions Romaines_, 3-48; Lange, L., _Röm. - Altertümer_, i. 501-22, and see index s. Tribus; Madvig, J. N., - _Verfassung und Verwaltung des röm. Staates_, i. 100-8; Herzog, - E., _Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. 39, - 101 ff., 1016-31; Grotefend, C. L., _Imperium romanum tributim - descriptum_; Kubitschek, J. W., _De romanorum tribuum origine - ac propogatione_; _Imperium romanum tributim discriptum_; - Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 674-6: Aerarius (Kubitschek); - 682-4: Aes equestre (idem); 780-93: Ager (idem); iii. 1281-3: - Caere (Hülsen); 2650 f.: Claudia (Wissowa); iv. 117 f.: - Clustumina (Kubitschek); Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 125: - Aes equestre and hordearium (Humbert). - - - - -CHAPTER IV - -THE CENTURIES AND THE CLASSES - - -The ancient authorities represent Servius Tullius as the founder of -an organization at once military and political—on the one hand the -army composed of classes and centuries, and on the other the comitia -centuriata. According to Livy[383]— - - “From those whose rating was 100,000 asses or more he made 80 - centuries, 40 of seniors and 40 of juniors, and termed them all - the _first_ class. The seniors were to be ready for guarding - the city and the juniors were to serve in the field. The arms - required of them were a helmet, round shield, greaves, and - cuirass,—all bronze,—for the protection of the body. Their - offensive weapons were a spear and a sword. To this class were - added two centuries of sappers who were to serve without arms. - Their duty was to convey the engines of war. The _second_ - class was made up of those whose rating was between 75,000 and - 100,000 asses, 20 centuries of seniors and juniors together. - They were equipped with an oblong shield (scutum) instead of - a round one, and they lacked the cuirass, but in all other - respects their arms were the same. The minimal rating of the - _third_ class was 50,000 asses, and the number of centuries - was the same with the same distinction of age, and there was - no change in arms excepting that greaves were not required. In - the _fourth_ were those appraised at 25,000 asses. They had the - same number of centuries but their arms were changed, nothing - being assigned them but a spear and a long javelin. The _fifth_ - class was larger, composed of 30 centuries. They carried - slings and stones for throwing. Among them were counted the - accensi, the hornblowers, and the trumpeters, 3 centuries. This - class was appraised at 11,000 asses. Those whose rating was - less formed one century exempt from military service. Having - thus armed and organized the infantry, he levied 12 centuries - of equites from among the chief men of the state. Also the - 3 centuries instituted by Romulus he made into 6 others of - the same names as those under which the three had originally - been inaugurated.” Afterward Livy speaks of the votes of the - centuries in the comitia. - -The ultimate source of this description, as well as of the similar -account given by Dionysius, is the censorial document already -mentioned,[384] sometimes termed the “discriptio centuriarum,”[385] -sometimes “Commentarii Servi Tullii”[386] on the supposition that Servius -was the author. In reality it belonged to the Censoriae Tabulae[387] -of the period immediately following 269.[388] The document gave a list -of the classes, centuries, and ratings, and furnished directions for -holding the centuriate assembly. As the military divisions and equipments -mentioned by Livy in the passage above had been discarded long before -this date,[389] they could not have been described in the document. -The account of them found in our sources must, therefore, have been -supplied by antiquarian study.[390] The annalist who first used these -Tabulae in the censorial archives was Fabius Pictor.[391] Whether Livy -and Dionysius derived their account directly from him or through a later -annalist cannot be determined.[392] Though Cicero’s source may ultimately -have been the same, he seems to have depended largely on his memory and -is chronologically, though not in substance, less exact. In assigning -seventy rather than eighty centuries to the first class he most probably -has in mind a stage of transition from the earlier to the reformed -organization.[393] - -A brief analysis of this description, as presented by Livy or Dionysius, -will prove that it could not apply at the same time to an army and a -political assembly: (1) The century of proletarians, which formed a part -of the comitia, and which according to Dionysius was larger than all the -rest together, was exempt from military service.[394] (2) The unarmed -supernumeraries termed accensi velati must in their military function -have lacked the centuriate organization, as will hereafter be made -clear.[395] (3) The musicians and the skilled workmen who accompanied -the army must also be eliminated from the centuriate organization of -the army.[396] (4) The seniors, too, lacked the centuriate military -organization.[397] (5) Thus the only pedites in the original centuriate -system were the juniors. Even the military century of juniors was not -in the beginning strictly identical with a voting century; and as -time progressed, the one group diverged more and more widely from the -other.[398] - -Chiefly from these facts, which will become clear in the course of -this study, we are warranted in concluding that the army was at no -time identical with the comitia centuriata. As one was necessarily an -outgrowth of the other, the military organization must have been the -earlier. If therefore the original form of the centuriate system is to -be referred to Servius Tullius, he will be considered the organizer -of the phalanx, which the military centuries constituted,[399] not of -the comitia.[400] This result harmonizes with the view of the ancient -writers that the comitia centuriata exercised no functions—hence we have -a right to infer that it had no existence—before the beginning of the -republic.[401] - -The following sketch of the development of the Roman military system from -the earliest times to the institution of the manipular legion includes -those features only which are essential to an understanding of the origin -and early character of the centuriate assembly. The view maintained -in this volume is, as suggested in the preceding paragraph, that the -comitia centuriata in the form described by Livy and Dionysius developed -from the early republican military organization, which was itself the -result of a gradual growth. Reference is made to equipments chiefly for -the purpose of throwing light on the relation of the Roman to the Greek -organization and of the various Roman military divisions to one another. - - -I. _The Primitive Graeco-Italic Army and the Origin of the Phalanx_ - -Recent research has brought to light a period of Italian history during -which the military system of the Latins and Etruscans closely resembled -that of the Mycenaeans, the former doubtless being derived in large -part from the latter.[402] The nobleman,[403] equipped in heavy armor, -rode forth in his chariot[404] to challenge his peer among the enemy to -personal combat. The mass of common footmen were probably grouped in -tribes and curiae (Greek phratries, brotherhoods),[405] as in Homeric -Greece[406] and among the early Europeans[407] before the development of -an organization based on a numerical system. The arms of the footmen must -have been lighter, and probably varied with the individual’s financial -resources. These common troops could have had no special training or -discipline, as they counted for little in war.[408] Yet in the Homeric -age of Greece some attempt was made to keep the fighters in line, and to -prevent the champions from advancing beyond it to single combat.[409] -A similar tendency to even, rhythmic movement may be inferred for -the Latin army.[410] The great innovators in this direction were the -Lacedaemonians, to whom the honor of inventing the phalanx is chiefly -due.[411] This improvement, which made an epoch in European warfare, -could not have been later than the eighth century B.C. The phalanx was a -line, several ranks deep, of heavy-armed warriors, who moved as a unit -to the sound of music.[412] The depth varied as the occasion demanded; -it was not necessarily uniform throughout the line, but for Lacedaemon -eight may be considered normal.[413] The heavy-armed trooper carried -a large shield, which covered the entire body, a helmet, and greaves; -his offensive weapons were sword and spear.[414] Tyrtaeus mentions also -a coat of mail though not as an essential part of the equipment.[415] -The metal of their defensive armor was mostly bronze; their swords and -spear-points were probably iron, which the mines of Laconia abundantly -supplied.[416] Although it is well known that the phalanx was composed -of smaller units, the original organization can only be conjectured. It -is not unlikely that in the beginning there were tribal regiments,[417] -divided into companies of fifty or perhaps a hundred,[418] which were -made up of still smaller groups. The military age extended from the -twentieth to the sixtieth year.[419] - -The phalanx was readily adopted by other Greek states, which modified it -to suit their several conditions. In Athens and probably elsewhere the -army had a tribal organization,[420] but a census was introduced in order -to determine who possessed sufficient wealth for service on horseback, in -the heavy infantry, and in the light infantry; and when once the census -classes were adopted, it was easy to extend them to political uses. In -this way the four property classes at Athens, probably instituted about -the middle of the seventh century B.C.,[421] became under Solon if not -earlier a basis for the distribution of offices and other political -privileges. Naturally the Greeks of Sicily and Italy adopted the phalanx, -and it is reasonable to suppose that the Romans derived it, through the -Etruscans,[422] from one of these neighbors. - - -II. _The Servian Army_ - -As the heavy troops of the Greek line were all armed alike, the Romans -probably at first composed their phalanx in a similar way, without -gradations of equipment. The complex system of census groupings in the -army as we find it immediately before the institution of the manipular -legion could only have resulted from a long development. The statement -last made finds justification in the fact that the term classis[423] was -originally limited to the first or highest census group, all the rest -being “infra classem.”[424] - -Not only was the organization like that of the Greeks, but the arms, too, -were in the main Greek. The soldiers of the classis were equipped with -helmet, shield, greaves, spear, and sword; as they wore a cuirass, they -used a large round Etruscan buckler[425] instead of the man-covering -Dorian shield. They were grouped in centuries,[426] forty of which -composed the classis in the fully developed phalanx.[427] The age of -service of the juniors, who alone fought in the field, extended from the -completed seventeenth to the completed forty-sixth year,[428] whereas the -seniors from the forty-seventh to the sixtieth year formed a reserve. - -A still nearer connection can be found between the Roman and the Greek -horsemen. As is proved by archaeology, the earliest Greek knights had -no specialized weapons or armor and were not accustomed to fight on -horseback, but were heavy infantry who used their horses simply as -conveyance.[429] The same is true of the earliest Roman equites, whose -equipment closely resembled that of the Greek horsemen. On account of -their swiftness they were primitively called celeres.[430] Although these -mounted footmen are generally known as equites, which in this sense may -but loosely be translated knights, the Romans did not institute a true -cavalry till the period of the Samnite wars.[431] It is a curious fact -that some horsemen, Roman as well as Greek, were provided each with two -horses,[432] one for the warrior and the other for his squire,[433] -and that the mounted soldiers of Etruria were in these respects the -same.[434] A further resemblance between the earliest Greek and Roman -horsemen lies in the fact that they were noble.[435] - -In their account of the growth of the mounted service during the regal -period the ancient authorities show great inconsistencies. It seems -probable that the early annalists pictured the increase in the knights -in a way analogous to that of the senate: at first Romulus formed a -troop, or century, from the Ramnes; afterward a second was added from -the Tities; and still later the Luceres furnished a third.[436] Then -Tarquinius Priscus doubled the number, making six in all, and Servius -finally increased it to eighteen centuries. This simple development, -itself a reconstruction, was complicated by the desire of the historians -to make the number of knights under Servius agree with the number -under Augustus, given by Dionysius[437] at about 5000; hence the -assumption of 200 or even 300 knights to the century as early as the -reign of Romulus.[438] It is possible by clearing away these evident -misconceptions to discover the approximate truth. - -When the chariot gave way to the horseback rider is not definitely -known; at all events the change seems to have taken place under -Hellenic influence, and could hardly therefore have been earlier than -the beginning of the seventh century B.C.[439] The idea of the sources -is that there came to be three troops of horsemen, furnished by the -tribes,[440] as well as three regiments of foot, that before Servius -the number of troops of horse was doubled, and that the six troops thus -formed were named accordingly after the tribes Ramnenses, Titienses, -and Lucerenses priores and posteriores respectively.[441] The priores -had each two horses, the posteriores one.[442] Hence the essential -difference between these divisions was in rank and wealth rather than in -the relative time of their institution. Long after Servius both divisions -continued to be patrician.[443] As the centuriate organization of Servius -applied to the infantry, the cavalry remained little affected by it. The -six troops with their old names survived, and eventually became a part -of the comitia centuriata. In the military sphere, however, the troop no -longer retained its identity; but the whole body was divided into twenty -turmae, each composed of three decuries commanded by decurions.[444] -When with the institution of the republic the phalanx was split into -two legions, ten turmae of cavalry were assigned to each legion.[445] -As in historical time the number of horsemen to a legion did not exceed -300,[446] and as we have no reason to suppose that at an earlier period -this arm of the service was proportionally stronger, we may conclude that -in the Servian phalanx, or double legion, the number did not exceed 600. - -From the foregoing discussion it appears clear that the Servian military -system rested upon a division of the citizens into four groups, closely -corresponding to the Athenian census divisions: (1) the equites -priores, like the pentacosiomedimni, (2) the equites posteriores, like -the hippeis,[447] (3) the classis, like the zeugitae, (4) the light -troops infra classem, like the thetes. The distinction between priores -and posteriores rested not upon an assessment but upon a less precise -difference in wealth, whether determined by the individual concerned -or by the state we cannot know; it represented, too, a gradation of -nobility. The distinction between the knights and the classici was one of -rank; that between the classis and the soldiers infra classem was alone -determined by the census. - - -III. _The Development of the Five Post-Servian Military Divisions on the -Basis of Census Ratings_ - -This arrangement was by no means final. Further changes were made in both -foot and horse which were to have a bearing on the organization of the -comitia centuriata. After a time[448] two additions of men less heavily -armed than the classici were made to the phalanx, whether simultaneously -or successively cannot be determined. There were now forty centuries of -classici, and the additions comprised ten centuries each, the second -less heavily armed than the first, though they may both be considered -heavy in contrast with the light troops. Perhaps the state according to -its ability made up the deficiency in the equipment, so as to render -the entire phalanx as evenly armed as possible.[449] It numbered sixty -centuries of heavy infantry, composed of three grades which depended -upon the census rating.[450] The light troops were also grouped in two -divisions on the same principle. The first comprised ten centuries; -originally the second may have contained the same number, in which -case four were afterward added to make the fourteen known to exist in -the fully developed system.[451] There were five divisions of infantry -amounting to eighty-four centuries of a hundred men each. Undoubtedly the -growth of the army to this degree of strength was gradual, though the -successive steps cannot be more minutely traced.[452] - -In making the levy the military tribunes selected the soldiers from -the lists of tribesmen, taking one tribe after another as the lot -determined.[453] The early Romans must have striven to distribute the -population as equally as possible among the tribes in order to render -them approximately equal in capacity for military service. As long as -this equality continued, the officials could constitute the army of -an equal number of men from each tribe. These considerations explain -the close relation in early time between the number of tribes and of -centuries as well as the suggestions offered by our sources as to an -early connection between the centuries and the tribes.[454] While there -were but twenty tribes we may suppose that the legion comprised but 4000 -men, which was raised to 4200 when the twenty-first tribe was added. In -this way can we account for the number of centuries to the legion. If -but half the available military strength was required, the magistrates -might draw by lot ten tribes from which to make the levy.[455] It was an -easy matter as long as the heavy troops were limited to the classis;[456] -but when two other ratings were added, and when meantime the tribes -must have grown unlike in population, it became practically impossible -to maintain for each rating a just proportion from the tribes;[457] and -perhaps this was the chief reason for the modification in the method of -recruiting. When therefore the tribes were increased to twenty-five, and -it was deemed inexpedient to make a corresponding enlargement of the -legion,[458] a new principle was adopted for the levy: after determining -the ratio between the number of men needed and the whole number -available, the officers drew from each tribe a number proportionate -to its capacity.[459] It would agree well with all the known facts to -suppose that the addition of the second and third ratings, followed by -a more thorough organization of the light troops, belongs to the early -republic (509-387),[460] when Rome needed all her strength in her life -and death struggle with hostile neighbors. At the same time the purchase -of armor and the increased burden of military duty would help account -for the desperate economic condition of the poorer peasants of that epoch. - -The proportions of the five ratings—20-15-10-5-2½ or 2—to be discussed -hereafter,[461] suggest an explanation of their origin. It would be -reasonable to assume that the normal holding of the well-to-do citizen -was a twenty-iugera lot and that the Servian phalanx was composed -of possessors of that amount, the light-armed being their sons and -others distinctly inferior in wealth. In course of a few generations -as the population grew, with no corresponding territorial expansion -or colonization or industrial development, and with only a limited -conversion of waste to arable land, many of the lots became divided -and subdivided. The result was a weakening of the phalanx at a time -when the state was in the most pressing need of military resources. -The institution of the five ratings as a basis for the reorganization -of the army was a temporary expedient for meeting the crisis, to be -superseded not long afterward by a better system founded on military -pay. In all probability the introduction of the five ratings, or at -least the beginning of the movement in that direction, should be closely -connected with the institution of the censorship in 443 or 435.[462] The -supposition would give us a sufficient reason for the creation of this -new office at that time, and the strengthening of the army would explain -the success of the Romans in the wars immediately following. - -How the five ratings were arrayed in battle is unknown. If the front -counted a thousand men (milites),[463] the classis comprised four -ranks (4000), the second and third ratings one rank each, making in -all six ranks of heavy troops (6000).[464] Twenty centuries could be -drawn from the two ratings of light troops to complete the eight ranks -when needed.[465] But the Romans undoubtedly exercised the same good -judgment as the Lacedaemonians in varying their formation to suit the -emergency;[466] and for that reason it is wrong to assume the same depth -for all occasions or an even depth for any one occasion. The management -of long lines one-man deep must have been extremely difficult, if not -impossible.[467] The explanation already suggested, that the state -supplied the deficiency in equipment,[468] would greatly simplify the -case, for there would then exist no need of arraying the census groups in -successive lines. Whatever may have been the tactic arrangement, it did -not continue long, for soon after the introduction of regular pay, about -400 B.C.,[469] the distinction between the ratings ceased to have an -importance for military affairs. - - -IV. _The Question as to the Connection of the Supernumeraries and the -Seniors with the Military Centuries_ - -A number of supernumeraries termed accensi velati accompanied the army. -The epithet accensi proves them to have been outside the five ratings, -while velati describes them as wearing civilian dress. We are informed -by the sources that they carried water and weapons to the fighting men, -stepped into the places of the dead and wounded, and acted as servants -to the lower officers.[470] These men could not have been organized -in centuries,[471] for they were drawn up in the rear behind the -light troops; they extended along the entire breadth of the army,[472] -and must have greatly exceeded one hundred or even two hundred. The -musicians,[473] too, who accompanied the army were not grouped in two -centuries, for they were distributed throughout the army.[474] There is -no reason for assuming exactly two hundred musicians[475] or exactly -two hundred workmen,[476] or for supposing that any of the men of this -description were organized in centuries in the army. Reasoning in a -similar way in regard to the seniors, we conclude that their organization -in centuries could not have belonged to the original Servian system. A -military century, as the name indicates, must have contained a hundred -men.[477] But in any static population there are three times as many men -between seventeen and forty-six as between forty-six and sixty[478]—in -Rome there were three times as many juniors as seniors; and as the -number of junior and senior centuries was equal, the latter could have -contained only about thirty-three each, on the supposition that the whole -male population between seventeen and forty-six years was organized in -centuries. - -The mere fact that the senior century contained so few men suggests that -it was not a military institution. This impression is confirmed by the -information that the seniors were reserved for the defence of the city, -while the juniors took the field in active service.[479] When we reflect -that even in the early republic the seniors could not often have been -called on for defence, as the juniors were ordinarily sufficient for the -purpose,[480] that the manning of the walls did not necessarily require a -division into companies or an equipment like that for field service, and -that when it was thought expedient for the seniors to serve in centuries -or cohorts, their enrolment in these companies is especially mentioned, -our conviction that the senior centuries did not belong to the original -Servian organization grows into a certainty.[481] - - -V. _Conclusions as to the Servian and Early Republican Organizations; -Transition to the Manipular Legion_ - -In our search for the Servian and post-Servian schemes of military -organization we found it necessary to eliminate from the discriptio -centuriarum all the centuries of pedites with the exception of the -juniors. But even a military century of juniors could not have remained -identical with a voting century; for the former comprised a fixed number -and the same for all ratings, whereas in the comitia of historical time -the centuries varied greatly in size, many of them containing far more -than a hundred men each. In the four lower classes each century contained -as many men as the entire first class;[482] and individuals constantly -shifted from one class to another as their several properties increased -or diminished.[483] It is a mistake, therefore, to think of the army as -identical with even the junior centuries of the comitia.[484] Doubtless -when the Servian army was first introduced, its organization was made -to fit actual conditions, so that all who were liable to service found -their place in it; but as the political assembly of centuries was -instituted many years afterward, the army with its various enlargements -could have kept meanwhile no more than approximate pace with the changing -population, and at no time could it include the physically disqualified, -who nevertheless had a right to vote in the junior centuries of the -political assembly. On the other hand there were soldiers in the army too -young to be in the comitia centuriata.[485] - -The conclusion as to the strength of the army in the first years of the -republic, before the latter had acquired any considerable accession of -territory, corresponds closely with a moderate estimate of the population -under the conditions then existing. The area of the state was about 983 -square kilometers (equivalent to 379.5 sq. mi. or 242,899 acres).[486] -Estimating the population of this agricultural community at its maximum -of sixty to the square kilometer, we should have less than 60,000 for the -entire area.[487] The number of men from seventeen to sixty, the Roman -military age, should be about thirty per cent of the population[488]—less -therefore than 18,000. If the ratio of juniors to seniors was about three -to one,[489] we should have about 13,000 juniors to 5000 seniors. But a -deduction must be made for slaves and for the physically incapacitated, -leaving perhaps 9000 or 10,000 juniors and 3000 or 4000 seniors. These -results are not unreasonable. Making allowance for several hundred -supernumeraries,[490] we should then have no more than enough juniors to -fill the eighty-four centuries of foot and the six troops of horse. It is -clear, therefore, that all available forces were included in the army and -that the junior centuries could not have contained more than a hundred -men each. - -Even before the phalanx had thus been brought to perfection, -modifications were being made in the equipment under the influence of the -Gallic invasion.[491] The introduction of pay, about 400 B.C., as has -been said,[492] broke down the distinction of equipment based on degree -of wealth, and not long afterward, probably in the time of the Samnite -wars, the phalanx gave way to the manipular legion, which reached its -full development in the Punic wars.[493] - - -VI. _The Five Classes and their Ratings_ - -Though originally denoting the men of the first rating, who possessed the -fullest equipment,[494] the term classis with an explanatory adjective -came to apply to the entire army[495] or to its component parts.[496] The -plural “classes” came finally to mean the five census groups, represented -by the five timocratic gradations of the comitia centuriata. What had -formerly been the classis then came to be known as classis prima, and the -“infra classem” ratings were numbered downward second, third, fourth, -and fifth. Probably this extension in the use of the word was not made -till after the disappearance of the ratings from the army—how much later -we do not know. In a speech delivered in 169 in favor of the lex Voconia -the elder Cato more than once examined into the meaning of classicus -and infra classem.[497] A hasty inference would be that at this late -date classis was still strictly limited to the first rating. It is to -be noted, however, that the early meaning might be retained in a legal -formula long after it had disappeared from general use, that classicus -certainly preserved its original meaning notwithstanding the new -development of the noun from which it is derived, and especially that the -early sense of the terms classicus and infra classem was not generally -known in 169, else Cato would not have taken such pains to define them. -We know that the ratings were termed classes in 111,[498] and from -what has just been said on the Voconian law it seems probable that the -development took place long before 169. The circumstance that in their -“discriptio centuriarum” Livy and Dionysius make no reference to the -distinction between classis and infra classem would favor the supposition -that they found no such distinction in their common source—ultimately -Fabius Pictor. Hence it is not unlikely that classis was used in its -historical meaning of property class in the censorial document from which -Fabius derived his knowledge of the fully developed comitia centuriata, -and which belonged to the period immediately following 269.[499] - -Before the censorship of Appius Claudius Caecus, 312, military service -within the census ratings was based on the possession of land, and -the gradations of equipment, while they lasted, must therefore have -been determined by the size of the estate reckoned in iugera.[500] -Huschke[501] rightly inferred that the number of iugera marking the -lower limit of each division must have been proportioned to the later -money ratings, and assumed accordingly 20, 15, 10, 5, 2½ or 2 iugera -as the respective minimal holdings of the five divisions. Although -absolute certainty is unattainable, most scholars accept his conclusions -as probable.[502] Before the change was made in the appraisements -from amount of land to money, the census gradations ceased to serve a -military purpose. In the further discussion of these groups reference is -therefore solely to their political character, especially as expressed -in the organization of the comitia centuriata. Till the time of Marius, -however, the soldiers were ordinarily recruited from the classes—that is, -from the citizens who possessed at least the qualification of the lowest -group.[503] - -The money ratings of 312 are not recorded; we know those only of the -time following 269. The ratings of the earlier date must have been in -the nominally libral asses then current. For a long time, probably down -to 312, the _as_ remained at eleven to nine ounces in weight, then sank -rapidly to four, three, and two ounces, reaching the last-mentioned -weight in or shortly before 269. In this year or the following was -legally adopted the lighter _as_, weighing two ounces, or a sixth of a -pound, and hence termed sextantarian, and the heavier asses still in -circulation were henceforth reckoned as sesterces, which now became -the unit of value.[504] Two and a half sextantarian asses made a -sesterce, and four sesterces made a denarius.[505] The _as_ continued -to be copper, whereas the sesterce and the denarius were silver. In -consequence of the use of the sextantarian _as_ the ratings must have -been elevated to correspond with the decline of the standard; and the -result of this change is the well-known series, 100,000, 75,000, 50,000, -25,000, 11,000.[506] There can be no doubt that under the standard used -in 312 the ratings were lower than those given. It is incredible that -the classis should ever have been appraised so high as 100,000 asses of -ten-ounce weight or even of the value of sesterces (5 oz.).[507] But -the ratings of 312 have not been definitely ascertained. Assuming but -one elevation between the two dates and in the proportion of 4:10:: -sextantarian _as_: heavy _as_ or sesterce, Mommsen[508] concludes that -the appraisements of 312 were 40,000, 30,000, 20,000, 10,000, and 4400 -asses respectively for the five classes. The adjustment however may have -been gradual, as was the decline of the standard, and the former need not -have corresponded exactly with the latter. But in so far as the Romans -failed to bring about this adjustment, the censors must have found it -necessary continually to advance the citizens from the lower to the -higher divisions. - -The ratings mentioned above as established on the basis of the -sextantarian standard, namely 100,000, 75,000, 50,000, 25,000, and 11,000 -asses for the five classes respectively, are those given by Livy.[509] -Several variations affecting the highest and lowest classes are offered -by other writers. Dionysius[510] states the appraisement of the fifth -class at 12½ minae, which would be 12,500 asses. The usual explanation is -that he is dealing in round numbers without especial regard to accuracy, -for which reason Livy should be given the preference. It is doubtful -however whether Dionysius was so inexact. More probably his estimate -depended ultimately on the idea that the minimal number of iugera of the -highest class was twenty-five,[511] taken in connection with the decimal -ratio between the extreme classes—an interpretation which would help -explain variations in the rating of the highest class to be mentioned -hereafter; or with less reason we might assume that the statements of -Dionysius and Livy represent earlier and later conditions.[512] The -limit of 400 drachmas given by Polybius[513] proves a lowering of the -minimal rating between 269 and the publication of his history.[514] It -may have been made in 217, when the money system was again changed. As -Polybius probably considered the drachma, or denarius, to be worth ten -asses,[515] the limit which he mentions would be 4000 asses. Cicero -states the minimal limit at 1500 asses,[516] and a still lower sum of -375, mentioned by Gellius,[517] marked the line of division between the -taxable proletarians and the capite censi, who were exempt from taxation. -As the differentiation between the two groups last named must have been -effected before 167, when the Romans were relieved of the tributum,[518] -the rating given by Cicero could not have been later than that vouched -for by Polybius. The limit of 4000 asses, accordingly, had reference -merely to military service, whereas 1500 marked at once the political -and tributary line of separation between the fifth class and the taxable -proletarians.[519] The limit of 375 asses, on the other hand, was far -below the fifth class, and had nothing to do with it.[520] The relation -of these numbers to one another may be summarized as follows: Those -assessed at 4000 or more asses belonged to the fifth class, enjoyed the -political rights of that class, and were subject to military service -as well as to taxation (tributum); those rated at 1500-4000 asses also -belonged to the fifth class, enjoyed the political rights of that class, -and were subject to taxation but exempt from military service; those -rated at 375-1500 asses were proletarians, below the fifth class but -subject to taxation; those rated below 375 asses, the capite censi, were -exempt from taxation. - -As regards the rating of the highest class, the elder Pliny[521] states -it at 110,000 asses, which may be a copyist’s error for 100,000 or -for 120,000; the estimate of Paulus Diaconus[522] is 120,000 and of -Gellius[523] 125,000. If the manuscripts have correctly preserved these -numbers, they may represent computations based on a varying number of -iugera, from twenty-two to twenty-five[524] at the rate of 5000 asses a -iugerum—a valuation which may have been given in the original annalistic -source (Fabius Pictor). From the fact that Pliny assigns this rating to -Servius as author, and that Gellius speaks of it in the past, we must -infer that it was not due to a relatively late change. Indeed the rating -must have remained unaltered to the time of Polybius,[525] who states -that those appraised at 10,000 drachmas wore the cuirass—according to -Livy[526] and Dionysius,[527] the distinctive equipment of the first -class.[528] In the same age the Voconian law, 169, provided that a -man registered by the censors as worth 100,000 asses or more should -not bequeath his property to a woman.[529] While speaking in favor -of the measure the elder Cato expounded the distinction between the -classici and those who were “infra classem.”[530] Strictly following -Cato’s definition, Gellius[531] explains the classici as those of the -first class in contrast with the members of the lower classes, who are -infra classem. Evidently the classici are to be identified with those -rated at 100,000 asses, as given by Gaius.[532] The sum of 100,000 -sesterces, in place of asses, represented by later writers[533] as -the one fixed by this law, is due either to a late interpretation or -to an amendment.[534] The minimal qualification of the first class -must therefore have continued unchanged from 269 to the passing of the -Voconian law, 169, and the composition of the _History_ of Polybius.[535] -From the latter event to the tribuneship of Tiberius Gracchus little -time was left for an increase, which certainly the Gracchi and their -successors would take no interest in bringing about. Further depreciation -in the weight of the _as_, by the reduction to a half ounce through the -Papirian law of 89,[536] had no effect on the valuation, as the standard -was the silver sesterce, the _as_ having merely the fiduciary value of a -quarter sesterce. Apart from the accounts of Livy and Dionysius already -considered, no reference is made to the valuation of the intermediate -classes, unless it be a passage in Livy[537] to the effect that freedmen -possessing country estates worth at least 30,000 sesterces were enrolled -in the rural tribes by the censors of 169, which is interpreted by -Mommsen[538] to refer to the qualification of the second class. This is -true if, as has been assumed above, the censors still reckoned two and a -half asses to the sesterce.[539] - - -VII. _Belot’s Theory as to the Ratings_ - -Notice must be taken of a theory proposed by Belot,[540] that at the time -of the First Punic War, owing to an economic revolution which enhanced -prices, and to the decrease in the weight of the _as_, the five ratings -as stated by Dionysius for the earlier period were multiplied by ten, -giving for the future 1,000,000, 750,000, 500,000, 250,000, 125,000 asses -for the five classes respectively.[541] The theory is supported with -remarkable learning and skill. There can be no doubt as to the lowering -of the weight of the _as_ or of the economic revolution which increased -prices. Large valuations of estates such as he mentions are found in the -sources. For example in 214 the government ordered[542] that— - - Those rated at 50,000- 100,000 asses should furnish one sailor. - Those rated at 100,000- 300,000 asses should furnish three sailors. - Those rated at 300,000-1,000,000 asses should furnish five sailors. - Those rated at above 1,000,000 asses should furnish seven sailors. - Senators should furnish eight sailors. - -Belot’s attempt to identify the highest of these appraisements with the -rating of the first class is unsuccessful, as will immediately appear. -The object of the order issued by the government in 214 was to provide -crews for the fleet of that year. Although the hundred and fifty ships -to be manned[543] seem to have been triremes, we may consider them -quinqueremes so as not to underestimate the number of men necessary. -Reckoning 375 men to the ship,[544] we should have 56,250 men for the -entire fleet. But according to Belot[545] there were 22,000 knights at -this time, whose census rating was 1,000,000 asses, and who accordingly -would have to furnish seven men each for the navy, which would amount to -154,000, or more than enough to man three such fleets as that of the year -under consideration. But as the knights constituted only a twelfth of the -total number of registered citizens of that period,[546] most if not all -of whom must according to Belot have been assessed at 50,000 or above, -we shall be obliged at least to double the 154,000 sailors furnished by -the knights to obtain the whole number demanded by the government. The -absurdity of the result condemns the premises. The minimal census of the -knight could not have been materially if at all above 100,000 asses,[547] -and the great mass of citizens must have been rated below that sum. Other -features of his theory need not be considered here. The truth is that -the great accumulation of wealth benefited but few; and notwithstanding -the advance in the money value of property, the mass of people remained -so poor that the state could not disturb the census ratings, however -out of harmony with the new conditions they seem to have become. No -suspicion should be thrown on the continuance of these small valuations -by the circumstance that occasionally the state compelled the wealthy to -contribute to the burden of war according to their ability, as in 214, -and increased the penalties for the crimes and misdemeanors which the -rich and powerful were wont to commit.[548] - - -VIII. _The Post-Servian Equites_ - -The classes, as developed after Servius, have now been considered -sufficiently for an appreciation of their relation to the comitia -centuriata. It remains to discuss from the same point of view the -post-Servian alterations in the equestrian organization. - -In the earliest period when the warriors in general equipped themselves -at their own expense,[549] the equites provided their own horses. But -in time as the patricians ceased to be the only wealthy class in the -community, and as they began to lose their political advantages, their -duty of keeping one or two horses came to be felt as onerous, and some -means of lightening it was sought for. The only private property which -was free from the burden of supporting military service was that of -widows and orphans. The government determined accordingly to levy a -regular contribution on this class of estates in the interest of the -equites. The eques was allowed ten thousand asses, or one thousand -denarii (aes equestre), with which to purchase his horse or horses for -the ten years of service and two thousand asses (aes hordearium) annually -for maintenance.[550] He was not paid the money in advance, but was given -security for the required sums,[551] which were gradually to be made -good from the special kind of tax here described. When these equestrian -funds were first granted cannot be absolutely determined. Cicero[552] -assigns their institution to Tarquinius Priscus, Livy[553] to Servius, -Plutarch[554] to Camillus in the year of his censorship, 377. For obvious -reasons the earlier dates are suspicious, whereas the last has the -advantage of connecting the institution of these funds with the general -movement for the public support of military service. When in the war with -Veii regular military pay was introduced, the eques on account of his -more burdensome duty, perhaps too because of his higher rank, was allowed -three times the pay of the legionary.[555] It was afterward decided to -deduct the aes hordearium, probably also the aes equestre, from his -pay.[556] Meanwhile as wars were waged on an ever increasing scale, the -patricians, who were dwindling in number, could not furnish all the -cavalry needed. This want was especially felt in the struggle with Veii, -whereupon wealthy plebeian youths[557] came forward and offered to serve -with their own horses.[558] This is the first known instance of voluntary -equestrian duty, doubtless often repeated at crises during the remainder -of the republican period. In the first case at least the state provided -for the keep of the horses. The volunteers were of the same grade of -wealth as the conscripts; they were held in equal honor,[559] and most -probably their years of voluntary service were counted in with their -regular duty in making up the required number.[560] Service equo privato -could also be imposed as a punishment. The only known instance, however, -was that required by the censors of 209 of the equites who had disgraced -themselves at Cannae. Their horses were taken from them, their campaigns -equo publico were not counted to their credit, but they were required -to serve ten years equis privatis.[561] These are the only instances -of service with private horses mentioned in history. In all ancient -literature is no suggestion that the equites equo privato formed a rank -by themselves or were an institution.[562] It should also be said that -the injustice of furnishing some with horses and of compelling others to -go to war at their own expense, unless by way of punishment, was contrary -to the spirit of the constitution. This conclusion is supported by the -elder Pliny’s[563] definition of the military equites, which makes the -public horse an essential. From the time therefore when the state began -to support the mounted service in the way described above, the equites -equis publicis continued to be the only regular citizen horsemen. - -The number of equites with public horses is approximately determined for -any time by the number of legions then enrolled. The Servian phalanx, -as has been noted,[564] consisted of two legions, which remained the -normal number through the fifth century. But in the wars with Samnium -and Pyrrhus Rome was able regularly to support four legions.[565] The -military force could not have been doubled before the incorporation of -the Veientan territory early in the fourth century;[566] most probably -the enlargement belongs to still later time. The increase in the -infantry required a corresponding enlargement of the mounted service. At -least twelve hundred equites were henceforth required for active duty. -Making allowance for reserves and ineffectives, the government raised -the number of equites equo publico to eighteen hundred. The twelve new -centuries were open alike to patricians and plebeians, whereas the old -six remained for a time exclusively patrician. This seems to have been -the condition at the opening of the first war with Carthage. During the -Punic wars the number varied greatly, sometimes reaching a total of -more than five thousand in the field, not counting reserves.[567] After -the war with Hannibal the state, drained of men and money, allowed the -cavalry to dwindle.[568] Viewing this condition with alarm, the elder -Cato[569] urged that the number should be increased, and that a minimal -limit be fixed at 2200. Probably at the same time he proposed that the -legion should be strengthened. His measure must have been adopted, for -after his censorship we find the legion regularly consisting of 5200 -foot and 300 horse.[570] Under Augustus there were times when 5000 -equites[571] equo publico took part in the parade which he revived.[572] -As no reason can be found why Augustus should suddenly increase this -class, we must conclude that there were probably about 5000 equites equo -publico in the late republic. - -As long as the cavalry remained exclusively patrician, a census -qualification was precluded. Though Cicero and Livy refer the equestrian -census to Servius Tullius, their vagueness on this point shows that they -lacked definite information.[573] It must have been introduced at the -time when the patriciate ceased to be an essential qualification, when -the levy came to be made on the basis of wealth rather than of blood. -This change should be assigned to the early part of the fourth century -B.C.[574] For a time the census was that of the first class.[575] In -214 it was still 100,000 asses, or not much above, as has already been -proved.[576] In the late republic and under the emperors the minimal -rating was 400,000 sesterces.[577] When it was raised to this amount is -unknown. - - I. THE EARLY GRAECO-ITALIAN PHALANX: Busolt, _Griechische - Geschichte_, i, ii (see Contents); Bauer, A., _Griechische - Kriegsaltertümer_; Droysen, H., _Kriegsalterthümer der - Griechen_, in Hermann’s _Lehrb. der griech. Antiquitäten_, - ii. 1-74; Gilbert, _Constitutional Antiquities of Sparta and - Athens_ (see Index and Contents); Lammert, E., _Geschichtliche - Entwickelung der griech. Taktik_, in _N. Jahrb. f. kl. Alt._ - iii (1899). 1-29; _Die neuesten Forschungen auf antiken - Schlachtfeldern im Griechenland_, in _N. Jahrb. f. d. kl. - Philol._ xiii (1904). 195-212, 252-79, contains some matters - of interest for the present subject, though it treats mainly - of the time after Alexander; Fröhlich, F., _Beiträge zur - Kriegsführung und Kriegskunst der Römer zur Zeit der Republik_; - Schiller, _Röm. Kriegsaltertümer_, in Müller’s _Hdb. d. kl. - Altwiss._ iv. 707 ff.; on earlier literature, 714 f., 728 f., - 733, 737, 741, 744; Leinveber, A., _Die Legion von Livius_, in - _Philol._ lxi. N. F. xv (1902). 32-41, a specialist in military - science; Nitzsch, K. W., _Das Verhältniss von Heer und Staat in - der röm. Republik_, in _Hist. Zeitschr._ vii (1862). 133-58; - Liers, H., _Kriegswesen der Alten_; Delbrück, _Geschichte - der Kriegskunst im Rahmen der politischen Geschichte_, bks. - i, iv, best authority; _Die römische Manipulartaktik_, in - _Hist. Zeitschr._ N. F. xv (1884). 239-64; Niese, B., _Ueber - Wehrverfassung, Dienstpflicht, und Heerwesen Griechenlands_, - ibid, xcviii (1907). 263-301, 473-506; Arnim, H., _Ineditum - Vaticanum_, in _Hermes_, xxvii (1892). 118-30, the portion of - Greek text used is on p. 121; Wendling, E., _Zu Posidonius und - Varro_, in _Hermes_, xxviii (1893). 335-53, on the source of - the _Ined Vat._; Bruncke, H., in _N. Philol. Rundschau_ (1888) - 40-4; Müller-Deecke, _Etrusker_, i. 364-72; Müller, J. J., - _Studien zur röm. Verfassungsgeschichte_, in _Philol._ xxxiv - (1876). 96-136; Helbig, _Sur les attributs des saliens_, in - _Mémoires de l’académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres_, - xxxvii² (1905). 205-76; on the same subject, in _Comptes rendus - de l’acad._ etc. 1904. ii. 206-12. - - II. THE MILITARY AND POLITICAL CENTURIES AND CLASSES: Niebuhr, - B. G., _Röm. Geschichte_, i. 451-511, Eng. 197-236; Schwegler, - _Röm. Geschichte_, I. bk. xvii; Huschke, Ph. E., _Verfassung - des Königs Servius Tullius_, especially chs. iv, vii, viii; - Peter, C., _Epochen der Verfassungsgeschichte der röm. - Republik; Studien zur röm. Geschichte_, controverts Mommsen’s - view as to the military character of the Servian institutions; - Mommsen, _History of Rome_, bk. I. ch. vi; _De apparitoribus - magistratuum romanorum_, in _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. vi (1846). - 1-57, includes some account of the accensi; _Röm. Tribus_, - 59-72, 121-143, 160 ff.; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 240 ff.; _Röm. - Forschungen_, i. 134-40; Willems, P., _Droit public Rom._ - 40, 43, 84-92; Mispoulet, J. B., _Institutions politiques - des Romains_, i. 203-7; Lange, L., _Röm. Altertümer_, i. - 522-66; _Cicero über die servianische Centurienverfassung_, - in _Kleine Schriften_, i. 227-234; Herzog, _Geschichte und - System der röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. 37-43, 1066 f.; Ihne, - W., _History of Rome_, bk. I. ch. vii; _Early Rome_, 51-4, - 79, 132-9; _Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung_, in - _Symbola Philologorum Bonnensium_ (1864-1867). 629-44; Breda, - _Die Centurienverfassung des Servius Tullius_; Genz, H., - _Servianische Centurien-Verfassung_; Soltau, W., _Altröm. - Volksversammlungen_, 229-96; Ullrich, J., _Centuriatcomitien_; - Le Tellier, M., _L’Organisation centuriate et les comices par - centuries_, ch. i; Hallays, A., _Les comices à Rome_; Morlot, - É., _Les comices électoraux_, ch. iii; Moye, M., _Élections - politiques sous la république Rom._ chs. iii, iv, vii; Müller, - ibid.; Neumann, K. J., _Grundherrschaft der röm. Republik, - die Bauernbefreiung, und die Entstehung der servianischen - Verfassung_, speculative but very suggestive; Greenidge, A. H. - J., _Roman Public Life_, 65-76; _Legal Procedure of Cicero’s - Time_, 307 ff.; Schott, P. O., _Röm. Geschichte im Lichte - der neuesten Forschungen_; Smith, F., _Röm. Timokratie_; - Pardon, _De aerariis_; Maue, H., _Der praefectus fabrum_; - Bloch, A., _Le praefectus Fabrum_, pt. ii, in _Musée Belge_, - ix (1905). 352-78; Babelon, E., _Monnaies de la république - Rom._ I. pts. i, ii; _Traité des monnaies Grecq. et Rom._ - i; _Origines de la monnaie_; Samwer-Bahrfeldt, _Geschichte - des alten röm. Münzwesens_; Hill, G. F., _Greek and Roman - Coins_, 45-9; Regling, _Zum älteren röm. und ital. Münzen_, - in _Klio_, vi (1906). 489-524; Belot, É., _De la révolution - économique et monétaire ... à Rome_; articles in Pauly-Wissowa, - _Real-Encycl.: Accensi_, i. 135-7 (Kubitschek); _Adscriptivi_, - i. 422 (Cichorius); _Adsiduus_, i. 426 (Kubitschek); - _Aerarius_, i. 674-6 (idem); _As_, ii. 1499-1513 (idem); - _Capite censi_, iii. 1521-3 (Kübler); _Census_, iii. 1914-24 - (Kubitschek); _Centuria_, iii. 1952-62 (Kübler, Domazewski, - Kubitschek); _Classis_, iii. 2630-32 (Kübler); _Collegium_, - iv. 380-480 (Kornemann); _Comitia_, iv. 679-715 (Liebenam); - _Cornicines_, iv. 1602 f. (Fiebiger); _Denarius_, v. 202-15 - (Hultsch); articles in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict.: Accensus_, - i. 16 ff. (Humbert and others); _As_, i. 454-64 (Lenormant); - _Census_, ii. 1003-17 (Humbert); _Centuria_, ii. 1017 (idem); - _Classis_, i. 1224 f. (idem); _Comices centuriates_, s. - _Comitia_, ii. 1378 ff. (idem); articles in Ruggiero, E., - _Dizionario epigrafico: Accensus_, i. 18-21; _Aerarius_, i. - 311-3; _Aes_, i. 313 f.; _Centuria_, ii. 183-9; _Censor_, - ii. 157 ff.; _Census_, ii. 174-7; _Cornicines_, ii. 1213-6; - _Fabri_, iii. 4-18 (Libenam); Olcott, _Thes. ling. lat. ep._ i. - 51: Accensus; Pais, E., _Ancient Legends of Roman History_, ch. - vii. - - III. THE EQUITES: Niebuhr, ibid. i. 415-22, Eng. 197-200; - Schwegler, ibid. i. 756-60; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 444-7, 523, - 547-51; _Recension über K. Niemeyer, De equitibus romanis - commentatio historica_, in _Kleine Schriften_, i. 113-37; - Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 397-400; iii. 106-9, 253-62; - Madvig, J. N., _Verfassung und Verwaltung des röm. Staates_, - i. 155-82; Mispoulet, J. B., _Études d’institutions Rom._ - 151-226; Bloch, G., _Origines du sénat Rom._ 46-95; Marquardt, - J., _Historiae equitum romanorum libri iv_; Gomont, M. H., - _Chevaliers Rom. depuis Romulus jusqu’à Galba_; Niemeyer, K., - _De equitibus romanis commentatio historica_; Rubino, J., - _Ueber das Verhältniss der VI Suffragia zur röm. Ritterschaft_, - in _Zeitschr. f. d. Altertumswiss._ iv (1846). 212-39; - Bertolini, C. I., _I celeres ed il tribunus celerum_; Belot, - É., _Histoire des chevaliers Rom._ 2 vols.; Gerathewohl, - H., _Die Reiter und die Rittercenturien zur Zeit der röm. - Republik_, valuable; Kubitschek, J. W., _Aes equestre_, in - Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 682-4; Kübler, _Equites - Romani_, ibid. vi. 272-312; Martin, A., _Equites_ (Greek), in - Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ ii. 752-71; Cagnat, R., _Equites_ - (Roman), ibid. ii. 771-89; Helbig, W., _Observations sur - les ἱππεῖς Athéniens_, in _Comptes rendus de l’académie des - inscriptions et belles-lettres_, 1900. 516-22; _Les ἱππεῖς - Athéniens_, in _Mémoires de l’acad._ etc. xxxvii¹ (1904). - 157-264; _Die ἱππεῖς und ihre Knappen_, in _Jahreshefte des - österr. archäol instituts_, viii. 2. 185-202; Peterson, E., _Zu - Helbigs ἱππεῖς_, etc., ibid., 125 f.; Helbig, _Zur Geschichte - des röm. Equitatus, A. Die Equites als berittene Hopliten_, in - _Abhdl. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss._ xxiii (1905). 267-317; _Die - Castores als Schutzgötter des röm. Equitatus_, in _Hermes_, xl - (1905). 101-15; _Contribution à l’histoire de l’equitatus_, in - _Comptes rendus de l’acad. des inscriptions et belles-lettres_, - 1904. ii. 190-201; Pellegrini, G., _Fregi arcaici etruschi - in terracotta_, etc., in Milani, L. A., _Studi e materiali - archeol. e numis._ i. 87-118. - - - - -CHAPTER V - -THE AUSPICES - - -I. _Auspicia Privata_ - -Auspices (auspicia) were signs sent by the gods through which they -declared their will to men. Those given in answer to prayer were -impetrativa (or impetrita), those sent unasked oblativa. The first were -necessarily favorable; the second might be either favorable or the -contrary.[578] To take or to hold auspices was to seek such signs in due -form. Auspicia, or the singular auspicium, also designated the right or -the power to perform the function. They were not a means of prophecy of -future events but of ascertaining whether the deity approved a proposed -action.[579] With reference to their object and to the persons qualified -to take them, they were of two kinds, private and public. Whereas the -public auspices, taken in behalf of the state, belonged exclusively -to magistrates, the private were open to all;[580] and in early -times a Roman always resorted to them before beginning any important -business.[581] Though it was permissible to consult any deity,[582] the -greatest weight attached to the approval of the supreme god Jupiter.[583] - -The plebeians, who as long as they were excluded from the magistracies -were necessarily debarred from the auspicia publica, enjoyed equally with -the patricians all private rights of religion; in fact if the nobles -had wished, they possessed no legal means of preventing the holding of -auspices or the performance of any other sacred rite in private plebeian -houses. Not only is it stated that all had a right to auspicate,[584] -but the formula for summoning troops given by Cincius[585] implies that -the soldiers, who were mainly plebeian, were accustomed to perform the -rite. We find accordingly the elder Cato, a plebeian, attending to the -ceremony in his own home.[586] The patricians, however, who believed -themselves to be nearer and dearer to the gods than were the plebeians, -and who in their struggle to keep themselves a closed caste and the -offices barred against the lower social class, declared that conubium -if granted would disturb the private as well as public auspices.[587] -But this assertion need not signify that the plebeians had no private -auspices, it might indicate merely a difference between the plebeian -and patrician ceremonies, naturally implying the superiority of the -latter. Again when on a certain occasion according to Livy a tribune -of the plebs inquired of a patrician why a plebeian could not be made -consul, the reply was that no plebeian had the auspices, reiterating that -the decemvirs had forbidden conubium to prevent the disturbance of the -ceremony by uncertainty of birth.[588] Reference might here be simply -to the auspicia publica, with which alone the consul was concerned. -However this may be, the patrician claim was indignantly repudiated -by the plebeians, and the historian can say no more than that it was -“perhaps true.” Another passage from Livy usually interpreted in support -of the theory that the patricians alone had private auspices represents -them, before the opening of the offices to the commons, as saying, “So -peculiar to us are the auspices that not only the patrician magistrates -whom the people choose are elected under the auspices, but we ourselves -under the sanction of the same rite without a vote of the people appoint -the interrex, and we as private persons hold auspices, which they do not -hold even as magistrates.”[589] This passage is perfectly intelligible -to one who bears in mind that in the late republic private auspices had -disappeared,[590] and that therefore when the word auspicia is used -without qualification by a late republican or imperial writer, it always -has reference to the public ceremonies.[591] In the quotation just given, -accordingly, nothing more is meant than that the patricians, who have the -exclusive right to the offices, are alone competent to perform the public -religious ceremonies which belong to the magistrates. Reference in the -quotation to the auspices of private persons signifies that when there -was no magistrate competent to hold the election of consuls, the public -auspices returned to the senate, the patrician members of which proceeded -under auspication to appoint an interrex for holding the elections. In -this case the senatorial patricians, it was asserted, attended to the -ceremony not as magistrates but as private persons, though the rites were -themselves public. As distinguished from magistrates, the senators were -privati. It was not, then, as mere citizens but as patrician members of -the senate that they performed the rite. Further light is thrown on this -subject by the fact that in the agitation for the opening of the augural -and pontifical colleges to the plebeians in 300, the patricians repeated -the assertion that with them alone were auspices, they alone had family -(gens), they alone possessed true imperium and auspicium in peace and -war.[592] This claim they had the effrontery to make despite the fact -that plebeian consuls had been taking public auspices for more than -sixty years. In the pride of their blood they claimed that theirs alone -were strictly legal (iustum). Notwithstanding such partisan assertions -the facts thus far adduced lead unmistakably to the conclusion that -the plebeians equally with the patricians enjoyed the right to private -auspices.[593] - - -II. _Auspicia Publica Impetrativa_ - -The right to public auspices belonged primarily to patrician -magistracies[594]—those which in the early republic were filled only by -patricians, but which continued to be called patrician after they were -open to plebeians. All elections and appointments to such offices were -auspicated;[595] and their incumbents were expected to seek the previous -approval of Jupiter for every important act of their administration.[596] -The king, interrex, dictator, consuls, praetors, and censors had the -auspicia maxima; the others the minora.[597] The praetor, as colleague -of the consuls, was elected under the same auspices with them, that is, -in the same meeting of the assembly, whereas the censors, not being -colleagues of the consuls, were elected under different auspices. -Between magistrates who were not colleagues there could be no collision -in the auspicia impetrativa; those of the censors neither strengthened -nor vitiated those of the consuls or praetors, nor were strengthened -or vitiated by them. In case of a conflict between colleagues, the -greater auspices annulled the lesser, and equal auspices annulled each -other.[598] For the exercise of a function properly belonging to a -magistracy, the incumbent performed the ceremony at his own will and -pleasure, unless expressly forbidden by a superior;[599] but one who -undertook a deputed duty had to ask the auspicium of a magistrate who -was competent to perform the duty in his own right. Thus the quaestor, -who was not qualified by right of his office to call the comitia -centuriata, found it necessary to do so in his capital prosecutions. -In such a case he asked of the praetor or consul the right to hold -auspices for summoning this assembly.[600] Whether the pontifex maximus -held auspices in his own name, or was obliged, like the quaestor, to -apply for them to a higher secular official, is unknown; at all events -it was necessary for him to auspicate the comitia calata, over which he -presided.[601] It seems probable that the tribunes originally did not -have the right as they were not magistrates; but when they came to be -so considered, they acquired the auspicium. All magistrates—necessarily -including the tribunes—who convoked the senate had previously to perform -the ceremony;[602] Cicero[603] seems to include the tribunes among -the magistrates who had the auspicium; and as further proof the very -expression “patriciorum (magistratuum) auspicia”[604] used by Messala -implies the existence of “plebeiorum magistratuum auspicia.” It was not -the custom of the tribunes, however, to auspicate their assemblies of the -plebs.[605] - -For assistance in auspication the magistrate summoned any person he -pleased, who was rarely if ever a public augur.[606] An augur,[607] -whether private or official, was a person who knew how to hold and to -interpret auspices.[608] A college of public augurs[609] for the service -of the state was established in the most primitive times. Probably -comprising three members, one from each tribe, it was gradually increased -till under Sulla it reached fifteen.[610] The members of the college were -neither magistrates[611] nor prophets. They were rather the wise,[612] -experienced[613] keepers and expounders of a sacred science and -art[614]—the “interpreters of Jupiter All-Great and Good.”[615] Having -to do with religion, they were sacerdotes, like the pontiffs, though not -offerers of sacrifice (flamines).[616] The functions which they exercised -independently of the magistrates included the inauguration of religious -officials (inaugurare sacerdotes), the blessing of fields twice a year, -and of the people after the close of a war.[617] In attending to such -duties (auguria) only did they exercise their right to the auspices.[618] -In a dependent though far more influential position they acted as the -professionally skilled advisers and assistants of the magistrates in -all matters of peace and war.[619] If a magistrate was not himself an -augur,[620] it was of the utmost importance to have their service; -for the science of discovering and interpreting the divine omens was -intricate, mistakes were easy, and the slightest oversight might vitiate -the whole business in hand. When in doubt as to the validity of the -ceremony, either the magistrate to whom it belonged or the senate could -refer the case to the college of augurs, which thereupon gave an opinion -in the form of a decree. The senate then acted on the matter according -to its judgment.[621] In case a law had been passed, a magistrate -elected, or any public act performed against its wishes, it could -inquire of the college of augurs whether the election or other act had -been duly auspicated; and should a defect be alleged, the senate could -annul the act or request the magistrate to resign. It required unusual -courage in a man to keep himself in office in defiance of the authority -of the senate and of the religious feeling of the whole people.[622] -These considerations account for the great importance attaching to the -presence of augurs in the comitia—a subject to be treated in another -connection.[623] - -The service of augurs was most needed in establishing the terrestrial -templum[624]—a carefully marked out, oriented spot which the magistrate -occupied while performing the rite.[625] Whereas the commander of an -army generally made use of chicken auspices (signa ex tripudiis), which -did not require their assistance,[626] they were doubtless always -called upon to institute templa in or near the city.[627] For the -exercise of their art they divided the world, so far as known to them, -into augural districts. The central district was the city, limited -by the pomerium,[628] beyond which, probably extending to the first -milestone,[629] lay a zone termed ager effatus,[630] whose boundaries -were marked by cippi.[631] The rest of the world within their sphere -of knowledge they divided into ager Romanus, which in its larger sense -included the two districts above mentioned, Gabinus, peregrinus, -hosticus, and incertus.[632] For the comitia the two inner regions -were alone important: (1) the auspication of assemblies held in the -city had to be performed within the pomerium; (2) as often as the -magistrate in passing from the city to the Campus Martius to hold the -comitia centuriata crossed the pomerium,[633] or more strictly the brook -Petronia,[634] he was obliged to take the special auspices of crossing. -Beyond the ager effatus assemblies were not ordinarily held. - -Originally the most common form of divination must have been the -watching of the flight of birds, for it is from this ceremony that -the word auspicium is derived.[635] Legend accordingly asserts that -Romulus founded the city on the Palatine under the auspices of twelve -vultures.[636] Before the end of the republic, however, all other -forms of public auspicia impetrativa in the city had given way to the -caelestia, especially the lightning and thunder.[637] The reason is that -the heavenly signs could be most easily understood and carried greatest -weight; whereas other auspices had to be held for each individual act, -the celestial omens of the morning served the magistrate for all his -undertakings during the entire day.[638] The effect of heavenly signs on -assemblies of the people, however, was peculiar. Not only were comitia -and contiones interrupted by storms;[639] not only was it impious to hold -an assembly while it was lightning or thundering,[640] but even while the -magistrate was auspicating at daybreak, if a flash of lightning appeared -on the left—a sign favorable for every other undertaking—he dared not -hold the assembly on that day.[641] Some favorable comitial sign the -magistrate was supposed to perceive,[642] but what it was we do not know. - -The general rule that the auspices should be taken for an act on the very -spot on which the magistrate intended to perform the act applied to the -comitial auspices. For meetings on the Capitoline Hill they probably used -the temple of Jupiter, dedicated for all time;[643] for assemblies in the -comitium the rostra, also a templum;[644] and for the comitia centuriata -the president’s platform in the Campus Martius.[645] Not only patrician -magistrates but also tribunes of the plebs occupied templa in transacting -business with the people.[646] - -Between midnight and morning[647] on the day of assembly the magistrate -repaired to the templum.[648] There, placing himself on a solid[649] seat -at the door, usually facing eastward, he watched the heavens (spectio). -Meanwhile he first asked the attendant, who always sat near,[650] -whether there was silence.[651] If the answer was affirmative, he -prayed Jupiter for a sign, which he described in a formula termed legum -dictio,[652] whereupon the attendant declared he saw it.[653] In case -of non-appearance of the sign or of a disturbance of the observation, -the auspication was deferred to another morning.[654] Before the time -of Cicero, however, the ceremony had been so reduced to a pretence as -practically to eliminate the possibility of failure.[655] - -Both curiate[656] and centuriate[657] assemblies were auspicated. -Although for the tribal assemblies the question is more difficult, it -seems reasonably certain that whereas a patrician magistrate took the -auspices for the comitia tributa,[658] plebeian magistrates (tribunes and -aediles of the plebs) did not.[659] - -As to whether contiones were auspicated we are not clearly informed. The -question concerns those only which were held by patrician magistrates. -The auspication of comitia necessarily extended to the contio immediately -preceding.[660] It is known, too, that the censors auspicated the -lustral gathering of the centuries,[661] hence we may infer that -magistrates and sacerdotes were accustomed to take auspices for formal -religious assemblies.[662] With these exceptions contiones were doubtless -held without auspices by patrician as well as by plebeian magistrates. - - -III. _Auspicia Publica Oblativa_ - -If Jupiter had approved the holding of an assembly, the magistrate -was not for that reason necessarily done with auspices. Though the -impetrativa may have favored, prohibitive oblativa were still possible, -for circumstances might cause the god to change his mind so as to forbid -what he had previously sanctioned; and the warning omen might come at -any time before the act was completed. Sometimes the magistrate himself -discovered, or for the accomplishment of his purpose pretended to -discover, the evil omen. When for instance Pompey was holding an assembly -for the election of praetors, and Cato, a political opponent, offered -himself as a candidate, Pompey, seeing the assembly unanimous for this -man, declared that he heard a clap of thunder, and thus by an adjournment -succeeded in preventing the election.[663] Sometimes the magistrate -was informed of the omen by (1) a private person, (2) an augur, or -(3) another magistrate. In the first two cases the report was termed -nuntiatio, in the third obnuntiatio.[664] Information received from a -private citizen the president could credit or not as he saw fit, or he -could declare it irrelevant;[665] but the law compelled him to accept the -nuntiatio of an augur or the obnuntiatio of another magistrate. - -Prohibitive auspicia oblativa included evil omens of all kinds. When -in 310 the dictator called the curiae for passing the lex de imperio, -it chanced that the Curia Faucia was the first to vote (principium). -Now this curia was ill omened because on two earlier occasions it had -happened to be principium at a time of great national disaster. The -dictator accordingly adjourned the meeting till the following day, when -he again summoned it after renewing the auspicia impetrativa.[666] A -case of epilepsy, by vitiating the business of the assembly, required -an adjournment; and for that reason the malady was called the comitial -sickness.[667] In the later republic the chief oblativa had come to be -caelestia; and it could happen that the auspicia impetrativa of any -magistrate might as oblativa vitiate the comitia of another. For this -reason when a higher magistrate was about to hold an assembly, he forbade -the taking of auspices by all inferior to him, for fear they might annul -his proceedings.[668] - -Although the augurs had neither the auspicia impetrativa nor the right -to watch the sky for unfavorable omens,[669] they were competent to -report (nuntiatio) unexpected oblativa to the magistrates.[670] Their -object in attending the comitia accordingly was not only to assist the -president with their special knowledge,[671] but also to witness the -religious legality of the proceeding. In the latter function the augur -derived great influence[672] from the possibility of an investigation -into such legality by the augural college and the senate, which might -result in the annulment of the act.[673] For this reason witnessing -augurs were granted the privilege of adjourning the assembly in case they -perceived unfavorable omens.[674] Cicero[675] describes in detail such an -adjournment of an electoral assembly of centuries: “Behold the day for -the election of Dolabella! The prerogative century is drawn by lot, he -(the augur) remains quiet. The vote is announced, he is silent. The first -class is called and the announcement made. Then as usual the suffragia -(of the equites?) were summoned; then the second class is called. All -this happened more quickly than I have told it. - -“When the business is over, that excellent augur says, ‘We adjourn to -another day.’ O remarkable impudence! What (omen) had you seen? What had -you felt? What had you heard?” Antony, who was both consul and augur, -presiding over the electoral assembly, allowed the voting to continue -till a majority was nearly reached in favor of Dolabella, when, making -use of the augural formula, he adjourned the meeting. This procedure was -in itself legal; but Antony had from the beginning of the year boasted -of his intention to prevent through augury this man’s election. As -only magistrates, through their right to the spectio, to be explained -hereafter, could with certainty predict an evil omen,[676] it was evident -that Antony, acting merely as augur, made a fictitious report. - -Augurs were always present at meetings of the curiae,[677] of the -centuries,[678] and of the tribes under the presidency of a patrician -magistrate.[679] That they attended the meetings of the plebs as well -and had the same relation to the plebeian as to the other assemblies -is necessarily implied in Cicero’s[680] question, “What shows greater -religious power than to be able to grant or refuse to grant the right to -transact business with the people or with the plebs?” - -If the person who reported the evil omen was not an augur but a -magistrate, the president was equally bound to heed it and to dismiss -the assembly;[681] and the force of the obnuntiatio was not in any way -affected by the relative official rank of the two persons concerned. -When accordingly a higher magistrate had set a day for an assembly, -he forbade all inferior magistrates not only to take the auspicia -impetrativa,[682] but also to watch the sky—de caelo servare—for any -purpose on that day, for fear that some omen unfavorable to the comitia -might be seen.[683] A consul for instance could prevent a quaestor from -scanning the heavens on any particular day; and the senate on the rare -occasions when it felt itself sufficiently strong, suspended for a -particular act of the assembly the right of all magistrates to receive -and to announce unfavorable omens.[684] In the absence of senatorial -interference it remained possible for any higher magistrate to scan the -heavens—de caelo servare—on an assembly day appointed by another, and to -vitiate the comitia by reporting an unfavorable omen. We find accordingly -a consul obnuntiating against a colleague[685] and against the pontifex -maximus,[686] a praetor against a tribune of the plebs,[687] and a -tribune against a consul[688] or a censor,[689] as well as against a -colleague.[690] - -So certain was it that a magistrate who looked for a bad omen would -see one that the expression “to watch the sky” became equivalent to -discovering an unpropitious sign. The rule was therefore formulated -that “religion forbade the transaction of any business with the people -when it was known that the sky was watched.”[691] If accordingly a -magistrate announced that he intended to scan the heavens on the day -appointed for an assembly, this declaration was in itself sufficient in -the ordinary course of events to compel a postponement. In the year 57 -Milo, a tribune of the plebs, pushed the custom to extremes by declaring -his intention to observe the sky on all comitial days.[692] Strictly the -observation had to be made and reported before the assembly met. “Can -any one divine beforehand,” Cicero[693] asks, “what defect there will be -in the auspices, except the man who has already determined to watch the -heavens? This in the first place the law forbids to be done in the time -of an assembly; and if any one has been observing the sky, he is bound -to give notice of it, not after the comitia are assembled, but before -they meet.” In the case belonging to the year 57 referred to above, -Milo, the tribune, came into the Campus Martius before midnight in order -to anticipate the arrival of the consul Metellus, who wished to hold -the elections. The assembly ordinarily met at sunrise, and could not -convene after midday. Milo accordingly remained on that day till noon, -without seeing the consul. Then Metellus demanded that for the future the -obnuntiatio should be served on him in the Forum; it was unnecessary, -he said, to go to the Campus before daybreak; he promised to be in the -comitium at the first hour of the day. As Milo was coming into the Forum -before sunrise on the next comitial day, he discovered Metellus stealing -hurriedly to the Campus by an unusual route. The tribune came upon him -and served the notice.[694] - -The consul’s announcement of intention to watch the sky might be -strengthened by a proclamation declaring certain or all comitial days for -the remainder of the year to be holidays, on which the people could not -legally transact business in assembly.[695] - -Although the obnuntiatio doubtless originated in the early republic, -it played no considerable part in political strife till after the -Gracchi. A great impetus to the abuse of the power was given by the -Aelian and Fufian laws, which were probably two plebiscites[696] passed -about 150.[697] What features of these statutes were new has not been -precisely determined. It is certain, however, that they made possible -the condition in which we find the spectio and obnuntiatio before the -legislation of Clodius on the subject in 58. As the tribune did not -originally have the obnuntiatio, we may infer that in all probability -these laws granted him the right to exercise it against patrician -magistrates in the way described above. Similarly from the fact that -the plebeian tribal assembly was not originally subject to religious -obstruction on the part of the government, it is reasonable to conclude -that the Aelian and Fufian statutes gave the patrician magistrates the -obnuntiatio against that body.[698] It was equivalent to a power of veto, -which the aristocracy could now exercise upon tribunician legislation, -hence Cicero[699] regards the two statutes as most holy[700] means of -“weakening and repressing the fury of the tribunes,” and as the “surest -protection of the commonwealth.”[701] Notwithstanding the opinion of -Lange,[702] that the obnuntiatio was restricted to legislation, it -seems clear from the words of Cicero,[703] as well as from the lack of -reference in the sources to such a limitation, that it applied equally -to elections. So long, however, as the nobility could depend for support -upon the tribunes, it had little need of such a power. But in the last -years of the republic, after the tribunician veto had been undermined by -Ti. Gracchus and Appuleius Saturninus, and the tribunes were again acting -independently of the senate as in the early history of their office, -optimates and populares, taking full advantage of the Aelian and Fufian -laws, alike exploited the auspices recklessly for partisan objects. Their -behavior was a sign of both religious and political disintegration. -Vatinius, tribune of the plebs in 59, had the boldness utterly to -disregard these statutes;[704] and in 58 the tribune Clodius repealed -them in so far as they affected legislation,[705] whereas for elections -the obnuntiatio still remained in force.[706] The misuse of auspices for -political purposes dates back, according to Livy,[707] to the beginning -of the Samnite wars. Although this may be an anticipation of later -conditions, there can be no doubt as to the attitude of statesmen toward -the custom in the closing years of the Punic wars.[708] In the time of -Clodius and Cicero, while some maintained a sincere belief in these -ceremonies, doubtless the great majority of public men saw in their -use nothing more than political chicanery calculated, by deceiving the -multitude, to keep the real power in the hands of a few.[709] - - Rubino, J., _Untersuchungen über röm. Verfassung und - Geschichte_, 34-106; Nissen, H., _Das Templum_; Mommsen, - _Röm. Staatsrecht_, i. 76-116; Marquardt, J., _Röm. - Staatsverwaltung_, iii. 397-415; Lange, L., _Röm. Altertümer_, - 3 vols, index s. Augures, Auspicia, Inauguratio, etc.; _De - legibus Aelia et Fufia commentatio_, in _Kleine Schriften_, - i. 274-341; Herzog, E., _Geschichte und System der röm. - Staatsverfassung_, 621-30, see also index s. Augures, - Auspicien; Müller-Deecke, _Etrusker_, ii. 114-27; Gilbert, - O., _Geschichte und Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum_, 3 - vols., index s. Auguraculum, Augures; Wissowa, G., _Religion - und Kultus der Römer_, 450-60; _Augures_, in Pauly-Wissowa, - _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2313-44; _Auspicium_, ibid. ii. 2580-7; - Aust, E., _Religion der Römer_, index s. Auguraculum, - Augurn, Auspicia, etc.; _Iuppiter Elicius_, in Roscher, - _Ausführliches Lexikon der griech. und röm. Mythologie_, ii. - 656-61; Bouché-Leclerq, A., _Histoire de la Divination dans - Antiquité_, iv. 134-285 (sources and modern literature, p. 180 - f.); _Augures_, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 550-60; - _Auspicia_, ibid. i. 580-5; Spinazzola, V., _Augures_, in - Ruggiero, _Dizionario epigrafico_, i. 778-810; Ruggiero, - ibid. i. 950 f.; De Marchi, A., _Il Culto privato di Roma - antica_, i. 152 ff., 232 ff.; Valeton, I. M. J., _De modis - auspicandi Romanorum_, in _Mnemosyne_, N. S. xvii (1889). - 275-325, 418-52; xviii. 208-64, 406-56; _De iure obnuntiandi - comitiis et conciliis_, ibid. xix (1891). 75-113, 229-70; _De - templis Romanis_, ibid. xx (1892). 338-90; xxi. 62-91, 397-440; - xxiii. 15-79; xxv. 93-144, 361-85; xxvi. 1-93 (papers in the - last two vols. are on the pomerium); Luterbacher, F., _Der - Prodigienglaube und Prodigienstil der Römer_, 2 ed.; Wülker, - L., _Die geschichtliche Entwickelung des Prodigienswesens bei - den Römern_; Willoughby, W. W., _Political Theories of the - Ancient World_, ch. xv. - - - - -PART II - -THE ASSEMBLIES - -ORGANIZATION, PROCEDURE, AND FUNCTIONS, RESOLUTIONS, STATUTES, AND CASES - - - - -CHAPTER VI - -COMITIA AND CONCILIUM - - -In treating of the distinction between comitia and concilium scholars -have invariably begun with the juristic definition of Laelius Felix,[710] -quoted by Gellius,[711] “He who orders not the whole people but some part -of it to be present (in assembly) ought to proclaim not comitia but a -concilium;” they have limited themselves to illustrating this definition, -and to setting down as lax or inaccurate the many uses of the two words -which cannot be forced into line with it. The object of this discussion, -on the contrary, is to consider all the occurrences of these words in the -principal extant literature, especially prose, of the republic and of the -Augustan age—a period in which the assemblies were still in existence—for -the purpose of testing the definition of Laelius, and of establishing new -definitions by induction in case his should prove wrong. - -It is convenient to begin with Livy, who though an imperial writer, and -under the stylistic influence of his age, probably adhered in the main to -the technical terminology of the republican annalists from whom he drew. -The first point which will be established is that in Livy’s usage the -difference between comitia and concilium is not a difference between the -whole people and a part of the people.[712] - -The plebeian tribal assembly is termed comitia in Livy ii. 56. 1, 2; -ii. 58. 1; ii. 60. 4; iii. 13. 9 (“Verginio comitia habente conlegae -appellati dimisere concilium,” in which comitia and concilium in one -sentence are applied to the same assembly); iii. 17. 4 (the comitia for -passing the Terentilian law, which from Livy’s point of view was the -plebeian assembly);[713] iii. 24. 9; iii. 30. 6; iii. 51. 8 (comitia of -plebeian soldiers for electing military tribunes and tribunes of the -plebs); iii. 54. 9, 11: (plebeian comitia under the pontifex maximus); -iv. 44. 1; v. 10. 10; vi. 35. 10 (“Comitia praeter aedilium tribunorumque -plebi nulla sunt habita”); vi. 36. 9 (the comitia for voting on the -Licinian-Sextian laws); vi. 39. 5; xxv. 4. 6; xxxiv. 2. 11; xlv. 35. 7. -Other examples of comitia of a part of the people are Livy ii. 64. 1 -(as the plebeians refused to participate in the consular election, the -patricians and clients held the comitia); xxvi. 2. 2 (comitia held by -the soldiers, and hence by only a part of the people, for the election -of a propraetor). Still more to the point are the comitia sacerdotum: -for electing a chief pontiff, Livy xxv. 5. 2; for electing an augur, -xxxix. 45. 8; for electing a chief curio, xxvii. 8. 1. Comitia sacerdotum -were composed of seventeen tribes, and hence of only a part of the -people.[714] Lastly is to be noted the fact that the plebeian assembly -met on a comitialis dies; Livy iii. 11. 3. - -It is now sufficiently established that Livy often applies the term -comitia to the assembly of plebs and to other assemblies which included -but a part of the people. It is equally true that he uses concilium to -denote an assembly of the whole people. The principal instances of Roman -assemblies are: - - (1) Livy i. 8. 1: “Vocataque ad concilium multitudine, quae - coalescere in populi unius corpus nulla re praeterquam legibus - poterat, iura dedit.” - - (2) i. 26. 5: “Concilio populi advocato” (for the trial of - Horatius). - - (3) i. 36. 6: “Auguriis certe sacerdotioque augurum tantus - honos accessit, ut nihil belli domique postea nisi auspicato - gereretur, concilia populi, exercitus vocati, summa rerum, ubi - aves non admississent, dirimerentur.” - - (4) ii. 7. 7: “Vocato ad concilium populo” (representing the - consul as calling the people to an assembly). - - (5) iii. 71. 3: “Concilio populi a magistratibus dato” (for - settling the dispute between Ardea and Aricia). - - (6) vi. 20. 11: “Concilium populi indictum est” (an assembly of - the people which condemned Marcus Manlius). - -These instances are well known, and have often been discussed. It is -enough for our purpose to note here that they prove Livy’s willingness -to designate assemblies of the whole Roman people as concilia. But -Mommsen[715] was not satisfied with regarding all these cases as -inaccurate. In spite of Laelius he believed that concilium could -sometimes properly apply to assemblies of all the people. With reference -to the first example given above he says that where concilium denotes -an assembly of all the people, the contio is meant—in other words, a -concilium of all the people is an assembly which has not been summoned -with a view to voting, and is not organized in voting divisions. This -new definition might explain example (1), for possibly Livy did not -think of the first Roman assembly as voting on the laws which Romulus -gave, or even as organized. Unfortunately Mommsen tries to support his -definition by example (2), which refers to the assembly for the trial -of Horatius. But in ch. 26. 12 the same assembly, which must have been -the gathering of the curiae, and which Cicero[716] speaks of as comitia, -voted the acquittal of the accused. Hence it could not have been a mere -contio. Another passage cited in support of his view, Livy ii. 7. 7, -example (4), represents the consul as calling the people to a concilium. -First he addressed them (“in contionem escendit”), and afterward laws -were passed on the subject of which he treated in his speech—evidently -by the same assembly; hence the concilium populi here mentioned was -something more than a contio. Another illustration which Mommsen offers, -but which, having to do with a Roman assembly only by implication, is not -included in the list of examples given above, is Livy v. 43. 8: “When -he had pushed into the midst of the contio, though hitherto accustomed -to keep away from such concilia.”[717] The passage refers to a meeting -of the Ardeates for consulting in regard to the sudden approach of the -Gauls. Gatherings of the kind were called concilia, but the word contio -is also introduced into the passage with reference to a speech made in -the assembly. The implication is that such concilia of all the people -for deliberation were held also at Rome. The circumstances indicate that -it met with a view also to taking action, and that it was therefore -not a simple contio. This passage accordingly offers no support to -Mommsen’s view that when applied to the whole people concilium is merely -a listening, not an acting, assembly.[718] Summing up the evidence for -the new definition of concilium, we may say that, were it true, it might -apply to Livy i. 8. 1, though it is unessential to the explanation -either of this passage or of any other. A single case, too, even if it -were clear, is not a sufficient basis for a generalization; and though -we must agree with Mommsen that the juristic definition does not cover -the cases cited above, it is necessary to reject his amendment as -unsatisfactory.[719] - -In fact Mommsen soon discovers cases which, from his own admission, -neither his definition nor that of Laelius will explain, for instance, -Livy i. 36. 6, example (3). On this citation Mommsen[720] remarks -that concilia in this connection could not mean contiones, with which -in his opinion the auspices had nothing to do; it could not refer to -the plebeian assemblies, which he also assumes to have been free -from the auspices.[721] He concludes, therefore, that it denotes the -“patricio-plebeian” tribal assemblies.[722] But why Livy should here be -thinking merely of the tribal assemblies, especially in connection with a -time before they had come into existence, no one could possibly explain. -It is far more reasonable to assume that he intended to include all -kinds of assemblies, curiate, centuriate, and tribal, which required the -auspices. The next citation which Mommsen finds difficult is Livy iii. -71. 3, example (5)—an assembly of the tribes meeting under the consuls to -decide the dispute between Ardea and Aricia over a piece of territory. -The assembly voted (ch. 72. 6) that the land in question belonged to the -Roman people. Mommsen’s[723] explanation of concilium in this connection -is that the resolution adopted by this assembly affected foreign states -only, and was not binding on Rome; hence he assumes that comitia are an -assembly whose resolutions are binding on the Roman state. Here then we -have a third definition of concilium based like the second on a single -case. But Mommsen thinks he finds some evidence for his last definition -in the fact that assemblies of foreign states are usually termed -concilia; and he assumes the reason to be that their resolutions were -not binding on Rome. It would be strange, however, if in calling foreign -institutions by Latin names (rex, senatus, populus, plebs, praetor, -dictator, etc.) Roman writers attempted to show a connection between -these institutions and Rome, seeing that in most cases no such connection -could exist. The proposed explanation of this use of concilium becomes -actually absurd when it is extended to foreign comitia; Mommsen certainly -would not say that the resolutions of the Syracusan comitia, mentioned by -Livy, were binding on Rome. - -His last and most difficult case is Livy vi. 20. 11—the concilium populi -which condemned Marcus Manlius, example (6), p. 121. Evidently this -was the centuriate assembly, which alone had the right to try capital -cases, and which alone had to meet outside the pomerium. Various feeble -explanations have been proposed; but Mommsen, with others, prefers to -consider the word wrongly used. It is true that if we accept the juristic -definition, we must conclude that Livy is guilty of error not only in -this case but wherever he applies the term concilium to an assembly of -all the people, Roman or foreign; but as we shall proceed by induction, -we must, at least provisionally, consider all the cases correct, and -frame our definitions accordingly. - -We have now reviewed a number of passages in Livy in which concilium -includes all the Romans. There remains a large group of passages which -refer to foreign assemblies. In considering these cases we are to bear in -mind that the Romans apply to foreign institutions in general the Latin -terms with which they are familiar, and in the same sense in which these -terms are used of Roman institutions; in this way only could they make -themselves understood. - - Concilium populi and concilia populorum are frequent (e.g. Livy - vii. 25. 5; x. 10. 11; 14. 3; xxi. 14. 1; xxiv. 37. 11), and - most of the assemblies of foreign states designated as concilia - are known to have admitted both nobles and commons. - - Instances of concilia in foreign states are: Alba Longa, Livy - i. 6. 1; Latins, Livy i. 50-52; vi. 10. 7; vii. 25. 5; viii. 3. - 10; xxvii. 9. 2; Aequians, Livy iii. 2. 3; ix. 45. 8; Antium, - Roman colony at, Livy iii. 10. 8; Veii, Livy v. 1. 8; Etruria, - Livy v. 17. 6; x. 10. 11; 13. 3; 14. 3; Gauls, Livy v. 36. 1; - xxi. 20. 1; Hernicans, Livy vi. 10. 7; Samnites, Livy x. 12. - 2; Saguntines, Livy xxi. 14. 1; Iberians, Livy xxi. 19. 9, 11; - xxix. 3. 1, 4; Enna, Livy xxiv. 37. 11; Aetolians, Livy xxvi. - 24. 1; xxvii. 29. 10; xxxi. 29. 1, 2, 8; 32. 3, 4; xxxiii. 3. - 7; 12. 6: xxxiv. 41. 5; xxxv. 32. 3, 5; 33. 1, 4; 34. 2; 43. - 7; xxxvi. 26. 1; 28. 7, 9; xxxviii. 9. 11; 10. 2; xlii. 6; - Achaeans, Livy xxvii. 30. 6; xxxi. 25. 2; xxxii. 19. 4, 5, 9; - 20. 1; 21. 2; 22. 3, 9, 12; xxxv. 25. 4; 27. 11; 48. 1; xxxvi. - 31. 9, 10; 32. 9; 34. 1; 35. 7; xxxviii. 31. 1; 32. 3; 34. - 5; 35. 1; xxxix. 33, 35, 36, 37, 48, 50; xli. 24; xlii. 12; - xliii. 17; Epirus, Livy xxxii. 10. 2; xlii. 38. 1: Boeotians, - Livy xxxiii. 1. 7; 2. 1, 7; xxxvi. 6. 3; xlii. 43, 44, 47; - Acarnanians, Livy xxxiii. 16. 3, 5, 8; xliii. 17; Thessalians, - Livy xxxiv. 51. 5; xxxv. 31. 3; xxxvi. 8. 2; xlii. 38; Argos, - Livy xlii. 44; Macedonians, Livy xlv. 18. - -Though most of these concilia are known to have been assemblies of the -whole people, nobles and commons, very rarely, as in Livy x. 16. 3, -the word signifies a council of a few men—in this case, of the leading -men of Etruria (cf. xxxvi. 6. 6); and twice, at Capua, we hear of a -plebis concilium; Livy xxiii. 4. 4; xxvi. 16. 9. From the frequency of -the first-mentioned use we must conclude that Livy does not hesitate to -designate as concilia assemblies of the whole people. - -Comitia, on the other hand, more rarely applies to foreign assemblies. We -hear of comitia of the Veientans (Livy v. 1. 1), of the Syracusans (Livy -xxiv. 23. 1; 26. 16; 27. 1), of the Argives (Livy xxxii. 25. 2), of the -Boeotians (Livy xxxiii. 27. 8), and of the Thessalians (Livy xxxiv. 51. -5). - -The conclusions thus far reached are as follows: - -I. As to Comitia: - - 1. Livy frequently uses comitia to denote the tribal assembly - of the plebs. - - 2. He always uses comitia to denote the assembly for the - election of priests, consisting of but seventeen tribes, and - hence of a minority of the people. - -II. As to Concilium: - - 1. He frequently uses concilia (rarely comitia) to denote - foreign assemblies of all the people. - - 2. Less frequently he uses concilia to denote Roman assemblies - of all the people. - -Mommsen and others admit, however, that Livy’s usage does not conform -strictly to the definition of Laelius Felix; they assume accordingly that -the exact meaning of comitia was lost in imperial times, that for the -correct usage we should look to the republican writers. - -As Caesar has little occasion for employing the terms in relation to -the Roman assemblies, his usage on purely Roman grounds cannot be made -out. Foreign assemblies—that is, of Gauls—he generally designates as -concilia: _B. G._ i. 30, 31; iii. 18; v. 2, 6, 24, 56 f.; vi. 3, 20; vii. -63, 89; viii. 20 (Hirtius). In all these cases the concilium is a tribal -or national assembly including both nobles and commons; more rarely the -word signifies a council of chiefs; _B. G._ i. 33; vii. 75; and perhaps -vii. 1. Once he applies comitia to Gallic assemblies; _B. G._ vii. 67. -So far, therefore, as his usage can be determined, it does not differ -from Livy’s. From Macrobius, _Sat._ i. 16. 29 (“Contra Julius Caesar -XVI auspiciorum negat, nundinis contionem advocari posse: id est cum -populo agere: ideoque nundinis Romanorum haberi comitia non posse”), it -appears that in Lucius Julius Caesar’s[724] augural language, which must -certainly have been conservative, contio was a general word including -comitia. This passage, with the similar one in Cicero, _Att._ iv. 3. 4, -suggests that the distinctions between contio, comitia, and concilium, -far from breaking down in late republican times, were only then taking -form. - -The material furnished by Sallust is more conclusive. In _Hist._ ii. 22, -concilium Gallorum doubtless signifies a national assembly; and although -generally comitia refers to the centuriate gathering (_Cat._ 24, 26; -_Iug._ 36, 44), in _Iug._ 37 (“P. Lucullus and L. Annius, tribunes of -the plebs, against the efforts of their colleagues strove to prolong -their office, and this dissension put off the comitia through all the -rest of the year”)[725] it clearly designates the assembly of the plebs. -His usage accordingly, which allows concilium sometimes to apply to an -assembly of the whole people and comitia to an assembly of a part of the -people, does not differ from that of Livy. - -Cicero, however, is the author on whom scholars rely in support of the -definition of Laelius. Following Berns,[726] they say Cicero has violated -the rule but once, _Att._ i. 1. 1, in which occurs the phrase comitiis -tribuniciis. Berns’ examination of Cicero must have been exceedingly -hasty, as he has left a number of instances unnoticed. The following -passage is especially to the point, _Q. Fr._ ii. 14 (15 b). 4: - - “The candidates for the tribuneship have made a mutual - compact—having deposited five hundred sestertia apiece with - Cato, they agree to conduct their canvass according to his - direction, with the understanding that any one offending - against it is to be condemned by him. If these comitia, then, - turn out to be pure, Cato will have been of more avail than all - laws and jurors put together.”[727] - -The tribunician comitia are the only comitia concerned in Cato’s -transaction. Again in _Att._ ii. 23. 3 (“It is of great interest to -me that you should be present at Rome, if not at the comitia for his -election, at least after he has been declared elected”)[728] Cicero is -thinking of the election of Clodius to the tribuneship, and hence the -comitia he refers to are the assembly of plebs. In _Fam._ viii. 4. 3, -“aedilium plebis comitiis” must refer to the plebeian assembly, in which -the plebeian aediles were elected.[729] Another important passage is -_Sest._ 51. 109: - - “I come now to the comitia whether for electing magistrates or - for enacting laws. We often see laws passed in great numbers. - I say nothing of those which are enacted in such a manner that - scarcely five of each tribe, and those not from their own - tribe, voted for them. He (Clodius) says that at the time of - that ruin of the republic he carried a law concerning me, whom - he called a tyrant and the destroyer of liberty. Who is there - who will confess that he gave a vote when this law was passed - against me? But when in compliance with the same resolution - of the senate, a law was passed about me in the comitia - centuriata, who is there who does not profess that then he was - present, and that he gave a vote in favor of my safety? Which - cause, then, is the one which ought to appear popular? That in - which everything that is honorable in the city, and every age, - and every rank of men agree? Or that to the carrying of which - some excited furies fly as if hastening to a banquet on the - funeral of the republic?”[730] - -The law which Cicero dwells on with such bitterness at the beginning -of this passage and recurs to at the end is the tribunician law which -pronounced on him the sentence of exile; in this connection, therefore, -comitia distinctly includes the plebeian assembly in its legislative -capacity. - -Even more telling is _Leg._ iii. 19. 44-45: - - “They (our ancestors) forbade the enactment of laws regarding - particular persons except by the comitia centuriata. For when - the people are organized according to wealth, rank, and age, - they use more consideration in giving their votes than when - summoned promiscuously by tribes. In our case, therefore, a - man of great ability and of consummate prudence, Lucius Cotta, - truly insisted that no act whatever had been passed regarding - us; for in addition to the fact that those comitia had been - held wholly under the fear of armed slaves, the comitia tributa - could not legally pass capital sentences or privilegia. - Consequently there was no need of a law to reinstate us, - against whom exile had not been legally pronounced. But it - seemed better both to you and to other most illustrious men - that all Italy should show what it felt concerning that same - person against whom some slaves and robbers declared they had - passed a decree.”[731] - -Cicero is here contrasting the comitia centuriata, which recalled him, -with the tribal assembly of the plebs, which pronounced the sentence of -exile. Now as he was condemned by the plebeian assembly, it is clear -that in this passage Cicero calls the plebeian assembly comitia. How -Mommsen[732] can make this citation refer to his “patricio-plebeian” -comitia tributa no one can possibly explain. In _Att._ iii. 12. 1, -comitia expressly includes the tribunician elections. The same elections -are twice called comitia in _Att._ iii. 14; and in iii. 13. 1, Cicero, -again mentioning these comitia, says: “In tribunis plebis designatis -reliqua spes est.” From all these passages it becomes evident that Cicero -regards the plebeian assembly as comitia. In many passages comitia -seems to include all the elections of the year, of plebeian as well as -of patrician magistrates; for the elections were usually held in the -same season, and could not well be separated in thought.[733] In fact, -according to Cicero’s usage, comitia includes all kinds of national -assemblies which do not come under the term contiones; cf. _Sest._ 50. -106: - - “In three places can the judgment and the will of the Roman - people be best discovered, in contio, in comitia, and in the - gathering for the festivals and the gladiatorial shows.”[734] - Cf. also 54. 115; 59. 125. - -The very phrase comitia populi (_Rep._ ii. 32. 56; _Div._ ii. 18. 42) -implies the existence of other comitia, for instance comitia plebis. -It is not strange, therefore, that Cicero should use the following -expression; _Rep._ i. 33. 50: “The nobles who have arrogated to -themselves this name, not with the consent of the people, but by their -own comitia.”[735] Here he makes it evident that there may be comitia -of the nobles in contrast with the “consent of the people.” Should the -senate usurp the elective function, Cicero would not hesitate to call -that small body comitia, as appears from his ironical expressions in -_Phil._ xi. 8. 19 (“Quod si comitia placet in senatu haberi” and “Quae -igitur haec comitia”), in which he anticipates imperial usage; cf. Vell. -ii. 124; Tac. _Ann._ i. 15. - -Furthermore he speaks of comitia, consisting of but seventeen tribes, for -the election of sacerdotes; _Cael._ 8. 19; _Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 18; _Ad -Brut._ i. 5. 3 f.; 14. 1; _Fam._ viii. 12. 4; 14. 1. - -From his point of view, a tribal assembly of the whole people was one -which consisted of all thirty-five tribes, irrespective of the number -present in the several tribes, irrespective, too, of the rank of those -who attended. An assembly tributim of a part of the people, on the other -hand, was one in which some of the tribes were unrepresented. All this is -clearly expressed in _Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 16 f.: - - “For it orders the tribune of the plebs who has passed this law - to elect ten decemvirs by the votes of seventeen tribes in such - a way that he shall be decemvir whom nine tribes (a majority - of the seventeen) have elected. Here I ask on what account he - (the proposer of the law) has made a beginning of his measures - and statutes in such form as to deprive the Roman people of - their right to vote.... For since it is fitting for every - power, command, and commission to proceed from the entire Roman - people, those especially ought to do so which are established - for some use or advantage of the people, in which case they all - together choose also the man who they think will look out more - carefully for the interest of the Roman people, and each one by - his own zeal and his own vote assists to make a road by which - he may obtain some individual benefit for himself. This is the - tribune to whom it has occurred, more than to any one else, to - deprive the entire Roman people of the right to vote, and to - summon a few tribes, not by any fixed legal condition, but by - the favor of sortition, to usurp the liberty of all.”[736] - -Even if the tribes were represented by no more than five men each, and -these men not voting in their own tribes, the assembly was nevertheless -comitia tributa populi.[737] This distinction—recognized by Cicero and -his contemporaries—between an assembly of the whole people as represented -by all the voting divisions and an assembly of a part of the people as -represented by some of the voting divisions, is incompatible with the -distinction formulated by Laelius. Though an antiquarian might make -much of the presence or absence of a few patricians, a man who lived in -the present, as did Cicero, probably never troubled himself about such -unpractical matters.[738] - -From the evidence as to Cicero’s usage given above, we must draw the -following conclusions: - - 1. He often uses comitia to denote the plebeian tribal - assembly, just as Livy does. - - 2. He regularly uses comitia to denote the assembly of - seventeen tribes for the election of sacerdotes. In this - respect his usage is the same as Livy’s. - - 3. He is ready to call the senate comitia, should it usurp the - elective function—an anticipation of imperial usage. - - 4. His distinction between an assembly of the whole people and - an assembly of a part of the people is incompatible with the - definition of Laelius. - -Concilium is comparatively rare in Cicero’s works. In a few cases -he seems to make concilia include all kinds of organized national -gatherings; cf. _Rep._ vi. 13 (3). 13: “Nihil est enim illi principi -deo ... acceptius quam concilia coetusque hominum iure sociati, quae -civitates appellantur (Nothing is more agreeable to the Supreme Being -than assemblies and gatherings of men which are joined in societies by -law and which are called states”); _Fin._ iii. 19. 63: “Natura sumus -apti ad coetus, concilia, civitates.” In the first citation concilium -must, and in the second it may, include all the citizens. Cicero could -hardly mean that we are by nature adapted to assemblies of a part of -the people, or that nothing could be more satisfactory to the Supreme -Being than the concilium plebis which interdicted him from fire and -water. In _Fin._ ii. 24. 77 (“To me those sentiments seem genuine which -are honorable, praiseworthy, and creditable, which may be expressed in -the senate, before the people, and in every gathering and concilium”) -he could not be thinking simply of the plebeian assembly, for he placed -far greater value on the opinions expressed in and by the comitia -centuriata.[739] - -From all that has been said it is evident that Cicero’s usage as well as -Sallust’s does not differ from that of Livy. In fact no variation can -be found in all the extant literature of the republic.[740] But it may -be asked whether there was not a juristic tradition separate from the -literary and preserving from early time the true distinction between the -two words under discussion. A negative answer is compelled by the fact -that history had its origin with jurisprudence in the pontifical college, -that from the beginning historian and jurist were often united in the -same person.[741] Hence the juristic usage was the same as the literary. -It is thoroughly established, therefore, that in the late republic, -as well as in the early empire, the distinction between comitia and -concilium was not a distinction between the whole and a part; in fact, -it becomes doubtful whether the definition of Laelius was known to the -writers of this period. - -The results thus far reached are of great importance; the definition of -comitia and concilium formulated by Laelius has been set aside, and the -ground prepared for the establishment of new definitions by induction. -From the material afforded by the authors under discussion, the following -conclusions relative to the general uses of the two words may be drawn: - -I. (_a_) The phrases comitia curiata, comitia centuriata, comitia tributa -constantly occur; whereas (_b_) the phrases concilium curiatum (or -tim), -concilium centuriatum (or -tim), concilium tributum (or -tim) cannot be -found. - -(_a_) The former is too well known to need illustration; (_b_) the latter -may be sufficiently established by an examination of the references for -concilium given in this chapter. - -II. (_a_) Concilium may apply to a non-political as well as to a -political gathering; (_b_) comitia is wholly restricted to the political -sphere. - -(_a_) Concilium is non-political in Cicero, _Div._ i. 24. 49 (deorum -concilium); _Tusc._ iv. 32. 69; _N. D._ i. 8. 18; _Off._ iii. 5. 25; 9. -38: _Senec._ 23. 84; _Fin._ ii. 4. 12 (virtutum concilium); _Rep._ i. 17. -28 (doctissimorum hominum in concilio); _Sest._ 14. 32 (applied to the -meeting of a collegium); Livy i. 21. 3 (Camenarum concilia); ii. 38. 4; -xxvii. 35. 4.[742] - -III. Within the political sphere, again, (_a_) concilium is the more -general term,—it suggests neither organization nor lack of organization; -whereas (_b_) comitia is restricted to the organized assembly. - -(_a_) Concilium is the more general term in Cicero, _Fin._ iii. 19. 63; -ii. 24. 77; _Rep._ vi. 13 (3). 13.[743] In all these citations concilia, -denoting assemblies of the whole people, must certainly include organized -meetings, without excluding the unorganized. In _Leg._ iii. 19. 42 -(“Invito eo qui cum populo ageret, seditionem non posse fieri, quippe -cui liceat concilium, simul atque intercessum turbarique coeptum sit, -dimittere”) concilium is probably the organized assembly. On the other -hand, the concilium of all the people mentioned by Livy, i. 8. 1, may -have been unorganized. - -IV. Within the province of organized national gatherings, on the other -hand, (_a_) comitia is the wider term, applying as it does to all -assemblies of the kind, whatever their function; whereas (_b_) concilium -as an organized national assembly is wholly restricted to legislative and -judicial functions.[744] - -(_a_) Comitia is used in its most general sense in Cicero, _Div._ i. 45. -103; ii. 18. 42 f.; 35. 74; _Tusc._ iv. 1. 1.[745] - -V. (_a_) Applied to foreign institutions, comitia always designates -electoral assemblies; (_b_) as at Rome, concilia are always legislative -or judicial assemblies.[746] - -(_a_) Comitia is used of foreign states in: - - Caesar, _B. G._ vii. 67; Cicero, _Verr._ II. ii. 52. 128 (three - occurrences), 129, 130; 53. 133; 54. 136; _Fam._ viii. 1. 2; - Livy v. 1. 1; xxiv. 23. 1; 26. 16; 27. 1; xxxii. 25. 2; xxxiii. - 27. 8; xxxiv. 51. 5. - -(_b_) Foreign concilia are mentioned by: - - Caesar, _B. G._ i. 18, 19, 30, 31, 33; iii. 18; v. 2, 6, 24, 56 - f.; vi. 3, 20; vii. 1, 14, 15, 63, 75, 89; viii. 20 (Hirtius); - Sallust, _Hist._ ii. 22; Nepos, _Tim._ iv. 2; Livy i. 6. 1; - 50-52; iii. 2. 3; 10. 8; v. 1. 8; 17. 6; 36. 1; vi. 10. 7; vii. - 25. 5; viii. 3. 10; ix. 45. 8; x. 10. 11; 12. 2; 13. 3; 14. 3; - xxi. 14. 1; 19. 9, 11; 20. 1; xxiv. 37. 11; xxvi. 24. 1; xxvii. - 9. 2; 29. 10; 30. 6; xxix. 3. 1, 4; xxxi. 25. 2.; 29. 1, 2, 8; - 32. 3, 4; xxxii. 10. 2; 19. 4, 5, 9; 20. 1; 21. 2; 22. 3, 9, - 12; xxxiii. 1. 7; 2. 1, 7; 3. 7; 12. 6; 16. 3, 5, 8; xxxiv. 41. - 5; 51. 5; xxxv. 25. 4; 27. 11; 31. 3; 32. 3, 5; 33. 1, 4; 34. - 2; 43. 7; 48. 1; xxxvi. 6. 3; 8. 2; 26. 1; 28. 7, 9; 31. 9, 10; - 32. 9; 34. 1; 35. 7; xxxviii. 9. 11; 10. 2; 31. 1; 32. 3; 34. - 5; 35. 1; xxxix. 33, 35, 36, 37, 48, 50; xli. 24; xlii. 6, 12, - 38, 43, 44, 47; xliii. 17; xlv. 18. Most of these concilia are - known to have been assemblies of the whole people, noble and - common.[747] - -VI. In the Roman state, in a great majority of cases comitia are -electoral assemblies; in fact, the word may generally be understood to -signify that kind of assembly, or simply elections, unless the context -indicates a different meaning. - -Comitia are electoral in: - - Caes. _B. C._ i. 9; iii. 1, 2, 82; Sall. _Cat._ 24; _Iug._ 36, - 37; Cic. _Imp. Pomp._ 1. 2; _Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 18; 8. 20; 10. - 26; 11. 27; 12. 31; _Mil._ 9. 24, 25; 15. 41; 16. 42; _Mur._ 1. - 1; 17. 35; 18. 38; 19. 38; 25. 51; 26. 53; _Phil._ ii. 32. 80, - 81; 33. 82; 38. 99; viii. 9. 27; xi. 8. 19; _Planc._ 3. 7, 8; - 4. 9, 10; 6. 15; 8. 21; 20. 49, 50; 22. 53, 54; _Verr._ 1. 6. - 17; 7. 19; 8. 22, 23; 9. 24, 25; 18. 54; II. i. 7. 19; Frag. A. - vii. 48; _Rep._ ii. 13. 25; 17. 31; 31. 53; _Att._ i. 1. 1, 2; - 4. 1; 10. 6; 11. 2; 16. 13; ii. 20. 6; 21. 5; 23. 3; iii. 12. - 1; 13. 1; 18. 1; iv. 2. 6; 3. 3, 5; 13. 1; 17. 7; 19. 1; xii. - 8; _Ad Brut._ i. 5. 3; 14. 1; _Fam._ i. 4. 1; vii. 30. 1; viii. - 2. 2; 4. 3; 14. 1; x. 26; _Q. Fr._ ii. 1. 2; 2. 1; 11. 3; 15. - 3; iii. 2. 3; 3. 2; Varro, _R. R._ iii. 2. 1; Nepos, _Att._ v. - 4; Livy i. 32. 1; 35. 1; 60. 4; ii. 8. 3; 56. 1, 2; 58. 1; 60. - 4, 5; iii. 6. 1; 19. 2; 20. 8; 24. 9; 30. 6; 34. 7; 35. 1, 7, - 8; 37. 5, 6; 39. 8; 51. 8; 54. 9, 11; iv. 6. 9; 16. 6; 25. 14; - 35. 6; 36. 4; 41. 2; 44. 1, 2, 5; 50. 8; 51. 1; 53. 13; 54. 8; - 55. 4, 8; 56. 1; 57. 9; v. 9. 1, 8; 10. 10; 14. 1; 31. 1; vi. - 1. 5; 22. 7; 35. 10; 36. 3, 9; 37. 4; 39. 5; 42. 9, 14; vii. - 9. 4; 17. 10, 13; 19. 5; 21. 1; 22. 7, 11; viii. 3. 4; 13. 10; - 16. 12; 20. 1; 23. 11, 14, 17; ix. 7. 12, 14; x. 5. 14; 11. 3; - 15. 7; 16. 1; 21. 13; 22. 8; xxi. 53. 6; xxii. 33. 9, 10; 34. - 1, 3, 9; 35. 2, 4; xxiii. 24. 3; 31. 7, 12; xxiv. 7. 11; 9. 5, - 9; 10. 2; 11. 6; 43. 5, 9; xxv. 2. 3, 5; 5. 2; 7. 5; 41. 10; - xxvi. 2. 2; 18. 4; 22. 2; 23. 1, 2; xxvii. 4. 1; 8. 1; xxviii. - 10. 1, 4; 38. 11; xxix. 10. 1, 2; 11. 9, 10; xxx. 40. 5; xxxi. - 49. 12; 50. 6; xxxii. 7. 8, 12; 27. 5, 6; xxxiii. 21. 9; xxxiv. - 42. 3, 4; 44. 4; 53. 2; xxxv. 6. 2; 8. 1; 10. 1, 9; 20. 7; 24. - 3; xxxvi. 45. 9; xxxvii. 47. 1, 6; xxxviii. 35. 1; 42. 1, 2, 4; - xxxix. 6. 1; 23. 1; chs. 32, 39, 40, 41, 45; xl. 18, 37, 45, - 59; xli. 6, 8, 14, 16, 17, 18, 28; xlii. 9, 28; xliii. 11, 14; - xliv. 17. - -Comitia are legislative or judicial in: - - Cic. _Dom._ 28. 75; 30. 79; 32. 86; 33. 87; _Har. Resp._ 6. 11; - _Mil._ 3. 7; _Phil._ i. 8. 19; x. 8. 17; xiii. 15. 31; _Pis._ - 15. 35, 36; _Red. in Sen._ 11. 27; _Sest._ 30. 65; 34. 73; 51. - 109; _Leg._ iii. 19. 45; _Rep._ ii. 31. 53; 35. 60; 36. 61; - _Att._ i. 14. 5; ii. 15. 2; iv. 1. 4; xiv. 12. 1; Livy iii. 13. - 9; 17. 4; 20. 7; 24. 17; 29. 6; 55. 3; vi. 36. 9; viii. 12. 15; - xxv. 4. 6; xxvi. 3. 9, 12; xxxi. 6. 3, 5; xxxiv. 2. 11; xlii. - 30; xliii. 16; xlv. 35. - -As these lists are nearly exhaustive, they represent substantially the -relative frequency of the two uses of comitia. - -VII. (_a_) Rarely is either the centuriate assembly or the so-called -patricio-plebeian tribal assembly termed concilium; (_b_) the plebeian -tribal assembly is rarely termed comitia except when electoral. - -The principal instances of the rare use of concilium under (_a_) are Livy -i. 26. 5; 36. 6; iii. 71. 3; vi. 20. 11.[748] (_b_) In its legislative -or judicial capacity the plebeian tribal assembly is called comitia in -Cicero, _Leg._ iii. 19. 45; _Sest._ 51. 109; Livy iii. 13. 9; 17. 4; vi. -36. 9; xxv. 4. 6; xxxiv. 2. 11; xlv. 35. - -This classification covers without exception all the cases in the authors -under discussion. An attempt may now be made to trace the development of -these uses. - -The first thing to be considered is that whereas concilium is singular, -comitia is plural. Undoubtedly it is a plural of the parts of which the -whole is composed; in other words, the curiae, or centuries, or tribes -were originally thought of as little assemblies, whose sum total formed -the comitia. Comitia therefore always has reference to the parts—the -voting units—of which the assembly is composed, whereas concilium as a -singular views the assembly without reference to its parts. For this -reason, whenever it is advisable to add a modifier to indicate the -kind of organization of the assembly, comitia is always used. We find, -accordingly, comitia curiata, comitia centuriata, and comitia tributa in -common use, but never concilium curiatum (or -tim), concilium centuriatum -(or -tim), or concilium tributum (or -tim). These last expressions, which -are modern inventions, do not accord with the Roman way of viewing the -assemblies. This consideration satisfactorily explains the first general -use.[749] - -As a non-political gathering is not made up of groups—similar to the -voting divisions of the national assemblies—it cannot be called comitia. -Concilium is the only term appropriate to it; hence we have the second -general use of the two words.[750] - -The same consideration makes concilium the more general term within -the political sphere; the assembly it designates may be organized or -unorganized, whereas comitia applies only to assemblies organized in -voting divisions. This is the third general use.[751] - -For explaining the four remaining uses it is necessary to inquire -into the fundamental meaning of concilium. Although the etymology is -uncertain, probability favors the ancient conjecture which derives -it from “con-calare.”[752] People could only be called together for -a purpose, which would most naturally be conversation, discussion, -deliberation. Whatever may have been its origin, concilium certainly -developed this meaning.[753] In the manuscripts and editions it is -frequently interchanged with consilium,[754] and in the sources these -two words are often placed in punning juxtaposition.[755] Possibly their -close resemblance, founded on no etymological connection of the roots, -helped create in concilium the idea of deliberation. At all events in the -prose authors of the period under discussion this is the primary meaning. -The deliberative character of most non-political concilia is very -evident.[756] With this meaning the word could not designate an electoral -assembly, which did not allow discussion;[757] it was restricted to -legislative and judicial assemblies, in which the voting was preceded by -deliberation. This is the fourth use.[758] - -Rarely did a Roman writer have occasion to mention an election in a -foreign state. Whenever he did so, however, he always used comitia. Most -of the business of foreign assemblies referred to by Roman writers was -concerned with international affairs—was legislative—and hence foreign -assemblies are usually termed concilia.[759] This consideration accounts -for the fifth general use.[760] - -The sixth[761] may be easily explained. The tendency was to restrict -comitia to electoral assemblies, just as concilium was restricted to -legislative and judicial assemblies, though this tendency never became a -rule. - -The seventh[762] may be accounted for by the fact that after the -passing of the Hortensian Law, the centuriate comitia came to be almost -wholly electoral, while the plebeian tribal gathering became the chief -statute-making body in the state. Furthermore the assembly over which -the tribunes presided was far more deliberative than any other. Hence -the centuriate assembly became _the_ comitia, and the plebeian tribal -assembly _the_ concilium.[763] - -The cause of the error into which Laelius[764] fell is now apparent. -Finding the plebeian tribal assembly frequently termed concilium and -the centuriate assembly of the whole people generally termed comitia, -he hastily concluded that comitia should be restricted to assemblies of -the whole people and concilia to assemblies of a part of the people. -This discussion has proved, against Laelius, that for the republic and -for the age of Augustus the distinction between the two words was not -a distinction between the whole and a part, and that all the uses of -comitia and concilium in this period may be explained by two simple -facts: (1) that whereas concilium is singular, comitia is plural; (2) -that concilium suggests deliberation, discussion. - -A result of this inquiry is to banish the expressions “concilium tributum -plebis” and “patricio-plebeian comitia tributa”—the former as impossible, -the latter as unnecessary—from the nomenclature of Roman public law. -There were but three forms of organized assembly—curiate, centuriate, and -tribal—all equally entitled to the name “comitia.” The difference between -the “comitia tributa populi” and “comitia tributa plebis” was chiefly in -the presidency, as will be shown in a later chapter.[765] Contio, on the -other hand, denotes the listening or witnessing assembly, unorganized or -organized but never voting, whereas concilium, overlapping contio and -comitia, may include voting in addition to deliberation. - - Mommsen, Th., _Röm. Forschungen_, i. 129-217; Berns, C., _De - comitiorum tributorum et conciliorum plebis discrimine_; - Soltau, W., _Altröm. Volksversammlungen_, 37-46; Humbert, - G., _Comitia_, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 1374 ff.; - _Concilium_, ibid. 1432 f.; Liebenam, W., _Comitia_, in - Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 679 ff.; Kornemann, E., - _Concilium_, ibid. iv. 801 ff.; Vaglieri, D., _Concilium_, in - Ruggiero, _Diz. ep._ ii. 566 ff.; see also indices s. Comitia, - Concilium, in the works of Niebuhr, Schwegler, Lange, Mommsen, - Marquardt, Willems, Herzog, etc. The authorities thus far - named represent the usual theory as to the distinction between - comitia and concilium based on the definition of Laelius Felix - discussed in this chapter. A new view is presented by Botsford, - G. W., _On the Distinction between Comitia and Concilium_, in - _Transactions of the American Philological Association_, xxxv - (1904). 21-32—a paper reproduced with additions in the present - chapter. See also Lodge, G., _Lexicon Plautinum_, i. 277 f. - (Comitia), 289 (Concilium); Forcellini, _Totius Latinitatis - Lexicon_, ii. 297 f. (Comitia), 347 f. (Concilium); Gudeman, - _Concilium_, in _Thesaurus linguae latinae_, iv. 44-8. - - - - -CHAPTER VII - -THE CONTIO - - -Contio, derived from conventio,[766] originally signified “a coming -together,” “a meeting” of any kind. In an early stage of its history it -must have been a general term for public assembly, especially comitia. -This meaning appears most clearly in a passage of Macrobius,[767] in -which, quoting the treatise of Lucius Julius Caesar on the Auspices, he -declares (1) that on market days a contio cannot be called, (2) in other -words, that on such days business cannot be transacted with the people, -(3) that for this reason the Romans cannot hold comitia on market days. -Cicero,[768] too, states with reference to a certain market day that -“for two days no contio can be held”—for the day of the market and the -one following. From the context it is evident that he, like Macrobius, -is thinking of comitia, which, as is well known, could not legally meet -on market days.[769] Doubtless in the conservative nomenclature of -the pontiffs and augurs, quoted by Macrobius and Cicero, contio still -included comitia; it must in fact have applied more particularly to -the formal, voting assembly; for informal meetings were not forbidden -on such days.[770] But in the time of Cicero this use of the word was -obsolete excepting in the archaic formulae of the sacerdotal colleges. -In the political language of his age contio had come to be restricted -to the non-voting assembly—either organized[771] or more commonly -unorganized—summoned by a magistrate or a sacerdos,[772] and in this -sense it will be used in the present volume. Still farther removed from -its origin is the meaning “oration” delivered to the people in such a -gathering.[773] - -Because of the passive character of this form of assembly the magistrate -admitted all who wished to attend, without inquiring whether they were -citizens and in full possession of their political rights.[774] It might -be composed either of soldiers[775] or of civilians, presided over in -the field by the commander, in the city by any magistrate who had a -right to hold comitia in their own or in another’s name, including the -king,[776] interrex, dictator, master of horse, and tribunes of the -plebs;[777] also the quaestors[778] and aediles,[779] the pontifex -maximus and the rex sacrorum.[780] Necessarily the right belonged as well -to all extraordinary magistrates, as the decemviri legibus scribundis, -who possessed consular power within the city.[781] But promagistrates -and any others who held an exclusively military imperium could summon -neither the comitia nor the civil contio.[782] The censors held contiones -for the taking of the census,[783] for imposing fines,[784] and for the -lustration. In the last-named function the assembly was also called -comitia centuriata or exercitus urbanus.[785] The quaestors, the curule -aediles, and the plebeian aediles exercised their jurisdiction in -contiones and comitia, which for this purpose they called not in their -own name but by permission of a higher magistrate.[786] - -As the contio did not, like the comitia, theoretically include all the -people, any number of magistrates could simultaneously hold meetings of -the kind.[787] A minor officer had no right to take charge of, or to -summon the people from, a contio called by another. A higher officer -exercised this right against a lower; the consul, for instance, -could take the meeting from the hands of any ordinary patrician -magistrate,[788] though not of a tribune of the plebs. No one dared -disturb a meeting of any kind under the presidency of the latter,[789] -and at least in the late republic a tribune sometimes forbade a patrician -magistrate to address an assembly;[790] but otherwise consuls and -plebeian tribunes might hold simultaneous contiones.[791] - -Sometimes the contio was summoned merely to witness a public act. The -consuls called the people together outside the walls by the sound of -the war-trumpet to see an execution for treason. On this occasion the -citizens were arrayed in centuries on the Campus Martius, in an assembly -called at once comitia centuriata and contio.[792] We hear of a similar -execution of an astrologer or magician outside the Esquiline gate, -according to a primitive custom;[793] and it was most probably in a -contio that the supreme pontiff scourged to death a man who had wronged a -Vestal.[794] The people gathered in the same kind of meeting to witness -an oath,[795] a judicial process,[796] or the levy of a fine.[797] But -it was preëminently the listening assembly, hence the definition offered -by Gellius,[798] “To hold a contio is to address the people, without -calling on them for a vote.” It applied not only to the isolated meeting -summoned to hear edicts, reports, communications of every kind, including -arguments and appeals for or against a given policy,[799] but also to -the preparatory stage of the voting assembly whether addresses were -delivered or not. Occasionally in early times there was speaking on the -merits of candidates at the opening of an electoral assembly, and the -voting was sometimes interrupted for the purpose.[800] Before the age of -Cicero this rare proceeding had disappeared. In his day the canvass for -candidates had been made before the holding of the preliminary contio, -which accordingly was brief and formal. Because much time was required -for the voting of the centuries,[801] speaking on the day of their -assembly had to be minimized. For this reason the contio for advising -the adoption of a resolution by the comitia centuriata was held on an -earlier day. Such was the meeting summoned in the Campus Martius by the -consul P. Lentulus for the purpose of urging the people to vote in the -ensuing centuriate assembly for the recall of Cicero.[802] In judicial -proceedings before any of the assemblies the testimonies of witnesses and -the pleadings occupied the greater part of the time, and for this reason -judicial assemblies were frequently termed simply contiones. They will be -described in a later chapter.[803] - -Informal contiones could be called at any time while the sun was up,[804] -with or without[805] an interval between the summons and the meeting, and -in any place[806] at the pleasure of the person who convoked them. In -public assemblies of every kind the people remained standing throughout -the session.[807] The magistrate who was about to summon an auspicated -contio repaired to the templum which he intended to occupy during the -meeting.[808] After taking the auspices there, and finding the omens -favorable, he ordered the crier to call the citizens.[809] His directions -to this assistant were prefaced by a solemn wish that the gathering of -the citizens might be well, fortunate, auspicious, and advantageous to -the Roman people, the commonwealth, himself, his colleague or colleagues, -and his magistracy.[810] After first issuing the summons from the templum -the crier repeated it while making the circuit of the walls.[811] -Meantime the presiding officer invited the senators, his colleague or -colleagues, and the various other magistrates to assist him with their -presence and advice.[812] The invitation was extended even to opposing -tribunes;[813] and on the other hand a presiding tribune was especially -anxious to secure the presence and favorable influence of patrician -magistrates and of the leading men of the state.[814] When the president -saw his friends about him and the people gathered, he called the contio -to order,[815] and proceeded to open the meeting with a prayer.[816] In -the case of a resolution to be brought before the assembly the magistrate -was accustomed first to submit it to the senate, which considered the -bill and perhaps suggested alterations;[817] but sometimes measures were -brought into the comitia without this senatorial deliberation.[818] -In the contio the presiding officer had power to exclude or to limit -discussion of his proposals. Ordinarily he found it advantageous to -instruct the people regarding the subject on which they were to vote; and -it was for this purpose that one or more contiones were held previous to -the comitia. The right to address the people belonged primarily to the -presiding magistrate. Although the king enjoyed the superior right, the -notion that in the regal period no private persons spoke in the assembly -seems to be unwarranted.[819] The custom of the republic prescribed that -the president should grant the privilege not only to his colleagues[820] -but also to all the higher magistrates.[821] In some cases the -invitation was extended to senators[822] and to other distinguished -private persons.[823] The tribunes sometimes gave the privilege to -freedmen,[824] to foreign kings,[825] and to ambassadors.[826] The early -republic did not allow women to be present in political meetings;[827] -but in time this severity began to relax. Livy[828] represents the -elder Cato as saying that his generation permitted women to take part -in affairs of state and to interfere in contiones and comitia—evidently -an exaggeration, as the context proves that the women referred to did -not actually come into the assembly, and the speaker intimates that -custom disapproved of their doing so. From the time of the Gracchi they -occasionally spoke in public. Dio Cassius[829] states that Tiberius -Gracchus brought his mother and children into a contio to join their -entreaties with his; and according to Valerius Maximus[830] a tribune of -the plebs required Sempronia, sister of the Gracchi, to come forward in a -similar meeting and give her opinion on the subject under consideration. -In the year 43 some ladies attended a contio to protest against being -taxed by the triumvirs. Hortensia spoke for the complainants.[831] -It was an accepted custom that no tribune should intercede against a -measure till an opportunity had been afforded private persons to speak -for or against it.[832] When after the victory of Pydna a tribune of the -plebs had introduced a motion to grant a triumph to Aemilius Paulus, -and the debate had been thrown open to the assembly, all for a time -remained silent, for no doubt was entertained as to its passing; but -finally Servius Galba, who as a military tribune had served under Paulus -and was his enemy, came forward and obstructed the measure by a long -harangue.[833] Although the president could, and perhaps often did, throw -the debate open to the citizens in this way, he was not compelled to -do so. The tribunician assembly was more deliberative than any other—a -circumstance which accounts for its designation as a concilium.[834] -Those invited to speak, if citizens, had to be of good standing and not -under disqualification through a special law or usage. The rex sacrorum -was prohibited not only from holding any other office but also from -addressing an assembly.[835] The spendthrift[836] and the man condemned -for extortion[837] were likewise forbidden. When the right was granted -as a special distinction, the receiver was probably placed thereby on a -footing of equal dignity with the magistrates.[838] - -The president could also compel a citizen to speak. The holder of the -imperium had a right to summon any man into a public meeting, and order -him to answer any question put to him.[839] Tribunes of the plebs, -however, who lacked the power of summoning, exercised this coercive -function against citizens and even consuls, not through a direct right -but by a usurpation, probably based on their power to arrest and -imprison.[840] - -The president extended permission by asking a man to give his opinion -on the subject under discussion, and it was not in good order even -for a magistrate to address the assembly unless invited, though he -had ground for resentment if he was passed over in favor of private -persons.[841] When Caesar as consul, 59, brought his agrarian bill -before the comitia without the consent of the senate and in spite of its -silent disapproval,[842] he first asked his colleague whether he had -any objection to the proposal. Bibulus offered none but declared that -he would allow no innovation during his consulship. Thereupon Caesar -begged him for support, and requested the people to join in the entreaty, -saying, “You will have the law on the sole condition that he is willing.” -Then Bibulus, answering in a loud voice, “You will not have this law the -present year, even if all of you want it,” left the assembly. Slighting -the other magistrates, Caesar invited Pompey and Crassus to address the -meeting, though they were but senators and therefore, as contrasted with -magistrates, merely private citizens. After Pompey had spoken at length, -commending the details of the law, Caesar asked if he would support it -against opponents, at the same time requesting the people to beg of him -this favor. They did so, doubtless by acclamation; and Pompey, greatly -flattered because the consul and the people besought help of him, a -private citizen, promised to stand by the law.[843] - -A magistrate spoke from the platform, a private person from a lower -position, presumably from one of the steps; for the chairman to -bring a private speaker upon the stage was a cause of offence to his -colleagues.[844] When the president granted an opportunity to speak, -he had a right to fix the amount of time to be used. In the debate on -the law for assigning provinces to Caesar and Pompey, 55, the presiding -tribune granted one hour to Favorinus and two hours to Cato, both -opponents of the measure.[845] The speaker could use the time in whatever -way he pleased; a few persons by concert might waste the whole day in -trivialities, as is sometimes done in the senate of the United States of -America, so as to prevent voting on the subject for that date. In the -case above mentioned Favorinus, doubtless for lack of real argument, -exhausted his hour in lamentation over the shortness of the time allowed -him,[846] and Cato spent his two hours on irrelevant or minor matters, -merely that he might be silenced by the president while still appearing -to have something to say. He persisted in speaking accordingly till an -officer dragged him from the rostra and ejected him from the Forum. Even -then he returned several times to interrupt the proceedings with his -shouting.[847] If the speaker approved the measure, he might close with -the words, “This law of yours and your purpose and sentiments I praise -and most heartily approve”;[848] or more formally, “In my opinion this -bill as presented ought to be passed, and may it prove well, auspicious, -and fortunate both to yourselves and to the republic”;[849] or if opposed -to the proposition, he might conclude with this form of disapproval, “It -is my judgment that this law should by no means be repealed.”[850] - -Sometimes the magistrates were invited in the order of their rank and -afterward private citizens; in other cases, especially in tribunician -contiones, private persons were called first that they might speak with -perfect freedom, uninfluenced by the opinion of their magistrates.[851] -As the president had absolute control, he could alter the usage to suit -his own interest, and could certainly reserve to himself the advantage -of speaking last.[852] It often happened that there was not enough time -in one day for the discussion of a question. In that case the magistrate -adjourned the meeting to a specified date.[853] - -After the deliberation, or after the formality of opening the contio -which was merely preliminary to the comitia, the president ordered the -assembly to form into voting groups—curiae, centuries, or tribes. He -could say, for instance, “I order you to take your proper places in the -comitia centuriata,”[854] or more generally, “If you think fit, quirites, -move apart (into your voting groups).”[855] At the same time he ordered -the departure of all who lacked the qualification for voting.[856] The -lictors of the magistrates with imperium and the beadle (viator) of the -tribune attended to clearing away the unqualified.[857] - - Schulze, C. F., _Volksversammlungen der Römer_, 141 ff., 243 - ff.; Rubino, J., _Röm. Verfassung und Geschichte_, 240-53; - Lange, L., _Röm. Altertümer_, ii. 715-23, and see indices s. - v.; Mommsen, Th., _Röm. Staatsrecht_, i. 191-209; iii. 370-8, - and see index s. v.; Willems, P., _Droit public Rom._ 158 f.; - Herzog, E., _Röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. 632-6, 1057 f., and - see index s. v.; Karlowa, O., _Röm. Rechtsgeschichte_, i. 48 - f., 379-81; Madvig, J. N., _Verf. u. Verw. d. röm. Staates_, - i. 219; Soltau, W., _Altröm. Volksversammlungen_, 37 ff.; - Humbert, G., _Contio_, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 1484 - f.; Liebenam, W., _Contio_, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ - iv. 1149-53; Ruggiero, _Diz. ep._ ii. 1185, s. Contio; Lodge, - G., _Lex. Plaut._ i. 307, s. Contio; Forcellini, _Tot. Lat. - Lex._ ii. 349 f., s. Concio; Dupond, A., _Constitution et - magistratures Rom._ 60-3; Ihne, _History of Rome_, iv. 40-2. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII - -THE CALATA COMITIA - - -In seeking for the origin and primitive character of the Roman assembly -we are enabled by comparative study to reach a stage of growth far -anterior to the beginnings of Roman tradition. In its earliest known -form the European popular assembly had the following characteristics, -provisionally enumerated here, but established in the next chapter: (1) -the people who attended were the mass of freemen of a tribe, especially -the warriors; (2) they stood or sat promiscuously, without reference -to sub-tribal groups; (3) measures were proposed by none but chiefs -or nobles, generally after previous discussion in council, the common -members wholly lacking initiative; (4) the speakers were as a rule, -though not exclusively, chieftains; (5) the vote was by acclamation, -the clash of weapons, or some similar demonstration; as a correlate of -(3) and (4) may be added, (6) sovereignty, so far as the idea existed, -resided not in the assembly, which of itself could take no action, but -in the king and chieftains, who made use of the assembly (_a_) for the -publication of news or of projects, (_b_) for securing by their eloquence -the coöperation of the tribe in a plan already formed in council. However -far developed beyond this crude institution the comitia curiata or the -comitia centuriata of the republican period may have been, traces of all -the characteristics above mentioned may be found in the historical Roman -assembly[858]—a fact which justifies the comparative method of approach -to the subject. - -We need not hesitate to begin with the unorganized contio as the -earliest form of Roman assembly, to which we may attach the other -features of the European gathering named above. The first problem is to -determine under what influence and for what purpose the gathering of -the people came to be organized in curiae. The notion that the object -was primarily for voting is groundless. The Athenians had the germ of a -tribal assembly in the division of the people by phylae on the occasion -of ostracophory[859] and of the passing of other privilegia (νόμοι ἐπ’ -ἀνδρί). The organization was not in this case for the purpose of using -the tribes as voting units, but merely for bringing order and solemnity -to the proceeding. Apparently the assembly of Alamanni was arrayed in -military form for ratifying emancipations,[860] though in the process the -military companies did not vote as units. In like manner, but for a wider -range of functions, we find at Rome the meeting of the people in curiae, -less frequently in centuries, merely for listening, for witnessing, or -for receiving purification. The circumstances that the business of such -assemblies was largely religious, and of such a character that it must -have originated in the earliest Roman times, and that in the greater -number of cases these gatherings were under sacerdotal presidency suggest -that the sacerdotes, particularly the pontiffs, introduced the curiate -organization from the army to make their religious meetings more orderly -and dignified.[861] - -All assemblies which met under pontifical presidency for religious -purposes were called calata,[862] evidently from “calare,” a verb which -must originally have been in common use in the sense of “to call,” but -which in historical time was restricted to the technical language of -the sacerdotes.[863] In the latter connection it designates the peculiar -method of summoning used by the pontiffs.[864] Probably, at least in -earlier time, their calatores acted as curiate lictors in convoking the -calata comitia curiata,[865] over which they presided. In all meetings -of the kind in the regal period the people were grouped in curiae; under -the republic the centuriata comitia calata were also used for certain -purposes.[866] The usual meeting-place of the calata comitia curiata -was in front of the curia Calabra on the Capitoline Hill.[867] With -reference to their object, they may be classed as non-voting and voting; -the former were purely religious, the latter were for the settlement -of questions which were in part civil.[868] First to be noted of the -non-voting assemblies were those in which the people gathered in comitia -under the presidency of the king,[869] in the republic under the rex -sacrorum, to hear the proclamation of the fasti. On the calends of each -month a pontifex minor, as clerk of the college,[870] announced to them -on what day, whether the fifth or seventh, the nones would come.[871] On -the nones the king again summoned the people to hear the calendar of the -month,[872] read probably by the same pontifex minor. This custom fell -into disuse with the publication of the calendar in the Forum, beginning -in 304.[873] - -Equally passive were those comitia calata which under the presidency of -the supreme pontiff witnessed the inauguration of the three flamines -maiores,[874] probably of the king in the regal period, and certainly -of the rex sacrorum under the republic.[875] As warlike Mars had his -shrines outside the pomerium,[876] his chief temple being in the Campus -Martius,[877] it is a probable conclusion that his flamen was inaugurated -there—in the regal period in some form of military assembly, under the -republic in the comitia centuriata.[878] The inaugural ceremonies were -performed by an augur;[879] in the case of the sacerdotes it was the -supreme pontiff who requested this service of him,[880] whereas the king -could doubtless command an augur without the coöperation of the pontiff. -A closely related function was the appointment of Vestals by lot, under -the conduct of the supreme pontiff in a public assembly, probably the -calata comitia.[881] The destatio sacrorum and the abjuration of social -rank, other acts which these comitia merely witnessed, will be considered -in connection with the transitio ad plebem and the adrogatio.[882] The -ceremonies attended to by the rex sacrorum on March 24 and again on May -24 may have been in comitia calata, though this is doubtful.[883] - -Assemblies of the people were organized in curiae by the pontiffs for -the religious purposes mentioned above, while political measures, so -far as submitted to the people, continued for a time, we may suppose, -to be decided by din in contiones. But when a desire for a more precise -vote began to be felt, the curiate organization naturally offered itself -as most convenient for the purpose. The contention that in primitive -Rome, as among other early peoples,[884] the assembly expressed its -feeling or opinion by noisy demonstration finds strong support in the -most probable derivation of suffragium, “vote,” which connects it with -frangere, fragor, “a breaking,” “crash,” “din,” “applause,”[885] the -prefix sub- expressing the dependence of the action upon the proposal -of the speaker, as in the military succlamare, succlamatio.[886] We -may well believe that even after the organization of the assembly as -comitia—that is, in curiate, centuriate, or tribal divisions[887]—the -voting within the component groups continued for a time to be by din, -as is suggested by the phrase sex suffragia, applied to the six oldest -groups of knights in the comitia centuriata.[888] Voting by heads in -large gatherings is in fact a slow, cumbersome process, the product of a -well-developed political life. In all probability it originated in the -centuriate assembly—in which the military array facilitated the taking of -individual opinion[889]—and afterward extended to the other comitia. This -line of reasoning suggests that when in the regal period a desire began -to be felt for a more precise vote, and the curiate organization readily -offered itself for the purpose, the expedient was adopted of taking the -vote of each curia in order by din and then of deciding the question at -issue by a majority of the thirty curial votes.[890] There can be little -doubt that this step also was first taken by the pontiffs. - -The testamentary calata comitia met twice a year, probably on fixed -days.[891] It has been a disputed question whether the oldest form of -testament here referred to required a vote of the people. Rubino[892] -strongly upheld the negative on the ground (1) of analogy with the -procedure in inaugurations, (2) of analogy with other forms of testament, -none of which required a vote, (3) of the word testamentum itself, which -refers to witnessing, (4) of the conviction that the patricians would -not leave to the popular assembly the making of private law, (5) on the -authority of Theophilus,[893] who mentions the people’s witnessing of the -testament, (6) on the statement of Gellius[894] that wills of the kind -were made “in populi contione.” Against this reasoning may be urged (1) -the analogy from the adrogatio, (2) the analogy from the testamentary -adoption, to both of which cases the simple testament was similar, and -both of which required a vote of the people,[895] (3) the consideration -that the act of witnessing in the assembly did not necessarily exclude a -vote, (4) the statement of Gaius[896] that calata comitia were convoked -“for making”—not for witnessing—testaments, (5) the circumstance that -the contio was often a preliminary stage of the voting assembly[897] in -addition to the fact that pontifical language applies the term to comitia -in general.[898] These arguments offset all the points offered by Rubino, -unless it be the fourth, which is a purely subjective consideration. -Arguments (1), (2), and (4) are especially effective for establishing -the fact of a vote in the case under consideration. But the problem -can be most satisfactorily solved (6) by comparative investigation. In -the constitution of the early Indo-European family the estate belonged -jointly to all the male members, and for that reason could not be given -away by the pater.[899] The primitive Germans accordingly made no wills, -but left their property to their children, or in failure of children to -the near kin.[900] In Attica the right to bequeath was instituted by -a law of Solon, which allowed it to those only who had no legitimate -sons;[901] in Sparta the right was introduced by Epitadeus, perhaps -early in the fourth century B.C.[902] Testaments were unknown in Gortyn -at the time when the _Twelve Tables_ of this city were published,[903] -and similar conditions existed in other states of Greece.[904] The rule -holds, too, for ancient India.[905] The Slavic householder could not -alienate his land without the consent of the community.[906] As there is -no reason to assume a more advanced condition for primitive Rome, we may -conclude that, as indicated above, the calata comitia not only witnessed -but ratified testaments.[907] - -Mommsen has attempted to fix these days as March 24 and May 24,[908] on -which the rex sacrificulus performed comitial ceremonies not clearly -described by the sources.[909] He admits, however, that the testamentary -comitia met under the pontifex maximus rather than under the rex -sacrorum[910]—a fact directly opposed to his contention. We should be -surprised also to find the testamentary days so close together.[911] -But the most effective argument against his view is that this function -performed by the rex sacrorum could not have been the holding of -comitia, for the time during which it continued was nefas.[912] The -ancient authorities state that “the sacrificial king, after performing -sacred rites, comes into, or makes a sacrifice in (venit or litat), the -comitium,”[913] but they do not mention an assembly; hence we may infer -that in the fasti for these days reference is to some other function than -the holding of comitia. The form of testament above described fell early -into disuse,[914] so that the conditions and ceremonies attending it -became a subject of study for antiquarians. - -Adoptions ordinarily came before the praetor. The legal object was -the perpetuation of the family and its religion. The law granted the -privilege accordingly to those only who had no children and who were -incapable of having children. It required further that the act should not -imperil the continuance of the family from whom the adopted came.[915] -Adrogatio was the adoption of a person who was his own master and who -accordingly consented to pass under the paternal power of another. -The word signifies that the act to which it applies required a vote -of the people.[916] It was not undertaken rashly or without careful -consideration.[917] The persons concerned were required first to present -the case to the college of pontiffs, who took into account “what reason -any one has for adopting children, what considerations of family or -dignity are involved, what principles of religion are concerned.”[918] -The age of the man who wished to arrogate was considered—whether in this -respect he was capable of having children of his own, and care was taken -that the property of the arrogated person should not be insidiously -coveted.[919] The adrogator was asked whether he wished the candidate for -adoption to be his real son, and the candidate was asked whether he would -allow himself to be placed in this condition;[920] and the testimonies -were confirmed by an oath formulated by Q. Mucius Scaevola.[921] - -If the pontiffs gave their consent, the case came before the comitia -curiata under the presidency of the chief of the college,[922] who put -the question in the following form: “Do you wish and order that L. -Valerius be the son of L. Titus by the same legal rights as if born -of the father and mother of that family, and that the latter have the -power of life and death over the former as a father over a son? This -order I request of you, Romans, to grant, just as I have pronounced -the words.”[923] The curiae decided by vote.[924] At the same meeting -the arrogated son was required to declare that he forsook the religion -of the family or gens of his birth—detestatio sacrorum[925]—and by a -similar declaration the adrogator received him into the sacra of the new -family.[926] This form of adoption could not apply to youths before they -had put on the manly gown, or to wards or women; for children and women -had no part in an assembly, and guardians were not allowed under any -circumstances to place their wards in the power of another.[927] - -A modification of adrogatio is testamentary adoption, of which the only -well-known case is that of Octavius, the heir of the dictator Caesar. -Octavius came before a praetor with witnesses and formally accepted the -inheritance;[928] afterward he was declared adopted by a vote of the -curiae.[929] As this case is nearly akin to the adrogatio, there can be -no doubt that the vote was taken in the calata comitia under pontifical -presidency.[930] - -Distinct from the adrogatio, though analogous to it, was the direct -passing of individuals and of gentes from the patrician to the plebeian -rank—transitio ad plebem. The motive was a desire to qualify for the -tribunate of the plebs,[931] or more generally to widen the range of -one’s eligibility to office.[932] The history of the republic affords -several instances of the transition of individuals;[933] and two plebeian -gentes, the Octavia[934] and the Minucia,[935] boasted of having passed -over from the patricians. Even if these boasts rest upon genealogical -falsifications,[936] the Romans thought such an act legally possible; and -they formulated a process applicable to every case whether of individuals -or of gentes. It was through some other ceremony than the adrogatio, for -the latter could not apply to groups of persons. Clodius was following -the more general procedure here referred to when in the year 60 he -tried to make himself a plebeian without recourse to adrogatio. First -he abdicated his nobility by an oath, probably taken in the comitia -calata;[937] then coming before an assembly of the plebs, he held himself -ready to receive plebeian rights through a resolution introduced by the -tribune Herennius.[938] The process allowed the retention of the name, -sacra, and all other privileges not dependent on the patriciate.[939] -But Metellus, the consul, objected that a curiate law was needed to -make the act valid, and the senate evidently agreed with him.[940] -Metellus may have had in mind the transition through the adrogatio, -which required a curiate law, or more probably he was thinking of a -vote of the curiae in addition to the other formalities which Clodius -was passing through.[941] The complete process accordingly would have -been the abjuration of the patriciate, confirmed by a curiate law, and -the reception of plebeian rights through a plebi scitum. Clodius was -not so foolish as to suppose that a process of transitio invented by -himself would prove acceptable to the senate and magistrates, and must -therefore have followed as closely as possible the formula which he -believed to be legal. But when Metellus raised the objection, and when -the tribunes persisted in interceding against the plebi scitum,[942] -he yielded for the present, and in the following year had himself -arrogated by a plebeian named Fonteius, from whom he was forthwith -emancipated.[943] This procedure, too, allowed him to retain the gentile -name of his birth,[944] his imagines and sacra,[945] and consequently his -inheritance. The oath taken in the calata comitia accordingly was not the -detestatio sacrorum usual in arrogations, but a form of declaration which -reserved these privileges, with the understanding that in this case the -arrogatio was not for the customary object but to enable him to change -his rank.[946] - -Analogous to the transitio ad plebem is the elevation of a plebeian to -the patrician rank. The Romans believed that eminent plebeians, including -foreigners of distinction newly admitted to citizenship, were sometimes -granted the patriciate not only through the regal period but also in the -opening years of the republic. For the republican age they represented -the bestowal as a double act, a resolution of the people followed by -coöptation into the senate.[947] In stating that the first consuls -chose the best men from the commons, made them patricians, and with -them filled the senate to the number of three hundred, Dionysius[948] -apparently has in mind the consuls’ function of recruiting the senate -before the Ovinian legislation,[949] together with their initiative in -granting the patriciate. The Roman view that the bestowal required a -vote of the people is further proved by the procedure of Julius Caesar -and of Octavianus in creating new patricians; for in this function -they doubtless followed tradition as nearly as possible. In 45 a -plebi scitum,[950] proposed by L. Cassius Longinus and supported by a -senatus consultum,[951] empowered Caesar to recruit the patrician rank. -Octavianus proceeded in a similar manner except that a consular law,[952] -approved also by a senatus consultum,[953] was passed for the purpose. -As the object was religious, we may suppose that the qualifications of -the candidates were previously examined by the pontifical college. On the -analogy of the transitio ad plebem it may be assumed further that the -candidate abjured his plebeian rank in the calata comitia, which then -confirmed his declaration by vote.[954] - -But whether the Romans were right in supposing patricians to have been -created in the early republic has been doubted. Mommsen[955] takes the -ground that when the curiae ceased to be exclusively patrician, elevation -to the rank became impossible, and that therefore no cases of the kind -occurred after the fall of the kings. But in such a matter it is absurd -to speak of impossibilities; everything was possible which the governing -power approved, and the argument falls when its basis, the purely -patrician state, has been removed.[956] The cessation was in fact due to -the growing exclusiveness of the patricians, who as they came to supplant -the king in the government, learned to value their privileged position so -highly they were unwilling longer to share it with others. Just when the -closing of their rank was effected has not been ascertained, but there -is no good reason for rejecting the Roman view that for a time after the -fall of the kings plebeians continued to be admitted: in reality the -indications are strong for a relatively late closing.[957] - -We may next inquire how patricians were created in the time of the -kings. As the history of the regal period is in general a reconstruction -with material drawn from later time, so in this particular case ancient -writers sometimes date back to the age of the kings the usage of the -republic. Dionysius[958] accordingly states that “the Romans by vote -transferred Servius Tullius from the plebeian to the patrician order, -just as they had previously transferred Tarquin the Elder and still -earlier Numa Pompilius.” But the Romans preferred to reconstruct the -process on an entirely different principle. Regarding the kings as the -founders of all the fundamental institutions, the patricians looked upon -their superior rank as a gift of these monarchs. The patriciate depended -upon senatorial membership, which was at the disposal of the kings.[959] -This view is well adapted to explain the creation of the senate; but -for the period after its establishment Livy[960] adds to the adlectio -of the king a coöptatio by the patres (senators). Livy’s account of the -usage here given is reasonable; the king indicated his preference as -to the choice of advisers, but a powerful council, such as the senate -must have been, at least in the later regal period, would have the final -decision on the question of admitting a new member. The conclusion is -that toward the end of the monarchy, if not from the beginning, plebeians -were admitted to the senate, and through it to the patriciate, by the -coöperation of the king and the senate, the people having nothing to do -with the matter.[961] But after the overthrow of the monarchy the vote of -the people was substituted for the will of the king, coöptation by the -senate continuing as before.[962] - -The patriciate was acquired not only through bestowal by the state, but -also through the adoption of a plebeian into a patrician family. Several -cases of the kind have been ascertained.[963] The act took place before -the praetor[964] and did not concern the comitia. Probably a preliminary -examination by the pontiffs was necessary to adoptions as well as to -arrogations.[965] - - Rubino, J., _Röm. Verfassung_, 241-53; Mommsen, _Röm. - Forschungen_, i. 123-7, 397-409; _Röm. Chronologie_, 241 ff.; - _Röm. Staatsrecht_, ii. 33-41; iii. 38-40; Lange, L., _Röm. - Altertümer_, i. 131-4, 177 f., 356 f., 362, 398-401, 459, 795; - ii. 518, see also indices s. Adrogatio, Calatores, Detestatio - sacrorum; _Transitio ad plebem_, in _Kleine Schriften_, - ii. 1-90; Madvig, J. N., _Verf. u. Verw. d. röm. Staates_, - i. 222-6; Herzog, E., _Röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. 108-11, - 1062-4, 1075; Mispoulet, J. B., _Institutions politiques - des Romains_, i. 202 f.; Willems, P., _Droit public Rom._ - 53 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 187 ff.; Wissowa, - G., _Religion und Kultus der Römer_, 440 f.; Hallays, A., - _Comices à Rome_, 16-9; Mercklein, D. L., _Coöptation der - Römer_, 11-44 (of the gentes and of the senate); Helbig, W., - in _Comptes rendus de l’acad. des inscr. et belles-lettres_, - xxi (1893). 350-3; Büdinger, M., _Cicero und die Patriciat_, - in _Denkschr. d. Kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss. Phil.-hist. Cl._ - xxxi (1881). 211-73; _Der Patriciat und das Fehderecht in den - letzten Jahrzehnten der röm. Rep._, ibid. xxxvi (1888). 81-125; - Baudry, F., _Adrogatio_, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 83 - f.; Saglio, E., _Calator_, ibid. i. 814; Humbert, G., ibid. - i. 1375 f.; _Detestatio sacrorum_, ibid. ii. 113; Leonhard, - _Adrogatio_, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 419-21; - Samter, _Calatores_, ibid. iii. 1335 f.; Kübler, _Calata - comitia_, ibid. iii. 1330-4; Ruggiero, E., _Diz. ep._ ii. - 1185; Smith, _Dict._ i. 26 f.; Nettleship, _Contrib. to Lat. - Lexicog._ 400. - - - - -CHAPTER IX. - -THE COMITIA CURIATA - - -The primitive European assembly, of which the Roman is a variety, may be -reconstructed in broad outline by a comparison of the forms and functions -of the institution as found among the earliest Italians, Greeks, -Celts, Germans, Slavs, and kindred peoples, among whom it differed in -detail while possessing the same general features. The usual tendency -of development was toward the abridgment of popular powers to the -advantage of the nobles or of the king;[966] but in some instances may be -discovered a growth in the opposite direction. - -Generally the assembly did not have fixed times of meeting but convened -only when called by the king or chiefs. This is known to be true of the -Homeric Greeks,[967] of the Slavs,[968] and of the Romans,[969] and may -be regarded as the more primitive condition. In addition to extraordinary -sessions the German assembly acquired the right to meet regularly twice -a month at fixed times[970]—a right which gave the people a valuable -political advantage. In like manner the Lacedaemonians met once a -month;[971] the Athenians probably once a prytany (tenth of a year) after -Cleisthenes, and certainly four times a prytany after Pericles.[972] The -Celtic assemblies convened annually or triennially at fixed seasons.[973] -Among all these peoples, however, subjects for consideration were -presented by none but the king or chief, the assembly itself being -wholly without initiative. Such subjects were as a rule previously -discussed in a council of chiefs or nobles.[974] The person who summoned -the assembly naturally made the first speech, which explained the purpose -of the meeting and the character of the subject to be considered. If -it was an enterprise in which he desired the support or coöperation -of the community, he attempted to rouse for it the enthusiasm of his -hearers.[975] The discussion might then be continued by the chiefs or any -others distinguished for age, military prowess, or eloquence.[976] Among -the Germans, who possessed more than the average degree of liberty, any -one spoke who could gain a hearing; in the Homeric assembly a commoner -who dared lift up his voice against king or noble was liable to severe -chastisement as a disorderly person;[977] and conditions at Rome, as well -as in Etruria,[978] seem to have been equally unfavorable to the ordinary -freeman. - -A considerable variety of business came before the assembly. It might -be summoned to hear the announcement of news of interest to the -community,[979] the reading of the calendar for the month,[980] the -declaration of a policy or opinion by a king or chief,[981] or for -witnessing acts affecting the interests of the community.[982] More -important were judicial cases,[983] questions of war and peace,[984] and -elections.[985] - -The problem as to the relative power of the king and council on the one -hand and of the assembly on the other is difficult. It was a disadvantage -to the people, over and above their lack of initiative, to have no means -of precisely expressing their will. The Greeks signified their approval -by acclamation,[986] the Germans by clashing their weapons,[987] and the -Celts by both;[988] either demonstration aimed to express, not the will -of the majority,[989] but the intensity of conviction on the part of the -assembly as a whole. It lacked as well the means of legally enforcing its -will.[990] The Achaeans in assembly approved the petition of Chryses, -a suppliant priest; nevertheless King Agamemnon rejected it.[991] After -the people had divided the spoils of war, Agamemnon seized the prize -they had given another.[992] The Trojans were ready to surrender Helen -for the sake of peace; but Priam, to gratify his son, refused, and the -war went on.[993] In his relations with individuals the king often acted -unjustly and tyrannically. Even in affairs which concerned the entire -community he might take large liberty. Without consulting the assembly he -could count on the support of the people in a war of defence. Treaties -of peace, which were often guest-friendships and intermarriages between -royal families,[994] did not come before the people for ratification as a -right, but only in cases in which their pledge seemed necessary for the -prevention of private warfare. The right of the magistrate to conclude -peace with or without discussion in the council or senate was recognized -by the states of Italy as late as the Second Samnite war.[995] The -king might even declare an offensive war on his own responsibility, if -without consulting the people he could feel sure of their support.[996] -Enterprises requiring their coöperation he usually submitted to them -to win their approval, as he had no means of coercing the entire -community. His independence of the assembly increased with the growth -of heredity. The idea of sovereignty, strictly speaking, was unknown to -primitive times; yet so far as people thought of political power, they -assigned it to the king and council.[997] Nevertheless the fact of the -assembly’s existence and the need of eloquence for persuading it prove -it to have been a real force. The suppression of the German assembly -or the prohibition of carrying arms to the meeting was looked upon as -intolerable tyranny.[998] For the disturbance of an Irish assembly the -penalty was death.[999] Public opinion was a check on royalty,[1000] and -in extreme cases the people rebelled and killed their king.[1001] - -The strengthening of the kingship naturally tended to weaken the -assembly. The Lacedaemonian kings had a right to make war on whatever -state they pleased, and any citizen who obstructed this power was -accursed;[1002] if, too, in anything the people gave a wrong decision, -the kings and council could set it right.[1003] Under the Frankish -monarchy the general assembly seems to have entirely disappeared -in the sixth century A.D., to be revived in the latter part of the -seventh,[1004] in a form which took little account of the commons.[1005] -In the other Germanic tribes which entered the Empire the effect of the -migration was to strengthen the king and to weaken in a corresponding -degree the power of the people.[1006] In Russia Tartar domination, -converting the legitimate princes into tyrants, effected the downfall of -the assemblies.[1007] The building up of large states, too, necessarily -degrades or destroys popular gatherings.[1008] - -The heritage of the Roman assembly from the earlier tribal time must -have been slight as well as vague—a heritage diminished further by the -growing power of the king and nobles. The assumption has often been -made that from the beginning the Roman assembly was sovereign. The view -rests in part, however, on a confusion of two ideas which should be kept -distinct. In its broadest sense populus designates the state, which is -sovereign whether it expresses its will through the king, the senate, -or the popular assembly, or through the concurrence of two or more of -these elements. In interstate relations it always has this meaning. -More narrowly populus signifies the masses of citizens in contrast with -the magistrates or with the senate.[1009] In the latter sense it cannot -be said that the populus was from the beginning sovereign. The Romans -themselves of later time understood that in the regal period the senate -had the wisdom to advise, the king possessed the imperium, whereas the -people enjoyed but a limited degree of freedom, right, and power.[1010] -Their condition was not liberty but a preparation for it.[1011] Their -assembly, like that of other early Europeans, had no power of initiative; -it met only when summoned by the king, and could consider those matters -only which the king brought before it. Its object must have been chiefly -to receive information and to witness acts of public importance. In no -case did the king call upon the assembly for advice; counsel belonged -exclusively to the wise elders, who composed the senate;[1012] and should -he wish to instruct the people in the merits of a proposed measure, -he would himself address them and perhaps invite the most respected -senators or his most trustworthy supporters among the private citizens -to give the masses the benefit of their wisdom.[1013] In other than -judicial assemblies the privilege of speaking must have been sparingly -granted.[1014] Finally no elective or legislative act of the curiae was -valid without the authorization of the senate (patrum auctoritas).[1015] - -With reference to the specific rights of the assembly, Dionysius[1016] -states that Romulus granted the commons three prerogatives, (1) to elect -magistrates, (2) to ratify laws, (3) to decide concerning war, whenever -the king should refer the matter to them. Livy’s[1017] stricture on the -absolutism of Tarquin the Proud implies, too, that constitutionally -the assembly should have had power to decide on peace and war. But -stress should be laid on the admission of Dionysius that probably all -the questions above enumerated, or at least those of peace and war, -were referred to the assembly at the pleasure only of the king—that the -decision of them was not a right of the people, but a concession on the -part of the sovereign.[1018] Still more important, these generalizations -are in great part invalidated, as Rubino[1019] has shown, by the -testimony of their authors. When either refers to individual cases of -treaty-making under the kings, he never connects the assembly with the -proceedings.[1020] It is significant, too, that the formula of treaty -makes the king the only actor, taking no account of the people.[1021] -Usually peace continued merely through the lifetime of the king who -contracted it,[1022] but a truce for a definite period was binding to -the end, even after his death.[1023] Under the republic to the time -of the decemvirs the treaty-making power resided in the consuls and -senate.[1024] Ordinarily either a senatus consultum empowered the -magistrates to use their discretion[1025] or sanctioned the agreement -when made.[1026] More rarely the senate treated directly with ambassadors -from the enemy.[1027] The clamor of the plebeians sometimes prevailed -upon the senate to negotiate for peace;[1028] and at other times it -was merely by accident that the people heard of the conclusion of a -treaty.[1029] After the decemviral legislation the plebeian assembly -of tribes slowly acquired the right of ratification;[1030] in fact -it was not till the Second Samnite war that their vote came to be -essential.[1031] Among the archives devoted to treaties and alliances, -accordingly, senatus consulta and plebiscites alone are mentioned.[1032] -The very fact that in the later republic the ratification of treaties -belonged exclusively to the tribal assembly[1033] proves that it was an -acquired right of the people; for we may set it down as a fixed principle -that the curiae and the centuries yielded none of their prerogatives to -the tribes.[1034] - -As regards the right of the people to declare war a distinction must -be drawn between defensive wars, which, admitting neither choice nor -delay,[1035] could not be referred to their decision, and aggressive -wars, which were in the option of the state to undertake or avoid. Yet -even in the case of offensive wars, though the approval of the people was -doubtless often sought, they exercised under the kings and in the early -republic no real right. When the king or magistrate felt that Rome had -suffered injury from a neighboring state, he despatched an ambassador to -seek reparation. If the demand was not complied with, the ambassador, -calling Jupiter and the other gods to witness the injustice, added: “But -we shall consult the elders in our own country concerning these matters, -to determine in what way we may obtain justice.” When the messenger had -returned to Rome and had made his report, the king consulted the senate -substantially in these words: “Concerning such matters, differences, and -disagreements as the pater patratus of the Roman people, the quirites, -has conferred with the pater patratus of the ancient Latins and of the -ancient Latin peoples—which matters ought to be given up, performed, -discharged, but which they have neither given up nor performed nor -discharged—declare,” said he to the senator whose opinion he wished first -to obtain, “what you think.” Then the elder thus questioned replied, -“I think the demand should be enforced by a just and pious war; and -therefore I consent to it and vote for it.” Then the rest were asked -in order, and when a majority agreed in this opinion, war was thereby -voted.[1036] In all this account there is no mention of the people; but -afterward when the fetialis reached the border of the enemy’s country, -and pronounced the formula for the declaration of war, he included a -statement that the populus Romanus had ordered it: “Forasmuch as the -populus Romanus of the quirites have ordered that there should be war -with the ancient Latins, and the senate of the populus Romanus of the -quirites have given their opinion, consented, etc., I and the populus -Romanus declare and make war on the peoples of the ancient Latins.”[1037] -In this connection, as in all formulae applying to international -relations, populus means not the assembly but the state; hence the use -of the word cannot be taken as evidence of the existence of a popular -right to declare war.[1038] Besides this formula we have in support of -such a right the general statement only of Dionysius and the implied -idea of Livy, referred to above,[1039] neither of which is in itself of -especial weight. On the other hand the individual kings seem to have -been free to make war at their discretion. The fact that peace and war -are represented as depending upon the character and inclinations of the -king[1040] further establishes the real view of the Roman historians. -In a succeeding chapter[1041] it will be made clear that not till 427 -did the centuriate assembly acquire the right to declare an aggressive -war; probably not till some time afterward was this right established as -inalienable. Previous to that date the warriors, perhaps in a contio, -were occasionally called on to give their approval, doubtless, as has -been explained above,[1042] to increase their enthusiasm for the war. - -With reference to the legislative activity of the assembly under -the kings, it is necessary to call attention to the fact that among -all peoples in the earlier stages of their growth law is chiefly -customary.[1043] At the time of her founding Rome inherited from the -Latin stock, to which her people mainly belonged, a mass of private and -public customs, which, owing their existence to no legislative power, -were the result of gradual evolution. Under such conditions, as in -Homeric Greece, the king or chief settled disputes in accordance with -these usages, though in the general belief his individual judgments -came directly to him from some god. The Homeric king received his -dooms—θέμιστες—and even his thoughts from the gods.[1044] The mythical or -semi-mythical legislators of Greece, as Minos, Lycurgus, and Zaleucus, -were given their laws by revelation. In like manner Numa, who may be -considered a typical legislator for primitive Rome,[1045] received -his sacred laws and institutions from the goddess Egeria;[1046] and -Romulus, the first great law-giver,[1047] was a demi-god, who passed -without dying to the dwelling-place of the immortals.[1048] Roughly -distinguished, Romulus was the author of the secular law, Numa of the -sacred.[1049] In general the Romans of later time looked back to their -kings, the founders of their state,[1050] as the authors not only -of their fundamental laws and institutions but even of their moral -principles.[1051] Doubtless the Roman view of the ancient king is an -image of the republican dictatorship, of the extraordinary magistratus -rei publicae constituendae, of the consul freed from his various -limitations;[1052] but the picture, stripped of the distinctness which -came with the gradual formulation of constitutional usage, is, as -comparative study shows, true to the primitive condition which it aims to -represent. - -From this early conception the idea of human legislation gradually -emerged. Not daring on his own responsibility to change a traditional -usage which the people held sacred, the magistrate found it expedient -to obtain their consent to any serious departure,[1053] with a view not -to legalizing the proposal, but to pledging the people to its practical -adoption. When and how the primitive acclamation gave way to the orderly -vote of the comitia curiata cannot be ascertained from the sources.[1054] -After this stage was reached, the transaction between king and people -had the following form: “I ask you, quirites, whether you will consent -to, and consider it right, that T. Valerius be a son to L. Titus as -rightfully and legally as if born of the father and mother of the family -of the latter, and that the latter have the power of life and death -over the former as a father over his son. These (questions) in the form -in which I have pronounced them, thus, quirites, I ask you.”[1055] The -magistrate brought his formulated request before the people (legem -ferre), who accepted it (legem accipere); the question (rogatio) was -directed not to the assembly as a whole but to the component citizens, -who individually replied ut rogas, “yes,” or antiquo, “no.”[1056] -By this procedure the citizens bound themselves to the acceptance of -the proposition on an oral promise, which was the strongest form of -obligation known to them. Herein is involved the fundamental idea of lex, -which was not a command addressed by the sovereign to the people or a -contract between ruler and ruled, but an obligation which the citizens -took upon themselves at the request of the magistrate.[1057] The verb -iubere, which designates the people’s part (populus iubet) in the passing -of laws and resolutions, did not originally have the meaning “to order,” -which belonged to it in the age of Cicero. Some have derived it from ius -habere, “to regard as right;”[1058] others from judh, an extension of -the root ju, “to bind.”[1059] In either case it seems to mean no more -than to accept or hold as right or as binding. In its widest sense lex -denotes any obligation which one party takes upon himself on the offer of -another. In this meaning it may apply to a business contract,[1060] in -which alone the obligations are reciprocal, to the instruction imposed by -a superior magistrate upon an inferior,[1061] to the auspicium which the -magistrate formulates and the god accepts,[1062] to the ordinance which -the subject, without being consulted, receives willingly or unwillingly -from the ruler (lex data),[1063] as well as to the statute established -by the question of the magistrate and the affirmative answer of the -citizens (lex rogata). The leges of the community, with which alone the -present discussion is concerned, were distinguished as publicae.[1064] -A lex of the kind was not necessarily general,[1065] but applied as -readily to an individual citizen[1066] as to the entire body, to a -declaration of war,[1067] or the banishment of a citizen,[1068] as well -as to a universal rule of conduct. In the earlier time the lex rogata, or -simply lex, seems to have designated any act of an assembly, elective or -judicial as well as law-making in the modern sense.[1069] But in the time -of Cicero it had come to mean any act of an assembly which was neither an -election nor a judicial decision,[1070] and in the latter sense the word -is used in this volume. - -The acceptance of a proposition by the citizens obligated -themselves[1071] but not the government. The king, who retained office -for life and was irresponsible, could not be held amenable to law; -against a tyrannical ruler the only resource was revolution. Although the -republican magistrates possessed remarkably great power, as temporary -functionaries they belonged to the people, along with whom they were -bound by the laws.[1072] - -To the end of the regal period the legislative activity of the people -remained narrowly restricted. The body of leges regiae, described as -curiate by Pomponius[1073] on the supposition that they were passed by -the assembly under royal presidency,[1074] was little more than the ius -pontificum—the customary religious law—with whose making the curiae had -nothing to do.[1075] If the king wished to admit new citizens,[1076] -erect public works, levy forced labor on the citizens,[1077] reform the -military organization,[1078] punish a man with chains or death,[1079] -make a treaty, or even declare an offensive war, no power compelled him -to submit the measure to the citizens. Although he must often have found -it expedient to engage their coöperation in national enterprises, or more -rarely in a legal innovation,[1080] it may be stated with confidence -that before the beginning of the republic the curiate assembly had not -acquired the right to be consulted on any of these matters—that its -slight activity in legislation and administration was a concession from -the king rather than a right; for under the republic such activity, -gradually increasing, belonged to the centuries and the tribes. We may -accept without hesitation the principle that in form if not in substance -the curiae retained all the powers which they had ever actually possessed. - -Judicial business, which no one has ever assumed to be a primitive -function of the Roman assembly, needs no long consideration here. Among -the early Indo-Europeans the settlement of disputes and the punishment -of most crimes were in the hands of the families and brotherhoods; only -treason and closely related offences were noticed by the state; and these -cases were tried by the king in the presence of the assembly.[1081] The -religious ideas attaching to crime and punishment[1082] in early Rome -suggest that the priests had the same connection with these matters there -as among the Celts and Germans. That condition yielded to the growing -authority of the king, who is represented by the ancients as wielding -an absolute power of life and death over his people and as allowing in -capital cases an appeal to the assembly at his own discretion.[1083] -From the general conception of the relation between king and assembly as -established in this chapter, it is necessary to infer that if the people -had any claim to a share in the jurisdiction, it must have been slight as -well as vague, and one which they were in no position to enforce. - -A review of the individual kings might give the impression that an act -of the assembly was unessential to filling the regal office. Not only -were Romulus and Tatius kings without election,[1084] but according to -Livy[1085] Numa’s appointment was made by the senate alone; and Servius -ruled long and introduced his great reforms before his election.[1086] -Tarquin the Proud to the end of his reign was neither appointed by the -senate nor chosen by the people.[1087] From these four or five instances -of kings who ruled without election, as well as from the fact that -both the dictatorship—a temporary return to monarchy—and the office -of rex sacrorum—the priestly successor to the monarch—were filled by -appointment, we might infer that the kingship was not elective.[1088] -But on the other hand the word interregnum, which could not have been -invented in the republican period and which involves the idea of -election, as well as the general custom of choosing kings among primitive -European peoples, may be added to the authority of our sources[1089] -in favor of an elective monarchy in earliest Rome. The nomination of -the king by the competent person was perhaps acclaimed in a contio in -some such way as among the early Germans. Such an election, we may -suppose, was in the beginning legal without further action on the part -of the people. But the accession of a king was a momentous event in the -life of a generation—far more important than the annual declaration of -war upon a neighbor—and the advantage of a formal vote of the curiate -assembly, after its institution, was obvious both to the king and to the -sacerdotes; it gave to the former the solemn oral pledge of obedience -from the citizens, and to the latter an opportunity to influence the -proceedings through the auspices and through the manipulation of the -calendar. - -Under this system the king after his appointment by his predecessor or -by the interrex, and after the acclamation in contio if such action took -place, convoked the curiae on the first convenient comitial day of his -reign,[1090] having held favorable auspices in the morning, and proposed -to them a rogation[1091] in some such form as the following: “Do you -consent, and regard it as just and legal, that I, whom the populus has -designated king, should exercise imperium over you?” This rogation, -answered affirmatively by a majority of the curiae, became a lex curiata -de imperio.[1092] The informal acclamation, if it was the custom, must -have disappeared in time, and the passing of the curiate law was looked -upon as the election proper.[1093] - -Concessions to the people develop into popular rights. The citizens, -deeply interested in the choice of a man who for the remainder of his -life was to represent their community before the gods, lead them in war, -and exercise over them the power of life and death, claimed as their -first active political right the ius suffragii in the passing of this lex -curiata de imperio. Hence after the institution of the republic and of -the comitia centuriata, the curiae clung obstinately to this inalienable -prerogative.[1094] - -The development of the elective process outlined above is offered in -explanation of the curious phenomenon that under the republic, while -all other acts of the centuriate and tribal assemblies required no -confirmation by the curiae, elections by these assemblies did require -such a sanction. This explanation is the only one proposed which accords -with the Roman interpretation of the peculiarity. According to Cicero it -was provided that in the case of all elective magistrates the people -should vote twice on each that they might have an opportunity to correct -what they had done, if they repented of having conferred an office on -any person. In the case of the censors this second vote was cast in -the comitia centuriata; all other elective magistrates received it in -the curiate assembly.[1095] Rubino[1096] and others have objected that -Cicero’s interpretation of the curiate law is biassed by his desire -to contrast the essentially antipopular character of the demagogue -Rullus,[1097] who by the terms of his agrarian law would deprive the -people of their right to vote even once in the election of officials, -with the wise and moderate statesmen of old, who were so devoted to the -people as to allow them two opportunities to express their choice in -the case of each magistrate. The orator, it is urged, could not himself -know the original intention of the usage; and his interpretation is -contradicted by the fact that the person who proposed the lex curiata -was already a magistrate, the voting on this lex being subsequent to the -election and forming no part of it.[1098] - -In favor of Cicero’s interpretation it may in the first place be stated -that he was not simply offering a conjecture as to the original intention -of the usage, but was interpreting the formula of the law as it existed -in his own day. There would be no point to his interpretation unless the -formula ran somewhat like that of an election; and he affirms definitely -that the law bestows the magistracy upon a person who has already -received the same office from other comitia—that it is, in other words, -a second bestowal of the office.[1099] That this interpretation is not a -mere invention of Cicero is proved by a statement of Messala[1100] that -the magistracy in the strict legal sense of the term is granted by the -curiate law. And the point maintained by Messala is further confirmed -by that article of the agrarian rogation of P. Servilius Rullus which -provides that the decemviri agris adsignandis may, if necessary, dispense -with the curiate law and yet be “decemvirs in as legal a sense as are -those who hold the office according to the strictest law.”[1101] In other -words, the person who has been elected by the comitia centuriata or -tributa is a magistratus, though not a magistratus iustus or optimo iure -(optima lege); the completion of all formalities, ending with a second -election (by the curiae), is essential to the latter. - -Optimo iure requires explanation. It often signifies “with perfect -justice,” “most deservedly.”[1102] Closely related to this meaning is -that of “perfect formality,” as in making a bequest[1103] or in creating -a sacerdos[1104] or a magistrate.[1105] In this sense optimo iure is -interchangeable with optima lege. Developed in another direction, either -phrase readily gives the idea of completeness or perfection of title, -not only to property,[1106] but also to office.[1107] One who holds a -perfect title to a property, or has been granted a civil status[1108] -or an office[1109] in a perfectly legal way, necessarily enjoys all the -immunities, honors, and powers inherent in such absolute condition. -To indicate that due legality has been observed in the creation of a -magistrate, and that the latter has accordingly complete possession of -his office, and of all the honors and powers belonging to it, the phrase -ut qui optima lege sunt, erunt is often inserted in the formula of -appointment or election. These words continued to be used, for example, -in the creation of the dictator as long as his power remained absolute, -but after it became subject to appeal, they were dropped.[1110] The -author of the act was at the same time author of the condition attaching -to it expressed by the phrase under consideration: in the appointment -of a dictator it was the consul; in the creation of a promagistrate or -the assignment of a province it might be the senate.[1111] Laws must -often have contained provisions that the magistrates created under them -should be ut qui optima lege.[1112] The Servilian bill most probably -included an article of the kind for the decemviri agris adsignandis -to be elected under it. But as the title to an office was impaired -by any informality in the elective process, and as Servilius foresaw -that the lex curiata might be prevented by tribunician intercession or -other cause, he inserted in his bill a further provision, referred to -above,[1113] that the decemviri might be officials optima lege[1114] even -without the curiate sanction. From what is here said it is clear that -the condition of iustus or optima lege was not obtained for a magistrate -by the passing of the curiate act alone, but rather by due attention to -all formalities,[1115] which were brought to completion by that act. - -The formula for the curiate law, in addition to its resemblance to that -for elections, must have contained some reference to the imperium, as we -may infer from the frequent designation of the law as a lex de imperio -by Cicero. From this phrase modern writers infer that the curiate act -conferred the imperium upon newly elected magistrates. The question -whether it granted to a magistrate powers which he did not already -possess will be considered below. For the present it is enough to state -that in no instance do the ancients speak of “conferring” the imperium by -the curiate law or of deriving the imperium from that law by any process -whatsoever. But mention is made of conferring the imperium by a decree of -the senate or by the suffrages of the people in the centuriate or tribal -assembly[1116] and of _confirming_ it by the curiate law.[1117] - -The consuls and the praetor were elected by the centuries, and their -imperium was sanctioned by the curiae. The dictator, too, was obliged -to carry a curiate law.[1118] But the quaestors, the curule aediles, -and other inferior magistrates, after their election by the tribes, did -not themselves convoke the curiae for sanctioning their election; the -lex was proposed in their behalf by a higher magistrate.[1119] As the -origin of this custom we may suppose that the kings, and after them the -higher magistrates of the early republic, used to ask the people for a -pledge of loyalty not only to themselves but also to their assistants, -and that this custom continued even after they had come to be elective -magistrates. To functionaries who lacked the imperium the expression lex -de imperio could not apply; lex de potestate, though not occurring in our -sources, would be the appropriate phrase. - -It has generally been assumed that the curiate law bestowed a power -in addition to that received through election.[1120] Something can in -fact be said in favor of this view. We are told that the newly elected -magistrate could attend to no serious public business till he had secured -the passage of the act:[1121] till then the praetor could not undertake -judicial business; the consul could have nothing to do with military -affairs[1122] or hold comitia for the election of his successor.[1123] -Some of Cicero’s contemporaries asserted that a magistrate who failed to -pass the law could not as promagistrate govern a province.[1124] Or if -without a curiate law he made the attempt, he would be obliged to conduct -the administration at his own expense;[1125] and if as promagistrate -he gained a victory in war, he was denied a triumph.[1126] Under such -conditions it might well be said that a magistrate could engage in no -serious public business before he had carried for himself the sanctioning -law. But practice diverged widely from these rules. An act containing a -provision for the election of functionaries might include a dispensing -clause to the effect that the persons elected shall, in the lack of a -curiate law, “be magistrates in as legal a sense as those who are elected -according to the strictest forms of law.”[1127] Yet even without this -special provision the magistrate regularly attended to much business -before passing the law. The first public act of the consul, praetor, -or other magistrate was to take the auspices, to determine whether his -magistracy was acceptable to the gods;[1128] and another auspication was -held for the meeting of the curiae.[1129] It was customary, too, for the -consul to make his vows to the Capitoline Jupiter and to hold a session -of the senate, both of which acts had to be auspicated.[1130] These facts -disprove the theory that the curiate law conferred the auspicium. In the -first session of the senate here mentioned not only religious affairs -but civil and military matters of great importance were discussed and -finally arranged, all of which business was regularly managed without a -curiate law.[1131] As to other administrative acts it is probable that -the want of a lex curiata never hindered the performance of necessary -business civil or military. In case of danger to the state the interrex, -who wholly lacked the curiate law, or the consul before passing the law -could doubtless take command of the army;[1132] and it is significant -that the unlimited imperium and iudicium were granted the magistrates -not by the curiae but by the senate.[1133] The law was indeed considered -indispensable to the dictator in 310.[1134] It is generally assumed by -the moderns that C. Flaminius, consul in 217, lacked the law;[1135] their -reason is the statement of Livy[1136] that he entered upon his office not -at Rome but at Ariminum. The fact, however, that in this year he carried -a monetary statute before his departure for the war[1137] proves that he -began his official duties at Rome, and that Livy’s tirade to the contrary -is empty rhetoric. Probably because he departed without attending to the -usual auspices, his political opponents were unwilling to admit that he -had entered on his office. But the army obeyed his command, his name -remained in the fasti as consul, and his monetary law continued in force. -Livy, while complaining at length of his failure to take the auspices, -says nothing of the curiate law. His silence is significant.[1138] We -cannot be certain that the lex curiata was not passed in his case; but -we have no right to imagine that it was not and then draw far-reaching -deductions from our fancy.[1139] - -A more valuable instance is that of L. Marcius, elected propraetor by -the army in Spain in 212.[1140] Although he could not have had a lex -curiata, the senate, while censuring the election because it transferred -the auspices to the camp, did not make the want of the law a ground -for declaring the magistracy illegal.[1141] A still more famous case -is that of the magistrates of the year 49, who with the Pompeian party -fled from Rome before carrying a lex curiata, and yet were not prevented -by this circumstance from holding military commands during their year -of office or from continuing in command into the following year as -promagistrates.[1142] A further instance is that of Pomptinus, praetor in -63, who had no curiate law; nevertheless as propraetor in 61 he governed -Narbonensis where he gained a victory over the Gauls. This fact, too, -is evidence that the want of the law did not in practice debar from -military commands. From 58 to 54 he waited outside the gates of Rome -for a triumph. The senate would not grant it and some of the magistrates -opposed his effort to obtain it. The privilege was at last given him by -the comitia under pretorian presidency.[1143] Although the want of the -law involved him in inconvenience, he finally accomplished his purpose -without it. Appius Claudius, consul in 54, insisted that, should he -fail to carry the sanctioning act, he should nevertheless, since he -was in possession of a province decreed the consuls of his year in -accordance with the Sempronian plebiscite, have imperium by virtue of a -Cornelian statute until such time as he should re-enter the city.[1144] -The law of Sulla, to which he referred, probably stated simply that the -promagistrate was to retain his imperium till his return to the city, -without mentioning the curiate law; and for that reason Appius believed -the sanctioning act to be unnecessary. Cicero, who informs us of this -matter, inclines to the interpretation of Appius. Our conclusion, -accordingly, is that in practice, if not in legal theory, the lex -curiata, however convenient it may have been, was not essential to the -government of a province or to a military command. It remains to consider -whether it was indispensable to the holding of comitia centuriata for -elections. The same Appius Claudius maintained that though a curiate law -was appropriate to the consul, it was not a necessity,[1145] implying -that without the law he was competent to perform all the functions of -that office. He and his colleague, therefore, who was equally without the -law,[1146] were ready to hold comitia for the election of successors; -and although party complications opposed the election, no one objected -to it on the ground that the consuls were incompetent; for postponing -the election they resorted to auspical obnuntiations[1147] and to -prosecutions of the candidates for bribery.[1148] Their competence to -hold the elective comitia is further established by the senate’s desire -that they should hold them at the earliest possible moment.[1149] The -ultimate failure of these consuls to elect successors was not owing to -any one’s objecting to their competence.[1150] - -Scholars have attached great weight to the case of the magistrates of -49, who with the Pompeian party, as has been stated,[1151] left the city -before carrying a lex curiata. Though desiring, in the Pompeian camp -at Thessalonica, to hold comitia for the election of successors, it -was decided that the want of the law rendered the consuls incompetent -for the function.[1152] But the case requires careful examination. The -Pompeians had with them two hundred senators, enough in their opinion -to constitute a quorum, and their augurs had consecrated a place for -taking auspices; so that it was assumed that the populus Romanus and the -entire city were now located in the camp.[1153] All these circumstances -clearly imply an intention to assume a temporary transfer of the city -of Rome to the camp and to conduct the government in that place on the -basis of this constitutional fiction. But suddenly the execution of the -plan was stopped by the plea that the consuls had no curiate law! The -difficulty, however, was not so serious as Dio Cassius and the moderns -have supposed. The assumption of the Pompeians that the city of Rome -temporarily existed in the camp implied as well the existence of a -pomerium, within which the consuls could legally have held a meeting of -the curiae.[1154] Or in case they felt any scruple about the matter, the -senate could have decreed the consuls a dispensation from the law for the -purpose of holding the elections. That they allowed a mere formality to -baulk them is out of the question. The whole situation is made clear by -the understanding that the consuls themselves, or more probably Pompey, -did not wish elections to be held or a civil government established -in the camp; such a proceeding would have disturbed still further the -discipline of the army and would have roused jealousies inimical to the -cause. On this interpretation the want of a law, especially as it has the -appearance of an afterthought, was a mere pretext. - -We have seen promagistrates whose election to their respective offices -had not been sanctioned by the curiae governing provinces and holding -military commands; we have seen consuls who lacked the curiate sanction -attending with less inconvenience to all their official duties. The same -looseness characterized the application of the law to minor officials. -The want of the sanction legally involved curule aediles, quaestors, and -all other officials who lacked the right to convoke the curiae; and yet -it is impossible that in 54, for instance, when the consuls failed to -pass the law, the curule aediles and the quaestors should have remained -inactive through the entire year without leaving in our sources some -trace of the disturbance caused by the suspension of their administrative -functions. Dio Cassius states that no judicial process could be -undertaken before the enactment of the law; nevertheless Clodius as -aedile in 56 prosecuted Milo before the people prior to the vote on the -sanctioning act.[1155] The quaestors entered office regularly on December -5;[1156] and as the curiate law was carried for them by the consuls, they -were necessarily in official duty for some time every year before their -election could be sanctioned. It seems clear that ordinarily one curiate -law was passed each year, under the joint presidency of the consuls and -praetors, for all the officials who required it.[1157] If that is true, -a postponement of the law, or a failure to pass it, affected all the -magistrates of the year. - -The question as to the meaning of this wide divergence between -constitutional theory and actual practice can find an answer only in -the history of the curiate assembly. For a time after the founding of -the republic it remained politically important. From the institution -of the plebeian tribunate (494) to the enactment of the so-called law -of Publilius Volero (471) the curiate assembly elected tribunes of the -plebs.[1158] In 390, according to Livy,[1159] it voted the restoration -of a citizen from exile. Rubino[1160] maintained that this assembly -continued to be a real gathering of the people to the year after the -battle of Cannae, 215, when the exigencies of the war with Hannibal -brought into being a statute whereby the curiate act was passed by a vote -of thirty lictors as the representatives of their respective curiae; in -consequence the sanction was reduced to a formality.[1161] The passage -in Festus on which his theory depends is seriously mutilated; and his -attempted restoration is objectionable chiefly (1) because it required -no statute to keep the people from attending the comitia curiata,[1162] -(2) because without a statute a resolution of the assembly was valid, -if each voting division was represented by a single person,[1163] (3) -because the measure, accordingly, to be a relief to existing conditions, -must have freed the commander rather than the men from the necessity -of going to Rome to enact the curiate law. Whatever may be the true -reading,[1164] we have a right to infer from the extant fragment (1) -that in the year mentioned, owing to the nearness of Hannibal, something -was done to relieve officers in the field from the necessity of coming -to Rome to propose the law for themselves, (2) that the regulation -was permanent.[1165] It is known that the consul Q. Fabius Maximus -presided at the consular elections for 214.[1166] He and M. Claudius -Marcellus, who as proconsul was at the time in command of an army, were -elected.[1167] Down to this time the custom had probably been for men who -were reëlected to an office or who passed from a promagistracy to the -corresponding magistracy, or the reverse, to reënact the lex curiata. -But we may suppose that after the election of 215 Fabius, fearing that -both he and Marcellus might be absent on military duty at the opening -of their official year, secured the passage of a measure, most likely -a senatus consultum,[1168] which exempted from the need of repeating -the curiate law holders of the imperium who were making the transition -above described. In consenting to the arrangement the senate was making -a great sacrifice to the exigencies of the situation. For to maintain -control over the commanders it had insisted that they should begin their -terms with all due formality at Rome.[1169] The lex curiata had proved a -material help to this end. But now the person already in command might -continue from year to year at his post, relieved of the need of coming -to the capital, where he would be temporarily subject to senatorial -control. - -This provision of 215 was therefore an important step in the development -of the imperium; and at the same time it tended to destroy the little -importance still attaching to the curiate law. It seems to have been -after this event and partly in consequence of it[1170] that the comitia -curiata, which had long been declining, became at last a mere formality, -attended by none but three augurs as witnesses to the proceedings[1171] -and thirty lictors,[1172] who meekly[1173] cast the votes in obedience to -the command of the presiding magistrates.[1174] It is a noteworthy fact -that whereas the statesman Cicero has much to say of the curiate law, -Livy and Dionysius make little reference to it. Our conclusion must be -that it was more important in the late republic than in the earlier time. -Probably it nearly fell into disuse after 215, to be revived some time -before Cicero. Its rehabilitation was the work of the optimates, for we -find the senatorial party chiefly interested in maintaining it during the -age of Cicero. Since the lex curiata, subject as it was to impetrative -auspices and to obnuntiations, correlated closely with the Aelian and -Fufian statutes, we may reasonably connect its revival closely with their -origin. Cicero[1175] tells us accordingly that the comitia curiata have -continued merely for the sake of the auspices. The curtailment of the -power of this assembly is analogous to the curtailment of the power of -the king; as the latter was reduced, in the rex sacrorum, to a shadow -continued merely for a religious purpose, the curiate comitia were -likewise reduced to a shadow maintained in appearance merely for keeping -up an ancient custom and for the auspices connected therewith,[1176] but -in reality as a part of the religious machinery operated with more or -less effect for controlling refractory office-holders. During the age of -Cicero the senate strove to uphold its theory of the necessity of the -law, while individuals in office and even the entire group of magistrates -for the year looked upon it as appropriate indeed but unessential to -their functions. At its best the theory could be but partially realized -in practice. - -Naturally the lictors never refused to vote the lex curiata, but it -was often prevented or delayed by the intercession of the plebeian -tribunes.[1177] As we hear nothing of such action of the tribunes in the -early republic we may well conclude that it was a late usurpation. Their -veto could be offset by a special resolution of the people for dispensing -the persons elected from the need of the curiate sanction.[1178] In -destroying the tribunician power Sulla, perhaps consciously, strengthened -the lex curiata as a weapon in the hands of the senate. He did not treat -the subject, however, with his usual precision; for in 54 we find Appius -Claudius appealing to a Cornelian law in justification of his intention -to govern a province without the sanction.[1179] The procedure of Appius -must have robbed the sanctioning act of the little vitality which it -still possessed. With the downfall of the republic it fell completely -into disuse.[1180] - - I. COMPARATIVE VIEW: Spencer, H., _Principles of Sociology_, - ii. chs. viii, ix; Post, A. H., _Grundlagen des Rechts_, - 130-6; _Die Anfänge des Staats- und Rechtsleben_, 113 f.; - Jenks, E., _History of Politics_, chs. ix, xi, xii; Schrader, - O., _Reallexikon_, 923-5; _Sprachv. u. Urgesch._ ii³ (1907). - 376; Leist, B. W., _Alt-arisches Jus Gentium_, see index, s. - Jus; _Alt-arisches Jus Civile_, i. 337 ff., 368 ff. (fas, ius, - lex); Hirt, H., _Indogermanen_, ii. 522-31 (fundamental ideas - of right and law); Brunner, H., _Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte_, - i. 128-32; Schröder, R., _Lehrbuch der deutschen - Rechtsgeschichte_, 21-7; Cramer, J., _Verfassungsgeschichte der - Germanen und Kelten_ (Berlin, 1906); Seeck, O., _Geschichte - des Untergangs der antiken Welt_, i. 212-4; Kovalevsky, M., - _Modern Customs and Ancient Laws of Russia_, chs. iv, v; - Ginnell, L., _Brehon Laws_, ch. iv; Hermann-Thumser, _Griech. - Staatsaltertümer_, 67-9 (Homeric); 166-76 (Lacedaemonian); - 504-38 (Athenian); Gilbert, G., _Constitutional Antiquities of - Sparta and Athens_, 50-2 (Lacedaemonian); 285-310 (Athenian); - Buchholz, E., _Homerische Realien_, ii. 24-7; Seymour, T. D., - _Life in the Hom. Age_, 101-9; Moreau, F., _Les assemblées - politiques d’apres l’Iliade et l’Odyssée_, in _Revue des études - Grecques_, vi (1893). 204-50; Finsler, G., _Das homerische - Königtum_, in _N. Jahrb. für kl. Alt._ ix (1906). 313-36; - Fustel de Coulanges, _Ancient City_, 216 f., 244 ff., 329; - _Histoire des institutions politiques de l’ancienne France: - La Gaule Romaine_ (1891); _L’invasion germanique_ (1891); _La - monarchie Franque_ (1888); Farrand, L., _Basis of American - History_, see index, s. Council; Bernhöft, F., _Staat und Recht - der röm. Königszeit_, 145-56. - - II. THE COMITIA CURIATA: Schulze, C. F., _Von den - Volksversammlungen der Römer_, 282-307; Newman, _On the - Comitia Curiata_, in _Classical Museum_, xx (1848). 101-27; - Mommsen, _Die patricisch-plebejischen Comitien der Republik_, - in _Röm. Forschungen_, i. 140-50; _Nichtexistenz patricischer - Sonderversammlungen in republikanischen Zeit_, ibid. i. 167-76; - _Bürgerschaft und Senat der vorgeschichtlichen Zeit_, ibid. - i. 269-84; _Die lex curiata de imperio_, in _Rhein. Mus._ - N. F. xiii (1858). 565-73; _History of Rome_, bk. 1. ch. v; - _Röm. Staatsrecht_, i. 609-15; iii. 33-42, 316-21; Obudzinski, - _Die Kuriat- und Centuriatkomitien der Römer_; Kappeyne van - de Coppello, J., _Comitien_, 60-86; Hallays, A., _Comices - à Rome_, ch. i; Morlot, E., _Comices électoraux_, ch. ii; - Soltau, W., _Altröm. Volksversammlungen_, 37-106; Humbert, G., - _Comitia_, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 1374-7; Liebenam, - W., _Comitia: I. Curiata_, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ - iv. 682-6; _Curiata Lex_, ibid. iv. 1826-30; Hüllmann, K. - D., _Ursprünge der röm. Verfassung_, 96-8; Rubino, J., _Röm. - Verfassung und Geschichte_, 233 ff.; Madvig, J. N., _Verfassung - und Verwaltung des röm. Staates_, i. 222-6; Lange, L., _Röm. - Altertümer_, i. 396-413; Mispoulet, J. B., _Institutions - politiques des Romains_, i. 194-203; Willems, P., _Droit public - Romain_, 49-54; Herzog, E., _Röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. 106-18, - 1059-65; Schiller, H., _Röm. Alt._ iv. 628 f.; Karlowa, O., - _Röm. Rechtsgeschichte_, i. 48-54, 382-4; Greenidge, A. H. - J., _Roman Public Life_, 250 f.; _Legal Procedure of Cicero’s - Time_, 297-307; Abbott, F. F., _Roman Political Institutions_, - 14 f., 18-20, 252 f.; Voigt, M., _XII Tafeln_, i. 97-124 - (ethical laws, fas, ius, etc.); _Leges regiae_, in _Abhdl. d. - sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ vii (1879). 555-826; Bernhöft, - ibid. 145-160; Genz, H., _Das patricische Rom_, 51 ff.; Seeley, - J. R., Livy, 62-70; Munderloh, _Aus der Zeit der Quiriten_, - 4 f.; Clason, D. O., _Kritische Erörterungen über den röm. - Staat_, 1-30; Hoffmann, E., _Patricische und plebeiische - Curien_; Nissen, A., _Beiträge zum röm. Staatsrecht_, 39 ff.; - Le Jeune, M. L., _L’imperium des magistrats de Rome sous le - République_; Schwegler, A., _Röm. Geschichte_, i. 663-7; Ihne, - W., _History of Rome_, i. 113 f.; Peter, C., _Geschichte Roms_, - i. 59 f.; Dunning, W. A., _History of Political Theories - Ancient and Mediaeval_, 107 ff.; Willoughby, W. W., _Political - Theories of the Ancient World_, ch. xvi; Nettleship, H., - _Contributions to Latin Lexicography_, 497-500 (ius), 515-7 - (lex); Rothstein, M., _Suffragium_, in _Festschrift zu Otto - Hirschfelds 60stem Geburtstage_, 30-3; Botsford, G. W., _Lex - Curiata_, in _Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxiii (1908). 498-517. - - - - -CHAPTER X - -THE ORGANIZATION OF THE COMITIA CENTURIATA - - -I. _In the Early Republic_ - -From the point of view of the Roman historians the centuriate -assembly,[1181] planned by Servius Tullius, came into existence at the -beginning of the republic; its earliest act in their opinion was the -election of the first consuls[1182] and its earliest statute the Valerian -law of appeal.[1183] Though they could not know precisely when it voted -for the first time, they were right in understanding it to have been -the basal comitia of the republic during the patrician supremacy. It -may not have been instituted till some time after the downfall of the -kingship,[1184] and it certainly did not reach its full complement of a -hundred and ninety-three centuries till more than a hundred years after -that event. - -Through the early republic Rome was engaged in an almost unceasing -struggle for existence. The army was constantly in the field; and the -consuls from the praetorium issued their commands for the protection -and the government of the city. Their measures, after discussion in -the council of war, they must often have submitted to the approval of -the army. The military contio was sometimes summoned for exhorting the -men,[1185] for promising the reward of spoil in case of victory,[1186] -for reprimanding as well as for encouraging.[1187] On one occasion -the master of horse, calling a contio of soldiers, appealed to them -for protection from the dictator,[1188] and they replied with a shout -that they would allow no harm to befall him.[1189] Thereupon the -dictator summoned another contio to witness the court-martial of the -rebellious officer.[1190] On another occasion the consuls asked the -soldiers to decide a question by acclamation, and they obeyed.[1191] -We hear of the adjournment of a meeting on the motion of a military -tribune.[1192] After a victory, honors and rewards were granted by -vote of the soldiers.[1193] For acclamation, the regular form of -voting,[1194] was sometimes substituted a division of the army to right -and left for the sake of silence.[1195] A military assembly, meeting -at Veii, decided upon the appointment of Camillus, then in exile, to -the dictatorship, and despatched the resolution to Rome.[1196] In the -year 357 the consul Cn. Manlius held a tribal assembly of his troops at -Sutrium, and passed in it a law which imposed a tax of five per cent -on the manumission of slaves.[1197] Long afterward the army in Spain -elected a propraetor.[1198] It may be that much other political business -was decided by the army in the troublous times which followed the -overthrow of the kings. Although such acts were valid, they were always -of an exceptional nature, and they ran counter to the spirit of the -constitution, which granted to all the citizens, not to those merely who -chanced to be on military duty, a voice in the decision of such public -affairs as came before the people. - -It is true that the centuriate assembly, having developed from the -army, showed pronounced military features. It could not be convoked -within the pomerium, for the reason that the army had to be kept -outside the city;[1199] before the reform it met ordinarily in military -array under its officers and with banners displayed;[1200] the usual -place of gathering was the Campus Martius; and no one but a magistrate -cum imperio could under his own auspices convoke it for the purpose -of taking a vote.[1201] For these reasons it was frequently, even -in official language, termed exercitus.[1202] The use of this word, -however, should not mislead us into supposing that the assembly was an -actual army. Though Dionysius[1203] represents the first meeting as -armed—a mere supposition, apparently to account for its known military -features—the fact is that the citizens carried weapons to none of the -assemblies.[1204] Strictly, too, the centuriate gathering was termed -exercitus urbanus in contrast with the real army designated as exercitus -armatus or classis procincta.[1205] The facts thus far adduced amply -warrant us in refusing to consider the voting assembly an army. - -But some imagine the censorial assembly for the assessment and lustration -of the citizens to have been an army.[1206] For this view they rely upon -Dionysius,[1207] who states that the people came armed to the first -lustrum, and upon an uncertain passage from the Censoriae Tabulae, quoted -by Varro,[1208] which possibly speaks of the citizens in the lustral -assembly as armati. If this word should be supplied in the passage, it -might refer to an inspection of arms of the men of military age;[1209] -but that circumstance would by no means imply that all who attended the -lustrum were armed or were liable to military duty. It is certain that -as the census-taking had primary reference to property for the purpose -of apportioning taxes and other burdens of citizenship, those only were -summoned who were legally capable of holding property in their own name. -The list excluded all the men “in patris aut avi potestate,” however -liable they were to military duty,[1210] as well as the women and -children.[1211] All such persons were reported by the father or guardian. -It included, on the other hand, many who were exempt from military -service on account of age, physical condition, or want of the necessary -property qualification. Hence the censorial assembly could not have been -identical with the army. Furthermore the centuriate assembly was not a -basis for the levy.[1212] On the contrary, the soldiers were enrolled -directly from the tribes.[1213] These facts warrant the conclusion -that the relation between the army and the assembly must have been one -of origin only; the organization of the assembly developed from that -of the army, but at no time was the political assembly an army or the -army otherwise than exceptionally or irregularly a political assembly. -The truth is that an army regularly officiating as a political body -would require for its explanation two revolutions—one to bring it into -existence and another to abolish it; but of both cataclysms history is -silent. - -The growth of the political from the military organization was somewhat -as follows. After the Romans had determined to use the centuries -regularly as voting units for the decision of questions not purely -military, they proceeded forthwith to extend the organization so as -to include all the citizens. For this purpose the men of military age -who were free from duty for the time being, or who had served the -required number of campaigns—sixteen in the infantry or ten in the -cavalry[1214]—or who were exempt on account of bodily infirmity or for -any other reason, had to be admitted to the junior centuries, thus -materially increasing their number and making them unequal with one -another. In a state, too, in which great reverence was paid to age the -seniors could not be ignored. They were accordingly organized in a number -of centuries (84) equal to that of the juniors—an arrangement which -made one senior count as much as three juniors.[1215] The mechanics who -were liable to skilled service in the army[1216] were then grouped -for voting purposes in two centuries, that of the smiths and that of -the carpenters,[1217] based on the two guilds in which these artisans -were already organized.[1218] Authorities differ as to the classes with -which they were associated. Livy[1219] adds them to the first class. -Cicero,[1220] too, places a century of carpenters with that group, making -no mention of the smiths, whereas Dionysius[1221] assigns both centuries -of mechanics to the second class. The explanation of the difference of -opinion seems to be that information as to this point was not contained -in the censorial document from which the annalist (Fabius Pictor) drew -his knowledge of the earlier comitia centuriata; the Romans knew only by -tradition that the industrial centuries were associated in the assembly -with one of the higher classes. The weight of authority inclines in favor -of the first class, and the reason for the respectable place occupied -by the mechanics is the high value placed on their service in early -time.[1222] In like manner the trumpeters (tubicines, liticines) and the -hornblowers (cornicines) were grouped each in a century for voting in the -comitia,[1223] also on the basis of their guild organizations.[1224] -The accensi velati, who as we are informed followed the army in civilian -dress and without weapons,[1225] also received a centuriate organization. -As to the number of centuries belonging to them opinion has differed. -Some, formerly including Mommsen,[1226] have assumed two. Livy,[1227] -however, gives but one century; Cicero[1228] seems to have only one in -mind; and in imperial time there was a single collegium, or century, of -accensi,[1229] probably a survival of the old political group. These -considerations led Mommsen to abandon his former view, to assume instead -a single century of the kind; and recent writers are inclined to follow -him.[1230] Lowest in rank of the supernumerary centuries was that of -the proletarians.[1231] The government so designated those citizens -who owned no land,[1232] and hence were poor. They were exempt from -military duty, excepting in so far as they served with arms furnished -by the state.[1233] Though few in the beginning, their number gradually -increased till in the time of Dionysius[1234] it exceeded all the five -classes together. At some time in the early history of the comitia -centuriata they were formed into a century and given one vote,[1235] -which was not counted with any class but was reported after all the -others. Dionysius[1236] wrongly speaks of it as a sixth class. The -existence of this century is due to the principle that no one should be -excluded from the right to vote on account of poverty.[1237] - -Six supernumerary centuries have now been mentioned and the place of -three—the two industrial and the one proletarian—in the voting system -has been considered. With reference to the others Dionysius assigns the -musicians to the fourth class, Livy to the fifth. The settlement of this -question is aided by an examination into the total number of comitial -centuries of the fifth class. It is given as thirty by the sources.[1238] -Assuming this to be the correct number and adding to the sum of centuries -in the five classes (170) the six supernumerary centuries and the -eighteen centuries of knights to be considered below, we should have in -all a hundred and ninety-four, which would be one too many. In an earlier -chapter, however, the conclusion was reached that there were but fourteen -military centuries in the fifth class.[1239] Two of the thirty centuries -assigned to that class In the comitia centuriata must therefore have -been in fact supernumerary. If one was the accensi, what was the other? -Most probably it was the century of the tardy described by Festus,[1240] -made up at each meeting of those who came too late to vote in their own -classes. Obviously all writers who apply the discriptio centuriarum to -the army view this century, as well as that of the proletarians, with -suspicion.[1241] The two centuries of the accensi and the tardy should be -included among, not added to, the thirty of the fifth class.[1242] Having -reached this result, it might seem advisable for us to assume no further -supernumerary centuries for the fifth class, but to follow the authority -of Dionysius in assigning the musicians to the fourth. Or as the -trumpeters preceded the hornblowers in rank, it might be plausibly argued -that the former belonged to the fourth and the latter to the fifth. In -this way a compromise could be effected between Livy and Dionysius, -and Livy’s three supernumerary centuries of the fifth class could be -explained. Absolute certainty is unattainable. The notion of Dionysius -that one century of musicians voted with the seniors, the other with the -juniors, and so of the mechanics,[1243] is erroneous; for the seniors did -not vote separately from the juniors. - -In the centuriate assembly each of the six tribal troops of knights[1244] -had one vote, and was called, therefore, a suffragium. As the term -centuria had not previously applied to these groups, it was for a time -withheld from them in the comitia, the six divisions being known simply -as the sex suffragia.[1245] Afterward as new voting groups were added -to the equites they came to be called centuries, and thence the term -extended to the old.[1246] The centuriate organization of the comitia did -not demand the creation of suffragia seniorum, to correspond with the -centuriae seniorum of the infantry, perhaps because the six votes in the -comitia centuriata adequately represented the whole number of patricians. -As the equites originally provided their own horses,[1247] they held -their rank for life, not merely through the period of service. After the -state had undertaken to furnish money for the purchase and keeping of -the horses,[1248] the eques retained his public horse, and consequently -his membership in an equestrian century, long after his retirement from -active duty.[1249] The increase in the number of equestrian votes was -owing to the participation of plebeians in the mounted service.[1250] -From them twelve equestrian centuries were formed for the centuriate -assembly, and added to the six groups already existing. This increase -probably came about in the course of the fourth century, accompanying or -following the enlargement of the infantry from two to four legions.[1251] -Thus the total number of one hundred and ninety-three centuries could not -have been reached till shortly before 269. - -The foregoing discussion has made it evident that from the time when -the comitia centuriata came into being, there were two centuriate -organizations; (1) the military, which continued as before till it -changed to the manipular formation,[1252] (2) the political, which -developed from the military but which was at no time identical with it. - - DISCRIPTIO CENTURIARUM OF THE COMITIA CENTURIATA - - Old centuries of knights 6 - New centuries of knights 12 - =========+=====================+===========+================== - CLASSES | JUNIOR CENTURIES | SENIOR | RATINGS IN ASSES - | | CENTURIES | ACCORDING TO LIVY - ---------+---------------------+---------—+------------------- - I | 40 + 2 of artisans | 40 | 100,000 - II | 10 | 10 | 75,000 - III | 10 | 10 | 50,000 - | | | - IV | 10 + 2 of musicians | 10 | 25,000 - V | 14 + 1 of accensi | | - | + 1 of the tardy | 14 | 11,000 - =========+=====================+===========+================== - - Below the classes: - 1 century of proletarians - - SUMMARY - - Knights 18 - Seniors and juniors 168 - Supernumerary 7 - --- - Total 193 - -Before the reform this assembly met in military array with banners -displayed, each company under its centurion.[1253] The voting was -oral. Probably it was at first by acclamation; if so the suggestion of -individual voting, as we find it in historical time, must have come from -the orderly military array, which offered itself conveniently for the -purpose.[1254] The centurions may originally have served as rogatores, -to collect and report the votes.[1255] Each century cast a single vote, -which in historical time the majority of its members decided.[1256] The -voting proceeded according to classes; the equites were asked first, -hence their centuries were termed prerogative (praerogativae), then the -eighty centuries of the first class. If the votes of these two groups -were unanimous, they decided the question at issue; as ninety-seven -was a majority, they had one to spare from their total number. If they -disagreed, the second class was called and then the third and so on to -the proletarian century. But the voting ceased as soon as a majority was -reached, which was often with the first class; and it rarely happened -that the proletarians were called on to decide the issue.[1257] The -announcement of the prerogative votes greatly influenced the action of -those which followed.[1258] - - -II. _The Reform_ - -The study of the centuriate assembly begun earlier in the volume[1259] -and continued in the preceding part of this chapter shows it gradually -developing its organization during the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. -The main line of progress has been traced though details are unknown. -The growth of popular rights in the latter half of the fourth century -gave a great impetus to the activity of the assemblies in general, as is -manifested in the Genucian, Publilian, and Hortensian legislation. In -312 when the change was made in the appraisements from land to money, -many aerarii who had voted with the proletarians must have been advanced -to the higher classes.[1260] This step toward the democratization of -the comitia centuriata, following upon the reduction of the patrum -auctoritas to a mere formality, could not help adding new energy to -the institution, leading to further changes in a popular direction. -The class ratings which are known to history were established no -earlier than 269.[1261] Two other more important changes, which can be -but approximately dated, must now be considered in detail. They are -(1) the abolition of the equestrian prerogative and the introduction -of the custom of drawing by lot a prerogative century from the first -class on each occasion before the voting began; (2) the division of the -citizens into classes and centuries within the several tribes. These two -innovations are commonly grouped together under the name of the “reform.” -As they have no necessary connection with one another, they need not -have been simultaneous. Livy’s narrative of the happenings of 396[1262] -and of 383[1263] seems to imply that they had been introduced before -these dates.[1264] But the passages here referred to are uncertain; and -at all events they belong to a period in which the centuries may still -have been closely connected with the tribes.[1265] But should they be so -interpreted as to apply to the reformed centuriate assembly, they might -still be looked upon as historical anticipations for the reason that -Livy’s[1266] account of the year 296 has reference to a feature of the -old organization. This disposition of the three passages is supported by -the following consideration. Had the reform been introduced much earlier -than 269, the annalists would have assigned it to Servius Tullius, just -as they assigned to him thirty tribes (reached in 318), all thirty-five -tribes (reached in 241), and the census ratings in the sextantarian asses -(established in or after 269);[1267] and in that case all memory of the -original Servian system would have been lost. The circumstance that we -are acquainted with it in some detail is proof of its survival into the -third century B.C. In fact Livy’s[1268] chief reference to the reform -indicates that it was completed, if not undertaken, after the number of -tribes had been brought up to thirty-five (241). On the other hand it -came before the opening of his third decade (218), which takes the new -arrangement for granted.[1269] The contention is often made that Livy -must have given an account of the reform in his second decade (292-219) -now lost; and there is a universal agreement that the reform was brought -about not by statute, but by arbitrary censorial disposition.[1270] The -censor commonly assumed to be the author of the change is either Fabius -Buteo, 241, or Flaminius, 220.[1271] Against the latter may be urged -the silence of Polybius[1272] and Livy,[1273] who in speaking at length -of his opposition to the nobles makes no reference to this reform. In -favor of Fabius it may be said that in 241 the full number of tribes -was completed; and the name of the thirty-fifth, Quirina, corresponding -to Romilia, the first rural tribe, suggests that the Romans intended to -create no more. In naming the last tribe the censors seem to have had in -mind the completion of the new system, to each component part of which -they apparently guaranteed a definite share of political power, which -would have been impaired by the further creation of tribes.[1274] - -A little reflection, however, will convince us of the impossibility of -assigning the reform to any one censor or to a definite date. Livy could -not have made much of it in the lost part of his history without leaving -some trace in the epitome, which mentions far more trivial matters.[1275] -The only explanation of the epitomator’s silence is that the reform -was so gradual as to escape marked attention. This view is supported -by a strict interpretation of Livy,[1276] who supposes the change to -have come about naturally with the increase in the number of tribes, -and of Dionysius,[1277] who ascribes the innovation, or a part of it, -to no individual but to “certain powerful forces.” A conclusion as to -the date of the reform, to be acceptable, must satisfy the conditions -above mentioned. In earlier time, when there was a single classis, the -centuries were made up within the tribes; but this simple system was -rendered impossible by the increase in the number of classes.[1278] -For convenience of administration the censors must soon after this -enlargement have begun an effort to reduce the discord to harmony. One -class may have been brought into agreement with the tribes more readily -than another, and thus the readaptation may have extended through -many lustra. The number of centuries probably did not long remain at -one hundred and ninety-three. It may have received its first increase -above that sum in 304, for instance, the date to which Niebuhr[1279] -assigns the reform. The process may have been far advanced in 241, the -date preferred by a majority of scholars, and completed by Flaminius -in 220.[1280] The abolition of the equestrian prerogative may likewise -have been gradual; it may have been retained in one class of comitial -acts—elections or legislation, for instance—longer than in another. The -conclusion that the changes were gradually introduced in the period from -304 to 220 would best explain all the known facts.[1281] - -As no description of the reformed organization has come down to us, we -are obliged to reconstruct it from the scant references of various -writers. It is to be noted first that the five classes continued in the -new system.[1282] They were still based on the census,[1283] and were -called to vote in their order as before.[1284] The distinction between -juniors and seniors was retained;[1285] and as these comitia were still -called centuriata, the centuries necessarily continued as the voting -units.[1286] But the reform brought them into direct relation with the -tribes, which now served as a basis for the division into centuries -and for their distribution according to age and class. On this point -Livy[1287] remarks, “We ought not to wonder that the arrangement which -now exists after the tribes have been increased to thirty-five, their -number being doubled in the centuries of juniors and seniors, does -not agree with the total number instituted by Servius Tullius; for he -divided the city into four parts, ... which he called tribes.... Nor -did those tribes have any relation to the distribution and number of -the centuries.” From this passage we may infer (1) that in the reformed -assembly the number and distribution of the centuries depended closely -upon the tribes—a conclusion supported by other citations to be given -hereafter, (2) that the number of centuries was changed, although we are -not distinctly informed whether by diminution or increase. According to -one interpretation the number of tribes was doubled by the number of -centuries of juniors and seniors, and there were therefore seventy of -these centuries, thirty-five juniors and as many seniors, each century -forming a half tribe. This view is supported by passages in which the -century bears the name of the tribe, as Aniensis iuniorum,[1288] Voturia -iuniorum,[1289] Galeria iuniorum,[1290] as well as by those which in a -more general way refer to voting or the announcement of the votes by -or according to tribes in the centuriate assembly.[1291] It accords -perfectly with other evidence that the century was an integral part of -the tribe.[1292] This is the view adopted by Niebuhr.[1293] It is open, -however, to the fatal objection of abolishing the classes, which in -fact continued through the republic, as has already been shown.[1294] -He does indeed allow for a first class comprising the country tribes -and a second class made up of the others;[1295] but this hypothesis is -overthrown by those citations which imply the continuance of all five -classes,[1296] as well as by those which make the census an element of -the later organization.[1297] Huschke,[1298] who places the reform in the -earliest times of the republic, adopts Niebuhr’s view as to the number -of centuries; but maintaining the continuance of the five classes,[1299] -he considers them to be groups of tribes, the seventeen old rural tribes -being distributed as follows: in the first class eight, in the second, -third, and fourth respectively two, in the fifth three.[1300] But bearing -in mind that these tribes were primarily local, we cannot at the same -time regard them as census groups without ascribing to them an impossibly -artificial character. For this reason the theory of Huschke should be -rejected. To avoid this difficulty, while retaining the classes, the -assumption has been made that the classes were subdivisions of the -century, in other words that each century contained men of every class. -This view is invalidated by the fact that the centuries continued to -be divisions of the classes, which were still called to vote in their -order.[1301] - -The assumption of a diminution in number having proved untenable, the -conclusion is that there was an increase.[1302] In view of the facts -(1) that the reformed organization rested on a tribal basis,[1303] (2) -that the centuries were divisions not only of the tribes[1304] but also -of the classes,[1305] (3) that the tribes could not have been divisions -of the classes,[1306] it is necessary to conclude that the classes were -themselves divisions of the tribes with the centuries as subdivisions. -In other words, the work of organization took place within the tribe: -the members of a tribe were first divided into five classes according to -their wealth; within each class the men were grouped on the basis of age -into juniors and seniors,[1307] one century for each within the several -classes, making ten centuries of juniors to the tribe, or in all three -hundred and fifty tribal centuries, to which are to be added eighteen -centuries of knights and probably five supernumerary centuries, amounting -to a total of three hundred and seventy-three. This is substantially the -view of Pantagathus.[1308] Convincing evidence is afforded by a group of -inscriptions of the imperial period.[1309] From them we learn that under -the emperors the urban tribes comprised severally (1) a corpus seniorum, -(2) a corpus iuniorum, (3) the tribus Sucusana a corpus Iulianum, and the -Palatine and Esquiline each a corpus Augustale. Every corpus consisted of -several centuries. In the corpus Sucusana iuniorum were eight centuries -divided into two groups of five and three respectively, the first group -being evidently superior to the second. At the head of the century was a -centurio or curator.[1310] Eliminating the corpora which were named after -emperors and which must have been instituted in their time, eliminating -also the inferior centuries of the corpora seniorum and iuniorum, which -were undoubtedly added either by the emperors or by the late republican -censors, we have remaining five centuries to the corpus as it must -have stood in the period immediately following the reform. This result -confirms the view suggested by Pantagathus. - -It was accepted by Mommsen in his _Römische Tribus_ (1844) and in the -first seven editions of his _History of Rome_; but in his _Römisches -Staatsrecht_[1311] he has offered a radical modification: while holding -to the 373 centuries, he maintains that they were so combined as to cast -in all 193 votes. According to this theory the first class comprised 35 -× 2 = 70 centuries, each with one vote, whereas the remaining classes -together, made up of 4 × 35 × 2 = 280 centuries, cast but 100 votes. -How the centuries were combined Mommsen does not presume to say. He -considers it possible, however, that for instance sixty of the seventy -centuries of the second class were grouped by threes and ten by twos, -making twenty-five voting groups in all. Had he attempted to follow out -in detail the practical working of the theory, he would hardly have -offered it to the public. The votes could not have been determined by a -majority of component centuries, for according to the theory some groups -comprised but two. Or if the group voted by individuals without regard to -the component centuries, the four lower classes were practically composed -not of centuries but of larger, nameless voting divisions. - -His main support is the account of the centuriate organization given in -Cicero’s _Republic_,[1312] which speaks of a hundred and ninety-three -centuries, and which Mommsen[1313] believes to be a description of the -reformed organization. Cicero’s[1314] assumption that the essential -facts were known to the friends of the younger Scipio—the leader in -the dialogue—and the discrepancy in the number of centuries of the -first class between the Servian system as given by the annalists (Livy -and Dionysius) and the organization which Cicero describes[1315] are -the chief points in Mommsen’s favor. Against his interpretation it -may be urged (1) that the passage is exceedingly uncertain;[1316] -(2) that Cicero makes Servius Tullius the author of the organization -which he describes; (3) that though the reform affected the details of -the comitial organization, the principle—a distribution of the people -according to ordines, census, aetates—remained the same from the time -of Servius to the time of Cicero, so that he could assume that it was -known to the hearers of Scipio; (4) that as to the discrepancy in the -number of centuries in the first class, on the assumption that the text -is correct, (_a_) Cicero, who was by no means infallible, may have made a -mistake,[1317] being in this case especially liable to error because in -the reformed organization the first class comprised seventy centuries, -or (_b_) in case Cicero is right, either (_m_) the annalists may be in -error in assigning eighty centuries to the first class, or (_n_) in an -early stage of transition from the old to the new organization the number -of centuries in the first class may have been cut down to seventy with -a corresponding increase of ten in some other part of the system; (5) -that Mommsen’s theory is refuted by the language of Cicero,[1318] who -speaks of the voting divisions of the four lower classes not as groups of -centuries but simply as centuries, the absence of a name for such a group -being one of the strongest arguments against its existence. Mommsen’s -interpretation of the passage is in brief too strained and unnatural to -commend itself to the understanding. Apart from its lack of support in -the sources, an objection to the theory is its extreme impracticability. -Holding that juniors and seniors could not have been brought together in -the same voting divisions, and assuming that the combinations were made -by twos and threes and that the four lower classes had an equal number of -votes, Klebs has worked out the simplest arrangement as follows: - - ===============+===========+==================================+========= - CLASS | CENTURIES | | VOTES - ---------------+-----------+----------------------------------+--------- - I | 70 | One vote each | 70 - II | 70 | 35 of seniors | - | | 8 in groups of two 4 votes | - | | 27 in groups of three 9 votes | - | | -- | - | | 13 votes | - | | 35 of juniors | - | | 2 in a group 1 vote | - | | 33 in groups of three 11 votes | - | | 12 votes | - | | -- | - | | Total | 25 - | | | - If the remaining classes are like the second, we shall have: - | | | - III | 70 | | 25 - IV | 70 | | 25 - V | 70 | | 25 - Equites | 18 | One vote each | 18 - Supernumeraries| 5 | One vote each | 5 - | | | --- - | | Total | 193[1319] - ===============+===========+==================================+========== - -This complex system would make the action of the centuriate assembly -exceedingly slow and difficult, and would be as useless as impracticable; -for if the object was to reduce the votes of the first class by ten and -to make the other classes equal, that end could have been easily attained -by the readjustment of numbers on the old basis, without the invention -of this awkward grouping, the like of which is not known to have existed -in any ancient or modern state. Such a reform, too, would bring out -more clearly than ever the inequality of rights in the comitia,[1320] -and therefore could not have been called democratic by Dionysius.[1321] -It is contradicted also by Livy,[1322] who distinctly states that the -number of centuries was changed. Lastly the objection must be made that -the joining of centuries of different tribes into voting units cannot -be reconciled with the imperial grouping of centuries of the same tribe -into corpora,[1323] and is refuted by the many citations which assume the -voting or the announcement of the votes to have proceeded according to -tribes[1324] as well as according to classes.[1325] - -Lange,[1326] not thinking it necessary to preserve a total of a hundred -and ninety-three votes but accepting in the main the view of Pantagathus, -tries to bring the centuries into relation with the tribes by assuming -that the seventy half-tribes, severally comprising five centuries -of juniors or seniors, were given each one vote in the “concluding -announcement” (Schlussrenuntiation), this vote being determined by a -majority of the five component centuries. In like manner the eighteen -centuries of knights were grouped in divisions of three centuries each, -so as to count six votes in the final announcement, hence the name sex -suffragia. The supernumerary centuries were grouped in one or two voting -divisions, so that in all seventy-seven or seventy-eight votes were -cast.[1327] As to the process, he believed that after the prerogative -the seventy centuries of the first class and the eighteen centuries of -cavalry voted simultaneously, and while their votes were being counted -the second class was voting, the votes, in his opinion, not being -announced as soon as known.[1328] This view as to the announcement is -contradicted by the sources,[1329] which clearly imply that the reports -were made public as they came in. Against his theory may be urged also -(1) the fact that no name existed for the half-tribe, which in his -opinion cast one vote in the closing announcement,[1330] as well as (2) -the fact that the sources give more than six votes to the equites in the -late republic.[1331] Lange is right, however, in understanding that the -voting did not now, as formerly, cease when a majority was reached, but -continued till all the centuries had voted.[1332] - -A solution of the problem as to the order of voting suggested by -Klebs[1333] seems to satisfy all conditions. The centuries gave their -votes by classes, each being announced as soon as it was ascertained. -Then when all the centuries had voted, a count was taken by tribes in the -order determined by lot;[1334] and a second announcement, made in that -order, decided the election or other act of the people. Each candidate -was declared elected when a majority of votes was reached in his favor. - -Regarding the supernumerary centuries our information is extremely -meagre. As it does not seem likely that influential corporations would -be robbed of a privilege they once enjoyed, we may reasonably believe -that the artisans, musicians, and accensi velati retained centuries of -their own in the reformed organization. Cicero,[1335] however, speaks of -a single century of artisans for his time. The two industrial colleges, -which had existed from an early age,[1336] seem to have been joined in -one and to have continued into the imperial period after nearly all -the other guilds had been abolished.[1337] When the two were united, -they were probably reduced to a single vote in the assembly. In like -manner the liticines, or tubicines, and the cornicines were united in -one college of musicians[1338] and were probably given one vote. The -accensi velati, too, formed a college composed of wealthy freedmen, -freeborn, and even knights.[1339] We may well suppose that it still -possessed a vote in the centuriate assembly. Lastly may be mentioned -the century of proletarians and that of the tardy,[1340] which were as -necessary after the reform as before it.[1341] Although new centuries -were added, possibly by the later republican censors and certainly by -the emperors,[1342] the principle of the reformed organization remained -unchanged.[1343] - -In the reformed assembly the equestrian centuries ceased to be -prerogative.[1344] A century was drawn from the first class[1345] by -lot[1346] to take the lead in voting. Then came the remainder of the -class, including the equestrian centuries and the single century of -artisans, eighty-eight in all. In the announcement the votes of the -equites were distinguished from those of the class;[1347] and the sex -suffragia, no longer exclusively patrician,[1348] were reported after -the other eighty-two. The inferior place assigned to the suffragia was -evidently to remove them far from their earlier prerogative position so -as to free the assembly from patrician influence. Next the lower classes, -among which other supernumerary centuries were distributed as in the -earlier republic, voted in order; and finally came the summing up by -tribes in the way described above. The old military array gave place to -a civilian grouping like that already established for the curiate and -tribal assemblies.[1349] - - I. THE EARLIER ORGANIZATION: the literature on this subject is - essentially the same as for ch. iv. - - II. THE REFORM: Schulze, C. F., _Volksversamml. der Römer_, 69 - ff.; Huschke, Ph. E., _Verfass. des Königs Servius Tullius_, - ch. xii; Peter, C., _Epochen der Verfassungsgesch. der röm. - Republik_, 42 ff.; Savigny, F. C., _Verbindung der Centurien - mit den Tribus_, in _Vermischte Schriften_, i. 1-13; for - other early literature, see Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 495 ff., - notes; Neumann, C., _Zeitalter der punischen Kriege_, 187 - ff.; Nitzsch, K. W., _Gesch. der röm. Republik_, i. 146 f.; - Mommsen, _Röm. Tribus_, 66-113, 143-149; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. - 269 ff.; Lange, L., _De magistratuum romanorum renuntiatione - et de centuriatorum comitiorum forma recentiore_, in _Kleine - Schriften_, ii. 463-493; _Röm. Alt._ ii. 494-516; Madvig, - J. N., _Verfass. und Verw. des röm. Staates_, i. 117-23; - Herzog, E., _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 320-7; _Die Charakter der - Tributcomitien ... und die Reform der Centuriatcomitien_, in - _Philol._ xxiv (1876). 312-29; Willems, P., _Droit public - Romain_, 92-8; Mispoulet, J. B., _Institutions politiques - des Romains_, i. 46-8; Greenidge, A. H. J., _Roman Public - Life_, 252 f.; Abbott, F. F., _Roman Political Institutions_, - 74-6; Karlowa, O., _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 384-8; Soltau, W., - _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 358-71; _Cicero de Re Publica und - die servianische Centurienordnung_, in _Jahrb. f. Philol._ - xli (1895). 410-4; Kappeyne Van de Coppello, J., _Comitien_, - 20 ff.; Morlot, E., _Comices électoraux sous la république - Rom._ ch. v; Goguet, R., _Centuries_, ch. iv; Le Tellier, M., - _L’organisation centuriate_, ch. ii; Hallays, A., _Comices à - Rome_, 25-31; Plüss, H. T., _Entwick. der Centurienverfass._; - Ullrich, J., _Centuriatcomitien_; Clason, O., _Zur Frage - über die reformierte Centurienverfass._ in Heidelb. _Jahrb._ - lxv (1872). 221-37; Ritschl, F. W., _Opuscula Philologica_, - iii. 637-73; Genz, H., _Centuriat-Comitien nach der Reform_; - Guiraud, P., _De la Reforme des Comices centuriates au III - Siècle av. J.-C._ in _Rev. hist._ xvii (1881). 1-24; Klebs, - E., _Stimmenzahl und Abstimmungsordnung der ref. servianischen - Verf._, in _Zeitschr. d. Savignystift. f. Rechtsgesch. - Röm._ Abt. xii (1892). 181-244; Meyer, E., _Die angebliche - Centurienreform Sullas_, in _Hermes_, xxxiiii (1898). 652-4; - Humbert, G., in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ ii. 1389 f.; - Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1956-60. - - - - -CHAPTER XI - -THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COMITIA CENTURIATA - - -I. _Elective_ - -The first act of the centuriate assembly according to Livy,[1350] who has -certainly placed the beginning of its functions at the earliest possible -date,[1351] was the election of the first two consuls. Thereafter -these comitia not only continued to elect the consuls, but also -naturally acquired the right to choose all elective higher magistrates, -extraordinary as well as ordinary, who were entrusted temporarily -or permanently with some or all of the consular power—including the -decemviri legibus scribundis, 451, 450, the tribuni militum consulari -potestate, beginning in 444, the two censors, beginning in 443 (or 435?), -and the praetors, increased gradually from one in 366 to sixteen under -Caesar.[1352] The activity of this assembly in elections expanded with -the growth in the number of offices; and its importance was further -enhanced by the opening of the patrician magistracies to plebeians. -The validity of a centuriate elective act depended upon the subsequent -curiate law, which soon became a mere form, and upon the patrum -auctoritas. The latter, too, was deprived of all vitality by the Maenian -plebiscite,[1353] which required the act to be passed before the election -while the issue was uncertain.[1354] The date of this plebiscite is -unknown; but it probably followed close upon the Hortensian legislation -(287).[1355] - - -II. _Legislative_ - -In an earlier chapter[1356] it was shown that primitive Rome, like -primitive Greece, regarded law as god-given—a conception which left no -scope for legislation by a popular assembly. Though under the kings -the people may occasionally have been called to vote on a resolution -affecting their customs, the comitia curiata never acquired a law-making -function.[1357] Even the declaration of war, which historical Rome -looked upon as a lex, was issued by the king without the consent of -the community, his only need being to secure the hearty support of the -warriors.[1358] It seems probable therefore that this question came, -not before the comitia, but before a military contio.[1359] From the -custom of the soldiers to participate in the settlement of questions -touching their interests[1360] developed the function of declaring war. -The people, however, were slow in acquiring the right. It is true that -several such acts are mentioned by Dionysius for the early republic—for -the war against the Volscians, 489,[1361] against Veii, 482,[1362] and -against the Aequians and Volscians in 462.[1363] These instances may be -explained either as acclamations in contio or as exceptional votes in -the comitia centuriata, or with more probability, owing to the character -of our sources for those early times, as anticipations of later usage. -The decisive fact in the problem is that as late as 427 a controversy -arose as to whether war could be declared by order of the people only, -or whether a senatus consultum was sufficient. It was settled in favor -of the people by the threats of the plebeian tribunes to impede the -levy.[1364] For the next hundred years mention is often made of the -exercise of this function by the people;[1365] and when a declaration -was once issued by them, it could be recalled only by their vote.[1366] -During the period of the Samnite wars the assembly still more frequently -made use of this right.[1367] In better known times we find it firmly -established. The people declared war against Carthage in 264,[1368] -against the Illyrians in 229,[1369] against Carthage again in 218,[1370] -against Macedon in 200,[1371] against Antiochus in 191,[1372] against -Macedon again in 171,[1373] against Jugurtha in 111.[1374] In the case of -the two Macedonian wars here referred to, the declaration is mentioned as -an act of the comitia centuriata.[1375] In 167 the praetor M. Juventus -Thalna attempted to pass through the tribal assembly a lex de bello -indicendo against the Rhodians, but was effectually opposed by a tribune -of the plebs;[1376] so that the function continued to be exclusively -centuriate. Cn. Manlius Volso in 189 made war upon the Gallograeci -without an order of the people or a decree of the senate, and was on that -ground accused in the senate by two of his legati.[1377] We conclude, -however, that the charge was fruitless from the circumstance that the -senate finally decreed him a triumph.[1378] For beginning war against -the Histrians on his own responsibility the consul A. Manlius, 178, -was threatened with a prosecution, which was quashed by a tribunician -veto.[1379] Licinius Lucullus was not even brought to trial for the war -he waged without an order of the people against the Vaccaei in 151.[1380] -Hence it appears that though a magistrate could not legally begin war -on his own initiative, there was no real danger of condemnation for so -doing. The reason is that those in authority attached little importance -to the right of the comitia in the matter. Only once is mentioned a -fear lest the people may not give their consent to a war.[1381] One -case of rejection is recorded, and even here the centuries at a second -session obediently accepted the consul’s proposition.[1382] The control -of diplomacy and of the revenues by the senate and magistrates assured -these powers the practical decision of questions of war and peace to -such an extent that ratification by the assembly could ordinarily be -counted on as certain; and its influence decreased with the expansion -of the empire. Meantime, however, the idea of popular sovereignty, -which was expressing itself in other spheres of government, effectually -demanded, if only in form, some concession to the assembly in this field -as well; and accordingly in the formula of declaration “populus” wholly -takes the place of the once all-important “senatus.”[1383] By such empty -concessions the nobility rendered the people more docile. Thus to the -end of the republic the centuriate assembly retained the constitutional -right to decide questions of aggressive war, although in practice the -magistrates nearly regained the place which they and the senate had held -during the century following the overthrow of kingship.[1384] - -The nature of our sources does not allow a precise judgment regarding -the importance of the comitia curiata in the early republic. To the -time of the Gallic invasion it may occasionally have passed resolutions -affecting the status of citizens.[1385] But as legislation never became -an acknowledged function of the curiae, we are in a position to assert -that through the comitia centuriata the people were first introduced into -this sphere of public life.[1386] - -The earliest legislation of this assembly, in fact the earliest recorded -legislative act of the Roman people, was the lex de provocatione -attributed to Valerius Publicola, consul in the first year of the -republic, 509.[1387] It was also through the centuriate assembly that -the consuls Valerius and Horatius in 449 passed a law which forbade the -election of a magistrate without appeal, and affixed as a penalty the -outlawing of the trespasser.[1388] The third Valerian law of appeal in -300[1389] was an act of the same assembly, whereas all three Porcian -laws on the same subject seem to have been tribal.[1390] The legislative -function of the centuriate assembly, resting in the pre-decemviral period -simply on precedent, brought into being the statute of 471 to establish -a tribal assembly for the transaction of plebeian business, improperly -known as the Publilian law,[1391] the lex sacrata for the division of -the Aventine among the plebeians, erroneously termed Icilian, 456,[1392] -the lex Aternia Tarpeia de multae dictione, 454,[1393] the lex Menenia -Sextia on the same subjects in 452,[1394] the laws ratifying the Twelve -Tables in 451, 449[1395]—all excepting the second having reference to the -limitation of the magisterial power. Regarding the creation of offices, -no mention is made of a law for the institution of the consulate itself; -but the centuries passed a law for the creation of the dictatorship, -501,[1396] and of the decemviri legibus scribundis, which should be named -Sestian after the consul who undoubtedly proposed it, 452.[1397] Thus -far popular legislation had no basis excepting precedent, but a law of -the Twelve Tables now provided that there should be resolutions and -votes of the people, and whatever the people voted last should be law and -valid—the first clear enunciation of the principle that the will of the -people, whenever expressed, prevailed over every other authority.[1398] -It was far from establishing popular sovereignty, however, for the -initiative remained with the magistrates. - -The activity of the comitia centuriata, thus authoritatively established, -manifested itself in the passing of the Valerian-Horatian laws of -449,[1399] the lex Iulia Papiria de multarum aestimatione, 430,[1400] the -law for the election of six military tribunes by the comitia tributa, -362,[1401] the law of the dictator Publilius Philo, 339,[1402] the third -Valerian law concerning appeal, 300,[1403] and finally the Hortensian -law, 287.[1404] All have reference to the regulation of magistracies -or of assemblies. Meantime the centuriate comitia passed the law for -instituting tribunes of the soldiers with consular power, 445,[1405] and -censors, 443[1406] (or 435?), for increasing the number of quaestors, -421,[1407] for instituting the praetorship, 367,[1408] and the curule -aedileship in the same year.[1409] All the laws thus far mentioned, -excepting that for the division of the Aventine, effected important -modifications of the constitution, the most of them forced upon the -senate and magistrates in the struggle for equal rights in which the -commons were engaged with the nobility. In like manner two provisions -of the Valerian law of 342, (1) that the name of no soldier should be -erased from the muster roll without his consent. (2) that no military -tribune should be degraded to the rank of centurion,[1410] established -under the sanction of an oath certain fundamental rights on which the -soldiers and their officers respectively insisted. Another provision, -the total abolition of debts,[1411] if indeed it is historical, was -administrative, and is considered therefore in another connection.[1412] -Of the same nature, though less sweeping, was the Hortensian provision -for the relief of debtors. - -As soon as there came to be plebeian senators (about 400), the patricians -reserved to themselves the right to decide on the legality of legislative -and elective acts of the people under patrician presidency—a right -designated by the phrase patrum auctoritas, which signified originally -the authorization of the senators, thereafter of the patrician senators. -Till 339 the patres were at liberty to give or withhold the auctoritas; -but in that year an article of the Publilian law required them to grant -it to legislative acts of the centuries before the voting began and -while the issue was still in doubt, reducing it in this way to a mere -formality.[1413] The effect was to free centuriate legislation from the -constitutional control hitherto exercised by patrician senators.[1414] -Henceforth the resolutions of this assembly could be declared illegal -by no less than a majority of the entire senate. The Publilian statute, -accordingly, deprived the patricians of an important power, whereas -the senate as a whole continued through its consulta to exercise an -increasing influence over the comitia centuriata. Polybius rightly -ascribes to the consuls, therefore, the function of bringing the -resolutions of the senate before the assembly. It could not have been -the intention of Publilius Philo to energize the comitia centuriata -by this provision; for another article of the same statute, confirming -the validity of the tribunician assembly of tribes, as then actually -constituted exclusively of plebeians, paved the way for the Hortensian -law, which by making the acts of the tribunician assembly in every -respect equal to those of the centuries, deprived the latter of their -great importance as a factor in constitutional progress. From the time -of Hortensius to the time of Sulla no constitutional statute is known to -have been enacted by the centuriate assembly; though our sources do not -give us clear information on the point, it is highly probable that the -consuls and dictators of this period preferred to bring their measures -however important before the tribes.[1415] In Sulla’s time the lex -Valeria, 82,[1416] clothing him with his extraordinary dictatorship rei -publicae constituendae, must have been passed by the centuries, which -alone in addition to the politically obsolete comitia curiata could be -summoned by an interrex, as was the author of the law. This act, Lange -remarks, cannot well be considered a revival of the legislative power of -the centuries, as it was not only passed through intimidation and under a -magistrate who had no constitutional right to initiate legislation, but -it also created a legalized tyranny destructive of popular freedom.[1417] -In the words of Cicero it was the most iniquitous of all laws and most -unlike a law.[1418] Only one of Sulla’s statutes, the lex de civitate -Volaterranis adimenda, 81, which, depriving the Volaterrani of their -civitas cum suffragio, placed them in the condition of the Latins -of Ariminum, is known to have been an act of the centuries.[1419] -Probably all his other laws were ratified by the tribes.[1420] C. -Julius Caesar preferably used the tribes, although it is possible that -his lex de provinciis and his lex iudiciaria came before the comitia -centuriata.[1421] - -Sulla’s constitutional legislation curtailed the powers of the plebeian -tribunes and of their assembly, proportionally increasing the importance -of the centuries; and although his form of government was of short -duration, the optimates thereafter naturally preferred the comitia -centuriata for the ratification of senatorial resolutions.[1422] To -this assembly accordingly belong the leges Vibiae of the consul C. -Vibius Pansa, 43, which confirmed the acts of Caesar, and took the place -of Antony’s leges de coloniis deducendis and of his lex de dictatura -tollenda.[1423] - -On the institution of the censorship, and by the law which called the -office into being, it was enacted that elections of censors should be -ratified, not by the curiae as in the case of other magistrates, but -by the centuries themselves.[1424] Before this date the principle was -already established that the people should vote twice in the election of -every magistrate in order that if they repented of their choice, they -might recall it by a second vote.[1425] As the primary function of the -censors was the periodical reconstitution of the comitia centuriata, it -was doubtless thought appropriate that this assembly alone should be -concerned with the election. The lex centuriata de potestate censoria, -evidently passed under consular presidency, remained, like the curiate -law in confirmation of elections to other offices, a mere form. It -was of too little practical significance ever to be noticed by the -historians; in fact no individual instance of the passing of this act -is mentioned by any extant writer. Characteristically the lex Aemilia, -433, which is alleged to have cut down the term of censorship to eighteen -months,[1426] and the lex Publilia Philonis, 339, which provided that -at least one censor must be a plebeian,[1427] were centuriate, whereas -the Licinian-Sextian law, 367, which provided that one consul must be a -plebeian,[1428] and the Genucian law, 342, permitting both to be,[1429] -were plebiscites. - -An occasional attempt was made by a magistrate to usurp for the comitia -centuriata a share in the administration. The first which is worthy of -notice,[1430] even though it may be mythical, is the agrarian proposal -of Sp. Cassius, 486. According to the sources it was opposed by the -senate and the colleague of the mover. Far from enacting it into a law, -the author, on the expiration of his consulship, was himself accused -of attempting to usurp the royal power, and was, in one version of the -story, condemned to death by the assembly to which he had offered the -bill.[1431] The senate must have taken very seriously this first attempt -of a magistrate to transfer some of its administrative power to the -comitia. The law for the division of the Aventine Hill among the people, -456, was actually passed, most probably by the centuries.[1432] It was -forced upon the government by the plebeians, and did not serve as a -precedent for the future. The Valerian law of 342,[1433] which abolished -debts, was an extraordinary administrative measure similar in character, -but far more sweeping, to the clause for the relief of debtors in the -Licinian-Sextian plebiscite. - -If then the centuriate assembly was excluded from the field of -administration, it must certainly in pre-decemviral times have had no -part in religious legislation. The law which regulated the intercalary -month inscribed on a bronze column by Pinarius and Furius, consuls in -472,[1434] and the ancient law composed in archaic letters, mentioned -in connection with the year 363,[1435] requiring the praetor maximus to -drive the nail on the ides of September, must accordingly have been acts, -not of the centuriate assembly, but of the pontifical college. By the -ratification of the Twelve Tables, composed chiefly of private laws and -of closely connected religious regulations, an example was set for the -invasion of both of these legal spheres by the centuriate assembly. But -the precedent remained unproductive; for at this time the tribal assembly -under plebeian or patrician magistrates was recognized as competent for -legislation, and naturally took to itself the function of enacting the -less weighty, for a time generally the non-constitutional, laws.[1436] -We are not to imagine the field of legislation clearly divided into -constitutional, private, religious, and other departments; aside from -the question of declaring an offensive war, which remained strictly the -province of the comitia centuriata, the distinction in legislation was -simply between the more and the less important; the dignified assembly of -centuries, organized on an aristocratic-timocratic basis, was entrusted -with the weightier business, whereas the simpler tribal assembly, which -was easier to summon and more expeditious in action, served well enough -for the despatch of lighter business. The question of the assembly to -be employed was largely one of inertia; it required a far greater force -of circumstances to set in motion for legislative purposes the cumbrous -centuriate assembly than the relatively mobile gathering of the tribes. - - -III. _Judicial_ - -The jurisdiction of the people in whatever assembly was confined to -cases of crime and of serious disobedience to magistrates.[1437] It was -not exercised by them in the first instance but only by way of appeal. -In the opinion of the Romans Tullus Hostilius was the first to grant -an appeal,[1438] necessarily to the comitia curiata, which under the -kings remained the only formally voting assembly.[1439] During the regal -period, the well attested appellate function of the comitia[1440] was -simply precarious, depending wholly on the pleasure of the king.[1441] -The Romans represented the advance in liberty brought by the republic -as consisting partly in the establishment of the right of appeal for -every citizen through the lex de provocatione of Valerius,[1442] a -consul of the first year of the republic—according to Cicero the first -law carried through the comitia centuriata—providing that no magistrate -should scourge or put to death a citizen without granting him an appeal -to the people.[1443] Although the historical existence of this Valerius -has been questioned, and though his law has the appearance of being an -anticipation of the Valerian law of 449, or more closely of that of -300,[1444] we must admit in favor of its reality that the decemvirs were -themselves exceptionally above appeal and that their laws guaranteed to -the citizens an extensive use of the right.[1445] The appellant, however, -had no legal means of enforcing his right against the magistrate; he -could do no more than “throw himself on the mercy of the crowd, and -trust that their shouts or murmurs would bend the magistrate to respect -the law.”[1446] The first lex Valeria, accordingly, brought little -real benefit to the citizens.[1447] The right was recognized and its -application extended, as intimated above, by the Twelve Tables, in which -various laws relating not only to capital crimes but to some of less -importance granted an appeal to the people.[1448] It was provided also by -a special statute of the code that judgments as well as laws involving -life or citizenship could be passed only by the comitiatus maximus, which -is evidently the comitia centuriata.[1449] - -The Valerian-Horatian law of appeal, 449, was directed against the -recurrence of the decemvirate or any similar magistracy with absolute -jurisdiction, and hence resembled neither the laws of the Twelve Tables -referring to the subject nor the Valerian law of 509. It provided that -any one who brought about the election of such a magistracy might be put -to death with impunity,[1450] and is alleged to have been reinforced by a -Duillian plebiscite of the same year, which set the penalty of scourging -and death for the same offence.[1451] These regulations could not refer -to the dictatorship, which was appointive not elective, and which -continued to possess absolute jurisdiction for more than a century after -the decemviral legislation.[1452] - -But legal rights by no means imply actual enjoyment; and the decemviral -laws of appeal must have long remained substantially inoperative through -lack of a power sufficiently interested in their enforcement; “the might -of the few was stronger than the liberty of the commons.”[1453] The -right was limited, too, by the first milestone,[1454] and hence did not -affect the imperium militiae.[1455] The only punishment of a magistrate -for refusal to grant an appeal even by the Valerian law of 300, was to -be deemed wicked.[1456] Furthermore the oft-recurring dictatorship was -unrestricted by the law, being in this respect a temporary restoration of -the regal office.[1457] Not till after the enactment of the last Valerian -statute did the people begin to enjoy in fact the privilege which had -long been constitutionally theirs. The enforcement of the law, as in -general of the rights of the citizens, was chiefly due to the plebeian -tribunate, “the only sure protection even of oppressed patricians,”[1458] -but itself a limitation on the jurisdiction of the assembly.[1459] At -some unknown date after 325[1460] the dictator’s authority within the -city was subjected to appeal; and it has accordingly been suggested that -this limitation was due to the Valerian law of 300.[1461] - -The practical establishment of the right of appeal ordinarily led the -magistrate in the exercise of his disciplinary power to substitute light -fines and imprisonment, which he had full power to enforce, for the -heavier penalty of scourging.[1462] But in case of crimes, especially -perduellio and parricidium, public sentiment compelled him to prosecute -the accused to the full extent of the law. In the former accusation the -consul of the early republic appointed duumviri perduellioni iudicandae -for each case as it arose.[1463] This office is obscure because, without -being formally abolished, it fell early into disuse, its function -passing to the tribunate of the plebs. Of the three cases attributed by -the sources to these duumviri, that of Horatius[1464] belongs to the -regal period, and is a mythical prototype of the republican procedure. -The offence has the appearance of parricidium. Only by the broadest -interpretation could perduellio be made to cover the murder of a -sister.[1465] The second case is that of M. Manlius, 384, according -to the more credible account,[1466] whereas Livy[1467] himself is of -the opinion that the prosecutors were the plebeian tribunes. We may -conclude, then, that the duumviri were still employed at this date.[1468] -The third case is an unsuccessful attempt in 63 to revive the office -for the trial of C. Rabirius.[1469] The first republican law of appeal -must have empowered the comitia to order the appointment of these -officials by the magistrate;[1470] and it seems probable that at a later -date unknown to us they began to be elected by the people.[1471] The -function of the duumviri was to try the case and pronounce sentence, from -which if condemnatory the accused had a right to appeal to the comitia -centuriata.[1472] From the analogy offered by the questorian procedure we -may infer that the duumviri requested from a higher magistrate permission -to take auspices for that assembly, over which they presided in the final -trial.[1473] - -All capital crimes committed by a citizen against another were in a -similar way referred by the consuls to the quaestores parricidii as -their deputies.[1474] The activity of these officials is first mentioned -by the annalists in connection with the trial of Sp. Cassius, not for -murder but for perduellio.[1475] Lange’s[1476] explanation that the -quaestors were appointed duumviri for the trial would satisfy all -requirements; yet in myths of this kind we need not expect absolute legal -consistency.[1477] According to another, perhaps even earlier, version he -was tried and condemned at home by his father.[1478] The second instance -is the trial of M. Volscius, 459, for false testimony,[1479] which was -likewise a capital crime. Their judicial competence was recognized by -the Twelve Tables;[1480] and two capital cases are assigned to their -jurisdiction after the decemvirate, (1) that of Camillus on an accusation -variously stated by the ancient authorities;[1481] he avoided capital -prosecution before the centuries by retiring into exile, and in his -absence was condemned by the tribes to a fine of 15,000 or perhaps -100,000 asses: (2) that of T. Quinctius Trogus brought by the quaestor M. -Sergius,[1482] which must have taken place after 242.[1483] The reason -for the fewness of the known cases is to be sought in the circumstance -that their jurisdiction was substantially limited to common crimes, -whereas political crimes came at first before the duumviri and afterward -before the tribunes of the plebs.[1484] The criminal jurisdiction of -the quaestors must have continued till the institution of standing -quaestiones.[1485] - -While the importance of the comitia centuriata as a criminal court was -enhanced by the lex Valeria Horatia and the Duillian plebiscite of 449, -which prohibited the election of a magistrate with absolute jurisdiction, -the number of officials competent to bring capital actions before this -assembly was increased as a result of that law of the Twelve Tables which -enacted that all resolutions concerning the caput of a Roman citizen -should be offered to the centuries only.[1486] Thereafter the tribunes -were required to prefer their capital accusations before this assembly, -for the summoning of which they, like the quaestors and the duumviri -perduellioni iudicandae, requested the auspices of a higher magistrate, -ordinarily after 367 of a praetor.[1487] For a time, probably till -the Hortensian legislation, they were dependent upon the patrician -magistrates for this privilege.[1488] According to our sources the -tribunes, with the approval of the consuls,[1489] entered upon their new -sphere of judicial activity by bringing a capital charge against Appius -Claudius and Sp. Oppius, past decemvirs, for misconduct in office, the -specific charge being the abuse of justice in the interest of a person or -of a party.[1490] The suicide of the accused prevented the trial. On the -eight remaining decemvirs they passed in the same assembly a sentence of -exile.[1491] M. Claudius, too, condemned for false testimony, was exiled, -the death penalty being mitigated also in his case.[1492] The tribunes -of 439 are said to have accused L. Minucius and C. Servilius Ahala for -the part they had taken in the death of Sp. Maelius, and two years -afterward Servilius was sentenced to exile by the comitia centuriata, to -be recalled later by the same body. The charge against the former was -false testimony, against the latter the putting to death of a citizen -who had not been legally sentenced.[1493] Livy next mentions a charge, -probably of perduellio, brought by the tribunes against Q. Fabius, 390, -for having, in violation of the ius gentium, fought against the Gauls -while he was an ambassador to them. He, too, is said to have died before -the trial.[1494] All these cases are uncertain. If historical, they -may represent the beginnings of capital jurisdiction of the tribunes, -in rivalry with the duumviri; or they may in reality, like the case -of M. Manlius, 384, already mentioned, have been duumviral. On either -alternative they came before the centuriate comitia. - -As we approach firmer historical ground, we hear of three accusations -of unnatural lust alleged to have been brought by the tribunes of the -plebs before the same comitia: (1) that against L. Papirius, 326,[1495] -(2) that against L. or M. Laetorius Mergus, a military tribune, quod -cornicularium suum stupri causa appellasset,[1496] (3) the case mentioned -by Pliny and others against a person of unknown name, which probably -belongs to this period.[1497] The second case seems to be a trial of -official accountability, which fell within tribunician jurisdiction -according to the usage of historical time; the others are too little -known to be legally formulated. - -In this period falls the attempted prosecution of Appius Claudius Caecus, -310, on the ground that he had not laid down the censorship at the end of -the limit of eighteen months.[1498] The accusing tribune ordered him to -be seized and imprisoned, but three colleagues interceded.[1499] About -the same time M. Atilius Calatinus was unsuccessfully prosecuted on a -charge of having betrayed Sora,[1500] probably in connection with the -defection of that town to the Samnites in 315.[1501] - -In reviewing the cases said to have been brought by tribunes before -the comitia centuriata it is surprising to find the period from the -institution of the office to the trial of Q. Fabius, 390, swarming with -such prosecutions, whereas for the century intervening between that date -and the Hortensian legislation comparatively few cases are recorded and -those of little significance.[1502] These circumstances tend to prove -that the cases assigned to the earlier and less known period either -belong mostly to the jurisdiction of the duumviri or of the quaestors -rather than of the tribunes, or are in great part mythical, and that -the tribunes, therefore, exercised no extensive capital jurisdiction -before the enactment of the Hortensian law.[1503] We are led thence to -the conclusion that either by an article of the statute of Hortensius or -at least as a recognized consequence of the high place in the government -assured the tribunes by it, the jurisdiction of these magistrates in -political cases was freed from every restraint. At this time they -succeeded wholly to the place of the duumviri. The cases of which the -tribunes had cognizance were thereafter exclusively political, whereas -the questorian jurisdiction was confined to murder and other common -crimes. This distinction was not a limitation upon the power of the -tribunes, who if they chose might have superseded the quaestors as -easily as they had superseded the duumviri. It was rather a division -of functions adopted by the tribunes themselves in view of their own -political character and on the basis of the relative dignity of the two -offices. The chief judicial function of the tribunes, accordingly, was to -hold officials responsible for their administration, though occasionally -they called private persons to account for their conduct as citizens. All -grades of officials were within their jurisdiction, but most of the cases -were against the higher magistrates. - -The first tribunician case of the kind after the Hortensian legislation, -and the first which is absolutely free from historical doubt, is that -brought against P. Claudius Pulcher on the ground that as consul, 249, -he fought the naval battle off Drepana contrary to auspices, thereby -losing his fleet. After the comitia had been interrupted by a storm, the -intercession of colleagues against the resumption of the trial saved him -from the death penalty. As the result of a new trial before the tribes, -however, he was fined 120,000 asses, 1000 for each ship lost.[1504] -His colleague, L. Junius, by suicide escaped condemnation on a charge -of perduellio.[1505] In 212 two tribunes of the plebs prosecuted M. -Postumius Pyrgensis, a publican, before the tribes for fraud, setting -the penalty at 200,000 asses; but the accused with his friends violently -broke up the assembly, whereupon the tribunes, dropping the original -charge, prosecuted him for perduellio,[1506] we should suppose before the -centuries.[1507] Among the complaints urged against him by the consuls -in the senate were that “he had wrested from the Roman people the right -of suffrage, had broken up a concilium plebis, had reduced the tribunes -to the rank of private persons, had marshalled an army against the Roman -people, seized a position, and cut the tribunes off from the plebs, -and had prevented the tribes from being called to vote.” Specifically -the crime must have been perduellio.[1508] Before the day of trial he -withdrew into exile. In his absence the plebs on the motion of Sp. -and L. Carvilius decreed that he was legally in banishment, that his -property should be confiscated, and that he should be interdicted from -fire and water. In this connection it should be noticed that whereas the -banishment of a citizen by lex or iudicium was the exclusive right of the -centuries,[1509] the tribes were competent to decree him an exile after -his voluntary retirement.[1510] Some of the coadjutors in the violence -of the publican above mentioned left their bail and followed him into -exile; others were imprisoned to await capital trial, with what result -the historian does not inform us.[1511] - -In the same year Cn. Fulvius, a praetor, met with military reverses -through gross cowardice,[1512] and in the following was prosecuted in a -finable action by a tribune of the plebs for having corrupted his army -by the example of his unsoldierly habits. Finding in the course of the -trial that the fault of the magistrate was far more serious than had -been imagined, and that the people were in a temper to vote the extreme -penalty, the prosecutor changed the form of accusation to perduellio -on the ground that such cowardly conduct in a commander threatened the -existence of the state. In this instance, too, the accused avoided trial -by withdrawing into exile.[1513] In 204 by a decree of the senate a -special commission, consisting of the praetor for Sicily with a council -of ten senators,[1514] was appointed for the trial of a legate of -Scipio, Q. Pleminius, on the charge that he had robbed the temple of -Persephone in Locri and had violently oppressed the Locrians.[1515] The -commission brought him and his accomplices in chains to Rome and cast -them in prison to await their trial for life before the centuries.[1516] -The day of trial was continually deferred, till finally Pleminius, now -charged with the instigation of a plot to burn the city, was put to -death in prison.[1517] The fate of his accomplices is unknown.[1518] -Livy[1519] remarks that while Pleminius was languishing in jail the -wrath of the populace gradually changed to sympathy, to such an extent -doubtless as to convince the authorities of their inability to secure a -popular verdict in favor of the death penalty. In fact since the death -of M. Manlius Capitolinus, 384, no example of the execution of a death -sentence pronounced by the assembly is recorded in history.[1520] But -the magistrate probably often inflicted corporal punishment in violation -of the third Valerian law. To put an end to this abuse, and at the same -time to embody in legal form the popular feeling against the application -of the death penalty to citizens, a Porcian law absolutely forbade the -scourging or slaying of a citizen under the imperium domi, the article -prohibiting the sentence of death being afterward reënforced by other -enactments.[1521] There has been much discussion as to the authorship -of this law; probably it was the work of M. Porcius Cato the Elder in -his praetorship, 198.[1522] Another Porcian law, probably of P. Porcius -Laeca, praetor in 195, extended the right of appeal to Roman citizens -who were engaged in the affairs of peace outside the city, in Italy and -the provinces, and were therefore under the military imperium.[1523] -According to this law the citizen who appealed was sent to Rome for trial -by the appropriate civil authorities. Still later the third Porcian law, -which Lange[1524] conjecturally assigns to L. Porcius Licinus, consul in -the year of the elder Cato’s censorship, 184, seems to have been passed -for the benefit of Roman soldiers. We learn from Polybius,[1525] who -wrote later than the date last mentioned, that the military tribunes -were accustomed in court-martial to condemn common soldiers for neglect -of sentinel duty and that the condemned were cudgeled and stoned, often -to death, by their fellow-soldiers. He also speaks of the punishment of -entire maniples by decimation. Under Scipio Aemilianus, 133, the Roman -who neglected duty was flogged with vine stocks, the foreigner with -cudgels.[1526] Cicero[1527] intimates that in his own time there was no -appeal from the judgment of commanders; and in fact it is impossible to -understand how discipline could otherwise be maintained. Evidence to the -contrary is scant and uncertain. The person against whom an accusation -of desertion was brought before the tribunes of the plebs in 138 seems -to have claimed to be a civilian, and on that ground appealed to the -tribunes. When proved guilty he was flogged and sold as a slave, probably -by a judgment of the military authorities.[1528] In 122 Livius Drusus -proposed to exempt Latin soldiers from flogging.[1529] While informing -us that in 108 a commander had a right to scourge and put to death a -Latin official, Sallust[1530] intimates that he had less authority over -a Roman. In the time of the emperors, on the other hand, soldiers were -subject to the death penalty as in the time of Polybius.[1531] All -these circumstances may be best explained by supposing that the third -Porcian law permitted the infliction of flogging and death on Roman -soldiers by the judgment only of a court-martial.[1532] This difficult -subject is further complicated by the statement of Cicero[1533] that -the three Porcian statutes introduced nothing new excepting by way of -penalty. Interpreted in the light of other information given by various -authors, including Cicero himself, these statutes simply extended the -right of appeal by adapting the Valerian principle to new conditions, -and substituted exile in place of scourging and death. In the relation -between the accused and the civil court the cry “civis Romanus sum” was -thereafter a sufficient protection from bodily injury.[1534] - -In the period to which the Porcian laws belong falls the accusation of -perduellio brought by the tribune P. Rutilius Rufus against the censors -C. Claudius and Ti. Sempronius Gracchus, while they were in office, 169. -The charge against Gracchus was disregard of the tribunician auxilium, -against his colleague the interruption of a concilium plebis (quod -contionem ab se avocasset). The accused, foregoing the privilege of -their magistracy, consented to a trial, which came before the comitia -centuriata. Claudius narrowly escaped condemnation, whereupon the case -against Gracchus was dropped.[1535] - -The increasing number of special judiciary commissions and the -institution of standing courts limited more and more the judicial -activity of the centuriate assembly; but the tribunes of the plebs kept -alive the feeling of popular sovereignty in this sphere by the occasional -prosecution of some notorious offender.[1536] The continuance of the -centuriate judicial function is proved by the Cassian plebiscite of 137, -which provided for the use of the ballot in all iudicia populi excepting -in perduellio,[1537] and by the lex Caelia, 108, which removed the -exception.[1538] - -The limitation upon popular jurisdiction by the special court is said -to have begun as early as 414, when, according to Livy,[1539] a senatus -consultum authorized the appointment of a quaestio extraordinaria to -discover and punish the murderers of M. Postumius, a tribune of the -soldiers with consular power. The plebs, consulted as to the presidency -of the court, left it to the consuls. The instance may be an anticipation -of later usage. The case of wholesale poisoning by Roman matrons, 331, -was investigated, and a hundred and seventy matrons were condemned, -by an extraordinary court, which evidently owed its existence to a -senatus consultum without the coöperation of the people.[1540] The -same is true of the quaestio appointed by the senate under dictatorial -presidency in 314 to inquire into charges of conspiracy of the leading -men in certain allied states. The dictator extended the inquiry to -Rome, and after his resignation the consuls continued the work. Livy’s -account of this affair assumes that the senate had full power to appoint -such commissions.[1541] It did in fact possess the right without the -coöperation of the people to institute quaestiones extraordinariae for -the trial of allies or other aliens in crimes which menaced the security -of Rome. In the period between the Hortensian legislation and the Gracchi -in two recorded instances it dared on its own responsibility to appoint -such courts for the trial of citizens.[1542] These were usurpations; for -as the laws of appeal forbade the putting to death of a citizen unless -condemned by the people, a special court with capital jurisdiction -over citizens could not be constitutionally established excepting with -the consent of the assembly. This right of the people was considered a -legislative equivalent of their judicial power, which the vast expansion -of their state made it impossible for them directly to exercise.[1543] -The court which tried and condemned the insurgent garrison of Rhegium -in 270 was instituted accordingly by a plebiscite authorized by a -senatus consultum.[1544] Most probably the court in this case was the -senate itself, just as in 210, when the plebiscite of L. Atilius gave -it full power to judge and punish the Campanians for revolt.[1545] The -appointment of special courts for the detection and punishment of aliens -for illegal usurpation of the citizenship, which belonged originally to -the senate, began in 177 to be shared by the people.[1546] - -Similar in character to the special judiciary commission appointed by -the senate, but far more sweeping in effect, was the senatus consultum -ultimum (“videant consules, ne quid respublica detrimenti capiat”), -which in crises armed the consuls with absolute power of life and death -over the citizens.[1547] By these means the senate at its pleasure -circumvented the laws of appeal on the plea that the accused had -ceased to be citizens.[1548] Against this abuse Ti. Gracchus planned -a new law of appeal, which he did not live to see enacted.[1549] -His own followers were ruthlessly condemned without the privilege -of appeal by an extraordinary quaestio under P. Popillius Laenas, -consul in 132.[1550] Probably a similar court was appointed after the -revolt of Fregellae.[1551] To put an end to such circumvention of a -well-established right of the people, C. Gracchus in his first tribunate, -123, carrying into effect the plan of his brother, passed the often -mentioned lex Sempronia de provocatione, which absolutely forbade capital -sentence upon a citizen without an order of the people.[1552] The -wording indicates that it was intended not to do away with extraordinary -courts and powers, but to allow their establishment in no other way than -by popular vote.[1553] It reiterated, too, the article of the Porcian -statute which absolutely forbade the infliction of the death penalty on -civilians.[1554] Far, however, from transferring the jurisdiction of -the assembly to the quaestiones, the Sempronian law evidently confirmed -the right of the people by enacting that the tribunes might bring the -violator of that law before the comitia on a charge of perduellio, for -which it mentioned the penalty of interdict from fire and water.[1555] It -held responsible not only the magistrate charged with the extraordinary -commission, but probably also the senator who moved or supported the -measure which called it into being.[1556] The entire Sempronian law was -made retroactive, so as to cover the case of Popillius, who thereupon -fled into exile to avoid trial. The interdict was accordingly decreed -by the tribes on the motion of Gaius.[1557] Rupilius, the colleague of -Popillius, seems to have suffered a similar punishment.[1558] - -In 120 the tribune Decius prosecuted for perduellio L. Opimius, who, -as consul in 121, armed with the senatus consultum ultimum, had caused -the death of C. Gracchus. The accused was acquitted.[1559] Ihne[1560] -considers this prosecution to have been instigated by the optimates -in order to settle once for all and in their favor the question as to -the legality of special courts which were called into being by an act -of the senate alone. In that case acquittal was a foregone conclusion. -In 119 the popular party met with greater success in the prosecution of -C. Papirius Carbo, whom it hated as a renegade.[1561] The charge was -probably perduellio, though the details are unknown.[1562] - -The jurisdiction of the comitia in criminal cases suffered more extensive -curtailment from the standing courts,—quaestiones perpetuae,—the first -of which was established in 149 for the trial of Roman officials accused -of extortion—repetundae—committed in the provinces or in Italy.[1563] As -the object of the prosecutors was in the main the recovery of extorted -property, the court was essentially civil, and seemed, therefore, to -the Romans no infringement of popular rights; yet even before Sulla -the principle began to apply to distinctly criminal cases.[1564] -Notwithstanding this development several accusations were brought -before the centuriate assembly in the period between the Gracchi and -Sulla.[1565] The latter increased the number of quaestiones to seven and -brought all crimes within their cognizance. The questorian jurisdiction -in cases of murder had already passed to the quaestio inter sicarios, -established between 149 and 141;[1566] and now Sulla transferred cases -of perduellio from the jurisdiction of the tribunes to the quaestio -maiestatis.[1567] Although restored to the tribunes in 70, it was for the -remainder of the republican period exercised by them on special occasions -only, for the quaestio maiestatis still existed. With the establishment -of the principate the jurisdiction of the people finally vanished.[1568] - -The revolutionary character of the period after Sulla is illustrated -by the case of perduellio against C. Rabirius[1569] brought in 63 by -a tribune of the plebs, T. Atius Labienus. Rabirius was charged with -complicity in the murder of L. Appuleius Saturninus, the famous tribune -of the year 100. Labienus proposed and carried a plebiscite requiring the -praetor to appoint duumviri for the trial, whereas it was generally held -at the time that these officials should have been elected by the people. -It was also enacted, in violation of the Porcian and Sempronian laws, -that in case of conviction the accused should be crucified on the Campus -Martius. C. and L. Caesar, appointed duumviri, brought the case before -the comitia centuriata, which were prevented from giving their verdict -by the removal of the flag from Janiculum.[1570] The object of the trial -was not to punish the guilty, but to discredit the senate, to which the -accused belonged.[1571] The decline of the idea of popular sovereignty is -further indicated by the agrarian rogation of the tribune P. Servilius -Rullus, 63, an article of which, in violation of the lex Valeria Horatia -de provocatione, ordered the appointment of decemviri agris adsignandis -without appeal.[1572] - -The procedure was the same in all finable and capital actions. In a -case subject to appeal the magistrate, after a preliminary inquiry -(quaestio), summoned the people to contio on the third day[1573] for a -thorough examination (anquisitio).[1574] The trumpeter blew his horn -before the door of the accused, and cited him to appear at daybreak in -the place of assembly.[1575] Acting as accuser, the magistrate addressed -the contio and produced his witnesses. Then came the witnesses for the -defence, the statement of the accused, and the pleading of his counsel. -These proceedings filled three contiones separated from one another by -a day’s interval. At the end of the third day’s session the magistrate -acquitted the accused or condemned him and fixed the penalty. In case -of condemnation, the accused if dissatisfied appealed. The magistrate -then put his sentence in the form of a rogation and set a date for the -comitia,[1576] which could be held only after an interval of a trinum -nundinum,[1577] unless the accused desired an earlier trial.[1578] -Some scholars, however, hold the theory that a magistrate, recognizing -the limitation of his competence, might bring the case directly to the -comitia without the formality of a condemnation and appeal.[1579] The -penalty proposed in the rogation was not necessarily the same as at -first announced; for the trial might bring to light facts to mitigate or -to aggravate the sentence. The presentation of the case to the comitia -by the magistrate was termed the fourth accusation.[1580] If anything -prevented the voting in the comitia, the accused was discharged,[1581] -and could not be legally brought to trial again for the same offence -excepting under a different form of action.[1582] - - Schulze, C. F., _Volksversammlungen der Römer_, 307-40; - Hüllmann, K. D., _Staatsrecht des Altertums_, 334-54; Huschke, - Ph. E., _Verfassung des Königs Servius Tullius_, chs. vii, xi; - Wöniger, A. T., _Sacralsystem und das Provocationsverfahren der - Römer_; Peter, C., _Epochen der Verfassungsgeschichte der röm. - Republik, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Centuriatcomitien - und der mit diesen vorgegangenen Veränderungen; Studien zur - röm. Geschichte_, 54 ff.; Schwegler, A., _Röm. Geschichte_, - see index, s. Centuriatcomitien; Ihne, W., _History of Rome_, - iv. 10 ff.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsrecht_, iii. 300 ff.; _Röm. - Strafrecht_, 151-74, 473-8, 632-5; Mommsen and others, _Zum - ältesten Strafrecht der Kulturvölker_, especially 31-51 by H. - F. Hitzig; Lange, L., _Röm. Altertümer_, ii. 516-33, 541-65, - 597-613, see also indices of vols. i-iii, s. v.; Madvig, J. - N., _Verfassung und Verwaltung des röm. Staates_, i. 226-34; - Herzog, E., _Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung_, - i. 1068-1119, see also index, s. v.; Willems, P., _Droit - public Romain_, 159 f., 172, 176 ff.; Mispoulet, J. B., - _Institutions politiques des Romaines_, i. 203-7; _Études - d’institutions Romaines_, 63-6; Liebenam, W., _Comitia_ II, - in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 686-700; Humbert, G. - (s. _Comitia_), in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 1378 f.; - Voigt, M., _XII Tafeln_, i. 673-82; ii. 781-845; Karlowa, O., - _Röm. Rechtsgeschichte_, i. 409; Girard, P. F., _Histoire de - l’organisation judiciaire des Romains_, i. 104-59; Usener, H., - _Italische Volksjustiz_, in _Rhein. Mus._ lvi (1901). 1 ff.; - Müller, A., _Strafjustiz im röm. Heere_, in _N. Jahrb. f. kl. - Altertum_, xvii (1906). 550-77; Vassis, Sp., _Leges valeriae de - provocatione_, in _Athena_, xvii (1905). 160-5; Küspert, O., - _Ueber die Bedeutung und Gebrauch des Wortes ‘Caput’ im älteren - Latein_; Dupond, A., _De la constitution et des magistratures - Romaines sous la république_, 67-74; Moye, M., _Élections - politiques sous la république Romaine_; Hallays, A., _Comices - à Rome_, ch. ii; Morlot, E., _Comices électoraux_, ch. vi; - Kappeyne van de Coppello, J., _Comitien_, 105-7; Borgeaud, - C., _Histoire du plébiscite_, 45-57; Pantaleoni, D., _Della - auctoritas patrum nell’ antica Roma_; Greenidge, A. H. J., - _Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time_, see index, s. Centuriata - Comitia, Lex, Provocatio, etc.; _Roman Public Life_, 75, 252 - f., 255; Abbott, F. F., _Roman Political Institutions_, 253-9; - Wirz, H., _Perduellionsprocess des C. Rabirius_, in _Jahrb. f. - Philol._ xxv (1879). 177-201; Mirabelli, G., _Di un processo - politico avvenuto negli ultimi tempi della republica Romana_; - Schulthess, O., _Der Process des C. Rabirius vom Jahre 63 v. - Chr._; Baron, in _Berl. Philol. Woch._ 1893. 658-60. - - - - -CHAPTER XII - -THE COMITIA TRIBUTA AND THE RISE OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY TO THE YEAR 449 - - -In the belief of the Romans the tribunes of the plebs, originally two, -were instituted in 494 as a concession to the seceding commons to win -them back to the state.[1583] The historical truth of the first secession -need not be discussed here; but there is no good ground for rejecting -the view of the ancients either that the tribunate of the plebs owed -its existence to a revolution or that it began at as early a date. -According to our sources the plebeian tribunes, hence we may infer also -the aediles, were for a time elected, and other business affecting -the interests of the common people was transacted, in comitia curiata -composed potentially of all the citizens.[1584] The change in the form of -organization in 471, from curiate to tribal, will be considered below. -The president of the comitia which elected the first plebeian tribunes -was necessarily a patrician magistrate,[1585] probably the pontifex -maximus;[1586] thereafter, with the exception of the comitia for the -election of the first plebeian officials after the overthrow of the -decemvirs, tribunes of the plebs presided not only for elections but also -for judicial business and for the enactment of plebiscites (plebi scita). - -The object of the office of tribune was the protection of individual -citizens, plebeian and patrician alike,[1587] from oppression; and the -means was the auxilium (official aid),[1588] which could be rendered -in no other way than by personal contact; hence the law prohibiting a -tribune from being absent over night from the city[1589] and requiring -him to leave the door of his house open during the night.[1590] In the -further interest of the citizens the tribunes had the unrestricted right -to call the plebs to a contio and address them at any time and on any -subject, to form them when so assembled into voting groups, at first -curiae and after 471, tribes, and to take their votes on proposals -affecting plebeian interests, plebiscites being from the beginning -binding on the plebeian body in so far as they harmonized with the laws -of the state.[1591] - -These were the two original functions from which the vast powers of the -later tribunes gradually developed. As strictly plebeian officials they -had no authority to summon patricians, to exclude them from the place -of assembly,[1592] or to condemn them judicially.[1593] It follows that -their alleged prosecutions of past consuls for maladministration[1594] -are fictions[1595]—an anticipation of their jurisdiction at a later age. -Directly they possessed no power of judgment or of coercion;[1596] but -for the enforcement of the auxilium and of the ius agendi cum plebe their -persons were made sacred—sacro sancti—by an oath which the plebs swore at -the time they instituted the office,[1597] namely that any one who killed -a tribune or aedile of the plebs or did him bodily harm, or who commanded -another to inflict harm or death upon him might as a person devoted to -Jupiter be killed with impunity, and his property be confiscated.[1598] -The avenger was necessarily either a private plebeian or an official of -the plebs.[1599] The formal act which rendered the tribunes sacred was -termed a lex sacrata. The essence of such a law is (1) that it was sworn -to by the community—in this instance by the community of plebs, (2) that -the offender against it became a homo sacer and could be put to death -with impunity.[1600] This idea of sanctity the plebeians may have derived -partly from the Greek asylum;[1601] but it seems also to have been -influenced by the condition of ambassadors, hence the later, ill-founded -conception of the plebs as a state, and of the plebeian officials and -other institutions as based on a treaty ratified with fetial ceremonies -between the patrician government and the seceding plebs.[1602] Though -termed lex sacrata because it was passed and sworn to in the community, -as it were, of the plebs, like any plebiscite of this period the -resolution had no legal validity for the state or for the patricians. -Under compulsion, however, the government yielded to the demands of the -plebeians without formally acknowledging the sanctity of their officials; -so that the patricians, by asserting that Roman law did not recognize -an inviolability founded purely on religion,[1603] could afterward deny -that the tribunes were really sacrosanct. Till the enactment of the -Valerian-Horatian laws of 449,[1604] accordingly, the inviolability of -the tribunes existed in so far only as the plebeians were in a position -to maintain it by holding over their opponents and over the government -the threat of violence and revolution. That under the circumstances -domestic peace was on the whole preserved should be credited to the -orderly character of the great mass of citizens. - -Applied to the holding of contiones and comitia, this inviolability -protected the presiding tribune from interruption, contradiction, and -every disturbance. The principle was afterward extended to verbal abuse -anywhere publicly indulged in.[1605] Even if a man showed disrespect -by not stepping out of the way of a tribune who was passing along -the street, he was liable to the death penalty.[1606] Under normal -conditions, however, the rigorous execution of this lex sacrata could -not be thought of; in place of outlawing the offender against his person -the tribune was ordinarily willing to impose a fine upon him, from -which an appeal might be made to the plebeian assembly; or in cases of -violence to his person, he might resort to capital prosecution, which -was likewise appealable. These principles were formulated in an alleged -Icilian plebiscite of the year 492.[1607] From what has just been said -it is clear that the tribune’s coercive[1608] and judicial functions -resulted, not from usurpation as has often been asserted,[1609] but -from a mitigation of the harsh lex sacrata. In a word, the ultimate -basis of tribunician authority was the revolutionary power of the plebs, -upon which rested the sanctity of the tribunes, and thereon their -jurisdiction. Of the judicial activity attributed by the annalists to -the plebeian officials in the period before the decemvirs we do not know -how much is mythical; but it is safe to say that all the capital cases, -probably all the cases without qualification, which they actually settled -as judges were submitted to by the patrician government for the sake of -peace, without being accepted as legal. - -To the third year of the tribunate, 491, is assigned the first mentioned -exercise of tribunician jurisdiction. C. Marcius Coriolanus, the -accused, had advocated in the senate the abolition of the tribunician -office,[1610] and had done personal violence to the aediles, in this -way rendering himself liable to the penalty of the lex sacrata on which -rested the sanctity of the plebeian officials. Instead of declaring him -a homo sacer, a tribune brought him to trial before the tribes, which -condemned him by a narrow majority.[1611] The story is now regarded by -all scholars as a myth. The vote by tribes at this early time is either -exceptional or more likely an anticipation of later usage.[1612] - -In accordance with the Icilian plebiscite a capital charge is said to -have been brought by a tribune of the plebs against Kaeso Quinctius on -the ground that he had repeatedly driven the tribunes from the Forum and -had dispersed their assembly.[1613] After providing sureties the accused -went into exile,[1614] and the sentence of banishment was passed—in -Cicero’s opinion by the comitia centuriata, in Livy’s by the tribal -comitia of plebs, 461.[1615] Another case prior to the decemvirate is -recorded for the year 455. Representatives of three illustrious patrician -families were charged with having disturbed an assembly under tribunician -presidency. Their estates were forfeited to Ceres.[1616] Naturally under -this arrangement between the plebs and the government there was room for -much misunderstanding: the leaders of the plebs stretched their claims to -the uttermost; and the patricians, after granting the radical concession, -endeavored to recall as much of it as possible. They plausibly urged that -while the sacrosanctitas, so far as it existed,[1617] might protect the -person of the tribune, it gave him no authority over a patrician;[1618] -and their position as the sole holders of political power and the -sole repositories of law and usage enabled them before the decemviral -legislation by stubborn, skilful perseverance in the details of political -warfare almost to throw the tribunician sanctity into oblivion.[1619] -Livy tells us that in the assembly appointed for the trial of the past -consuls L. Furius and C. Manlius, the accusing tribune failed to appear, -and was found murdered in his home; and the historian gives us to -understand that the crime was the result of a private conference among -the patricians.[1620] Dio Cassius[1621] states that they secretly slew a -number of the boldest spirits among the plebeians. Though these stories -are mythical, they reflect at least the opinion of the historians that -in this early period the sanctity of the tribune counted for little. -If it failed to protect his person, it could have given him no great -degree of recognized judicial competence. Under these circumstances -we should not expect to find the tribunes often bringing the power of -their questioned sanctity into actual use in the early years of their -existence; but that before the decemvirate they exercised jurisdiction to -some extent even in capital cases, which were appealed to the assembly -under their presidency, is proved by a law of the Twelve Tables, which, -to remedy what the legislators must have considered an abuse, provided -that accusations affecting the caput of a citizen should be brought only -before the comitiatus maximus—evidently the comitia centuriata.[1622] - -If the tribunes presumed to condemn men to death, they certainly would -not hesitate to fine them for lighter offences. For checking the power of -the magistrates to levy unlimited fines the consuls of 454, A. Aternius -and Sp. Tarpeius, passed through the comitia centuriata a law which -set the maximum fine to be levied by a magistrate on an individual in -any one day at thirty cattle and two sheep, the minimum being a single -sheep. In case he exceeded the former amount, an appeal could be made -to the assembly.[1623] In the opinion of Dionysius[1624] this law was -interpreted to apply to all magistrates, including those of the plebs, -and was made accordingly the basis of the tribunician jurisdiction in -finable offences. These consequences seem to have been drawn from the -statute, although the proposers may not have so intended it.[1625] - -Sufficient evidence has now been offered that before the decemviral -legislation the plebeian tribunes exercised, on the basis of their -sanctity, a vague jurisdiction in both finable and capital cases, -occasionally submitted to by the patrician government though probably -not recognized by it as just or constitutional. For the same period -their method of agitation by the obstruction of the levy,[1626] by -haranguing the people in contiones,[1627] and occasionally by sedition, -proves clearly the lack of legislative power through the assembly over -which they presided, as well as their lack of veto on the acts of the -government. With reference to legislation the course of the discussion -in the present and following chapters will make it evident that only -by a provision of the Hortensian statute did plebiscites become -unconditionally binding on the whole people. Although from the beginning -a tribune, as a member of a collegial office, could intercede against -the act of a colleague, he had in this period no legal right of the kind -against the government; for had he now possessed it, as he did at a later -age, he would have felt no need of obstructing the levy—a relatively -slow, clumsy method of political warfare. It is to be noticed further -that the power of veto of the tribunes, after it had been acquired, -rested upon their jurisdiction. If a magistrate persisted in ignoring -their prohibition, his act remained valid but he rendered himself -liable to tribunician prosecution.[1628] Necessarily, then, as long as -the tribunes lacked judicial competence (till the Valerian-Horatian -legislation, 449) they lacked the veto against governmental action; -as long as their judicial competence depended upon the will of the -government (probably till the Hortensian legislation, 287), their veto -on the government must have been correspondingly limited. Finally it was -not till tribunician obstruction of the levy, sedition, and secession -disappear (that is, with the enactment of the Hortensian statute) that -we have a right to assume the existence of an unrestricted tribunician -veto.[1629] The method of the tribunes in the pre-decemviral period -was, by the means above indicated, to force a proposed measure upon -the patrician magistrates, and to compel them to bring it before the -centuriate assembly in regular form.[1630] - -In view of the circumstances that passed bills alone were recorded and -hence could be known to posterity, we may reject as unauthentic all the -alleged proposals of agrarian laws of this period,[1631] which however -may not have been free from agitation of the kind. - -A law of the year 471 gave the tribunician assembly a tribal -organization. This measure, brought about by the agitation of Publilius -Volero, tribune of the plebs of that year,[1632] must, for the reason -above mentioned, have been an act of the comitia centuriata.[1633] The -motive given by Livy was the desire of the tribunes to free themselves -from the influence which the patricians through the votes of their -clients exercised on the assembly.[1634] The curiae contained all -the citizens,[1635] the tribes none but the landowners. The tribal -organization, therefore, excluded not all the clients but those only, -together with any other citizens, who were landless.[1636] Probably -in other ways the patricians had greater control of the curiate than -of the tribal assemblies, although it is impossible to believe with -Dionysius[1637] that the essence of the change from the curiate to the -tribal comitia consisted in the elimination of auspical influence. That -the law forbade the patricians to take part in tribunician assemblies, as -Zonaras[1638] imagines, is not probable, for it gave the tribune no new -authority over the patricians; he had power neither to summon them to his -assembly nor to expel them from it.[1639] In fact we have evidence of the -presence of patricians in tribunician assemblies after this date.[1640] -The so-called law of Publilius Volero, now under discussion, was confused -by the sources with the Publilian law of 339, some of the provisions of -the later act being uncritically assigned to the earlier.[1641] - -The statute of 471 imparted to the tribunician assembly no new function. -Although in mentioning the bill Dionysius[1642] includes a proposal to -grant the assembly legislative power, when he comes to speak of the -statute as actually passed, he refers only to its provisions for the -election of plebeian tribunes and aediles by the tribes, herein agreeing -with Livy and other authorities.[1643] - -In the same year four tribunes of the plebs were elected for the first -time.[1644] The increase was probably effected by an article of the -statute under discussion. - -Till after the decemviral legislation the comitia tributa,[1645] -brought into existence by the statute of 471, was restricted, as had -been the tribunician comitia curiata, to the transaction of purely -plebeian business. In the records of this period we find a continuance -of apocryphal agrarian bills[1646] and condemnations of retired -magistrates.[1647] In reality the only political weapon of the tribunes, -aside from general agitation, continued to be the obstruction of the -levy,[1648] as is proved by their increase in number to ten.[1649] -The only agrarian law of the period, the so-called lex Icilia for the -division of the Aventine among the people, was passed by the comitia -centuriata.[1650] The very circumstance that this mild concession to the -plebs was couched in a lex sacrata[1651] shows how little faith the -commons had in the government.[1652] - -During this period the supreme power was the senate. Shortly after the -fall of the kings it provided for the purchase of corn among neighboring -states in a time of scarcity, made a state monopoly of salt in the -interest of the poor, freed the plebs from port dues and tributum, -thereby placing the whole burden of these taxes on the wealthy.[1653] -These acts imply legislative as well as administrative competence. -Foreign affairs,[1654] including the decision of war and peace, were in -its hands. It resolved not to restore the property of the Tarquins,[1655] -decreed triumphs to victorious generals,[1656] the celebration of -games,[1657] the expulsion of the Volscians from the city in the time -of a festival,[1658] controlled the magistrates, including the plebeian -tribunate, by means of the dictatorship,[1659] or clothed the consuls -with absolute authority.[1660] Little room was left for the activity of -the assemblies. - -Notwithstanding these unfavorable conditions the tribunes of the -plebs through obstruction of the levy and through their harangues -in contiones[1661] were chiefly instrumental in bringing about the -institution of the decemviri legibus scribundis. Actual votes in -tribunician comitia on proposals looking to that end[1662] could have had -no more than moral weight. Under popular pressure the consul Sestius, -452, referred the question to the senate,[1663] and the bill for their -institution was passed by comitia, doubtless of the centuries. The only -valid activity, therefore, of the tribal assembly prior to the decemviral -legislation, so far as is known, was the enactment of plebiscites, which -lacked the force of law, the election of plebeian officials,[1664] and -the quasi-judicial decision of cases appealed to it by those who were -accused of violating the tribunician sanctity.[1665] - -An epoch was made in the history of the tribunate and of the tribal -assembly by the consulship of Valerius and Horatius, 449, who proposed -and carried a centuriate law[1666] which gave these institutions a legal -basis. The article which logically first claims our attention provided -that any one who injured the tribunes of the plebs, the aediles, or the -decemviral judges should be devoted to Jupiter, and his property should -be forfeit to the temple of Ceres, Liber, and Libera.[1667] According -to Livy,[1668] who here represents the tribunician point of view, the -original lex sacrata, passed on the Sacred Mount, was first renewed with -appropriate ceremonies, thus reëstablishing the religious inviolability -of the plebeian officials, whom then the article of the Valerian-Horatian -statute here mentioned rendered legally inviolable. The constitutional -relation of these two ideas was difficult even for the Romans to -determine. Certain jurists, controverting the tribunician interpretation, -asserted that this law made no person sacrosanct, but merely threatened -with capital punishment any one who injured the officials concerned, -clothing them thus in the same kind of inviolability as that which -protected the ordinary magistrates.[1669] The object, according to this -view, was not only to eliminate from the government the anomaly of a -power sanctioned by religion only,[1670] but also to convert the plebeian -officials into state officials. The leaders of the plebs gladly accepted -the new position tendered them, without being willing however to withdraw -from the old. Henceforth we have to deal, accordingly, with a group -of legally recognized public functionaries who effectively claimed a -religious inviolability hard to reconcile with the constitution, in which -they were in time to make for themselves a disproportionate place. - -The second article of the Valerian-Horatian statute was to the effect -that “whatever the plebs ordered in their tribal assembly should be -valid for the people”;[1671] so that henceforth plebiscites, when passed -under the conditions hereafter specified, were the equivalent of leges, -as they were often so called. It is so similar to a provision of the -later Publilian and of the still later Hortensian statute that we should -incline to reject it as an anticipation of the one or the other, were it -not for the fact that under it important plebi scita, as the Canuleian, -the Licinian-Sextian, and the Genucian, were passed.[1672] We must accept -it, then, as historical, and adapt our interpretation to the few known -facts in the case. - -Notwithstanding the use of the word plebs to designate the tribal -gathering under tribunician presidency, there is no valid reason for -supposing that the Valerian-Horatian law altered its composition—that -the patricians were now excluded.[1673] Dionysius[1674] is clearly -of the opinion that they participated in this form of comitia both -before and after the enactment of the statute under consideration; and -Livy[1675] thinks of them as still present in the tribunician meetings -as late as the struggle for the Licinian-Sextian laws. The problem must -be considered in connection with the development of the voting function -of the assembly. Primitively the leaders (nobles) in council decided -upon a measure, which they then submitted to the people to be accepted -with clamor and din.[1676] Although the acclamation was essentially an -act of the masses, nothing forbade the nobles to join in the shouting. -Doubtless in the tribal assemblies the expression of opinion within -the tribe continued for a time to be by acclamation.[1677] As long as -this primitive condition existed, a distinction could not be drawn -between the right to be present and the right to join in the decision of -questions brought before the comitia. Undoubtedly the custom of voting -by heads within the tribe was an imitation of a usage adopted by the -comitia centuriata some time after the institution of the latter;[1678] -hence we could not reasonably assume its use by the tribes so early -as the pre-decemviral period. The question therefore as to whether -the patricians, who were certainly present in meetings of the tribes, -enjoyed the right of voting in them could not have arisen till after the -decemviral legislation. The plebeians had found it impossible by their -own powers to exclude from their assembly the landless clients, who were -inferior to themselves.[1679] Much less could they exclude the nobles. -If the presiding tribune could not prevent their remaining after the -people had been formed into voting groups, he could not prevent their -voting. As the patricians, equally with the plebeians, belonged to the -tribes, the former, being men of superior privilege, could not lawfully -be debarred from meetings of their associations; and if they chose to -attend, it was not for the tribunes of the plebs to decide as to the -law in the matter. The word plebs in the statute is susceptible of an -easy explanation. As the comitia curiata and comitia centuriata, under -patrician presidents, had from the beginning been termed populus, nothing -could be more natural than that from the time an assembly convened -under plebeian presidency for plebeian objects, the latter should by -way of distinction be termed plebs, even though the few patricians were -included. Ordinarily the plebeians must have welcomed patricians to their -assemblies, as the presence of magistrates and senators and their sons -added dignity and weight to the proceedings. But when the patricians used -all their superior influence in both lawful and unlawful ways to block a -popular measure, the tribunes, naturally wishing then to exclude them, -attempted to establish the principle that tribunician assemblies were -exclusively plebeian. This question was settled by the law of Publilius -Philo, 339.[1680] - -This article of the Valerian-Horatian statute was a concession extorted -from the patrician government by the strongest pressure, perhaps by a -plebeian secession. The actual advantage which it brought to the plebs -was minimized, however, by the provision that the previous consent of -the senate was essential to the validity of bills brought before the -tribunician assembly.[1681] The patricians could urge in support of this -arrangement that as their magistrates according to long established -custom always obtained the previous consent of the senate (senatus -consultum) to measures brought before any assembly, and were absolutely -required to obtain senatorial sanction (patrum auctoritas) for curiate -and centuriate laws and elections,[1682] the tribunes, who were free from -the trammels of the sanction, should be legally compelled to consult the -senate before bringing a measure into their assemblies, especially as -their legislation was in a field hitherto monopolized by the patrician -magistrates and the senate. Although the tribunes of the plebs would -have preferred to understand by the term plebiscite all that it had -meant before—the unconditioned resolution of the tribal assembly under -their presidency—they must have felt satisfied for the time being with -the great gain they had made, however strenuous they afterward became to -relieve themselves of senatorial control. This condition on the validity -of the plebiscite is not expressly mentioned by Livy in connection with -the Valerian-Horatian legislation, but is assumed by the sources for the -following period.[1683] The same thing is clearly implied, too, in the -long series of political struggles which came after the enactment of the -Valerian-Horatian statute.[1684] Had the tribunes been free to legislate -without interference on the part of the senate, they would have been in -a position easily to complete the social and political equalization of -the orders, and by one sweeping reform law to place themselves and their -constituents in the condition reached by an almost uninterrupted conflict -of a hundred and sixty years (449-287).[1685] - -It was in accordance with this regulation that another article of the -Valerian-Horatian statute directed the aediles of the plebs to preserve -the senatus consulta in the temple of Ceres.[1686] We cannot look -upon these officials as keepers of the senatorial archives of that -time,[1687] and hence must conclude that the documents in their charge -were those decrees which authorized the presentation of tribunician -bills, for with those alone the plebeians were directly concerned. - -The patricians expected to find a further safeguard in the tribunician -veto, which could be directed against a colleague.[1688] From the fact, -however, that the tribunes continued to resort to the clumsy method of -obstructing the levy, and afterward also of impeding the collection of -the tributum,[1689] we must infer that as yet their intercession did not -prevail against a patrician magistrate.[1690] Various popular seditions, -too, are mentioned for the same period (449-287).[1691] That one which -led to the Hortensian legislation is historical, and it is hardly -possible that all the others are fictions. - -Another conservative check was the application of oblative auspices to -the plebeian assembly.[1692] Livy[1693] reports that in 293 the tribunes -resigned because of a faulty election, held probably in violation of -oblativa. In general, however, the plebeian gathering was relatively free -from religious control till after the enactment of the Aelian and Fufian -laws (about 150).[1694] It had the advantage of the comitia centuriata -(1) in freedom from the impetrative auspices, (2) in freedom from the -patrum auctoritas, (3) in mobility. Immediately after the adoption of -the Valerian-Horatian statute it must have become evident that the -tribunician assembly, through the character of its presidency, its -composition, and its democratic spirit, was to outstrip the centuriate -gathering in energy and aggressiveness, and to be in a word the chief -factor of progress in legislation. - -No enactment affecting the jurisdiction of tribunes is referred to -Valerius and Horatius by the ancient writers; and yet the arrangement by -which they thereafter brought their capital actions before the centuries -could not have been made without the consent of the government. If, -on the other hand, the tribunes now possessed an unconditioned power -to subject patricians, whether magistrates or private citizens, to -capital prosecutions, they would have found it so effective a means -of political warfare as no longer to need obstruction and sedition in -their struggle for plebeian rights. In capital cases the permission of a -higher magistrate, ordinarily after 367 the praetor, was required; and -before the enactment of the Hortensian statute, we may well believe, -the tribunes had no means of forcing this permission. Some similar -restriction must have been placed on their liberty to bring finable -actions. - -The comitia tributa under tribunician presidency had at length become -an effective constitutional factor in legislation and in jurisdiction. -But its action in the former sphere was dependent upon the favor of the -senate, in the latter on that of a patrician magistrate. The range, too, -of its legislation was restricted by the wide administrative powers of -the senate. We shall find it in the following period winning freedom and -enlarging the field of its activity. - - The following literature is for the whole period from 449 to - 287. - - Schulze, C. F., _Volksversammlungen der Römer_, 341-70; - Hüllmann, K. D., _Staatsrecht des Altertums_, 354-67; Niebuhr, - B. G., _Römische Geschichte_, i. 624 ff., Eng. 283 ff.; - see also index, s. Tributcomitien; Schwegler, A., _Röm. - Geschichte_, see index, s. Tributcomitien; Mommsen, Th., - _Röm. Staatsrecht_, iii. 300 ff.; _Röm. Forschungen_, i. - 151-66; _Röm. Strafrecht_, 462-8, 473-8, 1014-6, et passim; - Ihne, W., _History of Rome_, bk. VI. chs. i, viii; _Ueber die - Entstehung und die ältesten Befugnisse des röm. Tribunats_, - in _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. xxi (1866). 161-79; _Entwickelung der - Tributcomitien_, in _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. xxviii (1873). 353-79; - Peter, C., _Gesch. Roms_, bks. ii, iii; Lange, L., _Röm. - Altertümer_, i. 586-681, 821-56; ii. 459-94, 533-42, 565-97, - 613-42; _De legibus Porciis libertatis civium vindicibus_, - in _Kleine Schriften_, i. 342-429; _De plebiscitis Ovinio et - Atinio disputatio_, ibid. ii. 393-446; _Ueber das poetelische - Gesetz de ambitu_, ibid. ii. 195-202; Kleineidam, F., _Beitr. - z. Kentniss d. lex Poetelia_, in _Festg. f. F. Dahn_, ii. 1-30; - Ihm, _Ambitus_, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 1800-3; - Madvig, J. N., _Verfassung und Verwaltung des röm. Staates_, - i. 234-46; Voigt, M., _XII Tafeln_, i. 683-90; Karlowa, O., - _Röm. Rechtsgeschichte_, i. 409; Girard, P. F., _Histoire - de l’organisation judiciaire des Romains_, i. 149-59, 237 - ff.; Puchta, G. F., _Cursus der Institutionen_, i. (10th - ed. 1893) 166-9 (on lex and plebiscite); Mispoulet, J. B., - _Institutions politiques des Romains_, i. 207-30; _Études - d’institutions Romaines_, 66-81; Willems, P., _Droit public - Romain_, 160 ff., 173 ff.; Greenidge, _Legal Procedure of - Cicero’s Time_, 327-49; Herzog, E., _Geschichte und System der - röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. 153 ff., 189-96, 216 ff., 248-64, - 279-88, 1128-88; _Glaubwürdigkeit der Gesetze bis 387 der - Stadt_; _Lex Sacrata und das Sacrosanctum_, in _Jahrb. f. - Philol._ xxii (1876). 139-50; Dupond, A., _De la constitution - et des magistratures Romaines sous la république Romaine_, 75 - ff.; Borgeaud, C., _Histoire du plébiscite_, 57-76, 117-67; - Hallays, A., _Comices à Rome_, ch. iii; Morlot, E., _Comices - électoraux sous la république Romaine_, ch. iv; Ptaschnik, - J., _Die Wahl der Volkstribunen vor der Rogation des Volero - Publilius_, in _Zeitschr. f. österreich. Gymn._ xiv (1863). - 627-38; _Publilische Rogation_, ibid. xvii (1866). 161-200; - _Die Centuriatgesetze von 305 und 415 U. C._, ibid. xxi (1870). - 497-525; _Lex Hortensia 473 U. C._ ibid. xxiii (1872). 241-53; - _Stimmrecht der Patricier in den Tributcomitien_, ibid. xxxii - (1881). 81-102; Ruppel, K. W., _Teilnahme der Patrizier an den - Tributkomitien_; Soltau, W., _Gültigkeit der Plebiscite_, in - _Berliner Studien_, ii (1885). 1-176; Clason, D. O., _Kritische - Erörterungen über den röm. Staat_, 30-9; Schmidt, J., _Die - Einsetzung der röm. Volkstribunen_, in _Hermes_, xxi (1886). - 460-6; Meyer, E., _Der Ursprung des Tribunats und die Gemeinde - der vier Tribus_, in _Hermes_, xxi (1895). 1-24, controverted - by Vassis, in _Athena_, ix (1897). 470 ff.; Pais, _Ancient - Italy_, chs. xx, xxi; Garofalo, F. P., _L’origine e l’elezione - dei tribuni e degli edili della plebe con un indice alfabetico - dei loro nomi_; Podestà, G., _Il tribunato della plebe in - Roma dalla secessione sul monte sacro all’approvazione della - legge di Publilio Volerone_; Eigenbrodt, A., _De magistratuum - Romanorum iure intercedendi_; Ackermann, H., _Ueber die - raümlichen Schranken der tribunizischen Gewalt_; Tophoff, - _De lege Valeria Horatia, Publilia, Hortensia_; Hennes, _Das - dritte valerisch-horatische Gesetz und dessen Wiederholungen_; - Long, G., _On the Passage in Appian’s Civil Wars_ (i. 8) - _which relates to the Licinian Law_, in _Classical Museum_, - iii (1846). 78 ff.; Kubitschek, _Aedilis_, in Pauly-Wissowa, - _Real-Encycl._ i. 448-64; Humbert, G., _Aedilis_, in Daremberg - et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 95-100; Bloch, L., _Die ständischen - und sozialen Kämpfe in der römischen Republik_; Willoughby, - W. W., _Political Theories of the Ancient World_, ch. xvi; - Strachan-Davidson, T. L., _Decrees of the Roman Plebs_, in - _Eng. Hist. Rev._ v (1890). 462-74; Dreyfus, R., _Les lois - agraires sous la république Romaine_, pt. I. chs. i-iii; De - Sanctis, G., _Storia dei Romani_, I. chs. xiii, xiv, xvii; - Billeter, G., _Gesch. d. Zinsfusses_, 115 ff. - - - - -CHAPTER XIII - -THE COMITIA TRIBUTA AND THE RISE OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY FROM 449 TO 287 - - -For a time after the Valerian-Horatian legislation the senate and -magistrates, as was intimated at the close of the preceding chapter, -maintained their authority but slightly impaired against the rising -popular power. It is true that in 427 the centuries acquired the right -to declare a war of aggression.[1695] Defensive wars in behalf either of -Rome or of an ally were regularly decided upon by the senate;[1696] and -the question whether the war was necessary for the safety of the state -admitted of a broad interpretation.[1697] From the beginning of the -period to the year 321 treaties of peace and of alliance were still made -either by a magistrate, with the authorization of the senate,[1698] or -more commonly by the senate itself, even though the alliance or offer of -protection was such as to render war with other states inevitable;[1699] -and at the close of a conquest the senate disposed of the acquired -territory and population.[1700] Through its authority alone, till 332, -the censor bestowed the perfect or the limited citizenship.[1701] - -In the affairs of peace it retained almost as absolute power of -administration as in the preceding period.[1702] We find it, accordingly, -authorizing a magistrate to vow games and the erection of a temple -in the event of victory,[1703] providing for the restoration of -the city after the Gallic conflagration,[1704] for the building of -temples,[1705] introducing pay for military service,[1706] levying -the taxes,[1707] dividing the public lands among the citizens,[1708] -founding colonies,[1709] and recalling under penalty of death those -who without permission had gone out to colonize a captured city,[1710] -directing the appropriate college to consult the Sibylline books,[1711] -and ordering the aediles to take measures against the inroad of foreign -superstitions,[1712] and the consuls to punish with rods and beheading -the instigators to revolt among the allies.[1713] It was in obedience to -a decree of the senate that the consul, or military tribune with consular -power, suspended his own imperium and that of his colleague or colleagues -by the appointment of a dictator,[1714] who had power to compel the -resignation of all other magistrates.[1715] Or the senate could directly -order the magistrates to retire from office, with or without a scruple -as to the auspices.[1716] It rewarded successful commanders with -triumphs[1717] at the expense of the state[1718] and in time of especial -danger it armed the consuls with absolute imperium.[1719] In the face of -an opposing force so vast as here indicated, the assemblies for a time -made slow headway. The development of their functions through the period -between the Valerian-Horatian and the Hortensian legislation will now be -followed. - - -I. _Elective_ - -Appreciating the great possibilities of the tribunate, the patricians -attempted to fill the college with men of their own rank. If we are to -trust our authorities, an effort was made in that direction immediately -after the fall of the decemvirs, when it was agreed that the pontifex -maximus should preside over the tribal comitia for the election of the -first tribunes of the plebs under the restored constitution.[1720] Among -the men chosen were some so closely attached to patrician interests -that at the end of the year they secured the election of successors who -coöpted into the college two patricians of consular rank.[1721] At this -crisis there was great danger that the college of tribunes might become -a possession of the patricians. It was averted, however, by a certain -tribune, L. Trebonius, who succeeded in carrying a law that whoever -presided over the comitia for the election of tribunes should continue -till ten tribunes were elected, the object being to preclude coöptation. -The tribune who violated this law was to be burned alive.[1722] That -part of Livy’s account which assigns the author of the law to the -year 448 is improbable. A half century later (401) he informs us, it -happened that two places left vacant in the college were again filled -by the coöptation of patricians and, by the strangest accident, a Cn. -Trebonius was among their colleagues. His complaint that the Trebonian -plebiscite and the leges sacratae were being violated had, in Livy’s -opinion,[1723] no result. Probability greatly favors the later date for -the law, especially as an instance of coöptation is mentioned between -the two dates;[1724] the name of Trebonius or of one or more patricians -in the college of 448[1725] was enough to lead the historian astray. The -later date fits well the political condition of the time; the patricians, -almost succeeding in monopolizing the military tribunate with consular -power, proceeded to lay hands on the plebeian tribunate—a far more -valuable prize. After 401, however, the Trebonian law proved effective -in excluding patricians from the tribunate of the plebs. Henceforth -all plebeian officials were elected by the tribes under tribunician -presidency.[1726] - -In granting the tribal assembly a share in law-making the senate must -have hoped to convert it into an organ of the patrician government. -Shortly after the Valerian-Horatian legislation, accordingly, patrician -magistrates began to convoke this assembly for the election of quaestors -(447)—previously appointed by the chief magistrates[1727]—and afterward -of curule aediles (367),[1728] military tribunes,[1729] and other minor -officials.[1730] - - -II. _Judicial_ - - -_a._ TRIBUNICIAN - -By an arrangement referred to in the preceding chapter,[1731] partly -based on the law of the Twelve Tables relating to capital cases[1732] and -further developed in 449, possibly by an article of the Valerian-Horatian -statute, a division of popular jurisdiction was made between the -centuriate and the tribal assemblies, on the basis of a distinction -in the nature, not of the crime, but of the penalty.[1733] The tribes -punished with fines, the centuries with the extreme penalty—banishment -or death, to which was always added total confiscation of property. -The prosecutor, accordingly, first thought of the penalty, to which he -then attempted to adapt the form of action. The people were not guided -to their decision by legal formalities and precedents,[1734] but were -often swayed by the emotions of favor and anger.[1735] No juror’s oath -was imposed upon them to decide according to law and without personal -or party bias, such as the Athenian heliasts swore. If the prosecutor, -in addition to believing that the case merited the severest punishment, -hoped to persuade the people to vote the death or banishment of the -accused, he pronounced a capital condemnation, and the case was -accordingly appealed to the centuriate assembly. If on the other hand he -doubted whether he would be able sufficiently to excite the anger of the -populace against the accused, however heinous the crime may have been in -his own opinion, he satisfied himself with a finable action, and allowed -it to go before the tribes. Sometimes while the evidence was being taken -in the latter form of action, the rage of the people was so inflamed -against the accused that they clamored for the extreme penalty, in which -case the prosecutor might change the form of action agreeably to their -wishes.[1736] The greater ease with which the tribes were summoned, -together with the growing disinclination of the people to pronouncing -the death penalty, induced the magistrates more and more to make use of -finable rather than of capital actions. Fines were generally estimated -in cattle and sheep till in 430 the consuls L. Julius and L. Papirius -Crassus passed a centuriate law establishing a hundred pounds of copper -as equivalent to an ox and ten to a sheep.[1737] Probably the same law -provided that no fine should exceed half the value of the estate on which -it was levied.[1738] - -For the period immediately following 449 the authorities—uncritically -as will soon be made evident—assign to the tribunes of the plebs a -formidable jurisdiction in finable actions, not only over private -persons,[1739] but also, on account of official misconduct, over -functionaries of every grade from ambassadors and tresviri coloniae -deducendae to consuls and dictators. Such prosecutions were usually -brought after the retirement of the accused from office. A chronological -list of the principal cases reported will be instructive. - -In 442 the three commissioners for conducting a colony to Ardea were -prosecuted by the tribunes on the ground that, by enrolling Ardeates -in place of Romans in the list of colonists, they had circumvented the -law which called their commission into being. The action would probably -have been finable; but the accused avoided trial by remaining in the -colony.[1740] In 423 M. Postumius and T. Quinctius, retired tribunes -with consular power, were tried for mismanagement of the war with Veii. -The former was fined 10,000 asses; the latter was exculpated by all the -tribes.[1741] In 401 two other retired tribunes with consular power -were prosecuted by the tribunes of the plebs and fined each 10,000 -asses.[1742] The imposition of a fine on Camillus, 391, has already been -considered.[1743] In 389 a tribune of the plebs brought an accusation -against Q. Fabius on the ground that the latter while ambassador to -the Gauls had fought against them in violation of the law of nations. -The accused suddenly died, possibly by suicide, before the day of -trial.[1744] In 362 the dictator of the preceding year, L. Manlius, was -prosecuted by a tribune because, though appointed for the sole purpose of -driving the nail, he had nevertheless made a levy of troops and that with -extreme cruelty. But the prosecutor dropped the accusation, intimidated -by the son of the accused.[1745] This is the view of Livy, whereas -Cicero[1746] states the ground of the charge to have been the addition -of a few days to his dictatorship. If historical, the prosecution may -possibly have been for perduellio, and in that case it would have come -before the centuries. - -The following cases are historically more certain. Lucius Postumius, -prosecuted by the tribunes of the plebs in 293 for the misuse of his -consulship of the preceding year, escaped trial by becoming the legatus -of the consul Carvilius. The charge was that in his campaign he had -not limited himself to the province assigned him by the senate.[1747] -Evidently the intention of the prosecutor was not serious.[1748] The -consul Q. Fabius Gurges of the year 292, defeated in battle, was -recalled, and his conduct was impugned before the people. The past -services and the promises of his father saved him, and he continued his -consulship with greater success. The accusation probably did not take the -form of a trial, but was presented in a resolution to remove him from -office[1749] or at least from the command of the army. L. Postumius, -third time consul in 291, employed his army to work on his own estate; -and on the expiration of his office he was brought to trial therefor by -the tribunes and condemned.[1750] - -In the period under discussion, 449-287, a single effort to hold the -plebeian tribunes responsible for their official conduct is reported. -In 293 two retired tribunes were condemned to a fine of 10,000 asses -each on a charge of having favored the patres by interceding against the -proposals of colleagues.[1751] This instance, if historical, is the only -one of the kind before the revolution. The tribunes doubtless felt that -the prosecution of their predecessors rendered their own future unsafe. - -Several attempts were also made by legislation to reach results -equivalent to judicial sentences. In spite of the prohibition of -privilegia by a law of the Twelve Tables, Sp. Maelius, a tribune of -the plebs in 436, tried to carry a resolution for the confiscation of -the property of Servilius Ahala; but the people rejected it.[1752] -Another privilegium was the resolution of the plebs of 368 which -threatened M. Furius Camillus with a fine of 500,000 asses, should he -use his dictatorship to obstruct the Licinian-Sextian bills then under -discussion.[1753] It was certainly not supported by a senatus consultum, -and probably the proposers had no serious intention of carrying it into -effect. - -In reviewing the finable actions alleged to have been brought by the -plebeian tribunes during the two centuries which intervened between the -institution of their office and the Hortensian legislation, as in the -case of the capital actions,[1754] we are struck by the relatively small -number belonging to the latter part of the period; in fact to the time -following 362 two cases only are assigned, one of which is insignificant. -The conclusion we must draw from this fact is similar to that expressed -with relation to the capital cases—that the finable actions attributed -to the earlier period are in all probability largely unhistorical, and -that before the enactment of the Hortensian law the jurisdiction of the -tribunes in finable cases was limited and rare. - - -_b._ AEDILICIAN - -For some time after their institution the tribunes of the plebs, -having no viatores or at least none that were recognized as public -officials,[1755] depended upon the two plebeian aediles as bailiffs -for making arrests and for executing sentences.[1756] The latter -functionaries seem to have stood in some such relation to the tribunes -as the quaestors toward the consuls. It was accordingly as deputies -of the tribunes that they acquired jurisdiction.[1757] The earliest -mentioned case, 454, is the trial and condemnation of a retired consul in -a finable action for official misconduct.[1758] It should be placed in -the same mythical category with the numerous tribunician prosecutions -of the period.[1759] After the institution of curule aediles, 367, the -aediles of the plebs continued indeed to serve occasionally as bailiffs -of the tribunes,[1760] but acquired in addition, along with those of -curule rank, an independent jurisdiction. In 357 C. Licinius Stolo was -prosecuted by M. Popillius Laenas on the charge of having circumvented -his own law by emancipating his son in order that he and his son might -each possess five hundred iugera of the public land. He was fined 10,000 -asses.[1761] From the cases to be mentioned below the inference may -be drawn that the accuser was an aedile. In 298 several persons were -prosecuted by the aediles, whether curule or plebeian is not stated, for -violation of the same law, and hardly one was acquitted.[1762] In 295 -the plebeian aediles made considerable money by fining those who had -trespassed against the article of the Licinian-Sextian statute which -related to pasturage;[1763] and two years afterward violators of the same -provision were again fined, on this occasion by the curule aediles.[1764] -Actions against usurers were brought by aediles in 344,[1765] 304,[1766] -and 295.[1767] - -Shortly before 328, M. Flavius was prosecuted before the people by the -aediles for the crimen stupratae matris familiae, and acquitted.[1768] -In 295 Q. Fabius Gurges, a curule aedile,[1769] accused several matrons -before the people, also of stuprum, and fined them. - -In the period between the Licinian-Sextian and the Hortensian -legislation, accordingly, the jurisdiction of the aediles, so far as is -known, was limited to usury, stuprum, and the violation of laws regarding -the occupation and pasturage of the public land. They had nothing to -do with perduellio or related offences, or with the accountability of -magistrates, or with any capital actions whatsoever. All their trials -were finable, and in case the fine exceeded thirty cattle and two sheep, -or the equivalent, 3020 heavy asses,[1770] an appeal could be made -to the tribes. The plebeian aediles equally with the tribunes[1771] -lacked the power to summon patricians, whereas the curule aediles as -patrician magistrates[1772] possessed the right; but no distinction in -the composition of these tribal assemblies, corresponding to the form of -presidency, is suggested by the sources.[1773] - - -III. _Legislative_ - -The legislative function of the tribal assembly under tribunician -presidency after the decemvirate (451-450)[1774] is represented as -bringing forthwith into being the Icilian and Duillian plebiscites of -449. That of Icilius granted amnesty to those who had seceded from the -decemvirs.[1775] The first plebiscite of Duillius provided for the -election of consuls cum provocatione.[1776] Both acts are alleged to have -been passed, however, before the resolutions of the plebs had acquired -the force of law. The second Duillian plebiscite, which followed the -enactment of the Valerian-Horatian statute, and which was therefore -valid for all the citizens, threatened with scourging and death any -one who left the plebs without tribunes or who caused the election -of a magistrate without appeal.[1777] Its first provision was merely -the expression of a principle on which the plebeians, had from the -beginning insisted as essential to the continuance of the office from -year to year;[1778] the second clause precluded the recurrence of an -elective magistracy like the decemvirate just past.[1779] According to -Diodorus[1780] an agreement was made in this year between the patricians -and plebeians by which one consul at least should be a plebeian. Although -Diodorus generally drew from sources more ancient than those of Livy, he -is wrong in assigning this provision to so early a date.[1781] - -For the same year is recorded another Icilian plebiscite, which granted -the privilege of a triumph to the consuls after the senate had refused -it.[1782] The alleged act is suspicious, in the first place, because the -two consuls must have had the support of a majority in the senate, as the -acceptance of their great constitutional statute proves. Then, too, a -resolution of the people for granting the triumph could not avail in this -period without the consent of the senate. The last observation applies as -well to the alleged refusal of the senate to ratify an act of the people -in 356 for granting a triumph to the first plebeian dictator.[1783] Such -a resolution merely assured the triumphator that the people would be -present at the festival. Without the consent of the senate, they could -not appropriate the necessary funds for the occasion;[1784] but the -general always had a right to triumph, in earlier time within the city -and later on the Alban Mount, at his own expense.[1785] If the senate -decreed the triumph, as remained the rule,[1786] ratification by the -people was unnecessary, though it sometimes occurred.[1787] - -The Trebonian plebiscite, 448 or more probably 401, has already been -discussed.[1788] The interest of the plebs in enhancing the dignity and -importance of their own order manifested itself not only in this act but -also in the Canuleian plebiscite of 445, which reëstablished conubium -between the patricians and plebeians after it had been forbidden by a law -of the Twelve Tables.[1789] Closely related is the centuriate law of the -same year for the institution of tribunes of the soldiers with consular -power to be elected indiscriminately from the two social classes.[1790] - -Slightly earlier, if we may trust our sources, the people were given -an unwonted opportunity to share in the decision of questions relating -to foreign affairs; and the favor fell to the comitia tributa under -patrician presidency, which had convened in this form for the first -time in 447 for the election of quaestors.[1791] The question before -this assembly in 446 was the arbitration of a dispute between Ardea and -Aricia concerning a piece of territory. The contestants brought the -case before the Roman senate, which usually decided such matters on its -own responsibility, but which in this instance requested the consuls to -refer the business to the tribes. The aim of the senate must have been -to throw the odium of the decision upon the people, who, disregarding -the claims of the two contestants, lost little time in adjudging the -disputed property to Rome.[1792] This act did not serve as a precedent -for further interference of the assembly in foreign affairs; and when in -427 the people acquired the right to declare an offensive war,[1793] the -function fell to the centuries rather than to the tribes. Apart from this -gain the comitia made little progress[1794] in the period between the -Canuleian and the Licinian-Sextian legislation, 445-367. Few legislative -acts of the tribes are recorded: the plebiscite which provided in a -time of famine for the election of a prefect of the market, 440;[1795] -the historically questionable plebiscite which forbade candidates for -office to whiten their garments, 432;[1796] the plebiscite of 414 for -the creation of a special court to try a case of murder;[1797] the -act, probably a plebiscite, which forbade a patrician to dwell on the -Capitoline, 384.[1798] - -Doubtless in this period there was much agrarian agitation on the part of -the tribunes, although we cannot be sure that any of the bills mentioned -by Livy[1799] are historical. In like manner the leaders of the plebs, as -candidates for the consular tribunate, are represented as agitating for -the institution of pay for military service, the money to be derived from -rents of public lands.[1800] When the reform came, however, it was by a -voluntary concession of the senate extremely annoying to the tribunes, -who found themselves thus deprived of a useful ground for complaint, -406.[1801] Epoch-making were the Licinian-Sextian laws, the first, 368, -increasing the duoviri sacris faciundis to decemviri and providing that -five should be plebeian,[1802] the second, 367, containing in Livy’s -opinion four articles: (1) that one consul must be plebeian,[1803] (2) -that the interest already paid on debts should be deducted from the -principal and the balance rendered in three equal annual instalments, (3) -that no one should occupy more than five hundred iugera of the public -land,[1804] (4) that the right to pasture cattle and sheep on the public -land should also be limited.[1805] - -Thereafter we find the tribal assembly more active in legislation. To -the year 358 is assigned the first well-authenticated lex de ambitu, -the Poetelian plebiscite, which forbade candidates for office to -visit markets and meeting-places outside the city for electioneering -purposes.[1806] The motive, however, which Livy attributes to the -author—to prevent the further enlargement of the patricio-plebeian -nobility through the admission of new men—was hardly possible at this -early date. - -In 357 tribal comitia under patrician chairmanship passed a law -for placing a tax of five per cent on manumissions of slaves. The -circumstances attending this meeting were peculiar; the consul Cn. -Manlius summoned to it the soldiers of his army in the camp at -Sutrium.[1807] It must have been composed, therefore, of a small minority -of the citizens, lacking not only those who were too old for service, but -doubtless a majority of the men of military age. Difficulties regarding -the auspices, too, and other formalities might have arisen; and yet -in spite of the fact that the enactment of the law was an intrusion -within the administrative domain of the senate, the patres gave their -sanction;[1808] and the legality of the measure was never called in -question.[1809] In contrast with the general prevalence of free labor -in early Rome, the number of slaves since the conquest of Veii had -become considerable; and wealthy individuals were evidently beginning -the practice of building up a political following through the clientage -of their freedmen, to the disadvantage of the older plebs. The majority -of the patricians must have been in sympathy with the effort of their -consul to check this new development, although they could not approve -the peculiar means by which the law was passed. Nor could the tribunes -of the plebs allow legislation to be thus removed beyond the sphere of -their control. The repetition of the procedure was immediately forbidden -accordingly by a plebiscite which threatened with the death penalty -any magistrate who held comitia away from the city.[1810] In the same -year the people took a further step in the administration of finance by -enacting the Duillian-Menenian plebiscite for establishing the rate of -interest at ten per cent[1811]—thereby confirming a law of the Twelve -Tables[1812]—and five years later the consular law of P. Valerius -Publicola and C. Marcius Rutilus for the institution of a bank under -the direction of five commissioners to assist debtors in meeting their -obligations (352).[1813] The latter was followed in 347 by a plebiscite -which reduced the maximal rate of interest to five per cent and provided -for the payment of the principal in four equal annual instalments.[1814] - -This activity of the people in financial legislation is to be explained -by the economic distress which lasted many years, and which the measures -thus far mentioned failed to remedy. There can be no doubt that the -general indebtedness and the resultant discontent of the masses, assigned -by the annalists to the earliest years of the republic, belong in -reality to the period now under consideration. The murmurings of the -debtors culminated in 342 in a military mutiny, with which the masses of -citizens seem to have been in full sympathy. The demands of the soldiers -and civilians were met (1) by a law of the dictator Valerius, which, -remedying other grievances of the soldiers, is said to have proclaimed an -abolition of debts,[1815] (2) by the plebiscite of L. Genucius, tribune -of the same year. The provisions of the latter were as follows: (1) it -forbade the lending of money on interest; (2) it ordered that no one -should fill the same office within a period of ten years, or two offices -at the same time;(3) it allowed both consuls to be plebeian.[1816] -Although Livy, failing to find the Genucian law in all his sources, -hesitates to accept it as historical, there seems to be no cogent -ground for disbelieving that such a statute was actually passed.[1817] -The legal rate of interest had recently been lowered one-half; and the -plebeians, not satisfied with the temporary relief afforded by the -cancellation of debts, hoped for all time to free themselves from an -intolerable affliction by one sweeping legislative act. This article of -the plebiscite, however, probably remained from the beginning a dead -letter. The second continued unenforced for many years,[1818] whereas the -provision regarding two consuls had to wait more than a century for its -first practical application.[1819] The patricians had often violated the -Licinian-Sextian statute by placing two of their number together in the -consulship. Perhaps the third article of the Genucian law was intended -to make them respect the earlier statute by a threat to exclude them -entirely from this office. If this was the object of Genucius, his means -certainly proved effective.[1820] - -Three years later the dictator Publilius Philo passed through the -centuriate assembly the statute (1) that plebi scita should be binding -on all the quirites; (2) that before the voting began the patres -should give their auctoritas to proposals brought before the comitia -centuriata; (3) that one censor at least should be plebeian (339).[1821] -All three articles were alike aimed against the political dominance -of the patricians. The second freed centuriate legislation from their -control;[1822] the third[1823] assured to the plebeians a just share in -the function of determining the composition of the tribes, hence of the -civil and political status of every Roman. It was not long afterward that -the censors were to be given in addition the function of revising the -list of senators.[1824] - -The first article has substantially the same form as the corresponding -provision of the Valerian-Horatian statute, 449, and of the Hortensian, -287.[1825] All manner of conjectures as to the relation of these -three laws to one another has been offered, the readiest theory -being that the Valerian-Horatian statute had become obsolete, and -required reënactment.[1826] The explanation is proved impossible -by the circumstance that important plebi scita were passed under -the Valerian-Horatian provision, the last being the Genucian. The -Valerian-Horatian law could not have become obsolete in three years. -The true explanation is to be found in the fact, now well known to -historians, that the political ideas and political struggles assigned by -our sources to the fifth century B.C. belong mostly to the fourth. The -setting of the law of Publilius Volero, 471, was inaccurately transferred -to it from the law of Publilius Philo, 339. The very existence of the -latter statute is proof that the patricians were at that time declaring -plebi scita invalid on the ground that they were passed by only a part -of the people—a complaint recorded against neither the Canuleian nor the -Licinian plebiscite. Hence, as the sources indicate, the patricians were -in the assembly which passed these two measures. We may legitimately -apply to the period from 449 to 339 the story of the long but finally -successful struggle on the part of the tribunes to expel the patricians -from the comitia tributa under plebeian chairmanship—a story which the -sources assign to the period ending in 367. The struggle must be accepted -as historical, for there was in later time no motive for creating it; -and as it must have been a matter of tradition rather than of record, -it could not well be placed earlier than the fourth century B.C. We may -suppose that the patricians yielded the more readily because they at -last recognized their inability simply by their votes to control the -tribunician assembly, and because from the beginning they disliked to -submit to the authority of a plebeian president. Hence their withdrawal -from that form of comitia was in the first instance voluntary. The -assembly, therefore, which adopted the Genucian plebiscite was de facto, -though not de jure, exclusively plebeian. When accordingly the patricians -objected to its validity on the ground that it was passed by but a part -of the people, Publilius Philo, the most eminent plebeian statesman of -his age, carried through the centuriate assembly the law above mentioned, -that the resolutions of the tribunician assembly as then constituted, -of plebs only, should be valid for all the people. This interpretation -throws light on the otherwise inexplicable circumstance that the Genucian -plebiscite was so indifferently enforced. The exclusion of the patricians -was in line, too, with the general policy followed by the plebeians -against them in the fourth century: the plebeians shut the patricians -out (1) from the plebeian tribunate, probably 401. (2) from five places -in the college of decemviri sacris faciundis, 368, and from one of the -consular places, 367. (3) by agreement from the two curule aedileships on -alternate years, (4) from one of the censorial places, 339. (5) from a -fixed number of places in the college of augurs and of pontiffs, 300. It -was in accord with this tendency to convert the earlier privileges of the -patricians into disabilities that a vote of the people excluded them from -those comitia tributa which were presided over by tribunes. This state -of affairs was formulated in the antiquarian and juristic definitions of -populus and plebs, lex and plebi scitum. The condition, however, seems to -have been only transient. The dwindling of the patriciate in numbers and -strength, with the corresponding growth of a plebeian nobility, which -converted the tribunate and assembly of plebs into most potent organs of -the senatorial government, obliterated distinctions between patricians -and plebeians within the political assemblies, to such a degree that -for the period after the Hortensian legislation no reference to an -exclusively plebeian assembly is made by any ancient author. Although -this article of the Publilian statute was never formally repealed, we may -feel certain that the principle involved was no longer remembered in the -age of Cicero.[1827] - -The Publilian statute of 339 is not known to have provided for an -extension of the field of competence of the tribal assembly; yet we find -the comitia tributa soon afterward attending to business heretofore -managed by the senate or in one or two instances by the centuries. -Although about a hundred years earlier the centuriate comitia had -acquired the right to ratify or reject declarations of offensive -war,[1828] we find no record of a ratification of a treaty of peace -by the people before the year 321, in which occurred the disaster -at Caudium; and in this case it was not only the common opinion in -Livy’s time, but also the understanding of Claudius, the historian, -that the treaty made by the consuls, without the sanction of the -senate or the people, was regular and valid[1829]—a “foedus summae -religionis,” as Cicero declares.[1830] Even Livy, who aims to prove the -procedure defective, admits that the tribunes of the plebs[1831] and -Postumius,[1832] one of the consuls who made it, looked upon it as -legitimate. But according to Livy[1833] the senate itself declared the -treaty invalid on the ground that it lacked popular confirmation;[1834] -and in that body the principle was then enunciated that nothing which -was to bind the people could be sanctioned without their order[1835]—the -first recorded expression of the doctrine of popular sovereignty among -the Romans. In this period, however, the people were never called -upon to ratify the acceptance of a submission or of an alliance on -unequal terms. Such agreements granting Rome the superior right were -negotiated, as in earlier time, by the magistrate or senate or by both -in conjunction.[1836] The details, too, of every treaty were still left -to the magistrates and senate, so that to the end of the republic the -senatus consultum continued to be indispensable.[1837] But from the time -of the Caudine misfortune, and in consequence of it, the principle was -established that a treaty involving a concession of even equal rights -on the part of Rome required the sanction of a popular vote. Recorded -instances of such ratification for this period (321-287) are rare.[1838] -The function fell to the comitia tributa under patrician or plebeian -presidency, which in its exercise showed more independence[1839] than did -the comitia centuriata in the declaration of wars. In this way the tribal -assembly took its place by the side of the centuriate in international -affairs.[1840] - -The absolute power to bestow the citizenship exercised by the kings[1841] -would naturally pass undiminished to the consuls, and thence to the -censors on the institution of the latter. It is in fact the opinion of -Lange[1842] that these magistrates respectively exercised full rights in -the matter, and that they consulted the senate in important cases only. -At all events the question is simply as to the relative participation of -the magistrates and the senate in the function. The final settlement of -Latium after the war, involving the bestowal of citizenship, 338, the -senate seems to have attended to alone through a consultum, no mention -being made of the people.[1843] In the whole course of Roman history to -332 there is no record of a grant of citizenship by popular vote.[1844] -As the Acerrani were left out of account by the senatus consultum above -mentioned, L. Papirius in 332 through the first recorded pretorian law -granted them the civitas sine suffragio.[1845] In opinion of Lange,[1846] -based upon a statement of Velleius,[1847] the censors of the year, Q. -Publilius Philo and Sp. Postumius, while enrolling the new citizens, -probably obtained a senatus consultum requesting the praetor to bring -this subject before the tribes. That a senatorial decree was essential -is proved by the case of the Privernates mentioned below. We may well -believe that the great plebeian statesman Publilius gladly embraced -the opportunity to make the tribal assembly a partner in the important -function of imparting the rights of the city. Three years afterward an -order of the people, doubtless of the tribes, ex auctoritate patrum, -granted the citizenship to the Privernates, 329.[1848] By what authority -the Hernicans received the civitas sine suffragio in 306 is not -stated.[1849] Long after the Hortensian legislation the principle was -established that the people alone without the authorization of the senate -had a right to bestow the ius suffragii on whomsoever they pleased.[1850] -Logically the function should have fallen to the comitia centuriata as -the source of censorial power; but the tribal assembly assumed it because -of its connection with the making of treaties.[1851] - -It was the province of the centuriate assembly to introduce permanent -regulations of existing magistracies and to institute new ones;[1852] -but the function was now transferred, silently so far as we know, to the -tribes. Far-reaching in its effect was the creation of the promagistracy -in 327. No prolongation of an official power is known to have occurred -before this date. The extension of the territory of Rome and of her -military operations was now calling for greater elasticity in the -duration of commands; but in the face of a strong movement toward popular -rights the senate dared not assume the responsibility of so sweeping an -innovation. It placed in the hands of the tribunes, accordingly, the -business of bringing before the people a rogation for prolonging the -imperium of the consul Q. Publilius Philo to the end of the war with -Naples, instituting by this precedent the promagistracy.[1853] Again -in 295 the imperium of the consul Volumnius was prolonged for a year -by a decree of the senate ratified by a plebiscite.[1854] After the -custom had been established, however, the senate ordinarily attended -to the prolonging of the imperium, as in 308,[1855] in 296,[1856] and -in 294,[1857] consulting the people, as it seems, only in cases of -tribunician opposition.[1858] No instance of popular interference in -the assignment of provinces is mentioned before 295, when a resolution -of the comitia tributa, under what form of presidency is not stated, -granted Etruria to the patrician Fabius in preference to the plebeian -Decius.[1859] This act was an inroad upon the right of the magistrates -to divide the business of their office among themselves by agreement or -lot. In 292 another resolution of the people recalled from the field the -consul Q. Fabius Gurges because of ill-success in war with the Samnites. -The senate was the prime mover in the matter, but the form of assembly is -unknown. The question concerned either the abrogation of his magistracy -or more probably his transfer to some other activity.[1860] Even in the -latter case the act of the people was a remarkable deviation from their -usual modest policy of dealing with officials. - -In 318 a law, doubtless tribal, was passed for sending praefecti -iure dicundo to Capua;[1861] and similar laws were from time to time -enacted for assigning the same kind of officials to other communities -of Italy.[1862] These prefects continued to be appointed by the urban -praetor till after 124.[1863] Whether the law of 318 was pretorian or -tribunician cannot be determined.[1864] Similar in character was the -Atilian-Marcian plebiscite for the election of sixteen military tribunes -instead of six, 311.[1865] The substitution of election for appointment -was in effect the institution of a magistracy—in this case merely an -increase in number within a magisterial college which had existed since -362. In the act of 311 the tribes usurped a function which had hitherto -belonged to the centuries.[1866] Although the elective military tribunes -remained subordinate to the consuls, the change increased their dignity -and in some degree their independence, while it tended to impair the -efficiency of the service. Naturally the office became a stepping-stone -to political honors. The Decian plebiscite of the same year instituted -the duumviri navales charged with the function of repairing, equipping, -and commanding the fleet.[1867] The two plebiscites of this year have -the appearance of a compromise between continental and commercial -interests under the influence of Appius Claudius Caecus the censor. -Closely related is the article of the Ogulnian plebiscite, 300, which -provided for an increase in the number of augurs and pontiffs.[1868] -Here, too, belongs the plebiscite of 296 for the appointment of -commissioners for conducting colonies.[1869] Henceforth it was the custom -of the senate to refer to the people the creation of all extraordinary -offices, and their election to the comitia tributa usually under -pretorian presidency.[1870] - -The people made a further advance when they undertook to regulate by law -the composition of the senate itself. To the period between the Publilian -legislation of 339 and the censorship of Appius Claudius Caecus, 312, -belongs the famous Ovinian plebiscite concerning the revision of the -senate list.[1871] It transferred the function from the consuls to the -censors, and required the latter under oath (iurati; MS. curiati) to -enroll all who were worthy among the retired magistrates of every rank, -from the curule functionaries down through those of plebeian standing to -the quaestors.[1872] - -The Valerian-Horatian and Publilian statutes are evidence of the right -of the people to legislate regarding the composition and powers of -their assemblies. No longer content, however, with the making and -repeal of laws,—a right guaranteed by the Twelve Tables,[1873]—they -began the practice of occasionally suspending laws to the advantage or -disadvantage of individuals or of classes—in other words, the voting -of privilegia.[1874] There were repeated violations of that article of -the Genucian plebiscite which forbade reëlection to an office within a -period of ten years,[1875] and no mention is made of the necessity of a -dispensation before the year 298, when Q. Fabius Maximus is alleged to -have objected to further reëlection on the ground that such conduct was -forbidden by law. Thereupon the tribunes of the plebs declared that to -remove the obstacle they would propose to the people that he should be -absolved from the legal requirement.[1876] But in fact, as Lange[1877] -has noticed, Fabius had not been consul for ten years and was therefore -legally eligible. Lange suggests that this story of the dispensation -may belong to his next election in 295.[1878] At all events the custom -of granting dispensations began about this time,[1879] although we need -not suppose that the patricians attached much importance to the Genucian -statute, which was adopted by an exclusively plebeian assembly. This -function assumed by the people of freeing from the power of the law, -often exercised in historical time by the senate as well, marks a great -advance toward popular sovereignty. The idea that the law was sovereign, -which had arisen in the early republic, was now yielding to the idea -that it was subject to the caprice of every popular gathering.[1880] The -aristocracy was giving way to a democracy, which under the conditions -destined to prevail at Rome could only mean mob-rule. - -The right of the people in their tribal assemblies to legislate -concerning religion had already been established by the precedent of -the Licinian-Sextian plebiscite on the decemviri sacris faciundis[1881] -and of other less important acts.[1882] Immediately after the Publilian -legislation the comitia of tribes became more active in this field. -To the period of the great Latin war according to Cicero,[1883] hence -necessarily to 338,[1884] belongs the consular lex Maenia, which added -to the Ludi Romani the day called instauraticius,[1885] although less -trustworthy accounts assign the establishment of this day to 491.[1886] -The law initiated by the senate in 304 forbidding the dedication of a -temple or altar except by permission of the senate or of a majority of -the college of tribunes[1887] was probably passed by the comitia tributa -plebis. In the opinion of Lange[1888] it was either identical with, or -afterward supplemented by, the lex Papiria tribunicia, which forbade the -consecration of a temple, precinct, or altar without an order of the -plebs.[1889] The latter is the more probable; it seems reasonable that, -as Lange suggests, the right of the people in this matter developed from -the necessity of referring to them cases in which the senate and the -tribunes could not agree. Technically religious, though of vast political -consequence, was the Ogulnian plebiscite of 300, which increased the -number of augurs and pontiffs to nine each, and provided that four augurs -and five pontiffs should be plebeian.[1890] It was the last step in the -opening of offices to the plebs. - -In their effort to gain control of the more important judicial business -the people made slower progress. In all probability it was not till after -the Publilian legislation that the centuriate and tribal assemblies -began regularly to exercise the function of appellate courts—a right -established long before by legislation[1891] and confirmed for the -centuries by the Valerian law of appeal in 300.[1892] The creation -of special judicial commissions—quaestiones extraordinariae—belonged -originally to the senate; and the establishment of such a court de caede -through a plebiscite in 414, if historical, was merely the execution -of a senatus consultum.[1893] The task of trying and condemning the -matrons for poisoning in 331 must have fallen to such a quaestio -extraordinaria not expressly mentioned. Whether it was instituted by the -senate or the tribes cannot be known.[1894] The special quaestio, too, -concerning conspiracy, at first under dictatorial and afterward under -consular presidency, seems to have been instituted solely by a senatus -consultum.[1895] The Flavian rogation of 323 for punishing the Tusculans -for having given aid and encouragement to the enemies of Rome[1896] may -have aimed to create a special court for the purpose, or it may have been -an attempt to dispense justice by means of legislation.[1897] However -that may be, it was rejected by all the tribes but one. The Satricans, -who revolted to the Samnites after the Caudine disaster and were -conquered in 319, were punished by the senate acting as a special court -on the authority of the Antistian plebiscite.[1898] - -The right of the people both in the centuries and in the tribes to -legislate on finance had before 339 been well established by precedent. -Economic as well as social in character was the lex Poetelia, which -prohibited loans on the security of the person,[1899] and which was -proposed to the tribes, or possibly to the centuries, by C. Poetelius -Libo as consul in 326 or as dictator in 313.[1900] It abolished -contractual but not judicial servitude, though it probably mitigated the -latter.[1901] Politically more significant than this individual act was -the long-continued popular effort to gain control of the disposal of the -public land. It was to the detriment of the senatorial prerogative that -the tribunes of the plebs took up the agrarian question from the time -of Sp. Cassius,[1902] and continued almost unceasingly to agitate for -the limitation of the use of public land by the rich and the division of -the surplus among the poor, till they succeeded in embodying their ideas -in the Licinian-Sextian law on these subjects. Equally to the province -of the senate belonged the planting of colonies[1903] both from the -military and from the financial point of view. Here, too, the tribunes in -the economic interest of their constituents began early to agitate for -a share in the administration.[1904] It was not till 296 that they met -with any success in this direction, and then at the will of the senate, -which charged the tribunes with the business of introducing a plebiscite -for ordering the praetor to appoint triumviri for conducting colonies to -certain specified places.[1905] This was the modest outcome of centuries -of agrarian and colonial agitation on the part of the tribunes. - -The fact is that after the enactment of the Genucian and Publilian laws -the plebeians continued for about a generation relatively content with -their economic condition. Frequent victories brought booty,[1906] and -conquests made extensive assignments of land possible.[1907] But the -people must have found the third Samnite war oppressive. Although of -far shorter duration than the second, it required larger armies and -longer and more distant campaigns. Under the burden of military service -the plebs again fell into debt, in spite of the unusual distributions -of booty among the soldiers when victorious.[1908] Their burden was -rendered the heavier by the circumstance that many of the wealthy were -violating the Licinian-Sextian restrictions on the use of public land -and pasture, and were doubtless failing to pay their dues[1909]—a course -of conduct which rendered necessary not only the assignment of the spoil -of 293 to the aerarium but also the imposition of a tributum especially -vexatious to the plebs.[1910] The distress was augmented by a pestilence -which began in 295 and continued for several years.[1911] Whereas all -on actual service were by law exempt from prosecution for debt, many -citizens who remained at home were the victims of the usurers, who were -occasionally fined for their illegal exactions.[1912] Again all the -commons incurred hopeless debts, which at the close of the war (290) the -creditors must have proceeded to exact with their usual ruthlessness. -The institution of the tresviri capitales in the following year[1913] is -proof of the intention of the government to enforce the criminal law with -the utmost rigor. A new movement for the relief of debtors had already -set in, and the creditors were organizing resistance to the popular -demands. As long as the nobility could rely upon the tribunate of the -plebs,[1914] they felt secure. Even if a bill for the benefit of the poor -should be presented, they believed their interests to be well fortified -by tribunician intercession and by the senate, which, composed chiefly -of creditors, would certainly refuse its sanction to such a measure. The -grave economic distress, however, at length filled the tribunate with -men who were at one in demanding a radical measure of relief, and who -accordingly presented a bill for the abolition of debts. Many times they -offered it to the tribes in vain; the senate refused its assent; for -the creditors, among whom must be counted a majority of the senators, -hoped to recover both principal and interest. Willing to compromise, the -tribunes then offered the senate, if it should yield, a choice of two -alternatives, neither of which can be deduced with certainty from the -mutilated fragment of Dio Cassius, our authority for this event. One of -them, however, is conjectured to be that the principal alone should be -recovered,[1915] in what way cannot be made out; and the other that the -interest already paid should be deducted from the principal, and the -balance rendered in three equal annual instalments—a repetition of the -Licinian-Sextian provision regarding debts. At first the debtors were -willing to grant this concession through fear of failing to obtain any -degree of relief; but the creditors, now hoping to recover everything, -refused to be conciliated. After a time both parties shifted their -attitude; the creditors expressed themselves as satisfied to recover -the principal merely, while the debtors would no longer accept either -alternative of the compromise. The sedition, for such the conflict -became, continued interminably; and although the creditors yielded, -little by little, far more than they had intended in the beginning, the -debtors made each concession the basis of a new demand. They brought -the long, serious struggle to a climax by seceding to the Janiculum, at -the very time when the Tarentines were completing the organization of -a coalition of Etruscans, Gauls, Samnites, and several other peoples -against Rome.[1916] Q. Hortensius, appointed dictator to meet this -crisis, carried through the comitia centuriata a group of provisions for -satisfying the demands of the seceders: - - (1) Doubtless a clause for the relief of debtors, of which no - mention is made in our scant sources. - - (2) A provision that without the consent either of the senate - or of the patrician portion of it a resolution of the plebs - should be valid for all the citizens.[1917] - - At the time when the Valerian-Horatian statute provided that - with the consent of the senate resolutions of the tribunician - comitia tributa should have the force of law, the senate was - still composed exclusively of patricians; and the phrase - senatus consultum in this law was therefore considered a full - equivalent of the patrum auctoritas, the only difference being - that the consultum was given in advance of a popular vote and - the auctoritas subsequently to it. But when with the appearance - of plebeians in the senate the two acts began to drift more - widely apart, the patricians successfully claimed an exclusive - right to the auctoritas, which, as we have seen,[1918] was - reduced to a formality, so far as centuriate legislation was - concerned, by an article of the Publilian law. So long as the - patricians voted in the tribunician comitia tributa, however, - and constituted a majority in the senate, they were willing - to abide by the specific declaration of the Valerian-Horatian - statute which conditioned the validity of the plebiscite on the - senatus consultum. But from 339 they were legally excluded from - the tribunician comitia tributa, and they foresaw, moreover, - the end of their majority in the senate. In the period between - 339 and 287, accordingly, they set up a new claim, based - doubtless on the practical intention of the Valerian-Horatian - law, to be free from plebi scita because the latter were passed - without their auctoritas.[1919] If they could make good their - intention, they would remain unaffected by tribunician laws - for the abolition of debt. But the Hortensian statute settled - finally the controversy to their disadvantage. That it also - rendered the consultum unessential to the validity of the - plebiscite is proved not only by later usage but also by the - statement of our sources that resolutions of the plebs were - placed by the Hortensian act on an equal footing with laws. - - (3) Now that the tribunes were given equal freedom with the - patrician higher magistrates in initiating legislation, it - was of advantage to the nobility to bring the former into the - closest possible touch with the senate. Probably therefore - the right of the tribunes not only to sit in the senate, but - also in the interest of their business to summon that body and - to preside over its sessions when so convoked, was due to a - provision of the Hortensian law.[1920] - - (4) A correlate of the full power to initiate legislation was - the right to veto acts of the government, probably acquired by - the Hortensian statute. - - (5) But the veto depended upon the power to prosecute.[1921] - The unlimited veto implied a right to bring finable or capital - actions independently of the will of the patrician magistrates. - Either by a provision of the Hortensian statute or as a direct - consequence of it, the tribunes acquired an unconditioned right - to prosecute, being now competent in capital cases to compel - the praetor to grant the auspices for holding the comitia - centuriata. With the establishment of their absolute power of - intercession and jurisdiction they ceased to resort to sedition. - - (6) Another article provided that the market-days should be - fasti, allowing judicial business to be done thereon, but - forbade the meeting of voting assemblies on such days.[1922] - The peasants who came into the city to use the markets were - thus afforded an opportunity to have their law suits settled - without being engrossed by the duty of voting, though the - magistrates were at liberty to invite them to informal - contiones.[1923] This Hortensian provision was conservative in - so far as it placed the tribunician assembly under the same - pontifical regulations of the calendar as those which were to - control the other forms of comitia.[1924] - -The right of the people to elect their magistrates, with the exception -of the dictator and the master of horse, existed from the beginning of -the republic. Their right also to create new offices began with the -institution of the consulship, and was frequently exercised during -the period treated in this chapter. In the age which begins with the -Valerian-Horatian legislation we find the people regulating by law the -qualifications and conduct of candidates as well as the powers and -functions of the magistrates themselves. They had the same right to deal -with the organization and competence of the assemblies. From 358 to -287 they rapidly extended their legislative power, by precedent rather -than by statute, over the whole field of the constitution and over the -administration in all its departments; they ventured even to regulate the -senate and to interfere with the imperium. Controlled originally by the -senate, in the end they won their freedom from that body, whereas the -initiative in every act always remained with the presiding magistrate. -Meantime they had acquired supreme judicial power. In constitutional -theory they were at last sovereign. The senate and the magistrates, so -this theory asserted, still retained large administrative powers for the -sole reason that the assemblies, unable to manage the current details -of public business, were content with occasional participation and -regulation. Most of these gains had been made by the tribes under the -presidency of tribunes or of patrician magistrates, usually praetors. -In legislation the comitia tributa had rendered the centuriate assembly -dispensable excepting in declarations of offensive war and in the -confirmation of censorial elections. The question whether the people in -their centuries and tribes were to realize their sovereignty in actual -public life was left to the following period. - - The literature on this subject is included in the bibliography - for the preceding chapter. - - - - -CHAPTER XIV - -THE JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE COMITIA TRIBUTA FROM 287 TO THE END OF THE -REPUBLIC - - -I. _Tribunician Jurisdiction_ - -Whereas the sources assume that the tribunes of the plebs as early at -least as the decemviral legislation had cognizance of both finable and -capital cases,[1925] an examination of the recorded trials leads to -the conclusion that they made little use of this power till the period -between the legislation of Publilius Philo (339) and that of Hortensius -(287).[1926] Whether their activity after 339 was due to the Publilian -enactment of that year[1927] or merely to the gradual evolution of -popular rights cannot be determined. However that may be, it was not -till after the Hortensian legislation that we find the tribunician -jurisdiction at its highest point of development and free from every -restriction.[1928] - -The capital actions brought by the tribunes before the centuries in the -period from Hortensius to the end of the republic have already been -reviewed.[1929] We have now to consider the finable cases brought before -the comitia tributa in the same period. It is characteristic of the era -immediately following the Hortensian legislation, 287-232, described -in the following chapter as politically stagnant,[1930] that only one -tribunician prosecution is mentioned, and that against the consuls -of 249 for contempt of the auspices. Appius Claudius Pulcher, one of -the consuls, was fined a hundred and twenty thousand asses, after the -action had been transferred from the centuries to the tribes in the way -described in an earlier chapter.[1931] - -In accord with the spirit of the Flaminian era, 232-201, on the other -hand, is the prosecution of the retired consuls, M. Livius Salinator -and L. Aemilius Paulus, on the ground that they had unjustly distributed -the booty gained in war. Technically the charge seems to have been -peculatus;[1932] it was brought before the tribes in 218, doubtless by -tribunes of the plebs. Aemilius narrowly escaped condemnation; Livius -was fined. The popular feeling against them was extremely bitter.[1933] -In 214 M. Atilius Regulus and P. Furius Philus, censors, degraded to -the condition of aerarius[1934] L. Caecilius Metellus,[1935] who after -the battle of Cannae had tried to persuade the knights to abandon -Italy.[1936] He was elected tribune of the plebs for the following year, -and made use of his office in an attempt to prosecute the censors before -the close of their administration. His purpose was thwarted, however, -by the intercession of the remaining nine tribunes,[1937] who in this -way saved for a time a conservative principle of the constitution—the -inviolability of the magistrate from prosecutions while in office.[1938] -The trial of Postumius the publican, beginning in a finable action and -ending as perduellio, has been treated elsewhere.[1939] In the same -period falls the trial of the tresviri nocturni for appearing too late at -a fire. They were accused by the tribunes and condemned by a vote of the -tribes.[1940] - -The era of the full-grown plutocracy, 201-134, is characterized by the -great number of prosecutions of eminent persons for political objects. -M. Porcius Cato was several times brought to trial for the conduct of -his consulship, 195, with the result that the speeches delivered in his -own defence filled a volume.[1941] In 189 M’. Acilius Glabrio, then -candidate for the censorship, was accused of peculatus of booty by two -tribunes in a finable action of a hundred thousand asses. The crime was -alleged to have been committed in the preceding year, when as proconsul -the accused gained over the Aetolians and Antiochus a victory by which he -won the right to a triumph.[1942] Cato, formerly his military tribune and -now a competitor for the censorship, appearing as a witness, delivered -at least four speeches against him. These proceedings forced Acilius to -drop the candidacy, whereupon the accusation was withdrawn.[1943] The -attack upon this man is to be regarded as a manoeuvre of Cato and his -supporters against his political adversaries, the Scipios, who numbered -the accused among their friends. In 185 Cato was ready for a direct -assault. In that year two of his supporters, both named Q. Petillius, -tribunes of the plebs, made in the senate at his instance a demand that -L. Scipio Asiagenus[1944] should render an account of the three thousand -talents paid him as war indemnity by Antiochus among the conditions of -peace. His brother Publius, knowing well that the blow was in reality -aimed at himself, resolved to measure his full strength with that of his -adversaries. When accordingly the record of the transaction was produced, -Publius, complaining that an account of three thousand talents should -be demanded of a man who had brought fifteen thousand into the treasury -from booty, tore the document in pieces.[1945] In this proceeding he -kept strictly within his legal rights.[1946] Nothing further seems to -have been accomplished for the present;[1947] but M. Naevius, tribune -of the plebs, after entering office December 10, 185, brought against -Publius Scipio a prosecution, not for peculatus, but for official -misconduct. The specific charge was that in return for the restoration -of his son from captivity he, as legatus of his brother, had granted too -favorable terms of peace to Antiochus. In the first contio the accused -recited his services to the state; in the second, which happened to -fall on the anniversary of his victory over Hannibal, he invited the -people there assembled to go with him to the Capitoline temple to give -thanks to Jupiter, Juno, Minerva, and the gods who kept the place, for -having endowed him with the will and the ability to achieve that and -other similar deeds in behalf of the commonwealth.[1948] Naturally the -dissolution of the assembly vexed the tribunes. Before the day came for -the third contio he withdrew from Rome. His brother tried to excuse his -absence on the plea of sickness, and Ti. Sempronius Gracchus, tribune of -the plebs, prevented his colleagues from causing further annoyance to -the great man. The general circumstances indicate that the trial was to -take place before the tribes, and that the penalty in case of conviction -was accordingly to be a fine. His brother was still in danger. Early in -184 C. Minucius Augurinus brought a finable action[1949] against Lucius -concerning the money received from Antiochus.[1950] He was condemned -by the tribes, whereupon the prosecutor demanded surety (praedes) for -the payment of the fine. But when Scipio failed to comply, the tribune -attempted to imprison him. Returning suddenly to Rome, Publius appealed -to the tribunes in behalf of his brother. Whereas eight members of the -college sustained the prosecutor, one of them, Ti. Gracchus, prevented -the imprisonment and consequently the collection of the fine.[1951] But -the total result of the proceedings was the overthrow of the Scipios, -and the conqueror of Hannibal retired heart-broken to his country -estate.[1952] - -In the same year, 184, M. Porcius Cato, at that time censor, was -prosecuted for official misconduct by tribunes in a finable action for -two talents, but was in all probability acquitted.[1953] In this period -the tribes must have been unusually active in a judicial capacity,[1954] -as Cato was himself prosecuted forty-four times, often doubtless before -the comitia tributa, but was always given a favorable verdict.[1955] - -C. Lucretius, praetor in 171, was accused in the senate by Chalcidian -ambassadors of merciless cruelties and robberies perpetrated by him on -their community. Thereupon two tribunes of the plebs, M’. Juventius -Thalna and Cn. Aufidius, prosecuted him before the people, technically on -a charge of furtum and iniuria. He was condemned by all the tribes to a -fine of a million asses.[1956] But after 149 most cases of misgovernment -in the provinces came before the quaestio repetundarum instituted in that -year.[1957] There were occasional prosecutions for beginning war without -authorization.[1958] Toward the end of the pre-Gracchan oligarchy C. -Laelius Sapiens, the friend of Scipio Aemilianus, seems to have been -brought to trial for malversation in his consulship of the year 140, but -was probably acquitted.[1959] A peculiar case, yet characteristic of -the time, was that against Cn. Tremellius, praetor in 160, for having -“contended injuriously” with the supreme pontiff. It is stated merely -that he was fined. If the action came before the people, it must have -been brought by a tribune, as the pontiff’s jurisdiction was restricted, -so far as is known, to the sacerdotes under his supervision. Whatever may -have been the procedure, the effect was to place the religious official -above the magistrate[1960]—a policy which could be expected of the -generation that adopted the Aelian and Fufian laws.[1961] - -Several prosecutions in the era extending from the Gracchi to Sulla -partake of the revolutionary nature of the time. The inconsistency in the -position of Ti. Gracchus, who depended on the sanctity of the tribunate -while technically violating it in the person of his colleague Octavius, -is illustrated by his attack on T. Annius Luscus. The latter, a man of -consular rank, challenged Tiberius in the senate to answer definitely -whether or not he had branded with infamy a brother tribune whom the law -declared sacred and inviolable. The senators applauded the challenge; but -Tiberius, hurrying from the Curia, convoked the plebs, and ordered Annius -to come forward and defend himself against the charge of violating by -his words the tribunician sanctity. Before the proceedings could begin, -Annius by permission asked his accuser: “If you intend to deprive me of -my rank and disgrace me, and I appeal to a colleague of yours, and he -comes to my support, and you thereupon lose your temper, will you deprive -him of his office?” Plutarch, who tells this story, alleges further that -Tiberius, not knowing what to reply, dismissed the assembly and withdrew -his accusation.[1962] But the fact that Annius made a speech against -Tiberius[1963] indicates that the proceedings went farther. Evidently -the accused in some way escaped condemnation. The same political -significance attaches to the tribunician capital prosecutions of the -time, mentioned in an earlier chapter.[1964] No more actions, however, -are known to have been brought by the tribunes before the tribes till -103,[1965] when Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, a popular tribune of the plebs, -author of the famous statute concerning the election of sacerdotes,[1966] -prosecuted M. Junius Silanus for misconduct as consul in 109. The -charge was that he had begun war on the Cimbri without an order of the -people. Notwithstanding the stigma of defeat borne by the accused, he -was acquitted by thirty-three of the thirty-five tribes.[1967] In the -same year Domitius prosecuted M. Aemilius Scaurus for having as consul -neglected the sacra of the di Penates at Lavinium. The accused was -acquitted by the votes of thirty-two tribes.[1968] These prosecutions, -together with the plebiscite just mentioned, excited against Domitius an -antipathy among the optimates which reveals itself in the sources but -which his character hardly deserved.[1969] - -Another popular tribune, C. Appuleius Decianus, 98, brought against P. -Furius the accusation that in the preceding year the latter as tribune -of the plebs had betrayed the people’s cause. Acquitted of that charge, -he was accused later in the year by C. Canuleius, another tribune, on -the ground that he had impeded the return of Metellus.[1970] In one of -the contiones for the trial of this case the citizens would not listen -to the defence of the accused but tore him in pieces. In the same year -Appuleius prosecuted L. Valerius Flaccus, curule aedile, on what charge -is unknown. His own condemnation to exile, more probably by the centuries -than by a quaestio, on the ground that in his accusation of Furius he -lamented the death of Appuleius Saturninus, his gentilis, is mentioned in -an earlier chapter.[1971] - -Sulla’s completion of the system of standing courts and his restriction -of the tribunician function of prosecution[1972] substantially withdrew -all judicial power from the tribal assembly under the presidency of -tribunes. The overthrow of the Cornelian constitutional arrangements left -the standing courts with jurisdiction unimpaired. Though constitutionally -the tribunes by this overthrow regained their right to prosecute, they -exercised it rarely and feebly during the remainder of the republic. C. -Memmius, tribune of the plebs in 66, brought M. Terentius Varro Lucullus -to trial for what he had done long before in his quaestorship at the -dictation of Sulla. As the motive was evidently personal, the accused was -acquitted.[1973] Early in 58 L. Antistius, tribune of the plebs, in the -interest of the optimates threatened to prosecute C. Julius Caesar, who -had just retired from his consulship and was on the point of setting out -for his provinces. Caesar appealed to the other tribunes, who suspended -the prosecution on the ground that the accused was to be necessarily -absent in the service of the state.[1974] In the year 44 C. Epidius -Marullus and L. Caesetius Flavius, tribunes, instituted proceedings -against the man who took the lead in acclaiming Caesar king as he was -returning from Alba. The evident displeasure of Caesar at the accusation -caused its withdrawal.[1975] In incomplete trials, like those last -mentioned, it is seldom possible to determine whether they were to come -before the centuries or the tribes.[1976] - - -II. _Aedilician Jurisdiction_ - -Before the Hortensian legislation the curule and plebeian aediles alike -had cognizance of usury, stuprum, and violation of the law concerning -the limitation of occupation and pasturage of the public lands.[1977] -In the period now under consideration, beginning in 287, they continued -to exercise the same function besides taking upon themselves some -new cases. Aedilician actions for violation of the pasturage clause -of the Licinian-Sextian statute took place in 240,[1978] 196,[1979] -and 193.[1980] Closely related is the fining of usurers in 192,[1981] -and of grain dealers for cornering the market in 189.[1982] In 157 C. -Furius Chresimus was prosecuted by a curule aedile for injuring the -crops of others by magic, and the case came before the tribes in the -Forum. By bringing his farm tools into the assembly and calling them his -instruments of magic he induced the citizens to vote his acquittal.[1983] - -There are several known cases of criminal lust which fell within the -aedilician cognizance. In 227 C. Scantinus Capitolinus during his term of -office as tribune or aedile of the plebs was prosecuted by M. Claudius -Marcellus, curule aedile, on a charge of attempted paederastia. He called -attention to the sanctity of his person; but as the tribunes refused -to protect him on that ground, he was condemned by the people.[1984] -Most of the known cases of this general character were against women. -Several matrons, accused of stuprum by the plebeian aediles of 213 -and fined by the comitia tributa, retired into exile.[1985] About the -time of the war with Hannibal a charge of incest, based on the fact of -intermarriage between close relatives and brought doubtless by an aedile, -was judged favorably to the accused by the people.[1986] The curule -aedile A. Hostilius Mancinus, 183, brought to trial before the tribal -assembly Manilia, a courtesan, who, he alleged, had thrown a stone at him -in the night and had wounded him. Manilia, appealing to the tribunes, -explained that he was attempting violently to break into her house, -when she repulsed him with stones. Thereupon the tribunes decreed that -the prosecutor deserved the treatment he had received. They interceded -against his action, which accordingly had to be dropped.[1987] - -One case of perduellio under aedilician jurisdiction is recorded. In -246 Claudia, sister of that P. Claudius Pulcher who lost his fleet off -Drepanum,[1988] was jostled by the crowd as she came from the games. -She was heard to say on this occasion that she wondered what would have -happened to herself, had her brother not caused the death of so many of -the citizens, and to wish that he were again living, to lose another -fleet together with the crowd that troubled her. For these words she was -brought to trial by the aediles of the plebs, and the people imposed -on her a fine of 25,000 heavy asses.[1989] The case is described as a -iudicium maiestatis apud populum Romanum.[1990] - -The jurisdiction of the aediles as well as that of the tribunes suffered -from the growth of standing courts.[1991] The fact that the power -remained, provided the holder was in a position to use it, is proved by -the occasional recurrence of a prosecution in the lifetime of Cicero. -First may be mentioned the proceedings instituted by C. Flavius Fimbria, -aedile in 86, against Q. Scaevola. Evidently the case did not come to -vote.[1992] Interesting is the threat of Cicero[1993] as curule aedile to -bring to trial before the people C. Verres and all who should by bribery -aid his acquittal. The circumstance that Cicero was ready to place so -great a function upon the aedileship is proof of the confusion into -which the ideas of popular jurisdiction had fallen through infrequent -use.[1994] Another anomaly is the prosecution begun by P. Clodius against -T. Annius Milo on the charge of violence (vis).[1995] It took place in -the Forum before the comitia tributa, but we do not know whether it came -to a vote. - - -III. _Pontifical Jurisdiction_ - -In the exercise of his disciplinary power the supreme pontiff sometimes -imposed a fine on a sacerdos under his authority. An appeal to the -thirty-five tribes was allowed, if the amount of the penalty reached the -appealable limit.[1996] After the analogy of the civil magistrate the -pontiff presided over the assembly during the trial.[1997] In 189 Q. -Fabius Pictor, who was at the same time praetor and flamen Quirinalis, -was forbidden by the supreme pontiff to go to the province assigned -him. After much contention the pontiff imposed a fine, and an appeal -was taken to the people, who decided that the flamen must obey the -pontifex maximus, and on that condition remitted the fine.[1998] In 180 -L. Cornelius Dolabella was fined for refusal to resign his office of -naval duumvir that he might be inaugurated rex sacrificulus. The case -was decided as the preceding, but an unfavorable omen which dissolved -the assembly deterred the pontiffs from inaugurating him.[1999] A -similar case occurred in 131.[2000] In the appeal of Claudius, an -augur, from a pontifical fine, the date of which is unknown, though it -probably followed the trials above mentioned, the people sustained the -accused.[2001] These are the few recorded cases of appeal from sacerdotal -jurisdiction. The moderation of the pontifex maximus, together with the -respect of his sacerdotes for religion, usually served to prevent the -need of recourse to the people. It is a noteworthy fact that the custom -was practically conterminous with the era of the most highly developed -plutocracy. The circumstance that in all the cases known to have fallen -within this period the people confirmed the authority of the pontiff -affords striking evidence of the perfection to which the optimates had -now brought the religious machinery of their political system.[2002] - -From what has been said on the judicial functions of the comitia in this -and earlier chapters, it is clear that the jurisdiction of the people is -inseparably connected with the political and constitutional history of -Rome. Beginning feebly in the early republic, the right of appeal was -most intensely exercised from the middle of the third to the middle of -the second century B.C. Its decline thereafter, owing mainly to the rise -of the quaestiones, was a symptom of the general decay of the republic. - - Peter, C., _Epochen der Verfassungsgesch. der röm. Republik_, - 118-140 (on the general character of the period); Ihne, W., - _History of Rome_, iv. 125 ff., 171-3, 321-32; Mommsen, _Röm. - Staatsrecht_, ii. 317-27, 491-7; _Die Scipionenprocesse_, in - _Röm. Forsch._ ii. 417-510; Lange, _Röm. Altertümer_, ii. - 582-93; Herzog, _Gesch. u. Syst. der röm. Staatsverfassung_, - i. 811 f., 1177 f.; Greenidge, A. H. J., _Legal Procedure of - Cicero’s Time_, 327-66; Mispoulet, J. B., _Les institutions - politiques des Romains_, i. 228 f.; Willems, _Droit public - Romain_, 175 ff.; Girard, P. F., _Histoire de l’organisation - judiciaire des Romains_, i. 235 ff.; Hallays, A., _Comices à - Rome_, 70 f.; Stella Maranca, _Il tribunato della plebe dalla - lex Hortensia alla lex Cornelia_; Gerlach, _De vita P. Cornelii - Scipionis Africani Superioris_; _P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus - der Aeltere und seine Zeit_; Nissen, _Kritische Untersuchungen - über die Quellen der vierten und fünften Dekade des Livius_, - 213 ff.; Bloch, G., _Observations sur le procès des Scipions_, - in _Revue des études anciennes_, viii (1906). 93-110, 191-228, - 287-322; Pascal, C., _Studi Romani_, i: _Il processo degli - Scipioni_; ibid. iii: _L’Esilio di Scipione Africano Maggiore_; - _Di un studio recente sul processo degli Scipioni_, in _Riv. d. - storia ant._ iv (1899). 268-71; Niccolini, G., _La questione - dei processi degli Scipioni_, ibid. iii. fasc. 4 (1898). 28-75; - articles in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 448-64: Aedilis - (Kubitschek); 584-8: M. Aemilius Scaurus (Klebs); iv. 702-5: - Comitia, part of (Liebenam); 1462-70: P. Cornelius Scipio - Africanus Major (Henze); 1471-83: L. Cornelius Scipio Asiagenus - (Münzer); v. 1324-7: Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus (ibid.); - Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 95-100: Aedilis (Humbert); see - also ibid. s. Comitia. - - - - -CHAPTER XV - -COMITIAL LEGISLATION FROM HORTENSIUS TO THE GRACCHI 287-134 - - -I. _An Era of Repose_ - -287-232 - -The Hortensian enactment which raised the plebiscite to an equality -with the lex and gave the tribunician initiative full constitutional -freedom[2003] seems to have been especially calculated to prepare for a -splendid outburst of legislative energy. No such result, however, was -actually reached. Circumstances prove the leaders of the plebs to have -been well satisfied with the political gains thus far made as regards -(1) their place in the senate assured them by the Ovinian statute,[2004] -(2) their right to the magistracies, confirmed by various laws, (3) -the powers of the tribunate and its relation to the senate established -by the Hortensian statute. Content with their position as a branch of -the widened nobility, inferior neither politically nor socially to the -patrician branch, and happy in the enjoyment of authority, they were now -as much inclined as the patricians to discourage and to resist further -aggression on the part of the plain citizens. Their control of the -initiative in legislation was the chief means of forwarding this policy. -Their respect for the senate, in which they were now rapidly becoming the -dominant party, was such that they were willing to forego the recently -acquired privilege of bringing their rogations before the people without -the senatorial sanction. But in case a tribune was so bold and so out of -harmony with his political peers as to offer an unsanctioned bill, they -could count on the intercession of one of his colleagues; if matters came -to an extremity, the senate could annul the act after its adoption by -declaring it illegal or contrary to the auspices.[2005] Evidently the -plebeian nobles were aware, too, that with the increase in the number of -citizens and with their dispersion over Italy the assembly had ceased to -represent the citizen body, and was failing in ability to grapple with -the new and increasingly complex problems of administration created by -the widening of the Roman domain.[2006] - -Under these new conditions the assemblies continued, it is true, to -elect their annual magistrates and to receive appeals from the judicial -decisions of the latter, more rarely to declare war or to ratify a -treaty. Occasionally they passed a law to increase the number of -magistrates or to regulate elections; but for the fifty-five years -following the Hortensian legislation, 287-232, there is no record of the -enactment of a distinctly administrative law. The silence of history on -this point is due not so much to the exceptionally scant sources[2007] as -to a lack of comitial activity. - -First among the statutes relating to the election of magistrates is to -be placed the Maenian plebiscite, adopted in 287 or thereabout, which -directed the patres in case of elections, as the Publilian statute had -directed them in case of rogations,[2008] to give their auctoritas before -the voting began, while the issue was still uncertain.[2009] Blocking -the last efforts of the patricians to monopolize the consulship,[2010] -the act completed the reduction of the patrum auctoritas to a formality. -The sources represent Appius Claudius Caecus as the chief offender -whom this law was designed to rebuke. His personality had brought -to the censorship an enormous accretion of power which disturbed the -constitutional balance. In this period that magistracy assumed also the -function of supervising the morals of the citizens.[2011] To check this -disproportionate growth a law, probably tribunician, of 265 forbade -reëlection to the office.[2012] - -The Romans created no more absolutely new magistratus ordinarii. In 267, -however, probably by an act of the comitia tributa, they doubled the -number of quaestors—from four to eight—in order that the new members of -the college might attend to the financial business of the government at -various points in Italy.[2013] A second praetor was created in 242,[2014] -doubtless by a law, not only for jurisdiction inter peregrinos but -also for increasing the number of magistrates available for military -commands.[2015] The tresviri capitales, instituted in 289,[2016] were -given the rank of magistrate by a plebiscite of L. Papirius, adopted -after 242, which directed the urban praetor to elect these officials -in the comitia tributa.[2017] In 241 the people, probably in tribal -assembly, granted to L. Caecilius Metellus on account of his blindness -the privilege of riding to the Curia in a carriage.[2018] - -One statute referred to this period[2019] belongs to the domain of -private law. The first chapter of the tribunician lex Aquilia provided -“that if a slave of another man, or a quadruped of his cattle, be -unlawfully slain, whatever within a year is the highest value thereof, -that amount the offender shall pay to the owner.”[2020] The second -chapter secured the principal stipulator against adstipulators, and the -third provided for all other kinds of damage.[2021] It superseded all -previous statutes on the subject, including that of the Twelve Tables. - - -II. _The Flaminian Era_[2022] - -232-201 - -Such is the scant list of legislative acts of the half century following -the dictatorship of Hortensius (287-232), none of them as innovating -as, for instance, the reform of the comitia centuriata brought about in -approximately the same period by the power of the censors alone.[2023] -The nobles had a certain degree of reason for feeling secure in their -control of the administration. But in this respect they miscalculated. -The long war with Carthage, which had diverted the attention of all the -citizens from politics, ended without bringing in the wake of victory -the usual rewards to the masses. No lands in Sicily were assigned to the -citizens, while on their northeastern border the Picene district and the -territory recently taken from the Gauls in the neighborhood of Ariminum -were reserved by the nobles for their own occupation. Popular discontent -at these short-sighted, selfish proceedings found expression in the -rogation of C. Flaminius, tribune of the plebs in 232, for the assignment -of the lands here mentioned to the citizens who were willing to settle -on the frontier.[2024] It was vehemently opposed by the nobility,[2025] -and was finally passed without the authorization of a senatus -consultum.[2026] From a statement of Cicero[2027] that as long afterward -as 228 Q. Fabius Maximus, then consul a second time, was hindering -Flaminius from dividing the land, we may infer that the author of the law -was elected among the tresviri charged with its administration.[2028] -Most of the settlers in that region were assigned to the tribe Velina, -probably in pursuance of an article of the Flaminian statute.[2029] The -enactment came as a disagreeable interruption to the quiet happiness of -the nobles—as a sign that the political battle fought out between comitia -and senate in the period ending with the Hortensian legislation was to -be renewed with perhaps even greater bitterness. Hence Polybius, echoing -the complaints of the nobles, denounces the measure as the first step -toward the demoralization of the people.[2030] The lasting hatred felt by -the senators for this new and powerful enemy is seen in their refusal to -grant him a triumph for military successes he had won as consul in 223. A -plebiscite without their authorization gave the desired privilege to the -champion of popular rights.[2031] It was probably in this connection—at -least we are soon to hear of it for the first time—that an act of the -people was made essential to a triumph within the city. Henceforth even -when the senate was willing to allow a triumph or an ovation, the person -thus honored could not hold imperium in the city on the day of such -festival excepting by a comitial lex. Usually in cases of the kind the -senate, after voting the privilege, instructed a praetor to request one -of the tribunes to bring a rogatio de imperio before the tribes.[2032] -The earliest known act of the kind is the plebiscite of 211 which granted -the imperium to M. Marcellus, proconsul on the day of his ovation.[2033] - -The popular party had not long to wait for an opportunity to retaliate -upon the senate for the slight it had offered their champion. On the -precedent of the Ovinian law[2034] the people had a right to legislate -concerning the honors, privileges, and qualifications of its individual -members.[2035] In 219 accordingly the plebiscite of Q. Claudius, known -to have been supported in the senate by C. Flaminius alone, who was then -censor, prohibited senators and their sons from owning sea-going ships -of more than three hundred amphoras capacity.[2036] It was probably -an article of this statute which forbade the same class of persons -to take contracts from the government, with the reservation of such -economically insignificant agreements as concerned worship.[2037] The -peasants, whose interests Flaminius represented, opposed the renewal of -the war with Carthage, regarding it as a means of extending the field -of commerce and speculation of the nobles. This law therefore expresses -the determination of the country people that the senatorial families -should no longer share the advantages of such wars. From the point of -view of the statesman it was the first step toward the separation of -the governing class from the commercial class, with a view to guarding -against the administration of the government in the sole interest of -capital. The result was not all that could be desired; the senatorial -families found secret ways of placing a great part of their funds in -commercial companies; and in so far as the law was actually effective, -it compelled senators to invest money in Italian land[2038]—a proceeding -which contributed largely to the economic ruin of the peninsula. - -In the administration of finance, which in spite of occasional -interference on the part of the comitia remained with the senate, is -included the regulation of coinage. The comitia passed few acts relating -to the subject. The earliest known to history is the misnamed lex minus -solvendi of C. Flaminius, consul in 217, which introduced the uncial -standard for the as, making for ordinary use sixteen asses of an ounce -weight equivalent to ten old—in other words, to the denarius.[2039] In -the payment of soldiers, however, the denarius was still reckoned at ten -asses.[2040] Probably the same law regulated the issue of plated silver -denarii[2041] and of gold coins.[2042] The debtor’s gain was offset by -the actual decrease in the weight of the _as_ to a little more than an -ounce before the enactment of the law.[2043] This measure was followed -the next year by the plebiscite of M. Minucius, which created the -triumviri mensarii, a banking commission for relieving the great lack of -money (216).[2044] The board managed some of the financial business of -the state,[2045] and undoubtedly did what it could to strengthen private -credit, which at this time was at a low ebb.[2046] The next step taken -by the comitia was the enactment of a plebiscite within a field properly -belonging to the censors under senatorial supervision—the building and -repair of public works.[2047] In 212 the act of an unknown tribune, -carried through the comitia with the consent of the senate, created three -temporary administrative boards—quinqueviri for repairing the defences -of the city, triumviri to seek for property belonging to the temples -and to register gifts, and another board of three for repairing the -temples of Fortune, Mater Matuta, and Hope. These officials were to be -elected by the tribes under the chairmanship of the urban praetor.[2048] -Nearly related is the plebiscite of 210, which in pursuance of a senatus -consultum directed the censors to farm the vectigalia of the Campanian -territory.[2049] Evidently in the trying time of the war with Hannibal -the senate found it advisable to conciliate the citizens by voluntarily -bringing a few administrative measures of the kind before it. All this -legislation was due more or less directly to the influence of Flaminius. -A succession of sumptuary laws may be likewise traced to his second -consulship, 217. The Twelve Tables contained a number of laws relating -to funerals, designed to preserve good order and to prevent extravagant -expense.[2050] After their ratification the authority of the magistrates -and especially of the censors sufficed for the maintenance of good -conduct, till in the period of the Punic wars the character of the -people began to suffer deterioration, whereupon the assemblies undertook -to enact new laws for the enforcement of morality. One of the earliest -was the lex alearia, which prohibited the game of dice. Its mention by -Plautus makes it prior to 204.[2051] The name of the author is not given; -and for that reason we cannot be sure that it was a comitial law.[2052] -To the same period belongs the plebiscite of P. and M. Silius concerning -weights and measures.[2053] The first comitial sumptuary statute is the -lex Metilia (217), probably tribunician, passed under the influence of C. -Flaminius and L. Aemilius, who were censors in 220. It prescribed certain -rules for the preparation of cloth.[2054] The object, in Lange’s[2055] -opinion, was to strike at the luxury of the nobles through the guild of -fullers. It was a warning to them, he asserts, which however they failed -to heed. If this was indeed the object, the means were surprisingly -feeble. The next sumptuary law was the plebiscite of C. Oppius, 215, -directed against the luxury of wealthy women. It forbade a woman to wear -more than a half ounce of gold or a dress of various colors or to ride -in a carriage in a city or town or within a mile of either, excepting -when engaged in public worship.[2056] The author must have sympathized -with the tendency of Flaminius, and the law was supported, or at -least not opposed, by the nobility. Twenty years afterward their best -representatives strove in vain to maintain it against the rising tide of -wealth and luxury.[2057] - -The influence of Flaminius on legislation may be traced still farther. -Under the economic distress of the war with Hannibal the plebs began to -lapse into clientage to the nobles. In spite of the principle that the -patron should accept no honorarium for legal service,[2058] the nobles -began by the requisition of gifts to render the commons tributary to -themselves.[2059] The chief occasion for these exactions was found in -the Saturnalia, which was reconstituted in 217.[2060] To check the abuse -the Publician plebiscite mentioned by Macrobius,[2061] undoubtedly of -C. Publicius Bibulus, the popular tribune of 209,[2062] prohibited all -gifts from the poor to the rich on that festival with the exception of -wax candles. It was supplemented in 204 by the plebiscite of M. Cincius -Alimentus,[2063] which absolutely forbade gifts and fees for legal -service.[2064] The prohibition of a magistrate’s acceptance of gifts for -the performance of official duty was undoubtedly included in it.[2065] -Moreover it forbade all gifts above a specified amount, but with -exceptions in favor of various relatives and benefactors.[2066] - -It is not unlikely that the Flaminian age saw the earliest comitial -legislation governing judicial procedure in private cases.[2067] Some -changes were wrought, too, in family law by popular vote. In early -time intermarriage between persons of the sixth degree of kinship was -forbidden by usage;[2068] but in the period between the first and second -Punic wars the right was extended to relatives of the fifth and sixth -degrees,[2069] and shortly afterward to those of the fourth degree -(consobrini).[2070] Another law, the lex Atilia, enacted between 242 and -186,[2071] probably in the second Punic war,[2072] directed the urban -praetor to appoint a tutor for a woman or child who was left without a -natural protector.[2073] It now became possible, too, for a magistrate -under justifying circumstances to place a young man under twenty-five -in the care of a curator, in accordance with the Plaetorian law,[2074] -which was enacted before 192,[2075] and which belongs therefore to the -Flaminian age.[2076] - -In the same period we find the comitia active in other fields. In 215 a -tribal law of an unknown author granted the citizenship to three hundred -Campanian knights who had remained faithful to Rome, and assigned them to -the municipium of Cumae.[2077] Following a precedent set by the Antistian -plebiscite of 319,[2078] L. Atilius, tribune of the plebs in 210, carried -a law, in pursuance of a senatus consultum, for granting the senate -absolute power over the Campanians who had revolted;[2079] and the senate -accordingly not only punished them with loss of citizenship but reduced -them to miserable subjection.[2080] The right of the comitia to ratify -a vow of a sacred spring was recognized in 217 by an opinion rendered -by the pontiffs,[2081] and was first exercised through a plebiscite of -that year.[2082] The appointment of commissioners for the dedication of -temples also belonged to the assembly,[2083] as well as the regulation -of religious festivals.[2084] The greatest gain made by the people -within the province of religious legislation in the third century B.C. -was the provision for electing the pontifex maximus by seventeen tribes -drawn by lot from the whole number thirty-five and presided over by -a pontiff. This innovation probably belongs to the Flaminian era and -certainly to the time before 212, when the first instance of such an -election is given.[2085] The act was followed by another, before 209, -which authorized the election of the chief curio in the same way.[2086] -The object was to take the control of these places from the nobles, -who looked upon the great sacerdotal collegia as a main support of -their political power.[2087] It was but the beginning of a movement -for transferring the appointment of all members of these collegia to -the comitia sacerdotum, made up as above described. In the peculiar -composition of assemblies of this character we see an attempt to make -the gods in some degree coadjutors of the populace in filling the sacred -places.[2088] - -The assembly was merely exercising a long-recognized right[2089] in the -institution of two new praetors in 227, for which we are warranted -in assuming a legislative act.[2090] The same observation applies to -the increase in the number of elective military tribunes from sixteen -to twenty-four in 207,[2091] which was evidently a concession to the -commons. As the senate generally attended to the prolongation of the -imperium,[2092] the confirmation of a senatorial decree to that effect -by an act of the people in 208[2093] was exceptional. Far more radical -was the plebiscite of M. Metilius, 217, for equalizing the power of -the dictator with that of the master of horse.[2094] This act and the -resort to election for filling the office[2095] destroyed the value of -the institution.[2096] A violent departure from usage was attempted in -209 by the rogation of C. Publicius Bibulus, tribune of the plebs, for -abrogating the proconsular imperium of M. Claudius Marcellus. On this -occasion not merely the plebs but all classes attended the assembly, -which by an overwhelming vote rejected the proposition.[2097] Three -quarters of a century were to pass before a law of the kind could -actually carry.[2098] - -A plebiscite known to have been in force in the time of the second Punic -war[2099] debarred from the tribunate and aedileship of the plebs any -person during the lifetime of a father or grandfather who had filled a -curule office. As the aim was to free the plebeian officials from the -influence of the nobility, exercised through the patria potestas, that -they might be in a better position to serve the interests of their -constituents, we may reasonably suppose this measure to have passed in -the time of Flaminius and under his influence. The tendency was to widen -the breach then forming between the nobility and the commons.[2100] The -right of the people to dispense from the law was acknowledged by the -senate in 217, when, after the destruction of the army at Trasimene and -the death of Flaminius, the patres authorized a plebiscite for dispensing -the consulars for the remainder of the war from the Genucian plebiscite -which forbade reëlection to the same office excepting after an interval -of ten years.[2101] - -From what has been given above it is clear that Flaminius began a new era -in legislation, by no change in the constitution, but rather by assuming -the free initiative granted the tribunes of the plebs through the -Hortensian statute. Under the influence of his personality the comitia -recovered the share in the administration which they had lost in the -half century of lethargy just passed, and even made new inroads into the -province of magisterial and senatorial authority. While the disaster at -Cannae, following hard upon that of Trasimene, subdued the rising spirit -of popular independence, it made the senate more conciliatory,[2102] with -the result that neither did the comitia lapse into its former repose -nor did the nobles lose their hold on the government. It was to this -era, more definitely to the opening of the war with Hannibal, that the -description of the constitution by Polybius[2103] applies. The political -condition of Rome was improving,[2104] or was just at its zenith.[2105] -As the senate was at the height of its power, public measures were -deliberated upon, not by the many, but by the best men.[2106] Political -life was sound, elections were pure, and a scrupulous fear of the -gods remained the strongest support of the commonwealth.[2107] At this -epoch the three chief constitutional elements—magistrates, senate, and -comitia—were so perfectly balanced that even a native would hardly be -able to say whether the form of government was monarchy, aristocracy, -or democracy.[2108] In this equilibrium of forces, in this mutual power -of checking or strengthening, lay the might and the excellence of the -constitution.[2109] - -It is solely with the place of the assemblies in this system that we are -at present concerned. Inasmuch as the consuls were supreme masters of -the home administration, as well as of the actual conduct of war,[2110] -and as the senate controlled finance, diplomacy, and all interstate -judicial business affecting the Italian allies,[2111] what part in the -government could have been left to the people? Polybius answers a most -weighty part. They are constitutionally the sole fountain of honor and -punishment, by which alone governments and societies are held together. -Not only are they in a position to discriminate between the fit and the -unfit in elections to office, but they are the sole court for trying -cases involving life and death. The death penalty, however, may be -avoided by voluntary exile, if undertaken before a majority has been -reached in the process of voting.[2112] Even finable actions in which the -proposed penalty is considerable, especially when the accused has held -a higher magistracy, come before them. It is they who bestow offices on -the deserving—the most honorable reward which the constitution grants -to virtue. It is they who have absolute power to decide concerning the -adoption or repeal of laws; and most important of all, it is they who -deliberate concerning war and peace, and who ratify or reject proposals -for alliances, truces, and treaties.[2113] These facts might lead one to -suppose that the supreme power is with the people and that the government -is a democracy.[2114] In the domestic administration the consuls are -dependent on them for authorizing various kinds of business and are under -obligations to execute their decrees.[2115] In war, however distant -from home, the consul must still court their favor, to secure their -ratification of his arrangements for peace; and on laying down his office -he is liable to prosecution before them for maladministration.[2116] -Hence he can afford to neglect them no more than he can the senate.[2117] - -The senate, too, is dependent upon the people for ratifying all serious -penalties imposed by the courts, which are made up of senators.[2118] -Similarly in matters directly concerning that body, the people have power -to accept or reject proposals for diminishing its traditional authority, -for depriving its members of dignities or offices, or even for lessening -their means of livelihood.[2119] But the greatest popular restriction -upon its authority is the tribunician veto, which can prevent it from -passing a decree or even from holding a meeting. As the tribunes are -under obligations to carry into effect the decisions of the people and -in every way to have regard for their wishes,—for this and for the other -reasons mentioned, the senate respects the people and cannot fail to -neglect their feelings.[2120] - -From the foregoing remarks of Polybius it is clear that in the political -theory of his time the will of the multitude when expressed by a comitial -act prevailed, in other words that the people were sovereign. Several -checks on their action from the side of the senate and magistrates he -mentions, especially the absolute power of life and death exercised by -the consuls in war over those under their command,[2121] and the control -over the citizens wielded by the senate through the management of public -contracts and through filling the courts from its own number. But the -most important limitation, implied throughout this discussion though -never expressly mentioned, is the lack of popular initiative. The people -could convene for no business whatever unless summoned by a magistrate. -They could consider no other subject than that proposed to them by the -president; they could take no part in the deliberation excepting in so -far as the president granted permission to individuals; they could merely -vote yes or no on the question presented to them.[2122] Notwithstanding -the theory of popular sovereignty these conditions prevented the rise of -a real democracy; they placed the assemblies under the control of the -magistrates, who as a rule, including even the tribunes, were willing -ministers of the senate. The bridled masses were rendered more obedient -by the disasters of the war with Hannibal, and the nobles were soon to -grow arrogant and violent through a surfeit of wealth and power.[2123] -Under these new circumstances the docility of the commons made possible -the thorough organization of plutocracy on the basis of a democratic -theory of government. - - -III. _The Era of the Completed Plutocracy, based on a Recognition of -Popular Sovereignty_ - -201-134 - -The period from the close of the war with Hannibal to the tribunate of -Ti. Gracchus is marked by no such display of comitial energy as that -which characterized either the pre-Hortensian age or the epoch introduced -by Flaminius. In return for a spurious freedom and a pretended share in -the administration the assembly became the handmaid of the plutocracy. - -There was, as usual, some legislation of the old kind concerning -magistrates. In 198 the number of praetors was increased to six.[2124] -The arrangement was modified by the consular statute of M. Baebius, -181, which provided for the election of four and six on alternate -years,[2125] with the object of giving the governors of the Spains a -biennial term.[2126] The greedy office-seekers by another statute brought -about the repeal of this arrangement in 179.[2127] The only new office -was that of the tresviri epulones, instituted by a plebiscite of C. -Licinius Lucullus, 196. Their function was to attend to certain religious -festivals, especially to the feast of Jupiter held on November 13. The -law provided that these officials should wear the toga praetexta just as -did the pontiffs.[2128] - -A stage in the development of the plutocracy and of its control -over the plebeian tribunate is marked by the enactment of the lex -annalis of L. Villius, tribune of the plebs in 180. This statute not -only fixed the ages at which men might sue for and hold the various -patrician magistracies,[2129] but also, developing a custom already -in existence, established an interval, evidently of two years,[2130] -between consecutive magistracies. The stated object was to curb the -greed for office which the young nobles were manifesting[2131] as well -as the eagerness of the people to favor such ambitious persons, and for -that reason it received the support of Cato.[2132] While it prevented -the Scipios and the Flaminini from creating a dynastic oligarchy, by -checking the growth of exceptional talent and by subjecting statesmen to -a fixed routine of honors and functions it subordinated the individual -to the class, and in this way aided the consolidation of the senatorial -plutocracy.[2133] To the same period, at all events after 194,[2134] -belong the Licinian and Aebutian plebiscites, which prohibited the -presiding magistrate from offering as candidates for any extraordinary -office himself, his colleagues, and his relations by blood or marriage. -This measure, too, was to prevent the formation of governing cliques and -dynasties. In 151, the year after the third consulship of M. Claudius -Marcellus,[2135] to check the further aggrandizement of this man as well -as the rise of similar personalities, a law, supported by Cato,[2136] -absolutely forbade reëlection to the consulship.[2137] Cato’s idea -may have been to expedite the advancement of novi homines; but so far -from accomplishing this object, the measure contributed to the further -subordination of the individual to the plutocratic machine.[2138] It may -well have been in the same partisan spirit rather than in the interest of -political morality that P. Cornelius and M. Baebius Tamphilus, consuls -in 181, carried a law ex auctoritate senatus for the prosecution of -bribery. It disqualified for office for ten years any person found guilty -of influencing an election through bribery or other illegal means.[2139] -Probably through this measure the nobles aimed to curb the greed of -office in the more ambitious and unscrupulous of their number; but it -accomplished nothing, and was followed in 159 by another consular lex -de ambitu of Cn. Cornelius Dolabella and M. Fulvius Nobilior, which -increased the penalty to death.[2140] Practically the punishment was -exile. This law had no more effect than the earlier; and the conduct of -the nobles both before and after its enactment proves that they did not -intend by it to open the consulship to the competition of novi homines. - -The limitation upon the judicial imperium of magistrates and -promagistrates by the three Porcian laws of appeal, which belong -to this period, has been considered in connection with popular -jurisdiction.[2141] The last of these acts affected the administration -of the provinces and of military affairs, which belonged originally to -the magistrates and the senate. It was only by degrees that the people -interfered in this department. The earliest known act of the kind was -the consular lex de sumptu provinciali of M. Porcius Cato, 195, for -limiting the expenses of provincials in the support and honor of the -governor.[2142] To prevent conflicts in the provinces between the -incoming and the retiring governor, Cato favored a regulation, adopted -probably in 177, whether a lex or a senatus consultum has not been -determined, to the effect that the imperium of the outgoing functionary -should cease on the arrival of the new.[2143] It was still more unusual -for the people to take part in the organization of a new province; but in -146 a lex Livia, probably tribunician, commissioned P. Scipio Aemilianus, -assisted by ten legati, to organize the province of Africa.[2144] - -In foreign affairs the assemblies took the same part as in the preceding -period; the centuries continued to declare war and the tribes to ratify -peace. In 196 the tribunician lex Marcia Atinia compelled the consuls -against their will to conclude a treaty with Macedon.[2145] In 149 L. -Scribonius Libo, tribune of the plebs, attempted in vain to secure the -adoption of a rogation for restoring liberty to the Lusitanians, whom -the praetor Servius Galba had treacherously enslaved.[2146] No less -characteristic of the age is the consular lex of L. Furius and Ser. -Atilius, 136, for surrendering C. Mancinus to the Numantines because -without the consent of the senate he had made an unfavorable treaty with -them.[2147] The deterioration in the character of Roman generalship and -warfare is indicated by a statute of unknown authorship, enacted after -180,[2148] which forbade a triumph to a commander who had not killed at -least five thousand of the enemy in a single battle.[2149] The intention -of the law, however, which obviously was to prevent commanders from -triumphing for fictitious or insignificant victories, was circumvented by -falsifications regarding the number of enemies slain or by triumphs on -the Alban Mount.[2150] - -Whereas before the second century B.C. no mention is made of a comitial -act for the founding of a colony, in the beginning of the period now -under consideration the function was exercised by the people three or -four times in quick succession. In 197 was enacted the tribunician -statute of C. Atinius for planting five colonies—Vulturnum, Liternum, -Puteoli, Salernum, and Buxentum—on the coast of Italy, each to consist of -three hundred families, the execution of the measure to be in the hands -of triumviri, who were to hold their office three years.[2151] Not long -afterward a plebiscite of Q. Aelius Tubero provided for founding two -Latin colonies, one in Bruttium, the other at Thurii, each by triumviri, -who likewise held office three years. The measure was authorized by a -senatus consultum, 194.[2152] In the same year a tribunician law of -M. Baebius Tamphilus provided for the establishment of three Roman -colonies.[2153] Mention of colonial legislation by the people then -ceases. Although the phenomenon may be due in some cases to the sources, -this explanation does not generally hold good, especially as the -colonization of the years 189[2154] and 184[2155] is expressly attributed -to the senate, and because Velleius[2156] credits that body with the -founding of all the colonies from the Gallic conflagration to his own -time. Probably before the Gracchi a senatorial decree was issued in every -case, and though the commissioners for conducting colonies were as a rule -elected by the tribes after 296,[2157] the people were given but a taste -of power within this administrative field.[2158] - -Early in the second century B.C. we find creditors rioting in usury, -unchecked by the various statutes which had been enacted against the -evil. They discovered a way of circumventing the law by transferring -their securities to citizens of an allied state, who had a right to force -the collection of debts under the law of their own community. To put a -stop to this kind of fraud the senate decreed that after a stated date -allies who lent money to Roman citizens should register the transaction, -and that in suits for the collection of such money the debtor should have -the privilege of choosing under which law, whether that of Rome or of the -allied community, the suit against him should be tried. As the registers -provided for the purpose showed that an enormous amount of fraud was -still being committed in circumvention of the law and of the senatorial -act, M. Sempronius, tribune of the plebs in 193, ex auctoritate patrum -proposed and carried a statute which ordered that money lent between -a Roman citizen and one of a Latin or other allied state should be -collected under Roman law.[2159] This is one of the earliest instances -of unfairness introduced by Rome into the private relations between her -citizens and those of her allies.[2160] - -Family law underwent some modification. A plebiscite of Q. Voconius -Saxa, 169,[2161] provided that no citizen assessed at a hundred thousand -asses or more should will his property to a woman.[2162] Another article -limited to a half of the estate the amount which any legatee, male or -female, could receive.[2163] Dowries were regulated by a lex Maenia, -which seems to belong to 186.[2164] - -In the bestowal of the citizenship the people were unhampered. Doubtless -for some time after the Hortensian legislation comitial acts for this -purpose were commonly authorized by senatus consulta; but in the year -188 we first hear the enunciation of the principle that the people -without the authority of the senate had the power to bestow the ius -suffragii on whomsoever they pleased.[2165] The principle was carried -into immediate effect by the tribunician statute of C. Valerius Tappo, -which without a senatus consultum conferred the right of suffrage on -the Formiani, Fundani, and Arpinates, who hitherto had been cives sine -suffragio. The determination of the tribe to which new citizens should -belong was also provided for by the legislative act of admission.[2166] -The citizenship granted in this period continued occasionally to be -limited. The Campanians, excluded forever from the rights of the state -in 210,[2167] were in 188 placed under the census by a senatus consultum -of the preceding year and were given intermarriage probably by a similar -act.[2168] In early time, at least before 184, the custom arose of -granting to the founders of a colony the right to enroll as citizens -a specified number of aliens. The first recorded instance belongs to -the year mentioned, in which the poet Ennius received the citizenship -in accordance with such a law.[2169] It was by the pretorian comitia -tributa that the priestesses of Ceres, who were Greeks from Naples, -Velia, or Sicily, were admitted to the citizenship.[2170] Perhaps by -the same assembly, at all events by an act of the people, a slave -who deserved well of the state was given his liberty, which involved -citizenship.[2171] Such grants to single individuals by the people, -however, must have been rare.[2172] A Roman taken captive in war, -recovered all his rights simply by returning home (postliminium).[2173] -But even when an entire community was brought into the state by a single -vote, the wording of the law indicates that the inhabitants received -the honor as individuals and not in mass.[2174] It was permissible for -independent communities and individuals to reject the offer of the -franchise,[2175] whereas subjects and partial citizens were compelled -to accept it.[2176] From the facts here stated it will immediately -appear that after the people had acquired an unconditioned right to -extend the Roman franchise, they made little use of the opportunity. -The senate could well afford to concede to them a power which they -cherished a growing disinclination to use. The expansion of the empire -had at length so enhanced the value of citizenship that the masses were -unwilling except on the rarest occasions to share its advantages with -others.[2177] Any attempt, therefore, on the part of aliens to usurp the -rights of the city was resented. In 187 we find the senate appointing the -praetor Q. Terentius Culleo extraordinary commissioner for determining -by investigation who from the Latin towns had recently usurped the -citizenship, and for expelling from Rome those found guilty of the -offence.[2178] Soon afterward the people extended their power over such -cases; in 177 a second expulsion of the Latins was brought about by a -consular law of C. Claudius Pulcher.[2179] - -The same spirit prompted the citizens to limit the political rights of -freedmen. There can be no doubt that early Rome was as liberal in the -treatment of this class as of aliens. From earliest times they had a -right to acquire land; and such proprietors were undoubtedly enrolled -in the tribes in which their estates were situated.[2180] From the -beginning, however, custom deprived them of the ius honorum[2181] and -of conubium. The former they acquired along with the other plebeians, -although they were less readily admitted to the actual enjoyment of -it;[2182] the latter they continued to lack.[2183] They were exempt, -too, from ordinary military service.[2184] In time their condition -became worse. C. Flaminius as censor in 220, in the interest of the rural -plebs,[2185] began arbitrarily to assign all the libertini, whether they -had lands or not, to the four city tribes,[2186] doubtless at the same -time to the supernumerary centuries of the comitia centuriata.[2187] -But the sons of freedmen, themselves originally libertini,[2188] came -in time to be looked upon as ingenui, with the same legal rights as -the old citizens. This change seems to have been effected by the -plebiscite of Q. Terentius Culleo, 189, for compelling the censors to -admit to the senate the sons of free parents—undoubtedly those sons of -libertini who were born after the emancipation of the father.[2189] -The law must have involved the principle of treating such persons as -citizens optimo iure, and have therefore required their enrolment in -the country tribes, provided they owned land. As the acquisition of -full rights came only with the death of the father, which made the son -sui iuris, the application of the principle must have required the -enrolment of the fathers along with the sons in the rural tribes; in -other words, it recognized as citizens optimo iure those libertini who -had children,[2190] on the basis of the existing custom of enlisting such -persons in military service at crises.[2191] The political connections -of the author of this statute leads us to interpret it as a measure of -the oligarchs for strengthening their position by the votes of their -dependents.[2192] - -The increasing wealth and luxury of the age naturally gave rise to -sumptuary legislation; and the nobility could allow the comitia to revel -in this field, devoid as it was of political significance. The first act, -however, was to undo the Oppian law of 215[2193] through the plebiscite -of M. Valerius, 195, enacted probably without a senatus consultum.[2194] -It was the senate which initiated the tribunician statute of C. Orchius, -181, for limiting the number of guests at banquets.[2195] Cato opposed -the enactment of this measure on the ground that it was too easy,[2196] -but twenty years afterward he protected it from abolition.[2197] It was -reinforced in 161 by the lex cibaria of the consul C. Fannius Strabo, -which prescribed that ordinary meals should cost no more than ten asses; -on ten days of the month meals should cost no more than thirty; and -on the days of the ludi plebeii, Saturnalia, and certain other great -festivals, no more than a hundred.[2198] It also forbade the use of fowls -excepting one unfattened hen.[2199] The lex Didia cibaria, pretorian or -tribunician, 143, extended the application of the Fannian statute to all -Italy, and rendered liable to punishment not only the host who violated -the law but also the guests at such illegal repasts.[2200] - -Closely akin to sumptuary laws are those for the regulation of theatres -and games. A plebiscite of Cn. Aufidius of unknown date, possibly -170,[2201] permitted the importation of wild beasts from Africa for use -in the circensian games. The statute repealed a senatus consultum which -had prohibited such importation.[2202] The arrangement of the social -classes in the theatre and at the games was determined partly by law. It -was the censors of 194, persuaded by Scipio Africanus the Elder,[2203] -who reserved the front seats for senators.[2204] The assignment of -fourteen rows to the knights next to those of the senators was effected -by a plebiscite, possibly of 146, the author of which is unknown.[2205] - -For a long time the laws of the Twelve Tables administered by the -magistrates, more rarely by a special court created sometimes by the -senate but oftener and in better right during this period by the -people,[2206] sufficed for controlling crime. But as offences multiplied -in consequence of the increasing complexity of life, the people were -called upon more and more frequently to legislate on the subject.[2207] -One of the earliest may have been the lex Fabia de plagiariis,[2208] -against the usurpation of ownership over a Roman citizen without his -consent or over his slave without the consent of the owner.[2209] The -date of its origin is unknown; but if Plautus[2210] refers to it, as -Voigt asserts,[2211] it must have been in force before 197. For this -and other reasons Voigt assigns it to Q. Fabius Verrucossus, consul in -209.[2212] Lange prefers Q. Fabius Labeo, consul in 183,[2213] whereas -Mommsen places it after the Social war.[2214] A lex Gabinia threatened -with scourging and death any one who induced the people to gather in -secret meetings. It seems to belong to the time of the Bacchanalian -trouble, 186,[2215] and to have been designed against religious -associations of the kind; nevertheless the nobility found in it a means -of repressing popular agitation. - -On the authority of a mutilated passage in the newly found epitome of -Livy an attempt has been made to assign to 149 the law of M. Scantinius -(or Scatinius), probably tribune of the plebs, for imposing a fine of -ten thousand sesterces on any one convicted of violating a man of free -birth.[2216] - -The statute which established the first standing court—quaestio -perpetua—was the lex Calpurnia de repetundis of the tribune L. Calpurnius -Piso Frugi, 149.[2217] His motive was undoubtedly a sincere desire to -protect Italy[2218] and the provinces from official rapacity. The court -was made up of a considerable number of jurors drawn from the senate and -presided over by a praetor, who had hitherto exercised civil jurisdiction -only. In fact a trial for extortion was at first thought of as a civil -suit for the recovery of wealth illegally taken—a conception which -determined the organization of the Calpurnian quaestio. But from time -to time new standing courts were instituted each with cognizance of a -specified class of crimes, till before the end of the republic they had -taken upon themselves practically all criminal jurisdiction, retaining -little trace of their civil origin.[2219] Between 149 and 141, for -instance, was established a standing quaestio for the trial of cases of -murder.[2220] - -It was in keeping with the oligarchic tendency of the age that a consular -law of M’. Acilius Glabrio, 191, gave the pontiffs the function of -determining which years should be intercalary and of how many days -such years should consist. Thus these functionaries secured the means -of bringing the solar and civil years into accord; but they used their -new power mostly in the interests of their party, with the result that -the confusion in the calendar increased rather than lessened.[2221] -The nobles made their greatest gain in the control of legislation and -of elections about the middle of the century through the statutes of -Aelius and Fufius, probably tribunes of the plebs. By granting the -patrician magistrates the obnuntiatio against the tribunes, or perhaps -by confirming the former in a usurped power of the kind, it enabled -the nobles to exercise a practical veto on tribunician legislation, -and may for that reason be looked upon as the firmest support of the -plutocracy.[2222] An article of the statute forbade the bringing of a -rogation before the people in the interval between the announcement and -the holding of elective comitia.[2223] - -Toward the close of the period a democratic movement preliminary to the -revolution began with the enactment of two important ballot laws. The -first was the plebiscite of Q. Gabinius, 139, whom the optimates took -pleasure in representing as ignoble and mean.[2224] It introduced the -ballot in elections with a view to freeing the voter from the influence -of the nobility; for many of the poor were at this time falling into -economic, and hence political, dependence on the rich.[2225] The other -was the plebiscite of L. Cassius Longinus Ravilla, 137, for extending the -use of the ballot to all trials before the people with the exception of -perduellio.[2226] Cases coming under the law were those which involved -fines imposed by the tribes under aedilician or tribunician presidency. -Probably in the opinion of the author, a conscientious noble,[2227] cases -of perduellio were too rare to need the change or too solemn to admit of -a disturbance of traditional usage. These measures had little immediate -effect, for the nobles were as clever as the commons at exploiting -the secret ballot for partisan objects[2228]; yet the principle, when -carried to completion by the supplementary laws on the subject in the -years immediately following, contributed greatly to the success of the -revolution.[2229] Not without significance for the general trend of -affairs is the circumstance that in these latter years of the completed -plutocracy two dispensations were granted P. Scipio Aemilianus from -laws which had been designed to secure it against the rise of great -personalities. In 148 when he offered himself for the aedileship, being -still too young for the consulship,[2230] the people insisted on electing -him to the latter office. “When the consuls showed them the law they -became more importunate and urged all the more, exclaiming that by the -laws handed down from Tullius and Romulus the people were judges of the -elections, and of the laws pertaining thereto they could set aside or -confirm whichever they pleased.[2231] Finally one of the tribunes of -the people declared that he would take from the consuls the power of -holding an election unless they yielded to the people in this matter. -Then the senate allowed the tribunes to repeal this law and after one -year they reënacted it.”[2232] From this event it can be seen that when -the tribunes and people were unitedly determined upon a measure, they -were irresistible. It is evident, too, that in popular theory no laws -could prevent the citizens from having the magistrates whom they chose -to elect. Again in 135 a plebiscite, authorized by a senatus consultum, -granted more speedily on this occasion though doubtless with as great -regret, exempted him from the law which absolutely forbade reëlection to -the consulship.[2233] It was equally ominous that in the preceding year -the proconsulship of M. Aemilius Lepidus was abrogated, probably by an -act of the comitia.[2234] - -Another premonition of the revolution was the renewal of agrarian -agitation, with which in a varying degree some of the more enlightened -nobles sympathized. It began slowly to dawn upon them that the economic -ruin of the peasant class was endangering the state—a feeling which -found expression in the agrarian rogation of C. Laelius, praetor in -145.[2235] The measure must have been similar to the Licinian-Sextian -law as it threatened the interests of the rich.[2236] When he saw that -their opposition would be such as to disturb the public peace, he -dropped the proposal. If he was in truth called Sapiens because of this -speedy retreat, the epithet was too easily earned. Reform, while there -was yet time, was blocked as much by the cowardice of the well-minded -as by the enormous selfishness of the majority of nobles. It was in -this time of extraordinary imperial prosperity that, in the opinion of -Polybius, the constitution was successfully put to its severest test. -“When these external alarms are past, and the people are enjoying their -good fortune and the fruits of their victories, and, as usually happens, -growing corrupted by flattery and sloth, show a tendency to violence -and arrogance—it is in these circumstances more than ever that the -constitution is seen to possess within itself the power of correcting -abuses. For when any one of the three classes becomes puffed up, and -manifests an inclination to be contentious and unduly encroaching, -the mutual interdependence of all the three, and the possibility of -the pretensions of any one’s being curbed and thwarted by the others, -must plainly check this tendency; and so the proper equilibrium is -maintained by the impulsiveness of the one part’s being checked by its -fear of the other.”[2237] These words, which we may suppose to have been -written after the tribunate of Ti. Gracchus,[2238] accurately describe -the interplay of constitutional forces in the period of the completed -plutocracy and of the incipient revolution. Controlled in some instances -by self-satisfaction and the spirit of repose and in others by greed and -arrogance, the dominant institutions of government tended in the one -case to sluggishness and decay, in the other to violence; whereas the -harmony of the constitution, or its equivalent the soundness of Roman -character, like a central sun, held the various institutions in the main -to their respective orbits, compelling each to attend to its appropriate -function. No retrospect of the Gracchan troubles induced the great -historian to revise the view here expressed; for with his boundless faith -in Rome he could never doubt that her constitution contained the cure of -every evil which new conditions should breed within the state.[2239] - - Schulze, C. F., _Volksversammlungen der Römer_, 100-10; Peter, - C., _Epochen der Verfassungsgesch. der röm. Republik_, 118-140 - (on the general character of the period); Ihne, W., _History of - Rome_, bk. vi; Long, G., _Decline of the Roman Republic_, I. - chs. v, vii, viii; Mommsen, Th., _History of Rome_, bk. III, - ch. xi; _Röm. Staatsrecht_, see index s. the various laws; - Lange, L., _Röm. Altertümer_, ii. 116-351, and see index s. - the various laws; _De legibus Aelia et Fufia commentatio_, in - _Kleine Schriften_, i. 274-341; Neumann, C., _Geschichte Roms_, - I. ch. i; Nitzsch, K. W., _Die Gracchen und ihre nächsten - Vorgänger_, bks. i, ii; Willems, _Droit public Romain_, 178 - ff.; Mispoulet, J. B., _Les institutions politiques des - Romains_, I. 220 ff.; Hallays, A., _Les comices à Rome_, 67 f.; - Maranca, _Il tribunato della plebe dalla lex Hortensia alla lex - Cornelia_; Arndts, _Die lex Maenia de dote vom Jahr der Stadt - Rom 568_, in _Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch._ vii (1868). 1-44; - Voigt, M., _Die lex Maenia de dote vom Jahre 568 der Stadt_; - _Die lex Fabia de plagiariis_, in _Verhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. - d. Wiss._ xxxvii (1885). 319-345; Savigny, F. C. von, _Lex - Cincia de donis et muneribus_, in _Vermischte Schriften_, i. - 315-85; _Ueber die lex Voconia_, ibid. i. 407-46; _Schutz - der Minderjährigen und die lex Plaetoria_, ibid. ii. 321-95; - Garofalo, F. P., _Lex Cincia de donis et muneribus_, in _Bull. - dell’ ist. di diritt. Röm._ xv (1903). 310-2; Krüger, P. and - Mommsen, Th., _Anecdoton Livianum_, in _Hermes_, iv (1870). - 371-6; Babelon, E., _Monnaies de la république Rom._ i. 37-69; - Hill, G. F., _Greek and Roman Coins_, 44 ff.; Haeberlin, - E. J., _Del più antico sistema monetario presso i Romani_, - V, in _Rivista Italiana numismatica e scienze affini_, xix - (1906). 611-46; Cunz, O., _Polybius und sein Werk_; Pais, E., - _L’elezione del pontefice massimo Romano per mezzo delle_ XVII - _tribù_; articles in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 576-80: - L. Aimilius Paullus (Klebs); ii. 2728 f.: Baebius (idem); iii. - 2738-55: M. Claudius Marcellus (Münzer); iv. 1112-38: Consul - (Kübler). Grenfell, B. P., and Hunt, A. S., _Oxyrhynchus - Papyri_, iv (1904). 90-116 for the newly discovered epitome - of Livy, including text and commentary. The lost books - xlviii-lv, covering the years 150-137, are represented. See - also Kornemann, E., _Die neue Livius-Epitome aus Oxyrhynchus_, - in _Beitr. zur alt. Gesch._ Beiheft ii (1904); Sanders, H. - A., _The Oxyrhynchus Epitome of Livy_, in _Trans. of the Am. - Philol. Assoc._ xxxvi (1905). 5-31, and a brief notice by - Liebenam, W., in _Jahresb. d. Geschichtswiss._ xxvii (1904). - 124 f. - - - - -CHAPTER XVI - -COMITIAL LEGISLATION FROM THE GRACCHI TO SULLA 134-82 - - -I. _The Gracchi_ - -134-122 - -The work of agrarian reform, after the feeble attempt of Laelius,[2240] -was taken up in a more determined spirit by Ti. Sempronius Gracchus, -who early in his tribunate, upon which he entered December 10, 134, -promulgated his famous lex agraria. It was a repetition, with some -modifications and additions, of those articles of the Licinian-Sextian -statute which related to the same subject. The last instance of the -prosecution of trespassers against the earlier law given in our imperfect -records belongs to 193,[2241] and it must still have been in force in -167 when Cato[2242] recited its terms in his “Oration in behalf of the -Rhodians.” Probably about the time of Flaminius the agrarian provisions -of this statute were renewed with the addition of articles, (a) providing -that a specified proportion of free laborers should be employed on public -lands held in possession. (b) requiring holders to take an oath to obey -the law. (c) increasing the penalty for violations.[2243] - -Tiberius had matured his plan before entering office. Assisted by -experienced friends, among whom were P. Licinius Crassus, P. Mucius -Scaevola, the most eminent jurist of his generation, consul designate -for 133, and Appius Claudius Pulcher, his father-in-law, he expressed -the articles of his rogation in the most careful terms and with especial -regard for vested interests.[2244] Its chief provisions were— - -(1) No one shall hold more than five hundred iugera of the public land, -excepting that in case the holder has sons he may occupy an additional -two hundred and fifty iugera for each of two sons.[2245] - -(2) The occupier shall receive compensation for improvements on the lands -which the law compels him to surrender.[2246] - -(3) The five hundred to one thousand iugera retained by the occupier -shall be granted to him by the state in perpetuity and free from all -dues.[2247] - -(4) The lands thus accruing to the state shall be divided among the -needy[2248] in lots, the maximal size of which seems to have been set at -thirty iugera,[2249] to be held not as private property but as permanent, -heritable leaseholds inalienable and subject to a specified rent.[2250] -The Latins and Italians are to be included among the beneficiaries of -this provision.[2251] - -(5) Certain specified parts of the public domain shall not be subject to -assignment—the same parts which are afterward reserved from assignment by -the agrarian law of 111:[2252] - -a. Land granted by law or by a senatorial decree to a colony, a -municipium, or a Latin town, with the exception of any tracts of such -land which this law may expressly order to be sold, assigned, or -restored.[2253] Public domain granted by a lex or a senatus consultum can -be withdrawn by the same, but the modification of a treaty requires the -consent of both parties.[2254] - -b. The trientabula—portions of public land granted by the government for -a quit rent to its creditors as security for any part of a loan.[2255] - -c. The ager compascuus—public land on which a specified group of -neighbors have a right to pasture free of charge ten large domestic -animals—cattle, horses, mules, and asses—and a fixed number of small -animals, unknown to us on account of a lacuna in the inscription but most -probably fifty.[2256] As the unit was doubtless the individual, much of -the land of this description must have remained undivided.[2257] - -d. Public roads.[2258] - -e. Other portions of the public domain specifically designated as exempt -from distribution, including the Campanian lands, which are leased out by -the censors.[2259] - -f. Certain pasture lands let out to any who wish to feed their live stock -thereon, who pay a tax (scriptura) for the privilege.[2260] - -(6) The distribution of the lands shall be effected by a standing -magistracy elected annually by the tribes[2261]—the triumviri agris -dandis adsignandis.[2262] - -(7) As all available public land is to be utilized in the various ways -described above, and as the holders of lands once public are to be -guaranteed in their possession, further occupation of land is thereby -precluded.[2263] - -Afterward as Tiberius found it impossible to reconcile the optimates -to his measure, he withdrew the second article and proposed to eject -illegal holders without compensation.[2264] When the nobles induced -Octavius, a colleague in the tribunate, to veto the bill, Tiberius had -him deposed by a vote of the tribes, and then passed the agrarian law -without further opposition, unauthorized however by the senate.[2265] -The triumviri elected to take charge of the work of distribution were -the author of the law, his brother Gaius, and his father-in-law Appius -Claudius Pulcher.[2266] As the election of these persons was a violation -of the Licinian and Aebutian plebiscites,[2267] a dispensation was -probably granted by vote of the people.[2268] When the commission found -itself hampered by legal inability to distinguish between public and -private land, Tiberius carried a second agrarian law which invested the -triumviri with the necessary judicial power for determining what land was -public and what private.[2269] It was by virtue of this second enactment -that the word iudicandis was introduced into the phrase descriptive -of their functions—“iudicandis adsignandis” or “dandis adsignandis -iudicandis.”[2270] In the year 129, probably at the time of the election -to this office, Publius Scipio Aemilianus brought about the transfer of -the judicial function to the consuls. Appian,[2271] our sole authority -for the latter act, speaks only of its discussion in the senate, implying -that this body rather than the people passed the resolution. In that -case the senate must have annulled the second agrarian law on the ground -that it was illegally passed; for in no other way could it set aside a -comitial statute.[2272] Some land, already delimited, may still have been -subject to distribution; but as the consuls avoided the disagreeable -function received from the commissioners, the work of assignment came -speedily to an end. The agrarian law of Ti. Gracchus fell thus into -disuse till it was revived by his brother.[2273] - -The deposition of Octavius[2274] requires especial consideration. In -136 the proconsular imperium had been abrogated, probably by a popular -vote[2275]; but no instance of the abrogation of an actual magistracy had -thus far occurred. Most scholars consider the act unconstitutional.[2276] -It did indeed involve a sweeping departure from long-established custom; -but in favor of its legality may be urged the fact that nearly all the -powers ever possessed by the assembly are known to have been acquired in -the way in which Tiberius was attempting to establish for it the right -to remove from office—by precedent rather than by law. A statute of the -Twelve Tables declared that whatever the people voted last should be -law and valid[2277]; and through the ages preceding the Gracchi they -had often applied this principle to the extension of their power at the -expense of the senate and magistrates. They were sovereign; and if they -chose to introduce the custom of deposing a magistrate whom they regarded -as the betrayer of their dearest interests, they had the legal right. The -wisdom of the proceeding may be questioned, but he who has followed the -history of the assemblies thus far must regard the measure as merely one -of the many steps by which the people advanced toward the realization of -their sovereignty. - -Tiberius attempted to apply the same principle to securing his election -to the tribunate. His motive was not a purely selfish desire to save his -life; it required no superhuman wisdom to discover that his downfall -would mean the collapse of the great reform on which he had set his -heart. The continued ascendancy of a popular champion necessarily -involved the overthrow of the senatorial government. This idea, which -he now clearly grasped, found expression in his new political platform, -(1) to shorten the period of military service, (2) by means of a law of -appeal to vest the supreme jurisdiction solely in the people, so as to -deprive the senate of its extra-constitutional judicial power,[2278] -(3) to give the equites equal representation with the senators in the -juries, or possibly as Dio Cassius states, to transfer the courts from -the senate to the knights.[2279] When the day of election came, his -peasant supporters were busy with their harvests, and his platform -did not strongly appeal to the city plebs, on whom he had chiefly to -rely for votes. Had the people insisted, as they twice did in favor of -Scipio,[2280] they would have prevailed either with or without an act -of dispensation passed by the senate or by themselves[2281]; but the -weakness of his supporters rather than any illegality in the proceeding -proved his ruin. To free the future reformer from this limitation, -however, a rogation of C. Papirius Carbo, tribune of the plebs in 131, -proposed that a tribune should be eligible to reëlection as many times -as he chose to offer himself as a candidate. This rogation failed[2282]; -but before the tribunate of C. Gracchus, 123, “a certain law had already -been enacted,” as Appian[2283] obscurely informs us, “that if a tribune -should be wanting on the announcement (of the votes), the people might -elect one from the whole body of citizens.” The statute, which Appian has -evidently failed to understand clearly, seems to have provided that if -the returns showed the election of only nine tribunes from the candidates -proposed, the people could proceed to elect a tenth from the whole body -of citizens, including the existing tribunician college; or equivalently, -if for the tenth place the tribes cast a majority of votes for one who -was not a candidate, he would be considered legally elected.[2284] The -object was to enable the people to continue in office an especially -popular tribune, and was therefore a notable stride in the direction of -monarchy. - -Papirius was more successful with his lex tabellaria, which extended the -ballot to legislation, 131.[2285] Trials of perduellio alone retained the -oral vote. Doubtless this improvement greatly strengthened the rising -popular party. A plebiscite passed about 129, requiring a knight on -entering the senate to sell his public horse, deprived the senators of -their votes in the eighteen centuries, and completed the separation of -the governing aristocracy from the commercial class begun by the Claudian -statute of 219.[2286] - -At some unknown time before the tribunate of C. Gracchus a plebiscite of -M. Junius modified the lex Calpurnia concerning extortion,[2287] in what -way we are not informed. The act is with a high degree of probability -attributed to M. Junius Pennus, tribune of the plebs in 126.[2288] If the -Junian lex repetundarum was indeed his work, it could have been dictated -by no sympathy with the unprivileged classes, for it was this Junius -whose plebiscite ordered the expulsion of all aliens from Rome—a measure -which Cicero condemns as inhuman.[2289] The act last mentioned was the -response of the senate and rabble to the effort of the more enlightened -Romans to grant the citizenship to the Latins and Italians. The new idea -was embodied in a rogation of M. Fulvius Flaccus, consul in 125, which -offered the citizenship, or as an alternative the right of appeal, to -the Italians, with the purpose of buying off their opposition to the -Sempronian agrarian law; but the measure was so vehemently opposed in the -senate that the author withdrew it.[2290] The idea however lived in the -minds of the reformers till it was finally realized. - -Ten years after the tribunate of Ti. Gracchus his brother Gaius entered -upon the same office. Since the beginning of the decennium the leaders -of the popular party had made various proposals but had accomplished -little. The agrarian law was still nominally in force, though its -execution was effectually blocked. The plan of extending the franchise -had found its most bitter opponents in the men of the street, on whom -the tribunes had chiefly to depend. The ballot in legislation, the -possibility of continuous reëlection to the tribunate, and the increase -of discontent with the plutocracy were the only gains. Extraordinary -progress was now to be made under the leadership of a great creative -statesman. The chronological succession of his comitial enactments cannot -be determined with absolute certainty. We do not in every instance know -whether a given proposal was carried in his first or second year. This -much, however, is clear, that most of his measures belong to 123 and to -the early part of 122. The execution of the laws, including the seventy -days’ journey to Carthage,[2291] consumed much of the second year, and -after his defeat for the third term—about July, 122—he carried no more -plebiscites.[2292] Among his first thoughts was that of strengthening -the legality of the deposition of Octavius[2293] by a rogation which -provided that a person so deposed should thereby be debarred forever -from office. He probably meant it more as an enunciation of a principle -than as a legislative project. The measure was never offered to vote, -but was withdrawn, we are told, at the request of his mother.[2294] Far -more serious, and of lasting importance, was his lex de provocatione, -which, carrying into effect the idea of his brother,[2295] forbade the -establishment of a special court or the placing of the state under -martial law without an act of the people.[2296] Further judicial -legislation was postponed in the interest of more pressing matters. - -While colonization and the assignment of land individually to citizens, -which Gaius planned on an extensive scale, as will soon be noticed, were -to provide for the agricultural population at the expense of the state, -and while the nobles and knights continued to reap an unfailing harvest -of wealth in the administration of the provinces, the democratic reformer -could think it only just and expedient to subsidize the populace of the -capital. The artificial growth of Rome as a political centre, with no -sound economic basis but with a most unfavorable geographical situation, -rendered the problem of living difficult for the masses even in time -of prosperity; and recently circumstances had so diminished the grain -supply that relief from the government seemed the only resource against -threatening famine.[2297] Before the time of the Gracchi on occasions of -especial scarcity or of especial plenty the state had sold grain at a -reduced rate; and the aediles, we know not how often, had made similar -reductions at their own expense.[2298] There can be no doubt, too, that -individual nobles in a private capacity often distributed free or cheap -grain among the poor to secure their support in elections. Attached by -such means to the nobles and the senate, the rabble had been in the -main conservative. There was a certain degree of justice in giving the -populace a share in the profits of empire and some wisdom in substituting -system for the existing irregularity. A political result, we may also -say aim, of the frumentarian plebiscite of Gaius was to disattach the -city populace from its conservative moorings and to enlist it in the -service of reform. His measure, the first frumentarian law in Roman -history, provided for the monthly sale to every citizen who applied for -it—practically to those only who resided in or near Rome—of a fixed -number of modii of wheat at six and a third asses a modius,[2299] which -was probably about half the average market price. The law won for him -the good will of the populace,[2300] but his opponents complained that -it depleted the treasury and excited the mob to seditions.[2301] It set -an example for further reductions at the expense of the state. Hence -notwithstanding some good features the effect of the law was pernicious, -as it tended to increase the number of idlers, to make the populace -improvident, and to encourage demagogism. It must be said, on the other -hand, that had Gaius lived to carry out his wide scheme of colonization, -he would have so relieved the capital of its semi-pauper population as to -render frumentations unnecessary, whereupon the law would naturally have -been repealed.[2302] - -After providing in the frumentarian act an expedient which, we -may believe, he looked upon as temporary, he resumed the work of -construction[2303] by reviving his brother’s agrarian law.[2304] The -continuance of the assignations as long as there remained any public -land that could be distributed was a most essential element of his plan. -Among the articles retained were those which subjected the holders of -assigned lots to a tax[2305] and exempted from distribution the Campanian -territory not set apart for his colony at Capua,[2306] as well as various -other lands excepted both by the agrarian law of Tiberius and by that -of 111.[2307] Doubtless it also reinvested the three commissioners with -judicial power, without which they could accomplish nothing. Through -this agrarian law, or possibly through a subsequent lex viaria, the -triumviri were empowered to build roads for the accommodation of the -new peasantry.[2308] Though introducing no new principle,[2309] his -lex agraria was not a simple reaffirmation of his brother’s law with -amendments and additions; but “a comprehensive statute, so completely -covering the ground of the earlier Sempronian law that later legislation -cites the law of Gaius, not that of Tiberius Gracchus, as the authority -for the regulations which had revolutionized the tenure of the public -land.”[2310] - -These measures were passed before the tribunician elections of the -year,[2311] which took place as usual in midsummer.[2312] It was his -frumentarian law, together with the hope aroused by the long array of -promulgated measures, which secured his reëlection. Soon afterward, -though still in 123, he brought before the comitia a rogation concerning -the qualification of iudices. As the quaestiones extraordinariae from the -earliest times were made up of senators, it was natural that the standing -courts also from the time of their institution should be similarly -composed.[2313] Under such conditions the judicial authority afforded -no efficient check upon maladministration; and this immunity from the -law, together with the temptations to the misuse of power especially in -provincial commands, tended in the course of generations to make of the -senate, with individual exceptions, a class of grand criminals. To remedy -this evil and at the same time to remove from the senate the strongest -foundation of its political power,[2314] Ti. Sempronius Gracchus had -proposed his rogatio iudiciaria either for transferring the courts -entirely to the knights, or more probably for making up the juries of an -equal number of senators and knights.[2315] It failed to become a law; -but Gaius now took up the matter, and after experimenting unsuccessfully -with one or two projects,[2316] he finally, 122, carried a plebiscite -which substituted knights for senators in the alba iudicum,[2317] from -which not only standing courts but also special commissions were to -be filled.[2318] It is uncertain whether mention was made of equites -or whether the result was reached merely by exclusion and definition. -There can be no doubt that the qualifications were identical with those -described in the extant lex repetundarum,[2319] attributed by scholars -to M’. Acilius Glabrio, a colleague of Gaius, and adopted accordingly -soon after the Sempronian judiciary law. The terms of the Acilian statute -excluded tribunes of the plebs, quaestors, tresviri capitales, military -tribunes of the first four legions, tresviri for assigning lands, persons -who had fought in the arena for pay or had been condemned by a quaestio -or by the people. It excluded further all under thirty or over sixty -years of age, and all who had their domicile more than a mile from Rome, -the fathers, brothers, and sons of those who held the offices above -enumerated, senators, and their fathers, brothers and sons, as well as -persons living beyond the sea. A part of the statute missing from the -inscription may have contained a minimal property qualification, which -could have been no other than four hundred thousand sesterces; or it may -have restricted jury service to those who “possess a public horse.”[2320] -According to Plutarch Gaius was allowed the privilege of selecting -the jurors. Had he remained in power and continued in this function, -he doubtless could have compelled the courts of his choosing to do -justice. But the privilege seems to have been restricted to the first -list; thereafter, as provided by the lex repetundarum of Acilius the -praetor qui inter peregrinos ius dicit was to attend to the matter.[2321] -The relation between the Sempronian lex iudiciaria and the lex Acilia -repetundarum has not been precisely determined.[2322] If the Sempronian -statute preceded the Acilian,[2323] as is not unlikely, it was the -intention of Gaius to pass a general law regarding the qualifications -and mode of appointment of jurors, to be superseded in large part by a -succession of laws, which dealing with individual courts, should regulate -the qualification and appointment of their several juries as well as the -procedure and the penalties. This policy indicates a conviction that he -could give the reformed judicial system greater stability by making the -separate laws here referred to entirely independent of his original lex -iudiciaria.[2324] - -The lex Acilia, described above as a plebiscite of M’. Acilius Glabrio, -colleague of C. Gracchus in 122,[2325] took the place of the lex -Iunia of 126,[2326] and is to be identified with a lex repetundarum -extensive fragments of which are preserved in an inscription.[2327] -Whereas earlier laws on the subject rendered governors of provinces, and -perhaps administrative officers in Italy, alone liable to punishment, -the Acilian statute includes magistrates and senators and the sons of -both as well as the holders of promagisterial imperium.[2328] The crime -consists in taking in any one year from those whom the law is designed -to protect—from the allies, Latins, provincials, and exterior nations -under the sway or in the friendship of the Roman people[2329]—by gift, -seizure, compulsion, or other illegal means money or property exceeding -a specified sum, which a lacuna in the inscription leaves unknown, -but which is supposed to be four thousand sesterces.[2330] Holders of -magistracies and imperia cannot be brought to trial for the crime till -after the expiration of their terms,[2331] on the general principle which -exempts from prosecution those who are engaged in the service of the -state.[2332] The praetor qui inter peregrinos ius dicit within ten days -after the passage of the statute, and in future within ten days after -entering upon his office, is to choose for this court four hundred and -fifty persons with the qualifications for jury service described above in -connection with the Sempronian judiciary law. From this group the accused -is to reject under oath his kinsmen within a specified degree and his -sodales. The accuser is to draw from the remainder a hundred persons, -taking oath that he has chosen no kinsman within a specified degree or -sodalis. The accused rejects fifty of the hundred, and the remaining -fifty constitute the jury for trying the case.[2333] The rules of -procedure in the trial and the amount of liability of the accused in the -event of conviction are given. The accuser, if an alien, is granted as -a reward for a successful prosecution the Roman citizenship for himself -and his born sons and grandsons. If he is a Latin and does not want the -citizenship, he is given instead the right of appeal.[2334] Probably the -law contained provisions for the punishment of corruption in the patrons -of the accusers and in the praetor and jurors.[2335] - -It is certain that Gaius carried a law also for reconstituting the -quaestio inter sicarios et veneficos,[2336] which had originally been -established shortly before 141.[2337] The Sempronian law on this subject -contained a provision for the punishment of bribery or conspiracy -committed in trials of the kind. The article referred to included the -words “Ne quis iudicio circumveniretur,”[2338] a principle repeated as -“Qui coisset, quo quis condemnaretur”[2339] in the corresponding article -of the Cornelian law which superseded the Sempronian. There was no -quaestio for dealing especially with judicial corruption and conspiracy, -but the accused was brought to trial before the very court in relation to -which his crime was alleged to have been committed.[2340] The provision -was directed against the accuser, against magistrates and senators who -presided over such courts, and presumably against equestrian jurors who -accepted bribes.[2341] - -We have in an inscription the concluding articles of a criminal law[2342] -of this period. It is on a bronze tablet found on the site of the ancient -Italian city Bantia, and is called the Latin Lex Bantina to distinguish -it from another lex in Oscan on the opposite face.[2343] A reference -to the triumviri agris dandis adsignandis, who seem to have been those -elected under the Sempronian agrarian law, places the document between -133 and 118. It is concerned with a quaestio.[2344] An attempt has been -made to identify it with the lex Iunia repetundarum and to assign it -accordingly to 126.[2345] The circumstance, however, that it was passed -without the authorization of the senate, and that its whole spirit is -anti-senatorial, would lead us rather to the conclusion that it was the -work of C. Gracchus at the time of his most bitter struggle with the -optimates yet before he had lost control of the comitia. The fragment -contains no more than the sanctio—provisions for enforcement of the -statute. The beginning of the first extant article is lost, but it must -have described the class of offenders to which the article applies, and -the nature of the offence. It speaks merely of disabilities imposed on -the offender, among which are the following: he must not address the -senate or vote in a public trial (poplico ioudicio) or in comitia or -receive or give testimony in court or wear the praetexta and soleae in -public or be chosen into the senate or remain in it if already a member. -The second article provides that if a tribune of the plebs, a quaestor, a -triumvir capitalis, a triumvir for assigning lands, or a index appointed -under the law itself, or a senator shall with knowledge and malice -prepense violate the law or hinder its operation, he shall be liable to -a fine, the amount of which a lacuna in the text leaves unknown. The -third article provides that a consul, praetor, aedile, tribune of the -plebs, quaestor, triumvir capitalis, or triumvir for the assignment of -lands now in office shall, within the next five days after ascertaining -that the law has been enacted, swear in the manner described below: also -that the dictator, consul, praetor, master of horse, censor, aedile, -and other officials as above enumerated, and the index appointed under -this law shall in future take the oath within five days after entering -upon their magistracies or imperia. They shall give oath to the urban -quaestor publicly in front of the temple of Castor, swearing by Jupiter -and the di Penates that they will do as the law requires and will not -with knowledge and malice prepense violate the law or by intercession or -otherwise hinder its administration. He who fails to swear shall not be -candidate for a magistracy or imperium, or manage or retain either, or -address the senate or be chosen into it; and the quaestor shall keep a -list of those who have taken the oath. The fourth article provides that -whoever is or shall be a senator, or shall have the right of addressing -the senate after this law has been passed, shall within the next ten -days after ascertaining the fact of its enactment take an oath like that -described in article 3. The penalty for failure to swear is not mentioned -in the extant fragment, but must at the mildest have been expulsion from -the senate. - -Closely connected with the transfer of the iudicia from the senators to -the knights is the statute of Gaius concerning the taxation of Asia. It -ordered the censors to let out the taxes of this province to the highest -bidders; and it limited the right of the senate to lessen the sum agreed -upon.[2346] Under such an arrangement, however, no sufficient guarantee -could be provided for the security of the provincials from publican -exactions.[2347] The political result of this legislation in favor of -the knights was to invest them not only with an important share in the -administration, but through the courts with a superiority even over the -senate.[2348] The opposition of the poorer class to the aristocracy could -never be otherwise than uncertain and fitful; but the knights with their -immense wealth and their efficient organization were to be henceforth -an ever present rival of the senate. The author of the law had given -the state a double head,[2349] which was to prove the source of civil -discord; or nearly in his own words, he had thrust into the body of the -senate a sword which nothing could withdraw.[2350] For a few months their -benefactor may have cherished the delusion that he could depend upon -their grateful support; he lived to discover that they cared not for him -or his reforms but only for their immediate interests. In his work of -construction the statesman found them slightly more serviceable than the -proletariate. - -The right which the senate had hitherto possessed of assigning the -provinces to the magistrates and promagistrates according to its pleasure -gave a great opportunity for favoritism and partisanship; it could thwart -the will of the people by assigning a popular consul to an insignificant -province. To deprive the senate of a power which could be so easily -perverted to wrong use, C. Gracchus proposed and carried an act which -ordered the senate before the election to name the provinces that were to -be consular.[2351] An article forbade tribunician intercession against -such action of the senate.[2352] Far from improving the administration, -however, this statute tended to foster that routine which was one of the -most marked defects of oligarchic rule.[2353] - -As under the government of the nobility military affairs were in the -hands of the magistrates and senate, this field was closed to comitial -legislation.[2354] One of the most notable indications of growing -democracy was the project of Ti. Gracchus, 133, for shortening the period -of service. It was not brought to vote;[2355] but his brother Gaius -succeeded in passing a plebiscite, 123, which ordered that the state -should bear the cost of clothing soldiers, and forbade the enlistment -of boys before the close of their seventeenth year.[2356] The pay of -the soldiers, which since the war with Hannibal had remained five and a -third asses a day, had under new conditions become wholly inadequate; -and certainly insistence on the legal age limitation was prudent as well -as humane. There is no ground, then, for imagining with Diodorus[2357] -that in this salutary measure Gaius was catering for the support of the -soldiers by inciting them to disobedience and lawlessness. - -His greatest constructive work he aimed to achieve through colonization -and through the extension of the franchise. His colonial law, 123, -proposed to establish many settlements in Italy,[2358] two of which at -least should be made up of men of the best character, not the neediest -but traders and workmen of moderate means.[2359] The two actually founded -were Scolacium and Neptunia,[2360] both in situations favorable for -commerce. Several other settlements in Italy are attributed to his -colonial or agrarian statute.[2361] As his colonies were exclusively -citizen,[2362] if any aliens took part, they must by virtue of the -colonial law have obtained the Roman rights. The statute of his colleague -Rubrius the same year (123) provided for the founding of Junonia on the -site of Carthage.[2363] But the most liberal and statesmanlike measure -was reserved for his second tribunate, 122. It was a proposal to grant -full citizenship to the Latins and the ius Latii to the remaining -allies.[2364] The rejection of the bill by a popular vote proved the -leader far too liberal and too progressive for his supporters. Deceived -by the spurious proposals of M. Livius Drusus,[2365] a colleague of -Gaius, for the founding of twelve colonies, the members of which -were to hold their lots by fee simple and consequently exempt from -rents, and for depriving the Roman magistrates of the right to inflict -corporal punishment on Latins even when in military service under their -commands,[2366] the populace, readily accepting the new proposals,[2367] -turned against their true champion, and defeated him in the election -for the tribunate for the ensuing year.[2368] It was probably the same -measure of Gaius for extending the citizenship which alienated from him -the equites, who in every crisis pursued their own selfish ends.[2369] In -the ensuing struggle between the senate and Gaius they took the side of -the former.[2370] - -In the tribunate of Gaius Gracchus the life of the comitia reached the -highest point of intensity. The two years of his administration afford -evidence of what the assembly could accomplish when directed by the -personality of a great statesman.[2371] The sum total of the measures -adopted should be estimated not as a completed work, but as a foundation -to be strengthened at defective points and to be built upon till the -whole structure of the state and empire should be reconstituted and -freshly vitalized. These results might have been achieved, had Gaius -lived out his natural life and retained the support of the populace -and the knights.[2372] His failure proved the comitia a weak, unsafe -instrument for constructive statesmanship. - - -II. _The Aristocratic Reaction and the Popular Recovery_ - -122-103 - -The optimates waited only for the expiration of the tribunate of Gaius -Gracchus to begin undoing his work, and they found the comitia ready to -aid in the demolition. In 121 a plebiscite of M. Minucius Rufus repealed -the Rubrian law for the colonization of Junonia (Carthage).[2373] Soon -afterward, certainly not later than 118, a plebiscite, whose author is -unknown, permitted the beneficiaries of the Sempronian agrarian laws to -sell the lots they had received.[2374] This enactment was followed in 118 -by a plebiscite which Appian[2375] assigns to Spurius Borius (?), a name -not otherwise known.[2376] It put an end to the distributions, and must -therefore have abolished the agrarian triumvirate. The same law confirmed -all holders of the ager publicus in their possession, without converting -any of this land into private property, and it continued the imposition -of rents. We may assume that the lands here referred to included those -recently distributed in small lots as well as those retained by the -occupiers. Lastly it enacted that the revenues accruing from the rents -should be used for distributions—probably of cheap grain.[2377] In 111 -another tribune, whom Cicero[2378] names Sp. Thorius, through a law which -has partially survived in an inscription, aimed to settle definitely and -for all time in the interest of the nobles the questions raised by the -Sempronian agrarian legislation. - -I. This epigraphic lex agraria converts into private property the -following classes of lands.[2379] - -(1) Land assigned to a colony or in any way made public, and afterward -restored to the original owners (domneis). It is to be private optuma -lege.[2380] - -(2) Land assigned to a colony and afterward restored to its former -occupier (veteri possessori).[2381] - -(3) Land within the legal limit (of five hundred iugera) left to the -occupier by the three commissioners.[2382] - -(4) Land assigned after 133 to colonies of Roman citizens.[2383] - -(5) Land given and assigned by the three commissioners after 133.[2384] - -(6) Land which has been occupied after 133 (not assigned by the -commissioners) to the extent of not more than thirty iugera to the -occupier.[2385] - -(7) Land which by the provision of this law is to be sold, granted, or -restored.[2386] - -All the lands above enumerated are declared private and free from -vectigal and scriptura.[2387] - -II. The lands which the law declares public are those reserved from -distribution by the law of Ti. Gracchus.[2388] It retains further as -public all lands along public roads which have been granted by the -commissioners on condition that the recipients (viasieis vicaneis) in -return for the use of the land undertake the duty of keeping the roads in -repair. Though heritable and alienable, they remain subject to the burden -here described.[2389] - -III. In the regulation of the agrarian conditions of Africa the statute -deals with three kinds of land, (1) private ex iure quiritium,[2390] (2) -private ex iure peregrino,[2391] (3) public domain of the Roman people -of various sub-classes.[2392] Lastly the statute aims to settle the -status of the lands of Corinth.[2393] As regards the Latins and aliens, -whatever has already been permitted them by treaty or law is allowed them -by this statute, provided the same thing is allowed a Roman citizen; but -it is forbidden them if forbidden a citizen. Rights granted the citizens -which up to this time are not enjoyed by aliens are not by this law -communicated to aliens.[2394] - -Through this series of reactionary laws, from the Minucian (121) to the -Thorian (111), the optimates succeeded in nullifying the good results of -the Sempronian agrarian reforms. It was while the Minucian rogation[2395] -was under discussion that the senate took advantage of a disturbance -in the concilium to arm the consul Opimius with absolute power for -putting down C. Gracchus and his followers.[2396] The failure of an -attempt in the following year (120) to call Opimius to account for these -proceedings established the right of the senate to the appointment of -special commissions and to the decretum ultimum[2397]—a right on which -the optimates continued to insist to the end of the republic. Through -the plebiscite of L. Calpurnius Bestia (also 120)[2398] they put the -stamp of legitimacy upon the murder of the followers of Ti. Gracchus by -recalling from exile P. Popillius Laenas, who as consul in 132 and head -of a special court was chiefly responsible for that judicial crime.[2399] -An attempt was made by Q. Servilius Caepio, consul in 106, to restore -the courts to the senate,[2400] or possibly to compromise by providing -for an album composed of both senators and equites.[2401] The sources -imply that the measure was accepted by the comitia; but if so, it must -have been immediately annulled, as it was not carried into effect.[2402] -Within this period of reaction, and perhaps as a part of it, falls the -lex de libertinorum suffragiis of the consul M. Aemilius Scaurus, 115. -Although nothing certain is known of it, we may suppose that it attempted -again[2403] to restrict the libertini to the four city tribes.[2404] -About this time, too, several acts seem to have been passed for -diminishing the pay of soldiers, probably undoing the Sempronian law on -the subject.[2405] - -A glance at these reactionary measures alone would leave the impression -that the senate was recovering its entire supremacy. This result might -have been reached had it not been on the one hand for the lasting -inspiration of the Gracchan spirit in the plebs and their leaders, and -on the other the new position of the equites. In 119 C. Marius, at once -a representative of the knights[2406] and of the peasants, opposed as -tribune of the plebs the senatorial aristocracy, which now had to depend -for immediate support upon the populace.[2407] The optimates had greatly -impaired the value of the secret ballot through the custodes tabellarum, -who stood on the pontes as well as by the boxes (cistae) to keep watch -over the voting. They were often influential men[2408]—in elections -selected by the candidates[2409]—who used their influence with the -voters, especially of the principium or of the prerogative century,[2410] -thereby maintaining for the aristocrats a high degree of control over the -comitia in spite of the ballot laws.[2411] For this reason C. Marius when -tribune of the plebs carried an act for making the pontes narrower that -there might be room on them for the voters only.[2412] The politicians, -however, soon found means of circumventing this law as well as the use -of the ballot.[2413] The populares could expect little therefore from the -plebiscite of C. Caelius, 107, which by extending the ballot to trials of -perduellio, completed the abolition of oral voting in the comitia.[2414] - -We find another sign of popular recovery in the assembly’s resumption of -the appointment of special judiciary commissions.[2415] One of the most -remarkable courts of the kind was that created in 113 for the trial of -three Vestal virgins on a charge of incest. The pontifex maximus, who -possessed absolute authority over the Vestals, had already pronounced -judgment, condemning one and acquitting the other two, when a plebiscite -of Sex. Peducaeus, taking the case out of his hands, transferred it -to a quaestio extraordinaria.[2416] To such an extent did the tribune -apply the theory of popular sovereignty.[2417] The plebiscite of C. -Mamilius, 109, ordered the appointment of a court for the detection and -punishment of those who had accepted money from Jugurtha for aid rendered -him against the decrees of the senate and the interests of Rome. As it -was a blow aimed at the nobility, the people in the hatred they then -cherished against the governing class voted it with great spirit.[2418] -In 105 the tribal comitia abrogated the proconsular imperium of Q. -Servilius Caepio,[2419] and in the following year, they not only -appointed a special court to try him for embezzlement of the gold found -at Tolosa,[2420] but through the plebiscite of L. Cassius Longinus, they -disqualified for membership of the senate any person whom the people -had judicially condemned or whose imperium they had abrogated.[2421] -These acts confirmed and applied the principles underlying the deposition -of Octavius and the rogation of C. Gracchus concerning persons deposed -from office (abacti). In theory the people indirectly chose the senators -through their function of electing magistrates; and they were only -claiming this right when they insisted that he should be prohibited from -membership whom they had condemned in either of the two ways described -by the statute. It must have seemed to the people, on the other hand, -that the tribunes, who were once more their true representatives, had -as good a right as any other magistrates to seats in the senate. This -feeling found expression in the Atinian plebiscite, enacted between 122 -and 102,[2422] which gave the tribunes the ius sententiae dicendae in the -senate with the same right to censorial enrolment as that enjoyed by the -curule magistrates.[2423] - -The growing strength of the people and at the same time the increasing -dependence of the optimates on religion for the control of politics are -indicated by a law of 103 concerning the election of sacerdotes. More -than a hundred years earlier[2424] was instituted the custom of electing -the supreme pontiff and the chief curio in comitia of seventeen tribes -designated by lot. Toward the end of the plutocratic régime C. Licinius -Crassus in the interest of the people attempted in vain to pass a law -for extending the principle to all the members of the more important -sacerdotal colleges.[2425] The proposal was defeated by the eloquence of -C. Laelius,[2426] but at length it was passed as the lex de sacerdotiis -of Cn. Domitius, tribune of the plebs in 103. The statute affected the -pontifical and augural colleges, the decemviri sacris faciundis, and the -epulones.[2427] According to the new arrangement when a place became -vacant in any one of these colleges, the members of the college drew up -a list of eligible candidates from whom the comitia sacerdotum, composed -as above described, made a choice.[2428] In spite of this law religion -remained a political tool of the optimates. - -Meantime the popular party succeeded in enacting economic laws. A -Porcian statute concerning interest, which may well have aimed to -benefit the poor, seems to be the work of M. Porcius Cato, consul in -118. The author had to defend the act against several attempts to repeal -it.[2429] In 109 under the stress of the Cimbric war the consul M. -Junius Silanus passed an act for repealing several earlier laws which -had diminished the pay of soldiers. We may reasonably believe that it -restored the Sempronian law on the subject.[2430] His immediate object -was to encourage enlistments.[2431] An agrarian rogation was offered by -L. Marcius Philipus, tribune of the plebs in 104. As the author was at -heart a democrat, his measure was doubtless inspired with the spirit -of the Gracchi. Perhaps it aimed to restore their law; but lacking -determination, the proposer readily allowed it to be voted down.[2432] -The monetary lex Clodia, which probably belongs to the same year, has no -political significance.[2433] - - -III. _The Appuleian Legislation and the Rule of the Moderate Optimates_ - -103-88 - -Through the legislative acts above described we can trace the speedy -restoration of the democracy and of comitial legislative power after -the overthrow of C. Sempronius Gracchus. We are now approaching a -second crisis in which the aristocracy had to struggle for existence. -Against it was formed a combination of three powerful men, C. Marius, -supported by the knights and the municipes,[2434] C. Servilius Glaucia, -and L. Appuleius Saturninus. It is almost certain that this Servilius -is to be identified with the author of the lex repetundarum of 111 -or thereabout, probably a plebiscite, which repealed the Acilian law -on the same subject.[2435] In important respects his statute was an -improvement on earlier regulations of the crime. “Glaucia’s alteration -in procedure was thorough and permanent. He introduced the system of the -‘second hearing’—an obligatory renewal of the trial, which rendered it -possible for counsel to discuss evidence which had already been given, -and for jurors to get a grasp of the mass of scattered data which had -been presented to their notice[2436]—and he also made it possible to -recover damages, not only from the chief malefactor, but from all who -had dishonestly shared his spoils.”[2437] These principles were taken up -into the Cornelian law which superseded it in 81.[2438] The circumstance -that the man whom the optimates regarded as merely a vulgar demagogue -was the author of so statesmanlike a measure ought to militate against -their opinion, not only of him, but also of his associates. He, too, -represented the knights,[2439] whereas Appuleius was a champion of the -rural plebs against the senate and the populace. As tribune of the -plebs in 103 the latter proposed a law for the assignment of lands in -the province of Africa to the retiring veterans of Marius in lots of a -hundred iugera each. When Baebius, a colleague, interceded, the people -pelted him with stones and drove him from the assembly. Thus the law -was violently carried, but we hear nothing more of it. Probably it was -not enforced.[2440] This act marks an epoch in the history of Roman -colonization; through it the government first expressed its intention to -provide discharged soldiers with farms, a departure made necessary by the -Marian policy of filling the army with capite censi.[2441] Either to this -tribunate or more probably to his second belongs the lex de maiestate -(minuta),[2442] the first of the kind in Roman history. It defined the -crime and made general provisions for the prosecution of those who were -accused of it.[2443] The same statute provided for the establishment of a -court which seems to have been standing rather than special.[2444] - -In his second tribunate, 100, supported by Marius, consul a sixth time, -and by Servilius, Appuleius proposed and carried a law for the founding -of settlements of the Marian veterans in Sicily, Corsica, Achaia, and -Macedonia.[2445] Marius was to be a commissioner for conducting these -colonies, and was to have the right to enroll as citizens in each -settlement a specified number of aliens.[2446] The object of the latter -clause was doubtless to provide for the Italian veterans in his army. -He proposed further that certain Transpadane lands which the Cimbri had -taken from the Gauls and which Marius had recovered should be distributed -among the citizens and the Italians.[2447] Another proposal was for the -monthly sale of a specified number of modii of grain to every citizen -resident of Rome who desired it at five-sixths of an as to the modius—a -merely nominal price.[2448] It is not known whether the colonial, -agrarian, and frumentarian measures were separate enactments or articles -of one statute; or the colonial and agrarian provisions may alone have -been combined. However that may be, we are informed by Appian[2449] -that attached to the agrarian measure—whether to the others also is -nowhere stated—was an article which provided that if the bill should -become a law, the senators within five days should swear to uphold it, -or if any senator refused to take the oath, he should be expelled from -the senate and should be liable to a fine of twenty talents, the Greek -equivalent of about five hundred thousand sesterces.[2450] The rural -plebs, including many discharged soldiers of Marius, swarmed into the -comitia at the call of the tribune and violently passed the law. Marius, -who as a consul and a knight disapproved of such illegality, set for -the senators the example of swearing to the law, “in so far as it was a -law,” which left them a loophole of escape from its provisions should -they afterward so determine. Metellus, who alone of the senators refused -the oath, was forced into exile and an interdict from fire and water -was passed against him by the tribes on the motion of Saturninus.[2451] -Soon afterward an election riot gave the senate a pretext for martial -law. Placed under custody, Saturninus and some fellow officials were -stoned to death by a mob. His measures were then annulled by the senate -on the ground that they had been violently passed;[2452] nevertheless -Mariana was founded by Marius in Corsica, apparently under the colonial -provision.[2453] The import of the agrarian law of Sex. Titius, tribune -of the plebs in 99, is unknown.[2454] It may have been merely a -reënactment of the Appuleian measure. At all events before it could be -put into force it was annulled by the senate on the ground that it had -been passed by violence and against the intercession of colleagues.[2455] - -The optimates, having again triumphed over the democracy, adopted a -policy of moderation. Their consuls of 98, Q. Caecilius Metellus and T. -Didius, attempted by a mild statute to check the most flagrant abuses -of tribunician legislation, (1) the combination of various dissimilar -provisions in one bill (lex satura) for the purpose of drawing the -votes of all parties, (2) the passing of bills through the assembly -by surprise. Their law accordingly, reviving usages once in force but -recently neglected, forbade such combinations[2456] and ordered that the -promulgation should precede the voting by at least a trinum nundinum—an -interval which included three market days.[2457] Similarly in 95 their -consuls, L. Licinius Crassus and Q. Mucius Scaevola, aimed by an equally -moderate law to check the usurpation of the citizenship on the part of -aliens. It forbade peregrini to perform the functions of citizens, though -it did not order the innocent among them to leave Rome.[2458] It provided -for the appointment of a special commission to discover and punish -usurpers of the citizenship.[2459] Those found guilty were sent back to -their communities.[2460] Though the authors were eminent in justice and -cherished the best intentions, their law proved to be not merely useless -but most pernicious to the state,[2461] as it helped drive the Italians -to revolt.[2462] - -The next attempt at reform proceeded from the inmost circle of the -aristocracy.[2463] M. Livius Drusus, tribune of the plebs in 91, was a -man of the highest nobility, wealthy, eloquent, and upright at heart, -the son of that Livius who had opposed C. Gracchus.[2464] Regarding his -aims and the quality of his statesmanship conflicting opinions have -been expressed by modern scholars. The sources intimate that he wished -primarily to strengthen the senate by breaking away from its hide-bound -conservatism and undertaking various pressing reforms. His agrarian -measure was conceived in the Gracchan spirit but was more radical.[2465] -Appian[2466] states that it proposed the founding of colonies voted long -ago but not yet established. Reference must be to the twelve colonies -planned by his father.[2467] It probably abolished the statute of 111 -and ordered the division not only of the Campanian lands,[2468] but also -of those public domains which were held by the allied communities—in -brief, of all the public land remaining in Italy and Sicily;[2469] and it -established a board of ten for making the assignments.[2470] Livy[2471] -attributes to the author a frumentarian proposal, though we are not -informed of its character. The aim must have been to win the support of -the populace for his other measures.[2472] - -He further proposed to mix with the silver coinage an eighth part of -copper,[2473] the proceeds of this gain to be applied perhaps to the -execution of his frumentarian project.[2474] There is much controversy -as to the intent of his judiciary reform. Appian[2475] supposes that -he wished to add three hundred knights to the senate and to draw the -jurors from that body thus enlarged. Velleius[2476] is of the opinion -that his aim was to transfer the iudicia to the senate; whereas the -epitomator of Livy[2477] directly states that he provided for making up -the iudicia of senators and knights in equal numbers. We may partially -reconcile these conflicting statements by supposing that he planned to -compose the jurors’ album of six hundred senators and knights in equal -numbers, by which expedient he hoped to bring these two hostile orders -back to their former harmony,[2478] while serving the interests of the -senate and ridding the state of the corrupt and tyrannical rule of the -knights.[2479] By a special article of the rogation a quaestio, probably -perpetua, was to be appointed to inquire into the cases of bribery -of jurors and to punish the guilty.[2480] His most radical measure, -introduced after opposition to his other reforms began to develop,[2481] -was for extending the citizenship to the Latins[2482] and to all the -Italians.[2483] This group of proposals, designed for the benefit of -all parties, proved distasteful to all. The senators found a ground -for complaint in the circumstance that the knights would have equal -power with them in the courts; the knights were unwilling to surrender -their judicial control or to grant the franchise to the Italians; the -wealthy Italians feared they might lose the public lands which they -still held. Only the poor among the Romans and allies supported the -proposal in the hope of profiting by the distribution of lands.[2484] The -agrarian, frumentarian, monetary, and judiciary measures were combined -in one statute, and passed with violence[2485] and contrary to the -omens.[2486] On these grounds and furthermore because they violated the -article of the Caecilian-Didian statute forbidding the passing of a lex -satura, they were annulled by the senate.[2487] Although Drusus might -have interposed his veto against this decree, he preferred rather to -disregard it, most probably on the theory that the senatorial authority -did not avail against the sovereign will of the people.[2488] Aware that -his intercession would but postpone the annulment to another year, he -contented himself with informing his opponents that his measures were -absolutely necessary for the security of the state, and that those who -offended against them did it at their peril. He proceeded to carry -his statute into immediate effect.[2489] A plebiscite of Saufeius, a -colleague, established a commission of five in addition to the ten -provided for by the Livian statute; and Livius was elected a member of -both commissions.[2490] After his murder the Livian and Saufeian statutes -were both considered null and void.[2491] - -The lex Remmia de calumniatoribus, which was enacted before 80, may -belong to the year of the Livian attempt at reform, 91;[2492] and in -that case it would be most natural to regard it as a piece of counter -legislation to offset the proposal for establishing a court for the trial -of jurors accused of bribery. The complainant who was proved malicious it -rendered liable to trial and punishment with the loss of citizenship and -the branding of his forehead with the letter K (for Kalumniator).[2493] -This we may believe was the defiance offered by the knights to those who -were attempting to bring them to account for their conduct as judges. -Exulting in their victory over Drusus, they expressed their antipathy to -the Italian movement in a lex de maiestate of Q. Varius, tribune of the -plebs in 90. They stood round the Rostra with drawn daggers and forced it -through the comitia in spite of tribunician intercession. It supplanted -the Appuleian law on the subject by a severe provision against those -who encouraged the Italians to demand the citizenship or in any way to -conspire or to revolt against the Roman people. It must have contained an -article, too, concerning seditions.[2494] The court which it established -was to sit on all ordinary dies fasti, undisturbed by iustitia,[2495] and -was to be a quaestio perpetua.[2496] Now that two attempts, the Appuleian -and the Livian, to substitute more popular measures for the Sempronian -frumentarian law had failed, the optimates found themselves strong -enough to supersede the Sempronian act by one less popular. This was the -Octavian law,[2497] the contents of which are unknown, but which received -the praise of Cicero for its moderation.[2498] - -The Social War, following close upon the murder of Livius Drusus, -compelled the Romans to grant the citizenship to the Italians. This -result was brought about by a succession of statutes. A law of the consul -L. Julius Caesar, 90, bestowed the citizenship upon the Latins[2499] -and on all the Italians who had not taken arms against Rome[2500] and -who were willing to accept the gift.[2501] The same statute probably -regulated the assignment of these new citizens to the tribes.[2502] -In the following year a law of L. Calpurnius Piso, probably a tribune, -granted the commanding general power, apparently absolute, to bestow -the right of the city upon the soldiers under his orders.[2503] Another -statute of 89, carried by M. Plautius Silvanus and C. Papirius Carbo, -tribunes of the plebs, granted the citizenship to all members of allied -communities who were domiciled in Italy at the time the statute was -passed and who within sixty days should signify to the praetor at Rome -their willingness to accept the offer.[2504] The object of this measure -was not only to expedite the reconciliation, but also to make the work -of the next censors practicable. The citizenship thus granted involved -the right of suffrage, though in new tribes which voted after the others. -Many Italians, especially the Lucanians and the Samnites, took no notice -of the offer.[2505] In the same year Cn. Pompeius Strabo, a consul, -proposed and carried a law which seems to have empowered himself at his -discretion to invest with full citizenship those Transpadani who already -enjoyed the Latin rights, and to confer upon the rest the ius Latii.[2506] - -The question as to the composition of the courts, still left unsettled, -was taken up by M. Plautius Silvanus, the tribune referred to above. His -statute transferred the filling of the album from the urban praetor to -the tribes, which were to elect each fifteen members. The law made the -qualifications of the iudices independent of the social classes. Under it -accordingly senators and a few common plebeians in addition to equites -served as jurors, so that the equestrian control of the courts was -partially checked.[2507] - -Mommsen[2508] supposes that these jurors were for the quaestio de -maiestate only. For this opinion he depends upon the assertion of -Cicero[2509] that the equites remained till Sulla’s legislation in -uninterrupted possession of the courts. The authority of Cicero, however, -would allow us to assume that while the equites lost the legal monopoly -they retained practical control. However that may be, it is hardly -possible that this reactionary measure survived the proletarian uprising -under Marius and Cinna. The lex agraria of the same Plautius seems to -have been intended for supplying the veterans of the Social War with -farms.[2510] The lex Papiria, which introduced the semiuncial _as_, is -doubtless to be assigned to C. Papirius Carbo, the colleague of Plautius -above mentioned. If so, the object was to relieve slightly the financial -embarrassment caused by the war, and more particularly to bring the small -coins of Rome into correspondence with those of Italy.[2511] - - -IV. _The Political Equalization of Italy_ - -88-83 - -With many Italians still in revolt and the others smarting under the -inferior citizenship eked out to them, and with Mithridates threatening -the existence of the empire, Rome should have adopted a policy of -domestic conciliation. Under these circumstances Sulla, consul in 88, -showed a lamentable want of tact in expressing the sentiment that there -could be no peace in Italy as long as a single Samnite lived[2512]—a -curiously antiquated frame of mind for a statesman of his shrewdness. -The cause of the new citizens was taken up by P. Sulpicius Rufus, a -patrician who had forsaken his rank to qualify himself for the plebeian -tribunate.[2513] A man of marvellous eloquence, he had been an adherent -of Drusus, though more inclined to the equestrian interests. As tribune -of the plebs, 88, he seems to have tried to win the support of the senate -and of the equestrian order to his policy; but failing in the attempt, -he looked for aid to the commons and to a small band of knights who were -faithful to him. His rogation contained the following articles: (1) -that the new citizens and the libertini should be distributed among all -the tribes,[2514] with a view to completing the plan of Livius Drusus -for the political equalization of Italy; (2) that those who had been -driven from the state by violence should be recalled.[2515] This article -was probably for the benefit of those knights against whom the Varian -law had been turned.[2516] His rogation provided further, (3) that no -one who owed more than two thousand denarii should be a senator.[2517] -Money was scarce because of the war;[2518] and Sulpicius must have felt -that if the senators, most of whom were abundantly able, should pay -their debts, it would go far toward relieving the stringency, and that -if any were ejected because of failure to pay, an opportunity would be -afforded of promoting equites to the vacant places. The consuls of the -year, L. Cornelius Sulla and Q. Pompeius Rufus, attempted to prevent a -vote on these radical measures by interposing a cessation of business -for many days through the proclamation of a festival.[2519] With his -armed followers Sulpicius forced the consuls to recall the proclamation, -whereupon Sulla fled for safety to his army at Nola. Sulpicius then -added to his statute a fourth article to the effect that the imperium -of Sulla should be abrogated and that the province of Asia, involving -the conduct of the war against Mithridates, should be given to Marius -as proconsul,[2520] although the latter was now but a private citizen. -Doubtless Sulpicius understood that there could be no guarantee for -the execution of his statute as long as Sulla remained in power, and -furthermore that the advancement of Marius would be a great gain for the -knights. The bill was passed by the comitia of tribes; but Sulla, far -from delivering up his command, marched his army into Rome to settle the -question in his own interest by the sword. On his initiative Sulpicius, -Marius, and ten of their associates were declared public enemies by a -decree of the senate ratified by a popular vote.[2521] There is no need -of assuming that the supporters of the tribune turned against him; the -optimates were as clever as their opponents at packing assemblies. The -absurdity of continuing the worn-out comitial machinery as a factor of -government is nowhere more apparent than on this page of history, which -records that the comitia a few days after adopting the measures of -Sulpicius, voted to outlaw him and his friends. Marius fled; Sulpicius -and several adherents were killed. Thereupon the senate annulled the -entire Sulpician statute on the ground that it had been violently -passed.[2522] - -No statesman, however opposed to popular government, could think of -abolishing the comitia or even of putting an end to their legislative -function. But the democracy could be effectually checked by reducing -the legislative power of the assemblies to the harmless function of -ratifying decrees of the senate. This result Sulla and Pompeius aimed -to reach by renewing an ancient law[2523] that no measure should ever -again be brought before the people which had not been previously -considered and agreed to by the senate.[2524] A closely related law of -the same consuls ordered that “the voting should not be by tribes but -by centuries, as King Tullius had ordained.”[2525] This statement has -often been interpreted to signify the restoration of the earlier form of -comitia centuriata. But it seems most improbable that, on the point of -setting out for a long, distant war, Sulla should think of restoring an -organization which had been obsolete for more than a century and a half, -and which could have been known to none but antiquarians. With his clear, -practical intelligence he could not have failed to see the insuperable -difficulty of restoring the ancient definitions of the classes in -terms of iugera or even on the later basis of the libral _as_.[2526] -Furthermore no censors were then at hand to undertake the work, and it -was altogether unlikely that during his absence any could be elected who -would be willing to apply themselves to the revitalization of the antique -mummy. Such a measure, too, as Meyer[2527] has pointed out, would place -the control of the assembly in the hands, not of the senate, but of the -knights, his mortal enemies. It is far more reasonable to suppose that -this act transferred the function of ratifying laws from the tribal to -the centuriate comitia, to restore the arrangement supposed to have been -introduced by Servius Tullius.[2528] If this reasoning is correct, the -act under consideration totally abolished the legislative initiative -of the tribunes.[2529] The other Cornelian-Pompeian law mentioned by -Appian must have applied, accordingly, not to the tribunate but to the -other magistracies.[2530] The current interpretation, which involves -the theory of a return to the original centuriate system, requires -further examination. Its chief basis is the statement of Appian that no -law should be brought before the πλῆθος which had not been previously -considered in the senate. It is commonly assumed that he uses δῆμος to -designate the whole citizen body, and πλῆθος the exclusively plebeian -assembly under tribunician presidency. A study of his usage, however, -proves that he makes no such discrimination. Δῆμος is ordinarily the -people in general, especially as distinguished from the βουλή,[2531] -parallel to Livy’s common distinction between plebs and senatus. It -is the technical term for the plebs in their tribal comitia under -tribunician presidency.[2532] Rarely it signifies the state[2533] with -reference to the interest of the people. Πλῆθος, on the other hand, -ordinarily denotes the masses, multitude, rabble,[2534] including the -crowd gathered not only in a tribunician assembly[2535] but also in -the ἐκκλησία (here meaning contio) under the presidency of a patrician -magistrate.[2536] But πλῆθος is never technically or officially used to -denote any assembly either of the populus or of the plebs. In the passage -under discussion Appian’s statement of the Cornelian-Pompeian law is -εἰσηγοῦντό τε μηδὲν ἔτι ἀπροβούλευτον ἐς τὸν δῆμον ἐσφέρεσθαι, in which -he uses δῆμος according to his custom to designate the popular assembly -without specifying whether it is of the populus or of the plebs. In -commenting on it he substitutes πλῆθος for δῆμος for the purpose, not of -defining the assembly as tribunician, but of contrasting the masses in -the assembly with the nobles in the senate: ἐσ τὸ πλῆθος is substantially -equivalent to ἐν τοῖς πένησι καὶ θρασυτάτοις used just below; Sulla -wished nothing to be submitted to the masses in the comitia centuriata -before it had been considered by the senate. - -Appian[2537] attributes to Sulla for this early date an attempt to -increase the number of senators. “They (the consuls) enrolled three -hundred nobles in the senate, which had been reduced in numbers and for -that reason had come to be despised.” He does not state, however, by what -authority the consuls made this extraordinary adlectio; and it is in fact -improbable that the senate had so dwindled. However that may be, the -increase did not take permanent effect at this time.[2538] Two other laws -of these consuls are briefly mentioned: (1) for planting colonies,[2539] -of which nothing is known; (2) a lex unciaria.[2540] The latter may have -been a reduction of existing debts by one-twelfth of the principle, or a -lowering of the maximal rate of interest to 8⅓ per cent;[2541] or it may -have been a general insolvency law, providing for the payment of debts in -instalments.[2542] The chief value of these measures, even if we knew -them in detail, would be to reveal the idea of their authors; for they -were all repealed in the following year on the initiative of the consul -L. Cornelius Cinna, probably by a comitial vote.[2543] - -Cinna then proposed (1) a renewal of the Sulpician plebiscite for -the enrolment of the new citizens and the libertini among all the -tribes,[2544] (2) a recall of Marius and the other exiles.[2545] -Before these measures could be carried, the consul was driven from -Rome and deposed from office by an act of the senate on the motion -of Cn. Octavius, the other consul.[2546] This is the only certain -instance of the abrogation of the civil imperium known to the history -of the republic. Cinna returned at the head of an army; and after -taking forcible possession of the city, he carried his law concerning -the exiles through the assembly either on his own motion or that of a -tribune.[2547] As the senate, reversing its earlier action,[2548] had -already legalized the Sulpician provision concerning the distribution of -the libertini and the new citizens among the thirty-five tribes,[2549] it -was without reënactment carried into effect in 84.[2550] The execution -of this measure completed the political unification of Italy. Meantime -L. Valerius Flaccus, consul suffectus in 86, to relieve the financial -distress, passed a law which compelled creditors to satisfy themselves -with one-fourth of the amount due.[2551] In 83 M. Junius Brutus, tribune -of the plebs, proposed and carried, as a milder measure of relief, a law -for the colonization of Capua.[2552] - - Schulze, C. F., _Volksversammlungen der Römer_, 110-26; - Peter, C., _Epochen der Verfassungsgesch. der röm. Republik_, - 141-65; _Geschichte Roms_, bks. VI, VII. chs. i-iv; Ihne, - W., _History of Rome_, bk. VII. chs. ii-xix; _Researches - into the History of the Roman Constitution_, 161 ff.; Long, - G., _Decline of the Roman Republic_, I. ch. x-II. ch. xxiv; - Lange, _Röm. Altertümer_, iii. 1-146, and see indices s. - the various laws; _Die promulgatio trinum nundinum, die - lex Caecilia Didia und nochmals die lex Pupia_, in _Kleine - Schriften_, ii. 214-70; Mommsen, Th., _History of Rome_, bk. - iv; _Röm. Staatsr._ see index s. the various laws; _Ueber das - thorische Ackergesetz_, in _Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ - i (1849). 89-101; Neumann, C., _Geschichte Roms_, I. chs. - ii-v; Ferrero, _Greatness and Decline of Rome_, I. chs. ii-v; - Greenidge, A. H. J., _History of Rome_, i; _The Lex Sempronia - and the Banishment of Cicero_, in _Class. Rev._ vii (1893). - 347 f.; Greenidge and Clay, _Sources for Roman History_, - 133-70 _B.C._; Strachan-Davidson, J. L., ed. Appian, _Civil - Wars_, bk. i, with notes; Weber, M., _Röm. Agrargeschichte_, - 151 ff.; Dreyfus, _Lois agr. sous la république Rom._ 77-196; - Voigt, M., _Ueber die staatsrechtliche Possessio und den Ager - compascuus_, in _Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ x (1880). - 221-72; _Ueber das röm. System der Wege im alten Italien_, in - _Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ xxiv (1872). 29-90; Babeion, - E., _Monnaies de la république Rom._ i. 69-79; Billeter, G., - _Geschichte des Zinsfusses im griechisch-röm. Altertum_, - 155 ff.; Fowler, W. W., _Notes on Gaius Gracchus_, in _Eng. - Hist. Rev._ xx (1905). 209-27, 417-33; _Gaius Gracchus and - the Senate_, in _Class. Rev._ x (1896). 278-80; Pöhlmann, R., - _Zur Geschichte der Gracchen_, in _Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. - Wiss._ 1907. 443-93; Oman, C., _Seven Roman Statesmen_, i-iv; - Huschke, Ph. E., _Die lex Sempronia und ihr Verhältniss zur - lex Acilia repetundarum_, in _Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch._ v. - (1866). 46-84; Rudorff, A. E., _Ad legem Aciliam de pecuniis - repentundis latam anno ab urbe condita 631 vel 632_, in - _Philol. u. hist. Abhdl. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin_, 1861. - 411-553; Krüger-Brissaud, _Hist. d. sources d. droit Rom._ 94 - f.; Hegewisch, D. H., _Geschichte der gracchischen Unruhen_; - Ahren, E. A. J., _Die drei Volkstribunen Ti. Gracchus, M. - Drusus, und P. Sulpicius_; Nitzsch, K. W., _Die Gracchen und - ihre nächsten Vorgänger_, bks. iii, iv; Blasel, J., _Die - Motiven der Gesetzgebung des C. Gracchus_; Callegari, E., _La - legislazione di Caio Gracco_; Meyer, E., _Untersuchungen zur - Geschichte der Gracchen_, in _Festschriften ... der vereinigten - Friedrichs-Universität_, etc. 1894. _Philos. Fak._ 79-109; - controverted by Schwartz, E., in _Göttingische gelehrte - Anzeigen_, clviii (1896). 792-811; Hesky, R., _Anmerkungen zur - lex Acilia repetundarum_, in _Wiener Studien_, xxv (1903). - 272-87; Brassloff, S., _Beiträge zur Erläuterung der lex Acilia - repetundarum_, ibid. xxvi. 106-17; Hagge, _Einige Bemerkungen - über die lex Servilia repetundarum_; Mühl, F. V., _De L. - Appuleio Saturnino tribuno plebis_; Pappritz, R., _Marius - und Sulla_; Vassis, S., Ζητληματα Ῥωμαϊκά, in _Athena_, xii - (1900). 54-7 (on the Cornelian-Pompeian laws of 88 concerning - the assemblies); Lengle, J., _Sullanische Verfassung_; - articles in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 426-8: Adsignatio - (Kubitschek); 256: (M’.) Acilius Glabrio (Klebs); 584-8: M. - Aemilius Scaurus (Klebs); 780-93 Ager (idem); ii. 261-9: - Appuleius (Klebs); 2848 f.: Bantia (Hülsen); iii. 1414-21: - Calumnia (Hitzig); 1441 f.: Campanus Ager (Kubitschek); iv. 195 - f.: C. Coelius Caldus (Münzer); 510-88: Coloniae (Kornemann); - v. 407-10: T. Didius (Münzer); articles in Daremberg et Saglio, - _Dict._ i. 133-8: Ager Publicus (Humbert); 1301-21: Colonies - Romains (Lenormant); ii. 1346-8: Frumentariae leges (Humbert). - - - - -CHAPTER XVII - -COMITIAL LEGISLATION FROM SULLA TO THE END OF THE REPUBLIC, 82 TO ABOUT 30 - - -I. _The Cornelian Reaction_ - -82-70 - -In November, 82, after destroying his political enemies by war and -proscription, Sulla was ready to begin the work of restoring the -aristocratic constitution. As both consuls, Cn. Papirius Carbo and C. -Marius the younger,[2553] were dead, and as Sulla desired above all -things to give his legislation a constitutional basis, he advised the -senate to appoint an interrex. The choice fell on L. Valerius Flaccus, -princeps senatus, a moderate in politics. Thereupon Sulla withdrew -from Rome, leaving the civil authorities free in appearance to act at -their discretion. In reality he had determined to retain control of -affairs; and accordingly he wrote to Valerius advising the appointment -of a dictator, not for a fixed time but till the general unrest should -be quieted. He suggested himself as a suitable person for the place. -Valerius obediently proposed and carried a law through the comitia -centuriata, (1) which made Sulla dictator rei publicae constituendae for -an indefinite time with absolute power over the lives and property of the -citizens,[2554] (2) which legalized all his past acts, both as consul and -as proconsul,[2555] including his arrangements in Asia as well as his -proscriptions and confiscations.[2556] He returned to the city, appointed -Valerius his magister equitum,[2557] and took to himself twenty-four -lictors in addition to a less formal guard of servants and friends.[2558] -Without delay he began the promulgation of laws, which undoubtedly he had -long been planning. They are here grouped according to subject, with an -occasional reference to their chronological relation. - -First he applied himself to curbing the power of the tribunate, an -institution in which centred the strength of the democracy. A statute for -that purpose he must have felt compelled to draw up and pass before the -next tribunician election. Instead of renewing his earlier law, however, -for absolutely depriving the tribunes of initiative in legislation,[2559] -he enacted simply that the previous consent of the senate should be -necessary to bills brought by them before the tribes.[2560] By another -article of this law he limited the right of tribunes to address the -people in contiones.[2561] The range of their intercession was also -greatly limited.[2562] Their function of bringing prosecutions before -the people underwent restriction not only through the laws affecting the -quaestiones but also by special enactment;[2563] for had they retained -their unlimited right to prosecute, they could at once have regained -all their other power.[2564] Little was left them but their original -auxilii latio adversus imperium.[2565] Finally the office was made -unattractive to the ambitious by the provision that those who held it -were thereby disqualified for other magistracies.[2566] By these measures -the most vital and powerful institution in the state was reduced to a -shadow without substance.[2567] The return to conditions preceding the -Hortensian legislation, in some respects even the Decemviral legislation, -was, as Fröhlich[2568] remarks, a backward step such as finds few -parallels in history. - -About a year[2569] after limiting the power of the tribunes Sulla -proceeded to regulate the other offices through his lex de magistratibus, -81. This statute, making use of the principle contained in the lex -Villia annalis,[2570] prescribed (1) that no one could be consul before -he had been praetor or praetor before he had been quaestor,[2571] (2) -that a space of two years should intervene between the holding of -consecutive offices.[2572] (3) The minimal age of the quaestor it fixed -at thirty-seven.[2573] The fortieth year was therefore the age for the -praetorship and the forty-third for the office of consul. The aedileship, -while bringing the holder a positive advantage for his future career, was -never an essential step to a higher place. But in case this office was -taken, the biennial interval had to be observed.[2574] The quaestorship -Sulla made the sole avenue to the senate, so as to dispense with the -revision of the list by the censors.[2575] The statute of 151, forbidding -reëlection to the consulship,[2576] he repealed, and substituted for -it the article of the Genucian plebiscite of 442[2577] which fixed an -interval of ten years between the expiration of any office and reëlection -to the same.[2578] He increased the number of quaestors, at this time -certainly more than eight,[2579] to twenty, with the object not only of -supplying an administrative need but also of creating the required number -of senators.[2580] It was necessary also to raise the number of praetors -from six to eight in order to provide presidents for the new quaestiones -perpetuae.[2581] - -The reforms above mentioned, together with the doubling of the number -of senators to be considered below, naturally led to the enlargement of -the chief sacerdotal colleges. The augurs and pontiffs were increased -from nine to fifteen and the decemviri sacris faciundis were made -quindecemviri.[2582] Another measure, which seems to have been an article -of the same act, repealed the Domitian lex de sacerdotiis,[2583] and thus -restored to these colleges, and at the same time to the epulones, their -right of filling vacancies by coöptation,[2584] leaving to the people the -function only of electing the head of the pontifical college from among -the members.[2585] As the object of the first article was evidently to -provide places for some of the new magistrates and senators,[2586] the -coöptation doubtless immediately followed the enactment of the law. - -In increasing the number of praetors to eight[2587] Sulla provided that -during their year of office they were to remain in the city and devote -their whole time to the administration of justice. After the expiration -of their term they were to take upon themselves as propraetors the -command of provinces. In like manner the consuls were to remain in -Italy during their term, in the ordinary course of events to give their -entire attention to the affairs of peace; only after they had retired -from office were they expected as proconsuls to govern provinces. In -brief, Sulla by law established an absolute distinction between the civil -magistrate and the military promagistrate.[2588] The lex de provinciis -ordinandis[2589] recognized the right of the senate to determine which -provinces should be consular and which pretorian in the way provided for -by the Sempronian law on this subject.[2590] The Cornelian statute did -not, however, any more than the Sempronian, forbid the assignment of a -province to a promagistrate by popular vote; and it recognized the right -of the senate to create promagistracies.[2591] But it established the -rule (1) that the two consuls should receive for a year of promagisterial -imperium the provinces declared to be consular; and that they should -either agree as to which each should take or cast lots for them;[2592] -(2) that the senate should annually assign the eight retiring praetors -to the remaining provinces, also for a year of promagistracy.[2593] The -same law directed that the promagistrate, who had received the imperium -in legal form, should retain it till his return to the city and the -celebration of his triumph,[2594] provided he merited one. To avoid -conflicts between retiring and incoming governors it ordained that the -former should leave the province within thirty days after the latter had -entered it.[2595] The law further contained the definite regulation of -the supplies and honors granted the legati by the provincials.[2596] The -tendency of Sulla’s legislation thus far considered was to weaken the -civil functionaries (1) by restricting the tribunician initiative. (2) -by increasing the number of quaestors and praetors. (3) by depriving the -higher civil magistrates of the military imperium. The last-mentioned -loss was in some measure an advantage to the senate but in a far higher -degree to the promagistrates, who from this time began to overshadow the -republic. - -The power taken from the tribunes necessarily went to the senate, to -restore to it the full control of legislation which it had possessed -before the enactment of the Hortensian statute. Under the reformed -constitution it was to be supreme. As it had dwindled during the recent -civil war and proscription,[2597] and as the performance of jury service, -which Sulla was restoring to its members, required a large number of men, -he added three hundred, mostly from the equestrian rank, but including -some centurions and other insignificant persons who were likely to do his -bidding.[2598] Appian[2599] states that these new senators were elected -by the tribes, possibly meaning the tribal comitia.[2600] But as that -process of selection would have required an enormous length of time, it -is far more probable that each tribe had the privilege of choosing a -definite number, perhaps nine, after the precedent of the lex Plautia -iudiciaria.[2601] This addition would raise the number to about four -hundred and fifty. As the normal membership from Sulla to Caesar was -about six hundred,[2602] we may assume either that, independently of -the extraordinary adlectio by the tribes, he made the usual censorial -enrolment of the recently retired magistrates, or that he left it to time -to fill up the senate to the desired number by the annual admission of -retired quaestors.[2603] Henceforth it was to be recruited automatically -by this process, without any action on the part of the censors, -who were thus deprived of the only important function remaining to -them.[2604] Closely connected with the increase in membership is the lex -iudiciaria,[2605] which restored the quaestiones to the senators.[2606] -It was enacted near the end of 81, but prior to the increase in the -number of quaestors.[2607] Before this act the courts had remained under -the control of the knights in spite of the lex Plautia of 89, which seems -not to have continued long in force.[2608] - -In the reorganization of the criminal courts (year 81) Sulla passed -criminal laws, in which he regulated the procedure of the existing -courts and created new quaestiones perpetuae.[2609] His reform increased -the number to seven, four of which were concerned almost wholly with -maladministration of office: (1) quaestio repetundarum, extortion,[2610] -(2) quaestio ambitus, bribery in elections,[2611] (3) quaestio peculatus, -misappropriation of public funds[2612] and sacrilege,[2613] (4) -quaestio maiestatis, injury to the majesty of the Roman name, of which -a private person as well as a magistrate might be guilty.[2614] The -three following were concerned with common crimes: (5) quaestio inter -sicarios et veneficos, assassination, poisoning, and arson,[2615] (6) -quaestio de falsis, counterfeiting and falsification of testaments and -other forgery,[2616] (7) quaestio iniuriarum, acute personal violence, -housebreaking, and probably defamation of character.[2617] These laws -concerning quaestiones contained provisions for granting the accused the -privilege of deciding whether the vote should be oral or by ballot,[2618] -and they directed that the order of voting should be determined by -lot.[2619] The first of these two articles aimed to make the jurors -individually responsible, and the second to prevent influential men from -prejudicing the case by giving their opinions first.[2620] - -While the praetor urbanus and praetor peregrinus still busied themselves -with civil jurisdiction, the six other praetors presided over these -courts; but as the number was insufficient, past aediles were appointed -to preside as iudices quaestionis. This arrangement was especially -necessary for the quaestio inter sicarios, overburdened as it was with a -variety of crimes. - -As these courts were vested with the function of trying without appeal -all crimes, including those formerly brought before the comitia, the -result was that the people were practically, though not constitutionally, -deprived of their judicial power. The tendency of the Cornelian -legislation in this as in other respects was oligarchic. - -Among the statutes passed in the winter or early spring of 81 we must -place the lex de proscriptione,[2621] which added certain regulations -to those of the Valerian law for the creation of the Cornelian -dictatorship,[2622] and which Sulla considered essential to the execution -of his policy and the maintenance of its results. The Cornelian -statute concerning proscription forbade the giving of relief or aid -to a proscribed person;[2623] it legalized the previous slayings and -confiscations of property,[2624] and provided also that the estates not -only of the proscribed but also of enemies who had fallen in battle -should be sold for the benefit of the treasury.[2625] It excepted from -the sale ten thousand of the youngest and strongest slaves, who were -given their freedom; and it debarred from the ius honorum the sons, -grandsons, and other descendants of the proscribed,[2626] with a view to -keeping from them the means of vengeance; and lastly, it fixed the date -for closing the proscriptions at June 1, 81.[2627] - -During the winter of 82-81 Sulla gave his attention not only to -law-making but also to the sale of confiscated property and to -the regulation of Italy. The latter work was carried out by the -administrative power of the dictator through the destruction of the -fortifications of rebellious communities, their punishment by fines and -extraordinary taxes, and the confiscation of some of their lands, to -be assigned to his discharged veterans.[2628] The Cornelian agrarian -laws,[2629] which brought about these confiscations and assignments, -seem to have been not acts of the comitia but dictatorial orders.[2630] -They must have been issued from time to time as occasion demanded, -probably through the entire year 81.[2631] The legions were kept together -till after the triumph (January 27, 28 of the year 81)[2632] and then -disbanded, to be led off gradually to their lands. Some of the municipia -to which soldiers were assigned, most obstinately Volaterrae and Nola, -resisted their admission by force of arms. To punish these rebels Sulla -carried through the comitia centuriata his lex de civitate Volaterranis -adimenda,[2633] which disfranchised not only Volaterrae but also other -rebellious municipia.[2634] Those who by this act were deprived of the -citizenship received the so-called Latin rights of Ariminum.[2635] - -Among the regulations for the improvement of the finances, which he -found in bad condition,[2636] was his abolition of the distributions -of grain.[2637] Whether it was effected by a lex frumentaria or a -dictatorial order cannot be determined.[2638] The levy of taxes on -Italian and transmarine communities[2639] could be brought about by -senatus consulta,[2640] as the people had nothing to do with such -matters. Credit had been shattered by the law of L. Valerius Flaccus -concerning debts, 86,[2641] which Sulla repealed by one of his own on the -same subject, 81.[2642] - -In connection with the Circensian games which he celebrated in the -autumn of 81, and which in honor of Victoria were thereafter repeated -annually from October 26 to November 1,[2643] Sulla must have passed -a lex de ludis Victoriae instituendis.[2644] Lastly came the sumptuary -law, through which he attempted to regulate the manners and morals of -the citizens.[2645] It was the restoration, in a revised form, of the -lex Licinia of 104,[2646] which had been repealed by M. Duronius in -97.[2647] The Cornelian statute permitted the expenditure of no more than -three hundred sesterces for meals on the calends, nones, ides, ludi, and -certain other holidays, and only thirty for ordinary meals; and it fixed -the prices of various luxuries.[2648] Another article of the same statute -limited funeral expenses.[2649] The author’s object seems to have been to -restore the morals and manners as well as the constitution and laws of -the good old time before they were corrupted by the demagogues. - -Sulla’s legislation was substantially complete on January 1, 80, when -he entered upon his second consulship with Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius -as colleague.[2650] Retiring into private life early in 79, he left -the constitution to its fate. No better comment on its value could be -offered than the history of its decline and overthrow in a single decade. -Opposition began to manifest itself from the time of his abdication; -and he was hardly in his grave when M. Aemilius Lepidus, consul in 78, -promulgated bills for the abolition of some of the Cornelian statutes; -but the opposition of his colleague, Q. Lutatius Catulus, and of the -senate prevented their ratification.[2651] The right of retired tribunes -to sue for other offices,[2652] however, was restored by a statute of -the consul C. Aurelius Cotta, 75.[2653] - -Before coming to the restoration of the tribunician power it is necessary -to mention the statutes passed under the Cornelian constitution. To -78 or 77 probably belongs the lex Plautia de vi, generally regarded -as tribunician, which established a quaestio perpetua for the trial -of persons charged with violence. It also forbade the acquisition by -long use of things stolen or violently seized.[2654] As no censors were -elected, an order of the people of unknown authorship in 75, pursuant -to a senatus consultum, empowered the consuls of the year to farm the -vectigalia.[2655] The approaching end of the Cornelian régime was -foreboded in the Plautian law for the recall of Cinna and other exiled -democrats, if indeed this measure belongs to 73,[2656] and certainly in -the consular law of Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus, 72, which directed -the consuls of the year to collect the money remitted by Sulla to the -purchasers of confiscated estates.[2657] A popular tendency may be -discovered as well in the final settlement of the question of conflict -between sessions of the senate and of the comitia by the lex Pupia, which -seems to have been a statute of M. Pupius Piso Calpurnianus, praetor -in 71.[2658] It forbade the magistrates to convoke the senate on those -comitial days on which an assembly actually met,[2659] the prohibition -applying to that part only of the day which preceded the dismissal of the -comitia.[2660] It was probably this year which saw the enactment of the -lex Antonia de Termessibus—a plebiscite proposed de senatus sententia -by C. Antonius, tribune of the plebs, and several of his colleagues, -for granting to Termessus Major in Pisidia the rights of a free state -in friendship and alliance with Rome, and for regulating on that basis -the relations which were to exist between the inhabitants and the -Romans.[2661] - -The struggle for the rehabilitation of the tribunes began in 78, when -those officials applied to the consuls for legislation on the subject. -Even Aemilius Lepidus[2662] declined, as he could see no advantage in -the unhampered tribunate.[2663] Though generally in these early years -of the Cornelian régime the tribunes were mere puppets of the senate, -one of them in 76, L. Sicinius, dared in a contio to plead for the full -restoration of their office.[2664] In the following year Q. Opimius, -another tribune, continued the struggle, with such success that he -secured the passage of the Aurelian law above mentioned.[2665] This -measure narrowly escaped annulment, and Opimius after retiring from -office was exorbitantly fined on the ground that he had interceded in -violation of a Cornelian law.[2666] In the year of the condemnation of -Opimius, 74, L. Quinctius, who had risen to the tribunate from the lowest -social class, strove energetically for the same object,[2667] though he -could effect no more than the maintenance of the Aurelian law. Toward -the close of his term, however, he opened battle against the senatorial -courts, which had fallen into disfavor because of their corruption.[2668] -In 73 the contest was resumed by Licinius Macer the annalist, then -tribune of the plebs, who demanded in vain the full restoration of the -tribunician power.[2669] In his efforts he had the support of C. Julius -Caesar.[2670] The struggle died down as the danger from Spartacus rose; -but at the close of the servile war it was a tribune of the plebs, M. -Lollius Palicanus, a man of low birth, who in a contio held outside the -walls in order that Pompey, a proconsul, might attend, persuaded the -latter to commit himself publicly to a definite promise to bring about -a repeal of the lex Cornelia de tribunicia potestate.[2671] Inveighing -against the corruption of the senatorial courts,[2672] Pompey in the same -speech intimated an intention to propose a bill on this subject as well. - -Shortly after entering upon the office of consul in 70, or at all events -before the elections of the year,[2673] Pompey promulgated his rogation -for the restoration of the tribunician power. The senate yielded in -spite of its dislike for the measure,[2674] and Licinius Crassus, his -colleague,[2675] added his name to the proposal.[2676] The people gladly -accepted it. Those articles of the Cornelian statute which remained -untouched by the Aurelian law of 75 were thereby repealed, and every -restriction on the tribunes removed.[2677] By destroying the chief -support of the Cornelian constitution this measure paved the way to -its overthrow. Notwithstanding the popular clamor for a reform of the -courts,[2678] Pompey hesitated to propose a law for that purpose, as he -hoped rather to purify the senatorial order through a severe censorial -revision so as to make a judiciary law unnecessary. The reform, however, -was taken in hand by L. Aurelius Cotta, praetor in the same year, -youngest brother of the consul of 75.[2679] The rogation was promulgated -while the trial of Verres was in progress and while the people were -excited by lack of confidence in the senatorial jurors.[2680] The -first project seems to have been the retransfer of the courts to the -equites;[2681] but when the senators saw that they were destined to lose -in the contest, they were able to save something by compromise. It was -agreed that there should be three decuries of jurors, composed in equal -numbers of senators, knights, and tribuni aerarii respectively.[2682] -The last-named decury was included because the Plautian judiciary law -of 89 had opened the courts to common citizens in addition to senators -and knights,[2683] and it was now thought that no less liberality -should be shown. The Aurelian statute provided accordingly that the -urban praetor[2684] should make up the annual album iudicum of an equal -number of men from each of the three classes.[2685] The good feature of -the law is obvious. As experience had proved the equestrian courts, as -well as the senatorial, to be partisan and corrupt, it was hoped that a -combination of the two with an equal proportion of the most responsible -and respectable common citizens would be just and impartial. If these -expectations were not realized, it was the fault of the Romans, not of -their law. - - -II. _Democracy in Alliance with Caesarism_ - -70-49 - -The first tribunician law under the restored constitution may have been -the sumptuary statute of C. Antius Restio, which Lange[2686] assigns to -the year 70. It limited the amount to be expended on festive meals; it -designated some delicacies as allowable and others as forbidden; and it -regulated the participation of candidates and of magistrates in dinners -away from home, doubtless with a view to curtailing ambitus practiced by -such means.[2687] Far however from being a partisan measure, this statute -seems to have been suggested by the censors of the year, to reënforce -their function of supervising the morals of the citizens. - -Three years passed before the tribunes of the plebs were ready to make -independent use of their recovered power. The reason is to be found in -the harmony—concordia ordinum[2688]—reëstablished between senators and -knights, when representatives of the two classes found themselves sitting -together on the jury benches. Although the object of the combination was -idealized by contemporaries, it was in fact a governing “trust,” which in -practice operated for the maintenance of plutocracy and for the ruthless -exploitation of the provincials.[2689] The nobles were willing to concede -something to the equites to make permanent the alliance with this -powerful order.[2690] L. Roscius Otho, tribune of the plebs in 67, as -spokesman of the optimates[2691] “railroaded”[2692] through the assembly -a statute which ordered that there should be reserved in the theatre for -those in possession of the equestrian census[2693] fourteen rows of seats -just back of the orchestra, in which sat the senators.[2694] It was more -than a restoration of the concession made to the knights in 146, which -evidently Sulla had withdrawn.[2695] - -There were in this year (67), however, two popular tribunes, A. Gabinius -and C. Cornelius, both of whom proposed and carried laws in the interest -of the people. Early in the year Gabinius persuaded the tribes to adopt -a statute which ordered the senate to sit daily during February to -consider embassies.[2696] It was in this month that delegations from -other states generally came. Often to obtain a hearing they had to bribe -the senators and magistrates.[2697] For that month the Gabinian law -reversed the Pupian[2698] by making senatorial sessions compulsory and -forbidding the concurrence of comitia.[2699] The object was to limit the -stay of foreign embassies at Rome not only for their own convenience -but also for lessening both the need and the opportunity for bribery. -Closely related was the purpose of his statute which forbade lending -money to provincials at Rome.[2700] Representatives of subject and -allied states, finding it necessary to bribe more extensively than their -resources in hand allowed, were tempted to borrow of the capitalists at -exorbitant interest. Private individuals from the provinces must often -have similarly borrowed to the ruin of their fortunes. The double aim -of the statute, accordingly, was to help the provincials and to check -bribery. How it passed against senatorial opposition is unknown. A -supplementary measure on the same subject was proposed to the senate by -C. Cornelius, a colleague of Gabinius, for prohibiting the lending of -money to the legati of other states, the idea being identical with that -of the two Gabinian laws. The good intention of Cornelius is vouched for -by the well-known uprightness[2701] of his character, which contrasts -with the reputed vileness of Gabinius. But the senate rejected the -proposal on the ground that it had already made sufficient provision -for checking the abuse. Although Cornelius thereupon complained in a -contio that the provinces were being exhausted by usury, he does not -seem to have urged his measure further.[2702] He promulgated, however, -against the interests of the senate a rogation for ordering that no one -should receive a dispensation from a law excepting through a vote of the -comitia. This right had been acquired by the people in the period between -the Publilian and the Hortensian legislation (339-287).[2703] It had -come to be regarded as inseparable from the sovereignty of the people -to such an extent that all senatus consulta for dispensing from the -laws contained a provision for bringing the matter before the comitia. -Gradually the custom of referring to the people ceased, and at last -the provision to that effect was dropped from senatorial decrees. The -result was that often a few senators, meeting in the Curia, voted away to -acquaintances and relatives the valuable privilege of exemption from a -law. The optimates induced a tribune of the plebs, P. Servilius Globulus, -to intercede against the bill while it was being read to the assembly -prior to the vote. When the dissenting tribune forbade the crier to -proceed with the reading, Cornelius himself read it.[2704] A disturbance -in the assembly, started by the interference of Piso the consul, caused -Cornelius to dismiss the concilium. Afterward he so compromised with the -optimates as to secure the passage of a law that no dispensations should -be granted by the senate unless two hundred members were present, and -that when a resolution of the kind was brought down from the senate to -the people, no one should intercede against the act.[2705] The victory -was with the senate; it gained a legal right to a function which it had -usurped, provision being merely made against abuse. But it exercised -this function by the sufferance of the tribunes, any one of whom could -insist on bringing the dispensing resolution before the people, in which -case his colleagues were forbidden to intercede.[2706] - -Another proposal of this tribune was the rogatio de ambitu, which -threatened with severe penalties not only the candidates but also their -agents, the divisores, whose duty was to distribute the corruption fund -among the tribes.[2707] The senate, declaring the penalties so harsh -that neither accuser nor jurors could be found to enforce it, put the -bill in the hands of the two consuls, C. Calpurnius Piso and M’. Acilius -Glabrio.[2708] Here was a comical situation; both consuls were liable to -the existing law on the subject; but for the sake of appearances they -had to revise the bill and present it to the comitia in the Forum.[2709] -The lex Acilia Calpurnia, enacted in this way,[2710] inflicted on those -found guilty of the crime a heavy fine, and forever disqualified them -from holding office or sitting in the senate.[2711] Cornelius proposed -other measures, all of which were vetoed by colleagues excepting his -lex concerning the edict of the praetor, described as follows by Dio -Cassius:[2712] “All the praetors themselves compiled and published the -principles according to which they intended to try cases; for all the -decrees regarding contracts had not yet been laid down. Now since they -were not in the habit of doing this once for all and did not observe -the rules as written, but often made changes in them and incidentally -a number of clauses naturally appeared in some one’s favor or to some -one’s hurt, he moved that they should at the very start announce the -principles they would use and not swerve from them at all.” The object -was to make the administration of the law more just and regular, and to -cut off an opportunity for favoritism.[2713] - -By far the most important measure of the year was the Gabinian law -for the appointment of an especial commander against the pirates. The -proposition was that from the consulares should be chosen a general -for putting down the pirates; that his province should be the entire -Mediterranean and a strip of its coasts extending fifty miles inland, -including Italy and the islands; that the command should continue three -years; that the holder of this imperium should have the right to fifteen -legati and 200 ships, and the privilege of enlisting soldiers and oarsmen -over all his province; that he should have credit with the aerarium at -Rome and the publicans in the provinces for 6000 talents.[2714] The name -of Pompey did not appear in the bill, but no one doubted who was to be -the man. The optimates were all opposed, though in 74 they had given -Antonius such a command,[2715] which now served Gabinius as a precedent. -The senate was compelled by threats of the people to yield, but used its -influence on the colleagues of Gabinius to have them oppose the measure. -Two of them, L. Roscius Otho, author of the lex theatralis,[2716] and -L. Trebellius, attempted to prevent comitial action. The tribes began -to vote the deposition of Trebellius; but before the eighteenth was -called he desisted.[2717] Thereafter both remained silent, and the law -was passed. Pompey was then elected to the command by the tribes.[2718] -They enacted further that he should have two quaestors, twenty-four -legati pro praetore, 500 ships, 120,000 men, and 5000 cavalry. On one -point only the senate refused its sanction; it would not permit Gabinius -to be a legatus.[2719] An article of the statute gave as a province to -the outgoing consul, M’. Acilius Glabrio, Bithynia and Pontus with the -conduct of the war against Mithridates.[2720] The Gabinian law led to -far-reaching consequences. It established temporarily, not precisely a -monarchy, but a dyarchy, as the Roman world was thereby divided between -the senate and a general with almost absolute power. The arrangement was -a prototype of the Augustan system. At the outset the act seemed to be -justified by the results, for immediately after its adoption the price of -grain fell from the famine height to which the piratical control of the -seas had forced it.[2721] - -An addition to this vast power was made in the following year by the -Manilian law. The author, C. Manilius, after entering upon his tribunate -on December 10, 67, promulgated a rogation for giving libertini the right -to vote in the tribes of their patrons.[2722] It was said by some, though -probably without ground, that the real author was Cornelius.[2723] While -in general the optimates disliked the measure, some favored it in the -hope that they would gain political influence through the votes of their -freedmen.[2724] In spite of the fact that constitutionally the comitia -could not be held on a festive day, Manilius convoked the assembly on -the last day of the year, which was the Compitalia, toward evening, -gathering to the assembly a few men who he knew favored the proposal. On -the following day the senate heard of the enactment and at once declared -it invalid.[2725] The behavior of Manilius exposed him to certain -prosecution unless he could win powerful support. This is the motive -ascribed to him by Dio Cassius[2726] for his famous law which conferred -extraordinary power on Pompey for the conduct of the war against -Mithridates.[2727] It gave the Roman general, in addition to his existing -command, the provinces of Asia, Bithynia, and Cilicia with the right to -declare war and make treaties at his discretion.[2728] The province thus -granted him included nearly all the eastern domain of Rome which had not -already been conferred by the Gabinian law. No discussion of this measure -in the senate is mentioned, though it is difficult to understand how such -action could be avoided.[2729] The only optimates who opposed the bill in -contiones were Q. Lutatius Catulus and Q. Hortensius, who had been the -chief opponents of the Gabinian law. Their objection was the monarchical -position in which these measures were placing Pompey.[2730] Its leading -supporters were Caesar and Cicero.[2731] It was so enthusiastically -favored by the knights and the populace that its adoption was from the -beginning a foregone conclusion. - -In 65 the conservatives found themselves strong enough to put through -the assembly the plebiscite of C. Papius for expelling the peregrini -from Rome, and for punishing those who had usurped the rights of the -citizens. The object was to prevent Latin-speaking foreigners, especially -the Transpadane Gauls, from packing the assemblies with a view to passing -measures for the further extension of the franchise. The Papian law was -modelled after the Claudian of 177,[2732] the Junian of 126,[2733] and in -some respects after the Licinian-Mucian of 95.[2734] Probably to the same -Papius belongs the lex Papia de Vestalium lectione, which limited the -power of choice exercised by the supreme pontiff.[2735] - -After the unusual comitial activity of 67-66 there was almost a pause -in legislation till the year of Cicero’s consulship, 63. To that date -belongs the plebiscite of T. Atius Labienus, which restored the form of -election of sacerdotes introduced by Domitius in 103[2736] and abolished -by Sulla.[2737] - -A remarkable effort at agrarian legislation was made at the beginning -of the year by P. Servilius Rullus, tribune of the plebs. In December, -64, shortly after entering office, he promulgated a bill, comprising -more than forty articles,[2738] with the intention of having it -voted on in January.[2739] The administration of the law was to -be in the hands of ten men elected by seventeen tribes after the -manner of the comitia pontificis maximi,[2740] to hold office five -years.[2741] Candidates should be required to present themselves in -person[2742] (so as to exclude Pompey). This commission was to have the -irresponsible[2743] management of large resources[2744] for the purchase -of land in Italy,[2745] on which they were to plant colonies at their -discretion.[2746] The object of the rogation seems to have been the -creation of an oligarchy of ten who with their vast powers and revenues -should control Rome and counterbalance the military prestige of Pompey. -Caesar and Crassus were probably behind the scheme. Should it by any -chance succeed, they would be the dominant members of the board. Its -faulty structure and revolutionary demands, however, made failure almost -certain from the outset. At all events Cicero, driven into the ranks -of the optimates by the necessity of opposing it,—so Caesar may have -reasoned,—would thus be eliminated from the leadership of the democratic -party, while the populace, with appetite whetted for an agrarian law, -would be ready for the saner measure which Caesar was himself intending -to propose as soon as an opportunity offered. But Cicero out-manoeuvred -his adversaries. It was as a friend of the people and an ally of the -tribunes that he opposed the bill in two contiones,[2747] after which -a threat of intercession on the part of a colleague induced Rullus to -withdraw it. - -In Cicero’s judgment there was pressing need of a new lex de ambitu -to cover the loopholes left by the Acilian-Calpurnian statute of -67.[2748] Early in the year he passed through the senate a decree which -so interpreted that enactment as to make it apply to the hiring of -sectatores, the granting of free seats to the tribes at gladiatorial -shows, and the entertainment of the public at dinners.[2749] Later -in the summer, after the elections of the year had been announced, -a dispensation from the Aelian-Fufian law[2750] enabled him and C. -Antonius, his colleague,[2751] to propose and carry a new statute -concerning bribery at elections.[2752] It increased the penalty on the -divisores,[2753] and forbade any one within the two years preceding the -announcement of a candidacy to give gladiatorial shows excepting in -fulfilment of a testament.[2754] The penalty for the convicted candidate -was ten years’ exile.[2755] The part of the law which had to do with the -jurors included a provision for fining those who absented themselves -from the trial even on the ground of illness.[2756] A measure certainly -passed in this year, and probably forming an article of the Tullian lex -de ambitu, forbade candidacies in absentia.[2757] Amid the troubles -connected with the Catilinarian conspiracy Cicero found time for an -attempt to relieve the provincials of one of the most flagrant abuses -inflicted on them by the senatorial oligarchy. To increase the dignity -and lessen the expense of a member while travelling even on private -business through the provinces, the senate was accustomed to have the -office of public legatus conferred on him by a magistrate, which honor -at the same time implied the right to be absent from sessions of the -senate.[2758] In this capacity a senator represented the state,[2759] -and could have lictors assigned him by the provincial governors.[2760] -Abuses of this privilege were to the provincials an especially vexatious -form of oppression.[2761] Cicero’s first rogation on the subject proposed -to abolish the free legation, but when a tribune in the service of the -illiberals interceded, the measure before enactment was so weakened as -to limit the privilege of any one person to a single year,[2762] and -hence did little to remedy the mischief.[2763] There was in fact no hope -for the provincials either from the avaricious plutocrats or the hungry -proletarians. - -The legislation of the years between the consulships of Cicero and -Caesar, 63-59, involved no important principle. To prevent the -introduction of forged statutes in the archives,[2764] a law of D. -Junius Silanus and L. Licinius Murena, consuls in 62, forbade the filing -of a statute in the aerarian archives excepting in the presence of -witnesses.[2765] In this year M. Porcius Cato and L. Marcius, tribunes -of the plebs, carried a law which threatened with punishment commanders -who reported falsely to the senate the number of the enemy killed and -of citizens lost, and required them within ten days after returning to -the city to give their oath before the urban quaestors that they had -transmitted correct reports.[2766] For the year 60 must be mentioned the -pretorian law of Q. Caecilius Metellus Nepos, which abolished vectigalia -in Italy,[2767] and the tribunician rogation of L. Flavius for granting -lands to Pompey’s veterans. The latter failed through the disapproval -of the senate.[2768] Far more interesting because of the procedure, -though otherwise of little consequence, was the tribunician rogation of -Herennius of the same year for transferring P. Clodius to the plebeian -rank. The subject has been considered in an earlier chapter.[2769] - -The year of Caesar’s consulship was one of unusual legislative activity. -Resuming the agrarian policy of the Gracchi, which had been undone by -the statute of 111,[2770] he promulgated early in the year a bill for -the distribution of lands, which exempted the Campanian[2771] and -Stellatine[2772] territory as well as that of Volaterrae, which Sulla -had confiscated without ejecting the inhabitants.[2773] As little other -public land remained in Italy, the bill ordered that money accruing -from the sale of booty taken by Pompey, and from the new revenues of -the territory he had won for Rome, be used for the purchase of lands -from those who were willing to sell at the values assessed in the last -census.[2774] The beneficiaries were the needy citizens and the veterans -of Pompey.[2775] The lots assigned were to remain inalienable twenty -years.[2776] The work of distribution was to be in the hands of a board -of twenty—vigintiviri[2777]—which should not include the author of -the law.[2778] A sub-committee of this large board must have been the -Vviri agris dandis adsignandis iudicandis,[2779] who in the opinion -of Mommsen[2780] possessed the sole judicial power connected with the -work of distribution. As the senate studiously delayed action on the -measure, though unable to offer any criticism,[2781] Caesar without its -sanction presented the bill to the people.[2782] Bibulus, his colleague, -backed by three tribunes of the plebs, not only protested against -the bill,[2783] but resorted to sky-watching and the proclamation of -festivals to prevent its adoption.[2784] Disregarding this opposition, -Caesar with the support of Pompey and Crassus offered his rogation to the -tribes,[2785] who accepted it with great enthusiasm. For the remainder of -his term he ignored the senate in all his legislation. As to his other -agrarian provisions, it is difficult to determine whether they were -attached to this rogation before its enactment or formed a new bill. -In favor of the second alternative it is to be noticed in the first -place that Cicero and others mention Julian agrarian laws,[2786] and -that Cicero’s expression “Campanian lex”[2787] could describe a measure -relating to the Campanian territory but not the whole group of agrarian -provisions of that year. Moreover although Cicero was acquainted with -the Julian rogation from the beginning of the year,[2788] he did not -at Formiae hear of the inclusion of the Campanian territory till near -the end of April.[2789] It might be assumed that after the senate and -Bibulus showed opposition Caesar modified the original rogation before -putting it to vote, but no mention is made of an alteration. Finally Dio -Cassius[2790] and Plutarch[2791] speak distinctly of an earlier and a -later law.[2792] On the whole it seems probable therefore that toward the -end of April Caesar promulgated a second agrarian bill which provided -for the distribution of the Campanian and Stellatine lands among needy -citizens, preferably those who had three or more children.[2793] The -complete execution of the law would dispose of all public lands in Italy -from which a revenue might be derived. An article required not only -senators within a specified time to swear that they would support the -measures[2794] but also candidates for office for the following year to -give their oath in contio that they would not propose any modification or -repeal of them.[2795] - -This statute was full of significance both in content and in the manner -of enactment: it set at defiance the senate and the auspices; it deprived -the state of important revenues, increasing correspondingly the financial -burden on the provinces; it brought relief to many proletarians, while -encouraging militarism through a provision for Pompey’s veterans. -Ostensibly democratic, it cemented and announced to the world the -triumvirate of Caesar, Crassus, and Pompey—a combination of democratic, -plutocratic, and military bossism, which proved more dangerous to -political liberty than had been the dictatorship of Sulla. The last -great agrarian law of the republic contained in itself a prophecy of the -monarchy which its author was soon to establish. - -Because of the losses suffered in Asia in the recent war with -Mithridates, Caesar carried a law, also early in the year, for a -remission of a third of the sum due to the treasury from the publicans -of that province. As the senate had failed to pass a measure of relief -for the contractors of revenue,[2796] the concession from Caesar and the -people served to alienate the feelings of the knights from the optimates -and to attach them to the ambitious consul.[2797] Next to the agrarian -statute, however, the lex de pecuniis repetundis was the most important -piece of legislation of his consulship. Comprising at least a hundred -and one articles,[2798] including much material from earlier laws on -extortion, it dealt minutely with all the particulars of the offence, -procedure, and punishment so exhaustively as to render further comitial -legislation on the subject unnecessary.[2799] It aimed to protect -alike citizens, provincials, and allies from every form of misrule and -oppression by the home and promagisterial authorities. It regulated -strictly the supplies due from the provincials to the promagistrate and -his officium, including shelter and sustenance for man and beast.[2800] -Under this law the governor was forbidden without an order from Rome -to conduct diplomatic business with foreign states, to wage war, or to -cross the boundary of his province,[2801] or to demand of the cities -crown gold for a triumph not decreed by the senate.[2802] On retiring -from his command he was to leave copies of his administrative accounts in -two cities of his province and an exact duplicate in the aerarium.[2803] -It provided further for the punishment of corrupt accusers, jurors, and -witnesses in cases under the law.[2804] A man convicted of the crime -was fined and compelled to restore extorted property; and in case his -estate did not suffice to cover the loss, an investigation could be made -as to who had shared his gains.[2805] He was also to be expelled from -the senate and banished.[2806] The severity of the law is commended by -Cicero.[2807] Caesar’s legislation concerning extortion was reënforced -(i) by the judiciary law of P. Vatinius, tribune of the plebs, of the -same year, which granted to both accuser and accused greater freedom in -the rejection of jurors than had been allowed by the corresponding law -of Sulla, the terms of which however are not definitely known;[2808] -(2) by a statute of Q. Fufius Calenus, praetor in 59, which required the -three decuries to deposit their votes in three separate urns, the object -being to establish class responsibility.[2809] The remaining comitial -acts of Caesar were merely administrative. As a favor to Pompey, who in -his eastern campaign had received support from Ptolemy Auletes, king of -Egypt,[2810] Caesar in the beginning of his consulship[2811] carried a -resolution for acknowledging the latter as an ally and friend of the -Roman people.[2812] Later in the year, to repay Pompey for his support -of the agrarian statute, Caesar secured against the will of the senate -the enactment of a law for confirming his ally’s arrangements in the -East.[2813] Lastly may be mentioned the lex curiata for the arrogation -of P. Clodius Pulcher proposed by Caesar in the capacity of pontifex -maximus, a measure considered in an earlier chapter.[2814] Clodius wished -to qualify himself for the tribunate of the plebs, and his design was -aided by Caesar in the expectation that he would occupy the attention of -Cicero, the only strong opponent of the triumviri. Caesar’s immediate -future was provided for by a plebiscite of his friend Vatinius, which -granted him Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum as a province for five years -beginning March 1, 59.[2815] He was to have three legions[2816] and to -name his own legati, who were to enjoy propretorian rank.[2817] The -senate, which had looked unwillingly upon these proceedings, now added -Comata and a fourth legion, partly because of the conviction that in the -face of an imminent war with the Helvetians no one would be willing to -take that province without Cisalpina as a support, and partly through -fear lest the popular party might gain the additional credit of bestowing -it.[2818] In one respect the position was far better than that held by -Pompey in the East: while winning prestige in a popular conquest[2819] -and attaching to himself a powerful army, Caesar would be near enough to -Rome to control the political situation.[2820] Intellectual brilliancy -would serve in place of experience. In fact, in addition to maintaining -the position of democratic boss of Rome, the outlook seemed to him -favorable for wresting from his fellow-triumvir the sceptre of the -military monarch.[2821] - -P. Clodius Pulcher, tribune of the plebs in 58, seems to have worked -partly as an agent of Caesar for the more complete organization of -democracy, and partly from motives of personal hatred for Cicero. -He first proposed a frumentarian plebiscite, which provided for the -absolutely free distribution of grain monthly among the citizens resident -in Rome.[2822] In vain the optimates complained that the abolition of the -existing price, which was that prescribed by the Sempronian law,[2823] -would rob the treasury of nearly a fifth of its income.[2824] Accepted -by the tribes, the law proved a most effective means of maintaining a -numerous mob of proletarians ever present and willing to vote for the -measures of their political patrons, the leaders of the democracy. -A closely related plebiscite permitted the free organization of -clubs (collegia),[2825] which a senatus consultum of 64 had strictly -limited,[2826] but which now became an active part of the democratic -organization.[2827] His legislation, however, was not utterly devoid of -statesmanship. A third act, by repealing those articles of the Aelian and -Fufian statutes which applied obnuntiations to law-making assemblies, -deprived the nobility of their most effective means of controlling -legislation.[2828] An article of the same statute declared all dies fasti -available for legislation.[2829] This measure went far toward abolishing -a usage which had made religion a mockery and public life a farce. To -limit the arbitrary power of the censors, Clodius enacted through a -plebiscite that these magistrates should place their stigma upon those -only whom they had jointly condemned after having heard sufficient -testimony.[2830] Another comitial act prohibited the secretaries of the -quaestors from engaging in business in the provinces.[2831] The last -three statutes mentioned were useful reforms. His most famous measure was -the law which prescribed the penalty of interdict from fire and water -for any one who had put to death a Roman citizen without trial.[2832] -Strengthening the Sempronian law of appeal,[2833] it forced the party -issue as to the question whether that act could apply to persons accused -of having attempted to overthrow the state. The optimates contended that -such persons were no longer citizens but enemies and hence outside the -pale of law[2834]—a principle which the populares held to be destructive -of liberty. From a democratic point of view the Clodian law was just -and necessary; but unfortunately Cicero, who in putting to death the -associates of Catiline had simply acted for the senate, was to be made -the scapegoat. Fearing condemnation under the law, Cicero voluntarily -retired into exile, whereupon a new plebiscite declared the interdict -to be legally in operation.[2835] In the following year he was recalled -with great enthusiasm by a resolution of the comitia centuriata proposed -by the consuls P. Cornelius Lentulus and Q. Caecilius Metellus.[2836] -The same magistrates were authors of a law for conferring upon Pompey -the care of the grain supply, which he was to administer five years with -unlimited proconsular imperium.[2837] In spite of such efforts to prop -up his power in order to counterpoise that of Caesar, the latter through -the prestige of his brilliant victories in Gaul and the liberal use of -money in the capital far outshone his fellow-triumviri. The only hope -for their ambition was to be found in the good will and favor of the -great proconsul. As the result of the conference held by the triumviri -at Luca, 56, Pompey and Crassus were elected to a second consulship for -55 through the votes of Caesar’s soldiers, who were given a furlough to -attend the comitia held purposely late in the year.[2838] As proconsuls -Pompey and Crassus were to be given advantageous commands, and Caesar -was to receive as his reward a prolongation of his governorship.[2839] -Subservient tribunes were found to propose the desired measures, and -it had long been an easy matter to obtain a majority in favor of any -conceivable bill. C. Trebonius drew up a law for granting Syria to -Crassus and the two Spains to Pompey for a period of five years, with a -dispensation for both from that article of the lex Iulia repetundarum -which forbade promagistrates of their own free will to declare war.[2840] -The intercessions of tribunes and all other opposition were violently -overborne, and the rogation was readily accepted by the people.[2841] -Thereupon the two consuls secured the passage of an act for extending -Caesar’s command.[2842] - -Notwithstanding the fact that these consuls had been elected with the -help of the clubs organized under the Clodian law of 58, they must have -felt such associations to be a menace to themselves as well as to the -public peace. Crassus accordingly carried through the assembly a lex de -sodaliciis, which increased the penalty for ambitus committed through -the agency of clubs.[2843] It also ordered that the jury in such cases -be made up by the accuser from any four tribes he should choose, however -unfavorable they might be to the accused,[2844] who had merely the -right to reject one of the four tribal decuries thus presented,[2845] -in so far as the court itself did not grant him the further privilege -of rejecting individuals.[2846] It is difficult to understand how -impartial justice could be administered under such a law. But no further -legislation concerning ambitus was attempted till 52, when Pompey in -his third consulship carried a statute which increased the penalty for -the offence and made the procedure more strict.[2847] The attention of -Pompey in his second consulship was directed rather to other classes of -crimes. First he had a statute adopted concerning parricide (the murder -of a near relative or patron), which hitherto had been provided for -by the Cornelian lex de sicariis et veneficis.[2848] His project for -displacing the lex Iulia repetundarum by a statute which should make -the non-senatorial class specifically responsible failed to become a -law.[2849] A sumptuary rogation for restricting personal expenditure -he voluntarily withdrew on the advice of Hortensius, who persuaded him -that luxury and delicacy of life were but the fitting adornments of -empire.[2850] His lex iudiciaria ordered the urban praetor to begin the -selection of jurors from the wealthiest of each of the three classes, and -thence to descend gradually to the poorer members, the object being to -make the composition of the courts as aristocratic as the terms of the -Aurelian statute of 70 would allow.[2851] The lex de vi of his third -consulship, 52, was merely for the appointment of a special commission to -try those who were accused of having murdered Clodius, burned the Curia, -and besieged the house of the interrex M. Aemilius Lepidus. It determined -the composition of the court and the penalty to be inflicted.[2852] -Of his statute de iure magistratuum, passed in the latter year, that -article only is known which reiterated the law of 63 for prohibiting -candidacies in absentia. But as a plebiscite had been passed earlier in -the year to dispense Caesar from the law of 63,[2853] and as Pompey did -not dare antagonize him by abolishing the plebiscite here mentioned, he -secured the adoption of an additional law for excepting such candidates -as had been or should be dispensed by comitial action.[2854] But Caesar’s -prospect of passing immediately from his Gallic command to a second -consulship was more effectually blocked by Pompey’s lex de provinciis, -which, embodying a senatus consultum of the previous year,[2855] -ordered that five years should intervene between the expiration of a -magistracy and the beginning of the corresponding promagistracy.[2856] -The general purpose was to dampen the ardor of the ambitious, who sought -praetorships and consulships merely as a stepping-stone to lucrative and -influential commands in the provinces. Its immediate effect, however, -was to precipitate the conflict between Caesar and Pompey which brought -the republic to ruin. The relation of the law to this event requires -explanation. In the Pompeian-Licinian act of 55 for prolonging Caesar’s -command measures were taken that the senate should not discuss the -question of succession to him before March 1, 50. According to the -Sempronian law,[2857] therefore, the senate could assign his provinces -to no consuls earlier than those of 49; hence Caesar would continue in -command during that year while suing for the consulship for 48. But by -the Pompeian law of 52 the Sempronian was abolished, and the senate was -given an opportunity to appoint a successor to him on or after March 1, -50.[2858] - -From the close of the second consulship of Pompey to the beginning of -Caesar’s dictatorship there was no important legislation.[2859] - - -III. _The Decline of the Republican Comitia_ - -FROM 49 TO ABOUT 30 - -With the dictatorship of Caesar begins the last stage in the life of the -republican comitia. For them it was from the beginning of his supremacy -essentially a time of decline. Although Caesar continued to submit his -plans to the assemblies for legalization, he rapidly concentrated in -his own person powers and functions hitherto exercised by the people; -and the triumviri, his successors, after a sham-republican interregnum, -constituted in law as well as in fact a three-headed despot. Mention -will first be made of the comitial acts which conferred powers and -honors on Caesar during his life. In 49 when news of his success in -Spain reached Rome, M. Aemilius Lepidus, a partisan who was then urban -praetor, persuaded the tribes to adopt a resolution empowering the author -to name Caesar dictator.[2860] Entering upon this office after his -return to Rome, about the end of November, Caesar used it to secure the -ratification of laws—to be considered hereafter—and to hold the electoral -comitia. After eleven days he resigned. At this election he was chosen -consul with P. Servilius Vatia as colleague.[2861] About the middle of -October, 48, when the senate and people heard of the death of Pompey, -they conferred on him by law (1) absolute judicial authority over the -partisans of Pompey,[2862] (2) the right to make peace and war at his -own pleasure, the pretext being the development of opposition to him -in Africa, (3) the right to be candidate for the consulship five years -in succession,[2863] (4) the dictatorship for an indefinite period, to -which he was appointed by his colleague in the consulship,[2864] (5) -the tribunician authority for life, with the privilege of sitting with -the tribunes, (6) the right to preside at the election of all patrician -magistrates, for which reason the comitia were postponed till his return -to the city, (7) the right to assign the pretorian provinces according to -his own judgment, (8) the right to triumph over Juba, king of Mauretania, -though at that time he did not know there was to be a war with that -state.[2865] Near the end of April, 46, when news came of the victory -at Thapsus, the Romans granted him (1) the censoria potestas with the -title of praefectus morum for three years, (2) the annual dictatorship -for ten years, (3) the right to nominate candidates for both ordinary and -extraordinary offices. These powers were doubtless conferred by comitial -action. At the same time great honors were heaped upon him, probably -through senatus consulta.[2866] Again in April, 45, after the battle -of Munda honors were showered on him in still greater profusion.[2867] -Politically the most important were the lifelong, hereditary title of -imperator, which he bore as a second cognomen,[2868] the sole right to -command soldiers and to manage the public funds, the privilege of being -consul ten years in succession (which he did not use), the prefecture -of morals and the dictatorship for life, and finally deification under -the title of the “Invincible God.”[2869] In fact for the remainder of -his life there was no cessation in the bestowal of divine and human -honors. Among those of his last year were the tribunician sanctity[2870] -and the right to have as many wives as he pleased—the latter granted by -a plebiscite of C. Helvius Cinna.[2871] The theocratic monarchy which -the Romans were erecting for him on the ruins of the republic left no -independence to the senate or the assemblies. The functions of the latter -were especially abridged by the large power of nominating and appointing -officials possessed by the monarch.[2872] His important legislative -plans, however, he brought before the people, preferably in their tribal -comitia. - -In December, 49, after returning from Spain, Caesar sought to relieve -somewhat the distress of debtors and at the same time to quiet the -general fear that he might decree a cancellation of all debts.[2873] -This object he accomplished through a law, (1) that interest already -paid should be deducted from the principal, (2) that the property of the -debtor should be taken in payment of the balance—not at the low values -then existing, but on the basis of ante-bellum prices, (3) that no one -should hoard more than fifteen thousand denarii in cash.[2874] The third -article was a renewal of an old law.[2875] Another statute,[2876] 47, -released from a year’s rent tenants of houses in Rome which brought the -owner more than 2000 sesterces or of houses outside the city which earned -more than 500.[2877] These houses were private property, and the law was -therefore a partial abolition of private debts.[2878] Such prosperity -came that in another year, 46, Caesar found it possible to cut down the -number who received free grain from 320,000 to 150,000.[2879] He provided -for the surplus population as well as for his veterans by colonies in -Gaul, Spain, Africa, Macedonia, Greece, and Asia.[2880] Eighty thousand -citizens found homes in these provincial settlements.[2881] - -Among Caesar’s most admirable traits was his liberality in restoring to -their civil rights those who were under disfranchisement and in granting -the citizenship to aliens. At his suggestion M. Antonius, tribune of the -plebs in 49, secured the enactment of a plebiscite for restoring the ius -honorum to the children of those whom Sulla had proscribed.[2882] Near -the end of the same year, also at his request, the praetors and tribunes -brought before the people and carried proposals for the recall of certain -persons who had been exiled, unjustly as he believed, under the Pompeian -law on ambitus.[2883] It was further at his suggestion that L. Roscius, -probably praetor, enacted a comitial law for granting the citizenship to -the Transpadani who at this time possessed simply the ius Latii.[2884] -Another law of unknown authorship confirmed the grant of the franchise -already made on his own responsibility to the people of Gades.[2885] - -Among his administrative improvements was the increase in the number of -praetors from eight to ten[2886] in 47, for which a comitial statute may -be assumed.[2887] The people surrendered to him a large part of their -electoral right through the plebiscite of L. Antonius,[2888] December, -45, which granted him the privilege of nominating and presenting to -the comitia a half of the candidates below the consulship.[2889] The -degradation into which the ordinary magistracies had been brought by the -supremacy of Caesar is indicated by the deposition of two tribunes of -the plebs, C. Epidius Marullus and L. Caesetius Flavus, because of their -opposition to monarchy, 44, through a plebiscite of their colleague, C. -Helvius Cinna.[2890] - -To the year 46 belongs Caesar’s legislation on judicial matters. First -disqualifying the tribuni aerarii for jury service,[2891] he ordered -through the comitia that the courts be composed exclusively of the -senators and knights.[2892] The man who had been carried to supreme -power on the shoulders of the common people now spurned even the most -respectable of their number from association with himself in the -administration.[2893] It is known that he enacted laws on individual -crimes.[2894] A lex de vi and a lex de maiestate are mentioned,[2895] -but it is not known in what they differed from those of earlier or later -date.[2896] His sumptuary statute of the same year[2897] restricted the -expense of the table,[2898] sepulchral monuments, dwellings,[2899] -furniture, clothing, jewels, and other luxuries, covering the ground -in great detail.[2900] A Cassian plebiscite empowered him to recruit -the patrician rank[2901]—a means of creating a nobility devoted to -himself, while supplying a religious need. A law proposed by himself (de -provinciis) limited proconsuls to two years of command and propraetors -to one,[2902] that in future they might not acquire such strength as to -overthrow the civil authority, after the pattern set by the author of -the regulation. It was by a vote of the people, too, that the famous -lex Iulia municipalis was adopted, probably in the autumn of 46.[2903] -Although there has been much controversy regarding the nature of the -document,[2904] it is most probably a general municipal statute. Far -from exhaustive, it had to be supplemented by special laws for the -several cities.[2905] The extant fragment, which seems to begin with the -second table, regulates (1) applications of citizens resident at Rome -for free grain,[2906] (2) the aedilician supervision of the streets, -buildings, and games of the capital,[2907] (3) the qualifications for -the magistracies and the decurionate in the municipia,[2908] (4) the -introduction of the Roman census in the municipia,[2909] and (5) of -individual Roman statutes in those municipia which enjoyed the laws of -Rome.[2910] The inclusion of the capital with the cities of Roman rights -throughout the empire in one general law marks the first step in the -monarchical process of reducing Rome to the level of the municipia.[2911] - -In comparison with the amount of reform work undertaken by Caesar the -legislative activity of the people was remarkably slight. The growth of -the monarchy wrought the decline of the comitia as well as of the senate; -and the assassination of the monarch brought equally to the republic and -to the assemblies but a short interval of pretended liberty.[2912] A -lex proposed by the consul M. Antonius confirmed the acts of Caesar and -established as law the plans which he left in writing at his death.[2913] -It was arbitrarily used by the consul for legalizing every whim of his -own. His colonial law, passed shortly after Caesar’s assassination,[2914] -seems to have been used by him for establishing in Italy a permanent -support for himself.[2915] The last known agrarian law of the republic -is that of his brother, L. Antonius, tribune of the plebs in the same -year, 44. It ordered the distribution of the Pomptine marshes—which -the author asserted were then ready for cultivation[2916]—and other -extensive tracts.[2917] The execution of the measure was in the hands of -septemviri,[2918] including the author[2919] and his two brothers.[2920] -It was annulled in the following year by the senate on the ground that it -had been violently passed.[2921] - -Meantime the consul Antonius continued his legislation. An arbitrary -act restored to the pontifical college its ancient right to appoint its -chief in place of the long-used election by seventeen tribes.[2922] -Next to colonization, however, his chief legislative interest was in -the reform of the courts. He repealed the Julian statute concerning the -qualifications of jurors;[2923] and instead of restoring the eligibility -of the tribuni aerarii, he made up a third decury of retired centurions -and other veterans.[2924] His law for granting an appeal to the people -from the quaestiones de vi and de maiestate,[2925] had it remained in -force, would as Cicero asserts have abolished these courts and have given -free rein to mob violence, such as comitial trials for these crimes must -necessarily be under conditions as they then existed.[2926] Popularity -was the aim of this measure as well as of his lex which forever abolished -the dictatorship. Along with all his other laws they were annulled by the -senate in February 43.[2927] - -The establishment of the triumviri rei publicae constituendae in 43 -practically abolished the functions of the comitia, as these three -potentates usurped the right of filling all offices by appointment and of -managing affairs according to their pleasure without consulting either -the senate or the people.[2928] The power they had seized was legalized -for a period of five years by the plebiscite of P. Titius, November 43, -passed without regard to the trinundinum.[2929] The reference of business -to the people was thereafter a rare indulgence. It may have been through -a comitial act that the triumviri resolved upon building a temple to -Serapis and Isis in the first year of their rule.[2930] We are less -certain that the measure of Octavianus in 41 for a partial remission of -rents was offered to the people.[2931] To the year 40 belongs the lex -Falcidia, of P. Falcidius, tribune of the plebs, which permitted a man -to bequeath no more than three-fourths of his estate, leaving one-fourth -to his natural heirs.[2932] We need not be surprised to find that the -rulers gladly allowed the people to vote them honors. In their first -year they were awarded civic crowns by a comitial act, doubtless of the -tribes;[2933] and in 35 the honors bestowed upon Octavia and Livia -probably came through a plebiscite, as did certainly the triumph voted -to Octavianus.[2934] Last may be mentioned the law of L. Saenius, consul -in 30, supported by a senatus consultum, which empowered Octavianus to -create new patricians.[2935] - - Schulze, C. F., _Volksversammlungen der Römer_, 124-39; Peter, - C., _Epochen der Verfassungsgeschichte der röm. Republik_, - 165 ff.; _Gesch. Roms_, bk. VII. ch. v; bks. VIII-X; Ihne, - _Hist. of Rome_, bk. VII. chs. xxi-xxiii; Lange, _Röm. - Alt._ iii. 146-597; cf. ii, see index s. the various laws; - _Commentationes de legibus Antoniis a Cicerone Phil. v. - 4. 10 commemoratis particula prior et posterior_, in _Kl. - Schr._ ii. 126-49; _Die lex Pupia_, etc., ibid. ii. 175-94; - _Die promulgatio trinum nundinum_, etc., ibid. ii. 214-70; - Long, G., _Decline of the Roman Republic_, 5 vols.; Herzog, - E., _Gesch. und System der röm. Staatsverf._ i. 509-65; ii. - 1-130; Mommsen, _History of Rome_, bk. IV. ch. x; bk. V; _Röm. - Staatsr._ and _Röm. Strafr._ see indices s. the various laws, - courts, etc.; _Ein zweites Bruchstück des rubrischen Gesetzes - vom Jahre 705 Roms_, in _Hermes_, xvi (1881). 24-41; _Lex - coloniae Iuliae Genetivae Urbanorum_, etc., in _Ephem. Ep._ ii - (1875). 105-51; _Lex municipii Tarentini_, ibid. ix. (1903). - 1-11; _Ueber die lex Mamilia Roscia Peducaea Alliena Fabia_, - in _Röm. Feldmess._ ii. 221-6; Neumann, C., _Gesch. Roms_, - i. 602-23; ii. entire; Ferrero, G., _Greatness and Decline - of Rome_; Schiller, H., _Geschichte der röm. Kaiserzeit_, - I. bk. i; Lengle, _Sullanische Verfassung_; Sunden, J. M., - _De tribunicia potestate a L. Sulla imminuta quaestiones_; - Freeman, E. A., _Lucius Cornelius Sulla_, in _Hist. Essays_, - ii. 271-306; Wilmanns, _Ueber die Gerichtshöfe während des - Bestehens der lex Cornelia iudiciaria_, in _Rhein. Mus._ N. - F. xix (1864). 528-41; Voigt, M., _Ueber die lex Cornelia - sumptuaria_, in _Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ xlii - (1890). 244-79; Nipperdey, K., _Die leges annales der röm. - Republik_, in _Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ v. (1870). - 1-88; Keil, J., _Zur lex Cornelia de viginti quaestoribus_, in - _Wiener Studien_, xxiv (1902). 548-51; Ritschl, F., _In leges - Viselliam Antoniam Corneliam observationes epigraphicae_, - in _Opuscula Philologica_, iv (1878). 427-45; Oman, C., - _Seven Roman Statesmen_, v-ix; Strachan-Davidson, _Cicero_; - Forsyth, W., _Life of Marcus Tullius Cicero_, 2 vols.; White, - H., _Cicero, Clodius, and Milo_; Sternkopf, W., _Ueber die - “Verbesserung” des clodianischen Gesetzwurfes de exilio - Ciceronis_, in _Philol._ N. F. xiii (1900). 272-304; _Noch - einmal die correctio der lex Clodia de exilio_, ibid. xv. - 42-70; Gurlitt, _Lex Clodia de exilio Ciceronis_, ibid. - xiii. 578-83; Greenidge, A. H. J., _The lex Sempronia and - the Banishment of Cicero_, in _Cl. Rev._ vii (1893). 347 f.; - Schmidt, O. E., _Der Briefwechsel des M. Tullius Cicero von - seinem Prokonsulat in Cicilien bis zu Cäsars Ermordung_; - John, C., _Die Entstehungsgeschichte der catilinarischen - Verschwörung_, in _Jahrb. f. cl. Philol. Supplb._ viii (1875, - 1876). 701-819; Abbott, F. F., _The Constitutional Argument in - the Fourth Catilinarian Oration_, in _Cl. Journ._ ii (1907). - 123-5; Napoleon III, _Jules César_, 2 vols.; Fowler, W., - _Julius Caesar_; Nissen, H., _Der Ausbruch des Bürgerkrieges - 49 vor Chr._, in _Hist. Zeitschr._ xliv (1880). 409-45; xlvi - (1881). 48-105; Hirschfeld, O., _Der Endtermin der gallischen - Staatshalterschaft Caesars_, in _Klio_, iv (1904). 76-87. - Wiegandt, L., _Studien zur staatsrechtlichen Stellung des - Diktators Cäsar: das Recht über Krieg und Frieden_; _Caesar und - die tribunizische Gewalt_; Hackel, H., _Die Hypothesen über - die lex Iulia municipalis_, in _Wiener Studien_, xxiv (1902). - 552-62; Cuq, E., _Juges plébéiens de colonie de Narbonne_, - in _Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire_ (1881). 297-311; - Kornemann, _Die cäsarische Kolonie Karthago und die Einführung - röm. Gemeindeordnung in Africa_, in _Philol._ N. F. xiv - (1901). 402-26; Liebenam, W., _Gesch. und Organisation d. röm. - Vereinswesens_; Waltzing, J. P., _Corporations professionelles - chez les Romains_, i. 78 ff.; Babelon, E., _Monnaies de la - république Romaine_, i. 79-88; Dreyfus, R., _Lois agraires_, - pt. iii; Toutain, J., _Municipium_, in Daremberg et Saglio, - _Dict._ iii. 2022-34; Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 256 f.: - M’. Acilius Glabrio (Klebs); 554-6; M. Aemilius Lepidus (idem); - 1800-3: Ambitus (Hartmann); ii. 191-4: Apparitores (Habel); - 2482-4: C. Aurelius Cotta (Klebs); 2485-7: L. Aurelius Cotta - (idem); iii. 1376 f.: C. Calpurnius Piso (Münzer); iv. 82-8: P. - Clodius Pulcher (Fröhlich); 1252-5: C. Cornelius (Münzer); iv. - 1287 f.: L. Cornelius Cinna—son of the famous democratic consul - (idem); 1380 f.: Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus (idem); - 1522-66: L. Cornelius Sulla Felix (Fröhlich); 2401-4: Deiotarus - (Niese). - - - - -CHAPTER XVIII - -THE COMPOSITION AND PRESERVATION OF STATUTES, COMITIAL PROCEDURE, AND -COMITIAL DAYS - - -I. _The Composition and Preservation of Statutes_ - -Laws were drawn up in technically exact language. If the proposer of a -rogation lacked the necessary knowledge, he sought the advice of learned -friends.[2936] The bill, as first presented to the senate and published -in the city on wooden tablets,[2937] was merely tentative; for discussion -in the senate or the expression of public opinion might suggest -changes[2938] or even induce the author to withdraw the proposal.[2939] - -At the head of the law after its adoption was inserted the index and -praescriptio,[2940] of which the consular lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus, -accepted by the tribes in the year 9 B.C., offers a good example:[2941] - -“T. Quinctius Crispinus consul populum iure rogavit, populusque iure -scivit in foro pro rostris aedis divi Iulii pr(idie) _K_ Iulias. -Tribus Sergia principium fuit, pro tribu Sex.... L. f. Virro _primus -scivit_.”[2942] - -It contains the name of the rogator,[2943] his office, the body of -citizens, whether populus or plebs, to which the proposal is offered, -the place of the assembly,[2944] the date, the century (praerogativa) or -the tribe or curia (principium) which voted first, and the name of the -citizen who has been granted the honor of casting the first vote for his -praerogativa or principium.[2945] If the senate has given its sanction, -that fact is indicated by the insertion of the phrase “de s(enatus) -s(ententia).”[2946] In case the proposal is by a tribune of the plebs, it -is strictly a plebi scitum; but that its equivalence to a lex may be made -clear, it is described as a lex plebeive scitum.[2947] - -The body of the law is divided into chapters separated by spaces, -sometimes numbered, and occasionally bearing individual titles.[2948] -Last comes the sanction,[2949] which provides for the enforcement. Some -laws, however,—termed leges imperfectae—lack this part.[2950] Usually the -sanction prescribes the form of procedure according to which offenders -are to be tried.[2951] - -If the author of the new proposal has no desire to disturb any existing -law, this fact is indicated by the insertion of the formula E(x) H(ac) -L(ege) N(ihilum) R(ogatur).[2952] As a protection from the operation of -earlier laws left in whole or in part unrepealed by the new statute, the -latter is provided with a declaration that no attempt is hereby made to -legalize anything illegal.[2953] By an analogous statement unconscious -trespassing upon the rights of religion is rendered harmless.[2954] In -accordance with a law of the Twelve Tables[2955] provision is further -made against the consequences of conflict with other laws by the -declaration that if any one in carrying out this law shall trespass -against other statutes or senatus consulta, his act shall render him in -no way liable to such earlier laws or decrees.[2956] A provision may -also be added against illegal alteration or repeal.[2957] Sometimes the -proposer includes an article for compelling senators and magistrates -to uphold his law, should it be enacted,[2958] or for otherwise -overcoming opposition to its enforcement,[2959] or for making repeal -difficult.[2960] It becomes binding from the moment when the author -announces its adoption by the comitia, excepting in case time has to be -given the senators and magistrates for swearing to it.[2961] The law is -then engraved on a bronze tablet,[2962] the original copy of which is -kept by the quaestors in the aerarium.[2963] Other copies are posted in -public places where all can read it.[2964] - - -II. _Comitial Procedure_ - -The tribal assembly convened under the presidency of a tribune or aedile -of the plebs,[2965] in which case the gathering was technically the -plebs;[2966] or as the populus under a patrician magistrate—dictator, -consul, praetor,[2967] curule aedile,[2968] pontifex maximus,[2969] -or any extraordinary magistrate who possessed the ius agendi cum -populo.[2970] It met indifferently within or without the pomerium, -usually on the Capitoline hill in the precinct of the temple of -Jupiter,[2971] in the Forum and comitium,[2972] the Campus Martius,[2973] -and within the latter in the Flaminian meadow or Flaminian Circus.[2974] -Meetings called by tribunes had to convene within the first milestone, -which bounded the authority of these officials,[2975] whereas we hear -of a tribal assembly called by a consul in the military camp at Sutrium -(357).[2976] The contio, described in an earlier chapter, was transformed -into comitia by order of the presiding magistrate directing the people -to take their places in their respective tribes.[2977] Before this -command was given a tribe was drawn by lot to receive the Latins who -were at Rome.[2978] A second tribe was then drawn as a principium -to cast the first vote.[2979] The bringing of the urn[2980] and the -sortition were the last acts of the contio. To facilitate the division -ropes were stretched across the Forum or other assembly-place, forming -as many compartments as there were tribes.[2981] In time a permanent -enclosure, termed Saepta,[2982] was built for the comitia.[2983] If the -magistrate found that an entire tribe was absent, he assigned to it for -the occasion a few citizens from some other, in order that in theory all -thirty-five tribes—the universus populus Romanus—might be present.[2984] -After the tribes were assembled in their comitia as here described, -the principium was called to vote. This point terminated the right -of intercession[2985] and of obnuntiating an evil omen discovered in -watching the sky.[2986] When the suffrage of the principium was given and -announced,[2987] all the remaining tribes voted simultaneously.[2988] In -earlier time a rogator stood at the exit of each saeptum, and received -the oral votes of the citizens as they passed out one by one.[2989] After -the introduction of the ballot,[2990] the state provided little tablets -inscribed with abbreviations for “ut rogas” and “antiquo” for affirmative -and negative votes respectively,[2991] and for elections blank tablets -on which the names of the candidates could be written.[2992] They were -deposited in boxes (cistae) placed at the exits above mentioned,[2993] -under the charge of rogatores, who, having lost their original function, -were now often, and more aptly, called custodes.[2994] They counted -(diribitio) the ballots, and reported (renuntiatio) the results to the -president.[2995] The latter had a right to announce to the public the -returns from the tribes in whatever order he pleased, but he usually -preferred to determine the succession by lot.[2996] In the election of -any college of magistrates each citizen voted for as many candidates as -there were places to be filled, and the announcements for each continued -till a majority was reached in his favor. Precedence in honor within the -college depended upon priority of election.[2997] The declaration of the -vote by the praeco at the command of the president closed the comitial -act.[2998] If for any reason the presiding magistrate discontinued -the announcement before a majority was reached, the vote was without -effect.[2999] The session of any assembly had to begin and end between -sunrise and sunset.[3000] - -The comitia curiata, presided over by the king, the interrex, and -possibly by the tribunus celerum,[3001] and in the republican period -by the dictator,[3002] consul,[3003] interrex,[3004] praetor,[3005] -pontifex maximus,[3006] or rex sacrorum,[3007] met always within the -pomerium,[3008] usually in the comitium,[3009] or for religious purposes -in front of the Curia Calabra on the Capitoline hill.[3010] It was -called together by a curiate lictor[3011] at the sound of the lituus or -tuba.[3012] The procedure, which in general was like that of the tribal -assembly, and which has been touched upon in the chapters on the comitia -calata and curiata, does not require further consideration here.[3013] - -The comitia centuriata could be summoned for voting by no magistrates -in their own name and under their own auspices excepting those who were -vested with the imperium[3014]—the dictator, consul, interrex for holding -elections, the praetor for judicial business,[3015] and all extraordinary -magistrates with consular power. The duoviri perduellioni iudicandae, the -quaestors, and the tribunes of the plebs could summon this assembly for -judicial business under the auspices only of a magistrate cum imperio, as -the consul or more especially the praetor.[3016] It always met outside -the pomerium, usually in the Campus Martius,[3017] at the call of an -accensus, who sounded the trumpet (classicum) at daybreak along the city -wall.[3018] During the session the citizens in the assembly could see a -flag waving above the Janiculum to signify that this post was occupied by -a garrison as a protection for the city while they were engaged outside -in a public duty.[3019] As in the case of the tribal assembly, the contio -was transformed into comitia by an order of the president commanding -the citizens to separate into their respective voting groups.[3020] The -place of meeting, termed ovile[3021] (sheepfold), was divided by ropes -or wooden fences into as many compartments as there were centuries in -the largest voting division—probably eighty-seven.[3022] An elevated -passage (pons) formed the exit of each compartment.[3023] The members of -a century, while passing out one by one, gave their votes to the rogator, -in the same way as the tribesmen in the comitia tributa. After the ballot -was introduced, it was used in all assemblies alike.[3024] The order -of voting before and after the reform has been sufficiently explained -in an earlier chapter.[3025] In general the principles governing the -announcement of votes, interruptions, and adjournments were the same -for all three assemblies. The length of the assemblies must have varied -according to the form of organization, the number of voters present, and -various other circumstances. In the time of Caesar the process in the -comitia centuriata, on an occasion in which there was no delay, lasted -five hours.[3026] We should therefore assume at least an hour for the -voting of the tribes.[3027] - - -III. _Comitial Days_ - -The people could meet for voting on comitial days only[3028]—marked -=C= in the calendar.[3029] They excluded the dies nefasti—marked =N=, -=NP=, or =NF=—on which religion forbade that public business should be -done.[3030] They excluded further the two days marked Q(uando) R(ex) -C(omitiavit) F(as),[3031] the one day marked Q(uando) ST(ercus) D(eletum) -F(as)[3032]—because on these days it was impossible to open the assembly -in the morning as usage prescribed—and the eight days marked =EN=,[3033] -the morning and evening of which were alone nefasti, the intervening -part being free for business. Equally distinct from the comitial days -were the dies fasti non comitiales, marked =F=, and in this volume -termed simply fasti.[3034] They were reserved for judicial business. -The pre-Julian year contained a hundred and eight nefasti[3035] and -forty-five fasti, leaving a hundred and ninety-one comitial days.[3036] -The ten days added by Caesar are all marked =F=.[3037] It is to be -noticed, however, that those days marked =C= on which fell in any year -extraordinary or changeable festivals were thereby rendered unfit for -comitia.[3038] - -It seems probable that in early time market-days (nundinae) were -not wholly devoted to trade[3039] and to the settlement of cases -at law,[3040] but that they could be used equally well for voting -assemblies,[3041] till the Hortensian statute of 287 declared those -marked =F= and =C= to be fasti, reserving them thus for judicial business -and prohibiting from them voting assemblies of every kind.[3042] The -general tendency during the republic was to restrict the power of the -people by lessening the number of days on which they could meet for -passing resolutions.[3043] - - Lange, _Römische Altertümer_, ii. 649-54; Madvig, _Verfass, und - Verw. d. röm. Staates_, i. 246-73; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ - i. 1105-13; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 388-448; Mommsen, - _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 314 f., 396-419; in _CIL._ i. p. 203 - ff., 290 ff.; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. - 482-4, 687-93, 705-8; Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ - i. 1377, 1379 f.; Cuq, ibid. iii. 1122 ff.; Hübner, A., _De - senatus populique Romani actis_; Ritschl, F., _In leges - Viselliam Antoniam Corneliam observationes epigraphicae_, in - _Opuscula Philol._ iv. 427-45; Egbert, _Latin Inscriptions_, - 348-50; Cagnat, _Épigraphie Lat._ 265-7; Marquardt, _Röm. - Staatsv._ iii. 289 ff.; Wissowa, _Religion und Kultus der - Römer_, 368 ff.; _Comitiales dies_, in Pauly-Wissowa, - _Real-Encycl._ iv. 716; Fowler, _Roman Festivals_, 8 ff. - - - - -CHAPTER XIX - -A SUMMARY OF COMITIAL HISTORY - - -Originating in the simple gathering (contio) of the primitive folk, the -general assembly of Roman citizens came, under sacerdotal influence, -to be grouped in curiae with a view to adding order and solemnity to -the meetings. Thus the Romans created the comitia curiata. Not only the -curiae, but also the later centuries, classes, and tribes, originally -existed independently of the assembly for various administrative purposes -and were brought into connection with that institution as convenient -systems of organization. At first ceremonial, the comitia curiata came -to be used for voting on resolutions. Gradually reducing this earliest -organized gathering to a formality, the Romans successively introduced -the centuriate and the tribal comitia. Excepting for brief, transitional -periods the assembly, whatever its form, admitted all citizens who -possessed the right of suffrage. Its power was at first slight vague, and -chiefly receptive. Though in the regal period the people occasionally -approved or rejected judicial sentences, administrative plans, and even -proposals for changes in existing customs submitted to them by the -king of his own free will, the only function which at that time they -definitely acquired was the election of their chief magistrate. - -From the founding of the republic to the decemviral legislation (509-450) -the magistrates and senate exercised almost absolute control over the -administration. At the very beginning the comitia centuriata—a newly -established timocratic institution—assumed the right to enact laws, which -for a long time were substantially limited to matters directly affecting -the constitution; and the alleged Valerian centuriate statute made of -this body a supreme court to which any citizen condemned on a capital -charge was granted the privilege of appeal. In practice, however, the law -benefited those only of high rank who were accused of political crimes. -Meantime a new, more democratic assembly under the presidency of tribunes -of the plebs, meeting by tribes after 471, usurped an extensive though -ill-defined power of fining and capitally condemning offenders against -the sanctity of plebeian officials. But this function, resting upon an -act of the plebs only and enforced by threats of violence, was almost -nullified by patrician opposition. It was doubtless in this period that -voting by heads arose in the comitia centuriata, whence it was adopted by -the other assemblies. - -The Twelve Tables (451-450) confirmed the comitia centuriata in the -rights it had previously assumed; and if not expressly, at least -by implication they granted legislative and judicial power to the -tribunician assembly of tribes. A Valerian-Horatian statute of 449 -provided that resolutions approved by the senate and carried by the -latter assembly should have the force of law, just as from the beginning -the senatorial sanction (patrum auctoritas) was essential to the validity -of curiate and centuriate resolutions and elections. At the same time -in conformity with a law of the Twelve Tables an arrangement was made -by which the tribunes should bring their finable actions before the -tribes and those of a capital nature before the centuries. Soon afterward -the patrician magistrates began to use the tribes for the election of -inferior officials and occasionally for the ratification of laws. - -During the century following the decemviral legislation (450-358) the -almost absolute administrative power of the senate and magistrates -remained but slightly affected by the comitia. The appointment of a -dictator or the establishment of a special judicial commission placed the -citizens at the mercy of the government. Although the comitia centuriata -acquired the right to ratify or reject declarations of offensive war -(427) and though the tribunes succeeded in enacting a few important -plebiscites, like the Canuleian and the Licinian-Sextian, the people made -little progress toward the free exercise of legislative and judicial -functions. With the enactment of a lex de ambitu in 358 the tribes -began to legislate concerning magistrates, with reference not only to -candidacy and qualifications but soon also to powers and functions and -to the creation of new offices. They passed laws on finance and religion -and on the qualification and appointment of senators; they assumed -the function of ratifying or rejecting proposals for peace (321) and -of admitting aliens to citizenship. The tribes and the centuries began -regularly to exercise appellate jurisdiction. About the same time the -people acquired the function of appointing special judicial commissions, -and subjected the dictator to the law of appeal. In an effort to throw -off the control exercised by the nobility the Publilian statute of 339 -excluded patricians from the tribunician assembly of tribes (a regulation -afterward silently abandoned), and in 287 that of Hortensius rendered the -approval of the senate and of the patrician portion of it unessential -to the validity of the plebiscite. Meanwhile in administrative and in -constitutional legislation the comitia tributa made great gains at the -expense of the senate and magistrates and of the centuriate assembly. - -The period extending from 358 to 287 was accordingly the first great -age of comitial legislative and judicial activity. The strong popular -tendency then manifested might have created a real democracy, had it -not been for (1) the cleverness of the nobles in gaining control of the -plebeian tribunate and in using religion as a check on comitial freedom. -(2) the rapid expansion of the Roman power, which drew the public mind -away from internal politics, and which rendered the assembly not only -an inadequate representative of the citizens but also incompetent for -the functions devolving upon it. Many years passed, however, before this -incompetency became serious. Though henceforth the comitia were in theory -sovereign, they remained limited by a want of initiative both in the act -of assembling and in the offering of resolutions, by the lack of free -deliberation, by the tribunician veto, and by the oblative auspices. -After the enactment of the Hortensian statute the comitia tributa enjoyed -almost exclusive possession of the legislative function. The larger share -fell to the tribunician assembly, which excelled in aggressiveness, and -which admitted as much freedom of debate as was consistent with the -spirit of the constitution—hence it was preferably termed concilium. -Notwithstanding these relative advantages of the tribal assembly the -adverse conditions above mentioned led to an era of comitial stagnation -(287-232), at the close of which the tribunate of C. Flaminius brought -a new outburst of activity (232-201). The assemblies now recovered all -they had lost in the preceding age and made fresh gains. Noteworthy -are the sumptuary, monetary, private, and family statutes, and the -recognition of the right of the people to grant dispensations from -existing laws. In the opinion of Polybius the constitution was in this -time at its best. The nobles admitted the theory of popular sovereignty, -as they could well afford to do in view of their thorough control of -all governmental institutions. In the era of the completed plutocracy -(201-134) they regularly resorted to the comitia in matters of little -political importance or in those in which they felt certain of the -results. Under these conditions fewer laws were enacted for the benefit -of the masses. The policy of the nobles was to repress individual freedom -by subjecting both magistrates and assemblies to the plutocratic machine. -Even the comitial judicia were subordinated to this end; and toward the -close of the period the people in establishing permanent courts began -through legislation to surrender their judicial power to the senatorial -class, while the senate, on the other hand, resumed the function of -dispensing from the laws and of appointing special courts. In these ways -the nobility was making great inroads on popular liberty. - -In the beginning of the revolutionary period (134-30) the tribal -assembly, liberated for a time from servitude to the plutocracy, became -under the presidency of reforming tribunes the ruling power at Rome. Its -activity not only embraced the whole field of administration but was -directed by the Gracchi to the creation of a new political constitution -and to the regeneration of society. But its variable composition -precluded consistency of action. Though at times, as when controlled -by the rural element of the citizen body, it could be induced to adopt -liberal, statesmanlike measures such as the agrarian and colonial laws -of the Gracchi, the usual dominance of the ignorant and unprincipled -poor of the metropolis inclined it to a short-sighted, selfish course -of conduct—rendering it a powerful weapon in the hands either of the -demagogue or of the plutocratic senate, equally effective for resisting -genuine reforms and for destroying the institutions of the republic. -As with the progress of the revolution the conservative checks began -to weaken and disappear, the comitia became more and more subject -to violence and coercion. The comitial prosecutions of this period -partook of the same revolutionary character. From the time of Sulla the -assemblies were overshadowed by the military power. Under his dictation -they surrendered to the senatorial courts nearly all that remained of -their judicial function, and they seriously crippled their legislative -power in favor of a reaction to the pre-Hortensian constitution. After -a brief interval of bondage to the senate (81-70) they recovered their -legislative freedom, only to subserve for the future the alliance now -formed between the tribunes of the plebs and the great proconsuls. From -the accession of Julius Cæesar to the dictatorship (49) their power -rapidly declined. They yielded to him a large share of their legislative -and even of their elective function. After a brief period of pretended -liberty following the assassination of the dictator, they lapsed with the -fall of the republic into utter insignificance. - -The comitia had filled a large place in the history of the state. They -were the chief factor of constitutional progress and of beneficent -legislation. Their development and decline involved the prosperity and -the ruin of the republic. For the world they have a higher value. The -tribal assembly, supporting the plebeian tribunate, was the storm centre -of long, heroic struggles for human rights. The fact that it championed -this cause, that it met with some success in the conflict, that a -Gracchus deemed it worthy to undertake the social regeneration of the -world, has given the institution a universal and a permanent interest. - - - - -BIBLIOGRAPHY - - -From this list are excluded the titles of all works which, treating -of other than Roman institutions, are referred to in this volume for -comparative purposes, and of all sources which are accessible in -well-known, standard editions. - - Abbott, F. F. A History and Description of Roman Political - Institutions. Boston, 1901. - - ⸺ The Constitutional Argument in the Fourth Catilinarian - Oration. _Classical Journal_, ii (1907). 123-5. - - _Abhdl. d. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin._ = _Philologische - und historische Abhandlungen der königlichen Akademie der - Wissenschaften zu Berlin._ - - _Abhdl. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss._ = _Abhandlungen der königlich - bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften._ Munich. - - _Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ = _Abhandlungen der - philologisch-historische Classe der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig._ - - Ackermann, H. Die räumlichen Schranken der tribunizischen - Gewalt. Program. Rostock, 1891. - - Aelius Donatus. Commentum Terenti, ed. P. Wessner. 2 vols. - Leipzig, 1902, 1905. - - Ahren, E. A. J. Die drei Volkstribunen Ti. Gracchus, M. Drusus, - und P. Sulpicius. Leipzig, 1836. - - Ampère, J. J. Histoire Romaine à Rome. 4 vols. Paris, 1866-1872. - - _Archiv f. lat. Lexicog._ = _Archiv für lateinische - Lexicographie und Grammatik ... als Ergänzung zu dem Thesaurus - linguae Latinae_, ed. E. von Wölfflin. Leipzig. - - Arndts, D. Die lex Maenia de dote vom Jahre der Stadt Rom 568. - _Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte_, vii (1868). 1-44. - - Arnim, H., von. Ineditum Vaticanum. _Hermes_, xxvii (1892). - 118-30. - - Arnobius, Adversus Nationes libri vii, rec. A. Reifferscheid. - Vienna, 1875. - - Arnold, W. T. The Roman System of Provincial Administration. - New ed. Oxford, 1906. - - Auct. Inc. de Diff. = Auctor Incertus (Cornelius Fronte?), (in) - Grammatici Latini, ed. Keil, vii. 519-32. - - Aust, E. Die Religion der Römer. Münster, 1899. - - - Babelon, E. Description historique et chronologique des - monnaies de la république Romaine. 2 vols. Paris, 1885, 1886. - - Babelon, E. Les origines de la monnaie. Paris, 1897. - - ⸺ Traité des monnaies Grecques et Romaines, i. Paris, 1901. - - Bardt, C. Die Priester der vier grossen Collegien aus - römisch-republikanischer Zeit. Program. Berlin, 1871. - - ⸺ Zur lex Caecilia Didia und noch einmal: Senatssitzungstage - der späteren Republik. _Hermes_, ix (1875). 305-18. - - _Beiträge zur alten Geschichte._ Leipzig. Beginning with vol. v - the periodical is termed _Klio_, with _Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ - as a sub-title. - - Beloch, J. Campanien: Topographie, Geschichte, und Leben der - Umgebung Neapels im Altertum. Berlin, 1879. - - ⸺ Der italische Bund unter Roms Hegemonie. Leipzig, 1880. - - ⸺ Die Bewölkerung der griechisch-römischen Welt. Leipzig, 1886. - - ⸺ Die Bewölkerung Italiens im Altertum. _Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ - iii (1903). 471-90. - - Belot, E. Histoire des chevaliers Romaines, etc. 2 vols. Paris, - 1866, 1873. - - ⸺ De la révolution économique et monétaire qui eut lieu à Rome - au milieu du IIIe siècle avant l’ère Chrétienne, etc. Paris, - 1885. - - _Berl. phil. Wochenschr._ = _Berliner philologische - Wochenschrift._ - - _Berliner Studien_ = _Berliner Studien für classische - Philologie und Archaeologie._ - - Bernhöft, F. Staat und Recht der römischen Königszeit im - Verhältniss zu verwandten Rechten. Stuttgart, 1882. - - Berns, C. De comitiorum tributorum et conciliorum plebis - discrimine. Inaugural dissertation. Wetzlar, 1875. - - _Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ or _Verhdl. d. sächs. - Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ = _Berichte über die Verhandlungen der - königlich sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu - Leipzig. Philologisch-historische Classe._ - - Bertolini, C. I celeres ed il tribunus celerum; contributo alla - storia della constituzione dell’ antica Roma. Rome, 1888. - - Billeter, G. _Gesch. d. Zinsfuss._ = Geschichte des Zinsfusses - in griechisch-römischen Altertum bis auf Justinien. Leipzig, - 1898. - - Blasel, J. Die Motiven der Gesetzgebung des C. Sempronius - Gracchus. Trieste, 1878. - - Bloch, A. Le praefectus fabrum, ii. _Musée Belge_, ix (1905). - 352-78. - - Bloch, G. Recherches sur quelques gentes patriciennes, (in) - Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’école Française de - Rome, 241-76. 1882. - - ⸺ Orig. d. sén. = Les origines du sénat Romain; recherches sur - la formation et la dissolution du sénat patricien. Paris, 1883. - - ⸺ La réforme démocratique à Rome au IIIe siècle av. J. C. - _Revue historique_, xxxii (1886). 1-32, 241-89. - - ⸺ Observations sur le procès des Scipions. _Revue des études - anciennes_, viii (1906). 93-110, 191-228, 287-322. - - Bloch, L. Die ständischen und sozialen Kämpfe in der römischen - Republik. Leipzig, 1900. - - Blume, F., Lachmann, K., and Rudorff, A. F. [Röm. Feldmess.] - Die Schriften der römischen Feldmesser, ii. Berlin, 1852. Vol. - i is the Gromatici Veteres, ed. K. Lachmann. - - Böckh, A. Metrologische Untersuchungen. Berlin, 1838. - - Bormann, E. Die älteste Gliederung Roms, (in) Eranos - Vindobonensis, 345-58. Vienna, 1893. - - Botsford, G. W. On the Distinction between Comitia and - Concilium. _Transactions of the American Philological - Association_, xxxv (1904). 21-32. - - ⸺ Social Composition of the Primitive Roman Populus. _Political - Science Quarterly_, xxi (1906). 498-526. - - ⸺ Some Problems connected with the Roman Gens. ibid, xxii - (1907). 663-92. - - ⸺ The Lex Curiata. ibid, xxiii (1908). 498-517. - - Bouché-Leclerq, A. Histoire de la divination dans l’antiquité, - iv. 134-285. Paris, 1882. - - ⸺ Augures, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. i. 550-60. Auspicia. - ibid. i. 580-5. - - Borgeaud, C. Histoire du plébiscite: le plébiscite dans - antiquité. Geneva and Paris, 1887. - - Brassloff, S. Beiträge zur Erläuterung der lex Acilia - repetundarum. _Wiener Studien_, xxvi (1904). 106-17. - - Breda. Die Centurienverfassung des Servius Tullius. Bromberg, - 1848. - - Bröcker, L. O. Untersuchungen über die Glaubwürdigkeit der - altrömischen Verfassungsgeschichte. Hamburg, 1858. - - ⸺ Untersuchungen über die Glaubwürdigkeit der altrömischen - Geschichte. Basel, 1868. - - Bruncke, H. Beiträge zur Entwickelungsgeschichte des römischen - Heerwesens. _Philol._ xl (1881). 357-77. - - Bruns, C. G. Fontes iuris Romani antiqui. 6th ed. Freiburg, - 1893. - - ⸺ Geschichte und Quellen des römischen Rechts, (in) - Holtzendorff, F. von, and Kohler, J. Encyklopädie der - Rechtswissenschaft in systematischer Bearbeitung, i. 70 ff. 6th - ed. (1st ed. of Kohler’s revision). 2 vols. Leipzig and Berlin, - 1904. - - Bücheler, F. Umbrica. Bonn, 1883. - - Buck, C. D. A Grammar of Oscan and Umbrian. Boston, 1904. - - Büdinger, M. Cicero und der Patriciat, eine staatsrechtliche - Untersuchung. _Denkschr. d. kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss._ xxi - (1881). 211-74. - - ⸺ Der Patriciat und das Fehderecht in den letzten Jahrzehnten - der römischen Republik, ibid, xxxvi (1888). 81-125. - - Bürger, C. P., Jr. Sechzig Jahre aus der älteren Geschichte - Roms, 418-358. Historisch-kritische Forschungen. Amsterdam, - 1891. - - ⸺ Neue Forschungen zur älteren Geschichte Roms, i, ii. - Amsterdam, 1894, 1895. - - - Cagnat, R. Cours d’épigraphie Latine. 3d ed. Paris, 1898. - - ⸺ Equites, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. ii. 771-89. - - Callegari, E. La legislazione sociale di Caio Gracco. Padua, - 1896. - - Cantalupi. La magistratura di Silla durante la guerra civile. - Rome, 1899. - - Carter, J. B. Roma Quadrata and the Septimontium. _Am. Journ. - of Archaeol._ xii (1908). 172-83. - - Casagrandi, V. Le minores gentes ed i patres minorum gentium, - etc. Torino, 1892. Unscientific. - - Cassiodorus, Magnus Aurelius. Opera omnia, (in) Patrologiae - cursus completus, lxix, ed. Migne. Paris, 1865. - - Charis. = Charisius, F. S. Ars grammatica (or Instit. Gram.), - (in) Grammatici Latini, i, ed. Keil. Leipzig, 1857. - - Christ, W. Sprachliche Verwandtschaft der Gräko-Italiker. - _Sitzb. d. k. bayer Akad._ 1906. 151-246. - - Christensen, H. Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung der Patres. - _Hermes_, ix (1875). 196-216. - - CIL. = Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum, ed. Mommsen and others. - Berlin. The first edition is cited, unless otherwise indicated. - - CJA. = Corpus iuris Attici, ed. I. B. Telfy. Leipzig and - London, 1868. - - Clason, O. Kritische Erörterungen über die römischen Staat. - Rostock, 1871. - - ⸺ Zur Frage über die reformierte Centurienverfassung. - _Heidelberger Jahrbücher der Literatur_, lxv (1872). 221-37. - - Conway, R. S. I due strati di populazione Indo-Europea del - Lazio e dell’ Italia antica. _Rivista di storia antica_, vii - (1903). 422-4. - - Corp. Gloss. Lat. = Corpus glossariorum Latinorum. 7 vols. Ed. - G. Loewe, G. Goetz, and others. Leipzig, 1876-1903. - - Corssen, W. [Ausspr.]. Ueber Aussprache Vokalismus und Betonung - der lateinischen Sprache. 2d ed. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1868, 1870. - - ⸺ [Beitr. z. ital. Sprachk.] Beiträge zur italischen - Sprachkunde. Leipzig, 1876. - - Cuntz, O. Polybius und sein Werk. Leipzig, 1902. - - Cuq, E. Les juges plébéiens de la colonie de Narbonne, (in) - Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire, 297-311. Paris, 1881. - - ⸺ Les institutions juridiques des Romains. 2d ed. 2 vols. - Paris, 1891, 1902. - - ⸺ Lex publica, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. iii. 1121-74. - - - Daremberg et Saglio, [Dict.]. Dictionnaire des antiquités - Grecques et Romaines, i-iii (A-M). Paris, 1873-1904. - - Deecke, W. Die Falisker: eine geschichtlich-sprachliche - Untersuchung. Strassburg, 1888. - - Delbrück, H. Die römische Manipulartaktik. _Hist. Zeitschr._ N. - F. xv (1884). 239-64. - - Delbrück, [Gesch. d. Kriegsk.] Geschichte der Kriegskunst im - Rahmen der politischen Geschichte, i: das Altertum. Berlin, - 1900. - - Deloume, A. Les manieurs d’argent à Rome. Paris, 1890. - - _Denkschr. d. kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss._ = _Denkschriften - der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. - Philosophisch-historische Classe._ Vienna. - - De Sanctis, G. Storia dei Romani: la conquista del primato in - Italia. 2 vols. Milan, Turin, etc., 1907. - - Diodorus Siculus. Bibliotheca historica, bks. i-xviii, ed. - Vogel. Leipzig. The remaining bks. and frags. ed. C. Müller. - Didot. Paris, 1842, 1844. - - Dreyfus, R. Essai sur les lois agraires sous la république - Romaine. Paris, 1898. - - Drumann-Gröbe, Gesch. Roms = Drumann, W., Geschichte Roms in - seinem Uebergange von der republikanischen zur monarchischen - Verfassung, ed. P. Gröbe, i-iii, iv. 1. Berlin, 1899-1908. - - Dupond, A. De la constitution et des magistratures Romaines - sous la république. Paris, 1877. - - - Egbert, J. C. Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions. - New York, 1906. - - Eigenbrodt, A. De magistratuum Romanorum iure intercedendi. - Inaugural dissertation. Leipzig, 1875. - - _Ephem. Ep._ = _Ephemeris epigraphica._ Rome and Berlin. - - Exup. = Julius Exsuperantius. Opusculum de Marii, Lepidi ac - Sertorii bellis civilibus, (in) Sallust, Omnia opera, 507-15. - Paris, 1821. This work is also referred to as Jul. Exuper. - - - Ferrero, G. Greatness and Decline of Rome. Translated into - English by Zimmern and others. 5 vols. New York, 1907-1909. - Suggestive but untrustworthy. - - Festg. f. F. Dahn = Festgabe für Felix Dahn zu seinem - fünfzigjährigen Doktorjubiläum gewidmet. Breslau, 1905. - - Forcellini, A. Totius Latinitatis lexicon, ed. V. De-Vit. 6 - vols. Prati, 1858-1875. - - Forsyth, W. Life of Marcus Tullius Cicero, 2 vols. New York, - 1865. - - Fowler, W. W. Julius Caesar. New York and London, 1894. - - ⸺ Notes on Gaius Gracchus. _English Historical Review_, xx - (1905). 209-27. - - ⸺ Gaius Gracchus and the Senate. _Classical Review_, x (1896). - 278-80. - - ⸺ The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic. London, - 1899. - - Freeman, E. A. Lucius Cornelius Sulla, (in) Historical Essays, - ii. 271-306. London, 1873. - - Fröhlich, F. Beiträge zur Kriegsführung und Kriegskunst der - Römer zur Zeit der Republik. Berlin, 1886. - - Fröhlich (no initial given). P. Clodius Pulcher, (in) - Pauly-Wissowa, Real Encycl. iv. 82-8. L. Cornelius Sulla Felix, - ibid. iv. 1522-66. - - Frontin. Contr. = Frontinus, Julius. De controversiis, (in) - Grom. Vet. 9-26, ed. Lachmann. Berlin, 1848. - - Fronto, M. Cornelius. Epistulae, ed. S. A. Naber. Leipzig, - 1867. [Ver = Ad Verum.] - - Fustel de Coulanges. The Ancient City. Translated from the - French. Boston and New York, 1889. - - - Gardner, P. As, (in) Smith, W., Dict. i. 201-8. 3d ed. 2 vols. - London, 1890, 1891. - - Garofalo, F. P. I fasti dei tribuni della plebe della - repubblica Romana. Catania, 1889. - - ⸺ L’origine e l’elezione dei tribuni e degli edili della plebe, - etc. Catania, 1890. Not altogether accurate. - - ⸺ Sul plebiscitum Atinium. Catania, 1896. - - ⸺ Lex Cincia de donis et muneribus. _Bulletino dell’istituto di - diritto Romano_, xv (1903). 310-12. - - Genz, H. [Centurienverf.]. Die servianische - Centurienverfassung. Sorau, 1874. - - ⸺ [Patr. Rom.] Das patricische Rom. Berlin, 1878. - - ⸺ Die Centuriatcomitien nach der Reform. Freienwald, 1882. - - Gerathewohl, H. [Reiter und Rittercent.] Die Reiter und die - Rittercenturien zur Zeit der römischen Republik. Munich, 1886. - - Gilbert, O. Geschichte und Topographie der Stadt Rom im - Altertum. 3 parts. Leipzig, 1883-1890. - - Girard, P. F. [Hist. d. org. jud.] Histoire de l’organisation - judiciaire des Romains, i. Paris, 1901. - - ⸺ [Textes] Textes de droit Romain. 3d. ed. Paris, 1903. - - Goguet, R. [Cent.] Droit Romain des centuries. Thesis. Paris, - 1890. Of little value. - - Gomont, M. H. Les chevaliers Romains depuis Romulus jusqu’à - Galba. Paris, 1854. - - Göttling, K. W. Geschichte der römischen Staatsverfassung. - Halle, 1840. - - Gramm. Lat. = Grammatici Latini, ed. H. G. T. Keil. 7 vols. - Leipzig, 1855-1880. - - Gran. Licin. = Granius Licinianus. Annalium quae supersunt, ed. - Pertz. Berlin, 1857. - - Greenidge, A. H. J. The Lex Sempronia and the Banishment of - Cicero. _Classical Review_, vii (1893). 347 f. - - ⸺ Roman Public Life. London and New York, 1901. - - ⸺ Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time. London and New York, 1901. - - ⸺ A History of Rome during the Later Republic and the Early - Principate, i. New York, 1903. - - Greenidge, A. H. J. The Authenticity of the Twelve Tables. - _English Historical Review_, xx (1905). 1-21. - - Greenidge and Clay. Sources for Roman History, 133-70 B.C. - Oxford, 1903. - - Grenfell, B. P., and Hunt, A. S. Oxyrhynchus Papiri, iv. - 90-116. London, 1904. For the newly discovered epitome of Livy, - including text and commentary. See also Kornemann. - - Grom. Vet. = Gromatici veteres, ed. K. Lachmann. Berlin, 1848. - - Grotefend, C. L. Imperium Romanum tributim descriptum. - Hannover, 1863. - - Gudeman, A. Concilium, (in) Thesaurus linguae Latinae, iv. 44-8. - - Guiraud, P. De la réforme des comices centuriates au IIIe - siècle av. J.-C. _Revue historique_, xvii (1881). 1-24. - - Gurlitt, L. Lex Clodia de exilio Ciceronis. _Philol._ N. F. - xiii (1900). 578-83. - - - Habel, P. Apparitores, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. ii. - 191-4. - - Hackel, H. Die Hypothesen über die sogenannte lex Iulia - municipalis. _Wiener Studien_ (1902). 552-62. - - Haeberlin, E. J. Del più antico sistema monetario presso - i Romani, v. _Rivista italiana di numismatica_, xix - (1906). 611-46. Translation of an article in the _Berliner - Münzblätter_, 1905, 1906. - - Hagge. Einige Bemerkungen über die lex Servilia repetundarum. - Glückstadt, 1845. - - Hallays, A. Les comices à Rome. Dissertation. Paris, 1890. Of - little worth. - - Hartmann, Ambitus. (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. i. 1800-3. - - Hegewisch, D. H. Geschichte der gracchischen Unruhen in der - römischen Republik. Hamburg, 1801. - - Helbig, W. Die Italiker in der Poebene. Leipzig, 1879. - - ⸺ (An illustration of Adrogatio.) _Comptes rendus de l’acad. - des inscriptions et belles-lettres_, xxi (1893). 350-3. - - ⸺ Contribution à l’histoire de l’equitatus Romain. ibid. 1904. - ii. 190-201. - - ⸺ Les attributs des saliens. ibid. 206-12. - - ⸺ Sur les attributs des saliens. _Mémoires de l’acad. des - inscriptions et belles-lettres_, xxvii² (1905). 205-76. - - ⸺ Zur Geschichte des römischen Equitatus A. Die Equites als - berittene Hopliten. _Abhdl. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss._ xxiii - (1905). 267-317. - - ⸺ Die Castores als Schutzgötter des römischen Equitatus. - _Hermes_, xl (1905). 101-15. - - Hennebert, A. Histoire de la lutte entre les patriciens et les - plébéiens à Rome. Gand, 1845. - - Hennes. Das dritte valerisch-horatische Gesetz und seine - Wiederholungen. Program. Bonn, 1880. - - Henze. Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus (Maior), (in) - Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iv. 1462-70. - - _Hermes_ = _Hermes: Zeitschrift für classische Philologie._ - Berlin. - - Herzog, E. Lex sacrata und das Sacrosanctum. _Jahrb. f. cl. - Philol._ xxii (1876). 139-50. - - ⸺ Die Charakter der Tributcomitien im fünften und sechsten - Jahrhundert der Stadt und die Reform der Centuriatcomitien. - _Philol._ xxiv (1876). 312-29. - - ⸺ Glaubwürdigkeit der Gesetze bis 387 der Stadt. Tübingen, 1881. - - ⸺ [Röm. Staatsverf.] Geschichte und System der römischen - Staatsverfassung. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1884, 1887. - - Hesky, R. Anmerkungen zur lex Acilia repetundarum. _Wiener - Studien_, xxv (1903). 272-87. - - Heydenreich, E. Livius und die römische Plebs, (in) Sammlung - gemeinverständlicher wissenschaftlicher Vorträge, xvii (1882). - 581-628. - - Hill, G. F. Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins. New York, 1899. - - Hirschfeld, O. Der Endtermin der gallischen Statthalterschaft - Caesars. _Klio_, iv (1904). 76-87. - - Hoffman, E. Die patricischen und plebeiischen Curien. Vienna, - 1879. - - Hoffmeister, K. Die wirtschaftliche Entwickelung Roms. Vienna, - 1899. - - Holzapfel, L. Il numero dei senatori Romani durante il periodo - dei re. _Rivista di storia antica_, ii. 2 (1897). 52-64. - - ⸺ Die drei ältesten römischen Tribus. _Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ i - (1901). 228-55. - - Hüllmann, K. D. Römische Grundverfassung. Bonn, 1832. - - ⸺ Ursprünge der römischen Verfassung durch Vergleichungen - erläutert. Bonn, 1835. - - Hülsen, C. Caere, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iii. 1281-3. - - ⸺ The Roman Forum. Translated from the 2d German edition by J. - B. Carter. 2d English ed. Rome, 1909. - - Hultsch, F. Denarius, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. v. - 202-15. - - Humbert, G. Accensus, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. i. 16 - ff. Aedilis. ibid. 95-100. Ager publicus. ibid. 133-8. Census. - ibid. 1003-17. Classis. ibid. 1224 f. Comitia. ibid. 1374-1401. - Concilium. ibid. 1432 f. Contio. ibid. 1484 f. Frumentariae - leges. ibid. ii. 1346-8. - - Huschke, Ph. E. [Verf. d. Serv.] Die Verfassung des - Königs Servius Tullius als Grundlage zu einer römischen - Verfassungsgeschichte. Heidelberg, 1838. - - ⸺ Die lex Sempronia iudiciaria und ihr Verhältniss zur lex - Acilia repetundarum. _Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch._ v (1866). - 46-84. - - Hyg. Cond. Agr. = Hyginus. De condicionibus agrorum, (in) - Grom. Vet. ed. K. Lachmann, 113-24. [Lim. Const.] De limitibus - constituendis ibid. 166-208. - - - Ihne, W. The Asylum of Romulus. _Classical Museum_, iii (1846). - 190-3. - - ⸺ Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der römischen - Verfassungsgeschichte. Frankfurt am Main, 1847. This study is - translated into English by Haywood under the title, Researches - into the History of the Roman Constitution. London, 1853. - - ⸺ Ueber die Entstehung und die ältesten Befugnisse des - römischen Tribunats. _Rhein. Mus._ xxi (1866). 161-79. - - ⸺ Die Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung, (in) Symbola - philologorum Bonnensium, 629-44. 1864-1867. - - ⸺ History of Rome. 5 vols. London, 1871-1882. - - ⸺ Die Entwickelung der Tributcomitien. _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. - xxviii (1873). 353-79. - - ⸺ Early Rome. New York, 1890. - - Inc. Auct. = Incertus Auctor. Magistratuum et sacerdotiorum P. - R. expositiones ineditae, ed. Ph. E. Huschke. Vratislavia, 1829. - - Ined. Vat. See Arnim, H. von. - - Isid. Etym. = Isidorus Hispalensis. Etymologiae, (in) Opera - omnia, iii, ed. Migne. Paris, 1878. - - Isler, M. Ueber das poetelische Gesetz de ambitu. _Rhein. Mus._ - xxviii (1873). 473-7. - - - _Jahrb. f. Philol._ = _Neue Jahrbücher für Philologie und - Paedagogik._ Second title: _Jahrbücher für classische - Philologie._ Leipzig. - - _Jahresb. ü. Altwiss._ = _Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte - der classischen Altertumswissenschaft._ Leipzig. - - John, C. Entstehungsgeschichte der catilinarischen - Verschwörung, _Jahrb. f. cl. Philol._ Supplb. viii (1875, - 1876). 701-819. - - Jordan, H. Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum. 2 vols. - Berlin, 1878-1907. I. iii (1907) is edited by C. Hülsen. - - ⸺ Die Könige im alten Italien. Berlin, 1887. - - Jul. Exuper. See Exup. - - Julius Victor, C. Ars Rhetorica, (in) Orelli-Baiter, Ciceronis - Opera, V. 195-269. Turici, 1833. - - - Kalb, W. Jahresbericht über römischen Juristen für 1901-1905. - _Jahresb. ü. Altwiss._ cxxxiv (1906). 1-48. - - Kappeyne van de Coppello, J. [Comitien] Drei Abhandlungen zum - römischen Staats- und Privatrecht, i: Betrachtungen über die - Comitien. 2d ed. Berlin, 1891. - - Karlowa, O. Der römische Civilprocess zur Zeit der - Legisactionen. Berlin, 1872. - - ⸺ Römische Rechtsgeschichte. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1885, 1901. - - Keil, J. Zur lex Cornelia de viginti quaestoribus. _Wiener - Studien_, xxiv (1902). 548-51. - - Klebs, E. Die Stimmenzahl und die Abstimmungsordnung der - reformierten servianischen Verfassung. _Zeitschr. d. - Savignyst._ xii (1891). 181-244. - - Klebs, L. Aimilius Paullus, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. i. - 576-80. M. Aemilius Scaurus. ibid. 584-8. Appuleius. ibid. ii. - 261-9. - - Kleineidam, F. Beiträge zur Kentniss der lex Poetelia, (in) - Festg. f. F. Dahn, ii. 1-30. Breslau, 1905. - - _Klio._ See _Beiträge zur alten Geschichte_. - - Kniep. Societas publicanorum. Jena, 1896. - - Köhm, J. Altlateinische Forschungen. Leipzig, 1905. - - Kornemann, E. Die cäsarische Kolonie Karthago und die - Einführung römischer Gemeindeordnung in Africa. _Philol._ N. F. - xiv (1901). 402-26. - - ⸺ Zur Geschichte der Gracchenzeit. Reprinted from _Beitr. z. - alt. Gesch._ Beiheft i. 1903. - - ⸺ Die neue Livius-Epitome aus Oxyrhynchus. _Beitr. z. alt. - Gesch._ Beiheft ii. 1904. - - ⸺ Polis und Urbs. _Klio_, v (1905). 72-92. - - ⸺ Collegium, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iv. 380-480. - Coloniae. ibid. 511-88. Concilium. ibid. 801 ff. - - Krüger, P., and Mommsen, Th. Anecdoton Livianum. _Hermes_, iv - (1870). 371-6. - - Krüger-Brissaud, Sourc. d. Droit Rom. = Krüger, P. Histoire des - sources du droit Romain. Trad. de l’Allemand par M. Brissaud. - Paris, 1894. - - Kubitschek, J. W. De Romanorum tribuum origine ac propogatione. - Vienna, 1882. - - ⸺ Imperium Romanum tributim discriptum. Leipzig, 1889. - - ⸺ Aedilis, (in) Real-Encycl. i. 448-64. Aerarius. ibid. - 674-6. Aes equestre. ibid. 682-4. Ager. ibid. 780-93. As. ii. - 1499-1513. Census. ibid. iii. 1914-24. - - Kübler, B. Calata comitia, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. - iii. 1330-4. Capite censi. ibid. 1521-3. Centuria. ibid. - 1952-62. Classis. ibid. 2630-2. Consul. ibid. iv. 1112-38. - Equites Romani. ibid. vi. 272-312. - - Kübler, B., and Hülsen, C. Curia, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, - Real-Encycl. iv. 1815-26. - - - Labatut, E. Corruption électorale chez les Romains. Paris, 1876. - - Lambert, E. L’histoire traditionelle des XII Tables et les - critères d’authenticité des traditions en usage dans l’école de - Mommsen, (in) Mélanges Ch. Appleton, 503-626. Lyons and Paris, - 1903. - - ⸺ La fonction du droit civil comparé, 390-718. Paris, 1903. - - Lanciani, R. Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome. Boston, - 1897. - - ⸺ New Tales of Old Rome. Boston, 1901. - - Lange, L. Römische Altertümer. 3 vols. 2d and 3d eds. Berlin, - 1876, 1879. - - ⸺ Kleine Schriften. 2 vols. Göttingen, 1887. - - Lécrivain, C. Gens, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. ii. - 1494-1516. - - Leinveber, A. Die Legion des Livius. _Philol._ N. F. xv (1902). - 32-41. - - Leist, B. W. Graeco-italische Rechtsgeschichte. Jena, 1884. - - ⸺ Alt-arisches Ius Gentium. Jena, 1889. - - ⸺ Alt-arisches Ius Civile. 2 vols. Jena, 1892, 1896. - - Lengle, J. Untersuchungen über die sullanische Verfassung. - Freiburg im Breisgau, 1899. - - Lenormant, F. As, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. i. 454-64. - - ⸺ Colonies Romains, ibid. i. 1303-21. - - Leonhard, R. Adoptio, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. i. - 398-400. Adrogatio. ibid. 419-21. - - Le Tellier, M. [Organ. cent.] L’organisation centuriale et les - comices par centuries. Thesis. Paris, 1896. - - Liebenam, W. Zur Geschichte und Organisation des römischen - Vereinswesens. Leipzig, 1890. - - ⸺ Comitia, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iv. 679-715. - Curiata lex. ibid. iv. 1826-30. Fabri, (in) Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. - iii. 4-18. - - Lieboldt, K. Die Ansichten über die Entstehung und das Wesen - der gentes patriciae in Rom aus der Zeit der Humanisten bis auf - unsere Tage, i, ii. Meerane, 1890. - - Liers, H. [Kriegsw. d. Alt.] Das Kriegswesen der Alten mit - besonderer Berücksichtigung der Strategie. Breslau, 1895. - - Livy, new epitome of. See Grenfell and Hunt; also Kornemann. - - Long, G. The Decline of the Roman Republic. 5 vols. London, - 1864-1874. - - - Madvig, J. N. [Röm. Staat.] Die Verfassung und Verwaltung des - römischen Staates. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1881, 1882. - - Marchi, A. de. Il culto privato di Roma antica. 2 vols. Milan, - 1896, 1903. Uncritical, but to some extent useful. - - Marquardt, J. Historiae equitum Romanorum. Berlin, 1840. - - ⸺ [Röm. Staatsv.] Römische Staatsverwaltung. 3 vols. 2d ed. - revised by Dessau and others. Leipzig, 1881, 1885. - - ⸺ Das Privatleben der Römer. 2d ed. Leipzig, 1886. - - Matzat, H. Römische Chronologie. 2 vols. Berlin, 1883, 1884. - - Maue, H. Der praefectus fabrum. Halle, 1887. - - Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’école Française de - Rome. - - Mercklein, D. L. Die Coöptation der Römer. Leipzig, 1848. - - Merguet, H. Lexikon zu den Schriften Ciceros, i, ii. Jena, - 1877-1887. - - Meyer, E. Untersuchungen über Diodor’s römische Geschichte. - _Rhein. Mus._ xxxvii (1882). 610-27. - - ⸺ [Gesch. d. Alt.] Geschichte des Altertums, ii, v. Stuttgart, - 1893 (and Berlin), 1902. - - ⸺ [Gesch. d. Gracch.] Untersuchungen zur Geschichte - der Gracchen, (in) Festschriften ... der vereinigten - Friedrichs-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 1894. Philos. Fak. - 79-109. - - ⸺ Der Ursprung des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der vier Tribus. - _Hermes_, xxx (1895). 1-24. - - ⸺ Die angebliche Centurienreform Sullas. _Hermes_, xxxiii - (1898). 652-4. - - ⸺ Plebs, (in) Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaft, vi. - 98-106. 2d ed. Jena, 1901. - - Michel, N. H. Du droit de cité Romaine: études d’épigraphie - juridique. Paris, 1885. - - Milani, L. A. Studi e materiali di archaeologia e numismatica. - 3 vols. Florence, 1899-1905. - - Mispoulet, J. B. Les institutions politiques des Romains. 2 - vols. Paris, 1882, 1883. - - ⸺ Études d’institutions Romaines. Paris, 1887. - - Mommsen, Th. [Röm. Tribus.] Die römischen Tribus in - administrativer Beziehung. Altona, 1834. - - ⸺ De apparitoribus magistratuum Romanorum. _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. - vi (1846). 1-57. - - ⸺ Ueber das thorische Ackergesetz. _Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. - Wiss._ i (1849). 89-101. - - ⸺ Ueber die lex Mamilia Roscia Peducaea Alliena Fabia, (in) - Röm. Feldmess. ii. 221-6. Berlin, 1852. - - ⸺ Die Stadtrechte der lateinischen Gemeinden Salpensa und - Malaca in der Provinz Baetica. _Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. - Wiss._ ii. (1857). 361-507. - - ⸺ Die lex curiata de imperio. _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. xiii (1858). - 565-73. - - ⸺ Die römische Chronologie bis auf Caesar. 2d ed. Berlin, 1859. - - ⸺ Zwei Sepulcralreden aus der Zeit Augusts und Hadrians. - _Abhdl. d. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin._ 1863, 455-89. - - ⸺ Römische Forschungen. 2 vols. Berlin, 1864, 1879. - - ⸺ Lex coloniae Iuliae Genetivae Urbanorum sive Ursonis data - a.u.c. DCCX. Additamentum ad corporis volumen ii. _Ephem. Ep._ - ii (1875). 105-51. - - ⸺ Ein zweites Bruchstück des rubrischen Gesetzes vom Jahre 705 - Roms. _Hermes_, xvi (1881). 24-41. - - ⸺ Römisches Staatsrecht. 1st and 3d eds. 3 vols. Leipzig, 1887. - - ⸺ Abriss des römischen Staatsrechts. Leipzig, 1893. - - ⸺ Römisches Strafrecht. Leipzig, 1899. - - ⸺ History of Rome. Translated from the German. 5 vols. New - York, 1900. - - ⸺ Lex municipii Tarentini. _Ephem. Ep._ ix (1903). 1-11. - - Mommsen-Blacas = Mommsen, Histoire de la monnaie Romaine. - Translated from the German by Le Duc de Blacas. 4 vols. Paris, - 1865-1875. - - Mommsen, Th. and others. Zum ältesten Strafrecht der - Kulturvölker. Leipzig, 1905. - - Morlot, E. [Comices élect.] Les comices électoraux sous la - république Romaine. Thesis. Paris, 1884. - - Moye, M. Les élections politiques sous la république Romaine. - Thesis. Bordeaux, 1896. - - Mühl, F. V. [App. Sat.] De L. Appuleio Saturnino tribuno - plebis. Basel, 1906. - - Muirhead, J. Historical Introduction to the Private Law of - Rome. Edinburgh, 1886. - - Müller, A. Die Strafjustiz im römischen Heere. _N. Jahrb. f. - kl. Altertum_, xvii (1906). 550-77. - - Müller, I. [Hdb. d. kl. Altwiss.] Handbuch der klassischen - Altertumswissenschaft. Nördlingen. - - Müller, J. J. Studien zur römischen Verfassungsgeschichte. - _Philol._ xxxiv (1876). 96-136. - - Müller-Deecke = Müller, K. O. Die Etrusker. 2 vols. Revised by - W. Deecke. Stuttgart, 1877. - - Munderloh, I. G. H. W. Aus der Zeit der Quiriten. Weimar, 1872. - - Münzer, F. M. Claudius Marcellus, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, - Real-Encycl. iii. 2738-55. Appius Claudius Pulcher. ibid. 2848 - f. L. Cornelius Cinna. ibid. iv. 1282-7. L. Cornelius Scipio - Asiagenus. ibid. iv. 1471-83. T. Didius. ibid. v. 407-10. Cn. - Domitius Ahenobarbus. ibid. v. 1324-7. - - - Nettleship, H. Contributions to Latin Lexicography. Oxford, - 1889. - - _N. Jahrb. f. kl. Alt._ = _Neue Jahrbücher für das klassische - Altertum, Geschichte und deutsche Literatur, und für - Pädagogik._ Leipzig. - - Neumann, C. Das Zeitalter der punischen Kriege. Breslau, 1883. - - ⸺ [Gesch. Roms.] Geschichte Roms während des Verfalles der - Republik. 2 vols. Breslau, 1881, 1884. - - Neumann, K. J. Die Grundherrschaft der römischen Republik, - Die Bauernbefreiung und die Entstehung der servianischen - Verfassung. Strassburg, 1900. - - Niccolini, G. La questione dei processi degli Scipioni. - _Rivista di storia antica_, iii (1898). Fasc. 4. 28-75. - - Niebuhr, B. G. Römische Geschichte. 3 vols. 4th ed. Berlin, - 1833-1843. Also the English translation by Hare and Thirlwall. - Philadelphia, 1844. - - ⸺ Lectures on the History of Rome, edited and translated from - the German by L. Schmitz. 3 vols. 3d ed. London, 1853. - - Niemeyer, K. De equitibus Romanis. Gryphia, 1851. - - Niese, B. Das sogenannte licinisch-sextische Ackergesetz. - _Hermes_, xxiii (1888). 410-23. - - ⸺ [Röm. Gesch.] Grundriss der römische Geschichte nebst - Quellenkunde. 3d ed. Munich, 1906. - - ⸺ Deiotarus, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iv. 2401-4. - - Nipperdey, K. Die leges annales der römischen Republik. _Abhdl. - sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ v (1870). 1-88. - - Nissen, A. Beiträge zum römischen Staatsrecht. Strassburg, 1885. - - Nissen, H. Kritische Untersuchungen über die Quellen der - vierten und fünften Dekade des Livius. Berlin, 1863. - - ⸺ Das Templum. Berlin, 1869. - - ⸺ Der Ausbruch des Bürgerkrieges 49 vor Chr. _Hist. Zeitschr._ - xliv (1880). 409-45; xlvi. 48-105. - - ⸺ Italische Landeskunde. 2 vols. Berlin, 1883, 1902. - - Nitzsch, K. W. Die Gracchen und ihre nächsten Vorgänger. - Berlin, 1847. - - ⸺ Das Verhältniss von Heer und Staat in der römischen Republik. - _Hist. Zeitschr._ vii (1862). 133-58. - - ⸺ [Röm. Rep.] Geschichte der römischen Republik. 2 vols. Ed. by - G. Thouret. Leipzig, 1884, 1885. - - Nonius Marcellus. Compendiosa doctrina. Emend. et adn. L. - Müller. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1888. - - - Oberziner, G. Origine della plebe Romana. Leipzig and Genoa, - 1901. - - Obseq. = Iulii Obsequentis ab anno urbis conditae DV - prodigiorum liber, (in) Weissenborn’s Livy, vol. xii. 193-209. - 2d ed. Berlin, 1881. - - Olcott, G. N. Thesaurus linguae Latinae epigraphicae, i. Rome, - 1904-1908. - - Oliver, E. H. Roman Economic Conditions to the Close of the - Republic. Toronto, 1907. - - Orelli and Baiter, Index legum Romanorum quarum apud Ciceronem - eiusque scholiastas item apud Livium, Velleium Paterculum, A. - Gellium nominatim mentio fit, (in their) Ciceronis Opera, viii. - 3. - - Oxyrhynchus Papiri. See Grenfell and Hunt; also Kornemann. - - - Pais, E. Storia di Roma, I. i, ii. Torino, 1898, 1899. - - ⸺ [Leg. of Rom. Hist.] Ancient Legends of Roman History. - Translated from the Italian. New York, 1905. - - ⸺ Ancient Italy. Translated from the Italian by C. D. Curtis. - Chicago and London, 1908. - - ⸺ L’elezione del pontefice massimo Romano per mezzo delle XVII - tribù. Naples, 1908. - - ⸺ A proposito dell’attendibilità dei fasti dell’antica - repubblica Romana. _Rendiconti della reale accademia dei - Lincei_, xxvii (1908). 33-68. - - Pantaleoni, D. Della auctoritas patrum nell’antica Roma sotto - le sue diverse forme. Torino, 1884. - - Pappritz, R. Marius und Sulla. Gütersloh, 1899. - - Pascal, C. Studi Romani, i, iii. Torino, 1896. - - ⸺ Di un studio recente sul processo degli Scipioni. _Riv. di - stor. ant._ iv (1899). 268-71. - - Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. = Pauly, Real-Encyclopädie der - classischen Altertumswissenschaft. New ed. by G. Wissowa, - i-vi. 1. Stuttgart, 1894-1907. - - Pelham, H. The Roman Curiae. (Eng.) _Journ. of Philol._ ix - (1880). 266-79. - - Pellegrini, G. Fregi arcaici Etruschi in terracotta, etc. (in) - Milani, Studi e materiali, i. 87-118. - - Pellegrino, D. Andeutungen über den ursprünglichen - Religionsunterschied der römischen Patricier und Plebeier. - Leipzig, 1842. - - Peter, C. Die Epochen der Verfassungsgeschichte der römischen - Republik, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Centuriatcomitien - und der mit diesen vorgegangenen Veränderungen. Leipzig, 1841. - - ⸺ Studien zur römischen Geschichte mit besonderer Beziehung auf - Th. Mommsen. Naumburg, 1861. A new enlarged ed. Halle, 1863. - - ⸺ Geschichte Roms. 4th ed. 3 vols. Halle, 1881. - - Peter, H. [Reliquiae] Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae. 2 vols. - Leipzig, 1870, 1906. - - _Philol._ = _Philologus: Zeitschrift für das classische - Altertum._ Leipzig. - - Pinvert, L. Du droit de cité Romaine. Thesis. Paris, 1885. - - Platner, S. B. The Topography and Monuments of Ancient Rome. - Boston, 1904. - - Plüss, H. T. [Centurienverf.] Die Entwickelung der - Centurienverfassung in den beiden letzten Jahrhunderten der - römischen Republik. Leipzig, 1870. - - Podestà. Il tribunato della plebe in Roma dalla secessione - della plebe sul monte Sacro all’approvazione della legge di - Publilio Volerone. Parma, 1895. - - Pöhlmann, R. Die Anfänge Roms. Erlangen, 1881. - - ⸺ Zur Geschichte der Gracchen. _Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. - Wiss._ 1907. 443-93. - - _Pol. Sci. Quart._ = _Political Science Quarterly._ Boston and - New York. - - Poste, E. Gaii institutionum iuris civilis commentarii quatuor. - Or, Elements of Roman Law by Gaius. With translation and - commentary. Oxford, 1871. - - Pott, A. F. [Etym. Forsch.] Etymologische Forschungen auf dem - Gebiete der indo-germanischen Sprachen. 2d ed. 5 vols. Detmold, - 1859-1873. This work includes the author’s Wurzel-Wörterbuch - der indo-germanischen Sprachen. - - Priscianus. [Inst. Gram.] Institutionum grammaticarum libri - xvii, ed. M. Hertz, (in) Gram. Lat. ii, ed. Keil. Leipzig, 1855. - - Probus, Valerius. De litteris singularibus fragmentum, ed. - Mommsen, (in) Gram. Lat. iv, ed. Keil. Leipzig, 1864. - - Pseudacr. Schol. Cruq. ad Hor. = Pseudacronis Scholia in - Horatium vetustiora. Ed. O. Keller. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1902, 1904. - - Pseudo-Sall. Declam. in Cat. = Porcii Latronis Declamatio - contra L. Sergium Catilinam, (in) C. Crispi Salustii quae - extant, i. 260-87. Ed. C. H. Frotscher. Leipzig, 1825. - - Ptaschnik, J. Die Wahl der Volkstribunen vor der Rogation des - Volero Publilius. _Oesterreich. Gymn._ xiv (1863). 627-38. - - ⸺ Publilische Rogation. ibid, xvii (1866). 161-200. - - ⸺ Die Centuriengesetze von 305 und 415 U. C. ibid. xxi (1870). - 497-525. - - ⸺ Stimmrecht der Patricier in den Tributcomitien. ibid, xxxii - (1881). 81-102. - - - Regling, K. Zum älteren römischen und italischen Münzen. - _Klio_, vi (1906). 489-524. - - _Rhein. Mus._ = _Rheinisches Museum für Philologie._ Frankfurt - am Main. - - Richter, O. Die Topographie der Stadt Rom. 2d ed. Munich, 1901. - (In) Müller, I. Hdb. d. kl. Altwiss. iii. 3. - - Ritschl, F. W. Opuscula philologica. Or, Kleine philologische - Schriften. 5 vols. Leipzig, 1866-1879. - - _Riv. d. Stor. ant._ = _Rivista di storia antica e scienze - affini._ Messina. - - Roby, J. H. Roman Private Law in the Times of Cicero and of the - Antonines. 2 vols. Cambridge (England), 1902. - - Röm. Feldmess. See Blume, F., etc. - - Roscher, W. H. Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und - römischen Mythologie, i-iii. Leipzig, 1884-1902. - - Rothstein, M. Suffragium, (in) Festschrift zu Otto Hirschfelds - sechsigstem Geburtstage, 30-3. Berlin, 1903. - - Rubino, J. [Röm. Verf.] Ueber den Entwickelungsgang der - römischen Verfassung his zum Höhepunkt der Republik. Cassel, - 1839. - - ⸺ Ueber das Verhältniss der sex Suffragia zur römischen - Ritterschaft. _Zeitschr. f. die Altwiss._ iv (1846). 212-39. - - Rudorff, A. F. Römische Rechtsgeschichte. 2 vols. Leipzig, - 1857, 1859. - - ⸺ Ad legem Aciliam de pecuniis repetundis, etc. _Abhdl. d. - Akad. d. Wiss._ 1861. 411-553. - - Ruggiero, E. de. [Diz. Ep.] Dizionario epigrafico, i-iii. Rome, - 1895-1906. - - Ruppel, K. W. Teilnahme der Patrizier an den Tributcomitien. - Heidelberg, 1887. - - - Sall. Hist. = C. Sallusti Crispi, Historiarum reliquiae, ed. B. - Maurenbrecher, ii: fragmenta. Leipzig, 1893. - - Sall. or Pseud. Sall. Rep. Ord. = Incerti auctoris epistulae - duae ad C. Caesarem de republica ordinanda, (in) C. Crispi - Sallusti quae extant, i. Ed. C. H. Frotscher. Leipzig, 1825. - - Samwer-Bahrfeldt, Röm. Münzw. = Samwer, K. Geschichte des - älteren römischen Münzwesens bis circa 200 vor Christi. Ed. M. - Bahrfeldt. Vienna, 1883. - - Sanders, H. A. The Oxyrhynchus Epitome of Livy. _Trans. of the - Am. Philol. Assoc._ xxxvi (1905). 5-31. - - Savigny, F. C. von. Vermischte Schriften. 5 vols. Berlin, 1850. - - Schiller, H. Geschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit, i. Gotha, - 1883. - - ⸺ [Röm. Alt.] Römische Kriegsaltertümer, (in) Müller, Hdb. d. - kl. Altwiss. iv. 707-44. Staats- und Rechtsaltertümer, ibid. - 483-704. Nördlingen, 1887. - - Schlossman, S. Tributum, tribuere, tribus. _Archiv f. Lat. - Lexicog._ xiv (1905). 25-40. - - Schmidt, J. Die Einsetzung der römischen Volkstribunen. - _Hermes_, xxi (1886). 460-6. - - Schmidt, O. E. Die letzten Kämpfe der römischen Republik. - Leipzig, 1884. - - ⸺ Der Briefwechsel des M. Tullius Cicero von seinem Prokonsulat - in Cilicien bis zu Cäsars Ermordung. Leipzig, 1893. - - Schöll, R. [Leg. Duod. Tab. Rel.] Legis duodecim tabularum - reliquiae. Leipzig, 1866. - - Schott, P. O. Die römische Geschichte im Licht der neuesten - Forschungen. _Videnskabs-Selskabets Skriften. Hist. Filos. - Klasse_, ii. 1906. - - Schrader, O. [Reallex.] Reallexikon der indogermanischen - Altertumskunde. Strassburg, 1901. - - ⸺ Sprachvergleichung und Urgeschichte, i, ii. 1, 2. 3d ed. - Jena, 1906, 1907. - - Schulthess, O. Der Process des C. Rabirius vom Jahre 63 v. Chr. - Frauenfeld, 1891. - - Schulze, C. F. Von den Volksversammlungen der Römer. Gotha, - 1815. - - Schulze, W. [Gesch. lat. Eigennam.] Zur Geschichte lateinischer - Eigennamen. _Abhdl. d. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. zu Gött._ N. F. v. - Berlin, 1904. - - Schwegler, A. Römische Geschichte. 3 vols. Freiburg, 1870-1884. - - Seeley, J. R. Livy i. 3d ed. Oxford, 1881. - - Sic. Flacc. = Siculus Flaccus. De condicionibus agrorum, (in) - Grom. Vet. 134-65. Ed. Lachmann. Berlin, 1848. - - Siebert, W. Ueber Appius Claudius Caecus. Kassel, 1863. - - _Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss._ = _Sitzungsberichte der - königlich bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München._ - - _Sitzb. d. Berl. Akad. d. Wiss._ = _Sitzungsberichte der - königlich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin._ - - Smith, F. Die römische Timokratie. Berlin, 1906. - - Smith, W. and others. [Dict.] A Dictionary of Greek and Roman - Antiquities. 3d ed. 2 vols. London, 1890, 1891. - - Sol., Solin. = Solinus, C. Julius, Polyhistor; ex editione - Claudii Salmasii, accurante M. A. Goezio. Leipzig, 1777. - - Soltau, W. [Altröm. Volksversamml.] Ueber Entstehung und - Zusammensetzung der altrömischen Volksversammlungen. Berlin, - 1880. - - ⸺ Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung und Competenz der aediles plebis, - (in) Historische Untersuchungen A. Schaefer ... gewidmet, - 98-147. Bonn, 1882. - - Soltau, W. Gültigkeit der Plebiscite. _Berliner Studien_, ii - (1885). 1-176. - - ⸺ Die Echtheit des licinischen Ackergesetz von 367 vor Chr. - _Hermes_, xxx (1895). 624-9. - - ⸺ Cicero de Re Publica und die servianische Centurienordnung. - _Jahrb. f. Philol._ xli (1895). 410-4. - - Spinazolla, V. Augures, (in) Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. i. 778-810. - - Staaf, E. De origine gentium patriciarum commentatio academica. - Upsala, 1896. - - Stella Maranca, F. Il tribunato della plebe dalla lex Hortensia - alla lex Cornelia. Lanciano, 1901. - - Strachan-Davidson, J. L. The Growth of Plebeian Privilege at - Rome. _Eng. Hist. Rev._ i (1886). 209-17. - - ⸺ The Decrees of the Roman Plebs. ibid, v (1890). 462-74. - - ⸺ Cicero. New York and London, 1894. - - ⸺ Appian, Civil Wars, i. Oxford, 1902. - - Sunden, J. M. De tribunicia potestate a L. Sulla imminuta - quaestiones. Upsala, 1897. - - Symmachus, Q. Aurelius, quae supersunt. Ed. Seeck. Berlin, 1883. - - - Terpstra, D. Quaestiones literariae de populo, de senatu, de - rege, de interregibus, antiquissimis rei publicae Romanae - temporibus. Rotterdam, 1842. - - Thesaurus linguae Latinae, i-iv. Leipzig, 1900-1906. - - Tophoff, De lege Valeria Horatia, Publilia, Hortensia. - Paderborn, 1852. - - Toutain, J. Municipium, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. iii. - 2022-34. - - - Ullrich, J. [Centuriatcom.] Die Centuriatcomitien. Landshut, - 1873. - - Usener, H. Italische Volksjustiz. _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. lvi - (1901). 1-28. - - - Vaglieri, D. Concilium, (in) Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. ii. 566-71. - Mainly provincial. - - Valeton, I. M. J. De modis auspicandi Romanorum. _Mnemos._ N. - S. xvii (1889). 275-323, 418-52; xviii. 208-64, 406-56. - - ⸺ De iure obnuntiandi comitiis et conciliis. ibid. xix (1891). - 75-113, 229-70. - - Vaniček, A. [Etym. Wörterb. d. lat. Spr.] Etymologisches - Wörterbuch der lateinischen Sprache. Leipzig, 1874. - - ⸺ [Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb.] Griechisch-lateinisches - etymologisches Wörterbuch. Leipzig, 1877. - - Vassis, Sp. Leges Valeriae de provocatione. _Athena_, xvii - (1905). 160-5. - - _Verhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ = _Berichte über die - Verhandlungen der königlich sächsischen Gesellschaft der - Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Philologisch-historische Classe._ - Referred to also as _Ber. sächs._ etc. - - Victor, C. Julius, Ars rhetorica, (in) Orelli-Baiter, Ciceronis - Opera, v. 1. 195-268. - - Voigt, M. Die lex Maenia de dote vom Jahre 568 der Stadt. - Weimar, 1865. - - ⸺ Ueber das römische System der Wege im alten Italien. _Ber. - sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ xxiv (1872). 29-90. - - ⸺ Leges regiae. _Abhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ vii - (1879). 555-826. - - ⸺ XII Tafeln. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1883. - - ⸺ Die lex Fabia de plagiariis. _Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. - Wiss._ xxxvii (1885). 319-345. - - ⸺ Ueber die staatsrechtliche possessio und den ager compascuus. - _Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ x (1888). 221-272. - - ⸺ Ueber die lex Cornelia sumptuaria. _Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. - Wiss._ xlii (1890). 244-79. - - ⸺ Römische Rechtsgeschichte. 3 vols. Leipzig and Berlin, - 1892-1902. - - Volquardsen, C. A. Die drei ältesten römischen Tribus. _Rhein. - Mus._ N. F. xxxiii (1878). 557-64. - - - Wachsmuth, W. Die ältere Geschichte des römischen Staates. - Halle, 1819. - - Walde, A. Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg, - 1906. - - Wallinder. De statu plebeiorum Romanorum ante primam in montem - Sacrum secessionem quaestiones. Upsala, 1860. - - Waltzing, J. P. Étude historique sur les corporations - professionelles chez les Romains. 4 vols. Louvain, 1895-1900. - - Warren, M. The Stele Inscription in the Roman Forum. _Am. - Journ. of Philol._ xxviii (1907). 249-72. - - Weber, M. Die römische Agrargeschichte in ihrer Bedeutung für - das Staats- und Privatrecht. Stuttgart, 1891. - - Wex, C. Ueber die leges annales der Römer. _Rhein. Mus._ iii - (1845). 276-88. - - _Wiener Studien. Zeitschrift für klassische Philologie. - Supplement der Zeitschrift für die österreichischen Gymnasien._ - Vienna. - - Wigger, J. Verteidigung der Nieburschen Ansicht über den - Ursprung der römischen Plebs, etc. Warburg, 1885. - - Willems, P. [Sén. Rom.] Le sénat de la république Romaine, etc. - 2 vols. 2d ed. Louvain, 1885. - - ⸺ Droit public Romain. 6th ed. Paris and Louvain, 1888. - - Wilmanns, W. Ueber die Gerichtshöfe während des Bestehens der - lex Cornelia iudiciaria. _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. xix (1864). 528-41. - - Wissowa, G. Religion und Kultus der Römer, (in) Müller, Hdb. d. - kl. Altwiss. v. 4. Munich, 1902. - - ⸺ Augures, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. ii. 2313-44. - Auspicium. ibid. 2580-7. - - - _Zeitschrift für die österreichischen Gymnasien._ Vienna. - - _Zeitschr. f. gesch. Rechtswiss._ = _Zeitschrift für - geschichtliche Rechtswissenschaft._ Berlin. - - _Zeitschr. d. Savignyst._ = _Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung - für Rechtsgeschichte. Römische Abteilung._ Weimar. - - Zöller, Latium und Rom. Leipzig, 1878. - - Zumpt, C. T. De legibus iudiciisque repetundarum. _Abhdl. d. - Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin._ 1845. 1-70, 475-515. - - - - -FOOTNOTES - - -[1] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 168 and n. 1. Schrader, _Reallex._ 920 -f., accepts this explanation as most probable, and connecting it with -Skt. cakrá-, interprets it as referring to a wheel formation of the army. -But Vaniček, _Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb._ 1085 f., connects populari -with spol-iu-m. - -[2] Curtius, _Griech. Etym._ 260, English, 344; Corssen, _Ausspr._ i. -368, 422; Vaniček, _Etym. Wörterb. d. lat. Spr._ 90; _Griech.-lat. etym. -Wörterb._ 506; Walde, _Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 480 f.; cf. Schrader, ibid.; -Genz, _Patr. Rom._, 51 f. - -[3] This interpretation would explain magister populi and populari. -Plebs, on the other hand, denoted the multitude as distinguished from the -leaders; hence it differed from populus, notwithstanding Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 98, n. 2. - -[4] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 3. - -[5] Livy xxi. 34. 1. - -[6] Cic. _Rep._ i. 25. 39; Livy i. 8. 1; Isid. _Etym._ ix. 6. 5. - -[7] Cf. Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 34 ff.; Schiller, _Röm. Alt._ 612 ff. - -[8] “Arma sumere, sacris adesse, concilium inire”; Tac. _Germ._ 6. 6; 13. -1. On the Indo-European relation of the army to the folk, see Schrader, -_Reallex._ 349 f. For Rome, Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 3 f. - -[9] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 8. 14; Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 2; Plut. _Rom._ 14, 20; -Ovid, _Fast._ iii. 131; Dio Cass. Frag. 5. 8; Varro, _L. L._ v. 55; -Colum. v. 1. 9. - -[10] As Romulus was the eponymous hero of the Ramnes (or of all the -Romans?) and Lucerus (Fest. ep. 119) of the Luceres. - -[11] The original seat of the hero at Rome was on the Capitoline near -the site of the later temple of Juno Moneta; Plut. _Rom._ 20. It was -closely connected, therefore, with the auguraculum on the spot; Varro, -_L. L._ v. 47; Cic. _Off._ iii. 16. 66; Fest. ep. 16. Perhaps his name -has some etymological relation with titiare, “to chirp as a sparrow”; -Varro, _L. L._ v. 85 (titiis avibus); Pais, _Storia di Roma_, I. i. 277 -and n. 3; Forcellini, _Lex._ s. v. The Sodales Titii, who attended to his -worship (cf. Dion. Hal. ii. 52. 5; Tac. _Ann._ i. 54; _Hist._ ii. 95) -were accustomed to take a certain kind of auspices from birds; Varro, -ibid. His tomb was in a place called Lauretum on the Aventine (Pais, -ibid. 279), confused probably with Laurentum, where he is said to have -been killed. All these circumstances indicate that Titus Tatius was an -indigenous Roman, or at most a Latin hero, and that his connection with -the Sabines is an ill-founded, relatively late idea. The primary origin -of the word Titienses is Etruscan; Schulze, _Lat. Eigennam._ 218. - -[12] Possibly because the rites of the Titian sodales seemed to be Sabine -(cf. Tac. _Ann._ i. 54); but even if they were, this circumstance would -not make the Titian tribe Sabine. - -[13] Varro, however, placed them on the Aventine. A Sabine settlement on -the Quirinal has not been proved; cf. Lécrivain, in Daremberg et Saglio, -_Dict._ ii. 1514. - -[14] In Dion. Hal. ii. 47. 4; cf. 7. 2; Plut. _Rom._ 13. - -[15] _L. L._ v. 46, 55; Serv. _in Aen._ v. 560. - -[16] P. 2, n. 6, and n. 1 above. - -[17] Serv. ibid. - -[18] Cf. Hülsen, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1273. - -[19] Proposed by Niebuhr, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 311 ff., English, i. 153 -ff. In his opinion the three tribes were of different nationalities. -His view, with or without the theory of national syncretism, has been -accepted by many scholars, including Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 480 -ff., 497-514; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 82 ff.; Peter, _Gesch. Roms._ i. -60; Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 97 f.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 23 -f. (with some reserve); Schiller, _Röm. Alt._ 621; Ihering, _Geist -des röm. Rechts_, i. 309, 313; Genz, _Patr. Rom_, 89 ff.; Bernhöft, -_Röm. Königsz._ 79; Puchta, _Curs. d. Inst._ i. 73; Soltau, _Röm. -Volksversamml._ 46 f.; Kubitschek, _Rom. trib. or._ 4; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 96 f.; Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. 7; Schrader, _Reallex._ -801; Nissen, _Templum_, 145 f.; _Ital. Landesk._ ii. 496. - -[20] Against the view that the three tribes were once independent -communities are Volquardsen, in _Rhein. Mus._ xxxiii. 542 ff.; Meyer, -_Gesch. d. Alt._ ii. 510; Lécrivain, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ ii. -1514 a; Holzapfel, in _Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ i. 241, 249 ff.; Platner, -_Top. and Mon. of Anc. Rome_, 33. Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 114, thinks -they probably had reference only to the army. The double nature of many -Roman institutions—a phenomenon on which scholars chiefly rely for their -theory of a once existent two-tribe state—may better be explained by the -union of the Sabines with the Romans after the institution of the three -tribes; as this relatively later date would at the same time explain the -six-fold character of various institutions. That the union took place at -the beginning of the fifth century B.C. is believed by Pais, _Storia di -Roma_, I. i. 277. Or the stated increase in the number of members of the -vestals, augurs, pontiffs, and more particularly of senators, may be due -to an ancient theory, dimly hinted at in the sources, of an admission -of the second and third tribes successively to representation in these -bodies; cf. Niebuhr, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 320 f., English, i. 157; Bloch, -_Orig. d. sén._ 32 ff. - -[21] Bormann, in _Eran. Vind._ 345-58, following a hint offered by Niese, -_Röm. Gesch._ (1st ed. 1886) 585, has gone so far as to deny their -existence, setting them down as an invention of Varro; but Holzapfel, in -_Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ i. 230 ff., proves that Cicero and other sources -did not draw from Varro their information regarding the tribes. Against -Bormann, see also Pais, ibid. I. i. 279, n. 1. - -[22] That the primitive Roman tribes were in character substantially -identical with the primitive Greek phylae cannot be doubted. Apparently -the four Ionic phylae in Attica offered no resistance to dissolution at -the hands of Cleisthenes; cf. Hdt. v. 66; Arist. _Ath. Pol._ 21. (For -the best treatment of the Greek phylae, see Szanto, E., _Ausgewählte -Abhandlungen_, 216-88, who maintains that the institution was -artificial.) In like manner the three Roman tribes disappeared, leaving -but scant traces; p. 7. - -[23] Mantua, till late an Etruscan city, had three tribes; Serv. _in -Aen._ x. 202. In this connection it is significant that Volnius, an -Etruscan poet, declared the primitive tribal names to be Etruscan; -Varro, _L. L._ v. 55. The information suggests the possibility that some -Etruscan cities had these same tribes; cf. Fest. 285. 25; _CIL._ ix. -4204 (locality unknown). In fact these names can be ultimately traced -to Etruscan gentilicia; Schulze, _Lat. Eigennam._ 218, 581. The triplet -champions of Alba point to a division of this community into three -tribes; Niebuhr, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 386; Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 502. -The story that T. Tatius was killed at Lavinium indicates the existence -of a tomb of the hero in that place—a clear sign of a tribe of Tities -there; Livy i. 14. 2; Dion. Hal. ii. 52; cf. Varro, _L. L._ v. 152. A -trace of Ramnes is found at Ardea; Serv. _in Aen._ ix. 358. There were -Ramnennii in Ostia (_CIL._ xiv. 1542) and Ramnii in Capua; ibid. x. 3772; -Schulze, _Lat. Eigennam._ 218. The existence of a tribe of Luceres in -Ardea is vouched for by Lucerus, its eponymous hero, king of that city; -Fest. ep. 119; Pais, _Storia di Roma_, I. i. 279. The word in various -forms occurs in certain Etruscan towns; Schulze, ibid. 182. These facts -make it probable that some at least of the Latin as well as Etruscan -cities had the same three tribes. - -[24] The Etruscans had twelve cities in each of their three districts; -Strabo v. 4. 3; Livy v. 33. Each city had three consecrated gates and -three temples to Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva; Serv. _in Aen._ i. 422. The -Umbrians had three hundred cities in the Po valley, destroyed by the -Etruscans; Pliny, _N. H._ iii. 14. 113. The Bruttians were organized in -a confederation of twelve cities; Livy xxv. 1. 2. The Iapygians were -divided into three branches (Polyb. iii. 88. 4), each of which comprised -twelve smaller groups; Bloch, _Orig. d. sén._ 9 f.; Holzapfel, in _Beitr. -z. alt. Gesch._ i. 245 ff., 252 f. The tripartite division also existed -in many pagi which continued to historical time; Kornemann, in _Klio_, v. -83. - -[25] These facts are too well known to need illustration; cf. Nissen, -_Templum_, 144; Bloch, _Orig. d. sén._ 1 ff. - -[26] Varro, _L. L._ v. 55. Tribus = tri-bu-s: bu- is related to φυ- “to -grow,” Skt. bhū-; tribus, corresponding to φυ-λή, would then signify -“three-branch;” Corssen, _Ausspr._ i. 163; Pott, _Etym. Forsch._ i. 111, -217; ii. 441; Vaniček, _Etym. Wörterb. d. lat. Spr._ 69; _Griech.-lat. -etym. Wörterb._ 636; Bloch, ibid. 9. Schlossman, in _Archiv f. lat. -Lexicog._ xiv (1905). 25-40, connecting tribus with tres, interprets it -not as a third but as an indefinite part, cf. entzweien with the meaning -to divide in several parts. Schrader, _Reallex._ 801, is doubtful as to -the etymology; cf. Walde, _Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 636. The connection of -the word with tres is denied by Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 96; Nissen, -_Ital. Landesk._ ii. 8, n. 5. Christ, in _Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad._ 1906. -204, prefers to connect it with Celt *trebo- (Old Irish treb), “house,” -Goth. thaúrp, “village.” Oscan trebo- also means “house.” - -[27] The existence of four Ionic tribes in all Ionic cities cannot be -maintained; cf. Wilamowitz-Möllendorff, in _Sitzb. d. Berl. Akad._ 1906. -71. - -[28] The tribus Sapinia was the territory of the Sapinian community (Livy -xxxi. 2. 6; xxxiii. 37. 1), just as the trifu Tarinate was the territory -of the community (tuta, tota, Osc. touto; _Tab. Bant._ 2) Tadinum; _Tab. -Iguv._ vi. b. 54; cf. iii. 24; Buck, _Grammar of Oscan and Umbrian_, 278 -f., 298; Bücheler, _Umbrica_, see index, s. Tref, Trefiper; Kornemann, in -_Klio_, v. 87. - -[29] Christ, in _Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad._ 1906. 207. - -[30] Livy i. 55. 3 f.; _CIL._ ix. 1618, 5565; Nissen, _Ital. Landesk._ -ii. 8 ff.; Kornemann, in _Klio_, v. 80. - -[31] Dion. Hal. iv. 15; Nissen, _Ital. Landesk._ ii. 9-15. Doubtless -oppidum applied primarily to the enclosing wall, thence to the space -enclosed; Caes. _B. G._ v. 21; Varro, _L. L._ v. 153. From the beginning -it must have been the chief or central settlement of the pagus, though -the organization was not urban but territorial-tribal; cf. Pöhlmann, -_Anfänge Roms_, 40 ff. - -[32] Livy ix. 41. 6; x. 18. 8; _CIL._ i. 199; Isid. _Etym._ xv. 2. 11: -“Vici et castella et pagi sunt quae nulla dignitate civitatis ornantur, -sed vulgari hominum conventu incoluntur et propter parvitatem sui -maioribus civitatibus attribuuntur;” Fest. ep. 72; Nissen, ibid. 11. - -[33] Thus the three tribes of Cyrene were made up each of a nationality -or group of nationalities (Hdt. iv. 161), and the ten tribes of Thurii -were named after the nationalities of which they were respectively -composed; Diod. xii. 11. 3. - -[34] The Romans founded their colonies according to Etruscan rites, -and they believed their city to have been established in the same way; -Varro, _L. L._ v. 143; Cato, in Serv. _in Aen._ v. 755; Fest. 237. -18; Kornemann, in _Klio_, v. 88. The word Roma is now declared to be -Etruscan; Schultze, _Lat. Eigennam._ 579 ff.; Schmidt, Karl Fr. W., in -_Berl. Philol. Woch._ 1906. 1656. - -[35] Richter, _Top. d. Stadt Rom_, 30 ff., still believes that the -earliest settlement was on the Palatine. His view is controverted by -Degering, H., in _Berl. Philol. Woch._ xxiii (1903). 1645 f., who prefers -the Quirinal; cf. also Carter, J. B., in _Am. Journ. of Archaeol._ xii -(1908). 172-83. - -[36] Cf. Richter, ibid. 38; Meyer, E., in _Hermes_, xxx. 13. - -[37] Cf. Nissen, _Ital. Landesk._ ii. 504. - -[38] Cf. Varro, _L. L._ v. 55; Verrius Flaccus, in Gell. xviii. 7. 5. The -idea of Isidorus, _Etym._ ix. 6. 7, is of course absurd. - -[39] This subject will be considered in connection with the Servian -tribes; p. 48 f. - -[40] Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2. - -[41] P. 74. - -[42] Like the Attic phylobasileis they continued through historical time -to perform sacerdotal functions; Dion. Hal. ii. 64. 3; _Fast. Praen. Mar. -19_, in _CIL._ i². p. 234: “(Sali) faciunt in comitio saltu (adstantibus -po)ntificibus et trib. celer;” Holzapfel, in _Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ i. -242. - -[43] Verg. _Aen._ v. 553 ff.; Serv. _in Aen._ v. 560; Holzapfel, ibid. -243. - -[44] P. 2, n. 6. - -[45] Fest. 285. 25; cf. Serv. _in Aen._ x. 202. - -[46] There were curiae in Lanuvium, an old Latin town; _CIL._ xiv. 2120. -Juno Curis, Cur(r)itis, Quiritis, goddess of the curiae, was worshipped -in Tibur (Serv. _in Aen._ i. 17), and in Falerii (Tertul. _Apol._ 24; -_CIL._ xi. 3100, 3125, 3126; cf. Holzapfel, _Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ -i. 247; Roscher, _Lex. d. griech. u. röm. Myth._ II. i. 596 f.). A -connection between Cūris and cūria is not clear; Deecke, _Falisker_, 86. - -[47] Aristotle, _Politics_, 1329, b 8, considers Italus, king of the -Oenotrians, to have been author of the mess-associations (συσσίτια), -adding that the institution was derived from the country of the Opici and -the Chaonians. With the Opici he includes Latins as well as Ausonians; -Dion. Hal. i. 72. 3. On the relation of these peoples to one another, -see especially Pais, _Anc. Italy_, ch. i. Greek writers identify the -curia with the phratry (Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 3 f.; Dio Cass. Frag. 4. -8), the ἑταιρεία, and the syssition (Dion. Hal. ii. 23. 3; Dio Cass. -ibid.). Although the institutions designated by these four names show -considerable variety of form and function, they are similar in general -character and may have a common origin; Meyer, _Gesch. d. Alt._ ii. 514. - -The myth which names the curiae after the Sabine women suggests that some -of the curial names, and perhaps the curiae themselves, might be found -among the Sabines. On Rapta and Titia however see p. 11, n. 7. - -[48] Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 2; Dio Cass. Frag. 5. 8; Plut. _Rom._ 20; Fest. -174. 8; ep. 49; (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ ii. 12; Serv. _in Aen._ viii. -638; Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 2. - -Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 47 f., entertains the peculiar idea that -the curiae, invented to counteract the independent tendencies of the -tribes, were not divisions of the tribes, the members of each curia being -drawn from all three tribes. His view is contradicted by the sources and -he admits that he cannot prove it. - -St. Augustine, _Enarr. in Psalm._ 121. 7 (iv. 2. 1624 ed. Migne), -and still later Paulus, the epitomator of Festus, 54, suppose that -there were thirty-five curiae. Notwithstanding Hoffmann, _Patr. u. -pleb. Cur._ 44 ff., the opinion of these late writers doubtless arose -from an identification of the curiae with the tribes; cf. Kübler, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1818. - -[49] P. 11 f. - -[50] The word is derived from *co-viria, “a dwelling together,” “an -assembly,” by Pott, _Etym. Forsch._ ii. 373 f. (cf. Vaniček, _Etym. -Wörterb. d. lat. Spr._ 160; Walde, _Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 161), who is -followed by Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 496, n. 8, 610, n. 4; Herzog, -_Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 96. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 5, 90 and notes, -gives the word the meaning “an association of citizens,” deriving it -from quiris (cf. _Abriss_, 11), which he connects with κῦρος, κῦριος, as -did Lange in 1853 (_Kleine Schriften_, i. 147). Afterward—_Röm. Alt._ i. -(1876) 91—Lange expressed some doubt as to this connection. But the fact -that curia applies to the house not only of the curiales, but also of the -senate and of the Salii, as well as to various other buildings, seems -to indicate that the meaning “house” is primary for the Latin language -if not ultimately original. Corssen, who accepts this meaning, derives -cu- from sku-, “to cover,” “to protect” (_Ausspr._ i. 353 f.; Vaniček, -_Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb._ 1116), cf. Old High Germ. hū-t, hū-s, -Eng. “house.” Although Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 90, n. 2, protests -against this explanation, it is accepted by Meyer, _Gesch. d. Alt._ ii. -511, Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 52, and others. Far less probable -is a connection with cura, curare, assumed by most ancient writers; cf. -Varro, _L. L._ v. 155; vi. 46; _Vit. pop. rom._ in Non. Marc. 57; Fest. -ep. 49; Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 2; Dio Cass. Frag. 5. 8; Isid. -_Etym._ xv. 2. 28. These sources have misled Genz, _Patr. Rom_, 32, into -fruitless speculation on the functions of the curia. - -[51] Tac. _Ann._ xii. 24. - -[52] Fest. 174. 6; Jordan, _Top. d. Stadt Rom_, I. i. 165 f.; iii. 43 -f.; Gilbert, _Gesch. u. Top. d. Stadt Rom_, i. 102 f.; 195 ff.; Richter, -_Top. d. Stadt Rom_, 33, 340; Lanciani, _Ruins and Excavations of Ancient -Rome_, map opp. 58; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 99. - -[53] P. 8, n. 5; Dion. Hal. ii. 50. 3; Fest. 254. 25; ep. 64; cf. -Roscher, _Lex._ II. i. 596. - -[54] Worshipped in the Fordicidia; Ovid, _Fast._ iv. 634; Lyd. _De Mens._ -iv. 49; Wissowa, _Rel. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 159. - -[55] On the curial worship, see Varro, _L. L._ vi. 13; Fest. 254. 25; -317. 12; Dion. Hal. ii. 23. 1-3; 50. 3; 65. 4; Ovid, _Fast._ ii. 527 -ff.; iv. 629 ff.; Plut. _Q. R._ 89; cf. Fowler, _Roman Festivals_, 71-2, -302-6. On the stultorum feriae, see Wissowa, ibid. 142; Fowler, ibid. 304 -ff. - -[56] Dion. Hal. ii. 23. 1; Fest. 245. 28. - -[57] Varro, _L. L._ v. 83; vi. 46; Dion. Hal. 64. 1; 65. 4; Fest. ep. 49, -62; Lyd. _De Mag._ i. 9. - -[58] Dion. Hal. ii. 22. 1. - -[59] _CIL._ vi. 1892; xiv. 296; Gell. xv. 27. 2; cf. Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. -12. 31. - -[60] Fest. ep. 64: “Curiales flamines curiarum sacerdotes.” For the -flamen of the Curia Iovis of Simitthus, see _CIL._ viii. 14683; cf. 2596 -and 11008. The statement of Festus, 154. 26, that there were but fifteen -flamines must be modified. But there may have been fewer than thirty -curial flamines; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 390. Of the two curial -officials mentioned by Dionysius, ii. 21. 2, therefore, one was the curio -and the other a lictor (Mommsen, ibid. 309, n. 5; Genz, _Patr. Rom._, 47) -or a flamen (Holzapfel, in _Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ i. 242). - -[61] Cf. Wissowa, _Rel. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 338, n. 3, 413, n. 2. - -[62] Livy iii. 7. 7; xxvii. 8. 1; Fest. ep. 126. This official was -probably instituted after the curiones had become mere priests; Genz, -ibid. 48. - -[63] P. 157. The comitium was a place of assembly adjoining the Forum. - -[64] II. 7. 2 f.; 23. 3. - -[65] Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 52, 65, following J. J. Müller, in -_Philol._ xxxiv (1874), 96-136, refuses to credit a military character -to the curiae because it is mentioned by no other writer and because we -can find no trace of it in historical time. His reasoning is not cogent. -The curia may have lost its earlier military function, as did the phratry -(_Il._ ii. 362 f.). - -[66] That the antiquarians had some evidence as to the military character -of the curiae is suggested by Fest. ep. 54: “Centuriata comitia item -curiata dicebantur, quia populus Romanus per cetenas turmas divisus erat.” - -[67] _Il._ ii. 362 f. - -[68] Tac. _Germ._ 7. 3. - -[69] Schrader, _Reallex._ 349 f. - -[70] All adult male citizens had a right to attend this assembly, all -who were physically qualified and of military age were liable to service -when called to it; but probably on no occasion were those present in the -assembly identical with the military levy of the year; cf. p. 203. - -[71] P. 7. - -[72] II. 7. 4. The curiales must have been neighbors in order to use a -common drying oven; n. 8 below. - -[73] Fest. 174. 12. The first is evidently named after the Forum, the -second after the Velia; cf. Plut. _Rom._ 20, who states that many were -named after places. Of the other five Velitia (Fest. ibid.), Titia (ibid. -ep. 366), Faucia (Livy ix. 38. 15), and Acculeia (Varro, _L. L._ vi. 23) -have gentile endings. We should not imagine these four to be named after -gentes, which were of later origin; Botsford, in _Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxi. -(1907). 685 ff. It would be safer to assume that they, like gentilicia, -are derived from the names of persons real or imaginary. Rapta (Fest. -174. 12) and Titia possibly suggested to the ancients the derivation of -the curial names from those of the captive Sabine women; cf. p. 8, n. 6. - -[74] Dion. Hal. iv. 12. 2. This statement is confirmed by the nature of -the Fornacalia, the chief festival of the curiae; it was celebrated in -connection with the drying of the far in ovens; Pliny _N. H._ xviii. 2. -8; Fest. ep. 83, 93. Evidently the members of a curia were those who had -a common drying oven; Wissowa, _Rel. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 142. - -[75] Διῄρηνται δὲ καὶ εἰς δεκάδας αἰ φράτραι, πρὸς αὑτοῦ, καὶ ἡγεμὼν -ἐκὰστην ἐκόσμει δεκάδα, δεκουρίων κατὰ τὴν ἐπιχώριον, γλῶτταν -προσαγομευόμενος. - -[76] Polyb. vi. 25. 1; cf. 20. 9. - -[77] _L. L._ v. 91. - -[78] There is no need of assuming, with Bloch, _Origines du sénat -Romain_, 102-5, that the decuriae mentioned by Dionysius are “purely -imaginary.” - -[79] _Röm. Gesch._ i. 334 f.; Eng. 163; cf. also Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ -i. 612 f. The antiquated view is still held by Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ -i. 96, and by Lécrivain, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ ii. 1504. Though -Ihne, _History of Rome_, i. 113, n. 3, believes that the curiae were -composed of gentes, he is doubtful as to the number. - -[80] “Cum ex generibus hominum suffragium feratur, curiata comitia esse; -cum ex censu et aetate, centuriata; cum ex regionibus et locis, tributa.” - -[81] Mommsen, too, supposes that genera here means gentes but is used so -as to include also the plebeian stirpes; nevertheless he knows that the -voting in the curiate assembly was by heads rather than by gentes; _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 9, n. 2; 90, n. 5. - -[82] Livy i. 43. 10: “Viritim suffragium ... omnibus datum est” (i.e. in -the curiate assembly). This statement of the lack of relation between the -gens and the curia is repeated from _Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxi. 511 f. - -[83] It is in the main a reproduction of my article on the subject in -_Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxi (1906). 498-526. - -[84] P. 25 ff. - -[85] _Rep._ ii. 8. 14; 12. 23: “Senatus, qui constabat ex optimatibus, -quibus ipse rex tantum tribuisset, ut eos patres vellet nominari -patriciosque eorum liberos.” - -[86] In the expression “omnibus patriciis, omnibus antiquissimis -civibus,” Cicero (_Caec._ 35. 101) intends no more than to include the -patricians among the oldest citizens, whom he is contrasting with the -newly-admitted municipes. Only the most superficial examination of the -passage (cf. Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. 7) could make “omnibus patriciis” -equivalent to “omnibus antiquissimis civibus.” - -[87] I. 8. 7. - -[88] Ibid.: “Consilium deinde viribus parat: centum creat senatores.” - -[89] Livy iv. 4. 7: “Nobilitatem istam vestram quam plerique oriundi ex -Albanis et Sabinis non genere nec sanguine sed per coöptationem in patres -habetis, aut ab regibus lecti aut post reges exactos iussu populi.” - -[90] Livy i. 34. 6: “In novo populo, ubi omnis repentina atque ex virtute -nobilitas sit.” - -[91] II. 8. 1-3. In 12. 1, he shifts his point of view: Romulus chose the -hundred original senators from the patricians. - -[92] _Rom._ 13; cf. _Q. R._ 58. - -[93] Cf. further Ovid, _Fast._ iii. 127; Vell. i. 8. 6; Fest. 246. 23; -339. 11. - -[94] There is no inconsistency, however, in the fact that some noble -gentes claimed descent from Aeneas or from deities (cf. Seeley, _Livy_, -57) or from Alban or Sabine ancestors (cf. Livy i. 30. 2; iv. 4. 7; Dion. -Hal. ii. 46. 3; iii. 29. 7); they were nobles in their original homes -before the founding of Rome, but became patricians by an act only of the -Roman government. - -Although after the creation of the first hundred patres, the ancients -do not distinctly state that each newly-made senator was the founder of -a new patrician family, they do represent the enlargement of the senate -and of the patriciate as going hand in hand; in this way they continue to -make the patriciate depend upon membership in the senate; cf. Livy i. 30. -2; 35. 6; Dion. Hal. ii. 47. 1; iii. 67. 1; Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 75. - -[95] _Rep._, ii. 8. 14; cf. (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ ii. 11. - -[96] _Cat._ 6. 6; cf. Isid. _Etym._ ix. 6. 10: “Nam sicut patres suos, -ita illi rem publicam habebant” (or “alebant”). - -[97] I. 8. 7. - -[98] 339. 11. - -[99] 247. - -[100] ii. 8. 1. - -[101] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 227. - -[102] From the root pa, to protect, preserve, conservare; Pott, -_Wurzel-Wörterb. d. Indog. Spr._ (2d ed.), 221; Corssen, _Ausspr._ i. -424; Schrader, _Sprachvergl. u. Urgesch._ 538; Lécrivain, in Daremberg et -Saglio, _Dict._ ii. 1507. - -[103] _Dig._ 1. 16. 195. 2: “Pater familias appellatur qui in domo -dominium habet.” In like manner patronus is protector of clients, pater -patriae protector of his country; Pott, ibid. 227. - -[104] Ulpian, in _Dig._, ibid.: “Pater autem familias recte hoc nomine -appellatur, quamvis filium non habeat; non enim solam personam eius, sed -et ius demonstramus: denique et pupillum patrem familias appellamus.” - -[105] Livy i. 32. 10 (from a fetial formula). - -[106] Rubino, _Röm. Verfassung und Geschichte_, 186; Mommsen, _Röm. -Forsch._ i. 228, n. 16. - -[107] In the same way reges is made to include the whole family of the -rex; Livy i. 39. 2. For other illustrations of the same principle, see -Rubino, ibid. 188, n. 1. - -[108] The Twelve Tables seem to apply it to all patricians, not to -senators alone: Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 37. 63: “Conubia ... ut ne plebei cum -patribus essent;” Livy iv. 4. 5: “Ne conubium patribus cum plebe esset.” -These passages, however, do not afford absolute proof; for Gaius, bk. vi -_ad legem Duodecim Tabularum_ (_Dig._ 1. 16. 238: “Plebs est ceteri cives -sine senatoribus”), probably commenting on the very law quoted by Cicero -and Livy, seems to understand patres as senators; cf. the prohibition -of intermarriage between senators and their agnatic descendants on the -one hand and freed persons on the other; _Dig._ xxii. 2. 44; Roby, _Rom. -Priv. Law_, i. 130; Vassis, in _Athena_, xii. 57 f. In some instances, -however, as in the expression “a patribus transire ad plebem” (Vell. ii. -45. 1) patres is certainly equivalent to patricii. - -[109] Cf. gentilicius from gentilis; tribunicius from tribunus, Pott, -ibid. 227. Patricius is an adjective signifying paternal, ancestral, -belonging to parents or progenitors; Corssen, ibid. i. 53. - -[110] In his work on the Comitia, quoted by Fest. 241. 21: “Patricios eos -appellari solitos qui nunc ingenui vocentur.” - -[111] X. 8. 10: “En umquam fando audistis patricios primo esse factos non -de caelo demissos, sed qui patrem ciere possent, id est nihil ultra quam -ingenuos...?” - -[112] VI. 40. 6. The speaker contrasts ingenui with patricii. - -[113] Plut. _Q. R._ 58: Those who were first constituted senators by -Romulus were called patres and patricii as being men of good birth, who -could show their pedigree. In its adjectival and adverbial uses ingenuus -connotes not the quality of free birth, but respectability, nobility. -The original meaning is “born within,” hence indigenous, native; cf. -Forcellini, _Totius Latinitatis Lexicon_, s. v. In this sense it could -not apply to the patricians, who generally claimed a foreign origin. -But native is superior to alien; doubtless in this secondary meaning of -excellence it attached to the nobility, the close relation of the word to -gens (family, lineage) attracting it in that direction. Afterward it was -so democratized as to include all the freeborn. With this meaning we find -it as early as Plautus, _Mil._ 784, 961. According to Dionysius, ii. 8. -3, the identification of patricii with ingenui in its sense of freeborn -was accepted not by the most trustworthy historians, but by certain -malicious slanderers: “Some say they were called patricians because they -alone could cite their fathers, the rest being fugitives and unable to -cite free fathers.” - -[114] P. 30. - -[115] The word is probably derived from the same root as populus; -Corssen, _Ausspr._ i. 368; cf. p. 1, n. 3 above. - -[116] _Rep._ ii. 9. 16. - -[117] ii. 9. 2. - -[118] Notably among the Sabines, Livy ii. 16. 4; Dion. Hal. ii. 46. 3. - -[119] Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 9. 16; Dion. Hal. ii. 9. 2. - -[120] Cf. the citations in Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 71, n. 1. -Dionysius, ii. 63. 3, distinguished the two classes as early as the -interregnum which followed Romulus. - -[121] Dion. Hal. v. 40. 3; vi. 47. 1; vii. 19. 2; x. 43. As late as 134 -Scipio called his clients to follow him to the Numantine war; Appian, -_Iber._ 84. - -[122] Livy iii. 58. 1. - -[123] Dion. Hal. ii. 10. 3. - -[124] Livy ii. 56. 3; 64. 2; Dion. Hal. ii. 10. 3; iv. 23. 6; ix. 41. 5. - -[125] Dion. Hal. ii. 10. 3 (it was not lawful for either patron or client -to vote against the other). Marius, a client of Herennius, was elected to -the praetorship; Plut. _Mar._ 5. A law declared that election to a curule -office (according to Plutarch, or as Marius asserted to any office) freed -a man and his family from clientage. Evidently this law was passed in -or after 367 B.C. Mucius, a client of Ti. Gracchus, was elected to the -plebeian tribunate; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 13. Cn. Flavius, who was the son -of a freedman and probably therefore a client, was elected curule aedile -for 304; Livy ix. 46. 1; Val. Max. ii. 5. 2. - -[126] Gaius 1. 3: “Plebs autem a populo eo distat, quod populi -appellatione universi cives significantur connumeratis etiam patriciis; -plebis autem appellatione sine patriciis ceteri cives significantur.” -Evidently Pomponius held the same view; _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 1-6; cf. Capito, -in Gell. x. 20. 5; Fest. 233. 29; 330. 19; Isid. _Etym._ ix. 6. 5 f.; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 4, n. 2. - -[127] Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 12. 23; Livy i. 8. 7; Zon. vii. 9; Isid. _Etym._ -ix. 6. 6. - -[128] Illustrations of this common use are Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 8. 14; 12. -23; Livy ii. 54. 3; iv. 51. 3; x. 13. 9; xxv. 2. 9; 3. 13; 3. 16; xxx. -27. 3; xxxiv. 54. 4; xxxvii. 58. 1; xliii. 8. 9. The Greeks always regard -populus as the equivalent of δῆμος; cf. Plut. _Rom._ 13. Not only does -the tribune in addressing the plebs call them populus Romanus (Sall. -_Iug._ 31), but the consuls also apply the term to the same class (Livy -xxv. 4. 4); and a statement of Cicero (_Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 17), which has -the appearance of a legal definition, makes the people of the thirty-five -tribes under a tribune the universus populus Romanus. - -[129] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 172. - -[130] Cic. _Fam._ x. 35; _Verr._ v. 14. 36; _Mur._ 1. 1; Livy xxix. -27. 2: Tac. _Ann._ 1. 8; Macrob. _Sat._ 1. 17. 28; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. -Forsch._ i. 169, n. 4. - -[131] E.g. senatui populo plebique Romanae; Cicero, _Fam._ x. 35 -(address). - -[132] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 6, n. 4; Soltau, _Altröm. -Volksversamml._ 84. - -[133] For the division of the populus into tribes and curiae, see Cic. -_Rep._ ii. 8. 14; Livy i. 13. 6; Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 2; App. _B. C._ iii. -94. The author of _Vir. Ill._ 2. 12, in supposing that the plebs alone -were assigned to the tribes is certainly wrong; but his mistake is -pardonable in view of the general agreement among our sources that the -populus, πλῆθος, contained in the curiae were mainly plebeian. - -[134] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 7. 13; 8. 14; 18. 33; Livy i. 13. 4; 13. 6; 28. 7; -30. 1; 33. 1-5; Dion. Hal. ii. 46. 2 f.; 47. 1; 50. 4 f.; 55. 6; iii. 29. -7; 30. 3; 31. 3; 37. 4; 48. 2; iv. 22. 3. - -[135] Cf. Dion. Hal. ii. 8. 4. - -[136] Livy i. 17. 11; 35. 2; 43. 10; 46. 1; Dion. Hal. ii. 10. 3; 14. 3; -60. 3; 62. 3; iv. 12. 3; 20. 2. - -[137] Cf. _Lectures on the History of Rome_, i. 80, 83: “I beg you to -mark this well ... that even ingenious and learned men like Livy and -Dionysius did not comprehend the ancient institutions and yet have -preserved a number of expressions from their predecessors from which we, -with much labor and difficulty, may elicit the truth.” - -[138] The school of Mommsen, which still clings to Niebuhr’s theory of an -exclusively patrician populus, has abandoned the attempt to support it by -a reconstruction of lost sources. - -[139] The late regal period may have left a few documents which, if used -by the annalists, might have thrown light on the condition of that time. -It has not yet been determined whether the inscription recently found -in the Roman Forum belongs to the late regal or to the early republican -period. - -[140] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 69, grants to the ancients far more -knowledge of their own history, but claims a “wider horizon.” - -[141] Niebuhr treats Dionysius with great respect; cf. _Lectures_, i. -liv: “The longer and more carefully the work is examined, the more must -true criticism acknowledge that it is deserving of all respect, and the -more it will be found a storehouse of most solid information.” Schwegler, -_Röm. Gesch._ i. 621 f., and 626 f., assumes that Dionysius is alone -responsible for the view that the plebeians were in the primitive tribes -and the curiae. A glance at the citations given above, p. 24 f., will -show, however, that Cicero and Livy shared this view. - -[142] Cf. Pais, _Storia di Roma_, I. 1. 82. The usual opinion (cf. -Bernhöft, _Röm. Königsz._ 8 f.) is that the sources of Dionysius are -later and less trustworthy than those of Livy, but Pais asserts that on -the whole the two authors drew from the same sources. - -[143] _Röm. Gesch._ i. 339, Eng. 165. - -[144] _Lectures on Roman History_, i. 81, 100 f. - -[145] _Röm. Gesch._ i. 332, Eng. 158. - -[146] In ibid. i. 330, Eng. 162, he excludes the “freed clients” from the -gens; in 339, Eng. 165, he states that the nobles alone _had_ the gens, -the clients belonged to it in a dependent capacity. - -[147] Cf. the edition of Sandys, 252; Rose, _Aristotelis Frag._ 385. - -[148] _Röm. Gesch._ i. 326, Eng. 160. Genz, _Patricisches Rom_, 6, has -the same idea. - -[149] _Il._ ii. 362 f.; ix. 63 f. - -[150] _CIA._ i. 61; cf. Dem. xliii. 57. - -[151] This is illustrated, for instance, by a law quoted by Philochorus, -in Müller, _Frag. Hist. Graec._ i. 399. 94: Τοὺς δὲ φράτορας ἐπάναγκες -δέχεσθαι καὶ τοὺς ὀργεῶνας καὶ τοὺς ὁμογάλακτας, οὺς γεννῆτας καλοῦμεν -(“The members of the phratry must receive the orgeones as well as the -homogalaktes, whom we call gennetae”). This fact is now too well known to -need further proof; cf. Gilbert, _Constitutional Antiquities of Sparta -and Athens_, 148 f.; Thumser, _Griechische Staatsaltertümer_, 324 f. - -[152] P. 11. - -[153] _Top._ 6. 29: “Gentiles sunt inter se, qui eodem nomine sunt. Non -est satis. Qui ab ingenuis oriundi sunt. Ne id quidem satis est. Quorum -maiorum nemo servitutem servivit. Abest etiam nunc. Qui capite non sunt -deminuti. Hoc fortasse satis est. Nihil enim video Scaevolam pontificem -ad hanc definitionem addidisse;” cf. Cincius, in Fest. ep. 94. - -As the word itself indicates, gentiles are members of a gens, and no -other members are known to the sources. If it were true, as Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 66, supposes, that there were dependent members not -termed gentiles, a name would have been given this dependent relation, or -the jurists would have defined it, or some ancient writer would at least -have mentioned it. The attempt of Kübler, _Wochenschr. f. kl. Philol._ -xxv (1908). 541 f., to prove, on the authority of Cicero, _Tim._ 11. 41, -that clients were termed quasi gentiles is simply absurd. The passage -does not even hint at clientage; and the quasi gentiles of the immortal -gods, according to this passage, were related to the gods by birth, as -the word gignatis proves. From this point of view men might be called the -children of the gods; but because the divine element in both men and gods -comes alike from the Creator, it is possible to place them more nearly on -a level with one another—in a relation like that of gentiles. Kübler’s -other remarks on the gens, 539-43, are equally unconvincing. - -[154] Cic. _Brut._ 16. 32; Livy iv. 16. 3; Suet. _Aug._ 2. Whether these -two gentes had ever been patrician does not affect the question at issue. - -[155] Val. Max. ix. 2. 1. - -[156] Cic. _Har. Resp._ 15. 32, mentions sacrificia gentilicia of the -Calpurnia. - -[157] Suet. _Ner._ 1. - -[158] Cic. _Dom._ 13. 35. - -[159] Fest. ep. 23. - -[160] Varro, _R. R._ i. 2. 10. - -[161] Unless Sp. Cassius, consul 502, 493, 486 B.C. and author of the -first agrarian rogation, is a myth; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. -94. - -[162] Cf. Cic. _Orat._ i. 39. 176. The patrician and plebeian branches -are sometimes spoken of as distinct gentes; Suet. _Tib._ 1. - -[163] Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 113 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, ibid. 359. - -[164] Cic. _Phil._ i. 13. 32; Gell. ix. 2. 11; Fest. ep. 125. - -[165] Mommsen, ibid. 116. - -[166] L. Poplilius Volscus, patrician; Livy v. 12. 10. Q. Publilius -Philo, plebeian; Livy viii. 15. 9. - -[167] This patrician gens included an Aebutius who was tribune of the -plebs (Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 8. 21) and several other plebeians; Klebs, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 442 f. - -[168] Mommsen, ibid. 117 ff. - -[169] V. 14. 4: “Comitiis auspicato quae fierent indignum dis visum -honores volgari discriminaque gentium confundi.” - -[170] _Dom._ 13. 35: “Ita perturbatis sacris, contaminatis gentibus, et -quam deseruisti et quam poluisti.” - -[171] Sall. _Iug._ 95. 3; Livy iii. 27. 1; 33. 9; vi. 11. 2; Gell. x. 20. -5; cf. ix. 2. 11. - -[172] _L. L._ viii. 4: “Ut in hominibus quaedam sunt agnationes ac -gentilitates, sic in verbis.” - -[173] In _Lib. Praen._ 3. - -[174] It will suffice to quote Gaius iii. 17: “Si nullus agnatus sit, -eadem lex XII Tabularum gentiles ad hereditatem vocat”; cf. Cic. _Verr._ -i. 45. 115: “Lege hereditas ad gentem Minuciam veniebat.” The Minucian -gens was plebeian. Its right to the inheritance in question rested on -this law of the Twelve Tables. For the gentile right of tutelage, see the -so-called Laudatio Turiae, 15, 22 (_CIL._ vi. 1527; Girard, _Textes_, -778). - -[175] Cf. p. 20; see also Auct. Inc. _De Diff._ 527 (Keil): “Gens seriem -maiorum explicat.” - -[176] E.g. “Family will take a person everywhere”; C. D. Warner, quoted -by the _Standard Dictionary_, s. v. - -[177] Mommsen’s theory of the gens—a development from Niebuhr’s—is -criticized in _Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxii (1907). 668 f. The distinction -between patrician gentes and plebeian stirpes, on which he especially -relies, is there shown to be groundless. - -[178] Gell. xv. 27. 2. - -[179] II. 8. 4. - -[180] _Sén. Rom._ ii. 34 f. - -[181] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 233 f.; 247 f.; cf. Genz, _Patr. Rom_, 70. On the -patrum auctoritas, see p. 235 below. - -[182] E.g. _Röm. Gesch._ ii. 359; iii. 168; Eng. ii. 147; iii. 73: “the -common council of the patres—the curies.” - -[183] _Cic._ Frag. A. vii. 48; Livy ii. 56, especially § 3; Dion. Hal. -vi. 89. 1; ix. 41. - -[184] Livy xxvii. 8. 3. - -[185] Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 148. - -[186] _Cic. Leg. Agr._ ii. 12. 31. - -[187] _Cic. Dom._ 14. 38; Livy vi. 41. 10. - -[188] P. 185 below; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 147 f. - -[189] In the face of all evidence to the contrary two or three scholars -persist in maintaining essentially the opinion of Niebuhr that through -the republic the curiae continued patrician. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ -i. 98 f., 108, 1014, n. 2, imagines that from the beginning the clients -belonged to the curia in its administrative capacity, shared in its -sacra, attended its meetings, but did not vote. The plebs, however, were -not even passive members. His reasons do not deserve mention. Vassis, -Ῥωμαών Πολιτεία ἡ βασιλευομένη κα ἡ ἐλευθέρα (Athens, 1903), also -excludes the commons from the curiate assembly throughout its history. -The fancies of Hoffmann, _Patr. und pleb. Curien_, need not detain us. - -[190] _Röm. Gesch._ i. 623 f. - -[191] Cf. p. 152, 172. - -[192] Cf. p. 170, 172. - -[193] P. 173 ff., 345. - -[194] P. 75, 96, 209. - -[195] _Röm. Gesch._ i. 625, n. 3. - -[196] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 140 f. - -[197] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 269; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 92. Clason, _Krit. -Erört. über den röm. Staat_, 12, supposes they were admitted by the -Ogulnian law, in 300. Genz, _Patr. Rom_, 41, 62, places their admission -not earlier than the institution of the Servian tribes and not later than -the decemvirate, greatly preferring the latter date. - -[198] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 13; _Abriss_, 5. - -[199] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 54 f. - -[200] Ibid. iii. 91. - -[201] Ibid. iii. 63. - -[202] Ibid. iii. 67 f. - -[203] Ibid. i. 91, n. 1; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 261 f. Reference here -is only to the auspicia publica of the magistrates. It is established -below (p. 101 ff.) that from the beginning the plebeians had a right to -private auspices. - -[204] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 77. - -[205] Cf. Töpffer, _Attische Genealogie_, 177. - -[206] _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 93. - -[207] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 109. - -[208] P. 69. - -[209] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 106 f. and n. 80. - -[210] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 13. - -[211] _Rep._ ii. 20. 35: “Duplicavit illum pristinum patrum numerum et -antiquos patres maiorum gentium appellavit, quos priores sententiam -rogabat, a se adscitos minorum.” The connection shows that Cicero is -speaking of two classes of senators distinguished by the rank of the -gentes from which they respectively came. - -[212] P. 28 f. - -[213] P. 11 f. - -[214] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 14. - -[215] P. 17 f. and notes. - -[216] P. 20 f. - -[217] For the sources, see Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 459 f.; Stengel, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 1885. - -[218] _Andeutungen über den urspr. Religionsunterschied der röm. Patr. -und Pleb._ 1 f. - -[219] Cf. Livy xxxv. 51. 2; Serv. _in Aen._ ii. 761. Schwegler, ibid. -464-8, who insists on this fact, shows clearly that no historical value -attaches to the myth; see also Pais, _Storia di Roma_, I. i. 218, n. 1. - -[220] Pais, ibid. 217 ff. Dionysius, i. 4. 2 f., expressly states that -this story is a Greek falsification. - -[221] See the examples collected by Pais, ibid. - -[222] Cf. Livy i. 8. 5. - -[223] Cf. ibid. ii. 1. 4. - -[224] Dionysius, i. 85. 3, states that the colonists from Alba were -mostly plebeians, but that a considerable number of the highest nobility -accompanied them. It is a significant fact, however, that no patrician -family is known to have derived its origin from this earliest colony. -Those who claimed Alban and Trojan descent preferred to connect their -admission to citizenship with the Roman annexation of Alba Longa, e.g. -the Tullii, Servilii, Quinctii, Geganii, Curiatii, and Cloelii; Livy i. -30. 2. On the Alban and Sabine origin of most of the nobility, Livy iv. -4. 7. In so far as the local cognomina are indicative of origin (cf. -Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. 11 ff.), they point to a diversity of foreign -connections. The Tarquinian gens, which in later time was thought of as -patrician, came from Etruria, ultimately from Greece. The Aemilii were -Greek (Plut. _Aem._ 1; Fest. ep. 23) or Sabine (Plut. _Num._ 8) or Oscan -(Fest. 130. 1). - -[225] Cf. p. 31 above. For details, see _Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxii. 679 ff. - -[226] That Caere was the first community to receive the civitas sine -suffragio may justly be inferred from the expression “Caerite franchise,” -which designates this kind of limited citizenship (cf. p. 62). The -general fact stated in (6) is further confirmed by the law which granted -the right of extending the pomerium to those magistrates only who had -acquired new territory for Rome; Gell. xiii. 14. 3; Tacitus, _Ann._ xii. -23. - -[227] Since the publication of the _Staatsrecht_, writers have made -slight modifications or extensions of the conventional theory. Greenidge, -in Poste, _Gaii Institutiones_, xix, suggests that the dual forms in -Roman law may have as their basis a racial distinction between the -patricians and the plebeians. A serious objection to this kind of -reasoning is that if we are on the lookout for dualities, trinities, -and the like, we shall find them in abundance everywhere. All sorts of -theories as to the racial connections of the two social classes have been -proposed. Zöller, _Latium und Rom_, 23 ff., supposes that the patricians -were Sabine and the plebeians Latin. Ridgeway, _Early Age of Greece_, i. -257, holds that the plebeians were Ligurians, whereas Conway, in _Riv. di -Stor. ant._ vii (1903). 422-4, prefers to consider them Volscians. These -notions are equally worthless. Undoubtedly race is a potent factor in -history; but Gumplowicz, _Rassenkampf_ (1883), has killed the theory by -overwork. - -Among the writers who have rejected the conventional view are Soltau, -_Altröm. Volksversamml._ (1880); Bernhöft, _Röm. Königsz._ (1882); -Pelham, _Outlines of Roman History_ (1893; reprint of his article on -“Roman History,” in the _Encycl. Brit._); Meyer, _Gesch. d. Alt._ ii -(1893); Holzapfel, in _Beitr. z. alt. Gesch._ i (1902). 254. - -[228] Meyer, _Gesch. d. Alt._ ii. 80; Featherman, _Social History of -the Races of Mankind_, ii. 408; Hellwald, _Culturgeschichte_, i. 175; -Barth, _Philosophie der Geschichte_, i. 382. It would be practicable by -the citation of authorities to prove the existence of such distinctions -in nearly every community, present or past, whose social condition is -sufficiently known. - -[229] Giddings, _Principles of Sociology_, 124; Tarde, _Laws of -Imitation_, 233 f.; Fairbanks, _Introduction to Sociology_, 158; Grave, -_L’individu et la société_, 23; Funck-Brentano, _Civilisation et ses -lois_, 71 f.; Caspari, _Urgeschichte der Menschheit_, i. 125 f.; -Hellwald, ibid. i. 175, 177; Ross, _Social Control_, 80. - -[230] Giddings, ibid. 262; Ammon, _Gesellschaftsordnung_, 133 f.; -Cherbuliez, _Simples notions de l’ordre social à l’usage de tout le -monde_, 38 f.; Dechesne, _Conception du droit_, 36; Grave, ibid. 23 -f.; Caspari, ibid. i. 133 f.; Harris, _Civilization considered as a -Science_, 211; Lepelletier de la Sarthe, _Système sociale_, i. 329; -Mismer, _Principes sociologiques_, 63 f.; Rossbach, _Geschichte der -Gesellschaft_, i. 13 f.; Schurtz, _Urgeschichte der Kultur_, 385; -Hittell, _Mankind in Ancient Times_, i. 228 f.; Maine, _Early History of -Institutions_, 130; Seebohm, _Tribal System in Wales_, 139; Post, A. H., -_Anfänge des Staats- und Rechtslebens_, 150 f. - -[231] Giddings, ibid. 262; cf. Arnd, _Die materiellen Grundlagen ... -der europäischen Kultur_, 444 f.; Frohschammer, _Organisation und -Kultur der mensch. Gesellschaft_, 84 f.; Bastian, _Rechtsverhältnisse -bei verschiedenen Völkern der Erde_, 20 f.; Spencer, _Principles of -Sociology_, ii. 333, 335. - -[232] Frazer, _Early Hist. of the Kingship_; Spencer, ibid. ii. 338 -f.; cf. for the Malays, Skeat and Blagden, _Pagan Races of the Malay -Peninsula_, 499. - -[233] Cf. Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 183; Spencer, ibid. ii. 334 f.; Seebohm, -_Tribal System in Wales_, 72. - -[234] Aristotle, _Politics_, 1294, a 21; Giddings, _Principles of -Sociology_, 293 f.; Jenks, _History of Politics_, 30 f.; Grave, -_L’individu et la société_, 25; Combes de Lestrade, _Éléments de -sociologie_, 185; Schurtz, _Urgeschichte der Kultur_, 148, 385; -Featherman, _Social History of the Races of Mankind_, see index, s. -Classes; Hittell, _Mankind in Ancient Times_, i. 228; Maine, _Early -History of Institutions_, 134; Ginnell, _Brehon Laws_, 60 f.; Farrand, -_Basis of American History_, 114, 201; Bluntschli, _Theory of the State_, -149. - -[235] Grave, ibid. 30 f.; Combes de Lestrade, ibid. 184 f.; -Funck-Brentano, _Civilisation et ses lois_, 68 f.; Spencer, ibid. ii. -348 f.; Schurtz, ibid. 150 f.; Featherman, ibid. ii. 128, 197 f., 311; -Letourneau, _Sociology_, 480 f.; Bastian, _Rechtsverhältnisse_, 8 f. - -[236] Cf. Schurtz, ibid. 148; Farrand, ibid. 114, 129, 141. For the -Malays, see Skeat and Blagden, ibid. 494 ff. - -[237] Maine, ibid. 132. - -[238] Maine, ibid.; Ginnell, _Brehon Laws_, 63 f., 93 f. - -[239] Seebohm, _Tribal System in Wales_, 134 f. - -[240] As in Wales; Seebohm, ibid. 139; cf. the Inca grandees, who -all claimed descent from the founder of the monarchy; Letourneau, -_Sociology_, 479. - -[241] Tac. _Germ._ 13. 3: “Insignis nobilitas aut magna patrum merita -principis dignationem etiam adulescentulis adsignant.” It is clear that -the family of a youth who receives an office or dignity because of the -merits of his ancestors is coming near to nobility. - -[242] A certain man of illegitimate birth, hence of inferior social -standing, through martial skill and daring becomes a leader of warriors, -acquires wealth, marries the daughter of a notable, “waxes dread and -honorable” among his countrymen, who elect him to a high military -command by the side of their hereditary chief; the taint of his birth is -forgotten; Od., xiv. 199; cf. Bernhöft, _Röm. Königsz._ 123. - -[243] Livy viii. 39. 12; x. 38. 7: “Nobilissimum quemque genere -factisque,” with reference to the Samnites; some were nobles by birth, -others by prowess; cf. 46. 4: “Nobiles aliquot captivi clari suis -patrumque factis ducti;” some of these captives were noble through their -own prowess, others through that of their ancestors. The Samnite nobility -was in the formative stage like that of the German nobility in the time -of Tacitus. The Yakonan of California are in this condition; Farrand, -_Basis of American History_, 129. - -[244] Maine, _Early Hist. of Inst._ 135 f.; Giddings, _Principles of -Sociology_, 294 f. - -[245] Cf. Giddings, ibid. - -[246] Maine, ibid. 136. - -[247] Laws of Athelstan. - -[248] Giddings, _Principles of Sociology_, 296; cf. Maine, _Early Hist. -of Inst._ 141. Thus in the time of Tacitus the German youth of common -blood who entered the comitatus of a chief had a fair opportunity to -become noble; _Germ._ 13. 3-5; 14. 1 f. Among the Danes, too, some noble -families were once peasant; Maine, ibid. 135. - -[249] Brunner, _Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte_, i. 235 f., 252; Maine, ibid. -138; Ammon, _Gesellschaftsordnung_, 135; Schurtz, _Urgeschichte der -Kultur_, 148 f.; Bluntschli, _Theory of the State_, 131, 155; Tarde, -_Laws of Imitation_, 237. - -[250] Giddings, _Principles of Sociology_, 315; cf. Combes de Lestrade, -_Éléments de sociologie_, 185; Rossbach, _Gesch. der Gesellsch._ i. 14. A -nobility formed purely by conquest, if such indeed exists, must be rare, -and can hardly be lasting; Schurtz, _Urgesch. der Kul._ 149. - -[251] Giddings, ibid. 315; cf. Grave, _L’individu et la société_, 32. - -[252] Strabo viii. 4. 4, p. 364; Aristotle, _Politics_, 1270, a 34. - -[253] Schurtz, _Urgesch. der Kult._ 165. - -[254] Ginnell, _Brehon Laws_, 145. - -[255] Bluntschli, _Theory of the State_, 142; Freeman, _Norman Conquest_, -iv. 11. There were nobles both in England and in Normandy before the -conquest. After the battle of Senlac most of the English nobles submitted -to William, and were allowed to redeem their lands; Freeman, ibid. iv. 13 -f., 36 f. It was only in punishment for later rebellion that they lost -their holdings, and some English thanes were never displaced; cf. Powell, -in Traill, _Social England_, i. 240. - -[256] The most violent and oppressive Germanic invaders are supposed -to have been the Vandals, and yet they doubtless retained for the -administration of the government the trained Roman officials; Hodgkin, -_Italy and her Invaders_, ii. 263. The Ostrogoths were more liberal in -their treatment of the Romans (ibid. iv. 250, 271, 282), and the Franks -still more liberal; Brunner, _Deutsche Rechtsgesch._ ii. 202. - -[257] Featherman, _Social History of the Races of Mankind_, ii. 354; -Tarde, _Laws of Imitation_, 238, n. 1, 239; Hellwald, _Kulturgesch._ i. -175 f.; Schurtz, _Urgesch. der Kult._ 149; cf. Demolins, _Comment la -route crée le type social_. - -[258] P. 16. - -[259] P. 37, n. 4. - -[260] P. 31; _Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxii (1907). 679 ff. - -[261] The idea that the primitive community is essentially illiberal -with its membership is erroneous. For the mingling of conquerors and -conquered, see p. 42 f. and notes. On the ethnic heterogeneity of states -in general, see Gumplowicz, _Rassenkampf_, 181. The laws of Solon granted -citizenship to alien residents who were in perpetual exile from their own -country, or who had settled with their families in Attica with a view -to plying their trade; Plut. _Sol._ 24. Under his laws, too, a valid -marriage could be contracted between an Athenian and an alien; Hdt. vi. -130. The Athenians, like the Romans, believed that many of their noble -families were of foreign origin. In Ireland “strangers settling in the -district, conducting themselves well, and intermarrying with the clan, -were after a few generations indistinguishable from it;” Ginnell, _Brehon -Laws_, 103. Nearly the same rule holds for South Wales; Seebohm, _Tribal -System in Wales_, 131. To the Germans before their settlement within the -empire the idea of an exclusive community must have been foreign; for -as yet the individual was but loosely attached to his tribe. Persons of -many tribes were united in the comitatus of a chief; the two halves of -a tribe often fought on opposite sides in war; a tribe often chose its -chief from another tribe. Intermarriage among the tribes was common, even -between Germans and Sarmatians. A single tribe often split into several -independent tribes, and conversely new tribes were formed of the most -diverse elements; Seeck, _Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt_, -i. 209 with notes; Kaufmann, _Die Germanen der Urzeit_, 136 f. Under -these circumstances the primitive German community cannot be described -as exclusive. In like manner our sources unanimously testify to the -liberality of early Rome in granting the citizenship to strangers. It is -no longer possible to oppose to this authority the objection that such -generosity does not accord with primitive conditions. - -[262] Gaius i. 120 f. - -[263] Mommsen’s theory of gentile ownership, adopted by Kubitschek, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 790, depends upon his view that the gens -was as old as the state; in his opinion it was originally stronger but -gradually weakened, whereas the state went through the opposite process; -_Röm Staatsr._ iii. 25. But if, as I have elsewhere pointed out (_Pol. -Sci. Quart._ xxii. 685 ff.), the gens developed from the family during -the decline of the kingship and the rise of aristocracy, the theory of a -primitive gentile ownership falls to the ground. - -[264] We are not to think of the state as granting a certain district -to the tribe, which then parcelled it among the component curiae, etc., -for this reason that the tribes and the curiae did not themselves -possess common lands. Rather the state divided a given district among -the families which were already included, or which it wished to include, -in a given curia or tribe. In this way the later tribes were formed -in historical time, and in this way the Claudian tribe was originally -constituted; Livy ii. 16. 4 f.; cf. Plut. _Popl._ 21. When therefore -Dionysius, ii. 7. 4, states that Romulus divided the land into thirty -lots and assigned a lot to each of the thirty curiae, he means, if he -correctly understands the matter, that land was assigned not to the curia -as a whole but to the families which composed the curia, unless indeed -the curiae once had a right of landholding not possessed in historical -time. - -[265] Christ, W., in _Sitzb. d. Berl. Akad. d. Wiss._ 1906. 207. - -[266] In the Twelve Tables heredium has the meaning of hortus, “garden;” -Pliny, _N. H._ xix. 4. 50. It was a praedium parvulum consisting of two -iugera; Fest. ep. 99. - -[267] In the earliest colonies this was the amount assigned to each -man; cf. Livy iv. 47. 6 (Labici); vi. 16. 6 (Satricum); viii. 21. 11 -(Tarracina, founded 329). The first two are not so distinctly historical -as the third; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 24, n. 1. Supposing Rome to -have been a colony, the historians infer that Romulus made a similar -distribution among its earliest settlers; cf. Varro, _R. R._ i. 10. 2; -Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 2. 7; Fest. ep. 53; Juvenal xiv. 163 f.; Siculus -Flaccus 153; Livy vi. 36. 11; Plut. _Popl._ 21; Columella v. 1. 9; -Nissen, _Ital. Landesk._ ii. 507. - -[268] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 23 f. - -[269] Dion. Hal. iv. 13. 1; Varro, _De vit. pop. rom._ i, in Non. Marc. -43; Livy i. 46. 1. - -[270] Dion. Hal. v. 57. 3; Plut. _Popl._ 21. Moreover the division into -the five classes was based on unequal holdings. - -[271] Cf. Meyer, _Gesch. d. Alt._ ii. 518, n. - -[272] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 168. - -[273] Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2 might refer to a condition in which land was -still inalienable and the right of changing residence restricted. - -[274] The text followed is that of Jacoby. The reading represented -by Jordan, _Cato_, p. 8, is not satisfactory. We have no ground for -impugning the statement of Dionysius that Fabius actually called the -country districts phylae, tribes. He may have termed them at once μοῖραι, -“regions,” and phylae with perfect consistency; cf. Kubitschek, _Rom. -trib. or._ 7, n. 34. - -[275] _Röm. Gesch._ i. 434-7; English, 205 f. - -[276] _Verf. d. Serv._ 95 f. - -[277] Cf. Huschke, _Verf. d. Serv._ 72 ff., who supposed that the -twenty-six rural regiones were in most respects like tribes, but -contained only plebeians, who were politically inferior to the city -people; see also Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 736 f. - -[278] _Röm. Tribus_, followed by Grotefend, _Imp. rom. trib. descr._ - -[279] The supposition that there were originally but four rests upon -those passages which mention only that number in connection with Servius, -as Livy 1. 43. 13; Fest. ep. 368; (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 7. 7; the -discussion of the four city tribes as though they were the only Servian -tribes by Dionysius (iv. 14. 1), whereas in the next chapter he describes -those also of the country; and the designation of the rural districts -as regiones rather than tribes by Varro, _De vit. pop. rom._ i, in -Non. Marc. 43: “Et extra urbem in regiones xxvi agros viritim liberis -attribuit.” In _L. L._ v. 56, however, he calls the country districts -tribes. - -[280] Grotefend, ibid. 27. - -[281] Inferred from an obscure passage in Fest. 213. 13, and from -inscriptions cited by Mommsen, _Röm. Trib._ 215; Grotefend, ibid. 67. - -[282] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 504; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 39 and n. -2; Pelham, _Rom. Hist._ 39; Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 457 ff.; -Greenidge, _Rom. Pub. Life_, 67. - -[283] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 163 ff. Mommsen calls attention to epigraphic -evidence, cited more fully by Kubitschek, _Imp. rom. trib. discr._ 26 -f., which assigns Ostia unmistakably to the Voturia tribus. He notices -further that the same sort of evidence which places Ostia in the Palatina -would give Puteoli, Sutrium, Canusium, and Fundi to the same city tribe, -which is impossible. The error of including Alba and Ostia in the -Palatina is due to neglect of the fact that men excluded from the country -tribes were assigned to those of the city irrespective of domicile; cf. -_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 442 f., with notes. - -[284] _Stor. di Rom._ I. i. 320, n. 1, relying on Livy ix. 46. 14. - -[285] Fest. 246. 30: “‘Pro censu classis iuniorum’ Ser. Tullius cum -dixerit in descriptione centuriarum;” cf. 249. 1; Livy 1. 60. 4; iv. 4. -2. Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 22. 39, writes discriptio, which Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -i. 464, following Bücheler, in _Rhein. Mus._ xiii (1858). 598, accepts as -the correct form. - -[286] P. 67. - -[287] Fabius Pictor, in Livy 1. 44. 2. Altogether unnecessary therefore -is Soltau’s supposition (_Altröm. Volksversamml._ 458, n. 2), in itself -improbable, that Fabius, who wrote his annals in Greek, applied the word -φυλαί incorrectly to the rural districts. However that may be, Cato, as -good an authority, spoke of these same districts as tribes. If the number -thirty was suggested to Fabius by the curiate organization (cf. Ullrich, -_Centuriatcomitien_, 9), this circumstance would be no argument against -the existence of country tribes. On the strength of the army in the early -republic, see p. 83. - -[288] P. 57. - -[289] Ibid.; cf. Pais, _Leg. of Rom. Hist._ 140. - -[290] Just as he supposed the Suburana to have been evolved, name and -all, from the pagus Succusanus; _L. L._ v. 48; cf. Fest. 302. 15; ep. 115. - -[291] Varro, _De vit. pop. rom._ i, in Non. Marc. 43: “Et extra urbem in -regiones xxvi agros viritim liberis attribuit.” As this statement does -not rest upon an independent source, but is merely an interpretation of -Fabius and Cato, it has not the value which Huschke (_Verf. d. Serv._ -72 f., 85 f.), Mommsen (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 168 f.), and Meyer (in -_Hermes_, xxx. 11) attach to it. - -[292] Cf. Livy i. 43. 13; Fest. ep. 368. - -[293] IV. 14. - -[294] Dion. Hal. iv. 15. - -[295] Dion. Hal. iv. 15. 4-6. His idea of a census of the country people -he derived from Lucius Piso (§ 5 f.) and from the censors’ office through -Fabius (22. 2)—a fact which militates against Mommsen’s theory that under -Servius the country was not yet ager privatus. - -[296] Livy vi. 5. 8. - -[297] P. 56. - -[298] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 162 ff. - -[299] _Gesch. d. Alt._ v. 135, 142; _Hermes_, xxx. 11; accepted by -Neumann, _Grundherrsch. d. röm. Rep._ 14 f.; Kornemann, in _Klio_, v. 90. - -[300] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 168. - -[301] P. 50 - -[302] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 164 f. - -[303] Ibid. 163 and n. 3, in opposition to his former view and that of -Grotefend; cf. p. 52. - -[304] There might remain the conjecture that the regiones, or pagi, had -the same constitution as the tribes, but in that case the difference -between pagus and tribus would be one of name only, and would therefore -be without historical significance. Meyer’s view (_Gesch. d. Alt._ v. -135, 142) that the sixteen earliest country tribes were not formed till -after the institution of the plebeian tribunate depends partly on his -notion that the tribunes were originally the heads of the four urban -tribes and partly on the difference in the naming, the city tribes being -named after localities and the country tribes after gentes; cf. _Hermes_, -xxx. 11. The latter circumstance, he asserts, establishes a later -origin for the rural tribes. This argument is by no means convincing; -the difference may have arisen from different conditions in country and -city; probably no urban ward had one patrician gens so predominant as to -give its name. If one kind of name is earlier than another, we should -naturally suppose the gentile name to be the earlier, and in that case we -should prefer the view of Pais, _Stor. di Rom._ I. i. 320, n. 1; _Leg. of -Rom. Hist._ 140; cf. above, p. 52, n. 2. - -The patrician gentile name does not imply patrician domination any more -than the eupatrid name of an Attic deme implies eupatrid domination of -that deme. - -[305] _Hermes_, xxx. 12; followed by Neumann, _Grundherrsch. d. röm. -Rep._ 13 f.; Kornemann, in _Klio_, v. 90 f. - -[306] P. 6. - -[307] Among the scholars who insist that originally country as well -as city was divided into tribes are Müller, J. J., in _Philol._ xxxiv -(1876). 112 ff., and more recently Kubitschek, _De trib. or._ (1882); -_Imp. rom. trib. discr._ (1889), 2. Beloch, _Ital. Bund_ (1880), 28, -begins with twenty-one tribes in 495, considering it impossible to -penetrate earlier conditions. Niese, _Röm. Gesch._ (1906). 38 and n. 3, -more positively assigns the creation of twenty-one tribes to that date. - -[308] Livy ii. 16. 5; cf. Dion. Hal. v. 40. 5. - -[309] In Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 2650. - -[310] Some place the immigration in the time of Titus Tatius; Verg. -_Aen._ vii. 706 ff.; Suet. _Tib._ 1; Appian, _Reg._ 12; Mommsen, _Röm. -Forsch._ i. 293; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 26, n. 1. That the earlier -tradition assigned the event to the date mentioned in the text is -asserted by Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, ibid. iii. 2663. - -[311] Livy ii. 21. 7 (495): “Romae tribus una et xxx factae.” This -statement is not that thirty-one tribes were instituted in that year, -but that the number thirty-one was reached, “factae” being copulative. -If “una et xxx” is not a copyist’s error, it probably depends on the -Fabian view that there were originally thirty tribes. At all events it -is inconsistent with the later statement (vi. 5. 8) that the number -twenty-five was not reached till 387. The epitomator of Livy accordingly -corrected the number to twenty-one, which most editors now write in the -text itself. That there were twenty-one tribes in 491, when Coriolanus -was tried, is assumed too by Dion. Hal. vii. 64. 6: Μιᾶς γὰρ καὶ εἴκοσι -τότε φυλῶν οὐσῶν, οἶς ἡ ψῆφος ἀνεδόθη, τὰς ἀπολυούσας φυλὰς ἔσχεν ὁ -Μάρκιος ἐννέα· ὤστ’ εἰ δύο προσῆλθον αὐτῷ φυλαί, διὰ τὴν ἰσοψηφίαν -ἀπελέλυτ’ ἄν, ὥσπερ ὁ νόμος ἠξίου (“There being at the time twenty-one -tribes, to whom the vote was given, Marcius received the votes of nine -tribes for acquittal; so that, had two more tribes been favorable, he -would have been acquitted by an equality of votes, as the law required”). -This is not a mistake, as many assume, but an understatement; cf. Müller, -J. J., in _Philol._ xxxiv (1876). 110 f. Meyer’s explanation (_Hermes_, -xxx. 10, n. 2), which makes διὰ τὴν ἰσοψηφλίαν signify “owing to the -equal value of the votes,” is improbable and unnecessary. - -[312] For the form of the word, see Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 171; -Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 117. Crustumeria had -been taken four years earlier (Livy ii. 19. 2, 499); so that a tribe of -the same name could have been admitted in 495. - -[313] Livy vi, 5. 8. - -[314] Ibid. viii, 15. 12. - -[315] Ibid. 17. 11. - -[316] Ibid. ix, 20. 6. - -[317] Ibid. x, 9. 14. - -[318] Ibid. ep. xix. - -[319] _B.C._ i. 49. 214: Ῥωμαῖοι μὲν δὴ τούσδε τοὺς νεοπολίτας οὐκ ἐς τὰς -πέντε καὶ τριάκοντα φυλὰς, αἳ τότε ἦσαν αὐτοῖς, κατέλεξαν, ἵνα μὴ τῶν -ἀρχαίων πλέονες ὄντες ἐν ταῖς χειροτονίαις ἐπικρατοῖεν, ἀλλὰ δεκατεύοντες -ἀπέφηναν ἑτέρας, ἐν αἷς ἐχειροτόνουν ἔσχατοι. For δεκατεύοντες scholars -have attempted to substitute δέκα, δέκα πέντε, δέκα ἐνεδρεύοντες -(Mendelssohn, _App._ ii. p. 53, n.). The meaning given in the rendering -offered above, though not found elsewhere, is possible. The passage has -reference to the Latins and faithful Italians admitted by the Julian law -of 90. - -[320] III. 17 (Peter, _Reliquiae_, i. 280): “L. Calpurnius Piso ex senati -consulto duas novas tribus.” - -[321] II. 20. 2. - -[322] Kubitschek, _Imp. rom. trib. discr._ 2-6, tries to prove that the -lex Iulia, 90, provided for the enrolment of the Latins and faithful -allies in fifteen old rural tribes, and that the lex Plautia Papiria, 89, -assigned the more obstinate rebels to eight other existing rural tribes. - -[323] Cf. Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 26 f. - -[324] _B. C._ i. 53. 231. - -[325] That there was an increase is held by Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -179, n. 1; Drumann-Gröbe, _Röm. Gesch._ ii. 370. This view is favored by -Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 199 f. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 111 f., compromises. - -[326] Livy, ep. lxxvii; App. _B. C._ i. 55. 242; p. 404. - -[327] App. _B. C._ i. 59. 268; Cic. _Phil._ viii. 2. 7. - -[328] Vell. ii. 20. 2; Livy, ep. lxxxiv; App. _B. C._ i. 64. 287; Cic. -ibid.; Exup. 4; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 180, 439. - -[329] Livy, ep. lxxxvi. - -[330] Mommsen, ibid. 180. - -[331] P. 71. Their military purpose is recognized by Dion. Hal. iv. 14. -2, whereas Livy, i. 43. 13, connects with them nothing but the collection -of taxes. - -[332] Livy i. 43. 13; Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 3. 13; Varro, _L. L._ v. 45; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 166, n. 1. - -[333] Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2; Laelius Felix, in Gell. xv. 27. 5; Flaccus, -in Gell. xvii. 7. 5. In referring to the year 204 Livy, xxix. 37. 3 f., -represents the tribes as districts. The Pupinian tribe is often spoken of -as a district, as by Varro, _R. R._ i. 9. 5. On the local nature of the -urban tribes, see Varro, _L. L._ v. 56; Livy i. 43. 13; Dion. Hal. iv. -14. 1. - -[334] Kubitschek, _Rom. trib. or._ 24 f.; _Imp. rom. trib. discr._ 2. - -[335] Cf. Grotefend, _Imp. rom. trib. descr._ 7. - -[336] Kubitschek, _Imp. rom. trib. discr._ 2 f. - -[337] Cic. _Flac._ 32. 79 f. On the growth of the tribe, see Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 175 ff.; Kubitschek, ibid. See also the maps in the -latter work. - -[338] Flaccus, in Gell. xvii. 7. 5. A list was kept of the estates -comprising a tribe; Cic. ibid. - -[339] Cf. the admission of new tribes; Livy vi. 5. 8: “Tribus quattuor ex -novis civibus additae;” viii. 17. 11. - -[340] Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2. - -[341] P. 64. - -[342] Livy xxix. 37. 3 f.; Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 379, n. 3. - -[343] Somewhat different is the view of Mommsen, _Röm. Trib._ 2 f.; _Röm. -Forsch._ i. 151; _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 402; controverted by Soltau, ibid. -384 ff. - -[344] The Romans had but two pursuits, agriculture and war, for the -sedentary occupations were given to slaves and strangers; Dion. Hal. ii. -28; ix. 25. 2. It was assumed that those who were without property could -take no interest in the state; ibid. iv. 9. 3 f.; Livy viii. 20. 4. - -[345] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 630. - -[346] It is well known too that freedmen were not regularly employed in -military service; Livy x. 21. 4; p. 354 f. below. - -[347] Widows and orphans were enrolled in a different list from that of -the tribes, and hence were not included in the statistics of population -which have come down to us; cf. Livy iii. 3. 9; ep. lix; Plut. _Popl._ -12; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 365 f., 401. Livy, ii. 56. 3, seems to -exclude the clients. Only those lacked membership, however, who possessed -no land. Clients of free birth were as liable to military service, -according to their ratable property, as any other class of citizens; p. -22. - -[348] Law of the Twelve Tables, in Gell. xvi. 10. 5; Schöll, _Leg. Duod. -Tab. Rel._ 116; Bruns, _Font. iur._ 18 f.; Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 18. 51; -_Att._ iv. 8 a. 3; Fest. ep. 9; Charis. p. 75 (Keil). The derivation from -ab asse dando proposed by Aelius Stilo, though absurd, was accepted by -Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 40; _Top._ 2. 10; Fest. ep. 9 (as an alternative); -Isid. _Etym._ x. 27; Quint. _Inst._ v. 10. 55. The derivation ab -assidendo is nearer the truth; Vaniček, _Griech.-lat. Wörterb._ 1012; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 466; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 237 f.; -Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 426. See also Varro, _De -vit. pop. rom._ i, in Non. Marc. 67; Gell. xix. 8. 15. - -[349] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 9. 16; 22. 40; P. Nigidius, in Gell. x. 5. 2; Fest. -ep. 9, 119; Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 3. 11; Quint. v. 10. 55; Ovid, _Fast._ -v. 281; Vaniček, ibid. 506, 1149. - -[350] The army in the field must have consisted largely of men in patris -aut avi potestate, whose names were reported to the censors, not for -taxation but for military service, by those who had authority over them; -cf. Livy xxiv. 11. 7; xliii. 14; Dion. Hal. ix. 36. 3; Fest. ep. 66. -Scipio’s complaint (Gell. v. 19. 16: “In alia tribu patrem, in alia -filium suffragium ferre”) indicates that the sons were regularly enrolled -in the tribe of the father. That the list comprised plebeians only -(Niebuhr, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 457 f.) has proved untenable; Mommsen, _Röm. -Forsch._ i. 153 f. - -[351] Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2; Livy i. 43. 14; Varro, _L. L._ v. 181. - -[352] Livy, ibid.; Varro, ibid.; cf. p. 63, n. 4 below. - -[353] Dion. Hal. iv. 19. 3; Fest. ep. 9; Ennius, in Gell. xvi. 10. 1; -cf. 12 f. Before the introduction of pay for military service in 406 the -soldiers bore their own expenses; Livy iv. 59. 11; v. 4. 5; viii. 8. 3; -Flor. i. 6. 8; Diod. xiv. 16. 5; Lyd. _De mag._ i. 45 f.; p. 71 ff. below. - -[354] Plutarch, _Cam._ 2, makes Camillus the author of the tax on orphans -for the support of the knights’ horses, thus connecting this measure -with the general introduction of pay—a statement of some importance -notwithstanding Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 683. - -[355] Zon. vii. 20: Οἰκόσιτοι ἐστρατεύοντο. - -[356] Cic. _Rep._ v. 2. 3. - -[357] Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ ii. 150 f., 159 f. with citations. - -[358] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 20. 36; Livy i. 43. 9; Plut. _Cam._ 2. - -[359] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 469, is of the opinion that before Servius -all the plebeians had this standing, and that Servius left the newly -conquered plebeians in that class, because if admitted to the army, they -might revolt! Cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 95. - -[360] On the meaning of the word, see Pseud. Ascon. 103: “Ut pro capite -suo tributi nomine aera praeberet.” On the removal from the tribe into -this class; Livy iv. 24. 7; xxiv. 18. 6, 8; 43. 3; xliv. 16. 8. The -removal from the tribe is understood when it is not mentioned; Varro, in -Non. Marc. 190; Livy ix. 34. 9; xxvii. 11. 15; Gell. iv. 12. - -[361] Livy vii. 20. 7; Dio Cass. Frag. 33; Strabo v. 2. 3; Gell. xvi. -13. 7; Schol. Hor. _Ep._ i. 6. 62. On the aerarii and Caerites, see -further Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 392-4, 401 ff., 406; Kubitschek, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 674-6; iii. 1284 f.; Hülsen, ibid. iii. -1281 f.; see also the works of Herzog, Lange, Madvig, and Willems. - -[362] P. 466, n. 2. - -[363] It would be absurd to suppose that while the absolutely poor -citizens could vote in the proletarian century, those who possessed -considerable wealth, though not in land, were excluded. - -[364] Unutterable confusion was brought into this subject by Varro, _L. -L._ v. 181: “Tributum dictum a tribubus, quod ea pecunia, quae populo -imperata erat, tributim a singulis pro portione census exigebatur;” cf. -Livy i. 43. 13; Isid. _Etym._ xvi. 18. 7. Neither is tributum derived -from tribus nor _vice versa_. Tribuere signifies “to divide,” “to -apportion;” tributum, “that which is apportioned,” tribus being only -indirectly connected with these words; Schlossmann, in _Archiv f. lat. -Lexicog._ xiv (1905). 25-40. - -[365] Livy vi. 14. 12. - -[366] Ibid. 32. 1. - -[367] Dion. Hal. v. 20; cf. iv. 11. 2; xi. 63. 2; Plut. _Popl._ 12. - -[368] Livy ii. 9. 6; xxiii. 48. 8; xxxiii. 42. 4; xxxix. 7. 5; Pliny, _N. -H._ xxxiv. 6. 23; Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ ii. 162, n. 4. - -[369] Instances of public expenditure for the equipment or pay of troops -before this date (Dion. Hal. v. 47. 1; viii. 68. 3; ix. 59. 4; Livy iv. -36. 2) are either exceptional or more probably historical anticipations -of later usage. That before 406 the soldiers drew pay from their tribes -(Mommsen, _Röm. Trib._ 32; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 540) is disproved by -Soltau, _Altröm Volksversamml._ 407 f. - -[370] Marquardt, ibid. 164-7. - -[371] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 392. - -[372] Varro, _L. L._ v. 181. - -[373] The function of the tribuni aerarii was to pay the soldiers; Cato, -_Epist. Quaest._ i, in Gell. vi (vii). 10. 2; Varro, v. 181; Fest. ep. -2; Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiv. 1. 1. Perhaps they also collected money into -the treasury; Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 3. From Cato’s statement they appear to -have been financially responsible; and we are informed that as early as -100 they constituted a rank (ordo) evidently next below the equites; Cic. -_Rab. Perd._ 9. 27. Under the Aurelian law of 70 they made up a decury -of jurors; Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 3; Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 1. 31. From -these facts it is clear that the aerarian tribunes were officers of the -aerarium, but no connection with the tribes can be discovered; Soltau, -_Altröm. Volksversamml._ 409-12. - -[374] Diod. xx. 46; Livy ix. 46. 10 f.; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -403. - -[375] Mommsen, ibid. This class came to an end in the Social War; -Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1285. - -[376] In Mommsen’s opinion (_Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 403) these censors -transferred to the country tribes as many landholding members of the -urban tribes as possible. - -[377] Livy ix. 46. 13 f. - -[378] Livy xlv. 15. - -[379] The expression tribu movere or in aerarios referre was still used, -but meant no more than the transfer from a rural to an urban tribe and to -the aerarian class within the latter; p. 62, n. 7. - -[380] Cf. Livy xxiv. 18. 8 f. - -[381] Livy xxiv. 43. 2 f.; Cic. _Cluent._ 42. 120. - -[382] P. 86. - -[383] I. 43. The account given by Dionysius Hal. iv. 16 f.; vii. 59, is -the same in principle, though slightly different in detail. - -[384] P. 52. - -[385] Fest. 246. 30; or “discriptio classium,” ibid. 249. 1. - -[386] Livy i. 60. 4. - -[387] Quoted by Cic. _Orat._ 46. 156, for the forms “centuria fabrum” -and “procum.” Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86-8, is an extract from the Tabulae of -later time; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 245, n. 1. - -[388] P. 52. Proof of the date is the fact that the ratings are in the -sextantarian _as_, legally adopted in 269 or 268 (page 86). The _as_ of -this standard was valued at one tenth of a denarius, so that 1000 asses -= 100 denarii = 1 mina; Dion. Hal. iv. 16 f.; Polyb. vi. 23. 15: Οἱ ὑπὲρ -τὰς μυρίας τιμώμενοι δραχμάς, descriptive of the highest rating—100,000 -asses; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 249, n. 4; Hill, _Greek and Roman -Coins_, 47. It could not have been later than 241, in which year the -reform of the centuriate assembly must have been far advanced, if not -completed; page 215. - -[389] P. 84. - -[390] It is wrong to suppose with Soltau, in _Jahrb. f. cl. Philol._ xli -(1895). 412, n. 6, that all the details of the Servian system were known -only in this way. - -[391] Cf. Livy i. 44. 2; Dion. Hal. iv. 15. 1. - -[392] Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 9 ff., supposes Calpurnius Piso to have been -the intermediary. But a problem in which so many of the quantities are -unknown is incapable of solution. - -[393] P. 205, n. 5, 215. - -[394] Livy i. 43. 8; Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 2; p. 207. - -[395] P. 80. - -[396] P. 81. - -[397] P. 81. - -[398] P. 82 f. - -[399] Livy viii. 8. 3; Dion. Hal. iv. 22. 1. - -[400] It is unnecessary here to consider the question as to the -historical personality of Servius Tullius. In this volume the name will -be given to the king (or group of kings?) who instituted the so-called -Servian tribes and the military centuries and made a beginning of the -census. - -[401] P. 201. - -[402] Helbig, _Sur les attributes des saliens_, in _Mémoires de l’acad. -d. inscr. et belles-let._ xxxvii (1906). 230 ff.; cf. _Comptes rendus de -l’acad._ etc. 1904. ii. 206-12. Helbig finds that the Latino-Etruscan -equipments of the time preceding Hellenic influence, as shown by -archaeology, correspond closely with those of the Salii, whom he regards -therefore as religious survivals from that early civilization. It is from -archaeological data, combined with the well-known equipment of the Salii, -that the close resemblance between the early Latino-Etruscan and the -Mycenaean military system is established. - -[403] Not merely the chief, as Helbig, _Comptes rendus_, 1900. 517, -supposes. The ἠνίοχοι καὶ παραβάται who fought at Delium, and whom he -rightly regards as a survival from the age of war-chariots, acted as a -company not as individuals; Diod. xii. 70. 1. - -[404] Helbig, _Le Currus du roi Romain_, in _Mélanges Perrot_, 167 f. It -was like that chiseled on a gravestone found by Dr. Schliemann on the -acropolis of Mycenae, in the main identical with the Homeric chariot, -represented in later time on the famous sarcophagus at Clazomenae; -Pellegrini, in Milani, _Studi e materiali_, i. 91-3, 98. - -[405] That the army of Romulus—the primitive Roman army—was a single -legion, and that the Servian reform consisted accordingly in doubling -it, is an ancient hypothesis accepted by some moderns, as Smith, _Röm. -Timokr._ 38 f. An organization in definite numbers, however, as 1000 from -each tribe, cannot arise till the state has grown sufficiently populous -to make up the army of a part only of its available strength, when folk -and army have ceased to be identical (Schrader, _Reallex._ 350), and it -is agreed that this condition was not reached till after the adoption of -the Servian reform; Delbrück, _Gesch d. Kriegsk._ i. 225; Smith, ibid. 52 -f., 56. - -[406] _Il._ ii. 362. - -[407] Schrader, ibid. For the Sueves, see Caesar, _B. G._ iv. 1; for -the Lacedaemonian army, see p. 71. The assumption of Helbig, _Comptes -rendus_, 1904. ii. 209, that the army was composed of patricians only -is altogether unwarranted. Equally groundless is the notion of Soltau, -_Altröm. Volksversamml._ 250, that the Homeric army was composed chiefly -of nobles with a few light-armed dependents. - -[408] Cf. Liers, _Kriegswesen der Alten_, 78; Niese in _Hist. Zeitschr._ -xcviii (1907). 264, 266, 289. - -[409] _Il._ iv. 293 ff. - -[410] Represented by the dances of the Salii; Helbig, ibid. 211 f. - -[411] Paus. iv. 8. 11; Polyaen. i. 10; Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. -30 f.; Niese, in _Hist. Zeitschr._ xcviii (1907). 274 ff. - -[412] Cf. Thuc. v. 70; Polyaen. i. 10. - -[413] Cf. Thuc. v. 69. For this and other depths, see Delbrück, ibid. i. -25; Liers, _Kriegswesen der Alten_, 45; Lammert, in _N. Jahrb. f. kl. -Philol._ xiii (1904). 276 f. - -[414] Tyrtaeus, Frag. xi (Bergk). For the shield which covered “hips, -legs, breast, and shoulders,” v. 23 f. It was abolished by Cleomenes III; -Plut. _Cleom._ 11; cf. Liers, ibid. 34; Lammert, ibid. 276 f. - -[415] XII. 26; Xen. _Anab._ i. 2. 16. A public gift of a bronze cuirass -is mentioned by Aristotle, _Lac. Pol._ 75, Müller, _Frag. Hist. Graec._ -ii. p. 127. Gilbert, _Const. Antiq._ 73; Delbrück, ibid. 25, maintain -that the cuirass was a regular part of the equipment. This is true of -soldiers who carried smaller shields. - -[416] Beloch, _Griech. Gesch._ i. 200 f.; cf. Liers, _Kriegswesen der -Alten_, 34 f.; Droysen, _Griech. Kriegsalt._ 3 ff. - -[417] Cf. the name of one of these regiments Μεσσοάτης (Schol. Thuc. -iv. 8) derived from the village or local tribe Messoa. Schol. Aristoph. -_Lysistr._ 453, mentions five by name; cf. Aristotle, Frag. 541. Perhaps -a sixth for guarding the kings was drawn from all the tribes; Busolt, -_Griech. Gesch._ i. 535 ff. with notes. Lenschau, in _Jahresb. ü. -Altwiss._ cxxxv. 83, holds that there were but four phylae. - -[418] The name pentecosty indicates that it originally comprised fifty -men, which suggests that the century may have been a higher group. Before -the Peloponnesian War (Thuc. v. 68) the Lacedaemonian organization had -departed far from its original form. - -[419] Droysen, _Griech. Kriegsalt._ 70; Gilbert, _Const. Antiq._ 72. -Compulsory service beyond the border ceased with the fortieth year; Xen. -_Hell._ v. 4. 13. - -[420] Cf. Liers, _Kriegsw. der Alten_, 14. - -[421] Busolt, _Griech. Gesch._ ii. 180 ff.; Helbig, in _Mém. de l’acad. -des inscr._ xxxvii¹ (1904). 164. But the Athenian army did not become -efficient till long after Solon; cf. Niese, in _Hist. Zeitschr._ xcviii -(1907). 278-82. - -[422] The Romans believed that they got the phalanx from the Etruscans; -_Ined. Vat._, in _Hermes_, xxvii (1892). 121 from an early historian, -Fabius Pictor or Posidonius or Polybius (Pais, _Anc. Italy_, 323); Diod. -xxiii. 2 (Müller); Athen. vi. 106. p. 273 f.; Wendling, in _Hermes_, -xxviii (1893). 335 ff.; Müller-Deecke, _Etrusker_, i. 364 ff.; Smith, -_Röm. Timokr._ 40. The circumstance does not prove that the Romans were -then in subjection to the Etruscans. - -[423] Some of the ancients derive classis from calare, “to call,” hence -“summoning;” Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 2; Quint. _Inst._ i. 6. 33; accepted by -Walde, _Lat. Etym. Wörterb._ 125; Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 242; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 464. Others connected it with κᾶλος “firewood,” -hence “gathering;” Serv. _in Aen._ i. 39; Isid. _Etym._ xix. 1. 15; -Schol. Luc. i. 306. Corssen, _Ausspr._ i. 494, proposes to derive it from -a root “clat,” which appears in the Greek κλητεύειν (Lat. *clat-ē-re), -Germ. laden, which would still give the meaning “summoning;” cf. Curtius, -_Griech. Etym._ 139; Vaniček, _Griech. Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 143 (*cla-t, -cla-t-ti-s). Mommsen accepted the meaning “summoning” in the early -editions of his _History_, but rejects it in the _Staatsrecht_, iii. 262 -f. (cf. his _History_, English ed. i. 1900. 115 f., 118) on the ground -that however adapted it may have been to the later political classes, it -could not well apply to the fleet and army, and hence could not belong -to the earlier use of the word, which denoted the line in contrast with -those who fought outside the line. But against his reasoning it could be -urged that classis with the idea of “summoning” first applied to the line -of heavy infantry—the only effective part of the army; and when once the -connotation of “line” had been established, it could easily extend to the -fleet. - -[424] Gell. vi (vii). 13: “‘Classici’ dicebantur non omnes, qui in -quinque classibus erant, sed primae tantum classis homines, qui centum -et viginti quinque milia aeris ampliusve censi erant. ‘Infra classem’ -autem appellabantur secundae classis ceterarumque omnium classium, qui -minore summa aeris, quod supra dixi, censebantur. Hoc eo strictim notavi, -quoniam in M. Catonis oratione, qua Voconiam legem suasit, quaeri solet, -quid sit ‘classicus,’ quid ‘infra classem;’” Fest. ep. 113; cf. Cic. -_Verr._ II. i. 41. 104; Pseud. Ascon. 188; Gaius ii. 274. - -[425] The statement of Diod. xxiii. 2 (Müller), and of the _Ined. Vat._ -(in _Hermes_, xxvii. 121) that the Romans derived their round shield -from the Etruscans accords with archaeological evidence for the use of -the round shield by the early Etruscans; Pellegrini, in Milani, _Studi e -materiali_, i. 91 ff.; Helbig, in _Comptes rendus de l’acad. des inscr._ -1904. ii. 196. - -[426] The notion of Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 227, that the army -was not organized in centuries till after the beginning of the republic -has no foundation whatever. - -[427] P. 76. The original number cannot be determined. - -[428] Tubero, in Gell. x. 28. 1; Non. Marc. 523. 24. From this fact it -appears that military conditions made a far greater demand upon the early -Romans than upon the Lacedaemonians. - -[429] Helbig, in _Comptes rendus de l’acad. des inscr._ 1900. 516 ff.; -_Mém. de l’acad._ etc. xxxvii¹ (1904). 157 ff.; _Hermes_ xl (1905). 109. -The objection of Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 37, n. 3, is not well founded. - -[430] Incertus Auctor (Huschke), p. 1. - -[431] _Ined. Vat._, in _Hermes_ xxvii (1892). 121; Helbig, ibid, xl -(1905). 114. The transvectio equitum was instituted in 304; Livy ix. 46. -15. On the close connection of the Roman cavalry with that of the Greeks -of southern Italy, see Pais, _Storia di Roma_, I. ii. 607, n. 1. - -[432] The priores had each two horses; Granius Licinianus xxvi, p. 29: -“Verum de equitibus non omittam, quos Tarquinius ita constituit, ut -priores equites binos equos in proelium ducerent;” cf. Fest. ep. 221. On -the Tarentine cavalry, see Livy xxxiii. 29, 5. The inference is that the -posteriores had one horse each. - -[433] Helbig, in _Hermes_ xl (1905). 107. _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1899. -167, fig. 17 (cf. p. 157); 1900. 325, fig. 28; Pellegrini, in Milani, -_Studi e materiali_, i. 106. - -[434] Pellegrini, ibid. i. 97, fig. 5; 104, fig. 10. - -[435] P. 75. - -[436] P. 3, n. 8. - -[437] VI. 13. 4. - -[438] The principal sources are Cic. _Rep._ ii. 20. 36; 22. 39; Livy i. -13. 8; 15. 8; 36. 7; 43. 8 f.; Dion. Hal. ii. 13; vi. 13. 4; Pliny, _N. -H._ xxxiii. (9.) 35; Fest. ep. 55; Plut. _Rom._ 13. On the basis of these -sources we could reckon an increase to 1800, 3600, or 5400 according -to our assumption as to the number of horsemen to the century; cf. -Gerathewohl, _Die Reiter und die Rittercenturien_, 3-8. - -[439] Helbig, in _Hermes_, xl (1905). 101, 105, 107. - -[440] Livy i. 13. 8; Dion. Hal. ii. 13. 1 f.; Fest. ep. 55. - -[441] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 20. 36: Livy i. 36. 2, 7; Fest. 344. 20; ep. 349. -Writers differ slightly in the form of the names. - -[442] P. 73, n. 7. - -[443] This distinction of rank among the patrician centuries of the -comitia centuriata is proved by the expression “proceres patricii” in -the Censoriae Tabulae, quoted by Fest. 249. 1: “Procum patricium in -descriptione classium, quam fecit Ser. Tullius, significat procerum. I -enim sunt principes;” Cic. _Orat._ 46. 156: “Centuriam fabrum et procum, -ut censoriae tabulae loquuntur, audeo dicere, non fabrorum aut procorum.” -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 109, n. 1, has rightly referred it to one -of the sex suffragia, for no century outside this group could have been -so designated; cf. Livy ii. 20. 11, who speaks of the cavalry as proceres -iuventutis. The mention of a century of leading patricians implies the -existence of one or more centuries of the less distinguished members of -the same rank, which must have been the rest of the sex suffragia. The -superior rank of the equites in early Rome is proved by Dion. Hal. ii. -13. 1; iv. 18. 1; Livy i. 43. 8 f.; ii. 20. 11. In ii. 24. 2 Livy implies -that the patricians did not serve on foot (militare), and in iii. 27. 1 -he speaks of a patrician who, as an exception among his rank, served on -foot because of his poverty. In ii. 42 f. he distinguishes the cavalry -from the infantry as patricians from plebeians. The fact that in the -political conflict between the two social classes the patricians often -threatened to carry on foreign wars with the aid merely of their clients -(cf. Dion. Hal. x. 15, 27 f., 43) proves that the phalanx was essentially -plebeian. On the honorable place of the equites in the camp, see Nitzsch, -in _Hist. Zeitschr._ vii (1862). 145. That the sex suffragia remained -patrician down to the reform of the comitia centuriata is probable; cf. -Sallust, _Hist._ i. 11, who represents the struggle between the social -classes as continuing to the opening of the war with Hannibal; see also -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 254. - -[444] Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 4; cf. Polyb. vi. 25. 1; Varro, _L. L._ v. 91: -“Turma terima (e in u abiit) quod ter deni equites ex tribus tribubus -Titiensium Ramnium Lucerum fiebant: itaque primi singularum decuriones -dicti, qui ab eo in singulis turmis sunt etiamnunc terni;” cf. Curiatius, -in Fest. 355. 6. - -[445] Cf. Polyb. vi. 25. 1. - -[446] Three hundred is given as normal by Polyb. i. 16. 2; vi. 20. 9. -In iii. 107. 10 f. he states it at 200, increased to 300 when to meet -extraordinary cases the legion was strengthened to 5000; cf. ii. 24. -3. Livy, xxii. 36. 3, agrees with the latter statement. Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 477, believes that the normal number was 300, decreased to -200 when a greater number of legions was levied. - -[447] Niese, _Hist. Zeitschr._ xcviii (1907). 283, rightly assumes that -the first and second classes at Athens were not cavalry; Helbig is right -in understanding them to be mounted hoplites. Niese’s criticism (ibid. -287 and n. 1) of Helbig’s view is not convincing. - -[448] Considerable time was required for the establishment of the -earliest known meaning of classis before the second and third divisions -were added. - -[449] This is a conjecture of Bruncke, in _Philol._ xl (1881). 362, -favored by Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 222. - -[450] P. 79, 86. - -[451] Usually scholars (cf. Domazewski, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -iii. 1953 f.; Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 227; Smith, _Röm. -Timokr._ 39) assume fifteen centuries for the fifth rating, on the -authority of Livy i. 43. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 17. 2; vii. 59. 5. But our -knowledge of the phalanx is only inference, which to be acceptable must -have at least the merit of possibility. The number fifteen is wrong -because it could not have been divided evenly between the two legions; -and on the other hand it will be shown later (p. 208) that in all -probability the fifteenth century was not military but was added in the -make up of the comitia centuriata. - -[452] Müller, in _Philol._ xxxiv (1876). 129, is right in supposing that -the legion was strengthened between the time of Servius and 387, but it -was not in the way he assumes. The tradition of a legion (half phalanx) -of 4000 men is preserved in Livy vi. 22. 8. - -[453] Polyb. vi. 20. - -[454] Cf. Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 121 ff. - -[455] Livy iv. 46. 1: “Dilectum haberi non ex toto passim populo placuit: -decem tribus sorte ductae sunt. Ex his scriptos iuniores duo tribuni ad -bellum duxere.” If this passage does not state a historical fact, at -least it gives the idea of the writer as to the custom of earlier time. - -[456] P. 72, 76. - -[457] Cf. Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 51 ff. - -[458] In time of especial danger, however, the legion was increased to -five thousand; Polyb. vi. 20. 8. - -[459] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 268, n. 2. - -[460] That the phalanx was a comparatively late institution at Rome, or -that it was slow in becoming the only military system, is indicated by -the survival in tradition of a more primitive mode of warfare. Sometimes -in the early republic a single gens with its clients took the field; for -the Fabian gens, see Livy ii. 48 ff. Often the patricians threatened to -arm their clients, to carry on a war without the aid of the troublesome -plebeians; cf. Dion. Hal. x. 15, 27 f., 43. As there was no motive in -later time for the invention of such stories, they must contain a kernel -of real tradition; hence they could not go back to the sixth century, and -it is difficult to believe that they are so old as the fifth. - -Collateral evidence that the second and third divisions were instituted -relatively late may be found in the circumstance that the scutum, the -distinctive piece of armor of these divisions, was introduced no earlier -than the age of Camillus—the period of the war with Veii and the Gallic -conflagration; Livy viii. 8. 3; Müller-Deecke, _Etrusker_, i. 366. It -was Samnite (Athen. vi. 106, p. 273 f.; cf. Sall. _Cat._ 51), and was -therefore probably adopted in the fourth century when Rome first came -into contact with that people. - -[461] It is evident to the reader that these proportions are those of the -discriptio centuriarum of Livy and Dionysius (p. 66 above), and it will -be made clear below (p. 86) that the ratings were originally in terms of -iugera, the minima of the five ratings being in all probability 20, 15, -10, 5, and 2½ or 2 iugera respectively. - -[462] For the date, see Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 334 f.; Kubitschek, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1902 f.; Pais, _Storia di Roma_, I. -ii. 13, 33 f. - -[463] There may be some truth in the etymology suggested by Varro, _L. -L._ v. 89; cf. Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 256. - -[464] Cf. Liers, _Kriegsw. d. Alten_, 46. - -[465] Dionysius Hal. iv. 17. 1, includes the fourth rating in the phalanx -of heavy infantry. For other possibilities of arrangement, see Smith, -_Röm. Timokr._ 46 f. - -[466] Thuc. v. 68; p. 86 above. - -[467] Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 229; Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 45 -ff. That the second and third divisions of the phalanx were sometimes -withdrawn to operate on the flanks (Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 249) -is possible, though we have no proof of it. - -[468] P. 76. From early times the Greek and Italian states kept arsenals -with which to arm the poor in crises; Liers, _Kriegsw. d. Alten_, 36 f. - -[469] P. 84. - -[470] Fest. ep. 14, 18, 369; Varro, _L. L._ vii. 56-58. From them the -centurions and decurions engaged their servants; Cato, in Varro, _L. L._ -vii. 58; Varro, _Vit. pop. rom._ iii, in Non. Marc. 520; Veget. ii. 19. -Hence they served the civil magistrates as attendants; cf. Censoriae -Tabulae, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 88; Livy iii. 33. 8; Suet. _Caes._ 20; -Non. Marc. 59. They must have corresponded with the squires of the Greek -and Roman cavalry; p. 73. They were sometimes called adscriptivi, or -as carriers ferentarii. If, as has been suggested, the secretaries and -other attendants of the higher officers were also drawn from them, this -circumstance would help explain the honor attaching to the collegium -accensorum velatorum of imperial time; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 289; -Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 233. - -[471] Notwithstanding Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 135 -f. - -[472] Livy viii. 8. 8. Leinveber, in _Philol._ N. F. xv (1902). 36, -estimates 558 accensi to the legion. - -[473] The cornicines tubicinesque; Livy i. 43. 7. - -[474] The cornicines marched in front of the banners; Joseph. _Bell. -Iud._ v. 48; Fiebiger, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1602. - -[475] The number is unknown. In the legio III Augusta there were -thirty-six cornicines; _CIL._ vii. 2557; Fiebiger, ibid. 1603. - -[476] Livy i. 43. 3. - -[477] Varro, _L. L._ v. 88: “Centuria qui sub uno centurione sunt, quorum -centenarius iustus numerus;” Fest. ep. 53: “Centuria ... significat ... -in re militari centum homines;” Isid. _Etym._ ix. 3. 48; cf. Huschke, -_Verf. d. Serv._ 107. - -[478] Estimates have been made by Müller, in _Philol._ xxxiv (1876). 127; -Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 224; Beloch, _Bevölk. d. griech.-röm. -Welt_, 42 f.; Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 67. In the United States the ratio is -more than four to one; _Special Reports: Suppl. Analysis and Derivative -Tables, Twelfth Census of the United States_, 1900, Washington, 1906. -p. 170 f. The estimate given in the text is based upon the “Deutsche -Sterbetafel” for men, in E. Czuber, _Warscheinlichkeitsrechnung_ -(Leipzig, 1903), p. 572, 574. The ratio is almost exactly three. - -[479] Livy i. 43. 2. For the year 401, see Livy v. 10. 4: “Nec iuniores -modo conscripti, sed seniores etiam coacti nomina dare, ut urbis -custodiam agerent;” for 389, vi. 2. 6; for 386, vi. 6. 14; for 296, x. -21. 4: “Nec ingenui modo aut iuniores sacramento adacti, sed seniorum -etiam cohortes factae libertinique centuriati. Et defendendae urbis -consilia agitabantur;” cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 409, n. 5. The -last of the definite instances here mentioned could alone be historical, -and in this case not centuriae or legiones but cohortes seniorum are -spoken of. - -[480] Cf. Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 227 f. - -[481] If the senior centuries were formed in the way assumed by Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 261 (“Nicht selbständig gebildet worden, sondern -daraus hervorgegangen, dass wer aus einer Centurie des ersten Aufgebots -Alters halber ausschied, damit in die entsprechende Centurie des zweiten -Aufgebots eintrat”), about a half generation must have been required to -evolve them. An objection to his idea is that the military centuries as -well as the legions were formed anew at each year’s levy (Polyb. vi. -20, 24), whereas the political centuries were made up by the censors -(cf. Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 40: “In una centuria censebantur”), doubtless -modified annually by the consuls. A military century and a political -century accordingly could not have been composed of the same men. - -The Tabulae Iuniorum contained the names of all juniors in honorable -service in the field; Livy xxiv. 18. 7. Tabulae Seniorum are not -mentioned. Classis Iuniorum (Fest. 246. 30) may apply to all eighty-five -(or eighty-four) centuries of juniors, as Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 474, -supposes, or to the first class; Tubero, _Historiae_, i, in Gell. x. -28. 1: “Scripsit Servium Tullium regem, populi Romani cum illas quinque -classes iuniorum census faciendi gratia institueret.” It is doubtful -whether there was a separate list of seniors. - -[482] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 40: “Illarum autem sex et nonaginta centuriarum -in una centuria tum quidem plures censebantur quam paene in prima classe -tota.” - -[483] Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 240. - -[484] The confusion of the comitia with the army, which the ancient -writers began, the moderns have intensified till the subject has -become utterly incomprehensible. Chiefly to Genz, _Servianische -Centurienverfassung_ (1874) and Soltau, _Alröm. Volksversammlungen_ -(1880) belongs the credit of putting in a clear light the fact that the -original Servian organization was an army. Both authors, however, have -made the fundamental mistake of supposing that for a time during the -early republic the army officiated as an assembly. - -[485] Livy xxiv. 8. 19. - -[486] After the inclusion of the Tribus Clustumina; Beloch, _Ital. Bund_, -74; Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 58, n. 1. - -[487] Delbrück, _Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 223 f.; Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 58. - -[488] Beloch, _Bevölk. d. griech.-röm. Welt_, 53; Meyer, _Forsch. z. -alt. Gesch._ ii. 162, n. 3; Delbrück, ibid. i. 14. Ferrero’s estimate -(_Greatness and Decline of Rome_, i. 1) of a total population of 150,000 -seems to be too large. - -[489] P. 81. - -[490] Cf. Liers, _Kriegsw. d. Alten_, 10. - -[491] Ascribed to Camillus; Plut. _Cam._ 40; cf. Fröhlich, _Gesch. d. -Kriegsführung und Kriegskunst der Römer zur Zeit der Rep._; Schiller, -_Röm. Alt._ 708. - -[492] P. 80; cf. 63. - -[493] Fröhlich, ibid. 21 f.; Schiller, ibid. - -[494] P. 76. - -[495] Fest. 189. 13; ep. 56, 225; Fabius Pictor, _Annales_, i, in Gell. -x. 15. 3 f. - -[496] Gell. i. 11. 3; Vergil, _Aen._ vii. 716: “Hortinae classes.” - -[497] Gell. vi (vii). 13. 3: “In M. Catonis oratione, qua Voconiam legem -suasit, quaeri solet, quid sit classicus, quid infra classem;” p. 90 -below. - -[498] _CIL._ i. 200 (Lex Agr.). 37: (“Recuperatores ex ci)vibus L quei -classis primae sient, XI dato.” - -[499] P. 66 f.; cf. Fest. 249. 1: “In descriptione classium quam fecit -Ser. Tullius.” The attempt of Smith, _Röm. Timokr._, especially 140 -ff., to prove that the five classes were introduced by the censors of -179 has nothing in its favor. It rests upon Livy xl. 51. 9: “Mutarunt -suffragia, regionatimque generibus hominum causisque et quaestibus -tribus descripserunt.” This passage makes no reference to the classes. -In “generibus hominum” are included chiefly the “genus ingenuum” and -the “genus libertinum.” “Causis” applies to those conditions of the -libertini, such as the possession of children of a definite age, which -might serve as a ground for enrolment in a rural tribe; and “quaestibus” -refers to the distinction between landowners and the “opifices et -sellularii” of the city. “They changed the arrangement for voting, and -drew up the tribal lists on a local basis according to the social orders, -the conditions, and the callings of men;” cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. -265 f.; p. 354 f. below. Among the many objections to Smith’s theory -these two may be mentioned: if the classes were introduced at this -late historical time, (1) they would not have been ascribed to Servius -Tullius; (2) they would have been adapted to the economic conditions of -the second century B.C., whereas in 179 they were largely outgrown by -the depreciation of the standard of value, the increase in the cost of -living, and the growth of enormous estates. The _Römische Timokratie_ is -ably written, but its main thesis—the institution of the classes in the -second century B.C.—remains unproved. - -[500] P. 64. - -[501] _Verf. d. Serv._ 643 f. et passim. He made a mistake however in -supposing that from the beginning land was valued in terms of money. - -[502] Mommsen, _Röm. Trib._ 111; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 247 ff.; Kübler, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 2631. When the change was made -from a land to a money rating, the land of the fifth class was appraised -relatively higher than that of the others. Neumann, _Grundherrsch. d. -röm. Rep._ 9 f., prefers to assume 16 (= 2 + 14) iugera for the highest -class in order to explain the often mentioned estates of seven and -fourteen iugera. But it is difficult to work out a consistent scheme on -this basis. Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 78 ff. et passim, strongly objects -to the view in any form, as he doubts the existence of the Servian -classes. In general he has greatly exaggerated the difficulties of their -administration. - -[503] Sall. _Iug._ 86; Gell. xvi. 10. 14, 16; cf. Cass. Hem. 21 (Peter, -_Reliquiae_, i. 102 f.). - -[504] Haeberlin, in _Riv. ital. numis._ xix (1906). 614 f. - -[505] Samwer-Bahrfeldt, _Gesch. d. alt. röm. Münzw._ 176 f.; Hill, -_Greek and Roman Coins_, 47, 49, n. 1; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 1509 ff.; Hultsch, ibid. v. 206; Regling, in _Klio_, -vi (1906). 503. Babelon, _Trait. d. mon. Grecq. et Rom._ i. 595, still -holds the view that the triental _as_ was introduced in 269; cf. his -_Orig. d. la mon._ 376; _Mon. d. la rép. Rom._ i. 37. - -[506] P. 66 f. - -[507] As silver is at present worth 51¼ cents an ounce (so quoted in -New York, Sept. 5, 1908), a denarius (= ⅟₇₂ lb. Troy) of the coinage -preceding 217 is worth by weight today 8½ cents. A more just comparison -would be based on the present coined values. As a dollar contains 371¼ -grains of silver, a denarius would be worth 21½ cents; or with a liberal -allowance for the alloy, we might say about 20 cents. The sesterce, ¼ -denarius, would therefore be equivalent to five cents. An estate of -100,000 asses of heavy weight (sesterces) would be worth about $5000, of -the sextantarian standard $2000. It is hardly possible that so large a -proportion of the population as was contained in the first class should -average the former amount of wealth to the family. In fact the purchasing -power of money was enormously higher than these equivalents indicate. In -430 the value of an ox or cow was legally set at 100 libral asses and of -a sheep at ten. Reckoning a beef at the low modern value of $45, and a -sheep at $4.50, we obtain a value of 45 cents for the libral _as_, or 22½ -cents for one of 5 oz. weight (sesterce), which would give the denarius a -purchasing power of 90 cents. - -[508] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 249. In his _History_ (Eng. ed. 1900), iii. -50, he expresses some doubt as to the numbers. - -[509] I. 43; cf. p. 66. - -[510] IV. 17. 2. - -[511] Plut. _Popl._ 21. - -[512] The view of Goguet, _Centuries_, 29 (following Niebuhr), that Livy -has made a mistake, is not so likely. - -[513] VI. 19. 2: (All must serve in war) πλὴν τῶν ὑπὸ τὰς τετρακοσίας -δραχμὰς τετιμημένων· τούτους δὲ παριᾶσι πάντας εἰς τὴν ναυτικήν. That it -was the minimal rating of the fifth class, and not a still lower rating -for military use only, is proved by a statement of Sall. _Iug._ 86, that -till the time of Marius the soldiers were drawn from the classes. - -[514] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 251. - -[515] Commercially the denarius was then, after 217, worth sixteen asses; -Hultsch, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ v. 209. - -[516] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 40; Gell. xvi. 10. 10. - -[517] XVI. 10. 10. - -[518] Cf. Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1522. - -[519] This interpretation differs slightly from that of Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 237. - -[520] In like manner those possessing above 100,000 asses were at times -divided into groups for the distribution of military burdens according -to wealth; cf. Livy xxiv. II. 7-9. This too has no reference to the -organization of the comitia. - -[521] _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 43: “Maximus census C̅X̅ assium fuit illo -(Servio) rege, et ideo haec prima classis.” - -[522] Fest. ep. 113. - -[523] VI (VII). 13. - -[524] Plut. _Popl._ 21; Huschke, _Verf. d. Serv._ 164. - -[525] VI. 23. 15. - -[526] I. 43. 2. - -[527] IV. 16. 2. - -[528] After the adoption of the _as_ of an ounce weight in 217, sixteen -asses of this standard were considered equivalent to a denarius or a -drachma, which would give a rating of 160,000 asses for those who wore -the cuirass. But the military pay was still reckoned at ten asses to the -denarius (Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 45); the censors seem to have used -the same ratio (Livy xxxix. 44. 2 f. compared with Plut. _Cat. Mai._ -18); and it is therefore highly probable that in this statement Polybius -intended to express in drachmas the value of 100,000 asses. Taken in -its entirety, the passage sufficiently proves that reference is to the -highest class; the majority (οἱ πολλοί) of soldiers, he says, have -breastplates, but those rated above 10,000 drachmas wear cuirasses. If, -as Belot, _Rév. écon. et mon._ 77 ff., imagines, the sum of 100,000 asses -fell below the rating of the lowest class, there would hardly have been a -soldier without the cuirass. - -[529] Gaius ii. 274. That registration was necessary is proved by Cic. -_Verr._ II. i. 41. 104 ff. By the word “censi” Cicero does not mean to -designate any group or division of citizens; he simply refers to the -fact of registration. P. Annius Asellus, of whom he speaks, had not been -registered, or in any case at that sum, and hence was not technically -liable to the law; but the value of his estate could be ascertained by -authority of a court of justice, according to Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -95 f. Mommsen held the opinion, on the contrary (_Abhdl. d. Akad. d. -Wiss. zu Berlin_, 1863. 468 f.), that the incensi were absolutely free -from the law. - -[530] P. 85 above. - -[531] VI (VII). 13. For his rating of 125,000 asses for the first class, -see p. 89. - -[532] N. 5 above. - -[533] Dio Cass. lvi. 10. 2; Pseud. Ascon. 188. - -[534] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 249, n. 4; Greenidge, _Leg. -Proced._ 95. - -[535] The part containing this reference was not essentially later than -the enactment of the Voconian law (p. 361). - -[536] P. 403. - -[537] XLV. 15. 2. - -[538] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 249, n. 2. - -[539] P. 90, n. 4. - -[540] First offered in his _Histoire des chevaliers_, i (Paris, 1866), -and afterward defended in his _Révolution économique et monétaire ... à -Rome_ (1885). - -[541] Cf. _Rév. écon. et mon._ 82. - -[542] Livy xxiv. 11. 7 f. - -[543] Ibid. § 5. - -[544] Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ ii. 498 f. - -[545] _Rév. écon. et mon._ 50. The Roman and Campanian (cives sine -suffragio) knights together amounted to 23,000; Polyb. ii. 24. 14. - -[546] About 270,000 in 220; Livy ep. xx. - -[547] Even with this understanding we shall have to assume for the -requisition of 214 a division between 100,000 and 300,000—those rated at -100,000-200,000 asses furnishing two and those at 200,000-300,000 asses -three sailors. Otherwise the number of sailors will be greatly in excess -of the need. - -[548] Similar conditions exist at present in America. The monstrous -luxury of the few and the heavy fines recently imposed on the Standard -Oil Company do not prove all Americans to be wealthy. - -[549] P. 61 f. - -[550] Livy i. 43. 9; Cic. _Rep._ ii. 20. 36; Fest. ep. 81, 221; Gaius iv. -27. - -[551] Gaius iv. 27. - -[552] _Rep._ ii. 20. 36. - -[553] I. 43. 9. - -[554] _Cam._ 2. This statement is valuable notwithstanding Kubitschek, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 683. - -[555] Payment is mentioned by Livy v. 7. 12 (403) but triple pay is first -spoken of in ch. 12. 12 (400); cf. Polyb. vi. 39. 12; Fest. 234. 26. - -[556] Polyb. vi. 39. 15. The statement of Varro, _L. L._ viii. 71 -(“Debet igitur dici ... non equum publicum mille assarium esse, sed -mille assariorum”), seems to signify that in practice the cost of -a public horse meant a payment to the eques of a thousand asses a -year; cf. Gerathewohl, _Die Reiter und die Rittercent._ 49 ff., whose -interpretation is preferable to that of Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -257, n. 5. The fact that the support of one knight was considered equal -to that of three legionaries (Livy xxix. 15. 7) is further evidence that -the triple pay covered the purchase and keep of the horse. Reference in -Livy vii. 41. 8, may be to the sums (aera) for the purchase and keep of -the horse; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 257, n. 3. - -[557] Dionysius Hal. vi. 44. 2, assigns the first recruiting of the -equites from the plebeians to the year 494, dating the event about a -century too early; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 478, n. 1. - -[558] Livy v. 7. 5. - -[559] All this may be gathered from Livy v. 7. 4-13; cf. Gerathewohl, -_Die Reiter und die Rittercent._ 16 ff. - -[560] Polyb. vi. 19. 2; Livy xxvii. 11. 14. - -[561] Livy xxvii. 11. 14, 16. This passage does not refer to those who -avoided duty equo privato, as Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 478, n. 2, -supposes. Those were punished who were qualified to serve equo publico -but had avoided military duty altogether. Gerathewohl, ibid. 20 f., -believes that Livy has made a mistake in assigning this judgment to the -censors of 209, as it would much better suit the conditions of 214. - -[562] The credit of establishing this fact beyond a doubt is due to -Gerathewohl, _Die Reiter und die Rittercent._ 14-34. - -[563] _N. H._ xxxiii. 1. 30: “Equitum nomen subsistebat in turmis equorum -publicorum;” cf. Fest. ep. 81: “Equitare antiqui dicebant equum publicum -merere.” - -[564] P. 75. - -[565] There were four legions each with 4000 infantry and 300 horse at -the opening of the First Punic War; Polyb. i. 16. 2. Four legions fought -against Pyrrhus at Asculum, 279; Dion. Hal. xx. 1. This was the normal -number for the Samnite wars; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 477. - -[566] Two legions of juniors was the maximal limit of Rome’s military -strength during the period of twenty-one tribes; cf. p. 77, 84. The -incorporation of the Veientan territory, 387, could not at once have -doubled this force. - -[567] Livy xxv. 3. 1-7; cf. Gerathewohl, _Die Reiter und die Rittercent._ -54. The sources do not suggest that the number after reaching eighteen -hundred remained unalterable. In Cic. _Rep._ ii. 20. 36 (“Deinde equitum -ad hunc morem constituit, qui usque adhuc est retentus”) reference -is not to number but to character; Gerathewohl, ibid. 8 f. Mommsen’s -interpretation (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 259, n. 5) is therefore wrong. - -[568] In 200 the seven legions contained twenty-one hundred equites or -fewer; Gerathewohl, _Die Reiter und die Rittercent._ 56. - -[569] _Orat._ lxiv: “Nunc ego arbitror oportere restitui (Mommsen’s -emendation ‘institui’ is unnecessary), quin minus duobus milibus ac -ducentis sit aerum equestrium.” Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 259, -wrongly holds the opinion that the measure failed to pass. - -[570] See citations collected by Gerathewohl, ibid. 56, n. 1. - -[571] Dion. Hal. vi. 13. 4: Ἔστιν ὅτε shows that the number varied; cf. -Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 171. - -[572] Suet. _Aug._ 38. - -[573] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 39; Livy i. 43. 8 f.; Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 1. -High birth and great wealth are emphasized, but no definite rating of -the class is given. Their treatment of the subject is compatible with -the view that the knights were then patrician—a view however which -these writers did not have clearly in mind. Livy’s statement (iii. -27. 1) that a certain patrician served in the infantry because of his -poverty harmonizes well with the same view; for as the aes equestre and -hordearium were not yet introduced, a poor patrician would be unable -to own and keep a horse. Those scholars therefore seem to be wrong -who, like Grathewohl, ibid. 67, following Rubino, in _Zeitschr. f. d. -Altertumswiss._ iv (1846). 219, refer the equestrian census to Servius -Tullius. - -[574] P. 94. It is for about this time (403) that Livy, v. 7. 5, first -refers definitely to an equestrian census. - -[575] This fact is most clearly stated by Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3, and is -confirmed by Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 39.; cf. Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 43; -for further evidence, see Belot, _Rev. écon. et mon._ 5 ff. - -[576] P. 92. - -[577] Hor. _Ep._ I. i. 57; Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 2. 32; Mart. iv. 67; v. -23, 25, 38; Pliny, _Ep._ 1. 19. 2; Juv. i. 105; v. 132; xiv. 326; Suet. -_Caes._ 38. - -[578] Serv. _in Aen._ iii. 89; vi. 190; xii. 259. - -[579] Cic. _Div._ 16. 29 f.: “Dirae, sicut cetera auspicia, ut omina, ut -signa, non causas adferunt, cur quid eveniat, sed nuntiant eventura, nisi -provideris.” The last statement means only that a misfortune will happen, -if an evil omen is unheeded. Cic. _Div._ ii. 33. 70: “Non enim sumus ii -nos augures, qui ... futura dicamus;” cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 331; -Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 198. - -[580] Serv. _in. Aen._ iii. 20: “Auspicari enim cuivis ... licet.” - -[581] Cic. _Div._ i. 16. 28: “Nihil fere quondam maioris rei nisi -auspicato ne privatim quidem gerebatur, quod etiam nunc nuptiarum -auspices declarant, qui re omissa nomen tantum tenent;” 46. 104; Val. -Max. ii. 1. 1. On the nuptial auspices, see De Marchi, _Cult. priv. di -Rom._ i. 152-5. - -[582] Romulus consulted the rest of the gods along with Jupiter; Dion. -Hal. ii. 5. 1. - -[583] The public auspices were Jupiter’s alone; Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 20. -So were the auspical chickens; _Div._ ii. 34. 72; 35. 73; cf. Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 77, n. 2. In historical time the sign called for was -Jupiter’s lightning; Cic. _Div._ ii. 18. 42; _Vatin._ 8. 20; _Phil._ v. -3. 7. The epithet Elicius, notwithstanding Varro, _L. L._ vi. 95; Livy -i. 20. 7; 31. 8, does not find its explanation in the auspices; Aust, in -Roscher, _Lex. Myth._ ii. 656 ff.; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 106. - -[584] P. 100, n. 3. - -[585] In Gell. xvi. 4. 4. - -[586] Cato, _De sacrilegio commisso_, in Fest. 234. 30. No one could -imagine Attus Navius, the swineherd, to have been a patrician, and -yet he was the most famous of private augurs; Cic. _Div._ i. 17. It -is significant, too, that the great authority on private auspices, P. -Nigidius Figulus, author of _Augurium privatum_ in several books (Gell. -vii. 6. 10), was a plebeian. - -[587] Livy iv. 2. 5 f. - -[588] Livy iv. 6. 1 f. - -[589] Livy vi. 41. 5 f. - -[590] Cic. _Div._ ii. 36. 76: “Nos, nisi dum a populo auspicia accepta -habemus, quam multum iis utimur?” i. 16. 28. - -[591] Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 46, n. 2, has pointed out that the phrase -auspicia publica occurs only in Livy iv. 2. 5, where he believes it to be -used in a special sense. In the time of Cicero no one but an antiquarian -ever thought of any other kind of auspices. - -[592] Livy x. 8. 9. - -[593] The usual view, represented by Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 89, -n. 1, is that the plebeians did not possess this right originally but -acquired it later; cf. also Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -ii. 2581; Di Marchi, _Cult. priv. di. Rom._ i. 233. This hypothesis not -only lacks support, but is also vitiated by the fact that at the time of -the supposed equalization private auspices must have been declining, as -Cicero found them extinct. - -The treatment of private auspices here given is supplementary to the -study of the social classes made in ch. ii. - -[594] Messala, in Gell. xiii. 15. 4; Fest. 157. 21; Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ -71 ff.; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 580. - -[595] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 3. 9; Livy vi. 41. 6; viii. 23. 15 f. - -[596] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 96 ff. - -[597] Messala, _De auspiciis_, i, in Gell. xiii. 15. 4; Bouché-Leclerq, -ibid. ii. 581. - -[598] Messala, ibid. - -[599] As when for instance the consul forbids the minor magistrate to -“watch the sky” on an appointed comitial day; Gell. xiii. 15. 1: “In -edicto consulum, quo edicunt, quis dies comitiis centuriatis futurus sit, -scribitur ex vetere forma perpetua: ne quis magistratus minor de caelo -servasse velit.” - -[600] _Commentarium Anquisitionis_ of a quaestor, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. -91: “Auspicio operam des et in templo auspices, dum aut ad praetorem -aut ad consulem mittas auspicium petitum.” This passage shows that the -quaestor, though asking permission, himself holds the auspices. - -[601] The first alternative is held by Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 89, -whereas Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2584, is inclined -to the latter. - -[602] Gell. xiv. 7. 4, 8, quoting Varro. - -[603] _Leg._ iii. 3. 10: “Omnes magistratus auspicium iudiciumque -habento.” The previous paragraph is concerned with the tribunes, and -in this citation the use of iudicium instead of imperium points to the -tribunes. It is hardly possible that Cicero in his _Laws_ would give the -tribunes a right they did not possess. - -[604] In Gell. xiii. 15. 4. Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. -2583, seems therefore to be incorrect in excluding the tribunes from the -right. - -[605] In stating that the tribunes were given the right to take auspices -for their assemblies, Zonaras, vii. 19, evidently confuses the oblativa -with the impetrativa. It is an interesting fact that according to Cicero -the first college of tribunes was elected under auspices in the comitia -curiata; Frag. A. vii. 48: “Itaque auspiciato postero anno tr. pl. -comitiis curiatis creati sunt.” - -[606] Cic. _Div._ ii. 34. 71: “Hic apud maiores nostros adhibebatur -peritus, nunc quilubet.” As in the time of Cicero auspices had come to -be a mere pretence (p. 118), an attendant without skill or scruple would -best serve the magistrate’s purpose. In Livy iv. 18. 6, the augurs see -the omen for the dictator, but some other attendant might serve the -purpose. Being a paid functionary, the bird-seer mentioned by Dion. Hal. -ii. 6. 2 as assisting in an auspication could not have been a public -augur; Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xviii. 406 ff.; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. -Römer_, 456, n. 8. The magistrate requested assistance in the following -form: “Q. Fabi, te mihi in auspicio esse volo;” and the reply was -“Audivi;” Cic. _Div._ ii. 34. 71; cf. § 72. From this formula it appears -that the person summoned did not hold, but assisted in, the auspices; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 338. The auspices are always said to belong not to -the augurs, but to the magistrates; Cic. _Leg._ iii. 3. 10; Messala, in -Gell. xiii. 15. 4. Instead of remaining with the augurs in the city the -auspices followed a duly elected consul into the field; Livy xxii. 1. -6. Auspicari is strictly a function of the magistrate (cf. Varro, _Rer. -hum._ xx, in Non. Marc. 92) though the word is sometimes applied to the -observation made by augurs (Fest. ep. 18), whose function is properly -termed augurium, augurare; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 200 f.; Wissowa, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2580 f. - -[607] The derivation is unknown. Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 2313 f., summarizes the principal theories. -Probability seems to favor the view that it is a combination of the root -of avis with a verbal noun meaning “to see” or the like; Walde, _Lat. -etym. Wörterb._ 55. - -[608] Attus Navius from his boyhood was renowned for his augural skill; -Cic. _Div._ i. 17; Livy i. 36; Dion. Hal. iii. 70 f.; cf. Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ i. 333. Romulus, too, is said to have been an excellent augur; -Remus possessed similar skill (Cic. _Div._ i. 2. 3; 17. 30; 40. 89; -Ennius, in Cic. _Div._ i. 48. 107), and in the opinion of Livy, i. 18. 6; -iv. 4. 2, there was no augural college before Numa. - -[609] Varro, _L. L._ v. 33; Cic. _Fam._ vi. 6. 7; _Senec._ 18. 64; Fest. -161. 20; _CIL._ vi. 503, 504, 511, 1233, 1449; x. 211; Wissowa, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2314. - -[610] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 9. 16; 14. 26; Livy x. 6. 7; ep. lxxxix; Marquardt, -_Röm. Staatsv._ iii. 398; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 334 f.; Wissowa, -_Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 451; also his article in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 2316 f. In adding a supernumerary (Dio Cass. xlii. 51. -4) Caesar set an example extensively followed by the principes; cf. Dio -Cass. li. 20. 3; Wissowa, ibid. ii. 2317. - -[611] As distinguished from magistrates they were privati; Cic. _Div._ i. -40. 89. - -[612] Auctor Incertus (Huschke) p. 4: “Collegium augurum ordo hominum -prudentum erat, qui prodigiis publicis praeerant;” cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -i. 330. - -[613] Cic. _Div._ ii. 34. 71 f.; cf. Livy xli. 18. - -[614] Plut. _Q. R._ 99. - -[615] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 20; _Phil._ xiii. 5. 12. - -[616] They are never called flamines, and no flamen was attached to their -office; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 451. The great sacerdotal -colleges were more political than religious, and the college of augurs -was the most thoroughly political of all; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et -Saglio, _Dict._ i. 564. - -[617] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 20; Dio Cass, xxxvii. 24 f.; Aust, _Relig. d. -Römer_, 199; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2325-30. - -[618] Fest. 333. 9: “Spectio in auguralibus ponitur pro aspectione; (data -est) et nuntiatio, qui omne ius auspiciorum habent, auguribus non spectio -dumtaxat, quorum consilio rem gererent magistratus, ut possent impedire, -nuntiando quaecumque vidissent; privatis spectio sine nuntiatione -data est, ut ipsi auspicio rem gererent, non ut alios impedirent -nuntiando.”—Valeton’s emendation, in _Mnemos._ xviii (1890). 455 f. - -[619] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 21: “Quique agent rem duelli quique domi -popularem, auspicium praemonento ollique obtemperanto;” cf. Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ i. 332. - -[620] It generally happened that both the augural and pontifical colleges -were filled by statesmen, so that Cicero could lay down the principle -that the sacred and political offices were held by the same persons; -_Div._ i. 40. 89; cf. Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2321. - -[621] Livy iv. 7. 3; viii. 23. 14-17; xxiii. 31. 13; xlv. 12. 10; Cic. -_Phil._ ii. 33. 83; _Leg._ ii. 12. 31; _N. D._ ii. 4. 11. A defect in the -auspicia impetrativa was expressed by the formula “vitio tabernaculum -captum esse” (Cic. _N. D._ ii. 4. 11; _Div._ i. 17. 33; Livy iv. 7. -3; Serv. _in Aen._ ii. 178), whereas the phrase “vitio creatum esse” -or the like (Livy viii. 15. 6; 23. 14; xxiii. 31. 13; xlv. 12. 10; -Plut. _Marcell._ 4) denoted a failure to take the auspices or to heed -unfavorable omens; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2334. On -the annulment of laws through augural decrees, see Cic. _Leg._ 8. 21; 12. -31; _Div._ ii. 35. 74. The decree was no more than an opinion, on which -the senate acted; Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 88. n. 3; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, -201. - -[622] An example of such boldness was that of C. Flaminius; Livy xxi. 63; -cf. Plut. _Marcell._ 4; Zon. vii. 20. For the case of Appius Claudius -Pulcher, see Livy ep. xix; Polyb. i. 52. - -[623] P. 112. - -[624] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 21. Strictly it was the templum minus as -distinguished from the templum magnum, a region of the sky; Varro, _L. -L._ vii. 7; Fest. 157. 24; Serv. _in Aen._ i. 92. - -[625] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86, 91. It was always rectangular, and was -usually covered with a tent; Fest. 157. 24; Serv. _in Aen._ ii. 512; iv. -200; Nissen, _Templum_, 162 ff.; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, -455; in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2337 ff.; Valeton, in _Mnemos._ -xx (1892). 338-90; xxi. 62-91, 397-440; xxiii. 15-79; xxv. 93-144, -361-385; xxvi. 1-93; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. -554 f. - -[626] When wars were waged in the immediate vicinity of Rome the augurs -could easily accompany the commander; cf. Livy iv. 18. 6; Cic. _Leg._ -ii. 8. 21. But they certainly did not often go as far as Samnium; cf. -Livy viii. 23. 16; ix. 38. 14. Though the augurs remained at Rome, the -auspices followed the commander into the field; Livy xxii. 1. 6; p. 105, -n. 1. - -[627] Livy iii. 20. 6; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 201. - -[628] Gell. xiii. 14. 1; Varro, _L. L._ v. 143; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. -d. Römer_, 456, n. 1. - -[629] Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2339. - -[630] Serv. _in Aen._ vi. 197; Varro, _L. L._ vi. 53; Wissowa, _Relig. u. -Kult. d. Römer_, 456; also his article in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -ii. 2339. - -[631] Varro, _L. L._ v. 143; Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 21; _CIL._ vi. 1233; -Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 456 and notes. - -[632] Varro, _L. L._ v. 33. - -[633] The elder Tiberius Gracchus vitiated the election of his successors -in the consulship by forgetting to renew the auspices, when, after -entering the city to preside over the senate, he recrossed the pomerium -to hold the election in the Campus; Cic. _N. D._ ii. 4. 11; _Div._ i. 17. -33; cf. Tac. _Ann._ iii. 19. - -[634] Fest. 250. 12; 157. 29; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i, 97, n. 1; -Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xviii (1890). 209 f. The reason for the auspication -on such occasions is differently stated by the authorities, but the -interpretation given by Jordan-Hülsen, _Top. d. Stadt Rom_, 1. iii. 472 -f., that this brook marked the boundary of the city auspices, seems -preferable. - -[635] Avispex, auspex, bird-seer; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 2580. - -[636] Livy i. 7. 1. - -[637] Fest. ep. 64; Cic. _Div._ ii. 33. 71: “Haec certe quibus utimur, -sive tripudio sive de caelo” (the auspicia tripudio being used in the -military sphere, leaving only the auspicia de caelo for the city); cf. i. -16. 28; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 79, n. 1; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, -203; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2333. - -[638] Dio Cass, xxxviii. 13. 3. Lightning from left to right especially -in a clear sky was favorable; Dion. Hal. ii. 5. 2; Verg. _Aen._ ii. -692; vii. 141; ix. 628 (on the last, see Servius). A thunderclap was -unfavorable to one entering office; xxiii. 31. 13; Plut. _Marcell._ 12; -cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 80, n. 2. - -[639] Tac. _Hist._ i. 18. - -[640] Cic. _Div._ ii. 18. 42. - -[641] Cic. _Div._ ii. 35. 74; 18. 43; Dio Cass, xxxviii. 13. 3 f. - -[642] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86: “Ubi noctu in -templum censor auspicaverit atque de caelo nuntium erit, praeconi sic -imperato ut viros vocet.” - -[643] Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2585. The auguraculum -was doubtless used only by the augurs, not as Mommsen (_Röm. Staatsr._ i. -103, n. 2) supposes, by the magistrates. - -[644] Livy viii. 14. 12; Cic. _Vatin._ 10. 24: “In rostris, in illo -inquam augurato templo ac loco.” - -[645] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91; Val. Max. iv. 5. 3; Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 11; -Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2585 f. - -[646] Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xxiii (1895). 28 ff. - -[647] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86; Livy viii. 23. 15; -x. 40. 2. - -[648] The auspices had to be taken on the day the business was to be -transacted, counting the day from midnight to midnight; Gell. iii. 2. 10; -Consorinus xxiii. 4. - -[649] Verrius, in Fest. 347. 17; Serv. _in Aen._ ix. 4; Statius, _Theb._ -iii. 459. Romulus, however, stood upright; Dion. Hall. ii. 5. 1. - -[650] P. 105. - -[651] Silence was essential to perfect auspices; Fest. 348. 29; ep. 64; -Livy viii. 23. 15; ix. 38. 14; x. 40. 2; Pliny, _N. H._ viii. 57. 223. - -[652] Serv. _in Aen._ iii. 89; Livy i. 18. 9. - -[653] Cf. Livy xli. 18. 14. - -[654] Cf. Livy ix. 38. 15; 39. 1. - -[655] Cf. p. 115, 118, n. 2. - -[656] Livy v. 52. 15; ix. 38. 15 f.; 39. 1; Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 3; Cic. -_Att._ ii. 7. 2; 12. 1; viii. 3. 3. Hoffmann, _Patric. u. pleb. Curien_, -29 ff., is of the opinion that the assembly which passed the lex curiata -was not auspicated, his idea being that the lex curiata itself conferred -the ius auspiciorum publicorum. There is no ground, however, for either -of these suppositions. - -[657] Cic. _N. D._ ii. 4. 11; Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 2. On the censorial -auspication of the comitia centuriata for the lustrum, see Varro, _L. -L._ vi. 86. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 98, n. 6, supposes this to be -the auspication of the censor’s entrance into office (cf. 81, n. 1), -believing that assemblies which did not vote were unauspicated. But cf. -p. 111, n. 1 below. - -[658] Dio Cass. liv. 24. 1; Cic. _Fam._ vii. 30. 1; cf. Varro, _R. R._ -iii. 2. 1. - -[659] Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 3; 49. 5. - -[660] This is shown by the _Commentarium Anquisitionis_ of M. Sergius, a -quaestor, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91. - -[661] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86 f.: “Ubi noctu -in templum censor auspicaverit atque de caelo nuntium erit ... tum -conventionem habet qui lustrum conditurus est.” Mommsen’s interpretation -(_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 81, n. 2, 98, n. 6) which applies these auspices to -the censor’s entrance upon his office seems forced. It is not necessary, -however, to suppose that this magistrate had to renew the auspices for -every day of the census-taking; Mommsen, ibid. i. 113, n. 4. - -[662] The current view (cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 718; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ i. 98; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 380; Liebenam, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1150) that no contio was auspicated -appears therefore to require modification. - -[663] Plut. _Pomp._ 52; _Cato Min._ 42. - -[664] Ael. Don. in Terent. _Ad._ iv. 2. 8: “Qui malam rem nuntiat, -obnuntiat, qui bonam, adnuntiat: nam proprie obnuntiare dicuntur augures, -qui aliquid mali ominis scaevumque viderint.” In this late author (350 -A.D.) obnuntiatio is ascribed to the augurs. When Cicero says to Antony -(_Phil._ ii. 33. 83) “Augur auguri, consul consuli obnuntiasti,” he does -it only to find fault with the proceeding; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ -i. 111, n. 2. These are the only instances known to us in which the -distinction is not observed; Mommsen, ibid.; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 2335; Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xix (1891). 75 ff., 229 -ff.; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 582. - -[665] Cato, _De sacr. comm._ in Fest. 234. 33: “Quod ego non sensi, -nullum mihi vitium facit;” Pliny, _N. H._ xxviii. 2. 17; Serv. _in Aen._ -xii. 259: “In oblativis auguriis in potestate videntis est, utrum id -ad se pertinere velit, an refutet et abominetur;” cf. Cic. _Div._ ii. -36. 77; Wissowa, ibid. ii. 2335. An example of an evil omen privately -reported is given by App. _B. C._ i. 30. - -[666] Livy ix. 38. 16 with ch. 39. 1. - -[667] Fest. 234. 27. - -[668] P. 104; Cato, _De re mil._ in Fest. 214-7: “Magistratus nihil -audent imperare, ne quid consul auspici peremat.” - -[669] P. 114. - -[670] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 32. 81: “Nos (augures) nuntiationem solum -habemus, consules et reliqui magistratus etiam spectionem;” Varro, _Rer. -hum._ xx, in Non. Marc. 92: “De caelo auspicari ius neminist praeter -magistratum;” Fest. 333. 9 (quoted p. 106, n. 8). Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ -i. 267, supposes that the augurs had both the spectio and the nuntiatio; -but this view contradicts the clear statement of Cicero; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ 1. 109, n. 1. The fact is, as has been stated (p. 106), they -had the spectio for their own functions only, and as assistants of the -magistrates simply the nuntiatio. - -[671] The formula used is “in auspicio esse;” Cic. _Att._ ii. 12. 1. - -[672] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 20 f.; iii. 4. 11; 19. 43; _N. D._ ii. 3. 8; -_Div._ ii. 33. 71; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 339. - -[673] P. 106 f. - -[674] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 83; _Div._ i. 40. 89: “Privati eodem -sacerdotio praediti rem publicam religionum auctoritate rexerunt,” an -exaggeration; _Leg._ ii. 12. 31; Livy i. 36. 6. In this capacity the -augur did not look for omens with a view to reporting them, but merely -announced those which came unexpectedly. - -[675] _Phil._ ii. 33. 82 f. - -[676] P. 115. - -[677] Three were present at curiate assemblies; Cic. _Att._ iv. 17. 2; -cf. ii. 7. 2. - -[678] In this case the augur not only assisted with his special -knowledge, but also acted as crier; Varro, _L. L._ vi. 95. - -[679] Varro, _R. R._ iii. 2. 2; 7. 1. - -[680] _Leg._ ii. 12. 31. - -[681] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 32. 81. - -[682] P. 104, 112. - -[683] Gell. xiii. 15. 1; cf. Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 79. - -[684] Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 13: “Lurco tribunus pl. solutus est et Aelia et -Fufia, ut legem de ambitu ferret;” _Sest._ 61. 129: “Decretum in curia -... ne quis de caelo servaret, ne quis moram ullam adferret” (that no one -should watch the heavens or interpose any delay in the proceedings for -the recall of Cicero). Both measures here referred to were so popular -and the magistrates were so nearly unanimous in their support that the -senate felt it could in these cases forestall the opposition of one or -two opponents. - -[685] In the famous case of Bibulus against Caesar, 59; Suet. _Caes._ 20; -cf. Dio Cass. xxxviii. 4. 2 f. - -[686] Proved by the fact that the watching of the sky by Bibulus should -have annulled the arrogation of Clodius (Cic. _Dom._ 15. 39 f.; _Har. -Resp._ 23. 48; _Att._ ii. 12. 2; 16. 2; _Prov. Cons._ 19. 45; Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 113, n. 2), which was brought about by an act of the -curiae under the presidency of the supreme pontiff. Any one competent to -observe the heavens necessarily had the obnuntiatio. - -[687] Cic. _Sest._ 36. 78. Probably obnuntiatio against tribunes is -referred to by Cic. _Phil._ v. 3. 7 f. and by Ascon. 68 (the last is the -abolition of the Livian laws of 91), but the obnuntiating magistrate is -not known. In Cic. _Vatin._ 7. 17 (“Num quem post urbem conditam scias -tribunum pl. egisse cum plebe, cum constaret servatum esse de caelo”) the -principle is laid down that any one who has the right to obnuntiate may -use this power against a tribune. The validity of the tribunician law -for the interdiction of Cicero from fire and water was maintained on the -ground that no one was then watching the sky; Cic. _Prov. Cons._ 19. 45. - -[688] Cic. _Sest._ 37. 79; cf. 38. 83; _Phil._ ii. 38. 99; _Att._ iv. 3. -3 f.; 17. 4; _Q. Fr._ iii. 3. 2 (cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. -6; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 113, n. 3); Dio Cass, xxxix. 39; Plut. -_Crass._ 16; App. _B. C._ ii. 18. 66 (cf. Cic. _Div._ i. 16. 29); iii. 7. -25. - -[689] Cic. _Att._ iv. 9. 1. - -[690] Cic. _Vatin._ 7. 16. - -[691] Cic. _Dom._ 15. 39: “(Augures) negant fas esse agi cum populo, cum -de caelo servatum sit.” - -[692] Cic. _Att._ iv. 3. 3. - -[693] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 32. 81. - -[694] Cic. _Att._ iv. 3. 4. In like manner Bibulus, after obnuntiating -in vain against Caesar’s agrarian law (p. 439), determined to remain at -home and continually to watch the sky for the remainder of the year. This -procedure invalidated all acts passed during that time by the assembly; -Cic. _Dom._ 15. 39 f.; _Har. Resp._ 23. 48; _Prov. Cons._ 19. 45. - -[695] This procedure too was followed by Bibulus; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 6. -1; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 82, n. 3. - -[696] That they were two separate enactments, and not one complex statute -by joint authors, is clearly indicated by Cic. _Har. Resp._ 27. 58: -“Sustulit duas leges Aeliam et Fufiam;” _Sest._ 15. 33. Generally they -are spoken of as separate laws, though Cicero occasionally, as _Vatin._ -5. 7, groups them in one. That they were plebiscites is held probable by -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 111, n. 4. - -[697] When Cicero, _Vatin._ 9. 23, states that these laws survived the -ferocity of the Gracchi, the audacity of Saturninus, etc., he places -their origin in the times before the Gracchi; and when he speaks of their -abolition, 58, he tells us that they had been in force about a hundred -years (_Pis._ 5. 10). - -[698] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. - -[699] _Vatin._ 7. 18. - -[700] Ibid. 9. 13. - -[701] _Red. in Sen._ 5. 11; cf. _Har. Resp._ 27. 58; _Pis._ 4. 9: -“Propugnacula murique tranquillitatis atque otii.” With other provisions -of these statutes (cf. Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 13; Schol. Bob. 319 f.) the -present discussion is not concerned. See further on these laws, p. 358 f. -below. - -[702] _Kleine Schriften_, i. 274 ff., 341; _Röm. Alt._ ii. 315, 477 f. - -[703] _Att._ iv. 3. 4; 16. 5; _Phil._ ii. 32. 81. - -[704] Cic. _Vatin._ 6. 15; 7. 18. - -[705] Cic. _Red. in Sen._ 5. 11: “Legem tribunus pl. tulit, ne auspiciis -obtemperaretur, ne obnuntiare concilio aut comitiis, ne intercedere -liceret, ut lex Aelia et Fufia ne valeret;” _Har. Resp._ 27. 58; _Sest._ -15. 33; _Prov. Cons._ 19. 46; _Pis._ 4. 9; 5. 11; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. -5 f.; 14. 2; Ascon. 9; Schol. Bob. 319 f. - -[706] Cic. _Att._ iv. 3. 4; 16. 5; _Phil._ ii. 32. 81; cf. Fröhlich, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 84; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. -204 f. - -[707] VIII. 23. 13 ff. - -[708] Polyb. vi. 56. 6 ff. - -[709] The former view was taken by Appius Claudius Pulcher, consul in 54 -and author of a work _De disciplina augurali_ (Fest. 298. 26), and the -latter by C. Claudius Marcellus, consul in 50, and by Cicero—all three -being public augurs; Cic. _Div._ i. 47. 105; ii. 18. 42; 33. 70; 35. 75; -Leg. ii. 13. 32 f.; _N. D._ i. 42. 118; in general _Div._ ii. At that -time auspices were a mere pretence; the chicken omens were forced, and -the celestial signs were not seen; Cic. _Div._ ii. 33 f., 71 f.; Dion. -Hal. ii. 6. On the decline of augury and the auspices, see Wissowa, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2315, 2333. - -[710] Probably the jurist of that name who lived under Hadrian, and who -is mentioned by Paulus, in _Dig._ v. 4. 3. - -[711] XV. 27. 4: “Is qui non universum populum, sed partem aliquam adesse -iubet, non comitia, sed concilium edicere debet.” - -[712] For the purpose of the present discussion the plebeian -assembly—that is, the assembly which convened under the tribunes of the -plebs and which issued plebiscita—is assumed to be a gathering of only a -part of the people. If it admitted patricians (p. 300), and if therefore -there was no assembly comprised exclusively of plebeians, no argument -would be needed to prove the error of the conventional distinction -between comitia and concilium. - -[713] In Livy iii. 16. 6, this meeting is called a concilium. - -[714] P. 341. - -[715] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 170, n. 8; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 149, n. 3. - -[716] _Mil._ 3. 7; cf. p. 122, n. 3 below. - -[717] “Cum se in mediam contionem intulissent, abstinere suetus ante -talibus conciliis.” - -[718] His last citation on this point, Livy v. 47. 7 (“Vocatis ad -concilium militibus”) has reference to the soldiers only—to a part of the -people—and is therefore altogether unlike the others. For an explanation -of it, see p. 135 f. - -[719] A closely related question is whether concilium is ever restricted -to the deliberative stage of a session preliminary to the division -into voting units, with comitia limited in a corresponding manner to -the final, voting stage of the session. A few passages, as examples -(2) and (4), might be explained by such a conjecture, but others, as -Livy iii. 13. 9 (“Virginio comitia habente conlegae appellati dimisere -concilium”) prove the supposition impossible. Concilium denotes the -assembly in its final as well as in its initial stage, voting as well as -deliberating, whereas in ordinary political language contio is used to -denote the merely listening or witnessing assembly, whether organized or -unorganized, whether called to prepare the citizens for voting or for any -other purpose. - -[720] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 170, n. 8. - -[721] Ibid. i. 195 f. It is true that the plebeian assembly came to be -subject to the obnuntiatio (p. 117), but it would be absurd on this -ground to suppose that Livy’s statement refers especially to gatherings -of the kind. - -[722] This statement admits that concilium here designates an assembly of -the whole people; but Mommsen does not tell us why the word applies with -greater propriety to the “patricio-plebeian” tribal assembly than to the -centuriate assembly. For the true reason, see p. 137, n. 5. - -[723] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 149, n. 3. - -[724] Undoubtedly the Caesar who was consul in 64 B.C.; Teuffel and -Schwabe, _Rom. Lit._ i. 348. § 3; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 120, -n. 6. - -[725] “P. Lucullus et L. Annius, tribuni plebis, resistentibus collegis -continuare magistratum nitebantur, quae dissensio totius anni comitia -impediebat.” - -[726] _De com. trib. et conc. pl. discr._ (1875); Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 149, n. 1; Kornemann, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -iv. 802. The correctness of my results is acknowledged in the _Thesaurus -linguae latinae_, iv. 44 ff. - -[727] “Tribunicii candidati compromiserunt HS quingenis in singulos apud -M. Catonem depositis petere eius arbitratu, ut, qui contra fecisset, -ab eo condemnaretur. Quae quidem comitia si gratuita fuerint, ut -putantur, plus unus Cato potuerit quam omnes leges omnesque iudices.” The -translation given above is Shuckburgh’s. - -[728] “Permagni nostra interest te, si comitiis non potueris, at, -declarato illo, esse Romae.” - -[729] _Cf._ Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 482. - -[730] “Venio ad comitia, sive magistratuum placet sive legum. Leges -videmus saepe ferri multas. Omitto eas, quae feruntur ita, vix ut quini, -et ii ex aliena tribu, qui suffragium ferant, reperiantur. De me, quem -tyrannum atque ereptorem libertatis esse dicebat illa ruina rei publicae, -dicit se legem tulisse. Quis est, qui se, cum contra me ferebatur, -inisse suffragium confiteatur? cum autem de me eodem ex senatus consulto -comitiis centuriatis ferebatur, quis est, qui non profiteatur se adfuisse -et suffragium de salute mea tulisse? Utra igitur causa popularis debet -videri, in qua omnes honestates civitatis, omnes aetates, omnes ordines -una mente consentiunt, an in qua furiae concitatae tamquam ad funus rei -publicae convolant?” - -[731] “Ferri de singulis nisi centuriatis comitiis noluerunt. Descriptus -enim populus censu, ordinibus, aetatibus plus adhibet ad suffragium -consilii quam fuse in tribus convocatus. Quo verius in causa nostra vir -magni ingenii summaque prudentia, L. Cotta, dicebat nihil omnino actum -esse de nobis; praeter enim quam quod comitia ilia essent armis gesta -servilibus, praeterea neque tributa capitis comitia rata esse posse neque -ulla privilegii: quocirca nihil nobis opus esse lege, de quibus nihil -omnino actum esset legibus. Sed visum est et vobis et clarissimis viris -melius, de quo servi et latrones scivisse se aliquid dicerent, de hoc -eodem cunctam Italiam quid sentiret, ostendere.” - -[732] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 161, n. 53. - -[733] See list of citations for electoral assemblies, p. 133. - -[734] “Tribus locis significari maxime populi Romani iudicium ac voluntas -potest, contione, comitiis, ludorum gladiatorumque consessu.” - -[735] “Qui (optimates) non populi concessu, sed suis comitiis hoc sibi -nomen adrogaverunt.” - -[736] “Iubet enim tribunum plebis, qui eam legem tulerit, creare -decemviros per tribus septemdecim, ut, quern novem tribus fecerint, -is decemvir sit. Hic quaero, quam ob causam initium rerum ac legum -suarum hinc duxerit, ut populus Romanus suffragio privaretur.... Etenim -cum omnes potestates, imperia, curationes ab universo populo Romano -proficisci convenit, tum eas profecto maxime, quae constituuntur ad -populi fructum aliquem et commodum, in quo et universi deligant, quem -populo Romano maxime consulturum putent, et unus quisque studio et -suffragio suo viam sibi ad beneficium impetrandum munire possit. Hoc -tribuno plebis potissimum venit in mentem, populum Romanum universum -privare suffragiis, paucas tribus non certa condicione iuris, sed sortis -beneficio fortuito ad usurpandam libertatem vocare;” cf. _Imp. Pomp._ 15. -44; 22. 64. - -[737] _Sest._ 51. 109. - -[738] P. 301 f. - -[739] “Mihi quidem eae verae videntur opiniones, quae honestae, quae -laudabiles, quae gloriosae, quae in senatu, quae ad populum, quae in omni -coetu concilioque profitendae sint;” cf. _Leg._ iii. 19. 44, quoted p. -127. - -[740] The writers not included in this discussion, as Nepos and the -poets, contain nothing at variance with the results here reached. -Gudeman’s article on Concilium in the _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 44-8, in -most respects excellent, still retains the groundless distinction between -republican and imperial usage. - -[741] It will suffice here to mention the elder Cato; Livy xxxix. 40. 6: -“Si ius consuleres, peritissumus;” Cic. _Senec._ 11. 38: “Ius augurium, -pontificium, civile tracto.” On the subject in general, see Pais, _Stor. -d. Rom._ I. i. 68 and notes. - -[742] For citations of other authors, see Gudeman, in _Thes. ling. lat._ -iv. 45. - -[743] All three passages are quoted, p. 130 f. - -[744] The classification of comitial functions into elective, -legislative, and judicial follows Cicero, _Div._ ii. 35. 74: “Ut -comitiorum vel in iudiciis populi vel in iure legum vel in creandis -magistratibus.” In this volume, accordingly, “legislative” refers not -merely to law-making in the narrower sense, but also to the passing of -resolutions on all affairs, domestic and foreign, including necessarily -the lex de bello indicendo. - -[745] For separate lists of the elective and the legislative and judicial -comitia, see VI (below), where will be found sufficient illustrations of -(_b_). - -[746] Only one instance of concilium as an elective body has been -found; _Lex Iulia Municipalis_, in _CIL._ i. 206. 132: the election of -magistrates “comitieis conciliove.” The explanation is that the usage of -some of the Italian municipia differed from the Roman, and the author of -the law had to adapt his language to local custom. With this exception -the inscriptions are in line with the literature. - -[747] P. 124. - -[748] Discussed on p. 123 f. - -[749] P. 132. - -[750] Ibid. - -[751] Ibid. - -[752] Fest. ep. 38: “Concilium dicitur a concalando, id est vocando.” -It is accepted by Curtius, _Griech. Etym._ 139; Vaniček, _Griech.-lat. -etym. Wörterb._ 143; Walde, _Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 136. But Corssen, -_Beitr. z. ital. Sprachk._ 41 f., rejects this etymology on the ground -that it does not harmonize with all the meanings of the word and of its -derivative “conciliare”; also Gudeman, in _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 44. -Corssen, analyzing it into con-cil-iu-m, and connecting -cil- with a root -kal-, “to cover,” supposes the original meaning to be simply “a joining -together,” “a union,”—giving that signification which he considers -primary. It is equally reasonable, however, to assume the development -to be (1) “a calling together,” (2) “a meeting for consultation,” (3) -“a natural union of individuals of any kind.” In the third sense it is -applied perhaps figuratively to inanimate things, especially the union of -atoms to form objects, by Lucretius i. 183, 484, 772, 1082; ii. 120; iii. -805; cf. Ovid, _Met._ i. 710. - -[753] The meaning consultation, deliberation, clearly appears in Plaut. -_Mil._ 597 ff.: - - “Sinite me priu’ perspectare, ne uspiam insidiae sient - Concilium quod habere volumus. Nam opus est nunc tuto loco - Unde inimicus ne quis nostri spolia capiat consili. - Nam bene consultum inconsultumst, si id inimicis usuist, - Neque potest quin, si id inimicis usuist, opsit tibi; - Nam bene (consultum) consilium surrupitur saepissume.” - -Also in 249, 1013: “Socium tuorum conciliorum et participem consiliorum”; -Cic. _Rep._ 17. 28: “Doctissimorum hominum in concilio”; Caes. _B. C._ i. -19; Nep. _Epam._ 3. 5; Verg. _Aen._ ii. 89 (or consiliis); iii. 679; v. -75; xi. 234; Livy 1. 21. 3; see also II (_a_), p. 132, and Forcellini, -_Lat. Lex._ ii. 347. It is never a chance crowd; _Diff._ ed. Beck, p. -47. 43: “Concilium est convocata multitudo, conventus ex diversis locis -populum in unum contrahit, coetus fortuitu congregatur.” The ancients -understood this to be the meaning of the word; Varro _L. L._ vi. 43: -“A cogitatione concilium, inde consilium,” an unsuccessful though -instructive guess; Fest. ep. 38: “Concilium dicitur a populo consensu;” -Isid. _Etym._ vi. 16. 12: “Concilium a communi intentione ductum, quasi -communicilium.” This interpretation is supported by several glosses; -φιλοποιεία (_Corp. Gloss. Lat._ ii. 471. 49), συμβούλιον (ibid. ii. 107. -5), coenobulium, caenobulium (ibid. iv. 321. 27). Lastly our derivative -“council” points in the same direction. The meaning “deliberative -assembly” has been accepted by Gudeman, in _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 46, who -has added citations from the whole range of Latin literature. - -[754] Lodge, _Lex. Plaut._ i. 288; Gudeman, _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 45. - -[755] Cf. Gudeman, ibid. iv. 48. - -[756] Cf. n. 1 and p. 132, II (_a_). - -[757] P. 143. - -[758] P. 132. - -[759] The notion sometimes expressed that the word applies more -appropriately to a body of representatives of the component states of -a league is without foundation, though it is true that some foreign -concilia are of this character. - -[760] P. 133. - -[761] Ibid. - -[762] P. 134. - -[763] Thus is explained a phenomenon for which Mommsen could find no -adequate reason—that the so-called “patricio-plebeian” tribal assembly -was more apt to be called concilium than were the comitia centuriata. The -deliberative feature of the concilium also explains the close approach of -the word to contio—another fact which Mommsen knew but did not understand. - -[764] Cf. p. 131. Notwithstanding all the confidence reposed by the -moderns in this utterance of Laelius, ‘debet’ suggests that he is -proposing an ideal distinction rather than stating an actual usage. - -[765] P. 286, 292, 301 f. - -[766] Corssen, _Ausspr._ i. 51; ii. 683; Vaniček, _Griech.-lat. etym. -Wörterb._ 184; Walde, _Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 140; cf. _SC de Bacch._ in -_CIL._ i. 196. 23: “In conventionid”; Fest. ep. 113: “In conventione -in contio”; _Commentaria Consularia_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 88; _Corp. -Gloss. Lat._ v. 280. 13; vi. 270, s. v. - -[767] _Sat._ i. 16. 29: “Contra Iulius Caesar XVI auspiciorum libro -negat nundinis contionem advocari posse, id est cum populo agi, ideoque -nundinis Romanorum haberi comitia non posse;” cf. p. 125 f. - -[768] _Att._ iv. 3. 4: “Contio biduo nulla.” - -[769] Cf. Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 3. 13: “Nundinis urbem revisitabant et -ideo comitia nundinis habere non licebat, ne plebs avocaretur;” Fest. -173. 30-3. - -[770] Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 1; _Lex Gen._ 81, in _CIL._ ii. Supplb. 5439: -“In contione palam luci nundinis.” Another illustration is the statement -of Gellius, xv. 27. 3, that wills were made in comitia calata, in a -contio of the people. Mommsen’s assumption (_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 199 -and n. 3) that no contio was held on a market day as a rule, to which -there were exceptions, is altogether unsatisfactory. The passages cited -refer to a law, not to a mere custom to be observed or not at the will -of the magistrate. The contio which met on a market day must have been -essentially different in nature from the contio which was forbidden for -market days; cf. also Varro, _L. L._ vi. 93; Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 11. - -[771] The calata comitia curiata is termed contio by Gell. xv. 27. 3: -“Quod calatis comitiis in populi contione fieret.” Cicero, _Rab. Perd._ -4. 11 (cf. 5. 15) speaks of the witnessing comitia centuriata as contio, -and the lustral centuriate assembly was similarly termed; _Censoriae -Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 87: “Conventionem habet qui lustrum -conditurus est.” A widespread idea (held by Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ -i. 379; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1149; Soltau, -_Altröm. Volksversamml._ 37, and others) that all contiones were -unorganized is therefore wrong. - -[772] Fest. ep. 38. - -[773] Cic. _Vatin._ i. 3; _Att._ xiv. 11. 1; 20. 3; xv. 2. 3; _Fam._ ix. -14. 7; x. 33. 2; Livy xxiv. 22. 1; Gell. xviii. 7. 6 f.; _Gloss. Corp. -Lat._ ii. 114. 25; 269. 27; 575. 8. - -[774] P. 150. - -[775] Examples of military contiones are Caes. _B. G._ v. 48; vii. 52 f.; -Livy i. 16. 1; ii. 59. 4 ff.; vii. 36. 9; viii. 7. 14; 31 f.; xxvi. 48. -13; xxx. 17. 9; xli. 10. 6; see also p. 202 f. - -[776] Dion. Hal. iv. 37; v. 11. 2; Plut. _Popl._ 3; the candidate, too, -for the regal office; Livy i. 35. 2. - -[777] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 4. 10: “Cum populo ... agendi ius esto consuli, -praetori, magistro populi equitumque eique, quem patres prodent consulum -rogandorum ergo; tribunisque, quos sibi plebes creassit ... ad plebem, -quod oesus erit, ferunto;” Varro, _L. L._ vi. 93: “Censor, consul, -dictator, interrex potest (exercitum urbanum vocare).” - -[778] Schol. Bob. 330; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ I. p. xix. This -passage proves that a quaestor could call a contio in his own right; and -the same holds probable for the aediles. - -[779] It is necessary to include them in the general statement of -Messala, in Gell. xiii. 16 (17). 1, that the lower magistrates had the -right; cf. the note above. - -[780] Fest. ep. 38: “Contio significat conventum, non tamen alium, quam -eum, qui a magistratu vel a sacerdote publico per praeconem convocatur.” -The sacerdos is the rex sacrorum as well as the supreme pontiff. It was -necessary for the latter to hold judicial contiones; p. 259, 327. For the -former, see Varro, _L. L._ vi. 28; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 15. 9-12; Serv. _in -Aen._ viii. 654. Strictly the contiones of the rex sacrorum were calata -comitia curiata; p. 155. - -[781] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 193. For a contio of the Xviri leg. -scrib. see Livy iii. 34. 1. On the duumviri for presiding at the election -of consuls in 43, see Dio Cass. xlvi. 45. 3. In the opinion of the Romans -the tribunus celerum, an officer under the kings, possessed the right; -Livy i. 59. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 71. 6; 75. 1; Serv. _in Aen._ viii. 646; -Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 3: “Exactis regibus lege tribunicia.” These -authors suppose that L. Junius Brutus held an assembly in the capacity of -tribunus celerum, whereas Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 25. 46, speaks of him as a -private citizen. - -[782] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 193. But the promagistrate had a right -to attend and to address a contio called for him outside the walls by a -competent person; cf. Vell. i. 10. 4; p. 426 below. - -[783] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 90. - -[784] Livy xliii. 16. 5. - -[785] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 93. - -[786] For the quaestor, see _Com. Anq._ in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91 f. For -the curule aediles, Cic. _Verr._ i. 12. 36; v. 67. 173; Livy x. 23. 11; -31. 9; 47. 4; xxxv. 10. 11; 41. 9; Val. Max. vi. 1. 7; viii. 1. damn. 7; -Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 6. 42. For the plebeian aediles, Livy x. 23. 13; -xxv. 2. 9; xxxiii. 42. 10; Gell. x. 6. 3; p. 290, 325 below; Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 196, n. 2 f. - -[787] Messala, _De Auspiciis_, in Gell. xiii. 16 (15). 1. - -[788] Messala, _De Auspiciis_, in Gell. xiii. 16 (15). 1. - -[789] Dion. Hal. vii. 16. 4; 17. 5; 22. 2; x. 41; Cic. _Sest._ 37. 79; -Livy iii. 11. 8; xxv. 3 f.; xliii. 16. 7-9; (Aur. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 65. -5; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 604, 826; p. 266 below. - -[790] Cic. _Fam._ v. 2. 7: Q. Metellus Nepos forbade Cicero to -address the people in contio on the occasion of his retiring from the -consulship—a prohibition which Cicero declares was never before heard of. -For another case, see Dio Cass. xxxviii. 12. 3; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. -716; iii. 299 f. - -[791] Lange’s supposition (_Röm. Alt._ ii. 716) that by the holding of -a contio a tribune could prevent a patrician magistrate’s convoking -comitia is not well founded. Livy, iv. 25. 1 (“Tribuni plebi adsiduiis -contionibus prohibendo consularia comitia”), does not intend to express a -constitutional principle; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 289; Liebenam, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1150. - -[792] Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 11: “Tune, qui civibus Romanis in contione -ipsa carnificem, qui vincla adhiberi putas oportere, qui in Campo Martio -comitiis centuriatis auspicato in loco crucem ad civium supplicium defigi -et constitui iubes, an ego, qui funestari contionem contagione carnificis -veto ... qui castam contionem, sanctum Campum ... defendo servari -oportere;” cf. 5. 15. - -[793] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 32. - -[794] Fest. 241. 29; Livy xxii. 57. 3; Suet. _Dom._ 8; Dio Cass. lxxix. -9. 3 f.; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 56, n. 4. - -[795] Cf. Livy xli. 15. 10; _Lex Gen._ 81, in _CIL._ ii. Supplb. 5439. - -[796] Livy iii. 66. 2; v. 11. 15; 12. 1; xxxviii. 52. 4; 53. 6. On the -judicial contio, see p. 259. - -[797] Livy xliii. 16. 5. - -[798] XIII. 16. 13. - -[799] Cic. _Att._ ii. 21. 5; _Verr._ i. 15. 44; _Sest._ 12. 29; _Rep._ -i. 4. 7; Nep. _Tim._ iv. 3; _Them._ i. 3; Livy ii. 2. 4; 24. 4-6; 27. 2; -iii. 31. 2; 41. 5 ff.; 54. 6; 67 f.; iv. 15; xli. 10. 13. - -[800] Livy x. 13, 21; (Cic.) _Herenn._ iv. 55. 68. A contio, described -by Livy vi. 39-41, was held by the tribunes Licinius and Sextius in -the ninth year of their tribunate, after the day of election for the -following year had been set. This meeting however was as much for the -consideration of the proposed laws as of their own candidacy, and hence -could not be thought of as strictly pertaining to the election. Mommsen’s -opinion (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 392, n. 1) that stories of the kind prove -nothing does not accord with his own general attitude toward the sources -for the earlier history of Rome. - -[801] P. 470. - -[802] Cic. _Sest._ 50. 107 f.; _Red. in Sen._ 10. 26; _Pis._ 15. 34. - -[803] P. 259 f. - -[804] Livy xxxix. 17. 4 f.; Plut. _Aem._ 30; Pseud. Sall. _Declam. in -Cat._ 19; cf. the _Twelve Tables_, in _Censorin._ 24. 3. - -[805] Livy xlii. 33. 2. - -[806] Besides the Forum or Comitium (Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 4) it sometimes -met in the Area Capitolina (Cic. Frag. A. vii. 49; Livy xxxiii. 25. 6; -xxxiv. 1. 4), or in the Circus Flaminius (Livy xxvii. 21. 1; Cic. _Att._ -i. 14. 1; _Sest._ 14. 33). In general, see Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1151; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 380. - -[807] Cic. _Flacc._ 7. 16 (contrasting the sitting contio of the Greeks); -_Brut._ 84. 289; _Leg. Agr._ ii. 5. 13; _Acad. Pr._ 47. 144; _Tusc._ iii. -20. 48; _Orat._ 63. 213. But probably the contio in the Flaminian circus -was seated; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 396, n. 3. - -[808] P. 107, 110. Although the tribune of the plebs did not auspicate -their assemblies, they like other magistrates occupied a templum during -the meeting; Livy ii. 56. 10. - -[809] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro _L. L._ vi. 86. For the summons -by the consul, see the _Commentaria Consularia_, ibid. 88; and by the -quaestor, _Commentarium Anquisitionis_ of M. Sergius, ibid. 91. - -[810] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86. - -[811] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 87: “Praeco in templo -primum vocat, postea de moeris item vocat;” cf. 90 f.; Livy xxxix. 32. -11; Cic. _Fam._ vii. 30. 1. - -[812] Documents, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86, 91. - -[813] Livy xxv. 3. 17; Cic. _Sest._ 50. 107 f. - -[814] Caesar, a praetor and friend of the presiding tribune, sat with him -on the porch of the temple of Castor and Pollux—used on that occasion as -the speaker’s platform; Plut. _Cat. Min._ 27; Cic. _Vatin._ 10. 24: “In -rostris, in illo, inquam, augurato templo ac loco ... quo auctoritatis -exquirendae causa ceteri tribuni pl. principes civitatis producere -consuerunt.” - -[815] Documents, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 88, 91; cf. 93. - -[816] Livy xxxix. 15. 1: “Consules in rostra escenderunt, et contione -advocata cum solemne carmen precationis, quod praefari, priusquam populus -adloquantur, magistratus solent, peregisset consul, ita coepit: Nulli -umquam contioni, quirites, tam non solum apta sed etiam necessaria haec -sollemnis deorum comprecatio fuit.” The prayer was made at the opening -of elective as well as of deliberative assemblies (Cic. _Mur._ 1; Plin. -_Paneg._ 63) by plebeian as well as by patrician magistrates; (Cic.) -_Herenn._ iv. 55. 68. Every speech addressed to the people began with a -prayer; Serv. _in Aen._ xi. 301; Cic. _Caecil._ 13. 43; Gell. xiii. 23. -1; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 390, n. 2. - -[817] P. 430, 439. - -[818] Caesar first brought his agrarian bill before the senate; and -calling on the senators one after another by name to say whether -they found any fault with it, he promised to amend it or to drop it -altogether, if any clause proved unsatisfactory to any member. As the -senators would not debate the merits of the proposal, but did all they -could to delay its consideration, he offered the bill to the assembly -without their consent; and for the remainder of his consulship he brought -no more bills before the senate, but referred them directly to the -people; Dio Cass, xxxviii. 2-4; cf. p. 148. - -[819] Dion. Hal. v. 11. 2; Plut. _Popl._ 3. Besides the king it was -supposed that the interrex and the tribunus celerum alone were competent; -Dion. Hal. iv. 71. 6; 75. 1. The ancient writers seem to have been -brought to this conception by a desire to contrast the despotism of the -monarchy with the liberty of the republic. But according to Livy, i. 16. -5 ff., and Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 10. 20 (cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. -200, n. 6) Proculus Julius, a private person, made a speech in a contio -of the regal period; and in judicial assemblies speaking by private -persons was necessary; cf. Livy i. 26. For the general usage in the -primitive European assembly, see p. 169. - -[820] In presenting his agrarian bill to the people Caesar first called -on his colleague, despite the fact that the latter was known to be -opposed to the measure; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 4. 1. - -[821] _Commentarium Anquisitionis_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91. Clodius, -tribune of the plebs, brought forward the two consuls into the Flaminian -circus, where they gave their sanction and formal approval of all the -tribune had been saying against Cicero; Cic. _Sest._ 14. 33. On this -occasion the consul Piso condemned Cicero’s consulship for its cruelty; -Cic. _Pis._ 6. 14; _Red. in Sen._ 6. 13. In 44 Cannutius, a tribune of -the plebs, introduced into a contio the consul Mark Antony, who spoke -regarding the assassins of Caesar; Cic. _Fam._ xii. 3. 2. Earlier -instances are Livy iii. 64. 6; iv. 6. 1 f. A tribune brought the augurs -into a contio, to ask of them information concerning the auspices; Cic. -_Dom._ 15. 40. - -[822] Although the senators were invited to sit on the platform (_Comm. -Anq._ in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91), speaking by them was exceptional; in -the assembly they were no more than eminent private persons; Dio Cass, -xxxviii. 4. 4; cf. ch. 5. - -[823] E.g. Cic. _Att._ iv. 1. 6: “Habui contionem. Omnes magistratus -praesentes praeter unum praetorem et duos tribunos dederunt.” In a -certain contio a tribune asked Scipio Aemilianus what he thought of the -conduct of Ti. Gracchus; Val. Max. vi. 2. 3. At the suggestion of the -consul Piso, Fufius, a tribune, brought Pompey upon the platform and -asked his opinion as to the selection of jurors for a particular case; -Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 1; cf. Ascon. 50. The tribune M. Servilius invited -Cicero to speak in a contio in support of C. Cassius (Cic. _Fam._ xii. -7. 1), and it was in response to an invitation of another tribune, P. -Appuleius (_Phil._ vi. 1), that he delivered the sixth _Philippic_. Other -references to tribunician invitations are Cic. _Att._ xiv. 20. 5; Dio -Cass. xlv. 6. 3. - -[824] Ascon. 38. - -[825] Sall. _Iug._ 33 f. - -[826] The Rhodian ambassadors were introduced by the tribune Antony to -the senate (Polyb. xxx. 4. 6), as the context (cf. § 8) indicates, not as -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 313, n. 1, supposes, to the people. There -is no question, however, as to the right of a magistrate to bring such -persons before the popular assembly. - -[827] Val. Max. iii. 8. 6: “Quid feminae cum contione? Si patrius mos -sevetur, nihil.” The lex Horatia, which is alleged to have granted -the Vestal Gaia Taracia among many honors the right to give testimony -[Gell. vii (vi). 7. 1-3], and which is assigned by Cuq (_Inst. jurid. d. -Rom._ i. 255; and in Daremb. et Saglio, _Dict._ iv. 1145) to the consul -Horatius, 509, is a myth (Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 608), though doubtless -in the course of the republic laws of the kind were occasionally passed, -the language of which might be quoted by the annalists (Gell. l. c.). The -rule that women were intestabiles is proved by such exceptions. - -[828] XXXIV. 2. 11. - -[829] Frag. 83. 8. - -[830] III. 8. 6. - -[831] Appian, _B. C._ iv. 32-4; see also p. 326. - -[832] Livy xlv. 21. 6; 36. 1. - -[833] Livy xlv. 36; cf. the statement of Dion. Hal. x. 41. 1, that on a -certain occasion the crier invited all who wished to speak. These two -passages are credible, notwithstanding the doubt expressed by Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 395, n. 2, if we regard the general invitation as a -concession on the part of the presiding magistrate rather than as a right -of the people. - -[834] P. 136. - -[835] Plut. _Q. R._ 63. - -[836] Quint. _Inst._ iii. 11. 13: “Qui bona paterna consumpserit, ne -contionetur.” - -[837] (Cic.) _Herenn_. i. 11. 20; cf. _Lex Bant._ (133-118 B.C.) in -_CIL._ i. 197. 2 f. - -[838] Such a grant in Alexandria Troas, mentioned by _CIL._ iii. 392, -Mommsen (_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 201, n. 3) believes to have been in imitation -of Roman usage. - -[839] Varro, _Rer. hum._ xxi, in Gell. xiii. 12. 6. - -[840] Ibid.; cf. Val. Max. iii. 7. 3: “C. Curiatius tr. pl. productos -in contionem consules compellebat ut de frumento emendo referrent.” -Mommsen’s interpretation (_Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 313, n. 2), that the -tribunes could not summon the consuls but could compel them to speak -when present, is not altogether satisfactory. The comment of Gellius (§ -7 f.: “Huius ego iuris, quod M. Varro tradit, Labeonem arbitror vana -tunc fiducia, cum privatus esset, vocatum a tribunis non isse. Quae, -malum, autem ratio fuit vocantibus nolle obsequi, quos confiteare ius -habere prendendi? Nam qui iure prendi potest, et in vincula duci potest”) -supports the view given above in the text. A magistracy might afford -some degree of protection, but on the principle enunciated by Gellius -the tribune, who had the power to arrest a consul, was in a position -practically to compel him to appear at a public meeting. As further -examples of the president’s power to force speaking, Cato, a tribune of -the plebs, compelled the keepers of the Sibylline books to come before -the people in contio and declare the prophecy; Dio Cass. xxxix. 15. 4; -cf. also Cic. _Vatin._ 10. 24; _Att._ ii. 24; Plut. _Cic._ 9; Dio Cass. -xxxvi. 44. 1. - -[841] P. 146. - -[842] P. 145, n. 3. - -[843] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 2-5. - -[844] Cic. _Att._ ii. 24. 3: “Caesar, is qui olim praetor cum esset, Q. -Catulum ex inferiore loco iusserat dicere, Vettium in rostra produxit;” -_Vatin._ 10. 24: “Cum L. Vettium ... in contionem produxeris, indicem -in rostris, in illo, inquam, augurato templo ac loco collocaris, quo -auctoritatis exquirendae causa ceteri tribuni pl. principes civitatis -producere consuerunt.” - -[845] Dio Cass. xxxix. 34. 2; Plut. _Cat. Min._ 43. - -[846] Or as Foster translates, “about the distressing condition of the -times.” - -[847] Dio Cass. xxxix. 34; Plut. ibid. - -[848] Cic. _Imp. Pomp._ 24. 69. - -[849] Livy x. 8. 12. - -[850] Ibid. xxxiv. 4. 20. - -[851] Dio Cass. xxxix. 35. 1. - -[852] Ibid. - -[853] Livy ii. 56. 9: “Quirites, ... crastino die adeste.” - -[854] _Commentaria Consularia_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 88: “Impero qua -convenit ad comitia centuriata.” - -[855] Livy ii. 56. 12: “Si vobis videtur, discedite, quirites.” - -[856] Preparatory to voting, the plebeian tribune Laetorius ordered the -removal of all, including patricians, who were not to vote; Livy ii. 56. -10: “Submoveri Laetorius iubet praeterquam qui suffragium ineant.” - -[857] In the case referred to in the note above, some of the young -patricians stood their ground and refused to give way before the viator; -§ 11; cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 48. Again on other occasions the patricians when -ordered refused to withdraw before the voting (cf. Livy iii. 11. 4), -from which we may infer that the right to attend the comitia presided -over by tribunes was claimed by the patricians but denied them by the -tribunes. The word used in these passages to designate the removal of the -unqualified is “submovere.” In Livy xxv. 3. 16 (cf. Cic. _Flacc._ 7. 15) -“tribuni populum summoverunt” has reference to the adjournment of the -people to their voting divisions, and probably also to the exclusion of -those who had no right to vote; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 390, n. -1. - -[858] Acclamation was retained as a regular form of voting by the army; -p. 202; cf. Bernhöft, _Röm. Königsz._ 153. - -[859] Philochorus, 79 b, in Müller, _Frag. Hist. Graec._ i. 396. The -condemnation of the generals who fought at Arginusae was voted in the -same way; Xen. _Hell._ i. 7. 9. - -[860] Cf. Schröder, _Deutsche Rechtsgesch_. 16. - -[861] It is interesting in this connection that in the Homeric assembly -the heralds (κήρυκες), who were a sacerdotal class, kept order; cf. -_Il._ ii. 97 f. In the German assembly the priests with coercive power -maintained quiet; Tac. _Germ._ ii. 3; Schröder, _Deutsche Rechtsgesch_. -22 f. The Irish assemblies were of religious origin, and maintained some -religious features till after the introduction of Christianity; Ginnell, -_Brehon Laws_, 42, 44. - -[862] They excluded on the one hand comitia for religious purposes -presided over by a political magistrate—for instance, the comitia -centuriata under the censor for the lustrum (p. 141)—and on the other the -meetings of the people under pontifical presidency for secular business, -such as an appeal to the comitia from the pontifical imposition of fines -(cf. Livy, xl. 42. 9), the meeting of the plebs under the supreme pontiff -for the election of plebeian tribunes after the fall of the decemvirate -(Cic. _Cornel._ in Ascon. 77; Livy, iii. 54. 5, 11), and the meeting of -seventeen tribes for the election of sacerdotes. In the three exceptional -instances last mentioned the comitia are tributa, which are never calata. - -[863] Kindred words are calendae, Calabra, calator. As late as Plautus -(_Pseud._ 1009; _Merc._ 852; _Rud._ 335) a common use of calatores was -to designate slave messengers; cf. Fest. ep. 38; _Corp. Gloss. Lat._ ii. -95. 42: δοῦλοι δημόσιοι. This use became obsolete, but the word continued -to apply to certain assistants of the sacerdotes; Serv. _in Georg._ i. -268; _Corp. Gloss. Lat._ ii. 96. 3; iv. 214. 1; v. 275. 1; 595. 34, -63; 563. 66; _CIL._ vi. 712, 2053. 5; 2184-90, 3878; x. 1726; also the -_inscr._ recently discovered in the Forum; cf. Holzapfel, in _Jahresb. -f. Altwiss._ 1905. 263, 265 ff.; Warren, in _Am. Journ. of Philol._ -xxviii (1907). 249-72. In all the known instances they were freemen, -often freedmen; Saglio, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 814. For other -citations, see Samter, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1335 f. They -correspond to the lictors of the magistrates. - -[864] Varro, _L. L._ v. 13: “Nec curia Calabra sine calatione potest -aperiri.” - -[865] Saglio, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 814; Humbert, ibid. -i. 1375. But the comitia curiata were convoked by lictors according to -Gell. xv. 27. 2: “Curiata (comitia) per lictorem curiatum calari, id -est convocari”; Theophilus, _Paraphr. Inst._ ii. 10. 1. Possibly the -lictor curiatius (or curiatus; _CIL._ iii. 6078) should in this case be -identified with the calator. - -[866] Labeo, in Gell. xv. 27. 1 f.: “Calata comitia esse, quae pro -collegio pontificum habentur aut regis aut flaminum inaugurandorum causa; -eorum autem alia esse curiata, alia centuriata.” From this statement we -learn that the calate assemblies for inaugural purposes were organized -either in curiae or in centuries. As “comitia” connotes organization (p. -135), we may be sure that in all calata comitia the people stood in their -voting groups. On the centuriate comitia calata, see p. 156. - -[867] Varro, _L. L._ v. 13; vi. 27; Fest. ep. 49; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 15. 9 -f.; _Fast. Praenest. Kal. Ian._, in _CIL._ i.² p. 231; Jordan, _Top. d. -Stadt Rom_, I. ii. 51; Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 245, n. 1; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -i. 398 f.; Hülsen, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1821. - -[868] Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 1376. - -[869] He may have appointed a priestly substitute for such functions. - -[870] Livy xxii. 57. 3: “Scriba pontificis, quos nunc minores pontifices -adpellant.” That he acted in behalf of the college is proved by Varro, -_L. L._ vi. 27 (note below). - -[871] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 27: “Primi dies mensium nominati Kalendae, -quod his diebus calantur eius mensis nonae a pontificibus, quintanae -an septimanae sint futurae in Capitolio in curia Calabra”; _Hemerol. -Praenest._ Ian. 1, in _CIL._ i.² p. 231: “Hae et (aliae pri) mae calendae -appellantur, quia (eorum pri) mus is dies est quos pont(i)fex minor -quo(vis anni) mense ad nonas sin(gulas currere edicit in capi)tolio in -curia cala(bra)”; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 15. 9 f.: “Pontifici minori haec -provincia delegabatur, ut novae lunae primum observaret aspectum visamque -regi sacrificulo nuntiaret. Itaque sacrificio a rege et minore pontifice -celebrato idem pontifex calata, id est vocata in Capitolium plebe iuxta -curiam Calabram ... quot numero dies a Kalendis ad Nonas superessent -pronuntiabat.” Serv. _in Aen._ viii. 654 and Plut. _Q. R._ 24 are -inexact, and still more confused is Lyd. _Mens._ iii. 7; cf. Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 39, n. 1. In the opinion of Mommsen the announcement -on the calends was not to an assembly, but was merely preparatory to the -assembly on the nones; but the words of Macrobius (vocata ... plebe) -clearly indicate a gathering of the people on that day. - -[872] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 13, 28; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 15. 12; cf. Herzog, -_Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 109 and n. 1. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 40, -n. 2, warns us against confusing “this unorganized contio” with the -comitia calata, which are always organized in curiae or in centuries. -Labeo, in Gell. xv. 27. 1, states, however, that calata comitia were -held for the inauguration of the king and priests. If for this occasion -the purely passive assembly was organized in voting divisions, there can -be no reason for doubting that it was organized also on the occasion -in question, when it met in the assembly-place of the calata comitia—a -place which could not be opened sine calatione—and its convocation was -designated by “calare” not “vocare.” It is significant that the phrase -“calata contio” is never used. Mommsen gives no authority or reason for -his assumption; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 398; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ -i. 111; Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ iii. 283, 323; Wissowa, _Relig. u. -Kult. d. Römer_, 440, for the view here maintained that the assembly for -hearing the calendar was calata. - -[873] Macrob. _Sat._ i. 15. 9. - -[874] For the inauguration of the flamen Dialis, see Gaius i. 130; iii. -114; Ulpian, Frag. 10. 5; Livy xxvii. 8. 4; xli. 28. 7; the flamen -Martialis, Livy xxix. 38. 6; xlv. 15. 10; Macrob. _Sat._ iii. 13. 11; -the flamen Quirinalis, Livy xxxvii. 47. 8; cf. Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. -d. Römer_, 420, n. 3. The inauguration of augurs probably took place in -their own college. - -[875] For the inauguration of the rex sacrorum, see Livy xxvii. 36. 5; -xl. 42. 8. Livy’s description of the inauguration of Numa (i. 18. 6-9) -probably follows the historical usage in the case of the rex sacrorum. - -[876] Serv. _in Aen._ vi. 859. - -[877] Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 130. - -[878] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 307, n. 1. This is the only function -discovered for the calata comitia centuriata, mentioned by Labeo, in -Gell. xv. 27. 2. The origin of the inauguration must have preceded that -of the centuriate assembly; it must therefore have taken place for a time -in some other form of meeting. Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -iii. 1331, objects to this interpretation but finds nothing better. - -[879] Cic. _Brut._ 1 (of an augur); _Phil._ ii. 43. 110 (of a flamen); -_Leg._ ii. 8. 21 (of sacerdotes); Macrob. _Sat._ iii. 13. 11 (of the -flamen Martialis); Livy. i. 18. 6 (of the king). - -[880] Fest. 343. 8; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 420, n. 5, 421, -n. 1. - -[881] Gell. i. 12. 11, citing the lex Papia. Gellius calls this assembly -a contio, which includes the calata comitia; cf. xv. 27. 3: “Calatiis -comitiis in populi contione.” - -[882] P. 161, 163, 165. - -[883] P. 157 f. - -[884] P. 170. - -[885] Quint. _Inst._ viii. 3. 3: fragor here signifies “thunders of -applause.” - -[886] Cic. _Fam._ xi. 13. 3; Livy xxviii. 26. 12; xl. 36. 4; xlii. 53. 1. - -[887] P. 135. - -[888] P. 74 f., 96. - -[889] P. 211. - -[890] On the meaning of suffragium, see the excellent article by -Rothstein, in _Festschrift zu Otto Hirschfelds 60stem Geburtstage_, 30-3. - -[891] Gell. xv. 27. 3: “Isdem comitiis, quae calata appellari diximus, -... testamenta fieri solebant”; Gaius ii. 101: “Calatis comitiis -testamentum faciebant, quae comitia bis in anno testamentis faciendis -destinata erant”; Theophilus, _Paraphr. Inst._ ii. 10. 1. - -[892] _Röm. Verf._ 242-5, with notes, following J. H. Dernburg, _Beitr. -zur Gesch. der röm. Testamente_, i. 53-78. - -[893] _Paraphr. Inst._ ii. 10. 1, p. 154 ed. Ferrini: Ὁ βουλόμενος ὑπὸ -πάρτυρι διετίθετο τῷ δήμῳ. - -[894] XV. 27. 3. This view is accepted by Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 398 f.; -Schiller, _Röm. Alt._ 628; Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 39; Mommsen, -_Röm. Forsch._ i. 126, 239, 270; Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 221; Kübler, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1333; Mispoulet, _Inst. polit. Rom._ -i. 202 f. - -[895] P. 161. - -[896] II. 101. - -[897] P. 143. - -[898] P. 139. - -[899] Schrader, _Reallex._ 221, 864; Leist, _Alt-arisch. Jus Gent._ 419; -_Alt-arisch. Jus Civ._ ii. 171; Fustel de Coulanges, _Ancient City_, 104. - -[900] Tac. _Germ._ 20. 5. The oldest Frankish laws make no mention of -testaments; Schrader, ibid. 865. - -[901] Demosth. xx. 102; Plut. _Sol._ 21; Telfy, in _CJA._ 1399-1412, with -comment, p. 613 ff. - -[902] Plut. _Agis_, 5; cf. Thumser, _Griech. Staatsalt._ 259. - -[903] Bücheler und Zitelmann, _Recht von Gortyn_, 134. - -[904] Aristot. _Polit._ 1309, a 24; cf. Thalheim, _Griech. Rechtsalt._ 61. - -[905] Fustel de Coulanges, _Anc. City_, 105; Leist, _Alt-arisch. Jus -Civ._ ii. 171. - -[906] Schrader, _Sprachv. und Urgesch._ ii.³ (1907). 374 f. - -[907] This view is held by Schrader, ibid. 865; Ihering, _Geist des -röm. Rechts_, i. 145 ff.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 37 f.; iii. -318 ff.; Kappeyne van de Coppello, _Comitien_, 67; Poste, _Gai Inst._ -178; Hallays, _Comices_, 18; and with some hesitation by Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 110, 118, 1063. - -[908] _Röm. Chronol._ 241 ff.; _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 38, n. 2; iii. 319; -_CIL._ i.² p. 289; accepted by Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 399; Kübler, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1331; Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ iii. -323. - -[909] Q(uando) R(ex) C(omitiavit); _CIL._ i. p. 291 f. after the two days -mentioned; cf. Varro, _L. L._ vi. 31: “Dies, qui vocatur sic, ‘Quando -Rex Comitiavit, Fas’ is dictus ab eo quod eo die rex sacrifiolus litat -(or perhaps venit, MS. dicat) ad comitium, ad quod tempus est nefas, ab -eo fas; itaque post id tempus lege actum saepe”; Fest. ep. 259: “Quando -Rex Comitiavit Fas, in fastis notari solet, et hoc videtur significare, -quando rex sacrificulus divinis rebus perfectis in comitium venit”; Ovid, -_Fast._ v. 727; Plut. _Q. R._ 63; _Fast. Praenest._ Mart. 24; for other -citations, see _CIL._ i². p. 289. - -[910] _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 38, n. 2. - -[911] Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 110, n. 2. - -[912] See note 8 above; cf. Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 440, n. -6. - -[913] See p. 159, n. 8 above. - -[914] Gaius ii. 101, 103. - -[915] Cic. _Dom._ 13. 34; cf. Leonhard, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -i. 398 ff. - -[916] Gell. v. 19. 4, 6 f.; Gaius i. 99; Cic. _Att._ ii. 12. 2; _Dom._ -15. 39. - -[917] Gell. v. 19. 5. - -[918] Cic. _Dom._ 13. 34. - -[919] Gell. v. 19. 6. - -[920] Gaius i. 99. - -[921] Gell. v. 19. 6; cf. the leaden tessera showing on the face a man -taking another by the hand and the word ADOPTIO beneath; on the back -are three officials seated, doubtless pontiffs, with the word COLLEGIUM -beneath; Helbig, in _Compt. rend. d. l’acad. d. inscr. et bell.-let._ -xxi (1893). 350-3. It evidently illustrates the preliminary stage of an -adrogatio; see also Tac. _Hist._ i. 15. - -[922] Gell. v. 19. 5 f.: “Adrogationes non temere neque inexplorata -committuntur; nam comitia arbitris pontificibus praebentur, quae curiata -appellantur”; Tac. _Hist._ i. 15: “Si te privatus lege curiata apud -pontifices, ut moris est, adoptarem.” Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 253, supposes -that these comitia were under a civil magistrate; but the expressions -“arbitris pontificibus” and “apud pontifices” prove pontifical -management. Caesar, who passed the curiate law for the arrogation of -Clodius, was supreme pontiff as well as consul. - -[923] Gell. v. 19. 9. - -[924] Gell. v. 19. 8; Tac. _Hist._ i. 15; Cic. _Dom._ 15. 39; _Att._ ii. -12. 2; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 1 f. Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 126, 270, -supposed that the curiae simply witnessed the transaction, without giving -their vote; but afterward (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 38) he changed his mind. - -[925] Gell. xv. 27. 3. - -[926] This seems to be the meaning of Serv. _in Aen._ ii. 156: -“Consuetudo apud antiquos fuit, ut qui in familiam vel gentem transiret, -prius se abdicaret ab ea in qua fuerat et sic ab alia acciperetur.” - -[927] Gell. v. 19. 8, 10. - -[928] Appian, _B. C._ iii. 14. 49. - -[929] Ibid. iii. 94. 389; Dio Cass. xlv. 5. 3. - -[930] On the testamentary adoption, see further Leonhard, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 420 f. - -[931] Zon. vii. 15. 9. - -[932] Cic. _Dom._ 14. 37; _Scaur._ 33; Ascon. 25. - -[933] Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 123 ff., has collected the cases. - -[934] Suet. _Aug._ 2. - -[935] Livy iv. 16. 3. - -[936] Cic. _Brut._ 16. 62. - -[937] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 1: Τήν τε εὐγένειαν ἐξωμόσατο. The similarity -of this oath to the detestatio sacrorum warrants the conclusion that -it, too, was taken in the calata comitia. The abjuration of one’s rank, -however, was not a detestatio sacrorum, for the reason given in n. 8 -below. - -[938] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 1: Καὶ πρὸς τὰ τοῦ πλήθους δικαιώματα, ἐς -αὐτόν σφων τὸν σύλλογον ἐσελθὼν, μετέστη; Cic. _Att._ i. 18. 4: “C. -Herennius ... tribunus pl. ... ad plebem P. Clodium traducit.” Cicero’s -following statement (“Idemque fert, ut universus populus in campo Martio -suffragium de re Clodi ferat”) signifies that Herennius was proposing to -bring the question not before the centuries, as Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. -Roms_, ii. 188, n. 3, imagines, for a tribune had no means of doing -so, but before the thirty-five tribes, who were the universus populus -(Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 16 f.) in contrast with the curiate comitia -represented by thirty lictors; cf. p. 129 f. - -[939] The falsification of pedigrees by plebeian families to prove -descent from patrician ancestors of the same name is sufficient evidence -that the name was retained through the transition; cf. Lange, _Kleine -Schriften_, ii. 7 f. Were not the sacra retained, the transition of -an entire gens would mean the destruction of its old religion and the -creation of a new one—which is impossible. For this reason it appears -that the detestatio sacrorum did not apply to such cases of transition. - -[940] Lange, ibid. ii. 19. - -[941] The fact that he promulgated a bill of the same tenor as that of -Herennius, even if it was merely for the sake of appearance, as Cicero, -_Att._ i. 18. 5, alleges, favors the latter view. - -[942] Cic. _Att._ i. 19. 5. - -[943] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 2; xxxviii. 12. 1 f.; Cic. _Dom._ 13. 35; 29. -77. - -[944] Cic. _Dom._ 14. 37: “Nam adoptatum emancipari statim, ne sit -eius filius qui adoptarit”; 13. 35: “Tu (Clodi) neque Fonteius es, qui -esse debebas, neque patris heres neque amissis sacris paternis in haec -adoptiva venisti.” In _Har. Resp._ 27. 57 (“Iste parentum nomen, sacra, -memoriam, gentem Fonteiano nomine obruit”) Cicero does not say that -Clodius assumed the gentile name of Fonteius, but rather that he used -this name as a means of destroying the name, sacra, etc. of his parents; -and in fact he continued to be called Clodius; cf. Dio Cass. xxxix. 23. -2 (official use). He claimed still to belong to the Clodian gens rather -than to the Fonteian (Cic. _Dom._ 44. 116), whereas Cicero, looking upon -the emancipation as a sham, insists that he was a Fonteian. - -[945] That he retained the Claudian imagines is implied in Cic. _Mil._ -13. 33; 32. 86. He must therefore have kept the rest of the sacra. - -[946] Lange, _Kleine Schriften_, ii. 23 ff. Cicero aims to bring the -greatest possible confusion into the case by representing Clodius as -having given up his native religion without receiving that of Fonteius, -as being a gentilis of the Claudii though he had left the Claudian gens, -etc.; _Dom._ 13. 35; 49. 127. - -[947] This double act is most clearly stated by Livy iv. 4. 7: -“Nobilitatem istam vestram ... non genere nec sanguine sed per -coöptationem in patres habetis ... post reges exactos iussu populi”; -p. 17, n. 5; cf. Dion. Hal. v. 40. 5: Ἡ βουλὴ καὶ ὁ δῆμος εἴς τε τοὺς -πατρικίους αὐτὸν (Appius Claudius) ἐνέγραψε. This passage shows that -Dionysius regards the process as an act of the people and of the senate, -though he does not speak of the latter as coöptation. In the case of -Appius Claudius Livy, ii. 16. 5, says simply that he was enrolled among -the patres (“inter patres lectus”), and in like manner Suetonius, _Tib._ -i, states that the patrician gens Claudia was coöpted into the class of -patrician gentes. - -[948] V. 13. 2. - -[949] Fest. 246. 23. - -[950] This measure is called the lex Cassia; Tac. _Ann._ xi. 25; p. 456 -below. There can be no doubt that the author was L. Cassius Longinus, a -faithful friend of the dictator, who entered upon his tribunate Dec. 10, -45; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 128 f.; iii. 602. - -[951] Dio Cass. xliii. 47. 3; xlv. 2. 7; Suet. _Caes._ 41. - -[952] The lex Saenia; Tac. _Ann._ xi. 25. - -[953] Augustus, _Mon. Ancyr._ 8; Dio Cass. lii. 42. 5. - -[954] Neither the pontifical examination nor the curiate law is noticed -by the authorities, who refer briefly to the two acts. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -iii. 472, and Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 1101, suppose that Caesar -as supreme pontiff made the adlectio, although, as Mommsen notices, -Octavianus had not yet attained to that office when he attended to -the same function. Both writers (cf. Lange, ibid. i. 412) understand -the curiate assembly to have been a factor in the process. On these -late adlectiones, see also Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ ii. 38 f., 130; -Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 602; Büdinger, in _Denkschr. d. -kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss. Phil.-hist. Cl._ xxxi (1881). 211-73; xxxvi -(1888). 81-125. - -[955] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 32. - -[956] Ch. ii above; also p. 166, n. 3 below. - -[957] Botsford, in _Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxii (1907). 689-92. - -[958] IV. 3. 4. - -[959] P. 17. - -[960] IV. 4. 7; p. 24, n. 5, 200, n. 1; cf. Suet. _Tib._ 1: “Patricia -gens Claudia ... in patricias cooptata.” - -[961] Mommsen’s theory (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 29 and n. 2) that the -patriciate was conferred through the coöperation of the king and the -comitia appears accordingly to rest on a weak foundation. He gives -no evidence, but bases his contention on the argument (1) that the -community was sovereign, (2) that—the patriciate being in his opinion -equivalent to the citizenship and the comitia curiata being a group -of gentes—the downfall of the comitia made the reception of gentes -impossible. Ground is taken against the theory of popular sovereignty in -the following chapter. Against his second point it can be urged that the -original comitia were neither patrician nor “gentile”; hence there is no -occasion for speaking of the downfall of such comitia or of its sweeping -consequences. - -[962] Livy iv. 4. 7; p. 17, n. 5, 164, n. 6. - -[963] Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 74 ff. - -[964] Gell. v. 19. 1-3. - -[965] Such an examination was the only means by which the patricians -could protect their order from being flooded by plebeians; cf. Mommsen, -ibid. i. 77, who notices that no known instance of this kind of adoption -took place before the admission of plebeians to the pontifical college -through the Ogulnian law, 300; p. 309 below. - -[966] Schrader, _Reallexikon_, 924; Spencer, _Principles of Sociology_, -ii. 407. - -[967] _Il._ i. 54; ii. 50; xix. 40 ff.; _Od._ ii. 6 f. - -[968] Kovalevsky, _Modern Customs and Ancient Laws of Russia_, 122, 124. - -[969] We must except the purely sacerdotal meetings of the curiae -described in the preceding chapter. - -[970] Tac. _Germ._ 11. 2; cf. Schröder, _Deutsche Rechtsgesch_. 22 f. - -[971] _Rhetra_ of Lycurgus, in Plut. _Lyc._ 6; cf. Gilbert, _Altspart. -Gesch._ 131 f. - -[972] Arist. _Ath. Pol._ 43. 4; cf. Gilbert, _Const. Antiq. of Sparta and -Athens_, 285. - -[973] This is true of the religious-judicial assemblies of the -continental Celts (Caesar, _B. G._ vi. 13), which may also have exercised -political functions, and of the Irish assemblies; Ginnell, _Brehon Laws_, -44, 51, 54; cf. Schrader, _Reallexikon_, 924. - -[974] The Celtic magistrates disclosed to the people those matters only -which they determined to be expedient; and it was unlawful to speak on -public affairs outside the assembly; Caesar, _B. G._ vi. 20. The German -chiefs in council preconsidered every subject to be presented to the -assembly; Tac. _Germ._ 11. 1; Schröder, ibid. 23. The prominence of the -nobles in the Slavic assembly (Kovalevsky, ibid. 123 ff.) would lead to -the same conclusion regarding them. For the Homeric age of Greece the -meeting of the council previous to the assembly as described by _Il._ ii. -50 ff. is typical, although we could not expect the poet in every case to -repeat the procedure with uniform minuteness. The preconsidering power of -the Roman senate was of the same nature. - -[975] _Il._ ii. 278 ff. - -[976] Tac. _Germ._ 11. 4. As a rule the North American Indians enjoy the -same freedom of speech in their councils; Farrand, _Basis of American -History_, 160, 211. - -[977] _Il._ ii. 211 ff.; xii. 212 f. Calchas the seer, a man of the -people, gained the protection of Achilles before daring to speak against -Agamemnon; _Il._ i. 76 ff. - -[978] On the control of the Etruscan assembly by the nobles, see -Müller-Deecke, _Etrusker_, i. 337; Hirt, _Indogermanen_, i. 55. - -[979] _Od._ ii. 28 ff. - -[980] P. 154 f. - -[981] _Od._ ii. 35 ff.; cf. the public complaint made by a Slavic chief -of an injury he had received; Kovalevsky, ibid. 121. - -[982] Such as the reception of the youth into the warrior class among the -Germans; Tac. _Germ._ 13. 2; for the witnessing assembly at Rome, see p. -155 f. - -[983] Schrader, _Reallexikon_, 659, 662, 688. For the Celts; Caesar, _B. -G._ vi. 13; cf. i. 4 (trial of Orgetorix). For the Germans; Tac. _Germ._ -12. 1 f. For the Slavs; Kovalevsky, _Mod. Cust. and Anc. Laws_, 126. The -famous trial scene in the Homeric assembly; _Il._ xviii. 497 ff. For -the Macedonians; Curt. vi. 8. 25. It is probably true of Vedic India; -Schrader, ibid. 688. - -[984] For the Germans; Brunner, _Deutsche Rechtsgesch_. i. 129. For the -Slavs; Kovalevsky, ibid. 128, 130, 141 f. For the Celts; Polyb. iii. 44. -5 f.; Caes. _B. G._ v. 27, 36; Livy xxi. 20. 3; Tac. _Hist._ iv. 67. The -Helvetian assembly probably decided the question of migration; Caesar, -_B. G._ i. 2. As to the Greeks, Agamemnon proposed to the assembly to -quit the war and return home, the people gladly accepted; _Il._ ii. 86 -ff. A proposal of peace came from the Trojans to the Achaean assembly; -the people rejected it on the advice of Diomede, and Agamemnon concurred -in their opinion; _Il._ vii. 382 ff. - -[985] The German mode of electing a king or war-leader is well known; -cf. Brunner, ibid. i. 129. The assembly also elected the chiefs of the -pagi (Gaue) and of the villages; Tac. _Germ._ 12. 3. The Celts who were -not ruled by hereditary kings elected their chiefs annually (Caesar, _B. -G._ i. 16) or for a migration; ibid. 3. The Irish kings were generally -elected from particular families; Ginnell, _Brehon Laws_, 66. The Slavs -elected their king and other officials; Kovalevsky, ibid. 124 f., 127, -129, 138 f. In Homeric Greece the kingship was generally hereditary, -but the people might elect a war-leader to take command by the side of -the king; _Od._ xiv. 237; cf. xiii. 266. There are traces of elective -kingship, lasting at least a few generations, in the great majority of -early European states; Jenks, _History of Politics_, 87; cf. 35 f. - -[986] _Il._ i. 22 ff. For the Lacedaemonians, see Thuc. i. 87. - -[987] Tac. _Germ._ 11. 5; _Hist._ v. 17. Sometimes the Germans mingled -clamor with the clash of weapons; Amm. Marc. xvi. 12. 13. - -[988] Caesar, _B. G._ vii. 21. - -[989] Majority rule was unknown to primitive times. The members of the -council talked together till they came to a unanimous agreement. If the -Homeric Greeks in assembly failed to agree, each party went its own way; -_Od._ iii. 150 ff. Among the Slavs the majority forced a unanimous vote -by coercing the minority; Kovalevsky, ibid. 122 ff. For the Germans; -Seeck, _Gesch. d. Unterg. d. antik. Welt_, i. 213. - -[990] For the Homeric Greek assembly, see Hermann-Thumser, _Griech -Staatsalt._ 67 f. - -[991] _Il._ i. 11 ff. - -[992] Ibid. i. 135 ff., 320 ff. - -[993] Ibid. vii. 345 ff. - -[994] In Italy, Livy i. 45. 2; 49. 8. - -[995] This right is proved by the fact that the death of a king freed -the neighboring states from their treaty obligations to his community, -_e.g._, the Fidenates after the death of Romulus; Dion. Hal. iii. 23. -1; the Latins after the death of Tullus; Dion. Hal. iii. 37. 3; various -neighbors after the expulsion of the last Tarquin; Dion. Hal. viii. -64. 2; cf. Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 175, n. 2. At the time of the Caudine -disaster (321 B.C.) the Samnite leader assumed that the Roman consuls -were competent in their own right to conclude a definitive peace; Livy -ix. 2 ff. - -[996] Among the Quadi the right to declare war belonged to the council, -not to the assembly; Amm. Marc. xxx. 6. 2. With the Saxons the will of -the nobles was equivalent to the will of the people; Beowulf, cited -by Seeck, ibid. i. 217. 7, see also his notes on p. 531. The Sabine -senators (senes) are represented as responsible for the continual wars -of their people with the Romans; Livy ii. 18. 11. In general the leading -men and the senate were able by their own oath to bind the community; -Caes. _B. G._ iv. 11; cf. 13. A chief might work his will by packing an -assembly with men on whom he could rely; Tac. _Hist._ iv. 14. The Grand -Duke of Russia, relying on his comitatus, sometimes went to war without -consulting the people; Kovalevsky, _Mod. Cust. and Anc. Laws_, 142. - -[997] Leist, _Graeco-ital. Rechtsgesch._ 130, 136 f. Under favorable -conditions the assembly acquired sovereignty, as at Athens and for a time -in Russia; Kovalevsky, _Russian Political Institutions_, 17. Schrader, -_Reallexikon_, 923 f., following Mommsen (cf. also Post, _Grundlagen des -Rechts_, 130; Cramer, _Verfassungsgesch. d. Germ. u. Kelt._ 61 et pass.), -is altogether wrong in supposing the assembly to have been originally -sovereign. - -[998] Tac. _Hist._ iv. 64. Charlemagne suppressed the assemblies of the -Saxons except for receiving communications from his missi and for the -administration of justice; _Cap. de Part. Sax._ i. 70. 34 (Boretius 26. -p. 68). - -[999] Ginnell, _Brehon Laws_, 42. - -[1000] _Od._ iii. 214 f.; xiv. 239; xvi. 75, 95 f., 114; xix. 527. - -[1001] In Homeric Greece; _Il._ i. 231 f.; iii. 57. The Herulians killed -their king merely because they were weary of royal government; Procopius, -_Bel. Goth._ ii. 14, p. 422 A. Sometimes the Celtic commons massacred -both magistrates and council, and took affairs into their own hands; -Polyb. ii. 21; Caesar, _B. G._ iii. 17. - -[1002] Hdt. vi. 56. - -[1003] _Rhetra_ of Polydorus and Theopompus, in Plut. _Lyc._ 6. This -power is essentially the same as the auctoritas of the Roman patres. - -[1004] Fustel de Coulanges, _Monarchie Franque_, 598 ff. - -[1005] Ibid. 638 ff. - -[1006] Hodgkin, _Italy and her Invaders_, iii. 239 ff. - -[1007] Kovalevsky, _Mod. Cust. and Anc. Laws_, 148. - -[1008] The rest of this chapter is largely a reproduction of Botsford, -_Lex Curiata_, in _Pol. Sci. Quart._ xxiii (1908). 498-517. - -[1009] P. 2, 176. - -[1010] Cic. _Rep._ 28. 50; cf. 23. 43. - -[1011] Livy i. 46. 3; 60. 3; ii. 1. 6 f.; 15. 3. - -[1012] Cic. _Planc._ 4. 9: “Non est consilium in vulgo.” - -[1013] Cf. Livy i. 34. 12. - -[1014] P. 145. - -[1015] P. 235. - -[1016] II. 14. 3: Τῷ δὲ δημοτικῷ πλήθει τρία ταῦτα ἐπέτρεψεν· -ἀρχαιρεσιάζειν τε καὶ νόμους ἐπικυροῦν καὶ περὶ πολέμου διαγιγνώσκειν, -ὅταν ὁ βασιλεὺς ἔφη. - -[1017] I. 49. 7. - -[1018] This interpretation, offered by Rubino, is accepted by Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 599. - -[1019] _Röm. Verf._ 257 ff. - -[1020] The treaty with the Sabines rested on the oaths of the two kings -alone; Livy i. 13. 4; Dion. Hal. ii. 46. 3; Plut. _Rom._ 19. Romulus -of his own authority made a hundred years’ truce with Veii; Dion. Hal. -ii. 55. 5 f. With the advice of the senate he solicited alliances -with the neighboring states; Livy i. 9. 2. Numa personally contracted -alliances with the surrounding states; Livy i. 19. 4. Tullus Hostilius -made a treaty with the Sabines, the indemnity being fixed by a senatus -consultum; Dion. Hal. iii. 32. 6. For other citations, see Rubino, ibid. -264, n. 3. - -[1021] Livy i. 24. 4 ff. - -[1022] P. 171, n. 5 above. - -[1023] Livy i. 30. 7. - -[1024] Cf. Livy ii. 22. 5. In 495 the consul, in pursuance of a senatus -consultum, made peace with the Volscians at their request; Livy ii. 25. -6. In the same form Cassius the consul in 493 made peace with the Latins -(Livy ii. 33. 4; Dion. Hal. vi. 18-21, especially 21. 2) and in 486 with -the Hernicans; Dion. Hal. viii. 68. 4; 69. 2; Livy ii. 41; cf. Rubino, -ibid. 266 f. - -[1025] Cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 17. 2; 59. 4. - -[1026] Livy iii. 1. 8. - -[1027] Dion. Hal. ix. 36. 2 f.; x. 21. 8. - -[1028] Livy ii. 39. 9 f. - -[1029] Cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 17. 2, 4. - -[1030] P. 351; cf. Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 269 ff. - -[1031] On the epoch-making rejection of the Caudine treaty of 321, see p. -171, n. 5. 376. - -[1032] Suet. _Vesp._ 8; Rubino, ibid. 261. - -[1033] Cf. Rubino, ibid. 260. - -[1034] Ibid. 263. - -[1035] Cf. i. 14. 6; 36. 1. Too much stress should not be laid on this -distinction, however, as the Romans always regarded their enemy as the -aggressor, and assumed that every war was undertaken for the redress of -grievances. - -[1036] Livy i. 32. - -[1037] Ibid. i. 32. - -[1038] P. 1 f., 173. The formula is extremely ancient in origin, but it -must have undergone modifications in time, as is indicated by the word -prisci applied to the Latins. Possibly the reference to the populus -should be similarly explained. - -[1039] P. 174. - -[1040] Cf. Livy i. 22; 30. 3; 35. 7; 38. 4. - -[1041] P. 230. - -[1042] P. 171. - -[1043] For the Indo-Europeans, see Schrader, _Reallexikon_, 655 ff.; -Maine, _Ancient Law_, xv f., 2 ff.; Hirt, _Indogermanen_, ii. 522 ff. -There may have been occasional legislation by the assembly in its -earliest history; cf. the prohibition of the importation of wine by the -Suevi (Caesar, _B. G._ iv. 2), which may have been an act of the kind. - -[1044] _Il._ i. 238; ix. 98; _Od._ vi. 12. - -[1045] Cic. _Rep._ v. 2. 3; Livy i. 19. 1. - -[1046] Livy i. 19. 5; cf. 42. 4; Tac. _Ann._ iii. 26. - -[1047] Livy i. 8. 1; Verg. _Aen._ i. 292 f. - -[1048] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 10. 17; Livy i. 16. - -[1049] On the legislation of the kings, see Voigt, in _Abhdl. d. sächs. -Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ vii (1879). 555 ff. - -[1050] Livy ii. 1. 1. - -[1051] Cf. Cic. _Rep._ i. 2. 2. To the end of the republic resort was had -in national crises to the numen deorum as the ultimate source of law; -Cic. _Phil._ xi. 12. 28. - -[1052] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 11. - -[1053] Mommsen, ibid. iii. 313; cf. Jenks, _History of Politics_, 89 f. - -[1054] In the preceding chapter (p. 153, 157) an attempt is made -to determine under what influence the curiate organization and the -systematic vote were introduced into the assembly. - -[1055] Cf. Gell. v. 19. 9: “Velitis, iubeatis, uti.... Haec ita, uti -dixi, ita vos, quirites, rogo.” This reference to an arrogation is quoted -here merely for the sake of the formula. For further citations, see -Mommsen, ibid. iii. 312, n. 2. - -[1056] For ut rogas, see Livy vi. 38. 5; x. 8. 12. Antiquo for “no” may -be inferred from the use of antiquare to designate the rejection of a -proposal; e.g. Livy iv. 58. 14; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 1108, -n. 4; p. 467 below. - -[1057] Lex may be related to lēgare, ligare, “to bind”; Brugmann, -_Grundriss_, I. i. 134; Corssen, _Aussprache_, i. 444; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 112, n. 1; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ 1. 315 (“bindende -Vorschrift”). Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 308, n. 4, quotes J. Schmidt -for the fundamental meaning of the root leg, “to place in order,” -connecting it with English “law” (cf. θεσμός, Gesetz); cf. Kretschmer, -_Einleitung in die Geschichte der griech. Sprache_, 165; Schrader, -_Reallexikon_, 657; Christ, in _Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss._ 1906. -215. - -[1058] Cf. Corssen, _Aussprache_, i. 684. - -[1059] Cf. Vaniček, _Etym. Wörterb._ 227; Herzog, ibid. i. 116, n. 3 -(Rechtsetzen). Schrader, _Reallexikon_, 657, connecting ius with Avest. -yaoš, “pure,” develops its meaning through (1) oath of purification in -legal procedure, (2) legal procedure, finally (3) human law, right, -as distinguished from fas; cf. Christ, in _Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. -d. Wiss._ 1906. 212 (ius = Skt. yōs). On the meaning, see further -Nettleship, _Contributions to Latin Lexicography_, 497; Clark, _Practical -Jurisprudence_, 16-20. - -[1060] For the leges censoriae, see Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 430. - -[1061] Livy i. 26. 7: “Hac lege duumviri creati.” - -[1062] On the legum dictio, see Serv. _in Aen._ iii. 89. - -[1063] Examples of leges datae are the ordinances of the kings or of -extraordinary constitutive magistracies, as the triumviri rei publicae -constituendae, municipal laws and provincial regulations established by -Rome; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 311 and notes. - -[1064] Law of the XII Tables, cited by Gaius, in _Dig._ xlvii. 22. 4: -“Dum ne quid ex publica lege corrumpant”; Cato, _Orig._ iv. 13: “Duo -exules lege publica (condemnati) et execrati”; Gaius ii. 104; _CIL._ vi. -9404, 10235; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 310, n. 3; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -ii. 598 f. - -[1065] Ateius Capito’s definition in Gell. x. 20. 2 (“Lex est generale -iussum populi aut plebis rogante magistratu”) fails to cover all cases, -as Gellius immediately shows. - -[1066] E.g. the granting of the imperium to Pompey or the recall of -Cicero from exile; Gell. x. 20. 3. - -[1067] Livy iv. 60. 9; cf. 58. 14. - -[1068] Cato, _Orig._ iv. 13; n. 2 above. - -[1069] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 598 f.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 111 -ff. The election of a king was a iussus populi, which was equivalent to -a lex; Livy i. 22. 1. For an election by the centuriate assembly, see -Livy vii. 17. 12. The lex curiata de imperio was regarded strictly as an -election; p. 184 ff. On judicial decisions see Lange, ibid. i. 629 f.; -ii. 571. - -[1070] Cic. _Div._ ii. 35. 74: “Ut comitiorum vel in iudiciis populi vel -in iure legum vel in creandis magistratibus”; _Leg._ iii. 3. 10; 15. 33. -Iudicia populi practically disappeared, leaving comitia legum and comitia -magistratuum; idem, _Sest._ 51. 109; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -326, n. 1. - -[1071] The usual expression for the validity of a law is lege populus -tenetur; cf. Cic. _Dom._ 16. 41; _Phil._ v. 4. 10; Gell. xv. 27. 4; Gaius -i. 3. For further citations, see Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 356, n. 1; Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 159, n. 1, 309, n. 3. - -[1072] Cf. Livy. ix. 34. 8-10. - -[1073] _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 2. - -[1074] Ascribed to Ancus Marcius by Livy (i. 32. 2) and Dionysius (iii. -36. 2 ff.), to Romulus and his successors by Pomponius (ibid.), but -destroyed in the Gallic conflagration (Livy vi. 1. 1). - -[1075] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ 1. 314 f.; Voigt, in _Abhdl. d. sächs. -Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ vii (1879). 559; Schrader, _Reallexikon_, 657 f. - -[1076] The sources uniformly represent the kings as acting alone in the -admission of individuals and of entire communities to citizenship. The -view of Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 29, that the assembly coöperated -rests upon his theory of an original popular sovereignty and of an -original patrician state, neither of which has any basis in fact. - -[1077] Cic. _Rep._ v. 2. 3; Livy 1. 38. 7; 44. 3; 56. 1 f. - -[1078] Ibid. i. 43. - -[1079] Ibid. i. 44. 1; cf. especially the summary condemnation and -execution of Mettius; ibid. i. 28. Livy’s complaint (i. 49. 4) against -Tarquin the Proud is that he decided capital cases without assessors, not -that he allowed no appeal. - -[1080] Lange’s view (_Röm. Alt._ i. 314) that under the kings there was -no legislation, except the passing of the lex de imperio, cannot be -proved and seems unlikely. Mommsen’s hypothesis (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -327) that under the kings the comitia were exclusively legislative, -elective and judicial functions being a republican innovation, is -disproved by the facts presented in this chapter. There is no reason for -supposing that the republic brought to the comitia any absolutely new -functions. - -[1081] Schrader, _Reallexikon_, 662. - -[1082] Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 298 f. - -[1083] Cf. Livy i. 26. 8 ff.; Cic. _Mil._ 3. 7; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -8, 305 ff. - -[1084] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 2. 4; 7. 13; Livy i. 13. 4. - -[1085] I. 17. 11. Cicero (_Rep._ ii. 13. 25), however, supposes he was -elected by the people. - -[1086] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 21. 37; Livy i. 41-6; Dion. Hal. iv. 8. - -[1087] Livy i. 49. 3. - -[1088] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 6 f. - -[1089] Cf. Cic. _Rep._ ii. 13. 25; 17. 31; 18. 33; 20. 35; Livy i. 17. -10; 32. 1; 35. 1, 6; 46. 1; Jordan, _Könige im alt. Ital._ 25 ff. - -[1090] Cf. Livy xxii. 35. 4. - -[1091] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 13. 25 (Numa); 17. 31 (Tullus Hostilius); 18. 33 -(Ancus Marcius); 20. 35 (Tarquinius Priscus). - -[1092] The formula for the curiate law is unknown. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. -307 ff. 407 f., 459, 461 f., supposes that it not only pledged the people -to obedience, but also defined the imperium and bound the king not to -exceed the limitations imposed; that every constitutional modification -of the imperium required a corresponding modification of the curiate -act. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 111 f., further assumes that the law -contained the formula of treaty on which in his opinion the state rested, -and that before the age of written documents this treaty was handed -down orally through the repetition of the law. Lange’s theory, which -runs throughout his great work, seems to rest on the single statement -of Tacitus, _Ann._ xi. 22: “Quaestores regibus etiam tum imperantibus -instituti sunt, quod lex curiata ostendit a L. Bruto repetita.” But this -statement proves only that the quaestors were mentioned in the curiate -law, and this circumstance is otherwise explained below, p. 189. That the -law defined and limited the imperium is unlikely (1) because in early -time, when the act had a real meaning, precise definitions were unknown; -(2) because there is no evidence for it. - -P. Servilius Rullus stated, evidently in his rogation, that the object of -the curiate act to be passed for the decemviri provided for in his bill -was “ut ii decemviratum habeant, quos plebs designaverit” (Cic. _Leg. -Agr._ ii. 10. 26)—a formula probably copied from earlier laws. From this -statement and from evidence furnished below (p. 185 f.) it is practically -certain that the formula for the curiate act ran somewhat like that for -an election. - -[1093] It is true that Cicero (p. 183, n. 2) supposes the king to have -been elected by the curiate assembly, and the imperium to have been -afterward sanctioned by the same assembly. This double vote of the curiae -seems as improbable as it was unnecessary. We may reasonably consider the -alleged first vote a mistaken inference from the later election of higher -magistrates by the centuries. The assumption of an acclamation as the -first stage in the process accords far better with primitive conditions. - -[1094] The people claimed that the right to elect magistrates had come -down to them from Servius Tullius; Appian, _Lib._ 112 (probably from -Polyb.); Livy i. 60. 4; p. 360. - -[1095] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 26: “Maiores de singulis magistratibus -bis vos sententiam ferre voluerunt. Nam cum centuriata lex censoribus -ferebatur, cum curiata ceteris patriciis magistratibus, tum iterum de -eisdem iudicabatur, ut esset reprehendendi potestas, si populum beneficii -sui paeniteret”; cf. 10. 26; _Rep._ ii. 13. 25. - -[1096] _Röm. Verf._ 361 f., 379 f. For a summary of the various modern -views, see Nissen, _Beitr. zum röm. Staatsr._ 42-6. - -[1097] P. 435. - -[1098] It is not probable that an official could pass the law for a -colleague, the intention being that each higher magistrate should -personally propose and carry it for himself; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ -i. 610, n. 2. - -[1099] _Leg. Agr._ ii. 10. 26: “Hoc inauditum et plane novum, ut ei -curiata lege magistratus detur, cui nullis comitiis ante sit datus.” - -[1100] In Gell. xiii. 15. 4: “Magistratus ... iustus curiata datur lege.” - -[1101] In Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 29: “Tum ii decemviri, inquit, eodem -iure sint, quo qui optuma lege.” In keeping with this statement is the -object of the curiate act as given by the Servilian rogation (p. 183, n. -5). - -[1102] Plaut. _Most._ 713; Cic. _Off._ i. 31. 111; 42. 151; _Fin._ iv. -12. 31; _Rep._ iii. 17. 27; _Cat._ i. 9. 21; _Sest._ 43. 94; _Planc._ 36. -88; _Marc._ 1. 4; _Fam._ iii. 8. 6; _Att._ xv. 3. 2. - -[1103] Gaius ii. 197: “Proinde utile sit legatum atque si optimo iure -relictum esset; optimum ius est per damnationem legati.” It is clear that -this statement refers merely to the form. - -[1104] Fabius Pictor, in Gell. i. 12. 14: “Uti quae optima lege fuit, ita -te, Amata, capio.” - -[1105] Cic. _Phil._ xi. 12. 30: “Senatui placere C. Cassium pro consule -provinciam optinere, ut qui optimo iure eam provinciam optinuerit” (with -all the formality usual in cases of appointment to that province); v. 16. -44: “Sit (Caesar) pro praetore eo iure quo qui optimo.” - -[1106] Cic. _Har. Resp._ 7. 14 (reference is to the complete and perfect -title with which Cicero holds his dwelling); _Phil._ ix. 7. 17 (a burial -place granted by the state to a family with a perfect title); _Lex Agr._ -(_CIL._ 200) 27: “_Is ager locus do_mneis privatus ita, utei quoi optuma -lege privatus est, esto.” - -[1107] _Lex Col. Gen._ (_CIL._ ii. Supplb. 5439) 67: “Quicumque -pontif(ices) quique augures c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) post h(anc) -l(egem) datam in conlegium pontific(um) augurumq(ue) in demortui -damnative loco h(ac) lege lectus cooptatusve erit, is pontif(ex) -augurq(ue) in c(olonia) Iul(ia) in conlegium pontifex augurq(ue) esto, -ita uti qui optuma lege in quaque colon(ia) pontif(ices) auguresq(ue) -sunt erunt”; ch. 66: “Ei pontifices c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) -sunto, ... ita uti qui optima lege optumo iure in quaque colon(ia) -pontif(ices) augures sunt erunt.” Optima lege refers to the perfection of -their right to the sacerdotal places (cf. 67 above), whereas optumo iure -seems to apply to the privileges and honors attaching to these positions. - -[1108] Papinian, in _Dig._ iv. 4. 31 (slaves manumitted in the way here -described were exempt from payment to maintain their freedom, on the -ground that they were emancipated in a perfectly legal way—optimo iure); -_Lex Salp._ (_CIL._ ii. 1963) 28: “Ut qui optumo iure Latini libertini -liberi sunt erunt” (Just as are, or shall be, Latin freedmen or freemen -of best standing); Cic. _Verr._ II. v. 22. 58: “Quae colonia est in -Italia tam bono iure, quod tam immune municipium, quod ... sit usum.” - -[1109] _Lex Col. Gen._ 67, quoted in n. above. - -[1110] Fest. 198. 32; cf. 189. 21. Applied to the censor, dictator, and -interrex in Livy ix. 34. 10-12, it has reference not to amount of power -but length of office. - -[1111] See p. 186, n. 5. - -[1112] As the _Lex Col. Gen._ 66 f.; p. 186, n. 1 above. - -[1113] P. 186. - -[1114] Magistratus optuma lege is the same as magistratus iustus; cf. -Messala, p. 185, n. 6. In this connection iustus does not signify legal -as opposed to illegal, but legally or technically perfect, correct; -cf. for the meaning “proper,” “perfect,” Cic. _Fam._ ii. 10. 3 (iusta -victoria); Caes. _B. G._ i. 23 (iustum iter); Livy i. 4. 4 (iusti cursum -amnis); xxxix. 2. 8 (iusto proelio). When Cicero (_Red. in Sen._ 11. -27), accordingly, speaks of the comitia centuriata as the iusta comitia, -he does not imply that the other comitia and their acts lack legality, -but rather that they carry less weight; and when as late as 300 the -patricians claimed that they alone had iustum imperium et auspicium -(Livy x. 8. 9), they could only mean that their right to these powers -was better established than that of the plebeians. C. Flaminius, consul -in 217, possessed imperium, which he was actually exercising over his -troops, but which was not iustum, for he had neglected the auspical -formalities appropriate to the entrance upon the consulship (Livy xxii. -1. 5). It would be wrong, however, to suppose with Nissen, _Beitr. z. -röm. Staatsr._ 51, that he commanded on the sufferance only of his -soldiers. - -[1115] Including the auspices; see n. above. - -[1116] The usual expression is “de suo imperio curiatam legem tulit,” -or “populum consuluit;” Cic. _Rep._ ii. 13. 25; 17. 31; 18. 33; 20. -35; 21. 38; Livy ix. 38. 15. According to Cicero, _Phil._ v. 16. 45, -the senate grants the imperium to Octavianus, a private citizen. The -interrex, who could not have had a curiate law, nevertheless possessed -imperium (Livy i. 17. 5 f.), and the absolute imperium was granted by a -decree of the senate (Livy iii. 4. 9; Sall. _Cat._ 29; _Hist._ i. 77. -22). See also Cic. _Leg._ iii. 3. 9: “Imperia, potestates, legationes, -quom senatus creverit populusve iusserit, ex urbe exeunto;” _Leg. Agr._ -ii. 7. 17: “Omnes potestates, imperia, curationes ab universo populo -proficisci convenit” (reference cannot here be to the curiate assembly, -which in this connection Cicero does not recognize as the people). For -the centuriate assembly, see Livy xxvi. 18. 9: “Omnes non centuriae modo -sed etiam homines P. Scipioni imperium esse in Hispania iusserunt;” -22. 15: “Centuriam vero iuniorum seniores consulere voluisse, quibus -imperium suffragio mandarunt.” For the tribal assembly, see T. Annius -Luscus, _Orat. adv. Ti. Gracch._ in Fest. 314. 30: “Imperium quod plebes -... dederat.” It is a fact, too, that the tribal assembly had power to -abrogate the imperium; Livy xxvii. 20. 11; 21. 1, 4; xxix. 19. 6; cf. p. -342, 360, 367. Also from Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 28 (“Vidit ... sine -curiata lege decemviros potestatem habere non posse, quoniam per novem -tribus essent constituti”) we must infer that had these decemvirs been -elected in the regular way, by the thirty-five tribes, they would have -had the potestas without a curiate law. The phrase nullis comitiis in -11. 29 (“Si hoc fieri potest, ut ... quisquam nullis comitiis imperium -aut potestatem adsequi posset, etc.,”) implies that the imperium or -potestas may be obtained in more than one form of comitia—either the -centuriata or the tributa. In the same paragraph he asserts that on the -principle followed by Servilius, whom he is assailing, any one could -obtain the imperium or potestas without the vote of any comitia, for he -does not consider the comitia curiata real comitia, seeing that they have -degenerated into a mere form. From these passages it is clear that Cicero -believed the imperium or potestas to be conferred by the centuries or -tribes and merely confirmed by the curiae. - -[1117] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 27: “Curiatis eam (potestatem) comitiis -... confirmavit.” - -[1118] Livy ix. 38 f.; Dion. Hal. v. 70. 4: Ὃν ἃν ἥ τε βουλὴ προέληται -καὶ ὁ δῆμος ἐπιψηφίσῃ. To avoid unnecessary delay the sanctioning act -was probably always kept free from the obligation of the promulgatio per -trinum nundinum; Livy iii. 27. 1; iv. 14. 1; p. 396 f. below. - -[1119] The consuls proposed the curiate law for the quaestors; Tac. -_Ann._ xi. 22. That these inferior officials required the law is further -indicated by Cic. _Phil._ ii. 20. 50. For the lower functionaries in -general, see Gell. xiii. 15. 4. The agrarian rogation of Servilius Rullus -provided that the praetor should propose the law for the decemviri agris -adsignandis required for the administration of his measure; Cic. _Leg. -Agr._ ii. 11. 28. - -That the magisterial helpers who were in need of the curiate law included -not only the quaestors but also the lictors seems to be indicated by Cic. -_Rep._ ii. 17. 31: “Ne insignibus quidem regiis Tullus nisi iussu populi -est ausus uti. Nam ut sibi duodecim lictores cum fascibus anteire” (the -remainder of the sentence is missing). Dion. Hal. ii. 62. 1 ascribes -the introduction of the lictors to Tarquin the Elder. This curiate -law, however, may not be thought of by Cicero and Dionysius as a mere -sanction, but rather as a legislative act which called the lictors into -being; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 372, n. 1, 613, n. 1. - -[1120] In the opinion of Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 300 ff., the election -conferred potestas only, the lex curiata imperium. - -[1121] Dio Cass. xxxix. 19. 3. - -[1122] Ibid.; Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 12. 30: “Consuli si legem curiatam -non habet, attingere rem militarem non licet;” Livy v. 52. 15: “Comitia -curiata, quae rem militarem continent.” These statements, however, are -not, as some have imagined, to the effect that the lex curiata _confers_ -military power upon the magistrate. - -[1123] Dio Cass. xli. 43. 3. - -[1124] Cic. _Fam._ i. 9. 25. - -[1125] Cic. _Att._ iv. 18. 4: “Appius sine lege suo sumptu in Ciliciam -cogitat.” - -[1126] Ibid. - -[1127] Such an article in favor of the decemviri agris adsignandis -appeared in the Servilian agrarian rogation of 63; Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. -11. 29; cf. p. 186. - -[1128] According to Dion. Hal. ii. 5 f., those who are entering upon an -office pass the night in tents and in the morning under the open sky take -the auspices. Livy, xxi. 63. 10, states that the consul dons his official -robe in his own house, but neither he nor any other authority intimates -that the public auspices were taken in his private house, as Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 616, asserts. - -[1129] Livy ix. 39. 1. - -[1130] Ibid. xxi. 63. 9; Varro, in Gell. xiv. 7. 9. - -[1131] Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 365 ff. - -[1132] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 612, n. 1. - -[1133] Sall. _Cat._ 29: “Ea potestas per senatum more Romano magistratui -maxuma permittitur, exercitum parare, bellum gerere, coercere omnibus -modis socios atque cives, domi militiaeque imperium atque iudicium summum -habere; aliter sine populi iussu nullius earum rerum consuli ius est;” -_Hist._ i. 77. 22: (The senate decreed) “uti Appius Claudius cum Q. -Catulo pro consule et ceteris quibus imperium est, urbi praesidio sint -operamque dent, ne quid respublica detrimenti capiat.” The interpretation -which includes the interrex, Appius Claudius, with those who possessed -the imperium is confirmed by Livy i. 17. 5 f., who informs us that the -imperium of an interrex lasted five days. - -[1134] Livy ix. 38 f. - -[1135] Cf. Nissen, _Beitr. z. röm. Staatsr._ 51 f. - -[1136] XXI. 63. 5 ff. - -[1137] Fest. 347. 14; p. 336 below. - -[1138] Cf. Livy xxii. 1. 5 ff. - -[1139] Nissen, ibid., supposes, too, that Appius Claudius, consul in 179, -went to the army without a curiate law and for that reason the soldiers -refused to obey him; Livy xli. 10. Livy mentions the neglect of other -formalities, but makes no reference to the curiate act. - -[1140] Livy xxv. 37. 5 f.; cf. xxvi. 2. 1. - -[1141] Ibid. xxvi. 2. 2. - -[1142] Dio Cass. xli. 43. In this instance the senate had conferred -dictatorial power upon the magistrates by its supreme decree (Caesar, -_B. C._ i. 5); that they were constitutionally in command, whereas the -general direction of affairs by Pompey, however autocratic, was only -informal, is expressly stated by Dio Cass. xl. 43. 5. What Nissen, -_Beitr. z. röm. Staatsr._ 53 f., says of these magistrates’ lack of -military imperium is therefore baseless. - -[1143] Cic. _Att._ iv. 18. 4; _Q. Fr._ iii. 4. 6; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 47; -xxxix. 65. The praetor was Ser. Sulpicius Galba. - -[1144] Cic. _Fam._ i. 9. 25; cf. _Q. Fr._ iii. 2. 3; p. 417 below. - -[1145] Cic. _Fam._ i. 9. 25: “Appius ... dixit ... legem curiatam consuli -ferri opus esse, necesse non esse.” - -[1146] Cic. _Att._ iv. 17. 2. - -[1147] Cic. _Att._ iv. 17. 4; _Q. Fr._ iii. 3. 2; cf. p. 111 above. - -[1148] Cic. _Att._ iv. 17. 3 ff.; 18. 3; _Q. Fr._ iii. 2. 3; 3. 2 f. - -[1149] Cic. _Att._ iv. 17. 3. - -[1150] The compact (Cic. _Att._ iv. 17. 2) made between Appius and his -colleague in the consulship, 54, parties of the first part, and Memmius -and Domitius, candidates for the consulship for the ensuing year, parties -of the second part, that the parties of the second part in the event of -their election should produce three augurs to testify that the parties -of the first part had proposed and carried a lex curiata, or in failure -to produce the witnesses should forfeit to the parties of the first -part a specified sum of money, assumes, inasmuch as the evidence was -not to be forthcoming till after the election, (1) that the lex curiata -was not essential to holding the elective comitia, but (2) that it was -highly advantageous to the promagistrate. Cicero, who often refers to the -postponement of the elective comitia of this year, never intimates that -the want of a lex curiata stood in the way. - -Varro, consul in 216, must have found it extremely difficult, though -perhaps not impossible, after carrying his lex de imperio in the -comitium, to complete the consular and pretorian elections in the Campus -Martius—all between sunrise and sunset on the same day; Livy xxii. 35. 4. - -[1151] P. 192. - -[1152] Dio Cass. xli. 43. 3. Livy, v. 52. 15, proves that the comitia -curiata could meet only within the pomerium. - -[1153] Dio Cass. xli. 43. 2. - -[1154] Cf. Livy v. 52. 15. - -[1155] Dio Cass. xxxix. 19. 3. The date of the trial was Feb. 7, 56; Cic. -_Q. Fr._ ii. 3. 2. - -[1156] _Lex Cornelia de XX Quaest._ in _CIL._ i. 202; Cic. _Verr._ i. 10. -30; Schol. Gronov. 395. Mark Antony when quaestor performed the functions -of his office through the year without the sanctioning law; Cic. _Phil._ -ii. 20. 50. - -[1157] It is always spoken of in the singular, the implication being that -one act served for all; cf. especially Caesar, _B. C._ i. 6; Livy ix. 38. -15; Dio Cass. xxxix. 19. 3. - -[1158] Cic. Frag. A. vii. 48: “Itaque auspicato ... tr. pl. comitiis -curiatis creati sunt”; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 1; ix. 41. 2; cf. Livy ii. 56. -2; p. 262 below. - -[1159] V. 46. 10. - -[1160] _Röm. Verf._ 381 and n. 2. - -[1161] Based on his reading of Fest. 351. 34: “(Triginta lictoribus l)ex -curiata fertur; quod Hanni(bal in propinquitate) Romae cum esset, nec ex -praesidi(is discedere liceret), Q. Fabius Maximus Verru(cosus egit per -tr. pl. et Ma)rcellus cos. facere in(stituit.”...). - -[1162] The attendance on the comitia tributa was sometimes as low as five -to the tribe; Cic. _Sest._ 51. 109. - -[1163] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 16 f.; in connection with the preceding -note and p. 127. - -[1164] Mommsen’s restoration is, “(Transit imperium nec denuo l)ex -curiata fertur, quod Hanni(bal in vicinitate) Romae cum esset nec ex -praesidi(is tuto decedi posset), Q. Fabius Maximus Verru(cossus M. -Claudius Ma)rcellus cos. facere in(stituerunt)”; _Röm. Forsch_, ii. 412; -_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 613, n. 3. Bergk, _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. xix (1864). -606, with less success proposes translatione imperii; cf. also Herzog, -_Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 679. The passage is in fact past healing, though -Mommsen’s reconstruction is an improvement on Rubino’s. - -[1165] The second inference is from the present tense of the verb -“fertur.” - -[1166] Livy xxiv. 7-9. - -[1167] Ibid. 9. 3. - -[1168] Cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 679. It is not to be assumed, -however, that the senatus consultum had to be repeated at every such case -of transition. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 175, 704 f., who gives the measure -a wider constitutional scope, assumes that it was a plebiscite. Mommsen, -_Röm. Forsch._ ii. 413, supposes that the two consuls on entering office -in 214 simply omitted the curiate sanction on the ground that they -already held the imperium, which was unlimited in duration, and that the -jurists accepted this procedure as constitutional. The specific motive -for this action, Mommsen asserts, was the fact that they were absent from -Rome at the opening of their official year. But the truth is that they -were both present (Livy xxiv. 10 f.), and had accordingly no occasion for -establishing such precedent on their own responsibility. All they did in -the matter, then, was to take advantage of a measure already enacted. - -[1169] Cf. Livy xxi. 63; xxii. 1. - -[1170] The existence of the measure of 215 proves that the curiate -assembly and curiate law were at the time something more than a mere -formality. - -[1171] Cic. _Att._ iv. 17. 2; cf. p. 113, 194, n. 2. The Ciceronian -passage, our only authority on this point, seems to imply a custom. - -[1172] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 12. 30. - -[1173] On the servility of the lictors, see Cic. _Verr._ ii. 29. 72; -_Pis._ 22. 53. - -[1174] That the comitia curiata were no longer attended by the people in -the time of Cicero is attested by _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 27: “Curiatis ... -comitiis, quae vos non initis”; cf. n. 6. - -[1175] _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 27. On the Aelian and Fufian statutes, see p. -116, 358 f. - -[1176] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 12. 31: “Illis (comitiis) ad speciam atque ad -usurpationem vetustatis per ... lictores auspiciorum causa adumbratis.” - -[1177] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 12. 30: “Consulibus legem curiatam ferentibus -a tribunis plebis saepe est intercessum”; cf. Dio Cass. xxxix. 19. 3. - -[1178] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 29; p. 227 above. - -[1179] Cic. _Fam._ i. 9. 25; p. 193 above. - -[1180] Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ ii. 905. - -[1181] This chapter historically follows ch. iv. - -[1182] Livy i. 60. 4. This is the first act which Livy records, and it is -his opinion that the last king never consulted the people; i. 49. 3. His -view harmonizes with that of Dionysius, iv. 40. 3, that Servius intended -to resign his office and establish a republic, had he lived. - -[1183] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 31. 53: “(Valerius Poplicola) legem ad populum -tulit eam, quae centuriatis comitiis prima lata est.” Dionysius, iv. -20. 3, supposes that Servius actually used this assembly for elections, -legislation, and declarations of war, that Tarquin the Proud set aside -the Servian arrangement (iv. 43. 1), which was restored at the beginning -of the republic. The first of these ideas is an inference from republican -usage, not based on knowledge of any definite act of the assembly in the -regal period. In this matter, Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 264, has -given him too much credit. - -[1184] An objection to the view represented by Soltau, ibid. 270-5, that -the coöperation of the army in the overthrow of Tarquin the Proud caused -its immediate transformation into the comitia centuriata, is that we -have no ground for accepting as historical the details of the overthrow -to which he calls attention. In p. 285-96 he attempts to reconstruct -the earliest constitution of the republic on the theory that the army -elected the consuls (283), that for a time those who were not actually on -military duty were excluded from a vote in the centuriate assembly. The -sources give no information regarding such an assembly, and we have no -right to assume it, at least as a regular, recognized institution, for -any period however early. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 465, supposes that with -the founding of the republic the assembly began to diverge from the army, -the two institutions having previously been identical; cf. Guiraud, in -_Rev. hist._ xvii (1881). 1. - -[1185] Livy ix. 13. 1. - -[1186] Livy vii. 16. 4. - -[1187] Livy v. 28. 7; vii. 36. 9. - -[1188] Livy viii. 31. - -[1189] Ibid. 32. 1. - -[1190] Livy viii. 32 f. - -[1191] Livy x. 19. 11. - -[1192] Livy vii. 36. 9. - -[1193] Ibid. ch. 37, especially § 9. - -[1194] Cic. _Fam._ xi. 13. 3; Livy vii. 37. 9. viii. 32. 1; ix. 13. 1; x. -19. 11; xxviii. 26. 12; xl. 36. 4; xlii. 53. 1; Dion. Hal. iii. 13. 1. - -[1195] Livy vii. 35. 1 f. - -[1196] Livy v. 46. 5 ff. - -[1197] Livy vii. 16. 7; p. 297. - -[1198] Livy xxvi. 2. 2 (211 B.C.). On the military contio, see also p. -140. - -[1199] Laelius Felix, _Lib. ad. Muc._ in Gell. xv. 27. 5: “Centuriata -autem comitia intra pomerium fieri nefas esse, quia exercitum extra urbem -imperari oporteat, intra urbem imperari ius non sit.” - -[1200] Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3: Συνῄει δὲ τὸ πλῆθος εἰς τὸ πρὸ τῆς πόλεως -Ἄρειον πεδίον ὑπὸ λοχαγοῖς καὶ σημείοις τεταγμένον ὥσπερ ἐν πολέμῳ; p. -211. During the session Janiculum was occupied by a garrison, above -which, in view of the Campus Martius, waved a flag; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 27; -cf. Gell. xv. 27. 5. - -[1201] P. 104, 140 f., 244. - -[1202] _Comm. Consular._ in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 88; Livy xxxix. 15. 11; -Laelius Felix, in Gell. xv. 27. 5; Fest. ep. 103; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 16. -15; Serv. _in Aen._ viii. 1. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 216, 294, n. -2, is of the opinion that the centuriate assembly was termed exercitus -because it met for military exercise on the Campus Martius. But we have -no evidence that the assembly ever took such exercise; in fact the drill -of the proletarian mob would be hardly less ridiculous than that of the -nonagenarians, both of whom had a right to vote in the assembly. - -[1203] IV. 84. 5. - -[1204] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 216 and n. 3. - -[1205] Fabius Pictor, _Ann._ i, in Gell. x. 15. 3 f.: “Dialem flaminem -... religio est classem procinctam extra pomerium, id est, exercitum -armatum, videre; idcirco rarenter flamen Dialis creatus consul est, cum -bella consulibus mandabantur.” There was no objection to this flamen’s -seeing the comitia centuriata, but the armed centuries it was not lawful -for him to see. Cf. Varro, _L. L._ vi. 93: “Alia de causa hic magistrates -(quaestor) non potest exercitum urbanum convocare; censor, consul, -dictator, interrex potest, quod censor exercitum centuriato constituit -quinquennalem, cum lustrare et in urbem ad vexillum ducere debet.” But -the term exercitus urbanus sometimes denotes the body of men enlisted for -military service from those who were ordinarily exempt; Livy xxii. 11. 9. - -[1206] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 265, supposes that in the original -form of census-taking the citizens were so arranged in companies under -their leaders as to constitute an army ready to be led against the enemy. -But the only citation he offers (Dion. Hal. ii. 14, perhaps for iv. 22. -1; see n. below) has no bearing on the matter. - -[1207] IV. 22, i: Κελεύσας τοὺς πολίτας ἅπαντας συνελθεῖν εἰς τὸ μέγιστον -τῶν πρὸ τῆς πόλεως πεδίων ἔχοντας τὰ ὅπλα καὶ τάξας τοὺς θ’ἱππεῖς κατὰ -τέλη καὶ τοὺς πεζοὺς ἐν φάλαγγι καὶ τοὺς ἐσταλμένους τὸν φιλικὸν ὁπλισμὸν -ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις ἑκάστους λόχοις καθαρμὸν αὐτῶν ἐποιήσατο. - -[1208] _L. L._ vi. 86: “Censor ... praeconi sic imperato ut viros -vocet.... Omnes quirites pedites armatos, privatosque curatores omnium -tribuum, si quis pro se sive pro alio rationem dari volet, vocato in -licium huc ad me” (Mommsen’s reading, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 361, n. -6). Spengel reads, “Omnes quirites, (equites) pedites, magistratos -privatosque, curatores,” etc., in which armatos does not appear. - -[1209] Such an inspection by the censors, if it ever existed, must have -fallen early into disuse (cf. Mommsen, ibid. iii. 397); but we could more -reasonably suppose that the inspection of the arms and of the physical -condition of the men always belonged to the officers who attended to the -levy; Polyb. vi. 20. - -[1210] Cf. Livy xliii. 14. 8: “Censores edixerunt ... qui in patris aut -avi potestate essent, eorum nomina ad se ederentur.” The father gave the -census of his son; Fest. ep. 66: “Duicensus (census of two) dicebatur -cum altero, id est cum filio census;” Dion. Hal. ix. 36. 3. The son was -classed according to the census of the father; Livy xxiv. 11. 7. - -[1211] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 3. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 15. 6; v. 75. 3; Gell. iv. -20. 3 ff. - -[1212] Notwithstanding Genz, _Centuriatverf._ 11; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. -477. - -[1213] Polyb. vi. 20 ff. The Romans were of the opinion that the same -principle held for the earliest times; Varro, _L. L._ v. 89; Dion. Hal. -iv. 14; cf. Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 337. - -[1214] Polyb. vi. 19. 2. - -[1215] The five classes contained accordingly 80, 20, 20, 20, and 28 -centuries respectively; cf. p. 66 f., 77; see also table on p. 210. A -great difference exists between Livy and Dionysius, on the one hand, -and Cicero, on the other, as to the number of centuries in the highest -class. Cicero (_Rep._ ii. 22. 39: “Nunc rationem videtis esse talem, ut -equitum centuriae cum sex suffragiis et prima classis addita centuria, -quae ad summum usum urbis fabris tignariis est data, LXXXVIIII centurias -habebat”) states that the eighteen centuries of knights, the centuries of -the first class, and one century of mechanics amounted to eighty-nine, -which would give but seventy to the first class. The most satisfactory -explanation of this difficulty seems to be that Cicero, while professing -to describe the earlier centuriate system, had in mind a formative stage -of the new organization, in which the first class comprised seventy -centuries; p. 67, 215, n. 2. On the number in the fifth class, see p. 66, -77, 208. - -[1216] P. 68. - -[1217] The two are mentioned by Livy i. 43. 3 and Dion. Hal. iv. -17. 3; vii. 59. 4. Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiv. 1. 1, speaks of a guild of -coppersmiths, and Plut. _Num._ 17, refers to the same guild and to that -of the carpenters, ascribing both to Numa as founder. Cicero, _Rep._ ii. -22. 39; _Orat._ 46. 156, mentions only the century of carpenters. Placing -this century with the first class, he either overlooks that of the smiths -or wishes to reckon it with the second class (cf. Huschke, _Verf. des -Serv._ 153). As he reckons the total number of centuries at one hundred -and ninety-three, he has allowed for both. - -[1218] Plut. _Num._ 17; also n. above. - -[1219] I. 43. 3. - -[1220] _Rep._ ii. 22. 39; cf. n. 2 above. - -[1221] IV. 17. 3. - -[1222] Cf. Smith, _Röm. Timokr._ 91 f. with citations. - -[1223] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 40; Livy i. 43. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 17. 3 f.; -vii. 59. 5; cf. Varro, _L. L._ v. 91; Cato, in Gell. xx. 2. - -[1224] Plut. _Num._ 17, speaks of only one guild of musicians, the -pipers. But the cornicines formed a guild in imperial times; _CIL._ vi. -524. The two centuries were united in the collegium aeneatorum; Fest. ep. -20; _CIL._ vi. 10220 f.; Domazewski, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -iii. 1954. - -[1225] P. 68, 80. - -[1226] _Röm. Trib._ 137, accepted by Genz, _Centurienverf._ 3, 8; Soltau, -_Altröm. Volksversamml._ 254, 317, 520, n. 1. Huschke, _Verf. d. Serv._ -172, assumes ten and includes them in the fifth class. Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ i. 471, supposes the accensi to have included the entire fifth -class, which in his opinion was not instituted till the beginning of the -republic. - -[1227] I. 43. 7. - -[1228] _Rep._ ii. 22. 40: “Quin etiam accensis velatis, liticinibus, -cornicinibus, proletariis.” - -[1229] _CIL._ vi. 9219: “Praef(ectus) c(enturiae) a(ccensorum) -v(elatorum)”; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. p. xi, n. 1; Ulpian, -_Vat. Frag._ 138, mentions the privileges of this century. A decuria of -the accensi velati is referred to by _CIL._ vi. 1973; cf. Kubitschek, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 136. - -[1230] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 282; Kubitschek, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 135 ff.; Domazewski, ibid. iii. 1953 f. - -[1231] P. 68. - -[1232] _XII Tables_, in Gell. xvi. 10. 5: “Adsiduo vindex adsiduus esto. -Proletario iam civi, cui, quis volet, vindex esto.” - -[1233] Livy i. 43. 8; Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 2; Ennius, in Gell. xvi. 10. 1. - -[1234] IV. 18. 2. - -[1235] That there was a proletarian century, besides the accensi velati, -in the comitia centuriata is proved by Livy i. 43. 8; Dion. Hal. iv. -18. 2; Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 40. Mommsen’s attempt (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -237 f., 285 f.) to rule this century out of existence has failed, -notwithstanding the approval of some recent writers, as Domazewski, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1953. Cf. Kübler, ibid. iii. 1521 ff. - -[1236] IV. 17. 2; vii. 59. 3. - -[1237] Cf. Livy i. 43. 10. - -[1238] Cf. p. 66, 77, n. 2. - -[1239] P. 77 and n. 2. - -[1240] 177. 21: “‘Niquis scivit’ centuria est, quae dicitur a Ser. Tullio -rege constituta, in qua liceret ei suffragium ferre, qui non tulisset in -sua, nequis civis suffragii iure privaretur.... Sed in ea centuria, neque -censetur quisquam, neque centurio praeficitur, neque centurialis potest -esse, quia nemo certus est eius centuriae. Est autem ni quis scivit nisi -quis scivit.” - -[1241] As does Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 285 f. - -[1242] This view accords best with the words of Livy i. 43. 7: “In his -accensi, cornicines tubicinesque, in tres centurias distributi” (they -were reckoned among the thirty). - -[1243] Accepted by Huschke, _Verf. d. Serv._ 152, but rejected by -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 283, n. 1. - -[1244] P. 7, 62, 74 ff. 93, 96. - -[1245] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 39: “Equitum centuriae cum sex suffragiis”; -Fest. 334. 29. Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 82, is uncertain. - -[1246] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 39 (n. above); Livy i. 36. 7; 43. 9. - -[1247] P. 62, 93. - -[1248] P. 93. - -[1249] L. Scipio Asiagenus retained his public horse till, six years -after his consulship, he was deprived of it by Cato the censor; Plut. -_Cat. Mai._ 18; Livy xxxix. 44. 1. Both censors of the year 204 had -public horses; Livy xxix. 37. 8. The senators were equites and voted -in the equestrian centuries as late as 129; Cic. _Rep._ iv. 2. 2; cf. -Gerathewohl, _Reiter und Rittercent._ 77 and n. 2 f. - -[1250] P. 94. - -[1251] P. 96. - -[1252] Livy viii. 8, while describing the manipular arrangement under -the year 340, assigns the beginning of it to the time of Camillus, -considering it due to the introduction of pay; Plut. _Cam._ 40 -(for change of armor at time of Camillus); cf. Soltau, _Altröm. -Volksversamml._ 278; Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ ii. 332 f.; Delbrück, -_Gesch. d. Kriegsk._ i. 235. - -[1253] Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3 (p. 203, n. 2). There seems to be no reason -for doubting this statement; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 1100. - -[1254] P. 157 b. - -[1255] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 563. His citations, however (Fest. 177. 27; -Cic. _Orat._ ii. 64. 260), do not prove the point; Herzog, ibid. - -[1256] Dion. Hal. iv. 21. 1; x. 17. - -[1257] Livy i. 43. 11; Dion. Hal. iv. 20. 3-5; vii. 59. 3-8; x. 17. 3. -On the prerogative equestrian centuries, see Livy i. 43. 8; v. 18. 1: -“Praerogativa ... creant” (corrupt text); x. 22. 1: “Praerogativae et -primo vocatae centuriae ... dicebant”; Fest. 249. 7. - -[1258] Cic. _Planc._ 20. 49; _Q. Fr._ ii. 14. 4; _Div._ i. 45. 103; Fest. -ibid. - -[1259] Ch. iv. - -[1260] P. 64, 86 f. - -[1261] P. 86 f. - -[1262] V. 18. 1 f.; “P. Licinium Calvum praerogativa tribunum militum non -petentem creant ... omnesque deinceps ex collegio eiusdem anni refici -apparebat.... Qui priusquam renuntiarentur iure vocatis tribubus.... -Calvus ita verba fecit.” We might amend this evidently corrupt passage -either by changing praerogativa to the plural, as do Müller (2d ed. -1888) and Weissenborn (8th ed. 1885), thus making it refer to the -equestrian centuriae. At the same time we might read iis revocatis (scil. -praerogativis). The passage would then apply to the Servian arrangement. -Or we could bring it to the support of the reformed order by reading -creat (cf. Madvig). The preferable interpretation of the qui priusquam -... tribubus clause seems to be “Before they could be declared elected -on the official reports from the tribes,” the official reports being -counted tribe by tribe, as will hereafter appear; p. 225. See also on -this passage, Plüss, _Centurienverf._ 10 ff.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 496. -Here, as often elsewhere, Ullrich, _Centuriatcom._ 14, is wrong. But it -is impossible to prove or to disprove anything by the emendation of such -a passage. - -[1263] VI. 21. 5: “Omnes tribus bellum iusserunt.” As the tribal assembly -did not declare war, this passage must refer to the reformed comitia -(Lange, ibid.; Plüss, ibid. 13), unless omnes tribus is carelessly used -to designate the unanimous vote of the populus Romanus. The assembly -tributim mentioned by Livy vii. 16. 7 for the year 357 was tribal, not -centuriate as Ullrich, ibid. 15, supposes. - -[1264] In fact some scholars have assigned the reform to the decemvirs, -451; cf. Peter, _Epoch. d. Verfassungsgesch._ 75; Soltau, _Altröm. -Volksversamml._ 361 ff. - -[1265] P. 77 f., 214. - -[1266] X. 22. 1: “Eumque et praerogativae et primo vocatae omnes -centuriae.” Praerogativae refers to the equestrian centuriae and hence -to the Servian organization. It is hazardous, however, to make so much -depend on a single letter; should final e be dropped from this adjective, -the sentence would still read correctly. - -[1267] P. 57 f., 66 f., 86 f. - -[1268] I. 43. 12. - -[1269] Cf. xxiv. 7. 12 (215 B.C.): “Eo die cum sors praerogativae Aniensi -iuniorum exisset”; 9. 3: “Praerogativae suffragium iniit ... eosdem -consules ceterae centuriae ... dixerunt”; xxvi. 22. 2 f.; xxvii. 6. 3. - -[1270] Livy xl. 51 is evidence that the censors had power to make changes -as extensive as these. - -[1271] Mommsen, _Röm. Trib._ 108, preferred Fabius, and his view has -been accepted by Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 499; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ -i. 326; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1956; Le Tellier, -_Organ. cent._ 75; Willems, _Droit public Röm._ 93; Karlowa, _Röm. -Rechtsgesch._ i. 384; and others. But in his _Staatsr._ iii. 254, n. -4, 270, n. 3, following Göttling, _Gesch. d. röm. Staatsverf._ 383, he -changes his preference to Flaminius on the ground that the conflict -between the patricians and the plebeians continued to the war with -Hannibal (Sall. _Hist._ i. 9. 11), ending, as he supposes, in the opening -of the six patrician centuries of knights to the plebeians—a change which -he connects with the reform under discussion. His reasoning as to the -date is not cogent, and is outweighed by the consideration given in the -text. - -[1272] II. 21. - -[1273] XXI. 63; cf. Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1956. - -[1274] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 499; Plüss, _Centurienverf._ 10; Le -Tellier, _Organ. cent._ 73 ff. - -[1275] Guiraud, in _Rev. hist._ xvii (1881). 7. - -[1276] I. 43. 12: “Nec mirari oportet hunc ordinem, qui nunc est post -expletas quinque et triginta tribus duplicato earum numero centuriis -iuniorum seniorumque, ad institutam ab Serv. Tullio summam non convenire” -(Nor need we be surprised that the arrangement as it now exists after the -tribes have been increased to thirty-five, their number being doubled -in the centuries of juniors and seniors, does not agree with the total -number instituted by Servius Tullius). - -[1277] IV. 21. 3: Οὑτος ὁ κόσμος τοῦ πολιτεύματος ἐπὶ πολλὰς διέμεινε -γενεὰς φυλαττόμενος ὑπὸ Ῥωμαίον· ἐν δὲ τοῖς καθ’ ἡμᾶς κεκίνηται χρόνοις -καὶ μεταβέβληκεν εἰς τὸ δημοτικώτερον, ἀνάγκαις τισὶ βιασθεὶς ἰσχυραῖς, -οὐ τῶν λόχον καταλυθέντων, ἀλλὰ τῆς κρίσεως (or κλήσεως) αὐτῶν οὐκέτι τὴν -ἀρχαίαν ἀκρίβειαν φυλαττούσης, ὡς ἐγνων ταῖς ἀρχαιρεσίαις αὐτῶν πολλάκις -παρών. (After this arrangement had continued many generations, carefully -preserved by the Romans, it has assumed in our time a more democratic -character, driven into this new course by certain powerful forces. The -centuries were not abolished, but the decision of their votes has lost -its former carefulness—or we may read, the calling of the centuries no -longer retains its precise order. This fact, he tells us, he himself -often noticed when present at elections.) - -If κρίσεως, supported by most MSS., is retained, it should refer to the -equalization of power among the classes; κλῆσεως would probably mean that -the prerogative century was now drawn by lot. - -[1278] P. 77 f. - -[1279] _Röm. Gesch._ iii. 374 ff. - -It is not improbable that the first step was the reduction of the first -class to seventy centuries, the ten centuries deducted being at the same -time added to the lower classes. This view will explain Cic. _Rep._ ii. -22. 39, which otherwise must be considered a mistake; p. 67, 205, n. 5. - -[1280] P. 213, n. 5. - -[1281] Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 12, concludes that the change was -gradual. The line of development suggested by Plüss, _Centurienverf._, -however, is ill supported by the evidence. Guiraud, _Rev. hist._ xvii -(1881). 1 ff., also accepts the view of a gradual reform but minimizes -its importance. - -[1282] The citations below refer to a plurality of classes for the -period following the reform, without mentioning a definite number; Sall. -_Iug._ 86; Cic. _Rep._ iv. 2. 2; _Flacc._ 7. 15; _Red. ad Quir._ 7. 17; -Symmachus, _Pro Patre_, 7 (Seeck); Auson. _Grat. Act._ iii. 13; ix. 44 -(Peiper); p. 287, 293 (Bip.). In his speech for the Voconian law, 169, -the elder Cato, in Gell. vi. 13. 3, referred to the distinction between -the classici and those who were infra classem, from which we may conclude -that the distinction existed in his time. The agrarian law of 111 (_CIL._ -i. 200. 37) mentions the first class; also Livy xliii. 16. 14. The -first and second are spoken of by Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 82. Ullrich’s -view (_Centuriatcom._), resting on these passages, is that there were -but two classes, one of seniors another of juniors. Besides involving -many impossibilities, it is refuted by the frequent references to the -continuance of the census as an element in the system (see note below) -and by the occasional mention of the five classes. The latter number for -the time of C. Gracchus is given by Pseud. Sall. _Rep. Ord._ 2. 8. This -work, though late, is generally considered good authority; cf. Greenidge, -_Hist. of Rome_, i. 237 f. Five are mentioned also by Gell. vi (vii). 13. -1; Serv. _in Aen._ vii. 716; Arnob. _Adv. Nat._ ii. 67, with no definite -reference to a particular period. Cicero’s allusion (_Acad. Pr._ ii. 23. -73) to the fifth class implies at least that the five classes were then -fresh in the memory. The mention of an amplissimus census for the time -of Cicero by Ascon. _in Pis._ 16, proves the existence of more than two -classes at the time. These citations, together with the fact that no -other definite number but five is ever spoken of by the ancient writers, -must lead to the conclusion that there was no change. - -[1283] To the time of Marius the soldiers were still drawn from the -census classes; Polyb. vi. 19. 2; Sall. _Iug._ 86. The first class -was distinguished from the rest by its armor, Polyb. vi. 23. 15. That -the political classes likewise rested on the census is proved by Cic. -_Leg._ iii. 3. 7; 19. 44; Gell. vi (vii). 13; xv. 27. 5; Ascon. _in -Pis._ 16. The agrarian law of 111 (_CIL._ i. 200. 37) implies a property -qualification of the class mentioned (note above). These citations -dispose of the hypothesis of Plüss, _Centurienverf._ 36 ff., 80, which -represents the classes of this period as consisting of groups of tribes -resting partly on the census but mainly on differences of rank. - -[1284] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 82; Livy xliii. 16. 14; Pseud. Sall. _Rep. -Ord._ 2. 8; Val. Max. vi. 5. 3; (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 57. 3. - -[1285] Livy i. 43. 12; xxiv. 7. 12; xxvi. 22. 2 f.; xxvii. 6. 3 (p. 213, -n. 5 above); Cic. _Rep._ iv. 2. 2; _Verr._ II. v. 15. 38: “Qui (praeco) -te totiens seniorum iuniorumque centuriis illo honore (praetorship) -adfici pronuntiavit”; _Har. Resp._ 6. 11; _Leg._ iii. 3. 7; Horace, _Ars -Poet._ 341: “Centuriae seniorum agitant expertia frugis.” - -[1286] Varro, _L. L._ vii. 42; Cic. _Flacc._ 7. 15; _Sull._ 32. 91; _Tog. -Cand._ in Ascon. 85; _Red. in Sen._ 11. 27; _Imp. Pomp._ 1. 2; _Brut._ -67. 237; _Orat._ ii. 64. 260; Ascon. 16, 95; Pseud. Sall. _Rep. Ord._ -2. 8; Livy i. 43. 12 f.; xxvi. 18. 9; 22. 4, 8, 10, 13; xxvii. 21. 4; -xxviii. 38. 6; xxix. 22. 9; xxxi. 6. 3; 7. 1; xxxvii. 47. 7; xliii. 16. -14, 16; Dion. Hal. iv. 21. 3; et passim. - -[1287] I. 43. 12 f. “Nec mirari oportet hunc ordinem, qui nunc est post -expletas quinque et triginta tribus duplicate earum numero centuriis -iuniorum seniorumque, ad institutam ab Servio Tullio summam non -convenire. Quadrifariam enim urbe divisa ... partes eas tribus appellavit -... neque eae tribus ad centuriarum distributionem numerumque quicquam -pertinuere.” - -[1288] Livy xxiv. 7. 12. - -[1289] Livy xxvi. 22. 2 f. - -[1290] Livy xxvii. 6. 3. - -[1291] Voting or the announcement of the votes according to tribes -is indicated by Polyb. vi. 14. 7: Τοῖς γὰρ θανάτου κρινομένοις, ἐπὰν -καταδικάζωνται δίδωσι τὴν ἐξουσίαν τὸ παρ’ αὐτοῖς ἔθος ἀπαλλάττεσθαι -φανερῶς, κἂν ἔτι μία λείπηται φυλὴ τῶν ἐπικυρουσῶν τὴν κρίσιν ἀψηφόρητος, -ἑκούσιον ἑαυτοῦ κατγνόντα φυγαδείαν. (To those who are on trial for -life, while the vote of condemnation is being taken, even if a single -tribe of those whose suffrages are needed to ratify the sentence has not -voted, the Roman custom grants permission to depart openly, condemning -themselves to voluntary exile.) This procedure must have been in the -comitia centuriata, and hence the votes of the centuries must have been -taken or announced by tribes; cf. Klebs, in _Zeitschr. d. Savignyst._ -xii (1892). 220; Plüss, _Centurienverf._ 14. See also Cic. _Leg. Agr._ -ii. 2. 4: “Meis comitiis non tabellam vindicem tacitae libertatis, sed -vocem [unam] prae vobis indicem vestrarum erga me voluntatum ac studiorum -tulistis. Itaque me non extrema tribus (not diribitio) suffragiorum, sed -primi illi vestri concursus, neque singulae voces praeconum, sed una -vox universi populi Romani consulem declaravit.” The MSS. have tribus -and there is nothing against it, though Müller, following Richter, has -adopted diribitio for the Teubner text, 1896. The meaning is “In my -election you offered not merely the ballot, the vindication of your -silent liberty, but also your unanimous voice as evidence of your good -will to me and of your eagerness in my behalf. Hence it was not the last -tribal group of votes but your first coming together, not the single -announcements of the criers but the unanimous voice of the entire Roman -people which declared me consul.” From this passage we may infer (1) that -the votes were cast or announced by tribes, (2) that the tribe cast more -than one vote, (3) that the result was sometimes known before the last -tribe was reached. Cf. further Cic. _Phil._ vi. 5. 12; 6. 16; xi. 8. 18; -Livy v. 18. 2; vi. 21. 5; viii. 37. 12; xxix. 37. 13; ep. xlix; Oros. v. -7. 1; Lucan, _Phars._ v. 391 ff.; Plut. _Cat. Min._ 42. - -[1292] Cic. _Planc._ 20. 49: “Unius tribus pars” (i.e. the prerogative -century); Pseudacr. Schol. Cruq. ad Hor. _Poet._ 341: “Singulae tribus -certas habebant centurias seniorum et iuniorum”; Livy i. 43. 12 f. -implies that the number of centuries was a multiple of the number of -tribes, in other words that the century was an integral part of the -tribe; cf. Q. Cic. _Petit._ 5. 17 f.; 8. 32; Mommsen, _Röm. Trib._ 74. -The most convincing evidence is that of inscriptions of the imperial -period (p. 220) which prove the urban tribes to have comprised each an -integral number of centuries. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 274, has -therefore failed in his attempt to limit to the first class the division -of the tribes into centuries. - -[1293] _Röm. Gesch._ iii. 382 f., followed by Plüss, _Centurienverf._ -23 ff. Niebuhr places the change in 304, when there were but thirty-one -tribes, which would give for that date but sixty-two half-tribe centuries. - -[1294] P. 216. - -[1295] Niebuhr, ibid. His authorities for the two classes are Livy xliii. -16. 14: “Cum ex duodecim centuriis equitum octo censorem condemnassent -multaeque aliae primae classis”; Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 82: “Prima classis -vocatur, renuntiatur; deinde, ita ut adsolet, suffragia; tum secunda -classis vocatur; quae omnia sunt citius facta, quam dixi. Confecto -negotio bonus augur ... alio die inquit”; cf. p. 113. In the Livian -citation, however, the mention of only the first class affords no hint -as to the number of classes to follow; and the keen analysis of the -Ciceronian passage made by Huschke, _Verf. des Serv._ 615 and n. 8, -proves confecto negotio to signify not necessarily that the voting -had been finished, but rather that the comitia had advanced so far as -to preclude the obnuntiatio. It should be served before the assembly -convened, not after the meeting began (“Non comitiis habitis, sed -priusquam habeantur”; § 81). Confecto negotio, equivalent to comitiis -habitis, is the negative of priusquam habeantur. This interpretation -deprives the theory of two classes, held by Niebuhr, Ullrich, and others, -of its only support. - -[1296] P. 216, n. 1. - -[1297] P. 216, n. 2. - -[1298] _Verf. des Serv._ 623. - -[1299] Ibid. 617 ff. - -[1300] Ibid. 634. Similar is the view of Plüss, _Centurienverf._ 36 ff., -80, that for the period 179-86 the classes were groups of tribes based -partly on the census and partly on social rank. - -[1301] P. 216, n. 3. The long-known hypothesis here mentioned was -sufficiently refuted by Huschke, ibid. 619 ff., but has been more -recently revived by Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 117 ff., who, however, so -develops it as to make the five classes voting divisions of the century. -This notion is controverted by Genz, _Centuriatcom. nach der Ref._, and -defended without success by Gerathewohl, _Reit. und Rittercent._ 90 f. - -[1302] This result is in fact suggested by the passage in Livy 1. 43. 12 -f. (p. 217, n. 1); it is not to be wondered at that an increase in the -tribes should bring about an increase in the centuries—a diminution in -the centuries could not be spoken of in the same way. - -[1303] P. 217. - -[1304] P. 218, n. 1. - -[1305] P. 216, n. 3. - -[1306] ¶ above. - -[1307] P. 216, n. 4. - -[1308] A monk who lived 1494-1567. For his view see Drackenborch’s -commentary on Livy i. 43. To the 350 centuries of juniors and seniors -he added 35 or 70 centuries of knights and a century of proletarians, -making a total of 386 or 421 respectively. No scholar now holds to more -than 18 equestrian centuries. With this and a few other variations as to -supernumerary centuries his view has been adopted by Savigny, _Vermischte -Schriften_, i. 1 ff.; Mommsen, _Röm. Trib._; Genz, _Centuriatcom. nach -der Ref._; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 15; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. -324; Klebs, in _Zeitschr. d. Savignyst._ xii (1892). 181-244; Schiller, -_Röm. Alt._ 633; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1956 -ff.; Greenidge, _Rom. Publ. Life_, 253; Le Tellier, _Organ. cent._ 89 -ff.; Göttling, _Gesch. der röm. Staatsverf._ 383; Peter, _Epoch. d. -Verfassungsgesch._ 75; Morlot, _Comices élect._ 85 ff. - -[1309] _CIL._ vi. 196-8, 1104, 10097, 10214-8; _Inscr. bull. della comm. -di Roma_, 1885. 161; _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1887. 191. - -[1310] There must have been in the reformed comitia two curators from -each class for every tribe. This connection with the classes was wrongly -transferred to the tribunes of the plebs by Livy iii. 30. 7; Ascon. 76. - -[1311] III. 274 ff.; cf. his _History of Rome_ (Eng. ed. 1900), iii. 52 f. - -[1312] II. 22. - -[1313] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 274 with notes; cf. Guiraud, in _Rev. hist._ -xvii (1881). 16. - -[1314] _Rep._ ii. 22. 39: “Quae discriptio, si esset ignota vobis, -explicaretur a me; nunc rationem videtis esse talem.” - -[1315] Seventy in Cicero’s description, eighty according to the -annalists; p. 67 f., 205, n. 5. - -[1316] It is unnecessary here to enter into the controversy regarding the -text. Evidently the second hand has drawn from a reliable source (Klebs, -ibid. 200-210); yet in view of its uncertainty the passage should not be -made the foundation of a theory so thoroughly objectionable as Mommsen’s. - -[1317] To Soltau, _Jahrb. f. cl. Philol._ xli (1895). 411, n. 3, this -explanation seems “too cheap.” - -[1318] In the clause “Ut equitum centuriae cum sex suffrages et prima -classis addita centuria, quae ... data, LXXXVIIII centuriae habeat,” -centuriae applies to the centuries proper, but in the clause immediately -following, “Quibus ex centum quattuor centuriis (tot enim reliquae sunt) -octo solae accesserunt,” the word on Mommsen’s supposition must denote -not the centuries themselves but the voting groups of centuries. Though -Mommsen usually avoids the application of the term century to the assumed -voting units, he allows himself to do so on p. 274 and in n. 2. Granting -that in this instance he has used the word correctly, we should have the -first class composed of simple centuries and the others of centuries -which were themselves composed of centuries—an evidently absurd result of -his assumption. - -[1319] Klebs, in _Zeitschr. d. Savignyst._ xii (1892). 197. Not less -complicated is Le Tellier’s supposition (_Organ. cent._ 88, n. 1) that -the four classes may have differed in number of votes (for example, 30, -28, 28, 14), and that the several voting groups of a class comprised the -same number of centuries, in some cases with a fraction of a century, -e.g., 2, 2½, 2½, 5 centuries for the four classes respectively. This -combination would be as undemocratic and as impracticable as any of those -proposed by Klebs. - -[1320] Klebs, ibid. 187. - -[1321] P. 214, n. 6. - -[1322] I. 43. 12. - -[1323] P. 220. - -[1324] P. 217. - -[1325] P. 216, n. 3. Soltau’s modifications, _Jahrb. f. Philol._ xli -(1895). 410-4, of Mommsen’s hypothesis are no improvement on the original. - -[1326] _Röm. Alt._ ii. 510 ff. - -[1327] In this way the prerogative century, after serving as an omen -(Cic. _Mur._ 18. 39), would be joined with four others of the same -half-tribe. - -[1328] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 526. - -[1329] Livy xliii. 16. 14 (171 B.C.): “Cum ex duodecim centuriis equitum -octo censorem condemnassent multaeque aliae primae classis, extemplo -principes civitatis ... vestem mutarunt.” This proves that the votes were -made public early in the course of the voting, though not necessarily -before the second class began; cf. Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 82. Lange too -hastily rejects the evidence of these two passages. The vote of each -century was announced separately; Varro, _L. L._ vii. 42: “Quod ... -comitiis cum recitatur a praecone dicitur olla centuria,” which would not -be true, if, as Lange supposes, the announcement was by tribal groups of -five. - -[1330] Cf. Gerathewohl, _Reit. und Rittercent._ 90, n. 2. - -[1331] As authority for the six votes of the eighteen equestrian -centuries Lange cites Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 39: “Equitum centuriae cum sex -suffrages”; _Phil._ ii. 33. 82; “Prima classis vocatur, renuntiatur; -deinde, ita ut adsolet, suffragia.” So far as these two passages are -concerned, Lange could be right; but his view is contradicted by Festus -334. 29 (“Sex suffragia appellantur in equitum centuriis, quae sunt -adiecta—MS. adfectae—ei numero centuriarum, quas Priscus Tarquinius rex -constituit”), which distinguishes the sex suffragia from the remaining -centuries of cavalry, and by Livy xliii. 16. 14, which gives each century -a vote. - -[1332] All the tribes voted; Livy vi. 21. 5 (a historical anticipation -but useful for showing later custom); viii. 37. 12; xxix. 37. 13 f.; ep. -xlix; Val. Max. ix. 10. 1. All the centuries voted; Livy xxiv. 9. 3; -xxvi. 18. 9; 22. 13; xxvii. 21. 4; xxviii. 38. 6; xxix. 22. 5; xxxi. 6. -3; Cic. _Sull._ 32. 91; Pis. 1. 2; _Imp. Pomp._ 1. 2. - -[1333] In _Zeitschr. d. Savignyst._ xii (1892). 230 ff. - -[1334] Lucan v. 392 ff.: - - “Fingit solemnia campi - Et non admissae diribet suffragia plebis - Decantatque tribus et vana versat in urna.” - -These verses picture a sham election held by Caesar in 49; he pretends to -hold comitia, counts the votes of the plebs, who are not really permitted -to be present, calls off the tribes, and draws lots for them from the -empty urn. - -[1335] _Orat._ 46. 156: “Centuriam, ut Censoriae Tabulae loquuntur, -fabrum audeo dicere, non fabrorum.” Cicero seems to refer to recent -Tabulae Censoriae; though he might quote ancient poets, he was not the -man to ransack old documents even to learn the ancient usage of words. - -[1336] Plut. _Num._ 17; Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiv. 1. 1. - -[1337] Ascon. 75: “Postea collegia S. C. et pluribus legibus sunt sublata -praeter pauca atque certa, quae utilitas civitatis desiderasset, qualia -sunt (MS. quasi, ut) fabrorum fictorumque.” - -[1338] P. 207, n. 1. - -[1339] See citations in Olcott, _Thes. ling. lat. ep._ i. 51. - -[1340] P. 208 f. - -[1341] That these supernumerary centuries were abolished at the time -of the reform is argued by Huschke, _Verf. des. Serv._ 622 f.; Plüss, -_Centurienverf._ 28, 34; Genz, _Centuriatcom. nach der Ref._ 12; Klebs, -in _Zeitschr. d. Savignyst._ xii. 218. That they continued in the new -system is the belief of Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 281 ff.; Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 512; Le Tellier, _Organ. cent._ 90. - -[1342] P. 220 f. - -[1343] The supposed Sullan reaction to the earlier form of the centuriate -comitia is not well founded; p. 406. - -[1344] P. 212. - -[1345] P. 217. This is a necessary inference from the term used to -describe a prerogative centuria, e.g., Aniensis iuniorum. Had the drawing -been from a group of classes, the number of the class would have been -added, e.g., Aniensis iuniorum secundae classis. - -[1346] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 82. - -[1347] Livy xliii. 16. 14: “Cum ex duodecim centuriis equitum octo -censorem condemnassent multaeque aliae primae classis” (171 B.C.). This -passage proves that the announcement distinguished the votes of the -twelve equestrian centuries both from the sex suffragia and from those of -the class. Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 82: “Sortitio praerogativae; quiescit. -Renuntiatur; tacet. Prima classis vocatur, renuntiatur; deinde, ita ut -adsolet, suffragia; tum secunda classis vocatur.” Here Cicero informs us -that the (sex) suffragia were announced after the report of the first -class had been given. The circumstance that he does not mention the -separate calling of the suffragia indicates that their separation from -the first class was limited to the announcement. There is no reason why -the Romans should have added to the length of the centuriate sessions by -assigning a part of the day to the exclusive use of these six centuries. -Livy, i. 43. 8 f., has their inferiority in mind. It is unnecessary to -amend the Ciceronian passage. The attempt of Holzapfel, in _Beiträge zur -alten Gesch._ i (1902). 254 f., is unsuccessful. Klebs, in _Zeitschr. d. -Savignyst._ xii (1892). 237 ff., fruitlessly opposes the division of the -equites into these two groups. - -[1348] P. 74 f., 95 f., 209 f. - -[1349] P. 211, 467, 469. - -[1350] P. 201, n. 2. - -[1351] The idea that Servius Tullius gave this assembly the right to -elect kings (Dion. Hal. v. 12. 3; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 458; ii. 531) is -proved wrong by the circumstance that the organization attributed to him -was purely military, from which the comitia centuriata slowly developed; -p. 203 ff. - -[1352] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 531. On the number of praetors, see -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 202. The election of a centurion to the -function of dedicating a temple (Livy ii. 27. 6) in the period before the -first secession Lange (ibid. i. 917; ii. 532) with good reason considers -a myth. It is doubtful, however, whether he is right in viewing as -historical the so-called lex Valeria de candidatis, assigned to the first -year of the republic (Plut. _Popl._ 11; Lange, ibid. ii. 532), which -ordered the presiding magistrate to accept as candidates all qualified -patricians who offered themselves for the consulship—a principle said to -have been afterward applied to other patrician offices. - -[1353] P. 331. - -[1354] Cic. _Brut._ 14. 55; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 409; ii. 115, 532. - -[1355] On the centuriate elective function in general, see Lange, ibid. -ii. 531-3. Willems, _Sén. Röm._ ii. 69 ff., contends unconvincingly that -the Maenian statute should be assigned to 338. - -[1356] P. 177. - -[1357] P. 181 f. - -[1358] P. 177. - -[1359] P. 177. - -[1360] P. 202 f.; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 599 f. - -[1361] Dion. Hal. viii. 15. 3. - -[1362] VIII. 91. 4. - -[1363] IX. 69. 2. - -[1364] Livy iv. 30. 15. - -[1365] Livy iv. 58. 8, 14; 60. 9 (406); vi. 21. 3 (383) 22. 4 (382); vii. -6. 7 (362); 12. 6 (358); 19. 10 (353); 32. 1 (343). - -[1366] Livy vii. 20. 3. - -[1367] Livy viii. 22. 8 (327); 25. 2 with Dion. Hal. xv. 14 (326); Livy -viii. 29. 6 (325); 43. 2 (306); 45. 8 (304); x. 12. 3 (298); 45. 6 f. -(293). - -[1368] Polyb. i. 11. - -[1369] Dio Cass. Frag. 49. 5; Zon. viii. 19. 4. - -[1370] Livy xxi. 17. 4. - -[1371] Livy xxxi. 5-8; especially 6. 1, 3; 7. 1. - -[1372] Livy xxxvi. 1. 4 f.; 2. 2 f. - -[1373] Livy xlii. 30. 10 f.; 36. 2. - -[1374] Oros. v. 15. 1: “Consensu populi.” - -[1375] Livy xxxi. 6. 3; 7. 1; xlii. 30. 10; cf. 36. 1. - -[1376] Livy xlv. 21; Polyb. xxx. 4. 4 ff. - -[1377] Livy xxxviii. 42. 11; 45. 4 ff. - -[1378] Livy xxxviii. 50. 3. - -[1379] Livy xli. 6; 7. 8; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 320, n. 3. - -[1380] Appian, _Iber._ 51, 55. The condemnation of M. Aemilius Lepidus, -proconsul in 136, to a fine by a judgment of the people seems to have -been more for the failure of his war upon the same state than for -beginning it without authorization; Appian, _Iber._ 80-82; Livy, ep. lvi; -Oros. v. 5. 14. - -[1381] Livy iv. 58. 14. - -[1382] This is the Macedonian war beginning in 200; p. 231; cf. Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 602. - -[1383] P. 176; Gell. xvi. 4. 1; Livy xxxvi. 2. 2. - -[1384] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 41. 1 ff.; Cic. _Pis._ 21. 48 f. - -[1385] E.g., the act which recalled Camillus from exile; Livy v. 46. 10; -xxii. 14. 11; Cic. _Dom._ 32. 86. - -[1386] P. 181 f. - -[1387] P. 201, 240. - -[1388] Livy iii. 55. 4; Cic. _Rep._ ii. 31. 54. - -[1389] Livy x. 9. 5; cf. p. 242 below. - -[1390] P. 250 f. 349. - -[1391] P. 270 f. - -[1392] P. 272. - -[1393] P. 269. - -[1394] Fest. 237. 17; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 622; ii. 603. The contents -are unknown. - -[1395] Livy iii. 34. 6. Doubt has been thrown on the early date of the -Twelve Tables by Pais, _Storia di Roma_, I. i. 558-606, and on their -official character as well by Lambert, _La question de l’authenticité -des XII Tables et les annales maximi_; _L’histoire traditionelle des XII -Tables et les critères d’inauthenticité des traditions en usage dans -l’école de Mommsen_ in _Mélanges Ch. Appleton_, 503-626; _La fonction -du droit civil comparé_, 390-718; _Le problème de l’origine des XII -Tables_, in _Revue générale de droit_, 1902. 385 ff., 481 ff. Their views -are controverted by Greenidge, in _Eng. Hist. Rev._ xx (1905). 1-21. -For other literature on the subject, see _Jahresb. ü. Altwiss._ cxxxiv -(1907). 17 ff. - -According to Diod. xii. 26. 1, the last two tables were drawn up by -Valerius and Horatius, consuls in 449. - -[1396] Livy ii. 18. 5; Dion. Hal. v. 70. 5; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 585; -ii. 603. Dion. Hal. vi. 90. 2, assumes the enactment of a statute for the -creation of the plebeian tribunate, 494. - -[1397] Livy iii. 33. 4; Dion. Hal. x. 55. 3 (cf. p. 273). - -[1398] Livy vii. 17. 12: “In Duodecim Tabulis legem esse, ut, quodcumque -postremum populus iussisset, id ius ratumque esset; iussum populi et -suffragia esse.” After the decemviral legislation an attempt was made to -extend the principle to elections, as in the case here mentioned by Livy. - -[1399] P. 274 ff. - -[1400] P. 287. - -[1401] Livy vii. 5. 9; Sall. _Iug._ 63; Cic. _Cluent._ 54. 148; _Leg._ -iii. 3. 6; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 25, 604. It is only an inference that -this important constitutional change was brought about by the centuries -rather than by the tribes. - -[1402] P. 299 f. - -[1403] P. 233, 241 f. - -[1404] P. 313. - -[1405] Livy iv. 6. 8. A law is not mentioned but must be inferred; Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ i. 650; ii. 603. - -[1406] Livy ix. 34. 7: “Illi antiquae (legi), qua primum censores creati -sunt”; cf. Lange, ibid. i. 664. In 433 a law, doubtless centuriate, of -the dictator Mam. Aemilius cut down the term of the censors to eighteen -months; Livy iv. 24. 5 f.; ix. 33. 6; ch. 34. - -[1407] Livy iv. 43; Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22; cf. Lange, ibid. i. 666. - -[1408] Livy vi. 42. 11. - -[1409] Ibid. § 13. The laws last named, relating to the quaestorship, -praetorship, and aedileship, are not mentioned by the ancient authorities -but are necessarily assumed; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 476, 479. - -[1410] Livy vii. 41. 4. - -[1411] Appian, _Samn._ i. 3; cf. p. 298. - -[1412] P. 238. - -[1413] Livy viii. 12. 15; cf. i. 17. 9. The auctoritas applied to comitia -curiata as well as centuriata; Cic. _Dom._ 14. 38; Livy vi. 41. 10. On -the comitia tributa, see p. 314. - -[1414] The view maintained by Willems, _Sén. Rom._ ii. 33 ff., that -the patres auctores were all the senators, not merely the patrician -members, is disproved by Cic. _Dom._ 14. 38 (Should the patriciate -become extinct, there would no longer be “auctores centuriatorum et -curiatorum comitiorum”). In spite of some looseness of statement in the -passage cited, there seems to be no good ground for considering either -the whole oration spurious or the particular reference to the auctoritas -inaccurate. The question, too complex for detailed treatment in this -volume, is of practical importance for the period only from about 400 to -339. - -[1415] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 605 f. - -[1416] P. 412. - -[1417] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 553; ii. 606. - -[1418] _Leg. Agr._ iii. 2. 5; cf. _Leg._ i. 15. 42; _Rosc. Am._ 43. 125; -Schol. Gron. 435; Appian, _B. C._ i. 98. 458 ff.; Plut. _Sull._ 33. - -[1419] Cic. _Dom._ 30. 79; _Caecin._ 33. 95; 35. 102. - -[1420] P. 416, n. 1. - -[1421] Cic. _Phil._ i. 8. 19 obscurely suggests that these two laws were -centuriate, though Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 606, doubts it; cf. p. 455. - -[1422] Cf. Appian, _B. C._ iii. 30. 117. - -[1423] Cic. _Phil._ x. 8. 17; xiii. 15. 31; cf. v. 19. 53. - -[1424] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 26: “Centuriata lex censoribus ferebatur.” - -[1425] P. 185. Before the institution of the censorship the original -motive of the sanctioning act—to leave the curiae a share in the elective -function—must have given way to the purpose stated by Cicero and -represented here in the text. - -[1426] Livy iv. 24. 3 ff.; cf. ix. 33 f. - -[1427] Livy viii. 12. 16; cf. p. 300. Livy’s words referring to the -censorship are corrupt, but the passage seems to have the meaning here -given; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 340, n. 2. It was not till 131 -that advantage was taken of the provision; Livy, ep. lix. Herzog, _Röm. -Staatswerf._ i. 257, refuses to believe that both censors might now be -plebeian. - -[1428] Livy vi. 35. 5. The provision that “at least” one should be -plebeian is doubtless an anticipation of the Genucian law. - -[1429] Livy vii. 42. 2; cf. p. 299. - -[1430] The alleged centuriate resolution granting a place for a dwelling -to P. Valerius Publicola, passed under his own presidency (Ascon. 13), is -still earlier and less trustworthy. - -[1431] Livy ii. 41; Dion Hal. viii. 71, 73 ff. - -[1432] Livy iii. 31. 1. In 32. 7 he calls it the Icilian law with the -idea that it was tribunician; but Dion. Hal. x. 32. 4, referring to the -document kept in the temple of Diana, states that it was passed by the -centuriate assembly; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 169, n. 1. Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ i. 619; ii. 607 f., wrongly asserts that it was a plebiscite; -cf. p. 272 below. - -[1433] P. 234 f., 298. - -[1434] Macrob. _Sat._ i. 13. 21. - -[1435] Livy vii. 3. 5. - -[1436] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 608 f. - -[1437] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 541, and note on earlier literature; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 148 f., 160 f.; iii. 353. - -[1438] Livy i. 26. 5-14; viii. 33. 8. For the theory that the popular -assembly was sometimes a court of the first instance, see p. 260. - -[1439] Lange’s idea (ibid. i. 457 f.; ii. 542) that Servius Tullius -transferred appellate jurisdiction to the comitia centuriata rests -upon his view that Servius was the author of the political centuriate -organization. - -[1440] Cf. Fest. 297. 11-24; Cic. _Mil._ 3. 7; _Rep._ ii. 31. 54; Livy i. -26. - -[1441] Dion. Hal. iv. 25. 2; Livy i. 26. 5; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -11; _Röm. Strafr._ 474. - -[1442] For the earlier literature on the ius provocationis, see Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 542, n. - -[1443] Cic. _Rep._ i. 40. 62; ii. 31. 53: “Legem ad populum tulit eam, -quae centuriatis comitiis prima lata est, ne quis magistratus civem -Romanum adversus provocationem necaret neve verberaret”; 36. 61; Livy -ii. 8. 2; 30. 5 f.; iii. 33. 9 f.; Val. Max. iv. 1. 1; Plut. _Popl._ -11; Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 16; Dion. Hal. v. 19. 4; cf. Ihne, in -_Rhein. Mus._ xxi (1866). 168. - -[1444] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 31. 54; Livy iii. 55. 4; x. 9. 3-6; cf. Pais, -_Storia di Roma_, I. i. 489. - -[1445] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 31. 54: “Ab omni iudicio poenaque provocari -indicant XII Tabulae compluribus legibus; et quod proditum memoriae -est, X viros, qui leges scripserint, sine provocatione creatos, satis -ostenderit reliquos sine provocatione magistratus non fuisse.” - -[1446] Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 311. Varro, _L. L._ vi. 68: “Quiritare -dicitur is qui quiritium fidem clamans implorat”; cf. Cic. _Fam._ 32. 3; -Livy ii. 55. 5 f.; iv. 14 f. - -[1447] Ihne, in _Rhein. Mus._ xxi (1886). 165 ff. Two cases of appeal, -which indeed may be mythical, are mentioned by the annalists for the time -before the decemviral legislation—that of Sp. Cassius, which is only one -of several views as to his condemnation and death (Livy ii. 41; iv. 15. -4; Dion. Hal. viii. 77 f.; ix. 1. 1; 3. 2; 51. 2; x. 38. 3; Diod. xi. 37. -7; Cic. _Rep._ ii. 35. 60; Flor. i. 26. 7), and that of the plebeian M. -Volscius Fictor for false testimony; Livy iii. 25. 2 f. - -[1448] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 31. 54, quoted p. 240, n. 6. The statement of -Cicero is too general; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 312. - -[1449] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 4. 11: “De capite civis Romani nisi per maximum -comitiatum ollosque, quos censores in partibus populi locassint, ne -ferunto”; 19. 44; _Sest._ 30. 65; 34. 73: “De capite non modo ferri, sed -ne iudicari quidem posse nisi comitiis centuriatis”; cf. _Rep._ ii. 36. -61; Plaut. _Pseud._ 1232; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 578; Karlowa, -_Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 409; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 317; p. 268. - -[1450] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 31. 54; Livy iii. 55. 4; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 352, n. 2; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 638; ii. 551; Greenidge, -_Leg. Proced._ 318. - -[1451] Livy iii. 55. 14; cf. 54. 15. - -[1452] Livy iv. 13. 11 f.; vi. 16. 3 (385); vii. 4. 2 (362); viii. 33-35 -(325; see p. 242, n. 5); Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 164 f. with notes; -_Röm. Strafr._ 476; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 318; cf. p. 242. - -[1453] Livy x. 9. 4. - -[1454] Livy iii. 20. 7; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 66 f.; iii. 352. - -[1455] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 543; Mommsen, ibid. - -[1456] Livy x. 9. 5: “Improbe factum.” This denunciation might involve -penal consequences according to Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 319 f. Mommsen, -_Röm. Strafr._ 167, 632 f., supposes the expression to signify that the -offending magistrate was to be treated as a private person and punished -for murder. Some are of the opinion that it involved loss of citizenship, -whereas others suppose its effect was simply moral; cf. Karlowa, _Röm. -Rechtsgesch._ i. 429. - -[1457] Livy ii. 18. 8; 30. 5; iii. 20. 8; viii. 33 (dictator permits -appeal); Dion. Hal. v. 75. 2 f.; vi. 58. 2; Zon. vii. 13. 13; Pomponius, -in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 18; Lydus, _Mag._ i. 37; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -163, n. 1; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 756 f. - -[1458] Livy ii. 55. 5; iii. 45. 8; 55. 6, 14; 56. 5; 67. 9; viii. 33. 7: -“Tribunos plebis appello et provoco ad populum”; xxxvii. 51. 4; Dion. -Hal. ix. 39. 1 f.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 277. - -[1459] Livy iii. 24. 7; 25. 2; 29. 6; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 840; ii. 544. - -[1460] The appeal of Fabius from the jurisdiction of the dictator in 325 -was granted not under compulsion but in grace; Livy viii. 35. 5. On the -freedom of the dictatorship from this restriction in the period between -449 and 325, see p. 241, n. 5. The court mentioned by Livy ix. 26. 6 ff. -(314) seems to have been an extraordinary quaestio under the presidency -of a dictator; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 165, n. 6. On the subjection -of his authority to appeal, see Fest. 198. 32: “Optima lex ... in -magistro populi faciendo, qui vulgo dictator appellatur, quam plenissimum -posset ius eius esse significabat, ut fuit M’. Valerio M. f. Volusi -nepotis, qui primus magister populi creatus est. Postquam vero provocatio -ab eo magistratu ad populum data est, quae ante non erat, desitum est -adici, ‘ut optima lege,’ utpote imminuto iure priorum magistrorum.” - -[1461] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 165; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 319. - -[1462] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 3. 6; Livy ii. 29. 4: “Ab lictore nihil aliud -quam prendere prohibito”; ii. 55. 5; Dion. Hal. vi. 24. 2. - -[1463] Livy i. 26. 5: “Duumviros ... qui ... perduellionem iudicent -secundum legem facio”; § 7: “Hac lege duumviri creati”; vi. 20. 12: “Sunt -qui per duumviros, qui de perduellione anquirerent creatos auctores sint -damnatum.” Creare applies to appointments though less commonly than to -elections; cf. Livy ii. 18. 4 f.; 30. 5; iv. 26. 6; Fest. 198. 4 (of the -dictator); Livy iv. 46. 11; 57. 6 (of the magister equitum). In vi. 20. -12, quoted above, Livy may possibly be thinking of election, which seems -to have become the rule before the disuse of the office; cf. Greenidge, -_Leg. Proced._ 304, 309. - -[1464] Livy i. 26; Fest. 297. 11. - -[1465] _Dig._ xlviii. 4. 11: “Qui perduellionis reus est, hostili animo -aduersus rem publicam uel principem animatus”; cf. Greenidge, _Leg. -Proced._ 303. - -[1466] Livy vi. 20. 12; see n. 1 above. - -[1467] Ibid. vi. 19. 6 ff. - -[1468] Cf. Ihne, in _Rhein. Mus._ xxi (1866). 177. - -[1469] P. 258. - -[1470] This comitial resolution may be anticipated in the account of the -process against Horatius given by Livy i. 26. 5: “Duumviros ... secundum -legem facio”; cf. § 7: “Hac lege duumviri creati.” The king, whose -judgments were absolute, could not have thus been forced; hence more -probably lex in these phrases is not a comitial act but the formula of -appointment; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 356 and n. 1. The procedure in the -trial of C. Rabirius was in this respect similar; a law compelling the -praetor to appoint duumviri is suggested by Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 12. - -[1471] Dio Cassius, xxxvii. 27. 2, finds fault with the procedure against -Rabirius on the ground that the duumviri for judging him were appointed -by the praetor, not elected as they should have been “according to -ancestral usage.” - -[1472] Livy i. 26. 5; Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 16; Cic. _Leg._ iii. -12. 27; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 544; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 617 f. - -[1473] P. 104. - -[1474] Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 303-5. - -[1475] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 35. 60; Livy ii. 41. 11; Dion. Hal. viii. 77. 1; -cf. Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 309. - -[1476] _Röm. Alt._ i. 610; ii. 545. - -[1477] Cf. the trial of Horatius for murder by the duumviri perduellioni -iudicandae; p. 243. - -[1478] Livy ii. 41. 10. - -[1479] Livy iii. 24. 3; 25. 2. - -[1480] Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 23: “Quia ... de capite civis Romani -iniussu populi non erat lege permissum consulibus ius dicere, propterea -quaestores constituebantur a populo, qui capitalibus rebus praeessent: -his appellabantur quaestores parricidii, quorum etiam meminit lex -Duodecim Tabularum”; cf. Fest. 258. 29; ep. 221. - -[1481] Pliny _N. H._ xxxiv. 4. 13: “Camillo inter crimina obiecerit -Sp. Carvilius quaestor, quod aerata ostia haberet in domo.” According -to Livy v. 23. 11; 32. 8 f., it was misappropriation of the Veientan -spoil. Diodorus, xiv. 117. 6, states that according to one report the -accusation was that he had driven white horses in his triumph. The appeal -was to the comitia centuriata; Cic. _Dom._ 32. 86. This case indicates -either inconsistency in legal usage, quite possible in early time, or -more probably the union of inconsistent traditions. The facts that Pliny -mentions a quaestor apparently as prosecutor, not simply as witness -(Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 582), and that Cicero represents the trial as -belonging to the centuries suffice to indicate a questorian prosecution -before that assembly. Should we venture to bring consistency to so -uncertain a story, we could suppose that in his absence, the tribunes, -taking up the case, lightened the penalty to a fine. - -[1482] Varro, _L. L._ 90-92 (mutilated excerpts from the record of this -trial, preserved in the _Commentaria Quaestorum_ and containing part of -the edict for summoning the assembly and the accused). - -[1483] That is, after the increase in the number of praetors; Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ i. 884; ii. 551; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 543, n. 2. - -[1484] P. 243, 248. - -[1485] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 543 f.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. -389, 884, 910; ii. 555. - -[1486] P. 241. - -[1487] Cf. Livy xxvi. 3. 9; xliii. 16. 11; Gell. vi. 9. 9; Karlowa, _Röm. -Rechtsgesch._ i. 409. - -[1488] Cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 196. - -[1489] Livy iii. 59. 4; Dion. Hal. xi. 49. 3. - -[1490] Livy iii. 56-8; Dion. Hal. xi. 46, 49. - -[1491] Livy iii. 58. 10; Dion. Hal. xi. 49; Zon. vii. 18. 11. - -[1492] Livy iii. 58. 10; Dion. Hal. xi. 46. 5; Gell. xx. 1. 53. False -testimony in a case of this kind, which was vindicia not murder, was not -capital; hence it did not ordinarily come before the tribunes; Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 324, n. 6. The political importance of the case, -however, was a sufficient motive to their undertaking it. - -[1493] Livy iv. 16. 5 f.; 21. 3 f.; Cic. _Dom._ 32. 86; _Rep._ i. 3. -6; Val. Max. v. 3. 2 g; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 668; ii. 553. Roman -law regarded false testimony in capital cases as murder; hence the -prosecution of Minucius might legally have come before the quaestors; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 324, n. 6. - -[1494] Livy vi. 1. 6. - -[1495] Livy viii. 28; Dion. Hal. xvi. 5 (9); Suid. s. Γάιος Λαιτώριος. -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 325, n. 1, denies that a case of the kind -could come before the tribunes. - -[1496] Dion. Hal. xvi. 4 (8); Val. Max. vi. 1. 11; Suid. ibid. This -prosecution could be brought on the ground of misconduct of office; -Mommsen, ibid. - -[1497] Pliny, _N. H._ viii. 45. 180; Val. Max. viii. 1. 8. - -[1498] Livy ix. 33. 4 f. - -[1499] Ibid. 34. 26. - -[1500] Val. Max. viii. 1. abs. 9. - -[1501] Livy ix. 23. 2; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 323, n. 5. - -[1502] The same thing is true of the finable actions of this period; p. -290. - -[1503] This view has no other warrant than the uncertainty of our sources -for the fifth and early fourth centuries B.C. That the tribunes should -make early gains in jurisdiction, to be afterward partially lost, is -thoroughly consistent with the law of plebeian progress, which consisted, -not in a steady forward movement, but in successive advances and retreats. - -[1504] Livy, ep. xix.; Cic. _Div._ ii. 33. 71; _N. D._ ii. 3. 7; Polyb. -i. 52. 1-3; Schol. Bob. 337; Val. Max. viii. 1. abs. 4; Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ ii. 556; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 321, n. 1; iii. 357, n. 1; p. -317 below. - -[1505] Cic. _Div._ ii. 33. 71; _N. D._ ii. 3. 7; Val. Max. i. 4. 3. - -[1506] P. 318. - -[1507] Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 328 f., wrongly assumes that in this -case the charge of perduellio came before the tribes; the interdiction of -the man by the tribes after his departure was not a iudicium but a lex. - -[1508] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm Staatsr._ ii. 299. - -[1509] P. 241. - -[1510] P. 267, 446. - -[1511] Livy xxv. 3 f. - -[1512] Livy xxv. 20. 6 ff.; p. 318, n. 8 below. Livy gives us to -understand that defeat resulting from ignorance or temerity could not be -made a ground of prosecution. - -[1513] Livy xxvi. 2. 7 through ch. 3; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 320, -n. 2, 321, n. 2; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 556; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -329 f. On the right to change the form of action, see p. 287. - -[1514] The two plebeian tribunes and the aedile who accompanied this -commission were sent to recall Scipio, should he be found responsible for -the conduct of his legate; Livy xxix. 20. 11. They do not seem to have -been members of the commission. - -[1515] Livy xxix. 8. 6 ff.; chs. 16-22. - -[1516] Livy xxix. 19. 5; 22. 7. The form of comitia is inferred from the -circumstances. - -[1517] Livy xxxiv. 44. 7 f. - -[1518] Livy xxix. 22. 8 f. (cf. xxxi. 12. 2); Diod. xxvii. 4; cf. Vai. -Max. i. 2. 21; Appian, _Hann._ 55. - -[1519] XXIX. 22. 8. - -[1520] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 557. The date of the execution of C. -Veturius in pursuance of a vote of the people (Plut. _C. Gracch._ 3) is -unknown. - -[1521] Sall. _Cat._ 51. 21 f.: “Quamobrem in sententiam non addidisti, -ut prius verberibus in eos animadvorteretur? An quia lex Porcia vetat? -At aliae leges item condemnatis civibus non animam eripi sed exilium -permitti iubent”; 51. 40: “Postquam res publica adolevit et multitudine -civium factiones valuere, circumvenire innocentes, alia huiusce modi -fieri coepere, tum lex Porcia aliaeque paratae sunt, quibus legibus -exilium damnatis permissum est”; Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 3. 8: “De civibus -Romanis contra legem Porciam verberatis aut necatis”; Pseud. Sall. _in -Cic._ i. 5: charges against Cicero that in putting Roman citizens to -death he has abolished the lex Porcia. Livy x. 9. 4: “Porcia tamen lex -... gravi poena, si quis verberasset necassetve civem Romanum, sanxit”; -cf. Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 12 f.; _Verr._ v. 63. 163; Gell. x. 3. 13. -Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 320, doubts whether it allowed exile to one -condemned by a vote of the people. Against him is Polyb. vi. 14. 7, -quoted p. 217, n. 5. - -[1522] Livy xxxii. 7. 8; Fest. 234. 10; The opinion here given is that -of Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 205, 558. A different view is represented by -Orelli-Baiter, Cic. _Op._ viii. 3. 252 f. - -[1523] The decisive evidence is a coin, described by Mommsen, _Röm. -Münzwesen_, 552, representing an armed man evidently in the act of -condemning a civilian, whose appeal is indicated by the word PROVOCO -beneath. The inscription on the obverse P. LAECA reveals the author of -the law. - -[1524] _Röm. Alt._ i. 249; ii. 559. - -[1525] VI. 37 f. - -[1526] Livy, ep. lvii; cf. Cic. _Rep._ i. 40. 63: “Noster populus in -bello sic paret ut regi.” - -[1527] _Leg._ iii. 3. 6: “Militiae ab eo qui imperabit provocatio nec -esto,” which however, Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 117, n. 2 (cf. _Röm. -Strafr._ 31, n. 3) sets down as merely a pious wish of the author. - -[1528] Livy, ep. lv: (In the consulship of P. Cornelius Nasica and D. -Junius Brutus) “C. Matienus accusatus est apud tribunos plebis, quod -exercitum in Hispania deseruisset, damnatusque sub furca diu virgis -caesus est, et sestertio nummo veniit.” The new epitome, l. 207-9, speaks -of desertores who on this occasion were thus flogged and sold. It is not -known that the tribunes tried cases of desertion or that they inflicted -the kind of punishment here described. C. Titius, sent for trial to the -tribunes on the charge of having stirred up a mutiny (Dio. Cass. Frag. -100; year 89), may have been a civilian. - -[1529] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 9. - -[1530] _Iug._ 69. - -[1531] Modestinus, in _Dig._ xlix. 16. 3. 15; Menander, ibid. 16. 6. 1 f. - -[1532] An example of a military consilium is given by Livy xxix. 20 f. - -[1533] _Rep._ ii. 31. 54: “Neque vero leges Porciae, quae tres sunt trium -Porciorum, ut scitis, quicquam praeter sanctionem attulerunt novi.” - -[1534] Cic. _Verr._ v. 62. 162. - -[1535] Livy xliii. 16. 8 ff. - -[1536] Polyb. vi. 14. 6; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 560. - -[1537] Cic. _Brut._ 25. 97; 27. 106; _Leg._ iii. 16. 37; _Sest._ 48. 103; -Schol. Bob. 303; Cic. Frag. A. vii. 50; Ascon. 78; Pseud. Ascon. 141 f.; -Orelli-Baiter, Cic. _Op._ viii. 3. 278 f. - -[1538] Cic. _Planc._ 6. 16. - -[1539] IV. 50. 6 ff. - -[1540] Livy viii. 18; Val. Max. ii. 5. 3. - -[1541] IX. 26. - -[1542] (1) In 186 for the trial of the Bacchanalians (Livy xxxix. 8-19); -(2) in 180 two courts for the detection and trial of poisoners in Rome -and Italy (Livy xl. 37). The two courts established in 186 for the trial -of poisoners and for putting down the last of the Bacchanalians are -mentioned by Livy xxxix. 41 without a hint as to the manner of their -appointment; cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 135, n. 4. - -[1543] Polyb. vi. 16. 2; Cic. _Dom._ 13. 33. - -[1544] Dion. Hal. xx. 7. Though no mention is here made of a quaestio -extraordinaria, we may assume one for every such instance. In actual -iudicia populi the senate had no part. - -[1545] Livy xxvi. 33 f. - -[1546] The following pre-Gracchan quaestiones extraordinariae, according -to our authorities, owed their existence to a popular vote. (1) The lex -de pecunia regis Antiochi of the two Q. Petilii, tribunes in 185, for -the establishment of a special court to try L. Scipio Asiagenus and some -others for the misappropriation of public money; Livy xxxviii. 54, p. -399 below.—(2) The plebiscite of M. Marcius Sermo and Q. Marcius Scylla, -tribunes in 172, directed the senate to establish a special court for -the trial of M. Popillius on the charge of having unjustly subjugated -and enslaved the Ligurians; Livy xlii. 21. 5.—(3) By the lex Caecilia, -154, a special quaestio repetundarum was established for the trial of -L. Lentulus, retired consul of 156; Val. Max. vi. 9. 10.—(4) Another -special court for the trial of L. Hostilius Tubulus on the charge of -having accepted bribes while president of a murder court (quaestio inter -sicarios) was ordered by a plebiscite of P. Mucius Scaevola in 141, -whereupon the accused went into exile; Cic. _Fin._ ii. 16. 54; iv. 28. -77; v. 22. 62; _N. D._ i. 23. 63; iii. 30. 74; _Att._ xii. 5 b; Ascon. -22; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 197. - -[1547] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 728. The formula varied with the occasion, -and other magistrates were often associated with the consuls in this -supreme power. - -[1548] Cic. _Cat._ i. 11. 28: “Numquam in hac urbe, qui a re publica -defecerunt, civium iura tenuerunt”; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 359; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 560. - -[1549] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 16; p. 368 below. The idea of Tiberius is to -be inferred from the law which his brother afterward passed. - -[1550] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 4; Cic. _Lael._ 11. 37; _CIL._ i². p. 148. - -[1551] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 3; cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 172. - -[1552] Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 12: “C. Gracchus legem tulit, ne de capite -civium Romanorum iniussu vestro iudicaretur”; _Cat._ iv. 5. 10; _Verr._ -v. 63. 163; _Sest._ 28. 61; Schol. Gronov. 412: “Lex Sempronia iniussu -populi non licebat quaeri de capite civis Romani”; Schol. Ambros. 370; -Plut. _C. Gracch._ 4; p. 371 below. - -[1553] For examples of special courts afterward instituted, see p. 390. - -[1554] Sall. _Cat._ 51. 40; Cic. _Cat._ i. 11. 28; iv. 5. 10. - -[1555] Cic. _Dom._ 31. 82 f.; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 4; cf. Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ ii. 561. It is not probable, as Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 330; -_Hist. of Rome_, i. 201, has assumed, that the Sempronian law transferred -jurisdiction in such cases from the centuries to the tribes. The comitia -tributa had long exercised the right to condemn those who had fled into -exile to avoid trial; p. 249, 267, 257, n. 5 (3). - -[1556] Cic. _Sest._ 28. 61; cf. Dio Cass. xxxviii. 14. 5; Greenidge, -_Hist. of Rome_, i. 200 f. - -[1557] Cic. _Dom._ 31. 82; _Leg._ iii. 11. 26; cf. _Cluent._ 35. 95; -Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 465. - -[1558] Vell. ii. 7. 4. - -[1559] Livy, ep. lxi: “Quod indemnatos cives in carcerem coniecisset” -(Mommsen reads “in carcere necasset” or “in carcerem coniectos necasset”; -_Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 111, n. 1); Cic. _Part. Or._ 30. 104, 106; _Orat._ -ii. 25. 106; 30. 132; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 562; iii. 50; Greenidge, -_Hist. of Rome_, i. 278-80. - -[1560] _History of Rome_, v. 5-7. His view is an inference from the -circumstances. - -[1561] The prosecutor was L. Crassus; Cic. _Brut._ 43. 159; cf. _Orat._ -i. 10. 40; ii. 40. 170; _Verr._ II. iii. 1. 3; Val. Max. vi. 5. 6. - -[1562] Valerius Maximus, iii. 7. 6, assumes that the accused went into -exile; Cicero, _Fam._ ix. 21. 3, informs us of a rumor that he committed -suicide. Both reports may be true; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 282; -cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 51. - -[1563] P. 358. - -[1564] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 223 ff. - -[1565] (1) After the case against Carbo may be mentioned the accusation -of perduellio against C. Popillius Laenas, 107, on the ground of a -disgraceful surrender to the Tigurini. It was on this occasion that the -ballot was first used in a trial for perduellio. The accused seems to -have been condemned to exile; Cic. _Leg._ iii. 16. 36; _Herenn._ i. 15. -25; iv. 24. 34; Oros. v. 15. 24. This case, which resembles those of far -earlier time, has nothing to do with violation of the right of appeal; -(Cic.) _Herenn._ ibid.—(2) Similar in this respect was the prosecution -of Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus for the murder of his son. The accused -went into exile before judgment was pronounced; Oros. v. 16. 8; Val. Max. -vi. 1. 5.—(3) More famous is the prosecution of Q. Caecilius Metellus -Numidicus, 100, by L. Appuleius Saturninus because the former refused -to swear to maintain the agrarian law of the latter. Technically the -charge was that Metellus refused to do his duty as a senator. The accused -withdrew into exile before the trial, whereupon, by vote of the assembly, -he was interdicted from fire and water; Livy, ep. lxix.; Appian, _B. C._ -i. 31. 137-40; Cic. _Dom._ 31. 82; _Sest._ 16. 37; 47. 101.—(4) Decianus, -tribune of the plebs, 97, in accusing P. Furius, tribune of the preceding -year, let fall some complaint regarding the murder of Saturninus, and -on that ground was accused, probably by a tribune of the plebs, and -condemned to exile; Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 9. 24; Schol. Bob. 230.—(5) The -prosecution of M. Aemilius Scaurus for maiestas by Q. Varius, tribune, -Dec. 91, was withdrawn in the second anquisitio; Ascon. 19, 21 f.; -(Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 72. 11; Quintil. v. 12. 10; Cic. _Scaur._ 1, -3; _Sest._ 47. 101.—(6) L. Cornelius Merula and Q. Lutatius Catulus, 87, -avoided trial, probably for perduellio, by suicide; Diod. xxxviii. 4; -Appian, _B. C._ i. 74. 341 f.—(7) On the first day of the following year, -86, P. Popillius Laenas, tribune of the plebs, hurled from the Tarpeian -Rock Sextus Lucilius (or Licinius?), tribune of the preceding year, and -set a day of trial for the colleagues of the latter. The accused fled to -Sulla and in their absence were interdicted from fire and water. They -were charged with perduellio; their offence was the veto of the popular -measures of Cornelius Cinna. This is the only certain case of calling -retired tribunes to account for their official conduct, and may be -regarded as a symptom of the revolution then in progress; Vell. ii. 24; -Livy, ep. lxxx; Dio Cass. Frag. 102. 12; Plut. _Mar._ 45. - -[1566] P. 255, n. 1 (4). - -[1567] Cic. _Verr._ i. 13. 38; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 326. - -[1568] Dio Cass. lvi. 40. 4; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 326; iii. 359 f. - -[1569] P. 243. - -[1570] P. 203, n. 2. - -[1571] Cic. _Rab. Perd._; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 26 ff.; Suet. _Caes._ -12; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 563 f.; iii. 240; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. -Roms_, iii. 150-5; Wirz, in _Jahrb. f. Philol._ xxv. (1879). 177-201. -In the opinion of Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 298, n. 3; 615, n. 2, -following Niebuhr, a tribunician accusation involving a fine was then -introduced, and the oration of Cicero was delivered in this second trial. -Drumann-Gröbe, ibid.; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 357 f.; Schneider, -_Process des Rabirius_ (Zürich, 1899), and others maintain that Cicero -spoke in the trial conducted by the duumviri and that after it was -dropped no further accusation was brought. Wirz, ibid., supposes that the -senate quashed the process of the duumviri on the ground of illegality, -that the accuser (Labienus) then brought a tribunician accusation for -perduellio, but intimated a possible finable action in addition, and that -the trial was ended, without resumption, by the hauling down of the flag. - -[1572] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 13. 33: “Orbis terrarum gentiumque omnium -datur cognitio sine consilio, poena sine provocatione, animadversio sine -auxilio”; p. 435. - -[1573] Cic. _Har. Resp._ 4. 7. - -[1574] Anquisitio seems to mean an examination on both sides—including -testimony for and against the accused; Fest. ep. 22; Greenidge, _Leg. -Proced._ 345, n. 3. - -[1575] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91 f. - -[1576] Cic. _Dom._ 17. 45: “Cum tam moderata iudicia populi sint a -maioribus constituta ... ne inprodicta die quis accusetur, ut ter ante -magistratus accuset intermissa die, quam multam inroget aut iudicet, -quarta sit accusatio trinum nundinum prodicta die, quo die iudicium -sit futurum, tum multa etiam ad placandum atque ad misericordiam reis -concessa sint, deinde exorabilis populus, facilis suffragatio pro salute, -denique etiam, si qua res ilium diem aut auspiciis aut excusatione -sustulit, tota causa iudiciumque sublatum sit.” - -[1577] The trinum nundinum, which included three market days (Macrob. -_Sat._ i. 16. 34), could not have contained less than seventeen days or -more than twenty-four. - -[1578] Livy, xliii. 16. 11. - -[1579] E.g. Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 306, 344. The theory has little in -its favor and is not generally accepted; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 167 -f. - -[1580] On the quarta accusatio, see Cic. _Dom._ 17. 45, quoted p. 259, n. -6. An example of the mitigation of a capital to a finable action is the -case against T. Menenius for the mismanagement of a campaign which he had -conducted as consul; Livy ii. 52. 3-5 (476). Two examples of change in -the form of action in the opposite direction are given on p. 249 f. - -[1581] Cic. _Dom._ 17. 45, quoted p. 259, n. 6. - -[1582] Cf. the case of Appius Claudius Pulcher, p. 248. - -[1583] Livy ii. 33. 1; Calpurnius Piso, in ibid. § 3; 58. 1; Dion. Hal. -vi. 89. 1; cf. Cic. _Rep._ ii. 33. 58; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 274 -f. with notes. Meyer, in _Rhein. Mus._ xxxvii (1882). 616 f., suggests -a doubt as to whether they were instituted at that time. Niese, _De -annalibus Romanis observationes_ (1886), and Meyer, in _Hermes_, xxx -(1895), 1-24, have tried to prove that they were not instituted till 471 -and that their original number was four. Niese’s view is controverted by -Joh. Schmidt, in _Hermes_, xxi (1886). 464-6. Pais, _Anc. Italy_, 260, -275, assumes that they came into existence as a result of the abolition -of the decemvirate. - -[1584] Cic. Frag. A. vii. 48: “Tanta igitur in illis virtus fuit, ut anno -XVI post reges exactos propter nimiam dominationem potentium secederent -... duos tribunos crearent, ... Itaque auspicato postero anno tr. pl. -comitiis curiatis sunt”; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 1; cf. ix. 41. 4 f. (included -clients and patricians); Livy ii. 56, especially § 3, 10. These authors -represent the tribunes as trying vainly to force the patricians from the -assembly while the voting was under way. The question of excluding the -patricians, however, is connected with the statute of Publilius Philo -(339) rather than with the so-called plebiscite of Publilius Volero -(471); p. 300 f. - -Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 2, places the first tribal meeting in 491, twenty -years before the date to which its institution is otherwise assigned. If -his account is not an anticipation of later usage, it is exceptional. - -[1585] (1) Because there were no other magistrates at the time, (2) -because the meeting was auspicated; p. 262, n. 2. - -[1586] Inferred from the circumstance that this dignitary presided over -the assembly which elected the first college of tribunes after the fall -of the decemvirs; Livy iii. 54. 5, 9, 11; p. 285 below. - -[1587] Livy iii. 13. 6; 56. 5; viii. 33. 7; ix. 26. 16; xxxviii. 52. -8; Suet. _Caes._ 23. Naturally the plebeians were in most need of -protection; cf. Ihne, in _Rhein. Mus._ xxi (1866). 169. - -[1588] Livy ii. 33. 3: “Auxilii non poenae ius datum illi potestati”; cf. -Ihne, ibid. 170. - -[1589] Gell. iii. 2. 11; xiii. 12. 9; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 3. 8; Dion. Hal. -viii. 87. 6; Serv. _in Aen._ v. 738; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -291, n. 2. - -[1590] Plut. _Q. R._ 81. - -[1591] In this respect the plebeian body was analogous to a corporation; -Gaius, in _Dig._ xlvii. 22. 4 (quoting a law of the Twelve Tables). But -it was not a private association. It could neither limit its membership -nor change its organization. Proof of these two facts is that the change -of organization from curiate to tribal and the consequent exclusion of -the landless resulted from a centuriate law; p. 271. Notwithstanding the -fact that its resolutions lacked the force of law, the close relation -existing between it and the state gave it from the beginning a prominent -place in the constitution. - -[1592] Livy ii. 56. 11-13 (The consul asserted that according to -ancestral usage he himself had no right to remove any one from the place -of assembly); cf. 35. 3: “Plebis non patrum tribunos esse.” - -[1593] Livy ii. 35. 3: “Auxilii non poenae ius datum illi potestati”; 56. -11-13. - -[1594] Cf. Livy ii. 35. 2; 52. 3 ff.; 54. 3 ff.; 61. - -[1595] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 320, n. 2; Ihne, in _Rhein. Mus._ -xxi (1866). 175 ff.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 157. - -[1596] Hence they had no viatores; so that for a time after they assumed -criminal jurisdiction the aediles acted as their bailiffs; p. 290. - -[1597] Livy iii. 55. 10: (In the opinion of some iuris interpretates) -“Tribunos vetere iure iurando plebis, cum primum eam potestatem creavit, -sacrosanctos esse.” - -[1598] Fest. 318; Livy iii. 55. 6-10; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 3. The wording -of the oath as given above is derived from the law which, according to -Livy, was carried by the consuls Valerius and Horatius in 449; but there -can be no doubt that this statute confirmed the oath taken long before by -the plebs. As to the connection of Ceres with the plebeian organization, -Pais, _Anc. Italy_, 272 ff., believes that her temple was not built -before the middle of the fifth century, whereas Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. -d. Röm._ 45, holds to the traditional date (493); cf. De Sanctis, _Storia -d. Romani_, ii. 30. The building of the temple did not necessarily -precede the institution of the tribunate. On the sacrosanctitas of the -aediles, see Cato, in Fest. 318. 8; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 472 f. - -[1599] As late as 131 a tribune of the plebs, C. Atinius Labeo, regarding -the censor Q. Caecilius Metellus as a homo sacer for alleged violation of -the tribunician sanctity, attempted without legal trial to hurl him from -the Tarpeian Rock; Livy, ep. lix; Pliny, _N. H._ vii. 44. 142 f., 146; -Cic. _Dom._ 47. 123. See also Vell. ii. 24. 2; (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ -66. 8. - -[1600] Cic. _Balb._ 14. 33; Fest. 318. 9; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ -i. 147; also in _Jahrb. f. cl. Philol._ xxii (1876). 139-50; cf. -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 286. Ihne, in _Rhein. Mus._ xxi (1866). -176, expresses the belief that the lex sacrata had nothing more than a -religious influence, that the offender suffered in his conscience and -in public opinion only. The known leges sacratae, collected by Herzog, -were (1) the first Valerian law of appeal; Livy ii. 8. 2 (cf. ii. 1. -9); (2) the act which rendered the persons of the tribunes sacred, and -which, as intimated above, was not strictly a statute; Livy ii. 33. 1, -3; Fest. 318. 30; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 2; Cic. Frag. A. vii. 48; (3) the -lex de Aventino; Livy iii. 31. 1; 32. 7; Dion. Hal. x. 32. 4; (4) the -Valerian-Horatian law of appeal; Livy iii. 55. 4; (5) the military lex -sacrata of 342; Livy vii. 41. 3; (6) the law of M. Antonius for the -abolition of the dictatorship, 44; Appian, _B. C._ iii. 25. 94; Dio Cass. -xliv. 51. 2. - -[1601] Pais, _Anc. Italy_, 263. - -[1602] Dion. Hal. vi. 84, 89. 1; cf. vii. 40; xi. 55. 3; Fest. 318; Livy -iv. 6. 7. The idea that there was such a treaty is represented among -moderns by Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ ii. 249 f.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. -591; ii. 566, and opposed by Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 146 f.; De -Sanctis, _Storia d. Romani_, ii. 29. - -[1603] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 15; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 287, n. -1. The fictitious character of the legal basis on which the plebeians -are represented as acting in this early period of their history may be -illustrated, as Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 299, n. 3, has pointed -out, by their assumption of the agrarian proposal of Sp. Cassius as -one of their fundamental principles, the application of which neither -magistrates nor private individuals were at liberty to impede; cf. Livy -ii. 54, 61; Dion. Hal. ix. 37, 54; Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ ii. 480, 531, -567. The fault is not all with the annalists. - -[1604] P. 274. - -[1605] Livy, ep. lviii; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10. - -[1606] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 3. - -[1607] Dion. Hal. vii. 17. 5: Δημάρχου γνώμην ἀγορεύοντος ἐν δήμῳ μηδεὶς -λεγέτω μηδὲν ἐναντίον μηδὲ μεσολαβείτω τὸν λόγον. Ἐὰν δέ τις παρὰ ταῦτα -ποιήσῃ, διδότω τοῖς δημάρχοις ἐγγυητὰς αἰτηθεὶς εἰς ἔκτισιν ἧς ἂν -ἐπιθῶσιν αὐτῶ ζημίας. Ὁ δὲ μὴ διδοὺς ἐγγυητὴν θανάτῳ ζημιούσθω, καὶ τὰ -χρήματ’ αὐτοῦ ἱερὰ ἔστω. Τῶν δ’ ἀμφισβητούντων πρὸς ταύτας τὰς ζημίας αἱ -κρίσεις ἔστωσαν ἐπὶ τοῦ δήμου; cf. x. 32. 1; 42. 4. Although we may feel -uncertain as to the author and the date of this plebiscite, we need not -doubt its existence, especially as the principle it contains is derived -from leges sacratae by Cicero (_Sest._ 37. 79; cf. Pliny, _Ep._ i. 23), -and was often put into practice; Livy iii. 11. 8; xxv. 3 f.; Dion. Hal. -x. 41 f.; Cic. _Inv._ ii. 17. 52; Val. Max. ix. 5. 2; (Aurel. Vict.) -_Vir. Ill._ 65; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 260 n. 2; ii. 289, n. 1; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 602 f.; ii. 567. For the state, however, it had no -more validity than had the original lex sacrata, of which the so-called -Icilian plebiscite was an expansion. - -[1608] Gell. xiii. 12. 9: “Tribuni, qui haberent summam coercendi -potestatem.” - -[1609] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 179; Ihne, in _Rhein. Mus._ xxi -(1866). 174. - -[1610] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 299, n. 1, expresses the opinion that -the original form of the story represented Coriolanus as consul proposing -a law for the abolition of the tribunate. - -[1611] Dion. Hal. vii. 20-67, especially 59. 9 f.; 65; Livy ii. 34 ff.; -Plut. _Cor._ 16-20; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 605; ii. 565. - -[1612] P. 56, n. 4, 270 f. - -[1613] Livy iii. 11. 8 f.; Dion. Hal. x. 5 ff. - -[1614] Livy iii. 13. 8; Dion. Hal. x. 8. 3. - -[1615] Livy’s idea that this assembly met in the Forum (iii. 13. 8) is -sufficient evidence of his point of view. Cicero’s opinion (_Dom._ 32. -86; cf. _Sest._ 30. 65) may be biassed by his personal feelings; p. 268, -n. 6. - -[1616] Dion. Hal. x. 41 f. Various attempts of tribunes in this period to -punish retired magistrates for abuse of office are also alleged by the -ancient writers; cf. p. 264. - -[1617] P. 265 f. - -[1618] Livy ii. 35. 3; cf. 56. 11 f. - -[1619] Livy iii. 55. 6. - -[1620] Livy ii. 54. - -[1621] Frag. 22. 1. - -[1622] P. 241; cf. also Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 157. A far -different view as to the form of assembly which received appeals in -tribunician capital cases is represented by Cicero, in whose opinion the -comitia centuriata were established as the sole power to judge concerning -the caput of a citizen even in pre-decemviral time by the leges sacratae -(_Sest._ 30. 65); and accordingly he believes that the sentence of exile -was passed on Kaeso Quinctius by that body (_Dom._ 32. 86). But in this -opinion Cicero’s personal bias already referred to (p. 267, n. 6) cannot -be neglected: in discrediting the decree of exile passed against himself -by the tribal comitia, it was agreeable to his purpose to deny that this -assembly ever had enjoyed such competence. The view given in the text, -represented by the annalists and confirmed by a law of the Twelve Tables, -is obviously preferable. - -[1623] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 35. 60; Gell. xi. 1. 2 f.; Fest. 202. 11; 237. -13; ep. 144; cf. p. 233 above. Dionysius, x. 50. 1 f., wrongly gives two -cattle and thirty sheep as the maximum. - -[1624] X. 50. 1 f. - -[1625] With less probability Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 620; ii. 576 f., -regards it as a concession to the plebs to satisfy their craving for the -limitation of the consular power by written law. - -[1626] Livy ii. 43. 3; 44. 6; Dion. Hal. viii. 87. 4; ix. 5. 1; 18. 1; x. -26. 4; Dio Cass. Frag. 22. 3; Zon. vii. 17. 7. - -[1627] Livy iii. 11. 1. - -[1628] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 297. - -[1629] The veto of governmental acts, assigned them for the -pre-decemviral period by the historians (cf. Livy ii. 44), is therefore -an anachronism. The very fact mentioned by Livy, in the chapter here -cited, of the patrician attempt to win as many tribunes as possible -points to obstruction rather than to the veto as their weapon. The -increase in the number of tribunes from two to ten indicates the same -condition. - -[1630] Cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 157. - -[1631] Cf. Livy ii. 42. 6; 43. 3; 44. 1; 48. 2 f.; 52. 2 f.; 54. 2; Dion. -Hal. viii. 87. 4 f.; ix. 5. 1; 37. 1 f. - -[1632] Livy ii. 56. 2: “Rogationem tulit ad populum, ut plebei -magistratus tributis comitiis fierent.” - -[1633] The senate gave its consent; Livy ii. 57; Dion. Hal. ix. 49. 3 f. - -[1634] Livy ii. 56. 3: “Haud parva res sub titulo prima specie minime -atroci ferebatur, sed quae patriciis omnem potestatem per clientium -suffragia creandi quos vellent tribunos auferret”; cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 41. -5. - -[1635] That the ancients had this conception of the curiate assembly -which elected tribunes cannot be doubted; p. 24, 32; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. -Forsch._ ii. 283, n. 1. - -[1636] P. 54, 60 f. - -[1637] IX. 49. 5; cf. 41. 3. Patrician magistrates auspicated their -comitia, plebeian magistrates did not; p. 104. - -[1638] VII. 17. 6: Καί τινες τῶν δημάρχων ἄλλα τε κατὰ τῶν εὐπατριδῶν -συνέγραψαν, καὶ τὸ ἐξεῖναι τῷ πλήθει καὶ καθ’ ἑαυτὸ συνιέναι καὶ ἄνευ -ἐκείνων βουλεύεσθαι καὶ χρηματίσαι πάνθ’ ὅσα ἂν ἐθελήσῃ; cf. Livy ii. 60. -4 f. - -[1639] Livy ii. 56. 11 f. - -[1640] Livy iii. 11. 4; vi. 35. 7; Dion. Hal. x. 3. 5; ch. 4; 40. 3 f.; -41. - -[1641] P. 300 f. - -[1642] IX. 43. 4. - -[1643] Dion. Hal. ix. 49. 5; Livy ii. 56. 2; Dio Cass. xxxix. 32. 3; -Suet. _Caes._ 76; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 799, n. 2. - -[1644] Diod. xi. 68. 8: Ἐν τῇ Ῥῶμῃ τότε πρώτως κατεστάθησαν δήμαρχοι -τέτταρες, Γάιος Σικίνιος καὶ Λεύκιος Νεμετώριος, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις Μάρκος -Δουίλλιος καὶ Σπόριος Ἀκίλιος. Livy, ii. 58. 1, following Piso, supposes -that the number was now increased from two to five. Dio Cassius probably -placed the increase from five to ten at this date; Zon. vii. 15. 1; 17. -6; Dio Cass. Frag. 22. 1. In the opinion of Meyer, in _Hermes_, xxx -(1895). 1-24; _Gesch. d. Alt._ v. 141 f., the plebeian tribunate was -instituted at this time and the original number was four; cf. p. 55, -n. 1 above. But Diodorus does not say so; indeed his grouping of the -four tribunes in pairs suggests a doubling—a fact which he has perhaps -condensed from his source. - -[1645] It has been shown above (119 ff., 126 ff.) that the assembly of -tribes under tribunician presidency is rightly so designated. - -[1646] Livy ii. 61. 1; 63. 2; iii. 1. 2 f.; Dion. Hal. ix. 51 f. - -[1647] Livy iii. 31. 5 f. (454); Dion. Hal. x. 34 f., 42, 48; Pliny, _N. -H._ vii. 28. 101. - -[1648] Livy iii. 10; 25. 9; 30. 5; Dion. Hal. x. 15. 3; 20. 4; 26. 4; Dio -Cass. Frag. 21. - -[1649] Livy iii. 30. 5; Dion. Hal. x. 30. 6 (457). The object, as stated -by Livy, was increased protection for the commons. Any enlargement of -the number after they had acquired the veto would have been a positive -disadvantage; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 161; cf. above p. 270, n. 2. -The change was made with the consent of the senate, doubtless through a -centuriate law. - -[1650] P. 233, 265, n. 1 (3). - -[1651] P. 265, n. 1 (3). - -[1652] Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 170. - -[1653] Livy. ii. 9. 6. Even if these acts are not historical, there can -be no doubt that the senate had the power which they imply. - -[1654] Cf. Livy ii. 15. 1 f. - -[1655] Livy ii. 3. 5; 5. 1. - -[1656] Cf. Livy iii. 70. 14. - -[1657] Livy ii. 36. 1; 37. 1. - -[1658] Livy ii. 37. 8. - -[1659] Cf. Livy iii. 21. 1 f. - -[1660] Livy iii. 4. 9 (464). As long as the dictatorship was in use (till -near the end of the third century B.C.) there was no need of resorting to -this measure, although it cannot be doubted that the senate had the right. - -[1661] Cf. Livy iii. 11. 1. - -[1662] Livy iii. 11. 4; 14. 5; 16. 6; 17. 4; Dion. Hal. x. 3. 3 f.; 4. 2. - -[1663] Livy iii. 33. 4; Dion. Hal. x. 55. 3; p. 233 above. - -[1664] Cf. Livy ii. 58. 1; iii. 24. 9; 30. 6. - -[1665] Cf. p. 264 ff. - -[1666] P. 234. - -[1667] Livy. iii. 55. 7; cf. p. 264. - -[1668] Ibid. § 6 f. - -[1669] Livy iii. 55. 8 ff.; cf. Cic. _Balb._ 14. 33; _Tull._ 20. 47; -Appian, _B. C._ ii. 108. 453; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 303 with notes. - -[1670] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 15. - -[1671] Livy iii. 55. 3: “Cum velut in controverso iure esset, -tenerenturne patres plebi scitis, legem centuriatis comitiis tulere, ut -quod tributim plebis iussisset, populum teneret, qua lege tribuniciis -rogationibus telum acerrimum datum est”; cf. 67. 9; Dion. Hal. xi. 45. 1. - -[1672] On the tribunician legislation of the period 449-339, see p. 292 -ff. - -[1673] P. 271. - -[1674] XI. 45. 3: Εἴρηται δὲ καὶ πρότερον, ὅτι ἐν μὲν ταῖς φυλετικαῖς -ἐκκλησίαις οἱ δημοτικοὶ καὶ πένητες ἐκράτουν τῶν πατρικίων. - -[1675] VI. 35. 7: “Qui (patres) ubi tribus ad suffragium ineundum citari -a Licinio Sextioque viderunt, stipati patrum praesidiis nec recitari -rogationes nec sollemne quidquam aliud ad sciscendum plebi fieri passi -sunt.” When the tribes were again called for voting, the dictator, -accompanied by a crowd of patricians, took a seat in the assembly and -supported the tribunician protest; Livy vi. 38. 5 ff. On another occasion -some years earlier the patres old and young came into the Forum, and -taking their places in the several tribes, appealed to their tribesmen -to vote against the proposal of the tribunes; Livy v. 30. 4 f. Still -earlier C. Claudius and other senior patricians spoke in a tribunician -assembly against the measure then before the plebs. Soltau’s objection -(_Berl. Stud._ ii. 47) to the interpretation here represented has little -weight, as it rests upon the theory that from the beginning everything -was carefully defined and regulated by law. - -[1676] P. 153, 156 f. - -[1677] P. 157, 211. - -[1678] P. 211. - -[1679] P. 271, n. 3. - -[1680] P. 300 f. - -[1681] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 157, regarding the alleged -pre-decemviral plebiscites as genuine acts of the plebs, believes that -this conditioned validity of such acts was established at some unknown -time prior to the decemvirate. The view of Herzog that certain statutes -termed plebiscites in the sources were in reality centuriate laws is -accepted in this chapter. - -[1682] P. 235. - -[1683] Livy iii. 55. 15; iv. 6. 3 (Canuleian plebiscite); 12. 8 (for the -election of a prefect of the market, 440); 49. 6 (“Temptatum ab L. Sextio -tribuno plebis, ut rogationem ferret, qua Bolas quoque sicut Labicos -coloni mitterentur, per intercessionem collegarum, qui nullum plebi -scitum nisi ex auctoritate senatus passuros se perferri ostenderunt, -discussum est,” 415); 51. 2 f. (413); vi. 42. 9 (Licinian-Sextian -plebiscite); vii. 15. 12 f. (law against bribery, 356); 27. 3 (347); -viii. 23. 11 f. (the plebiscite for prolonging the consular imperium, -327); x. 6. 9 (Ogulnian plebiscite, 300); 21. 9 (plebiscite ordering -the praetor to appoint triumviri for conducting colonies, 296). Cf. -also Dion. Hal. x. 26. 4 f. (457); 30. 1; 48. 1 (454); 50. 3; xi. 54. -4 (444); Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 208 ff. All the citations from -Dionysius, excepting the last, refer to pre-decemviral time, and hence -are anticipations of a later condition. - -The first triumph by order of the people, without the consent of the -senate, according to Livy iii. 63. 11 (cf. Dion. Hal. xi. 50. 1), took -place in 449. It is to be noticed, however, that a magistrate always had -a right to triumph without permission either of the senate or of the -people (Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 214 f.), provided he paid his own -expenses; Polyb. vi. 15. 8; Livy xxxiii. 23. 8. The resolution of the -people on this occasion, if historical, may have been a mere pledge of -sympathy and confidence; cf. p. 293. But Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. -194, doubts its reality. - -The “ancient law long ago abolished,” which required the consent of the -senate to proposals brought before the people, and which Sulla is said -to have renewed (Appian, _B. C._ i. 59. 266; cf. p. 406), is ordinarily -referred, as by Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 158; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 193, to the condition on the validity of the plebiscite -under discussion. Appian may have had this restriction in mind, for -we know at least that under the constitution as reformed by Sulla the -tribunes did propose laws de senatus sententia; _CIL._ i. 204 (year 71); -Bruns, _Font. Iur._ 94; Girard, _Textes_, 66; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. -154; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 158; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1559. - -[1684] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 157. - -[1685] Lange’s idea (_Röm. Alt._ ii. 619; cf. i. 611, 614, 642) that -there was no statute which made the consent of the senate essential to -the validity of the plebiscite does not appear to be well considered. Had -the tribunes not been bound by written enactment, they would have felt -themselves free to legislate without the senate’s coöperation, and even -the law they tried in vain to disregard. - -[1686] Livy iii. 55. 13. - -[1687] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 158. - -[1688] Diod. xii. 25. 3: Ἐὰν δὲ οἱ δήμαρχοι μὴ συμφωνῶσι πρὸς ἀλλήλους, -κύριοι εἶναι τὸν ἀνὰ μέσον κείμενον μὴ κωλύεσθαι; Livy iv. 48. 10-16 -(416); 53. 6; v. 25. 1 (395); vi. 36. 8; 37. 3; 38. 5. The same passages -show the dependence of the government upon the tribunes for checking -innovations. - -[1689] Livy iii. 69. 5 f.; iv. i. 6; 30. 15; 53. 2, 6 (407); 55. 1-5 -(406); 60. 5 (403); v. 12. 3, 7 (397); vi. 27. 9 f. (376); 31. 4 (cf. 31. -1 f., year 374); vi. 36. 3 f.; Dion. Hal. xi. 54. 3 (444). - -[1690] It is true that Livy (iv. 50. 6, 8; 56. 10-13, year 408; v. 9. -4 ff., year 402; vi. 35. 9) assigns the tribune this right; but on one -occasion (vii. 17. 12, year 356) he informs us that such a protest was -disregarded by the magistrate. We may suppose that in this period they -often attempted the power, but usually without success. They possessed a -growing influence in the right to address the people, which must often -have added an overwhelming force to their protests; cf. Livy iv. 25. -1 (434); 58. 14 (406); v. 2. 2 ff. (403); ch. 6 (403). This kind of -obstruction may be meant by Livy iv. 36. 3 (424); 43. 3 (421); v. 17. 5 -(397); vii. 21. 1 ff. (353). The government, on the other hand, continued -to use the levy for the obstruction of tribunician bills; Livy iv. 55. 1 -(409); v. 11. 9 (401). - -[1691] The principal recorded seditions are (1) the revolt against the -decemvirate in 449 (Livy iii. 50 ff.); (2) a plebeian secession to the -Janiculum in the struggle for the Canuleian law (Florus i. 25); (3) a -state of anarchy in 376 (Diod. xv. 61. 1), which, according to Matzat -(_Röm. Chron._ ii. 110), lasted about four months; (4) a state of anarchy -in the struggle for the Licinian-Sextian laws (Diod. xv. 75. 1; Livy vi. -35. 10), which, according to Matzat (ibid. ii. 112), continued three -years, 376-373; (5) a secession of the plebs to the Janiculum in the -struggle which resulted in the Hortensian legislation, 287 (Livy, ep. xi; -Dio Cass. Frag. 37; Zon. viii. 2. 1). - -[1692] P. 104, 110, 116 f. - -[1693] X. 47. 1. - -[1694] P. 116 f. - -[1695] P. 230. - -[1696] Cf. Livy vi. 3. 2 (389); 33. 7 f. (377); vii. 19. 7 (353). - -[1697] Livy vi. 14. 1: “Dictator ... minime dubius bellum cum his populis -patres iussuros” (385). In 381 the senate decreed that the Tusculans -should be punished with war (Livy vi. 25. 5), no mention being made of -the people; and the declaration of war against the Latins in 340 appears -to have been merely acclaimed by the people who chanced at the time to be -in front of the senate-house; Livy viii. 6. 4-8. - -[1698] Livy v. 49. 2 (390). - -[1699] Livy iv. 58. 1 f.; v. 28. 5 (394); 50. 3 (390); vi. 10. 9 (382); -vii. 19. 4 (353); 22. 5 (351); 38. 1 (343); viii. 2. 1 (341); 19. 1-3 -(330); x. 11. 13 with 12. 1, 13 (298); 45. 4 (293); p. 302. - -[1700] Livy viii. 11 f., 14 (340, 338). It punished for revolt; ibid. -viii. 20. 7 (329). - -[1701] Livy vi. 26. 8; viii. 11. 16; p. 304. - -[1702] P. 273. - -[1703] Livy v. 19. 6 (396); cf. iv. 27. 1 (431). - -[1704] Livy v. 50 (390). - -[1705] Cf. Livy vii. 28. 5 f. (345). - -[1706] Livy iv. 59. 11 (406); p. 367. The statement of Diodorus, xiv. 16. -5, that the Romans voted to pay for military service does not necessarily -point to an act of the assembly; and the opposition of the tribunes to -the measure indicates that at least in Livy’s opinion it was an act of -the senate alone. - -[1707] Cf. the tributum for the new wall; Livy vi. 32. 1. - -[1708] Cf. Livy v. 30. 8 (393); p. 295, 310. - -[1709] Livy iv. 11; 47. 6; v. 24. 4; 30. 8; ix. 28. 8 (313); Vell. i. 14. -1; p. 310. - -[1710] Livy vi. 4. 5 (389). - -[1711] Livy v. 13. 5 (399). - -[1712] Livy iv. 30. 9 (428). - -[1713] Livy x. 1. 3 (303). - -[1714] Livy iv. 46. 10; 56. 8; vi. 11. 10; vii. 6. 12; 21. 9; vii. 3. 4; -viii. 17. 3; 29. 9 (325). - -[1715] Livy v. 9. 6 (402). - -[1716] Livy v. 9; 17. 2 f. (397); 31 f. (392, 391); viii. 3. 4 (341). - -[1717] Livy viii. 16. 11; 20. 7; 39. 15 (322). - -[1718] P. 277, n. 4. - -[1719] Livy vi. 19. 3 (384). - -[1720] Livy iii. 54. 5, 9, 11 (449). - -[1721] Livy iii. 65. 1 (448). That the coöptation of tribunes was once -legal is proved by a formula quoted by Livy iii. 61. 10. That the coöpted -tribunes were patrician is now generally disbelieved (cf. Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 195) because it does not accord with the conventional -view of a constitution kept in perfect working order from the beginning -to the end of Roman history. The irregular is possible and is less likely -to be invented. - -[1722] Livy iii. 65. 1-4; Diod. xii. 25. 3. Diodorus, who mentions -the penalty, connects the law closely in time, as does Livy, with the -reëstablishment of the constitution. - -[1723] V. 10. 11; 11. 1-3. - -[1724] Livy iv. 16. 3 (439). - -[1725] Continuous fasti tribunicii, however, did not exist. - -[1726] Thereafter when a vacancy occurred during the year, it was filled -by election; Appian, _B. C._ i. 13. 54; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 13. - -[1727] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22; Cic. _Fam._ vii. 30. 1; cf. Gell. xiii. 15. 4. - -[1728] Livy ix. 46. 1 f.; xxv. 2. 7; Varro, _R. R._ iii. 17. 1; Cic. -_Planc._ 20. 49; Piso, in Gell. vii. 9. 2. - -[1729] Sall. _Iug._ 63. - -[1730] Gell. xiii. 15. 4. - -[1731] P. 280. - -[1732] P. 241, 268. - -[1733] Cf. Cic. _Leg._ iii. 19. 45; Livy xxvi. 3. This subject is -admirably presented by Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 578-80. - -[1734] Cic. _Inv._ i. 38. 68. - -[1735] Cf. Livy v. 11. 4; 12. 2; 29. 6 f.; viii. 33. 17; xxvi. 3. 6. - -[1736] Livy xxvi. 3. 6-9; p. 307 f., 322 above. - -[1737] P. 234, 269 above; Cic. _Rep._ ii. 35. 60; Livy iv. 30. 3. The -equivalents are mentioned in connection with the lex Aternia Tarpeia; -Gell. xi. 1. 2; Fest. 202. 11; 237. 13; ep. 144; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. -622; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 172, 639. The law is no proof of the -existence of coins at that time. - -[1738] Cato, _Orig._ v. 5; Fest. 246 (lex Silia); Cic. _Rep._ 35. 60; -Livy iv. 30. 3; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 409; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -ii. 580. - -[1739] Livy viii. 37. 8 ff. A tribune of the plebs brought before the -tribes certain Tusculans, accused of having incited neighboring states -against Rome, 323. They were acquitted; p. 310. - -[1740] Livy iv. 11. 3-7. This is one of the few prosecutions of inferior -officials for maladministration; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 323, n. 2. -The event is too early to be certain. - -[1741] Livy iv. 40. 4; 41. 10 f.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 581. - -[1742] Livy v. 11. 4 ff.; 12. 1. - -[1743] P. 244 f. - -[1744] Livy vi. 1. 6. - -[1745] Livy vii. 3-5. - -[1746] _Off._ ii. 31. 112. - -[1747] Livy x. 37. 7; cf. xxix. 19. 6 f.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -320, n. 3. - -[1748] Livy x. 46. 16. - -[1749] Livy, ep. xi; cf. p. 306 below. - -[1750] Livy, ep. xi; Dion. Hal. xvii. 4 f.; Dio Cass. Frag. 36. 32. -Dionysius states the fine at 50,000 denarii. - -[1751] Livy v. 29. 6 f. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 823; ii. 581, looks -with suspicion on this case because it is the only one of the kind in -the period. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 323, n. 1, considers it an -anticipation of the condemnation of the tribunes in 84 for having taken -the side of Sulla. - -[1752] Livy iv. 21. 3 f. - -[1753] Livy vi. 38. 9; Plut. _Cam._ 39. - -[1754] P. 247, 248, n. 1. - -[1755] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 282, 475. In time the aediles -themselves received viatores through a lex Papiria of unknown date; -_CIL._ vi. 1933. - -[1756] Dion. Hal. vii. 35. 4; Plut. _Cor._ 18. For this reason -tribunician sentences continued to the end to be executed by a tribune or -an aedile; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 146. - -[1757] Dion. Hal. vi. 90. 2; cf. 95. 4; Zon. vii. 15. 10. - -[1758] Livy iii. 31. 4-6; Dion. Hal. x. 48; Pliny, _N. H._ vii. 29. 201. - -[1759] P. 264, 272. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 475, n. 3, however, -who looks upon it as a legally credible tradition, remarks that the -competence of the aediles, at that time coextensive with that of the -tribunes, must afterward have been limited by the Twelve Tables. - -[1760] As in 204, when an aedile was sent to arrest Scipio, should -circumstances favor his apprehension: Livy xxix. 20. 11; xxxviii. 52. 7. -More frequently they executed the sentence; p. 290, n. 5. - -[1761] Livy vii. 16. 9; Dion. Hal. xiv. 12 (22); Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 3. -17; Plut. _Cam._ 39; Val. Max. viii. 6. 3. - -[1762] Livy x. 13. 14; cf. Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 341. - -[1763] Livy x. 23. 13. We are not informed whether these cases came -before the assembly. - -[1764] Livy x. 47. 4. - -[1765] Livy vii. 28. 9. The rank of the prosecutor cannot be more -definitely stated. - -[1766] Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. (6.) 19. The accuser, Cn. Flavius, was -curule aedile; Livy ix. 46. 1. - -[1767] Livy x. 23. 11 f. The prosecutors were curule aediles. - -[1768] Livy viii. 22. 3; Val. Max. viii. 1. 7. Fourteen of the -twenty-nine tribes then existing had declared against him, when the -prosecuting aedile by an unintentional expression turned the vote in -his favor. This result is to be explained on the supposition that the -proceedings were at that point interrupted, and the whole vote taken -again; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 486. - -[1769] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 493, n. 3; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. -584. From the nature of the process we infer that it was aedilician; and -as the accuser was a patrician, his aedileship must have been curule. - -[1770] P. 233, 269, 287. - -[1771] P. 264. - -[1772] P. 103. - -[1773] P. 102, n. 1. - -[1774] P. 273 ff. - -[1775] Livy iii. 54. 14. - -[1776] Ibid. § 15. - -[1777] Livy iii. 55. 14. - -[1778] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 279, n. 1, 302. - -[1779] We have no means of testing the historical truth of these three -alleged plebiscites. The first Icilian was of transient character, and -the first Duillian was unnecessary, though not especially suspicious on -that account. The second Duillian represents constitutional principles -known to have been early established. They are doubted by Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 149 f. - -[1780] XII. 25. 2. He does not state that this arrangement was embodied -in a law, although otherwise it could not have been effective. - -[1781] Pais, _Stor. di Rom._ I. i. 558 f. The fact that Fabius Pictor -(in Gell. v. 4. 3) places the election of the first plebeian consul in -the twenty-second year after the Gallic conflagration indicates (1) -that Diodorus did not depend upon Fabius, (2) that Livy’s view of this -constitutional change is essentially that of Fabius; cf. Pais, ibid. I. -ii. 136, n. 2. - -[1782] Livy iii. 63. 8-11; Dion. Hal. xi. 50. 1; _Act. Triumph. Capit._, -in _CIL._ i². p. 44; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 194. - -[1783] Livy vii. 17. 9; _Act. Triumph. Capit._, in _CIL._ i². p. 44. In -this case it is possible that the senate for a time resisted, to yield -finally under pressure. - -[1784] Cf. Polyb. vi. 15. 8; Dio Cass. Frag. 74. 2; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -ii. 623. - -[1785] Postumius, consul in 294, when refused a triumph by the senate, -refrained from bringing the case before the people because he foresaw -tribunician resistance, but declared his intention to triumph by right -of his consular imperium; Livy x. 37. 6-12; Dion. Hal. xvii, xviii. 5. -3 (18); _Act. Triumph. Capit._ in _CIL._ i². p. 45. Q. Minucius, consul -in 197, when refused by the senate, asserted that he would triumph on -the Alban Mount, also by right of his consular imperium and after the -example of many illustrious men; Livy xxxiii. 23. 3; _CIL._ i². p. 48; -cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ i. 214 f.; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 134. - -[1786] P. 273, 284. - -[1787] Cf. Livy iv. 20. 1; vi. 42. 8. - -[1788] P. 285; cf. p. 301. - -[1789] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 37. 63; Livy iv. 1-6; Flor. i. 17. 25. The -commonly accepted theory that this decemviral enactment merely confirmed -a custom which had existed from the beginning of Rome is supported -neither by the sources nor by a comparison of early usage in other states. - -[1790] P. 234. - -[1791] P. 286. - -[1792] Livy iii. 71 f.; Dion. Hal. xi. 52. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. -198, n. 4, finds difficulties in the details; but we are not warranted -in denying the truth of the event on the ground of irregularity in the -proceedings, even while we admit that much is uncertain in the history of -the period to which the act is assigned. - -[1793] P. 230, 283. - -[1794] The institution of new offices and the increase in number within -existing magisterial colleges by act of the centuries (cf. p. 234) is -merely the application of a long-recognized popular right. - -[1795] Livy iv. 12. 8. This alleged act of the tribes is suspicious -because of its isolation; for in this period offices were instituted -by the centuries. It is either exceptional or an anticipation of later -usage; cf. p. 306. - -[1796] Livy iv. 25. 13 f. The same author, vii. 15. 12 f., states that -the first lex de ambitu was enacted in 358; p. 296. - -[1797] Livy iv. 51. 2 f.; Flor. i. 17. 2 (22); Zon. vii. 20. 5. The act, -like that of 440, is either exceptional or an anticipation of later -usage; cf. p. 309. - -[1798] Livy vi. 20. 13. The context indicates that in Livy’s opinion it -was a resolution of the plebs. Dio Cass. Frag. 25. - -Whether the order of the people, 437, directing the dictator at public -expense to present a golden crown of a pound weight to Jupiter was -dictatorial or tribunician cannot be determined; Livy iv. 20. 4. - -[1799] Cf. iv. 48. 1; 53. 6; v. 12. 3; vi. 5. 2; 6. 1. - -[1800] Livy iv. 36. 2 (424). - -[1801] Livy iv. 59. 11; Diod. xiv. 16. 5; Zon. vii. 20. 6; Flor. i. 6 -(12). 8; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 540, 668 f.; ii. 627; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 212 f.; p. 284 above. - -[1802] Livy vi. 42. 2; cf. Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 461. - -[1803] The word utique, “at least,” inserted in this article by Livy, vi. -35. 5, belongs to the Genucian law of 342; p. 299. - -[1804] Livy vi. 35. 4 f.; 42. 9; xxxiv. 4. 9. - -[1805] In his account of the Licinian-Sextian legislation he makes -no mention of this last regulation, but assumes its existence for -the following period; cf. p. 291 f., on aedilician prosecutions for -violations of this article. - -Other sources for the second Licinian-Sextian plebiscite are Varro, _R. -R._ i. 2. 9; Plut. _Cam._ 39; _Ti. Gracch._ 8; Appian, _B. C._ i. 8. 33; -Vell. ii. 6. 3; Val. Max. viii. 6. 3; (Aurel. Vict.), _Vir. Ill._ 20. - -The statute, especially the agrarian portion, is discussed by Meyer, in -_Rhein. Mus._ xxxvii (1882). 610-27; Niese, in _Hermes_, xxiii (1888). -410-23; _Röm. Gesch._ 55, 148; Soltau, in _Hermes_, xxx (1895). 624-9; -Pais, _Stor. di Rom._ I. ii. 72 ff., 134 ff. Niese refuses to believe -that this agrarian legislation came so early, and prefers a date shortly -after the close of the war with Hannibal. Soltau, controverting Niese’s -view, insists that the chief regulation mentioned by Livy—the limitation -of occupation to five hundred iugera—belongs to Licinius and Sextius, -and that the article was afterward renewed, with the addition of the -other provisions stated by Appian, probably about the time of the -Hortensian legislation. Against the earlier date is especially urged the -circumstance that the large number of iugera allowed to the individual is -incongruous with the narrow limits of the Roman territory at that time. -The provision for the relief of debtors, too, has the appearance of an -anticipation of a plebiscite on the same subject passed in 447; p. 298 -below; cf. Matzat, _Röm. Chron._ ii. 113, n. 9; 128, n. 6. - -[1806] Livy vii. 15. 12 f.; Isler, _Ueber das poetelische Gesetz -de ambitu_, in _Rhein. Mus._ xxviii (1873). 473-7; Lange, _Kleine -Schriften_, ii. 195-213; _Röm. Alt._ i. 716; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ -i. 241 f.; Ihm, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 1801; cf. p. 295 -above. - -[1807] P. 202. - -[1808] P. 235, 314. - -[1809] Livy vii. 16. 7 f.; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 246-8; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 191; ii. 26, 621. - -[1810] Livy vii. 16. 8. - -[1811] Livy vii. 16. 1. Two laws of 356 have a certain degree of -financial interest: the dictatorial law which made provision for an -impending war (Livy vii. 17. 7); and the alleged resolution of the people -(p. 293) to grant the same dictator the privilege of a triumph. - -[1812] Tac. _Ann._ vi. 16; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 183, n. 3. - -[1813] Livy vii. 21, 5; cf. Herzog. _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 245. That -the bank commission owed its existence to a law is an inference -from the circumstances. The form of assembly is unknown. With this -Valerian-Marcian law, 352, Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 621 f., conjecturally -identifies the lex Marcia against usurers; Gaius iv. 23. In his opinion -also (ibid. ii. 622; cf. Rudorff, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 51) the lex -Furia de sponsu mentioned by Gaius, iii. 121; iv. 22, “discharging the -sponsor and fide-promissor of liability in two years and limiting the -liability of each to a proportionate part” (Poste’s interpretation) -belongs to L. Furius, dictator in 345 (Livy vii. 28. 2); whereas others -assign it to the year 95 (cf. Poste, _Gai. Inst._ 359) and others to a -time subsequent to Cicero (cf. Roby, _Rom. Priv. Law_, ii. 30). It was -later than the lex Appuleia de sponsu, which is referred to by Gaius -iii. 122, and which must have been enacted after the establishment -of the provincial system. It is to be attributed, accordingly, to -the famous tribune of 103, 100 (Poste, ibid. 359) rather than to the -like-named tribune of 390 (Livy v. 32. 8; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 621). -These considerations render the later dating of the lex Furia the more -probable. The lex Publilia de sponsu, the date of which is also unknown, -granted the surety (sponsor) an action against the principal debtor in -case the latter failed to reimburse him within six months; Gaius iii. -127; iv. 22, cf. 171. - -[1814] Livy vii. 27. 3; Tac. _Ann._ vi. 16. The author is not named. - -[1815] P. 238. - -[1816] Livy vii. 42. 1-3. Appian, _B. C._ i. 54, testifies to the -existence of an ancient law forbidding interest; cf. Tac. _Ann._ vi. 16. - -[1817] Pais, _Stor. di Rom._ I. ii. 270, with his usual acumen has -argued against the existence of the Genucian as well as of the Publilian -statute; but the reasons urged by this eminent scholar do not seem to me -to be convincing. The period in which they fall is certainly within the -reach of tradition. The abolition of debts through the Valerian law was -in keeping with the populistic spirit of the masses in that age, as was -the prohibition of interest. - -[1818] Pais, _Stor. di Rom._ I. ii. 278, n. 4: “Thus C. Junius Bubulcus -and Aemilius Barbula, consuls in 317, reappear in 311 B.C.; L. Papirius -Cursor is consul in 320, 319, 315, 313; P. Decius is consul in 312 and -in 308,” etc.; cf. further Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 519, n. 5. It is -true that on one occasion Livy, x. 13. 8 f. (298), speaks of the law and -of a proposal of the tribunes to obtain a dispensation for the candidate -Fabius by a vote of the people, oblivious of the violation of the law by -this same Fabius as well as by many others. - -[1819] Livy xxiii. 31. 13 f.; Plut. _Marc._ 12 (215). On that occasion -when the people were told that the election of two plebeians as -colleagues in the consulship was displeasing to the gods, they proceeded -to choose a patrician in place of the second plebeian; cf. Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 253, n. 2. The first definitive election of two plebeians -was in 172; _Fast. Cos. Capit._, in _CIL._ i². p. 25: “Ambo primi de -plebe.” - -[1820] Cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 253. - -[1821] Livy viii. 12. 14-16. - -[1822] P. 235. - -[1823] P. 237. - -[1824] P. 307. - -[1825] P. 274, 313. - -[1826] The most detailed study of this subject, including a critique -of the principal modern views, is made by Soltau, _Gültigkeit der -Plebiscite_, in _Berl. Stud._ ii (1885). 1-176. His criticism is more -satisfactory than his construction. - -[1827] This point is established by the circumstances (1) that no writer -of the period refers to the principle mentioned; (2) that Cicero regards -the thirty-five tribes under tribunician presidency as the universus -populus Romanus—a definition which is incompatible with the legal -exclusion of the patricians from that form of assembly (p. 129 f.); (3) -that on one occasion, 209, after the Hortensian legislation Livy (xxvii. -21. 1-4) represents the voting assembly under tribunician presidency as -composed not only of plebs but of all ranks (concursu plebisque et omnium -ordinum), and that the patricians were evidently free to take part in the -debates of the concilium; cf. Livy xliii. 16. 8; (4) Caesar, _B. C._ iii. -1, seems to represent the praetors and tribunes as presiding together -over the same comitia (“praetoribus tribunisque plebis rogationes ad -populum ferentibus”)—which would prove that no difference of composition -existed between the pretorian and the tribunician assemblies of tribes. - -[1828] P. 230. - -[1829] Livy ix. 5. 2. - -[1830] _Inv._ ii. 30. 92. - -[1831] Livy ix. 8. 14: the tribunes protested against breaking it. - -[1832] Livy ix. 10. 10: the circumstance that he assaulted the Roman -fetialis is sufficient evidence of his view. - -[1833] IX. 9. 4. Gellius, xvii. 21. 36, less credibly states that the -treaty was repudiated by order of the people. - -[1834] Livy ix. 5-11; Cic. _Off._ iii. 30. 109; _Inv._ ii. 30. 92; Zon. -vii. 26. 15. - -[1835] Livy ix. 9. 4. - -[1836] Livy viii. 36. 11 f. (ambassadors of the Samnites, applying for -peace to the dictator, are ordered by him to address the senate, which -replies that it will accept the arrangements of the magistrate, 324); ix. -20. 8 (an unequal alliance with Apulia negotiated by the consul, 317); -ix. 43. 6 f. (the Hernicans, beaten in war, apply to the senate, and are -referred to the consuls, who accept their submission, 307); ix. 45. 1-3 -(Samnite ambassadors ask peace of the senate, which replies that the -consul will pass through their country and will report to the senate on -the conditions which he finds there, 304); x. 3. 5 (the dictator, fining -the Marsians of a part of their territory, grants them a renewal of the -treaty, 302). In none of these instances is mention made of the people; -and most of them preclude a popular vote. - -[1837] Sall. _Iug._ 39. - -[1838] Cf. Livy ix. 20. 2 f. (318), in which a proposal of peace was -rejected by the people. In the treaty with the Lucanians, 298, Livy, x. -11. 13; 12. 1, mentions the senate only; Dionysius, xvii, xviii (xvi. -12). 1. 3, speaks of both senate and assembly. - -[1839] Cf. Livy ix. 20. 2 f. - -[1840] Polyb. vi. 14. 10 f.; 15. 9. - -[1841] P. 181. - -[1842] _Röm. Alt._ i. 514; ii. 638; p. 283 above. - -[1843] Livy viii. 13. 10 ff.; ch. 14. - -[1844] The gift of citizenship, adprobantibus cunctis, to L. Mamilius, -dictator of Tusculum, 458, does not necessarily imply a public vote; Livy -iii. 29. 6. Even if this were the opinion of Livy, it need be no more -than an anticipation of later usage. In 381 the Tusculans received the -citizenship, how we are not informed; Livy vi. 26. 8; Dio Cass. Frag. -28. 2. In the account of the settlement of Latium and Campania in 340, -involving the grant of citizenship to the Capuan equites, no mention -is made of either senate or people; Livy viii. 11. 13-16. The sources -are likewise silent as to a popular vote in the grant of citizenship -sine suffragio to the Caerites; Livy vii. 20. 8; Dio Cass. Frag. 33 -(Boissevain i. p. 138); Strabo v. 2. 3, p. 220; Gell. xvi. 13. 7. From -Livy and Dio Cassius it may be reasonably inferred that the event took -place after 353, though Boissevain’s date, 273, seems to be too late. -Probably they were admitted between 353 and 332—before the hundred years’ -peace had far advanced. - -[1845] Livy viii. 17. 12. - -[1846] _Röm. Alt._ ii. 638. - -[1847] I. 14. 4. - -[1848] Livy viii. 21. 10. Nothing is said as to the chairmanship of the -assembly. The event is referred to by Dio Cass. Frag. 35. 11. - -[1849] Livy ix. 43. 24. - -[1850] P. 352. - -[1851] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 610 f., 638. - -[1852] P. 234. The only exception is the creation of a prefecture of the -market by a plebiscite in 440; p. 295. - -[1853] Livy viii. 23. 11 f. - -[1854] Livy x. 22. 9. - -[1855] Livy ix. 42. 2. - -[1856] Livy x. 16. 1. - -[1857] Dion. Hal. xvii, xviii (xvi. 16). 4. 4. - -[1858] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 640. - -[1859] Livy x. 24. 18; cf. Willems, _Sén. Rom._ ii. 531. For other -versions of the event, see Livy x. 26. 5 f. - -[1860] Livy, ep. xi; p. 359 above. Probability favors the tribunician -assembly. - -[1861] Livy ix. 20. 5. - -[1862] Fest. 233. 14. - -[1863] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 609. - -[1864] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 73, 632. Cuq, in Daremberg et Saglio, -_Dict._ iii. 1144, assumes that it was proposed by L. Furius, praetor in -that year. - -[1865] Livy ix. 30. 3. - -[1866] P. 234. - -[1867] Livy ix. 30. 3 f. In ix. 38. 2 he refers to a naval commander -whom the senate placed in charge of the coast, and whom Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ ii. 580, n. 1, supposes to have been a duovir. That a duovir -commanded a fleet in 282 is proved by Livy, ep. xii; Dio Cass. Frag. 39. -4. Probably the triumviri capitales, 289, were created by a similar act -of the tribes; Livy, ep. xi; p. 312. - -[1868] P. 309. - -[1869] P. 311. - -[1870] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 534, 636. - -[1871] Fest. 246. 19. - -[1872] The brief statement of Festus, ibid., is here interpreted in the -light of Livy xxiii. 23. 6. In general on the Ovinian plebiscite, see -Lange, _Kleine Schriften_, ii. 393-446; Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. 153-173, -668-89; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 259 ff.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ -ii. 418; iii. 873, 879. - -[1873] Cf. Livy iv. 5. 2; p. 287 above. - -[1874] Cf. Gell. x. 20. 4, 9 f. - -[1875] Cf. Livy viii. 16. 4; ix. 7. 15; 28. 2; Diod. xix. 66. 1; p. 299, -n. 3. - -[1876] Livy x. 13. 8 f. - -[1877] _Röm. Alt._ ii. 641. - -[1878] Livy x. 22. 9. - -[1879] It is the only instance mentioned for this early time. - -[1880] Livy x. 13. 10: “Iam regi leges, non regere”; cf. Appian, _Lib._ -112; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 641. - -[1881] P. 295 f. - -[1882] P. 293, 295, n. 6. - -[1883] _Div._ i. 26. 55; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 11. 13 (on the reading, see -Mommsen, in _Hermes_ iv (1870). 7; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 634. - -[1884] Livy viii. 13. 1. - -[1885] Macrob. _Sat._ i. 11. 5; Cuq, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ iii. -11. 54. On these games, see Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ iii. 497; Wissowa, -_Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 111 f., 385 f. - -[1886] Livy ii. 36; Dion. Hal. vii. 68; Plut. _Cor._ 24; Val. Max. i. 7. -4; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 634. - -[1887] Livy ix. 46. 7. - -[1888] _Röm. Alt._ i. 828; ii. 634. - -[1889] Cic. _Dom._ 49. 127 f.; _Att._ iv. 2. 3. - -[1890] Livy x. 6 f. He has evidently made a mistake in supposing the -number of pontiffs to have been increased to only eight (chs. 6. 6; 8. 3; -9. 2; cf. Bardt, _Priester der vier grossen Collegien_, 32 f.; Wissowa, -_Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 432, n. 4.) - -[1891] P. 240, 241, 269, 280. - -[1892] P. 241 f. - -[1893] P. 295. - -[1894] Livy viii. 18. 3 ff.; Val. Max. ii. 5. 3; Oros. iii. 10; August. -_Civ. Dei_, iii. 17. p. 124 Domb. The lex de veneficio mentioned by Livy, -ep. viii, may refer to the act which established this court; but it would -not be legitimate to argue from this expression a popular vote. The -epitomator undoubtedly drew all his information from the text. - -[1895] Livy ix. 26. 6 ff.; cf. however, Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 637. - -[1896] Livy viii. 37. 8; Val. Max. ix. 10. 1; Pliny, _N. H._ vii. 42. 43. -136; p. 288, n. 1. - -[1897] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 637. - -[1898] Livy ix. 16. 10; xxvi. 33. 10. - -[1899] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 34. 59; Livy viii. 28; Varro, _L. L._ vii. 105; -Dion. Hal. xvi. 5 (9); Suidas, s. v. Γάιος Λαιτώριος; cf. Kleineidam, _in -Festg. f. F. Dahn_, ii. 1-30. - -[1900] Varro, ibid., assigns the law to a dictator, C. Popillius, which -may be a mistake for C. Poetelius, dictator in 313; Livy ix. 28. 2. - -[1901] Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 74. - -[1902] P. 238. - -[1903] P. 284. - -[1904] Livy, iv. 11. 3-7, represents the tribunes of 442 as attempting -to call to account the colonial commissioners of that year (cf. p. 288). -In 418 they planned to offer a bill for colonizing Labici (Livy iv. 47. -6). In 415 a bill for colonizing Bolae, introduced by a tribune of the -plebs, was vetoed by a colleague; Livy iv. 49. 6; cf. Diod. xiii. 42. 6. -Many similar instances are given for the time immediately following; cf. -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 626 f. with citations. Although we may question -the truth of these individual cases, we have no ground for doubting that -such agitation continued long before the tribunes succeeded in carrying a -colonial law. - -[1905] Livy x. 21. 9; p. 307. - -[1906] Livy viii. 36. 9 f.; ix. 42. 5. - -[1907] Cf. Livy x. 6. 3; 21. 9; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 282 f. - -[1908] Cf. Livy x. 17. 10; 20. 16; 25. 3; 30. 10: “Praemia illa -tempestate militiae haudquaquam spernenda”; 31. 4; 44. 1; 45. 14; 46. 15. - -[1909] Livy x. 13. 14; 23. 13; 47. 4. - -[1910] Livy x. 46. 5 f. - -[1911] Livy x. 31. 8; 47. 6; ep. xi; Zon. viii. 1. 10; Val. Max. i. 8. 2. - -[1912] Livy x. 23. 11 f. - -[1913] P. 307, n. 1, 332. - -[1914] P. 279. - -[1915] Boissevain’s reading. - -[1916] The chief source is a mutilated fragment of Dio Cassius viii. 37. -2-4, which is paraphrased in the text above. The account given by Zonaras -viii. 2 is a brief epitome of the fragment, adding the circumstance -of the foreign war. The restoration of the fragment is due chiefly to -Niebuhr, _Rhein. Mus._ ii (1828). 588 ff. See also the edition of Dio -Cassius by Boissevain, i. 110 f. and by Melber, i. 108 f. The secession -to the Janiculum is mentioned by Livy, ep. xi, and by Pliny, _N. H._ xvi. -10. 37. - -[1917] Pliny, _N. H._ xvi. 10. 37: “Q. Hortensius dictator, cum -plebes secessisset in Ianiculum, legem in aesculeto tulit, ut quod ea -iussisset omnes quirites teneret”; Gaius i. 3: “Unde olim patricii -dicebant plebiscitis se non teneri, quia sine auctoritate eorum -facta essent; sed postea lex Hortensia lata est, qua cautum est ut -plebiscita universum populum tenerent; itaque eo modo legibus exaequata -sunt”; Laelius, in Gell. xv. 27. 4: “Ita ne leges quidem proprie, sed -plebisscita appellantur, quae tribunis plebis ferentibus accepta sunt, -quibus rogationibus ante patricii non tenebantur, donec Q. Hortensius -dictator legem tulit, ut eo iure, quod plebs statuisset, omnes quirites -tenerentur”; Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 8: “Quia multae discordiae -nascebantur de his plebis scitis, pro legibus placuit et ea observari -lege Hortensia: et ita factum est, ut inter plebis scita et legem species -constituendi interesset, potestas eadem esset.” - -[1918] P. 235, 372. - -[1919] This fact is clearly expressed by Gaius; see p. 313, n. 2 above. - -[1920] Before acquiring this right they had been accustomed to sit -on their bench at the door of the curia, in order to watch the -proceedings within. Though as yet without an unrestricted legal right of -intercession, they had attempted to force their veto upon the senate; -Val. Max. ii. 2. 7; Zon. vii. 15. 8; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 316 -f. The wording of the law of 304 regarding the dedication of a temple -or altar indicates that the tribunes had not yet acquired the right to -convoke the senate and bring measures formally before it; Mommsen, ibid. -p. x, n. 2. - -[1921] P. 270. - -[1922] Granius Licinianus, in Macrob. _Sat._ i. 16. 30: “Lege Hortensia -effectum, ut fastae essent (nundinae), uti rustici, qui nundiniandi -causa in urbem veniebant, lites componerent. Nefasto enim die praetori -fari non licebat”; § 29: “Iulius Caesar sexto decimo auspiciorum libro -negat nundinis contionem advocari posse, id est cum populo agi: ideoque -nundinis Romanorum haberi comitia non posse”; cf. p. 471 below. - -[1923] P. 139. - -[1924] P. 471 below; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 644; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 287 f.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 372 f. - -[1925] P. 243, 287 f. - -[1926] P. 247, 289. - -[1927] P. 309. - -[1928] P. 290. - -[1929] p. 248 ff. - -[1930] P. 330 ff. - -[1931] P. 248. - -[1932] (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 50. 1. - -[1933] Livy xxii. 35. 3; 40. 3; 49. 11; xxvii. 34. 3 f.; xxix. 37. 13 f. - -[1934] P. 62. - -[1935] Livy xxiv. 18. 3, 6. - -[1936] Livy xxii. 53. 4 f. - -[1937] Livy xxiv. 43. 1-3; cf. Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -ii. 2093. - -[1938] A similar attempt in 204 by Cn. Baebius, tribune of the plebs, -to prosecute the censors C. Claudius and M. Livius while in office was -quashed by the senate; Livy xxix. 37; Val. Max. vii. 2. 6; cf. Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 322, n. 4. - -[1939] P. 249. The state agreed to insure from the enemy and from storms -cargoes shipped for the use of the army; Livy xxiii. 49. 1-3; xxv. 3. 10. -Postumius took advantage of this insurance to send out old, unseaworthy -ships with cargoes of little value, and after wrecking them, to report -many times the real amount of the loss; ibid. § 10 f. The senate, -fearing to give offence to the powerful order of publicans, failed to -act when informed by the praetor; § 12. Thereupon the tribunes brought -the accusation. For the trial, see ibid. § 13-9 and ch. 4; cf. Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 177, 588. The weight of the _as_ in which the fine was -estimated is not given by Livy xxv. 3. 13. - -For a similar transfer of the case against Cn. Fulvius, retired praetor, -from the tribes to the centuries, 211, see p. 249. - -[1940] Val. Max. viii. 1. damn. 5. Here, too, should be mentioned the -condemnation of a member of the same board in a similar action for -neglect to inspect the watchmen; Val. Max. ibid. § 6. - -[1941] Cato, _Orat._ i: “Dierum dictarum de consulatu suo.” - -[1942] Livy xxvii. 46. 1 f. - -[1943] Cato, _Orat._ xiii; Livy xxxviii. 57. 10; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. -Forsch._ ii. 459 ff. - -[1944] For the cognomen, see Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. -1475. - -[1945] Polyb. xxiii. 14; Gell. iv. 3-5, 7-12; Diod. xxix. 24 (from -Polyb.); Livy xxxviii. 54; Val. Max. iii. 7. 1 d; (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. -Ill._ 49. 16-9. - -[1946] Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ ii. 464 f. - -[1947] In the story of the trial given by Antias the two Petilii were the -prosecutors of Publius (Livy xxxviii. 50 f.). In ch. 54 f. Livy, again -following Antias, represents these tribunes as authors of a plebiscite -for the appointment of a special court to inquire concerning the money -received from King Antiochus, and states that L. Scipio was condemned -by this court. The story may not be without foundation; but if such a -plebiscite was adopted, it could not have had the desired result. - -[1948] This incident is considered doubtful by Bloch, in _Rev. d. étud. -anc._ viii. (1906). 109. - -[1949] According to Diod. xxix. 21, Scipio was threatened with the death -penalty; but the trial actually took the form described above in the text. - -[1950] Gell. vi. 19. 2. It was probably in connection with this trial -that Cato delivered his speech “Concerning the money of King Antiochus”; -Livy xxxviii. 54. 11; Plut. _Cat. Mai._ 15; Cato, _Orat._ xv. - -[1951] The edicts of these conflicting tribunes are given by Gell. -vi. 19. 5, 7; cf. Livy xxxviii. 56. 10; Cic. _Prov. Cons._ 8. 18. The -dissenting edict states that the fine was imposed nullo exemplo, yet it -was within the competence of the tribune; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -322, n. 2. - -[1952] The account here given closely follows Mommsen, _Röm. Forsch._ ii. -417-510. For other authorities on the trial, see p. 329. - -[1953] Plut. _Cat. Mai._ 19; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 590; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ ii. 322, n. 4. - -In 142 P. Scipio Aemilianus when censor had deprived Ti. Claudius Asellus -of his public horse. Afterward this man as tribune of the plebs brought -against him an accusation for malversation in his censorship; Gell. -iii. 4. 1; cf. ii. 20. 6. It was a finable case (ibid. vi. 11. 9), in -which was charged against him a lustrum malum infelixque; Lucilius, in -Gell. iv. 17. 1; cf. Cic. _Orat._ ii. 64. 258; 66. 268. The prosecution -probably failed; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 591; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -322, n. 4. - -[1954] Cf. Plautus, _Capt._ 476. - -[1955] Pliny, _N. H._ vii. 27. 100; Plut. _Cat. Mai._ 15. Cato’s -_Oration_ liv was delivered on one of these occasions. For his general -character and activity, see Livy xxxix. 40. - -[1956] Livy xliii. 7 f. With this trial was concerned the senatus -consultum of 170; cf. Bruns, _Font. iur._ p. 162. See further Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 287, 591; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 322, n. 3; cf. i. -699 f. - -[1957] P. 358. - -[1958] P. 231 f. - -[1959] Fest. 193. 21; 314. 33; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 591. - -[1960] Livy, ep. xlvii; cf. Lange, ibid. ii. 313, 591. - -[1961] P. 359. - -[1962] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 14; cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 131 f.; -Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 2270. - -[1963] Fest. 314. 30; cf. Livy, ep. lviii. - -[1964] P. 256 f. - -[1965] Vell. ii. 12. 3 assigns the tribunate of Domitius to 103, Ascon. -80 f. to 104. Probably the latter refers to his entrance upon the office, -December 10, 104; but see Bardt, _Priester der vier grossen Collegien_, 7 -f. - -[1966] P. 391. - -[1967] Ascon. 80; Cic. _Caecil._ 20. 67; _Verr._ ii. 47. 118 (in both -Ciceronian passages the motive of the accusation is said to have been -personal); cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 592; iii. 70; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ ii. 320, n. 3. - -[1968] Ascon. 1; Cic. _Deiot._ 11. 31; Val. Max. vi. 5. 5; Dio Cass. -Frag. 92. A personal motive is suggested for this trial also by the -sources. - -[1969] Cf. Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ v. 1324-7. - -[1970] Dio Cass. Frag. 95. 3; App. _B. C._ i. 33. 148; Schol. Bob. 230; -Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 9. 24; _Flacc._ 32. 77; Val. Max. viii. 1. damn. -2; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 592; iii. 86; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -323, n. 1; Mühl, _App. Sat._ 94 ff., 105 f.; Rohden, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 259. - -[1971] P. 257, n. 5 (4). Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 352, holds the unusual -opinion that he was condemned by a quaestio. - -To the time shortly preceding the dictatorship of Sulla belong certain -threats of tribunician prosecution which may be mentioned here. In 87 a -day was set for the trial of L. Cornelius Sulla himself by the tribune -M. Vergilius. The accused, taking no notice of the prosecution, departed -for the East; Cic. _Brut._ 48. 179; Plut. _Sull._ 10; cf. Fröhlich, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1537. In the same year Appius Claudius -Pulcher, summoned to trial by a tribune of the plebs, retired into exile, -whereupon his propretorian imperium was abrogated; Cic. _Dom._ 31. 83; -Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 2489; Greenidge, _Leg. -Proced._ 352. In 84 Cn. Papirius Carbo, consul, was threatened with a -prosecution, or more strictly with an abrogation of his office, if he -should fail to return to Rome to hold the election of a colleague; App. -_B. C._ i. 78. 358 f. - -[1972] P. 414. - -[1973] Plut. _Lucull._ 37; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 221; Greenidge, _Leg. -Proced._ 353. - -[1974] Suet. _Caes._ 23; cf. p. 377 below. - -[1975] Dio Cass. xliv. 10. - -[1976] Whether the case against Rabirius in 63, begun as perduellio, was -transformed into a finable action is uncertain; p. 258. The attack of -Clodius on Cicero in 58 took the form, not of a judicial case, but of an -interdict through a plebiscite; p. 446. - -[1977] P. 291. - -[1978] Fest. 238. 28; Varro, _L. L._ v. 158; Ovid, _Fast._ v. 283 ff.; -Tac. _Ann._ ii. 49. - -[1979] Livy xxxiii. 42. 10. - -[1980] Livy xxxv. 10. 11. - -[1981] Livy xxxv. 41. 9. - -[1982] Livy xxxviii. 35. 5 f. - -[1983] Piso, in Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 6. 41; Serv. _in Ecl._ viii. 99; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 493, n. 2. - -[1984] Val. Max. vi. 17; Plut. _Marcell._ 2; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 823; -ii. 585. - -[1985] Livy xxv. 2. 9; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 585. The statement of -Gellius v. 19. 10, that women had nothing to do with comitia (“Feminis -nulla comitiorum communio est”), does not refer to their lack of -suffrage, as Lange assumes, for Gellius is explaining why women could not -be arrogated. Originally they had no right to be present in contiones or -comitia; but in time the principle was modified to a limited extent; p. -147. It was not necessary, however, that the accused should be present in -person during the trial; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 496. - -[1986] Plut. _Q. R._ 6; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 126; ii. 585. - -[1987] Ateius Capito, in Gell. iv. 14. - -[1988] P. 248, 317. - -[1989] Ateius Capito, in Gell. x. 6; Livy, ep. xix; Val. Max. viii. -1. damn. 4; Suet. _Tib._ 2; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 492, n. 4. -This, says Mommsen, is the only aedilician prosecution for a crime -committed directly against the state in the period after the decemviral -legislation. With this case compare Cicero’s threat mentioned in the text -below. - -[1990] Suet. _Tib._ 2. - -[1991] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 586; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 496. - -[1992] Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 12. 33; Val. Max. ix. 11. 2; Lange, ibid. iii. -134; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 352. - -Valerius Maximus, vi. 1. 8, refers to a prosecution (probably aedilician) -of Cn. Sergius by Metellus Celer for stuprum, which seems to have -occurred about this time; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 493, n. 4. - -[1993] _Verr._ i. 12. 36; v. 58. 151; 67. 173; 69. 178; 71. 183. - -[1994] Cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 586. - -[1995] Cic. _Q. Fr._ ii. 3; _Sest._ 44. 95; _Vat._ 17. 40; Ascon. 49; Dio -Cass. xxxix. 18 ff.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 586; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ -ii. 493, n. 1; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 341, 353. - -On the aedilician jurisdiction in general, see especially Girard, _Org. -jud. d. Rom._ 243 ff. - -[1996] P. 269, 287. - -[1997] Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 439 f.; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ i. 195 f.; ii. 36. - -[1998] Livy xxxvii. 51. 4 f. - -[1999] Livy xl. 42. 9 f. - -[2000] Cic. _Phil._ xi. 8. 18. - -[2001] Fest. 343. 6; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 439, n. 8. For -the pontifical cases above mentioned, see also Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. -593-5. - -[2002] Cf. ch. v and p. 322. - -[2003] P. 313 f. - -[2004] P. 307. - -[2005] P. 107, 113. - -[2006] On the lack of a popular opposition to the nobility during this -period, see Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 26. On the antiquated character of -the assemblies, ibid. 39 f. - -[2007] For this era we have to depend upon the epitome of Livy and -occasional notices of other authors. The complete Livian narrative which -treats of the age, should it ever be discovered, would doubtless reveal -a considerable number of other comitial measures; but we could hardly -expect to find any of more importance than those which are actually known. - -[2008] P. 235, 300. - -[2009] Cic. _Brut._ 14. 55. Cicero informs us that the law under -consideration was passed after the tribunate of M’. Curius, which must -have preceded his consulship (290). The enactment should preferably -be placed after that of Hortensius, when the patres were no longer in -a position to oppose it; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 409; ii. 216, 654; -Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 281 f. Willems, _Sén. Rom._ ii. 69 ff., -attempts to assign it to 338. - -[2010] Livy x. 15. 7 ff.; Cic. ibid. - -[2011] Dion Hal. xix, 16. 5 (xviii. 19); xx. 13 (3). 3. - -[2012] In this year C. Marcius Rutilus, elected censor a second time -(_Fast. cos. capit._, in _CIL._ i². p. 22), persuaded the people to -adopt this law; Val. Max iv. i. 3; Plut. _Cor._ 1; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ I. -797; ii. 122, 654; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 317-20; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ i. 520. - -[2013] Livy, ep. xv; Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22. Lydus, _Mag._ i. 27, supposes -the newly created quaestors to have been naval officers, and wrongly -states their number at twelve. Whether the lex Titia de provinciis -quaestoriis (Cic. _Mur._ 8. 18; Schol. Bob. 316) belongs to this date or -to some later time cannot be determined; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -532, n. 3; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 654. See further on the act of 267, -Mommsen, ibid. ii. 527, 570 ff.; Lange, ibid. i. 891; ii. 124. - -[2014] Livy, ep. xix; Lyd. _Mag._ i. 38, 45. - -[2015] Val. Max ii. 8. 2; Zon. viii. 17. 1; 18. 10; Polyb. ii. 23. 5. - -[2016] P. 307, n. 1, 312. - -[2017] Fest. 347. 3; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 884, 910; ii. 654; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 594 f.; Girard, _Organ. jud. d. Röm._ i. 263 -ff. - -[2018] Pliny, _N. H._ vii. 43. 141; cf. Polyb. vi. 16. 3. - -[2019] We are informed by Theophilus, iv. 3. 15, that this statute was -a plebiscite adopted at a secession of the plebs, meaning most probably -that of 287. But his view may be merely an inference from Ulpian, in -_Dig._ ix. 2. 1 and Pomponius, ibid. i. 2. 2. 8; cf. Roby, _Röm. Priv. -Law_, ii. 186. The law is the subject of _Dig._ ix. 2 f.; Justinian, -_Inst._ iv. 3; Theoph. _Inst._ iv. 3. Voigt, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. -69, assigns it to 287. On p. 71 f. he adds other chapters which he has -gathered from various sources. See also Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ ii. -793 ff. Injury committed by dogs was made actionable by the lex Pesolania -of unknown though early date; Paul. _Sent._ i. 15. 1; cf. _Dig._ ix. 1. -1. 15. Voigt, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 39, n. 18, assigns it to the time -closely following the decemviral legislation; cf. Cuq, in Daremberg et -Saglio, _Dict._ iii. 1158. - -The lex Mamilia concerning arbitri, but not more definitely known (Cic. -_Leg._ i. 21. 55), may belong to the consul C. Mamilius, 239. - -[2020] Gaius iii. 210, Poste’s rendering; cf. also the following §§; -Justin. _Inst._ iv. 3. 15. - -[2021] Gaius iii. 215, 217; cf. Ulpian, in _Dig._ vii. 1. 13. 2; Cic. -_Brut._ 34. 131. - -[2022] As here used, “Flaminian” is not confined to the lifetime of -Flaminius, but designates the period during which lasted the impetus -given by him to the activity of the assemblies—approximately to the end -of the war with Hannibal. - -[2023] P. 213, 215. - -[2024] Cato, _Orig._ ii. 10 (in Varro, _R. R._ i. 2. 7): “Ager -Gallicus Romanus vocatur, qui viritim cis Ariminum datus est ultra -agrum Picentium”; Cic. _Brut._ 14. 57; _Acad. Pr._ ii. 5. 13. There is -reason for believing that about this time the Licinian-Sextian agrarian -enactments were revived and extended by a comitial statute; p. 296, 363. - -[2025] Cf. Cic. _Inv._ ii. 17. 52; Val. Max. v. 4. 5. - -[2026] Cic. _Acad. Pr._ ii. 5. 13; Val. Max. ibid. - -[2027] _Senec._ 4. 11. - -[2028] Cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 149. - -[2029] Kubitschek, _Röm. trib. or._ 26 f.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -176. - -[2030] II. 21. 8. On this law in general, see further Ihne, _Hist. of -Rome_, ii. 125-7; iv. 26 f.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 344 ff.; Long, -_Rom. Rep._ i. 157 f.; Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 15. - -[2031] Zon. viii. 20. 7; Plut. _Marcell._ 4; cf. Livy xxi. 63. 2. - -[2032] Livy xlv. 35. 4. - -[2033] Livy xxvi. 21.5. Next is mentioned the plebiscite of Ti. -Sempronius, 167, for granting the imperium to three promagistrates; Livy -xlv. 35-40; cf. xxxii. 7. 4; xxxviii. 47. 1; Plut. _Aemil._ 30 ff. The -triumphs of Pompey, 80 and 71, must have been made possible by leges -de eius imperio, though none are mentioned; Plut. _Pomp._ 14, 21; Cic. -_Imp. Pomp._ 21. 61 f. The lex Cornelia, 80, which permitted Pompey to -bring his army home from Africa, was essential to the triumph but was -not the law which granted the imperium; Sall. _Hist._ ii. 21; Gell. x. -20. 10; Plut. _Pomp._ 13; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 678. The law for the -triumph over Juba was passed for Caesar in 48 in advance of his victory; -Dio Cass. xliii. 14. 3. There must have been many other such plebiscites -not mentioned by the sources. Magistrates had no more right than -promagistrates without especial authorization to command troops within -the city limits, though the triumph on the Alban Mount continued to be -permissible without an act either of the senate or of the comitia; p. 293. - -[2034] P. 307. - -[2035] Polyb. vi. 16. 3. - -[2036] Livy xxi. 63. 3; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 353, 898; -Nitzsch, _Röm. Rep._ i. 156 f. - -[2037] Ascon. 94; Dio Cass. lv. 10. 5; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 162, 657; -Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 898. - -[2038] App. _B. C._ 1. 7. 29; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 8. - -[2039] Fest. 347. 14; Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 45; cf. Hill, _Greek -and Rom. Coins_, 48. According to Festus, Flaminius was author, whereas -Pliny states that the change was made under the dictatorship of Q. Fabius -Maximus. One seems to refer to the enactment of the law, the other to its -administration. - -[2040] P. 90. - -[2041] Zon. viii. 26. 14. - -[2042] Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 47. - -[2043] Böckh, _Metrologische Utersuchungen_, p. 472; Mommsen-Blacas, -_Hist. d. monn. Rom._ ii. 67, n. 1; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 496; ii. 167, -674; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 365; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 1511; Samwer-Bahrfeldt, _Röm. Münzw._ 190 f. - -[2044] Livy xxiii. 21. 6; cf. Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, ii. 289. - -[2045] Livy xxiv. 18. 12; xxvi. 36. 8. - -[2046] Livy xxxvii. 51. 10; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 173 f.; Herzog, -_Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 365. - -[2047] Cf. Livy xli. 27; Polyb. vi. 17. - -[2048] Livy xxv. 7. 5 f. - -[2049] Livy xxvii. 11. 8. - -[2050] Tab. x, in Schöll, _Duod. Tab. Rel._ 153 ff.; Marquardt, _Privatl. -d. Röm._ 345. - -[2051] _Mil._ 164; Hor. _Od._ iii. 24. 58; Ovid, _Trist._ ii. 471 -ff.; cf. Cic. _Phil._ ii. 23. 56; Pseud. Ascon, 110; Hartmann, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 1359. It remained in force to the end of -the republic. Other laws on gambling, which cannot be assigned to dates, -were the lex Cornelia (_Dig._ xi. 5. 3), the lex Publicia (ibid.), and -the lex Titia (ibid.). - -[2052] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 663, 670. - -[2053] Fest. 246. 32; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 662. - -[2054] Pliny, _N. H._ xxxv. 17. 197. A M. Metilius was tribune in 217. - -[2055] _Röm. Alt._ ii. 161 f., 670; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 354. - -[2056] Livy xxxiv. 1 ff.; Tac. _Ann._ iii. 33 f.; Oros. iv. 20. 14; Zon. -ix. 17; cf. Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, ii. 290. - -[2057] P. 356. The lex lenonia mentioned by Plautus (Fest. ep. 143), if -indeed it is not a mere joke, should also be classed as sumptuary; cf. p. -528, n. 2. - -[2058] Polyb. vi. 56; Plut. _Rom._ 13. - -[2059] Livy xxxiv. 4. 9: “Vectigalis iam et stipendiaria plebs esse -senatui coeperat.” - -[2060] Livy xxii. 1. 19; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 170. - -[2061] _Sat._ i. 7. 33. - -[2062] Livy xxvii. 20. 11. - -[2063] Livy xxix. 20. 11. - -[2064] Livy xxxiv. 4. 9; Cic. _Senec._ 4. 10; _Orat._ ii. 71. 286; -_Att._ i. 20. 7; Fest. ep. 143, including a quotation from Plautus; Tac. -_Ann._ xi. 5; xiii. 42; xv. 20; Frag. Vat. 260 ff. (Ad legem Cinciam -de donationibus); Bruns, _Quid conferant Vaticana fragmenta ad melius -cognoscendum ius Romanum_, 112 ff.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 366; -Garofalo, in _Bull. dell’ ist. di diritt. Rom._ xv (1903). 310-2. In -the opinion of Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 191, the law may have resulted -in part from the selfishness of the rich, with a view to checking the -presentation of gifts among themselves. - -[2065] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 4. 11; _Lex Iul. Col. Gen._ 93; Mommsen, _Ephem. -Ep._ ii. 139; Bruns, _Font. Iur._ p. 123. - -[2066] Vat. Frag. 294, 298-309; Paulus, _Sent._ v. 11. 6; Roby, _Rom. -Priv. Law_, i. 526 f. - -[2067] Such was the lex Pinaria, which ordered the appointment of a judge -on the thirtieth day after an action was instituted (Gaius iv. 15); also -the lex Silia creating the legis actio per condictionem, for the recovery -of a certain sum of money, extended by the lex Calpurnia so as to apply -to any certain object; Gaius iv. 18 f., and comment by Poste; Greenidge, -_Leg. Proced._ see index, s. Lex Calpurnia and Silia; Roby, _Rom. Priv. -Law_, ii. 71; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ ii. 594; _Röm. Civilprocess_, -230 ff.; Voigt, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 44 ff. On the probable date, -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ see indices, s. v.—The lex Crepereia, having to do -with a legis actio before the centumviral court, set the sponsia at a -hundred and twenty-five sesterces; Gaius iv. 95.—The lex Aebutia tended -to substitute for the legis actio the formulary process of later time; -Gaius iv. 30 f.; Gell. xvi. 10. 8; Greenidge, ibid. 93, 170 ff.; Roby, -ibid. ii. 347; Karlowa, _Röm. Civilproc._ 216, 324; Voigt, ibid. 124 ff. -Lange assigns these laws to the period of the war with Hannibal, Voigt to -earlier time. - -To the year 214 Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 660, assigns the lex Atinia on -the usucapio of stolen property; Gell. xvii. 7; Just. _Inst._ ii. 6. 2; -_Dig._ xli. 3. 4. 6; cf. Roby, ibid. i. 475.—No date can be found for the -lex Licinnia de actione communi dividundo; Marcianus, in _Dig._ iv. 7. 12. - -[2068] Livy xx, Frag.; Krüger and Mommsen, in _Hermes_, iv (1870). 371-6; -Tac. _Ann._ xii. 6. Livy states that a marriage of a patrician with a -relative of the sixth degree caused a riot of the plebs, which drove the -patres for refuge to the Capitol. - -[2069] Ulpian, Frag. v. 6; cf. _De gradibus cognationum_. - -[2070] Plut. _Q. R._ 6; Livy xlii. 34. 2 (case of a man’s marrying his -cousin shortly after the war with Hannibal); Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 126; -ii. 659 f.; Marquardt, _Privatl. d. Röm._ 30 f. - -[2071] Livy xxxix. 9. 7. - -[2072] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 659 f. - -[2073] Cf. Lange, ibid. i. 231; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ ii. 27. It -supplemented the Twelve Tables, v. 1 f. (Gaius i. 144; ii. 47; Schöll, -_Duod. Tab. Rel._ 126). - -[2074] Cic. _Off._ iii. 15. 61; _N. D._ iii. 30. 74; Varro, _L. L._ vi. -5; _Lex Iul. Munic._ 112. - -[2075] Plaut. _Pseud._ 303; _Rud._ 1382. - -[2076] The author may have been the Plaetorius who carried a law -concerning the urban praetor; p. 342, n. 1; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ -ii. 306, thinks it the result of continual war, which while giving young -men experience in military affairs, deprived them of the opportunity to -acquaint themselves with the management of property. - -[2077] Livy xxiii. 31. 10. - -[2078] P. 310. - -[2079] Livy xxvi. 33. 10-4. For the decree of the plebs, § 14: “Quod -senatus iuratus, maxima pars, censeat, qui adsient, id volumus -iubemusque.” - -[2080] Ibid. ch. 34. - -[2081] Livy xxii. 10. 1. - -[2082] It is given in full by Livy xxii. 10; cf. xxxiii. 44. 1 f.; xxxiv. -44. 1-3. - -[2083] The consular law of Ti. Sempronius Longus, 215, appointing -duumviri, one of them the builder, Q. Fabius, for dedicating the temple -of Venus Erucina; Livy xxiii. 30. 13. f.—The lex granting Q. Lutatius -Catulus permission to dedicate the Capitoline temple, 78; Cic. _Verr._ -II. iv. 31. 69; 38. 82; _CIL._ i. 592.—The rogation of the praetor -Caesar, 62, which threatened to deprive Catulus of the function; Suet, -_Caes._ 15; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 44. 2. - -[2084] In consequence of a pestilence a pretorian law of P. Licinius -Varus, 208, placed the games in honor of Apollo in the class called -stativi—those which were celebrated annually on stated days; Livy xxvii. -23. 7; xxx. 38. 10 f.; cf. Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 241; -Fowler, _Roman Festivals_, 179 f. - -[2085] Livy xxv. 5. 2, for the first instance and for the pontifical -presidency. Such a departure in favor of the people was hardly -possible in the period of comitial stagnation preceding the tribunate -of Flaminius, 232; and the law must have been passed, or at least -amended, after the institution of the last two tribes; for it specified -definitely seventeen tribes; Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 16. On this measure, -see Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 27 f.; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. -Röm._ 437; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 131. Pais, _L’elezione del pontefice -massimo_, etc. (1908), maintains on the contrary that the plebiscite in -question was passed about 254, and that it resorted to seventeen tribes -as the legal half of the total number (33) then existing. On the use of -the word comitia, see p. 130 above. - -[2086] The first recorded instance occurs at the date mentioned; Livy -xxvii. 8. 1-3. - -[2087] Cf. Cic. _Sest._ 46. 98. - -[2088] P. 391. - -[2089] P. 234, 305, 306. - -[2090] Livy, ep. xx; _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 32. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 784; ii. -152, 654, conjecturally identifies it with the Plaetorian plebiscite, -which assigned two lictors to the urban praetor when acting as judge, and -defined his jurisdiction; Censorin. 24. 3. - -[2091] Livy xxvii. 36. 14; p. 306 above. In 171 because of the impending -Macedonian war the consular lex Licinia Cassia permitted the consuls -to name their tribuni militum (Livy xliii. 31)—a precedent followed -thereafter in emergencies. - -[2092] P. 305; Polyb. vi. 15. 6. - -[2093] Livy xxvii. 22. 6. On the comparatively frequent use of the -promagistracy during the war with Hannibal, see Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, -iv. 310. - -[2094] Livy xxii. 25; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 355. - -[2095] Polyb. iii. 87. 6; Livy xxii. 8. 5 f. - -[2096] Cf. Herzog, ibid. i. 358 f.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 169. - -[2097] Livy xxvii. 20. 11-3; 21. 1-4; Plut. _Marcell._ 27. It is -surprising that in 204 the question of abrogating the proconsular -imperium of Scipio through a plebiscite was discussed in the senate; Livy -xxix. 19. 6. - -The grant of a burial place “virtutis caussa senatus consulto populique -iussu” (_CIL._ i. 635) to a C. Poplicius Bibulus was not to this Bibulus -but to some unknown person of the same name near the close of the -republic. - -[2098] P. 360. - -[2099] Livy xxvii. 21. 10; xxx. 19. 9. - -[2100] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 850, 861; ii. 151, 654. - -[2101] Livy xxvii. 6. 7; cf. p. 298 above. Two other dispensations from -laws by act of the people are recorded for the latter part of this -century: (1) the plebiscite of 203, which exempted C. Servilius from -the law prohibiting the election of a man to the plebeian tribunate or -aedileship in the lifetime of a father who had filled a curule office -(Livy xxx. 19. 9); (2) a plebiscite of 200 for permitting L. Valerius -Flaccus to take the oath of office for the aedileship as a proxy for his -brother, who being flamen Dialis was forbidden to swear; Livy xxxi. 50. -7-9. - -[2102] Cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 369. - -[2103] VI. 11. 1. - -[2104] VI. 51. 3. - -[2105] Ibid. § 5. - -[2106] Ibid. § 7. - -[2107] Polyb. vi. 56. - -[2108] Ibid. 11. 11. - -[2109] VI. 18. - -[2110] VI. 12. - -[2111] VI. 13. - -[2112] P. 217, n. 5. - -[2113] A plebiscite of M’. Acilius and Q. Minucius, 201, ordered the -senate to negotiate peace with Carthage; Livy xxx. 43. 2. Tribal -ratification may be assumed for every treaty, and for that reason is -generally not mentioned in this volume. - -[2114] Polyb. vi. 14. - -[2115] Polyb. vi. 12. 4. - -[2116] VI. 15. 9 f. - -[2117] Ibid. § 11. - -[2118] VI. 16. 1 f. Polybius speaks of the decisions of the senate; but -since that body as a whole was not a court, and since there was no appeal -from either the special or the standing quaestiones, he must be thinking -here of the consilia of the magistrates, which also were composed of -senators. - -[2119] VI. 16. 3. Doubtless he has in mind the Claudian statute of 219; -p. 335. - -[2120] VI. 16. 4 f. - -[2121] VI. 17. 9. - -[2122] P. 33, 173. - -[2123] Polyb. vi. 18. 5-8; Sall. _Iug._ 41. - -[2124] Livy xxxii. 27. 6. A law may be assumed for this act. - -[2125] Livy xl. 44. 2; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 198, n. 4; more -accurately, Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 259, 655; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 2728. - -[2126] Cf. Arnold, _Rom. Prov. Administr._ 47. - -[2127] Cato, _Orat._ xxv; Fest. 282. 28; Non. Marc. 470; Livy xl. 59. 5. - -[2128] Livy xxxiii. 42. 1; cf. Cic. _Orat._ iii. 19. 73; Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ ii. 211 f., 675; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 357, 446. -The people continued occasionally to create temporary magistracies -and commissions. A lex Plaetoria for the appointment of duoviri aedi -dedicandae (_CIL._ vi. 3732) probably belongs to 151; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ ii. 621, n. 1. - -[2129] Livy xl. 44. 1. Cf. in general on the leges annales, Fest. ep. 27; -Cic. _Phil._ v. 17. 47; _Leg._ iii. 3. 9; Ovid, _Fast._ v. 65 f.; Tac. -_Ann._ xi. 22; Arnob. ii. 67. A rogation of similar import was offered by -a certain M. Pinarius Rusca (Cic. _Orat._ ii. 65. 261), who is perhaps -to be identified with a praetor of that name in 182; Livy xl. 18. 2; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 529, n. 1. - -[2130] This interval is assigned to the lex Villia by none of the ancient -authorities, but is found to be the practice after its enactment; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 526 f. - -[2131] Cic. _Phil._ v. 17. 47. - -[2132] Cf. Plut. _Cat. Mai._ 8. - -[2133] Wex, in _Rhein. Mus._ iii (1845). 276-88; Nipperdey, in _Abhdl. -sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. zu Leipzig_, v. (1870). 1-88; Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ i. 707; ii. 259-61, 655; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 529 f., 537; -Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 386 f., 664 ff.; Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. -335 ff.; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1114. - -[2134] They were not in force in 196 (Livy xxxiii. 42. 1) or in 194 (Livy -xxxiv. 53. 1 f.; xxxv. 9. 7). On the other hand Cicero’s description -(_Dom._ 20. 51; _Leg. Agr._ ii. 8. 21) of these laws as veteres should -place them a hundred years or more before his time. The two passages of -Cicero are the only sources; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 919; ii. 315 f., -655; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 835. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 501, -thinks they may have resulted from the Gracchan agitation. - -[2135] _CIL._ i². p. 146; Obseq. 18. - -[2136] _Orat._ xxxvi. - -[2137] Livy, ep. lvi (mentioned in connection with the year 134); Long, -_Rom. Rep._ i. 85-7. Long does not consider the date settled; but see -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 521; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 485; -Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1117. - -[2138] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 712; ii. 316, 655. - -[2139] Livy xl. 19. 11; Schol. Bob. 361; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 717; ii. -257, 663; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 92; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ -i. 391; Hartmann, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 1801, Mommsen, -_Strafr._ 867, n. 2. - -[2140] Polyb. vi. 56. 4; Livy, ep. xlvii; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 717; ii. -312, 663; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 92; Hartmann, ibid. - -[2141] P. 250.—Of minor importance is the lex Rutilia, 169, which -besides confirming the earlier statute for the election of twenty-four -military tribunes (p. 342) defined the rights of the tribuni “rufuli” -and “a populo” respectively; Fest. 261. 29; ep. 260; cf. Livy vii. 5. -9; xxvii. 36. 14; Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ ii. 365.—The rogation of -Ti. Sempronius, tr. pl. in 167, for granting the imperium to certain -promagistrates for the day of their triumph has been considered above; p. -335, n. 2. - -[2142] _Lex Ant. de Termess._ in _CIL._ I. 204. ii. 13-7; cf. Livy xxxii. -27. 3 f. (cutting down such expenses in Sardinia); xxxiv. 4; cf. Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 207, 673; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 307. - -[2143] Cato, _Orat._ lxix, in Gell. xx. 2. 1; cf. Livy xxxii. 8. 3; xli. -14. 11; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 280, 673. - -[2144] App. _Lib._ 135; Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 19. 51. Appian and Cicero -speak of a senatus consultum only; but a lex Livia is vouched for by the -_Lex Agr._ of 111; _CIL._ i. 200. 81; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -643; Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ i. 465. - -[2145] Livy xxxiii. 25. 6. A lex Maevia, seemingly on Asiatic affairs, -supported by Cato but otherwise unknown, belongs perhaps to 189; Cato, -_Orat._ lxxv. - -[2146] Livy, ep. xlix; new ep. l. 98-100; Cic. _Brut._ 23. 89; _Att._ -xii. 5. 3; Val. Max. viii. 1. absol. 2. - -[2147] Cic. _Off._ iii. 30. 109. - -[2148] Livy xl. 38. 9; cf. 59. 1 (179 B.C.). - -[2149] Val. Max. ii. 8. 1; Oros. v. 4. 7; cf. Cic. _Pis._ 26. 62; Livy -xxxvii. 46. 1 f.; xl. 38. 9; Gell. v. 6. 21; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 262, -676; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 133. - -[2150] P. 293. - -[2151] Livy xxxii. 29. 3 f. These colonies were actually founded in 194; -Livy xxxiv. 45. 1; Vell. i. 15. 3. - -[2152] Livy xxxiv. 53. 1 f. The former was founded in 192; Livy xxxv. 40. -5. - -[2153] _Lex Agr._ of 111, in _CIL._ i. 200. 43; Livy xxxiv. 45. - -[2154] Livy xxxvii. 57. 7. - -[2155] Livy xxxix. 55. 5. On the colonies of 181, see Livy xl. 29. 1; 34. -2; Vell. i. 15; _CIL._ i. 538, in which nothing is said either of the -senate or of the people. - -[2156] I. 41. 1. - -[2157] P. 307, 311. - -[2158] It was in the capacity of administrator of public property that -the senate controlled this field. The only other instance of popular -legislation in this period touching state economy was the plebiscite of -M. Lucretius, 172 (Livy xlii. 19. 1 f.; cf. xxvii. 11. 8; Gran. Licin. -xxviii), for renewing the tribunician law of 210, which directed the -censors to farm the vectigalia of Campania; p. 337 above.—In 169 a -tribunician rogation of P. Rutilius threatened to annul the censorial -contracts (Livy xliii. 16. 6) as a rebuke to the censors for their -arbitrary management of the business. When this object was secured, the -bill was allowed to drop. It is true, as Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 24, -n. 1, remarks, that no one questioned the right of the people to cancel -an administrative act of the censors; but it was quite another thing -to find a college of tribunes unanimously disposed to interfere. The -significant fact is that in all the time between the peace with Hannibal -and the tribunate of Ti. Gracchus no important financial act was passed -by the comitia. - -[2159] Livy xxxv. 7; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 221, 660. - -[2160] A rogatio Iunia concerning usury, known only through Cato’s -opposition to it (_Orat._ vi), belongs to this period—perhaps to 195 -(Livy xxxiv. 1. 4; xxxv. 41. 9 f.) or to 191 (Livy xxxvi. 2. 6). - -[2161] Livy, ep. xli. - -[2162] Cic. _Verr._ II. i. 41. 104 ff.; _Rep._ iii. 10. 17; Gaius ii. -274; Dio Cass. lvi. 10. 2; Pseud. Ascon. 188; Gell, vi (vii). 13; xx. i. -23; p. 90 above. - -[2163] Gaius ii. 226 and Poste’s comment; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 298, -660; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 95, 128; Roby, _Rom. Priv. Law_, i. 345. -It took the place of a lex Furia of earlier date for limiting to one -thousand asses the amount which a legatee or, in view of death, a donee -could accept; Gaius, ibid.; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ ii. 940 ff. -Voigt, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 502, places the lex Furia between 203 and -170. - -[2164] Cato, _Orat._ lxviii, lxxv; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 660; Voigt, -_Die lex Maenia de dote vom Jahre 568 der Stadt_; _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ -i. 789-801, attempts to determine the contents as well as the date; cf. -Arndts, in _Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch._ vii (1868). 1-44. - -[2165] Livy xxxvii. 36. 7 f.; cf. Cic. _Verr._ II. i. 5. 13. - -[2166] Ibid. § 9; p. 57 f., 334 above. - -[2167] P. 340. - -[2168] Livy xxxviii. 36. 5 f. - -[2169] Cic. _Brut._ 20. 79; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 135, n. 1. - -[2170] A pretorian law of Valerius Flaccus, 98, for the purpose is -mentioned by Cic. _Balb._ 24. 55; cf. _CIL._ vi. 2181 f.; Pais, _Anc. -Italy_, 309. Naturally before the establishment of the right of the -people in this matter (p. 283, 304) the grant was made by the consuls and -the censors. - -[2171] Cic. _Balb._ 9. 24. - -[2172] Cf. the bestowal of citizenship upon the Carthaginian Muttines by -a plebiscite ex auctoritate patrum in 210; Livy xxvii. 5. 7; Varro, in -Ascon. 13. - -[2173] See the literature on the ius postliminii in Schiller, _Röm. -Staatsalt._ 618. There were certain cases of restoration of citizenship, -however, which were thought to require a comitial vote; Cic. _Balb._ 11. -28. But on this question opinions differed; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ -iii. 656, n. 1. - -[2174] Cf. the lex Plautia Papiria, in Cic. _Arch._ 4. 7: “Data est -civitas Silvani lege et Carbonis: Si qui foederatis civitatibus adscripti -fuissent, si tum, cum lex ferebatur, in Italia domicilium habuissent et -si sexaginta diebus apud praetorem essent professi”; also _Balb._ 8. -19 (singillatim); _CIL._ ii. 159; iii. 5232 (viritim); Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 132. - -[2175] Gell. xvi. 13. 6; Cic. _Balb._ 8. 21. Heraclea and Naples -preferred their freedom; Cic. ibid.; _Fam._ xiii. 30. 1. - -[2176] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 133. - -[2177] This spirit expressed itself in the lex Minicia of unknown date, -though probably anterior to the social war. It ordered that children born -of a union between a Roman and a person of a nationality with which there -was no conubium should follow the condition of the alien parent; Gaius i. -78 f.; Ulp. v. 8; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ ii. 182. - -[2178] Livy xxxix. 3. 5 f. - -[2179] Livy xli. 9. 9-11; Neumann, _Gesch. Roms_, i. 21, 115; Herzog, -_Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 964, n. 1; Meyer, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ 92, n. 1. - -[2180] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 435 f.; cf. however Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ ii. 27; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 993. - -[2181] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 705; ii. 27. - -[2182] Livy ix. 46; Plut. _Mar._ 5. - -[2183] Livy xxxix. 19. 5 f.; Cic. _Sest._ 52. 110; _Phil._ ii. 2. 3. -A law of Augustus, 18 B.C., permitted all excepting senators to marry -freedwomen; Dio Cass. liv. 16. 2; lvi. 7. 2. Conubium had not been -impossible, but had been considered disgraceful both by society and by -the law. - -[2184] Cf. Livy x. 21. 4; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 515; ii. 27; p. 60 above. - -[2185] P. 334. - -[2186] Livy, ep. xx; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 436, n. 3. The -statement of the epitomator is that by the censors “Libertini in quattuor -tribus redacti sunt, cum antea dispersi per omnes fuissent, Esquilinam,” -etc. It refers either to the censorship of Flaminius (Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 995) or far less probably to the one immediately -preceding. On the city tribes, see p. 64. - -[2187] P. 205 f. - -[2188] Suet. _Claud._ 24; Livy vi. 46. 6; Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 2. 32; -cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 422; Herzog, ibid. i. 977. - -[2189] Plut. _Flamin._ 18. - -[2190] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 234; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 436 -f. This interpretation seems necessary notwithstanding Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 884. - -[2191] As in 217; Livy xxii. 11. 8. - -[2192] In general, see Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 26-38; Mommsen, -_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 420 ff.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 976 ff., -992 ff.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._, see index, s. Libertini. On the censorial -distribution of the libertini in 179, see p. 85, n. 3. - -[2193] P. 338. - -[2194] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 174, 211, 670; Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 23. - -[2195] Macrob. _Sat._ iii. 17. 2; Diod. xxxvii. 3. 5; Ferrero, _Rome_, i. -23; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 425. - -[2196] Macrob. ibid. § 3; Schol. Bob. 310; Fest. 242. 12. - -[2197] Fest. 201. 31; Cato, _Orat._ xxvii. - -[2198] Gell. ii. 24. 3; Macrob. _Sat._ iii. 17. 3-5; Athen. vi. 274 C. - -[2199] Pliny, _N. H._ x. 50. 139. - -[2200] Macrob. _Sat._ iii. 17. 6. - -[2201] The author may, as Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 311, 672, assumes, be -identical with the Cn. Aufidius who was tribune in that year; Livy xliii. -8. 2. Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2288 f., regards the -identity as no more than possible. - -[2202] Pliny, _N. H._ viii. 17. 64. - -[2203] Cic. _Cornel._ i. 25 (Frag. A. vii); Ascon. 69. - -[2204] Livy xxxiv. 44. 4. - -[2205] Mention of this law is made in connection only with the Roscian -statute of 67, which is spoken of as a restoration of an earlier act; p. -428 f. below. - -[2206] P. 253 ff. - -[2207] Cic. _Off._ ii. 21. 75. - -[2208] Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 3. 8. - -[2209] _Dig._ xlviii. 15. - -[2210] _Curc._ 621 f.; _Merc._ 664 f. - -[2211] In _Verhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ xxxvii (1885). 320. - -[2212] Ibid. 327. - -[2213] _Röm. Alt._ ii. 663; cf. _CIL._ i². p. 144. - -[2214] _Röm. Strafr._ 780, n. 4. - -[2215] _Declam. in Cat._ 19. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 664 f., prefers to -assign it to the tribune of 139; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 563, n. 4, -doubts its existence. - -[2216] Cic. _Fam._ viii. 12. 3; 14. 4; Suet. _Dom._ 8. 3 (Scantinius; -Ihm); Juv. ii. 44; Quint. _Inst._ iv. 2. 69. Voigt, in _Verhdl. d. sächs. -Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ xlii (1890), 273, assigns it to 226 or 225. Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 667 f., places it between 227 and 50. The date 149 -rests upon W. W. Fowler’s restoration of the new epitome, 115 f.: “M. -Sca(n)ti(ni)us ... am tulit (de) in stupro deprehensi(s).” Quite another -matter, however, is referred to in this passage, if Kornemann’s reading -is correct: “Sca(n)tius (qui repuls)am tulit in stupro deprehens(us se -occidit).” The date of the law, therefore, still remains in doubt. - -[2217] Schol. Bob. 233; Cic. _Brut._ 27. 106; _Off._ ii. 21. 75; _Verr._ -iii. 84. 195; iv. 25. 56; Val. Max. vi. 9. 10; Tac. _Ann._ xv. 20; Lex -Acil. in _CIL._ i. 198. 23, 74, 81; Mommsen, ibid. p. 54 f.; _Strafr._ -708; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 321 f., 664; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 419. - -[2218] In general the leges repetundarum were for the protection of Italy -as well as of the provinces; cf. p. 376, 377, 442. - -[2219] Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 17; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 415 f. - -[2220] P. 255, n. 1 (3). - -[2221] Macrob. _Sat._ i. 13. 21; Censor, xx. 6. f.; Livy xliii. 11. 3; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 353; ii. 223, 676; Mommsen, _Röm. Chron._ 40 ff.; -Matzat, _Röm. Chron._ i. 46. - -[2222] P. 116; cf. Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 308 f. - -[2223] Schol. Bob. 319; cf. Cic. _Sest._ 26. 56: “De tempore legum -rogandorum.” - -[2224] Livy, new ep. liv. 193 f.: “A. Gabinius verna(e ... rogationem -tulit) suffragium per ta(bellam ferri),” indicates servile descent. - -[2225] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 16. 35; cf. 15. 34; _Amic._ 12. 41; _Leg. Agr._ -ii. 2. 4. - -[2226] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 16. 35 f.; _Brut._ 25. 97; 27. 106; _Sest._ 48. -103; _Amic._ 12. 41; Ascon. 78; Pseud. Ascon. 141 f.; Schol. Bob. 303; -Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 105-10; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 658; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 422; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 340 f. - -[2227] Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 30. 84; Ascon. 46; Val. Max. iii. 7. 9; cf. Cic. -_Brut._ 25. 97; Vell. ii. 10. 1; Val. Max. viii. 1. damn. 7. - -[2228] Cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 344; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 94. - -[2229] See especially Cic. _Leg._ iii. 15. 34: “Quis autem non sentit -omnem auctoritatem optimatium tabellariam legem abstulisse?” - -[2230] P. 347. - -[2231] P. 184. - -[2232] App. _Lib._ 112 (White’s rendering); cf. Livy, ep. l. - -[2233] Livy, ep. lvi; App. _Iber._ 84. - -[2234] App. _Iber._ 83; cf. p. 188, n. 2, 342, 367. - -[2235] Cic. _Amic._ 25. 96; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 335, 688. - -[2236] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 8. - -[2237] Polyb. vi. 18. 5-8 (Shuckburgh’s rendering). - -[2238] The main part of his history was composed before the third war -with Carthage; Christ, W., _Gesch. d. griech. Litteratur_ (4th ed. 1905), -585; Cuntz, O., _Polybius und sein Werk_ (1902), 82. It is understood, -however, that certain parts were inserted after the beginning of the -revolutionary period. - -[2239] It is true that the Gracchan trouble opened his eyes to some of -the defects in the constitution; but the aristocratic recovery after the -tribunate of Tiberius (and perhaps after that of Gaius) confirmed his -belief in the fundamental soundness and in the recuperative power of the -state. - -[2240] P. 360 f. - -[2241] Livy xxxv. 10. 12: “Multos pecuarios damnarunt.” In Livy xxxiv. -4. 9 Cato while speaking in defence of the Oppian law, in 195, is -represented as mentioning the article which established the limit of five -hundred iugera. - -[2242] _Orig._ v. 5. - -[2243] These are provisions of an agrarian law passed before the -tribunate of Ti. Gracchus (App. _B. C._ i. 8. 33 f.) but not expressly -referred to Licinius and Sextius in any ancient source. The first article -seems to assume a greater development of slavery than could be true of -the year 367, and the second would belong more naturally to a repetition -than to the original enactment; p. 296, n. 4, 334, n. 1. - -[2244] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 9. - -[2245] App. _B. C._ i. 9. 37 and 11. 46 states that an additional two -hundred and fifty iugera were allowed for each son, and Livy, ep. lviii, -sets the maximum at a thousand iugera. Combining the two sources, we -reach the probable result given in the text; cf. also (Aurel. Vict.) -_Vir. Ill._ 64. 3; Siculus Flacc. p. 136. 10 (CC is a corruption of ↀ). -See Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 450, n. 3; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, -i. 114; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 87. - -[2246] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 9; cf. Greenidge, ibid. - -[2247] App. _B. C._ i. 11. 46. It is not stated that these lots should -become private property. Appian mentions this article as the only -compensation for improvements on the lands surrendered. The fact that -article 2 was withdrawn from the bill before it became a law may account -for its omission from this source. - -[2248] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 9; App. _B. C._ i. 11. - -[2249] _CIL._ i. 200. 14: “_Sei quis_ ... agri iugra non amplius xxx -possidebit habebitve.” In all probability this specification came -originally from the Sempronian law. - -[2250] Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 88; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 9; App. _B. C._ -i. 27. 121; Weber, _Röm. Agrargesch._ 151. - -[2251] This is a necessary deduction from a speech of Tiberius quoted by -App. _B. C._ i. 9. 35; cf. 11. 43; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 9. The _Lex Agr._ -of 111 (_CIL._ i. 200. 21) refers to assignments made by C. Gracchus to -Latins and allies as compensation for public lands surrendered by them -to the government for colonial purposes; cf. § 31. Doubtless a similar -provision was included in the statute of Tiberius. Although viritim -assignments had hitherto benefited citizens only, Latins and Italians -had been admitted to Latin colonies founded by Rome; Meyer, _Gesch. d. -Gracch._ 91. - -[2252] Cf. _Lex Agr._ in _CIL._ i. 200. 6: “_Extra eum agrum, qui ager -ex_ lege plebive scito, quod C. Sempronius Ti. f. tr(ibunus) pl(ebei) -rog(avit), exceptum cavitumque est nei divideretur.” The exceptions -numbered from a to g in the text above are taken from the agrarian law of -111. As these exceptions were made in the agrarian law of C. Gracchus, it -is here assumed that they were made previously by Tiberius. - -[2253] _Lex Agr._ in _CIL._ i. 200. 31 f.; cf. Cic. _Leg. Agr._ i. 4. 10; -ii. 22. 58 (land held similarly in Africa). - -[2254] Cf. Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 90. - -[2255] In the earliest arrangement of the kind the part was one third, -as the name indicates; Livy xxxi. 13. 9; _CIL._ i. 200. 31 f.; cf. -Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 113; Weber, _Röm. Agrargesch._ 149-51. -The word is derived from trientare, as stabulum from stare; Mommsen, in -_CIL._ i. p. 90. - -[2256] _CIL._ i. 200. 14; cf. 25 f. See Mommsen’s comment, p. 91; -Frontin. _Contr._ p. 15; Hygin. _Cond. Agr._ p. 116. 23; _Lim. Const._ p. -201. 12; Siculus Flacc. p. 157; Weber, _Röm. Agrargesch._ 120 f. - -[2257] Voigt, in _Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ x (1888). 229; -Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 113. - -[2258] _CIL._ ibid. 28. - -[2259] _CIL._ 200. 1, 4, 6, 13, 22; cf. Cic. _Leg. Agr._ i. 7. 21; ii. -29. 81; _Att._ i. 19. 4; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 91; Greenidge, ibid. -112 f. - -[2260] _CIL._ ibid. 24-6; Voigt, ibid. 227. The classification of public -land reserved from distribution by the agrarian law of 111 is that of -Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 90 f. - -[2261] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 12. 31; App. _B. C._ i. 9. 37; Livy, ep. -lviii. - -[2262] They are so called in _Lex Lat. Bant._ 15, in _CIL._ i. 197; _Lex -Rep._ 13, 16, 22, ibid. 198; _Lex Agr._ 16, ibid. 200. - -[2263] _Lex Agr._ in _CIL._ i. 200. 13 f., 17, 21-3; Cic. _Att._ i. 19. -4; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 87. Illegal occupations alone are thereafter -mentioned; Cic. _Orat._ ii. 70. 284; App. _B. C._ i. 36. 162. - -[2264] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10; cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 121; -Strachan-Davidson’s explanation (_Appian_, p. 13) seems to be incorrect. - -[2265] Livy, ep. lviii; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10-3; App. _B. C._ i. 12 f.; -Cic. _N. D._ i. 38. 106. - -[2266] Livy, ep. lviii; App. _B. C._ i. 13. 55; Vell. ii. 2. 3; Flor. ii. -2. 6. - -[2267] P. 347 f. - -[2268] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 13. - -[2269] Livy, ep. lviii: “Promulgavit et aliam legem agrariam, qua sibi -latius agrum patefaceret, ut iidem triumviri iudicarent, qua publicus -ager, qua privatus esset.” - -[2270] _CIL._ i. 552-5, 583; ix. 1024 f. - -[2271] _B. C._ i. 19. 78 f. The context indicates that in Appian’s -opinion the people had nothing to do with the measure. - -[2272] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 688 (cf. iii. 22) and Greenidge, _Hist. of -Rome_, i. 158, suppose without evidence that Scipio effected his object -by means of a law. - -[2273] P. 373 below. On the agrarian law of Ti. Gracchus, see further -Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 159-91; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 445-52; Ihne, -_Hist. of Rome_, iv. 382-400; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 110-28; -Neumann, _Gesch. Roms_, i. 156-84. - -[2274] Livy, ep. lviii; Vell. ii. 2. 3: “Octavio collegae pro bono -publico stanti imperium abrogavit”; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 12; App. _B. C._ -i. 12; Cic. _Leg._ iii. 10. 24; Dio Cass. Frag. 83. 4. - -[2275] P. 360. - -[2276] Cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 12; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 80, -395; Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 185 ff. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 125-7, -and Pöhlmann, in _Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad._ 1907. 465 ff., contend for its -legality. - -[2277] P. 233 f. - -[2278] P. 255. - -[2279] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 16; Dio Cass. Frag. 83. 7. These sources are -obscure and somewhat inconsistent. The proposals of Tiberius can, better -than in any other way though not with absolute certainty, be inferred -from the laws of his brother. - -[2280] P. 360. - -[2281] P. 307 f. - -[2282] Livy, ep. lix; Cic. _Amic._ 25. 96. - -[2283] _B. C._ i. 21. 90: Καὶ γάρ τις ἤδη νόμος κεκύρωτο εἰ δήμαρχος -ἐνδέοι ταῖς παραγγλείαις, τὸν δῆμον ἐκ πάντων ἐπιλέγεσθαι. White -translates, “For in cases where there was not a sufficient number of -candidates, the law authorizes the people to choose from the whole number -then in office”; and scholars usually suppose that in the first clause -reference is to candidates. But if tribunus, the equivalent of δήμαρχος, -stood in the law, it must have signified tribune, not candidate; and in -that case παραγγελίαις, however Appian may have understood it, must be -the equivalent of renuntiationibus, “announcements of votes.” - -[2284] Cf. Strachan-Davidson, _Appian_, p. 23. It was under the second -contingency that C. Gracchus was reëlected tribune without being a -candidate; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 8. The third time, though as some averred -he had a majority of votes, the presiding tribune dared reject them; -ibid. 12; Meyer, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ 94, n. 3. Fowler’s suggestion (_Eng. -Hist. Rev._ xx. 217) that the law permitted but one reëlection of an -individual is on the whole unlikely. - -[2285] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 16. 35; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 461; -Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 163 f. - -[2286] The measure was being agitated at the time to which Cicero -referred the dialogue _On the Republic_, iv. 2; cf. Q. Cic. _Petit. -Cons._ 8. 33; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 657; iii. 25. On the Claudian law, -see p. 335 above. - -[2287] P. 358. - -[2288] _Lex Acil. Rep._ 23, 74, in _CIL._ i. 198; Zumpt, in _Abhdl. d. -Akad. zu Berlin_, 1845. 1-70, 475-515; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 664; iii. -26; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 420; _Hist. of Rome_, i. 135, 211. The -Latin Lex Bantina (_CIL._ i. 197), identified by some with the Lex Iunia, -seems rather to belong to the tribunate of C. Gracchus; p. 379. - -[2289] Cic. _Off._ iii. 11. 47; _Brut._ 28. 109; Fest. 286. 10; Long, -_Rom. Rep._ i. 237 f.; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 166 f. - -[2290] App. _B. C._, i. 21, 34. 152; Val. Max. ix. 5. 1; Ihne, _Hist. of -Rome_, iv. 418-21; Long, ibid. 241; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 462; -Greenidge, ibid. 167 ff.; Meyer, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ 93; Fowler, in _Eng. -Hist. Rev._ xx. 422. - -[2291] In March, April, and May, according to Kornemann, _Gesch. d. -Gracch._ 44. - -[2292] On the order of his enactments, see Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 38; -Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 210; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 466; -Meyer, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ 95, n. 4; Kornemann, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ -42 ff.; Fowler, in _Eng. Hist. Rev._ xx. (1905). 216 ff. Meyer calls -attention to the fact that while Appian, _B. C._ i. 21 f., states the -enactments in substantially correct order, he wrongly identifies the date -of reëlection—midsummer 123—with the date of entrance upon his second -term—December 10, 123—in this way pushing forward into the second year a -large group of enactments which belong to the latter part of his first -term. - -[2293] P. 367. - -[2294] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 4; Diod. xxxv. 25, 2; Fest. ep. 23 (abacti); -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 655; iii. 30 f.; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 202. - -[2295] P. 368. - -[2296] P. 255 f. For the comitial interdict against Popillius, see p. 256. - -[2297] Cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 204 f.; Fowler, _Eng. Hist. -Rev._ xx. 224. - -[2298] Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ ii. 1346. For examples, -see Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ ii. 114, and especially, Oliver, _Roman -Economic Conditions_, 61 ff. - -[2299] Livy, ep. lx; App. _B. C._ i. 21. 89; Schol. Bob. 303; Vell. ii. -6. 3; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 5. - -[2300] App. ibid. § 90; Diod. xxxv. 25; Cic. _Sest._ 48. 103. - -[2301] Cic. _Off._ ii. 21. 72; _Tusc._ iii. 20. 48; Diod. ibid; Oros. v. -12. 4; cf. Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 261-3; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. -203-7. - -[2302] The view here offered was suggested in Botsford, _History of Rome_ -(1901), 156. It is presented in greater detail by Fowler, in _Eng. Hist. -Rev._ xx (1905). 221 ff. - -[2303] Begun by his lex de provocatione; p. 371. - -[2304] Placed before the frumentarian law by Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 31. -Meyer, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ 95, n. 4, and Kornemann, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ -43, hold the view represented above in the text. - -[2305] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 9. - -[2306] _CIL._ i. 200. 6, 22; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 32. - -[2307] P. 364 f., 386. - -[2308] App. _B. C._ i. 23. 98; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 6 f.; cf. Voigt, in -_Verhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ xxiv (1872). 68 ff. - -[2309] Livy, ep. lx; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 88. - -[2310] Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 209; cf. _CIL._ i. 200, 1, 3, 4, 6, -22. Dio Cassius, Frag. 84. 2, intimates that after the death of Scipio -the distribution of the public land was renewed with energy. Reference -must accordingly be to the operation of the law of Gaius. - -[2311] Cf. App. _B. C._ i. 21 f. - -[2312] App. _B. C._ i. 14. 58. - -[2313] P. 358. - -[2314] P. 345. - -[2315] P. 368. The measure is referred to as a lex iudiciaria by Macrob. -_Sat._ iii. 14. 6. - -[2316] The epitomator of Livy, lx, supposes that Gaius offered and -actually carried a measure for adding six hundred knights to the senate -with the understanding that the jurors were to be drawn from that body -thus enlarged; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 530, n. 1. Such an act, -however, could not have been termed a lex iudiciaria, as it would have -been concerned simply with the composition of the senate. Everything -is opposed to the assumption that the bill in this form passed or at -least that it was put into effect. Plutarch, _C. Gracch._ 5 f., seems -to signify that his law provided for an album of six hundred jurors, -one half to be drawn from the senate, the rest from the knights. It is -by no means necessary, with Fowler, in _Eng. Hist. Rev._ xx (1905). -426, n. 16, to interpret the expression ὁ δὲ τριακοσίους τῶν ἱππέων -προσκατέλεξεν αὐτοῖς οὖσι τριακοσίοις, καὶ τὰς κρίσεις κοινὰς τῶν -ἑξακοσίωον ἐποίησε (cf. _Ag. et Cleom. et Gracch._ _Comp._ 2) as “adding -three hundred equites to the senate to form the body of iudices.” These -sources have confused the projects with the law as actually passed; cf. -Strachan-Davidson, _Appian_, p. 23. - -[2317] App. _B. C._ i. 22. 92; Vell. ii. 6. 3; 32. 3; Varro, in Non. -Marc. 454; Tac. _Ann._ xii. 60; Pseud. Ascon. 103, 145; Flor. ii. 1. 6; -5. 3 (iii. 13. 17); Diod. xxxv. 25; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 5; Livy, ep. lx; -cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 668; iii. 38-40; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. -466 f.; Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 263-9; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 434; _Hist. -of Rome_, i. 212-7; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, iv. 457-64; Madvig, _Röm. -Staat._ ii. 219-21. - -[2318] This is true at least of the extraordinary quaestio established by -the Mamilian law of 110; Cic. _Brut._ 34. 128; cf. 33. 127; Schol. Bob. -311; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 381 f., 435. - -[2319] _CIL._ i. 198. - -[2320] _CIL._ i. 198. 16. There was under the republic a census -qualification for the knights who acted as iudices (Cic. _Phil._ i. 8. -20), though we have no authority that the limit of four hundred thousand -sesterces existed before the principate. Originally Mommsen supplied the -lacuna with a statement of the money qualification as here given; but -afterward, changing his mind, he filled the gap with “equum publicum -habebit habuerit.” - -[2321] An article of the lex Acilia provides that within ten days after -the enactment of this statute the said praetor shall choose the four -hundred and fifty persons from whom the jurors of that court are to be -drawn; thereafter the revision is to be annual; _CIL._ i. 198. 12, 14. - -[2322] Strachan-Davidson, _Appian_, p. 23, followed by Fowler, in _Eng. -Hist. Rev._ xx. 429, identifies the two—on untenable ground, for the -reliable sources speak distinctly of a Sempronian law and an Acilian law. - -[2323] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 531, n. 1, preferably regards the -Sempronian as the later; but in that case the transfer would have been -achieved in substance by the Acilian statute—a view which is contradicted -by the sources. - -[2324] This idea would explain the fact that the extant fragments of the -lex Acilia contain no reference to a Sempronian lex iudiciaria. - -[2325] Cic. _Verr._ i. 17. 51 f.; II. i. 9. 26; _Brut_. 68. 239; Pseud. -Ascon. 149, 165. - -[2326] P. 370. - -[2327] _CIL._ i. 198. Reference to the IIIviri of the Sempronian agrarian -law (§ 13, 16, 22) proves it to belong to 133-119, while the fact that -it does not admit senators among the jurors requires it to follow the -judiciary law of C. Gracchus; and more particularly, the implication that -at the time of its enactment the lex Rubria (p. 383 below) was in force -places it between 123 and 121; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 55; Ruggiero, -_Diz. Ep._ i. 41. In general on the law, see Rudorff, _Ad legem Aciliam_; -Zumpt, in _Abhdl. d. Akad. zu Berlin_, 1845. 1-70, 475-515; _Röm. -Criminalr._ i. 99 ff.; Huschke, in _Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch._ v (1866). -46-84; Hesky, in _Wiener_ _Studien_, xxv (1903). 272-87; Brassloff, -ibid. xxvi. 106-17; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 664; iii. 40; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 642; _Röm. Strafr._ 708 f.; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -420; _Hist. of Rome_, i. 214, n. 2; Ruggiero, ibid. 41-4; Klebs, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 256. - -[2328] _Lex Rep._ 2 f.; cf. 8 f. - -[2329] _Lex Rep._ 1. - -[2330] Vell. ii. 8. 1; cf. Cic. _Verr._ iii. 80. 184; Ruggiero, _Diz. -Ep._ i. 42. - -[2331] _Lex Rep._ 8 f. - -[2332] The principle was expressed in an article of the lex Memmia de -incestu of 111 (Val. Max. iii. 7. 9), and probably in every law for the -establishment of a court. It was used throughout the history of the -republic; cf. Livy x. 37. 7; 46. 16 (year 293); p. 289 above; Suet. -_Caes._ 23 (59); Dio Cass. xxxix. 7. 3 (57). - -In this connection mention may be made of the lex Hostilia, which allowed -actions for theft to be brought in behalf of persons absent in the -service of the state or in captivity or in wardship; Just. _Inst._ iv. -10. The date is unknown, though Voigt, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 282, n. 14, -inclines to assign it to 209 or 207. - -[2333] _Lex Rep._ 19-26; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 216 f. Ruggiero, ibid. -43, is obviously wrong. - -[2334] _Lex Rep._ 76-8; cf. 83-5. - -[2335] § 28 states that money within a specified limit might legally be -received—perhaps by the patron of the accuser—from which we may infer -that the law defined precisely what was permitted and what forbidden all -persons participating in the trial; cf. Brassloff, in _Wiener Studien_, -xxvi. 109 f. - -[2336] Cic. _Cluent._ 56. 154: “Illi (senatus) non hoc recusabant, ne ea -lege accusarentur, qua nunc Habitus accusatur, quae tum erat Sempronia, -nunc est Cornelia” (“They did not object to being accused under that law -under which Habitus is now being tried, which was then the Sempronian -but is now the Cornelian statute”). The trial was before the quaestio -veneficis under the Cornelian law which constituted this court and which -is described as essentially identical with a Sempronian law. _CIL._ i. p. -200. xxxiii: (“C. Claud. Ap. F. C. N. Pulcher) ... IUDEX. Q. VENEFICIS,” -aedile 99, praetor 95, consul 92, corroborates the existence of such a -court before Sulla. For other proofs, see Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 36 ff.; -cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 664. - -[2337] P. 255, n. 1 (4), 358. - -[2338] Cic. _Cluent._ 55. 151. - -[2339] Ibid. 52. 144. - -[2340] In 66 Cluentius Habitus was brought to trial before the quaestio -inter sicarios et veneficos on the charge (1) of having corrupted the -jurors in an earlier trial of the kind, (2) of poisoning; Cic. _Cluent._; -cf. Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 12. - -[2341] The whole tenor of Cicero’s _Pro Cluentio_ is to the effect -that the knights were not bound by the provision against bribery. He -had a strong motive, however, for bringing into prominence the article -which provided for the punishment of magistrates and senators, and for -suppressing the one, if there was one, concerning the punishment of -equites; and this suppression was rendered easy by the fact that the -Cornelian law then in force mentioned senatorial jurors only. Appian, _B. -C._ i. 22. 97 (cf. 35. 158, 161), assumes that under the Sempronian law -there were trials for the bribery of jurors, rendered useless, however, -and finally done away with by the conspiracy and violence of the knights; -cf. Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 18 f. This interpretation of the known facts -seems preferable to the view of Cicero, which, however, is accepted by -most scholars; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 635; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -421; _Hist. of Rome_, i. 216 f. - -[2342] _CIL._ i. 197; Ritschl. _Prisc. lat. mon. epigr. tab._ xix. - -[2343] Bruns, _Font. Iur._ p. 48-53; Girard, _Textes_, p. 26-9. - -[2344] As indicated by the “Ioudex, quei ex hace lege plebeive scito -factus erit”; § 2. - -[2345] Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 431. Kirchhoff, _Stadtrecht von -Bantia_, 90-7, regards it as a part of a judiciary law. Mommsen, in -_CIL._ i. p. 46 f., connects it with a treaty between Rome and Bantia. -See also Krüger-Brissaud, _Hist. d. source d. droit Rom._ 94. - -[2346] Cic. _Verr._ iii. 6. 12; _Att._ i. 17. 9; Schol. Bob. 259; Vell. -ii. 6. 3; Gell. xi. 10; App. _B. C._ v. 4. 17 f.; Fronto, _Ad Verum_, p. -125; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 674 f.; iii. 34; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ -i. 468 f.; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 217-21. Hitherto the senate had -exercised unrestricted power in granting such remissions; Polyb. vi. 17. -5. - -[2347] App. _B. C._ v. 4. 19; Diod. xxxv. 25. - -[2348] App. _B. C._ i. 22. 94-7. - -[2349] Varro, in Non. Marc. 454; Flor. ii. 5. 3 (iii. 17). - -[2350] Diod. xxxvii. 9; cf. Cic. _Leg._ iii. 9. 20. As a substitute for -his law concerning the taxation of Asia his opponents vainly offered the -rogatio Aufeia, probably pretorian, on the same subject; Gell. xi. 10; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 675; iii. 35. - -[2351] Cic. _Prov. Cons._ 2. 3; _Balb._ 27. 61; _Dom._ 9. 24; _Fam._ -i. 7. 10; Sall. _Iug._ 27; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 41; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 470. Before the enactment of this law it was possible -for the people to grant a province to whomsoever it pleased, whether -magistrate or private person. A lex of 131, probably tribunician, had -given the province of Asia to P. Licinius Crassus, consul; Livy, ep. lix; -Cic. _Phil._ xi. 8. 18. The Sempronian law did not affect their right. In -107 a plebiscite of C. Manlius granted Numidia, with the conduct of the -Jugurthine war, to C. Marius, consul; Sall. _Iug._ 73; Gell. vii. 11. 2; -_CIL._ i. p. 290 f. On the Sulpician law for granting the conduct of the -Mithridatic war to Marius, then a private citizen, see p. 404. - -[2352] Cic. _Prov. Cons._ 7. 17. - -[2353] Cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 222 f. - -[2354] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 672. - -[2355] P. 368. - -[2356] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 5; cf. Livy xxv. 5. 5-8. In speaking on the -rogation of Cn. Marcius Censorinus, a proposal not otherwise known, Gaius -is said to have remarked: “Si vobis probati essent homines adulescentes, -tamen necessario vobis tribuni militares veteres faciundi essent”; -Charis. 208. The new epitome of Livy proves that the military question -was more prominently before the public at this time than has hitherto -been supposed. - -[2357] XXXV. 25. For the Gracchi in general Diodorus draws from -Posidonius, an exceedingly hostile source. - -[2358] Livy lx; App. _B. C._ i. 23 f.; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 6, 8 f.; -(Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 65. 3. The date is established by Vell. i. 15. -4; Oros. v. 12. 1; cf. Meyer, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ 95, n. 4; Mommsen, in -_CIL._ p. 87, 96. - -[2359] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 9; cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 224 f. - -[2360] Vell. i. 15. 4; (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 65. 3; cf. Kornemann, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 522; Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 55. His -plan to colonize Capua (Plut. _C. Gracch._ 8) was not carried out. - -[2361] The lex Sempronia or Graccana, mentioned in the _Liber -Coloniarum_, in _Gromatici_ (Lachmann), p. 229, 233, 237, 238; cf. p. -216, 219, 228, 255; cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 224, n. 2. - -[2362] This fact is deduced from the literary references to the subject -and from the terms of the agrarian law of 111; _CIL._ i. 200. 5, 13; cf. -Mommsen’s comment, p. 90. The same principle holds for any other colonies -founded in Italy between 133 and 111. - -[2363] _Lex Acil._, in _CIL._ i. 198. 22; _Lex Agr._, _CIL._ i. 200. 59; -Vell. i. 15. 4; ii. 7. 8; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 10 f.; App. _B. C._ i. 24; -_Pun._ 136; Livy, ep. lx; Fronto, _Ad Verum_, ii. p. 125; Sol. 28. For -the date, see Vell. i. 15. 4; Oros. v. 12. 1; Eutrop. iv. 21. - -[2364] Vell. ii. 6. 2; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 5, 8 f.; App. _B. C._ i. 23. -99; 34. 153; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 474 f.; Greenidge, _Hist. -of Rome_, 233-7. About the end of 123 or the beginning of 122 Gaius had -proposed to give the Latins equal suffrage with the Romans; Plut. ibid. 8 -f.: Kornemann, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ 45. The promulgation of this earlier -rogation must have preceded that of the Livian bills. - -The bill (or possibly bills) which included the Italians among the -recipients of the citizenship could have been offered only between his -return from Carthage and the elections of midsummer, 122; Kornemann, -ibid. 51; Fowler, in _Eng. Hist. Rev._ xx. 425. - -[2365] Cf. Fannius, in Jul. Victor vi. 6. p. 224 Or.; Charisius, p. 143 -Keil. - -[2366] Appian, _B. C._ i. 23. 101; Plut. C. _Gracch._ 9. Plutarch, who -alone speaks of the exemption from rent, seems to consider the measure -to have applied retroactively to the Sempronian settlements as well -as to those proposed by Livius. Although this could hardly have been -the intention of the Livian act, the exemption of the colonists under -it would naturally lead to the extension of equal privileges to the -beneficiaries of the Sempronian agrarian laws. - -[2367] Appian, _B. C._ i. 35. 156 (cf. p. 397 below) assumes that the -colonial bill of Livius became a law. If that is true, there is no reason -for supposing that the other was dropped before being brought to vote. -Gaius might have prevented both by his veto (Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 45); -but even if he felt the intention to be mischievous, he could not have -afforded to oppose so popular measures. Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 87, is -of the opinion that Minervia may have been a Livian colony; but he cannot -understand why the others provided for were not founded. The reason -doubtless is that the senate, which had used Livius as a tool, never -seriously intended to execute the law. - -[2368] A rogation of Gaius, proposed about the same time as the lex de -civitate danda, concerning the order of voting in the comitia centuriata -is mentioned by (Sall.) _Rep. Ord._ ii. 8: “Mihi ... placet lex quam C. -Gracchus in tribunatu promulgaverit, ut ex confusis quinque classibus -sorte centuriae vocarentur: ita coaequatur dignitate pecunia.” His -object, to eliminate the influence of wealth, could be achieved by -determining by lot the order of voting of the five classes; or a new -grouping of the centuries could be substituted for the classes; but he -could not have proposed that the centuries should vote one by one. - -[2369] We know that in 91 they vehemently opposed the admission of the -allies; p. 399, 400 below; cf. Meyer, _Gesch. d. Gracch._ 106, n. 1. - -[2370] Opimius, consul in 121, ordered the equites to come each with two -armed slaves to the support of the government; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 14. -Sallust, _Iug._ 42, states that the senate, by holding out to the equites -the hope of an alliance with the aristocracy, detached them from the -plebs; cf. Meyer, ibid. 106. - -The lex Acilia Rubria, passed most probably in 122, seems to have -had to do with the participation of aliens in the worship of Jupiter -Capitolinus; _S. C. de Astypalaeensibus_, in _CIG._ ii. 2485. 11 (cf. -Böckh’s comment); Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 42. It is to be connected with -the rogation for granting the citizenship to the allies, and probably -aimed to liberalize the worship in the Sempronian spirit. - -[2371] Cf. Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 231. - -[2372] Dio Cassius, Frag. 85. 3, in a mutilated passage seems to refer to -the great possibilities of a longer career. It would be unreasonable to -suppose that so creative a mind could rest content at any given point. - -[2373] Fest. 201. 19; Flor. ii. 3. 4 (iii. 15); Diod. xxxiv. 28 a (from -Posidonius); (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 65. 5; Oros. v. 12. 5; Plut. _C. -Gracch._ 13; App. _B. C._ i. 24. 105; _Pun._ 136; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. -47; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 248; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 96. - -[2374] App. _B. C._ i. 27. 121; cf. Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 352; Greenidge, -ibid. i. 285; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, v. 4 f. - -[2375] Ibid. § 122. - -[2376] It seems to be a mistake for Spurius Thorius (Cic. _Brut._ 36. -136: “Sp. Thorius .... qui agrum publicum vitiosa et inutili lege -vectigali levavit”). By interpreting this sentence “Sp. Thorius ... who -relieved the public land of a defective and useless law by the imposition -of a vectigal,” Mommsen (in _Verhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ 92 -f.) attempts to bring Cicero into agreement with Appian. But the -interpretation is violent and is not generally accepted. The statement -of Cicero applies to the law of 111 far better than to that which Appian -mentions under the name of Borius. - -[2377] App. ibid.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 688; iii. 51; Long, _Rom. Rep._ -i. 353 f.; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, v. 9; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. -285-8. If, as Greenidge supposes, the Livian colonial rogation became a -law, it did not affect the vectigal imposed by the Sempronian statutes -(p. 383 above). - -It may have been as a compensation for the repeal of this Sempronian -statute and of that of Rubrius that a lex of an unknown author provided -in this year for the establishment of the colony of Narbo Martius in -Narbonensis; Vell. i. 15. 5; ii. 7. 8; Eutrop. iv. 23; Cic. _Brut._ 43. -160; _Cluent._ 51. 140; _Font._ 5. 13; Kornemann, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 522. - -[2378] _Brut._ 36. 136 (quoted p. 385, n. 5 above); cf. _Orat._ ii. 70. -284; App. _B. C._ i. 27. 123; _CIL._ i. 200; Rudorff, in _Zeitschr. -f. gesch. Rechtswiss._ x (1842). 1-194; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 75 -ff.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 478; Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 351-86; -Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 288. - -[2379] The classification here given is a close reproduction of Mommsen, -in _CIL._ i. p. 87-106; cf. _Verhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ i. -89-101. - -[2380] _Lex Agr._ 27 (cf. 4), in _CIL._ i. 200. - -[2381] Ibid. 20-23. - -[2382] Ibid. 2; cf. 13 f. - -[2383] Ibid. 3, 15 f. The word sortito in these passages, e.g. “IIIvir -sortito ceivi Romano dedit adsignavit,” proves a reference to the -founding of colonies, as viritim assignations were not by lot; Mommsen, -in _CIL._ i. p. 87. - -[2384] Ibid. 5. - -[2385] Ibid. 13 f. Although occupation was forbidden by the agrarian law -of Ti. Gracchus (p. 366 above), they did take place, and are legalized -by this article of the law of 111, in so far as they do not exceed the -specified limit. - -[2386] _Lex Agr._ 12: “Eum agrum quem ex h(ace) l(ege) venire dari -reddive oportebit”; cf. 32. We do not know what land is meant. Perhaps -Sipontia is included in this category; cf. 43; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. -89. - -[2387] _Lex Agr._ 19 f.; App. _B. C._ i. 27. 123; Cic. _Brut._ 36. 136: -“Sp. Thorius ... qui agrum publicum vitiosa et inutili lege vectigali -levavit” (“Sp. Thorius ... who by a mischievous and useless law freed the -public land of vectigal”). - -[2388] P. 365. - -[2389] _Lex Agr._ 11-3; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 90. - -[2390] _Lex Agr._ 45, 55, 59-61, 66-9, 79, 89. - -[2391] Ibid. 75 f., 79 f., 85. - -[2392] Mommsen, in _CIL._ i. p. 98 ff. - -[2393] _Lex Agr._ 96. This part of the inscription is hopelessly -mutilated. - -[2394] Ibid. 29. - -[2395] P. 385. - -[2396] P. 255. - -[2397] P. 256 f. - -[2398] Cic. _Brut._ 34. 128; cf. _Red. in Sen._ 15. 38; _Red. ad Quir._ -4. 9; 5. 11; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 279 f.; Ihne, _Hist. of -Rome_, v. 6 f. - -[2399] P. 255. - -[2400] Tac. _Ann._ xii. 60, confirmed by a statement of Cicero, in Ascon. -79, that senators and knights first sat together as jurors under the -Plautian law of 89 (p. 402 below). - -[2401] Cassiod. _Chron._ 384 C: “Per Servilium Caepionem consulem iudicia -equitatibus et senatoribus communicata”; Obseq. 41 (101). - -[2402] Cf. further Cic. _Inv._ i. 49. 92; _Brut._ 43. 161; 44. 164; -_Cluent._ 51. 140; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 668; iii. 67 f.; Long, _Rom. -Rep._ ii. 2 f.; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 477-82. But that the -knights continued in uninterrupted possession of the courts is proved by -Cicero, _Verr._ i. 13. 38; Pseud. Ascon. 103, 145. - -[2403] P. 355. - -[2404] (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 72. 5; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 53; -Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 478. His lex sumptuaria of the same year, -perhaps combined in one law with the provision concerning the libertini, -limited not only the expense of meals but also the kind of food and the -mode of preparing it; Pliny, _N. H._ viii. 57. 223; cf. Gell. ii. 24. 12; -(Aurel. Vict.) ibid.—Two other sumptuary laws, both of which were enacted -before 97, may be mentioned here. The statute of P. Licinius Crassus, -pretorian or tribunician, ex senatus consulto, perhaps 104, made some -changes in the lex Fannia and the lex Didia; Gell. ii. 24. 7; xv. 8; -Macrob. _Sat._ iii. 17. 7; Fest. ep. 54; p. 356 above.—It was repealed by -the plebiscite of M. Duronius before 97; Val. Max ii. 9. 5; Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ iii. 71, 88. - -[2405] Ascon. 67 f.; cf. p. 382, 392. - -[2406] The reading of the MS. of Velleius, ii. 11. 1 (“natus equestri -loco”) should not be corrected to “agresti loco” to conform with Plut. -_Mar._ 3. Velleius has mentioned his equestrian birth to explain his -connections with the publicans referred to in the following sentence. - -[2407] The opposition of Marius to the populace is proved by his -intercession against a frumentarian rogation of the same year, the -purport of which is not definitely stated; Plut. _Mar._ 4. - -[2408] Cic. _Pis._ 15. 36; _Red. in Sen._ 11. 28. On the pontes, see p. -469. - -[2409] Varro, _R. R._ iii. 5. 18. On the custodes, see also p. 467 below. - -[2410] Cic. _Pis._ 5. 11; _Red. in Sen._ 7. 17; cf. p. 466. - -[2411] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 17. 38. - -[2412] Plut. _Mar._ 4; Cic. ibid.; Lange, _Rom. Alt._ ii. 490; iii. 51; -Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 322 f.; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. 304-6. The -opposition of the consuls to this measure, and the consequent threat of -Marius to imprison them, Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, v. 8, regards as a farce. -This interpretation of the circumstances, however, is unnecessary for -explaining the policy of Marius; as a champion of the peasants, rather -than of the plebs as a whole, be consistently passed his election law and -opposed the frumentarian bill. - -[2413] Plut. _Cat. Min._ 42. - -[2414] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 16. 36; Oros. v. 15. 24; cf. Münzer, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 195 f.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 527; -iii. 66. On the leges tabellariae in general, see Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, -iv. 94, 340; Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 105-10; Lange, ibid. see indices, s. v. - -[2415] P. 388. - -[2416] Cic. _N. D._ iii. 30. 74; Ascon. 46; Livy, ep. lxiii; Dio Cass. -Frag. 87; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 10. 5 f. A plebiscite of C. Memmius, 111, de -incestu (p. 377, n. 5) refers to the same subject. - -[2417] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 697 f. - -[2418] Sall. _Iug_. 40. 65; Cic. _Brut._ 33. 127 f.; Schol. Bob. 311. In -111 a plebiscite of the C. Memmius mentioned in n. 4 had commissioned L. -Cassius, praetor, to bring Jugurtha to Rome as a witness against those -accused of having bribed him; Sall. _Iug._ 32. - -[2419] Livy, ep. lxvii; Ascon. 78; cf. (Cic.) _Herenn._ i. 14. 24, which -refers to a defence against the tribunes. For the earliest case of the -kind, see p. 360; cf. p. 342. - -[2420] The court was established by a plebiscite of C. Norbanus, 104; Dio -Cass. Frag. 90; Gell. iii. 9. 7; Strabo iv. 1. 13; Cic. _N. D._ iii. 30. -74; _Balb._ 11. 28; Val. Max. iv. 7. 3; vi. 9. 13. - -[2421] Ascon. 78: “Ut, quem populus damnasset cuive imperium abrogasset, -in senatu non esset.” The disgraceful defeat of Caepio in Gaul and his -embezzlement of the treasury found at Tolosa excited the people to this -line of action; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 484. On the author, see -Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1738. 63. - -[2422] The lex Acilia repetundarum (_CIL._ i. 198. 13, 16), adopted -in 122, implies that they did not have the right; but they must have -acquired it before 102; App. _B. C._ i. 28. 126. - -[2423] Ateius Capito, in Gell. xiv. 8. 2; Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. 228. - -[2424] P. 341. - -[2425] Cic. _Amic._ 25. 96. - -[2426] Cic. ibid.; _Brut._ 21. 83; _N. D._ iii. 2. 5; 17. 43. - -[2427] P. 347. - -[2428] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 18; _Fam._ viii. 4. 1; _Ad Brut._ i. 5. 3; -_Phil._ ii. 2. 4; xiii. 5. 12; Suet, _Ner._ 2; Vell. ii. 12. 3; Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 537, 675; iii. 71; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm_, -418; Long, _Rom. Rep._ i. 49 f.; ii. 40-2; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. -484 f. - -[2429] Priscian, _Inst. Gram._ p. 90: “Cato nepos de actionibus ad -populum, ne lex sua abrogetur: facite vobis in mentem veniat, quirites, -ex aere alieno in hac civitate et in aliis omnibus propter diem atque -fenus saepissimam discordiam fuisse.” This is the only source for the -measure. - -[2430] P. 388 f. - -[2431] Ascon. 67 f. - -[2432] The only source is Cic. _Off._ ii. 21. 73. - -[2433] Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 46; Mommsen-Blacas, _Hist. d. mon. Rom_, -ii. 101 (for date and character). - -[2434] P. 389. - -[2435] Ascon. 21; Cic. _Rab. Post._ 4. 9; _Balb._ 23. 53; 24. 54. -Cicero here informs us that by a provision of this law citizenship was -offered to Latins as a reward for evidence in cases arising under it. -This article was borrowed from the lex Acilia; p. 378. See also Val. -Max viii. 1. 8; Cic. _Brut._ 62. 224; Greenidge, _Hist. of Rome_, i. -309-11. Proof of the repeal of the Acilian law no later than that year is -the circumstance that on the reverse of the stone which contains it is -inscribed the agrarian law of 111; Mommsen, _CIL._ i. p. 55 f. - -[2436] Cic. _Verr._ i. 9. 26. - -[2437] Cic. _Rab. Post._ 4. 8 f. The quotation is from Greenidge, _Hist. -of Rome_, i. 310. - -[2438] Cic. _Rab. Post._ 4. 9; cf. Mommsen. _Röm. Strafr._ 709; -Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 423. - -[2439] Cic. _Brut._ 62. 224. - -[2440] (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 73. 1: “Ut gratiam Marianorum -militum pararet, legem tulit, ut veteranis centena agri iugera in -Africa dividerentur, intercedentem Baebium collegam facta per populum -lapidatione submovit”; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 76; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 485; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 262. -In the opinion of Mühl, _App. Sat._ 77 f., the colonia Mariana (p. 396 -below) was founded under this law. - -[2441] P. 86, 89. - -[2442] Cic. _Orat._ ii. 25. 107; 49. 201; _N. D._ iii. 30. 74. - -[2443] As indicated by the fact that the trial of C. Norbanus in 95 took -place under the law; Cic. _Orat._ 21. 89; 25. 107; 50. 203; _Off._ ii. -14. 49; Val. Max. viii. 5. 2. - -[2444] The theory that the court established by the Appuleian law was -special is held by Mommsen, _Hist. of Rome_, iii (1898). 440, n. 1; _Röm. -Staatsr._ ii. 664, n. 1; _Röm. Strafr._ 198. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 76, -82, supposes that in his first tribunate he established a special court -and in his second by his lex maiestatis a quaestio perpetua. Mühl, _App. -Sat._ 74, also strongly favors the second. The statement of Gran. Licin. -xxxiii (?). 4—“Cn. Manilius (for Manlius or Mallius; cf. _CIL._ i². p. -152 f.) ob eandem causam quam et Cepio L. Saturnini rogatione e civitate -est cito (for plebiscito?) eiectus”—Lange applies to the rogation for a -special court. The circumstance that the trial of Norbanus took place no -less than five years after the enactment of the law and the general tenor -of Cicero’s account of that trial (see n. 4 above) point clearly to the -existence of a standing court; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 485; -Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ ii. 275; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -ii. 262 f.; Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 23-32. - -To the same tribune, either in 103 or in 100, may belong the lex Appuleia -de sponsu (Gaius iii. 122; p. 298, n. 1 above). In that case the lex -Furia de sponsu (Gaius iii. 121; iv. 22; cf. same page above) must belong -to the first century B.C. - -[2445] (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 73. 5: “Tribunus plebis refectus -(Saturninus) Siciliam, Achaiam, Macedoniam novis colonis destinavit et -aurum (Tolosanum), dolo an scelere Caepionis partum, ad emptionem agrorum -convertit.” For Corsica, see p. 396. - -[2446] Cic. _Balb._ 21. 48. The MS. reads “ternos,” which may be a -mistake for a larger number (trecenos?). - -[2447] App. _B. C._ i. 29. 130, 132; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 111 f.; -Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 486. - -[2448] (Cic.) _Herenn._ i. 12. 21; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 114 f.; Herzog, -ibid. i. 486 f. - -[2449] _B. C._ i. 29. 131; cf. Plut. _Mar._ 29. - -[2450] Cf. Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 265. - -[2451] App. _B. C._ i. 30 f.; Plut. _Mar._ 29; (Aurel. Vict.) Vir. _Ill._ -73; 8; Vell. ii. 15. 4; Val. Max iii. 8. 4; Cic. _Dom._ 31. 82; _Har. -Resp._ 19. 41; _Sest._ 47. 101; _Leg._ iii. 11. 26. After the downfall -of Appuleius, Metellus was recalled by a plebiscite of Q. Calidius, 98; -Cic. _Planc._ 28. 69; _Dom._ 32. 87; _Red. ad Quir._ 4. 9; 5. 11; Val. -Max. v. 2. 7; App. _B. C._ i. 33. 147-9; Dio Cass. Frag. 95. 1; (Aurel. -Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 62. 3. On this Calidius, see further Münzer, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1354. 5. A fruitless attempt to recall -Metellus had been made in 99 through the tribunician rogatio Porcia -Pompeia; Oros. v. 17. 11; App. _B. C._ i. 33. - -[2452] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 6. 14. According to Oros. v. 12. 10, P. Furius, -tribune in 99, secured the enactment of a law for confiscating the -property of those who conspired against the state. - -[2453] Pliny, _N. H._ iii. 12. 80: “Marianam a C. Mario deductam”; -Seneca, _Ad. Helv._ vii. 9; Solin. iii. 3; Mela ii. 7. 122; Mommsen, in -_CIL._ x. p. 838, 997; Kornemann, in Pauly Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. -522. - -[2454] Obseq. 46 (106); Val. Max viii. 1. damn. 3; cf. Cic. _Orat._ ii. -11. 48. - -[2455] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 6. 14; 12. 31; Obseq. ibid. A criminal lex Titia, -the contents of which also are unknown—Auson. _Epigr._ 92 (89). 4—may -belong to this tribune; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 661, 668. - -[2456] Cic. _Dom._ 20. 53; _Leg._ iii. 4. 11; 19. 43. The enactment was -merely the confirmation of an old custom or law introduced between the -Licinian-Sextian legislation and 122; cf. _Lex Acil._ 72, in _CIL._ i. -198. - -[2457] Cic. _Dom._ 16. 41; _Sest._ 64. 135; Schol. Bob. 310. This, too, -was a confirmation of an earlier usage; Dion. Hal. vii. 58. 3; x. 3. 5; -Livy iii. 35. 1; p. 189, 260, n. 1 above; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ -iii. 336, 376 f. - -[2458] Cic. _Off._ iii. 11. 47; cf. p. 354, 370. - -[2459] Cic. _Balb._ 21. 48. - -[2460] Cic. _Brut._ 16. 63; Schol. Bob. 296. - -[2461] Cic. Frag. A. vii. 20. - -[2462] Ascon. 67. On the law in general, see Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. -90; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 128; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 490. On -Caecilius and Didius, see Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. -1216. 95; v. 407-10. - -[2463] Vell. ii. 13. 1; Dio Cass. Frag. 96. 2; Diod. xxxvii. 10. - -[2464] The citations of the preceding note, and Ascon. 68; Livy, ep. lxx; -less clearly Flor. ii. 5. 1, 4 (iii. 17). - -[2465] (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 66. 4 f.; _CIL._ vi. 1312 (i. p. 279 -vii). Livy, ep. lxxi, merely mentions them. - -[2466] _B. C._ i. 35. 156. - -[2467] P. 383 above. - -[2468] This may be inferred from the silence of Cicero, _Leg. Agr._ i. 7. -21; ii. 29. 81; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 102; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, -v. 181; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 490. - -[2469] App. _B. C._ 36. 162 f.; Flor. ii. 5. 6 (iii. 17): “Exstat vox -ipsius nihil se ad largitionem ulli reliquisse nisi siquis aut caenum -dividere vellet aut caelum.” - -[2470] _CIL._ vi. 1312; cf. i. p. 279. vii. A beginning was actually made -of the colonization; and this is all that could be indicated by the verb -ὑπήγετο (App. _B. C._ i. 35. 156), “he was for conducting.” - -[2471] Ep. lxxi. - -[2472] Cf. Vell. ii. 13. 2; Livy, ep. lxx f. - -[2473] Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 46. The idea was to issue one -silver-plated copper denarius to every seven silver denarii; Mommsen, -_Röm. Münzw._ 387 (Mommsen-Blacas, _Hist. d. mon. Rom_, ii. 41 f., 82); -Babelon, _Mon. d. la rép. Rom_, 1. introd. p. lix. - -[2474] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 674; iii. 103. - -[2475] _B. C._ i. 35. 157 f. The same view seems to be held by (Aurel. -Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 66. 4. It is accepted by Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 97; -Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 436. The objection is that a judiciary measure, -as the Livian, could not have dealt primarily with the composition of the -senate; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 489. - -[2476] II. 13. 2. Florus, ii. 5. 4 (iii. 17), is non-committal. - -[2477] LXXI; accepted by Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, v. 177. - -[2478] Cf. App. _B. C._ i. 35. 157. - -[2479] Flor. ii. 5. 3 (iii. 17); App. _B. C._ i. 35. 158. - -[2480] Cic. _Rab. Post._ 7. 16; _Cluent._ 56. 153; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, -v. 177 f. - -[2481] Velleius, ii. 14. 1, regards it as an afterthought, whereas -Appian, _B. C._ i. 35. 155, asserting that, petitioned by the Italians -for the citizenship, he had already promised to grant it, intimates that -this was his main object. At all events the Italians expected it of him -and were prepared to support him in his effort by force of arms. - -[2482] (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 66. 4; Oros. v. 18. 2. - -[2483] Vell. ii. 14. 1; App. _B. C._ i. 35. 155 f.; 36. 162; Livy, ep. -lxxi; Flor. ii. 5. 6. Most probably he combined this measure with his -colonial rogation; App. _B. C._ i. 36. - -[2484] App. _B. C._ i. 35 f. - -[2485] Livy, ep. lxxi; Flor. ii. 5. 7 (iii. 17). - -[2486] Ascon. 68. - -[2487] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 6. 14; 12. 31; _Dom._ 16. 41; Frag. A. vii -(_Cornel._ i. 24); Ascon. 68; Diod. xxxvii. 10. 3. - -[2488] According to Diod. xxxvii. 10. 3, he declared that though he had -full power to prevent the decree, he would not willingly exert it; for -he knew well that the wrongdoers in this matter would speedily suffer -merited punishment. - -[2489] Cf. the elogium, n. below. - -[2490] Elogium, in _CIL._ vi. 1312 = i. p. 279. vii: “M. Livius M. F. C. -N. Drusus, Pontifex, tr. mil. X. vir. stlit. iudic. tr. pl. X. vir. a. d. -a. lege sua et eodem anno V. vir. a. d. a. lege Saufe(i)a, in magistratu -occisus est.” - -[2491] On M. Livius Drusus, see Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 96-106; Long, -_Rom. Rep._ II. ch. xiii; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 488-93; Ihne, -_Hist. of Rome_, V. ch. xiii; Mommsen, _Hist. of Rome_, bk. IV. ch. vi; -Neumann, _Gesch. Roms_, i. 451-74; Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 79 f. - -[2492] (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 66. 2; Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 19. 55; Schol. -Gronov. 431; Ascon. 30; _Dig._ xxii. 5. 13; xlviii. 16. 3. 2; Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 665; iii. 101; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 491, 494. Hitzig, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1416, places it earlier. - -[2493] Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 20. 57; Pliny, _Paneg._ 35; Seneca, _De Ira_, -iii. 3. 6; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 495. It is almost certain that the -punishment mentioned was prescribed by this law; Hitzig, ibid. - -[2494] This conclusion is deduced from the circumstance that Varius was -tried under his own law. The charge could not possibly have been that -of favoring the Italians, but must rather have been the instigation of -the sedition by which his statute was originally carried; Lengle, _Sull. -Verf._ 35. - -[2495] Cic. _Brut._ 89. 304: “Exercebatur una lege iudicium Varia, -ceteris propter bellum intermissis.” - -[2496] This is an inference from the fact that the court which tried Cn. -Pompeius Strabo in 88, and which sat under the Varian law, was composed -in accordance with the subsequent Plautian judiciary law (Cic. Frag. A. -vii. _Cornel._ i. 53). A special court was composed in no other way than -by the law which established it. In general on the Varian law, see Ascon. -21 f., 73, 79; Val. Max. viii. 6. 4; App. _B. C._ i. 37; Cic. _Tusc._ ii. -24. 57. From Appian we learn that the law was passed before the outbreak -of the Social War, and Cicero, _Brut._ 89. 305, informs us that the -prosecutions under it continued through the war. The last trial mentioned -is that of Cn. Pompeius Strabo in 88, referred to above. See also Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ iii. 108; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 493; Mommsen, _Röm. -Strafr._ 198; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 164 f.; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -384 f.; Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, v. 188 f.; and especially Lengle, _Sull. -Verf._ 32-6, where further sources are cited. - -[2497] Cic. _Brut._ 62. 222. It belongs to about 90; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -ii. 693. - -[2498] _Off._ ii. 21. 72. It is an interesting fact that, as this passage -shows, Cicero did not object to frumentarian laws on principle, but -condemned the Sempronian act because it was burdensome to the treasury. - -[2499] Gell. iv. 4. 3. - -[2500] Vell. ii. 16. 4; cf. App. _B. C._ i. 49. 212 (who speaks merely of -a senatus consultum). This statute seems to have considered the Po the -northern boundary of Italy; Sall. _Hist._ i. 20. - -[2501] Cic. _Balb._ 8. 21: “Ipsa Iulia lege civitas ita est sociis et -Latinis data, ut, qui fundi populi facti non essent, civitatem non -haberent.” On fundus see Fest. ep. 89. Heraclea and Naples declined the -citizenship; Cic. ibid. - -[2502] P. 57 f. - -[2503] Cic. _Arch._ 10. 26; _Balb._ 8. 19; 14. 32; 22. 50; _Fam._ xiii. -36; Sisenna, Frag. 17, in Peter, _Hist. Rom. Reliq._ i. 280; Frag. 120, -ibid. 293: “Milites, ut lex Calpurnia concesserat, virtutis ergo civitate -donari”; cf. Kiene, _Röm. Bundesgenossenkrieg_, 224 f., 229 f. The -identity of the author is uncertain; he may be the Calpurnius who was -praetor in 74; Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iii. 1395. 98. - -[2504] Cic. _Arch._ 4. 7: Schol. Bob. 353. - -[2505] Dio Cass. Frag. 102. 7. - -[2506] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 9. 3; Ascon. p. 3; Pliny, _N. H._ iii. 20. 138; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 118; cf. however Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. -497 f. - -[2507] Cic. Frag. A. vii. 53; Ascon. 79; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 539, -668 f.; iii. 115; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 499; Greenidge, _Leg. -Proced._ 385; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 213 f. We may connect with this -change the prosecution and condemnation of Q. Varius; p. 401, n. 1 above; -Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, v. 224 f. - -[2508] _Röm. Strafr._ 198, n. 1, followed by Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -386. A difficulty with this interpretation is the great number of jurors -provided for, apparently enough to supply all the courts. - -[2509] Verr. i. 13. 38. - -[2510] Cic. _Att._ i. 18. 6. - -[2511] Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 46; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 1512; Gardner, in Smith, _Dict._ i. 206; Babelon, -_Monn. de la rép. Rom._ i. 74 f. - -[2512] Strabo v. 4. 11. - -[2513] P. 162. - -[2514] Livy, ep. lxxvii; App. _B. C._ i. 55. 242 f.; Vell. ii. 18. 6; -Ascon. 64; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1532. The -libertini may have been those who fought in the recent war; App. _B. C._ -i. 49. 212; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 11. 32. - -[2515] (Cic.) _Herenn._ ii. 28. 45; Livy, ep. lxxvii; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -iii. 123; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 501. - -[2516] P. 400 f. - -[2517] Plut. _Sull._ 8. - -[2518] P. 403 above; also Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 84. - -[2519] In this way a justitium, cessation of civil business, was -indirectly brought about; Plut. _Sull._ 8; _Mar._ 35; App. _B. C._ i. 55. -244; p. 141 above; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 221; Neumann, _Gesch. Roms_, i. -513; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1533; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ i. 263, n. 6. - -[2520] For the abrogation of Sulla’s imperium Vell. ii. 18. 6 is -authority. Plutarch, _Sull._ 8, states that Pompeius, not Sulla, was -deprived of the consulship and that from Sulla was taken merely the -provincial command. Appian, _B. C._ i. 56. 249 (cf. Plut. _Mar._ 35; -Schol. Gronov. 410) speaks only of the transfer of the command. That -the fourth article was added after the departure of Sulla from Rome, -and that the latter knew nothing of it till summoned to deliver up his -command is clearly stated by Appian, ibid. ch. 56 f.; cf. Fröhlich, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1533 f. - -[2521] Plutarch, _Sull._ 8 and Livy, ep. lxxvii, speak of a decree of the -senate only, whereas the account of Appian, _B. C._ i. 60. 271 (Πολεμίους -Ῥωμαίων ἐψήφιστο εἶναι) implies a vote of the assembly. Velleius, ii. 19. -1 (“Lege lata exules fecit”) distinctly mentions a comitial act, though -he is wrong in supposing it to be a sentence of exile, as may be gathered -from his context; cf. Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, v. 237. - -[2522] App. _B. C._ i. 59. 268; Cic. _Phil._ viii. 2. 7. Scholars are -at variance as regards the character and motives of Sulpicius. Herzog, -_Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 501 (cf. Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 85 f.), can see in -his measures no earnest purpose of reform. Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, v. -225 f., 233 f., hesitatingly inclines to regard him as a demagogue. -Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1532, looks upon him as a -statesman with a mind and heart for the best interests of his country. -In the opinion of Mommsen, _Hist. of Rome_, iii. (1898). 531 f., he was -essentially the successor of Drusus, a reformer in the interest of the -senate, yet led by the force of circumstances to adopt revolutionary -methods. Cf. also Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 121-5; Long, _Rom. Rep._ II. -ch. xvii; Neumann, _Gesch. Roms_, i. 507-17. - -[2523] P. 277, 313 f. - -[2524] App. _B. C._ i. 59. 266: Εἰσηγοῦντό τε μηδὲν ἔτι ἀπροβούλευτον ἐς -τὸν δῆμον ἐσφέρεσθαι, νενομισμένον μὲν οὕτω καὶ πάλαι, παραλελυμένον δ’ -ἐκ πολλοῦ. - -[2525] Ibid.: Εἰσηγοῦντο ... καὶ τὰς χειροτονίας μὴ κατὰ φυλάς, ἀλλὰ κατὰ -λόχους, ὡς Τύλλιος βασιλεὺς ἔταξε γίνεσθαι. - -[2526] P. 86. - -[2527] In _Hermes_, xxxiii (1898). 652. - -[2528] This view is held by Sunden, _De trib. pot. imm._ (1897) 21 ff.; -Meyer, ibid. 652-4; Vassis, in _Athena_, xii (1900). 54-7. Fröhlich, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1537, supposes that elections -simply were thereby transferred to the comitia centuriata; but the -word χειροτονίαι used by Appian, though often denoting elections (as -in _B. C._ i. 14. 58-60; 15. 66; 28. 127, where the meaning is easily -derived from the context), includes also voting on laws, as in _B. C._ -i. 23. 100; 55. 244. Had he meant elections, he would here have written -ἀρχαιρεσία (cf. i. 1. 1; 44. 196), as otherwise the meaning would have -been doubtful. The view represented by Fröhlich, moreover, would in no -way explain the passage, nor was it likely that Sulla would leave to -the tribes the ratification of laws but deprive them of the politically -unimportant right to elect minor officials. - -[2529] Appian’s words πολλά τε ἄλλα τῆς τῶν δημάρχων ἀρχῆς ... -περιελόντες (i. 59. 267) imply an extensive curtailment of the -tribunician power not definitely specified. The statement of Livy, -ep. lxxxix, that Sulla afterward (82) deprived the tribunes of all -legislative power (p. 413 below) is not true of his dictatorial -law-giving, but belongs properly to the year under consideration. - -[2530] Lengle (_Sull. Verf._ 10) argues, on the contrary, that the -measure could be intended for the tribunes only, because, as he supposes, -a patrician magistrate always consulted the senate concerning his -legislative proposals. But Lengle has reckoned without the facts. An -examination of the sources will show that from the time of the dictator -Publilius Philo (Livy viii. 12. 14) to the time of the dictator Julius -Caesar (Dio Cass. xxxviii. 3 f.; Plut. _Caes._ 14; App. _B. C._ ii. 10) -patrician magistrates occasionally brought rogations before the comitia -without the senatorial sanction. But it is possible that in speaking of -“an ancient law long disused” (p. 406, n. 2) Appian may wrongly have had -in mind the pre-Hortensian restriction on the plebiscite; p. 277, n. 4. - -[2531] _B. C._ i. 1. 1, 2, 3; 19. 81; 20. 83; 22. 91; 29. 132 (city -people); 30. 136; 32. 143; 33. 147; 35. 155; 36. 162; 38. 169; 100. 469. -Δημόται always means plebeians; i. 24. 106; 25. 109; 33. 146; 100. 469. -Sometimes δῆμος is exactly equivalent to πλῆθος, multitude, as in i. 26. -119. - -[2532] _B. C._ i. 12. 51; 13. 55; 20. 83; 21. 90; 22. 92; 23. 101; 25. -107; 28. 128; 29. 131. - -[2533] _B. C._ i. 27. 122. In 33. 148 it applies to the judicial contio -preliminary to the comitia centuriata. - -[2534] _B. C._ i. 13. 56; 25. 112; 32. 143; 54. 236; 104. 485. - -[2535] _B. C._ i. 12. 49; 32. 141. - -[2536] _B. C._ i. 101. 472. - -[2537] _B. C._ i. 59. 267. - -[2538] Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. 402 f. - -[2539] Livy, ep. lxxvii. - -[2540] Fest. 375. 7. - -[2541] Cf. the law of 357; p. 297. See also Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. -126 f.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 502; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1537. - -[2542] Billeter, _Gesch. d. Zinsfusses_, 155-7. - -[2543] App. _B. C._ i. 73. 339. No mention is here made of the manner of -repeal, but we may infer a comitial act from the public policy of Cinna. -It seems probable that at this time, or after his return from exile, the -Plautian judiciary law of 89 was also repealed; p. 402. - -[2544] Cic. _Phil._ viii. (3.) 7; Vell. ii. 20. 2 f.; Schol. Gronov. 410; -Jul. Exuper. 4; App. _B. C._ i. 64. 287; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -180, 439; Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1283. - -[2545] App. ibid.; Flor. ii. 9. 9 (iii. 21); (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ -69. 2. - -[2546] Livy, ep. lxxix; Vell. ii. 20. 3; App. _B. C._ i. 65. 296; (Aurel. -Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 69. 2; Plut. _Mar._ 41. - -[2547] Cinna is represented as the author by Vell. ii. 21. 6; Plut. -_Mar._ 43; Dio Cass. Frag. 102. 8; whereas Appian, _B. C._ i. 70. -324, mentions tribunes. Cf. Diod. xxxviii, xxxix. 1-4; Münzer, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1285; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 244. - -[2548] P. 405. - -[2549] Livy, ep. lxxxiv: “Novis civibus senatus consulto suffragium datum -est.” - -[2550] P. 58 above. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 141, unnecessarily assumes a -consular lex Papiria for the purpose. - -In the year 87 the propretorian imperium of Appius Claudius Pulcher, -father of the famous tribune of 58, was abrogated by a lex of an unknown -tribune. The ground was a refusal to obey the summons of the tribune in -question; Cic. _Dom._ 31. 83; Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -iii. 2848 f. - -[2551] Vell. ii. 23. 2; Cic. _Font._ 1. 1; _Quinct._ 4. 17; Sall. _Cat._ -33; Mommsen, _Röm. Münzwesen_, 385; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 251; Ferrero, -_Rome_, i. 92. - -[2552] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 33. 89; 34. 92; 36. 98. - -[2553] _CIL._ i². p. 154. - -[2554] App. _B. C._ i. 3, 98 f.; Plut. _Sull._ 33; Vell. ii. 28. 2; Oros. -v. 21. 12; Diod. xxxviii, xxxix. 15; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. -703 f. The office had been disused for a hundred and twenty years; Plut. -ibid.; Vell. ibid.; _CIL._ i². p. 23. On the form of comitia, see p. 236. - -[2555] App. _B. C._ i. 97. 451; Cic. _Leg. Agr._ iii. 2. 5. - -[2556] Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 43. 126; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1556; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 404. From -this Ciceronian passage it is necessary to infer that the Valerian law -contained an article similar to the later Cornelian lex de proscriptione; -p. 421 below. - -[2557] _CIL._ i². p. 27. - -[2558] Livy, ep. lxxxix; App. _B. C._ i. 100. 465; Sall. _Hist._ i. 55. 2. - -[2559] P. 406 f. - -[2560] Livy, ep. lxxxix: “Tribunorum plebis potestatem minuit, et omne -ius legum ferendarum ademit.” We should infer from this statement, which -is the sole authority for the view it presents, that he absolutely -deprived the tribunes of legislative initiative, were it not that under -his constitutional arrangements they actually proposed laws de senatus -sententia; _CIL._ i. 204 (year 71); Bruns, _Font. iur._ p. 94; Dessau, -_Inscr. Lat._ i. p. 11; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 154; Fröhlich, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1559; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -158; Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 11; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, i. 390 f., -411. The conference between Sulla and Scipio, mentioned by Cic. _Phil._ -xii. 11. 27, referred to this arrangement. Sunden, _De rib. pot. imm._ 10 -ff. (cf. Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 399 ff.), holding that Sulla abolished the -right of the tribunes to propose laws, refuses to accept 71 as the date -of the epigraphic lex above mentioned. - -It seems probable (Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 175; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ -654, n. 2), though it is not certain (Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 424, 430 -f.), that the lex Plautia de vi was proposed by a tribune of 78 or 77 as -the agent of Q. Lutatius Catulus, proconsul; Sall. _Cat._ 31; Schol. Bob. -368; Cic. _Cael._ 29. 70; p. 424 below. Probably the lex Plautia which -recalled from exile L. Cornelius Cinna, brother-in-law of Caesar, and -others who, having shared in the insurrection of Lepidus, had gone over -to Sertorius, was a plebiscite de senatus sententia of 73; Suet. _Caes._ -5; Gell. xiii. 3. 5; Val. Max. vii. 7. 6; Dio Cass. xliv. 47. 4; Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ iii. 185; Maurembrecher, Sall. _Hist. Proleg._ 78; Münzer, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1287. Others assign the measure to 70; -cf. Long, _Rom. Rep._ iii. 53. For other laws, see p. 424. - -The statement of Livy’s epitomator concerning the lex Cornelia -de tribunicia potestate would apply more accurately to the -Cornelian-Pompeian law of 88; p. 406. - -[2561] From Cic. _Cluent._ 40. 110 (cf. Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 400) we -should infer that under the Cornelian government no tribunician contio -was held; but we know that this is not true. In 76 a contio was summoned -by L. Sicinius, tribune of the plebs; _Orat._ of Licinius Macer, in -Sall. _Hist._ iii. 48. 8: “L. Sicinius primus de potestate tribunicia -loqui ausus mussantibus vobis”; cf. Pseud. Ascon. 103; Plut. _Caes._ -7; Cic. _Brut._ 60. 216 f. In 74 the tribune Quinctius held contiones; -Cic. _Cluent._ 34. 93; Sall. _Hist._ ibid. § 11. The oration of Licinius -Macer, quoted by Sallust, _Hist._ iii. 48, is a tribunician harangue. -Finally in 71 the tribune Palicanus held a contio outside the city that -Pompey might attend; p. 426. - -[2562] Cic. _Verr._ II. i. 60. 155: Q. Opimius was prosecuted in a -finable action on the ground that as tribune in 75 (Pseud. Ascon. 200) -he had interceded in violation of a Cornelian law, which must have fixed -the fine. The statement of Caesar, _B. C._ i. 5. 1; 7. 3, that Sulla -left the tribunes the right of intercession proves no more than that he -did not wholly abolish it. Cf. further Sunden, _De trib. pot. imm._ 4; -Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 411, n. 10. - -[2563] Cic. _Verr._ i. 13. 38: “Sublata populi Romani in unum quemque -vestrum potestate.” - -[2564] P. 245, 266, 315. - -[2565] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 9. 22. - -[2566] App. _B. C._ i. 100. 467; Ascon. 78 (repealed by Cotta); Pseud. -Ascon. 200. - -[2567] Vell. ii. 30. 4; Dion. Hal. v. 77. 5; Sall. _Hist._ i. 55. 23; -iii. 48. 3; Pseud. Ascon. 102. - -The following sources assume more or less definitely an abolition of the -tribunicia potestas; Sall. _Hist._ i. 55. 23; 77. 14; iii. 48. 1; _Cat._ -38. 1; Plut. _Pomp._ 21; Pseud. Ascon. 102. The following speak of a -limitation; Caes. _B. C._ i. 5. 1; 7. 3; Livy, ep. lxxxix; Dion. Hal. v. -77. 5; Vell. ii. 30. 4; Suet. _Caes._ 5; (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 75. -11; App. _B. C._ ii. 29. 113. Tacitus, _Ann._ iii. 27, is non-committal. -In general on the lex de tribunicia potestate, see Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -iii. 153 f.; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1559; -Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 410 ff.; Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 10-16; -Sunden, _De trib. pot. imm._ - -[2568] In Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1559. - -[2569] The law concerning the quaestors was preceded by the judiciary -statute (Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22), which must have been enacted near the end -of 81, for the senators remained ten years (80-70) in control of the -courts; Cic. _Verr._ i. 13. 37. - -[2570] P. 347. The relation of this Cornelian provision to the lex Villia -is not more definitely known. - -[2571] App. _B. C._ i. 100. 466; cf. 121. 560. - -[2572] Cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 529. - -[2573] In the thirty-sixth year of his age Pompey was not yet qualified -for the quaestorship; Cic. _Imp. Pomp._ 21. 62. Cicero, who was -consul in his forty-third year, states that he obtained the office -at the earliest legal age; _Leg. Agr._ ii. 2. 3. An interval of two -years between successive offices would place the quaestorship in the -thirty-seventh year; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 527, 569; Fröhlich, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1560; but soon after Sulla it came -about, probably through further legislation, that the office was often -filled in the thirty-first year; Mommsen, ibid. 570 ff. - -[2574] Cic. _Dom._ 43. 112; _Fam._ x. 25. 2; 26. 2 f. - -[2575] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22; cf. Fröhlich, ibid. iv. 1560. - -[2576] P. 348. - -[2577] P. 298. - -[2578] App. _B. C._ i. 100. 466; cf. Cic. _Leg._ iii. 3. 9; Caes. _B. C._ -i. 32; Dio Cass. xl. 51. 2. - -[2579] P. 332. There were probably twelve; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 163; -Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 543. - -[2580] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22: “Lege Sullae viginti creati supplendo -senatui.” The eighth chapter of this law concerning the twenty quaestors -is preserved in an inscription; _CIL._ i. 202; Bruns, _Font. Iur._ p. 90; -Girard, _Textes_, p. 64. It regulates the qualifications, appointment, -and pay of the apparitores of the quaestors. An important fact derived -from the praescriptio is that the law was adopted in the tribal assembly. -Since in the case of one law the centuriate assembly is mentioned as -if exceptional (p. 422), we may infer that most of Sulla’s enactments -were tribal. On the apparitores, see Mommsen, in _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. -vi (1846). 1-57; _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 332-46; Habel, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ ii. 191-4; Keil, J., in _Wiener Studien_, xxiv (1902). -548-51. - -[2581] Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 32, wrongly says to ten—a number -reached by the legislation of Caesar; Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 3; p. 454 -below. On the relation of the praetors to the courts, see p. 420. - -[2582] Livy, ep. lxxxix, who connects it closely with the increase in -the number of senators, placing it thus among his earlier measures; -(Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 75. 11; Servius, _in Aen._ vi. 73; cf. Tac. -_Ann._ vi. 12; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 157; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1559 f.; Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 1-9. That the increase -in the last-named college was due to Sulla seems certain, though it is -nowhere stated. It is possible, too, that the increase of the epulones -from three to seven was his work; Lengle, ibid. 2. - -[2583] P. 391. - -[2584] Livy, ep. lxxxix; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 37. 1; Pseud. Ascon. 102; -wrongly Plut. _Caes._ 1; Serv. _in Aen._ vi. 73; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -iii. 157. - -[2585] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 7. 18; Lange, ibid. The Servilian agrarian -rogation, 63 (p. 435 below), drawn up before the enactment of the Atian -plebiscite of that year which restored the election of sacerdotes, -assumes that the comitia pontificis maximi were at the time in use. Most -authorities, as Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 418; Drumann-Gröbe, -_Gesch. Roms_, iii. 156; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 30, have failed to -notice this important fact. - -[2586] P. 106, n. 10. - -[2587] P. 416. - -[2588] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 200; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1560. - -[2589] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 164. - -[2590] P. 381. - -[2591] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 705. - -[2592] Cic. _Fam._ i. 9. 25. - -[2593] Cf. Cic. _Fam._ viii. 8. 8. - -[2594] Cic. _Fam._ i. 9. 25. On the relation of the Cornelian legislation -to the curiate law, see p. 193, 199. - -[2595] Cic. _Fam._ iii. 6. 3, 6. - -[2596] Cic. _Fam._ iii. 10. 6; _Q. Fr._ i. 1. 9, 26. - -[2597] App. _B. C._ i. 103. 482; Oros. v. 22. 4; Eutrop. v. 9. Willems, -_Sén. Rom._ i. 404, calculates that the number was reduced to about a -hundred and fifty. - -[2598] Livy, ep. lxxxix; cf. Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 3. 8; Dion. Hal. v. 77. 5; -Sall. _Cat._ 37. - -[2599] _B. C._ i. 100. 468. - -[2600] Cf. Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1559. - -[2601] P. 402. The second view, which seems more reasonable, is held by -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 156. - -[2602] No authority gives this number, which however may be deduced from -well-known facts; Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. 405 f. - -[2603] Willems, ibid. 406 f. - -[2604] Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1560. - -[2605] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 156. - -[2606] Vell. ii. 32. 3; Cic. _Verr._ i. 13. 37 f.; Pseud. Ascon. 99, 102, -103, 145, 149, 161; Schol. Gronov. 384, 426; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -436 ff.; Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 419 ff.; Wilmanns, in _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. -xix (1864). 528. - -[2607] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22: “Lege Sullae viginti creati (quaestores) -supplendo senatui, cui iudicia tradiderat.” - -[2608] P. 402. - -[2609] _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 32. - -[2610] Cic. _Rab. Post._ 4. 9. It took the place of the lex Servilia of -111; p. 393. - -[2611] Schol. Bob. 361. From Plut. _Mar._ 5 it seems evident that a -quaestio de ambitu existed as early as 116; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -422, n. 3; Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 21 f., who has collected the cases de -ambitu anterior to Sulla; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 665; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 521; Lohse, _De quaestionum perpetuarum origine, -praesidibus, consiliis_. - -[2612] Cic. _Verr._ i. 13. 39; II. i. 4. 11 f.; iii. 36. 83; _Cluent._ -53. 147; cf. _Mur._ 20. 42; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 665; iii. 166. The -trial of Pompeius Magnus in 86 for misappropriation of booty by his -father in 89 seems to have come before a quaestio de peculatu; Cic. -_Brut._ 64. 230; Plut. _Pomp._ 4; Lengle, ibid. 40 f. If this supposition -is right, the court must have existed before Sulla. A Cornelian law on -the subject is not expressly mentioned but may be reasonably assumed. - -[2613] Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 203. - -[2614] Cic. _Pis._ 21. 50; Ascon. 59; cf. Cic. _Fam._ iii. 11. 2; -_Cluent._ 35. 97; _Verr._ II. i. 5. 12. This law took the place of -the lex Appuleia, probably of 100; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 165; -Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 423, 507. - -[2615] Cic. _Cluent._ 20. 55; 54. 148; 55. 151; 56. 154; Frag. A. ii. -(_Var._) 6; _Mil._ 4. 11; Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 44; Justin. _Inst._ iv. 18. 5 -f.; _Dig._ xlviii. 8; Paul. _Sent._ v. 23. (Girard, _Textes_, p. 423). - -[2616] Cic. _Verr._ i. 42. 108; Paul. _Sent._ iv. 7; v. 25; _Dig._ -xlviii. 10; Justin. _Inst._ iv. 18. 7; cf. Voigt, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. -271 f. - -[2617] _Dig._ iii. 3. 42. 1; xlvii. 10. 5; 10. 37. 1; xlviii. 2. 12. 4; -Paul. _Sent._ v. 4. 8; Justin. _Inst._ iv. 4. 8; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ -203; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 208, 423 f.; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1561; Bruns, _Font. Iur._ 93. In the opinion of Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 665; iii. 166, this lex did not establish a quaestio. - -[2618] Cic. _Cluent._ 20. 55; 27. 75; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 442. - -[2619] Cic. _Cluent._ 28. 75. - -[2620] Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 442. On the Cornelian courts in general, -see Long, _Rom. Rep._ ii. 420 ff.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 520 -f.; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 413-6; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ -see index, s. Quaestio and the various crimes belonging thereto; _Röm. -Staatsr._ ii. 200 f.; Lengle, _Sull. Verf._ 17-54; Lohse, _De quaestionum -perpetuarum origine, praesidibus, consiliis_; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1561 f. - -In Lange’s opinion (_Röm. Alt._ ii. 665; iii. 166) there must have been -a lex Cornelia de adulteriis et pudicitia, for it is doubtful whether -Sulla’s ordinance περὶ γάμων καὶ σωφροσύνης could have formed part of -his lex de iniuriis; Plut. _Comp. Lys. et Sull._ 3; cf. _Dig._ xlviii. -5. 23. It seems to be demonstrated, however, by Voigt, in _Ber. sächs. -Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ xlii (1890). 244-79, that all republican regulations -of this offence, including the Cornelian, were sumptuary; cf. Cuq, in -Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ iii. 1141. No quaestio accordingly was -needed for the trial of the offence. - -[2621] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 158. - -[2622] P. 412. - -[2623] Cic. _Verr._ II. i. 47. 123; Pseud. Ascon. 193. - -[2624] Suet. _Caes._ 11. - -[2625] Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 43. 125 f. Though Cicero says he does not know -whether the law in question was the Valerian or Cornelian, he probably -knew it was the latter, the terms of which he states: “Ut eorum bona -veneant, qui proscripti sunt, ... aut eorum, qui in adversariorum -praesidiis occisi sunt.” - -[2626] Livy lxxxix; Vell. ii. 28. 4; Sall. _Hist._ i. 55. 6; Plut. -_Sull._ 31; _Cic._ 12; Dion. Hal. viii. 80. 2. - -[2627] Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 44. 128. - -[2628] App. _B. C._ i. 96. 100; Flor. ii. 9 (iii. 21); cf. Suet. _Ill. -Gramm._ 11. - -[2629] Livy, ep. lxxxix; App. _B. C._ i. 100. 470; 104. 489; Sall. -_Hist._ i. 55. 12; Cic. _Mur._ 24. 49: _Leg. Agr._ ii. 28. 78; iii. 2. 6 -ff.; 3. 12; Gromat. p. 230 ff. - -[2630] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 159; cf. ii. 689; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. -Roms_, ii. 407 f. - -[2631] Lange, ibid. iii. 159. - -[2632] _CIL._ i². p. 49. - -[2633] Lange, ibid. iii. 161. - -[2634] Cic. _Dom._ 30. 79; Sall. _Hist._ i. 55. 12; cf. Pseud. Ascon. 102. - -[2635] Cic. _Caecin._ 35. 102. - -[2636] App. _B. C._ i. 102. 474; cf. Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 14. 35. - -[2637] Sall. _Hist._ i. 55. 11. They were then being made according -to the law of M. Octavius (p. 401), or if that was repealed by Cinna, -according to the lex Sempronia of 123 (p. 372). - -[2638] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 693. The statement in iii. 161 is less -exact. - -[2639] App. _B. C._ i. 102. 474. - -[2640] Cic. _Off._ iii. 22. 87. - -[2641] P. 409 f. - -[2642] Hence it was that T. Crispinus, quaestor in the following year, -treated the Valerian law as no longer in force; Cic. _Font._ 15; Lange, -ibid. iii. 162. To this date seems to belong the lex Cornelia de sponsu -(Gaius iii. 124), which Poste, 359, reasonably assigns to the dictator. - -[2643] _CIL._ i². p. 333; Vell. ii. 27. 6; Cic. _Verr._ i. 10. 31; Pseud. -Ascon. 150; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 128. - -[2644] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 675; iii. 162. - -[2645] Its existence is assumed for the year 80; Plut. _Sull._ 35. - -[2646] P. 388, n. 9. - -[2647] Ibid. - -[2648] Gell. ii. 24. 11; Macrob. _Sat._ iii. 17. 11. - -[2649] Plut. _Sull._ 35. Here belongs also his regulation de adulteriis -et pudicitia; p. 420, n. 6 above. - -[2650] _CIL._ i². p. 154. A proof that he completed his legislation in -this year is the fact that he looked upon the following as a time of -probation for his system (App. _B. C._ i. 103; Cic. _Rosc. Am._ 48. 139), -and that the newly organized criminal courts were in operation for the -first time in 80; Cic. ibid. 5. 11; 10. 28; _Brut._ 90. 312; _Off._ ii. -14. 51; Gell. xv. 28. 3; Plut. _Cic._ 3. - -On the form of comitia used for the ratification of his measures, see p. -236. - -[2651] The general character of these proposals, among which the -frumentarian alone was adopted, can be gathered from the _Oration_ of -Lepidus, in Sall. _Hist._ i. 55; cf. Gran. Licin. x. p. 44: “Legem -frumentariam nullo resistente adeptus est, ut annonae quinque modi populo -darentur, et alia multa pollicebantur: exules reducere, res gestas -a Sulla rescindere”; Tac. _Ann._ iii. 27; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ i. 554 f. - -[2652] P. 414. - -[2653] Sall. _Hist._ ii. 49; Ascon. 66, 78; Pseud. Ascon. 200; Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ iii. 178 f.; Long, _Rom. Rep._ iii. 3; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ i. 531 f.; Klebs, ibid. ii. 2483. - -Cicero, _Cornel._ i. 18 (Frag. A. vii), states that Cotta proposed to -the senate the repeal of his own laws, whereupon Asconius comments that -he can find the mention of no law of his except the one concerning -retired tribunes above described. Cicero, however, attributes to him a -lex de iudiciis privatis, which his brother caused to be repealed in the -following year; _Cornel._ i. 19. It is not otherwise known. - -[2654] Sall. _Cat._ 31; Gaius ii. 45; Cuq, in Daremberg et Saglio, -_Dict._ iii. 1159. For the cases coming before this court, see Greenidge, -_Leg. Proced._ 424, n. 6. - -[2655] Cic. _Verr._ iii. 8. 9. C. Scribonius, consul in the preceding -year, may have been author of the lex Scribonia de usucapione servitutum -(_Dig._ xli. 3. 4. 28; cf. Cic. _Caecin._ 26. 74), or it may belong to -the tribune of the same name of the year 50; p. 450, n. 2. - -[2656] P. 413, n. 4. The consuls of 73 passed a frumentarian measure—the -lex Cassia Terentia, considered below; p. 444, n. 6. - -[2657] Sall. _Hist._ iv. 1, in Gell. xviii. 4. 4. Sallust speaks of -nothing more than the promulgation of the law; but we know that afterward -an attempt was made to collect the moneys; Ascon. 72; cf. Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ iii. 190, 221; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 467. Münzer, -in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1380, speaks of the measure as a -proposal. - -The same consul with his colleague, L. Gellius Poplicola, proposed and -carried a law for confirming the grants of citizenship already made by -Pompey in Spain; Cic. _Balb._ 8. 19; 14. 32 f.; Pliny, _N. H._ v. 5. 36. -Their joint proposal that provincials should not in their absence be -tried on a capital charge took the form merely of a senatus consultum; -Cic. _Verr._ II. ii. 38. 95; Münzer, ibid.; Drumann-Gröbe, ibid. - -In 71 (_CIL._ i. 593 = vi. 1299) and in 62 (_CIL._ i. 600 = vi. 1305) -there was a curator viarum e lege Visellia. The law mentioned could not -have been later than 71, but may have been many years earlier. There were -curatores viarum in 115; _CIL._ vi. 3824; Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ ii. -89, n. 6. - -[2658] Cic. _Flacc._ 3. 6; Ascon. 15; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 191. - -[2659] Cic. _Q. Fr._ ii. 13. 3; _Fam._ i. 4. 1; cf. _Q. Fr._ ii. 2. 3; -_Fam._ viii. 8. 5; _Sest._ 34. 74; Caes. _B. C._ i. 5. - -[2660] Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 5; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 43. 3. As consul in 63 -Cicero adjourned the assembly in order to hold a meeting of the senate on -a certain comitial day; Cic. _Mur._ 25. 51; Plut. _Cic._ 14. - -[2661] The first chapter of this law is preserved in an inscription; -_CIL._ i. 204; Bruns, _Font. Iur._ p. 94; Girard, _Textes_, p. 66. - -[2662] P. 423. - -[2663] Gran. Licin. x. p. 44. It was charged against him by Philippus -in the senate that for the sake of concord he wished to restore the -tribunician power; Sall. _Hist._ i. 77. 14. - -[2664] Sall. _Hist._ iii. 48. 8; Pseud. Ascon. 103. - -[2665] P. 423 f. - -[2666] Cic. _Verr._ II. i. 60. - -[2667] Cic. _Cluent._ 34. 93 f.; Ascon. 103; Plut. _Lucull._ 5. - -[2668] Licinius Macer, _Oratio ad plebem_, in Sall. _Hist._ iii. 48. -11 (cf. iv. 71); Cic. _Cluent._ 22. 61; 27. 74; 28. 77; 29. 79; Pseud. -Ascon. 141; Schol. Gronov. 386, 395, 441. - -[2669] Sall. _Hist._ iii. 48; Cic. _Brut._ 67. 238. - -[2670] Suet. _Caes._ 5. - -[2671] Plut. _Pomp._ 21; App. _B. C._ i. 121. 560; Sall. _Hist._ iv. -44 (“Magnam exorsus orationem”) probably refers to his speech in this -contio. Frag. 45 (“Si nihil ante adventum suum inter plebem et patres -convenisset, coram se daturum operam”) seems also to be from this speech. - -[2672] Sall. _Hist._ iv. 46. - -[2673] Cic. _Verr._ i. 16. 46 f. - -[2674] Ibid. 15. 44; Pseud. Ascon. 147. - -[2675] _CIL._ i². p. 154. - -[2676] Livy, ep. xcvii; Cic. Frag. A. vii (_Cornel._ i). 47; Ascon. 75; -Pseud. Ascon. 103. - -[2677] Sall. _Cat._ 38; Vell. ii. 30. 4; Cic. _Leg._ iii. 9. 22; ii. 26; -Plut. _Pomp._ 22; App. _B. C._ ii. 29. 113; cf. Cic. _Verr._ v. 63. 163; -68. 175; Schol. Gronov. 397; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 192 f.; Long, _Rom. -Rep._ iii. 49-51; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 553. - -[2678] Cic. _Verr._ i. 15. 45. - -[2679] P. 424. Pompey found it popular to give his assent; Plut. _Pomp._ -22; cf. Neumann, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 75. - -[2680] Cicero, in his _In Verrem Actio_ I, is unacquainted with the -rogation and expresses the hope that the condemnation of Verres will -restore confidence in the senatorial courts. In _Actio_ II, composed -after the exile of Verres and not delivered, he assumes the existence of -such a rogation (cf. v. 69. 177). - -[2681] Cic. _Verr._ ii. 71. 174 f.; iii. 96. 223 f.; v. 69. 177 f.; Livy, -ep. xcvii; Plut. _Pomp._ 22; Pseud. Ascon. 127. - -[2682] On the tribuni aerarii, see p. 64, n. 3. See also Cic. _Phil._ i. -8. 20; _Rab. Perd._ 9. 27; _Cat._ iv. 7. 15; Ascon. 16; Schol. Bob. 339. - -[2683] P. 402. - -[2684] Cic. _Cluent._ 43. 121. - -[2685] Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 3; _Phil._ i. 8. 20; Ascon. 16, 30, 53, 67, 78, -90; Pseud. Ascon. 103; Schol. Bob. 229, 235, 339; Schol. Gronov. 384, -386; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 197 f.; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 533; -Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 442 ff.; Long, _Rom. Rep._ iii. 51-3; Klebs, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2485 f. - -The reference to a lex Aurelia in Cic. _Q. Fr._ i. 3. 8, seems to be, not -to a lex de ambitu, as Lange, ibid. iii. 198, supposes, but to the lex -iudiciaria under discussion. - -[2686] _Röm. Alt._ ii. 199 (cf. ii. 671). It must have been passed -between the death of Sulla and 57; Gell. ii. 24. 13; Macrob. _Sat._ iii. -17. 13; Cic. _Fam._ vii. 26. 2. - -[2687] Q. Cic. _Petit. Cons._ 11. 44. - -[2688] Cic. _Cluent._ 55. 152 (year 66). - -[2689] Cic. _Att._ i. 17. 9; _Off._ iii. 22. 88; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -iii. 202. - -[2690] Cf. Neumann, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 141. - -[2691] Dio Cass. xxxvi. 30. - -[2692] Cic. Frag. A. vii (_Cornel._ i). 52; Ascon. 78. - -[2693] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 18. 44; Hor. _Epist._ i. 1. 61; Juv. iii. 159; -xiv. 324. - -[2694] Livy, ep. xcix; Tac. _Ann._ xv. 32; Ascon. 79; Cic. _Mur._ 19. 40; -Dio Cass. xxxvi. 42. 1; cf. Hor. _Epod._ iv. 15. The censors of 194 had -given front seats to the senators; p. 356 f. - -[2695] Vell. ii. 32. 3; Cic. _Mur._ 19. 40; p. 356 f. above. - -[2696] Cic. _Q. Fr._ ii. 11. 3. - -[2697] Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 526. - -[2698] P. 425. - -[2699] Cic. _Q. Fr._ ii. 13. 3; cf. _Fam._ i. 4. 1. - -[2700] Cic. _Alt._ v. 21. 12; vi. 2. 7. Loans were sometimes made in -violation of the law (_Flacc._ 20. 46 f.), and sometimes the senate -granted a dispensation from it; _Att._ v. 21. 11 f.; vi. 2. 7; Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ iii. 203. - -[2701] Ascon. 56. - -[2702] Ibid. 57. - -[2703] P. 307 f. - -[2704] Cic. Frag. A. vii (_Cornel._ i). 5; _Valin._ 2. 5; Ascon. 57 f.; -Quintil. _Inst._ x. 5. 3 (iv. 4. 8). - -[2705] Ascon. 58; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 39. 4. - -[2706] Cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 214; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. -337 f.; Long, _Rom. Rep._ iii. 107. Dio Cassius, xxxvi. 39, has wholly -misunderstood the matter. Ferrero’s account (_Rome_, i. 194) of the -Cornelian legislation is inaccurate in all points. - -[2707] Dio Cass. xxxvi. 38. 4; Cic. Frag. A. vii (_Cornel._ i). 40. - -[2708] _CIL._ 1², p. 156; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 256 -f.; Münzer, ibid. iii. 1376 f. - -[2709] Ascon. 75. - -[2710] Schol. Bob. 361; Ascon. 68, 89; Cic. _Mur._ 23. 46; 32. 67. It was -opposed by the people, who preferred the stricter measure of Cornelius; -but Piso with a crowd of followers forced it through the assembly; Dio -Cass. xxxvi. 38. 1. - -[2711] Schol. Bob. 361; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 38; xxxvii. 25. 3; Greenidge, -_Leg. Proced._ 425, 508, 521 f.; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 867; Long, -_Rom. Rep._ iii. 105 f. It was supplemented by the lex Fabia de numero -sectatorum, apparently a plebiscite of 66; Cic. _Mur._ 34. 71; Mommsen, -ibid. 871; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 527. - -[2712] XXXVI. 40. 1 f. (Foster’s rendering); cf. Ascon. 58; Cic. _Fin._ -ii. 22. 74; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 656; iii. 215; Long, _Rom. Rep._ iii. -107 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 527; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -95, 97 f., 122. - -[2713] Ascon. 58. The restriction, however, was only partial; Erman, -in _Mélanges_ Ch. Appleton (1903), 201-304. The author of the law -seems to have been a man not only of excellent heart but of remarkably -statesmanlike views, though the optimates naturally classed him as -seditious. On Cornelius in general, see Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 1252-5; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 526-9. - -[2714] Dio Cass. xxxvi. 23 ff.; Plut. _Pomp._ 25; Vell. ii. 31; App. -_Mithr._ 94. - -[2715] Vell. ii. 31; Cic. _Verr._ ii. 3. 8; iii. 91. 213; Pseud. Ascon. -122, 176, 206; Schol. Bob. 234; Sall. _Hist._ iii. 4 f. - -[2716] P. 428 f. - -[2717] Dio Cass. xxxvi. 30. 2; cf. the deposition of Octavius, p. 367. - -[2718] Cic. _Imp. Pomp._ 15. 44; Livy, ep. xcix; Eutrop. vi. 12. - -[2719] Plut. _Pomp._ 26; Dio Cass, xxxvi. 37. 1; Cic. _Imp. Pomp._ 19. 57 -f. - -[2720] Sall. _Hist._ v. 13; cf. Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -i. 256. - -[2721] Cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 76. Another comitial act on -foreign affairs was the plebiscite of unknown authorship providing for a -commission of ten to aid Lucullus in settling the affairs of Asia; Dio -Cass. xxxvi. 43. 2. - -[2722] Ascon, p. 64 ff.; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 42. 1-3. - -[2723] Cic. Frag. A. vii (_Cornel._ i). 3. - -[2724] Cic. _Mur._ 23. 47. - -[2725] Ascon. 65 f. The Cn. Manlius mentioned by Ascon. 45 f. is probably -to be identified with this Manilius; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. -19, n. 9. - -[2726] XXXVI. 42. 3. - -[2727] Ascon. 66, or more simply the “lex de imperio Cn. Pompeii”; Cic. -_Imp. Pomp._ Inscr. - -[2728] Dio Cass. xxxvi. 42.4; Plut. _Pomp._ 30; _Lucull._ 35; App. -_Mithr._ 97; Livy, ep. c; Vell. ii. 33. 1; Eutrop. vi. 12. - -[2729] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 219; Willems, _Sén. Rom._ ii. 586 f. - -[2730] Cic. _Imp. Pomp._ 17. 51 ff.; 20. 59 ff.; Plut. _Pomp._ 30. - -[2731] Dio Cass. xxxvi. 43. 2, and especially Cicero’s oration _De -imperio Pompeii ad quirites_. Long, _Rom. Rep._ iii. 131 f., severely -criticises Dio Cassius for his treatment of Cicero’s motives. - -[2732] P. 354. - -[2733] P. 370. - -[2734] P. 397; Cic. _Off._ iii. 11. 47; _Brut._ 16. 63; _Balb._ 21. 48; -23. 52; 24. 54; _Arch._ 5. 10; _Leg. Agr._ i. 4. 13; Ascon. 67; Schol. -Bob. 296, 354; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 9. 5; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 229; -Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 140. - -[2735] Gell. i. 12. 11 f.; Suet. _Aug._ 31; Lange, ibid. ii. 675 f.; iii. -229; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 439. - -[2736] P. 391. - -[2737] P. 416. On the lex Atia, see Dio Cass. xxxvii. 37. 1; Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ iii. 243. This act had no effect on the supreme pontificate, which -had remained elective (p. 416 above) and which was conferred on Caesar -soon after (Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 155 f.) the enactment of -the Atian law; Dio Cass. ibid.; Suet. _Caes._ 13; Vell. ii. 43. 3. The -same Atius, together with T. Ampius Balbus, a colleague, proposed and -carried a plebiscite for granting to Pompey the privilege of wearing the -triumphal ornaments in the Circensian games and the toga praetexta and -laurel (or golden?) crown at the theatres; Vell. ii. 40. 4; Dio Cass. -xxxvii. 21. 3 f. - -[2738] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ iii. 2. 4. - -[2739] Ibid. i. 2. 4; ii. 5. 13. - -[2740] Ibid. ii. 7. 16-8; 8. 21. - -[2741] Ibid. ii. 13. 34; 24. 64. - -[2742] Ibid. ii. 9. 24. - -[2743] Ibid. i. 5. 15; ii. 13. 33; 27. 72. - -[2744] From (1) an extensive sale of houses, lands, and other property -belonging to the state (ibid. i. 1. 3; 3. 10; ii. 14. 35; 15. 38). (2) -vectigalia (i. 4. 10; ii. 21. 56), and (3) other public moneys (i. 4. 12 -f.; ii. 22. 59). - -[2745] Ibid. ii. 25. 66. - -[2746] Ibid. i. 5. 16 f.; ii. 13. 34; 20. 55; 24. 63; 25. 66; 26. 68; 27. -74 f. - -[2747] These are the second and third _Orations on the Agrarian Law_, -the first having been delivered in the senate. On the purpose of the -rogation, see Neumann, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 223 ff.; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. -Roms_, iii. 143; Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 231-3. - -[2748] P. 431. - -[2749] Cic. _Mur._ 32. 67. - -[2750] Cic. _Vat._ 15. 37; p. 359 above. - -[2751] _CIL._ i². p. 156. - -[2752] Cic. _Mur._ 2. 3; 3. 5; 23. 47; 32. 67; Schol. Bob. 269, 309, 324, -362. - -[2753] Cic. _Mur._ 23. 47. - -[2754] Cic. _Vat._ 15. 37; _Sest._ 64. 133 (cf. _Har. Resp._ 26. 56); -Schol. Bob. 309. - -[2755] Cic. _Mur._ 23. 47; 41. 89; _Planc._ 34. 83; Schol. Bob. 269, 362; -Dio Cass. xxxvii. 29. 1. - -[2756] Cic. _Mur._ 23. 47. On the law in general, see Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -iii. 245; Hartmann, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 1801. - -[2757] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 9. 24, proves that no such law existed at -the beginning of 63, and in 62 its existence is assumed by the Caecilian -rogation for dispensing Pompey from its provisions; Schol. Bob. 302. - -In 61 M. Aufidius Lurco, tribune of the plebs, attempted a curious -modification of the statute concerning corruption at elections, -proposing that promises of money to the tribes should not be binding, -but that a candidate who actually paid should be liable for life to a -payment—apparently annual—of three thousand sesterces to the tribe. -His measure failed to become a law; Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 12 f.; 18. 3; -Hartmann, ibid. i. 1802. - -[2758] Cic. _Fam._ xi. 1. 2; _Att._ ii. 18. 3. - -[2759] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 8. 18. - -[2760] Cic. _Fam._ xii. 21. - -[2761] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ i. 3. 8; 17. 45; _Flacc._ 34. 86. - -[2762] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 8. 18. - -[2763] Cic. _Flacc._ 34. 86; _Fam._ xii. 21; _Att._ ii. 18. 3; xv. ii. 4; -Suet. _Tib._ 31; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 244. - -Several unpassed bills of the year 63 are mentioned. (1) The rogation -of L. Caecilius, tribune of the plebs, for lightening the penalty upon -P. Autronius Paetus and P. Cornelius Sulla, who had been condemned for -ambitus; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 25. 3; Cic. _Sull._ 22 f.; cf. _Leg. Agr._ -ii. 3. 8; 4. 10.—(2) A proposal to restore to the children of those whom -Sulla had proscribed the right to become candidates for offices; Dio -Cass. ibid.; Plut. _Cic._ 12; Cic. _Att._ ii. 1. 3.—(3) A proposal for -the cancellation of debts and (4) another for the allotment of lands in -Italy. All these measures were quashed by Cicero; Dio Cass. ibid. § 3 f. - -[2764] Suet. _Caes._ 28. 3; Plut. _Cat. Min._ 17. - -[2765] Schol. Bob. 310. These same magistrates established a penalty for -violations of the lex Caecilia Didia (Cic. _Phil._ v. 3. 8), whether by -the law above mentioned or a separate enactment cannot be determined. - -[2766] Val. Max ii. 8. 1. In 62 falls the unpassed bill of Q. Caecilius -Metellus Nepos, tribune of the plebs (cf. p. 437, n. 1), directing Pompey -to come to the defence of Italy against Catiline; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 43; -Schol. Bob. 302. In the following year (61) the consuls, M. Pupius Piso -and M. Valerius Messala, proposed a resolution for the appointment of -a special commission to try Clodius on charge of having intruded in a -religious festival exclusively for women; Cic. _Att._ i. 13. 3; _Mil._ -5. 13; 22. 59; 27. 73; Ascon. 53; Suet. _Caes._ 6; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 46. -The bill provided that the jurors should not be drawn by lot in the usual -way but appointed by the praetor; Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 1. It was withdrawn -in favor of the plebiscite de religione for the same purpose but more -favorable to the accused, presented by Q. Fufius Calenus, and accepted by -the tribes; Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 2; _Parad._ iv. 2. 31; Plut. _Caes._ 10; -Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 198 f. - -[2767] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 3; Cic. _Att._ ii. 16. I; _Q. Fr._ i. 1. 11. -33; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 274. These taxes were made unnecessary by -Pompey’s acquisitions in the East. - -[2768] Cic. _Att._ i. 18. 6; 19. 4; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 50; Plut. _Cat. -Min._ 31. - -[2769] P. 162. - -[2770] P. 386. - -[2771] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 1. 4. On the later inclusion of this territory, -see p. 440 below. - -[2772] Suet. _Caes._ 20. - -[2773] Cic. _Fam._ xiii. 4. 2. - -[2774] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 1. 4 f.; Cic. _Dom._ 9. 23. - -[2775] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 1. 3; App. _B. C._ ii. 10. 35; Plut. _Cat. -Min._ 31; _Pomp._ 47; _Cic._ 26. - -[2776] App. _B. C._ iii. 2. 5; 7. 24. - -[2777] Varro, _R. R._ i. 2. 10; Cic. _Att._ ii. 6. 2; 7. 3; ix. 2 a. 1; -Vell. ii. 45. 2; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 1. 6 f.; Suet. _Aug._ 4. - -[2778] Dio Cass. ibid. - -[2779] _CIL._ vi. 3826 (Elogium of M. Valerius Messala, consul in 61); -Cic. _Att._ ii. 7. 4; _Prov. Cons._ 17. 41. - -[2780] _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 628, n. 4. - -[2781] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 2. - -[2782] Ibid. 3 f.; Plut. _Caes._ 14; App. _B. C._ ii. 10. - -[2783] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 6. 1. - -[2784] P. 116. - -[2785] The assembly met in the Forum, and was therefore tribal; Suet. -_Caes._ 20; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 6. 2; Plut. _Cat. Min._ 32. - -[2786] Cic. _Att._ ii. 18. 2: “Ut ex legibus Iuliis” seems to be official -language. The explanation of Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ i. 114 f., which -identifies one of the Julian laws with the lex Mamilia, Roscia, etc., is -not satisfactory, though accepted by Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. -182. A plurality is also mentioned by Livy, ep. ciii; Schol. Bob. 302; -Plut. _Pomp._ 47 f.; _Caes._ 14; App. _B. C._ ii. 10-2. - -[2787] _Att._ ii. 18. 2. - -[2788] _Att._ ii. 3. 3 (Dec. 60); 6. 2; 7. 3. - -[2789] _Att._ ii. 16. 1. - -[2790] XXXVIII. 1. 4; 7. 3. - -[2791] _Cat. Min._ 31, 33. - -[2792] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 279-88, maintains that there were two -agrarian laws; cf. Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 287-91. The opposite view is held -by Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ i. 114 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, -iii. 182. - -[2793] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 7. 3; _Cat. Min._ 33; Suet. _Caes._ 20; Vell. -ii. 44. 4. Whereas Cicero was of the opinion that this district could -provide not more than five thousand with lots of ten iugera, Suetonius -and Velleius state that twenty thousand were settled in it. Some -Campanian land remained undivided in 51; Cic. _Fam._ viii. 10. 4. Many -settlements under the Julian law are mentioned in the _liber coloniarum_, -in Gromat. 210, 220, 231, 235, 239, 259, 260. - -It was in accord with Caesar’s policy of colonization and of the -extension of the franchise that P. Vatinius, tribune of the plebs in this -year, carried a law for sending five thousand new settlers to Comum, a -Latin colony in northern Italy. Some of the new residents he honored with -the citizenship; Strabo v. 16; Suet. _Caes._ 28; App. _B. C._ ii. 26. 98; -Plut. _Caes._ 29; Cic. _Att._ v. 11. 2; _Fam._ xiii. 35. 1. The franchise -was afterward withdrawn by a decree of the senate; Suet. and Plut. ibid. - -[2794] Dio Cassius, xxxviii. 7. 1 f. (cf. Schol. Bob. 302; App. _B. C._ -ii. 12. 42), is probably wrong in saying that death was the penalty for -refusal to swear. Cicero (_Sest._ 28. 61) and Plutarch (_Cat. Min._ 32) -speak simply of heavy penalties. - -[2795] Cic. _Att._ ii. 18. 2. The provision regarding the oath was not -introduced till it was found that the senate opposed. - -Supplementary to these Julian laws is the lex Mamilia Roscia Peducaea -Alliena Fabia, three articles of which are contained in Gromat. 263-6; -Bruns, _Font. Iur._ 96-8; Girard, _Textes_, 69 f. Other references to -a lex Mamilia are Gromat. 11. 5; 12. 12; 37. 24; 144. 19; 169. 7; Cic. -_Leg._ i. 21. 55. The last proves it to have been passed before 51. The -seeming citation of the third article as an agrarian law of Gaius Caesar -by _Dig._ xlvii. 21. 3, may indicate merely a borrowing of this article -from the earlier law of Caesar, just as article 2 is substantially -repeated in _Lex Col. Genet._ 104. Mommsen, in _Röm. Feldmess._ ii. -221-6; _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 628, n. 4, considers it the work of a second -sub-committee (Vviri) of the vigintiviri provided for by the agrarian -law, enacted to furnish rules for the administration of the latter. Lange -(_Röm. Alt._ ii. 690; iii. 288) and more decidedly Willems (_Sén. Rom._ -i. 498, n. 5) prefer to regard it as a tribunician law and to assign it -to 55. - -[2796] Cf. Polyb. vi. 17. 5; p. 345 above. - -[2797] Suet. _Caes._ 20; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 7. 4; App. _B. C._ ii. 13. -48; Cic. _Att._ ii. 16. 2; Schol. Bob. 259, 261. - -[2798] Cic. _Fam._ viii. 8. 3. - -[2799] Pompey in his second consulship, 55, attempted in vain to displace -it by a still severer measure; p. 448. - -[2800] Cic. _Att._ v. 10. 2; 16. 3. - -[2801] Cic. _Pis._ 16. 37; 21. 49 f.; 37. 90; _Dom._ 9. 23; _Prov. Cons._ -4. 7. - -[2802] Cic. _Pis._ 37. 90. - -[2803] Cic. _Att._ vi. 7. 2; _Fam._ ii. 17. 2, 4; v. 20. 2, 7; _Pis._ 25. -61; cf. Plut. _Cat. Min._ 38; Dio Cass. xxxix. 23. 3. - -[2804] _Dig._ xlviii. 11. - -[2805] Cic. _Rab. Post._ 4. 8 f.; 11. 30. - -[2806] Suet. _Caes._ 43; _Otho_, 2; Tac. _Hist._ i. 77; Paul. _Sent._ v. -28. - -[2807] _Vat._ 12. 29. See further on the law, _Sest._ 64. 135; Schol. -Bob. 310, 321; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 195-7; Lange, _Röm. -Alt._ iii. 292; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 709; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ -427, 483, 485. - -[2808] Ci. _Vat._ ii. 27; _Planc._ 15. 36; Schol. Bob. 235, 321, 323. “It -is indifferently described as a method of challenging alternate benches -(consilia) and alternate iudices”; Greenidge, _Leg. Proced._ 451. It -seems to have permitted the rejection not simply of individual jurors as -heretofore, but of an entire panel; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. -197. - -[2809] Dio Cass, xxxviii. 8. 1; Schol. Bob. 235. - -[2810] Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 10. 136; Joseph. _Ant. Iud._ xiv. 34 f. - -[2811] Cic. _Att._ ii. 16. 2. - -[2812] Caes. _B. C._ iii. 107. 6; Suet. _Caes._ 54; Dio Cass, xxxix. 12. -1; Cic. _Rab. Post._ 3. 6. - -[2813] Dio Cass, xxxviii. 7. 5; App. _B. C._ ii. 13. 46; Plut. -_Lucull._ 42; _Pomp._ 48; Vell. ii. 44. 2; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 289; -Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 194. Several other laws on foreign -affairs, having especial reference to treaties, were proposed and carried -by P. Vatinius, tribune of the plebs in this year, acting probably as -Caesar’s instrument; Cic. _Vat._ 12. 29; _Fam._ i. 9. 7; _Att._ ii. 9. 1. - -[2814] P. 163. - -[2815] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 8. 5; Suet. _Caes._ 22; Cic. _Sest._ 64. 135; -_Vat._ 15. 35 f.; _Prov. Cons._ 15. 36; Caes. _B. G._ ii. 35. 2; iii. 7. -1; v. 1. 5. - -[2816] Caes. _B. G._ i. 10. - -[2817] Caes. _B. G._ i. 21. - -[2818] Suet. _Caes._ 22; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 8. 5; Plut. _Caes._ 14; -_Pomp._ 48; _Crass._ 14; _Cat. Min._ 33. The resolutions of people and -senate are combined by App. _B. C._ ii. 13. 49; Vell. ii. 44. 5; Zon. x. -6; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 198 f. - -[2819] Cf. Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 290. - -[2820] Drumann-Gröbe, ibid. - -[2821] On the consulship of Caesar see further Long, _Rom. Rep._ III. ch. -xix; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 278-96; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ i. 550-3; -Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 177 ff.; the histories of Mommsen, -Peter, Ferrero, etc., and the various biographies of Caesar. - -[2822] Cic. _Sest._ 25. 55; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 1; Ascon. 9; Schol. -Bob. 300 ff. - -[2823] Six and a third asses to the modius; p. 372. The frumentarian -law of Appuleius Saturninus for lowering the price to five-sixths of an -_as_ had been annulled (p. 395 f.), and the law in force in 82, whether -the Sempronian or the Octavian, was repealed by Sulla (p. 422). Lepidus, -consul in 78, carried a law for the distribution of five modii of grain -to the citizen, at what price and at what interval is not stated (p. 423, -n. 8). There was also a lex frumentaria of the consuls of 73, C. Cassius -Varus and M. Terentius Varro (Cic. _Verr._ iii. 70. 163; v. 21. 52; cf. -Sall. _Hist._ iii. 48. 19). It must have restored, or maintained, the -Sempronian price, which according to the sources was displaced by the -Clodian provision for free grain. Probably by an article of this law, -rather than by a new enactment, Sex. Clodius, a dependent of the tribune, -was given charge of the distribution; Cic. _Dom._ 10. 25. See further -Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ ii. 1346 f. - -[2824] Cic. _Sest._ 25. 55. - -[2825] Cic. ibid.; _Red. in Sen._ 13. 33; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 1 f.; -Plut. _Cic._ 30. - -[2826] Cic. _Pis._ 4. 9; _Sest._ 25. 55; Ascon. 9, 67; Dio Cass. xxxviii. -13. 2; Liebenam, _Röm. Vereinswes._ 21; Waltzing, _Corp. prof._ i. 92. - -[2827] Cf. Ferrero, _Rome_, i. 300. - -[2828] P. 117. - -[2829] Cic. _Sest._ 15. 33; p. 471. - -[2830] Ascon. 9: Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 2; Schol. Bob. 300; cf. Cic. -_Pis._ 4. 9; _Sest._ 25. 55. - -[2831] Suet. _Dom._ 9. 3: Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 308. - -[2832] Vell. ii. 45. 1; Livy, ep. ciii; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 14. 4; Plut. -_Cic._ 30; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 208 f. - -[2833] P. 371. - -[2834] We hear many echoes of this theory in the speeches of Cicero which -refer to the Catilinarian conspiracy; cf. _Cat._ ii. 2. 3; 8. 17; iv. 5. -10 (admitted by C. Caesar); 7. 15; 10. 22. - -[2835] This act accorded with earlier usage; p. 249, 267, 395. On -the original rogation of Clodius concerning the exile of Cicero and -its amendment, see Gurlitt, in _Philol._ N. F. xiii (1900). 578-83; -Sternkopf, ibid. 272-304; xv (1902). 42-70. See also Mommsen, _Röm. -Strafr._ 970, n. 2, 978, n. 1. - -The remaining Clodian laws may pass with briefer mention: (1) A -plebiscite which converted the kingdom of Cyprus into a province, -confiscated the property of the reigning king, and commissioned Cato to -bring the treasury of the latter to Rome; Livy, ep. civ; Cic. _Dom._ 8. -20; _Sest._ 26. 57; 27. 59; Schol. Bob. 301 f.; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 30. -5; App. _B. C._ ii. 85 f.—(2) The plebiscite de inuriis publicis, the -terms of which are not known; Cic. _Dom._ 30. 81.—(3) The plebiscite -which transferred the title of king and the priesthood of the Great -Mother at Pessinus from Deiotarus to his son-in-law Brogitarus; Cic. -_Sest._ 26. 56; _Har. Resp._ 13. 28 f.; 27. 59; _Dom._ 50. 129; _Q. -Fr._ ii. 7. 2; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 308; Niese, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 2401-4.—(4) The plebiscite de provinciis and (5) de -permutatione provinciarum, which assigned to the outgoing consuls of the -year provinces according to their desires; Cic. _Sest._ 25. 55; _Dom._ 9. -23 f.; 26. 70; _Prov. Cons._ 2. 3; Plut. _Cic._ 30; (Aurel. Vict.) _Vir. -Ill._ 81. 4. There were, too, several unpassed rogations. In general on -Clodius and his legislation, see Lange, ibid. 296 ff.; Long, _Rom. Rep._ -III. ch. xxi; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 202 ff.; Fröhlich, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 82-8; White, _Cicero, Clodius, and -Milo_, 16 ff. - -[2836] Cic. _Dom._ 33. 90; _Pis._ 15. 35 f.; _Red. in Sen._ 11. 27; p. -127 above. Among the tribunician rogations for the purpose, preceding the -enactment of the centuriate law, were the Ninnia (Dio Cass. xxxviii. 30. -4; Cic. _Sest._ 31. 68), the Messia (Cic. _Red. in Sen._ 8. 21), that of -eight tribunes (Cic. _Sest._ 33. 72; Pis. 15. 35; _Fam._ i. 9. 16), and -the Fabricia (Cic. _Red. in Sen._ 8. 22; _Mil._ 14. 38). The last was -proposed early in 57; the others near the end of 58. - -[2837] Cic. _Att._ iv. 1. 7; Livy, ep. civ; Dio Cass. xxxix. 9. 2 f.; -Plut. _Pomp._ 49; App. _B. C._ ii. 18. 67. - -In 56 a rogation of C. Porcius Cato, tribune of the plebs, for abrogating -the proconsular imperium of P. Cornelius Lentulus failed to become a -law (Cic. _Q. Fr._ ii. 3. 1; _Fam._ 1. 5 a. 2); also the rogation of -his colleague L. Caninius for commissioning Pompey with pretorian power -for the purpose of restoring Ptolemy, the exiled king of Egypt, to his -throne; Dio Cass. xxxix. 12 ff.; Cic. _Q. Fr._ ii. 2. 3; Plut. _Pomp._ 49. - -[2838] An interregnum was forced in order to secure a more favorable -chairman for the elections than were the consuls of 56. - -[2839] Plut. _Caes._ 21; _Pomp._ 51; _Crass._ 14; _Cat. Min._ 41; App. -_B. C._ ii. 17. 62 f. The postponement of the comitia was effected by C. -Porcius Cato (Dio Cass. xxxix. 27. 3; Livy, ep. cv; Cic. _Q. Fr._ ii. 4. -6) and a colleague in the tribunate (Cic. _Att._ iv. 15. 4). - -[2840] Cic. _Att._ iv. 9. 1; Dio Cass. xxxix. 33. 1 f.; Plut. _Cat. Min._ -43; _Crass._ 15; _Pomp._ 52; App. _B. C._ ii. 18. 65; Livy, ep. cv; Vell. -ii. 46. 1 f.; p. 442 above. - -[2841] Dio Cass. xxxix. 34 f.; Plut. and Livy, ibid. - -[2842] Dio Cass. xxxix. 33. 3 f. - -[2843] Dio Cass. xxxix. 37. 1. - -[2844] Cic. _Planc._ 15. 36; 16. 40; 17. 41. - -[2845] Ibid. 15. 36 ff.; Schol. Bob. 253 f., 261. - -[2846] Cic. _Planc._ 16. 40; Schol. Bob. 262; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 340 -f. - -[2847] Cic. _Att._ x. 4. 8; xiii. 49. 1; App. _B. C._ ii. 23. 87; Dio -Cass. xl. 52. 3; 55. 2; Plut. _Cat. Min._ 48; _Pomp._ 55. - -[2848] Paul. _Sent._ v. 24; _Dig._ xlviii. 9; cf. i. 2. 2. 2. 32, which -is inexact; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 667. - -[2849] Cic. _Rab. Post._ 6. 13. As the equites did not participate in the -government of Italy and the provinces, they had not been rendered liable -to the earlier leges repetundarum, although it was possible to bring -action against them for corrupt jury service; cf. p. 378, n. 3. - -[2850] Dio Cass. xxxix. 37. - -[2851] Cic. _Pis._ 39. 94; _Phil._ i. 8. 20; Ascon. 16; Pseud. Sall. -_Rep. Ord._ ii. 3. 2 f.; cf. 7. 11 f.; 12. 1; cf. Greenidge, _Leg. -Proced._ 448. - -[2852] Cic. _Mil._ 5. 13; 6. 15; 26. 70; 29. 79; Ascon. 31 ff., 37, 40, -53; Schol. Bob. 276; Schol. Gronov. 443; Gell. x. 20. - -[2853] Cic. _Att._ vii. 1. 4; 3. 4; viii. 3. 3; _Fam._ vi. 6. 5; xvi. 12. -3; _Phil._ ii. 10. 24; Suet. _Caes._ 26; Caes. _B. C._ i. 32; Dio Cass. -xl. 51. 2. - -[2854] Dio Cass. xl. 56. 1; Suet. _Caes._ 28. 3. - -[2855] Dio Cass. xl. 46. 2. - -[2856] Ibid, and 56. 1; cf. 30. 1. - -[2857] P. 381. - -[2858] Hirschfeld, in _Klio_, iv (1904). 76-87; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. -Roms_, iii. 720 ff. - -[2859] It suffices to mention (1) the unpassed bill of C. Lucilius Hirrus -and M. Coelius Vinicianus, 53 (in rivalry with a tribunician rogation -for the establishment of tribuni militum consulari potestate), to name -Pompey dictator; Cic. _Fam._ viii. 4. 3; _Q. Fr._ iii. 8. 4; Plut. -_Pomp._ 54.—(2) The repeal of the Clodian plebiscite of 58 concerning the -censorial stigma (p. 445) by a law of Q. Caecilius Metellus, colleague of -Pompey in 52; Dio Cass. xl. 57. 1.—(3) The unpassed bill of the famous P. -Clodius, praetor in 52, concerning the suffrage of the libertini—somewhat -similar to the Manilian law of 67 (p. 433); Ascon. 52; Schol. Bob. -346.—(4) Possibly a lex Scribonia de usucapione servitutum was the work -of C. Scribonius Curio, tribune in 50, though more probably it belongs -to an earlier date; p. 424, n. 4.—(5) An unpassed alimentary rogation of -the same Scribonius for ordering the aediles to control the weights and -measures of the markets in a way to give justice to the poor; Cic. _Fam._ -viii. 6. 5; App. _B. C._ ii. 27. 102.—(6) Another unpassed Scribonian -bill for limiting the travelling expenses of senators; Cic. _Att._ vi. -1. 25.—(7) An unpassed Scribonian bill concerning the Campanian land; -Cic. _Fam._ viii. 10. 4.—(8) An unpassed Scribonian rogatio viaria, like -the agrarian rogation of Servilius Rullus (p. 435); Cic. _Fam._ viii. -6. 5.—(9) An unpassed Scribonian bill for confiscating the realm of -King Juba; Caes. _B. C._ ii. 25; Dio Cass. xli. 41. 3. One or two other -unpassed bills of the same tribune are still less important. - -[2860] Dio Cass. xli. 36. 1 f.; Caes. _B. C._ ii. 21; App. _B. C._ ii. -48. 196; Plut. _Caes._ 37. - -[2861] Caes. _B. C._ iii. 2; App. _B. C._ ii. 48. 196 f.; Plut. _Caes._ -37. - -[2862] Here seems to belong the plebiscite of A. Hirtius concerning the -partisans of Pompey (Cic. _Phil._ xiii. 16. 32; _CIL._ i. p. 627 f.; -Willems, _Sén. Rom._ i. 592), though Mommsen (_CIL._ l. c.) assigns it to -46. - -[2863] Dio. Cass. xlii. 20. - -[2864] Ibid. 21. That his appointment was for an indefinite time, not for -a year as Dio Cassius, ibid. 20, states, is proved by _CIL._ i.² p. 28, -41. He held the office till news of the victory at Thapsus reached Rome. - -[2865] Dio Cass. xlii. 20. - -[2866] Dio Cass. xliii. 14; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 48 f. - -[2867] Dio Cassius, xliii. 42-6, describes them at great length, whereas -Suetonius, _Caes._ 76, is content with a brief enumeration. - -[2868] Dio Cass. xliii. 44; _CIL._ ix. 2563; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ -ii. 767, n. 1. - -[2869] The right to the consulship was granted according to Dio Cassius, -xliii. 45. 1 (προεχειρίσαντο), by a vote of the people. In general it is -impossible to determine which senatus consulta for conferring these and -future honors were ratified by the comitia. The perpetual dictatorship -was assumed February, 44; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 739. - -[2870] Dio Cass. xliv. 5. 3. - -[2871] Ibid. 7. 3; Suet. _Caes._ 52. 3. Two laws of the consul M. -Antonius were also enacted in his honor, the first changing the name of -the month Quinctilis to Julius (Macrob. _Sat._ i. 12. 34), the second -dedicating to Caesar the fifth day of the Roman games (Cic. _Phil._ ii. -43. 110). - -[2872] Cf. Bondurant, _Dec. Jun. Brut._ 40. - -[2873] Caes. _B. C._ iii. 1; Cic. _Att._ vii. 11. 1. - -[2874] Caes. _B. C._ iii. 1; Suet. _Caes._ 42; Dio Cass. xli. 37 f.; App. -_B. C._ ii. 48. 198; Plut. _Caes._ 37. Possibly the lex Iulia de bonorum -cessione (Gaius iii. 78; Theod. Cod. iv. 20; Justin. Cod. vii. 71. 4) may -be identical with this law. - -[2875] Dio Cass. xli. 38. 1 f.; Cic. _Att._ ix. 9. 4. - -[2876] Agitation leading to this measure found expression in a rogation -of M. Caelius Rufus, praetor in 48, for the payment of debts in six years -without interest (Caes. _B. C._ iii. 20) and somewhat later in a rogation -for an extensive, perhaps complete, abolition of debts (Caes. _B. C._ -iii. 21; Livy, ep. cxi; Vell. ii. 68. 1 f.; Dio Cass. xlii. 22-5); in a -rogation of P. Cornelius Dolabella, tribune of the plebs in 47, for the -complete abolition of debts (Livy, ep. cxiii; Plut. _Ant._ 9; Dio Cass. -xlii. 29. 32); and in rogations by these two officials respectively for -the remission of rents (treated by the sources in connection with their -bills on insolvency). - -[2877] Suet. _Caes._ 38; Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 1. - -[2878] On the similar measure of Octavianus, see p. 459. See also Lange, -_Röm. Alt._ ii. 694; iii. 435. - -[2879] This measure seems to have been brought about by no law but merely -through his censorial power; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 448; Drumann-Gröbe, -_Gesch. Roms_, iii. 557. - -[2880] A Julian colonial law is mentioned by _Lex Col. Genet._ 97. The -veterans were settled in Italy probably under the agrarian law of 59; -Suet. _Caes._ 81. 1. The known colonies founded under the dictatorial -law are included in Kornemann’s list, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -iv. 524 ff.; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 604-6. His most -famous colonies were Carthage (App. _Lib._ 136; Dio Cass. xliii. 50. 3 -f.; Plut. _Caes._ 57; Strabo xvii. 3. 5) and Corinth (Dio Cass. ibid. § -4; Plut. ibid.; Strabo viii. 6. 3; xvii. 3. 15; Paus. ii. 1. 2; 3. 1). -The colonia Genetiva Iulia Urbanorum in Spain was founded in 44 after -the death of Caesar, but iussu C. Caesaris dict. imp. et lege Antonia -senat(us)que c(onsulto) pl(ebi)que (scito)—by a consular law of Antonius -for the founding of the colony, supplemented by a plebiscite of unknown -authorship. - -The inscription known as the lex Coloniae Genetivae Iuliae (_CIL._ ii. -supplb. 5439; Bruns, _Font. Iur._ 123-40; Girard, _Textes_, 87-103) is -a part of the lex data (§ 67), or charter, granted the colony by its -founder. It was called Urbanorum because it was made up of proletarians -from Rome; cf. Kornemann, ibid. 527. - -[2881] Suet. _Caes._ 42. At the same time measures were taken to prevent -those residents of Italy who were liable to military service from -absenting themselves unduly from the country. To give employment to the -poor, the owners of herds were ordered to make up one-third of their -shepherds from freemen; ibid. - -[2882] Dio Cass. xli. 18. 2; xliv. 47. 4; Plut. _Caes._ 37; Suet. _Caes._ -41; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 416. - -[2883] Caes. _B. C._ iii. 1; cf. Suet. _Caes._ 41. - -[2884] Cic. _Phil._ xii. 4. 10; Tac. _Ann._ xi. 24; Dio Cass. xli. 36. -3; cf. xxxvii. 9. 3-5. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 134; 159, n. 1; -Krüger-Brissaud, _Sourc. d. droit Rom._ 97, for the authorship of the law. - -The so-called lex Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina (_CIL._ i. 205 = xi. 1146; -Bruns, _Font. Iur._ 98-102; Girard, _Textes_, 70-76) seems to be a lex -data, probably of 49 [Mommsen, in _Wiener Studien_, xxiv (1902). 238 f.; -_Ephem. Ep._ ix. 1903. p. 4]. As the lex Rubria cited in § 20 is not this -document but an earlier plebiscite, the name of the author has not been -determined. It regulated the administration of justice in Cisalpina, -which remained a province till 42. The fragment of a law found at Ateste -(Bruns, ibid. 102 f.; Girard, _Textes_, (76-8) is of the same nature -and belongs to the same period, though probably not to the Rubrian law -itself, as Mommsen (_Hermes_, xvi. 24-41) once assumed. - -[2885] Dio Cass. xli. 24. 1; cf. Livy, ep. cx. The monarchical quality of -his rule shows itself in his bestowal of the citizenship on individuals -at his own pleasure; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 134. - -In 44 the lex Iulia de Siculis, published by Antonius after the death -of Caesar, gave the full citizenship to the Sicilians, who had received -the Latinitas from Caesar. This law, Antonius asserted, had been carried -through the comitia by the dictator, whereas Cicero, _Att._ xiv. 12. 1, -states positively that no mention was even made of such a proposition in -the dictator’s lifetime. - -[2886] Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 4; Suet. _Caes._ 41; wrongly Pomponius, in -_Dig._ i. 2. 2. 2. 32. The two additional aediles (cereales) were not -instituted till 44; Dio Cass. xliii. 51. 3. - -[2887] Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 3; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 437; p. 416 -above. The addition of one to the fifteen members of the great sacerdotal -colleges (Dio Cass. ibid.; cf. Cic. _Fam._ xiii. 68. 2) refers to his -right to commend candidates for supernumerary membership (Wissowa, in -Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2317), and hence does not imply a -comitial act. - -[2888] Cic. _Phil._ vii. 6. 16. - -[2889] Suet. _Caes._ 41; cf. Dio Cass. xliii. 51. 3. The pretext was the -impending Parthian war. In 46 he had been given the right to name all the -magistrates but had rejected it; Dio Cass. xliii. 14. 5; 45. 1; 47. 1; -cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 612, n. 3. - -[2890] Livy, ep. cxvi; Dio Cass. xliv. 10. 1-3; xlvi. 49. 2. In the -following year a tribune was similarly deposed by a plebiscite of P. -Titius, a colleague (Dio Cass. xlvi. 49. 1); and in 43, before the -establishment of the triumvirate, the city praetor was deprived of his -office by his colleagues, probably through a comitial act; App. _B. C._ -iii. 95. 394 f.; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 630, n. 4. - -[2891] P. 427. - -[2892] Suet. _Caes._ 41; Dio Cass. xliii. 25. 1. Cicero, _Phil._ i. 8. -19, intimates, without positively stating, that this was a centuriate -law; p. 236 above. - -[2893] Cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 455; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, -iii. 558. - -[2894] We are informed that he increased the penalties for crimes, and -enacted that a person condemned to exile should forfeit half his estate, -and the murderer of a relative the whole; Suet. _Caes._ 42; cf. Dio Cass. -xliv. 49. 3. - -[2895] Cic. _Phil._ i. 9. 23. - -[2896] The Julian laws on these subjects in the _Digesta_, xlviii. 4 (de -maiestate), 6 f. (de vi) prove by their contents to belong to Augustus; -Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 560. 4; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. -455. The leges Iuliae which abolished what remained of the legis actiones -(Gaius iv. 30) are also supposed to belong to Augustus; Poste, _Gaius_, -474. - -[2897] Cic. _Att._ xiii. 7. - -[2898] Cic. _Fam._ ix. 15. 5; 26. 3; Suet. _Caes._ 43. - -[2899] Cic. _Att._ xii. 35; 36. 1. - -[2900] Cic. _Att._ xiii. 7; Suet. _Caes._ 43; Dio Cass. xliii. 25. 2; cf. -Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 559; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 450. The -officials failed to enforce it effectively; Suet. ibid. - -[2901] P. 164. - -[2902] Dio Cass. xliii. 25; Cic. _Phil._ i. 8. 9; iii. 15. 38; v. 3. 7; -viii. 9. 28. The lex Iulia et Titia, which gave provincial governors -the right to name tutors (Gaius i. 185, 195; Ulp. xi. 18; frag. d. Sin. -20; _Inst._ i. 20) may be a part of the lex de provinciis (Voigt, _Röm. -Rechtsgesch._ i. 840 f.), or a supplement to it. The expression may refer -either to one law or to two related laws. The Julian lex de liberis -legationibus, limiting their duration (Cic. _Att._ xv. 11. 4), also -belongs to 46. - -[2903] _CIL._ i. 206; Bruns, _Font. Iur._ 104-13; Dessau, ii. 6085; -Girard, _Textes_, 78-87. The extant fragment, originally known as the -Table of Heraclea (Lucania) from the place where it was found, is -inscribed on a bronze tablet now in the National Museum at Naples. As it -disqualified for office any who had taken part in the proscriptions (§ -121), it must have followed the downfall of the Cornelian régime in 70, -and the mention of the month Quinctilis (§ 98) proves that it preceded -the renaming of that month in 43. A reference to one of its provisions -(§§ 94, 104) by Cicero, _Fam._ vi. 18. 1 (Jan., 45) as of a law freshly -passed, proves it to be no later than January, 45; cf. Savigny, _Verm. -Schr._ iii (1850). 279-412; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 438; Girard, -_Textes_, 78. It must have been passed, therefore, before Caesar set out -for Spain, about November, 46; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 569. - -[2904] For the various hypotheses, see Hackel, in _Wiener Studien_, xxiv -(1902). 552-62. - -[2905] Kalb, in _Jahresb. ü. Altwiss._ 1906. 37. The identification of -this law with the lex Iulia municipalis cited in an inscription found -at Padua (_CIL._ v. 2864) and with the lex municipalis of the _Digesta_ -(1. 9. 3; _Cod._ vii. 9. 1), proposed by Savigny, ibid., is not certain; -Girard, _Textes_, 78. - -[2906] _Lex Iul. Mun._ 1-19. - -[2907] _Lex Iul. Mun._ 20-82. - -[2908] Ibid. 83-142. - -[2909] Ibid. 143-59. - -[2910] Ibid. 160-4. - -[2911] Savigny, _Verm. Schr._ iii. 329, was of the opinion that the -inclusion of articles 1 and 2 with articles 3-5 formed a lex satura (p. -396) having no other motive than convenience. Hackel, _Wien. Stud._ xxiv. -560, supposes that Caesar had intended to bring the provisions of this -measure before the comitia as two separate laws, but in his haste to be -off for Spain, combined them in one. At all events the interpretation -given above is true of the result if not of the intention. - -[2912] Many of his regulations were effected through edicts. Such were -probably the imposition of duties on goods imported into Italy—an -abolition of the law of 60 (Suet. _Caes._ 43; cf. p. 438), the leasing of -the emery mines in Crete (_Dig._ xxxix. 4. 15), and the suppression of -the collegia which had been organized under the Clodian law of 58; Suet. -_Caes._ 42; Joseph. _Ant. Iud._ xiv. 10. 8. 213 ff.; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -iii. 435; Liebenam, _Röm. Vereinswes._ 27. - -[2913] Cic. _Phil._ v. 4. 10; App. _B. C._ iii. 5. 16; 22. 81; Dio -Cass. xliv. 53. 2; xlv. 23. After the Antonian laws had been annulled -by the senate, February, 43, on the ground that they had been passed -with violence and contrary to the auspices (Cic. _Phil._ vi. 2. 3; Dio -Cass. xlv. 27), the acts of Caesar are confirmed anew by a centuriate -law of C. Vibius Pansa, consul in that year; Cic. _Phil._ x. 8. 17; -Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 526. The policy of using the departed Caesar as a -means of self-aggrandizement readily lent itself to Octavianus, at whose -instigation Q. Pedius, his colleague in the consulship in 43, caused a -comitial act to be passed for the establishment of a special court to try -the murderers of the dictator. The act specified the punishment to be -inflicted on the guilty and offered rewards to informers; Vell. ii. 69. -5; Suet. _Ner._ 3; _Galb._ 3; Dio Cass. xlvi. 48 f.; App. _B. C._ iii. -95; Aug. _Mon. Ancyr._ i. 10; Mommsen, _Röm. Strafr._ 199. - -The lex Rufrena in honor of Caesar (_CIL._ i. 626) probably belongs to -42; Lange, ibid. 556; Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ ii. 89, n. 3. In te -same year falls the lex of the triumvirs which changed the birthday of -Caesar from July 12 to 5 (Fowler, _Rom. Fest._ 174) and compelled all to -celebrate it; Dio Cass. xlvii. 18. 5. - -[2914] Cic. _Phil._ v. 4. 10; _Lex Col. Genet._ 104. - -[2915] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 499. After this law had been annulled by a -senatus consultum (p. 457, n. 7), the settlements made by Antonius were -confirmed by a centuriate law of C. Vibius Pansa, consul in 43; Cic. -_Phil._ xiii. 15. 31. - -[2916] Dio Cass. xlv. 9. 1. - -[2917] Cicero, _Phil._ v. 3. 7, says all Italy; 7. 20; vi. 5. 13. - -[2918] Ibid. v. 7. 21; vi. 5. 14; viii. 9. 26; xii. 9. 23. - -[2919] Ibid. v. 7. 21; vii. 6. 17. - -[2920] Ibid. ii. 38. 99; v. 12. 33; _Alt._ xv. 19. 2. - -[2921] Cic. _Phil._ v. 3; vi. 5. 14; xi. 6. 13. - -[2922] Dio Cass. xliv. 53. 7; cf. Livy, ep. cxvii; Vell. ii. 63. 1; cf. -p. 341, 391. No comitial act is suggested, and it may have been one of -the false laws of Caesar. Ferrero’s theory (_Rome_, iii. 38) has nothing -in its favor. - -[2923] P. 455. - -[2924] Cic. _Phil._ i. 8. 19; v. 5 f.; viii. 9. 27; cf. Greenidge, _Leg. -Proced._ 449 f. This law with his others was annulled in the following -year by the senate; Cic. xiii. 3. 5; p. 457, n. 7. - -[2925] Cic. _Phil._ i. 9. 21 f. - -[2926] Ibid. - -[2927] Cic. _Phil._ v. 4. 10; p. 457, n. 7. The lex Antonia on the -dictatorship was doubtless renewed by a lex Vibia; Cic. l. c. - -[2928] Dio Cass. xlvi. 55. 3. - -[2929] Aug. _Mon. Ancyr._ i. 8; App. _B. C._ iv. 7. 27; Herzog, _Röm. -Staatsverf._ ii. 84, 89. - -[2930] Dio Cass, xlvii. 15. 4 (ἐψηφίσαντο ordinarily implies a comitial -vote); cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 680. The grant of lictors to the -Vestals in 42 may also have been effected by a comitial act; Dio Cass. -xlvii. 19. 4. In the same year a consular lex of L. Munatius Plancus -ordered the erasure of the names of L. Julius Caesar and Sergius from the -list of the proscribed; App. _B. C._ iv. 37. 158; 45. 193. - -[2931] Dio Cass. xlviii. 9. 5. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ iii. 565, assumes a -vote of the comitia. - -[2932] Dio Cass. xlviii. 33. 5; Gaius ii. 227; _Dig._ 35. 2. Closely -related is the lex Glitia of unknown date, mentioned by Gaius only -(_Dig._ v. 2. 4), which aimed to prevent a parent from ill-humoredly -wronging a child in his testament. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 662, regards -the word Glitia as a copyist’s error for Falcidia. - -[2933] Dio Cass. xlvii. 13. 3. - -[2934] Dio Cass. xlix. 38. 1. - -[2935] Aug. _Mon. Ancyr._ ii. 1; Tac. _Ann._ xi. 25; Dio Cass. lii. 42. -5; cf. Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ ii. 130. - -[2936] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 9; Cic. _Att._ iii. 23. 4; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ -ii. 649; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 427. - -[2937] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 5. 13; Dion. Hal. x. 57. 5; Livy iii. 34. 1; -Dio Cass. xlii. 32. 2 f. A bronze tablet was sometimes used for a mere -rogation; Cic. _Mil._ 32. 87; Suet. _Caes._ 28. For leges promulgatae, -see Livy iii. 9. 5; iv. 1. 1; 48. 1, 9; vi. 35. 4; 39. 1; x. 6. 6; -xliii. 16. 6. On the requirement of the trinum nundinum, see p. 397. The -proposer was called rogator or lator (Livy iv. 48. 10); his supporters -adscriptores; Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 9. 22. The names of the latter, -provided they were magistrates, were often published with the bill for -the sake of influence; Cic. _Pis._ 15. 35; _Red. in Sen._ 2. 4; 9. 22; -_Sest._ 33. 72; _Fam._ i. 9. 16. - -[2938] Cic. _Att._ i. 19. 4; _Inv._ ii. 45. 130 f.; Ascon. 57; Livy iii. -34. 4 ff. - -[2939] Cic. _Sull._ 22. 62. - -[2940] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 9. 22. - -[2941] Frontinus, _De aquis urbis Romae_, ch. 129; Bruns, _Font. Iur._ -115; Girard, _Textes_, 103-5; _Lex Agr._ 1 (_CIL._ i. 200). - -[2942] The Italics supply lacunae. See also Cic. _Phil._ i. 10. 26; -Probus, in _Gramm. Lat._ iv. 272 (Keil). - -[2943] Or the several names of a group of rogatores (cf. Livy iv. 1. -2; Cic. _Sest._ 33. 7. 2), as in the _Lex de Termessibus_ (p. 425) and -the lex Mamilia Roscia, etc. (p. 441, n. 1); see also Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 315, n. 2. - -[2944] Cf. Probus, in _Gramm. Lat._ iv. 272. - -[2945] He was either taken by lot or appointed by the presiding -magistrate; Cic. _Planc._ 14. 35. - -[2946] As in the _Lex de Termess._ 1. - -[2947] Ex h(ace) l(ege) plebive scito; _Lex Lat. Bant._ (3). 15; Bruns, -_Font. Iur._ 55; Girard, _Textes_, 31; _Lex Agr._ 2 (_CIL._ i. 200). - -[2948] Sometimes K. (kaput) or K. L. (kaput legis) followed by a number -is used, or the title may be preceded by R. (rubrica); Egbert, _Lat. -Inscr._ 349; Cagnat, _Épigr. Lat._ 266. - -[2949] _Dig._ xlviii. 19. 41; Cic. _Att._ iii. 23. 2 f. The substance of -the sanctio comprising the extant fragment of the _Lex Lat. Bant._ is -given on p. 379. On the lex sacrata, see p. 264 f. - -[2950] Macrob. _Somn. Scip._ ii. 17. 13. A lex minusquam perfecta -prescribes a penalty but allows the violating act to stand. The lex Furia -testamentaria (p. 352), for instance, declares that the beneficiary of -a legacy above the legal limit must pay fourfold, but does not rescind -the legacy itself; Ulp. _Reg._ 1. A lex perfecta not only prescribes a -penalty but nullifies a contravening act. These distinctions apply only -to the civil law. Cf. Ulp. l. c.; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 428; -Poste, _Gaius_, 566. Other terms connected with the enactment, repeal, -and alteration of laws are explained by Ulp. _Reg._ 3: “Lex est rogatur, -id est fertur, aut abrogatur, id est prior lex tollitur, aut derogatur, -id est pars primae legis tollitur, aut subrogatur, id est adiicitur -aliquid primae legi, aut obrogatur, id est mutatur aliquid ex prima -lege.” The classification of laws as curiate, centuriate, and tribal -according to the form of the comitia, and as consular, tribunician, etc. -according to the office of the lator does not need explanation. - -[2951] _Dig._ xiii. 2. 1; Gromat. 265. - -[2952] Cf. _Frag. Atest._ in Bruns, _Font. Iur._ 101; Girard, _Textes_, -78; _Lex Acil. rep._ 78 (_CIL._ i. 198). - -[2953] “Si quid ius non est rogarier, eius ea lege nihilum rogatur”; Cic. -_Caec._ 33. 95; _Dom._ 40. 106; _Lex Tudert._ (_CIL._ i. 1409) 10 f. A -far more detailed formula is given by Cic. _Att._ iii. 23. 3. - -[2954] “Si quid sacri sancti est, quod non iure sit rogatum, eius hac -lege nihil rogatur”; Probus, in _Gramm. Lat._ iv. 273. - -[2955] P. 233 f. - -[2956] _Lex de imp. Vesp._ in _CIL._ vi. 930; Bruns, _Font. Iur._ 193 -f.; Girard, _Textes_, 106: “Si quis huiusce legis ergo adversus leges -rogationes plebisve scita senatusve consulta fecit fecerit, sive, quod -eum ex lege rogatione plebisve scito senatusve consulto facere oportebit, -non fecerit huius legis ergo, id ei ne fraudi esto, neve quit ob eam rem -populo dare debeto, neve cui de ea re actio neve iudicatio esto, neve -quis de ea re apud se agi sinito.” Although this document may have been a -senatus consultum, it has the form of a law and is so called by itself; -cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 876-9. All such formulae were indicated -by the series of initial letters of the component words; Probus, in -_Gramm. Lat._ iv. 272 f. - -[2957] Fest. 314. 29: “Neve per saturam abrogato aut derogato”; _Lex -Tudert._ 9; Cic. _Att._ iii. 23. 3. - -[2958] This is true of the Lex Lat. Bant. (p. 380), the Appuleian laws -(p. 395), and the Julian agrarian law of 59 (p. 440). - -[2959] As by forbidding tribunician intercession; _Lex Mal._ 58; Cic. -_Leg. Agr._ ii. 12. 30. - -[2960] Cic. _Att._ iii. 23. 2. - -[2961] Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 652. - -[2962] Livy iii. 57. 10; Cic. _Phil._ i. 10. 26; Tac. _Hist._ iv. 40; -Suet. _Vesp._ 8; Serv. _in Aen._ vi. 622. In earlier time wooden tables -were used for laws as well as for rogations; Dion. Hal. iii. 36. 4; iv. -43. 1. - -[2963] P. 438. Plebis cita and the senatus consulta pertaining thereto -were originally kept by the aediles of the plebs in the temple of Ceres; -p. 278 f. - -[2964] “Unde de piano recte legi possit”; Probus, in _Gramm. Lat._ iv. -273, for example, the Forum; Dion. Hal. x. 57. 7. Plebiscites and senatus -consulta of international importance could be found in the temple of -Faith on the Capitoline hill; Suet. _Vesp._ 8; Obseq. 68. For other -places, see Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 652 f. - -[2965] Under the aedile for judicial business only; p. 325. - -[2966] P. 276. - -[2967] Cf. p. 304. - -[2968] For judicial business only; p. 292. - -[2969] P. 327. - -[2970] P. 141. For instance, the dictator; p. 416, n. 1. - -[2971] Livy xxv. 3. 14; xxxiii. 25. 7; xxxiv. 1. 4; 53. 2; xliii. 16. 9; -xlv. 36. 1; App. _B. C._ i. 15. 64; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 17; _C. Gracch._ -13; _Aemil._ 31; Ascon. 77. - -[2972] Dion. Hal. vii. 17. 2; ix. 41. 4; x. 9. 3; Livy viii. 14. 12; -Varro, _R. R._ i. 2. 9. For legislation in the Forum, see _Lex Quinct. de -Aq._ praescriptio. - -[2973] Varro, _R. R._ iii. 2. 5; Cic. _Planc._ 9. 16; _Att._ i. 1. 1; iv. -3. 4; _Fam._ vii. 30. 1. - -[2974] Livy iii. 54. 15; xxvii. 21. 1; cf. Richter, _Top. v. Rom_, 48, -212; Platner, _Top. and Mon. of Anc. Rome_, 343. - -[2975] Livy iii. 20. 7. - -[2976] P. 297. Meetings distant from the city were soon afterward -forbidden by law. - -[2977] Vocare tribus in (or ad) suffragium (Cic. _Planc._ 20. 49; Livy -iii. 71. 3; iv. 5. 2; vi. 38. 3; x. 9. 1; xxv. 3. 15), citare tribus ad -suffragium ineundum (Livy vi. 35. 7), or mittere tribus in suffragium -(Livy iii. 64. 5). - -[2978] Livy xxv. 3. 16; _Lex Mal._ 53; Fest. 127. 1. These sources prove, -against Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 483, that the right to vote in a tribe -drawn thus by lot was not restricted to those who were virtually citizens -awaiting enrolment. It is probable that, at least in early time, not even -residence was a requirement; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 232, n. 2, -396 f., 643 f. - -[2979] In the opinion of Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 397, n. 4, 411, -n. 7; _Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss._ ii (1857). 426, n. 107, the -principium had nothing to do with the order of voting. His argument -is based chiefly on the fact that according to the _Lex Mal._ 55—a -constitution evidently based in large part on that of Rome—the curiae -voted simultaneously. Reference to the preliminary vote of a single -Roman tribe, however, is made by Plut. _Aemil._ 31; App. _B. C._ i. 12. -52. Furthermore it is difficult to understand why so great importance -should attach to the principium on Mommsen’s supposition that it had -merely to do with the order of announcement after the simultaneous vote -of all the tribes. His view is accepted by Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, -_Real-Encycl._ iv. 684, but rejected by Lange, _Kl. Schr._ ii. 477 f.; -Herzog, _Röm. Staatsverf._ 1184, and ignored by most other writers, -including Liebenam, inconsistently; ibid. 706. - -[2980] “Sitellam deferre.” It was filled with water, the lots were -thrown in, and the drawing was effected by pouring out the water, which -caused the pieces to fall one by one. The process was supervised by the -custodes; cf. Ascon. 70; Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 9. 22. - -[2981] Dion. Hal. vii. 59. i; App. _B. C._ iii. 30. 117. - -[2982] Serv. _in Bucol._ i. 33; Ovid, _Fast._ i. 53; Cic. _Mil._ 15. 41. - -[2983] The marble building, known as the Saepta Julia, begun in 54 by -Julius Caesar (Cic. _Att._ iv. 16. 14), was finished by Agrippa in 27 -B.C. A plan is given by Platner, _Top. and Mon. of Anc. Rome_, 365, who -describes it at length; cf. Richter, _Top. v. Rom_, 230 ff. - -[2984] Cic. _Sest._ 51. 109; p. 129 above. - -[2985] The act could take place during the deliberation, the placing of -the urn, the sortition, and the separation of the people in their voting -groups; Ascon. 70; (Cic.) _Herenn._ i. 12. 21; Cic. _N. D._ i. 38. 106. -It was most convenient, however, for the tribune to interpose his veto by -forbidding the reading of the bill; Ascon. 57 f. (p. 430 above); App. _B. -C._ i. 12. - -[2986] P. 115. - -[2987] Livy ix. 46. 2; Gell. vii (vi). 9. 2. - -[2988] Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 9; 64. 6. - -[2989] This is true of the comitia centuriata (Cic. _Div._ ii. 35. 75; -_N. D._ ii. 4. 10), and doubtless applies as well to other forms of -assembly; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 403, n. 4. The rogator must have -kept a tally of the votes in rogations in some such way as in elections, -in which for each vote he placed a mark (punctum) after the name of the -candidate in whose favor it was given; Mommsen, ibid. 404. - -[2990] P. 359, 390. - -[2991] U. R. and presumably A.; Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 5; Mommsen, _Röm. -Staatsr._ iii. 402, n. 2. There were corresponding abbreviations for -trials; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 692; cf. p. 178 f. -above. - -[2992] Plut. _Cat. Min._ 46; Suet. _Caes._ 80. These names might also be -abbreviated; Cic. _Dom._ 43. 112. - -[2993] Sisenna, Frag. 118 (Peter, _Reliq._ i. 293); (Cic.) _Herenn._ i. -12. 21; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 11. The voting within the curiae was also by -heads; Livy i. 43. 10; Dion. Hal. iv. 20. 2. - -[2994] Cic. _Red. in Sen._ 11. 28; _Pis._ 15. 36; _Lex Mal._ 55 (Bruns, -_Font. Iur._ 149; Girard, _Textes_, 112). As they also counted the votes, -they were termed diribitores. In the last century of the republic they -were drawn from the album iudicum (Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 2. 31), and -hence included some of the most influential men in the state; cf. Cic. -_Leg._ iii. 3. 10; 15. 33 f. - -[2995] Cic. _Planc._ 20. 49; _Pis._ 5. 11; 15. 36; Varro, _R. R._ iii. 5. -18. - -[2996] Cic. _Planc._ 14. 35. The order of announcement of the curial -votes was likewise determined by lot; _Lex Mal._ 57. Livy, ix. 38. 15, -refers to the sortition for the principium. - -[2997] Varro, in Gell. x. 1. 6; Cic. _Pis._ 1. 2; _Mur._ 17. 35; Plut. -_C. Gracch._ 3; _Caes._ 5; Suet. _Vesp._ 2. In the case of censors alone -no declaration was made unless two were elected; Livy ix. 34. 25. - -[2998] _Lex Mal._ 57; Cic. _Mur._ 1. 1; Gell. xii. 8. 6. In like manner -in the comitia curiata a majority of the curiae decided; Dion. Hal. ii. -14. 3. - -[2999] As in the vote to depose Trebellius from the tribunate in 67 (p. -432); cf. the deposition of Octavius in 133; p. 367. The voting as well -as the announcement might be interrupted by an evil omen (p. 109, 111, -248), in which case the assembly had to be adjourned. Sometimes the -president arbitrarily adjourned the meeting; Livy xlv. 36. 1-6, 10; Plut. -_Aemil._ 31. - -[3000] _Twelve Tables_ i. 9: “Solis occasus suprema tempestas esto”; -Documents in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 87, 92; _Declam. in Cat._ 19; cf. Livy x. -22. 7 f. - -[3001] For the presidency of the tribunus celerum, see Livy i. 59. 7; -cf. Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 1377. It is denied by -Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 682. - -[3002] Livy ix. 38. 15; p. 112 above. - -[3003] P. 195 f. - -[3004] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 13. 25; 17. 31. - -[3005] Cic. _Leg. Agr._ ii. 11. 28. - -[3006] P. 155. - -[3007] P. 154. - -[3008] Livy v. 52. 15; Dio Cass. xli. 43. - -[3009] Varro, _L. L._ v. 155; Livy, ibid.; cf. Fest. ep. 38. - -[3010] P. 154. - -[3011] Gell. xv. 27. 2. - -[3012] Dion. Hal. ii. 8. 4; p. 31 above; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ -iii. 386. - -[3013] On the procedure, see Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ -iv. 682-4. - -[3014] P. 103, 140, 203, 244, 245. The censors convoked it for the census -and the lustrum only; p. 204. - -[3015] He could not hold these comitia for elections; Livy xxii. 33. 9. - -[3016] See references in the next to the last note above. - -[3017] Livy v. 52. 15; Gell. xv. 27. 5; Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 11. - -[3018] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 88, 91; cf. Verg. _Georg._ ii. 539. - -[3019] P. 203, n. 2. - -[3020] P. 150. - -[3021] Livy xxvi. 22. 11; Juv. vi. 529; Serv. _in Bucol._ i. 33. - -[3022] 70 of the first class—1 prerogative + 18 equestrian. - -[3023] Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 5; (Cic.) _Herenn._ i. 21; Fest. 334. 16. - -[3024] P. 359, 390, 467. - -[3025] P. 211, 226 f. - -[3026] Cic. _Fam._ vii. 30. - -[3027] In the comitia centuriata in addition to the prerogative there -had to be at least four, and possibly seven, successive votings before -a majority could be reached. In the tribal assembly there was but one -in addition to the principium. After the comitia curiata had come to be -represented by thirty lictors the votes could be taken in a few minutes. - -[3028] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 29: “Comitiales dicti quod tum ut coiret -populus constitutum est ad suffragium ferendum nisi si quae feriae -conceptae essent, propter quas non liceret, (ut) Compitalia et Latinae”; -Macrob. _Sat._ i. 16. 14: “Comitiales sunt, quibus cum populo agi licet, -et fastis quidem lege agi potest, cum populo non potest, comitialibus -utrumque potest”; Verrius Flaccus, in _Fast. Praen._ ad Ian. 3 (_CIL._ -i². p. 231); Ovid, _Fast._ i. 53; Fest. ep. 38. - -[3029] For the various local Italian calendars with Mommsen’s comment, -see _CIL._ i². p. 203 ff. Especially useful is the Diei notarum -laterculus, ibid. p. 290 ff. - -[3030] On the distinction between dies fasti and dies nefasti, see Varro, -_L. L._ vi. 29 f., 53; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 16. 14; _Fast. Praen._ ad Ian. -2; Ovid, _Fast._ i. 47; Fest. ep. 93; Gaius iv. 29. - -[3031] March 24 and May 24; p. 159, n. 8. - -[3032] June 15. For the meaning of this expression and the one given -just above, see Varro, _L. L._ vi. 31 f.; Ovid, _Fast._ v. 727; vi. 225; -Mommsen, in _CIL._ i². p. 289. These three days were called fissi; Serv. -_in Aen._ vi. 37. - -[3033] Dies endotorcisi or intercisi; Varro, _L. L._ vi. 31; Macrob. -_Sat._ i. 16. 3; Ovid, _Fast._ i. 49; Mommsen, in _CIL._ i². p. 290. - -[3034] Cf. Varro, _L. L._ vi. 30; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 16. 14. In a wider -sense comitial days were fasti. Naturally judicial business could be -transacted on those comitial days on which the assembly did not actually -meet, or after its adjournment if time remained; p. 315. A Clodian law of -58 permitted comitial legislation on all dies fasti; p. 445. - -[3035] Mommsen, in _CIL._ i². p. 296; 109 according to Wissowa, _Relig. -u. Kult. d. Röm._ 368 f. - -[3036] Mommsen, ibid. Wissowa, ibid., reckons 192 comitial days, which -would give 43 non-comitial fasti. The following were the dies comitiales -according to Mommsen: - - Jan. 3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 16-28, 31—in all xix. - Feb. 18-20, 22, 25, 28—vi. - Mar. 3-6, 9-12, 18, 20, 21, 25, 26, 28-31—xvii. - Apr. 3, 4, 24, 27-30—vii. - May, 3-6, 10, 12, 14, 17-20, 25-31—xviii. - June, 4, 16-28, 30—xvi. - July, 10-14, 17, 18, 20, 22, 26-31—xv. - Aug. 3, 4, 7, 8, 10-12, 15, 16, 18, 20, 24, 26, 28, 31—xv. - Sept. 4, 7-11, 16-22, 24-28, 30—xix. - Oct. 3-6, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 20-31—xxi. - Nov. 3, 4, 7-12, 15-28, 30—xxiii. - Dec. 4, 7-10, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24-28, 31 —xv. - -[3037] Wissowa, ibid. 378. - -[3038] Varro, in Macrob, _Sat._ i. 16. 19; _L. L._ vi. 29. - -[3039] Varro, _R. R._ ii. praef. 1; Serv. _in Georg._ i. 275. - -[3040] That judicial business was done on those nundinae which were -not marked N(efasti) is clearly proved by the Twelve Tables, iii. 1-6 -(Girard, _Textes_, p. 13), in Gell. xx. i. 45 ff.; cf. especially § -47: “Trinis nundinis continuis ad praetorem in comitium producebantur, -quantaeque pecuniae iudicati essent, praedicabatur.” - -[3041] Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3: Ἐν δὲ ταύταις (ἀγοραῖς) συνιόντες ἐκ τῶν -ἀγρῶν εἰς τὴν πόλιν οἱ δημοτικοί τὰς τ’ ἀμείψεις ἐποιοῦντο τῶν ὠνίων κὰι -τὰς δίκας παρ’ ἀλλήλων ἐλάμβανον, τά τε κοινά, ὅσων ἦσαν κύριοι κατὰ -τοὺς νόμους καὶ ὅσα ἡ βουλὴ ἐπιτρέψειεν αὐτοῖς, ψῆφον ἀναλαμβάνοντες -ἐπεκύρουν; Rutilius, in Macrob. _Sat._ i. 16. 34: “Romanos instituisse -nundinas, ut octo quidem diebus in agris rustici opus facerent, nono -autem die intermisso rure ad mercatum legesque accipiendas Romam -venirent.” The words of Dionysius and Rutilius apply to all voting -assemblies, not simply to those of the plebs. - -[3042] Gran. Licinian. in Macrob. _Sat._ i. 16. 30 (quoted p. 315, n. 2). - -[3043] Cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 518 f. - - - - -INDEX - -Abbreviations: c. = consular, d. = dictatorial, p. = pretorian, t. = -tribunician. The numbers in parentheses are dates B.C. - - - Abacti, 391. - - Abjuration of social rank, 156, 162, 163, 165. - - Abrogation, of imperium, 324, n. 1, 342, 360, 390, 404; - of tribunician power, 366, 367 f., 432, 455; - of pretorian power, 455, n. 3. - - Accensi velati, 66, 80 f., 207, 208, 228. - - Accensus, summons comitia centuriata, 469. - - Accerani, receive citizenship, 304. - - Acclamation, 152, 202, 276. - - Acculeia (curia), 11, n. 7. - - Accusation, fourth, 260. - - Acilius Glabrio, M’., trial of (189), 319. - - Adlectio of senators, 166, 418. - - Adoptions, 160, 166; - testamentary, 161. - - Adrogatio, 156, 160 f.; - of Clodius, 30, 443; - formula of, 161; - for transitio ad plebem, 162, 443. - - Adscriptivi, 80, n. 5. - - Adsidui, 61. - - Aediles, election of, 127; - presidency of contio, 141; - of comitia, 292, 465; - jurisdiction of before Hortensius, 290-2; - after Hortensius, 325-7; - limited by standing courts, 326 f. - - Aediles cereales, 454, n. 5. - - Aediles, curule, and lex curiata, 189; - instituted, 234, 291; - presidency of comitia, 292, 465; - jurisdiction before Hortensius, 291 f.; - after Hortensius, 325-7. - - Aediles, plebeian, instituted, 262; - election of, 262, 272; - bailiffs of tribunes, 264, n. 5; - sacrosancti, n. 7, 274; - Valerian-Horatian law on, 274, 278 f.; - relation to tribunes, 290; - jurisdiction, before Hortensius, 195, 290-2; - after Hortensius, 325-7; - presidency of comitia, 292, 465. - - Aemilius Lepidus, M., his imperium abrogated (136), 360, 367. - - Aemilius Lepidus, M., consul (78), 423, 425. - - Aemilius Paulus, L., trial of (218), 318. - - Aemilius Scaurus, M., trial of, for neglect of duty (103), 323; - for maiestas (91), 257, n. 5. - - Aerarii, 60, 62, 64, 65, 212, 318. - - Aerarium, 62. - - Aes equestre et hordearium, 93 f. - - Aetates, in comitia centuriata, 222. - - Africa, organized under lex Livia, 349; - agrarian conditions of, 387. - - Ager, privatus, ownership of, 48 f.; - registration in tribes, 50, 54, 60 f., 64; - publicus, agitation for assignment of, 270, 272, 295, 310 f., 360, - 373 f., 435 f.; - laws for assignment of, see Legislation, agrarian. - - Ager compascuus, 365. - - Ager, effatus, etc., 108. - - Agrarian laws, see Legislation, agrarian. - - Alba Longa, three tribes in, 4, n. 3. - - Alban Mount, triumphs on, 293, 335, n. 2, 350. - - Aliens, treatment of, 38; - under jurisdiction of senate, 254; - of people, 255; - expulsions of, 273, 354, 370, 397, 434; - enrolment in colonies, 353; - see Italians, Latins. - - Allies, unfair treatment of, 352; - under lex Iulia repetundarum, 442; - see Italians, Latins. - - Ambitus, laws on, 295, 296 f., 348 f., 419, 431, 436 f., 448, 454, - 474. - - Aniensis iuniorum, 217, 227, n. 2. - - Annius Luscus, T., prosecution of (133), 322. - - Annius Milo, T., prosecution of, 327. - - Anquisitio, 259. - - Antias, Valerius, on Scipionic trial, 319, n. 7. - - Antiquo, 467. - - Antonius, L., tribune (45-44), 455. - - Antonius, M., misuses oblativa, 113; - tribune (49), 453 f.; - consul (44), 454, n. 4, 457-9. - - Apparitores, 416, n. 1. - - Appeal, to comitia curiata, 182, 239; - to centuriata, 239 ff., 259, 287; - to tributa, 259, 266, 268, 286 f., 292, 317, 325, 327; - limited by first milestone, 241; - from military imperium, 251 f.; - from tribunes in capital cases, 268; - when most used, 328; - right offered as reward, 378. - - Appian, on new tribes (90), 57 f.; - reëlection of tribunes, 369; - liability of jurors for bribery, 378, n. 8; - lex Boria (?), 385; - lex Livia iudiciaria, 398; - lex Cornelia Pompeia (88), 407; - election of senators, 418. - - Appuleius Decianus, C., tribune (98), 323 f. - - Appuleius Saturninus, L., weakens veto, 117; - interdicts Metellus, 257, n. 5; - murdered, 258 f., 396; - tribune (103, 100), 393-6. - - Ἀρχαιρεσία, 406, n. 6. - - Archives, for senatus consulta, 278 f.; - for statutes, 437 f., 465. - - Ardea, disputes with Aricia, 294. - - Ardeates, concilium of, 122. - - Aricia, disputes with Ardea, 294. - - Army, relation of to folk, 2, 35; - pre-Servian, 10 f., 35; - Servian, 58 ff., 66 ff., 72-6; - originally self-supporting, 61 f.; - not identical with comitia centuriata, 68; - Graeco-Italic, 69-71; - primitive Roman, 69, n. 4; - like Athenian, 76; - post-Servian, 76-80; - supernumeraries in, 80-2; - early republican, 83 f.; - political importance of, 202. - - Arpinates, receive suffrage, 352. - - Arrogation, see Adrogatio. - - As, sextantarian, 67, n. 4, 87, 213; - declines in value, 86 f.; - of ounce weight (uncial), 90, n. 4, 336; - semiuncial, 91, 403. - - Assembly, German, 33, 153, n. 3, 168, 169, 170, 172; - Homeric Greek, 33, 153, n. 3, 168, 169, 170 f.; - European, 152, 168-73; - Athenian, 153, 168; - Alamannic, 153; - Irish, 153, n. 3, 172; - Slavic, 168, 172 f.; - Lacedaemonian, 168; - Celtic, 168, 170; - Etruscan, 169; - Italian, 171; - Frankish, 172. - - Assembly, Roman, affected by omens, 109; - plebeian tribal, termed comitia, 120, 126-30; - three organized forms of, 138; - origin of, 152; - limited by senate in early republic, 273, 284; - development of voting in, 275 f.; - laws on, 307; - packing of, 405; - see Comitia, Concilium, Contio. - - Asylum, in theory of patrician state, 36 f.; - connection with tribunate, 265. - - Ateste, law found at, 454, n. 3. - - Atilius Calatinus, M., trial of, 247. - - Atinius Labeo, C., tribune (131), 264, n. 8. - - Atius Labienus, T., tribune (63), 435; - prosecutes Rabirius, 258. - - Attus Navius, 101, n. 3, 105, n. 3. - - Auctoritas, see Patrum auctoritas. - - Auguraculum, 109, n. 7. - - Augural districts, 108. - - Auguria, 106. - - Augurs, 105-8; - number and character, 105 f.; - functions, 106-8; - have nuntiatio, 111 f.; - attend comitia, 107, 112 ff.; - election of, 120, 391, 435; - in contiones, 146, n. 1; - increased to fifteen, 416. - - Auspices, 100-18; - of Sodales Titii, 2, n. 6; - private, 100-3; - nuptial, 100, n. 4; - public, 100, 101, 103-18; - impetrativa, 103-11; - assemblies requiring, 110 f.; - oblativa, 111-8; - spectio, 112 ff.; - under Aelian and Fufian laws, 116 f., 279 f., 358 f.; - misuse of, 117 f.; - essential to magistratus iustus, 187, n. 7; - borrowing of, 244, 245, 280, 315; - violated by consul, 248; - of first tribunician election, 263, n. 1; - support nobility, 330 f. - - Auspicium, 100, 102 f.; - deputed, 104, 244, 245, 280, 315; - lex for, 179; - see Auspices. - - Auxilium, tribunician, 253, 263, 414. - - Aventine hill, 2, n. 6; - outside the Servian tribes, 59; - so-called lex Icilia for assignment of, 238, 265, n. 1, 272 f. - - - Bacchanalians, 254, n. 3. - - Ballot, 467; - laws on, 359, 369, 371, 389 f.; - use of in quaestiones, 420; - in all comitia, 469; - boxes, 389, 467. - - Belot, on ratings, 91-3. - - Berns, on comitia and concilium, 126. - - Bibulus, spectio of, 114, n. 9, 116, n. 1, 439. - - Bill, see Rogatio. - - Birds, auspices from, 108. - - Bird-seer, 105, n. 1. - - βουλή, 407. - - Bribery, in trials, 378, 442; - of magistrates, 429 f.; - electoral, see Ambitus. - - - Caecilius Metellus, L., tribune (213), 318. - - Caecilius Metellus, Q., censor (131), 264, n. 8. - - Caecilius Metellus, Q., consul (60), 163. - - Caecilius Metellus, Q., consul (57), 115. - - Caecilius Metellus Numidicus, Q., prosecution of (100), 257, n. 5. - - Caedes, see Murder. - - Caeles Vibenna, 3. - - Caelestia (auspicia), impetrativa, 108; - oblativa, 112; - de caelo servare, 114; - of Bibulus, 439. - - Caelian hill, 3. - - Caerite franchise, 38, n. 1. - - Caerites, 62. - - Caesetius Flavius, L., tribune (44), 324, 455. - - Calabra, curia, 154, 468. - - Calare, 153 f. - - Calatores, 154. - - Calendar, 470-2; - pontifical control of, 358. - - Calumniator, Calumny, 400. - - Camillus, see Furius Camillus. - - Campanian land, vectigalia of, 337, 351, n. 5, 365 f., 373; - under lex Iulia, 439, 440. - - Campanians, punished for revolt, 254, 340; - senatus consultum on, 353. - - Campus Martius, meeting place of centuries, 108, 203, 469; - of tribes, 465; - president’s platform in, 109; - elections in, 115, 194, n. 2; - inauguration in, 156; - execution in, 258. - - Candidacy, in absentia, 436 f., 449; - see Ambitus. - - Cannae, effect of disaster at, 343. - - Capital punishment, under kings, 182, 239 f.; - voted by centuries, 240 ff., 286 f.; - in early republic by curiae and tribes, 266-9; - abolished by lex Porcia, 250 f.; - avoided by exile, 344; - see Appeal. - - Capite censi, 89, 394. - - Capitoline hill, 2; - beyond Servian tribes, 59; - auspication on, 109, 154; - comitia tributa on, 465; - curiata on, 468. - - Capua, plan to colonize, 373, 382, n. 9; - lex Iunia on, 410. - - Carpenters, in comitia centuriata, 206. - - Carthage, colonization of, 383, 385. - - Cassius, Sp., 238, 244, 310. - - Catiline, 437. - - Cato the Elder, see Porcius, M., the Elder. - - Cato the Younger, 111, 126. - - Cattle, standard of value, 269, 287. - - Caudium, effect of defeat at, 302 f. - - Cavalry, see Equites. - - Celeres, 73. - - Censi, 90, n. 5. - - Censoriae Tabulae, 67, 85, 204. - - Censors, make up tribes, 60; - relation to aerarii, 60, 62, 64 f.; - instituted, 79, 234, 237; - auspices of, 103; - auspicate lustral comitia, 111; - preside over contio, 141; - inspect arms, 204; - election of, 229; - centuriate sanction, 237; - laws on, 237, 300, 307; - grant citizenship, 283, 304; - prosecution of, 318; - reëlection forbidden, 332; - limited by comitia, 337; - supervise morals, 332, 337, 428; - tribunes interfere with, 351, n. 5; - assign seats to senators, 356 f.; - let out taxes of Asia, 380; - stigma of, 445, 450, n. 2. - - Census, connection of with tribes, 50, 54, 59; - money valuation in, 65; - instituted, 53, 68, n. 7, 76; - Greek, 71; - post-Servian, 77; - object of, 204; - after reform, 216; - under lex municipalis, 457. - - Centuria procum (patricium), 67, n. 3, 75, n. 1; - of the tardy, 208, 226. - - Centuriate organization, Fabius on, 52 f., 67; - Livy and Dionysius on, 66, 68; - Servian, 72-6; - post-Servian, 76-80, 201 ff.; - see Comitia centuriata. - - Centuries, 66 ff.; - number of, in classes, 66, 76 f.; - in the classis, 73, 76; - in post-Servian phalanx, 76 f.; - in fifth rating, 77; - supernumerary, 80-82, 205-9, 224; - of juniors, 82 f., 205; - of seniors, 205; - after reform, 216 ff.; - increased, 219 ff.; - see Comitia centuriata. - - Centurions, in comitia centuriata, 211; - in jury service, 458. - - Ceres, connection of with plebeian organization, 264, n. 7; - forfeiture of estates to, 267, 274; - senatus consulta in temple of, 278 f., 465, n. 2.; - Priestesses of granted citizenship, 353. - - Chalkidae, an Attic gens, 28. - - Chariot, in war, 69, 74. - - Χειροτονία, 406, n. 6. - - Chicken auspices, 107, 118, n. 2. - - Cicero, on early Roman history, 26; - account of centuriate system, 67, 205, n. 5, 215, n. 2, 221 f.; - criticises Antony’s obnuntiation, 111, n. 4; - attitude toward auspices, 118, n. 2; - usage relative to comitia and concilium, 126-31; - distinction between whole and part, 130, 466; - on curiate law, 184 f.; - on capital trials, 267, 268, n. 6; - curule aedile, 327; - on frumentations, 401, n. 5; - supports Manilian rogation, 434; - consul (63), 435-7; - commends lex Iulia repetundarum, 442. - - Cinna, see Cornelius Cinna. - - Circus, Flaminius, 465. - - Cistae (ballot boxes), 389, 467. - - Citizenship, early idea of, 2; - liberality of Rome in granting, 38, 43 f.; - of other states, 44, n. 1; - granted by king, 24, 181, 304; - by censors, 283, 304; - by tribes, 304 f., 352; - by founder of colony, 353, 395; - to priestesses of Ceres, 353; - to Latins and Italians, 401 f.; - less freely, 353 f.; - as reward, 393, n. 2; - value enhanced, 354; - usurpations of, 354, 397; - optimo iure, 355; - sine suffragio, 62, 63, 64, 304, n. 4, 305, 352. - - City, relation of to country, 55 f. - - City-state, origin of, 6. - - Cives sine suffragio, 44, 62, 63, 64, 352. - - Classes, 66 ff.; - relative size of, 83; - the five and their ratings, 84-91; - Smith on origin, 85, n. 3; - soldiers recruited from, 86, 394; - number of centuries in, after reform, 216 f.; - parts of tribes, 219 f.; - social, 16 ff.; - Athenian, 71; - in theatre, 356 f. - - Classici, 72, n. 2, 76, 85, 90, 216, n. 1. - - Classicum, 469. - - Classis, original meaning of, 72, n. 1; - and infra classem, 72; - like zeugitae, 76; - array in battle, 79; - changed meaning, 84 f.; - rating of, 87; - fifth, 88 f.; - first, 89 f.; - procincta, 203; - number of centuries in fifth, 208; - see Classes. - - Claudia, trial of, for perduellio (246), 326. - - Claudia (tribus), 56. - - Claudius, augur, fined, 328. - - Claudius, historian, on Claudine treaty, 302. - - Claudius, App., decemvir, trial of, 246. - - Claudius, App., consul (179), 192, n. 3. - - Claudius, C., censor (169), trial of, 253. - - Claudius, M., trial of, 246. - - Claudius Caecus, App., 307; - prosecution of, 247; - alters tribes, 64; - appraisements, 65, 86; - influences censorship, 331. - - Claudius Marcellus, C., consul (50), attitude of toward auspices, - 118, n. 2. - - Claudius Marcellus, M., consul (215), and curiate law, 197; - lex for abrogating imperium of, 342. - - Claudius Pulcher, App., consul (54), 194, n. 2; - author of work on augury, 118, n. 2; - view of curiate law, 193. - - Claudius Pulcher, P., consul (249), trial of, 248, 317. - - Clients, ancient view as to origin of, 22; - rights, 22 f.; - Niebuhr on, 27; - Meyer on, 55; - in Claudian tribe, 56; - in populus, tribes, and curiae, 24, 262, n. 2, 271; - vote in comitia curiata, 25, 32, 271; - in assemblies, 120, 276; - Mommsen on, 34; - in war, 22, 78, n. 6. - - Clodius Pulcher, P., tribune (58), 127, 444-6; - transitio ad plebem, 162 f., 443; - prosecutes Milo, 195. - - Clustumina (tribus), 56. - - Coinage, earliest copper, 86 f.; - Flaminian law on, 336; - Clodian, 392; - Papirian, 403. - - Coins, plated, 336, 398, n. 6. - - Collegia, laws on, Clodia, 445; - Licinia, 447 f.; - Caesar’s edict, 457, n. 6. - - Collegium (College), of accensi velati, 80, 207; - of fabri, 206, 226; - of tubicines and cornicines, 206 f.; - tribunician, 269; - of sacerdotes, 391 f.; - connection of latter with tribes, 7; - political character, 106, n. 6, 10, 113; - enlarged by Sulla, 416; - supernumeraries in, 454, n. 6; - see Augurs, Epulones, etc. - - Collina (tribus), 50. - - Colonia Genetiva Iulia, 453, n. 4. - - Colonies, founded by senate, 284; - triumviri for conducting, 307, 311, 350; - laws for founding, 350; - founder’s right to enroll aliens, 353; - Sempronian, 372, 382 f.; - regulations of in Thorian law, 386; - epoch in history of, 394; - founded by Caesar, 453. - - Comitia, relation of to augural districts, 108; - effect of celestial omens on, 109; - attended by augurs, 112 ff.; - meet at sunrise, 115; - distinguished from concilium, 119-38; - defined by Laelius, 119; - Livy’s usage relative to, 119-25; - sacerdotal usage, 125 f.; - Sallust’s, 126; - Cicero’s, 126-30; - literary and juristic, 131; - true distinctions, 131-8; - uses classified, 132-4; - developed, 135-7; - meaning of, 135; - relation to concilium and contio, 138; - not summoned by promagistrate, 141; - formed from contio, 150; - connotes organization, 154; - iusta, 187, n. 7; - in camp, 194; - right to establish special courts, 254, 390; - judicial procedure in, 259 f.; - limited by senate and magistrates, 273, 284, 344 f.; - development of voting in, 275 f.; - gain power, 315 f.; - permit triumphs, 334; - regulate festivals, 340 f.; - influence of Flaminius on, 343; - part of in government, 344; - lack initiative, 345 f.; - most active under C. Gracchus, 384; - worn out, 405; - under senatorial control, 406-8; - yield judicial function to courts, 420 f.; - decline, 450-61; - limited by Sulla and Caesar, 413 f., 420 f., 452, 454 f., 457, 477; - presidency of, 465, 468, 469; - length of sessions, 470; - composition of, 473; - summary of history, 473-7. - - Comitia calata, 152-67; - auspicated, 104; - wills made in, 139, n. 5, 157-9; - also termed contio, 140, n. 1; - definition of, 153 f.; - place of meeting, 154; - religious objects, 154-6; - centuriata, 154, n. 4, 156; - voting in, 156 f.; - adrogatio in, 160 f.; - testamentary adoptions in, 161; - transitio ad plebem in, 162 f.; - grant of patriciate in, 164-6. - - Comitia centuriata, principle of, 12 f.; - convoked by horn-blower, 31; - advance beyond curiata, 33, 473; - ascribed to Servius, 66 ff., 201; - described in Censoriae Tabulae, 67; - non-existent under kings, 68, 201; - developed from army, 68 f., 202 ff.; - distinguished from army, 83, 203, 205 ff.; - relation to augural districts, 108; - place of meeting, 108, 143, 203, 469; - auspicated, 104, 110; - attended by augurs, 114; - enact privilegia, 127 f.; - recall Cicero, 128; - lustral, 141, 204 f.; - no deliberation in, 143; - voting in, 157, 211, 469 f.; - declare war, 177, 230-2, 283, 295; - curiate sanction, 184, 229; - pass lex de censoria potestate, 185, 237; - confer imperium, 188; - elect praetor in Spain, 192; - organization of, 201-28; - early republican, 201-11; - presidency of, 203, 236, 469; - supernumeraries in, 205-9; - sex suffragia in, 209; - new equestrian centuries in, 209 f.; - table of centuries, 210; - reform of, 211-28; - essentials of, 212; - date, 212 f.; - gradual, 214 f.; - five classes after, 216; - tribes, 216 f.; - Niebuhr on, 217-9; - Huschke, 219; - Pantagathus, 220; - Mommsen, 221-4; - Lange, 224 f.; - Klebs, 225; - voting after, 225, 227, 469 f.; - supernumeraries, 226; - functions, 229-61; - elective, 229 f.; - legislative, 230-9; - Twelve Tables on, 233 f.; - freed from patrum auctoritas, 235; - yield to tribes, 239; - judicial, 239-61; - appeal to, 239-42, 268; - tribunician cases before, 245-53; - limited by special courts, 253-7; - try Rabirius, 258 f.; - procedure, 259 f.; - pass lex de Aventino, 272; - institute Decemvirate, 273; - divide jurisdiction with tribes, 286 f.; - lose regulation of magistracy, 305. - - Comitia curiata, 10, 168-200; - not identical with army, 11; - voting in by genera hominum, 12; - include clients and plebeians, 24 f., 32; - convoked by lictor, 31; - lack initiative, 33, 173; - auspicated, 110, 112; - pass lex de imperio, 112; - attended by augurs, 113; - origin, 152 f., 168-73, 473; - limited rights of, 173 ff.; - subject to patrum auctoritas, 174 f.; - on war and peace, 174-7; - legislation in, 177-82; - jurisdiction of, 182, 339; - elections, 182 ff., 196, 473; - lex de imperio, 184-96; - become formality, 196-8; - early republican, 232; - presidency of, 262; - composition of, 262, 271; - place of meeting, 468. - - Comitia sacerdotum, 120, 129, 341, 391, 458. - - Comitia tributa, principle of, 12 f.; - alleged trial of Coriolanus, 56, n. 4; - auspication of, 104, 110; - attended by augurs, 114; - Livy’s use of term, 120; - Sallust’s, 126; - Cicero’s, 126-9; - incompetent to pass privilegia, 128; - of whole people, 129 f.; - curiate sanction, 184; - confer imperium, 188; - under pretorian presidency, 193; - ratify Cornelian laws, 236; - gain at expense of centuries, 239; - legalize voluntary exile, 249, 256, 257, n. 5, 267, 446; - procedure in, 259 f., 465-8; - origin of, 262, 270-2, 473 f.; - pre-decemviral jurisdiction, 267-9, 273; - patricians in, 271, 275-7; - elective, 272; - no legislation before Decemvirate, 272-4; - conditioned legislative power granted to, 274-9; - advantages over centuriata, 280; - from 449 to 287 B.C., 283-316; - jurisdiction after Hortensius, 317-29; - tribunician, 317-25; - aedilician, 325-7; - pontifical, 327 f.; - era of repose in legislation, 330-3; - Flaminian, 333-46; - Plutocratic, 346-62; - from Gracchi to Sulla, 363-411; - subjected to senate by Sulla, 413 f.; - from Sulla to Octavianus, 412-61; - preferred by Caesar, 452; - decline of, 450 ff. - - Comitial days, 470-2; - vitiated by spectio, 115; - by proclamation of holidays, 116; - senatorial sessions forbidden on, 424; - lex Gabinia on, 429; - lex Clodia on, 445. - - Comitiatus maximus, 241, 268. - - Comitium, meeting-place of curiae, 10, 468; - of tribes, 465; - auspication in, 109. - - Commentarii Servi Tullii, 67. - - Commission, special, see Quaestio extraordinaria. - - Commissioners, see Duumviri, Triumviri, etc. - - Compitum Fabricium, 9. - - Concilium, distinguished from comitia, 119-38; - defined by Laelius, 119; - Livy’s use of term, 119-25; - Mommsen on, 121-4; - Caesar’s usage, 125 f.; - Sallust’s, 126; - Cicero’s, 130 f.; - literary and juristic, 131; - true distinction, 131-8; - uses classified, 132-4; - developed, 135-7; - relation to comitia and contio, 138; - of nobles, 124, 125; - populi, 120-6; - plebis at Capua, 125. - - Concordia ordinum, 428. - - Consobrini, intermarriage of, 340. - - Conspiracy, special court for trial of, 254, 310; - judicial, 378; - lex Furia on, 396, n. 2. - - Constitution, equilibrium of Roman, 343-6, 361 f. - - Consuls, auspices of, 103; - obnuntiate, 114; - watch sky, 115; - proclaim holidays, 116; - call to concilium, 121; - to contio, 142; - election of, 189, 229; - intermediate between senate and comitia centuriata, 235; - laws on, 237, 296, 299, 307; - given absolute authority, 273; - depend on people, 345; - minimal age of, 415; - presidency of assemblies, 465, 468, 469. - - Consulta, see Senatus consulta. - - Contio, 139-51; - interrupted by storm, 109; - auspicated, 110 f., 122, 144 - sacerdotal use of word, 125 f., 139 f.; - relation to comitia and concilium, 138; - derivation of, 139; - composition, 140; - presidency, 140 f.; - tribunician, 142, 144; - witnessing, 142; - preliminary to comitia, 143; - opening of, 144 f.; - speaking in, 145 f.; - women in, 146 f.; - change to comitia, 150, 465, 469; - earliest form of assembly, 152, 156, 473; - part of in elections, 183; - military, 202, 230; - judicial, 259 f., 320; - plebeian, 263, 269, 273, 425 f., 430; - for opposing Manilian law, 434; - oath in, 441. - - Conubium, connected with auspices, 101; - between near kin, 339 f.; - freedmen lack, 354. - - Conventio, 139, 140, n. 1; - see Contio. - - Conway, on social classes, 38, n. 2. - - Coöptation, of patricians, 164, n. 1, 166; - of sacerdotes, 416. - - Cornelian constitution, 423-8. - - Cornelius, C., tribune (67), 429 f. - - Cornelius Cinna, L., consul (87), 409; - assigns new citizens to tribes, 58, 409; - measures of vetoed by tribunes, 257, n. 5. - - Cornelius Dolabella, L., naval duumvir (180), fined by pontiff, 328. - - Cornelius Merula, L., prosecution of (87), 257, n. 5. - - Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus, P., punishes soldiers, 251 f.; - dispensed from laws, 360; - modifies Sempronian agrarian law, 367. - - Cornelius Scipio Africanus, P., trial of (185), 319 f.; - favors senators at theatre, 356 f. - - Cornelius Scipio Asiagenus, L., trial of (185), 255, 319 f. - - Cornelius Sulla Felix, L., treatment of new citizens, 58; - use of assemblies, 236; - increases quaestiones, 257 f., 324; - reactionary, 403, 414; - consular legislation of (88), 405-8; - dictatorial (82-81), 412-23; - limits comitia, 413 f., 420 f., 477. - - Cornicines, 81, n. 2-4, 206; - see Musicians. - - Corpus, Augustale, Iulianum, etc., 220. - - Cotta, L., opinion of on Cicero’s interdict, 128. - - Crier, see Praeco. - - Crimes, treatment of, by Sulla, 258, 419-21; - early legislation on, 357; - standing courts on, 358; - Julian laws on, 455. - - Crucifixion, punishment for perduellio, 258. - - Curatores, of tribes, 220, n. 4; - viarum, 424, n. 6. - - Curia Calabra, 154, 468. - - Curiae, 8-11; - social composition of, 24, 32, 271; - new citizens admitted to, 44; - relation of to land, 48; - see Comitia calata, curiata. - - Curiales, 9. - - Curio, 9; - maximus, 10, 120, 341, 391. - - Cursus honorum, 347, 415. - - Custodes tabellarum, 389, 466, n. 4, 467. - - Cyrene, tribes of, 7, n. 1. - - - Damnum, lex Aquilia on, 332 f. - - Debts, legislation on, 296, 298, 310, 312, 313, 351 f., 408, 409 f., - 437, n. 7, 452. - - De caelo servare, 114 ff. - - Decemviri agris adsignandis, under Servilian rogation, 186, 187, 259, - 435; - under Livian law, 398, 400. - - Decemviri legibus scribundis, presidency of contio, 141; - election of, 229; - without appeal, 240; - instituted, 273. - - Decemviri sacris faciundis, 296, 308; - election of, 391; - increased to quindecemviri, 416. - - Decianus, see Appuleius Decianus. - - Decius, censor (304), 64. - - Decius, tribune (120), 256. - - Decuriae (decades), of soldiers, 11 f.; - (decuries) of jurors, 427, 458. - - Decurions, 12. - - Decurionate, municipal, 457. - - Demagogism, encouraged by frumentations, 373. - - Democracy, incipient, 308; - rise of prevented, 346. - - Δῆμος, 17, 407 f. - - Δημοτικοί, 17. - - Denarius, value of, 87, n. 4, 336. - - Detestatio sacrorum, 156, 161, 162, n. 7, 163. - - Di penates, prosecution for neglecting, 323; - oath by, 380. - - Dice, prohibited, 337. - - Dictator, auspices of, 103, 112; - passes lex curiata, 112, 189, 191; - presidency of contio, 140; - of comitia, 465, 468, 469; - temporary monarch, 182; - optima lege, 187; - instituted, 233; - preferred tribes for legislation, 236, 416, n. 1, 452; - abolition of office, 237, 459; - subjection to appeal, 241 f.; - presides over special court, 254; - appointed at command of senate, 273, 284; - rei publicae constituendae, 412. - - Dies, comitiales, 470-2; - nefasti, 470 f.; - endotorcisi, intercisi, 470, n. 9; - fasti, 471. - - Diodorus, on plebeian tribunate, 272, n. 2; - admission of plebs to consulship, 293; - Sempronian law on military service, 382. - - Dionysius, on early Roman history, 25, n. 3, 26 f.; - Servian tribes, 50, 53; - centuriate system, 66, n. 1, 67, 201, n. 3; - first tribal meeting, 262, n. 2; - patricians in tribal assembly, 275. - - Diribitio, 467. - - Diribitores, 467, n. 10. - - Dispensations from law, 307 f., 343, 360, 366, 368 f., 449; - senate versus people on, 430 f.; - from lex curiata, 186, 190, 195, 199. - - Divination, forms of, 108 f.; - see Auspices. - - Divisores, 431. - - Domitius Ahenobarbus, Cn., tribune (103), 323. - - Draco, law of on phratry, 28. - - Duoviri, see Duumviri. - - Duumviri navales, instituted (311), 306 f. - - Duumviri perduellioni iudicandae, 243 f.; - give way to tribunes, 248; - for trial of Rabirius, 258. - - Duumviri sacris faciundis, 296. - - Dyarchy, established by Gabinian law (67), 433. - - - Edicts, pretorian, 431 f.; - of Caesar, 457, n. 6. - - Effatus ager, 108. - - Egeria, 177. - - Election, annulment of on religious ground, 107; - prevented by oblativa, 111, 113; - of king, 182-4; - and curiate law, 184-200; - by centuries, 229 f., 331; - of plebeian officials, 262 f.; - by tribes, 271 f., 285 f., 331; - ballot in, 359; - theory of popular control, 360; - see Ambitus, Magistrates. - - Elicius, 100, n. 6. - - Emancipation, in German assembly, 153; - in transitio ad plebem, 163. - - Ennius, granted citizenship, 353. - - Epidius Marullus, C., tribune (44), 324, 455. - - Epilepsy (morbus comitialis), 112. - - Epulones, instituted, 347; - election of, 391; - increased to seven, 416, n. 3. - - Equites, relation of to tribes, 7; - originally self-supporting, 62; - in centuriate system, 66, 209 f.; - before Servius, 73 f.; - in Servian army, 75 f.; - in 214 B.C., 92; - census of, 92, 96 f.; - post-Servian, 93-7; - funds for, 93 f.; - opened to plebeians, 94; - equo privato, 94 f.; - equo publico, 95 f., 209; - in comitia centuriata, 209 f.; - prerogative, 211; - after reform, 212, 215, 220, 224, 226 f.; - given seats at theatre, 357, 428; - liable to law against bribery, 378; - made superior to senators, 381; - desert C. Gracchus, 384; - associate with senators in courts, 402, 427 f., 455. - - Esquilina (tribus), 50, 220. - - Eupyridae, Attic gens, 28. - - Exercitus urbanus, 203. - - Exile, voluntary, legalized by comitia tributa, 249, 256, 257, n. 5, - 267, 446. - - Extortion, see Repetundae. - - - Fabius, Q., trial of (389), 246, 288. - - Fabius Buteo, censor (241), 213. - - Fabius Gurges, Q., consul (292), resolution on imperium of, 289, 306. - - Fabius Maximus, Q., consul (215), and curiate law, 197. - - Fabius Maximus Servilianus, Q., trial of, for murder, 257, n. 5. - - Fabius Pictor, sources of for early Rome, 26; - on Servian tribes, 51, 52-4; - centuriate system, 67, 85. - - Fabius Pictor, Q., praetor (189), trial of, 327 f. - - Fabius Rullianus, Q., alters tribes, 64. - - Fabri (mechanics, sappers, workmen), 66, 67, n. 3, 68, 81; - assigned to classes, 205 f.; - after reform, 226. - - Family law, changes in, 339 f., 352. - - Fasti, read in comitia calata, 154 f.; - dies, 471 f.; - Clodian law on, 445. - - Faucia (curia), 11, n. 7; - ill-omened, 112. - - Ferentarii, 80, n. 5. - - Festivals, regulated by law, 340 f. - - Fetialis, 176, 265. - - Finance, legislation on, 297 f., 310 f., 335-7, 351 f., 392, 403, - 422, 438. - - Fines, appealed to tribes, 259, 269, 286 f., 292, 317 ff., 344. - - Flamen, curial, 10; - Dialis, 203, n. 7. - - Flaminian, era, 333-46; - Circus, 465; - Meadow, 465. - - Flaminius, C., and curiate law, 191; - monetary law of, 191 f., 336; - censor, 213; - era of, 333-46; - agrarian law, 334 f.; - supports Claudian law, 335; - influences legislation, 337 f., 343; - assigns libertini to city tribes, 355; - energizes comitia, 343, 475. - - Flavius, M., trial of, 291. - - Fordicidia, 9. - - Foreign affairs, administered by senate, 273; - then fell partly to comitia tributa, 303; - laws on, 349 f. - - Forgery, 420. - - Foriensis (curia), 11. - - Formiani, Fundani, etc., receive suffrage, 352. - - Formulae, legal, 464. - - Fornacalia, 9, 11, n. 8. - - Forum, assembly in, 267, 327, 431, 439, n. 15, 465. - - Fowler, W. W., on lex Scantinia, 357, n. 13; - reëlection of tribune, 369, n. 4; - Sempronian lex iudiciaria, 374, n. 7. - - Freedmen, see Libertini. - - Fregellae, revolt of, 255. - - Fröhlich, on Sulpicius, 405, n. 2; - Cornelian-Pompeian law, 406, n. 6; - lex Cornelia de tribunicia potestate, 414. - - Frumentations, 372 f., 395, 398, 401; - abolished by Sulla, 422; - restored by Lepidus, 423, n. 8; - further legislation on, 424, n. 5, 444 f.; - curtailed by Caesar, 453; - under lex municipalis, 456. - - Fulvius, Cn., praetor (212), trial of, 249 f. - - Fundus populus factus, 401, n. 8. - - Furius, L., past consul, trial of, 268. - - Furius, P., tribune (98), 257, n. 5, 323. - - Furius Camillus, M., and equestrian fund, 94; - dictator, 202; - trial of, 244 f., 288, 290. - - Furtum (theft), 339, n. 5; - prosecution for, 321; - under lex Hostilia, 337, n. 5; - Plautia, 424; - see Peculatus. - - - Gabinius, A., tribune (67), 429 f., 432 f. - - Gabinius, Q., tribune (139), 359. - - Gabinus ager, 108. - - Gades, receives citizenship, 454. - - Galeria iuniorum, 217. - - Genera, identified with gentes, 12. - - Gens, meaning family, lineage, 30 f., 102. - - Gentes, 11-13; - unconnected with curiate system, 13; - social composition of, 28-31; - defined by Scaevola, 28, n. 7; - maiores et minores, 35 f.; - origin of patrician, 37, n. 4; - relatively late, 48, n. 2; - common land of, 49; - relation to rural tribes, 35, 50, 55, n. 1; - in war, 78, n. 6. - - Gentiles, Gentilitas, 28, n. 7, 29, 30. - - Gifts, leges Publicia and Cincia on, 338 f. - - Governors, provincial, of the Spains, 346 f.; - under Porcian laws, 349; - Sempronian, 374, 381 f.; - Acilian, 376 f.; - Julian, 442, 456. - - Gracchi, see Sempronius. - - Grain, see Frumentations. - - Greenidge, on social classes, 38, n. 2. - - Guilds, see Collegia. - - - Hackel, on lex Iulia municipalis, 457, n. 5. - - Heredium, 49. - - Herennius, tribune (60), 162, 438. - - Hernicans, receive civitas sine suffragio, 305. - - Herzog, on curiate law, 183, n. 5; - Sulpicius, 405, n. 2. - - Ἑταιρεία, 8, n. 6. - - Holidays, non-comitial, 116. - - Horatius, trial of for perduellio, 121. - - Hornblowers, in centuriate system, 66. - - Horsemen, see Equites. - - Hortensius, Q., dictator (287), 313. - - Hosticus ager, 108. - - Hostilius Tubulus, L., trial of (141), 255, n. 1. - - Huschke, on Servian tribes, 51; - ratings, 86; - reformed comitia centuriata, 219. - - - Ihne, on trial of Opimius, 256 f.; - popular interference with censors, 351, n. 5; - policy of Marius, 389; - Sulpicius, 405, n. 2. - - Imperium, true (iustum), 102 f., 187, n. 7; - confirmed by curiate law, 188; - granted by comitia, 188, n. 2; - by senate, 191, 284; - transition of without curiate law, 196 f.; - promagisterial, 305; - abrogated, 324, n. 1, 342, 360, 367, 390, 404, 409; - limited by Porcian laws, 349; - regulated by Sulla, 417. - - Impetrativa, impetrita (auspicia), 100, 103-11; - relation of to oblativa, 112. - - Inaugurare sacerdotes, 106. - - Inaugurations, in comitia calata, 155 f. - - Incertus ager, 108. - - Incest, prosecution for, 326. - - Index legis, 462. - - Ingenuus, 20 f., 36; - son of libertinus becomes, 355. - - Instauraticius dies, creation of by law, 308 f. - - Intercession, see Veto. - - Interdict, decreed by tribes, 249, 256, 257, n. 5, 267, 446. - - Interregnum, 183. - - Interrex, appointment of, 102; - auspices, 103; - presidency of contio, 140; - right of public speech, 145, n. 4; - nominates king, 183; - lacks curiate sanction, 191; - presides over curiae and centuries, 236, 412, 468, 469. - - Italians, benefit by Sempronian agrarian law, 364; - revolt of, 397, 401; - receive citizenship, 401 f.; - dissatisfied, 403; - equalized with Romans, 409. - - Iubere, in legislation, 179. - - Iudices (jurors), originally from senate, 345, 358, 374; - from knights under - leges Sempronia and Acilia, 374 f.; - qualifications of under lex Cornelia, 419; - Aurelia, 427; - Licinia and Pompeia, 448; - Antonia, 458; - punished for bribery, 442. - - Ius agendi cum populo, 465. - - Ius gentium, violation of, 246. - - Ius pontificum, 181. - - Ius sententiae dicendae, 391. - - Iussus populi, 180, n. 7. - - Iustitium, 401; - defined, 404, n. 6. - - Iustum auspicium, imperium, 102 f. - - - Janiculum, garrison and flag on, 203, n. 2, 258, 469; - secession to, 313. - - Judicial process, in contio, 142, 143; - in comitia, 259 f.; - choice as to assembly, 287; - ballot in, 359. - - Jugurtha, 390. - - Julius Caesar, C., usage as to comitia and concilium, 125; - creates patricians, 164, 456; - uses centuriate and tribal assemblies, 236; - threatened with prosecution, 324; - supports Licinius Macer, 426; - Manilian rogation, 434; - consul (59), 438-44; - affected by Pompeian laws, 449; - dictator (49-44), 451-7; - adds 10 days to year, 471. - - Julius Caesar, C., consul (64), usage as to contio, 125 f. - - Julius Caesar Octavianus, creates patricians, 164, 460; - triumvir, 459 f. - - Juniors, in centuriate system, 66, 68, 81 ff.; - number of, 84, 205; - after reform, 216. - - Junius, L., consul (249), trial of, 248. - - Junius Silanus, M., prosecution of (103), 323. - - Juno, Curis, 8, n. 5, 9; - Moneta, 2, n. 6. - - Junonia, colonization of, 383, 385. - - Jupiter, auspices of, 100, 103; - victim to, 264, 274; - feast of, 347; - oath by, 380. - - Jurisdiction, of king, 182; - comitia centuriata, 239-61, 315; - tributa, 264-9, 280, 286-92, 317-29. - - Jurors, see Iudices. - - Juventus Thalna, M., tribal lex de bello indicendo of, 231. - - - Kalumniator, 400. - - Kaput legis, 463, n. 6. - - Κήρυκες, 153, n. 3. - - King, auspices of, 103; - presidency of contio, 140; - of comitia calata, 154; - curiata, 173 ff.; - right to address people, 145, 173; - as legislator, 177 f.; - irresponsible, 180; - powers of, 181; - jurisdiction, 182; - election, 182-4, 189 f.; - declares war, 175 f., 181, 230. - - Klebs, on reformed comitia centuriata, 223, 225. - - Knights, see Equites. - - Kornemann, on lex Scantinia, 357, n. 13. - - - Laelius Felix, defines comitia and concilium, 119; - not in accord with Livy, 119-25; - view of rejected, 131; - error explained, 137. - - Laelius Sapiens, C., prosecution of, 322; - agrarian rogation of, 360 f. - - Laetorius Mergus, L. or M., trial of, 247. - - Land, see Ager. - - Lange, on obnuntiatio, 117; - early legislation, 181, n. 9; - transitio imperii, 183, n. 5, 197, n. 4; - comitia centuriata, 201, n. 4; - reform of, 224 f.; - validity of plebiscite, 278, n. 2; - right of dedication, 309; - lex Appuleia de maiestate, 394, n. 5; - lex Antia, 428; - principium, 466, n. 3. - - Lanuvium, curiae in, 8, n. 5. - - Latins, rights of, 63; - benefit by Sempronian agrarian law, 364; - proposal to grant citizenship to, 383; - receive citizenship, 401 f.; - limited suffrage, 466, n. 2. - - Lator legis, 462, n. 2. - - Laurentum, 2, n. 6, 3, n. 1. - - Lauretum, 2, n. 6. - - Lavinium, Tities in, 4, n. 3. - - Law, divine, 177; - human, 178; - sovereignty of, 308; - see Legislation, Lex. - - Legion, instituted, 68, 84; - early republican, 75 ff. - - Leges, composition and preservation of, 462-5; - imperfectae, etc., 463; - centuriate, consular, etc., n. 8; - provisions to secure validity of, 464; - annulment by senate, 107. - - Legislation, regal, 177-82, 230; - centuriate, 230-9; - tribal, pre-decemviral, 269-74; - pre-Hortensian, 292-316; - from Hortensius to Gracchi, 330-362; - from Gracchi to Sulla, 303-411; - late republican, 412-61; - freed from obnuntiatio, 117, 445; - process of, 178 f., 465-70; - provided for by Twelve Tables, 233 f., 307, 368, 464, 474; - senatorial, 273; - transferred to tribes, 316; - to centuries, 406-8; - ballot in, 369; - fields of: administrative, 238, 306 f.; - agrarian, 238, 265, n. 4, 272, 334, 363-7, 373 f., 385-7, 392, 395, - 400, 403, 435 f., 438-41, 458; - colonial, 311, 350, 382 f., 393 ff., 457 f.; - financial, 310 f., 335-7, 351 f., 392, 403, 422, 438; - frumentarian, 372 f., 395, 401, 423, n. 8, 444; - judiciary, 358, 374-6, 402 f., 419, 424, 427 f., 442, 448, 455 f., - 458 f.; - religious, 238, 295, n. 6, 308 f., 340, 358 f., 391 f., 435; - sumptuary, 337 f., 356, 388, n. 9, 423, 428, 448, 455 f. - - Legum dictio, 110, 179, n. 7. - - Lengle, on lex Cornelia Pompeia (88), 407, n. 2. - - Lentus, L., consul (156), trial of, 255, n. 1. - - Lex, meaning of word, 179; - data and rogata, 180. - - Lex alearia, (before 204), 337. - - ⸺ auspical, 110. - - ⸺ centuriata de potestate, 185. - - ⸺ Coloniae Genetivae, 453, n. 4. - - ⸺ curiata de imperio, 31, 32, 112, 180, n. 7; - formula of, 183, 188; - sanctioning, 184; - Messala on, 185 f.; - dispensations from, 186, 190, 195, 199; - subject to veto, 187; - confirms imperium, 188; - functions performed without, 191; - lack of in 49 B.C., 192, 194 f.; - one annually, 195; - becomes formality, 196 f.; - revived by optimates, 198; - strengthened by Sulla, 199; - de potestate, 190. - - ⸺ lenonia, 338, n. 5. - - Leges regiae, 181. - - Lex sacrata, so-called Icilian, 233, 272 f.; - on tribunes, 264; - meaning of, 264 f.; - mitigation of, 266; - renewed by Valerius and Horatius, 274; - list of leges s., 265, n. 1; - on centuriate trials, 268, n. 6. - - ⸺ satura, 396, 399. - - ⸺ de bello indicendo, 231. - - ⸺ de imperio, for triumphs, 334 f.; - Vespasiani, 464, n. 5; - see Lex curiata. - - ⸺ on driving nail, 238. - - ⸺ found at Ateste, 454, n. 3. - - ⸺ granting citizenship to priestesses of Ceres, 353. - - ⸺ creating dictatorship (501), 233. - - ⸺ instituting tribuni militum consulari potestate (445), 234, 294. - - ⸺ creating censors (443?), 234. - - ⸺ appointing prefect of market (440), 295, 305, n. 5. - - ⸺ on presenting crown to Jupiter (437), 295, n. 6. - - ⸺ on garments of candidates (432), 295. - - ⸺ increasing quaestors (421), 234. - - ⸺ creating special murder court (414), 253, 295. - - ⸺ as to residence on Capitoline hill (384), 295. - - ⸺ creating praetorship (367), 234. - - ⸺ creating curule aedileship (367), 234. - - ⸺ for election of 6 military tribunes (362), 234. - - ⸺ prohibiting comitia away from city (357), 297. - - ⸺ preparing for war (356), 297, n. 5. - - ⸺ granting triumph (356), 297, n. 5. - - ⸺ on interest and debts (347), 298. - - ⸺ granting citizenship to Privernates (329), 304 f. - - ⸺ creating promagistracy (t. 327), 305. - - ⸺ sending prefects to Capua (318), 306. - - ⸺ on dedication of temples, etc. (304), 309. - - ⸺ dispensing Q. Fabius from law (t. 298), 308. - - ⸺ creating triumviri coloniis deducendis (296), 311. - - ⸺ prolonging imperium (t. 295), 305. - - ⸺ granting Etruria to Fabius (295), 305 f. - - ⸺ on imperium of consul Q. Fabius (292), 289, 306. - - ⸺ creating special court (270), 254. - - ⸺ doubling number of quaestors (267), 332. - - ⸺ forbidding reëlection to censorship (265), 332. - - ⸺ instituting second praetor (242), 332. - - ⸺ granting privilege of riding (241), 332. - - ⸺ instituting 2 praetors (227), 341 f. - - ⸺ granting triumph (t. 223), 334. - - ⸺ on intermarriage of kin (241-219), 339 f. - - ⸺ on Sacred Spring (t. 217), 340. - - ⸺ dispensing consulars from law (t. 217), 343. - - ⸺ granting citizenship to Campanian knights (215), 340. - - ⸺ for election of pontifex maximus (before 212), 341; - for election of chief curio (before 209), 341. - - ⸺ creating 3 administrative boards (t. 212), 337. - - ⸺ on Campanian vectigalia (210), 337. - - ⸺ granting citizenship (t. 210), 353, n. 7. - - ⸺ for election of 24 military tribunes (207), 342. - - ⸺ dispensing C. Servilius from law (t. 203), 343, n. 2. - - ⸺ permitting oath by proxy (t. 200), 343, n. 2. - - ⸺ on qualification of plebeian tribunes and aediles (Flaminian - era), 342 f. - - ⸺ increasing praetors to 6 (198), 346. - - ⸺ on triumphs (after 180), 350. - - ⸺ forbidding reëlection of consul (151), 348; - dispensation from, 360; - repealed by Sulla, 415. - - Leges, dispensing Scipio Aemilianus from laws (t. 148, 135), 360. - - Lex, assigning seats to equites at theatre (t. 146?), 357. - - ⸺ abrogating proconsular imperium (136), 360. - - ⸺ granting Asia as province (t. 131), 381, n. 5. - - ⸺ on qualifications of senators (t. about 129), 369 f. - - ⸺ permitting reëlection of tribune (t. before 123), 369, 371. - - ⸺ agraria, amending Sempronian law (t. not after 118), 385. - - ⸺ founding Narbo Martius, 386, n. 1. - - Leges, repealing Sempronian law on military service (about 115), 388 - f. - - Lex, on dedication of Capitoline temple (78), 341, n. 1. - - ⸺ on vectigalia (75), 424. - - ⸺ appointing decemviri for regulating Asia (t. 67), 433. - - ⸺ dispensing Caesar from law (t. 52), 449. - - ⸺ granting citizenship to Gades (49), 454. - - Leges, recalling certain exiles (p. and t. 49), 454. - - Lex, granting Caesar triumph over Juba (48), 335, n. 2. - - Leges, conferring powers on Caesar (48-45), 451 f. - - Lex, for founding Colonia Genetiva (t. 44), 453, n. 4. - - Lex (?), for building temple to Isis (43), 459. - - Lex, honoring triumviri (43), 459. - - ⸺ on birthday of Caesar (42), 457, n. 7. - - ⸺ granting lictors to Vestals (42), 459, n. 5. - - Leges, honoring Octavia, Octavianus, and Livia (t. 35), 459 f. - - Leges whose authors are given: - - Lex Acilia de intercalatione (c. 191), 358. - - ⸺ Acilia repetundarum (t. 122), 375-8. - - ⸺ Acilia Calpurnia de ambitu (c. 67), 431; - amended by Cicero, 436. - - ⸺ Acilia Minucia, on peace with Carthage (t. 201), 344, n. 7. - - ⸺ Acilia Rubria, on worship of Jupiter (t. 122), 384, n. 4. - - ⸺ Aebutia, on legis actio, 339, n. 5. - - Leges Aebutia et Licinia, on qualifications of candidates (t. after - 194), 347 f. - - Lex Aelia, colonial (t. 194), 350. - - Leges Aelia et Fufia (t. about 150), 116 f., 358 f.; - amended by lex Clodia, 116 f., 445; - and curiate law, 198; - relation to tribunician comitia, 280. - - Lex Aemilia, on censorship (d. 443), 237. - - ⸺ Aemilia de libertinorum suffragiis (c. 115), 388; - Sumptuaria, n. 9. - - ⸺ Aemilia frumentaria (c. 78), 423, n. 1, 444, n. 6. - - ⸺ Aemilia, for naming Caesar dictator (p. 49), 450. - - ⸺ Antia sumptuaria (t. 70?), 428. - - ⸺ Antistia, on punishment of Satricans (t. 319), 310; - serves as precedent, 340. - - ⸺ Antonia de Termessibus (t. 71), 425. - - ⸺ Antonia, on children of proscribed (t. 49), 453 f.; - colonial (c. 44), 237, 453, n. 4, 457 f.; - iudiciaria, 458; - establishing appeal from quaestiones, 458 f.; - abolishing dictatorship, 237, 459; - a l. sacrata, 265, n. 1; - leges honoring Caesar, 452 n. 4; - lex confirming acts of Caesar, 457. - - ⸺ Antonia, on elections (t. 45), 454 f.; - agraria (t. 44), 458. - - ⸺ Antonia Tullia de ambitu (c. 63), 436 f. - - ⸺ Appuleia agraria (t. 100), 395; - colonial (t. 103, 100), 393 ff.; - frumentaria (t. 100), 395, 444, n. 6; - de maiestate, 394, 400; - de sponsu (103, 100?), 298, n. 1, 394, n. 5; - interdicting Metellus (t. 100), 257, n. 5, 395 f. - - ⸺ Aquilia de damno (t. 287?), 332 f. - - ⸺ Aternia Tarpeia de multae dictione (c. 454), 233, 269. - - ⸺ Atia, on election of sacerdotes (t. 63), 416, n. 6, 435. - - ⸺ Atia Ampia, honoring Pompey (t. 63), 435, n. 2. - - ⸺ Atilia, appointing special court (t. 210), 254, 340. - - ⸺ Atilia, on appointing tutors (242-186), 340. - - ⸺ Atilia Furia, for surrendering Mancinus (c. 136), 350. - - ⸺ Atilia Marcia, for electing 16 military tribunes (t. 311), 306. - - ⸺ Atinia, on stolen property (214?), 339, n. 5. - - ⸺ Atinia, for founding colonies (t. 197), 350. - - ⸺ Atinia, on right of tribunes to senatorship (t. 122-102), 391. - - ⸺ Atinia Marcia, on treaty with Macedon (t. 196), 349. - - ⸺ Aufidia, on importing wild beasts (t. 170), 356. - - ⸺ Aurelia, amending Cornelian law on tribunate (c. 75), 423 f.; - de iudiciis privatis, 424. - - ⸺ Aurelia iudiciaria (p. 70), 427, 448. - - ⸺ Baebia, colonial (t. 194), 350. - - ⸺ Baebia, on praetors (c. 181), 346. - - ⸺ Bantina, Latin, 370, n. 3, 379 f. - - ⸺ Boria (?) agraria (t. 118), 385. - - ⸺ Caecilia, appointing special court (154), 255. - - ⸺ Caecilia, abolishing vectigalia (p. 60), 438; - repealed by Caesar, 457, n. 6. - - ⸺ Caecilia, repealing lex Clodia on censorial stigma (c. 52), - 450, n. 2. - - ⸺ Caecilia Cornelia, recalling Cicero (c. 57), 114, n. 7, 143, - 446; - on cura annonae, 446. - - ⸺ Caecilia Didia, on rogations (c. 98), 396 f.; - amended, 438, n. 2. - - ⸺ Caelia tabellaria (t. 107), 253, 390. - - ⸺ Calidia, recalling Metellus (t. 98), 396, n. 1. - - ⸺ Calpurnia, for recovery of property, 339, n. 5. - - ⸺ Calpurnia repetundarum (t. 149), 358. - - ⸺ Calpurnia, recalling Popillius (t. 120), 388. - - ⸺ Calpurnia, granting citizenship (t. 89), 57, n. 5, 58, 402. - - ⸺ Calpurnia Acilia de ambitu (c. 67), 431. - - ⸺ Canuleia, on conubium (t. 445), 294. - - ⸺ Carvilia, legalizing voluntary exile (t. 212), 249. - - ⸺ Cassia tabellaria (t. 137), 253, 359. - - ⸺ Cassia, on qualifications of senators (t. 104), 390 f. - - ⸺ Cassia, for creating patricians (t. 45), 164, 456. - - ⸺ Cassia Terentia frumentaria (c. 73), 424, n. 5, 444, n. 6. - - ⸺ Cincia, on gifts (t. 204), 339. - - ⸺ Claudia, on senatorial qualifications and contracts (t. 219), - 335, 370. - - ⸺ Claudia, for expulsion of Latins (c. 177), 354. - - ⸺ Clodia, monetary (104?), 392. - - ⸺ Clodia, frumentaria (t. 58), 444 f.; - de collegiis, 445; - amended, 447 f., 457, n. 6; - on secretaries of quaestors, 445; - on censorial stigma, 445; - repealed, 450, n. 2; - amending Aelian and Fufian laws, 116 f., 445; - de provocatione, 445 f.; - interdicting Cicero, 115, n. 1, 127, 446; - leges on minor subjects, 446, n. 1. - - ⸺ Cornelia, on gambling, 337, n. 6. - - ⸺ Cornelia (?), outlawing Marius and others (88), 405. - - ⸺ Cornelia, repealing Cornelian-Pompeian laws (Cinna, c. 87), 409. - - ⸺ Cornelia (?), recalling exiles (c. or t. 87), 409. - - ⸺ Cornelia, de tribunicia potestate (d. 82), 236 f., 413 f., 418; - repealed, 423 f., 426 f.; - violated by Opimius, 425 f.; - de maiestate (81), 415-7; - on praetors, 416; - on quaestors, 415 f.; - de sacerdotibus, 416 f.; - de provinciis ordinandis, 417 f.; - iudiciaria, 419; - de adulteriis et pudicitia, alleged, 420, n. 6, 423, n. 6; - de proscriptione, 421; - de civitate Volaterranis adimenda, 236, 422; - on debts, 422; - de sponsu (?), 422, n. 13; - instituting ludi Victoriae, 422 f.; - sumptuaria, 423; - leges, criminal, 419-21; - on quaestio inter sicarios, 378; - amended, 448; - agrariae (82, 81), 421 f.; - lex on return of Pompey (80), 335, n. 2. - - ⸺ Cornelia, on collecting certain moneys (Lentulus, c. 72), 424. - - ⸺ Cornelia, on edicts of praetors (t. 67), 431 f.; - on dispensations, 430 f. - - ⸺ Cornelia Baebia de ambitu (c. 181), 348. - - ⸺ Cornelia Caecilia, recalling Cicero (c. 57), 446; - de cura annonae, 446. - - ⸺ Cornelia Fulvia de ambitu (c. 159), 348. - - ⸺ Cornelia Gellia, on granting citizenship (c. 72), 424, n. 6. - - ⸺ Cornelia Pompeia, on assemblies (c. 88), 277, n. 4, 406-8; - on rogations, 406, 407; - colonial, 408; - unciaria, 408. - - ⸺ Crepereia, on legis actio, 339, n. 5. - - ⸺ Decia, on duumviri navales (t. 311), 306. - - ⸺ Didia cibaria (p. or t. 143), 356. - - ⸺ Domitia, on election of sacerdotes (t. 103), 391 f.; - repealed by Sulla, 416; - renewed, 435. - - ⸺ Duillia, on appeal (t. 449), 241, 292. - - ⸺ Duillia Menenia, on interest (t. 357), 297. - - ⸺ Duronia, sumptuaria (t. before 97), 388, n. 9, 423. - - ⸺ Fabia de plagiariis (c. 209 or 183?), 357. - - ⸺ Fabia de numero sectatorum (t. 66), 431, n. 6. - - ⸺ Falcidia testamentaria (t. 40), 459. - - ⸺ Fannia cibaria (c. 161), 356. - - ⸺ Flaminia, agraria (t. 232), 334; - monetary (c. 217), 336. - - ⸺ Flavia, on punishing Tusculans (t. 323), 310. - - ⸺ Fufia de religione (t. 61), 438, n. 3. - - ⸺ Fufia, on voting in quaestiones (p. 59), 443. - - Leges Fufia et Aelia (t. about 150), 116 f., 198, 280, 358, 445. - - ⸺ Furia de sponsu, 298, n. 1. - - Lex Furia testamentaria (203-170?), 352, n. 5, 463, n. 8. - - ⸺ Furia (?), instituting prefects for Capua (318), 306, n. 6. - - ⸺ Furia, on conspiracy (t. 99), 396, n. 2. - - ⸺ Furia Atilia, surrendering Mancinus (c. 136), 350. - - ⸺ Furia Quinctia, arbitrating between Ardea and Aricia (c. 446), - 294 f. - - ⸺ Gabinia tabellaria (t. 139), 359. - - ⸺ Gabina, on secret meetings (t. 186 or 139?), 357. - - ⸺ Gabinia, on loans to provincials (t. 67), 429; - on sessions of senate, 429; - granting imperium to Pompey, 432 f. - - ⸺ Genucia (t. 342), 298 f.; - article of on consulship, 238; - on reëlections, often violated, 307 f.; - dispensations from, 307 f., 343; - renewed by Sulla, 415. - - ⸺ Glitia testamentaria, 459, n. 7. - - ⸺ Graccana, 383, n. 1. - - ⸺ Helvia, abrogating tribunicia potestas (t. 44), 455; - on wives of Caesar, 452. - - ⸺ Hirtia, on partisans of Pompey (t. 48?), 451, n. 2. - - ⸺ Horatia, honoring Gaia Taracia, 146, n. 7. - - ⸺ Hortensia (d. 287), 234, 312-6; - epoch-making in social history, 16; - effect on comitia centuriata, 137; - for relief of debtors, 235; - on plebi scita, 236, 269, 330, 475; - on tribunician jurisdiction, 247 f., 270; - on veto, 270. - - ⸺ Hostilia, on prosecutions for theft, 377, n. 5. - - ⸺ Icilia agraria, so called (456), 238; - sacrata, 265, n. 1, 272 f. - - ⸺ Icilia, granting amnesty to seceders (t. 449), 292; - granting triumph, 293. - - ⸺ Iulia, granting citizenship (c. 90), 57, n. 7, 10, 401 f. - - ⸺ Iulia, on dedication of Capitoline temple (p. 62), 341, n. 1; - agraria (c. 59), 145, n. 3, 148, 438-41; - relieving publicans, 441; - repetundarum, 441 f.; - dispensation from, 447; - attempt to amend, 448; - confirming acts of Pompey, 443; - on Ptolemy, 443; - curiata, arrogating Clodius (pont. max.), 443; - on debts (d. 49), 452; - de bonorum cessione (?), 452, n. 7; - on rents (47), 452 f.; - creating 2 praetors, 454; - iudiciaria (46), 455; - de maiestate, 455; - de vi, 455; - sumptuaria, 455 f.; - de provinciis, 456; - municipalis, 456 f.; - colonial (45), 453; - de Siculis, alleged (44), 454, n. 4. - - ⸺ Iulia, on rents (Octavianus, 41), 459; - on conubium of libertini (18), 354, n. 8. - - ⸺ Iulia Papiria de multarum aestimatione (c. 430), 234, 287. - - ⸺ Iunia repetundarum (t. 126), 370, 376, 379; - for expelling aliens, 370. - - ⸺ Iunia, on military pay (c. 109), 392. - - ⸺ Iunia, colonial (t. 83), 410. - - ⸺ Iunia Licinia, on filing statutes (c. 62), 437 f. - - ⸺ Licinia, on games (p. 208), 341, n. 2. - - ⸺ Licinia, instituting epulones (t. 196), 347. - - ⸺ Licinia sumptuaria (p. or t. before 97), 388, n. 9, 423. - - ⸺ Licinia de sodaliciis (c. 55), 447 f. - - Leges Licinia et Aebutia, on qualifications of candidates (t. after - 194), 347 f. - - Lex Licinia Cassia, on appointment of tribuni militum (c. 171), - 342, n. 2. - - ⸺ Licinia Iunia, on filing statutes (c. 62), 437 f. - - ⸺ Licinia Mucia, on aliens (c. 95), 397. - - ⸺ Licinia Pompeia de tribunicia potestate (c. 70), 426 f.; - prolonging Caesar’s command (55), 447. - - Leges Licinia Sextia (t. 368, 367), 120, 295 f.; - article of on consulship, 237 f.; - relieving debtors, 238; - on pasturage, 291; - violations of, 291, 311, 325, 363; - limiting occupation of land, 291, 310; - amended, 334, n. 1, 363, n. 4. - - Lex Licinnia de actione communi dividundo, 339, n. 5. - - ⸺ Livia, on organization of Africa (t. 146), 349. - - ⸺ Livia, colonial (t. 122), 383 f., 397; - on Latins, 252, 383. - - ⸺ Livia agraria, frumentaria, etc. (t. 91), 397-400. - - ⸺ Lucretia, on Campanian vectigalia (t. 172), 351, n. 5. - - ⸺ Maenia, on ludi Romani (c. 338), 308 f. - - ⸺ Maenia, on patrum auctoritas (t. 287?), 230, 331. - - ⸺ Maenia, on dowries (188?), 352. - - ⸺ Maenia Sextia de multae dictione (c. 452), 233. - - ⸺ Maevia, on Asiatic affairs (about 189), 349. n. 5. - - ⸺ Mamilia, on arbitri (c. 239?), 332, n. 9. - - ⸺ Mamilia, appointing special court (t. 109), 390. - - ⸺ Mamilia, Roscia, etc. (t. 55?), 441, n. 1. - - ⸺ Manilia, on libertini (t. 67), 433; - granting imperium to Pompey (66), 433 f. - - ⸺ Manlia, on manumission of slaves (c. 357), 202, 297. - - ⸺ Manlia, granting Numidia as province (t. 107), 381, n. 5. - - ⸺ Marcia, on usurers (c. 352?), 298, n. 1. - - ⸺ Marcia, appointing special court (t. 172), 255, n. 1. - - ⸺ Marcia Atinia, on treaty with Macedon (t. 196), 349. - - ⸺ Marcia Porcia, on triumphs (t. 62), 438. - - ⸺ Maria, on pontes (t. 119), 389. - - ⸺ Memmia de incestu (t. 111), 377, n. 5, 390, n. 4. - - ⸺ Metilia, on master of horse (t. 217), 342; - on fulling cloth, 338. - - ⸺ Minicia, on children of mixed parentage, 354, n. 2. - - ⸺ Minucia, instituting triumviri mensarii (t. 216), 336 f. - - ⸺ Minucia, repealing Rubrian colonial law (t. 121), 385. - - ⸺ Mucia, appointing special court (t. 141), 255, n. 1. - - ⸺ Munatia, pardoning certain persons (c. 42), 459. n. 5. - - ⸺ Norbana, appointing special court (t. 104), 390. - - ⸺ Octavia frumentaria (about 90), 401. - - ⸺ Ogulnia, on sacerdotes (t. 300), 102, 166, n. 7, 307, 309. - - ⸺ Oppia, on luxury of women (t. 215), 338; - repealed, 356. - - ⸺ Orchia cibaria (t. 181), 356. - - ⸺ Ovinia, on senators (t. 339-312), 164, 307, 335. - - ⸺ Papia de Vestalium lectione (t. 65?), 156, n. 7, 434; - expelling aliens, 434. - - ⸺ Papiria, on viatores of aediles, 290, n. 4. - - ⸺ Papiria, granting citizenship (p. 332), 304. - - ⸺ Papiria, on dedications (t. after 304), 309. - - ⸺ Papiria, on triumviri capitales (t. after 242), 332. - - ⸺ Papiria tabellaria (t. 131), 369, 371. - - ⸺ Papiria, monetary (t. 89), 91, 403. - - ⸺ Pedia, appointing special court (c. 43), 457, n. 7. - - ⸺ Peducaea, appointing special court (t. 113), 390. - - ⸺ Pesolania, on injury done by dogs, 332, n. 9. - - ⸺ Petillia, appointing special court (t. 185), 255, n. 1, 319, n. - 7. - - ⸺ Pinaria, on appointment of judge, 339, n. 5. - - ⸺ Pinaria annalis (p. 182?), 347, n. 3. - - ⸺ Pinaria Furia de intercalatione (c. 472), 238. - - ⸺ Plaetoria, on urban praetor (after 227), 342, n. 1. - - ⸺ Plaetoria, on cura of young men (before 192), 340. - - ⸺ Plaetoria, appointing duumviri aedi dedicandae (151?), 347, n. - 2. - - ⸺ Plautia iudiciaria (t. 89), 401, n. 3, 402 f., 427; - probably repealed, 409, n. 1; - agraria, 403. - - ⸺ Plautia de vi (t. 78-77), 424. - - ⸺ Plautia, recalling exiles (t. 73?), 424. - - ⸺ Plautia Papiria, granting citizenship (t. 89), 57, n. 10, 353, - n. 9, 402. - - ⸺ Poetelia de ambitu (t. 358), 296 f. - - ⸺ Poetelia, on slavery for debt (c. or d. 326 or 313), 310. - - ⸺ Pompeia, granting citizenship (c. 89), 402. - - ⸺ Pompeia iudiciaria (c. 55), 448; - de parricidio, 448; - de ambitu (52), 448, 454; - de provinciis, 449; - de iure magistratuum, 449; - excepting certain persons from law, 449. - - ⸺ Pompeia Licinia de tribunicia potestate (c. 70), 426 f.; - prolonging Caesar’s command (55), 447, 449. - - ⸺ Poplicia, granting burial place, 342, n. 8. - - Leges Porciae de provocatione (198-184?), 250-3, 256, 349. - - Lex Porcia de sumptu provinciali (c. 195), 349; - on provincial governors (177?), 349. - - ⸺ Porcia, on interest (c. 118?), 392. - - ⸺ Porcia Marcia, on triumphs (t. 62), 438. - - ⸺ Publicia, on gambling, 337, n. 6. - - ⸺ Publicia, on gifts at saturnalia (t. 209), 338; - rogatio for abrogating proconsular imperium, 342. - - ⸺ Publilia de sponsu, 298, n. 1. - - ⸺ Publilia, so-called (471), 196, 233, 270-2; - does not exclude patricians, 262, n. 2, 271; - confused with L. Publilia Philonis, 300. - - ⸺ Publilia (d. 339), 299-302; - article of on patrum auctoritas, 235; - on plebiscita, 236; - on consuls, 237; - excludes patricians, 262, n. 2, 276 f.; - relation to Valerian-Horatian laws, 300. - - ⸺ Pupia, on sessions of senate (p. 71), 424 f.; - amended, 429. - - ⸺ Quinctia de aquaeductibus (c. 9), 462. - - ⸺ Quinctia Furia, arbitrating between Ardea and Aricia (c. 446), - 294 f. - - ⸺ Remmia de calumniatoribus (91?), 400. - - ⸺ Roscia theatralis (t. 67), 357, n. 2, 428 f. - - ⸺ Roscia, granting citizenship to Transpadani (p. 49), 454. - - ⸺ Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina, so-called, 454, n. 3. - - ⸺ Rubria, for founding Junonia (t. 123), 383. - - ⸺ Rufrena, honoring Caesar (42), 457, n. 7. - - ⸺ Rutilia, on military tribunes (169), 349, n. 1. - - ⸺ Saenia, for creating patricians (c. 30), 164, n. 6, 460. - - ⸺ Saufeia agraria (t. 91), 400. - - ⸺ Scribonia de usucapione servitutum (c. 76 or t. 50), 424, n. 4, - 450, n. 2. - - ⸺ Scantinia, on violation of ingenui, 357. - - ⸺ Sempronia, for dedication of temple (c. 215), 341, n. 1. - - ⸺ Sempronia, on loans (t. 193), 351 f. - - ⸺ Sempronia de imperio (t. 167), 335, n. 2, 349, n. 1. - - ⸺ Sempronia agraria (t. 133), 363-7, 371; - abrogating potestas of colleague, 366, 367 f., 391. - - ⸺ Sempronia de provocatione (t. 123), 355 f., 371; - frumentaria, 372 f., 444; - agraria, 372, 373 f.; - on taxation of Asia, 380 f.; - on consular provinces, 381; - repealed, 449; - on military service, 382, 389; - colonial, 382 f.; - viaria (?), 373; - iudiciaria (122), 374-6; - on murder and poisoning, 378. - - ⸺ Servilia repetundarum (t. 111?), 393. - - ⸺ Servilia, on qualifications of iudices (c. 106), 388. - - ⸺ Sestia or Sextia, instituting Decemvirate (c. 452), 233, 273. - - ⸺ Silia, on legis actio per condictionem, 339. n. 5. - - ⸺ Silia, on weights and measures (t. Flaminian era), 337 f. - - ⸺ Sulpicia, on various subjects (t. 88), 404 f.; - article of on new citizens, 58; - on transferring command to Marius, 381, n. 5. - - ⸺ Terentia, on sons of libertini (t. 189), 355. - - ⸺ Terentilia, 120. - - ⸺ Thoria agraria (t. 111), 386 f. - - ⸺ Titia, on gambling, 337, n. 6. - - ⸺ Titia, on questorian provinces (267?), 332. n. 3. - - ⸺ Titia agraria (t. 99), 396; - criminal (99?), 396, n. 5. - - ⸺ Titia, abrogating potestas of colleague (t. 43), 455, n. 3. - - ⸺ Trebonia, on tribunician elections (t. 448 or 401), 285 f., 294. - - ⸺ Trebonia, granting provinces (t. 55), 447. - - ⸺ Tullia, on free legations (c. 63), 437. - - ⸺ Tullia Antonia de ambitu (c. 63), 436 f.; - article of renewed, 449. - - ⸺ Valeria de provocatione (c. 509), 232 f., 240, 473 f.; - a l. sacrata, 265, n. 1; - granting building lot to proposer, 238, n. 3. - - ⸺ Valeria (d. 342), 234 f.; - abolishing debts, 238, 298; - a l. sacrata, 265, n. 1. - - ⸺ Valeria de provocatione (300), 233, 234, 242, 250; - relation of to Porcian laws, 252 f. - - ⸺ Valeria, repealing Oppian law (t. 195), 356. - - ⸺ Valeria, granting suffragium (t. 188), 352. - - ⸺ Valeria, granting citizenship to priestesses of Ceres (p. 98), - 353, n. 5. - - ⸺ Valeria, on debts (c. 86), 409 f.; - repealed, 422. - - ⸺ Valeria, appointing Sulla dictator (interrex, 82), 236, 412, - 421. - - ⸺ Valeria Horatia (c. 449), 234, 274-80, 474; - de provocatione, 233, 241; - a l. sacrata, 265, n. 1; - violated by rogatio Servilia, 259; - on oath of plebs, 264, n. 7; - bearing on tribunician jurisdiction, 270, 280; - on sanctity of plebeian officials, 274; - on plebiscita, 274-8. - - ⸺ Valeria Marcia, instituting bank (c. 352), 297 f. - - ⸺ Varia de maiestate (t. 90), 400 f. - - ⸺ Vatinia iudiciaria (t. 59), 442; - colonial, 440, n. 8; - granting provinces to Caesar, 443 f.; - leges on foreign affairs, 443, n. 6. - - Leges Vibiae, confirming acts of Caesar (c. 43), 237, 457, n. 7, 458, - n. 2; - abolishing dictatorship, 459, n. 2. - - Lex Villia annalis (t. 180), 347; - renewed by Sulla, 415. - - ⸺ Visellia de curatoribus Viarum (before 71), 424, n. 6. - - ⸺ Voconia, on inheritance (t. 169), 72, n. 2, 85, 90, 352. - - Levy, obstruction of, 272, 273, 279. - - Liber and Libera, forfeiture of estates to, 274. - - Libertini, class of clients, 22; - enrolment in tribes, 58, 354; - deterioration of status, 354 f.; - lex Terentia on, 355; - l. Sulpicia on, 404. - - Licinius Crassus, M., consul (70), 426 f.; - triumvir, 441; - second consulship (50), 447 f. - - Licinius Macer, tribune (73), 426. - - Licinius Stolo, C., trial of (357), 291. - - Lictors, curial, 10, 154, 468; - curiate sanction, 189, n. 2; - cast votes of curiae, 196, 198, 199; - magisterial, 150; - granted to Vestals, 459, n. 5. - - Liticines, in comitia centuriata, 206, 226. - - Lituus, 468. - - Livius Drusus, M., tribune (122), 252, 383. - - Livius Drusus, M., tribune (91), 397-400. - - Livius Salinator, M., trial of (218), 317 f. - - Livy, on early Roman history, 25, n. 3, 26; - centuriate system, 66 f.; - comitia and concilium, 119-25; - patricians in tribal assembly, 275; - agrees with Fabius Pictor, 293, n. 3. - - Locupletes, 61. - - Lucerenses, 74. - - Luceres, 3, 74; - in Ardea, 4, n. 3. - - Lucerus, in Ardea, 4, n. 3. - - Lucilius (Licinius?), hurled from Tarpeian Rock, 257, n. 5. - - Lucretius, C., praetor (171), prosecution of, 321. - - Ludi, Romani, 308; - Victoriae, 422 f. - - Lusitanians, rogation on, 349 f. - - Lustrum, 204. - - Lutatius Catulus, Q., prosecution of (87), 257, n. 5. - - Lycurgus, 177. - - - Magic, prosecution for, 325. - - Magistracy, bestowed by curiate law, 185 f. - - Magistrates, patrician, 103, 263; - higher and lower, 103, 141 f.; - occupy templa, 109; - take auspices, 110; - have obnuntiatio, 111 f.; - spectio, 113; - preside over contio, 140 f.; - comitia, 465, 468, 469; - bound by laws, 180 f.; - iusti, optimo iure, 186-8; - and lex curiata, 189 ff.; - higher, 229; - act as accusers, 259; - controlled by dictator, 273, 284; - right to divide business, 306; - to enrolment in senate, 307; - exempt from prosecution, 318; - under law of extortion, 377; - regulated by Sulla, 413-8; - by Pompey, 449; - swear to uphold laws, 464; - municipal, 457. - - Maiestas, 257, n. 5; - Cornelian court of, 258; - Claudia tried for, 326, 394; - under lex Varia, 400 f.; - Cornelia, 419; - Iulia, 455. - - Majority rule, primitively unknown, 170, n. 7. - - Mancinus, law for surrendering, 350. - - Mancipatio, 48. - - Manilia, trial of for violence (183), 326. - - Manilius, C., tribune (67-66), 433 f. - - Manlius, A., consul (178), threatened with prosecution, 231. - - Manlius, past consul, trial of, 268. - - Manlius, Cn., consul (357), holds comitia at Sutrium, 297. - - Manlius, L., past dictator, trial of (362), 288. - - Manlius Capitolinus, M., trial of, 123 f., 243. - - Manlius Volso, Cn., 231. - - Mantua, three tribes in, 4, n. 3. - - Marcius, L., propraetor in Spain, 192. - - Marcius Coriolanus, C., trial of (491), 267. - - Mariana colonia, 394, n. 1, 396. - - Marius, C., change in recruiting, 86, 394; - tribune (119), 389; - combines with Saturninus, 393-5; - given command against Mithridates, 404. - - Market days, see Nundinae. - - Master of horse, presides over contio, 140. - - Matienus, C., trial of for desertion, 252. - - Matrons, fined for stuprum, 291 f., 326; - trial of for poisoning, 253 f., 309. - - Meadow, Flaminian, 465. - - Mechanics, see Fabri. - - Messala, on curiate law, 185 f. - - Metellus, see Caecilius Metellus. - - Meyer, E., on four city tribes, 54-6; - origin of tribunate, 55, n. 1, 262, n. 1, 272, n. 2; - Licinian-Sextian laws, 296, n. 4; - chronology of Sempronian laws, 371, n. 2; - Cornelian-Pompeian law on assemblies, 406. - - Milo, tribune (57), 115 f. - - Minervia, founding of, 384, n. 1. - - Minos, 177. - - Minucius, L., trial of, 246. - - Minucius Augurinus, C., tribune (184), 320. - - Mithridates, 403, 404, 433, 434. - - Mommsen, Th., on patrician state, 33-6; - gens, 35; - gentile ownership of land, 48; - urban tribes, 51 f., 54 f.; - classis, 72, n. 1; - concilium populi, 121-4; - grant of patriciate, 166, n. 3; - of citizenship, 181, n. 5; - early legislation, n. 9; - transitio imperii, 197, n. 4; - exercise of comitia centuriata, 203, n. 4; - proletarian century, 207, n. 12; - reformed comitia centuriata, 221-4; - validity of plebiscite, 277, n. 2; - Licinian and Aebutian laws, 347, n. 8; - qualification of iudices, 375, n. 4; - Thorian law, 385, n. 5; - lex Appuleia de maiestate, 394, n. 5; - lex Plautia iudiciaria, 403; - Sulpicius, 405, n. 2; - principium, 466, n. 3. - - Morals, laws on, 337 f. - - Mucius Scaevola, P., tribune (141), 255, n. 1. - - Mucius Scaevola, Q., formula of oath in arrogations, 160. - - Mühl, on lex Appuleia de maiestate, 394, n. 5. - - Municipia, lex Iulia on, 456 f. - - Murder, trial of, 244, 246, n. 6; - under questorian jurisdiction, 248; - court for, 253, 255, n. 1, 257, n. 5, 295, 309, 358; - under lex Sempronia, 378; - Cornelia, 419 f.; - of tribune alleged, 268. - - Musicians, in centuriate system, 66, 68, 81, 206, 208, 226. - - - Naevius, M., tribune (185), 320. - - Narbo Martius, founding of, 386, n. 1. - - Nefas, Nefasti dies, 159, 470. - - Neptunia, founding of, 382. - - Niebuhr, on early Roman history, 25 ff.; - patrician state, 27-32; - gens and curia, 11-13, 31 f.; - social composition of gens, 27; - Attic tribal system, 28, 31 f.; - Servian tribes, 51, 61, n. 3; - reformed comitia centuriata, 217-9; - unsoundness of his method, 45. - - Niese, on origin of tribunate, 262, n. 1; - Licinian-Sextian law, 296, n. 4. - - Nigidius Figulus, P., on auspices, 101, n. 3. - - Nobility, origin of, 39; - develops into class, 40; - among various peoples, 40-2; - at Rome, 43; - supported by tribunate, 312; - plebeian, allies of patrician, 330. - - Nobles, concilium of Etruscan, 124; - of Gallic, 125; - comitia of, 129; - represented in council, 275; - right to vote, 276; - see Patricians. - - Nola, loses citizenship, 422. - - Νόμοι ἐπ’ ἀνδρί, 153. - - Norbanus, C., trial of (95), 394, n. 4. - - Novae Curiae, 9. - - Numa, 177. - - Numantines, 350. - - Nundinae, comitia not held on, 139; - made fasti by Hortensian law, 315, 471. - - Nuntiatio, 111. - - - Oath, in contio, 142; - in arrogations, 160; - making tribunes sacred, 264, 274; - lack of in comitial trials, 287; - to support law, 380, 395, 440 f. - - Oblativa (auspicia), 100; - publica, 111-8; - under Aelian and Fufian laws, 116 f., 358 f.; - under lex Clodia, 116 f., 445. - - Obnuntiatio, by whom served, 111, 114 f., 439; - when served, 115; - under Aelian and Fufian laws, 116 f., 358 f.; - under lex Clodia, 116 f., 445; - prevents election, 193; - to what point allowable, 467. - - Octavianus, see Julius Caesar Octavianus. - - Octavius, tribune (133), 322; - deposed, 366, 367 f., 371. - - Opimius, L., trial of (120), 256; - given absolute power, 387 f. - - Opimius, Q., trial of, 414, n. 2; - tribune (75), 425 f. - - Oppidum, 6 f. - - Oppius, Sp., decemvir, trial of, 246. - - Optima lege, optimo iure, 186-8; - cives, 355; - private land, 386. - - Optimates, prefer centuries, 237; - undo Gracchan reforms, 385, 387; - policy of as to special courts, 388; - depend on religion, 391; - moderate rule of, 396 f. - - Ordines, in comitia centuriata, 222. - - Ovation, comitial act on, 334 f. - - Ovile, 469. - - - Paederastia, prosecution for (227), 325. - - Pagus, relation of to Servian tribes, 51, 53 f. - - Pais, on urban tribes, 52, 55, n. 1; - origin of tribunate, 262, n. 1; - connection of Ceres with plebs, 264, n. 7; - Genucian and Publilian laws, 299, n. 2; - election of pontiff, 341, n. 3. - - Palatine (tribus), 50, 51, 52, n. 1, 220. - - Palatine hill, 7, n. 3, 9. - - Pantagathus, 220. - - Papirius, L., trial of (326), 247. - - Papirius Carbo, C., trial of (119), 257. - - Parricidium, trial of, 244; - under lex Pompeia, 448; - Iulia, 455, n. 7. - - Pater, meaning of, 19. - - Pater patratus, 176. - - Patrem ciere, 20. - - Patres, meaning senators, 17 ff.; - patricians, 19; - in Mommsen’s theory, 34; - maiorum et minorum gentium, 35 f. - - Patrician magistrate, defined, 103. - - Patricians, Patricii, origin of, 16 ff., 37, n. 1; - Mommsen on, 34; - not conquerors, 43; - right to auspices, 101-3; - and patrum auctoritas, 229, 235; - in curiate assembly, 262, n. 2, 271; - in tribal assembly, 271, 275-7; - in plebeian tribunate, 285 f.; - affected by Publilian law (339), 300 f.; - creation of, 21, 164-6, 456, 460. - - Patriciate, relation of to senate, 18; - granted to plebeians, 21, 164-6, 456, 460; - closing of, 165; - acquired by adoption, 166. - - Patricio-plebeian tribal assembly, 123, 128, 134; - unnecessary term, 138. - - Patricius, meaning of, 20 f. - - Patrum auctoritas, 31, 174; - and comitia curiata, 229, 235, 277; - for curiate laws, 277; - Publilian law on, 300; - Hortensian law on, 313; - Maenian law on, 331. - - Pay, military, introduced, 61, n. 6, 94; - by senate, 284, 295; - how reckoned, 90, n. 4; - since war with Hannibal, 382; - laws on, 382, 388 f., 392. - - Peculatus, trials for, 317 f., 319, 419. - - Pecunia, 48. - - Pellegrino, on asylum, 36. - - Perduellio, 243 f., 248, 249, 253, 256, 257; - Sulla transfers to quaestio maiestatis, 258; - aedilician case of, 326; - ballot in, 390; - trials for: Horatius, 121; - Claudius, 248, 317; - Manlius, 288 f.; - Postumius, 248 f., 318; - Rabirius, 258 f. - - Peregrinus ager, 108. - - Petilii, Q., tribunes (185), 319. - - Petronia (amnis), 108. - - Phalanx, Greek, adopted by Rome, 61 f., 68, 71 f.; - origin of, 69 ff.; - organization and equipment, 72 f.; - split in legions, 75; - post-Servian changes, 76-80; - changed to manipular legion, 84. - - Phratry, 8, n. 6, 28, 69. - - Phyle, 4, 6, 28. - - Phylobasileis, 8, n. 1. - - Picene district, 333; - Flaminian law on, 334. - - Plebeian assembly, termed comitia, 120, 126-30; - question as to auspication, 122 f. - - Plebeian magistrates, occupy templa, 109; - do not auspicate assemblies, 110; - preside over contio, 140 f.; - comitia, 465, 469; - see Aediles, Tribuni plebis. - - Plebi scitum, issued by plebeian assembly, 120, n. 1; - originally binding on plebs only, 263, 273; - given conditioned validity, 274-9; - Publilian law on, 300; - made unconditionally valid, 313, 463; - for individual plebi scita, see Lex. - - Plebs, distinguished from populus, 1, n. 3; - origin of, 16, 21; - relation to clients, 22; - belong to populus, 23 ff.; - to tribes and curiae, 24; - to gentes, 28-31; - vote in comitia curiata, 25, 32; - Mommsen on, 34-6; - not the conquered, 43; - in army, 75, n. 1; - right to auspices, 101-3; - assembly of termed comitia, 120; - first secession of, 262; - in contio, 263; - community of, 264 f.; - misunderstanding with government, 268; - meaning of word in Valerian-Horatian law, 275-7; - Publilian law on, 301 f.; - condition of in third Samnite war, 311; - leaders of ally with patricians, 330; - in comitia under plebeian presidency, 465. - - Pleminius, Q., trial of, 250. - - Πλῆθος, 407 f. - - Plutocracy, era of, 346-62, 476; - discontent with, 371. - - Poetelius Libo, C., consul (326), dictator (313), 310. - - Poisoning, special court for trial of, 253, 254, n. 3. - - Polybius, on Flaminian law, 334; - on Roman constitution, 343-6, 361 f. - - Pomerium, limits urban tribes, 52, 54; - relation of to augury, 108; - to comitia curiata, 194, 468; - to comitia centuriata, 203, 469; - to comitia tributa, 465. - - Pompeius Magnus, Cn., use of oblativa, 111; - and curiate law, 194 f.; - consul (70), 426 f.; - given special commands, 432-4; - cura annonae, 446; - second consulship (55), 447-50; - third (52), 448. - - Pompeius Strabo, Cn., trial of, 401, n. 3; - consul (89), 402. - - Pomptinus, praetor (63), 192 f. - - Pontes, 469; - Marian law on, 389. - - Pontifex maximus, auspicium of, 104; - elected by comitia, 120, 341, 391; - presides over contio, 141; - comitia calata, 153 ff.; - comitia tributa, 153, n. 4, 263; - over first tribunician elections, 263; - and in 449 B.C., 285; - jurisdiction of, 327 f., 390; - chooses Vestals, 434. - - Pontifex minor, in comitia calata, 155. - - Pontifices, 102, 106, n. 10; - have charge of arrogations, 160; - of certain adoptions, 166; - religious legislation of, 238 f.; - opinion on Sacred Spring, 340; - control calendar, 358; - election of, 391; - increased - to fifteen, 416. - - Popillius, M., trial of (172), 255, n. 1. - - Popillius Laenas, C., trial of (107), 257, n. 5. - - Popillius Laenas, P., presides over special court (132), 255; - interdicted, 256; - recalled, 388. - - Popillius Laenas, P., tribune (86), 257, n. 5. - - Population of Rome, in early republic, 83. - - Populus, derivation of word, 1; - definition, 1 f.; - political divisions, 1-15; - social composition of, 16-47; - theory of a patrician, 27 ff.; - concilium of, 120-5; - sovereignty, 308, 316, 346, 368, 399; - yields judicial function to courts, 420 f.; - electoral function to Caesar, 454 f. - - Porcius Cato, M., the Elder, on Servian tribes, 51, 53, 54; - favors lex Voconia, 85, 90; - lex Villia, 347; - lex forbidding reëlections, 348; - author of law of appeal, 250 f.; - prosecutions of, 319, 321. - - Porcius Laeca, P., praetor (195), 251. - - Porcius Licinus, consul (184), 251. - - Posteriores (equites), 73, n. 7, 74, 76. - - Postliminium, 353. - - Postumius, L., trial of, 289. - - Postumius, M., trial of (423), 288. - - Postumius Pyrgensis, M., trial of, 248 f., 318. - - Potestas, tribunicia, destroyed by Sulla, 199; - patria, political influence of, 342 f.; - lex on, 185, 190. - - Praeco (crier), summons contio, 144; - invites to speak, 147, n. 5; - reads bill, 430; - declares result of vote, 468. - - Praescriptio legis, 462. - - Praetors, auspices of, 103; - obnuntiate, 115; - adoptions before, 160; - election of, 189, 229; - instituted, 234; - grant auspices to tribune, 245 f., 280, 315; - increased, 332, 341, 416, 454; - urban, presides over election of boards, 337; - lex Plaetoria on, 342, n. 1; - fills album iudicum, 376, 377; - minimal age of, 415; - edicts of, 431 f. - - Prefecture of market, created (440), 295, 305, n. 5. - - Prerogative (praerogativa), 211, 463; - equestrian abolished, 212, 215; - after reform, 212, 224, 227; - in elections, 389. - - Presidency, of contio, 140 f.; - of comitia, 465, 468, 469. - - Principium, 463; - in comitia curiata, 112; - elections, 389; - comitia tributa, 466 f. - - Priores (equites), 73, n. 7, 74, 76. - - Privernates, receive citizenship, 305. - - Privilegia, enacted by centuries, 127 f., 241; - violation of law on, 289 f.; - dispensations are, 307 f. - - Procedure, contional, 143 ff.; - comitial, 465-70; - in trials, 259 f. - - Proceres, Proci, in centuriate system, 67, n. 3, 75, n. 1. - - Proletarians, 68, 89, 207 f.; - after reform, 226. - - Promagistracy, instituted, 305. - - Promagistrates, lack right to summon people, 141; - and curiate law, 192 ff.; - under lex repetundarum, 377; - under lex Cornelia, 417; - lex Pompeia, 449. - - Propraetor, elected by army, 192, 202. - - Provinces, assigned exceptionally by law, 305, 381, n. 5, 417, 432-4, - 443 f., 447; - Sempronian law on consular, 381 f.; - Cornelian, 417; - Julian, 456; - protected by Gabinian, 429 f.; - from extortion, see Repetundae. - - Publicans, exactions of, 380 f.; - law for relief of, 441. - - Publicius Bibulus, C., tribune (209), 338. - - Publilius Philo, consul and dictator (339), 235, 299-302; - censor(322), 305. - - Punctum, in counting votes, 467, n. 5. - - Punic war, first, effect of on politics, 333. - - Pupinian tribe, 59, n. 3. - - - Quaestio, preliminary inquiry, 259. - - Quaestio extraordinaria (314), 242, n. 5; - for trial of Pleminius (204), 250; - affects centuriate jurisdiction, 253; - appointed by senate and people, 253, 295, 309; - by senate alone, 253 f., 255, 309; - by people, 255, n. 1; - for trial of conspiracy, 310; - Satricans, 310; - usurpers of citizenship, 354, 397; - Vestals, 390; - bribery, 390; - vis, 448 f.; - murderers of Caesar, 457, n. 7; - composed of senators, 374 f.; - under lex Sempronia, 371, 374-6; - optimate policy as to, 388. - - Quaestio perpetua, affects centuriate jurisdiction, 253; - repetundarum, 257, 358; - number increased by Sulla, 257 f., 324; - inter sicarios, 258, 358; - limits appeal, 328; - composed of senators, 374, 419; - Sempronian laws on, 374-6; - of knights, 374 f.; - of senators and knights, 402, 455; - of three classes, 427, 458; - under Latin lex Bantina, 379; - Appuleia de maiestate, 394; - Livia, 399; - Varia, 401; - Cornelia, 419-21; - Licinia and Pompeia, 448; - Iulia, 455; - Antonia, 458; - appeal granted from, 458 f. - - Quaestors, auspicate comitia centuriata, 104; - obnuntiate, 141; - preside over contio, 140, 141; - curiate sanction, 189, 195; - increased, 234, 332, 415 f.; - parricidii, 244 f.; - relation of to tribunes, 248; - elected by tribes, 294; - minimal age of, 415. - - Quando rex comitiavit fas, 159, n. 8, 470. - - Quinctius, K., trial of (461), 267, 268, n. 6. - - Quinctius, L., tribune (74), 426. - - Quinctius, T., past consular tribune, trial of, 288. - - Quinctius Trogus, T., trial of, 245. - - Quindecemviri sacris faciundis, 416; - see Decemviri. - - Quinqueviri, for repairing defences, 337; - agris adsignandis under lex Saufeia, 400; - lex Iulia, 439. - - Quirina (tribus), 214. - - Quirinal hill, 2, 3, n. 1. - - - Rabirius, C., trial of, 243 f., 258 f. - - Ramnenii, in Ostia, 4, n. 3. - - Ramnenses, 74. - - Ramnes, 2, n. 5, 74; - in Ardea, 4, n. 3. - - Ramnii, in Capua, 4, n. 3. - - Rapta (curia), 8, n. 6, 11, n. 7. - - Ratings, ascribed to Servius, 66; - in sextantarian as, 67, n. 4; - origin of, 79; - array in battle, 79 f.; - of five classes, 84-91; - Belot on, 91-3. - - Regiones, connection of with tribes, 51, n. 1, 4, 6, 53 f. - - Religion, influences formation of nobility, 39 f.; - right to legislate on, 308; - laws on, see Legislation. - - Remus, an augur, 105, n. 3. - - Renuntiatio, 467. - - Repetundae, court of, 257, 358, 370; - under lex lunia, 370, 376, 379; - lex Acilia, 375-8; - Servilia, 393; - Cornelia, 419; - Iulia, 441 f.; - defined, 377. - - Revolution, period of, 363-460, 476 f. - - Rex sacrorum, presides over contio, 141; - comitia calata, 154; - forbidden to address populus, 147; - ceremonies of in comitium, 156, 159 f.; - successor to king, 182; - a shadow, 198. - - Rhegium insurgent garrison of, 254. - - Rogatio, meaning of, 178; - composition and form of, 462 ff. - - ⸺ de imperio (t.) for triumph, 335. - - ⸺ colonizing Bolae (t. 415), 311, n. 1. - - ⸺ dispensing from law (298), 299, n. 3. - - ⸺ for abolition of debts (t. 287), 312. - - Rogationes of Cicero’s consulship (63), 437, n. 7. - - Rogatio, of 8 tribunes, recalling Cicero (58), 446, n. 2. - - ⸺ establishing consular tribunes (t. 53), 450, n. 2. - - Rogationes Aemiliae, repealing Cornelian laws (c. 78), 423. - - Rogatio Aufeia, on taxation of Asia (p. 123), 381, n. 4. - - ⸺ Aufidia de ambitu (t. 61), 437, n. 1. - - ⸺ Caecilia, lightening certain penalties (t. 63), 437, n. 7. - - ⸺ Caecilia, dispensing Pompey from law (t. 62), 437, n. 1. - - Rogationes Caeliae, on debts and rents (p. 48), 452, n. 9. - - Rogatio Caninia, granting imperium to Pompey (t. 56), 446, n. 3. - - ⸺ Cassia agraria (c. 486), 238, 265, n. 4. - - ⸺ Clodia de suffragiis libertinorum (p. 52), 450, n. 2. - - ⸺ Cornelia, renewing Sulpician lex (c. 87), 409. - - ⸺ Cornelia de ambitu (t. 67), 431. - - Rogationes Corneliae (t. 47), 452, n. 9. - - Rogatio Fabricia, recalling Cicero (t. 57), 446, n. 2. - - ⸺ Flavia, for punishing Tusculans, (323), 310. - - ⸺ Flavia agraria (t. 60), 438. - - ⸺ Fulvia, granting citizenship (c. 125), 370. - - ⸺ Herennia, transferring Clodius to plebs (t. 60), 162, 438. - - ⸺ Iunia, on usury (195?), 352, n. 2. - - ⸺ Laelia agraria (p. 145), 360 f., 363. - - ⸺ Licinia, on election of sacerdotes, 391. - - ⸺ Lucilia Coelia, for naming Pompey dictator (t. 53), 450, n. 2. - - ⸺ Maelia, confiscating property of Ahala (436), 289. - - ⸺ Marcia (123-122), referring to military tribunes, 382, n. 5. - - ⸺ Marcia agraria (t. 104), 392. - - ⸺ Messia, recalling Cicero (t. 58), 446, n. 2. - - ⸺ Ninnia, recalling Cicero (t. 58), 446, n. 2. - - ⸺ Papiria, permitting reëlection of tribunes (t. 131), 369. - - ⸺ Pinaria annalis (p. 182?), 347, n. 3. - - ⸺ Pompeia repetundarum (c. 55), 442, n. 2; - sumptuaria, 448. - - ⸺ Porcia, abrogating imperium (t. 56), 446, n. 3. - - ⸺ Porcia Pompeia, recalling Metellus (t. 99), 396, n. 1. - - ⸺ Pupia Valeria, appointing special court (c. 61), 438, n. 3. - - ⸺ Rutilia, on censorial contracts (t. 169), 351, n. 5. - - ⸺ Scribonia, on Lusitanians (t. 149), 349. - - Rogationes Scriboniae, on various subjects (t. 50), 450, n. 2. - - Rogatio Semproniade provocatione (t. 133), 255, 368; - iudiciaria, 368, 374; - on military service, 368, 382. - - ⸺ Sempronia de abactis (t. 124), 371, 391; - granting citizenship to Latins and Italians (123-122), 382, 383 f.; - on voting in comitia centuriata (122), 384, n. 2. - - ⸺ Servilia agraria, 129, 183, n. 5, 186, 435 f.; - violates right of appeal, 259; - bearing of on election of sacerdotes, 416, n. 6. - - Rogations, discussed in senate, 145; - judicial, 259; - no record of unpassed, 270; - apocryphal agrarian, 270, 272, 295; - restriction as to bringing, 359; - lex Caecilia Didia on, 396 f. - - Rogator legis, 462, n. 2, 463. - - Rogatores, 211, 467, 469. - - Roma, Etruscan origin of, 7, n. 2. - - Romanus ager, 108. - - Romilia (tribus), 214. - - Romulus, connection of with tribes, 2, n. 5, 3; - with army, 69, n. 4; - with equites, 74; - an augur, 105, n. 3; - as legislator, 177. - - Roscius, Otho, L., tribune (67), 428 f., 432. - - Rostra, a templum, 109. - - Rubino, on testamentary comitia, 157 f.; - lex curiata, 185; - vote by 30 lictors, 196. - - Rubrica legis, 463, n. 6. - - Rupilius, consul (132), condemned, 256. - - - Sabines, alleged connection of with Tities, 2 f. - - Sacer homo, 265. - - Sacerdotes, 7; - inauguration of, 106; - comitia, for election of, 120, 129, 341, 391, 458; - their part in instituting comitia, 153; - in trials, 182; - in election of king, 183; - see Augurs, Epulones, etc. - - Sacred Mount, lex sacrata passed on, 274. - - Sacred Spring, lex on, 340. - - Sacro sanctitas, 264; - origin of, 265; - religious and legal basis, 265 f.; - protects plebeian assembly, 266; - relation of to tribunician jurisdiction, 266 f., 273 f.; - confirmed by lex Valeria Horatia, 274. - - Saepta, 466. - - Saeptum, 467. - - Salii, 69, n. 1, 70, n. 5. - - Sallust, on comitia and concilium, 126. - - Sanctio, 463; - of Latin lex Bantina, 379. - - Sappers, see Fabri. - - Satricans, special court for punishing, 310. - - Saturnalia, gifts at, 338 f. - - Saturninus, see Appuleius Saturninus. - - Savigny, on lex Iulia municipalis, 457, n. 5. - - Scaevola, on gens, 28, n. 7. - - Scantinus Capitolinus, C., prosecution of, 325. - - Schmidt, Joh., on origin of tribunate, 262, n. 1. - - Schwegler, on patrician state, 32 f. - - Scipios, trial of (185), 319 f.; - see Cornelius. - - Scolacium, founding of, 382. - - Scutum, in centuriate system, 66, 78, n. 6. - - Secession, first, 262; - second, 277; - to Janiculum, 313. - - Sectatores, 436. - - Seditions, tribunician, 279, 313; - Varian law on, 401. - - Sempronius Gracchus, C., legislation of, 255 f., 371-85; - defeat for third tribunate, 384; - energizes comitia, 384 f. - - Sempronius Gracchus, Ti., censor (169), trial of, 253; - tribune (184), 320 f. - - Sempronius Gracchus, Ti., tribune (133), weakens veto, 117, 366, 476; - prosecutes Annius Luscus, 322; - legislation of, 363-6; - deposes colleague, 366, 367 f.; - new platform of, 368; - defeated for second tribunate, 368 f. - - Senate, represents primitive tribes, 3, n. 8, 7; - relation of to patriciate, 177 ff.; - annuls comitial acts, 106 f., 109, 113, 396, 399 f., 405, 433, 457, - n. 7, 459; - comitia in, 129, 130; - wisdom in, 173; - auctoritas of, 174; - grants imperium, 188; - and curiate law, 197-9; - declares war, 230-2; - admits plebeians, 235; - appoints special courts, 253-5, 309 f., 368, 371, 388; - passes consultum ultimum, 255 f., 273, 387 f.; - grants citizenship, 304; - prolongs imperium, 305; - plants colonies, 310 f., 351; - loses legal control of tribunician assembly, 313 f., 316; - conciliates citizens, 337; - depends on people, 345, 351; - class of criminals, 374; - controls tax contracts, 380; - deposes consul, 409; - regains control of assemblies, 406-8, 413 f.; - admission to through quaestorship, 415, 418 f.; - gains through Sulla, 418; - law on sessions of, 424 f.; - grants dispensations, 430 f.; - limited by Caesar, 457; - considers rogations, 462, 463. - - Senators, privati, 102; - mostly creditors, 312; - given seats at theatre, 356 f.; - monopolize quaestiones, 374; - debarred from by Sempronian law, 375; - under lex repetundarum, 377; - chosen indirectly by people, 391; - swear to uphold law, 395, 440, 464; - associate with equites in courts, 402, 427 f., 455; - elected by tribes, 418; - qualifications of under lex Ovinia, 307; - lex Claudia, 335; - Sulpicia, 404; - see Senate. - - Senatus consultum, on treaties, 175, 303, 465, n. 3; - declaring war, 230; - appointing special court, 253; - essential to legality of plebiscite, 277 f.; - for settling Latium, 304; - Hortensian law on, 313; - for founding colonies, 351; - on usurpation of citizenship, 354; - on importation of wild beasts, 346; - on finance, 422; - on trial of provincials, 424, n. 6; - amending lex Acilia Calpurnia, 436; - de collegiis, 445; - honoring Caesar, 451; - ultimum, 192, n. 6, 255, 273, 371, 387 f. - - Seniors, in centuriate system, 66, 68, 81 f.; - number of, 84, 205; - after reform, 216. - - Septemviri agris adsignandis, under lex Antonia, 458. - - Sergia (tribus), 58. - - Sergius, M., quaestor, 245. - - Service, public, exempts from prosecution, 377. - - Servilius Ahala, C., trial of, 246; - rogation on property of, 289 f. - - Servilius Caepio, Q., imperium of abrogated, 390. - - Servilius Glaucia, C., 393. - - Servilius Rullus, P., tribune (64-63), 435. - - Servius Tullius, distributes land, 49; - institutes new tribes, 50 ff., 217; - centuriate system, 66, 68; - personality of, 68, n. 7; - increases equites, 74; - and equestrian fund, 93; - reference to in lex Cornelia Pompeia, 406. - - Sesterce, 87. - - Sheep, standard of value, 269, 287. - - Sibylline books, 284. - - Sicilians, receive citizenship, 454, n. 4. - - Sicinius, L., tribune (76), 425. - - Signa ex tripudiis, 107. - - Sisenna, on creation of new tribes, 57 f. - - Slaves, manumission of, 297; - grant of citizenship to, 353. - - Smiths, in centuriate system, 206. - - Social classes, ancient view of, 16-25, 44 f.; - conventional view, 25-38; - comparative-sociological, 38-47; - universal, 38 f.; - origin of in nature, 39; - in army, 75 f. - - Social war, 401. - - Sodales Titii, 2, n. 6 f., 8. - - Sodalicii, lex on, 447 f. - - Soldiers, and appeal, 251-3; - laws on service of, 382, 388 f., 392. - - Solon, law of, on citizenship, 44, n. 1; - connection with classes, 71. - - Soltau, on comitia centuriata, 201; - composition of tribunician assembly, 275, n. 5; - Licinian-Sextian law, 296, n. 4; - validity of plebiscite, 300, n. 6. - - Sovereignty, belongs first to king and council, 171 f.; - not popular, 173; - popular develops, 303, 308, 316, 368, 399; - of law, yielding to democracy, 308; - not real, 346. - - Speaking, public, prohibition of, 142, 147; - on merits of candidates, 143; - right of, 145 ff.; - compulsion, 148; - time limited, 149; - sparingly granted, 173 f. - - Spectio, 110; - belongs to magistrates only, 113; - when forbidden, 114; - under Aelian and Fufian laws, 116. - - Statutes, see Leges. - - Stipendium, 63. - - Storm, interrupts comitia, 248. - - Stultorum feriae, 9, n. 6. - - Stuprum, prosecutions for, 247, 291 f., 326, 327, n. 2. - - Submovere, 150, n. 9. - - Suburana (tribus), 50. - - Sucusana (tribus), 220. - - Suffragia sex, 75, n. 1, 113, 157, 209, 224, 227. - - Suffragium, 157; - bestowal of, 352; - see Citizenship. - - Sulla, see Cornelius Sulla. - - Sulpicius Rufus, P., tribune (88), 403-5. - - Sumptuary laws, 337 f., 356, 388, n. 9, 428, 455 f. - - Supernumeraries, in centuriate system, 68, 80-2, 226. - - Sutrium, tribal assembly at, 297, 465. - - Συσσίτια, 8, n. 6. - - - Tabulae iuniorum, 82, n. 3. - - Tarpeian Rock, hurling from, 257, n. 5, 264, n. 8. - - Tarquinius Priscus (Elder), relation of to equites, 74, 93. - - Tarquinius Superbus, relation of to centuriate system, 201, n. 3 f. - - Taxes, in early Rome, 61-4. - - Tellus, 9. - - Temples, dedication of, 340 f., 347, n. 2. - - Templum, 107 f., 144. - - Terentius Varro Lucullus, M., trial of (66), 324. - - Testaments, in comitia calata, 157-9; - laws on, 352, 463, n. 8, 459. - - Testimony, false, prosecution for, 246. - - Theatres, regulation of, 356 f., 428 f. - - Theft, see Furtum. - - Θέμιστες, 177. - - Thunder, effect of, on comitia, 109, 111. - - Thurii, tribes of, 7, n. 1. - - Titia (curia), 8, n. 6, 11, n. 7. - - Titienses, Tities, 2, 74. - - Titus Tatius, 2 f., 4, n. 3, 56, n. 3. - - Tolosa, gold found at, 390. - - Transitio ad plebem, 162 f., 403, 438, 443. - - Transpadani, receive citizenship, 402, 454. - - Trasimene, political effect of disaster at, 343. - - Treaty, alleged between plebs and government, 265. - - Treaty-making, originally with magistrates and senate, 174 f., 273, - 283; - with king, 181; - ratification of acquired by tribes, 175, 283, 302 f., 344, 349. - - Trebellius, L., tribune (67), 432. - - Trebonius, L. and Cn., 285. - - Tremellius, Cn., praetor (160), prosecution of, 322. - - Tresviri (Triumviri) nocturni, trial of, 318. - - Tresviri epulones, 347, 391, 416, n. 3. - - Tribes, the three primitive, 2-8; - and Greek phylae, 4, 28; - military function of, 10, 69, 74; - social composition, 24; - admission of new citizens to, 44. - - Tribes, the later, 48-65; - with gentile names, 35, 50; - the thirty-five, 48-65; - urban, 50 ff., 355; - rural, 50 ff.; - character, 54; - temporary increase in Social War, 57 f., 402; - altered in 312, 304 B.C., 64 f.; - made up by censors, 300, 355; - relation of to centuries, 77, 212 f., 215, 217 ff.; - citizens assigned to, 352 f., 401 f.; - assembly of, see Comitia tributa. - - Tribuni aerarii, 64, n. 3; - in jury service, 427 f.; - debarred from, 455. - - Tribuni celerum, 7 f.; - preside over contio, 141, n. 3; - comitia curiata, 468; - right of to address people, 145, n. 4. - - Tribuni militum, 7; - make levy, 77; - Valerian law on, 235; - hold court-martial, 251; - elected by people, 234, 306, 342, 349, n. 1; - rarely appointed, 342, n. 2. - - Tribuni militum consulari potestate, 229, 234. - - Tribuni plebis, auspicium of, 104; - obnuntiate, 115; - under Aelian and Fufian laws, 116 f., 358 f.; - election of, 127, 128, 262, 272; - preside over contio, 140; - comitia, 263, 465, 469; - lack power of summoning, 148; - veto curiate law, 199; - bring capital actions before centuries, 245-53; - limited by Sulla, 258, 324, 413 f.; - instituted, 262; - object of, 263; - have no power over patricians, 264, 268, 276; - sacro sancti, 264-6, 274; - early methods of, 269, 270, 272, 273, 279; - pre-decemviral jurisdiction, 267-9; - number increased, 272; - controlled by dictatorship, 273; - Valerian-Horatian law on, 274, 277 f., 279 f.; - later jurisdiction, 280, 286-90, 317-25; - agrarian agitation, 310 f.; - right to summon senate, 314; - to prosecute unconditionally, 315; - limited by courts, 326 f.; - reëlection of permitted, 369; - restored after Sulla, 423-7. - - Tribunus, related to tribe, 7. - - Tributum, and tribes, 63 f.; - disused, 89; - impeded by tribunes, 279; - in third Samnite war, 311. - - Trientabula, 368. - - Trifu, 5, 6. - - Trinum nundinum, Trinundinum, 259 f. - - Triumph, deliberated on in contio, 147; - depends on curiate law, 190, 192 f.; - decreed by senate, 273, 284, 293 f.; - by people, 277, n. 4, 293, 334; - comitial act necessary to, 334 f.; - on Alban Mount, 293, 335, n. 2, 350; - laws on, 350, 417, 422, 438, 451. - - Triumvirate, so called first, 441; - second, 459; - see Triumviri. - - Triumviri (tresviri) agris adsignandis, under Sempronian laws, 366, - 367, 373, 375, 379, 386. - - Triumviri capitales, 307, n. 1, 312, 332. - - Triumviri coloniae deducendae, 288, 307, 350 f. - - Triumviri mensarii, 336 f. - - Triumviri rei publicae constituendae, 459. - - Triumviri, for repairing temples, 337; - for dedicating, 340. - - Trumpeters (tubicines, liticines), in centuriate system, 66, 206; - summon accused, 259. - - Tuba, 468. - - Tubicines, 81, n. 2, 206, 226; - see Musicians. - - Tullus Hostilius, permits appeal, 239. - - Turma, 12. - - Twelve Tables, law of on inheritance, 30; - ratified by laws, 233; - provide for legislation, 233 f., 307, 368, 464, 474; - composition of, 239; - guarantee right of appeal, 240; - on privilegia, 241, 245, 268; - forbid conubium, 294; - criminal laws of, 357; - grant jurisdiction to tribes, 474. - - - Urbs, 7. - - Urn, for drawing lots, 466, n. 4. - - Usurers, fined, 291, 312; - violate law, 351; - oppress provinces, 430. - - Ut rogas, 467. - - - Valerius Flaccus, L., prosecution of (98), 324. - - Valerius Publicola, P., consul (509), 232; - existence of questioned, 240. - - Valuation of property, change in from land to money, 65. - - Varius, Q., tribune (91-90), prosecutes Aemilius, 257, n. 5. - - Varro, on Servian tribes, 53 f. - - Vatinius, tribune (59), 117, 442 f. - - Vectigalia, law on Campanian, 337, 351, n. 5; - order to farm, 424; - in Italy, abolished, 438; - reimposed, 457, n. 6. - - Veliensis (curia), 11. - - Velina (tribus), 334. - - Velitia (curia), 11, n. 7. - - Velleius, on admission of socii to tribes, 57 f.; - colonization, 351; - lex Livia iudiciaria, 398. - - Vennonius, on Servian tribes, 53. - - Verres, trial of, 427. - - Vestals, trial of, 390; - choice of, 434. - - Veto (intercession), tribunician, weakened, 117; - original lack of, 269, 279; - established by Hortensian law, 270, 315; - conservative, 330; - against senate, 345; - oath not to use, 380 f.; - against certain consulta forbidden, 381 f.; - overborne, 393 f., 430, 447; - limited by Sulla, 414, 425 f.; - to what point allowable, 466 f.; - consular, 423, 439. - - Veturius, C., condemned, 250, n. 8. - - Viatores, 264, n. 5; - of tribune, 150; - originally lacking, 290; - of aedile, n. 4. - - Vicus Tuscus, 3. - - Vigintiviri agris adsignandis, 439. - - Vindicia, 246, n. 5. - - Vis (violence), 326; - under lex Plautia, 424; - Pompeia, 448 f.; - Iulia, 455. - - Vitio creatum esse, etc., 107, n. 1. - - Volaterrani, lose citizenship, 236, 422. - - Volscians, expelled, 273. - - Voting, origin of, 156 f., 275 f.; - by heads, 157; - formula for, 179; - order of in comitia centuriata, 211, 469 f.; - after reform, 217, 224, 227; - by ballot, 359 f.; - in quaestiones, 420; - in comitia tributa, 466 f. - - Voturia (tribus), 52, n. 1. - - Voturia iuniorum, 217. - - Vultures, auspices from, 108. - - - War, declarations of, belong originally to magistrates and senate, - 175-7, 181, 230, 273; - acquired by centuries, 177, 230, 302, 344; - formula of, 176, 232. - - Widows and orphans, tax on, 62, 93. - - Women, debarred from assemblies, 146 f., 326, n. 1; - luxury of restrained, 338, 356; - right of inheritance restricted, 352. - - - Zaleucus, 177. - - - - - -HANDBOOKS OF - -Archæology and Antiquities - -_Edited by_ - -PERCY GARDNER AND F. W. KELSEY - - - FOWLER - - =The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic.= By - W. WARDE FOWLER. $1.25 _net_ - - FROTHINGHAM - - =The Monuments of Christian Rome.= From Constantine to - the Renaissance. By ARTHUR L. FROTHINGHAM, Ph.D. $2.25 _net_ - - GARDNER, E. A. - - =Greek Sculpture.= By ERNEST A. GARDNER. Two parts in - one volume, with Appendix. $2.50 _net_ - - Appendix to the above, separately. $0.35 _net_ - - GARDNER, P. - - =Grammar of Greek Art.= By PERCY GARDNER. $1.75 _net_ - - GREENIDGE - - =A Handbook of Greek Constitutional History.= By A. H. - J. GREENIDGE. With Map. $1.25 _net_ - - =Roman Public Life.= By A. H. J. GREENIDGE. $2.50 _net_ - - HILL - - =Greek and Roman Coins.= By GEORGE F. HILL, of the Coins - Department, British Museum. $2.25 _net_ - - LANCIANI - - =The Destruction of Ancient Rome.= A sketch of the - history of the monuments. By RODOLFO LANCIANI. $1.50 _net_ - - LOWRIE - - =Monuments of the Early Church.= By W. LOWRIE. $1.25 _net_ - - MARQUAND - - =Greek Architecture.= By ALLAN MARQUAND. $2.25 _net_ - - PUBLISHED BY - THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York - - - - -BOOKS ON ROMAN SOCIETY - - -By W. WARDE FOWLER - -Social Life at Rome in the Age of Cicero - -_Cloth, Illustrated, 8vo, $2.25 net_ - -A notable example of the kind of history that deals with men rather -than with institutions and events is “Social Life at Rome in the Age of -Cicero,” by the learned scholar and fascinating writer W. Warde Fowler. -The book was originally intended as a companion to Professor Tucker’s -“Life in Ancient Athens”; but it grew beyond the limits of that volume -because of the wealth of material Mr. Fowler felt himself compelled to -utilize. As the author points out in his preface, there is no book in -the English language which supplies a picture of life and manners, of -education, morals, and religion, in the intensely interesting period -of the Roman Republic. The age of Cicero is one of the most important -periods of Roman history, and the Ciceronian correspondence, of more -than nine hundred contemporary letters, is the richest treasure-house of -social life that has survived from any period of classical antiquity. - - -By SAMUEL DILL, M.A. - -Hon. Litt.D., Dublin; Hon. LL.D., Edinburgh; Hon. Fellow and late Tutor -C.C.C., Oxford; Professor of Greek in Queens College, Belfast. - -Roman Society, from Nero to Marcus Aurelius - -_Second edition, Cloth, 8vo, $2.50 net_ - -“The most important contribution yet made in English to our knowledge of -the way in which all classes of Roman society, including the aristocracy, -the plebeians, the freedmen and the slaves, ordinarily lived in the -relatively happy age of the Antonines is presented in this admirable -work, not one of whose fifteen chapters is devoid of illumination and -fascination.... It should be distinctly understood that this work is the -product of first-hand, not second-hand, erudition and investigation.... -This book is what it purports to be, a social, not a political -history.”—M. W. H. in _New York Sun_. - - -Roman Society, in the Last Century of the Western Empire - -_Second edition, Cloth, 8vo, $1.75 net_ - -“We want to emphasize the point that this volume is not a mere raking -over of dry bones, with nothing but an antiquarian interest for the -reader of to-day. It is more vital to the student of modern social, -religious, and political tendencies than a large share of the strictly -modern sociological theses, studies, and dissertations now issuing in -such profusion from the workshops of the doctor-making universities. -And, aside from its inherent importance, its thoughts are so lucidly and -attractively expressed that no intelligent reader, whether a Latinist or -not, can fail to find it pleasant reading.”—_The Evening Post_, New York. - - PUBLISHED BY - THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York - - -PROF. MARTIN L. D’OOGE’S - -The Acropolis of Athens - -_Cloth, Illustrated, 8vo, $4.00 net_ - -“This handsome book embodies the results of a number of years of study -and of repeated visits to Athens, where in 1886-87 author was director -of the American School of Classical Studies. While some of the older -problems connected with the history of the Acropolis have been solved by -the aid of the discoveries completed in 1889, others have been raised -which await further light. A final satisfactory history of the Acropolis -and its monuments may never be written, but this work gives a summary of -the most important contributions to its history and states the results of -the author’s study of the site and of the ruins upon it.” - -His new book is published as a companion volume to Professor Seymour’s -“Life in the Homeric Age,” which proved so popular. It is designed both -for readers who have a general interest in Greek history and Greek art -and for students and visitors at Athens who desire to use a handbook upon -the spot. The history of the Acropolis is traced from the time of its -earliest occupation down to the present, and the volume is handsomely -illustrated. - - -_A COMPANION VOLUME_ - -PROF. THOMAS DAY SEYMOUR’S - -Life in the Homeric Age - -_Decorated cloth, gilt top, 8vo, illustrated, $4.00 net_ - -A study of the inhabitants of Greece and the Levant at the period of the -Homeric Poems which furnishes a clear and fairly complete picture of the -life which was familiar to them. “From the poet’s language,” the author -says, “he has attempted to discover what was before the poet’s mind.... -Homer’s picture of the life of his age is of particular interest to the -modern reader since it is the earliest account extant of the culture from -which our own is a true lineal descendant.” - -“Absolutely free from speculation and controversy, the volume will surely -prove valuable to every student of Greek life and literature. It has the -further advantage of being the only work of its kind on the English book -market to-day.”—_New York Tribune._ - - -Life in Ancient Athens - -The Social and Public Life of a Classical Athenian from Day to Day - -By T. G. TUCKER, Litt.D. - -_Cloth, illustrated, 8vo, $1.25 net; by mail $1.40_ - -“There’s nothing dusty, fusty, musty, about this book.... Evidences of -a mastery of the subject abound everywhere.... When you get through the -book you will believe that Athens is just around the corner, and you will -know its people in nature and in habits better than you do the dwellers -in the apartment house next door.”—_The Cleveland Leader._ - - PUBLISHED BY - THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York - - - - -STANDARD WORKS OF REFERENCE - -ON - -Archæology, Antiquities, Etc. - - SCHREIBER - - Atlas of Classical Antiquities. By TH. SCHREIBER. Edited - by W. C. F. ANDERSON. Oblong quarto. =$6.50= - - SEYFFERT - - A Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. By Dr. OSCAR - SEYFFERT. _Cloth, 8vo_, =$2.25= - - SEYFFERT and REICH - - A Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Abridged from Dr. - OSCAR SEYFFERT’S larger Dictionary by Dr. Emil Reich. - - _Cloth, 316 pages, 12mo_, =$1.00= - - -A FULLY ILLUSTRATED DESCRIPTIVE BOOK - -Ave Roma Immortalis! - -_By_ F. MARION CRAWFORD - -In one volume, profusely illustrated - -_Cloth, 8vo, $2.50 net_ - -“He is keenly appreciative of the wonderful picturesqueness, romance, -impressiveness, and fascination of the historical events which he -describes.”—_The Boston Herald._ - -“It is the most—oh, far and away the most—interesting book I ever read -about Rome. It fascinated me.”—DR. WEIR MITCHELL. - - Published by - THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ROMAN ASSEMBLIES FROM THEIR -ORIGIN TO THE END OF THE REPUBLIC *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/old/68419-0.zip b/old/68419-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 1d94dd5..0000000 --- a/old/68419-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/68419-h.zip b/old/68419-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f5f547a..0000000 --- a/old/68419-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/68419-h/68419-h.htm b/old/68419-h/68419-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 3434b89..0000000 --- a/old/68419-h/68419-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,43031 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta charset="UTF-8" /> - <title> - The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Roman assemblies, by George Willis Botsford. - </title> - - <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover" /> - - <style> /* <![CDATA[ */ - -a { - text-decoration: none; -} - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -h1,h2,h3,h4,h5 { - text-align: center; - clear: both; -} - -h2.nobreak, h3.nobreak { - page-break-before: avoid; -} - -hr.chap { - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - clear: both; - width: 65%; - margin-left: 17.5%; - margin-right: 17.5%; -} - -div.chapter { - page-break-before: always; -} - -ul { - list-style-type: none; -} - -li, li.indx { - margin-top: .5em; - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.ifrst { - margin-top: 2em; - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.isub1 { - padding-left: 4em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.isub2 { - padding-left: 6em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -p { - margin-top: 0.5em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: 0.5em; - text-indent: 1em; -} - -table { - margin: 1em auto 1em auto; - max-width: 40em; - border-collapse: collapse; -} - -th { - padding: 0.25em; - font-weight: normal; -} - -td { - padding-left: 2.25em; - padding-right: 0.25em; - vertical-align: top; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -table.contents { - margin: 1em auto 1em auto; - max-width: 35em; - border-collapse: collapse; -} - -.contents td { - padding-left: 2.25em; - padding-right: 0.25em; - vertical-align: top; - text-indent: -2em; - text-align: justify; -} - -.contents .tdc { - text-align: center; - padding: 1em 0.25em 0.25em 0.25em; -} - -.contents .tdpg { - vertical-align: bottom; - text-align: right; -} - -.tdc { - text-align: center; -} - -.tdr { - text-align: right; - white-space: nowrap; -} - -.in2 { - padding-left: 4.25em; -} - -.bb { - border-bottom: thin solid black; -} - -.bl { - border-left: thin solid black; -} - -.bt { - border-top: thin solid black; -} - -.bibliography { - margin-top: 1.5em; - font-size: 90%; -} - -.blockquote { - margin: 1.5em 10%; -} - -.center { - text-align: center; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.figcenter { - margin: auto; - text-align: center; -} - -.footnotes { - margin-top: 1em; - border: dashed 1px; -} - -.footnote { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; - font-size: 0.9em; -} - -.footnote .label { - position: absolute; - right: 84%; - text-align: right; -} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: none; -} - -.gothic { - font-family: 'Old English Text MT', 'Old English', serif; -} - -div.hanging p { - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.larger { - font-size: 150%; -} - -.noindent { - text-indent: 0; -} - -.mt2 { - margin-top: 2em; -} - - .pagenum { - position: absolute; - right: 4%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; - font-style: normal; -} - -.poetry-container { - text-align: center; - margin: 1em; -} - -.poetry { - display: inline-block; - text-align: left; -} - -.poetry .stanza { - margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em; -} - -.poetry .verse { - padding-left: 3em; -} - -.poetry .indent0 { - text-indent: -3em; -} - -.poetry .indent2 { - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.poetry .indent14 { - text-indent: 4em; -} - -.right { - text-align: right; -} - -.sans { - font-family: sans-serif; -} - -.smaller { - font-size: 80%; -} - -.smcap { - font-variant: small-caps; - font-style: normal; -} - -.allsmcap { - font-variant: small-caps; - font-style: normal; - text-transform: lowercase; -} - -.tb { - margin-top: 2em; -} - -.titlepage { - text-align: center; - margin-top: 3em; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.x-ebookmaker img { - max-width: 100%; - width: auto; - height: auto; -} - -.x-ebookmaker .poetry { - display: block; - margin-left: 1.5em; -} - -.x-ebookmaker .blockquote { - margin: 1.5em 5%; -} - - /* ]]> */ </style> - </head> -<body> -<p style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Roman assemblies from their origin to the end of the Republic, by George Willis Botsford</p> -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online -at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you -are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this eBook. -</div> - -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: The Roman assemblies from their origin to the end of the Republic</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: George Willis Botsford</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: June 28, 2022 [eBook #68419]</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</p> - <p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em; text-align:left'>Produced by: Tim Lindell and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)</p> -<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ROMAN ASSEMBLIES FROM THEIR ORIGIN TO THE END OF THE REPUBLIC ***</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_i"></a>[i]</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage larger">THE ROMAN ASSEMBLIES</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_ii"></a>[ii]</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;"> -<img src="images/macmillan.jpg" width="300" height="100" alt="" /> -</div> - -<p class="center">THE MACMILLAN COMPANY<br /> -<span class="smaller">NEW YORK. BOSTON. CHICAGO<br /> -ATLANTA. SAN FRANCISCO</span></p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">MACMILLAN & CO., Limited</span><br /> -<span class="smaller">LONDON. BOMBAY. CALCUTTA<br /> -MELBOURNE</span></p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd.</span><br /> -<span class="smaller">TORONTO</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_iii"></a>[iii]</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage larger">THE<br /> -ROMAN ASSEMBLIES</p> - -<p class="center">FROM THEIR ORIGIN TO THE END<br /> -OF THE REPUBLIC</p> - -<p class="titlepage"><span class="smaller">BY</span><br /> -GEORGE WILLIS BOTSFORD<br /> -<span class="smaller">PROFESSOR OF HISTORY IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY<br /> -AUTHOR OF “THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ATHENIAN CONSTITUTION,”<br /> -“A HISTORY OF GREECE,” “A HISTORY OF ROME,”<br /> -“AN ANCIENT HISTORY,” ETC.</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage"><span class="gothic">New York</span><br /> -THE MACMILLAN COMPANY<br /> -1909<br /> -<span class="smaller"><i>All rights reserved</i></span></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_iv"></a>[iv]</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage smaller"><span class="smcap">Copyright, 1909,</span><br /> -<span class="smcap">By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.</span></p> - -<p class="center smaller">Set up and electrotyped. Published September, 1909.</p> - -<p class="titlepage smaller"><span class="gothic">Norwood Press</span><br /> -J. S. Cushing Co.—Berwick & Smith Co.<br /> -Norwood, Mass., U.S.A.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_v"></a>[v]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak"><span class="smaller">To</span><br /> -MY WIFE</h2> - -</div> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent2">Οὐ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ γε κρεῖσσον καὶ ἄρειον,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Ἢ ὅθ’ ὁμοφρονέοντε νοήμασιν οἶκον ἔχητον</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Ἀνὴρ ἠδὲ γυνή· πόλλ’ ἄλγεα δυσμενέεσσι,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Χάρματα δ’ εὐμενέτησι· μάλιστα δέ τ’ ἔκλυον αὐτοί.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_vi"></a>[vi]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_vii"></a>[vii]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="PREFACE">PREFACE</h2> - -</div> - -<p>This volume is the first to offer in monographic form a -detailed treatment of the popular assemblies of ancient Rome. -Necessarily much of the material in it may be found in earlier -works; but recent progress in the field, involving a reaction -against certain theories of Niebuhr and Mommsen affecting -the comitia, justifies a systematic presentation of existing -knowledge of the subject. This task has required patient labor -extending through many years. The known sources and practically -all the modern authorities have been utilized. A determination -to keep free from conventional ideas, so as to look -at the sources freshly and with open mind, has brought views -of the assemblies not found in other books. The reader is -earnestly requested not to reject an interpretation because it -seems new but to examine carefully the grounds on which -it is given. In general the aim has been to follow a conservative -historical method as opposed to the radical juristic, to build -up generalizations on facts rather than to estimate sources by -the criterion of a preconceived theory. The primary object -of the volume, however, is not to defend a point of view but -to serve as a book of study and reference for those who are -interested in the history, law, and constitution of ancient Rome -and in comparative institutional research.</p> - -<p>In the preparation of the volume, I have been generously -aided by my colleagues in Columbia University. To Professor -William M. Sloane, Head of the Department of History, I owe -a great debt of gratitude for kindly sympathy and encouragement -in the work. It is an especial good fortune that the -proofs have been read by Professor James C. Egbert. Many -improvements are due to his scholarship and editorial experience. -Professor George N. Olcott has advised me on various -numismatic matters, and I am indebted to Dr. John L. Gerig<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_viii"></a>[viii]</span> -for information on two or three etymologies. The proofs have -also been read and corrections made by Dr. Richard R. Blews -of Cornell University. It is a pleasure to remember gratefully -these able friends who have helped me with their special knowledge, -and to add the name of Mr. Frederic W. Erb of the -Columbia University Library, whose courtesy has facilitated the -borrowing of books for the study from other institutions.</p> - -<p>Notwithstanding every effort to make the work accurate, -mistakes and inconsistencies will doubtless be found in it, and -I shall thankfully welcome suggestions from any reader for -its further correction and improvement.</p> - -<p class="right">GEORGE WILLIS BOTSFORD.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Mount Vernon, New York</span>, -June 7, 1909.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_ix"></a>[ix]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak">CONTENTS</h2> - -</div> - -<table class="contents"> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdpg smaller">PAGES</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">PART I</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">Elements of the Comitial Constitution</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#PART_I">1-118</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER I</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Populus and its Earliest Political Divisions</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_I">1-15</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER II</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Social Composition of the Primitive Populus</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_II">16-47</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER III</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Thirty-five Tribes</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_III">48-65</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER IV</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Centuries and the Classes</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_IV">66-99</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER V</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Auspices</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_V">100-118</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">PART II</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Assemblies: Organization, Procedure, - and Functions, Resolutions, Statutes, and Cases</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#PART_II">119-477</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER VI</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">Comitia and Concilium</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VI">119-138</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER VII</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Contio</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VII">139-151</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER VIII</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Calata Comitia</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VIII">152-167</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_x"></a>[x]</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER IX</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Comitia Curiata</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_IX">168-200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER X</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Organization of the Comitia Centuriata</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_X">201-228</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XI</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Functions of the Comitia Centuriata</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XI">229-261</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XII</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Comitia Tributa and the Rise of Popular - Sovereignty, to 449</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XII">262-282</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XIII</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Comitia Tributa and the Rise of Popular - Sovereignty, from 449 to 287</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIII">283-316</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XIV</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Judicial Functions of the Comitia Tributa, - from 287 to the End of the Republic</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIV">317-329</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XV</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">Comitial Legislation, from Hortensius to the - Gracchi</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XV">330-362</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XVI</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">Comitial Legislation, from the Gracchi to Sulla</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XVI">363-411</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XVII</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">Comitial Legislation, from Sulla to the End - of the Republic</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XVII">412-461</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XVIII</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">The Composition and Preservation of Statutes, - Comitial Procedure, and Comitial Days</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XVIII">462-472</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XIX</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">A Summary of Comitial History</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIX">473-477</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">Bibliography</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#BIBLIOGRAPHY">479-498</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td><span class="smcap">Index</span></td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#INDEX">499-521</a></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_1"></a>[1]</span></p> - -<h1>THE ROMAN ASSEMBLIES</h1> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="PART_I">PART I<br /> -<span class="smaller">ELEMENTS OF THE COMITIAL CONSTITUTION</span></h2> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_I">CHAPTER I<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE POPULUS AND ITS EARLIEST POLITICAL DIVISIONS</span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>The Populus</i></h4> - -<p>The derivation of populus, “people,” “folk,” is unknown. -Attempts have been made to connect it with populari, “to -devastate,” so as to give it primarily a military signification—perhaps -simply “the army.”<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> In the opinion of others it is -akin to plēnus, plēbes, πλῆθος, πολύς, πίμπλημι,<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> in which case -it would signify “multitude,” “mass,” with the idea of collective -strength, which might readily pass into “army” as a secondary -meaning.<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> Fundamentally personal, it included all those individuals, -not only the grown men but their families as well, who -collectively made up the state, whether Roman or foreign, -monarchical or republican.<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> Only in a transferred sense did it -apply to territory.<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> The ancient definition, “an association -based on the common acceptance of the same body of laws and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_2"></a>[2]</span> -on the general participation in public benefits,”<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> is doubtless -too abstract for the beginnings of Rome. Citizenship—membership -in the populus—with all that it involved is elaborately -defined by the Roman jurists;<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> but for the earlier period it will -serve the purpose of the present study to mention that the -three characteristic public functions of the citizen were military -service, participation in worship, and attendance at the assembly.<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> -In a narrower sense populus signifies “the people,” -“masses,” in contrast with the magistrates or with the senate, -as in the well known phrase, senatus populusque Romanus.</p> - -<h4>II. <i>The Three Primitive Tribes</i></h4> - -<p>The Romans believed that the three tribes which composed -the primitive populus were created by one act in close relation -with the founding of the city.<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> For some unknown reason -they were led to connect the myth of Titus Tatius, the -eponymous hero of the Tities,<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> with the Quirinal,<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> and with the -Sabines,<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> who were generally supposed to have occupied that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_3"></a>[3]</span> -hill.<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> Consequently some of their historians felt compelled to -defer their account of the institution of the tribes till they had -told of the union of the Sabines with the Romans, which at the -same time gave them an opportunity to derive the names of the -curiae from those of the Sabine women. Varro,<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> however, who -protests against this derivation, refers the organization of the -people in the three tribes to an earlier date, connecting it -immediately with the founding of Rome. Though he affirmed -that one tribe was named after Romulus, another after Titus -Tatius, and the third, less positively, after an Etruscan Lucumo, -Caeles Vibenna, who came to the aid of Romulus against Titus -Tatius,<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> neither he nor any other ancient writer identified the Tities -with the Sabines, whose quarter in the city was really unknown,<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> -or the Luceres with an Etruscan settlement under Caeles -whether in the Vicus Tuscus<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> or on the Caelian hill.<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> Since -the Romans knew the tribe in no other relation than as a part -of the state, they could not have thought of their city as consisting -originally of a single tribe, to which a second and afterward -a third were added, or that any one of these three tribes -had ever been an independent community. These views are -modern;<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> there is no trace of them in the ancient writers.<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_4"></a>[4]</span> -Even if it could be proved that they took this point of view, the -question at issue would not thereby be settled; for no genuine -tradition regarding the origin of the primitive tribes came down -to the earliest annalists; the only possible knowledge they possessed -on this point was deduced from the names of the tribes -and from surviving institutions presumably connected with them -in the period of their existence.<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> Under these circumstances -modern speculations as to their independent character and -diverse nationality seem absurd. The proper method of solving -the problem is to test and to supplement the scant sources -by a comparative study of the institution.</p> - -<p>The low political vitality of the three primitive Roman tribes, -as of the corresponding Greek phylae,<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> when we first meet -with them in history, points to the artificiality of these groups—a -condition indicated further both by their number and by -their occurrence in other Italian states.<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> Far from being confined<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_5"></a>[5]</span> -to Rome, the tripartite division of the community belonged -to many Greek and to most Italian peoples,<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> and has entered -largely into the organization of communities and nations the -world over.<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> A derivation of tribus, Umbrian trifu, accepted -by many scholars, connects it with the number three.<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> The -wide use of this conventional number, and more particularly the -regular recurrence of the same three Dorian tribes in many -Dorian cities—as of the same four Ionic tribes in many Ionic -cities<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a>—and of the same three Latin (or Etruscan?) tribes -in several old Latin cities, could not result from chance combinations<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_6"></a>[6]</span> -in all these places, but point unmistakably to the systematic -imitation of a common pattern. That pattern must be -ultimately sought in the pre-urban populus, ἔθνος, folk. If we -assume that before the rise of city-states the Ionian folk was -organized in four tribes (phylae) and the Dorian and Latin folks -in three tribes, we shall have a condition such as will satisfactorily -explain the tribal organization of the city-states which -grew up within the areas occupied by these three folks respectively. -The thirty votes of the Latins may be best explained -by assuming a division of their populus into three tribes, -subdivided each into ten groups corresponding to the Roman -curiae. Whereas in Umbria the decay of the pre-urban populus -allowed its tribes to become independent,<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> in Latium a -development in that direction was prevented by the rise of -city-states, which completely overshadowed the preëxisting organization.</p> - -<p>The Italian city-state grew not from a tribe or a combination -of tribes, but from the pagus,<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> “canton,” a district of the pre-urban -populus with definite consecrated boundaries,<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> usually -centering in an oppidum—a place of defence and refuge.<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> In -the beginning the latter enjoyed no superior right over the -territory in which it was situated.<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> A pagus became a populus -at the point of time when it asserted its political independence -of the folk. The new state organized itself in tribes and curiae -after the pattern of the folk. In the main this arrangement<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_7"></a>[7]</span> -was artificial, yet it must have taken some account of existing -ties of blood.<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> At the same time the oppidum became an urbs<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a>—a -city, the seat of government of the new populus. Thus -arose the city-state. In the case of Rome several oppida with -parts of their respective pagi<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> were merged in one urbs—that -known as the city of the four regions.<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> Urbs and ager excluded -each other, just as the oppidani contrasted with the pagani;<a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> -but both were included in the populus.</p> - -<p>Most ancient writers represent the three tribes as primarily -local,<a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> and the members as landowners from the founding of -the city.<a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> Although their view may be a mere inference from -the character of the so-called Servian tribes, the continuity of -name from the earlier to the later institution points to some -degree of similarity between them. It can be easily understood, -too, how in time the personal feature might have so overcome -the local as to make the old tribes appear to be based on birth -in contrast with the territorial aspect of the new.<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p> - -<p>It was probably on the institution of the later tribes that the -earlier were dissolved. They left their names to the three double -centuries of patrician knights.<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> Their number appears also as -a factor in the number of curiae, of senators, and of members -of the great sacerdotal colleges. Other survivals may be found -in the name “tribunus,” in the tribuni militum, the tribuni<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_8"></a>[8]</span> -celerum,<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> the ludus Troiae,<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> and less certainly in the Sodales -Titii.<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a></p> - -<h4>III. <i>The Curiae</i></h4> - -<p>The curia as well as the tribe was a common Italian institution. -We know that it belonged to the Etruscans,<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> the Latins,<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> -and several other peoples of Italy.<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> There were ten curiae to -the tribe, making thirty in all.<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> The association was composed, -not of gentes as many have imagined, but of families.<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> For the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_9"></a>[9]</span> -performance of its social and religious functions it had a house -of assembly, also called curia,<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> in which the members—curiales—gathered -for religious festivals. The place of meeting was -a part of an edifice belonging to the collective curiae. In historical -time there were two such buildings—the Curiae Veteres<a id="FNanchor_51" href="#Footnote_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> -on the northeast slope of the Palatine near the Arch of Constantine, -containing seven curial meeting-places, and the Novae -Curiae<a id="FNanchor_52" href="#Footnote_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> near the Compitum Fabricium, containing the others. -Their deities were Juno<a id="FNanchor_53" href="#Footnote_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> and Tellus;<a id="FNanchor_54" href="#Footnote_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> and their chief festivals -were the Fornacalia and the Fordicidia.<a id="FNanchor_55" href="#Footnote_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> As the worship was -public, the expense was paid by the state.<a id="FNanchor_56" href="#Footnote_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> At the head of the -curia stood the curio—who in historical time was merely a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_10"></a>[10]</span> -priest<a id="FNanchor_57" href="#Footnote_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a>—assisted in his religious functions by his wife and -children,<a id="FNanchor_58" href="#Footnote_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> by a lictor<a id="FNanchor_59" href="#Footnote_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> and a flamen.<a id="FNanchor_60" href="#Footnote_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> The fact that the curio -had these officials proves that he was originally a magistrate.<a id="FNanchor_61" href="#Footnote_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> -One of the curiones the people elected curio maximus to exercise -general supervision over the worship and festivals of the association.<a id="FNanchor_62" href="#Footnote_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a></p> - -<p>Another function of the curiae was political. The grown -male members, meeting in the comitium, constituted the earliest -assembly organized in voting divisions—the comitia curiata—in -which each curia cast a single vote.<a id="FNanchor_63" href="#Footnote_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> Religious and political -functions the curia continued to exercise far down into -historical time; and for that reason they have never been doubted -by the moderns. For the primitive period Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_64" href="#Footnote_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a> ascribes -to them military functions as well. His idea is that the three -original tribes furnished military divisions each under a tribune, -and the curiae as subdivisions of the tribe furnished companies, -commanded each by a curio chosen for his valor.<a id="FNanchor_65" href="#Footnote_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a> Doubtless -the writer fairly describes the military system which Rome employed -before the introduction of the phalanx,<a id="FNanchor_66" href="#Footnote_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> and which corresponds<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_11"></a>[11]</span> -closely with the system prevalent among the early -Greeks,<a id="FNanchor_67" href="#Footnote_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a> Germans,<a id="FNanchor_68" href="#Footnote_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> and other European peoples.<a id="FNanchor_69" href="#Footnote_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> The military -organization was everywhere a parallel of the civil. The Roman -army, however, was by no means identical with the curiate assembly, -for many belonged to the tribes and the curiae who for -various reasons were exempt from military service.<a id="FNanchor_70" href="#Footnote_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a></p> - -<p>It is probable, too, that the curiae, as well as the tribes,<a id="FNanchor_71" href="#Footnote_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> were -territorial divisions. Not only have we the authority of Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_72" href="#Footnote_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> -that each curia occupied a district of the state, but also -two of the seven known curial names—Foriensis and Veliensis<a id="FNanchor_73" href="#Footnote_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a>—are -local. Though the two mentioned refer to places within -the city, the country people were also included in the associations.<a id="FNanchor_74" href="#Footnote_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a></p> - -<p class="tb">Since Niebuhr the opinion has generally prevailed that the -curia was composed of gentes. A passage which at first glance -seems to have a bearing on the question is Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 4: -“Romulus divided the curiae into decades, each commanded by a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_12"></a>[12]</span> -leader, who in the language of the country is called decurion.”<a id="FNanchor_75" href="#Footnote_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a> -The word decurion proves, however, that in speaking of decades -Dionysius is thinking of the military divisions called decuriae, -each commanded by a decurion. In historical times the troop -of cavalry—turma—was divided into three decuriae of ten -each, as the word itself indicates. There were accordingly three -decurions to the turma, and ten turmae ordinarily went with the -legion.<a id="FNanchor_76" href="#Footnote_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a> From Varro<a id="FNanchor_77" href="#Footnote_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> we learn that the three primitive tribes -furnished turmae and decuriae of cavalry, the decuriae commanded -by decurions. Dionysius accordingly refers to military -companies—either to the well known decuriae of cavalry or to -corresponding companies of footmen which probably existed -before the adoption of the phalanx.<a id="FNanchor_78" href="#Footnote_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> Had he meant gentes, he -would have used the corresponding Greek word γένη. Niebuhr<a id="FNanchor_79" href="#Footnote_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a> -inferred from this passage that each curia was divided into ten -gentes, making three hundred gentes for the entire state; but a -careful interpretation shows that no reference to the gentes is -intended. We cannot infer therefore from this citation that the -curia was divided into gentes.</p> - -<p>The other passage relative to the question is Gellius xv. 27. -4,<a id="FNanchor_80" href="#Footnote_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a> in which Laelius Felix states that the voting in the comitia -curiata was by genera hominum in contrast with the census et -aetas of the centuriate assembly and with the regiones et loca -of the comitia tributa. Niebuhr identifies genera with gentes.<a id="FNanchor_81" href="#Footnote_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a> -It is clear, however, that in this passage Laelius is not concretely -defining the voting units of the various assemblies, but -is stating in a general way the principles underlying their<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_13"></a>[13]</span> -organization into voting units. In the comitia centuriata the -principle is wealth and age; census et aetas is not to be identified -with centuria or with any other group of individuals in this -assembly. In like manner regiones et loca expresses the principle -of organization of the tribal assembly; or if used concretely, -it must designate the tribes themselves, and not -subdivisions of the tribes, for none existed. Correspondingly -genera hominum signifies that the principle of organization of -the curiate assembly is hereditary connection; but so far as the -expression is applied concretely, it must denote the curiae themselves -not subdivisions of these associations. The curia, a -religious, social, and political group based on birth, might well -be called genus hominum in contrast with the local tribe and -with the century, composed artificially of men of similar wealth -and age. It is well known, too, that voting within the curiae -was not by gentes but by heads.<a id="FNanchor_82" href="#Footnote_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a> As no other passage from -the sources, besides these two, has even the appearance of -lending support to the proposition advanced by Niebuhr, and -favored by others, that the curia was a group of gentes, we -may conclude that this proposition is groundless. The result is -that the gens had no connection with the comitial organization.</p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>I. <span class="smcap">The Populus</span>; the beginnings of Rome: Schwegler, A., <i>Römische -Geschichte</i>, I. bk. viii; Peter, C., <i>Geschichte Roms</i>, i. 17 ff.; Niese, B., <i>Grundriss -der röm. Geschichte</i>, 16 ff., 28 ff.; Jordan, H., <i>Topographie der Stadt -Rom im Altertum</i>, I. i. 153 ff; iii. 34; Gilbert, O., <i>Geschichte und Topographie -der Stadt Rom im Altertum</i>, i, ii; Richter, <i>Topographie der Stadt Rom</i>, -30 ff. (see review by H. Degering, in <i>Berl. Philol. Woch.</i> 1903. 1645 f.); -Platner, S. B., <i>Topography and Monuments of Ancient Rome</i>, ch. iv; Schulze, -W., <i>Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen</i>, 579-82; Pais, E., <i>Ancient -Legends of Roman History</i>, ch. xii; Nissen, H., <i>Das Templum</i>, ch. v; <i>Italische -Landeskunde</i>, ii. 488 ff.; Kornemann, E., <i>Polis und Urbs</i>, in <i>Klio</i>, v (1905). -72-92; Carter, J. B., <i>Roma Quadrata and the Septimontium</i>, in <i>Am. Journ. -of Archaeol.</i> xii (1908). 172-83; Deecke, Wm., <i>Die Falisker</i>; Montelius, -<i>Die frühesten zeiten Roms</i>, in <i>Correspbl. d. deutsch. Gesellsch. f. Anthr. -Ethn. u. Urgesch.</i> xxxv (1904). 122; Pöhlmann, R., <i>Die Anfänge Roms</i>; -Schrader, O., <i>Sprachvergleichung und Urgeschichte</i>, bk. IV. ch. xii; <i>Heer, -König, Sippe, Stamm</i> in <i>Reallexikon der indogermanischen Altertumskunde</i>; -Fustel de Coulanges, <i>Ancient City</i>, bk. iii; Leist, <i>Graeco-italische Rechtsgeschichte</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_14"></a>[14]</span> -103 ff.; <i>Alt-arisches Jus Civile</i>, i. 319-36; Meyer, E., <i>Geschichte des -Altertums</i>, ii. 510 ff.; Mommsen, <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. I. chs. iii, iv; <i>Röm. -Staatsrecht</i>, iii. 3 ff., 112-22; Marquardt, J., <i>Röm. Staatsverwaltung</i>, i. 3 ff.; -Lange, L., <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, i. 55-284; <i>Das röm. Königtum</i>, in <i>Kleine -Schriften</i>, i. 77-104; Herzog, E., <i>Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, -i. 3-23, 969 ff.; Willems, P., <i>Droit public Romain</i>, 17 ff.; Karlowa, -O., <i>Röm. Rechtsgeschichte</i>, i. 30 ff.; Greenidge, A. H. J., <i>Roman Public Life</i>, -ch. i; Bernhöft, F., <i>Staat und Recht der röm. Königszeit</i>, 69 ff.; Genz, <i>Das -patricische Röm</i>, 51 ff.; Morlot, E., <i>Les comices électoraux sous la république -Romaine</i>, ch. i.</p> - -<p>II. <span class="smcap">The Primitive Tribes</span>: Niebuhr, B. G., <i>Röm. Geschichte</i>, i. 300-321; -English, i. 149-58; Schwegler, ibid. I. bk. IX. ch. xiv. § 2; Niese, ibid. 30 f.; -De Sanctis, G., <i>Storia dei Romani</i>, i. 249-55; Gilbert, ibid. ii. 329-79; -Nissen, <i>Templum</i>, 144-6; <i>Ital. Landesk.</i> ii. 7-15, 496 ff.; Jordan, H., <i>Die -Könige im alten Italien</i>, 35-7; controverted by W. Soltau, in <i>Woch. f. Kl. -Philol.</i> xxv (1908). 220-3; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 95-100, 109-12; -<i>Rom. Tribus</i>, 1 f.; Lange, <i>Rom. Alt.</i> i. 81-101; Herzog, ibid. i. 23 ff.; Madvig, -J. N., <i>Röm. Staat</i>, i. 95-8; Mispoulet, J. B., <i>Les institutions politiques des -Romains</i>, i. 3-6; Soltau, W., <i>Altröm. Volksversammlungen</i>, 46-51; Willems, -P., <i>Le sénat de la république Romaine</i>, I. ch. i; Bloch, G., <i>Les origines du -sénat Romain</i>, 1-16, 32-8; Bernhöft, ibid. 79 ff.; Genz, ibid. 89-106; Meyer, -ibid.; <i>Der Ursprung des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der vier Tribus</i>, in -<i>Hermes</i>, xxx (1895). 1-24; controverted by Sp. Vassis, in <i>Athena</i>, ix (1897). -470-2; Kubitschek, W., <i>De romanorum tribuum origine ac propagatione</i> -1 ff.; Volquardsen, C. A., <i>Die drei ältesten röm. Tribus</i>, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -N. F. xxxiii (1878). 538-64; Bormann, E., <i>die älteste Gliederung Roms</i>, in -<i>Eranos Vindobonensis</i>, 345-58; Holzapfel, L., <i>Die drei ältesten röm. Tribus</i>, -in <i>Beiträge zur alten Geschichte</i>, i (1902). 228-55; Bertolini, C. I., <i>I celeres -ed il tribunus celerum</i>; Zimmermann, A., <i>Zu Titus</i>, etc., in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -N. F. 1 (1895). 159 f.; Schlossmann, S., <i>Tributum, tribuere, tribus</i>, in <i>Archiv -f. lat. Lexicog.</i> xiv (1906). 25-40; Schulze, W., <i>Zur Gesch. lateinischer -Eigennamen</i>, see index, s. Ramnenses, etc.</p> - -<p>III. <span class="smcap">The Curiae: Pott</span>, A. F., <i>Etymologische Forschungen</i>, ii. 373 ff.; -Corssen, W., <i>Ausspr.</i> index, s. Curia; Vaniček, A., <i>Etymologisches Wörterbuch -der lat. Sprache</i>, 160; <i>Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterbuch</i>, 1116; Niebuhr, ibid. i. -321-54; Schwegler, ibid. i. 610-12; Gilbert, ibid, index s. Curia; Richter, ibid. -index s. Curia; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr</i>. iii. 89 ff.; Lange, ibid. i. 275-84, and -index, s. Curia; Willems, P., <i>Sén. Rom.</i> ibid.; Bloch, G., <i>Orig. d. sén.</i> 290 ff.; -Mispoulet, J. B., ibid. i. 7-9; Fustel de Coulanges, ibid. 154-7; Karlowa, ibid.; -Genz, ibid. 32-50; Hoffmeister, K., <i>Die Wirtschaftliche Entwickelung Roms</i>, -5 f.; Soltau, ibid. 46-67; Müller, J. J., <i>Studien zur röm. Verfassungsgeschichte</i>, -in <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv (1875). 96 ff.; Ihne, Wm., <i>History of Rome</i>, i. 113 f.; Newman, -F. W., <i>Dr. Ihne on the Early Roman Constitution</i>, in <i>Classical Museum</i>, -vi (1849). 15 ff.; Hoffmann, E., <i>Patricische und plebeiische Curien</i>; Kübler -and Hülsen, <i>Curia</i>, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1815-26; Pelham, H., -<i>The Roman Curiae</i>, in (English) <i>Journal of Philology</i>, ix (1880). 266-79.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_15"></a>[15]</span></p> - -<p>IV. <span class="smcap">The Gentes</span>: Fustel de Coulanges, ibid. bk. ii; Leist, <i>Graeco-ital. -Rechtsgesch.</i> 11 ff.; <i>Alt-arisches Ius Gentium</i>; <i>Alt-arisch. Jus Civ.</i> i. 461-76 -(Irish Kin); Hirt, H., <i>Indogermanen</i>, ii. 409-56; Engels, F., <i>Der Ursprung -der Familie, des Privateigentums und des Staats</i>, ch. v; Howard, G. E., -<i>History of Matrimonial Institutions</i>, I. pt. i; Levison, W., <i>Die Beurkundung -des Zivilstandes im Altertum</i>; Wildebrandt, M., <i>Die politische und sociale -Bedeutung der attischen Geschlechter vor Solon</i>, in <i>Philologus</i>, Supplb. vii -(1899). 135-227; Kovalevsky, M., <i>La gens et le clan</i>, in <i>Annales de l’institut -international de sociologie</i>, vii (1900). 57-100; Ruggiero, E., <i>La gens in -Roma avanti la formazione del comune</i>; Schwegler, ibid. i. 612-15; Lange, -ibid. i. 211-59, and see index, s. v.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch</i>, i. 1-127; -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 9-53, and see index s. v.; Mispoulet, ibid. i. 9-14; -Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. chs. i-iii; Müller, J. J., <i>Studien z. röm. Verfassungsgesch.</i> -in <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv (1876). 96-104; Bloch, G., ibid. 102 ff.; <i>Recherches -sur quelques gentes patriciennes</i>, in <i>Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire de -l’école Française de Rome</i>, 1882. 241-76; Soltau, ibid. 58-64, 652-5; Bernhöft, -ibid.; Genz, ibid. 1-31; Bloch, L., <i>Die ständischen und sozialen Kämpfe -in der röm. Republik</i>; Holzapfel, L., <i>Il numero dei senatori Romani durante -il periodo dei rei</i>, in <i>Rivista di storia antica</i>, ii. 2 (1897). 52-64; Marquardt, -J., <i>Privatleben der Römer</i>, 1-26, 353 f.; Deecke, ibid. 275 ff. (on Italian -names); Michel, N. H., <i>Du droit de cité Romaine</i>; Köhm, J., <i>Altlateinische -Forschungen</i>, 1-21; Lécrivain, C., <i>Gens</i>, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> ii. -1504-16; Ruggiero, E., <i>Diz. ep.</i> iii (1906). 482-6; Casagrandi, V., <i>Le -minores gentes ed i patres minorum gentium</i>; Staaf, E., <i>De origine gentium -patriciarum</i>; Lieboldt, K., <i>Die Ansichten über die Entstehung und das -Wesen der Gentes patriciae aus der Zeit der Humanisten bis auf unsere -Tage</i>; Botsford, G. W., <i>Some Problems connected with the Roman Gens</i>, in -<i>Political Science Quarterly</i>, xxii (1907). 663-92.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_16"></a>[16]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_II">CHAPTER II<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE SOCIAL COMPOSITION OF THE PRIMITIVE POPULUS</span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>This chapter<a id="FNanchor_83" href="#Footnote_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a> is primarily an inquiry into the social composition -of the comitia curiata. At the same time it seeks to solve -a problem which is doubtless the most fundamental in the early -political and constitutional history of Rome. The result we -reach will determine our conception of the whole course of -constitutional development, and of the accompanying political -struggles, to the complete equalization of the social ranks. For -if we believe, as do many of the moderns,<a id="FNanchor_84" href="#Footnote_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> that the primitive -Roman state was made up exclusively of patricians, we are -forced to the conclusion that the constitutional development to -the passing of the Hortensian laws centred in the gradual admission -of the plebeians and the clients to citizenship—perhaps -even in the amalgamation of two distinct peoples. If on the -other hand we take the ground that from the beginning the -plebeians and the clients were citizens and voted in the comitia -curiata, we must think of these inferior classes as struggling -through the early history of their country for the acquisition -not of citizenship but of various rights and privileges, social, -economic, religious, and political, formerly monopolized by a -patrician aristocracy. In attempting to solve the problem here -proposed it will be advantageous to consider (1) the ancient -view, (2) the conventional modern view, (3) the comparative-sociological -view.</p> - -<h4>I. <i>The Ancient View</i></h4> - -<p>The three social classes of freemen—plebeians, patricians, -and clients—were formed within the citizen body by official -recognition of existing distinctions not of nationality but of -worth. The first step in the process was the differentiation of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_17"></a>[17]</span> -the patricians from the plebeians. According to Cicero, -Romulus constituted a number of chief men into a royal council, -the senate, whose members he so highly esteemed as to have -them called patres, and their children patricians.<a id="FNanchor_85" href="#Footnote_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a> Cicero thinks -of the multitude as existing at first without a politically recognized -nobility, yet showing natural distinctions of worth. By -calling into the senate the ablest and best men, the state ennobled -them and their families.<a id="FNanchor_86" href="#Footnote_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a> Livy’s<a id="FNanchor_87" href="#Footnote_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a> view is similar: -Romulus selected from the multitude a hundred senators, whom -he named patres, and whose descendants were called patricians. -They were chosen because of their wisdom;<a id="FNanchor_88" href="#Footnote_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a> on that ground -the state granted them nobility,<a id="FNanchor_89" href="#Footnote_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a> which accordingly in Rome, as -in every early community, was founded on personal merit.<a id="FNanchor_90" href="#Footnote_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a> In -the more detailed theory of Dionysius,<a id="FNanchor_91" href="#Footnote_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a> Romulus “distinguished -those who were eminent for their birth and celebrated for their -virtue, and whom he knew to be rich in the account of those -times and who had children, from the obscure and mean and -poor. The lower class he called plebeians, Greek δημοτικοί, -and the higher patres, either because they were older than the -others, or had children, or were of higher birth, or for all these -reasons.... The most trustworthy historians of the Roman -constitution assert that owing to these facts they were called -patres and their descendants patricians.” According to Plutarch,<a id="FNanchor_92" href="#Footnote_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a> -“Romulus, after forming the army, employed the rest of -the people as the citizen body (δῆμος); the multitude he called<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_18"></a>[18]</span> -populus, and appointed a hundred nobles to be councillors, -whom he called patricians, and their assembly the senate.”<a id="FNanchor_93" href="#Footnote_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a></p> - -<p>There can be no doubt, therefore, as to the opinion of the -ancient writers. They believed that from the beginning social -distinctions existed naturally within the populus Romanus, and -that these distinctions were made the basis of an official division -of the people into nobles and commons, patricii and plebs, by -the government. This view is not only reasonable in itself, but -is supported, as we shall see, by analogies drawn from many -other states.</p> - -<p>All the sources make the patriciate depend upon connection -with the senate, Dionysius alone showing some inconsistency on -this point.<a id="FNanchor_94" href="#Footnote_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a> Why the senators were called patres the ancients -give various reasons. Cicero<a id="FNanchor_95" href="#Footnote_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a> thinks patres a term of endearment; -Sallust<a id="FNanchor_96" href="#Footnote_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a> believes that the name was applied either because -of age or because of the similarity of their duty; Livy<a id="FNanchor_97" href="#Footnote_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a> -sets it down as a title of honor; Festus<a id="FNanchor_98" href="#Footnote_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a> thinks chiefly of their -age and wisdom; Paulus,<a id="FNanchor_99" href="#Footnote_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a> his epitomator, suggests that they -were so called because they divided their lands among the -poorer class as fathers among children; Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_100" href="#Footnote_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a> gives three -possible reasons, (1) greater age, (2) possession of children, -(3) family reputation. The sources generally agree in representing -the patres as men who in age, honor, authority and -duty stood toward the rest of the citizens as a father toward his -children, and in identifying these social-political patres with the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_19"></a>[19]</span> -senators.<a id="FNanchor_101" href="#Footnote_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a> An examination of the word itself will tend to confirm -the ancient view. It seems to have originally signified -“protector,” “keeper,” “nourisher,”<a id="FNanchor_102" href="#Footnote_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a> hence “owner,” “master.” -Pater familias is nourisher, protector, and master of a household.<a id="FNanchor_103" href="#Footnote_103" class="fnanchor">[103]</a> -In late Roman law the term continued to refer not -necessarily to actual parentage but rather to the legal position -of the head of a household;<a id="FNanchor_104" href="#Footnote_104" class="fnanchor">[104]</a> in fact it is only in a distantly -derived sense that pater comes to signify the male parent. -Ideas early attaching to the word, accordingly, are those of -power or authority and age. The senate, as this word indicates, -was originally made up of elderly men, senatores, maiores -natu.<a id="FNanchor_105" href="#Footnote_105" class="fnanchor">[105]</a> It would be natural to call them patres because of their -authority over the community or of their age. As a designation -of rank, pater, excepting in jest, is always plural—an -indication that the authority and dignity did not attach to the -individual noble but to the senators collectively; they were collectively -patres of the community, not individually patres of -children, clients or gentes.<a id="FNanchor_106" href="#Footnote_106" class="fnanchor">[106]</a> But when in time a limited number -of families monopolized the senate, the term could easily be -extended to the entire privileged circle, meaning those with -hereditary right to authority over the rest of the community.<a id="FNanchor_107" href="#Footnote_107" class="fnanchor">[107]</a> -Though in the sources the patres are generally senators the -word is sometimes synonymous with patricii.<a id="FNanchor_108" href="#Footnote_108" class="fnanchor">[108]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_20"></a>[20]</span></p> - -<p>Regarding patricius the Romans reasoned with somewhat -less care. They were right in deriving it from pater, but they -made it signify “descended from,” whereas in fact it means -“belonging to,”<a id="FNanchor_109" href="#Footnote_109" class="fnanchor">[109]</a> and designates accordingly the families of the -political patres. Probably it was formed after patres began to -be applied to the entire governing class—a development which -would tend to throw the latter word back to its earlier and -narrower sense.</p> - -<p>Had the investigation of these words on the part of the -ancients rested at this point, all would have been well; but an -unfortunate guess as to the derivation of patricii by some unknown -antiquarian has brought into the study of the social -ranks unutterable confusion lasting down to the present day. -This conjecture derives patricius from patrem ciere, making it -signify “one who can cite a father.” The attempted etymology, -clearly a failure, would perhaps have been harmless, had it not -connected itself with the ambiguous word ingenuus. Cincius<a id="FNanchor_110" href="#Footnote_110" class="fnanchor">[110]</a> -says, “Those used to be called patricians who are now called -ingenui.” Livy has the two ideas in mind when he represents -a plebeian orator as inquiring, “Have ye never heard it said -that those first created patricians were not beings sent down -from heaven, but such as could cite their fathers, that is, nothing -more than ingenui? I can now cite my father—a consul—and -my son will be able to cite a grandfather.”<a id="FNanchor_111" href="#Footnote_111" class="fnanchor">[111]</a> There should -be no doubt as to the meaning of these passages; the antiquarian -who conjectured that patricius was derived from patrem -ciere, and therefore defined patricii as those who could cite<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_21"></a>[21]</span> -their fathers, meant merely those who had distinguished fathers, -and hence were of respectable birth. Ordinarily in extant -Latin literature ingenui are simply the freeborn; and in making -Appius Claudius Crassus in 368 include in the term the -whole body of citizens Livy<a id="FNanchor_112" href="#Footnote_112" class="fnanchor">[112]</a> dates this meaning back to the -period before the Licinian-Sextian laws. Elsewhere are indications -that in early times ingenui connoted rather respectable -birth, and so applied especially to the patricians.<a id="FNanchor_113" href="#Footnote_113" class="fnanchor">[113]</a> The quotations -from Cincius and the attempted derivation of patricius -from patrem ciere, accordingly, are sufficiently explained without -resorting to the strange hypothesis, held by some, that -in primitive Rome the patricians were the only men of free -birth.</p> - -<p>In summarizing the ancient view as to the origin and nature -of the patriciate, it will be enough to say that the king chose -from the people men who were eminent for the experience of -age, for ability and reputation, to sit in his council, the senate; -the men so distinguished were called patres, whereas the adjective -patricius applied as well to their families—the patricii -being those who could cite illustrious fathers.<a id="FNanchor_114" href="#Footnote_114" class="fnanchor">[114]</a> From this point -of view the Roman nobility did not differ from that of most -other countries.</p> - -<p>The plebs,<a id="FNanchor_115" href="#Footnote_115" class="fnanchor">[115]</a> then, were the mass of common freemen, from -whom the nobility was differentiated in the way described above.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_22"></a>[22]</span> -From the ancient point of view they existed from the beginning, -prior even to the patriciate itself.</p> - -<p>It is equally true that in the opinion of the ancients the plebs -were prior to the clients. Cicero<a id="FNanchor_116" href="#Footnote_116" class="fnanchor">[116]</a> records that Romulus distributed -the plebs in clientage among the chief men; Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_117" href="#Footnote_117" class="fnanchor">[117]</a> -adds that he gave the plebeians liberty to choose their patrons -from among the patricians. Thus far their view is in complete -accord with modern sociology, which teaches that such class -distinctions first arise through the differentiation of freemen. -Although aware of the fact that clientage existed in other states -which were presumably older than Rome,<a id="FNanchor_118" href="#Footnote_118" class="fnanchor">[118]</a> her historians doubtless -felt that the institution could have been legalized in their -own country by recognition only on the part of the government. -They did not, however, work out a consistent theory of the -relation between this class and the plebeians. Certain passages<a id="FNanchor_119" href="#Footnote_119" class="fnanchor">[119]</a> -hint, though they do not expressly assert, that at one epoch -all the plebeians were in clientage, whereas in their accounts of -political struggles the ancient writers uniformly array clients -against plebeians almost from the beginning of the state.<a id="FNanchor_120" href="#Footnote_120" class="fnanchor">[120]</a> The -latter view is historically better founded.</p> - -<p>There must have been various origins of clientage, with corresponding -gradations of privilege. The libertini were citizens -with straitly limited rights; other clients, certainly the greater -part of the class, not only followed their patron to war<a id="FNanchor_121" href="#Footnote_121" class="fnanchor">[121]</a> and to -the forum,<a id="FNanchor_122" href="#Footnote_122" class="fnanchor">[122]</a> but also testified and brought accusations in the -courts<a id="FNanchor_123" href="#Footnote_123" class="fnanchor">[123]</a> and voted in the assemblies;<a id="FNanchor_124" href="#Footnote_124" class="fnanchor">[124]</a> and when the plebeians -gained the right to hold offices the clients were admitted along -with them to the same privilege.<a id="FNanchor_125" href="#Footnote_125" class="fnanchor">[125]</a> In his relation with the state,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_23"></a>[23]</span> -therefore, the ordinary client did not differ essentially from the -plebeian.</p> - -<p>From the preceding examination of the social ranks it at once -becomes evident that the ancients made the populus comprise -both patricians and plebeians; in further proof of their view -may be cited the following juristic definition: “Plebs differs -from populus in that by the word populus all the citizens are -meant, including even the patricians, whereas plebs signifies -the rest of the citizens, excepting the patricians.”<a id="FNanchor_126" href="#Footnote_126" class="fnanchor">[126]</a> Since the -sources generally consider the patricians the descendants of the -hundred original senators,<a id="FNanchor_127" href="#Footnote_127" class="fnanchor">[127]</a> they cannot help regarding the populus -as composed chiefly of plebeians. In common speech the -term, like our word people, often applies to the lower class as -distinguished from the higher, in which sense it is interchangeable -with plebs; often, too, it signifies the people in contrast -with the senate.<a id="FNanchor_128" href="#Footnote_128" class="fnanchor">[128]</a> It is clear, then, as Mommsen has pointed -out,<a id="FNanchor_129" href="#Footnote_129" class="fnanchor">[129]</a> that if populus signifies first the whole body of citizens and -secondly the commons as distinguished from the nobles, it could -not possibly have as a third equivalent the patricians as distinguished -from the plebeians. In certain formulae found in -addresses, wills, prayers, and oracles, populus is so joined with -plebs (populus plebesque or the like) as to suggest the possible<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_24"></a>[24]</span> -meaning patricians.<a id="FNanchor_130" href="#Footnote_130" class="fnanchor">[130]</a> The combination of the two words with -senatus,<a id="FNanchor_131" href="#Footnote_131" class="fnanchor">[131]</a> however, reveals at once the overlapping of the terms -so joined. In these passages reference is to the modes by -which an individual may approach the state; he may address -the consuls, praetors, or plebeian tribunes, and in the same way -the senate, populus, or plebs.<a id="FNanchor_132" href="#Footnote_132" class="fnanchor">[132]</a> Hence in these formulae, -merely representing groups of institutions through which the -state is accustomed to act, the word populus does not apply -solely to the patricians, and the same may be said of its use -in all other connections. We may conclude, therefore, that -the Latin language gives no hint of an exclusively patrician -populus.</p> - -<p>Regarding the populus as made up of patricians, plebeians, -and clients, our sources necessarily ascribe the same social composition -to its divisions, the three old tribes and the thirty -curiae.<a id="FNanchor_133" href="#Footnote_133" class="fnanchor">[133]</a> With perfect consistency they mention repeated enlargements -of the populus and of the tribes and curiae, through -the admission of masses of aliens, most of whom must have -remained plebeian. In fact the sources uniformly represent all -the kings as freely admitting conquered aliens without exception -to the citizenship and to the tribes and the curiae, even -compelling some forcibly to enter this condition.<a id="FNanchor_134" href="#Footnote_134" class="fnanchor">[134]</a></p> - -<p>Might the plebeians and clients belong in a restricted sense -to the populus and curiae, and yet remain so far inferior to the -patricians as to be excluded from the political meetings of the -curiae—the comitia curiata? There can be no uncertainty as -to the answer to this question, for the ancient writers agree that -the comitia curiata included plebeians and clients as well as<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_25"></a>[25]</span> -patricians.<a id="FNanchor_135" href="#Footnote_135" class="fnanchor">[135]</a> Not only did the lower classes attend this assembly, -but they also voted in it, and constituted the majority.<a id="FNanchor_136" href="#Footnote_136" class="fnanchor">[136]</a></p> - -<h4>II. <span class="smcap">The Conventional Modern View</span></h4> - -<p>The passages cited above suffice to prove that the ancient -writers thought of the populus, and consequently of the comitia -curiata, as composed from the earliest times of patricians, -clients, and plebeians. Another question, far more difficult, is -whether the ancients were right in their view.</p> - -<p>As none of the authorities on whom we directly depend for -our knowledge of Roman affairs lived earlier than the last century -of the republic, they could have had no first-hand acquaintance -with primitive Roman conditions, but must have drawn -their information concerning the remote past from earlier writers—the -annalists—now lost. Niebuhr, who in the opening -years of the last century introduced the modern method of -investigating Roman history, was convinced that writers of the -late republic and of the empire, lacking historical perspective -and interpreting their sources in the false light of existing or -recent conditions, came to wrong conclusions in regard to the -primitive Roman state. He believed he could point to instances -of such misunderstanding, and he thought it within the power of -a well-equipped modern historian to eliminate much of the error -so as to come near to the standpoint of the earlier and more -trustworthy annalists.<a id="FNanchor_137" href="#Footnote_137" class="fnanchor">[137]</a></p> - -<p>The position of Niebuhr has in the main proved untenable. -Notwithstanding all the source-sifting of modern times, pursued -most zealously by the Germans, we are obliged to admit -that it is rarely possible with any fair degree of certainty to -discover the view of an annalist on a given subject excepting in -the few cases in which the citation is by name. We must also<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_26"></a>[26]</span> -admit that though Cicero and the Augustan writers might misinterpret -Fabius Pictor in minor details, it is inconceivable that -they should fail to understand his presentation of so fundamental -a subject as the character of the original populus or the composition -of the earliest assembly. Present scholarship accordingly -insists that in such weighty matters there was no essential difference -of view between earlier and later writers.<a id="FNanchor_138" href="#Footnote_138" class="fnanchor">[138]</a></p> - -<p>These considerations have simplified but not solved the -problem. Scholars now agree that no contemporary account -of the regal period—ending 509 (?) <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>—ever existed; and -even if it be conceded that the earliest Roman annalist—Fabius -Pictor, born about 250 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>—had access to traditional or documentary<a id="FNanchor_139" href="#Footnote_139" class="fnanchor">[139]</a> -information reaching back to the close of that period, -no historian will admit such a possibility for the beginnings of -Rome. It follows then that for the origin and character of her -earliest institutions Cicero, Livy, and Dionysius, or their sources, -have relied wholly on inference from later conditions, in so far -as they have not resorted to outright invention. Though with -their abundant material they were in a far better position for -making such deductions than we are, they lacked the experience -and the acute critical method of the moderns.<a id="FNanchor_140" href="#Footnote_140" class="fnanchor">[140]</a> Of the -three writers above mentioned—our main sources for the subject -under discussion—Cicero was essentially an orator, Dionysius a -rhetorician, and Livy, though historian in name, was in spirit -rhetorical and dramatic rather than critical. Naturally therefore -they or their sources, who on the whole were equally uncritical, -made mistakes in the difficult work of drawing inferences -as to the history and institutions of the regal period. -Such is the view of historians today. It was formerly argued -that Dionysius, a rhetorician and a Greek, failed in spite of his -twenty-two years of preparation at Rome to understand the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_27"></a>[27]</span> -spirit and character of the Roman constitution and has therefore -been an especial fountain of error;<a id="FNanchor_141" href="#Footnote_141" class="fnanchor">[141]</a> but it is now clear -that though in his treatment of early Rome he shows far greater -amplitude than Livy and is for that reason proportionally more -liable to error in detail, he follows good Roman sources for -institutions, and is in this field, with the reservation here mentioned, -not essentially inferior to the extant native writers.<a id="FNanchor_142" href="#Footnote_142" class="fnanchor">[142]</a></p> - -<p>Considering the sources untrustworthy and following certain -clues which he believed they afforded to a right understanding -of the annalists, Niebuhr came to his theory as to the composition -of the primitive Roman state. Although he asserts that it -was made up of “patrons and clients,”<a id="FNanchor_143" href="#Footnote_143" class="fnanchor">[143]</a> he does not rest satisfied -with this view, but proceeds to trace clientage to the following -origins, as though in his opinion this institution did not -exist from the beginning: (1) some native Siculians perhaps, -who were conquered by Latin invaders; (2) strangers settling -on Roman territory and choosing a Roman as protector; -(3) inhabitants of communities which were obliged to take -refuge under Roman protection; (4) manumitted slaves.<a id="FNanchor_144" href="#Footnote_144" class="fnanchor">[144]</a> Logically -he goes back to a state made up exclusively of patricians.</p> - -<p>He sought evidence for this hypothesis in the scheme of -tribal organization of Rome. The primitive city was divided -into three tribes, thirty curiae and, as he believed, three hundred -gentes. As no one could be a citizen without membership -in a gens,<a id="FNanchor_145" href="#Footnote_145" class="fnanchor">[145]</a> and as the patricians alone were active members of -the gentes,<a id="FNanchor_146" href="#Footnote_146" class="fnanchor">[146]</a> it must follow that the patricians alone were citizens.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_28"></a>[28]</span> -It is doubtful whether he would have proposed this -hypothesis had it not been for the analogy of the Attic tribal -scheme. An imperfect quotation from the lost part of Aristotle’s -<i>Constitution of Athens</i><a id="FNanchor_147" href="#Footnote_147" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> seems to signify that the Athenian -state was once divided into four tribes (φυλαί), twelve phratries -and three hundred and sixty gentes (γένη). On this authority -Niebuhr supposes that the phratry was a group of gentes, and he -assumes further that both phratries and gentes were composed -exclusively of eupatrids.<a id="FNanchor_148" href="#Footnote_148" class="fnanchor">[148]</a> But the suppositions (1) that there -were three hundred and sixty gentes, (2) that the phratry was a -group of gentes, (3) that both phratries and gentes contained -only eupatrids are contradicted by well known facts. From the -earliest times the Greek tribes and phratries included commons -as well as nobles. This is true of the Homeric Greeks,<a id="FNanchor_149" href="#Footnote_149" class="fnanchor">[149]</a> and a -law of Draco<a id="FNanchor_150" href="#Footnote_150" class="fnanchor">[150]</a> proves that the early Attic phratry comprised -both nobles and commons. In historical times all citizens belonged -to the phratries; whereas but few were members of the -gentes.<a id="FNanchor_151" href="#Footnote_151" class="fnanchor">[151]</a> Most of the gentes were in fact composed of the old -landed nobility, though a few, like the Chalkidae and the -Eupyridae, were apparently industrial guilds, which had received -the privileges of the gentes. So far therefore from supporting -Niebuhr in his peculiar view of the Roman gentes and curiae, -the Attic analogy militates in every way against him. As his -assumption that the curia was a group of ten gentes has already -been disproved,<a id="FNanchor_152" href="#Footnote_152" class="fnanchor">[152]</a> it remains only to consider whether the gens -was an exclusively patrician institution. From the circumstance -that patricianism is not given as an element of Scaevola’s definition, -quoted by Cicero,<a id="FNanchor_153" href="#Footnote_153" class="fnanchor">[153]</a> we may at once conclude that in their<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_29"></a>[29]</span> -time plebeians, too, were gentiles. This conclusion is supported -by a variety of evidence.</p> - -<p>Several plebeian gentes are mentioned, including the Minucia -and the Octavia,<a id="FNanchor_154" href="#Footnote_154" class="fnanchor">[154]</a> the Lutatia,<a id="FNanchor_155" href="#Footnote_155" class="fnanchor">[155]</a> the Calpurnia,<a id="FNanchor_156" href="#Footnote_156" class="fnanchor">[156]</a> the Domitia,<a id="FNanchor_157" href="#Footnote_157" class="fnanchor">[157]</a> the -Fonteia,<a id="FNanchor_158" href="#Footnote_158" class="fnanchor">[158]</a> the Aurelia,<a id="FNanchor_159" href="#Footnote_159" class="fnanchor">[159]</a> and the Licinia.<a id="FNanchor_160" href="#Footnote_160" class="fnanchor">[160]</a> Some gentes comprised -both patrician and plebeian families, as the Cassia,<a id="FNanchor_161" href="#Footnote_161" class="fnanchor">[161]</a> the Claudia,<a id="FNanchor_162" href="#Footnote_162" class="fnanchor">[162]</a> -the Cornelia,<a id="FNanchor_163" href="#Footnote_163" class="fnanchor">[163]</a> the Manlia,<a id="FNanchor_164" href="#Footnote_164" class="fnanchor">[164]</a> the Papiria,<a id="FNanchor_165" href="#Footnote_165" class="fnanchor">[165]</a> the Publilia or Poplilia,<a id="FNanchor_166" href="#Footnote_166" class="fnanchor">[166]</a> -the Aebutia,<a id="FNanchor_167" href="#Footnote_167" class="fnanchor">[167]</a> and the Servilia.<a id="FNanchor_168" href="#Footnote_168" class="fnanchor">[168]</a> Not only do the sources refer -to several plebeian gentes by name, but they clearly imply in -other ways the existence of such associations. Livy<a id="FNanchor_169" href="#Footnote_169" class="fnanchor">[169]</a> expresses<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_30"></a>[30]</span> -the patrician sentiment that “it would seem an affront to the -gods for honors to be vulgarized and for the distinction between -gentes to be confused at auspicated comitia” (by the election of -plebeians to the consular tribunate). “The distinction between -gentes” can only mean the distinction between patrician and -plebeian gentes—an interpretation confirmed by a similar statement -of Cicero<a id="FNanchor_170" href="#Footnote_170" class="fnanchor">[170]</a> to Clodius, who had passed by arrogation from -a patrician to a plebeian gens: “You have disturbed the sacra -and contaminated the gentes, both the one you have deserted -and the one you have defiled” (by your admission into it). To -our other proofs we may add the consideration that the very -expression gentes patriciae<a id="FNanchor_171" href="#Footnote_171" class="fnanchor">[171]</a> implies the existence of plebeian -gentes. It is natural then that Varro<a id="FNanchor_172" href="#Footnote_172" class="fnanchor">[172]</a> should make gentilitas a -condition of men in general. In asserting that there were a -thousand gentile names the same authority<a id="FNanchor_173" href="#Footnote_173" class="fnanchor">[173]</a> must have included -those of plebeians, for scarcely a hundred belonging to patricians -could have been known to him. By no means the weakest argument -in favor of the view here presented is the fact that the laws -of the Twelve Tables concerning inheritance, tutelage,<a id="FNanchor_174" href="#Footnote_174" class="fnanchor">[174]</a> etc.—which -apply not to the patricians alone but to the whole citizen -body—assume that every citizen in full possession of his civil -rights belonged to a gens.</p> - -<p>A passage often interpreted against the existence of plebeian -gentes is Livy x. 8. 9: “Vos solos gentem habere.” In this -case a plebeian speaker says the patricians claim that they alone -have gens (not gentes). The context shows clearly, however, -that gens does not here denote an association but is used in the -sense of illustrious birth or pedigree,<a id="FNanchor_175" href="#Footnote_175" class="fnanchor">[175]</a> as is sometimes our word<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_31"></a>[31]</span> -family.<a id="FNanchor_176" href="#Footnote_176" class="fnanchor">[176]</a> Wherever a nobility exists it necessarily lays greater -stress on descent than do the people, and in all countries the -nobles are in a far better position to keep up family connections -than are the commons. Naturally therefore at Rome we hear -more of patrician than of plebeian gentes. But in view of all -the facts mentioned above there should be no doubt as to the -existence of the latter. The result of this discussion is that -neither in the composition of the gens nor in its position in the -community can support be found for Niebuhr’s assumption of a -patrician state.<a id="FNanchor_177" href="#Footnote_177" class="fnanchor">[177]</a></p> - -<p>Other evidence for his hypothesis Niebuhr thinks he finds in -a statement of Labeo,<a id="FNanchor_178" href="#Footnote_178" class="fnanchor">[178]</a> that the curiate assembly was convoked -by a lictor, the centuriate by a horn-blower; while Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_179" href="#Footnote_179" class="fnanchor">[179]</a> -says that the patricians were summoned by name through a -messenger, the people by the blowing of a horn. Thus Niebuhr -maintains that Labeo and Dionysius agree unequivocally in -designating the curiae as the assembly of the patricians. But -in fact these two sources refer to the customs of the historical -age, when the curiate assembly was ordinarily attended by only -three augurs and thirty lictors. Horn-blowing under these -circumstances would have been absurd. The summoning of -the patricians by their own name and that of their father, on -the other hand, proves them too few to compose a popular -assembly. These citations therefore are far from supporting -his hypothesis. His last and greatest proof is the identification -of the lex de imperio, passed by the curiae, with the patrum -auctoritas. If these are merely two terms for the same act, the -curiae must have been made up of patres. But by establishing -the fact that the patrum auctoritas belonged to the senate or -to its patrician members, Willems<a id="FNanchor_180" href="#Footnote_180" class="fnanchor">[180]</a> and Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_181" href="#Footnote_181" class="fnanchor">[181]</a> have -deprived Niebuhr’s hypothesis of its main prop.</p> - -<p>Niebuhr evidently believed that the curiae continued exclusively<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_32"></a>[32]</span> -patrician through the whole republican period.<a id="FNanchor_182" href="#Footnote_182" class="fnanchor">[182]</a> This -idea, however, must be dismissed for the following reasons: -(1) Our sources agree that in the early republic the plebeians -and clients continued to vote in the curiate assembly.<a id="FNanchor_183" href="#Footnote_183" class="fnanchor">[183]</a> -(2) The plebeians were in the curiae in 208 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, when the -first curio maximus was chosen from the plebs.<a id="FNanchor_184" href="#Footnote_184" class="fnanchor">[184]</a> (3) In the time -of Cicero thirty plebeian<a id="FNanchor_185" href="#Footnote_185" class="fnanchor">[185]</a> lictors represented the comitia curiata, -and gave the votes.<a id="FNanchor_186" href="#Footnote_186" class="fnanchor">[186]</a> (4) Arrogations by plebeians took -place in this assembly; in the well-known case of Clodius -it must be borne in mind that it was a plebeian who arrogated -him. (5) The extinction of the patriciate did not involve -the downfall of the comitia curiata.<a id="FNanchor_187" href="#Footnote_187" class="fnanchor">[187]</a> (6) The confirmation -by the curiae (lex de imperio) of elections in the centuriate -assembly was conceived as a second vote of the community.<a id="FNanchor_188" href="#Footnote_188" class="fnanchor">[188]</a> -(7) The resolutions of the comitia curiata are always thought -of as resolutions of the populus, which Latin literature nowhere -restricts to the patrician body. (8) In all ancient literature -there is nowhere the slightest hint of a change in the social -composition of the curiae or of the comitia curiata in the whole -course of their history. What the ancients believed to be true -of either institution at any particular period will hold therefore -for its entire history.<a id="FNanchor_189" href="#Footnote_189" class="fnanchor">[189]</a></p> - -<p>Of the arguments in favor of Niebuhr’s hypothesis either -added by Schwegler<a id="FNanchor_190" href="#Footnote_190" class="fnanchor">[190]</a> or brought by him into greater prominence, -one only demands attention. He reasons that if the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_33"></a>[33]</span> -plebs were in the curiate assembly, it would be impossible to -explain the political advance made by the institution of the -comitia centuriata; and the constitutional history of Rome -would be reduced to an insoluble riddle. Here we have to deal -with a subjective argument—the rejection of sources because -they do not agree with a preconceived theory. Arguments of -the kind, however, which may be easily invented for the support -or overthrow of every imaginable proposition, carry little -weight. Besides it is easy to show by analogies from the history -of other peoples that the presence of the commons in the -primitive assembly does not make the constitutional history of -Rome a real enigma. In the primitive German assembly, for -instance, were included all the warriors; and yet in the more -developed German states were monarchies and aristocracies -which gave the people little or no voice in the management of -public affairs.<a id="FNanchor_191" href="#Footnote_191" class="fnanchor">[191]</a> The Homeric Greek assembly included all freemen, -who, however, had little to do with the government in -that period, and still less under the aristocracy which followed.<a id="FNanchor_192" href="#Footnote_192" class="fnanchor">[192]</a> -In like manner, although the plebeians attended the comitia -curiata and had a majority of votes in this assembly, they could -not thereby control the government, for they absolutely lacked -initiative.<a id="FNanchor_193" href="#Footnote_193" class="fnanchor">[193]</a> The comitia centuriata, a timocratic institution, -elevated the rich and degraded the poor. Here as elsewhere -the poor lost by the substitution of aristocracy for kingship; -but a real constitutional advance was made in the gradations of -privilege, which were based on wealth and which reached like a -ladder from the humblest member of the proletarian century to -the patrician knight in the sex suffragia.<a id="FNanchor_194" href="#Footnote_194" class="fnanchor">[194]</a> These gradations -prepared the way for an ultimate equalization of rights. We -conclude, then, that the presence of the commons in the primitive -assembly is perfectly compatible with a rational view of constitutional -development.</p> - -<p>With Schwegler, who grants however reluctantly that the -commons were received into the curiae before 208,<a id="FNanchor_195" href="#Footnote_195" class="fnanchor">[195]</a> the -theory enters upon its present phase; for the great majority -of writers since his time have accepted his view, yet with -varying opinions as to the date of the change. Mommsen,<a id="FNanchor_196" href="#Footnote_196" class="fnanchor">[196]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_34"></a>[34]</span> -who more than any one else has made it clear that, so far -back as our sources reach, the populus comprised both patricians -and commons, nevertheless assumes that the latter were -originally outside the populus but were admitted no later than -the beginning of the republic.<a id="FNanchor_197" href="#Footnote_197" class="fnanchor">[197]</a> In his reconstruction of the primitive -state he supposes that the citizens were all patres, in so far -as they, and they alone, could be fathers; or adjectively patricii, -in so far as they, and they alone, had fathers.<a id="FNanchor_198" href="#Footnote_198" class="fnanchor">[198]</a> Added to -the citizens and their slaves was a class of persons termed clients, -half way between freedom and slavery—a class made up -from various origins but chiefly by the conquest of neighbors.<a id="FNanchor_199" href="#Footnote_199" class="fnanchor">[199]</a> -These clients belonged, as dependents of the gentes, to the -curiae, but had no vote in the assembly.<a id="FNanchor_200" href="#Footnote_200" class="fnanchor">[200]</a> Later the plebs were -formed from the clients as the bond which united the latter with -their patrons relaxed.<a id="FNanchor_201" href="#Footnote_201" class="fnanchor">[201]</a> The plebs, who were free citizens of -inferior rank, came into being at the moment when the patricio-plebeian -comitia centuriata acquired the right to express the -will of the community.<a id="FNanchor_202" href="#Footnote_202" class="fnanchor">[202]</a></p> - -<p>Although Mommsen knows well the weakness of the evidence -offered by earlier writers, he adopts the hypothesis of an original -patrician state, without attempting a systematic defence. -Here and there in his works, however, he mentions some fact or -condition which he would like to have considered proof. The -following are the chief passages of this kind:</p> - -<p>(1) The lack of right to the auspicia<a id="FNanchor_203" href="#Footnote_203" class="fnanchor">[203]</a> and to the imperium<a id="FNanchor_204" href="#Footnote_204" class="fnanchor">[204]</a> -on the part of the plebeians proves that the patriciate was the -original citizenship.</p> - -<p>But we could as reasonably say, with reference to the auspices, -that the two Attic gentes which furnished the sacred exegetes -contained the only Athenian citizens.<a id="FNanchor_205" href="#Footnote_205" class="fnanchor">[205]</a> The auspicia, as Soltau<a id="FNanchor_206" href="#Footnote_206" class="fnanchor">[206]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_35"></a>[35]</span> -has noticed, belonged to the ius honorum, as did also the imperium; -hence they were both privileges of the nobility. In -brief Mommsen’s reasoning would make a governing nobility -everywhere impossible.</p> - -<p>(2) The cavalry were patrician; therefore the infantry must -have been.<a id="FNanchor_207" href="#Footnote_207" class="fnanchor">[207]</a></p> - -<p>With the same kind of reasoning we could conclude that because -in the Homeric age of Greece chariots were used in war -by nobles only, the infantry must also have been exclusively -noble; whereas we know that the rank and file were common -men.<a id="FNanchor_208" href="#Footnote_208" class="fnanchor">[208]</a> That the Roman army before Servius was similarly composed -is supported not only by this and many other analogies, -but also by the unanimous testimony of the sources. As in -other primitive states the warriors belonged to the assembly -and were the citizens.</p> - -<p>(3) Of the sixteen local tribes named after gentes it can be -proved that ten have the names of patrician gentes, and not one -name is known to be plebeian. This is evident proof that from -the beginning the patriciate was not nobility but citizenship.<a id="FNanchor_209" href="#Footnote_209" class="fnanchor">[209]</a></p> - -<p>His premises prove no more than that at the time when these -tribes were instituted the patricians were influential enough to -give their names to ten, probably to all sixteen. In all the -three cases mentioned, Mommsen reasons that because the patricians -alone enjoyed the honors, privileges, and influence usually -considered appropriate to a nobility, they must therefore -have constituted not the nobility simply but the whole citizen -body.</p> - -<p>(4) He identifies patres with gentiles and assumes that the -primitive state was an aggregate of gentes, thus making the -patres the only members of the state.<a id="FNanchor_210" href="#Footnote_210" class="fnanchor">[210]</a></p> - -<p>These are not proofs but unsupported assumptions. The only -connection of patres with gentes given in Latin literature is in -the well-known phrases patres maiorum and minorum gentium; -and Cicero<a id="FNanchor_211" href="#Footnote_211" class="fnanchor">[211]</a> makes it clear that these patres were senators.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_36"></a>[36]</span> -The phrase means senators from, or belonging to, the greater -or lesser gentes. Furthermore it has been proved (1) that the -patricians were not the only gentiles,<a id="FNanchor_212" href="#Footnote_212" class="fnanchor">[212]</a> (2) that the curia, and -hence the state, was not an aggregation of gentes.<a id="FNanchor_213" href="#Footnote_213" class="fnanchor">[213]</a></p> - -<p>(5) We are informed, says Mommsen, (a) that the body of -full Roman citizens consisted originally of a hundred families, -whose fathers, the patres, regarded more or less concretely as -the ancestors of the individual gentes, composed the senate, and -together with them their descendants, the patricians, made up -the citizen body; or expressed in other words (b) patrician -originally meant just what was afterward included under the -term ingenuus.<a id="FNanchor_214" href="#Footnote_214" class="fnanchor">[214]</a></p> - -<p>For (a) Mommsen cites those passages by which it has been -shown<a id="FNanchor_215" href="#Footnote_215" class="fnanchor">[215]</a> that the Romans looked upon the original hundred -senators as the fathers neither of the “citizen body” nor of the -“full citizens,” but of the nobility. His statement of the case -is directly contradicted by the authorities he quotes. As regards -(b) it has been sufficiently proved<a id="FNanchor_216" href="#Footnote_216" class="fnanchor">[216]</a> that ingenuus when -made equivalent to patricius most naturally signifies not “of -free birth,” but “of respectable, noble birth.”</p> - -<p>Most scholars have wisely avoided bringing the myth of the -asylum<a id="FNanchor_217" href="#Footnote_217" class="fnanchor">[217]</a> into the argument. Pellegrino,<a id="FNanchor_218" href="#Footnote_218" class="fnanchor">[218]</a> however, identifies the -refugees at that place with the entire plebeian body. As the -asylum was not an Italian but a Greek institution,<a id="FNanchor_219" href="#Footnote_219" class="fnanchor">[219]</a> the story -connected with it is doubtless a myth. It seems to have been -invented by the Greeks of southern Italy, most probably in the -fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> At that time they began to view with alarm -the southward advance of the Romans, and to disparage them -accordingly by falsifications representing their origin as obscure -and disreputable.<a id="FNanchor_220" href="#Footnote_220" class="fnanchor">[220]</a> Similar calumnies against other peoples were<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_37"></a>[37]</span> -concocted by their Greek enemies.<a id="FNanchor_221" href="#Footnote_221" class="fnanchor">[221]</a> Notwithstanding the fact -that the story had not even a kernel of historical truth the -Romans accepted it with more or less modification<a id="FNanchor_222" href="#Footnote_222" class="fnanchor">[222]</a> and used it -to some extent for partisan objects.<a id="FNanchor_223" href="#Footnote_223" class="fnanchor">[223]</a> They could not oppose the -plebs to patricians as foreigners to natives, however, for (1) they -supposed that plebeians as well as patricians participated in -the original settlement of Rome, (2) they derived patrician as -well as plebeian families from foreign sources.<a id="FNanchor_224" href="#Footnote_224" class="fnanchor">[224]</a> We are warranted -in concluding that in adopting the Greek myth of the -asylum they looked upon it as a cause of increase in the plebeian -population without finding in it the origin of the plebeian class.</p> - -<p>To the theory of an exclusively patrician populus the following -objections may be summarily urged: (1) It is opposed by -the unanimous testimony of the ancient authorities. (2) It -rests upon a wrong explanation of the words patres, patricii, as -designations of the nobles. (3) It is further propped up by -reasons so feeble as to testify at once to its weakness, the more -substantial basis having been overthrown partly by Mommsen -himself. (4) The number of patricians is too small for the -theory.<a id="FNanchor_225" href="#Footnote_225" class="fnanchor">[225]</a> (5) It ignores the meaning of the word plebs, which -evidently signifies “the masses,” in contrast with the few nobles, -and hence could not apply to a class gradually formed by the -liberation of clients, or by the admission of foreigners. No -one who holds the theory has attempted to show what these -liberated clients were called when they were but few compared -with the patricians—before they became “the multitude.” -(6) It is contradicted by everything we know of Rome’s attitude<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_38"></a>[38]</span> -towards aliens. So far back as our knowledge reaches, she was -extremely liberal in bestowing the citizenship, even forcing it -upon some communities. Only when she acquired the rule -over a considerable part of Italy did she begin to show illiberality -in this respect. Down to 353 the citizenship thus freely -extended included the right to vote.<a id="FNanchor_226" href="#Footnote_226" class="fnanchor">[226]</a> (7) It assumes the existence -of a community politically far advanced yet showing no -inequalities of rank among the freemen—a condition outside -the range of human experience. It aims to explain the origin -of the social classes on purely Roman ground, ignoring the fact -that distinctions of rank are far older than the city, and exist, at -least in germ, in the most primitive communities of which we -have knowledge.<a id="FNanchor_227" href="#Footnote_227" class="fnanchor">[227]</a></p> - -<h4>III. <i>The Comparative-Sociological View</i></h4> - -<p>As social classes belong to all society,<a id="FNanchor_228" href="#Footnote_228" class="fnanchor">[228]</a> they cannot be explained -by the peculiar conditions of any one community. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_39"></a>[39]</span> -only scientific approach to this subject is through comparative -study; the inferences of the ancient historians relative to -primitive Rome are not to be displaced by purely subjective -theories, but are to be tested by comparison with conditions in -other communities of equal or less cultural advancement.</p> - -<p>Distinctions of rank depend ultimately upon physical, mental, -and moral inequalities,<a id="FNanchor_229" href="#Footnote_229" class="fnanchor">[229]</a> which differentiate the population of a -community into leaders and followers.<a id="FNanchor_230" href="#Footnote_230" class="fnanchor">[230]</a> The exhibition of -physical strength and skill on the part of young men and of -knowledge and wisdom on the part of the elders are often “the -foundation of leadership and of that useful subordination in -mutual aid which depends on voluntary deference.”<a id="FNanchor_231" href="#Footnote_231" class="fnanchor">[231]</a> In an -age in which men were largely under the control of religion the -possession of an oracle or skill in divination or prophecy might -contribute as much to the elevation of an individual above -his fellows.<a id="FNanchor_232" href="#Footnote_232" class="fnanchor">[232]</a> Leadership, once obtained, could display and -strengthen itself in various ways. In primitive society the -strong, brave, intelligent man was especially qualified to take -command in war. Success brought the chief not only renown -but a large share of the booty and in later time acquired land. -The same result might be obtained by other means than by -war;<a id="FNanchor_233" href="#Footnote_233" class="fnanchor">[233]</a> but in any case wealth and influence inherited through<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_40"></a>[40]</span> -several generations made nobility.<a id="FNanchor_234" href="#Footnote_234" class="fnanchor">[234]</a> Primarily grounded on -ability, wealth, and renown, this preëminence was often heightened -by a claim to divine lineage or other close connection with -the gods.<a id="FNanchor_235" href="#Footnote_235" class="fnanchor">[235]</a></p> - -<p>There was evidently a stage of development—before the -association of the nobles into a class—in which chieftains alone -held preëminence. This condition is common in primitive society, -as among the American Indians.<a id="FNanchor_236" href="#Footnote_236" class="fnanchor">[236]</a> Also among the Germans, -who had advanced somewhat beyond this stage, each chief -or lord appears to have been noble “less with reference to -other noblemen than with reference to the other free tribesmen -comprised in the same group with himself.”<a id="FNanchor_237" href="#Footnote_237" class="fnanchor">[237]</a> From Brehon -law we infer that the Irish lords were individually heads of -their several groups of kinsmen or of vassals;<a id="FNanchor_238" href="#Footnote_238" class="fnanchor">[238]</a> and in Wales -the nobles were a hierarchy of chieftains.<a id="FNanchor_239" href="#Footnote_239" class="fnanchor">[239]</a> As soon as leadership -became hereditary there arose noble families, in which the -younger members were often sub-chieftains;<a id="FNanchor_240" href="#Footnote_240" class="fnanchor">[240]</a> and finally -through intermarriage among these families, as well as through -the discovery of common interests, the nobles associated themselves -into a class.</p> - -<p>Among the ancient Germans,<a id="FNanchor_241" href="#Footnote_241" class="fnanchor">[241]</a> the Greeks of the Homeric<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_41"></a>[41]</span> -age,<a id="FNanchor_242" href="#Footnote_242" class="fnanchor">[242]</a> and in some early Italian states<a id="FNanchor_243" href="#Footnote_243" class="fnanchor">[243]</a> certain families had become -noble, and others were on the way to nobility. For -ancient Ireland the entire process can be followed. A common -freeman enters the service of some chief, from whom he receives -permission to use large portions of the tribe land.<a id="FNanchor_244" href="#Footnote_244" class="fnanchor">[244]</a> By pasturing -cattle, he grows wealthy, becomes a bo-aire (cow-nobleman) and -secures a band of dependents. Supported by these followers, -he preys upon his neighbors and, if successful, becomes in time -a powerful noble.<a id="FNanchor_245" href="#Footnote_245" class="fnanchor">[245]</a> After “a certain number of generations” -he can no longer be distinguished from the blooded nobility.<a id="FNanchor_246" href="#Footnote_246" class="fnanchor">[246]</a> -Here is an instance of a common freeman’s becoming noble -through service to a chief. In like manner among the Saxons -who had conquered England the ceorl who “thrived so that he -had fully five hides of land,” or the merchant who had “fared -twice over the wide sea by his own means,” became a thane; -“and if the thane thrived, so that he became an eorl, then was -he henceforth worthy of eorl-right.”<a id="FNanchor_247" href="#Footnote_247" class="fnanchor">[247]</a> “The thanes were the -immediate companions of the king—his comitatus—and from -their first appearance in English history they took rank above -the earlier nobility of Saxon eorls, who were descended from -ancient tribal chiefs. Thus the thanes as a nobility of newly -rich corresponded to the cow-noblemen of an earlier time.”<a id="FNanchor_248" href="#Footnote_248" class="fnanchor">[248]</a> In -the way just described many rose from the lower ranks to -nobility. In fact, eminent authorities assert that the inferior<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_42"></a>[42]</span> -nobles, especially of the middle age, were more often of servile -than of free origin, as the common freemen were inclined to -think it degrading to be seen among the comites of a chief.<a id="FNanchor_249" href="#Footnote_249" class="fnanchor">[249]</a></p> - -<p>It has now been sufficiently established that even in the tribal -condition people were differentiated into social ranks. We have -traced the beginning of nobility to leadership and have found, -in both ancient and mediaeval society, new noble families forming -by the side of the old. Social distinctions were well developed -long before the founding of cities. When a community, -whether a tribe or a city, is far enough advanced to begin the -conquest of neighbors, “it has already differentiated into royal, -noble, free, and servile families.”<a id="FNanchor_250" href="#Footnote_250" class="fnanchor">[250]</a> This was true of Sparta. -In her “the conquerors nevertheless, notwithstanding great differences -among themselves, remain sharply separated in social -function from the conquered.... The conquerors became a -religious, military, and political class, and the conquered an industrial -class.”<a id="FNanchor_251" href="#Footnote_251" class="fnanchor">[251]</a> Even in the case of Sparta, however, which is -perhaps our best example of the exclusiveness of a ruling city, -there is evidence of mingling between the conquering Spartans -and the conquered Laconians before the former became exclusive.<a id="FNanchor_252" href="#Footnote_252" class="fnanchor">[252]</a> -In like manner there was much mixing of the invading -“Aryans” with the natives of India—the more intelligent of -the natives rising to the higher classes and the less gifted of -the invaders sinking to the lower—before the crystallization -of the castes.<a id="FNanchor_253" href="#Footnote_253" class="fnanchor">[253]</a> We find the same mingling of conquerors and -conquered in varying degrees in ancient Ireland,<a id="FNanchor_254" href="#Footnote_254" class="fnanchor">[254]</a> in England -under the Normans,<a id="FNanchor_255" href="#Footnote_255" class="fnanchor">[255]</a> and throughout the Roman empire in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_43"></a>[43]</span> -period of Germanic settlements.<a id="FNanchor_256" href="#Footnote_256" class="fnanchor">[256]</a> It becomes doubtful, therefore, -whether a nobility was ever formed purely by the superposition -of one community upon another. The effect of conquest -was rather to accentuate existing class distinctions, and by a -partial substitution of strangers in place of native nobles to stir -up antagonism between the classes. Even where the differences -between the social ranks seem to be racial, it would be hazardous -to resort to the race theory in explanation; for such a condition -could be produced in the course of generations by -different modes of life, education, nurture, and marriage regulations -of the nobles and commons respectively.<a id="FNanchor_257" href="#Footnote_257" class="fnanchor">[257]</a></p> - -<p>The study pursued thus far will enable us to understand how -there came to be social classes at Rome before the beginning of -conquest. But for a long time after the Romans began to annex -territory we may seek in vain for a distinction between conquerors -and conquered, like that which we find in Laconia. We are -forbidden to identify the plebs with the conquered and the patricians -with the conquerors by many considerations mentioned -above—for instance, by tradition,<a id="FNanchor_258" href="#Footnote_258" class="fnanchor">[258]</a> by the derivation of several -patrician gentes from various foreign states,<a id="FNanchor_259" href="#Footnote_259" class="fnanchor">[259]</a> by the fewness of -the patricians,<a id="FNanchor_260" href="#Footnote_260" class="fnanchor">[260]</a> and by the fact that the latter show no differentiations -of rank, such as we find among the conquering Spartans; -they were not a folk but a nobility pure and simple. We are -to regard Rome’s early annexations of territory and of populations -not as subjugations, but as incorporations on terms of -equality. The people incorporated were of the same great -folk, the Latins, or of a closely related folk, the Sabines. -Accordingly they were not reduced to subjection, but were<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_44"></a>[44]</span> -admitted to citizenship, to the tribes and the curiae, and their -nobles were granted the patriciate.<a id="FNanchor_261" href="#Footnote_261" class="fnanchor">[261]</a> Only communities of alien -speech, like the Etruscan, or distant Italian communities like -the Campanian, were ordinarily given the inferior civitas sine -suffragio; and this restricted citizenship does not appear in -history before the middle of the fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span></p> - -<p>The analogies offered in this chapter, by proving that the -conditions they illustrate are possible for early Rome, tend to -confirm the authority of the sources. By similar comparative -study it would be practicable to illustrate in detail and to corroborate -the statements of ancient writers as to the organization of -the plebs, as well as of the patricians, in tribes and curiae, the -participation of the clients and plebeians in war and politics, and -the deterioration of the free commons through the strengthening -of the nobility—all of which are rejected by eminent modern -historians, who merely imagine them incompatible with primitive -conditions or with a rational theory of constitutional development. -The inquiry has been pursued far enough, however, to indicate -that from a comparative-sociological point of view the conception<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_45"></a>[45]</span> -of early Rome handed down to us by the ancients is sound and -consistent, and that the method of subjective reconstruction of -history introduced by Niebuhr and still extensively employed by -scholars is unscientific.</p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>I. <span class="smcap">Roman Society</span>: Niebuhr, B. G., <i>Römische Geschichte</i>, i. 321 ff.; -English, 158 ff.; Schwegler, A., <i>Römische Geschichte</i>, I. bk. xiv; Wigger, -J., <i>Verteidigung der nieburschen Ansicht über den Ursprung der röm. -Plebs</i>; Peter, C., <i>Geschichte Roms</i>, i. 31-3; <i>Verfassungsgeschichte der röm. -Republik</i>; <i>Studien zur röm. Geschichte mit besonderer Beziehung auf Th. -Mommsen</i>; Ihne, W., <i>History of Rome</i>, i. 109 ff.; <i>Early Rome</i>, ch. ix; <i>Asylum -of Romulus</i>, in <i>Classical Museum</i>, iii (1846). 190-3; <i>Forschungen auf -dem Gebiete der röm. Verfassungsgeschichte</i> (also translated into English by -Heywood); Lange, L., <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 414 ff., and see indices s. Patres, Plebs, -etc.; Mommsen, Th., <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. 1. chs. v, vi; <i>Röm. Forschungen</i>, -i. 131-284; <i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, iii. 127 ff., and see indices s. Patres, Plebs, etc.; -<i>Abriss d. röm. Staatsrechts</i>, 3 ff.; Herzog, E., <i>Geschichte und System der -röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, i. 32 ff.; Meyer, E., <i>Geschichte des Altertums</i>, ii. 515-7, -521 f.; v. 141-3; <i>Plebs</i>, in <i>Handiwörterb. d. Staatswiss.</i> vi. 98-106; Niese, B., -<i>Grundriss der röm. Geschichte</i>, 36 f.; Ampère, J. J., <i>Histoire Romaine à Rome</i>, -i. 440 ff.; ii. 15 ff.; Zöller, M., <i>Latium und Rom</i>, 163; Ridgeway, W., <i>Early -Age of Greece</i>, i. 254 ff.; Oberziner, G., <i>Origine della plebe Romana</i>; Conway, -R. S., <i>I due strati di populazione Indo-Europea del Lazio e dell’Italia antica</i>, -in <i>Rivista di storia antica</i>, vii (1903). 422-4; Hüllmann, K. D., <i>Ursprünge -der röm. Verfassung durch Vergleichungen erläutert</i>; Mispoulet, J. B., <i>Institutions -politiques des Romains</i>, i. 14 ff.; Greenidge, A. H. J., <i>Roman Public -Life</i>, 4 ff.; Abbott, F. F., <i>Roman Political Institutions</i>, 6 ff.; Naudet, M., <i>De -la noblesse et des récompenses d’honneur chez les Romains</i>; Hoffmann, <i>Patricische -und plebeiische Curien</i>; Pelham, H., <i>Roman Curiae</i>, in (English) -<i>Journal of Philology</i>, ix (1880). 266-79; Soltau, W., <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> -58 ff., 625 ff.; Bernhöft, F., <i>Staat und Recht der röm. Königsz.</i> 145 f.; Genz, -H., <i>Das patricische Rom</i>; Clason, D. O., <i>Kritische Erörterungen über den röm. -Staat</i>; Fustel de Coulanges, <i>Ancient City</i>, bk. iv; Pellegrino, D., <i>Andeutungen -über den ursprünglichen Religionsunterschied der röm. Patricier und Plebeier</i>; -Hennebert, A., <i>Histoire de la lutte entre les patriciens et les plébeiens à Rome</i>; -Bloch, L., <i>Die ständischen und sozialen Kämpfe in der röm. Republik</i>; -Wallinder, <i>De statu plebeiorum romanorum ante primam in montem sacrum -secessionem quaestiones</i>; Neumann, K. J., <i>Grundherrschaft der röm. Republik, -Bauernbefreiung und Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung</i>; Holzapfel, -L., <i>Die drei ältesten römischen Tribus</i>, in <i>Beiträge zur alten Geschichte</i>, -i (1902). 228-55; Heydenreich, E., <i>Livius und die röm. Plebs</i>, in <i>Samml. -gemeinverständlicher wissenschaftlicher Vorträge</i>, xvii (1882). 581-628; -Christensen, H., <i>Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung der Patres</i>, in <i>Hermes</i>, ix -(1875). 196-216; Staaf, E., <i>De origine gentium patriciarum commentatio -academica</i>; Terpstra, D., <i>Quaestiones literariae de populo</i>, etc., ch. i; Köhm, -J., <i>Altlateinische Forschungen</i>, ch. i; Bröcker, L. O., <i>Untersuchungen über die<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_46"></a>[46]</span> -Glaubwürdigkeit der altröm. Verfassungsgeschichte</i>, 3 ff.; Botsford, G. W., -<i>Social Composition of the Primitive Roman Populus</i>, in <i>Political Science -Quarterly</i>, xxi (1906). 498-526 (the present chapter is in the main a reproduction -of this article); <i>Some Problems connected with the Roman Gens</i>, ibid, -xxii (1907). 663-92.</p> - -<p>II. <span class="smcap">Comparative View</span>: Achelis, Th., <i>Moderne Völkerkunde, deren Entwickelung -und Aufgaben</i>, (Stuttgart, 1896) 406 ff.; Ammon, O., <i>Die Gesellschaftsordnung -und ihre natürlichen Grundlagen</i>, (Jena, 1895) Teil i; D’Arbois -de Jubainville, <i>La civilisation des Celtes et celle de l’épopée Homerique</i>, (Paris, -1899) ch. ii; Arnd, K., <i>Die materiellen Grundlagen und sittlichen Forderungen -der europäischen Kultur</i>, (Stuttgart, 1835) 444 f.; Barth, P., <i>Die Philosophie -der Geschichte als Sociologie</i>, i. (Leipzig, 1897) 382; Bastion, A., <i>Der -Mensch in der Geschichte</i>, iii. (Leipzig, 1860) 323-38; <i>Allerlei aus Volks- und -Menschenkunde</i>, ii. (Berlin, 1888) 138-54; <i>Rechtsverhältnisse bei verschiedenen -Völkern der Erde</i>, (Berlin, 1872) 8 ff.; Bluntschli, J. K., <i>Theory -of the State</i>, (2d ed. from the 6th German: Oxford 1892) bk. II. chs. vi-xiii; -Bordeau, L., <i>Le problème de la vie: Essai de sociologie générale</i>, (Paris, 1901) -95; Brunner, H., <i>Grundzüge der deutschen Rechtsgeschichte</i>, i (Leipzig, -1901); Bücher, C., <i>Industrial Evolution</i>, ch. ix; Buchholz, E., <i>Homerische -Realien</i>, II. bk. i (Leipzig, 1881); Caspari, O., <i>Die Urgeschichte der Menschheit</i>, -I. bk. ii. ch. 3 (Leipzig, 1877); Cherbuliez, A. E., <i>Simples notions de -l’ordre social à l’usage de tout le monde</i>, (Paris, 1881) ch. vi; Combes de Lestrade, -<i>Éléments de sociologie</i>, (Paris, 1896) bk. vi; Cooley, C. H., <i>Human -Nature and the Social Order</i>, (New York, 1902) ch. ix (analysis of leadership); -Craig, J., <i>Elements of Political Science</i>, i. (Edinburgh, 1814) 183-95; -Duchesne, L., <i>La conception du droit et les idées nouvelles</i>, (Paris, 1902) 36; -Demolins, E., <i>Comment la route crée le type social</i>, i (Paris); Farrand, L. F., -<i>Basis of American History</i>, (New York, 1904) see index s. Social organization; -Featherman, A., <i>Social History of the Races of Mankind</i>, ii. (London, 1888) -see indices s. Classes; <i>Thoughts and Reflections on Modern Society</i>, (London, -1894) 291-6; Frazer, J. G., <i>Lectures on the Early History of the Kingship</i> -(New York, 1905); Freeman, E. A., <i>History of the Norman Conquest of -England</i>, iv (New York, 1873); Frohschammer, J., <i>Ueber die Organisation -und Cultur der Menschlichen Gesellschaft</i>, (Munich, 1885) 84 f.; Funck-Brentano, -Th., <i>Civilisation et ses lois, morale sociale</i>, (Paris, 1876) chs. -v-viii; Fustel de Coulanges, <i>Ancient City</i>, bk. iv; <i>De l’inégalité du wergeld -dans les lois Franques</i>, in <i>Revue historique</i>, ii. (1876) 460-89; Giddings, -F. H., <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, (New York, 1896) bk. III. chs. iii, iv; Ginnell, -L., <i>Brehon Laws, a Legal Handbook</i>, (London, 1894) chs. iv, v; Grave, -J., <i>L’individu et la société</i>, (3d ed. Paris, 1897) ch. ii; Gumplowicz, L., <i>Rassenkampf</i> -(Innsbruck, 1883); Harris, G., <i>Civilization considered as a Science</i>, -(new ed. New York, 1873) ch. vii; Hellwald, Fr. von, <i>Culturgeschichte in -ihrer natürlichen Entwickelung bis zur Gegenwart</i>, 2 vols. (Augsburg, 1876); -Hirt, H., <i>Indogermanen</i>, 2 vols. (1905, 1907); Hittell, J. S., <i>History of the -Mental Growth of Mankind in Ancient Times</i>, (New York, 1893) i. 228 f.; -ii. 37, 72; Hodgkin, <i>Italy and her Invaders</i>, (2d ed. Oxford, 1892, 1896) ii,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_47"></a>[47]</span> -iii; Jenks, E., <i>History of Politics</i> (London, 1900); Kaufmann, G., <i>Die Germanen -der Urzeit</i> (Leipzig, 1880); Krauss, F. S., <i>Sitte und Brauch der Südslaven</i> -(Vienna, 1885); Lepelletier de la Sarthe, <i>Du système social, ses applications -pratiques à l’individu, à la famille, à la société</i>, (Paris, 1855) i. 329 ff.; -Letourneau, Ch., <i>Sociology based on Ethnography</i>, (new ed. London, 1893) -chs. vi-viii; Maine, H. S., <i>Lectures on the Early History of Institutions</i>, -(London, 1875) ch. v; Mismer, Ch., <i>Principes sociologiques</i>, (2d ed. Paris, -1898) 63 ff.; Müller-Deecke, <i>Die Etrusker</i>, 2. vols. (Stuttgart, 1877); Rhys, -J. and Brynmor-Jones, <i>The Welsh People</i> (New York, 1900); Ridgeway, W., -<i>Early Age of Greece</i>, i (Cambridge, 1901); Ross, E. A., <i>Social Control</i> -(New York, 1901); Rossbach, J. J., <i>Geschichte der Gesellschaft</i>, 3 vols. -(1868); Schrader, O., <i>Reallexikon der indogermanischen Altertumskunde</i>, -(Strassburg, 1901) 802-19; Schröder, R., <i>Lehrbuch der deutschen Rechtsgeschichte</i> -(4th ed. Leipzig, 1902); Schurtz, H., <i>Urgeschichte der Kultur</i>, (Leipzig, -1900) ch. ii; Seebohm, F., <i>Tribal System in Wales</i> (New York, 1895); -<i>Tribal Custom in Anglo-Saxon Law</i> (New York, 1902); Seeck, O., <i>Geschichte -des Untergangs der antiken Welt</i>, I. (2d ed. Berlin, 1897) bk. II. chs. -i, iv; Seymour, <i>Life in the Homeric Age</i>, (New York, 1907) 106 f; Skeat -and Blagden, <i>Pagan Races of the Malay Peninsula</i>, i (New York, 1906) 494-520; -Spencer, H., <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, II. (New York, 1883) chs. iv-viii; -Tarde, G., <i>Laws of Imitation</i>, trans. from the French, (New York, 1903) -233 ff.; Traill, H. D., <i>Social England</i>, i (New York, 1901); Tribhovandas, -<i>Hindu Castes</i>, in <i>Journal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay</i>, v (1899-1901). -74-91; Vinogradoff, P., <i>Growth of the Manor</i> (New York, 1905); -Waitz, Th., <i>Anthropologie der Naturvölker</i>, ii. (Leipzig, 1860) 126-67; iii. -(1862) 119-28; v. (1870) 112 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_48"></a>[48]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_III">CHAPTER III<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE THIRTY-FIVE TRIBES</span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>That among the Romans the conception of property first -attached to movable objects is attested by the words “pecunia” -and “mancipatio.”<a id="FNanchor_262" href="#Footnote_262" class="fnanchor">[262]</a> There was probably a period during which -the citizens cultivated the lots of arable land assigned them by -the state without regarding these holdings as property either -public or private. In view of the well-established fact that the -gens was a relatively late institution, we should for this remote -period exclude the idea of gentile tenure.<a id="FNanchor_263" href="#Footnote_263" class="fnanchor">[263]</a> The land was distributed -among the families according to tribes and curiae; and -when the idea of ownership extended to the soil, it took the -form of family ownership of the ager privatus and state ownership -of the public domain.<a id="FNanchor_264" href="#Footnote_264" class="fnanchor">[264]</a></p> - -<p>The condition of tenure anterior to the conception of property -in land left little trace of itself in the language and institutions -and absolutely none in tradition. The sources declare that family<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_49"></a>[49]</span> -ownership existed in Rome from her foundation as well as in her -earliest colonies—a view confirmed by the comparative study -of language.<a id="FNanchor_265" href="#Footnote_265" class="fnanchor">[265]</a> Each family, they assume, held two iugera—the -heredium<a id="FNanchor_266" href="#Footnote_266" class="fnanchor">[266]</a>—or we may more correctly say, at least two iugera.<a id="FNanchor_267" href="#Footnote_267" class="fnanchor">[267]</a> -This small lot has generally been explained<a id="FNanchor_268" href="#Footnote_268" class="fnanchor">[268]</a> as the private -landed property of the individual, in contrast with the public -land and with the common land of the gens, and thus it is taken -as evidence of a condition prior to the extension of private -ownership to the arable fields. Should we grant this to be the -true explanation, we might still assume that public and gentile -tenure had developed into private ownership of arable land -long before Servius, or that Servius himself converted the fields -into private holdings. For the second alternative we could find -apparent support in the sources, which have much to say of the -distribution of land among the citizens by Servius.<a id="FNanchor_269" href="#Footnote_269" class="fnanchor">[269]</a> For the -continued absence of private ownership after the Servian reforms -not even the shadow of an authority can be found.</p> - -<p>But the explanation of heredium given above is by no means -necessary; in fact the sources regard it not as the only private -land, but rather as the smallest share allotted to any citizen, the -rich and noble possessing more.<a id="FNanchor_270" href="#Footnote_270" class="fnanchor">[270]</a> While accordingly the wealthy -man owned many iugera, the poor man, limited to his heredium, -was obliged to earn part of his living by labor as a tenant or as -a wage-earner in the field of his rich neighbor;<a id="FNanchor_271" href="#Footnote_271" class="fnanchor">[271]</a> and in the early -colonies the bina iugera were granted on the same aristocratic -principle. If this is the true explanation of heredium, the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_50"></a>[50]</span> -strongest argument in support of the theory of public ownership -at Rome in the late regal period is taken away; we must either -abandon the theory or relegate it to a time far anterior to the -Servian reforms. Mommsen’s assumption<a id="FNanchor_272" href="#Footnote_272" class="fnanchor">[272]</a> that the sixteen oldest -rural tribes were instituted some time after the city tribes by -the division of gentile lands is untenable on other grounds. The -gens which gave its name to the tribe could not have owned all -the land in the tribe; for in that case all but the sixteen gentes -would have been landless. Again, assuming, as he does, that -all the land belonged to the gentes, which he supposes to have -been exclusively patrician, we should be forced to conclude that -the division left the plebeians landless. And further, if we bear -in mind that the gens developed from the family, we must also -believe that the undivided gentile land was once a family estate, -which according to Roman usage had to be registered in some -tribe, even if the land of the gens was not so registered. -Mommsen’s theory proves therefore not only to be unsupported -by the sources but actually unthinkable. In conclusion we may -safely say that though some land remained public, and though -the gens after it had come into existence owned some common -land, individual, or at most family,<a id="FNanchor_273" href="#Footnote_273" class="fnanchor">[273]</a> ownership was in full force -in the earliest times of which we have knowledge.</p> - -<p>The clearest and most detailed account of the origin of the -Servian tribes is given by Dionysius iv. 14. 1 f.: “When Tullius -had surrounded the seven hills with one wall, he divided the -city into four parts, and giving to the parts the names of the -hills—to one Palatina, to another Suburana, to the third -Collina, and to the fourth Esquilina—he made the city to consist -of four tribes, whereas up to that time it had comprised but -three.... And he ordained that the men who lived in each -of the four parts should not change their abode or give in their -census elsewhere. The enlistment of soldiers also and the collection -of taxes, which they were to pay individually to the -treasury for military and other purposes, were distributed no -longer among the three gentile tribes but among the four local -tribes instituted by him.... [15. 1:] And the whole country<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_51"></a>[51]</span> -he divided, as Fabius says,<a id="FNanchor_274" href="#Footnote_274" class="fnanchor">[274]</a> into twenty-six parts, also called -tribes, adding to them the four city tribes; but Venonius is -authority for thirty-one rural tribes, which with those of the -city would complete the thirty-five of our own time. Cato, -however, who is more trustworthy than either of these two, -says that all the tribes in the time of Tullius amounted to thirty, -though he does not separate the number of parts” (into urban -and rural).</p> - -<p>A great variety of opinion has arisen regarding the original -number of the Servian tribes. Niebuhr<a id="FNanchor_275" href="#Footnote_275" class="fnanchor">[275]</a> believed that Servius -created in all thirty, afterward reduced by unfortunate war with -the Etruscans to twenty. This view found supporters but was -refuted by Huschke.<a id="FNanchor_276" href="#Footnote_276" class="fnanchor">[276]</a> Those who rejected it generally agreed -that Servius divided the city into four tribes and the country -into districts, regiones, pagi.<a id="FNanchor_277" href="#Footnote_277" class="fnanchor">[277]</a> Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_278" href="#Footnote_278" class="fnanchor">[278]</a> gave a new phase to -the theory of the subject by assuming that the four so-called -city tribes, which all the sources agree in ascribing to Servius,<a id="FNanchor_279" href="#Footnote_279" class="fnanchor">[279]</a> -included the country as well as the city. According to this -hypothesis Alba<a id="FNanchor_280" href="#Footnote_280" class="fnanchor">[280]</a> and Ostia,<a id="FNanchor_281" href="#Footnote_281" class="fnanchor">[281]</a> for instance, belonged to the -Palatine tribe. His opinion has found wide acceptance.<a id="FNanchor_282" href="#Footnote_282" class="fnanchor">[282]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_52"></a>[52]</span> -Afterward changing his mind, he asserted that the four urban -tribes were confined within the pomerium—a view which now -seems to be established beyond doubt.<a id="FNanchor_283" href="#Footnote_283" class="fnanchor">[283]</a> With this final position -of Mommsen the creation of theories as to the number and -limitations of the Servian tribes has not been exhausted; for -against the view that Servius instituted only the four urban -tribes may be placed that of Pais,<a id="FNanchor_284" href="#Footnote_284" class="fnanchor">[284]</a> who assigns their origin to -the censors of the year 304. The theory of Pais implies that -the sixteen rural tribes which bore gentile names were far older -than the four urban tribes.</p> - -<p>Light will be thrown on this obscure subject by an inquiry -into the relation of the sources to one another. It seems -certain that Fabius derived his information concerning the tribes -and the entire centuriate organization from the “discriptio centuriarum”—a -document in the censors’ office. Though ascribed -to Servius Tullius as author,<a id="FNanchor_285" href="#Footnote_285" class="fnanchor">[285]</a> it set forth the centuriate -system as it existed in reality before the reform—that is in -the time of the first war with Carthage.<a id="FNanchor_286" href="#Footnote_286" class="fnanchor">[286]</a> It was this late -form of the centuriate organization which Fabius had in mind. -He must have been prevented, however, from ascribing to -Servius the institution of all the thirty-three tribes then existing, -by the recollection that two tribes were added as recently -as 299 from territory too far from Rome to have formed a part -of her domain under Servius; and perhaps the curiate organization -led him to favor the number thirty. He made Servius the -author of thirty tribes, accordingly, in spite of the fact that this -number was not reached till 318. His error is not more absurd<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_53"></a>[53]</span> -than the ascription to Servius of the whole centuriate organization -as it stood at the opening of the First Punic War, or -the assumption that in the first Servian census were enrolled -eighty thousand men fit for military service.<a id="FNanchor_287" href="#Footnote_287" class="fnanchor">[287]</a> Cato, who also -states the original number as thirty, without separating them -into rural and urban,<a id="FNanchor_288" href="#Footnote_288" class="fnanchor">[288]</a> may have been influenced by Fabius, -though it is likely that he drew from the same source. Vennonius -in making Servius the author of all thirty-five tribes but -slightly exceeds the absurdity of earlier writers.<a id="FNanchor_289" href="#Footnote_289" class="fnanchor">[289]</a> Evidently -Fabius and Cato were the sources for all future annalists. -While depending on them, Varro seems to have noticed the -error of ascribing twenty-six rural tribes to Servius, as there -were but seventeen of this class before 387. To avoid the difficulty -and at the same time to retain the Fabian number, he -supposed that the country districts of Servius were not yet -tribes but the regiones from which the tribes were afterward -formed<a id="FNanchor_290" href="#Footnote_290" class="fnanchor">[290]</a>—a superficial explanation in the true Varronian style.<a id="FNanchor_291" href="#Footnote_291" class="fnanchor">[291]</a> -Following Varro, however, later authorities generally speak of -the four urban tribes of Servius without mentioning those of -the country.<a id="FNanchor_292" href="#Footnote_292" class="fnanchor">[292]</a> So Dionysius, after referring to the four city -tribes, proceeds to describe their character and functions, as -though these were all the tribes then existing.<a id="FNanchor_293" href="#Footnote_293" class="fnanchor">[293]</a> Thus far he -depends upon Varro. Fortunately, however, he gained from -Fabius the information that there were also twenty-six rural -tribes, his description of which<a id="FNanchor_294" href="#Footnote_294" class="fnanchor">[294]</a> is slightly troubled by the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_54"></a>[54]</span> -Varronian notion that these country districts were not so much -tribes as regiones, πάγοι, but which served all the purposes of -tribes including the taking of the census.<a id="FNanchor_295" href="#Footnote_295" class="fnanchor">[295]</a></p> - -<p>The various contradictory statements of the ancients regarding -the original number of Servian tribes can now be appreciated -at their respective values. In the course of the discussion it -has become evident, too, that Fabius and Cato, the sources of -later annalists, had no tenable ground for their assumption of -thirty original tribes. Had they examined the records, perhaps -the succeeding parts of their own chronicles, they would have -found that before 387 there could have been only twenty-one -tribes in all.<a id="FNanchor_296" href="#Footnote_296" class="fnanchor">[296]</a> A less certain indication of the admission of one -or possibly two tribes still earlier in the republic may have -existed;<a id="FNanchor_297" href="#Footnote_297" class="fnanchor">[297]</a> but here we reach the extreme limit of their knowledge. -Any investigation of the number in the regal period, -whether by the ancients or by the moderns, must rest not upon -contemporary records but upon inference pure and simple. We -may inquire, accordingly, whether the view of Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_298" href="#Footnote_298" class="fnanchor">[298]</a> and -Meyer<a id="FNanchor_299" href="#Footnote_299" class="fnanchor">[299]</a> that the four city tribes were created first and existed -for a time before the institution of the rural tribes, having no -trustworthy foundation in the sources, can be deduced from our -knowledge of the general conditions of the time. We must by -all means avoid the supposition of Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_300" href="#Footnote_300" class="fnanchor">[300]</a> that in the time -of Servius there was no private property in land outside of the -city.<a id="FNanchor_301" href="#Footnote_301" class="fnanchor">[301]</a> If then we bear in mind two points which Mommsen has -himself established, (1) that the local tribe was an aggregate of -private estates,<a id="FNanchor_302" href="#Footnote_302" class="fnanchor">[302]</a> (2) that the four urban tribes of Servius were -limited to the city,<a id="FNanchor_303" href="#Footnote_303" class="fnanchor">[303]</a> we must conclude that in the time of Servius -the country estates were registered in rural tribes—in other<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_55"></a>[55]</span> -words that Servius instituted rural as well as urban tribes.<a id="FNanchor_304" href="#Footnote_304" class="fnanchor">[304]</a> -The view of Meyer that all the citizens lived in the city and -the dependents in the country<a id="FNanchor_305" href="#Footnote_305" class="fnanchor">[305]</a>—which would afford a ground -for assuming the urban tribes to have been earlier than the -rural—has no basis either in institutions or in tradition. If -originally the country was all-important,<a id="FNanchor_306" href="#Footnote_306" class="fnanchor">[306]</a> and if at the dawn -of history we find the country and city politically equal, as is -actually the case, we have no motive for the insertion of an -intermediate stage in which the city was all-important. There -was indeed a tendency toward the concentration of political -power within the city, but it did not advance beyond the equalization -of city and country.<a id="FNanchor_307" href="#Footnote_307" class="fnanchor">[307]</a> To maintain Meyer’s view we -should be obliged to complicate the early history of Rome with -two revolutions—one by which the city gained supremacy over -the country, and the other in which the supremacy was lost. -It is mainly to defend the early history of the comitia, and of -the constitution in general, against this complication that the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_56"></a>[56]</span> -present discussion of the early land tenure and of the origin -of the Servian tribes is offered.</p> - -<p>The original number of tribes, as has been stated, is unknown. -It was increased by the acquisition of territory. Possibly -the annalists found an obscure trace of the admission of -the sixteenth rural tribe—the Claudia—in 504. To that year -Livy assigns the coming of Attius Clausus with his host of -clients, who were formed into the Claudian tribe.<a id="FNanchor_308" href="#Footnote_308" class="fnanchor">[308]</a> Wissowa<a id="FNanchor_309" href="#Footnote_309" class="fnanchor">[309]</a> -suggests that the immigration of the Claudian gens, the date of -which did not appear in the original tradition,<a id="FNanchor_310" href="#Footnote_310" class="fnanchor">[310]</a> was arbitrarily -assigned to the year in which was recorded the admission of the -tribe. This conjecture is supported by the situation of the -Claudia, which would place it among the latest of the twenty.</p> - -<p>With more confidence we may assign the admission of the -seventeenth rural tribe—the twenty-first in the entire list—to -495.<a id="FNanchor_311" href="#Footnote_311" class="fnanchor">[311]</a> It must have been the Clustumina.<a id="FNanchor_312" href="#Footnote_312" class="fnanchor">[312]</a> We are certain that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_57"></a>[57]</span> -there were only twenty-one till 387, when four new tribes were -formed, bringing the number up to twenty-five.<a id="FNanchor_313" href="#Footnote_313" class="fnanchor">[313]</a> The twenty-sixth -and twenty-seventh were admitted in 358,<a id="FNanchor_314" href="#Footnote_314" class="fnanchor">[314]</a> the twenty-eighth -and twenty-ninth in 332,<a id="FNanchor_315" href="#Footnote_315" class="fnanchor">[315]</a> the thirtieth and thirty-first in -318,<a id="FNanchor_316" href="#Footnote_316" class="fnanchor">[316]</a> the thirty-second and thirty-third in 300<a id="FNanchor_317" href="#Footnote_317" class="fnanchor">[317]</a>, the thirty-fourth -and thirty-fifth in 241.<a id="FNanchor_318" href="#Footnote_318" class="fnanchor">[318]</a> To the year 90 that number is -known to have remained unchanged, and the evidence of a -temporary increase during the Social War is obscure. On this -point Appian<a id="FNanchor_319" href="#Footnote_319" class="fnanchor">[319]</a> states that “the Romans did not enroll the -newly admitted citizens in the existing thirty-five tribes for fear -that, being more numerous, they might outvote the old citizens -in the comitia; but by dividing them into ten parts (?) they -made new tribes, in which the new citizens voted last.” This -view of an increase in number is confirmed by a statement of -Sisenna<a id="FNanchor_320" href="#Footnote_320" class="fnanchor">[320]</a> as to the creation of two new tribes at about that -time. Velleius<a id="FNanchor_321" href="#Footnote_321" class="fnanchor">[321]</a> however informs us that the new citizens were -enrolled in eight tribes. In the object of the arrangement he -agrees with Appian. Next he mentions the promise of Cinna -to enroll the Italians in all the tribes. From the connection we -should naturally infer that in the opinion of Velleius the new -citizens were enrolled before Cinna in eight old tribes; and yet -it is difficult to understand how the assembly could be persuaded -to visit any group of rural tribes with this disgrace and political -disability.<a id="FNanchor_322" href="#Footnote_322" class="fnanchor">[322]</a> As the authority of Sisenna, if not that of Appian, -compels us to accept the fact of new tribes, it is better to interpret<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_58"></a>[58]</span> -Velleius in that light.<a id="FNanchor_323" href="#Footnote_323" class="fnanchor">[323]</a> We may suppose then that the -eight tribes which he mentions were provided for by the Julian -law of 90; and we must accept the statement of Sisenna that -in 89 the Calpurnian law “ex senati consulto” created two -other new tribes, in which were to be enrolled the citizens -admitted under this law. Thus we could account for the ten (?) -new tribes mentioned by Appian. As regards the Lucanians -and the Samnites, who held out obstinately against Rome, the -same historian<a id="FNanchor_324" href="#Footnote_324" class="fnanchor">[324]</a> states that they were respectively enrolled in -tribes, as in the former instances. He does not inform us, -however, that for this purpose other new tribes were instituted. -At all events there seems to be no essential disagreement -among our sources; and we have no reasonable ground for -doubting an increase, though we may remain uncertain as to the -number added.<a id="FNanchor_325" href="#Footnote_325" class="fnanchor">[325]</a></p> - -<p>The arrangement was only temporary. In 88 Sulpicius, -tribune of the plebs, carried a law containing a provision for -the distribution of the new citizens and the libertini among all -the thirty-five tribes.<a id="FNanchor_326" href="#Footnote_326" class="fnanchor">[326]</a> His plebiscite was annulled by the senate -on the ground that it had been passed by violence;<a id="FNanchor_327" href="#Footnote_327" class="fnanchor">[327]</a> but the -provisions contained in it were afterward legalized by a senatus -consultum, and it was finally carried into effect by Cinna -as consul in 84.<a id="FNanchor_328" href="#Footnote_328" class="fnanchor">[328]</a> This settlement of the question was approved -by Sulla<a id="FNanchor_329" href="#Footnote_329" class="fnanchor">[329]</a> for all the Italians excepting the Marsians -and the Paelignians, who were enrolled in one tribe—the -Sergia.<a id="FNanchor_330" href="#Footnote_330" class="fnanchor">[330]</a></p> - -<p>The nature of the tribes may be inferred from their object. -The intention of the organizer was to introduce the Greek -military system, comprising heavy and light infantry, in which -the kind of service to be performed depended upon financial<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_59"></a>[59]</span> -ability to provide equipments.<a id="FNanchor_331" href="#Footnote_331" class="fnanchor">[331]</a> Seeing that a classification of -citizens with respect to property was necessary for this purpose, -Servius instituted the tribes as a basis for the census. That -they contained the ager privatus only is indicated by the exclusion -from them of the Capitoline and Aventine hills.<a id="FNanchor_332" href="#Footnote_332" class="fnanchor">[332]</a> Their -local character is established by the concurrent testimony of -ancient writers.<a id="FNanchor_333" href="#Footnote_333" class="fnanchor">[333]</a> Yet even in the beginning they could but -roughly be described as districts, for they excluded all public -land and all waters and waste places claimed neither by individuals -nor by the government. They retained the approximate -character of districts so long only as the territory of annexed -communities continued to be formed into new tribes. The process -came to an end in 241; and it was as early at least as this -date that the Roman colonies, not originally in the tribes, were -incorporated in them.<a id="FNanchor_334" href="#Footnote_334" class="fnanchor">[334]</a> Thereafter the annexation of new territory -tended more and more to render the tribes geographically indeterminate.<a id="FNanchor_335" href="#Footnote_335" class="fnanchor">[335]</a> -The process was far advanced by the admission -(90-84) of the Latins and Italians with their lands to the existing -tribes,<a id="FNanchor_336" href="#Footnote_336" class="fnanchor">[336]</a> which were further enlarged in the imperial period -by the incorporation of provincial communities.<a id="FNanchor_337" href="#Footnote_337" class="fnanchor">[337]</a> As consisting -of lands, though no longer necessarily adjacent, they were still -considered local.<a id="FNanchor_338" href="#Footnote_338" class="fnanchor">[338]</a></p> - -<p>The tribe was also a group of persons; in fact the word -applies far more frequently to persons than to territory.<a id="FNanchor_339" href="#Footnote_339" class="fnanchor">[339]</a> During<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_60"></a>[60]</span> -the early republic a considerable degree of harmony was maintained -between the two aspects of the institution (1) possibly -by a restriction on the transfer of residence,<a id="FNanchor_340" href="#Footnote_340" class="fnanchor">[340]</a> (2) by the change -in membership from tribe to tribe, through the censors, on the -basis of a transfer of domicile, (3) by the assignment of new -citizens to the tribe in or near which they had their homes, -(4) by the creation of new tribes for new citizens who did not -live in or near the existing tribes. This harmony experienced -its first serious disturbance through the enrolment of the landless, -irrespective of domicile, in the urban tribes in 304,<a id="FNanchor_341" href="#Footnote_341" class="fnanchor">[341]</a> but -continued to such a degree that a hundred years later the -rural voters generally still resided in their own tribes.<a id="FNanchor_342" href="#Footnote_342" class="fnanchor">[342]</a> In -the last century of the republic the personal tribe, emancipated -from the local, depended solely on inheritance and the -will of the censors.<a id="FNanchor_343" href="#Footnote_343" class="fnanchor">[343]</a></p> - -<p>The original composition of the personal tribe is determined -by its purely military object. It comprised accordingly those -only who were liable to service in war. From the early Roman -point of view those citizens were qualified who found their -livelihood in agriculture.<a id="FNanchor_344" href="#Footnote_344" class="fnanchor">[344]</a> Not all landowners were enrolled in -the tribes; for Latin residents,<a id="FNanchor_345" href="#Footnote_345" class="fnanchor">[345]</a> freedmen,<a id="FNanchor_346" href="#Footnote_346" class="fnanchor">[346]</a> widows and orphans,<a id="FNanchor_347" href="#Footnote_347" class="fnanchor">[347]</a> -all of whom might possess land, lacked membership. -Those proprietors, too, were excluded whom the censors assigned -to the aerarii as a punishment. Tribesmen were all<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_61"></a>[61]</span> -the other landowners—adsidui<a id="FNanchor_348" href="#Footnote_348" class="fnanchor">[348]</a> et locupletes<a id="FNanchor_349" href="#Footnote_349" class="fnanchor">[349]</a>—together with -the male descendants of military age under their potestas.<a id="FNanchor_350" href="#Footnote_350" class="fnanchor">[350]</a></p> - -<p>Another object of the tribes, referred to Servius by our -sources, was the collection of taxes.<a id="FNanchor_351" href="#Footnote_351" class="fnanchor">[351]</a> We know that they -afterward served this purpose; and the ancient writers, who -could have had no direct knowledge of the intentions of Servius -but who assigned to him without hesitation all the later -developments of his organization, were in this case especially -misled by their false derivation of tributum from tribus or <i>vice -versa</i>.<a id="FNanchor_352" href="#Footnote_352" class="fnanchor">[352]</a> A brief study of the facts in the case will prove their -inference to be wrong. The most obvious consideration is that -had Servius intended the tribes for the levy of taxes as well as -for military purposes, he would have included all who were subject -to taxation as well as all who were liable to service in the -army, whereas in fact he admitted those only who were to -serve. It is to be noted that primitive Rome imposed no regular -direct taxes on the citizens in general. Every man equipped -himself for war even after the introduction of the phalanx;<a id="FNanchor_353" href="#Footnote_353" class="fnanchor">[353]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_62"></a>[62]</span> -doubtless at first the knights provided their own horses;<a id="FNanchor_354" href="#Footnote_354" class="fnanchor">[354]</a> and -in short campaigns the soldiers carried their provisions from -their own farms.<a id="FNanchor_355" href="#Footnote_355" class="fnanchor">[355]</a> Fortifications and public buildings were -erected by forced task-work. The king supported himself -partly by gifts from his subjects and partly from the public -property, including land.<a id="FNanchor_356" href="#Footnote_356" class="fnanchor">[356]</a> Other early sources of revenue were -tolls levied for the use of harbors, boundaries, temples, bridges, -roads, sewers, and salt works.<a id="FNanchor_357" href="#Footnote_357" class="fnanchor">[357]</a> In time the idea arose, too, that -the person who did not perform military service should help -with his property in the defence of the country. The estates -of widows and orphans were accordingly taxed to support the -horses of the knights.<a id="FNanchor_358" href="#Footnote_358" class="fnanchor">[358]</a> Those men, also, who were exempt -from service because they possessed no land<a id="FNanchor_359" href="#Footnote_359" class="fnanchor">[359]</a> and yet had other -property were required to pay on it a regular tax. From -this connection with the public treasury (aerarium) they were -termed aerarii. This class comprised shopkeepers and merchants. -Sometimes the censors assigned to it as a punishment -men who owned land. The fact that such persons were -at the same time removed from their tribes is sufficient proof -that the aerarii were originally outside these associations.<a id="FNanchor_360" href="#Footnote_360" class="fnanchor">[360]</a> -The cives sine suffragio, or Caerites, after this class had come -into existence in 353, were like the aerarii in (1) that they did -not belong to the tribes, (2) that they paid a regular tax, (3) that -men were placed on their list as a punishment. They may -accordingly be regarded as a special class of aerarii, enrolled as<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_63"></a>[63]</span> -they were in a distinct list.<a id="FNanchor_361" href="#Footnote_361" class="fnanchor">[361]</a> Whereas the cives sine suffragio -either wholly lacked the franchise, as the phrase implies, or at -most had but the right of the Latins,<a id="FNanchor_362" href="#Footnote_362" class="fnanchor">[362]</a> the other aerarii must -have voted in the proletarian century.<a id="FNanchor_363" href="#Footnote_363" class="fnanchor">[363]</a></p> - -<p>The ordinary taxes sufficed for the usual light expenses; but -in case of especial need an extraordinary tax was imposed upon -the citizens. It was called tributum from tribuere, “to apportion,” -because it was distributed among the citizens in proportion -to their ratable property.<a id="FNanchor_364" href="#Footnote_364" class="fnanchor">[364]</a> We hear of such a tax levied for -ransoming the city from the Gauls<a id="FNanchor_365" href="#Footnote_365" class="fnanchor">[365]</a> and another for the building -of a wall;<a id="FNanchor_366" href="#Footnote_366" class="fnanchor">[366]</a> but the most common use was for the payment of -soldiers, hence the tributum was thought of primarily as a war -tax.<a id="FNanchor_367" href="#Footnote_367" class="fnanchor">[367]</a> For this reason tributum came to be correlative with stipendium.<a id="FNanchor_368" href="#Footnote_368" class="fnanchor">[368]</a> -It was not often imposed before the introduction of -pay in 406.<a id="FNanchor_369" href="#Footnote_369" class="fnanchor">[369]</a> Even then it was not levied every year; it was -sometimes refunded when the condition of the treasury permitted; -and it fell into disuse after 167.<a id="FNanchor_370" href="#Footnote_370" class="fnanchor">[370]</a> As it was imposed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_64"></a>[64]</span> -on those only who were liable to military duty,<a id="FNanchor_371" href="#Footnote_371" class="fnanchor">[371]</a> the tribe lists -were followed in its collection, and in this sense we may say -that it was collected tributim.<a id="FNanchor_372" href="#Footnote_372" class="fnanchor">[372]</a> The work was done by state -functionaries, as the tribe, so far as we know, had neither fiscal -officers<a id="FNanchor_373" href="#Footnote_373" class="fnanchor">[373]</a> nor a treasury; and possessing no property, it could -not be held financially responsible.</p> - -<p>An epoch in the history of the tribes was made in 312 by -Appius Claudius Caecus the censor, who enrolled the landless -citizens, proletarians as well as aerarii, in the existing thirty-three -tribes without discrimination.<a id="FNanchor_374" href="#Footnote_374" class="fnanchor">[374]</a> Cives sine suffragio were -alone excepted.<a id="FNanchor_375" href="#Footnote_375" class="fnanchor">[375]</a> By giving the landless the upper hand in the -assemblies this measure roused the animosity of the proprietors, -and thus endangered the peace of the state. In order to soothe -the excited feelings of the better class, Q. Fabius Rullianus, -censor in 304, supported by his colleague Decius, removed the -landless from the rural tribes; but not to deprive them wholly -of tribal privileges, he registered them in the four urban tribes. -Hence his measure is spoken of as a compromise. Thereafter -the landholding and hence more respectable citizens were -preferably enrolled in the rural tribes,<a id="FNanchor_376" href="#Footnote_376" class="fnanchor">[376]</a> whereas the landless -were confined to those of the city.<a id="FNanchor_377" href="#Footnote_377" class="fnanchor">[377]</a> It was a permanent gain -that henceforth tribal membership was a test of perfect citizenship. -The censors still had the power to transfer a man from -one tribe to another, for instance, from a rural to an urban -tribe; but they could not exclude him wholly from the tribes,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_65"></a>[65]</span> -for that would be tantamount to depriving him of the citizenship.<a id="FNanchor_378" href="#Footnote_378" class="fnanchor">[378]</a> -There were still aerarii; individuals and sometimes large -groups of citizens were still assigned as a punishment to this -class, which, however, was henceforth included in the tribes of -the city.<a id="FNanchor_379" href="#Footnote_379" class="fnanchor">[379]</a> Although the ordinary urban tribesmen were usually -exempt from military duty, the aerarii were required to serve, at -times under especially hard conditions,<a id="FNanchor_380" href="#Footnote_380" class="fnanchor">[380]</a> and were not disqualified -for office.<a id="FNanchor_381" href="#Footnote_381" class="fnanchor">[381]</a> In registering them in the tribes Claudius made -them, like the landowners, liable to military service and to the -tributum according to their means. To effect this object he -necessarily assessed their personal property on a money valuation; -and in order to treat all tribesmen alike, he must have -changed the terms of valuation of the landholders’ estates from -iugera to money.<a id="FNanchor_382" href="#Footnote_382" class="fnanchor">[382]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Niebuhr, B. G., <i>Römische Geschichte</i>, i. 422-50, Eng. 200-12; Schwegler, -<i>Römische Geschichte</i>, I. bk. xvii; Huschke, Ph. E., <i>Verfassung des Königs -Servius Tullius</i>, ch. iii; Ihne, W., <i>History of Rome</i>, i. 62, 114; Nissen, H., -<i>Templum</i>, 144 ff.; <i>Italische Landeskunde</i>, ii. 503 f.; Beloch, J., <i>Italischer -Bund unter Roms Hegemonie</i>, ch. ii; Soltau, W., <i>Altröm. Volksversammlungen</i>, -375-548; Meyer, E., <i>Ursprung des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der -vier Tribus</i>, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxx (1895). 1-24; controverted by Sp. Vassis, in -<i>Athena</i>, ix (1897). 470-2; Neumann, K. J., <i>Grundherrschaft der röm. Republik</i>; -Siebert, W., <i>Ueber Appius Claudius Caecus</i>; Mommsen, Th., <i>History -of Rome</i>, bk. I. ch. vi; <i>Röm. Tribus</i>; <i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, iii. 161-98; -<i>Abriss des röm. Staatsrechts</i>, 28-36; Marquardt, J., <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> ii. -149-80; Willems, P., <i>Droit public Romain</i>, 40 ff., 98 ff.; Mispoulet, J. B., -<i>Institutions politiques des Romains</i>, i. 37-42; <i>Études d’institutions Romaines</i>, -3-48; Lange, L., <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, i. 501-22, and see index s. Tribus; -Madvig, J. N., <i>Verfassung und Verwaltung des röm. Staates</i>, i. 100-8; -Herzog, E., <i>Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, i. 39, 101 ff., -1016-31; Grotefend, C. L., <i>Imperium romanum tributim descriptum</i>; -Kubitschek, J. W., <i>De romanorum tribuum origine ac propogatione</i>; -<i>Imperium romanum tributim discriptum</i>; Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. -674-6: Aerarius (Kubitschek); 682-4: Aes equestre (idem); 780-93: -Ager (idem); iii. 1281-3: Caere (Hülsen); 2650 f.: Claudia (Wissowa); -iv. 117 f.: Clustumina (Kubitschek); Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 125: -Aes equestre and hordearium (Humbert).</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_66"></a>[66]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_IV">CHAPTER IV<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE CENTURIES AND THE CLASSES</span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>The ancient authorities represent Servius Tullius as the -founder of an organization at once military and political—on -the one hand the army composed of classes and centuries, -and on the other the comitia centuriata. According to Livy<a id="FNanchor_383" href="#Footnote_383" class="fnanchor">[383]</a>—</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“From those whose rating was 100,000 asses or more he made 80 centuries, -40 of seniors and 40 of juniors, and termed them all the <i>first</i> class. The -seniors were to be ready for guarding the city and the juniors were to serve in -the field. The arms required of them were a helmet, round shield, greaves, and -cuirass,—all bronze,—for the protection of the body. Their offensive weapons -were a spear and a sword. To this class were added two centuries of sappers -who were to serve without arms. Their duty was to convey the engines of -war. The <i>second</i> class was made up of those whose rating was between -75,000 and 100,000 asses, 20 centuries of seniors and juniors together. They -were equipped with an oblong shield (scutum) instead of a round one, and -they lacked the cuirass, but in all other respects their arms were the same. -The minimal rating of the <i>third</i> class was 50,000 asses, and the number of centuries -was the same with the same distinction of age, and there was no change -in arms excepting that greaves were not required. In the <i>fourth</i> were -those appraised at 25,000 asses. They had the same number of centuries -but their arms were changed, nothing being assigned them but a spear and -a long javelin. The <i>fifth</i> class was larger, composed of 30 centuries. They -carried slings and stones for throwing. Among them were counted the -accensi, the hornblowers, and the trumpeters, 3 centuries. This class was -appraised at 11,000 asses. Those whose rating was less formed one century -exempt from military service. Having thus armed and organized the infantry, -he levied 12 centuries of equites from among the chief men of the state. -Also the 3 centuries instituted by Romulus he made into 6 others of the same -names as those under which the three had originally been inaugurated.” -Afterward Livy speaks of the votes of the centuries in the comitia.</p> - -</div> - -<p>The ultimate source of this description, as well as of the -similar account given by Dionysius, is the censorial document -already mentioned,<a id="FNanchor_384" href="#Footnote_384" class="fnanchor">[384]</a> sometimes termed the “discriptio<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_67"></a>[67]</span> -centuriarum,”<a id="FNanchor_385" href="#Footnote_385" class="fnanchor">[385]</a> sometimes “Commentarii Servi Tullii”<a id="FNanchor_386" href="#Footnote_386" class="fnanchor">[386]</a> on the -supposition that Servius was the author. In reality it belonged -to the Censoriae Tabulae<a id="FNanchor_387" href="#Footnote_387" class="fnanchor">[387]</a> of the period immediately following -269.<a id="FNanchor_388" href="#Footnote_388" class="fnanchor">[388]</a> The document gave a list of the classes, centuries, and -ratings, and furnished directions for holding the centuriate -assembly. As the military divisions and equipments mentioned -by Livy in the passage above had been discarded long before -this date,<a id="FNanchor_389" href="#Footnote_389" class="fnanchor">[389]</a> they could not have been described in the document. -The account of them found in our sources must, therefore, -have been supplied by antiquarian study.<a id="FNanchor_390" href="#Footnote_390" class="fnanchor">[390]</a> The annalist -who first used these Tabulae in the censorial archives was -Fabius Pictor.<a id="FNanchor_391" href="#Footnote_391" class="fnanchor">[391]</a> Whether Livy and Dionysius derived their -account directly from him or through a later annalist cannot -be determined.<a id="FNanchor_392" href="#Footnote_392" class="fnanchor">[392]</a> Though Cicero’s source may ultimately have -been the same, he seems to have depended largely on his memory -and is chronologically, though not in substance, less exact. -In assigning seventy rather than eighty centuries to the first -class he most probably has in mind a stage of transition from -the earlier to the reformed organization.<a id="FNanchor_393" href="#Footnote_393" class="fnanchor">[393]</a></p> - -<p>A brief analysis of this description, as presented by Livy or -Dionysius, will prove that it could not apply at the same time to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_68"></a>[68]</span> -an army and a political assembly: (1) The century of proletarians, -which formed a part of the comitia, and which according -to Dionysius was larger than all the rest together, was exempt -from military service.<a id="FNanchor_394" href="#Footnote_394" class="fnanchor">[394]</a> (2) The unarmed supernumeraries -termed accensi velati must in their military function have lacked -the centuriate organization, as will hereafter be made clear.<a id="FNanchor_395" href="#Footnote_395" class="fnanchor">[395]</a> -(3) The musicians and the skilled workmen who accompanied -the army must also be eliminated from the centuriate organization -of the army.<a id="FNanchor_396" href="#Footnote_396" class="fnanchor">[396]</a> (4) The seniors, too, lacked the centuriate -military organization.<a id="FNanchor_397" href="#Footnote_397" class="fnanchor">[397]</a> (5) Thus the only pedites in the original -centuriate system were the juniors. Even the military century -of juniors was not in the beginning strictly identical with a voting -century; and as time progressed, the one group diverged -more and more widely from the other.<a id="FNanchor_398" href="#Footnote_398" class="fnanchor">[398]</a></p> - -<p>Chiefly from these facts, which will become clear in the course -of this study, we are warranted in concluding that the army was -at no time identical with the comitia centuriata. As one was -necessarily an outgrowth of the other, the military organization -must have been the earlier. If therefore the original form of -the centuriate system is to be referred to Servius Tullius, he -will be considered the organizer of the phalanx, which the military -centuries constituted,<a id="FNanchor_399" href="#Footnote_399" class="fnanchor">[399]</a> not of the comitia.<a id="FNanchor_400" href="#Footnote_400" class="fnanchor">[400]</a> This result -harmonizes with the view of the ancient writers that the comitia -centuriata exercised no functions—hence we have a right to -infer that it had no existence—before the beginning of the -republic.<a id="FNanchor_401" href="#Footnote_401" class="fnanchor">[401]</a></p> - -<p>The following sketch of the development of the Roman military -system from the earliest times to the institution of the -manipular legion includes those features only which are essential -to an understanding of the origin and early character of the -centuriate assembly. The view maintained in this volume is, -as suggested in the preceding paragraph, that the comitia<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_69"></a>[69]</span> -centuriata in the form described by Livy and Dionysius developed -from the early republican military organization, which -was itself the result of a gradual growth. Reference is made -to equipments chiefly for the purpose of throwing light on the -relation of the Roman to the Greek organization and of the -various Roman military divisions to one another.</p> - -<h4>I. <i>The Primitive Graeco-Italic Army and the Origin of the -Phalanx</i></h4> - -<p>Recent research has brought to light a period of Italian -history during which the military system of the Latins and -Etruscans closely resembled that of the Mycenaeans, the former -doubtless being derived in large part from the latter.<a id="FNanchor_402" href="#Footnote_402" class="fnanchor">[402]</a> The -nobleman,<a id="FNanchor_403" href="#Footnote_403" class="fnanchor">[403]</a> equipped in heavy armor, rode forth in his chariot<a id="FNanchor_404" href="#Footnote_404" class="fnanchor">[404]</a> -to challenge his peer among the enemy to personal combat. -The mass of common footmen were probably grouped in tribes -and curiae (Greek phratries, brotherhoods),<a id="FNanchor_405" href="#Footnote_405" class="fnanchor">[405]</a> as in Homeric<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_70"></a>[70]</span> -Greece<a id="FNanchor_406" href="#Footnote_406" class="fnanchor">[406]</a> and among the early Europeans<a id="FNanchor_407" href="#Footnote_407" class="fnanchor">[407]</a> before the development -of an organization based on a numerical system. The -arms of the footmen must have been lighter, and probably varied -with the individual’s financial resources. These common troops -could have had no special training or discipline, as they counted -for little in war.<a id="FNanchor_408" href="#Footnote_408" class="fnanchor">[408]</a> Yet in the Homeric age of Greece some attempt -was made to keep the fighters in line, and to prevent the -champions from advancing beyond it to single combat.<a id="FNanchor_409" href="#Footnote_409" class="fnanchor">[409]</a> A similar -tendency to even, rhythmic movement may be inferred for -the Latin army.<a id="FNanchor_410" href="#Footnote_410" class="fnanchor">[410]</a> The great innovators in this direction were -the Lacedaemonians, to whom the honor of inventing the -phalanx is chiefly due.<a id="FNanchor_411" href="#Footnote_411" class="fnanchor">[411]</a> This improvement, which made an -epoch in European warfare, could not have been later than the -eighth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> The phalanx was a line, several ranks -deep, of heavy-armed warriors, who moved as a unit to the -sound of music.<a id="FNanchor_412" href="#Footnote_412" class="fnanchor">[412]</a> The depth varied as the occasion demanded; -it was not necessarily uniform throughout the line, but for -Lacedaemon eight may be considered normal.<a id="FNanchor_413" href="#Footnote_413" class="fnanchor">[413]</a> The heavy-armed -trooper carried a large shield, which covered the entire body, a -helmet, and greaves; his offensive weapons were sword and -spear.<a id="FNanchor_414" href="#Footnote_414" class="fnanchor">[414]</a> Tyrtaeus mentions also a coat of mail though not as -an essential part of the equipment.<a id="FNanchor_415" href="#Footnote_415" class="fnanchor">[415]</a> The metal of their defensive<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_71"></a>[71]</span> -armor was mostly bronze; their swords and spear-points -were probably iron, which the mines of Laconia abundantly -supplied.<a id="FNanchor_416" href="#Footnote_416" class="fnanchor">[416]</a> Although it is well known that the phalanx was -composed of smaller units, the original organization can only be -conjectured. It is not unlikely that in the beginning there were -tribal regiments,<a id="FNanchor_417" href="#Footnote_417" class="fnanchor">[417]</a> divided into companies of fifty or perhaps a -hundred,<a id="FNanchor_418" href="#Footnote_418" class="fnanchor">[418]</a> which were made up of still smaller groups. The -military age extended from the twentieth to the sixtieth year.<a id="FNanchor_419" href="#Footnote_419" class="fnanchor">[419]</a></p> - -<p>The phalanx was readily adopted by other Greek states, -which modified it to suit their several conditions. In Athens -and probably elsewhere the army had a tribal organization,<a id="FNanchor_420" href="#Footnote_420" class="fnanchor">[420]</a> but -a census was introduced in order to determine who possessed -sufficient wealth for service on horseback, in the heavy infantry, -and in the light infantry; and when once the census classes -were adopted, it was easy to extend them to political uses. In -this way the four property classes at Athens, probably instituted -about the middle of the seventh century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>,<a id="FNanchor_421" href="#Footnote_421" class="fnanchor">[421]</a> became under -Solon if not earlier a basis for the distribution of offices and -other political privileges. Naturally the Greeks of Sicily and -Italy adopted the phalanx, and it is reasonable to suppose that -the Romans derived it, through the Etruscans,<a id="FNanchor_422" href="#Footnote_422" class="fnanchor">[422]</a> from one of -these neighbors.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_72"></a>[72]</span></p> - -<h4>II. <i>The Servian Army</i></h4> - -<p>As the heavy troops of the Greek line were all armed alike, -the Romans probably at first composed their phalanx in a similar -way, without gradations of equipment. The complex system -of census groupings in the army as we find it immediately -before the institution of the manipular legion could only have -resulted from a long development. The statement last made -finds justification in the fact that the term classis<a id="FNanchor_423" href="#Footnote_423" class="fnanchor">[423]</a> was originally -limited to the first or highest census group, all the rest being -“infra classem.”<a id="FNanchor_424" href="#Footnote_424" class="fnanchor">[424]</a></p> - -<p>Not only was the organization like that of the Greeks, but -the arms, too, were in the main Greek. The soldiers of the -classis were equipped with helmet, shield, greaves, spear, and -sword; as they wore a cuirass, they used a large round Etruscan -buckler<a id="FNanchor_425" href="#Footnote_425" class="fnanchor">[425]</a> instead of the man-covering Dorian shield. They<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_73"></a>[73]</span> -were grouped in centuries,<a id="FNanchor_426" href="#Footnote_426" class="fnanchor">[426]</a> forty of which composed the classis -in the fully developed phalanx.<a id="FNanchor_427" href="#Footnote_427" class="fnanchor">[427]</a> The age of service of the -juniors, who alone fought in the field, extended from the completed -seventeenth to the completed forty-sixth year,<a id="FNanchor_428" href="#Footnote_428" class="fnanchor">[428]</a> whereas -the seniors from the forty-seventh to the sixtieth year formed a -reserve.</p> - -<p>A still nearer connection can be found between the Roman -and the Greek horsemen. As is proved by archaeology, the -earliest Greek knights had no specialized weapons or armor -and were not accustomed to fight on horseback, but were heavy -infantry who used their horses simply as conveyance.<a id="FNanchor_429" href="#Footnote_429" class="fnanchor">[429]</a> The -same is true of the earliest Roman equites, whose equipment -closely resembled that of the Greek horsemen. On account of -their swiftness they were primitively called celeres.<a id="FNanchor_430" href="#Footnote_430" class="fnanchor">[430]</a> Although -these mounted footmen are generally known as equites, which -in this sense may but loosely be translated knights, the Romans -did not institute a true cavalry till the period of the Samnite -wars.<a id="FNanchor_431" href="#Footnote_431" class="fnanchor">[431]</a> It is a curious fact that some horsemen, Roman as well -as Greek, were provided each with two horses,<a id="FNanchor_432" href="#Footnote_432" class="fnanchor">[432]</a> one for the -warrior and the other for his squire,<a id="FNanchor_433" href="#Footnote_433" class="fnanchor">[433]</a> and that the mounted<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_74"></a>[74]</span> -soldiers of Etruria were in these respects the same.<a id="FNanchor_434" href="#Footnote_434" class="fnanchor">[434]</a> A further -resemblance between the earliest Greek and Roman horsemen -lies in the fact that they were noble.<a id="FNanchor_435" href="#Footnote_435" class="fnanchor">[435]</a></p> - -<p>In their account of the growth of the mounted service during -the regal period the ancient authorities show great inconsistencies. -It seems probable that the early annalists pictured the -increase in the knights in a way analogous to that of the senate: -at first Romulus formed a troop, or century, from the Ramnes; -afterward a second was added from the Tities; and still later -the Luceres furnished a third.<a id="FNanchor_436" href="#Footnote_436" class="fnanchor">[436]</a> Then Tarquinius Priscus -doubled the number, making six in all, and Servius finally increased -it to eighteen centuries. This simple development, -itself a reconstruction, was complicated by the desire of the -historians to make the number of knights under Servius agree -with the number under Augustus, given by Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_437" href="#Footnote_437" class="fnanchor">[437]</a> at about -5000; hence the assumption of 200 or even 300 knights to the -century as early as the reign of Romulus.<a id="FNanchor_438" href="#Footnote_438" class="fnanchor">[438]</a> It is possible by -clearing away these evident misconceptions to discover the -approximate truth.</p> - -<p>When the chariot gave way to the horseback rider is not -definitely known; at all events the change seems to have taken -place under Hellenic influence, and could hardly therefore have -been earlier than the beginning of the seventh century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span><a id="FNanchor_439" href="#Footnote_439" class="fnanchor">[439]</a> -The idea of the sources is that there came to be three troops -of horsemen, furnished by the tribes,<a id="FNanchor_440" href="#Footnote_440" class="fnanchor">[440]</a> as well as three regiments -of foot, that before Servius the number of troops of horse was -doubled, and that the six troops thus formed were named accordingly -after the tribes Ramnenses, Titienses, and Lucerenses -priores and posteriores respectively.<a id="FNanchor_441" href="#Footnote_441" class="fnanchor">[441]</a> The priores had each -two horses, the posteriores one.<a id="FNanchor_442" href="#Footnote_442" class="fnanchor">[442]</a> Hence the essential difference<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_75"></a>[75]</span> -between these divisions was in rank and wealth rather than in -the relative time of their institution. Long after Servius both -divisions continued to be patrician.<a id="FNanchor_443" href="#Footnote_443" class="fnanchor">[443]</a> As the centuriate organization -of Servius applied to the infantry, the cavalry remained -little affected by it. The six troops with their old names survived, -and eventually became a part of the comitia centuriata. -In the military sphere, however, the troop no longer retained -its identity; but the whole body was divided into twenty turmae, -each composed of three decuries commanded by decurions.<a id="FNanchor_444" href="#Footnote_444" class="fnanchor">[444]</a> -When with the institution of the republic the phalanx was -split into two legions, ten turmae of cavalry were assigned to -each legion.<a id="FNanchor_445" href="#Footnote_445" class="fnanchor">[445]</a> As in historical time the number of horsemen to -a legion did not exceed 300,<a id="FNanchor_446" href="#Footnote_446" class="fnanchor">[446]</a> and as we have no reason to suppose<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_76"></a>[76]</span> -that at an earlier period this arm of the service was -proportionally stronger, we may conclude that in the Servian -phalanx, or double legion, the number did not exceed 600.</p> - -<p>From the foregoing discussion it appears clear that the Servian -military system rested upon a division of the citizens into -four groups, closely corresponding to the Athenian census -divisions: (1) the equites priores, like the pentacosiomedimni, -(2) the equites posteriores, like the hippeis,<a id="FNanchor_447" href="#Footnote_447" class="fnanchor">[447]</a> (3) the classis, like -the zeugitae, (4) the light troops infra classem, like the thetes. -The distinction between priores and posteriores rested not upon -an assessment but upon a less precise difference in wealth, -whether determined by the individual concerned or by the -state we cannot know; it represented, too, a gradation of -nobility. The distinction between the knights and the classici -was one of rank; that between the classis and the soldiers infra -classem was alone determined by the census.</p> - -<h4>III. <i>The Development of the Five Post-Servian Military -Divisions on the Basis of Census Ratings</i></h4> - -<p>This arrangement was by no means final. Further changes -were made in both foot and horse which were to have a bearing -on the organization of the comitia centuriata. After a time<a id="FNanchor_448" href="#Footnote_448" class="fnanchor">[448]</a> -two additions of men less heavily armed than the classici were -made to the phalanx, whether simultaneously or successively -cannot be determined. There were now forty centuries of -classici, and the additions comprised ten centuries each, the -second less heavily armed than the first, though they may both -be considered heavy in contrast with the light troops. Perhaps -the state according to its ability made up the deficiency in the -equipment, so as to render the entire phalanx as evenly armed -as possible.<a id="FNanchor_449" href="#Footnote_449" class="fnanchor">[449]</a> It numbered sixty centuries of heavy infantry,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_77"></a>[77]</span> -composed of three grades which depended upon the census -rating.<a id="FNanchor_450" href="#Footnote_450" class="fnanchor">[450]</a> The light troops were also grouped in two divisions -on the same principle. The first comprised ten centuries; -originally the second may have contained the same number, in -which case four were afterward added to make the fourteen -known to exist in the fully developed system.<a id="FNanchor_451" href="#Footnote_451" class="fnanchor">[451]</a> There were five -divisions of infantry amounting to eighty-four centuries of a -hundred men each. Undoubtedly the growth of the army to -this degree of strength was gradual, though the successive steps -cannot be more minutely traced.<a id="FNanchor_452" href="#Footnote_452" class="fnanchor">[452]</a></p> - -<p>In making the levy the military tribunes selected the soldiers -from the lists of tribesmen, taking one tribe after another as the -lot determined.<a id="FNanchor_453" href="#Footnote_453" class="fnanchor">[453]</a> The early Romans must have striven to distribute -the population as equally as possible among the tribes in -order to render them approximately equal in capacity for military -service. As long as this equality continued, the officials -could constitute the army of an equal number of men from each -tribe. These considerations explain the close relation in early -time between the number of tribes and of centuries as well as -the suggestions offered by our sources as to an early connection -between the centuries and the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_454" href="#Footnote_454" class="fnanchor">[454]</a> While there were but -twenty tribes we may suppose that the legion comprised but -4000 men, which was raised to 4200 when the twenty-first tribe -was added. In this way can we account for the number of -centuries to the legion. If but half the available military -strength was required, the magistrates might draw by lot ten<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_78"></a>[78]</span> -tribes from which to make the levy.<a id="FNanchor_455" href="#Footnote_455" class="fnanchor">[455]</a> It was an easy matter as -long as the heavy troops were limited to the classis;<a id="FNanchor_456" href="#Footnote_456" class="fnanchor">[456]</a> but when -two other ratings were added, and when meantime the tribes -must have grown unlike in population, it became practically -impossible to maintain for each rating a just proportion from -the tribes;<a id="FNanchor_457" href="#Footnote_457" class="fnanchor">[457]</a> and perhaps this was the chief reason for the -modification in the method of recruiting. When therefore the -tribes were increased to twenty-five, and it was deemed inexpedient -to make a corresponding enlargement of the legion,<a id="FNanchor_458" href="#Footnote_458" class="fnanchor">[458]</a> a -new principle was adopted for the levy: after determining the -ratio between the number of men needed and the whole number -available, the officers drew from each tribe a number proportionate -to its capacity.<a id="FNanchor_459" href="#Footnote_459" class="fnanchor">[459]</a> It would agree well with all the known -facts to suppose that the addition of the second and third -ratings, followed by a more thorough organization of the light -troops, belongs to the early republic (509-387),<a id="FNanchor_460" href="#Footnote_460" class="fnanchor">[460]</a> when Rome -needed all her strength in her life and death struggle with -hostile neighbors. At the same time the purchase of armor -and the increased burden of military duty would help account<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_79"></a>[79]</span> -for the desperate economic condition of the poorer peasants of -that epoch.</p> - -<p>The proportions of the five ratings—20-15-10-5-2½ or 2—to -be discussed hereafter,<a id="FNanchor_461" href="#Footnote_461" class="fnanchor">[461]</a> suggest an explanation of their origin. -It would be reasonable to assume that the normal holding of the -well-to-do citizen was a twenty-iugera lot and that the Servian -phalanx was composed of possessors of that amount, the light-armed -being their sons and others distinctly inferior in wealth. -In course of a few generations as the population grew, with no -corresponding territorial expansion or colonization or industrial -development, and with only a limited conversion of waste to -arable land, many of the lots became divided and subdivided. -The result was a weakening of the phalanx at a time when the -state was in the most pressing need of military resources. The -institution of the five ratings as a basis for the reorganization -of the army was a temporary expedient for meeting the crisis, -to be superseded not long afterward by a better system founded -on military pay. In all probability the introduction of the five -ratings, or at least the beginning of the movement in that direction, -should be closely connected with the institution of the -censorship in 443 or 435.<a id="FNanchor_462" href="#Footnote_462" class="fnanchor">[462]</a> The supposition would give us a -sufficient reason for the creation of this new office at that time, -and the strengthening of the army would explain the success of -the Romans in the wars immediately following.</p> - -<p>How the five ratings were arrayed in battle is unknown. If -the front counted a thousand men (milites),<a id="FNanchor_463" href="#Footnote_463" class="fnanchor">[463]</a> the classis comprised -four ranks (4000), the second and third ratings one rank -each, making in all six ranks of heavy troops (6000).<a id="FNanchor_464" href="#Footnote_464" class="fnanchor">[464]</a> Twenty -centuries could be drawn from the two ratings of light troops -to complete the eight ranks when needed.<a id="FNanchor_465" href="#Footnote_465" class="fnanchor">[465]</a> But the Romans<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_80"></a>[80]</span> -undoubtedly exercised the same good judgment as the Lacedaemonians -in varying their formation to suit the emergency;<a id="FNanchor_466" href="#Footnote_466" class="fnanchor">[466]</a> -and for that reason it is wrong to assume the same depth -for all occasions or an even depth for any one occasion. -The management of long lines one-man deep must have been -extremely difficult, if not impossible.<a id="FNanchor_467" href="#Footnote_467" class="fnanchor">[467]</a> The explanation already -suggested, that the state supplied the deficiency in equipment,<a id="FNanchor_468" href="#Footnote_468" class="fnanchor">[468]</a> -would greatly simplify the case, for there would then exist no -need of arraying the census groups in successive lines. Whatever -may have been the tactic arrangement, it did not continue -long, for soon after the introduction of regular pay, about -400 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>,<a id="FNanchor_469" href="#Footnote_469" class="fnanchor">[469]</a> the distinction between the ratings ceased to have an -importance for military affairs.</p> - -<h4>IV. <i>The Question as to the Connection of the Supernumeraries -and the Seniors with the Military Centuries</i></h4> - -<p>A number of supernumeraries termed accensi velati accompanied -the army. The epithet accensi proves them to have -been outside the five ratings, while velati describes them as -wearing civilian dress. We are informed by the sources that -they carried water and weapons to the fighting men, stepped -into the places of the dead and wounded, and acted as servants -to the lower officers.<a id="FNanchor_470" href="#Footnote_470" class="fnanchor">[470]</a> These men could not have been organized -in centuries,<a id="FNanchor_471" href="#Footnote_471" class="fnanchor">[471]</a> for they were drawn up in the rear behind<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_81"></a>[81]</span> -the light troops; they extended along the entire breadth of the -army,<a id="FNanchor_472" href="#Footnote_472" class="fnanchor">[472]</a> and must have greatly exceeded one hundred or even -two hundred. The musicians,<a id="FNanchor_473" href="#Footnote_473" class="fnanchor">[473]</a> too, who accompanied the army -were not grouped in two centuries, for they were distributed -throughout the army.<a id="FNanchor_474" href="#Footnote_474" class="fnanchor">[474]</a> There is no reason for assuming exactly -two hundred musicians<a id="FNanchor_475" href="#Footnote_475" class="fnanchor">[475]</a> or exactly two hundred workmen,<a id="FNanchor_476" href="#Footnote_476" class="fnanchor">[476]</a> or -for supposing that any of the men of this description were organized -in centuries in the army. Reasoning in a similar way in -regard to the seniors, we conclude that their organization in -centuries could not have belonged to the original Servian system. -A military century, as the name indicates, must have -contained a hundred men.<a id="FNanchor_477" href="#Footnote_477" class="fnanchor">[477]</a> But in any static population there -are three times as many men between seventeen and forty-six -as between forty-six and sixty<a id="FNanchor_478" href="#Footnote_478" class="fnanchor">[478]</a>—in Rome there were three -times as many juniors as seniors; and as the number of junior -and senior centuries was equal, the latter could have contained -only about thirty-three each, on the supposition that the whole -male population between seventeen and forty-six years was -organized in centuries.</p> - -<p>The mere fact that the senior century contained so few men -suggests that it was not a military institution. This impression -is confirmed by the information that the seniors were reserved -for the defence of the city, while the juniors took the field in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_82"></a>[82]</span> -active service.<a id="FNanchor_479" href="#Footnote_479" class="fnanchor">[479]</a> When we reflect that even in the early republic -the seniors could not often have been called on for defence, as -the juniors were ordinarily sufficient for the purpose,<a id="FNanchor_480" href="#Footnote_480" class="fnanchor">[480]</a> that the -manning of the walls did not necessarily require a division into -companies or an equipment like that for field service, and that -when it was thought expedient for the seniors to serve in centuries -or cohorts, their enrolment in these companies is especially -mentioned, our conviction that the senior centuries did -not belong to the original Servian organization grows into a -certainty.<a id="FNanchor_481" href="#Footnote_481" class="fnanchor">[481]</a></p> - -<h4>V. <i>Conclusions as to the Servian and Early Republican Organizations; -Transition to the Manipular Legion</i></h4> - -<p>In our search for the Servian and post-Servian schemes of military -organization we found it necessary to eliminate from the -discriptio centuriarum all the centuries of pedites with the exception -of the juniors. But even a military century of juniors -could not have remained identical with a voting century; for the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_83"></a>[83]</span> -former comprised a fixed number and the same for all ratings, -whereas in the comitia of historical time the centuries varied -greatly in size, many of them containing far more than a hundred -men each. In the four lower classes each century contained -as many men as the entire first class;<a id="FNanchor_482" href="#Footnote_482" class="fnanchor">[482]</a> and individuals -constantly shifted from one class to another as their several -properties increased or diminished.<a id="FNanchor_483" href="#Footnote_483" class="fnanchor">[483]</a> It is a mistake, therefore, -to think of the army as identical with even the junior centuries -of the comitia.<a id="FNanchor_484" href="#Footnote_484" class="fnanchor">[484]</a> Doubtless when the Servian army was first -introduced, its organization was made to fit actual conditions, so -that all who were liable to service found their place in it; but as -the political assembly of centuries was instituted many years -afterward, the army with its various enlargements could have -kept meanwhile no more than approximate pace with the -changing population, and at no time could it include the physically -disqualified, who nevertheless had a right to vote in the -junior centuries of the political assembly. On the other hand -there were soldiers in the army too young to be in the comitia -centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_485" href="#Footnote_485" class="fnanchor">[485]</a></p> - -<p>The conclusion as to the strength of the army in the first -years of the republic, before the latter had acquired any considerable -accession of territory, corresponds closely with a moderate -estimate of the population under the conditions then -existing. The area of the state was about 983 square kilometers -(equivalent to 379.5 sq. mi. or 242,899 acres).<a id="FNanchor_486" href="#Footnote_486" class="fnanchor">[486]</a> Estimating -the population of this agricultural community at its maximum -of sixty to the square kilometer, we should have less than -60,000 for the entire area.<a id="FNanchor_487" href="#Footnote_487" class="fnanchor">[487]</a> The number of men from seventeen<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_84"></a>[84]</span> -to sixty, the Roman military age, should be about thirty per -cent of the population<a id="FNanchor_488" href="#Footnote_488" class="fnanchor">[488]</a>—less therefore than 18,000. If the -ratio of juniors to seniors was about three to one,<a id="FNanchor_489" href="#Footnote_489" class="fnanchor">[489]</a> we should -have about 13,000 juniors to 5000 seniors. But a deduction -must be made for slaves and for the physically incapacitated, -leaving perhaps 9000 or 10,000 juniors and 3000 or 4000 -seniors. These results are not unreasonable. Making allowance -for several hundred supernumeraries,<a id="FNanchor_490" href="#Footnote_490" class="fnanchor">[490]</a> we should then -have no more than enough juniors to fill the eighty-four centuries -of foot and the six troops of horse. It is clear, therefore, -that all available forces were included in the army and that the -junior centuries could not have contained more than a hundred -men each.</p> - -<p>Even before the phalanx had thus been brought to perfection, -modifications were being made in the equipment under the influence -of the Gallic invasion.<a id="FNanchor_491" href="#Footnote_491" class="fnanchor">[491]</a> The introduction of pay, about -400 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, as has been said,<a id="FNanchor_492" href="#Footnote_492" class="fnanchor">[492]</a> broke down the distinction of equipment -based on degree of wealth, and not long afterward, probably -in the time of the Samnite wars, the phalanx gave way -to the manipular legion, which reached its full development in -the Punic wars.<a id="FNanchor_493" href="#Footnote_493" class="fnanchor">[493]</a></p> - -<h4>VI. <i>The Five Classes and their Ratings</i></h4> - -<p>Though originally denoting the men of the first rating, who -possessed the fullest equipment,<a id="FNanchor_494" href="#Footnote_494" class="fnanchor">[494]</a> the term classis with an explanatory -adjective came to apply to the entire army<a id="FNanchor_495" href="#Footnote_495" class="fnanchor">[495]</a> or to its -component parts.<a id="FNanchor_496" href="#Footnote_496" class="fnanchor">[496]</a> The plural “classes” came finally to mean -the five census groups, represented by the five timocratic gradations -of the comitia centuriata. What had formerly been the -classis then came to be known as classis prima, and the “infra -classem” ratings were numbered downward second, third,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_85"></a>[85]</span> -fourth, and fifth. Probably this extension in the use of the -word was not made till after the disappearance of the ratings -from the army—how much later we do not know. In a speech -delivered in 169 in favor of the lex Voconia the elder Cato -more than once examined into the meaning of classicus and -infra classem.<a id="FNanchor_497" href="#Footnote_497" class="fnanchor">[497]</a> A hasty inference would be that at this late -date classis was still strictly limited to the first rating. It is to be -noted, however, that the early meaning might be retained in a -legal formula long after it had disappeared from general use, -that classicus certainly preserved its original meaning notwithstanding -the new development of the noun from which it is -derived, and especially that the early sense of the terms classicus -and infra classem was not generally known in 169, else Cato -would not have taken such pains to define them. We know -that the ratings were termed classes in 111,<a id="FNanchor_498" href="#Footnote_498" class="fnanchor">[498]</a> and from what has -just been said on the Voconian law it seems probable that the -development took place long before 169. The circumstance -that in their “discriptio centuriarum” Livy and Dionysius make -no reference to the distinction between classis and infra classem -would favor the supposition that they found no such distinction -in their common source—ultimately Fabius Pictor. Hence it -is not unlikely that classis was used in its historical meaning of -property class in the censorial document from which Fabius -derived his knowledge of the fully developed comitia centuriata, -and which belonged to the period immediately following 269.<a id="FNanchor_499" href="#Footnote_499" class="fnanchor">[499]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_86"></a>[86]</span></p> - -<p>Before the censorship of Appius Claudius Caecus, 312, military -service within the census ratings was based on the possession -of land, and the gradations of equipment, while they lasted, -must therefore have been determined by the size of the estate -reckoned in iugera.<a id="FNanchor_500" href="#Footnote_500" class="fnanchor">[500]</a> Huschke<a id="FNanchor_501" href="#Footnote_501" class="fnanchor">[501]</a> rightly inferred that the number -of iugera marking the lower limit of each division must -have been proportioned to the later money ratings, and assumed -accordingly 20, 15, 10, 5, 2½ or 2 iugera as the respective minimal -holdings of the five divisions. Although absolute certainty -is unattainable, most scholars accept his conclusions as probable.<a id="FNanchor_502" href="#Footnote_502" class="fnanchor">[502]</a> -Before the change was made in the appraisements from -amount of land to money, the census gradations ceased to serve -a military purpose. In the further discussion of these groups -reference is therefore solely to their political character, -especially as expressed in the organization of the comitia centuriata. -Till the time of Marius, however, the soldiers were -ordinarily recruited from the classes—that is, from the citizens -who possessed at least the qualification of the lowest group.<a id="FNanchor_503" href="#Footnote_503" class="fnanchor">[503]</a></p> - -<p>The money ratings of 312 are not recorded; we know those -only of the time following 269. The ratings of the earlier date -must have been in the nominally libral asses then current. For -a long time, probably down to 312, the <i>as</i> remained at eleven<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_87"></a>[87]</span> -to nine ounces in weight, then sank rapidly to four, three, and -two ounces, reaching the last-mentioned weight in or shortly -before 269. In this year or the following was legally adopted -the lighter <i>as</i>, weighing two ounces, or a sixth of a pound, and -hence termed sextantarian, and the heavier asses still in circulation -were henceforth reckoned as sesterces, which now became -the unit of value.<a id="FNanchor_504" href="#Footnote_504" class="fnanchor">[504]</a> Two and a half sextantarian asses made a -sesterce, and four sesterces made a denarius.<a id="FNanchor_505" href="#Footnote_505" class="fnanchor">[505]</a> The <i>as</i> continued -to be copper, whereas the sesterce and the denarius were -silver. In consequence of the use of the sextantarian <i>as</i> the -ratings must have been elevated to correspond with the decline -of the standard; and the result of this change is the well-known -series, 100,000, 75,000, 50,000, 25,000, 11,000.<a id="FNanchor_506" href="#Footnote_506" class="fnanchor">[506]</a> There can be -no doubt that under the standard used in 312 the ratings were -lower than those given. It is incredible that the classis should -ever have been appraised so high as 100,000 asses of ten-ounce -weight or even of the value of sesterces (5 oz.).<a id="FNanchor_507" href="#Footnote_507" class="fnanchor">[507]</a> But the ratings -of 312 have not been definitely ascertained. Assuming -but one elevation between the two dates and in the proportion -of 4:10:: sextantarian <i>as</i>: heavy <i>as</i> or sesterce, Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_508" href="#Footnote_508" class="fnanchor">[508]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_88"></a>[88]</span> -concludes that the appraisements of 312 were 40,000, 30,000, -20,000, 10,000, and 4400 asses respectively for the five classes. -The adjustment however may have been gradual, as was the -decline of the standard, and the former need not have corresponded -exactly with the latter. But in so far as the Romans -failed to bring about this adjustment, the censors must have -found it necessary continually to advance the citizens from the -lower to the higher divisions.</p> - -<p>The ratings mentioned above as established on the basis -of the sextantarian standard, namely 100,000, 75,000, 50,000, -25,000, and 11,000 asses for the five classes respectively, are -those given by Livy.<a id="FNanchor_509" href="#Footnote_509" class="fnanchor">[509]</a> Several variations affecting the highest -and lowest classes are offered by other writers. Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_510" href="#Footnote_510" class="fnanchor">[510]</a> -states the appraisement of the fifth class at 12½ minae, which -would be 12,500 asses. The usual explanation is that he is dealing -in round numbers without especial regard to accuracy, for -which reason Livy should be given the preference. It is doubtful -however whether Dionysius was so inexact. More probably -his estimate depended ultimately on the idea that the minimal -number of iugera of the highest class was twenty-five,<a id="FNanchor_511" href="#Footnote_511" class="fnanchor">[511]</a> taken in -connection with the decimal ratio between the extreme classes—an -interpretation which would help explain variations in the -rating of the highest class to be mentioned hereafter; or with -less reason we might assume that the statements of Dionysius -and Livy represent earlier and later conditions.<a id="FNanchor_512" href="#Footnote_512" class="fnanchor">[512]</a> The limit of -400 drachmas given by Polybius<a id="FNanchor_513" href="#Footnote_513" class="fnanchor">[513]</a> proves a lowering of the minimal -rating between 269 and the publication of his history.<a id="FNanchor_514" href="#Footnote_514" class="fnanchor">[514]</a> It -may have been made in 217, when the money system was again -changed. As Polybius probably considered the drachma, or -denarius, to be worth ten asses,<a id="FNanchor_515" href="#Footnote_515" class="fnanchor">[515]</a> the limit which he mentions<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_89"></a>[89]</span> -would be 4000 asses. Cicero states the minimal limit at 1500 -asses,<a id="FNanchor_516" href="#Footnote_516" class="fnanchor">[516]</a> and a still lower sum of 375, mentioned by Gellius,<a id="FNanchor_517" href="#Footnote_517" class="fnanchor">[517]</a> -marked the line of division between the taxable proletarians -and the capite censi, who were exempt from taxation. As the -differentiation between the two groups last named must have -been effected before 167, when the Romans were relieved of -the tributum,<a id="FNanchor_518" href="#Footnote_518" class="fnanchor">[518]</a> the rating given by Cicero could not have been -later than that vouched for by Polybius. The limit of 4000 -asses, accordingly, had reference merely to military service, -whereas 1500 marked at once the political and tributary line -of separation between the fifth class and the taxable proletarians.<a id="FNanchor_519" href="#Footnote_519" class="fnanchor">[519]</a> -The limit of 375 asses, on the other hand, was far -below the fifth class, and had nothing to do with it.<a id="FNanchor_520" href="#Footnote_520" class="fnanchor">[520]</a> The relation -of these numbers to one another may be summarized as follows: -Those assessed at 4000 or more asses belonged to the -fifth class, enjoyed the political rights of that class, and were -subject to military service as well as to taxation (tributum); -those rated at 1500-4000 asses also belonged to the fifth class, -enjoyed the political rights of that class, and were subject to -taxation but exempt from military service; those rated at 375-1500 -asses were proletarians, below the fifth class but subject -to taxation; those rated below 375 asses, the capite censi, were -exempt from taxation.</p> - -<p>As regards the rating of the highest class, the elder Pliny<a id="FNanchor_521" href="#Footnote_521" class="fnanchor">[521]</a> -states it at 110,000 asses, which may be a copyist’s error for -100,000 or for 120,000; the estimate of Paulus Diaconus<a id="FNanchor_522" href="#Footnote_522" class="fnanchor">[522]</a> is -120,000 and of Gellius<a id="FNanchor_523" href="#Footnote_523" class="fnanchor">[523]</a> 125,000. If the manuscripts have -correctly preserved these numbers, they may represent computations -based on a varying number of iugera, from twenty-two -to twenty-five<a id="FNanchor_524" href="#Footnote_524" class="fnanchor">[524]</a> at the rate of 5000 asses a iugerum—a valuation<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_90"></a>[90]</span> -which may have been given in the original annalistic source -(Fabius Pictor). From the fact that Pliny assigns this rating -to Servius as author, and that Gellius speaks of it in the past, -we must infer that it was not due to a relatively late change. -Indeed the rating must have remained unaltered to the time of -Polybius,<a id="FNanchor_525" href="#Footnote_525" class="fnanchor">[525]</a> who states that those appraised at 10,000 drachmas -wore the cuirass—according to Livy<a id="FNanchor_526" href="#Footnote_526" class="fnanchor">[526]</a> and Dionysius,<a id="FNanchor_527" href="#Footnote_527" class="fnanchor">[527]</a> the distinctive -equipment of the first class.<a id="FNanchor_528" href="#Footnote_528" class="fnanchor">[528]</a> In the same age the Voconian -law, 169, provided that a man registered by the censors -as worth 100,000 asses or more should not bequeath his property -to a woman.<a id="FNanchor_529" href="#Footnote_529" class="fnanchor">[529]</a> While speaking in favor of the measure -the elder Cato expounded the distinction between the classici -and those who were “infra classem.”<a id="FNanchor_530" href="#Footnote_530" class="fnanchor">[530]</a> Strictly following Cato’s -definition, Gellius<a id="FNanchor_531" href="#Footnote_531" class="fnanchor">[531]</a> explains the classici as those of the first class -in contrast with the members of the lower classes, who are infra -classem. Evidently the classici are to be identified with those -rated at 100,000 asses, as given by Gaius.<a id="FNanchor_532" href="#Footnote_532" class="fnanchor">[532]</a> The sum of 100,000 -sesterces, in place of asses, represented by later writers<a id="FNanchor_533" href="#Footnote_533" class="fnanchor">[533]</a> as the -one fixed by this law, is due either to a late interpretation or to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_91"></a>[91]</span> -an amendment.<a id="FNanchor_534" href="#Footnote_534" class="fnanchor">[534]</a> The minimal qualification of the first class -must therefore have continued unchanged from 269 to the passing -of the Voconian law, 169, and the composition of the <i>History</i> -of Polybius.<a id="FNanchor_535" href="#Footnote_535" class="fnanchor">[535]</a> From the latter event to the tribuneship of -Tiberius Gracchus little time was left for an increase, which -certainly the Gracchi and their successors would take no interest -in bringing about. Further depreciation in the weight of -the <i>as</i>, by the reduction to a half ounce through the Papirian -law of 89,<a id="FNanchor_536" href="#Footnote_536" class="fnanchor">[536]</a> had no effect on the valuation, as the standard was -the silver sesterce, the <i>as</i> having merely the fiduciary value of a -quarter sesterce. Apart from the accounts of Livy and Dionysius -already considered, no reference is made to the valuation -of the intermediate classes, unless it be a passage in Livy<a id="FNanchor_537" href="#Footnote_537" class="fnanchor">[537]</a> to -the effect that freedmen possessing country estates worth at -least 30,000 sesterces were enrolled in the rural tribes by the -censors of 169, which is interpreted by Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_538" href="#Footnote_538" class="fnanchor">[538]</a> to refer to -the qualification of the second class. This is true if, as has -been assumed above, the censors still reckoned two and a half -asses to the sesterce.<a id="FNanchor_539" href="#Footnote_539" class="fnanchor">[539]</a></p> - -<h4>VII. <i>Belot’s Theory as to the Ratings</i></h4> - -<p>Notice must be taken of a theory proposed by Belot,<a id="FNanchor_540" href="#Footnote_540" class="fnanchor">[540]</a> that at -the time of the First Punic War, owing to an economic revolution -which enhanced prices, and to the decrease in the weight of -the <i>as</i>, the five ratings as stated by Dionysius for the earlier -period were multiplied by ten, giving for the future 1,000,000, -750,000, 500,000, 250,000, 125,000 asses for the five classes respectively.<a id="FNanchor_541" href="#Footnote_541" class="fnanchor">[541]</a> -The theory is supported with remarkable learning -and skill. There can be no doubt as to the lowering of the -weight of the <i>as</i> or of the economic revolution which increased -prices. Large valuations of estates such as he mentions are<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_92"></a>[92]</span> -found in the sources. For example in 214 the government -ordered<a id="FNanchor_542" href="#Footnote_542" class="fnanchor">[542]</a> that—</p> - -<table> - <tr> - <td>Those rated at</td> - <td class="tdr">50,000-</td> - <td class="tdr">100,000</td> - <td>asses</td> - <td>should furnish one sailor.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Those rated at</td> - <td class="tdr">100,000-</td> - <td class="tdr">300,000</td> - <td>asses</td> - <td>should furnish three sailors.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Those rated at</td> - <td class="tdr">300,000-</td> - <td class="tdr">1,000,000</td> - <td>asses</td> - <td>should furnish five sailors.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Those rated at</td> - <td>above</td> - <td class="tdr">1,000,000</td> - <td>asses</td> - <td>should furnish seven sailors.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td colspan="3">Senators</td> - <td>should furnish eight sailors.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Belot’s attempt to identify the highest of these appraisements -with the rating of the first class is unsuccessful, as will immediately -appear. The object of the order issued by the government -in 214 was to provide crews for the fleet of that year. -Although the hundred and fifty ships to be manned<a id="FNanchor_543" href="#Footnote_543" class="fnanchor">[543]</a> seem -to have been triremes, we may consider them quinqueremes -so as not to underestimate the number of men necessary. -Reckoning 375 men to the ship,<a id="FNanchor_544" href="#Footnote_544" class="fnanchor">[544]</a> we should have 56,250 men -for the entire fleet. But according to Belot<a id="FNanchor_545" href="#Footnote_545" class="fnanchor">[545]</a> there were 22,000 -knights at this time, whose census rating was 1,000,000 asses, -and who accordingly would have to furnish seven men each -for the navy, which would amount to 154,000, or more than -enough to man three such fleets as that of the year under -consideration. But as the knights constituted only a twelfth -of the total number of registered citizens of that period,<a id="FNanchor_546" href="#Footnote_546" class="fnanchor">[546]</a> most -if not all of whom must according to Belot have been assessed -at 50,000 or above, we shall be obliged at least to double the -154,000 sailors furnished by the knights to obtain the whole number -demanded by the government. The absurdity of the result -condemns the premises. The minimal census of the knight could -not have been materially if at all above 100,000 asses,<a id="FNanchor_547" href="#Footnote_547" class="fnanchor">[547]</a> and the -great mass of citizens must have been rated below that sum. -Other features of his theory need not be considered here. The -truth is that the great accumulation of wealth benefited but few; -and notwithstanding the advance in the money value of property,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_93"></a>[93]</span> -the mass of people remained so poor that the state could -not disturb the census ratings, however out of harmony with the -new conditions they seem to have become. No suspicion should -be thrown on the continuance of these small valuations by the -circumstance that occasionally the state compelled the wealthy -to contribute to the burden of war according to their ability, as -in 214, and increased the penalties for the crimes and misdemeanors -which the rich and powerful were wont to commit.<a id="FNanchor_548" href="#Footnote_548" class="fnanchor">[548]</a></p> - -<h4>VIII. <i>The Post-Servian Equites</i></h4> - -<p>The classes, as developed after Servius, have now been considered -sufficiently for an appreciation of their relation to the -comitia centuriata. It remains to discuss from the same point of -view the post-Servian alterations in the equestrian organization.</p> - -<p>In the earliest period when the warriors in general equipped -themselves at their own expense,<a id="FNanchor_549" href="#Footnote_549" class="fnanchor">[549]</a> the equites provided their own -horses. But in time as the patricians ceased to be the only -wealthy class in the community, and as they began to lose their -political advantages, their duty of keeping one or two horses -came to be felt as onerous, and some means of lightening it was -sought for. The only private property which was free from the -burden of supporting military service was that of widows and -orphans. The government determined accordingly to levy a -regular contribution on this class of estates in the interest of the -equites. The eques was allowed ten thousand asses, or one -thousand denarii (aes equestre), with which to purchase his horse -or horses for the ten years of service and two thousand asses -(aes hordearium) annually for maintenance.<a id="FNanchor_550" href="#Footnote_550" class="fnanchor">[550]</a> He was not paid -the money in advance, but was given security for the required -sums,<a id="FNanchor_551" href="#Footnote_551" class="fnanchor">[551]</a> which were gradually to be made good from the special -kind of tax here described. When these equestrian funds were -first granted cannot be absolutely determined. Cicero<a id="FNanchor_552" href="#Footnote_552" class="fnanchor">[552]</a> assigns -their institution to Tarquinius Priscus, Livy<a id="FNanchor_553" href="#Footnote_553" class="fnanchor">[553]</a> to Servius,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_94"></a>[94]</span> -Plutarch<a id="FNanchor_554" href="#Footnote_554" class="fnanchor">[554]</a> to Camillus in the year of his censorship, 377. For -obvious reasons the earlier dates are suspicious, whereas the last -has the advantage of connecting the institution of these funds -with the general movement for the public support of military -service. When in the war with Veii regular military pay was -introduced, the eques on account of his more burdensome duty, -perhaps too because of his higher rank, was allowed three times -the pay of the legionary.<a id="FNanchor_555" href="#Footnote_555" class="fnanchor">[555]</a> It was afterward decided to deduct -the aes hordearium, probably also the aes equestre, from his -pay.<a id="FNanchor_556" href="#Footnote_556" class="fnanchor">[556]</a> Meanwhile as wars were waged on an ever increasing -scale, the patricians, who were dwindling in number, could not -furnish all the cavalry needed. This want was especially felt -in the struggle with Veii, whereupon wealthy plebeian youths<a id="FNanchor_557" href="#Footnote_557" class="fnanchor">[557]</a> -came forward and offered to serve with their own horses.<a id="FNanchor_558" href="#Footnote_558" class="fnanchor">[558]</a> This -is the first known instance of voluntary equestrian duty, doubtless -often repeated at crises during the remainder of the republican -period. In the first case at least the state provided for -the keep of the horses. The volunteers were of the same grade -of wealth as the conscripts; they were held in equal honor,<a id="FNanchor_559" href="#Footnote_559" class="fnanchor">[559]</a> and -most probably their years of voluntary service were counted in -with their regular duty in making up the required number.<a id="FNanchor_560" href="#Footnote_560" class="fnanchor">[560]</a> -Service equo privato could also be imposed as a punishment. -The only known instance, however, was that required by the -censors of 209 of the equites who had disgraced themselves at<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_95"></a>[95]</span> -Cannae. Their horses were taken from them, their campaigns -equo publico were not counted to their credit, but they were required -to serve ten years equis privatis.<a id="FNanchor_561" href="#Footnote_561" class="fnanchor">[561]</a> These are the only -instances of service with private horses mentioned in history. -In all ancient literature is no suggestion that the equites equo -privato formed a rank by themselves or were an institution.<a id="FNanchor_562" href="#Footnote_562" class="fnanchor">[562]</a> It -should also be said that the injustice of furnishing some with -horses and of compelling others to go to war at their own expense, -unless by way of punishment, was contrary to the spirit -of the constitution. This conclusion is supported by the elder -Pliny’s<a id="FNanchor_563" href="#Footnote_563" class="fnanchor">[563]</a> definition of the military equites, which makes the -public horse an essential. From the time therefore when the -state began to support the mounted service in the way described -above, the equites equis publicis continued to be the only regular -citizen horsemen.</p> - -<p>The number of equites with public horses is approximately -determined for any time by the number of legions then enrolled. -The Servian phalanx, as has been noted,<a id="FNanchor_564" href="#Footnote_564" class="fnanchor">[564]</a> consisted of two -legions, which remained the normal number through the fifth -century. But in the wars with Samnium and Pyrrhus Rome -was able regularly to support four legions.<a id="FNanchor_565" href="#Footnote_565" class="fnanchor">[565]</a> The military force -could not have been doubled before the incorporation of the -Veientan territory early in the fourth century;<a id="FNanchor_566" href="#Footnote_566" class="fnanchor">[566]</a> most probably -the enlargement belongs to still later time. The increase in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_96"></a>[96]</span> -infantry required a corresponding enlargement of the mounted -service. At least twelve hundred equites were henceforth required -for active duty. Making allowance for reserves and ineffectives, -the government raised the number of equites equo -publico to eighteen hundred. The twelve new centuries were -open alike to patricians and plebeians, whereas the old six remained -for a time exclusively patrician. This seems to have -been the condition at the opening of the first war with Carthage. -During the Punic wars the number varied greatly, sometimes -reaching a total of more than five thousand in the field, not -counting reserves.<a id="FNanchor_567" href="#Footnote_567" class="fnanchor">[567]</a> After the war with Hannibal the state, -drained of men and money, allowed the cavalry to dwindle.<a id="FNanchor_568" href="#Footnote_568" class="fnanchor">[568]</a> -Viewing this condition with alarm, the elder Cato<a id="FNanchor_569" href="#Footnote_569" class="fnanchor">[569]</a> urged that -the number should be increased, and that a minimal limit be -fixed at 2200. Probably at the same time he proposed that the -legion should be strengthened. His measure must have been -adopted, for after his censorship we find the legion regularly consisting -of 5200 foot and 300 horse.<a id="FNanchor_570" href="#Footnote_570" class="fnanchor">[570]</a> Under Augustus there were -times when 5000 equites<a id="FNanchor_571" href="#Footnote_571" class="fnanchor">[571]</a> equo publico took part in the parade -which he revived.<a id="FNanchor_572" href="#Footnote_572" class="fnanchor">[572]</a> As no reason can be found why Augustus -should suddenly increase this class, we must conclude that there -were probably about 5000 equites equo publico in the late -republic.</p> - -<p>As long as the cavalry remained exclusively patrician, a -census qualification was precluded. Though Cicero and Livy -refer the equestrian census to Servius Tullius, their vagueness<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_97"></a>[97]</span> -on this point shows that they lacked definite information.<a id="FNanchor_573" href="#Footnote_573" class="fnanchor">[573]</a> It -must have been introduced at the time when the patriciate -ceased to be an essential qualification, when the levy came to be -made on the basis of wealth rather than of blood. This change -should be assigned to the early part of the fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span><a id="FNanchor_574" href="#Footnote_574" class="fnanchor">[574]</a> -For a time the census was that of the first class.<a id="FNanchor_575" href="#Footnote_575" class="fnanchor">[575]</a> In 214 it was -still 100,000 asses, or not much above, as has already been -proved.<a id="FNanchor_576" href="#Footnote_576" class="fnanchor">[576]</a> In the late republic and under the emperors the -minimal rating was 400,000 sesterces.<a id="FNanchor_577" href="#Footnote_577" class="fnanchor">[577]</a> When it was raised to -this amount is unknown.</p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>I. <span class="smcap">The Early Graeco-Italian Phalanx</span>: Busolt, <i>Griechische Geschichte</i>, -i, ii (see Contents); Bauer, A., <i>Griechische Kriegsaltertümer</i>; Droysen, H., -<i>Kriegsalterthümer der Griechen</i>, in Hermann’s <i>Lehrb. der griech. Antiquitäten</i>, -ii. 1-74; Gilbert, <i>Constitutional Antiquities of Sparta and Athens</i> -(see Index and Contents); Lammert, E., <i>Geschichtliche Entwickelung der -griech. Taktik</i>, in <i>N. Jahrb. f. kl. Alt.</i> iii (1899). 1-29; <i>Die neuesten Forschungen -auf antiken Schlachtfeldern im Griechenland</i>, in <i>N. Jahrb. f. d. kl. -Philol.</i> xiii (1904). 195-212, 252-79, contains some matters of interest for the -present subject, though it treats mainly of the time after Alexander; Fröhlich, -F., <i>Beiträge zur Kriegsführung und Kriegskunst der Römer zur Zeit der -Republik</i>; Schiller, <i>Röm. Kriegsaltertümer</i>, in Müller’s <i>Hdb. d. kl. Altwiss.</i> -iv. 707 ff.; on earlier literature, 714 f., 728 f., 733, 737, 741, 744; Leinveber, -A., <i>Die Legion von Livius</i>, in <i>Philol.</i> lxi. N. F. xv (1902). 32-41, a specialist -in military science; Nitzsch, K. W., <i>Das Verhältniss von Heer und Staat in -der röm. Republik</i>, in <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> vii (1862). 133-58; Liers, H., <i>Kriegswesen -der Alten</i>; Delbrück, <i>Geschichte der Kriegskunst im Rahmen der -politischen Geschichte</i>, bks. i, iv, best authority; <i>Die römische Manipulartaktik</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_98"></a>[98]</span> -in <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> N. F. xv (1884). 239-64; Niese, B., <i>Ueber Wehrverfassung, -Dienstpflicht, und Heerwesen Griechenlands</i>, ibid, xcviii (1907). -263-301, 473-506; Arnim, H., <i>Ineditum Vaticanum</i>, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxvii (1892). -118-30, the portion of Greek text used is on p. 121; Wendling, E., <i>Zu -Posidonius und Varro</i>, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxviii (1893). 335-53, on the source of -the <i>Ined Vat.</i>; Bruncke, H., in <i>N. Philol. Rundschau</i> (1888) 40-4; Müller-Deecke, -<i>Etrusker</i>, i. 364-72; Müller, J. J., <i>Studien zur röm. Verfassungsgeschichte</i>, -in <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv (1876). 96-136; Helbig, <i>Sur les attributs des -saliens</i>, in <i>Mémoires de l’académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres</i>, xxxvii² -(1905). 205-76; on the same subject, in <i>Comptes rendus de l’acad.</i> etc. 1904. -ii. 206-12.</p> - -<p>II. <span class="smcap">The Military and Political Centuries and Classes</span>: Niebuhr, -B. G., <i>Röm. Geschichte</i>, i. 451-511, Eng. 197-236; Schwegler, <i>Röm. Geschichte</i>, -I. bk. xvii; Huschke, Ph. E., <i>Verfassung des Königs Servius Tullius</i>, especially -chs. iv, vii, viii; Peter, C., <i>Epochen der Verfassungsgeschichte der röm. Republik; -Studien zur röm. Geschichte</i>, controverts Mommsen’s view as to the -military character of the Servian institutions; Mommsen, <i>History of Rome</i>, -bk. I. ch. vi; <i>De apparitoribus magistratuum romanorum</i>, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -N. F. vi (1846). 1-57, includes some account of the accensi; <i>Röm. Tribus</i>, -59-72, 121-143, 160 ff.; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 240 ff.; <i>Röm. Forschungen</i>, i. 134-40; -Willems, P., <i>Droit public Rom.</i> 40, 43, 84-92; Mispoulet, J. B., <i>Institutions -politiques des Romains</i>, i. 203-7; Lange, L., <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, i. -522-66; <i>Cicero über die servianische Centurienverfassung</i>, in <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, -i. 227-234; Herzog, <i>Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, -i. 37-43, 1066 f.; Ihne, W., <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. I. ch. vii; <i>Early Rome</i>, -51-4, 79, 132-9; <i>Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung</i>, in <i>Symbola -Philologorum Bonnensium</i> (1864-1867). 629-44; Breda, <i>Die Centurienverfassung -des Servius Tullius</i>; Genz, H., <i>Servianische Centurien-Verfassung</i>; -Soltau, W., <i>Altröm. Volksversammlungen</i>, 229-96; Ullrich, J., <i>Centuriatcomitien</i>; -Le Tellier, M., <i>L’Organisation centuriate et les comices par centuries</i>, -ch. i; Hallays, A., <i>Les comices à Rome</i>; Morlot, É., <i>Les comices électoraux</i>, -ch. iii; Moye, M., <i>Élections politiques sous la république Rom.</i> chs. iii, iv, vii; -Müller, ibid.; Neumann, K. J., <i>Grundherrschaft der röm. Republik, die -Bauernbefreiung, und die Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung</i>, speculative -but very suggestive; Greenidge, A. H. J., <i>Roman Public Life</i>, 65-76; -<i>Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time</i>, 307 ff.; Schott, P. O., <i>Röm. Geschichte im -Lichte der neuesten Forschungen</i>; Smith, F., <i>Röm. Timokratie</i>; Pardon, <i>De -aerariis</i>; Maue, H., <i>Der praefectus fabrum</i>; Bloch, A., <i>Le praefectus -Fabrum</i>, pt. ii, in <i>Musée Belge</i>, ix (1905). 352-78; Babelon, E., <i>Monnaies de -la république Rom.</i> I. pts. i, ii; <i>Traité des monnaies Grecq. et Rom.</i> i; <i>Origines -de la monnaie</i>; Samwer-Bahrfeldt, <i>Geschichte des alten röm. Münzwesens</i>; -Hill, G. F., <i>Greek and Roman Coins</i>, 45-9; Regling, <i>Zum älteren -röm. und ital. Münzen</i>, in <i>Klio</i>, vi (1906). 489-524; Belot, É., <i>De la révolution -économique et monétaire ... à Rome</i>; articles in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.: -Accensi</i>, i. 135-7 (Kubitschek); <i>Adscriptivi</i>, i. 422 (Cichorius); -<i>Adsiduus</i>, i. 426 (Kubitschek); <i>Aerarius</i>, i. 674-6 (idem); <i>As</i>, ii. 1499-1513<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_99"></a>[99]</span> -(idem); <i>Capite censi</i>, iii. 1521-3 (Kübler); <i>Census</i>, iii. 1914-24 (Kubitschek); -<i>Centuria</i>, iii. 1952-62 (Kübler, Domazewski, Kubitschek); <i>Classis</i>, iii. 2630-32 -(Kübler); <i>Collegium</i>, iv. 380-480 (Kornemann); <i>Comitia</i>, iv. 679-715 -(Liebenam); <i>Cornicines</i>, iv. 1602 f. (Fiebiger); <i>Denarius</i>, v. 202-15 (Hultsch); -articles in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.: Accensus</i>, i. 16 ff. (Humbert and -others); <i>As</i>, i. 454-64 (Lenormant); <i>Census</i>, ii. 1003-17 (Humbert); <i>Centuria</i>, -ii. 1017 (idem); <i>Classis</i>, i. 1224 f. (idem); <i>Comices centuriates</i>, s. -<i>Comitia</i>, ii. 1378 ff. (idem); articles in Ruggiero, E., <i>Dizionario epigrafico: -Accensus</i>, i. 18-21; <i>Aerarius</i>, i. 311-3; <i>Aes</i>, i. 313 f.; <i>Centuria</i>, ii. 183-9; -<i>Censor</i>, ii. 157 ff.; <i>Census</i>, ii. 174-7; <i>Cornicines</i>, ii. 1213-6; <i>Fabri</i>, iii. 4-18 -(Libenam); Olcott, <i>Thes. ling. lat. ep.</i> i. 51: Accensus; Pais, E., <i>Ancient -Legends of Roman History</i>, ch. vii.</p> - -<p>III. <span class="smcap">The Equites</span>: Niebuhr, ibid. i. 415-22, Eng. 197-200; Schwegler, -ibid. i. 756-60; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 444-7, 523, 547-51; <i>Recension über K. -Niemeyer, De equitibus romanis commentatio historica</i>, in <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, i. -113-37; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 397-400; iii. 106-9, 253-62; Madvig, -J. N., <i>Verfassung und Verwaltung des röm. Staates</i>, i. 155-82; Mispoulet, -J. B., <i>Études d’institutions Rom.</i> 151-226; Bloch, G., <i>Origines du sénat -Rom.</i> 46-95; Marquardt, J., <i>Historiae equitum romanorum libri iv</i>; Gomont, -M. H., <i>Chevaliers Rom. depuis Romulus jusqu’à Galba</i>; Niemeyer, K., <i>De -equitibus romanis commentatio historica</i>; Rubino, J., <i>Ueber das Verhältniss -der VI Suffragia zur röm. Ritterschaft</i>, in <i>Zeitschr. f. d. Altertumswiss.</i> iv -(1846). 212-39; Bertolini, C. I., <i>I celeres ed il tribunus celerum</i>; Belot, É., -<i>Histoire des chevaliers Rom.</i> 2 vols.; Gerathewohl, H., <i>Die Reiter und die -Rittercenturien zur Zeit der röm. Republik</i>, valuable; Kubitschek, J. W., -<i>Aes equestre</i>, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 682-4; Kübler, <i>Equites Romani</i>, -ibid. vi. 272-312; Martin, A., <i>Equites</i> (Greek), in Daremberg et Saglio, -<i>Dict.</i> ii. 752-71; Cagnat, R., <i>Equites</i> (Roman), ibid. ii. 771-89; Helbig, W., -<i>Observations sur les ἱππεῖς Athéniens</i>, in <i>Comptes rendus de l’académie des -inscriptions et belles-lettres</i>, 1900. 516-22; <i>Les ἱππεῖς Athéniens</i>, in <i>Mémoires -de l’acad.</i> etc. xxxvii¹ (1904). 157-264; <i>Die ἱππεῖς und ihre Knappen</i>, in -<i>Jahreshefte des österr. archäol instituts</i>, viii. 2. 185-202; Peterson, E., <i>Zu -Helbigs ἱππεῖς</i>, etc., ibid., 125 f.; Helbig, <i>Zur Geschichte des röm. Equitatus, -A. Die Equites als berittene Hopliten</i>, in <i>Abhdl. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> -xxiii (1905). 267-317; <i>Die Castores als Schutzgötter des röm. Equitatus</i>, in -<i>Hermes</i>, xl (1905). 101-15; <i>Contribution à l’histoire de l’equitatus</i>, in <i>Comptes -rendus de l’acad. des inscriptions et belles-lettres</i>, 1904. ii. 190-201; Pellegrini, -G., <i>Fregi arcaici etruschi in terracotta</i>, etc., in Milani, L. A., <i>Studi e materiali -archeol. e numis.</i> i. 87-118.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_100"></a>[100]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_V">CHAPTER V<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE AUSPICES</span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>Auspicia Privata</i></h4> - -<p>Auspices (auspicia) were signs sent by the gods through -which they declared their will to men. Those given in answer -to prayer were impetrativa (or impetrita), those sent unasked -oblativa. The first were necessarily favorable; the second -might be either favorable or the contrary.<a id="FNanchor_578" href="#Footnote_578" class="fnanchor">[578]</a> To take or to hold -auspices was to seek such signs in due form. Auspicia, or the -singular auspicium, also designated the right or the power to -perform the function. They were not a means of prophecy of -future events but of ascertaining whether the deity approved a -proposed action.<a id="FNanchor_579" href="#Footnote_579" class="fnanchor">[579]</a> With reference to their object and to the -persons qualified to take them, they were of two kinds, private -and public. Whereas the public auspices, taken in behalf of the -state, belonged exclusively to magistrates, the private were open -to all;<a id="FNanchor_580" href="#Footnote_580" class="fnanchor">[580]</a> and in early times a Roman always resorted to them -before beginning any important business.<a id="FNanchor_581" href="#Footnote_581" class="fnanchor">[581]</a> Though it was permissible -to consult any deity,<a id="FNanchor_582" href="#Footnote_582" class="fnanchor">[582]</a> the greatest weight attached to -the approval of the supreme god Jupiter.<a id="FNanchor_583" href="#Footnote_583" class="fnanchor">[583]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_101"></a>[101]</span></p> - -<p>The plebeians, who as long as they were excluded from the -magistracies were necessarily debarred from the auspicia publica, -enjoyed equally with the patricians all private rights of -religion; in fact if the nobles had wished, they possessed no -legal means of preventing the holding of auspices or the performance -of any other sacred rite in private plebeian houses. -Not only is it stated that all had a right to auspicate,<a id="FNanchor_584" href="#Footnote_584" class="fnanchor">[584]</a> but the -formula for summoning troops given by Cincius<a id="FNanchor_585" href="#Footnote_585" class="fnanchor">[585]</a> implies that -the soldiers, who were mainly plebeian, were accustomed to -perform the rite. We find accordingly the elder Cato, a plebeian, -attending to the ceremony in his own home.<a id="FNanchor_586" href="#Footnote_586" class="fnanchor">[586]</a> The patricians, -however, who believed themselves to be nearer and -dearer to the gods than were the plebeians, and who in their -struggle to keep themselves a closed caste and the offices -barred against the lower social class, declared that conubium if -granted would disturb the private as well as public auspices.<a id="FNanchor_587" href="#Footnote_587" class="fnanchor">[587]</a> -But this assertion need not signify that the plebeians had no -private auspices, it might indicate merely a difference between -the plebeian and patrician ceremonies, naturally implying the -superiority of the latter. Again when on a certain occasion -according to Livy a tribune of the plebs inquired of a patrician -why a plebeian could not be made consul, the reply was -that no plebeian had the auspices, reiterating that the decemvirs -had forbidden conubium to prevent the disturbance of the -ceremony by uncertainty of birth.<a id="FNanchor_588" href="#Footnote_588" class="fnanchor">[588]</a> Reference might here be -simply to the auspicia publica, with which alone the consul was -concerned. However this may be, the patrician claim was indignantly -repudiated by the plebeians, and the historian can -say no more than that it was “perhaps true.” Another passage -from Livy usually interpreted in support of the theory<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_102"></a>[102]</span> -that the patricians alone had private auspices represents them, -before the opening of the offices to the commons, as saying, -“So peculiar to us are the auspices that not only the patrician -magistrates whom the people choose are elected under the auspices, -but we ourselves under the sanction of the same rite -without a vote of the people appoint the interrex, and we as -private persons hold auspices, which they do not hold even as -magistrates.”<a id="FNanchor_589" href="#Footnote_589" class="fnanchor">[589]</a> This passage is perfectly intelligible to one who -bears in mind that in the late republic private auspices had -disappeared,<a id="FNanchor_590" href="#Footnote_590" class="fnanchor">[590]</a> and that therefore when the word auspicia is used -without qualification by a late republican or imperial writer, it -always has reference to the public ceremonies.<a id="FNanchor_591" href="#Footnote_591" class="fnanchor">[591]</a> In the quotation -just given, accordingly, nothing more is meant than that -the patricians, who have the exclusive right to the offices, are -alone competent to perform the public religious ceremonies -which belong to the magistrates. Reference in the quotation -to the auspices of private persons signifies that when there was -no magistrate competent to hold the election of consuls, the -public auspices returned to the senate, the patrician members -of which proceeded under auspication to appoint an interrex for -holding the elections. In this case the senatorial patricians, it -was asserted, attended to the ceremony not as magistrates but -as private persons, though the rites were themselves public. -As distinguished from magistrates, the senators were privati. -It was not, then, as mere citizens but as patrician members of -the senate that they performed the rite. Further light is -thrown on this subject by the fact that in the agitation for the -opening of the augural and pontifical colleges to the plebeians -in 300, the patricians repeated the assertion that with them -alone were auspices, they alone had family (gens), they alone -possessed true imperium and auspicium in peace and war.<a id="FNanchor_592" href="#Footnote_592" class="fnanchor">[592]</a> -This claim they had the effrontery to make despite the fact that -plebeian consuls had been taking public auspices for more than<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_103"></a>[103]</span> -sixty years. In the pride of their blood they claimed that theirs -alone were strictly legal (iustum). Notwithstanding such partisan -assertions the facts thus far adduced lead unmistakably -to the conclusion that the plebeians equally with the patricians -enjoyed the right to private auspices.<a id="FNanchor_593" href="#Footnote_593" class="fnanchor">[593]</a></p> - -<h4>II. <i>Auspicia Publica Impetrativa</i></h4> - -<p>The right to public auspices belonged primarily to patrician -magistracies<a id="FNanchor_594" href="#Footnote_594" class="fnanchor">[594]</a>—those which in the early republic were filled -only by patricians, but which continued to be called patrician -after they were open to plebeians. All elections and appointments -to such offices were auspicated;<a id="FNanchor_595" href="#Footnote_595" class="fnanchor">[595]</a> and their incumbents -were expected to seek the previous approval of Jupiter for every -important act of their administration.<a id="FNanchor_596" href="#Footnote_596" class="fnanchor">[596]</a> The king, interrex, dictator, -consuls, praetors, and censors had the auspicia maxima; the -others the minora.<a id="FNanchor_597" href="#Footnote_597" class="fnanchor">[597]</a> The praetor, as colleague of the consuls, -was elected under the same auspices with them, that is, in the -same meeting of the assembly, whereas the censors, not being -colleagues of the consuls, were elected under different auspices. -Between magistrates who were not colleagues there could be no -collision in the auspicia impetrativa; those of the censors neither -strengthened nor vitiated those of the consuls or praetors, nor -were strengthened or vitiated by them. In case of a conflict -between colleagues, the greater auspices annulled the lesser, and -equal auspices annulled each other.<a id="FNanchor_598" href="#Footnote_598" class="fnanchor">[598]</a> For the exercise of a -function properly belonging to a magistracy, the incumbent performed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_104"></a>[104]</span> -the ceremony at his own will and pleasure, unless expressly -forbidden by a superior;<a id="FNanchor_599" href="#Footnote_599" class="fnanchor">[599]</a> but one who undertook a -deputed duty had to ask the auspicium of a magistrate who was -competent to perform the duty in his own right. Thus the -quaestor, who was not qualified by right of his office to call the -comitia centuriata, found it necessary to do so in his capital -prosecutions. In such a case he asked of the praetor or consul the -right to hold auspices for summoning this assembly.<a id="FNanchor_600" href="#Footnote_600" class="fnanchor">[600]</a> Whether -the pontifex maximus held auspices in his own name, or was -obliged, like the quaestor, to apply for them to a higher secular -official, is unknown; at all events it was necessary for him to -auspicate the comitia calata, over which he presided.<a id="FNanchor_601" href="#Footnote_601" class="fnanchor">[601]</a> It seems -probable that the tribunes originally did not have the right as -they were not magistrates; but when they came to be so considered, -they acquired the auspicium. All magistrates—necessarily -including the tribunes—who convoked the senate had -previously to perform the ceremony;<a id="FNanchor_602" href="#Footnote_602" class="fnanchor">[602]</a> Cicero<a id="FNanchor_603" href="#Footnote_603" class="fnanchor">[603]</a> seems to include -the tribunes among the magistrates who had the auspicium; -and as further proof the very expression “patriciorum (magistratuum) -auspicia”<a id="FNanchor_604" href="#Footnote_604" class="fnanchor">[604]</a> used by Messala implies the existence of -“plebeiorum magistratuum auspicia.” It was not the custom -of the tribunes, however, to auspicate their assemblies of the -plebs.<a id="FNanchor_605" href="#Footnote_605" class="fnanchor">[605]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_105"></a>[105]</span></p> - -<p>For assistance in auspication the magistrate summoned any -person he pleased, who was rarely if ever a public augur.<a id="FNanchor_606" href="#Footnote_606" class="fnanchor">[606]</a> An -augur,<a id="FNanchor_607" href="#Footnote_607" class="fnanchor">[607]</a> whether private or official, was a person who knew -how to hold and to interpret auspices.<a id="FNanchor_608" href="#Footnote_608" class="fnanchor">[608]</a> A college of public -augurs<a id="FNanchor_609" href="#Footnote_609" class="fnanchor">[609]</a> for the service of the state was established in the -most primitive times. Probably comprising three members, -one from each tribe, it was gradually increased till under Sulla -it reached fifteen.<a id="FNanchor_610" href="#Footnote_610" class="fnanchor">[610]</a> The members of the college were neither<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_106"></a>[106]</span> -magistrates<a id="FNanchor_611" href="#Footnote_611" class="fnanchor">[611]</a> nor prophets. They were rather the wise,<a id="FNanchor_612" href="#Footnote_612" class="fnanchor">[612]</a> experienced<a id="FNanchor_613" href="#Footnote_613" class="fnanchor">[613]</a> -keepers and expounders of a sacred science and art<a id="FNanchor_614" href="#Footnote_614" class="fnanchor">[614]</a>—the -“interpreters of Jupiter All-Great and Good.”<a id="FNanchor_615" href="#Footnote_615" class="fnanchor">[615]</a> Having -to do with religion, they were sacerdotes, like the pontiffs, -though not offerers of sacrifice (flamines).<a id="FNanchor_616" href="#Footnote_616" class="fnanchor">[616]</a> The functions which -they exercised independently of the magistrates included the -inauguration of religious officials (inaugurare sacerdotes), the -blessing of fields twice a year, and of the people after the -close of a war.<a id="FNanchor_617" href="#Footnote_617" class="fnanchor">[617]</a> In attending to such duties (auguria) only -did they exercise their right to the auspices.<a id="FNanchor_618" href="#Footnote_618" class="fnanchor">[618]</a> In a dependent -though far more influential position they acted as the professionally -skilled advisers and assistants of the magistrates in -all matters of peace and war.<a id="FNanchor_619" href="#Footnote_619" class="fnanchor">[619]</a> If a magistrate was not himself -an augur,<a id="FNanchor_620" href="#Footnote_620" class="fnanchor">[620]</a> it was of the utmost importance to have their service; -for the science of discovering and interpreting the divine -omens was intricate, mistakes were easy, and the slightest -oversight might vitiate the whole business in hand. When -in doubt as to the validity of the ceremony, either the magistrate -to whom it belonged or the senate could refer the case -to the college of augurs, which thereupon gave an opinion<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_107"></a>[107]</span> -in the form of a decree. The senate then acted on the -matter according to its judgment.<a id="FNanchor_621" href="#Footnote_621" class="fnanchor">[621]</a> In case a law had been -passed, a magistrate elected, or any public act performed -against its wishes, it could inquire of the college of augurs -whether the election or other act had been duly auspicated; -and should a defect be alleged, the senate could annul the -act or request the magistrate to resign. It required unusual -courage in a man to keep himself in office in defiance of the -authority of the senate and of the religious feeling of the -whole people.<a id="FNanchor_622" href="#Footnote_622" class="fnanchor">[622]</a> These considerations account for the great -importance attaching to the presence of augurs in the comitia—a -subject to be treated in another connection.<a id="FNanchor_623" href="#Footnote_623" class="fnanchor">[623]</a></p> - -<p>The service of augurs was most needed in establishing the -terrestrial templum<a id="FNanchor_624" href="#Footnote_624" class="fnanchor">[624]</a>—a carefully marked out, oriented spot -which the magistrate occupied while performing the rite.<a id="FNanchor_625" href="#Footnote_625" class="fnanchor">[625]</a> -Whereas the commander of an army generally made use of -chicken auspices (signa ex tripudiis), which did not require -their assistance,<a id="FNanchor_626" href="#Footnote_626" class="fnanchor">[626]</a> they were doubtless always called upon to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_108"></a>[108]</span> -institute templa in or near the city.<a id="FNanchor_627" href="#Footnote_627" class="fnanchor">[627]</a> For the exercise of -their art they divided the world, so far as known to them, into -augural districts. The central district was the city, limited by -the pomerium,<a id="FNanchor_628" href="#Footnote_628" class="fnanchor">[628]</a> beyond which, probably extending to the first -milestone,<a id="FNanchor_629" href="#Footnote_629" class="fnanchor">[629]</a> lay a zone termed ager effatus,<a id="FNanchor_630" href="#Footnote_630" class="fnanchor">[630]</a> whose boundaries -were marked by cippi.<a id="FNanchor_631" href="#Footnote_631" class="fnanchor">[631]</a> The rest of the world within their -sphere of knowledge they divided into ager Romanus, which in its -larger sense included the two districts above mentioned, Gabinus, -peregrinus, hosticus, and incertus.<a id="FNanchor_632" href="#Footnote_632" class="fnanchor">[632]</a> For the comitia the -two inner regions were alone important: (1) the auspication of -assemblies held in the city had to be performed within the -pomerium; (2) as often as the magistrate in passing from the -city to the Campus Martius to hold the comitia centuriata -crossed the pomerium,<a id="FNanchor_633" href="#Footnote_633" class="fnanchor">[633]</a> or more strictly the brook Petronia,<a id="FNanchor_634" href="#Footnote_634" class="fnanchor">[634]</a> he -was obliged to take the special auspices of crossing. Beyond -the ager effatus assemblies were not ordinarily held.</p> - -<p>Originally the most common form of divination must have -been the watching of the flight of birds, for it is from this ceremony -that the word auspicium is derived.<a id="FNanchor_635" href="#Footnote_635" class="fnanchor">[635]</a> Legend accordingly -asserts that Romulus founded the city on the Palatine under the -auspices of twelve vultures.<a id="FNanchor_636" href="#Footnote_636" class="fnanchor">[636]</a> Before the end of the republic, -however, all other forms of public auspicia impetrativa in the -city had given way to the caelestia, especially the lightning and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_109"></a>[109]</span> -thunder.<a id="FNanchor_637" href="#Footnote_637" class="fnanchor">[637]</a> The reason is that the heavenly signs could be most -easily understood and carried greatest weight; whereas other -auspices had to be held for each individual act, the celestial -omens of the morning served the magistrate for all his undertakings -during the entire day.<a id="FNanchor_638" href="#Footnote_638" class="fnanchor">[638]</a> The effect of heavenly signs -on assemblies of the people, however, was peculiar. Not only -were comitia and contiones interrupted by storms;<a id="FNanchor_639" href="#Footnote_639" class="fnanchor">[639]</a> not only was -it impious to hold an assembly while it was lightning or thundering,<a id="FNanchor_640" href="#Footnote_640" class="fnanchor">[640]</a> -but even while the magistrate was auspicating at daybreak, -if a flash of lightning appeared on the left—a sign -favorable for every other undertaking—he dared not hold the -assembly on that day.<a id="FNanchor_641" href="#Footnote_641" class="fnanchor">[641]</a> Some favorable comitial sign the magistrate -was supposed to perceive,<a id="FNanchor_642" href="#Footnote_642" class="fnanchor">[642]</a> but what it was we do not -know.</p> - -<p>The general rule that the auspices should be taken for an act -on the very spot on which the magistrate intended to perform -the act applied to the comitial auspices. For meetings on the -Capitoline Hill they probably used the temple of Jupiter, dedicated -for all time;<a id="FNanchor_643" href="#Footnote_643" class="fnanchor">[643]</a> for assemblies in the comitium the rostra, -also a templum;<a id="FNanchor_644" href="#Footnote_644" class="fnanchor">[644]</a> and for the comitia centuriata the president’s -platform in the Campus Martius.<a id="FNanchor_645" href="#Footnote_645" class="fnanchor">[645]</a> Not only patrician magistrates -but also tribunes of the plebs occupied templa in transacting -business with the people.<a id="FNanchor_646" href="#Footnote_646" class="fnanchor">[646]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_110"></a>[110]</span></p> - -<p>Between midnight and morning<a id="FNanchor_647" href="#Footnote_647" class="fnanchor">[647]</a> on the day of assembly the -magistrate repaired to the templum.<a id="FNanchor_648" href="#Footnote_648" class="fnanchor">[648]</a> There, placing himself on -a solid<a id="FNanchor_649" href="#Footnote_649" class="fnanchor">[649]</a> seat at the door, usually facing eastward, he watched -the heavens (spectio). Meanwhile he first asked the attendant, -who always sat near,<a id="FNanchor_650" href="#Footnote_650" class="fnanchor">[650]</a> whether there was silence.<a id="FNanchor_651" href="#Footnote_651" class="fnanchor">[651]</a> If the -answer was affirmative, he prayed Jupiter for a sign, which he -described in a formula termed legum dictio,<a id="FNanchor_652" href="#Footnote_652" class="fnanchor">[652]</a> whereupon the -attendant declared he saw it.<a id="FNanchor_653" href="#Footnote_653" class="fnanchor">[653]</a> In case of non-appearance of the -sign or of a disturbance of the observation, the auspication was -deferred to another morning.<a id="FNanchor_654" href="#Footnote_654" class="fnanchor">[654]</a> Before the time of Cicero, however, -the ceremony had been so reduced to a pretence as practically -to eliminate the possibility of failure.<a id="FNanchor_655" href="#Footnote_655" class="fnanchor">[655]</a></p> - -<p>Both curiate<a id="FNanchor_656" href="#Footnote_656" class="fnanchor">[656]</a> and centuriate<a id="FNanchor_657" href="#Footnote_657" class="fnanchor">[657]</a> assemblies were auspicated. -Although for the tribal assemblies the question is more difficult, -it seems reasonably certain that whereas a patrician magistrate -took the auspices for the comitia tributa,<a id="FNanchor_658" href="#Footnote_658" class="fnanchor">[658]</a> plebeian magistrates -(tribunes and aediles of the plebs) did not.<a id="FNanchor_659" href="#Footnote_659" class="fnanchor">[659]</a></p> - -<p>As to whether contiones were auspicated we are not clearly -informed. The question concerns those only which were held -by patrician magistrates. The auspication of comitia necessarily -extended to the contio immediately preceding.<a id="FNanchor_660" href="#Footnote_660" class="fnanchor">[660]</a> It is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_111"></a>[111]</span> -known, too, that the censors auspicated the lustral gathering of -the centuries,<a id="FNanchor_661" href="#Footnote_661" class="fnanchor">[661]</a> hence we may infer that magistrates and sacerdotes -were accustomed to take auspices for formal religious -assemblies.<a id="FNanchor_662" href="#Footnote_662" class="fnanchor">[662]</a> With these exceptions contiones were doubtless -held without auspices by patrician as well as by plebeian magistrates.</p> - -<h4>III. <i>Auspicia Publica Oblativa</i></h4> - -<p>If Jupiter had approved the holding of an assembly, the magistrate -was not for that reason necessarily done with auspices. -Though the impetrativa may have favored, prohibitive oblativa -were still possible, for circumstances might cause the god to -change his mind so as to forbid what he had previously sanctioned; -and the warning omen might come at any time before -the act was completed. Sometimes the magistrate himself discovered, -or for the accomplishment of his purpose pretended to -discover, the evil omen. When for instance Pompey was holding -an assembly for the election of praetors, and Cato, a political -opponent, offered himself as a candidate, Pompey, seeing the -assembly unanimous for this man, declared that he heard a clap -of thunder, and thus by an adjournment succeeded in preventing -the election.<a id="FNanchor_663" href="#Footnote_663" class="fnanchor">[663]</a> Sometimes the magistrate was informed of the -omen by (1) a private person, (2) an augur, or (3) another -magistrate. In the first two cases the report was termed nuntiatio, -in the third obnuntiatio.<a id="FNanchor_664" href="#Footnote_664" class="fnanchor">[664]</a> Information received from a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_112"></a>[112]</span> -private citizen the president could credit or not as he saw fit, or -he could declare it irrelevant;<a id="FNanchor_665" href="#Footnote_665" class="fnanchor">[665]</a> but the law compelled him to -accept the nuntiatio of an augur or the obnuntiatio of another -magistrate.</p> - -<p>Prohibitive auspicia oblativa included evil omens of all kinds. -When in 310 the dictator called the curiae for passing the lex -de imperio, it chanced that the Curia Faucia was the first to -vote (principium). Now this curia was ill omened because on -two earlier occasions it had happened to be principium at a time -of great national disaster. The dictator accordingly adjourned -the meeting till the following day, when he again summoned -it after renewing the auspicia impetrativa.<a id="FNanchor_666" href="#Footnote_666" class="fnanchor">[666]</a> A case of epilepsy, -by vitiating the business of the assembly, required an adjournment; -and for that reason the malady was called the comitial -sickness.<a id="FNanchor_667" href="#Footnote_667" class="fnanchor">[667]</a> In the later republic the chief oblativa had come to -be caelestia; and it could happen that the auspicia impetrativa -of any magistrate might as oblativa vitiate the comitia of another. -For this reason when a higher magistrate was about -to hold an assembly, he forbade the taking of auspices by all -inferior to him, for fear they might annul his proceedings.<a id="FNanchor_668" href="#Footnote_668" class="fnanchor">[668]</a></p> - -<p>Although the augurs had neither the auspicia impetrativa nor -the right to watch the sky for unfavorable omens,<a id="FNanchor_669" href="#Footnote_669" class="fnanchor">[669]</a> they were -competent to report (nuntiatio) unexpected oblativa to the magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_670" href="#Footnote_670" class="fnanchor">[670]</a> -Their object in attending the comitia accordingly was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_113"></a>[113]</span> -not only to assist the president with their special knowledge,<a id="FNanchor_671" href="#Footnote_671" class="fnanchor">[671]</a> -but also to witness the religious legality of the proceeding. In -the latter function the augur derived great influence<a id="FNanchor_672" href="#Footnote_672" class="fnanchor">[672]</a> from the -possibility of an investigation into such legality by the augural -college and the senate, which might result in the annulment of -the act.<a id="FNanchor_673" href="#Footnote_673" class="fnanchor">[673]</a> For this reason witnessing augurs were granted the -privilege of adjourning the assembly in case they perceived -unfavorable omens.<a id="FNanchor_674" href="#Footnote_674" class="fnanchor">[674]</a> Cicero<a id="FNanchor_675" href="#Footnote_675" class="fnanchor">[675]</a> describes in detail such an adjournment -of an electoral assembly of centuries: “Behold the -day for the election of Dolabella! The prerogative century is -drawn by lot, he (the augur) remains quiet. The vote is announced, -he is silent. The first class is called and the announcement -made. Then as usual the suffragia (of the equites?) were -summoned; then the second class is called. All this happened -more quickly than I have told it.</p> - -<p>“When the business is over, that excellent augur says, ‘We -adjourn to another day.’ O remarkable impudence! What -(omen) had you seen? What had you felt? What had you -heard?” Antony, who was both consul and augur, presiding -over the electoral assembly, allowed the voting to continue till -a majority was nearly reached in favor of Dolabella, when, -making use of the augural formula, he adjourned the meeting. -This procedure was in itself legal; but Antony had from the -beginning of the year boasted of his intention to prevent through -augury this man’s election. As only magistrates, through their -right to the spectio, to be explained hereafter, could with certainty -predict an evil omen,<a id="FNanchor_676" href="#Footnote_676" class="fnanchor">[676]</a> it was evident that Antony, acting -merely as augur, made a fictitious report.</p> - -<p>Augurs were always present at meetings of the curiae,<a id="FNanchor_677" href="#Footnote_677" class="fnanchor">[677]</a> of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_114"></a>[114]</span> -the centuries,<a id="FNanchor_678" href="#Footnote_678" class="fnanchor">[678]</a> and of the tribes under the presidency of a patrician -magistrate.<a id="FNanchor_679" href="#Footnote_679" class="fnanchor">[679]</a> That they attended the meetings of the plebs -as well and had the same relation to the plebeian as to the other -assemblies is necessarily implied in Cicero’s<a id="FNanchor_680" href="#Footnote_680" class="fnanchor">[680]</a> question, “What -shows greater religious power than to be able to grant or refuse -to grant the right to transact business with the people or with -the plebs?”</p> - -<p>If the person who reported the evil omen was not an augur -but a magistrate, the president was equally bound to heed it and -to dismiss the assembly;<a id="FNanchor_681" href="#Footnote_681" class="fnanchor">[681]</a> and the force of the obnuntiatio was -not in any way affected by the relative official rank of the two -persons concerned. When accordingly a higher magistrate had -set a day for an assembly, he forbade all inferior magistrates not -only to take the auspicia impetrativa,<a id="FNanchor_682" href="#Footnote_682" class="fnanchor">[682]</a> but also to watch the sky—de -caelo servare—for any purpose on that day, for fear that -some omen unfavorable to the comitia might be seen.<a id="FNanchor_683" href="#Footnote_683" class="fnanchor">[683]</a> A -consul for instance could prevent a quaestor from scanning the -heavens on any particular day; and the senate on the rare occasions -when it felt itself sufficiently strong, suspended for a particular -act of the assembly the right of all magistrates to receive -and to announce unfavorable omens.<a id="FNanchor_684" href="#Footnote_684" class="fnanchor">[684]</a> In the absence of senatorial -interference it remained possible for any higher magistrate -to scan the heavens—de caelo servare—on an assembly -day appointed by another, and to vitiate the comitia by reporting -an unfavorable omen. We find accordingly a consul obnuntiating -against a colleague<a id="FNanchor_685" href="#Footnote_685" class="fnanchor">[685]</a> and against the pontifex maximus,<a id="FNanchor_686" href="#Footnote_686" class="fnanchor">[686]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_115"></a>[115]</span> -a praetor against a tribune of the plebs,<a id="FNanchor_687" href="#Footnote_687" class="fnanchor">[687]</a> and a tribune against -a consul<a id="FNanchor_688" href="#Footnote_688" class="fnanchor">[688]</a> or a censor,<a id="FNanchor_689" href="#Footnote_689" class="fnanchor">[689]</a> as well as against a colleague.<a id="FNanchor_690" href="#Footnote_690" class="fnanchor">[690]</a></p> - -<p>So certain was it that a magistrate who looked for a bad omen -would see one that the expression “to watch the sky” became -equivalent to discovering an unpropitious sign. The rule was -therefore formulated that “religion forbade the transaction of -any business with the people when it was known that the sky -was watched.”<a id="FNanchor_691" href="#Footnote_691" class="fnanchor">[691]</a> If accordingly a magistrate announced that he -intended to scan the heavens on the day appointed for an assembly, -this declaration was in itself sufficient in the ordinary -course of events to compel a postponement. In the year 57 Milo, -a tribune of the plebs, pushed the custom to extremes by declaring -his intention to observe the sky on all comitial days.<a id="FNanchor_692" href="#Footnote_692" class="fnanchor">[692]</a> Strictly -the observation had to be made and reported before the assembly -met. “Can any one divine beforehand,” Cicero<a id="FNanchor_693" href="#Footnote_693" class="fnanchor">[693]</a> asks, “what -defect there will be in the auspices, except the man who has -already determined to watch the heavens? This in the first place -the law forbids to be done in the time of an assembly; and if -any one has been observing the sky, he is bound to give notice -of it, not after the comitia are assembled, but before they meet.” -In the case belonging to the year 57 referred to above, Milo, the -tribune, came into the Campus Martius before midnight in order -to anticipate the arrival of the consul Metellus, who wished to -hold the elections. The assembly ordinarily met at sunrise, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_116"></a>[116]</span> -could not convene after midday. Milo accordingly remained on -that day till noon, without seeing the consul. Then Metellus -demanded that for the future the obnuntiatio should be served -on him in the Forum; it was unnecessary, he said, to go to the -Campus before daybreak; he promised to be in the comitium -at the first hour of the day. As Milo was coming into the Forum -before sunrise on the next comitial day, he discovered Metellus -stealing hurriedly to the Campus by an unusual route. The -tribune came upon him and served the notice.<a id="FNanchor_694" href="#Footnote_694" class="fnanchor">[694]</a></p> - -<p>The consul’s announcement of intention to watch the sky -might be strengthened by a proclamation declaring certain or -all comitial days for the remainder of the year to be holidays, -on which the people could not legally transact business in -assembly.<a id="FNanchor_695" href="#Footnote_695" class="fnanchor">[695]</a></p> - -<p>Although the obnuntiatio doubtless originated in the early -republic, it played no considerable part in political strife till -after the Gracchi. A great impetus to the abuse of the power -was given by the Aelian and Fufian laws, which were probably -two plebiscites<a id="FNanchor_696" href="#Footnote_696" class="fnanchor">[696]</a> passed about 150.<a id="FNanchor_697" href="#Footnote_697" class="fnanchor">[697]</a> What features of these -statutes were new has not been precisely determined. It is certain, -however, that they made possible the condition in which -we find the spectio and obnuntiatio before the legislation of -Clodius on the subject in 58. As the tribune did not originally -have the obnuntiatio, we may infer that in all probability these -laws granted him the right to exercise it against patrician magistrates<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_117"></a>[117]</span> -in the way described above. Similarly from the fact -that the plebeian tribal assembly was not originally subject to -religious obstruction on the part of the government, it is reasonable -to conclude that the Aelian and Fufian statutes gave the -patrician magistrates the obnuntiatio against that body.<a id="FNanchor_698" href="#Footnote_698" class="fnanchor">[698]</a> It was -equivalent to a power of veto, which the aristocracy could now -exercise upon tribunician legislation, hence Cicero<a id="FNanchor_699" href="#Footnote_699" class="fnanchor">[699]</a> regards the -two statutes as most holy<a id="FNanchor_700" href="#Footnote_700" class="fnanchor">[700]</a> means of “weakening and repressing -the fury of the tribunes,” and as the “surest protection of the -commonwealth.”<a id="FNanchor_701" href="#Footnote_701" class="fnanchor">[701]</a> Notwithstanding the opinion of Lange,<a id="FNanchor_702" href="#Footnote_702" class="fnanchor">[702]</a> that -the obnuntiatio was restricted to legislation, it seems clear from -the words of Cicero,<a id="FNanchor_703" href="#Footnote_703" class="fnanchor">[703]</a> as well as from the lack of reference -in the sources to such a limitation, that it applied equally to -elections. So long, however, as the nobility could depend for -support upon the tribunes, it had little need of such a power. -But in the last years of the republic, after the tribunician veto -had been undermined by Ti. Gracchus and Appuleius Saturninus, -and the tribunes were again acting independently of the -senate as in the early history of their office, optimates and populares, -taking full advantage of the Aelian and Fufian laws, -alike exploited the auspices recklessly for partisan objects. -Their behavior was a sign of both religious and political disintegration. -Vatinius, tribune of the plebs in 59, had the boldness -utterly to disregard these statutes;<a id="FNanchor_704" href="#Footnote_704" class="fnanchor">[704]</a> and in 58 the tribune -Clodius repealed them in so far as they affected legislation,<a id="FNanchor_705" href="#Footnote_705" class="fnanchor">[705]</a> -whereas for elections the obnuntiatio still remained in force.<a id="FNanchor_706" href="#Footnote_706" class="fnanchor">[706]</a> -The misuse of auspices for political purposes dates back, -according to Livy,<a id="FNanchor_707" href="#Footnote_707" class="fnanchor">[707]</a> to the beginning of the Samnite wars.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_118"></a>[118]</span> -Although this may be an anticipation of later conditions, there -can be no doubt as to the attitude of statesmen toward the custom -in the closing years of the Punic wars.<a id="FNanchor_708" href="#Footnote_708" class="fnanchor">[708]</a> In the time of Clodius -and Cicero, while some maintained a sincere belief in these -ceremonies, doubtless the great majority of public men saw in -their use nothing more than political chicanery calculated, by -deceiving the multitude, to keep the real power in the hands of -a few.<a id="FNanchor_709" href="#Footnote_709" class="fnanchor">[709]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Rubino, J., <i>Untersuchungen über röm. Verfassung und Geschichte</i>, 34-106; -Nissen, H., <i>Das Templum</i>; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, i. 76-116; -Marquardt, J., <i>Röm. Staatsverwaltung</i>, iii. 397-415; Lange, L., <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, -3 vols, index s. Augures, Auspicia, Inauguratio, etc.; <i>De legibus -Aelia et Fufia commentatio</i>, in <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, i. 274-341; Herzog, E., -<i>Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, 621-30, see also index s. -Augures, Auspicien; Müller-Deecke, <i>Etrusker</i>, ii. 114-27; Gilbert, O., <i>Geschichte -und Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum</i>, 3 vols., index s. Auguraculum, -Augures; Wissowa, G., <i>Religion und Kultus der Römer</i>, 450-60; -<i>Augures</i>, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2313-44; <i>Auspicium</i>, ibid. ii. -2580-7; Aust, E., <i>Religion der Römer</i>, index s. Auguraculum, Augurn, Auspicia, -etc.; <i>Iuppiter Elicius</i>, in Roscher, <i>Ausführliches Lexikon der griech. und -röm. Mythologie</i>, ii. 656-61; Bouché-Leclerq, A., <i>Histoire de la Divination -dans Antiquité</i>, iv. 134-285 (sources and modern literature, p. 180 f.); -<i>Augures</i>, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 550-60; <i>Auspicia</i>, ibid. i. 580-5; -Spinazzola, V., <i>Augures</i>, in Ruggiero, <i>Dizionario epigrafico</i>, i. 778-810; -Ruggiero, ibid. i. 950 f.; De Marchi, A., <i>Il Culto privato di Roma antica</i>, i. -152 ff., 232 ff.; Valeton, I. M. J., <i>De modis auspicandi Romanorum</i>, in <i>Mnemosyne</i>, -N. S. xvii (1889). 275-325, 418-52; xviii. 208-64, 406-56; <i>De iure -obnuntiandi comitiis et conciliis</i>, ibid. xix (1891). 75-113, 229-70; <i>De -templis Romanis</i>, ibid. xx (1892). 338-90; xxi. 62-91, 397-440; xxiii. 15-79; -xxv. 93-144, 361-85; xxvi. 1-93 (papers in the last two vols. are on the -pomerium); Luterbacher, F., <i>Der Prodigienglaube und Prodigienstil der -Römer</i>, 2 ed.; Wülker, L., <i>Die geschichtliche Entwickelung des Prodigienswesens -bei den Römern</i>; Willoughby, W. W., <i>Political Theories of the Ancient -World</i>, ch. xv.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_119"></a>[119]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="PART_II">PART II<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE ASSEMBLIES<br /> -ORGANIZATION, PROCEDURE, AND FUNCTIONS, RESOLUTIONS, STATUTES, AND CASES</span> -</h2> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VI">CHAPTER VI<br /> -<span class="smaller">COMITIA AND CONCILIUM</span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>In treating of the distinction between comitia and concilium -scholars have invariably begun with the juristic definition of -Laelius Felix,<a id="FNanchor_710" href="#Footnote_710" class="fnanchor">[710]</a> quoted by Gellius,<a id="FNanchor_711" href="#Footnote_711" class="fnanchor">[711]</a> “He who orders not the -whole people but some part of it to be present (in assembly) -ought to proclaim not comitia but a concilium;” they have -limited themselves to illustrating this definition, and to setting -down as lax or inaccurate the many uses of the two words which -cannot be forced into line with it. The object of this discussion, -on the contrary, is to consider all the occurrences of these -words in the principal extant literature, especially prose, of the -republic and of the Augustan age—a period in which the assemblies -were still in existence—for the purpose of testing the -definition of Laelius, and of establishing new definitions by -induction in case his should prove wrong.</p> - -<p>It is convenient to begin with Livy, who though an imperial -writer, and under the stylistic influence of his age, probably adhered -in the main to the technical terminology of the republican -annalists from whom he drew. The first point which will be -established is that in Livy’s usage the difference between<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_120"></a>[120]</span> -comitia and concilium is not a difference between the whole -people and a part of the people.<a id="FNanchor_712" href="#Footnote_712" class="fnanchor">[712]</a></p> - -<p>The plebeian tribal assembly is termed comitia in Livy ii. 56. -1, 2; ii. 58. 1; ii. 60. 4; iii. 13. 9 (“Verginio comitia habente -conlegae appellati dimisere concilium,” in which comitia and -concilium in one sentence are applied to the same assembly); -iii. 17. 4 (the comitia for passing the Terentilian law, which -from Livy’s point of view was the plebeian assembly);<a id="FNanchor_713" href="#Footnote_713" class="fnanchor">[713]</a> iii. 24. -9; iii. 30. 6; iii. 51. 8 (comitia of plebeian soldiers for electing -military tribunes and tribunes of the plebs); iii. 54. 9, 11: (plebeian -comitia under the pontifex maximus); iv. 44. 1; v. 10. -10; vi. 35. 10 (“Comitia praeter aedilium tribunorumque plebi -nulla sunt habita”); vi. 36. 9 (the comitia for voting on the -Licinian-Sextian laws); vi. 39. 5; xxv. 4. 6; xxxiv. 2. 11; xlv. -35. 7. Other examples of comitia of a part of the people are -Livy ii. 64. 1 (as the plebeians refused to participate in the consular -election, the patricians and clients held the comitia); xxvi. -2. 2 (comitia held by the soldiers, and hence by only a part of -the people, for the election of a propraetor). Still more to the -point are the comitia sacerdotum: for electing a chief pontiff, -Livy xxv. 5. 2; for electing an augur, xxxix. 45. 8; for electing -a chief curio, xxvii. 8. 1. Comitia sacerdotum were composed -of seventeen tribes, and hence of only a part of the people.<a id="FNanchor_714" href="#Footnote_714" class="fnanchor">[714]</a> -Lastly is to be noted the fact that the plebeian assembly met on -a comitialis dies; Livy iii. 11. 3.</p> - -<p>It is now sufficiently established that Livy often applies the -term comitia to the assembly of plebs and to other assemblies -which included but a part of the people. It is equally true that -he uses concilium to denote an assembly of the whole people. -The principal instances of Roman assemblies are:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>(1) Livy i. 8. 1: “Vocataque ad concilium multitudine, quae coalescere in -populi unius corpus nulla re praeterquam legibus poterat, iura dedit.”</p> - -<p>(2) i. 26. 5: “Concilio populi advocato” (for the trial of Horatius).</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_121"></a>[121]</span></p> - -<p>(3) i. 36. 6: “Auguriis certe sacerdotioque augurum tantus honos accessit, ut -nihil belli domique postea nisi auspicato gereretur, concilia populi, -exercitus vocati, summa rerum, ubi aves non admississent, dirimerentur.”</p> - -<p>(4) ii. 7. 7: “Vocato ad concilium populo” (representing the consul as calling -the people to an assembly).</p> - -<p>(5) iii. 71. 3: “Concilio populi a magistratibus dato” (for settling the dispute -between Ardea and Aricia).</p> - -<p>(6) vi. 20. 11: “Concilium populi indictum est” (an assembly of the people -which condemned Marcus Manlius).</p> - -</div> - -<p>These instances are well known, and have often been discussed. -It is enough for our purpose to note here that they -prove Livy’s willingness to designate assemblies of the whole -Roman people as concilia. But Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_715" href="#Footnote_715" class="fnanchor">[715]</a> was not satisfied -with regarding all these cases as inaccurate. In spite of -Laelius he believed that concilium could sometimes properly -apply to assemblies of all the people. With reference to the -first example given above he says that where concilium denotes -an assembly of all the people, the contio is meant—in other -words, a concilium of all the people is an assembly which has -not been summoned with a view to voting, and is not organized -in voting divisions. This new definition might explain example -(1), for possibly Livy did not think of the first Roman assembly -as voting on the laws which Romulus gave, or even as organized. -Unfortunately Mommsen tries to support his definition by example -(2), which refers to the assembly for the trial of Horatius. -But in ch. 26. 12 the same assembly, which must have been the -gathering of the curiae, and which Cicero<a id="FNanchor_716" href="#Footnote_716" class="fnanchor">[716]</a> speaks of as comitia, -voted the acquittal of the accused. Hence it could not have -been a mere contio. Another passage cited in support of his -view, Livy ii. 7. 7, example (4), represents the consul as calling -the people to a concilium. First he addressed them (“in contionem -escendit”), and afterward laws were passed on the subject -of which he treated in his speech—evidently by the same -assembly; hence the concilium populi here mentioned was something -more than a contio. Another illustration which Mommsen -offers, but which, having to do with a Roman assembly only -by implication, is not included in the list of examples given<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_122"></a>[122]</span> -above, is Livy v. 43. 8: “When he had pushed into the midst -of the contio, though hitherto accustomed to keep away from -such concilia.”<a id="FNanchor_717" href="#Footnote_717" class="fnanchor">[717]</a> The passage refers to a meeting of the Ardeates -for consulting in regard to the sudden approach of the -Gauls. Gatherings of the kind were called concilia, but the word -contio is also introduced into the passage with reference to a -speech made in the assembly. The implication is that such -concilia of all the people for deliberation were held also at -Rome. The circumstances indicate that it met with a view also -to taking action, and that it was therefore not a simple contio. -This passage accordingly offers no support to Mommsen’s view -that when applied to the whole people concilium is merely a -listening, not an acting, assembly.<a id="FNanchor_718" href="#Footnote_718" class="fnanchor">[718]</a> Summing up the evidence -for the new definition of concilium, we may say that, were it -true, it might apply to Livy i. 8. 1, though it is unessential to -the explanation either of this passage or of any other. A single -case, too, even if it were clear, is not a sufficient basis for a -generalization; and though we must agree with Mommsen that -the juristic definition does not cover the cases cited above, it is -necessary to reject his amendment as unsatisfactory.<a id="FNanchor_719" href="#Footnote_719" class="fnanchor">[719]</a></p> - -<p>In fact Mommsen soon discovers cases which, from his own -admission, neither his definition nor that of Laelius will explain, -for instance, Livy i. 36. 6, example (3). On this citation Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_720" href="#Footnote_720" class="fnanchor">[720]</a> -remarks that concilia in this connection could not mean -contiones, with which in his opinion the auspices had nothing to -do; it could not refer to the plebeian assemblies, which he also<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_123"></a>[123]</span> -assumes to have been free from the auspices.<a id="FNanchor_721" href="#Footnote_721" class="fnanchor">[721]</a> He concludes, -therefore, that it denotes the “patricio-plebeian” tribal assemblies.<a id="FNanchor_722" href="#Footnote_722" class="fnanchor">[722]</a> -But why Livy should here be thinking merely of the -tribal assemblies, especially in connection with a time before -they had come into existence, no one could possibly explain. It -is far more reasonable to assume that he intended to include all -kinds of assemblies, curiate, centuriate, and tribal, which required -the auspices. The next citation which Mommsen finds -difficult is Livy iii. 71. 3, example (5)—an assembly of the tribes -meeting under the consuls to decide the dispute between Ardea -and Aricia over a piece of territory. The assembly voted (ch. -72. 6) that the land in question belonged to the Roman people. -Mommsen’s<a id="FNanchor_723" href="#Footnote_723" class="fnanchor">[723]</a> explanation of concilium in this connection is that -the resolution adopted by this assembly affected foreign states -only, and was not binding on Rome; hence he assumes that -comitia are an assembly whose resolutions are binding on the -Roman state. Here then we have a third definition of concilium -based like the second on a single case. But Mommsen thinks -he finds some evidence for his last definition in the fact that assemblies -of foreign states are usually termed concilia; and he -assumes the reason to be that their resolutions were not binding -on Rome. It would be strange, however, if in calling foreign -institutions by Latin names (rex, senatus, populus, plebs, praetor, -dictator, etc.) Roman writers attempted to show a connection -between these institutions and Rome, seeing that in most cases -no such connection could exist. The proposed explanation of -this use of concilium becomes actually absurd when it is extended -to foreign comitia; Mommsen certainly would not say that the -resolutions of the Syracusan comitia, mentioned by Livy, were -binding on Rome.</p> - -<p>His last and most difficult case is Livy vi. 20. 11—the concilium -populi which condemned Marcus Manlius, example (6), -p. 121. Evidently this was the centuriate assembly, which alone<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_124"></a>[124]</span> -had the right to try capital cases, and which alone had to meet -outside the pomerium. Various feeble explanations have been -proposed; but Mommsen, with others, prefers to consider the -word wrongly used. It is true that if we accept the juristic -definition, we must conclude that Livy is guilty of error not only -in this case but wherever he applies the term concilium to an -assembly of all the people, Roman or foreign; but as we shall -proceed by induction, we must, at least provisionally, consider -all the cases correct, and frame our definitions accordingly.</p> - -<p>We have now reviewed a number of passages in Livy in -which concilium includes all the Romans. There remains a -large group of passages which refer to foreign assemblies. In -considering these cases we are to bear in mind that the Romans -apply to foreign institutions in general the Latin terms with -which they are familiar, and in the same sense in which these -terms are used of Roman institutions; in this way only could -they make themselves understood.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Concilium populi and concilia populorum are frequent (e.g. Livy vii. 25. -5; x. 10. 11; 14. 3; xxi. 14. 1; xxiv. 37. 11), and most of the assemblies -of foreign states designated as concilia are known to have admitted both -nobles and commons.</p> - -<p>Instances of concilia in foreign states are: Alba Longa, Livy i. 6. 1; Latins, -Livy i. 50-52; vi. 10. 7; vii. 25. 5; viii. 3. 10; xxvii. 9. 2; Aequians, Livy iii. -2. 3; ix. 45. 8; Antium, Roman colony at, Livy iii. 10. 8; Veii, Livy v. 1. 8; -Etruria, Livy v. 17. 6; x. 10. 11; 13. 3; 14. 3; Gauls, Livy v. 36. 1; xxi. -20. 1; Hernicans, Livy vi. 10. 7; Samnites, Livy x. 12. 2; Saguntines, Livy -xxi. 14. 1; Iberians, Livy xxi. 19. 9, 11; xxix. 3. 1, 4; Enna, Livy xxiv. 37. -11; Aetolians, Livy xxvi. 24. 1; xxvii. 29. 10; xxxi. 29. 1, 2, 8; 32. 3, 4; -xxxiii. 3. 7; 12. 6: xxxiv. 41. 5; xxxv. 32. 3, 5; 33. 1, 4; 34. 2; 43. 7; -xxxvi. 26. 1; 28. 7, 9; xxxviii. 9. 11; 10. 2; xlii. 6; Achaeans, Livy xxvii. -30. 6; xxxi. 25. 2; xxxii. 19. 4, 5, 9; 20. 1; 21. 2; 22. 3, 9, 12; xxxv. 25. 4; -27. 11; 48. 1; xxxvi. 31. 9, 10; 32. 9; 34. 1; 35. 7; xxxviii. 31. 1; 32. 3; -34. 5; 35. 1; xxxix. 33, 35, 36, 37, 48, 50; xli. 24; xlii. 12; xliii. 17; Epirus, -Livy xxxii. 10. 2; xlii. 38. 1: Boeotians, Livy xxxiii. 1. 7; 2. 1, 7; xxxvi. 6. -3; xlii. 43, 44, 47; Acarnanians, Livy xxxiii. 16. 3, 5, 8; xliii. 17; Thessalians, -Livy xxxiv. 51. 5; xxxv. 31. 3; xxxvi. 8. 2; xlii. 38; Argos, Livy xlii. -44; Macedonians, Livy xlv. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<p>Though most of these concilia are known to have been -assemblies of the whole people, nobles and commons, very -rarely, as in Livy x. 16. 3, the word signifies a council of a few -men—in this case, of the leading men of Etruria (cf. xxxvi. 6.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_125"></a>[125]</span> -6); and twice, at Capua, we hear of a plebis concilium; Livy -xxiii. 4. 4; xxvi. 16. 9. From the frequency of the first-mentioned -use we must conclude that Livy does not hesitate to -designate as concilia assemblies of the whole people.</p> - -<p>Comitia, on the other hand, more rarely applies to foreign -assemblies. We hear of comitia of the Veientans (Livy v. 1. 1), -of the Syracusans (Livy xxiv. 23. 1; 26. 16; 27. 1), of the -Argives (Livy xxxii. 25. 2), of the Boeotians (Livy xxxiii. 27. 8), -and of the Thessalians (Livy xxxiv. 51. 5).</p> - -<p>The conclusions thus far reached are as follows:</p> - -<p>I. As to Comitia:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. Livy frequently uses comitia to denote the tribal assembly of the plebs.</p> - -<p>2. He always uses comitia to denote the assembly for the election of priests, -consisting of but seventeen tribes, and hence of a minority of the -people.</p> - -</div> - -<p>II. As to Concilium:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. He frequently uses concilia (rarely comitia) to denote foreign assemblies -of all the people.</p> - -<p>2. Less frequently he uses concilia to denote Roman assemblies of all the -people.</p> - -</div> - -<p>Mommsen and others admit, however, that Livy’s usage does -not conform strictly to the definition of Laelius Felix; they -assume accordingly that the exact meaning of comitia was lost -in imperial times, that for the correct usage we should look to -the republican writers.</p> - -<p>As Caesar has little occasion for employing the terms in relation -to the Roman assemblies, his usage on purely Roman -grounds cannot be made out. Foreign assemblies—that is, of -Gauls—he generally designates as concilia: <i>B. G.</i> i. 30, 31; iii. -18; v. 2, 6, 24, 56 f.; vi. 3, 20; vii. 63, 89; viii. 20 (Hirtius). -In all these cases the concilium is a tribal or national assembly -including both nobles and commons; more rarely the word -signifies a council of chiefs; <i>B. G.</i> i. 33; vii. 75; and perhaps -vii. 1. Once he applies comitia to Gallic assemblies; <i>B. G.</i> vii. -67. So far, therefore, as his usage can be determined, it does -not differ from Livy’s. From Macrobius, <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 29 (“Contra -Julius Caesar XVI auspiciorum negat, nundinis contionem -advocari posse: id est cum populo agere: ideoque nundinis -Romanorum haberi comitia non posse”), it appears that in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_126"></a>[126]</span> -Lucius Julius Caesar’s<a id="FNanchor_724" href="#Footnote_724" class="fnanchor">[724]</a> augural language, which must certainly -have been conservative, contio was a general word including -comitia. This passage, with the similar one in Cicero, <i>Att.</i> iv. -3. 4, suggests that the distinctions between contio, comitia, and -concilium, far from breaking down in late republican times, -were only then taking form.</p> - -<p>The material furnished by Sallust is more conclusive. In -<i>Hist.</i> ii. 22, concilium Gallorum doubtless signifies a national -assembly; and although generally comitia refers to the centuriate -gathering (<i>Cat.</i> 24, 26; <i>Iug.</i> 36, 44), in <i>Iug.</i> 37 (“P. Lucullus -and L. Annius, tribunes of the plebs, against the efforts of their -colleagues strove to prolong their office, and this dissension put -off the comitia through all the rest of the year”)<a id="FNanchor_725" href="#Footnote_725" class="fnanchor">[725]</a> it clearly -designates the assembly of the plebs. His usage accordingly, -which allows concilium sometimes to apply to an assembly of -the whole people and comitia to an assembly of a part of the -people, does not differ from that of Livy.</p> - -<p>Cicero, however, is the author on whom scholars rely in support -of the definition of Laelius. Following Berns,<a id="FNanchor_726" href="#Footnote_726" class="fnanchor">[726]</a> they say -Cicero has violated the rule but once, <i>Att.</i> i. 1. 1, in which occurs -the phrase comitiis tribuniciis. Berns’ examination of Cicero -must have been exceedingly hasty, as he has left a number of -instances unnoticed. The following passage is especially to the -point, <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 14 (15 b). 4:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“The candidates for the tribuneship have made a mutual compact—having -deposited five hundred sestertia apiece with Cato, they agree to conduct -their canvass according to his direction, with the understanding that any one -offending against it is to be condemned by him. If these comitia, then, turn -out to be pure, Cato will have been of more avail than all laws and jurors put -together.”<a id="FNanchor_727" href="#Footnote_727" class="fnanchor">[727]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_127"></a>[127]</span></p> - -<p>The tribunician comitia are the only comitia concerned in -Cato’s transaction. Again in <i>Att.</i> ii. 23. 3 (“It is of great interest -to me that you should be present at Rome, if not at the -comitia for his election, at least after he has been declared -elected”)<a id="FNanchor_728" href="#Footnote_728" class="fnanchor">[728]</a> Cicero is thinking of the election of Clodius to the -tribuneship, and hence the comitia he refers to are the assembly -of plebs. In <i>Fam.</i> viii. 4. 3, “aedilium plebis comitiis” must -refer to the plebeian assembly, in which the plebeian aediles -were elected.<a id="FNanchor_729" href="#Footnote_729" class="fnanchor">[729]</a> Another important passage is <i>Sest.</i> 51. 109:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“I come now to the comitia whether for electing magistrates or for enacting -laws. We often see laws passed in great numbers. I say nothing of -those which are enacted in such a manner that scarcely five of each tribe, and -those not from their own tribe, voted for them. He (Clodius) says that at -the time of that ruin of the republic he carried a law concerning me, whom he -called a tyrant and the destroyer of liberty. Who is there who will confess -that he gave a vote when this law was passed against me? But when in compliance -with the same resolution of the senate, a law was passed about me in -the comitia centuriata, who is there who does not profess that then he was -present, and that he gave a vote in favor of my safety? Which cause, then, -is the one which ought to appear popular? That in which everything that is -honorable in the city, and every age, and every rank of men agree? Or that -to the carrying of which some excited furies fly as if hastening to a banquet -on the funeral of the republic?”<a id="FNanchor_730" href="#Footnote_730" class="fnanchor">[730]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>The law which Cicero dwells on with such bitterness at the beginning -of this passage and recurs to at the end is the tribunician -law which pronounced on him the sentence of exile; in this -connection, therefore, comitia distinctly includes the plebeian -assembly in its legislative capacity.</p> - -<p>Even more telling is <i>Leg.</i> iii. 19. 44-45:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“They (our ancestors) forbade the enactment of laws regarding particular -persons except by the comitia centuriata. For when the people are organized<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_128"></a>[128]</span> -according to wealth, rank, and age, they use more consideration in giving their -votes than when summoned promiscuously by tribes. In our case, therefore, -a man of great ability and of consummate prudence, Lucius Cotta, truly insisted -that no act whatever had been passed regarding us; for in addition to -the fact that those comitia had been held wholly under the fear of armed -slaves, the comitia tributa could not legally pass capital sentences or privilegia. -Consequently there was no need of a law to reinstate us, against whom -exile had not been legally pronounced. But it seemed better both to you -and to other most illustrious men that all Italy should show what it felt concerning -that same person against whom some slaves and robbers declared -they had passed a decree.”<a id="FNanchor_731" href="#Footnote_731" class="fnanchor">[731]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Cicero is here contrasting the comitia centuriata, which recalled -him, with the tribal assembly of the plebs, which pronounced the -sentence of exile. Now as he was condemned by the plebeian -assembly, it is clear that in this passage Cicero calls the plebeian -assembly comitia. How Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_732" href="#Footnote_732" class="fnanchor">[732]</a> can make this citation refer -to his “patricio-plebeian” comitia tributa no one can possibly explain. -In <i>Att.</i> iii. 12. 1, comitia expressly includes the tribunician -elections. The same elections are twice called comitia in <i>Att.</i> iii. -14; and in iii. 13. 1, Cicero, again mentioning these comitia, says: -“In tribunis plebis designatis reliqua spes est.” From all these -passages it becomes evident that Cicero regards the plebeian assembly -as comitia. In many passages comitia seems to include all -the elections of the year, of plebeian as well as of patrician magistrates; -for the elections were usually held in the same season, -and could not well be separated in thought.<a id="FNanchor_733" href="#Footnote_733" class="fnanchor">[733]</a> In fact, according -to Cicero’s usage, comitia includes all kinds of national assemblies -which do not come under the term contiones; cf. <i>Sest.</i> 50. 106:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“In three places can the judgment and the will of the Roman people be -best discovered, in contio, in comitia, and in the gathering for the festivals -and the gladiatorial shows.”<a id="FNanchor_734" href="#Footnote_734" class="fnanchor">[734]</a> Cf. also 54. 115; 59. 125.</p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_129"></a>[129]</span></p> - -<p>The very phrase comitia populi (<i>Rep.</i> ii. 32. 56; <i>Div.</i> ii. 18. -42) implies the existence of other comitia, for instance comitia -plebis. It is not strange, therefore, that Cicero should use the following -expression; <i>Rep.</i> i. 33. 50: “The nobles who have arrogated -to themselves this name, not with the consent of the people, -but by their own comitia.”<a id="FNanchor_735" href="#Footnote_735" class="fnanchor">[735]</a> Here he makes it evident that there -may be comitia of the nobles in contrast with the “consent of the -people.” Should the senate usurp the elective function, Cicero -would not hesitate to call that small body comitia, as appears from -his ironical expressions in <i>Phil.</i> xi. 8. 19 (“Quod si comitia placet -in senatu haberi” and “Quae igitur haec comitia”), in which he -anticipates imperial usage; cf. Vell. ii. 124; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> i. 15.</p> - -<p>Furthermore he speaks of comitia, consisting of but seventeen -tribes, for the election of sacerdotes; <i>Cael.</i> 8. 19; <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. -7. 18; <i>Ad Brut.</i> i. 5. 3 f.; 14. 1; <i>Fam.</i> viii. 12. 4; 14. 1.</p> - -<p>From his point of view, a tribal assembly of the whole people -was one which consisted of all thirty-five tribes, irrespective of the -number present in the several tribes, irrespective, too, of the rank -of those who attended. An assembly tributim of a part of the -people, on the other hand, was one in which some of the tribes were -unrepresented. All this is clearly expressed in <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 7. 16 f.:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“For it orders the tribune of the plebs who has passed this law to elect ten -decemvirs by the votes of seventeen tribes in such a way that he shall be -decemvir whom nine tribes (a majority of the seventeen) have elected. Here -I ask on what account he (the proposer of the law) has made a beginning -of his measures and statutes in such form as to deprive the Roman people of -their right to vote.... For since it is fitting for every power, command, -and commission to proceed from the entire Roman people, those especially -ought to do so which are established for some use or advantage of the people, -in which case they all together choose also the man who they think will look -out more carefully for the interest of the Roman people, and each one by his -own zeal and his own vote assists to make a road by which he may obtain -some individual benefit for himself. This is the tribune to whom it has -occurred, more than to any one else, to deprive the entire Roman people of -the right to vote, and to summon a few tribes, not by any fixed legal condition, -but by the favor of sortition, to usurp the liberty of all.”<a id="FNanchor_736" href="#Footnote_736" class="fnanchor">[736]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_130"></a>[130]</span></p> - -<p>Even if the tribes were represented by no more than five men -each, and these men not voting in their own tribes, the assembly -was nevertheless comitia tributa populi.<a id="FNanchor_737" href="#Footnote_737" class="fnanchor">[737]</a> This distinction—recognized -by Cicero and his contemporaries—between an -assembly of the whole people as represented by all the voting -divisions and an assembly of a part of the people as represented -by some of the voting divisions, is incompatible with the distinction -formulated by Laelius. Though an antiquarian might make -much of the presence or absence of a few patricians, a man who -lived in the present, as did Cicero, probably never troubled himself -about such unpractical matters.<a id="FNanchor_738" href="#Footnote_738" class="fnanchor">[738]</a></p> - -<p>From the evidence as to Cicero’s usage given above, we must -draw the following conclusions:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. He often uses comitia to denote the plebeian tribal assembly, just as -Livy does.</p> - -<p>2. He regularly uses comitia to denote the assembly of seventeen tribes -for the election of sacerdotes. In this respect his usage is the same -as Livy’s.</p> - -<p>3. He is ready to call the senate comitia, should it usurp the elective function—an -anticipation of imperial usage.</p> - -<p>4. His distinction between an assembly of the whole people and an assembly -of a part of the people is incompatible with the definition of Laelius.</p> - -</div> - -<p>Concilium is comparatively rare in Cicero’s works. In a few -cases he seems to make concilia include all kinds of organized -national gatherings; cf. <i>Rep.</i> vi. 13 (3). 13: “Nihil est enim illi -principi deo ... acceptius quam concilia coetusque hominum -iure sociati, quae civitates appellantur (Nothing is more agreeable -to the Supreme Being than assemblies and gatherings of -men which are joined in societies by law and which are called -states”); <i>Fin.</i> iii. 19. 63: “Natura sumus apti ad coetus, concilia, -civitates.” In the first citation concilium must, and in the -second it may, include all the citizens. Cicero could hardly -mean that we are by nature adapted to assemblies of a part of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_131"></a>[131]</span> -the people, or that nothing could be more satisfactory to the -Supreme Being than the concilium plebis which interdicted him -from fire and water. In <i>Fin.</i> ii. 24. 77 (“To me those sentiments -seem genuine which are honorable, praiseworthy, and -creditable, which may be expressed in the senate, before the -people, and in every gathering and concilium”) he could not be -thinking simply of the plebeian assembly, for he placed far -greater value on the opinions expressed in and by the comitia -centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_739" href="#Footnote_739" class="fnanchor">[739]</a></p> - -<p>From all that has been said it is evident that Cicero’s usage -as well as Sallust’s does not differ from that of Livy. In fact -no variation can be found in all the extant literature of the republic.<a id="FNanchor_740" href="#Footnote_740" class="fnanchor">[740]</a> -But it may be asked whether there was not a juristic -tradition separate from the literary and preserving from early -time the true distinction between the two words under discussion. -A negative answer is compelled by the fact that history -had its origin with jurisprudence in the pontifical college, that -from the beginning historian and jurist were often united in the -same person.<a id="FNanchor_741" href="#Footnote_741" class="fnanchor">[741]</a> Hence the juristic usage was the same as the -literary. It is thoroughly established, therefore, that in the late -republic, as well as in the early empire, the distinction between -comitia and concilium was not a distinction between the whole -and a part; in fact, it becomes doubtful whether the definition -of Laelius was known to the writers of this period.</p> - -<p>The results thus far reached are of great importance; the -definition of comitia and concilium formulated by Laelius has -been set aside, and the ground prepared for the establishment -of new definitions by induction. From the material afforded -by the authors under discussion, the following conclusions -relative to the general uses of the two words may be drawn:</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_132"></a>[132]</span></p> - -<p>I. (<i>a</i>) The phrases comitia curiata, comitia centuriata, comitia -tributa constantly occur; whereas (<i>b</i>) the phrases concilium -curiatum (or -tim), concilium centuriatum (or -tim), concilium -tributum (or -tim) cannot be found.</p> - -<p>(<i>a</i>) The former is too well known to need illustration; (<i>b</i>) the -latter may be sufficiently established by an examination of the -references for concilium given in this chapter.</p> - -<p>II. (<i>a</i>) Concilium may apply to a non-political as well as -to a political gathering; (<i>b</i>) comitia is wholly restricted to the -political sphere.</p> - -<p>(<i>a</i>) Concilium is non-political in Cicero, <i>Div.</i> i. 24. 49 (deorum -concilium); <i>Tusc.</i> iv. 32. 69; <i>N. D.</i> i. 8. 18; <i>Off.</i> iii. 5. 25; 9. -38: <i>Senec.</i> 23. 84; <i>Fin.</i> ii. 4. 12 (virtutum concilium); <i>Rep.</i> i. -17. 28 (doctissimorum hominum in concilio); <i>Sest.</i> 14. 32 (applied -to the meeting of a collegium); Livy i. 21. 3 (Camenarum -concilia); ii. 38. 4; xxvii. 35. 4.<a id="FNanchor_742" href="#Footnote_742" class="fnanchor">[742]</a></p> - -<p>III. Within the political sphere, again, (<i>a</i>) concilium is the -more general term,—it suggests neither organization nor lack -of organization; whereas (<i>b</i>) comitia is restricted to the organized -assembly.</p> - -<p>(<i>a</i>) Concilium is the more general term in Cicero, <i>Fin.</i> iii. 19. -63; ii. 24. 77; <i>Rep.</i> vi. 13 (3). 13.<a id="FNanchor_743" href="#Footnote_743" class="fnanchor">[743]</a> In all these citations concilia, -denoting assemblies of the whole people, must certainly -include organized meetings, without excluding the unorganized. -In <i>Leg.</i> iii. 19. 42 (“Invito eo qui cum populo ageret, seditionem -non posse fieri, quippe cui liceat concilium, simul atque intercessum -turbarique coeptum sit, dimittere”) concilium is probably -the organized assembly. On the other hand, the concilium of -all the people mentioned by Livy, i. 8. 1, may have been -unorganized.</p> - -<p>IV. Within the province of organized national gatherings, -on the other hand, (<i>a</i>) comitia is the wider term, applying as -it does to all assemblies of the kind, whatever their function; -whereas (<i>b</i>) concilium as an organized national assembly is -wholly restricted to legislative and judicial functions.<a id="FNanchor_744" href="#Footnote_744" class="fnanchor">[744]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_133"></a>[133]</span></p> - -<p>(<i>a</i>) Comitia is used in its most general sense in Cicero, -<i>Div.</i> i. 45. 103; ii. 18. 42 f.; 35. 74; <i>Tusc.</i> iv. 1. 1.<a id="FNanchor_745" href="#Footnote_745" class="fnanchor">[745]</a></p> - -<p>V. (<i>a</i>) Applied to foreign institutions, comitia always designates -electoral assemblies; (<i>b</i>) as at Rome, concilia are -always legislative or judicial assemblies.<a id="FNanchor_746" href="#Footnote_746" class="fnanchor">[746]</a></p> - -<p>(<i>a</i>) Comitia is used of foreign states in:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> vii. 67; Cicero, <i>Verr.</i> II. ii. 52. 128 (three occurrences), -129, 130; 53. 133; 54. 136; <i>Fam.</i> viii. 1. 2; Livy v. 1. 1; xxiv. 23. 1; 26. -16; 27. 1; xxxii. 25. 2; xxxiii. 27. 8; xxxiv. 51. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<p>(<i>b</i>) Foreign concilia are mentioned by:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> i. 18, 19, 30, 31, 33; iii. 18; v. 2, 6, 24, 56 f.; vi. 3, 20; vii. 1, -14, 15, 63, 75, 89; viii. 20 (Hirtius); Sallust, <i>Hist.</i> ii. 22; Nepos, <i>Tim.</i> iv. 2; -Livy i. 6. 1; 50-52; iii. 2. 3; 10. 8; v. 1. 8; 17. 6; 36. 1; vi. 10. 7; vii. 25. -5; viii. 3. 10; ix. 45. 8; x. 10. 11; 12. 2; 13. 3; 14. 3; xxi. 14. 1; 19. 9, -11; 20. 1; xxiv. 37. 11; xxvi. 24. 1; xxvii. 9. 2; 29. 10; 30. 6; xxix. 3. 1, -4; xxxi. 25. 2.; 29. 1, 2, 8; 32. 3, 4; xxxii. 10. 2; 19. 4, 5, 9; 20. 1; 21. 2; -22. 3, 9, 12; xxxiii. 1. 7; 2. 1, 7; 3. 7; 12. 6; 16. 3, 5, 8; xxxiv. 41. 5; 51. -5; xxxv. 25. 4; 27. 11; 31. 3; 32. 3, 5; 33. 1, 4; 34. 2; 43. 7; 48. 1; -xxxvi. 6. 3; 8. 2; 26. 1; 28. 7, 9; 31. 9, 10; 32. 9; 34. 1; 35. 7; xxxviii. -9. 11; 10. 2; 31. 1; 32. 3; 34. 5; 35. 1; xxxix. 33, 35, 36, 37, 48, 50; -xli. 24; xlii. 6, 12, 38, 43, 44, 47; xliii. 17; xlv. 18. Most of these concilia -are known to have been assemblies of the whole people, noble and common.<a id="FNanchor_747" href="#Footnote_747" class="fnanchor">[747]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>VI. In the Roman state, in a great majority of cases comitia -are electoral assemblies; in fact, the word may generally be -understood to signify that kind of assembly, or simply elections, -unless the context indicates a different meaning.</p> - -<p>Comitia are electoral in:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Caes. <i>B. C.</i> i. 9; iii. 1, 2, 82; Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 24; <i>Iug.</i> 36, 37; Cic. <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> -1. 2; <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 7. 18; 8. 20; 10. 26; 11. 27; 12. 31; <i>Mil.</i> 9. 24, 25; 15. -41; 16. 42; <i>Mur.</i> 1. 1; 17. 35; 18. 38; 19. 38; 25. 51; 26. 53; <i>Phil.</i> ii. 32. -80, 81; 33. 82; 38. 99; viii. 9. 27; xi. 8. 19; <i>Planc.</i> 3. 7, 8; 4. 9, 10; 6. 15;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_134"></a>[134]</span> -8. 21; 20. 49, 50; 22. 53, 54; <i>Verr.</i> 1. 6. 17; 7. 19; 8. 22, 23; 9. 24, 25; -18. 54; II. i. 7. 19; Frag. A. vii. 48; <i>Rep.</i> ii. 13. 25; 17. 31; 31. 53; <i>Att.</i> -i. 1. 1, 2; 4. 1; 10. 6; 11. 2; 16. 13; ii. 20. 6; 21. 5; 23. 3; iii. 12. 1; 13. -1; 18. 1; iv. 2. 6; 3. 3, 5; 13. 1; 17. 7; 19. 1; xii. 8; <i>Ad Brut.</i> i. 5. 3; 14. 1; -<i>Fam.</i> i. 4. 1; vii. 30. 1; viii. 2. 2; 4. 3; 14. 1; x. 26; <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 1. 2; 2. 1; -11. 3; 15. 3; iii. 2. 3; 3. 2; Varro, <i>R. R.</i> iii. 2. 1; Nepos, <i>Att.</i> v. 4; Livy i. -32. 1; 35. 1; 60. 4; ii. 8. 3; 56. 1, 2; 58. 1; 60. 4, 5; iii. 6. 1; 19. 2; 20. -8; 24. 9; 30. 6; 34. 7; 35. 1, 7, 8; 37. 5, 6; 39. 8; 51. 8; 54. 9, 11; iv. 6. -9; 16. 6; 25. 14; 35. 6; 36. 4; 41. 2; 44. 1, 2, 5; 50. 8; 51. 1; 53. 13; 54. -8; 55. 4, 8; 56. 1; 57. 9; v. 9. 1, 8; 10. 10; 14. 1; 31. 1; vi. 1. 5; 22. 7; -35. 10; 36. 3, 9; 37. 4; 39. 5; 42. 9, 14; vii. 9. 4; 17. 10, 13; 19. 5; 21. 1; -22. 7, 11; viii. 3. 4; 13. 10; 16. 12; 20. 1; 23. 11, 14, 17; ix. 7. 12, 14; x. -5. 14; 11. 3; 15. 7; 16. 1; 21. 13; 22. 8; xxi. 53. 6; xxii. 33. 9, 10; 34. 1, -3, 9; 35. 2, 4; xxiii. 24. 3; 31. 7, 12; xxiv. 7. 11; 9. 5, 9; 10. 2; 11. 6; -43. 5, 9; xxv. 2. 3, 5; 5. 2; 7. 5; 41. 10; xxvi. 2. 2; 18. 4; 22. 2; 23. 1, 2; -xxvii. 4. 1; 8. 1; xxviii. 10. 1, 4; 38. 11; xxix. 10. 1, 2; 11. 9, 10; xxx. 40. -5; xxxi. 49. 12; 50. 6; xxxii. 7. 8, 12; 27. 5, 6; xxxiii. 21. 9; xxxiv. 42. 3, -4; 44. 4; 53. 2; xxxv. 6. 2; 8. 1; 10. 1, 9; 20. 7; 24. 3; xxxvi. 45. 9; -xxxvii. 47. 1, 6; xxxviii. 35. 1; 42. 1, 2, 4; xxxix. 6. 1; 23. 1; chs. 32, 39, -40, 41, 45; xl. 18, 37, 45, 59; xli. 6, 8, 14, 16, 17, 18, 28; xlii. 9, 28; xliii. 11, -14; xliv. 17.</p> - -</div> - -<p>Comitia are legislative or judicial in:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 28. 75; 30. 79; 32. 86; 33. 87; <i>Har. Resp.</i> 6. 11; <i>Mil.</i> 3. 7; -<i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 19; x. 8. 17; xiii. 15. 31; <i>Pis.</i> 15. 35, 36; <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 11. 27; -<i>Sest.</i> 30. 65; 34. 73; 51. 109; <i>Leg.</i> iii. 19. 45; <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 53; 35. 60; 36. -61; <i>Att.</i> i. 14. 5; ii. 15. 2; iv. 1. 4; xiv. 12. 1; Livy iii. 13. 9; 17. 4; 20. -7; 24. 17; 29. 6; 55. 3; vi. 36. 9; viii. 12. 15; xxv. 4. 6; xxvi. 3. 9, 12; -xxxi. 6. 3, 5; xxxiv. 2. 11; xlii. 30; xliii. 16; xlv. 35.</p> - -</div> - -<p>As these lists are nearly exhaustive, they represent substantially -the relative frequency of the two uses of comitia.</p> - -<p>VII. (<i>a</i>) Rarely is either the centuriate assembly or the so-called -patricio-plebeian tribal assembly termed concilium; (<i>b</i>) -the plebeian tribal assembly is rarely termed comitia except -when electoral.</p> - -<p>The principal instances of the rare use of concilium under -(<i>a</i>) are Livy i. 26. 5; 36. 6; iii. 71. 3; vi. 20. 11.<a id="FNanchor_748" href="#Footnote_748" class="fnanchor">[748]</a> (<i>b</i>) In its -legislative or judicial capacity the plebeian tribal assembly is -called comitia in Cicero, <i>Leg.</i> iii. 19. 45; <i>Sest.</i> 51. 109; Livy -iii. 13. 9; 17. 4; vi. 36. 9; xxv. 4. 6; xxxiv. 2. 11; xlv. 35.</p> - -<p>This classification covers without exception all the cases in -the authors under discussion. An attempt may now be made -to trace the development of these uses.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_135"></a>[135]</span></p> - -<p>The first thing to be considered is that whereas concilium is -singular, comitia is plural. Undoubtedly it is a plural of the -parts of which the whole is composed; in other words, the -curiae, or centuries, or tribes were originally thought of as little -assemblies, whose sum total formed the comitia. Comitia therefore -always has reference to the parts—the voting units—of -which the assembly is composed, whereas concilium as a singular -views the assembly without reference to its parts. For this -reason, whenever it is advisable to add a modifier to indicate -the kind of organization of the assembly, comitia is always used. -We find, accordingly, comitia curiata, comitia centuriata, and -comitia tributa in common use, but never concilium curiatum -(or -tim), concilium centuriatum (or -tim), or concilium tributum -(or -tim). These last expressions, which are modern inventions, -do not accord with the Roman way of viewing the assemblies. -This consideration satisfactorily explains the first general use.<a id="FNanchor_749" href="#Footnote_749" class="fnanchor">[749]</a></p> - -<p>As a non-political gathering is not made up of groups—similar -to the voting divisions of the national assemblies—it cannot -be called comitia. Concilium is the only term appropriate -to it; hence we have the second general use of the two words.<a id="FNanchor_750" href="#Footnote_750" class="fnanchor">[750]</a></p> - -<p>The same consideration makes concilium the more general term -within the political sphere; the assembly it designates may be -organized or unorganized, whereas comitia applies only to assemblies -organized in voting divisions. This is the third general use.<a id="FNanchor_751" href="#Footnote_751" class="fnanchor">[751]</a></p> - -<p>For explaining the four remaining uses it is necessary to inquire -into the fundamental meaning of concilium. Although -the etymology is uncertain, probability favors the ancient conjecture -which derives it from “con-calare.”<a id="FNanchor_752" href="#Footnote_752" class="fnanchor">[752]</a> People could only<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_136"></a>[136]</span> -be called together for a purpose, which would most naturally -be conversation, discussion, deliberation. Whatever may have -been its origin, concilium certainly developed this meaning.<a id="FNanchor_753" href="#Footnote_753" class="fnanchor">[753]</a> -In the manuscripts and editions it is frequently interchanged -with consilium,<a id="FNanchor_754" href="#Footnote_754" class="fnanchor">[754]</a> and in the sources these two words are often -placed in punning juxtaposition.<a id="FNanchor_755" href="#Footnote_755" class="fnanchor">[755]</a> Possibly their close resemblance, -founded on no etymological connection of the roots, -helped create in concilium the idea of deliberation. At all -events in the prose authors of the period under discussion this -is the primary meaning. The deliberative character of most -non-political concilia is very evident.<a id="FNanchor_756" href="#Footnote_756" class="fnanchor">[756]</a> With this meaning the -word could not designate an electoral assembly, which did not -allow discussion;<a id="FNanchor_757" href="#Footnote_757" class="fnanchor">[757]</a> it was restricted to legislative and judicial -assemblies, in which the voting was preceded by deliberation. -This is the fourth use.<a id="FNanchor_758" href="#Footnote_758" class="fnanchor">[758]</a></p> - -<p>Rarely did a Roman writer have occasion to mention an -election in a foreign state. Whenever he did so, however, he -always used comitia. Most of the business of foreign assemblies<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_137"></a>[137]</span> -referred to by Roman writers was concerned with -international affairs—was legislative—and hence foreign -assemblies are usually termed concilia.<a id="FNanchor_759" href="#Footnote_759" class="fnanchor">[759]</a> This consideration -accounts for the fifth general use.<a id="FNanchor_760" href="#Footnote_760" class="fnanchor">[760]</a></p> - -<p>The sixth<a id="FNanchor_761" href="#Footnote_761" class="fnanchor">[761]</a> may be easily explained. The tendency was to -restrict comitia to electoral assemblies, just as concilium was -restricted to legislative and judicial assemblies, though this -tendency never became a rule.</p> - -<p>The seventh<a id="FNanchor_762" href="#Footnote_762" class="fnanchor">[762]</a> may be accounted for by the fact that after the -passing of the Hortensian Law, the centuriate comitia came to -be almost wholly electoral, while the plebeian tribal gathering -became the chief statute-making body in the state. Furthermore -the assembly over which the tribunes presided was far -more deliberative than any other. Hence the centuriate assembly -became <i>the</i> comitia, and the plebeian tribal assembly <i>the</i> -concilium.<a id="FNanchor_763" href="#Footnote_763" class="fnanchor">[763]</a></p> - -<p>The cause of the error into which Laelius<a id="FNanchor_764" href="#Footnote_764" class="fnanchor">[764]</a> fell is now apparent. -Finding the plebeian tribal assembly frequently termed -concilium and the centuriate assembly of the whole people -generally termed comitia, he hastily concluded that comitia -should be restricted to assemblies of the whole people and -concilia to assemblies of a part of the people. This discussion -has proved, against Laelius, that for the republic and for -the age of Augustus the distinction between the two words was -not a distinction between the whole and a part, and that all the -uses of comitia and concilium in this period may be explained -by two simple facts: (1) that whereas concilium is singular, -comitia is plural; (2) that concilium suggests deliberation, -discussion.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_138"></a>[138]</span></p> - -<p>A result of this inquiry is to banish the expressions “concilium -tributum plebis” and “patricio-plebeian comitia tributa”—the -former as impossible, the latter as unnecessary—from -the nomenclature of Roman public law. There were but three -forms of organized assembly—curiate, centuriate, and tribal—all -equally entitled to the name “comitia.” The difference -between the “comitia tributa populi” and “comitia tributa -plebis” was chiefly in the presidency, as will be shown in a -later chapter.<a id="FNanchor_765" href="#Footnote_765" class="fnanchor">[765]</a> Contio, on the other hand, denotes the listening -or witnessing assembly, unorganized or organized but never -voting, whereas concilium, overlapping contio and comitia, may -include voting in addition to deliberation.</p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Mommsen, Th., <i>Röm. Forschungen</i>, i. 129-217; Berns, C., <i>De comitiorum -tributorum et conciliorum plebis discrimine</i>; Soltau, W., <i>Altröm. Volksversammlungen</i>, -37-46; Humbert, G., <i>Comitia</i>, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. -1374 ff.; <i>Concilium</i>, ibid. 1432 f.; Liebenam, W., <i>Comitia</i>, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 679 ff.; Kornemann, E., <i>Concilium</i>, ibid. iv. 801 ff.; -Vaglieri, D., <i>Concilium</i>, in Ruggiero, <i>Diz. ep.</i> ii. 566 ff.; see also indices s. -Comitia, Concilium, in the works of Niebuhr, Schwegler, Lange, Mommsen, -Marquardt, Willems, Herzog, etc. The authorities thus far named represent -the usual theory as to the distinction between comitia and concilium based -on the definition of Laelius Felix discussed in this chapter. A new view is -presented by Botsford, G. W., <i>On the Distinction between Comitia and -Concilium</i>, in <i>Transactions of the American Philological Association</i>, xxxv -(1904). 21-32—a paper reproduced with additions in the present chapter. -See also Lodge, G., <i>Lexicon Plautinum</i>, i. 277 f. (Comitia), 289 (Concilium); -Forcellini, <i>Totius Latinitatis Lexicon</i>, ii. 297 f. (Comitia), 347 f. (Concilium); -Gudeman, <i>Concilium</i>, in <i>Thesaurus linguae latinae</i>, iv. 44-8.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_139"></a>[139]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VII">CHAPTER VII<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE CONTIO</span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>Contio, derived from conventio,<a id="FNanchor_766" href="#Footnote_766" class="fnanchor">[766]</a> originally signified “a coming -together,” “a meeting” of any kind. In an early stage of -its history it must have been a general term for public assembly, -especially comitia. This meaning appears most clearly in a -passage of Macrobius,<a id="FNanchor_767" href="#Footnote_767" class="fnanchor">[767]</a> in which, quoting the treatise of Lucius -Julius Caesar on the Auspices, he declares (1) that on market -days a contio cannot be called, (2) in other words, that on such -days business cannot be transacted with the people, (3) that for -this reason the Romans cannot hold comitia on market days. -Cicero,<a id="FNanchor_768" href="#Footnote_768" class="fnanchor">[768]</a> too, states with reference to a certain market day that -“for two days no contio can be held”—for the day of the -market and the one following. From the context it is evident -that he, like Macrobius, is thinking of comitia, which, as is well -known, could not legally meet on market days.<a id="FNanchor_769" href="#Footnote_769" class="fnanchor">[769]</a> Doubtless -in the conservative nomenclature of the pontiffs and augurs, -quoted by Macrobius and Cicero, contio still included comitia; -it must in fact have applied more particularly to the formal, -voting assembly; for informal meetings were not forbidden on -such days.<a id="FNanchor_770" href="#Footnote_770" class="fnanchor">[770]</a> But in the time of Cicero this use of the word was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_140"></a>[140]</span> -obsolete excepting in the archaic formulae of the sacerdotal -colleges. In the political language of his age contio had come -to be restricted to the non-voting assembly—either organized<a id="FNanchor_771" href="#Footnote_771" class="fnanchor">[771]</a> -or more commonly unorganized—summoned by a magistrate -or a sacerdos,<a id="FNanchor_772" href="#Footnote_772" class="fnanchor">[772]</a> and in this sense it will be used in the present -volume. Still farther removed from its origin is the meaning -“oration” delivered to the people in such a gathering.<a id="FNanchor_773" href="#Footnote_773" class="fnanchor">[773]</a></p> - -<p>Because of the passive character of this form of assembly the -magistrate admitted all who wished to attend, without inquiring -whether they were citizens and in full possession of their -political rights.<a id="FNanchor_774" href="#Footnote_774" class="fnanchor">[774]</a> It might be composed either of soldiers<a id="FNanchor_775" href="#Footnote_775" class="fnanchor">[775]</a> or of -civilians, presided over in the field by the commander, in the -city by any magistrate who had a right to hold comitia in their -own or in another’s name, including the king,<a id="FNanchor_776" href="#Footnote_776" class="fnanchor">[776]</a> interrex, dictator, -master of horse, and tribunes of the plebs;<a id="FNanchor_777" href="#Footnote_777" class="fnanchor">[777]</a> also the quaestors<a id="FNanchor_778" href="#Footnote_778" class="fnanchor">[778]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_141"></a>[141]</span> -and aediles,<a id="FNanchor_779" href="#Footnote_779" class="fnanchor">[779]</a> the pontifex maximus and the rex sacrorum.<a id="FNanchor_780" href="#Footnote_780" class="fnanchor">[780]</a> -Necessarily the right belonged as well to all extraordinary -magistrates, as the decemviri legibus scribundis, who possessed -consular power within the city.<a id="FNanchor_781" href="#Footnote_781" class="fnanchor">[781]</a> But promagistrates and any -others who held an exclusively military imperium could summon -neither the comitia nor the civil contio.<a id="FNanchor_782" href="#Footnote_782" class="fnanchor">[782]</a> The censors held -contiones for the taking of the census,<a id="FNanchor_783" href="#Footnote_783" class="fnanchor">[783]</a> for imposing fines,<a id="FNanchor_784" href="#Footnote_784" class="fnanchor">[784]</a> and -for the lustration. In the last-named function the assembly -was also called comitia centuriata or exercitus urbanus.<a id="FNanchor_785" href="#Footnote_785" class="fnanchor">[785]</a> The -quaestors, the curule aediles, and the plebeian aediles exercised -their jurisdiction in contiones and comitia, which for this purpose -they called not in their own name but by permission of a -higher magistrate.<a id="FNanchor_786" href="#Footnote_786" class="fnanchor">[786]</a></p> - -<p>As the contio did not, like the comitia, theoretically include -all the people, any number of magistrates could simultaneously -hold meetings of the kind.<a id="FNanchor_787" href="#Footnote_787" class="fnanchor">[787]</a> A minor officer had no right to -take charge of, or to summon the people from, a contio called -by another. A higher officer exercised this right against a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_142"></a>[142]</span> -lower; the consul, for instance, could take the meeting from -the hands of any ordinary patrician magistrate,<a id="FNanchor_788" href="#Footnote_788" class="fnanchor">[788]</a> though not of a -tribune of the plebs. No one dared disturb a meeting of any -kind under the presidency of the latter,<a id="FNanchor_789" href="#Footnote_789" class="fnanchor">[789]</a> and at least in the late -republic a tribune sometimes forbade a patrician magistrate to -address an assembly;<a id="FNanchor_790" href="#Footnote_790" class="fnanchor">[790]</a> but otherwise consuls and plebeian -tribunes might hold simultaneous contiones.<a id="FNanchor_791" href="#Footnote_791" class="fnanchor">[791]</a></p> - -<p>Sometimes the contio was summoned merely to witness a public -act. The consuls called the people together outside the walls -by the sound of the war-trumpet to see an execution for treason. -On this occasion the citizens were arrayed in centuries on the -Campus Martius, in an assembly called at once comitia centuriata -and contio.<a id="FNanchor_792" href="#Footnote_792" class="fnanchor">[792]</a> We hear of a similar execution of an astrologer -or magician outside the Esquiline gate, according to a primitive -custom;<a id="FNanchor_793" href="#Footnote_793" class="fnanchor">[793]</a> and it was most probably in a contio that the supreme -pontiff scourged to death a man who had wronged a Vestal.<a id="FNanchor_794" href="#Footnote_794" class="fnanchor">[794]</a> -The people gathered in the same kind of meeting to witness an -oath,<a id="FNanchor_795" href="#Footnote_795" class="fnanchor">[795]</a> a judicial process,<a id="FNanchor_796" href="#Footnote_796" class="fnanchor">[796]</a> or the levy of a fine.<a id="FNanchor_797" href="#Footnote_797" class="fnanchor">[797]</a> But it was -preëminently the listening assembly, hence the definition offered -by Gellius,<a id="FNanchor_798" href="#Footnote_798" class="fnanchor">[798]</a> “To hold a contio is to address the people, without<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_143"></a>[143]</span> -calling on them for a vote.” It applied not only to the isolated -meeting summoned to hear edicts, reports, communications of -every kind, including arguments and appeals for or against a -given policy,<a id="FNanchor_799" href="#Footnote_799" class="fnanchor">[799]</a> but also to the preparatory stage of the voting -assembly whether addresses were delivered or not. Occasionally -in early times there was speaking on the merits of candidates -at the opening of an electoral assembly, and the voting -was sometimes interrupted for the purpose.<a id="FNanchor_800" href="#Footnote_800" class="fnanchor">[800]</a> Before the age of -Cicero this rare proceeding had disappeared. In his day the -canvass for candidates had been made before the holding of the -preliminary contio, which accordingly was brief and formal. -Because much time was required for the voting of the centuries,<a id="FNanchor_801" href="#Footnote_801" class="fnanchor">[801]</a> -speaking on the day of their assembly had to be minimized. -For this reason the contio for advising the adoption of a resolution -by the comitia centuriata was held on an earlier day. Such -was the meeting summoned in the Campus Martius by the consul -P. Lentulus for the purpose of urging the people to vote in -the ensuing centuriate assembly for the recall of Cicero.<a id="FNanchor_802" href="#Footnote_802" class="fnanchor">[802]</a> In -judicial proceedings before any of the assemblies the testimonies -of witnesses and the pleadings occupied the greater part of the -time, and for this reason judicial assemblies were frequently -termed simply contiones. They will be described in a later -chapter.<a id="FNanchor_803" href="#Footnote_803" class="fnanchor">[803]</a></p> - -<p>Informal contiones could be called at any time while the sun -was up,<a id="FNanchor_804" href="#Footnote_804" class="fnanchor">[804]</a> with or without<a id="FNanchor_805" href="#Footnote_805" class="fnanchor">[805]</a> an interval between the summons -and the meeting, and in any place<a id="FNanchor_806" href="#Footnote_806" class="fnanchor">[806]</a> at the pleasure of the person<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_144"></a>[144]</span> -who convoked them. In public assemblies of every kind the -people remained standing throughout the session.<a id="FNanchor_807" href="#Footnote_807" class="fnanchor">[807]</a> The magistrate -who was about to summon an auspicated contio repaired to -the templum which he intended to occupy during the meeting.<a id="FNanchor_808" href="#Footnote_808" class="fnanchor">[808]</a> -After taking the auspices there, and finding the omens favorable, -he ordered the crier to call the citizens.<a id="FNanchor_809" href="#Footnote_809" class="fnanchor">[809]</a> His directions to this -assistant were prefaced by a solemn wish that the gathering of -the citizens might be well, fortunate, auspicious, and advantageous -to the Roman people, the commonwealth, himself, his -colleague or colleagues, and his magistracy.<a id="FNanchor_810" href="#Footnote_810" class="fnanchor">[810]</a> After first issuing -the summons from the templum the crier repeated it while -making the circuit of the walls.<a id="FNanchor_811" href="#Footnote_811" class="fnanchor">[811]</a> Meantime the presiding officer -invited the senators, his colleague or colleagues, and the various -other magistrates to assist him with their presence and advice.<a id="FNanchor_812" href="#Footnote_812" class="fnanchor">[812]</a> -The invitation was extended even to opposing tribunes;<a id="FNanchor_813" href="#Footnote_813" class="fnanchor">[813]</a> and on -the other hand a presiding tribune was especially anxious to secure -the presence and favorable influence of patrician magistrates -and of the leading men of the state.<a id="FNanchor_814" href="#Footnote_814" class="fnanchor">[814]</a> When the president -saw his friends about him and the people gathered, he called -the contio to order,<a id="FNanchor_815" href="#Footnote_815" class="fnanchor">[815]</a> and proceeded to open the meeting with a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_145"></a>[145]</span> -prayer.<a id="FNanchor_816" href="#Footnote_816" class="fnanchor">[816]</a> In the case of a resolution to be brought before the assembly -the magistrate was accustomed first to submit it to the -senate, which considered the bill and perhaps suggested alterations;<a id="FNanchor_817" href="#Footnote_817" class="fnanchor">[817]</a> -but sometimes measures were brought into the comitia -without this senatorial deliberation.<a id="FNanchor_818" href="#Footnote_818" class="fnanchor">[818]</a> In the contio the presiding -officer had power to exclude or to limit discussion of his proposals. -Ordinarily he found it advantageous to instruct the -people regarding the subject on which they were to vote; and it -was for this purpose that one or more contiones were held previous -to the comitia. The right to address the people belonged -primarily to the presiding magistrate. Although the king enjoyed -the superior right, the notion that in the regal period no -private persons spoke in the assembly seems to be unwarranted.<a id="FNanchor_819" href="#Footnote_819" class="fnanchor">[819]</a> -The custom of the republic prescribed that the president should -grant the privilege not only to his colleagues<a id="FNanchor_820" href="#Footnote_820" class="fnanchor">[820]</a> but also to all the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_146"></a>[146]</span> -higher magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_821" href="#Footnote_821" class="fnanchor">[821]</a> In some cases the invitation was extended -to senators<a id="FNanchor_822" href="#Footnote_822" class="fnanchor">[822]</a> and to other distinguished private persons.<a id="FNanchor_823" href="#Footnote_823" class="fnanchor">[823]</a> The -tribunes sometimes gave the privilege to freedmen,<a id="FNanchor_824" href="#Footnote_824" class="fnanchor">[824]</a> to foreign -kings,<a id="FNanchor_825" href="#Footnote_825" class="fnanchor">[825]</a> and to ambassadors.<a id="FNanchor_826" href="#Footnote_826" class="fnanchor">[826]</a> The early republic did not allow -women to be present in political meetings;<a id="FNanchor_827" href="#Footnote_827" class="fnanchor">[827]</a> but in time this -severity began to relax. Livy<a id="FNanchor_828" href="#Footnote_828" class="fnanchor">[828]</a> represents the elder Cato as -saying that his generation permitted women to take part in -affairs of state and to interfere in contiones and comitia—evidently -an exaggeration, as the context proves that the women -referred to did not actually come into the assembly, and the -speaker intimates that custom disapproved of their doing so.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_147"></a>[147]</span> -From the time of the Gracchi they occasionally spoke in public. -Dio Cassius<a id="FNanchor_829" href="#Footnote_829" class="fnanchor">[829]</a> states that Tiberius Gracchus brought his mother -and children into a contio to join their entreaties with his; and -according to Valerius Maximus<a id="FNanchor_830" href="#Footnote_830" class="fnanchor">[830]</a> a tribune of the plebs required -Sempronia, sister of the Gracchi, to come forward in a similar -meeting and give her opinion on the subject under consideration. -In the year 43 some ladies attended a contio to protest against -being taxed by the triumvirs. Hortensia spoke for the complainants.<a id="FNanchor_831" href="#Footnote_831" class="fnanchor">[831]</a> -It was an accepted custom that no tribune should -intercede against a measure till an opportunity had been afforded -private persons to speak for or against it.<a id="FNanchor_832" href="#Footnote_832" class="fnanchor">[832]</a> When after -the victory of Pydna a tribune of the plebs had introduced a -motion to grant a triumph to Aemilius Paulus, and the debate -had been thrown open to the assembly, all for a time remained -silent, for no doubt was entertained as to its passing; but finally -Servius Galba, who as a military tribune had served under Paulus -and was his enemy, came forward and obstructed the measure -by a long harangue.<a id="FNanchor_833" href="#Footnote_833" class="fnanchor">[833]</a> Although the president could, and perhaps -often did, throw the debate open to the citizens in this way, -he was not compelled to do so. The tribunician assembly was -more deliberative than any other—a circumstance which accounts -for its designation as a concilium.<a id="FNanchor_834" href="#Footnote_834" class="fnanchor">[834]</a> Those invited to -speak, if citizens, had to be of good standing and not under disqualification -through a special law or usage. The rex sacrorum -was prohibited not only from holding any other office but also -from addressing an assembly.<a id="FNanchor_835" href="#Footnote_835" class="fnanchor">[835]</a> The spendthrift<a id="FNanchor_836" href="#Footnote_836" class="fnanchor">[836]</a> and the man -condemned for extortion<a id="FNanchor_837" href="#Footnote_837" class="fnanchor">[837]</a> were likewise forbidden. When the -right was granted as a special distinction, the receiver was probably -placed thereby on a footing of equal dignity with the -magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_838" href="#Footnote_838" class="fnanchor">[838]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_148"></a>[148]</span></p> - -<p>The president could also compel a citizen to speak. The -holder of the imperium had a right to summon any man into a -public meeting, and order him to answer any question put to -him.<a id="FNanchor_839" href="#Footnote_839" class="fnanchor">[839]</a> Tribunes of the plebs, however, who lacked the power -of summoning, exercised this coercive function against citizens -and even consuls, not through a direct right but by a usurpation, -probably based on their power to arrest and imprison.<a id="FNanchor_840" href="#Footnote_840" class="fnanchor">[840]</a></p> - -<p>The president extended permission by asking a man to give -his opinion on the subject under discussion, and it was not in -good order even for a magistrate to address the assembly unless -invited, though he had ground for resentment if he was passed -over in favor of private persons.<a id="FNanchor_841" href="#Footnote_841" class="fnanchor">[841]</a> When Caesar as consul, 59, -brought his agrarian bill before the comitia without the consent -of the senate and in spite of its silent disapproval,<a id="FNanchor_842" href="#Footnote_842" class="fnanchor">[842]</a> he first -asked his colleague whether he had any objection to the proposal. -Bibulus offered none but declared that he would allow -no innovation during his consulship. Thereupon Caesar begged -him for support, and requested the people to join in the entreaty, -saying, “You will have the law on the sole condition -that he is willing.” Then Bibulus, answering in a loud voice, -“You will not have this law the present year, even if all of you -want it,” left the assembly. Slighting the other magistrates, -Caesar invited Pompey and Crassus to address the meeting, -though they were but senators and therefore, as contrasted with<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_149"></a>[149]</span> -magistrates, merely private citizens. After Pompey had spoken -at length, commending the details of the law, Caesar asked if -he would support it against opponents, at the same time requesting -the people to beg of him this favor. They did so, -doubtless by acclamation; and Pompey, greatly flattered because -the consul and the people besought help of him, a private -citizen, promised to stand by the law.<a id="FNanchor_843" href="#Footnote_843" class="fnanchor">[843]</a></p> - -<p>A magistrate spoke from the platform, a private person from -a lower position, presumably from one of the steps; for the -chairman to bring a private speaker upon the stage was a cause -of offence to his colleagues.<a id="FNanchor_844" href="#Footnote_844" class="fnanchor">[844]</a> When the president granted an -opportunity to speak, he had a right to fix the amount of time -to be used. In the debate on the law for assigning provinces -to Caesar and Pompey, 55, the presiding tribune granted one -hour to Favorinus and two hours to Cato, both opponents of -the measure.<a id="FNanchor_845" href="#Footnote_845" class="fnanchor">[845]</a> The speaker could use the time in whatever -way he pleased; a few persons by concert might waste the -whole day in trivialities, as is sometimes done in the senate of -the United States of America, so as to prevent voting on the -subject for that date. In the case above mentioned Favorinus, -doubtless for lack of real argument, exhausted his hour in -lamentation over the shortness of the time allowed him,<a id="FNanchor_846" href="#Footnote_846" class="fnanchor">[846]</a> and -Cato spent his two hours on irrelevant or minor matters, merely -that he might be silenced by the president while still appearing -to have something to say. He persisted in speaking accordingly -till an officer dragged him from the rostra and ejected -him from the Forum. Even then he returned several times to -interrupt the proceedings with his shouting.<a id="FNanchor_847" href="#Footnote_847" class="fnanchor">[847]</a> If the speaker -approved the measure, he might close with the words, “This -law of yours and your purpose and sentiments I praise and -most heartily approve”;<a id="FNanchor_848" href="#Footnote_848" class="fnanchor">[848]</a> or more formally, “In my opinion<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_150"></a>[150]</span> -this bill as presented ought to be passed, and may it prove well, -auspicious, and fortunate both to yourselves and to the republic”;<a id="FNanchor_849" href="#Footnote_849" class="fnanchor">[849]</a> -or if opposed to the proposition, he might conclude -with this form of disapproval, “It is my judgment that this law -should by no means be repealed.”<a id="FNanchor_850" href="#Footnote_850" class="fnanchor">[850]</a></p> - -<p>Sometimes the magistrates were invited in the order of their -rank and afterward private citizens; in other cases, especially -in tribunician contiones, private persons were called first that -they might speak with perfect freedom, uninfluenced by the -opinion of their magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_851" href="#Footnote_851" class="fnanchor">[851]</a> As the president had absolute -control, he could alter the usage to suit his own interest, and -could certainly reserve to himself the advantage of speaking last.<a id="FNanchor_852" href="#Footnote_852" class="fnanchor">[852]</a> -It often happened that there was not enough time in one day -for the discussion of a question. In that case the magistrate -adjourned the meeting to a specified date.<a id="FNanchor_853" href="#Footnote_853" class="fnanchor">[853]</a></p> - -<p>After the deliberation, or after the formality of opening the -contio which was merely preliminary to the comitia, the president -ordered the assembly to form into voting groups—curiae, -centuries, or tribes. He could say, for instance, “I order you -to take your proper places in the comitia centuriata,”<a id="FNanchor_854" href="#Footnote_854" class="fnanchor">[854]</a> or more -generally, “If you think fit, quirites, move apart (into your -voting groups).”<a id="FNanchor_855" href="#Footnote_855" class="fnanchor">[855]</a> At the same time he ordered the departure -of all who lacked the qualification for voting.<a id="FNanchor_856" href="#Footnote_856" class="fnanchor">[856]</a> The lictors of -the magistrates with imperium and the beadle (viator) of the -tribune attended to clearing away the unqualified.<a id="FNanchor_857" href="#Footnote_857" class="fnanchor">[857]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_151"></a>[151]</span></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Schulze, C. F., <i>Volksversammlungen der Römer</i>, 141 ff., 243 ff.; Rubino, -J., <i>Röm. Verfassung und Geschichte</i>, 240-53; Lange, L., <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, ii. -715-23, and see indices s. v.; Mommsen, Th., <i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, i. 191-209; -iii. 370-8, and see index s. v.; Willems, P., <i>Droit public Rom.</i> 158 f.; Herzog, -E., <i>Röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, i. 632-6, 1057 f., and see index s. v.; Karlowa, O., -<i>Röm. Rechtsgeschichte</i>, i. 48 f., 379-81; Madvig, J. N., <i>Verf. u. Verw. d. röm. -Staates</i>, i. 219; Soltau, W., <i>Altröm. Volksversammlungen</i>, 37 ff.; Humbert, -G., <i>Contio</i>, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 1484 f.; Liebenam, W., <i>Contio</i>, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1149-53; Ruggiero, <i>Diz. ep.</i> ii. 1185, s. Contio; -Lodge, G., <i>Lex. Plaut.</i> i. 307, s. Contio; Forcellini, <i>Tot. Lat. Lex.</i> ii. -349 f., s. Concio; Dupond, A., <i>Constitution et magistratures Rom.</i> 60-3; Ihne, -<i>History of Rome</i>, iv. 40-2.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_152"></a>[152]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VIII">CHAPTER VIII<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE CALATA COMITIA</span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>In seeking for the origin and primitive character of the -Roman assembly we are enabled by comparative study to reach -a stage of growth far anterior to the beginnings of Roman tradition. -In its earliest known form the European popular -assembly had the following characteristics, provisionally enumerated -here, but established in the next chapter: (1) the -people who attended were the mass of freemen of a tribe, -especially the warriors; (2) they stood or sat promiscuously, -without reference to sub-tribal groups; (3) measures were proposed -by none but chiefs or nobles, generally after previous -discussion in council, the common members wholly lacking initiative; -(4) the speakers were as a rule, though not exclusively, -chieftains; (5) the vote was by acclamation, the clash -of weapons, or some similar demonstration; as a correlate of -(3) and (4) may be added, (6) sovereignty, so far as the idea -existed, resided not in the assembly, which of itself could take -no action, but in the king and chieftains, who made use of the -assembly (<i>a</i>) for the publication of news or of projects, (<i>b</i>) for -securing by their eloquence the coöperation of the tribe in a -plan already formed in council. However far developed beyond -this crude institution the comitia curiata or the comitia centuriata -of the republican period may have been, traces of all the -characteristics above mentioned may be found in the historical -Roman assembly<a id="FNanchor_858" href="#Footnote_858" class="fnanchor">[858]</a>—a fact which justifies the comparative -method of approach to the subject.</p> - -<p>We need not hesitate to begin with the unorganized contio as -the earliest form of Roman assembly, to which we may attach -the other features of the European gathering named above. -The first problem is to determine under what influence and for<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_153"></a>[153]</span> -what purpose the gathering of the people came to be organized -in curiae. The notion that the object was primarily for voting -is groundless. The Athenians had the germ of a tribal assembly -in the division of the people by phylae on the occasion of -ostracophory<a id="FNanchor_859" href="#Footnote_859" class="fnanchor">[859]</a> and of the passing of other privilegia (νόμοι ἐπ’ -ἀνδρί). The organization was not in this case for the purpose -of using the tribes as voting units, but merely for bringing order -and solemnity to the proceeding. Apparently the assembly of -Alamanni was arrayed in military form for ratifying emancipations,<a id="FNanchor_860" href="#Footnote_860" class="fnanchor">[860]</a> -though in the process the military companies did not -vote as units. In like manner, but for a wider range of functions, -we find at Rome the meeting of the people in curiae, less -frequently in centuries, merely for listening, for witnessing, or -for receiving purification. The circumstances that the business -of such assemblies was largely religious, and of such a character -that it must have originated in the earliest Roman times, and -that in the greater number of cases these gatherings were under -sacerdotal presidency suggest that the sacerdotes, particularly -the pontiffs, introduced the curiate organization from the army -to make their religious meetings more orderly and dignified.<a id="FNanchor_861" href="#Footnote_861" class="fnanchor">[861]</a></p> - -<p>All assemblies which met under pontifical presidency for -religious purposes were called calata,<a id="FNanchor_862" href="#Footnote_862" class="fnanchor">[862]</a> evidently from “calare,” -a verb which must originally have been in common use in the -sense of “to call,” but which in historical time was restricted to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_154"></a>[154]</span> -the technical language of the sacerdotes.<a id="FNanchor_863" href="#Footnote_863" class="fnanchor">[863]</a> In the latter connection -it designates the peculiar method of summoning used by -the pontiffs.<a id="FNanchor_864" href="#Footnote_864" class="fnanchor">[864]</a> Probably, at least in earlier time, their calatores -acted as curiate lictors in convoking the calata comitia curiata,<a id="FNanchor_865" href="#Footnote_865" class="fnanchor">[865]</a> -over which they presided. In all meetings of the kind in the -regal period the people were grouped in curiae; under the -republic the centuriata comitia calata were also used for certain -purposes.<a id="FNanchor_866" href="#Footnote_866" class="fnanchor">[866]</a> The usual meeting-place of the calata comitia -curiata was in front of the curia Calabra on the Capitoline Hill.<a id="FNanchor_867" href="#Footnote_867" class="fnanchor">[867]</a> -With reference to their object, they may be classed as non-voting -and voting; the former were purely religious, the latter -were for the settlement of questions which were in part civil.<a id="FNanchor_868" href="#Footnote_868" class="fnanchor">[868]</a> -First to be noted of the non-voting assemblies were those in -which the people gathered in comitia under the presidency of -the king,<a id="FNanchor_869" href="#Footnote_869" class="fnanchor">[869]</a> in the republic under the rex sacrorum, to hear the -proclamation of the fasti. On the calends of each month a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_155"></a>[155]</span> -pontifex minor, as clerk of the college,<a id="FNanchor_870" href="#Footnote_870" class="fnanchor">[870]</a> announced to them on -what day, whether the fifth or seventh, the nones would come.<a id="FNanchor_871" href="#Footnote_871" class="fnanchor">[871]</a> -On the nones the king again summoned the people to hear the -calendar of the month,<a id="FNanchor_872" href="#Footnote_872" class="fnanchor">[872]</a> read probably by the same pontifex -minor. This custom fell into disuse with the publication of the -calendar in the Forum, beginning in 304.<a id="FNanchor_873" href="#Footnote_873" class="fnanchor">[873]</a></p> - -<p>Equally passive were those comitia calata which under the -presidency of the supreme pontiff witnessed the inauguration -of the three flamines maiores,<a id="FNanchor_874" href="#Footnote_874" class="fnanchor">[874]</a> probably of the king in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_156"></a>[156]</span> -regal period, and certainly of the rex sacrorum under the republic.<a id="FNanchor_875" href="#Footnote_875" class="fnanchor">[875]</a> -As warlike Mars had his shrines outside the pomerium,<a id="FNanchor_876" href="#Footnote_876" class="fnanchor">[876]</a> -his chief temple being in the Campus Martius,<a id="FNanchor_877" href="#Footnote_877" class="fnanchor">[877]</a> it is a -probable conclusion that his flamen was inaugurated there—in -the regal period in some form of military assembly, under the -republic in the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_878" href="#Footnote_878" class="fnanchor">[878]</a> The inaugural ceremonies -were performed by an augur;<a id="FNanchor_879" href="#Footnote_879" class="fnanchor">[879]</a> in the case of the sacerdotes it -was the supreme pontiff who requested this service of him,<a id="FNanchor_880" href="#Footnote_880" class="fnanchor">[880]</a> -whereas the king could doubtless command an augur without -the coöperation of the pontiff. A closely related function was -the appointment of Vestals by lot, under the conduct of the -supreme pontiff in a public assembly, probably the calata -comitia.<a id="FNanchor_881" href="#Footnote_881" class="fnanchor">[881]</a> The destatio sacrorum and the abjuration of social -rank, other acts which these comitia merely witnessed, will be -considered in connection with the transitio ad plebem and the -adrogatio.<a id="FNanchor_882" href="#Footnote_882" class="fnanchor">[882]</a> The ceremonies attended to by the rex sacrorum -on March 24 and again on May 24 may have been in comitia -calata, though this is doubtful.<a id="FNanchor_883" href="#Footnote_883" class="fnanchor">[883]</a></p> - -<p>Assemblies of the people were organized in curiae by the -pontiffs for the religious purposes mentioned above, while political -measures, so far as submitted to the people, continued for a -time, we may suppose, to be decided by din in contiones. But -when a desire for a more precise vote began to be felt, the -curiate organization naturally offered itself as most convenient -for the purpose. The contention that in primitive Rome, as<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_157"></a>[157]</span> -among other early peoples,<a id="FNanchor_884" href="#Footnote_884" class="fnanchor">[884]</a> the assembly expressed its feeling -or opinion by noisy demonstration finds strong support in the -most probable derivation of suffragium, “vote,” which connects -it with frangere, fragor, “a breaking,” “crash,” “din,” “applause,”<a id="FNanchor_885" href="#Footnote_885" class="fnanchor">[885]</a> -the prefix sub- expressing the dependence of the action -upon the proposal of the speaker, as in the military succlamare, -succlamatio.<a id="FNanchor_886" href="#Footnote_886" class="fnanchor">[886]</a> We may well believe that even after the organization -of the assembly as comitia—that is, in curiate, centuriate, -or tribal divisions<a id="FNanchor_887" href="#Footnote_887" class="fnanchor">[887]</a>—the voting within the component -groups continued for a time to be by din, as is suggested by the -phrase sex suffragia, applied to the six oldest groups of knights -in the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_888" href="#Footnote_888" class="fnanchor">[888]</a> Voting by heads in large gatherings -is in fact a slow, cumbersome process, the product of a well-developed -political life. In all probability it originated in the -centuriate assembly—in which the military array facilitated -the taking of individual opinion<a id="FNanchor_889" href="#Footnote_889" class="fnanchor">[889]</a>—and afterward extended to the -other comitia. This line of reasoning suggests that when in the -regal period a desire began to be felt for a more precise vote, -and the curiate organization readily offered itself for the purpose, -the expedient was adopted of taking the vote of each -curia in order by din and then of deciding the question at issue -by a majority of the thirty curial votes.<a id="FNanchor_890" href="#Footnote_890" class="fnanchor">[890]</a> There can be little -doubt that this step also was first taken by the pontiffs.</p> - -<p>The testamentary calata comitia met twice a year, probably -on fixed days.<a id="FNanchor_891" href="#Footnote_891" class="fnanchor">[891]</a> It has been a disputed question whether the -oldest form of testament here referred to required a vote of the -people. Rubino<a id="FNanchor_892" href="#Footnote_892" class="fnanchor">[892]</a> strongly upheld the negative on the ground -(1) of analogy with the procedure in inaugurations, (2) of analogy -with other forms of testament, none of which required a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_158"></a>[158]</span> -vote, (3) of the word testamentum itself, which refers to witnessing, -(4) of the conviction that the patricians would not leave -to the popular assembly the making of private law, (5) on the -authority of Theophilus,<a id="FNanchor_893" href="#Footnote_893" class="fnanchor">[893]</a> who mentions the people’s witnessing -of the testament, (6) on the statement of Gellius<a id="FNanchor_894" href="#Footnote_894" class="fnanchor">[894]</a> that wills of -the kind were made “in populi contione.” Against this reasoning -may be urged (1) the analogy from the adrogatio, (2) the -analogy from the testamentary adoption, to both of which cases -the simple testament was similar, and both of which required a -vote of the people,<a id="FNanchor_895" href="#Footnote_895" class="fnanchor">[895]</a> (3) the consideration that the act of witnessing -in the assembly did not necessarily exclude a vote, (4) the -statement of Gaius<a id="FNanchor_896" href="#Footnote_896" class="fnanchor">[896]</a> that calata comitia were convoked “for -making”—not for witnessing—testaments, (5) the circumstance -that the contio was often a preliminary stage of the -voting assembly<a id="FNanchor_897" href="#Footnote_897" class="fnanchor">[897]</a> in addition to the fact that pontifical language -applies the term to comitia in general.<a id="FNanchor_898" href="#Footnote_898" class="fnanchor">[898]</a> These arguments offset -all the points offered by Rubino, unless it be the fourth, -which is a purely subjective consideration. Arguments (1), (2), -and (4) are especially effective for establishing the fact of a -vote in the case under consideration. But the problem can be -most satisfactorily solved (6) by comparative investigation. In -the constitution of the early Indo-European family the estate -belonged jointly to all the male members, and for that reason -could not be given away by the pater.<a id="FNanchor_899" href="#Footnote_899" class="fnanchor">[899]</a> The primitive Germans -accordingly made no wills, but left their property to their children, -or in failure of children to the near kin.<a id="FNanchor_900" href="#Footnote_900" class="fnanchor">[900]</a> In Attica the -right to bequeath was instituted by a law of Solon, which -allowed it to those only who had no legitimate sons;<a id="FNanchor_901" href="#Footnote_901" class="fnanchor">[901]</a> in Sparta<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_159"></a>[159]</span> -the right was introduced by Epitadeus, perhaps early in the -fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span><a id="FNanchor_902" href="#Footnote_902" class="fnanchor">[902]</a> Testaments were unknown in Gortyn at -the time when the <i>Twelve Tables</i> of this city were published,<a id="FNanchor_903" href="#Footnote_903" class="fnanchor">[903]</a> -and similar conditions existed in other states of Greece.<a id="FNanchor_904" href="#Footnote_904" class="fnanchor">[904]</a> The -rule holds, too, for ancient India.<a id="FNanchor_905" href="#Footnote_905" class="fnanchor">[905]</a> The Slavic householder -could not alienate his land without the consent of the community.<a id="FNanchor_906" href="#Footnote_906" class="fnanchor">[906]</a> -As there is no reason to assume a more advanced condition -for primitive Rome, we may conclude that, as indicated -above, the calata comitia not only witnessed but ratified testaments.<a id="FNanchor_907" href="#Footnote_907" class="fnanchor">[907]</a></p> - -<p>Mommsen has attempted to fix these days as March 24 and -May 24,<a id="FNanchor_908" href="#Footnote_908" class="fnanchor">[908]</a> on which the rex sacrificulus performed comitial -ceremonies not clearly described by the sources.<a id="FNanchor_909" href="#Footnote_909" class="fnanchor">[909]</a> He admits, -however, that the testamentary comitia met under the pontifex -maximus rather than under the rex sacrorum<a id="FNanchor_910" href="#Footnote_910" class="fnanchor">[910]</a>—a fact directly -opposed to his contention. We should be surprised also to find -the testamentary days so close together.<a id="FNanchor_911" href="#Footnote_911" class="fnanchor">[911]</a> But the most effective -argument against his view is that this function performed by -the rex sacrorum could not have been the holding of comitia, for -the time during which it continued was nefas.<a id="FNanchor_912" href="#Footnote_912" class="fnanchor">[912]</a> The ancient<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_160"></a>[160]</span> -authorities state that “the sacrificial king, after performing -sacred rites, comes into, or makes a sacrifice in (venit or litat), -the comitium,”<a id="FNanchor_913" href="#Footnote_913" class="fnanchor">[913]</a> but they do not mention an assembly; hence we -may infer that in the fasti for these days reference is to some -other function than the holding of comitia. The form of testament -above described fell early into disuse,<a id="FNanchor_914" href="#Footnote_914" class="fnanchor">[914]</a> so that the conditions -and ceremonies attending it became a subject of study for -antiquarians.</p> - -<p>Adoptions ordinarily came before the praetor. The legal -object was the perpetuation of the family and its religion. The -law granted the privilege accordingly to those only who had no -children and who were incapable of having children. It required -further that the act should not imperil the continuance of the -family from whom the adopted came.<a id="FNanchor_915" href="#Footnote_915" class="fnanchor">[915]</a> Adrogatio was the -adoption of a person who was his own master and who accordingly -consented to pass under the paternal power of another. -The word signifies that the act to which it applies required -a vote of the people.<a id="FNanchor_916" href="#Footnote_916" class="fnanchor">[916]</a> It was not undertaken rashly or without -careful consideration.<a id="FNanchor_917" href="#Footnote_917" class="fnanchor">[917]</a> The persons concerned were required -first to present the case to the college of pontiffs, who took into -account “what reason any one has for adopting children, what -considerations of family or dignity are involved, what principles -of religion are concerned.”<a id="FNanchor_918" href="#Footnote_918" class="fnanchor">[918]</a> The age of the man who wished -to arrogate was considered—whether in this respect he was -capable of having children of his own, and care was taken that -the property of the arrogated person should not be insidiously -coveted.<a id="FNanchor_919" href="#Footnote_919" class="fnanchor">[919]</a> The adrogator was asked whether he wished the -candidate for adoption to be his real son, and the candidate was -asked whether he would allow himself to be placed in this condition;<a id="FNanchor_920" href="#Footnote_920" class="fnanchor">[920]</a> -and the testimonies were confirmed by an oath formulated -by Q. Mucius Scaevola.<a id="FNanchor_921" href="#Footnote_921" class="fnanchor">[921]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_161"></a>[161]</span></p> - -<p>If the pontiffs gave their consent, the case came before the -comitia curiata under the presidency of the chief of the college,<a id="FNanchor_922" href="#Footnote_922" class="fnanchor">[922]</a> -who put the question in the following form: “Do you wish and -order that L. Valerius be the son of L. Titus by the same legal -rights as if born of the father and mother of that family, and -that the latter have the power of life and death over the former -as a father over a son? This order I request of you, Romans, -to grant, just as I have pronounced the words.”<a id="FNanchor_923" href="#Footnote_923" class="fnanchor">[923]</a> The curiae -decided by vote.<a id="FNanchor_924" href="#Footnote_924" class="fnanchor">[924]</a> At the same meeting the arrogated son was -required to declare that he forsook the religion of the family or -gens of his birth—detestatio sacrorum<a id="FNanchor_925" href="#Footnote_925" class="fnanchor">[925]</a>—and by a similar -declaration the adrogator received him into the sacra of the -new family.<a id="FNanchor_926" href="#Footnote_926" class="fnanchor">[926]</a> This form of adoption could not apply to youths -before they had put on the manly gown, or to wards or women; -for children and women had no part in an assembly, and guardians -were not allowed under any circumstances to place their -wards in the power of another.<a id="FNanchor_927" href="#Footnote_927" class="fnanchor">[927]</a></p> - -<p>A modification of adrogatio is testamentary adoption, of -which the only well-known case is that of Octavius, the heir -of the dictator Caesar. Octavius came before a praetor with -witnesses and formally accepted the inheritance;<a id="FNanchor_928" href="#Footnote_928" class="fnanchor">[928]</a> afterward he -was declared adopted by a vote of the curiae.<a id="FNanchor_929" href="#Footnote_929" class="fnanchor">[929]</a> As this case is -nearly akin to the adrogatio, there can be no doubt that the vote -was taken in the calata comitia under pontifical presidency.<a id="FNanchor_930" href="#Footnote_930" class="fnanchor">[930]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_162"></a>[162]</span></p> - -<p>Distinct from the adrogatio, though analogous to it, was the -direct passing of individuals and of gentes from the patrician -to the plebeian rank—transitio ad plebem. The motive was a -desire to qualify for the tribunate of the plebs,<a id="FNanchor_931" href="#Footnote_931" class="fnanchor">[931]</a> or more generally -to widen the range of one’s eligibility to office.<a id="FNanchor_932" href="#Footnote_932" class="fnanchor">[932]</a> The history -of the republic affords several instances of the transition of -individuals;<a id="FNanchor_933" href="#Footnote_933" class="fnanchor">[933]</a> and two plebeian gentes, the Octavia<a id="FNanchor_934" href="#Footnote_934" class="fnanchor">[934]</a> and the -Minucia,<a id="FNanchor_935" href="#Footnote_935" class="fnanchor">[935]</a> boasted of having passed over from the patricians. -Even if these boasts rest upon genealogical falsifications,<a id="FNanchor_936" href="#Footnote_936" class="fnanchor">[936]</a> the -Romans thought such an act legally possible; and they formulated -a process applicable to every case whether of individuals -or of gentes. It was through some other ceremony than the -adrogatio, for the latter could not apply to groups of persons. -Clodius was following the more general procedure here referred -to when in the year 60 he tried to make himself a plebeian without -recourse to adrogatio. First he abdicated his nobility by an -oath, probably taken in the comitia calata;<a id="FNanchor_937" href="#Footnote_937" class="fnanchor">[937]</a> then coming before -an assembly of the plebs, he held himself ready to receive -plebeian rights through a resolution introduced by the tribune -Herennius.<a id="FNanchor_938" href="#Footnote_938" class="fnanchor">[938]</a> The process allowed the retention of the name, -sacra, and all other privileges not dependent on the patriciate.<a id="FNanchor_939" href="#Footnote_939" class="fnanchor">[939]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_163"></a>[163]</span> -But Metellus, the consul, objected that a curiate law was needed -to make the act valid, and the senate evidently agreed with him.<a id="FNanchor_940" href="#Footnote_940" class="fnanchor">[940]</a> -Metellus may have had in mind the transition through the -adrogatio, which required a curiate law, or more probably he -was thinking of a vote of the curiae in addition to the other -formalities which Clodius was passing through.<a id="FNanchor_941" href="#Footnote_941" class="fnanchor">[941]</a> The complete -process accordingly would have been the abjuration of the patriciate, -confirmed by a curiate law, and the reception of plebeian -rights through a plebi scitum. Clodius was not so foolish as to -suppose that a process of transitio invented by himself would -prove acceptable to the senate and magistrates, and must therefore -have followed as closely as possible the formula which he -believed to be legal. But when Metellus raised the objection, -and when the tribunes persisted in interceding against the plebi -scitum,<a id="FNanchor_942" href="#Footnote_942" class="fnanchor">[942]</a> he yielded for the present, and in the following year -had himself arrogated by a plebeian named Fonteius, from whom -he was forthwith emancipated.<a id="FNanchor_943" href="#Footnote_943" class="fnanchor">[943]</a> This procedure, too, allowed -him to retain the gentile name of his birth,<a id="FNanchor_944" href="#Footnote_944" class="fnanchor">[944]</a> his imagines and -sacra,<a id="FNanchor_945" href="#Footnote_945" class="fnanchor">[945]</a> and consequently his inheritance. The oath taken in the -calata comitia accordingly was not the detestatio sacrorum usual in -arrogations, but a form of declaration which reserved these privileges, -with the understanding that in this case the arrogatio was -not for the customary object but to enable him to change his rank.<a id="FNanchor_946" href="#Footnote_946" class="fnanchor">[946]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_164"></a>[164]</span></p> - -<p>Analogous to the transitio ad plebem is the elevation of a -plebeian to the patrician rank. The Romans believed that -eminent plebeians, including foreigners of distinction newly -admitted to citizenship, were sometimes granted the patriciate -not only through the regal period but also in the opening years -of the republic. For the republican age they represented -the bestowal as a double act, a resolution of the people followed -by coöptation into the senate.<a id="FNanchor_947" href="#Footnote_947" class="fnanchor">[947]</a> In stating that the first consuls -chose the best men from the commons, made them patricians, -and with them filled the senate to the number of three hundred, -Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_948" href="#Footnote_948" class="fnanchor">[948]</a> apparently has in mind the consuls’ function of -recruiting the senate before the Ovinian legislation,<a id="FNanchor_949" href="#Footnote_949" class="fnanchor">[949]</a> together -with their initiative in granting the patriciate. The Roman -view that the bestowal required a vote of the people is further -proved by the procedure of Julius Caesar and of Octavianus in -creating new patricians; for in this function they doubtless -followed tradition as nearly as possible. In 45 a plebi scitum,<a id="FNanchor_950" href="#Footnote_950" class="fnanchor">[950]</a> -proposed by L. Cassius Longinus and supported by a senatus -consultum,<a id="FNanchor_951" href="#Footnote_951" class="fnanchor">[951]</a> empowered Caesar to recruit the patrician rank. -Octavianus proceeded in a similar manner except that a consular -law,<a id="FNanchor_952" href="#Footnote_952" class="fnanchor">[952]</a> approved also by a senatus consultum,<a id="FNanchor_953" href="#Footnote_953" class="fnanchor">[953]</a> was passed -for the purpose. As the object was religious, we may suppose -that the qualifications of the candidates were previously examined -by the pontifical college. On the analogy of the transitio<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_165"></a>[165]</span> -ad plebem it may be assumed further that the candidate abjured -his plebeian rank in the calata comitia, which then confirmed -his declaration by vote.<a id="FNanchor_954" href="#Footnote_954" class="fnanchor">[954]</a></p> - -<p>But whether the Romans were right in supposing patricians -to have been created in the early republic has been doubted. -Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_955" href="#Footnote_955" class="fnanchor">[955]</a> takes the ground that when the curiae ceased -to be exclusively patrician, elevation to the rank became impossible, -and that therefore no cases of the kind occurred after the -fall of the kings. But in such a matter it is absurd to speak of -impossibilities; everything was possible which the governing -power approved, and the argument falls when its basis, the -purely patrician state, has been removed.<a id="FNanchor_956" href="#Footnote_956" class="fnanchor">[956]</a> The cessation was -in fact due to the growing exclusiveness of the patricians, who -as they came to supplant the king in the government, learned -to value their privileged position so highly they were unwilling -longer to share it with others. Just when the closing of their -rank was effected has not been ascertained, but there is no good -reason for rejecting the Roman view that for a time after the -fall of the kings plebeians continued to be admitted: in reality -the indications are strong for a relatively late closing.<a id="FNanchor_957" href="#Footnote_957" class="fnanchor">[957]</a></p> - -<p>We may next inquire how patricians were created in the -time of the kings. As the history of the regal period is in -general a reconstruction with material drawn from later time, so -in this particular case ancient writers sometimes date back to -the age of the kings the usage of the republic. Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_958" href="#Footnote_958" class="fnanchor">[958]</a> -accordingly states that “the Romans by vote transferred Servius -Tullius from the plebeian to the patrician order, just as they -had previously transferred Tarquin the Elder and still earlier -Numa Pompilius.” But the Romans preferred to reconstruct<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_166"></a>[166]</span> -the process on an entirely different principle. Regarding the -kings as the founders of all the fundamental institutions, the -patricians looked upon their superior rank as a gift of these -monarchs. The patriciate depended upon senatorial membership, -which was at the disposal of the kings.<a id="FNanchor_959" href="#Footnote_959" class="fnanchor">[959]</a> This view is well -adapted to explain the creation of the senate; but for the period -after its establishment Livy<a id="FNanchor_960" href="#Footnote_960" class="fnanchor">[960]</a> adds to the adlectio of the king a -coöptatio by the patres (senators). Livy’s account of the usage -here given is reasonable; the king indicated his preference as -to the choice of advisers, but a powerful council, such as the -senate must have been, at least in the later regal period, would -have the final decision on the question of admitting a new -member. The conclusion is that toward the end of the monarchy, -if not from the beginning, plebeians were admitted to the -senate, and through it to the patriciate, by the coöperation of the -king and the senate, the people having nothing to do with -the matter.<a id="FNanchor_961" href="#Footnote_961" class="fnanchor">[961]</a> But after the overthrow of the monarchy the vote -of the people was substituted for the will of the king, coöptation -by the senate continuing as before.<a id="FNanchor_962" href="#Footnote_962" class="fnanchor">[962]</a></p> - -<p>The patriciate was acquired not only through bestowal by the -state, but also through the adoption of a plebeian into a patrician -family. Several cases of the kind have been ascertained.<a id="FNanchor_963" href="#Footnote_963" class="fnanchor">[963]</a> The -act took place before the praetor<a id="FNanchor_964" href="#Footnote_964" class="fnanchor">[964]</a> and did not concern the -comitia. Probably a preliminary examination by the pontiffs -was necessary to adoptions as well as to arrogations.<a id="FNanchor_965" href="#Footnote_965" class="fnanchor">[965]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_167"></a>[167]</span></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Rubino, J., <i>Röm. Verfassung</i>, 241-53; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forschungen</i>, i. -123-7, 397-409; <i>Röm. Chronologie</i>, 241 ff.; <i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, ii. 33-41; iii. -38-40; Lange, L., <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, i. 131-4, 177 f., 356 f., 362, 398-401, -459, 795; ii. 518, see also indices s. Adrogatio, Calatores, Detestatio sacrorum; -<i>Transitio ad plebem</i>, in <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, ii. 1-90; Madvig, J. N., <i>Verf. u. -Verw. d. röm. Staates</i>, i. 222-6; Herzog, E., <i>Röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, i. -108-11, 1062-4, 1075; Mispoulet, J. B., <i>Institutions politiques des Romains</i>, -i. 202 f.; Willems, P., <i>Droit public Rom.</i> 53 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. -Roms</i>, ii. 187 ff.; Wissowa, G., <i>Religion und Kultus der Römer</i>, 440 f.; -Hallays, A., <i>Comices à Rome</i>, 16-9; Mercklein, D. L., <i>Coöptation der Römer</i>, -11-44 (of the gentes and of the senate); Helbig, W., in <i>Comptes rendus de -l’acad. des inscr. et belles-lettres</i>, xxi (1893). 350-3; Büdinger, M., <i>Cicero und -die Patriciat</i>, in <i>Denkschr. d. Kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss. Phil.-hist. Cl.</i> xxxi -(1881). 211-73; <i>Der Patriciat und das Fehderecht in den letzten Jahrzehnten -der röm. Rep.</i>, ibid. xxxvi (1888). 81-125; Baudry, F., <i>Adrogatio</i>, in Daremberg -et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 83 f.; Saglio, E., <i>Calator</i>, ibid. i. 814; Humbert, G., -ibid. i. 1375 f.; <i>Detestatio sacrorum</i>, ibid. ii. 113; Leonhard, <i>Adrogatio</i>, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 419-21; Samter, <i>Calatores</i>, ibid. iii. 1335 f.; -Kübler, <i>Calata comitia</i>, ibid. iii. 1330-4; Ruggiero, E., <i>Diz. ep.</i> ii. 1185; -Smith, <i>Dict.</i> i. 26 f.; Nettleship, <i>Contrib. to Lat. Lexicog.</i> 400.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_168"></a>[168]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_IX">CHAPTER IX.<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE COMITIA CURIATA</span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>The primitive European assembly, of which the Roman is -a variety, may be reconstructed in broad outline by a comparison -of the forms and functions of the institution as found among -the earliest Italians, Greeks, Celts, Germans, Slavs, and kindred -peoples, among whom it differed in detail while possessing the -same general features. The usual tendency of development was -toward the abridgment of popular powers to the advantage -of the nobles or of the king;<a id="FNanchor_966" href="#Footnote_966" class="fnanchor">[966]</a> but in some instances may be -discovered a growth in the opposite direction.</p> - -<p>Generally the assembly did not have fixed times of meeting -but convened only when called by the king or chiefs. This is -known to be true of the Homeric Greeks,<a id="FNanchor_967" href="#Footnote_967" class="fnanchor">[967]</a> of the Slavs,<a id="FNanchor_968" href="#Footnote_968" class="fnanchor">[968]</a> and -of the Romans,<a id="FNanchor_969" href="#Footnote_969" class="fnanchor">[969]</a> and may be regarded as the more primitive -condition. In addition to extraordinary sessions the German -assembly acquired the right to meet regularly twice a month at -fixed times<a id="FNanchor_970" href="#Footnote_970" class="fnanchor">[970]</a>—a right which gave the people a valuable political -advantage. In like manner the Lacedaemonians met once a -month;<a id="FNanchor_971" href="#Footnote_971" class="fnanchor">[971]</a> the Athenians probably once a prytany (tenth of -a year) after Cleisthenes, and certainly four times a prytany -after Pericles.<a id="FNanchor_972" href="#Footnote_972" class="fnanchor">[972]</a> The Celtic assemblies convened annually or -triennially at fixed seasons.<a id="FNanchor_973" href="#Footnote_973" class="fnanchor">[973]</a> Among all these peoples, however, -subjects for consideration were presented by none but the king<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_169"></a>[169]</span> -or chief, the assembly itself being wholly without initiative. -Such subjects were as a rule previously discussed in a council -of chiefs or nobles.<a id="FNanchor_974" href="#Footnote_974" class="fnanchor">[974]</a> The person who summoned the assembly -naturally made the first speech, which explained the purpose of -the meeting and the character of the subject to be considered. -If it was an enterprise in which he desired the support or -coöperation of the community, he attempted to rouse for it the -enthusiasm of his hearers.<a id="FNanchor_975" href="#Footnote_975" class="fnanchor">[975]</a> The discussion might then be continued -by the chiefs or any others distinguished for age, military -prowess, or eloquence.<a id="FNanchor_976" href="#Footnote_976" class="fnanchor">[976]</a> Among the Germans, who possessed -more than the average degree of liberty, any one spoke who -could gain a hearing; in the Homeric assembly a commoner -who dared lift up his voice against king or noble was liable to -severe chastisement as a disorderly person;<a id="FNanchor_977" href="#Footnote_977" class="fnanchor">[977]</a> and conditions -at Rome, as well as in Etruria,<a id="FNanchor_978" href="#Footnote_978" class="fnanchor">[978]</a> seem to have been equally -unfavorable to the ordinary freeman.</p> - -<p>A considerable variety of business came before the assembly. -It might be summoned to hear the announcement of news of interest -to the community,<a id="FNanchor_979" href="#Footnote_979" class="fnanchor">[979]</a> the reading of the calendar for the -month,<a id="FNanchor_980" href="#Footnote_980" class="fnanchor">[980]</a> the declaration of a policy or opinion by a king or chief,<a id="FNanchor_981" href="#Footnote_981" class="fnanchor">[981]</a> -or for witnessing acts affecting the interests of the community.<a id="FNanchor_982" href="#Footnote_982" class="fnanchor">[982]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_170"></a>[170]</span> -More important were judicial cases,<a id="FNanchor_983" href="#Footnote_983" class="fnanchor">[983]</a> questions of war and peace,<a id="FNanchor_984" href="#Footnote_984" class="fnanchor">[984]</a> -and elections.<a id="FNanchor_985" href="#Footnote_985" class="fnanchor">[985]</a></p> - -<p>The problem as to the relative power of the king and council -on the one hand and of the assembly on the other is difficult. -It was a disadvantage to the people, over and above their lack -of initiative, to have no means of precisely expressing their will. -The Greeks signified their approval by acclamation,<a id="FNanchor_986" href="#Footnote_986" class="fnanchor">[986]</a> the Germans -by clashing their weapons,<a id="FNanchor_987" href="#Footnote_987" class="fnanchor">[987]</a> and the Celts by both;<a id="FNanchor_988" href="#Footnote_988" class="fnanchor">[988]</a> either -demonstration aimed to express, not the will of the majority,<a id="FNanchor_989" href="#Footnote_989" class="fnanchor">[989]</a> -but the intensity of conviction on the part of the assembly as a -whole. It lacked as well the means of legally enforcing its -will.<a id="FNanchor_990" href="#Footnote_990" class="fnanchor">[990]</a> The Achaeans in assembly approved the petition of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_171"></a>[171]</span> -Chryses, a suppliant priest; nevertheless King Agamemnon -rejected it.<a id="FNanchor_991" href="#Footnote_991" class="fnanchor">[991]</a> After the people had divided the spoils of war, -Agamemnon seized the prize they had given another.<a id="FNanchor_992" href="#Footnote_992" class="fnanchor">[992]</a> The -Trojans were ready to surrender Helen for the sake of peace; -but Priam, to gratify his son, refused, and the war went on.<a id="FNanchor_993" href="#Footnote_993" class="fnanchor">[993]</a> In -his relations with individuals the king often acted unjustly and -tyrannically. Even in affairs which concerned the entire community -he might take large liberty. Without consulting the assembly -he could count on the support of the people in a war of -defence. Treaties of peace, which were often guest-friendships -and intermarriages between royal families,<a id="FNanchor_994" href="#Footnote_994" class="fnanchor">[994]</a> did not come before -the people for ratification as a right, but only in cases in which -their pledge seemed necessary for the prevention of private -warfare. The right of the magistrate to conclude peace with -or without discussion in the council or senate was recognized by -the states of Italy as late as the Second Samnite war.<a id="FNanchor_995" href="#Footnote_995" class="fnanchor">[995]</a> The king -might even declare an offensive war on his own responsibility, -if without consulting the people he could feel sure of their support.<a id="FNanchor_996" href="#Footnote_996" class="fnanchor">[996]</a> -Enterprises requiring their coöperation he usually submitted -to them to win their approval, as he had no means of -coercing the entire community. His independence of the assembly -increased with the growth of heredity. The idea of -sovereignty, strictly speaking, was unknown to primitive times;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_172"></a>[172]</span> -yet so far as people thought of political power, they assigned it -to the king and council.<a id="FNanchor_997" href="#Footnote_997" class="fnanchor">[997]</a> Nevertheless the fact of the assembly’s -existence and the need of eloquence for persuading it prove it to -have been a real force. The suppression of the German assembly -or the prohibition of carrying arms to the meeting was -looked upon as intolerable tyranny.<a id="FNanchor_998" href="#Footnote_998" class="fnanchor">[998]</a> For the disturbance of an -Irish assembly the penalty was death.<a id="FNanchor_999" href="#Footnote_999" class="fnanchor">[999]</a> Public opinion was a -check on royalty,<a id="FNanchor_1000" href="#Footnote_1000" class="fnanchor">[1000]</a> and in extreme cases the people rebelled and -killed their king.<a id="FNanchor_1001" href="#Footnote_1001" class="fnanchor">[1001]</a></p> - -<p>The strengthening of the kingship naturally tended to weaken -the assembly. The Lacedaemonian kings had a right to make -war on whatever state they pleased, and any citizen who obstructed -this power was accursed;<a id="FNanchor_1002" href="#Footnote_1002" class="fnanchor">[1002]</a> if, too, in anything the people -gave a wrong decision, the kings and council could set it -right.<a id="FNanchor_1003" href="#Footnote_1003" class="fnanchor">[1003]</a> Under the Frankish monarchy the general assembly -seems to have entirely disappeared in the sixth century <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>, to -be revived in the latter part of the seventh,<a id="FNanchor_1004" href="#Footnote_1004" class="fnanchor">[1004]</a> in a form which -took little account of the commons.<a id="FNanchor_1005" href="#Footnote_1005" class="fnanchor">[1005]</a> In the other Germanic -tribes which entered the Empire the effect of the migration was -to strengthen the king and to weaken in a corresponding degree -the power of the people.<a id="FNanchor_1006" href="#Footnote_1006" class="fnanchor">[1006]</a> In Russia Tartar domination, converting -the legitimate princes into tyrants, effected the downfall of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_173"></a>[173]</span> -the assemblies.<a id="FNanchor_1007" href="#Footnote_1007" class="fnanchor">[1007]</a> The building up of large states, too, necessarily -degrades or destroys popular gatherings.<a id="FNanchor_1008" href="#Footnote_1008" class="fnanchor">[1008]</a></p> - -<p>The heritage of the Roman assembly from the earlier tribal -time must have been slight as well as vague—a heritage diminished -further by the growing power of the king and nobles. -The assumption has often been made that from the beginning -the Roman assembly was sovereign. The view rests in part, -however, on a confusion of two ideas which should be kept -distinct. In its broadest sense populus designates the state, -which is sovereign whether it expresses its will through the -king, the senate, or the popular assembly, or through the concurrence -of two or more of these elements. In interstate -relations it always has this meaning. More narrowly populus -signifies the masses of citizens in contrast with the magistrates -or with the senate.<a id="FNanchor_1009" href="#Footnote_1009" class="fnanchor">[1009]</a> In the latter sense it cannot be said that -the populus was from the beginning sovereign. The Romans -themselves of later time understood that in the regal period the -senate had the wisdom to advise, the king possessed the imperium, -whereas the people enjoyed but a limited degree of -freedom, right, and power.<a id="FNanchor_1010" href="#Footnote_1010" class="fnanchor">[1010]</a> Their condition was not liberty -but a preparation for it.<a id="FNanchor_1011" href="#Footnote_1011" class="fnanchor">[1011]</a> Their assembly, like that of other -early Europeans, had no power of initiative; it met only when -summoned by the king, and could consider those matters -only which the king brought before it. Its object must have -been chiefly to receive information and to witness acts of public -importance. In no case did the king call upon the assembly -for advice; counsel belonged exclusively to the wise elders, who -composed the senate;<a id="FNanchor_1012" href="#Footnote_1012" class="fnanchor">[1012]</a> and should he wish to instruct the people -in the merits of a proposed measure, he would himself address -them and perhaps invite the most respected senators or his most -trustworthy supporters among the private citizens to give the -masses the benefit of their wisdom.<a id="FNanchor_1013" href="#Footnote_1013" class="fnanchor">[1013]</a> In other than judicial<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_174"></a>[174]</span> -assemblies the privilege of speaking must have been sparingly -granted.<a id="FNanchor_1014" href="#Footnote_1014" class="fnanchor">[1014]</a> Finally no elective or legislative act of the curiae -was valid without the authorization of the senate (patrum -auctoritas).<a id="FNanchor_1015" href="#Footnote_1015" class="fnanchor">[1015]</a></p> - -<p>With reference to the specific rights of the assembly, Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1016" href="#Footnote_1016" class="fnanchor">[1016]</a> -states that Romulus granted the commons three prerogatives, -(1) to elect magistrates, (2) to ratify laws, (3) to decide -concerning war, whenever the king should refer the matter to -them. Livy’s<a id="FNanchor_1017" href="#Footnote_1017" class="fnanchor">[1017]</a> stricture on the absolutism of Tarquin the -Proud implies, too, that constitutionally the assembly should -have had power to decide on peace and war. But stress should -be laid on the admission of Dionysius that probably all the -questions above enumerated, or at least those of peace and -war, were referred to the assembly at the pleasure only of the -king—that the decision of them was not a right of the people, -but a concession on the part of the sovereign.<a id="FNanchor_1018" href="#Footnote_1018" class="fnanchor">[1018]</a> Still more -important, these generalizations are in great part invalidated, -as Rubino<a id="FNanchor_1019" href="#Footnote_1019" class="fnanchor">[1019]</a> has shown, by the testimony of their authors. -When either refers to individual cases of treaty-making under -the kings, he never connects the assembly with the proceedings.<a id="FNanchor_1020" href="#Footnote_1020" class="fnanchor">[1020]</a> -It is significant, too, that the formula of treaty makes the -king the only actor, taking no account of the people.<a id="FNanchor_1021" href="#Footnote_1021" class="fnanchor">[1021]</a> Usually -peace continued merely through the lifetime of the king who -contracted it,<a id="FNanchor_1022" href="#Footnote_1022" class="fnanchor">[1022]</a> but a truce for a definite period was binding to -the end, even after his death.<a id="FNanchor_1023" href="#Footnote_1023" class="fnanchor">[1023]</a> Under the republic to the time -of the decemvirs the treaty-making power resided in the consuls<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_175"></a>[175]</span> -and senate.<a id="FNanchor_1024" href="#Footnote_1024" class="fnanchor">[1024]</a> Ordinarily either a senatus consultum empowered -the magistrates to use their discretion<a id="FNanchor_1025" href="#Footnote_1025" class="fnanchor">[1025]</a> or sanctioned the agreement -when made.<a id="FNanchor_1026" href="#Footnote_1026" class="fnanchor">[1026]</a> More rarely the senate treated directly with -ambassadors from the enemy.<a id="FNanchor_1027" href="#Footnote_1027" class="fnanchor">[1027]</a> The clamor of the plebeians -sometimes prevailed upon the senate to negotiate for peace;<a id="FNanchor_1028" href="#Footnote_1028" class="fnanchor">[1028]</a> -and at other times it was merely by accident that the people -heard of the conclusion of a treaty.<a id="FNanchor_1029" href="#Footnote_1029" class="fnanchor">[1029]</a> After the decemviral -legislation the plebeian assembly of tribes slowly acquired the -right of ratification;<a id="FNanchor_1030" href="#Footnote_1030" class="fnanchor">[1030]</a> in fact it was not till the Second Samnite -war that their vote came to be essential.<a id="FNanchor_1031" href="#Footnote_1031" class="fnanchor">[1031]</a> Among the archives -devoted to treaties and alliances, accordingly, senatus consulta -and plebiscites alone are mentioned.<a id="FNanchor_1032" href="#Footnote_1032" class="fnanchor">[1032]</a> The very fact that in the -later republic the ratification of treaties belonged exclusively to -the tribal assembly<a id="FNanchor_1033" href="#Footnote_1033" class="fnanchor">[1033]</a> proves that it was an acquired right of the -people; for we may set it down as a fixed principle that the -curiae and the centuries yielded none of their prerogatives to -the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1034" href="#Footnote_1034" class="fnanchor">[1034]</a></p> - -<p>As regards the right of the people to declare war a distinction -must be drawn between defensive wars, which, admitting neither -choice nor delay,<a id="FNanchor_1035" href="#Footnote_1035" class="fnanchor">[1035]</a> could not be referred to their decision, and -aggressive wars, which were in the option of the state to undertake -or avoid. Yet even in the case of offensive wars, though -the approval of the people was doubtless often sought, they -exercised under the kings and in the early republic no real right. -When the king or magistrate felt that Rome had suffered injury -from a neighboring state, he despatched an ambassador to seek -reparation. If the demand was not complied with, the ambassador,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_176"></a>[176]</span> -calling Jupiter and the other gods to witness the injustice, -added: “But we shall consult the elders in our own country -concerning these matters, to determine in what way we may -obtain justice.” When the messenger had returned to Rome -and had made his report, the king consulted the senate substantially -in these words: “Concerning such matters, differences, -and disagreements as the pater patratus of the Roman people, -the quirites, has conferred with the pater patratus of the ancient -Latins and of the ancient Latin peoples—which matters ought -to be given up, performed, discharged, but which they have -neither given up nor performed nor discharged—declare,” said -he to the senator whose opinion he wished first to obtain, “what -you think.” Then the elder thus questioned replied, “I think -the demand should be enforced by a just and pious war; and -therefore I consent to it and vote for it.” Then the rest were -asked in order, and when a majority agreed in this opinion, war -was thereby voted.<a id="FNanchor_1036" href="#Footnote_1036" class="fnanchor">[1036]</a> In all this account there is no mention of -the people; but afterward when the fetialis reached the border -of the enemy’s country, and pronounced the formula for the -declaration of war, he included a statement that the populus -Romanus had ordered it: “Forasmuch as the populus Romanus -of the quirites have ordered that there should be war with the -ancient Latins, and the senate of the populus Romanus of the -quirites have given their opinion, consented, etc., I and the populus -Romanus declare and make war on the peoples of the -ancient Latins.”<a id="FNanchor_1037" href="#Footnote_1037" class="fnanchor">[1037]</a> In this connection, as in all formulae applying -to international relations, populus means not the assembly -but the state; hence the use of the word cannot be taken as -evidence of the existence of a popular right to declare war.<a id="FNanchor_1038" href="#Footnote_1038" class="fnanchor">[1038]</a> -Besides this formula we have in support of such a right the -general statement only of Dionysius and the implied idea of -Livy, referred to above,<a id="FNanchor_1039" href="#Footnote_1039" class="fnanchor">[1039]</a> neither of which is in itself of especial -weight. On the other hand the individual kings seem to have -been free to make war at their discretion. The fact that peace<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_177"></a>[177]</span> -and war are represented as depending upon the character and -inclinations of the king<a id="FNanchor_1040" href="#Footnote_1040" class="fnanchor">[1040]</a> further establishes the real view of -the Roman historians. In a succeeding chapter<a id="FNanchor_1041" href="#Footnote_1041" class="fnanchor">[1041]</a> it will be -made clear that not till 427 did the centuriate assembly -acquire the right to declare an aggressive war; probably -not till some time afterward was this right established as -inalienable. Previous to that date the warriors, perhaps in a -contio, were occasionally called on to give their approval, -doubtless, as has been explained above,<a id="FNanchor_1042" href="#Footnote_1042" class="fnanchor">[1042]</a> to increase their -enthusiasm for the war.</p> - -<p>With reference to the legislative activity of the assembly -under the kings, it is necessary to call attention to the fact that -among all peoples in the earlier stages of their growth law is -chiefly customary.<a id="FNanchor_1043" href="#Footnote_1043" class="fnanchor">[1043]</a> At the time of her founding Rome inherited -from the Latin stock, to which her people mainly belonged, a -mass of private and public customs, which, owing their existence -to no legislative power, were the result of gradual evolution. -Under such conditions, as in Homeric Greece, the king or chief -settled disputes in accordance with these usages, though in the -general belief his individual judgments came directly to him from -some god. The Homeric king received his dooms—θέμιστες—and -even his thoughts from the gods.<a id="FNanchor_1044" href="#Footnote_1044" class="fnanchor">[1044]</a> The mythical or semi-mythical -legislators of Greece, as Minos, Lycurgus, and Zaleucus, -were given their laws by revelation. In like manner -Numa, who may be considered a typical legislator for primitive -Rome,<a id="FNanchor_1045" href="#Footnote_1045" class="fnanchor">[1045]</a> received his sacred laws and institutions from the -goddess Egeria;<a id="FNanchor_1046" href="#Footnote_1046" class="fnanchor">[1046]</a> and Romulus, the first great law-giver,<a id="FNanchor_1047" href="#Footnote_1047" class="fnanchor">[1047]</a> was a -demi-god, who passed without dying to the dwelling-place of the -immortals.<a id="FNanchor_1048" href="#Footnote_1048" class="fnanchor">[1048]</a> Roughly distinguished, Romulus was the author of -the secular law, Numa of the sacred.<a id="FNanchor_1049" href="#Footnote_1049" class="fnanchor">[1049]</a> In general the Romans<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_178"></a>[178]</span> -of later time looked back to their kings, the founders of their -state,<a id="FNanchor_1050" href="#Footnote_1050" class="fnanchor">[1050]</a> as the authors not only of their fundamental laws and -institutions but even of their moral principles.<a id="FNanchor_1051" href="#Footnote_1051" class="fnanchor">[1051]</a> Doubtless the -Roman view of the ancient king is an image of the republican -dictatorship, of the extraordinary magistratus rei publicae constituendae, -of the consul freed from his various limitations;<a id="FNanchor_1052" href="#Footnote_1052" class="fnanchor">[1052]</a> but -the picture, stripped of the distinctness which came with the -gradual formulation of constitutional usage, is, as comparative -study shows, true to the primitive condition which it aims to -represent.</p> - -<p>From this early conception the idea of human legislation -gradually emerged. Not daring on his own responsibility to -change a traditional usage which the people held sacred, the -magistrate found it expedient to obtain their consent to any -serious departure,<a id="FNanchor_1053" href="#Footnote_1053" class="fnanchor">[1053]</a> with a view not to legalizing the proposal, -but to pledging the people to its practical adoption. When and -how the primitive acclamation gave way to the orderly vote of the -comitia curiata cannot be ascertained from the sources.<a id="FNanchor_1054" href="#Footnote_1054" class="fnanchor">[1054]</a> After -this stage was reached, the transaction between king and people -had the following form: “I ask you, quirites, whether you will consent -to, and consider it right, that T. Valerius be a son to L. Titus -as rightfully and legally as if born of the father and mother of -the family of the latter, and that the latter have the power of -life and death over the former as a father over his son. These -(questions) in the form in which I have pronounced them, thus, -quirites, I ask you.”<a id="FNanchor_1055" href="#Footnote_1055" class="fnanchor">[1055]</a> The magistrate brought his formulated -request before the people (legem ferre), who accepted it (legem -accipere); the question (rogatio) was directed not to the assembly -as a whole but to the component citizens, who individually<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_179"></a>[179]</span> -replied ut rogas, “yes,” or antiquo, “no.”<a id="FNanchor_1056" href="#Footnote_1056" class="fnanchor">[1056]</a> By this procedure -the citizens bound themselves to the acceptance of the proposition -on an oral promise, which was the strongest form of obligation -known to them. Herein is involved the fundamental idea -of lex, which was not a command addressed by the sovereign to -the people or a contract between ruler and ruled, but an obligation -which the citizens took upon themselves at the request of -the magistrate.<a id="FNanchor_1057" href="#Footnote_1057" class="fnanchor">[1057]</a> The verb iubere, which designates the people’s -part (populus iubet) in the passing of laws and resolutions, did -not originally have the meaning “to order,” which belonged to -it in the age of Cicero. Some have derived it from ius habere, -“to regard as right;”<a id="FNanchor_1058" href="#Footnote_1058" class="fnanchor">[1058]</a> others from judh, an extension of -the root ju, “to bind.”<a id="FNanchor_1059" href="#Footnote_1059" class="fnanchor">[1059]</a> In either case it seems to mean no -more than to accept or hold as right or as binding. In its widest -sense lex denotes any obligation which one party takes upon -himself on the offer of another. In this meaning it may apply -to a business contract,<a id="FNanchor_1060" href="#Footnote_1060" class="fnanchor">[1060]</a> in which alone the obligations are reciprocal, -to the instruction imposed by a superior magistrate upon an -inferior,<a id="FNanchor_1061" href="#Footnote_1061" class="fnanchor">[1061]</a> to the auspicium which the magistrate formulates and -the god accepts,<a id="FNanchor_1062" href="#Footnote_1062" class="fnanchor">[1062]</a> to the ordinance which the subject, without -being consulted, receives willingly or unwillingly from the ruler<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_180"></a>[180]</span> -(lex data),<a id="FNanchor_1063" href="#Footnote_1063" class="fnanchor">[1063]</a> as well as to the statute established by the question -of the magistrate and the affirmative answer of the citizens (lex -rogata). The leges of the community, with which alone the -present discussion is concerned, were distinguished as publicae.<a id="FNanchor_1064" href="#Footnote_1064" class="fnanchor">[1064]</a> -A lex of the kind was not necessarily general,<a id="FNanchor_1065" href="#Footnote_1065" class="fnanchor">[1065]</a> but applied as -readily to an individual citizen<a id="FNanchor_1066" href="#Footnote_1066" class="fnanchor">[1066]</a> as to the entire body, to a declaration -of war,<a id="FNanchor_1067" href="#Footnote_1067" class="fnanchor">[1067]</a> or the banishment of a citizen,<a id="FNanchor_1068" href="#Footnote_1068" class="fnanchor">[1068]</a> as well as to a -universal rule of conduct. In the earlier time the lex rogata, or -simply lex, seems to have designated any act of an assembly, -elective or judicial as well as law-making in the modern sense.<a id="FNanchor_1069" href="#Footnote_1069" class="fnanchor">[1069]</a> -But in the time of Cicero it had come to mean any act of an -assembly which was neither an election nor a judicial decision,<a id="FNanchor_1070" href="#Footnote_1070" class="fnanchor">[1070]</a> -and in the latter sense the word is used in this volume.</p> - -<p>The acceptance of a proposition by the citizens obligated -themselves<a id="FNanchor_1071" href="#Footnote_1071" class="fnanchor">[1071]</a> but not the government. The king, who retained -office for life and was irresponsible, could not be held amenable -to law; against a tyrannical ruler the only resource was revolution. -Although the republican magistrates possessed remarkably<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_181"></a>[181]</span> -great power, as temporary functionaries they belonged to the -people, along with whom they were bound by the laws.<a id="FNanchor_1072" href="#Footnote_1072" class="fnanchor">[1072]</a></p> - -<p>To the end of the regal period the legislative activity of the -people remained narrowly restricted. The body of leges regiae, -described as curiate by Pomponius<a id="FNanchor_1073" href="#Footnote_1073" class="fnanchor">[1073]</a> on the supposition that they -were passed by the assembly under royal presidency,<a id="FNanchor_1074" href="#Footnote_1074" class="fnanchor">[1074]</a> was little -more than the ius pontificum—the customary religious law—with -whose making the curiae had nothing to do.<a id="FNanchor_1075" href="#Footnote_1075" class="fnanchor">[1075]</a> If the king -wished to admit new citizens,<a id="FNanchor_1076" href="#Footnote_1076" class="fnanchor">[1076]</a> erect public works, levy forced -labor on the citizens,<a id="FNanchor_1077" href="#Footnote_1077" class="fnanchor">[1077]</a> reform the military organization,<a id="FNanchor_1078" href="#Footnote_1078" class="fnanchor">[1078]</a> punish a -man with chains or death,<a id="FNanchor_1079" href="#Footnote_1079" class="fnanchor">[1079]</a> make a treaty, or even declare an -offensive war, no power compelled him to submit the measure to -the citizens. Although he must often have found it expedient -to engage their coöperation in national enterprises, or more -rarely in a legal innovation,<a id="FNanchor_1080" href="#Footnote_1080" class="fnanchor">[1080]</a> it may be stated with confidence -that before the beginning of the republic the curiate assembly -had not acquired the right to be consulted on any of these -matters—that its slight activity in legislation and administration -was a concession from the king rather than a right; for under -the republic such activity, gradually increasing, belonged to the -centuries and the tribes. We may accept without hesitation the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_182"></a>[182]</span> -principle that in form if not in substance the curiae retained all -the powers which they had ever actually possessed.</p> - -<p>Judicial business, which no one has ever assumed to be a -primitive function of the Roman assembly, needs no long consideration -here. Among the early Indo-Europeans the settlement -of disputes and the punishment of most crimes were in the -hands of the families and brotherhoods; only treason and -closely related offences were noticed by the state; and these -cases were tried by the king in the presence of the assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1081" href="#Footnote_1081" class="fnanchor">[1081]</a> -The religious ideas attaching to crime and punishment<a id="FNanchor_1082" href="#Footnote_1082" class="fnanchor">[1082]</a> in early -Rome suggest that the priests had the same connection with -these matters there as among the Celts and Germans. That -condition yielded to the growing authority of the king, who is -represented by the ancients as wielding an absolute power of -life and death over his people and as allowing in capital cases -an appeal to the assembly at his own discretion.<a id="FNanchor_1083" href="#Footnote_1083" class="fnanchor">[1083]</a> From the -general conception of the relation between king and assembly as -established in this chapter, it is necessary to infer that if the -people had any claim to a share in the jurisdiction, it must have -been slight as well as vague, and one which they were in no -position to enforce.</p> - -<p>A review of the individual kings might give the impression -that an act of the assembly was unessential to filling the regal -office. Not only were Romulus and Tatius kings without -election,<a id="FNanchor_1084" href="#Footnote_1084" class="fnanchor">[1084]</a> but according to Livy<a id="FNanchor_1085" href="#Footnote_1085" class="fnanchor">[1085]</a> Numa’s appointment was -made by the senate alone; and Servius ruled long and introduced -his great reforms before his election.<a id="FNanchor_1086" href="#Footnote_1086" class="fnanchor">[1086]</a> Tarquin the -Proud to the end of his reign was neither appointed by the -senate nor chosen by the people.<a id="FNanchor_1087" href="#Footnote_1087" class="fnanchor">[1087]</a> From these four or five -instances of kings who ruled without election, as well as from -the fact that both the dictatorship—a temporary return to -monarchy—and the office of rex sacrorum—the priestly successor -to the monarch—were filled by appointment, we might<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_183"></a>[183]</span> -infer that the kingship was not elective.<a id="FNanchor_1088" href="#Footnote_1088" class="fnanchor">[1088]</a> But on the other -hand the word interregnum, which could not have been invented -in the republican period and which involves the idea of election, -as well as the general custom of choosing kings among primitive -European peoples, may be added to the authority of -our sources<a id="FNanchor_1089" href="#Footnote_1089" class="fnanchor">[1089]</a> in favor of an elective monarchy in earliest -Rome. The nomination of the king by the competent person -was perhaps acclaimed in a contio in some such way as -among the early Germans. Such an election, we may suppose, -was in the beginning legal without further action on the -part of the people. But the accession of a king was a momentous -event in the life of a generation—far more important than -the annual declaration of war upon a neighbor—and the -advantage of a formal vote of the curiate assembly, after its -institution, was obvious both to the king and to the sacerdotes; -it gave to the former the solemn oral pledge of obedience from -the citizens, and to the latter an opportunity to influence the -proceedings through the auspices and through the manipulation -of the calendar.</p> - -<p>Under this system the king after his appointment by his predecessor -or by the interrex, and after the acclamation in contio -if such action took place, convoked the curiae on the first convenient -comitial day of his reign,<a id="FNanchor_1090" href="#Footnote_1090" class="fnanchor">[1090]</a> having held favorable auspices -in the morning, and proposed to them a rogation<a id="FNanchor_1091" href="#Footnote_1091" class="fnanchor">[1091]</a> in some -such form as the following: “Do you consent, and regard it as -just and legal, that I, whom the populus has designated king, -should exercise imperium over you?” This rogation, answered -affirmatively by a majority of the curiae, became a lex curiata -de imperio.<a id="FNanchor_1092" href="#Footnote_1092" class="fnanchor">[1092]</a> The informal acclamation, if it was the custom,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_184"></a>[184]</span> -must have disappeared in time, and the passing of the curiate -law was looked upon as the election proper.<a id="FNanchor_1093" href="#Footnote_1093" class="fnanchor">[1093]</a></p> - -<p>Concessions to the people develop into popular rights. The -citizens, deeply interested in the choice of a man who for the -remainder of his life was to represent their community before -the gods, lead them in war, and exercise over them the power -of life and death, claimed as their first active political right the -ius suffragii in the passing of this lex curiata de imperio. -Hence after the institution of the republic and of the comitia -centuriata, the curiae clung obstinately to this inalienable -prerogative.<a id="FNanchor_1094" href="#Footnote_1094" class="fnanchor">[1094]</a></p> - -<p>The development of the elective process outlined above is -offered in explanation of the curious phenomenon that under -the republic, while all other acts of the centuriate and tribal -assemblies required no confirmation by the curiae, elections by -these assemblies did require such a sanction. This explanation -is the only one proposed which accords with the Roman interpretation -of the peculiarity. According to Cicero it was provided<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_185"></a>[185]</span> -that in the case of all elective magistrates the people -should vote twice on each that they might have an opportunity -to correct what they had done, if they repented of having conferred -an office on any person. In the case of the censors this -second vote was cast in the comitia centuriata; all other elective -magistrates received it in the curiate assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1095" href="#Footnote_1095" class="fnanchor">[1095]</a> Rubino<a id="FNanchor_1096" href="#Footnote_1096" class="fnanchor">[1096]</a> -and others have objected that Cicero’s interpretation of the -curiate law is biassed by his desire to contrast the essentially -antipopular character of the demagogue Rullus,<a id="FNanchor_1097" href="#Footnote_1097" class="fnanchor">[1097]</a> who by the -terms of his agrarian law would deprive the people of their -right to vote even once in the election of officials, with the wise -and moderate statesmen of old, who were so devoted to the -people as to allow them two opportunities to express their choice -in the case of each magistrate. The orator, it is urged, could -not himself know the original intention of the usage; and his -interpretation is contradicted by the fact that the person who -proposed the lex curiata was already a magistrate, the voting -on this lex being subsequent to the election and forming no -part of it.<a id="FNanchor_1098" href="#Footnote_1098" class="fnanchor">[1098]</a></p> - -<p>In favor of Cicero’s interpretation it may in the first place be -stated that he was not simply offering a conjecture as to the original -intention of the usage, but was interpreting the formula of the -law as it existed in his own day. There would be no point to -his interpretation unless the formula ran somewhat like that of -an election; and he affirms definitely that the law bestows the -magistracy upon a person who has already received the same -office from other comitia—that it is, in other words, a second -bestowal of the office.<a id="FNanchor_1099" href="#Footnote_1099" class="fnanchor">[1099]</a> That this interpretation is not a mere -invention of Cicero is proved by a statement of Messala<a id="FNanchor_1100" href="#Footnote_1100" class="fnanchor">[1100]</a> that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_186"></a>[186]</span> -the magistracy in the strict legal sense of the term is granted -by the curiate law. And the point maintained by Messala is -further confirmed by that article of the agrarian rogation of -P. Servilius Rullus which provides that the decemviri agris adsignandis -may, if necessary, dispense with the curiate law and -yet be “decemvirs in as legal a sense as are those who hold the -office according to the strictest law.”<a id="FNanchor_1101" href="#Footnote_1101" class="fnanchor">[1101]</a> In other words, the person -who has been elected by the comitia centuriata or tributa -is a magistratus, though not a magistratus iustus or optimo iure -(optima lege); the completion of all formalities, ending with a -second election (by the curiae), is essential to the latter.</p> - -<p>Optimo iure requires explanation. It often signifies “with -perfect justice,” “most deservedly.”<a id="FNanchor_1102" href="#Footnote_1102" class="fnanchor">[1102]</a> Closely related to this -meaning is that of “perfect formality,” as in making a bequest<a id="FNanchor_1103" href="#Footnote_1103" class="fnanchor">[1103]</a> -or in creating a sacerdos<a id="FNanchor_1104" href="#Footnote_1104" class="fnanchor">[1104]</a> or a magistrate.<a id="FNanchor_1105" href="#Footnote_1105" class="fnanchor">[1105]</a> In this sense optimo -iure is interchangeable with optima lege. Developed in -another direction, either phrase readily gives the idea of completeness -or perfection of title, not only to property,<a id="FNanchor_1106" href="#Footnote_1106" class="fnanchor">[1106]</a> but also -to office.<a id="FNanchor_1107" href="#Footnote_1107" class="fnanchor">[1107]</a> One who holds a perfect title to a property, or has<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_187"></a>[187]</span> -been granted a civil status<a id="FNanchor_1108" href="#Footnote_1108" class="fnanchor">[1108]</a> or an office<a id="FNanchor_1109" href="#Footnote_1109" class="fnanchor">[1109]</a> in a perfectly legal -way, necessarily enjoys all the immunities, honors, and powers -inherent in such absolute condition. To indicate that due legality -has been observed in the creation of a magistrate, and that -the latter has accordingly complete possession of his office, and -of all the honors and powers belonging to it, the phrase ut qui -optima lege sunt, erunt is often inserted in the formula of appointment -or election. These words continued to be used, for -example, in the creation of the dictator as long as his power remained -absolute, but after it became subject to appeal, they were -dropped.<a id="FNanchor_1110" href="#Footnote_1110" class="fnanchor">[1110]</a> The author of the act was at the same time author -of the condition attaching to it expressed by the phrase under -consideration: in the appointment of a dictator it was the consul; -in the creation of a promagistrate or the assignment of a -province it might be the senate.<a id="FNanchor_1111" href="#Footnote_1111" class="fnanchor">[1111]</a> Laws must often have contained -provisions that the magistrates created under them should -be ut qui optima lege.<a id="FNanchor_1112" href="#Footnote_1112" class="fnanchor">[1112]</a> The Servilian bill most probably included -an article of the kind for the decemviri agris adsignandis -to be elected under it. But as the title to an office was -impaired by any informality in the elective process, and as -Servilius foresaw that the lex curiata might be prevented by -tribunician intercession or other cause, he inserted in his bill -a further provision, referred to above,<a id="FNanchor_1113" href="#Footnote_1113" class="fnanchor">[1113]</a> that the decemviri might -be officials optima lege<a id="FNanchor_1114" href="#Footnote_1114" class="fnanchor">[1114]</a> even without the curiate sanction.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_188"></a>[188]</span> -From what is here said it is clear that the condition of iustus -or optima lege was not obtained for a magistrate by the passing -of the curiate act alone, but rather by due attention to all formalities,<a id="FNanchor_1115" href="#Footnote_1115" class="fnanchor">[1115]</a> -which were brought to completion by that act.</p> - -<p>The formula for the curiate law, in addition to its resemblance -to that for elections, must have contained some reference to the -imperium, as we may infer from the frequent designation of the -law as a lex de imperio by Cicero. From this phrase modern -writers infer that the curiate act conferred the imperium upon -newly elected magistrates. The question whether it granted to -a magistrate powers which he did not already possess will be -considered below. For the present it is enough to state that -in no instance do the ancients speak of “conferring” the imperium -by the curiate law or of deriving the imperium from that -law by any process whatsoever. But mention is made of conferring -the imperium by a decree of the senate or by the suffrages -of the people in the centuriate or tribal assembly<a id="FNanchor_1116" href="#Footnote_1116" class="fnanchor">[1116]</a> and -of <i>confirming</i> it by the curiate law.<a id="FNanchor_1117" href="#Footnote_1117" class="fnanchor">[1117]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_189"></a>[189]</span></p> - -<p>The consuls and the praetor were elected by the centuries, -and their imperium was sanctioned by the curiae. The -dictator, too, was obliged to carry a curiate law.<a id="FNanchor_1118" href="#Footnote_1118" class="fnanchor">[1118]</a> But the -quaestors, the curule aediles, and other inferior magistrates, -after their election by the tribes, did not themselves convoke -the curiae for sanctioning their election; the lex was proposed -in their behalf by a higher magistrate.<a id="FNanchor_1119" href="#Footnote_1119" class="fnanchor">[1119]</a> As the origin of this -custom we may suppose that the kings, and after them the -higher magistrates of the early republic, used to ask the people<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_190"></a>[190]</span> -for a pledge of loyalty not only to themselves but also to their -assistants, and that this custom continued even after they had -come to be elective magistrates. To functionaries who lacked -the imperium the expression lex de imperio could not apply; -lex de potestate, though not occurring in our sources, would -be the appropriate phrase.</p> - -<p>It has generally been assumed that the curiate law bestowed -a power in addition to that received through election.<a id="FNanchor_1120" href="#Footnote_1120" class="fnanchor">[1120]</a> Something -can in fact be said in favor of this view. We are told -that the newly elected magistrate could attend to no serious -public business till he had secured the passage of the act:<a id="FNanchor_1121" href="#Footnote_1121" class="fnanchor">[1121]</a> -till then the praetor could not undertake judicial business; the -consul could have nothing to do with military affairs<a id="FNanchor_1122" href="#Footnote_1122" class="fnanchor">[1122]</a> or hold -comitia for the election of his successor.<a id="FNanchor_1123" href="#Footnote_1123" class="fnanchor">[1123]</a> Some of Cicero’s -contemporaries asserted that a magistrate who failed to pass -the law could not as promagistrate govern a province.<a id="FNanchor_1124" href="#Footnote_1124" class="fnanchor">[1124]</a> Or if -without a curiate law he made the attempt, he would be obliged -to conduct the administration at his own expense;<a id="FNanchor_1125" href="#Footnote_1125" class="fnanchor">[1125]</a> and if as -promagistrate he gained a victory in war, he was denied a -triumph.<a id="FNanchor_1126" href="#Footnote_1126" class="fnanchor">[1126]</a> Under such conditions it might well be said that a -magistrate could engage in no serious public business before he -had carried for himself the sanctioning law. But practice -diverged widely from these rules. An act containing a provision -for the election of functionaries might include a dispensing -clause to the effect that the persons elected shall, in -the lack of a curiate law, “be magistrates in as legal a sense as -those who are elected according to the strictest forms of law.”<a id="FNanchor_1127" href="#Footnote_1127" class="fnanchor">[1127]</a> -Yet even without this special provision the magistrate regularly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_191"></a>[191]</span> -attended to much business before passing the law. The first -public act of the consul, praetor, or other magistrate was to -take the auspices, to determine whether his magistracy was acceptable -to the gods;<a id="FNanchor_1128" href="#Footnote_1128" class="fnanchor">[1128]</a> and another auspication was held for the -meeting of the curiae.<a id="FNanchor_1129" href="#Footnote_1129" class="fnanchor">[1129]</a> It was customary, too, for the consul -to make his vows to the Capitoline Jupiter and to hold a session -of the senate, both of which acts had to be auspicated.<a id="FNanchor_1130" href="#Footnote_1130" class="fnanchor">[1130]</a> These -facts disprove the theory that the curiate law conferred the -auspicium. In the first session of the senate here mentioned -not only religious affairs but civil and military matters of -great importance were discussed and finally arranged, all of -which business was regularly managed without a curiate law.<a id="FNanchor_1131" href="#Footnote_1131" class="fnanchor">[1131]</a> -As to other administrative acts it is probable that the want of -a lex curiata never hindered the performance of necessary -business civil or military. In case of danger to the state -the interrex, who wholly lacked the curiate law, or the consul -before passing the law could doubtless take command of the -army;<a id="FNanchor_1132" href="#Footnote_1132" class="fnanchor">[1132]</a> and it is significant that the unlimited imperium and -iudicium were granted the magistrates not by the curiae but by -the senate.<a id="FNanchor_1133" href="#Footnote_1133" class="fnanchor">[1133]</a> The law was indeed considered indispensable to -the dictator in 310.<a id="FNanchor_1134" href="#Footnote_1134" class="fnanchor">[1134]</a> It is generally assumed by the moderns -that C. Flaminius, consul in 217, lacked the law;<a id="FNanchor_1135" href="#Footnote_1135" class="fnanchor">[1135]</a> their reason -is the statement of Livy<a id="FNanchor_1136" href="#Footnote_1136" class="fnanchor">[1136]</a> that he entered upon his office not -at Rome but at Ariminum. The fact, however, that in this -year he carried a monetary statute before his departure for<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_192"></a>[192]</span> -the war<a id="FNanchor_1137" href="#Footnote_1137" class="fnanchor">[1137]</a> proves that he began his official duties at Rome, and -that Livy’s tirade to the contrary is empty rhetoric. Probably -because he departed without attending to the usual auspices, -his political opponents were unwilling to admit that he had -entered on his office. But the army obeyed his command, his -name remained in the fasti as consul, and his monetary law -continued in force. Livy, while complaining at length of his -failure to take the auspices, says nothing of the curiate law. -His silence is significant.<a id="FNanchor_1138" href="#Footnote_1138" class="fnanchor">[1138]</a> We cannot be certain that the lex -curiata was not passed in his case; but we have no right to -imagine that it was not and then draw far-reaching deductions -from our fancy.<a id="FNanchor_1139" href="#Footnote_1139" class="fnanchor">[1139]</a></p> - -<p>A more valuable instance is that of L. Marcius, elected -propraetor by the army in Spain in 212.<a id="FNanchor_1140" href="#Footnote_1140" class="fnanchor">[1140]</a> Although he could -not have had a lex curiata, the senate, while censuring the -election because it transferred the auspices to the camp, did -not make the want of the law a ground for declaring the -magistracy illegal.<a id="FNanchor_1141" href="#Footnote_1141" class="fnanchor">[1141]</a> A still more famous case is that of the -magistrates of the year 49, who with the Pompeian party fled -from Rome before carrying a lex curiata, and yet were not prevented -by this circumstance from holding military commands -during their year of office or from continuing in command into -the following year as promagistrates.<a id="FNanchor_1142" href="#Footnote_1142" class="fnanchor">[1142]</a> A further instance is -that of Pomptinus, praetor in 63, who had no curiate law; -nevertheless as propraetor in 61 he governed Narbonensis -where he gained a victory over the Gauls. This fact, too, is -evidence that the want of the law did not in practice debar -from military commands. From 58 to 54 he waited outside the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_193"></a>[193]</span> -gates of Rome for a triumph. The senate would not grant it -and some of the magistrates opposed his effort to obtain it. -The privilege was at last given him by the comitia under pretorian -presidency.<a id="FNanchor_1143" href="#Footnote_1143" class="fnanchor">[1143]</a> Although the want of the law involved -him in inconvenience, he finally accomplished his purpose without -it. Appius Claudius, consul in 54, insisted that, should he -fail to carry the sanctioning act, he should nevertheless, since he -was in possession of a province decreed the consuls of his year in -accordance with the Sempronian plebiscite, have imperium by -virtue of a Cornelian statute until such time as he should re-enter -the city.<a id="FNanchor_1144" href="#Footnote_1144" class="fnanchor">[1144]</a> The law of Sulla, to which he referred, -probably stated simply that the promagistrate was to retain -his imperium till his return to the city, without mentioning the -curiate law; and for that reason Appius believed the sanctioning -act to be unnecessary. Cicero, who informs us of this -matter, inclines to the interpretation of Appius. Our conclusion, -accordingly, is that in practice, if not in legal theory, the -lex curiata, however convenient it may have been, was not -essential to the government of a province or to a military -command. It remains to consider whether it was indispensable -to the holding of comitia centuriata for elections. The same -Appius Claudius maintained that though a curiate law was -appropriate to the consul, it was not a necessity,<a id="FNanchor_1145" href="#Footnote_1145" class="fnanchor">[1145]</a> implying -that without the law he was competent to perform all the -functions of that office. He and his colleague, therefore, who -was equally without the law,<a id="FNanchor_1146" href="#Footnote_1146" class="fnanchor">[1146]</a> were ready to hold comitia for -the election of successors; and although party complications -opposed the election, no one objected to it on the ground that -the consuls were incompetent; for postponing the election they -resorted to auspical obnuntiations<a id="FNanchor_1147" href="#Footnote_1147" class="fnanchor">[1147]</a> and to prosecutions of the -candidates for bribery.<a id="FNanchor_1148" href="#Footnote_1148" class="fnanchor">[1148]</a> Their competence to hold the elective -comitia is further established by the senate’s desire that they<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_194"></a>[194]</span> -should hold them at the earliest possible moment.<a id="FNanchor_1149" href="#Footnote_1149" class="fnanchor">[1149]</a> The ultimate -failure of these consuls to elect successors was not owing -to any one’s objecting to their competence.<a id="FNanchor_1150" href="#Footnote_1150" class="fnanchor">[1150]</a></p> - -<p>Scholars have attached great weight to the case of the magistrates -of 49, who with the Pompeian party, as has been stated,<a id="FNanchor_1151" href="#Footnote_1151" class="fnanchor">[1151]</a> -left the city before carrying a lex curiata. Though desiring, in -the Pompeian camp at Thessalonica, to hold comitia for the -election of successors, it was decided that the want of the law -rendered the consuls incompetent for the function.<a id="FNanchor_1152" href="#Footnote_1152" class="fnanchor">[1152]</a> But the -case requires careful examination. The Pompeians had with -them two hundred senators, enough in their opinion to constitute -a quorum, and their augurs had consecrated a place for -taking auspices; so that it was assumed that the populus -Romanus and the entire city were now located in the camp.<a id="FNanchor_1153" href="#Footnote_1153" class="fnanchor">[1153]</a> -All these circumstances clearly imply an intention to assume a -temporary transfer of the city of Rome to the camp and to conduct -the government in that place on the basis of this constitutional -fiction. But suddenly the execution of the plan was -stopped by the plea that the consuls had no curiate law! The -difficulty, however, was not so serious as Dio Cassius and the -moderns have supposed. The assumption of the Pompeians -that the city of Rome temporarily existed in the camp implied -as well the existence of a pomerium, within which the consuls -could legally have held a meeting of the curiae.<a id="FNanchor_1154" href="#Footnote_1154" class="fnanchor">[1154]</a> Or in case<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_195"></a>[195]</span> -they felt any scruple about the matter, the senate could have -decreed the consuls a dispensation from the law for the purpose -of holding the elections. That they allowed a mere formality -to baulk them is out of the question. The whole situation -is made clear by the understanding that the consuls themselves, -or more probably Pompey, did not wish elections to be -held or a civil government established in the camp; such -a proceeding would have disturbed still further the discipline -of the army and would have roused jealousies inimical to -the cause. On this interpretation the want of a law, especially -as it has the appearance of an afterthought, was a mere -pretext.</p> - -<p>We have seen promagistrates whose election to their respective -offices had not been sanctioned by the curiae governing -provinces and holding military commands; we have seen consuls -who lacked the curiate sanction attending with less inconvenience -to all their official duties. The same looseness -characterized the application of the law to minor officials. The -want of the sanction legally involved curule aediles, quaestors, -and all other officials who lacked the right to convoke the -curiae; and yet it is impossible that in 54, for instance, when -the consuls failed to pass the law, the curule aediles and the -quaestors should have remained inactive through the entire -year without leaving in our sources some trace of the disturbance -caused by the suspension of their administrative -functions. Dio Cassius states that no judicial process could -be undertaken before the enactment of the law; nevertheless -Clodius as aedile in 56 prosecuted Milo before the people prior -to the vote on the sanctioning act.<a id="FNanchor_1155" href="#Footnote_1155" class="fnanchor">[1155]</a> The quaestors entered office -regularly on December 5;<a id="FNanchor_1156" href="#Footnote_1156" class="fnanchor">[1156]</a> and as the curiate law was carried -for them by the consuls, they were necessarily in official duty -for some time every year before their election could be sanctioned. -It seems clear that ordinarily one curiate law was -passed each year, under the joint presidency of the consuls and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_196"></a>[196]</span> -praetors, for all the officials who required it.<a id="FNanchor_1157" href="#Footnote_1157" class="fnanchor">[1157]</a> If that is true, a -postponement of the law, or a failure to pass it, affected all the -magistrates of the year.</p> - -<p>The question as to the meaning of this wide divergence -between constitutional theory and actual practice can find an -answer only in the history of the curiate assembly. For a time -after the founding of the republic it remained politically important. -From the institution of the plebeian tribunate (494) to -the enactment of the so-called law of Publilius Volero (471) the -curiate assembly elected tribunes of the plebs.<a id="FNanchor_1158" href="#Footnote_1158" class="fnanchor">[1158]</a> In 390, according -to Livy,<a id="FNanchor_1159" href="#Footnote_1159" class="fnanchor">[1159]</a> it voted the restoration of a citizen from exile. -Rubino<a id="FNanchor_1160" href="#Footnote_1160" class="fnanchor">[1160]</a> maintained that this assembly continued to be a real -gathering of the people to the year after the battle of Cannae, -215, when the exigencies of the war with Hannibal brought into -being a statute whereby the curiate act was passed by a vote of -thirty lictors as the representatives of their respective curiae; in -consequence the sanction was reduced to a formality.<a id="FNanchor_1161" href="#Footnote_1161" class="fnanchor">[1161]</a> The -passage in Festus on which his theory depends is seriously -mutilated; and his attempted restoration is objectionable chiefly -(1) because it required no statute to keep the people from attending -the comitia curiata,<a id="FNanchor_1162" href="#Footnote_1162" class="fnanchor">[1162]</a> (2) because without a statute a resolution -of the assembly was valid, if each voting division was -represented by a single person,<a id="FNanchor_1163" href="#Footnote_1163" class="fnanchor">[1163]</a> (3) because the measure, accordingly, -to be a relief to existing conditions, must have freed the -commander rather than the men from the necessity of going to -Rome to enact the curiate law. Whatever may be the true -reading,<a id="FNanchor_1164" href="#Footnote_1164" class="fnanchor">[1164]</a> we have a right to infer from the extant fragment<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_197"></a>[197]</span> -(1) that in the year mentioned, owing to the nearness of Hannibal, -something was done to relieve officers in the field from the -necessity of coming to Rome to propose the law for themselves, -(2) that the regulation was permanent.<a id="FNanchor_1165" href="#Footnote_1165" class="fnanchor">[1165]</a> It is known that the -consul Q. Fabius Maximus presided at the consular elections -for 214.<a id="FNanchor_1166" href="#Footnote_1166" class="fnanchor">[1166]</a> He and M. Claudius Marcellus, who as proconsul was -at the time in command of an army, were elected.<a id="FNanchor_1167" href="#Footnote_1167" class="fnanchor">[1167]</a> Down to -this time the custom had probably been for men who were -reëlected to an office or who passed from a promagistracy to the -corresponding magistracy, or the reverse, to reënact the lex -curiata. But we may suppose that after the election of 215 -Fabius, fearing that both he and Marcellus might be absent on -military duty at the opening of their official year, secured the -passage of a measure, most likely a senatus consultum,<a id="FNanchor_1168" href="#Footnote_1168" class="fnanchor">[1168]</a> which -exempted from the need of repeating the curiate law holders of -the imperium who were making the transition above described. -In consenting to the arrangement the senate was making a great -sacrifice to the exigencies of the situation. For to maintain control -over the commanders it had insisted that they should begin -their terms with all due formality at Rome.<a id="FNanchor_1169" href="#Footnote_1169" class="fnanchor">[1169]</a> The lex curiata -had proved a material help to this end. But now the person -already in command might continue from year to year at his<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_198"></a>[198]</span> -post, relieved of the need of coming to the capital, where he -would be temporarily subject to senatorial control.</p> - -<p>This provision of 215 was therefore an important step in the -development of the imperium; and at the same time it tended -to destroy the little importance still attaching to the curiate -law. It seems to have been after this event and partly in consequence -of it<a id="FNanchor_1170" href="#Footnote_1170" class="fnanchor">[1170]</a> that the comitia curiata, which had long been -declining, became at last a mere formality, attended by none -but three augurs as witnesses to the proceedings<a id="FNanchor_1171" href="#Footnote_1171" class="fnanchor">[1171]</a> and thirty -lictors,<a id="FNanchor_1172" href="#Footnote_1172" class="fnanchor">[1172]</a> who meekly<a id="FNanchor_1173" href="#Footnote_1173" class="fnanchor">[1173]</a> cast the votes in obedience to the command -of the presiding magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_1174" href="#Footnote_1174" class="fnanchor">[1174]</a> It is a noteworthy fact -that whereas the statesman Cicero has much to say of the curiate -law, Livy and Dionysius make little reference to it. Our -conclusion must be that it was more important in the late -republic than in the earlier time. Probably it nearly fell into -disuse after 215, to be revived some time before Cicero. Its -rehabilitation was the work of the optimates, for we find the -senatorial party chiefly interested in maintaining it during the -age of Cicero. Since the lex curiata, subject as it was to -impetrative auspices and to obnuntiations, correlated closely -with the Aelian and Fufian statutes, we may reasonably connect -its revival closely with their origin. Cicero<a id="FNanchor_1175" href="#Footnote_1175" class="fnanchor">[1175]</a> tells us -accordingly that the comitia curiata have continued merely for -the sake of the auspices. The curtailment of the power of this -assembly is analogous to the curtailment of the power of the -king; as the latter was reduced, in the rex sacrorum, to a shadow -continued merely for a religious purpose, the curiate comitia -were likewise reduced to a shadow maintained in appearance -merely for keeping up an ancient custom and for the auspices -connected therewith,<a id="FNanchor_1176" href="#Footnote_1176" class="fnanchor">[1176]</a> but in reality as a part of the religious<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_199"></a>[199]</span> -machinery operated with more or less effect for controlling -refractory office-holders. During the age of Cicero the senate -strove to uphold its theory of the necessity of the law, while -individuals in office and even the entire group of magistrates -for the year looked upon it as appropriate indeed but unessential -to their functions. At its best the theory could be but -partially realized in practice.</p> - -<p>Naturally the lictors never refused to vote the lex curiata, -but it was often prevented or delayed by the intercession of the -plebeian tribunes.<a id="FNanchor_1177" href="#Footnote_1177" class="fnanchor">[1177]</a> As we hear nothing of such action of the -tribunes in the early republic we may well conclude that it was -a late usurpation. Their veto could be offset by a special -resolution of the people for dispensing the persons elected from -the need of the curiate sanction.<a id="FNanchor_1178" href="#Footnote_1178" class="fnanchor">[1178]</a> In destroying the tribunician -power Sulla, perhaps consciously, strengthened the lex curiata -as a weapon in the hands of the senate. He did not treat the -subject, however, with his usual precision; for in 54 we find -Appius Claudius appealing to a Cornelian law in justification of -his intention to govern a province without the sanction.<a id="FNanchor_1179" href="#Footnote_1179" class="fnanchor">[1179]</a> The -procedure of Appius must have robbed the sanctioning act of -the little vitality which it still possessed. With the downfall -of the republic it fell completely into disuse.<a id="FNanchor_1180" href="#Footnote_1180" class="fnanchor">[1180]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>I. <span class="smcap">Comparative View</span>: Spencer, H., <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, ii. chs. viii, -ix; Post, A. H., <i>Grundlagen des Rechts</i>, 130-6; <i>Die Anfänge des Staats- und -Rechtsleben</i>, 113 f.; Jenks, E., <i>History of Politics</i>, chs. ix, xi, xii; Schrader, O., -<i>Reallexikon</i>, 923-5; <i>Sprachv. u. Urgesch.</i> ii³ (1907). 376; Leist, B. W., <i>Alt-arisches -Jus Gentium</i>, see index, s. Jus; <i>Alt-arisches Jus Civile</i>, i. 337 ff., -368 ff. (fas, ius, lex); Hirt, H., <i>Indogermanen</i>, ii. 522-31 (fundamental -ideas of right and law); Brunner, H., <i>Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte</i>, i. 128-32; -Schröder, R., <i>Lehrbuch der deutschen Rechtsgeschichte</i>, 21-7; Cramer, J., -<i>Verfassungsgeschichte der Germanen und Kelten</i> (Berlin, 1906); Seeck, O., -<i>Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt</i>, i. 212-4; Kovalevsky, M., -<i>Modern Customs and Ancient Laws of Russia</i>, chs. iv, v; Ginnell, L., <i>Brehon -Laws</i>, ch. iv; Hermann-Thumser, <i>Griech. Staatsaltertümer</i>, 67-9 (Homeric); -166-76 (Lacedaemonian); 504-38 (Athenian); Gilbert, G., <i>Constitutional Antiquities -of Sparta and Athens</i>, 50-2 (Lacedaemonian); 285-310 (Athenian);<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_200"></a>[200]</span> -Buchholz, E., <i>Homerische Realien</i>, ii. 24-7; Seymour, T. D., <i>Life in the -Hom. Age</i>, 101-9; Moreau, F., <i>Les assemblées politiques d’apres l’Iliade et -l’Odyssée</i>, in <i>Revue des études Grecques</i>, vi (1893). 204-50; Finsler, G., <i>Das -homerische Königtum</i>, in <i>N. Jahrb. für kl. Alt.</i> ix (1906). 313-36; Fustel -de Coulanges, <i>Ancient City</i>, 216 f., 244 ff., 329; <i>Histoire des institutions politiques -de l’ancienne France: La Gaule Romaine</i> (1891); <i>L’invasion germanique</i> -(1891); <i>La monarchie Franque</i> (1888); Farrand, L., <i>Basis of -American History</i>, see index, s. Council; Bernhöft, F., <i>Staat und Recht der -röm. Königszeit</i>, 145-56.</p> - -<p>II. <span class="smcap">The Comitia Curiata</span>: Schulze, C. F., <i>Von den Volksversammlungen -der Römer</i>, 282-307; Newman, <i>On the Comitia Curiata</i>, in <i>Classical Museum</i>, -xx (1848). 101-27; Mommsen, <i>Die patricisch-plebejischen Comitien der -Republik</i>, in <i>Röm. Forschungen</i>, i. 140-50; <i>Nichtexistenz patricischer Sonderversammlungen -in republikanischen Zeit</i>, ibid. i. 167-76; <i>Bürgerschaft und -Senat der vorgeschichtlichen Zeit</i>, ibid. i. 269-84; <i>Die lex curiata de imperio</i>, -in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. xiii (1858). 565-73; <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. 1. ch. v; -<i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, i. 609-15; iii. 33-42, 316-21; Obudzinski, <i>Die Kuriat- und -Centuriatkomitien der Römer</i>; Kappeyne van de Coppello, J., <i>Comitien</i>, 60-86; -Hallays, A., <i>Comices à Rome</i>, ch. i; Morlot, E., <i>Comices électoraux</i>, ch. ii; -Soltau, W., <i>Altröm. Volksversammlungen</i>, 37-106; Humbert, G., <i>Comitia</i>, in -Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 1374-7; Liebenam, W., <i>Comitia: I. Curiata</i>, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 682-6; <i>Curiata Lex</i>, ibid. iv. 1826-30; -Hüllmann, K. D., <i>Ursprünge der röm. Verfassung</i>, 96-8; Rubino, J., <i>Röm. -Verfassung und Geschichte</i>, 233 ff.; Madvig, J. N., <i>Verfassung und Verwaltung -des röm. Staates</i>, i. 222-6; Lange, L., <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, i. 396-413; -Mispoulet, J. B., <i>Institutions politiques des Romains</i>, i. 194-203; Willems, P., -<i>Droit public Romain</i>, 49-54; Herzog, E., <i>Röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, i. 106-18, -1059-65; Schiller, H., <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iv. 628 f.; Karlowa, O., <i>Röm. Rechtsgeschichte</i>, -i. 48-54, 382-4; Greenidge, A. H. J., <i>Roman Public Life</i>, 250 f.; -<i>Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time</i>, 297-307; Abbott, F. F., <i>Roman Political -Institutions</i>, 14 f., 18-20, 252 f.; Voigt, M., <i>XII Tafeln</i>, i. 97-124 (ethical -laws, fas, ius, etc.); <i>Leges regiae</i>, in <i>Abhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> vii -(1879). 555-826; Bernhöft, ibid. 145-160; Genz, H., <i>Das patricische Rom</i>, -51 ff.; Seeley, J. R., Livy, 62-70; Munderloh, <i>Aus der Zeit der Quiriten</i>, -4 f.; Clason, D. O., <i>Kritische Erörterungen über den röm. Staat</i>, 1-30; -Hoffmann, E., <i>Patricische und plebeiische Curien</i>; Nissen, A., <i>Beiträge zum -röm. Staatsrecht</i>, 39 ff.; Le Jeune, M. L., <i>L’imperium des magistrats de Rome -sous le République</i>; Schwegler, A., <i>Röm. Geschichte</i>, i. 663-7; Ihne, W., -<i>History of Rome</i>, i. 113 f.; Peter, C., <i>Geschichte Roms</i>, i. 59 f.; Dunning, -W. A., <i>History of Political Theories Ancient and Mediaeval</i>, 107 ff.; -Willoughby, W. W., <i>Political Theories of the Ancient World</i>, ch. xvi; -Nettleship, H., <i>Contributions to Latin Lexicography</i>, 497-500 (ius), 515-7 -(lex); Rothstein, M., <i>Suffragium</i>, in <i>Festschrift zu Otto Hirschfelds 60stem -Geburtstage</i>, 30-3; Botsford, G. W., <i>Lex Curiata</i>, in <i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxiii -(1908). 498-517.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_201"></a>[201]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_X">CHAPTER X<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE ORGANIZATION OF THE COMITIA CENTURIATA</span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>In the Early Republic</i></h4> - -<p>From the point of view of the Roman historians the centuriate -assembly,<a id="FNanchor_1181" href="#Footnote_1181" class="fnanchor">[1181]</a> planned by Servius Tullius, came into existence -at the beginning of the republic; its earliest act in their opinion -was the election of the first consuls<a id="FNanchor_1182" href="#Footnote_1182" class="fnanchor">[1182]</a> and its earliest statute the -Valerian law of appeal.<a id="FNanchor_1183" href="#Footnote_1183" class="fnanchor">[1183]</a> Though they could not know precisely -when it voted for the first time, they were right in understanding -it to have been the basal comitia of the republic during -the patrician supremacy. It may not have been instituted till -some time after the downfall of the kingship,<a id="FNanchor_1184" href="#Footnote_1184" class="fnanchor">[1184]</a> and it certainly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_202"></a>[202]</span> -did not reach its full complement of a hundred and ninety-three -centuries till more than a hundred years after that event.</p> - -<p>Through the early republic Rome was engaged in an almost -unceasing struggle for existence. The army was constantly in -the field; and the consuls from the praetorium issued their commands -for the protection and the government of the city. Their -measures, after discussion in the council of war, they must often -have submitted to the approval of the army. The military contio -was sometimes summoned for exhorting the men,<a id="FNanchor_1185" href="#Footnote_1185" class="fnanchor">[1185]</a> for promising -the reward of spoil in case of victory,<a id="FNanchor_1186" href="#Footnote_1186" class="fnanchor">[1186]</a> for reprimanding as well -as for encouraging.<a id="FNanchor_1187" href="#Footnote_1187" class="fnanchor">[1187]</a> On one occasion the master of horse, calling -a contio of soldiers, appealed to them for protection from -the dictator,<a id="FNanchor_1188" href="#Footnote_1188" class="fnanchor">[1188]</a> and they replied with a shout that they would allow -no harm to befall him.<a id="FNanchor_1189" href="#Footnote_1189" class="fnanchor">[1189]</a> Thereupon the dictator summoned another -contio to witness the court-martial of the rebellious officer.<a id="FNanchor_1190" href="#Footnote_1190" class="fnanchor">[1190]</a> -On another occasion the consuls asked the soldiers to decide a -question by acclamation, and they obeyed.<a id="FNanchor_1191" href="#Footnote_1191" class="fnanchor">[1191]</a> We hear of the -adjournment of a meeting on the motion of a military tribune.<a id="FNanchor_1192" href="#Footnote_1192" class="fnanchor">[1192]</a> -After a victory, honors and rewards were granted by vote of the -soldiers.<a id="FNanchor_1193" href="#Footnote_1193" class="fnanchor">[1193]</a> For acclamation, the regular form of voting,<a id="FNanchor_1194" href="#Footnote_1194" class="fnanchor">[1194]</a> was -sometimes substituted a division of the army to right and left -for the sake of silence.<a id="FNanchor_1195" href="#Footnote_1195" class="fnanchor">[1195]</a> A military assembly, meeting at Veii, -decided upon the appointment of Camillus, then in exile, to the -dictatorship, and despatched the resolution to Rome.<a id="FNanchor_1196" href="#Footnote_1196" class="fnanchor">[1196]</a> In the -year 357 the consul Cn. Manlius held a tribal assembly of his -troops at Sutrium, and passed in it a law which imposed a tax -of five per cent on the manumission of slaves.<a id="FNanchor_1197" href="#Footnote_1197" class="fnanchor">[1197]</a> Long afterward -the army in Spain elected a propraetor.<a id="FNanchor_1198" href="#Footnote_1198" class="fnanchor">[1198]</a> It may be that much -other political business was decided by the army in the troublous -times which followed the overthrow of the kings. Although -such acts were valid, they were always of an exceptional nature, -and they ran counter to the spirit of the constitution, which<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_203"></a>[203]</span> -granted to all the citizens, not to those merely who chanced to -be on military duty, a voice in the decision of such public affairs -as came before the people.</p> - -<p>It is true that the centuriate assembly, having developed from -the army, showed pronounced military features. It could not -be convoked within the pomerium, for the reason that the army -had to be kept outside the city;<a id="FNanchor_1199" href="#Footnote_1199" class="fnanchor">[1199]</a> before the reform it met ordinarily -in military array under its officers and with banners displayed;<a id="FNanchor_1200" href="#Footnote_1200" class="fnanchor">[1200]</a> -the usual place of gathering was the Campus Martius; -and no one but a magistrate cum imperio could under his own -auspices convoke it for the purpose of taking a vote.<a id="FNanchor_1201" href="#Footnote_1201" class="fnanchor">[1201]</a> For these -reasons it was frequently, even in official language, termed exercitus.<a id="FNanchor_1202" href="#Footnote_1202" class="fnanchor">[1202]</a> -The use of this word, however, should not mislead us -into supposing that the assembly was an actual army. Though -Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1203" href="#Footnote_1203" class="fnanchor">[1203]</a> represents the first meeting as armed—a mere supposition, -apparently to account for its known military features—the -fact is that the citizens carried weapons to none of the -assemblies.<a id="FNanchor_1204" href="#Footnote_1204" class="fnanchor">[1204]</a> Strictly, too, the centuriate gathering was termed -exercitus urbanus in contrast with the real army designated -as exercitus armatus or classis procincta.<a id="FNanchor_1205" href="#Footnote_1205" class="fnanchor">[1205]</a> The facts thus far<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_204"></a>[204]</span> -adduced amply warrant us in refusing to consider the voting -assembly an army.</p> - -<p>But some imagine the censorial assembly for the assessment -and lustration of the citizens to have been an army.<a id="FNanchor_1206" href="#Footnote_1206" class="fnanchor">[1206]</a> For -this view they rely upon Dionysius,<a id="FNanchor_1207" href="#Footnote_1207" class="fnanchor">[1207]</a> who states that the people -came armed to the first lustrum, and upon an uncertain passage -from the Censoriae Tabulae, quoted by Varro,<a id="FNanchor_1208" href="#Footnote_1208" class="fnanchor">[1208]</a> which possibly -speaks of the citizens in the lustral assembly as armati. If -this word should be supplied in the passage, it might refer to -an inspection of arms of the men of military age;<a id="FNanchor_1209" href="#Footnote_1209" class="fnanchor">[1209]</a> but that -circumstance would by no means imply that all who attended -the lustrum were armed or were liable to military duty. It is -certain that as the census-taking had primary reference to -property for the purpose of apportioning taxes and other burdens -of citizenship, those only were summoned who were legally -capable of holding property in their own name. The list -excluded all the men “in patris aut avi potestate,” however -liable they were to military duty,<a id="FNanchor_1210" href="#Footnote_1210" class="fnanchor">[1210]</a> as well as the women and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_205"></a>[205]</span> -children.<a id="FNanchor_1211" href="#Footnote_1211" class="fnanchor">[1211]</a> All such persons were reported by the father or -guardian. It included, on the other hand, many who were -exempt from military service on account of age, physical condition, -or want of the necessary property qualification. Hence -the censorial assembly could not have been identical with the -army. Furthermore the centuriate assembly was not a basis for -the levy.<a id="FNanchor_1212" href="#Footnote_1212" class="fnanchor">[1212]</a> On the contrary, the soldiers were enrolled directly -from the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1213" href="#Footnote_1213" class="fnanchor">[1213]</a> These facts warrant the conclusion that the -relation between the army and the assembly must have been -one of origin only; the organization of the assembly developed -from that of the army, but at no time was the political assembly -an army or the army otherwise than exceptionally or irregularly -a political assembly. The truth is that an army regularly -officiating as a political body would require for its explanation -two revolutions—one to bring it into existence and another to -abolish it; but of both cataclysms history is silent.</p> - -<p>The growth of the political from the military organization -was somewhat as follows. After the Romans had determined -to use the centuries regularly as voting units for the decision of -questions not purely military, they proceeded forthwith to extend -the organization so as to include all the citizens. For this purpose -the men of military age who were free from duty for the -time being, or who had served the required number of campaigns—sixteen -in the infantry or ten in the cavalry<a id="FNanchor_1214" href="#Footnote_1214" class="fnanchor">[1214]</a>—or -who were exempt on account of bodily infirmity or for any other -reason, had to be admitted to the junior centuries, thus materially -increasing their number and making them unequal with -one another. In a state, too, in which great reverence was paid -to age the seniors could not be ignored. They were accordingly -organized in a number of centuries (84) equal to that of the -juniors—an arrangement which made one senior count as much -as three juniors.<a id="FNanchor_1215" href="#Footnote_1215" class="fnanchor">[1215]</a> The mechanics who were liable to skilled<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_206"></a>[206]</span> -service in the army<a id="FNanchor_1216" href="#Footnote_1216" class="fnanchor">[1216]</a> were then grouped for voting purposes in -two centuries, that of the smiths and that of the carpenters,<a id="FNanchor_1217" href="#Footnote_1217" class="fnanchor">[1217]</a> -based on the two guilds in which these artisans were already -organized.<a id="FNanchor_1218" href="#Footnote_1218" class="fnanchor">[1218]</a> Authorities differ as to the classes with which -they were associated. Livy<a id="FNanchor_1219" href="#Footnote_1219" class="fnanchor">[1219]</a> adds them to the first class. -Cicero,<a id="FNanchor_1220" href="#Footnote_1220" class="fnanchor">[1220]</a> too, places a century of carpenters with that group, -making no mention of the smiths, whereas Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1221" href="#Footnote_1221" class="fnanchor">[1221]</a> assigns -both centuries of mechanics to the second class. The explanation -of the difference of opinion seems to be that information -as to this point was not contained in the censorial document -from which the annalist (Fabius Pictor) drew his knowledge of -the earlier comitia centuriata; the Romans knew only by tradition -that the industrial centuries were associated in the assembly -with one of the higher classes. The weight of authority inclines -in favor of the first class, and the reason for the respectable -place occupied by the mechanics is the high value placed on -their service in early time.<a id="FNanchor_1222" href="#Footnote_1222" class="fnanchor">[1222]</a> In like manner the trumpeters -(tubicines, liticines) and the hornblowers (cornicines) were -grouped each in a century for voting in the comitia,<a id="FNanchor_1223" href="#Footnote_1223" class="fnanchor">[1223]</a> also on<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_207"></a>[207]</span> -the basis of their guild organizations.<a id="FNanchor_1224" href="#Footnote_1224" class="fnanchor">[1224]</a> The accensi velati, who -as we are informed followed the army in civilian dress and without -weapons,<a id="FNanchor_1225" href="#Footnote_1225" class="fnanchor">[1225]</a> also received a centuriate organization. As to -the number of centuries belonging to them opinion has differed. -Some, formerly including Mommsen,<a id="FNanchor_1226" href="#Footnote_1226" class="fnanchor">[1226]</a> have assumed two. Livy,<a id="FNanchor_1227" href="#Footnote_1227" class="fnanchor">[1227]</a> -however, gives but one century; Cicero<a id="FNanchor_1228" href="#Footnote_1228" class="fnanchor">[1228]</a> seems to have only -one in mind; and in imperial time there was a single collegium, -or century, of accensi,<a id="FNanchor_1229" href="#Footnote_1229" class="fnanchor">[1229]</a> probably a survival of the old political -group. These considerations led Mommsen to abandon his -former view, to assume instead a single century of the kind; -and recent writers are inclined to follow him.<a id="FNanchor_1230" href="#Footnote_1230" class="fnanchor">[1230]</a> Lowest in rank -of the supernumerary centuries was that of the proletarians.<a id="FNanchor_1231" href="#Footnote_1231" class="fnanchor">[1231]</a> -The government so designated those citizens who owned no -land,<a id="FNanchor_1232" href="#Footnote_1232" class="fnanchor">[1232]</a> and hence were poor. They were exempt from military -duty, excepting in so far as they served with arms furnished by -the state.<a id="FNanchor_1233" href="#Footnote_1233" class="fnanchor">[1233]</a> Though few in the beginning, their number gradually -increased till in the time of Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1234" href="#Footnote_1234" class="fnanchor">[1234]</a> it exceeded all the -five classes together. At some time in the early history of the -comitia centuriata they were formed into a century and given -one vote,<a id="FNanchor_1235" href="#Footnote_1235" class="fnanchor">[1235]</a> which was not counted with any class but was reported<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_208"></a>[208]</span> -after all the others. Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1236" href="#Footnote_1236" class="fnanchor">[1236]</a> wrongly speaks of it as a -sixth class. The existence of this century is due to the principle -that no one should be excluded from the right to vote on -account of poverty.<a id="FNanchor_1237" href="#Footnote_1237" class="fnanchor">[1237]</a></p> - -<p>Six supernumerary centuries have now been mentioned and -the place of three—the two industrial and the one proletarian—in -the voting system has been considered. With reference -to the others Dionysius assigns the musicians to the fourth class, -Livy to the fifth. The settlement of this question is aided by -an examination into the total number of comitial centuries of the -fifth class. It is given as thirty by the sources.<a id="FNanchor_1238" href="#Footnote_1238" class="fnanchor">[1238]</a> Assuming -this to be the correct number and adding to the sum of centuries -in the five classes (170) the six supernumerary centuries and the -eighteen centuries of knights to be considered below, we should -have in all a hundred and ninety-four, which would be one too -many. In an earlier chapter, however, the conclusion was -reached that there were but fourteen military centuries in the -fifth class.<a id="FNanchor_1239" href="#Footnote_1239" class="fnanchor">[1239]</a> Two of the thirty centuries assigned to that class -In the comitia centuriata must therefore have been in fact supernumerary. -If one was the accensi, what was the other? Most -probably it was the century of the tardy described by Festus,<a id="FNanchor_1240" href="#Footnote_1240" class="fnanchor">[1240]</a> -made up at each meeting of those who came too late to vote in -their own classes. Obviously all writers who apply the discriptio -centuriarum to the army view this century, as well as that of -the proletarians, with suspicion.<a id="FNanchor_1241" href="#Footnote_1241" class="fnanchor">[1241]</a> The two centuries of the -accensi and the tardy should be included among, not added to, -the thirty of the fifth class.<a id="FNanchor_1242" href="#Footnote_1242" class="fnanchor">[1242]</a> Having reached this result, it<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_209"></a>[209]</span> -might seem advisable for us to assume no further supernumerary -centuries for the fifth class, but to follow the authority of Dionysius -in assigning the musicians to the fourth. Or as the trumpeters -preceded the hornblowers in rank, it might be plausibly -argued that the former belonged to the fourth and the latter to -the fifth. In this way a compromise could be effected between -Livy and Dionysius, and Livy’s three supernumerary centuries -of the fifth class could be explained. Absolute certainty is unattainable. -The notion of Dionysius that one century of musicians -voted with the seniors, the other with the juniors, and so -of the mechanics,<a id="FNanchor_1243" href="#Footnote_1243" class="fnanchor">[1243]</a> is erroneous; for the seniors did not vote -separately from the juniors.</p> - -<p>In the centuriate assembly each of the six tribal troops of -knights<a id="FNanchor_1244" href="#Footnote_1244" class="fnanchor">[1244]</a> had one vote, and was called, therefore, a suffragium. -As the term centuria had not previously applied to these groups, -it was for a time withheld from them in the comitia, the six -divisions being known simply as the sex suffragia.<a id="FNanchor_1245" href="#Footnote_1245" class="fnanchor">[1245]</a> Afterward -as new voting groups were added to the equites they came to be -called centuries, and thence the term extended to the old.<a id="FNanchor_1246" href="#Footnote_1246" class="fnanchor">[1246]</a> The -centuriate organization of the comitia did not demand the creation -of suffragia seniorum, to correspond with the centuriae -seniorum of the infantry, perhaps because the six votes in the -comitia centuriata adequately represented the whole number of -patricians. As the equites originally provided their own horses,<a id="FNanchor_1247" href="#Footnote_1247" class="fnanchor">[1247]</a> -they held their rank for life, not merely through the period of -service. After the state had undertaken to furnish money for -the purchase and keeping of the horses,<a id="FNanchor_1248" href="#Footnote_1248" class="fnanchor">[1248]</a> the eques retained -his public horse, and consequently his membership in an equestrian -century, long after his retirement from active duty.<a id="FNanchor_1249" href="#Footnote_1249" class="fnanchor">[1249]</a> The -increase in the number of equestrian votes was owing to the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_210"></a>[210]</span> -participation of plebeians in the mounted service.<a id="FNanchor_1250" href="#Footnote_1250" class="fnanchor">[1250]</a> From them -twelve equestrian centuries were formed for the centuriate assembly, -and added to the six groups already existing. This increase -probably came about in the course of the fourth century, accompanying -or following the enlargement of the infantry from two to -four legions.<a id="FNanchor_1251" href="#Footnote_1251" class="fnanchor">[1251]</a> Thus the total number of one hundred and ninety-three -centuries could not have been reached till shortly before -269.</p> - -<p>The foregoing discussion has made it evident that from the -time when the comitia centuriata came into being, there were -two centuriate organizations; (1) the military, which continued -as before till it changed to the manipular formation,<a id="FNanchor_1252" href="#Footnote_1252" class="fnanchor">[1252]</a> (2) the -political, which developed from the military but which was at -no time identical with it.</p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Discriptio Centuriarum of the Comitia Centuriata</span></p> - -<table> - <tr> - <td>Old centuries of knights</td> - <td class="tdr">6</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>New centuries of knights</td> - <td class="tdr">12</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<table> - <tr> - <th class="bt bb"><span class="smcap">Classes</span></th> - <th class="bl bt bb" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">Junior Centuries</span></th> - <th class="bl bt bb"><span class="smcap">Senior Centuries</span></th> - <th class="bl bt bb"><span class="smcap">Ratings in Asses<br />according to Livy</span></th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">I</td> - <td class="bl tdr">40</td> - <td>+ 2 of artisans</td> - <td class="bl tdr">40</td> - <td class="bl tdr">100,000</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">II</td> - <td class="bl tdr">10</td> - <td></td> - <td class="bl tdr">10</td> - <td class="bl tdr">75,000</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">III</td> - <td class="bl tdr">10</td> - <td></td> - <td class="bl tdr">10</td> - <td class="bl tdr">50,000</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">IV</td> - <td class="bl tdr">10</td> - <td>+ 2 of musicians</td> - <td class="bl tdr">10</td> - <td class="bl tdr">25,000</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">V</td> - <td class="bl tdr">14</td> - <td>+ 1 of accensi</td> - <td class="bl tdr"></td> - <td class="bl tdr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bb"></td> - <td class="bl tdr bb"></td> - <td class="bb">+ 1 of the tardy</td> - <td class="bl tdr bb">14</td> - <td class="bl tdr bb">11,000</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<table> - <tr> - <td colspan="2" class="tdc">Below the classes:</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td colspan="2" class="tdc">1 century of proletarians</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td colspan="2" class="tdc">SUMMARY</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Knights</td> - <td class="tdr">18</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Seniors and juniors</td> - <td class="tdr">168</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Supernumerary</td> - <td class="tdr">7</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2">Total</td> - <td class="tdr bt">193</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_211"></a>[211]</span></p> - -<p>Before the reform this assembly met in military array with banners -displayed, each company under its centurion.<a id="FNanchor_1253" href="#Footnote_1253" class="fnanchor">[1253]</a> The voting -was oral. Probably it was at first by acclamation; if so the suggestion -of individual voting, as we find it in historical time, must -have come from the orderly military array, which offered itself -conveniently for the purpose.<a id="FNanchor_1254" href="#Footnote_1254" class="fnanchor">[1254]</a> The centurions may originally -have served as rogatores, to collect and report the votes.<a id="FNanchor_1255" href="#Footnote_1255" class="fnanchor">[1255]</a> -Each century cast a single vote, which in historical time the -majority of its members decided.<a id="FNanchor_1256" href="#Footnote_1256" class="fnanchor">[1256]</a> The voting proceeded according -to classes; the equites were asked first, hence their -centuries were termed prerogative (praerogativae), then the -eighty centuries of the first class. If the votes of these two -groups were unanimous, they decided the question at issue; as -ninety-seven was a majority, they had one to spare from their -total number. If they disagreed, the second class was called -and then the third and so on to the proletarian century. But -the voting ceased as soon as a majority was reached, which -was often with the first class; and it rarely happened that the -proletarians were called on to decide the issue.<a id="FNanchor_1257" href="#Footnote_1257" class="fnanchor">[1257]</a> The announcement -of the prerogative votes greatly influenced the -action of those which followed.<a id="FNanchor_1258" href="#Footnote_1258" class="fnanchor">[1258]</a></p> - -<h4>II. <i>The Reform</i></h4> - -<p>The study of the centuriate assembly begun earlier in the -volume<a id="FNanchor_1259" href="#Footnote_1259" class="fnanchor">[1259]</a> and continued in the preceding part of this chapter -shows it gradually developing its organization during the fifth -and fourth centuries <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> The main line of progress has been -traced though details are unknown. The growth of popular -rights in the latter half of the fourth century gave a great impetus -to the activity of the assemblies in general, as is manifested -in the Genucian, Publilian, and Hortensian legislation.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_212"></a>[212]</span> -In 312 when the change was made in the appraisements from -land to money, many aerarii who had voted with the proletarians -must have been advanced to the higher classes.<a id="FNanchor_1260" href="#Footnote_1260" class="fnanchor">[1260]</a> This -step toward the democratization of the comitia centuriata, following -upon the reduction of the patrum auctoritas to a mere -formality, could not help adding new energy to the institution, -leading to further changes in a popular direction. The class -ratings which are known to history were established no earlier -than 269.<a id="FNanchor_1261" href="#Footnote_1261" class="fnanchor">[1261]</a> Two other more important changes, which can be -but approximately dated, must now be considered in detail. -They are (1) the abolition of the equestrian prerogative and the -introduction of the custom of drawing by lot a prerogative century -from the first class on each occasion before the voting began; -(2) the division of the citizens into classes and centuries -within the several tribes. These two innovations are commonly -grouped together under the name of the “reform.” As they -have no necessary connection with one another, they need not -have been simultaneous. Livy’s narrative of the happenings -of 396<a id="FNanchor_1262" href="#Footnote_1262" class="fnanchor">[1262]</a> and of 383<a id="FNanchor_1263" href="#Footnote_1263" class="fnanchor">[1263]</a> seems to imply that they had been introduced -before these dates.<a id="FNanchor_1264" href="#Footnote_1264" class="fnanchor">[1264]</a> But the passages here referred to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_213"></a>[213]</span> -are uncertain; and at all events they belong to a period in -which the centuries may still have been closely connected with -the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1265" href="#Footnote_1265" class="fnanchor">[1265]</a> But should they be so interpreted as to apply to -the reformed centuriate assembly, they might still be looked -upon as historical anticipations for the reason that Livy’s<a id="FNanchor_1266" href="#Footnote_1266" class="fnanchor">[1266]</a> account -of the year 296 has reference to a feature of the old organization. -This disposition of the three passages is supported -by the following consideration. Had the reform been introduced -much earlier than 269, the annalists would have assigned -it to Servius Tullius, just as they assigned to him thirty tribes -(reached in 318), all thirty-five tribes (reached in 241), and the -census ratings in the sextantarian asses (established in or after -269);<a id="FNanchor_1267" href="#Footnote_1267" class="fnanchor">[1267]</a> and in that case all memory of the original Servian system -would have been lost. The circumstance that we are acquainted -with it in some detail is proof of its survival into the -third century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> In fact Livy’s<a id="FNanchor_1268" href="#Footnote_1268" class="fnanchor">[1268]</a> chief reference to the reform -indicates that it was completed, if not undertaken, after the number -of tribes had been brought up to thirty-five (241). On the -other hand it came before the opening of his third decade (218), -which takes the new arrangement for granted.<a id="FNanchor_1269" href="#Footnote_1269" class="fnanchor">[1269]</a> The contention -is often made that Livy must have given an account of the -reform in his second decade (292-219) now lost; and there is a -universal agreement that the reform was brought about not by -statute, but by arbitrary censorial disposition.<a id="FNanchor_1270" href="#Footnote_1270" class="fnanchor">[1270]</a> The censor -commonly assumed to be the author of the change is either -Fabius Buteo, 241, or Flaminius, 220.<a id="FNanchor_1271" href="#Footnote_1271" class="fnanchor">[1271]</a> Against the latter may<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_214"></a>[214]</span> -be urged the silence of Polybius<a id="FNanchor_1272" href="#Footnote_1272" class="fnanchor">[1272]</a> and Livy,<a id="FNanchor_1273" href="#Footnote_1273" class="fnanchor">[1273]</a> who in speaking -at length of his opposition to the nobles makes no reference to -this reform. In favor of Fabius it may be said that in 241 the -full number of tribes was completed; and the name of the -thirty-fifth, Quirina, corresponding to Romilia, the first rural -tribe, suggests that the Romans intended to create no more. In -naming the last tribe the censors seem to have had in mind the -completion of the new system, to each component part of which -they apparently guaranteed a definite share of political power, -which would have been impaired by the further creation of -tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1274" href="#Footnote_1274" class="fnanchor">[1274]</a></p> - -<p>A little reflection, however, will convince us of the impossibility -of assigning the reform to any one censor or to a definite -date. Livy could not have made much of it in the lost part of -his history without leaving some trace in the epitome, which -mentions far more trivial matters.<a id="FNanchor_1275" href="#Footnote_1275" class="fnanchor">[1275]</a> The only explanation of -the epitomator’s silence is that the reform was so gradual as to -escape marked attention. This view is supported by a strict -interpretation of Livy,<a id="FNanchor_1276" href="#Footnote_1276" class="fnanchor">[1276]</a> who supposes the change to have come -about naturally with the increase in the number of tribes, and -of Dionysius,<a id="FNanchor_1277" href="#Footnote_1277" class="fnanchor">[1277]</a> who ascribes the innovation, or a part of it, to no<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_215"></a>[215]</span> -individual but to “certain powerful forces.” A conclusion as -to the date of the reform, to be acceptable, must satisfy the -conditions above mentioned. In earlier time, when there was -a single classis, the centuries were made up within the tribes; -but this simple system was rendered impossible by the increase -in the number of classes.<a id="FNanchor_1278" href="#Footnote_1278" class="fnanchor">[1278]</a> For convenience of administration -the censors must soon after this enlargement have begun an -effort to reduce the discord to harmony. One class may have -been brought into agreement with the tribes more readily than -another, and thus the readaptation may have extended through -many lustra. The number of centuries probably did not long -remain at one hundred and ninety-three. It may have received -its first increase above that sum in 304, for instance, the date to -which Niebuhr<a id="FNanchor_1279" href="#Footnote_1279" class="fnanchor">[1279]</a> assigns the reform. The process may have -been far advanced in 241, the date preferred by a majority of -scholars, and completed by Flaminius in 220.<a id="FNanchor_1280" href="#Footnote_1280" class="fnanchor">[1280]</a> The abolition -of the equestrian prerogative may likewise have been gradual; -it may have been retained in one class of comitial acts—elections -or legislation, for instance—longer than in another. The -conclusion that the changes were gradually introduced in the -period from 304 to 220 would best explain all the known facts.<a id="FNanchor_1281" href="#Footnote_1281" class="fnanchor">[1281]</a></p> - -<p>As no description of the reformed organization has come -down to us, we are obliged to reconstruct it from the scant<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_216"></a>[216]</span> -references of various writers. It is to be noted first that the -five classes continued in the new system.<a id="FNanchor_1282" href="#Footnote_1282" class="fnanchor">[1282]</a> They were still -based on the census,<a id="FNanchor_1283" href="#Footnote_1283" class="fnanchor">[1283]</a> and were called to vote in their order as -before.<a id="FNanchor_1284" href="#Footnote_1284" class="fnanchor">[1284]</a> The distinction between juniors and seniors was retained;<a id="FNanchor_1285" href="#Footnote_1285" class="fnanchor">[1285]</a> -and as these comitia were still called centuriata, the -centuries necessarily continued as the voting units.<a id="FNanchor_1286" href="#Footnote_1286" class="fnanchor">[1286]</a> But the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_217"></a>[217]</span> -reform brought them into direct relation with the tribes, which -now served as a basis for the division into centuries and for -their distribution according to age and class. On this point -Livy<a id="FNanchor_1287" href="#Footnote_1287" class="fnanchor">[1287]</a> remarks, “We ought not to wonder that the arrangement -which now exists after the tribes have been increased to thirty-five, -their number being doubled in the centuries of juniors and -seniors, does not agree with the total number instituted by -Servius Tullius; for he divided the city into four parts, ... -which he called tribes.... Nor did those tribes have any -relation to the distribution and number of the centuries.” From -this passage we may infer (1) that in the reformed assembly -the number and distribution of the centuries depended closely -upon the tribes—a conclusion supported by other citations to -be given hereafter, (2) that the number of centuries was -changed, although we are not distinctly informed whether by -diminution or increase. According to one interpretation the -number of tribes was doubled by the number of centuries of -juniors and seniors, and there were therefore seventy of these -centuries, thirty-five juniors and as many seniors, each century -forming a half tribe. This view is supported by passages in -which the century bears the name of the tribe, as Aniensis -iuniorum,<a id="FNanchor_1288" href="#Footnote_1288" class="fnanchor">[1288]</a> Voturia iuniorum,<a id="FNanchor_1289" href="#Footnote_1289" class="fnanchor">[1289]</a> Galeria iuniorum,<a id="FNanchor_1290" href="#Footnote_1290" class="fnanchor">[1290]</a> as well as by -those which in a more general way refer to voting or the announcement -of the votes by or according to tribes in the centuriate -assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1291" href="#Footnote_1291" class="fnanchor">[1291]</a> It accords perfectly with other evidence that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_218"></a>[218]</span> -the century was an integral part of the tribe.<a id="FNanchor_1292" href="#Footnote_1292" class="fnanchor">[1292]</a> This is the -view adopted by Niebuhr.<a id="FNanchor_1293" href="#Footnote_1293" class="fnanchor">[1293]</a> It is open, however, to the fatal -objection of abolishing the classes, which in fact continued -through the republic, as has already been shown.<a id="FNanchor_1294" href="#Footnote_1294" class="fnanchor">[1294]</a> He does -indeed allow for a first class comprising the country tribes and -a second class made up of the others;<a id="FNanchor_1295" href="#Footnote_1295" class="fnanchor">[1295]</a> but this hypothesis is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_219"></a>[219]</span> -overthrown by those citations which imply the continuance of -all five classes,<a id="FNanchor_1296" href="#Footnote_1296" class="fnanchor">[1296]</a> as well as by those which make the census an -element of the later organization.<a id="FNanchor_1297" href="#Footnote_1297" class="fnanchor">[1297]</a> Huschke,<a id="FNanchor_1298" href="#Footnote_1298" class="fnanchor">[1298]</a> who places the -reform in the earliest times of the republic, adopts Niebuhr’s -view as to the number of centuries; but maintaining the continuance -of the five classes,<a id="FNanchor_1299" href="#Footnote_1299" class="fnanchor">[1299]</a> he considers them to be groups of -tribes, the seventeen old rural tribes being distributed as follows: -in the first class eight, in the second, third, and fourth -respectively two, in the fifth three.<a id="FNanchor_1300" href="#Footnote_1300" class="fnanchor">[1300]</a> But bearing in mind that -these tribes were primarily local, we cannot at the same time -regard them as census groups without ascribing to them an -impossibly artificial character. For this reason the theory of -Huschke should be rejected. To avoid this difficulty, while retaining -the classes, the assumption has been made that the -classes were subdivisions of the century, in other words that -each century contained men of every class. This view is invalidated -by the fact that the centuries continued to be divisions -of the classes, which were still called to vote in their -order.<a id="FNanchor_1301" href="#Footnote_1301" class="fnanchor">[1301]</a></p> - -<p>The assumption of a diminution in number having proved -untenable, the conclusion is that there was an increase.<a id="FNanchor_1302" href="#Footnote_1302" class="fnanchor">[1302]</a> In -view of the facts (1) that the reformed organization rested on a -tribal basis,<a id="FNanchor_1303" href="#Footnote_1303" class="fnanchor">[1303]</a> (2) that the centuries were divisions not only of the -tribes<a id="FNanchor_1304" href="#Footnote_1304" class="fnanchor">[1304]</a> but also of the classes,<a id="FNanchor_1305" href="#Footnote_1305" class="fnanchor">[1305]</a> (3) that the tribes could not have -been divisions of the classes,<a id="FNanchor_1306" href="#Footnote_1306" class="fnanchor">[1306]</a> it is necessary to conclude that the -classes were themselves divisions of the tribes with the centuries<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_220"></a>[220]</span> -as subdivisions. In other words, the work of organization took -place within the tribe: the members of a tribe were first divided -into five classes according to their wealth; within each class the -men were grouped on the basis of age into juniors and seniors,<a id="FNanchor_1307" href="#Footnote_1307" class="fnanchor">[1307]</a> -one century for each within the several classes, making ten -centuries of juniors to the tribe, or in all three hundred and -fifty tribal centuries, to which are to be added eighteen centuries -of knights and probably five supernumerary centuries, amounting -to a total of three hundred and seventy-three. This is -substantially the view of Pantagathus.<a id="FNanchor_1308" href="#Footnote_1308" class="fnanchor">[1308]</a> Convincing evidence -is afforded by a group of inscriptions of the imperial period.<a id="FNanchor_1309" href="#Footnote_1309" class="fnanchor">[1309]</a> -From them we learn that under the emperors the urban tribes -comprised severally (1) a corpus seniorum, (2) a corpus iuniorum, -(3) the tribus Sucusana a corpus Iulianum, and the Palatine -and Esquiline each a corpus Augustale. Every corpus consisted -of several centuries. In the corpus Sucusana iuniorum -were eight centuries divided into two groups of five and three -respectively, the first group being evidently superior to the -second. At the head of the century was a centurio or curator.<a id="FNanchor_1310" href="#Footnote_1310" class="fnanchor">[1310]</a> -Eliminating the corpora which were named after emperors and -which must have been instituted in their time, eliminating also -the inferior centuries of the corpora seniorum and iuniorum, -which were undoubtedly added either by the emperors or by the -late republican censors, we have remaining five centuries to the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_221"></a>[221]</span> -corpus as it must have stood in the period immediately following -the reform. This result confirms the view suggested by -Pantagathus.</p> - -<p>It was accepted by Mommsen in his <i>Römische Tribus</i> (1844) -and in the first seven editions of his <i>History of Rome</i>; but in -his <i>Römisches Staatsrecht</i><a id="FNanchor_1311" href="#Footnote_1311" class="fnanchor">[1311]</a> he has offered a radical modification: -while holding to the 373 centuries, he maintains that they were -so combined as to cast in all 193 votes. According to this -theory the first class comprised 35 × 2 = 70 centuries, each with -one vote, whereas the remaining classes together, made up of -4 × 35 × 2 = 280 centuries, cast but 100 votes. How the centuries -were combined Mommsen does not presume to say. He -considers it possible, however, that for instance sixty of the -seventy centuries of the second class were grouped by threes -and ten by twos, making twenty-five voting groups in all. Had -he attempted to follow out in detail the practical working of the -theory, he would hardly have offered it to the public. The -votes could not have been determined by a majority of component -centuries, for according to the theory some groups comprised -but two. Or if the group voted by individuals without -regard to the component centuries, the four lower classes were -practically composed not of centuries but of larger, nameless -voting divisions.</p> - -<p>His main support is the account of the centuriate organization -given in Cicero’s <i>Republic</i>,<a id="FNanchor_1312" href="#Footnote_1312" class="fnanchor">[1312]</a> which speaks of a hundred and -ninety-three centuries, and which Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_1313" href="#Footnote_1313" class="fnanchor">[1313]</a> believes to be a -description of the reformed organization. Cicero’s<a id="FNanchor_1314" href="#Footnote_1314" class="fnanchor">[1314]</a> assumption -that the essential facts were known to the friends of the younger -Scipio—the leader in the dialogue—and the discrepancy in -the number of centuries of the first class between the Servian -system as given by the annalists (Livy and Dionysius) and the -organization which Cicero describes<a id="FNanchor_1315" href="#Footnote_1315" class="fnanchor">[1315]</a> are the chief points in -Mommsen’s favor. Against his interpretation it may be urged<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_222"></a>[222]</span> -(1) that the passage is exceedingly uncertain;<a id="FNanchor_1316" href="#Footnote_1316" class="fnanchor">[1316]</a> (2) that Cicero -makes Servius Tullius the author of the organization which he -describes; (3) that though the reform affected the details of the -comitial organization, the principle—a distribution of the people -according to ordines, census, aetates—remained the same from -the time of Servius to the time of Cicero, so that he could -assume that it was known to the hearers of Scipio; (4) that as -to the discrepancy in the number of centuries in the first class, -on the assumption that the text is correct, (<i>a</i>) Cicero, who was -by no means infallible, may have made a mistake,<a id="FNanchor_1317" href="#Footnote_1317" class="fnanchor">[1317]</a> being in this -case especially liable to error because in the reformed organization -the first class comprised seventy centuries, or (<i>b</i>) in case -Cicero is right, either (<i>m</i>) the annalists may be in error in -assigning eighty centuries to the first class, or (<i>n</i>) in an early -stage of transition from the old to the new organization the -number of centuries in the first class may have been cut down -to seventy with a corresponding increase of ten in some other -part of the system; (5) that Mommsen’s theory is refuted by the -language of Cicero,<a id="FNanchor_1318" href="#Footnote_1318" class="fnanchor">[1318]</a> who speaks of the voting divisions of the -four lower classes not as groups of centuries but simply as -centuries, the absence of a name for such a group being one -of the strongest arguments against its existence. Mommsen’s -interpretation of the passage is in brief too strained and unnatural -to commend itself to the understanding. Apart from its -lack of support in the sources, an objection to the theory is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_223"></a>[223]</span> -its extreme impracticability. Holding that juniors and seniors -could not have been brought together in the same voting divisions, -and assuming that the combinations were made by twos -and threes and that the four lower classes had an equal number -of votes, Klebs has worked out the simplest arrangement as -follows:</p> - -<table> - <tr> - <th class="bt bb"><span class="smcap">Class</span></th> - <th class="bl bt bb"><span class="smcap">Centuries</span></th> - <th class="bl bt bb" colspan="4"></th> - <th class="bl bt bb"><span class="smcap">Votes</span></th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>I</td> - <td class="tdr bl">70</td> - <td class="tdc bl" colspan="4">One vote each</td> - <td class="tdr bl">70</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>II</td> - <td class="tdr bl">70</td> - <td class="bl" colspan="4">35 of seniors</td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - <td class="tdr bl">8</td> - <td>in groups of two</td> - <td class="tdr">4</td> - <td>votes</td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - <td class="tdr bl">27</td> - <td>in groups of three</td> - <td class="tdr">9</td> - <td>votes</td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - <td class="bl"></td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bt">13</td> - <td>votes</td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - <td class="bl" colspan="4">35 of juniors</td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - <td class="tdr bl">2</td> - <td>in a group</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>vote</td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - <td class="tdr bl">33</td> - <td>in groups of three</td> - <td class="tdr">11</td> - <td>votes</td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - <td class="bl"></td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bt">12</td> - <td>votes</td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr bl"></td> - <td colspan="4" class="in2 bl">Total</td> - <td class="tdr bl">25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="7">If the remaining classes are like the second, we shall have:</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>III</td> - <td class="tdr bl">70</td> - <td class="tdc bl" colspan="4"></td> - <td class="tdr bl">25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>IV</td> - <td class="tdr bl">70</td> - <td class="tdc bl" colspan="4"></td> - <td class="tdr bl">25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>V</td> - <td class="tdr bl">70</td> - <td class="tdc bl" colspan="4"></td> - <td class="tdr bl">25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Equites</td> - <td class="tdr bl">18</td> - <td class="tdc bl" colspan="4">One vote each</td> - <td class="tdr bl">18</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Supernumeraries</td> - <td class="tdr bl">5</td> - <td class="tdc bl" colspan="4">One vote each</td> - <td class="tdr bl">5</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="bb"></td> - <td class="bl bb"></td> - <td class="tdc bl bb" colspan="4">Total</td> - <td class="tdr bl bt bb">193<br /> -<a id="FNanchor_1319" href="#Footnote_1319" class="fnanchor">[1319]</a></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>This complex system would make the action of the centuriate -assembly exceedingly slow and difficult, and would be as useless -as impracticable; for if the object was to reduce the votes of -the first class by ten and to make the other classes equal, that -end could have been easily attained by the readjustment of numbers -on the old basis, without the invention of this awkward -grouping, the like of which is not known to have existed in any -ancient or modern state. Such a reform, too, would bring out<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_224"></a>[224]</span> -more clearly than ever the inequality of rights in the comitia,<a id="FNanchor_1320" href="#Footnote_1320" class="fnanchor">[1320]</a> -and therefore could not have been called democratic by Dionysius.<a id="FNanchor_1321" href="#Footnote_1321" class="fnanchor">[1321]</a> -It is contradicted also by Livy,<a id="FNanchor_1322" href="#Footnote_1322" class="fnanchor">[1322]</a> who distinctly states -that the number of centuries was changed. Lastly the objection -must be made that the joining of centuries of different tribes -into voting units cannot be reconciled with the imperial grouping -of centuries of the same tribe into corpora,<a id="FNanchor_1323" href="#Footnote_1323" class="fnanchor">[1323]</a> and is refuted by -the many citations which assume the voting or the announcement -of the votes to have proceeded according to tribes<a id="FNanchor_1324" href="#Footnote_1324" class="fnanchor">[1324]</a> as well -as according to classes.<a id="FNanchor_1325" href="#Footnote_1325" class="fnanchor">[1325]</a></p> - -<p>Lange,<a id="FNanchor_1326" href="#Footnote_1326" class="fnanchor">[1326]</a> not thinking it necessary to preserve a total of a -hundred and ninety-three votes but accepting in the main the -view of Pantagathus, tries to bring the centuries into relation -with the tribes by assuming that the seventy half-tribes, severally -comprising five centuries of juniors or seniors, were -given each one vote in the “concluding announcement” -(Schlussrenuntiation), this vote being determined by a majority -of the five component centuries. In like manner the eighteen -centuries of knights were grouped in divisions of three centuries -each, so as to count six votes in the final announcement, hence -the name sex suffragia. The supernumerary centuries were -grouped in one or two voting divisions, so that in all seventy-seven -or seventy-eight votes were cast.<a id="FNanchor_1327" href="#Footnote_1327" class="fnanchor">[1327]</a> As to the process, -he believed that after the prerogative the seventy centuries -of the first class and the eighteen centuries of cavalry voted -simultaneously, and while their votes were being counted the -second class was voting, the votes, in his opinion, not being -announced as soon as known.<a id="FNanchor_1328" href="#Footnote_1328" class="fnanchor">[1328]</a> This view as to the announcement -is contradicted by the sources,<a id="FNanchor_1329" href="#Footnote_1329" class="fnanchor">[1329]</a> which clearly imply that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_225"></a>[225]</span> -the reports were made public as they came in. Against his -theory may be urged also (1) the fact that no name existed for -the half-tribe, which in his opinion cast one vote in the closing -announcement,<a id="FNanchor_1330" href="#Footnote_1330" class="fnanchor">[1330]</a> as well as (2) the fact that the sources give -more than six votes to the equites in the late republic.<a id="FNanchor_1331" href="#Footnote_1331" class="fnanchor">[1331]</a> Lange -is right, however, in understanding that the voting did not -now, as formerly, cease when a majority was reached, but -continued till all the centuries had voted.<a id="FNanchor_1332" href="#Footnote_1332" class="fnanchor">[1332]</a></p> - -<p>A solution of the problem as to the order of voting suggested -by Klebs<a id="FNanchor_1333" href="#Footnote_1333" class="fnanchor">[1333]</a> seems to satisfy all conditions. The centuries gave -their votes by classes, each being announced as soon as it -was ascertained. Then when all the centuries had voted, a -count was taken by tribes in the order determined by lot;<a id="FNanchor_1334" href="#Footnote_1334" class="fnanchor">[1334]</a> and -a second announcement, made in that order, decided the election -or other act of the people. Each candidate was declared -elected when a majority of votes was reached in his favor.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_226"></a>[226]</span></p> - -<p>Regarding the supernumerary centuries our information is -extremely meagre. As it does not seem likely that influential -corporations would be robbed of a privilege they once enjoyed, -we may reasonably believe that the artisans, musicians, and -accensi velati retained centuries of their own in the reformed -organization. Cicero,<a id="FNanchor_1335" href="#Footnote_1335" class="fnanchor">[1335]</a> however, speaks of a single century -of artisans for his time. The two industrial colleges, which -had existed from an early age,<a id="FNanchor_1336" href="#Footnote_1336" class="fnanchor">[1336]</a> seem to have been joined -in one and to have continued into the imperial period after -nearly all the other guilds had been abolished.<a id="FNanchor_1337" href="#Footnote_1337" class="fnanchor">[1337]</a> When the -two were united, they were probably reduced to a single vote -in the assembly. In like manner the liticines, or tubicines, -and the cornicines were united in one college of musicians<a id="FNanchor_1338" href="#Footnote_1338" class="fnanchor">[1338]</a> and -were probably given one vote. The accensi velati, too, formed -a college composed of wealthy freedmen, freeborn, and even -knights.<a id="FNanchor_1339" href="#Footnote_1339" class="fnanchor">[1339]</a> We may well suppose that it still possessed a vote -in the centuriate assembly. Lastly may be mentioned the -century of proletarians and that of the tardy,<a id="FNanchor_1340" href="#Footnote_1340" class="fnanchor">[1340]</a> which were as -necessary after the reform as before it.<a id="FNanchor_1341" href="#Footnote_1341" class="fnanchor">[1341]</a> Although new centuries -were added, possibly by the later republican censors -and certainly by the emperors,<a id="FNanchor_1342" href="#Footnote_1342" class="fnanchor">[1342]</a> the principle of the reformed -organization remained unchanged.<a id="FNanchor_1343" href="#Footnote_1343" class="fnanchor">[1343]</a></p> - -<p>In the reformed assembly the equestrian centuries ceased to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_227"></a>[227]</span> -be prerogative.<a id="FNanchor_1344" href="#Footnote_1344" class="fnanchor">[1344]</a> A century was drawn from the first class<a id="FNanchor_1345" href="#Footnote_1345" class="fnanchor">[1345]</a> by -lot<a id="FNanchor_1346" href="#Footnote_1346" class="fnanchor">[1346]</a> to take the lead in voting. Then came the remainder of the -class, including the equestrian centuries and the single century of -artisans, eighty-eight in all. In the announcement the votes of -the equites were distinguished from those of the class;<a id="FNanchor_1347" href="#Footnote_1347" class="fnanchor">[1347]</a> and -the sex suffragia, no longer exclusively patrician,<a id="FNanchor_1348" href="#Footnote_1348" class="fnanchor">[1348]</a> were reported -after the other eighty-two. The inferior place assigned to the -suffragia was evidently to remove them far from their earlier -prerogative position so as to free the assembly from patrician -influence. Next the lower classes, among which other supernumerary -centuries were distributed as in the earlier republic, -voted in order; and finally came the summing up by tribes in -the way described above. The old military array gave place to -a civilian grouping like that already established for the curiate -and tribal assemblies.<a id="FNanchor_1349" href="#Footnote_1349" class="fnanchor">[1349]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>I. <span class="smcap">The Earlier Organization</span>: the literature on this subject is essentially -the same as for ch. iv.</p> - -<p>II. <span class="smcap">The Reform</span>: Schulze, C. F., <i>Volksversamml. der Römer</i>, 69 ff.; -Huschke, Ph. E., <i>Verfass. des Königs Servius Tullius</i>, ch. xii; Peter, C., -<i>Epochen der Verfassungsgesch. der röm. Republik</i>, 42 ff.; Savigny, F. C., -<i>Verbindung der Centurien mit den Tribus</i>, in <i>Vermischte Schriften</i>, i. 1-13; -for other early literature, see Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 495 ff., notes; Neumann,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_228"></a>[228]</span> -C., <i>Zeitalter der punischen Kriege</i>, 187 ff.; Nitzsch, K. W., <i>Gesch. der röm. -Republik</i>, i. 146 f.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Tribus</i>, 66-113, 143-149; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -iii. 269 ff.; Lange, L., <i>De magistratuum romanorum renuntiatione et de centuriatorum -comitiorum forma recentiore</i>, in <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, ii. 463-493; -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 494-516; Madvig, J. N., <i>Verfass. und Verw. des röm. Staates</i>, -i. 117-23; Herzog, E., <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 320-7; <i>Die Charakter der -Tributcomitien ... und die Reform der Centuriatcomitien</i>, in <i>Philol.</i> xxiv -(1876). 312-29; Willems, P., <i>Droit public Romain</i>, 92-8; Mispoulet, J. B., -<i>Institutions politiques des Romains</i>, i. 46-8; Greenidge, A. H. J., <i>Roman -Public Life</i>, 252 f.; Abbott, F. F., <i>Roman Political Institutions</i>, 74-6; -Karlowa, O., <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 384-8; Soltau, W., <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> -358-71; <i>Cicero de Re Publica und die servianische Centurienordnung</i>, -in <i>Jahrb. f. Philol.</i> xli (1895). 410-4; Kappeyne Van de Coppello, -J., <i>Comitien</i>, 20 ff.; Morlot, E., <i>Comices électoraux sous la république Rom.</i> -ch. v; Goguet, R., <i>Centuries</i>, ch. iv; Le Tellier, M., <i>L’organisation centuriate</i>, -ch. ii; Hallays, A., <i>Comices à Rome</i>, 25-31; Plüss, H. T., <i>Entwick. der -Centurienverfass.</i>; Ullrich, J., <i>Centuriatcomitien</i>; Clason, O., <i>Zur Frage über -die reformierte Centurienverfass.</i> in Heidelb. <i>Jahrb.</i> lxv (1872). 221-37; -Ritschl, F. W., <i>Opuscula Philologica</i>, iii. 637-73; Genz, H., <i>Centuriat-Comitien -nach der Reform</i>; Guiraud, P., <i>De la Reforme des Comices centuriates au -III Siècle av. J.-C.</i> in <i>Rev. hist.</i> xvii (1881). 1-24; Klebs, E., <i>Stimmenzahl -und Abstimmungsordnung der ref. servianischen Verf.</i>, in <i>Zeitschr. d. Savignystift. -f. Rechtsgesch. Röm.</i> Abt. xii (1892). 181-244; Meyer, E., <i>Die angebliche -Centurienreform Sullas</i>, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxxiiii (1898). 652-4; Humbert, -G., in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> ii. 1389 f.; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1956-60.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_229"></a>[229]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XI">CHAPTER XI<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COMITIA CENTURIATA</span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>Elective</i></h4> - -<p>The first act of the centuriate assembly according to Livy,<a id="FNanchor_1350" href="#Footnote_1350" class="fnanchor">[1350]</a> -who has certainly placed the beginning of its functions at the -earliest possible date,<a id="FNanchor_1351" href="#Footnote_1351" class="fnanchor">[1351]</a> was the election of the first two consuls. -Thereafter these comitia not only continued to elect the consuls, -but also naturally acquired the right to choose all elective higher -magistrates, extraordinary as well as ordinary, who were -entrusted temporarily or permanently with some or all of the -consular power—including the decemviri legibus scribundis, -451, 450, the tribuni militum consulari potestate, beginning in -444, the two censors, beginning in 443 (or 435?), and the praetors, -increased gradually from one in 366 to sixteen under -Caesar.<a id="FNanchor_1352" href="#Footnote_1352" class="fnanchor">[1352]</a> The activity of this assembly in elections expanded -with the growth in the number of offices; and its importance -was further enhanced by the opening of the patrician magistracies -to plebeians. The validity of a centuriate elective act -depended upon the subsequent curiate law, which soon became -a mere form, and upon the patrum auctoritas. The latter, too,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_230"></a>[230]</span> -was deprived of all vitality by the Maenian plebiscite,<a id="FNanchor_1353" href="#Footnote_1353" class="fnanchor">[1353]</a> which -required the act to be passed before the election while the issue -was uncertain.<a id="FNanchor_1354" href="#Footnote_1354" class="fnanchor">[1354]</a> The date of this plebiscite is unknown; but it -probably followed close upon the Hortensian legislation (287).<a id="FNanchor_1355" href="#Footnote_1355" class="fnanchor">[1355]</a></p> - -<h4>II. <i>Legislative</i></h4> - -<p>In an earlier chapter<a id="FNanchor_1356" href="#Footnote_1356" class="fnanchor">[1356]</a> it was shown that primitive Rome, like -primitive Greece, regarded law as god-given—a conception -which left no scope for legislation by a popular assembly. -Though under the kings the people may occasionally have been -called to vote on a resolution affecting their customs, the comitia -curiata never acquired a law-making function.<a id="FNanchor_1357" href="#Footnote_1357" class="fnanchor">[1357]</a> Even the declaration -of war, which historical Rome looked upon as a lex, was -issued by the king without the consent of the community, his -only need being to secure the hearty support of the warriors.<a id="FNanchor_1358" href="#Footnote_1358" class="fnanchor">[1358]</a> -It seems probable therefore that this question came, not before -the comitia, but before a military contio.<a id="FNanchor_1359" href="#Footnote_1359" class="fnanchor">[1359]</a> From the custom of -the soldiers to participate in the settlement of questions touching -their interests<a id="FNanchor_1360" href="#Footnote_1360" class="fnanchor">[1360]</a> developed the function of declaring war. -The people, however, were slow in acquiring the right. It is -true that several such acts are mentioned by Dionysius for the -early republic—for the war against the Volscians, 489,<a id="FNanchor_1361" href="#Footnote_1361" class="fnanchor">[1361]</a> against -Veii, 482,<a id="FNanchor_1362" href="#Footnote_1362" class="fnanchor">[1362]</a> and against the Aequians and Volscians in 462.<a id="FNanchor_1363" href="#Footnote_1363" class="fnanchor">[1363]</a> -These instances may be explained either as acclamations in -contio or as exceptional votes in the comitia centuriata, or with -more probability, owing to the character of our sources for those -early times, as anticipations of later usage. The decisive fact -in the problem is that as late as 427 a controversy arose as to -whether war could be declared by order of the people only, or -whether a senatus consultum was sufficient. It was settled in -favor of the people by the threats of the plebeian tribunes to -impede the levy.<a id="FNanchor_1364" href="#Footnote_1364" class="fnanchor">[1364]</a> For the next hundred years mention is often<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_231"></a>[231]</span> -made of the exercise of this function by the people;<a id="FNanchor_1365" href="#Footnote_1365" class="fnanchor">[1365]</a> and when -a declaration was once issued by them, it could be recalled only -by their vote.<a id="FNanchor_1366" href="#Footnote_1366" class="fnanchor">[1366]</a> During the period of the Samnite wars the -assembly still more frequently made use of this right.<a id="FNanchor_1367" href="#Footnote_1367" class="fnanchor">[1367]</a> In -better known times we find it firmly established. The people -declared war against Carthage in 264,<a id="FNanchor_1368" href="#Footnote_1368" class="fnanchor">[1368]</a> against the Illyrians in -229,<a id="FNanchor_1369" href="#Footnote_1369" class="fnanchor">[1369]</a> against Carthage again in 218,<a id="FNanchor_1370" href="#Footnote_1370" class="fnanchor">[1370]</a> against Macedon in 200,<a id="FNanchor_1371" href="#Footnote_1371" class="fnanchor">[1371]</a> -against Antiochus in 191,<a id="FNanchor_1372" href="#Footnote_1372" class="fnanchor">[1372]</a> against Macedon again in 171,<a id="FNanchor_1373" href="#Footnote_1373" class="fnanchor">[1373]</a> -against Jugurtha in 111.<a id="FNanchor_1374" href="#Footnote_1374" class="fnanchor">[1374]</a> In the case of the two Macedonian -wars here referred to, the declaration is mentioned as an act of -the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_1375" href="#Footnote_1375" class="fnanchor">[1375]</a> In 167 the praetor M. Juventus Thalna -attempted to pass through the tribal assembly a lex de bello -indicendo against the Rhodians, but was effectually opposed by -a tribune of the plebs;<a id="FNanchor_1376" href="#Footnote_1376" class="fnanchor">[1376]</a> so that the function continued to be -exclusively centuriate. Cn. Manlius Volso in 189 made war -upon the Gallograeci without an order of the people or a decree -of the senate, and was on that ground accused in the senate by -two of his legati.<a id="FNanchor_1377" href="#Footnote_1377" class="fnanchor">[1377]</a> We conclude, however, that the charge was -fruitless from the circumstance that the senate finally decreed -him a triumph.<a id="FNanchor_1378" href="#Footnote_1378" class="fnanchor">[1378]</a> For beginning war against the Histrians on -his own responsibility the consul A. Manlius, 178, was threatened -with a prosecution, which was quashed by a tribunician -veto.<a id="FNanchor_1379" href="#Footnote_1379" class="fnanchor">[1379]</a> Licinius Lucullus was not even brought to trial for the -war he waged without an order of the people against the Vaccaei -in 151.<a id="FNanchor_1380" href="#Footnote_1380" class="fnanchor">[1380]</a> Hence it appears that though a magistrate could -not legally begin war on his own initiative, there was no real<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_232"></a>[232]</span> -danger of condemnation for so doing. The reason is that those -in authority attached little importance to the right of the comitia -in the matter. Only once is mentioned a fear lest the people -may not give their consent to a war.<a id="FNanchor_1381" href="#Footnote_1381" class="fnanchor">[1381]</a> One case of rejection -is recorded, and even here the centuries at a second session -obediently accepted the consul’s proposition.<a id="FNanchor_1382" href="#Footnote_1382" class="fnanchor">[1382]</a> The control of -diplomacy and of the revenues by the senate and magistrates -assured these powers the practical decision of questions of war -and peace to such an extent that ratification by the assembly -could ordinarily be counted on as certain; and its influence -decreased with the expansion of the empire. Meantime, however, -the idea of popular sovereignty, which was expressing -itself in other spheres of government, effectually demanded, if -only in form, some concession to the assembly in this field as -well; and accordingly in the formula of declaration “populus” -wholly takes the place of the once all-important “senatus.”<a id="FNanchor_1383" href="#Footnote_1383" class="fnanchor">[1383]</a> -By such empty concessions the nobility rendered the people -more docile. Thus to the end of the republic the centuriate -assembly retained the constitutional right to decide questions of -aggressive war, although in practice the magistrates nearly -regained the place which they and the senate had held during -the century following the overthrow of kingship.<a id="FNanchor_1384" href="#Footnote_1384" class="fnanchor">[1384]</a></p> - -<p>The nature of our sources does not allow a precise judgment -regarding the importance of the comitia curiata in the early -republic. To the time of the Gallic invasion it may occasionally -have passed resolutions affecting the status of citizens.<a id="FNanchor_1385" href="#Footnote_1385" class="fnanchor">[1385]</a> -But as legislation never became an acknowledged function of -the curiae, we are in a position to assert that through the comitia -centuriata the people were first introduced into this sphere -of public life.<a id="FNanchor_1386" href="#Footnote_1386" class="fnanchor">[1386]</a></p> - -<p>The earliest legislation of this assembly, in fact the earliest -recorded legislative act of the Roman people, was the lex de -provocatione attributed to Valerius Publicola, consul in the first<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_233"></a>[233]</span> -year of the republic, 509.<a id="FNanchor_1387" href="#Footnote_1387" class="fnanchor">[1387]</a> It was also through the centuriate -assembly that the consuls Valerius and Horatius in 449 passed a -law which forbade the election of a magistrate without appeal, and -affixed as a penalty the outlawing of the trespasser.<a id="FNanchor_1388" href="#Footnote_1388" class="fnanchor">[1388]</a> The third -Valerian law of appeal in 300<a id="FNanchor_1389" href="#Footnote_1389" class="fnanchor">[1389]</a> was an act of the same assembly, -whereas all three Porcian laws on the same subject seem to -have been tribal.<a id="FNanchor_1390" href="#Footnote_1390" class="fnanchor">[1390]</a> The legislative function of the centuriate -assembly, resting in the pre-decemviral period simply on precedent, -brought into being the statute of 471 to establish a tribal -assembly for the transaction of plebeian business, improperly -known as the Publilian law,<a id="FNanchor_1391" href="#Footnote_1391" class="fnanchor">[1391]</a> the lex sacrata for the division of -the Aventine among the plebeians, erroneously termed Icilian, -456,<a id="FNanchor_1392" href="#Footnote_1392" class="fnanchor">[1392]</a> the lex Aternia Tarpeia de multae dictione, 454,<a id="FNanchor_1393" href="#Footnote_1393" class="fnanchor">[1393]</a> the lex -Menenia Sextia on the same subjects in 452,<a id="FNanchor_1394" href="#Footnote_1394" class="fnanchor">[1394]</a> the laws ratifying -the Twelve Tables in 451, 449<a id="FNanchor_1395" href="#Footnote_1395" class="fnanchor">[1395]</a>—all excepting the second having -reference to the limitation of the magisterial power. Regarding -the creation of offices, no mention is made of a law for the -institution of the consulate itself; but the centuries passed a -law for the creation of the dictatorship, 501,<a id="FNanchor_1396" href="#Footnote_1396" class="fnanchor">[1396]</a> and of the decemviri -legibus scribundis, which should be named Sestian after -the consul who undoubtedly proposed it, 452.<a id="FNanchor_1397" href="#Footnote_1397" class="fnanchor">[1397]</a> Thus far popular -legislation had no basis excepting precedent, but a law of -the Twelve Tables now provided that there should be resolutions<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_234"></a>[234]</span> -and votes of the people, and whatever the people voted -last should be law and valid—the first clear enunciation of the -principle that the will of the people, whenever expressed, prevailed -over every other authority.<a id="FNanchor_1398" href="#Footnote_1398" class="fnanchor">[1398]</a> It was far from establishing -popular sovereignty, however, for the initiative remained with -the magistrates.</p> - -<p>The activity of the comitia centuriata, thus authoritatively -established, manifested itself in the passing of the Valerian-Horatian -laws of 449,<a id="FNanchor_1399" href="#Footnote_1399" class="fnanchor">[1399]</a> the lex Iulia Papiria de multarum aestimatione, -430,<a id="FNanchor_1400" href="#Footnote_1400" class="fnanchor">[1400]</a> the law for the election of six military tribunes by -the comitia tributa, 362,<a id="FNanchor_1401" href="#Footnote_1401" class="fnanchor">[1401]</a> the law of the dictator Publilius Philo, -339,<a id="FNanchor_1402" href="#Footnote_1402" class="fnanchor">[1402]</a> the third Valerian law concerning appeal, 300,<a id="FNanchor_1403" href="#Footnote_1403" class="fnanchor">[1403]</a> and finally -the Hortensian law, 287.<a id="FNanchor_1404" href="#Footnote_1404" class="fnanchor">[1404]</a> All have reference to the regulation of -magistracies or of assemblies. Meantime the centuriate comitia -passed the law for instituting tribunes of the soldiers with consular -power, 445,<a id="FNanchor_1405" href="#Footnote_1405" class="fnanchor">[1405]</a> and censors, 443<a id="FNanchor_1406" href="#Footnote_1406" class="fnanchor">[1406]</a> (or 435?), for increasing -the number of quaestors, 421,<a id="FNanchor_1407" href="#Footnote_1407" class="fnanchor">[1407]</a> for instituting the praetorship, -367,<a id="FNanchor_1408" href="#Footnote_1408" class="fnanchor">[1408]</a> and the curule aedileship in the same year.<a id="FNanchor_1409" href="#Footnote_1409" class="fnanchor">[1409]</a> All the -laws thus far mentioned, excepting that for the division of the -Aventine, effected important modifications of the constitution, -the most of them forced upon the senate and magistrates in the -struggle for equal rights in which the commons were engaged -with the nobility. In like manner two provisions of the Valerian -law of 342, (1) that the name of no soldier should be erased<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_235"></a>[235]</span> -from the muster roll without his consent. (2) that no military -tribune should be degraded to the rank of centurion,<a id="FNanchor_1410" href="#Footnote_1410" class="fnanchor">[1410]</a> established -under the sanction of an oath certain fundamental rights on -which the soldiers and their officers respectively insisted. -Another provision, the total abolition of debts,<a id="FNanchor_1411" href="#Footnote_1411" class="fnanchor">[1411]</a> if indeed it is -historical, was administrative, and is considered therefore in -another connection.<a id="FNanchor_1412" href="#Footnote_1412" class="fnanchor">[1412]</a> Of the same nature, though less sweeping, -was the Hortensian provision for the relief of debtors.</p> - -<p>As soon as there came to be plebeian senators (about 400), -the patricians reserved to themselves the right to decide on -the legality of legislative and elective acts of the people under -patrician presidency—a right designated by the phrase patrum -auctoritas, which signified originally the authorization of the -senators, thereafter of the patrician senators. Till 339 the -patres were at liberty to give or withhold the auctoritas; but in -that year an article of the Publilian law required them to grant -it to legislative acts of the centuries before the voting began -and while the issue was still in doubt, reducing it in this way -to a mere formality.<a id="FNanchor_1413" href="#Footnote_1413" class="fnanchor">[1413]</a> The effect was to free centuriate legislation -from the constitutional control hitherto exercised by patrician -senators.<a id="FNanchor_1414" href="#Footnote_1414" class="fnanchor">[1414]</a> Henceforth the resolutions of this assembly -could be declared illegal by no less than a majority of the entire -senate. The Publilian statute, accordingly, deprived the patricians -of an important power, whereas the senate as a whole -continued through its consulta to exercise an increasing influence -over the comitia centuriata. Polybius rightly ascribes to -the consuls, therefore, the function of bringing the resolutions -of the senate before the assembly. It could not have been the -intention of Publilius Philo to energize the comitia centuriata<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_236"></a>[236]</span> -by this provision; for another article of the same statute, confirming -the validity of the tribunician assembly of tribes, as -then actually constituted exclusively of plebeians, paved the -way for the Hortensian law, which by making the acts of the -tribunician assembly in every respect equal to those of the centuries, -deprived the latter of their great importance as a factor -in constitutional progress. From the time of Hortensius to the -time of Sulla no constitutional statute is known to have been -enacted by the centuriate assembly; though our sources do not -give us clear information on the point, it is highly probable -that the consuls and dictators of this period preferred to bring -their measures however important before the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1415" href="#Footnote_1415" class="fnanchor">[1415]</a> In Sulla’s -time the lex Valeria, 82,<a id="FNanchor_1416" href="#Footnote_1416" class="fnanchor">[1416]</a> clothing him with his extraordinary -dictatorship rei publicae constituendae, must have been passed -by the centuries, which alone in addition to the politically -obsolete comitia curiata could be summoned by an interrex, as -was the author of the law. This act, Lange remarks, cannot -well be considered a revival of the legislative power of the centuries, -as it was not only passed through intimidation and under -a magistrate who had no constitutional right to initiate legislation, -but it also created a legalized tyranny destructive of popular -freedom.<a id="FNanchor_1417" href="#Footnote_1417" class="fnanchor">[1417]</a> In the words of Cicero it was the most iniquitous -of all laws and most unlike a law.<a id="FNanchor_1418" href="#Footnote_1418" class="fnanchor">[1418]</a> Only one of Sulla’s statutes, -the lex de civitate Volaterranis adimenda, 81, which, depriving -the Volaterrani of their civitas cum suffragio, placed them -in the condition of the Latins of Ariminum, is known to have -been an act of the centuries.<a id="FNanchor_1419" href="#Footnote_1419" class="fnanchor">[1419]</a> Probably all his other laws were -ratified by the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1420" href="#Footnote_1420" class="fnanchor">[1420]</a> C. Julius Caesar preferably used the -tribes, although it is possible that his lex de provinciis and his -lex iudiciaria came before the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_1421" href="#Footnote_1421" class="fnanchor">[1421]</a></p> - -<p>Sulla’s constitutional legislation curtailed the powers of the -plebeian tribunes and of their assembly, proportionally increasing<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_237"></a>[237]</span> -the importance of the centuries; and although his form of -government was of short duration, the optimates thereafter -naturally preferred the comitia centuriata for the ratification -of senatorial resolutions.<a id="FNanchor_1422" href="#Footnote_1422" class="fnanchor">[1422]</a> To this assembly accordingly belong -the leges Vibiae of the consul C. Vibius Pansa, 43, which confirmed -the acts of Caesar, and took the place of Antony’s leges -de coloniis deducendis and of his lex de dictatura tollenda.<a id="FNanchor_1423" href="#Footnote_1423" class="fnanchor">[1423]</a></p> - -<p>On the institution of the censorship, and by the law which -called the office into being, it was enacted that elections of censors -should be ratified, not by the curiae as in the case of other -magistrates, but by the centuries themselves.<a id="FNanchor_1424" href="#Footnote_1424" class="fnanchor">[1424]</a> Before this date -the principle was already established that the people should -vote twice in the election of every magistrate in order that if -they repented of their choice, they might recall it by a second -vote.<a id="FNanchor_1425" href="#Footnote_1425" class="fnanchor">[1425]</a> As the primary function of the censors was the periodical -reconstitution of the comitia centuriata, it was doubtless -thought appropriate that this assembly alone should be concerned -with the election. The lex centuriata de potestate censoria, -evidently passed under consular presidency, remained, -like the curiate law in confirmation of elections to other offices, -a mere form. It was of too little practical significance ever to -be noticed by the historians; in fact no individual instance of -the passing of this act is mentioned by any extant writer. -Characteristically the lex Aemilia, 433, which is alleged to have -cut down the term of censorship to eighteen months,<a id="FNanchor_1426" href="#Footnote_1426" class="fnanchor">[1426]</a> and the -lex Publilia Philonis, 339, which provided that at least one censor -must be a plebeian,<a id="FNanchor_1427" href="#Footnote_1427" class="fnanchor">[1427]</a> were centuriate, whereas the Licinian-Sextian -law, 367, which provided that one consul must be a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_238"></a>[238]</span> -plebeian,<a id="FNanchor_1428" href="#Footnote_1428" class="fnanchor">[1428]</a> and the Genucian law, 342, permitting both to be,<a id="FNanchor_1429" href="#Footnote_1429" class="fnanchor">[1429]</a> -were plebiscites.</p> - -<p>An occasional attempt was made by a magistrate to usurp for -the comitia centuriata a share in the administration. The first -which is worthy of notice,<a id="FNanchor_1430" href="#Footnote_1430" class="fnanchor">[1430]</a> even though it may be mythical, is -the agrarian proposal of Sp. Cassius, 486. According to the -sources it was opposed by the senate and the colleague of the -mover. Far from enacting it into a law, the author, on the expiration -of his consulship, was himself accused of attempting to -usurp the royal power, and was, in one version of the story, -condemned to death by the assembly to which he had offered -the bill.<a id="FNanchor_1431" href="#Footnote_1431" class="fnanchor">[1431]</a> The senate must have taken very seriously this first -attempt of a magistrate to transfer some of its administrative -power to the comitia. The law for the division of the Aventine -Hill among the people, 456, was actually passed, most probably -by the centuries.<a id="FNanchor_1432" href="#Footnote_1432" class="fnanchor">[1432]</a> It was forced upon the government by the -plebeians, and did not serve as a precedent for the future. The -Valerian law of 342,<a id="FNanchor_1433" href="#Footnote_1433" class="fnanchor">[1433]</a> which abolished debts, was an extraordinary -administrative measure similar in character, but far more -sweeping, to the clause for the relief of debtors in the Licinian-Sextian -plebiscite.</p> - -<p>If then the centuriate assembly was excluded from the field -of administration, it must certainly in pre-decemviral times have -had no part in religious legislation. The law which regulated -the intercalary month inscribed on a bronze column by Pinarius -and Furius, consuls in 472,<a id="FNanchor_1434" href="#Footnote_1434" class="fnanchor">[1434]</a> and the ancient law composed in -archaic letters, mentioned in connection with the year 363,<a id="FNanchor_1435" href="#Footnote_1435" class="fnanchor">[1435]</a> requiring -the praetor maximus to drive the nail on the ides of -September, must accordingly have been acts, not of the centuriate<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_239"></a>[239]</span> -assembly, but of the pontifical college. By the ratification -of the Twelve Tables, composed chiefly of private laws and of -closely connected religious regulations, an example was set for -the invasion of both of these legal spheres by the centuriate -assembly. But the precedent remained unproductive; for at -this time the tribal assembly under plebeian or patrician magistrates -was recognized as competent for legislation, and naturally -took to itself the function of enacting the less weighty, -for a time generally the non-constitutional, laws.<a id="FNanchor_1436" href="#Footnote_1436" class="fnanchor">[1436]</a> We are not -to imagine the field of legislation clearly divided into constitutional, -private, religious, and other departments; aside from the -question of declaring an offensive war, which remained strictly -the province of the comitia centuriata, the distinction in legislation -was simply between the more and the less important; -the dignified assembly of centuries, organized on an aristocratic-timocratic -basis, was entrusted with the weightier business, -whereas the simpler tribal assembly, which was easier to summon -and more expeditious in action, served well enough for the -despatch of lighter business. The question of the assembly to -be employed was largely one of inertia; it required a far greater -force of circumstances to set in motion for legislative purposes -the cumbrous centuriate assembly than the relatively mobile -gathering of the tribes.</p> - -<h4>III. <i>Judicial</i></h4> - -<p>The jurisdiction of the people in whatever assembly was confined -to cases of crime and of serious disobedience to magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_1437" href="#Footnote_1437" class="fnanchor">[1437]</a> -It was not exercised by them in the first instance but -only by way of appeal. In the opinion of the Romans Tullus -Hostilius was the first to grant an appeal,<a id="FNanchor_1438" href="#Footnote_1438" class="fnanchor">[1438]</a> necessarily to the comitia -curiata, which under the kings remained the only formally -voting assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1439" href="#Footnote_1439" class="fnanchor">[1439]</a> During the regal period, the well attested<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_240"></a>[240]</span> -appellate function of the comitia<a id="FNanchor_1440" href="#Footnote_1440" class="fnanchor">[1440]</a> was simply precarious, depending -wholly on the pleasure of the king.<a id="FNanchor_1441" href="#Footnote_1441" class="fnanchor">[1441]</a> The Romans -represented the advance in liberty brought by the republic as -consisting partly in the establishment of the right of appeal for -every citizen through the lex de provocatione of Valerius,<a id="FNanchor_1442" href="#Footnote_1442" class="fnanchor">[1442]</a> a -consul of the first year of the republic—according to Cicero -the first law carried through the comitia centuriata—providing -that no magistrate should scourge or put to death a citizen -without granting him an appeal to the people.<a id="FNanchor_1443" href="#Footnote_1443" class="fnanchor">[1443]</a> Although the -historical existence of this Valerius has been questioned, and -though his law has the appearance of being an anticipation of the -Valerian law of 449, or more closely of that of 300,<a id="FNanchor_1444" href="#Footnote_1444" class="fnanchor">[1444]</a> we must -admit in favor of its reality that the decemvirs were themselves -exceptionally above appeal and that their laws guaranteed to the -citizens an extensive use of the right.<a id="FNanchor_1445" href="#Footnote_1445" class="fnanchor">[1445]</a> The appellant, however, -had no legal means of enforcing his right against the magistrate; -he could do no more than “throw himself on the mercy -of the crowd, and trust that their shouts or murmurs would -bend the magistrate to respect the law.”<a id="FNanchor_1446" href="#Footnote_1446" class="fnanchor">[1446]</a> The first lex Valeria, -accordingly, brought little real benefit to the citizens.<a id="FNanchor_1447" href="#Footnote_1447" class="fnanchor">[1447]</a> The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_241"></a>[241]</span> -right was recognized and its application extended, as intimated -above, by the Twelve Tables, in which various laws relating not -only to capital crimes but to some of less importance granted -an appeal to the people.<a id="FNanchor_1448" href="#Footnote_1448" class="fnanchor">[1448]</a> It was provided also by a special -statute of the code that judgments as well as laws involving life -or citizenship could be passed only by the comitiatus maximus, -which is evidently the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_1449" href="#Footnote_1449" class="fnanchor">[1449]</a></p> - -<p>The Valerian-Horatian law of appeal, 449, was directed -against the recurrence of the decemvirate or any similar magistracy -with absolute jurisdiction, and hence resembled neither -the laws of the Twelve Tables referring to the subject nor the -Valerian law of 509. It provided that any one who brought -about the election of such a magistracy might be put to death -with impunity,<a id="FNanchor_1450" href="#Footnote_1450" class="fnanchor">[1450]</a> and is alleged to have been reinforced by a Duillian -plebiscite of the same year, which set the penalty of scourging -and death for the same offence.<a id="FNanchor_1451" href="#Footnote_1451" class="fnanchor">[1451]</a> These regulations could -not refer to the dictatorship, which was appointive not elective, -and which continued to possess absolute jurisdiction for more -than a century after the decemviral legislation.<a id="FNanchor_1452" href="#Footnote_1452" class="fnanchor">[1452]</a></p> - -<p>But legal rights by no means imply actual enjoyment; and -the decemviral laws of appeal must have long remained substantially -inoperative through lack of a power sufficiently interested -in their enforcement; “the might of the few was stronger -than the liberty of the commons.”<a id="FNanchor_1453" href="#Footnote_1453" class="fnanchor">[1453]</a> The right was limited, too, -by the first milestone,<a id="FNanchor_1454" href="#Footnote_1454" class="fnanchor">[1454]</a> and hence did not affect the imperium -militiae.<a id="FNanchor_1455" href="#Footnote_1455" class="fnanchor">[1455]</a> The only punishment of a magistrate for refusal to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_242"></a>[242]</span> -grant an appeal even by the Valerian law of 300, was to be deemed -wicked.<a id="FNanchor_1456" href="#Footnote_1456" class="fnanchor">[1456]</a> Furthermore the oft-recurring dictatorship was unrestricted -by the law, being in this respect a temporary restoration -of the regal office.<a id="FNanchor_1457" href="#Footnote_1457" class="fnanchor">[1457]</a> Not till after the enactment of the -last Valerian statute did the people begin to enjoy in fact the -privilege which had long been constitutionally theirs. The -enforcement of the law, as in general of the rights of the -citizens, was chiefly due to the plebeian tribunate, “the only -sure protection even of oppressed patricians,”<a id="FNanchor_1458" href="#Footnote_1458" class="fnanchor">[1458]</a> but itself a limitation -on the jurisdiction of the assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1459" href="#Footnote_1459" class="fnanchor">[1459]</a> At some unknown -date after 325<a id="FNanchor_1460" href="#Footnote_1460" class="fnanchor">[1460]</a> the dictator’s authority within the city was subjected -to appeal; and it has accordingly been suggested that -this limitation was due to the Valerian law of 300.<a id="FNanchor_1461" href="#Footnote_1461" class="fnanchor">[1461]</a></p> - -<p>The practical establishment of the right of appeal ordinarily -led the magistrate in the exercise of his disciplinary power -to substitute light fines and imprisonment, which he had full -power to enforce, for the heavier penalty of scourging.<a id="FNanchor_1462" href="#Footnote_1462" class="fnanchor">[1462]</a> But<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_243"></a>[243]</span> -in case of crimes, especially perduellio and parricidium, public -sentiment compelled him to prosecute the accused to the full -extent of the law. In the former accusation the consul of the -early republic appointed duumviri perduellioni iudicandae for each -case as it arose.<a id="FNanchor_1463" href="#Footnote_1463" class="fnanchor">[1463]</a> This office is obscure because, without being -formally abolished, it fell early into disuse, its function passing -to the tribunate of the plebs. Of the three cases attributed by -the sources to these duumviri, that of Horatius<a id="FNanchor_1464" href="#Footnote_1464" class="fnanchor">[1464]</a> belongs to the -regal period, and is a mythical prototype of the republican -procedure. The offence has the appearance of parricidium. -Only by the broadest interpretation could perduellio be -made to cover the murder of a sister.<a id="FNanchor_1465" href="#Footnote_1465" class="fnanchor">[1465]</a> The second case is -that of M. Manlius, 384, according to the more credible account,<a id="FNanchor_1466" href="#Footnote_1466" class="fnanchor">[1466]</a> -whereas Livy<a id="FNanchor_1467" href="#Footnote_1467" class="fnanchor">[1467]</a> himself is of the opinion that the prosecutors -were the plebeian tribunes. We may conclude, then, -that the duumviri were still employed at this date.<a id="FNanchor_1468" href="#Footnote_1468" class="fnanchor">[1468]</a> The third -case is an unsuccessful attempt in 63 to revive the office for the -trial of C. Rabirius.<a id="FNanchor_1469" href="#Footnote_1469" class="fnanchor">[1469]</a> The first republican law of appeal must -have empowered the comitia to order the appointment of these -officials by the magistrate;<a id="FNanchor_1470" href="#Footnote_1470" class="fnanchor">[1470]</a> and it seems probable that at a -later date unknown to us they began to be elected by the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_244"></a>[244]</span> -people.<a id="FNanchor_1471" href="#Footnote_1471" class="fnanchor">[1471]</a> The function of the duumviri was to try the case and -pronounce sentence, from which if condemnatory the accused -had a right to appeal to the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_1472" href="#Footnote_1472" class="fnanchor">[1472]</a> From the -analogy offered by the questorian procedure we may infer that -the duumviri requested from a higher magistrate permission to -take auspices for that assembly, over which they presided in -the final trial.<a id="FNanchor_1473" href="#Footnote_1473" class="fnanchor">[1473]</a></p> - -<p>All capital crimes committed by a citizen against another -were in a similar way referred by the consuls to the quaestores -parricidii as their deputies.<a id="FNanchor_1474" href="#Footnote_1474" class="fnanchor">[1474]</a> The activity of these officials is -first mentioned by the annalists in connection with the trial of -Sp. Cassius, not for murder but for perduellio.<a id="FNanchor_1475" href="#Footnote_1475" class="fnanchor">[1475]</a> Lange’s<a id="FNanchor_1476" href="#Footnote_1476" class="fnanchor">[1476]</a> explanation -that the quaestors were appointed duumviri for the -trial would satisfy all requirements; yet in myths of this kind -we need not expect absolute legal consistency.<a id="FNanchor_1477" href="#Footnote_1477" class="fnanchor">[1477]</a> According to -another, perhaps even earlier, version he was tried and condemned -at home by his father.<a id="FNanchor_1478" href="#Footnote_1478" class="fnanchor">[1478]</a> The second instance is the -trial of M. Volscius, 459, for false testimony,<a id="FNanchor_1479" href="#Footnote_1479" class="fnanchor">[1479]</a> which was likewise -a capital crime. Their judicial competence was recognized -by the Twelve Tables;<a id="FNanchor_1480" href="#Footnote_1480" class="fnanchor">[1480]</a> and two capital cases are assigned to -their jurisdiction after the decemvirate, (1) that of Camillus on -an accusation variously stated by the ancient authorities;<a id="FNanchor_1481" href="#Footnote_1481" class="fnanchor">[1481]</a> he<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_245"></a>[245]</span> -avoided capital prosecution before the centuries by retiring into -exile, and in his absence was condemned by the tribes to a fine -of 15,000 or perhaps 100,000 asses: (2) that of T. Quinctius -Trogus brought by the quaestor M. Sergius,<a id="FNanchor_1482" href="#Footnote_1482" class="fnanchor">[1482]</a> which must have -taken place after 242.<a id="FNanchor_1483" href="#Footnote_1483" class="fnanchor">[1483]</a> The reason for the fewness of the -known cases is to be sought in the circumstance that their -jurisdiction was substantially limited to common crimes, whereas -political crimes came at first before the duumviri and afterward -before the tribunes of the plebs.<a id="FNanchor_1484" href="#Footnote_1484" class="fnanchor">[1484]</a> The criminal jurisdiction of -the quaestors must have continued till the institution of standing -quaestiones.<a id="FNanchor_1485" href="#Footnote_1485" class="fnanchor">[1485]</a></p> - -<p>While the importance of the comitia centuriata as a criminal -court was enhanced by the lex Valeria Horatia and the Duillian -plebiscite of 449, which prohibited the election of a magistrate -with absolute jurisdiction, the number of officials competent to -bring capital actions before this assembly was increased as a -result of that law of the Twelve Tables which enacted that all -resolutions concerning the caput of a Roman citizen should be -offered to the centuries only.<a id="FNanchor_1486" href="#Footnote_1486" class="fnanchor">[1486]</a> Thereafter the tribunes were -required to prefer their capital accusations before this assembly, -for the summoning of which they, like the quaestors and the -duumviri perduellioni iudicandae, requested the auspices of a -higher magistrate, ordinarily after 367 of a praetor.<a id="FNanchor_1487" href="#Footnote_1487" class="fnanchor">[1487]</a> For a -time, probably till the Hortensian legislation, they were dependent<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_246"></a>[246]</span> -upon the patrician magistrates for this privilege.<a id="FNanchor_1488" href="#Footnote_1488" class="fnanchor">[1488]</a> -According to our sources the tribunes, with the approval of -the consuls,<a id="FNanchor_1489" href="#Footnote_1489" class="fnanchor">[1489]</a> entered upon their new sphere of judicial activity -by bringing a capital charge against Appius Claudius and Sp. -Oppius, past decemvirs, for misconduct in office, the specific -charge being the abuse of justice in the interest of a person or -of a party.<a id="FNanchor_1490" href="#Footnote_1490" class="fnanchor">[1490]</a> The suicide of the accused prevented the trial. -On the eight remaining decemvirs they passed in the same -assembly a sentence of exile.<a id="FNanchor_1491" href="#Footnote_1491" class="fnanchor">[1491]</a> M. Claudius, too, condemned -for false testimony, was exiled, the death penalty being mitigated -also in his case.<a id="FNanchor_1492" href="#Footnote_1492" class="fnanchor">[1492]</a> The tribunes of 439 are said to have -accused L. Minucius and C. Servilius Ahala for the part they -had taken in the death of Sp. Maelius, and two years afterward -Servilius was sentenced to exile by the comitia centuriata, to -be recalled later by the same body. The charge against the -former was false testimony, against the latter the putting to -death of a citizen who had not been legally sentenced.<a id="FNanchor_1493" href="#Footnote_1493" class="fnanchor">[1493]</a> Livy -next mentions a charge, probably of perduellio, brought by the -tribunes against Q. Fabius, 390, for having, in violation of the -ius gentium, fought against the Gauls while he was an ambassador -to them. He, too, is said to have died before the -trial.<a id="FNanchor_1494" href="#Footnote_1494" class="fnanchor">[1494]</a> All these cases are uncertain. If historical, they may -represent the beginnings of capital jurisdiction of the tribunes, -in rivalry with the duumviri; or they may in reality, like the -case of M. Manlius, 384, already mentioned, have been duumviral. -On either alternative they came before the centuriate -comitia.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_247"></a>[247]</span></p> - -<p>As we approach firmer historical ground, we hear of three -accusations of unnatural lust alleged to have been brought by -the tribunes of the plebs before the same comitia: (1) that -against L. Papirius, 326,<a id="FNanchor_1495" href="#Footnote_1495" class="fnanchor">[1495]</a> (2) that against L. or M. Laetorius -Mergus, a military tribune, quod cornicularium suum stupri -causa appellasset,<a id="FNanchor_1496" href="#Footnote_1496" class="fnanchor">[1496]</a> (3) the case mentioned by Pliny and others -against a person of unknown name, which probably belongs to -this period.<a id="FNanchor_1497" href="#Footnote_1497" class="fnanchor">[1497]</a> The second case seems to be a trial of official -accountability, which fell within tribunician jurisdiction according -to the usage of historical time; the others are too little -known to be legally formulated.</p> - -<p>In this period falls the attempted prosecution of Appius -Claudius Caecus, 310, on the ground that he had not laid down -the censorship at the end of the limit of eighteen months.<a id="FNanchor_1498" href="#Footnote_1498" class="fnanchor">[1498]</a> -The accusing tribune ordered him to be seized and imprisoned, -but three colleagues interceded.<a id="FNanchor_1499" href="#Footnote_1499" class="fnanchor">[1499]</a> About the same time M. -Atilius Calatinus was unsuccessfully prosecuted on a charge of -having betrayed Sora,<a id="FNanchor_1500" href="#Footnote_1500" class="fnanchor">[1500]</a> probably in connection with the defection -of that town to the Samnites in 315.<a id="FNanchor_1501" href="#Footnote_1501" class="fnanchor">[1501]</a></p> - -<p>In reviewing the cases said to have been brought by tribunes -before the comitia centuriata it is surprising to find the period -from the institution of the office to the trial of Q. Fabius, 390, -swarming with such prosecutions, whereas for the century -intervening between that date and the Hortensian legislation -comparatively few cases are recorded and those of little significance.<a id="FNanchor_1502" href="#Footnote_1502" class="fnanchor">[1502]</a> -These circumstances tend to prove that the cases assigned -to the earlier and less known period either belong mostly -to the jurisdiction of the duumviri or of the quaestors rather -than of the tribunes, or are in great part mythical, and that the -tribunes, therefore, exercised no extensive capital jurisdiction<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_248"></a>[248]</span> -before the enactment of the Hortensian law.<a id="FNanchor_1503" href="#Footnote_1503" class="fnanchor">[1503]</a> We are led -thence to the conclusion that either by an article of the statute -of Hortensius or at least as a recognized consequence of the -high place in the government assured the tribunes by it, the -jurisdiction of these magistrates in political cases was freed from -every restraint. At this time they succeeded wholly to the -place of the duumviri. The cases of which the tribunes had -cognizance were thereafter exclusively political, whereas the -questorian jurisdiction was confined to murder and other common -crimes. This distinction was not a limitation upon the -power of the tribunes, who if they chose might have superseded -the quaestors as easily as they had superseded the duumviri. -It was rather a division of functions adopted by the tribunes -themselves in view of their own political character and on the -basis of the relative dignity of the two offices. The chief -judicial function of the tribunes, accordingly, was to hold officials -responsible for their administration, though occasionally -they called private persons to account for their conduct as citizens. -All grades of officials were within their jurisdiction, but -most of the cases were against the higher magistrates.</p> - -<p>The first tribunician case of the kind after the Hortensian -legislation, and the first which is absolutely free from historical -doubt, is that brought against P. Claudius Pulcher on the ground -that as consul, 249, he fought the naval battle off Drepana -contrary to auspices, thereby losing his fleet. After the comitia -had been interrupted by a storm, the intercession of colleagues -against the resumption of the trial saved him from the death -penalty. As the result of a new trial before the tribes, however, -he was fined 120,000 asses, 1000 for each ship lost.<a id="FNanchor_1504" href="#Footnote_1504" class="fnanchor">[1504]</a> His -colleague, L. Junius, by suicide escaped condemnation on a -charge of perduellio.<a id="FNanchor_1505" href="#Footnote_1505" class="fnanchor">[1505]</a> In 212 two tribunes of the plebs prosecuted<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_249"></a>[249]</span> -M. Postumius Pyrgensis, a publican, before the tribes for -fraud, setting the penalty at 200,000 asses; but the accused -with his friends violently broke up the assembly, whereupon the -tribunes, dropping the original charge, prosecuted him for perduellio,<a id="FNanchor_1506" href="#Footnote_1506" class="fnanchor">[1506]</a> -we should suppose before the centuries.<a id="FNanchor_1507" href="#Footnote_1507" class="fnanchor">[1507]</a> Among the -complaints urged against him by the consuls in the senate were -that “he had wrested from the Roman people the right of suffrage, -had broken up a concilium plebis, had reduced the tribunes -to the rank of private persons, had marshalled an army -against the Roman people, seized a position, and cut the tribunes -off from the plebs, and had prevented the tribes from being -called to vote.” Specifically the crime must have been perduellio.<a id="FNanchor_1508" href="#Footnote_1508" class="fnanchor">[1508]</a> -Before the day of trial he withdrew into exile. In -his absence the plebs on the motion of Sp. and L. Carvilius -decreed that he was legally in banishment, that his property -should be confiscated, and that he should be interdicted from -fire and water. In this connection it should be noticed that -whereas the banishment of a citizen by lex or iudicium was the -exclusive right of the centuries,<a id="FNanchor_1509" href="#Footnote_1509" class="fnanchor">[1509]</a> the tribes were competent to -decree him an exile after his voluntary retirement.<a id="FNanchor_1510" href="#Footnote_1510" class="fnanchor">[1510]</a> Some of -the coadjutors in the violence of the publican above mentioned -left their bail and followed him into exile; others were imprisoned -to await capital trial, with what result the historian does -not inform us.<a id="FNanchor_1511" href="#Footnote_1511" class="fnanchor">[1511]</a></p> - -<p>In the same year Cn. Fulvius, a praetor, met with military reverses -through gross cowardice,<a id="FNanchor_1512" href="#Footnote_1512" class="fnanchor">[1512]</a> and in the following was prosecuted -in a finable action by a tribune of the plebs for having -corrupted his army by the example of his unsoldierly habits. -Finding in the course of the trial that the fault of the magistrate -was far more serious than had been imagined, and that the people -were in a temper to vote the extreme penalty, the prosecutor<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_250"></a>[250]</span> -changed the form of accusation to perduellio on the ground that -such cowardly conduct in a commander threatened the existence -of the state. In this instance, too, the accused avoided trial by -withdrawing into exile.<a id="FNanchor_1513" href="#Footnote_1513" class="fnanchor">[1513]</a> In 204 by a decree of the senate a -special commission, consisting of the praetor for Sicily with a -council of ten senators,<a id="FNanchor_1514" href="#Footnote_1514" class="fnanchor">[1514]</a> was appointed for the trial of a legate -of Scipio, Q. Pleminius, on the charge that he had robbed the -temple of Persephone in Locri and had violently oppressed the -Locrians.<a id="FNanchor_1515" href="#Footnote_1515" class="fnanchor">[1515]</a> The commission brought him and his accomplices -in chains to Rome and cast them in prison to await their trial -for life before the centuries.<a id="FNanchor_1516" href="#Footnote_1516" class="fnanchor">[1516]</a> The day of trial was continually -deferred, till finally Pleminius, now charged with the instigation -of a plot to burn the city, was put to death in prison.<a id="FNanchor_1517" href="#Footnote_1517" class="fnanchor">[1517]</a> The fate -of his accomplices is unknown.<a id="FNanchor_1518" href="#Footnote_1518" class="fnanchor">[1518]</a> Livy<a id="FNanchor_1519" href="#Footnote_1519" class="fnanchor">[1519]</a> remarks that while -Pleminius was languishing in jail the wrath of the populace -gradually changed to sympathy, to such an extent doubtless as -to convince the authorities of their inability to secure a popular -verdict in favor of the death penalty. In fact since the death -of M. Manlius Capitolinus, 384, no example of the execution of -a death sentence pronounced by the assembly is recorded in -history.<a id="FNanchor_1520" href="#Footnote_1520" class="fnanchor">[1520]</a> But the magistrate probably often inflicted corporal -punishment in violation of the third Valerian law. To put an -end to this abuse, and at the same time to embody in legal form -the popular feeling against the application of the death penalty -to citizens, a Porcian law absolutely forbade the scourging or -slaying of a citizen under the imperium domi, the article prohibiting<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_251"></a>[251]</span> -the sentence of death being afterward reënforced by -other enactments.<a id="FNanchor_1521" href="#Footnote_1521" class="fnanchor">[1521]</a> There has been much discussion as to the -authorship of this law; probably it was the work of M. Porcius -Cato the Elder in his praetorship, 198.<a id="FNanchor_1522" href="#Footnote_1522" class="fnanchor">[1522]</a> Another Porcian law, -probably of P. Porcius Laeca, praetor in 195, extended the right -of appeal to Roman citizens who were engaged in the affairs of -peace outside the city, in Italy and the provinces, and were -therefore under the military imperium.<a id="FNanchor_1523" href="#Footnote_1523" class="fnanchor">[1523]</a> According to this law -the citizen who appealed was sent to Rome for trial by the appropriate -civil authorities. Still later the third Porcian law, -which Lange<a id="FNanchor_1524" href="#Footnote_1524" class="fnanchor">[1524]</a> conjecturally assigns to L. Porcius Licinus, consul -in the year of the elder Cato’s censorship, 184, seems to have -been passed for the benefit of Roman soldiers. We learn from -Polybius,<a id="FNanchor_1525" href="#Footnote_1525" class="fnanchor">[1525]</a> who wrote later than the date last mentioned, that -the military tribunes were accustomed in court-martial to condemn -common soldiers for neglect of sentinel duty and that the -condemned were cudgeled and stoned, often to death, by their -fellow-soldiers. He also speaks of the punishment of entire -maniples by decimation. Under Scipio Aemilianus, 133, the -Roman who neglected duty was flogged with vine stocks, the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_252"></a>[252]</span> -foreigner with cudgels.<a id="FNanchor_1526" href="#Footnote_1526" class="fnanchor">[1526]</a> Cicero<a id="FNanchor_1527" href="#Footnote_1527" class="fnanchor">[1527]</a> intimates that in his own time -there was no appeal from the judgment of commanders; and -in fact it is impossible to understand how discipline could otherwise -be maintained. Evidence to the contrary is scant and uncertain. -The person against whom an accusation of desertion -was brought before the tribunes of the plebs in 138 seems to -have claimed to be a civilian, and on that ground appealed to -the tribunes. When proved guilty he was flogged and sold as a -slave, probably by a judgment of the military authorities.<a id="FNanchor_1528" href="#Footnote_1528" class="fnanchor">[1528]</a> In -122 Livius Drusus proposed to exempt Latin soldiers from flogging.<a id="FNanchor_1529" href="#Footnote_1529" class="fnanchor">[1529]</a> -While informing us that in 108 a commander had a right -to scourge and put to death a Latin official, Sallust<a id="FNanchor_1530" href="#Footnote_1530" class="fnanchor">[1530]</a> intimates -that he had less authority over a Roman. In the time of the -emperors, on the other hand, soldiers were subject to the death -penalty as in the time of Polybius.<a id="FNanchor_1531" href="#Footnote_1531" class="fnanchor">[1531]</a> All these circumstances -may be best explained by supposing that the third Porcian law -permitted the infliction of flogging and death on Roman soldiers -by the judgment only of a court-martial.<a id="FNanchor_1532" href="#Footnote_1532" class="fnanchor">[1532]</a> This difficult subject -is further complicated by the statement of Cicero<a id="FNanchor_1533" href="#Footnote_1533" class="fnanchor">[1533]</a> that the -three Porcian statutes introduced nothing new excepting by -way of penalty. Interpreted in the light of other information -given by various authors, including Cicero himself, these -statutes simply extended the right of appeal by adapting the -Valerian principle to new conditions, and substituted exile in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_253"></a>[253]</span> -place of scourging and death. In the relation between the accused -and the civil court the cry “civis Romanus sum” was -thereafter a sufficient protection from bodily injury.<a id="FNanchor_1534" href="#Footnote_1534" class="fnanchor">[1534]</a></p> - -<p>In the period to which the Porcian laws belong falls the accusation -of perduellio brought by the tribune P. Rutilius Rufus -against the censors C. Claudius and Ti. Sempronius Gracchus, -while they were in office, 169. The charge against Gracchus -was disregard of the tribunician auxilium, against his colleague -the interruption of a concilium plebis (quod contionem ab se -avocasset). The accused, foregoing the privilege of their magistracy, -consented to a trial, which came before the comitia -centuriata. Claudius narrowly escaped condemnation, whereupon -the case against Gracchus was dropped.<a id="FNanchor_1535" href="#Footnote_1535" class="fnanchor">[1535]</a></p> - -<p>The increasing number of special judiciary commissions and -the institution of standing courts limited more and more the -judicial activity of the centuriate assembly; but the tribunes -of the plebs kept alive the feeling of popular sovereignty in -this sphere by the occasional prosecution of some notorious -offender.<a id="FNanchor_1536" href="#Footnote_1536" class="fnanchor">[1536]</a> The continuance of the centuriate judicial function -is proved by the Cassian plebiscite of 137, which provided for -the use of the ballot in all iudicia populi excepting in perduellio,<a id="FNanchor_1537" href="#Footnote_1537" class="fnanchor">[1537]</a> -and by the lex Caelia, 108, which removed the exception.<a id="FNanchor_1538" href="#Footnote_1538" class="fnanchor">[1538]</a></p> - -<p>The limitation upon popular jurisdiction by the special court -is said to have begun as early as 414, when, according to Livy,<a id="FNanchor_1539" href="#Footnote_1539" class="fnanchor">[1539]</a> -a senatus consultum authorized the appointment of a quaestio -extraordinaria to discover and punish the murderers of M. Postumius, -a tribune of the soldiers with consular power. The -plebs, consulted as to the presidency of the court, left it to the -consuls. The instance may be an anticipation of later usage. -The case of wholesale poisoning by Roman matrons, 331, was -investigated, and a hundred and seventy matrons were condemned, -by an extraordinary court, which evidently owed its -existence to a senatus consultum without the coöperation of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_254"></a>[254]</span> -the people.<a id="FNanchor_1540" href="#Footnote_1540" class="fnanchor">[1540]</a> The same is true of the quaestio appointed by -the senate under dictatorial presidency in 314 to inquire into -charges of conspiracy of the leading men in certain allied -states. The dictator extended the inquiry to Rome, and after -his resignation the consuls continued the work. Livy’s account -of this affair assumes that the senate had full power to appoint -such commissions.<a id="FNanchor_1541" href="#Footnote_1541" class="fnanchor">[1541]</a> It did in fact possess the right without -the coöperation of the people to institute quaestiones extraordinariae -for the trial of allies or other aliens in crimes which -menaced the security of Rome. In the period between the -Hortensian legislation and the Gracchi in two recorded instances -it dared on its own responsibility to appoint such courts -for the trial of citizens.<a id="FNanchor_1542" href="#Footnote_1542" class="fnanchor">[1542]</a> These were usurpations; for as the -laws of appeal forbade the putting to death of a citizen unless -condemned by the people, a special court with capital jurisdiction -over citizens could not be constitutionally established -excepting with the consent of the assembly. This right of the -people was considered a legislative equivalent of their judicial -power, which the vast expansion of their state made it impossible -for them directly to exercise.<a id="FNanchor_1543" href="#Footnote_1543" class="fnanchor">[1543]</a> The court which tried and -condemned the insurgent garrison of Rhegium in 270 was -instituted accordingly by a plebiscite authorized by a senatus -consultum.<a id="FNanchor_1544" href="#Footnote_1544" class="fnanchor">[1544]</a> Most probably the court in this case was the -senate itself, just as in 210, when the plebiscite of L. Atilius -gave it full power to judge and punish the Campanians for -revolt.<a id="FNanchor_1545" href="#Footnote_1545" class="fnanchor">[1545]</a> The appointment of special courts for the detection -and punishment of aliens for illegal usurpation of the citizenship,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_255"></a>[255]</span> -which belonged originally to the senate, began in 177 to -be shared by the people.<a id="FNanchor_1546" href="#Footnote_1546" class="fnanchor">[1546]</a></p> - -<p>Similar in character to the special judiciary commission appointed -by the senate, but far more sweeping in effect, was the -senatus consultum ultimum (“videant consules, ne quid respublica -detrimenti capiat”), which in crises armed the consuls -with absolute power of life and death over the citizens.<a id="FNanchor_1547" href="#Footnote_1547" class="fnanchor">[1547]</a> By -these means the senate at its pleasure circumvented the laws of -appeal on the plea that the accused had ceased to be citizens.<a id="FNanchor_1548" href="#Footnote_1548" class="fnanchor">[1548]</a> -Against this abuse Ti. Gracchus planned a new law of appeal, -which he did not live to see enacted.<a id="FNanchor_1549" href="#Footnote_1549" class="fnanchor">[1549]</a> His own followers were -ruthlessly condemned without the privilege of appeal by an -extraordinary quaestio under P. Popillius Laenas, consul in 132.<a id="FNanchor_1550" href="#Footnote_1550" class="fnanchor">[1550]</a> -Probably a similar court was appointed after the revolt of -Fregellae.<a id="FNanchor_1551" href="#Footnote_1551" class="fnanchor">[1551]</a> To put an end to such circumvention of a well-established -right of the people, C. Gracchus in his first tribunate, -123, carrying into effect the plan of his brother, passed -the often mentioned lex Sempronia de provocatione, which absolutely -forbade capital sentence upon a citizen without an order<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_256"></a>[256]</span> -of the people.<a id="FNanchor_1552" href="#Footnote_1552" class="fnanchor">[1552]</a> The wording indicates that it was intended not -to do away with extraordinary courts and powers, but to allow -their establishment in no other way than by popular vote.<a id="FNanchor_1553" href="#Footnote_1553" class="fnanchor">[1553]</a> It -reiterated, too, the article of the Porcian statute which absolutely -forbade the infliction of the death penalty on civilians.<a id="FNanchor_1554" href="#Footnote_1554" class="fnanchor">[1554]</a> Far, -however, from transferring the jurisdiction of the assembly to -the quaestiones, the Sempronian law evidently confirmed the -right of the people by enacting that the tribunes might bring -the violator of that law before the comitia on a charge of perduellio, -for which it mentioned the penalty of interdict from -fire and water.<a id="FNanchor_1555" href="#Footnote_1555" class="fnanchor">[1555]</a> It held responsible not only the magistrate -charged with the extraordinary commission, but probably also -the senator who moved or supported the measure which called -it into being.<a id="FNanchor_1556" href="#Footnote_1556" class="fnanchor">[1556]</a> The entire Sempronian law was made retroactive, -so as to cover the case of Popillius, who thereupon fled into -exile to avoid trial. The interdict was accordingly decreed by -the tribes on the motion of Gaius.<a id="FNanchor_1557" href="#Footnote_1557" class="fnanchor">[1557]</a> Rupilius, the colleague of -Popillius, seems to have suffered a similar punishment.<a id="FNanchor_1558" href="#Footnote_1558" class="fnanchor">[1558]</a></p> - -<p>In 120 the tribune Decius prosecuted for perduellio L. Opimius, -who, as consul in 121, armed with the senatus consultum -ultimum, had caused the death of C. Gracchus. The accused -was acquitted.<a id="FNanchor_1559" href="#Footnote_1559" class="fnanchor">[1559]</a> Ihne<a id="FNanchor_1560" href="#Footnote_1560" class="fnanchor">[1560]</a> considers this prosecution to have been<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_257"></a>[257]</span> -instigated by the optimates in order to settle once for all and in -their favor the question as to the legality of special courts which -were called into being by an act of the senate alone. In that -case acquittal was a foregone conclusion. In 119 the popular -party met with greater success in the prosecution of C. Papirius -Carbo, whom it hated as a renegade.<a id="FNanchor_1561" href="#Footnote_1561" class="fnanchor">[1561]</a> The charge was probably -perduellio, though the details are unknown.<a id="FNanchor_1562" href="#Footnote_1562" class="fnanchor">[1562]</a></p> - -<p>The jurisdiction of the comitia in criminal cases suffered -more extensive curtailment from the standing courts,—quaestiones -perpetuae,—the first of which was established in 149 -for the trial of Roman officials accused of extortion—repetundae—committed -in the provinces or in Italy.<a id="FNanchor_1563" href="#Footnote_1563" class="fnanchor">[1563]</a> As the object -of the prosecutors was in the main the recovery of extorted -property, the court was essentially civil, and seemed, therefore, -to the Romans no infringement of popular rights; yet even -before Sulla the principle began to apply to distinctly criminal -cases.<a id="FNanchor_1564" href="#Footnote_1564" class="fnanchor">[1564]</a> Notwithstanding this development several accusations -were brought before the centuriate assembly in the period between -the Gracchi and Sulla.<a id="FNanchor_1565" href="#Footnote_1565" class="fnanchor">[1565]</a> The latter increased the number<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_258"></a>[258]</span> -of quaestiones to seven and brought all crimes within their -cognizance. The questorian jurisdiction in cases of murder -had already passed to the quaestio inter sicarios, established -between 149 and 141;<a id="FNanchor_1566" href="#Footnote_1566" class="fnanchor">[1566]</a> and now Sulla transferred cases of perduellio -from the jurisdiction of the tribunes to the quaestio -maiestatis.<a id="FNanchor_1567" href="#Footnote_1567" class="fnanchor">[1567]</a> Although restored to the tribunes in 70, it was -for the remainder of the republican period exercised by them -on special occasions only, for the quaestio maiestatis still existed. -With the establishment of the principate the jurisdiction of the -people finally vanished.<a id="FNanchor_1568" href="#Footnote_1568" class="fnanchor">[1568]</a></p> - -<p>The revolutionary character of the period after Sulla is -illustrated by the case of perduellio against C. Rabirius<a id="FNanchor_1569" href="#Footnote_1569" class="fnanchor">[1569]</a> -brought in 63 by a tribune of the plebs, T. Atius Labienus. -Rabirius was charged with complicity in the murder of L. -Appuleius Saturninus, the famous tribune of the year 100. -Labienus proposed and carried a plebiscite requiring the praetor -to appoint duumviri for the trial, whereas it was generally -held at the time that these officials should have been elected by -the people. It was also enacted, in violation of the Porcian and -Sempronian laws, that in case of conviction the accused should -be crucified on the Campus Martius. C. and L. Caesar, appointed -duumviri, brought the case before the comitia centuriata, -which were prevented from giving their verdict by the removal -of the flag from Janiculum.<a id="FNanchor_1570" href="#Footnote_1570" class="fnanchor">[1570]</a> The object of the trial was not to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_259"></a>[259]</span> -punish the guilty, but to discredit the senate, to which the -accused belonged.<a id="FNanchor_1571" href="#Footnote_1571" class="fnanchor">[1571]</a> The decline of the idea of popular sovereignty -is further indicated by the agrarian rogation of the -tribune P. Servilius Rullus, 63, an article of which, in violation -of the lex Valeria Horatia de provocatione, ordered the appointment -of decemviri agris adsignandis without appeal.<a id="FNanchor_1572" href="#Footnote_1572" class="fnanchor">[1572]</a></p> - -<p>The procedure was the same in all finable and capital -actions. In a case subject to appeal the magistrate, after a -preliminary inquiry (quaestio), summoned the people to contio -on the third day<a id="FNanchor_1573" href="#Footnote_1573" class="fnanchor">[1573]</a> for a thorough examination (anquisitio).<a id="FNanchor_1574" href="#Footnote_1574" class="fnanchor">[1574]</a> -The trumpeter blew his horn before the door of the accused, -and cited him to appear at daybreak in the place of assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1575" href="#Footnote_1575" class="fnanchor">[1575]</a> -Acting as accuser, the magistrate addressed the contio and -produced his witnesses. Then came the witnesses for the -defence, the statement of the accused, and the pleading of his -counsel. These proceedings filled three contiones separated -from one another by a day’s interval. At the end of the third -day’s session the magistrate acquitted the accused or condemned -him and fixed the penalty. In case of condemnation, -the accused if dissatisfied appealed. The magistrate then put -his sentence in the form of a rogation and set a date for the -comitia,<a id="FNanchor_1576" href="#Footnote_1576" class="fnanchor">[1576]</a> which could be held only after an interval of a trinum<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_260"></a>[260]</span> -nundinum,<a id="FNanchor_1577" href="#Footnote_1577" class="fnanchor">[1577]</a> unless the accused desired an earlier trial.<a id="FNanchor_1578" href="#Footnote_1578" class="fnanchor">[1578]</a> Some -scholars, however, hold the theory that a magistrate, recognizing -the limitation of his competence, might bring the case -directly to the comitia without the formality of a condemnation -and appeal.<a id="FNanchor_1579" href="#Footnote_1579" class="fnanchor">[1579]</a> The penalty proposed in the rogation was not -necessarily the same as at first announced; for the trial might -bring to light facts to mitigate or to aggravate the sentence. -The presentation of the case to the comitia by the magistrate -was termed the fourth accusation.<a id="FNanchor_1580" href="#Footnote_1580" class="fnanchor">[1580]</a> If anything prevented the -voting in the comitia, the accused was discharged,<a id="FNanchor_1581" href="#Footnote_1581" class="fnanchor">[1581]</a> and could -not be legally brought to trial again for the same offence excepting -under a different form of action.<a id="FNanchor_1582" href="#Footnote_1582" class="fnanchor">[1582]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Schulze, C. F., <i>Volksversammlungen der Römer</i>, 307-40; Hüllmann, -K. D., <i>Staatsrecht des Altertums</i>, 334-54; Huschke, Ph. E., <i>Verfassung des -Königs Servius Tullius</i>, chs. vii, xi; Wöniger, A. T., <i>Sacralsystem und das -Provocationsverfahren der Römer</i>; Peter, C., <i>Epochen der Verfassungsgeschichte -der röm. Republik, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Centuriatcomitien -und der mit diesen vorgegangenen Veränderungen; Studien zur -röm. Geschichte</i>, 54 ff.; Schwegler, A., <i>Röm. Geschichte</i>, see index, s. Centuriatcomitien; -Ihne, W., <i>History of Rome</i>, iv. 10 ff.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsrecht</i>, iii. 300 ff.; <i>Röm. Strafrecht</i>, 151-74, 473-8, 632-5; Mommsen -and others, <i>Zum ältesten Strafrecht der Kulturvölker</i>, especially 31-51 by -H. F. Hitzig; Lange, L., <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, ii. 516-33, 541-65, 597-613, see -also indices of vols. i-iii, s. v.; Madvig, J. N., <i>Verfassung und Verwaltung -des röm. Staates</i>, i. 226-34; Herzog, E., <i>Geschichte und System der röm. -Staatsverfassung</i>, i. 1068-1119, see also index, s. v.; Willems, P., <i>Droit -public Romain</i>, 159 f., 172, 176 ff.; Mispoulet, J. B., <i>Institutions politiques des<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_261"></a>[261]</span> -Romaines</i>, i. 203-7; <i>Études d’institutions Romaines</i>, 63-6; Liebenam, W., -<i>Comitia</i> II, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 686-700; Humbert, G. (s. -<i>Comitia</i>), in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 1378 f.; Voigt, M., <i>XII Tafeln</i>, -i. 673-82; ii. 781-845; Karlowa, O., <i>Röm. Rechtsgeschichte</i>, i. 409; Girard, -P. F., <i>Histoire de l’organisation judiciaire des Romains</i>, i. 104-59; Usener, H., -<i>Italische Volksjustiz</i>, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> lvi (1901). 1 ff.; Müller, A., <i>Strafjustiz -im röm. Heere</i>, in <i>N. Jahrb. f. kl. Altertum</i>, xvii (1906). 550-77; -Vassis, Sp., <i>Leges valeriae de provocatione</i>, in <i>Athena</i>, xvii (1905). 160-5; -Küspert, O., <i>Ueber die Bedeutung und Gebrauch des Wortes ‘Caput’ im -älteren Latein</i>; Dupond, A., <i>De la constitution et des magistratures Romaines -sous la république</i>, 67-74; Moye, M., <i>Élections politiques sous la république -Romaine</i>; Hallays, A., <i>Comices à Rome</i>, ch. ii; Morlot, E., <i>Comices électoraux</i>, -ch. vi; Kappeyne van de Coppello, J., <i>Comitien</i>, 105-7; Borgeaud, C., -<i>Histoire du plébiscite</i>, 45-57; Pantaleoni, D., <i>Della auctoritas patrum nell’ -antica Roma</i>; Greenidge, A. H. J., <i>Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time</i>, see -index, s. Centuriata Comitia, Lex, Provocatio, etc.; <i>Roman Public Life</i>, 75, -252 f., 255; Abbott, F. F., <i>Roman Political Institutions</i>, 253-9; Wirz, H., -<i>Perduellionsprocess des C. Rabirius</i>, in <i>Jahrb. f. Philol.</i> xxv (1879). 177-201; -Mirabelli, G., <i>Di un processo politico avvenuto negli ultimi tempi della republica -Romana</i>; Schulthess, O., <i>Der Process des C. Rabirius vom Jahre -63 v. Chr.</i>; Baron, in <i>Berl. Philol. Woch.</i> 1893. 658-60.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_262"></a>[262]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XII">CHAPTER XII<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE COMITIA TRIBUTA AND THE RISE OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY<br /> -<span class="smcap">To the Year 449</span></span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>In the belief of the Romans the tribunes of the plebs, originally -two, were instituted in 494 as a concession to the seceding -commons to win them back to the state.<a id="FNanchor_1583" href="#Footnote_1583" class="fnanchor">[1583]</a> The historical -truth of the first secession need not be discussed here; but -there is no good ground for rejecting the view of the ancients -either that the tribunate of the plebs owed its existence to a -revolution or that it began at as early a date. According to -our sources the plebeian tribunes, hence we may infer also the -aediles, were for a time elected, and other business affecting -the interests of the common people was transacted, in comitia -curiata composed potentially of all the citizens.<a id="FNanchor_1584" href="#Footnote_1584" class="fnanchor">[1584]</a> The change -in the form of organization in 471, from curiate to tribal, will -be considered below. The president of the comitia which<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_263"></a>[263]</span> -elected the first plebeian tribunes was necessarily a patrician -magistrate,<a id="FNanchor_1585" href="#Footnote_1585" class="fnanchor">[1585]</a> probably the pontifex maximus;<a id="FNanchor_1586" href="#Footnote_1586" class="fnanchor">[1586]</a> thereafter, with -the exception of the comitia for the election of the first plebeian -officials after the overthrow of the decemvirs, tribunes of the -plebs presided not only for elections but also for judicial business -and for the enactment of plebiscites (plebi scita).</p> - -<p>The object of the office of tribune was the protection of individual -citizens, plebeian and patrician alike,<a id="FNanchor_1587" href="#Footnote_1587" class="fnanchor">[1587]</a> from oppression; and -the means was the auxilium (official aid),<a id="FNanchor_1588" href="#Footnote_1588" class="fnanchor">[1588]</a> which could be rendered -in no other way than by personal contact; hence the law prohibiting -a tribune from being absent over night from the city<a id="FNanchor_1589" href="#Footnote_1589" class="fnanchor">[1589]</a> and requiring -him to leave the door of his house open during the night.<a id="FNanchor_1590" href="#Footnote_1590" class="fnanchor">[1590]</a> -In the further interest of the citizens the tribunes had the unrestricted -right to call the plebs to a contio and address them at -any time and on any subject, to form them when so assembled -into voting groups, at first curiae and after 471, tribes, and to -take their votes on proposals affecting plebeian interests, plebiscites -being from the beginning binding on the plebeian body -in so far as they harmonized with the laws of the state.<a id="FNanchor_1591" href="#Footnote_1591" class="fnanchor">[1591]</a></p> - -<p>These were the two original functions from which the vast -powers of the later tribunes gradually developed. As strictly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_264"></a>[264]</span> -plebeian officials they had no authority to summon patricians, -to exclude them from the place of assembly,<a id="FNanchor_1592" href="#Footnote_1592" class="fnanchor">[1592]</a> or to condemn -them judicially.<a id="FNanchor_1593" href="#Footnote_1593" class="fnanchor">[1593]</a> It follows that their alleged prosecutions of -past consuls for maladministration<a id="FNanchor_1594" href="#Footnote_1594" class="fnanchor">[1594]</a> are fictions<a id="FNanchor_1595" href="#Footnote_1595" class="fnanchor">[1595]</a>—an anticipation -of their jurisdiction at a later age. Directly they possessed -no power of judgment or of coercion;<a id="FNanchor_1596" href="#Footnote_1596" class="fnanchor">[1596]</a> but for the enforcement -of the auxilium and of the ius agendi cum plebe their persons -were made sacred—sacro sancti—by an oath which the plebs -swore at the time they instituted the office,<a id="FNanchor_1597" href="#Footnote_1597" class="fnanchor">[1597]</a> namely that any -one who killed a tribune or aedile of the plebs or did him -bodily harm, or who commanded another to inflict harm or death -upon him might as a person devoted to Jupiter be killed with -impunity, and his property be confiscated.<a id="FNanchor_1598" href="#Footnote_1598" class="fnanchor">[1598]</a> The avenger was -necessarily either a private plebeian or an official of the plebs.<a id="FNanchor_1599" href="#Footnote_1599" class="fnanchor">[1599]</a> -The formal act which rendered the tribunes sacred was termed -a lex sacrata. The essence of such a law is (1) that it was -sworn to by the community—in this instance by the community<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_265"></a>[265]</span> -of plebs, (2) that the offender against it became a homo sacer -and could be put to death with impunity.<a id="FNanchor_1600" href="#Footnote_1600" class="fnanchor">[1600]</a> This idea of sanctity -the plebeians may have derived partly from the Greek asylum;<a id="FNanchor_1601" href="#Footnote_1601" class="fnanchor">[1601]</a> -but it seems also to have been influenced by the condition -of ambassadors, hence the later, ill-founded conception of the -plebs as a state, and of the plebeian officials and other institutions -as based on a treaty ratified with fetial ceremonies between -the patrician government and the seceding plebs.<a id="FNanchor_1602" href="#Footnote_1602" class="fnanchor">[1602]</a> Though -termed lex sacrata because it was passed and sworn to in the -community, as it were, of the plebs, like any plebiscite of this -period the resolution had no legal validity for the state or for -the patricians. Under compulsion, however, the government -yielded to the demands of the plebeians without formally acknowledging -the sanctity of their officials; so that the patricians, -by asserting that Roman law did not recognize an inviolability -founded purely on religion,<a id="FNanchor_1603" href="#Footnote_1603" class="fnanchor">[1603]</a> could afterward deny that -the tribunes were really sacrosanct. Till the enactment of the -Valerian-Horatian laws of 449,<a id="FNanchor_1604" href="#Footnote_1604" class="fnanchor">[1604]</a> accordingly, the inviolability of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_266"></a>[266]</span> -the tribunes existed in so far only as the plebeians were in a -position to maintain it by holding over their opponents and over -the government the threat of violence and revolution. That -under the circumstances domestic peace was on the whole preserved -should be credited to the orderly character of the great -mass of citizens.</p> - -<p>Applied to the holding of contiones and comitia, this inviolability -protected the presiding tribune from interruption, contradiction, -and every disturbance. The principle was afterward -extended to verbal abuse anywhere publicly indulged in.<a id="FNanchor_1605" href="#Footnote_1605" class="fnanchor">[1605]</a> Even -if a man showed disrespect by not stepping out of the way of a -tribune who was passing along the street, he was liable to the -death penalty.<a id="FNanchor_1606" href="#Footnote_1606" class="fnanchor">[1606]</a> Under normal conditions, however, the rigorous -execution of this lex sacrata could not be thought of; in -place of outlawing the offender against his person the tribune -was ordinarily willing to impose a fine upon him, from which an -appeal might be made to the plebeian assembly; or in cases of -violence to his person, he might resort to capital prosecution, -which was likewise appealable. These principles were formulated -in an alleged Icilian plebiscite of the year 492.<a id="FNanchor_1607" href="#Footnote_1607" class="fnanchor">[1607]</a> From -what has just been said it is clear that the tribune’s coercive<a id="FNanchor_1608" href="#Footnote_1608" class="fnanchor">[1608]</a> -and judicial functions resulted, not from usurpation as has often -been asserted,<a id="FNanchor_1609" href="#Footnote_1609" class="fnanchor">[1609]</a> but from a mitigation of the harsh lex sacrata. -In a word, the ultimate basis of tribunician authority was the -revolutionary power of the plebs, upon which rested the sanctity<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_267"></a>[267]</span> -of the tribunes, and thereon their jurisdiction. Of the judicial -activity attributed by the annalists to the plebeian officials in the -period before the decemvirs we do not know how much is mythical; -but it is safe to say that all the capital cases, probably all -the cases without qualification, which they actually settled as -judges were submitted to by the patrician government for the -sake of peace, without being accepted as legal.</p> - -<p>To the third year of the tribunate, 491, is assigned the first -mentioned exercise of tribunician jurisdiction. C. Marcius Coriolanus, -the accused, had advocated in the senate the abolition -of the tribunician office,<a id="FNanchor_1610" href="#Footnote_1610" class="fnanchor">[1610]</a> and had done personal violence to the -aediles, in this way rendering himself liable to the penalty of -the lex sacrata on which rested the sanctity of the plebeian officials. -Instead of declaring him a homo sacer, a tribune brought -him to trial before the tribes, which condemned him by a narrow -majority.<a id="FNanchor_1611" href="#Footnote_1611" class="fnanchor">[1611]</a> The story is now regarded by all scholars as a myth. -The vote by tribes at this early time is either exceptional or -more likely an anticipation of later usage.<a id="FNanchor_1612" href="#Footnote_1612" class="fnanchor">[1612]</a></p> - -<p>In accordance with the Icilian plebiscite a capital charge is -said to have been brought by a tribune of the plebs against -Kaeso Quinctius on the ground that he had repeatedly driven -the tribunes from the Forum and had dispersed their assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1613" href="#Footnote_1613" class="fnanchor">[1613]</a> -After providing sureties the accused went into exile,<a id="FNanchor_1614" href="#Footnote_1614" class="fnanchor">[1614]</a> and the -sentence of banishment was passed—in Cicero’s opinion by the -comitia centuriata, in Livy’s by the tribal comitia of plebs, 461.<a id="FNanchor_1615" href="#Footnote_1615" class="fnanchor">[1615]</a> -Another case prior to the decemvirate is recorded for the year -455. Representatives of three illustrious patrician families were -charged with having disturbed an assembly under tribunician -presidency. Their estates were forfeited to Ceres.<a id="FNanchor_1616" href="#Footnote_1616" class="fnanchor">[1616]</a> Naturally<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_268"></a>[268]</span> -under this arrangement between the plebs and the government -there was room for much misunderstanding: the leaders of the -plebs stretched their claims to the uttermost; and the patricians, -after granting the radical concession, endeavored to recall as -much of it as possible. They plausibly urged that while the sacrosanctitas, -so far as it existed,<a id="FNanchor_1617" href="#Footnote_1617" class="fnanchor">[1617]</a> might protect the person of the -tribune, it gave him no authority over a patrician;<a id="FNanchor_1618" href="#Footnote_1618" class="fnanchor">[1618]</a> and their position -as the sole holders of political power and the sole repositories -of law and usage enabled them before the decemviral legislation -by stubborn, skilful perseverance in the details of political -warfare almost to throw the tribunician sanctity into oblivion.<a id="FNanchor_1619" href="#Footnote_1619" class="fnanchor">[1619]</a> -Livy tells us that in the assembly appointed for the trial of the -past consuls L. Furius and C. Manlius, the accusing tribune -failed to appear, and was found murdered in his home; and the -historian gives us to understand that the crime was the result of -a private conference among the patricians.<a id="FNanchor_1620" href="#Footnote_1620" class="fnanchor">[1620]</a> Dio Cassius<a id="FNanchor_1621" href="#Footnote_1621" class="fnanchor">[1621]</a> states -that they secretly slew a number of the boldest spirits among -the plebeians. Though these stories are mythical, they reflect at -least the opinion of the historians that in this early period the -sanctity of the tribune counted for little. If it failed to protect -his person, it could have given him no great degree of recognized -judicial competence. Under these circumstances we -should not expect to find the tribunes often bringing the power -of their questioned sanctity into actual use in the early years of -their existence; but that before the decemvirate they exercised -jurisdiction to some extent even in capital cases, which were appealed -to the assembly under their presidency, is proved by a -law of the Twelve Tables, which, to remedy what the legislators -must have considered an abuse, provided that accusations affecting -the caput of a citizen should be brought only before the -comitiatus maximus—evidently the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_1622" href="#Footnote_1622" class="fnanchor">[1622]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_269"></a>[269]</span></p> - -<p>If the tribunes presumed to condemn men to death, they certainly -would not hesitate to fine them for lighter offences. For -checking the power of the magistrates to levy unlimited fines -the consuls of 454, A. Aternius and Sp. Tarpeius, passed -through the comitia centuriata a law which set the maximum -fine to be levied by a magistrate on an individual in any one -day at thirty cattle and two sheep, the minimum being a single -sheep. In case he exceeded the former amount, an appeal -could be made to the assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1623" href="#Footnote_1623" class="fnanchor">[1623]</a> In the opinion of Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1624" href="#Footnote_1624" class="fnanchor">[1624]</a> -this law was interpreted to apply to all magistrates, including -those of the plebs, and was made accordingly the basis of the -tribunician jurisdiction in finable offences. These consequences -seem to have been drawn from the statute, although the proposers -may not have so intended it.<a id="FNanchor_1625" href="#Footnote_1625" class="fnanchor">[1625]</a></p> - -<p>Sufficient evidence has now been offered that before the -decemviral legislation the plebeian tribunes exercised, on the -basis of their sanctity, a vague jurisdiction in both finable and -capital cases, occasionally submitted to by the patrician government -though probably not recognized by it as just or constitutional. -For the same period their method of agitation by the -obstruction of the levy,<a id="FNanchor_1626" href="#Footnote_1626" class="fnanchor">[1626]</a> by haranguing the people in contiones,<a id="FNanchor_1627" href="#Footnote_1627" class="fnanchor">[1627]</a> -and occasionally by sedition, proves clearly the lack of legislative -power through the assembly over which they presided, as -well as their lack of veto on the acts of the government. With -reference to legislation the course of the discussion in the -present and following chapters will make it evident that only -by a provision of the Hortensian statute did plebiscites become -unconditionally binding on the whole people. Although from -the beginning a tribune, as a member of a collegial office,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_270"></a>[270]</span> -could intercede against the act of a colleague, he had in this -period no legal right of the kind against the government; for -had he now possessed it, as he did at a later age, he would have -felt no need of obstructing the levy—a relatively slow, clumsy -method of political warfare. It is to be noticed further that -the power of veto of the tribunes, after it had been acquired, -rested upon their jurisdiction. If a magistrate persisted in -ignoring their prohibition, his act remained valid but he rendered -himself liable to tribunician prosecution.<a id="FNanchor_1628" href="#Footnote_1628" class="fnanchor">[1628]</a> Necessarily, -then, as long as the tribunes lacked judicial competence (till -the Valerian-Horatian legislation, 449) they lacked the veto -against governmental action; as long as their judicial competence -depended upon the will of the government (probably till -the Hortensian legislation, 287), their veto on the government -must have been correspondingly limited. Finally it was not -till tribunician obstruction of the levy, sedition, and secession -disappear (that is, with the enactment of the Hortensian statute) -that we have a right to assume the existence of an unrestricted -tribunician veto.<a id="FNanchor_1629" href="#Footnote_1629" class="fnanchor">[1629]</a> The method of the tribunes in the pre-decemviral -period was, by the means above indicated, to force a -proposed measure upon the patrician magistrates, and to compel -them to bring it before the centuriate assembly in regular -form.<a id="FNanchor_1630" href="#Footnote_1630" class="fnanchor">[1630]</a></p> - -<p>In view of the circumstances that passed bills alone were -recorded and hence could be known to posterity, we may reject -as unauthentic all the alleged proposals of agrarian laws of -this period,<a id="FNanchor_1631" href="#Footnote_1631" class="fnanchor">[1631]</a> which however may not have been free from agitation -of the kind.</p> - -<p>A law of the year 471 gave the tribunician assembly a tribal -organization. This measure, brought about by the agitation of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_271"></a>[271]</span> -Publilius Volero, tribune of the plebs of that year,<a id="FNanchor_1632" href="#Footnote_1632" class="fnanchor">[1632]</a> must, for -the reason above mentioned, have been an act of the comitia -centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_1633" href="#Footnote_1633" class="fnanchor">[1633]</a> The motive given by Livy was the desire of the -tribunes to free themselves from the influence which the patricians -through the votes of their clients exercised on the assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1634" href="#Footnote_1634" class="fnanchor">[1634]</a> -The curiae contained all the citizens,<a id="FNanchor_1635" href="#Footnote_1635" class="fnanchor">[1635]</a> the tribes none but -the landowners. The tribal organization, therefore, excluded -not all the clients but those only, together with any other citizens, -who were landless.<a id="FNanchor_1636" href="#Footnote_1636" class="fnanchor">[1636]</a> Probably in other ways the patricians -had greater control of the curiate than of the tribal assemblies, -although it is impossible to believe with Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1637" href="#Footnote_1637" class="fnanchor">[1637]</a> that the -essence of the change from the curiate to the tribal comitia consisted -in the elimination of auspical influence. That the law -forbade the patricians to take part in tribunician assemblies, as -Zonaras<a id="FNanchor_1638" href="#Footnote_1638" class="fnanchor">[1638]</a> imagines, is not probable, for it gave the tribune no -new authority over the patricians; he had power neither to -summon them to his assembly nor to expel them from it.<a id="FNanchor_1639" href="#Footnote_1639" class="fnanchor">[1639]</a> In -fact we have evidence of the presence of patricians in tribunician -assemblies after this date.<a id="FNanchor_1640" href="#Footnote_1640" class="fnanchor">[1640]</a> The so-called law of Publilius -Volero, now under discussion, was confused by the sources with -the Publilian law of 339, some of the provisions of the later act -being uncritically assigned to the earlier.<a id="FNanchor_1641" href="#Footnote_1641" class="fnanchor">[1641]</a></p> - -<p>The statute of 471 imparted to the tribunician assembly no -new function. Although in mentioning the bill Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1642" href="#Footnote_1642" class="fnanchor">[1642]</a> -includes a proposal to grant the assembly legislative power,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_272"></a>[272]</span> -when he comes to speak of the statute as actually passed, he -refers only to its provisions for the election of plebeian tribunes -and aediles by the tribes, herein agreeing with Livy and other -authorities.<a id="FNanchor_1643" href="#Footnote_1643" class="fnanchor">[1643]</a></p> - -<p>In the same year four tribunes of the plebs were elected for -the first time.<a id="FNanchor_1644" href="#Footnote_1644" class="fnanchor">[1644]</a> The increase was probably effected by an article -of the statute under discussion.</p> - -<p>Till after the decemviral legislation the comitia tributa,<a id="FNanchor_1645" href="#Footnote_1645" class="fnanchor">[1645]</a> -brought into existence by the statute of 471, was restricted, as -had been the tribunician comitia curiata, to the transaction of -purely plebeian business. In the records of this period we find -a continuance of apocryphal agrarian bills<a id="FNanchor_1646" href="#Footnote_1646" class="fnanchor">[1646]</a> and condemnations -of retired magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_1647" href="#Footnote_1647" class="fnanchor">[1647]</a> In reality the only political weapon of -the tribunes, aside from general agitation, continued to be the -obstruction of the levy,<a id="FNanchor_1648" href="#Footnote_1648" class="fnanchor">[1648]</a> as is proved by their increase in -number to ten.<a id="FNanchor_1649" href="#Footnote_1649" class="fnanchor">[1649]</a> The only agrarian law of the period, the -so-called lex Icilia for the division of the Aventine among the -people, was passed by the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_1650" href="#Footnote_1650" class="fnanchor">[1650]</a> The very circumstance -that this mild concession to the plebs was couched<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_273"></a>[273]</span> -in a lex sacrata<a id="FNanchor_1651" href="#Footnote_1651" class="fnanchor">[1651]</a> shows how little faith the commons had in the -government.<a id="FNanchor_1652" href="#Footnote_1652" class="fnanchor">[1652]</a></p> - -<p>During this period the supreme power was the senate. -Shortly after the fall of the kings it provided for the purchase -of corn among neighboring states in a time of scarcity, made a -state monopoly of salt in the interest of the poor, freed the plebs -from port dues and tributum, thereby placing the whole burden -of these taxes on the wealthy.<a id="FNanchor_1653" href="#Footnote_1653" class="fnanchor">[1653]</a> These acts imply legislative as -well as administrative competence. Foreign affairs,<a id="FNanchor_1654" href="#Footnote_1654" class="fnanchor">[1654]</a> including -the decision of war and peace, were in its hands. It resolved -not to restore the property of the Tarquins,<a id="FNanchor_1655" href="#Footnote_1655" class="fnanchor">[1655]</a> decreed triumphs -to victorious generals,<a id="FNanchor_1656" href="#Footnote_1656" class="fnanchor">[1656]</a> the celebration of games,<a id="FNanchor_1657" href="#Footnote_1657" class="fnanchor">[1657]</a> the expulsion -of the Volscians from the city in the time of a festival,<a id="FNanchor_1658" href="#Footnote_1658" class="fnanchor">[1658]</a> controlled -the magistrates, including the plebeian tribunate, by -means of the dictatorship,<a id="FNanchor_1659" href="#Footnote_1659" class="fnanchor">[1659]</a> or clothed the consuls with absolute -authority.<a id="FNanchor_1660" href="#Footnote_1660" class="fnanchor">[1660]</a> Little room was left for the activity of the assemblies.</p> - -<p>Notwithstanding these unfavorable conditions the tribunes of -the plebs through obstruction of the levy and through their harangues -in contiones<a id="FNanchor_1661" href="#Footnote_1661" class="fnanchor">[1661]</a> were chiefly instrumental in bringing about -the institution of the decemviri legibus scribundis. Actual votes -in tribunician comitia on proposals looking to that end<a id="FNanchor_1662" href="#Footnote_1662" class="fnanchor">[1662]</a> could -have had no more than moral weight. Under popular pressure -the consul Sestius, 452, referred the question to the senate,<a id="FNanchor_1663" href="#Footnote_1663" class="fnanchor">[1663]</a> and -the bill for their institution was passed by comitia, doubtless -of the centuries. The only valid activity, therefore, of the tribal -assembly prior to the decemviral legislation, so far as is known, -was the enactment of plebiscites, which lacked the force of law, -the election of plebeian officials,<a id="FNanchor_1664" href="#Footnote_1664" class="fnanchor">[1664]</a> and the quasi-judicial decision<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_274"></a>[274]</span> -of cases appealed to it by those who were accused of violating -the tribunician sanctity.<a id="FNanchor_1665" href="#Footnote_1665" class="fnanchor">[1665]</a></p> - -<p>An epoch was made in the history of the tribunate and of the -tribal assembly by the consulship of Valerius and Horatius, 449, -who proposed and carried a centuriate law<a id="FNanchor_1666" href="#Footnote_1666" class="fnanchor">[1666]</a> which gave these -institutions a legal basis. The article which logically first claims -our attention provided that any one who injured the tribunes of -the plebs, the aediles, or the decemviral judges should be -devoted to Jupiter, and his property should be forfeit to the -temple of Ceres, Liber, and Libera.<a id="FNanchor_1667" href="#Footnote_1667" class="fnanchor">[1667]</a> According to Livy,<a id="FNanchor_1668" href="#Footnote_1668" class="fnanchor">[1668]</a> who -here represents the tribunician point of view, the original lex -sacrata, passed on the Sacred Mount, was first renewed with appropriate -ceremonies, thus reëstablishing the religious inviolability -of the plebeian officials, whom then the article of the -Valerian-Horatian statute here mentioned rendered legally inviolable. -The constitutional relation of these two ideas was -difficult even for the Romans to determine. Certain jurists, -controverting the tribunician interpretation, asserted that this law -made no person sacrosanct, but merely threatened with capital -punishment any one who injured the officials concerned, clothing -them thus in the same kind of inviolability as that which -protected the ordinary magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_1669" href="#Footnote_1669" class="fnanchor">[1669]</a> The object, according to -this view, was not only to eliminate from the government the -anomaly of a power sanctioned by religion only,<a id="FNanchor_1670" href="#Footnote_1670" class="fnanchor">[1670]</a> but also to -convert the plebeian officials into state officials. The leaders of -the plebs gladly accepted the new position tendered them, without -being willing however to withdraw from the old. Henceforth -we have to deal, accordingly, with a group of legally recognized -public functionaries who effectively claimed a religious -inviolability hard to reconcile with the constitution, in which -they were in time to make for themselves a disproportionate -place.</p> - -<p>The second article of the Valerian-Horatian statute was to the -effect that “whatever the plebs ordered in their tribal assembly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_275"></a>[275]</span> -should be valid for the people”;<a id="FNanchor_1671" href="#Footnote_1671" class="fnanchor">[1671]</a> so that henceforth plebiscites, -when passed under the conditions hereafter specified, were the -equivalent of leges, as they were often so called. It is so similar -to a provision of the later Publilian and of the still later -Hortensian statute that we should incline to reject it as an anticipation -of the one or the other, were it not for the fact that -under it important plebi scita, as the Canuleian, the Licinian-Sextian, -and the Genucian, were passed.<a id="FNanchor_1672" href="#Footnote_1672" class="fnanchor">[1672]</a> We must accept it, -then, as historical, and adapt our interpretation to the few -known facts in the case.</p> - -<p>Notwithstanding the use of the word plebs to designate the -tribal gathering under tribunician presidency, there is no valid -reason for supposing that the Valerian-Horatian law altered its -composition—that the patricians were now excluded.<a id="FNanchor_1673" href="#Footnote_1673" class="fnanchor">[1673]</a> Dionysius<a id="FNanchor_1674" href="#Footnote_1674" class="fnanchor">[1674]</a> -is clearly of the opinion that they participated in this form -of comitia both before and after the enactment of the statute -under consideration; and Livy<a id="FNanchor_1675" href="#Footnote_1675" class="fnanchor">[1675]</a> thinks of them as still present -in the tribunician meetings as late as the struggle for the Licinian-Sextian -laws. The problem must be considered in connection -with the development of the voting function of the assembly. -Primitively the leaders (nobles) in council decided upon a measure, -which they then submitted to the people to be accepted<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_276"></a>[276]</span> -with clamor and din.<a id="FNanchor_1676" href="#Footnote_1676" class="fnanchor">[1676]</a> Although the acclamation was essentially -an act of the masses, nothing forbade the nobles to join -in the shouting. Doubtless in the tribal assemblies the expression -of opinion within the tribe continued for a time to be by -acclamation.<a id="FNanchor_1677" href="#Footnote_1677" class="fnanchor">[1677]</a> As long as this primitive condition existed, a distinction -could not be drawn between the right to be present and -the right to join in the decision of questions brought before the -comitia. Undoubtedly the custom of voting by heads within -the tribe was an imitation of a usage adopted by the comitia -centuriata some time after the institution of the latter;<a id="FNanchor_1678" href="#Footnote_1678" class="fnanchor">[1678]</a> hence -we could not reasonably assume its use by the tribes so early -as the pre-decemviral period. The question therefore as to -whether the patricians, who were certainly present in meetings -of the tribes, enjoyed the right of voting in them could not have -arisen till after the decemviral legislation. The plebeians had -found it impossible by their own powers to exclude from their -assembly the landless clients, who were inferior to themselves.<a id="FNanchor_1679" href="#Footnote_1679" class="fnanchor">[1679]</a> -Much less could they exclude the nobles. If the presiding tribune -could not prevent their remaining after the people had -been formed into voting groups, he could not prevent their -voting. As the patricians, equally with the plebeians, belonged -to the tribes, the former, being men of superior privilege, could -not lawfully be debarred from meetings of their associations; -and if they chose to attend, it was not for the tribunes of the -plebs to decide as to the law in the matter. The word plebs in -the statute is susceptible of an easy explanation. As the comitia -curiata and comitia centuriata, under patrician presidents, had -from the beginning been termed populus, nothing could be more -natural than that from the time an assembly convened under -plebeian presidency for plebeian objects, the latter should by -way of distinction be termed plebs, even though the few patricians -were included. Ordinarily the plebeians must have -welcomed patricians to their assemblies, as the presence of -magistrates and senators and their sons added dignity and -weight to the proceedings. But when the patricians used all -their superior influence in both lawful and unlawful ways to -block a popular measure, the tribunes, naturally wishing then<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_277"></a>[277]</span> -to exclude them, attempted to establish the principle that tribunician -assemblies were exclusively plebeian. This question was -settled by the law of Publilius Philo, 339.<a id="FNanchor_1680" href="#Footnote_1680" class="fnanchor">[1680]</a></p> - -<p>This article of the Valerian-Horatian statute was a concession -extorted from the patrician government by the strongest -pressure, perhaps by a plebeian secession. The actual advantage -which it brought to the plebs was minimized, however, -by the provision that the previous consent of the senate was -essential to the validity of bills brought before the tribunician -assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1681" href="#Footnote_1681" class="fnanchor">[1681]</a> The patricians could urge in support of this arrangement -that as their magistrates according to long established -custom always obtained the previous consent of the -senate (senatus consultum) to measures brought before any -assembly, and were absolutely required to obtain senatorial -sanction (patrum auctoritas) for curiate and centuriate laws and -elections,<a id="FNanchor_1682" href="#Footnote_1682" class="fnanchor">[1682]</a> the tribunes, who were free from the trammels of -the sanction, should be legally compelled to consult the senate -before bringing a measure into their assemblies, especially as -their legislation was in a field hitherto monopolized by the -patrician magistrates and the senate. Although the tribunes of -the plebs would have preferred to understand by the term -plebiscite all that it had meant before—the unconditioned -resolution of the tribal assembly under their presidency—they -must have felt satisfied for the time being with the great gain -they had made, however strenuous they afterward became to -relieve themselves of senatorial control. This condition on the -validity of the plebiscite is not expressly mentioned by Livy in -connection with the Valerian-Horatian legislation, but is assumed -by the sources for the following period.<a id="FNanchor_1683" href="#Footnote_1683" class="fnanchor">[1683]</a> The same<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_278"></a>[278]</span> -thing is clearly implied, too, in the long series of political -struggles which came after the enactment of the Valerian-Horatian -statute.<a id="FNanchor_1684" href="#Footnote_1684" class="fnanchor">[1684]</a> Had the tribunes been free to legislate without -interference on the part of the senate, they would have -been in a position easily to complete the social and political -equalization of the orders, and by one sweeping reform law -to place themselves and their constituents in the condition -reached by an almost uninterrupted conflict of a hundred and -sixty years (449-287).<a id="FNanchor_1685" href="#Footnote_1685" class="fnanchor">[1685]</a></p> - -<p>It was in accordance with this regulation that another article -of the Valerian-Horatian statute directed the aediles of the plebs -to preserve the senatus consulta in the temple of Ceres.<a id="FNanchor_1686" href="#Footnote_1686" class="fnanchor">[1686]</a> We -cannot look upon these officials as keepers of the senatorial<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_279"></a>[279]</span> -archives of that time,<a id="FNanchor_1687" href="#Footnote_1687" class="fnanchor">[1687]</a> and hence must conclude that the documents -in their charge were those decrees which authorized the -presentation of tribunician bills, for with those alone the plebeians -were directly concerned.</p> - -<p>The patricians expected to find a further safeguard in the -tribunician veto, which could be directed against a colleague.<a id="FNanchor_1688" href="#Footnote_1688" class="fnanchor">[1688]</a> -From the fact, however, that the tribunes continued to resort to -the clumsy method of obstructing the levy, and afterward also of -impeding the collection of the tributum,<a id="FNanchor_1689" href="#Footnote_1689" class="fnanchor">[1689]</a> we must infer that as -yet their intercession did not prevail against a patrician magistrate.<a id="FNanchor_1690" href="#Footnote_1690" class="fnanchor">[1690]</a> -Various popular seditions, too, are mentioned for the -same period (449-287).<a id="FNanchor_1691" href="#Footnote_1691" class="fnanchor">[1691]</a> That one which led to the Hortensian -legislation is historical, and it is hardly possible that all the -others are fictions.</p> - -<p>Another conservative check was the application of oblative -auspices to the plebeian assembly.<a id="FNanchor_1692" href="#Footnote_1692" class="fnanchor">[1692]</a> Livy<a id="FNanchor_1693" href="#Footnote_1693" class="fnanchor">[1693]</a> reports that in 293<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_280"></a>[280]</span> -the tribunes resigned because of a faulty election, held probably -in violation of oblativa. In general, however, the plebeian -gathering was relatively free from religious control till after the -enactment of the Aelian and Fufian laws (about 150).<a id="FNanchor_1694" href="#Footnote_1694" class="fnanchor">[1694]</a> It had -the advantage of the comitia centuriata (1) in freedom from the -impetrative auspices, (2) in freedom from the patrum auctoritas, -(3) in mobility. Immediately after the adoption of the Valerian-Horatian -statute it must have become evident that the tribunician -assembly, through the character of its presidency, its composition, -and its democratic spirit, was to outstrip the centuriate -gathering in energy and aggressiveness, and to be in a word the -chief factor of progress in legislation.</p> - -<p>No enactment affecting the jurisdiction of tribunes is referred -to Valerius and Horatius by the ancient writers; and yet the -arrangement by which they thereafter brought their capital -actions before the centuries could not have been made without -the consent of the government. If, on the other hand, the -tribunes now possessed an unconditioned power to subject -patricians, whether magistrates or private citizens, to capital -prosecutions, they would have found it so effective a means of -political warfare as no longer to need obstruction and sedition -in their struggle for plebeian rights. In capital cases the permission -of a higher magistrate, ordinarily after 367 the praetor, -was required; and before the enactment of the Hortensian -statute, we may well believe, the tribunes had no means of forcing -this permission. Some similar restriction must have been -placed on their liberty to bring finable actions.</p> - -<p>The comitia tributa under tribunician presidency had at -length become an effective constitutional factor in legislation -and in jurisdiction. But its action in the former sphere was -dependent upon the favor of the senate, in the latter on that of -a patrician magistrate. The range, too, of its legislation was -restricted by the wide administrative powers of the senate. We -shall find it in the following period winning freedom and enlarging -the field of its activity.</p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>The following literature is for the whole period from 449 to 287.</p> - -<p>Schulze, C. F., <i>Volksversammlungen der Römer</i>, 341-70; Hüllmann, K. D., -<i>Staatsrecht des Altertums</i>, 354-67; Niebuhr, B. G., <i>Römische Geschichte</i>, i.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_281"></a>[281]</span> -624 ff., Eng. 283 ff.; see also index, s. Tributcomitien; Schwegler, A., <i>Röm. -Geschichte</i>, see index, s. Tributcomitien; Mommsen, Th., <i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, -iii. 300 ff.; <i>Röm. Forschungen</i>, i. 151-66; <i>Röm. Strafrecht</i>, 462-8, 473-8, -1014-6, et passim; Ihne, W., <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. VI. chs. i, viii; <i>Ueber -die Entstehung und die ältesten Befugnisse des röm. Tribunats</i>, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -N. F. xxi (1866). 161-79; <i>Entwickelung der Tributcomitien</i>, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -N. F. xxviii (1873). 353-79; Peter, C., <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, bks. ii, iii; Lange, L., -<i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, i. 586-681, 821-56; ii. 459-94, 533-42, 565-97, 613-42; <i>De -legibus Porciis libertatis civium vindicibus</i>, in <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, i. 342-429; -<i>De plebiscitis Ovinio et Atinio disputatio</i>, ibid. ii. 393-446; <i>Ueber das poetelische -Gesetz de ambitu</i>, ibid. ii. 195-202; Kleineidam, F., <i>Beitr. z. Kentniss d. -lex Poetelia</i>, in <i>Festg. f. F. Dahn</i>, ii. 1-30; Ihm, <i>Ambitus</i>, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 1800-3; Madvig, J. N., <i>Verfassung und Verwaltung des röm. -Staates</i>, i. 234-46; Voigt, M., <i>XII Tafeln</i>, i. 683-90; Karlowa, O., <i>Röm. -Rechtsgeschichte</i>, i. 409; Girard, P. F., <i>Histoire de l’organisation judiciaire des -Romains</i>, i. 149-59, 237 ff.; Puchta, G. F., <i>Cursus der Institutionen</i>, i. (10th -ed. 1893) 166-9 (on lex and plebiscite); Mispoulet, J. B., <i>Institutions politiques -des Romains</i>, i. 207-30; <i>Études d’institutions Romaines</i>, 66-81; Willems, -P., <i>Droit public Romain</i>, 160 ff., 173 ff.; Greenidge, <i>Legal Procedure -of Cicero’s Time</i>, 327-49; Herzog, E., <i>Geschichte und System der röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, -i. 153 ff., 189-96, 216 ff., 248-64, 279-88, 1128-88; <i>Glaubwürdigkeit -der Gesetze bis 387 der Stadt</i>; <i>Lex Sacrata und das Sacrosanctum</i>, in -<i>Jahrb. f. Philol.</i> xxii (1876). 139-50; Dupond, A., <i>De la constitution et des -magistratures Romaines sous la république Romaine</i>, 75 ff.; Borgeaud, C., -<i>Histoire du plébiscite</i>, 57-76, 117-67; Hallays, A., <i>Comices à Rome</i>, ch. iii; -Morlot, E., <i>Comices électoraux sous la république Romaine</i>, ch. iv; Ptaschnik, -J., <i>Die Wahl der Volkstribunen vor der Rogation des Volero Publilius</i>, in -<i>Zeitschr. f. österreich. Gymn.</i> xiv (1863). 627-38; <i>Publilische Rogation</i>, ibid. -xvii (1866). 161-200; <i>Die Centuriatgesetze von 305 und 415 U. C.</i>, ibid. xxi -(1870). 497-525; <i>Lex Hortensia 473 U. C.</i> ibid. xxiii (1872). 241-53; <i>Stimmrecht -der Patricier in den Tributcomitien</i>, ibid. xxxii (1881). 81-102; Ruppel, -K. W., <i>Teilnahme der Patrizier an den Tributkomitien</i>; Soltau, W., <i>Gültigkeit -der Plebiscite</i>, in <i>Berliner Studien</i>, ii (1885). 1-176; Clason, D. O., -<i>Kritische Erörterungen über den röm. Staat</i>, 30-9; Schmidt, J., <i>Die Einsetzung -der röm. Volkstribunen</i>, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxi (1886). 460-6; Meyer, E., <i>Der Ursprung -des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der vier Tribus</i>, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxi (1895). -1-24, controverted by Vassis, in <i>Athena</i>, ix (1897). 470 ff.; Pais, <i>Ancient -Italy</i>, chs. xx, xxi; Garofalo, F. P., <i>L’origine e l’elezione dei tribuni e degli -edili della plebe con un indice alfabetico dei loro nomi</i>; Podestà, G., <i>Il tribunato -della plebe in Roma dalla secessione sul monte sacro all’approvazione della -legge di Publilio Volerone</i>; Eigenbrodt, A., <i>De magistratuum Romanorum -iure intercedendi</i>; Ackermann, H., <i>Ueber die raümlichen Schranken der -tribunizischen Gewalt</i>; Tophoff, <i>De lege Valeria Horatia, Publilia, Hortensia</i>; -Hennes, <i>Das dritte valerisch-horatische Gesetz und dessen Wiederholungen</i>; -Long, G., <i>On the Passage in Appian’s Civil Wars</i> (i. 8) <i>which relates to the -Licinian Law</i>, in <i>Classical Museum</i>, iii (1846). 78 ff.; Kubitschek, <i>Aedilis</i>, in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_282"></a>[282]</span> -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 448-64; Humbert, G., <i>Aedilis</i>, in Daremberg -et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 95-100; Bloch, L., <i>Die ständischen und sozialen Kämpfe in der -römischen Republik</i>; Willoughby, W. W., <i>Political Theories of the Ancient -World</i>, ch. xvi; Strachan-Davidson, T. L., <i>Decrees of the Roman Plebs</i>, in -<i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> v (1890). 462-74; Dreyfus, R., <i>Les lois agraires sous la république -Romaine</i>, pt. I. chs. i-iii; De Sanctis, G., <i>Storia dei Romani</i>, I. chs. xiii, -xiv, xvii; Billeter, G., <i>Gesch. d. Zinsfusses</i>, 115 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_283"></a>[283]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XIII">CHAPTER XIII<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE COMITIA TRIBUTA AND THE RISE OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY<br /> -<span class="smcap">From 449 to 287</span></span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>For a time after the Valerian-Horatian legislation the senate -and magistrates, as was intimated at the close of the preceding -chapter, maintained their authority but slightly impaired against -the rising popular power. It is true that in 427 the centuries -acquired the right to declare a war of aggression.<a id="FNanchor_1695" href="#Footnote_1695" class="fnanchor">[1695]</a> Defensive -wars in behalf either of Rome or of an ally were regularly -decided upon by the senate;<a id="FNanchor_1696" href="#Footnote_1696" class="fnanchor">[1696]</a> and the question whether the -war was necessary for the safety of the state admitted of a -broad interpretation.<a id="FNanchor_1697" href="#Footnote_1697" class="fnanchor">[1697]</a> From the beginning of the period to -the year 321 treaties of peace and of alliance were still made -either by a magistrate, with the authorization of the senate,<a id="FNanchor_1698" href="#Footnote_1698" class="fnanchor">[1698]</a> -or more commonly by the senate itself, even though the -alliance or offer of protection was such as to render war -with other states inevitable;<a id="FNanchor_1699" href="#Footnote_1699" class="fnanchor">[1699]</a> and at the close of a conquest -the senate disposed of the acquired territory and population.<a id="FNanchor_1700" href="#Footnote_1700" class="fnanchor">[1700]</a> -Through its authority alone, till 332, the censor bestowed the -perfect or the limited citizenship.<a id="FNanchor_1701" href="#Footnote_1701" class="fnanchor">[1701]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_284"></a>[284]</span></p> - -<p>In the affairs of peace it retained almost as absolute power -of administration as in the preceding period.<a id="FNanchor_1702" href="#Footnote_1702" class="fnanchor">[1702]</a> We find it, -accordingly, authorizing a magistrate to vow games and the -erection of a temple in the event of victory,<a id="FNanchor_1703" href="#Footnote_1703" class="fnanchor">[1703]</a> providing for -the restoration of the city after the Gallic conflagration,<a id="FNanchor_1704" href="#Footnote_1704" class="fnanchor">[1704]</a> for -the building of temples,<a id="FNanchor_1705" href="#Footnote_1705" class="fnanchor">[1705]</a> introducing pay for military service,<a id="FNanchor_1706" href="#Footnote_1706" class="fnanchor">[1706]</a> -levying the taxes,<a id="FNanchor_1707" href="#Footnote_1707" class="fnanchor">[1707]</a> dividing the public lands among the citizens,<a id="FNanchor_1708" href="#Footnote_1708" class="fnanchor">[1708]</a> -founding colonies,<a id="FNanchor_1709" href="#Footnote_1709" class="fnanchor">[1709]</a> and recalling under penalty of death those -who without permission had gone out to colonize a captured -city,<a id="FNanchor_1710" href="#Footnote_1710" class="fnanchor">[1710]</a> directing the appropriate college to consult the Sibylline -books,<a id="FNanchor_1711" href="#Footnote_1711" class="fnanchor">[1711]</a> and ordering the aediles to take measures against the -inroad of foreign superstitions,<a id="FNanchor_1712" href="#Footnote_1712" class="fnanchor">[1712]</a> and the consuls to punish -with rods and beheading the instigators to revolt among the -allies.<a id="FNanchor_1713" href="#Footnote_1713" class="fnanchor">[1713]</a> It was in obedience to a decree of the senate that the -consul, or military tribune with consular power, suspended his -own imperium and that of his colleague or colleagues by the -appointment of a dictator,<a id="FNanchor_1714" href="#Footnote_1714" class="fnanchor">[1714]</a> who had power to compel the -resignation of all other magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_1715" href="#Footnote_1715" class="fnanchor">[1715]</a> Or the senate could -directly order the magistrates to retire from office, with or -without a scruple as to the auspices.<a id="FNanchor_1716" href="#Footnote_1716" class="fnanchor">[1716]</a> It rewarded successful -commanders with triumphs<a id="FNanchor_1717" href="#Footnote_1717" class="fnanchor">[1717]</a> at the expense of the state<a id="FNanchor_1718" href="#Footnote_1718" class="fnanchor">[1718]</a> and -in time of especial danger it armed the consuls with absolute -imperium.<a id="FNanchor_1719" href="#Footnote_1719" class="fnanchor">[1719]</a> In the face of an opposing force so vast as here -indicated, the assemblies for a time made slow headway. The -development of their functions through the period between<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_285"></a>[285]</span> -the Valerian-Horatian and the Hortensian legislation will now -be followed.</p> - -<h4>I. <i>Elective</i></h4> - -<p>Appreciating the great possibilities of the tribunate, the patricians -attempted to fill the college with men of their own rank. -If we are to trust our authorities, an effort was made in that -direction immediately after the fall of the decemvirs, when -it was agreed that the pontifex maximus should preside over -the tribal comitia for the election of the first tribunes of the -plebs under the restored constitution.<a id="FNanchor_1720" href="#Footnote_1720" class="fnanchor">[1720]</a> Among the men chosen -were some so closely attached to patrician interests that at -the end of the year they secured the election of successors -who coöpted into the college two patricians of consular rank.<a id="FNanchor_1721" href="#Footnote_1721" class="fnanchor">[1721]</a> -At this crisis there was great danger that the college of tribunes -might become a possession of the patricians. It was averted, -however, by a certain tribune, L. Trebonius, who succeeded -in carrying a law that whoever presided over the comitia -for the election of tribunes should continue till ten tribunes -were elected, the object being to preclude coöptation. The -tribune who violated this law was to be burned alive.<a id="FNanchor_1722" href="#Footnote_1722" class="fnanchor">[1722]</a> That -part of Livy’s account which assigns the author of the law -to the year 448 is improbable. A half century later (401) -he informs us, it happened that two places left vacant in -the college were again filled by the coöptation of patricians -and, by the strangest accident, a Cn. Trebonius was among -their colleagues. His complaint that the Trebonian plebiscite -and the leges sacratae were being violated had, in Livy’s -opinion,<a id="FNanchor_1723" href="#Footnote_1723" class="fnanchor">[1723]</a> no result. Probability greatly favors the later date -for the law, especially as an instance of coöptation is mentioned<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_286"></a>[286]</span> -between the two dates;<a id="FNanchor_1724" href="#Footnote_1724" class="fnanchor">[1724]</a> the name of Trebonius or of -one or more patricians in the college of 448<a id="FNanchor_1725" href="#Footnote_1725" class="fnanchor">[1725]</a> was enough to -lead the historian astray. The later date fits well the political -condition of the time; the patricians, almost succeeding in -monopolizing the military tribunate with consular power, proceeded -to lay hands on the plebeian tribunate—a far more -valuable prize. After 401, however, the Trebonian law proved -effective in excluding patricians from the tribunate of the -plebs. Henceforth all plebeian officials were elected by the -tribes under tribunician presidency.<a id="FNanchor_1726" href="#Footnote_1726" class="fnanchor">[1726]</a></p> - -<p>In granting the tribal assembly a share in law-making the senate -must have hoped to convert it into an organ of the patrician -government. Shortly after the Valerian-Horatian legislation, -accordingly, patrician magistrates began to convoke this assembly -for the election of quaestors (447)—previously appointed -by the chief magistrates<a id="FNanchor_1727" href="#Footnote_1727" class="fnanchor">[1727]</a>—and afterward of curule -aediles (367),<a id="FNanchor_1728" href="#Footnote_1728" class="fnanchor">[1728]</a> military tribunes,<a id="FNanchor_1729" href="#Footnote_1729" class="fnanchor">[1729]</a> and other minor officials.<a id="FNanchor_1730" href="#Footnote_1730" class="fnanchor">[1730]</a></p> - -<h4>II. <i>Judicial</i></h4> - -<h5><i>a.</i> TRIBUNICIAN</h5> - -<p>By an arrangement referred to in the preceding chapter,<a id="FNanchor_1731" href="#Footnote_1731" class="fnanchor">[1731]</a> -partly based on the law of the Twelve Tables relating to capital -cases<a id="FNanchor_1732" href="#Footnote_1732" class="fnanchor">[1732]</a> and further developed in 449, possibly by an article of -the Valerian-Horatian statute, a division of popular jurisdiction -was made between the centuriate and the tribal assemblies, on -the basis of a distinction in the nature, not of the crime, but of -the penalty.<a id="FNanchor_1733" href="#Footnote_1733" class="fnanchor">[1733]</a> The tribes punished with fines, the centuries -with the extreme penalty—banishment or death, to which was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_287"></a>[287]</span> -always added total confiscation of property. The prosecutor, -accordingly, first thought of the penalty, to which he then attempted -to adapt the form of action. The people were not -guided to their decision by legal formalities and precedents,<a id="FNanchor_1734" href="#Footnote_1734" class="fnanchor">[1734]</a> -but were often swayed by the emotions of favor and anger.<a id="FNanchor_1735" href="#Footnote_1735" class="fnanchor">[1735]</a> -No juror’s oath was imposed upon them to decide according to -law and without personal or party bias, such as the Athenian -heliasts swore. If the prosecutor, in addition to believing that -the case merited the severest punishment, hoped to persuade -the people to vote the death or banishment of the accused, he -pronounced a capital condemnation, and the case was accordingly -appealed to the centuriate assembly. If on the other -hand he doubted whether he would be able sufficiently to excite -the anger of the populace against the accused, however heinous -the crime may have been in his own opinion, he satisfied himself -with a finable action, and allowed it to go before the tribes. -Sometimes while the evidence was being taken in the latter -form of action, the rage of the people was so inflamed against -the accused that they clamored for the extreme penalty, in -which case the prosecutor might change the form of action -agreeably to their wishes.<a id="FNanchor_1736" href="#Footnote_1736" class="fnanchor">[1736]</a> The greater ease with which the -tribes were summoned, together with the growing disinclination -of the people to pronouncing the death penalty, induced the -magistrates more and more to make use of finable rather than -of capital actions. Fines were generally estimated in cattle -and sheep till in 430 the consuls L. Julius and L. Papirius Crassus -passed a centuriate law establishing a hundred pounds of -copper as equivalent to an ox and ten to a sheep.<a id="FNanchor_1737" href="#Footnote_1737" class="fnanchor">[1737]</a> Probably -the same law provided that no fine should exceed half the value -of the estate on which it was levied.<a id="FNanchor_1738" href="#Footnote_1738" class="fnanchor">[1738]</a></p> - -<p>For the period immediately following 449 the authorities—uncritically<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_288"></a>[288]</span> -as will soon be made evident—assign to the tribunes -of the plebs a formidable jurisdiction in finable actions, -not only over private persons,<a id="FNanchor_1739" href="#Footnote_1739" class="fnanchor">[1739]</a> but also, on account of official -misconduct, over functionaries of every grade from ambassadors -and tresviri coloniae deducendae to consuls and dictators. -Such prosecutions were usually brought after the retirement of -the accused from office. A chronological list of the principal -cases reported will be instructive.</p> - -<p>In 442 the three commissioners for conducting a colony to -Ardea were prosecuted by the tribunes on the ground that, by -enrolling Ardeates in place of Romans in the list of colonists, -they had circumvented the law which called their commission -into being. The action would probably have been finable; but -the accused avoided trial by remaining in the colony.<a id="FNanchor_1740" href="#Footnote_1740" class="fnanchor">[1740]</a> In 423 -M. Postumius and T. Quinctius, retired tribunes with consular -power, were tried for mismanagement of the war with Veii. The -former was fined 10,000 asses; the latter was exculpated by all -the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1741" href="#Footnote_1741" class="fnanchor">[1741]</a> In 401 two other retired tribunes with consular -power were prosecuted by the tribunes of the plebs and fined -each 10,000 asses.<a id="FNanchor_1742" href="#Footnote_1742" class="fnanchor">[1742]</a> The imposition of a fine on Camillus, 391, -has already been considered.<a id="FNanchor_1743" href="#Footnote_1743" class="fnanchor">[1743]</a> In 389 a tribune of the plebs -brought an accusation against Q. Fabius on the ground that the -latter while ambassador to the Gauls had fought against them -in violation of the law of nations. The accused suddenly died, -possibly by suicide, before the day of trial.<a id="FNanchor_1744" href="#Footnote_1744" class="fnanchor">[1744]</a> In 362 the dictator -of the preceding year, L. Manlius, was prosecuted by a -tribune because, though appointed for the sole purpose of driving -the nail, he had nevertheless made a levy of troops and -that with extreme cruelty. But the prosecutor dropped the accusation, -intimidated by the son of the accused.<a id="FNanchor_1745" href="#Footnote_1745" class="fnanchor">[1745]</a> This is the -view of Livy, whereas Cicero<a id="FNanchor_1746" href="#Footnote_1746" class="fnanchor">[1746]</a> states the ground of the charge -to have been the addition of a few days to his dictatorship. If<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_289"></a>[289]</span> -historical, the prosecution may possibly have been for perduellio, -and in that case it would have come before the centuries.</p> - -<p>The following cases are historically more certain. Lucius -Postumius, prosecuted by the tribunes of the plebs in 293 for -the misuse of his consulship of the preceding year, escaped -trial by becoming the legatus of the consul Carvilius. The -charge was that in his campaign he had not limited himself to -the province assigned him by the senate.<a id="FNanchor_1747" href="#Footnote_1747" class="fnanchor">[1747]</a> Evidently the intention -of the prosecutor was not serious.<a id="FNanchor_1748" href="#Footnote_1748" class="fnanchor">[1748]</a> The consul Q. -Fabius Gurges of the year 292, defeated in battle, was recalled, -and his conduct was impugned before the people. The past -services and the promises of his father saved him, and he continued -his consulship with greater success. The accusation -probably did not take the form of a trial, but was presented -in a resolution to remove him from office<a id="FNanchor_1749" href="#Footnote_1749" class="fnanchor">[1749]</a> or at least from the -command of the army. L. Postumius, third time consul in 291, -employed his army to work on his own estate; and on the -expiration of his office he was brought to trial therefor by the -tribunes and condemned.<a id="FNanchor_1750" href="#Footnote_1750" class="fnanchor">[1750]</a></p> - -<p>In the period under discussion, 449-287, a single effort to -hold the plebeian tribunes responsible for their official conduct -is reported. In 293 two retired tribunes were condemned to a -fine of 10,000 asses each on a charge of having favored the -patres by interceding against the proposals of colleagues.<a id="FNanchor_1751" href="#Footnote_1751" class="fnanchor">[1751]</a> -This instance, if historical, is the only one of the kind before -the revolution. The tribunes doubtless felt that the prosecution -of their predecessors rendered their own future unsafe.</p> - -<p>Several attempts were also made by legislation to reach -results equivalent to judicial sentences. In spite of the prohibition -of privilegia by a law of the Twelve Tables, Sp. Maelius, -a tribune of the plebs in 436, tried to carry a resolution -for the confiscation of the property of Servilius Ahala; but the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_290"></a>[290]</span> -people rejected it.<a id="FNanchor_1752" href="#Footnote_1752" class="fnanchor">[1752]</a> Another privilegium was the resolution of -the plebs of 368 which threatened M. Furius Camillus with a -fine of 500,000 asses, should he use his dictatorship to obstruct -the Licinian-Sextian bills then under discussion.<a id="FNanchor_1753" href="#Footnote_1753" class="fnanchor">[1753]</a> It was -certainly not supported by a senatus consultum, and probably -the proposers had no serious intention of carrying it into -effect.</p> - -<p>In reviewing the finable actions alleged to have been brought -by the plebeian tribunes during the two centuries which intervened -between the institution of their office and the Hortensian -legislation, as in the case of the capital actions,<a id="FNanchor_1754" href="#Footnote_1754" class="fnanchor">[1754]</a> we are struck -by the relatively small number belonging to the latter part of the -period; in fact to the time following 362 two cases only are -assigned, one of which is insignificant. The conclusion we must -draw from this fact is similar to that expressed with relation -to the capital cases—that the finable actions attributed to the -earlier period are in all probability largely unhistorical, and -that before the enactment of the Hortensian law the jurisdiction -of the tribunes in finable cases was limited and rare.</p> - -<h5><i>b.</i> AEDILICIAN</h5> - -<p>For some time after their institution the tribunes of the -plebs, having no viatores or at least none that were recognized -as public officials,<a id="FNanchor_1755" href="#Footnote_1755" class="fnanchor">[1755]</a> depended upon the two plebeian aediles as -bailiffs for making arrests and for executing sentences.<a id="FNanchor_1756" href="#Footnote_1756" class="fnanchor">[1756]</a> The -latter functionaries seem to have stood in some such relation -to the tribunes as the quaestors toward the consuls. It was -accordingly as deputies of the tribunes that they acquired -jurisdiction.<a id="FNanchor_1757" href="#Footnote_1757" class="fnanchor">[1757]</a> The earliest mentioned case, 454, is the trial -and condemnation of a retired consul in a finable action for -official misconduct.<a id="FNanchor_1758" href="#Footnote_1758" class="fnanchor">[1758]</a> It should be placed in the same mythical<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_291"></a>[291]</span> -category with the numerous tribunician prosecutions of -the period.<a id="FNanchor_1759" href="#Footnote_1759" class="fnanchor">[1759]</a> After the institution of curule aediles, 367, the -aediles of the plebs continued indeed to serve occasionally as -bailiffs of the tribunes,<a id="FNanchor_1760" href="#Footnote_1760" class="fnanchor">[1760]</a> but acquired in addition, along with those -of curule rank, an independent jurisdiction. In 357 C. Licinius -Stolo was prosecuted by M. Popillius Laenas on the charge of -having circumvented his own law by emancipating his son in -order that he and his son might each possess five hundred iugera -of the public land. He was fined 10,000 asses.<a id="FNanchor_1761" href="#Footnote_1761" class="fnanchor">[1761]</a> From the cases -to be mentioned below the inference may be drawn that the -accuser was an aedile. In 298 several persons were prosecuted -by the aediles, whether curule or plebeian is not stated, for -violation of the same law, and hardly one was acquitted.<a id="FNanchor_1762" href="#Footnote_1762" class="fnanchor">[1762]</a> In -295 the plebeian aediles made considerable money by fining -those who had trespassed against the article of the Licinian-Sextian -statute which related to pasturage;<a id="FNanchor_1763" href="#Footnote_1763" class="fnanchor">[1763]</a> and two years -afterward violators of the same provision were again fined, on -this occasion by the curule aediles.<a id="FNanchor_1764" href="#Footnote_1764" class="fnanchor">[1764]</a> Actions against usurers -were brought by aediles in 344,<a id="FNanchor_1765" href="#Footnote_1765" class="fnanchor">[1765]</a> 304,<a id="FNanchor_1766" href="#Footnote_1766" class="fnanchor">[1766]</a> and 295.<a id="FNanchor_1767" href="#Footnote_1767" class="fnanchor">[1767]</a></p> - -<p>Shortly before 328, M. Flavius was prosecuted before the -people by the aediles for the crimen stupratae matris familiae, -and acquitted.<a id="FNanchor_1768" href="#Footnote_1768" class="fnanchor">[1768]</a> In 295 Q. Fabius Gurges, a curule aedile,<a id="FNanchor_1769" href="#Footnote_1769" class="fnanchor">[1769]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_292"></a>[292]</span> -accused several matrons before the people, also of stuprum, and -fined them.</p> - -<p>In the period between the Licinian-Sextian and the Hortensian -legislation, accordingly, the jurisdiction of the aediles, so -far as is known, was limited to usury, stuprum, and the violation -of laws regarding the occupation and pasturage of the public -land. They had nothing to do with perduellio or related -offences, or with the accountability of magistrates, or with any -capital actions whatsoever. All their trials were finable, and in -case the fine exceeded thirty cattle and two sheep, or the equivalent, -3020 heavy asses,<a id="FNanchor_1770" href="#Footnote_1770" class="fnanchor">[1770]</a> an appeal could be made to the tribes. -The plebeian aediles equally with the tribunes<a id="FNanchor_1771" href="#Footnote_1771" class="fnanchor">[1771]</a> lacked the -power to summon patricians, whereas the curule aediles as -patrician magistrates<a id="FNanchor_1772" href="#Footnote_1772" class="fnanchor">[1772]</a> possessed the right; but no distinction -in the composition of these tribal assemblies, corresponding to -the form of presidency, is suggested by the sources.<a id="FNanchor_1773" href="#Footnote_1773" class="fnanchor">[1773]</a></p> - -<h4>III. <i>Legislative</i></h4> - -<p>The legislative function of the tribal assembly under tribunician -presidency after the decemvirate (451-450)<a id="FNanchor_1774" href="#Footnote_1774" class="fnanchor">[1774]</a> is represented -as bringing forthwith into being the Icilian and Duillian plebiscites -of 449. That of Icilius granted amnesty to those who had -seceded from the decemvirs.<a id="FNanchor_1775" href="#Footnote_1775" class="fnanchor">[1775]</a> The first plebiscite of Duillius -provided for the election of consuls cum provocatione.<a id="FNanchor_1776" href="#Footnote_1776" class="fnanchor">[1776]</a> Both -acts are alleged to have been passed, however, before the resolutions -of the plebs had acquired the force of law. The second -Duillian plebiscite, which followed the enactment of the Valerian-Horatian -statute, and which was therefore valid for all the -citizens, threatened with scourging and death any one who left -the plebs without tribunes or who caused the election of a magistrate -without appeal.<a id="FNanchor_1777" href="#Footnote_1777" class="fnanchor">[1777]</a> Its first provision was merely the expression -of a principle on which the plebeians, had from the -beginning insisted as essential to the continuance of the office -from year to year;<a id="FNanchor_1778" href="#Footnote_1778" class="fnanchor">[1778]</a> the second clause precluded the recurrence<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_293"></a>[293]</span> -of an elective magistracy like the decemvirate just past.<a id="FNanchor_1779" href="#Footnote_1779" class="fnanchor">[1779]</a> According -to Diodorus<a id="FNanchor_1780" href="#Footnote_1780" class="fnanchor">[1780]</a> an agreement was made in this year between -the patricians and plebeians by which one consul at least -should be a plebeian. Although Diodorus generally drew from -sources more ancient than those of Livy, he is wrong in assigning -this provision to so early a date.<a id="FNanchor_1781" href="#Footnote_1781" class="fnanchor">[1781]</a></p> - -<p>For the same year is recorded another Icilian plebiscite, which -granted the privilege of a triumph to the consuls after the senate -had refused it.<a id="FNanchor_1782" href="#Footnote_1782" class="fnanchor">[1782]</a> The alleged act is suspicious, in the first -place, because the two consuls must have had the support of a -majority in the senate, as the acceptance of their great constitutional -statute proves. Then, too, a resolution of the people for -granting the triumph could not avail in this period without the -consent of the senate. The last observation applies as well to -the alleged refusal of the senate to ratify an act of the people -in 356 for granting a triumph to the first plebeian dictator.<a id="FNanchor_1783" href="#Footnote_1783" class="fnanchor">[1783]</a> -Such a resolution merely assured the triumphator that the -people would be present at the festival. Without the consent -of the senate, they could not appropriate the necessary funds -for the occasion;<a id="FNanchor_1784" href="#Footnote_1784" class="fnanchor">[1784]</a> but the general always had a right to triumph, -in earlier time within the city and later on the Alban -Mount, at his own expense.<a id="FNanchor_1785" href="#Footnote_1785" class="fnanchor">[1785]</a> If the senate decreed the triumph,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_294"></a>[294]</span> -as remained the rule,<a id="FNanchor_1786" href="#Footnote_1786" class="fnanchor">[1786]</a> ratification by the people was unnecessary, -though it sometimes occurred.<a id="FNanchor_1787" href="#Footnote_1787" class="fnanchor">[1787]</a></p> - -<p>The Trebonian plebiscite, 448 or more probably 401, has -already been discussed.<a id="FNanchor_1788" href="#Footnote_1788" class="fnanchor">[1788]</a> The interest of the plebs in enhancing -the dignity and importance of their own order manifested -itself not only in this act but also in the Canuleian plebiscite of -445, which reëstablished conubium between the patricians and -plebeians after it had been forbidden by a law of the Twelve -Tables.<a id="FNanchor_1789" href="#Footnote_1789" class="fnanchor">[1789]</a> Closely related is the centuriate law of the same year -for the institution of tribunes of the soldiers with consular -power to be elected indiscriminately from the two social classes.<a id="FNanchor_1790" href="#Footnote_1790" class="fnanchor">[1790]</a></p> - -<p>Slightly earlier, if we may trust our sources, the people were -given an unwonted opportunity to share in the decision of -questions relating to foreign affairs; and the favor fell to the -comitia tributa under patrician presidency, which had convened -in this form for the first time in 447 for the election of quaestors.<a id="FNanchor_1791" href="#Footnote_1791" class="fnanchor">[1791]</a> -The question before this assembly in 446 was the arbitration -of a dispute between Ardea and Aricia concerning a -piece of territory. The contestants brought the case before the -Roman senate, which usually decided such matters on its own -responsibility, but which in this instance requested the consuls -to refer the business to the tribes. The aim of the senate must -have been to throw the odium of the decision upon the people, -who, disregarding the claims of the two contestants, lost little -time in adjudging the disputed property to Rome.<a id="FNanchor_1792" href="#Footnote_1792" class="fnanchor">[1792]</a> This act -did not serve as a precedent for further interference of the assembly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_295"></a>[295]</span> -in foreign affairs; and when in 427 the people acquired -the right to declare an offensive war,<a id="FNanchor_1793" href="#Footnote_1793" class="fnanchor">[1793]</a> the function fell to the -centuries rather than to the tribes. Apart from this gain the -comitia made little progress<a id="FNanchor_1794" href="#Footnote_1794" class="fnanchor">[1794]</a> in the period between the Canuleian -and the Licinian-Sextian legislation, 445-367. Few legislative -acts of the tribes are recorded: the plebiscite which provided -in a time of famine for the election of a prefect of the -market, 440;<a id="FNanchor_1795" href="#Footnote_1795" class="fnanchor">[1795]</a> the historically questionable plebiscite which -forbade candidates for office to whiten their garments, 432;<a id="FNanchor_1796" href="#Footnote_1796" class="fnanchor">[1796]</a> -the plebiscite of 414 for the creation of a special court to try a -case of murder;<a id="FNanchor_1797" href="#Footnote_1797" class="fnanchor">[1797]</a> the act, probably a plebiscite, which forbade -a patrician to dwell on the Capitoline, 384.<a id="FNanchor_1798" href="#Footnote_1798" class="fnanchor">[1798]</a></p> - -<p>Doubtless in this period there was much agrarian agitation -on the part of the tribunes, although we cannot be sure that any -of the bills mentioned by Livy<a id="FNanchor_1799" href="#Footnote_1799" class="fnanchor">[1799]</a> are historical. In like manner -the leaders of the plebs, as candidates for the consular tribunate, -are represented as agitating for the institution of pay for -military service, the money to be derived from rents of public -lands.<a id="FNanchor_1800" href="#Footnote_1800" class="fnanchor">[1800]</a> When the reform came, however, it was by a voluntary -concession of the senate extremely annoying to the tribunes, -who found themselves thus deprived of a useful ground for -complaint, 406.<a id="FNanchor_1801" href="#Footnote_1801" class="fnanchor">[1801]</a> Epoch-making were the Licinian-Sextian laws,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_296"></a>[296]</span> -the first, 368, increasing the duoviri sacris faciundis to decemviri -and providing that five should be plebeian,<a id="FNanchor_1802" href="#Footnote_1802" class="fnanchor">[1802]</a> the second, 367, -containing in Livy’s opinion four articles: (1) that one consul -must be plebeian,<a id="FNanchor_1803" href="#Footnote_1803" class="fnanchor">[1803]</a> (2) that the interest already paid on debts -should be deducted from the principal and the balance rendered -in three equal annual instalments, (3) that no one should occupy -more than five hundred iugera of the public land,<a id="FNanchor_1804" href="#Footnote_1804" class="fnanchor">[1804]</a> (4) that the -right to pasture cattle and sheep on the public land should also -be limited.<a id="FNanchor_1805" href="#Footnote_1805" class="fnanchor">[1805]</a></p> - -<p>Thereafter we find the tribal assembly more active in legislation. -To the year 358 is assigned the first well-authenticated -lex de ambitu, the Poetelian plebiscite, which forbade candidates -for office to visit markets and meeting-places outside the city -for electioneering purposes.<a id="FNanchor_1806" href="#Footnote_1806" class="fnanchor">[1806]</a> The motive, however, which Livy -attributes to the author—to prevent the further enlargement<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_297"></a>[297]</span> -of the patricio-plebeian nobility through the admission of new -men—was hardly possible at this early date.</p> - -<p>In 357 tribal comitia under patrician chairmanship passed a -law for placing a tax of five per cent on manumissions of slaves. -The circumstances attending this meeting were peculiar; the -consul Cn. Manlius summoned to it the soldiers of his army in -the camp at Sutrium.<a id="FNanchor_1807" href="#Footnote_1807" class="fnanchor">[1807]</a> It must have been composed, therefore, -of a small minority of the citizens, lacking not only those who -were too old for service, but doubtless a majority of the men -of military age. Difficulties regarding the auspices, too, and -other formalities might have arisen; and yet in spite of the fact -that the enactment of the law was an intrusion within the -administrative domain of the senate, the patres gave their sanction;<a id="FNanchor_1808" href="#Footnote_1808" class="fnanchor">[1808]</a> -and the legality of the measure was never called in -question.<a id="FNanchor_1809" href="#Footnote_1809" class="fnanchor">[1809]</a> In contrast with the general prevalence of free -labor in early Rome, the number of slaves since the conquest -of Veii had become considerable; and wealthy individuals were -evidently beginning the practice of building up a political following -through the clientage of their freedmen, to the disadvantage -of the older plebs. The majority of the patricians must -have been in sympathy with the effort of their consul to check -this new development, although they could not approve the -peculiar means by which the law was passed. Nor could the -tribunes of the plebs allow legislation to be thus removed -beyond the sphere of their control. The repetition of the -procedure was immediately forbidden accordingly by a plebiscite -which threatened with the death penalty any magistrate -who held comitia away from the city.<a id="FNanchor_1810" href="#Footnote_1810" class="fnanchor">[1810]</a> In the same year the -people took a further step in the administration of finance by -enacting the Duillian-Menenian plebiscite for establishing the -rate of interest at ten per cent<a id="FNanchor_1811" href="#Footnote_1811" class="fnanchor">[1811]</a>—thereby confirming a law of -the Twelve Tables<a id="FNanchor_1812" href="#Footnote_1812" class="fnanchor">[1812]</a>—and five years later the consular law of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_298"></a>[298]</span> -P. Valerius Publicola and C. Marcius Rutilus for the institution -of a bank under the direction of five commissioners to assist -debtors in meeting their obligations (352).<a id="FNanchor_1813" href="#Footnote_1813" class="fnanchor">[1813]</a> The latter was -followed in 347 by a plebiscite which reduced the maximal rate -of interest to five per cent and provided for the payment of the -principal in four equal annual instalments.<a id="FNanchor_1814" href="#Footnote_1814" class="fnanchor">[1814]</a></p> - -<p>This activity of the people in financial legislation is to be -explained by the economic distress which lasted many years, -and which the measures thus far mentioned failed to remedy. -There can be no doubt that the general indebtedness and the -resultant discontent of the masses, assigned by the annalists to -the earliest years of the republic, belong in reality to the period -now under consideration. The murmurings of the debtors culminated -in 342 in a military mutiny, with which the masses of -citizens seem to have been in full sympathy. The demands of -the soldiers and civilians were met (1) by a law of the dictator -Valerius, which, remedying other grievances of the soldiers, is -said to have proclaimed an abolition of debts,<a id="FNanchor_1815" href="#Footnote_1815" class="fnanchor">[1815]</a> (2) by the plebiscite -of L. Genucius, tribune of the same year. The provisions -of the latter were as follows: (1) it forbade the lending of -money on interest; (2) it ordered that no one should fill the -same office within a period of ten years, or two offices at the same<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_299"></a>[299]</span> -time;(3) it allowed both consuls to be plebeian.<a id="FNanchor_1816" href="#Footnote_1816" class="fnanchor">[1816]</a> Although -Livy, failing to find the Genucian law in all his sources, hesitates -to accept it as historical, there seems to be no cogent ground -for disbelieving that such a statute was actually passed.<a id="FNanchor_1817" href="#Footnote_1817" class="fnanchor">[1817]</a> The -legal rate of interest had recently been lowered one-half; and -the plebeians, not satisfied with the temporary relief afforded -by the cancellation of debts, hoped for all time to free themselves -from an intolerable affliction by one sweeping legislative -act. This article of the plebiscite, however, probably remained -from the beginning a dead letter. The second continued unenforced -for many years,<a id="FNanchor_1818" href="#Footnote_1818" class="fnanchor">[1818]</a> whereas the provision regarding two -consuls had to wait more than a century for its first practical -application.<a id="FNanchor_1819" href="#Footnote_1819" class="fnanchor">[1819]</a> The patricians had often violated the Licinian-Sextian -statute by placing two of their number together in the -consulship. Perhaps the third article of the Genucian law was -intended to make them respect the earlier statute by a threat to -exclude them entirely from this office. If this was the object -of Genucius, his means certainly proved effective.<a id="FNanchor_1820" href="#Footnote_1820" class="fnanchor">[1820]</a></p> - -<p>Three years later the dictator Publilius Philo passed through -the centuriate assembly the statute (1) that plebi scita should be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_300"></a>[300]</span> -binding on all the quirites; (2) that before the voting began the -patres should give their auctoritas to proposals brought before -the comitia centuriata; (3) that one censor at least should be -plebeian (339).<a id="FNanchor_1821" href="#Footnote_1821" class="fnanchor">[1821]</a> All three articles were alike aimed against -the political dominance of the patricians. The second freed -centuriate legislation from their control;<a id="FNanchor_1822" href="#Footnote_1822" class="fnanchor">[1822]</a> the third<a id="FNanchor_1823" href="#Footnote_1823" class="fnanchor">[1823]</a> assured to -the plebeians a just share in the function of determining the -composition of the tribes, hence of the civil and political status -of every Roman. It was not long afterward that the censors -were to be given in addition the function of revising the list of -senators.<a id="FNanchor_1824" href="#Footnote_1824" class="fnanchor">[1824]</a></p> - -<p>The first article has substantially the same form as the -corresponding provision of the Valerian-Horatian statute, 449, -and of the Hortensian, 287.<a id="FNanchor_1825" href="#Footnote_1825" class="fnanchor">[1825]</a> All manner of conjectures as to -the relation of these three laws to one another has been offered, -the readiest theory being that the Valerian-Horatian statute -had become obsolete, and required reënactment.<a id="FNanchor_1826" href="#Footnote_1826" class="fnanchor">[1826]</a> The explanation -is proved impossible by the circumstance that important -plebi scita were passed under the Valerian-Horatian provision, -the last being the Genucian. The Valerian-Horatian law could -not have become obsolete in three years. The true explanation -is to be found in the fact, now well known to historians, that -the political ideas and political struggles assigned by our -sources to the fifth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> belong mostly to the fourth. -The setting of the law of Publilius Volero, 471, was inaccurately -transferred to it from the law of Publilius Philo, 339. The -very existence of the latter statute is proof that the patricians -were at that time declaring plebi scita invalid on the ground -that they were passed by only a part of the people—a complaint -recorded against neither the Canuleian nor the Licinian -plebiscite. Hence, as the sources indicate, the patricians were -in the assembly which passed these two measures. We may -legitimately apply to the period from 449 to 339 the story of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_301"></a>[301]</span> -the long but finally successful struggle on the part of the -tribunes to expel the patricians from the comitia tributa under -plebeian chairmanship—a story which the sources assign to -the period ending in 367. The struggle must be accepted as -historical, for there was in later time no motive for creating -it; and as it must have been a matter of tradition rather than -of record, it could not well be placed earlier than the fourth -century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> We may suppose that the patricians yielded the -more readily because they at last recognized their inability -simply by their votes to control the tribunician assembly, and -because from the beginning they disliked to submit to the -authority of a plebeian president. Hence their withdrawal from -that form of comitia was in the first instance voluntary. The -assembly, therefore, which adopted the Genucian plebiscite -was de facto, though not de jure, exclusively plebeian. When -accordingly the patricians objected to its validity on the ground -that it was passed by but a part of the people, Publilius Philo, -the most eminent plebeian statesman of his age, carried through -the centuriate assembly the law above mentioned, that the -resolutions of the tribunician assembly as then constituted, of -plebs only, should be valid for all the people. This interpretation -throws light on the otherwise inexplicable circumstance -that the Genucian plebiscite was so indifferently enforced. -The exclusion of the patricians was in line, too, with the -general policy followed by the plebeians against them in the -fourth century: the plebeians shut the patricians out (1) from -the plebeian tribunate, probably 401. (2) from five places in the -college of decemviri sacris faciundis, 368, and from one of -the consular places, 367. (3) by agreement from the two curule -aedileships on alternate years, (4) from one of the censorial -places, 339. (5) from a fixed number of places in the college -of augurs and of pontiffs, 300. It was in accord with this -tendency to convert the earlier privileges of the patricians into -disabilities that a vote of the people excluded them from -those comitia tributa which were presided over by tribunes. -This state of affairs was formulated in the antiquarian and -juristic definitions of populus and plebs, lex and plebi scitum. -The condition, however, seems to have been only transient. -The dwindling of the patriciate in numbers and strength, with<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_302"></a>[302]</span> -the corresponding growth of a plebeian nobility, which converted -the tribunate and assembly of plebs into most potent organs -of the senatorial government, obliterated distinctions between -patricians and plebeians within the political assemblies, to such -a degree that for the period after the Hortensian legislation no -reference to an exclusively plebeian assembly is made by any -ancient author. Although this article of the Publilian statute -was never formally repealed, we may feel certain that the principle -involved was no longer remembered in the age of Cicero.<a id="FNanchor_1827" href="#Footnote_1827" class="fnanchor">[1827]</a></p> - -<p>The Publilian statute of 339 is not known to have provided -for an extension of the field of competence of the tribal assembly; -yet we find the comitia tributa soon afterward attending to -business heretofore managed by the senate or in one or two -instances by the centuries. Although about a hundred years -earlier the centuriate comitia had acquired the right to ratify or -reject declarations of offensive war,<a id="FNanchor_1828" href="#Footnote_1828" class="fnanchor">[1828]</a> we find no record of a -ratification of a treaty of peace by the people before the year -321, in which occurred the disaster at Caudium; and in this -case it was not only the common opinion in Livy’s time, but -also the understanding of Claudius, the historian, that the -treaty made by the consuls, without the sanction of the senate -or the people, was regular and valid<a id="FNanchor_1829" href="#Footnote_1829" class="fnanchor">[1829]</a>—a “foedus summae religionis,” -as Cicero declares.<a id="FNanchor_1830" href="#Footnote_1830" class="fnanchor">[1830]</a> Even Livy, who aims to prove -the procedure defective, admits that the tribunes of the plebs<a id="FNanchor_1831" href="#Footnote_1831" class="fnanchor">[1831]</a> -and Postumius,<a id="FNanchor_1832" href="#Footnote_1832" class="fnanchor">[1832]</a> one of the consuls who made it, looked upon it<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_303"></a>[303]</span> -as legitimate. But according to Livy<a id="FNanchor_1833" href="#Footnote_1833" class="fnanchor">[1833]</a> the senate itself declared -the treaty invalid on the ground that it lacked popular confirmation;<a id="FNanchor_1834" href="#Footnote_1834" class="fnanchor">[1834]</a> -and in that body the principle was then enunciated that -nothing which was to bind the people could be sanctioned without -their order<a id="FNanchor_1835" href="#Footnote_1835" class="fnanchor">[1835]</a>—the first recorded expression of the doctrine -of popular sovereignty among the Romans. In this period, -however, the people were never called upon to ratify the acceptance -of a submission or of an alliance on unequal terms. Such -agreements granting Rome the superior right were negotiated, -as in earlier time, by the magistrate or senate or by both in conjunction.<a id="FNanchor_1836" href="#Footnote_1836" class="fnanchor">[1836]</a> -The details, too, of every treaty were still left to the -magistrates and senate, so that to the end of the republic the -senatus consultum continued to be indispensable.<a id="FNanchor_1837" href="#Footnote_1837" class="fnanchor">[1837]</a> But from -the time of the Caudine misfortune, and in consequence of it, -the principle was established that a treaty involving a concession -of even equal rights on the part of Rome required the -sanction of a popular vote. Recorded instances of such ratification -for this period (321-287) are rare.<a id="FNanchor_1838" href="#Footnote_1838" class="fnanchor">[1838]</a> The function fell to -the comitia tributa under patrician or plebeian presidency, -which in its exercise showed more independence<a id="FNanchor_1839" href="#Footnote_1839" class="fnanchor">[1839]</a> than did the -comitia centuriata in the declaration of wars. In this way the -tribal assembly took its place by the side of the centuriate in -international affairs.<a id="FNanchor_1840" href="#Footnote_1840" class="fnanchor">[1840]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_304"></a>[304]</span></p> - -<p>The absolute power to bestow the citizenship exercised by -the kings<a id="FNanchor_1841" href="#Footnote_1841" class="fnanchor">[1841]</a> would naturally pass undiminished to the consuls, -and thence to the censors on the institution of the latter. It is -in fact the opinion of Lange<a id="FNanchor_1842" href="#Footnote_1842" class="fnanchor">[1842]</a> that these magistrates respectively -exercised full rights in the matter, and that they consulted the -senate in important cases only. At all events the question is -simply as to the relative participation of the magistrates and -the senate in the function. The final settlement of Latium -after the war, involving the bestowal of citizenship, 338, the -senate seems to have attended to alone through a consultum, no -mention being made of the people.<a id="FNanchor_1843" href="#Footnote_1843" class="fnanchor">[1843]</a> In the whole course of -Roman history to 332 there is no record of a grant of citizenship -by popular vote.<a id="FNanchor_1844" href="#Footnote_1844" class="fnanchor">[1844]</a> As the Acerrani were left out of account -by the senatus consultum above mentioned, L. Papirius in 332 -through the first recorded pretorian law granted them the civitas -sine suffragio.<a id="FNanchor_1845" href="#Footnote_1845" class="fnanchor">[1845]</a> In opinion of Lange,<a id="FNanchor_1846" href="#Footnote_1846" class="fnanchor">[1846]</a> based upon a statement -of Velleius,<a id="FNanchor_1847" href="#Footnote_1847" class="fnanchor">[1847]</a> the censors of the year, Q. Publilius Philo and Sp. -Postumius, while enrolling the new citizens, probably obtained a -senatus consultum requesting the praetor to bring this subject -before the tribes. That a senatorial decree was essential is -proved by the case of the Privernates mentioned below. We -may well believe that the great plebeian statesman Publilius -gladly embraced the opportunity to make the tribal assembly a -partner in the important function of imparting the rights of the -city. Three years afterward an order of the people, doubtless of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_305"></a>[305]</span> -the tribes, ex auctoritate patrum, granted the citizenship to the -Privernates, 329.<a id="FNanchor_1848" href="#Footnote_1848" class="fnanchor">[1848]</a> By what authority the Hernicans received -the civitas sine suffragio in 306 is not stated.<a id="FNanchor_1849" href="#Footnote_1849" class="fnanchor">[1849]</a> Long after the -Hortensian legislation the principle was established that the -people alone without the authorization of the senate had a right -to bestow the ius suffragii on whomsoever they pleased.<a id="FNanchor_1850" href="#Footnote_1850" class="fnanchor">[1850]</a> Logically -the function should have fallen to the comitia centuriata -as the source of censorial power; but the tribal assembly assumed -it because of its connection with the making of treaties.<a id="FNanchor_1851" href="#Footnote_1851" class="fnanchor">[1851]</a></p> - -<p>It was the province of the centuriate assembly to introduce -permanent regulations of existing magistracies and to institute -new ones;<a id="FNanchor_1852" href="#Footnote_1852" class="fnanchor">[1852]</a> but the function was now transferred, silently so -far as we know, to the tribes. Far-reaching in its effect was -the creation of the promagistracy in 327. No prolongation -of an official power is known to have occurred before this -date. The extension of the territory of Rome and of her -military operations was now calling for greater elasticity in -the duration of commands; but in the face of a strong movement -toward popular rights the senate dared not assume the -responsibility of so sweeping an innovation. It placed in the -hands of the tribunes, accordingly, the business of bringing -before the people a rogation for prolonging the imperium of -the consul Q. Publilius Philo to the end of the war with Naples, -instituting by this precedent the promagistracy.<a id="FNanchor_1853" href="#Footnote_1853" class="fnanchor">[1853]</a> Again -in 295 the imperium of the consul Volumnius was prolonged -for a year by a decree of the senate ratified by a plebiscite.<a id="FNanchor_1854" href="#Footnote_1854" class="fnanchor">[1854]</a> -After the custom had been established, however, the senate -ordinarily attended to the prolonging of the imperium, as in -308,<a id="FNanchor_1855" href="#Footnote_1855" class="fnanchor">[1855]</a> in 296,<a id="FNanchor_1856" href="#Footnote_1856" class="fnanchor">[1856]</a> and in 294,<a id="FNanchor_1857" href="#Footnote_1857" class="fnanchor">[1857]</a> consulting the people, as it seems, -only in cases of tribunician opposition.<a id="FNanchor_1858" href="#Footnote_1858" class="fnanchor">[1858]</a> No instance of popular -interference in the assignment of provinces is mentioned -before 295, when a resolution of the comitia tributa, under<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_306"></a>[306]</span> -what form of presidency is not stated, granted Etruria to the -patrician Fabius in preference to the plebeian Decius.<a id="FNanchor_1859" href="#Footnote_1859" class="fnanchor">[1859]</a> This -act was an inroad upon the right of the magistrates to divide -the business of their office among themselves by agreement -or lot. In 292 another resolution of the people recalled from -the field the consul Q. Fabius Gurges because of ill-success in -war with the Samnites. The senate was the prime mover in the -matter, but the form of assembly is unknown. The question -concerned either the abrogation of his magistracy or more -probably his transfer to some other activity.<a id="FNanchor_1860" href="#Footnote_1860" class="fnanchor">[1860]</a> Even in the -latter case the act of the people was a remarkable deviation -from their usual modest policy of dealing with officials.</p> - -<p>In 318 a law, doubtless tribal, was passed for sending praefecti -iure dicundo to Capua;<a id="FNanchor_1861" href="#Footnote_1861" class="fnanchor">[1861]</a> and similar laws were from -time to time enacted for assigning the same kind of officials to -other communities of Italy.<a id="FNanchor_1862" href="#Footnote_1862" class="fnanchor">[1862]</a> These prefects continued to -be appointed by the urban praetor till after 124.<a id="FNanchor_1863" href="#Footnote_1863" class="fnanchor">[1863]</a> Whether -the law of 318 was pretorian or tribunician cannot be determined.<a id="FNanchor_1864" href="#Footnote_1864" class="fnanchor">[1864]</a> -Similar in character was the Atilian-Marcian plebiscite -for the election of sixteen military tribunes instead of six, -311.<a id="FNanchor_1865" href="#Footnote_1865" class="fnanchor">[1865]</a> The substitution of election for appointment was in -effect the institution of a magistracy—in this case merely an -increase in number within a magisterial college which had -existed since 362. In the act of 311 the tribes usurped a -function which had hitherto belonged to the centuries.<a id="FNanchor_1866" href="#Footnote_1866" class="fnanchor">[1866]</a> -Although the elective military tribunes remained subordinate -to the consuls, the change increased their dignity and -in some degree their independence, while it tended to impair -the efficiency of the service. Naturally the office became -a stepping-stone to political honors. The Decian plebiscite -of the same year instituted the duumviri navales charged -with the function of repairing, equipping, and commanding the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_307"></a>[307]</span> -fleet.<a id="FNanchor_1867" href="#Footnote_1867" class="fnanchor">[1867]</a> The two plebiscites of this year have the appearance -of a compromise between continental and commercial interests -under the influence of Appius Claudius Caecus the censor. -Closely related is the article of the Ogulnian plebiscite, 300, -which provided for an increase in the number of augurs and -pontiffs.<a id="FNanchor_1868" href="#Footnote_1868" class="fnanchor">[1868]</a> Here, too, belongs the plebiscite of 296 for the appointment -of commissioners for conducting colonies.<a id="FNanchor_1869" href="#Footnote_1869" class="fnanchor">[1869]</a> Henceforth -it was the custom of the senate to refer to the people the -creation of all extraordinary offices, and their election to the -comitia tributa usually under pretorian presidency.<a id="FNanchor_1870" href="#Footnote_1870" class="fnanchor">[1870]</a></p> - -<p>The people made a further advance when they undertook -to regulate by law the composition of the senate itself. To -the period between the Publilian legislation of 339 and the censorship -of Appius Claudius Caecus, 312, belongs the famous -Ovinian plebiscite concerning the revision of the senate list.<a id="FNanchor_1871" href="#Footnote_1871" class="fnanchor">[1871]</a> -It transferred the function from the consuls to the censors, and -required the latter under oath (iurati; MS. curiati) to enroll all -who were worthy among the retired magistrates of every rank, -from the curule functionaries down through those of plebeian -standing to the quaestors.<a id="FNanchor_1872" href="#Footnote_1872" class="fnanchor">[1872]</a></p> - -<p>The Valerian-Horatian and Publilian statutes are evidence of -the right of the people to legislate regarding the composition -and powers of their assemblies. No longer content, however, -with the making and repeal of laws,—a right guaranteed by the -Twelve Tables,<a id="FNanchor_1873" href="#Footnote_1873" class="fnanchor">[1873]</a>—they began the practice of occasionally suspending -laws to the advantage or disadvantage of individuals or -of classes—in other words, the voting of privilegia.<a id="FNanchor_1874" href="#Footnote_1874" class="fnanchor">[1874]</a> There -were repeated violations of that article of the Genucian plebiscite -which forbade reëlection to an office within a period of ten<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_308"></a>[308]</span> -years,<a id="FNanchor_1875" href="#Footnote_1875" class="fnanchor">[1875]</a> and no mention is made of the necessity of a dispensation -before the year 298, when Q. Fabius Maximus is alleged -to have objected to further reëlection on the ground that such -conduct was forbidden by law. Thereupon the tribunes of the -plebs declared that to remove the obstacle they would propose -to the people that he should be absolved from the legal requirement.<a id="FNanchor_1876" href="#Footnote_1876" class="fnanchor">[1876]</a> -But in fact, as Lange<a id="FNanchor_1877" href="#Footnote_1877" class="fnanchor">[1877]</a> has noticed, Fabius had not -been consul for ten years and was therefore legally eligible. -Lange suggests that this story of the dispensation may belong -to his next election in 295.<a id="FNanchor_1878" href="#Footnote_1878" class="fnanchor">[1878]</a> At all events the custom of granting -dispensations began about this time,<a id="FNanchor_1879" href="#Footnote_1879" class="fnanchor">[1879]</a> although we need not -suppose that the patricians attached much importance to the -Genucian statute, which was adopted by an exclusively plebeian -assembly. This function assumed by the people of freeing from -the power of the law, often exercised in historical time by the -senate as well, marks a great advance toward popular sovereignty. -The idea that the law was sovereign, which had arisen -in the early republic, was now yielding to the idea that it was -subject to the caprice of every popular gathering.<a id="FNanchor_1880" href="#Footnote_1880" class="fnanchor">[1880]</a> The aristocracy -was giving way to a democracy, which under the conditions -destined to prevail at Rome could only mean mob-rule.</p> - -<p>The right of the people in their tribal assemblies to legislate -concerning religion had already been established by the precedent -of the Licinian-Sextian plebiscite on the decemviri sacris -faciundis<a id="FNanchor_1881" href="#Footnote_1881" class="fnanchor">[1881]</a> and of other less important acts.<a id="FNanchor_1882" href="#Footnote_1882" class="fnanchor">[1882]</a> Immediately after -the Publilian legislation the comitia of tribes became more active -in this field. To the period of the great Latin war according -to Cicero,<a id="FNanchor_1883" href="#Footnote_1883" class="fnanchor">[1883]</a> hence necessarily to 338,<a id="FNanchor_1884" href="#Footnote_1884" class="fnanchor">[1884]</a> belongs the consular lex -Maenia, which added to the Ludi Romani the day called -instauraticius,<a id="FNanchor_1885" href="#Footnote_1885" class="fnanchor">[1885]</a> although less trustworthy accounts assign the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_309"></a>[309]</span> -establishment of this day to 491.<a id="FNanchor_1886" href="#Footnote_1886" class="fnanchor">[1886]</a> The law initiated by the -senate in 304 forbidding the dedication of a temple or altar except -by permission of the senate or of a majority of the college -of tribunes<a id="FNanchor_1887" href="#Footnote_1887" class="fnanchor">[1887]</a> was probably passed by the comitia tributa plebis. -In the opinion of Lange<a id="FNanchor_1888" href="#Footnote_1888" class="fnanchor">[1888]</a> it was either identical with, or afterward -supplemented by, the lex Papiria tribunicia, which forbade -the consecration of a temple, precinct, or altar without an order -of the plebs.<a id="FNanchor_1889" href="#Footnote_1889" class="fnanchor">[1889]</a> The latter is the more probable; it seems reasonable -that, as Lange suggests, the right of the people in this -matter developed from the necessity of referring to them cases -in which the senate and the tribunes could not agree. Technically -religious, though of vast political consequence, was the -Ogulnian plebiscite of 300, which increased the number of -augurs and pontiffs to nine each, and provided that four augurs -and five pontiffs should be plebeian.<a id="FNanchor_1890" href="#Footnote_1890" class="fnanchor">[1890]</a> It was the last step in -the opening of offices to the plebs.</p> - -<p>In their effort to gain control of the more important judicial -business the people made slower progress. In all probability -it was not till after the Publilian legislation that the centuriate -and tribal assemblies began regularly to exercise the function of -appellate courts—a right established long before by legislation<a id="FNanchor_1891" href="#Footnote_1891" class="fnanchor">[1891]</a> -and confirmed for the centuries by the Valerian law of appeal -in 300.<a id="FNanchor_1892" href="#Footnote_1892" class="fnanchor">[1892]</a> The creation of special judicial commissions—quaestiones -extraordinariae—belonged originally to the senate; and -the establishment of such a court de caede through a plebiscite -in 414, if historical, was merely the execution of a senatus consultum.<a id="FNanchor_1893" href="#Footnote_1893" class="fnanchor">[1893]</a> -The task of trying and condemning the matrons for -poisoning in 331 must have fallen to such a quaestio extraordinaria -not expressly mentioned. Whether it was instituted by -the senate or the tribes cannot be known.<a id="FNanchor_1894" href="#Footnote_1894" class="fnanchor">[1894]</a> The special quaestio,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_310"></a>[310]</span> -too, concerning conspiracy, at first under dictatorial and -afterward under consular presidency, seems to have been instituted -solely by a senatus consultum.<a id="FNanchor_1895" href="#Footnote_1895" class="fnanchor">[1895]</a> The Flavian rogation of -323 for punishing the Tusculans for having given aid and encouragement -to the enemies of Rome<a id="FNanchor_1896" href="#Footnote_1896" class="fnanchor">[1896]</a> may have aimed to create -a special court for the purpose, or it may have been an attempt -to dispense justice by means of legislation.<a id="FNanchor_1897" href="#Footnote_1897" class="fnanchor">[1897]</a> However that may -be, it was rejected by all the tribes but one. The Satricans, -who revolted to the Samnites after the Caudine disaster and -were conquered in 319, were punished by the senate acting as a -special court on the authority of the Antistian plebiscite.<a id="FNanchor_1898" href="#Footnote_1898" class="fnanchor">[1898]</a></p> - -<p>The right of the people both in the centuries and in the -tribes to legislate on finance had before 339 been well established -by precedent. Economic as well as social in character -was the lex Poetelia, which prohibited loans on the security -of the person,<a id="FNanchor_1899" href="#Footnote_1899" class="fnanchor">[1899]</a> and which was proposed to the tribes, or possibly -to the centuries, by C. Poetelius Libo as consul in 326 or as -dictator in 313.<a id="FNanchor_1900" href="#Footnote_1900" class="fnanchor">[1900]</a> It abolished contractual but not judicial servitude, -though it probably mitigated the latter.<a id="FNanchor_1901" href="#Footnote_1901" class="fnanchor">[1901]</a> Politically -more significant than this individual act was the long-continued -popular effort to gain control of the disposal of the public -land. It was to the detriment of the senatorial prerogative -that the tribunes of the plebs took up the agrarian question -from the time of Sp. Cassius,<a id="FNanchor_1902" href="#Footnote_1902" class="fnanchor">[1902]</a> and continued almost unceasingly -to agitate for the limitation of the use of public land -by the rich and the division of the surplus among the poor, -till they succeeded in embodying their ideas in the Licinian-Sextian -law on these subjects. Equally to the province of -the senate belonged the planting of colonies<a id="FNanchor_1903" href="#Footnote_1903" class="fnanchor">[1903]</a> both from the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_311"></a>[311]</span> -military and from the financial point of view. Here, too, the -tribunes in the economic interest of their constituents began -early to agitate for a share in the administration.<a id="FNanchor_1904" href="#Footnote_1904" class="fnanchor">[1904]</a> It was -not till 296 that they met with any success in this direction, -and then at the will of the senate, which charged the tribunes -with the business of introducing a plebiscite for ordering the -praetor to appoint triumviri for conducting colonies to certain -specified places.<a id="FNanchor_1905" href="#Footnote_1905" class="fnanchor">[1905]</a> This was the modest outcome of centuries -of agrarian and colonial agitation on the part of the tribunes.</p> - -<p>The fact is that after the enactment of the Genucian and -Publilian laws the plebeians continued for about a generation -relatively content with their economic condition. Frequent -victories brought booty,<a id="FNanchor_1906" href="#Footnote_1906" class="fnanchor">[1906]</a> and conquests made extensive assignments -of land possible.<a id="FNanchor_1907" href="#Footnote_1907" class="fnanchor">[1907]</a> But the people must have found -the third Samnite war oppressive. Although of far shorter -duration than the second, it required larger armies and longer -and more distant campaigns. Under the burden of military -service the plebs again fell into debt, in spite of the unusual -distributions of booty among the soldiers when victorious.<a id="FNanchor_1908" href="#Footnote_1908" class="fnanchor">[1908]</a> -Their burden was rendered the heavier by the circumstance -that many of the wealthy were violating the Licinian-Sextian -restrictions on the use of public land and pasture, and were -doubtless failing to pay their dues<a id="FNanchor_1909" href="#Footnote_1909" class="fnanchor">[1909]</a>—a course of conduct which -rendered necessary not only the assignment of the spoil of 293 -to the aerarium but also the imposition of a tributum especially -vexatious to the plebs.<a id="FNanchor_1910" href="#Footnote_1910" class="fnanchor">[1910]</a> The distress was augmented by a -pestilence which began in 295 and continued for several years.<a id="FNanchor_1911" href="#Footnote_1911" class="fnanchor">[1911]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_312"></a>[312]</span> -Whereas all on actual service were by law exempt from prosecution -for debt, many citizens who remained at home -were the victims of the usurers, who were occasionally fined -for their illegal exactions.<a id="FNanchor_1912" href="#Footnote_1912" class="fnanchor">[1912]</a> Again all the commons incurred -hopeless debts, which at the close of the war (290) -the creditors must have proceeded to exact with their usual -ruthlessness. The institution of the tresviri capitales in the -following year<a id="FNanchor_1913" href="#Footnote_1913" class="fnanchor">[1913]</a> is proof of the intention of the government -to enforce the criminal law with the utmost rigor. A new -movement for the relief of debtors had already set in, and the -creditors were organizing resistance to the popular demands. -As long as the nobility could rely upon the tribunate of the -plebs,<a id="FNanchor_1914" href="#Footnote_1914" class="fnanchor">[1914]</a> they felt secure. Even if a bill for the benefit of -the poor should be presented, they believed their interests -to be well fortified by tribunician intercession and by the -senate, which, composed chiefly of creditors, would certainly -refuse its sanction to such a measure. The grave economic -distress, however, at length filled the tribunate with men who -were at one in demanding a radical measure of relief, and -who accordingly presented a bill for the abolition of debts. -Many times they offered it to the tribes in vain; the senate -refused its assent; for the creditors, among whom must be -counted a majority of the senators, hoped to recover both -principal and interest. Willing to compromise, the tribunes -then offered the senate, if it should yield, a choice of two -alternatives, neither of which can be deduced with certainty -from the mutilated fragment of Dio Cassius, our authority -for this event. One of them, however, is conjectured to be -that the principal alone should be recovered,<a id="FNanchor_1915" href="#Footnote_1915" class="fnanchor">[1915]</a> in what way -cannot be made out; and the other that the interest already -paid should be deducted from the principal, and the balance -rendered in three equal annual instalments—a repetition of -the Licinian-Sextian provision regarding debts. At first the -debtors were willing to grant this concession through fear of -failing to obtain any degree of relief; but the creditors, now -hoping to recover everything, refused to be conciliated. After -a time both parties shifted their attitude; the creditors expressed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_313"></a>[313]</span> -themselves as satisfied to recover the principal merely, while -the debtors would no longer accept either alternative of the -compromise. The sedition, for such the conflict became, continued -interminably; and although the creditors yielded, little -by little, far more than they had intended in the beginning, -the debtors made each concession the basis of a new demand. -They brought the long, serious struggle to a climax by seceding -to the Janiculum, at the very time when the Tarentines were -completing the organization of a coalition of Etruscans, Gauls, -Samnites, and several other peoples against Rome.<a id="FNanchor_1916" href="#Footnote_1916" class="fnanchor">[1916]</a> Q. Hortensius, -appointed dictator to meet this crisis, carried through -the comitia centuriata a group of provisions for satisfying the -demands of the seceders:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>(1) Doubtless a clause for the relief of debtors, of which -no mention is made in our scant sources.</p> - -<p>(2) A provision that without the consent either of the senate -or of the patrician portion of it a resolution of the plebs -should be valid for all the citizens.<a id="FNanchor_1917" href="#Footnote_1917" class="fnanchor">[1917]</a></p> - -<p>At the time when the Valerian-Horatian statute provided that -with the consent of the senate resolutions of the tribunician -comitia tributa should have the force of law, the senate was -still composed exclusively of patricians; and the phrase senatus -consultum in this law was therefore considered a full equivalent<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_314"></a>[314]</span> -of the patrum auctoritas, the only difference being that -the consultum was given in advance of a popular vote and the -auctoritas subsequently to it. But when with the appearance -of plebeians in the senate the two acts began to drift more -widely apart, the patricians successfully claimed an exclusive -right to the auctoritas, which, as we have seen,<a id="FNanchor_1918" href="#Footnote_1918" class="fnanchor">[1918]</a> was reduced to -a formality, so far as centuriate legislation was concerned, by -an article of the Publilian law. So long as the patricians voted -in the tribunician comitia tributa, however, and constituted a -majority in the senate, they were willing to abide by the specific -declaration of the Valerian-Horatian statute which conditioned -the validity of the plebiscite on the senatus consultum. But -from 339 they were legally excluded from the tribunician comitia -tributa, and they foresaw, moreover, the end of their majority -in the senate. In the period between 339 and 287, accordingly, -they set up a new claim, based doubtless on the practical intention -of the Valerian-Horatian law, to be free from plebi scita -because the latter were passed without their auctoritas.<a id="FNanchor_1919" href="#Footnote_1919" class="fnanchor">[1919]</a> If -they could make good their intention, they would remain unaffected -by tribunician laws for the abolition of debt. But the -Hortensian statute settled finally the controversy to their disadvantage. -That it also rendered the consultum unessential to -the validity of the plebiscite is proved not only by later usage -but also by the statement of our sources that resolutions of the -plebs were placed by the Hortensian act on an equal footing -with laws.</p> - -<p>(3) Now that the tribunes were given equal freedom with the -patrician higher magistrates in initiating legislation, it was of -advantage to the nobility to bring the former into the closest -possible touch with the senate. Probably therefore the right -of the tribunes not only to sit in the senate, but also in the -interest of their business to summon that body and to preside -over its sessions when so convoked, was due to a provision of -the Hortensian law.<a id="FNanchor_1920" href="#Footnote_1920" class="fnanchor">[1920]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_315"></a>[315]</span></p> - -<p>(4) A correlate of the full power to initiate legislation was -the right to veto acts of the government, probably acquired by -the Hortensian statute.</p> - -<p>(5) But the veto depended upon the power to prosecute.<a id="FNanchor_1921" href="#Footnote_1921" class="fnanchor">[1921]</a> -The unlimited veto implied a right to bring finable or capital -actions independently of the will of the patrician magistrates. -Either by a provision of the Hortensian statute or as a direct -consequence of it, the tribunes acquired an unconditioned right -to prosecute, being now competent in capital cases to compel -the praetor to grant the auspices for holding the comitia centuriata. -With the establishment of their absolute power of intercession -and jurisdiction they ceased to resort to sedition.</p> - -<p>(6) Another article provided that the market-days should be -fasti, allowing judicial business to be done thereon, but forbade -the meeting of voting assemblies on such days.<a id="FNanchor_1922" href="#Footnote_1922" class="fnanchor">[1922]</a> The peasants -who came into the city to use the markets were thus afforded -an opportunity to have their law suits settled without being -engrossed by the duty of voting, though the magistrates were -at liberty to invite them to informal contiones.<a id="FNanchor_1923" href="#Footnote_1923" class="fnanchor">[1923]</a> This Hortensian -provision was conservative in so far as it placed the tribunician -assembly under the same pontifical regulations of the -calendar as those which were to control the other forms of -comitia.<a id="FNanchor_1924" href="#Footnote_1924" class="fnanchor">[1924]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>The right of the people to elect their magistrates, with the -exception of the dictator and the master of horse, existed from -the beginning of the republic. Their right also to create new -offices began with the institution of the consulship, and was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_316"></a>[316]</span> -frequently exercised during the period treated in this chapter. -In the age which begins with the Valerian-Horatian legislation -we find the people regulating by law the qualifications and conduct -of candidates as well as the powers and functions of the -magistrates themselves. They had the same right to deal with -the organization and competence of the assemblies. From 358 -to 287 they rapidly extended their legislative power, by precedent -rather than by statute, over the whole field of the constitution -and over the administration in all its departments; they -ventured even to regulate the senate and to interfere with the -imperium. Controlled originally by the senate, in the end they -won their freedom from that body, whereas the initiative in every -act always remained with the presiding magistrate. Meantime -they had acquired supreme judicial power. In constitutional -theory they were at last sovereign. The senate and the magistrates, -so this theory asserted, still retained large administrative -powers for the sole reason that the assemblies, unable to manage -the current details of public business, were content with -occasional participation and regulation. Most of these gains -had been made by the tribes under the presidency of tribunes -or of patrician magistrates, usually praetors. In legislation the -comitia tributa had rendered the centuriate assembly dispensable -excepting in declarations of offensive war and in the confirmation -of censorial elections. The question whether the people in -their centuries and tribes were to realize their sovereignty in -actual public life was left to the following period.</p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>The literature on this subject is included in the bibliography for the preceding -chapter.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_317"></a>[317]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XIV">CHAPTER XIV<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE COMITIA TRIBUTA<br /> -<span class="smcap">From 287 to the End of the Republic</span></span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>Tribunician Jurisdiction</i></h4> - -<p>Whereas the sources assume that the tribunes of the plebs -as early at least as the decemviral legislation had cognizance of -both finable and capital cases,<a id="FNanchor_1925" href="#Footnote_1925" class="fnanchor">[1925]</a> an examination of the recorded -trials leads to the conclusion that they made little use of this -power till the period between the legislation of Publilius Philo -(339) and that of Hortensius (287).<a id="FNanchor_1926" href="#Footnote_1926" class="fnanchor">[1926]</a> Whether their activity -after 339 was due to the Publilian enactment of that year<a id="FNanchor_1927" href="#Footnote_1927" class="fnanchor">[1927]</a> or -merely to the gradual evolution of popular rights cannot be -determined. However that may be, it was not till after the -Hortensian legislation that we find the tribunician jurisdiction -at its highest point of development and free from every -restriction.<a id="FNanchor_1928" href="#Footnote_1928" class="fnanchor">[1928]</a></p> - -<p>The capital actions brought by the tribunes before the centuries -in the period from Hortensius to the end of the republic -have already been reviewed.<a id="FNanchor_1929" href="#Footnote_1929" class="fnanchor">[1929]</a> We have now to consider the -finable cases brought before the comitia tributa in the same -period. It is characteristic of the era immediately following -the Hortensian legislation, 287-232, described in the following -chapter as politically stagnant,<a id="FNanchor_1930" href="#Footnote_1930" class="fnanchor">[1930]</a> that only one tribunician prosecution -is mentioned, and that against the consuls of 249 for -contempt of the auspices. Appius Claudius Pulcher, one of -the consuls, was fined a hundred and twenty thousand asses, -after the action had been transferred from the centuries to the -tribes in the way described in an earlier chapter.<a id="FNanchor_1931" href="#Footnote_1931" class="fnanchor">[1931]</a></p> - -<p>In accord with the spirit of the Flaminian era, 232-201, on -the other hand, is the prosecution of the retired consuls, M.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_318"></a>[318]</span> -Livius Salinator and L. Aemilius Paulus, on the ground that -they had unjustly distributed the booty gained in war. Technically -the charge seems to have been peculatus;<a id="FNanchor_1932" href="#Footnote_1932" class="fnanchor">[1932]</a> it was -brought before the tribes in 218, doubtless by tribunes of the -plebs. Aemilius narrowly escaped condemnation; Livius was -fined. The popular feeling against them was extremely -bitter.<a id="FNanchor_1933" href="#Footnote_1933" class="fnanchor">[1933]</a> In 214 M. Atilius Regulus and P. Furius Philus, -censors, degraded to the condition of aerarius<a id="FNanchor_1934" href="#Footnote_1934" class="fnanchor">[1934]</a> L. Caecilius -Metellus,<a id="FNanchor_1935" href="#Footnote_1935" class="fnanchor">[1935]</a> who after the battle of Cannae had tried to persuade -the knights to abandon Italy.<a id="FNanchor_1936" href="#Footnote_1936" class="fnanchor">[1936]</a> He was elected tribune of the -plebs for the following year, and made use of his office in an -attempt to prosecute the censors before the close of their administration. -His purpose was thwarted, however, by the -intercession of the remaining nine tribunes,<a id="FNanchor_1937" href="#Footnote_1937" class="fnanchor">[1937]</a> who in this way -saved for a time a conservative principle of the constitution—the -inviolability of the magistrate from prosecutions while in -office.<a id="FNanchor_1938" href="#Footnote_1938" class="fnanchor">[1938]</a> The trial of Postumius the publican, beginning in a -finable action and ending as perduellio, has been treated elsewhere.<a id="FNanchor_1939" href="#Footnote_1939" class="fnanchor">[1939]</a> -In the same period falls the trial of the tresviri -nocturni for appearing too late at a fire. They were accused -by the tribunes and condemned by a vote of the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1940" href="#Footnote_1940" class="fnanchor">[1940]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_319"></a>[319]</span></p> - -<p>The era of the full-grown plutocracy, 201-134, is characterized -by the great number of prosecutions of eminent persons for -political objects. M. Porcius Cato was several times brought -to trial for the conduct of his consulship, 195, with the result -that the speeches delivered in his own defence filled a volume.<a id="FNanchor_1941" href="#Footnote_1941" class="fnanchor">[1941]</a> -In 189 M’. Acilius Glabrio, then candidate for the censorship, -was accused of peculatus of booty by two tribunes in a finable -action of a hundred thousand asses. The crime was alleged -to have been committed in the preceding year, when as proconsul -the accused gained over the Aetolians and Antiochus -a victory by which he won the right to a triumph.<a id="FNanchor_1942" href="#Footnote_1942" class="fnanchor">[1942]</a> Cato, -formerly his military tribune and now a competitor for the -censorship, appearing as a witness, delivered at least four -speeches against him. These proceedings forced Acilius to -drop the candidacy, whereupon the accusation was withdrawn.<a id="FNanchor_1943" href="#Footnote_1943" class="fnanchor">[1943]</a> -The attack upon this man is to be regarded as a manoeuvre of -Cato and his supporters against his political adversaries, the -Scipios, who numbered the accused among their friends. In -185 Cato was ready for a direct assault. In that year two of -his supporters, both named Q. Petillius, tribunes of the plebs, -made in the senate at his instance a demand that L. Scipio -Asiagenus<a id="FNanchor_1944" href="#Footnote_1944" class="fnanchor">[1944]</a> should render an account of the three thousand -talents paid him as war indemnity by Antiochus among the -conditions of peace. His brother Publius, knowing well that -the blow was in reality aimed at himself, resolved to measure -his full strength with that of his adversaries. When accordingly -the record of the transaction was produced, Publius, -complaining that an account of three thousand talents should -be demanded of a man who had brought fifteen thousand into -the treasury from booty, tore the document in pieces.<a id="FNanchor_1945" href="#Footnote_1945" class="fnanchor">[1945]</a> In -this proceeding he kept strictly within his legal rights.<a id="FNanchor_1946" href="#Footnote_1946" class="fnanchor">[1946]</a> Nothing -further seems to have been accomplished for the present;<a id="FNanchor_1947" href="#Footnote_1947" class="fnanchor">[1947]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_320"></a>[320]</span> -but M. Naevius, tribune of the plebs, after entering office -December 10, 185, brought against Publius Scipio a prosecution, -not for peculatus, but for official misconduct. The -specific charge was that in return for the restoration of his -son from captivity he, as legatus of his brother, had granted -too favorable terms of peace to Antiochus. In the first contio -the accused recited his services to the state; in the second, -which happened to fall on the anniversary of his victory over -Hannibal, he invited the people there assembled to go with -him to the Capitoline temple to give thanks to Jupiter, Juno, -Minerva, and the gods who kept the place, for having endowed -him with the will and the ability to achieve that and other -similar deeds in behalf of the commonwealth.<a id="FNanchor_1948" href="#Footnote_1948" class="fnanchor">[1948]</a> Naturally the -dissolution of the assembly vexed the tribunes. Before the -day came for the third contio he withdrew from Rome. His -brother tried to excuse his absence on the plea of sickness, and -Ti. Sempronius Gracchus, tribune of the plebs, prevented his -colleagues from causing further annoyance to the great man. -The general circumstances indicate that the trial was to take -place before the tribes, and that the penalty in case of conviction -was accordingly to be a fine. His brother was still -in danger. Early in 184 C. Minucius Augurinus brought a -finable action<a id="FNanchor_1949" href="#Footnote_1949" class="fnanchor">[1949]</a> against Lucius concerning the money received -from Antiochus.<a id="FNanchor_1950" href="#Footnote_1950" class="fnanchor">[1950]</a> He was condemned by the tribes, whereupon -the prosecutor demanded surety (praedes) for the payment -of the fine. But when Scipio failed to comply, the -tribune attempted to imprison him. Returning suddenly to -Rome, Publius appealed to the tribunes in behalf of his -brother. Whereas eight members of the college sustained the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_321"></a>[321]</span> -prosecutor, one of them, Ti. Gracchus, prevented the imprisonment -and consequently the collection of the fine.<a id="FNanchor_1951" href="#Footnote_1951" class="fnanchor">[1951]</a> But the -total result of the proceedings was the overthrow of the Scipios, -and the conqueror of Hannibal retired heart-broken to his -country estate.<a id="FNanchor_1952" href="#Footnote_1952" class="fnanchor">[1952]</a></p> - -<p>In the same year, 184, M. Porcius Cato, at that time censor, -was prosecuted for official misconduct by tribunes in a finable -action for two talents, but was in all probability acquitted.<a id="FNanchor_1953" href="#Footnote_1953" class="fnanchor">[1953]</a> In -this period the tribes must have been unusually active in a -judicial capacity,<a id="FNanchor_1954" href="#Footnote_1954" class="fnanchor">[1954]</a> as Cato was himself prosecuted forty-four -times, often doubtless before the comitia tributa, but was always -given a favorable verdict.<a id="FNanchor_1955" href="#Footnote_1955" class="fnanchor">[1955]</a></p> - -<p>C. Lucretius, praetor in 171, was accused in the senate by -Chalcidian ambassadors of merciless cruelties and robberies -perpetrated by him on their community. Thereupon two -tribunes of the plebs, M’. Juventius Thalna and Cn. Aufidius, -prosecuted him before the people, technically on a charge of -furtum and iniuria. He was condemned by all the tribes to a -fine of a million asses.<a id="FNanchor_1956" href="#Footnote_1956" class="fnanchor">[1956]</a> But after 149 most cases of misgovernment -in the provinces came before the quaestio repetundarum -instituted in that year.<a id="FNanchor_1957" href="#Footnote_1957" class="fnanchor">[1957]</a> There were occasional prosecutions for -beginning war without authorization.<a id="FNanchor_1958" href="#Footnote_1958" class="fnanchor">[1958]</a> Toward the end of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_322"></a>[322]</span> -pre-Gracchan oligarchy C. Laelius Sapiens, the friend of Scipio -Aemilianus, seems to have been brought to trial for malversation -in his consulship of the year 140, but was probably -acquitted.<a id="FNanchor_1959" href="#Footnote_1959" class="fnanchor">[1959]</a> A peculiar case, yet characteristic of the time, -was that against Cn. Tremellius, praetor in 160, for having -“contended injuriously” with the supreme pontiff. It is stated -merely that he was fined. If the action came before the people, -it must have been brought by a tribune, as the pontiff’s jurisdiction -was restricted, so far as is known, to the sacerdotes -under his supervision. Whatever may have been the procedure, -the effect was to place the religious official above the magistrate<a id="FNanchor_1960" href="#Footnote_1960" class="fnanchor">[1960]</a>—a -policy which could be expected of the generation -that adopted the Aelian and Fufian laws.<a id="FNanchor_1961" href="#Footnote_1961" class="fnanchor">[1961]</a></p> - -<p>Several prosecutions in the era extending from the Gracchi -to Sulla partake of the revolutionary nature of the time. The -inconsistency in the position of Ti. Gracchus, who depended on -the sanctity of the tribunate while technically violating it in the -person of his colleague Octavius, is illustrated by his attack on -T. Annius Luscus. The latter, a man of consular rank, challenged -Tiberius in the senate to answer definitely whether or not -he had branded with infamy a brother tribune whom the law -declared sacred and inviolable. The senators applauded the -challenge; but Tiberius, hurrying from the Curia, convoked the -plebs, and ordered Annius to come forward and defend himself -against the charge of violating by his words the tribunician -sanctity. Before the proceedings could begin, Annius by permission -asked his accuser: “If you intend to deprive me of -my rank and disgrace me, and I appeal to a colleague of yours, -and he comes to my support, and you thereupon lose your temper, -will you deprive him of his office?” Plutarch, who tells -this story, alleges further that Tiberius, not knowing what to -reply, dismissed the assembly and withdrew his accusation.<a id="FNanchor_1962" href="#Footnote_1962" class="fnanchor">[1962]</a> -But the fact that Annius made a speech against Tiberius<a id="FNanchor_1963" href="#Footnote_1963" class="fnanchor">[1963]</a> indicates<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_323"></a>[323]</span> -that the proceedings went farther. Evidently the accused -in some way escaped condemnation. The same political significance -attaches to the tribunician capital prosecutions of the -time, mentioned in an earlier chapter.<a id="FNanchor_1964" href="#Footnote_1964" class="fnanchor">[1964]</a> No more actions, however, -are known to have been brought by the tribunes before -the tribes till 103,<a id="FNanchor_1965" href="#Footnote_1965" class="fnanchor">[1965]</a> when Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, a popular -tribune of the plebs, author of the famous statute concerning the -election of sacerdotes,<a id="FNanchor_1966" href="#Footnote_1966" class="fnanchor">[1966]</a> prosecuted M. Junius Silanus for misconduct -as consul in 109. The charge was that he had begun -war on the Cimbri without an order of the people. Notwithstanding -the stigma of defeat borne by the accused, he was -acquitted by thirty-three of the thirty-five tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1967" href="#Footnote_1967" class="fnanchor">[1967]</a> In the same -year Domitius prosecuted M. Aemilius Scaurus for having as -consul neglected the sacra of the di Penates at Lavinium. -The accused was acquitted by the votes of thirty-two tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1968" href="#Footnote_1968" class="fnanchor">[1968]</a> -These prosecutions, together with the plebiscite just mentioned, -excited against Domitius an antipathy among the -optimates which reveals itself in the sources but which his -character hardly deserved.<a id="FNanchor_1969" href="#Footnote_1969" class="fnanchor">[1969]</a></p> - -<p>Another popular tribune, C. Appuleius Decianus, 98, brought -against P. Furius the accusation that in the preceding year the -latter as tribune of the plebs had betrayed the people’s cause. -Acquitted of that charge, he was accused later in the year -by C. Canuleius, another tribune, on the ground that he had -impeded the return of Metellus.<a id="FNanchor_1970" href="#Footnote_1970" class="fnanchor">[1970]</a> In one of the contiones -for the trial of this case the citizens would not listen to the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_324"></a>[324]</span> -defence of the accused but tore him in pieces. In the same -year Appuleius prosecuted L. Valerius Flaccus, curule aedile, -on what charge is unknown. His own condemnation to exile, -more probably by the centuries than by a quaestio, on the -ground that in his accusation of Furius he lamented the death -of Appuleius Saturninus, his gentilis, is mentioned in an earlier -chapter.<a id="FNanchor_1971" href="#Footnote_1971" class="fnanchor">[1971]</a></p> - -<p>Sulla’s completion of the system of standing courts and his -restriction of the tribunician function of prosecution<a id="FNanchor_1972" href="#Footnote_1972" class="fnanchor">[1972]</a> substantially -withdrew all judicial power from the tribal assembly under -the presidency of tribunes. The overthrow of the Cornelian constitutional -arrangements left the standing courts with jurisdiction -unimpaired. Though constitutionally the tribunes by this -overthrow regained their right to prosecute, they exercised it -rarely and feebly during the remainder of the republic. C. -Memmius, tribune of the plebs in 66, brought M. Terentius -Varro Lucullus to trial for what he had done long before in his -quaestorship at the dictation of Sulla. As the motive was -evidently personal, the accused was acquitted.<a id="FNanchor_1973" href="#Footnote_1973" class="fnanchor">[1973]</a> Early in 58 -L. Antistius, tribune of the plebs, in the interest of the optimates -threatened to prosecute C. Julius Caesar, who had just -retired from his consulship and was on the point of setting out -for his provinces. Caesar appealed to the other tribunes, who -suspended the prosecution on the ground that the accused was -to be necessarily absent in the service of the state.<a id="FNanchor_1974" href="#Footnote_1974" class="fnanchor">[1974]</a> In the -year 44 C. Epidius Marullus and L. Caesetius Flavius, tribunes,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_325"></a>[325]</span> -instituted proceedings against the man who took the lead in -acclaiming Caesar king as he was returning from Alba. The -evident displeasure of Caesar at the accusation caused its withdrawal.<a id="FNanchor_1975" href="#Footnote_1975" class="fnanchor">[1975]</a> -In incomplete trials, like those last mentioned, it is -seldom possible to determine whether they were to come before -the centuries or the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_1976" href="#Footnote_1976" class="fnanchor">[1976]</a></p> - -<h4>II. <i>Aedilician Jurisdiction</i></h4> - -<p>Before the Hortensian legislation the curule and plebeian -aediles alike had cognizance of usury, stuprum, and violation -of the law concerning the limitation of occupation and pasturage -of the public lands.<a id="FNanchor_1977" href="#Footnote_1977" class="fnanchor">[1977]</a> In the period now under consideration, -beginning in 287, they continued to exercise the same function -besides taking upon themselves some new cases. Aedilician -actions for violation of the pasturage clause of the Licinian-Sextian -statute took place in 240,<a id="FNanchor_1978" href="#Footnote_1978" class="fnanchor">[1978]</a> 196,<a id="FNanchor_1979" href="#Footnote_1979" class="fnanchor">[1979]</a> and 193.<a id="FNanchor_1980" href="#Footnote_1980" class="fnanchor">[1980]</a> Closely -related is the fining of usurers in 192,<a id="FNanchor_1981" href="#Footnote_1981" class="fnanchor">[1981]</a> and of grain dealers for -cornering the market in 189.<a id="FNanchor_1982" href="#Footnote_1982" class="fnanchor">[1982]</a> In 157 C. Furius Chresimus was -prosecuted by a curule aedile for injuring the crops of others by -magic, and the case came before the tribes in the Forum. By -bringing his farm tools into the assembly and calling them his -instruments of magic he induced the citizens to vote his acquittal.<a id="FNanchor_1983" href="#Footnote_1983" class="fnanchor">[1983]</a></p> - -<p>There are several known cases of criminal lust which fell -within the aedilician cognizance. In 227 C. Scantinus Capitolinus -during his term of office as tribune or aedile of the plebs -was prosecuted by M. Claudius Marcellus, curule aedile, on a -charge of attempted paederastia. He called attention to the -sanctity of his person; but as the tribunes refused to protect -him on that ground, he was condemned by the people.<a id="FNanchor_1984" href="#Footnote_1984" class="fnanchor">[1984]</a> Most<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_326"></a>[326]</span> -of the known cases of this general character were against -women. Several matrons, accused of stuprum by the plebeian -aediles of 213 and fined by the comitia tributa, retired into -exile.<a id="FNanchor_1985" href="#Footnote_1985" class="fnanchor">[1985]</a> About the time of the war with Hannibal a charge of -incest, based on the fact of intermarriage between close relatives -and brought doubtless by an aedile, was judged favorably to -the accused by the people.<a id="FNanchor_1986" href="#Footnote_1986" class="fnanchor">[1986]</a> The curule aedile A. Hostilius -Mancinus, 183, brought to trial before the tribal assembly Manilia, -a courtesan, who, he alleged, had thrown a stone at him in the -night and had wounded him. Manilia, appealing to the tribunes, -explained that he was attempting violently to break into her -house, when she repulsed him with stones. Thereupon the -tribunes decreed that the prosecutor deserved the treatment he -had received. They interceded against his action, which accordingly -had to be dropped.<a id="FNanchor_1987" href="#Footnote_1987" class="fnanchor">[1987]</a></p> - -<p>One case of perduellio under aedilician jurisdiction is recorded. -In 246 Claudia, sister of that P. Claudius Pulcher who lost his -fleet off Drepanum,<a id="FNanchor_1988" href="#Footnote_1988" class="fnanchor">[1988]</a> was jostled by the crowd as she came from -the games. She was heard to say on this occasion that she -wondered what would have happened to herself, had her brother -not caused the death of so many of the citizens, and to wish that -he were again living, to lose another fleet together with the -crowd that troubled her. For these words she was brought to -trial by the aediles of the plebs, and the people imposed on her -a fine of 25,000 heavy asses.<a id="FNanchor_1989" href="#Footnote_1989" class="fnanchor">[1989]</a> The case is described as a -iudicium maiestatis apud populum Romanum.<a id="FNanchor_1990" href="#Footnote_1990" class="fnanchor">[1990]</a></p> - -<p>The jurisdiction of the aediles as well as that of the tribunes<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_327"></a>[327]</span> -suffered from the growth of standing courts.<a id="FNanchor_1991" href="#Footnote_1991" class="fnanchor">[1991]</a> The fact that -the power remained, provided the holder was in a position to -use it, is proved by the occasional recurrence of a prosecution -in the lifetime of Cicero. First may be mentioned the proceedings -instituted by C. Flavius Fimbria, aedile in 86, against Q. -Scaevola. Evidently the case did not come to vote.<a id="FNanchor_1992" href="#Footnote_1992" class="fnanchor">[1992]</a> Interesting -is the threat of Cicero<a id="FNanchor_1993" href="#Footnote_1993" class="fnanchor">[1993]</a> as curule aedile to bring to trial -before the people C. Verres and all who should by bribery aid -his acquittal. The circumstance that Cicero was ready to place -so great a function upon the aedileship is proof of the confusion -into which the ideas of popular jurisdiction had fallen through -infrequent use.<a id="FNanchor_1994" href="#Footnote_1994" class="fnanchor">[1994]</a> Another anomaly is the prosecution begun by -P. Clodius against T. Annius Milo on the charge of violence -(vis).<a id="FNanchor_1995" href="#Footnote_1995" class="fnanchor">[1995]</a> It took place in the Forum before the comitia tributa, -but we do not know whether it came to a vote.</p> - -<h4>III. <i>Pontifical Jurisdiction</i></h4> - -<p>In the exercise of his disciplinary power the supreme pontiff -sometimes imposed a fine on a sacerdos under his authority. -An appeal to the thirty-five tribes was allowed, if the amount of -the penalty reached the appealable limit.<a id="FNanchor_1996" href="#Footnote_1996" class="fnanchor">[1996]</a> After the analogy -of the civil magistrate the pontiff presided over the assembly -during the trial.<a id="FNanchor_1997" href="#Footnote_1997" class="fnanchor">[1997]</a> In 189 Q. Fabius Pictor, who was at the -same time praetor and flamen Quirinalis, was forbidden by the -supreme pontiff to go to the province assigned him. After -much contention the pontiff imposed a fine, and an appeal was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_328"></a>[328]</span> -taken to the people, who decided that the flamen must obey the -pontifex maximus, and on that condition remitted the fine.<a id="FNanchor_1998" href="#Footnote_1998" class="fnanchor">[1998]</a> In -180 L. Cornelius Dolabella was fined for refusal to resign his -office of naval duumvir that he might be inaugurated rex sacrificulus. -The case was decided as the preceding, but an unfavorable -omen which dissolved the assembly deterred the pontiffs -from inaugurating him.<a id="FNanchor_1999" href="#Footnote_1999" class="fnanchor">[1999]</a> A similar case occurred in 131.<a id="FNanchor_2000" href="#Footnote_2000" class="fnanchor">[2000]</a> In -the appeal of Claudius, an augur, from a pontifical fine, the -date of which is unknown, though it probably followed the -trials above mentioned, the people sustained the accused.<a id="FNanchor_2001" href="#Footnote_2001" class="fnanchor">[2001]</a> -These are the few recorded cases of appeal from sacerdotal -jurisdiction. The moderation of the pontifex maximus, together -with the respect of his sacerdotes for religion, usually -served to prevent the need of recourse to the people. It is a -noteworthy fact that the custom was practically conterminous -with the era of the most highly developed plutocracy. The -circumstance that in all the cases known to have fallen within -this period the people confirmed the authority of the pontiff -affords striking evidence of the perfection to which the optimates -had now brought the religious machinery of their political -system.<a id="FNanchor_2002" href="#Footnote_2002" class="fnanchor">[2002]</a></p> - -<p>From what has been said on the judicial functions of the -comitia in this and earlier chapters, it is clear that the jurisdiction -of the people is inseparably connected with the political -and constitutional history of Rome. Beginning feebly in the -early republic, the right of appeal was most intensely exercised -from the middle of the third to the middle of the second century -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> Its decline thereafter, owing mainly to the rise of the -quaestiones, was a symptom of the general decay of the republic.</p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Peter, C., <i>Epochen der Verfassungsgesch. der röm. Republik</i>, 118-140 (on -the general character of the period); Ihne, W., <i>History of Rome</i>, iv. 125 ff., -171-3, 321-32; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, ii. 317-27, 491-7; <i>Die Scipionenprocesse</i>, -in <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> ii. 417-510; Lange, <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, ii. 582-93; -Herzog, <i>Gesch. u. Syst. der röm. Staatsverfassung</i>, i. 811 f., 1177 f.; Greenidge, -A. H. J., <i>Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time</i>, 327-66; Mispoulet, J. B.,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_329"></a>[329]</span> -<i>Les institutions politiques des Romains</i>, i. 228 f.; Willems, <i>Droit public Romain</i>, -175 ff.; Girard, P. F., <i>Histoire de l’organisation judiciaire des Romains</i>, i. -235 ff.; Hallays, A., <i>Comices à Rome</i>, 70 f.; Stella Maranca, <i>Il tribunato -della plebe dalla lex Hortensia alla lex Cornelia</i>; Gerlach, <i>De vita P. Cornelii -Scipionis Africani Superioris</i>; <i>P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus der Aeltere -und seine Zeit</i>; Nissen, <i>Kritische Untersuchungen über die Quellen der vierten -und fünften Dekade des Livius</i>, 213 ff.; Bloch, G., <i>Observations sur le procès -des Scipions</i>, in <i>Revue des études anciennes</i>, viii (1906). 93-110, 191-228, 287-322; -Pascal, C., <i>Studi Romani</i>, i: <i>Il processo degli Scipioni</i>; ibid. iii: <i>L’Esilio -di Scipione Africano Maggiore</i>; <i>Di un studio recente sul processo degli -Scipioni</i>, in <i>Riv. d. storia ant.</i> iv (1899). 268-71; Niccolini, G., <i>La questione -dei processi degli Scipioni</i>, ibid. iii. fasc. 4 (1898). 28-75; articles in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 448-64: Aedilis (Kubitschek); 584-8: M. Aemilius -Scaurus (Klebs); iv. 702-5: Comitia, part of (Liebenam); 1462-70: P. -Cornelius Scipio Africanus Major (Henze); 1471-83: L. Cornelius Scipio -Asiagenus (Münzer); v. 1324-7: Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus (ibid.); Daremberg -et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 95-100: Aedilis (Humbert); see also ibid. s. Comitia.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_330"></a>[330]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XV">CHAPTER XV<br /> -<span class="smaller">COMITIAL LEGISLATION<br /> -<span class="smcap">From Hortensius to the Gracchi</span><br /> -287-134</span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>An Era of Repose</i><br /> -287-232</h4> - -<p>The Hortensian enactment which raised the plebiscite to an -equality with the lex and gave the tribunician initiative full -constitutional freedom<a id="FNanchor_2003" href="#Footnote_2003" class="fnanchor">[2003]</a> seems to have been especially calculated -to prepare for a splendid outburst of legislative energy. No -such result, however, was actually reached. Circumstances -prove the leaders of the plebs to have been well satisfied with -the political gains thus far made as regards (1) their place in -the senate assured them by the Ovinian statute,<a id="FNanchor_2004" href="#Footnote_2004" class="fnanchor">[2004]</a> (2) their right -to the magistracies, confirmed by various laws, (3) the powers -of the tribunate and its relation to the senate established by the -Hortensian statute. Content with their position as a branch -of the widened nobility, inferior neither politically nor socially -to the patrician branch, and happy in the enjoyment of authority, -they were now as much inclined as the patricians to discourage -and to resist further aggression on the part of the plain -citizens. Their control of the initiative in legislation was the -chief means of forwarding this policy. Their respect for the -senate, in which they were now rapidly becoming the dominant -party, was such that they were willing to forego the recently -acquired privilege of bringing their rogations before the people -without the senatorial sanction. But in case a tribune was so -bold and so out of harmony with his political peers as to offer -an unsanctioned bill, they could count on the intercession of -one of his colleagues; if matters came to an extremity, the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_331"></a>[331]</span> -senate could annul the act after its adoption by declaring it -illegal or contrary to the auspices.<a id="FNanchor_2005" href="#Footnote_2005" class="fnanchor">[2005]</a> Evidently the plebeian -nobles were aware, too, that with the increase in the number of -citizens and with their dispersion over Italy the assembly had -ceased to represent the citizen body, and was failing in ability -to grapple with the new and increasingly complex problems of -administration created by the widening of the Roman domain.<a id="FNanchor_2006" href="#Footnote_2006" class="fnanchor">[2006]</a></p> - -<p>Under these new conditions the assemblies continued, it is -true, to elect their annual magistrates and to receive appeals -from the judicial decisions of the latter, more rarely to declare -war or to ratify a treaty. Occasionally they passed a law to -increase the number of magistrates or to regulate elections; -but for the fifty-five years following the Hortensian legislation, -287-232, there is no record of the enactment of a distinctly -administrative law. The silence of history on this point is due -not so much to the exceptionally scant sources<a id="FNanchor_2007" href="#Footnote_2007" class="fnanchor">[2007]</a> as to a lack of -comitial activity.</p> - -<p>First among the statutes relating to the election of magistrates -is to be placed the Maenian plebiscite, adopted in 287 or -thereabout, which directed the patres in case of elections, as -the Publilian statute had directed them in case of rogations,<a id="FNanchor_2008" href="#Footnote_2008" class="fnanchor">[2008]</a> -to give their auctoritas before the voting began, while the -issue was still uncertain.<a id="FNanchor_2009" href="#Footnote_2009" class="fnanchor">[2009]</a> Blocking the last efforts of the patricians -to monopolize the consulship,<a id="FNanchor_2010" href="#Footnote_2010" class="fnanchor">[2010]</a> the act completed the -reduction of the patrum auctoritas to a formality. The sources -represent Appius Claudius Caecus as the chief offender whom -this law was designed to rebuke. His personality had brought<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_332"></a>[332]</span> -to the censorship an enormous accretion of power which disturbed -the constitutional balance. In this period that magistracy -assumed also the function of supervising the morals of the -citizens.<a id="FNanchor_2011" href="#Footnote_2011" class="fnanchor">[2011]</a> To check this disproportionate growth a law, probably -tribunician, of 265 forbade reëlection to the office.<a id="FNanchor_2012" href="#Footnote_2012" class="fnanchor">[2012]</a></p> - -<p>The Romans created no more absolutely new magistratus -ordinarii. In 267, however, probably by an act of the comitia -tributa, they doubled the number of quaestors—from four to -eight—in order that the new members of the college might -attend to the financial business of the government at various -points in Italy.<a id="FNanchor_2013" href="#Footnote_2013" class="fnanchor">[2013]</a> A second praetor was created in 242,<a id="FNanchor_2014" href="#Footnote_2014" class="fnanchor">[2014]</a> doubtless -by a law, not only for jurisdiction inter peregrinos but also -for increasing the number of magistrates available for military -commands.<a id="FNanchor_2015" href="#Footnote_2015" class="fnanchor">[2015]</a> The tresviri capitales, instituted in 289,<a id="FNanchor_2016" href="#Footnote_2016" class="fnanchor">[2016]</a> were -given the rank of magistrate by a plebiscite of L. Papirius, -adopted after 242, which directed the urban praetor to elect -these officials in the comitia tributa.<a id="FNanchor_2017" href="#Footnote_2017" class="fnanchor">[2017]</a> In 241 the people, probably -in tribal assembly, granted to L. Caecilius Metellus on -account of his blindness the privilege of riding to the Curia in a -carriage.<a id="FNanchor_2018" href="#Footnote_2018" class="fnanchor">[2018]</a></p> - -<p>One statute referred to this period<a id="FNanchor_2019" href="#Footnote_2019" class="fnanchor">[2019]</a> belongs to the domain of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_333"></a>[333]</span> -private law. The first chapter of the tribunician lex Aquilia -provided “that if a slave of another man, or a quadruped of his -cattle, be unlawfully slain, whatever within a year is the highest -value thereof, that amount the offender shall pay to the owner.”<a id="FNanchor_2020" href="#Footnote_2020" class="fnanchor">[2020]</a> -The second chapter secured the principal stipulator against -adstipulators, and the third provided for all other kinds of -damage.<a id="FNanchor_2021" href="#Footnote_2021" class="fnanchor">[2021]</a> It superseded all previous statutes on the subject, -including that of the Twelve Tables.</p> - -<h4>II. <i>The Flaminian Era</i><a id="FNanchor_2022" href="#Footnote_2022" class="fnanchor">[2022]</a><br /> -232-201</h4> - -<p>Such is the scant list of legislative acts of the half century -following the dictatorship of Hortensius (287-232), none of -them as innovating as, for instance, the reform of the comitia -centuriata brought about in approximately the same period by -the power of the censors alone.<a id="FNanchor_2023" href="#Footnote_2023" class="fnanchor">[2023]</a> The nobles had a certain -degree of reason for feeling secure in their control of the -administration. But in this respect they miscalculated. The -long war with Carthage, which had diverted the attention of all -the citizens from politics, ended without bringing in the wake -of victory the usual rewards to the masses. No lands in Sicily -were assigned to the citizens, while on their northeastern border -the Picene district and the territory recently taken from the -Gauls in the neighborhood of Ariminum were reserved by the -nobles for their own occupation. Popular discontent at these<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_334"></a>[334]</span> -short-sighted, selfish proceedings found expression in the rogation -of C. Flaminius, tribune of the plebs in 232, for the assignment -of the lands here mentioned to the citizens who were -willing to settle on the frontier.<a id="FNanchor_2024" href="#Footnote_2024" class="fnanchor">[2024]</a> It was vehemently opposed -by the nobility,<a id="FNanchor_2025" href="#Footnote_2025" class="fnanchor">[2025]</a> and was finally passed without the authorization -of a senatus consultum.<a id="FNanchor_2026" href="#Footnote_2026" class="fnanchor">[2026]</a> From a statement of Cicero<a id="FNanchor_2027" href="#Footnote_2027" class="fnanchor">[2027]</a> that -as long afterward as 228 Q. Fabius Maximus, then consul a -second time, was hindering Flaminius from dividing the land, -we may infer that the author of the law was elected among the -tresviri charged with its administration.<a id="FNanchor_2028" href="#Footnote_2028" class="fnanchor">[2028]</a> Most of the settlers -in that region were assigned to the tribe Velina, probably in -pursuance of an article of the Flaminian statute.<a id="FNanchor_2029" href="#Footnote_2029" class="fnanchor">[2029]</a> The enactment -came as a disagreeable interruption to the quiet happiness -of the nobles—as a sign that the political battle fought out -between comitia and senate in the period ending with the Hortensian -legislation was to be renewed with perhaps even greater -bitterness. Hence Polybius, echoing the complaints of the -nobles, denounces the measure as the first step toward the -demoralization of the people.<a id="FNanchor_2030" href="#Footnote_2030" class="fnanchor">[2030]</a> The lasting hatred felt by the -senators for this new and powerful enemy is seen in their -refusal to grant him a triumph for military successes he had -won as consul in 223. A plebiscite without their authorization -gave the desired privilege to the champion of popular rights.<a id="FNanchor_2031" href="#Footnote_2031" class="fnanchor">[2031]</a> -It was probably in this connection—at least we are soon to -hear of it for the first time—that an act of the people was -made essential to a triumph within the city. Henceforth even -when the senate was willing to allow a triumph or an ovation, -the person thus honored could not hold imperium in the city on<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_335"></a>[335]</span> -the day of such festival excepting by a comitial lex. Usually -in cases of the kind the senate, after voting the privilege, -instructed a praetor to request one of the tribunes to -bring a rogatio de imperio before the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2032" href="#Footnote_2032" class="fnanchor">[2032]</a> The earliest -known act of the kind is the plebiscite of 211 which granted -the imperium to M. Marcellus, proconsul on the day of his -ovation.<a id="FNanchor_2033" href="#Footnote_2033" class="fnanchor">[2033]</a></p> - -<p>The popular party had not long to wait for an opportunity -to retaliate upon the senate for the slight it had offered their -champion. On the precedent of the Ovinian law<a id="FNanchor_2034" href="#Footnote_2034" class="fnanchor">[2034]</a> the people -had a right to legislate concerning the honors, privileges, and -qualifications of its individual members.<a id="FNanchor_2035" href="#Footnote_2035" class="fnanchor">[2035]</a> In 219 accordingly -the plebiscite of Q. Claudius, known to have been supported -in the senate by C. Flaminius alone, who was then censor, prohibited -senators and their sons from owning sea-going ships of -more than three hundred amphoras capacity.<a id="FNanchor_2036" href="#Footnote_2036" class="fnanchor">[2036]</a> It was probably -an article of this statute which forbade the same class of persons -to take contracts from the government, with the reservation of -such economically insignificant agreements as concerned worship.<a id="FNanchor_2037" href="#Footnote_2037" class="fnanchor">[2037]</a> -The peasants, whose interests Flaminius represented, -opposed the renewal of the war with Carthage, regarding it as -a means of extending the field of commerce and speculation of -the nobles. This law therefore expresses the determination of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_336"></a>[336]</span> -the country people that the senatorial families should no longer -share the advantages of such wars. From the point of view -of the statesman it was the first step toward the separation -of the governing class from the commercial class, with a view to -guarding against the administration of the government in the -sole interest of capital. The result was not all that could be -desired; the senatorial families found secret ways of placing a -great part of their funds in commercial companies; and in so -far as the law was actually effective, it compelled senators to -invest money in Italian land<a id="FNanchor_2038" href="#Footnote_2038" class="fnanchor">[2038]</a>—a proceeding which contributed -largely to the economic ruin of the peninsula.</p> - -<p>In the administration of finance, which in spite of occasional -interference on the part of the comitia remained with the senate, -is included the regulation of coinage. The comitia passed few -acts relating to the subject. The earliest known to history is -the misnamed lex minus solvendi of C. Flaminius, consul in -217, which introduced the uncial standard for the as, making -for ordinary use sixteen asses of an ounce weight equivalent to -ten old—in other words, to the denarius.<a id="FNanchor_2039" href="#Footnote_2039" class="fnanchor">[2039]</a> In the payment of -soldiers, however, the denarius was still reckoned at ten asses.<a id="FNanchor_2040" href="#Footnote_2040" class="fnanchor">[2040]</a> -Probably the same law regulated the issue of plated silver -denarii<a id="FNanchor_2041" href="#Footnote_2041" class="fnanchor">[2041]</a> and of gold coins.<a id="FNanchor_2042" href="#Footnote_2042" class="fnanchor">[2042]</a> The debtor’s gain was offset by -the actual decrease in the weight of the <i>as</i> to a little more than -an ounce before the enactment of the law.<a id="FNanchor_2043" href="#Footnote_2043" class="fnanchor">[2043]</a> This measure was -followed the next year by the plebiscite of M. Minucius, which -created the triumviri mensarii, a banking commission for relieving -the great lack of money (216).<a id="FNanchor_2044" href="#Footnote_2044" class="fnanchor">[2044]</a> The board managed -some of the financial business of the state,<a id="FNanchor_2045" href="#Footnote_2045" class="fnanchor">[2045]</a> and undoubtedly -did what it could to strengthen private credit, which at this<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_337"></a>[337]</span> -time was at a low ebb.<a id="FNanchor_2046" href="#Footnote_2046" class="fnanchor">[2046]</a> The next step taken by the comitia -was the enactment of a plebiscite within a field properly belonging -to the censors under senatorial supervision—the building -and repair of public works.<a id="FNanchor_2047" href="#Footnote_2047" class="fnanchor">[2047]</a> In 212 the act of an unknown -tribune, carried through the comitia with the consent of the -senate, created three temporary administrative boards—quinqueviri -for repairing the defences of the city, triumviri to seek -for property belonging to the temples and to register gifts, and -another board of three for repairing the temples of Fortune, -Mater Matuta, and Hope. These officials were to be elected -by the tribes under the chairmanship of the urban praetor.<a id="FNanchor_2048" href="#Footnote_2048" class="fnanchor">[2048]</a> -Nearly related is the plebiscite of 210, which in pursuance of a -senatus consultum directed the censors to farm the vectigalia -of the Campanian territory.<a id="FNanchor_2049" href="#Footnote_2049" class="fnanchor">[2049]</a> Evidently in the trying time of -the war with Hannibal the senate found it advisable to conciliate -the citizens by voluntarily bringing a few administrative measures -of the kind before it. All this legislation was due more or -less directly to the influence of Flaminius. A succession of -sumptuary laws may be likewise traced to his second consulship, -217. The Twelve Tables contained a number of laws relating -to funerals, designed to preserve good order and to prevent -extravagant expense.<a id="FNanchor_2050" href="#Footnote_2050" class="fnanchor">[2050]</a> After their ratification the authority -of the magistrates and especially of the censors sufficed for -the maintenance of good conduct, till in the period of the Punic -wars the character of the people began to suffer deterioration, -whereupon the assemblies undertook to enact new laws for the -enforcement of morality. One of the earliest was the lex alearia, -which prohibited the game of dice. Its mention by Plautus -makes it prior to 204.<a id="FNanchor_2051" href="#Footnote_2051" class="fnanchor">[2051]</a> The name of the author is not given; -and for that reason we cannot be sure that it was a comitial law.<a id="FNanchor_2052" href="#Footnote_2052" class="fnanchor">[2052]</a> -To the same period belongs the plebiscite of P. and M. Silius<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_338"></a>[338]</span> -concerning weights and measures.<a id="FNanchor_2053" href="#Footnote_2053" class="fnanchor">[2053]</a> The first comitial sumptuary -statute is the lex Metilia (217), probably tribunician, passed -under the influence of C. Flaminius and L. Aemilius, who were -censors in 220. It prescribed certain rules for the preparation -of cloth.<a id="FNanchor_2054" href="#Footnote_2054" class="fnanchor">[2054]</a> The object, in Lange’s<a id="FNanchor_2055" href="#Footnote_2055" class="fnanchor">[2055]</a> opinion, was to strike at the -luxury of the nobles through the guild of fullers. It was a -warning to them, he asserts, which however they failed to heed. -If this was indeed the object, the means were surprisingly feeble. -The next sumptuary law was the plebiscite of C. Oppius, 215, -directed against the luxury of wealthy women. It forbade a -woman to wear more than a half ounce of gold or a dress of -various colors or to ride in a carriage in a city or town or within -a mile of either, excepting when engaged in public worship.<a id="FNanchor_2056" href="#Footnote_2056" class="fnanchor">[2056]</a> -The author must have sympathized with the tendency of Flaminius, -and the law was supported, or at least not opposed, by -the nobility. Twenty years afterward their best representatives -strove in vain to maintain it against the rising tide of wealth -and luxury.<a id="FNanchor_2057" href="#Footnote_2057" class="fnanchor">[2057]</a></p> - -<p>The influence of Flaminius on legislation may be traced still -farther. Under the economic distress of the war with Hannibal -the plebs began to lapse into clientage to the nobles. In -spite of the principle that the patron should accept no honorarium -for legal service,<a id="FNanchor_2058" href="#Footnote_2058" class="fnanchor">[2058]</a> the nobles began by the requisition of -gifts to render the commons tributary to themselves.<a id="FNanchor_2059" href="#Footnote_2059" class="fnanchor">[2059]</a> The -chief occasion for these exactions was found in the Saturnalia, -which was reconstituted in 217.<a id="FNanchor_2060" href="#Footnote_2060" class="fnanchor">[2060]</a> To check the abuse the Publician -plebiscite mentioned by Macrobius,<a id="FNanchor_2061" href="#Footnote_2061" class="fnanchor">[2061]</a> undoubtedly of C. -Publicius Bibulus, the popular tribune of 209,<a id="FNanchor_2062" href="#Footnote_2062" class="fnanchor">[2062]</a> prohibited all -gifts from the poor to the rich on that festival with the exception<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_339"></a>[339]</span> -of wax candles. It was supplemented in 204 by the plebiscite -of M. Cincius Alimentus,<a id="FNanchor_2063" href="#Footnote_2063" class="fnanchor">[2063]</a> which absolutely forbade gifts -and fees for legal service.<a id="FNanchor_2064" href="#Footnote_2064" class="fnanchor">[2064]</a> The prohibition of a magistrate’s -acceptance of gifts for the performance of official duty was undoubtedly -included in it.<a id="FNanchor_2065" href="#Footnote_2065" class="fnanchor">[2065]</a> Moreover it forbade all gifts above a -specified amount, but with exceptions in favor of various relatives -and benefactors.<a id="FNanchor_2066" href="#Footnote_2066" class="fnanchor">[2066]</a></p> - -<p>It is not unlikely that the Flaminian age saw the earliest -comitial legislation governing judicial procedure in private -cases.<a id="FNanchor_2067" href="#Footnote_2067" class="fnanchor">[2067]</a> Some changes were wrought, too, in family law by -popular vote. In early time intermarriage between persons of -the sixth degree of kinship was forbidden by usage;<a id="FNanchor_2068" href="#Footnote_2068" class="fnanchor">[2068]</a> but in the -period between the first and second Punic wars the right was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_340"></a>[340]</span> -extended to relatives of the fifth and sixth degrees,<a id="FNanchor_2069" href="#Footnote_2069" class="fnanchor">[2069]</a> and shortly -afterward to those of the fourth degree (consobrini).<a id="FNanchor_2070" href="#Footnote_2070" class="fnanchor">[2070]</a> Another -law, the lex Atilia, enacted between 242 and 186,<a id="FNanchor_2071" href="#Footnote_2071" class="fnanchor">[2071]</a> probably in -the second Punic war,<a id="FNanchor_2072" href="#Footnote_2072" class="fnanchor">[2072]</a> directed the urban praetor to appoint a -tutor for a woman or child who was left without a natural protector.<a id="FNanchor_2073" href="#Footnote_2073" class="fnanchor">[2073]</a> -It now became possible, too, for a magistrate under -justifying circumstances to place a young man under twenty-five -in the care of a curator, in accordance with the Plaetorian -law,<a id="FNanchor_2074" href="#Footnote_2074" class="fnanchor">[2074]</a> which was enacted before 192,<a id="FNanchor_2075" href="#Footnote_2075" class="fnanchor">[2075]</a> and which belongs therefore -to the Flaminian age.<a id="FNanchor_2076" href="#Footnote_2076" class="fnanchor">[2076]</a></p> - -<p>In the same period we find the comitia active in other fields. -In 215 a tribal law of an unknown author granted the citizenship -to three hundred Campanian knights who had remained -faithful to Rome, and assigned them to the municipium of -Cumae.<a id="FNanchor_2077" href="#Footnote_2077" class="fnanchor">[2077]</a> Following a precedent set by the Antistian plebiscite -of 319,<a id="FNanchor_2078" href="#Footnote_2078" class="fnanchor">[2078]</a> L. Atilius, tribune of the plebs in 210, carried a law, in -pursuance of a senatus consultum, for granting the senate absolute -power over the Campanians who had revolted;<a id="FNanchor_2079" href="#Footnote_2079" class="fnanchor">[2079]</a> and the -senate accordingly not only punished them with loss of citizenship -but reduced them to miserable subjection.<a id="FNanchor_2080" href="#Footnote_2080" class="fnanchor">[2080]</a> The right of -the comitia to ratify a vow of a sacred spring was recognized in -217 by an opinion rendered by the pontiffs,<a id="FNanchor_2081" href="#Footnote_2081" class="fnanchor">[2081]</a> and was first exercised -through a plebiscite of that year.<a id="FNanchor_2082" href="#Footnote_2082" class="fnanchor">[2082]</a> The appointment of -commissioners for the dedication of temples also belonged to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_341"></a>[341]</span> -the assembly,<a id="FNanchor_2083" href="#Footnote_2083" class="fnanchor">[2083]</a> as well as the regulation of religious festivals.<a id="FNanchor_2084" href="#Footnote_2084" class="fnanchor">[2084]</a> -The greatest gain made by the people within the province of -religious legislation in the third century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> was the provision -for electing the pontifex maximus by seventeen tribes drawn by -lot from the whole number thirty-five and presided over by a -pontiff. This innovation probably belongs to the Flaminian era -and certainly to the time before 212, when the first instance of -such an election is given.<a id="FNanchor_2085" href="#Footnote_2085" class="fnanchor">[2085]</a> The act was followed by another, -before 209, which authorized the election of the chief curio in -the same way.<a id="FNanchor_2086" href="#Footnote_2086" class="fnanchor">[2086]</a> The object was to take the control of these -places from the nobles, who looked upon the great sacerdotal -collegia as a main support of their political power.<a id="FNanchor_2087" href="#Footnote_2087" class="fnanchor">[2087]</a> It was but -the beginning of a movement for transferring the appointment -of all members of these collegia to the comitia sacerdotum, made -up as above described. In the peculiar composition of assemblies -of this character we see an attempt to make the gods in -some degree coadjutors of the populace in filling the sacred -places.<a id="FNanchor_2088" href="#Footnote_2088" class="fnanchor">[2088]</a></p> - -<p>The assembly was merely exercising a long-recognized right<a id="FNanchor_2089" href="#Footnote_2089" class="fnanchor">[2089]</a> -in the institution of two new praetors in 227, for which we are<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_342"></a>[342]</span> -warranted in assuming a legislative act.<a id="FNanchor_2090" href="#Footnote_2090" class="fnanchor">[2090]</a> The same observation -applies to the increase in the number of elective military -tribunes from sixteen to twenty-four in 207,<a id="FNanchor_2091" href="#Footnote_2091" class="fnanchor">[2091]</a> which was evidently -a concession to the commons. As the senate generally -attended to the prolongation of the imperium,<a id="FNanchor_2092" href="#Footnote_2092" class="fnanchor">[2092]</a> the confirmation -of a senatorial decree to that effect by an act of the people in -208<a id="FNanchor_2093" href="#Footnote_2093" class="fnanchor">[2093]</a> was exceptional. Far more radical was the plebiscite of -M. Metilius, 217, for equalizing the power of the dictator with -that of the master of horse.<a id="FNanchor_2094" href="#Footnote_2094" class="fnanchor">[2094]</a> This act and the resort to election -for filling the office<a id="FNanchor_2095" href="#Footnote_2095" class="fnanchor">[2095]</a> destroyed the value of the institution.<a id="FNanchor_2096" href="#Footnote_2096" class="fnanchor">[2096]</a> A -violent departure from usage was attempted in 209 by the rogation -of C. Publicius Bibulus, tribune of the plebs, for abrogating -the proconsular imperium of M. Claudius Marcellus. On this -occasion not merely the plebs but all classes attended the -assembly, which by an overwhelming vote rejected the proposition.<a id="FNanchor_2097" href="#Footnote_2097" class="fnanchor">[2097]</a> -Three quarters of a century were to pass before a law of -the kind could actually carry.<a id="FNanchor_2098" href="#Footnote_2098" class="fnanchor">[2098]</a></p> - -<p>A plebiscite known to have been in force in the time of the -second Punic war<a id="FNanchor_2099" href="#Footnote_2099" class="fnanchor">[2099]</a> debarred from the tribunate and aedileship -of the plebs any person during the lifetime of a father or -grandfather who had filled a curule office. As the aim was -to free the plebeian officials from the influence of the nobility, -exercised through the patria potestas, that they might be in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_343"></a>[343]</span> -a better position to serve the interests of their constituents, -we may reasonably suppose this measure to have passed in -the time of Flaminius and under his influence. The tendency -was to widen the breach then forming between the nobility -and the commons.<a id="FNanchor_2100" href="#Footnote_2100" class="fnanchor">[2100]</a> The right of the people to dispense from -the law was acknowledged by the senate in 217, when, after -the destruction of the army at Trasimene and the death of -Flaminius, the patres authorized a plebiscite for dispensing -the consulars for the remainder of the war from the Genucian -plebiscite which forbade reëlection to the same office excepting -after an interval of ten years.<a id="FNanchor_2101" href="#Footnote_2101" class="fnanchor">[2101]</a></p> - -<p>From what has been given above it is clear that Flaminius -began a new era in legislation, by no change in the constitution, -but rather by assuming the free initiative granted the -tribunes of the plebs through the Hortensian statute. Under -the influence of his personality the comitia recovered the -share in the administration which they had lost in the half -century of lethargy just passed, and even made new inroads -into the province of magisterial and senatorial authority. While -the disaster at Cannae, following hard upon that of Trasimene, -subdued the rising spirit of popular independence, it made -the senate more conciliatory,<a id="FNanchor_2102" href="#Footnote_2102" class="fnanchor">[2102]</a> with the result that neither did -the comitia lapse into its former repose nor did the nobles -lose their hold on the government. It was to this era, more -definitely to the opening of the war with Hannibal, that the -description of the constitution by Polybius<a id="FNanchor_2103" href="#Footnote_2103" class="fnanchor">[2103]</a> applies. The -political condition of Rome was improving,<a id="FNanchor_2104" href="#Footnote_2104" class="fnanchor">[2104]</a> or was just at its -zenith.<a id="FNanchor_2105" href="#Footnote_2105" class="fnanchor">[2105]</a> As the senate was at the height of its power, public -measures were deliberated upon, not by the many, but by -the best men.<a id="FNanchor_2106" href="#Footnote_2106" class="fnanchor">[2106]</a> Political life was sound, elections were pure,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_344"></a>[344]</span> -and a scrupulous fear of the gods remained the strongest -support of the commonwealth.<a id="FNanchor_2107" href="#Footnote_2107" class="fnanchor">[2107]</a> At this epoch the three chief -constitutional elements—magistrates, senate, and comitia—were -so perfectly balanced that even a native would hardly -be able to say whether the form of government was monarchy, -aristocracy, or democracy.<a id="FNanchor_2108" href="#Footnote_2108" class="fnanchor">[2108]</a> In this equilibrium of forces, in -this mutual power of checking or strengthening, lay the might -and the excellence of the constitution.<a id="FNanchor_2109" href="#Footnote_2109" class="fnanchor">[2109]</a></p> - -<p>It is solely with the place of the assemblies in this system -that we are at present concerned. Inasmuch as the consuls -were supreme masters of the home administration, as well -as of the actual conduct of war,<a id="FNanchor_2110" href="#Footnote_2110" class="fnanchor">[2110]</a> and as the senate controlled -finance, diplomacy, and all interstate judicial business affecting -the Italian allies,<a id="FNanchor_2111" href="#Footnote_2111" class="fnanchor">[2111]</a> what part in the government could have -been left to the people? Polybius answers a most weighty -part. They are constitutionally the sole fountain of honor -and punishment, by which alone governments and societies -are held together. Not only are they in a position to discriminate -between the fit and the unfit in elections to office, but -they are the sole court for trying cases involving life and -death. The death penalty, however, may be avoided by voluntary -exile, if undertaken before a majority has been reached -in the process of voting.<a id="FNanchor_2112" href="#Footnote_2112" class="fnanchor">[2112]</a> Even finable actions in which the -proposed penalty is considerable, especially when the accused -has held a higher magistracy, come before them. It is they -who bestow offices on the deserving—the most honorable -reward which the constitution grants to virtue. It is they -who have absolute power to decide concerning the adoption -or repeal of laws; and most important of all, it is they who -deliberate concerning war and peace, and who ratify or reject -proposals for alliances, truces, and treaties.<a id="FNanchor_2113" href="#Footnote_2113" class="fnanchor">[2113]</a> These facts -might lead one to suppose that the supreme power is with -the people and that the government is a democracy.<a id="FNanchor_2114" href="#Footnote_2114" class="fnanchor">[2114]</a> In the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_345"></a>[345]</span> -domestic administration the consuls are dependent on them -for authorizing various kinds of business and are under obligations -to execute their decrees.<a id="FNanchor_2115" href="#Footnote_2115" class="fnanchor">[2115]</a> In war, however distant -from home, the consul must still court their favor, to secure -their ratification of his arrangements for peace; and on laying -down his office he is liable to prosecution before them for -maladministration.<a id="FNanchor_2116" href="#Footnote_2116" class="fnanchor">[2116]</a> Hence he can afford to neglect them no -more than he can the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2117" href="#Footnote_2117" class="fnanchor">[2117]</a></p> - -<p>The senate, too, is dependent upon the people for ratifying -all serious penalties imposed by the courts, which are made up -of senators.<a id="FNanchor_2118" href="#Footnote_2118" class="fnanchor">[2118]</a> Similarly in matters directly concerning that body, -the people have power to accept or reject proposals for diminishing -its traditional authority, for depriving its members of -dignities or offices, or even for lessening their means of livelihood.<a id="FNanchor_2119" href="#Footnote_2119" class="fnanchor">[2119]</a> -But the greatest popular restriction upon its authority -is the tribunician veto, which can prevent it from passing a -decree or even from holding a meeting. As the tribunes are -under obligations to carry into effect the decisions of the people -and in every way to have regard for their wishes,—for this and -for the other reasons mentioned, the senate respects the people -and cannot fail to neglect their feelings.<a id="FNanchor_2120" href="#Footnote_2120" class="fnanchor">[2120]</a></p> - -<p>From the foregoing remarks of Polybius it is clear that in -the political theory of his time the will of the multitude when -expressed by a comitial act prevailed, in other words that the -people were sovereign. Several checks on their action from -the side of the senate and magistrates he mentions, especially -the absolute power of life and death exercised by the consuls in -war over those under their command,<a id="FNanchor_2121" href="#Footnote_2121" class="fnanchor">[2121]</a> and the control over the -citizens wielded by the senate through the management of public -contracts and through filling the courts from its own number. -But the most important limitation, implied throughout this discussion -though never expressly mentioned, is the lack of popular -initiative. The people could convene for no business whatever<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_346"></a>[346]</span> -unless summoned by a magistrate. They could consider no -other subject than that proposed to them by the president; -they could take no part in the deliberation excepting in so far -as the president granted permission to individuals; they could -merely vote yes or no on the question presented to them.<a id="FNanchor_2122" href="#Footnote_2122" class="fnanchor">[2122]</a> -Notwithstanding the theory of popular sovereignty these conditions -prevented the rise of a real democracy; they placed the -assemblies under the control of the magistrates, who as a rule, -including even the tribunes, were willing ministers of the senate. -The bridled masses were rendered more obedient by the disasters -of the war with Hannibal, and the nobles were soon -to grow arrogant and violent through a surfeit of wealth and -power.<a id="FNanchor_2123" href="#Footnote_2123" class="fnanchor">[2123]</a> Under these new circumstances the docility of the -commons made possible the thorough organization of plutocracy -on the basis of a democratic theory of government.</p> - -<h4>III. <i>The Era of the Completed Plutocracy, based on -a Recognition of Popular Sovereignty</i><br /> -201-134</h4> - -<p>The period from the close of the war with Hannibal to -the tribunate of Ti. Gracchus is marked by no such display of -comitial energy as that which characterized either the pre-Hortensian -age or the epoch introduced by Flaminius. In -return for a spurious freedom and a pretended share in the -administration the assembly became the handmaid of the -plutocracy.</p> - -<p>There was, as usual, some legislation of the old kind concerning -magistrates. In 198 the number of praetors was increased -to six.<a id="FNanchor_2124" href="#Footnote_2124" class="fnanchor">[2124]</a> The arrangement was modified by the consular statute -of M. Baebius, 181, which provided for the election of four and -six on alternate years,<a id="FNanchor_2125" href="#Footnote_2125" class="fnanchor">[2125]</a> with the object of giving the governors -of the Spains a biennial term.<a id="FNanchor_2126" href="#Footnote_2126" class="fnanchor">[2126]</a> The greedy office-seekers by -another statute brought about the repeal of this arrangement<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_347"></a>[347]</span> -in 179.<a id="FNanchor_2127" href="#Footnote_2127" class="fnanchor">[2127]</a> The only new office was that of the tresviri epulones, -instituted by a plebiscite of C. Licinius Lucullus, 196. Their -function was to attend to certain religious festivals, especially to -the feast of Jupiter held on November 13. The law provided -that these officials should wear the toga praetexta just as did -the pontiffs.<a id="FNanchor_2128" href="#Footnote_2128" class="fnanchor">[2128]</a></p> - -<p>A stage in the development of the plutocracy and of its -control over the plebeian tribunate is marked by the enactment -of the lex annalis of L. Villius, tribune of the plebs in 180. This -statute not only fixed the ages at which men might sue for and -hold the various patrician magistracies,<a id="FNanchor_2129" href="#Footnote_2129" class="fnanchor">[2129]</a> but also, developing a -custom already in existence, established an interval, evidently of -two years,<a id="FNanchor_2130" href="#Footnote_2130" class="fnanchor">[2130]</a> between consecutive magistracies. The stated object -was to curb the greed for office which the young nobles were -manifesting<a id="FNanchor_2131" href="#Footnote_2131" class="fnanchor">[2131]</a> as well as the eagerness of the people to favor -such ambitious persons, and for that reason it received the -support of Cato.<a id="FNanchor_2132" href="#Footnote_2132" class="fnanchor">[2132]</a> While it prevented the Scipios and the -Flaminini from creating a dynastic oligarchy, by checking -the growth of exceptional talent and by subjecting statesmen -to a fixed routine of honors and functions it subordinated the -individual to the class, and in this way aided the consolidation -of the senatorial plutocracy.<a id="FNanchor_2133" href="#Footnote_2133" class="fnanchor">[2133]</a> To the same period, at all events -after 194,<a id="FNanchor_2134" href="#Footnote_2134" class="fnanchor">[2134]</a> belong the Licinian and Aebutian plebiscites, which<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_348"></a>[348]</span> -prohibited the presiding magistrate from offering as candidates -for any extraordinary office himself, his colleagues, and his -relations by blood or marriage. This measure, too, was to -prevent the formation of governing cliques and dynasties. In -151, the year after the third consulship of M. Claudius Marcellus,<a id="FNanchor_2135" href="#Footnote_2135" class="fnanchor">[2135]</a> -to check the further aggrandizement of this man as well -as the rise of similar personalities, a law, supported by Cato,<a id="FNanchor_2136" href="#Footnote_2136" class="fnanchor">[2136]</a> -absolutely forbade reëlection to the consulship.<a id="FNanchor_2137" href="#Footnote_2137" class="fnanchor">[2137]</a> Cato’s idea -may have been to expedite the advancement of novi homines; -but so far from accomplishing this object, the measure contributed -to the further subordination of the individual to the -plutocratic machine.<a id="FNanchor_2138" href="#Footnote_2138" class="fnanchor">[2138]</a> It may well have been in the same partisan -spirit rather than in the interest of political morality that -P. Cornelius and M. Baebius Tamphilus, consuls in 181, carried -a law ex auctoritate senatus for the prosecution of bribery. It -disqualified for office for ten years any person found guilty of -influencing an election through bribery or other illegal means.<a id="FNanchor_2139" href="#Footnote_2139" class="fnanchor">[2139]</a> -Probably through this measure the nobles aimed to curb the -greed of office in the more ambitious and unscrupulous of their -number; but it accomplished nothing, and was followed in 159 -by another consular lex de ambitu of Cn. Cornelius Dolabella -and M. Fulvius Nobilior, which increased the penalty to death.<a id="FNanchor_2140" href="#Footnote_2140" class="fnanchor">[2140]</a> -Practically the punishment was exile. This law had no more -effect than the earlier; and the conduct of the nobles both -before and after its enactment proves that they did not intend<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_349"></a>[349]</span> -by it to open the consulship to the competition of novi -homines.</p> - -<p>The limitation upon the judicial imperium of magistrates and -promagistrates by the three Porcian laws of appeal, which -belong to this period, has been considered in connection with -popular jurisdiction.<a id="FNanchor_2141" href="#Footnote_2141" class="fnanchor">[2141]</a> The last of these acts affected the administration -of the provinces and of military affairs, which -belonged originally to the magistrates and the senate. It was -only by degrees that the people interfered in this department. -The earliest known act of the kind was the consular lex de -sumptu provinciali of M. Porcius Cato, 195, for limiting the -expenses of provincials in the support and honor of the governor.<a id="FNanchor_2142" href="#Footnote_2142" class="fnanchor">[2142]</a> -To prevent conflicts in the provinces between the incoming -and the retiring governor, Cato favored a regulation, -adopted probably in 177, whether a lex or a senatus consultum -has not been determined, to the effect that the imperium of the -outgoing functionary should cease on the arrival of the new.<a id="FNanchor_2143" href="#Footnote_2143" class="fnanchor">[2143]</a> -It was still more unusual for the people to take part in the -organization of a new province; but in 146 a lex Livia, probably -tribunician, commissioned P. Scipio Aemilianus, assisted by -ten legati, to organize the province of Africa.<a id="FNanchor_2144" href="#Footnote_2144" class="fnanchor">[2144]</a></p> - -<p>In foreign affairs the assemblies took the same part as in the -preceding period; the centuries continued to declare war and -the tribes to ratify peace. In 196 the tribunician lex Marcia -Atinia compelled the consuls against their will to conclude a -treaty with Macedon.<a id="FNanchor_2145" href="#Footnote_2145" class="fnanchor">[2145]</a> In 149 L. Scribonius Libo, tribune of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_350"></a>[350]</span> -the plebs, attempted in vain to secure the adoption of a rogation -for restoring liberty to the Lusitanians, whom the praetor -Servius Galba had treacherously enslaved.<a id="FNanchor_2146" href="#Footnote_2146" class="fnanchor">[2146]</a> No less characteristic -of the age is the consular lex of L. Furius and Ser. Atilius, -136, for surrendering C. Mancinus to the Numantines because -without the consent of the senate he had made an unfavorable -treaty with them.<a id="FNanchor_2147" href="#Footnote_2147" class="fnanchor">[2147]</a> The deterioration in the character of Roman -generalship and warfare is indicated by a statute of unknown -authorship, enacted after 180,<a id="FNanchor_2148" href="#Footnote_2148" class="fnanchor">[2148]</a> which forbade a triumph to a -commander who had not killed at least five thousand of the -enemy in a single battle.<a id="FNanchor_2149" href="#Footnote_2149" class="fnanchor">[2149]</a> The intention of the law, however, -which obviously was to prevent commanders from triumphing -for fictitious or insignificant victories, was circumvented by falsifications -regarding the number of enemies slain or by triumphs -on the Alban Mount.<a id="FNanchor_2150" href="#Footnote_2150" class="fnanchor">[2150]</a></p> - -<p>Whereas before the second century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> no mention is made -of a comitial act for the founding of a colony, in the beginning -of the period now under consideration the function was exercised -by the people three or four times in quick succession. In -197 was enacted the tribunician statute of C. Atinius for planting -five colonies—Vulturnum, Liternum, Puteoli, Salernum, -and Buxentum—on the coast of Italy, each to consist of three -hundred families, the execution of the measure to be in the -hands of triumviri, who were to hold their office three years.<a id="FNanchor_2151" href="#Footnote_2151" class="fnanchor">[2151]</a> -Not long afterward a plebiscite of Q. Aelius Tubero provided -for founding two Latin colonies, one in Bruttium, the other at -Thurii, each by triumviri, who likewise held office three years. -The measure was authorized by a senatus consultum, 194.<a id="FNanchor_2152" href="#Footnote_2152" class="fnanchor">[2152]</a> In -the same year a tribunician law of M. Baebius Tamphilus provided -for the establishment of three Roman colonies.<a id="FNanchor_2153" href="#Footnote_2153" class="fnanchor">[2153]</a> Mention<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_351"></a>[351]</span> -of colonial legislation by the people then ceases. Although the -phenomenon may be due in some cases to the sources, this explanation -does not generally hold good, especially as the colonization -of the years 189<a id="FNanchor_2154" href="#Footnote_2154" class="fnanchor">[2154]</a> and 184<a id="FNanchor_2155" href="#Footnote_2155" class="fnanchor">[2155]</a> is expressly attributed to -the senate, and because Velleius<a id="FNanchor_2156" href="#Footnote_2156" class="fnanchor">[2156]</a> credits that body with the -founding of all the colonies from the Gallic conflagration to his -own time. Probably before the Gracchi a senatorial decree was -issued in every case, and though the commissioners for conducting -colonies were as a rule elected by the tribes after 296,<a id="FNanchor_2157" href="#Footnote_2157" class="fnanchor">[2157]</a> the -people were given but a taste of power within this administrative -field.<a id="FNanchor_2158" href="#Footnote_2158" class="fnanchor">[2158]</a></p> - -<p>Early in the second century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> we find creditors rioting in -usury, unchecked by the various statutes which had been enacted -against the evil. They discovered a way of circumventing -the law by transferring their securities to citizens of an -allied state, who had a right to force the collection of debts -under the law of their own community. To put a stop to this -kind of fraud the senate decreed that after a stated date allies -who lent money to Roman citizens should register the transaction, -and that in suits for the collection of such money the debtor -should have the privilege of choosing under which law, whether -that of Rome or of the allied community, the suit against him -should be tried. As the registers provided for the purpose -showed that an enormous amount of fraud was still being committed -in circumvention of the law and of the senatorial act,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_352"></a>[352]</span> -M. Sempronius, tribune of the plebs in 193, ex auctoritate -patrum proposed and carried a statute which ordered that -money lent between a Roman citizen and one of a Latin or -other allied state should be collected under Roman law.<a id="FNanchor_2159" href="#Footnote_2159" class="fnanchor">[2159]</a> This -is one of the earliest instances of unfairness introduced by -Rome into the private relations between her citizens and those -of her allies.<a id="FNanchor_2160" href="#Footnote_2160" class="fnanchor">[2160]</a></p> - -<p>Family law underwent some modification. A plebiscite of -Q. Voconius Saxa, 169,<a id="FNanchor_2161" href="#Footnote_2161" class="fnanchor">[2161]</a> provided that no citizen assessed at a -hundred thousand asses or more should will his property to a -woman.<a id="FNanchor_2162" href="#Footnote_2162" class="fnanchor">[2162]</a> Another article limited to a half of the estate the -amount which any legatee, male or female, could receive.<a id="FNanchor_2163" href="#Footnote_2163" class="fnanchor">[2163]</a> -Dowries were regulated by a lex Maenia, which seems to -belong to 186.<a id="FNanchor_2164" href="#Footnote_2164" class="fnanchor">[2164]</a></p> - -<p>In the bestowal of the citizenship the people were unhampered. -Doubtless for some time after the Hortensian legislation -comitial acts for this purpose were commonly authorized -by senatus consulta; but in the year 188 we first hear the enunciation -of the principle that the people without the authority of -the senate had the power to bestow the ius suffragii on whomsoever -they pleased.<a id="FNanchor_2165" href="#Footnote_2165" class="fnanchor">[2165]</a> The principle was carried into immediate -effect by the tribunician statute of C. Valerius Tappo, which -without a senatus consultum conferred the right of suffrage on -the Formiani, Fundani, and Arpinates, who hitherto had been -cives sine suffragio. The determination of the tribe to which -new citizens should belong was also provided for by the legislative<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_353"></a>[353]</span> -act of admission.<a id="FNanchor_2166" href="#Footnote_2166" class="fnanchor">[2166]</a> The citizenship granted in this period -continued occasionally to be limited. The Campanians, excluded -forever from the rights of the state in 210,<a id="FNanchor_2167" href="#Footnote_2167" class="fnanchor">[2167]</a> were in 188 placed -under the census by a senatus consultum of the preceding year -and were given intermarriage probably by a similar act.<a id="FNanchor_2168" href="#Footnote_2168" class="fnanchor">[2168]</a> In -early time, at least before 184, the custom arose of granting to -the founders of a colony the right to enroll as citizens a specified -number of aliens. The first recorded instance belongs to the -year mentioned, in which the poet Ennius received the citizenship -in accordance with such a law.<a id="FNanchor_2169" href="#Footnote_2169" class="fnanchor">[2169]</a> It was by the pretorian -comitia tributa that the priestesses of Ceres, who were Greeks -from Naples, Velia, or Sicily, were admitted to the citizenship.<a id="FNanchor_2170" href="#Footnote_2170" class="fnanchor">[2170]</a> -Perhaps by the same assembly, at all events by an act of the -people, a slave who deserved well of the state was given his -liberty, which involved citizenship.<a id="FNanchor_2171" href="#Footnote_2171" class="fnanchor">[2171]</a> Such grants to single individuals -by the people, however, must have been rare.<a id="FNanchor_2172" href="#Footnote_2172" class="fnanchor">[2172]</a> A -Roman taken captive in war, recovered all his rights simply by -returning home (postliminium).<a id="FNanchor_2173" href="#Footnote_2173" class="fnanchor">[2173]</a> But even when an entire community -was brought into the state by a single vote, the wording -of the law indicates that the inhabitants received the honor as -individuals and not in mass.<a id="FNanchor_2174" href="#Footnote_2174" class="fnanchor">[2174]</a> It was permissible for independent -communities and individuals to reject the offer of the franchise,<a id="FNanchor_2175" href="#Footnote_2175" class="fnanchor">[2175]</a> -whereas subjects and partial citizens were compelled to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_354"></a>[354]</span> -accept it.<a id="FNanchor_2176" href="#Footnote_2176" class="fnanchor">[2176]</a> From the facts here stated it will immediately -appear that after the people had acquired an unconditioned -right to extend the Roman franchise, they made little use of the -opportunity. The senate could well afford to concede to them -a power which they cherished a growing disinclination to use. -The expansion of the empire had at length so enhanced the -value of citizenship that the masses were unwilling except on -the rarest occasions to share its advantages with others.<a id="FNanchor_2177" href="#Footnote_2177" class="fnanchor">[2177]</a> Any -attempt, therefore, on the part of aliens to usurp the rights of -the city was resented. In 187 we find the senate appointing -the praetor Q. Terentius Culleo extraordinary commissioner -for determining by investigation who from the Latin towns had -recently usurped the citizenship, and for expelling from Rome -those found guilty of the offence.<a id="FNanchor_2178" href="#Footnote_2178" class="fnanchor">[2178]</a> Soon afterward the people -extended their power over such cases; in 177 a second expulsion -of the Latins was brought about by a consular law of C. -Claudius Pulcher.<a id="FNanchor_2179" href="#Footnote_2179" class="fnanchor">[2179]</a></p> - -<p>The same spirit prompted the citizens to limit the political -rights of freedmen. There can be no doubt that early Rome -was as liberal in the treatment of this class as of aliens. From -earliest times they had a right to acquire land; and such proprietors -were undoubtedly enrolled in the tribes in which their -estates were situated.<a id="FNanchor_2180" href="#Footnote_2180" class="fnanchor">[2180]</a> From the beginning, however, custom -deprived them of the ius honorum<a id="FNanchor_2181" href="#Footnote_2181" class="fnanchor">[2181]</a> and of conubium. The -former they acquired along with the other plebeians, although -they were less readily admitted to the actual enjoyment of it;<a id="FNanchor_2182" href="#Footnote_2182" class="fnanchor">[2182]</a> -the latter they continued to lack.<a id="FNanchor_2183" href="#Footnote_2183" class="fnanchor">[2183]</a> They were exempt, too,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_355"></a>[355]</span> -from ordinary military service.<a id="FNanchor_2184" href="#Footnote_2184" class="fnanchor">[2184]</a> In time their condition became -worse. C. Flaminius as censor in 220, in the interest of the rural -plebs,<a id="FNanchor_2185" href="#Footnote_2185" class="fnanchor">[2185]</a> began arbitrarily to assign all the libertini, whether they -had lands or not, to the four city tribes,<a id="FNanchor_2186" href="#Footnote_2186" class="fnanchor">[2186]</a> doubtless at the same -time to the supernumerary centuries of the comitia centuriata.<a id="FNanchor_2187" href="#Footnote_2187" class="fnanchor">[2187]</a> -But the sons of freedmen, themselves originally libertini,<a id="FNanchor_2188" href="#Footnote_2188" class="fnanchor">[2188]</a> came -in time to be looked upon as ingenui, with the same legal rights -as the old citizens. This change seems to have been effected -by the plebiscite of Q. Terentius Culleo, 189, for compelling -the censors to admit to the senate the sons of free parents—undoubtedly -those sons of libertini who were born after the -emancipation of the father.<a id="FNanchor_2189" href="#Footnote_2189" class="fnanchor">[2189]</a> The law must have involved the -principle of treating such persons as citizens optimo iure, and -have therefore required their enrolment in the country tribes, -provided they owned land. As the acquisition of full rights -came only with the death of the father, which made the son sui -iuris, the application of the principle must have required the -enrolment of the fathers along with the sons in the rural tribes; -in other words, it recognized as citizens optimo iure those -libertini who had children,<a id="FNanchor_2190" href="#Footnote_2190" class="fnanchor">[2190]</a> on the basis of the existing custom -of enlisting such persons in military service at crises.<a id="FNanchor_2191" href="#Footnote_2191" class="fnanchor">[2191]</a> The -political connections of the author of this statute leads us to -interpret it as a measure of the oligarchs for strengthening -their position by the votes of their dependents.<a id="FNanchor_2192" href="#Footnote_2192" class="fnanchor">[2192]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_356"></a>[356]</span></p> - -<p>The increasing wealth and luxury of the age naturally gave -rise to sumptuary legislation; and the nobility could allow the -comitia to revel in this field, devoid as it was of political significance. -The first act, however, was to undo the Oppian law of -215<a id="FNanchor_2193" href="#Footnote_2193" class="fnanchor">[2193]</a> through the plebiscite of M. Valerius, 195, enacted probably -without a senatus consultum.<a id="FNanchor_2194" href="#Footnote_2194" class="fnanchor">[2194]</a> It was the senate which -initiated the tribunician statute of C. Orchius, 181, for limiting -the number of guests at banquets.<a id="FNanchor_2195" href="#Footnote_2195" class="fnanchor">[2195]</a> Cato opposed the enactment -of this measure on the ground that it was too easy,<a id="FNanchor_2196" href="#Footnote_2196" class="fnanchor">[2196]</a> but -twenty years afterward he protected it from abolition.<a id="FNanchor_2197" href="#Footnote_2197" class="fnanchor">[2197]</a> It was -reinforced in 161 by the lex cibaria of the consul C. Fannius -Strabo, which prescribed that ordinary meals should cost no -more than ten asses; on ten days of the month meals should -cost no more than thirty; and on the days of the ludi plebeii, -Saturnalia, and certain other great festivals, no more than a -hundred.<a id="FNanchor_2198" href="#Footnote_2198" class="fnanchor">[2198]</a> It also forbade the use of fowls excepting one unfattened -hen.<a id="FNanchor_2199" href="#Footnote_2199" class="fnanchor">[2199]</a> The lex Didia cibaria, pretorian or tribunician, -143, extended the application of the Fannian statute to all Italy, -and rendered liable to punishment not only the host who violated -the law but also the guests at such illegal repasts.<a id="FNanchor_2200" href="#Footnote_2200" class="fnanchor">[2200]</a></p> - -<p>Closely akin to sumptuary laws are those for the regulation -of theatres and games. A plebiscite of Cn. Aufidius of unknown -date, possibly 170,<a id="FNanchor_2201" href="#Footnote_2201" class="fnanchor">[2201]</a> permitted the importation of wild -beasts from Africa for use in the circensian games. The statute -repealed a senatus consultum which had prohibited such importation.<a id="FNanchor_2202" href="#Footnote_2202" class="fnanchor">[2202]</a> -The arrangement of the social classes in the theatre -and at the games was determined partly by law. It was the -censors of 194, persuaded by Scipio Africanus the Elder,<a id="FNanchor_2203" href="#Footnote_2203" class="fnanchor">[2203]</a> who<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_357"></a>[357]</span> -reserved the front seats for senators.<a id="FNanchor_2204" href="#Footnote_2204" class="fnanchor">[2204]</a> The assignment of fourteen -rows to the knights next to those of the senators was -effected by a plebiscite, possibly of 146, the author of which is -unknown.<a id="FNanchor_2205" href="#Footnote_2205" class="fnanchor">[2205]</a></p> - -<p>For a long time the laws of the Twelve Tables administered -by the magistrates, more rarely by a special court created sometimes -by the senate but oftener and in better right during this -period by the people,<a id="FNanchor_2206" href="#Footnote_2206" class="fnanchor">[2206]</a> sufficed for controlling crime. But as -offences multiplied in consequence of the increasing complexity -of life, the people were called upon more and more frequently -to legislate on the subject.<a id="FNanchor_2207" href="#Footnote_2207" class="fnanchor">[2207]</a> One of the earliest may have been -the lex Fabia de plagiariis,<a id="FNanchor_2208" href="#Footnote_2208" class="fnanchor">[2208]</a> against the usurpation of ownership -over a Roman citizen without his consent or over his slave -without the consent of the owner.<a id="FNanchor_2209" href="#Footnote_2209" class="fnanchor">[2209]</a> The date of its origin is -unknown; but if Plautus<a id="FNanchor_2210" href="#Footnote_2210" class="fnanchor">[2210]</a> refers to it, as Voigt asserts,<a id="FNanchor_2211" href="#Footnote_2211" class="fnanchor">[2211]</a> it must -have been in force before 197. For this and other reasons -Voigt assigns it to Q. Fabius Verrucossus, consul in 209.<a id="FNanchor_2212" href="#Footnote_2212" class="fnanchor">[2212]</a> -Lange prefers Q. Fabius Labeo, consul in 183,<a id="FNanchor_2213" href="#Footnote_2213" class="fnanchor">[2213]</a> whereas -Mommsen places it after the Social war.<a id="FNanchor_2214" href="#Footnote_2214" class="fnanchor">[2214]</a> A lex Gabinia -threatened with scourging and death any one who induced the -people to gather in secret meetings. It seems to belong to the -time of the Bacchanalian trouble, 186,<a id="FNanchor_2215" href="#Footnote_2215" class="fnanchor">[2215]</a> and to have been designed -against religious associations of the kind; nevertheless the -nobility found in it a means of repressing popular agitation.</p> - -<p>On the authority of a mutilated passage in the newly found -epitome of Livy an attempt has been made to assign to 149 -the law of M. Scantinius (or Scatinius), probably tribune of the -plebs, for imposing a fine of ten thousand sesterces on any one -convicted of violating a man of free birth.<a id="FNanchor_2216" href="#Footnote_2216" class="fnanchor">[2216]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_358"></a>[358]</span></p> - -<p>The statute which established the first standing court—quaestio -perpetua—was the lex Calpurnia de repetundis of the tribune -L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi, 149.<a id="FNanchor_2217" href="#Footnote_2217" class="fnanchor">[2217]</a> His motive was undoubtedly a -sincere desire to protect Italy<a id="FNanchor_2218" href="#Footnote_2218" class="fnanchor">[2218]</a> and the provinces from official -rapacity. The court was made up of a considerable number of -jurors drawn from the senate and presided over by a praetor, -who had hitherto exercised civil jurisdiction only. In fact a -trial for extortion was at first thought of as a civil suit for the -recovery of wealth illegally taken—a conception which determined -the organization of the Calpurnian quaestio. But from -time to time new standing courts were instituted each with cognizance -of a specified class of crimes, till before the end of the -republic they had taken upon themselves practically all criminal -jurisdiction, retaining little trace of their civil origin.<a id="FNanchor_2219" href="#Footnote_2219" class="fnanchor">[2219]</a> Between -149 and 141, for instance, was established a standing quaestio -for the trial of cases of murder.<a id="FNanchor_2220" href="#Footnote_2220" class="fnanchor">[2220]</a></p> - -<p>It was in keeping with the oligarchic tendency of the age -that a consular law of M’. Acilius Glabrio, 191, gave the pontiffs -the function of determining which years should be intercalary -and of how many days such years should consist. Thus -these functionaries secured the means of bringing the solar and -civil years into accord; but they used their new power mostly -in the interests of their party, with the result that the confusion -in the calendar increased rather than lessened.<a id="FNanchor_2221" href="#Footnote_2221" class="fnanchor">[2221]</a> The nobles -made their greatest gain in the control of legislation and of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_359"></a>[359]</span> -elections about the middle of the century through the statutes -of Aelius and Fufius, probably tribunes of the plebs. By granting -the patrician magistrates the obnuntiatio against the tribunes, -or perhaps by confirming the former in a usurped power of the -kind, it enabled the nobles to exercise a practical veto on tribunician -legislation, and may for that reason be looked upon as the -firmest support of the plutocracy.<a id="FNanchor_2222" href="#Footnote_2222" class="fnanchor">[2222]</a> An article of the statute forbade -the bringing of a rogation before the people in the interval -between the announcement and the holding of elective comitia.<a id="FNanchor_2223" href="#Footnote_2223" class="fnanchor">[2223]</a></p> - -<p>Toward the close of the period a democratic movement preliminary -to the revolution began with the enactment of two important -ballot laws. The first was the plebiscite of Q. Gabinius, -139, whom the optimates took pleasure in representing as ignoble -and mean.<a id="FNanchor_2224" href="#Footnote_2224" class="fnanchor">[2224]</a> It introduced the ballot in elections with a view to -freeing the voter from the influence of the nobility; for many -of the poor were at this time falling into economic, and hence -political, dependence on the rich.<a id="FNanchor_2225" href="#Footnote_2225" class="fnanchor">[2225]</a> The other was the plebiscite -of L. Cassius Longinus Ravilla, 137, for extending the use of -the ballot to all trials before the people with the exception of -perduellio.<a id="FNanchor_2226" href="#Footnote_2226" class="fnanchor">[2226]</a> Cases coming under the law were those which involved -fines imposed by the tribes under aedilician or tribunician -presidency. Probably in the opinion of the author, a conscientious -noble,<a id="FNanchor_2227" href="#Footnote_2227" class="fnanchor">[2227]</a> cases of perduellio were too rare to need the change or -too solemn to admit of a disturbance of traditional usage. These -measures had little immediate effect, for the nobles were as -clever as the commons at exploiting the secret ballot for partisan -objects<a id="FNanchor_2228" href="#Footnote_2228" class="fnanchor">[2228]</a>; yet the principle, when carried to completion by the -supplementary laws on the subject in the years immediately<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_360"></a>[360]</span> -following, contributed greatly to the success of the revolution.<a id="FNanchor_2229" href="#Footnote_2229" class="fnanchor">[2229]</a> -Not without significance for the general trend of affairs is the -circumstance that in these latter years of the completed plutocracy -two dispensations were granted P. Scipio Aemilianus from -laws which had been designed to secure it against the rise of -great personalities. In 148 when he offered himself for the -aedileship, being still too young for the consulship,<a id="FNanchor_2230" href="#Footnote_2230" class="fnanchor">[2230]</a> the people -insisted on electing him to the latter office. “When the consuls -showed them the law they became more importunate and urged -all the more, exclaiming that by the laws handed down from -Tullius and Romulus the people were judges of the elections, -and of the laws pertaining thereto they could set aside or confirm -whichever they pleased.<a id="FNanchor_2231" href="#Footnote_2231" class="fnanchor">[2231]</a> Finally one of the tribunes of -the people declared that he would take from the consuls the -power of holding an election unless they yielded to the people in -this matter. Then the senate allowed the tribunes to repeal this -law and after one year they reënacted it.”<a id="FNanchor_2232" href="#Footnote_2232" class="fnanchor">[2232]</a> From this event it -can be seen that when the tribunes and people were unitedly -determined upon a measure, they were irresistible. It is evident, -too, that in popular theory no laws could prevent the -citizens from having the magistrates whom they chose to elect. -Again in 135 a plebiscite, authorized by a senatus consultum, -granted more speedily on this occasion though doubtless with as -great regret, exempted him from the law which absolutely forbade -reëlection to the consulship.<a id="FNanchor_2233" href="#Footnote_2233" class="fnanchor">[2233]</a> It was equally ominous that -in the preceding year the proconsulship of M. Aemilius Lepidus -was abrogated, probably by an act of the comitia.<a id="FNanchor_2234" href="#Footnote_2234" class="fnanchor">[2234]</a></p> - -<p>Another premonition of the revolution was the renewal of -agrarian agitation, with which in a varying degree some of the -more enlightened nobles sympathized. It began slowly to dawn -upon them that the economic ruin of the peasant class was endangering -the state—a feeling which found expression in the -agrarian rogation of C. Laelius, praetor in 145.<a id="FNanchor_2235" href="#Footnote_2235" class="fnanchor">[2235]</a> The measure<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_361"></a>[361]</span> -must have been similar to the Licinian-Sextian law as it threatened -the interests of the rich.<a id="FNanchor_2236" href="#Footnote_2236" class="fnanchor">[2236]</a> When he saw that their opposition -would be such as to disturb the public peace, he dropped the -proposal. If he was in truth called Sapiens because of this -speedy retreat, the epithet was too easily earned. Reform, -while there was yet time, was blocked as much by the cowardice -of the well-minded as by the enormous selfishness of the majority -of nobles. It was in this time of extraordinary imperial -prosperity that, in the opinion of Polybius, the constitution was -successfully put to its severest test. “When these external -alarms are past, and the people are enjoying their good fortune -and the fruits of their victories, and, as usually happens, growing -corrupted by flattery and sloth, show a tendency to violence -and arrogance—it is in these circumstances more than ever -that the constitution is seen to possess within itself the power of -correcting abuses. For when any one of the three classes -becomes puffed up, and manifests an inclination to be contentious -and unduly encroaching, the mutual interdependence of -all the three, and the possibility of the pretensions of any one’s -being curbed and thwarted by the others, must plainly check -this tendency; and so the proper equilibrium is maintained by -the impulsiveness of the one part’s being checked by its fear of -the other.”<a id="FNanchor_2237" href="#Footnote_2237" class="fnanchor">[2237]</a> These words, which we may suppose to have been -written after the tribunate of Ti. Gracchus,<a id="FNanchor_2238" href="#Footnote_2238" class="fnanchor">[2238]</a> accurately describe -the interplay of constitutional forces in the period of the completed -plutocracy and of the incipient revolution. Controlled -in some instances by self-satisfaction and the spirit of repose -and in others by greed and arrogance, the dominant institutions -of government tended in the one case to sluggishness and decay, -in the other to violence; whereas the harmony of the constitution, -or its equivalent the soundness of Roman character, like a -central sun, held the various institutions in the main to their -respective orbits, compelling each to attend to its appropriate<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_362"></a>[362]</span> -function. No retrospect of the Gracchan troubles induced the -great historian to revise the view here expressed; for with his -boundless faith in Rome he could never doubt that her constitution -contained the cure of every evil which new conditions -should breed within the state.<a id="FNanchor_2239" href="#Footnote_2239" class="fnanchor">[2239]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Schulze, C. F., <i>Volksversammlungen der Römer</i>, 100-10; Peter, C., <i>Epochen -der Verfassungsgesch. der röm. Republik</i>, 118-140 (on the general character -of the period); Ihne, W., <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. vi; Long, G., <i>Decline -of the Roman Republic</i>, I. chs. v, vii, viii; Mommsen, Th., <i>History of Rome</i>, -bk. III, ch. xi; <i>Röm. Staatsrecht</i>, see index s. the various laws; Lange, L., -<i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, ii. 116-351, and see index s. the various laws; <i>De legibus -Aelia et Fufia commentatio</i>, in <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, i. 274-341; Neumann, C., -<i>Geschichte Roms</i>, I. ch. i; Nitzsch, K. W., <i>Die Gracchen und ihre nächsten -Vorgänger</i>, bks. i, ii; Willems, <i>Droit public Romain</i>, 178 ff.; Mispoulet, J. B., -<i>Les institutions politiques des Romains</i>, I. 220 ff.; Hallays, A., <i>Les comices à -Rome</i>, 67 f.; Maranca, <i>Il tribunato della plebe dalla lex Hortensia alla lex -Cornelia</i>; Arndts, <i>Die lex Maenia de dote vom Jahr der Stadt Rom 568</i>, in -<i>Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch.</i> vii (1868). 1-44; Voigt, M., <i>Die lex Maenia de dote -vom Jahre 568 der Stadt</i>; <i>Die lex Fabia de plagiariis</i>, in <i>Verhdl. d. sächs. -Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> xxxvii (1885). 319-345; Savigny, F. C. von, <i>Lex Cincia -de donis et muneribus</i>, in <i>Vermischte Schriften</i>, i. 315-85; <i>Ueber die lex Voconia</i>, -ibid. i. 407-46; <i>Schutz der Minderjährigen und die lex Plaetoria</i>, ibid. ii. -321-95; Garofalo, F. P., <i>Lex Cincia de donis et muneribus</i>, in <i>Bull. dell’ ist. -di diritt. Röm.</i> xv (1903). 310-2; Krüger, P. and Mommsen, Th., <i>Anecdoton -Livianum</i>, in <i>Hermes</i>, iv (1870). 371-6; Babelon, E., <i>Monnaies de la république -Rom.</i> i. 37-69; Hill, G. F., <i>Greek and Roman Coins</i>, 44 ff.; Haeberlin, -E. J., <i>Del più antico sistema monetario presso i Romani</i>, V, in <i>Rivista Italiana -numismatica e scienze affini</i>, xix (1906). 611-46; Cunz, O., <i>Polybius und -sein Werk</i>; Pais, E., <i>L’elezione del pontefice massimo Romano per mezzo delle</i> -<span class="allsmcap">XVII</span> <i>tribù</i>; articles in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 576-80: L. Aimilius -Paullus (Klebs); ii. 2728 f.: Baebius (idem); iii. 2738-55: M. Claudius -Marcellus (Münzer); iv. 1112-38: Consul (Kübler). Grenfell, B. P., and -Hunt, A. S., <i>Oxyrhynchus Papyri</i>, iv (1904). 90-116 for the newly discovered -epitome of Livy, including text and commentary. The lost books xlviii-lv, -covering the years 150-137, are represented. See also Kornemann, E., <i>Die -neue Livius-Epitome aus Oxyrhynchus</i>, in <i>Beitr. zur alt. Gesch.</i> Beiheft ii -(1904); Sanders, H. A., <i>The Oxyrhynchus Epitome of Livy</i>, in <i>Trans. of the -Am. Philol. Assoc.</i> xxxvi (1905). 5-31, and a brief notice by Liebenam, W., -in <i>Jahresb. d. Geschichtswiss.</i> xxvii (1904). 124 f.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_363"></a>[363]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XVI">CHAPTER XVI<br /> -<span class="smaller">COMITIAL LEGISLATION<br /> -<span class="smcap">From the Gracchi to Sulla</span><br /> -134-82</span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>The Gracchi</i><br /> -134-122</h4> - -<p>The work of agrarian reform, after the feeble attempt of -Laelius,<a id="FNanchor_2240" href="#Footnote_2240" class="fnanchor">[2240]</a> was taken up in a more determined spirit by Ti. Sempronius -Gracchus, who early in his tribunate, upon which he -entered December 10, 134, promulgated his famous lex agraria. -It was a repetition, with some modifications and additions, of -those articles of the Licinian-Sextian statute which related to -the same subject. The last instance of the prosecution of trespassers -against the earlier law given in our imperfect records -belongs to 193,<a id="FNanchor_2241" href="#Footnote_2241" class="fnanchor">[2241]</a> and it must still have been in force in 167 when -Cato<a id="FNanchor_2242" href="#Footnote_2242" class="fnanchor">[2242]</a> recited its terms in his “Oration in behalf of the Rhodians.” -Probably about the time of Flaminius the agrarian provisions -of this statute were renewed with the addition of articles, -(a) providing that a specified proportion of free laborers should -be employed on public lands held in possession. (b) requiring -holders to take an oath to obey the law. (c) increasing the -penalty for violations.<a id="FNanchor_2243" href="#Footnote_2243" class="fnanchor">[2243]</a></p> - -<p>Tiberius had matured his plan before entering office. Assisted<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_364"></a>[364]</span> -by experienced friends, among whom were P. Licinius Crassus, -P. Mucius Scaevola, the most eminent jurist of his generation, -consul designate for 133, and Appius Claudius Pulcher, his -father-in-law, he expressed the articles of his rogation in the -most careful terms and with especial regard for vested interests.<a id="FNanchor_2244" href="#Footnote_2244" class="fnanchor">[2244]</a> -Its chief provisions were—</p> - -<p>(1) No one shall hold more than five hundred iugera of the -public land, excepting that in case the holder has sons he may -occupy an additional two hundred and fifty iugera for each of -two sons.<a id="FNanchor_2245" href="#Footnote_2245" class="fnanchor">[2245]</a></p> - -<p>(2) The occupier shall receive compensation for improvements -on the lands which the law compels him to surrender.<a id="FNanchor_2246" href="#Footnote_2246" class="fnanchor">[2246]</a></p> - -<p>(3) The five hundred to one thousand iugera retained by -the occupier shall be granted to him by the state in perpetuity -and free from all dues.<a id="FNanchor_2247" href="#Footnote_2247" class="fnanchor">[2247]</a></p> - -<p>(4) The lands thus accruing to the state shall be divided -among the needy<a id="FNanchor_2248" href="#Footnote_2248" class="fnanchor">[2248]</a> in lots, the maximal size of which seems to -have been set at thirty iugera,<a id="FNanchor_2249" href="#Footnote_2249" class="fnanchor">[2249]</a> to be held not as private -property but as permanent, heritable leaseholds inalienable and -subject to a specified rent.<a id="FNanchor_2250" href="#Footnote_2250" class="fnanchor">[2250]</a> The Latins and Italians are to be -included among the beneficiaries of this provision.<a id="FNanchor_2251" href="#Footnote_2251" class="fnanchor">[2251]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_365"></a>[365]</span></p> - -<p>(5) Certain specified parts of the public domain shall not be -subject to assignment—the same parts which are afterward -reserved from assignment by the agrarian law of 111:<a id="FNanchor_2252" href="#Footnote_2252" class="fnanchor">[2252]</a></p> - -<p>a. Land granted by law or by a senatorial decree to a -colony, a municipium, or a Latin town, with the exception of -any tracts of such land which this law may expressly order to -be sold, assigned, or restored.<a id="FNanchor_2253" href="#Footnote_2253" class="fnanchor">[2253]</a> Public domain granted by a -lex or a senatus consultum can be withdrawn by the same, but -the modification of a treaty requires the consent of both -parties.<a id="FNanchor_2254" href="#Footnote_2254" class="fnanchor">[2254]</a></p> - -<p>b. The trientabula—portions of public land granted by the -government for a quit rent to its creditors as security for any -part of a loan.<a id="FNanchor_2255" href="#Footnote_2255" class="fnanchor">[2255]</a></p> - -<p>c. The ager compascuus—public land on which a specified -group of neighbors have a right to pasture free of charge ten -large domestic animals—cattle, horses, mules, and asses—and -a fixed number of small animals, unknown to us on account of a -lacuna in the inscription but most probably fifty.<a id="FNanchor_2256" href="#Footnote_2256" class="fnanchor">[2256]</a> As the unit -was doubtless the individual, much of the land of this description -must have remained undivided.<a id="FNanchor_2257" href="#Footnote_2257" class="fnanchor">[2257]</a></p> - -<p>d. Public roads.<a id="FNanchor_2258" href="#Footnote_2258" class="fnanchor">[2258]</a></p> - -<p>e. Other portions of the public domain specifically designated<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_366"></a>[366]</span> -as exempt from distribution, including the Campanian -lands, which are leased out by the censors.<a id="FNanchor_2259" href="#Footnote_2259" class="fnanchor">[2259]</a></p> - -<p>f. Certain pasture lands let out to any who wish to feed -their live stock thereon, who pay a tax (scriptura) for the -privilege.<a id="FNanchor_2260" href="#Footnote_2260" class="fnanchor">[2260]</a></p> - -<p>(6) The distribution of the lands shall be effected by a standing -magistracy elected annually by the tribes<a id="FNanchor_2261" href="#Footnote_2261" class="fnanchor">[2261]</a>—the triumviri -agris dandis adsignandis.<a id="FNanchor_2262" href="#Footnote_2262" class="fnanchor">[2262]</a></p> - -<p>(7) As all available public land is to be utilized in the -various ways described above, and as the holders of lands once -public are to be guaranteed in their possession, further occupation -of land is thereby precluded.<a id="FNanchor_2263" href="#Footnote_2263" class="fnanchor">[2263]</a></p> - -<p>Afterward as Tiberius found it impossible to reconcile the -optimates to his measure, he withdrew the second article and -proposed to eject illegal holders without compensation.<a id="FNanchor_2264" href="#Footnote_2264" class="fnanchor">[2264]</a> When -the nobles induced Octavius, a colleague in the tribunate, to -veto the bill, Tiberius had him deposed by a vote of the tribes, -and then passed the agrarian law without further opposition, -unauthorized however by the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2265" href="#Footnote_2265" class="fnanchor">[2265]</a> The triumviri elected -to take charge of the work of distribution were the author of -the law, his brother Gaius, and his father-in-law Appius Claudius -Pulcher.<a id="FNanchor_2266" href="#Footnote_2266" class="fnanchor">[2266]</a> As the election of these persons was a violation of -the Licinian and Aebutian plebiscites,<a id="FNanchor_2267" href="#Footnote_2267" class="fnanchor">[2267]</a> a dispensation was probably -granted by vote of the people.<a id="FNanchor_2268" href="#Footnote_2268" class="fnanchor">[2268]</a> When the commission -found itself hampered by legal inability to distinguish between<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_367"></a>[367]</span> -public and private land, Tiberius carried a second agrarian law -which invested the triumviri with the necessary judicial power -for determining what land was public and what private.<a id="FNanchor_2269" href="#Footnote_2269" class="fnanchor">[2269]</a> It was -by virtue of this second enactment that the word iudicandis was -introduced into the phrase descriptive of their functions—“iudicandis -adsignandis” or “dandis adsignandis iudicandis.”<a id="FNanchor_2270" href="#Footnote_2270" class="fnanchor">[2270]</a> In -the year 129, probably at the time of the election to this office, -Publius Scipio Aemilianus brought about the transfer of the -judicial function to the consuls. Appian,<a id="FNanchor_2271" href="#Footnote_2271" class="fnanchor">[2271]</a> our sole authority -for the latter act, speaks only of its discussion in the senate, -implying that this body rather than the people passed the resolution. -In that case the senate must have annulled the second -agrarian law on the ground that it was illegally passed; for in -no other way could it set aside a comitial statute.<a id="FNanchor_2272" href="#Footnote_2272" class="fnanchor">[2272]</a> Some land, -already delimited, may still have been subject to distribution; -but as the consuls avoided the disagreeable function received -from the commissioners, the work of assignment came speedily -to an end. The agrarian law of Ti. Gracchus fell thus into -disuse till it was revived by his brother.<a id="FNanchor_2273" href="#Footnote_2273" class="fnanchor">[2273]</a></p> - -<p>The deposition of Octavius<a id="FNanchor_2274" href="#Footnote_2274" class="fnanchor">[2274]</a> requires especial consideration. -In 136 the proconsular imperium had been abrogated, probably -by a popular vote<a id="FNanchor_2275" href="#Footnote_2275" class="fnanchor">[2275]</a>; but no instance of the abrogation of an -actual magistracy had thus far occurred. Most scholars consider -the act unconstitutional.<a id="FNanchor_2276" href="#Footnote_2276" class="fnanchor">[2276]</a> It did indeed involve a sweeping -departure from long-established custom; but in favor of its<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_368"></a>[368]</span> -legality may be urged the fact that nearly all the powers ever -possessed by the assembly are known to have been acquired in -the way in which Tiberius was attempting to establish for it the -right to remove from office—by precedent rather than by law. -A statute of the Twelve Tables declared that whatever the people -voted last should be law and valid<a id="FNanchor_2277" href="#Footnote_2277" class="fnanchor">[2277]</a>; and through the ages -preceding the Gracchi they had often applied this principle to -the extension of their power at the expense of the senate and -magistrates. They were sovereign; and if they chose to introduce -the custom of deposing a magistrate whom they regarded -as the betrayer of their dearest interests, they had the legal -right. The wisdom of the proceeding may be questioned, but -he who has followed the history of the assemblies thus far must -regard the measure as merely one of the many steps by which -the people advanced toward the realization of their sovereignty.</p> - -<p>Tiberius attempted to apply the same principle to securing -his election to the tribunate. His motive was not a purely -selfish desire to save his life; it required no superhuman wisdom -to discover that his downfall would mean the collapse of -the great reform on which he had set his heart. The continued -ascendancy of a popular champion necessarily involved the overthrow -of the senatorial government. This idea, which he now -clearly grasped, found expression in his new political platform, -(1) to shorten the period of military service, (2) by means of a -law of appeal to vest the supreme jurisdiction solely in the people, -so as to deprive the senate of its extra-constitutional judicial -power,<a id="FNanchor_2278" href="#Footnote_2278" class="fnanchor">[2278]</a> (3) to give the equites equal representation with the -senators in the juries, or possibly as Dio Cassius states, to -transfer the courts from the senate to the knights.<a id="FNanchor_2279" href="#Footnote_2279" class="fnanchor">[2279]</a> When -the day of election came, his peasant supporters were busy -with their harvests, and his platform did not strongly appeal -to the city plebs, on whom he had chiefly to rely for votes. -Had the people insisted, as they twice did in favor of Scipio,<a id="FNanchor_2280" href="#Footnote_2280" class="fnanchor">[2280]</a> -they would have prevailed either with or without an act of dispensation<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_369"></a>[369]</span> -passed by the senate or by themselves<a id="FNanchor_2281" href="#Footnote_2281" class="fnanchor">[2281]</a>; but the weakness -of his supporters rather than any illegality in the proceeding -proved his ruin. To free the future reformer from this limitation, -however, a rogation of C. Papirius Carbo, tribune of the -plebs in 131, proposed that a tribune should be eligible to reëlection -as many times as he chose to offer himself as a candidate. -This rogation failed<a id="FNanchor_2282" href="#Footnote_2282" class="fnanchor">[2282]</a>; but before the tribunate of C. Gracchus, -123, “a certain law had already been enacted,” as Appian<a id="FNanchor_2283" href="#Footnote_2283" class="fnanchor">[2283]</a> -obscurely informs us, “that if a tribune should be wanting on -the announcement (of the votes), the people might elect one -from the whole body of citizens.” The statute, which Appian -has evidently failed to understand clearly, seems to have provided -that if the returns showed the election of only nine -tribunes from the candidates proposed, the people could proceed -to elect a tenth from the whole body of citizens, including -the existing tribunician college; or equivalently, if for the tenth -place the tribes cast a majority of votes for one who was not a -candidate, he would be considered legally elected.<a id="FNanchor_2284" href="#Footnote_2284" class="fnanchor">[2284]</a> The object -was to enable the people to continue in office an especially popular -tribune, and was therefore a notable stride in the direction -of monarchy.</p> - -<p>Papirius was more successful with his lex tabellaria, which -extended the ballot to legislation, 131.<a id="FNanchor_2285" href="#Footnote_2285" class="fnanchor">[2285]</a> Trials of perduellio -alone retained the oral vote. Doubtless this improvement -greatly strengthened the rising popular party. A plebiscite<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_370"></a>[370]</span> -passed about 129, requiring a knight on entering the senate to -sell his public horse, deprived the senators of their votes in -the eighteen centuries, and completed the separation of the governing -aristocracy from the commercial class begun by the -Claudian statute of 219.<a id="FNanchor_2286" href="#Footnote_2286" class="fnanchor">[2286]</a></p> - -<p>At some unknown time before the tribunate of C. Gracchus a -plebiscite of M. Junius modified the lex Calpurnia concerning -extortion,<a id="FNanchor_2287" href="#Footnote_2287" class="fnanchor">[2287]</a> in what way we are not informed. The act is with a -high degree of probability attributed to M. Junius Pennus, tribune -of the plebs in 126.<a id="FNanchor_2288" href="#Footnote_2288" class="fnanchor">[2288]</a> If the Junian lex repetundarum was -indeed his work, it could have been dictated by no sympathy -with the unprivileged classes, for it was this Junius whose -plebiscite ordered the expulsion of all aliens from Rome—a -measure which Cicero condemns as inhuman.<a id="FNanchor_2289" href="#Footnote_2289" class="fnanchor">[2289]</a> The act last -mentioned was the response of the senate and rabble to the -effort of the more enlightened Romans to grant the citizenship -to the Latins and Italians. The new idea was embodied in a -rogation of M. Fulvius Flaccus, consul in 125, which offered the -citizenship, or as an alternative the right of appeal, to the Italians, -with the purpose of buying off their opposition to the -Sempronian agrarian law; but the measure was so vehemently -opposed in the senate that the author withdrew it.<a id="FNanchor_2290" href="#Footnote_2290" class="fnanchor">[2290]</a> The idea -however lived in the minds of the reformers till it was finally -realized.</p> - -<p>Ten years after the tribunate of Ti. Gracchus his brother -Gaius entered upon the same office. Since the beginning of -the decennium the leaders of the popular party had made various<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_371"></a>[371]</span> -proposals but had accomplished little. The agrarian law -was still nominally in force, though its execution was effectually -blocked. The plan of extending the franchise had found its -most bitter opponents in the men of the street, on whom the -tribunes had chiefly to depend. The ballot in legislation, the -possibility of continuous reëlection to the tribunate, and the increase -of discontent with the plutocracy were the only gains. -Extraordinary progress was now to be made under the leadership -of a great creative statesman. The chronological succession -of his comitial enactments cannot be determined with -absolute certainty. We do not in every instance know whether -a given proposal was carried in his first or second year. This -much, however, is clear, that most of his measures belong to 123 -and to the early part of 122. The execution of the laws, including -the seventy days’ journey to Carthage,<a id="FNanchor_2291" href="#Footnote_2291" class="fnanchor">[2291]</a> consumed much -of the second year, and after his defeat for the third term—about -July, 122—he carried no more plebiscites.<a id="FNanchor_2292" href="#Footnote_2292" class="fnanchor">[2292]</a> Among his -first thoughts was that of strengthening the legality of the -deposition of Octavius<a id="FNanchor_2293" href="#Footnote_2293" class="fnanchor">[2293]</a> by a rogation which provided that a -person so deposed should thereby be debarred forever from -office. He probably meant it more as an enunciation of a principle -than as a legislative project. The measure was never -offered to vote, but was withdrawn, we are told, at the request -of his mother.<a id="FNanchor_2294" href="#Footnote_2294" class="fnanchor">[2294]</a> Far more serious, and of lasting importance, -was his lex de provocatione, which, carrying into effect the idea -of his brother,<a id="FNanchor_2295" href="#Footnote_2295" class="fnanchor">[2295]</a> forbade the establishment of a special court or -the placing of the state under martial law without an act of the -people.<a id="FNanchor_2296" href="#Footnote_2296" class="fnanchor">[2296]</a> Further judicial legislation was postponed in the -interest of more pressing matters.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_372"></a>[372]</span></p> - -<p>While colonization and the assignment of land individually to -citizens, which Gaius planned on an extensive scale, as will soon -be noticed, were to provide for the agricultural population at the -expense of the state, and while the nobles and knights continued -to reap an unfailing harvest of wealth in the administration of -the provinces, the democratic reformer could think it only just -and expedient to subsidize the populace of the capital. The -artificial growth of Rome as a political centre, with no sound -economic basis but with a most unfavorable geographical situation, -rendered the problem of living difficult for the masses even -in time of prosperity; and recently circumstances had so diminished -the grain supply that relief from the government seemed -the only resource against threatening famine.<a id="FNanchor_2297" href="#Footnote_2297" class="fnanchor">[2297]</a> Before the time -of the Gracchi on occasions of especial scarcity or of especial -plenty the state had sold grain at a reduced rate; and the -aediles, we know not how often, had made similar reductions at -their own expense.<a id="FNanchor_2298" href="#Footnote_2298" class="fnanchor">[2298]</a> There can be no doubt, too, that individual -nobles in a private capacity often distributed free or cheap grain -among the poor to secure their support in elections. Attached -by such means to the nobles and the senate, the rabble had been -in the main conservative. There was a certain degree of justice -in giving the populace a share in the profits of empire and some -wisdom in substituting system for the existing irregularity. A -political result, we may also say aim, of the frumentarian -plebiscite of Gaius was to disattach the city populace from its -conservative moorings and to enlist it in the service of reform. -His measure, the first frumentarian law in Roman history, provided -for the monthly sale to every citizen who applied for it—practically -to those only who resided in or near Rome—of a -fixed number of modii of wheat at six and a third asses a modius,<a id="FNanchor_2299" href="#Footnote_2299" class="fnanchor">[2299]</a> -which was probably about half the average market price. The -law won for him the good will of the populace,<a id="FNanchor_2300" href="#Footnote_2300" class="fnanchor">[2300]</a> but his opponents -complained that it depleted the treasury and excited the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_373"></a>[373]</span> -mob to seditions.<a id="FNanchor_2301" href="#Footnote_2301" class="fnanchor">[2301]</a> It set an example for further reductions at -the expense of the state. Hence notwithstanding some good -features the effect of the law was pernicious, as it tended to -increase the number of idlers, to make the populace improvident, -and to encourage demagogism. It must be said, on -the other hand, that had Gaius lived to carry out his wide -scheme of colonization, he would have so relieved the capital -of its semi-pauper population as to render frumentations unnecessary, -whereupon the law would naturally have been -repealed.<a id="FNanchor_2302" href="#Footnote_2302" class="fnanchor">[2302]</a></p> - -<p>After providing in the frumentarian act an expedient which, -we may believe, he looked upon as temporary, he resumed the -work of construction<a id="FNanchor_2303" href="#Footnote_2303" class="fnanchor">[2303]</a> by reviving his brother’s agrarian law.<a id="FNanchor_2304" href="#Footnote_2304" class="fnanchor">[2304]</a> -The continuance of the assignations as long as there remained -any public land that could be distributed was a most essential -element of his plan. Among the articles retained were those -which subjected the holders of assigned lots to a tax<a id="FNanchor_2305" href="#Footnote_2305" class="fnanchor">[2305]</a> and exempted -from distribution the Campanian territory not set apart -for his colony at Capua,<a id="FNanchor_2306" href="#Footnote_2306" class="fnanchor">[2306]</a> as well as various other lands excepted -both by the agrarian law of Tiberius and by that of 111.<a id="FNanchor_2307" href="#Footnote_2307" class="fnanchor">[2307]</a> Doubtless -it also reinvested the three commissioners with judicial -power, without which they could accomplish nothing. Through -this agrarian law, or possibly through a subsequent lex viaria, -the triumviri were empowered to build roads for the accommodation -of the new peasantry.<a id="FNanchor_2308" href="#Footnote_2308" class="fnanchor">[2308]</a> Though introducing no new -principle,<a id="FNanchor_2309" href="#Footnote_2309" class="fnanchor">[2309]</a> his lex agraria was not a simple reaffirmation of his -brother’s law with amendments and additions; but “a comprehensive -statute, so completely covering the ground of the earlier -Sempronian law that later legislation cites the law of Gaius, not<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_374"></a>[374]</span> -that of Tiberius Gracchus, as the authority for the regulations -which had revolutionized the tenure of the public land.”<a id="FNanchor_2310" href="#Footnote_2310" class="fnanchor">[2310]</a></p> - -<p>These measures were passed before the tribunician elections -of the year,<a id="FNanchor_2311" href="#Footnote_2311" class="fnanchor">[2311]</a> which took place as usual in midsummer.<a id="FNanchor_2312" href="#Footnote_2312" class="fnanchor">[2312]</a> It was -his frumentarian law, together with the hope aroused by the long -array of promulgated measures, which secured his reëlection. -Soon afterward, though still in 123, he brought before the -comitia a rogation concerning the qualification of iudices. As -the quaestiones extraordinariae from the earliest times were -made up of senators, it was natural that the standing courts also -from the time of their institution should be similarly composed.<a id="FNanchor_2313" href="#Footnote_2313" class="fnanchor">[2313]</a> -Under such conditions the judicial authority afforded no efficient -check upon maladministration; and this immunity from -the law, together with the temptations to the misuse of power -especially in provincial commands, tended in the course of generations -to make of the senate, with individual exceptions, a class -of grand criminals. To remedy this evil and at the same time -to remove from the senate the strongest foundation of its political -power,<a id="FNanchor_2314" href="#Footnote_2314" class="fnanchor">[2314]</a> Ti. Sempronius Gracchus had proposed his rogatio -iudiciaria either for transferring the courts entirely to the -knights, or more probably for making up the juries of an equal -number of senators and knights.<a id="FNanchor_2315" href="#Footnote_2315" class="fnanchor">[2315]</a> It failed to become a law; -but Gaius now took up the matter, and after experimenting unsuccessfully -with one or two projects,<a id="FNanchor_2316" href="#Footnote_2316" class="fnanchor">[2316]</a> he finally, 122, carried a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_375"></a>[375]</span> -plebiscite which substituted knights for senators in the alba -iudicum,<a id="FNanchor_2317" href="#Footnote_2317" class="fnanchor">[2317]</a> from which not only standing courts but also special -commissions were to be filled.<a id="FNanchor_2318" href="#Footnote_2318" class="fnanchor">[2318]</a> It is uncertain whether mention -was made of equites or whether the result was reached merely -by exclusion and definition. There can be no doubt that the -qualifications were identical with those described in the extant -lex repetundarum,<a id="FNanchor_2319" href="#Footnote_2319" class="fnanchor">[2319]</a> attributed by scholars to M’. Acilius Glabrio, -a colleague of Gaius, and adopted accordingly soon after the -Sempronian judiciary law. The terms of the Acilian statute excluded -tribunes of the plebs, quaestors, tresviri capitales, military -tribunes of the first four legions, tresviri for assigning lands, -persons who had fought in the arena for pay or had been -condemned by a quaestio or by the people. It excluded further -all under thirty or over sixty years of age, and all who had their -domicile more than a mile from Rome, the fathers, brothers, -and sons of those who held the offices above enumerated, -senators, and their fathers, brothers and sons, as well as persons -living beyond the sea. A part of the statute missing from the -inscription may have contained a minimal property qualification, -which could have been no other than four hundred thousand -sesterces; or it may have restricted jury service to those who -“possess a public horse.”<a id="FNanchor_2320" href="#Footnote_2320" class="fnanchor">[2320]</a> According to Plutarch Gaius was -allowed the privilege of selecting the jurors. Had he remained -in power and continued in this function, he doubtless could have<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_376"></a>[376]</span> -compelled the courts of his choosing to do justice. But the privilege -seems to have been restricted to the first list; thereafter, as -provided by the lex repetundarum of Acilius the praetor qui inter -peregrinos ius dicit was to attend to the matter.<a id="FNanchor_2321" href="#Footnote_2321" class="fnanchor">[2321]</a> The relation between -the Sempronian lex iudiciaria and the lex Acilia repetundarum -has not been precisely determined.<a id="FNanchor_2322" href="#Footnote_2322" class="fnanchor">[2322]</a> If the Sempronian -statute preceded the Acilian,<a id="FNanchor_2323" href="#Footnote_2323" class="fnanchor">[2323]</a> as is not unlikely, it was the intention -of Gaius to pass a general law regarding the qualifications and -mode of appointment of jurors, to be superseded in large part -by a succession of laws, which dealing with individual courts, -should regulate the qualification and appointment of their several -juries as well as the procedure and the penalties. This policy -indicates a conviction that he could give the reformed judicial -system greater stability by making the separate laws here referred -to entirely independent of his original lex iudiciaria.<a id="FNanchor_2324" href="#Footnote_2324" class="fnanchor">[2324]</a></p> - -<p>The lex Acilia, described above as a plebiscite of M’. Acilius -Glabrio, colleague of C. Gracchus in 122,<a id="FNanchor_2325" href="#Footnote_2325" class="fnanchor">[2325]</a> took the place of the -lex Iunia of 126,<a id="FNanchor_2326" href="#Footnote_2326" class="fnanchor">[2326]</a> and is to be identified with a lex repetundarum -extensive fragments of which are preserved in an -inscription.<a id="FNanchor_2327" href="#Footnote_2327" class="fnanchor">[2327]</a> Whereas earlier laws on the subject rendered -governors of provinces, and perhaps administrative officers in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_377"></a>[377]</span> -Italy, alone liable to punishment, the Acilian statute includes magistrates -and senators and the sons of both as well as the holders -of promagisterial imperium.<a id="FNanchor_2328" href="#Footnote_2328" class="fnanchor">[2328]</a> The crime consists in taking in any -one year from those whom the law is designed to protect—from -the allies, Latins, provincials, and exterior nations under -the sway or in the friendship of the Roman people<a id="FNanchor_2329" href="#Footnote_2329" class="fnanchor">[2329]</a>—by -gift, seizure, compulsion, or other illegal means money or -property exceeding a specified sum, which a lacuna in the inscription -leaves unknown, but which is supposed to be four -thousand sesterces.<a id="FNanchor_2330" href="#Footnote_2330" class="fnanchor">[2330]</a> Holders of magistracies and imperia cannot -be brought to trial for the crime till after the expiration -of their terms,<a id="FNanchor_2331" href="#Footnote_2331" class="fnanchor">[2331]</a> on the general principle which exempts from -prosecution those who are engaged in the service of the -state.<a id="FNanchor_2332" href="#Footnote_2332" class="fnanchor">[2332]</a> The praetor qui inter peregrinos ius dicit within ten -days after the passage of the statute, and in future within ten -days after entering upon his office, is to choose for this court -four hundred and fifty persons with the qualifications for jury -service described above in connection with the Sempronian -judiciary law. From this group the accused is to reject under -oath his kinsmen within a specified degree and his sodales. The -accuser is to draw from the remainder a hundred persons, taking -oath that he has chosen no kinsman within a specified -degree or sodalis. The accused rejects fifty of the hundred, -and the remaining fifty constitute the jury for trying the -case.<a id="FNanchor_2333" href="#Footnote_2333" class="fnanchor">[2333]</a> The rules of procedure in the trial and the amount of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_378"></a>[378]</span> -liability of the accused in the event of conviction are given. -The accuser, if an alien, is granted as a reward for a successful -prosecution the Roman citizenship for himself and his born -sons and grandsons. If he is a Latin and does not want the -citizenship, he is given instead the right of appeal.<a id="FNanchor_2334" href="#Footnote_2334" class="fnanchor">[2334]</a> Probably -the law contained provisions for the punishment of corruption -in the patrons of the accusers and in the praetor and jurors.<a id="FNanchor_2335" href="#Footnote_2335" class="fnanchor">[2335]</a></p> - -<p>It is certain that Gaius carried a law also for reconstituting -the quaestio inter sicarios et veneficos,<a id="FNanchor_2336" href="#Footnote_2336" class="fnanchor">[2336]</a> which had originally -been established shortly before 141.<a id="FNanchor_2337" href="#Footnote_2337" class="fnanchor">[2337]</a> The Sempronian law on -this subject contained a provision for the punishment of bribery -or conspiracy committed in trials of the kind. The article -referred to included the words “Ne quis iudicio circumveniretur,”<a id="FNanchor_2338" href="#Footnote_2338" class="fnanchor">[2338]</a> -a principle repeated as “Qui coisset, quo quis condemnaretur”<a id="FNanchor_2339" href="#Footnote_2339" class="fnanchor">[2339]</a> -in the corresponding article of the Cornelian law -which superseded the Sempronian. There was no quaestio for -dealing especially with judicial corruption and conspiracy, but -the accused was brought to trial before the very court in relation -to which his crime was alleged to have been committed.<a id="FNanchor_2340" href="#Footnote_2340" class="fnanchor">[2340]</a> The -provision was directed against the accuser, against magistrates -and senators who presided over such courts, and presumably -against equestrian jurors who accepted bribes.<a id="FNanchor_2341" href="#Footnote_2341" class="fnanchor">[2341]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_379"></a>[379]</span></p> - -<p>We have in an inscription the concluding articles of a -criminal law<a id="FNanchor_2342" href="#Footnote_2342" class="fnanchor">[2342]</a> of this period. It is on a bronze tablet found on -the site of the ancient Italian city Bantia, and is called the -Latin Lex Bantina to distinguish it from another lex in -Oscan on the opposite face.<a id="FNanchor_2343" href="#Footnote_2343" class="fnanchor">[2343]</a> A reference to the triumviri -agris dandis adsignandis, who seem to have been those elected -under the Sempronian agrarian law, places the document between -133 and 118. It is concerned with a quaestio.<a id="FNanchor_2344" href="#Footnote_2344" class="fnanchor">[2344]</a> An -attempt has been made to identify it with the lex Iunia -repetundarum and to assign it accordingly to 126.<a id="FNanchor_2345" href="#Footnote_2345" class="fnanchor">[2345]</a> The circumstance, -however, that it was passed without the authorization -of the senate, and that its whole spirit is anti-senatorial, -would lead us rather to the conclusion that it was the work of -C. Gracchus at the time of his most bitter struggle with the -optimates yet before he had lost control of the comitia. The -fragment contains no more than the sanctio—provisions for -enforcement of the statute. The beginning of the first extant -article is lost, but it must have described the class of offenders -to which the article applies, and the nature of the offence. It -speaks merely of disabilities imposed on the offender, among -which are the following: he must not address the senate or -vote in a public trial (poplico ioudicio) or in comitia or receive -or give testimony in court or wear the praetexta and soleae in -public or be chosen into the senate or remain in it if already a -member. The second article provides that if a tribune of the -plebs, a quaestor, a triumvir capitalis, a triumvir for assigning<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_380"></a>[380]</span> -lands, or a index appointed under the law itself, or a senator -shall with knowledge and malice prepense violate the law or -hinder its operation, he shall be liable to a fine, the amount of -which a lacuna in the text leaves unknown. The third article -provides that a consul, praetor, aedile, tribune of the plebs, -quaestor, triumvir capitalis, or triumvir for the assignment of -lands now in office shall, within the next five days after ascertaining -that the law has been enacted, swear in the manner described -below: also that the dictator, consul, praetor, master of horse, -censor, aedile, and other officials as above enumerated, and the -index appointed under this law shall in future take the oath -within five days after entering upon their magistracies or imperia. -They shall give oath to the urban quaestor publicly in -front of the temple of Castor, swearing by Jupiter and the di -Penates that they will do as the law requires and will not with -knowledge and malice prepense violate the law or by intercession -or otherwise hinder its administration. He who fails to -swear shall not be candidate for a magistracy or imperium, or -manage or retain either, or address the senate or be chosen into -it; and the quaestor shall keep a list of those who have taken -the oath. The fourth article provides that whoever is or shall -be a senator, or shall have the right of addressing the senate -after this law has been passed, shall within the next ten days -after ascertaining the fact of its enactment take an oath like -that described in article 3. The penalty for failure to swear -is not mentioned in the extant fragment, but must at the mildest -have been expulsion from the senate.</p> - -<p>Closely connected with the transfer of the iudicia from the -senators to the knights is the statute of Gaius concerning the -taxation of Asia. It ordered the censors to let out the taxes of -this province to the highest bidders; and it limited the right of -the senate to lessen the sum agreed upon.<a id="FNanchor_2346" href="#Footnote_2346" class="fnanchor">[2346]</a> Under such an -arrangement, however, no sufficient guarantee could be provided -for the security of the provincials from publican<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_381"></a>[381]</span> -exactions.<a id="FNanchor_2347" href="#Footnote_2347" class="fnanchor">[2347]</a> The political result of this legislation in favor of the -knights was to invest them not only with an important share -in the administration, but through the courts with a superiority -even over the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2348" href="#Footnote_2348" class="fnanchor">[2348]</a> The opposition of the poorer class to -the aristocracy could never be otherwise than uncertain and -fitful; but the knights with their immense wealth and their -efficient organization were to be henceforth an ever present -rival of the senate. The author of the law had given the state -a double head,<a id="FNanchor_2349" href="#Footnote_2349" class="fnanchor">[2349]</a> which was to prove the source of civil discord; -or nearly in his own words, he had thrust into the body of the -senate a sword which nothing could withdraw.<a id="FNanchor_2350" href="#Footnote_2350" class="fnanchor">[2350]</a> For a few -months their benefactor may have cherished the delusion that -he could depend upon their grateful support; he lived to discover -that they cared not for him or his reforms but only for -their immediate interests. In his work of construction the -statesman found them slightly more serviceable than the proletariate.</p> - -<p>The right which the senate had hitherto possessed of assigning -the provinces to the magistrates and promagistrates according -to its pleasure gave a great opportunity for favoritism and -partisanship; it could thwart the will of the people by assigning -a popular consul to an insignificant province. To deprive -the senate of a power which could be so easily perverted to -wrong use, C. Gracchus proposed and carried an act which -ordered the senate before the election to name the provinces -that were to be consular.<a id="FNanchor_2351" href="#Footnote_2351" class="fnanchor">[2351]</a> An article forbade tribunician intercession<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_382"></a>[382]</span> -against such action of the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2352" href="#Footnote_2352" class="fnanchor">[2352]</a> Far from improving -the administration, however, this statute tended to foster that routine -which was one of the most marked defects of oligarchic rule.<a id="FNanchor_2353" href="#Footnote_2353" class="fnanchor">[2353]</a></p> - -<p>As under the government of the nobility military affairs were -in the hands of the magistrates and senate, this field was closed -to comitial legislation.<a id="FNanchor_2354" href="#Footnote_2354" class="fnanchor">[2354]</a> One of the most notable indications of -growing democracy was the project of Ti. Gracchus, 133, for -shortening the period of service. It was not brought to vote;<a id="FNanchor_2355" href="#Footnote_2355" class="fnanchor">[2355]</a> -but his brother Gaius succeeded in passing a plebiscite, 123, -which ordered that the state should bear the cost of clothing -soldiers, and forbade the enlistment of boys before the close of -their seventeenth year.<a id="FNanchor_2356" href="#Footnote_2356" class="fnanchor">[2356]</a> The pay of the soldiers, which since the -war with Hannibal had remained five and a third asses a day, -had under new conditions become wholly inadequate; and certainly -insistence on the legal age limitation was prudent as well -as humane. There is no ground, then, for imagining with -Diodorus<a id="FNanchor_2357" href="#Footnote_2357" class="fnanchor">[2357]</a> that in this salutary measure Gaius was catering for -the support of the soldiers by inciting them to disobedience and -lawlessness.</p> - -<p>His greatest constructive work he aimed to achieve through -colonization and through the extension of the franchise. His -colonial law, 123, proposed to establish many settlements in -Italy,<a id="FNanchor_2358" href="#Footnote_2358" class="fnanchor">[2358]</a> two of which at least should be made up of men of the -best character, not the neediest but traders and workmen of -moderate means.<a id="FNanchor_2359" href="#Footnote_2359" class="fnanchor">[2359]</a> The two actually founded were Scolacium -and Neptunia,<a id="FNanchor_2360" href="#Footnote_2360" class="fnanchor">[2360]</a> both in situations favorable for commerce.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_383"></a>[383]</span> -Several other settlements in Italy are attributed to his colonial -or agrarian statute.<a id="FNanchor_2361" href="#Footnote_2361" class="fnanchor">[2361]</a> As his colonies were exclusively citizen,<a id="FNanchor_2362" href="#Footnote_2362" class="fnanchor">[2362]</a> -if any aliens took part, they must by virtue of the colonial law -have obtained the Roman rights. The statute of his colleague -Rubrius the same year (123) provided for the founding of Junonia -on the site of Carthage.<a id="FNanchor_2363" href="#Footnote_2363" class="fnanchor">[2363]</a> But the most liberal and statesmanlike -measure was reserved for his second tribunate, 122. -It was a proposal to grant full citizenship to the Latins and the -ius Latii to the remaining allies.<a id="FNanchor_2364" href="#Footnote_2364" class="fnanchor">[2364]</a> The rejection of the bill by a -popular vote proved the leader far too liberal and too progressive -for his supporters. Deceived by the spurious proposals of -M. Livius Drusus,<a id="FNanchor_2365" href="#Footnote_2365" class="fnanchor">[2365]</a> a colleague of Gaius, for the founding of -twelve colonies, the members of which were to hold their lots by -fee simple and consequently exempt from rents, and for depriving -the Roman magistrates of the right to inflict corporal punishment -on Latins even when in military service under their -commands,<a id="FNanchor_2366" href="#Footnote_2366" class="fnanchor">[2366]</a> the populace, readily accepting the new<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_384"></a>[384]</span> -proposals,<a id="FNanchor_2367" href="#Footnote_2367" class="fnanchor">[2367]</a> turned against their true champion, and defeated him in the -election for the tribunate for the ensuing year.<a id="FNanchor_2368" href="#Footnote_2368" class="fnanchor">[2368]</a> It was probably -the same measure of Gaius for extending the citizenship which -alienated from him the equites, who in every crisis pursued their -own selfish ends.<a id="FNanchor_2369" href="#Footnote_2369" class="fnanchor">[2369]</a> In the ensuing struggle between the senate -and Gaius they took the side of the former.<a id="FNanchor_2370" href="#Footnote_2370" class="fnanchor">[2370]</a></p> - -<p>In the tribunate of Gaius Gracchus the life of the comitia -reached the highest point of intensity. The two years of his -administration afford evidence of what the assembly could accomplish -when directed by the personality of a great statesman.<a id="FNanchor_2371" href="#Footnote_2371" class="fnanchor">[2371]</a> -The sum total of the measures adopted should be estimated not -as a completed work, but as a foundation to be strengthened at -defective points and to be built upon till the whole structure of -the state and empire should be reconstituted and freshly vitalized.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_385"></a>[385]</span> -These results might have been achieved, had Gaius lived -out his natural life and retained the support of the populace and -the knights.<a id="FNanchor_2372" href="#Footnote_2372" class="fnanchor">[2372]</a> His failure proved the comitia a weak, unsafe -instrument for constructive statesmanship.</p> - -<h4>II. <i>The Aristocratic Reaction and the Popular Recovery</i><br /> -122-103</h4> - -<p>The optimates waited only for the expiration of the tribunate -of Gaius Gracchus to begin undoing his work, and they found -the comitia ready to aid in the demolition. In 121 a plebiscite -of M. Minucius Rufus repealed the Rubrian law for the colonization -of Junonia (Carthage).<a id="FNanchor_2373" href="#Footnote_2373" class="fnanchor">[2373]</a> Soon afterward, certainly not -later than 118, a plebiscite, whose author is unknown, permitted -the beneficiaries of the Sempronian agrarian laws to sell the -lots they had received.<a id="FNanchor_2374" href="#Footnote_2374" class="fnanchor">[2374]</a> This enactment was followed in 118 -by a plebiscite which Appian<a id="FNanchor_2375" href="#Footnote_2375" class="fnanchor">[2375]</a> assigns to Spurius Borius (?), a -name not otherwise known.<a id="FNanchor_2376" href="#Footnote_2376" class="fnanchor">[2376]</a> It put an end to the distributions, -and must therefore have abolished the agrarian triumvirate. -The same law confirmed all holders of the ager publicus -in their possession, without converting any of this land into -private property, and it continued the imposition of rents. We -may assume that the lands here referred to included those recently -distributed in small lots as well as those retained by the -occupiers. Lastly it enacted that the revenues accruing from<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_386"></a>[386]</span> -the rents should be used for distributions—probably of cheap -grain.<a id="FNanchor_2377" href="#Footnote_2377" class="fnanchor">[2377]</a> In 111 another tribune, whom Cicero<a id="FNanchor_2378" href="#Footnote_2378" class="fnanchor">[2378]</a> names Sp. Thorius, -through a law which has partially survived in an inscription, -aimed to settle definitely and for all time in the interest -of the nobles the questions raised by the Sempronian agrarian -legislation.</p> - -<p>I. This epigraphic lex agraria converts into private property -the following classes of lands.<a id="FNanchor_2379" href="#Footnote_2379" class="fnanchor">[2379]</a></p> - -<p>(1) Land assigned to a colony or in any way made public, -and afterward restored to the original owners (domneis). It is -to be private optuma lege.<a id="FNanchor_2380" href="#Footnote_2380" class="fnanchor">[2380]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Land assigned to a colony and afterward restored to its -former occupier (veteri possessori).<a id="FNanchor_2381" href="#Footnote_2381" class="fnanchor">[2381]</a></p> - -<p>(3) Land within the legal limit (of five hundred iugera) left -to the occupier by the three commissioners.<a id="FNanchor_2382" href="#Footnote_2382" class="fnanchor">[2382]</a></p> - -<p>(4) Land assigned after 133 to colonies of Roman citizens.<a id="FNanchor_2383" href="#Footnote_2383" class="fnanchor">[2383]</a></p> - -<p>(5) Land given and assigned by the three commissioners after -133.<a id="FNanchor_2384" href="#Footnote_2384" class="fnanchor">[2384]</a></p> - -<p>(6) Land which has been occupied after 133 (not assigned -by the commissioners) to the extent of not more than thirty -iugera to the occupier.<a id="FNanchor_2385" href="#Footnote_2385" class="fnanchor">[2385]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_387"></a>[387]</span></p> - -<p>(7) Land which by the provision of this law is to be sold, -granted, or restored.<a id="FNanchor_2386" href="#Footnote_2386" class="fnanchor">[2386]</a></p> - -<p>All the lands above enumerated are declared private and free -from vectigal and scriptura.<a id="FNanchor_2387" href="#Footnote_2387" class="fnanchor">[2387]</a></p> - -<p>II. The lands which the law declares public are those reserved -from distribution by the law of Ti. Gracchus.<a id="FNanchor_2388" href="#Footnote_2388" class="fnanchor">[2388]</a> It retains further -as public all lands along public roads which have been granted -by the commissioners on condition that the recipients (viasieis -vicaneis) in return for the use of the land undertake the duty of -keeping the roads in repair. Though heritable and alienable, -they remain subject to the burden here described.<a id="FNanchor_2389" href="#Footnote_2389" class="fnanchor">[2389]</a></p> - -<p>III. In the regulation of the agrarian conditions of Africa the -statute deals with three kinds of land, (1) private ex iure quiritium,<a id="FNanchor_2390" href="#Footnote_2390" class="fnanchor">[2390]</a> -(2) private ex iure peregrino,<a id="FNanchor_2391" href="#Footnote_2391" class="fnanchor">[2391]</a> (3) public domain of the -Roman people of various sub-classes.<a id="FNanchor_2392" href="#Footnote_2392" class="fnanchor">[2392]</a> Lastly the statute aims -to settle the status of the lands of Corinth.<a id="FNanchor_2393" href="#Footnote_2393" class="fnanchor">[2393]</a> As regards the -Latins and aliens, whatever has already been permitted them -by treaty or law is allowed them by this statute, provided the -same thing is allowed a Roman citizen; but it is forbidden -them if forbidden a citizen. Rights granted the citizens which -up to this time are not enjoyed by aliens are not by this law -communicated to aliens.<a id="FNanchor_2394" href="#Footnote_2394" class="fnanchor">[2394]</a></p> - -<p>Through this series of reactionary laws, from the Minucian -(121) to the Thorian (111), the optimates succeeded in nullifying -the good results of the Sempronian agrarian reforms. It -was while the Minucian rogation<a id="FNanchor_2395" href="#Footnote_2395" class="fnanchor">[2395]</a> was under discussion that -the senate took advantage of a disturbance in the concilium to -arm the consul Opimius with absolute power for putting down<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_388"></a>[388]</span> -C. Gracchus and his followers.<a id="FNanchor_2396" href="#Footnote_2396" class="fnanchor">[2396]</a> The failure of an attempt in -the following year (120) to call Opimius to account for these -proceedings established the right of the senate to the appointment -of special commissions and to the decretum ultimum<a id="FNanchor_2397" href="#Footnote_2397" class="fnanchor">[2397]</a>—a -right on which the optimates continued to insist to the end of -the republic. Through the plebiscite of L. Calpurnius Bestia -(also 120)<a id="FNanchor_2398" href="#Footnote_2398" class="fnanchor">[2398]</a> they put the stamp of legitimacy upon the murder -of the followers of Ti. Gracchus by recalling from exile P. -Popillius Laenas, who as consul in 132 and head of a special -court was chiefly responsible for that judicial crime.<a id="FNanchor_2399" href="#Footnote_2399" class="fnanchor">[2399]</a> An -attempt was made by Q. Servilius Caepio, consul in 106, to -restore the courts to the senate,<a id="FNanchor_2400" href="#Footnote_2400" class="fnanchor">[2400]</a> or possibly to compromise by -providing for an album composed of both senators and equites.<a id="FNanchor_2401" href="#Footnote_2401" class="fnanchor">[2401]</a> -The sources imply that the measure was accepted by the comitia; -but if so, it must have been immediately annulled, as it was not -carried into effect.<a id="FNanchor_2402" href="#Footnote_2402" class="fnanchor">[2402]</a> Within this period of reaction, and perhaps -as a part of it, falls the lex de libertinorum suffragiis of the -consul M. Aemilius Scaurus, 115. Although nothing certain -is known of it, we may suppose that it attempted again<a id="FNanchor_2403" href="#Footnote_2403" class="fnanchor">[2403]</a> to restrict -the libertini to the four city tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2404" href="#Footnote_2404" class="fnanchor">[2404]</a> About this time, too,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_389"></a>[389]</span> -several acts seem to have been passed for diminishing the -pay of soldiers, probably undoing the Sempronian law on the -subject.<a id="FNanchor_2405" href="#Footnote_2405" class="fnanchor">[2405]</a></p> - -<p>A glance at these reactionary measures alone would leave the -impression that the senate was recovering its entire supremacy. -This result might have been reached had it not been on the one -hand for the lasting inspiration of the Gracchan spirit in the -plebs and their leaders, and on the other the new position of -the equites. In 119 C. Marius, at once a representative of -the knights<a id="FNanchor_2406" href="#Footnote_2406" class="fnanchor">[2406]</a> and of the peasants, opposed as tribune of the -plebs the senatorial aristocracy, which now had to depend for -immediate support upon the populace.<a id="FNanchor_2407" href="#Footnote_2407" class="fnanchor">[2407]</a> The optimates had -greatly impaired the value of the secret ballot through the -custodes tabellarum, who stood on the pontes as well as by -the boxes (cistae) to keep watch over the voting. They were -often influential men<a id="FNanchor_2408" href="#Footnote_2408" class="fnanchor">[2408]</a>—in elections selected by the candidates<a id="FNanchor_2409" href="#Footnote_2409" class="fnanchor">[2409]</a>—who -used their influence with the voters, especially -of the principium or of the prerogative century,<a id="FNanchor_2410" href="#Footnote_2410" class="fnanchor">[2410]</a> thereby maintaining -for the aristocrats a high degree of control over the -comitia in spite of the ballot laws.<a id="FNanchor_2411" href="#Footnote_2411" class="fnanchor">[2411]</a> For this reason C. Marius -when tribune of the plebs carried an act for making the pontes -narrower that there might be room on them for the voters only.<a id="FNanchor_2412" href="#Footnote_2412" class="fnanchor">[2412]</a> -The politicians, however, soon found means of circumventing<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_390"></a>[390]</span> -this law as well as the use of the ballot.<a id="FNanchor_2413" href="#Footnote_2413" class="fnanchor">[2413]</a> The populares could -expect little therefore from the plebiscite of C. Caelius, 107, -which by extending the ballot to trials of perduellio, completed -the abolition of oral voting in the comitia.<a id="FNanchor_2414" href="#Footnote_2414" class="fnanchor">[2414]</a></p> - -<p>We find another sign of popular recovery in the assembly’s -resumption of the appointment of special judiciary commissions.<a id="FNanchor_2415" href="#Footnote_2415" class="fnanchor">[2415]</a> -One of the most remarkable courts of the kind was -that created in 113 for the trial of three Vestal virgins on a -charge of incest. The pontifex maximus, who possessed absolute -authority over the Vestals, had already pronounced judgment, -condemning one and acquitting the other two, when a -plebiscite of Sex. Peducaeus, taking the case out of his hands, -transferred it to a quaestio extraordinaria.<a id="FNanchor_2416" href="#Footnote_2416" class="fnanchor">[2416]</a> To such an extent -did the tribune apply the theory of popular sovereignty.<a id="FNanchor_2417" href="#Footnote_2417" class="fnanchor">[2417]</a> The -plebiscite of C. Mamilius, 109, ordered the appointment of a -court for the detection and punishment of those who had -accepted money from Jugurtha for aid rendered him against -the decrees of the senate and the interests of Rome. As it was -a blow aimed at the nobility, the people in the hatred they then -cherished against the governing class voted it with great spirit.<a id="FNanchor_2418" href="#Footnote_2418" class="fnanchor">[2418]</a> -In 105 the tribal comitia abrogated the proconsular imperium -of Q. Servilius Caepio,<a id="FNanchor_2419" href="#Footnote_2419" class="fnanchor">[2419]</a> and in the following year, they not only -appointed a special court to try him for embezzlement of the -gold found at Tolosa,<a id="FNanchor_2420" href="#Footnote_2420" class="fnanchor">[2420]</a> but through the plebiscite of L. Cassius -Longinus, they disqualified for membership of the senate any<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_391"></a>[391]</span> -person whom the people had judicially condemned or whose -imperium they had abrogated.<a id="FNanchor_2421" href="#Footnote_2421" class="fnanchor">[2421]</a> These acts confirmed and -applied the principles underlying the deposition of Octavius -and the rogation of C. Gracchus concerning persons deposed -from office (abacti). In theory the people indirectly chose the -senators through their function of electing magistrates; and -they were only claiming this right when they insisted that he -should be prohibited from membership whom they had condemned -in either of the two ways described by the statute. It -must have seemed to the people, on the other hand, that the -tribunes, who were once more their true representatives, had as -good a right as any other magistrates to seats in the senate. -This feeling found expression in the Atinian plebiscite, enacted -between 122 and 102,<a id="FNanchor_2422" href="#Footnote_2422" class="fnanchor">[2422]</a> which gave the tribunes the ius sententiae -dicendae in the senate with the same right to censorial enrolment -as that enjoyed by the curule magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_2423" href="#Footnote_2423" class="fnanchor">[2423]</a></p> - -<p>The growing strength of the people and at the same time the -increasing dependence of the optimates on religion for the control -of politics are indicated by a law of 103 concerning the -election of sacerdotes. More than a hundred years earlier<a id="FNanchor_2424" href="#Footnote_2424" class="fnanchor">[2424]</a> was -instituted the custom of electing the supreme pontiff and the -chief curio in comitia of seventeen tribes designated by lot. -Toward the end of the plutocratic régime C. Licinius Crassus -in the interest of the people attempted in vain to pass a law -for extending the principle to all the members of the more -important sacerdotal colleges.<a id="FNanchor_2425" href="#Footnote_2425" class="fnanchor">[2425]</a> The proposal was defeated by -the eloquence of C. Laelius,<a id="FNanchor_2426" href="#Footnote_2426" class="fnanchor">[2426]</a> but at length it was passed as the -lex de sacerdotiis of Cn. Domitius, tribune of the plebs in 103. -The statute affected the pontifical and augural colleges, the -decemviri sacris faciundis, and the epulones.<a id="FNanchor_2427" href="#Footnote_2427" class="fnanchor">[2427]</a> According to the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_392"></a>[392]</span> -new arrangement when a place became vacant in any one of -these colleges, the members of the college drew up a list of -eligible candidates from whom the comitia sacerdotum, composed -as above described, made a choice.<a id="FNanchor_2428" href="#Footnote_2428" class="fnanchor">[2428]</a> In spite of this law -religion remained a political tool of the optimates.</p> - -<p>Meantime the popular party succeeded in enacting economic -laws. A Porcian statute concerning interest, which may well -have aimed to benefit the poor, seems to be the work of -M. Porcius Cato, consul in 118. The author had to defend -the act against several attempts to repeal it.<a id="FNanchor_2429" href="#Footnote_2429" class="fnanchor">[2429]</a> In 109 under -the stress of the Cimbric war the consul M. Junius Silanus -passed an act for repealing several earlier laws which had -diminished the pay of soldiers. We may reasonably believe -that it restored the Sempronian law on the subject.<a id="FNanchor_2430" href="#Footnote_2430" class="fnanchor">[2430]</a> His -immediate object was to encourage enlistments.<a id="FNanchor_2431" href="#Footnote_2431" class="fnanchor">[2431]</a> An agrarian -rogation was offered by L. Marcius Philipus, tribune of the -plebs in 104. As the author was at heart a democrat, his -measure was doubtless inspired with the spirit of the Gracchi. -Perhaps it aimed to restore their law; but lacking determination, -the proposer readily allowed it to be voted down.<a id="FNanchor_2432" href="#Footnote_2432" class="fnanchor">[2432]</a> The -monetary lex Clodia, which probably belongs to the same -year, has no political significance.<a id="FNanchor_2433" href="#Footnote_2433" class="fnanchor">[2433]</a></p> - -<h4>III. <i>The Appuleian Legislation and the Rule of the Moderate -Optimates</i><br /> -103-88</h4> - -<p>Through the legislative acts above described we can trace -the speedy restoration of the democracy and of comitial legislative<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_393"></a>[393]</span> -power after the overthrow of C. Sempronius Gracchus. -We are now approaching a second crisis in which the aristocracy -had to struggle for existence. Against it was formed -a combination of three powerful men, C. Marius, supported -by the knights and the municipes,<a id="FNanchor_2434" href="#Footnote_2434" class="fnanchor">[2434]</a> C. Servilius Glaucia, and -L. Appuleius Saturninus. It is almost certain that this Servilius -is to be identified with the author of the lex repetundarum -of 111 or thereabout, probably a plebiscite, which repealed -the Acilian law on the same subject.<a id="FNanchor_2435" href="#Footnote_2435" class="fnanchor">[2435]</a> In important respects -his statute was an improvement on earlier regulations of the -crime. “Glaucia’s alteration in procedure was thorough and -permanent. He introduced the system of the ‘second hearing’—an -obligatory renewal of the trial, which rendered it -possible for counsel to discuss evidence which had already -been given, and for jurors to get a grasp of the mass of -scattered data which had been presented to their notice<a id="FNanchor_2436" href="#Footnote_2436" class="fnanchor">[2436]</a>—and -he also made it possible to recover damages, not only -from the chief malefactor, but from all who had dishonestly -shared his spoils.”<a id="FNanchor_2437" href="#Footnote_2437" class="fnanchor">[2437]</a> These principles were taken up into -the Cornelian law which superseded it in 81.<a id="FNanchor_2438" href="#Footnote_2438" class="fnanchor">[2438]</a> The circumstance -that the man whom the optimates regarded as merely a vulgar -demagogue was the author of so statesmanlike a measure -ought to militate against their opinion, not only of him, but also -of his associates. He, too, represented the knights,<a id="FNanchor_2439" href="#Footnote_2439" class="fnanchor">[2439]</a> whereas -Appuleius was a champion of the rural plebs against the -senate and the populace. As tribune of the plebs in 103 -the latter proposed a law for the assignment of lands in the -province of Africa to the retiring veterans of Marius in lots -of a hundred iugera each. When Baebius, a colleague, interceded,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_394"></a>[394]</span> -the people pelted him with stones and drove him from -the assembly. Thus the law was violently carried, but we -hear nothing more of it. Probably it was not enforced.<a id="FNanchor_2440" href="#Footnote_2440" class="fnanchor">[2440]</a> This -act marks an epoch in the history of Roman colonization; -through it the government first expressed its intention to -provide discharged soldiers with farms, a departure made -necessary by the Marian policy of filling the army with capite -censi.<a id="FNanchor_2441" href="#Footnote_2441" class="fnanchor">[2441]</a> Either to this tribunate or more probably to his second -belongs the lex de maiestate (minuta),<a id="FNanchor_2442" href="#Footnote_2442" class="fnanchor">[2442]</a> the first of the kind -in Roman history. It defined the crime and made general -provisions for the prosecution of those who were accused of -it.<a id="FNanchor_2443" href="#Footnote_2443" class="fnanchor">[2443]</a> The same statute provided for the establishment of a -court which seems to have been standing rather than special.<a id="FNanchor_2444" href="#Footnote_2444" class="fnanchor">[2444]</a></p> - -<p>In his second tribunate, 100, supported by Marius, consul -a sixth time, and by Servilius, Appuleius proposed and carried -a law for the founding of settlements of the Marian veterans -in Sicily, Corsica, Achaia, and Macedonia.<a id="FNanchor_2445" href="#Footnote_2445" class="fnanchor">[2445]</a> Marius was to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_395"></a>[395]</span> -be a commissioner for conducting these colonies, and was -to have the right to enroll as citizens in each settlement a -specified number of aliens.<a id="FNanchor_2446" href="#Footnote_2446" class="fnanchor">[2446]</a> The object of the latter clause -was doubtless to provide for the Italian veterans in his -army. He proposed further that certain Transpadane lands -which the Cimbri had taken from the Gauls and which Marius -had recovered should be distributed among the citizens and -the Italians.<a id="FNanchor_2447" href="#Footnote_2447" class="fnanchor">[2447]</a> Another proposal was for the monthly sale -of a specified number of modii of grain to every citizen resident -of Rome who desired it at five-sixths of an as to the modius—a -merely nominal price.<a id="FNanchor_2448" href="#Footnote_2448" class="fnanchor">[2448]</a> It is not known whether the colonial, -agrarian, and frumentarian measures were separate enactments -or articles of one statute; or the colonial and agrarian -provisions may alone have been combined. However that -may be, we are informed by Appian<a id="FNanchor_2449" href="#Footnote_2449" class="fnanchor">[2449]</a> that attached to the -agrarian measure—whether to the others also is nowhere -stated—was an article which provided that if the bill should -become a law, the senators within five days should swear to -uphold it, or if any senator refused to take the oath, he -should be expelled from the senate and should be liable to -a fine of twenty talents, the Greek equivalent of about five -hundred thousand sesterces.<a id="FNanchor_2450" href="#Footnote_2450" class="fnanchor">[2450]</a> The rural plebs, including many -discharged soldiers of Marius, swarmed into the comitia at -the call of the tribune and violently passed the law. Marius, -who as a consul and a knight disapproved of such illegality, -set for the senators the example of swearing to the law, -“in so far as it was a law,” which left them a loophole of -escape from its provisions should they afterward so determine. -Metellus, who alone of the senators refused the oath, was -forced into exile and an interdict from fire and water was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_396"></a>[396]</span> -passed against him by the tribes on the motion of Saturninus.<a id="FNanchor_2451" href="#Footnote_2451" class="fnanchor">[2451]</a> -Soon afterward an election riot gave the senate a pretext -for martial law. Placed under custody, Saturninus and some -fellow officials were stoned to death by a mob. His measures -were then annulled by the senate on the ground that they had -been violently passed;<a id="FNanchor_2452" href="#Footnote_2452" class="fnanchor">[2452]</a> nevertheless Mariana was founded by -Marius in Corsica, apparently under the colonial provision.<a id="FNanchor_2453" href="#Footnote_2453" class="fnanchor">[2453]</a> -The import of the agrarian law of Sex. Titius, tribune of the -plebs in 99, is unknown.<a id="FNanchor_2454" href="#Footnote_2454" class="fnanchor">[2454]</a> It may have been merely a reënactment -of the Appuleian measure. At all events before it could -be put into force it was annulled by the senate on the ground -that it had been passed by violence and against the intercession -of colleagues.<a id="FNanchor_2455" href="#Footnote_2455" class="fnanchor">[2455]</a></p> - -<p>The optimates, having again triumphed over the democracy, -adopted a policy of moderation. Their consuls of 98, Q. Caecilius -Metellus and T. Didius, attempted by a mild statute to -check the most flagrant abuses of tribunician legislation, (1) the -combination of various dissimilar provisions in one bill (lex -satura) for the purpose of drawing the votes of all parties, -(2) the passing of bills through the assembly by surprise. Their -law accordingly, reviving usages once in force but recently -neglected, forbade such combinations<a id="FNanchor_2456" href="#Footnote_2456" class="fnanchor">[2456]</a> and ordered that the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_397"></a>[397]</span> -promulgation should precede the voting by at least a trinum -nundinum—an interval which included three market days.<a id="FNanchor_2457" href="#Footnote_2457" class="fnanchor">[2457]</a> -Similarly in 95 their consuls, L. Licinius Crassus and Q. Mucius -Scaevola, aimed by an equally moderate law to check the usurpation -of the citizenship on the part of aliens. It forbade peregrini -to perform the functions of citizens, though it did not order -the innocent among them to leave Rome.<a id="FNanchor_2458" href="#Footnote_2458" class="fnanchor">[2458]</a> It provided for the -appointment of a special commission to discover and punish -usurpers of the citizenship.<a id="FNanchor_2459" href="#Footnote_2459" class="fnanchor">[2459]</a> Those found guilty were sent -back to their communities.<a id="FNanchor_2460" href="#Footnote_2460" class="fnanchor">[2460]</a> Though the authors were eminent -in justice and cherished the best intentions, their law proved to -be not merely useless but most pernicious to the state,<a id="FNanchor_2461" href="#Footnote_2461" class="fnanchor">[2461]</a> as it -helped drive the Italians to revolt.<a id="FNanchor_2462" href="#Footnote_2462" class="fnanchor">[2462]</a></p> - -<p>The next attempt at reform proceeded from the inmost circle -of the aristocracy.<a id="FNanchor_2463" href="#Footnote_2463" class="fnanchor">[2463]</a> M. Livius Drusus, tribune of the plebs in -91, was a man of the highest nobility, wealthy, eloquent, and -upright at heart, the son of that Livius who had opposed C. -Gracchus.<a id="FNanchor_2464" href="#Footnote_2464" class="fnanchor">[2464]</a> Regarding his aims and the quality of his statesmanship -conflicting opinions have been expressed by modern -scholars. The sources intimate that he wished primarily to -strengthen the senate by breaking away from its hide-bound -conservatism and undertaking various pressing reforms. His -agrarian measure was conceived in the Gracchan spirit but was -more radical.<a id="FNanchor_2465" href="#Footnote_2465" class="fnanchor">[2465]</a> Appian<a id="FNanchor_2466" href="#Footnote_2466" class="fnanchor">[2466]</a> states that it proposed the founding -of colonies voted long ago but not yet established. Reference -must be to the twelve colonies planned by his father.<a id="FNanchor_2467" href="#Footnote_2467" class="fnanchor">[2467]</a> It probably<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_398"></a>[398]</span> -abolished the statute of 111 and ordered the division not -only of the Campanian lands,<a id="FNanchor_2468" href="#Footnote_2468" class="fnanchor">[2468]</a> but also of those public domains -which were held by the allied communities—in brief, of all the -public land remaining in Italy and Sicily;<a id="FNanchor_2469" href="#Footnote_2469" class="fnanchor">[2469]</a> and it established a -board of ten for making the assignments.<a id="FNanchor_2470" href="#Footnote_2470" class="fnanchor">[2470]</a> Livy<a id="FNanchor_2471" href="#Footnote_2471" class="fnanchor">[2471]</a> attributes to -the author a frumentarian proposal, though we are not informed -of its character. The aim must have been to win the support of -the populace for his other measures.<a id="FNanchor_2472" href="#Footnote_2472" class="fnanchor">[2472]</a></p> - -<p>He further proposed to mix with the silver coinage an eighth -part of copper,<a id="FNanchor_2473" href="#Footnote_2473" class="fnanchor">[2473]</a> the proceeds of this gain to be applied perhaps -to the execution of his frumentarian project.<a id="FNanchor_2474" href="#Footnote_2474" class="fnanchor">[2474]</a> There is much -controversy as to the intent of his judiciary reform. Appian<a id="FNanchor_2475" href="#Footnote_2475" class="fnanchor">[2475]</a> -supposes that he wished to add three hundred knights to the -senate and to draw the jurors from that body thus enlarged. -Velleius<a id="FNanchor_2476" href="#Footnote_2476" class="fnanchor">[2476]</a> is of the opinion that his aim was to transfer the -iudicia to the senate; whereas the epitomator of Livy<a id="FNanchor_2477" href="#Footnote_2477" class="fnanchor">[2477]</a> directly -states that he provided for making up the iudicia of senators and -knights in equal numbers. We may partially reconcile these -conflicting statements by supposing that he planned to compose -the jurors’ album of six hundred senators and knights in -equal numbers, by which expedient he hoped to bring these two -hostile orders back to their former harmony,<a id="FNanchor_2478" href="#Footnote_2478" class="fnanchor">[2478]</a> while serving the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_399"></a>[399]</span> -interests of the senate and ridding the state of the corrupt and -tyrannical rule of the knights.<a id="FNanchor_2479" href="#Footnote_2479" class="fnanchor">[2479]</a> By a special article of the rogation -a quaestio, probably perpetua, was to be appointed to inquire -into the cases of bribery of jurors and to punish the guilty.<a id="FNanchor_2480" href="#Footnote_2480" class="fnanchor">[2480]</a> -His most radical measure, introduced after opposition to his -other reforms began to develop,<a id="FNanchor_2481" href="#Footnote_2481" class="fnanchor">[2481]</a> was for extending the citizenship -to the Latins<a id="FNanchor_2482" href="#Footnote_2482" class="fnanchor">[2482]</a> and to all the Italians.<a id="FNanchor_2483" href="#Footnote_2483" class="fnanchor">[2483]</a> This group of proposals, -designed for the benefit of all parties, proved distasteful -to all. The senators found a ground for complaint in the circumstance -that the knights would have equal power with them -in the courts; the knights were unwilling to surrender their -judicial control or to grant the franchise to the Italians; the -wealthy Italians feared they might lose the public lands which -they still held. Only the poor among the Romans and allies -supported the proposal in the hope of profiting by the distribution -of lands.<a id="FNanchor_2484" href="#Footnote_2484" class="fnanchor">[2484]</a> The agrarian, frumentarian, monetary, and judiciary -measures were combined in one statute, and passed with -violence<a id="FNanchor_2485" href="#Footnote_2485" class="fnanchor">[2485]</a> and contrary to the omens.<a id="FNanchor_2486" href="#Footnote_2486" class="fnanchor">[2486]</a> On these grounds and -furthermore because they violated the article of the Caecilian-Didian -statute forbidding the passing of a lex satura, they were -annulled by the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2487" href="#Footnote_2487" class="fnanchor">[2487]</a> Although Drusus might have interposed -his veto against this decree, he preferred rather to disregard -it, most probably on the theory that the senatorial authority -did not avail against the sovereign will of the people.<a id="FNanchor_2488" href="#Footnote_2488" class="fnanchor">[2488]</a> Aware -that his intercession would but postpone the annulment to another<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_400"></a>[400]</span> -year, he contented himself with informing his opponents that -his measures were absolutely necessary for the security of the -state, and that those who offended against them did it at their -peril. He proceeded to carry his statute into immediate effect.<a id="FNanchor_2489" href="#Footnote_2489" class="fnanchor">[2489]</a> -A plebiscite of Saufeius, a colleague, established a commission -of five in addition to the ten provided for by the Livian statute; -and Livius was elected a member of both commissions.<a id="FNanchor_2490" href="#Footnote_2490" class="fnanchor">[2490]</a> -After his murder the Livian and Saufeian statutes were both -considered null and void.<a id="FNanchor_2491" href="#Footnote_2491" class="fnanchor">[2491]</a></p> - -<p>The lex Remmia de calumniatoribus, which was enacted -before 80, may belong to the year of the Livian attempt at -reform, 91;<a id="FNanchor_2492" href="#Footnote_2492" class="fnanchor">[2492]</a> and in that case it would be most natural to -regard it as a piece of counter legislation to offset the proposal -for establishing a court for the trial of jurors accused of bribery. -The complainant who was proved malicious it rendered liable to -trial and punishment with the loss of citizenship and the branding -of his forehead with the letter K (for Kalumniator).<a id="FNanchor_2493" href="#Footnote_2493" class="fnanchor">[2493]</a> This -we may believe was the defiance offered by the knights to those -who were attempting to bring them to account for their conduct -as judges. Exulting in their victory over Drusus, they expressed -their antipathy to the Italian movement in a lex de maiestate of -Q. Varius, tribune of the plebs in 90. They stood round the -Rostra with drawn daggers and forced it through the comitia -in spite of tribunician intercession. It supplanted the Appuleian -law on the subject by a severe provision against those -who encouraged the Italians to demand the citizenship or in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_401"></a>[401]</span> -any way to conspire or to revolt against the Roman people. -It must have contained an article, too, concerning seditions.<a id="FNanchor_2494" href="#Footnote_2494" class="fnanchor">[2494]</a> -The court which it established was to sit on all ordinary dies -fasti, undisturbed by iustitia,<a id="FNanchor_2495" href="#Footnote_2495" class="fnanchor">[2495]</a> and was to be a quaestio perpetua.<a id="FNanchor_2496" href="#Footnote_2496" class="fnanchor">[2496]</a> -Now that two attempts, the Appuleian and the Livian, -to substitute more popular measures for the Sempronian frumentarian -law had failed, the optimates found themselves strong -enough to supersede the Sempronian act by one less popular. -This was the Octavian law,<a id="FNanchor_2497" href="#Footnote_2497" class="fnanchor">[2497]</a> the contents of which are unknown, -but which received the praise of Cicero for its moderation.<a id="FNanchor_2498" href="#Footnote_2498" class="fnanchor">[2498]</a></p> - -<p>The Social War, following close upon the murder of Livius -Drusus, compelled the Romans to grant the citizenship to the -Italians. This result was brought about by a succession of -statutes. A law of the consul L. Julius Caesar, 90, bestowed -the citizenship upon the Latins<a id="FNanchor_2499" href="#Footnote_2499" class="fnanchor">[2499]</a> and on all the Italians who had -not taken arms against Rome<a id="FNanchor_2500" href="#Footnote_2500" class="fnanchor">[2500]</a> and who were willing to accept -the gift.<a id="FNanchor_2501" href="#Footnote_2501" class="fnanchor">[2501]</a> The same statute probably regulated the assignment<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_402"></a>[402]</span> -of these new citizens to the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2502" href="#Footnote_2502" class="fnanchor">[2502]</a> In the following year a law -of L. Calpurnius Piso, probably a tribune, granted the commanding -general power, apparently absolute, to bestow the right of -the city upon the soldiers under his orders.<a id="FNanchor_2503" href="#Footnote_2503" class="fnanchor">[2503]</a> Another statute of -89, carried by M. Plautius Silvanus and C. Papirius Carbo, tribunes -of the plebs, granted the citizenship to all members of allied -communities who were domiciled in Italy at the time the statute -was passed and who within sixty days should signify to the -praetor at Rome their willingness to accept the offer.<a id="FNanchor_2504" href="#Footnote_2504" class="fnanchor">[2504]</a> The -object of this measure was not only to expedite the reconciliation, -but also to make the work of the next censors practicable. -The citizenship thus granted involved the right of suffrage, -though in new tribes which voted after the others. Many -Italians, especially the Lucanians and the Samnites, took no -notice of the offer.<a id="FNanchor_2505" href="#Footnote_2505" class="fnanchor">[2505]</a> In the same year Cn. Pompeius Strabo, a -consul, proposed and carried a law which seems to have empowered -himself at his discretion to invest with full citizenship -those Transpadani who already enjoyed the Latin rights, and -to confer upon the rest the ius Latii.<a id="FNanchor_2506" href="#Footnote_2506" class="fnanchor">[2506]</a></p> - -<p>The question as to the composition of the courts, still left -unsettled, was taken up by M. Plautius Silvanus, the tribune -referred to above. His statute transferred the filling of the -album from the urban praetor to the tribes, which were to -elect each fifteen members. The law made the qualifications -of the iudices independent of the social classes. Under it -accordingly senators and a few common plebeians in addition to -equites served as jurors, so that the equestrian control of the -courts was partially checked.<a id="FNanchor_2507" href="#Footnote_2507" class="fnanchor">[2507]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_403"></a>[403]</span></p> - -<p>Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_2508" href="#Footnote_2508" class="fnanchor">[2508]</a> supposes that these jurors were for the quaestio -de maiestate only. For this opinion he depends upon the assertion -of Cicero<a id="FNanchor_2509" href="#Footnote_2509" class="fnanchor">[2509]</a> that the equites remained till Sulla’s legislation -in uninterrupted possession of the courts. The authority of -Cicero, however, would allow us to assume that while the equites -lost the legal monopoly they retained practical control. However -that may be, it is hardly possible that this reactionary -measure survived the proletarian uprising under Marius and -Cinna. The lex agraria of the same Plautius seems to have -been intended for supplying the veterans of the Social War -with farms.<a id="FNanchor_2510" href="#Footnote_2510" class="fnanchor">[2510]</a> The lex Papiria, which introduced the semiuncial -<i>as</i>, is doubtless to be assigned to C. Papirius Carbo, the colleague -of Plautius above mentioned. If so, the object was to -relieve slightly the financial embarrassment caused by the war, -and more particularly to bring the small coins of Rome into -correspondence with those of Italy.<a id="FNanchor_2511" href="#Footnote_2511" class="fnanchor">[2511]</a></p> - -<h4>IV. <i>The Political Equalization of Italy</i><br /> -88-83</h4> - -<p>With many Italians still in revolt and the others smarting -under the inferior citizenship eked out to them, and with Mithridates -threatening the existence of the empire, Rome should -have adopted a policy of domestic conciliation. Under these -circumstances Sulla, consul in 88, showed a lamentable want of -tact in expressing the sentiment that there could be no peace in -Italy as long as a single Samnite lived<a id="FNanchor_2512" href="#Footnote_2512" class="fnanchor">[2512]</a>—a curiously antiquated -frame of mind for a statesman of his shrewdness. The cause -of the new citizens was taken up by P. Sulpicius Rufus, a patrician -who had forsaken his rank to qualify himself for the -plebeian tribunate.<a id="FNanchor_2513" href="#Footnote_2513" class="fnanchor">[2513]</a> A man of marvellous eloquence, he had<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_404"></a>[404]</span> -been an adherent of Drusus, though more inclined to the equestrian -interests. As tribune of the plebs, 88, he seems to have -tried to win the support of the senate and of the equestrian order -to his policy; but failing in the attempt, he looked for aid to the -commons and to a small band of knights who were faithful to -him. His rogation contained the following articles: (1) that -the new citizens and the libertini should be distributed among all -the tribes,<a id="FNanchor_2514" href="#Footnote_2514" class="fnanchor">[2514]</a> with a view to completing the plan of Livius Drusus -for the political equalization of Italy; (2) that those who -had been driven from the state by violence should be recalled.<a id="FNanchor_2515" href="#Footnote_2515" class="fnanchor">[2515]</a> -This article was probably for the benefit of those knights against -whom the Varian law had been turned.<a id="FNanchor_2516" href="#Footnote_2516" class="fnanchor">[2516]</a> His rogation provided -further, (3) that no one who owed more than two thousand denarii -should be a senator.<a id="FNanchor_2517" href="#Footnote_2517" class="fnanchor">[2517]</a> Money was scarce because of the war;<a id="FNanchor_2518" href="#Footnote_2518" class="fnanchor">[2518]</a> and -Sulpicius must have felt that if the senators, most of whom were -abundantly able, should pay their debts, it would go far toward -relieving the stringency, and that if any were ejected because -of failure to pay, an opportunity would be afforded of promoting -equites to the vacant places. The consuls of the year, L. -Cornelius Sulla and Q. Pompeius Rufus, attempted to prevent a -vote on these radical measures by interposing a cessation of -business for many days through the proclamation of a festival.<a id="FNanchor_2519" href="#Footnote_2519" class="fnanchor">[2519]</a> -With his armed followers Sulpicius forced the consuls to recall -the proclamation, whereupon Sulla fled for safety to his army -at Nola. Sulpicius then added to his statute a fourth article to -the effect that the imperium of Sulla should be abrogated and -that the province of Asia, involving the conduct of the war -against Mithridates, should be given to Marius as proconsul,<a id="FNanchor_2520" href="#Footnote_2520" class="fnanchor">[2520]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_405"></a>[405]</span> -although the latter was now but a private citizen. Doubtless -Sulpicius understood that there could be no guarantee for the -execution of his statute as long as Sulla remained in power, and -furthermore that the advancement of Marius would be a great -gain for the knights. The bill was passed by the comitia of -tribes; but Sulla, far from delivering up his command, marched -his army into Rome to settle the question in his own interest by -the sword. On his initiative Sulpicius, Marius, and ten of their -associates were declared public enemies by a decree of the senate -ratified by a popular vote.<a id="FNanchor_2521" href="#Footnote_2521" class="fnanchor">[2521]</a> There is no need of assuming -that the supporters of the tribune turned against him; the optimates -were as clever as their opponents at packing assemblies. -The absurdity of continuing the worn-out comitial machinery as -a factor of government is nowhere more apparent than on this -page of history, which records that the comitia a few days after -adopting the measures of Sulpicius, voted to outlaw him and his -friends. Marius fled; Sulpicius and several adherents were -killed. Thereupon the senate annulled the entire Sulpician -statute on the ground that it had been violently passed.<a id="FNanchor_2522" href="#Footnote_2522" class="fnanchor">[2522]</a></p> - -<p>No statesman, however opposed to popular government, could -think of abolishing the comitia or even of putting an end to -their legislative function. But the democracy could be effectually<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_406"></a>[406]</span> -checked by reducing the legislative power of the assemblies -to the harmless function of ratifying decrees of the senate. -This result Sulla and Pompeius aimed to reach by renewing an -ancient law<a id="FNanchor_2523" href="#Footnote_2523" class="fnanchor">[2523]</a> that no measure should ever again be brought -before the people which had not been previously considered -and agreed to by the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2524" href="#Footnote_2524" class="fnanchor">[2524]</a> A closely related law of the same -consuls ordered that “the voting should not be by tribes but by -centuries, as King Tullius had ordained.”<a id="FNanchor_2525" href="#Footnote_2525" class="fnanchor">[2525]</a> This statement has -often been interpreted to signify the restoration of the earlier -form of comitia centuriata. But it seems most improbable that, -on the point of setting out for a long, distant war, Sulla should -think of restoring an organization which had been obsolete for -more than a century and a half, and which could have been -known to none but antiquarians. With his clear, practical intelligence -he could not have failed to see the insuperable difficulty -of restoring the ancient definitions of the classes in terms -of iugera or even on the later basis of the libral <i>as</i>.<a id="FNanchor_2526" href="#Footnote_2526" class="fnanchor">[2526]</a> Furthermore -no censors were then at hand to undertake the work, and -it was altogether unlikely that during his absence any could be -elected who would be willing to apply themselves to the revitalization -of the antique mummy. Such a measure, too, as -Meyer<a id="FNanchor_2527" href="#Footnote_2527" class="fnanchor">[2527]</a> has pointed out, would place the control of the assembly -in the hands, not of the senate, but of the knights, his -mortal enemies. It is far more reasonable to suppose that this -act transferred the function of ratifying laws from the tribal to -the centuriate comitia, to restore the arrangement supposed to -have been introduced by Servius Tullius.<a id="FNanchor_2528" href="#Footnote_2528" class="fnanchor">[2528]</a> If this reasoning is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_407"></a>[407]</span> -correct, the act under consideration totally abolished the legislative -initiative of the tribunes.<a id="FNanchor_2529" href="#Footnote_2529" class="fnanchor">[2529]</a> The other Cornelian-Pompeian -law mentioned by Appian must have applied, accordingly, not -to the tribunate but to the other magistracies.<a id="FNanchor_2530" href="#Footnote_2530" class="fnanchor">[2530]</a> The current -interpretation, which involves the theory of a return to the original -centuriate system, requires further examination. Its chief -basis is the statement of Appian that no law should be brought -before the πλῆθος which had not been previously considered in -the senate. It is commonly assumed that he uses δῆμος to designate -the whole citizen body, and πλῆθος the exclusively plebeian -assembly under tribunician presidency. A study of his -usage, however, proves that he makes no such discrimination. -Δῆμος is ordinarily the people in general, especially as distinguished -from the βουλή,<a id="FNanchor_2531" href="#Footnote_2531" class="fnanchor">[2531]</a> parallel to Livy’s common distinction -between plebs and senatus. It is the technical term for -the plebs in their tribal comitia under tribunician presidency.<a id="FNanchor_2532" href="#Footnote_2532" class="fnanchor">[2532]</a> -Rarely it signifies the state<a id="FNanchor_2533" href="#Footnote_2533" class="fnanchor">[2533]</a> with reference to the interest of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_408"></a>[408]</span> -people. Πλῆθος, on the other hand, ordinarily denotes the -masses, multitude, rabble,<a id="FNanchor_2534" href="#Footnote_2534" class="fnanchor">[2534]</a> including the crowd gathered not -only in a tribunician assembly<a id="FNanchor_2535" href="#Footnote_2535" class="fnanchor">[2535]</a> but also in the ἐκκλησία (here -meaning contio) under the presidency of a patrician magistrate.<a id="FNanchor_2536" href="#Footnote_2536" class="fnanchor">[2536]</a> -But πλῆθος is never technically or officially used to -denote any assembly either of the populus or of the plebs. In -the passage under discussion Appian’s statement of the Cornelian-Pompeian -law is εἰσηγοῦντό τε μηδὲν ἔτι ἀπροβούλευτον ἐς -τὸν δῆμον ἐσφέρεσθαι, in which he uses δῆμος according to his -custom to designate the popular assembly without specifying -whether it is of the populus or of the plebs. In commenting -on it he substitutes πλῆθος for δῆμος for the purpose, not of -defining the assembly as tribunician, but of contrasting the -masses in the assembly with the nobles in the senate: ἐσ τὸ -πλῆθος is substantially equivalent to ἐν τοῖς πένησι καὶ θρασυτάτοις -used just below; Sulla wished nothing to be submitted to -the masses in the comitia centuriata before it had been considered -by the senate.</p> - -<p>Appian<a id="FNanchor_2537" href="#Footnote_2537" class="fnanchor">[2537]</a> attributes to Sulla for this early date an attempt to -increase the number of senators. “They (the consuls) enrolled -three hundred nobles in the senate, which had been -reduced in numbers and for that reason had come to be despised.” -He does not state, however, by what authority the -consuls made this extraordinary adlectio; and it is in fact improbable -that the senate had so dwindled. However that may -be, the increase did not take permanent effect at this time.<a id="FNanchor_2538" href="#Footnote_2538" class="fnanchor">[2538]</a> -Two other laws of these consuls are briefly mentioned: (1) for -planting colonies,<a id="FNanchor_2539" href="#Footnote_2539" class="fnanchor">[2539]</a> of which nothing is known; (2) a lex -unciaria.<a id="FNanchor_2540" href="#Footnote_2540" class="fnanchor">[2540]</a> The latter may have been a reduction of existing -debts by one-twelfth of the principle, or a lowering of the maximal -rate of interest to 8⅓ per cent;<a id="FNanchor_2541" href="#Footnote_2541" class="fnanchor">[2541]</a> or it may have been a general -insolvency law, providing for the payment of debts in instalments.<a id="FNanchor_2542" href="#Footnote_2542" class="fnanchor">[2542]</a> -The chief value of these measures, even if we knew<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_409"></a>[409]</span> -them in detail, would be to reveal the idea of their authors; for -they were all repealed in the following year on the initiative -of the consul L. Cornelius Cinna, probably by a comitial -vote.<a id="FNanchor_2543" href="#Footnote_2543" class="fnanchor">[2543]</a></p> - -<p>Cinna then proposed (1) a renewal of the Sulpician plebiscite -for the enrolment of the new citizens and the libertini among all -the tribes,<a id="FNanchor_2544" href="#Footnote_2544" class="fnanchor">[2544]</a> (2) a recall of Marius and the other exiles.<a id="FNanchor_2545" href="#Footnote_2545" class="fnanchor">[2545]</a> Before -these measures could be carried, the consul was driven from -Rome and deposed from office by an act of the senate on the -motion of Cn. Octavius, the other consul.<a id="FNanchor_2546" href="#Footnote_2546" class="fnanchor">[2546]</a> This is the only -certain instance of the abrogation of the civil imperium known -to the history of the republic. Cinna returned at the head of -an army; and after taking forcible possession of the city, he -carried his law concerning the exiles through the assembly either -on his own motion or that of a tribune.<a id="FNanchor_2547" href="#Footnote_2547" class="fnanchor">[2547]</a> As the senate, reversing -its earlier action,<a id="FNanchor_2548" href="#Footnote_2548" class="fnanchor">[2548]</a> had already legalized the Sulpician provision -concerning the distribution of the libertini and the new citizens -among the thirty-five tribes,<a id="FNanchor_2549" href="#Footnote_2549" class="fnanchor">[2549]</a> it was without reënactment -carried into effect in 84.<a id="FNanchor_2550" href="#Footnote_2550" class="fnanchor">[2550]</a> The execution of this measure completed -the political unification of Italy. Meantime L. Valerius -Flaccus, consul suffectus in 86, to relieve the financial distress, -passed a law which compelled creditors to satisfy themselves<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_410"></a>[410]</span> -with one-fourth of the amount due.<a id="FNanchor_2551" href="#Footnote_2551" class="fnanchor">[2551]</a> In 83 M. Junius Brutus, -tribune of the plebs, proposed and carried, as a milder measure -of relief, a law for the colonization of Capua.<a id="FNanchor_2552" href="#Footnote_2552" class="fnanchor">[2552]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Schulze, C. F., <i>Volksversammlungen der Römer</i>, 110-26; Peter, C., <i>Epochen -der Verfassungsgesch. der röm. Republik</i>, 141-65; <i>Geschichte Roms</i>, bks. -VI, VII. chs. i-iv; Ihne, W., <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. VII. chs. ii-xix; <i>Researches -into the History of the Roman Constitution</i>, 161 ff.; Long, G., <i>Decline of the -Roman Republic</i>, I. ch. x-II. ch. xxiv; Lange, <i>Röm. Altertümer</i>, iii. 1-146, -and see indices s. the various laws; <i>Die promulgatio trinum nundinum, die -lex Caecilia Didia und nochmals die lex Pupia</i>, in <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, ii. 214-70; -Mommsen, Th., <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. iv; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> see index s. the various -laws; <i>Ueber das thorische Ackergesetz</i>, in <i>Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> -i (1849). 89-101; Neumann, C., <i>Geschichte Roms</i>, I. chs. ii-v; Ferrero, -<i>Greatness and Decline of Rome</i>, I. chs. ii-v; Greenidge, A. H. J., <i>History of -Rome</i>, i; <i>The Lex Sempronia and the Banishment of Cicero</i>, in <i>Class. Rev.</i> -vii (1893). 347 f.; Greenidge and Clay, <i>Sources for Roman History</i>, 133-70 -<i>B.C.</i>; Strachan-Davidson, J. L., ed. Appian, <i>Civil Wars</i>, bk. i, with notes; -Weber, M., <i>Röm. Agrargeschichte</i>, 151 ff.; Dreyfus, <i>Lois agr. sous la république -Rom.</i> 77-196; Voigt, M., <i>Ueber die staatsrechtliche Possessio und den -Ager compascuus</i>, in <i>Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> x (1880). 221-72; <i>Ueber -das röm. System der Wege im alten Italien</i>, in <i>Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> -xxiv (1872). 29-90; Babeion, E., <i>Monnaies de la république Rom.</i> i. 69-79; -Billeter, G., <i>Geschichte des Zinsfusses im griechisch-röm. Altertum</i>, 155 ff.; -Fowler, W. W., <i>Notes on Gaius Gracchus</i>, in <i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> xx (1905). 209-27, -417-33; <i>Gaius Gracchus and the Senate</i>, in <i>Class. Rev.</i> x (1896). 278-80; -Pöhlmann, R., <i>Zur Geschichte der Gracchen</i>, in <i>Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> -1907. 443-93; Oman, C., <i>Seven Roman Statesmen</i>, i-iv; Huschke, Ph. E., -<i>Die lex Sempronia und ihr Verhältniss zur lex Acilia repetundarum</i>, in -<i>Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch.</i> v. (1866). 46-84; Rudorff, A. E., <i>Ad legem Aciliam -de pecuniis repentundis latam anno ab urbe condita 631 vel 632</i>, in <i>Philol. u. -hist. Abhdl. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin</i>, 1861. 411-553; Krüger-Brissaud, -<i>Hist. d. sources d. droit Rom.</i> 94 f.; Hegewisch, D. H., <i>Geschichte der gracchischen -Unruhen</i>; Ahren, E. A. J., <i>Die drei Volkstribunen Ti. Gracchus, M. -Drusus, und P. Sulpicius</i>; Nitzsch, K. W., <i>Die Gracchen und ihre nächsten -Vorgänger</i>, bks. iii, iv; Blasel, J., <i>Die Motiven der Gesetzgebung des C. -Gracchus</i>; Callegari, E., <i>La legislazione di Caio Gracco</i>; Meyer, E., <i>Untersuchungen -zur Geschichte der Gracchen</i>, in <i>Festschriften ... der vereinigten -Friedrichs-Universität</i>, etc. 1894. <i>Philos. Fak.</i> 79-109; controverted by -Schwartz, E., in <i>Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen</i>, clviii (1896). 792-811; Hesky, -R., <i>Anmerkungen zur lex Acilia repetundarum</i>, in <i>Wiener Studien</i>, xxv (1903). -272-87; Brassloff, S., <i>Beiträge zur Erläuterung der lex Acilia repetundarum</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_411"></a>[411]</span> -ibid. xxvi. 106-17; Hagge, <i>Einige Bemerkungen über die lex Servilia repetundarum</i>; -Mühl, F. V., <i>De L. Appuleio Saturnino tribuno plebis</i>; Pappritz, -R., <i>Marius und Sulla</i>; Vassis, S., Ζητληματα Ῥωμαϊκά, in <i>Athena</i>, xii (1900). -54-7 (on the Cornelian-Pompeian laws of 88 concerning the assemblies); -Lengle, J., <i>Sullanische Verfassung</i>; articles in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -i. 426-8: Adsignatio (Kubitschek); 256: (M’.) Acilius Glabrio (Klebs); -584-8: M. Aemilius Scaurus (Klebs); 780-93 Ager (idem); ii. 261-9: -Appuleius (Klebs); 2848 f.: Bantia (Hülsen); iii. 1414-21: Calumnia (Hitzig); -1441 f.: Campanus Ager (Kubitschek); iv. 195 f.: C. Coelius Caldus -(Münzer); 510-88: Coloniae (Kornemann); v. 407-10: T. Didius (Münzer); -articles in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 133-8: Ager Publicus (Humbert); -1301-21: Colonies Romains (Lenormant); ii. 1346-8: Frumentariae leges -(Humbert).</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_412"></a>[412]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XVII">CHAPTER XVII<br /> -<span class="smaller">COMITIAL LEGISLATION<br /> -<span class="smcap">From Sulla to the End of the Republic, 82 to about 30</span></span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>The Cornelian Reaction</i><br /> -82-70</h4> - -<p>In November, 82, after destroying his political enemies by -war and proscription, Sulla was ready to begin the work of -restoring the aristocratic constitution. As both consuls, Cn. -Papirius Carbo and C. Marius the younger,<a id="FNanchor_2553" href="#Footnote_2553" class="fnanchor">[2553]</a> were dead, and as -Sulla desired above all things to give his legislation a constitutional -basis, he advised the senate to appoint an interrex. The -choice fell on L. Valerius Flaccus, princeps senatus, a moderate -in politics. Thereupon Sulla withdrew from Rome, leaving the -civil authorities free in appearance to act at their discretion. In -reality he had determined to retain control of affairs; and accordingly -he wrote to Valerius advising the appointment of a -dictator, not for a fixed time but till the general unrest should -be quieted. He suggested himself as a suitable person for the -place. Valerius obediently proposed and carried a law through -the comitia centuriata, (1) which made Sulla dictator rei publicae -constituendae for an indefinite time with absolute power -over the lives and property of the citizens,<a id="FNanchor_2554" href="#Footnote_2554" class="fnanchor">[2554]</a> (2) which legalized -all his past acts, both as consul and as proconsul,<a id="FNanchor_2555" href="#Footnote_2555" class="fnanchor">[2555]</a> including his -arrangements in Asia as well as his proscriptions and confiscations.<a id="FNanchor_2556" href="#Footnote_2556" class="fnanchor">[2556]</a> -He returned to the city, appointed Valerius his magister<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_413"></a>[413]</span> -equitum,<a id="FNanchor_2557" href="#Footnote_2557" class="fnanchor">[2557]</a> and took to himself twenty-four lictors in addition to -a less formal guard of servants and friends.<a id="FNanchor_2558" href="#Footnote_2558" class="fnanchor">[2558]</a> Without delay he -began the promulgation of laws, which undoubtedly he had long -been planning. They are here grouped according to subject, -with an occasional reference to their chronological relation.</p> - -<p>First he applied himself to curbing the power of the tribunate, -an institution in which centred the strength of the democracy. -A statute for that purpose he must have felt compelled -to draw up and pass before the next tribunician election. Instead -of renewing his earlier law, however, for absolutely -depriving the tribunes of initiative in legislation,<a id="FNanchor_2559" href="#Footnote_2559" class="fnanchor">[2559]</a> he enacted -simply that the previous consent of the senate should be -necessary to bills brought by them before the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2560" href="#Footnote_2560" class="fnanchor">[2560]</a> By -another article of this law he limited the right of tribunes to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_414"></a>[414]</span> -address the people in contiones.<a id="FNanchor_2561" href="#Footnote_2561" class="fnanchor">[2561]</a> The range of their intercession -was also greatly limited.<a id="FNanchor_2562" href="#Footnote_2562" class="fnanchor">[2562]</a> Their function of bringing prosecutions -before the people underwent restriction not only through -the laws affecting the quaestiones but also by special enactment;<a id="FNanchor_2563" href="#Footnote_2563" class="fnanchor">[2563]</a> -for had they retained their unlimited right to prosecute, -they could at once have regained all their other power.<a id="FNanchor_2564" href="#Footnote_2564" class="fnanchor">[2564]</a> -Little was left them but their original auxilii latio adversus -imperium.<a id="FNanchor_2565" href="#Footnote_2565" class="fnanchor">[2565]</a> Finally the office was made unattractive to the -ambitious by the provision that those who held it were thereby -disqualified for other magistracies.<a id="FNanchor_2566" href="#Footnote_2566" class="fnanchor">[2566]</a> By these measures the -most vital and powerful institution in the state was reduced to a -shadow without substance.<a id="FNanchor_2567" href="#Footnote_2567" class="fnanchor">[2567]</a> The return to conditions preceding -the Hortensian legislation, in some respects even the Decemviral -legislation, was, as Fröhlich<a id="FNanchor_2568" href="#Footnote_2568" class="fnanchor">[2568]</a> remarks, a backward step -such as finds few parallels in history.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_415"></a>[415]</span></p> - -<p>About a year<a id="FNanchor_2569" href="#Footnote_2569" class="fnanchor">[2569]</a> after limiting the power of the tribunes Sulla -proceeded to regulate the other offices through his lex de magistratibus, -81. This statute, making use of the principle contained -in the lex Villia annalis,<a id="FNanchor_2570" href="#Footnote_2570" class="fnanchor">[2570]</a> prescribed (1) that no one could -be consul before he had been praetor or praetor before he had -been quaestor,<a id="FNanchor_2571" href="#Footnote_2571" class="fnanchor">[2571]</a> (2) that a space of two years should intervene -between the holding of consecutive offices.<a id="FNanchor_2572" href="#Footnote_2572" class="fnanchor">[2572]</a> (3) The minimal -age of the quaestor it fixed at thirty-seven.<a id="FNanchor_2573" href="#Footnote_2573" class="fnanchor">[2573]</a> The fortieth year -was therefore the age for the praetorship and the forty-third for -the office of consul. The aedileship, while bringing the holder -a positive advantage for his future career, was never an essential -step to a higher place. But in case this office was taken, the -biennial interval had to be observed.<a id="FNanchor_2574" href="#Footnote_2574" class="fnanchor">[2574]</a> The quaestorship Sulla -made the sole avenue to the senate, so as to dispense with the -revision of the list by the censors.<a id="FNanchor_2575" href="#Footnote_2575" class="fnanchor">[2575]</a> The statute of 151, forbidding -reëlection to the consulship,<a id="FNanchor_2576" href="#Footnote_2576" class="fnanchor">[2576]</a> he repealed, and substituted -for it the article of the Genucian plebiscite of 442<a id="FNanchor_2577" href="#Footnote_2577" class="fnanchor">[2577]</a> which -fixed an interval of ten years between the expiration of any -office and reëlection to the same.<a id="FNanchor_2578" href="#Footnote_2578" class="fnanchor">[2578]</a> He increased the number of -quaestors, at this time certainly more than eight,<a id="FNanchor_2579" href="#Footnote_2579" class="fnanchor">[2579]</a> to twenty, with<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_416"></a>[416]</span> -the object not only of supplying an administrative need but also -of creating the required number of senators.<a id="FNanchor_2580" href="#Footnote_2580" class="fnanchor">[2580]</a> It was necessary -also to raise the number of praetors from six to eight in order -to provide presidents for the new quaestiones perpetuae.<a id="FNanchor_2581" href="#Footnote_2581" class="fnanchor">[2581]</a></p> - -<p>The reforms above mentioned, together with the doubling of -the number of senators to be considered below, naturally led to -the enlargement of the chief sacerdotal colleges. The augurs -and pontiffs were increased from nine to fifteen and the decemviri -sacris faciundis were made quindecemviri.<a id="FNanchor_2582" href="#Footnote_2582" class="fnanchor">[2582]</a> Another -measure, which seems to have been an article of the same act, -repealed the Domitian lex de sacerdotiis,<a id="FNanchor_2583" href="#Footnote_2583" class="fnanchor">[2583]</a> and thus restored to -these colleges, and at the same time to the epulones, their right -of filling vacancies by coöptation,<a id="FNanchor_2584" href="#Footnote_2584" class="fnanchor">[2584]</a> leaving to the people the -function only of electing the head of the pontifical college from -among the members.<a id="FNanchor_2585" href="#Footnote_2585" class="fnanchor">[2585]</a> As the object of the first article was -evidently to provide places for some of the new magistrates and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_417"></a>[417]</span> -senators,<a id="FNanchor_2586" href="#Footnote_2586" class="fnanchor">[2586]</a> the coöptation doubtless immediately followed the -enactment of the law.</p> - -<p>In increasing the number of praetors to eight<a id="FNanchor_2587" href="#Footnote_2587" class="fnanchor">[2587]</a> Sulla provided -that during their year of office they were to remain in the city -and devote their whole time to the administration of justice. -After the expiration of their term they were to take upon themselves -as propraetors the command of provinces. In like manner -the consuls were to remain in Italy during their term, in the -ordinary course of events to give their entire attention to the -affairs of peace; only after they had retired from office were -they expected as proconsuls to govern provinces. In brief, -Sulla by law established an absolute distinction between the -civil magistrate and the military promagistrate.<a id="FNanchor_2588" href="#Footnote_2588" class="fnanchor">[2588]</a> The lex de -provinciis ordinandis<a id="FNanchor_2589" href="#Footnote_2589" class="fnanchor">[2589]</a> recognized the right of the senate to determine -which provinces should be consular and which pretorian -in the way provided for by the Sempronian law on this -subject.<a id="FNanchor_2590" href="#Footnote_2590" class="fnanchor">[2590]</a> The Cornelian statute did not, however, any more -than the Sempronian, forbid the assignment of a province to a -promagistrate by popular vote; and it recognized the right of -the senate to create promagistracies.<a id="FNanchor_2591" href="#Footnote_2591" class="fnanchor">[2591]</a> But it established the -rule (1) that the two consuls should receive for a year of promagisterial -imperium the provinces declared to be consular; -and that they should either agree as to which each should take -or cast lots for them;<a id="FNanchor_2592" href="#Footnote_2592" class="fnanchor">[2592]</a> (2) that the senate should annually assign -the eight retiring praetors to the remaining provinces, also -for a year of promagistracy.<a id="FNanchor_2593" href="#Footnote_2593" class="fnanchor">[2593]</a> The same law directed that the -promagistrate, who had received the imperium in legal form, -should retain it till his return to the city and the celebration of -his triumph,<a id="FNanchor_2594" href="#Footnote_2594" class="fnanchor">[2594]</a> provided he merited one. To avoid conflicts between -retiring and incoming governors it ordained that the former -should leave the province within thirty days after the latter -had entered it.<a id="FNanchor_2595" href="#Footnote_2595" class="fnanchor">[2595]</a> The law further contained the definite regulation -of the supplies and honors granted the legati by the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_418"></a>[418]</span> -provincials.<a id="FNanchor_2596" href="#Footnote_2596" class="fnanchor">[2596]</a> The tendency of Sulla’s legislation thus far considered -was to weaken the civil functionaries (1) by restricting the tribunician -initiative. (2) by increasing the number of quaestors and -praetors. (3) by depriving the higher civil magistrates of the military -imperium. The last-mentioned loss was in some measure -an advantage to the senate but in a far higher degree to the -promagistrates, who from this time began to overshadow the -republic.</p> - -<p>The power taken from the tribunes necessarily went to the -senate, to restore to it the full control of legislation which it -had possessed before the enactment of the Hortensian statute. -Under the reformed constitution it was to be supreme. As it -had dwindled during the recent civil war and proscription,<a id="FNanchor_2597" href="#Footnote_2597" class="fnanchor">[2597]</a> and -as the performance of jury service, which Sulla was restoring -to its members, required a large number of men, he added three -hundred, mostly from the equestrian rank, but including some -centurions and other insignificant persons who were likely to -do his bidding.<a id="FNanchor_2598" href="#Footnote_2598" class="fnanchor">[2598]</a> Appian<a id="FNanchor_2599" href="#Footnote_2599" class="fnanchor">[2599]</a> states that these new senators were -elected by the tribes, possibly meaning the tribal comitia.<a id="FNanchor_2600" href="#Footnote_2600" class="fnanchor">[2600]</a> But -as that process of selection would have required an enormous -length of time, it is far more probable that each tribe had the -privilege of choosing a definite number, perhaps nine, after the -precedent of the lex Plautia iudiciaria.<a id="FNanchor_2601" href="#Footnote_2601" class="fnanchor">[2601]</a> This addition would -raise the number to about four hundred and fifty. As the normal -membership from Sulla to Caesar was about six hundred,<a id="FNanchor_2602" href="#Footnote_2602" class="fnanchor">[2602]</a> -we may assume either that, independently of the extraordinary -adlectio by the tribes, he made the usual censorial enrolment of -the recently retired magistrates, or that he left it to time to fill -up the senate to the desired number by the annual admission of -retired quaestors.<a id="FNanchor_2603" href="#Footnote_2603" class="fnanchor">[2603]</a> Henceforth it was to be recruited automatically<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_419"></a>[419]</span> -by this process, without any action on the part of the -censors, who were thus deprived of the only important function -remaining to them.<a id="FNanchor_2604" href="#Footnote_2604" class="fnanchor">[2604]</a> Closely connected with the increase in -membership is the lex iudiciaria,<a id="FNanchor_2605" href="#Footnote_2605" class="fnanchor">[2605]</a> which restored the quaestiones -to the senators.<a id="FNanchor_2606" href="#Footnote_2606" class="fnanchor">[2606]</a> It was enacted near the end of 81, but prior -to the increase in the number of quaestors.<a id="FNanchor_2607" href="#Footnote_2607" class="fnanchor">[2607]</a> Before this act -the courts had remained under the control of the knights in -spite of the lex Plautia of 89, which seems not to have continued -long in force.<a id="FNanchor_2608" href="#Footnote_2608" class="fnanchor">[2608]</a></p> - -<p>In the reorganization of the criminal courts (year 81) Sulla -passed criminal laws, in which he regulated the procedure of -the existing courts and created new quaestiones perpetuae.<a id="FNanchor_2609" href="#Footnote_2609" class="fnanchor">[2609]</a> -His reform increased the number to seven, four of which -were concerned almost wholly with maladministration of office: -(1) quaestio repetundarum, extortion,<a id="FNanchor_2610" href="#Footnote_2610" class="fnanchor">[2610]</a> (2) quaestio ambitus, bribery -in elections,<a id="FNanchor_2611" href="#Footnote_2611" class="fnanchor">[2611]</a> (3) quaestio peculatus, misappropriation of public -funds<a id="FNanchor_2612" href="#Footnote_2612" class="fnanchor">[2612]</a> and sacrilege,<a id="FNanchor_2613" href="#Footnote_2613" class="fnanchor">[2613]</a> (4) quaestio maiestatis, injury to the -majesty of the Roman name, of which a private person as well -as a magistrate might be guilty.<a id="FNanchor_2614" href="#Footnote_2614" class="fnanchor">[2614]</a> The three following were -concerned with common crimes: (5) quaestio inter sicarios et<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_420"></a>[420]</span> -veneficos, assassination, poisoning, and arson,<a id="FNanchor_2615" href="#Footnote_2615" class="fnanchor">[2615]</a> (6) quaestio de -falsis, counterfeiting and falsification of testaments and other -forgery,<a id="FNanchor_2616" href="#Footnote_2616" class="fnanchor">[2616]</a> (7) quaestio iniuriarum, acute personal violence, housebreaking, -and probably defamation of character.<a id="FNanchor_2617" href="#Footnote_2617" class="fnanchor">[2617]</a> These laws -concerning quaestiones contained provisions for granting the -accused the privilege of deciding whether the vote should be -oral or by ballot,<a id="FNanchor_2618" href="#Footnote_2618" class="fnanchor">[2618]</a> and they directed that the order of voting -should be determined by lot.<a id="FNanchor_2619" href="#Footnote_2619" class="fnanchor">[2619]</a> The first of these two articles -aimed to make the jurors individually responsible, and the -second to prevent influential men from prejudicing the case by -giving their opinions first.<a id="FNanchor_2620" href="#Footnote_2620" class="fnanchor">[2620]</a></p> - -<p>While the praetor urbanus and praetor peregrinus still busied -themselves with civil jurisdiction, the six other praetors presided -over these courts; but as the number was insufficient, past -aediles were appointed to preside as iudices quaestionis. This -arrangement was especially necessary for the quaestio inter -sicarios, overburdened as it was with a variety of crimes.</p> - -<p>As these courts were vested with the function of trying without<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_421"></a>[421]</span> -appeal all crimes, including those formerly brought before -the comitia, the result was that the people were practically, -though not constitutionally, deprived of their judicial power. -The tendency of the Cornelian legislation in this as in other -respects was oligarchic.</p> - -<p>Among the statutes passed in the winter or early spring of -81 we must place the lex de proscriptione,<a id="FNanchor_2621" href="#Footnote_2621" class="fnanchor">[2621]</a> which added certain -regulations to those of the Valerian law for the creation of the -Cornelian dictatorship,<a id="FNanchor_2622" href="#Footnote_2622" class="fnanchor">[2622]</a> and which Sulla considered essential to -the execution of his policy and the maintenance of its results. -The Cornelian statute concerning proscription forbade the giving -of relief or aid to a proscribed person;<a id="FNanchor_2623" href="#Footnote_2623" class="fnanchor">[2623]</a> it legalized the -previous slayings and confiscations of property,<a id="FNanchor_2624" href="#Footnote_2624" class="fnanchor">[2624]</a> and provided -also that the estates not only of the proscribed but also of enemies -who had fallen in battle should be sold for the benefit of -the treasury.<a id="FNanchor_2625" href="#Footnote_2625" class="fnanchor">[2625]</a> It excepted from the sale ten thousand of the -youngest and strongest slaves, who were given their freedom; -and it debarred from the ius honorum the sons, grandsons, and -other descendants of the proscribed,<a id="FNanchor_2626" href="#Footnote_2626" class="fnanchor">[2626]</a> with a view to keeping -from them the means of vengeance; and lastly, it fixed the date -for closing the proscriptions at June 1, 81.<a id="FNanchor_2627" href="#Footnote_2627" class="fnanchor">[2627]</a></p> - -<p>During the winter of 82-81 Sulla gave his attention not only -to law-making but also to the sale of confiscated property and -to the regulation of Italy. The latter work was carried out by -the administrative power of the dictator through the destruction -of the fortifications of rebellious communities, their punishment -by fines and extraordinary taxes, and the confiscation of some of -their lands, to be assigned to his discharged veterans.<a id="FNanchor_2628" href="#Footnote_2628" class="fnanchor">[2628]</a> The -Cornelian agrarian laws,<a id="FNanchor_2629" href="#Footnote_2629" class="fnanchor">[2629]</a> which brought about these confiscations<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_422"></a>[422]</span> -and assignments, seem to have been not acts of the comitia but -dictatorial orders.<a id="FNanchor_2630" href="#Footnote_2630" class="fnanchor">[2630]</a> They must have been issued from time to -time as occasion demanded, probably through the entire year -81.<a id="FNanchor_2631" href="#Footnote_2631" class="fnanchor">[2631]</a> The legions were kept together till after the triumph (January -27, 28 of the year 81)<a id="FNanchor_2632" href="#Footnote_2632" class="fnanchor">[2632]</a> and then disbanded, to be led off -gradually to their lands. Some of the municipia to which soldiers -were assigned, most obstinately Volaterrae and Nola, resisted -their admission by force of arms. To punish these rebels -Sulla carried through the comitia centuriata his lex de civitate -Volaterranis adimenda,<a id="FNanchor_2633" href="#Footnote_2633" class="fnanchor">[2633]</a> which disfranchised not only Volaterrae -but also other rebellious municipia.<a id="FNanchor_2634" href="#Footnote_2634" class="fnanchor">[2634]</a> Those who by this act -were deprived of the citizenship received the so-called Latin -rights of Ariminum.<a id="FNanchor_2635" href="#Footnote_2635" class="fnanchor">[2635]</a></p> - -<p>Among the regulations for the improvement of the finances, -which he found in bad condition,<a id="FNanchor_2636" href="#Footnote_2636" class="fnanchor">[2636]</a> was his abolition of the distributions -of grain.<a id="FNanchor_2637" href="#Footnote_2637" class="fnanchor">[2637]</a> Whether it was effected by a lex frumentaria -or a dictatorial order cannot be determined.<a id="FNanchor_2638" href="#Footnote_2638" class="fnanchor">[2638]</a> The levy of -taxes on Italian and transmarine communities<a id="FNanchor_2639" href="#Footnote_2639" class="fnanchor">[2639]</a> could be brought -about by senatus consulta,<a id="FNanchor_2640" href="#Footnote_2640" class="fnanchor">[2640]</a> as the people had nothing to do with -such matters. Credit had been shattered by the law of L. Valerius -Flaccus concerning debts, 86,<a id="FNanchor_2641" href="#Footnote_2641" class="fnanchor">[2641]</a> which Sulla repealed by one -of his own on the same subject, 81.<a id="FNanchor_2642" href="#Footnote_2642" class="fnanchor">[2642]</a></p> - -<p>In connection with the Circensian games which he celebrated -in the autumn of 81, and which in honor of Victoria were thereafter -repeated annually from October 26 to November 1,<a id="FNanchor_2643" href="#Footnote_2643" class="fnanchor">[2643]</a> Sulla<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_423"></a>[423]</span> -must have passed a lex de ludis Victoriae instituendis.<a id="FNanchor_2644" href="#Footnote_2644" class="fnanchor">[2644]</a> Lastly -came the sumptuary law, through which he attempted to regulate -the manners and morals of the citizens.<a id="FNanchor_2645" href="#Footnote_2645" class="fnanchor">[2645]</a> It was the restoration, -in a revised form, of the lex Licinia of 104,<a id="FNanchor_2646" href="#Footnote_2646" class="fnanchor">[2646]</a> which had -been repealed by M. Duronius in 97.<a id="FNanchor_2647" href="#Footnote_2647" class="fnanchor">[2647]</a> The Cornelian statute -permitted the expenditure of no more than three hundred -sesterces for meals on the calends, nones, ides, ludi, and certain -other holidays, and only thirty for ordinary meals; and it fixed -the prices of various luxuries.<a id="FNanchor_2648" href="#Footnote_2648" class="fnanchor">[2648]</a> Another article of the same -statute limited funeral expenses.<a id="FNanchor_2649" href="#Footnote_2649" class="fnanchor">[2649]</a> The author’s object seems to -have been to restore the morals and manners as well as the constitution -and laws of the good old time before they were corrupted -by the demagogues.</p> - -<p>Sulla’s legislation was substantially complete on January 1, 80, -when he entered upon his second consulship with Q. Caecilius -Metellus Pius as colleague.<a id="FNanchor_2650" href="#Footnote_2650" class="fnanchor">[2650]</a> Retiring into private life early in -79, he left the constitution to its fate. No better comment on -its value could be offered than the history of its decline and overthrow -in a single decade. Opposition began to manifest itself -from the time of his abdication; and he was hardly in his grave -when M. Aemilius Lepidus, consul in 78, promulgated bills for -the abolition of some of the Cornelian statutes; but the opposition -of his colleague, Q. Lutatius Catulus, and of the senate -prevented their ratification.<a id="FNanchor_2651" href="#Footnote_2651" class="fnanchor">[2651]</a> The right of retired tribunes to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_424"></a>[424]</span> -sue for other offices,<a id="FNanchor_2652" href="#Footnote_2652" class="fnanchor">[2652]</a> however, was restored by a statute of the -consul C. Aurelius Cotta, 75.<a id="FNanchor_2653" href="#Footnote_2653" class="fnanchor">[2653]</a></p> - -<p>Before coming to the restoration of the tribunician power it -is necessary to mention the statutes passed under the Cornelian -constitution. To 78 or 77 probably belongs the lex Plautia de -vi, generally regarded as tribunician, which established a quaestio -perpetua for the trial of persons charged with violence. It -also forbade the acquisition by long use of things stolen or violently -seized.<a id="FNanchor_2654" href="#Footnote_2654" class="fnanchor">[2654]</a> As no censors were elected, an order of the -people of unknown authorship in 75, pursuant to a senatus consultum, -empowered the consuls of the year to farm the vectigalia.<a id="FNanchor_2655" href="#Footnote_2655" class="fnanchor">[2655]</a> -The approaching end of the Cornelian régime was -foreboded in the Plautian law for the recall of Cinna and other -exiled democrats, if indeed this measure belongs to 73,<a id="FNanchor_2656" href="#Footnote_2656" class="fnanchor">[2656]</a> and -certainly in the consular law of Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus, -72, which directed the consuls of the year to collect the -money remitted by Sulla to the purchasers of confiscated estates.<a id="FNanchor_2657" href="#Footnote_2657" class="fnanchor">[2657]</a> -A popular tendency may be discovered as well in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_425"></a>[425]</span> -final settlement of the question of conflict between sessions of -the senate and of the comitia by the lex Pupia, which seems to -have been a statute of M. Pupius Piso Calpurnianus, praetor in -71.<a id="FNanchor_2658" href="#Footnote_2658" class="fnanchor">[2658]</a> It forbade the magistrates to convoke the senate on those -comitial days on which an assembly actually met,<a id="FNanchor_2659" href="#Footnote_2659" class="fnanchor">[2659]</a> the prohibition -applying to that part only of the day which preceded the -dismissal of the comitia.<a id="FNanchor_2660" href="#Footnote_2660" class="fnanchor">[2660]</a> It was probably this year which saw -the enactment of the lex Antonia de Termessibus—a plebiscite -proposed de senatus sententia by C. Antonius, tribune of the -plebs, and several of his colleagues, for granting to Termessus -Major in Pisidia the rights of a free state in friendship and alliance -with Rome, and for regulating on that basis the relations -which were to exist between the inhabitants and the Romans.<a id="FNanchor_2661" href="#Footnote_2661" class="fnanchor">[2661]</a></p> - -<p>The struggle for the rehabilitation of the tribunes began in -78, when those officials applied to the consuls for legislation on -the subject. Even Aemilius Lepidus<a id="FNanchor_2662" href="#Footnote_2662" class="fnanchor">[2662]</a> declined, as he could see -no advantage in the unhampered tribunate.<a id="FNanchor_2663" href="#Footnote_2663" class="fnanchor">[2663]</a> Though generally -in these early years of the Cornelian régime the tribunes were -mere puppets of the senate, one of them in 76, L. Sicinius, -dared in a contio to plead for the full restoration of their office.<a id="FNanchor_2664" href="#Footnote_2664" class="fnanchor">[2664]</a> -In the following year Q. Opimius, another tribune, continued -the struggle, with such success that he secured the passage of -the Aurelian law above mentioned.<a id="FNanchor_2665" href="#Footnote_2665" class="fnanchor">[2665]</a> This measure narrowly -escaped annulment, and Opimius after retiring from office was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_426"></a>[426]</span> -exorbitantly fined on the ground that he had interceded in violation -of a Cornelian law.<a id="FNanchor_2666" href="#Footnote_2666" class="fnanchor">[2666]</a> In the year of the condemnation of -Opimius, 74, L. Quinctius, who had risen to the tribunate from -the lowest social class, strove energetically for the same object,<a id="FNanchor_2667" href="#Footnote_2667" class="fnanchor">[2667]</a> -though he could effect no more than the maintenance of the -Aurelian law. Toward the close of his term, however, he opened -battle against the senatorial courts, which had fallen into disfavor -because of their corruption.<a id="FNanchor_2668" href="#Footnote_2668" class="fnanchor">[2668]</a> In 73 the contest was resumed by -Licinius Macer the annalist, then tribune of the plebs, who demanded -in vain the full restoration of the tribunician power.<a id="FNanchor_2669" href="#Footnote_2669" class="fnanchor">[2669]</a> In -his efforts he had the support of C. Julius Caesar.<a id="FNanchor_2670" href="#Footnote_2670" class="fnanchor">[2670]</a> The struggle -died down as the danger from Spartacus rose; but at the close -of the servile war it was a tribune of the plebs, M. Lollius Palicanus, -a man of low birth, who in a contio held outside the walls -in order that Pompey, a proconsul, might attend, persuaded the -latter to commit himself publicly to a definite promise to bring -about a repeal of the lex Cornelia de tribunicia potestate.<a id="FNanchor_2671" href="#Footnote_2671" class="fnanchor">[2671]</a> Inveighing -against the corruption of the senatorial courts,<a id="FNanchor_2672" href="#Footnote_2672" class="fnanchor">[2672]</a> Pompey -in the same speech intimated an intention to propose a bill -on this subject as well.</p> - -<p>Shortly after entering upon the office of consul in 70, or at all -events before the elections of the year,<a id="FNanchor_2673" href="#Footnote_2673" class="fnanchor">[2673]</a> Pompey promulgated -his rogation for the restoration of the tribunician power. -The senate yielded in spite of its dislike for the measure,<a id="FNanchor_2674" href="#Footnote_2674" class="fnanchor">[2674]</a> and -Licinius Crassus, his colleague,<a id="FNanchor_2675" href="#Footnote_2675" class="fnanchor">[2675]</a> added his name to the proposal.<a id="FNanchor_2676" href="#Footnote_2676" class="fnanchor">[2676]</a> -The people gladly accepted it. Those articles of the -Cornelian statute which remained untouched by the Aurelian<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_427"></a>[427]</span> -law of 75 were thereby repealed, and every restriction on the -tribunes removed.<a id="FNanchor_2677" href="#Footnote_2677" class="fnanchor">[2677]</a> By destroying the chief support of the -Cornelian constitution this measure paved the way to its overthrow. -Notwithstanding the popular clamor for a reform of -the courts,<a id="FNanchor_2678" href="#Footnote_2678" class="fnanchor">[2678]</a> Pompey hesitated to propose a law for that purpose, -as he hoped rather to purify the senatorial order through a -severe censorial revision so as to make a judiciary law unnecessary. -The reform, however, was taken in hand by L. Aurelius -Cotta, praetor in the same year, youngest brother of the consul -of 75.<a id="FNanchor_2679" href="#Footnote_2679" class="fnanchor">[2679]</a> The rogation was promulgated while the trial of -Verres was in progress and while the people were excited by -lack of confidence in the senatorial jurors.<a id="FNanchor_2680" href="#Footnote_2680" class="fnanchor">[2680]</a> The first project -seems to have been the retransfer of the courts to the equites;<a id="FNanchor_2681" href="#Footnote_2681" class="fnanchor">[2681]</a> -but when the senators saw that they were destined to lose in -the contest, they were able to save something by compromise. -It was agreed that there should be three decuries of jurors, composed -in equal numbers of senators, knights, and tribuni aerarii -respectively.<a id="FNanchor_2682" href="#Footnote_2682" class="fnanchor">[2682]</a> The last-named decury was included because -the Plautian judiciary law of 89 had opened the courts to common -citizens in addition to senators and knights,<a id="FNanchor_2683" href="#Footnote_2683" class="fnanchor">[2683]</a> and it was -now thought that no less liberality should be shown. The -Aurelian statute provided accordingly that the urban praetor<a id="FNanchor_2684" href="#Footnote_2684" class="fnanchor">[2684]</a> -should make up the annual album iudicum of an equal number -of men from each of the three classes.<a id="FNanchor_2685" href="#Footnote_2685" class="fnanchor">[2685]</a> The good feature of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_428"></a>[428]</span> -the law is obvious. As experience had proved the equestrian -courts, as well as the senatorial, to be partisan and corrupt, it -was hoped that a combination of the two with an equal proportion -of the most responsible and respectable common citizens -would be just and impartial. If these expectations were -not realized, it was the fault of the Romans, not of their law.</p> - -<h4>II. <i>Democracy in Alliance with Caesarism</i><br /> -70-49</h4> - -<p>The first tribunician law under the restored constitution may -have been the sumptuary statute of C. Antius Restio, which -Lange<a id="FNanchor_2686" href="#Footnote_2686" class="fnanchor">[2686]</a> assigns to the year 70. It limited the amount to be -expended on festive meals; it designated some delicacies as -allowable and others as forbidden; and it regulated the participation -of candidates and of magistrates in dinners away from -home, doubtless with a view to curtailing ambitus practiced by -such means.<a id="FNanchor_2687" href="#Footnote_2687" class="fnanchor">[2687]</a> Far however from being a partisan measure, -this statute seems to have been suggested by the censors of -the year, to reënforce their function of supervising the morals -of the citizens.</p> - -<p>Three years passed before the tribunes of the plebs were -ready to make independent use of their recovered power. The -reason is to be found in the harmony—concordia ordinum<a id="FNanchor_2688" href="#Footnote_2688" class="fnanchor">[2688]</a>—reëstablished -between senators and knights, when representatives -of the two classes found themselves sitting together on the -jury benches. Although the object of the combination was -idealized by contemporaries, it was in fact a governing “trust,” -which in practice operated for the maintenance of plutocracy -and for the ruthless exploitation of the provincials.<a id="FNanchor_2689" href="#Footnote_2689" class="fnanchor">[2689]</a> The nobles -were willing to concede something to the equites to make -permanent the alliance with this powerful order.<a id="FNanchor_2690" href="#Footnote_2690" class="fnanchor">[2690]</a> L. Roscius<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_429"></a>[429]</span> -Otho, tribune of the plebs in 67, as spokesman of the optimates<a id="FNanchor_2691" href="#Footnote_2691" class="fnanchor">[2691]</a> -“railroaded”<a id="FNanchor_2692" href="#Footnote_2692" class="fnanchor">[2692]</a> through the assembly a statute which -ordered that there should be reserved in the theatre for those -in possession of the equestrian census<a id="FNanchor_2693" href="#Footnote_2693" class="fnanchor">[2693]</a> fourteen rows of seats -just back of the orchestra, in which sat the senators.<a id="FNanchor_2694" href="#Footnote_2694" class="fnanchor">[2694]</a> It was -more than a restoration of the concession made to the knights -in 146, which evidently Sulla had withdrawn.<a id="FNanchor_2695" href="#Footnote_2695" class="fnanchor">[2695]</a></p> - -<p>There were in this year (67), however, two popular tribunes, -A. Gabinius and C. Cornelius, both of whom proposed and -carried laws in the interest of the people. Early in the year -Gabinius persuaded the tribes to adopt a statute which ordered -the senate to sit daily during February to consider embassies.<a id="FNanchor_2696" href="#Footnote_2696" class="fnanchor">[2696]</a> -It was in this month that delegations from other states generally -came. Often to obtain a hearing they had to bribe the -senators and magistrates.<a id="FNanchor_2697" href="#Footnote_2697" class="fnanchor">[2697]</a> For that month the Gabinian law -reversed the Pupian<a id="FNanchor_2698" href="#Footnote_2698" class="fnanchor">[2698]</a> by making senatorial sessions compulsory -and forbidding the concurrence of comitia.<a id="FNanchor_2699" href="#Footnote_2699" class="fnanchor">[2699]</a> The object was to -limit the stay of foreign embassies at Rome not only for their -own convenience but also for lessening both the need and the -opportunity for bribery. Closely related was the purpose of his -statute which forbade lending money to provincials at Rome.<a id="FNanchor_2700" href="#Footnote_2700" class="fnanchor">[2700]</a> -Representatives of subject and allied states, finding it necessary -to bribe more extensively than their resources in hand allowed, -were tempted to borrow of the capitalists at exorbitant interest. -Private individuals from the provinces must often have similarly -borrowed to the ruin of their fortunes. The double aim of the -statute, accordingly, was to help the provincials and to check -bribery. How it passed against senatorial opposition is unknown. -A supplementary measure on the same subject was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_430"></a>[430]</span> -proposed to the senate by C. Cornelius, a colleague of Gabinius, -for prohibiting the lending of money to the legati of other states, -the idea being identical with that of the two Gabinian laws. -The good intention of Cornelius is vouched for by the well-known -uprightness<a id="FNanchor_2701" href="#Footnote_2701" class="fnanchor">[2701]</a> of his character, which contrasts with the -reputed vileness of Gabinius. But the senate rejected the proposal -on the ground that it had already made sufficient provision -for checking the abuse. Although Cornelius thereupon -complained in a contio that the provinces were being exhausted -by usury, he does not seem to have urged his measure further.<a id="FNanchor_2702" href="#Footnote_2702" class="fnanchor">[2702]</a> -He promulgated, however, against the interests of the senate a -rogation for ordering that no one should receive a dispensation -from a law excepting through a vote of the comitia. This right -had been acquired by the people in the period between the -Publilian and the Hortensian legislation (339-287).<a id="FNanchor_2703" href="#Footnote_2703" class="fnanchor">[2703]</a> It had -come to be regarded as inseparable from the sovereignty of the -people to such an extent that all senatus consulta for dispensing -from the laws contained a provision for bringing the matter -before the comitia. Gradually the custom of referring to the -people ceased, and at last the provision to that effect was -dropped from senatorial decrees. The result was that often a -few senators, meeting in the Curia, voted away to acquaintances -and relatives the valuable privilege of exemption from a law. -The optimates induced a tribune of the plebs, P. Servilius -Globulus, to intercede against the bill while it was being read to -the assembly prior to the vote. When the dissenting tribune -forbade the crier to proceed with the reading, Cornelius himself -read it.<a id="FNanchor_2704" href="#Footnote_2704" class="fnanchor">[2704]</a> A disturbance in the assembly, started by the interference -of Piso the consul, caused Cornelius to dismiss the concilium. -Afterward he so compromised with the optimates as to -secure the passage of a law that no dispensations should be -granted by the senate unless two hundred members were present, -and that when a resolution of the kind was brought down -from the senate to the people, no one should intercede against -the act.<a id="FNanchor_2705" href="#Footnote_2705" class="fnanchor">[2705]</a> The victory was with the senate; it gained a legal -right to a function which it had usurped, provision being merely<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_431"></a>[431]</span> -made against abuse. But it exercised this function by the sufferance -of the tribunes, any one of whom could insist on bringing -the dispensing resolution before the people, in which case -his colleagues were forbidden to intercede.<a id="FNanchor_2706" href="#Footnote_2706" class="fnanchor">[2706]</a></p> - -<p>Another proposal of this tribune was the rogatio de ambitu, -which threatened with severe penalties not only the candidates -but also their agents, the divisores, whose duty was to distribute -the corruption fund among the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2707" href="#Footnote_2707" class="fnanchor">[2707]</a> The senate, declaring -the penalties so harsh that neither accuser nor jurors could be -found to enforce it, put the bill in the hands of the two consuls, -C. Calpurnius Piso and M’. Acilius Glabrio.<a id="FNanchor_2708" href="#Footnote_2708" class="fnanchor">[2708]</a> Here was a comical -situation; both consuls were liable to the existing law on -the subject; but for the sake of appearances they had to revise -the bill and present it to the comitia in the Forum.<a id="FNanchor_2709" href="#Footnote_2709" class="fnanchor">[2709]</a> The lex -Acilia Calpurnia, enacted in this way,<a id="FNanchor_2710" href="#Footnote_2710" class="fnanchor">[2710]</a> inflicted on those found -guilty of the crime a heavy fine, and forever disqualified them -from holding office or sitting in the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2711" href="#Footnote_2711" class="fnanchor">[2711]</a> Cornelius proposed -other measures, all of which were vetoed by colleagues -excepting his lex concerning the edict of the praetor, described -as follows by Dio Cassius:<a id="FNanchor_2712" href="#Footnote_2712" class="fnanchor">[2712]</a> “All the praetors themselves compiled -and published the principles according to which they intended -to try cases; for all the decrees regarding contracts had -not yet been laid down. Now since they were not in the habit -of doing this once for all and did not observe the rules as written, -but often made changes in them and incidentally a number<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_432"></a>[432]</span> -of clauses naturally appeared in some one’s favor or to some one’s -hurt, he moved that they should at the very start announce the -principles they would use and not swerve from them at all.” -The object was to make the administration of the law more just -and regular, and to cut off an opportunity for favoritism.<a id="FNanchor_2713" href="#Footnote_2713" class="fnanchor">[2713]</a></p> - -<p>By far the most important measure of the year was the -Gabinian law for the appointment of an especial commander -against the pirates. The proposition was that from the consulares -should be chosen a general for putting down the -pirates; that his province should be the entire Mediterranean -and a strip of its coasts extending fifty miles inland, including -Italy and the islands; that the command should continue three -years; that the holder of this imperium should have the right -to fifteen legati and 200 ships, and the privilege of enlisting -soldiers and oarsmen over all his province; that he should have -credit with the aerarium at Rome and the publicans in the provinces -for 6000 talents.<a id="FNanchor_2714" href="#Footnote_2714" class="fnanchor">[2714]</a> The name of Pompey did not appear -in the bill, but no one doubted who was to be the man. The -optimates were all opposed, though in 74 they had given Antonius -such a command,<a id="FNanchor_2715" href="#Footnote_2715" class="fnanchor">[2715]</a> which now served Gabinius as a precedent. -The senate was compelled by threats of the people to -yield, but used its influence on the colleagues of Gabinius to -have them oppose the measure. Two of them, L. Roscius Otho, -author of the lex theatralis,<a id="FNanchor_2716" href="#Footnote_2716" class="fnanchor">[2716]</a> and L. Trebellius, attempted to -prevent comitial action. The tribes began to vote the deposition -of Trebellius; but before the eighteenth was called he -desisted.<a id="FNanchor_2717" href="#Footnote_2717" class="fnanchor">[2717]</a> Thereafter both remained silent, and the law was -passed. Pompey was then elected to the command by the -tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2718" href="#Footnote_2718" class="fnanchor">[2718]</a> They enacted further that he should have two quaestors, -twenty-four legati pro praetore, 500 ships, 120,000 men,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_433"></a>[433]</span> -and 5000 cavalry. On one point only the senate refused its -sanction; it would not permit Gabinius to be a legatus.<a id="FNanchor_2719" href="#Footnote_2719" class="fnanchor">[2719]</a> An -article of the statute gave as a province to the outgoing consul, -M’. Acilius Glabrio, Bithynia and Pontus with the conduct of the -war against Mithridates.<a id="FNanchor_2720" href="#Footnote_2720" class="fnanchor">[2720]</a> The Gabinian law led to far-reaching -consequences. It established temporarily, not precisely a -monarchy, but a dyarchy, as the Roman world was thereby -divided between the senate and a general with almost absolute -power. The arrangement was a prototype of the Augustan -system. At the outset the act seemed to be justified by the -results, for immediately after its adoption the price of grain fell -from the famine height to which the piratical control of the -seas had forced it.<a id="FNanchor_2721" href="#Footnote_2721" class="fnanchor">[2721]</a></p> - -<p>An addition to this vast power was made in the following -year by the Manilian law. The author, C. Manilius, after -entering upon his tribunate on December 10, 67, promulgated -a rogation for giving libertini the right to vote in the tribes of -their patrons.<a id="FNanchor_2722" href="#Footnote_2722" class="fnanchor">[2722]</a> It was said by some, though probably without -ground, that the real author was Cornelius.<a id="FNanchor_2723" href="#Footnote_2723" class="fnanchor">[2723]</a> While in general -the optimates disliked the measure, some favored it in the hope -that they would gain political influence through the votes of -their freedmen.<a id="FNanchor_2724" href="#Footnote_2724" class="fnanchor">[2724]</a> In spite of the fact that constitutionally the -comitia could not be held on a festive day, Manilius convoked -the assembly on the last day of the year, which was the Compitalia, -toward evening, gathering to the assembly a few men -who he knew favored the proposal. On the following day -the senate heard of the enactment and at once declared it invalid.<a id="FNanchor_2725" href="#Footnote_2725" class="fnanchor">[2725]</a> -The behavior of Manilius exposed him to certain prosecution -unless he could win powerful support. This is the -motive ascribed to him by Dio Cassius<a id="FNanchor_2726" href="#Footnote_2726" class="fnanchor">[2726]</a> for his famous law<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_434"></a>[434]</span> -which conferred extraordinary power on Pompey for the conduct -of the war against Mithridates.<a id="FNanchor_2727" href="#Footnote_2727" class="fnanchor">[2727]</a> It gave the Roman general, -in addition to his existing command, the provinces of Asia, -Bithynia, and Cilicia with the right to declare war and make -treaties at his discretion.<a id="FNanchor_2728" href="#Footnote_2728" class="fnanchor">[2728]</a> The province thus granted him included -nearly all the eastern domain of Rome which had not -already been conferred by the Gabinian law. No discussion of -this measure in the senate is mentioned, though it is difficult to -understand how such action could be avoided.<a id="FNanchor_2729" href="#Footnote_2729" class="fnanchor">[2729]</a> The only -optimates who opposed the bill in contiones were Q. Lutatius -Catulus and Q. Hortensius, who had been the chief opponents -of the Gabinian law. Their objection was the monarchical -position in which these measures were placing Pompey.<a id="FNanchor_2730" href="#Footnote_2730" class="fnanchor">[2730]</a> Its -leading supporters were Caesar and Cicero.<a id="FNanchor_2731" href="#Footnote_2731" class="fnanchor">[2731]</a> It was so enthusiastically -favored by the knights and the populace that its -adoption was from the beginning a foregone conclusion.</p> - -<p>In 65 the conservatives found themselves strong enough to -put through the assembly the plebiscite of C. Papius for expelling -the peregrini from Rome, and for punishing those who had -usurped the rights of the citizens. The object was to prevent -Latin-speaking foreigners, especially the Transpadane Gauls, -from packing the assemblies with a view to passing measures -for the further extension of the franchise. The Papian law -was modelled after the Claudian of 177,<a id="FNanchor_2732" href="#Footnote_2732" class="fnanchor">[2732]</a> the Junian of 126,<a id="FNanchor_2733" href="#Footnote_2733" class="fnanchor">[2733]</a> -and in some respects after the Licinian-Mucian of 95.<a id="FNanchor_2734" href="#Footnote_2734" class="fnanchor">[2734]</a> Probably -to the same Papius belongs the lex Papia de Vestalium -lectione, which limited the power of choice exercised by the -supreme pontiff.<a id="FNanchor_2735" href="#Footnote_2735" class="fnanchor">[2735]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_435"></a>[435]</span></p> - -<p>After the unusual comitial activity of 67-66 there was almost -a pause in legislation till the year of Cicero’s consulship, 63. -To that date belongs the plebiscite of T. Atius Labienus, -which restored the form of election of sacerdotes introduced -by Domitius in 103<a id="FNanchor_2736" href="#Footnote_2736" class="fnanchor">[2736]</a> and abolished by Sulla.<a id="FNanchor_2737" href="#Footnote_2737" class="fnanchor">[2737]</a></p> - -<p>A remarkable effort at agrarian legislation was made at the -beginning of the year by P. Servilius Rullus, tribune of the -plebs. In December, 64, shortly after entering office, he promulgated -a bill, comprising more than forty articles,<a id="FNanchor_2738" href="#Footnote_2738" class="fnanchor">[2738]</a> with the -intention of having it voted on in January.<a id="FNanchor_2739" href="#Footnote_2739" class="fnanchor">[2739]</a> The administration -of the law was to be in the hands of ten men elected by -seventeen tribes after the manner of the comitia pontificis -maximi,<a id="FNanchor_2740" href="#Footnote_2740" class="fnanchor">[2740]</a> to hold office five years.<a id="FNanchor_2741" href="#Footnote_2741" class="fnanchor">[2741]</a> Candidates should be -required to present themselves in person<a id="FNanchor_2742" href="#Footnote_2742" class="fnanchor">[2742]</a> (so as to exclude -Pompey). This commission was to have the irresponsible<a id="FNanchor_2743" href="#Footnote_2743" class="fnanchor">[2743]</a> -management of large resources<a id="FNanchor_2744" href="#Footnote_2744" class="fnanchor">[2744]</a> for the purchase of land in -Italy,<a id="FNanchor_2745" href="#Footnote_2745" class="fnanchor">[2745]</a> on which they were to plant colonies at their discretion.<a id="FNanchor_2746" href="#Footnote_2746" class="fnanchor">[2746]</a> -The object of the rogation seems to have been the creation of -an oligarchy of ten who with their vast powers and revenues -should control Rome and counterbalance the military prestige -of Pompey. Caesar and Crassus were probably behind the -scheme. Should it by any chance succeed, they would be -the dominant members of the board. Its faulty structure and -revolutionary demands, however, made failure almost certain -from the outset. At all events Cicero, driven into the ranks<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_436"></a>[436]</span> -of the optimates by the necessity of opposing it,—so Caesar -may have reasoned,—would thus be eliminated from the -leadership of the democratic party, while the populace, with -appetite whetted for an agrarian law, would be ready for the -saner measure which Caesar was himself intending to propose -as soon as an opportunity offered. But Cicero out-manoeuvred -his adversaries. It was as a friend of the people and an ally of -the tribunes that he opposed the bill in two contiones,<a id="FNanchor_2747" href="#Footnote_2747" class="fnanchor">[2747]</a> after -which a threat of intercession on the part of a colleague induced -Rullus to withdraw it.</p> - -<p>In Cicero’s judgment there was pressing need of a new lex -de ambitu to cover the loopholes left by the Acilian-Calpurnian -statute of 67.<a id="FNanchor_2748" href="#Footnote_2748" class="fnanchor">[2748]</a> Early in the year he passed through the senate -a decree which so interpreted that enactment as to make it -apply to the hiring of sectatores, the granting of free seats -to the tribes at gladiatorial shows, and the entertainment of -the public at dinners.<a id="FNanchor_2749" href="#Footnote_2749" class="fnanchor">[2749]</a> Later in the summer, after the elections -of the year had been announced, a dispensation from -the Aelian-Fufian law<a id="FNanchor_2750" href="#Footnote_2750" class="fnanchor">[2750]</a> enabled him and C. Antonius, his colleague,<a id="FNanchor_2751" href="#Footnote_2751" class="fnanchor">[2751]</a> -to propose and carry a new statute concerning bribery -at elections.<a id="FNanchor_2752" href="#Footnote_2752" class="fnanchor">[2752]</a> It increased the penalty on the divisores,<a id="FNanchor_2753" href="#Footnote_2753" class="fnanchor">[2753]</a> and -forbade any one within the two years preceding the announcement -of a candidacy to give gladiatorial shows excepting in -fulfilment of a testament.<a id="FNanchor_2754" href="#Footnote_2754" class="fnanchor">[2754]</a> The penalty for the convicted candidate -was ten years’ exile.<a id="FNanchor_2755" href="#Footnote_2755" class="fnanchor">[2755]</a> The part of the law which had to -do with the jurors included a provision for fining those who -absented themselves from the trial even on the ground of -illness.<a id="FNanchor_2756" href="#Footnote_2756" class="fnanchor">[2756]</a> A measure certainly passed in this year, and probably -forming an article of the Tullian lex de ambitu, forbade<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_437"></a>[437]</span> -candidacies in absentia.<a id="FNanchor_2757" href="#Footnote_2757" class="fnanchor">[2757]</a> Amid the troubles connected with -the Catilinarian conspiracy Cicero found time for an attempt -to relieve the provincials of one of the most flagrant abuses -inflicted on them by the senatorial oligarchy. To increase -the dignity and lessen the expense of a member while travelling -even on private business through the provinces, the senate -was accustomed to have the office of public legatus conferred -on him by a magistrate, which honor at the same time implied -the right to be absent from sessions of the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2758" href="#Footnote_2758" class="fnanchor">[2758]</a> In this -capacity a senator represented the state,<a id="FNanchor_2759" href="#Footnote_2759" class="fnanchor">[2759]</a> and could have lictors -assigned him by the provincial governors.<a id="FNanchor_2760" href="#Footnote_2760" class="fnanchor">[2760]</a> Abuses of this -privilege were to the provincials an especially vexatious form -of oppression.<a id="FNanchor_2761" href="#Footnote_2761" class="fnanchor">[2761]</a> Cicero’s first rogation on the subject proposed -to abolish the free legation, but when a tribune in the service of -the illiberals interceded, the measure before enactment was so -weakened as to limit the privilege of any one person to a single -year,<a id="FNanchor_2762" href="#Footnote_2762" class="fnanchor">[2762]</a> and hence did little to remedy the mischief.<a id="FNanchor_2763" href="#Footnote_2763" class="fnanchor">[2763]</a> There was -in fact no hope for the provincials either from the avaricious -plutocrats or the hungry proletarians.</p> - -<p>The legislation of the years between the consulships of Cicero -and Caesar, 63-59, involved no important principle. To prevent<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_438"></a>[438]</span> -the introduction of forged statutes in the archives,<a id="FNanchor_2764" href="#Footnote_2764" class="fnanchor">[2764]</a> a law -of D. Junius Silanus and L. Licinius Murena, consuls in 62, -forbade the filing of a statute in the aerarian archives excepting -in the presence of witnesses.<a id="FNanchor_2765" href="#Footnote_2765" class="fnanchor">[2765]</a> In this year M. Porcius Cato -and L. Marcius, tribunes of the plebs, carried a law which -threatened with punishment commanders who reported falsely -to the senate the number of the enemy killed and of citizens -lost, and required them within ten days after returning to the -city to give their oath before the urban quaestors that they had -transmitted correct reports.<a id="FNanchor_2766" href="#Footnote_2766" class="fnanchor">[2766]</a> For the year 60 must be mentioned -the pretorian law of Q. Caecilius Metellus Nepos, which -abolished vectigalia in Italy,<a id="FNanchor_2767" href="#Footnote_2767" class="fnanchor">[2767]</a> and the tribunician rogation of L. -Flavius for granting lands to Pompey’s veterans. The latter -failed through the disapproval of the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2768" href="#Footnote_2768" class="fnanchor">[2768]</a> Far more interesting -because of the procedure, though otherwise of little consequence, -was the tribunician rogation of Herennius of the same -year for transferring P. Clodius to the plebeian rank. The -subject has been considered in an earlier chapter.<a id="FNanchor_2769" href="#Footnote_2769" class="fnanchor">[2769]</a></p> - -<p>The year of Caesar’s consulship was one of unusual legislative -activity. Resuming the agrarian policy of the Gracchi, -which had been undone by the statute of 111,<a id="FNanchor_2770" href="#Footnote_2770" class="fnanchor">[2770]</a> he promulgated -early in the year a bill for the distribution of lands, which exempted<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_439"></a>[439]</span> -the Campanian<a id="FNanchor_2771" href="#Footnote_2771" class="fnanchor">[2771]</a> and Stellatine<a id="FNanchor_2772" href="#Footnote_2772" class="fnanchor">[2772]</a> territory as well as that -of Volaterrae, which Sulla had confiscated without ejecting the -inhabitants.<a id="FNanchor_2773" href="#Footnote_2773" class="fnanchor">[2773]</a> As little other public land remained in Italy, the -bill ordered that money accruing from the sale of booty taken -by Pompey, and from the new revenues of the territory he had -won for Rome, be used for the purchase of lands from those -who were willing to sell at the values assessed in the last census.<a id="FNanchor_2774" href="#Footnote_2774" class="fnanchor">[2774]</a> -The beneficiaries were the needy citizens and the veterans -of Pompey.<a id="FNanchor_2775" href="#Footnote_2775" class="fnanchor">[2775]</a> The lots assigned were to remain inalienable -twenty years.<a id="FNanchor_2776" href="#Footnote_2776" class="fnanchor">[2776]</a> The work of distribution was to be in the hands -of a board of twenty—vigintiviri<a id="FNanchor_2777" href="#Footnote_2777" class="fnanchor">[2777]</a>—which should not include -the author of the law.<a id="FNanchor_2778" href="#Footnote_2778" class="fnanchor">[2778]</a> A sub-committee of this large board -must have been the Vviri agris dandis adsignandis iudicandis,<a id="FNanchor_2779" href="#Footnote_2779" class="fnanchor">[2779]</a> -who in the opinion of Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_2780" href="#Footnote_2780" class="fnanchor">[2780]</a> possessed the sole judicial -power connected with the work of distribution. As the senate -studiously delayed action on the measure, though unable to -offer any criticism,<a id="FNanchor_2781" href="#Footnote_2781" class="fnanchor">[2781]</a> Caesar without its sanction presented the -bill to the people.<a id="FNanchor_2782" href="#Footnote_2782" class="fnanchor">[2782]</a> Bibulus, his colleague, backed by three -tribunes of the plebs, not only protested against the bill,<a id="FNanchor_2783" href="#Footnote_2783" class="fnanchor">[2783]</a> but -resorted to sky-watching and the proclamation of festivals to -prevent its adoption.<a id="FNanchor_2784" href="#Footnote_2784" class="fnanchor">[2784]</a> Disregarding this opposition, Caesar -with the support of Pompey and Crassus offered his rogation to -the tribes,<a id="FNanchor_2785" href="#Footnote_2785" class="fnanchor">[2785]</a> who accepted it with great enthusiasm. For the -remainder of his term he ignored the senate in all his legislation. -As to his other agrarian provisions, it is difficult to determine -whether they were attached to this rogation before its enactment -or formed a new bill. In favor of the second alternative<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_440"></a>[440]</span> -it is to be noticed in the first place that Cicero and others -mention Julian agrarian laws,<a id="FNanchor_2786" href="#Footnote_2786" class="fnanchor">[2786]</a> and that Cicero’s expression -“Campanian lex”<a id="FNanchor_2787" href="#Footnote_2787" class="fnanchor">[2787]</a> could describe a measure relating to the -Campanian territory but not the whole group of agrarian provisions -of that year. Moreover although Cicero was acquainted -with the Julian rogation from the beginning of the year,<a id="FNanchor_2788" href="#Footnote_2788" class="fnanchor">[2788]</a> he did -not at Formiae hear of the inclusion of the Campanian territory -till near the end of April.<a id="FNanchor_2789" href="#Footnote_2789" class="fnanchor">[2789]</a> It might be assumed that after the -senate and Bibulus showed opposition Caesar modified the original -rogation before putting it to vote, but no mention is made -of an alteration. Finally Dio Cassius<a id="FNanchor_2790" href="#Footnote_2790" class="fnanchor">[2790]</a> and Plutarch<a id="FNanchor_2791" href="#Footnote_2791" class="fnanchor">[2791]</a> speak -distinctly of an earlier and a later law.<a id="FNanchor_2792" href="#Footnote_2792" class="fnanchor">[2792]</a> On the whole it seems -probable therefore that toward the end of April Caesar promulgated -a second agrarian bill which provided for the distribution -of the Campanian and Stellatine lands among needy citizens, -preferably those who had three or more children.<a id="FNanchor_2793" href="#Footnote_2793" class="fnanchor">[2793]</a> The complete -execution of the law would dispose of all public lands in -Italy from which a revenue might be derived. An article required -not only senators within a specified time to swear that -they would support the measures<a id="FNanchor_2794" href="#Footnote_2794" class="fnanchor">[2794]</a> but also candidates for office<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_441"></a>[441]</span> -for the following year to give their oath in contio that they -would not propose any modification or repeal of them.<a id="FNanchor_2795" href="#Footnote_2795" class="fnanchor">[2795]</a></p> - -<p>This statute was full of significance both in content and in -the manner of enactment: it set at defiance the senate and the -auspices; it deprived the state of important revenues, increasing -correspondingly the financial burden on the provinces; it -brought relief to many proletarians, while encouraging militarism -through a provision for Pompey’s veterans. Ostensibly -democratic, it cemented and announced to the world the triumvirate -of Caesar, Crassus, and Pompey—a combination of -democratic, plutocratic, and military bossism, which proved -more dangerous to political liberty than had been the dictatorship -of Sulla. The last great agrarian law of the republic contained -in itself a prophecy of the monarchy which its author -was soon to establish.</p> - -<p>Because of the losses suffered in Asia in the recent war with -Mithridates, Caesar carried a law, also early in the year, for a -remission of a third of the sum due to the treasury from the -publicans of that province. As the senate had failed to pass a -measure of relief for the contractors of revenue,<a id="FNanchor_2796" href="#Footnote_2796" class="fnanchor">[2796]</a> the concession -from Caesar and the people served to alienate the feelings of -the knights from the optimates and to attach them to the ambitious -consul.<a id="FNanchor_2797" href="#Footnote_2797" class="fnanchor">[2797]</a> Next to the agrarian statute, however, the lex de<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_442"></a>[442]</span> -pecuniis repetundis was the most important piece of legislation -of his consulship. Comprising at least a hundred and one -articles,<a id="FNanchor_2798" href="#Footnote_2798" class="fnanchor">[2798]</a> including much material from earlier laws on extortion, -it dealt minutely with all the particulars of the offence, -procedure, and punishment so exhaustively as to render further -comitial legislation on the subject unnecessary.<a id="FNanchor_2799" href="#Footnote_2799" class="fnanchor">[2799]</a> It aimed to -protect alike citizens, provincials, and allies from every form -of misrule and oppression by the home and promagisterial -authorities. It regulated strictly the supplies due from the -provincials to the promagistrate and his officium, including -shelter and sustenance for man and beast.<a id="FNanchor_2800" href="#Footnote_2800" class="fnanchor">[2800]</a> Under this law -the governor was forbidden without an order from Rome to -conduct diplomatic business with foreign states, to wage war, -or to cross the boundary of his province,<a id="FNanchor_2801" href="#Footnote_2801" class="fnanchor">[2801]</a> or to demand of the -cities crown gold for a triumph not decreed by the senate.<a id="FNanchor_2802" href="#Footnote_2802" class="fnanchor">[2802]</a> On -retiring from his command he was to leave copies of his administrative -accounts in two cities of his province and an exact -duplicate in the aerarium.<a id="FNanchor_2803" href="#Footnote_2803" class="fnanchor">[2803]</a> It provided further for the punishment -of corrupt accusers, jurors, and witnesses in cases under -the law.<a id="FNanchor_2804" href="#Footnote_2804" class="fnanchor">[2804]</a> A man convicted of the crime was fined and compelled -to restore extorted property; and in case his estate did -not suffice to cover the loss, an investigation could be made as -to who had shared his gains.<a id="FNanchor_2805" href="#Footnote_2805" class="fnanchor">[2805]</a> He was also to be expelled from -the senate and banished.<a id="FNanchor_2806" href="#Footnote_2806" class="fnanchor">[2806]</a> The severity of the law is commended -by Cicero.<a id="FNanchor_2807" href="#Footnote_2807" class="fnanchor">[2807]</a> Caesar’s legislation concerning extortion -was reënforced (i) by the judiciary law of P. Vatinius, tribune -of the plebs, of the same year, which granted to both accuser -and accused greater freedom in the rejection of jurors than had -been allowed by the corresponding law of Sulla, the terms of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_443"></a>[443]</span> -which however are not definitely known;<a id="FNanchor_2808" href="#Footnote_2808" class="fnanchor">[2808]</a> (2) by a statute of -Q. Fufius Calenus, praetor in 59, which required the three -decuries to deposit their votes in three separate urns, the object -being to establish class responsibility.<a id="FNanchor_2809" href="#Footnote_2809" class="fnanchor">[2809]</a> The remaining comitial -acts of Caesar were merely administrative. As a favor to -Pompey, who in his eastern campaign had received support -from Ptolemy Auletes, king of Egypt,<a id="FNanchor_2810" href="#Footnote_2810" class="fnanchor">[2810]</a> Caesar in the beginning -of his consulship<a id="FNanchor_2811" href="#Footnote_2811" class="fnanchor">[2811]</a> carried a resolution for acknowledging the -latter as an ally and friend of the Roman people.<a id="FNanchor_2812" href="#Footnote_2812" class="fnanchor">[2812]</a> Later in -the year, to repay Pompey for his support of the agrarian -statute, Caesar secured against the will of the senate the enactment -of a law for confirming his ally’s arrangements in the -East.<a id="FNanchor_2813" href="#Footnote_2813" class="fnanchor">[2813]</a> Lastly may be mentioned the lex curiata for the arrogation -of P. Clodius Pulcher proposed by Caesar in the capacity -of pontifex maximus, a measure considered in an earlier chapter.<a id="FNanchor_2814" href="#Footnote_2814" class="fnanchor">[2814]</a> -Clodius wished to qualify himself for the tribunate of the -plebs, and his design was aided by Caesar in the expectation -that he would occupy the attention of Cicero, the only strong -opponent of the triumviri. Caesar’s immediate future was provided -for by a plebiscite of his friend Vatinius, which granted -him Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum as a province for five years -beginning March 1, 59.<a id="FNanchor_2815" href="#Footnote_2815" class="fnanchor">[2815]</a> He was to have three legions<a id="FNanchor_2816" href="#Footnote_2816" class="fnanchor">[2816]</a> and to -name his own legati, who were to enjoy propretorian rank.<a id="FNanchor_2817" href="#Footnote_2817" class="fnanchor">[2817]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_444"></a>[444]</span> -The senate, which had looked unwillingly upon these proceedings, -now added Comata and a fourth legion, partly because of -the conviction that in the face of an imminent war with the -Helvetians no one would be willing to take that province without -Cisalpina as a support, and partly through fear lest the -popular party might gain the additional credit of bestowing it.<a id="FNanchor_2818" href="#Footnote_2818" class="fnanchor">[2818]</a> -In one respect the position was far better than that held by -Pompey in the East: while winning prestige in a popular conquest<a id="FNanchor_2819" href="#Footnote_2819" class="fnanchor">[2819]</a> -and attaching to himself a powerful army, Caesar would -be near enough to Rome to control the political situation.<a id="FNanchor_2820" href="#Footnote_2820" class="fnanchor">[2820]</a> Intellectual -brilliancy would serve in place of experience. In fact, -in addition to maintaining the position of democratic boss of -Rome, the outlook seemed to him favorable for wresting from -his fellow-triumvir the sceptre of the military monarch.<a id="FNanchor_2821" href="#Footnote_2821" class="fnanchor">[2821]</a></p> - -<p>P. Clodius Pulcher, tribune of the plebs in 58, seems to -have worked partly as an agent of Caesar for the more complete -organization of democracy, and partly from motives of -personal hatred for Cicero. He first proposed a frumentarian -plebiscite, which provided for the absolutely free distribution -of grain monthly among the citizens resident in Rome.<a id="FNanchor_2822" href="#Footnote_2822" class="fnanchor">[2822]</a> In -vain the optimates complained that the abolition of the existing -price, which was that prescribed by the Sempronian law,<a id="FNanchor_2823" href="#Footnote_2823" class="fnanchor">[2823]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_445"></a>[445]</span> -would rob the treasury of nearly a fifth of its income.<a id="FNanchor_2824" href="#Footnote_2824" class="fnanchor">[2824]</a> Accepted -by the tribes, the law proved a most effective means of -maintaining a numerous mob of proletarians ever present and -willing to vote for the measures of their political patrons, the -leaders of the democracy. A closely related plebiscite permitted -the free organization of clubs (collegia),<a id="FNanchor_2825" href="#Footnote_2825" class="fnanchor">[2825]</a> which a senatus -consultum of 64 had strictly limited,<a id="FNanchor_2826" href="#Footnote_2826" class="fnanchor">[2826]</a> but which now -became an active part of the democratic organization.<a id="FNanchor_2827" href="#Footnote_2827" class="fnanchor">[2827]</a> His -legislation, however, was not utterly devoid of statesmanship. -A third act, by repealing those articles of the Aelian and -Fufian statutes which applied obnuntiations to law-making -assemblies, deprived the nobility of their most effective means -of controlling legislation.<a id="FNanchor_2828" href="#Footnote_2828" class="fnanchor">[2828]</a> An article of the same statute declared -all dies fasti available for legislation.<a id="FNanchor_2829" href="#Footnote_2829" class="fnanchor">[2829]</a> This measure -went far toward abolishing a usage which had made religion a -mockery and public life a farce. To limit the arbitrary power -of the censors, Clodius enacted through a plebiscite that these -magistrates should place their stigma upon those only whom -they had jointly condemned after having heard sufficient testimony.<a id="FNanchor_2830" href="#Footnote_2830" class="fnanchor">[2830]</a> -Another comitial act prohibited the secretaries of the -quaestors from engaging in business in the provinces.<a id="FNanchor_2831" href="#Footnote_2831" class="fnanchor">[2831]</a> The -last three statutes mentioned were useful reforms. His most -famous measure was the law which prescribed the penalty of -interdict from fire and water for any one who had put to death -a Roman citizen without trial.<a id="FNanchor_2832" href="#Footnote_2832" class="fnanchor">[2832]</a> Strengthening the Sempronian -law of appeal,<a id="FNanchor_2833" href="#Footnote_2833" class="fnanchor">[2833]</a> it forced the party issue as to the question -whether that act could apply to persons accused of having -attempted to overthrow the state. The optimates contended -that such persons were no longer citizens but enemies -and hence outside the pale of law<a id="FNanchor_2834" href="#Footnote_2834" class="fnanchor">[2834]</a>—a principle which the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_446"></a>[446]</span> -populares held to be destructive of liberty. From a democratic -point of view the Clodian law was just and necessary; -but unfortunately Cicero, who in putting to death the associates -of Catiline had simply acted for the senate, was to be -made the scapegoat. Fearing condemnation under the law, -Cicero voluntarily retired into exile, whereupon a new plebiscite -declared the interdict to be legally in operation.<a id="FNanchor_2835" href="#Footnote_2835" class="fnanchor">[2835]</a> In the -following year he was recalled with great enthusiasm by a -resolution of the comitia centuriata proposed by the consuls -P. Cornelius Lentulus and Q. Caecilius Metellus.<a id="FNanchor_2836" href="#Footnote_2836" class="fnanchor">[2836]</a> The same -magistrates were authors of a law for conferring upon Pompey -the care of the grain supply, which he was to administer five -years with unlimited proconsular imperium.<a id="FNanchor_2837" href="#Footnote_2837" class="fnanchor">[2837]</a> In spite of such<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_447"></a>[447]</span> -efforts to prop up his power in order to counterpoise that of -Caesar, the latter through the prestige of his brilliant victories -in Gaul and the liberal use of money in the capital far outshone -his fellow-triumviri. The only hope for their ambition -was to be found in the good will and favor of the great proconsul. -As the result of the conference held by the triumviri -at Luca, 56, Pompey and Crassus were elected to a second -consulship for 55 through the votes of Caesar’s soldiers, who -were given a furlough to attend the comitia held purposely late -in the year.<a id="FNanchor_2838" href="#Footnote_2838" class="fnanchor">[2838]</a> As proconsuls Pompey and Crassus were to be -given advantageous commands, and Caesar was to receive as -his reward a prolongation of his governorship.<a id="FNanchor_2839" href="#Footnote_2839" class="fnanchor">[2839]</a> Subservient -tribunes were found to propose the desired measures, and it had -long been an easy matter to obtain a majority in favor of any -conceivable bill. C. Trebonius drew up a law for granting -Syria to Crassus and the two Spains to Pompey for a period -of five years, with a dispensation for both from that article of -the lex Iulia repetundarum which forbade promagistrates of -their own free will to declare war.<a id="FNanchor_2840" href="#Footnote_2840" class="fnanchor">[2840]</a> The intercessions of tribunes -and all other opposition were violently overborne, and the -rogation was readily accepted by the people.<a id="FNanchor_2841" href="#Footnote_2841" class="fnanchor">[2841]</a> Thereupon the -two consuls secured the passage of an act for extending Caesar’s -command.<a id="FNanchor_2842" href="#Footnote_2842" class="fnanchor">[2842]</a></p> - -<p>Notwithstanding the fact that these consuls had been elected -with the help of the clubs organized under the Clodian law of -58, they must have felt such associations to be a menace to -themselves as well as to the public peace. Crassus accordingly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_448"></a>[448]</span> -carried through the assembly a lex de sodaliciis, which increased -the penalty for ambitus committed through the agency of clubs.<a id="FNanchor_2843" href="#Footnote_2843" class="fnanchor">[2843]</a> -It also ordered that the jury in such cases be made up by the -accuser from any four tribes he should choose, however unfavorable -they might be to the accused,<a id="FNanchor_2844" href="#Footnote_2844" class="fnanchor">[2844]</a> who had merely the right -to reject one of the four tribal decuries thus presented,<a id="FNanchor_2845" href="#Footnote_2845" class="fnanchor">[2845]</a> in so -far as the court itself did not grant him the further privilege of -rejecting individuals.<a id="FNanchor_2846" href="#Footnote_2846" class="fnanchor">[2846]</a> It is difficult to understand how impartial -justice could be administered under such a law. But no -further legislation concerning ambitus was attempted till 52, -when Pompey in his third consulship carried a statute which -increased the penalty for the offence and made the procedure -more strict.<a id="FNanchor_2847" href="#Footnote_2847" class="fnanchor">[2847]</a> The attention of Pompey in his second consulship -was directed rather to other classes of crimes. First he -had a statute adopted concerning parricide (the murder of a -near relative or patron), which hitherto had been provided for -by the Cornelian lex de sicariis et veneficis.<a id="FNanchor_2848" href="#Footnote_2848" class="fnanchor">[2848]</a> His project for -displacing the lex Iulia repetundarum by a statute which should -make the non-senatorial class specifically responsible failed to -become a law.<a id="FNanchor_2849" href="#Footnote_2849" class="fnanchor">[2849]</a> A sumptuary rogation for restricting personal -expenditure he voluntarily withdrew on the advice of Hortensius, -who persuaded him that luxury and delicacy of life were -but the fitting adornments of empire.<a id="FNanchor_2850" href="#Footnote_2850" class="fnanchor">[2850]</a> His lex iudiciaria ordered -the urban praetor to begin the selection of jurors from -the wealthiest of each of the three classes, and thence to descend -gradually to the poorer members, the object being to -make the composition of the courts as aristocratic as the terms -of the Aurelian statute of 70 would allow.<a id="FNanchor_2851" href="#Footnote_2851" class="fnanchor">[2851]</a> The lex de vi of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_449"></a>[449]</span> -his third consulship, 52, was merely for the appointment of a -special commission to try those who were accused of having -murdered Clodius, burned the Curia, and besieged the house of -the interrex M. Aemilius Lepidus. It determined the composition -of the court and the penalty to be inflicted.<a id="FNanchor_2852" href="#Footnote_2852" class="fnanchor">[2852]</a> Of his statute -de iure magistratuum, passed in the latter year, that article -only is known which reiterated the law of 63 for prohibiting -candidacies in absentia. But as a plebiscite had been passed -earlier in the year to dispense Caesar from the law of 63,<a id="FNanchor_2853" href="#Footnote_2853" class="fnanchor">[2853]</a> and -as Pompey did not dare antagonize him by abolishing the plebiscite -here mentioned, he secured the adoption of an additional -law for excepting such candidates as had been or should be dispensed -by comitial action.<a id="FNanchor_2854" href="#Footnote_2854" class="fnanchor">[2854]</a> But Caesar’s prospect of passing -immediately from his Gallic command to a second consulship -was more effectually blocked by Pompey’s lex de provinciis, -which, embodying a senatus consultum of the previous year,<a id="FNanchor_2855" href="#Footnote_2855" class="fnanchor">[2855]</a> -ordered that five years should intervene between the expiration -of a magistracy and the beginning of the corresponding promagistracy.<a id="FNanchor_2856" href="#Footnote_2856" class="fnanchor">[2856]</a> -The general purpose was to dampen the ardor of -the ambitious, who sought praetorships and consulships merely -as a stepping-stone to lucrative and influential commands in the -provinces. Its immediate effect, however, was to precipitate -the conflict between Caesar and Pompey which brought the -republic to ruin. The relation of the law to this event requires -explanation. In the Pompeian-Licinian act of 55 for prolonging -Caesar’s command measures were taken that the senate -should not discuss the question of succession to him before -March 1, 50. According to the Sempronian law,<a id="FNanchor_2857" href="#Footnote_2857" class="fnanchor">[2857]</a> therefore, -the senate could assign his provinces to no consuls earlier than -those of 49; hence Caesar would continue in command during -that year while suing for the consulship for 48. But by the -Pompeian law of 52 the Sempronian was abolished, and the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_450"></a>[450]</span> -senate was given an opportunity to appoint a successor to him -on or after March 1, 50.<a id="FNanchor_2858" href="#Footnote_2858" class="fnanchor">[2858]</a></p> - -<p>From the close of the second consulship of Pompey to the -beginning of Caesar’s dictatorship there was no important legislation.<a id="FNanchor_2859" href="#Footnote_2859" class="fnanchor">[2859]</a></p> - -<h4>III. <i>The Decline of the Republican Comitia</i><br /> -<span class="smcap">From 49 to about 30</span></h4> - -<p>With the dictatorship of Caesar begins the last stage in the -life of the republican comitia. For them it was from the beginning -of his supremacy essentially a time of decline. Although -Caesar continued to submit his plans to the assemblies for legalization, -he rapidly concentrated in his own person powers and -functions hitherto exercised by the people; and the triumviri, -his successors, after a sham-republican interregnum, constituted -in law as well as in fact a three-headed despot. Mention will -first be made of the comitial acts which conferred powers and -honors on Caesar during his life. In 49 when news of his success -in Spain reached Rome, M. Aemilius Lepidus, a partisan -who was then urban praetor, persuaded the tribes to adopt a -resolution empowering the author to name Caesar dictator.<a id="FNanchor_2860" href="#Footnote_2860" class="fnanchor">[2860]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_451"></a>[451]</span> -Entering upon this office after his return to Rome, about the -end of November, Caesar used it to secure the ratification of -laws—to be considered hereafter—and to hold the electoral -comitia. After eleven days he resigned. At this election he -was chosen consul with P. Servilius Vatia as colleague.<a id="FNanchor_2861" href="#Footnote_2861" class="fnanchor">[2861]</a> About -the middle of October, 48, when the senate and people heard of -the death of Pompey, they conferred on him by law (1) absolute -judicial authority over the partisans of Pompey,<a id="FNanchor_2862" href="#Footnote_2862" class="fnanchor">[2862]</a> (2) the right -to make peace and war at his own pleasure, the pretext being -the development of opposition to him in Africa, (3) the right to -be candidate for the consulship five years in succession,<a id="FNanchor_2863" href="#Footnote_2863" class="fnanchor">[2863]</a> (4) the -dictatorship for an indefinite period, to which he was appointed -by his colleague in the consulship,<a id="FNanchor_2864" href="#Footnote_2864" class="fnanchor">[2864]</a> (5) the tribunician authority -for life, with the privilege of sitting with the tribunes, (6) the -right to preside at the election of all patrician magistrates, for -which reason the comitia were postponed till his return to the -city, (7) the right to assign the pretorian provinces according to -his own judgment, (8) the right to triumph over Juba, king of -Mauretania, though at that time he did not know there was to -be a war with that state.<a id="FNanchor_2865" href="#Footnote_2865" class="fnanchor">[2865]</a> Near the end of April, 46, when -news came of the victory at Thapsus, the Romans granted him -(1) the censoria potestas with the title of praefectus morum for -three years, (2) the annual dictatorship for ten years, (3) the -right to nominate candidates for both ordinary and extraordinary -offices. These powers were doubtless conferred by comitial -action. At the same time great honors were heaped upon him, -probably through senatus consulta.<a id="FNanchor_2866" href="#Footnote_2866" class="fnanchor">[2866]</a> Again in April, 45, after -the battle of Munda honors were showered on him in still -greater profusion.<a id="FNanchor_2867" href="#Footnote_2867" class="fnanchor">[2867]</a> Politically the most important were the -lifelong, hereditary title of imperator, which he bore as a second<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_452"></a>[452]</span> -cognomen,<a id="FNanchor_2868" href="#Footnote_2868" class="fnanchor">[2868]</a> the sole right to command soldiers and to manage -the public funds, the privilege of being consul ten years in succession -(which he did not use), the prefecture of morals and the -dictatorship for life, and finally deification under the title of the -“Invincible God.”<a id="FNanchor_2869" href="#Footnote_2869" class="fnanchor">[2869]</a> In fact for the remainder of his life there -was no cessation in the bestowal of divine and human honors. -Among those of his last year were the tribunician sanctity<a id="FNanchor_2870" href="#Footnote_2870" class="fnanchor">[2870]</a> and -the right to have as many wives as he pleased—the latter -granted by a plebiscite of C. Helvius Cinna.<a id="FNanchor_2871" href="#Footnote_2871" class="fnanchor">[2871]</a> The theocratic -monarchy which the Romans were erecting for him on the ruins -of the republic left no independence to the senate or the assemblies. -The functions of the latter were especially abridged by -the large power of nominating and appointing officials possessed -by the monarch.<a id="FNanchor_2872" href="#Footnote_2872" class="fnanchor">[2872]</a> His important legislative plans, however, he -brought before the people, preferably in their tribal comitia.</p> - -<p>In December, 49, after returning from Spain, Caesar sought -to relieve somewhat the distress of debtors and at the same time -to quiet the general fear that he might decree a cancellation of -all debts.<a id="FNanchor_2873" href="#Footnote_2873" class="fnanchor">[2873]</a> This object he accomplished through a law, (1) that -interest already paid should be deducted from the principal, -(2) that the property of the debtor should be taken in payment -of the balance—not at the low values then existing, but on the -basis of ante-bellum prices, (3) that no one should hoard more -than fifteen thousand denarii in cash.<a id="FNanchor_2874" href="#Footnote_2874" class="fnanchor">[2874]</a> The third article was a -renewal of an old law.<a id="FNanchor_2875" href="#Footnote_2875" class="fnanchor">[2875]</a> Another statute,<a id="FNanchor_2876" href="#Footnote_2876" class="fnanchor">[2876]</a> 47, released from a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_453"></a>[453]</span> -year’s rent tenants of houses in Rome which brought the owner -more than 2000 sesterces or of houses outside the city which -earned more than 500.<a id="FNanchor_2877" href="#Footnote_2877" class="fnanchor">[2877]</a> These houses were private property, -and the law was therefore a partial abolition of private debts.<a id="FNanchor_2878" href="#Footnote_2878" class="fnanchor">[2878]</a> -Such prosperity came that in another year, 46, Caesar found it -possible to cut down the number who received free grain from -320,000 to 150,000.<a id="FNanchor_2879" href="#Footnote_2879" class="fnanchor">[2879]</a> He provided for the surplus population -as well as for his veterans by colonies in Gaul, Spain, Africa, -Macedonia, Greece, and Asia.<a id="FNanchor_2880" href="#Footnote_2880" class="fnanchor">[2880]</a> Eighty thousand citizens found -homes in these provincial settlements.<a id="FNanchor_2881" href="#Footnote_2881" class="fnanchor">[2881]</a></p> - -<p>Among Caesar’s most admirable traits was his liberality in -restoring to their civil rights those who were under disfranchisement -and in granting the citizenship to aliens. At his suggestion -M. Antonius, tribune of the plebs in 49, secured the enactment<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_454"></a>[454]</span> -of a plebiscite for restoring the ius honorum to the children of -those whom Sulla had proscribed.<a id="FNanchor_2882" href="#Footnote_2882" class="fnanchor">[2882]</a> Near the end of the same -year, also at his request, the praetors and tribunes brought -before the people and carried proposals for the recall of certain -persons who had been exiled, unjustly as he believed, under the -Pompeian law on ambitus.<a id="FNanchor_2883" href="#Footnote_2883" class="fnanchor">[2883]</a> It was further at his suggestion -that L. Roscius, probably praetor, enacted a comitial law for -granting the citizenship to the Transpadani who at this time -possessed simply the ius Latii.<a id="FNanchor_2884" href="#Footnote_2884" class="fnanchor">[2884]</a> Another law of unknown -authorship confirmed the grant of the franchise already made -on his own responsibility to the people of Gades.<a id="FNanchor_2885" href="#Footnote_2885" class="fnanchor">[2885]</a></p> - -<p>Among his administrative improvements was the increase in -the number of praetors from eight to ten<a id="FNanchor_2886" href="#Footnote_2886" class="fnanchor">[2886]</a> in 47, for which a -comitial statute may be assumed.<a id="FNanchor_2887" href="#Footnote_2887" class="fnanchor">[2887]</a> The people surrendered to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_455"></a>[455]</span> -him a large part of their electoral right through the plebiscite -of L. Antonius,<a id="FNanchor_2888" href="#Footnote_2888" class="fnanchor">[2888]</a> December, 45, which granted him the privilege -of nominating and presenting to the comitia a half of the candidates -below the consulship.<a id="FNanchor_2889" href="#Footnote_2889" class="fnanchor">[2889]</a> The degradation into which the -ordinary magistracies had been brought by the supremacy of -Caesar is indicated by the deposition of two tribunes of the -plebs, C. Epidius Marullus and L. Caesetius Flavus, because of -their opposition to monarchy, 44, through a plebiscite of their -colleague, C. Helvius Cinna.<a id="FNanchor_2890" href="#Footnote_2890" class="fnanchor">[2890]</a></p> - -<p>To the year 46 belongs Caesar’s legislation on judicial matters. -First disqualifying the tribuni aerarii for jury service,<a id="FNanchor_2891" href="#Footnote_2891" class="fnanchor">[2891]</a> he ordered -through the comitia that the courts be composed exclusively of -the senators and knights.<a id="FNanchor_2892" href="#Footnote_2892" class="fnanchor">[2892]</a> The man who had been carried to -supreme power on the shoulders of the common people now -spurned even the most respectable of their number from association -with himself in the administration.<a id="FNanchor_2893" href="#Footnote_2893" class="fnanchor">[2893]</a> It is known that he -enacted laws on individual crimes.<a id="FNanchor_2894" href="#Footnote_2894" class="fnanchor">[2894]</a> A lex de vi and a lex de -maiestate are mentioned,<a id="FNanchor_2895" href="#Footnote_2895" class="fnanchor">[2895]</a> but it is not known in what they -differed from those of earlier or later date.<a id="FNanchor_2896" href="#Footnote_2896" class="fnanchor">[2896]</a> His sumptuary -statute of the same year<a id="FNanchor_2897" href="#Footnote_2897" class="fnanchor">[2897]</a> restricted the expense of the table,<a id="FNanchor_2898" href="#Footnote_2898" class="fnanchor">[2898]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_456"></a>[456]</span> -sepulchral monuments, dwellings,<a id="FNanchor_2899" href="#Footnote_2899" class="fnanchor">[2899]</a> furniture, clothing, jewels, -and other luxuries, covering the ground in great detail.<a id="FNanchor_2900" href="#Footnote_2900" class="fnanchor">[2900]</a> A -Cassian plebiscite empowered him to recruit the patrician -rank<a id="FNanchor_2901" href="#Footnote_2901" class="fnanchor">[2901]</a>—a means of creating a nobility devoted to himself, while -supplying a religious need. A law proposed by himself (de -provinciis) limited proconsuls to two years of command and -propraetors to one,<a id="FNanchor_2902" href="#Footnote_2902" class="fnanchor">[2902]</a> that in future they might not acquire such -strength as to overthrow the civil authority, after the pattern -set by the author of the regulation. It was by a vote of the -people, too, that the famous lex Iulia municipalis was adopted, -probably in the autumn of 46.<a id="FNanchor_2903" href="#Footnote_2903" class="fnanchor">[2903]</a> Although there has been much -controversy regarding the nature of the document,<a id="FNanchor_2904" href="#Footnote_2904" class="fnanchor">[2904]</a> it is most -probably a general municipal statute. Far from exhaustive, it -had to be supplemented by special laws for the several cities.<a id="FNanchor_2905" href="#Footnote_2905" class="fnanchor">[2905]</a> -The extant fragment, which seems to begin with the second -table, regulates (1) applications of citizens resident at Rome for -free grain,<a id="FNanchor_2906" href="#Footnote_2906" class="fnanchor">[2906]</a> (2) the aedilician supervision of the streets, buildings,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_457"></a>[457]</span> -and games of the capital,<a id="FNanchor_2907" href="#Footnote_2907" class="fnanchor">[2907]</a> (3) the qualifications for the -magistracies and the decurionate in the municipia,<a id="FNanchor_2908" href="#Footnote_2908" class="fnanchor">[2908]</a> (4) the -introduction of the Roman census in the municipia,<a id="FNanchor_2909" href="#Footnote_2909" class="fnanchor">[2909]</a> and (5) of -individual Roman statutes in those municipia which enjoyed the -laws of Rome.<a id="FNanchor_2910" href="#Footnote_2910" class="fnanchor">[2910]</a> The inclusion of the capital with the cities of -Roman rights throughout the empire in one general law marks -the first step in the monarchical process of reducing Rome to -the level of the municipia.<a id="FNanchor_2911" href="#Footnote_2911" class="fnanchor">[2911]</a></p> - -<p>In comparison with the amount of reform work undertaken -by Caesar the legislative activity of the people was remarkably -slight. The growth of the monarchy wrought the decline of -the comitia as well as of the senate; and the assassination -of the monarch brought equally to the republic and to the -assemblies but a short interval of pretended liberty.<a id="FNanchor_2912" href="#Footnote_2912" class="fnanchor">[2912]</a> A lex -proposed by the consul M. Antonius confirmed the acts of -Caesar and established as law the plans which he left in -writing at his death.<a id="FNanchor_2913" href="#Footnote_2913" class="fnanchor">[2913]</a> It was arbitrarily used by the consul<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_458"></a>[458]</span> -for legalizing every whim of his own. His colonial law, -passed shortly after Caesar’s assassination,<a id="FNanchor_2914" href="#Footnote_2914" class="fnanchor">[2914]</a> seems to have -been used by him for establishing in Italy a permanent support -for himself.<a id="FNanchor_2915" href="#Footnote_2915" class="fnanchor">[2915]</a> The last known agrarian law of the republic -is that of his brother, L. Antonius, tribune of the plebs in -the same year, 44. It ordered the distribution of the Pomptine -marshes—which the author asserted were then ready for cultivation<a id="FNanchor_2916" href="#Footnote_2916" class="fnanchor">[2916]</a>—and -other extensive tracts.<a id="FNanchor_2917" href="#Footnote_2917" class="fnanchor">[2917]</a> The execution of the -measure was in the hands of septemviri,<a id="FNanchor_2918" href="#Footnote_2918" class="fnanchor">[2918]</a> including the author<a id="FNanchor_2919" href="#Footnote_2919" class="fnanchor">[2919]</a> -and his two brothers.<a id="FNanchor_2920" href="#Footnote_2920" class="fnanchor">[2920]</a> It was annulled in the following year -by the senate on the ground that it had been violently passed.<a id="FNanchor_2921" href="#Footnote_2921" class="fnanchor">[2921]</a></p> - -<p>Meantime the consul Antonius continued his legislation. An -arbitrary act restored to the pontifical college its ancient right -to appoint its chief in place of the long-used election by seventeen -tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2922" href="#Footnote_2922" class="fnanchor">[2922]</a> Next to colonization, however, his chief legislative -interest was in the reform of the courts. He repealed -the Julian statute concerning the qualifications of jurors;<a id="FNanchor_2923" href="#Footnote_2923" class="fnanchor">[2923]</a> and -instead of restoring the eligibility of the tribuni aerarii, he -made up a third decury of retired centurions and other veterans.<a id="FNanchor_2924" href="#Footnote_2924" class="fnanchor">[2924]</a> -His law for granting an appeal to the people from the quaestiones -de vi and de maiestate,<a id="FNanchor_2925" href="#Footnote_2925" class="fnanchor">[2925]</a> had it remained in force, -would as Cicero asserts have abolished these courts and have -given free rein to mob violence, such as comitial trials for<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_459"></a>[459]</span> -these crimes must necessarily be under conditions as they -then existed.<a id="FNanchor_2926" href="#Footnote_2926" class="fnanchor">[2926]</a> Popularity was the aim of this measure as -well as of his lex which forever abolished the dictatorship. -Along with all his other laws they were annulled by the -senate in February 43.<a id="FNanchor_2927" href="#Footnote_2927" class="fnanchor">[2927]</a></p> - -<p>The establishment of the triumviri rei publicae constituendae -in 43 practically abolished the functions of the comitia, as -these three potentates usurped the right of filling all offices by -appointment and of managing affairs according to their pleasure -without consulting either the senate or the people.<a id="FNanchor_2928" href="#Footnote_2928" class="fnanchor">[2928]</a> The power -they had seized was legalized for a period of five years by -the plebiscite of P. Titius, November 43, passed without regard -to the trinundinum.<a id="FNanchor_2929" href="#Footnote_2929" class="fnanchor">[2929]</a> The reference of business to the people -was thereafter a rare indulgence. It may have been through -a comitial act that the triumviri resolved upon building a -temple to Serapis and Isis in the first year of their rule.<a id="FNanchor_2930" href="#Footnote_2930" class="fnanchor">[2930]</a> We -are less certain that the measure of Octavianus in 41 for a -partial remission of rents was offered to the people.<a id="FNanchor_2931" href="#Footnote_2931" class="fnanchor">[2931]</a> To the -year 40 belongs the lex Falcidia, of P. Falcidius, tribune -of the plebs, which permitted a man to bequeath no more -than three-fourths of his estate, leaving one-fourth to his -natural heirs.<a id="FNanchor_2932" href="#Footnote_2932" class="fnanchor">[2932]</a> We need not be surprised to find that the -rulers gladly allowed the people to vote them honors. In -their first year they were awarded civic crowns by a comitial -act, doubtless of the tribes;<a id="FNanchor_2933" href="#Footnote_2933" class="fnanchor">[2933]</a> and in 35 the honors bestowed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_460"></a>[460]</span> -upon Octavia and Livia probably came through a plebiscite, -as did certainly the triumph voted to Octavianus.<a id="FNanchor_2934" href="#Footnote_2934" class="fnanchor">[2934]</a> Last may -be mentioned the law of L. Saenius, consul in 30, supported -by a senatus consultum, which empowered Octavianus to create -new patricians.<a id="FNanchor_2935" href="#Footnote_2935" class="fnanchor">[2935]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Schulze, C. F., <i>Volksversammlungen der Römer</i>, 124-39; Peter, C., <i>Epochen -der Verfassungsgeschichte der röm. Republik</i>, 165 ff.; <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, bk. VII. -ch. v; bks. VIII-X; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, bk. VII. chs. xxi-xxiii; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 146-597; cf. ii, see index s. the various laws; <i>Commentationes -de legibus Antoniis a Cicerone Phil. v. 4. 10 commemoratis particula prior et -posterior</i>, in <i>Kl. Schr.</i> ii. 126-49; <i>Die lex Pupia</i>, etc., ibid. ii. 175-94; <i>Die -promulgatio trinum nundinum</i>, etc., ibid. ii. 214-70; Long, G., <i>Decline of the -Roman Republic</i>, 5 vols.; Herzog, E., <i>Gesch. und System der röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 509-65; ii. 1-130; Mommsen, <i>History of Rome</i>, bk. IV. ch. x; bk. V; -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> and <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> see indices s. the various laws, courts, etc.; -<i>Ein zweites Bruchstück des rubrischen Gesetzes vom Jahre 705 Roms</i>, in -<i>Hermes</i>, xvi (1881). 24-41; <i>Lex coloniae Iuliae Genetivae Urbanorum</i>, etc., -in <i>Ephem. Ep.</i> ii (1875). 105-51; <i>Lex municipii Tarentini</i>, ibid. ix. (1903). -1-11; <i>Ueber die lex Mamilia Roscia Peducaea Alliena Fabia</i>, in <i>Röm. Feldmess.</i> -ii. 221-6; Neumann, C., <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, i. 602-23; ii. entire; Ferrero, G., -<i>Greatness and Decline of Rome</i>; Schiller, H., <i>Geschichte der röm. Kaiserzeit</i>, -I. bk. i; Lengle, <i>Sullanische Verfassung</i>; Sunden, J. M., <i>De tribunicia potestate -a L. Sulla imminuta quaestiones</i>; Freeman, E. A., <i>Lucius Cornelius -Sulla</i>, in <i>Hist. Essays</i>, ii. 271-306; Wilmanns, <i>Ueber die Gerichtshöfe während -des Bestehens der lex Cornelia iudiciaria</i>, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. xix (1864). -528-41; Voigt, M., <i>Ueber die lex Cornelia sumptuaria</i>, in <i>Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. -d. Wiss.</i> xlii (1890). 244-79; Nipperdey, K., <i>Die leges annales der röm. Republik</i>, -in <i>Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> v. (1870). 1-88; Keil, J., <i>Zur lex Cornelia -de viginti quaestoribus</i>, in <i>Wiener Studien</i>, xxiv (1902). 548-51; Ritschl, -F., <i>In leges Viselliam Antoniam Corneliam observationes epigraphicae</i>, in -<i>Opuscula Philologica</i>, iv (1878). 427-45; Oman, C., <i>Seven Roman Statesmen</i>, -v-ix; Strachan-Davidson, <i>Cicero</i>; Forsyth, W., <i>Life of Marcus Tullius Cicero</i>, -2 vols.; White, H., <i>Cicero, Clodius, and Milo</i>; Sternkopf, W., <i>Ueber die “Verbesserung” -des clodianischen Gesetzwurfes de exilio Ciceronis</i>, in <i>Philol.</i> N. F. -xiii (1900). 272-304; <i>Noch einmal die correctio der lex Clodia de exilio</i>, ibid. -xv. 42-70; Gurlitt, <i>Lex Clodia de exilio Ciceronis</i>, ibid. xiii. 578-83; Greenidge, -A. H. J., <i>The lex Sempronia and the Banishment of Cicero</i>, in <i>Cl. Rev.</i> -vii (1893). 347 f.; Schmidt, O. E., <i>Der Briefwechsel des M. Tullius Cicero -von seinem Prokonsulat in Cicilien bis zu Cäsars Ermordung</i>; John, C., <i>Die -Entstehungsgeschichte der catilinarischen Verschwörung</i>, in <i>Jahrb. f. cl. Philol. -Supplb.</i> viii (1875, 1876). 701-819; Abbott, F. F., <i>The Constitutional Argument<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_461"></a>[461]</span> -in the Fourth Catilinarian Oration</i>, in <i>Cl. Journ.</i> ii (1907). 123-5; -Napoleon III, <i>Jules César</i>, 2 vols.; Fowler, W., <i>Julius Caesar</i>; Nissen, H., -<i>Der Ausbruch des Bürgerkrieges 49 vor Chr.</i>, in <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> xliv (1880). -409-45; xlvi (1881). 48-105; Hirschfeld, O., <i>Der Endtermin der gallischen -Staatshalterschaft Caesars</i>, in <i>Klio</i>, iv (1904). 76-87. Wiegandt, L., <i>Studien -zur staatsrechtlichen Stellung des Diktators Cäsar: das Recht über Krieg und -Frieden</i>; <i>Caesar und die tribunizische Gewalt</i>; Hackel, H., <i>Die Hypothesen -über die lex Iulia municipalis</i>, in <i>Wiener Studien</i>, xxiv (1902). 552-62; Cuq, -E., <i>Juges plébéiens de colonie de Narbonne</i>, in <i>Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire</i> -(1881). 297-311; Kornemann, <i>Die cäsarische Kolonie Karthago und die -Einführung röm. Gemeindeordnung in Africa</i>, in <i>Philol.</i> N. F. xiv (1901). -402-26; Liebenam, W., <i>Gesch. und Organisation d. röm. Vereinswesens</i>; Waltzing, -J. P., <i>Corporations professionelles chez les Romains</i>, i. 78 ff.; Babelon, E., -<i>Monnaies de la république Romaine</i>, i. 79-88; Dreyfus, R., <i>Lois agraires</i>, -pt. iii; Toutain, J., <i>Municipium</i>, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> iii. 2022-34; -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 256 f.: M’. Acilius Glabrio (Klebs); 554-6; -M. Aemilius Lepidus (idem); 1800-3: Ambitus (Hartmann); ii. 191-4: Apparitores -(Habel); 2482-4: C. Aurelius Cotta (Klebs); 2485-7: L. Aurelius -Cotta (idem); iii. 1376 f.: C. Calpurnius Piso (Münzer); iv. 82-8: P. Clodius -Pulcher (Fröhlich); 1252-5: C. Cornelius (Münzer); iv. 1287 f.: L. Cornelius -Cinna—son of the famous democratic consul (idem); 1380 f.: Cn. -Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus (idem); 1522-66: L. Cornelius Sulla Felix -(Fröhlich); 2401-4: Deiotarus (Niese).</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_462"></a>[462]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XVIII">CHAPTER XVIII<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE COMPOSITION AND PRESERVATION OF STATUTES, COMITIAL PROCEDURE, AND COMITIAL DAYS</span></h3> - -</div> - -<h4>I. <i>The Composition and Preservation of Statutes</i></h4> - -<p>Laws were drawn up in technically exact language. If the -proposer of a rogation lacked the necessary knowledge, he -sought the advice of learned friends.<a id="FNanchor_2936" href="#Footnote_2936" class="fnanchor">[2936]</a> The bill, as first presented -to the senate and published in the city on wooden tablets,<a id="FNanchor_2937" href="#Footnote_2937" class="fnanchor">[2937]</a> -was merely tentative; for discussion in the senate or the -expression of public opinion might suggest changes<a id="FNanchor_2938" href="#Footnote_2938" class="fnanchor">[2938]</a> or even -induce the author to withdraw the proposal.<a id="FNanchor_2939" href="#Footnote_2939" class="fnanchor">[2939]</a></p> - -<p>At the head of the law after its adoption was inserted the index -and praescriptio,<a id="FNanchor_2940" href="#Footnote_2940" class="fnanchor">[2940]</a> of which the consular lex Quinctia de -aquaeductibus, accepted by the tribes in the year 9 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, offers -a good example:<a id="FNanchor_2941" href="#Footnote_2941" class="fnanchor">[2941]</a></p> - -<p>“T. Quinctius Crispinus consul populum iure rogavit, populusque -iure scivit in foro pro rostris aedis divi Iulii pr(idie) <i>K</i> -Iulias. Tribus Sergia principium fuit, pro tribu Sex.... L. f. -Virro <i>primus scivit</i>.”<a id="FNanchor_2942" href="#Footnote_2942" class="fnanchor">[2942]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_463"></a>[463]</span></p> - -<p>It contains the name of the rogator,<a id="FNanchor_2943" href="#Footnote_2943" class="fnanchor">[2943]</a> his office, the body of -citizens, whether populus or plebs, to which the proposal is -offered, the place of the assembly,<a id="FNanchor_2944" href="#Footnote_2944" class="fnanchor">[2944]</a> the date, the century (praerogativa) -or the tribe or curia (principium) which voted first, -and the name of the citizen who has been granted the honor of -casting the first vote for his praerogativa or principium.<a id="FNanchor_2945" href="#Footnote_2945" class="fnanchor">[2945]</a> If the -senate has given its sanction, that fact is indicated by the insertion -of the phrase “de s(enatus) s(ententia).”<a id="FNanchor_2946" href="#Footnote_2946" class="fnanchor">[2946]</a> In case the proposal -is by a tribune of the plebs, it is strictly a plebi scitum; -but that its equivalence to a lex may be made clear, it is described -as a lex plebeive scitum.<a id="FNanchor_2947" href="#Footnote_2947" class="fnanchor">[2947]</a></p> - -<p>The body of the law is divided into chapters separated by -spaces, sometimes numbered, and occasionally bearing individual -titles.<a id="FNanchor_2948" href="#Footnote_2948" class="fnanchor">[2948]</a> Last comes the sanction,<a id="FNanchor_2949" href="#Footnote_2949" class="fnanchor">[2949]</a> which provides for the -enforcement. Some laws, however,—termed leges imperfectae—lack -this part.<a id="FNanchor_2950" href="#Footnote_2950" class="fnanchor">[2950]</a> Usually the sanction prescribes the form of -procedure according to which offenders are to be tried.<a id="FNanchor_2951" href="#Footnote_2951" class="fnanchor">[2951]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_464"></a>[464]</span></p> - -<p>If the author of the new proposal has no desire to disturb any -existing law, this fact is indicated by the insertion of the formula -E(x) H(ac) L(ege) N(ihilum) R(ogatur).<a id="FNanchor_2952" href="#Footnote_2952" class="fnanchor">[2952]</a> As a protection from -the operation of earlier laws left in whole or in part unrepealed -by the new statute, the latter is provided with a declaration that -no attempt is hereby made to legalize anything illegal.<a id="FNanchor_2953" href="#Footnote_2953" class="fnanchor">[2953]</a> By an -analogous statement unconscious trespassing upon the rights of -religion is rendered harmless.<a id="FNanchor_2954" href="#Footnote_2954" class="fnanchor">[2954]</a> In accordance with a law of -the Twelve Tables<a id="FNanchor_2955" href="#Footnote_2955" class="fnanchor">[2955]</a> provision is further made against the consequences -of conflict with other laws by the declaration that if -any one in carrying out this law shall trespass against other -statutes or senatus consulta, his act shall render him in no way -liable to such earlier laws or decrees.<a id="FNanchor_2956" href="#Footnote_2956" class="fnanchor">[2956]</a> A provision may also be -added against illegal alteration or repeal.<a id="FNanchor_2957" href="#Footnote_2957" class="fnanchor">[2957]</a> Sometimes the proposer -includes an article for compelling senators and magistrates -to uphold his law, should it be enacted,<a id="FNanchor_2958" href="#Footnote_2958" class="fnanchor">[2958]</a> or for otherwise overcoming -opposition to its enforcement,<a id="FNanchor_2959" href="#Footnote_2959" class="fnanchor">[2959]</a> or for making repeal difficult.<a id="FNanchor_2960" href="#Footnote_2960" class="fnanchor">[2960]</a> -It becomes binding from the moment when the author -announces its adoption by the comitia, excepting in case time -has to be given the senators and magistrates for swearing to it.<a id="FNanchor_2961" href="#Footnote_2961" class="fnanchor">[2961]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_465"></a>[465]</span> -The law is then engraved on a bronze tablet,<a id="FNanchor_2962" href="#Footnote_2962" class="fnanchor">[2962]</a> the original copy -of which is kept by the quaestors in the aerarium.<a id="FNanchor_2963" href="#Footnote_2963" class="fnanchor">[2963]</a> Other -copies are posted in public places where all can read it.<a id="FNanchor_2964" href="#Footnote_2964" class="fnanchor">[2964]</a></p> - -<h4>II. <i>Comitial Procedure</i></h4> - -<p>The tribal assembly convened under the presidency of a tribune -or aedile of the plebs,<a id="FNanchor_2965" href="#Footnote_2965" class="fnanchor">[2965]</a> in which case the gathering was -technically the plebs;<a id="FNanchor_2966" href="#Footnote_2966" class="fnanchor">[2966]</a> or as the populus under a patrician -magistrate—dictator, consul, praetor,<a id="FNanchor_2967" href="#Footnote_2967" class="fnanchor">[2967]</a> curule aedile,<a id="FNanchor_2968" href="#Footnote_2968" class="fnanchor">[2968]</a> pontifex -maximus,<a id="FNanchor_2969" href="#Footnote_2969" class="fnanchor">[2969]</a> or any extraordinary magistrate who possessed the -ius agendi cum populo.<a id="FNanchor_2970" href="#Footnote_2970" class="fnanchor">[2970]</a> It met indifferently within or without -the pomerium, usually on the Capitoline hill in the precinct of -the temple of Jupiter,<a id="FNanchor_2971" href="#Footnote_2971" class="fnanchor">[2971]</a> in the Forum and comitium,<a id="FNanchor_2972" href="#Footnote_2972" class="fnanchor">[2972]</a> the Campus -Martius,<a id="FNanchor_2973" href="#Footnote_2973" class="fnanchor">[2973]</a> and within the latter in the Flaminian meadow or Flaminian -Circus.<a id="FNanchor_2974" href="#Footnote_2974" class="fnanchor">[2974]</a> Meetings called by tribunes had to convene -within the first milestone, which bounded the authority of these -officials,<a id="FNanchor_2975" href="#Footnote_2975" class="fnanchor">[2975]</a> whereas we hear of a tribal assembly called by a consul -in the military camp at Sutrium (357).<a id="FNanchor_2976" href="#Footnote_2976" class="fnanchor">[2976]</a> The contio, described -in an earlier chapter, was transformed into comitia by -order of the presiding magistrate directing the people to take<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_466"></a>[466]</span> -their places in their respective tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2977" href="#Footnote_2977" class="fnanchor">[2977]</a> Before this command -was given a tribe was drawn by lot to receive the Latins who -were at Rome.<a id="FNanchor_2978" href="#Footnote_2978" class="fnanchor">[2978]</a> A second tribe was then drawn as a principium -to cast the first vote.<a id="FNanchor_2979" href="#Footnote_2979" class="fnanchor">[2979]</a> The bringing of the urn<a id="FNanchor_2980" href="#Footnote_2980" class="fnanchor">[2980]</a> and the -sortition were the last acts of the contio. To facilitate the -division ropes were stretched across the Forum or other assembly-place, -forming as many compartments as there were tribes.<a id="FNanchor_2981" href="#Footnote_2981" class="fnanchor">[2981]</a> -In time a permanent enclosure, termed Saepta,<a id="FNanchor_2982" href="#Footnote_2982" class="fnanchor">[2982]</a> was built for -the comitia.<a id="FNanchor_2983" href="#Footnote_2983" class="fnanchor">[2983]</a> If the magistrate found that an entire tribe was -absent, he assigned to it for the occasion a few citizens from -some other, in order that in theory all thirty-five tribes—the -universus populus Romanus—might be present.<a id="FNanchor_2984" href="#Footnote_2984" class="fnanchor">[2984]</a> After the -tribes were assembled in their comitia as here described, the principium -was called to vote. This point terminated the right of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_467"></a>[467]</span> -intercession<a id="FNanchor_2985" href="#Footnote_2985" class="fnanchor">[2985]</a> and of obnuntiating an evil omen discovered in -watching the sky.<a id="FNanchor_2986" href="#Footnote_2986" class="fnanchor">[2986]</a> When the suffrage of the principium was -given and announced,<a id="FNanchor_2987" href="#Footnote_2987" class="fnanchor">[2987]</a> all the remaining tribes voted simultaneously.<a id="FNanchor_2988" href="#Footnote_2988" class="fnanchor">[2988]</a> -In earlier time a rogator stood at the exit of each -saeptum, and received the oral votes of the citizens as they -passed out one by one.<a id="FNanchor_2989" href="#Footnote_2989" class="fnanchor">[2989]</a> After the introduction of the ballot,<a id="FNanchor_2990" href="#Footnote_2990" class="fnanchor">[2990]</a> -the state provided little tablets inscribed with abbreviations for -“ut rogas” and “antiquo” for affirmative and negative votes -respectively,<a id="FNanchor_2991" href="#Footnote_2991" class="fnanchor">[2991]</a> and for elections blank tablets on which the names -of the candidates could be written.<a id="FNanchor_2992" href="#Footnote_2992" class="fnanchor">[2992]</a> They were deposited in -boxes (cistae) placed at the exits above mentioned,<a id="FNanchor_2993" href="#Footnote_2993" class="fnanchor">[2993]</a> under the -charge of rogatores, who, having lost their original function, -were now often, and more aptly, called custodes.<a id="FNanchor_2994" href="#Footnote_2994" class="fnanchor">[2994]</a> They counted -(diribitio) the ballots, and reported (renuntiatio) the results to -the president.<a id="FNanchor_2995" href="#Footnote_2995" class="fnanchor">[2995]</a> The latter had a right to announce to the public -the returns from the tribes in whatever order he pleased, -but he usually preferred to determine the succession by lot.<a id="FNanchor_2996" href="#Footnote_2996" class="fnanchor">[2996]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_468"></a>[468]</span> -In the election of any college of magistrates each citizen voted -for as many candidates as there were places to be filled, and the -announcements for each continued till a majority was reached -in his favor. Precedence in honor within the college depended -upon priority of election.<a id="FNanchor_2997" href="#Footnote_2997" class="fnanchor">[2997]</a> The declaration of the vote by the -praeco at the command of the president closed the comitial act.<a id="FNanchor_2998" href="#Footnote_2998" class="fnanchor">[2998]</a> -If for any reason the presiding magistrate discontinued the -announcement before a majority was reached, the vote was -without effect.<a id="FNanchor_2999" href="#Footnote_2999" class="fnanchor">[2999]</a> The session of any assembly had to begin and -end between sunrise and sunset.<a id="FNanchor_3000" href="#Footnote_3000" class="fnanchor">[3000]</a></p> - -<p>The comitia curiata, presided over by the king, the interrex, -and possibly by the tribunus celerum,<a id="FNanchor_3001" href="#Footnote_3001" class="fnanchor">[3001]</a> and in the republican -period by the dictator,<a id="FNanchor_3002" href="#Footnote_3002" class="fnanchor">[3002]</a> consul,<a id="FNanchor_3003" href="#Footnote_3003" class="fnanchor">[3003]</a> interrex,<a id="FNanchor_3004" href="#Footnote_3004" class="fnanchor">[3004]</a> praetor,<a id="FNanchor_3005" href="#Footnote_3005" class="fnanchor">[3005]</a> pontifex -maximus,<a id="FNanchor_3006" href="#Footnote_3006" class="fnanchor">[3006]</a> or rex sacrorum,<a id="FNanchor_3007" href="#Footnote_3007" class="fnanchor">[3007]</a> met always within the pomerium,<a id="FNanchor_3008" href="#Footnote_3008" class="fnanchor">[3008]</a> -usually in the comitium,<a id="FNanchor_3009" href="#Footnote_3009" class="fnanchor">[3009]</a> or for religious purposes in front -of the Curia Calabra on the Capitoline hill.<a id="FNanchor_3010" href="#Footnote_3010" class="fnanchor">[3010]</a> It was called -together by a curiate lictor<a id="FNanchor_3011" href="#Footnote_3011" class="fnanchor">[3011]</a> at the sound of the lituus or tuba.<a id="FNanchor_3012" href="#Footnote_3012" class="fnanchor">[3012]</a> -The procedure, which in general was like that of the tribal -assembly, and which has been touched upon in the chapters on<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_469"></a>[469]</span> -the comitia calata and curiata, does not require further consideration -here.<a id="FNanchor_3013" href="#Footnote_3013" class="fnanchor">[3013]</a></p> - -<p>The comitia centuriata could be summoned for voting by no -magistrates in their own name and under their own auspices -excepting those who were vested with the imperium<a id="FNanchor_3014" href="#Footnote_3014" class="fnanchor">[3014]</a>—the -dictator, consul, interrex for holding elections, the praetor for -judicial business,<a id="FNanchor_3015" href="#Footnote_3015" class="fnanchor">[3015]</a> and all extraordinary magistrates with consular -power. The duoviri perduellioni iudicandae, the quaestors, -and the tribunes of the plebs could summon this assembly for -judicial business under the auspices only of a magistrate cum -imperio, as the consul or more especially the praetor.<a id="FNanchor_3016" href="#Footnote_3016" class="fnanchor">[3016]</a> It always -met outside the pomerium, usually in the Campus Martius,<a id="FNanchor_3017" href="#Footnote_3017" class="fnanchor">[3017]</a> at -the call of an accensus, who sounded the trumpet (classicum) at -daybreak along the city wall.<a id="FNanchor_3018" href="#Footnote_3018" class="fnanchor">[3018]</a> During the session the citizens -in the assembly could see a flag waving above the Janiculum to -signify that this post was occupied by a garrison as a protection -for the city while they were engaged outside in a public duty.<a id="FNanchor_3019" href="#Footnote_3019" class="fnanchor">[3019]</a> -As in the case of the tribal assembly, the contio was transformed -into comitia by an order of the president commanding the citizens -to separate into their respective voting groups.<a id="FNanchor_3020" href="#Footnote_3020" class="fnanchor">[3020]</a> The place -of meeting, termed ovile<a id="FNanchor_3021" href="#Footnote_3021" class="fnanchor">[3021]</a> (sheepfold), was divided by ropes or -wooden fences into as many compartments as there were centuries -in the largest voting division—probably eighty-seven.<a id="FNanchor_3022" href="#Footnote_3022" class="fnanchor">[3022]</a> -An elevated passage (pons) formed the exit of each compartment.<a id="FNanchor_3023" href="#Footnote_3023" class="fnanchor">[3023]</a> -The members of a century, while passing out one by -one, gave their votes to the rogator, in the same way as the -tribesmen in the comitia tributa. After the ballot was introduced, -it was used in all assemblies alike.<a id="FNanchor_3024" href="#Footnote_3024" class="fnanchor">[3024]</a> The order of voting -before and after the reform has been sufficiently explained in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_470"></a>[470]</span> -an earlier chapter.<a id="FNanchor_3025" href="#Footnote_3025" class="fnanchor">[3025]</a> In general the principles governing the -announcement of votes, interruptions, and adjournments were -the same for all three assemblies. The length of the assemblies -must have varied according to the form of organization, -the number of voters present, and various other circumstances. -In the time of Caesar the process in the comitia centuriata, on -an occasion in which there was no delay, lasted five hours.<a id="FNanchor_3026" href="#Footnote_3026" class="fnanchor">[3026]</a> -We should therefore assume at least an hour for the voting of -the tribes.<a id="FNanchor_3027" href="#Footnote_3027" class="fnanchor">[3027]</a></p> - -<h4>III. <i>Comitial Days</i></h4> - -<p>The people could meet for voting on comitial days only<a id="FNanchor_3028" href="#Footnote_3028" class="fnanchor">[3028]</a>—marked -<b class="sans">C</b> in the calendar.<a id="FNanchor_3029" href="#Footnote_3029" class="fnanchor">[3029]</a> They excluded the dies nefasti—marked -<b class="sans">N</b>, <b class="sans">NP</b>, or <b class="sans">NF</b>—on which religion forbade that public -business should be done.<a id="FNanchor_3030" href="#Footnote_3030" class="fnanchor">[3030]</a> They excluded further the two days -marked Q(uando) R(ex) C(omitiavit) F(as),<a id="FNanchor_3031" href="#Footnote_3031" class="fnanchor">[3031]</a> the one day marked -Q(uando) ST(ercus) D(eletum) F(as)<a id="FNanchor_3032" href="#Footnote_3032" class="fnanchor">[3032]</a>—because on these days -it was impossible to open the assembly in the morning as usage -prescribed—and the eight days marked <b class="sans">EN</b>,<a id="FNanchor_3033" href="#Footnote_3033" class="fnanchor">[3033]</a> the morning and -evening of which were alone nefasti, the intervening part being<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_471"></a>[471]</span> -free for business. Equally distinct from the comitial days were -the dies fasti non comitiales, marked <b class="sans">F</b>, and in this volume -termed simply fasti.<a id="FNanchor_3034" href="#Footnote_3034" class="fnanchor">[3034]</a> They were reserved for judicial business. -The pre-Julian year contained a hundred and eight nefasti<a id="FNanchor_3035" href="#Footnote_3035" class="fnanchor">[3035]</a> and -forty-five fasti, leaving a hundred and ninety-one comitial days.<a id="FNanchor_3036" href="#Footnote_3036" class="fnanchor">[3036]</a> -The ten days added by Caesar are all marked <b class="sans">F</b>.<a id="FNanchor_3037" href="#Footnote_3037" class="fnanchor">[3037]</a> It is to be -noticed, however, that those days marked <b class="sans">C</b> on which fell in -any year extraordinary or changeable festivals were thereby -rendered unfit for comitia.<a id="FNanchor_3038" href="#Footnote_3038" class="fnanchor">[3038]</a></p> - -<p>It seems probable that in early time market-days (nundinae) -were not wholly devoted to trade<a id="FNanchor_3039" href="#Footnote_3039" class="fnanchor">[3039]</a> and to the settlement of cases -at law,<a id="FNanchor_3040" href="#Footnote_3040" class="fnanchor">[3040]</a> but that they could be used equally well for voting -assemblies,<a id="FNanchor_3041" href="#Footnote_3041" class="fnanchor">[3041]</a> till the Hortensian statute of 287 declared those<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_472"></a>[472]</span> -marked <b class="sans">F</b> and <b class="sans">C</b> to be fasti, reserving them thus for judicial -business and prohibiting from them voting assemblies of every -kind.<a id="FNanchor_3042" href="#Footnote_3042" class="fnanchor">[3042]</a> The general tendency during the republic was to -restrict the power of the people by lessening the number of -days on which they could meet for passing resolutions.<a id="FNanchor_3043" href="#Footnote_3043" class="fnanchor">[3043]</a></p> - -<div class="bibliography"> - -<p>Lange, <i>Römische Altertümer</i>, ii. 649-54; Madvig, <i>Verfass, und Verw. d. -röm. Staates</i>, i. 246-73; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 1105-13; Karlowa, -<i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 388-448; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 314 f., 396-419; -in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 203 ff., 290 ff.; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. -482-4, 687-93, 705-8; Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 1377, 1379 f.; -Cuq, ibid. iii. 1122 ff.; Hübner, A., <i>De senatus populique Romani actis</i>; -Ritschl, F., <i>In leges Viselliam Antoniam Corneliam observationes epigraphicae</i>, -in <i>Opuscula Philol.</i> iv. 427-45; Egbert, <i>Latin Inscriptions</i>, 348-50; Cagnat, -<i>Épigraphie Lat.</i> 265-7; Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> iii. 289 ff.; Wissowa, -<i>Religion und Kultus der Römer</i>, 368 ff.; <i>Comitiales dies</i>, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 716; Fowler, <i>Roman Festivals</i>, 8 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_473"></a>[473]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XIX">CHAPTER XIX<br /> -<span class="smaller">A SUMMARY OF COMITIAL HISTORY</span></h3> - -</div> - -<p>Originating in the simple gathering (contio) of the primitive -folk, the general assembly of Roman citizens came, under sacerdotal -influence, to be grouped in curiae with a view to adding -order and solemnity to the meetings. Thus the Romans created -the comitia curiata. Not only the curiae, but also the later centuries, -classes, and tribes, originally existed independently of -the assembly for various administrative purposes and were -brought into connection with that institution as convenient systems -of organization. At first ceremonial, the comitia curiata -came to be used for voting on resolutions. Gradually reducing -this earliest organized gathering to a formality, the Romans -successively introduced the centuriate and the tribal comitia. -Excepting for brief, transitional periods the assembly, whatever -its form, admitted all citizens who possessed the right of suffrage. -Its power was at first slight vague, and chiefly receptive. -Though in the regal period the people occasionally -approved or rejected judicial sentences, administrative plans, -and even proposals for changes in existing customs submitted -to them by the king of his own free will, the only function -which at that time they definitely acquired was the election of -their chief magistrate.</p> - -<p>From the founding of the republic to the decemviral legislation -(509-450) the magistrates and senate exercised almost absolute -control over the administration. At the very beginning -the comitia centuriata—a newly established timocratic institution—assumed -the right to enact laws, which for a long time -were substantially limited to matters directly affecting the constitution; -and the alleged Valerian centuriate statute made of -this body a supreme court to which any citizen condemned on a -capital charge was granted the privilege of appeal. In practice, -however, the law benefited those only of high rank who were<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_474"></a>[474]</span> -accused of political crimes. Meantime a new, more democratic -assembly under the presidency of tribunes of the plebs, meeting -by tribes after 471, usurped an extensive though ill-defined -power of fining and capitally condemning offenders against the -sanctity of plebeian officials. But this function, resting upon -an act of the plebs only and enforced by threats of violence, -was almost nullified by patrician opposition. It was doubtless -in this period that voting by heads arose in the comitia centuriata, -whence it was adopted by the other assemblies.</p> - -<p>The Twelve Tables (451-450) confirmed the comitia centuriata -in the rights it had previously assumed; and if not expressly, -at least by implication they granted legislative and judicial power -to the tribunician assembly of tribes. A Valerian-Horatian -statute of 449 provided that resolutions approved by the senate -and carried by the latter assembly should have the force of law, -just as from the beginning the senatorial sanction (patrum auctoritas) -was essential to the validity of curiate and centuriate -resolutions and elections. At the same time in conformity -with a law of the Twelve Tables an arrangement was made by -which the tribunes should bring their finable actions before the -tribes and those of a capital nature before the centuries. Soon -afterward the patrician magistrates began to use the tribes for -the election of inferior officials and occasionally for the ratification -of laws.</p> - -<p>During the century following the decemviral legislation (450-358) -the almost absolute administrative power of the senate and -magistrates remained but slightly affected by the comitia. The -appointment of a dictator or the establishment of a special judicial -commission placed the citizens at the mercy of the government. -Although the comitia centuriata acquired the right to -ratify or reject declarations of offensive war (427) and though -the tribunes succeeded in enacting a few important plebiscites, -like the Canuleian and the Licinian-Sextian, the people made -little progress toward the free exercise of legislative and judicial -functions. With the enactment of a lex de ambitu in 358 the -tribes began to legislate concerning magistrates, with reference -not only to candidacy and qualifications but soon also to powers -and functions and to the creation of new offices. They passed -laws on finance and religion and on the qualification and appointment<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_475"></a>[475]</span> -of senators; they assumed the function of ratifying -or rejecting proposals for peace (321) and of admitting aliens -to citizenship. The tribes and the centuries began regularly to -exercise appellate jurisdiction. About the same time the people -acquired the function of appointing special judicial commissions, -and subjected the dictator to the law of appeal. In an effort -to throw off the control exercised by the nobility the Publilian -statute of 339 excluded patricians from the tribunician assembly -of tribes (a regulation afterward silently abandoned), and in 287 -that of Hortensius rendered the approval of the senate and of -the patrician portion of it unessential to the validity of the plebiscite. -Meanwhile in administrative and in constitutional legislation -the comitia tributa made great gains at the expense of -the senate and magistrates and of the centuriate assembly.</p> - -<p>The period extending from 358 to 287 was accordingly the -first great age of comitial legislative and judicial activity. The -strong popular tendency then manifested might have created a -real democracy, had it not been for (1) the cleverness of the -nobles in gaining control of the plebeian tribunate and in using -religion as a check on comitial freedom. (2) the rapid expansion -of the Roman power, which drew the public mind away from -internal politics, and which rendered the assembly not only an -inadequate representative of the citizens but also incompetent -for the functions devolving upon it. Many years passed, however, -before this incompetency became serious. Though henceforth -the comitia were in theory sovereign, they remained limited -by a want of initiative both in the act of assembling and in the -offering of resolutions, by the lack of free deliberation, by the -tribunician veto, and by the oblative auspices. After the enactment -of the Hortensian statute the comitia tributa enjoyed almost -exclusive possession of the legislative function. The larger -share fell to the tribunician assembly, which excelled in aggressiveness, -and which admitted as much freedom of debate as was -consistent with the spirit of the constitution—hence it was -preferably termed concilium. Notwithstanding these relative -advantages of the tribal assembly the adverse conditions above -mentioned led to an era of comitial stagnation (287-232), at the -close of which the tribunate of C. Flaminius brought a new outburst -of activity (232-201). The assemblies now recovered all<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_476"></a>[476]</span> -they had lost in the preceding age and made fresh gains. Noteworthy -are the sumptuary, monetary, private, and family statutes, -and the recognition of the right of the people to grant -dispensations from existing laws. In the opinion of Polybius -the constitution was in this time at its best. The nobles admitted -the theory of popular sovereignty, as they could well -afford to do in view of their thorough control of all governmental -institutions. In the era of the completed plutocracy -(201-134) they regularly resorted to the comitia in matters of -little political importance or in those in which they felt certain -of the results. Under these conditions fewer laws were enacted -for the benefit of the masses. The policy of the nobles was to -repress individual freedom by subjecting both magistrates and -assemblies to the plutocratic machine. Even the comitial judicia -were subordinated to this end; and toward the close of -the period the people in establishing permanent courts began -through legislation to surrender their judicial power to the -senatorial class, while the senate, on the other hand, resumed -the function of dispensing from the laws and of appointing special -courts. In these ways the nobility was making great inroads -on popular liberty.</p> - -<p>In the beginning of the revolutionary period (134-30) the -tribal assembly, liberated for a time from servitude to the plutocracy, -became under the presidency of reforming tribunes the -ruling power at Rome. Its activity not only embraced the -whole field of administration but was directed by the Gracchi -to the creation of a new political constitution and to the regeneration -of society. But its variable composition precluded consistency -of action. Though at times, as when controlled by the -rural element of the citizen body, it could be induced to adopt -liberal, statesmanlike measures such as the agrarian and colonial -laws of the Gracchi, the usual dominance of the ignorant and -unprincipled poor of the metropolis inclined it to a short-sighted, -selfish course of conduct—rendering it a powerful weapon in -the hands either of the demagogue or of the plutocratic senate, -equally effective for resisting genuine reforms and for destroying -the institutions of the republic. As with the progress of -the revolution the conservative checks began to weaken and -disappear, the comitia became more and more subject to violence<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_477"></a>[477]</span> -and coercion. The comitial prosecutions of this period -partook of the same revolutionary character. From the time -of Sulla the assemblies were overshadowed by the military -power. Under his dictation they surrendered to the senatorial -courts nearly all that remained of their judicial function, and -they seriously crippled their legislative power in favor of a reaction -to the pre-Hortensian constitution. After a brief interval -of bondage to the senate (81-70) they recovered their legislative -freedom, only to subserve for the future the alliance now formed -between the tribunes of the plebs and the great proconsuls. -From the accession of Julius Cæesar to the dictatorship (49) -their power rapidly declined. They yielded to him a large -share of their legislative and even of their elective function. -After a brief period of pretended liberty following the assassination -of the dictator, they lapsed with the fall of the republic -into utter insignificance.</p> - -<p>The comitia had filled a large place in the history of the state. -They were the chief factor of constitutional progress and of -beneficent legislation. Their development and decline involved -the prosperity and the ruin of the republic. For the world they -have a higher value. The tribal assembly, supporting the plebeian -tribunate, was the storm centre of long, heroic struggles -for human rights. The fact that it championed this cause, that -it met with some success in the conflict, that a Gracchus deemed -it worthy to undertake the social regeneration of the world, has -given the institution a universal and a permanent interest.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_478"></a>[478]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_479"></a>[479]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="BIBLIOGRAPHY">BIBLIOGRAPHY</h2> - -</div> - -<p>From this list are excluded the titles of all works which, treating of other -than Roman institutions, are referred to in this volume for comparative purposes, -and of all sources which are accessible in well-known, standard editions.</p> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p class="mt2">Abbott, F. F. A History and Description of Roman Political Institutions. -Boston, 1901.</p> - -<p>⸺ The Constitutional Argument in the Fourth Catilinarian Oration. -<i>Classical Journal</i>, ii (1907). 123-5.</p> - -<p><i>Abhdl. d. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin.</i> = <i>Philologische und historische Abhandlungen -der königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin.</i></p> - -<p><i>Abhdl. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> = <i>Abhandlungen der königlich bayerischen -Akademie der Wissenschaften.</i> Munich.</p> - -<p><i>Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> = <i>Abhandlungen der philologisch-historische -Classe der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig.</i></p> - -<p>Ackermann, H. Die räumlichen Schranken der tribunizischen Gewalt. Program. -Rostock, 1891.</p> - -<p>Aelius Donatus. Commentum Terenti, ed. P. Wessner. 2 vols. Leipzig, -1902, 1905.</p> - -<p>Ahren, E. A. J. Die drei Volkstribunen Ti. Gracchus, M. Drusus, und -P. Sulpicius. Leipzig, 1836.</p> - -<p>Ampère, J. J. Histoire Romaine à Rome. 4 vols. Paris, 1866-1872.</p> - -<p><i>Archiv f. lat. Lexicog.</i> = <i>Archiv für lateinische Lexicographie und Grammatik -... als Ergänzung zu dem Thesaurus linguae Latinae</i>, ed. E. von Wölfflin. -Leipzig.</p> - -<p>Arndts, D. Die lex Maenia de dote vom Jahre der Stadt Rom 568. <i>Zeitschrift -für Rechtsgeschichte</i>, vii (1868). 1-44.</p> - -<p>Arnim, H., von. Ineditum Vaticanum. <i>Hermes</i>, xxvii (1892). 118-30.</p> - -<p>Arnobius, Adversus Nationes libri vii, rec. A. Reifferscheid. Vienna, 1875.</p> - -<p>Arnold, W. T. The Roman System of Provincial Administration. New ed. -Oxford, 1906.</p> - -<p>Auct. Inc. de Diff. = Auctor Incertus (Cornelius Fronte?), (in) Grammatici -Latini, ed. Keil, vii. 519-32.</p> - -<p>Aust, E. Die Religion der Römer. Münster, 1899.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Babelon, E. Description historique et chronologique des monnaies de la -république Romaine. 2 vols. Paris, 1885, 1886.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_480"></a>[480]</span></p> - -<p>Babelon, E. Les origines de la monnaie. Paris, 1897.</p> - -<p>⸺ Traité des monnaies Grecques et Romaines, i. Paris, 1901.</p> - -<p>Bardt, C. Die Priester der vier grossen Collegien aus römisch-republikanischer -Zeit. Program. Berlin, 1871.</p> - -<p>⸺ Zur lex Caecilia Didia und noch einmal: Senatssitzungstage der späteren -Republik. <i>Hermes</i>, ix (1875). 305-18.</p> - -<p><i>Beiträge zur alten Geschichte.</i> Leipzig. Beginning with vol. v the periodical -is termed <i>Klio</i>, with <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> as a sub-title.</p> - -<p>Beloch, J. Campanien: Topographie, Geschichte, und Leben der Umgebung -Neapels im Altertum. Berlin, 1879.</p> - -<p>⸺ Der italische Bund unter Roms Hegemonie. Leipzig, 1880.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Bewölkerung der griechisch-römischen Welt. Leipzig, 1886.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Bewölkerung Italiens im Altertum. <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> iii (1903). -471-90.</p> - -<p>Belot, E. Histoire des chevaliers Romaines, etc. 2 vols. Paris, 1866, -1873.</p> - -<p>⸺ De la révolution économique et monétaire qui eut lieu à Rome au -milieu du IIIe siècle avant l’ère Chrétienne, etc. Paris, 1885.</p> - -<p><i>Berl. phil. Wochenschr.</i> = <i>Berliner philologische Wochenschrift.</i></p> - -<p><i>Berliner Studien</i> = <i>Berliner Studien für classische Philologie und Archaeologie.</i></p> - -<p>Bernhöft, F. Staat und Recht der römischen Königszeit im Verhältniss zu -verwandten Rechten. Stuttgart, 1882.</p> - -<p>Berns, C. De comitiorum tributorum et conciliorum plebis discrimine. Inaugural -dissertation. Wetzlar, 1875.</p> - -<p><i>Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> or <i>Verhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> = <i>Berichte -über die Verhandlungen der königlich sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften -zu Leipzig. Philologisch-historische Classe.</i></p> - -<p>Bertolini, C. I celeres ed il tribunus celerum; contributo alla storia della -constituzione dell’ antica Roma. Rome, 1888.</p> - -<p>Billeter, G. <i>Gesch. d. Zinsfuss.</i> = Geschichte des Zinsfusses in griechisch-römischen -Altertum bis auf Justinien. Leipzig, 1898.</p> - -<p>Blasel, J. Die Motiven der Gesetzgebung des C. Sempronius Gracchus. -Trieste, 1878.</p> - -<p>Bloch, A. Le praefectus fabrum, ii. <i>Musée Belge</i>, ix (1905). 352-78.</p> - -<p>Bloch, G. Recherches sur quelques gentes patriciennes, (in) Mélanges -d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’école Française de Rome, 241-76. 1882.</p> - -<p>⸺ Orig. d. sén. = Les origines du sénat Romain; recherches sur la formation -et la dissolution du sénat patricien. Paris, 1883.</p> - -<p>⸺ La réforme démocratique à Rome au IIIe siècle av. J. C. <i>Revue historique</i>, -xxxii (1886). 1-32, 241-89.</p> - -<p>⸺ Observations sur le procès des Scipions. <i>Revue des études anciennes</i>, -viii (1906). 93-110, 191-228, 287-322.</p> - -<p>Bloch, L. Die ständischen und sozialen Kämpfe in der römischen Republik. -Leipzig, 1900.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_481"></a>[481]</span></p> - -<p>Blume, F., Lachmann, K., and Rudorff, A. F. [Röm. Feldmess.] Die Schriften -der römischen Feldmesser, ii. Berlin, 1852. Vol. i is the Gromatici -Veteres, ed. K. Lachmann.</p> - -<p>Böckh, A. Metrologische Untersuchungen. Berlin, 1838.</p> - -<p>Bormann, E. Die älteste Gliederung Roms, (in) Eranos Vindobonensis, -345-58. Vienna, 1893.</p> - -<p>Botsford, G. W. On the Distinction between Comitia and Concilium. -<i>Transactions of the American Philological Association</i>, xxxv (1904). -21-32.</p> - -<p>⸺ Social Composition of the Primitive Roman Populus. <i>Political Science -Quarterly</i>, xxi (1906). 498-526.</p> - -<p>⸺ Some Problems connected with the Roman Gens. ibid, xxii (1907). -663-92.</p> - -<p>⸺ The Lex Curiata. ibid, xxiii (1908). 498-517.</p> - -<p>Bouché-Leclerq, A. Histoire de la divination dans l’antiquité, iv. 134-285. -Paris, 1882.</p> - -<p>⸺ Augures, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. i. 550-60. Auspicia. ibid. i. -580-5.</p> - -<p>Borgeaud, C. Histoire du plébiscite: le plébiscite dans antiquité. Geneva -and Paris, 1887.</p> - -<p>Brassloff, S. Beiträge zur Erläuterung der lex Acilia repetundarum. <i>Wiener -Studien</i>, xxvi (1904). 106-17.</p> - -<p>Breda. Die Centurienverfassung des Servius Tullius. Bromberg, 1848.</p> - -<p>Bröcker, L. O. Untersuchungen über die Glaubwürdigkeit der altrömischen -Verfassungsgeschichte. Hamburg, 1858.</p> - -<p>⸺ Untersuchungen über die Glaubwürdigkeit der altrömischen Geschichte. -Basel, 1868.</p> - -<p>Bruncke, H. Beiträge zur Entwickelungsgeschichte des römischen Heerwesens. -<i>Philol.</i> xl (1881). 357-77.</p> - -<p>Bruns, C. G. Fontes iuris Romani antiqui. 6th ed. Freiburg, 1893.</p> - -<p>⸺ Geschichte und Quellen des römischen Rechts, (in) Holtzendorff, F. von, -and Kohler, J. Encyklopädie der Rechtswissenschaft in systematischer -Bearbeitung, i. 70 ff. 6th ed. (1st ed. of Kohler’s revision). 2 vols. -Leipzig and Berlin, 1904.</p> - -<p>Bücheler, F. Umbrica. Bonn, 1883.</p> - -<p>Buck, C. D. A Grammar of Oscan and Umbrian. Boston, 1904.</p> - -<p>Büdinger, M. Cicero und der Patriciat, eine staatsrechtliche Untersuchung. -<i>Denkschr. d. kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> xxi (1881). 211-74.</p> - -<p>⸺ Der Patriciat und das Fehderecht in den letzten Jahrzehnten der -römischen Republik, ibid, xxxvi (1888). 81-125.</p> - -<p>Bürger, C. P., Jr. Sechzig Jahre aus der älteren Geschichte Roms, 418-358. -Historisch-kritische Forschungen. Amsterdam, 1891.</p> - -<p>⸺ Neue Forschungen zur älteren Geschichte Roms, i, ii. Amsterdam, -1894, 1895.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_482"></a>[482]</span></p> - -<p class="mt2">Cagnat, R. Cours d’épigraphie Latine. 3d ed. Paris, 1898.</p> - -<p>⸺ Equites, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. ii. 771-89.</p> - -<p>Callegari, E. La legislazione sociale di Caio Gracco. Padua, 1896.</p> - -<p>Cantalupi. La magistratura di Silla durante la guerra civile. Rome, 1899.</p> - -<p>Carter, J. B. Roma Quadrata and the Septimontium. <i>Am. Journ. of -Archaeol.</i> xii (1908). 172-83.</p> - -<p>Casagrandi, V. Le minores gentes ed i patres minorum gentium, etc. Torino, -1892. Unscientific.</p> - -<p>Cassiodorus, Magnus Aurelius. Opera omnia, (in) Patrologiae cursus completus, -lxix, ed. Migne. Paris, 1865.</p> - -<p>Charis. = Charisius, F. S. Ars grammatica (or Instit. Gram.), (in) Grammatici -Latini, i, ed. Keil. Leipzig, 1857.</p> - -<p>Christ, W. Sprachliche Verwandtschaft der Gräko-Italiker. <i>Sitzb. d. k. -bayer Akad.</i> 1906. 151-246.</p> - -<p>Christensen, H. Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung der Patres. <i>Hermes</i>, ix -(1875). 196-216.</p> - -<p>CIL. = Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum, ed. Mommsen and others. Berlin. -The first edition is cited, unless otherwise indicated.</p> - -<p>CJA. = Corpus iuris Attici, ed. I. B. Telfy. Leipzig and London, 1868.</p> - -<p>Clason, O. Kritische Erörterungen über die römischen Staat. Rostock, -1871.</p> - -<p>⸺ Zur Frage über die reformierte Centurienverfassung. <i>Heidelberger -Jahrbücher der Literatur</i>, lxv (1872). 221-37.</p> - -<p>Conway, R. S. I due strati di populazione Indo-Europea del Lazio e dell’ -Italia antica. <i>Rivista di storia antica</i>, vii (1903). 422-4.</p> - -<p>Corp. Gloss. Lat. = Corpus glossariorum Latinorum. 7 vols. Ed. G. Loewe, -G. Goetz, and others. Leipzig, 1876-1903.</p> - -<p>Corssen, W. [Ausspr.]. Ueber Aussprache Vokalismus und Betonung der -lateinischen Sprache. 2d ed. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1868, 1870.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Beitr. z. ital. Sprachk.] Beiträge zur italischen Sprachkunde. Leipzig, -1876.</p> - -<p>Cuntz, O. Polybius und sein Werk. Leipzig, 1902.</p> - -<p>Cuq, E. Les juges plébéiens de la colonie de Narbonne, (in) Mélanges -d’archéologie et d’histoire, 297-311. Paris, 1881.</p> - -<p>⸺ Les institutions juridiques des Romains. 2d ed. 2 vols. Paris, 1891, -1902.</p> - -<p>⸺ Lex publica, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. iii. 1121-74.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Daremberg et Saglio, [Dict.]. Dictionnaire des antiquités Grecques et Romaines, -i-iii (A-M). Paris, 1873-1904.</p> - -<p>Deecke, W. Die Falisker: eine geschichtlich-sprachliche Untersuchung. -Strassburg, 1888.</p> - -<p>Delbrück, H. Die römische Manipulartaktik. <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> N. F. xv -(1884). 239-64.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_483"></a>[483]</span></p> - -<p>Delbrück, [Gesch. d. Kriegsk.] Geschichte der Kriegskunst im Rahmen -der politischen Geschichte, i: das Altertum. Berlin, 1900.</p> - -<p>Deloume, A. Les manieurs d’argent à Rome. Paris, 1890.</p> - -<p><i>Denkschr. d. kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> = <i>Denkschriften der kaiserlichen Akademie -der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Classe.</i> Vienna.</p> - -<p>De Sanctis, G. Storia dei Romani: la conquista del primato in Italia. 2 vols. -Milan, Turin, etc., 1907.</p> - -<p>Diodorus Siculus. Bibliotheca historica, bks. i-xviii, ed. Vogel. Leipzig. -The remaining bks. and frags. ed. C. Müller. Didot. Paris, 1842, -1844.</p> - -<p>Dreyfus, R. Essai sur les lois agraires sous la république Romaine. Paris, -1898.</p> - -<p>Drumann-Gröbe, Gesch. Roms = Drumann, W., Geschichte Roms in seinem -Uebergange von der republikanischen zur monarchischen Verfassung, -ed. P. Gröbe, i-iii, iv. 1. Berlin, 1899-1908.</p> - -<p>Dupond, A. De la constitution et des magistratures Romaines sous la république. -Paris, 1877.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Egbert, J. C. Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions. New York, -1906.</p> - -<p>Eigenbrodt, A. De magistratuum Romanorum iure intercedendi. Inaugural -dissertation. Leipzig, 1875.</p> - -<p><i>Ephem. Ep.</i> = <i>Ephemeris epigraphica.</i> Rome and Berlin.</p> - -<p>Exup. = Julius Exsuperantius. Opusculum de Marii, Lepidi ac Sertorii -bellis civilibus, (in) Sallust, Omnia opera, 507-15. Paris, 1821. This -work is also referred to as Jul. Exuper.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Ferrero, G. Greatness and Decline of Rome. Translated into English by -Zimmern and others. 5 vols. New York, 1907-1909. Suggestive but -untrustworthy.</p> - -<p>Festg. f. F. Dahn = Festgabe für Felix Dahn zu seinem fünfzigjährigen Doktorjubiläum -gewidmet. Breslau, 1905.</p> - -<p>Forcellini, A. Totius Latinitatis lexicon, ed. V. De-Vit. 6 vols. Prati, -1858-1875.</p> - -<p>Forsyth, W. Life of Marcus Tullius Cicero, 2 vols. New York, 1865.</p> - -<p>Fowler, W. W. Julius Caesar. New York and London, 1894.</p> - -<p>⸺ Notes on Gaius Gracchus. <i>English Historical Review</i>, xx (1905). -209-27.</p> - -<p>⸺ Gaius Gracchus and the Senate. <i>Classical Review</i>, x (1896). 278-80.</p> - -<p>⸺ The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic. London, 1899.</p> - -<p>Freeman, E. A. Lucius Cornelius Sulla, (in) Historical Essays, ii. 271-306. -London, 1873.</p> - -<p>Fröhlich, F. Beiträge zur Kriegsführung und Kriegskunst der Römer zur -Zeit der Republik. Berlin, 1886.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_484"></a>[484]</span></p> - -<p>Fröhlich (no initial given). P. Clodius Pulcher, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real -Encycl. iv. 82-8. L. Cornelius Sulla Felix, ibid. iv. 1522-66.</p> - -<p>Frontin. Contr. = Frontinus, Julius. De controversiis, (in) Grom. Vet. 9-26, -ed. Lachmann. Berlin, 1848.</p> - -<p>Fronto, M. Cornelius. Epistulae, ed. S. A. Naber. Leipzig, 1867. [Ver = -Ad Verum.]</p> - -<p>Fustel de Coulanges. The Ancient City. Translated from the French. -Boston and New York, 1889.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Gardner, P. As, (in) Smith, W., Dict. i. 201-8. 3d ed. 2 vols. London, -1890, 1891.</p> - -<p>Garofalo, F. P. I fasti dei tribuni della plebe della repubblica Romana. -Catania, 1889.</p> - -<p>⸺ L’origine e l’elezione dei tribuni e degli edili della plebe, etc. Catania, -1890. Not altogether accurate.</p> - -<p>⸺ Sul plebiscitum Atinium. Catania, 1896.</p> - -<p>⸺ Lex Cincia de donis et muneribus. <i>Bulletino dell’istituto di diritto -Romano</i>, xv (1903). 310-12.</p> - -<p>Genz, H. [Centurienverf.]. Die servianische Centurienverfassung. Sorau, -1874.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Patr. Rom.] Das patricische Rom. Berlin, 1878.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Centuriatcomitien nach der Reform. Freienwald, 1882.</p> - -<p>Gerathewohl, H. [Reiter und Rittercent.] Die Reiter und die Rittercenturien -zur Zeit der römischen Republik. Munich, 1886.</p> - -<p>Gilbert, O. Geschichte und Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum. -3 parts. Leipzig, 1883-1890.</p> - -<p>Girard, P. F. [Hist. d. org. jud.] Histoire de l’organisation judiciaire des -Romains, i. Paris, 1901.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Textes] Textes de droit Romain. 3d. ed. Paris, 1903.</p> - -<p>Goguet, R. [Cent.] Droit Romain des centuries. Thesis. Paris, 1890. -Of little value.</p> - -<p>Gomont, M. H. Les chevaliers Romains depuis Romulus jusqu’à Galba. -Paris, 1854.</p> - -<p>Göttling, K. W. Geschichte der römischen Staatsverfassung. Halle, 1840.</p> - -<p>Gramm. Lat. = Grammatici Latini, ed. H. G. T. Keil. 7 vols. Leipzig, -1855-1880.</p> - -<p>Gran. Licin. = Granius Licinianus. Annalium quae supersunt, ed. Pertz. -Berlin, 1857.</p> - -<p>Greenidge, A. H. J. The Lex Sempronia and the Banishment of Cicero. -<i>Classical Review</i>, vii (1893). 347 f.</p> - -<p>⸺ Roman Public Life. London and New York, 1901.</p> - -<p>⸺ Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time. London and New York, 1901.</p> - -<p>⸺ A History of Rome during the Later Republic and the Early Principate, -i. New York, 1903.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_485"></a>[485]</span></p> - -<p>Greenidge, A. H. J. The Authenticity of the Twelve Tables. <i>English -Historical Review</i>, xx (1905). 1-21.</p> - -<p>Greenidge and Clay. Sources for Roman History, 133-70 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> Oxford, -1903.</p> - -<p>Grenfell, B. P., and Hunt, A. S. Oxyrhynchus Papiri, iv. 90-116. London, -1904. For the newly discovered epitome of Livy, including text and -commentary. See also Kornemann.</p> - -<p>Grom. Vet. = Gromatici veteres, ed. K. Lachmann. Berlin, 1848.</p> - -<p>Grotefend, C. L. Imperium Romanum tributim descriptum. Hannover, -1863.</p> - -<p>Gudeman, A. Concilium, (in) Thesaurus linguae Latinae, iv. 44-8.</p> - -<p>Guiraud, P. De la réforme des comices centuriates au IIIe siècle av. J.-C. -<i>Revue historique</i>, xvii (1881). 1-24.</p> - -<p>Gurlitt, L. Lex Clodia de exilio Ciceronis. <i>Philol.</i> N. F. xiii (1900). 578-83.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Habel, P. Apparitores, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. ii. 191-4.</p> - -<p>Hackel, H. Die Hypothesen über die sogenannte lex Iulia municipalis. -<i>Wiener Studien</i> (1902). 552-62.</p> - -<p>Haeberlin, E. J. Del più antico sistema monetario presso i Romani, v. -<i>Rivista italiana di numismatica</i>, xix (1906). 611-46. Translation of an -article in the <i>Berliner Münzblätter</i>, 1905, 1906.</p> - -<p>Hagge. Einige Bemerkungen über die lex Servilia repetundarum. Glückstadt, -1845.</p> - -<p>Hallays, A. Les comices à Rome. Dissertation. Paris, 1890. Of little worth.</p> - -<p>Hartmann, Ambitus. (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. i. 1800-3.</p> - -<p>Hegewisch, D. H. Geschichte der gracchischen Unruhen in der römischen -Republik. Hamburg, 1801.</p> - -<p>Helbig, W. Die Italiker in der Poebene. Leipzig, 1879.</p> - -<p>⸺ (An illustration of Adrogatio.) <i>Comptes rendus de l’acad. des inscriptions -et belles-lettres</i>, xxi (1893). 350-3.</p> - -<p>⸺ Contribution à l’histoire de l’equitatus Romain. ibid. 1904. ii. 190-201.</p> - -<p>⸺ Les attributs des saliens. ibid. 206-12.</p> - -<p>⸺ Sur les attributs des saliens. <i>Mémoires de l’acad. des inscriptions et -belles-lettres</i>, xxvii² (1905). 205-76.</p> - -<p>⸺ Zur Geschichte des römischen Equitatus A. Die Equites als berittene -Hopliten. <i>Abhdl. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> xxiii (1905). 267-317.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Castores als Schutzgötter des römischen Equitatus. <i>Hermes</i>, -xl (1905). 101-15.</p> - -<p>Hennebert, A. Histoire de la lutte entre les patriciens et les plébéiens à -Rome. Gand, 1845.</p> - -<p>Hennes. Das dritte valerisch-horatische Gesetz und seine Wiederholungen. -Program. Bonn, 1880.</p> - -<p>Henze. Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus (Maior), (in) Pauly-Wissowa, -Real-Encycl. iv. 1462-70.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_486"></a>[486]</span></p> - -<p><i>Hermes</i> = <i>Hermes: Zeitschrift für classische Philologie.</i> Berlin.</p> - -<p>Herzog, E. Lex sacrata und das Sacrosanctum. <i>Jahrb. f. cl. Philol.</i> xxii -(1876). 139-50.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Charakter der Tributcomitien im fünften und sechsten Jahrhundert -der Stadt und die Reform der Centuriatcomitien. <i>Philol.</i> xxiv (1876). -312-29.</p> - -<p>⸺ Glaubwürdigkeit der Gesetze bis 387 der Stadt. Tübingen, 1881.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Röm. Staatsverf.] Geschichte und System der römischen Staatsverfassung. -2 vols. Leipzig, 1884, 1887.</p> - -<p>Hesky, R. Anmerkungen zur lex Acilia repetundarum. <i>Wiener Studien</i>, -xxv (1903). 272-87.</p> - -<p>Heydenreich, E. Livius und die römische Plebs, (in) Sammlung gemeinverständlicher -wissenschaftlicher Vorträge, xvii (1882). 581-628.</p> - -<p>Hill, G. F. Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins. New York, 1899.</p> - -<p>Hirschfeld, O. Der Endtermin der gallischen Statthalterschaft Caesars. -<i>Klio</i>, iv (1904). 76-87.</p> - -<p>Hoffman, E. Die patricischen und plebeiischen Curien. Vienna, 1879.</p> - -<p>Hoffmeister, K. Die wirtschaftliche Entwickelung Roms. Vienna, 1899.</p> - -<p>Holzapfel, L. Il numero dei senatori Romani durante il periodo dei re. -<i>Rivista di storia antica</i>, ii. 2 (1897). 52-64.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die drei ältesten römischen Tribus. <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> i (1901). 228-55.</p> - -<p>Hüllmann, K. D. Römische Grundverfassung. Bonn, 1832.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ursprünge der römischen Verfassung durch Vergleichungen erläutert. -Bonn, 1835.</p> - -<p>Hülsen, C. Caere, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iii. 1281-3.</p> - -<p>⸺ The Roman Forum. Translated from the 2d German edition by J. B. -Carter. 2d English ed. Rome, 1909.</p> - -<p>Hultsch, F. Denarius, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. v. 202-15.</p> - -<p>Humbert, G. Accensus, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. i. 16 ff. Aedilis. -ibid. 95-100. Ager publicus. ibid. 133-8. Census. ibid. 1003-17. -Classis. ibid. 1224 f. Comitia. ibid. 1374-1401. Concilium. ibid. 1432 f. -Contio. ibid. 1484 f. Frumentariae leges. ibid. ii. 1346-8.</p> - -<p>Huschke, Ph. E. [Verf. d. Serv.] Die Verfassung des Königs Servius Tullius -als Grundlage zu einer römischen Verfassungsgeschichte. Heidelberg, -1838.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die lex Sempronia iudiciaria und ihr Verhältniss zur lex Acilia repetundarum. -<i>Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch.</i> v (1866). 46-84.</p> - -<p>Hyg. Cond. Agr. = Hyginus. De condicionibus agrorum, (in) Grom. Vet. -ed. K. Lachmann, 113-24. [Lim. Const.] De limitibus constituendis -ibid. 166-208.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Ihne, W. The Asylum of Romulus. <i>Classical Museum</i>, iii (1846). 190-3.</p> - -<p>⸺ Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der römischen Verfassungsgeschichte. -Frankfurt am Main, 1847. This study is translated into English by<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_487"></a>[487]</span> -Haywood under the title, Researches into the History of the Roman -Constitution. London, 1853.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ueber die Entstehung und die ältesten Befugnisse des römischen -Tribunats. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxi (1866). 161-79.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung, (in) Symbola philologorum -Bonnensium, 629-44. 1864-1867.</p> - -<p>⸺ History of Rome. 5 vols. London, 1871-1882.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Entwickelung der Tributcomitien. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. xxviii (1873). -353-79.</p> - -<p>⸺ Early Rome. New York, 1890.</p> - -<p>Inc. Auct. = Incertus Auctor. Magistratuum et sacerdotiorum P. R. expositiones -ineditae, ed. Ph. E. Huschke. Vratislavia, 1829.</p> - -<p>Ined. Vat. See Arnim, H. von.</p> - -<p>Isid. Etym. = Isidorus Hispalensis. Etymologiae, (in) Opera omnia, iii, ed. -Migne. Paris, 1878.</p> - -<p>Isler, M. Ueber das poetelische Gesetz de ambitu. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxviii -(1873). 473-7.</p> - -<p class="mt2"><i>Jahrb. f. Philol.</i> = <i>Neue Jahrbücher für Philologie und Paedagogik.</i> Second -title: <i>Jahrbücher für classische Philologie.</i> Leipzig.</p> - -<p><i>Jahresb. ü. Altwiss.</i> = <i>Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der classischen Altertumswissenschaft.</i> -Leipzig.</p> - -<p>John, C. Entstehungsgeschichte der catilinarischen Verschwörung, <i>Jahrb. f. -cl. Philol.</i> Supplb. viii (1875, 1876). 701-819.</p> - -<p>Jordan, H. Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum. 2 vols. Berlin, -1878-1907. I. iii (1907) is edited by C. Hülsen.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Könige im alten Italien. Berlin, 1887.</p> - -<p>Jul. Exuper. See Exup.</p> - -<p>Julius Victor, C. Ars Rhetorica, (in) Orelli-Baiter, Ciceronis Opera, V. -195-269. Turici, 1833.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Kalb, W. Jahresbericht über römischen Juristen für 1901-1905. <i>Jahresb. -ü. Altwiss.</i> cxxxiv (1906). 1-48.</p> - -<p>Kappeyne van de Coppello, J. [Comitien] Drei Abhandlungen zum römischen -Staats- und Privatrecht, i: Betrachtungen über die Comitien. -2d ed. Berlin, 1891.</p> - -<p>Karlowa, O. Der römische Civilprocess zur Zeit der Legisactionen. Berlin, -1872.</p> - -<p>⸺ Römische Rechtsgeschichte. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1885, 1901.</p> - -<p>Keil, J. Zur lex Cornelia de viginti quaestoribus. <i>Wiener Studien</i>, xxiv -(1902). 548-51.</p> - -<p>Klebs, E. Die Stimmenzahl und die Abstimmungsordnung der reformierten -servianischen Verfassung. <i>Zeitschr. d. Savignyst.</i> xii (1891). 181-244.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_488"></a>[488]</span></p> - -<p>Klebs, L. Aimilius Paullus, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. i. 576-80. M. -Aemilius Scaurus. ibid. 584-8. Appuleius. ibid. ii. 261-9.</p> - -<p>Kleineidam, F. Beiträge zur Kentniss der lex Poetelia, (in) Festg. f. F. Dahn, -ii. 1-30. Breslau, 1905.</p> - -<p><i>Klio.</i> See <i>Beiträge zur alten Geschichte</i>.</p> - -<p>Kniep. Societas publicanorum. Jena, 1896.</p> - -<p>Köhm, J. Altlateinische Forschungen. Leipzig, 1905.</p> - -<p>Kornemann, E. Die cäsarische Kolonie Karthago und die Einführung -römischer Gemeindeordnung in Africa. <i>Philol.</i> N. F. xiv (1901). 402-26.</p> - -<p>⸺ Zur Geschichte der Gracchenzeit. Reprinted from <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> -Beiheft i. 1903.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die neue Livius-Epitome aus Oxyrhynchus. <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> Beiheft -ii. 1904.</p> - -<p>⸺ Polis und Urbs. <i>Klio</i>, v (1905). 72-92.</p> - -<p>⸺ Collegium, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iv. 380-480. Coloniae. -ibid. 511-88. Concilium. ibid. 801 ff.</p> - -<p>Krüger, P., and Mommsen, Th. Anecdoton Livianum. <i>Hermes</i>, iv (1870). -371-6.</p> - -<p>Krüger-Brissaud, Sourc. d. Droit Rom. = Krüger, P. Histoire des sources du -droit Romain. Trad. de l’Allemand par M. Brissaud. Paris, 1894.</p> - -<p>Kubitschek, J. W. De Romanorum tribuum origine ac propogatione. Vienna, -1882.</p> - -<p>⸺ Imperium Romanum tributim discriptum. Leipzig, 1889.</p> - -<p>⸺ Aedilis, (in) Real-Encycl. i. 448-64. Aerarius. ibid. 674-6. Aes equestre. -ibid. 682-4. Ager. ibid. 780-93. As. ii. 1499-1513. Census. ibid. -iii. 1914-24.</p> - -<p>Kübler, B. Calata comitia, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iii. 1330-4. -Capite censi. ibid. 1521-3. Centuria. ibid. 1952-62. Classis. ibid. -2630-2. Consul. ibid. iv. 1112-38. Equites Romani. ibid. vi. 272-312.</p> - -<p>Kübler, B., and Hülsen, C. Curia, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iv. -1815-26.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Labatut, E. Corruption électorale chez les Romains. Paris, 1876.</p> - -<p>Lambert, E. L’histoire traditionelle des XII Tables et les critères d’authenticité -des traditions en usage dans l’école de Mommsen, (in) Mélanges -Ch. Appleton, 503-626. Lyons and Paris, 1903.</p> - -<p>⸺ La fonction du droit civil comparé, 390-718. Paris, 1903.</p> - -<p>Lanciani, R. Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome. Boston, 1897.</p> - -<p>⸺ New Tales of Old Rome. Boston, 1901.</p> - -<p>Lange, L. Römische Altertümer. 3 vols. 2d and 3d eds. Berlin, 1876, -1879.</p> - -<p>⸺ Kleine Schriften. 2 vols. Göttingen, 1887.</p> - -<p>Lécrivain, C. Gens, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. ii. 1494-1516.</p> - -<p>Leinveber, A. Die Legion des Livius. <i>Philol.</i> N. F. xv (1902). 32-41.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_489"></a>[489]</span></p> - -<p>Leist, B. W. Graeco-italische Rechtsgeschichte. Jena, 1884.</p> - -<p>⸺ Alt-arisches Ius Gentium. Jena, 1889.</p> - -<p>⸺ Alt-arisches Ius Civile. 2 vols. Jena, 1892, 1896.</p> - -<p>Lengle, J. Untersuchungen über die sullanische Verfassung. Freiburg im -Breisgau, 1899.</p> - -<p>Lenormant, F. As, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. i. 454-64.</p> - -<p>⸺ Colonies Romains, ibid. i. 1303-21.</p> - -<p>Leonhard, R. Adoptio, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. i. 398-400. Adrogatio. -ibid. 419-21.</p> - -<p>Le Tellier, M. [Organ. cent.] L’organisation centuriale et les comices par -centuries. Thesis. Paris, 1896.</p> - -<p>Liebenam, W. Zur Geschichte und Organisation des römischen Vereinswesens. -Leipzig, 1890.</p> - -<p>⸺ Comitia, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iv. 679-715. Curiata lex. -ibid. iv. 1826-30. Fabri, (in) Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. iii. 4-18.</p> - -<p>Lieboldt, K. Die Ansichten über die Entstehung und das Wesen der gentes -patriciae in Rom aus der Zeit der Humanisten bis auf unsere Tage, i, -ii. Meerane, 1890.</p> - -<p>Liers, H. [Kriegsw. d. Alt.] Das Kriegswesen der Alten mit besonderer -Berücksichtigung der Strategie. Breslau, 1895.</p> - -<p>Livy, new epitome of. See Grenfell and Hunt; also Kornemann.</p> - -<p>Long, G. The Decline of the Roman Republic. 5 vols. London, 1864-1874.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Madvig, J. N. [Röm. Staat.] Die Verfassung und Verwaltung des römischen -Staates. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1881, 1882.</p> - -<p>Marchi, A. de. Il culto privato di Roma antica. 2 vols. Milan, 1896, -1903. Uncritical, but to some extent useful.</p> - -<p>Marquardt, J. Historiae equitum Romanorum. Berlin, 1840.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Röm. Staatsv.] Römische Staatsverwaltung. 3 vols. 2d ed. revised by -Dessau and others. Leipzig, 1881, 1885.</p> - -<p>⸺ Das Privatleben der Römer. 2d ed. Leipzig, 1886.</p> - -<p>Matzat, H. Römische Chronologie. 2 vols. Berlin, 1883, 1884.</p> - -<p>Maue, H. Der praefectus fabrum. Halle, 1887.</p> - -<p>Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’école Française de Rome.</p> - -<p>Mercklein, D. L. Die Coöptation der Römer. Leipzig, 1848.</p> - -<p>Merguet, H. Lexikon zu den Schriften Ciceros, i, ii. Jena, 1877-1887.</p> - -<p>Meyer, E. Untersuchungen über Diodor’s römische Geschichte. <i>Rhein. -Mus.</i> xxxvii (1882). 610-27.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Gesch. d. Alt.] Geschichte des Altertums, ii, v. Stuttgart, 1893 (and -Berlin), 1902.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Gesch. d. Gracch.] Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Gracchen, (in) -Festschriften ... der vereinigten Friedrichs-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, -1894. Philos. Fak. 79-109.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_490"></a>[490]</span></p> - -<p>⸺ Der Ursprung des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der vier -Tribus. <i>Hermes</i>, xxx (1895). 1-24.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die angebliche Centurienreform Sullas. <i>Hermes</i>, xxxiii (1898). 652-4.</p> - -<p>⸺ Plebs, (in) Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaft, vi. 98-106. 2d ed. -Jena, 1901.</p> - -<p>Michel, N. H. Du droit de cité Romaine: études d’épigraphie juridique. -Paris, 1885.</p> - -<p>Milani, L. A. Studi e materiali di archaeologia e numismatica. 3 vols. -Florence, 1899-1905.</p> - -<p>Mispoulet, J. B. Les institutions politiques des Romains. 2 vols. Paris, -1882, 1883.</p> - -<p>⸺ Études d’institutions Romaines. Paris, 1887.</p> - -<p>Mommsen, Th. [Röm. Tribus.] Die römischen Tribus in administrativer -Beziehung. Altona, 1834.</p> - -<p>⸺ De apparitoribus magistratuum Romanorum. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. vi -(1846). 1-57.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ueber das thorische Ackergesetz. <i>Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> i -(1849). 89-101.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ueber die lex Mamilia Roscia Peducaea Alliena Fabia, (in) Röm. Feldmess. -ii. 221-6. Berlin, 1852.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Stadtrechte der lateinischen Gemeinden Salpensa und Malaca in -der Provinz Baetica. <i>Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> ii. (1857). 361-507.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die lex curiata de imperio. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. xiii (1858). 565-73.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die römische Chronologie bis auf Caesar. 2d ed. Berlin, 1859.</p> - -<p>⸺ Zwei Sepulcralreden aus der Zeit Augusts und Hadrians. <i>Abhdl. d. -Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin.</i> 1863, 455-89.</p> - -<p>⸺ Römische Forschungen. 2 vols. Berlin, 1864, 1879.</p> - -<p>⸺ Lex coloniae Iuliae Genetivae Urbanorum sive Ursonis data a.u.c. -DCCX. Additamentum ad corporis volumen ii. <i>Ephem. Ep.</i> ii (1875). -105-51.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ein zweites Bruchstück des rubrischen Gesetzes vom Jahre 705 Roms. -<i>Hermes</i>, xvi (1881). 24-41.</p> - -<p>⸺ Römisches Staatsrecht. 1st and 3d eds. 3 vols. Leipzig, 1887.</p> - -<p>⸺ Abriss des römischen Staatsrechts. Leipzig, 1893.</p> - -<p>⸺ Römisches Strafrecht. Leipzig, 1899.</p> - -<p>⸺ History of Rome. Translated from the German. 5 vols. New York, -1900.</p> - -<p>⸺ Lex municipii Tarentini. <i>Ephem. Ep.</i> ix (1903). 1-11.</p> - -<p>Mommsen-Blacas = Mommsen, Histoire de la monnaie Romaine. Translated -from the German by Le Duc de Blacas. 4 vols. Paris, 1865-1875.</p> - -<p>Mommsen, Th. and others. Zum ältesten Strafrecht der Kulturvölker. -Leipzig, 1905.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_491"></a>[491]</span></p> - -<p>Morlot, E. [Comices élect.] Les comices électoraux sous la république Romaine. -Thesis. Paris, 1884.</p> - -<p>Moye, M. Les élections politiques sous la république Romaine. Thesis. -Bordeaux, 1896.</p> - -<p>Mühl, F. V. [App. Sat.] De L. Appuleio Saturnino tribuno plebis. Basel, -1906.</p> - -<p>Muirhead, J. Historical Introduction to the Private Law of Rome. Edinburgh, -1886.</p> - -<p>Müller, A. Die Strafjustiz im römischen Heere. <i>N. Jahrb. f. kl. Altertum</i>, -xvii (1906). 550-77.</p> - -<p>Müller, I. [Hdb. d. kl. Altwiss.] Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. -Nördlingen.</p> - -<p>Müller, J. J. Studien zur römischen Verfassungsgeschichte. <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv -(1876). 96-136.</p> - -<p>Müller-Deecke = Müller, K. O. Die Etrusker. 2 vols. Revised by W. -Deecke. Stuttgart, 1877.</p> - -<p>Munderloh, I. G. H. W. Aus der Zeit der Quiriten. Weimar, 1872.</p> - -<p>Münzer, F. M. Claudius Marcellus, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iii. -2738-55. Appius Claudius Pulcher. ibid. 2848 f. L. Cornelius Cinna. -ibid. iv. 1282-7. L. Cornelius Scipio Asiagenus. ibid. iv. 1471-83. -T. Didius. ibid. v. 407-10. Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus. ibid. v. 1324-7.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Nettleship, H. Contributions to Latin Lexicography. Oxford, 1889.</p> - -<p><i>N. Jahrb. f. kl. Alt.</i> = <i>Neue Jahrbücher für das klassische Altertum, Geschichte -und deutsche Literatur, und für Pädagogik.</i> Leipzig.</p> - -<p>Neumann, C. Das Zeitalter der punischen Kriege. Breslau, 1883.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Gesch. Roms.] Geschichte Roms während des Verfalles der Republik. -2 vols. Breslau, 1881, 1884.</p> - -<p>Neumann, K. J. Die Grundherrschaft der römischen Republik, Die Bauernbefreiung -und die Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung. Strassburg, -1900.</p> - -<p>Niccolini, G. La questione dei processi degli Scipioni. <i>Rivista di storia -antica</i>, iii (1898). Fasc. 4. 28-75.</p> - -<p>Niebuhr, B. G. Römische Geschichte. 3 vols. 4th ed. Berlin, 1833-1843. -Also the English translation by Hare and Thirlwall. Philadelphia, -1844.</p> - -<p>⸺ Lectures on the History of Rome, edited and translated from the German -by L. Schmitz. 3 vols. 3d ed. London, 1853.</p> - -<p>Niemeyer, K. De equitibus Romanis. Gryphia, 1851.</p> - -<p>Niese, B. Das sogenannte licinisch-sextische Ackergesetz. <i>Hermes</i>, xxiii -(1888). 410-23.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Röm. Gesch.] Grundriss der römische Geschichte nebst Quellenkunde. -3d ed. Munich, 1906.</p> - -<p>⸺ Deiotarus, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. iv. 2401-4.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_492"></a>[492]</span></p> - -<p>Nipperdey, K. Die leges annales der römischen Republik. <i>Abhdl. sächs. -Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> v (1870). 1-88.</p> - -<p>Nissen, A. Beiträge zum römischen Staatsrecht. Strassburg, 1885.</p> - -<p>Nissen, H. Kritische Untersuchungen über die Quellen der vierten und -fünften Dekade des Livius. Berlin, 1863.</p> - -<p>⸺ Das Templum. Berlin, 1869.</p> - -<p>⸺ Der Ausbruch des Bürgerkrieges 49 vor Chr. <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> xliv (1880). -409-45; xlvi. 48-105.</p> - -<p>⸺ Italische Landeskunde. 2 vols. Berlin, 1883, 1902.</p> - -<p>Nitzsch, K. W. Die Gracchen und ihre nächsten Vorgänger. Berlin, 1847.</p> - -<p>⸺ Das Verhältniss von Heer und Staat in der römischen Republik. <i>Hist. -Zeitschr.</i> vii (1862). 133-58.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Röm. Rep.] Geschichte der römischen Republik. 2 vols. Ed. by -G. Thouret. Leipzig, 1884, 1885.</p> - -<p>Nonius Marcellus. Compendiosa doctrina. Emend. et adn. L. Müller. 2 vols. -Leipzig, 1888.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Oberziner, G. Origine della plebe Romana. Leipzig and Genoa, 1901.</p> - -<p>Obseq. = Iulii Obsequentis ab anno urbis conditae DV prodigiorum liber, -(in) Weissenborn’s Livy, vol. xii. 193-209. 2d ed. Berlin, 1881.</p> - -<p>Olcott, G. N. Thesaurus linguae Latinae epigraphicae, i. Rome, 1904-1908.</p> - -<p>Oliver, E. H. Roman Economic Conditions to the Close of the Republic. -Toronto, 1907.</p> - -<p>Orelli and Baiter, Index legum Romanorum quarum apud Ciceronem eiusque -scholiastas item apud Livium, Velleium Paterculum, A. Gellium nominatim -mentio fit, (in their) Ciceronis Opera, viii. 3.</p> - -<p>Oxyrhynchus Papiri. See Grenfell and Hunt; also Kornemann.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Pais, E. Storia di Roma, I. i, ii. Torino, 1898, 1899.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Leg. of Rom. Hist.] Ancient Legends of Roman History. Translated -from the Italian. New York, 1905.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ancient Italy. Translated from the Italian by C. D. Curtis. Chicago -and London, 1908.</p> - -<p>⸺ L’elezione del pontefice massimo Romano per mezzo delle XVII tribù. -Naples, 1908.</p> - -<p>⸺ A proposito dell’attendibilità dei fasti dell’antica repubblica Romana. -<i>Rendiconti della reale accademia dei Lincei</i>, xxvii (1908). 33-68.</p> - -<p>Pantaleoni, D. Della auctoritas patrum nell’antica Roma sotto le sue diverse -forme. Torino, 1884.</p> - -<p>Pappritz, R. Marius und Sulla. Gütersloh, 1899.</p> - -<p>Pascal, C. Studi Romani, i, iii. Torino, 1896.</p> - -<p>⸺ Di un studio recente sul processo degli Scipioni. <i>Riv. di stor. ant.</i> iv -(1899). 268-71.</p> - -<p>Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. = Pauly, Real-Encyclopädie der classischen<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_493"></a>[493]</span> -Altertumswissenschaft. New ed. by G. Wissowa, i-vi. 1. Stuttgart, 1894-1907.</p> - -<p>Pelham, H. The Roman Curiae. (Eng.) <i>Journ. of Philol.</i> ix (1880). 266-79.</p> - -<p>Pellegrini, G. Fregi arcaici Etruschi in terracotta, etc. (in) Milani, Studi e -materiali, i. 87-118.</p> - -<p>Pellegrino, D. Andeutungen über den ursprünglichen Religionsunterschied -der römischen Patricier und Plebeier. Leipzig, 1842.</p> - -<p>Peter, C. Die Epochen der Verfassungsgeschichte der römischen Republik, -mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Centuriatcomitien und der mit -diesen vorgegangenen Veränderungen. Leipzig, 1841.</p> - -<p>⸺ Studien zur römischen Geschichte mit besonderer Beziehung auf Th. -Mommsen. Naumburg, 1861. A new enlarged ed. Halle, 1863.</p> - -<p>⸺ Geschichte Roms. 4th ed. 3 vols. Halle, 1881.</p> - -<p>Peter, H. [Reliquiae] Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae. 2 vols. Leipzig, -1870, 1906.</p> - -<p><i>Philol.</i> = <i>Philologus: Zeitschrift für das classische Altertum.</i> Leipzig.</p> - -<p>Pinvert, L. Du droit de cité Romaine. Thesis. Paris, 1885.</p> - -<p>Platner, S. B. The Topography and Monuments of Ancient Rome. Boston, -1904.</p> - -<p>Plüss, H. T. [Centurienverf.] Die Entwickelung der Centurienverfassung in -den beiden letzten Jahrhunderten der römischen Republik. Leipzig, 1870.</p> - -<p>Podestà. Il tribunato della plebe in Roma dalla secessione della plebe sul -monte Sacro all’approvazione della legge di Publilio Volerone. Parma, -1895.</p> - -<p>Pöhlmann, R. Die Anfänge Roms. Erlangen, 1881.</p> - -<p>⸺ Zur Geschichte der Gracchen. <i>Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> 1907. -443-93.</p> - -<p><i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> = <i>Political Science Quarterly.</i> Boston and New York.</p> - -<p>Poste, E. Gaii institutionum iuris civilis commentarii quatuor. Or, Elements -of Roman Law by Gaius. With translation and commentary. -Oxford, 1871.</p> - -<p>Pott, A. F. [Etym. Forsch.] Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete -der indo-germanischen Sprachen. 2d ed. 5 vols. Detmold, 1859-1873. -This work includes the author’s Wurzel-Wörterbuch der indo-germanischen -Sprachen.</p> - -<p>Priscianus. [Inst. Gram.] Institutionum grammaticarum libri xvii, ed. M. -Hertz, (in) Gram. Lat. ii, ed. Keil. Leipzig, 1855.</p> - -<p>Probus, Valerius. De litteris singularibus fragmentum, ed. Mommsen, (in) -Gram. Lat. iv, ed. Keil. Leipzig, 1864.</p> - -<p>Pseudacr. Schol. Cruq. ad Hor. = Pseudacronis Scholia in Horatium vetustiora. -Ed. O. Keller. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1902, 1904.</p> - -<p>Pseudo-Sall. Declam. in Cat. = Porcii Latronis Declamatio contra L. Sergium -Catilinam, (in) C. Crispi Salustii quae extant, i. 260-87. Ed. C. H. -Frotscher. Leipzig, 1825.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_494"></a>[494]</span></p> - -<p>Ptaschnik, J. Die Wahl der Volkstribunen vor der Rogation des Volero -Publilius. <i>Oesterreich. Gymn.</i> xiv (1863). 627-38.</p> - -<p>⸺ Publilische Rogation. ibid, xvii (1866). 161-200.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Centuriengesetze von 305 und 415 U. C. ibid. xxi (1870). 497-525.</p> - -<p>⸺ Stimmrecht der Patricier in den Tributcomitien. ibid, xxxii (1881). -81-102.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Regling, K. Zum älteren römischen und italischen Münzen. <i>Klio</i>, vi (1906). -489-524.</p> - -<p><i>Rhein. Mus.</i> = <i>Rheinisches Museum für Philologie.</i> Frankfurt am Main.</p> - -<p>Richter, O. Die Topographie der Stadt Rom. 2d ed. Munich, 1901. -(In) Müller, I. Hdb. d. kl. Altwiss. iii. 3.</p> - -<p>Ritschl, F. W. Opuscula philologica. Or, Kleine philologische Schriften. -5 vols. Leipzig, 1866-1879.</p> - -<p><i>Riv. d. Stor. ant.</i> = <i>Rivista di storia antica e scienze affini.</i> Messina.</p> - -<p>Roby, J. H. Roman Private Law in the Times of Cicero and of the Antonines. -2 vols. Cambridge (England), 1902.</p> - -<p>Röm. Feldmess. See Blume, F., etc.</p> - -<p>Roscher, W. H. Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen -Mythologie, i-iii. Leipzig, 1884-1902.</p> - -<p>Rothstein, M. Suffragium, (in) Festschrift zu Otto Hirschfelds sechsigstem -Geburtstage, 30-3. Berlin, 1903.</p> - -<p>Rubino, J. [Röm. Verf.] Ueber den Entwickelungsgang der römischen -Verfassung his zum Höhepunkt der Republik. Cassel, 1839.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ueber das Verhältniss der sex Suffragia zur römischen Ritterschaft. -<i>Zeitschr. f. die Altwiss.</i> iv (1846). 212-39.</p> - -<p>Rudorff, A. F. Römische Rechtsgeschichte. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1857, 1859.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ad legem Aciliam de pecuniis repetundis, etc. <i>Abhdl. d. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> -1861. 411-553.</p> - -<p>Ruggiero, E. de. [Diz. Ep.] Dizionario epigrafico, i-iii. Rome, 1895-1906.</p> - -<p>Ruppel, K. W. Teilnahme der Patrizier an den Tributcomitien. Heidelberg, -1887.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Sall. Hist. = C. Sallusti Crispi, Historiarum reliquiae, ed. B. Maurenbrecher, -ii: fragmenta. Leipzig, 1893.</p> - -<p>Sall. or Pseud. Sall. Rep. Ord. = Incerti auctoris epistulae duae ad C. Caesarem -de republica ordinanda, (in) C. Crispi Sallusti quae extant, i. Ed. -C. H. Frotscher. Leipzig, 1825.</p> - -<p>Samwer-Bahrfeldt, Röm. Münzw. = Samwer, K. Geschichte des älteren -römischen Münzwesens bis circa 200 vor Christi. Ed. M. Bahrfeldt. -Vienna, 1883.</p> - -<p>Sanders, H. A. The Oxyrhynchus Epitome of Livy. <i>Trans. of the Am. -Philol. Assoc.</i> xxxvi (1905). 5-31.</p> - -<p>Savigny, F. C. von. Vermischte Schriften. 5 vols. Berlin, 1850.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_495"></a>[495]</span></p> - -<p>Schiller, H. Geschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit, i. Gotha, 1883.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Röm. Alt.] Römische Kriegsaltertümer, (in) Müller, Hdb. d. kl. Altwiss. -iv. 707-44. Staats- und Rechtsaltertümer, ibid. 483-704. Nördlingen, -1887.</p> - -<p>Schlossman, S. Tributum, tribuere, tribus. <i>Archiv f. Lat. Lexicog.</i> xiv -(1905). 25-40.</p> - -<p>Schmidt, J. Die Einsetzung der römischen Volkstribunen. <i>Hermes</i>, xxi -(1886). 460-6.</p> - -<p>Schmidt, O. E. Die letzten Kämpfe der römischen Republik. Leipzig, -1884.</p> - -<p>⸺ Der Briefwechsel des M. Tullius Cicero von seinem Prokonsulat in -Cilicien bis zu Cäsars Ermordung. Leipzig, 1893.</p> - -<p>Schöll, R. [Leg. Duod. Tab. Rel.] Legis duodecim tabularum reliquiae. -Leipzig, 1866.</p> - -<p>Schott, P. O. Die römische Geschichte im Licht der neuesten Forschungen. -<i>Videnskabs-Selskabets Skriften. Hist. Filos. Klasse</i>, ii. 1906.</p> - -<p>Schrader, O. [Reallex.] Reallexikon der indogermanischen Altertumskunde. -Strassburg, 1901.</p> - -<p>⸺ Sprachvergleichung und Urgeschichte, i, ii. 1, 2. 3d ed. Jena, 1906, -1907.</p> - -<p>Schulthess, O. Der Process des C. Rabirius vom Jahre 63 v. Chr. Frauenfeld, -1891.</p> - -<p>Schulze, C. F. Von den Volksversammlungen der Römer. Gotha, 1815.</p> - -<p>Schulze, W. [Gesch. lat. Eigennam.] Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen. -<i>Abhdl. d. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. zu Gött.</i> N. F. v. Berlin, 1904.</p> - -<p>Schwegler, A. Römische Geschichte. 3 vols. Freiburg, 1870-1884.</p> - -<p>Seeley, J. R. Livy i. 3d ed. Oxford, 1881.</p> - -<p>Sic. Flacc. = Siculus Flaccus. De condicionibus agrorum, (in) Grom. Vet. -134-65. Ed. Lachmann. Berlin, 1848.</p> - -<p>Siebert, W. Ueber Appius Claudius Caecus. Kassel, 1863.</p> - -<p><i>Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> = <i>Sitzungsberichte der königlich bayerische -Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München.</i></p> - -<p><i>Sitzb. d. Berl. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> = <i>Sitzungsberichte der königlich preussischen -Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin.</i></p> - -<p>Smith, F. Die römische Timokratie. Berlin, 1906.</p> - -<p>Smith, W. and others. [Dict.] A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. -3d ed. 2 vols. London, 1890, 1891.</p> - -<p>Sol., Solin. = Solinus, C. Julius, Polyhistor; ex editione Claudii Salmasii, -accurante M. A. Goezio. Leipzig, 1777.</p> - -<p>Soltau, W. [Altröm. Volksversamml.] Ueber Entstehung und Zusammensetzung -der altrömischen Volksversammlungen. Berlin, 1880.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung und Competenz der aediles plebis, (in) -Historische Untersuchungen A. Schaefer ... gewidmet, 98-147. Bonn, -1882.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_496"></a>[496]</span></p> - -<p>Soltau, W. Gültigkeit der Plebiscite. <i>Berliner Studien</i>, ii (1885). 1-176.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die Echtheit des licinischen Ackergesetz von 367 vor Chr. <i>Hermes</i>, xxx -(1895). 624-9.</p> - -<p>⸺ Cicero de Re Publica und die servianische Centurienordnung. <i>Jahrb. f. -Philol.</i> xli (1895). 410-4.</p> - -<p>Spinazolla, V. Augures, (in) Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. i. 778-810.</p> - -<p>Staaf, E. De origine gentium patriciarum commentatio academica. Upsala, -1896.</p> - -<p>Stella Maranca, F. Il tribunato della plebe dalla lex Hortensia alla lex -Cornelia. Lanciano, 1901.</p> - -<p>Strachan-Davidson, J. L. The Growth of Plebeian Privilege at Rome. <i>Eng. -Hist. Rev.</i> i (1886). 209-17.</p> - -<p>⸺ The Decrees of the Roman Plebs. ibid, v (1890). 462-74.</p> - -<p>⸺ Cicero. New York and London, 1894.</p> - -<p>⸺ Appian, Civil Wars, i. Oxford, 1902.</p> - -<p>Sunden, J. M. De tribunicia potestate a L. Sulla imminuta quaestiones. -Upsala, 1897.</p> - -<p>Symmachus, Q. Aurelius, quae supersunt. Ed. Seeck. Berlin, 1883.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Terpstra, D. Quaestiones literariae de populo, de senatu, de rege, de interregibus, -antiquissimis rei publicae Romanae temporibus. Rotterdam, -1842.</p> - -<p>Thesaurus linguae Latinae, i-iv. Leipzig, 1900-1906.</p> - -<p>Tophoff, De lege Valeria Horatia, Publilia, Hortensia. Paderborn, 1852.</p> - -<p>Toutain, J. Municipium, (in) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. iii. 2022-34.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Ullrich, J. [Centuriatcom.] Die Centuriatcomitien. Landshut, 1873.</p> - -<p>Usener, H. Italische Volksjustiz. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. lvi (1901). 1-28.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Vaglieri, D. Concilium, (in) Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. ii. 566-71. Mainly provincial.</p> - -<p>Valeton, I. M. J. De modis auspicandi Romanorum. <i>Mnemos.</i> N. S. xvii -(1889). 275-323, 418-52; xviii. 208-64, 406-56.</p> - -<p>⸺ De iure obnuntiandi comitiis et conciliis. ibid. xix (1891). 75-113, 229-70.</p> - -<p>Vaniček, A. [Etym. Wörterb. d. lat. Spr.] Etymologisches Wörterbuch der -lateinischen Sprache. Leipzig, 1874.</p> - -<p>⸺ [Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb.] Griechisch-lateinisches etymologisches -Wörterbuch. Leipzig, 1877.</p> - -<p>Vassis, Sp. Leges Valeriae de provocatione. <i>Athena</i>, xvii (1905). 160-5.</p> - -<p><i>Verhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> = <i>Berichte über die Verhandlungen der -königlich sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Philologisch-historische -Classe.</i> Referred to also as <i>Ber. sächs.</i> etc.</p> - -<p>Victor, C. Julius, Ars rhetorica, (in) Orelli-Baiter, Ciceronis Opera, v. 1. -195-268.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_497"></a>[497]</span></p> - -<p>Voigt, M. Die lex Maenia de dote vom Jahre 568 der Stadt. Weimar, -1865.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ueber das römische System der Wege im alten Italien. <i>Ber. sächs. -Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> xxiv (1872). 29-90.</p> - -<p>⸺ Leges regiae. <i>Abhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> vii (1879). 555-826.</p> - -<p>⸺ XII Tafeln. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1883.</p> - -<p>⸺ Die lex Fabia de plagiariis. <i>Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> xxxvii (1885). -319-345.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ueber die staatsrechtliche possessio und den ager compascuus. <i>Abhdl. -sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> x (1888). 221-272.</p> - -<p>⸺ Ueber die lex Cornelia sumptuaria. <i>Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> xlii -(1890). 244-79.</p> - -<p>⸺ Römische Rechtsgeschichte. 3 vols. Leipzig and Berlin, 1892-1902.</p> - -<p>Volquardsen, C. A. Die drei ältesten römischen Tribus. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. -xxxiii (1878). 557-64.</p> - -<p class="mt2">Wachsmuth, W. Die ältere Geschichte des römischen Staates. Halle, -1819.</p> - -<p>Walde, A. Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg, 1906.</p> - -<p>Wallinder. De statu plebeiorum Romanorum ante primam in montem -Sacrum secessionem quaestiones. Upsala, 1860.</p> - -<p>Waltzing, J. P. Étude historique sur les corporations professionelles chez -les Romains. 4 vols. Louvain, 1895-1900.</p> - -<p>Warren, M. The Stele Inscription in the Roman Forum. <i>Am. Journ. of -Philol.</i> xxviii (1907). 249-72.</p> - -<p>Weber, M. Die römische Agrargeschichte in ihrer Bedeutung für das Staats- -und Privatrecht. Stuttgart, 1891.</p> - -<p>Wex, C. Ueber die leges annales der Römer. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> iii (1845). -276-88.</p> - -<p><i>Wiener Studien. Zeitschrift für klassische Philologie. Supplement der Zeitschrift -für die österreichischen Gymnasien.</i> Vienna.</p> - -<p>Wigger, J. Verteidigung der Nieburschen Ansicht über den Ursprung der -römischen Plebs, etc. Warburg, 1885.</p> - -<p>Willems, P. [Sén. Rom.] Le sénat de la république Romaine, etc. 2 vols. -2d ed. Louvain, 1885.</p> - -<p>⸺ Droit public Romain. 6th ed. Paris and Louvain, 1888.</p> - -<p>Wilmanns, W. Ueber die Gerichtshöfe während des Bestehens der lex Cornelia -iudiciaria. <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. xix (1864). 528-41.</p> - -<p>Wissowa, G. Religion und Kultus der Römer, (in) Müller, Hdb. d. kl. Altwiss. -v. 4. Munich, 1902.</p> - -<p>⸺ Augures, (in) Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. ii. 2313-44. Auspicium. -ibid. 2580-7.</p> - -<p class="mt2"><i>Zeitschrift für die österreichischen Gymnasien.</i> Vienna.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_498"></a>[498]</span></p> - -<p><i>Zeitschr. f. gesch. Rechtswiss.</i> = <i>Zeitschrift für geschichtliche Rechtswissenschaft.</i> -Berlin.</p> - -<p><i>Zeitschr. d. Savignyst.</i> = <i>Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. -Römische Abteilung.</i> Weimar.</p> - -<p>Zöller, Latium und Rom. Leipzig, 1878.</p> - -<p>Zumpt, C. T. De legibus iudiciisque repetundarum. <i>Abhdl. d. Akad. d. -Wiss. zu Berlin.</i> 1845. 1-70, 475-515.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="FOOTNOTES">FOOTNOTES</h2> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 168 and n. 1. Schrader, <i>Reallex.</i> 920 f., accepts -this explanation as most probable, and connecting it with Skt. cakrá-, interprets it as -referring to a wheel formation of the army. But Vaniček, <i>Griech.-lat. etym. -Wörterb.</i> 1085 f., connects populari with spol-iu-m.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> Curtius, <i>Griech. Etym.</i> 260, English, 344; Corssen, <i>Ausspr.</i> i. 368, 422; Vaniček, -<i>Etym. Wörterb. d. lat. Spr.</i> 90; <i>Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 506; Walde, <i>Lat. etym. -Wörterb.</i> 480 f.; cf. Schrader, ibid.; Genz, <i>Patr. Rom.</i>, 51 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> This interpretation would explain magister populi and populari. Plebs, on the -other hand, denoted the multitude as distinguished from the leaders; hence it differed -from populus, notwithstanding Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 98, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> Livy xxi. 34. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> i. 25. 39; Livy i. 8. 1; Isid. <i>Etym.</i> ix. 6. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> Cf. Madvig, <i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 34 ff.; Schiller, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> 612 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> “Arma sumere, sacris adesse, concilium inire”; Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 6. 6; 13. 1. On the -Indo-European relation of the army to the folk, see Schrader, <i>Reallex.</i> 349 f. For -Rome, Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 8. 14; Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 2; Plut. <i>Rom.</i> 14, 20; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> iii. 131; -Dio Cass. Frag. 5. 8; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 55; Colum. v. 1. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> As Romulus was the eponymous hero of the Ramnes (or of all the Romans?) -and Lucerus (Fest. ep. 119) of the Luceres.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> The original seat of the hero at Rome was on the Capitoline near the site of -the later temple of Juno Moneta; Plut. <i>Rom.</i> 20. It was closely connected, therefore, -with the auguraculum on the spot; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 47; Cic. <i>Off.</i> iii. 16. 66; -Fest. ep. 16. Perhaps his name has some etymological relation with titiare, “to -chirp as a sparrow”; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 85 (titiis avibus); Pais, <i>Storia di Roma</i>, I. i. -277 and n. 3; Forcellini, <i>Lex.</i> s. v. The Sodales Titii, who attended to his worship -(cf. Dion. Hal. ii. 52. 5; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> i. 54; <i>Hist.</i> ii. 95) were accustomed to take a -certain kind of auspices from birds; Varro, ibid. His tomb was in a place called -Lauretum on the Aventine (Pais, ibid. 279), confused probably with Laurentum, -where he is said to have been killed. All these circumstances indicate that Titus -Tatius was an indigenous Roman, or at most a Latin hero, and that his connection -with the Sabines is an ill-founded, relatively late idea. The primary origin of the -word Titienses is Etruscan; Schulze, <i>Lat. Eigennam.</i> 218.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> Possibly because the rites of the Titian sodales seemed to be Sabine (cf. Tac. -<i>Ann.</i> i. 54); but even if they were, this circumstance would not make the Titian -tribe Sabine.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> Varro, however, placed them on the Aventine. A Sabine settlement on the -Quirinal has not been proved; cf. Lécrivain, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> ii. 1514.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> In Dion. Hal. ii. 47. 4; cf. 7. 2; Plut. <i>Rom.</i> 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> <i>L. L.</i> v. 46, 55; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> v. 560.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> P. 2, n. 6, and n. 1 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> Serv. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> Cf. Hülsen, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1273.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> Proposed by Niebuhr, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 311 ff., English, i. 153 ff. In his opinion -the three tribes were of different nationalities. His view, with or without the theory -of national syncretism, has been accepted by many scholars, including Schwegler, -<i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 480 ff., 497-514; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 82 ff.; Peter, <i>Gesch. Roms.</i> -i. 60; Madvig, <i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 97 f.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 23 f. (with some -reserve); Schiller, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> 621; Ihering, <i>Geist des röm. Rechts</i>, i. 309, 313; -Genz, <i>Patr. Rom</i>, 89 ff.; Bernhöft, <i>Röm. Königsz.</i> 79; Puchta, <i>Curs. d. Inst.</i> i. 73; -Soltau, <i>Röm. Volksversamml.</i> 46 f.; Kubitschek, <i>Rom. trib. or.</i> 4; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> iii. 96 f.; Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 7; Schrader, <i>Reallex.</i> 801; Nissen, <i>Templum</i>, -145 f.; <i>Ital. Landesk.</i> ii. 496.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> Against the view that the three tribes were once independent communities are -Volquardsen, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxxiii. 542 ff.; Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Alt.</i> ii. 510; Lécrivain, -in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> ii. 1514 a; Holzapfel, in <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> i. 241, -249 ff.; Platner, <i>Top. and Mon. of Anc. Rome</i>, 33. Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 114, -thinks they probably had reference only to the army. The double nature of many -Roman institutions—a phenomenon on which scholars chiefly rely for their theory -of a once existent two-tribe state—may better be explained by the union of the -Sabines with the Romans after the institution of the three tribes; as this relatively -later date would at the same time explain the six-fold character of various institutions. -That the union took place at the beginning of the fifth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> is believed by -Pais, <i>Storia di Roma</i>, I. i. 277. Or the stated increase in the number of members of -the vestals, augurs, pontiffs, and more particularly of senators, may be due to an -ancient theory, dimly hinted at in the sources, of an admission of the second and -third tribes successively to representation in these bodies; cf. Niebuhr, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> -i. 320 f., English, i. 157; Bloch, <i>Orig. d. sén.</i> 32 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> Bormann, in <i>Eran. Vind.</i> 345-58, following a hint offered by Niese, <i>Röm. -Gesch.</i> (1st ed. 1886) 585, has gone so far as to deny their existence, setting them -down as an invention of Varro; but Holzapfel, in <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> i. 230 ff., -proves that Cicero and other sources did not draw from Varro their information -regarding the tribes. Against Bormann, see also Pais, ibid. I. i. 279, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> That the primitive Roman tribes were in character substantially identical with -the primitive Greek phylae cannot be doubted. Apparently the four Ionic phylae -in Attica offered no resistance to dissolution at the hands of Cleisthenes; cf. Hdt. v. -66; Arist. <i>Ath. Pol.</i> 21. (For the best treatment of the Greek phylae, see Szanto, -E., <i>Ausgewählte Abhandlungen</i>, 216-88, who maintains that the institution was artificial.) -In like manner the three Roman tribes disappeared, leaving but scant traces; -p. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> Mantua, till late an Etruscan city, had three tribes; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> x. 202. In -this connection it is significant that Volnius, an Etruscan poet, declared the primitive -tribal names to be Etruscan; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 55. The information suggests the -possibility that some Etruscan cities had these same tribes; cf. Fest. 285. 25; -<i>CIL.</i> ix. 4204 (locality unknown). In fact these names can be ultimately traced to -Etruscan gentilicia; Schulze, <i>Lat. Eigennam.</i> 218, 581. The triplet champions of -Alba point to a division of this community into three tribes; Niebuhr, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> -i. 386; Schwegler, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 502. The story that T. Tatius was killed at -Lavinium indicates the existence of a tomb of the hero in that place—a clear sign -of a tribe of Tities there; Livy i. 14. 2; Dion. Hal. ii. 52; cf. Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 152. -A trace of Ramnes is found at Ardea; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> ix. 358. There were Ramnennii -in Ostia (<i>CIL.</i> xiv. 1542) and Ramnii in Capua; ibid. x. 3772; Schulze, <i>Lat. -Eigennam.</i> 218. The existence of a tribe of Luceres in Ardea is vouched for by -Lucerus, its eponymous hero, king of that city; Fest. ep. 119; Pais, <i>Storia di Roma</i>, -I. i. 279. The word in various forms occurs in certain Etruscan towns; Schulze, -ibid. 182. These facts make it probable that some at least of the Latin as well as -Etruscan cities had the same three tribes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> The Etruscans had twelve cities in each of their three districts; Strabo v. 4. 3; -Livy v. 33. Each city had three consecrated gates and three temples to Jupiter, -Juno, and Minerva; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> i. 422. The Umbrians had three hundred cities -in the Po valley, destroyed by the Etruscans; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> iii. 14. 113. The Bruttians -were organized in a confederation of twelve cities; Livy xxv. 1. 2. The Iapygians -were divided into three branches (Polyb. iii. 88. 4), each of which comprised -twelve smaller groups; Bloch, <i>Orig. d. sén.</i> 9 f.; Holzapfel, in <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> -i. 245 ff., 252 f. The tripartite division also existed in many pagi which continued -to historical time; Kornemann, in <i>Klio</i>, v. 83.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> These facts are too well known to need illustration; cf. Nissen, <i>Templum</i>, 144; -Bloch, <i>Orig. d. sén.</i> 1 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 55. Tribus = tri-bu-s: bu- is related to φυ- “to grow,” Skt. -bhū-; tribus, corresponding to φυ-λή, would then signify “three-branch;” Corssen, -<i>Ausspr.</i> i. 163; Pott, <i>Etym. Forsch.</i> i. 111, 217; ii. 441; Vaniček, <i>Etym. Wörterb. -d. lat. Spr.</i> 69; <i>Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 636; Bloch, ibid. 9. Schlossman, in -<i>Archiv f. lat. Lexicog.</i> xiv (1905). 25-40, connecting tribus with tres, interprets it -not as a third but as an indefinite part, cf. entzweien with the meaning to divide in -several parts. Schrader, <i>Reallex.</i> 801, is doubtful as to the etymology; cf. Walde, -<i>Lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 636. The connection of the word with tres is denied by Madvig, -<i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 96; Nissen, <i>Ital. Landesk.</i> ii. 8, n. 5. Christ, in <i>Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad.</i> -1906. 204, prefers to connect it with Celt *trebo- (Old Irish treb), “house,” Goth. -thaúrp, “village.” Oscan trebo- also means “house.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> The existence of four Ionic tribes in all Ionic cities cannot be maintained; cf. -Wilamowitz-Möllendorff, in <i>Sitzb. d. Berl. Akad.</i> 1906. 71.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> The tribus Sapinia was the territory of the Sapinian community (Livy xxxi. 2. -6; xxxiii. 37. 1), just as the trifu Tarinate was the territory of the community (tuta, -tota, Osc. touto; <i>Tab. Bant.</i> 2) Tadinum; <i>Tab. Iguv.</i> vi. b. 54; cf. iii. 24; Buck, -<i>Grammar of Oscan and Umbrian</i>, 278 f., 298; Bücheler, <i>Umbrica</i>, see index, s. -Tref, Trefiper; Kornemann, in <i>Klio</i>, v. 87.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> Christ, in <i>Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad.</i> 1906. 207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> Livy i. 55. 3 f.; <i>CIL.</i> ix. 1618, 5565; Nissen, <i>Ital. Landesk.</i> ii. 8 ff.; Kornemann, -in <i>Klio</i>, v. 80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 15; Nissen, <i>Ital. Landesk.</i> ii. 9-15. Doubtless oppidum applied -primarily to the enclosing wall, thence to the space enclosed; Caes. <i>B. G.</i> v. 21; -Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 153. From the beginning it must have been the chief or central -settlement of the pagus, though the organization was not urban but territorial-tribal; -cf. Pöhlmann, <i>Anfänge Roms</i>, 40 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> Livy ix. 41. 6; x. 18. 8; <i>CIL.</i> i. 199; Isid. <i>Etym.</i> xv. 2. 11: “Vici et castella -et pagi sunt quae nulla dignitate civitatis ornantur, sed vulgari hominum conventu -incoluntur et propter parvitatem sui maioribus civitatibus attribuuntur;” Fest. ep. 72; -Nissen, ibid. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> Thus the three tribes of Cyrene were made up each of a nationality or group of -nationalities (Hdt. iv. 161), and the ten tribes of Thurii were named after the -nationalities of which they were respectively composed; Diod. xii. 11. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> The Romans founded their colonies according to Etruscan rites, and they believed -their city to have been established in the same way; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 143; Cato, -in Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> v. 755; Fest. 237. 18; Kornemann, in <i>Klio</i>, v. 88. The word Roma -is now declared to be Etruscan; Schultze, <i>Lat. Eigennam.</i> 579 ff.; Schmidt, Karl -Fr. W., in <i>Berl. Philol. Woch.</i> 1906. 1656.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> Richter, <i>Top. d. Stadt Rom</i>, 30 ff., still believes that the earliest settlement was -on the Palatine. His view is controverted by Degering, H., in <i>Berl. Philol. Woch.</i> -xxiii (1903). 1645 f., who prefers the Quirinal; cf. also Carter, J. B., in <i>Am. Journ. -of Archaeol.</i> xii (1908). 172-83.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> Cf. Richter, ibid. 38; Meyer, E., in <i>Hermes</i>, xxx. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a> Cf. Nissen, <i>Ital. Landesk.</i> ii. 504.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> Cf. Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 55; Verrius Flaccus, in Gell. xviii. 7. 5. The idea of Isidorus, -<i>Etym.</i> ix. 6. 7, is of course absurd.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> This subject will be considered in connection with the Servian tribes; p. 48 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> P. 74.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> Like the Attic phylobasileis they continued through historical time to perform -sacerdotal functions; Dion. Hal. ii. 64. 3; <i>Fast. Praen. Mar. 19</i>, in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 234: -“(Sali) faciunt in comitio saltu (adstantibus po)ntificibus et trib. celer;” Holzapfel, -in <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> i. 242.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> Verg. <i>Aen.</i> v. 553 ff.; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> v. 560; Holzapfel, ibid. 243.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> P. 2, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> Fest. 285. 25; cf. Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> x. 202.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> There were curiae in Lanuvium, an old Latin town; <i>CIL.</i> xiv. 2120. Juno -Curis, Cur(r)itis, Quiritis, goddess of the curiae, was worshipped in Tibur (Serv. -<i>in Aen.</i> i. 17), and in Falerii (Tertul. <i>Apol.</i> 24; <i>CIL.</i> xi. 3100, 3125, 3126; cf. Holzapfel, -<i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> i. 247; Roscher, <i>Lex. d. griech. u. röm. Myth.</i> II. i. 596 f.). -A connection between Cūris and cūria is not clear; Deecke, <i>Falisker</i>, 86.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> Aristotle, <i>Politics</i>, 1329, b 8, considers Italus, king of the Oenotrians, to have -been author of the mess-associations (συσσίτια), adding that the institution was -derived from the country of the Opici and the Chaonians. With the Opici he includes -Latins as well as Ausonians; Dion. Hal. i. 72. 3. On the relation of these -peoples to one another, see especially Pais, <i>Anc. Italy</i>, ch. i. Greek writers identify -the curia with the phratry (Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 3 f.; Dio Cass. Frag. 4. 8), the ἑταιρεία, -and the syssition (Dion. Hal. ii. 23. 3; Dio Cass. ibid.). Although the institutions -designated by these four names show considerable variety of form and function, they -are similar in general character and may have a common origin; Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. -Alt.</i> ii. 514.</p> - -<p>The myth which names the curiae after the Sabine women suggests that some of -the curial names, and perhaps the curiae themselves, might be found among the -Sabines. On Rapta and Titia however see p. 11, n. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 2; Dio Cass. Frag. 5. 8; Plut. <i>Rom.</i> 20; Fest. 174. 8; ep. 49; -(Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> ii. 12; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> viii. 638; Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 2.</p> - -<p>Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 47 f., entertains the peculiar idea that the curiae, -invented to counteract the independent tendencies of the tribes, were not divisions -of the tribes, the members of each curia being drawn from all three tribes. His -view is contradicted by the sources and he admits that he cannot prove it.</p> - -<p>St. Augustine, <i>Enarr. in Psalm.</i> 121. 7 (iv. 2. 1624 ed. Migne), and still later -Paulus, the epitomator of Festus, 54, suppose that there were thirty-five curiae. Notwithstanding -Hoffmann, <i>Patr. u. pleb. Cur.</i> 44 ff., the opinion of these late writers -doubtless arose from an identification of the curiae with the tribes; cf. Kübler, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1818.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> P. 11 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> The word is derived from *co-viria, “a dwelling together,” “an assembly,” by Pott, -<i>Etym. Forsch.</i> ii. 373 f. (cf. Vaniček, <i>Etym. Wörterb. d. lat. Spr.</i> 160; Walde, <i>Lat. etym. -Wörterb.</i> 161), who is followed by Schwegler, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 496, n. 8, 610, n. 4; -Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 96. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 5, 90 and notes, gives -the word the meaning “an association of citizens,” deriving it from quiris (cf. <i>Abriss</i>, -11), which he connects with κῦρος, κῦριος, as did Lange in 1853 (<i>Kleine Schriften</i>, i. -147). Afterward—<i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. (1876) 91—Lange expressed some doubt as to this -connection. But the fact that curia applies to the house not only of the curiales, but -also of the senate and of the Salii, as well as to various other buildings, seems to -indicate that the meaning “house” is primary for the Latin language if not ultimately -original. Corssen, who accepts this meaning, derives cu- from sku-, “to -cover,” “to protect” (<i>Ausspr.</i> i. 353 f.; Vaniček, <i>Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 1116), -cf. Old High Germ. hū-t, hū-s, Eng. “house.” Although Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -iii. 90, n. 2, protests against this explanation, it is accepted by Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Alt.</i> -ii. 511, Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 52, and others. Far less probable is a connection -with cura, curare, assumed by most ancient writers; cf. Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 155; -vi. 46; <i>Vit. pop. rom.</i> in Non. Marc. 57; Fest. ep. 49; Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 2; -Dio Cass. Frag. 5. 8; Isid. <i>Etym.</i> xv. 2. 28. These sources have misled Genz, <i>Patr. -Rom</i>, 32, into fruitless speculation on the functions of the curia.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_51" href="#FNanchor_51" class="label">[51]</a> Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xii. 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_52" href="#FNanchor_52" class="label">[52]</a> Fest. 174. 6; Jordan, <i>Top. d. Stadt Rom</i>, I. i. 165 f.; iii. 43 f.; Gilbert, <i>Gesch. u. -Top. d. Stadt Rom</i>, i. 102 f.; 195 ff.; Richter, <i>Top. d. Stadt Rom</i>, 33, 340; Lanciani, -<i>Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome</i>, map opp. 58; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -iii. 99.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_53" href="#FNanchor_53" class="label">[53]</a> P. 8, n. 5; Dion. Hal. ii. 50. 3; Fest. 254. 25; ep. 64; cf. Roscher, <i>Lex.</i> II. i. -596.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_54" href="#FNanchor_54" class="label">[54]</a> Worshipped in the Fordicidia; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> iv. 634; Lyd. <i>De Mens.</i> iv. 49; Wissowa, -<i>Rel. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 159.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_55" href="#FNanchor_55" class="label">[55]</a> On the curial worship, see Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 13; Fest. 254. 25; 317. 12; Dion. -Hal. ii. 23. 1-3; 50. 3; 65. 4; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> ii. 527 ff.; iv. 629 ff.; Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 89; -cf. Fowler, <i>Roman Festivals</i>, 71-2, 302-6. On the stultorum feriae, see Wissowa, -ibid. 142; Fowler, ibid. 304 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_56" href="#FNanchor_56" class="label">[56]</a> Dion. Hal. ii. 23. 1; Fest. 245. 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_57" href="#FNanchor_57" class="label">[57]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 83; vi. 46; Dion. Hal. 64. 1; 65. 4; Fest. ep. 49, 62; Lyd. -<i>De Mag.</i> i. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_58" href="#FNanchor_58" class="label">[58]</a> Dion. Hal. ii. 22. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_59" href="#FNanchor_59" class="label">[59]</a> <i>CIL.</i> vi. 1892; xiv. 296; Gell. xv. 27. 2; cf. Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 12. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_60" href="#FNanchor_60" class="label">[60]</a> Fest. ep. 64: “Curiales flamines curiarum sacerdotes.” For the flamen of the -Curia Iovis of Simitthus, see <i>CIL.</i> viii. 14683; cf. 2596 and 11008. The statement -of Festus, 154. 26, that there were but fifteen flamines must be modified. But there -may have been fewer than thirty curial flamines; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 390. -Of the two curial officials mentioned by Dionysius, ii. 21. 2, therefore, one was the -curio and the other a lictor (Mommsen, ibid. 309, n. 5; Genz, <i>Patr. Rom.</i>, 47) or a -flamen (Holzapfel, in <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> i. 242).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_61" href="#FNanchor_61" class="label">[61]</a> Cf. Wissowa, <i>Rel. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 338, n. 3, 413, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_62" href="#FNanchor_62" class="label">[62]</a> Livy iii. 7. 7; xxvii. 8. 1; Fest. ep. 126. This official was probably instituted -after the curiones had become mere priests; Genz, ibid. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_63" href="#FNanchor_63" class="label">[63]</a> P. 157. The comitium was a place of assembly adjoining the Forum.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_64" href="#FNanchor_64" class="label">[64]</a> II. 7. 2 f.; 23. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_65" href="#FNanchor_65" class="label">[65]</a> Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 52, 65, following J. J. Müller, in <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv -(1874), 96-136, refuses to credit a military character to the curiae because it is mentioned -by no other writer and because we can find no trace of it in historical time. -His reasoning is not cogent. The curia may have lost its earlier military function, -as did the phratry (<i>Il.</i> ii. 362 f.).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_66" href="#FNanchor_66" class="label">[66]</a> That the antiquarians had some evidence as to the military character of the -curiae is suggested by Fest. ep. 54: “Centuriata comitia item curiata dicebantur, -quia populus Romanus per cetenas turmas divisus erat.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_67" href="#FNanchor_67" class="label">[67]</a> <i>Il.</i> ii. 362 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_68" href="#FNanchor_68" class="label">[68]</a> Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 7. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_69" href="#FNanchor_69" class="label">[69]</a> Schrader, <i>Reallex.</i> 349 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_70" href="#FNanchor_70" class="label">[70]</a> All adult male citizens had a right to attend this assembly, all who were physically -qualified and of military age were liable to service when called to it; but probably -on no occasion were those present in the assembly identical with the military levy -of the year; cf. p. 203.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_71" href="#FNanchor_71" class="label">[71]</a> P. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_72" href="#FNanchor_72" class="label">[72]</a> II. 7. 4. The curiales must have been neighbors in order to use a common drying -oven; n. 8 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_73" href="#FNanchor_73" class="label">[73]</a> Fest. 174. 12. The first is evidently named after the Forum, the second after the -Velia; cf. Plut. <i>Rom.</i> 20, who states that many were named after places. Of the other -five Velitia (Fest. ibid.), Titia (ibid. ep. 366), Faucia (Livy ix. 38. 15), and Acculeia -(Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 23) have gentile endings. We should not imagine these four to be -named after gentes, which were of later origin; Botsford, in <i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxi. -(1907). 685 ff. It would be safer to assume that they, like gentilicia, are derived -from the names of persons real or imaginary. Rapta (Fest. 174. 12) and Titia possibly -suggested to the ancients the derivation of the curial names from those of the -captive Sabine women; cf. p. 8, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_74" href="#FNanchor_74" class="label">[74]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 12. 2. This statement is confirmed by the nature of the Fornacalia, -the chief festival of the curiae; it was celebrated in connection with the drying of -the far in ovens; Pliny <i>N. H.</i> xviii. 2. 8; Fest. ep. 83, 93. Evidently the members -of a curia were those who had a common drying oven; Wissowa, <i>Rel. u. Kult. d. -Röm.</i> 142.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_75" href="#FNanchor_75" class="label">[75]</a> Διῄρηνται δὲ καὶ εἰς δεκάδας αἰ φράτραι, πρὸς αὑτοῦ, καὶ ἡγεμὼν ἐκὰστην ἐκόσμει -δεκάδα, δεκουρίων κατὰ τὴν ἐπιχώριον, γλῶτταν προσαγομευόμενος.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_76" href="#FNanchor_76" class="label">[76]</a> Polyb. vi. 25. 1; cf. 20. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_77" href="#FNanchor_77" class="label">[77]</a> <i>L. L.</i> v. 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_78" href="#FNanchor_78" class="label">[78]</a> There is no need of assuming, with Bloch, <i>Origines du sénat Romain</i>, 102-5, -that the decuriae mentioned by Dionysius are “purely imaginary.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_79" href="#FNanchor_79" class="label">[79]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 334 f.; Eng. 163; cf. also Schwegler, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 612 f. The -antiquated view is still held by Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 96, and by Lécrivain, in -Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> ii. 1504. Though Ihne, <i>History of Rome</i>, i. 113, n. 3, -believes that the curiae were composed of gentes, he is doubtful as to the number.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_80" href="#FNanchor_80" class="label">[80]</a> “Cum ex generibus hominum suffragium feratur, curiata comitia esse; cum ex -censu et aetate, centuriata; cum ex regionibus et locis, tributa.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_81" href="#FNanchor_81" class="label">[81]</a> Mommsen, too, supposes that genera here means gentes but is used so as to include -also the plebeian stirpes; nevertheless he knows that the voting in the curiate -assembly was by heads rather than by gentes; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 9, n. 2; 90, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_82" href="#FNanchor_82" class="label">[82]</a> Livy i. 43. 10: “Viritim suffragium ... omnibus datum est” (i.e. in the -curiate assembly). This statement of the lack of relation between the gens and the -curia is repeated from <i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxi. 511 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_83" href="#FNanchor_83" class="label">[83]</a> It is in the main a reproduction of my article on the subject in <i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> -xxi (1906). 498-526.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_84" href="#FNanchor_84" class="label">[84]</a> P. 25 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_85" href="#FNanchor_85" class="label">[85]</a> <i>Rep.</i> ii. 8. 14; 12. 23: “Senatus, qui constabat ex optimatibus, quibus ipse rex -tantum tribuisset, ut eos patres vellet nominari patriciosque eorum liberos.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_86" href="#FNanchor_86" class="label">[86]</a> In the expression “omnibus patriciis, omnibus antiquissimis civibus,” Cicero -(<i>Caec.</i> 35. 101) intends no more than to include the patricians among the oldest -citizens, whom he is contrasting with the newly-admitted municipes. Only the -most superficial examination of the passage (cf. Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 7) could make -“omnibus patriciis” equivalent to “omnibus antiquissimis civibus.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_87" href="#FNanchor_87" class="label">[87]</a> I. 8. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_88" href="#FNanchor_88" class="label">[88]</a> Ibid.: “Consilium deinde viribus parat: centum creat senatores.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_89" href="#FNanchor_89" class="label">[89]</a> Livy iv. 4. 7: “Nobilitatem istam vestram quam plerique oriundi ex Albanis et -Sabinis non genere nec sanguine sed per coöptationem in patres habetis, aut ab regibus -lecti aut post reges exactos iussu populi.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_90" href="#FNanchor_90" class="label">[90]</a> Livy i. 34. 6: “In novo populo, ubi omnis repentina atque ex virtute nobilitas -sit.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_91" href="#FNanchor_91" class="label">[91]</a> II. 8. 1-3. In 12. 1, he shifts his point of view: Romulus chose the hundred -original senators from the patricians.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_92" href="#FNanchor_92" class="label">[92]</a> <i>Rom.</i> 13; cf. <i>Q. R.</i> 58.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_93" href="#FNanchor_93" class="label">[93]</a> Cf. further Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> iii. 127; Vell. i. 8. 6; Fest. 246. 23; 339. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_94" href="#FNanchor_94" class="label">[94]</a> There is no inconsistency, however, in the fact that some noble gentes claimed -descent from Aeneas or from deities (cf. Seeley, <i>Livy</i>, 57) or from Alban or Sabine -ancestors (cf. Livy i. 30. 2; iv. 4. 7; Dion. Hal. ii. 46. 3; iii. 29. 7); they were -nobles in their original homes before the founding of Rome, but became patricians -by an act only of the Roman government.</p> - -<p>Although after the creation of the first hundred patres, the ancients do not distinctly -state that each newly-made senator was the founder of a new patrician family, -they do represent the enlargement of the senate and of the patriciate as going hand -in hand; in this way they continue to make the patriciate depend upon membership -in the senate; cf. Livy i. 30. 2; 35. 6; Dion. Hal. ii. 47. 1; iii. 67. 1; Madvig, -<i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_95" href="#FNanchor_95" class="label">[95]</a> <i>Rep.</i>, ii. 8. 14; cf. (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> ii. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_96" href="#FNanchor_96" class="label">[96]</a> <i>Cat.</i> 6. 6; cf. Isid. <i>Etym.</i> ix. 6. 10: “Nam sicut patres suos, ita illi rem publicam -habebant” (or “alebant”).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_97" href="#FNanchor_97" class="label">[97]</a> I. 8. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_98" href="#FNanchor_98" class="label">[98]</a> 339. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_99" href="#FNanchor_99" class="label">[99]</a> 247.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_100" href="#FNanchor_100" class="label">[100]</a> ii. 8. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_101" href="#FNanchor_101" class="label">[101]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 227.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_102" href="#FNanchor_102" class="label">[102]</a> From the root pa, to protect, preserve, conservare; Pott, <i>Wurzel-Wörterb. d. -Indog. Spr.</i> (2d ed.), 221; Corssen, <i>Ausspr.</i> i. 424; Schrader, <i>Sprachvergl. u. Urgesch.</i> -538; Lécrivain, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> ii. 1507.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_103" href="#FNanchor_103" class="label">[103]</a> <i>Dig.</i> 1. 16. 195. 2: “Pater familias appellatur qui in domo dominium habet.” -In like manner patronus is protector of clients, pater patriae protector of his country; -Pott, ibid. 227.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_104" href="#FNanchor_104" class="label">[104]</a> Ulpian, in <i>Dig.</i>, ibid.: “Pater autem familias recte hoc nomine appellatur, -quamvis filium non habeat; non enim solam personam eius, sed et ius demonstramus: -denique et pupillum patrem familias appellamus.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_105" href="#FNanchor_105" class="label">[105]</a> Livy i. 32. 10 (from a fetial formula).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_106" href="#FNanchor_106" class="label">[106]</a> Rubino, <i>Röm. Verfassung und Geschichte</i>, 186; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 228, -n. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_107" href="#FNanchor_107" class="label">[107]</a> In the same way reges is made to include the whole family of the rex; Livy i. -39. 2. For other illustrations of the same principle, see Rubino, ibid. 188, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_108" href="#FNanchor_108" class="label">[108]</a> The Twelve Tables seem to apply it to all patricians, not to senators alone: -Cicero, <i>Rep.</i> ii. 37. 63: “Conubia ... ut ne plebei cum patribus essent;” Livy iv. -4. 5: “Ne conubium patribus cum plebe esset.” These passages, however, do not -afford absolute proof; for Gaius, bk. vi <i>ad legem Duodecim Tabularum</i> (<i>Dig.</i> 1. 16. -238: “Plebs est ceteri cives sine senatoribus”), probably commenting on the very -law quoted by Cicero and Livy, seems to understand patres as senators; cf. the prohibition -of intermarriage between senators and their agnatic descendants on the one -hand and freed persons on the other; <i>Dig.</i> xxii. 2. 44; Roby, <i>Rom. Priv. Law</i>, -i. 130; Vassis, in <i>Athena</i>, xii. 57 f. In some instances, however, as in the expression -“a patribus transire ad plebem” (Vell. ii. 45. 1) patres is certainly equivalent -to patricii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_109" href="#FNanchor_109" class="label">[109]</a> Cf. gentilicius from gentilis; tribunicius from tribunus, Pott, ibid. 227. Patricius -is an adjective signifying paternal, ancestral, belonging to parents or progenitors; -Corssen, ibid. i. 53.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_110" href="#FNanchor_110" class="label">[110]</a> In his work on the Comitia, quoted by Fest. 241. 21: “Patricios eos appellari -solitos qui nunc ingenui vocentur.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_111" href="#FNanchor_111" class="label">[111]</a> X. 8. 10: “En umquam fando audistis patricios primo esse factos non de caelo -demissos, sed qui patrem ciere possent, id est nihil ultra quam ingenuos...?”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_112" href="#FNanchor_112" class="label">[112]</a> VI. 40. 6. The speaker contrasts ingenui with patricii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_113" href="#FNanchor_113" class="label">[113]</a> Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 58: Those who were first constituted senators by Romulus were -called patres and patricii as being men of good birth, who could show their pedigree. -In its adjectival and adverbial uses ingenuus connotes not the quality of free birth, -but respectability, nobility. The original meaning is “born within,” hence indigenous, -native; cf. Forcellini, <i>Totius Latinitatis Lexicon</i>, s. v. In this sense it could -not apply to the patricians, who generally claimed a foreign origin. But native is -superior to alien; doubtless in this secondary meaning of excellence it attached to -the nobility, the close relation of the word to gens (family, lineage) attracting it in -that direction. Afterward it was so democratized as to include all the freeborn. -With this meaning we find it as early as Plautus, <i>Mil.</i> 784, 961. According to -Dionysius, ii. 8. 3, the identification of patricii with ingenui in its sense of freeborn -was accepted not by the most trustworthy historians, but by certain malicious -slanderers: “Some say they were called patricians because they alone could cite -their fathers, the rest being fugitives and unable to cite free fathers.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_114" href="#FNanchor_114" class="label">[114]</a> P. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_115" href="#FNanchor_115" class="label">[115]</a> The word is probably derived from the same root as populus; Corssen, <i>Ausspr.</i> -i. 368; cf. p. 1, n. 3 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_116" href="#FNanchor_116" class="label">[116]</a> <i>Rep.</i> ii. 9. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_117" href="#FNanchor_117" class="label">[117]</a> ii. 9. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_118" href="#FNanchor_118" class="label">[118]</a> Notably among the Sabines, Livy ii. 16. 4; Dion. Hal. ii. 46. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_119" href="#FNanchor_119" class="label">[119]</a> Cicero, <i>Rep.</i> ii. 9. 16; Dion. Hal. ii. 9. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_120" href="#FNanchor_120" class="label">[120]</a> Cf. the citations in Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 71, n. 1. Dionysius, ii. 63. 3, -distinguished the two classes as early as the interregnum which followed Romulus.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_121" href="#FNanchor_121" class="label">[121]</a> Dion. Hal. v. 40. 3; vi. 47. 1; vii. 19. 2; x. 43. As late as 134 Scipio called -his clients to follow him to the Numantine war; Appian, <i>Iber.</i> 84.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_122" href="#FNanchor_122" class="label">[122]</a> Livy iii. 58. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_123" href="#FNanchor_123" class="label">[123]</a> Dion. Hal. ii. 10. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_124" href="#FNanchor_124" class="label">[124]</a> Livy ii. 56. 3; 64. 2; Dion. Hal. ii. 10. 3; iv. 23. 6; ix. 41. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_125" href="#FNanchor_125" class="label">[125]</a> Dion. Hal. ii. 10. 3 (it was not lawful for either patron or client to vote against -the other). Marius, a client of Herennius, was elected to the praetorship; Plut. -<i>Mar.</i> 5. A law declared that election to a curule office (according to Plutarch, or -as Marius asserted to any office) freed a man and his family from clientage. Evidently -this law was passed in or after 367 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> Mucius, a client of Ti. Gracchus, -was elected to the plebeian tribunate; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 13. Cn. Flavius, who was -the son of a freedman and probably therefore a client, was elected curule aedile for -304; Livy ix. 46. 1; Val. Max. ii. 5. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_126" href="#FNanchor_126" class="label">[126]</a> Gaius 1. 3: “Plebs autem a populo eo distat, quod populi appellatione universi -cives significantur connumeratis etiam patriciis; plebis autem appellatione sine -patriciis ceteri cives significantur.” Evidently Pomponius held the same view; <i>Dig.</i> -i. 2. 2. 1-6; cf. Capito, in Gell. x. 20. 5; Fest. 233. 29; 330. 19; Isid. <i>Etym.</i> ix. 6. -5 f.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 4, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_127" href="#FNanchor_127" class="label">[127]</a> Cicero, <i>Rep.</i> ii. 12. 23; Livy i. 8. 7; Zon. vii. 9; Isid. <i>Etym.</i> ix. 6. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_128" href="#FNanchor_128" class="label">[128]</a> Illustrations of this common use are Cicero, <i>Rep.</i> ii. 8. 14; 12. 23; Livy ii. 54. -3; iv. 51. 3; x. 13. 9; xxv. 2. 9; 3. 13; 3. 16; xxx. 27. 3; xxxiv. 54. 4; xxxvii. 58. -1; xliii. 8. 9. The Greeks always regard populus as the equivalent of δῆμος; cf. Plut. -<i>Rom.</i> 13. Not only does the tribune in addressing the plebs call them populus -Romanus (Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 31), but the consuls also apply the term to the same class -(Livy xxv. 4. 4); and a statement of Cicero (<i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 7. 17), which has the -appearance of a legal definition, makes the people of the thirty-five tribes under a -tribune the universus populus Romanus.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_129" href="#FNanchor_129" class="label">[129]</a> <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 172.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_130" href="#FNanchor_130" class="label">[130]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> x. 35; <i>Verr.</i> v. 14. 36; <i>Mur.</i> 1. 1; Livy xxix. 27. 2: Tac. <i>Ann.</i> 1. 8; -Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> 1. 17. 28; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 169, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_131" href="#FNanchor_131" class="label">[131]</a> E.g. senatui populo plebique Romanae; Cicero, <i>Fam.</i> x. 35 (address).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_132" href="#FNanchor_132" class="label">[132]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 6, n. 4; Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 84.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_133" href="#FNanchor_133" class="label">[133]</a> For the division of the populus into tribes and curiae, see Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 8. 14; -Livy i. 13. 6; Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 2; App. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 94. The author of <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 2. 12, -in supposing that the plebs alone were assigned to the tribes is certainly wrong; -but his mistake is pardonable in view of the general agreement among our sources -that the populus, πλῆθος, contained in the curiae were mainly plebeian.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_134" href="#FNanchor_134" class="label">[134]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 7. 13; 8. 14; 18. 33; Livy i. 13. 4; 13. 6; 28. 7; 30. 1; 33. 1-5; -Dion. Hal. ii. 46. 2 f.; 47. 1; 50. 4 f.; 55. 6; iii. 29. 7; 30. 3; 31. 3; 37. 4; 48. 2; -iv. 22. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_135" href="#FNanchor_135" class="label">[135]</a> Cf. Dion. Hal. ii. 8. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_136" href="#FNanchor_136" class="label">[136]</a> Livy i. 17. 11; 35. 2; 43. 10; 46. 1; Dion. Hal. ii. 10. 3; 14. 3; 60. 3; 62. 3; -iv. 12. 3; 20. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_137" href="#FNanchor_137" class="label">[137]</a> Cf. <i>Lectures on the History of Rome</i>, i. 80, 83: “I beg you to mark this well -... that even ingenious and learned men like Livy and Dionysius did not comprehend -the ancient institutions and yet have preserved a number of expressions from -their predecessors from which we, with much labor and difficulty, may elicit the -truth.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_138" href="#FNanchor_138" class="label">[138]</a> The school of Mommsen, which still clings to Niebuhr’s theory of an exclusively -patrician populus, has abandoned the attempt to support it by a reconstruction of -lost sources.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_139" href="#FNanchor_139" class="label">[139]</a> The late regal period may have left a few documents which, if used by the annalists, -might have thrown light on the condition of that time. It has not yet been determined -whether the inscription recently found in the Roman Forum belongs to the -late regal or to the early republican period.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_140" href="#FNanchor_140" class="label">[140]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 69, grants to the ancients far more knowledge of -their own history, but claims a “wider horizon.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_141" href="#FNanchor_141" class="label">[141]</a> Niebuhr treats Dionysius with great respect; cf. <i>Lectures</i>, i. liv: “The longer and -more carefully the work is examined, the more must true criticism acknowledge that -it is deserving of all respect, and the more it will be found a storehouse of most -solid information.” Schwegler, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 621 f., and 626 f., assumes that Dionysius -is alone responsible for the view that the plebeians were in the primitive tribes -and the curiae. A glance at the citations given above, p. 24 f., will show, however, -that Cicero and Livy shared this view.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_142" href="#FNanchor_142" class="label">[142]</a> Cf. Pais, <i>Storia di Roma</i>, I. 1. 82. The usual opinion (cf. Bernhöft, <i>Röm. -Königsz.</i> 8 f.) is that the sources of Dionysius are later and less trustworthy than -those of Livy, but Pais asserts that on the whole the two authors drew from the same -sources.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_143" href="#FNanchor_143" class="label">[143]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 339, Eng. 165.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_144" href="#FNanchor_144" class="label">[144]</a> <i>Lectures on Roman History</i>, i. 81, 100 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_145" href="#FNanchor_145" class="label">[145]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 332, Eng. 158.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_146" href="#FNanchor_146" class="label">[146]</a> In ibid. i. 330, Eng. 162, he excludes the “freed clients” from the gens; in 339, -Eng. 165, he states that the nobles alone <i>had</i> the gens, the clients belonged to it in a -dependent capacity.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_147" href="#FNanchor_147" class="label">[147]</a> Cf. the edition of Sandys, 252; Rose, <i>Aristotelis Frag.</i> 385.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_148" href="#FNanchor_148" class="label">[148]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 326, Eng. 160. Genz, <i>Patricisches Rom</i>, 6, has the same idea.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_149" href="#FNanchor_149" class="label">[149]</a> <i>Il.</i> ii. 362 f.; ix. 63 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_150" href="#FNanchor_150" class="label">[150]</a> <i>CIA.</i> i. 61; cf. Dem. xliii. 57.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_151" href="#FNanchor_151" class="label">[151]</a> This is illustrated, for instance, by a law quoted by Philochorus, in Müller, <i>Frag. -Hist. Graec.</i> i. 399. 94: Τοὺς δὲ φράτορας ἐπάναγκες δέχεσθαι καὶ τοὺς ὀργεῶνας καὶ -τοὺς ὁμογάλακτας, οὺς γεννῆτας καλοῦμεν (“The members of the phratry must receive -the orgeones as well as the homogalaktes, whom we call gennetae”). This fact is -now too well known to need further proof; cf. Gilbert, <i>Constitutional Antiquities of -Sparta and Athens</i>, 148 f.; Thumser, <i>Griechische Staatsaltertümer</i>, 324 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_152" href="#FNanchor_152" class="label">[152]</a> P. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_153" href="#FNanchor_153" class="label">[153]</a> <i>Top.</i> 6. 29: “Gentiles sunt inter se, qui eodem nomine sunt. Non est satis. -Qui ab ingenuis oriundi sunt. Ne id quidem satis est. Quorum maiorum nemo -servitutem servivit. Abest etiam nunc. Qui capite non sunt deminuti. Hoc fortasse -satis est. Nihil enim video Scaevolam pontificem ad hanc definitionem addidisse;” -cf. Cincius, in Fest. ep. 94.</p> - -<p>As the word itself indicates, gentiles are members of a gens, and no other -members are known to the sources. If it were true, as Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. -66, supposes, that there were dependent members not termed gentiles, a name would -have been given this dependent relation, or the jurists would have defined it, or -some ancient writer would at least have mentioned it. The attempt of Kübler, -<i>Wochenschr. f. kl. Philol.</i> xxv (1908). 541 f., to prove, on the authority of Cicero, -<i>Tim.</i> 11. 41, that clients were termed quasi gentiles is simply absurd. The passage -does not even hint at clientage; and the quasi gentiles of the immortal gods, according -to this passage, were related to the gods by birth, as the word gignatis proves. -From this point of view men might be called the children of the gods; but because -the divine element in both men and gods comes alike from the Creator, it is -possible to place them more nearly on a level with one another—in a relation like -that of gentiles. Kübler’s other remarks on the gens, 539-43, are equally unconvincing.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_154" href="#FNanchor_154" class="label">[154]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 16. 32; Livy iv. 16. 3; Suet. <i>Aug.</i> 2. Whether these two gentes had -ever been patrician does not affect the question at issue.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_155" href="#FNanchor_155" class="label">[155]</a> Val. Max. ix. 2. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_156" href="#FNanchor_156" class="label">[156]</a> Cic. <i>Har. Resp.</i> 15. 32, mentions sacrificia gentilicia of the Calpurnia.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_157" href="#FNanchor_157" class="label">[157]</a> Suet. <i>Ner.</i> 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_158" href="#FNanchor_158" class="label">[158]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 13. 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_159" href="#FNanchor_159" class="label">[159]</a> Fest. ep. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_160" href="#FNanchor_160" class="label">[160]</a> Varro, <i>R. R.</i> i. 2. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_161" href="#FNanchor_161" class="label">[161]</a> Unless Sp. Cassius, consul 502, 493, 486 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> and author of the first agrarian -rogation, is a myth; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 94.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_162" href="#FNanchor_162" class="label">[162]</a> Cf. Cic. <i>Orat.</i> i. 39. 176. The patrician and plebeian branches are sometimes -spoken of as distinct gentes; Suet. <i>Tib.</i> 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_163" href="#FNanchor_163" class="label">[163]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 113 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, ibid. 359.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_164" href="#FNanchor_164" class="label">[164]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 13. 32; Gell. ix. 2. 11; Fest. ep. 125.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_165" href="#FNanchor_165" class="label">[165]</a> Mommsen, ibid. 116.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_166" href="#FNanchor_166" class="label">[166]</a> L. Poplilius Volscus, patrician; Livy v. 12. 10. Q. Publilius Philo, plebeian; -Livy viii. 15. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_167" href="#FNanchor_167" class="label">[167]</a> This patrician gens included an Aebutius who was tribune of the plebs (Cic. -<i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 8. 21) and several other plebeians; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -i. 442 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_168" href="#FNanchor_168" class="label">[168]</a> Mommsen, ibid. 117 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_169" href="#FNanchor_169" class="label">[169]</a> V. 14. 4: “Comitiis auspicato quae fierent indignum dis visum honores volgari -discriminaque gentium confundi.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_170" href="#FNanchor_170" class="label">[170]</a> <i>Dom.</i> 13. 35: “Ita perturbatis sacris, contaminatis gentibus, et quam deseruisti -et quam poluisti.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_171" href="#FNanchor_171" class="label">[171]</a> Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 95. 3; Livy iii. 27. 1; 33. 9; vi. 11. 2; Gell. x. 20. 5; cf. ix. 2. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_172" href="#FNanchor_172" class="label">[172]</a> <i>L. L.</i> viii. 4: “Ut in hominibus quaedam sunt agnationes ac gentilitates, sic in -verbis.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_173" href="#FNanchor_173" class="label">[173]</a> In <i>Lib. Praen.</i> 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_174" href="#FNanchor_174" class="label">[174]</a> It will suffice to quote Gaius iii. 17: “Si nullus agnatus sit, eadem lex XII Tabularum -gentiles ad hereditatem vocat”; cf. Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 45. 115: “Lege hereditas -ad gentem Minuciam veniebat.” The Minucian gens was plebeian. Its right to the -inheritance in question rested on this law of the Twelve Tables. For the gentile -right of tutelage, see the so-called Laudatio Turiae, 15, 22 (<i>CIL.</i> vi. 1527; Girard, -<i>Textes</i>, 778).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_175" href="#FNanchor_175" class="label">[175]</a> Cf. p. 20; see also Auct. Inc. <i>De Diff.</i> 527 (Keil): “Gens seriem maiorum -explicat.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_176" href="#FNanchor_176" class="label">[176]</a> E.g. “Family will take a person everywhere”; C. D. Warner, quoted by the -<i>Standard Dictionary</i>, s. v.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_177" href="#FNanchor_177" class="label">[177]</a> Mommsen’s theory of the gens—a development from Niebuhr’s—is criticized -in <i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxii (1907). 668 f. The distinction between patrician gentes and -plebeian stirpes, on which he especially relies, is there shown to be groundless.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_178" href="#FNanchor_178" class="label">[178]</a> Gell. xv. 27. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_179" href="#FNanchor_179" class="label">[179]</a> II. 8. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_180" href="#FNanchor_180" class="label">[180]</a> <i>Sén. Rom.</i> ii. 34 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_181" href="#FNanchor_181" class="label">[181]</a> <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 233 f.; 247 f.; cf. Genz, <i>Patr. Rom</i>, 70. On the patrum -auctoritas, see p. 235 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_182" href="#FNanchor_182" class="label">[182]</a> E.g. <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> ii. 359; iii. 168; Eng. ii. 147; iii. 73: “the common council -of the patres—the curies.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_183" href="#FNanchor_183" class="label">[183]</a> <i>Cic.</i> Frag. A. vii. 48; Livy ii. 56, especially § 3; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 1; ix. 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_184" href="#FNanchor_184" class="label">[184]</a> Livy xxvii. 8. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_185" href="#FNanchor_185" class="label">[185]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 148.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_186" href="#FNanchor_186" class="label">[186]</a> <i>Cic. Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 12. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_187" href="#FNanchor_187" class="label">[187]</a> <i>Cic. Dom.</i> 14. 38; Livy vi. 41. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_188" href="#FNanchor_188" class="label">[188]</a> P. 185 below; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 147 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_189" href="#FNanchor_189" class="label">[189]</a> In the face of all evidence to the contrary two or three scholars persist in maintaining -essentially the opinion of Niebuhr that through the republic the curiae continued -patrician. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 98 f., 108, 1014, n. 2, imagines that -from the beginning the clients belonged to the curia in its administrative capacity, -shared in its sacra, attended its meetings, but did not vote. The plebs, however, -were not even passive members. His reasons do not deserve mention. Vassis, -Ῥωμαών Πολιτεία ἡ βασιλευομένη κα ἡ ἐλευθέρα (Athens, 1903), also excludes the -commons from the curiate assembly throughout its history. The fancies of Hoffmann, -<i>Patr. und pleb. Curien</i>, need not detain us.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_190" href="#FNanchor_190" class="label">[190]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 623 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_191" href="#FNanchor_191" class="label">[191]</a> Cf. p. 152, 172.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_192" href="#FNanchor_192" class="label">[192]</a> Cf. p. 170, 172.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_193" href="#FNanchor_193" class="label">[193]</a> P. 173 ff., 345.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_194" href="#FNanchor_194" class="label">[194]</a> P. 75, 96, 209.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_195" href="#FNanchor_195" class="label">[195]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 625, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_196" href="#FNanchor_196" class="label">[196]</a> <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 140 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_197" href="#FNanchor_197" class="label">[197]</a> <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 269; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 92. Clason, <i>Krit. Erört. über den röm. -Staat</i>, 12, supposes they were admitted by the Ogulnian law, in 300. Genz, <i>Patr. -Rom</i>, 41, 62, places their admission not earlier than the institution of the Servian -tribes and not later than the decemvirate, greatly preferring the latter date.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_198" href="#FNanchor_198" class="label">[198]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 13; <i>Abriss</i>, 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_199" href="#FNanchor_199" class="label">[199]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 54 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_200" href="#FNanchor_200" class="label">[200]</a> Ibid. iii. 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_201" href="#FNanchor_201" class="label">[201]</a> Ibid. iii. 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_202" href="#FNanchor_202" class="label">[202]</a> Ibid. iii. 67 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_203" href="#FNanchor_203" class="label">[203]</a> Ibid. i. 91, n. 1; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 261 f. Reference here is only to -the auspicia publica of the magistrates. It is established below (p. 101 ff.) that -from the beginning the plebeians had a right to private auspices.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_204" href="#FNanchor_204" class="label">[204]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 77.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_205" href="#FNanchor_205" class="label">[205]</a> Cf. Töpffer, <i>Attische Genealogie</i>, 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_206" href="#FNanchor_206" class="label">[206]</a> <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_207" href="#FNanchor_207" class="label">[207]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 109.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_208" href="#FNanchor_208" class="label">[208]</a> P. 69.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_209" href="#FNanchor_209" class="label">[209]</a> <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 106 f. and n. 80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_210" href="#FNanchor_210" class="label">[210]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_211" href="#FNanchor_211" class="label">[211]</a> <i>Rep.</i> ii. 20. 35: “Duplicavit illum pristinum patrum numerum et antiquos patres -maiorum gentium appellavit, quos priores sententiam rogabat, a se adscitos minorum.” -The connection shows that Cicero is speaking of two classes of senators distinguished -by the rank of the gentes from which they respectively came.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_212" href="#FNanchor_212" class="label">[212]</a> P. 28 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_213" href="#FNanchor_213" class="label">[213]</a> P. 11 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_214" href="#FNanchor_214" class="label">[214]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_215" href="#FNanchor_215" class="label">[215]</a> P. 17 f. and notes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_216" href="#FNanchor_216" class="label">[216]</a> P. 20 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_217" href="#FNanchor_217" class="label">[217]</a> For the sources, see Schwegler, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 459 f.; Stengel, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 1885.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_218" href="#FNanchor_218" class="label">[218]</a> <i>Andeutungen über den urspr. Religionsunterschied der röm. Patr. und Pleb.</i> 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_219" href="#FNanchor_219" class="label">[219]</a> Cf. Livy xxxv. 51. 2; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> ii. 761. Schwegler, ibid. 464-8, who insists -on this fact, shows clearly that no historical value attaches to the myth; see also -Pais, <i>Storia di Roma</i>, I. i. 218, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_220" href="#FNanchor_220" class="label">[220]</a> Pais, ibid. 217 ff. Dionysius, i. 4. 2 f., expressly states that this story is a Greek -falsification.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_221" href="#FNanchor_221" class="label">[221]</a> See the examples collected by Pais, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_222" href="#FNanchor_222" class="label">[222]</a> Cf. Livy i. 8. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_223" href="#FNanchor_223" class="label">[223]</a> Cf. ibid. ii. 1. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_224" href="#FNanchor_224" class="label">[224]</a> Dionysius, i. 85. 3, states that the colonists from Alba were mostly plebeians, but -that a considerable number of the highest nobility accompanied them. It is a significant -fact, however, that no patrician family is known to have derived its origin -from this earliest colony. Those who claimed Alban and Trojan descent preferred -to connect their admission to citizenship with the Roman annexation of Alba Longa, -e.g. the Tullii, Servilii, Quinctii, Geganii, Curiatii, and Cloelii; Livy i. 30. 2. On the -Alban and Sabine origin of most of the nobility, Livy iv. 4. 7. In so far as the local -cognomina are indicative of origin (cf. Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 11 ff.), they point to a -diversity of foreign connections. The Tarquinian gens, which in later time was -thought of as patrician, came from Etruria, ultimately from Greece. The Aemilii -were Greek (Plut. <i>Aem.</i> 1; Fest. ep. 23) or Sabine (Plut. <i>Num.</i> 8) or Oscan (Fest. -130. 1).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_225" href="#FNanchor_225" class="label">[225]</a> Cf. p. 31 above. For details, see <i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxii. 679 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_226" href="#FNanchor_226" class="label">[226]</a> That Caere was the first community to receive the civitas sine suffragio may -justly be inferred from the expression “Caerite franchise,” which designates this kind -of limited citizenship (cf. p. 62). The general fact stated in (6) is further confirmed -by the law which granted the right of extending the pomerium to those magistrates -only who had acquired new territory for Rome; Gell. xiii. 14. 3; Tacitus, <i>Ann.</i> -xii. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_227" href="#FNanchor_227" class="label">[227]</a> Since the publication of the <i>Staatsrecht</i>, writers have made slight modifications or -extensions of the conventional theory. Greenidge, in Poste, <i>Gaii Institutiones</i>, xix, -suggests that the dual forms in Roman law may have as their basis a racial distinction -between the patricians and the plebeians. A serious objection to this kind of reasoning -is that if we are on the lookout for dualities, trinities, and the like, we shall find -them in abundance everywhere. All sorts of theories as to the racial connections -of the two social classes have been proposed. Zöller, <i>Latium und Rom</i>, 23 ff., -supposes that the patricians were Sabine and the plebeians Latin. Ridgeway, <i>Early -Age of Greece</i>, i. 257, holds that the plebeians were Ligurians, whereas Conway, in -<i>Riv. di Stor. ant.</i> vii (1903). 422-4, prefers to consider them Volscians. These notions -are equally worthless. Undoubtedly race is a potent factor in history; but -Gumplowicz, <i>Rassenkampf</i> (1883), has killed the theory by overwork.</p> - -<p>Among the writers who have rejected the conventional view are Soltau, <i>Altröm. -Volksversamml.</i> (1880); Bernhöft, <i>Röm. Königsz.</i> (1882); Pelham, <i>Outlines of Roman -History</i> (1893; reprint of his article on “Roman History,” in the <i>Encycl. Brit.</i>); -Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Alt.</i> ii (1893); Holzapfel, in <i>Beitr. z. alt. Gesch.</i> i (1902). 254.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_228" href="#FNanchor_228" class="label">[228]</a> Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Alt.</i> ii. 80; Featherman, <i>Social History of the Races of Mankind</i>, -ii. 408; Hellwald, <i>Culturgeschichte</i>, i. 175; Barth, <i>Philosophie der Geschichte</i>, -i. 382. It would be practicable by the citation of authorities to prove the existence -of such distinctions in nearly every community, present or past, whose social condition -is sufficiently known.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_229" href="#FNanchor_229" class="label">[229]</a> Giddings, <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, 124; Tarde, <i>Laws of Imitation</i>, 233 f.; -Fairbanks, <i>Introduction to Sociology</i>, 158; Grave, <i>L’individu et la société</i>, 23; -Funck-Brentano, <i>Civilisation et ses lois</i>, 71 f.; Caspari, <i>Urgeschichte der Menschheit</i>, -i. 125 f.; Hellwald, ibid. i. 175, 177; Ross, <i>Social Control</i>, 80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_230" href="#FNanchor_230" class="label">[230]</a> Giddings, ibid. 262; Ammon, <i>Gesellschaftsordnung</i>, 133 f.; Cherbuliez, <i>Simples -notions de l’ordre social à l’usage de tout le monde</i>, 38 f.; Dechesne, <i>Conception du -droit</i>, 36; Grave, ibid. 23 f.; Caspari, ibid. i. 133 f.; Harris, <i>Civilization considered -as a Science</i>, 211; Lepelletier de la Sarthe, <i>Système sociale</i>, i. 329; Mismer, <i>Principes -sociologiques</i>, 63 f.; Rossbach, <i>Geschichte der Gesellschaft</i>, i. 13 f.; Schurtz, -<i>Urgeschichte der Kultur</i>, 385; Hittell, <i>Mankind in Ancient Times</i>, i. 228 f.; -Maine, <i>Early History of Institutions</i>, 130; Seebohm, <i>Tribal System in Wales</i>, 139; -Post, A. H., <i>Anfänge des Staats- und Rechtslebens</i>, 150 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_231" href="#FNanchor_231" class="label">[231]</a> Giddings, ibid. 262; cf. Arnd, <i>Die materiellen Grundlagen ... der europäischen -Kultur</i>, 444 f.; Frohschammer, <i>Organisation und Kultur der mensch. Gesellschaft</i>, -84 f.; Bastian, <i>Rechtsverhältnisse bei verschiedenen Völkern der Erde</i>, 20 f.; Spencer, -<i>Principles of Sociology</i>, ii. 333, 335.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_232" href="#FNanchor_232" class="label">[232]</a> Frazer, <i>Early Hist. of the Kingship</i>; Spencer, ibid. ii. 338 f.; cf. for the -Malays, Skeat and Blagden, <i>Pagan Races of the Malay Peninsula</i>, 499.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_233" href="#FNanchor_233" class="label">[233]</a> Cf. Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 183; Spencer, ibid. ii. 334 f.; Seebohm, <i>Tribal System -in Wales</i>, 72.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_234" href="#FNanchor_234" class="label">[234]</a> Aristotle, <i>Politics</i>, 1294, a 21; Giddings, <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, 293 f.; Jenks, -<i>History of Politics</i>, 30 f.; Grave, <i>L’individu et la société</i>, 25; Combes de Lestrade, -<i>Éléments de sociologie</i>, 185; Schurtz, <i>Urgeschichte der Kultur</i>, 148, 385; Featherman, -<i>Social History of the Races of Mankind</i>, see index, s. Classes; Hittell, <i>Mankind -in Ancient Times</i>, i. 228; Maine, <i>Early History of Institutions</i>, 134; Ginnell, -<i>Brehon Laws</i>, 60 f.; Farrand, <i>Basis of American History</i>, 114, 201; Bluntschli, -<i>Theory of the State</i>, 149.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_235" href="#FNanchor_235" class="label">[235]</a> Grave, ibid. 30 f.; Combes de Lestrade, ibid. 184 f.; Funck-Brentano, <i>Civilisation -et ses lois</i>, 68 f.; Spencer, ibid. ii. 348 f.; Schurtz, ibid. 150 f.; Featherman, ibid. -ii. 128, 197 f., 311; Letourneau, <i>Sociology</i>, 480 f.; Bastian, <i>Rechtsverhältnisse</i>, 8 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_236" href="#FNanchor_236" class="label">[236]</a> Cf. Schurtz, ibid. 148; Farrand, ibid. 114, 129, 141. For the Malays, see -Skeat and Blagden, ibid. 494 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_237" href="#FNanchor_237" class="label">[237]</a> Maine, ibid. 132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_238" href="#FNanchor_238" class="label">[238]</a> Maine, ibid.; Ginnell, <i>Brehon Laws</i>, 63 f., 93 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_239" href="#FNanchor_239" class="label">[239]</a> Seebohm, <i>Tribal System in Wales</i>, 134 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_240" href="#FNanchor_240" class="label">[240]</a> As in Wales; Seebohm, ibid. 139; cf. the Inca grandees, who all claimed -descent from the founder of the monarchy; Letourneau, <i>Sociology</i>, 479.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_241" href="#FNanchor_241" class="label">[241]</a> Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 13. 3: “Insignis nobilitas aut magna patrum merita principis dignationem -etiam adulescentulis adsignant.” It is clear that the family of a youth who -receives an office or dignity because of the merits of his ancestors is coming near to -nobility.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_242" href="#FNanchor_242" class="label">[242]</a> A certain man of illegitimate birth, hence of inferior social standing, through -martial skill and daring becomes a leader of warriors, acquires wealth, marries the -daughter of a notable, “waxes dread and honorable” among his countrymen, who -elect him to a high military command by the side of their hereditary chief; the taint -of his birth is forgotten; Od., xiv. 199; cf. Bernhöft, <i>Röm. Königsz.</i> 123.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_243" href="#FNanchor_243" class="label">[243]</a> Livy viii. 39. 12; x. 38. 7: “Nobilissimum quemque genere factisque,” with -reference to the Samnites; some were nobles by birth, others by prowess; cf. 46. 4: -“Nobiles aliquot captivi clari suis patrumque factis ducti;” some of these captives -were noble through their own prowess, others through that of their ancestors. The -Samnite nobility was in the formative stage like that of the German nobility in the -time of Tacitus. The Yakonan of California are in this condition; Farrand, <i>Basis -of American History</i>, 129.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_244" href="#FNanchor_244" class="label">[244]</a> Maine, <i>Early Hist. of Inst.</i> 135 f.; Giddings, <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, 294 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_245" href="#FNanchor_245" class="label">[245]</a> Cf. Giddings, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_246" href="#FNanchor_246" class="label">[246]</a> Maine, ibid. 136.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_247" href="#FNanchor_247" class="label">[247]</a> Laws of Athelstan.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_248" href="#FNanchor_248" class="label">[248]</a> Giddings, <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, 296; cf. Maine, <i>Early Hist. of Inst.</i> 141. Thus -in the time of Tacitus the German youth of common blood who entered the comitatus -of a chief had a fair opportunity to become noble; <i>Germ.</i> 13. 3-5; 14. 1 f. Among -the Danes, too, some noble families were once peasant; Maine, ibid. 135.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_249" href="#FNanchor_249" class="label">[249]</a> Brunner, <i>Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte</i>, i. 235 f., 252; Maine, ibid. 138; Ammon, -<i>Gesellschaftsordnung</i>, 135; Schurtz, <i>Urgeschichte der Kultur</i>, 148 f.; Bluntschli, -<i>Theory of the State</i>, 131, 155; Tarde, <i>Laws of Imitation</i>, 237.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_250" href="#FNanchor_250" class="label">[250]</a> Giddings, <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, 315; cf. Combes de Lestrade, <i>Éléments de -sociologie</i>, 185; Rossbach, <i>Gesch. der Gesellsch.</i> i. 14. A nobility formed purely by conquest, -if such indeed exists, must be rare, and can hardly be lasting; Schurtz, -<i>Urgesch. der Kul.</i> 149.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_251" href="#FNanchor_251" class="label">[251]</a> Giddings, ibid. 315; cf. Grave, <i>L’individu et la société</i>, 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_252" href="#FNanchor_252" class="label">[252]</a> Strabo viii. 4. 4, p. 364; Aristotle, <i>Politics</i>, 1270, a 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_253" href="#FNanchor_253" class="label">[253]</a> Schurtz, <i>Urgesch. der Kult.</i> 165.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_254" href="#FNanchor_254" class="label">[254]</a> Ginnell, <i>Brehon Laws</i>, 145.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_255" href="#FNanchor_255" class="label">[255]</a> Bluntschli, <i>Theory of the State</i>, 142; Freeman, <i>Norman Conquest</i>, iv. 11. There -were nobles both in England and in Normandy before the conquest. After the -battle of Senlac most of the English nobles submitted to William, and were allowed to -redeem their lands; Freeman, ibid. iv. 13 f., 36 f. It was only in punishment for -later rebellion that they lost their holdings, and some English thanes were never -displaced; cf. Powell, in Traill, <i>Social England</i>, i. 240.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_256" href="#FNanchor_256" class="label">[256]</a> The most violent and oppressive Germanic invaders are supposed to have been -the Vandals, and yet they doubtless retained for the administration of the government -the trained Roman officials; Hodgkin, <i>Italy and her Invaders</i>, ii. 263. The Ostrogoths -were more liberal in their treatment of the Romans (ibid. iv. 250, 271, 282), -and the Franks still more liberal; Brunner, <i>Deutsche Rechtsgesch.</i> ii. 202.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_257" href="#FNanchor_257" class="label">[257]</a> Featherman, <i>Social History of the Races of Mankind</i>, ii. 354; Tarde, <i>Laws of -Imitation</i>, 238, n. 1, 239; Hellwald, <i>Kulturgesch.</i> i. 175 f.; Schurtz, <i>Urgesch. der Kult.</i> -149; cf. Demolins, <i>Comment la route crée le type social</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_258" href="#FNanchor_258" class="label">[258]</a> P. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_259" href="#FNanchor_259" class="label">[259]</a> P. 37, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_260" href="#FNanchor_260" class="label">[260]</a> P. 31; <i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxii (1907). 679 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_261" href="#FNanchor_261" class="label">[261]</a> The idea that the primitive community is essentially illiberal with its membership -is erroneous. For the mingling of conquerors and conquered, see p. 42 f. and notes. -On the ethnic heterogeneity of states in general, see Gumplowicz, <i>Rassenkampf</i>, 181. -The laws of Solon granted citizenship to alien residents who were in perpetual exile -from their own country, or who had settled with their families in Attica with a view -to plying their trade; Plut. <i>Sol.</i> 24. Under his laws, too, a valid marriage could be -contracted between an Athenian and an alien; Hdt. vi. 130. The Athenians, like -the Romans, believed that many of their noble families were of foreign origin. In -Ireland “strangers settling in the district, conducting themselves well, and intermarrying -with the clan, were after a few generations indistinguishable from it;” -Ginnell, <i>Brehon Laws</i>, 103. Nearly the same rule holds for South Wales; Seebohm, -<i>Tribal System in Wales</i>, 131. To the Germans before their settlement within the -empire the idea of an exclusive community must have been foreign; for as yet the -individual was but loosely attached to his tribe. Persons of many tribes were united -in the comitatus of a chief; the two halves of a tribe often fought on opposite sides -in war; a tribe often chose its chief from another tribe. Intermarriage among the -tribes was common, even between Germans and Sarmatians. A single tribe often -split into several independent tribes, and conversely new tribes were formed of the -most diverse elements; Seeck, <i>Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt</i>, i. 209 -with notes; Kaufmann, <i>Die Germanen der Urzeit</i>, 136 f. Under these circumstances -the primitive German community cannot be described as exclusive. In like manner -our sources unanimously testify to the liberality of early Rome in granting the -citizenship to strangers. It is no longer possible to oppose to this authority the -objection that such generosity does not accord with primitive conditions.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_262" href="#FNanchor_262" class="label">[262]</a> Gaius i. 120 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_263" href="#FNanchor_263" class="label">[263]</a> Mommsen’s theory of gentile ownership, adopted by Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 790, depends upon his view that the gens was as old as the -state; in his opinion it was originally stronger but gradually weakened, whereas the -state went through the opposite process; <i>Röm Staatsr.</i> iii. 25. But if, as I have elsewhere -pointed out (<i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxii. 685 ff.), the gens developed from the family -during the decline of the kingship and the rise of aristocracy, the theory of a primitive -gentile ownership falls to the ground.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_264" href="#FNanchor_264" class="label">[264]</a> We are not to think of the state as granting a certain district to the tribe, which -then parcelled it among the component curiae, etc., for this reason that the tribes and -the curiae did not themselves possess common lands. Rather the state divided a -given district among the families which were already included, or which it wished to -include, in a given curia or tribe. In this way the later tribes were formed in historical -time, and in this way the Claudian tribe was originally constituted; Livy ii. -16. 4 f.; cf. Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 21. When therefore Dionysius, ii. 7. 4, states that Romulus -divided the land into thirty lots and assigned a lot to each of the thirty curiae, he -means, if he correctly understands the matter, that land was assigned not to the curia -as a whole but to the families which composed the curia, unless indeed the curiae -once had a right of landholding not possessed in historical time.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_265" href="#FNanchor_265" class="label">[265]</a> Christ, W., in <i>Sitzb. d. Berl. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> 1906. 207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_266" href="#FNanchor_266" class="label">[266]</a> In the Twelve Tables heredium has the meaning of hortus, “garden;” Pliny, -<i>N. H.</i> xix. 4. 50. It was a praedium parvulum consisting of two iugera; Fest. ep. 99.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_267" href="#FNanchor_267" class="label">[267]</a> In the earliest colonies this was the amount assigned to each man; cf. Livy iv. -47. 6 (Labici); vi. 16. 6 (Satricum); viii. 21. 11 (Tarracina, founded 329). The -first two are not so distinctly historical as the third; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 24, n. -1. Supposing Rome to have been a colony, the historians infer that Romulus made -a similar distribution among its earliest settlers; cf. Varro, <i>R. R.</i> i. 10. 2; Pliny, -<i>N. H.</i> xviii. 2. 7; Fest. ep. 53; Juvenal xiv. 163 f.; Siculus Flaccus 153; Livy vi. -36. 11; Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 21; Columella v. 1. 9; Nissen, <i>Ital. Landesk.</i> ii. 507.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_268" href="#FNanchor_268" class="label">[268]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 23 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_269" href="#FNanchor_269" class="label">[269]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 13. 1; Varro, <i>De vit. pop. rom.</i> i, in Non. Marc. 43; Livy i. 46. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_270" href="#FNanchor_270" class="label">[270]</a> Dion. Hal. v. 57. 3; Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 21. Moreover the division into the five classes -was based on unequal holdings.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_271" href="#FNanchor_271" class="label">[271]</a> Cf. Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Alt.</i> ii. 518, n.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_272" href="#FNanchor_272" class="label">[272]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 168.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_273" href="#FNanchor_273" class="label">[273]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2 might refer to a condition in which land was still inalienable -and the right of changing residence restricted.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_274" href="#FNanchor_274" class="label">[274]</a> The text followed is that of Jacoby. The reading represented by Jordan, <i>Cato</i>, -p. 8, is not satisfactory. We have no ground for impugning the statement of -Dionysius that Fabius actually called the country districts phylae, tribes. He may -have termed them at once μοῖραι, “regions,” and phylae with perfect consistency; -cf. Kubitschek, <i>Rom. trib. or.</i> 7, n. 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_275" href="#FNanchor_275" class="label">[275]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 434-7; English, 205 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_276" href="#FNanchor_276" class="label">[276]</a> <i>Verf. d. Serv.</i> 95 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_277" href="#FNanchor_277" class="label">[277]</a> Cf. Huschke, <i>Verf. d. Serv.</i> 72 ff., who supposed that the twenty-six rural regiones -were in most respects like tribes, but contained only plebeians, who were -politically inferior to the city people; see also Schwegler, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 736 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_278" href="#FNanchor_278" class="label">[278]</a> <i>Röm. Tribus</i>, followed by Grotefend, <i>Imp. rom. trib. descr.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_279" href="#FNanchor_279" class="label">[279]</a> The supposition that there were originally but four rests upon those passages -which mention only that number in connection with Servius, as Livy 1. 43. 13; Fest. -ep. 368; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 7. 7; the discussion of the four city tribes as -though they were the only Servian tribes by Dionysius (iv. 14. 1), whereas in the -next chapter he describes those also of the country; and the designation of the -rural districts as regiones rather than tribes by Varro, <i>De vit. pop. rom.</i> i, in Non. -Marc. 43: “Et extra urbem in regiones xxvi agros viritim liberis attribuit.” In <i>L. L.</i> -v. 56, however, he calls the country districts tribes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_280" href="#FNanchor_280" class="label">[280]</a> Grotefend, ibid. 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_281" href="#FNanchor_281" class="label">[281]</a> Inferred from an obscure passage in Fest. 213. 13, and from inscriptions cited by -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Trib.</i> 215; Grotefend, ibid. 67.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_282" href="#FNanchor_282" class="label">[282]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 504; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 39 and n. 2; Pelham, -<i>Rom. Hist.</i> 39; Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 457 ff.; Greenidge, <i>Rom. Pub. -Life</i>, 67.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_283" href="#FNanchor_283" class="label">[283]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 163 ff. Mommsen calls attention to epigraphic evidence, -cited more fully by Kubitschek, <i>Imp. rom. trib. discr.</i> 26 f., which assigns Ostia unmistakably -to the Voturia tribus. He notices further that the same sort of evidence -which places Ostia in the Palatina would give Puteoli, Sutrium, Canusium, and Fundi -to the same city tribe, which is impossible. The error of including Alba and Ostia -in the Palatina is due to neglect of the fact that men excluded from the country -tribes were assigned to those of the city irrespective of domicile; cf. <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -iii. 442 f., with notes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_284" href="#FNanchor_284" class="label">[284]</a> <i>Stor. di Rom.</i> I. i. 320, n. 1, relying on Livy ix. 46. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_285" href="#FNanchor_285" class="label">[285]</a> Fest. 246. 30: “‘Pro censu classis iuniorum’ Ser. Tullius cum dixerit in descriptione -centuriarum;” cf. 249. 1; Livy 1. 60. 4; iv. 4. 2. Cicero, <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39, -writes discriptio, which Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 464, following Bücheler, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -xiii (1858). 598, accepts as the correct form.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_286" href="#FNanchor_286" class="label">[286]</a> P. 67.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_287" href="#FNanchor_287" class="label">[287]</a> Fabius Pictor, in Livy 1. 44. 2. Altogether unnecessary therefore is Soltau’s -supposition (<i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 458, n. 2), in itself improbable, that Fabius, -who wrote his annals in Greek, applied the word φυλαί incorrectly to the rural districts. -However that may be, Cato, as good an authority, spoke of these same districts -as tribes. If the number thirty was suggested to Fabius by the curiate organization -(cf. Ullrich, <i>Centuriatcomitien</i>, 9), this circumstance would be no argument -against the existence of country tribes. On the strength of the army in the early republic, -see p. 83.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_288" href="#FNanchor_288" class="label">[288]</a> P. 57.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_289" href="#FNanchor_289" class="label">[289]</a> Ibid.; cf. Pais, <i>Leg. of Rom. Hist.</i> 140.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_290" href="#FNanchor_290" class="label">[290]</a> Just as he supposed the Suburana to have been evolved, name and all, from the -pagus Succusanus; <i>L. L.</i> v. 48; cf. Fest. 302. 15; ep. 115.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_291" href="#FNanchor_291" class="label">[291]</a> Varro, <i>De vit. pop. rom.</i> i, in Non. Marc. 43: “Et extra urbem in regiones xxvi -agros viritim liberis attribuit.” As this statement does not rest upon an independent -source, but is merely an interpretation of Fabius and Cato, it has not the value which -Huschke (<i>Verf. d. Serv.</i> 72 f., 85 f.), Mommsen (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 168 f.), and -Meyer (in <i>Hermes</i>, xxx. 11) attach to it.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_292" href="#FNanchor_292" class="label">[292]</a> Cf. Livy i. 43. 13; Fest. ep. 368.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_293" href="#FNanchor_293" class="label">[293]</a> IV. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_294" href="#FNanchor_294" class="label">[294]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_295" href="#FNanchor_295" class="label">[295]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 15. 4-6. His idea of a census of the country people he derived -from Lucius Piso (§ 5 f.) and from the censors’ office through Fabius (22. 2)—a -fact which militates against Mommsen’s theory that under Servius the country was -not yet ager privatus.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_296" href="#FNanchor_296" class="label">[296]</a> Livy vi. 5. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_297" href="#FNanchor_297" class="label">[297]</a> P. 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_298" href="#FNanchor_298" class="label">[298]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 162 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_299" href="#FNanchor_299" class="label">[299]</a> <i>Gesch. d. Alt.</i> v. 135, 142; <i>Hermes</i>, xxx. 11; accepted by Neumann, <i>Grundherrsch. -d. röm. Rep.</i> 14 f.; Kornemann, in <i>Klio</i>, v. 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_300" href="#FNanchor_300" class="label">[300]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 168.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_301" href="#FNanchor_301" class="label">[301]</a> P. 50</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_302" href="#FNanchor_302" class="label">[302]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 164 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_303" href="#FNanchor_303" class="label">[303]</a> Ibid. 163 and n. 3, in opposition to his former view and that of Grotefend; cf. -p. 52.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_304" href="#FNanchor_304" class="label">[304]</a> There might remain the conjecture that the regiones, or pagi, had the same -constitution as the tribes, but in that case the difference between pagus and tribus -would be one of name only, and would therefore be without historical significance. -Meyer’s view (<i>Gesch. d. Alt.</i> v. 135, 142) that the sixteen earliest country tribes -were not formed till after the institution of the plebeian tribunate depends partly on -his notion that the tribunes were originally the heads of the four urban tribes and -partly on the difference in the naming, the city tribes being named after localities -and the country tribes after gentes; cf. <i>Hermes</i>, xxx. 11. The latter circumstance, -he asserts, establishes a later origin for the rural tribes. This argument is by no -means convincing; the difference may have arisen from different conditions in -country and city; probably no urban ward had one patrician gens so predominant -as to give its name. If one kind of name is earlier than another, we should -naturally suppose the gentile name to be the earlier, and in that case we should -prefer the view of Pais, <i>Stor. di Rom.</i> I. i. 320, n. 1; <i>Leg. of Rom. Hist.</i> 140; cf. -above, p. 52, n. 2.</p> - -<p>The patrician gentile name does not imply patrician domination any more than -the eupatrid name of an Attic deme implies eupatrid domination of that deme.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_305" href="#FNanchor_305" class="label">[305]</a> <i>Hermes</i>, xxx. 12; followed by Neumann, <i>Grundherrsch. d. röm. Rep.</i> 13 f.; -Kornemann, in <i>Klio</i>, v. 90 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_306" href="#FNanchor_306" class="label">[306]</a> P. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_307" href="#FNanchor_307" class="label">[307]</a> Among the scholars who insist that originally country as well as city was -divided into tribes are Müller, J. J., in <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv (1876). 112 ff., and more -recently Kubitschek, <i>De trib. or.</i> (1882); <i>Imp. rom. trib. discr.</i> (1889), 2. Beloch, -<i>Ital. Bund</i> (1880), 28, begins with twenty-one tribes in 495, considering it impossible -to penetrate earlier conditions. Niese, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> (1906). 38 and n. 3, more -positively assigns the creation of twenty-one tribes to that date.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_308" href="#FNanchor_308" class="label">[308]</a> Livy ii. 16. 5; cf. Dion. Hal. v. 40. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_309" href="#FNanchor_309" class="label">[309]</a> In Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 2650.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_310" href="#FNanchor_310" class="label">[310]</a> Some place the immigration in the time of Titus Tatius; Verg. <i>Aen.</i> vii. 706 ff.; -Suet. <i>Tib.</i> 1; Appian, <i>Reg.</i> 12; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 293; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. -26, n. 1. That the earlier tradition assigned the event to the date mentioned in the -text is asserted by Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, ibid. iii. 2663.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_311" href="#FNanchor_311" class="label">[311]</a> Livy ii. 21. 7 (495): “Romae tribus una et xxx factae.” This statement is not -that thirty-one tribes were instituted in that year, but that the number thirty-one -was reached, “factae” being copulative. If “una et xxx” is not a copyist’s error, it -probably depends on the Fabian view that there were originally thirty tribes. At -all events it is inconsistent with the later statement (vi. 5. 8) that the number -twenty-five was not reached till 387. The epitomator of Livy accordingly corrected -the number to twenty-one, which most editors now write in the text itself. That -there were twenty-one tribes in 491, when Coriolanus was tried, is assumed too by -Dion. Hal. vii. 64. 6: Μιᾶς γὰρ καὶ εἴκοσι τότε φυλῶν οὐσῶν, οἶς ἡ ψῆφος ἀνεδόθη, τὰς -ἀπολυούσας φυλὰς ἔσχεν ὁ Μάρκιος ἐννέα· ὤστ’ εἰ δύο προσῆλθον αὐτῷ φυλαί, διὰ τὴν -ἰσοψηφίαν ἀπελέλυτ’ ἄν, ὥσπερ ὁ νόμος ἠξίου (“There being at the time twenty-one -tribes, to whom the vote was given, Marcius received the votes of nine tribes -for acquittal; so that, had two more tribes been favorable, he would have been -acquitted by an equality of votes, as the law required”). This is not a mistake, as -many assume, but an understatement; cf. Müller, J. J., in <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv (1876). -110 f. Meyer’s explanation (<i>Hermes</i>, xxx. 10, n. 2), which makes διὰ τὴν ἰσοψηφλίαν -signify “owing to the equal value of the votes,” is improbable and unnecessary.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_312" href="#FNanchor_312" class="label">[312]</a> For the form of the word, see Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 171; Kubitschek, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 117. Crustumeria had been taken four years -earlier (Livy ii. 19. 2, 499); so that a tribe of the same name could have been -admitted in 495.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_313" href="#FNanchor_313" class="label">[313]</a> Livy vi, 5. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_314" href="#FNanchor_314" class="label">[314]</a> Ibid. viii, 15. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_315" href="#FNanchor_315" class="label">[315]</a> Ibid. 17. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_316" href="#FNanchor_316" class="label">[316]</a> Ibid. ix, 20. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_317" href="#FNanchor_317" class="label">[317]</a> Ibid. x, 9. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_318" href="#FNanchor_318" class="label">[318]</a> Ibid. ep. xix.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_319" href="#FNanchor_319" class="label">[319]</a> <i>B.C.</i> i. 49. 214: Ῥωμαῖοι μὲν δὴ τούσδε τοὺς νεοπολίτας οὐκ ἐς τὰς πέντε καὶ -τριάκοντα φυλὰς, αἳ τότε ἦσαν αὐτοῖς, κατέλεξαν, ἵνα μὴ τῶν ἀρχαίων πλέονες ὄντες ἐν -ταῖς χειροτονίαις ἐπικρατοῖεν, ἀλλὰ δεκατεύοντες ἀπέφηναν ἑτέρας, ἐν αἷς ἐχειροτόνουν -ἔσχατοι. For δεκατεύοντες scholars have attempted to substitute δέκα, δέκα πέντε, -δέκα ἐνεδρεύοντες (Mendelssohn, <i>App.</i> ii. p. 53, n.). The meaning given in the -rendering offered above, though not found elsewhere, is possible. The passage has -reference to the Latins and faithful Italians admitted by the Julian law of 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_320" href="#FNanchor_320" class="label">[320]</a> III. 17 (Peter, <i>Reliquiae</i>, i. 280): “L. Calpurnius Piso ex senati consulto duas -novas tribus.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_321" href="#FNanchor_321" class="label">[321]</a> II. 20. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_322" href="#FNanchor_322" class="label">[322]</a> Kubitschek, <i>Imp. rom. trib. discr.</i> 2-6, tries to prove that the lex Iulia, 90, provided -for the enrolment of the Latins and faithful allies in fifteen old rural tribes, -and that the lex Plautia Papiria, 89, assigned the more obstinate rebels to eight -other existing rural tribes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_323" href="#FNanchor_323" class="label">[323]</a> Cf. Madvig, <i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 26 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_324" href="#FNanchor_324" class="label">[324]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 53. 231.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_325" href="#FNanchor_325" class="label">[325]</a> That there was an increase is held by Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 179, n. 1; -Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> ii. 370. This view is favored by Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. -199 f. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 111 f., compromises.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_326" href="#FNanchor_326" class="label">[326]</a> Livy, ep. lxxvii; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 55. 242; p. 404.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_327" href="#FNanchor_327" class="label">[327]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 59. 268; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> viii. 2. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_328" href="#FNanchor_328" class="label">[328]</a> Vell. ii. 20. 2; Livy, ep. lxxxiv; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 64. 287; Cic. ibid.; Exup. 4; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 180, 439.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_329" href="#FNanchor_329" class="label">[329]</a> Livy, ep. lxxxvi.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_330" href="#FNanchor_330" class="label">[330]</a> Mommsen, ibid. 180.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_331" href="#FNanchor_331" class="label">[331]</a> P. 71. Their military purpose is recognized by Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2, whereas -Livy, i. 43. 13, connects with them nothing but the collection of taxes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_332" href="#FNanchor_332" class="label">[332]</a> Livy i. 43. 13; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xviii. 3. 13; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 45; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> iii. 166, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_333" href="#FNanchor_333" class="label">[333]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2; Laelius Felix, in Gell. xv. 27. 5; Flaccus, in Gell. xvii. 7. 5. -In referring to the year 204 Livy, xxix. 37. 3 f., represents the tribes as districts. -The Pupinian tribe is often spoken of as a district, as by Varro, <i>R. R.</i> i. 9. 5. On -the local nature of the urban tribes, see Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 56; Livy i. 43. 13; Dion. -Hal. iv. 14. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_334" href="#FNanchor_334" class="label">[334]</a> Kubitschek, <i>Rom. trib. or.</i> 24 f.; <i>Imp. rom. trib. discr.</i> 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_335" href="#FNanchor_335" class="label">[335]</a> Cf. Grotefend, <i>Imp. rom. trib. descr.</i> 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_336" href="#FNanchor_336" class="label">[336]</a> Kubitschek, <i>Imp. rom. trib. discr.</i> 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_337" href="#FNanchor_337" class="label">[337]</a> Cic. <i>Flac.</i> 32. 79 f. On the growth of the tribe, see Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. -175 ff.; Kubitschek, ibid. See also the maps in the latter work.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_338" href="#FNanchor_338" class="label">[338]</a> Flaccus, in Gell. xvii. 7. 5. A list was kept of the estates comprising a tribe; -Cic. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_339" href="#FNanchor_339" class="label">[339]</a> Cf. the admission of new tribes; Livy vi. 5. 8: “Tribus quattuor ex novis -civibus additae;” viii. 17. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_340" href="#FNanchor_340" class="label">[340]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_341" href="#FNanchor_341" class="label">[341]</a> P. 64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_342" href="#FNanchor_342" class="label">[342]</a> Livy xxix. 37. 3 f.; Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 379, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_343" href="#FNanchor_343" class="label">[343]</a> Somewhat different is the view of Mommsen, <i>Röm. Trib.</i> 2 f.; <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. -151; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 402; controverted by Soltau, ibid. 384 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_344" href="#FNanchor_344" class="label">[344]</a> The Romans had but two pursuits, agriculture and war, for the sedentary occupations -were given to slaves and strangers; Dion. Hal. ii. 28; ix. 25. 2. It was -assumed that those who were without property could take no interest in the state; -ibid. iv. 9. 3 f.; Livy viii. 20. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_345" href="#FNanchor_345" class="label">[345]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 630.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_346" href="#FNanchor_346" class="label">[346]</a> It is well known too that freedmen were not regularly employed in military -service; Livy x. 21. 4; p. 354 f. below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_347" href="#FNanchor_347" class="label">[347]</a> Widows and orphans were enrolled in a different list from that of the tribes, -and hence were not included in the statistics of population which have come down -to us; cf. Livy iii. 3. 9; ep. lix; Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 12; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 365 f., -401. Livy, ii. 56. 3, seems to exclude the clients. Only those lacked membership, -however, who possessed no land. Clients of free birth were as liable to military service, -according to their ratable property, as any other class of citizens; p. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_348" href="#FNanchor_348" class="label">[348]</a> Law of the Twelve Tables, in Gell. xvi. 10. 5; Schöll, <i>Leg. Duod. Tab. Rel.</i> 116; -Bruns, <i>Font. iur.</i> 18 f.; Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 18. 51; <i>Att.</i> iv. 8 a. 3; Fest. ep. 9; Charis. -p. 75 (Keil). The derivation from ab asse dando proposed by Aelius Stilo, though -absurd, was accepted by Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 40; <i>Top.</i> 2. 10; Fest. ep. 9 (as an alternative); -Isid. <i>Etym.</i> x. 27; Quint. <i>Inst.</i> v. 10. 55. The derivation ab assidendo is -nearer the truth; Vaniček, <i>Griech.-lat. Wörterb.</i> 1012; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 466; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 237 f.; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -i. 426. See also Varro, <i>De vit. pop. rom.</i> i, in Non. Marc. 67; Gell. xix. 8. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_349" href="#FNanchor_349" class="label">[349]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 9. 16; 22. 40; P. Nigidius, in Gell. x. 5. 2; Fest. ep. 9, 119; -Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xviii. 3. 11; Quint. v. 10. 55; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> v. 281; Vaniček, ibid. 506, -1149.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_350" href="#FNanchor_350" class="label">[350]</a> The army in the field must have consisted largely of men in patris aut avi -potestate, whose names were reported to the censors, not for taxation but for military -service, by those who had authority over them; cf. Livy xxiv. 11. 7; xliii. 14; Dion. -Hal. ix. 36. 3; Fest. ep. 66. Scipio’s complaint (Gell. v. 19. 16: “In alia tribu -patrem, in alia filium suffragium ferre”) indicates that the sons were regularly enrolled -in the tribe of the father. That the list comprised plebeians only (Niebuhr, -<i>Röm. Gesch.</i> i. 457 f.) has proved untenable; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 153 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_351" href="#FNanchor_351" class="label">[351]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 14. 2; Livy i. 43. 14; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 181.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_352" href="#FNanchor_352" class="label">[352]</a> Livy, ibid.; Varro, ibid.; cf. p. 63, n. 4 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_353" href="#FNanchor_353" class="label">[353]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 19. 3; Fest. ep. 9; Ennius, in Gell. xvi. 10. 1; cf. 12 f. Before -the introduction of pay for military service in 406 the soldiers bore their own -expenses; Livy iv. 59. 11; v. 4. 5; viii. 8. 3; Flor. i. 6. 8; Diod. xiv. 16. 5; Lyd. -<i>De mag.</i> i. 45 f.; p. 71 ff. below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_354" href="#FNanchor_354" class="label">[354]</a> Plutarch, <i>Cam.</i> 2, makes Camillus the author of the tax on orphans for the -support of the knights’ horses, thus connecting this measure with the general introduction -of pay—a statement of some importance notwithstanding Kubitschek, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 683.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_355" href="#FNanchor_355" class="label">[355]</a> Zon. vii. 20: Οἰκόσιτοι ἐστρατεύοντο.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_356" href="#FNanchor_356" class="label">[356]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> v. 2. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_357" href="#FNanchor_357" class="label">[357]</a> Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> ii. 150 f., 159 f. with citations.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_358" href="#FNanchor_358" class="label">[358]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 20. 36; Livy i. 43. 9; Plut. <i>Cam.</i> 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_359" href="#FNanchor_359" class="label">[359]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 469, is of the opinion that before Servius all the plebeians -had this standing, and that Servius left the newly conquered plebeians in that -class, because if admitted to the army, they might revolt! Cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 95.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_360" href="#FNanchor_360" class="label">[360]</a> On the meaning of the word, see Pseud. Ascon. 103: “Ut pro capite suo -tributi nomine aera praeberet.” On the removal from the tribe into this class; -Livy iv. 24. 7; xxiv. 18. 6, 8; 43. 3; xliv. 16. 8. The removal from the tribe is -understood when it is not mentioned; Varro, in Non. Marc. 190; Livy ix. 34. 9; -xxvii. 11. 15; Gell. iv. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_361" href="#FNanchor_361" class="label">[361]</a> Livy vii. 20. 7; Dio Cass. Frag. 33; Strabo v. 2. 3; Gell. xvi. 13. 7; Schol. -Hor. <i>Ep.</i> i. 6. 62. On the aerarii and Caerites, see further Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. -392-4, 401 ff., 406; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 674-6; iii. -1284 f.; Hülsen, ibid. iii. 1281 f.; see also the works of Herzog, Lange, Madvig, -and Willems.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_362" href="#FNanchor_362" class="label">[362]</a> P. 466, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_363" href="#FNanchor_363" class="label">[363]</a> It would be absurd to suppose that while the absolutely poor citizens could vote -in the proletarian century, those who possessed considerable wealth, though not in -land, were excluded.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_364" href="#FNanchor_364" class="label">[364]</a> Unutterable confusion was brought into this subject by Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 181: -“Tributum dictum a tribubus, quod ea pecunia, quae populo imperata erat, tributim -a singulis pro portione census exigebatur;” cf. Livy i. 43. 13; Isid. <i>Etym.</i> xvi. 18. 7. -Neither is tributum derived from tribus nor <i>vice versa</i>. Tribuere signifies “to -divide,” “to apportion;” tributum, “that which is apportioned,” tribus being only -indirectly connected with these words; Schlossmann, in <i>Archiv f. lat. Lexicog.</i> -xiv (1905). 25-40.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_365" href="#FNanchor_365" class="label">[365]</a> Livy vi. 14. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_366" href="#FNanchor_366" class="label">[366]</a> Ibid. 32. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_367" href="#FNanchor_367" class="label">[367]</a> Dion. Hal. v. 20; cf. iv. 11. 2; xi. 63. 2; Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_368" href="#FNanchor_368" class="label">[368]</a> Livy ii. 9. 6; xxiii. 48. 8; xxxiii. 42. 4; xxxix. 7. 5; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiv. 6. 23; -Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> ii. 162, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_369" href="#FNanchor_369" class="label">[369]</a> Instances of public expenditure for the equipment or pay of troops before this -date (Dion. Hal. v. 47. 1; viii. 68. 3; ix. 59. 4; Livy iv. 36. 2) are either exceptional -or more probably historical anticipations of later usage. That before 406 -the soldiers drew pay from their tribes (Mommsen, <i>Röm. Trib.</i> 32; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -i. 540) is disproved by Soltau, <i>Altröm Volksversamml.</i> 407 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_370" href="#FNanchor_370" class="label">[370]</a> Marquardt, ibid. 164-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_371" href="#FNanchor_371" class="label">[371]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 392.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_372" href="#FNanchor_372" class="label">[372]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 181.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_373" href="#FNanchor_373" class="label">[373]</a> The function of the tribuni aerarii was to pay the soldiers; Cato, <i>Epist. Quaest.</i> -i, in Gell. vi (vii). 10. 2; Varro, v. 181; Fest. ep. 2; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiv. 1. 1. -Perhaps they also collected money into the treasury; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 16. 3. From Cato’s -statement they appear to have been financially responsible; and we are informed -that as early as 100 they constituted a rank (ordo) evidently next below the equites; -Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 9. 27. Under the Aurelian law of 70 they made up a decury of -jurors; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 16. 3; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 1. 31. From these facts it is clear -that the aerarian tribunes were officers of the aerarium, but no connection with the -tribes can be discovered; Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 409-12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_374" href="#FNanchor_374" class="label">[374]</a> Diod. xx. 46; Livy ix. 46. 10 f.; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 403.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_375" href="#FNanchor_375" class="label">[375]</a> Mommsen, ibid. This class came to an end in the Social War; Kubitschek, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1285.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_376" href="#FNanchor_376" class="label">[376]</a> In Mommsen’s opinion (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 403) these censors transferred to the -country tribes as many landholding members of the urban tribes as possible.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_377" href="#FNanchor_377" class="label">[377]</a> Livy ix. 46. 13 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_378" href="#FNanchor_378" class="label">[378]</a> Livy xlv. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_379" href="#FNanchor_379" class="label">[379]</a> The expression tribu movere or in aerarios referre was still used, but meant no -more than the transfer from a rural to an urban tribe and to the aerarian class within -the latter; p. 62, n. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_380" href="#FNanchor_380" class="label">[380]</a> Cf. Livy xxiv. 18. 8 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_381" href="#FNanchor_381" class="label">[381]</a> Livy xxiv. 43. 2 f.; Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 42. 120.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_382" href="#FNanchor_382" class="label">[382]</a> P. 86.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_383" href="#FNanchor_383" class="label">[383]</a> I. 43. The account given by Dionysius Hal. iv. 16 f.; vii. 59, is the same in -principle, though slightly different in detail.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_384" href="#FNanchor_384" class="label">[384]</a> P. 52.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_385" href="#FNanchor_385" class="label">[385]</a> Fest. 246. 30; or “discriptio classium,” ibid. 249. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_386" href="#FNanchor_386" class="label">[386]</a> Livy i. 60. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_387" href="#FNanchor_387" class="label">[387]</a> Quoted by Cic. <i>Orat.</i> 46. 156, for the forms “centuria fabrum” and “procum.” -Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86-8, is an extract from the Tabulae of later time; cf. Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 245, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_388" href="#FNanchor_388" class="label">[388]</a> P. 52. Proof of the date is the fact that the ratings are in the sextantarian <i>as</i>, -legally adopted in 269 or 268 (page 86). The <i>as</i> of this standard was valued -at one tenth of a denarius, so that 1000 asses = 100 denarii = 1 mina; Dion. Hal. -iv. 16 f.; Polyb. vi. 23. 15: Οἱ ὑπὲρ τὰς μυρίας τιμώμενοι δραχμάς, descriptive of the -highest rating—100,000 asses; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 249, n. 4; Hill, <i>Greek -and Roman Coins</i>, 47. It could not have been later than 241, in which year the -reform of the centuriate assembly must have been far advanced, if not completed; -page 215.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_389" href="#FNanchor_389" class="label">[389]</a> P. 84.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_390" href="#FNanchor_390" class="label">[390]</a> It is wrong to suppose with Soltau, in <i>Jahrb. f. cl. Philol.</i> xli (1895). 412, n. 6, -that all the details of the Servian system were known only in this way.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_391" href="#FNanchor_391" class="label">[391]</a> Cf. Livy i. 44. 2; Dion. Hal. iv. 15. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_392" href="#FNanchor_392" class="label">[392]</a> Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 9 ff., supposes Calpurnius Piso to have been the intermediary. -But a problem in which so many of the quantities are unknown is -incapable of solution.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_393" href="#FNanchor_393" class="label">[393]</a> P. 205, n. 5, 215.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_394" href="#FNanchor_394" class="label">[394]</a> Livy i. 43. 8; Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 2; p. 207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_395" href="#FNanchor_395" class="label">[395]</a> P. 80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_396" href="#FNanchor_396" class="label">[396]</a> P. 81.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_397" href="#FNanchor_397" class="label">[397]</a> P. 81.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_398" href="#FNanchor_398" class="label">[398]</a> P. 82 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_399" href="#FNanchor_399" class="label">[399]</a> Livy viii. 8. 3; Dion. Hal. iv. 22. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_400" href="#FNanchor_400" class="label">[400]</a> It is unnecessary here to consider the question as to the historical personality of -Servius Tullius. In this volume the name will be given to the king (or group of -kings?) who instituted the so-called Servian tribes and the military centuries and -made a beginning of the census.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_401" href="#FNanchor_401" class="label">[401]</a> P. 201.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_402" href="#FNanchor_402" class="label">[402]</a> Helbig, <i>Sur les attributes des saliens</i>, in <i>Mémoires de l’acad. d. inscr. et belles-let.</i> -xxxvii (1906). 230 ff.; cf. <i>Comptes rendus de l’acad.</i> etc. 1904. ii. 206-12. -Helbig finds that the Latino-Etruscan equipments of the time preceding Hellenic -influence, as shown by archaeology, correspond closely with those of the Salii, whom -he regards therefore as religious survivals from that early civilization. It is from -archaeological data, combined with the well-known equipment of the Salii, that the -close resemblance between the early Latino-Etruscan and the Mycenaean military -system is established.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_403" href="#FNanchor_403" class="label">[403]</a> Not merely the chief, as Helbig, <i>Comptes rendus</i>, 1900. 517, supposes. The -ἠνίοχοι καὶ παραβάται who fought at Delium, and whom he rightly regards as a -survival from the age of war-chariots, acted as a company not as individuals; Diod. -xii. 70. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_404" href="#FNanchor_404" class="label">[404]</a> Helbig, <i>Le Currus du roi Romain</i>, in <i>Mélanges Perrot</i>, 167 f. It was like -that chiseled on a gravestone found by Dr. Schliemann on the acropolis of -Mycenae, in the main identical with the Homeric chariot, represented in later time -on the famous sarcophagus at Clazomenae; Pellegrini, in Milani, <i>Studi e materiali</i>, -i. 91-3, 98.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_405" href="#FNanchor_405" class="label">[405]</a> That the army of Romulus—the primitive Roman army—was a single legion, -and that the Servian reform consisted accordingly in doubling it, is an ancient -hypothesis accepted by some moderns, as Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 38 f. An organization -in definite numbers, however, as 1000 from each tribe, cannot arise till the -state has grown sufficiently populous to make up the army of a part only of its -available strength, when folk and army have ceased to be identical (Schrader, -<i>Reallex.</i> 350), and it is agreed that this condition was not reached till after the -adoption of the Servian reform; Delbrück, <i>Gesch d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 225; Smith, ibid. -52 f., 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_406" href="#FNanchor_406" class="label">[406]</a> <i>Il.</i> ii. 362.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_407" href="#FNanchor_407" class="label">[407]</a> Schrader, ibid. For the Sueves, see Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> iv. 1; for the Lacedaemonian -army, see p. 71. The assumption of Helbig, <i>Comptes rendus</i>, 1904. ii. 209, that the -army was composed of patricians only is altogether unwarranted. Equally groundless -is the notion of Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 250, that the Homeric army -was composed chiefly of nobles with a few light-armed dependents.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_408" href="#FNanchor_408" class="label">[408]</a> Cf. Liers, <i>Kriegswesen der Alten</i>, 78; Niese in <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> xcviii (1907). 264, -266, 289.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_409" href="#FNanchor_409" class="label">[409]</a> <i>Il.</i> iv. 293 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_410" href="#FNanchor_410" class="label">[410]</a> Represented by the dances of the Salii; Helbig, ibid. 211 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_411" href="#FNanchor_411" class="label">[411]</a> Paus. iv. 8. 11; Polyaen. i. 10; Delbrück, <i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 30 f.; Niese, in -<i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> xcviii (1907). 274 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_412" href="#FNanchor_412" class="label">[412]</a> Cf. Thuc. v. 70; Polyaen. i. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_413" href="#FNanchor_413" class="label">[413]</a> Cf. Thuc. v. 69. For this and other depths, see Delbrück, ibid. i. 25; Liers, -<i>Kriegswesen der Alten</i>, 45; Lammert, in <i>N. Jahrb. f. kl. Philol.</i> xiii (1904). 276 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_414" href="#FNanchor_414" class="label">[414]</a> Tyrtaeus, Frag. xi (Bergk). For the shield which covered “hips, legs, breast, -and shoulders,” v. 23 f. It was abolished by Cleomenes III; Plut. <i>Cleom.</i> 11; cf. -Liers, ibid. 34; Lammert, ibid. 276 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_415" href="#FNanchor_415" class="label">[415]</a> XII. 26; Xen. <i>Anab.</i> i. 2. 16. A public gift of a bronze cuirass is mentioned by -Aristotle, <i>Lac. Pol.</i> 75, Müller, <i>Frag. Hist. Graec.</i> ii. p. 127. Gilbert, <i>Const. Antiq.</i> -73; Delbrück, ibid. 25, maintain that the cuirass was a regular part of the equipment. -This is true of soldiers who carried smaller shields.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_416" href="#FNanchor_416" class="label">[416]</a> Beloch, <i>Griech. Gesch.</i> i. 200 f.; cf. Liers, <i>Kriegswesen der Alten</i>, 34 f.; Droysen, -<i>Griech. Kriegsalt.</i> 3 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_417" href="#FNanchor_417" class="label">[417]</a> Cf. the name of one of these regiments Μεσσοάτης (Schol. Thuc. iv. 8) derived -from the village or local tribe Messoa. Schol. Aristoph. <i>Lysistr.</i> 453, mentions five by -name; cf. Aristotle, Frag. 541. Perhaps a sixth for guarding the kings was drawn -from all the tribes; Busolt, <i>Griech. Gesch.</i> i. 535 ff. with notes. Lenschau, in <i>Jahresb. -ü. Altwiss.</i> cxxxv. 83, holds that there were but four phylae.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_418" href="#FNanchor_418" class="label">[418]</a> The name pentecosty indicates that it originally comprised fifty men, which -suggests that the century may have been a higher group. Before the Peloponnesian -War (Thuc. v. 68) the Lacedaemonian organization had departed far from its original -form.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_419" href="#FNanchor_419" class="label">[419]</a> Droysen, <i>Griech. Kriegsalt.</i> 70; Gilbert, <i>Const. Antiq.</i> 72. Compulsory service -beyond the border ceased with the fortieth year; Xen. <i>Hell.</i> v. 4. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_420" href="#FNanchor_420" class="label">[420]</a> Cf. Liers, <i>Kriegsw. der Alten</i>, 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_421" href="#FNanchor_421" class="label">[421]</a> Busolt, <i>Griech. Gesch.</i> ii. 180 ff.; Helbig, in <i>Mém. de l’acad. des inscr.</i> xxxvii¹ -(1904). 164. But the Athenian army did not become efficient till long after Solon; -cf. Niese, in <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> xcviii (1907). 278-82.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_422" href="#FNanchor_422" class="label">[422]</a> The Romans believed that they got the phalanx from the Etruscans; <i>Ined. Vat.</i>, -in <i>Hermes</i>, xxvii (1892). 121 from an early historian, Fabius Pictor or Posidonius -or Polybius (Pais, <i>Anc. Italy</i>, 323); Diod. xxiii. 2 (Müller); Athen. vi. 106. -p. 273 f.; Wendling, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxviii (1893). 335 ff.; Müller-Deecke, <i>Etrusker</i>, i. -364 ff.; Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 40. The circumstance does not prove that the -Romans were then in subjection to the Etruscans.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_423" href="#FNanchor_423" class="label">[423]</a> Some of the ancients derive classis from calare, “to call,” hence “summoning;” -Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 2; Quint. <i>Inst.</i> i. 6. 33; accepted by Walde, <i>Lat. Etym. Wörterb.</i> -125; Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 242; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 464. Others connected -it with κᾶλος “firewood,” hence “gathering;” Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> i. 39; Isid. -<i>Etym.</i> xix. 1. 15; Schol. Luc. i. 306. Corssen, <i>Ausspr.</i> i. 494, proposes to derive it -from a root “clat,” which appears in the Greek κλητεύειν (Lat. *clat-ē-re), Germ. -laden, which would still give the meaning “summoning;” cf. Curtius, <i>Griech. Etym.</i> -139; Vaniček, <i>Griech. Lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 143 (*cla-t, cla-t-ti-s). Mommsen -accepted the meaning “summoning” in the early editions of his <i>History</i>, but rejects -it in the <i>Staatsrecht</i>, iii. 262 f. (cf. his <i>History</i>, English ed. i. 1900. 115 f., 118) on -the ground that however adapted it may have been to the later political classes, it -could not well apply to the fleet and army, and hence could not belong to the earlier -use of the word, which denoted the line in contrast with those who fought outside -the line. But against his reasoning it could be urged that classis with the idea of -“summoning” first applied to the line of heavy infantry—the only effective part -of the army; and when once the connotation of “line” had been established, it -could easily extend to the fleet.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_424" href="#FNanchor_424" class="label">[424]</a> Gell. vi (vii). 13: “‘Classici’ dicebantur non omnes, qui in quinque classibus -erant, sed primae tantum classis homines, qui centum et viginti quinque milia aeris -ampliusve censi erant. ‘Infra classem’ autem appellabantur secundae classis ceterarumque -omnium classium, qui minore summa aeris, quod supra dixi, censebantur. -Hoc eo strictim notavi, quoniam in M. Catonis oratione, qua Voconiam legem suasit, -quaeri solet, quid sit ‘classicus,’ quid ‘infra classem;’” Fest. ep. 113; cf. Cic. <i>Verr.</i> -II. i. 41. 104; Pseud. Ascon. 188; Gaius ii. 274.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_425" href="#FNanchor_425" class="label">[425]</a> The statement of Diod. xxiii. 2 (Müller), and of the <i>Ined. Vat.</i> (in <i>Hermes</i>, xxvii. -121) that the Romans derived their round shield from the Etruscans accords with -archaeological evidence for the use of the round shield by the early Etruscans; -Pellegrini, in Milani, <i>Studi e materiali</i>, i. 91 ff.; Helbig, in <i>Comptes rendus de -l’acad. des inscr.</i> 1904. ii. 196.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_426" href="#FNanchor_426" class="label">[426]</a> The notion of Delbrück, <i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 227, that the army was not organized -in centuries till after the beginning of the republic has no foundation whatever.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_427" href="#FNanchor_427" class="label">[427]</a> P. 76. The original number cannot be determined.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_428" href="#FNanchor_428" class="label">[428]</a> Tubero, in Gell. x. 28. 1; Non. Marc. 523. 24. From this fact it appears that -military conditions made a far greater demand upon the early Romans than upon -the Lacedaemonians.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_429" href="#FNanchor_429" class="label">[429]</a> Helbig, in <i>Comptes rendus de l’acad. des inscr.</i> 1900. 516 ff.; <i>Mém. de l’acad.</i> -etc. xxxvii¹ (1904). 157 ff.; <i>Hermes</i> xl (1905). 109. The objection of Smith, <i>Röm. -Timokr.</i> 37, n. 3, is not well founded.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_430" href="#FNanchor_430" class="label">[430]</a> Incertus Auctor (Huschke), p. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_431" href="#FNanchor_431" class="label">[431]</a> <i>Ined. Vat.</i>, in <i>Hermes</i> xxvii (1892). 121; Helbig, ibid, xl (1905). 114. The -transvectio equitum was instituted in 304; Livy ix. 46. 15. On the close connection -of the Roman cavalry with that of the Greeks of southern Italy, see Pais, <i>Storia di -Roma</i>, I. ii. 607, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_432" href="#FNanchor_432" class="label">[432]</a> The priores had each two horses; Granius Licinianus xxvi, p. 29: “Verum de -equitibus non omittam, quos Tarquinius ita constituit, ut priores equites binos equos -in proelium ducerent;” cf. Fest. ep. 221. On the Tarentine cavalry, see Livy xxxiii. -29, 5. The inference is that the posteriores had one horse each.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_433" href="#FNanchor_433" class="label">[433]</a> Helbig, in <i>Hermes</i> xl (1905). 107. <i>Notizie degli Scavi</i>, 1899. 167, fig. 17 (cf. -p. 157); 1900. 325, fig. 28; Pellegrini, in Milani, <i>Studi e materiali</i>, i. 106.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_434" href="#FNanchor_434" class="label">[434]</a> Pellegrini, ibid. i. 97, fig. 5; 104, fig. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_435" href="#FNanchor_435" class="label">[435]</a> P. 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_436" href="#FNanchor_436" class="label">[436]</a> P. 3, n. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_437" href="#FNanchor_437" class="label">[437]</a> VI. 13. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_438" href="#FNanchor_438" class="label">[438]</a> The principal sources are Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 20. 36; 22. 39; Livy i. 13. 8; 15. 8; -36. 7; 43. 8 f.; Dion. Hal. ii. 13; vi. 13. 4; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. (9.) 35; Fest. ep. -55; Plut. <i>Rom.</i> 13. On the basis of these sources we could reckon an increase to -1800, 3600, or 5400 according to our assumption as to the number of horsemen to -the century; cf. Gerathewohl, <i>Die Reiter und die Rittercenturien</i>, 3-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_439" href="#FNanchor_439" class="label">[439]</a> Helbig, in <i>Hermes</i>, xl (1905). 101, 105, 107.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_440" href="#FNanchor_440" class="label">[440]</a> Livy i. 13. 8; Dion. Hal. ii. 13. 1 f.; Fest. ep. 55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_441" href="#FNanchor_441" class="label">[441]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 20. 36: Livy i. 36. 2, 7; Fest. 344. 20; ep. 349. Writers differ -slightly in the form of the names.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_442" href="#FNanchor_442" class="label">[442]</a> P. 73, n. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_443" href="#FNanchor_443" class="label">[443]</a> This distinction of rank among the patrician centuries of the comitia centuriata -is proved by the expression “proceres patricii” in the Censoriae Tabulae, quoted by -Fest. 249. 1: “Procum patricium in descriptione classium, quam fecit Ser. Tullius, -significat procerum. I enim sunt principes;” Cic. <i>Orat.</i> 46. 156: “Centuriam fabrum -et procum, ut censoriae tabulae loquuntur, audeo dicere, non fabrorum aut procorum.” -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 109, n. 1, has rightly referred it to one of the sex suffragia, -for no century outside this group could have been so designated; cf. Livy ii. -20. 11, who speaks of the cavalry as proceres iuventutis. The mention of a century -of leading patricians implies the existence of one or more centuries of the less distinguished -members of the same rank, which must have been the rest of the sex -suffragia. The superior rank of the equites in early Rome is proved by Dion. Hal. -ii. 13. 1; iv. 18. 1; Livy i. 43. 8 f.; ii. 20. 11. In ii. 24. 2 Livy implies that the -patricians did not serve on foot (militare), and in iii. 27. 1 he speaks of a patrician -who, as an exception among his rank, served on foot because of his poverty. In -ii. 42 f. he distinguishes the cavalry from the infantry as patricians from plebeians. -The fact that in the political conflict between the two social classes the patricians -often threatened to carry on foreign wars with the aid merely of their clients (cf. -Dion. Hal. x. 15, 27 f., 43) proves that the phalanx was essentially plebeian. On the -honorable place of the equites in the camp, see Nitzsch, in <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> vii (1862). -145. That the sex suffragia remained patrician down to the reform of the comitia -centuriata is probable; cf. Sallust, <i>Hist.</i> i. 11, who represents the struggle between -the social classes as continuing to the opening of the war with Hannibal; see also -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 254.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_444" href="#FNanchor_444" class="label">[444]</a> Dion. Hal. ii. 7. 4; cf. Polyb. vi. 25. 1; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 91: “Turma terima (e -in u abiit) quod ter deni equites ex tribus tribubus Titiensium Ramnium Lucerum -fiebant: itaque primi singularum decuriones dicti, qui ab eo in singulis turmis sunt -etiamnunc terni;” cf. Curiatius, in Fest. 355. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_445" href="#FNanchor_445" class="label">[445]</a> Cf. Polyb. vi. 25. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_446" href="#FNanchor_446" class="label">[446]</a> Three hundred is given as normal by Polyb. i. 16. 2; vi. 20. 9. In iii. 107. 10 f. -he states it at 200, increased to 300 when to meet extraordinary cases the legion -was strengthened to 5000; cf. ii. 24. 3. Livy, xxii. 36. 3, agrees with the latter statement. -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 477, believes that the normal number was 300, -decreased to 200 when a greater number of legions was levied.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_447" href="#FNanchor_447" class="label">[447]</a> Niese, <i>Hist. Zeitschr.</i> xcviii (1907). 283, rightly assumes that the first and second -classes at Athens were not cavalry; Helbig is right in understanding them to be -mounted hoplites. Niese’s criticism (ibid. 287 and n. 1) of Helbig’s view is not -convincing.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_448" href="#FNanchor_448" class="label">[448]</a> Considerable time was required for the establishment of the earliest known -meaning of classis before the second and third divisions were added.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_449" href="#FNanchor_449" class="label">[449]</a> This is a conjecture of Bruncke, in <i>Philol.</i> xl (1881). 362, favored by Delbrück, -<i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 222.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_450" href="#FNanchor_450" class="label">[450]</a> P. 79, 86.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_451" href="#FNanchor_451" class="label">[451]</a> Usually scholars (cf. Domazewski, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1953 f.; -Delbrück, <i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 227; Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 39) assume fifteen centuries -for the fifth rating, on the authority of Livy i. 43. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 17. 2; vii. -59. 5. But our knowledge of the phalanx is only inference, which to be acceptable -must have at least the merit of possibility. The number fifteen is wrong because it -could not have been divided evenly between the two legions; and on the other hand -it will be shown later (p. 208) that in all probability the fifteenth century was not -military but was added in the make up of the comitia centuriata.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_452" href="#FNanchor_452" class="label">[452]</a> Müller, in <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv (1876). 129, is right in supposing that the legion was -strengthened between the time of Servius and 387, but it was not in the way he -assumes. The tradition of a legion (half phalanx) of 4000 men is preserved in -Livy vi. 22. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_453" href="#FNanchor_453" class="label">[453]</a> Polyb. vi. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_454" href="#FNanchor_454" class="label">[454]</a> Cf. Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 121 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_455" href="#FNanchor_455" class="label">[455]</a> Livy iv. 46. 1: “Dilectum haberi non ex toto passim populo placuit: decem -tribus sorte ductae sunt. Ex his scriptos iuniores duo tribuni ad bellum duxere.” -If this passage does not state a historical fact, at least it gives the idea of the writer -as to the custom of earlier time.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_456" href="#FNanchor_456" class="label">[456]</a> P. 72, 76.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_457" href="#FNanchor_457" class="label">[457]</a> Cf. Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 51 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_458" href="#FNanchor_458" class="label">[458]</a> In time of especial danger, however, the legion was increased to five thousand; -Polyb. vi. 20. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_459" href="#FNanchor_459" class="label">[459]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 268, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_460" href="#FNanchor_460" class="label">[460]</a> That the phalanx was a comparatively late institution at Rome, or that it was -slow in becoming the only military system, is indicated by the survival in tradition -of a more primitive mode of warfare. Sometimes in the early republic a single gens -with its clients took the field; for the Fabian gens, see Livy ii. 48 ff. Often the -patricians threatened to arm their clients, to carry on a war without the aid of the -troublesome plebeians; cf. Dion. Hal. x. 15, 27 f., 43. As there was no motive in -later time for the invention of such stories, they must contain a kernel of real tradition; -hence they could not go back to the sixth century, and it is difficult to -believe that they are so old as the fifth.</p> - -<p>Collateral evidence that the second and third divisions were instituted relatively -late may be found in the circumstance that the scutum, the distinctive piece of armor -of these divisions, was introduced no earlier than the age of Camillus—the period -of the war with Veii and the Gallic conflagration; Livy viii. 8. 3; Müller-Deecke, -<i>Etrusker</i>, i. 366. It was Samnite (Athen. vi. 106, p. 273 f.; cf. Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 51), and -was therefore probably adopted in the fourth century when Rome first came into -contact with that people.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_461" href="#FNanchor_461" class="label">[461]</a> It is evident to the reader that these proportions are those of the discriptio centuriarum -of Livy and Dionysius (p. 66 above), and it will be made clear below -(p. 86) that the ratings were originally in terms of iugera, the minima of the five -ratings being in all probability 20, 15, 10, 5, and 2½ or 2 iugera respectively.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_462" href="#FNanchor_462" class="label">[462]</a> For the date, see Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 334 f.; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1902 f.; Pais, <i>Storia di Roma</i>, I. ii. 13, 33 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_463" href="#FNanchor_463" class="label">[463]</a> There may be some truth in the etymology suggested by Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 89; cf. -Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 256.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_464" href="#FNanchor_464" class="label">[464]</a> Cf. Liers, <i>Kriegsw. d. Alten</i>, 46.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_465" href="#FNanchor_465" class="label">[465]</a> Dionysius Hal. iv. 17. 1, includes the fourth rating in the phalanx of heavy infantry. -For other possibilities of arrangement, see Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 46 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_466" href="#FNanchor_466" class="label">[466]</a> Thuc. v. 68; p. 86 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_467" href="#FNanchor_467" class="label">[467]</a> Delbrück, <i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 229; Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 45 ff. That the -second and third divisions of the phalanx were sometimes withdrawn to operate -on the flanks (Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 249) is possible, though we have no -proof of it.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_468" href="#FNanchor_468" class="label">[468]</a> P. 76. From early times the Greek and Italian states kept arsenals with which -to arm the poor in crises; Liers, <i>Kriegsw. d. Alten</i>, 36 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_469" href="#FNanchor_469" class="label">[469]</a> P. 84.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_470" href="#FNanchor_470" class="label">[470]</a> Fest. ep. 14, 18, 369; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vii. 56-58. From them the centurions and -decurions engaged their servants; Cato, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vii. 58; Varro, <i>Vit. pop. rom.</i> -iii, in Non. Marc. 520; Veget. ii. 19. Hence they served the civil magistrates as -attendants; cf. Censoriae Tabulae, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 88; Livy iii. 33. 8; Suet. -<i>Caes.</i> 20; Non. Marc. 59. They must have corresponded with the squires of the -Greek and Roman cavalry; p. 73. They were sometimes called adscriptivi, or as -carriers ferentarii. If, as has been suggested, the secretaries and other attendants -of the higher officers were also drawn from them, this circumstance would help -explain the honor attaching to the collegium accensorum velatorum of imperial -time; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 289; Delbrück, <i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 233.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_471" href="#FNanchor_471" class="label">[471]</a> Notwithstanding Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 135 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_472" href="#FNanchor_472" class="label">[472]</a> Livy viii. 8. 8. Leinveber, in <i>Philol.</i> N. F. xv (1902). 36, estimates 558 accensi -to the legion.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_473" href="#FNanchor_473" class="label">[473]</a> The cornicines tubicinesque; Livy i. 43. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_474" href="#FNanchor_474" class="label">[474]</a> The cornicines marched in front of the banners; Joseph. <i>Bell. Iud.</i> v. 48; -Fiebiger, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1602.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_475" href="#FNanchor_475" class="label">[475]</a> The number is unknown. In the legio III Augusta there were thirty-six cornicines; -<i>CIL.</i> vii. 2557; Fiebiger, ibid. 1603.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_476" href="#FNanchor_476" class="label">[476]</a> Livy i. 43. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_477" href="#FNanchor_477" class="label">[477]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 88: “Centuria qui sub uno centurione sunt, quorum centenarius -iustus numerus;” Fest. ep. 53: “Centuria ... significat ... in re militari centum -homines;” Isid. <i>Etym.</i> ix. 3. 48; cf. Huschke, <i>Verf. d. Serv.</i> 107.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_478" href="#FNanchor_478" class="label">[478]</a> Estimates have been made by Müller, in <i>Philol.</i> xxxiv (1876). 127; Delbrück, -<i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 224; Beloch, <i>Bevölk. d. griech.-röm. Welt</i>, 42 f.; Smith, <i>Röm. -Timokr.</i> 67. In the United States the ratio is more than four to one; <i>Special -Reports: Suppl. Analysis and Derivative Tables, Twelfth Census of the United -States</i>, 1900, Washington, 1906. p. 170 f. The estimate given in the text is based -upon the “Deutsche Sterbetafel” for men, in E. Czuber, <i>Warscheinlichkeitsrechnung</i> -(Leipzig, 1903), p. 572, 574. The ratio is almost exactly three.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_479" href="#FNanchor_479" class="label">[479]</a> Livy i. 43. 2. For the year 401, see Livy v. 10. 4: “Nec iuniores modo conscripti, -sed seniores etiam coacti nomina dare, ut urbis custodiam agerent;” for 389, -vi. 2. 6; for 386, vi. 6. 14; for 296, x. 21. 4: “Nec ingenui modo aut iuniores sacramento -adacti, sed seniorum etiam cohortes factae libertinique centuriati. Et defendendae -urbis consilia agitabantur;” cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 409, n. 5. The -last of the definite instances here mentioned could alone be historical, and in this -case not centuriae or legiones but cohortes seniorum are spoken of.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_480" href="#FNanchor_480" class="label">[480]</a> Cf. Delbrück, <i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 227 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_481" href="#FNanchor_481" class="label">[481]</a> If the senior centuries were formed in the way assumed by Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> iii. 261 (“Nicht selbständig gebildet worden, sondern daraus hervorgegangen, -dass wer aus einer Centurie des ersten Aufgebots Alters halber ausschied, -damit in die entsprechende Centurie des zweiten Aufgebots eintrat”), about a half -generation must have been required to evolve them. An objection to his idea is that -the military centuries as well as the legions were formed anew at each year’s levy -(Polyb. vi. 20, 24), whereas the political centuries were made up by the censors -(cf. Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 40: “In una centuria censebantur”), doubtless modified annually -by the consuls. A military century and a political century accordingly could not -have been composed of the same men.</p> - -<p>The Tabulae Iuniorum contained the names of all juniors in honorable service in -the field; Livy xxiv. 18. 7. Tabulae Seniorum are not mentioned. Classis Iuniorum -(Fest. 246. 30) may apply to all eighty-five (or eighty-four) centuries of juniors, as -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 474, supposes, or to the first class; Tubero, <i>Historiae</i>, i, in Gell. -x. 28. 1: “Scripsit Servium Tullium regem, populi Romani cum illas quinque classes -iuniorum census faciendi gratia institueret.” It is doubtful whether there was a -separate list of seniors.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_482" href="#FNanchor_482" class="label">[482]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 40: “Illarum autem sex et nonaginta centuriarum in una centuria -tum quidem plures censebantur quam paene in prima classe tota.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_483" href="#FNanchor_483" class="label">[483]</a> Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 240.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_484" href="#FNanchor_484" class="label">[484]</a> The confusion of the comitia with the army, which the ancient writers began, -the moderns have intensified till the subject has become utterly incomprehensible. -Chiefly to Genz, <i>Servianische Centurienverfassung</i> (1874) and Soltau, <i>Alröm. Volksversammlungen</i> -(1880) belongs the credit of putting in a clear light the fact that the -original Servian organization was an army. Both authors, however, have made the -fundamental mistake of supposing that for a time during the early republic the army -officiated as an assembly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_485" href="#FNanchor_485" class="label">[485]</a> Livy xxiv. 8. 19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_486" href="#FNanchor_486" class="label">[486]</a> After the inclusion of the Tribus Clustumina; Beloch, <i>Ital. Bund</i>, 74; Smith, -<i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 58, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_487" href="#FNanchor_487" class="label">[487]</a> Delbrück, <i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 223 f.; Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 58.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_488" href="#FNanchor_488" class="label">[488]</a> Beloch, <i>Bevölk. d. griech.-röm. Welt</i>, 53; Meyer, <i>Forsch. z. alt. Gesch.</i> ii. 162, n. -3; Delbrück, ibid. i. 14. Ferrero’s estimate (<i>Greatness and Decline of Rome</i>, i. 1) -of a total population of 150,000 seems to be too large.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_489" href="#FNanchor_489" class="label">[489]</a> P. 81.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_490" href="#FNanchor_490" class="label">[490]</a> Cf. Liers, <i>Kriegsw. d. Alten</i>, 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_491" href="#FNanchor_491" class="label">[491]</a> Ascribed to Camillus; Plut. <i>Cam.</i> 40; cf. Fröhlich, <i>Gesch. d. Kriegsführung -und Kriegskunst der Römer zur Zeit der Rep.</i>; Schiller, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> 708.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_492" href="#FNanchor_492" class="label">[492]</a> P. 80; cf. 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_493" href="#FNanchor_493" class="label">[493]</a> Fröhlich, ibid. 21 f.; Schiller, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_494" href="#FNanchor_494" class="label">[494]</a> P. 76.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_495" href="#FNanchor_495" class="label">[495]</a> Fest. 189. 13; ep. 56, 225; Fabius Pictor, <i>Annales</i>, i, in Gell. x. 15. 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_496" href="#FNanchor_496" class="label">[496]</a> Gell. i. 11. 3; Vergil, <i>Aen.</i> vii. 716: “Hortinae classes.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_497" href="#FNanchor_497" class="label">[497]</a> Gell. vi (vii). 13. 3: “In M. Catonis oratione, qua Voconiam legem suasit, quaeri -solet, quid sit classicus, quid infra classem;” p. 90 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_498" href="#FNanchor_498" class="label">[498]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 200 (Lex Agr.). 37: (“Recuperatores ex ci)vibus L quei classis primae -sient, XI dato.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_499" href="#FNanchor_499" class="label">[499]</a> P. 66 f.; cf. Fest. 249. 1: “In descriptione classium quam fecit Ser. Tullius.” -The attempt of Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i>, especially 140 ff., to prove that the five classes -were introduced by the censors of 179 has nothing in its favor. It rests upon Livy -xl. 51. 9: “Mutarunt suffragia, regionatimque generibus hominum causisque et -quaestibus tribus descripserunt.” This passage makes no reference to the classes. In -“generibus hominum” are included chiefly the “genus ingenuum” and the “genus -libertinum.” “Causis” applies to those conditions of the libertini, such as the possession -of children of a definite age, which might serve as a ground for enrolment -in a rural tribe; and “quaestibus” refers to the distinction between landowners and -the “opifices et sellularii” of the city. “They changed the arrangement for voting, -and drew up the tribal lists on a local basis according to the social orders, the conditions, -and the callings of men;” cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 265 f.; p. 354 f. below. -Among the many objections to Smith’s theory these two may be mentioned: if the -classes were introduced at this late historical time, (1) they would not have been -ascribed to Servius Tullius; (2) they would have been adapted to the economic -conditions of the second century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, whereas in 179 they were largely outgrown by -the depreciation of the standard of value, the increase in the cost of living, and -the growth of enormous estates. The <i>Römische Timokratie</i> is ably written, but its -main thesis—the institution of the classes in the second century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>—remains -unproved.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_500" href="#FNanchor_500" class="label">[500]</a> P. 64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_501" href="#FNanchor_501" class="label">[501]</a> <i>Verf. d. Serv.</i> 643 f. et passim. He made a mistake however in supposing that -from the beginning land was valued in terms of money.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_502" href="#FNanchor_502" class="label">[502]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Trib.</i> 111; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 247 ff.; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 2631. When the change was made from a land to a -money rating, the land of the fifth class was appraised relatively higher than that of -the others. Neumann, <i>Grundherrsch. d. röm. Rep.</i> 9 f., prefers to assume -16 (= 2 + 14) iugera for the highest class in order to explain the often mentioned -estates of seven and fourteen iugera. But it is difficult to work out a consistent -scheme on this basis. Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 78 ff. et passim, strongly objects to the -view in any form, as he doubts the existence of the Servian classes. In general he -has greatly exaggerated the difficulties of their administration.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_503" href="#FNanchor_503" class="label">[503]</a> Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 86; Gell. xvi. 10. 14, 16; cf. Cass. Hem. 21 (Peter, <i>Reliquiae</i>, i. 102 f.).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_504" href="#FNanchor_504" class="label">[504]</a> Haeberlin, in <i>Riv. ital. numis.</i> xix (1906). 614 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_505" href="#FNanchor_505" class="label">[505]</a> Samwer-Bahrfeldt, <i>Gesch. d. alt. röm. Münzw.</i> 176 f.; Hill, <i>Greek and Roman -Coins</i>, 47, 49, n. 1; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 1509 ff.; Hultsch, -ibid. v. 206; Regling, in <i>Klio</i>, vi (1906). 503. Babelon, <i>Trait. d. mon. Grecq. et -Rom.</i> i. 595, still holds the view that the triental <i>as</i> was introduced in 269; cf. his -<i>Orig. d. la mon.</i> 376; <i>Mon. d. la rép. Rom.</i> i. 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_506" href="#FNanchor_506" class="label">[506]</a> P. 66 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_507" href="#FNanchor_507" class="label">[507]</a> As silver is at present worth 51¼ cents an ounce (so quoted in New York, -Sept. 5, 1908), a denarius (= ⅟₇₂ lb. Troy) of the coinage preceding 217 is worth by -weight today 8½ cents. A more just comparison would be based on the present -coined values. As a dollar contains 371¼ grains of silver, a denarius would be worth -21½ cents; or with a liberal allowance for the alloy, we might say about 20 cents. -The sesterce, ¼ denarius, would therefore be equivalent to five cents. An estate of -100,000 asses of heavy weight (sesterces) would be worth about $5000, of the sextantarian -standard $2000. It is hardly possible that so large a proportion of the -population as was contained in the first class should average the former amount of -wealth to the family. In fact the purchasing power of money was enormously higher -than these equivalents indicate. In 430 the value of an ox or cow was legally set at -100 libral asses and of a sheep at ten. Reckoning a beef at the low modern value -of $45, and a sheep at $4.50, we obtain a value of 45 cents for the libral <i>as</i>, or 22½ -cents for one of 5 oz. weight (sesterce), which would give the denarius a purchasing -power of 90 cents.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_508" href="#FNanchor_508" class="label">[508]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 249. In his <i>History</i> (Eng. ed. 1900), iii. 50, he expresses -some doubt as to the numbers.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_509" href="#FNanchor_509" class="label">[509]</a> I. 43; cf. p. 66.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_510" href="#FNanchor_510" class="label">[510]</a> IV. 17. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_511" href="#FNanchor_511" class="label">[511]</a> Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_512" href="#FNanchor_512" class="label">[512]</a> The view of Goguet, <i>Centuries</i>, 29 (following Niebuhr), that Livy has made a -mistake, is not so likely.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_513" href="#FNanchor_513" class="label">[513]</a> VI. 19. 2: (All must serve in war) πλὴν τῶν ὑπὸ τὰς τετρακοσίας δραχμὰς τετιμημένων· -τούτους δὲ παριᾶσι πάντας εἰς τὴν ναυτικήν. That it was the minimal rating -of the fifth class, and not a still lower rating for military use only, is proved by a -statement of Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 86, that till the time of Marius the soldiers were drawn from -the classes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_514" href="#FNanchor_514" class="label">[514]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 251.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_515" href="#FNanchor_515" class="label">[515]</a> Commercially the denarius was then, after 217, worth sixteen asses; Hultsch, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> v. 209.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_516" href="#FNanchor_516" class="label">[516]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 40; Gell. xvi. 10. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_517" href="#FNanchor_517" class="label">[517]</a> XVI. 10. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_518" href="#FNanchor_518" class="label">[518]</a> Cf. Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1522.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_519" href="#FNanchor_519" class="label">[519]</a> This interpretation differs slightly from that of Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. -237.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_520" href="#FNanchor_520" class="label">[520]</a> In like manner those possessing above 100,000 asses were at times divided into -groups for the distribution of military burdens according to wealth; cf. Livy xxiv. -II. 7-9. This too has no reference to the organization of the comitia.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_521" href="#FNanchor_521" class="label">[521]</a> <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 3. 43: “Maximus census C̅X̅ assium fuit illo (Servio) rege, et ideo -haec prima classis.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_522" href="#FNanchor_522" class="label">[522]</a> Fest. ep. 113.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_523" href="#FNanchor_523" class="label">[523]</a> VI (VII). 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_524" href="#FNanchor_524" class="label">[524]</a> Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 21; Huschke, <i>Verf. d. Serv.</i> 164.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_525" href="#FNanchor_525" class="label">[525]</a> VI. 23. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_526" href="#FNanchor_526" class="label">[526]</a> I. 43. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_527" href="#FNanchor_527" class="label">[527]</a> IV. 16. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_528" href="#FNanchor_528" class="label">[528]</a> After the adoption of the <i>as</i> of an ounce weight in 217, sixteen asses of this standard -were considered equivalent to a denarius or a drachma, which would give a rating -of 160,000 asses for those who wore the cuirass. But the military pay was still reckoned -at ten asses to the denarius (Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 3. 45); the censors seem to -have used the same ratio (Livy xxxix. 44. 2 f. compared with Plut. <i>Cat. Mai.</i> 18); -and it is therefore highly probable that in this statement Polybius intended to express -in drachmas the value of 100,000 asses. Taken in its entirety, the passage -sufficiently proves that reference is to the highest class; the majority (οἱ πολλοί) -of soldiers, he says, have breastplates, but those rated above 10,000 drachmas wear -cuirasses. If, as Belot, <i>Rév. écon. et mon.</i> 77 ff., imagines, the sum of 100,000 asses -fell below the rating of the lowest class, there would hardly have been a soldier without -the cuirass.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_529" href="#FNanchor_529" class="label">[529]</a> Gaius ii. 274. That registration was necessary is proved by Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. i. 41. -104 ff. By the word “censi” Cicero does not mean to designate any group or division -of citizens; he simply refers to the fact of registration. P. Annius Asellus, of -whom he speaks, had not been registered, or in any case at that sum, and hence was -not technically liable to the law; but the value of his estate could be ascertained by -authority of a court of justice, according to Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 95 f. Mommsen -held the opinion, on the contrary (<i>Abhdl. d. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin</i>, 1863. 468 f.), -that the incensi were absolutely free from the law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_530" href="#FNanchor_530" class="label">[530]</a> P. 85 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_531" href="#FNanchor_531" class="label">[531]</a> VI (VII). 13. For his rating of 125,000 asses for the first class, see p. 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_532" href="#FNanchor_532" class="label">[532]</a> N. 5 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_533" href="#FNanchor_533" class="label">[533]</a> Dio Cass. lvi. 10. 2; Pseud. Ascon. 188.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_534" href="#FNanchor_534" class="label">[534]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 249, n. 4; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 95.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_535" href="#FNanchor_535" class="label">[535]</a> The part containing this reference was not essentially later than the enactment -of the Voconian law (p. 361).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_536" href="#FNanchor_536" class="label">[536]</a> P. 403.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_537" href="#FNanchor_537" class="label">[537]</a> XLV. 15. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_538" href="#FNanchor_538" class="label">[538]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 249, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_539" href="#FNanchor_539" class="label">[539]</a> P. 90, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_540" href="#FNanchor_540" class="label">[540]</a> First offered in his <i>Histoire des chevaliers</i>, i (Paris, 1866), and afterward defended -in his <i>Révolution économique et monétaire ... à Rome</i> (1885).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_541" href="#FNanchor_541" class="label">[541]</a> Cf. <i>Rév. écon. et mon.</i> 82.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_542" href="#FNanchor_542" class="label">[542]</a> Livy xxiv. 11. 7 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_543" href="#FNanchor_543" class="label">[543]</a> Ibid. § 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_544" href="#FNanchor_544" class="label">[544]</a> Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> ii. 498 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_545" href="#FNanchor_545" class="label">[545]</a> <i>Rév. écon. et mon.</i> 50. The Roman and Campanian (cives sine suffragio) -knights together amounted to 23,000; Polyb. ii. 24. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_546" href="#FNanchor_546" class="label">[546]</a> About 270,000 in 220; Livy ep. xx.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_547" href="#FNanchor_547" class="label">[547]</a> Even with this understanding we shall have to assume for the requisition of 214 a -division between 100,000 and 300,000—those rated at 100,000-200,000 asses furnishing -two and those at 200,000-300,000 asses three sailors. Otherwise the number of -sailors will be greatly in excess of the need.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_548" href="#FNanchor_548" class="label">[548]</a> Similar conditions exist at present in America. The monstrous luxury of the -few and the heavy fines recently imposed on the Standard Oil Company do not prove -all Americans to be wealthy.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_549" href="#FNanchor_549" class="label">[549]</a> P. 61 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_550" href="#FNanchor_550" class="label">[550]</a> Livy i. 43. 9; Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 20. 36; Fest. ep. 81, 221; Gaius iv. 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_551" href="#FNanchor_551" class="label">[551]</a> Gaius iv. 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_552" href="#FNanchor_552" class="label">[552]</a> <i>Rep.</i> ii. 20. 36.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_553" href="#FNanchor_553" class="label">[553]</a> I. 43. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_554" href="#FNanchor_554" class="label">[554]</a> <i>Cam.</i> 2. This statement is valuable notwithstanding Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 683.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_555" href="#FNanchor_555" class="label">[555]</a> Payment is mentioned by Livy v. 7. 12 (403) but triple pay is first spoken of in -ch. 12. 12 (400); cf. Polyb. vi. 39. 12; Fest. 234. 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_556" href="#FNanchor_556" class="label">[556]</a> Polyb. vi. 39. 15. The statement of Varro, <i>L. L.</i> viii. 71 (“Debet igitur dici -... non equum publicum mille assarium esse, sed mille assariorum”), seems to -signify that in practice the cost of a public horse meant a payment to the eques of a -thousand asses a year; cf. Gerathewohl, <i>Die Reiter und die Rittercent.</i> 49 ff., whose -interpretation is preferable to that of Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 257, n. 5. The -fact that the support of one knight was considered equal to that of three legionaries -(Livy xxix. 15. 7) is further evidence that the triple pay covered the purchase and -keep of the horse. Reference in Livy vii. 41. 8, may be to the sums (aera) for the -purchase and keep of the horse; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 257, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_557" href="#FNanchor_557" class="label">[557]</a> Dionysius Hal. vi. 44. 2, assigns the first recruiting of the equites from the plebeians -to the year 494, dating the event about a century too early; cf. Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 478, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_558" href="#FNanchor_558" class="label">[558]</a> Livy v. 7. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_559" href="#FNanchor_559" class="label">[559]</a> All this may be gathered from Livy v. 7. 4-13; cf. Gerathewohl, <i>Die Reiter und -die Rittercent.</i> 16 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_560" href="#FNanchor_560" class="label">[560]</a> Polyb. vi. 19. 2; Livy xxvii. 11. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_561" href="#FNanchor_561" class="label">[561]</a> Livy xxvii. 11. 14, 16. This passage does not refer to those who avoided duty -equo privato, as Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 478, n. 2, supposes. Those were punished -who were qualified to serve equo publico but had avoided military duty altogether. -Gerathewohl, ibid. 20 f., believes that Livy has made a mistake in assigning -this judgment to the censors of 209, as it would much better suit the conditions of -214.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_562" href="#FNanchor_562" class="label">[562]</a> The credit of establishing this fact beyond a doubt is due to Gerathewohl, <i>Die -Reiter und die Rittercent.</i> 14-34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_563" href="#FNanchor_563" class="label">[563]</a> <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 1. 30: “Equitum nomen subsistebat in turmis equorum publicorum;” -cf. Fest. ep. 81: “Equitare antiqui dicebant equum publicum merere.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_564" href="#FNanchor_564" class="label">[564]</a> P. 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_565" href="#FNanchor_565" class="label">[565]</a> There were four legions each with 4000 infantry and 300 horse at the opening -of the First Punic War; Polyb. i. 16. 2. Four legions fought against Pyrrhus at -Asculum, 279; Dion. Hal. xx. 1. This was the normal number for the Samnite -wars; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 477.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_566" href="#FNanchor_566" class="label">[566]</a> Two legions of juniors was the maximal limit of Rome’s military strength during -the period of twenty-one tribes; cf. p. 77, 84. The incorporation of the Veientan -territory, 387, could not at once have doubled this force.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_567" href="#FNanchor_567" class="label">[567]</a> Livy xxv. 3. 1-7; cf. Gerathewohl, <i>Die Reiter und die Rittercent.</i> 54. The -sources do not suggest that the number after reaching eighteen hundred remained -unalterable. In Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 20. 36 (“Deinde equitum ad hunc morem constituit, -qui usque adhuc est retentus”) reference is not to number but to character; -Gerathewohl, ibid. 8 f. Mommsen’s interpretation (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 259, n. 5) -is therefore wrong.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_568" href="#FNanchor_568" class="label">[568]</a> In 200 the seven legions contained twenty-one hundred equites or fewer; -Gerathewohl, <i>Die Reiter und die Rittercent.</i> 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_569" href="#FNanchor_569" class="label">[569]</a> <i>Orat.</i> lxiv: “Nunc ego arbitror oportere restitui (Mommsen’s emendation -‘institui’ is unnecessary), quin minus duobus milibus ac ducentis sit aerum -equestrium.” Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 259, wrongly holds the opinion that -the measure failed to pass.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_570" href="#FNanchor_570" class="label">[570]</a> See citations collected by Gerathewohl, ibid. 56, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_571" href="#FNanchor_571" class="label">[571]</a> Dion. Hal. vi. 13. 4: Ἔστιν ὅτε shows that the number varied; cf. Madvig, -<i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_572" href="#FNanchor_572" class="label">[572]</a> Suet. <i>Aug.</i> 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_573" href="#FNanchor_573" class="label">[573]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39; Livy i. 43. 8 f.; Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 1. High birth and great -wealth are emphasized, but no definite rating of the class is given. Their treatment -of the subject is compatible with the view that the knights were then patrician—a -view however which these writers did not have clearly in mind. Livy’s -statement (iii. 27. 1) that a certain patrician served in the infantry because of his -poverty harmonizes well with the same view; for as the aes equestre and hordearium -were not yet introduced, a poor patrician would be unable to own and keep a -horse. Those scholars therefore seem to be wrong who, like Grathewohl, ibid. 67, -following Rubino, in <i>Zeitschr. f. d. Altertumswiss.</i> iv (1846). 219, refer the -equestrian census to Servius Tullius.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_574" href="#FNanchor_574" class="label">[574]</a> P. 94. It is for about this time (403) that Livy, v. 7. 5, first refers definitely -to an equestrian census.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_575" href="#FNanchor_575" class="label">[575]</a> This fact is most clearly stated by Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3, and is confirmed by -Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39.; cf. Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 3. 43; for further evidence, see Belot, -<i>Rev. écon. et mon.</i> 5 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_576" href="#FNanchor_576" class="label">[576]</a> P. 92.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_577" href="#FNanchor_577" class="label">[577]</a> Hor. <i>Ep.</i> I. i. 57; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 2. 32; Mart. iv. 67; v. 23, 25, 38; Pliny, -<i>Ep.</i> 1. 19. 2; Juv. i. 105; v. 132; xiv. 326; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_578" href="#FNanchor_578" class="label">[578]</a> Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> iii. 89; vi. 190; xii. 259.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_579" href="#FNanchor_579" class="label">[579]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> 16. 29 f.: “Dirae, sicut cetera auspicia, ut omina, ut signa, non causas -adferunt, cur quid eveniat, sed nuntiant eventura, nisi provideris.” The last statement -means only that a misfortune will happen, if an evil omen is unheeded. Cic. -<i>Div.</i> ii. 33. 70: “Non enim sumus ii nos augures, qui ... futura dicamus;” cf. -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 331; Aust, <i>Relig. d. Römer</i>, 198.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_580" href="#FNanchor_580" class="label">[580]</a> Serv. <i>in. Aen.</i> iii. 20: “Auspicari enim cuivis ... licet.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_581" href="#FNanchor_581" class="label">[581]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> i. 16. 28: “Nihil fere quondam maioris rei nisi auspicato ne privatim -quidem gerebatur, quod etiam nunc nuptiarum auspices declarant, qui re omissa -nomen tantum tenent;” 46. 104; Val. Max. ii. 1. 1. On the nuptial auspices, see -De Marchi, <i>Cult. priv. di Rom.</i> i. 152-5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_582" href="#FNanchor_582" class="label">[582]</a> Romulus consulted the rest of the gods along with Jupiter; Dion. Hal. ii. 5. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_583" href="#FNanchor_583" class="label">[583]</a> The public auspices were Jupiter’s alone; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 20. So were the auspical -chickens; <i>Div.</i> ii. 34. 72; 35. 73; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 77, n. 2. -In historical time the sign called for was Jupiter’s lightning; Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 18. 42; -<i>Vatin.</i> 8. 20; <i>Phil.</i> v. 3. 7. The epithet Elicius, notwithstanding Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. -95; Livy i. 20. 7; 31. 8, does not find its explanation in the auspices; Aust, in -Roscher, <i>Lex. Myth.</i> ii. 656 ff.; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 106.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_584" href="#FNanchor_584" class="label">[584]</a> P. 100, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_585" href="#FNanchor_585" class="label">[585]</a> In Gell. xvi. 4. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_586" href="#FNanchor_586" class="label">[586]</a> Cato, <i>De sacrilegio commisso</i>, in Fest. 234. 30. No one could imagine Attus Navius, -the swineherd, to have been a patrician, and yet he was the most famous of -private augurs; Cic. <i>Div.</i> i. 17. It is significant, too, that the great authority on -private auspices, P. Nigidius Figulus, author of <i>Augurium privatum</i> in several -books (Gell. vii. 6. 10), was a plebeian.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_587" href="#FNanchor_587" class="label">[587]</a> Livy iv. 2. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_588" href="#FNanchor_588" class="label">[588]</a> Livy iv. 6. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_589" href="#FNanchor_589" class="label">[589]</a> Livy vi. 41. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_590" href="#FNanchor_590" class="label">[590]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 36. 76: “Nos, nisi dum a populo auspicia accepta habemus, quam -multum iis utimur?” i. 16. 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_591" href="#FNanchor_591" class="label">[591]</a> Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 46, n. 2, has pointed out that the phrase auspicia publica occurs -only in Livy iv. 2. 5, where he believes it to be used in a special sense. In the -time of Cicero no one but an antiquarian ever thought of any other kind of auspices.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_592" href="#FNanchor_592" class="label">[592]</a> Livy x. 8. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_593" href="#FNanchor_593" class="label">[593]</a> The usual view, represented by Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 89, n. 1, is that the -plebeians did not possess this right originally but acquired it later; cf. also Wissowa, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2581; Di Marchi, <i>Cult. priv. di. Rom.</i> i. 233. -This hypothesis not only lacks support, but is also vitiated by the fact that at the -time of the supposed equalization private auspices must have been declining, as -Cicero found them extinct.</p> - -<p>The treatment of private auspices here given is supplementary to the study of the -social classes made in ch. ii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_594" href="#FNanchor_594" class="label">[594]</a> Messala, in Gell. xiii. 15. 4; Fest. 157. 21; Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 71 ff.; Bouché-Leclerq, -in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 580.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_595" href="#FNanchor_595" class="label">[595]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 9; Livy vi. 41. 6; viii. 23. 15 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_596" href="#FNanchor_596" class="label">[596]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 96 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_597" href="#FNanchor_597" class="label">[597]</a> Messala, <i>De auspiciis</i>, i, in Gell. xiii. 15. 4; Bouché-Leclerq, ibid. ii. 581.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_598" href="#FNanchor_598" class="label">[598]</a> Messala, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_599" href="#FNanchor_599" class="label">[599]</a> As when for instance the consul forbids the minor magistrate to “watch the sky” -on an appointed comitial day; Gell. xiii. 15. 1: “In edicto consulum, quo edicunt, -quis dies comitiis centuriatis futurus sit, scribitur ex vetere forma perpetua: ne quis -magistratus minor de caelo servasse velit.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_600" href="#FNanchor_600" class="label">[600]</a> <i>Commentarium Anquisitionis</i> of a quaestor, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 91: “Auspicio -operam des et in templo auspices, dum aut ad praetorem aut ad consulem mittas -auspicium petitum.” This passage shows that the quaestor, though asking permission, -himself holds the auspices.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_601" href="#FNanchor_601" class="label">[601]</a> The first alternative is held by Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 89, whereas Wissowa, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2584, is inclined to the latter.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_602" href="#FNanchor_602" class="label">[602]</a> Gell. xiv. 7. 4, 8, quoting Varro.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_603" href="#FNanchor_603" class="label">[603]</a> <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 10: “Omnes magistratus auspicium iudiciumque habento.” The -previous paragraph is concerned with the tribunes, and in this citation the use of -iudicium instead of imperium points to the tribunes. It is hardly possible that -Cicero in his <i>Laws</i> would give the tribunes a right they did not possess.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_604" href="#FNanchor_604" class="label">[604]</a> In Gell. xiii. 15. 4. Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2583, seems -therefore to be incorrect in excluding the tribunes from the right.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_605" href="#FNanchor_605" class="label">[605]</a> In stating that the tribunes were given the right to take auspices for their assemblies, -Zonaras, vii. 19, evidently confuses the oblativa with the impetrativa. It is an -interesting fact that according to Cicero the first college of tribunes was elected under -auspices in the comitia curiata; Frag. A. vii. 48: “Itaque auspiciato postero anno -tr. pl. comitiis curiatis creati sunt.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_606" href="#FNanchor_606" class="label">[606]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 34. 71: “Hic apud maiores nostros adhibebatur peritus, nunc -quilubet.” As in the time of Cicero auspices had come to be a mere pretence -(p. 118), an attendant without skill or scruple would best serve the magistrate’s -purpose. In Livy iv. 18. 6, the augurs see the omen for the dictator, but some -other attendant might serve the purpose. Being a paid functionary, the bird-seer -mentioned by Dion. Hal. ii. 6. 2 as assisting in an auspication could not have -been a public augur; Valeton, in <i>Mnemos.</i> xviii. 406 ff.; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. -Kult. d. Römer</i>, 456, n. 8. The magistrate requested assistance in the following -form: “Q. Fabi, te mihi in auspicio esse volo;” and the reply was “Audivi;” Cic. -<i>Div.</i> ii. 34. 71; cf. § 72. From this formula it appears that the person summoned -did not hold, but assisted in, the auspices; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 338. The auspices -are always said to belong not to the augurs, but to the magistrates; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> -iii. 3. 10; Messala, in Gell. xiii. 15. 4. Instead of remaining with the augurs in -the city the auspices followed a duly elected consul into the field; Livy xxii. 1. 6. -Auspicari is strictly a function of the magistrate (cf. Varro, <i>Rer. hum.</i> xx, in -Non. Marc. 92) though the word is sometimes applied to the observation made -by augurs (Fest. ep. 18), whose function is properly termed augurium, augurare; -Aust, <i>Relig. d. Römer</i>, 200 f.; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2580 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_607" href="#FNanchor_607" class="label">[607]</a> The derivation is unknown. Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. -2313 f., summarizes the principal theories. Probability seems to favor the view -that it is a combination of the root of avis with a verbal noun meaning “to see” -or the like; Walde, <i>Lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_608" href="#FNanchor_608" class="label">[608]</a> Attus Navius from his boyhood was renowned for his augural skill; Cic. <i>Div.</i> i. -17; Livy i. 36; Dion. Hal. iii. 70 f.; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 333. Romulus, too, -is said to have been an excellent augur; Remus possessed similar skill (Cic. <i>Div.</i> i. -2. 3; 17. 30; 40. 89; Ennius, in Cic. <i>Div.</i> i. 48. 107), and in the opinion of -Livy, i. 18. 6; iv. 4. 2, there was no augural college before Numa.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_609" href="#FNanchor_609" class="label">[609]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 33; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> vi. 6. 7; <i>Senec.</i> 18. 64; Fest. 161. 20; <i>CIL.</i> vi. -503, 504, 511, 1233, 1449; x. 211; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2314.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_610" href="#FNanchor_610" class="label">[610]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 9. 16; 14. 26; Livy x. 6. 7; ep. lxxxix; Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> -iii. 398; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 334 f.; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 451; also -his article in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2316 f. In adding a supernumerary -(Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 4) Caesar set an example extensively followed by the principes; -cf. Dio Cass. li. 20. 3; Wissowa, ibid. ii. 2317.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_611" href="#FNanchor_611" class="label">[611]</a> As distinguished from magistrates they were privati; Cic. <i>Div.</i> i. 40. 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_612" href="#FNanchor_612" class="label">[612]</a> Auctor Incertus (Huschke) p. 4: “Collegium augurum ordo hominum prudentum -erat, qui prodigiis publicis praeerant;” cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 330.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_613" href="#FNanchor_613" class="label">[613]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 34. 71 f.; cf. Livy xli. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_614" href="#FNanchor_614" class="label">[614]</a> Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 99.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_615" href="#FNanchor_615" class="label">[615]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 20; <i>Phil.</i> xiii. 5. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_616" href="#FNanchor_616" class="label">[616]</a> They are never called flamines, and no flamen was attached to their office; -Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 451. The great sacerdotal colleges were more -political than religious, and the college of augurs was the most thoroughly political -of all; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 564.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_617" href="#FNanchor_617" class="label">[617]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 20; Dio Cass, xxxvii. 24 f.; Aust, <i>Relig. d. Römer</i>, 199; Wissowa, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2325-30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_618" href="#FNanchor_618" class="label">[618]</a> Fest. 333. 9: “Spectio in auguralibus ponitur pro aspectione; (data est) -et nuntiatio, qui omne ius auspiciorum habent, auguribus non spectio dumtaxat, -quorum consilio rem gererent magistratus, ut possent impedire, nuntiando quaecumque -vidissent; privatis spectio sine nuntiatione data est, ut ipsi auspicio rem -gererent, non ut alios impedirent nuntiando.”—Valeton’s emendation, in <i>Mnemos.</i> -xviii (1890). 455 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_619" href="#FNanchor_619" class="label">[619]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 21: “Quique agent rem duelli quique domi popularem, auspicium -praemonento ollique obtemperanto;” cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 332.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_620" href="#FNanchor_620" class="label">[620]</a> It generally happened that both the augural and pontifical colleges were filled -by statesmen, so that Cicero could lay down the principle that the sacred and -political offices were held by the same persons; <i>Div.</i> i. 40. 89; cf. Wissowa, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2321.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_621" href="#FNanchor_621" class="label">[621]</a> Livy iv. 7. 3; viii. 23. 14-17; xxiii. 31. 13; xlv. 12. 10; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 83; -<i>Leg.</i> ii. 12. 31; <i>N. D.</i> ii. 4. 11. A defect in the auspicia impetrativa was expressed -by the formula “vitio tabernaculum captum esse” (Cic. <i>N. D.</i> ii. 4. 11; <i>Div.</i> i. 17. -33; Livy iv. 7. 3; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> ii. 178), whereas the phrase “vitio creatum esse” -or the like (Livy viii. 15. 6; 23. 14; xxiii. 31. 13; xlv. 12. 10; Plut. <i>Marcell.</i> 4) denoted -a failure to take the auspices or to heed unfavorable omens; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2334. On the annulment of laws through augural decrees, -see Cic. <i>Leg.</i> 8. 21; 12. 31; <i>Div.</i> ii. 35. 74. The decree was no more than an opinion, -on which the senate acted; Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 88. n. 3; Aust, <i>Relig. d. Römer</i>, 201.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_622" href="#FNanchor_622" class="label">[622]</a> An example of such boldness was that of C. Flaminius; Livy xxi. 63; cf. Plut. -<i>Marcell.</i> 4; Zon. vii. 20. For the case of Appius Claudius Pulcher, see Livy ep. -xix; Polyb. i. 52.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_623" href="#FNanchor_623" class="label">[623]</a> P. 112.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_624" href="#FNanchor_624" class="label">[624]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 21. Strictly it was the templum minus as distinguished from -the templum magnum, a region of the sky; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vii. 7; Fest. 157. 24; -Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> i. 92.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_625" href="#FNanchor_625" class="label">[625]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86, 91. It was always rectangular, and was usually covered with -a tent; Fest. 157. 24; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> ii. 512; iv. 200; Nissen, <i>Templum</i>, 162 ff.; -Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 455; in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2337 ff.; -Valeton, in <i>Mnemos.</i> xx (1892). 338-90; xxi. 62-91, 397-440; xxiii. 15-79; xxv. -93-144, 361-385; xxvi. 1-93; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 554 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_626" href="#FNanchor_626" class="label">[626]</a> When wars were waged in the immediate vicinity of Rome the augurs could -easily accompany the commander; cf. Livy iv. 18. 6; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 21. But they -certainly did not often go as far as Samnium; cf. Livy viii. 23. 16; ix. 38. 14. -Though the augurs remained at Rome, the auspices followed the commander into -the field; Livy xxii. 1. 6; p. 105, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_627" href="#FNanchor_627" class="label">[627]</a> Livy iii. 20. 6; Aust, <i>Relig. d. Römer</i>, 201.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_628" href="#FNanchor_628" class="label">[628]</a> Gell. xiii. 14. 1; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 143; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 456, -n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_629" href="#FNanchor_629" class="label">[629]</a> Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2339.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_630" href="#FNanchor_630" class="label">[630]</a> Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> vi. 197; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 53; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, -456; also his article in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2339.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_631" href="#FNanchor_631" class="label">[631]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 143; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 21; <i>CIL.</i> vi. 1233; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. -d. Römer</i>, 456 and notes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_632" href="#FNanchor_632" class="label">[632]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_633" href="#FNanchor_633" class="label">[633]</a> The elder Tiberius Gracchus vitiated the election of his successors in the consulship -by forgetting to renew the auspices, when, after entering the city to preside -over the senate, he recrossed the pomerium to hold the election in the Campus; Cic. -<i>N. D.</i> ii. 4. 11; <i>Div.</i> i. 17. 33; cf. Tac. <i>Ann.</i> iii. 19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_634" href="#FNanchor_634" class="label">[634]</a> Fest. 250. 12; 157. 29; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i, 97, n. 1; Valeton, in -<i>Mnemos.</i> xviii (1890). 209 f. The reason for the auspication on such occasions is -differently stated by the authorities, but the interpretation given by Jordan-Hülsen, -<i>Top. d. Stadt Rom</i>, 1. iii. 472 f., that this brook marked the boundary of the city -auspices, seems preferable.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_635" href="#FNanchor_635" class="label">[635]</a> Avispex, auspex, bird-seer; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2580.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_636" href="#FNanchor_636" class="label">[636]</a> Livy i. 7. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_637" href="#FNanchor_637" class="label">[637]</a> Fest. ep. 64; Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 33. 71: “Haec certe quibus utimur, sive tripudio sive -de caelo” (the auspicia tripudio being used in the military sphere, leaving only the -auspicia de caelo for the city); cf. i. 16. 28; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 79, n. 1; -Aust, <i>Relig. d. Römer</i>, 203; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2333.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_638" href="#FNanchor_638" class="label">[638]</a> Dio Cass, xxxviii. 13. 3. Lightning from left to right especially in a clear sky -was favorable; Dion. Hal. ii. 5. 2; Verg. <i>Aen.</i> ii. 692; vii. 141; ix. 628 (on the last, -see Servius). A thunderclap was unfavorable to one entering office; xxiii. 31. 13; -Plut. <i>Marcell.</i> 12; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 80, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_639" href="#FNanchor_639" class="label">[639]</a> Tac. <i>Hist.</i> i. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_640" href="#FNanchor_640" class="label">[640]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 18. 42.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_641" href="#FNanchor_641" class="label">[641]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 35. 74; 18. 43; Dio Cass, xxxviii. 13. 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_642" href="#FNanchor_642" class="label">[642]</a> <i>Censoriae Tabulae</i>, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86: “Ubi noctu in templum censor auspicaverit -atque de caelo nuntium erit, praeconi sic imperato ut viros vocet.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_643" href="#FNanchor_643" class="label">[643]</a> Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2585. The auguraculum was doubtless -used only by the augurs, not as Mommsen (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 103, n. 2) supposes, -by the magistrates.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_644" href="#FNanchor_644" class="label">[644]</a> Livy viii. 14. 12; Cic. <i>Vatin.</i> 10. 24: “In rostris, in illo inquam augurato templo -ac loco.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_645" href="#FNanchor_645" class="label">[645]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 91; Val. Max. iv. 5. 3; Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 4. 11; Wissowa, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2585 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_646" href="#FNanchor_646" class="label">[646]</a> Valeton, in <i>Mnemos.</i> xxiii (1895). 28 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_647" href="#FNanchor_647" class="label">[647]</a> <i>Censoriae Tabulae</i>, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86; Livy viii. 23. 15; x. 40. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_648" href="#FNanchor_648" class="label">[648]</a> The auspices had to be taken on the day the business was to be transacted, -counting the day from midnight to midnight; Gell. iii. 2. 10; Consorinus xxiii. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_649" href="#FNanchor_649" class="label">[649]</a> Verrius, in Fest. 347. 17; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> ix. 4; Statius, <i>Theb.</i> iii. 459. Romulus, -however, stood upright; Dion. Hall. ii. 5. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_650" href="#FNanchor_650" class="label">[650]</a> P. 105.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_651" href="#FNanchor_651" class="label">[651]</a> Silence was essential to perfect auspices; Fest. 348. 29; ep. 64; Livy viii. 23. 15; -ix. 38. 14; x. 40. 2; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> viii. 57. 223.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_652" href="#FNanchor_652" class="label">[652]</a> Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> iii. 89; Livy i. 18. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_653" href="#FNanchor_653" class="label">[653]</a> Cf. Livy xli. 18. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_654" href="#FNanchor_654" class="label">[654]</a> Cf. Livy ix. 38. 15; 39. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_655" href="#FNanchor_655" class="label">[655]</a> Cf. p. 115, 118, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_656" href="#FNanchor_656" class="label">[656]</a> Livy v. 52. 15; ix. 38. 15 f.; 39. 1; Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 3; Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 7. 2; 12. 1; -viii. 3. 3. Hoffmann, <i>Patric. u. pleb. Curien</i>, 29 ff., is of the opinion that the assembly -which passed the lex curiata was not auspicated, his idea being that the lex curiata -itself conferred the ius auspiciorum publicorum. There is no ground, however, -for either of these suppositions.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_657" href="#FNanchor_657" class="label">[657]</a> Cic. <i>N. D.</i> ii. 4. 11; Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 2. On the censorial auspication of the -comitia centuriata for the lustrum, see Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -i. 98, n. 6, supposes this to be the auspication of the censor’s entrance into office (cf. -81, n. 1), believing that assemblies which did not vote were unauspicated. But cf. -p. 111, n. 1 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_658" href="#FNanchor_658" class="label">[658]</a> Dio Cass. liv. 24. 1; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> vii. 30. 1; cf. Varro, <i>R. R.</i> iii. 2. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_659" href="#FNanchor_659" class="label">[659]</a> Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 3; 49. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_660" href="#FNanchor_660" class="label">[660]</a> This is shown by the <i>Commentarium Anquisitionis</i> of M. Sergius, a quaestor, in -Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_661" href="#FNanchor_661" class="label">[661]</a> <i>Censoriae Tabulae</i>, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86 f.: “Ubi noctu in templum censor -auspicaverit atque de caelo nuntium erit ... tum conventionem habet qui lustrum -conditurus est.” Mommsen’s interpretation (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 81, n. 2, 98, n. 6) -which applies these auspices to the censor’s entrance upon his office seems forced. It -is not necessary, however, to suppose that this magistrate had to renew the auspices -for every day of the census-taking; Mommsen, ibid. i. 113, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_662" href="#FNanchor_662" class="label">[662]</a> The current view (cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 718; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 98; -Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 380; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. -1150) that no contio was auspicated appears therefore to require modification.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_663" href="#FNanchor_663" class="label">[663]</a> Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 52; <i>Cato Min.</i> 42.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_664" href="#FNanchor_664" class="label">[664]</a> Ael. Don. in Terent. <i>Ad.</i> iv. 2. 8: “Qui malam rem nuntiat, obnuntiat, qui -bonam, adnuntiat: nam proprie obnuntiare dicuntur augures, qui aliquid mali ominis -scaevumque viderint.” In this late author (350 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>) obnuntiatio is ascribed to -the augurs. When Cicero says to Antony (<i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 83) “Augur auguri, consul -consuli obnuntiasti,” he does it only to find fault with the proceeding; cf. Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 111, n. 2. These are the only instances known to us in which the -distinction is not observed; Mommsen, ibid.; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -ii. 2335; Valeton, in <i>Mnemos.</i> xix (1891). 75 ff., 229 ff.; Bouché-Leclerq, -in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 582.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_665" href="#FNanchor_665" class="label">[665]</a> Cato, <i>De sacr. comm.</i> in Fest. 234. 33: “Quod ego non sensi, nullum mihi vitium -facit;” Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxviii. 2. 17; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> xii. 259: “In oblativis auguriis in -potestate videntis est, utrum id ad se pertinere velit, an refutet et abominetur;” cf. -Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 36. 77; Wissowa, ibid. ii. 2335. An example of an evil omen privately -reported is given by App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_666" href="#FNanchor_666" class="label">[666]</a> Livy ix. 38. 16 with ch. 39. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_667" href="#FNanchor_667" class="label">[667]</a> Fest. 234. 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_668" href="#FNanchor_668" class="label">[668]</a> P. 104; Cato, <i>De re mil.</i> in Fest. 214-7: “Magistratus nihil audent imperare, ne -quid consul auspici peremat.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_669" href="#FNanchor_669" class="label">[669]</a> P. 114.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_670" href="#FNanchor_670" class="label">[670]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 32. 81: “Nos (augures) nuntiationem solum habemus, consules et -reliqui magistratus etiam spectionem;” Varro, <i>Rer. hum.</i> xx, in Non. Marc. 92: “De -caelo auspicari ius neminist praeter magistratum;” Fest. 333. 9 (quoted p. 106, n. -8). Madvig, <i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 267, supposes that the augurs had both the spectio and -the nuntiatio; but this view contradicts the clear statement of Cicero; Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> 1. 109, n. 1. The fact is, as has been stated (p. 106), they had the -spectio for their own functions only, and as assistants of the magistrates simply the -nuntiatio.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_671" href="#FNanchor_671" class="label">[671]</a> The formula used is “in auspicio esse;” Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 12. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_672" href="#FNanchor_672" class="label">[672]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 20 f.; iii. 4. 11; 19. 43; <i>N. D.</i> ii. 3. 8; <i>Div.</i> ii. 33. 71; cf. Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 339.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_673" href="#FNanchor_673" class="label">[673]</a> P. 106 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_674" href="#FNanchor_674" class="label">[674]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 83; <i>Div.</i> i. 40. 89: “Privati eodem sacerdotio praediti rem -publicam religionum auctoritate rexerunt,” an exaggeration; <i>Leg.</i> ii. 12. 31; Livy i. -36. 6. In this capacity the augur did not look for omens with a view to reporting -them, but merely announced those which came unexpectedly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_675" href="#FNanchor_675" class="label">[675]</a> <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_676" href="#FNanchor_676" class="label">[676]</a> P. 115.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_677" href="#FNanchor_677" class="label">[677]</a> Three were present at curiate assemblies; Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 17. 2; cf. ii. 7. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_678" href="#FNanchor_678" class="label">[678]</a> In this case the augur not only assisted with his special knowledge, but also -acted as crier; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 95.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_679" href="#FNanchor_679" class="label">[679]</a> Varro, <i>R. R.</i> iii. 2. 2; 7. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_680" href="#FNanchor_680" class="label">[680]</a> <i>Leg.</i> ii. 12. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_681" href="#FNanchor_681" class="label">[681]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 32. 81.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_682" href="#FNanchor_682" class="label">[682]</a> P. 104, 112.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_683" href="#FNanchor_683" class="label">[683]</a> Gell. xiii. 15. 1; cf. Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 79.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_684" href="#FNanchor_684" class="label">[684]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 16. 13: “Lurco tribunus pl. solutus est et Aelia et Fufia, ut legem de -ambitu ferret;” <i>Sest.</i> 61. 129: “Decretum in curia ... ne quis de caelo servaret, -ne quis moram ullam adferret” (that no one should watch the heavens or interpose -any delay in the proceedings for the recall of Cicero). Both measures here referred -to were so popular and the magistrates were so nearly unanimous in their support -that the senate felt it could in these cases forestall the opposition of one or two -opponents.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_685" href="#FNanchor_685" class="label">[685]</a> In the famous case of Bibulus against Caesar, 59; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 20; cf. Dio Cass. -xxxviii. 4. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_686" href="#FNanchor_686" class="label">[686]</a> Proved by the fact that the watching of the sky by Bibulus should have annulled -the arrogation of Clodius (Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 15. 39 f.; <i>Har. Resp.</i> 23. 48; <i>Att.</i> ii. 12. 2; 16. -2; <i>Prov. Cons.</i> 19. 45; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 113, n. 2), which was brought -about by an act of the curiae under the presidency of the supreme pontiff. Any one -competent to observe the heavens necessarily had the obnuntiatio.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_687" href="#FNanchor_687" class="label">[687]</a> Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 36. 78. Probably obnuntiatio against tribunes is referred to by Cic. -<i>Phil.</i> v. 3. 7 f. and by Ascon. 68 (the last is the abolition of the Livian laws of 91), -but the obnuntiating magistrate is not known. In Cic. <i>Vatin.</i> 7. 17 (“Num quem -post urbem conditam scias tribunum pl. egisse cum plebe, cum constaret servatum -esse de caelo”) the principle is laid down that any one who has the right to obnuntiate -may use this power against a tribune. The validity of the tribunician law for -the interdiction of Cicero from fire and water was maintained on the ground that no -one was then watching the sky; Cic. <i>Prov. Cons.</i> 19. 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_688" href="#FNanchor_688" class="label">[688]</a> Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 37. 79; cf. 38. 83; <i>Phil.</i> ii. 38. 99; <i>Att.</i> iv. 3. 3 f.; 17. 4; <i>Q. Fr.</i> iii. 3. -2 (cf. Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 6; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 113, n. 3); -Dio Cass, xxxix. 39; Plut. <i>Crass.</i> 16; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 18. 66 (cf. Cic. <i>Div.</i> i. 16. 29); -iii. 7. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_689" href="#FNanchor_689" class="label">[689]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 9. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_690" href="#FNanchor_690" class="label">[690]</a> Cic. <i>Vatin.</i> 7. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_691" href="#FNanchor_691" class="label">[691]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 15. 39: “(Augures) negant fas esse agi cum populo, cum de caelo servatum -sit.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_692" href="#FNanchor_692" class="label">[692]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 3. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_693" href="#FNanchor_693" class="label">[693]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 32. 81.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_694" href="#FNanchor_694" class="label">[694]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 3. 4. In like manner Bibulus, after obnuntiating in vain against -Caesar’s agrarian law (p. 439), determined to remain at home and continually to watch -the sky for the remainder of the year. This procedure invalidated all acts passed -during that time by the assembly; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 15. 39 f.; <i>Har. Resp.</i> 23. 48; <i>Prov. -Cons.</i> 19. 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_695" href="#FNanchor_695" class="label">[695]</a> This procedure too was followed by Bibulus; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 6. 1; cf. -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 82, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_696" href="#FNanchor_696" class="label">[696]</a> That they were two separate enactments, and not one complex statute by joint -authors, is clearly indicated by Cic. <i>Har. Resp.</i> 27. 58: “Sustulit duas leges -Aeliam et Fufiam;” <i>Sest.</i> 15. 33. Generally they are spoken of as separate laws, -though Cicero occasionally, as <i>Vatin.</i> 5. 7, groups them in one. That they were -plebiscites is held probable by Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 111, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_697" href="#FNanchor_697" class="label">[697]</a> When Cicero, <i>Vatin.</i> 9. 23, states that these laws survived the ferocity of the -Gracchi, the audacity of Saturninus, etc., he places their origin in the times before -the Gracchi; and when he speaks of their abolition, 58, he tells us that they had -been in force about a hundred years (<i>Pis.</i> 5. 10).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_698" href="#FNanchor_698" class="label">[698]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_699" href="#FNanchor_699" class="label">[699]</a> <i>Vatin.</i> 7. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_700" href="#FNanchor_700" class="label">[700]</a> Ibid. 9. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_701" href="#FNanchor_701" class="label">[701]</a> <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 5. 11; cf. <i>Har. Resp.</i> 27. 58; <i>Pis.</i> 4. 9: “Propugnacula murique -tranquillitatis atque otii.” With other provisions of these statutes (cf. Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 16. -13; Schol. Bob. 319 f.) the present discussion is not concerned. See further on -these laws, p. 358 f. below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_702" href="#FNanchor_702" class="label">[702]</a> <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, i. 274 ff., 341; <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 315, 477 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_703" href="#FNanchor_703" class="label">[703]</a> <i>Att.</i> iv. 3. 4; 16. 5; <i>Phil.</i> ii. 32. 81.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_704" href="#FNanchor_704" class="label">[704]</a> Cic. <i>Vatin.</i> 6. 15; 7. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_705" href="#FNanchor_705" class="label">[705]</a> Cic. <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 5. 11: “Legem tribunus pl. tulit, ne auspiciis obtemperaretur, -ne obnuntiare concilio aut comitiis, ne intercedere liceret, ut lex Aelia et Fufia ne -valeret;” <i>Har. Resp.</i> 27. 58; <i>Sest.</i> 15. 33; <i>Prov. Cons.</i> 19. 46; <i>Pis.</i> 4. 9; 5. 11; -Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 5 f.; 14. 2; Ascon. 9; Schol. Bob. 319 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_706" href="#FNanchor_706" class="label">[706]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 3. 4; 16. 5; <i>Phil.</i> ii. 32. 81; cf. Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -iv. 84; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 204 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_707" href="#FNanchor_707" class="label">[707]</a> VIII. 23. 13 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_708" href="#FNanchor_708" class="label">[708]</a> Polyb. vi. 56. 6 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_709" href="#FNanchor_709" class="label">[709]</a> The former view was taken by Appius Claudius Pulcher, consul in 54 and author -of a work <i>De disciplina augurali</i> (Fest. 298. 26), and the latter by C. Claudius Marcellus, -consul in 50, and by Cicero—all three being public augurs; Cic. <i>Div.</i> i. 47. -105; ii. 18. 42; 33. 70; 35. 75; Leg. ii. 13. 32 f.; <i>N. D.</i> i. 42. 118; in general -<i>Div.</i> ii. At that time auspices were a mere pretence; the chicken omens were forced, -and the celestial signs were not seen; Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 33 f., 71 f.; Dion. Hal. ii. 6. On -the decline of augury and the auspices, see Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -ii. 2315, 2333.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_710" href="#FNanchor_710" class="label">[710]</a> Probably the jurist of that name who lived under Hadrian, and who is mentioned -by Paulus, in <i>Dig.</i> v. 4. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_711" href="#FNanchor_711" class="label">[711]</a> XV. 27. 4: “Is qui non universum populum, sed partem aliquam adesse iubet, -non comitia, sed concilium edicere debet.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_712" href="#FNanchor_712" class="label">[712]</a> For the purpose of the present discussion the plebeian assembly—that is, the -assembly which convened under the tribunes of the plebs and which issued plebiscita—is -assumed to be a gathering of only a part of the people. If it admitted -patricians (p. 300), and if therefore there was no assembly comprised exclusively of -plebeians, no argument would be needed to prove the error of the conventional distinction -between comitia and concilium.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_713" href="#FNanchor_713" class="label">[713]</a> In Livy iii. 16. 6, this meeting is called a concilium.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_714" href="#FNanchor_714" class="label">[714]</a> P. 341.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_715" href="#FNanchor_715" class="label">[715]</a> <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 170, n. 8; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 149, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_716" href="#FNanchor_716" class="label">[716]</a> <i>Mil.</i> 3. 7; cf. p. 122, n. 3 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_717" href="#FNanchor_717" class="label">[717]</a> “Cum se in mediam contionem intulissent, abstinere suetus ante talibus conciliis.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_718" href="#FNanchor_718" class="label">[718]</a> His last citation on this point, Livy v. 47. 7 (“Vocatis ad concilium militibus”) -has reference to the soldiers only—to a part of the people—and is therefore -altogether unlike the others. For an explanation of it, see p. 135 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_719" href="#FNanchor_719" class="label">[719]</a> A closely related question is whether concilium is ever restricted to the deliberative -stage of a session preliminary to the division into voting units, with comitia -limited in a corresponding manner to the final, voting stage of the session. A few -passages, as examples (2) and (4), might be explained by such a conjecture, but -others, as Livy iii. 13. 9 (“Virginio comitia habente conlegae appellati dimisere concilium”) -prove the supposition impossible. Concilium denotes the assembly in its -final as well as in its initial stage, voting as well as deliberating, whereas in ordinary -political language contio is used to denote the merely listening or witnessing assembly, -whether organized or unorganized, whether called to prepare the citizens for -voting or for any other purpose.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_720" href="#FNanchor_720" class="label">[720]</a> <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 170, n. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_721" href="#FNanchor_721" class="label">[721]</a> Ibid. i. 195 f. It is true that the plebeian assembly came to be subject to the -obnuntiatio (p. 117), but it would be absurd on this ground to suppose that Livy’s -statement refers especially to gatherings of the kind.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_722" href="#FNanchor_722" class="label">[722]</a> This statement admits that concilium here designates an assembly of the whole -people; but Mommsen does not tell us why the word applies with greater propriety -to the “patricio-plebeian” tribal assembly than to the centuriate assembly. For the -true reason, see p. 137, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_723" href="#FNanchor_723" class="label">[723]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 149, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_724" href="#FNanchor_724" class="label">[724]</a> Undoubtedly the Caesar who was consul in 64 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>; Teuffel and Schwabe, <i>Rom. -Lit.</i> i. 348. § 3; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 120, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_725" href="#FNanchor_725" class="label">[725]</a> “P. Lucullus et L. Annius, tribuni plebis, resistentibus collegis continuare -magistratum nitebantur, quae dissensio totius anni comitia impediebat.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_726" href="#FNanchor_726" class="label">[726]</a> <i>De com. trib. et conc. pl. discr.</i> (1875); Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 149, n. 1; -Kornemann, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 802. The correctness of my results -is acknowledged in the <i>Thesaurus linguae latinae</i>, iv. 44 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_727" href="#FNanchor_727" class="label">[727]</a> “Tribunicii candidati compromiserunt HS quingenis in singulos apud M. Catonem -depositis petere eius arbitratu, ut, qui contra fecisset, ab eo condemnaretur. -Quae quidem comitia si gratuita fuerint, ut putantur, plus unus Cato potuerit quam -omnes leges omnesque iudices.” The translation given above is Shuckburgh’s.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_728" href="#FNanchor_728" class="label">[728]</a> “Permagni nostra interest te, si comitiis non potueris, at, declarato illo, esse -Romae.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_729" href="#FNanchor_729" class="label">[729]</a> <i>Cf.</i> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 482.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_730" href="#FNanchor_730" class="label">[730]</a> “Venio ad comitia, sive magistratuum placet sive legum. Leges videmus saepe -ferri multas. Omitto eas, quae feruntur ita, vix ut quini, et ii ex aliena tribu, qui -suffragium ferant, reperiantur. De me, quem tyrannum atque ereptorem libertatis -esse dicebat illa ruina rei publicae, dicit se legem tulisse. Quis est, qui se, cum contra -me ferebatur, inisse suffragium confiteatur? cum autem de me eodem ex senatus -consulto comitiis centuriatis ferebatur, quis est, qui non profiteatur se adfuisse et suffragium -de salute mea tulisse? Utra igitur causa popularis debet videri, in qua -omnes honestates civitatis, omnes aetates, omnes ordines una mente consentiunt, an -in qua furiae concitatae tamquam ad funus rei publicae convolant?”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_731" href="#FNanchor_731" class="label">[731]</a> “Ferri de singulis nisi centuriatis comitiis noluerunt. Descriptus enim populus -censu, ordinibus, aetatibus plus adhibet ad suffragium consilii quam fuse in tribus -convocatus. Quo verius in causa nostra vir magni ingenii summaque prudentia, L. -Cotta, dicebat nihil omnino actum esse de nobis; praeter enim quam quod comitia -ilia essent armis gesta servilibus, praeterea neque tributa capitis comitia rata esse -posse neque ulla privilegii: quocirca nihil nobis opus esse lege, de quibus nihil -omnino actum esset legibus. Sed visum est et vobis et clarissimis viris melius, de -quo servi et latrones scivisse se aliquid dicerent, de hoc eodem cunctam Italiam -quid sentiret, ostendere.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_732" href="#FNanchor_732" class="label">[732]</a> <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 161, n. 53.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_733" href="#FNanchor_733" class="label">[733]</a> See list of citations for electoral assemblies, p. 133.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_734" href="#FNanchor_734" class="label">[734]</a> “Tribus locis significari maxime populi Romani iudicium ac voluntas potest, -contione, comitiis, ludorum gladiatorumque consessu.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_735" href="#FNanchor_735" class="label">[735]</a> “Qui (optimates) non populi concessu, sed suis comitiis hoc sibi nomen adrogaverunt.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_736" href="#FNanchor_736" class="label">[736]</a> “Iubet enim tribunum plebis, qui eam legem tulerit, creare decemviros per tribus -septemdecim, ut, quern novem tribus fecerint, is decemvir sit. Hic quaero, quam -ob causam initium rerum ac legum suarum hinc duxerit, ut populus Romanus suffragio -privaretur.... Etenim cum omnes potestates, imperia, curationes ab universo -populo Romano proficisci convenit, tum eas profecto maxime, quae constituuntur ad -populi fructum aliquem et commodum, in quo et universi deligant, quem populo -Romano maxime consulturum putent, et unus quisque studio et suffragio suo viam -sibi ad beneficium impetrandum munire possit. Hoc tribuno plebis potissimum venit -in mentem, populum Romanum universum privare suffragiis, paucas tribus non certa -condicione iuris, sed sortis beneficio fortuito ad usurpandam libertatem vocare;” cf. -<i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 15. 44; 22. 64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_737" href="#FNanchor_737" class="label">[737]</a> <i>Sest.</i> 51. 109.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_738" href="#FNanchor_738" class="label">[738]</a> P. 301 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_739" href="#FNanchor_739" class="label">[739]</a> “Mihi quidem eae verae videntur opiniones, quae honestae, quae laudabiles, -quae gloriosae, quae in senatu, quae ad populum, quae in omni coetu concilioque -profitendae sint;” cf. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 19. 44, quoted p. 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_740" href="#FNanchor_740" class="label">[740]</a> The writers not included in this discussion, as Nepos and the poets, contain -nothing at variance with the results here reached. Gudeman’s article on Concilium -in the <i>Thes. ling. lat.</i> iv. 44-8, in most respects excellent, still retains the groundless -distinction between republican and imperial usage.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_741" href="#FNanchor_741" class="label">[741]</a> It will suffice here to mention the elder Cato; Livy xxxix. 40. 6: “Si ius consuleres, -peritissumus;” Cic. <i>Senec.</i> 11. 38: “Ius augurium, pontificium, civile tracto.” -On the subject in general, see Pais, <i>Stor. d. Rom.</i> I. i. 68 and notes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_742" href="#FNanchor_742" class="label">[742]</a> For citations of other authors, see Gudeman, in <i>Thes. ling. lat.</i> iv. 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_743" href="#FNanchor_743" class="label">[743]</a> All three passages are quoted, p. 130 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_744" href="#FNanchor_744" class="label">[744]</a> The classification of comitial functions into elective, legislative, and judicial -follows Cicero, <i>Div.</i> ii. 35. 74: “Ut comitiorum vel in iudiciis populi vel in iure -legum vel in creandis magistratibus.” In this volume, accordingly, “legislative” -refers not merely to law-making in the narrower sense, but also to the passing of -resolutions on all affairs, domestic and foreign, including necessarily the lex de bello -indicendo.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_745" href="#FNanchor_745" class="label">[745]</a> For separate lists of the elective and the legislative and judicial comitia, see -VI (below), where will be found sufficient illustrations of (<i>b</i>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_746" href="#FNanchor_746" class="label">[746]</a> Only one instance of concilium as an elective body has been found; <i>Lex Iulia -Municipalis</i>, in <i>CIL.</i> i. 206. 132: the election of magistrates “comitieis conciliove.” -The explanation is that the usage of some of the Italian municipia differed from -the Roman, and the author of the law had to adapt his language to local custom. -With this exception the inscriptions are in line with the literature.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_747" href="#FNanchor_747" class="label">[747]</a> P. 124.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_748" href="#FNanchor_748" class="label">[748]</a> Discussed on p. 123 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_749" href="#FNanchor_749" class="label">[749]</a> P. 132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_750" href="#FNanchor_750" class="label">[750]</a> Ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_751" href="#FNanchor_751" class="label">[751]</a> Ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_752" href="#FNanchor_752" class="label">[752]</a> Fest. ep. 38: “Concilium dicitur a concalando, id est vocando.” It is accepted -by Curtius, <i>Griech. Etym.</i> 139; Vaniček, <i>Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 143; Walde, <i>Lat. -etym. Wörterb.</i> 136. But Corssen, <i>Beitr. z. ital. Sprachk.</i> 41 f., rejects this etymology -on the ground that it does not harmonize with all the meanings of the word and of -its derivative “conciliare”; also Gudeman, in <i>Thes. ling. lat.</i> iv. 44. Corssen, analyzing -it into con-cil-iu-m, and connecting -cil- with a root kal-, “to cover,” supposes -the original meaning to be simply “a joining together,” “a union,”—giving that -signification which he considers primary. It is equally reasonable, however, to assume -the development to be (1) “a calling together,” (2) “a meeting for consultation,” -(3) “a natural union of individuals of any kind.” In the third sense it is applied -perhaps figuratively to inanimate things, especially the union of atoms to form -objects, by Lucretius i. 183, 484, 772, 1082; ii. 120; iii. 805; cf. Ovid, <i>Met.</i> i. 710.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_753" href="#FNanchor_753" class="label">[753]</a> The meaning consultation, deliberation, clearly appears in Plaut. <i>Mil.</i> 597 ff.:</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">“Sinite me priu’ perspectare, ne uspiam insidiae sient</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Concilium quod habere volumus. Nam opus est nunc tuto loco</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Unde inimicus ne quis nostri spolia capiat consili.</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Nam bene consultum inconsultumst, si id inimicis usuist,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Neque potest quin, si id inimicis usuist, opsit tibi;</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Nam bene (consultum) consilium surrupitur saepissume.”</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Also in 249, 1013: “Socium tuorum conciliorum et participem consiliorum”; -Cic. <i>Rep.</i> 17. 28: “Doctissimorum hominum in concilio”; Caes. <i>B. C.</i> i. 19; -Nep. <i>Epam.</i> 3. 5; Verg. <i>Aen.</i> ii. 89 (or consiliis); iii. 679; v. 75; xi. 234; Livy 1. -21. 3; see also II (<i>a</i>), p. 132, and Forcellini, <i>Lat. Lex.</i> ii. 347. It is never a chance -crowd; <i>Diff.</i> ed. Beck, p. 47. 43: “Concilium est convocata multitudo, conventus -ex diversis locis populum in unum contrahit, coetus fortuitu congregatur.” The -ancients understood this to be the meaning of the word; Varro <i>L. L.</i> vi. 43: “A -cogitatione concilium, inde consilium,” an unsuccessful though instructive guess; -Fest. ep. 38: “Concilium dicitur a populo consensu;” Isid. <i>Etym.</i> vi. 16. 12: -“Concilium a communi intentione ductum, quasi communicilium.” This interpretation -is supported by several glosses; φιλοποιεία (<i>Corp. Gloss. Lat.</i> ii. 471. 49), -συμβούλιον (ibid. ii. 107. 5), coenobulium, caenobulium (ibid. iv. 321. 27). Lastly -our derivative “council” points in the same direction. The meaning “deliberative -assembly” has been accepted by Gudeman, in <i>Thes. ling. lat.</i> iv. 46, who has added -citations from the whole range of Latin literature.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_754" href="#FNanchor_754" class="label">[754]</a> Lodge, <i>Lex. Plaut.</i> i. 288; Gudeman, <i>Thes. ling. lat.</i> iv. 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_755" href="#FNanchor_755" class="label">[755]</a> Cf. Gudeman, ibid. iv. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_756" href="#FNanchor_756" class="label">[756]</a> Cf. n. 1 and p. 132, II (<i>a</i>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_757" href="#FNanchor_757" class="label">[757]</a> P. 143.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_758" href="#FNanchor_758" class="label">[758]</a> P. 132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_759" href="#FNanchor_759" class="label">[759]</a> The notion sometimes expressed that the word applies more appropriately to a -body of representatives of the component states of a league is without foundation, -though it is true that some foreign concilia are of this character.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_760" href="#FNanchor_760" class="label">[760]</a> P. 133.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_761" href="#FNanchor_761" class="label">[761]</a> Ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_762" href="#FNanchor_762" class="label">[762]</a> P. 134.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_763" href="#FNanchor_763" class="label">[763]</a> Thus is explained a phenomenon for which Mommsen could find no adequate -reason—that the so-called “patricio-plebeian” tribal assembly was more apt to be -called concilium than were the comitia centuriata. The deliberative feature of the -concilium also explains the close approach of the word to contio—another fact -which Mommsen knew but did not understand.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_764" href="#FNanchor_764" class="label">[764]</a> Cf. p. 131. Notwithstanding all the confidence reposed by the moderns in this -utterance of Laelius, ‘debet’ suggests that he is proposing an ideal distinction -rather than stating an actual usage.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_765" href="#FNanchor_765" class="label">[765]</a> P. 286, 292, 301 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_766" href="#FNanchor_766" class="label">[766]</a> Corssen, <i>Ausspr.</i> i. 51; ii. 683; Vaniček, <i>Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 184; -Walde, <i>Lat. etym. Wörterb.</i> 140; cf. <i>SC de Bacch.</i> in <i>CIL.</i> i. 196. 23: “In conventionid”; -Fest. ep. 113: “In conventione in contio”; <i>Commentaria Consularia</i>, -in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 88; <i>Corp. Gloss. Lat.</i> v. 280. 13; vi. 270, s. v.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_767" href="#FNanchor_767" class="label">[767]</a> <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 29: “Contra Iulius Caesar XVI auspiciorum libro negat nundinis -contionem advocari posse, id est cum populo agi, ideoque nundinis Romanorum -haberi comitia non posse;” cf. p. 125 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_768" href="#FNanchor_768" class="label">[768]</a> <i>Att.</i> iv. 3. 4: “Contio biduo nulla.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_769" href="#FNanchor_769" class="label">[769]</a> Cf. Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xviii. 3. 13: “Nundinis urbem revisitabant et ideo comitia nundinis -habere non licebat, ne plebs avocaretur;” Fest. 173. 30-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_770" href="#FNanchor_770" class="label">[770]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 14. 1; <i>Lex Gen.</i> 81, in <i>CIL.</i> ii. Supplb. 5439: “In contione palam -luci nundinis.” Another illustration is the statement of Gellius, xv. 27. 3, that wills -were made in comitia calata, in a contio of the people. Mommsen’s assumption -(<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 199 and n. 3) that no contio was held on a market day as a rule, -to which there were exceptions, is altogether unsatisfactory. The passages cited refer -to a law, not to a mere custom to be observed or not at the will of the magistrate. -The contio which met on a market day must have been essentially different in nature -from the contio which was forbidden for market days; cf. also Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 93; -Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 4. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_771" href="#FNanchor_771" class="label">[771]</a> The calata comitia curiata is termed contio by Gell. xv. 27. 3: “Quod calatis -comitiis in populi contione fieret.” Cicero, <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 4. 11 (cf. 5. 15) speaks of -the witnessing comitia centuriata as contio, and the lustral centuriate assembly was -similarly termed; <i>Censoriae Tabulae</i>, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 87: “Conventionem habet -qui lustrum conditurus est.” A widespread idea (held by Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> -i. 379; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1149; Soltau, <i>Altröm. -Volksversamml.</i> 37, and others) that all contiones were unorganized is therefore -wrong.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_772" href="#FNanchor_772" class="label">[772]</a> Fest. ep. 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_773" href="#FNanchor_773" class="label">[773]</a> Cic. <i>Vatin.</i> i. 3; <i>Att.</i> xiv. 11. 1; 20. 3; xv. 2. 3; <i>Fam.</i> ix. 14. 7; x. 33. 2; -Livy xxiv. 22. 1; Gell. xviii. 7. 6 f.; <i>Gloss. Corp. Lat.</i> ii. 114. 25; 269. 27; 575. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_774" href="#FNanchor_774" class="label">[774]</a> P. 150.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_775" href="#FNanchor_775" class="label">[775]</a> Examples of military contiones are Caes. <i>B. G.</i> v. 48; vii. 52 f.; Livy i. 16. 1; -ii. 59. 4 ff.; vii. 36. 9; viii. 7. 14; 31 f.; xxvi. 48. 13; xxx. 17. 9; xli. 10. 6; -see also p. 202 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_776" href="#FNanchor_776" class="label">[776]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 37; v. 11. 2; Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 3; the candidate, too, for the regal -office; Livy i. 35. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_777" href="#FNanchor_777" class="label">[777]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 4. 10: “Cum populo ... agendi ius esto consuli, praetori, magistro -populi equitumque eique, quem patres prodent consulum rogandorum ergo; -tribunisque, quos sibi plebes creassit ... ad plebem, quod oesus erit, ferunto;” -Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 93: “Censor, consul, dictator, interrex potest (exercitum urbanum -vocare).”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_778" href="#FNanchor_778" class="label">[778]</a> Schol. Bob. 330; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> I. p. xix. This passage proves -that a quaestor could call a contio in his own right; and the same holds probable -for the aediles.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_779" href="#FNanchor_779" class="label">[779]</a> It is necessary to include them in the general statement of Messala, in Gell. -xiii. 16 (17). 1, that the lower magistrates had the right; cf. the note above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_780" href="#FNanchor_780" class="label">[780]</a> Fest. ep. 38: “Contio significat conventum, non tamen alium, quam eum, qui a -magistratu vel a sacerdote publico per praeconem convocatur.” The sacerdos is the -rex sacrorum as well as the supreme pontiff. It was necessary for the latter to hold -judicial contiones; p. 259, 327. For the former, see Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 28; Macrob. -<i>Sat.</i> i. 15. 9-12; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> viii. 654. Strictly the contiones of the rex sacrorum -were calata comitia curiata; p. 155.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_781" href="#FNanchor_781" class="label">[781]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 193. For a contio of the Xviri leg. scrib. see Livy -iii. 34. 1. On the duumviri for presiding at the election of consuls in 43, see Dio -Cass. xlvi. 45. 3. In the opinion of the Romans the tribunus celerum, an officer -under the kings, possessed the right; Livy i. 59. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 71. 6; 75. 1; -Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> viii. 646; Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 3: “Exactis regibus lege tribunicia.” -These authors suppose that L. Junius Brutus held an assembly in the capacity -of tribunus celerum, whereas Cicero, <i>Rep.</i> ii. 25. 46, speaks of him as a private -citizen.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_782" href="#FNanchor_782" class="label">[782]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 193. But the promagistrate had a right to attend -and to address a contio called for him outside the walls by a competent person; cf. -Vell. i. 10. 4; p. 426 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_783" href="#FNanchor_783" class="label">[783]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_784" href="#FNanchor_784" class="label">[784]</a> Livy xliii. 16. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_785" href="#FNanchor_785" class="label">[785]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_786" href="#FNanchor_786" class="label">[786]</a> For the quaestor, see <i>Com. Anq.</i> in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 91 f. For the curule aediles, -Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 12. 36; v. 67. 173; Livy x. 23. 11; 31. 9; 47. 4; xxxv. 10. 11; 41. -9; Val. Max. vi. 1. 7; viii. 1. damn. 7; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xviii. 6. 42. For the plebeian -aediles, Livy x. 23. 13; xxv. 2. 9; xxxiii. 42. 10; Gell. x. 6. 3; p. 290, 325 below; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 196, n. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_787" href="#FNanchor_787" class="label">[787]</a> Messala, <i>De Auspiciis</i>, in Gell. xiii. 16 (15). 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_788" href="#FNanchor_788" class="label">[788]</a> Messala, <i>De Auspiciis</i>, in Gell. xiii. 16 (15). 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_789" href="#FNanchor_789" class="label">[789]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 16. 4; 17. 5; 22. 2; x. 41; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 37. 79; Livy iii. 11. 8; -xxv. 3 f.; xliii. 16. 7-9; (Aur. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 65. 5; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 604, -826; p. 266 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_790" href="#FNanchor_790" class="label">[790]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> v. 2. 7: Q. Metellus Nepos forbade Cicero to address the people in -contio on the occasion of his retiring from the consulship—a prohibition which -Cicero declares was never before heard of. For another case, see Dio Cass. xxxviii. -12. 3; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 716; iii. 299 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_791" href="#FNanchor_791" class="label">[791]</a> Lange’s supposition (<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 716) that by the holding of a contio a tribune -could prevent a patrician magistrate’s convoking comitia is not well founded. Livy, -iv. 25. 1 (“Tribuni plebi adsiduiis contionibus prohibendo consularia comitia”), does -not intend to express a constitutional principle; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 289; -Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1150.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_792" href="#FNanchor_792" class="label">[792]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 4. 11: “Tune, qui civibus Romanis in contione ipsa carnificem, -qui vincla adhiberi putas oportere, qui in Campo Martio comitiis centuriatis auspicato -in loco crucem ad civium supplicium defigi et constitui iubes, an ego, qui funestari -contionem contagione carnificis veto ... qui castam contionem, sanctum Campum -... defendo servari oportere;” cf. 5. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_793" href="#FNanchor_793" class="label">[793]</a> Tac. <i>Ann.</i> ii. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_794" href="#FNanchor_794" class="label">[794]</a> Fest. 241. 29; Livy xxii. 57. 3; Suet. <i>Dom.</i> 8; Dio Cass. lxxix. 9. 3 f.; cf. Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 56, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_795" href="#FNanchor_795" class="label">[795]</a> Cf. Livy xli. 15. 10; <i>Lex Gen.</i> 81, in <i>CIL.</i> ii. Supplb. 5439.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_796" href="#FNanchor_796" class="label">[796]</a> Livy iii. 66. 2; v. 11. 15; 12. 1; xxxviii. 52. 4; 53. 6. On the judicial contio, -see p. 259.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_797" href="#FNanchor_797" class="label">[797]</a> Livy xliii. 16. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_798" href="#FNanchor_798" class="label">[798]</a> XIII. 16. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_799" href="#FNanchor_799" class="label">[799]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 21. 5; <i>Verr.</i> i. 15. 44; <i>Sest.</i> 12. 29; <i>Rep.</i> i. 4. 7; Nep. <i>Tim.</i> iv. 3; -<i>Them.</i> i. 3; Livy ii. 2. 4; 24. 4-6; 27. 2; iii. 31. 2; 41. 5 ff.; 54. 6; 67 f.; iv. 15; -xli. 10. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_800" href="#FNanchor_800" class="label">[800]</a> Livy x. 13, 21; (Cic.) <i>Herenn.</i> iv. 55. 68. A contio, described by Livy vi. -39-41, was held by the tribunes Licinius and Sextius in the ninth year of their -tribunate, after the day of election for the following year had been set. This meeting -however was as much for the consideration of the proposed laws as of their own -candidacy, and hence could not be thought of as strictly pertaining to the election. -Mommsen’s opinion (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 392, n. 1) that stories of the kind prove nothing -does not accord with his own general attitude toward the sources for the earlier -history of Rome.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_801" href="#FNanchor_801" class="label">[801]</a> P. 470.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_802" href="#FNanchor_802" class="label">[802]</a> Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 50. 107 f.; <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 10. 26; <i>Pis.</i> 15. 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_803" href="#FNanchor_803" class="label">[803]</a> P. 259 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_804" href="#FNanchor_804" class="label">[804]</a> Livy xxxix. 17. 4 f.; Plut. <i>Aem.</i> 30; Pseud. Sall. <i>Declam. in Cat.</i> 19; cf. the -<i>Twelve Tables</i>, in <i>Censorin.</i> 24. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_805" href="#FNanchor_805" class="label">[805]</a> Livy xlii. 33. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_806" href="#FNanchor_806" class="label">[806]</a> Besides the Forum or Comitium (Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 4) it sometimes met in the -Area Capitolina (Cic. Frag. A. vii. 49; Livy xxxiii. 25. 6; xxxiv. 1. 4), or in the Circus -Flaminius (Livy xxvii. 21. 1; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 14. 1; <i>Sest.</i> 14. 33). In general, see Liebenam, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1151; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 380.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_807" href="#FNanchor_807" class="label">[807]</a> Cic. <i>Flacc.</i> 7. 16 (contrasting the sitting contio of the Greeks); <i>Brut.</i> 84. 289; -<i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 5. 13; <i>Acad. Pr.</i> 47. 144; <i>Tusc.</i> iii. 20. 48; <i>Orat.</i> 63. 213. But probably -the contio in the Flaminian circus was seated; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. -396, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_808" href="#FNanchor_808" class="label">[808]</a> P. 107, 110. Although the tribune of the plebs did not auspicate their assemblies, -they like other magistrates occupied a templum during the meeting; Livy ii. -56. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_809" href="#FNanchor_809" class="label">[809]</a> <i>Censoriae Tabulae</i>, in Varro <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86. For the summons by the consul, -see the <i>Commentaria Consularia</i>, ibid. 88; and by the quaestor, <i>Commentarium -Anquisitionis</i> of M. Sergius, ibid. 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_810" href="#FNanchor_810" class="label">[810]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_811" href="#FNanchor_811" class="label">[811]</a> <i>Censoriae Tabulae</i>, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 87: “Praeco in templo primum vocat, -postea de moeris item vocat;” cf. 90 f.; Livy xxxix. 32. 11; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> vii. 30. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_812" href="#FNanchor_812" class="label">[812]</a> Documents, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86, 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_813" href="#FNanchor_813" class="label">[813]</a> Livy xxv. 3. 17; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 50. 107 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_814" href="#FNanchor_814" class="label">[814]</a> Caesar, a praetor and friend of the presiding tribune, sat with him on the porch -of the temple of Castor and Pollux—used on that occasion as the speaker’s platform; -Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 27; Cic. <i>Vatin.</i> 10. 24: “In rostris, in illo, inquam, augurato -templo ac loco ... quo auctoritatis exquirendae causa ceteri tribuni pl. principes -civitatis producere consuerunt.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_815" href="#FNanchor_815" class="label">[815]</a> Documents, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 88, 91; cf. 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_816" href="#FNanchor_816" class="label">[816]</a> Livy xxxix. 15. 1: “Consules in rostra escenderunt, et contione advocata cum -solemne carmen precationis, quod praefari, priusquam populus adloquantur, magistratus -solent, peregisset consul, ita coepit: Nulli umquam contioni, quirites, tam non solum -apta sed etiam necessaria haec sollemnis deorum comprecatio fuit.” The prayer was -made at the opening of elective as well as of deliberative assemblies (Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 1; -Plin. <i>Paneg.</i> 63) by plebeian as well as by patrician magistrates; (Cic.) <i>Herenn.</i> iv. -55. 68. Every speech addressed to the people began with a prayer; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> -xi. 301; Cic. <i>Caecil.</i> 13. 43; Gell. xiii. 23. 1; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 390, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_817" href="#FNanchor_817" class="label">[817]</a> P. 430, 439.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_818" href="#FNanchor_818" class="label">[818]</a> Caesar first brought his agrarian bill before the senate; and calling on the -senators one after another by name to say whether they found any fault with it, he -promised to amend it or to drop it altogether, if any clause proved unsatisfactory to -any member. As the senators would not debate the merits of the proposal, but did -all they could to delay its consideration, he offered the bill to the assembly without -their consent; and for the remainder of his consulship he brought no more bills -before the senate, but referred them directly to the people; Dio Cass, xxxviii. 2-4; -cf. p. 148.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_819" href="#FNanchor_819" class="label">[819]</a> Dion. Hal. v. 11. 2; Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 3. Besides the king it was supposed that the -interrex and the tribunus celerum alone were competent; Dion. Hal. iv. 71. 6; 75. 1. -The ancient writers seem to have been brought to this conception by a desire to contrast -the despotism of the monarchy with the liberty of the republic. But according -to Livy, i. 16. 5 ff., and Cicero, <i>Rep.</i> ii. 10. 20 (cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -i. 200, n. 6) Proculus Julius, a private person, made a speech in a contio of -the regal period; and in judicial assemblies speaking by private persons was necessary; -cf. Livy i. 26. For the general usage in the primitive European assembly, -see p. 169.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_820" href="#FNanchor_820" class="label">[820]</a> In presenting his agrarian bill to the people Caesar first called on his colleague, -despite the fact that the latter was known to be opposed to the measure; Dio Cass. -xxxviii. 4. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_821" href="#FNanchor_821" class="label">[821]</a> <i>Commentarium Anquisitionis</i>, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 91. Clodius, tribune of the -plebs, brought forward the two consuls into the Flaminian circus, where they gave -their sanction and formal approval of all the tribune had been saying against Cicero; -Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 14. 33. On this occasion the consul Piso condemned Cicero’s consulship -for its cruelty; Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 6. 14; <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 6. 13. In 44 Cannutius, a tribune of -the plebs, introduced into a contio the consul Mark Antony, who spoke regarding -the assassins of Caesar; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> xii. 3. 2. Earlier instances are Livy iii. 64. 6; -iv. 6. 1 f. A tribune brought the augurs into a contio, to ask of them information -concerning the auspices; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 15. 40.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_822" href="#FNanchor_822" class="label">[822]</a> Although the senators were invited to sit on the platform (<i>Comm. Anq.</i> in Varro, -<i>L. L.</i> vi. 91), speaking by them was exceptional; in the assembly they were no more -than eminent private persons; Dio Cass, xxxviii. 4. 4; cf. ch. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_823" href="#FNanchor_823" class="label">[823]</a> E.g. Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 1. 6: “Habui contionem. Omnes magistratus praesentes -praeter unum praetorem et duos tribunos dederunt.” In a certain contio a tribune -asked Scipio Aemilianus what he thought of the conduct of Ti. Gracchus; Val. Max. -vi. 2. 3. At the suggestion of the consul Piso, Fufius, a tribune, brought Pompey -upon the platform and asked his opinion as to the selection of jurors for a particular -case; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 14. 1; cf. Ascon. 50. The tribune M. Servilius invited Cicero to -speak in a contio in support of C. Cassius (Cic. <i>Fam.</i> xii. 7. 1), and it was in response -to an invitation of another tribune, P. Appuleius (<i>Phil.</i> vi. 1), that he delivered the -sixth <i>Philippic</i>. Other references to tribunician invitations are Cic. <i>Att.</i> xiv. 20. 5; -Dio Cass. xlv. 6. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_824" href="#FNanchor_824" class="label">[824]</a> Ascon. 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_825" href="#FNanchor_825" class="label">[825]</a> Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 33 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_826" href="#FNanchor_826" class="label">[826]</a> The Rhodian ambassadors were introduced by the tribune Antony to the senate -(Polyb. xxx. 4. 6), as the context (cf. § 8) indicates, not as Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -ii. 313, n. 1, supposes, to the people. There is no question, however, as to the right -of a magistrate to bring such persons before the popular assembly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_827" href="#FNanchor_827" class="label">[827]</a> Val. Max. iii. 8. 6: “Quid feminae cum contione? Si patrius mos sevetur, -nihil.” The lex Horatia, which is alleged to have granted the Vestal Gaia Taracia -among many honors the right to give testimony [Gell. vii (vi). 7. 1-3], and which -is assigned by Cuq (<i>Inst. jurid. d. Rom.</i> i. 255; and in Daremb. et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> iv. -1145) to the consul Horatius, 509, is a myth (Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 608), though -doubtless in the course of the republic laws of the kind were occasionally passed, the -language of which might be quoted by the annalists (Gell. l. c.). The rule that -women were intestabiles is proved by such exceptions.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_828" href="#FNanchor_828" class="label">[828]</a> XXXIV. 2. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_829" href="#FNanchor_829" class="label">[829]</a> Frag. 83. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_830" href="#FNanchor_830" class="label">[830]</a> III. 8. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_831" href="#FNanchor_831" class="label">[831]</a> Appian, <i>B. C.</i> iv. 32-4; see also p. 326.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_832" href="#FNanchor_832" class="label">[832]</a> Livy xlv. 21. 6; 36. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_833" href="#FNanchor_833" class="label">[833]</a> Livy xlv. 36; cf. the statement of Dion. Hal. x. 41. 1, that on a certain occasion -the crier invited all who wished to speak. These two passages are credible, notwithstanding -the doubt expressed by Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 395, n. 2, if we regard -the general invitation as a concession on the part of the presiding magistrate rather -than as a right of the people.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_834" href="#FNanchor_834" class="label">[834]</a> P. 136.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_835" href="#FNanchor_835" class="label">[835]</a> Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_836" href="#FNanchor_836" class="label">[836]</a> Quint. <i>Inst.</i> iii. 11. 13: “Qui bona paterna consumpserit, ne contionetur.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_837" href="#FNanchor_837" class="label">[837]</a> (Cic.) <i>Herenn</i>. i. 11. 20; cf. <i>Lex Bant.</i> (133-118 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) in <i>CIL.</i> i. 197. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_838" href="#FNanchor_838" class="label">[838]</a> Such a grant in Alexandria Troas, mentioned by <i>CIL.</i> iii. 392, Mommsen (<i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> i. 201, n. 3) believes to have been in imitation of Roman usage.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_839" href="#FNanchor_839" class="label">[839]</a> Varro, <i>Rer. hum.</i> xxi, in Gell. xiii. 12. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_840" href="#FNanchor_840" class="label">[840]</a> Ibid.; cf. Val. Max. iii. 7. 3: “C. Curiatius tr. pl. productos in contionem consules -compellebat ut de frumento emendo referrent.” Mommsen’s interpretation -(<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 313, n. 2), that the tribunes could not summon the consuls but -could compel them to speak when present, is not altogether satisfactory. The comment -of Gellius (§ 7 f.: “Huius ego iuris, quod M. Varro tradit, Labeonem arbitror -vana tunc fiducia, cum privatus esset, vocatum a tribunis non isse. Quae, malum, -autem ratio fuit vocantibus nolle obsequi, quos confiteare ius habere prendendi? -Nam qui iure prendi potest, et in vincula duci potest”) supports the view given above -in the text. A magistracy might afford some degree of protection, but on the principle -enunciated by Gellius the tribune, who had the power to arrest a consul, was -in a position practically to compel him to appear at a public meeting. As further -examples of the president’s power to force speaking, Cato, a tribune of the plebs, -compelled the keepers of the Sibylline books to come before the people in contio -and declare the prophecy; Dio Cass. xxxix. 15. 4; cf. also Cic. <i>Vatin.</i> 10. 24; -<i>Att.</i> ii. 24; Plut. <i>Cic.</i> 9; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 44. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_841" href="#FNanchor_841" class="label">[841]</a> P. 146.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_842" href="#FNanchor_842" class="label">[842]</a> P. 145, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_843" href="#FNanchor_843" class="label">[843]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 2-5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_844" href="#FNanchor_844" class="label">[844]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 24. 3: “Caesar, is qui olim praetor cum esset, Q. Catulum ex inferiore -loco iusserat dicere, Vettium in rostra produxit;” <i>Vatin.</i> 10. 24: “Cum -L. Vettium ... in contionem produxeris, indicem in rostris, in illo, inquam, augurato -templo ac loco collocaris, quo auctoritatis exquirendae causa ceteri tribuni pl. -principes civitatis producere consuerunt.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_845" href="#FNanchor_845" class="label">[845]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 34. 2; Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_846" href="#FNanchor_846" class="label">[846]</a> Or as Foster translates, “about the distressing condition of the times.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_847" href="#FNanchor_847" class="label">[847]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 34; Plut. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_848" href="#FNanchor_848" class="label">[848]</a> Cic. <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 24. 69.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_849" href="#FNanchor_849" class="label">[849]</a> Livy x. 8. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_850" href="#FNanchor_850" class="label">[850]</a> Ibid. xxxiv. 4. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_851" href="#FNanchor_851" class="label">[851]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 35. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_852" href="#FNanchor_852" class="label">[852]</a> Ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_853" href="#FNanchor_853" class="label">[853]</a> Livy ii. 56. 9: “Quirites, ... crastino die adeste.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_854" href="#FNanchor_854" class="label">[854]</a> <i>Commentaria Consularia</i>, in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 88: “Impero qua convenit ad -comitia centuriata.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_855" href="#FNanchor_855" class="label">[855]</a> Livy ii. 56. 12: “Si vobis videtur, discedite, quirites.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_856" href="#FNanchor_856" class="label">[856]</a> Preparatory to voting, the plebeian tribune Laetorius ordered the removal of -all, including patricians, who were not to vote; Livy ii. 56. 10: “Submoveri Laetorius -iubet praeterquam qui suffragium ineant.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_857" href="#FNanchor_857" class="label">[857]</a> In the case referred to in the note above, some of the young patricians stood -their ground and refused to give way before the viator; § 11; cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 48. -Again on other occasions the patricians when ordered refused to withdraw before the -voting (cf. Livy iii. 11. 4), from which we may infer that the right to attend the -comitia presided over by tribunes was claimed by the patricians but denied them by -the tribunes. The word used in these passages to designate the removal of the -unqualified is “submovere.” In Livy xxv. 3. 16 (cf. Cic. <i>Flacc.</i> 7. 15) “tribuni populum -summoverunt” has reference to the adjournment of the people to their voting -divisions, and probably also to the exclusion of those who had no right to vote; cf. -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 390, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_858" href="#FNanchor_858" class="label">[858]</a> Acclamation was retained as a regular form of voting by the army; p. 202; -cf. Bernhöft, <i>Röm. Königsz.</i> 153.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_859" href="#FNanchor_859" class="label">[859]</a> Philochorus, 79 b, in Müller, <i>Frag. Hist. Graec.</i> i. 396. The condemnation of -the generals who fought at Arginusae was voted in the same way; Xen. <i>Hell.</i> i. 7. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_860" href="#FNanchor_860" class="label">[860]</a> Cf. Schröder, <i>Deutsche Rechtsgesch</i>. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_861" href="#FNanchor_861" class="label">[861]</a> It is interesting in this connection that in the Homeric assembly the heralds -(κήρυκες), who were a sacerdotal class, kept order; cf. <i>Il.</i> ii. 97 f. In the German -assembly the priests with coercive power maintained quiet; Tac. <i>Germ.</i> ii. 3; -Schröder, <i>Deutsche Rechtsgesch</i>. 22 f. The Irish assemblies were of religious origin, -and maintained some religious features till after the introduction of Christianity; -Ginnell, <i>Brehon Laws</i>, 42, 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_862" href="#FNanchor_862" class="label">[862]</a> They excluded on the one hand comitia for religious purposes presided over by -a political magistrate—for instance, the comitia centuriata under the censor for the -lustrum (p. 141)—and on the other the meetings of the people under pontifical presidency -for secular business, such as an appeal to the comitia from the pontifical imposition -of fines (cf. Livy, xl. 42. 9), the meeting of the plebs under the supreme -pontiff for the election of plebeian tribunes after the fall of the decemvirate (Cic. -<i>Cornel.</i> in Ascon. 77; Livy, iii. 54. 5, 11), and the meeting of seventeen tribes for -the election of sacerdotes. In the three exceptional instances last mentioned the -comitia are tributa, which are never calata.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_863" href="#FNanchor_863" class="label">[863]</a> Kindred words are calendae, Calabra, calator. As late as Plautus (<i>Pseud.</i> 1009; -<i>Merc.</i> 852; <i>Rud.</i> 335) a common use of calatores was to designate slave messengers; -cf. Fest. ep. 38; <i>Corp. Gloss. Lat.</i> ii. 95. 42: δοῦλοι δημόσιοι. This use -became obsolete, but the word continued to apply to certain assistants of the sacerdotes; -Serv. <i>in Georg.</i> i. 268; <i>Corp. Gloss. Lat.</i> ii. 96. 3; iv. 214. 1; v. 275. 1; -595. 34, 63; 563. 66; <i>CIL.</i> vi. 712, 2053. 5; 2184-90, 3878; x. 1726; also the -<i>inscr.</i> recently discovered in the Forum; cf. Holzapfel, in <i>Jahresb. f. Altwiss.</i> 1905. -263, 265 ff.; Warren, in <i>Am. Journ. of Philol.</i> xxviii (1907). 249-72. In all the -known instances they were freemen, often freedmen; Saglio, in Daremberg et -Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 814. For other citations, see Samter, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -iii. 1335 f. They correspond to the lictors of the magistrates.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_864" href="#FNanchor_864" class="label">[864]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 13: “Nec curia Calabra sine calatione potest aperiri.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_865" href="#FNanchor_865" class="label">[865]</a> Saglio, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 814; Humbert, ibid. i. 1375. But the -comitia curiata were convoked by lictors according to Gell. xv. 27. 2: “Curiata -(comitia) per lictorem curiatum calari, id est convocari”; Theophilus, <i>Paraphr. -Inst.</i> ii. 10. 1. Possibly the lictor curiatius (or curiatus; <i>CIL.</i> iii. 6078) should in -this case be identified with the calator.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_866" href="#FNanchor_866" class="label">[866]</a> Labeo, in Gell. xv. 27. 1 f.: “Calata comitia esse, quae pro collegio pontificum -habentur aut regis aut flaminum inaugurandorum causa; eorum autem alia esse -curiata, alia centuriata.” From this statement we learn that the calate assemblies -for inaugural purposes were organized either in curiae or in centuries. As “comitia” -connotes organization (p. 135), we may be sure that in all calata comitia the people -stood in their voting groups. On the centuriate comitia calata, see p. 156.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_867" href="#FNanchor_867" class="label">[867]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 13; vi. 27; Fest. ep. 49; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 15. 9 f.; <i>Fast. -Praenest. Kal. Ian.</i>, in <i>CIL.</i> i.² p. 231; Jordan, <i>Top. d. Stadt Rom</i>, I. ii. 51; -Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 245, n. 1; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 398 f.; Hülsen, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1821.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_868" href="#FNanchor_868" class="label">[868]</a> Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 1376.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_869" href="#FNanchor_869" class="label">[869]</a> He may have appointed a priestly substitute for such functions.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_870" href="#FNanchor_870" class="label">[870]</a> Livy xxii. 57. 3: “Scriba pontificis, quos nunc minores pontifices adpellant.” -That he acted in behalf of the college is proved by Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 27 (note below).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_871" href="#FNanchor_871" class="label">[871]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 27: “Primi dies mensium nominati Kalendae, quod his diebus -calantur eius mensis nonae a pontificibus, quintanae an septimanae sint futurae in -Capitolio in curia Calabra”; <i>Hemerol. Praenest.</i> Ian. 1, in <i>CIL.</i> i.² p. 231: “Hae et -(aliae pri) mae calendae appellantur, quia (eorum pri) mus is dies est quos pont(i)fex -minor quo(vis anni) mense ad nonas sin(gulas currere edicit in capi)tolio in curia -cala(bra)”; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 15. 9 f.: “Pontifici minori haec provincia delegabatur, -ut novae lunae primum observaret aspectum visamque regi sacrificulo nuntiaret. -Itaque sacrificio a rege et minore pontifice celebrato idem pontifex calata, id est -vocata in Capitolium plebe iuxta curiam Calabram ... quot numero dies a Kalendis -ad Nonas superessent pronuntiabat.” Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> viii. 654 and Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 24 are -inexact, and still more confused is Lyd. <i>Mens.</i> iii. 7; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -ii. 39, n. 1. In the opinion of Mommsen the announcement on the calends was not -to an assembly, but was merely preparatory to the assembly on the nones; but the -words of Macrobius (vocata ... plebe) clearly indicate a gathering of the people on -that day.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_872" href="#FNanchor_872" class="label">[872]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 13, 28; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 15. 12; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. -109 and n. 1. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 40, n. 2, warns us against confusing “this -unorganized contio” with the comitia calata, which are always organized in curiae or -in centuries. Labeo, in Gell. xv. 27. 1, states, however, that calata comitia were held -for the inauguration of the king and priests. If for this occasion the purely passive -assembly was organized in voting divisions, there can be no reason for doubting that -it was organized also on the occasion in question, when it met in the assembly-place -of the calata comitia—a place which could not be opened sine calatione—and its -convocation was designated by “calare” not “vocare.” It is significant that the -phrase “calata contio” is never used. Mommsen gives no authority or reason for -his assumption; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 398; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 111; -Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> iii. 283, 323; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 440, for -the view here maintained that the assembly for hearing the calendar was calata.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_873" href="#FNanchor_873" class="label">[873]</a> Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 15. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_874" href="#FNanchor_874" class="label">[874]</a> For the inauguration of the flamen Dialis, see Gaius i. 130; iii. 114; Ulpian, -Frag. 10. 5; Livy xxvii. 8. 4; xli. 28. 7; the flamen Martialis, Livy xxix. 38. 6; xlv. -15. 10; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 13. 11; the flamen Quirinalis, Livy xxxvii. 47. 8; cf. Wissowa, -<i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 420, n. 3. The inauguration of augurs probably took -place in their own college.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_875" href="#FNanchor_875" class="label">[875]</a> For the inauguration of the rex sacrorum, see Livy xxvii. 36. 5; xl. 42. 8. Livy’s -description of the inauguration of Numa (i. 18. 6-9) probably follows the historical -usage in the case of the rex sacrorum.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_876" href="#FNanchor_876" class="label">[876]</a> Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> vi. 859.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_877" href="#FNanchor_877" class="label">[877]</a> Aust, <i>Relig. d. Römer</i>, 130.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_878" href="#FNanchor_878" class="label">[878]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 307, n. 1. This is the only function discovered for -the calata comitia centuriata, mentioned by Labeo, in Gell. xv. 27. 2. The origin of -the inauguration must have preceded that of the centuriate assembly; it must therefore -have taken place for a time in some other form of meeting. Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1331, objects to this interpretation but finds nothing better.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_879" href="#FNanchor_879" class="label">[879]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 1 (of an augur); <i>Phil.</i> ii. 43. 110 (of a flamen); <i>Leg.</i> ii. 8. 21 (of -sacerdotes); Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 13. 11 (of the flamen Martialis); Livy. i. 18. 6 (of the -king).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_880" href="#FNanchor_880" class="label">[880]</a> Fest. 343. 8; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 420, n. 5, 421, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_881" href="#FNanchor_881" class="label">[881]</a> Gell. i. 12. 11, citing the lex Papia. Gellius calls this assembly a contio, which -includes the calata comitia; cf. xv. 27. 3: “Calatiis comitiis in populi contione.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_882" href="#FNanchor_882" class="label">[882]</a> P. 161, 163, 165.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_883" href="#FNanchor_883" class="label">[883]</a> P. 157 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_884" href="#FNanchor_884" class="label">[884]</a> P. 170.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_885" href="#FNanchor_885" class="label">[885]</a> Quint. <i>Inst.</i> viii. 3. 3: fragor here signifies “thunders of applause.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_886" href="#FNanchor_886" class="label">[886]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> xi. 13. 3; Livy xxviii. 26. 12; xl. 36. 4; xlii. 53. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_887" href="#FNanchor_887" class="label">[887]</a> P. 135.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_888" href="#FNanchor_888" class="label">[888]</a> P. 74 f., 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_889" href="#FNanchor_889" class="label">[889]</a> P. 211.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_890" href="#FNanchor_890" class="label">[890]</a> On the meaning of suffragium, see the excellent article by Rothstein, in <i>Festschrift -zu Otto Hirschfelds 60stem Geburtstage</i>, 30-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_891" href="#FNanchor_891" class="label">[891]</a> Gell. xv. 27. 3: “Isdem comitiis, quae calata appellari diximus, ... testamenta -fieri solebant”; Gaius ii. 101: “Calatis comitiis testamentum faciebant, quae comitia -bis in anno testamentis faciendis destinata erant”; Theophilus, <i>Paraphr. Inst.</i> ii. -10. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_892" href="#FNanchor_892" class="label">[892]</a> <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 242-5, with notes, following J. H. Dernburg, <i>Beitr. zur Gesch. der -röm. Testamente</i>, i. 53-78.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_893" href="#FNanchor_893" class="label">[893]</a> <i>Paraphr. Inst.</i> ii. 10. 1, p. 154 ed. Ferrini: Ὁ βουλόμενος ὑπὸ πάρτυρι διετίθετο -τῷ δήμῳ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_894" href="#FNanchor_894" class="label">[894]</a> XV. 27. 3. This view is accepted by Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 398 f.; Schiller, <i>Röm. -Alt.</i> 628; Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 39; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 126, 239, -270; Madvig, <i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 221; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1333; -Mispoulet, <i>Inst. polit. Rom.</i> i. 202 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_895" href="#FNanchor_895" class="label">[895]</a> P. 161.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_896" href="#FNanchor_896" class="label">[896]</a> II. 101.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_897" href="#FNanchor_897" class="label">[897]</a> P. 143.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_898" href="#FNanchor_898" class="label">[898]</a> P. 139.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_899" href="#FNanchor_899" class="label">[899]</a> Schrader, <i>Reallex.</i> 221, 864; Leist, <i>Alt-arisch. Jus Gent.</i> 419; <i>Alt-arisch. Jus -Civ.</i> ii. 171; Fustel de Coulanges, <i>Ancient City</i>, 104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_900" href="#FNanchor_900" class="label">[900]</a> Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 20. 5. The oldest Frankish laws make no mention of testaments; -Schrader, ibid. 865.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_901" href="#FNanchor_901" class="label">[901]</a> Demosth. xx. 102; Plut. <i>Sol.</i> 21; Telfy, in <i>CJA.</i> 1399-1412, with comment, p. 613 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_902" href="#FNanchor_902" class="label">[902]</a> Plut. <i>Agis</i>, 5; cf. Thumser, <i>Griech. Staatsalt.</i> 259.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_903" href="#FNanchor_903" class="label">[903]</a> Bücheler und Zitelmann, <i>Recht von Gortyn</i>, 134.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_904" href="#FNanchor_904" class="label">[904]</a> Aristot. <i>Polit.</i> 1309, a 24; cf. Thalheim, <i>Griech. Rechtsalt.</i> 61.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_905" href="#FNanchor_905" class="label">[905]</a> Fustel de Coulanges, <i>Anc. City</i>, 105; Leist, <i>Alt-arisch. Jus Civ.</i> ii. 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_906" href="#FNanchor_906" class="label">[906]</a> Schrader, <i>Sprachv. und Urgesch.</i> ii.³ (1907). 374 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_907" href="#FNanchor_907" class="label">[907]</a> This view is held by Schrader, ibid. 865; Ihering, <i>Geist des röm. Rechts</i>, i. -145 ff.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 37 f.; iii. 318 ff.; Kappeyne van de Coppello, -<i>Comitien</i>, 67; Poste, <i>Gai Inst.</i> 178; Hallays, <i>Comices</i>, 18; and with some hesitation -by Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 110, 118, 1063.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_908" href="#FNanchor_908" class="label">[908]</a> <i>Röm. Chronol.</i> 241 ff.; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 38, n. 2; iii. 319; <i>CIL.</i> i.² p. 289; -accepted by Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 399; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. -1331; Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> iii. 323.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_909" href="#FNanchor_909" class="label">[909]</a> Q(uando) R(ex) C(omitiavit); <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 291 f. after the two days mentioned; -cf. Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 31: “Dies, qui vocatur sic, ‘Quando Rex Comitiavit, -Fas’ is dictus ab eo quod eo die rex sacrifiolus litat (or perhaps venit, MS. dicat) ad -comitium, ad quod tempus est nefas, ab eo fas; itaque post id tempus lege actum -saepe”; Fest. ep. 259: “Quando Rex Comitiavit Fas, in fastis notari solet, et hoc -videtur significare, quando rex sacrificulus divinis rebus perfectis in comitium venit”; -Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> v. 727; Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 63; <i>Fast. Praenest.</i> Mart. 24; for other citations, see -<i>CIL.</i> i². p. 289.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_910" href="#FNanchor_910" class="label">[910]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 38, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_911" href="#FNanchor_911" class="label">[911]</a> Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 110, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_912" href="#FNanchor_912" class="label">[912]</a> See note 8 above; cf. Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 440, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_913" href="#FNanchor_913" class="label">[913]</a> See p. 159, n. 8 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_914" href="#FNanchor_914" class="label">[914]</a> Gaius ii. 101, 103.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_915" href="#FNanchor_915" class="label">[915]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 13. 34; cf. Leonhard, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 398 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_916" href="#FNanchor_916" class="label">[916]</a> Gell. v. 19. 4, 6 f.; Gaius i. 99; Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 12. 2; <i>Dom.</i> 15. 39.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_917" href="#FNanchor_917" class="label">[917]</a> Gell. v. 19. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_918" href="#FNanchor_918" class="label">[918]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 13. 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_919" href="#FNanchor_919" class="label">[919]</a> Gell. v. 19. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_920" href="#FNanchor_920" class="label">[920]</a> Gaius i. 99.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_921" href="#FNanchor_921" class="label">[921]</a> Gell. v. 19. 6; cf. the leaden tessera showing on the face a man taking another -by the hand and the word <span class="smcap">Adoptio</span> beneath; on the back are three officials seated, -doubtless pontiffs, with the word <span class="smcap">Collegium</span> beneath; Helbig, in <i>Compt. rend. d. -l’acad. d. inscr. et bell.-let.</i> xxi (1893). 350-3. It evidently illustrates the preliminary -stage of an adrogatio; see also Tac. <i>Hist.</i> i. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_922" href="#FNanchor_922" class="label">[922]</a> Gell. v. 19. 5 f.: “Adrogationes non temere neque inexplorata committuntur; -nam comitia arbitris pontificibus praebentur, quae curiata appellantur”; Tac. <i>Hist.</i> i. -15: “Si te privatus lege curiata apud pontifices, ut moris est, adoptarem.” Rubino, -<i>Röm. Verf.</i> 253, supposes that these comitia were under a civil magistrate; but the -expressions “arbitris pontificibus” and “apud pontifices” prove pontifical management. -Caesar, who passed the curiate law for the arrogation of Clodius, was supreme -pontiff as well as consul.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_923" href="#FNanchor_923" class="label">[923]</a> Gell. v. 19. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_924" href="#FNanchor_924" class="label">[924]</a> Gell. v. 19. 8; Tac. <i>Hist.</i> i. 15; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 15. 39; <i>Att.</i> ii. 12. 2; Dio Cass. -xxxvii. 51. 1 f. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 126, 270, supposed that the curiae simply -witnessed the transaction, without giving their vote; but afterward (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -iii. 38) he changed his mind.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_925" href="#FNanchor_925" class="label">[925]</a> Gell. xv. 27. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_926" href="#FNanchor_926" class="label">[926]</a> This seems to be the meaning of Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> ii. 156: “Consuetudo apud antiquos -fuit, ut qui in familiam vel gentem transiret, prius se abdicaret ab ea in qua -fuerat et sic ab alia acciperetur.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_927" href="#FNanchor_927" class="label">[927]</a> Gell. v. 19. 8, 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_928" href="#FNanchor_928" class="label">[928]</a> Appian, <i>B. C.</i> iii. 14. 49.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_929" href="#FNanchor_929" class="label">[929]</a> Ibid. iii. 94. 389; Dio Cass. xlv. 5. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_930" href="#FNanchor_930" class="label">[930]</a> On the testamentary adoption, see further Leonhard, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -i. 420 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_931" href="#FNanchor_931" class="label">[931]</a> Zon. vii. 15. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_932" href="#FNanchor_932" class="label">[932]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 14. 37; <i>Scaur.</i> 33; Ascon. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_933" href="#FNanchor_933" class="label">[933]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 123 ff., has collected the cases.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_934" href="#FNanchor_934" class="label">[934]</a> Suet. <i>Aug.</i> 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_935" href="#FNanchor_935" class="label">[935]</a> Livy iv. 16. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_936" href="#FNanchor_936" class="label">[936]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 16. 62.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_937" href="#FNanchor_937" class="label">[937]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 1: Τήν τε εὐγένειαν ἐξωμόσατο. The similarity of this oath -to the detestatio sacrorum warrants the conclusion that it, too, was taken in the -calata comitia. The abjuration of one’s rank, however, was not a detestatio sacrorum, -for the reason given in n. 8 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_938" href="#FNanchor_938" class="label">[938]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 1: Καὶ πρὸς τὰ τοῦ πλήθους δικαιώματα, ἐς αὐτόν σφων τὸν -σύλλογον ἐσελθὼν, μετέστη; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 18. 4: “C. Herennius ... tribunus pl. -... ad plebem P. Clodium traducit.” Cicero’s following statement (“Idemque -fert, ut universus populus in campo Martio suffragium de re Clodi ferat”) signifies -that Herennius was proposing to bring the question not before the centuries, as -Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 188, n. 3, imagines, for a tribune had no means of -doing so, but before the thirty-five tribes, who were the universus populus (Cic. <i>Leg. -Agr.</i> ii. 7. 16 f.) in contrast with the curiate comitia represented by thirty lictors; cf. -p. 129 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_939" href="#FNanchor_939" class="label">[939]</a> The falsification of pedigrees by plebeian families to prove descent from -patrician ancestors of the same name is sufficient evidence that the name was -retained through the transition; cf. Lange, <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, ii. 7 f. Were not the -sacra retained, the transition of an entire gens would mean the destruction of its old -religion and the creation of a new one—which is impossible. For this reason it -appears that the detestatio sacrorum did not apply to such cases of transition.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_940" href="#FNanchor_940" class="label">[940]</a> Lange, ibid. ii. 19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_941" href="#FNanchor_941" class="label">[941]</a> The fact that he promulgated a bill of the same tenor as that of Herennius, even -if it was merely for the sake of appearance, as Cicero, <i>Att.</i> i. 18. 5, alleges, favors the -latter view.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_942" href="#FNanchor_942" class="label">[942]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 19. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_943" href="#FNanchor_943" class="label">[943]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 2; xxxviii. 12. 1 f.; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 13. 35; 29. 77.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_944" href="#FNanchor_944" class="label">[944]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 14. 37: “Nam adoptatum emancipari statim, ne sit eius filius qui -adoptarit”; 13. 35: “Tu (Clodi) neque Fonteius es, qui esse debebas, neque patris -heres neque amissis sacris paternis in haec adoptiva venisti.” In <i>Har. Resp.</i> 27. 57 -(“Iste parentum nomen, sacra, memoriam, gentem Fonteiano nomine obruit”) -Cicero does not say that Clodius assumed the gentile name of Fonteius, but rather -that he used this name as a means of destroying the name, sacra, etc. of his parents; -and in fact he continued to be called Clodius; cf. Dio Cass. xxxix. 23. 2 (official use). -He claimed still to belong to the Clodian gens rather than to the Fonteian (Cic. -<i>Dom.</i> 44. 116), whereas Cicero, looking upon the emancipation as a sham, insists -that he was a Fonteian.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_945" href="#FNanchor_945" class="label">[945]</a> That he retained the Claudian imagines is implied in Cic. <i>Mil.</i> 13. 33; 32. 86. -He must therefore have kept the rest of the sacra.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_946" href="#FNanchor_946" class="label">[946]</a> Lange, <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, ii. 23 ff. Cicero aims to bring the greatest possible -confusion into the case by representing Clodius as having given up his native religion -without receiving that of Fonteius, as being a gentilis of the Claudii though he had -left the Claudian gens, etc.; <i>Dom.</i> 13. 35; 49. 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_947" href="#FNanchor_947" class="label">[947]</a> This double act is most clearly stated by Livy iv. 4. 7: “Nobilitatem istam -vestram ... non genere nec sanguine sed per coöptationem in patres habetis ... -post reges exactos iussu populi”; p. 17, n. 5; cf. Dion. Hal. v. 40. 5: Ἡ βουλὴ καὶ -ὁ δῆμος εἴς τε τοὺς πατρικίους αὐτὸν (Appius Claudius) ἐνέγραψε. This passage -shows that Dionysius regards the process as an act of the people and of the senate, -though he does not speak of the latter as coöptation. In the case of Appius Claudius -Livy, ii. 16. 5, says simply that he was enrolled among the patres (“inter patres -lectus”), and in like manner Suetonius, <i>Tib.</i> i, states that the patrician gens Claudia -was coöpted into the class of patrician gentes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_948" href="#FNanchor_948" class="label">[948]</a> V. 13. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_949" href="#FNanchor_949" class="label">[949]</a> Fest. 246. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_950" href="#FNanchor_950" class="label">[950]</a> This measure is called the lex Cassia; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 25; p. 456 below. There -can be no doubt that the author was L. Cassius Longinus, a faithful friend of the -dictator, who entered upon his tribunate Dec. 10, 45; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, -ii. 128 f.; iii. 602.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_951" href="#FNanchor_951" class="label">[951]</a> Dio Cass. xliii. 47. 3; xlv. 2. 7; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_952" href="#FNanchor_952" class="label">[952]</a> The lex Saenia; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_953" href="#FNanchor_953" class="label">[953]</a> Augustus, <i>Mon. Ancyr.</i> 8; Dio Cass. lii. 42. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_954" href="#FNanchor_954" class="label">[954]</a> Neither the pontifical examination nor the curiate law is noticed by the authorities, -who refer briefly to the two acts. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 472, and Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 1101, suppose that Caesar as supreme pontiff made the adlectio, -although, as Mommsen notices, Octavianus had not yet attained to that office when -he attended to the same function. Both writers (cf. Lange, ibid. i. 412) understand -the curiate assembly to have been a factor in the process. On these late adlectiones, -see also Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> ii. 38 f., 130; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. -602; Büdinger, in <i>Denkschr. d. kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss. Phil.-hist. Cl.</i> xxxi (1881). -211-73; xxxvi (1888). 81-125.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_955" href="#FNanchor_955" class="label">[955]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_956" href="#FNanchor_956" class="label">[956]</a> Ch. ii above; also p. 166, n. 3 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_957" href="#FNanchor_957" class="label">[957]</a> Botsford, in <i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxii (1907). 689-92.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_958" href="#FNanchor_958" class="label">[958]</a> IV. 3. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_959" href="#FNanchor_959" class="label">[959]</a> P. 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_960" href="#FNanchor_960" class="label">[960]</a> IV. 4. 7; p. 24, n. 5, 200, n. 1; cf. Suet. <i>Tib.</i> 1: “Patricia gens Claudia ... in -patricias cooptata.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_961" href="#FNanchor_961" class="label">[961]</a> Mommsen’s theory (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 29 and n. 2) that the patriciate was conferred -through the coöperation of the king and the comitia appears accordingly to rest -on a weak foundation. He gives no evidence, but bases his contention on the argument -(1) that the community was sovereign, (2) that—the patriciate being in his opinion -equivalent to the citizenship and the comitia curiata being a group of gentes—the -downfall of the comitia made the reception of gentes impossible. Ground is taken -against the theory of popular sovereignty in the following chapter. Against his -second point it can be urged that the original comitia were neither patrician nor -“gentile”; hence there is no occasion for speaking of the downfall of such comitia or -of its sweeping consequences.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_962" href="#FNanchor_962" class="label">[962]</a> Livy iv. 4. 7; p. 17, n. 5, 164, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_963" href="#FNanchor_963" class="label">[963]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 74 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_964" href="#FNanchor_964" class="label">[964]</a> Gell. v. 19. 1-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_965" href="#FNanchor_965" class="label">[965]</a> Such an examination was the only means by which the patricians could protect -their order from being flooded by plebeians; cf. Mommsen, ibid. i. 77, who notices -that no known instance of this kind of adoption took place before the admission of -plebeians to the pontifical college through the Ogulnian law, 300; p. 309 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_966" href="#FNanchor_966" class="label">[966]</a> Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 924; Spencer, <i>Principles of Sociology</i>, ii. 407.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_967" href="#FNanchor_967" class="label">[967]</a> <i>Il.</i> i. 54; ii. 50; xix. 40 ff.; <i>Od.</i> ii. 6 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_968" href="#FNanchor_968" class="label">[968]</a> Kovalevsky, <i>Modern Customs and Ancient Laws of Russia</i>, 122, 124.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_969" href="#FNanchor_969" class="label">[969]</a> We must except the purely sacerdotal meetings of the curiae described in the -preceding chapter.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_970" href="#FNanchor_970" class="label">[970]</a> Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 11. 2; cf. Schröder, <i>Deutsche Rechtsgesch</i>. 22 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_971" href="#FNanchor_971" class="label">[971]</a> <i>Rhetra</i> of Lycurgus, in Plut. <i>Lyc.</i> 6; cf. Gilbert, <i>Altspart. Gesch.</i> 131 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_972" href="#FNanchor_972" class="label">[972]</a> Arist. <i>Ath. Pol.</i> 43. 4; cf. Gilbert, <i>Const. Antiq. of Sparta and Athens</i>, 285.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_973" href="#FNanchor_973" class="label">[973]</a> This is true of the religious-judicial assemblies of the continental Celts (Caesar, -<i>B. G.</i> vi. 13), which may also have exercised political functions, and of the Irish -assemblies; Ginnell, <i>Brehon Laws</i>, 44, 51, 54; cf. Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 924.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_974" href="#FNanchor_974" class="label">[974]</a> The Celtic magistrates disclosed to the people those matters only which they -determined to be expedient; and it was unlawful to speak on public affairs outside -the assembly; Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> vi. 20. The German chiefs in council preconsidered -every subject to be presented to the assembly; Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 11. 1; Schröder, ibid. 23. -The prominence of the nobles in the Slavic assembly (Kovalevsky, ibid. 123 ff.) -would lead to the same conclusion regarding them. For the Homeric age of Greece -the meeting of the council previous to the assembly as described by <i>Il.</i> ii. 50 ff. is -typical, although we could not expect the poet in every case to repeat the procedure -with uniform minuteness. The preconsidering power of the Roman senate was of -the same nature.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_975" href="#FNanchor_975" class="label">[975]</a> <i>Il.</i> ii. 278 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_976" href="#FNanchor_976" class="label">[976]</a> Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 11. 4. As a rule the North American Indians enjoy the same freedom -of speech in their councils; Farrand, <i>Basis of American History</i>, 160, 211.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_977" href="#FNanchor_977" class="label">[977]</a> <i>Il.</i> ii. 211 ff.; xii. 212 f. Calchas the seer, a man of the people, gained the protection -of Achilles before daring to speak against Agamemnon; <i>Il.</i> i. 76 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_978" href="#FNanchor_978" class="label">[978]</a> On the control of the Etruscan assembly by the nobles, see Müller-Deecke, -<i>Etrusker</i>, i. 337; Hirt, <i>Indogermanen</i>, i. 55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_979" href="#FNanchor_979" class="label">[979]</a> <i>Od.</i> ii. 28 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_980" href="#FNanchor_980" class="label">[980]</a> P. 154 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_981" href="#FNanchor_981" class="label">[981]</a> <i>Od.</i> ii. 35 ff.; cf. the public complaint made by a Slavic chief of an injury he -had received; Kovalevsky, ibid. 121.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_982" href="#FNanchor_982" class="label">[982]</a> Such as the reception of the youth into the warrior class among the Germans; -Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 13. 2; for the witnessing assembly at Rome, see p. 155 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_983" href="#FNanchor_983" class="label">[983]</a> Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 659, 662, 688. For the Celts; Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> vi. 13; cf. -i. 4 (trial of Orgetorix). For the Germans; Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 12. 1 f. For the Slavs; -Kovalevsky, <i>Mod. Cust. and Anc. Laws</i>, 126. The famous trial scene in the Homeric -assembly; <i>Il.</i> xviii. 497 ff. For the Macedonians; Curt. vi. 8. 25. It is probably -true of Vedic India; Schrader, ibid. 688.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_984" href="#FNanchor_984" class="label">[984]</a> For the Germans; Brunner, <i>Deutsche Rechtsgesch</i>. i. 129. For the Slavs; Kovalevsky, -ibid. 128, 130, 141 f. For the Celts; Polyb. iii. 44. 5 f.; Caes. <i>B. G.</i> v. 27, -36; Livy xxi. 20. 3; Tac. <i>Hist.</i> iv. 67. The Helvetian assembly probably decided -the question of migration; Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> i. 2. As to the Greeks, Agamemnon proposed -to the assembly to quit the war and return home, the people gladly accepted; -<i>Il.</i> ii. 86 ff. A proposal of peace came from the Trojans to the Achaean assembly; -the people rejected it on the advice of Diomede, and Agamemnon concurred in -their opinion; <i>Il.</i> vii. 382 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_985" href="#FNanchor_985" class="label">[985]</a> The German mode of electing a king or war-leader is well known; cf. Brunner, -ibid. i. 129. The assembly also elected the chiefs of the pagi (Gaue) and of the -villages; Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 12. 3. The Celts who were not ruled by hereditary kings -elected their chiefs annually (Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> i. 16) or for a migration; ibid. 3. The -Irish kings were generally elected from particular families; Ginnell, <i>Brehon Laws</i>, -66. The Slavs elected their king and other officials; Kovalevsky, ibid. 124 f., 127, -129, 138 f. In Homeric Greece the kingship was generally hereditary, but the people -might elect a war-leader to take command by the side of the king; <i>Od.</i> xiv. 237; -cf. xiii. 266. There are traces of elective kingship, lasting at least a few generations, -in the great majority of early European states; Jenks, <i>History of Politics</i>, 87; cf. 35 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_986" href="#FNanchor_986" class="label">[986]</a> <i>Il.</i> i. 22 ff. For the Lacedaemonians, see Thuc. i. 87.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_987" href="#FNanchor_987" class="label">[987]</a> Tac. <i>Germ.</i> 11. 5; <i>Hist.</i> v. 17. Sometimes the Germans mingled clamor with -the clash of weapons; Amm. Marc. xvi. 12. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_988" href="#FNanchor_988" class="label">[988]</a> Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> vii. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_989" href="#FNanchor_989" class="label">[989]</a> Majority rule was unknown to primitive times. The members of the council -talked together till they came to a unanimous agreement. If the Homeric Greeks -in assembly failed to agree, each party went its own way; <i>Od.</i> iii. 150 ff. Among -the Slavs the majority forced a unanimous vote by coercing the minority; Kovalevsky, -ibid. 122 ff. For the Germans; Seeck, <i>Gesch. d. Unterg. d. antik. Welt</i>, i. 213.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_990" href="#FNanchor_990" class="label">[990]</a> For the Homeric Greek assembly, see Hermann-Thumser, <i>Griech Staatsalt.</i> 67 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_991" href="#FNanchor_991" class="label">[991]</a> <i>Il.</i> i. 11 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_992" href="#FNanchor_992" class="label">[992]</a> Ibid. i. 135 ff., 320 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_993" href="#FNanchor_993" class="label">[993]</a> Ibid. vii. 345 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_994" href="#FNanchor_994" class="label">[994]</a> In Italy, Livy i. 45. 2; 49. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_995" href="#FNanchor_995" class="label">[995]</a> This right is proved by the fact that the death of a king freed the neighboring -states from their treaty obligations to his community, <i>e.g.</i>, the Fidenates after the -death of Romulus; Dion. Hal. iii. 23. 1; the Latins after the death of Tullus; Dion. -Hal. iii. 37. 3; various neighbors after the expulsion of the last Tarquin; Dion. Hal. -viii. 64. 2; cf. Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 175, n. 2. At the time of the Caudine disaster -(321 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) the Samnite leader assumed that the Roman consuls were competent in -their own right to conclude a definitive peace; Livy ix. 2 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_996" href="#FNanchor_996" class="label">[996]</a> Among the Quadi the right to declare war belonged to the council, not to the -assembly; Amm. Marc. xxx. 6. 2. With the Saxons the will of the nobles was equivalent -to the will of the people; Beowulf, cited by Seeck, ibid. i. 217. 7, see also his -notes on p. 531. The Sabine senators (senes) are represented as responsible for the -continual wars of their people with the Romans; Livy ii. 18. 11. In general the -leading men and the senate were able by their own oath to bind the community; -Caes. <i>B. G.</i> iv. 11; cf. 13. A chief might work his will by packing an assembly with -men on whom he could rely; Tac. <i>Hist.</i> iv. 14. The Grand Duke of Russia, relying -on his comitatus, sometimes went to war without consulting the people; Kovalevsky, -<i>Mod. Cust. and Anc. Laws</i>, 142.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_997" href="#FNanchor_997" class="label">[997]</a> Leist, <i>Graeco-ital. Rechtsgesch.</i> 130, 136 f. Under favorable conditions the assembly -acquired sovereignty, as at Athens and for a time in Russia; Kovalevsky, -<i>Russian Political Institutions</i>, 17. Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 923 f., following Mommsen -(cf. also Post, <i>Grundlagen des Rechts</i>, 130; Cramer, <i>Verfassungsgesch. d. Germ. u. -Kelt.</i> 61 et pass.), is altogether wrong in supposing the assembly to have been -originally sovereign.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_998" href="#FNanchor_998" class="label">[998]</a> Tac. <i>Hist.</i> iv. 64. Charlemagne suppressed the assemblies of the Saxons except -for receiving communications from his missi and for the administration of justice; -<i>Cap. de Part. Sax.</i> i. 70. 34 (Boretius 26. p. 68).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_999" href="#FNanchor_999" class="label">[999]</a> Ginnell, <i>Brehon Laws</i>, 42.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1000" href="#FNanchor_1000" class="label">[1000]</a> <i>Od.</i> iii. 214 f.; xiv. 239; xvi. 75, 95 f., 114; xix. 527.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1001" href="#FNanchor_1001" class="label">[1001]</a> In Homeric Greece; <i>Il.</i> i. 231 f.; iii. 57. The Herulians killed their king merely -because they were weary of royal government; Procopius, <i>Bel. Goth.</i> ii. 14, p. 422 A. -Sometimes the Celtic commons massacred both magistrates and council, and took -affairs into their own hands; Polyb. ii. 21; Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> iii. 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1002" href="#FNanchor_1002" class="label">[1002]</a> Hdt. vi. 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1003" href="#FNanchor_1003" class="label">[1003]</a> <i>Rhetra</i> of Polydorus and Theopompus, in Plut. <i>Lyc.</i> 6. This power is essentially -the same as the auctoritas of the Roman patres.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1004" href="#FNanchor_1004" class="label">[1004]</a> Fustel de Coulanges, <i>Monarchie Franque</i>, 598 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1005" href="#FNanchor_1005" class="label">[1005]</a> Ibid. 638 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1006" href="#FNanchor_1006" class="label">[1006]</a> Hodgkin, <i>Italy and her Invaders</i>, iii. 239 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1007" href="#FNanchor_1007" class="label">[1007]</a> Kovalevsky, <i>Mod. Cust. and Anc. Laws</i>, 148.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1008" href="#FNanchor_1008" class="label">[1008]</a> The rest of this chapter is largely a reproduction of Botsford, <i>Lex Curiata</i>, in -<i>Pol. Sci. Quart.</i> xxiii (1908). 498-517.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1009" href="#FNanchor_1009" class="label">[1009]</a> P. 2, 176.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1010" href="#FNanchor_1010" class="label">[1010]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> 28. 50; cf. 23. 43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1011" href="#FNanchor_1011" class="label">[1011]</a> Livy i. 46. 3; 60. 3; ii. 1. 6 f.; 15. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1012" href="#FNanchor_1012" class="label">[1012]</a> Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 4. 9: “Non est consilium in vulgo.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1013" href="#FNanchor_1013" class="label">[1013]</a> Cf. Livy i. 34. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1014" href="#FNanchor_1014" class="label">[1014]</a> P. 145.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1015" href="#FNanchor_1015" class="label">[1015]</a> P. 235.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1016" href="#FNanchor_1016" class="label">[1016]</a> II. 14. 3: Τῷ δὲ δημοτικῷ πλήθει τρία ταῦτα ἐπέτρεψεν· ἀρχαιρεσιάζειν τε καὶ -νόμους ἐπικυροῦν καὶ περὶ πολέμου διαγιγνώσκειν, ὅταν ὁ βασιλεὺς ἔφη.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1017" href="#FNanchor_1017" class="label">[1017]</a> I. 49. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1018" href="#FNanchor_1018" class="label">[1018]</a> This interpretation, offered by Rubino, is accepted by Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 599.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1019" href="#FNanchor_1019" class="label">[1019]</a> <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 257 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1020" href="#FNanchor_1020" class="label">[1020]</a> The treaty with the Sabines rested on the oaths of the two kings alone; Livy i. -13. 4; Dion. Hal. ii. 46. 3; Plut. <i>Rom.</i> 19. Romulus of his own authority made a -hundred years’ truce with Veii; Dion. Hal. ii. 55. 5 f. With the advice of the senate -he solicited alliances with the neighboring states; Livy i. 9. 2. Numa personally -contracted alliances with the surrounding states; Livy i. 19. 4. Tullus Hostilius -made a treaty with the Sabines, the indemnity being fixed by a senatus consultum; -Dion. Hal. iii. 32. 6. For other citations, see Rubino, ibid. 264, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1021" href="#FNanchor_1021" class="label">[1021]</a> Livy i. 24. 4 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1022" href="#FNanchor_1022" class="label">[1022]</a> P. 171, n. 5 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1023" href="#FNanchor_1023" class="label">[1023]</a> Livy i. 30. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1024" href="#FNanchor_1024" class="label">[1024]</a> Cf. Livy ii. 22. 5. In 495 the consul, in pursuance of a senatus consultum, made -peace with the Volscians at their request; Livy ii. 25. 6. In the same form Cassius -the consul in 493 made peace with the Latins (Livy ii. 33. 4; Dion. Hal. vi. 18-21, -especially 21. 2) and in 486 with the Hernicans; Dion. Hal. viii. 68. 4; 69. 2; Livy -ii. 41; cf. Rubino, ibid. 266 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1025" href="#FNanchor_1025" class="label">[1025]</a> Cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 17. 2; 59. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1026" href="#FNanchor_1026" class="label">[1026]</a> Livy iii. 1. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1027" href="#FNanchor_1027" class="label">[1027]</a> Dion. Hal. ix. 36. 2 f.; x. 21. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1028" href="#FNanchor_1028" class="label">[1028]</a> Livy ii. 39. 9 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1029" href="#FNanchor_1029" class="label">[1029]</a> Cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 17. 2, 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1030" href="#FNanchor_1030" class="label">[1030]</a> P. 351; cf. Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 269 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1031" href="#FNanchor_1031" class="label">[1031]</a> On the epoch-making rejection of the Caudine treaty of 321, see p. 171, n. 5. -376.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1032" href="#FNanchor_1032" class="label">[1032]</a> Suet. <i>Vesp.</i> 8; Rubino, ibid. 261.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1033" href="#FNanchor_1033" class="label">[1033]</a> Cf. Rubino, ibid. 260.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1034" href="#FNanchor_1034" class="label">[1034]</a> Ibid. 263.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1035" href="#FNanchor_1035" class="label">[1035]</a> Cf. i. 14. 6; 36. 1. Too much stress should not be laid on this distinction, however, -as the Romans always regarded their enemy as the aggressor, and assumed that -every war was undertaken for the redress of grievances.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1036" href="#FNanchor_1036" class="label">[1036]</a> Livy i. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1037" href="#FNanchor_1037" class="label">[1037]</a> Ibid. i. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1038" href="#FNanchor_1038" class="label">[1038]</a> P. 1 f., 173. The formula is extremely ancient in origin, but it must have undergone -modifications in time, as is indicated by the word prisci applied to the Latins. -Possibly the reference to the populus should be similarly explained.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1039" href="#FNanchor_1039" class="label">[1039]</a> P. 174.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1040" href="#FNanchor_1040" class="label">[1040]</a> Cf. Livy i. 22; 30. 3; 35. 7; 38. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1041" href="#FNanchor_1041" class="label">[1041]</a> P. 230.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1042" href="#FNanchor_1042" class="label">[1042]</a> P. 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1043" href="#FNanchor_1043" class="label">[1043]</a> For the Indo-Europeans, see Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 655 ff.; Maine, <i>Ancient -Law</i>, xv f., 2 ff.; Hirt, <i>Indogermanen</i>, ii. 522 ff. There may have been occasional -legislation by the assembly in its earliest history; cf. the prohibition of the importation -of wine by the Suevi (Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> iv. 2), which may have been an act of the -kind.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1044" href="#FNanchor_1044" class="label">[1044]</a> <i>Il.</i> i. 238; ix. 98; <i>Od.</i> vi. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1045" href="#FNanchor_1045" class="label">[1045]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> v. 2. 3; Livy i. 19. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1046" href="#FNanchor_1046" class="label">[1046]</a> Livy i. 19. 5; cf. 42. 4; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> iii. 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1047" href="#FNanchor_1047" class="label">[1047]</a> Livy i. 8. 1; Verg. <i>Aen.</i> i. 292 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1048" href="#FNanchor_1048" class="label">[1048]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 10. 17; Livy i. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1049" href="#FNanchor_1049" class="label">[1049]</a> On the legislation of the kings, see Voigt, in <i>Abhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> -vii (1879). 555 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1050" href="#FNanchor_1050" class="label">[1050]</a> Livy ii. 1. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1051" href="#FNanchor_1051" class="label">[1051]</a> Cf. Cic. <i>Rep.</i> i. 2. 2. To the end of the republic resort was had in national crises -to the numen deorum as the ultimate source of law; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> xi. 12. 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1052" href="#FNanchor_1052" class="label">[1052]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1053" href="#FNanchor_1053" class="label">[1053]</a> Mommsen, ibid. iii. 313; cf. Jenks, <i>History of Politics</i>, 89 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1054" href="#FNanchor_1054" class="label">[1054]</a> In the preceding chapter (p. 153, 157) an attempt is made to determine under -what influence the curiate organization and the systematic vote were introduced into -the assembly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1055" href="#FNanchor_1055" class="label">[1055]</a> Cf. Gell. v. 19. 9: “Velitis, iubeatis, uti.... Haec ita, uti dixi, ita vos, quirites, -rogo.” This reference to an arrogation is quoted here merely for the sake of the -formula. For further citations, see Mommsen, ibid. iii. 312, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1056" href="#FNanchor_1056" class="label">[1056]</a> For ut rogas, see Livy vi. 38. 5; x. 8. 12. Antiquo for “no” may be inferred -from the use of antiquare to designate the rejection of a proposal; e.g. Livy iv. 58. -14; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 1108, n. 4; p. 467 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1057" href="#FNanchor_1057" class="label">[1057]</a> Lex may be related to lēgare, ligare, “to bind”; Brugmann, <i>Grundriss</i>, I. i. -134; Corssen, <i>Aussprache</i>, i. 444; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 112, n. 1; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> 1. 315 (“bindende Vorschrift”). Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 308, n. 4, -quotes J. Schmidt for the fundamental meaning of the root leg, “to place in order,” -connecting it with English “law” (cf. θεσμός, Gesetz); cf. Kretschmer, <i>Einleitung -in die Geschichte der griech. Sprache</i>, 165; Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 657; Christ, in -<i>Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss.</i> 1906. 215.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1058" href="#FNanchor_1058" class="label">[1058]</a> Cf. Corssen, <i>Aussprache</i>, i. 684.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1059" href="#FNanchor_1059" class="label">[1059]</a> Cf. Vaniček, <i>Etym. Wörterb.</i> 227; Herzog, ibid. i. 116, n. 3 (Rechtsetzen). -Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 657, connecting ius with Avest. yaoš, “pure,” develops its -meaning through (1) oath of purification in legal procedure, (2) legal procedure, -finally (3) human law, right, as distinguished from fas; cf. Christ, in <i>Sitzb. d. bayer. -Akad. d. Wiss.</i> 1906. 212 (ius = Skt. yōs). On the meaning, see further -Nettleship, <i>Contributions to Latin Lexicography</i>, 497; Clark, <i>Practical Jurisprudence</i>, -16-20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1060" href="#FNanchor_1060" class="label">[1060]</a> For the leges censoriae, see Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 430.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1061" href="#FNanchor_1061" class="label">[1061]</a> Livy i. 26. 7: “Hac lege duumviri creati.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1062" href="#FNanchor_1062" class="label">[1062]</a> On the legum dictio, see Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> iii. 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1063" href="#FNanchor_1063" class="label">[1063]</a> Examples of leges datae are the ordinances of the kings or of extraordinary constitutive -magistracies, as the triumviri rei publicae constituendae, municipal laws and -provincial regulations established by Rome; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 311 -and notes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1064" href="#FNanchor_1064" class="label">[1064]</a> Law of the XII Tables, cited by Gaius, in <i>Dig.</i> xlvii. 22. 4: “Dum ne quid ex -publica lege corrumpant”; Cato, <i>Orig.</i> iv. 13: “Duo exules lege publica (condemnati) -et execrati”; Gaius ii. 104; <i>CIL.</i> vi. 9404, 10235; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> iii. 310, n. 3; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 598 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1065" href="#FNanchor_1065" class="label">[1065]</a> Ateius Capito’s definition in Gell. x. 20. 2 (“Lex est generale iussum populi aut -plebis rogante magistratu”) fails to cover all cases, as Gellius immediately shows.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1066" href="#FNanchor_1066" class="label">[1066]</a> E.g. the granting of the imperium to Pompey or the recall of Cicero from exile; -Gell. x. 20. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1067" href="#FNanchor_1067" class="label">[1067]</a> Livy iv. 60. 9; cf. 58. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1068" href="#FNanchor_1068" class="label">[1068]</a> Cato, <i>Orig.</i> iv. 13; n. 2 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1069" href="#FNanchor_1069" class="label">[1069]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 598 f.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 111 ff. The election -of a king was a iussus populi, which was equivalent to a lex; Livy i. 22. 1. For an -election by the centuriate assembly, see Livy vii. 17. 12. The lex curiata de imperio -was regarded strictly as an election; p. 184 ff. On judicial decisions see Lange, -ibid. i. 629 f.; ii. 571.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1070" href="#FNanchor_1070" class="label">[1070]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 35. 74: “Ut comitiorum vel in iudiciis populi vel in iure legum vel -in creandis magistratibus”; <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 10; 15. 33. Iudicia populi practically disappeared, -leaving comitia legum and comitia magistratuum; idem, <i>Sest.</i> 51. 109; cf. -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 326, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1071" href="#FNanchor_1071" class="label">[1071]</a> The usual expression for the validity of a law is lege populus tenetur; cf. Cic. -<i>Dom.</i> 16. 41; <i>Phil.</i> v. 4. 10; Gell. xv. 27. 4; Gaius i. 3. For further citations, see -Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 356, n. 1; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 159, n. 1, 309, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1072" href="#FNanchor_1072" class="label">[1072]</a> Cf. Livy. ix. 34. 8-10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1073" href="#FNanchor_1073" class="label">[1073]</a> <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1074" href="#FNanchor_1074" class="label">[1074]</a> Ascribed to Ancus Marcius by Livy (i. 32. 2) and Dionysius (iii. 36. 2 ff.), to -Romulus and his successors by Pomponius (ibid.), but destroyed in the Gallic conflagration -(Livy vi. 1. 1).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1075" href="#FNanchor_1075" class="label">[1075]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> 1. 314 f.; Voigt, in <i>Abhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> vii -(1879). 559; Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 657 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1076" href="#FNanchor_1076" class="label">[1076]</a> The sources uniformly represent the kings as acting alone in the admission of -individuals and of entire communities to citizenship. The view of Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 29, that the assembly coöperated rests upon his theory of an -original popular sovereignty and of an original patrician state, neither of which has -any basis in fact.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1077" href="#FNanchor_1077" class="label">[1077]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> v. 2. 3; Livy 1. 38. 7; 44. 3; 56. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1078" href="#FNanchor_1078" class="label">[1078]</a> Ibid. i. 43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1079" href="#FNanchor_1079" class="label">[1079]</a> Ibid. i. 44. 1; cf. especially the summary condemnation and execution of Mettius; -ibid. i. 28. Livy’s complaint (i. 49. 4) against Tarquin the Proud is that he -decided capital cases without assessors, not that he allowed no appeal.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1080" href="#FNanchor_1080" class="label">[1080]</a> Lange’s view (<i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 314) that under the kings there was no legislation, -except the passing of the lex de imperio, cannot be proved and seems unlikely. Mommsen’s -hypothesis (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 327) that under the kings the comitia were -exclusively legislative, elective and judicial functions being a republican innovation, -is disproved by the facts presented in this chapter. There is no reason for supposing -that the republic brought to the comitia any absolutely new functions.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1081" href="#FNanchor_1081" class="label">[1081]</a> Schrader, <i>Reallexikon</i>, 662.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1082" href="#FNanchor_1082" class="label">[1082]</a> Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 298 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1083" href="#FNanchor_1083" class="label">[1083]</a> Cf. Livy i. 26. 8 ff.; Cic. <i>Mil.</i> 3. 7; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 8, 305 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1084" href="#FNanchor_1084" class="label">[1084]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 2. 4; 7. 13; Livy i. 13. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1085" href="#FNanchor_1085" class="label">[1085]</a> I. 17. 11. Cicero (<i>Rep.</i> ii. 13. 25), however, supposes he was elected by the -people.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1086" href="#FNanchor_1086" class="label">[1086]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 21. 37; Livy i. 41-6; Dion. Hal. iv. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1087" href="#FNanchor_1087" class="label">[1087]</a> Livy i. 49. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1088" href="#FNanchor_1088" class="label">[1088]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 6 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1089" href="#FNanchor_1089" class="label">[1089]</a> Cf. Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 13. 25; 17. 31; 18. 33; 20. 35; Livy i. 17. 10; 32. 1; 35. 1, -6; 46. 1; Jordan, <i>Könige im alt. Ital.</i> 25 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1090" href="#FNanchor_1090" class="label">[1090]</a> Cf. Livy xxii. 35. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1091" href="#FNanchor_1091" class="label">[1091]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 13. 25 (Numa); 17. 31 (Tullus Hostilius); 18. 33 (Ancus Marcius); -20. 35 (Tarquinius Priscus).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1092" href="#FNanchor_1092" class="label">[1092]</a> The formula for the curiate law is unknown. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 307 ff. 407 f., -459, 461 f., supposes that it not only pledged the people to obedience, but also -defined the imperium and bound the king not to exceed the limitations imposed; -that every constitutional modification of the imperium required a corresponding -modification of the curiate act. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 111 f., further assumes -that the law contained the formula of treaty on which in his opinion the state rested, -and that before the age of written documents this treaty was handed down orally -through the repetition of the law. Lange’s theory, which runs throughout his great -work, seems to rest on the single statement of Tacitus, <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22: “Quaestores -regibus etiam tum imperantibus instituti sunt, quod lex curiata ostendit a L. Bruto -repetita.” But this statement proves only that the quaestors were mentioned in the -curiate law, and this circumstance is otherwise explained below, p. 189. That the -law defined and limited the imperium is unlikely (1) because in early time, when -the act had a real meaning, precise definitions were unknown; (2) because there is -no evidence for it.</p> - -<p>P. Servilius Rullus stated, evidently in his rogation, that the object of the curiate act -to be passed for the decemviri provided for in his bill was “ut ii decemviratum -habeant, quos plebs designaverit” (Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 10. 26)—a formula probably -copied from earlier laws. From this statement and from evidence furnished below -(p. 185 f.) it is practically certain that the formula for the curiate act ran somewhat -like that for an election.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1093" href="#FNanchor_1093" class="label">[1093]</a> It is true that Cicero (p. 183, n. 2) supposes the king to have been elected by -the curiate assembly, and the imperium to have been afterward sanctioned by the -same assembly. This double vote of the curiae seems as improbable as it was unnecessary. -We may reasonably consider the alleged first vote a mistaken inference -from the later election of higher magistrates by the centuries. The assumption of -an acclamation as the first stage in the process accords far better with primitive -conditions.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1094" href="#FNanchor_1094" class="label">[1094]</a> The people claimed that the right to elect magistrates had come down to them -from Servius Tullius; Appian, <i>Lib.</i> 112 (probably from Polyb.); Livy i. 60. 4; -p. 360.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1095" href="#FNanchor_1095" class="label">[1095]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 26: “Maiores de singulis magistratibus bis vos sententiam -ferre voluerunt. Nam cum centuriata lex censoribus ferebatur, cum curiata ceteris -patriciis magistratibus, tum iterum de eisdem iudicabatur, ut esset reprehendendi -potestas, si populum beneficii sui paeniteret”; cf. 10. 26; <i>Rep.</i> ii. 13. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1096" href="#FNanchor_1096" class="label">[1096]</a> <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 361 f., 379 f. For a summary of the various modern views, see -Nissen, <i>Beitr. zum röm. Staatsr.</i> 42-6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1097" href="#FNanchor_1097" class="label">[1097]</a> P. 435.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1098" href="#FNanchor_1098" class="label">[1098]</a> It is not probable that an official could pass the law for a colleague, the intention -being that each higher magistrate should personally propose and carry it for -himself; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 610, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1099" href="#FNanchor_1099" class="label">[1099]</a> <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 10. 26: “Hoc inauditum et plane novum, ut ei curiata lege magistratus -detur, cui nullis comitiis ante sit datus.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1100" href="#FNanchor_1100" class="label">[1100]</a> In Gell. xiii. 15. 4: “Magistratus ... iustus curiata datur lege.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1101" href="#FNanchor_1101" class="label">[1101]</a> In Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 29: “Tum ii decemviri, inquit, eodem iure sint, quo qui -optuma lege.” In keeping with this statement is the object of the curiate act as -given by the Servilian rogation (p. 183, n. 5).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1102" href="#FNanchor_1102" class="label">[1102]</a> Plaut. <i>Most.</i> 713; Cic. <i>Off.</i> i. 31. 111; 42. 151; <i>Fin.</i> iv. 12. 31; <i>Rep.</i> iii. 17. 27; -<i>Cat.</i> i. 9. 21; <i>Sest.</i> 43. 94; <i>Planc.</i> 36. 88; <i>Marc.</i> 1. 4; <i>Fam.</i> iii. 8. 6; <i>Att.</i> xv. 3. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1103" href="#FNanchor_1103" class="label">[1103]</a> Gaius ii. 197: “Proinde utile sit legatum atque si optimo iure relictum esset; -optimum ius est per damnationem legati.” It is clear that this statement refers -merely to the form.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1104" href="#FNanchor_1104" class="label">[1104]</a> Fabius Pictor, in Gell. i. 12. 14: “Uti quae optima lege fuit, ita te, Amata, capio.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1105" href="#FNanchor_1105" class="label">[1105]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> xi. 12. 30: “Senatui placere C. Cassium pro consule provinciam optinere, -ut qui optimo iure eam provinciam optinuerit” (with all the formality usual in -cases of appointment to that province); v. 16. 44: “Sit (Caesar) pro praetore eo -iure quo qui optimo.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1106" href="#FNanchor_1106" class="label">[1106]</a> Cic. <i>Har. Resp.</i> 7. 14 (reference is to the complete and perfect title with which -Cicero holds his dwelling); <i>Phil.</i> ix. 7. 17 (a burial place granted by the state to a -family with a perfect title); <i>Lex Agr.</i> (<i>CIL.</i> 200) 27: “<i>Is ager locus do</i>mneis privatus -ita, utei quoi optuma lege privatus est, esto.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1107" href="#FNanchor_1107" class="label">[1107]</a> <i>Lex Col. Gen.</i> (<i>CIL.</i> ii. Supplb. 5439) 67: “Quicumque pontif(ices) quique -augures c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) post h(anc) l(egem) datam in conlegium -pontific(um) augurumq(ue) in demortui damnative loco h(ac) lege lectus cooptatusve -erit, is pontif(ex) augurq(ue) in c(olonia) Iul(ia) in conlegium pontifex augurq(ue) -esto, ita uti qui optuma lege in quaque colon(ia) pontif(ices) auguresq(ue) sunt -erunt”; ch. 66: “Ei pontifices c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) sunto, ... ita uti -qui optima lege optumo iure in quaque colon(ia) pontif(ices) augures sunt erunt.” -Optima lege refers to the perfection of their right to the sacerdotal places (cf. 67 -above), whereas optumo iure seems to apply to the privileges and honors attaching -to these positions.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1108" href="#FNanchor_1108" class="label">[1108]</a> Papinian, in <i>Dig.</i> iv. 4. 31 (slaves manumitted in the way here described were -exempt from payment to maintain their freedom, on the ground that they were -emancipated in a perfectly legal way—optimo iure); <i>Lex Salp.</i> (<i>CIL.</i> ii. 1963) 28: -“Ut qui optumo iure Latini libertini liberi sunt erunt” (Just as are, or shall be, -Latin freedmen or freemen of best standing); Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. v. 22. 58: “Quae colonia -est in Italia tam bono iure, quod tam immune municipium, quod ... sit usum.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1109" href="#FNanchor_1109" class="label">[1109]</a> <i>Lex Col. Gen.</i> 67, quoted in n. above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1110" href="#FNanchor_1110" class="label">[1110]</a> Fest. 198. 32; cf. 189. 21. Applied to the censor, dictator, and interrex in Livy -ix. 34. 10-12, it has reference not to amount of power but length of office.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1111" href="#FNanchor_1111" class="label">[1111]</a> See p. 186, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1112" href="#FNanchor_1112" class="label">[1112]</a> As the <i>Lex Col. Gen.</i> 66 f.; p. 186, n. 1 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1113" href="#FNanchor_1113" class="label">[1113]</a> P. 186.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1114" href="#FNanchor_1114" class="label">[1114]</a> Magistratus optuma lege is the same as magistratus iustus; cf. Messala, p. 185, -n. 6. In this connection iustus does not signify legal as opposed to illegal, but -legally or technically perfect, correct; cf. for the meaning “proper,” “perfect,” Cic. -<i>Fam.</i> ii. 10. 3 (iusta victoria); Caes. <i>B. G.</i> i. 23 (iustum iter); Livy i. 4. 4 (iusti cursum -amnis); xxxix. 2. 8 (iusto proelio). When Cicero (<i>Red. in Sen.</i> 11. 27), -accordingly, speaks of the comitia centuriata as the iusta comitia, he does not imply -that the other comitia and their acts lack legality, but rather that they carry less -weight; and when as late as 300 the patricians claimed that they alone had iustum -imperium et auspicium (Livy x. 8. 9), they could only mean that their right to these -powers was better established than that of the plebeians. C. Flaminius, consul in -217, possessed imperium, which he was actually exercising over his troops, but which -was not iustum, for he had neglected the auspical formalities appropriate to the -entrance upon the consulship (Livy xxii. 1. 5). It would be wrong, however, to -suppose with Nissen, <i>Beitr. z. röm. Staatsr.</i> 51, that he commanded on the sufferance -only of his soldiers.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1115" href="#FNanchor_1115" class="label">[1115]</a> Including the auspices; see n. above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1116" href="#FNanchor_1116" class="label">[1116]</a> The usual expression is “de suo imperio curiatam legem tulit,” or “populum -consuluit;” Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 13. 25; 17. 31; 18. 33; 20. 35; 21. 38; Livy ix. 38. 15. -According to Cicero, <i>Phil.</i> v. 16. 45, the senate grants the imperium to Octavianus, -a private citizen. The interrex, who could not have had a curiate law, nevertheless -possessed imperium (Livy i. 17. 5 f.), and the absolute imperium was granted by a -decree of the senate (Livy iii. 4. 9; Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 29; <i>Hist.</i> i. 77. 22). See also Cic. -<i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 9: “Imperia, potestates, legationes, quom senatus creverit populusve -iusserit, ex urbe exeunto;” <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 7. 17: “Omnes potestates, imperia, curationes -ab universo populo proficisci convenit” (reference cannot here be to the -curiate assembly, which in this connection Cicero does not recognize as the people). -For the centuriate assembly, see Livy xxvi. 18. 9: “Omnes non centuriae modo sed -etiam homines P. Scipioni imperium esse in Hispania iusserunt;” 22. 15: “Centuriam -vero iuniorum seniores consulere voluisse, quibus imperium suffragio mandarunt.” -For the tribal assembly, see T. Annius Luscus, <i>Orat. adv. Ti. Gracch.</i> in Fest. 314. -30: “Imperium quod plebes ... dederat.” It is a fact, too, that the tribal assembly -had power to abrogate the imperium; Livy xxvii. 20. 11; 21. 1, 4; xxix. 19. 6; cf. -p. 342, 360, 367. Also from Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 28 (“Vidit ... sine curiata lege -decemviros potestatem habere non posse, quoniam per novem tribus essent constituti”) -we must infer that had these decemvirs been elected in the regular way, by -the thirty-five tribes, they would have had the potestas without a curiate law. The -phrase nullis comitiis in 11. 29 (“Si hoc fieri potest, ut ... quisquam nullis comitiis -imperium aut potestatem adsequi posset, etc.,”) implies that the imperium or potestas -may be obtained in more than one form of comitia—either the centuriata or the -tributa. In the same paragraph he asserts that on the principle followed by Servilius, -whom he is assailing, any one could obtain the imperium or potestas without the vote -of any comitia, for he does not consider the comitia curiata real comitia, seeing that -they have degenerated into a mere form. From these passages it is clear that Cicero -believed the imperium or potestas to be conferred by the centuries or tribes and -merely confirmed by the curiae.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1117" href="#FNanchor_1117" class="label">[1117]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 27: “Curiatis eam (potestatem) comitiis ... confirmavit.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1118" href="#FNanchor_1118" class="label">[1118]</a> Livy ix. 38 f.; Dion. Hal. v. 70. 4: Ὃν ἃν ἥ τε βουλὴ προέληται καὶ ὁ δῆμος -ἐπιψηφίσῃ. To avoid unnecessary delay the sanctioning act was probably always -kept free from the obligation of the promulgatio per trinum nundinum; Livy iii. 27. -1; iv. 14. 1; p. 396 f. below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1119" href="#FNanchor_1119" class="label">[1119]</a> The consuls proposed the curiate law for the quaestors; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22. -That these inferior officials required the law is further indicated by Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 20. -50. For the lower functionaries in general, see Gell. xiii. 15. 4. The agrarian -rogation of Servilius Rullus provided that the praetor should propose the law for -the decemviri agris adsignandis required for the administration of his measure; -Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 28.</p> - -<p>That the magisterial helpers who were in need of the curiate law included not -only the quaestors but also the lictors seems to be indicated by Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 17. 31: -“Ne insignibus quidem regiis Tullus nisi iussu populi est ausus uti. Nam ut sibi -duodecim lictores cum fascibus anteire” (the remainder of the sentence is missing). -Dion. Hal. ii. 62. 1 ascribes the introduction of the lictors to Tarquin the -Elder. This curiate law, however, may not be thought of by Cicero and Dionysius -as a mere sanction, but rather as a legislative act which called the lictors into being; -cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 372, n. 1, 613, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1120" href="#FNanchor_1120" class="label">[1120]</a> In the opinion of Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 300 ff., the election conferred potestas -only, the lex curiata imperium.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1121" href="#FNanchor_1121" class="label">[1121]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 19. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1122" href="#FNanchor_1122" class="label">[1122]</a> Ibid.; Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 12. 30: “Consuli si legem curiatam non habet, attingere -rem militarem non licet;” Livy v. 52. 15: “Comitia curiata, quae rem -militarem continent.” These statements, however, are not, as some have imagined, -to the effect that the lex curiata <i>confers</i> military power upon the magistrate.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1123" href="#FNanchor_1123" class="label">[1123]</a> Dio Cass. xli. 43. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1124" href="#FNanchor_1124" class="label">[1124]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1125" href="#FNanchor_1125" class="label">[1125]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 18. 4: “Appius sine lege suo sumptu in Ciliciam cogitat.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1126" href="#FNanchor_1126" class="label">[1126]</a> Ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1127" href="#FNanchor_1127" class="label">[1127]</a> Such an article in favor of the decemviri agris adsignandis appeared in the -Servilian agrarian rogation of 63; Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 29; cf. p. 186.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1128" href="#FNanchor_1128" class="label">[1128]</a> According to Dion. Hal. ii. 5 f., those who are entering upon an office pass -the night in tents and in the morning under the open sky take the auspices. Livy, -xxi. 63. 10, states that the consul dons his official robe in his own house, but -neither he nor any other authority intimates that the public auspices were taken -in his private house, as Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 616, asserts.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1129" href="#FNanchor_1129" class="label">[1129]</a> Livy ix. 39. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1130" href="#FNanchor_1130" class="label">[1130]</a> Ibid. xxi. 63. 9; Varro, in Gell. xiv. 7. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1131" href="#FNanchor_1131" class="label">[1131]</a> Rubino, <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 365 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1132" href="#FNanchor_1132" class="label">[1132]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 612, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1133" href="#FNanchor_1133" class="label">[1133]</a> Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 29: “Ea potestas per senatum more Romano magistratui maxuma -permittitur, exercitum parare, bellum gerere, coercere omnibus modis socios atque -cives, domi militiaeque imperium atque iudicium summum habere; aliter sine populi -iussu nullius earum rerum consuli ius est;” <i>Hist.</i> i. 77. 22: (The senate decreed) -“uti Appius Claudius cum Q. Catulo pro consule et ceteris quibus imperium est, -urbi praesidio sint operamque dent, ne quid respublica detrimenti capiat.” The -interpretation which includes the interrex, Appius Claudius, with those who possessed -the imperium is confirmed by Livy i. 17. 5 f., who informs us that the imperium -of an interrex lasted five days.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1134" href="#FNanchor_1134" class="label">[1134]</a> Livy ix. 38 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1135" href="#FNanchor_1135" class="label">[1135]</a> Cf. Nissen, <i>Beitr. z. röm. Staatsr.</i> 51 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1136" href="#FNanchor_1136" class="label">[1136]</a> XXI. 63. 5 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1137" href="#FNanchor_1137" class="label">[1137]</a> Fest. 347. 14; p. 336 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1138" href="#FNanchor_1138" class="label">[1138]</a> Cf. Livy xxii. 1. 5 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1139" href="#FNanchor_1139" class="label">[1139]</a> Nissen, ibid., supposes, too, that Appius Claudius, consul in 179, went to the -army without a curiate law and for that reason the soldiers refused to obey him; -Livy xli. 10. Livy mentions the neglect of other formalities, but makes no reference -to the curiate act.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1140" href="#FNanchor_1140" class="label">[1140]</a> Livy xxv. 37. 5 f.; cf. xxvi. 2. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1141" href="#FNanchor_1141" class="label">[1141]</a> Ibid. xxvi. 2. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1142" href="#FNanchor_1142" class="label">[1142]</a> Dio Cass. xli. 43. In this instance the senate had conferred dictatorial power -upon the magistrates by its supreme decree (Caesar, <i>B. C.</i> i. 5); that they were -constitutionally in command, whereas the general direction of affairs by Pompey, -however autocratic, was only informal, is expressly stated by Dio Cass. xl. 43. 5. -What Nissen, <i>Beitr. z. röm. Staatsr.</i> 53 f., says of these magistrates’ lack of military -imperium is therefore baseless.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1143" href="#FNanchor_1143" class="label">[1143]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 18. 4; <i>Q. Fr.</i> iii. 4. 6; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 47; xxxix. 65. The -praetor was Ser. Sulpicius Galba.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1144" href="#FNanchor_1144" class="label">[1144]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. 25; cf. <i>Q. Fr.</i> iii. 2. 3; p. 417 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1145" href="#FNanchor_1145" class="label">[1145]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. 25: “Appius ... dixit ... legem curiatam consuli ferri opus -esse, necesse non esse.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1146" href="#FNanchor_1146" class="label">[1146]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 17. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1147" href="#FNanchor_1147" class="label">[1147]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 17. 4; <i>Q. Fr.</i> iii. 3. 2; cf. p. 111 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1148" href="#FNanchor_1148" class="label">[1148]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 17. 3 ff.; 18. 3; <i>Q. Fr.</i> iii. 2. 3; 3. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1149" href="#FNanchor_1149" class="label">[1149]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 17. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1150" href="#FNanchor_1150" class="label">[1150]</a> The compact (Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 17. 2) made between Appius and his colleague in -the consulship, 54, parties of the first part, and Memmius and Domitius, candidates -for the consulship for the ensuing year, parties of the second part, that the parties of -the second part in the event of their election should produce three augurs to testify -that the parties of the first part had proposed and carried a lex curiata, or in failure -to produce the witnesses should forfeit to the parties of the first part a specified sum -of money, assumes, inasmuch as the evidence was not to be forthcoming till after -the election, (1) that the lex curiata was not essential to holding the elective -comitia, but (2) that it was highly advantageous to the promagistrate. Cicero, who -often refers to the postponement of the elective comitia of this year, never intimates -that the want of a lex curiata stood in the way.</p> - -<p>Varro, consul in 216, must have found it extremely difficult, though perhaps not -impossible, after carrying his lex de imperio in the comitium, to complete the consular -and pretorian elections in the Campus Martius—all between sunrise and -sunset on the same day; Livy xxii. 35. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1151" href="#FNanchor_1151" class="label">[1151]</a> P. 192.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1152" href="#FNanchor_1152" class="label">[1152]</a> Dio Cass. xli. 43. 3. Livy, v. 52. 15, proves that the comitia curiata could meet -only within the pomerium.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1153" href="#FNanchor_1153" class="label">[1153]</a> Dio Cass. xli. 43. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1154" href="#FNanchor_1154" class="label">[1154]</a> Cf. Livy v. 52. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1155" href="#FNanchor_1155" class="label">[1155]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 19. 3. The date of the trial was Feb. 7, 56; Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 3. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1156" href="#FNanchor_1156" class="label">[1156]</a> <i>Lex Cornelia de XX Quaest.</i> in <i>CIL.</i> i. 202; Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 10. 30; Schol. -Gronov. 395. Mark Antony when quaestor performed the functions of his office -through the year without the sanctioning law; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 20. 50.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1157" href="#FNanchor_1157" class="label">[1157]</a> It is always spoken of in the singular, the implication being that one act served -for all; cf. especially Caesar, <i>B. C.</i> i. 6; Livy ix. 38. 15; Dio Cass. xxxix. 19. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1158" href="#FNanchor_1158" class="label">[1158]</a> Cic. Frag. A. vii. 48: “Itaque auspicato ... tr. pl. comitiis curiatis creati -sunt”; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 1; ix. 41. 2; cf. Livy ii. 56. 2; p. 262 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1159" href="#FNanchor_1159" class="label">[1159]</a> V. 46. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1160" href="#FNanchor_1160" class="label">[1160]</a> <i>Röm. Verf.</i> 381 and n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1161" href="#FNanchor_1161" class="label">[1161]</a> Based on his reading of Fest. 351. 34: “(Triginta lictoribus l)ex curiata fertur; -quod Hanni(bal in propinquitate) Romae cum esset, nec ex praesidi(is discedere -liceret), Q. Fabius Maximus Verru(cosus egit per tr. pl. et Ma)rcellus cos. -facere in(stituit.”...).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1162" href="#FNanchor_1162" class="label">[1162]</a> The attendance on the comitia tributa was sometimes as low as five to the tribe; -Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 51. 109.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1163" href="#FNanchor_1163" class="label">[1163]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 7. 16 f.; in connection with the preceding note and p. 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1164" href="#FNanchor_1164" class="label">[1164]</a> Mommsen’s restoration is, “(Transit imperium nec denuo l)ex curiata fertur, -quod Hanni(bal in vicinitate) Romae cum esset nec ex praesidi(is tuto decedi posset), -Q. Fabius Maximus Verru(cossus M. Claudius Ma)rcellus cos. facere in(stituerunt)”; -<i>Röm. Forsch</i>, ii. 412; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 613, n. 3. Bergk, <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -N. F. xix (1864). 606, with less success proposes translatione imperii; cf. also Herzog, -<i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 679. The passage is in fact past healing, though Mommsen’s -reconstruction is an improvement on Rubino’s.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1165" href="#FNanchor_1165" class="label">[1165]</a> The second inference is from the present tense of the verb “fertur.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1166" href="#FNanchor_1166" class="label">[1166]</a> Livy xxiv. 7-9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1167" href="#FNanchor_1167" class="label">[1167]</a> Ibid. 9. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1168" href="#FNanchor_1168" class="label">[1168]</a> Cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 679. It is not to be assumed, however, that the -senatus consultum had to be repeated at every such case of transition. Lange, <i>Röm. -Alt.</i> ii. 175, 704 f., who gives the measure a wider constitutional scope, assumes that -it was a plebiscite. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> ii. 413, supposes that the two consuls -on entering office in 214 simply omitted the curiate sanction on the ground that they -already held the imperium, which was unlimited in duration, and that the jurists -accepted this procedure as constitutional. The specific motive for this action, Mommsen -asserts, was the fact that they were absent from Rome at the opening of their -official year. But the truth is that they were both present (Livy xxiv. 10 f.), and had -accordingly no occasion for establishing such precedent on their own responsibility. -All they did in the matter, then, was to take advantage of a measure already enacted.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1169" href="#FNanchor_1169" class="label">[1169]</a> Cf. Livy xxi. 63; xxii. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1170" href="#FNanchor_1170" class="label">[1170]</a> The existence of the measure of 215 proves that the curiate assembly and -curiate law were at the time something more than a mere formality.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1171" href="#FNanchor_1171" class="label">[1171]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 17. 2; cf. p. 113, 194, n. 2. The Ciceronian passage, our only -authority on this point, seems to imply a custom.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1172" href="#FNanchor_1172" class="label">[1172]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 12. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1173" href="#FNanchor_1173" class="label">[1173]</a> On the servility of the lictors, see Cic. <i>Verr.</i> ii. 29. 72; <i>Pis.</i> 22. 53.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1174" href="#FNanchor_1174" class="label">[1174]</a> That the comitia curiata were no longer attended by the people in the time of -Cicero is attested by <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 27: “Curiatis ... comitiis, quae vos non -initis”; cf. n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1175" href="#FNanchor_1175" class="label">[1175]</a> <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 27. On the Aelian and Fufian statutes, see p. 116, 358 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1176" href="#FNanchor_1176" class="label">[1176]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 12. 31: “Illis (comitiis) ad speciam atque ad usurpationem -vetustatis per ... lictores auspiciorum causa adumbratis.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1177" href="#FNanchor_1177" class="label">[1177]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 12. 30: “Consulibus legem curiatam ferentibus a tribunis -plebis saepe est intercessum”; cf. Dio Cass. xxxix. 19. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1178" href="#FNanchor_1178" class="label">[1178]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 29; p. 227 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1179" href="#FNanchor_1179" class="label">[1179]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. 25; p. 193 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1180" href="#FNanchor_1180" class="label">[1180]</a> Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> ii. 905.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1181" href="#FNanchor_1181" class="label">[1181]</a> This chapter historically follows ch. iv.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1182" href="#FNanchor_1182" class="label">[1182]</a> Livy i. 60. 4. This is the first act which Livy records, and it is his opinion that -the last king never consulted the people; i. 49. 3. His view harmonizes with that -of Dionysius, iv. 40. 3, that Servius intended to resign his office and establish a -republic, had he lived.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1183" href="#FNanchor_1183" class="label">[1183]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 53: “(Valerius Poplicola) legem ad populum tulit eam, quae centuriatis -comitiis prima lata est.” Dionysius, iv. 20. 3, supposes that Servius actually -used this assembly for elections, legislation, and declarations of war, that Tarquin the -Proud set aside the Servian arrangement (iv. 43. 1), which was restored at the beginning -of the republic. The first of these ideas is an inference from republican -usage, not based on knowledge of any definite act of the assembly in the regal period. -In this matter, Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 264, has given him too much credit.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1184" href="#FNanchor_1184" class="label">[1184]</a> An objection to the view represented by Soltau, ibid. 270-5, that the coöperation -of the army in the overthrow of Tarquin the Proud caused its immediate transformation -into the comitia centuriata, is that we have no ground for accepting as historical -the details of the overthrow to which he calls attention. In p. 285-96 he attempts -to reconstruct the earliest constitution of the republic on the theory that the army -elected the consuls (283), that for a time those who were not actually on military -duty were excluded from a vote in the centuriate assembly. The sources give no information -regarding such an assembly, and we have no right to assume it, at least as -a regular, recognized institution, for any period however early. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -i. 465, supposes that with the founding of the republic the assembly began to diverge -from the army, the two institutions having previously been identical; cf. Guiraud, in -<i>Rev. hist.</i> xvii (1881). 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1185" href="#FNanchor_1185" class="label">[1185]</a> Livy ix. 13. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1186" href="#FNanchor_1186" class="label">[1186]</a> Livy vii. 16. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1187" href="#FNanchor_1187" class="label">[1187]</a> Livy v. 28. 7; vii. 36. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1188" href="#FNanchor_1188" class="label">[1188]</a> Livy viii. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1189" href="#FNanchor_1189" class="label">[1189]</a> Ibid. 32. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1190" href="#FNanchor_1190" class="label">[1190]</a> Livy viii. 32 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1191" href="#FNanchor_1191" class="label">[1191]</a> Livy x. 19. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1192" href="#FNanchor_1192" class="label">[1192]</a> Livy vii. 36. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1193" href="#FNanchor_1193" class="label">[1193]</a> Ibid. ch. 37, especially § 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1194" href="#FNanchor_1194" class="label">[1194]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> xi. 13. 3; Livy vii. 37. 9. viii. 32. 1; ix. 13. 1; x. 19. 11; xxviii. -26. 12; xl. 36. 4; xlii. 53. 1; Dion. Hal. iii. 13. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1195" href="#FNanchor_1195" class="label">[1195]</a> Livy vii. 35. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1196" href="#FNanchor_1196" class="label">[1196]</a> Livy v. 46. 5 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1197" href="#FNanchor_1197" class="label">[1197]</a> Livy vii. 16. 7; p. 297.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1198" href="#FNanchor_1198" class="label">[1198]</a> Livy xxvi. 2. 2 (211 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>). On the military contio, see also p. 140.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1199" href="#FNanchor_1199" class="label">[1199]</a> Laelius Felix, <i>Lib. ad. Muc.</i> in Gell. xv. 27. 5: “Centuriata autem comitia intra -pomerium fieri nefas esse, quia exercitum extra urbem imperari oporteat, intra urbem -imperari ius non sit.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1200" href="#FNanchor_1200" class="label">[1200]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3: Συνῄει δὲ τὸ πλῆθος εἰς τὸ πρὸ τῆς πόλεως Ἄρειον πεδίον -ὑπὸ λοχαγοῖς καὶ σημείοις τεταγμένον ὥσπερ ἐν πολέμῳ; p. 211. During the session -Janiculum was occupied by a garrison, above which, in view of the Campus Martius, -waved a flag; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 27; cf. Gell. xv. 27. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1201" href="#FNanchor_1201" class="label">[1201]</a> P. 104, 140 f., 244.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1202" href="#FNanchor_1202" class="label">[1202]</a> <i>Comm. Consular.</i> in Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 88; Livy xxxix. 15. 11; Laelius Felix, in -Gell. xv. 27. 5; Fest. ep. 103; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 15; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> viii. 1. Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 216, 294, n. 2, is of the opinion that the centuriate assembly -was termed exercitus because it met for military exercise on the Campus Martius. -But we have no evidence that the assembly ever took such exercise; in fact the drill -of the proletarian mob would be hardly less ridiculous than that of the nonagenarians, -both of whom had a right to vote in the assembly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1203" href="#FNanchor_1203" class="label">[1203]</a> IV. 84. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1204" href="#FNanchor_1204" class="label">[1204]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 216 and n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1205" href="#FNanchor_1205" class="label">[1205]</a> Fabius Pictor, <i>Ann.</i> i, in Gell. x. 15. 3 f.: “Dialem flaminem ... religio -est classem procinctam extra pomerium, id est, exercitum armatum, videre; idcirco -rarenter flamen Dialis creatus consul est, cum bella consulibus mandabantur.” -There was no objection to this flamen’s seeing the comitia centuriata, but the armed -centuries it was not lawful for him to see. Cf. Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 93: “Alia de causa -hic magistrates (quaestor) non potest exercitum urbanum convocare; censor, consul, -dictator, interrex potest, quod censor exercitum centuriato constituit quinquennalem, -cum lustrare et in urbem ad vexillum ducere debet.” But the term exercitus urbanus -sometimes denotes the body of men enlisted for military service from those who were -ordinarily exempt; Livy xxii. 11. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1206" href="#FNanchor_1206" class="label">[1206]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 265, supposes that in the original form of census-taking -the citizens were so arranged in companies under their leaders as to constitute -an army ready to be led against the enemy. But the only citation he offers (Dion. -Hal. ii. 14, perhaps for iv. 22. 1; see n. below) has no bearing on the matter.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1207" href="#FNanchor_1207" class="label">[1207]</a> IV. 22, i: Κελεύσας τοὺς πολίτας ἅπαντας συνελθεῖν εἰς τὸ μέγιστον τῶν πρὸ -τῆς πόλεως πεδίων ἔχοντας τὰ ὅπλα καὶ τάξας τοὺς θ’ἱππεῖς κατὰ τέλη καὶ τοὺς -πεζοὺς ἐν φάλαγγι καὶ τοὺς ἐσταλμένους τὸν φιλικὸν ὁπλισμὸν ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις ἑκάστους -λόχοις καθαρμὸν αὐτῶν ἐποιήσατο.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1208" href="#FNanchor_1208" class="label">[1208]</a> <i>L. L.</i> vi. 86: “Censor ... praeconi sic imperato ut viros vocet.... -Omnes quirites pedites armatos, privatosque curatores omnium tribuum, si quis pro -se sive pro alio rationem dari volet, vocato in licium huc ad me” (Mommsen’s -reading, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 361, n. 6). Spengel reads, “Omnes quirites, (equites) -pedites, magistratos privatosque, curatores,” etc., in which armatos does not appear.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1209" href="#FNanchor_1209" class="label">[1209]</a> Such an inspection by the censors, if it ever existed, must have fallen early into -disuse (cf. Mommsen, ibid. iii. 397); but we could more reasonably suppose that -the inspection of the arms and of the physical condition of the men always belonged -to the officers who attended to the levy; Polyb. vi. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1210" href="#FNanchor_1210" class="label">[1210]</a> Cf. Livy xliii. 14. 8: “Censores edixerunt ... qui in patris aut avi potestate -essent, eorum nomina ad se ederentur.” The father gave the census of his son; -Fest. ep. 66: “Duicensus (census of two) dicebatur cum altero, id est cum filio -census;” Dion. Hal. ix. 36. 3. The son was classed according to the census of the -father; Livy xxiv. 11. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1211" href="#FNanchor_1211" class="label">[1211]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 15. 6; v. 75. 3; Gell. iv. 20. 3 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1212" href="#FNanchor_1212" class="label">[1212]</a> Notwithstanding Genz, <i>Centuriatverf.</i> 11; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 477.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1213" href="#FNanchor_1213" class="label">[1213]</a> Polyb. vi. 20 ff. The Romans were of the opinion that the same principle held -for the earliest times; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 89; Dion. Hal. iv. 14; cf. Soltau, <i>Altröm. -Volksversamml.</i> 337.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1214" href="#FNanchor_1214" class="label">[1214]</a> Polyb. vi. 19. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1215" href="#FNanchor_1215" class="label">[1215]</a> The five classes contained accordingly 80, 20, 20, 20, and 28 centuries respectively; -cf. p. 66 f., 77; see also table on p. 210. A great difference exists between -Livy and Dionysius, on the one hand, and Cicero, on the other, as to the number of -centuries in the highest class. Cicero (<i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39: “Nunc rationem videtis -esse talem, ut equitum centuriae cum sex suffragiis et prima classis addita centuria, -quae ad summum usum urbis fabris tignariis est data, LXXXVIIII centurias habebat”) -states that the eighteen centuries of knights, the centuries of the first class, -and one century of mechanics amounted to eighty-nine, which would give but seventy -to the first class. The most satisfactory explanation of this difficulty seems to be that -Cicero, while professing to describe the earlier centuriate system, had in mind a -formative stage of the new organization, in which the first class comprised seventy -centuries; p. 67, 215, n. 2. On the number in the fifth class, see p. 66, 77, 208.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1216" href="#FNanchor_1216" class="label">[1216]</a> P. 68.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1217" href="#FNanchor_1217" class="label">[1217]</a> The two are mentioned by Livy i. 43. 3 and Dion. Hal. iv. 17. 3; vii. 59. 4. -Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiv. 1. 1, speaks of a guild of coppersmiths, and Plut. <i>Num.</i> 17, refers -to the same guild and to that of the carpenters, ascribing both to Numa as founder. -Cicero, <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39; <i>Orat.</i> 46. 156, mentions only the century of carpenters. -Placing this century with the first class, he either overlooks that of the smiths or -wishes to reckon it with the second class (cf. Huschke, <i>Verf. des Serv.</i> 153). As -he reckons the total number of centuries at one hundred and ninety-three, he has -allowed for both.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1218" href="#FNanchor_1218" class="label">[1218]</a> Plut. <i>Num.</i> 17; also n. above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1219" href="#FNanchor_1219" class="label">[1219]</a> I. 43. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1220" href="#FNanchor_1220" class="label">[1220]</a> <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39; cf. n. 2 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1221" href="#FNanchor_1221" class="label">[1221]</a> IV. 17. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1222" href="#FNanchor_1222" class="label">[1222]</a> Cf. Smith, <i>Röm. Timokr.</i> 91 f. with citations.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1223" href="#FNanchor_1223" class="label">[1223]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 40; Livy i. 43. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 17. 3 f.; vii. 59. 5; cf. Varro, -<i>L. L.</i> v. 91; Cato, in Gell. xx. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1224" href="#FNanchor_1224" class="label">[1224]</a> Plut. <i>Num.</i> 17, speaks of only one guild of musicians, the pipers. But the cornicines -formed a guild in imperial times; <i>CIL.</i> vi. 524. The two centuries were -united in the collegium aeneatorum; Fest. ep. 20; <i>CIL.</i> vi. 10220 f.; Domazewski, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1954.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1225" href="#FNanchor_1225" class="label">[1225]</a> P. 68, 80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1226" href="#FNanchor_1226" class="label">[1226]</a> <i>Röm. Trib.</i> 137, accepted by Genz, <i>Centurienverf.</i> 3, 8; Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> -254, 317, 520, n. 1. Huschke, <i>Verf. d. Serv.</i> 172, assumes ten and includes -them in the fifth class. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 471, supposes the accensi to have included -the entire fifth class, which in his opinion was not instituted till the beginning of the -republic.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1227" href="#FNanchor_1227" class="label">[1227]</a> I. 43. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1228" href="#FNanchor_1228" class="label">[1228]</a> <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 40: “Quin etiam accensis velatis, liticinibus, cornicinibus, proletariis.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1229" href="#FNanchor_1229" class="label">[1229]</a> <i>CIL.</i> vi. 9219: “Praef(ectus) c(enturiae) a(ccensorum) v(elatorum)”; -cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. p. xi, n. 1; Ulpian, <i>Vat. Frag.</i> 138, mentions the -privileges of this century. A decuria of the accensi velati is referred to by <i>CIL.</i> vi. -1973; cf. Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 136.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1230" href="#FNanchor_1230" class="label">[1230]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 282; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -i. 135 ff.; Domazewski, ibid. iii. 1953 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1231" href="#FNanchor_1231" class="label">[1231]</a> P. 68.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1232" href="#FNanchor_1232" class="label">[1232]</a> <i>XII Tables</i>, in Gell. xvi. 10. 5: “Adsiduo vindex adsiduus esto. Proletario iam -civi, cui, quis volet, vindex esto.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1233" href="#FNanchor_1233" class="label">[1233]</a> Livy i. 43. 8; Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 2; Ennius, in Gell. xvi. 10. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1234" href="#FNanchor_1234" class="label">[1234]</a> IV. 18. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1235" href="#FNanchor_1235" class="label">[1235]</a> That there was a proletarian century, besides the accensi velati, in the comitia -centuriata is proved by Livy i. 43. 8; Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 2; Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 40. -Mommsen’s attempt (<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 237 f., 285 f.) to rule this century out of -existence has failed, notwithstanding the approval of some recent writers, as Domazewski, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1953. Cf. Kübler, ibid. iii. 1521 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1236" href="#FNanchor_1236" class="label">[1236]</a> IV. 17. 2; vii. 59. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1237" href="#FNanchor_1237" class="label">[1237]</a> Cf. Livy i. 43. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1238" href="#FNanchor_1238" class="label">[1238]</a> Cf. p. 66, 77, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1239" href="#FNanchor_1239" class="label">[1239]</a> P. 77 and n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1240" href="#FNanchor_1240" class="label">[1240]</a> 177. 21: “‘Niquis scivit’ centuria est, quae dicitur a Ser. Tullio rege constituta, -in qua liceret ei suffragium ferre, qui non tulisset in sua, nequis civis suffragii -iure privaretur.... Sed in ea centuria, neque censetur quisquam, neque centurio -praeficitur, neque centurialis potest esse, quia nemo certus est eius centuriae. Est -autem ni quis scivit nisi quis scivit.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1241" href="#FNanchor_1241" class="label">[1241]</a> As does Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 285 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1242" href="#FNanchor_1242" class="label">[1242]</a> This view accords best with the words of Livy i. 43. 7: “In his accensi, cornicines -tubicinesque, in tres centurias distributi” (they were reckoned among the -thirty).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1243" href="#FNanchor_1243" class="label">[1243]</a> Accepted by Huschke, <i>Verf. d. Serv.</i> 152, but rejected by Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> iii. 283, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1244" href="#FNanchor_1244" class="label">[1244]</a> P. 7, 62, 74 ff. 93, 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1245" href="#FNanchor_1245" class="label">[1245]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39: “Equitum centuriae cum sex suffragiis”; Fest. 334. 29. -Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82, is uncertain.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1246" href="#FNanchor_1246" class="label">[1246]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39 (n. above); Livy i. 36. 7; 43. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1247" href="#FNanchor_1247" class="label">[1247]</a> P. 62, 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1248" href="#FNanchor_1248" class="label">[1248]</a> P. 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1249" href="#FNanchor_1249" class="label">[1249]</a> L. Scipio Asiagenus retained his public horse till, six years after his consulship, -he was deprived of it by Cato the censor; Plut. <i>Cat. Mai.</i> 18; Livy xxxix. 44. 1. -Both censors of the year 204 had public horses; Livy xxix. 37. 8. The senators -were equites and voted in the equestrian centuries as late as 129; Cic. <i>Rep.</i> iv. 2. 2; -cf. Gerathewohl, <i>Reiter und Rittercent.</i> 77 and n. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1250" href="#FNanchor_1250" class="label">[1250]</a> P. 94.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1251" href="#FNanchor_1251" class="label">[1251]</a> P. 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1252" href="#FNanchor_1252" class="label">[1252]</a> Livy viii. 8, while describing the manipular arrangement under the year 340, -assigns the beginning of it to the time of Camillus, considering it due to the introduction -of pay; Plut. <i>Cam.</i> 40 (for change of armor at time of Camillus); cf. Soltau, -<i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 278; Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> ii. 332 f.; Delbrück, -<i>Gesch. d. Kriegsk.</i> i. 235.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1253" href="#FNanchor_1253" class="label">[1253]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3 (p. 203, n. 2). There seems to be no reason for doubting -this statement; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 1100.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1254" href="#FNanchor_1254" class="label">[1254]</a> P. 157 b.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1255" href="#FNanchor_1255" class="label">[1255]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 563. His citations, however (Fest. 177. 27; Cic. <i>Orat.</i> ii. -64. 260), do not prove the point; Herzog, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1256" href="#FNanchor_1256" class="label">[1256]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 21. 1; x. 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1257" href="#FNanchor_1257" class="label">[1257]</a> Livy i. 43. 11; Dion. Hal. iv. 20. 3-5; vii. 59. 3-8; x. 17. 3. On the prerogative -equestrian centuries, see Livy i. 43. 8; v. 18. 1: “Praerogativa ... creant” -(corrupt text); x. 22. 1: “Praerogativae et primo vocatae centuriae ... dicebant”; -Fest. 249. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1258" href="#FNanchor_1258" class="label">[1258]</a> Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 20. 49; <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 14. 4; <i>Div.</i> i. 45. 103; Fest. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1259" href="#FNanchor_1259" class="label">[1259]</a> Ch. iv.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1260" href="#FNanchor_1260" class="label">[1260]</a> P. 64, 86 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1261" href="#FNanchor_1261" class="label">[1261]</a> P. 86 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1262" href="#FNanchor_1262" class="label">[1262]</a> V. 18. 1 f.; “P. Licinium Calvum praerogativa tribunum militum non petentem -creant ... omnesque deinceps ex collegio eiusdem anni refici apparebat.... Qui -priusquam renuntiarentur iure vocatis tribubus.... Calvus ita verba fecit.” We -might amend this evidently corrupt passage either by changing praerogativa to the -plural, as do Müller (2d ed. 1888) and Weissenborn (8th ed. 1885), thus making it -refer to the equestrian centuriae. At the same time we might read iis revocatis -(scil. praerogativis). The passage would then apply to the Servian arrangement. -Or we could bring it to the support of the reformed order by reading creat (cf. -Madvig). The preferable interpretation of the qui priusquam ... tribubus clause -seems to be “Before they could be declared elected on the official reports from the -tribes,” the official reports being counted tribe by tribe, as will hereafter appear; -p. 225. See also on this passage, Plüss, <i>Centurienverf.</i> 10 ff.; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -496. Here, as often elsewhere, Ullrich, <i>Centuriatcom.</i> 14, is wrong. But it is impossible -to prove or to disprove anything by the emendation of such a passage.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1263" href="#FNanchor_1263" class="label">[1263]</a> VI. 21. 5: “Omnes tribus bellum iusserunt.” As the tribal assembly did not declare -war, this passage must refer to the reformed comitia (Lange, ibid.; Plüss, ibid. -13), unless omnes tribus is carelessly used to designate the unanimous vote of the -populus Romanus. The assembly tributim mentioned by Livy vii. 16. 7 for the year -357 was tribal, not centuriate as Ullrich, ibid. 15, supposes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1264" href="#FNanchor_1264" class="label">[1264]</a> In fact some scholars have assigned the reform to the decemvirs, 451; cf. Peter, -<i>Epoch. d. Verfassungsgesch.</i> 75; Soltau, <i>Altröm. Volksversamml.</i> 361 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1265" href="#FNanchor_1265" class="label">[1265]</a> P. 77 f., 214.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1266" href="#FNanchor_1266" class="label">[1266]</a> X. 22. 1: “Eumque et praerogativae et primo vocatae omnes centuriae.” Praerogativae -refers to the equestrian centuriae and hence to the Servian organization. -It is hazardous, however, to make so much depend on a single letter; should final e -be dropped from this adjective, the sentence would still read correctly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1267" href="#FNanchor_1267" class="label">[1267]</a> P. 57 f., 66 f., 86 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1268" href="#FNanchor_1268" class="label">[1268]</a> I. 43. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1269" href="#FNanchor_1269" class="label">[1269]</a> Cf. xxiv. 7. 12 (215 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>): “Eo die cum sors praerogativae Aniensi iuniorum exisset”; -9. 3: “Praerogativae suffragium iniit ... eosdem consules ceterae centuriae -... dixerunt”; xxvi. 22. 2 f.; xxvii. 6. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1270" href="#FNanchor_1270" class="label">[1270]</a> Livy xl. 51 is evidence that the censors had power to make changes as extensive -as these.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1271" href="#FNanchor_1271" class="label">[1271]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Trib.</i> 108, preferred Fabius, and his view has been accepted by -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 499; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 326; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1956; Le Tellier, <i>Organ. cent.</i> 75; Willems, <i>Droit public -Röm.</i> 93; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 384; and others. But in his <i>Staatsr.</i> iii. -254, n. 4, 270, n. 3, following Göttling, <i>Gesch. d. röm. Staatsverf.</i> 383, he changes -his preference to Flaminius on the ground that the conflict between the patricians -and the plebeians continued to the war with Hannibal (Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 9. 11), ending, -as he supposes, in the opening of the six patrician centuries of knights to the plebeians—a -change which he connects with the reform under discussion. His reasoning as -to the date is not cogent, and is outweighed by the consideration given in the text.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1272" href="#FNanchor_1272" class="label">[1272]</a> II. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1273" href="#FNanchor_1273" class="label">[1273]</a> XXI. 63; cf. Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1956.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1274" href="#FNanchor_1274" class="label">[1274]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 499; Plüss, <i>Centurienverf.</i> 10; Le Tellier, <i>Organ. cent.</i> -73 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1275" href="#FNanchor_1275" class="label">[1275]</a> Guiraud, in <i>Rev. hist.</i> xvii (1881). 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1276" href="#FNanchor_1276" class="label">[1276]</a> I. 43. 12: “Nec mirari oportet hunc ordinem, qui nunc est post expletas quinque -et triginta tribus duplicato earum numero centuriis iuniorum seniorumque, ad -institutam ab Serv. Tullio summam non convenire” (Nor need we be surprised that -the arrangement as it now exists after the tribes have been increased to thirty-five, -their number being doubled in the centuries of juniors and seniors, does not agree -with the total number instituted by Servius Tullius).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1277" href="#FNanchor_1277" class="label">[1277]</a> IV. 21. 3: Οὑτος ὁ κόσμος τοῦ πολιτεύματος ἐπὶ πολλὰς διέμεινε γενεὰς φυλαττόμενος -ὑπὸ Ῥωμαίον· ἐν δὲ τοῖς καθ’ ἡμᾶς κεκίνηται χρόνοις καὶ μεταβέβληκεν εἰς τὸ -δημοτικώτερον, ἀνάγκαις τισὶ βιασθεὶς ἰσχυραῖς, οὐ τῶν λόχον καταλυθέντων, ἀλλὰ -τῆς κρίσεως (or κλήσεως) αὐτῶν οὐκέτι τὴν ἀρχαίαν ἀκρίβειαν φυλαττούσης, ὡς ἐγνων -ταῖς ἀρχαιρεσίαις αὐτῶν πολλάκις παρών. (After this arrangement had continued -many generations, carefully preserved by the Romans, it has assumed in our time a -more democratic character, driven into this new course by certain powerful forces. -The centuries were not abolished, but the decision of their votes has lost its former -carefulness—or we may read, the calling of the centuries no longer retains its -precise order. This fact, he tells us, he himself often noticed when present at -elections.)</p> - -<p>If κρίσεως, supported by most MSS., is retained, it should refer to the equalization -of power among the classes; κλῆσεως would probably mean that the prerogative century -was now drawn by lot.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1278" href="#FNanchor_1278" class="label">[1278]</a> P. 77 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1279" href="#FNanchor_1279" class="label">[1279]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> iii. 374 ff.</p> - -<p>It is not improbable that the first step was the reduction of the first class to seventy -centuries, the ten centuries deducted being at the same time added to the lower -classes. This view will explain Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39, which otherwise must be considered -a mistake; p. 67, 205, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1280" href="#FNanchor_1280" class="label">[1280]</a> P. 213, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1281" href="#FNanchor_1281" class="label">[1281]</a> Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 12, concludes that the change was gradual. The line of -development suggested by Plüss, <i>Centurienverf.</i>, however, is ill supported by the -evidence. Guiraud, <i>Rev. hist.</i> xvii (1881). 1 ff., also accepts the view of a gradual -reform but minimizes its importance.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1282" href="#FNanchor_1282" class="label">[1282]</a> The citations below refer to a plurality of classes for the period following the -reform, without mentioning a definite number; Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 86; Cic. <i>Rep.</i> iv. 2. 2; -<i>Flacc.</i> 7. 15; <i>Red. ad Quir.</i> 7. 17; Symmachus, <i>Pro Patre</i>, 7 (Seeck); Auson. -<i>Grat. Act.</i> iii. 13; ix. 44 (Peiper); p. 287, 293 (Bip.). In his speech for the -Voconian law, 169, the elder Cato, in Gell. vi. 13. 3, referred to the distinction between -the classici and those who were infra classem, from which we may conclude -that the distinction existed in his time. The agrarian law of 111 (<i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 37) -mentions the first class; also Livy xliii. 16. 14. The first and second are spoken of -by Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82. Ullrich’s view (<i>Centuriatcom.</i>), resting on these passages, -is that there were but two classes, one of seniors another of juniors. Besides involving -many impossibilities, it is refuted by the frequent references to the continuance -of the census as an element in the system (see note below) and by the occasional -mention of the five classes. The latter number for the time of C. Gracchus is given -by Pseud. Sall. <i>Rep. Ord.</i> 2. 8. This work, though late, is generally considered good -authority; cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 237 f. Five are mentioned also by Gell. -vi (vii). 13. 1; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> vii. 716; Arnob. <i>Adv. Nat.</i> ii. 67, with no definite -reference to a particular period. Cicero’s allusion (<i>Acad. Pr.</i> ii. 23. 73) to the fifth -class implies at least that the five classes were then fresh in the memory. The -mention of an amplissimus census for the time of Cicero by Ascon. <i>in Pis.</i> 16, proves -the existence of more than two classes at the time. These citations, together with -the fact that no other definite number but five is ever spoken of by the ancient -writers, must lead to the conclusion that there was no change.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1283" href="#FNanchor_1283" class="label">[1283]</a> To the time of Marius the soldiers were still drawn from the census classes; -Polyb. vi. 19. 2; Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 86. The first class was distinguished from the rest by -its armor, Polyb. vi. 23. 15. That the political classes likewise rested on the census -is proved by Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 7; 19. 44; Gell. vi (vii). 13; xv. 27. 5; Ascon. <i>in Pis.</i> -16. The agrarian law of 111 (<i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 37) implies a property qualification of -the class mentioned (note above). These citations dispose of the hypothesis of Plüss, -<i>Centurienverf.</i> 36 ff., 80, which represents the classes of this period as consisting of -groups of tribes resting partly on the census but mainly on differences of rank.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1284" href="#FNanchor_1284" class="label">[1284]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82; Livy xliii. 16. 14; Pseud. Sall. <i>Rep. Ord.</i> 2. 8; Val. Max. -vi. 5. 3; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 57. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1285" href="#FNanchor_1285" class="label">[1285]</a> Livy i. 43. 12; xxiv. 7. 12; xxvi. 22. 2 f.; xxvii. 6. 3 (p. 213, n. 5 above); Cic. -<i>Rep.</i> iv. 2. 2; <i>Verr.</i> II. v. 15. 38: “Qui (praeco) te totiens seniorum iuniorumque -centuriis illo honore (praetorship) adfici pronuntiavit”; <i>Har. Resp.</i> 6. 11; <i>Leg.</i> iii. -3. 7; Horace, <i>Ars Poet.</i> 341: “Centuriae seniorum agitant expertia frugis.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1286" href="#FNanchor_1286" class="label">[1286]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vii. 42; Cic. <i>Flacc.</i> 7. 15; <i>Sull.</i> 32. 91; <i>Tog. Cand.</i> in Ascon. 85; -<i>Red. in Sen.</i> 11. 27; <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 1. 2; <i>Brut.</i> 67. 237; <i>Orat.</i> ii. 64. 260; Ascon. 16, -95; Pseud. Sall. <i>Rep. Ord.</i> 2. 8; Livy i. 43. 12 f.; xxvi. 18. 9; 22. 4, 8, 10, 13; -xxvii. 21. 4; xxviii. 38. 6; xxix. 22. 9; xxxi. 6. 3; 7. 1; xxxvii. 47. 7; xliii. 16. 14, -16; Dion. Hal. iv. 21. 3; et passim.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1287" href="#FNanchor_1287" class="label">[1287]</a> I. 43. 12 f. “Nec mirari oportet hunc ordinem, qui nunc est post expletas -quinque et triginta tribus duplicate earum numero centuriis iuniorum seniorumque, -ad institutam ab Servio Tullio summam non convenire. Quadrifariam enim urbe -divisa ... partes eas tribus appellavit ... neque eae tribus ad centuriarum distributionem -numerumque quicquam pertinuere.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1288" href="#FNanchor_1288" class="label">[1288]</a> Livy xxiv. 7. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1289" href="#FNanchor_1289" class="label">[1289]</a> Livy xxvi. 22. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1290" href="#FNanchor_1290" class="label">[1290]</a> Livy xxvii. 6. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1291" href="#FNanchor_1291" class="label">[1291]</a> Voting or the announcement of the votes according to tribes is indicated by -Polyb. vi. 14. 7: Τοῖς γὰρ θανάτου κρινομένοις, ἐπὰν καταδικάζωνται δίδωσι τὴν -ἐξουσίαν τὸ παρ’ αὐτοῖς ἔθος ἀπαλλάττεσθαι φανερῶς, κἂν ἔτι μία λείπηται φυλὴ τῶν -ἐπικυρουσῶν τὴν κρίσιν ἀψηφόρητος, ἑκούσιον ἑαυτοῦ κατγνόντα φυγαδείαν. (To those -who are on trial for life, while the vote of condemnation is being taken, even if a -single tribe of those whose suffrages are needed to ratify the sentence has not voted, -the Roman custom grants permission to depart openly, condemning themselves to -voluntary exile.) This procedure must have been in the comitia centuriata, and -hence the votes of the centuries must have been taken or announced by tribes; -cf. Klebs, in <i>Zeitschr. d. Savignyst.</i> xii (1892). 220; Plüss, <i>Centurienverf.</i> 14. See -also Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 2. 4: “Meis comitiis non tabellam vindicem tacitae libertatis, -sed vocem [unam] prae vobis indicem vestrarum erga me voluntatum ac studiorum -tulistis. Itaque me non extrema tribus (not diribitio) suffragiorum, sed primi illi -vestri concursus, neque singulae voces praeconum, sed una vox universi populi Romani -consulem declaravit.” The MSS. have tribus and there is nothing against it, -though Müller, following Richter, has adopted diribitio for the Teubner text, 1896. -The meaning is “In my election you offered not merely the ballot, the vindication -of your silent liberty, but also your unanimous voice as evidence of your good will -to me and of your eagerness in my behalf. Hence it was not the last tribal group -of votes but your first coming together, not the single announcements of the criers -but the unanimous voice of the entire Roman people which declared me consul.” -From this passage we may infer (1) that the votes were cast or announced by tribes, -(2) that the tribe cast more than one vote, (3) that the result was sometimes known -before the last tribe was reached. Cf. further Cic. <i>Phil.</i> vi. 5. 12; 6. 16; xi. 8. 18; -Livy v. 18. 2; vi. 21. 5; viii. 37. 12; xxix. 37. 13; ep. xlix; Oros. v. 7. 1; Lucan, -<i>Phars.</i> v. 391 ff.; Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 42.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1292" href="#FNanchor_1292" class="label">[1292]</a> Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 20. 49: “Unius tribus pars” (i.e. the prerogative century); -Pseudacr. Schol. Cruq. ad Hor. <i>Poet.</i> 341: “Singulae tribus certas habebant centurias -seniorum et iuniorum”; Livy i. 43. 12 f. implies that the number of centuries -was a multiple of the number of tribes, in other words that the century was an -integral part of the tribe; cf. Q. Cic. <i>Petit.</i> 5. 17 f.; 8. 32; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Trib.</i> 74. -The most convincing evidence is that of inscriptions of the imperial period (p. 220) -which prove the urban tribes to have comprised each an integral number of centuries. -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 274, has therefore failed in his attempt to limit to the -first class the division of the tribes into centuries.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1293" href="#FNanchor_1293" class="label">[1293]</a> <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> iii. 382 f., followed by Plüss, <i>Centurienverf.</i> 23 ff. Niebuhr places -the change in 304, when there were but thirty-one tribes, which would give for that -date but sixty-two half-tribe centuries.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1294" href="#FNanchor_1294" class="label">[1294]</a> P. 216.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1295" href="#FNanchor_1295" class="label">[1295]</a> Niebuhr, ibid. His authorities for the two classes are Livy xliii. 16. 14: “Cum -ex duodecim centuriis equitum octo censorem condemnassent multaeque aliae primae -classis”; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82: “Prima classis vocatur, renuntiatur; deinde, ita ut -adsolet, suffragia; tum secunda classis vocatur; quae omnia sunt citius facta, quam -dixi. Confecto negotio bonus augur ... alio die inquit”; cf. p. 113. In the -Livian citation, however, the mention of only the first class affords no hint as to the -number of classes to follow; and the keen analysis of the Ciceronian passage made -by Huschke, <i>Verf. des Serv.</i> 615 and n. 8, proves confecto negotio to signify not -necessarily that the voting had been finished, but rather that the comitia had advanced -so far as to preclude the obnuntiatio. It should be served before the assembly -convened, not after the meeting began (“Non comitiis habitis, sed priusquam habeantur”; -§ 81). Confecto negotio, equivalent to comitiis habitis, is the negative of -priusquam habeantur. This interpretation deprives the theory of two classes, held -by Niebuhr, Ullrich, and others, of its only support.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1296" href="#FNanchor_1296" class="label">[1296]</a> P. 216, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1297" href="#FNanchor_1297" class="label">[1297]</a> P. 216, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1298" href="#FNanchor_1298" class="label">[1298]</a> <i>Verf. des Serv.</i> 623.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1299" href="#FNanchor_1299" class="label">[1299]</a> Ibid. 617 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1300" href="#FNanchor_1300" class="label">[1300]</a> Ibid. 634. Similar is the view of Plüss, <i>Centurienverf.</i> 36 ff., 80, that for the -period 179-86 the classes were groups of tribes based partly on the census and -partly on social rank.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1301" href="#FNanchor_1301" class="label">[1301]</a> P. 216, n. 3. The long-known hypothesis here mentioned was sufficiently refuted -by Huschke, ibid. 619 ff., but has been more recently revived by Madvig, <i>Röm. -Staat.</i> i. 117 ff., who, however, so develops it as to make the five classes voting divisions -of the century. This notion is controverted by Genz, <i>Centuriatcom. nach der -Ref.</i>, and defended without success by Gerathewohl, <i>Reit. und Rittercent.</i> 90 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1302" href="#FNanchor_1302" class="label">[1302]</a> This result is in fact suggested by the passage in Livy 1. 43. 12 f. (p. 217, n. 1); -it is not to be wondered at that an increase in the tribes should bring about an -increase in the centuries—a diminution in the centuries could not be spoken of -in the same way.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1303" href="#FNanchor_1303" class="label">[1303]</a> P. 217.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1304" href="#FNanchor_1304" class="label">[1304]</a> P. 218, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1305" href="#FNanchor_1305" class="label">[1305]</a> P. 216, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1306" href="#FNanchor_1306" class="label">[1306]</a> ¶ above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1307" href="#FNanchor_1307" class="label">[1307]</a> P. 216, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1308" href="#FNanchor_1308" class="label">[1308]</a> A monk who lived 1494-1567. For his view see Drackenborch’s commentary -on Livy i. 43. To the 350 centuries of juniors and seniors he added 35 or 70 -centuries of knights and a century of proletarians, making a total of 386 or 421 -respectively. No scholar now holds to more than 18 equestrian centuries. With -this and a few other variations as to supernumerary centuries his view has been -adopted by Savigny, <i>Vermischte Schriften</i>, i. 1 ff.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Trib.</i>; Genz, -<i>Centuriatcom. nach der Ref.</i>; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 15; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 324; Klebs, in <i>Zeitschr. d. Savignyst.</i> xii (1892). 181-244; Schiller, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -633; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1956 ff.; Greenidge, <i>Rom. Publ. -Life</i>, 253; Le Tellier, <i>Organ. cent.</i> 89 ff.; Göttling, <i>Gesch. der röm. Staatsverf.</i> 383; -Peter, <i>Epoch. d. Verfassungsgesch.</i> 75; Morlot, <i>Comices élect.</i> 85 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1309" href="#FNanchor_1309" class="label">[1309]</a> <i>CIL.</i> vi. 196-8, 1104, 10097, 10214-8; <i>Inscr. bull. della comm. di Roma</i>, 1885. -161; <i>Notizie degli Scavi</i>, 1887. 191.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1310" href="#FNanchor_1310" class="label">[1310]</a> There must have been in the reformed comitia two curators from each class for -every tribe. This connection with the classes was wrongly transferred to the tribunes -of the plebs by Livy iii. 30. 7; Ascon. 76.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1311" href="#FNanchor_1311" class="label">[1311]</a> III. 274 ff.; cf. his <i>History of Rome</i> (Eng. ed. 1900), iii. 52 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1312" href="#FNanchor_1312" class="label">[1312]</a> II. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1313" href="#FNanchor_1313" class="label">[1313]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 274 with notes; cf. Guiraud, in <i>Rev. hist.</i> xvii (1881). 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1314" href="#FNanchor_1314" class="label">[1314]</a> <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39: “Quae discriptio, si esset ignota vobis, explicaretur a me; nunc -rationem videtis esse talem.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1315" href="#FNanchor_1315" class="label">[1315]</a> Seventy in Cicero’s description, eighty according to the annalists; p. 67 f., -205, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1316" href="#FNanchor_1316" class="label">[1316]</a> It is unnecessary here to enter into the controversy regarding the text. Evidently -the second hand has drawn from a reliable source (Klebs, ibid. 200-210); yet in -view of its uncertainty the passage should not be made the foundation of a theory -so thoroughly objectionable as Mommsen’s.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1317" href="#FNanchor_1317" class="label">[1317]</a> To Soltau, <i>Jahrb. f. cl. Philol.</i> xli (1895). 411, n. 3, this explanation seems “too -cheap.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1318" href="#FNanchor_1318" class="label">[1318]</a> In the clause “Ut equitum centuriae cum sex suffrages et prima classis addita -centuria, quae ... data, LXXXVIIII centuriae habeat,” centuriae applies to the -centuries proper, but in the clause immediately following, “Quibus ex centum quattuor -centuriis (tot enim reliquae sunt) octo solae accesserunt,” the word on Mommsen’s -supposition must denote not the centuries themselves but the voting groups of -centuries. Though Mommsen usually avoids the application of the term century to -the assumed voting units, he allows himself to do so on p. 274 and in n. 2. Granting -that in this instance he has used the word correctly, we should have the first class -composed of simple centuries and the others of centuries which were themselves -composed of centuries—an evidently absurd result of his assumption.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1319" href="#FNanchor_1319" class="label">[1319]</a> Klebs, in <i>Zeitschr. d. Savignyst.</i> xii (1892). 197. Not less complicated is Le -Tellier’s supposition (<i>Organ. cent.</i> 88, n. 1) that the four classes may have differed -in number of votes (for example, 30, 28, 28, 14), and that the several voting groups -of a class comprised the same number of centuries, in some cases with a fraction of a -century, e.g., 2, 2½, 2½, 5 centuries for the four classes respectively. This combination -would be as undemocratic and as impracticable as any of those proposed by Klebs.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1320" href="#FNanchor_1320" class="label">[1320]</a> Klebs, ibid. 187.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1321" href="#FNanchor_1321" class="label">[1321]</a> P. 214, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1322" href="#FNanchor_1322" class="label">[1322]</a> I. 43. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1323" href="#FNanchor_1323" class="label">[1323]</a> P. 220.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1324" href="#FNanchor_1324" class="label">[1324]</a> P. 217.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1325" href="#FNanchor_1325" class="label">[1325]</a> P. 216, n. 3. Soltau’s modifications, <i>Jahrb. f. Philol.</i> xli (1895). 410-4, of -Mommsen’s hypothesis are no improvement on the original.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1326" href="#FNanchor_1326" class="label">[1326]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 510 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1327" href="#FNanchor_1327" class="label">[1327]</a> In this way the prerogative century, after serving as an omen (Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 18. 39), -would be joined with four others of the same half-tribe.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1328" href="#FNanchor_1328" class="label">[1328]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 526.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1329" href="#FNanchor_1329" class="label">[1329]</a> Livy xliii. 16. 14 (171 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>): “Cum ex duodecim centuriis equitum octo censorem -condemnassent multaeque aliae primae classis, extemplo principes civitatis -... vestem mutarunt.” This proves that the votes were made public early in -the course of the voting, though not necessarily before the second class began; -cf. Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82. Lange too hastily rejects the evidence of these two passages. -The vote of each century was announced separately; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vii. -42: “Quod ... comitiis cum recitatur a praecone dicitur olla centuria,” which -would not be true, if, as Lange supposes, the announcement was by tribal groups -of five.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1330" href="#FNanchor_1330" class="label">[1330]</a> Cf. Gerathewohl, <i>Reit. und Rittercent.</i> 90, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1331" href="#FNanchor_1331" class="label">[1331]</a> As authority for the six votes of the eighteen equestrian centuries Lange cites -Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 22. 39: “Equitum centuriae cum sex suffrages”; <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82; -“Prima classis vocatur, renuntiatur; deinde, ita ut adsolet, suffragia.” So far as -these two passages are concerned, Lange could be right; but his view is contradicted -by Festus 334. 29 (“Sex suffragia appellantur in equitum centuriis, quae sunt -adiecta—MS. adfectae—ei numero centuriarum, quas Priscus Tarquinius rex -constituit”), which distinguishes the sex suffragia from the remaining centuries -of cavalry, and by Livy xliii. 16. 14, which gives each century a vote.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1332" href="#FNanchor_1332" class="label">[1332]</a> All the tribes voted; Livy vi. 21. 5 (a historical anticipation but useful for -showing later custom); viii. 37. 12; xxix. 37. 13 f.; ep. xlix; Val. Max. ix. 10. 1. -All the centuries voted; Livy xxiv. 9. 3; xxvi. 18. 9; 22. 13; xxvii. 21. 4; xxviii. -38. 6; xxix. 22. 5; xxxi. 6. 3; Cic. <i>Sull.</i> 32. 91; Pis. 1. 2; <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 1. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1333" href="#FNanchor_1333" class="label">[1333]</a> In <i>Zeitschr. d. Savignyst.</i> xii (1892). 230 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1334" href="#FNanchor_1334" class="label">[1334]</a> Lucan v. 392 ff.:</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent14">“Fingit solemnia campi</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Et non admissae diribet suffragia plebis</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Decantatque tribus et vana versat in urna.”</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>These verses picture a sham election held by Caesar in 49; he pretends to hold -comitia, counts the votes of the plebs, who are not really permitted to be present, -calls off the tribes, and draws lots for them from the empty urn.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1335" href="#FNanchor_1335" class="label">[1335]</a> <i>Orat.</i> 46. 156: “Centuriam, ut Censoriae Tabulae loquuntur, fabrum audeo -dicere, non fabrorum.” Cicero seems to refer to recent Tabulae Censoriae; though -he might quote ancient poets, he was not the man to ransack old documents even -to learn the ancient usage of words.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1336" href="#FNanchor_1336" class="label">[1336]</a> Plut. <i>Num.</i> 17; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiv. 1. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1337" href="#FNanchor_1337" class="label">[1337]</a> Ascon. 75: “Postea collegia S. C. et pluribus legibus sunt sublata praeter -pauca atque certa, quae utilitas civitatis desiderasset, qualia sunt (MS. quasi, ut) -fabrorum fictorumque.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1338" href="#FNanchor_1338" class="label">[1338]</a> P. 207, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1339" href="#FNanchor_1339" class="label">[1339]</a> See citations in Olcott, <i>Thes. ling. lat. ep.</i> i. 51.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1340" href="#FNanchor_1340" class="label">[1340]</a> P. 208 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1341" href="#FNanchor_1341" class="label">[1341]</a> That these supernumerary centuries were abolished at the time of the reform -is argued by Huschke, <i>Verf. des. Serv.</i> 622 f.; Plüss, <i>Centurienverf.</i> 28, 34; Genz, -<i>Centuriatcom. nach der Ref.</i> 12; Klebs, in <i>Zeitschr. d. Savignyst.</i> xii. 218. That -they continued in the new system is the belief of Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. -281 ff.; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 512; Le Tellier, <i>Organ. cent.</i> 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1342" href="#FNanchor_1342" class="label">[1342]</a> P. 220 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1343" href="#FNanchor_1343" class="label">[1343]</a> The supposed Sullan reaction to the earlier form of the centuriate comitia is -not well founded; p. 406.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1344" href="#FNanchor_1344" class="label">[1344]</a> P. 212.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1345" href="#FNanchor_1345" class="label">[1345]</a> P. 217. This is a necessary inference from the term used to describe a prerogative -centuria, e.g., Aniensis iuniorum. Had the drawing been from a group of classes, -the number of the class would have been added, e.g., Aniensis iuniorum secundae -classis.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1346" href="#FNanchor_1346" class="label">[1346]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1347" href="#FNanchor_1347" class="label">[1347]</a> Livy xliii. 16. 14: “Cum ex duodecim centuriis equitum octo censorem condemnassent -multaeque aliae primae classis” (171 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>). This passage proves that the -announcement distinguished the votes of the twelve equestrian centuries both from -the sex suffragia and from those of the class. Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 33. 82: “Sortitio praerogativae; -quiescit. Renuntiatur; tacet. Prima classis vocatur, renuntiatur; deinde, -ita ut adsolet, suffragia; tum secunda classis vocatur.” Here Cicero informs us that -the (sex) suffragia were announced after the report of the first class had been given. -The circumstance that he does not mention the separate calling of the suffragia indicates -that their separation from the first class was limited to the announcement. -There is no reason why the Romans should have added to the length of the centuriate -sessions by assigning a part of the day to the exclusive use of these six centuries. -Livy, i. 43. 8 f., has their inferiority in mind. It is unnecessary to amend the Ciceronian -passage. The attempt of Holzapfel, in <i>Beiträge zur alten Gesch.</i> i (1902). -254 f., is unsuccessful. Klebs, in <i>Zeitschr. d. Savignyst.</i> xii (1892). 237 ff., fruitlessly -opposes the division of the equites into these two groups.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1348" href="#FNanchor_1348" class="label">[1348]</a> P. 74 f., 95 f., 209 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1349" href="#FNanchor_1349" class="label">[1349]</a> P. 211, 467, 469.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1350" href="#FNanchor_1350" class="label">[1350]</a> P. 201, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1351" href="#FNanchor_1351" class="label">[1351]</a> The idea that Servius Tullius gave this assembly the right to elect kings (Dion. -Hal. v. 12. 3; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 458; ii. 531) is proved wrong by the circumstance -that the organization attributed to him was purely military, from which the -comitia centuriata slowly developed; p. 203 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1352" href="#FNanchor_1352" class="label">[1352]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 531. On the number of praetors, see Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> ii. 202. The election of a centurion to the function of dedicating a temple -(Livy ii. 27. 6) in the period before the first secession Lange (ibid. i. 917; ii. 532) -with good reason considers a myth. It is doubtful, however, whether he is right in -viewing as historical the so-called lex Valeria de candidatis, assigned to the first year -of the republic (Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 11; Lange, ibid. ii. 532), which ordered the presiding -magistrate to accept as candidates all qualified patricians who offered themselves for -the consulship—a principle said to have been afterward applied to other patrician -offices.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1353" href="#FNanchor_1353" class="label">[1353]</a> P. 331.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1354" href="#FNanchor_1354" class="label">[1354]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 14. 55; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 409; ii. 115, 532.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1355" href="#FNanchor_1355" class="label">[1355]</a> On the centuriate elective function in general, see Lange, ibid. ii. 531-3. -Willems, <i>Sén. Röm.</i> ii. 69 ff., contends unconvincingly that the Maenian statute -should be assigned to 338.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1356" href="#FNanchor_1356" class="label">[1356]</a> P. 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1357" href="#FNanchor_1357" class="label">[1357]</a> P. 181 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1358" href="#FNanchor_1358" class="label">[1358]</a> P. 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1359" href="#FNanchor_1359" class="label">[1359]</a> P. 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1360" href="#FNanchor_1360" class="label">[1360]</a> P. 202 f.; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 599 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1361" href="#FNanchor_1361" class="label">[1361]</a> Dion. Hal. viii. 15. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1362" href="#FNanchor_1362" class="label">[1362]</a> VIII. 91. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1363" href="#FNanchor_1363" class="label">[1363]</a> IX. 69. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1364" href="#FNanchor_1364" class="label">[1364]</a> Livy iv. 30. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1365" href="#FNanchor_1365" class="label">[1365]</a> Livy iv. 58. 8, 14; 60. 9 (406); vi. 21. 3 (383) 22. 4 (382); vii. 6. 7 (362); -12. 6 (358); 19. 10 (353); 32. 1 (343).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1366" href="#FNanchor_1366" class="label">[1366]</a> Livy vii. 20. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1367" href="#FNanchor_1367" class="label">[1367]</a> Livy viii. 22. 8 (327); 25. 2 with Dion. Hal. xv. 14 (326); Livy viii. 29. 6 -(325); 43. 2 (306); 45. 8 (304); x. 12. 3 (298); 45. 6 f. (293).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1368" href="#FNanchor_1368" class="label">[1368]</a> Polyb. i. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1369" href="#FNanchor_1369" class="label">[1369]</a> Dio Cass. Frag. 49. 5; Zon. viii. 19. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1370" href="#FNanchor_1370" class="label">[1370]</a> Livy xxi. 17. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1371" href="#FNanchor_1371" class="label">[1371]</a> Livy xxxi. 5-8; especially 6. 1, 3; 7. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1372" href="#FNanchor_1372" class="label">[1372]</a> Livy xxxvi. 1. 4 f.; 2. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1373" href="#FNanchor_1373" class="label">[1373]</a> Livy xlii. 30. 10 f.; 36. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1374" href="#FNanchor_1374" class="label">[1374]</a> Oros. v. 15. 1: “Consensu populi.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1375" href="#FNanchor_1375" class="label">[1375]</a> Livy xxxi. 6. 3; 7. 1; xlii. 30. 10; cf. 36. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1376" href="#FNanchor_1376" class="label">[1376]</a> Livy xlv. 21; Polyb. xxx. 4. 4 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1377" href="#FNanchor_1377" class="label">[1377]</a> Livy xxxviii. 42. 11; 45. 4 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1378" href="#FNanchor_1378" class="label">[1378]</a> Livy xxxviii. 50. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1379" href="#FNanchor_1379" class="label">[1379]</a> Livy xli. 6; 7. 8; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 320, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1380" href="#FNanchor_1380" class="label">[1380]</a> Appian, <i>Iber.</i> 51, 55. The condemnation of M. Aemilius Lepidus, proconsul in -136, to a fine by a judgment of the people seems to have been more for the failure of -his war upon the same state than for beginning it without authorization; Appian, -<i>Iber.</i> 80-82; Livy, ep. lvi; Oros. v. 5. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1381" href="#FNanchor_1381" class="label">[1381]</a> Livy iv. 58. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1382" href="#FNanchor_1382" class="label">[1382]</a> This is the Macedonian war beginning in 200; p. 231; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -602.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1383" href="#FNanchor_1383" class="label">[1383]</a> P. 176; Gell. xvi. 4. 1; Livy xxxvi. 2. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1384" href="#FNanchor_1384" class="label">[1384]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 41. 1 ff.; Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 21. 48 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1385" href="#FNanchor_1385" class="label">[1385]</a> E.g., the act which recalled Camillus from exile; Livy v. 46. 10; xxii. 14. 11; -Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 32. 86.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1386" href="#FNanchor_1386" class="label">[1386]</a> P. 181 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1387" href="#FNanchor_1387" class="label">[1387]</a> P. 201, 240.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1388" href="#FNanchor_1388" class="label">[1388]</a> Livy iii. 55. 4; Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 54.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1389" href="#FNanchor_1389" class="label">[1389]</a> Livy x. 9. 5; cf. p. 242 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1390" href="#FNanchor_1390" class="label">[1390]</a> P. 250 f. 349.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1391" href="#FNanchor_1391" class="label">[1391]</a> P. 270 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1392" href="#FNanchor_1392" class="label">[1392]</a> P. 272.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1393" href="#FNanchor_1393" class="label">[1393]</a> P. 269.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1394" href="#FNanchor_1394" class="label">[1394]</a> Fest. 237. 17; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 622; ii. 603. The contents are unknown.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1395" href="#FNanchor_1395" class="label">[1395]</a> Livy iii. 34. 6. Doubt has been thrown on the early date of the Twelve Tables -by Pais, <i>Storia di Roma</i>, I. i. 558-606, and on their official character as well by -Lambert, <i>La question de l’authenticité des XII Tables et les annales maximi</i>; <i>L’histoire -traditionelle des XII Tables et les critères d’inauthenticité des traditions en usage -dans l’école de Mommsen</i> in <i>Mélanges Ch. Appleton</i>, 503-626; <i>La fonction du droit -civil comparé</i>, 390-718; <i>Le problème de l’origine des XII Tables</i>, in <i>Revue générale -de droit</i>, 1902. 385 ff., 481 ff. Their views are controverted by Greenidge, in <i>Eng. -Hist. Rev.</i> xx (1905). 1-21. For other literature on the subject, see <i>Jahresb. ü. -Altwiss.</i> cxxxiv (1907). 17 ff.</p> - -<p>According to Diod. xii. 26. 1, the last two tables were drawn up by Valerius and -Horatius, consuls in 449.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1396" href="#FNanchor_1396" class="label">[1396]</a> Livy ii. 18. 5; Dion. Hal. v. 70. 5; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 585; ii. 603. Dion. -Hal. vi. 90. 2, assumes the enactment of a statute for the creation of the plebeian -tribunate, 494.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1397" href="#FNanchor_1397" class="label">[1397]</a> Livy iii. 33. 4; Dion. Hal. x. 55. 3 (cf. p. 273).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1398" href="#FNanchor_1398" class="label">[1398]</a> Livy vii. 17. 12: “In Duodecim Tabulis legem esse, ut, quodcumque postremum -populus iussisset, id ius ratumque esset; iussum populi et suffragia esse.” After -the decemviral legislation an attempt was made to extend the principle to elections, -as in the case here mentioned by Livy.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1399" href="#FNanchor_1399" class="label">[1399]</a> P. 274 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1400" href="#FNanchor_1400" class="label">[1400]</a> P. 287.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1401" href="#FNanchor_1401" class="label">[1401]</a> Livy vii. 5. 9; Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 63; Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 54. 148; <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 6; Lange, <i>Röm. -Alt.</i> ii. 25, 604. It is only an inference that this important constitutional change was -brought about by the centuries rather than by the tribes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1402" href="#FNanchor_1402" class="label">[1402]</a> P. 299 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1403" href="#FNanchor_1403" class="label">[1403]</a> P. 233, 241 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1404" href="#FNanchor_1404" class="label">[1404]</a> P. 313.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1405" href="#FNanchor_1405" class="label">[1405]</a> Livy iv. 6. 8. A law is not mentioned but must be inferred; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -i. 650; ii. 603.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1406" href="#FNanchor_1406" class="label">[1406]</a> Livy ix. 34. 7: “Illi antiquae (legi), qua primum censores creati sunt”; cf. -Lange, ibid. i. 664. In 433 a law, doubtless centuriate, of the dictator Mam. Aemilius -cut down the term of the censors to eighteen months; Livy iv. 24. 5 f.; ix. 33. -6; ch. 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1407" href="#FNanchor_1407" class="label">[1407]</a> Livy iv. 43; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22; cf. Lange, ibid. i. 666.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1408" href="#FNanchor_1408" class="label">[1408]</a> Livy vi. 42. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1409" href="#FNanchor_1409" class="label">[1409]</a> Ibid. § 13. The laws last named, relating to the quaestorship, praetorship, and -aedileship, are not mentioned by the ancient authorities but are necessarily assumed; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 476, 479.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1410" href="#FNanchor_1410" class="label">[1410]</a> Livy vii. 41. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1411" href="#FNanchor_1411" class="label">[1411]</a> Appian, <i>Samn.</i> i. 3; cf. p. 298.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1412" href="#FNanchor_1412" class="label">[1412]</a> P. 238.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1413" href="#FNanchor_1413" class="label">[1413]</a> Livy viii. 12. 15; cf. i. 17. 9. The auctoritas applied to comitia curiata as well -as centuriata; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 14. 38; Livy vi. 41. 10. On the comitia tributa, see p. 314.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1414" href="#FNanchor_1414" class="label">[1414]</a> The view maintained by Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> ii. 33 ff., that the patres auctores -were all the senators, not merely the patrician members, is disproved by Cic. <i>Dom.</i> -14. 38 (Should the patriciate become extinct, there would no longer be “auctores -centuriatorum et curiatorum comitiorum”). In spite of some looseness of statement -in the passage cited, there seems to be no good ground for considering either the -whole oration spurious or the particular reference to the auctoritas inaccurate. The -question, too complex for detailed treatment in this volume, is of practical importance -for the period only from about 400 to 339.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1415" href="#FNanchor_1415" class="label">[1415]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 605 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1416" href="#FNanchor_1416" class="label">[1416]</a> P. 412.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1417" href="#FNanchor_1417" class="label">[1417]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 553; ii. 606.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1418" href="#FNanchor_1418" class="label">[1418]</a> <i>Leg. Agr.</i> iii. 2. 5; cf. <i>Leg.</i> i. 15. 42; <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 43. 125; Schol. Gron. 435; -Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 98. 458 ff.; Plut. <i>Sull.</i> 33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1419" href="#FNanchor_1419" class="label">[1419]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 30. 79; <i>Caecin.</i> 33. 95; 35. 102.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1420" href="#FNanchor_1420" class="label">[1420]</a> P. 416, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1421" href="#FNanchor_1421" class="label">[1421]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 19 obscurely suggests that these two laws were centuriate, though -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 606, doubts it; cf. p. 455.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1422" href="#FNanchor_1422" class="label">[1422]</a> Cf. Appian, <i>B. C.</i> iii. 30. 117.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1423" href="#FNanchor_1423" class="label">[1423]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> x. 8. 17; xiii. 15. 31; cf. v. 19. 53.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1424" href="#FNanchor_1424" class="label">[1424]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 26: “Centuriata lex censoribus ferebatur.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1425" href="#FNanchor_1425" class="label">[1425]</a> P. 185. Before the institution of the censorship the original motive of the sanctioning -act—to leave the curiae a share in the elective function—must have given -way to the purpose stated by Cicero and represented here in the text.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1426" href="#FNanchor_1426" class="label">[1426]</a> Livy iv. 24. 3 ff.; cf. ix. 33 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1427" href="#FNanchor_1427" class="label">[1427]</a> Livy viii. 12. 16; cf. p. 300. Livy’s words referring to the censorship are corrupt, -but the passage seems to have the meaning here given; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -ii. 340, n. 2. It was not till 131 that advantage was taken of the provision; Livy, -ep. lix. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatswerf.</i> i. 257, refuses to believe that both censors might -now be plebeian.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1428" href="#FNanchor_1428" class="label">[1428]</a> Livy vi. 35. 5. The provision that “at least” one should be plebeian is doubtless -an anticipation of the Genucian law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1429" href="#FNanchor_1429" class="label">[1429]</a> Livy vii. 42. 2; cf. p. 299.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1430" href="#FNanchor_1430" class="label">[1430]</a> The alleged centuriate resolution granting a place for a dwelling to P. Valerius -Publicola, passed under his own presidency (Ascon. 13), is still earlier and less -trustworthy.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1431" href="#FNanchor_1431" class="label">[1431]</a> Livy ii. 41; Dion Hal. viii. 71, 73 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1432" href="#FNanchor_1432" class="label">[1432]</a> Livy iii. 31. 1. In 32. 7 he calls it the Icilian law with the idea that it was tribunician; -but Dion. Hal. x. 32. 4, referring to the document kept in the temple of -Diana, states that it was passed by the centuriate assembly; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. -Staatsverf.</i> i. 169, n. 1. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 619; ii. 607 f., wrongly asserts that it -was a plebiscite; cf. p. 272 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1433" href="#FNanchor_1433" class="label">[1433]</a> P. 234 f., 298.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1434" href="#FNanchor_1434" class="label">[1434]</a> Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 13. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1435" href="#FNanchor_1435" class="label">[1435]</a> Livy vii. 3. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1436" href="#FNanchor_1436" class="label">[1436]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 608 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1437" href="#FNanchor_1437" class="label">[1437]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 541, and note on earlier literature; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> i. 148 f., 160 f.; iii. 353.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1438" href="#FNanchor_1438" class="label">[1438]</a> Livy i. 26. 5-14; viii. 33. 8. For the theory that the popular assembly was -sometimes a court of the first instance, see p. 260.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1439" href="#FNanchor_1439" class="label">[1439]</a> Lange’s idea (ibid. i. 457 f.; ii. 542) that Servius Tullius transferred appellate -jurisdiction to the comitia centuriata rests upon his view that Servius was the author -of the political centuriate organization.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1440" href="#FNanchor_1440" class="label">[1440]</a> Cf. Fest. 297. 11-24; Cic. <i>Mil.</i> 3. 7; <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 54; Livy i. 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1441" href="#FNanchor_1441" class="label">[1441]</a> Dion. Hal. iv. 25. 2; Livy i. 26. 5; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 11; <i>Röm. -Strafr.</i> 474.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1442" href="#FNanchor_1442" class="label">[1442]</a> For the earlier literature on the ius provocationis, see Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -542, n.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1443" href="#FNanchor_1443" class="label">[1443]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> i. 40. 62; ii. 31. 53: “Legem ad populum tulit eam, quae centuriatis -comitiis prima lata est, ne quis magistratus civem Romanum adversus provocationem -necaret neve verberaret”; 36. 61; Livy ii. 8. 2; 30. 5 f.; iii. 33. 9 f.; Val. Max. iv. -1. 1; Plut. <i>Popl.</i> 11; Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 16; Dion. Hal. v. 19. 4; cf. Ihne, -in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxi (1866). 168.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1444" href="#FNanchor_1444" class="label">[1444]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 54; Livy iii. 55. 4; x. 9. 3-6; cf. Pais, <i>Storia di Roma</i>, I. i. 489.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1445" href="#FNanchor_1445" class="label">[1445]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 54: “Ab omni iudicio poenaque provocari indicant XII Tabulae -compluribus legibus; et quod proditum memoriae est, X viros, qui leges scripserint, -sine provocatione creatos, satis ostenderit reliquos sine provocatione magistratus non -fuisse.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1446" href="#FNanchor_1446" class="label">[1446]</a> Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 311. Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 68: “Quiritare dicitur is qui quiritium -fidem clamans implorat”; cf. Cic. <i>Fam.</i> 32. 3; Livy ii. 55. 5 f.; iv. 14 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1447" href="#FNanchor_1447" class="label">[1447]</a> Ihne, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxi (1886). 165 ff. Two cases of appeal, which indeed -may be mythical, are mentioned by the annalists for the time before the decemviral -legislation—that of Sp. Cassius, which is only one of several views as to his condemnation -and death (Livy ii. 41; iv. 15. 4; Dion. Hal. viii. 77 f.; ix. 1. 1; 3. 2; 51. -2; x. 38. 3; Diod. xi. 37. 7; Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 35. 60; Flor. i. 26. 7), and that of the -plebeian M. Volscius Fictor for false testimony; Livy iii. 25. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1448" href="#FNanchor_1448" class="label">[1448]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 54, quoted p. 240, n. 6. The statement of Cicero is too general; -Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 312.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1449" href="#FNanchor_1449" class="label">[1449]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 4. 11: “De capite civis Romani nisi per maximum comitiatum ollosque, -quos censores in partibus populi locassint, ne ferunto”; 19. 44; <i>Sest.</i> 30. 65; -34. 73: “De capite non modo ferri, sed ne iudicari quidem posse nisi comitiis centuriatis”; -cf. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 36. 61; Plaut. <i>Pseud.</i> 1232; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 578; -Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 409; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 317; p. 268.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1450" href="#FNanchor_1450" class="label">[1450]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 54; Livy iii. 55. 4; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 352, n. 2; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 638; ii. 551; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 318.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1451" href="#FNanchor_1451" class="label">[1451]</a> Livy iii. 55. 14; cf. 54. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1452" href="#FNanchor_1452" class="label">[1452]</a> Livy iv. 13. 11 f.; vi. 16. 3 (385); vii. 4. 2 (362); viii. 33-35 (325; see p. 242, -n. 5); Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 164 f. with notes; <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 476; Greenidge, -<i>Leg. Proced.</i> 318; cf. p. 242.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1453" href="#FNanchor_1453" class="label">[1453]</a> Livy x. 9. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1454" href="#FNanchor_1454" class="label">[1454]</a> Livy iii. 20. 7; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 66 f.; iii. 352.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1455" href="#FNanchor_1455" class="label">[1455]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 543; Mommsen, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1456" href="#FNanchor_1456" class="label">[1456]</a> Livy x. 9. 5: “Improbe factum.” This denunciation might involve penal consequences -according to Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 319 f. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 167, -632 f., supposes the expression to signify that the offending magistrate was to be -treated as a private person and punished for murder. Some are of the opinion that -it involved loss of citizenship, whereas others suppose its effect was simply moral; -cf. Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 429.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1457" href="#FNanchor_1457" class="label">[1457]</a> Livy ii. 18. 8; 30. 5; iii. 20. 8; viii. 33 (dictator permits appeal); Dion. Hal. -v. 75. 2 f.; vi. 58. 2; Zon. vii. 13. 13; Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 18; Lydus, -<i>Mag.</i> i. 37; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 163, n. 1; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 756 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1458" href="#FNanchor_1458" class="label">[1458]</a> Livy ii. 55. 5; iii. 45. 8; 55. 6, 14; 56. 5; 67. 9; viii. 33. 7: “Tribunos -plebis appello et provoco ad populum”; xxxvii. 51. 4; Dion. Hal. ix. 39. 1 f.; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 277.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1459" href="#FNanchor_1459" class="label">[1459]</a> Livy iii. 24. 7; 25. 2; 29. 6; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 840; ii. 544.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1460" href="#FNanchor_1460" class="label">[1460]</a> The appeal of Fabius from the jurisdiction of the dictator in 325 was granted -not under compulsion but in grace; Livy viii. 35. 5. On the freedom of the dictatorship -from this restriction in the period between 449 and 325, see p. 241, n. 5. -The court mentioned by Livy ix. 26. 6 ff. (314) seems to have been an extraordinary -quaestio under the presidency of a dictator; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 165, n. 6. -On the subjection of his authority to appeal, see Fest. 198. 32: “Optima lex ... -in magistro populi faciendo, qui vulgo dictator appellatur, quam plenissimum posset -ius eius esse significabat, ut fuit M’. Valerio M. f. Volusi nepotis, qui primus magister -populi creatus est. Postquam vero provocatio ab eo magistratu ad populum -data est, quae ante non erat, desitum est adici, ‘ut optima lege,’ utpote imminuto -iure priorum magistrorum.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1461" href="#FNanchor_1461" class="label">[1461]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 165; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 319.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1462" href="#FNanchor_1462" class="label">[1462]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 6; Livy ii. 29. 4: “Ab lictore nihil aliud quam prendere prohibito”; -ii. 55. 5; Dion. Hal. vi. 24. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1463" href="#FNanchor_1463" class="label">[1463]</a> Livy i. 26. 5: “Duumviros ... qui ... perduellionem iudicent secundum -legem facio”; § 7: “Hac lege duumviri creati”; vi. 20. 12: “Sunt qui per duumviros, -qui de perduellione anquirerent creatos auctores sint damnatum.” Creare -applies to appointments though less commonly than to elections; cf. Livy ii. 18. -4 f.; 30. 5; iv. 26. 6; Fest. 198. 4 (of the dictator); Livy iv. 46. 11; 57. 6 (of the -magister equitum). In vi. 20. 12, quoted above, Livy may possibly be thinking of -election, which seems to have become the rule before the disuse of the office; cf. -Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 304, 309.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1464" href="#FNanchor_1464" class="label">[1464]</a> Livy i. 26; Fest. 297. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1465" href="#FNanchor_1465" class="label">[1465]</a> <i>Dig.</i> xlviii. 4. 11: “Qui perduellionis reus est, hostili animo aduersus rem publicam -uel principem animatus”; cf. Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 303.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1466" href="#FNanchor_1466" class="label">[1466]</a> Livy vi. 20. 12; see n. 1 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1467" href="#FNanchor_1467" class="label">[1467]</a> Ibid. vi. 19. 6 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1468" href="#FNanchor_1468" class="label">[1468]</a> Cf. Ihne, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxi (1866). 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1469" href="#FNanchor_1469" class="label">[1469]</a> P. 258.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1470" href="#FNanchor_1470" class="label">[1470]</a> This comitial resolution may be anticipated in the account of the process against -Horatius given by Livy i. 26. 5: “Duumviros ... secundum legem facio”; cf. -§ 7: “Hac lege duumviri creati.” The king, whose judgments were absolute, could -not have thus been forced; hence more probably lex in these phrases is not a -comitial act but the formula of appointment; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 356 and n. 1. -The procedure in the trial of C. Rabirius was in this respect similar; a law compelling -the praetor to appoint duumviri is suggested by Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 4. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1471" href="#FNanchor_1471" class="label">[1471]</a> Dio Cassius, xxxvii. 27. 2, finds fault with the procedure against Rabirius on -the ground that the duumviri for judging him were appointed by the praetor, not -elected as they should have been “according to ancestral usage.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1472" href="#FNanchor_1472" class="label">[1472]</a> Livy i. 26. 5; Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 16; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 12. 27; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 544; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 617 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1473" href="#FNanchor_1473" class="label">[1473]</a> P. 104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1474" href="#FNanchor_1474" class="label">[1474]</a> Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 303-5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1475" href="#FNanchor_1475" class="label">[1475]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 35. 60; Livy ii. 41. 11; Dion. Hal. viii. 77. 1; cf. Greenidge, <i>Leg. -Proced.</i> 309.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1476" href="#FNanchor_1476" class="label">[1476]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 610; ii. 545.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1477" href="#FNanchor_1477" class="label">[1477]</a> Cf. the trial of Horatius for murder by the duumviri perduellioni iudicandae; -p. 243.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1478" href="#FNanchor_1478" class="label">[1478]</a> Livy ii. 41. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1479" href="#FNanchor_1479" class="label">[1479]</a> Livy iii. 24. 3; 25. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1480" href="#FNanchor_1480" class="label">[1480]</a> Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 23: “Quia ... de capite civis Romani iniussu -populi non erat lege permissum consulibus ius dicere, propterea quaestores constituebantur -a populo, qui capitalibus rebus praeessent: his appellabantur quaestores -parricidii, quorum etiam meminit lex Duodecim Tabularum”; cf. Fest. 258. 29; ep. -221.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1481" href="#FNanchor_1481" class="label">[1481]</a> Pliny <i>N. H.</i> xxxiv. 4. 13: “Camillo inter crimina obiecerit Sp. Carvilius quaestor, -quod aerata ostia haberet in domo.” According to Livy v. 23. 11; 32. 8 f., it was -misappropriation of the Veientan spoil. Diodorus, xiv. 117. 6, states that according -to one report the accusation was that he had driven white horses in his triumph. -The appeal was to the comitia centuriata; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 32. 86. This case indicates -either inconsistency in legal usage, quite possible in early time, or more probably the -union of inconsistent traditions. The facts that Pliny mentions a quaestor apparently -as prosecutor, not simply as witness (Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 582), and that Cicero -represents the trial as belonging to the centuries suffice to indicate a questorian -prosecution before that assembly. Should we venture to bring consistency to so -uncertain a story, we could suppose that in his absence, the tribunes, taking up the -case, lightened the penalty to a fine.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1482" href="#FNanchor_1482" class="label">[1482]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> 90-92 (mutilated excerpts from the record of this trial, preserved in -the <i>Commentaria Quaestorum</i> and containing part of the edict for summoning the -assembly and the accused).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1483" href="#FNanchor_1483" class="label">[1483]</a> That is, after the increase in the number of praetors; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 884; -ii. 551; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 543, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1484" href="#FNanchor_1484" class="label">[1484]</a> P. 243, 248.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1485" href="#FNanchor_1485" class="label">[1485]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 543 f.; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 389, 884, 910; ii. -555.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1486" href="#FNanchor_1486" class="label">[1486]</a> P. 241.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1487" href="#FNanchor_1487" class="label">[1487]</a> Cf. Livy xxvi. 3. 9; xliii. 16. 11; Gell. vi. 9. 9; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. -409.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1488" href="#FNanchor_1488" class="label">[1488]</a> Cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 196.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1489" href="#FNanchor_1489" class="label">[1489]</a> Livy iii. 59. 4; Dion. Hal. xi. 49. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1490" href="#FNanchor_1490" class="label">[1490]</a> Livy iii. 56-8; Dion. Hal. xi. 46, 49.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1491" href="#FNanchor_1491" class="label">[1491]</a> Livy iii. 58. 10; Dion. Hal. xi. 49; Zon. vii. 18. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1492" href="#FNanchor_1492" class="label">[1492]</a> Livy iii. 58. 10; Dion. Hal. xi. 46. 5; Gell. xx. 1. 53. False testimony in a -case of this kind, which was vindicia not murder, was not capital; hence it did not -ordinarily come before the tribunes; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 324, n. 6. The -political importance of the case, however, was a sufficient motive to their undertaking -it.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1493" href="#FNanchor_1493" class="label">[1493]</a> Livy iv. 16. 5 f.; 21. 3 f.; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 32. 86; <i>Rep.</i> i. 3. 6; Val. Max. v. 3. 2 g; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 668; ii. 553. Roman law regarded false testimony in capital -cases as murder; hence the prosecution of Minucius might legally have come -before the quaestors; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 324, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1494" href="#FNanchor_1494" class="label">[1494]</a> Livy vi. 1. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1495" href="#FNanchor_1495" class="label">[1495]</a> Livy viii. 28; Dion. Hal. xvi. 5 (9); Suid. s. Γάιος Λαιτώριος. Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> ii. 325, n. 1, denies that a case of the kind could come before the tribunes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1496" href="#FNanchor_1496" class="label">[1496]</a> Dion. Hal. xvi. 4 (8); Val. Max. vi. 1. 11; Suid. ibid. This prosecution could -be brought on the ground of misconduct of office; Mommsen, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1497" href="#FNanchor_1497" class="label">[1497]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> viii. 45. 180; Val. Max. viii. 1. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1498" href="#FNanchor_1498" class="label">[1498]</a> Livy ix. 33. 4 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1499" href="#FNanchor_1499" class="label">[1499]</a> Ibid. 34. 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1500" href="#FNanchor_1500" class="label">[1500]</a> Val. Max. viii. 1. abs. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1501" href="#FNanchor_1501" class="label">[1501]</a> Livy ix. 23. 2; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 323, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1502" href="#FNanchor_1502" class="label">[1502]</a> The same thing is true of the finable actions of this period; p. 290.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1503" href="#FNanchor_1503" class="label">[1503]</a> This view has no other warrant than the uncertainty of our sources for the fifth -and early fourth centuries <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> That the tribunes should make early gains in jurisdiction, -to be afterward partially lost, is thoroughly consistent with the law of plebeian -progress, which consisted, not in a steady forward movement, but in successive -advances and retreats.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1504" href="#FNanchor_1504" class="label">[1504]</a> Livy, ep. xix.; Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 33. 71; <i>N. D.</i> ii. 3. 7; Polyb. i. 52. 1-3; Schol. -Bob. 337; Val. Max. viii. 1. abs. 4; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 556; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> ii. 321, n. 1; iii. 357, n. 1; p. 317 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1505" href="#FNanchor_1505" class="label">[1505]</a> Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 33. 71; <i>N. D.</i> ii. 3. 7; Val. Max. i. 4. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1506" href="#FNanchor_1506" class="label">[1506]</a> P. 318.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1507" href="#FNanchor_1507" class="label">[1507]</a> Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 328 f., wrongly assumes that in this case the charge of -perduellio came before the tribes; the interdiction of the man by the tribes after -his departure was not a iudicium but a lex.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1508" href="#FNanchor_1508" class="label">[1508]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm Staatsr.</i> ii. 299.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1509" href="#FNanchor_1509" class="label">[1509]</a> P. 241.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1510" href="#FNanchor_1510" class="label">[1510]</a> P. 267, 446.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1511" href="#FNanchor_1511" class="label">[1511]</a> Livy xxv. 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1512" href="#FNanchor_1512" class="label">[1512]</a> Livy xxv. 20. 6 ff.; p. 318, n. 8 below. Livy gives us to understand that defeat -resulting from ignorance or temerity could not be made a ground of prosecution.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1513" href="#FNanchor_1513" class="label">[1513]</a> Livy xxvi. 2. 7 through ch. 3; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 320, n. 2, 321, n. 2; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 556; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 329 f. On the right to change the -form of action, see p. 287.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1514" href="#FNanchor_1514" class="label">[1514]</a> The two plebeian tribunes and the aedile who accompanied this commission -were sent to recall Scipio, should he be found responsible for the conduct of his -legate; Livy xxix. 20. 11. They do not seem to have been members of the commission.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1515" href="#FNanchor_1515" class="label">[1515]</a> Livy xxix. 8. 6 ff.; chs. 16-22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1516" href="#FNanchor_1516" class="label">[1516]</a> Livy xxix. 19. 5; 22. 7. The form of comitia is inferred from the circumstances.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1517" href="#FNanchor_1517" class="label">[1517]</a> Livy xxxiv. 44. 7 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1518" href="#FNanchor_1518" class="label">[1518]</a> Livy xxix. 22. 8 f. (cf. xxxi. 12. 2); Diod. xxvii. 4; cf. Vai. Max. i. 2. 21; -Appian, <i>Hann.</i> 55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1519" href="#FNanchor_1519" class="label">[1519]</a> XXIX. 22. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1520" href="#FNanchor_1520" class="label">[1520]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 557. The date of the execution of C. Veturius in pursuance -of a vote of the people (Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 3) is unknown.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1521" href="#FNanchor_1521" class="label">[1521]</a> Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 51. 21 f.: “Quamobrem in sententiam non addidisti, ut prius verberibus -in eos animadvorteretur? An quia lex Porcia vetat? At aliae leges item -condemnatis civibus non animam eripi sed exilium permitti iubent”; 51. 40: -“Postquam res publica adolevit et multitudine civium factiones valuere, circumvenire -innocentes, alia huiusce modi fieri coepere, tum lex Porcia aliaeque paratae sunt, -quibus legibus exilium damnatis permissum est”; Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 3. 8: “De -civibus Romanis contra legem Porciam verberatis aut necatis”; Pseud. Sall. <i>in Cic.</i> -i. 5: charges against Cicero that in putting Roman citizens to death he has -abolished the lex Porcia. Livy x. 9. 4: “Porcia tamen lex ... gravi poena, si -quis verberasset necassetve civem Romanum, sanxit”; cf. Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 4. 12 f.; -<i>Verr.</i> v. 63. 163; Gell. x. 3. 13. Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 320, doubts whether it -allowed exile to one condemned by a vote of the people. Against him is Polyb. -vi. 14. 7, quoted p. 217, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1522" href="#FNanchor_1522" class="label">[1522]</a> Livy xxxii. 7. 8; Fest. 234. 10; The opinion here given is that of Lange, <i>Röm. -Alt.</i> ii. 205, 558. A different view is represented by Orelli-Baiter, Cic. <i>Op.</i> viii. 3. -252 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1523" href="#FNanchor_1523" class="label">[1523]</a> The decisive evidence is a coin, described by Mommsen, <i>Röm. Münzwesen</i>, 552, -representing an armed man evidently in the act of condemning a civilian, whose -appeal is indicated by the word PROVOCO beneath. The inscription on the obverse -P. LAECA reveals the author of the law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1524" href="#FNanchor_1524" class="label">[1524]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 249; ii. 559.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1525" href="#FNanchor_1525" class="label">[1525]</a> VI. 37 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1526" href="#FNanchor_1526" class="label">[1526]</a> Livy, ep. lvii; cf. Cic. <i>Rep.</i> i. 40. 63: “Noster populus in bello sic paret ut -regi.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1527" href="#FNanchor_1527" class="label">[1527]</a> <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 6: “Militiae ab eo qui imperabit provocatio nec esto,” which however, -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 117, n. 2 (cf. <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 31, n. 3) sets down as -merely a pious wish of the author.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1528" href="#FNanchor_1528" class="label">[1528]</a> Livy, ep. lv: (In the consulship of P. Cornelius Nasica and D. Junius Brutus) -“C. Matienus accusatus est apud tribunos plebis, quod exercitum in Hispania deseruisset, -damnatusque sub furca diu virgis caesus est, et sestertio nummo veniit.” -The new epitome, l. 207-9, speaks of desertores who on this occasion were thus -flogged and sold. It is not known that the tribunes tried cases of desertion or that -they inflicted the kind of punishment here described. C. Titius, sent for trial to the -tribunes on the charge of having stirred up a mutiny (Dio. Cass. Frag. 100; year -89), may have been a civilian.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1529" href="#FNanchor_1529" class="label">[1529]</a> Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1530" href="#FNanchor_1530" class="label">[1530]</a> <i>Iug.</i> 69.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1531" href="#FNanchor_1531" class="label">[1531]</a> Modestinus, in <i>Dig.</i> xlix. 16. 3. 15; Menander, ibid. 16. 6. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1532" href="#FNanchor_1532" class="label">[1532]</a> An example of a military consilium is given by Livy xxix. 20 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1533" href="#FNanchor_1533" class="label">[1533]</a> <i>Rep.</i> ii. 31. 54: “Neque vero leges Porciae, quae tres sunt trium Porciorum, ut -scitis, quicquam praeter sanctionem attulerunt novi.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1534" href="#FNanchor_1534" class="label">[1534]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> v. 62. 162.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1535" href="#FNanchor_1535" class="label">[1535]</a> Livy xliii. 16. 8 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1536" href="#FNanchor_1536" class="label">[1536]</a> Polyb. vi. 14. 6; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 560.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1537" href="#FNanchor_1537" class="label">[1537]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 25. 97; 27. 106; <i>Leg.</i> iii. 16. 37; <i>Sest.</i> 48. 103; Schol. Bob. 303; -Cic. Frag. A. vii. 50; Ascon. 78; Pseud. Ascon. 141 f.; Orelli-Baiter, Cic. <i>Op.</i> viii. -3. 278 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1538" href="#FNanchor_1538" class="label">[1538]</a> Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 6. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1539" href="#FNanchor_1539" class="label">[1539]</a> IV. 50. 6 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1540" href="#FNanchor_1540" class="label">[1540]</a> Livy viii. 18; Val. Max. ii. 5. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1541" href="#FNanchor_1541" class="label">[1541]</a> IX. 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1542" href="#FNanchor_1542" class="label">[1542]</a> (1) In 186 for the trial of the Bacchanalians (Livy xxxix. 8-19); (2) in -180 two courts for the detection and trial of poisoners in Rome and Italy -(Livy xl. 37). The two courts established in 186 for the trial of poisoners and -for putting down the last of the Bacchanalians are mentioned by Livy xxxix. 41 -without a hint as to the manner of their appointment; cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, -i. 135, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1543" href="#FNanchor_1543" class="label">[1543]</a> Polyb. vi. 16. 2; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 13. 33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1544" href="#FNanchor_1544" class="label">[1544]</a> Dion. Hal. xx. 7. Though no mention is here made of a quaestio extraordinaria, -we may assume one for every such instance. In actual iudicia populi the -senate had no part.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1545" href="#FNanchor_1545" class="label">[1545]</a> Livy xxvi. 33 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1546" href="#FNanchor_1546" class="label">[1546]</a> The following pre-Gracchan quaestiones extraordinariae, according to our -authorities, owed their existence to a popular vote. (1) The lex de pecunia regis -Antiochi of the two Q. Petilii, tribunes in 185, for the establishment of a special -court to try L. Scipio Asiagenus and some others for the misappropriation of public -money; Livy xxxviii. 54, p. 399 below.—(2) The plebiscite of M. Marcius Sermo -and Q. Marcius Scylla, tribunes in 172, directed the senate to establish a special -court for the trial of M. Popillius on the charge of having unjustly subjugated and -enslaved the Ligurians; Livy xlii. 21. 5.—(3) By the lex Caecilia, 154, a special -quaestio repetundarum was established for the trial of L. Lentulus, retired consul of -156; Val. Max. vi. 9. 10.—(4) Another special court for the trial of L. Hostilius -Tubulus on the charge of having accepted bribes while president of a murder court -(quaestio inter sicarios) was ordered by a plebiscite of P. Mucius Scaevola in 141, -whereupon the accused went into exile; Cic. <i>Fin.</i> ii. 16. 54; iv. 28. 77; v. 22. 62; -<i>N. D.</i> i. 23. 63; iii. 30. 74; <i>Att.</i> xii. 5 b; Ascon. 22; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 197.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1547" href="#FNanchor_1547" class="label">[1547]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 728. The formula varied with the occasion, and other -magistrates were often associated with the consuls in this supreme power.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1548" href="#FNanchor_1548" class="label">[1548]</a> Cic. <i>Cat.</i> i. 11. 28: “Numquam in hac urbe, qui a re publica defecerunt, -civium iura tenuerunt”; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 359; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -560.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1549" href="#FNanchor_1549" class="label">[1549]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 16; p. 368 below. The idea of Tiberius is to be inferred -from the law which his brother afterward passed.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1550" href="#FNanchor_1550" class="label">[1550]</a> Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 4; Cic. <i>Lael.</i> 11. 37; <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 148.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1551" href="#FNanchor_1551" class="label">[1551]</a> Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 3; cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 172.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1552" href="#FNanchor_1552" class="label">[1552]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 4. 12: “C. Gracchus legem tulit, ne de capite civium Romanorum -iniussu vestro iudicaretur”; <i>Cat.</i> iv. 5. 10; <i>Verr.</i> v. 63. 163; <i>Sest.</i> 28. 61; -Schol. Gronov. 412: “Lex Sempronia iniussu populi non licebat quaeri de capite -civis Romani”; Schol. Ambros. 370; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 4; p. 371 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1553" href="#FNanchor_1553" class="label">[1553]</a> For examples of special courts afterward instituted, see p. 390.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1554" href="#FNanchor_1554" class="label">[1554]</a> Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 51. 40; Cic. <i>Cat.</i> i. 11. 28; iv. 5. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1555" href="#FNanchor_1555" class="label">[1555]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 31. 82 f.; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 4; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 561. It is not -probable, as Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 330; <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 201, has assumed, that -the Sempronian law transferred jurisdiction in such cases from the centuries to the -tribes. The comitia tributa had long exercised the right to condemn those who had -fled into exile to avoid trial; p. 249, 267, 257, n. 5 (3).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1556" href="#FNanchor_1556" class="label">[1556]</a> Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 28. 61; cf. Dio Cass. xxxviii. 14. 5; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 200 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1557" href="#FNanchor_1557" class="label">[1557]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 31. 82; <i>Leg.</i> iii. 11. 26; cf. <i>Cluent.</i> 35. 95; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 465.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1558" href="#FNanchor_1558" class="label">[1558]</a> Vell. ii. 7. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1559" href="#FNanchor_1559" class="label">[1559]</a> Livy, ep. lxi: “Quod indemnatos cives in carcerem coniecisset” (Mommsen -reads “in carcere necasset” or “in carcerem coniectos necasset”; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. -111, n. 1); Cic. <i>Part. Or.</i> 30. 104, 106; <i>Orat.</i> ii. 25. 106; 30. 132; Lange, <i>Röm. -Alt.</i> ii. 562; iii. 50; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 278-80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1560" href="#FNanchor_1560" class="label">[1560]</a> <i>History of Rome</i>, v. 5-7. His view is an inference from the circumstances.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1561" href="#FNanchor_1561" class="label">[1561]</a> The prosecutor was L. Crassus; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 43. 159; cf. <i>Orat.</i> i. 10. 40; ii. 40. -170; <i>Verr.</i> II. iii. 1. 3; Val. Max. vi. 5. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1562" href="#FNanchor_1562" class="label">[1562]</a> Valerius Maximus, iii. 7. 6, assumes that the accused went into exile; Cicero, -<i>Fam.</i> ix. 21. 3, informs us of a rumor that he committed suicide. Both reports may -be true; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 282; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 51.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1563" href="#FNanchor_1563" class="label">[1563]</a> P. 358.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1564" href="#FNanchor_1564" class="label">[1564]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 223 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1565" href="#FNanchor_1565" class="label">[1565]</a> (1) After the case against Carbo may be mentioned the accusation of perduellio -against C. Popillius Laenas, 107, on the ground of a disgraceful surrender to the -Tigurini. It was on this occasion that the ballot was first used in a trial for perduellio. -The accused seems to have been condemned to exile; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 16. 36; -<i>Herenn.</i> i. 15. 25; iv. 24. 34; Oros. v. 15. 24. This case, which resembles those -of far earlier time, has nothing to do with violation of the right of appeal; (Cic.) -<i>Herenn.</i> ibid.—(2) Similar in this respect was the prosecution of Q. Fabius Maximus -Servilianus for the murder of his son. The accused went into exile before judgment -was pronounced; Oros. v. 16. 8; Val. Max. vi. 1. 5.—(3) More famous is the -prosecution of Q. Caecilius Metellus Numidicus, 100, by L. Appuleius Saturninus -because the former refused to swear to maintain the agrarian law of the latter. -Technically the charge was that Metellus refused to do his duty as a senator. The -accused withdrew into exile before the trial, whereupon, by vote of the assembly, he -was interdicted from fire and water; Livy, ep. lxix.; Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 31. 137-40; -Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 31. 82; <i>Sest.</i> 16. 37; 47. 101.—(4) Decianus, tribune of the plebs, 97, in -accusing P. Furius, tribune of the preceding year, let fall some complaint regarding -the murder of Saturninus, and on that ground was accused, probably by a tribune of -the plebs, and condemned to exile; Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 9. 24; Schol. Bob. 230.—(5) -The prosecution of M. Aemilius Scaurus for maiestas by Q. Varius, tribune, -Dec. 91, was withdrawn in the second anquisitio; Ascon. 19, 21 f.; (Aurel. Vict.) -<i>Vir. Ill.</i> 72. 11; Quintil. v. 12. 10; Cic. <i>Scaur.</i> 1, 3; <i>Sest.</i> 47. 101.—(6) L. Cornelius -Merula and Q. Lutatius Catulus, 87, avoided trial, probably for perduellio, by -suicide; Diod. xxxviii. 4; Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 74. 341 f.—(7) On the first day of the -following year, 86, P. Popillius Laenas, tribune of the plebs, hurled from the Tarpeian -Rock Sextus Lucilius (or Licinius?), tribune of the preceding year, and set a -day of trial for the colleagues of the latter. The accused fled to Sulla and in their -absence were interdicted from fire and water. They were charged with perduellio; -their offence was the veto of the popular measures of Cornelius Cinna. This is the -only certain case of calling retired tribunes to account for their official conduct, and -may be regarded as a symptom of the revolution then in progress; Vell. ii. 24; -Livy, ep. lxxx; Dio Cass. Frag. 102. 12; Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1566" href="#FNanchor_1566" class="label">[1566]</a> P. 255, n. 1 (4).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1567" href="#FNanchor_1567" class="label">[1567]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 13. 38; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 326.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1568" href="#FNanchor_1568" class="label">[1568]</a> Dio Cass. lvi. 40. 4; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 326; iii. 359 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1569" href="#FNanchor_1569" class="label">[1569]</a> P. 243.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1570" href="#FNanchor_1570" class="label">[1570]</a> P. 203, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1571" href="#FNanchor_1571" class="label">[1571]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i>; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 26 ff.; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 12; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -563 f.; iii. 240; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 150-5; Wirz, in <i>Jahrb. f. Philol.</i> -xxv. (1879). 177-201. In the opinion of Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 298, n. 3; -615, n. 2, following Niebuhr, a tribunician accusation involving a fine was then introduced, -and the oration of Cicero was delivered in this second trial. Drumann-Gröbe, -ibid.; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 357 f.; Schneider, <i>Process des Rabirius</i> (Zürich, 1899), -and others maintain that Cicero spoke in the trial conducted by the duumviri and -that after it was dropped no further accusation was brought. Wirz, ibid., supposes -that the senate quashed the process of the duumviri on the ground of illegality, that -the accuser (Labienus) then brought a tribunician accusation for perduellio, but -intimated a possible finable action in addition, and that the trial was ended, without -resumption, by the hauling down of the flag.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1572" href="#FNanchor_1572" class="label">[1572]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 13. 33: “Orbis terrarum gentiumque omnium datur cognitio -sine consilio, poena sine provocatione, animadversio sine auxilio”; p. 435.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1573" href="#FNanchor_1573" class="label">[1573]</a> Cic. <i>Har. Resp.</i> 4. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1574" href="#FNanchor_1574" class="label">[1574]</a> Anquisitio seems to mean an examination on both sides—including testimony -for and against the accused; Fest. ep. 22; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 345, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1575" href="#FNanchor_1575" class="label">[1575]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 91 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1576" href="#FNanchor_1576" class="label">[1576]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 17. 45: “Cum tam moderata iudicia populi sint a maioribus constituta -... ne inprodicta die quis accusetur, ut ter ante magistratus accuset intermissa -die, quam multam inroget aut iudicet, quarta sit accusatio trinum nundinum prodicta -die, quo die iudicium sit futurum, tum multa etiam ad placandum atque ad misericordiam -reis concessa sint, deinde exorabilis populus, facilis suffragatio pro salute, -denique etiam, si qua res ilium diem aut auspiciis aut excusatione sustulit, tota causa -iudiciumque sublatum sit.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1577" href="#FNanchor_1577" class="label">[1577]</a> The trinum nundinum, which included three market days (Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 34), -could not have contained less than seventeen days or more than twenty-four.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1578" href="#FNanchor_1578" class="label">[1578]</a> Livy, xliii. 16. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1579" href="#FNanchor_1579" class="label">[1579]</a> E.g. Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 306, 344. The theory has little in its favor and is -not generally accepted; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 167 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1580" href="#FNanchor_1580" class="label">[1580]</a> On the quarta accusatio, see Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 17. 45, quoted p. 259, n. 6. An example -of the mitigation of a capital to a finable action is the case against T. Menenius for -the mismanagement of a campaign which he had conducted as consul; Livy ii. 52. -3-5 (476). Two examples of change in the form of action in the opposite direction -are given on p. 249 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1581" href="#FNanchor_1581" class="label">[1581]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 17. 45, quoted p. 259, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1582" href="#FNanchor_1582" class="label">[1582]</a> Cf. the case of Appius Claudius Pulcher, p. 248.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1583" href="#FNanchor_1583" class="label">[1583]</a> Livy ii. 33. 1; Calpurnius Piso, in ibid. § 3; 58. 1; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 1; cf. -Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 33. 58; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 274 f. with notes. Meyer, in -<i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxxvii (1882). 616 f., suggests a doubt as to whether they were instituted -at that time. Niese, <i>De annalibus Romanis observationes</i> (1886), and -Meyer, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxx (1895), 1-24, have tried to prove that they were not instituted -till 471 and that their original number was four. Niese’s view is controverted -by Joh. Schmidt, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxi (1886). 464-6. Pais, <i>Anc. Italy</i>, 260, 275, assumes -that they came into existence as a result of the abolition of the decemvirate.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1584" href="#FNanchor_1584" class="label">[1584]</a> Cic. Frag. A. vii. 48: “Tanta igitur in illis virtus fuit, ut anno XVI post reges -exactos propter nimiam dominationem potentium secederent ... duos tribunos -crearent, ... Itaque auspicato postero anno tr. pl. comitiis curiatis sunt”; Dion. -Hal. vi. 89. 1; cf. ix. 41. 4 f. (included clients and patricians); Livy ii. 56, especially -§ 3, 10. These authors represent the tribunes as trying vainly to force the patricians -from the assembly while the voting was under way. The question of excluding the -patricians, however, is connected with the statute of Publilius Philo (339) rather -than with the so-called plebiscite of Publilius Volero (471); p. 300 f.</p> - -<p>Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 2, places the first tribal meeting in 491, twenty years before -the date to which its institution is otherwise assigned. If his account is not an -anticipation of later usage, it is exceptional.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1585" href="#FNanchor_1585" class="label">[1585]</a> (1) Because there were no other magistrates at the time, (2) because the meeting -was auspicated; p. 262, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1586" href="#FNanchor_1586" class="label">[1586]</a> Inferred from the circumstance that this dignitary presided over the assembly -which elected the first college of tribunes after the fall of the decemvirs; Livy iii. -54. 5, 9, 11; p. 285 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1587" href="#FNanchor_1587" class="label">[1587]</a> Livy iii. 13. 6; 56. 5; viii. 33. 7; ix. 26. 16; xxxviii. 52. 8; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 23. -Naturally the plebeians were in most need of protection; cf. Ihne, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -xxi (1866). 169.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1588" href="#FNanchor_1588" class="label">[1588]</a> Livy ii. 33. 3: “Auxilii non poenae ius datum illi potestati”; cf. Ihne, ibid. -170.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1589" href="#FNanchor_1589" class="label">[1589]</a> Gell. iii. 2. 11; xiii. 12. 9; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 3. 8; Dion. Hal. viii. 87. 6; Serv. <i>in -Aen.</i> v. 738; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 291, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1590" href="#FNanchor_1590" class="label">[1590]</a> Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 81.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1591" href="#FNanchor_1591" class="label">[1591]</a> In this respect the plebeian body was analogous to a corporation; Gaius, in <i>Dig.</i> -xlvii. 22. 4 (quoting a law of the Twelve Tables). But it was not a private association. -It could neither limit its membership nor change its organization. Proof of -these two facts is that the change of organization from curiate to tribal and the consequent -exclusion of the landless resulted from a centuriate law; p. 271. Notwithstanding -the fact that its resolutions lacked the force of law, the close relation existing -between it and the state gave it from the beginning a prominent place in the -constitution.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1592" href="#FNanchor_1592" class="label">[1592]</a> Livy ii. 56. 11-13 (The consul asserted that according to ancestral usage he -himself had no right to remove any one from the place of assembly); cf. 35. 3: -“Plebis non patrum tribunos esse.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1593" href="#FNanchor_1593" class="label">[1593]</a> Livy ii. 35. 3: “Auxilii non poenae ius datum illi potestati”; 56. 11-13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1594" href="#FNanchor_1594" class="label">[1594]</a> Cf. Livy ii. 35. 2; 52. 3 ff.; 54. 3 ff.; 61.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1595" href="#FNanchor_1595" class="label">[1595]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 320, n. 2; Ihne, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxi (1866). -175 ff.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1596" href="#FNanchor_1596" class="label">[1596]</a> Hence they had no viatores; so that for a time after they assumed criminal -jurisdiction the aediles acted as their bailiffs; p. 290.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1597" href="#FNanchor_1597" class="label">[1597]</a> Livy iii. 55. 10: (In the opinion of some iuris interpretates) “Tribunos vetere -iure iurando plebis, cum primum eam potestatem creavit, sacrosanctos esse.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1598" href="#FNanchor_1598" class="label">[1598]</a> Fest. 318; Livy iii. 55. 6-10; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 3. The wording of the oath -as given above is derived from the law which, according to Livy, was carried by the -consuls Valerius and Horatius in 449; but there can be no doubt that this statute -confirmed the oath taken long before by the plebs. As to the connection of Ceres -with the plebeian organization, Pais, <i>Anc. Italy</i>, 272 ff., believes that her temple -was not built before the middle of the fifth century, whereas Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. -d. Röm.</i> 45, holds to the traditional date (493); cf. De Sanctis, <i>Storia d. Romani</i>, -ii. 30. The building of the temple did not necessarily precede the institution of the -tribunate. On the sacrosanctitas of the aediles, see Cato, in Fest. 318. 8; Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 472 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1599" href="#FNanchor_1599" class="label">[1599]</a> As late as 131 a tribune of the plebs, C. Atinius Labeo, regarding the censor -Q. Caecilius Metellus as a homo sacer for alleged violation of the tribunician sanctity, -attempted without legal trial to hurl him from the Tarpeian Rock; Livy, ep. lix; -Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> vii. 44. 142 f., 146; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 47. 123. See also Vell. ii. 24. 2; (Aurel. -Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 66. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1600" href="#FNanchor_1600" class="label">[1600]</a> Cic. <i>Balb.</i> 14. 33; Fest. 318. 9; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 147; also in <i>Jahrb. -f. cl. Philol.</i> xxii (1876). 139-50; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 286. Ihne, in -<i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxi (1866). 176, expresses the belief that the lex sacrata had nothing -more than a religious influence, that the offender suffered in his conscience and in -public opinion only. The known leges sacratae, collected by Herzog, were (1) the -first Valerian law of appeal; Livy ii. 8. 2 (cf. ii. 1. 9); (2) the act which rendered -the persons of the tribunes sacred, and which, as intimated above, was not strictly a -statute; Livy ii. 33. 1, 3; Fest. 318. 30; Dion. Hal. vi. 89. 2; Cic. Frag. A. vii. 48; -(3) the lex de Aventino; Livy iii. 31. 1; 32. 7; Dion. Hal. x. 32. 4; (4) the Valerian-Horatian -law of appeal; Livy iii. 55. 4; (5) the military lex sacrata of 342; -Livy vii. 41. 3; (6) the law of M. Antonius for the abolition of the dictatorship, 44; -Appian, <i>B. C.</i> iii. 25. 94; Dio Cass. xliv. 51. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1601" href="#FNanchor_1601" class="label">[1601]</a> Pais, <i>Anc. Italy</i>, 263.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1602" href="#FNanchor_1602" class="label">[1602]</a> Dion. Hal. vi. 84, 89. 1; cf. vii. 40; xi. 55. 3; Fest. 318; Livy iv. 6. 7. The -idea that there was such a treaty is represented among moderns by Schwegler, <i>Röm. -Gesch.</i> ii. 249 f.; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 591; ii. 566, and opposed by Herzog, <i>Röm. -Staatsverf.</i> i. 146 f.; De Sanctis, <i>Storia d. Romani</i>, ii. 29.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1603" href="#FNanchor_1603" class="label">[1603]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 15; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 287, n. 1. The fictitious -character of the legal basis on which the plebeians are represented as acting in this -early period of their history may be illustrated, as Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 299, -n. 3, has pointed out, by their assumption of the agrarian proposal of Sp. Cassius as -one of their fundamental principles, the application of which neither magistrates nor -private individuals were at liberty to impede; cf. Livy ii. 54, 61; Dion. Hal. ix. 37, -54; Schwegler, <i>Röm. Gesch.</i> ii. 480, 531, 567. The fault is not all with the annalists.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1604" href="#FNanchor_1604" class="label">[1604]</a> P. 274.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1605" href="#FNanchor_1605" class="label">[1605]</a> Livy, ep. lviii; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1606" href="#FNanchor_1606" class="label">[1606]</a> Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1607" href="#FNanchor_1607" class="label">[1607]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 17. 5: Δημάρχου γνώμην ἀγορεύοντος ἐν δήμῳ μηδεὶς λεγέτω -μηδὲν ἐναντίον μηδὲ μεσολαβείτω τὸν λόγον. Ἐὰν δέ τις παρὰ ταῦτα ποιήσῃ, διδότω -τοῖς δημάρχοις ἐγγυητὰς αἰτηθεὶς εἰς ἔκτισιν ἧς ἂν ἐπιθῶσιν αὐτῶ ζημίας. Ὁ δὲ μὴ διδοὺς -ἐγγυητὴν θανάτῳ ζημιούσθω, καὶ τὰ χρήματ’ αὐτοῦ ἱερὰ ἔστω. Τῶν δ’ ἀμφισβητούντων -πρὸς ταύτας τὰς ζημίας αἱ κρίσεις ἔστωσαν ἐπὶ τοῦ δήμου; cf. x. 32. 1; 42. 4. -Although we may feel uncertain as to the author and the date of this plebiscite, we -need not doubt its existence, especially as the principle it contains is derived from -leges sacratae by Cicero (<i>Sest.</i> 37. 79; cf. Pliny, <i>Ep.</i> i. 23), and was often put into -practice; Livy iii. 11. 8; xxv. 3 f.; Dion. Hal. x. 41 f.; Cic. <i>Inv.</i> ii. 17. 52; Val. -Max. ix. 5. 2; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 65; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 260 n. 2; -ii. 289, n. 1; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 602 f.; ii. 567. For the state, however, it had no -more validity than had the original lex sacrata, of which the so-called Icilian plebiscite -was an expansion.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1608" href="#FNanchor_1608" class="label">[1608]</a> Gell. xiii. 12. 9: “Tribuni, qui haberent summam coercendi potestatem.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1609" href="#FNanchor_1609" class="label">[1609]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 179; Ihne, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> xxi (1866). 174.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1610" href="#FNanchor_1610" class="label">[1610]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 299, n. 1, expresses the opinion that the original -form of the story represented Coriolanus as consul proposing a law for the abolition -of the tribunate.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1611" href="#FNanchor_1611" class="label">[1611]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 20-67, especially 59. 9 f.; 65; Livy ii. 34 ff.; Plut. <i>Cor.</i> 16-20; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 605; ii. 565.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1612" href="#FNanchor_1612" class="label">[1612]</a> P. 56, n. 4, 270 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1613" href="#FNanchor_1613" class="label">[1613]</a> Livy iii. 11. 8 f.; Dion. Hal. x. 5 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1614" href="#FNanchor_1614" class="label">[1614]</a> Livy iii. 13. 8; Dion. Hal. x. 8. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1615" href="#FNanchor_1615" class="label">[1615]</a> Livy’s idea that this assembly met in the Forum (iii. 13. 8) is sufficient evidence -of his point of view. Cicero’s opinion (<i>Dom.</i> 32. 86; cf. <i>Sest.</i> 30. 65) may be biassed -by his personal feelings; p. 268, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1616" href="#FNanchor_1616" class="label">[1616]</a> Dion. Hal. x. 41 f. Various attempts of tribunes in this period to punish retired -magistrates for abuse of office are also alleged by the ancient writers; cf. p. 264.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1617" href="#FNanchor_1617" class="label">[1617]</a> P. 265 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1618" href="#FNanchor_1618" class="label">[1618]</a> Livy ii. 35. 3; cf. 56. 11 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1619" href="#FNanchor_1619" class="label">[1619]</a> Livy iii. 55. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1620" href="#FNanchor_1620" class="label">[1620]</a> Livy ii. 54.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1621" href="#FNanchor_1621" class="label">[1621]</a> Frag. 22. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1622" href="#FNanchor_1622" class="label">[1622]</a> P. 241; cf. also Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 157. A far different view as to the -form of assembly which received appeals in tribunician capital cases is represented -by Cicero, in whose opinion the comitia centuriata were established as the sole power -to judge concerning the caput of a citizen even in pre-decemviral time by the leges -sacratae (<i>Sest.</i> 30. 65); and accordingly he believes that the sentence of exile was -passed on Kaeso Quinctius by that body (<i>Dom.</i> 32. 86). But in this opinion Cicero’s -personal bias already referred to (p. 267, n. 6) cannot be neglected: in discrediting -the decree of exile passed against himself by the tribal comitia, it was agreeable to -his purpose to deny that this assembly ever had enjoyed such competence. The -view given in the text, represented by the annalists and confirmed by a law of the -Twelve Tables, is obviously preferable.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1623" href="#FNanchor_1623" class="label">[1623]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 35. 60; Gell. xi. 1. 2 f.; Fest. 202. 11; 237. 13; ep. 144; cf. -p. 233 above. Dionysius, x. 50. 1 f., wrongly gives two cattle and thirty sheep as -the maximum.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1624" href="#FNanchor_1624" class="label">[1624]</a> X. 50. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1625" href="#FNanchor_1625" class="label">[1625]</a> With less probability Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 620; ii. 576 f., regards it as a concession -to the plebs to satisfy their craving for the limitation of the consular power by -written law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1626" href="#FNanchor_1626" class="label">[1626]</a> Livy ii. 43. 3; 44. 6; Dion. Hal. viii. 87. 4; ix. 5. 1; 18. 1; x. 26. 4; Dio -Cass. Frag. 22. 3; Zon. vii. 17. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1627" href="#FNanchor_1627" class="label">[1627]</a> Livy iii. 11. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1628" href="#FNanchor_1628" class="label">[1628]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 297.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1629" href="#FNanchor_1629" class="label">[1629]</a> The veto of governmental acts, assigned them for the pre-decemviral period by -the historians (cf. Livy ii. 44), is therefore an anachronism. The very fact mentioned -by Livy, in the chapter here cited, of the patrician attempt to win as many -tribunes as possible points to obstruction rather than to the veto as their weapon. -The increase in the number of tribunes from two to ten indicates the same condition.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1630" href="#FNanchor_1630" class="label">[1630]</a> Cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1631" href="#FNanchor_1631" class="label">[1631]</a> Cf. Livy ii. 42. 6; 43. 3; 44. 1; 48. 2 f.; 52. 2 f.; 54. 2; Dion. Hal. viii. 87. -4 f.; ix. 5. 1; 37. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1632" href="#FNanchor_1632" class="label">[1632]</a> Livy ii. 56. 2: “Rogationem tulit ad populum, ut plebei magistratus tributis -comitiis fierent.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1633" href="#FNanchor_1633" class="label">[1633]</a> The senate gave its consent; Livy ii. 57; Dion. Hal. ix. 49. 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1634" href="#FNanchor_1634" class="label">[1634]</a> Livy ii. 56. 3: “Haud parva res sub titulo prima specie minime atroci ferebatur, -sed quae patriciis omnem potestatem per clientium suffragia creandi quos vellent -tribunos auferret”; cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1635" href="#FNanchor_1635" class="label">[1635]</a> That the ancients had this conception of the curiate assembly which elected -tribunes cannot be doubted; p. 24, 32; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> ii. 283, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1636" href="#FNanchor_1636" class="label">[1636]</a> P. 54, 60 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1637" href="#FNanchor_1637" class="label">[1637]</a> IX. 49. 5; cf. 41. 3. Patrician magistrates auspicated their comitia, plebeian -magistrates did not; p. 104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1638" href="#FNanchor_1638" class="label">[1638]</a> VII. 17. 6: Καί τινες τῶν δημάρχων ἄλλα τε κατὰ τῶν εὐπατριδῶν συνέγραψαν, -καὶ τὸ ἐξεῖναι τῷ πλήθει καὶ καθ’ ἑαυτὸ συνιέναι καὶ ἄνευ ἐκείνων βουλεύεσθαι καὶ -χρηματίσαι πάνθ’ ὅσα ἂν ἐθελήσῃ; cf. Livy ii. 60. 4 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1639" href="#FNanchor_1639" class="label">[1639]</a> Livy ii. 56. 11 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1640" href="#FNanchor_1640" class="label">[1640]</a> Livy iii. 11. 4; vi. 35. 7; Dion. Hal. x. 3. 5; ch. 4; 40. 3 f.; 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1641" href="#FNanchor_1641" class="label">[1641]</a> P. 300 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1642" href="#FNanchor_1642" class="label">[1642]</a> IX. 43. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1643" href="#FNanchor_1643" class="label">[1643]</a> Dion. Hal. ix. 49. 5; Livy ii. 56. 2; Dio Cass. xxxix. 32. 3; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 76; cf. -Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 799, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1644" href="#FNanchor_1644" class="label">[1644]</a> Diod. xi. 68. 8: Ἐν τῇ Ῥῶμῃ τότε πρώτως κατεστάθησαν δήμαρχοι τέτταρες, -Γάιος Σικίνιος καὶ Λεύκιος Νεμετώριος, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις Μάρκος Δουίλλιος καὶ Σπόριος -Ἀκίλιος. Livy, ii. 58. 1, following Piso, supposes that the number was now increased -from two to five. Dio Cassius probably placed the increase from five to ten at this -date; Zon. vii. 15. 1; 17. 6; Dio Cass. Frag. 22. 1. In the opinion of Meyer, in -<i>Hermes</i>, xxx (1895). 1-24; <i>Gesch. d. Alt.</i> v. 141 f., the plebeian tribunate was instituted -at this time and the original number was four; cf. p. 55, n. 1 above. But -Diodorus does not say so; indeed his grouping of the four tribunes in pairs suggests -a doubling—a fact which he has perhaps condensed from his source.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1645" href="#FNanchor_1645" class="label">[1645]</a> It has been shown above (119 ff., 126 ff.) that the assembly of tribes under tribunician -presidency is rightly so designated.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1646" href="#FNanchor_1646" class="label">[1646]</a> Livy ii. 61. 1; 63. 2; iii. 1. 2 f.; Dion. Hal. ix. 51 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1647" href="#FNanchor_1647" class="label">[1647]</a> Livy iii. 31. 5 f. (454); Dion. Hal. x. 34 f., 42, 48; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> vii. 28. 101.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1648" href="#FNanchor_1648" class="label">[1648]</a> Livy iii. 10; 25. 9; 30. 5; Dion. Hal. x. 15. 3; 20. 4; 26. 4; Dio Cass. -Frag. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1649" href="#FNanchor_1649" class="label">[1649]</a> Livy iii. 30. 5; Dion. Hal. x. 30. 6 (457). The object, as stated by Livy, was -increased protection for the commons. Any enlargement of the number after they -had acquired the veto would have been a positive disadvantage; Herzog, <i>Röm. -Staatsverf.</i> i. 161; cf. above p. 270, n. 2. The change was made with the consent -of the senate, doubtless through a centuriate law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1650" href="#FNanchor_1650" class="label">[1650]</a> P. 233, 265, n. 1 (3).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1651" href="#FNanchor_1651" class="label">[1651]</a> P. 265, n. 1 (3).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1652" href="#FNanchor_1652" class="label">[1652]</a> Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 170.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1653" href="#FNanchor_1653" class="label">[1653]</a> Livy. ii. 9. 6. Even if these acts are not historical, there can be no doubt that -the senate had the power which they imply.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1654" href="#FNanchor_1654" class="label">[1654]</a> Cf. Livy ii. 15. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1655" href="#FNanchor_1655" class="label">[1655]</a> Livy ii. 3. 5; 5. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1656" href="#FNanchor_1656" class="label">[1656]</a> Cf. Livy iii. 70. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1657" href="#FNanchor_1657" class="label">[1657]</a> Livy ii. 36. 1; 37. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1658" href="#FNanchor_1658" class="label">[1658]</a> Livy ii. 37. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1659" href="#FNanchor_1659" class="label">[1659]</a> Cf. Livy iii. 21. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1660" href="#FNanchor_1660" class="label">[1660]</a> Livy iii. 4. 9 (464). As long as the dictatorship was in use (till near the end -of the third century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) there was no need of resorting to this measure, although it -cannot be doubted that the senate had the right.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1661" href="#FNanchor_1661" class="label">[1661]</a> Cf. Livy iii. 11. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1662" href="#FNanchor_1662" class="label">[1662]</a> Livy iii. 11. 4; 14. 5; 16. 6; 17. 4; Dion. Hal. x. 3. 3 f.; 4. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1663" href="#FNanchor_1663" class="label">[1663]</a> Livy iii. 33. 4; Dion. Hal. x. 55. 3; p. 233 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1664" href="#FNanchor_1664" class="label">[1664]</a> Cf. Livy ii. 58. 1; iii. 24. 9; 30. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1665" href="#FNanchor_1665" class="label">[1665]</a> Cf. p. 264 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1666" href="#FNanchor_1666" class="label">[1666]</a> P. 234.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1667" href="#FNanchor_1667" class="label">[1667]</a> Livy. iii. 55. 7; cf. p. 264.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1668" href="#FNanchor_1668" class="label">[1668]</a> Ibid. § 6 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1669" href="#FNanchor_1669" class="label">[1669]</a> Livy iii. 55. 8 ff.; cf. Cic. <i>Balb.</i> 14. 33; <i>Tull.</i> 20. 47; Appian, <i>B. C.</i> ii. 108. -453; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 303 with notes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1670" href="#FNanchor_1670" class="label">[1670]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1671" href="#FNanchor_1671" class="label">[1671]</a> Livy iii. 55. 3: “Cum velut in controverso iure esset, tenerenturne patres plebi -scitis, legem centuriatis comitiis tulere, ut quod tributim plebis iussisset, populum -teneret, qua lege tribuniciis rogationibus telum acerrimum datum est”; cf. 67. 9; -Dion. Hal. xi. 45. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1672" href="#FNanchor_1672" class="label">[1672]</a> On the tribunician legislation of the period 449-339, see p. 292 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1673" href="#FNanchor_1673" class="label">[1673]</a> P. 271.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1674" href="#FNanchor_1674" class="label">[1674]</a> XI. 45. 3: Εἴρηται δὲ καὶ πρότερον, ὅτι ἐν μὲν ταῖς φυλετικαῖς ἐκκλησίαις οἱ -δημοτικοὶ καὶ πένητες ἐκράτουν τῶν πατρικίων.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1675" href="#FNanchor_1675" class="label">[1675]</a> VI. 35. 7: “Qui (patres) ubi tribus ad suffragium ineundum citari a Licinio -Sextioque viderunt, stipati patrum praesidiis nec recitari rogationes nec sollemne -quidquam aliud ad sciscendum plebi fieri passi sunt.” When the tribes were again -called for voting, the dictator, accompanied by a crowd of patricians, took a seat in -the assembly and supported the tribunician protest; Livy vi. 38. 5 ff. On another -occasion some years earlier the patres old and young came into the Forum, and taking -their places in the several tribes, appealed to their tribesmen to vote against the -proposal of the tribunes; Livy v. 30. 4 f. Still earlier C. Claudius and other senior -patricians spoke in a tribunician assembly against the measure then before the plebs. -Soltau’s objection (<i>Berl. Stud.</i> ii. 47) to the interpretation here represented has little -weight, as it rests upon the theory that from the beginning everything was carefully -defined and regulated by law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1676" href="#FNanchor_1676" class="label">[1676]</a> P. 153, 156 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1677" href="#FNanchor_1677" class="label">[1677]</a> P. 157, 211.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1678" href="#FNanchor_1678" class="label">[1678]</a> P. 211.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1679" href="#FNanchor_1679" class="label">[1679]</a> P. 271, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1680" href="#FNanchor_1680" class="label">[1680]</a> P. 300 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1681" href="#FNanchor_1681" class="label">[1681]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 157, regarding the alleged pre-decemviral plebiscites -as genuine acts of the plebs, believes that this conditioned validity of such -acts was established at some unknown time prior to the decemvirate. The view of -Herzog that certain statutes termed plebiscites in the sources were in reality centuriate -laws is accepted in this chapter.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1682" href="#FNanchor_1682" class="label">[1682]</a> P. 235.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1683" href="#FNanchor_1683" class="label">[1683]</a> Livy iii. 55. 15; iv. 6. 3 (Canuleian plebiscite); 12. 8 (for the election of a -prefect of the market, 440); 49. 6 (“Temptatum ab L. Sextio tribuno plebis, ut -rogationem ferret, qua Bolas quoque sicut Labicos coloni mitterentur, per intercessionem -collegarum, qui nullum plebi scitum nisi ex auctoritate senatus passuros -se perferri ostenderunt, discussum est,” 415); 51. 2 f. (413); vi. 42. 9 (Licinian-Sextian -plebiscite); vii. 15. 12 f. (law against bribery, 356); 27. 3 (347); viii. 23. -11 f. (the plebiscite for prolonging the consular imperium, 327); x. 6. 9 (Ogulnian -plebiscite, 300); 21. 9 (plebiscite ordering the praetor to appoint triumviri for conducting -colonies, 296). Cf. also Dion. Hal. x. 26. 4 f. (457); 30. 1; 48. 1 (454); -50. 3; xi. 54. 4 (444); Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 208 ff. All the citations from -Dionysius, excepting the last, refer to pre-decemviral time, and hence are anticipations -of a later condition.</p> - -<p>The first triumph by order of the people, without the consent of the senate, according -to Livy iii. 63. 11 (cf. Dion. Hal. xi. 50. 1), took place in 449. It is to be -noticed, however, that a magistrate always had a right to triumph without permission -either of the senate or of the people (Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> i. 214 f.), provided -he paid his own expenses; Polyb. vi. 15. 8; Livy xxxiii. 23. 8. The resolution -of the people on this occasion, if historical, may have been a mere pledge of -sympathy and confidence; cf. p. 293. But Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 194, doubts -its reality.</p> - -<p>The “ancient law long ago abolished,” which required the consent of the senate -to proposals brought before the people, and which Sulla is said to have renewed -(Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 59. 266; cf. p. 406), is ordinarily referred, as by Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 158; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 193, to the condition on the -validity of the plebiscite under discussion. Appian may have had this restriction in -mind, for we know at least that under the constitution as reformed by Sulla the -tribunes did propose laws de senatus sententia; <i>CIL.</i> i. 204 (year 71); Bruns, <i>Font. -Iur.</i> 94; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 66; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 154; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -iii. 158; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1559.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1684" href="#FNanchor_1684" class="label">[1684]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1685" href="#FNanchor_1685" class="label">[1685]</a> Lange’s idea (<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 619; cf. i. 611, 614, 642) that there was no statute -which made the consent of the senate essential to the validity of the plebiscite does -not appear to be well considered. Had the tribunes not been bound by written -enactment, they would have felt themselves free to legislate without the senate’s -coöperation, and even the law they tried in vain to disregard.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1686" href="#FNanchor_1686" class="label">[1686]</a> Livy iii. 55. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1687" href="#FNanchor_1687" class="label">[1687]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 158.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1688" href="#FNanchor_1688" class="label">[1688]</a> Diod. xii. 25. 3: Ἐὰν δὲ οἱ δήμαρχοι μὴ συμφωνῶσι πρὸς ἀλλήλους, κύριοι εἶναι τὸν -ἀνὰ μέσον κείμενον μὴ κωλύεσθαι; Livy iv. 48. 10-16 (416); 53. 6; v. 25. 1 (395); -vi. 36. 8; 37. 3; 38. 5. The same passages show the dependence of the government -upon the tribunes for checking innovations.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1689" href="#FNanchor_1689" class="label">[1689]</a> Livy iii. 69. 5 f.; iv. i. 6; 30. 15; 53. 2, 6 (407); 55. 1-5 (406); 60. 5 (403); -v. 12. 3, 7 (397); vi. 27. 9 f. (376); 31. 4 (cf. 31. 1 f., year 374); vi. 36. 3 f.; -Dion. Hal. xi. 54. 3 (444).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1690" href="#FNanchor_1690" class="label">[1690]</a> It is true that Livy (iv. 50. 6, 8; 56. 10-13, year 408; v. 9. 4 ff., year 402; vi. -35. 9) assigns the tribune this right; but on one occasion (vii. 17. 12, year 356) he -informs us that such a protest was disregarded by the magistrate. We may suppose -that in this period they often attempted the power, but usually without success. -They possessed a growing influence in the right to address the people, which must -often have added an overwhelming force to their protests; cf. Livy iv. 25. 1 (434); -58. 14 (406); v. 2. 2 ff. (403); ch. 6 (403). This kind of obstruction may be meant -by Livy iv. 36. 3 (424); 43. 3 (421); v. 17. 5 (397); vii. 21. 1 ff. (353). The government, -on the other hand, continued to use the levy for the obstruction of tribunician -bills; Livy iv. 55. 1 (409); v. 11. 9 (401).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1691" href="#FNanchor_1691" class="label">[1691]</a> The principal recorded seditions are (1) the revolt against the decemvirate in -449 (Livy iii. 50 ff.); (2) a plebeian secession to the Janiculum in the struggle for -the Canuleian law (Florus i. 25); (3) a state of anarchy in 376 (Diod. xv. 61. 1), -which, according to Matzat (<i>Röm. Chron.</i> ii. 110), lasted about four months; (4) a -state of anarchy in the struggle for the Licinian-Sextian laws (Diod. xv. 75. 1; -Livy vi. 35. 10), which, according to Matzat (ibid. ii. 112), continued three years, -376-373; (5) a secession of the plebs to the Janiculum in the struggle which -resulted in the Hortensian legislation, 287 (Livy, ep. xi; Dio Cass. Frag. 37; Zon. -viii. 2. 1).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1692" href="#FNanchor_1692" class="label">[1692]</a> P. 104, 110, 116 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1693" href="#FNanchor_1693" class="label">[1693]</a> X. 47. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1694" href="#FNanchor_1694" class="label">[1694]</a> P. 116 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1695" href="#FNanchor_1695" class="label">[1695]</a> P. 230.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1696" href="#FNanchor_1696" class="label">[1696]</a> Cf. Livy vi. 3. 2 (389); 33. 7 f. (377); vii. 19. 7 (353).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1697" href="#FNanchor_1697" class="label">[1697]</a> Livy vi. 14. 1: “Dictator ... minime dubius bellum cum his populis patres -iussuros” (385). In 381 the senate decreed that the Tusculans should be punished -with war (Livy vi. 25. 5), no mention being made of the people; and the declaration -of war against the Latins in 340 appears to have been merely acclaimed by -the people who chanced at the time to be in front of the senate-house; Livy -viii. 6. 4-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1698" href="#FNanchor_1698" class="label">[1698]</a> Livy v. 49. 2 (390).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1699" href="#FNanchor_1699" class="label">[1699]</a> Livy iv. 58. 1 f.; v. 28. 5 (394); 50. 3 (390); vi. 10. 9 (382); vii. 19. 4 (353); -22. 5 (351); 38. 1 (343); viii. 2. 1 (341); 19. 1-3 (330); x. 11. 13 with 12. 1, 13 -(298); 45. 4 (293); p. 302.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1700" href="#FNanchor_1700" class="label">[1700]</a> Livy viii. 11 f., 14 (340, 338). It punished for revolt; ibid. viii. 20. 7 (329).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1701" href="#FNanchor_1701" class="label">[1701]</a> Livy vi. 26. 8; viii. 11. 16; p. 304.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1702" href="#FNanchor_1702" class="label">[1702]</a> P. 273.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1703" href="#FNanchor_1703" class="label">[1703]</a> Livy v. 19. 6 (396); cf. iv. 27. 1 (431).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1704" href="#FNanchor_1704" class="label">[1704]</a> Livy v. 50 (390).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1705" href="#FNanchor_1705" class="label">[1705]</a> Cf. Livy vii. 28. 5 f. (345).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1706" href="#FNanchor_1706" class="label">[1706]</a> Livy iv. 59. 11 (406); p. 367. The statement of Diodorus, xiv. 16. 5, that the -Romans voted to pay for military service does not necessarily point to an act of -the assembly; and the opposition of the tribunes to the measure indicates that at -least in Livy’s opinion it was an act of the senate alone.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1707" href="#FNanchor_1707" class="label">[1707]</a> Cf. the tributum for the new wall; Livy vi. 32. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1708" href="#FNanchor_1708" class="label">[1708]</a> Cf. Livy v. 30. 8 (393); p. 295, 310.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1709" href="#FNanchor_1709" class="label">[1709]</a> Livy iv. 11; 47. 6; v. 24. 4; 30. 8; ix. 28. 8 (313); Vell. i. 14. 1; p. 310.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1710" href="#FNanchor_1710" class="label">[1710]</a> Livy vi. 4. 5 (389).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1711" href="#FNanchor_1711" class="label">[1711]</a> Livy v. 13. 5 (399).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1712" href="#FNanchor_1712" class="label">[1712]</a> Livy iv. 30. 9 (428).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1713" href="#FNanchor_1713" class="label">[1713]</a> Livy x. 1. 3 (303).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1714" href="#FNanchor_1714" class="label">[1714]</a> Livy iv. 46. 10; 56. 8; vi. 11. 10; vii. 6. 12; 21. 9; vii. 3. 4; viii. 17. 3; 29. -9 (325).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1715" href="#FNanchor_1715" class="label">[1715]</a> Livy v. 9. 6 (402).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1716" href="#FNanchor_1716" class="label">[1716]</a> Livy v. 9; 17. 2 f. (397); 31 f. (392, 391); viii. 3. 4 (341).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1717" href="#FNanchor_1717" class="label">[1717]</a> Livy viii. 16. 11; 20. 7; 39. 15 (322).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1718" href="#FNanchor_1718" class="label">[1718]</a> P. 277, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1719" href="#FNanchor_1719" class="label">[1719]</a> Livy vi. 19. 3 (384).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1720" href="#FNanchor_1720" class="label">[1720]</a> Livy iii. 54. 5, 9, 11 (449).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1721" href="#FNanchor_1721" class="label">[1721]</a> Livy iii. 65. 1 (448). That the coöptation of tribunes was once legal is proved -by a formula quoted by Livy iii. 61. 10. That the coöpted tribunes were patrician -is now generally disbelieved (cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 195) because it does -not accord with the conventional view of a constitution kept in perfect working -order from the beginning to the end of Roman history. The irregular is possible -and is less likely to be invented.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1722" href="#FNanchor_1722" class="label">[1722]</a> Livy iii. 65. 1-4; Diod. xii. 25. 3. Diodorus, who mentions the penalty, -connects the law closely in time, as does Livy, with the reëstablishment of the -constitution.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1723" href="#FNanchor_1723" class="label">[1723]</a> V. 10. 11; 11. 1-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1724" href="#FNanchor_1724" class="label">[1724]</a> Livy iv. 16. 3 (439).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1725" href="#FNanchor_1725" class="label">[1725]</a> Continuous fasti tribunicii, however, did not exist.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1726" href="#FNanchor_1726" class="label">[1726]</a> Thereafter when a vacancy occurred during the year, it was filled by election; -Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 13. 54; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1727" href="#FNanchor_1727" class="label">[1727]</a> Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> vii. 30. 1; cf. Gell. xiii. 15. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1728" href="#FNanchor_1728" class="label">[1728]</a> Livy ix. 46. 1 f.; xxv. 2. 7; Varro, <i>R. R.</i> iii. 17. 1; Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 20. 49; Piso, in -Gell. vii. 9. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1729" href="#FNanchor_1729" class="label">[1729]</a> Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1730" href="#FNanchor_1730" class="label">[1730]</a> Gell. xiii. 15. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1731" href="#FNanchor_1731" class="label">[1731]</a> P. 280.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1732" href="#FNanchor_1732" class="label">[1732]</a> P. 241, 268.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1733" href="#FNanchor_1733" class="label">[1733]</a> Cf. Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 19. 45; Livy xxvi. 3. This subject is admirably presented by -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 578-80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1734" href="#FNanchor_1734" class="label">[1734]</a> Cic. <i>Inv.</i> i. 38. 68.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1735" href="#FNanchor_1735" class="label">[1735]</a> Cf. Livy v. 11. 4; 12. 2; 29. 6 f.; viii. 33. 17; xxvi. 3. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1736" href="#FNanchor_1736" class="label">[1736]</a> Livy xxvi. 3. 6-9; p. 307 f., 322 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1737" href="#FNanchor_1737" class="label">[1737]</a> P. 234, 269 above; Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 35. 60; Livy iv. 30. 3. The equivalents are -mentioned in connection with the lex Aternia Tarpeia; Gell. xi. 1. 2; Fest. 202. -11; 237. 13; ep. 144; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 622; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 172, -639. The law is no proof of the existence of coins at that time.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1738" href="#FNanchor_1738" class="label">[1738]</a> Cato, <i>Orig.</i> v. 5; Fest. 246 (lex Silia); Cic. <i>Rep.</i> 35. 60; Livy iv. 30. 3; Karlowa, -<i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 409; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 580.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1739" href="#FNanchor_1739" class="label">[1739]</a> Livy viii. 37. 8 ff. A tribune of the plebs brought before the tribes certain Tusculans, -accused of having incited neighboring states against Rome, 323. They were -acquitted; p. 310.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1740" href="#FNanchor_1740" class="label">[1740]</a> Livy iv. 11. 3-7. This is one of the few prosecutions of inferior officials for -maladministration; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 323, n. 2. The event is too early -to be certain.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1741" href="#FNanchor_1741" class="label">[1741]</a> Livy iv. 40. 4; 41. 10 f.; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 581.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1742" href="#FNanchor_1742" class="label">[1742]</a> Livy v. 11. 4 ff.; 12. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1743" href="#FNanchor_1743" class="label">[1743]</a> P. 244 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1744" href="#FNanchor_1744" class="label">[1744]</a> Livy vi. 1. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1745" href="#FNanchor_1745" class="label">[1745]</a> Livy vii. 3-5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1746" href="#FNanchor_1746" class="label">[1746]</a> <i>Off.</i> ii. 31. 112.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1747" href="#FNanchor_1747" class="label">[1747]</a> Livy x. 37. 7; cf. xxix. 19. 6 f.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 320, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1748" href="#FNanchor_1748" class="label">[1748]</a> Livy x. 46. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1749" href="#FNanchor_1749" class="label">[1749]</a> Livy, ep. xi; cf. p. 306 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1750" href="#FNanchor_1750" class="label">[1750]</a> Livy, ep. xi; Dion. Hal. xvii. 4 f.; Dio Cass. Frag. 36. 32. Dionysius states -the fine at 50,000 denarii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1751" href="#FNanchor_1751" class="label">[1751]</a> Livy v. 29. 6 f. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 823; ii. 581, looks with suspicion on this -case because it is the only one of the kind in the period. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -ii. 323, n. 1, considers it an anticipation of the condemnation of the tribunes in 84 -for having taken the side of Sulla.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1752" href="#FNanchor_1752" class="label">[1752]</a> Livy iv. 21. 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1753" href="#FNanchor_1753" class="label">[1753]</a> Livy vi. 38. 9; Plut. <i>Cam.</i> 39.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1754" href="#FNanchor_1754" class="label">[1754]</a> P. 247, 248, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1755" href="#FNanchor_1755" class="label">[1755]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 282, 475. In time the aediles themselves received -viatores through a lex Papiria of unknown date; <i>CIL.</i> vi. 1933.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1756" href="#FNanchor_1756" class="label">[1756]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 35. 4; Plut. <i>Cor.</i> 18. For this reason tribunician sentences continued -to the end to be executed by a tribune or an aedile; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> i. 146.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1757" href="#FNanchor_1757" class="label">[1757]</a> Dion. Hal. vi. 90. 2; cf. 95. 4; Zon. vii. 15. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1758" href="#FNanchor_1758" class="label">[1758]</a> Livy iii. 31. 4-6; Dion. Hal. x. 48; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> vii. 29. 201.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1759" href="#FNanchor_1759" class="label">[1759]</a> P. 264, 272. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 475, n. 3, however, who looks upon -it as a legally credible tradition, remarks that the competence of the aediles, at that -time coextensive with that of the tribunes, must afterward have been limited by the -Twelve Tables.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1760" href="#FNanchor_1760" class="label">[1760]</a> As in 204, when an aedile was sent to arrest Scipio, should circumstances favor -his apprehension: Livy xxix. 20. 11; xxxviii. 52. 7. More frequently they executed -the sentence; p. 290, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1761" href="#FNanchor_1761" class="label">[1761]</a> Livy vii. 16. 9; Dion. Hal. xiv. 12 (22); Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xviii. 3. 17; Plut. <i>Cam.</i> -39; Val. Max. viii. 6. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1762" href="#FNanchor_1762" class="label">[1762]</a> Livy x. 13. 14; cf. Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 341.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1763" href="#FNanchor_1763" class="label">[1763]</a> Livy x. 23. 13. We are not informed whether these cases came before the -assembly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1764" href="#FNanchor_1764" class="label">[1764]</a> Livy x. 47. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1765" href="#FNanchor_1765" class="label">[1765]</a> Livy vii. 28. 9. The rank of the prosecutor cannot be more definitely stated.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1766" href="#FNanchor_1766" class="label">[1766]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. (6.) 19. The accuser, Cn. Flavius, was curule aedile; Livy -ix. 46. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1767" href="#FNanchor_1767" class="label">[1767]</a> Livy x. 23. 11 f. The prosecutors were curule aediles.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1768" href="#FNanchor_1768" class="label">[1768]</a> Livy viii. 22. 3; Val. Max. viii. 1. 7. Fourteen of the twenty-nine tribes then -existing had declared against him, when the prosecuting aedile by an unintentional -expression turned the vote in his favor. This result is to be explained on the supposition -that the proceedings were at that point interrupted, and the whole vote -taken again; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 486.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1769" href="#FNanchor_1769" class="label">[1769]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 493, n. 3; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 584. From the -nature of the process we infer that it was aedilician; and as the accuser was a patrician, -his aedileship must have been curule.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1770" href="#FNanchor_1770" class="label">[1770]</a> P. 233, 269, 287.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1771" href="#FNanchor_1771" class="label">[1771]</a> P. 264.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1772" href="#FNanchor_1772" class="label">[1772]</a> P. 103.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1773" href="#FNanchor_1773" class="label">[1773]</a> P. 102, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1774" href="#FNanchor_1774" class="label">[1774]</a> P. 273 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1775" href="#FNanchor_1775" class="label">[1775]</a> Livy iii. 54. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1776" href="#FNanchor_1776" class="label">[1776]</a> Ibid. § 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1777" href="#FNanchor_1777" class="label">[1777]</a> Livy iii. 55. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1778" href="#FNanchor_1778" class="label">[1778]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 279, n. 1, 302.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1779" href="#FNanchor_1779" class="label">[1779]</a> We have no means of testing the historical truth of these three alleged plebiscites. -The first Icilian was of transient character, and the first Duillian was unnecessary, -though not especially suspicious on that account. The second Duillian -represents constitutional principles known to have been early established. They are -doubted by Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 149 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1780" href="#FNanchor_1780" class="label">[1780]</a> XII. 25. 2. He does not state that this arrangement was embodied in a law, -although otherwise it could not have been effective.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1781" href="#FNanchor_1781" class="label">[1781]</a> Pais, <i>Stor. di Rom.</i> I. i. 558 f. The fact that Fabius Pictor (in Gell. v. 4. 3) -places the election of the first plebeian consul in the twenty-second year after the -Gallic conflagration indicates (1) that Diodorus did not depend upon Fabius, (2) -that Livy’s view of this constitutional change is essentially that of Fabius; cf. Pais, -ibid. I. ii. 136, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1782" href="#FNanchor_1782" class="label">[1782]</a> Livy iii. 63. 8-11; Dion. Hal. xi. 50. 1; <i>Act. Triumph. Capit.</i>, in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. -44; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 194.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1783" href="#FNanchor_1783" class="label">[1783]</a> Livy vii. 17. 9; <i>Act. Triumph. Capit.</i>, in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 44. In this case it is possible -that the senate for a time resisted, to yield finally under pressure.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1784" href="#FNanchor_1784" class="label">[1784]</a> Cf. Polyb. vi. 15. 8; Dio Cass. Frag. 74. 2; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 623.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1785" href="#FNanchor_1785" class="label">[1785]</a> Postumius, consul in 294, when refused a triumph by the senate, refrained from -bringing the case before the people because he foresaw tribunician resistance, but -declared his intention to triumph by right of his consular imperium; Livy x. 37. -6-12; Dion. Hal. xvii, xviii. 5. 3 (18); <i>Act. Triumph. Capit.</i> in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 45. Q. -Minucius, consul in 197, when refused by the senate, asserted that he would triumph -on the Alban Mount, also by right of his consular imperium and after the example -of many illustrious men; Livy xxxiii. 23. 3; <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 48; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Forsch.</i> i. 214 f.; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 134.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1786" href="#FNanchor_1786" class="label">[1786]</a> P. 273, 284.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1787" href="#FNanchor_1787" class="label">[1787]</a> Cf. Livy iv. 20. 1; vi. 42. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1788" href="#FNanchor_1788" class="label">[1788]</a> P. 285; cf. p. 301.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1789" href="#FNanchor_1789" class="label">[1789]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 37. 63; Livy iv. 1-6; Flor. i. 17. 25. The commonly accepted -theory that this decemviral enactment merely confirmed a custom which had existed -from the beginning of Rome is supported neither by the sources nor by a comparison -of early usage in other states.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1790" href="#FNanchor_1790" class="label">[1790]</a> P. 234.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1791" href="#FNanchor_1791" class="label">[1791]</a> P. 286.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1792" href="#FNanchor_1792" class="label">[1792]</a> Livy iii. 71 f.; Dion. Hal. xi. 52. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 198, n. 4, finds -difficulties in the details; but we are not warranted in denying the truth of the -event on the ground of irregularity in the proceedings, even while we admit that -much is uncertain in the history of the period to which the act is assigned.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1793" href="#FNanchor_1793" class="label">[1793]</a> P. 230, 283.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1794" href="#FNanchor_1794" class="label">[1794]</a> The institution of new offices and the increase in number within existing magisterial -colleges by act of the centuries (cf. p. 234) is merely the application of a long-recognized -popular right.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1795" href="#FNanchor_1795" class="label">[1795]</a> Livy iv. 12. 8. This alleged act of the tribes is suspicious because of its isolation; -for in this period offices were instituted by the centuries. It is either exceptional -or an anticipation of later usage; cf. p. 306.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1796" href="#FNanchor_1796" class="label">[1796]</a> Livy iv. 25. 13 f. The same author, vii. 15. 12 f., states that the first lex de -ambitu was enacted in 358; p. 296.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1797" href="#FNanchor_1797" class="label">[1797]</a> Livy iv. 51. 2 f.; Flor. i. 17. 2 (22); Zon. vii. 20. 5. The act, like that of -440, is either exceptional or an anticipation of later usage; cf. p. 309.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1798" href="#FNanchor_1798" class="label">[1798]</a> Livy vi. 20. 13. The context indicates that in Livy’s opinion it was a resolution -of the plebs. Dio Cass. Frag. 25.</p> - -<p>Whether the order of the people, 437, directing the dictator at public expense to -present a golden crown of a pound weight to Jupiter was dictatorial or tribunician -cannot be determined; Livy iv. 20. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1799" href="#FNanchor_1799" class="label">[1799]</a> Cf. iv. 48. 1; 53. 6; v. 12. 3; vi. 5. 2; 6. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1800" href="#FNanchor_1800" class="label">[1800]</a> Livy iv. 36. 2 (424).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1801" href="#FNanchor_1801" class="label">[1801]</a> Livy iv. 59. 11; Diod. xiv. 16. 5; Zon. vii. 20. 6; Flor. i. 6 (12). 8; cf. Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 540, 668 f.; ii. 627; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 212 f.; p. 284 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1802" href="#FNanchor_1802" class="label">[1802]</a> Livy vi. 42. 2; cf. Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 461.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1803" href="#FNanchor_1803" class="label">[1803]</a> The word utique, “at least,” inserted in this article by Livy, vi. 35. 5, belongs -to the Genucian law of 342; p. 299.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1804" href="#FNanchor_1804" class="label">[1804]</a> Livy vi. 35. 4 f.; 42. 9; xxxiv. 4. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1805" href="#FNanchor_1805" class="label">[1805]</a> In his account of the Licinian-Sextian legislation he makes no mention of this -last regulation, but assumes its existence for the following period; cf. p. 291 f., on -aedilician prosecutions for violations of this article.</p> - -<p>Other sources for the second Licinian-Sextian plebiscite are Varro, <i>R. R.</i> i. 2. 9; -Plut. <i>Cam.</i> 39; <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 8; Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 8. 33; Vell. ii. 6. 3; Val. Max. -viii. 6. 3; (Aurel. Vict.), <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 20.</p> - -<p>The statute, especially the agrarian portion, is discussed by Meyer, in <i>Rhein. -Mus.</i> xxxvii (1882). 610-27; Niese, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxiii (1888). 410-23; <i>Röm. -Gesch.</i> 55, 148; Soltau, in <i>Hermes</i>, xxx (1895). 624-9; Pais, <i>Stor. di Rom.</i> I. ii. 72 ff., -134 ff. Niese refuses to believe that this agrarian legislation came so early, and -prefers a date shortly after the close of the war with Hannibal. Soltau, controverting -Niese’s view, insists that the chief regulation mentioned by Livy—the limitation -of occupation to five hundred iugera—belongs to Licinius and Sextius, and that the -article was afterward renewed, with the addition of the other provisions stated by -Appian, probably about the time of the Hortensian legislation. Against the earlier -date is especially urged the circumstance that the large number of iugera allowed to -the individual is incongruous with the narrow limits of the Roman territory at that -time. The provision for the relief of debtors, too, has the appearance of an anticipation -of a plebiscite on the same subject passed in 447; p. 298 below; cf. Matzat, -<i>Röm. Chron.</i> ii. 113, n. 9; 128, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1806" href="#FNanchor_1806" class="label">[1806]</a> Livy vii. 15. 12 f.; Isler, <i>Ueber das poetelische Gesetz de ambitu</i>, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> -xxviii (1873). 473-7; Lange, <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, ii. 195-213; <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 716; -Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 241 f.; Ihm, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 1801; -cf. p. 295 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1807" href="#FNanchor_1807" class="label">[1807]</a> P. 202.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1808" href="#FNanchor_1808" class="label">[1808]</a> P. 235, 314.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1809" href="#FNanchor_1809" class="label">[1809]</a> Livy vii. 16. 7 f.; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 246-8; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. -191; ii. 26, 621.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1810" href="#FNanchor_1810" class="label">[1810]</a> Livy vii. 16. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1811" href="#FNanchor_1811" class="label">[1811]</a> Livy vii. 16. 1. Two laws of 356 have a certain degree of financial interest: -the dictatorial law which made provision for an impending war (Livy vii. 17. 7); -and the alleged resolution of the people (p. 293) to grant the same dictator the -privilege of a triumph.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1812" href="#FNanchor_1812" class="label">[1812]</a> Tac. <i>Ann.</i> vi. 16; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 183, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1813" href="#FNanchor_1813" class="label">[1813]</a> Livy vii. 21, 5; cf. Herzog. <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 245. That the bank commission -owed its existence to a law is an inference from the circumstances. The form of -assembly is unknown. With this Valerian-Marcian law, 352, Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -621 f., conjecturally identifies the lex Marcia against usurers; Gaius iv. 23. In his -opinion also (ibid. ii. 622; cf. Rudorff, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 51) the lex Furia de -sponsu mentioned by Gaius, iii. 121; iv. 22, “discharging the sponsor and fide-promissor -of liability in two years and limiting the liability of each to a proportionate -part” (Poste’s interpretation) belongs to L. Furius, dictator in 345 (Livy vii. 28. 2); -whereas others assign it to the year 95 (cf. Poste, <i>Gai. Inst.</i> 359) and others to a -time subsequent to Cicero (cf. Roby, <i>Rom. Priv. Law</i>, ii. 30). It was later than the -lex Appuleia de sponsu, which is referred to by Gaius iii. 122, and which must have -been enacted after the establishment of the provincial system. It is to be attributed, -accordingly, to the famous tribune of 103, 100 (Poste, ibid. 359) rather than to the -like-named tribune of 390 (Livy v. 32. 8; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 621). These considerations -render the later dating of the lex Furia the more probable. The lex -Publilia de sponsu, the date of which is also unknown, granted the surety (sponsor) -an action against the principal debtor in case the latter failed to reimburse him -within six months; Gaius iii. 127; iv. 22, cf. 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1814" href="#FNanchor_1814" class="label">[1814]</a> Livy vii. 27. 3; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> vi. 16. The author is not named.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1815" href="#FNanchor_1815" class="label">[1815]</a> P. 238.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1816" href="#FNanchor_1816" class="label">[1816]</a> Livy vii. 42. 1-3. Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 54, testifies to the existence of an ancient law -forbidding interest; cf. Tac. <i>Ann.</i> vi. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1817" href="#FNanchor_1817" class="label">[1817]</a> Pais, <i>Stor. di Rom.</i> I. ii. 270, with his usual acumen has argued against the -existence of the Genucian as well as of the Publilian statute; but the reasons urged -by this eminent scholar do not seem to me to be convincing. The period in which -they fall is certainly within the reach of tradition. The abolition of debts through -the Valerian law was in keeping with the populistic spirit of the masses in that age, -as was the prohibition of interest.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1818" href="#FNanchor_1818" class="label">[1818]</a> Pais, <i>Stor. di Rom.</i> I. ii. 278, n. 4: “Thus C. Junius Bubulcus and Aemilius -Barbula, consuls in 317, reappear in 311 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>; L. Papirius Cursor is consul in 320, -319, 315, 313; P. Decius is consul in 312 and in 308,” etc.; cf. further Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 519, n. 5. It is true that on one occasion Livy, x. 13. 8 f. (298), -speaks of the law and of a proposal of the tribunes to obtain a dispensation for the -candidate Fabius by a vote of the people, oblivious of the violation of the law by -this same Fabius as well as by many others.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1819" href="#FNanchor_1819" class="label">[1819]</a> Livy xxiii. 31. 13 f.; Plut. <i>Marc.</i> 12 (215). On that occasion when the people -were told that the election of two plebeians as colleagues in the consulship was -displeasing to the gods, they proceeded to choose a patrician in place of the second -plebeian; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 253, n. 2. The first definitive election -of two plebeians was in 172; <i>Fast. Cos. Capit.</i>, in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 25: “Ambo primi de -plebe.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1820" href="#FNanchor_1820" class="label">[1820]</a> Cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 253.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1821" href="#FNanchor_1821" class="label">[1821]</a> Livy viii. 12. 14-16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1822" href="#FNanchor_1822" class="label">[1822]</a> P. 235.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1823" href="#FNanchor_1823" class="label">[1823]</a> P. 237.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1824" href="#FNanchor_1824" class="label">[1824]</a> P. 307.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1825" href="#FNanchor_1825" class="label">[1825]</a> P. 274, 313.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1826" href="#FNanchor_1826" class="label">[1826]</a> The most detailed study of this subject, including a critique of the principal -modern views, is made by Soltau, <i>Gültigkeit der Plebiscite</i>, in <i>Berl. Stud.</i> ii (1885). -1-176. His criticism is more satisfactory than his construction.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1827" href="#FNanchor_1827" class="label">[1827]</a> This point is established by the circumstances (1) that no writer of the period -refers to the principle mentioned; (2) that Cicero regards the thirty-five tribes -under tribunician presidency as the universus populus Romanus—a definition which -is incompatible with the legal exclusion of the patricians from that form of assembly -(p. 129 f.); (3) that on one occasion, 209, after the Hortensian legislation Livy -(xxvii. 21. 1-4) represents the voting assembly under tribunician presidency as -composed not only of plebs but of all ranks (concursu plebisque et omnium ordinum), -and that the patricians were evidently free to take part in the debates of -the concilium; cf. Livy xliii. 16. 8; (4) Caesar, <i>B. C.</i> iii. 1, seems to represent -the praetors and tribunes as presiding together over the same comitia (“praetoribus -tribunisque plebis rogationes ad populum ferentibus”)—which would prove that -no difference of composition existed between the pretorian and the tribunician -assemblies of tribes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1828" href="#FNanchor_1828" class="label">[1828]</a> P. 230.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1829" href="#FNanchor_1829" class="label">[1829]</a> Livy ix. 5. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1830" href="#FNanchor_1830" class="label">[1830]</a> <i>Inv.</i> ii. 30. 92.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1831" href="#FNanchor_1831" class="label">[1831]</a> Livy ix. 8. 14: the tribunes protested against breaking it.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1832" href="#FNanchor_1832" class="label">[1832]</a> Livy ix. 10. 10: the circumstance that he assaulted the Roman fetialis is sufficient -evidence of his view.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1833" href="#FNanchor_1833" class="label">[1833]</a> IX. 9. 4. Gellius, xvii. 21. 36, less credibly states that the treaty was repudiated -by order of the people.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1834" href="#FNanchor_1834" class="label">[1834]</a> Livy ix. 5-11; Cic. <i>Off.</i> iii. 30. 109; <i>Inv.</i> ii. 30. 92; Zon. vii. 26. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1835" href="#FNanchor_1835" class="label">[1835]</a> Livy ix. 9. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1836" href="#FNanchor_1836" class="label">[1836]</a> Livy viii. 36. 11 f. (ambassadors of the Samnites, applying for peace to the dictator, -are ordered by him to address the senate, which replies that it will accept the -arrangements of the magistrate, 324); ix. 20. 8 (an unequal alliance with Apulia -negotiated by the consul, 317); ix. 43. 6 f. (the Hernicans, beaten in war, apply to the -senate, and are referred to the consuls, who accept their submission, 307); ix. 45. -1-3 (Samnite ambassadors ask peace of the senate, which replies that the consul will -pass through their country and will report to the senate on the conditions which he -finds there, 304); x. 3. 5 (the dictator, fining the Marsians of a part of their territory, -grants them a renewal of the treaty, 302). In none of these instances is mention -made of the people; and most of them preclude a popular vote.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1837" href="#FNanchor_1837" class="label">[1837]</a> Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 39.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1838" href="#FNanchor_1838" class="label">[1838]</a> Cf. Livy ix. 20. 2 f. (318), in which a proposal of peace was rejected by the -people. In the treaty with the Lucanians, 298, Livy, x. 11. 13; 12. 1, mentions the -senate only; Dionysius, xvii, xviii (xvi. 12). 1. 3, speaks of both senate and assembly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1839" href="#FNanchor_1839" class="label">[1839]</a> Cf. Livy ix. 20. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1840" href="#FNanchor_1840" class="label">[1840]</a> Polyb. vi. 14. 10 f.; 15. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1841" href="#FNanchor_1841" class="label">[1841]</a> P. 181.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1842" href="#FNanchor_1842" class="label">[1842]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 514; ii. 638; p. 283 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1843" href="#FNanchor_1843" class="label">[1843]</a> Livy viii. 13. 10 ff.; ch. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1844" href="#FNanchor_1844" class="label">[1844]</a> The gift of citizenship, adprobantibus cunctis, to L. Mamilius, dictator of Tusculum, -458, does not necessarily imply a public vote; Livy iii. 29. 6. Even if this -were the opinion of Livy, it need be no more than an anticipation of later usage. -In 381 the Tusculans received the citizenship, how we are not informed; Livy vi. 26. -8; Dio Cass. Frag. 28. 2. In the account of the settlement of Latium and Campania -in 340, involving the grant of citizenship to the Capuan equites, no mention is -made of either senate or people; Livy viii. 11. 13-16. The sources are likewise -silent as to a popular vote in the grant of citizenship sine suffragio to the Caerites; -Livy vii. 20. 8; Dio Cass. Frag. 33 (Boissevain i. p. 138); Strabo v. 2. 3, p. 220; -Gell. xvi. 13. 7. From Livy and Dio Cassius it may be reasonably inferred that the -event took place after 353, though Boissevain’s date, 273, seems to be too late. -Probably they were admitted between 353 and 332—before the hundred years’ -peace had far advanced.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1845" href="#FNanchor_1845" class="label">[1845]</a> Livy viii. 17. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1846" href="#FNanchor_1846" class="label">[1846]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 638.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1847" href="#FNanchor_1847" class="label">[1847]</a> I. 14. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1848" href="#FNanchor_1848" class="label">[1848]</a> Livy viii. 21. 10. Nothing is said as to the chairmanship of the assembly. The -event is referred to by Dio Cass. Frag. 35. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1849" href="#FNanchor_1849" class="label">[1849]</a> Livy ix. 43. 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1850" href="#FNanchor_1850" class="label">[1850]</a> P. 352.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1851" href="#FNanchor_1851" class="label">[1851]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 610 f., 638.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1852" href="#FNanchor_1852" class="label">[1852]</a> P. 234. The only exception is the creation of a prefecture of the market by a -plebiscite in 440; p. 295.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1853" href="#FNanchor_1853" class="label">[1853]</a> Livy viii. 23. 11 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1854" href="#FNanchor_1854" class="label">[1854]</a> Livy x. 22. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1855" href="#FNanchor_1855" class="label">[1855]</a> Livy ix. 42. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1856" href="#FNanchor_1856" class="label">[1856]</a> Livy x. 16. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1857" href="#FNanchor_1857" class="label">[1857]</a> Dion. Hal. xvii, xviii (xvi. 16). 4. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1858" href="#FNanchor_1858" class="label">[1858]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 640.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1859" href="#FNanchor_1859" class="label">[1859]</a> Livy x. 24. 18; cf. Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> ii. 531. For other versions of the -event, see Livy x. 26. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1860" href="#FNanchor_1860" class="label">[1860]</a> Livy, ep. xi; p. 359 above. Probability favors the tribunician assembly.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1861" href="#FNanchor_1861" class="label">[1861]</a> Livy ix. 20. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1862" href="#FNanchor_1862" class="label">[1862]</a> Fest. 233. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1863" href="#FNanchor_1863" class="label">[1863]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 609.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1864" href="#FNanchor_1864" class="label">[1864]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 73, 632. Cuq, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> iii. 1144, -assumes that it was proposed by L. Furius, praetor in that year.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1865" href="#FNanchor_1865" class="label">[1865]</a> Livy ix. 30. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1866" href="#FNanchor_1866" class="label">[1866]</a> P. 234.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1867" href="#FNanchor_1867" class="label">[1867]</a> Livy ix. 30. 3 f. In ix. 38. 2 he refers to a naval commander whom the senate -placed in charge of the coast, and whom Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 580, n. 1, -supposes to have been a duovir. That a duovir commanded a fleet in 282 is -proved by Livy, ep. xii; Dio Cass. Frag. 39. 4. Probably the triumviri capitales, -289, were created by a similar act of the tribes; Livy, ep. xi; p. 312.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1868" href="#FNanchor_1868" class="label">[1868]</a> P. 309.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1869" href="#FNanchor_1869" class="label">[1869]</a> P. 311.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1870" href="#FNanchor_1870" class="label">[1870]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 534, 636.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1871" href="#FNanchor_1871" class="label">[1871]</a> Fest. 246. 19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1872" href="#FNanchor_1872" class="label">[1872]</a> The brief statement of Festus, ibid., is here interpreted in the light of Livy -xxiii. 23. 6. In general on the Ovinian plebiscite, see Lange, <i>Kleine Schriften</i>, ii. -393-446; Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 153-173, 668-89; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. -259 ff.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 418; iii. 873, 879.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1873" href="#FNanchor_1873" class="label">[1873]</a> Cf. Livy iv. 5. 2; p. 287 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1874" href="#FNanchor_1874" class="label">[1874]</a> Cf. Gell. x. 20. 4, 9 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1875" href="#FNanchor_1875" class="label">[1875]</a> Cf. Livy viii. 16. 4; ix. 7. 15; 28. 2; Diod. xix. 66. 1; p. 299, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1876" href="#FNanchor_1876" class="label">[1876]</a> Livy x. 13. 8 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1877" href="#FNanchor_1877" class="label">[1877]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 641.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1878" href="#FNanchor_1878" class="label">[1878]</a> Livy x. 22. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1879" href="#FNanchor_1879" class="label">[1879]</a> It is the only instance mentioned for this early time.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1880" href="#FNanchor_1880" class="label">[1880]</a> Livy x. 13. 10: “Iam regi leges, non regere”; cf. Appian, <i>Lib.</i> 112; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 641.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1881" href="#FNanchor_1881" class="label">[1881]</a> P. 295 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1882" href="#FNanchor_1882" class="label">[1882]</a> P. 293, 295, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1883" href="#FNanchor_1883" class="label">[1883]</a> <i>Div.</i> i. 26. 55; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 11. 13 (on the reading, see Mommsen, in <i>Hermes</i> -iv (1870). 7; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 634.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1884" href="#FNanchor_1884" class="label">[1884]</a> Livy viii. 13. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1885" href="#FNanchor_1885" class="label">[1885]</a> Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 11. 5; Cuq, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> iii. 11. 54. On these -games, see Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> iii. 497; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> -111 f., 385 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1886" href="#FNanchor_1886" class="label">[1886]</a> Livy ii. 36; Dion. Hal. vii. 68; Plut. <i>Cor.</i> 24; Val. Max. i. 7. 4; cf. Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 634.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1887" href="#FNanchor_1887" class="label">[1887]</a> Livy ix. 46. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1888" href="#FNanchor_1888" class="label">[1888]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 828; ii. 634.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1889" href="#FNanchor_1889" class="label">[1889]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 49. 127 f.; <i>Att.</i> iv. 2. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1890" href="#FNanchor_1890" class="label">[1890]</a> Livy x. 6 f. He has evidently made a mistake in supposing the number of -pontiffs to have been increased to only eight (chs. 6. 6; 8. 3; 9. 2; cf. Bardt, -<i>Priester der vier grossen Collegien</i>, 32 f.; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 432, n. 4.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1891" href="#FNanchor_1891" class="label">[1891]</a> P. 240, 241, 269, 280.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1892" href="#FNanchor_1892" class="label">[1892]</a> P. 241 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1893" href="#FNanchor_1893" class="label">[1893]</a> P. 295.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1894" href="#FNanchor_1894" class="label">[1894]</a> Livy viii. 18. 3 ff.; Val. Max. ii. 5. 3; Oros. iii. 10; August. <i>Civ. Dei</i>, iii. 17. p. -124 Domb. The lex de veneficio mentioned by Livy, ep. viii, may refer to the act -which established this court; but it would not be legitimate to argue from this -expression a popular vote. The epitomator undoubtedly drew all his information -from the text.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1895" href="#FNanchor_1895" class="label">[1895]</a> Livy ix. 26. 6 ff.; cf. however, Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 637.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1896" href="#FNanchor_1896" class="label">[1896]</a> Livy viii. 37. 8; Val. Max. ix. 10. 1; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> vii. 42. 43. 136; p. 288, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1897" href="#FNanchor_1897" class="label">[1897]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 637.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1898" href="#FNanchor_1898" class="label">[1898]</a> Livy ix. 16. 10; xxvi. 33. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1899" href="#FNanchor_1899" class="label">[1899]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 34. 59; Livy viii. 28; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vii. 105; Dion. Hal. xvi. -5 (9); Suidas, s. v. Γάιος Λαιτώριος; cf. Kleineidam, <i>in Festg. f. F. Dahn</i>, ii. 1-30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1900" href="#FNanchor_1900" class="label">[1900]</a> Varro, ibid., assigns the law to a dictator, C. Popillius, which may be a mistake -for C. Poetelius, dictator in 313; Livy ix. 28. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1901" href="#FNanchor_1901" class="label">[1901]</a> Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 74.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1902" href="#FNanchor_1902" class="label">[1902]</a> P. 238.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1903" href="#FNanchor_1903" class="label">[1903]</a> P. 284.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1904" href="#FNanchor_1904" class="label">[1904]</a> Livy, iv. 11. 3-7, represents the tribunes of 442 as attempting to call to account -the colonial commissioners of that year (cf. p. 288). In 418 they planned to offer -a bill for colonizing Labici (Livy iv. 47. 6). In 415 a bill for colonizing Bolae, -introduced by a tribune of the plebs, was vetoed by a colleague; Livy iv. 49. 6; -cf. Diod. xiii. 42. 6. Many similar instances are given for the time immediately -following; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 626 f. with citations. Although we may question -the truth of these individual cases, we have no ground for doubting that such -agitation continued long before the tribunes succeeded in carrying a colonial law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1905" href="#FNanchor_1905" class="label">[1905]</a> Livy x. 21. 9; p. 307.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1906" href="#FNanchor_1906" class="label">[1906]</a> Livy viii. 36. 9 f.; ix. 42. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1907" href="#FNanchor_1907" class="label">[1907]</a> Cf. Livy x. 6. 3; 21. 9; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 282 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1908" href="#FNanchor_1908" class="label">[1908]</a> Cf. Livy x. 17. 10; 20. 16; 25. 3; 30. 10: “Praemia illa tempestate militiae -haudquaquam spernenda”; 31. 4; 44. 1; 45. 14; 46. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1909" href="#FNanchor_1909" class="label">[1909]</a> Livy x. 13. 14; 23. 13; 47. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1910" href="#FNanchor_1910" class="label">[1910]</a> Livy x. 46. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1911" href="#FNanchor_1911" class="label">[1911]</a> Livy x. 31. 8; 47. 6; ep. xi; Zon. viii. 1. 10; Val. Max. i. 8. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1912" href="#FNanchor_1912" class="label">[1912]</a> Livy x. 23. 11 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1913" href="#FNanchor_1913" class="label">[1913]</a> P. 307, n. 1, 332.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1914" href="#FNanchor_1914" class="label">[1914]</a> P. 279.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1915" href="#FNanchor_1915" class="label">[1915]</a> Boissevain’s reading.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1916" href="#FNanchor_1916" class="label">[1916]</a> The chief source is a mutilated fragment of Dio Cassius viii. 37. 2-4, which -is paraphrased in the text above. The account given by Zonaras viii. 2 is a -brief epitome of the fragment, adding the circumstance of the foreign war. The -restoration of the fragment is due chiefly to Niebuhr, <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> ii (1828). 588 ff. -See also the edition of Dio Cassius by Boissevain, i. 110 f. and by Melber, i. 108 f. -The secession to the Janiculum is mentioned by Livy, ep. xi, and by Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> -xvi. 10. 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1917" href="#FNanchor_1917" class="label">[1917]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xvi. 10. 37: “Q. Hortensius dictator, cum plebes secessisset in -Ianiculum, legem in aesculeto tulit, ut quod ea iussisset omnes quirites teneret”; -Gaius i. 3: “Unde olim patricii dicebant plebiscitis se non teneri, quia sine -auctoritate eorum facta essent; sed postea lex Hortensia lata est, qua cautum est -ut plebiscita universum populum tenerent; itaque eo modo legibus exaequata sunt”; -Laelius, in Gell. xv. 27. 4: “Ita ne leges quidem proprie, sed plebisscita appellantur, -quae tribunis plebis ferentibus accepta sunt, quibus rogationibus ante patricii -non tenebantur, donec Q. Hortensius dictator legem tulit, ut eo iure, quod plebs -statuisset, omnes quirites tenerentur”; Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 8: “Quia -multae discordiae nascebantur de his plebis scitis, pro legibus placuit et ea observari -lege Hortensia: et ita factum est, ut inter plebis scita et legem species constituendi -interesset, potestas eadem esset.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1918" href="#FNanchor_1918" class="label">[1918]</a> P. 235, 372.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1919" href="#FNanchor_1919" class="label">[1919]</a> This fact is clearly expressed by Gaius; see p. 313, n. 2 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1920" href="#FNanchor_1920" class="label">[1920]</a> Before acquiring this right they had been accustomed to sit on their bench at -the door of the curia, in order to watch the proceedings within. Though as yet -without an unrestricted legal right of intercession, they had attempted to force their -veto upon the senate; Val. Max. ii. 2. 7; Zon. vii. 15. 8; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> ii. 316 f. The wording of the law of 304 regarding the dedication of a -temple or altar indicates that the tribunes had not yet acquired the right to convoke -the senate and bring measures formally before it; Mommsen, ibid. p. x, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1921" href="#FNanchor_1921" class="label">[1921]</a> P. 270.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1922" href="#FNanchor_1922" class="label">[1922]</a> Granius Licinianus, in Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 30: “Lege Hortensia effectum, ut -fastae essent (nundinae), uti rustici, qui nundiniandi causa in urbem veniebant, lites -componerent. Nefasto enim die praetori fari non licebat”; § 29: “Iulius Caesar -sexto decimo auspiciorum libro negat nundinis contionem advocari posse, id est cum -populo agi: ideoque nundinis Romanorum haberi comitia non posse”; cf. p. 471 -below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1923" href="#FNanchor_1923" class="label">[1923]</a> P. 139.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1924" href="#FNanchor_1924" class="label">[1924]</a> P. 471 below; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 644; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 287 f.; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 372 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1925" href="#FNanchor_1925" class="label">[1925]</a> P. 243, 287 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1926" href="#FNanchor_1926" class="label">[1926]</a> P. 247, 289.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1927" href="#FNanchor_1927" class="label">[1927]</a> P. 309.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1928" href="#FNanchor_1928" class="label">[1928]</a> P. 290.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1929" href="#FNanchor_1929" class="label">[1929]</a> p. 248 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1930" href="#FNanchor_1930" class="label">[1930]</a> P. 330 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1931" href="#FNanchor_1931" class="label">[1931]</a> P. 248.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1932" href="#FNanchor_1932" class="label">[1932]</a> (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 50. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1933" href="#FNanchor_1933" class="label">[1933]</a> Livy xxii. 35. 3; 40. 3; 49. 11; xxvii. 34. 3 f.; xxix. 37. 13 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1934" href="#FNanchor_1934" class="label">[1934]</a> P. 62.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1935" href="#FNanchor_1935" class="label">[1935]</a> Livy xxiv. 18. 3, 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1936" href="#FNanchor_1936" class="label">[1936]</a> Livy xxii. 53. 4 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1937" href="#FNanchor_1937" class="label">[1937]</a> Livy xxiv. 43. 1-3; cf. Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2093.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1938" href="#FNanchor_1938" class="label">[1938]</a> A similar attempt in 204 by Cn. Baebius, tribune of the plebs, to prosecute the -censors C. Claudius and M. Livius while in office was quashed by the senate; Livy -xxix. 37; Val. Max. vii. 2. 6; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 322, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1939" href="#FNanchor_1939" class="label">[1939]</a> P. 249. The state agreed to insure from the enemy and from storms cargoes -shipped for the use of the army; Livy xxiii. 49. 1-3; xxv. 3. 10. Postumius took -advantage of this insurance to send out old, unseaworthy ships with cargoes of little -value, and after wrecking them, to report many times the real amount of the loss; -ibid. § 10 f. The senate, fearing to give offence to the powerful order of publicans, -failed to act when informed by the praetor; § 12. Thereupon the tribunes brought -the accusation. For the trial, see ibid. § 13-9 and ch. 4; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -ii. 177, 588. The weight of the <i>as</i> in which the fine was estimated is not given by -Livy xxv. 3. 13.</p> - -<p>For a similar transfer of the case against Cn. Fulvius, retired praetor, from the -tribes to the centuries, 211, see p. 249.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1940" href="#FNanchor_1940" class="label">[1940]</a> Val. Max. viii. 1. damn. 5. Here, too, should be mentioned the condemnation -of a member of the same board in a similar action for neglect to inspect the -watchmen; Val. Max. ibid. § 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1941" href="#FNanchor_1941" class="label">[1941]</a> Cato, <i>Orat.</i> i: “Dierum dictarum de consulatu suo.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1942" href="#FNanchor_1942" class="label">[1942]</a> Livy xxvii. 46. 1 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1943" href="#FNanchor_1943" class="label">[1943]</a> Cato, <i>Orat.</i> xiii; Livy xxxviii. 57. 10; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> ii. 459 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1944" href="#FNanchor_1944" class="label">[1944]</a> For the cognomen, see Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1475.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1945" href="#FNanchor_1945" class="label">[1945]</a> Polyb. xxiii. 14; Gell. iv. 3-5, 7-12; Diod. xxix. 24 (from Polyb.); Livy xxxviii. -54; Val. Max. iii. 7. 1 d; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 49. 16-9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1946" href="#FNanchor_1946" class="label">[1946]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> ii. 464 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1947" href="#FNanchor_1947" class="label">[1947]</a> In the story of the trial given by Antias the two Petilii were the prosecutors of -Publius (Livy xxxviii. 50 f.). In ch. 54 f. Livy, again following Antias, represents -these tribunes as authors of a plebiscite for the appointment of a special court to -inquire concerning the money received from King Antiochus, and states that L. -Scipio was condemned by this court. The story may not be without foundation; -but if such a plebiscite was adopted, it could not have had the desired result.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1948" href="#FNanchor_1948" class="label">[1948]</a> This incident is considered doubtful by Bloch, in <i>Rev. d. étud. anc.</i> viii. (1906). -109.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1949" href="#FNanchor_1949" class="label">[1949]</a> According to Diod. xxix. 21, Scipio was threatened with the death penalty; -but the trial actually took the form described above in the text.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1950" href="#FNanchor_1950" class="label">[1950]</a> Gell. vi. 19. 2. It was probably in connection with this trial that Cato delivered -his speech “Concerning the money of King Antiochus”; Livy xxxviii. 54. -11; Plut. <i>Cat. Mai.</i> 15; Cato, <i>Orat.</i> xv.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1951" href="#FNanchor_1951" class="label">[1951]</a> The edicts of these conflicting tribunes are given by Gell. vi. 19. 5, 7; cf. Livy -xxxviii. 56. 10; Cic. <i>Prov. Cons.</i> 8. 18. The dissenting edict states that the fine was -imposed nullo exemplo, yet it was within the competence of the tribune; Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 322, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1952" href="#FNanchor_1952" class="label">[1952]</a> The account here given closely follows Mommsen, <i>Röm. Forsch.</i> ii. 417-510. -For other authorities on the trial, see p. 329.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1953" href="#FNanchor_1953" class="label">[1953]</a> Plut. <i>Cat. Mai.</i> 19; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 590; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. -322, n. 4.</p> - -<p>In 142 P. Scipio Aemilianus when censor had deprived Ti. Claudius Asellus of his -public horse. Afterward this man as tribune of the plebs brought against him an -accusation for malversation in his censorship; Gell. iii. 4. 1; cf. ii. 20. 6. It was -a finable case (ibid. vi. 11. 9), in which was charged against him a lustrum malum -infelixque; Lucilius, in Gell. iv. 17. 1; cf. Cic. <i>Orat.</i> ii. 64. 258; 66. 268. The -prosecution probably failed; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 591; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. -322, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1954" href="#FNanchor_1954" class="label">[1954]</a> Cf. Plautus, <i>Capt.</i> 476.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1955" href="#FNanchor_1955" class="label">[1955]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> vii. 27. 100; Plut. <i>Cat. Mai.</i> 15. Cato’s <i>Oration</i> liv was delivered -on one of these occasions. For his general character and activity, see Livy xxxix. 40.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1956" href="#FNanchor_1956" class="label">[1956]</a> Livy xliii. 7 f. With this trial was concerned the senatus consultum of 170; cf. -Bruns, <i>Font. iur.</i> p. 162. See further Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 287, 591; Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 322, n. 3; cf. i. 699 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1957" href="#FNanchor_1957" class="label">[1957]</a> P. 358.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1958" href="#FNanchor_1958" class="label">[1958]</a> P. 231 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1959" href="#FNanchor_1959" class="label">[1959]</a> Fest. 193. 21; 314. 33; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 591.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1960" href="#FNanchor_1960" class="label">[1960]</a> Livy, ep. xlvii; cf. Lange, ibid. ii. 313, 591.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1961" href="#FNanchor_1961" class="label">[1961]</a> P. 359.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1962" href="#FNanchor_1962" class="label">[1962]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 14; cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 131 f.; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 2270.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1963" href="#FNanchor_1963" class="label">[1963]</a> Fest. 314. 30; cf. Livy, ep. lviii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1964" href="#FNanchor_1964" class="label">[1964]</a> P. 256 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1965" href="#FNanchor_1965" class="label">[1965]</a> Vell. ii. 12. 3 assigns the tribunate of Domitius to 103, Ascon. 80 f. to 104. -Probably the latter refers to his entrance upon the office, December 10, 104; but -see Bardt, <i>Priester der vier grossen Collegien</i>, 7 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1966" href="#FNanchor_1966" class="label">[1966]</a> P. 391.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1967" href="#FNanchor_1967" class="label">[1967]</a> Ascon. 80; Cic. <i>Caecil.</i> 20. 67; <i>Verr.</i> ii. 47. 118 (in both Ciceronian passages -the motive of the accusation is said to have been personal); cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -592; iii. 70; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 320, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1968" href="#FNanchor_1968" class="label">[1968]</a> Ascon. 1; Cic. <i>Deiot.</i> 11. 31; Val. Max. vi. 5. 5; Dio Cass. Frag. 92. A personal -motive is suggested for this trial also by the sources.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1969" href="#FNanchor_1969" class="label">[1969]</a> Cf. Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> v. 1324-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1970" href="#FNanchor_1970" class="label">[1970]</a> Dio Cass. Frag. 95. 3; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 33. 148; Schol. Bob. 230; Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> -9. 24; <i>Flacc.</i> 32. 77; Val. Max. viii. 1. damn. 2; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 592; iii. 86; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 323, n. 1; Mühl, <i>App. Sat.</i> 94 ff., 105 f.; Rohden, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 259.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1971" href="#FNanchor_1971" class="label">[1971]</a> P. 257, n. 5 (4). Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 352, holds the unusual opinion that he -was condemned by a quaestio.</p> - -<p>To the time shortly preceding the dictatorship of Sulla belong certain threats of -tribunician prosecution which may be mentioned here. In 87 a day was set for the -trial of L. Cornelius Sulla himself by the tribune M. Vergilius. The accused, taking -no notice of the prosecution, departed for the East; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 48. 179; Plut. <i>Sull.</i> 10; -cf. Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1537. In the same year Appius Claudius -Pulcher, summoned to trial by a tribune of the plebs, retired into exile, whereupon -his propretorian imperium was abrogated; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 31. 83; Münzer, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 2489; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 352. In 84 Cn. -Papirius Carbo, consul, was threatened with a prosecution, or more strictly with an -abrogation of his office, if he should fail to return to Rome to hold the election of a -colleague; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 78. 358 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1972" href="#FNanchor_1972" class="label">[1972]</a> P. 414.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1973" href="#FNanchor_1973" class="label">[1973]</a> Plut. <i>Lucull.</i> 37; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 221; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 353.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1974" href="#FNanchor_1974" class="label">[1974]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 23; cf. p. 377 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1975" href="#FNanchor_1975" class="label">[1975]</a> Dio Cass. xliv. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1976" href="#FNanchor_1976" class="label">[1976]</a> Whether the case against Rabirius in 63, begun as perduellio, was transformed -into a finable action is uncertain; p. 258. The attack of Clodius on Cicero in 58 -took the form, not of a judicial case, but of an interdict through a plebiscite; p. 446.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1977" href="#FNanchor_1977" class="label">[1977]</a> P. 291.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1978" href="#FNanchor_1978" class="label">[1978]</a> Fest. 238. 28; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 158; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> v. 283 ff.; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> ii. 49.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1979" href="#FNanchor_1979" class="label">[1979]</a> Livy xxxiii. 42. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1980" href="#FNanchor_1980" class="label">[1980]</a> Livy xxxv. 10. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1981" href="#FNanchor_1981" class="label">[1981]</a> Livy xxxv. 41. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1982" href="#FNanchor_1982" class="label">[1982]</a> Livy xxxviii. 35. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1983" href="#FNanchor_1983" class="label">[1983]</a> Piso, in Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xviii. 6. 41; Serv. <i>in Ecl.</i> viii. 99; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -ii. 493, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1984" href="#FNanchor_1984" class="label">[1984]</a> Val. Max. vi. 17; Plut. <i>Marcell.</i> 2; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 823; ii. 585.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1985" href="#FNanchor_1985" class="label">[1985]</a> Livy xxv. 2. 9; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 585. The statement of Gellius v. 19. -10, that women had nothing to do with comitia (“Feminis nulla comitiorum communio -est”), does not refer to their lack of suffrage, as Lange assumes, for Gellius is -explaining why women could not be arrogated. Originally they had no right to be -present in contiones or comitia; but in time the principle was modified to a limited -extent; p. 147. It was not necessary, however, that the accused should be present -in person during the trial; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 496.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1986" href="#FNanchor_1986" class="label">[1986]</a> Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 6; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 126; ii. 585.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1987" href="#FNanchor_1987" class="label">[1987]</a> Ateius Capito, in Gell. iv. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1988" href="#FNanchor_1988" class="label">[1988]</a> P. 248, 317.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1989" href="#FNanchor_1989" class="label">[1989]</a> Ateius Capito, in Gell. x. 6; Livy, ep. xix; Val. Max. viii. 1. damn. 4; Suet. <i>Tib.</i> -2; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 492, n. 4. This, says Mommsen, is the only -aedilician prosecution for a crime committed directly against the state in the period -after the decemviral legislation. With this case compare Cicero’s threat mentioned -in the text below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1990" href="#FNanchor_1990" class="label">[1990]</a> Suet. <i>Tib.</i> 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1991" href="#FNanchor_1991" class="label">[1991]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 586; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 496.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1992" href="#FNanchor_1992" class="label">[1992]</a> Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 12. 33; Val. Max. ix. 11. 2; Lange, ibid. iii. 134; Greenidge, -<i>Leg. Proced.</i> 352.</p> - -<p>Valerius Maximus, vi. 1. 8, refers to a prosecution (probably aedilician) of Cn. -Sergius by Metellus Celer for stuprum, which seems to have occurred about this -time; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 493, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1993" href="#FNanchor_1993" class="label">[1993]</a> <i>Verr.</i> i. 12. 36; v. 58. 151; 67. 173; 69. 178; 71. 183.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1994" href="#FNanchor_1994" class="label">[1994]</a> Cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 586.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1995" href="#FNanchor_1995" class="label">[1995]</a> Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 3; <i>Sest.</i> 44. 95; <i>Vat.</i> 17. 40; Ascon. 49; Dio Cass. xxxix. 18 ff.; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 586; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 493, n. 1; Greenidge, <i>Leg. -Proced.</i> 341, 353.</p> - -<p>On the aedilician jurisdiction in general, see especially Girard, <i>Org. jud. d. Rom.</i> -243 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1996" href="#FNanchor_1996" class="label">[1996]</a> P. 269, 287.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1997" href="#FNanchor_1997" class="label">[1997]</a> Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 439 f.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 195 f.; -ii. 36.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1998" href="#FNanchor_1998" class="label">[1998]</a> Livy xxxvii. 51. 4 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1999" href="#FNanchor_1999" class="label">[1999]</a> Livy xl. 42. 9 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2000" href="#FNanchor_2000" class="label">[2000]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> xi. 8. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2001" href="#FNanchor_2001" class="label">[2001]</a> Fest. 343. 6; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer</i>, 439, n. 8. For the pontifical -cases above mentioned, see also Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 593-5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2002" href="#FNanchor_2002" class="label">[2002]</a> Cf. ch. v and p. 322.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2003" href="#FNanchor_2003" class="label">[2003]</a> P. 313 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2004" href="#FNanchor_2004" class="label">[2004]</a> P. 307.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2005" href="#FNanchor_2005" class="label">[2005]</a> P. 107, 113.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2006" href="#FNanchor_2006" class="label">[2006]</a> On the lack of a popular opposition to the nobility during this period, see Ihne, -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 26. On the antiquated character of the assemblies, ibid. 39 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2007" href="#FNanchor_2007" class="label">[2007]</a> For this era we have to depend upon the epitome of Livy and occasional -notices of other authors. The complete Livian narrative which treats of the age, -should it ever be discovered, would doubtless reveal a considerable number of other -comitial measures; but we could hardly expect to find any of more importance than -those which are actually known.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2008" href="#FNanchor_2008" class="label">[2008]</a> P. 235, 300.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2009" href="#FNanchor_2009" class="label">[2009]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 14. 55. Cicero informs us that the law under consideration was -passed after the tribunate of M’. Curius, which must have preceded his consulship -(290). The enactment should preferably be placed after that of Hortensius, when -the patres were no longer in a position to oppose it; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 409; -ii. 216, 654; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 281 f. Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> ii. 69 ff., -attempts to assign it to 338.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2010" href="#FNanchor_2010" class="label">[2010]</a> Livy x. 15. 7 ff.; Cic. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2011" href="#FNanchor_2011" class="label">[2011]</a> Dion Hal. xix, 16. 5 (xviii. 19); xx. 13 (3). 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2012" href="#FNanchor_2012" class="label">[2012]</a> In this year C. Marcius Rutilus, elected censor a second time (<i>Fast. cos. capit.</i>, -in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 22), persuaded the people to adopt this law; Val. Max iv. i. 3; Plut. -<i>Cor.</i> 1; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 797; ii. 122, 654; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 317-20; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 520.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2013" href="#FNanchor_2013" class="label">[2013]</a> Livy, ep. xv; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22. Lydus, <i>Mag.</i> i. 27, supposes the newly created -quaestors to have been naval officers, and wrongly states their number at twelve. -Whether the lex Titia de provinciis quaestoriis (Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 8. 18; Schol. Bob. 316) -belongs to this date or to some later time cannot be determined; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> ii. 532, n. 3; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 654. See further on the act of 267, -Mommsen, ibid. ii. 527, 570 ff.; Lange, ibid. i. 891; ii. 124.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2014" href="#FNanchor_2014" class="label">[2014]</a> Livy, ep. xix; Lyd. <i>Mag.</i> i. 38, 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2015" href="#FNanchor_2015" class="label">[2015]</a> Val. Max ii. 8. 2; Zon. viii. 17. 1; 18. 10; Polyb. ii. 23. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2016" href="#FNanchor_2016" class="label">[2016]</a> P. 307, n. 1, 312.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2017" href="#FNanchor_2017" class="label">[2017]</a> Fest. 347. 3; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 884, 910; ii. 654; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -ii. 594 f.; Girard, <i>Organ. jud. d. Röm.</i> i. 263 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2018" href="#FNanchor_2018" class="label">[2018]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> vii. 43. 141; cf. Polyb. vi. 16. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2019" href="#FNanchor_2019" class="label">[2019]</a> We are informed by Theophilus, iv. 3. 15, that this statute was a plebiscite -adopted at a secession of the plebs, meaning most probably that of 287. But his -view may be merely an inference from Ulpian, in <i>Dig.</i> ix. 2. 1 and Pomponius, ibid. -i. 2. 2. 8; cf. Roby, <i>Röm. Priv. Law</i>, ii. 186. The law is the subject of <i>Dig.</i> -ix. 2 f.; Justinian, <i>Inst.</i> iv. 3; Theoph. <i>Inst.</i> iv. 3. Voigt, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 69, -assigns it to 287. On p. 71 f. he adds other chapters which he has gathered from -various sources. See also Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> ii. 793 ff. Injury committed -by dogs was made actionable by the lex Pesolania of unknown though early date; -Paul. <i>Sent.</i> i. 15. 1; cf. <i>Dig.</i> ix. 1. 1. 15. Voigt, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 39, n. 18, -assigns it to the time closely following the decemviral legislation; cf. Cuq, in -Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> iii. 1158.</p> - -<p>The lex Mamilia concerning arbitri, but not more definitely known (Cic. <i>Leg.</i> -i. 21. 55), may belong to the consul C. Mamilius, 239.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2020" href="#FNanchor_2020" class="label">[2020]</a> Gaius iii. 210, Poste’s rendering; cf. also the following §§; Justin. <i>Inst.</i> iv. -3. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2021" href="#FNanchor_2021" class="label">[2021]</a> Gaius iii. 215, 217; cf. Ulpian, in <i>Dig.</i> vii. 1. 13. 2; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 34. 131.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2022" href="#FNanchor_2022" class="label">[2022]</a> As here used, “Flaminian” is not confined to the lifetime of Flaminius, but -designates the period during which lasted the impetus given by him to the activity -of the assemblies—approximately to the end of the war with Hannibal.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2023" href="#FNanchor_2023" class="label">[2023]</a> P. 213, 215.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2024" href="#FNanchor_2024" class="label">[2024]</a> Cato, <i>Orig.</i> ii. 10 (in Varro, <i>R. R.</i> i. 2. 7): “Ager Gallicus Romanus vocatur, -qui viritim cis Ariminum datus est ultra agrum Picentium”; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 14. 57; -<i>Acad. Pr.</i> ii. 5. 13. There is reason for believing that about this time the Licinian-Sextian -agrarian enactments were revived and extended by a comitial statute; -p. 296, 363.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2025" href="#FNanchor_2025" class="label">[2025]</a> Cf. Cic. <i>Inv.</i> ii. 17. 52; Val. Max. v. 4. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2026" href="#FNanchor_2026" class="label">[2026]</a> Cic. <i>Acad. Pr.</i> ii. 5. 13; Val. Max. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2027" href="#FNanchor_2027" class="label">[2027]</a> <i>Senec.</i> 4. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2028" href="#FNanchor_2028" class="label">[2028]</a> Cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 149.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2029" href="#FNanchor_2029" class="label">[2029]</a> Kubitschek, <i>Röm. trib. or.</i> 26 f.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 176.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2030" href="#FNanchor_2030" class="label">[2030]</a> II. 21. 8. On this law in general, see further Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, ii. 125-7; -iv. 26 f.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 344 ff.; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. 157 f.; Ferrero, -<i>Rome</i>, i. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2031" href="#FNanchor_2031" class="label">[2031]</a> Zon. viii. 20. 7; Plut. <i>Marcell.</i> 4; cf. Livy xxi. 63. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2032" href="#FNanchor_2032" class="label">[2032]</a> Livy xlv. 35. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2033" href="#FNanchor_2033" class="label">[2033]</a> Livy xxvi. 21.5. Next is mentioned the plebiscite of Ti. Sempronius, 167, for -granting the imperium to three promagistrates; Livy xlv. 35-40; cf. xxxii. 7. 4; -xxxviii. 47. 1; Plut. <i>Aemil.</i> 30 ff. The triumphs of Pompey, 80 and 71, must have -been made possible by leges de eius imperio, though none are mentioned; Plut. -<i>Pomp.</i> 14, 21; Cic. <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 21. 61 f. The lex Cornelia, 80, which permitted -Pompey to bring his army home from Africa, was essential to the triumph but was -not the law which granted the imperium; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> ii. 21; Gell. x. 20. 10; Plut. -<i>Pomp.</i> 13; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 678. The law for the triumph over Juba was -passed for Caesar in 48 in advance of his victory; Dio Cass. xliii. 14. 3. There -must have been many other such plebiscites not mentioned by the sources. Magistrates -had no more right than promagistrates without especial authorization to -command troops within the city limits, though the triumph on the Alban Mount -continued to be permissible without an act either of the senate or of the comitia; -p. 293.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2034" href="#FNanchor_2034" class="label">[2034]</a> P. 307.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2035" href="#FNanchor_2035" class="label">[2035]</a> Polyb. vi. 16. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2036" href="#FNanchor_2036" class="label">[2036]</a> Livy xxi. 63. 3; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 353, 898; Nitzsch, <i>Röm. Rep.</i> -i. 156 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2037" href="#FNanchor_2037" class="label">[2037]</a> Ascon. 94; Dio Cass. lv. 10. 5; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 162, 657; Herzog, <i>Röm. -Staatsverf.</i> i. 898.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2038" href="#FNanchor_2038" class="label">[2038]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> 1. 7. 29; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2039" href="#FNanchor_2039" class="label">[2039]</a> Fest. 347. 14; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 3. 45; cf. Hill, <i>Greek and Rom. Coins</i>, 48. -According to Festus, Flaminius was author, whereas Pliny states that the change -was made under the dictatorship of Q. Fabius Maximus. One seems to refer to the -enactment of the law, the other to its administration.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2040" href="#FNanchor_2040" class="label">[2040]</a> P. 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2041" href="#FNanchor_2041" class="label">[2041]</a> Zon. viii. 26. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2042" href="#FNanchor_2042" class="label">[2042]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 3. 47.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2043" href="#FNanchor_2043" class="label">[2043]</a> Böckh, <i>Metrologische Utersuchungen</i>, p. 472; Mommsen-Blacas, <i>Hist. d. monn. -Rom.</i> ii. 67, n. 1; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 496; ii. 167, 674; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. -365; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 1511; Samwer-Bahrfeldt, <i>Röm. -Münzw.</i> 190 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2044" href="#FNanchor_2044" class="label">[2044]</a> Livy xxiii. 21. 6; cf. Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, ii. 289.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2045" href="#FNanchor_2045" class="label">[2045]</a> Livy xxiv. 18. 12; xxvi. 36. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2046" href="#FNanchor_2046" class="label">[2046]</a> Livy xxxvii. 51. 10; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 173 f.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. -365.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2047" href="#FNanchor_2047" class="label">[2047]</a> Cf. Livy xli. 27; Polyb. vi. 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2048" href="#FNanchor_2048" class="label">[2048]</a> Livy xxv. 7. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2049" href="#FNanchor_2049" class="label">[2049]</a> Livy xxvii. 11. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2050" href="#FNanchor_2050" class="label">[2050]</a> Tab. x, in Schöll, <i>Duod. Tab. Rel.</i> 153 ff.; Marquardt, <i>Privatl. d. Röm.</i> 345.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2051" href="#FNanchor_2051" class="label">[2051]</a> <i>Mil.</i> 164; Hor. <i>Od.</i> iii. 24. 58; Ovid, <i>Trist.</i> ii. 471 ff.; cf. Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 23. 56; -Pseud. Ascon, 110; Hartmann, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 1359. It remained -in force to the end of the republic. Other laws on gambling, which cannot -be assigned to dates, were the lex Cornelia (<i>Dig.</i> xi. 5. 3), the lex Publicia (ibid.), -and the lex Titia (ibid.).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2052" href="#FNanchor_2052" class="label">[2052]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 663, 670.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2053" href="#FNanchor_2053" class="label">[2053]</a> Fest. 246. 32; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 662.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2054" href="#FNanchor_2054" class="label">[2054]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxv. 17. 197. A M. Metilius was tribune in 217.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2055" href="#FNanchor_2055" class="label">[2055]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 161 f., 670; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 354.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2056" href="#FNanchor_2056" class="label">[2056]</a> Livy xxxiv. 1 ff.; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> iii. 33 f.; Oros. iv. 20. 14; Zon. ix. 17; cf. Ihne, -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, ii. 290.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2057" href="#FNanchor_2057" class="label">[2057]</a> P. 356. The lex lenonia mentioned by Plautus (Fest. ep. 143), if indeed it is -not a mere joke, should also be classed as sumptuary; cf. p. 528, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2058" href="#FNanchor_2058" class="label">[2058]</a> Polyb. vi. 56; Plut. <i>Rom.</i> 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2059" href="#FNanchor_2059" class="label">[2059]</a> Livy xxxiv. 4. 9: “Vectigalis iam et stipendiaria plebs esse senatui coeperat.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2060" href="#FNanchor_2060" class="label">[2060]</a> Livy xxii. 1. 19; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 170.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2061" href="#FNanchor_2061" class="label">[2061]</a> <i>Sat.</i> i. 7. 33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2062" href="#FNanchor_2062" class="label">[2062]</a> Livy xxvii. 20. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2063" href="#FNanchor_2063" class="label">[2063]</a> Livy xxix. 20. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2064" href="#FNanchor_2064" class="label">[2064]</a> Livy xxxiv. 4. 9; Cic. <i>Senec.</i> 4. 10; <i>Orat.</i> ii. 71. 286; <i>Att.</i> i. 20. 7; Fest. ep. -143, including a quotation from Plautus; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 5; xiii. 42; xv. 20; Frag. -Vat. 260 ff. (Ad legem Cinciam de donationibus); Bruns, <i>Quid conferant Vaticana -fragmenta ad melius cognoscendum ius Romanum</i>, 112 ff.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 366; Garofalo, in <i>Bull. dell’ ist. di diritt. Rom.</i> xv (1903). 310-2. In the opinion -of Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 191, the law may have resulted in part from the selfishness -of the rich, with a view to checking the presentation of gifts among themselves.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2065" href="#FNanchor_2065" class="label">[2065]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 4. 11; <i>Lex Iul. Col. Gen.</i> 93; Mommsen, <i>Ephem. Ep.</i> ii. 139; Bruns, -<i>Font. Iur.</i> p. 123.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2066" href="#FNanchor_2066" class="label">[2066]</a> Vat. Frag. 294, 298-309; Paulus, <i>Sent.</i> v. 11. 6; Roby, <i>Rom. Priv. Law</i>, i. 526 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2067" href="#FNanchor_2067" class="label">[2067]</a> Such was the lex Pinaria, which ordered the appointment of a judge on the -thirtieth day after an action was instituted (Gaius iv. 15); also the lex Silia creating -the legis actio per condictionem, for the recovery of a certain sum of money, extended -by the lex Calpurnia so as to apply to any certain object; Gaius iv. 18 f., and -comment by Poste; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> see index, s. Lex Calpurnia and Silia; -Roby, <i>Rom. Priv. Law</i>, ii. 71; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> ii. 594; <i>Röm. Civilprocess</i>, -230 ff.; Voigt, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 44 ff. On the probable date, Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -see indices, s. v.—The lex Crepereia, having to do with a legis actio before the centumviral -court, set the sponsia at a hundred and twenty-five sesterces; Gaius iv. 95.—The -lex Aebutia tended to substitute for the legis actio the formulary process of -later time; Gaius iv. 30 f.; Gell. xvi. 10. 8; Greenidge, ibid. 93, 170 ff.; Roby, ibid. -ii. 347; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Civilproc.</i> 216, 324; Voigt, ibid. 124 ff. Lange assigns these -laws to the period of the war with Hannibal, Voigt to earlier time.</p> - -<p>To the year 214 Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 660, assigns the lex Atinia on the usucapio -of stolen property; Gell. xvii. 7; Just. <i>Inst.</i> ii. 6. 2; <i>Dig.</i> xli. 3. 4. 6; cf. Roby, ibid. -i. 475.—No date can be found for the lex Licinnia de actione communi dividundo; -Marcianus, in <i>Dig.</i> iv. 7. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2068" href="#FNanchor_2068" class="label">[2068]</a> Livy xx, Frag.; Krüger and Mommsen, in <i>Hermes</i>, iv (1870). 371-6; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> -xii. 6. Livy states that a marriage of a patrician with a relative of the sixth degree -caused a riot of the plebs, which drove the patres for refuge to the Capitol.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2069" href="#FNanchor_2069" class="label">[2069]</a> Ulpian, Frag. v. 6; cf. <i>De gradibus cognationum</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2070" href="#FNanchor_2070" class="label">[2070]</a> Plut. <i>Q. R.</i> 6; Livy xlii. 34. 2 (case of a man’s marrying his cousin shortly after -the war with Hannibal); Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 126; ii. 659 f.; Marquardt, <i>Privatl. -d. Röm.</i> 30 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2071" href="#FNanchor_2071" class="label">[2071]</a> Livy xxxix. 9. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2072" href="#FNanchor_2072" class="label">[2072]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 659 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2073" href="#FNanchor_2073" class="label">[2073]</a> Cf. Lange, ibid. i. 231; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> ii. 27. It supplemented the -Twelve Tables, v. 1 f. (Gaius i. 144; ii. 47; Schöll, <i>Duod. Tab. Rel.</i> 126).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2074" href="#FNanchor_2074" class="label">[2074]</a> Cic. <i>Off.</i> iii. 15. 61; <i>N. D.</i> iii. 30. 74; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 5; <i>Lex Iul. Munic.</i> -112.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2075" href="#FNanchor_2075" class="label">[2075]</a> Plaut. <i>Pseud.</i> 303; <i>Rud.</i> 1382.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2076" href="#FNanchor_2076" class="label">[2076]</a> The author may have been the Plaetorius who carried a law concerning the urban -praetor; p. 342, n. 1; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> ii. 306, thinks it the result of -continual war, which while giving young men experience in military affairs, deprived -them of the opportunity to acquaint themselves with the management of property.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2077" href="#FNanchor_2077" class="label">[2077]</a> Livy xxiii. 31. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2078" href="#FNanchor_2078" class="label">[2078]</a> P. 310.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2079" href="#FNanchor_2079" class="label">[2079]</a> Livy xxvi. 33. 10-4. For the decree of the plebs, § 14: “Quod senatus iuratus, -maxima pars, censeat, qui adsient, id volumus iubemusque.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2080" href="#FNanchor_2080" class="label">[2080]</a> Ibid. ch. 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2081" href="#FNanchor_2081" class="label">[2081]</a> Livy xxii. 10. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2082" href="#FNanchor_2082" class="label">[2082]</a> It is given in full by Livy xxii. 10; cf. xxxiii. 44. 1 f.; xxxiv. 44. 1-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2083" href="#FNanchor_2083" class="label">[2083]</a> The consular law of Ti. Sempronius Longus, 215, appointing duumviri, one of -them the builder, Q. Fabius, for dedicating the temple of Venus Erucina; Livy xxiii. -30. 13. f.—The lex granting Q. Lutatius Catulus permission to dedicate the Capitoline -temple, 78; Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. iv. 31. 69; 38. 82; <i>CIL.</i> i. 592.—The rogation of the -praetor Caesar, 62, which threatened to deprive Catulus of the function; Suet, <i>Caes.</i> -15; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 44. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2084" href="#FNanchor_2084" class="label">[2084]</a> In consequence of a pestilence a pretorian law of P. Licinius Varus, 208, placed -the games in honor of Apollo in the class called stativi—those which were celebrated -annually on stated days; Livy xxvii. 23. 7; xxx. 38. 10 f.; cf. Wissowa, <i>Relig. -u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 241; Fowler, <i>Roman Festivals</i>, 179 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2085" href="#FNanchor_2085" class="label">[2085]</a> Livy xxv. 5. 2, for the first instance and for the pontifical presidency. Such a -departure in favor of the people was hardly possible in the period of comitial stagnation -preceding the tribunate of Flaminius, 232; and the law must have been passed, -or at least amended, after the institution of the last two tribes; for it specified -definitely seventeen tribes; Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 7. 16. On this measure, see Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 27 f.; Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 437; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -131. Pais, <i>L’elezione del pontefice massimo</i>, etc. (1908), maintains on the contrary -that the plebiscite in question was passed about 254, and that it resorted to seventeen -tribes as the legal half of the total number (33) then existing. On the use of the -word comitia, see p. 130 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2086" href="#FNanchor_2086" class="label">[2086]</a> The first recorded instance occurs at the date mentioned; Livy xxvii. 8. 1-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2087" href="#FNanchor_2087" class="label">[2087]</a> Cf. Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 46. 98.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2088" href="#FNanchor_2088" class="label">[2088]</a> P. 391.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2089" href="#FNanchor_2089" class="label">[2089]</a> P. 234, 305, 306.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2090" href="#FNanchor_2090" class="label">[2090]</a> Livy, ep. xx; <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 32. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 784; ii. 152, 654, conjecturally -identifies it with the Plaetorian plebiscite, which assigned two lictors to the -urban praetor when acting as judge, and defined his jurisdiction; Censorin. 24. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2091" href="#FNanchor_2091" class="label">[2091]</a> Livy xxvii. 36. 14; p. 306 above. In 171 because of the impending Macedonian -war the consular lex Licinia Cassia permitted the consuls to name their tribuni militum -(Livy xliii. 31)—a precedent followed thereafter in emergencies.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2092" href="#FNanchor_2092" class="label">[2092]</a> P. 305; Polyb. vi. 15. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2093" href="#FNanchor_2093" class="label">[2093]</a> Livy xxvii. 22. 6. On the comparatively frequent use of the promagistracy during -the war with Hannibal, see Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 310.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2094" href="#FNanchor_2094" class="label">[2094]</a> Livy xxii. 25; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 355.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2095" href="#FNanchor_2095" class="label">[2095]</a> Polyb. iii. 87. 6; Livy xxii. 8. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2096" href="#FNanchor_2096" class="label">[2096]</a> Cf. Herzog, ibid. i. 358 f.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 169.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2097" href="#FNanchor_2097" class="label">[2097]</a> Livy xxvii. 20. 11-3; 21. 1-4; Plut. <i>Marcell.</i> 27. It is surprising that in 204 -the question of abrogating the proconsular imperium of Scipio through a plebiscite -was discussed in the senate; Livy xxix. 19. 6.</p> - -<p>The grant of a burial place “virtutis caussa senatus consulto populique iussu” -(<i>CIL.</i> i. 635) to a C. Poplicius Bibulus was not to this Bibulus but to some unknown -person of the same name near the close of the republic.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2098" href="#FNanchor_2098" class="label">[2098]</a> P. 360.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2099" href="#FNanchor_2099" class="label">[2099]</a> Livy xxvii. 21. 10; xxx. 19. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2100" href="#FNanchor_2100" class="label">[2100]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 850, 861; ii. 151, 654.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2101" href="#FNanchor_2101" class="label">[2101]</a> Livy xxvii. 6. 7; cf. p. 298 above. Two other dispensations from laws by act -of the people are recorded for the latter part of this century: (1) the plebiscite -of 203, which exempted C. Servilius from the law prohibiting the election of a -man to the plebeian tribunate or aedileship in the lifetime of a father who had -filled a curule office (Livy xxx. 19. 9); (2) a plebiscite of 200 for permitting -L. Valerius Flaccus to take the oath of office for the aedileship as a proxy for his -brother, who being flamen Dialis was forbidden to swear; Livy xxxi. 50. 7-9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2102" href="#FNanchor_2102" class="label">[2102]</a> Cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 369.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2103" href="#FNanchor_2103" class="label">[2103]</a> VI. 11. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2104" href="#FNanchor_2104" class="label">[2104]</a> VI. 51. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2105" href="#FNanchor_2105" class="label">[2105]</a> Ibid. § 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2106" href="#FNanchor_2106" class="label">[2106]</a> Ibid. § 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2107" href="#FNanchor_2107" class="label">[2107]</a> Polyb. vi. 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2108" href="#FNanchor_2108" class="label">[2108]</a> Ibid. 11. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2109" href="#FNanchor_2109" class="label">[2109]</a> VI. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2110" href="#FNanchor_2110" class="label">[2110]</a> VI. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2111" href="#FNanchor_2111" class="label">[2111]</a> VI. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2112" href="#FNanchor_2112" class="label">[2112]</a> P. 217, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2113" href="#FNanchor_2113" class="label">[2113]</a> A plebiscite of M’. Acilius and Q. Minucius, 201, ordered the senate to negotiate -peace with Carthage; Livy xxx. 43. 2. Tribal ratification may be assumed for every -treaty, and for that reason is generally not mentioned in this volume.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2114" href="#FNanchor_2114" class="label">[2114]</a> Polyb. vi. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2115" href="#FNanchor_2115" class="label">[2115]</a> Polyb. vi. 12. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2116" href="#FNanchor_2116" class="label">[2116]</a> VI. 15. 9 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2117" href="#FNanchor_2117" class="label">[2117]</a> Ibid. § 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2118" href="#FNanchor_2118" class="label">[2118]</a> VI. 16. 1 f. Polybius speaks of the decisions of the senate; but since that body -as a whole was not a court, and since there was no appeal from either the special or -the standing quaestiones, he must be thinking here of the consilia of the magistrates, -which also were composed of senators.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2119" href="#FNanchor_2119" class="label">[2119]</a> VI. 16. 3. Doubtless he has in mind the Claudian statute of 219; p. 335.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2120" href="#FNanchor_2120" class="label">[2120]</a> VI. 16. 4 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2121" href="#FNanchor_2121" class="label">[2121]</a> VI. 17. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2122" href="#FNanchor_2122" class="label">[2122]</a> P. 33, 173.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2123" href="#FNanchor_2123" class="label">[2123]</a> Polyb. vi. 18. 5-8; Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2124" href="#FNanchor_2124" class="label">[2124]</a> Livy xxxii. 27. 6. A law may be assumed for this act.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2125" href="#FNanchor_2125" class="label">[2125]</a> Livy xl. 44. 2; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 198, n. 4; more accurately, -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 259, 655; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2728.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2126" href="#FNanchor_2126" class="label">[2126]</a> Cf. Arnold, <i>Rom. Prov. Administr.</i> 47.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2127" href="#FNanchor_2127" class="label">[2127]</a> Cato, <i>Orat.</i> xxv; Fest. 282. 28; Non. Marc. 470; Livy xl. 59. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2128" href="#FNanchor_2128" class="label">[2128]</a> Livy xxxiii. 42. 1; cf. Cic. <i>Orat.</i> iii. 19. 73; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 211 f., 675; -Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 357, 446. The people continued occasionally to -create temporary magistracies and commissions. A lex Plaetoria for the appointment -of duoviri aedi dedicandae (<i>CIL.</i> vi. 3732) probably belongs to 151; cf. Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 621, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2129" href="#FNanchor_2129" class="label">[2129]</a> Livy xl. 44. 1. Cf. in general on the leges annales, Fest. ep. 27; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> -v. 17. 47; <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 9; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> v. 65 f.; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22; Arnob. ii. 67. A -rogation of similar import was offered by a certain M. Pinarius Rusca (Cic. <i>Orat.</i> ii. -65. 261), who is perhaps to be identified with a praetor of that name in 182; Livy -xl. 18. 2; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 529, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2130" href="#FNanchor_2130" class="label">[2130]</a> This interval is assigned to the lex Villia by none of the ancient authorities, but -is found to be the practice after its enactment; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 526 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2131" href="#FNanchor_2131" class="label">[2131]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> v. 17. 47.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2132" href="#FNanchor_2132" class="label">[2132]</a> Cf. Plut. <i>Cat. Mai.</i> 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2133" href="#FNanchor_2133" class="label">[2133]</a> Wex, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> iii (1845). 276-88; Nipperdey, in <i>Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. -d. Wiss. zu Leipzig</i>, v. (1870). 1-88; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 707; ii. 259-61, 655; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 529 f., 537; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 386 f., 664 ff.; -Madvig, <i>Röm. Staat.</i> i. 335 ff.; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1114.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2134" href="#FNanchor_2134" class="label">[2134]</a> They were not in force in 196 (Livy xxxiii. 42. 1) or in 194 (Livy xxxiv. 53. 1 f.; -xxxv. 9. 7). On the other hand Cicero’s description (<i>Dom.</i> 20. 51; <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 8. -21) of these laws as veteres should place them a hundred years or more before his -time. The two passages of Cicero are the only sources; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 919; -ii. 315 f., 655; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 835. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 501, -thinks they may have resulted from the Gracchan agitation.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2135" href="#FNanchor_2135" class="label">[2135]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 146; Obseq. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2136" href="#FNanchor_2136" class="label">[2136]</a> <i>Orat.</i> xxxvi.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2137" href="#FNanchor_2137" class="label">[2137]</a> Livy, ep. lvi (mentioned in connection with the year 134); Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> -i. 85-7. Long does not consider the date settled; but see Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -i. 521; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 485; Kübler, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -iv. 1117.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2138" href="#FNanchor_2138" class="label">[2138]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 712; ii. 316, 655.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2139" href="#FNanchor_2139" class="label">[2139]</a> Livy xl. 19. 11; Schol. Bob. 361; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 717; ii. 257, 663; Ihne, -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 92; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 391; Hartmann, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 1801, Mommsen, <i>Strafr.</i> 867, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2140" href="#FNanchor_2140" class="label">[2140]</a> Polyb. vi. 56. 4; Livy, ep. xlvii; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 717; ii. 312, 663; Ihne, -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 92; Hartmann, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2141" href="#FNanchor_2141" class="label">[2141]</a> P. 250.—Of minor importance is the lex Rutilia, 169, which besides confirming -the earlier statute for the election of twenty-four military tribunes (p. 342) defined -the rights of the tribuni “rufuli” and “a populo” respectively; Fest. 261. 29; ep. -260; cf. Livy vii. 5. 9; xxvii. 36. 14; Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> ii. 365.—The rogation -of Ti. Sempronius, tr. pl. in 167, for granting the imperium to certain promagistrates -for the day of their triumph has been considered above; p. 335, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2142" href="#FNanchor_2142" class="label">[2142]</a> <i>Lex Ant. de Termess.</i> in <i>CIL.</i> I. 204. ii. 13-7; cf. Livy xxxii. 27. 3 f. (cutting -down such expenses in Sardinia); xxxiv. 4; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 207, 673; Ihne, -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 307.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2143" href="#FNanchor_2143" class="label">[2143]</a> Cato, <i>Orat.</i> lxix, in Gell. xx. 2. 1; cf. Livy xxxii. 8. 3; xli. 14. 11; Lange, <i>Röm. -Alt.</i> ii. 280, 673.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2144" href="#FNanchor_2144" class="label">[2144]</a> App. <i>Lib.</i> 135; Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 19. 51. Appian and Cicero speak of a senatus -consultum only; but a lex Livia is vouched for by the <i>Lex Agr.</i> of 111; <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. -81; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 643; Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> i. 465.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2145" href="#FNanchor_2145" class="label">[2145]</a> Livy xxxiii. 25. 6. A lex Maevia, seemingly on Asiatic affairs, supported by -Cato but otherwise unknown, belongs perhaps to 189; Cato, <i>Orat.</i> lxxv.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2146" href="#FNanchor_2146" class="label">[2146]</a> Livy, ep. xlix; new ep. l. 98-100; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 23. 89; <i>Att.</i> xii. 5. 3; Val. Max. -viii. 1. absol. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2147" href="#FNanchor_2147" class="label">[2147]</a> Cic. <i>Off.</i> iii. 30. 109.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2148" href="#FNanchor_2148" class="label">[2148]</a> Livy xl. 38. 9; cf. 59. 1 (179 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2149" href="#FNanchor_2149" class="label">[2149]</a> Val. Max. ii. 8. 1; Oros. v. 4. 7; cf. Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 26. 62; Livy xxxvii. 46. 1 f.; -xl. 38. 9; Gell. v. 6. 21; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 262, 676; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -i. 133.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2150" href="#FNanchor_2150" class="label">[2150]</a> P. 293.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2151" href="#FNanchor_2151" class="label">[2151]</a> Livy xxxii. 29. 3 f. These colonies were actually founded in 194; Livy xxxiv. -45. 1; Vell. i. 15. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2152" href="#FNanchor_2152" class="label">[2152]</a> Livy xxxiv. 53. 1 f. The former was founded in 192; Livy xxxv. 40. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2153" href="#FNanchor_2153" class="label">[2153]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> of 111, in <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 43; Livy xxxiv. 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2154" href="#FNanchor_2154" class="label">[2154]</a> Livy xxxvii. 57. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2155" href="#FNanchor_2155" class="label">[2155]</a> Livy xxxix. 55. 5. On the colonies of 181, see Livy xl. 29. 1; 34. 2; Vell. i. 15; -<i>CIL.</i> i. 538, in which nothing is said either of the senate or of the people.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2156" href="#FNanchor_2156" class="label">[2156]</a> I. 41. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2157" href="#FNanchor_2157" class="label">[2157]</a> P. 307, 311.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2158" href="#FNanchor_2158" class="label">[2158]</a> It was in the capacity of administrator of public property that the senate controlled -this field. The only other instance of popular legislation in this period touching -state economy was the plebiscite of M. Lucretius, 172 (Livy xlii. 19. 1 f.; cf. -xxvii. 11. 8; Gran. Licin. xxviii), for renewing the tribunician law of 210, which -directed the censors to farm the vectigalia of Campania; p. 337 above.—In 169 a -tribunician rogation of P. Rutilius threatened to annul the censorial contracts (Livy -xliii. 16. 6) as a rebuke to the censors for their arbitrary management of the business. -When this object was secured, the bill was allowed to drop. It is true, as -Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 24, n. 1, remarks, that no one questioned the right of the -people to cancel an administrative act of the censors; but it was quite another thing -to find a college of tribunes unanimously disposed to interfere. The significant fact -is that in all the time between the peace with Hannibal and the tribunate of Ti. -Gracchus no important financial act was passed by the comitia.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2159" href="#FNanchor_2159" class="label">[2159]</a> Livy xxxv. 7; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 221, 660.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2160" href="#FNanchor_2160" class="label">[2160]</a> A rogatio Iunia concerning usury, known only through Cato’s opposition to it -(<i>Orat.</i> vi), belongs to this period—perhaps to 195 (Livy xxxiv. 1. 4; xxxv. 41. 9 f.) -or to 191 (Livy xxxvi. 2. 6).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2161" href="#FNanchor_2161" class="label">[2161]</a> Livy, ep. xli.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2162" href="#FNanchor_2162" class="label">[2162]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. i. 41. 104 ff.; <i>Rep.</i> iii. 10. 17; Gaius ii. 274; Dio Cass. lvi. 10. 2; -Pseud. Ascon. 188; Gell, vi (vii). 13; xx. i. 23; p. 90 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2163" href="#FNanchor_2163" class="label">[2163]</a> Gaius ii. 226 and Poste’s comment; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 298, 660; Greenidge, -<i>Leg. Proced.</i> 95, 128; Roby, <i>Rom. Priv. Law</i>, i. 345. It took the place of a lex -Furia of earlier date for limiting to one thousand asses the amount which a legatee -or, in view of death, a donee could accept; Gaius, ibid.; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> -ii. 940 ff. Voigt, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 502, places the lex Furia between 203 and 170.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2164" href="#FNanchor_2164" class="label">[2164]</a> Cato, <i>Orat.</i> lxviii, lxxv; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 660; Voigt, <i>Die lex Maenia de dote -vom Jahre 568 der Stadt</i>; <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 789-801, attempts to determine -the contents as well as the date; cf. Arndts, in <i>Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch.</i> vii (1868). -1-44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2165" href="#FNanchor_2165" class="label">[2165]</a> Livy xxxvii. 36. 7 f.; cf. Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. i. 5. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2166" href="#FNanchor_2166" class="label">[2166]</a> Ibid. § 9; p. 57 f., 334 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2167" href="#FNanchor_2167" class="label">[2167]</a> P. 340.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2168" href="#FNanchor_2168" class="label">[2168]</a> Livy xxxviii. 36. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2169" href="#FNanchor_2169" class="label">[2169]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 20. 79; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 135, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2170" href="#FNanchor_2170" class="label">[2170]</a> A pretorian law of Valerius Flaccus, 98, for the purpose is mentioned by Cic. -<i>Balb.</i> 24. 55; cf. <i>CIL.</i> vi. 2181 f.; Pais, <i>Anc. Italy</i>, 309. Naturally before the -establishment of the right of the people in this matter (p. 283, 304) the grant was -made by the consuls and the censors.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2171" href="#FNanchor_2171" class="label">[2171]</a> Cic. <i>Balb.</i> 9. 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2172" href="#FNanchor_2172" class="label">[2172]</a> Cf. the bestowal of citizenship upon the Carthaginian Muttines by a plebiscite ex -auctoritate patrum in 210; Livy xxvii. 5. 7; Varro, in Ascon. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2173" href="#FNanchor_2173" class="label">[2173]</a> See the literature on the ius postliminii in Schiller, <i>Röm. Staatsalt.</i> 618. There -were certain cases of restoration of citizenship, however, which were thought to require -a comitial vote; Cic. <i>Balb.</i> 11. 28. But on this question opinions differed; -cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 656, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2174" href="#FNanchor_2174" class="label">[2174]</a> Cf. the lex Plautia Papiria, in Cic. <i>Arch.</i> 4. 7: “Data est civitas Silvani lege et -Carbonis: Si qui foederatis civitatibus adscripti fuissent, si tum, cum lex ferebatur, -in Italia domicilium habuissent et si sexaginta diebus apud praetorem essent professi”; -also <i>Balb.</i> 8. 19 (singillatim); <i>CIL.</i> ii. 159; iii. 5232 (viritim); Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2175" href="#FNanchor_2175" class="label">[2175]</a> Gell. xvi. 13. 6; Cic. <i>Balb.</i> 8. 21. Heraclea and Naples preferred their freedom; -Cic. ibid.; <i>Fam.</i> xiii. 30. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2176" href="#FNanchor_2176" class="label">[2176]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 133.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2177" href="#FNanchor_2177" class="label">[2177]</a> This spirit expressed itself in the lex Minicia of unknown date, though probably -anterior to the social war. It ordered that children born of a union between a -Roman and a person of a nationality with which there was no conubium should follow -the condition of the alien parent; Gaius i. 78 f.; Ulp. v. 8; Karlowa, <i>Röm. -Rechtsgesch.</i> ii. 182.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2178" href="#FNanchor_2178" class="label">[2178]</a> Livy xxxix. 3. 5 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2179" href="#FNanchor_2179" class="label">[2179]</a> Livy xli. 9. 9-11; Neumann, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, i. 21, 115; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 964, n. 1; Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 92, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2180" href="#FNanchor_2180" class="label">[2180]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 435 f.; cf. however Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 27; -Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 993.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2181" href="#FNanchor_2181" class="label">[2181]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 705; ii. 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2182" href="#FNanchor_2182" class="label">[2182]</a> Livy ix. 46; Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2183" href="#FNanchor_2183" class="label">[2183]</a> Livy xxxix. 19. 5 f.; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 52. 110; <i>Phil.</i> ii. 2. 3. A law of Augustus, 18 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, -permitted all excepting senators to marry freedwomen; Dio Cass. liv. 16. 2; -lvi. 7. 2. Conubium had not been impossible, but had been considered disgraceful -both by society and by the law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2184" href="#FNanchor_2184" class="label">[2184]</a> Cf. Livy x. 21. 4; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. 515; ii. 27; p. 60 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2185" href="#FNanchor_2185" class="label">[2185]</a> P. 334.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2186" href="#FNanchor_2186" class="label">[2186]</a> Livy, ep. xx; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 436, n. 3. The statement of the -epitomator is that by the censors “Libertini in quattuor tribus redacti sunt, cum -antea dispersi per omnes fuissent, Esquilinam,” etc. It refers either to the censorship -of Flaminius (Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 995) or far less probably to the one -immediately preceding. On the city tribes, see p. 64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2187" href="#FNanchor_2187" class="label">[2187]</a> P. 205 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2188" href="#FNanchor_2188" class="label">[2188]</a> Suet. <i>Claud.</i> 24; Livy vi. 46. 6; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 2. 32; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> iii. 422; Herzog, ibid. i. 977.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2189" href="#FNanchor_2189" class="label">[2189]</a> Plut. <i>Flamin.</i> 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2190" href="#FNanchor_2190" class="label">[2190]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 234; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 436 f. This interpretation -seems necessary notwithstanding Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 884.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2191" href="#FNanchor_2191" class="label">[2191]</a> As in 217; Livy xxii. 11. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2192" href="#FNanchor_2192" class="label">[2192]</a> In general, see Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 26-38; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. -420 ff.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 976 ff., 992 ff.; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i>, see index, s. -Libertini. On the censorial distribution of the libertini in 179, see p. 85, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2193" href="#FNanchor_2193" class="label">[2193]</a> P. 338.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2194" href="#FNanchor_2194" class="label">[2194]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 174, 211, 670; Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2195" href="#FNanchor_2195" class="label">[2195]</a> Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 17. 2; Diod. xxxvii. 3. 5; Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 23; Herzog, <i>Röm. -Staatsverf.</i> i. 425.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2196" href="#FNanchor_2196" class="label">[2196]</a> Macrob. ibid. § 3; Schol. Bob. 310; Fest. 242. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2197" href="#FNanchor_2197" class="label">[2197]</a> Fest. 201. 31; Cato, <i>Orat.</i> xxvii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2198" href="#FNanchor_2198" class="label">[2198]</a> Gell. ii. 24. 3; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 17. 3-5; Athen. vi. 274 C.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2199" href="#FNanchor_2199" class="label">[2199]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> x. 50. 139.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2200" href="#FNanchor_2200" class="label">[2200]</a> Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 17. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2201" href="#FNanchor_2201" class="label">[2201]</a> The author may, as Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 311, 672, assumes, be identical with -the Cn. Aufidius who was tribune in that year; Livy xliii. 8. 2. Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2288 f., regards the identity as no more than possible.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2202" href="#FNanchor_2202" class="label">[2202]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> viii. 17. 64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2203" href="#FNanchor_2203" class="label">[2203]</a> Cic. <i>Cornel.</i> i. 25 (Frag. A. vii); Ascon. 69.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2204" href="#FNanchor_2204" class="label">[2204]</a> Livy xxxiv. 44. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2205" href="#FNanchor_2205" class="label">[2205]</a> Mention of this law is made in connection only with the Roscian statute of 67, -which is spoken of as a restoration of an earlier act; p. 428 f. below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2206" href="#FNanchor_2206" class="label">[2206]</a> P. 253 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2207" href="#FNanchor_2207" class="label">[2207]</a> Cic. <i>Off.</i> ii. 21. 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2208" href="#FNanchor_2208" class="label">[2208]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 3. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2209" href="#FNanchor_2209" class="label">[2209]</a> <i>Dig.</i> xlviii. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2210" href="#FNanchor_2210" class="label">[2210]</a> <i>Curc.</i> 621 f.; <i>Merc.</i> 664 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2211" href="#FNanchor_2211" class="label">[2211]</a> In <i>Verhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> xxxvii (1885). 320.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2212" href="#FNanchor_2212" class="label">[2212]</a> Ibid. 327.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2213" href="#FNanchor_2213" class="label">[2213]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 663; cf. <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 144.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2214" href="#FNanchor_2214" class="label">[2214]</a> <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 780, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2215" href="#FNanchor_2215" class="label">[2215]</a> <i>Declam. in Cat.</i> 19. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 664 f., prefers to assign it to the -tribune of 139; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 563, n. 4, doubts its existence.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2216" href="#FNanchor_2216" class="label">[2216]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> viii. 12. 3; 14. 4; Suet. <i>Dom.</i> 8. 3 (Scantinius; Ihm); Juv. ii. 44; -Quint. <i>Inst.</i> iv. 2. 69. Voigt, in <i>Verhdl. d. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> xlii (1890), -273, assigns it to 226 or 225. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 667 f., places it between 227 and -50. The date 149 rests upon W. W. Fowler’s restoration of the new epitome, 115 f.: -“M. Sca(n)ti(ni)us ... am tulit (de) in stupro deprehensi(s).” Quite another -matter, however, is referred to in this passage, if Kornemann’s reading is correct: -“Sca(n)tius (qui repuls)am tulit in stupro deprehens(us se occidit).” The date -of the law, therefore, still remains in doubt.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2217" href="#FNanchor_2217" class="label">[2217]</a> Schol. Bob. 233; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 27. 106; <i>Off.</i> ii. 21. 75; <i>Verr.</i> iii. 84. 195; iv. 25. -56; Val. Max. vi. 9. 10; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xv. 20; Lex Acil. in <i>CIL.</i> i. 198. 23, 74, 81; -Mommsen, ibid. p. 54 f.; <i>Strafr.</i> 708; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 321 f., 664; Greenidge, -<i>Leg. Proced.</i> 419.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2218" href="#FNanchor_2218" class="label">[2218]</a> In general the leges repetundarum were for the protection of Italy as well as of -the provinces; cf. p. 376, 377, 442.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2219" href="#FNanchor_2219" class="label">[2219]</a> Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 17; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 415 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2220" href="#FNanchor_2220" class="label">[2220]</a> P. 255, n. 1 (3).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2221" href="#FNanchor_2221" class="label">[2221]</a> Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 13. 21; Censor, xx. 6. f.; Livy xliii. 11. 3; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> i. -353; ii. 223, 676; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Chron.</i> 40 ff.; Matzat, <i>Röm. Chron.</i> i. 46.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2222" href="#FNanchor_2222" class="label">[2222]</a> P. 116; cf. Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 308 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2223" href="#FNanchor_2223" class="label">[2223]</a> Schol. Bob. 319; cf. Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 26. 56: “De tempore legum rogandorum.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2224" href="#FNanchor_2224" class="label">[2224]</a> Livy, new ep. liv. 193 f.: “A. Gabinius verna(e ... rogationem tulit) suffragium -per ta(bellam ferri),” indicates servile descent.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2225" href="#FNanchor_2225" class="label">[2225]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 16. 35; cf. 15. 34; <i>Amic.</i> 12. 41; <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 2. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2226" href="#FNanchor_2226" class="label">[2226]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 16. 35 f.; <i>Brut.</i> 25. 97; 27. 106; <i>Sest.</i> 48. 103; <i>Amic.</i> 12. 41; -Ascon. 78; Pseud. Ascon. 141 f.; Schol. Bob. 303; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. 105-10; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 658; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 422; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. -340 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2227" href="#FNanchor_2227" class="label">[2227]</a> Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 30. 84; Ascon. 46; Val. Max. iii. 7. 9; cf. Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 25. 97; -Vell. ii. 10. 1; Val. Max. viii. 1. damn. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2228" href="#FNanchor_2228" class="label">[2228]</a> Cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 344; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 94.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2229" href="#FNanchor_2229" class="label">[2229]</a> See especially Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 15. 34: “Quis autem non sentit omnem auctoritatem -optimatium tabellariam legem abstulisse?”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2230" href="#FNanchor_2230" class="label">[2230]</a> P. 347.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2231" href="#FNanchor_2231" class="label">[2231]</a> P. 184.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2232" href="#FNanchor_2232" class="label">[2232]</a> App. <i>Lib.</i> 112 (White’s rendering); cf. Livy, ep. l.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2233" href="#FNanchor_2233" class="label">[2233]</a> Livy, ep. lvi; App. <i>Iber.</i> 84.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2234" href="#FNanchor_2234" class="label">[2234]</a> App. <i>Iber.</i> 83; cf. p. 188, n. 2, 342, 367.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2235" href="#FNanchor_2235" class="label">[2235]</a> Cic. <i>Amic.</i> 25. 96; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 335, 688.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2236" href="#FNanchor_2236" class="label">[2236]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2237" href="#FNanchor_2237" class="label">[2237]</a> Polyb. vi. 18. 5-8 (Shuckburgh’s rendering).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2238" href="#FNanchor_2238" class="label">[2238]</a> The main part of his history was composed before the third war with Carthage; -Christ, W., <i>Gesch. d. griech. Litteratur</i> (4th ed. 1905), 585; Cuntz, O., <i>Polybius und -sein Werk</i> (1902), 82. It is understood, however, that certain parts were inserted -after the beginning of the revolutionary period.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2239" href="#FNanchor_2239" class="label">[2239]</a> It is true that the Gracchan trouble opened his eyes to some of the defects in -the constitution; but the aristocratic recovery after the tribunate of Tiberius (and -perhaps after that of Gaius) confirmed his belief in the fundamental soundness and -in the recuperative power of the state.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2240" href="#FNanchor_2240" class="label">[2240]</a> P. 360 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2241" href="#FNanchor_2241" class="label">[2241]</a> Livy xxxv. 10. 12: “Multos pecuarios damnarunt.” In Livy xxxiv. 4. 9 Cato -while speaking in defence of the Oppian law, in 195, is represented as mentioning -the article which established the limit of five hundred iugera.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2242" href="#FNanchor_2242" class="label">[2242]</a> <i>Orig.</i> v. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2243" href="#FNanchor_2243" class="label">[2243]</a> These are provisions of an agrarian law passed before the tribunate of Ti. -Gracchus (App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 8. 33 f.) but not expressly referred to Licinius and Sextius -in any ancient source. The first article seems to assume a greater development of -slavery than could be true of the year 367, and the second would belong more naturally -to a repetition than to the original enactment; p. 296, n. 4, 334, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2244" href="#FNanchor_2244" class="label">[2244]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2245" href="#FNanchor_2245" class="label">[2245]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 9. 37 and 11. 46 states that an additional two hundred and fifty -iugera were allowed for each son, and Livy, ep. lviii, sets the maximum at a thousand -iugera. Combining the two sources, we reach the probable result given in the text; -cf. also (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 64. 3; Siculus Flacc. p. 136. 10 (CC is a corruption -of ↀ). See Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 450, n. 3; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. -114; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 87.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2246" href="#FNanchor_2246" class="label">[2246]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 9; cf. Greenidge, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2247" href="#FNanchor_2247" class="label">[2247]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 11. 46. It is not stated that these lots should become private -property. Appian mentions this article as the only compensation for improvements -on the lands surrendered. The fact that article 2 was withdrawn from the bill -before it became a law may account for its omission from this source.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2248" href="#FNanchor_2248" class="label">[2248]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 9; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2249" href="#FNanchor_2249" class="label">[2249]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 14: “<i>Sei quis</i> ... agri iugra non amplius xxx possidebit -habebitve.” In all probability this specification came originally from the Sempronian -law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2250" href="#FNanchor_2250" class="label">[2250]</a> Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 88; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 9; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 27. 121; -Weber, <i>Röm. Agrargesch.</i> 151.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2251" href="#FNanchor_2251" class="label">[2251]</a> This is a necessary deduction from a speech of Tiberius quoted by App. <i>B. C.</i> -i. 9. 35; cf. 11. 43; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 9. The <i>Lex Agr.</i> of 111 (<i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 21) -refers to assignments made by C. Gracchus to Latins and allies as compensation for -public lands surrendered by them to the government for colonial purposes; cf. § 31. -Doubtless a similar provision was included in the statute of Tiberius. Although -viritim assignments had hitherto benefited citizens only, Latins and Italians had been -admitted to Latin colonies founded by Rome; Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2252" href="#FNanchor_2252" class="label">[2252]</a> Cf. <i>Lex Agr.</i> in <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 6: “<i>Extra eum agrum, qui ager ex</i> lege plebive -scito, quod C. Sempronius Ti. f. tr(ibunus) pl(ebei) rog(avit), exceptum cavitumque -est nei divideretur.” The exceptions numbered from a to g in the text above are -taken from the agrarian law of 111. As these exceptions were made in the agrarian -law of C. Gracchus, it is here assumed that they were made previously by -Tiberius.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2253" href="#FNanchor_2253" class="label">[2253]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> in <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 31 f.; cf. Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> i. 4. 10; ii. 22. 58 (land held -similarly in Africa).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2254" href="#FNanchor_2254" class="label">[2254]</a> Cf. Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2255" href="#FNanchor_2255" class="label">[2255]</a> In the earliest arrangement of the kind the part was one third, as the name -indicates; Livy xxxi. 13. 9; <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 31 f.; cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 113; -Weber, <i>Röm. Agrargesch.</i> 149-51. The word is derived from trientare, as stabulum -from stare; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2256" href="#FNanchor_2256" class="label">[2256]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 14; cf. 25 f. See Mommsen’s comment, p. 91; Frontin. <i>Contr.</i> p. -15; Hygin. <i>Cond. Agr.</i> p. 116. 23; <i>Lim. Const.</i> p. 201. 12; Siculus Flacc. p. 157; -Weber, <i>Röm. Agrargesch.</i> 120 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2257" href="#FNanchor_2257" class="label">[2257]</a> Voigt, in <i>Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> x (1888). 229; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of -Rome</i>, i. 113.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2258" href="#FNanchor_2258" class="label">[2258]</a> <i>CIL.</i> ibid. 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2259" href="#FNanchor_2259" class="label">[2259]</a> <i>CIL.</i> 200. 1, 4, 6, 13, 22; cf. Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> i. 7. 21; ii. 29. 81; <i>Att.</i> i. 19. 4; -Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 91; Greenidge, ibid. 112 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2260" href="#FNanchor_2260" class="label">[2260]</a> <i>CIL.</i> ibid. 24-6; Voigt, ibid. 227. The classification of public land reserved -from distribution by the agrarian law of 111 is that of Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 90 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2261" href="#FNanchor_2261" class="label">[2261]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 12. 31; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 9. 37; Livy, ep. lviii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2262" href="#FNanchor_2262" class="label">[2262]</a> They are so called in <i>Lex Lat. Bant.</i> 15, in <i>CIL.</i> i. 197; <i>Lex Rep.</i> 13, 16, 22, -ibid. 198; <i>Lex Agr.</i> 16, ibid. 200.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2263" href="#FNanchor_2263" class="label">[2263]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> in <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 13 f., 17, 21-3; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 19. 4; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> -i. p. 87. Illegal occupations alone are thereafter mentioned; Cic. <i>Orat.</i> ii. 70. 284; -App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 36. 162.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2264" href="#FNanchor_2264" class="label">[2264]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 10; cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 121; Strachan-Davidson’s -explanation (<i>Appian</i>, p. 13) seems to be incorrect.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2265" href="#FNanchor_2265" class="label">[2265]</a> Livy, ep. lviii; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 10-3; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 12 f.; Cic. <i>N. D.</i> i. 38. -106.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2266" href="#FNanchor_2266" class="label">[2266]</a> Livy, ep. lviii; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 13. 55; Vell. ii. 2. 3; Flor. ii. 2. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2267" href="#FNanchor_2267" class="label">[2267]</a> P. 347 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2268" href="#FNanchor_2268" class="label">[2268]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2269" href="#FNanchor_2269" class="label">[2269]</a> Livy, ep. lviii: “Promulgavit et aliam legem agrariam, qua sibi latius agrum -patefaceret, ut iidem triumviri iudicarent, qua publicus ager, qua privatus esset.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2270" href="#FNanchor_2270" class="label">[2270]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 552-5, 583; ix. 1024 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2271" href="#FNanchor_2271" class="label">[2271]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 19. 78 f. The context indicates that in Appian’s opinion the people had -nothing to do with the measure.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2272" href="#FNanchor_2272" class="label">[2272]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 688 (cf. iii. 22) and Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 158, suppose -without evidence that Scipio effected his object by means of a law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2273" href="#FNanchor_2273" class="label">[2273]</a> P. 373 below. On the agrarian law of Ti. Gracchus, see further Long, <i>Rom. -Rep.</i> i. 159-91; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 445-52; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 382-400; -Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 110-28; Neumann, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, i. 156-84.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2274" href="#FNanchor_2274" class="label">[2274]</a> Livy, ep. lviii; Vell. ii. 2. 3: “Octavio collegae pro bono publico stanti imperium -abrogavit”; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 12; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 12; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 10. 24; Dio -Cass. Frag. 83. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2275" href="#FNanchor_2275" class="label">[2275]</a> P. 360.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2276" href="#FNanchor_2276" class="label">[2276]</a> Cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 12; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 80, 395; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> -i. 185 ff. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 125-7, and Pöhlmann, in <i>Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad.</i> -1907. 465 ff., contend for its legality.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2277" href="#FNanchor_2277" class="label">[2277]</a> P. 233 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2278" href="#FNanchor_2278" class="label">[2278]</a> P. 255.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2279" href="#FNanchor_2279" class="label">[2279]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 16; Dio Cass. Frag. 83. 7. These sources are obscure and -somewhat inconsistent. The proposals of Tiberius can, better than in any other -way though not with absolute certainty, be inferred from the laws of his brother.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2280" href="#FNanchor_2280" class="label">[2280]</a> P. 360.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2281" href="#FNanchor_2281" class="label">[2281]</a> P. 307 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2282" href="#FNanchor_2282" class="label">[2282]</a> Livy, ep. lix; Cic. <i>Amic.</i> 25. 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2283" href="#FNanchor_2283" class="label">[2283]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 21. 90: Καὶ γάρ τις ἤδη νόμος κεκύρωτο εἰ δήμαρχος ἐνδέοι ταῖς -παραγγλείαις, τὸν δῆμον ἐκ πάντων ἐπιλέγεσθαι. White translates, “For in cases where -there was not a sufficient number of candidates, the law authorizes the people to -choose from the whole number then in office”; and scholars usually suppose that in -the first clause reference is to candidates. But if tribunus, the equivalent of δήμαρχος, -stood in the law, it must have signified tribune, not candidate; and in that -case παραγγελίαις, however Appian may have understood it, must be the equivalent -of renuntiationibus, “announcements of votes.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2284" href="#FNanchor_2284" class="label">[2284]</a> Cf. Strachan-Davidson, <i>Appian</i>, p. 23. It was under the second contingency -that C. Gracchus was reëlected tribune without being a candidate; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 8. -The third time, though as some averred he had a majority of votes, the presiding -tribune dared reject them; ibid. 12; Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 94, n. 3. Fowler’s -suggestion (<i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> xx. 217) that the law permitted but one reëlection of -an individual is on the whole unlikely.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2285" href="#FNanchor_2285" class="label">[2285]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 16. 35; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 461; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, -i. 163 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2286" href="#FNanchor_2286" class="label">[2286]</a> The measure was being agitated at the time to which Cicero referred the dialogue -<i>On the Republic</i>, iv. 2; cf. Q. Cic. <i>Petit. Cons.</i> 8. 33; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -657; iii. 25. On the Claudian law, see p. 335 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2287" href="#FNanchor_2287" class="label">[2287]</a> P. 358.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2288" href="#FNanchor_2288" class="label">[2288]</a> <i>Lex Acil. Rep.</i> 23, 74, in <i>CIL.</i> i. 198; Zumpt, in <i>Abhdl. d. Akad. zu Berlin</i>, -1845. 1-70, 475-515; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 664; iii. 26; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> -420; <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 135, 211. The Latin Lex Bantina (<i>CIL.</i> i. 197), identified by -some with the Lex Iunia, seems rather to belong to the tribunate of C. Gracchus; -p. 379.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2289" href="#FNanchor_2289" class="label">[2289]</a> Cic. <i>Off.</i> iii. 11. 47; <i>Brut.</i> 28. 109; Fest. 286. 10; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. 237 f.; -Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 166 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2290" href="#FNanchor_2290" class="label">[2290]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i>, i. 21, 34. 152; Val. Max. ix. 5. 1; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 418-21; -Long, ibid. 241; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 462; Greenidge, ibid. 167 ff.; Meyer, -<i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 93; Fowler, in <i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> xx. 422.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2291" href="#FNanchor_2291" class="label">[2291]</a> In March, April, and May, according to Kornemann, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2292" href="#FNanchor_2292" class="label">[2292]</a> On the order of his enactments, see Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 38; Greenidge, <i>Hist. -of Rome</i>, i. 210; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 466; Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 95, n. -4; Kornemann, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 42 ff.; Fowler, in <i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> xx. (1905). -216 ff. Meyer calls attention to the fact that while Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 21 f., states the -enactments in substantially correct order, he wrongly identifies the date of reëlection—midsummer -123—with the date of entrance upon his second term—December -10, 123—in this way pushing forward into the second year a large group of enactments -which belong to the latter part of his first term.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2293" href="#FNanchor_2293" class="label">[2293]</a> P. 367.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2294" href="#FNanchor_2294" class="label">[2294]</a> Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 4; Diod. xxxv. 25, 2; Fest. ep. 23 (abacti); Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -i. 655; iii. 30 f.; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 202.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2295" href="#FNanchor_2295" class="label">[2295]</a> P. 368.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2296" href="#FNanchor_2296" class="label">[2296]</a> P. 255 f. For the comitial interdict against Popillius, see p. 256.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2297" href="#FNanchor_2297" class="label">[2297]</a> Cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 204 f.; Fowler, <i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> xx. 224.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2298" href="#FNanchor_2298" class="label">[2298]</a> Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> ii. 1346. For examples, see Marquardt, -<i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> ii. 114, and especially, Oliver, <i>Roman Economic Conditions</i>, 61 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2299" href="#FNanchor_2299" class="label">[2299]</a> Livy, ep. lx; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 21. 89; Schol. Bob. 303; Vell. ii. 6. 3; Plut. -<i>C. Gracch.</i> 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2300" href="#FNanchor_2300" class="label">[2300]</a> App. ibid. § 90; Diod. xxxv. 25; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 48. 103.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2301" href="#FNanchor_2301" class="label">[2301]</a> Cic. <i>Off.</i> ii. 21. 72; <i>Tusc.</i> iii. 20. 48; Diod. ibid; Oros. v. 12. 4; cf. Long, <i>Rom. -Rep.</i> i. 261-3; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 203-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2302" href="#FNanchor_2302" class="label">[2302]</a> The view here offered was suggested in Botsford, <i>History of Rome</i> (1901), 156. -It is presented in greater detail by Fowler, in <i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> xx (1905). 221 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2303" href="#FNanchor_2303" class="label">[2303]</a> Begun by his lex de provocatione; p. 371.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2304" href="#FNanchor_2304" class="label">[2304]</a> Placed before the frumentarian law by Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 31. Meyer, <i>Gesch. -d. Gracch.</i> 95, n. 4, and Kornemann, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 43, hold the view represented -above in the text.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2305" href="#FNanchor_2305" class="label">[2305]</a> Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2306" href="#FNanchor_2306" class="label">[2306]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 6, 22; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2307" href="#FNanchor_2307" class="label">[2307]</a> P. 364 f., 386.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2308" href="#FNanchor_2308" class="label">[2308]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 23. 98; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 6 f.; cf. Voigt, in <i>Verhdl. sächs. -Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> xxiv (1872). 68 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2309" href="#FNanchor_2309" class="label">[2309]</a> Livy, ep. lx; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 88.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2310" href="#FNanchor_2310" class="label">[2310]</a> Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 209; cf. <i>CIL.</i> i. 200, 1, 3, 4, 6, 22. Dio Cassius, -Frag. 84. 2, intimates that after the death of Scipio the distribution of the public land -was renewed with energy. Reference must accordingly be to the operation of the -law of Gaius.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2311" href="#FNanchor_2311" class="label">[2311]</a> Cf. App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 21 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2312" href="#FNanchor_2312" class="label">[2312]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 14. 58.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2313" href="#FNanchor_2313" class="label">[2313]</a> P. 358.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2314" href="#FNanchor_2314" class="label">[2314]</a> P. 345.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2315" href="#FNanchor_2315" class="label">[2315]</a> P. 368. The measure is referred to as a lex iudiciaria by Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 14. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2316" href="#FNanchor_2316" class="label">[2316]</a> The epitomator of Livy, lx, supposes that Gaius offered and actually carried a -measure for adding six hundred knights to the senate with the understanding that -the jurors were to be drawn from that body thus enlarged; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> -iii. 530, n. 1. Such an act, however, could not have been termed a lex iudiciaria, as -it would have been concerned simply with the composition of the senate. Everything -is opposed to the assumption that the bill in this form passed or at least that it was -put into effect. Plutarch, <i>C. Gracch.</i> 5 f., seems to signify that his law provided for -an album of six hundred jurors, one half to be drawn from the senate, the rest from -the knights. It is by no means necessary, with Fowler, in <i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> xx (1905). -426, n. 16, to interpret the expression ὁ δὲ τριακοσίους τῶν ἱππέων προσκατέλεξεν αὐτοῖς -οὖσι τριακοσίοις, καὶ τὰς κρίσεις κοινὰς τῶν ἑξακοσίωον ἐποίησε (cf. <i>Ag. et Cleom. et Gracch.</i> -<i>Comp.</i> 2) as “adding three hundred equites to the senate to form the body of iudices.” -These sources have confused the projects with the law as actually passed; cf. -Strachan-Davidson, <i>Appian</i>, p. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2317" href="#FNanchor_2317" class="label">[2317]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 22. 92; Vell. ii. 6. 3; 32. 3; Varro, in Non. Marc. 454; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> -xii. 60; Pseud. Ascon. 103, 145; Flor. ii. 1. 6; 5. 3 (iii. 13. 17); Diod. xxxv. 25; -Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 5; Livy, ep. lx; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 668; iii. 38-40; Herzog, -<i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 466 f.; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. 263-9; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 434; -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 212-7; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 457-64; Madvig, <i>Röm. Staat.</i> ii. -219-21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2318" href="#FNanchor_2318" class="label">[2318]</a> This is true at least of the extraordinary quaestio established by the Mamilian -law of 110; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 34. 128; cf. 33. 127; Schol. Bob. 311; Greenidge, <i>Leg. -Proced.</i> 381 f., 435.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2319" href="#FNanchor_2319" class="label">[2319]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 198.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2320" href="#FNanchor_2320" class="label">[2320]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 198. 16. There was under the republic a census qualification for the -knights who acted as iudices (Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 20), though we have no authority that -the limit of four hundred thousand sesterces existed before the principate. Originally -Mommsen supplied the lacuna with a statement of the money qualification as here -given; but afterward, changing his mind, he filled the gap with “equum publicum -habebit habuerit.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2321" href="#FNanchor_2321" class="label">[2321]</a> An article of the lex Acilia provides that within ten days after the enactment of -this statute the said praetor shall choose the four hundred and fifty persons from -whom the jurors of that court are to be drawn; thereafter the revision is to be -annual; <i>CIL.</i> i. 198. 12, 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2322" href="#FNanchor_2322" class="label">[2322]</a> Strachan-Davidson, <i>Appian</i>, p. 23, followed by Fowler, in <i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> xx. -429, identifies the two—on untenable ground, for the reliable sources speak distinctly -of a Sempronian law and an Acilian law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2323" href="#FNanchor_2323" class="label">[2323]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 531, n. 1, preferably regards the Sempronian as -the later; but in that case the transfer would have been achieved in substance by -the Acilian statute—a view which is contradicted by the sources.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2324" href="#FNanchor_2324" class="label">[2324]</a> This idea would explain the fact that the extant fragments of the lex Acilia -contain no reference to a Sempronian lex iudiciaria.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2325" href="#FNanchor_2325" class="label">[2325]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 17. 51 f.; II. i. 9. 26; <i>Brut</i>. 68. 239; Pseud. Ascon. 149, 165.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2326" href="#FNanchor_2326" class="label">[2326]</a> P. 370.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2327" href="#FNanchor_2327" class="label">[2327]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 198. Reference to the IIIviri of the Sempronian agrarian law (§ 13, -16, 22) proves it to belong to 133-119, while the fact that it does not admit senators -among the jurors requires it to follow the judiciary law of C. Gracchus; and more -particularly, the implication that at the time of its enactment the lex Rubria (p. 383 -below) was in force places it between 123 and 121; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 55; -Ruggiero, <i>Diz. Ep.</i> i. 41. In general on the law, see Rudorff, <i>Ad legem Aciliam</i>; -Zumpt, in <i>Abhdl. d. Akad. zu Berlin</i>, 1845. 1-70, 475-515; <i>Röm. Criminalr.</i> i. -99 ff.; Huschke, in <i>Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch.</i> v (1866). 46-84; Hesky, in <i>Wiener</i> -<i>Studien</i>, xxv (1903). 272-87; Brassloff, ibid. xxvi. 106-17; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. -664; iii. 40; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 642; <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 708 f.; Greenidge, -<i>Leg. Proced.</i> 420; <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 214, n. 2; Ruggiero, ibid. 41-4; Klebs, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 256.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2328" href="#FNanchor_2328" class="label">[2328]</a> <i>Lex Rep.</i> 2 f.; cf. 8 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2329" href="#FNanchor_2329" class="label">[2329]</a> <i>Lex Rep.</i> 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2330" href="#FNanchor_2330" class="label">[2330]</a> Vell. ii. 8. 1; cf. Cic. <i>Verr.</i> iii. 80. 184; Ruggiero, <i>Diz. Ep.</i> i. 42.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2331" href="#FNanchor_2331" class="label">[2331]</a> <i>Lex Rep.</i> 8 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2332" href="#FNanchor_2332" class="label">[2332]</a> The principle was expressed in an article of the lex Memmia de incestu of 111 -(Val. Max. iii. 7. 9), and probably in every law for the establishment of a court. It -was used throughout the history of the republic; cf. Livy x. 37. 7; 46. 16 (year 293); -p. 289 above; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 23 (59); Dio Cass. xxxix. 7. 3 (57).</p> - -<p>In this connection mention may be made of the lex Hostilia, which allowed actions -for theft to be brought in behalf of persons absent in the service of the state or -in captivity or in wardship; Just. <i>Inst.</i> iv. 10. The date is unknown, though Voigt, -<i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 282, n. 14, inclines to assign it to 209 or 207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2333" href="#FNanchor_2333" class="label">[2333]</a> <i>Lex Rep.</i> 19-26; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 216 f. Ruggiero, ibid. 43, is obviously -wrong.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2334" href="#FNanchor_2334" class="label">[2334]</a> <i>Lex Rep.</i> 76-8; cf. 83-5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2335" href="#FNanchor_2335" class="label">[2335]</a> § 28 states that money within a specified limit might legally be received—perhaps -by the patron of the accuser—from which we may infer that the law -defined precisely what was permitted and what forbidden all persons participating -in the trial; cf. Brassloff, in <i>Wiener Studien</i>, xxvi. 109 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2336" href="#FNanchor_2336" class="label">[2336]</a> Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 56. 154: “Illi (senatus) non hoc recusabant, ne ea lege accusarentur, -qua nunc Habitus accusatur, quae tum erat Sempronia, nunc est Cornelia” (“They did -not object to being accused under that law under which Habitus is now being tried, -which was then the Sempronian but is now the Cornelian statute”). The trial was -before the quaestio veneficis under the Cornelian law which constituted this court and -which is described as essentially identical with a Sempronian law. <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 200. -xxxiii: (“C. Claud. Ap. F. C. N. Pulcher) ... <span class="smcap">Iudex. Q. Veneficis</span>,” aedile -99, praetor 95, consul 92, corroborates the existence of such a court before Sulla. -For other proofs, see Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 36 ff.; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 664.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2337" href="#FNanchor_2337" class="label">[2337]</a> P. 255, n. 1 (4), 358.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2338" href="#FNanchor_2338" class="label">[2338]</a> Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 55. 151.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2339" href="#FNanchor_2339" class="label">[2339]</a> Ibid. 52. 144.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2340" href="#FNanchor_2340" class="label">[2340]</a> In 66 Cluentius Habitus was brought to trial before the quaestio inter sicarios -et veneficos on the charge (1) of having corrupted the jurors in an earlier trial of the -kind, (2) of poisoning; Cic. <i>Cluent.</i>; cf. Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2341" href="#FNanchor_2341" class="label">[2341]</a> The whole tenor of Cicero’s <i>Pro Cluentio</i> is to the effect that the knights were -not bound by the provision against bribery. He had a strong motive, however, -for bringing into prominence the article which provided for the punishment of magistrates -and senators, and for suppressing the one, if there was one, concerning the -punishment of equites; and this suppression was rendered easy by the fact that the -Cornelian law then in force mentioned senatorial jurors only. Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 22. -97 (cf. 35. 158, 161), assumes that under the Sempronian law there were trials for -the bribery of jurors, rendered useless, however, and finally done away with by the -conspiracy and violence of the knights; cf. Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 18 f. This interpretation -of the known facts seems preferable to the view of Cicero, which, however, is -accepted by most scholars; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 635; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> -421; <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 216 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2342" href="#FNanchor_2342" class="label">[2342]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 197; Ritschl. <i>Prisc. lat. mon. epigr. tab.</i> xix.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2343" href="#FNanchor_2343" class="label">[2343]</a> Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> p. 48-53; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, p. 26-9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2344" href="#FNanchor_2344" class="label">[2344]</a> As indicated by the “Ioudex, quei ex hace lege plebeive scito factus erit”; § 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2345" href="#FNanchor_2345" class="label">[2345]</a> Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 431. Kirchhoff, <i>Stadtrecht von Bantia</i>, 90-7, regards -it as a part of a judiciary law. Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 46 f., connects it with a -treaty between Rome and Bantia. See also Krüger-Brissaud, <i>Hist. d. source d. droit -Rom.</i> 94.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2346" href="#FNanchor_2346" class="label">[2346]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> iii. 6. 12; <i>Att.</i> i. 17. 9; Schol. Bob. 259; Vell. ii. 6. 3; Gell. xi. 10; -App. <i>B. C.</i> v. 4. 17 f.; Fronto, <i>Ad Verum</i>, p. 125; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 674 f.; iii. -34; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 468 f.; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 217-21. -Hitherto the senate had exercised unrestricted power in granting such remissions; -Polyb. vi. 17. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2347" href="#FNanchor_2347" class="label">[2347]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> v. 4. 19; Diod. xxxv. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2348" href="#FNanchor_2348" class="label">[2348]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 22. 94-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2349" href="#FNanchor_2349" class="label">[2349]</a> Varro, in Non. Marc. 454; Flor. ii. 5. 3 (iii. 17).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2350" href="#FNanchor_2350" class="label">[2350]</a> Diod. xxxvii. 9; cf. Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 9. 20. As a substitute for his law concerning -the taxation of Asia his opponents vainly offered the rogatio Aufeia, probably -pretorian, on the same subject; Gell. xi. 10; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 675; iii. 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2351" href="#FNanchor_2351" class="label">[2351]</a> Cic. <i>Prov. Cons.</i> 2. 3; <i>Balb.</i> 27. 61; <i>Dom.</i> 9. 24; <i>Fam.</i> i. 7. 10; Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 27; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 41; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 470. Before the enactment of -this law it was possible for the people to grant a province to whomsoever it pleased, -whether magistrate or private person. A lex of 131, probably tribunician, had given -the province of Asia to P. Licinius Crassus, consul; Livy, ep. lix; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> xi. 8. -18. The Sempronian law did not affect their right. In 107 a plebiscite of C. -Manlius granted Numidia, with the conduct of the Jugurthine war, to C. Marius, -consul; Sall. <i>Iug.</i> 73; Gell. vii. 11. 2; <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 290 f. On the Sulpician law for -granting the conduct of the Mithridatic war to Marius, then a private citizen, see -p. 404.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2352" href="#FNanchor_2352" class="label">[2352]</a> Cic. <i>Prov. Cons.</i> 7. 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2353" href="#FNanchor_2353" class="label">[2353]</a> Cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 222 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2354" href="#FNanchor_2354" class="label">[2354]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 672.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2355" href="#FNanchor_2355" class="label">[2355]</a> P. 368.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2356" href="#FNanchor_2356" class="label">[2356]</a> Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 5; cf. Livy xxv. 5. 5-8. In speaking on the rogation of Cn. -Marcius Censorinus, a proposal not otherwise known, Gaius is said to have remarked: -“Si vobis probati essent homines adulescentes, tamen necessario vobis tribuni militares -veteres faciundi essent”; Charis. 208. The new epitome of Livy proves that -the military question was more prominently before the public at this time than has -hitherto been supposed.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2357" href="#FNanchor_2357" class="label">[2357]</a> XXXV. 25. For the Gracchi in general Diodorus draws from Posidonius, an -exceedingly hostile source.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2358" href="#FNanchor_2358" class="label">[2358]</a> Livy lx; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 23 f.; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 6, 8 f.; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> -65. 3. The date is established by Vell. i. 15. 4; Oros. v. 12. 1; cf. Meyer, <i>Gesch. -d. Gracch.</i> 95, n. 4; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> p. 87, 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2359" href="#FNanchor_2359" class="label">[2359]</a> Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 9; cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 224 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2360" href="#FNanchor_2360" class="label">[2360]</a> Vell. i. 15. 4; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 65. 3; cf. Kornemann, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 522; Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 55. His plan to colonize Capua (Plut. <i>C. -Gracch.</i> 8) was not carried out.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2361" href="#FNanchor_2361" class="label">[2361]</a> The lex Sempronia or Graccana, mentioned in the <i>Liber Coloniarum</i>, in <i>Gromatici</i> -(Lachmann), p. 229, 233, 237, 238; cf. p. 216, 219, 228, 255; cf. Greenidge, -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 224, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2362" href="#FNanchor_2362" class="label">[2362]</a> This fact is deduced from the literary references to the subject and from the -terms of the agrarian law of 111; <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 5, 13; cf. Mommsen’s comment, p. 90. -The same principle holds for any other colonies founded in Italy between 133 -and 111.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2363" href="#FNanchor_2363" class="label">[2363]</a> <i>Lex Acil.</i>, in <i>CIL.</i> i. 198. 22; <i>Lex Agr.</i>, <i>CIL.</i> i. 200. 59; Vell. i. 15. 4; ii. 7. 8; -Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 10 f.; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 24; <i>Pun.</i> 136; Livy, ep. lx; Fronto, <i>Ad -Verum</i>, ii. p. 125; Sol. 28. For the date, see Vell. i. 15. 4; Oros. v. 12. 1; -Eutrop. iv. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2364" href="#FNanchor_2364" class="label">[2364]</a> Vell. ii. 6. 2; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 5, 8 f.; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 23. 99; 34. 153; cf. Herzog, -<i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 474 f.; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, 233-7. About the end of -123 or the beginning of 122 Gaius had proposed to give the Latins equal suffrage -with the Romans; Plut. ibid. 8 f.: Kornemann, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 45. The promulgation -of this earlier rogation must have preceded that of the Livian bills.</p> - -<p>The bill (or possibly bills) which included the Italians among the recipients of -the citizenship could have been offered only between his return from Carthage and -the elections of midsummer, 122; Kornemann, ibid. 51; Fowler, in <i>Eng. Hist. Rev.</i> -xx. 425.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2365" href="#FNanchor_2365" class="label">[2365]</a> Cf. Fannius, in Jul. Victor vi. 6. p. 224 Or.; Charisius, p. 143 Keil.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2366" href="#FNanchor_2366" class="label">[2366]</a> Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 23. 101; Plut. C. <i>Gracch.</i> 9. Plutarch, who alone speaks of -the exemption from rent, seems to consider the measure to have applied retroactively -to the Sempronian settlements as well as to those proposed by Livius. Although -this could hardly have been the intention of the Livian act, the exemption of the -colonists under it would naturally lead to the extension of equal privileges to the -beneficiaries of the Sempronian agrarian laws.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2367" href="#FNanchor_2367" class="label">[2367]</a> Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 35. 156 (cf. p. 397 below) assumes that the colonial bill of -Livius became a law. If that is true, there is no reason for supposing that the other -was dropped before being brought to vote. Gaius might have prevented both by -his veto (Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 45); but even if he felt the intention to be mischievous, -he could not have afforded to oppose so popular measures. Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> -i. p. 87, is of the opinion that Minervia may have been a Livian colony; but he cannot -understand why the others provided for were not founded. The reason doubtless -is that the senate, which had used Livius as a tool, never seriously intended to -execute the law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2368" href="#FNanchor_2368" class="label">[2368]</a> A rogation of Gaius, proposed about the same time as the lex de civitate danda, -concerning the order of voting in the comitia centuriata is mentioned by (Sall.) -<i>Rep. Ord.</i> ii. 8: “Mihi ... placet lex quam C. Gracchus in tribunatu promulgaverit, -ut ex confusis quinque classibus sorte centuriae vocarentur: ita coaequatur -dignitate pecunia.” His object, to eliminate the influence of wealth, could be -achieved by determining by lot the order of voting of the five classes; or a new -grouping of the centuries could be substituted for the classes; but he could not -have proposed that the centuries should vote one by one.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2369" href="#FNanchor_2369" class="label">[2369]</a> We know that in 91 they vehemently opposed the admission of the allies; p. -399, 400 below; cf. Meyer, <i>Gesch. d. Gracch.</i> 106, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2370" href="#FNanchor_2370" class="label">[2370]</a> Opimius, consul in 121, ordered the equites to come each with two armed -slaves to the support of the government; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 14. Sallust, <i>Iug.</i> 42, -states that the senate, by holding out to the equites the hope of an alliance with the -aristocracy, detached them from the plebs; cf. Meyer, ibid. 106.</p> - -<p>The lex Acilia Rubria, passed most probably in 122, seems to have had to do -with the participation of aliens in the worship of Jupiter Capitolinus; <i>S. C. de -Astypalaeensibus</i>, in <i>CIG.</i> ii. 2485. 11 (cf. Böckh’s comment); Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -iii. 42. It is to be connected with the rogation for granting the citizenship to the -allies, and probably aimed to liberalize the worship in the Sempronian spirit.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2371" href="#FNanchor_2371" class="label">[2371]</a> Cf. Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 231.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2372" href="#FNanchor_2372" class="label">[2372]</a> Dio Cassius, Frag. 85. 3, in a mutilated passage seems to refer to the great possibilities -of a longer career. It would be unreasonable to suppose that so creative a -mind could rest content at any given point.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2373" href="#FNanchor_2373" class="label">[2373]</a> Fest. 201. 19; Flor. ii. 3. 4 (iii. 15); Diod. xxxiv. 28 a (from Posidonius); -(Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 65. 5; Oros. v. 12. 5; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 13; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 24. -105; <i>Pun.</i> 136; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 47; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 248; Mommsen, -in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2374" href="#FNanchor_2374" class="label">[2374]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 27. 121; cf. Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. 352; Greenidge, ibid. i. 285; -Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 4 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2375" href="#FNanchor_2375" class="label">[2375]</a> Ibid. § 122.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2376" href="#FNanchor_2376" class="label">[2376]</a> It seems to be a mistake for Spurius Thorius (Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 36. 136: “Sp. Thorius -.... qui agrum publicum vitiosa et inutili lege vectigali levavit”). By interpreting -this sentence “Sp. Thorius ... who relieved the public land of a defective -and useless law by the imposition of a vectigal,” Mommsen (in <i>Verhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. -d. Wiss.</i> 92 f.) attempts to bring Cicero into agreement with Appian. But the interpretation -is violent and is not generally accepted. The statement of Cicero applies -to the law of 111 far better than to that which Appian mentions under the name of -Borius.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2377" href="#FNanchor_2377" class="label">[2377]</a> App. ibid.; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 688; iii. 51; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. 353 f.; Ihne, -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 9; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 285-8. If, as Greenidge supposes, -the Livian colonial rogation became a law, it did not affect the vectigal imposed by -the Sempronian statutes (p. 383 above).</p> - -<p>It may have been as a compensation for the repeal of this Sempronian statute and -of that of Rubrius that a lex of an unknown author provided in this year for the -establishment of the colony of Narbo Martius in Narbonensis; Vell. i. 15. 5; ii. 7. -8; Eutrop. iv. 23; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 43. 160; <i>Cluent.</i> 51. 140; <i>Font.</i> 5. 13; Kornemann, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 522.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2378" href="#FNanchor_2378" class="label">[2378]</a> <i>Brut.</i> 36. 136 (quoted p. 385, n. 5 above); cf. <i>Orat.</i> ii. 70. 284; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. -27. 123; <i>CIL.</i> i. 200; Rudorff, in <i>Zeitschr. f. gesch. Rechtswiss.</i> x (1842). 1-194; -Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 75 ff.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 478; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. -351-86; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 288.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2379" href="#FNanchor_2379" class="label">[2379]</a> The classification here given is a close reproduction of Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. -87-106; cf. <i>Verhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> i. 89-101.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2380" href="#FNanchor_2380" class="label">[2380]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> 27 (cf. 4), in <i>CIL.</i> i. 200.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2381" href="#FNanchor_2381" class="label">[2381]</a> Ibid. 20-23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2382" href="#FNanchor_2382" class="label">[2382]</a> Ibid. 2; cf. 13 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2383" href="#FNanchor_2383" class="label">[2383]</a> Ibid. 3, 15 f. The word sortito in these passages, e.g. “IIIvir sortito ceivi -Romano dedit adsignavit,” proves a reference to the founding of colonies, as viritim -assignations were not by lot; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 87.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2384" href="#FNanchor_2384" class="label">[2384]</a> Ibid. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2385" href="#FNanchor_2385" class="label">[2385]</a> Ibid. 13 f. Although occupation was forbidden by the agrarian law of Ti. -Gracchus (p. 366 above), they did take place, and are legalized by this article -of the law of 111, in so far as they do not exceed the specified limit.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2386" href="#FNanchor_2386" class="label">[2386]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> 12: “Eum agrum quem ex h(ace) l(ege) venire dari reddive oportebit”; -cf. 32. We do not know what land is meant. Perhaps Sipontia is included -in this category; cf. 43; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2387" href="#FNanchor_2387" class="label">[2387]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> 19 f.; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 27. 123; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 36. 136: “Sp. Thorius ... -qui agrum publicum vitiosa et inutili lege vectigali levavit” (“Sp. Thorius ... who -by a mischievous and useless law freed the public land of vectigal”).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2388" href="#FNanchor_2388" class="label">[2388]</a> P. 365.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2389" href="#FNanchor_2389" class="label">[2389]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> 11-3; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2390" href="#FNanchor_2390" class="label">[2390]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> 45, 55, 59-61, 66-9, 79, 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2391" href="#FNanchor_2391" class="label">[2391]</a> Ibid. 75 f., 79 f., 85.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2392" href="#FNanchor_2392" class="label">[2392]</a> Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 98 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2393" href="#FNanchor_2393" class="label">[2393]</a> <i>Lex Agr.</i> 96. This part of the inscription is hopelessly mutilated.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2394" href="#FNanchor_2394" class="label">[2394]</a> Ibid. 29.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2395" href="#FNanchor_2395" class="label">[2395]</a> P. 385.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2396" href="#FNanchor_2396" class="label">[2396]</a> P. 255.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2397" href="#FNanchor_2397" class="label">[2397]</a> P. 256 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2398" href="#FNanchor_2398" class="label">[2398]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 34. 128; cf. <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 15. 38; <i>Red. ad Quir.</i> 4. 9; 5. 11; Greenidge, -<i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 279 f.; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 6 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2399" href="#FNanchor_2399" class="label">[2399]</a> P. 255.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2400" href="#FNanchor_2400" class="label">[2400]</a> Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xii. 60, confirmed by a statement of Cicero, in Ascon. 79, that senators -and knights first sat together as jurors under the Plautian law of 89 (p. 402 below).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2401" href="#FNanchor_2401" class="label">[2401]</a> Cassiod. <i>Chron.</i> 384 C: “Per Servilium Caepionem consulem iudicia equitatibus -et senatoribus communicata”; Obseq. 41 (101).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2402" href="#FNanchor_2402" class="label">[2402]</a> Cf. further Cic. <i>Inv.</i> i. 49. 92; <i>Brut.</i> 43. 161; 44. 164; <i>Cluent.</i> 51. 140; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 668; iii. 67 f.; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. 2 f.; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. -477-82. But that the knights continued in uninterrupted possession of the courts is -proved by Cicero, <i>Verr.</i> i. 13. 38; Pseud. Ascon. 103, 145.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2403" href="#FNanchor_2403" class="label">[2403]</a> P. 355.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2404" href="#FNanchor_2404" class="label">[2404]</a> (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 72. 5; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 53; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 478. His lex sumptuaria of the same year, perhaps combined in one law -with the provision concerning the libertini, limited not only the expense of meals -but also the kind of food and the mode of preparing it; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> viii. 57. 223; -cf. Gell. ii. 24. 12; (Aurel. Vict.) ibid.—Two other sumptuary laws, both of which -were enacted before 97, may be mentioned here. The statute of P. Licinius Crassus, -pretorian or tribunician, ex senatus consulto, perhaps 104, made some changes in -the lex Fannia and the lex Didia; Gell. ii. 24. 7; xv. 8; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 17. 7; -Fest. ep. 54; p. 356 above.—It was repealed by the plebiscite of M. Duronius before -97; Val. Max ii. 9. 5; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 71, 88.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2405" href="#FNanchor_2405" class="label">[2405]</a> Ascon. 67 f.; cf. p. 382, 392.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2406" href="#FNanchor_2406" class="label">[2406]</a> The reading of the MS. of Velleius, ii. 11. 1 (“natus equestri loco”) should not -be corrected to “agresti loco” to conform with Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 3. Velleius has mentioned -his equestrian birth to explain his connections with the publicans referred to -in the following sentence.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2407" href="#FNanchor_2407" class="label">[2407]</a> The opposition of Marius to the populace is proved by his intercession against -a frumentarian rogation of the same year, the purport of which is not definitely -stated; Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2408" href="#FNanchor_2408" class="label">[2408]</a> Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 15. 36; <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 11. 28. On the pontes, see p. 469.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2409" href="#FNanchor_2409" class="label">[2409]</a> Varro, <i>R. R.</i> iii. 5. 18. On the custodes, see also p. 467 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2410" href="#FNanchor_2410" class="label">[2410]</a> Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 5. 11; <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 7. 17; cf. p. 466.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2411" href="#FNanchor_2411" class="label">[2411]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 17. 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2412" href="#FNanchor_2412" class="label">[2412]</a> Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 4; Cic. ibid.; Lange, <i>Rom. Alt.</i> ii. 490; iii. 51; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> -i. 322 f.; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 304-6. The opposition of the consuls to this -measure, and the consequent threat of Marius to imprison them, Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, -v. 8, regards as a farce. This interpretation of the circumstances, however, is unnecessary -for explaining the policy of Marius; as a champion of the peasants, rather -than of the plebs as a whole, be consistently passed his election law and opposed the -frumentarian bill.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2413" href="#FNanchor_2413" class="label">[2413]</a> Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 42.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2414" href="#FNanchor_2414" class="label">[2414]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 16. 36; Oros. v. 15. 24; cf. Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -iv. 195 f.; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 527; iii. 66. On the leges tabellariae in general, see -Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iv. 94, 340; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. 105-10; Lange, ibid. see -indices, s. v.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2415" href="#FNanchor_2415" class="label">[2415]</a> P. 388.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2416" href="#FNanchor_2416" class="label">[2416]</a> Cic. <i>N. D.</i> iii. 30. 74; Ascon. 46; Livy, ep. lxiii; Dio Cass. Frag. 87; Macrob. -<i>Sat.</i> i. 10. 5 f. A plebiscite of C. Memmius, 111, de incestu (p. 377, n. 5) refers to -the same subject.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2417" href="#FNanchor_2417" class="label">[2417]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 697 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2418" href="#FNanchor_2418" class="label">[2418]</a> Sall. <i>Iug</i>. 40. 65; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 33. 127 f.; Schol. Bob. 311. In 111 a plebiscite -of the C. Memmius mentioned in n. 4 had commissioned L. Cassius, praetor, to bring -Jugurtha to Rome as a witness against those accused of having bribed him; Sall. -<i>Iug.</i> 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2419" href="#FNanchor_2419" class="label">[2419]</a> Livy, ep. lxvii; Ascon. 78; cf. (Cic.) <i>Herenn.</i> i. 14. 24, which refers to a defence -against the tribunes. For the earliest case of the kind, see p. 360; cf. p. 342.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2420" href="#FNanchor_2420" class="label">[2420]</a> The court was established by a plebiscite of C. Norbanus, 104; Dio Cass. -Frag. 90; Gell. iii. 9. 7; Strabo iv. 1. 13; Cic. <i>N. D.</i> iii. 30. 74; <i>Balb.</i> 11. 28; Val. -Max. iv. 7. 3; vi. 9. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2421" href="#FNanchor_2421" class="label">[2421]</a> Ascon. 78: “Ut, quem populus damnasset cuive imperium abrogasset, in senatu -non esset.” The disgraceful defeat of Caepio in Gaul and his embezzlement of the -treasury found at Tolosa excited the people to this line of action; cf. Herzog, <i>Röm. -Staatsverf.</i> i. 484. On the author, see Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. -1738. 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2422" href="#FNanchor_2422" class="label">[2422]</a> The lex Acilia repetundarum (<i>CIL.</i> i. 198. 13, 16), adopted in 122, implies that -they did not have the right; but they must have acquired it before 102; App. <i>B. C.</i> -i. 28. 126.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2423" href="#FNanchor_2423" class="label">[2423]</a> Ateius Capito, in Gell. xiv. 8. 2; Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 228.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2424" href="#FNanchor_2424" class="label">[2424]</a> P. 341.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2425" href="#FNanchor_2425" class="label">[2425]</a> Cic. <i>Amic.</i> 25. 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2426" href="#FNanchor_2426" class="label">[2426]</a> Cic. ibid.; <i>Brut.</i> 21. 83; <i>N. D.</i> iii. 2. 5; 17. 43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2427" href="#FNanchor_2427" class="label">[2427]</a> P. 347.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2428" href="#FNanchor_2428" class="label">[2428]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 7. 18; <i>Fam.</i> viii. 4. 1; <i>Ad Brut.</i> i. 5. 3; <i>Phil.</i> ii. 2. 4; xiii. 5. -12; Suet, <i>Ner.</i> 2; Vell. ii. 12. 3; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 537, 675; iii. 71; Wissowa, -<i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm</i>, 418; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> i. 49 f.; ii. 40-2; Herzog, <i>Röm. -Staatsverf.</i> i. 484 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2429" href="#FNanchor_2429" class="label">[2429]</a> Priscian, <i>Inst. Gram.</i> p. 90: “Cato nepos de actionibus ad populum, ne lex -sua abrogetur: facite vobis in mentem veniat, quirites, ex aere alieno in hac civitate -et in aliis omnibus propter diem atque fenus saepissimam discordiam fuisse.” This -is the only source for the measure.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2430" href="#FNanchor_2430" class="label">[2430]</a> P. 388 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2431" href="#FNanchor_2431" class="label">[2431]</a> Ascon. 67 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2432" href="#FNanchor_2432" class="label">[2432]</a> The only source is Cic. <i>Off.</i> ii. 21. 73.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2433" href="#FNanchor_2433" class="label">[2433]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 3. 46; Mommsen-Blacas, <i>Hist. d. mon. Rom</i>, ii. 101 (for -date and character).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2434" href="#FNanchor_2434" class="label">[2434]</a> P. 389.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2435" href="#FNanchor_2435" class="label">[2435]</a> Ascon. 21; Cic. <i>Rab. Post.</i> 4. 9; <i>Balb.</i> 23. 53; 24. 54. Cicero here informs -us that by a provision of this law citizenship was offered to Latins as a reward -for evidence in cases arising under it. This article was borrowed from the lex -Acilia; p. 378. See also Val. Max viii. 1. 8; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 62. 224; Greenidge, <i>Hist. of -Rome</i>, i. 309-11. Proof of the repeal of the Acilian law no later than that year is -the circumstance that on the reverse of the stone which contains it is inscribed -the agrarian law of 111; Mommsen, <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 55 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2436" href="#FNanchor_2436" class="label">[2436]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 9. 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2437" href="#FNanchor_2437" class="label">[2437]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Post.</i> 4. 8 f. The quotation is from Greenidge, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, i. 310.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2438" href="#FNanchor_2438" class="label">[2438]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Post.</i> 4. 9; cf. Mommsen. <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 709; Greenidge, <i>Leg. -Proced.</i> 423.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2439" href="#FNanchor_2439" class="label">[2439]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 62. 224.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2440" href="#FNanchor_2440" class="label">[2440]</a> (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 73. 1: “Ut gratiam Marianorum militum pararet, -legem tulit, ut veteranis centena agri iugera in Africa dividerentur, intercedentem -Baebium collegam facta per populum lapidatione submovit”; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -iii. 76; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 485; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -ii. 262. In the opinion of Mühl, <i>App. Sat.</i> 77 f., the colonia Mariana (p. 396 below) -was founded under this law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2441" href="#FNanchor_2441" class="label">[2441]</a> P. 86, 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2442" href="#FNanchor_2442" class="label">[2442]</a> Cic. <i>Orat.</i> ii. 25. 107; 49. 201; <i>N. D.</i> iii. 30. 74.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2443" href="#FNanchor_2443" class="label">[2443]</a> As indicated by the fact that the trial of C. Norbanus in 95 took place under -the law; Cic. <i>Orat.</i> 21. 89; 25. 107; 50. 203; <i>Off.</i> ii. 14. 49; Val. Max. viii. 5. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2444" href="#FNanchor_2444" class="label">[2444]</a> The theory that the court established by the Appuleian law was special is -held by Mommsen, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, iii (1898). 440, n. 1; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 664, n. 1; -<i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 198. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 76, 82, supposes that in his first tribunate -he established a special court and in his second by his lex maiestatis a quaestio -perpetua. Mühl, <i>App. Sat.</i> 74, also strongly favors the second. The statement of -Gran. Licin. xxxiii (?). 4—“Cn. Manilius (for Manlius or Mallius; cf. <i>CIL.</i> i². -p. 152 f.) ob eandem causam quam et Cepio L. Saturnini rogatione e civitate est cito -(for plebiscito?) eiectus”—Lange applies to the rogation for a special court. -The circumstance that the trial of Norbanus took place no less than five years -after the enactment of the law and the general tenor of Cicero’s account of that -trial (see n. 4 above) point clearly to the existence of a standing court; cf. Herzog, -<i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 485; Madvig, <i>Röm. Staat.</i> ii. 275; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 262 f.; Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 23-32.</p> - -<p>To the same tribune, either in 103 or in 100, may belong the lex Appuleia de -sponsu (Gaius iii. 122; p. 298, n. 1 above). In that case the lex Furia de sponsu -(Gaius iii. 121; iv. 22; cf. same page above) must belong to the first century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2445" href="#FNanchor_2445" class="label">[2445]</a> (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 73. 5: “Tribunus plebis refectus (Saturninus) Siciliam, -Achaiam, Macedoniam novis colonis destinavit et aurum (Tolosanum), dolo an -scelere Caepionis partum, ad emptionem agrorum convertit.” For Corsica, see -p. 396.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2446" href="#FNanchor_2446" class="label">[2446]</a> Cic. <i>Balb.</i> 21. 48. The MS. reads “ternos,” which may be a mistake for a -larger number (trecenos?).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2447" href="#FNanchor_2447" class="label">[2447]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 29. 130, 132; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. 111 f.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 486.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2448" href="#FNanchor_2448" class="label">[2448]</a> (Cic.) <i>Herenn.</i> i. 12. 21; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. 114 f.; Herzog, ibid. i. 486 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2449" href="#FNanchor_2449" class="label">[2449]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 29. 131; cf. Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 29.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2450" href="#FNanchor_2450" class="label">[2450]</a> Cf. Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 265.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2451" href="#FNanchor_2451" class="label">[2451]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 30 f.; Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 29; (Aurel. Vict.) Vir. <i>Ill.</i> 73; 8; Vell. ii. -15. 4; Val. Max iii. 8. 4; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 31. 82; <i>Har. Resp.</i> 19. 41; <i>Sest.</i> 47. 101; <i>Leg.</i> -iii. 11. 26. After the downfall of Appuleius, Metellus was recalled by a plebiscite -of Q. Calidius, 98; Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 28. 69; <i>Dom.</i> 32. 87; <i>Red. ad Quir.</i> 4. 9; 5. 11; -Val. Max. v. 2. 7; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 33. 147-9; Dio Cass. Frag. 95. 1; (Aurel. Vict.) -<i>Vir. Ill.</i> 62. 3. On this Calidius, see further Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -iii. 1354. 5. A fruitless attempt to recall Metellus had been made in 99 -through the tribunician rogatio Porcia Pompeia; Oros. v. 17. 11; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. -33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2452" href="#FNanchor_2452" class="label">[2452]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 6. 14. According to Oros. v. 12. 10, P. Furius, tribune in 99, -secured the enactment of a law for confiscating the property of those who conspired -against the state.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2453" href="#FNanchor_2453" class="label">[2453]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> iii. 12. 80: “Marianam a C. Mario deductam”; Seneca, <i>Ad. Helv.</i> -vii. 9; Solin. iii. 3; Mela ii. 7. 122; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> x. p. 838, 997; Kornemann, -in Pauly Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 522.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2454" href="#FNanchor_2454" class="label">[2454]</a> Obseq. 46 (106); Val. Max viii. 1. damn. 3; cf. Cic. <i>Orat.</i> ii. 11. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2455" href="#FNanchor_2455" class="label">[2455]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 6. 14; 12. 31; Obseq. ibid. A criminal lex Titia, the contents of -which also are unknown—Auson. <i>Epigr.</i> 92 (89). 4—may belong to this tribune; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 661, 668.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2456" href="#FNanchor_2456" class="label">[2456]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 20. 53; <i>Leg.</i> iii. 4. 11; 19. 43. The enactment was merely the -confirmation of an old custom or law introduced between the Licinian-Sextian legislation -and 122; cf. <i>Lex Acil.</i> 72, in <i>CIL.</i> i. 198.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2457" href="#FNanchor_2457" class="label">[2457]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 16. 41; <i>Sest.</i> 64. 135; Schol. Bob. 310. This, too, was a confirmation -of an earlier usage; Dion. Hal. vii. 58. 3; x. 3. 5; Livy iii. 35. 1; p. 189, 260, -n. 1 above; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 336, 376 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2458" href="#FNanchor_2458" class="label">[2458]</a> Cic. <i>Off.</i> iii. 11. 47; cf. p. 354, 370.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2459" href="#FNanchor_2459" class="label">[2459]</a> Cic. <i>Balb.</i> 21. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2460" href="#FNanchor_2460" class="label">[2460]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 16. 63; Schol. Bob. 296.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2461" href="#FNanchor_2461" class="label">[2461]</a> Cic. Frag. A. vii. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2462" href="#FNanchor_2462" class="label">[2462]</a> Ascon. 67. On the law in general, see Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 90; Long, <i>Rom. -Rep.</i> ii. 128; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 490. On Caecilius and Didius, see Münzer, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1216. 95; v. 407-10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2463" href="#FNanchor_2463" class="label">[2463]</a> Vell. ii. 13. 1; Dio Cass. Frag. 96. 2; Diod. xxxvii. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2464" href="#FNanchor_2464" class="label">[2464]</a> The citations of the preceding note, and Ascon. 68; Livy, ep. lxx; less clearly -Flor. ii. 5. 1, 4 (iii. 17).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2465" href="#FNanchor_2465" class="label">[2465]</a> (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 66. 4 f.; <i>CIL.</i> vi. 1312 (i. p. 279 vii). Livy, ep. lxxi, -merely mentions them.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2466" href="#FNanchor_2466" class="label">[2466]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 35. 156.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2467" href="#FNanchor_2467" class="label">[2467]</a> P. 383 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2468" href="#FNanchor_2468" class="label">[2468]</a> This may be inferred from the silence of Cicero, <i>Leg. Agr.</i> i. 7. 21; ii. 29. 81; -cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 102; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 181; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> -i. 490.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2469" href="#FNanchor_2469" class="label">[2469]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> 36. 162 f.; Flor. ii. 5. 6 (iii. 17): “Exstat vox ipsius nihil se ad -largitionem ulli reliquisse nisi siquis aut caenum dividere vellet aut caelum.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2470" href="#FNanchor_2470" class="label">[2470]</a> <i>CIL.</i> vi. 1312; cf. i. p. 279. vii. A beginning was actually made of the colonization; -and this is all that could be indicated by the verb ὑπήγετο (App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 35. -156), “he was for conducting.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2471" href="#FNanchor_2471" class="label">[2471]</a> Ep. lxxi.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2472" href="#FNanchor_2472" class="label">[2472]</a> Cf. Vell. ii. 13. 2; Livy, ep. lxx f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2473" href="#FNanchor_2473" class="label">[2473]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 3. 46. The idea was to issue one silver-plated copper denarius -to every seven silver denarii; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Münzw.</i> 387 (Mommsen-Blacas, -<i>Hist. d. mon. Rom</i>, ii. 41 f., 82); Babelon, <i>Mon. d. la rép. Rom</i>, 1. introd. p. -lix.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2474" href="#FNanchor_2474" class="label">[2474]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 674; iii. 103.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2475" href="#FNanchor_2475" class="label">[2475]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 35. 157 f. The same view seems to be held by (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> -66. 4. It is accepted by Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 97; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 436. -The objection is that a judiciary measure, as the Livian, could not have dealt primarily -with the composition of the senate; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 489.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2476" href="#FNanchor_2476" class="label">[2476]</a> II. 13. 2. Florus, ii. 5. 4 (iii. 17), is non-committal.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2477" href="#FNanchor_2477" class="label">[2477]</a> LXXI; accepted by Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2478" href="#FNanchor_2478" class="label">[2478]</a> Cf. App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 35. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2479" href="#FNanchor_2479" class="label">[2479]</a> Flor. ii. 5. 3 (iii. 17); App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 35. 158.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2480" href="#FNanchor_2480" class="label">[2480]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Post.</i> 7. 16; <i>Cluent.</i> 56. 153; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 177 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2481" href="#FNanchor_2481" class="label">[2481]</a> Velleius, ii. 14. 1, regards it as an afterthought, whereas Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 35. -155, asserting that, petitioned by the Italians for the citizenship, he had already -promised to grant it, intimates that this was his main object. At all events the -Italians expected it of him and were prepared to support him in his effort by force of -arms.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2482" href="#FNanchor_2482" class="label">[2482]</a> (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 66. 4; Oros. v. 18. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2483" href="#FNanchor_2483" class="label">[2483]</a> Vell. ii. 14. 1; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 35. 155 f.; 36. 162; Livy, ep. lxxi; Flor. ii. 5. 6. -Most probably he combined this measure with his colonial rogation; App. <i>B. C.</i> -i. 36.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2484" href="#FNanchor_2484" class="label">[2484]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 35 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2485" href="#FNanchor_2485" class="label">[2485]</a> Livy, ep. lxxi; Flor. ii. 5. 7 (iii. 17).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2486" href="#FNanchor_2486" class="label">[2486]</a> Ascon. 68.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2487" href="#FNanchor_2487" class="label">[2487]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> ii. 6. 14; 12. 31; <i>Dom.</i> 16. 41; Frag. A. vii (<i>Cornel.</i> i. 24); Ascon. -68; Diod. xxxvii. 10. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2488" href="#FNanchor_2488" class="label">[2488]</a> According to Diod. xxxvii. 10. 3, he declared that though he had full power to -prevent the decree, he would not willingly exert it; for he knew well that the wrongdoers -in this matter would speedily suffer merited punishment.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2489" href="#FNanchor_2489" class="label">[2489]</a> Cf. the elogium, n. below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2490" href="#FNanchor_2490" class="label">[2490]</a> Elogium, in <i>CIL.</i> vi. 1312 = i. p. 279. vii: “M. Livius M. F. C. N. Drusus, Pontifex, -tr. mil. X. vir. stlit. iudic. tr. pl. X. vir. a. d. a. lege sua et eodem anno V. vir. a. -d. a. lege Saufe(i)a, in magistratu occisus est.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2491" href="#FNanchor_2491" class="label">[2491]</a> On M. Livius Drusus, see Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 96-106; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> II. -ch. xiii; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 488-93; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, V. ch. xiii; -Mommsen, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, bk. IV. ch. vi; Neumann, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, i. 451-74; Ferrero, -<i>Rome</i>, i. 79 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2492" href="#FNanchor_2492" class="label">[2492]</a> (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 66. 2; Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 19. 55; Schol. Gronov. 431; -Ascon. 30; <i>Dig.</i> xxii. 5. 13; xlviii. 16. 3. 2; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 665; iii. 101; -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 491, 494. Hitzig, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1416, -places it earlier.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2493" href="#FNanchor_2493" class="label">[2493]</a> Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 20. 57; Pliny, <i>Paneg.</i> 35; Seneca, <i>De Ira</i>, iii. 3. 6; Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 495. It is almost certain that the punishment mentioned was prescribed -by this law; Hitzig, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2494" href="#FNanchor_2494" class="label">[2494]</a> This conclusion is deduced from the circumstance that Varius was tried under -his own law. The charge could not possibly have been that of favoring the Italians, -but must rather have been the instigation of the sedition by which his statute was -originally carried; Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2495" href="#FNanchor_2495" class="label">[2495]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 89. 304: “Exercebatur una lege iudicium Varia, ceteris propter -bellum intermissis.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2496" href="#FNanchor_2496" class="label">[2496]</a> This is an inference from the fact that the court which tried Cn. Pompeius -Strabo in 88, and which sat under the Varian law, was composed in accordance with -the subsequent Plautian judiciary law (Cic. Frag. A. vii. <i>Cornel.</i> i. 53). A special -court was composed in no other way than by the law which established it. In -general on the Varian law, see Ascon. 21 f., 73, 79; Val. Max. viii. 6. 4; App. -<i>B. C.</i> i. 37; Cic. <i>Tusc.</i> ii. 24. 57. From Appian we learn that the law was passed -before the outbreak of the Social War, and Cicero, <i>Brut.</i> 89. 305, informs us that the -prosecutions under it continued through the war. The last trial mentioned is that -of Cn. Pompeius Strabo in 88, referred to above. See also Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 108; -Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 493; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 198; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. -164 f.; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 384 f.; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 188 f.; and especially -Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 32-6, where further sources are cited.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2497" href="#FNanchor_2497" class="label">[2497]</a> Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 62. 222. It belongs to about 90; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 693.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2498" href="#FNanchor_2498" class="label">[2498]</a> <i>Off.</i> ii. 21. 72. It is an interesting fact that, as this passage shows, Cicero did -not object to frumentarian laws on principle, but condemned the Sempronian act -because it was burdensome to the treasury.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2499" href="#FNanchor_2499" class="label">[2499]</a> Gell. iv. 4. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2500" href="#FNanchor_2500" class="label">[2500]</a> Vell. ii. 16. 4; cf. App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 49. 212 (who speaks merely of a senatus consultum). -This statute seems to have considered the Po the northern boundary of -Italy; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2501" href="#FNanchor_2501" class="label">[2501]</a> Cic. <i>Balb.</i> 8. 21: “Ipsa Iulia lege civitas ita est sociis et Latinis data, ut, qui -fundi populi facti non essent, civitatem non haberent.” On fundus see Fest. ep. 89. -Heraclea and Naples declined the citizenship; Cic. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2502" href="#FNanchor_2502" class="label">[2502]</a> P. 57 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2503" href="#FNanchor_2503" class="label">[2503]</a> Cic. <i>Arch.</i> 10. 26; <i>Balb.</i> 8. 19; 14. 32; 22. 50; <i>Fam.</i> xiii. 36; Sisenna, Frag. 17, -in Peter, <i>Hist. Rom. Reliq.</i> i. 280; Frag. 120, ibid. 293: “Milites, ut lex Calpurnia -concesserat, virtutis ergo civitate donari”; cf. Kiene, <i>Röm. Bundesgenossenkrieg</i>, -224 f., 229 f. The identity of the author is uncertain; he may be the Calpurnius -who was praetor in 74; Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 1395. 98.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2504" href="#FNanchor_2504" class="label">[2504]</a> Cic. <i>Arch.</i> 4. 7: Schol. Bob. 353.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2505" href="#FNanchor_2505" class="label">[2505]</a> Dio Cass. Frag. 102. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2506" href="#FNanchor_2506" class="label">[2506]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvii. 9. 3; Ascon. p. 3; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> iii. 20. 138; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -iii. 118; cf. however Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 497 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2507" href="#FNanchor_2507" class="label">[2507]</a> Cic. Frag. A. vii. 53; Ascon. 79; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 539, 668 f.; iii. 115; -Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 499; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 385; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. -213 f. We may connect with this change the prosecution and condemnation of Q. -Varius; p. 401, n. 1 above; Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 224 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2508" href="#FNanchor_2508" class="label">[2508]</a> <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 198, n. 1, followed by Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 386. A difficulty -with this interpretation is the great number of jurors provided for, apparently enough -to supply all the courts.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2509" href="#FNanchor_2509" class="label">[2509]</a> Verr. i. 13. 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2510" href="#FNanchor_2510" class="label">[2510]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 18. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2511" href="#FNanchor_2511" class="label">[2511]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 3. 46; Kubitschek, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 1512; -Gardner, in Smith, <i>Dict.</i> i. 206; Babelon, <i>Monn. de la rép. Rom.</i> i. 74 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2512" href="#FNanchor_2512" class="label">[2512]</a> Strabo v. 4. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2513" href="#FNanchor_2513" class="label">[2513]</a> P. 162.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2514" href="#FNanchor_2514" class="label">[2514]</a> Livy, ep. lxxvii; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 55. 242 f.; Vell. ii. 18. 6; Ascon. 64; Fröhlich, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1532. The libertini may have been those who -fought in the recent war; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 49. 212; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 11. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2515" href="#FNanchor_2515" class="label">[2515]</a> (Cic.) <i>Herenn.</i> ii. 28. 45; Livy, ep. lxxvii; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 123; Herzog, -<i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 501.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2516" href="#FNanchor_2516" class="label">[2516]</a> P. 400 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2517" href="#FNanchor_2517" class="label">[2517]</a> Plut. <i>Sull.</i> 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2518" href="#FNanchor_2518" class="label">[2518]</a> P. 403 above; also Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 84.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2519" href="#FNanchor_2519" class="label">[2519]</a> In this way a justitium, cessation of civil business, was indirectly brought about; -Plut. <i>Sull.</i> 8; <i>Mar.</i> 35; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 55. 244; p. 141 above; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. -221; Neumann, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, i. 513; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. -1533; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 263, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2520" href="#FNanchor_2520" class="label">[2520]</a> For the abrogation of Sulla’s imperium Vell. ii. 18. 6 is authority. Plutarch, -<i>Sull.</i> 8, states that Pompeius, not Sulla, was deprived of the consulship and that -from Sulla was taken merely the provincial command. Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 56. 249 (cf. -Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 35; Schol. Gronov. 410) speaks only of the transfer of the command. -That the fourth article was added after the departure of Sulla from Rome, and that -the latter knew nothing of it till summoned to deliver up his command is clearly -stated by Appian, ibid. ch. 56 f.; cf. Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. -1533 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2521" href="#FNanchor_2521" class="label">[2521]</a> Plutarch, <i>Sull.</i> 8 and Livy, ep. lxxvii, speak of a decree of the senate only, -whereas the account of Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 60. 271 (Πολεμίους Ῥωμαίων ἐψήφιστο -εἶναι) implies a vote of the assembly. Velleius, ii. 19. 1 (“Lege lata exules fecit”) -distinctly mentions a comitial act, though he is wrong in supposing it to be a sentence -of exile, as may be gathered from his context; cf. Ihne, <i>Hist. of Rome</i>, v. 237.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2522" href="#FNanchor_2522" class="label">[2522]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 59. 268; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> viii. 2. 7. Scholars are at variance as regards -the character and motives of Sulpicius. Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 501 (cf. Ferrero, -<i>Rome</i>, i. 85 f.), can see in his measures no earnest purpose of reform. Ihne, <i>Hist. of -Rome</i>, v. 225 f., 233 f., hesitatingly inclines to regard him as a demagogue. Fröhlich, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1532, looks upon him as a statesman with a mind -and heart for the best interests of his country. In the opinion of Mommsen, <i>Hist. of -Rome</i>, iii. (1898). 531 f., he was essentially the successor of Drusus, a reformer in the -interest of the senate, yet led by the force of circumstances to adopt revolutionary -methods. Cf. also Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 121-5; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> II. ch. xvii; Neumann, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, i. 507-17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2523" href="#FNanchor_2523" class="label">[2523]</a> P. 277, 313 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2524" href="#FNanchor_2524" class="label">[2524]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 59. 266: Εἰσηγοῦντό τε μηδὲν ἔτι ἀπροβούλευτον ἐς τὸν δῆμον ἐσφέρεσθαι, -νενομισμένον μὲν οὕτω καὶ πάλαι, παραλελυμένον δ’ ἐκ πολλοῦ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2525" href="#FNanchor_2525" class="label">[2525]</a> Ibid.: Εἰσηγοῦντο ... καὶ τὰς χειροτονίας μὴ κατὰ φυλάς, ἀλλὰ κατὰ λόχους, -ὡς Τύλλιος βασιλεὺς ἔταξε γίνεσθαι.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2526" href="#FNanchor_2526" class="label">[2526]</a> P. 86.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2527" href="#FNanchor_2527" class="label">[2527]</a> In <i>Hermes</i>, xxxiii (1898). 652.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2528" href="#FNanchor_2528" class="label">[2528]</a> This view is held by Sunden, <i>De trib. pot. imm.</i> (1897) 21 ff.; Meyer, ibid. -652-4; Vassis, in <i>Athena</i>, xii (1900). 54-7. Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -iv. 1537, supposes that elections simply were thereby transferred to the comitia centuriata; -but the word χειροτονίαι used by Appian, though often denoting elections -(as in <i>B. C.</i> i. 14. 58-60; 15. 66; 28. 127, where the meaning is easily derived from -the context), includes also voting on laws, as in <i>B. C.</i> i. 23. 100; 55. 244. Had he -meant elections, he would here have written ἀρχαιρεσία (cf. i. 1. 1; 44. 196), as otherwise -the meaning would have been doubtful. The view represented by Fröhlich, -moreover, would in no way explain the passage, nor was it likely that Sulla would -leave to the tribes the ratification of laws but deprive them of the politically unimportant -right to elect minor officials.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2529" href="#FNanchor_2529" class="label">[2529]</a> Appian’s words πολλά τε ἄλλα τῆς τῶν δημάρχων ἀρχῆς ... περιελόντες (i. 59. -267) imply an extensive curtailment of the tribunician power not definitely specified. -The statement of Livy, ep. lxxxix, that Sulla afterward (82) deprived the tribunes of -all legislative power (p. 413 below) is not true of his dictatorial law-giving, but belongs -properly to the year under consideration.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2530" href="#FNanchor_2530" class="label">[2530]</a> Lengle (<i>Sull. Verf.</i> 10) argues, on the contrary, that the measure could be -intended for the tribunes only, because, as he supposes, a patrician magistrate always -consulted the senate concerning his legislative proposals. But Lengle has reckoned -without the facts. An examination of the sources will show that from the time of -the dictator Publilius Philo (Livy viii. 12. 14) to the time of the dictator Julius -Caesar (Dio Cass. xxxviii. 3 f.; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 14; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 10) patrician magistrates -occasionally brought rogations before the comitia without the senatorial sanction. -But it is possible that in speaking of “an ancient law long disused” (p. 406, -n. 2) Appian may wrongly have had in mind the pre-Hortensian restriction on the -plebiscite; p. 277, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2531" href="#FNanchor_2531" class="label">[2531]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 1. 1, 2, 3; 19. 81; 20. 83; 22. 91; 29. 132 (city people); 30. 136; -32. 143; 33. 147; 35. 155; 36. 162; 38. 169; 100. 469. Δημόται always means -plebeians; i. 24. 106; 25. 109; 33. 146; 100. 469. Sometimes δῆμος is exactly -equivalent to πλῆθος, multitude, as in i. 26. 119.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2532" href="#FNanchor_2532" class="label">[2532]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 12. 51; 13. 55; 20. 83; 21. 90; 22. 92; 23. 101; 25. 107; 28. 128; -29. 131.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2533" href="#FNanchor_2533" class="label">[2533]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 27. 122. In 33. 148 it applies to the judicial contio preliminary to -the comitia centuriata.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2534" href="#FNanchor_2534" class="label">[2534]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 13. 56; 25. 112; 32. 143; 54. 236; 104. 485.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2535" href="#FNanchor_2535" class="label">[2535]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 12. 49; 32. 141.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2536" href="#FNanchor_2536" class="label">[2536]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 101. 472.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2537" href="#FNanchor_2537" class="label">[2537]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 59. 267.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2538" href="#FNanchor_2538" class="label">[2538]</a> Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 402 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2539" href="#FNanchor_2539" class="label">[2539]</a> Livy, ep. lxxvii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2540" href="#FNanchor_2540" class="label">[2540]</a> Fest. 375. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2541" href="#FNanchor_2541" class="label">[2541]</a> Cf. the law of 357; p. 297. See also Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 126 f.; Herzog, -<i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 502; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1537.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2542" href="#FNanchor_2542" class="label">[2542]</a> Billeter, <i>Gesch. d. Zinsfusses</i>, 155-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2543" href="#FNanchor_2543" class="label">[2543]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 73. 339. No mention is here made of the manner of repeal, but -we may infer a comitial act from the public policy of Cinna. It seems probable that -at this time, or after his return from exile, the Plautian judiciary law of 89 was also -repealed; p. 402.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2544" href="#FNanchor_2544" class="label">[2544]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> viii. (3.) 7; Vell. ii. 20. 2 f.; Schol. Gronov. 410; Jul. Exuper. 4; -App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 64. 287; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 180, 439; Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1283.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2545" href="#FNanchor_2545" class="label">[2545]</a> App. ibid.; Flor. ii. 9. 9 (iii. 21); (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 69. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2546" href="#FNanchor_2546" class="label">[2546]</a> Livy, ep. lxxix; Vell. ii. 20. 3; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 65. 296; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> -69. 2; Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2547" href="#FNanchor_2547" class="label">[2547]</a> Cinna is represented as the author by Vell. ii. 21. 6; Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 43; Dio Cass. -Frag. 102. 8; whereas Appian, <i>B. C.</i> i. 70. 324, mentions tribunes. Cf. Diod. -xxxviii, xxxix. 1-4; Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1285; Long, <i>Rom. -Rep.</i> ii. 244.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2548" href="#FNanchor_2548" class="label">[2548]</a> P. 405.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2549" href="#FNanchor_2549" class="label">[2549]</a> Livy, ep. lxxxiv: “Novis civibus senatus consulto suffragium datum est.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2550" href="#FNanchor_2550" class="label">[2550]</a> P. 58 above. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 141, unnecessarily assumes a consular lex -Papiria for the purpose.</p> - -<p>In the year 87 the propretorian imperium of Appius Claudius Pulcher, father of -the famous tribune of 58, was abrogated by a lex of an unknown tribune. The -ground was a refusal to obey the summons of the tribune in question; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 31. -83; Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iii. 2848 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2551" href="#FNanchor_2551" class="label">[2551]</a> Vell. ii. 23. 2; Cic. <i>Font.</i> 1. 1; <i>Quinct.</i> 4. 17; Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 33; Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Münzwesen</i>, 385; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. 251; Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 92.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2552" href="#FNanchor_2552" class="label">[2552]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 33. 89; 34. 92; 36. 98.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2553" href="#FNanchor_2553" class="label">[2553]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 154.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2554" href="#FNanchor_2554" class="label">[2554]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 3, 98 f.; Plut. <i>Sull.</i> 33; Vell. ii. 28. 2; Oros. v. 21. 12; Diod. -xxxviii, xxxix. 15; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 703 f. The office had been disused -for a hundred and twenty years; Plut. ibid.; Vell. ibid.; <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 23. On -the form of comitia, see p. 236.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2555" href="#FNanchor_2555" class="label">[2555]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 97. 451; Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> iii. 2. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2556" href="#FNanchor_2556" class="label">[2556]</a> Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 43. 126; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1556; -Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 404. From this Ciceronian passage it is necessary -to infer that the Valerian law contained an article similar to the later Cornelian lex -de proscriptione; p. 421 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2557" href="#FNanchor_2557" class="label">[2557]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2558" href="#FNanchor_2558" class="label">[2558]</a> Livy, ep. lxxxix; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 100. 465; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 55. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2559" href="#FNanchor_2559" class="label">[2559]</a> P. 406 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2560" href="#FNanchor_2560" class="label">[2560]</a> Livy, ep. lxxxix: “Tribunorum plebis potestatem minuit, et omne ius legum -ferendarum ademit.” We should infer from this statement, which is the sole authority -for the view it presents, that he absolutely deprived the tribunes of legislative initiative, -were it not that under his constitutional arrangements they actually proposed -laws de senatus sententia; <i>CIL.</i> i. 204 (year 71); Bruns, <i>Font. iur.</i> p. 94; Dessau, -<i>Inscr. Lat.</i> i. p. 11; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 154; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -iv. 1559; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 158; Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 11; -Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, i. 390 f., 411. The conference between Sulla and -Scipio, mentioned by Cic. <i>Phil.</i> xii. 11. 27, referred to this arrangement. Sunden, <i>De -rib. pot. imm.</i> 10 ff. (cf. Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. 399 ff.), holding that Sulla abolished -the right of the tribunes to propose laws, refuses to accept 71 as the date of the epigraphic -lex above mentioned.</p> - -<p>It seems probable (Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 175; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 654, -n. 2), though it is not certain (Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 424, 430 f.), that the lex -Plautia de vi was proposed by a tribune of 78 or 77 as the agent of Q. Lutatius -Catulus, proconsul; Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 31; Schol. Bob. 368; Cic. <i>Cael.</i> 29. 70; p. 424 -below. Probably the lex Plautia which recalled from exile L. Cornelius Cinna, -brother-in-law of Caesar, and others who, having shared in the insurrection of Lepidus, -had gone over to Sertorius, was a plebiscite de senatus sententia of 73; Suet. -<i>Caes.</i> 5; Gell. xiii. 3. 5; Val. Max. vii. 7. 6; Dio Cass. xliv. 47. 4; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -iii. 185; Maurembrecher, Sall. <i>Hist. Proleg.</i> 78; Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> -iv. 1287. Others assign the measure to 70; cf. Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> iii. 53. -For other laws, see p. 424.</p> - -<p>The statement of Livy’s epitomator concerning the lex Cornelia de tribunicia potestate -would apply more accurately to the Cornelian-Pompeian law of 88; p. 406.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2561" href="#FNanchor_2561" class="label">[2561]</a> From Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 40. 110 (cf. Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. 400) we should infer that under -the Cornelian government no tribunician contio was held; but we know that this is -not true. In 76 a contio was summoned by L. Sicinius, tribune of the plebs; <i>Orat.</i> -of Licinius Macer, in Sall. <i>Hist.</i> iii. 48. 8: “L. Sicinius primus de potestate tribunicia -loqui ausus mussantibus vobis”; cf. Pseud. Ascon. 103; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 7; Cic. -<i>Brut.</i> 60. 216 f. In 74 the tribune Quinctius held contiones; Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 34. 93; -Sall. <i>Hist.</i> ibid. § 11. The oration of Licinius Macer, quoted by Sallust, <i>Hist.</i> iii. -48, is a tribunician harangue. Finally in 71 the tribune Palicanus held a contio -outside the city that Pompey might attend; p. 426.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2562" href="#FNanchor_2562" class="label">[2562]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. i. 60. 155: Q. Opimius was prosecuted in a finable action on the -ground that as tribune in 75 (Pseud. Ascon. 200) he had interceded in violation of -a Cornelian law, which must have fixed the fine. The statement of Caesar, <i>B. C.</i> i. -5. 1; 7. 3, that Sulla left the tribunes the right of intercession proves no more than -that he did not wholly abolish it. Cf. further Sunden, <i>De trib. pot. imm.</i> 4; Drumann-Gröbe, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 411, n. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2563" href="#FNanchor_2563" class="label">[2563]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 13. 38: “Sublata populi Romani in unum quemque vestrum potestate.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2564" href="#FNanchor_2564" class="label">[2564]</a> P. 245, 266, 315.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2565" href="#FNanchor_2565" class="label">[2565]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 9. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2566" href="#FNanchor_2566" class="label">[2566]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 100. 467; Ascon. 78 (repealed by Cotta); Pseud. Ascon. 200.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2567" href="#FNanchor_2567" class="label">[2567]</a> Vell. ii. 30. 4; Dion. Hal. v. 77. 5; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 55. 23; iii. 48. 3; Pseud. -Ascon. 102.</p> - -<p>The following sources assume more or less definitely an abolition of the tribunicia -potestas; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 55. 23; 77. 14; iii. 48. 1; <i>Cat.</i> 38. 1; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 21; -Pseud. Ascon. 102. The following speak of a limitation; Caes. <i>B. C.</i> i. 5. 1; 7. 3; -Livy, ep. lxxxix; Dion. Hal. v. 77. 5; Vell. ii. 30. 4; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 5; (Aurel. Vict.) -<i>Vir. Ill.</i> 75. 11; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 29. 113. Tacitus, <i>Ann.</i> iii. 27, is non-committal. -In general on the lex de tribunicia potestate, see Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 153 f.; Fröhlich, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1559; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. -410 ff.; Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 10-16; Sunden, <i>De trib. pot. imm.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2568" href="#FNanchor_2568" class="label">[2568]</a> In Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1559.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2569" href="#FNanchor_2569" class="label">[2569]</a> The law concerning the quaestors was preceded by the judiciary statute (Tac. -<i>Ann.</i> xi. 22), which must have been enacted near the end of 81, for the senators -remained ten years (80-70) in control of the courts; Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 13. 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2570" href="#FNanchor_2570" class="label">[2570]</a> P. 347. The relation of this Cornelian provision to the lex Villia is not more -definitely known.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2571" href="#FNanchor_2571" class="label">[2571]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 100. 466; cf. 121. 560.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2572" href="#FNanchor_2572" class="label">[2572]</a> Cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 529.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2573" href="#FNanchor_2573" class="label">[2573]</a> In the thirty-sixth year of his age Pompey was not yet qualified for the quaestorship; -Cic. <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 21. 62. Cicero, who was consul in his forty-third year, states -that he obtained the office at the earliest legal age; <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 2. 3. An interval -of two years between successive offices would place the quaestorship in the thirty-seventh -year; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 527, 569; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1560; but soon after Sulla it came about, probably through further -legislation, that the office was often filled in the thirty-first year; Mommsen, ibid. -570 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2574" href="#FNanchor_2574" class="label">[2574]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 43. 112; <i>Fam.</i> x. 25. 2; 26. 2 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2575" href="#FNanchor_2575" class="label">[2575]</a> Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22; cf. Fröhlich, ibid. iv. 1560.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2576" href="#FNanchor_2576" class="label">[2576]</a> P. 348.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2577" href="#FNanchor_2577" class="label">[2577]</a> P. 298.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2578" href="#FNanchor_2578" class="label">[2578]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 100. 466; cf. Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 9; Caes. <i>B. C.</i> i. 32; Dio Cass. xl. -51. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2579" href="#FNanchor_2579" class="label">[2579]</a> P. 332. There were probably twelve; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 163; Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 543.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2580" href="#FNanchor_2580" class="label">[2580]</a> Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22: “Lege Sullae viginti creati supplendo senatui.” The eighth -chapter of this law concerning the twenty quaestors is preserved in an inscription; -<i>CIL.</i> i. 202; Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> p. 90; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, p. 64. It regulates the qualifications, -appointment, and pay of the apparitores of the quaestors. An important -fact derived from the praescriptio is that the law was adopted in the tribal assembly. -Since in the case of one law the centuriate assembly is mentioned as if exceptional -(p. 422), we may infer that most of Sulla’s enactments were tribal. On the apparitores, -see Mommsen, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. vi (1846). 1-57; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 332-46; -Habel, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 191-4; Keil, J., in <i>Wiener Studien</i>, -xxiv (1902). 548-51.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2581" href="#FNanchor_2581" class="label">[2581]</a> Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 32, wrongly says to ten—a number reached by the -legislation of Caesar; Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 3; p. 454 below. On the relation of the -praetors to the courts, see p. 420.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2582" href="#FNanchor_2582" class="label">[2582]</a> Livy, ep. lxxxix, who connects it closely with the increase in the number of senators, -placing it thus among his earlier measures; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 75. 11; -Servius, <i>in Aen.</i> vi. 73; cf. Tac. <i>Ann.</i> vi. 12; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 157; Fröhlich, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1559 f.; Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 1-9. That the increase -in the last-named college was due to Sulla seems certain, though it is nowhere -stated. It is possible, too, that the increase of the epulones from three to seven was -his work; Lengle, ibid. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2583" href="#FNanchor_2583" class="label">[2583]</a> P. 391.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2584" href="#FNanchor_2584" class="label">[2584]</a> Livy, ep. lxxxix; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 37. 1; Pseud. Ascon. 102; wrongly Plut. -<i>Caes.</i> 1; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> vi. 73; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2585" href="#FNanchor_2585" class="label">[2585]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 7. 18; Lange, ibid. The Servilian agrarian rogation, 63 (p. -435 below), drawn up before the enactment of the Atian plebiscite of that year -which restored the election of sacerdotes, assumes that the comitia pontificis maximi -were at the time in use. Most authorities, as Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 418; -Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 156; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 30, have failed -to notice this important fact.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2586" href="#FNanchor_2586" class="label">[2586]</a> P. 106, n. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2587" href="#FNanchor_2587" class="label">[2587]</a> P. 416.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2588" href="#FNanchor_2588" class="label">[2588]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 200; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. -1560.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2589" href="#FNanchor_2589" class="label">[2589]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 164.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2590" href="#FNanchor_2590" class="label">[2590]</a> P. 381.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2591" href="#FNanchor_2591" class="label">[2591]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 705.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2592" href="#FNanchor_2592" class="label">[2592]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2593" href="#FNanchor_2593" class="label">[2593]</a> Cf. Cic. <i>Fam.</i> viii. 8. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2594" href="#FNanchor_2594" class="label">[2594]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. 25. On the relation of the Cornelian legislation to the curiate -law, see p. 193, 199.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2595" href="#FNanchor_2595" class="label">[2595]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> iii. 6. 3, 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2596" href="#FNanchor_2596" class="label">[2596]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> iii. 10. 6; <i>Q. Fr.</i> i. 1. 9, 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2597" href="#FNanchor_2597" class="label">[2597]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 103. 482; Oros. v. 22. 4; Eutrop. v. 9. Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. -404, calculates that the number was reduced to about a hundred and fifty.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2598" href="#FNanchor_2598" class="label">[2598]</a> Livy, ep. lxxxix; cf. Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 3. 8; Dion. Hal. v. 77. 5; Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2599" href="#FNanchor_2599" class="label">[2599]</a> <i>B. C.</i> i. 100. 468.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2600" href="#FNanchor_2600" class="label">[2600]</a> Cf. Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1559.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2601" href="#FNanchor_2601" class="label">[2601]</a> P. 402. The second view, which seems more reasonable, is held by Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 156.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2602" href="#FNanchor_2602" class="label">[2602]</a> No authority gives this number, which however may be deduced from well-known -facts; Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 405 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2603" href="#FNanchor_2603" class="label">[2603]</a> Willems, ibid. 406 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2604" href="#FNanchor_2604" class="label">[2604]</a> Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1560.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2605" href="#FNanchor_2605" class="label">[2605]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 156.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2606" href="#FNanchor_2606" class="label">[2606]</a> Vell. ii. 32. 3; Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 13. 37 f.; Pseud. Ascon. 99, 102, 103, 145, 149, -161; Schol. Gronov. 384, 426; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 436 ff.; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> -ii. 419 ff.; Wilmanns, in <i>Rhein. Mus.</i> N. F. xix (1864). 528.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2607" href="#FNanchor_2607" class="label">[2607]</a> Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 22: “Lege Sullae viginti creati (quaestores) supplendo senatui, -cui iudicia tradiderat.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2608" href="#FNanchor_2608" class="label">[2608]</a> P. 402.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2609" href="#FNanchor_2609" class="label">[2609]</a> <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2610" href="#FNanchor_2610" class="label">[2610]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Post.</i> 4. 9. It took the place of the lex Servilia of 111; p. 393.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2611" href="#FNanchor_2611" class="label">[2611]</a> Schol. Bob. 361. From Plut. <i>Mar.</i> 5 it seems evident that a quaestio de ambitu -existed as early as 116; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 422, n. 3; Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 21 f., -who has collected the cases de ambitu anterior to Sulla; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 665; -Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 521; Lohse, <i>De quaestionum perpetuarum origine, -praesidibus, consiliis</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2612" href="#FNanchor_2612" class="label">[2612]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 13. 39; II. i. 4. 11 f.; iii. 36. 83; <i>Cluent.</i> 53. 147; cf. <i>Mur.</i> 20. -42; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 665; iii. 166. The trial of Pompeius Magnus in 86 for -misappropriation of booty by his father in 89 seems to have come before a quaestio -de peculatu; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 64. 230; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 4; Lengle, ibid. 40 f. If this supposition -is right, the court must have existed before Sulla. A Cornelian law on the -subject is not expressly mentioned but may be reasonably assumed.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2613" href="#FNanchor_2613" class="label">[2613]</a> Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 203.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2614" href="#FNanchor_2614" class="label">[2614]</a> Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 21. 50; Ascon. 59; cf. Cic. <i>Fam.</i> iii. 11. 2; <i>Cluent.</i> 35. 97; <i>Verr.</i> II. -i. 5. 12. This law took the place of the lex Appuleia, probably of 100; cf. Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 165; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 423, 507.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2615" href="#FNanchor_2615" class="label">[2615]</a> Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 20. 55; 54. 148; 55. 151; 56. 154; Frag. A. ii. (<i>Var.</i>) 6; <i>Mil.</i> 4. -11; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xiii. 44; Justin. <i>Inst.</i> iv. 18. 5 f.; <i>Dig.</i> xlviii. 8; Paul. <i>Sent.</i> v. 23. -(Girard, <i>Textes</i>, p. 423).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2616" href="#FNanchor_2616" class="label">[2616]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 42. 108; Paul. <i>Sent.</i> iv. 7; v. 25; <i>Dig.</i> xlviii. 10; Justin. <i>Inst.</i> iv. -18. 7; cf. Voigt, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 271 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2617" href="#FNanchor_2617" class="label">[2617]</a> <i>Dig.</i> iii. 3. 42. 1; xlvii. 10. 5; 10. 37. 1; xlviii. 2. 12. 4; Paul. <i>Sent.</i> v. 4. 8; -Justin. <i>Inst.</i> iv. 4. 8; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 203; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 208, -423 f.; Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1561; Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> 93. In -the opinion of Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 665; iii. 166, this lex did not establish a quaestio.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2618" href="#FNanchor_2618" class="label">[2618]</a> Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 20. 55; 27. 75; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 442.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2619" href="#FNanchor_2619" class="label">[2619]</a> Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 28. 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2620" href="#FNanchor_2620" class="label">[2620]</a> Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 442. On the Cornelian courts in general, see Long, -<i>Rom. Rep.</i> ii. 420 ff.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 520 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. -Roms</i>, ii. 413-6; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> see index, s. Quaestio and the various -crimes belonging thereto; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 200 f.; Lengle, <i>Sull. Verf.</i> 17-54; -Lohse, <i>De quaestionum perpetuarum origine, praesidibus, consiliis</i>; Fröhlich, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1561 f.</p> - -<p>In Lange’s opinion (<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 665; iii. 166) there must have been a lex Cornelia -de adulteriis et pudicitia, for it is doubtful whether Sulla’s ordinance περὶ γάμων -καὶ σωφροσύνης could have formed part of his lex de iniuriis; Plut. <i>Comp. Lys. et -Sull.</i> 3; cf. <i>Dig.</i> xlviii. 5. 23. It seems to be demonstrated, however, by Voigt, in -<i>Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> xlii (1890). 244-79, that all republican regulations of -this offence, including the Cornelian, were sumptuary; cf. Cuq, in Daremberg et -Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> iii. 1141. No quaestio accordingly was needed for the trial of the -offence.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2621" href="#FNanchor_2621" class="label">[2621]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 158.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2622" href="#FNanchor_2622" class="label">[2622]</a> P. 412.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2623" href="#FNanchor_2623" class="label">[2623]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. i. 47. 123; Pseud. Ascon. 193.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2624" href="#FNanchor_2624" class="label">[2624]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2625" href="#FNanchor_2625" class="label">[2625]</a> Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 43. 125 f. Though Cicero says he does not know whether the -law in question was the Valerian or Cornelian, he probably knew it was the latter, -the terms of which he states: “Ut eorum bona veneant, qui proscripti sunt, ... -aut eorum, qui in adversariorum praesidiis occisi sunt.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2626" href="#FNanchor_2626" class="label">[2626]</a> Livy lxxxix; Vell. ii. 28. 4; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 55. 6; Plut. <i>Sull.</i> 31; <i>Cic.</i> 12; -Dion. Hal. viii. 80. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2627" href="#FNanchor_2627" class="label">[2627]</a> Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 44. 128.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2628" href="#FNanchor_2628" class="label">[2628]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 96. 100; Flor. ii. 9 (iii. 21); cf. Suet. <i>Ill. Gramm.</i> 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2629" href="#FNanchor_2629" class="label">[2629]</a> Livy, ep. lxxxix; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 100. 470; 104. 489; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 55. 12; Cic. -<i>Mur.</i> 24. 49: <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 28. 78; iii. 2. 6 ff.; 3. 12; Gromat. p. 230 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2630" href="#FNanchor_2630" class="label">[2630]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 159; cf. ii. 689; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 407 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2631" href="#FNanchor_2631" class="label">[2631]</a> Lange, ibid. iii. 159.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2632" href="#FNanchor_2632" class="label">[2632]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 49.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2633" href="#FNanchor_2633" class="label">[2633]</a> Lange, ibid. iii. 161.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2634" href="#FNanchor_2634" class="label">[2634]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 30. 79; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 55. 12; cf. Pseud. Ascon. 102.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2635" href="#FNanchor_2635" class="label">[2635]</a> Cic. <i>Caecin.</i> 35. 102.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2636" href="#FNanchor_2636" class="label">[2636]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 102. 474; cf. Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 14. 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2637" href="#FNanchor_2637" class="label">[2637]</a> Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 55. 11. They were then being made according to the law of M. -Octavius (p. 401), or if that was repealed by Cinna, according to the lex Sempronia -of 123 (p. 372).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2638" href="#FNanchor_2638" class="label">[2638]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 693. The statement in iii. 161 is less exact.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2639" href="#FNanchor_2639" class="label">[2639]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 102. 474.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2640" href="#FNanchor_2640" class="label">[2640]</a> Cic. <i>Off.</i> iii. 22. 87.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2641" href="#FNanchor_2641" class="label">[2641]</a> P. 409 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2642" href="#FNanchor_2642" class="label">[2642]</a> Hence it was that T. Crispinus, quaestor in the following year, treated the Valerian -law as no longer in force; Cic. <i>Font.</i> 15; Lange, ibid. iii. 162. To this date -seems to belong the lex Cornelia de sponsu (Gaius iii. 124), which Poste, 359, reasonably -assigns to the dictator.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2643" href="#FNanchor_2643" class="label">[2643]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 333; Vell. ii. 27. 6; Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 10. 31; Pseud. Ascon. 150; Wissowa, -<i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 128.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2644" href="#FNanchor_2644" class="label">[2644]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 675; iii. 162.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2645" href="#FNanchor_2645" class="label">[2645]</a> Its existence is assumed for the year 80; Plut. <i>Sull.</i> 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2646" href="#FNanchor_2646" class="label">[2646]</a> P. 388, n. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2647" href="#FNanchor_2647" class="label">[2647]</a> Ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2648" href="#FNanchor_2648" class="label">[2648]</a> Gell. ii. 24. 11; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 17. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2649" href="#FNanchor_2649" class="label">[2649]</a> Plut. <i>Sull.</i> 35. Here belongs also his regulation de adulteriis et pudicitia; p. 420, -n. 6 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2650" href="#FNanchor_2650" class="label">[2650]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 154. A proof that he completed his legislation in this year is the fact -that he looked upon the following as a time of probation for his system (App. <i>B. C.</i> i. -103; Cic. <i>Rosc. Am.</i> 48. 139), and that the newly organized criminal courts were in -operation for the first time in 80; Cic. ibid. 5. 11; 10. 28; <i>Brut.</i> 90. 312; <i>Off.</i> ii. 14. -51; Gell. xv. 28. 3; Plut. <i>Cic.</i> 3.</p> - -<p>On the form of comitia used for the ratification of his measures, see p. 236.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2651" href="#FNanchor_2651" class="label">[2651]</a> The general character of these proposals, among which the frumentarian alone -was adopted, can be gathered from the <i>Oration</i> of Lepidus, in Sall. <i>Hist.</i> i. 55; cf. -Gran. Licin. x. p. 44: “Legem frumentariam nullo resistente adeptus est, ut annonae -quinque modi populo darentur, et alia multa pollicebantur: exules reducere, res gestas -a Sulla rescindere”; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> iii. 27; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. -554 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2652" href="#FNanchor_2652" class="label">[2652]</a> P. 414.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2653" href="#FNanchor_2653" class="label">[2653]</a> Sall. <i>Hist.</i> ii. 49; Ascon. 66, 78; Pseud. Ascon. 200; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. -178 f.; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> iii. 3; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 531 f.; Klebs, ibid. ii. -2483.</p> - -<p>Cicero, <i>Cornel.</i> i. 18 (Frag. A. vii), states that Cotta proposed to the senate the -repeal of his own laws, whereupon Asconius comments that he can find the mention of -no law of his except the one concerning retired tribunes above described. Cicero, -however, attributes to him a lex de iudiciis privatis, which his brother caused to be -repealed in the following year; <i>Cornel.</i> i. 19. It is not otherwise known.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2654" href="#FNanchor_2654" class="label">[2654]</a> Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 31; Gaius ii. 45; Cuq, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> iii. 1159. For -the cases coming before this court, see Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 424, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2655" href="#FNanchor_2655" class="label">[2655]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> iii. 8. 9. C. Scribonius, consul in the preceding year, may have been -author of the lex Scribonia de usucapione servitutum (<i>Dig.</i> xli. 3. 4. 28; cf. Cic. -<i>Caecin.</i> 26. 74), or it may belong to the tribune of the same name of the year 50; -p. 450, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2656" href="#FNanchor_2656" class="label">[2656]</a> P. 413, n. 4. The consuls of 73 passed a frumentarian measure—the lex Cassia -Terentia, considered below; p. 444, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2657" href="#FNanchor_2657" class="label">[2657]</a> Sall. <i>Hist.</i> iv. 1, in Gell. xviii. 4. 4. Sallust speaks of nothing more than the -promulgation of the law; but we know that afterward an attempt was made to collect -the moneys; Ascon. 72; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 190, 221; Drumann-Gröbe, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 467. Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1380, speaks of -the measure as a proposal.</p> - -<p>The same consul with his colleague, L. Gellius Poplicola, proposed and carried a -law for confirming the grants of citizenship already made by Pompey in Spain; Cic. -<i>Balb.</i> 8. 19; 14. 32 f.; Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> v. 5. 36. Their joint proposal that provincials -should not in their absence be tried on a capital charge took the form merely of a -senatus consultum; Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. ii. 38. 95; Münzer, ibid.; Drumann-Gröbe, ibid.</p> - -<p>In 71 (<i>CIL.</i> i. 593 = vi. 1299) and in 62 (<i>CIL.</i> i. 600 = vi. 1305) there was a -curator viarum e lege Visellia. The law mentioned could not have been later than -71, but may have been many years earlier. There were curatores viarum in 115; -<i>CIL.</i> vi. 3824; Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> ii. 89, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2658" href="#FNanchor_2658" class="label">[2658]</a> Cic. <i>Flacc.</i> 3. 6; Ascon. 15; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 191.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2659" href="#FNanchor_2659" class="label">[2659]</a> Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 13. 3; <i>Fam.</i> i. 4. 1; cf. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 2. 3; <i>Fam.</i> viii. 8. 5; <i>Sest.</i> 34. 74; -Caes. <i>B. C.</i> i. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2660" href="#FNanchor_2660" class="label">[2660]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 14. 5; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 43. 3. As consul in 63 Cicero adjourned the -assembly in order to hold a meeting of the senate on a certain comitial day; Cic. -<i>Mur.</i> 25. 51; Plut. <i>Cic.</i> 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2661" href="#FNanchor_2661" class="label">[2661]</a> The first chapter of this law is preserved in an inscription; <i>CIL.</i> i. 204; Bruns, -<i>Font. Iur.</i> p. 94; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, p. 66.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2662" href="#FNanchor_2662" class="label">[2662]</a> P. 423.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2663" href="#FNanchor_2663" class="label">[2663]</a> Gran. Licin. x. p. 44. It was charged against him by Philippus in the senate -that for the sake of concord he wished to restore the tribunician power; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> -i. 77. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2664" href="#FNanchor_2664" class="label">[2664]</a> Sall. <i>Hist.</i> iii. 48. 8; Pseud. Ascon. 103.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2665" href="#FNanchor_2665" class="label">[2665]</a> P. 423 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2666" href="#FNanchor_2666" class="label">[2666]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> II. i. 60.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2667" href="#FNanchor_2667" class="label">[2667]</a> Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 34. 93 f.; Ascon. 103; Plut. <i>Lucull.</i> 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2668" href="#FNanchor_2668" class="label">[2668]</a> Licinius Macer, <i>Oratio ad plebem</i>, in Sall. <i>Hist.</i> iii. 48. 11 (cf. iv. 71); Cic. -<i>Cluent.</i> 22. 61; 27. 74; 28. 77; 29. 79; Pseud. Ascon. 141; Schol. Gronov. 386, -395, 441.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2669" href="#FNanchor_2669" class="label">[2669]</a> Sall. <i>Hist.</i> iii. 48; Cic. <i>Brut.</i> 67. 238.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2670" href="#FNanchor_2670" class="label">[2670]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2671" href="#FNanchor_2671" class="label">[2671]</a> Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 21; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 121. 560; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> iv. 44 (“Magnam exorsus -orationem”) probably refers to his speech in this contio. Frag. 45 (“Si nihil ante -adventum suum inter plebem et patres convenisset, coram se daturum operam”) -seems also to be from this speech.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2672" href="#FNanchor_2672" class="label">[2672]</a> Sall. <i>Hist.</i> iv. 46.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2673" href="#FNanchor_2673" class="label">[2673]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 16. 46 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2674" href="#FNanchor_2674" class="label">[2674]</a> Ibid. 15. 44; Pseud. Ascon. 147.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2675" href="#FNanchor_2675" class="label">[2675]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 154.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2676" href="#FNanchor_2676" class="label">[2676]</a> Livy, ep. xcvii; Cic. Frag. A. vii (<i>Cornel.</i> i). 47; Ascon. 75; Pseud. Ascon. 103.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2677" href="#FNanchor_2677" class="label">[2677]</a> Sall. <i>Cat.</i> 38; Vell. ii. 30. 4; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 9. 22; ii. 26; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 22; App. -<i>B. C.</i> ii. 29. 113; cf. Cic. <i>Verr.</i> v. 63. 163; 68. 175; Schol. Gronov. 397; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 192 f.; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> iii. 49-51; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 553.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2678" href="#FNanchor_2678" class="label">[2678]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> i. 15. 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2679" href="#FNanchor_2679" class="label">[2679]</a> P. 424. Pompey found it popular to give his assent; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 22; cf. -Neumann, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2680" href="#FNanchor_2680" class="label">[2680]</a> Cicero, in his <i>In Verrem Actio</i> I, is unacquainted with the rogation and expresses -the hope that the condemnation of Verres will restore confidence in the senatorial -courts. In <i>Actio</i> II, composed after the exile of Verres and not delivered, he -assumes the existence of such a rogation (cf. v. 69. 177).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2681" href="#FNanchor_2681" class="label">[2681]</a> Cic. <i>Verr.</i> ii. 71. 174 f.; iii. 96. 223 f.; v. 69. 177 f.; Livy, ep. xcvii; Plut. -<i>Pomp.</i> 22; Pseud. Ascon. 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2682" href="#FNanchor_2682" class="label">[2682]</a> On the tribuni aerarii, see p. 64, n. 3. See also Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 20; <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 9. -27; <i>Cat.</i> iv. 7. 15; Ascon. 16; Schol. Bob. 339.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2683" href="#FNanchor_2683" class="label">[2683]</a> P. 402.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2684" href="#FNanchor_2684" class="label">[2684]</a> Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 43. 121.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2685" href="#FNanchor_2685" class="label">[2685]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 16. 3; <i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 20; Ascon. 16, 30, 53, 67, 78, 90; Pseud. Ascon. -103; Schol. Bob. 229, 235, 339; Schol. Gronov. 384, 386; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. -197 f.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 533; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 442 ff.; Long, <i>Rom. -Rep.</i> iii. 51-3; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2485 f.</p> - -<p>The reference to a lex Aurelia in Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> i. 3. 8, seems to be, not to a lex de -ambitu, as Lange, ibid. iii. 198, supposes, but to the lex iudiciaria under discussion.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2686" href="#FNanchor_2686" class="label">[2686]</a> <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 199 (cf. ii. 671). It must have been passed between the death of -Sulla and 57; Gell. ii. 24. 13; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> iii. 17. 13; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> vii. 26. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2687" href="#FNanchor_2687" class="label">[2687]</a> Q. Cic. <i>Petit. Cons.</i> 11. 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2688" href="#FNanchor_2688" class="label">[2688]</a> Cic. <i>Cluent.</i> 55. 152 (year 66).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2689" href="#FNanchor_2689" class="label">[2689]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 17. 9; <i>Off.</i> iii. 22. 88; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 202.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2690" href="#FNanchor_2690" class="label">[2690]</a> Cf. Neumann, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 141.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2691" href="#FNanchor_2691" class="label">[2691]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvi. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2692" href="#FNanchor_2692" class="label">[2692]</a> Cic. Frag. A. vii (<i>Cornel.</i> i). 52; Ascon. 78.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2693" href="#FNanchor_2693" class="label">[2693]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 18. 44; Hor. <i>Epist.</i> i. 1. 61; Juv. iii. 159; xiv. 324.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2694" href="#FNanchor_2694" class="label">[2694]</a> Livy, ep. xcix; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xv. 32; Ascon. 79; Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 19. 40; Dio Cass. -xxxvi. 42. 1; cf. Hor. <i>Epod.</i> iv. 15. The censors of 194 had given front seats to the -senators; p. 356 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2695" href="#FNanchor_2695" class="label">[2695]</a> Vell. ii. 32. 3; Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 19. 40; p. 356 f. above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2696" href="#FNanchor_2696" class="label">[2696]</a> Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 11. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2697" href="#FNanchor_2697" class="label">[2697]</a> Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 526.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2698" href="#FNanchor_2698" class="label">[2698]</a> P. 425.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2699" href="#FNanchor_2699" class="label">[2699]</a> Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 13. 3; cf. <i>Fam.</i> i. 4. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2700" href="#FNanchor_2700" class="label">[2700]</a> Cic. <i>Alt.</i> v. 21. 12; vi. 2. 7. Loans were sometimes made in violation of the -law (<i>Flacc.</i> 20. 46 f.), and sometimes the senate granted a dispensation from it; <i>Att.</i> -v. 21. 11 f.; vi. 2. 7; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 203.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2701" href="#FNanchor_2701" class="label">[2701]</a> Ascon. 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2702" href="#FNanchor_2702" class="label">[2702]</a> Ibid. 57.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2703" href="#FNanchor_2703" class="label">[2703]</a> P. 307 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2704" href="#FNanchor_2704" class="label">[2704]</a> Cic. Frag. A. vii (<i>Cornel.</i> i). 5; <i>Valin.</i> 2. 5; Ascon. 57 f.; Quintil. <i>Inst.</i> x. 5. -3 (iv. 4. 8).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2705" href="#FNanchor_2705" class="label">[2705]</a> Ascon. 58; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 39. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2706" href="#FNanchor_2706" class="label">[2706]</a> Cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 214; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 337 f.; Long, <i>Rom. -Rep.</i> iii. 107. Dio Cassius, xxxvi. 39, has wholly misunderstood the matter. Ferrero’s -account (<i>Rome</i>, i. 194) of the Cornelian legislation is inaccurate in all points.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2707" href="#FNanchor_2707" class="label">[2707]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvi. 38. 4; Cic. Frag. A. vii (<i>Cornel.</i> i). 40.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2708" href="#FNanchor_2708" class="label">[2708]</a> <i>CIL.</i> 1², p. 156; Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 256 f.; Münzer, ibid. -iii. 1376 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2709" href="#FNanchor_2709" class="label">[2709]</a> Ascon. 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2710" href="#FNanchor_2710" class="label">[2710]</a> Schol. Bob. 361; Ascon. 68, 89; Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 23. 46; 32. 67. It was opposed by -the people, who preferred the stricter measure of Cornelius; but Piso with a crowd -of followers forced it through the assembly; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 38. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2711" href="#FNanchor_2711" class="label">[2711]</a> Schol. Bob. 361; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 38; xxxvii. 25. 3; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> -425, 508, 521 f.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 867; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> iii. 105 f. It was -supplemented by the lex Fabia de numero sectatorum, apparently a plebiscite of 66; -Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 34. 71; Mommsen, ibid. 871; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 527.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2712" href="#FNanchor_2712" class="label">[2712]</a> XXXVI. 40. 1 f. (Foster’s rendering); cf. Ascon. 58; Cic. <i>Fin.</i> ii. 22. 74; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 656; iii. 215; Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> iii. 107 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. -Roms</i>, ii. 527; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 95, 97 f., 122.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2713" href="#FNanchor_2713" class="label">[2713]</a> Ascon. 58. The restriction, however, was only partial; Erman, in <i>Mélanges</i> Ch. -Appleton (1903), 201-304. The author of the law seems to have been a man not -only of excellent heart but of remarkably statesmanlike views, though the optimates -naturally classed him as seditious. On Cornelius in general, see Münzer, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 1252-5; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 526-9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2714" href="#FNanchor_2714" class="label">[2714]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvi. 23 ff.; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 25; Vell. ii. 31; App. <i>Mithr.</i> 94.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2715" href="#FNanchor_2715" class="label">[2715]</a> Vell. ii. 31; Cic. <i>Verr.</i> ii. 3. 8; iii. 91. 213; Pseud. Ascon. 122, 176, 206; -Schol. Bob. 234; Sall. <i>Hist.</i> iii. 4 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2716" href="#FNanchor_2716" class="label">[2716]</a> P. 428 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2717" href="#FNanchor_2717" class="label">[2717]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvi. 30. 2; cf. the deposition of Octavius, p. 367.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2718" href="#FNanchor_2718" class="label">[2718]</a> Cic. <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 15. 44; Livy, ep. xcix; Eutrop. vi. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2719" href="#FNanchor_2719" class="label">[2719]</a> Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 26; Dio Cass, xxxvi. 37. 1; Cic. <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 19. 57 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2720" href="#FNanchor_2720" class="label">[2720]</a> Sall. <i>Hist.</i> v. 13; cf. Klebs, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 256.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2721" href="#FNanchor_2721" class="label">[2721]</a> Cf. Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 76. Another comitial act on foreign -affairs was the plebiscite of unknown authorship providing for a commission of ten -to aid Lucullus in settling the affairs of Asia; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 43. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2722" href="#FNanchor_2722" class="label">[2722]</a> Ascon, p. 64 ff.; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 42. 1-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2723" href="#FNanchor_2723" class="label">[2723]</a> Cic. Frag. A. vii (<i>Cornel.</i> i). 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2724" href="#FNanchor_2724" class="label">[2724]</a> Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 23. 47.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2725" href="#FNanchor_2725" class="label">[2725]</a> Ascon. 65 f. The Cn. Manlius mentioned by Ascon. 45 f. is probably to be -identified with this Manilius; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 19, n. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2726" href="#FNanchor_2726" class="label">[2726]</a> XXXVI. 42. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2727" href="#FNanchor_2727" class="label">[2727]</a> Ascon. 66, or more simply the “lex de imperio Cn. Pompeii”; Cic. <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> -Inscr.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2728" href="#FNanchor_2728" class="label">[2728]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvi. 42.4; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 30; <i>Lucull.</i> 35; App. <i>Mithr.</i> 97; Livy, -ep. c; Vell. ii. 33. 1; Eutrop. vi. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2729" href="#FNanchor_2729" class="label">[2729]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 219; Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> ii. 586 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2730" href="#FNanchor_2730" class="label">[2730]</a> Cic. <i>Imp. Pomp.</i> 17. 51 ff.; 20. 59 ff.; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2731" href="#FNanchor_2731" class="label">[2731]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvi. 43. 2, and especially Cicero’s oration <i>De imperio Pompeii ad -quirites</i>. Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> iii. 131 f., severely criticises Dio Cassius for his treatment -of Cicero’s motives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2732" href="#FNanchor_2732" class="label">[2732]</a> P. 354.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2733" href="#FNanchor_2733" class="label">[2733]</a> P. 370.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2734" href="#FNanchor_2734" class="label">[2734]</a> P. 397; Cic. <i>Off.</i> iii. 11. 47; <i>Brut.</i> 16. 63; <i>Balb.</i> 21. 48; 23. 52; 24. 54; <i>Arch.</i> -5. 10; <i>Leg. Agr.</i> i. 4. 13; Ascon. 67; Schol. Bob. 296, 354; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 9. 5; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 229; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 140.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2735" href="#FNanchor_2735" class="label">[2735]</a> Gell. i. 12. 11 f.; Suet. <i>Aug.</i> 31; Lange, ibid. ii. 675 f.; iii. 229; Wissowa, -<i>Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm.</i> 439.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2736" href="#FNanchor_2736" class="label">[2736]</a> P. 391.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2737" href="#FNanchor_2737" class="label">[2737]</a> P. 416. On the lex Atia, see Dio Cass. xxxvii. 37. 1; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 243. -This act had no effect on the supreme pontificate, which had remained elective -(p. 416 above) and which was conferred on Caesar soon after (Drumann-Gröbe, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 155 f.) the enactment of the Atian law; Dio Cass. ibid.; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> -13; Vell. ii. 43. 3. The same Atius, together with T. Ampius Balbus, a colleague, -proposed and carried a plebiscite for granting to Pompey the privilege of wearing the -triumphal ornaments in the Circensian games and the toga praetexta and laurel (or -golden?) crown at the theatres; Vell. ii. 40. 4; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 21. 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2738" href="#FNanchor_2738" class="label">[2738]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> iii. 2. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2739" href="#FNanchor_2739" class="label">[2739]</a> Ibid. i. 2. 4; ii. 5. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2740" href="#FNanchor_2740" class="label">[2740]</a> Ibid. ii. 7. 16-8; 8. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2741" href="#FNanchor_2741" class="label">[2741]</a> Ibid. ii. 13. 34; 24. 64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2742" href="#FNanchor_2742" class="label">[2742]</a> Ibid. ii. 9. 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2743" href="#FNanchor_2743" class="label">[2743]</a> Ibid. i. 5. 15; ii. 13. 33; 27. 72.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2744" href="#FNanchor_2744" class="label">[2744]</a> From (1) an extensive sale of houses, lands, and other property belonging to -the state (ibid. i. 1. 3; 3. 10; ii. 14. 35; 15. 38). (2) vectigalia (i. 4. 10; ii. 21. 56), -and (3) other public moneys (i. 4. 12 f.; ii. 22. 59).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2745" href="#FNanchor_2745" class="label">[2745]</a> Ibid. ii. 25. 66.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2746" href="#FNanchor_2746" class="label">[2746]</a> Ibid. i. 5. 16 f.; ii. 13. 34; 20. 55; 24. 63; 25. 66; 26. 68; 27. 74 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2747" href="#FNanchor_2747" class="label">[2747]</a> These are the second and third <i>Orations on the Agrarian Law</i>, the first having -been delivered in the senate. On the purpose of the rogation, see Neumann, <i>Gesch. -Roms</i>, ii. 223 ff.; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 143; Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 231-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2748" href="#FNanchor_2748" class="label">[2748]</a> P. 431.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2749" href="#FNanchor_2749" class="label">[2749]</a> Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 32. 67.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2750" href="#FNanchor_2750" class="label">[2750]</a> Cic. <i>Vat.</i> 15. 37; p. 359 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2751" href="#FNanchor_2751" class="label">[2751]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 156.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2752" href="#FNanchor_2752" class="label">[2752]</a> Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 2. 3; 3. 5; 23. 47; 32. 67; Schol. Bob. 269, 309, 324, 362.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2753" href="#FNanchor_2753" class="label">[2753]</a> Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 23. 47.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2754" href="#FNanchor_2754" class="label">[2754]</a> Cic. <i>Vat.</i> 15. 37; <i>Sest.</i> 64. 133 (cf. <i>Har. Resp.</i> 26. 56); Schol. Bob. 309.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2755" href="#FNanchor_2755" class="label">[2755]</a> Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 23. 47; 41. 89; <i>Planc.</i> 34. 83; Schol. Bob. 269, 362; Dio Cass. -xxxvii. 29. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2756" href="#FNanchor_2756" class="label">[2756]</a> Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 23. 47. On the law in general, see Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 245; Hartmann, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> i. 1801.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2757" href="#FNanchor_2757" class="label">[2757]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 9. 24, proves that no such law existed at the beginning of 63, -and in 62 its existence is assumed by the Caecilian rogation for dispensing Pompey -from its provisions; Schol. Bob. 302.</p> - -<p>In 61 M. Aufidius Lurco, tribune of the plebs, attempted a curious modification of -the statute concerning corruption at elections, proposing that promises of money to -the tribes should not be binding, but that a candidate who actually paid should -be liable for life to a payment—apparently annual—of three thousand sesterces to -the tribe. His measure failed to become a law; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 16. 12 f.; 18. 3; Hartmann, -ibid. i. 1802.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2758" href="#FNanchor_2758" class="label">[2758]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> xi. 1. 2; <i>Att.</i> ii. 18. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2759" href="#FNanchor_2759" class="label">[2759]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 8. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2760" href="#FNanchor_2760" class="label">[2760]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> xii. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2761" href="#FNanchor_2761" class="label">[2761]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> i. 3. 8; 17. 45; <i>Flacc.</i> 34. 86.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2762" href="#FNanchor_2762" class="label">[2762]</a> Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 8. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2763" href="#FNanchor_2763" class="label">[2763]</a> Cic. <i>Flacc.</i> 34. 86; <i>Fam.</i> xii. 21; <i>Att.</i> ii. 18. 3; xv. ii. 4; Suet. <i>Tib.</i> 31; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 244.</p> - -<p>Several unpassed bills of the year 63 are mentioned. (1) The rogation of L. -Caecilius, tribune of the plebs, for lightening the penalty upon P. Autronius Paetus -and P. Cornelius Sulla, who had been condemned for ambitus; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 25. -3; Cic. <i>Sull.</i> 22 f.; cf. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 3. 8; 4. 10.—(2) A proposal to restore to the -children of those whom Sulla had proscribed the right to become candidates for -offices; Dio Cass. ibid.; Plut. <i>Cic.</i> 12; Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 1. 3.—(3) A proposal for the -cancellation of debts and (4) another for the allotment of lands in Italy. All these -measures were quashed by Cicero; Dio Cass. ibid. § 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2764" href="#FNanchor_2764" class="label">[2764]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 28. 3; Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2765" href="#FNanchor_2765" class="label">[2765]</a> Schol. Bob. 310. These same magistrates established a penalty for violations of -the lex Caecilia Didia (Cic. <i>Phil.</i> v. 3. 8), whether by the law above mentioned or a -separate enactment cannot be determined.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2766" href="#FNanchor_2766" class="label">[2766]</a> Val. Max ii. 8. 1. In 62 falls the unpassed bill of Q. Caecilius Metellus Nepos, -tribune of the plebs (cf. p. 437, n. 1), directing Pompey to come to the defence of -Italy against Catiline; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 43; Schol. Bob. 302. In the following year -(61) the consuls, M. Pupius Piso and M. Valerius Messala, proposed a resolution for -the appointment of a special commission to try Clodius on charge of having intruded -in a religious festival exclusively for women; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 13. 3; <i>Mil.</i> 5. 13; 22. 59; -27. 73; Ascon. 53; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 6; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 46. The bill provided that the -jurors should not be drawn by lot in the usual way but appointed by the praetor; -Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 14. 1. It was withdrawn in favor of the plebiscite de religione for the -same purpose but more favorable to the accused, presented by Q. Fufius Calenus, and -accepted by the tribes; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 16. 2; <i>Parad.</i> iv. 2. 31; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 10; Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 198 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2767" href="#FNanchor_2767" class="label">[2767]</a> Dio Cass. xxxvii. 51. 3; Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 16. I; <i>Q. Fr.</i> i. 1. 11. 33; Lange, <i>Röm. -Alt.</i> iii. 274. These taxes were made unnecessary by Pompey’s acquisitions in the -East.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2768" href="#FNanchor_2768" class="label">[2768]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 18. 6; 19. 4; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 50; Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2769" href="#FNanchor_2769" class="label">[2769]</a> P. 162.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2770" href="#FNanchor_2770" class="label">[2770]</a> P. 386.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2771" href="#FNanchor_2771" class="label">[2771]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 1. 4. On the later inclusion of this territory, see p. 440 below.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2772" href="#FNanchor_2772" class="label">[2772]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2773" href="#FNanchor_2773" class="label">[2773]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> xiii. 4. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2774" href="#FNanchor_2774" class="label">[2774]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 1. 4 f.; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 9. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2775" href="#FNanchor_2775" class="label">[2775]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 1. 3; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 10. 35; Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 31; <i>Pomp.</i> 47; -<i>Cic.</i> 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2776" href="#FNanchor_2776" class="label">[2776]</a> App. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 2. 5; 7. 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2777" href="#FNanchor_2777" class="label">[2777]</a> Varro, <i>R. R.</i> i. 2. 10; Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 6. 2; 7. 3; ix. 2 a. 1; Vell. ii. 45. 2; Dio -Cass. xxxviii. 1. 6 f.; Suet. <i>Aug.</i> 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2778" href="#FNanchor_2778" class="label">[2778]</a> Dio Cass. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2779" href="#FNanchor_2779" class="label">[2779]</a> <i>CIL.</i> vi. 3826 (Elogium of M. Valerius Messala, consul in 61); Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 7. -4; <i>Prov. Cons.</i> 17. 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2780" href="#FNanchor_2780" class="label">[2780]</a> <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 628, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2781" href="#FNanchor_2781" class="label">[2781]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2782" href="#FNanchor_2782" class="label">[2782]</a> Ibid. 3 f.; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 14; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2783" href="#FNanchor_2783" class="label">[2783]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 6. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2784" href="#FNanchor_2784" class="label">[2784]</a> P. 116.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2785" href="#FNanchor_2785" class="label">[2785]</a> The assembly met in the Forum, and was therefore tribal; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 20; Dio -Cass. xxxviii. 6. 2; Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2786" href="#FNanchor_2786" class="label">[2786]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 18. 2: “Ut ex legibus Iuliis” seems to be official language. The -explanation of Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> i. 114 f., which identifies one of the Julian -laws with the lex Mamilia, Roscia, etc., is not satisfactory, though accepted by Drumann-Gröbe, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 182. A plurality is also mentioned by Livy, ep. ciii; -Schol. Bob. 302; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 47 f.; <i>Caes.</i> 14; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 10-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2787" href="#FNanchor_2787" class="label">[2787]</a> <i>Att.</i> ii. 18. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2788" href="#FNanchor_2788" class="label">[2788]</a> <i>Att.</i> ii. 3. 3 (Dec. 60); 6. 2; 7. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2789" href="#FNanchor_2789" class="label">[2789]</a> <i>Att.</i> ii. 16. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2790" href="#FNanchor_2790" class="label">[2790]</a> XXXVIII. 1. 4; 7. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2791" href="#FNanchor_2791" class="label">[2791]</a> <i>Cat. Min.</i> 31, 33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2792" href="#FNanchor_2792" class="label">[2792]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 279-88, maintains that there were two agrarian laws; cf. -Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 287-91. The opposite view is held by Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsv.</i> i. -114 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 182.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2793" href="#FNanchor_2793" class="label">[2793]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 7. 3; <i>Cat. Min.</i> 33; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 20; Vell. ii. 44. 4. Whereas -Cicero was of the opinion that this district could provide not more than five thousand -with lots of ten iugera, Suetonius and Velleius state that twenty thousand were settled -in it. Some Campanian land remained undivided in 51; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> viii. 10. 4. -Many settlements under the Julian law are mentioned in the <i>liber coloniarum</i>, in -Gromat. 210, 220, 231, 235, 239, 259, 260.</p> - -<p>It was in accord with Caesar’s policy of colonization and of the extension of the -franchise that P. Vatinius, tribune of the plebs in this year, carried a law for sending -five thousand new settlers to Comum, a Latin colony in northern Italy. Some of -the new residents he honored with the citizenship; Strabo v. 16; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 28; -App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 26. 98; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 29; Cic. <i>Att.</i> v. 11. 2; <i>Fam.</i> xiii. 35. 1. The -franchise was afterward withdrawn by a decree of the senate; Suet. and Plut. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2794" href="#FNanchor_2794" class="label">[2794]</a> Dio Cassius, xxxviii. 7. 1 f. (cf. Schol. Bob. 302; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 12. 42), is -probably wrong in saying that death was the penalty for refusal to swear. Cicero (<i>Sest.</i> -28. 61) and Plutarch (<i>Cat. Min.</i> 32) speak simply of heavy penalties.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2795" href="#FNanchor_2795" class="label">[2795]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 18. 2. The provision regarding the oath was not introduced till it -was found that the senate opposed.</p> - -<p>Supplementary to these Julian laws is the lex Mamilia Roscia Peducaea Alliena -Fabia, three articles of which are contained in Gromat. 263-6; Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> -96-8; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 69 f. Other references to a lex Mamilia are Gromat. 11. 5; -12. 12; 37. 24; 144. 19; 169. 7; Cic. <i>Leg.</i> i. 21. 55. The last proves it to have been -passed before 51. The seeming citation of the third article as an agrarian law of -Gaius Caesar by <i>Dig.</i> xlvii. 21. 3, may indicate merely a borrowing of this article -from the earlier law of Caesar, just as article 2 is substantially repeated in <i>Lex Col. -Genet.</i> 104. Mommsen, in <i>Röm. Feldmess.</i> ii. 221-6; <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 628, n. 4, -considers it the work of a second sub-committee (Vviri) of the vigintiviri provided -for by the agrarian law, enacted to furnish rules for the administration of the latter. -Lange (<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 690; iii. 288) and more decidedly Willems (<i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 498, -n. 5) prefer to regard it as a tribunician law and to assign it to 55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2796" href="#FNanchor_2796" class="label">[2796]</a> Cf. Polyb. vi. 17. 5; p. 345 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2797" href="#FNanchor_2797" class="label">[2797]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 20; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 7. 4; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 13. 48; Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 16. 2; -Schol. Bob. 259, 261.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2798" href="#FNanchor_2798" class="label">[2798]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> viii. 8. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2799" href="#FNanchor_2799" class="label">[2799]</a> Pompey in his second consulship, 55, attempted in vain to displace it by a still -severer measure; p. 448.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2800" href="#FNanchor_2800" class="label">[2800]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> v. 10. 2; 16. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2801" href="#FNanchor_2801" class="label">[2801]</a> Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 16. 37; 21. 49 f.; 37. 90; <i>Dom.</i> 9. 23; <i>Prov. Cons.</i> 4. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2802" href="#FNanchor_2802" class="label">[2802]</a> Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 37. 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2803" href="#FNanchor_2803" class="label">[2803]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> vi. 7. 2; <i>Fam.</i> ii. 17. 2, 4; v. 20. 2, 7; <i>Pis.</i> 25. 61; cf. Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> -38; Dio Cass. xxxix. 23. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2804" href="#FNanchor_2804" class="label">[2804]</a> <i>Dig.</i> xlviii. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2805" href="#FNanchor_2805" class="label">[2805]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Post.</i> 4. 8 f.; 11. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2806" href="#FNanchor_2806" class="label">[2806]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 43; <i>Otho</i>, 2; Tac. <i>Hist.</i> i. 77; Paul. <i>Sent.</i> v. 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2807" href="#FNanchor_2807" class="label">[2807]</a> <i>Vat.</i> 12. 29. See further on the law, <i>Sest.</i> 64. 135; Schol. Bob. 310, 321; -Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 195-7; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 292; Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 709; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 427, 483, 485.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2808" href="#FNanchor_2808" class="label">[2808]</a> Ci. <i>Vat.</i> ii. 27; <i>Planc.</i> 15. 36; Schol. Bob. 235, 321, 323. “It is indifferently -described as a method of challenging alternate benches (consilia) and alternate -iudices”; Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 451. It seems to have permitted the rejection -not simply of individual jurors as heretofore, but of an entire panel; Drumann-Gröbe, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 197.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2809" href="#FNanchor_2809" class="label">[2809]</a> Dio Cass, xxxviii. 8. 1; Schol. Bob. 235.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2810" href="#FNanchor_2810" class="label">[2810]</a> Pliny, <i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 10. 136; Joseph. <i>Ant. Iud.</i> xiv. 34 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2811" href="#FNanchor_2811" class="label">[2811]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> ii. 16. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2812" href="#FNanchor_2812" class="label">[2812]</a> Caes. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 107. 6; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 54; Dio Cass, xxxix. 12. 1; Cic. <i>Rab. Post.</i> -3. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2813" href="#FNanchor_2813" class="label">[2813]</a> Dio Cass, xxxviii. 7. 5; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 13. 46; Plut. <i>Lucull.</i> 42; <i>Pomp.</i> 48; -Vell. ii. 44. 2; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 289; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 194. -Several other laws on foreign affairs, having especial reference to treaties, were -proposed and carried by P. Vatinius, tribune of the plebs in this year, acting probably -as Caesar’s instrument; Cic. <i>Vat.</i> 12. 29; <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. 7; <i>Att.</i> ii. 9. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2814" href="#FNanchor_2814" class="label">[2814]</a> P. 163.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2815" href="#FNanchor_2815" class="label">[2815]</a> Dio Cass. xxxviii. 8. 5; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 22; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 64. 135; <i>Vat.</i> 15. 35 f.; <i>Prov. -Cons.</i> 15. 36; Caes. <i>B. G.</i> ii. 35. 2; iii. 7. 1; v. 1. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2816" href="#FNanchor_2816" class="label">[2816]</a> Caes. <i>B. G.</i> i. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2817" href="#FNanchor_2817" class="label">[2817]</a> Caes. <i>B. G.</i> i. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2818" href="#FNanchor_2818" class="label">[2818]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 22; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 8. 5; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 14; <i>Pomp.</i> 48; <i>Crass.</i> 14; -<i>Cat. Min.</i> 33. The resolutions of people and senate are combined by App. <i>B. C.</i> -ii. 13. 49; Vell. ii. 44. 5; Zon. x. 6; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 198 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2819" href="#FNanchor_2819" class="label">[2819]</a> Cf. Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 290.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2820" href="#FNanchor_2820" class="label">[2820]</a> Drumann-Gröbe, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2821" href="#FNanchor_2821" class="label">[2821]</a> On the consulship of Caesar see further Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> III. ch. xix; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 278-96; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> i. 550-3; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. -Roms</i>, iii. 177 ff.; the histories of Mommsen, Peter, Ferrero, etc., and the various -biographies of Caesar.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2822" href="#FNanchor_2822" class="label">[2822]</a> Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 25. 55; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 1; Ascon. 9; Schol. Bob. 300 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2823" href="#FNanchor_2823" class="label">[2823]</a> Six and a third asses to the modius; p. 372. The frumentarian law of Appuleius -Saturninus for lowering the price to five-sixths of an <i>as</i> had been annulled -(p. 395 f.), and the law in force in 82, whether the Sempronian or the Octavian, -was repealed by Sulla (p. 422). Lepidus, consul in 78, carried a law for the distribution -of five modii of grain to the citizen, at what price and at what interval is -not stated (p. 423, n. 8). There was also a lex frumentaria of the consuls of 73, C. -Cassius Varus and M. Terentius Varro (Cic. <i>Verr.</i> iii. 70. 163; v. 21. 52; cf. Sall. -<i>Hist.</i> iii. 48. 19). It must have restored, or maintained, the Sempronian price, -which according to the sources was displaced by the Clodian provision for free grain. -Probably by an article of this law, rather than by a new enactment, Sex. Clodius, a -dependent of the tribune, was given charge of the distribution; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 10. 25. -See further Humbert, in Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> ii. 1346 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2824" href="#FNanchor_2824" class="label">[2824]</a> Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 25. 55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2825" href="#FNanchor_2825" class="label">[2825]</a> Cic. ibid.; <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 13. 33; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 1 f.; Plut. <i>Cic.</i> 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2826" href="#FNanchor_2826" class="label">[2826]</a> Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 4. 9; <i>Sest.</i> 25. 55; Ascon. 9, 67; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 2; Liebenam, -<i>Röm. Vereinswes.</i> 21; Waltzing, <i>Corp. prof.</i> i. 92.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2827" href="#FNanchor_2827" class="label">[2827]</a> Cf. Ferrero, <i>Rome</i>, i. 300.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2828" href="#FNanchor_2828" class="label">[2828]</a> P. 117.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2829" href="#FNanchor_2829" class="label">[2829]</a> Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 15. 33; p. 471.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2830" href="#FNanchor_2830" class="label">[2830]</a> Ascon. 9: Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 2; Schol. Bob. 300; cf. Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 4. 9; <i>Sest.</i> 25. -55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2831" href="#FNanchor_2831" class="label">[2831]</a> Suet. <i>Dom.</i> 9. 3: Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 308.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2832" href="#FNanchor_2832" class="label">[2832]</a> Vell. ii. 45. 1; Livy, ep. ciii; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 14. 4; Plut. <i>Cic.</i> 30; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 208 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2833" href="#FNanchor_2833" class="label">[2833]</a> P. 371.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2834" href="#FNanchor_2834" class="label">[2834]</a> We hear many echoes of this theory in the speeches of Cicero which refer to the -Catilinarian conspiracy; cf. <i>Cat.</i> ii. 2. 3; 8. 17; iv. 5. 10 (admitted by C. Caesar); -7. 15; 10. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2835" href="#FNanchor_2835" class="label">[2835]</a> This act accorded with earlier usage; p. 249, 267, 395. On the original rogation -of Clodius concerning the exile of Cicero and its amendment, see Gurlitt, in -<i>Philol.</i> N. F. xiii (1900). 578-83; Sternkopf, ibid. 272-304; xv (1902). 42-70. See -also Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 970, n. 2, 978, n. 1.</p> - -<p>The remaining Clodian laws may pass with briefer mention: (1) A plebiscite -which converted the kingdom of Cyprus into a province, confiscated the property of -the reigning king, and commissioned Cato to bring the treasury of the latter to -Rome; Livy, ep. civ; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 8. 20; <i>Sest.</i> 26. 57; 27. 59; Schol. Bob. 301 f.; -Dio Cass. xxxviii. 30. 5; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 85 f.—(2) The plebiscite de inuriis publicis, -the terms of which are not known; Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 30. 81.—(3) The plebiscite which -transferred the title of king and the priesthood of the Great Mother at Pessinus from -Deiotarus to his son-in-law Brogitarus; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 26. 56; <i>Har. Resp.</i> 13. 28 f.; 27. -59; <i>Dom.</i> 50. 129; <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 7. 2; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 308; Niese, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 2401-4.—(4) The plebiscite de provinciis and (5) de -permutatione provinciarum, which assigned to the outgoing consuls of the year -provinces according to their desires; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 25. 55; <i>Dom.</i> 9. 23 f.; 26. 70; <i>Prov. -Cons.</i> 2. 3; Plut. <i>Cic.</i> 30; (Aurel. Vict.) <i>Vir. Ill.</i> 81. 4. There were, too, several -unpassed rogations. In general on Clodius and his legislation, see Lange, ibid. 296 ff.; -Long, <i>Rom. Rep.</i> III. ch. xxi; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, ii. 202 ff.; Fröhlich, -in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 82-8; White, <i>Cicero, Clodius, and Milo</i>, -16 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2836" href="#FNanchor_2836" class="label">[2836]</a> Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 33. 90; <i>Pis.</i> 15. 35 f.; <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 11. 27; p. 127 above. Among -the tribunician rogations for the purpose, preceding the enactment of the centuriate -law, were the Ninnia (Dio Cass. xxxviii. 30. 4; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 31. 68), the Messia (Cic. -<i>Red. in Sen.</i> 8. 21), that of eight tribunes (Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 33. 72; Pis. 15. 35; <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. -16), and the Fabricia (Cic. <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 8. 22; <i>Mil.</i> 14. 38). The last was proposed -early in 57; the others near the end of 58.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2837" href="#FNanchor_2837" class="label">[2837]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 1. 7; Livy, ep. civ; Dio Cass. xxxix. 9. 2 f.; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 49; App. -<i>B. C.</i> ii. 18. 67.</p> - -<p>In 56 a rogation of C. Porcius Cato, tribune of the plebs, for abrogating the proconsular -imperium of P. Cornelius Lentulus failed to become a law (Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. -3. 1; <i>Fam.</i> 1. 5 a. 2); also the rogation of his colleague L. Caninius for commissioning -Pompey with pretorian power for the purpose of restoring Ptolemy, the -exiled king of Egypt, to his throne; Dio Cass. xxxix. 12 ff.; Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 2. 3; -Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 49.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2838" href="#FNanchor_2838" class="label">[2838]</a> An interregnum was forced in order to secure a more favorable chairman for the -elections than were the consuls of 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2839" href="#FNanchor_2839" class="label">[2839]</a> Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 21; <i>Pomp.</i> 51; <i>Crass.</i> 14; <i>Cat. Min.</i> 41; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 17. 62 f. -The postponement of the comitia was effected by C. Porcius Cato (Dio Cass. xxxix. -27. 3; Livy, ep. cv; Cic. <i>Q. Fr.</i> ii. 4. 6) and a colleague in the tribunate (Cic. <i>Att.</i> -iv. 15. 4).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2840" href="#FNanchor_2840" class="label">[2840]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 9. 1; Dio Cass. xxxix. 33. 1 f.; Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 43; <i>Crass.</i> 15; -<i>Pomp.</i> 52; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 18. 65; Livy, ep. cv; Vell. ii. 46. 1 f.; p. 442 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2841" href="#FNanchor_2841" class="label">[2841]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 34 f.; Plut. and Livy, ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2842" href="#FNanchor_2842" class="label">[2842]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 33. 3 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2843" href="#FNanchor_2843" class="label">[2843]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 37. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2844" href="#FNanchor_2844" class="label">[2844]</a> Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 15. 36; 16. 40; 17. 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2845" href="#FNanchor_2845" class="label">[2845]</a> Ibid. 15. 36 ff.; Schol. Bob. 253 f., 261.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2846" href="#FNanchor_2846" class="label">[2846]</a> Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 16. 40; Schol. Bob. 262; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 340 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2847" href="#FNanchor_2847" class="label">[2847]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> x. 4. 8; xiii. 49. 1; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 23. 87; Dio Cass. xl. 52. 3; 55. 2; -Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 48; <i>Pomp.</i> 55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2848" href="#FNanchor_2848" class="label">[2848]</a> Paul. <i>Sent.</i> v. 24; <i>Dig.</i> xlviii. 9; cf. i. 2. 2. 2. 32, which is inexact; Lange, <i>Röm. -Alt.</i> ii. 667.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2849" href="#FNanchor_2849" class="label">[2849]</a> Cic. <i>Rab. Post.</i> 6. 13. As the equites did not participate in the government of -Italy and the provinces, they had not been rendered liable to the earlier leges repetundarum, -although it was possible to bring action against them for corrupt jury -service; cf. p. 378, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2850" href="#FNanchor_2850" class="label">[2850]</a> Dio Cass. xxxix. 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2851" href="#FNanchor_2851" class="label">[2851]</a> Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 39. 94; <i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 20; Ascon. 16; Pseud. Sall. <i>Rep. Ord.</i> ii. 3. 2 f.; -cf. 7. 11 f.; 12. 1; cf. Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 448.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2852" href="#FNanchor_2852" class="label">[2852]</a> Cic. <i>Mil.</i> 5. 13; 6. 15; 26. 70; 29. 79; Ascon. 31 ff., 37, 40, 53; Schol. Bob. -276; Schol. Gronov. 443; Gell. x. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2853" href="#FNanchor_2853" class="label">[2853]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> vii. 1. 4; 3. 4; viii. 3. 3; <i>Fam.</i> vi. 6. 5; xvi. 12. 3; <i>Phil.</i> ii. 10. 24; -Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 26; Caes. <i>B. C.</i> i. 32; Dio Cass. xl. 51. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2854" href="#FNanchor_2854" class="label">[2854]</a> Dio Cass. xl. 56. 1; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 28. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2855" href="#FNanchor_2855" class="label">[2855]</a> Dio Cass. xl. 46. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2856" href="#FNanchor_2856" class="label">[2856]</a> Ibid, and 56. 1; cf. 30. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2857" href="#FNanchor_2857" class="label">[2857]</a> P. 381.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2858" href="#FNanchor_2858" class="label">[2858]</a> Hirschfeld, in <i>Klio</i>, iv (1904). 76-87; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 720 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2859" href="#FNanchor_2859" class="label">[2859]</a> It suffices to mention (1) the unpassed bill of C. Lucilius Hirrus and M. Coelius -Vinicianus, 53 (in rivalry with a tribunician rogation for the establishment of tribuni -militum consulari potestate), to name Pompey dictator; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> viii. 4. 3; <i>Q. Fr.</i> -iii. 8. 4; Plut. <i>Pomp.</i> 54.—(2) The repeal of the Clodian plebiscite of 58 concerning -the censorial stigma (p. 445) by a law of Q. Caecilius Metellus, colleague of -Pompey in 52; Dio Cass. xl. 57. 1.—(3) The unpassed bill of the famous P. Clodius, -praetor in 52, concerning the suffrage of the libertini—somewhat similar to the Manilian -law of 67 (p. 433); Ascon. 52; Schol. Bob. 346.—(4) Possibly a lex Scribonia -de usucapione servitutum was the work of C. Scribonius Curio, tribune in 50, -though more probably it belongs to an earlier date; p. 424, n. 4.—(5) An unpassed -alimentary rogation of the same Scribonius for ordering the aediles to control the -weights and measures of the markets in a way to give justice to the poor; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> -viii. 6. 5; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 27. 102.—(6) Another unpassed Scribonian bill for limiting -the travelling expenses of senators; Cic. <i>Att.</i> vi. 1. 25.—(7) An unpassed Scribonian -bill concerning the Campanian land; Cic. <i>Fam.</i> viii. 10. 4.—(8) An unpassed -Scribonian rogatio viaria, like the agrarian rogation of Servilius Rullus (p. 435); -Cic. <i>Fam.</i> viii. 6. 5.—(9) An unpassed Scribonian bill for confiscating the realm of -King Juba; Caes. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 25; Dio Cass. xli. 41. 3. One or two other unpassed -bills of the same tribune are still less important.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2860" href="#FNanchor_2860" class="label">[2860]</a> Dio Cass. xli. 36. 1 f.; Caes. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 21; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 48. 196; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2861" href="#FNanchor_2861" class="label">[2861]</a> Caes. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 2; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 48. 196 f.; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2862" href="#FNanchor_2862" class="label">[2862]</a> Here seems to belong the plebiscite of A. Hirtius concerning the partisans of -Pompey (Cic. <i>Phil.</i> xiii. 16. 32; <i>CIL.</i> i. p. 627 f.; Willems, <i>Sén. Rom.</i> i. 592), though -Mommsen (<i>CIL.</i> l. c.) assigns it to 46.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2863" href="#FNanchor_2863" class="label">[2863]</a> Dio. Cass. xlii. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2864" href="#FNanchor_2864" class="label">[2864]</a> Ibid. 21. That his appointment was for an indefinite time, not for a year as -Dio Cassius, ibid. 20, states, is proved by <i>CIL.</i> i.² p. 28, 41. He held the office till -news of the victory at Thapsus reached Rome.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2865" href="#FNanchor_2865" class="label">[2865]</a> Dio Cass. xlii. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2866" href="#FNanchor_2866" class="label">[2866]</a> Dio Cass. xliii. 14; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 48 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2867" href="#FNanchor_2867" class="label">[2867]</a> Dio Cassius, xliii. 42-6, describes them at great length, whereas Suetonius, <i>Caes.</i> -76, is content with a brief enumeration.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2868" href="#FNanchor_2868" class="label">[2868]</a> Dio Cass. xliii. 44; <i>CIL.</i> ix. 2563; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> ii. 767, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2869" href="#FNanchor_2869" class="label">[2869]</a> The right to the consulship was granted according to Dio Cassius, xliii. 45. 1 -(προεχειρίσαντο), by a vote of the people. In general it is impossible to determine -which senatus consulta for conferring these and future honors were ratified by the -comitia. The perpetual dictatorship was assumed February, 44; Drumann-Gröbe, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 739.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2870" href="#FNanchor_2870" class="label">[2870]</a> Dio Cass. xliv. 5. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2871" href="#FNanchor_2871" class="label">[2871]</a> Ibid. 7. 3; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 52. 3. Two laws of the consul M. Antonius were also -enacted in his honor, the first changing the name of the month Quinctilis to Julius -(Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 12. 34), the second dedicating to Caesar the fifth day of the Roman -games (Cic. <i>Phil.</i> ii. 43. 110).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2872" href="#FNanchor_2872" class="label">[2872]</a> Cf. Bondurant, <i>Dec. Jun. Brut.</i> 40.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2873" href="#FNanchor_2873" class="label">[2873]</a> Caes. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 1; Cic. <i>Att.</i> vii. 11. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2874" href="#FNanchor_2874" class="label">[2874]</a> Caes. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 1; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 42; Dio Cass. xli. 37 f.; App. <i>B. C.</i> ii. 48. 198; -Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 37. Possibly the lex Iulia de bonorum cessione (Gaius iii. 78; Theod. -Cod. iv. 20; Justin. Cod. vii. 71. 4) may be identical with this law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2875" href="#FNanchor_2875" class="label">[2875]</a> Dio Cass. xli. 38. 1 f.; Cic. <i>Att.</i> ix. 9. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2876" href="#FNanchor_2876" class="label">[2876]</a> Agitation leading to this measure found expression in a rogation of M. Caelius -Rufus, praetor in 48, for the payment of debts in six years without interest (Caes. -<i>B. C.</i> iii. 20) and somewhat later in a rogation for an extensive, perhaps complete, -abolition of debts (Caes. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 21; Livy, ep. cxi; Vell. ii. 68. 1 f.; Dio Cass. xlii. -22-5); in a rogation of P. Cornelius Dolabella, tribune of the plebs in 47, for the -complete abolition of debts (Livy, ep. cxiii; Plut. <i>Ant.</i> 9; Dio Cass. xlii. 29. 32); -and in rogations by these two officials respectively for the remission of rents (treated -by the sources in connection with their bills on insolvency).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2877" href="#FNanchor_2877" class="label">[2877]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 38; Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2878" href="#FNanchor_2878" class="label">[2878]</a> On the similar measure of Octavianus, see p. 459. See also Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> -ii. 694; iii. 435.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2879" href="#FNanchor_2879" class="label">[2879]</a> This measure seems to have been brought about by no law but merely through -his censorial power; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 448; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, -iii. 557.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2880" href="#FNanchor_2880" class="label">[2880]</a> A Julian colonial law is mentioned by <i>Lex Col. Genet.</i> 97. The veterans were -settled in Italy probably under the agrarian law of 59; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 81. 1. The known -colonies founded under the dictatorial law are included in Kornemann’s list, in -Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 524 ff.; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 604-6. -His most famous colonies were Carthage (App. <i>Lib.</i> 136; Dio Cass. xliii. 50. 3 f.; -Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 57; Strabo xvii. 3. 5) and Corinth (Dio Cass. ibid. § 4; Plut. ibid.; -Strabo viii. 6. 3; xvii. 3. 15; Paus. ii. 1. 2; 3. 1). The colonia Genetiva Iulia Urbanorum -in Spain was founded in 44 after the death of Caesar, but iussu C. Caesaris -dict. imp. et lege Antonia senat(us)que c(onsulto) pl(ebi)que (scito)—by a consular -law of Antonius for the founding of the colony, supplemented by a plebiscite of -unknown authorship.</p> - -<p>The inscription known as the lex Coloniae Genetivae Iuliae (<i>CIL.</i> ii. supplb. 5439; -Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> 123-40; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 87-103) is a part of the lex data (§ 67), -or charter, granted the colony by its founder. It was called Urbanorum because it -was made up of proletarians from Rome; cf. Kornemann, ibid. 527.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2881" href="#FNanchor_2881" class="label">[2881]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 42. At the same time measures were taken to prevent those residents -of Italy who were liable to military service from absenting themselves unduly -from the country. To give employment to the poor, the owners of herds were -ordered to make up one-third of their shepherds from freemen; ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2882" href="#FNanchor_2882" class="label">[2882]</a> Dio Cass. xli. 18. 2; xliv. 47. 4; Plut. <i>Caes.</i> 37; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 41; cf. Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 416.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2883" href="#FNanchor_2883" class="label">[2883]</a> Caes. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 1; cf. Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2884" href="#FNanchor_2884" class="label">[2884]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> xii. 4. 10; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 24; Dio Cass. xli. 36. 3; cf. xxxvii. 9. 3-5. -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 134; 159, n. 1; Krüger-Brissaud, <i>Sourc. d. droit Rom.</i> -97, for the authorship of the law.</p> - -<p>The so-called lex Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina (<i>CIL.</i> i. 205 = xi. 1146; Bruns, <i>Font. -Iur.</i> 98-102; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 70-76) seems to be a lex data, probably of 49 [Mommsen, -in <i>Wiener Studien</i>, xxiv (1902). 238 f.; <i>Ephem. Ep.</i> ix. 1903. p. 4]. As the -lex Rubria cited in § 20 is not this document but an earlier plebiscite, the name -of the author has not been determined. It regulated the administration of justice in -Cisalpina, which remained a province till 42. The fragment of a law found at Ateste -(Bruns, ibid. 102 f.; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, (76-8) is of the same nature and belongs to the -same period, though probably not to the Rubrian law itself, as Mommsen (<i>Hermes</i>, -xvi. 24-41) once assumed.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2885" href="#FNanchor_2885" class="label">[2885]</a> Dio Cass. xli. 24. 1; cf. Livy, ep. cx. The monarchical quality of his rule shows -itself in his bestowal of the citizenship on individuals at his own pleasure; cf. -Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 134.</p> - -<p>In 44 the lex Iulia de Siculis, published by Antonius after the death of Caesar, -gave the full citizenship to the Sicilians, who had received the Latinitas from Caesar. -This law, Antonius asserted, had been carried through the comitia by the dictator, -whereas Cicero, <i>Att.</i> xiv. 12. 1, states positively that no mention was even made -of such a proposition in the dictator’s lifetime.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2886" href="#FNanchor_2886" class="label">[2886]</a> Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 4; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 41; wrongly Pomponius, in <i>Dig.</i> i. 2. 2. 2. 32. -The two additional aediles (cereales) were not instituted till 44; Dio Cass. xliii. 51. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2887" href="#FNanchor_2887" class="label">[2887]</a> Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 3; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 437; p. 416 above. The addition -of one to the fifteen members of the great sacerdotal colleges (Dio Cass. ibid.; cf. -Cic. <i>Fam.</i> xiii. 68. 2) refers to his right to commend candidates for supernumerary -membership (Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> ii. 2317), and hence does -not imply a comitial act.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2888" href="#FNanchor_2888" class="label">[2888]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> vii. 6. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2889" href="#FNanchor_2889" class="label">[2889]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 41; cf. Dio Cass. xliii. 51. 3. The pretext was the impending Parthian -war. In 46 he had been given the right to name all the magistrates but had -rejected it; Dio Cass. xliii. 14. 5; 45. 1; 47. 1; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, -iii. 612, n. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2890" href="#FNanchor_2890" class="label">[2890]</a> Livy, ep. cxvi; Dio Cass. xliv. 10. 1-3; xlvi. 49. 2. In the following year a -tribune was similarly deposed by a plebiscite of P. Titius, a colleague (Dio Cass. xlvi. -49. 1); and in 43, before the establishment of the triumvirate, the city praetor was -deprived of his office by his colleagues, probably through a comitial act; App. <i>B. C.</i> -iii. 95. 394 f.; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> i. 630, n. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2891" href="#FNanchor_2891" class="label">[2891]</a> P. 427.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2892" href="#FNanchor_2892" class="label">[2892]</a> Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 41; Dio Cass. xliii. 25. 1. Cicero, <i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 19, intimates, without -positively stating, that this was a centuriate law; p. 236 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2893" href="#FNanchor_2893" class="label">[2893]</a> Cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 455; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 558.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2894" href="#FNanchor_2894" class="label">[2894]</a> We are informed that he increased the penalties for crimes, and enacted that a -person condemned to exile should forfeit half his estate, and the murderer of a relative -the whole; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 42; cf. Dio Cass. xliv. 49. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2895" href="#FNanchor_2895" class="label">[2895]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 9. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2896" href="#FNanchor_2896" class="label">[2896]</a> The Julian laws on these subjects in the <i>Digesta</i>, xlviii. 4 (de maiestate), 6 f. (de -vi) prove by their contents to belong to Augustus; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, -iii. 560. 4; cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 455. The leges Iuliae which abolished what remained -of the legis actiones (Gaius iv. 30) are also supposed to belong to Augustus; -Poste, <i>Gaius</i>, 474.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2897" href="#FNanchor_2897" class="label">[2897]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> xiii. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2898" href="#FNanchor_2898" class="label">[2898]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> ix. 15. 5; 26. 3; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2899" href="#FNanchor_2899" class="label">[2899]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> xii. 35; 36. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2900" href="#FNanchor_2900" class="label">[2900]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> xiii. 7; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 43; Dio Cass. xliii. 25. 2; cf. Drumann-Gröbe, -<i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 559; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 450. The officials failed to enforce it -effectively; Suet. ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2901" href="#FNanchor_2901" class="label">[2901]</a> P. 164.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2902" href="#FNanchor_2902" class="label">[2902]</a> Dio Cass. xliii. 25; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 9; iii. 15. 38; v. 3. 7; viii. 9. 28. The lex -Iulia et Titia, which gave provincial governors the right to name tutors (Gaius i. 185, -195; Ulp. xi. 18; frag. d. Sin. 20; <i>Inst.</i> i. 20) may be a part of the lex de provinciis -(Voigt, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 840 f.), or a supplement to it. The expression -may refer either to one law or to two related laws. The Julian lex de liberis legationibus, -limiting their duration (Cic. <i>Att.</i> xv. 11. 4), also belongs to 46.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2903" href="#FNanchor_2903" class="label">[2903]</a> <i>CIL.</i> i. 206; Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> 104-13; Dessau, ii. 6085; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 78-87. -The extant fragment, originally known as the Table of Heraclea (Lucania) from the -place where it was found, is inscribed on a bronze tablet now in the National -Museum at Naples. As it disqualified for office any who had taken part in the proscriptions -(§ 121), it must have followed the downfall of the Cornelian régime in 70, -and the mention of the month Quinctilis (§ 98) proves that it preceded the renaming -of that month in 43. A reference to one of its provisions (§§ 94, 104) by Cicero, -<i>Fam.</i> vi. 18. 1 (Jan., 45) as of a law freshly passed, proves it to be no later than January, -45; cf. Savigny, <i>Verm. Schr.</i> iii (1850). 279-412; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> -i. 438; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 78. It must have been passed, therefore, before Caesar set -out for Spain, about November, 46; Drumann-Gröbe, <i>Gesch. Roms</i>, iii. 569.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2904" href="#FNanchor_2904" class="label">[2904]</a> For the various hypotheses, see Hackel, in <i>Wiener Studien</i>, xxiv (1902). -552-62.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2905" href="#FNanchor_2905" class="label">[2905]</a> Kalb, in <i>Jahresb. ü. Altwiss.</i> 1906. 37. The identification of this law with the -lex Iulia municipalis cited in an inscription found at Padua (<i>CIL.</i> v. 2864) and with -the lex municipalis of the <i>Digesta</i> (1. 9. 3; <i>Cod.</i> vii. 9. 1), proposed by Savigny, ibid., -is not certain; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 78.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2906" href="#FNanchor_2906" class="label">[2906]</a> <i>Lex Iul. Mun.</i> 1-19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2907" href="#FNanchor_2907" class="label">[2907]</a> <i>Lex Iul. Mun.</i> 20-82.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2908" href="#FNanchor_2908" class="label">[2908]</a> Ibid. 83-142.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2909" href="#FNanchor_2909" class="label">[2909]</a> Ibid. 143-59.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2910" href="#FNanchor_2910" class="label">[2910]</a> Ibid. 160-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2911" href="#FNanchor_2911" class="label">[2911]</a> Savigny, <i>Verm. Schr.</i> iii. 329, was of the opinion that the inclusion of articles 1 -and 2 with articles 3-5 formed a lex satura (p. 396) having no other motive than -convenience. Hackel, <i>Wien. Stud.</i> xxiv. 560, supposes that Caesar had intended to -bring the provisions of this measure before the comitia as two separate laws, but in -his haste to be off for Spain, combined them in one. At all events the interpretation -given above is true of the result if not of the intention.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2912" href="#FNanchor_2912" class="label">[2912]</a> Many of his regulations were effected through edicts. Such were probably -the imposition of duties on goods imported into Italy—an abolition of the law -of 60 (Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 43; cf. p. 438), the leasing of the emery mines in Crete (<i>Dig.</i> -xxxix. 4. 15), and the suppression of the collegia which had been organized under -the Clodian law of 58; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 42; Joseph. <i>Ant. Iud.</i> xiv. 10. 8. 213 ff.; -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 435; Liebenam, <i>Röm. Vereinswes.</i> 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2913" href="#FNanchor_2913" class="label">[2913]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> v. 4. 10; App. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 5. 16; 22. 81; Dio Cass. xliv. 53. 2; xlv. 23. -After the Antonian laws had been annulled by the senate, February, 43, on the -ground that they had been passed with violence and contrary to the auspices (Cic. -<i>Phil.</i> vi. 2. 3; Dio Cass. xlv. 27), the acts of Caesar are confirmed anew by a -centuriate law of C. Vibius Pansa, consul in that year; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> x. 8. 17; Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 526. The policy of using the departed Caesar as a means of self-aggrandizement -readily lent itself to Octavianus, at whose instigation Q. Pedius, his colleague -in the consulship in 43, caused a comitial act to be passed for the establishment -of a special court to try the murderers of the dictator. The act specified the -punishment to be inflicted on the guilty and offered rewards to informers; Vell. -ii. 69. 5; Suet. <i>Ner.</i> 3; <i>Galb.</i> 3; Dio Cass. xlvi. 48 f.; App. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 95; Aug. -<i>Mon. Ancyr.</i> i. 10; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Strafr.</i> 199.</p> - -<p>The lex Rufrena in honor of Caesar (<i>CIL.</i> i. 626) probably belongs to 42; -Lange, ibid. 556; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> ii. 89, n. 3. In te same year falls the -lex of the triumvirs which changed the birthday of Caesar from July 12 to 5 -(Fowler, <i>Rom. Fest.</i> 174) and compelled all to celebrate it; Dio Cass. xlvii. 18. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2914" href="#FNanchor_2914" class="label">[2914]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> v. 4. 10; <i>Lex Col. Genet.</i> 104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2915" href="#FNanchor_2915" class="label">[2915]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 499. After this law had been annulled by a senatus consultum -(p. 457, n. 7), the settlements made by Antonius were confirmed by a centuriate -law of C. Vibius Pansa, consul in 43; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> xiii. 15. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2916" href="#FNanchor_2916" class="label">[2916]</a> Dio Cass. xlv. 9. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2917" href="#FNanchor_2917" class="label">[2917]</a> Cicero, <i>Phil.</i> v. 3. 7, says all Italy; 7. 20; vi. 5. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2918" href="#FNanchor_2918" class="label">[2918]</a> Ibid. v. 7. 21; vi. 5. 14; viii. 9. 26; xii. 9. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2919" href="#FNanchor_2919" class="label">[2919]</a> Ibid. v. 7. 21; vii. 6. 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2920" href="#FNanchor_2920" class="label">[2920]</a> Ibid. ii. 38. 99; v. 12. 33; <i>Alt.</i> xv. 19. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2921" href="#FNanchor_2921" class="label">[2921]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> v. 3; vi. 5. 14; xi. 6. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2922" href="#FNanchor_2922" class="label">[2922]</a> Dio Cass. xliv. 53. 7; cf. Livy, ep. cxvii; Vell. ii. 63. 1; cf. p. 341, 391. No -comitial act is suggested, and it may have been one of the false laws of Caesar. -Ferrero’s theory (<i>Rome</i>, iii. 38) has nothing in its favor.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2923" href="#FNanchor_2923" class="label">[2923]</a> P. 455.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2924" href="#FNanchor_2924" class="label">[2924]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 8. 19; v. 5 f.; viii. 9. 27; cf. Greenidge, <i>Leg. Proced.</i> 449 f. This -law with his others was annulled in the following year by the senate; Cic. xiii. -3. 5; p. 457, n. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2925" href="#FNanchor_2925" class="label">[2925]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 9. 21 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2926" href="#FNanchor_2926" class="label">[2926]</a> Ibid.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2927" href="#FNanchor_2927" class="label">[2927]</a> Cic. <i>Phil.</i> v. 4. 10; p. 457, n. 7. The lex Antonia on the dictatorship was -doubtless renewed by a lex Vibia; Cic. l. c.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2928" href="#FNanchor_2928" class="label">[2928]</a> Dio Cass. xlvi. 55. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2929" href="#FNanchor_2929" class="label">[2929]</a> Aug. <i>Mon. Ancyr.</i> i. 8; App. <i>B. C.</i> iv. 7. 27; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> ii. -84, 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2930" href="#FNanchor_2930" class="label">[2930]</a> Dio Cass, xlvii. 15. 4 (ἐψηφίσαντο ordinarily implies a comitial vote); cf. Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 680. The grant of lictors to the Vestals in 42 may also have been -effected by a comitial act; Dio Cass. xlvii. 19. 4. In the same year a consular -lex of L. Munatius Plancus ordered the erasure of the names of L. Julius Caesar -and Sergius from the list of the proscribed; App. <i>B. C.</i> iv. 37. 158; 45. 193.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2931" href="#FNanchor_2931" class="label">[2931]</a> Dio Cass. xlviii. 9. 5. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> iii. 565, assumes a vote of the comitia.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2932" href="#FNanchor_2932" class="label">[2932]</a> Dio Cass. xlviii. 33. 5; Gaius ii. 227; <i>Dig.</i> 35. 2. Closely related is the lex -Glitia of unknown date, mentioned by Gaius only (<i>Dig.</i> v. 2. 4), which aimed to -prevent a parent from ill-humoredly wronging a child in his testament. Lange, -<i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 662, regards the word Glitia as a copyist’s error for Falcidia.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2933" href="#FNanchor_2933" class="label">[2933]</a> Dio Cass. xlvii. 13. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2934" href="#FNanchor_2934" class="label">[2934]</a> Dio Cass. xlix. 38. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2935" href="#FNanchor_2935" class="label">[2935]</a> Aug. <i>Mon. Ancyr.</i> ii. 1; Tac. <i>Ann.</i> xi. 25; Dio Cass. lii. 42. 5; cf. Herzog, -<i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> ii. 130.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2936" href="#FNanchor_2936" class="label">[2936]</a> Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 9; Cic. <i>Att.</i> iii. 23. 4; Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 649; Karlowa, -<i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 427.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2937" href="#FNanchor_2937" class="label">[2937]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 5. 13; Dion. Hal. x. 57. 5; Livy iii. 34. 1; Dio Cass. xlii. 32. -2 f. A bronze tablet was sometimes used for a mere rogation; Cic. <i>Mil.</i> 32. 87; -Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 28. For leges promulgatae, see Livy iii. 9. 5; iv. 1. 1; 48. 1, 9; vi. 35. -4; 39. 1; x. 6. 6; xliii. 16. 6. On the requirement of the trinum nundinum, see p. -397. The proposer was called rogator or lator (Livy iv. 48. 10); his supporters adscriptores; -Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 9. 22. The names of the latter, provided they were -magistrates, were often published with the bill for the sake of influence; Cic. <i>Pis.</i> -15. 35; <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 2. 4; 9. 22; <i>Sest.</i> 33. 72; <i>Fam.</i> i. 9. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2938" href="#FNanchor_2938" class="label">[2938]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 19. 4; <i>Inv.</i> ii. 45. 130 f.; Ascon. 57; Livy iii. 34. 4 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2939" href="#FNanchor_2939" class="label">[2939]</a> Cic. <i>Sull.</i> 22. 62.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2940" href="#FNanchor_2940" class="label">[2940]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 9. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2941" href="#FNanchor_2941" class="label">[2941]</a> Frontinus, <i>De aquis urbis Romae</i>, ch. 129; Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> 115; Girard, -<i>Textes</i>, 103-5; <i>Lex Agr.</i> 1 (<i>CIL.</i> i. 200).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2942" href="#FNanchor_2942" class="label">[2942]</a> The Italics supply lacunae. See also Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 10. 26; Probus, in <i>Gramm. -Lat.</i> iv. 272 (Keil).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2943" href="#FNanchor_2943" class="label">[2943]</a> Or the several names of a group of rogatores (cf. Livy iv. 1. 2; Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 33. -7. 2), as in the <i>Lex de Termessibus</i> (p. 425) and the lex Mamilia Roscia, etc. (p. 441, -n. 1); see also Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 315, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2944" href="#FNanchor_2944" class="label">[2944]</a> Cf. Probus, in <i>Gramm. Lat.</i> iv. 272.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2945" href="#FNanchor_2945" class="label">[2945]</a> He was either taken by lot or appointed by the presiding magistrate; Cic. -<i>Planc.</i> 14. 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2946" href="#FNanchor_2946" class="label">[2946]</a> As in the <i>Lex de Termess.</i> 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2947" href="#FNanchor_2947" class="label">[2947]</a> Ex h(ace) l(ege) plebive scito; <i>Lex Lat. Bant.</i> (3). 15; Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> -55; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 31; <i>Lex Agr.</i> 2 (<i>CIL.</i> i. 200).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2948" href="#FNanchor_2948" class="label">[2948]</a> Sometimes K. (kaput) or K. L. (kaput legis) followed by a number is used, or -the title may be preceded by R. (rubrica); Egbert, <i>Lat. Inscr.</i> 349; Cagnat, <i>Épigr. -Lat.</i> 266.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2949" href="#FNanchor_2949" class="label">[2949]</a> <i>Dig.</i> xlviii. 19. 41; Cic. <i>Att.</i> iii. 23. 2 f. The substance of the sanctio comprising -the extant fragment of the <i>Lex Lat. Bant.</i> is given on p. 379. On the lex -sacrata, see p. 264 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2950" href="#FNanchor_2950" class="label">[2950]</a> Macrob. <i>Somn. Scip.</i> ii. 17. 13. A lex minusquam perfecta prescribes a penalty -but allows the violating act to stand. The lex Furia testamentaria (p. 352), for instance, -declares that the beneficiary of a legacy above the legal limit must pay fourfold, but -does not rescind the legacy itself; Ulp. <i>Reg.</i> 1. A lex perfecta not only prescribes a -penalty but nullifies a contravening act. These distinctions apply only to the civil -law. Cf. Ulp. l. c.; Karlowa, <i>Röm. Rechtsgesch.</i> i. 428; Poste, <i>Gaius</i>, 566. Other -terms connected with the enactment, repeal, and alteration of laws are explained by -Ulp. <i>Reg.</i> 3: “Lex est rogatur, id est fertur, aut abrogatur, id est prior lex tollitur, -aut derogatur, id est pars primae legis tollitur, aut subrogatur, id est adiicitur aliquid -primae legi, aut obrogatur, id est mutatur aliquid ex prima lege.” The classification -of laws as curiate, centuriate, and tribal according to the form of the comitia, and as -consular, tribunician, etc. according to the office of the lator does not need explanation.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2951" href="#FNanchor_2951" class="label">[2951]</a> <i>Dig.</i> xiii. 2. 1; Gromat. 265.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2952" href="#FNanchor_2952" class="label">[2952]</a> Cf. <i>Frag. Atest.</i> in Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> 101; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 78; <i>Lex Acil. rep.</i> 78 -(<i>CIL.</i> i. 198).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2953" href="#FNanchor_2953" class="label">[2953]</a> “Si quid ius non est rogarier, eius ea lege nihilum rogatur”; Cic. <i>Caec.</i> 33. 95; -<i>Dom.</i> 40. 106; <i>Lex Tudert.</i> (<i>CIL.</i> i. 1409) 10 f. A far more detailed formula is -given by Cic. <i>Att.</i> iii. 23. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2954" href="#FNanchor_2954" class="label">[2954]</a> “Si quid sacri sancti est, quod non iure sit rogatum, eius hac lege nihil rogatur”; -Probus, in <i>Gramm. Lat.</i> iv. 273.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2955" href="#FNanchor_2955" class="label">[2955]</a> P. 233 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2956" href="#FNanchor_2956" class="label">[2956]</a> <i>Lex de imp. Vesp.</i> in <i>CIL.</i> vi. 930; Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> 193 f.; Girard, <i>Textes</i>, -106: “Si quis huiusce legis ergo adversus leges rogationes plebisve scita senatusve -consulta fecit fecerit, sive, quod eum ex lege rogatione plebisve scito senatusve consulto -facere oportebit, non fecerit huius legis ergo, id ei ne fraudi esto, neve quit ob -eam rem populo dare debeto, neve cui de ea re actio neve iudicatio esto, neve quis -de ea re apud se agi sinito.” Although this document may have been a senatus -consultum, it has the form of a law and is so called by itself; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. -Staatsr.</i> ii. 876-9. All such formulae were indicated by the series of initial letters of -the component words; Probus, in <i>Gramm. Lat.</i> iv. 272 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2957" href="#FNanchor_2957" class="label">[2957]</a> Fest. 314. 29: “Neve per saturam abrogato aut derogato”; <i>Lex Tudert.</i> 9; -Cic. <i>Att.</i> iii. 23. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2958" href="#FNanchor_2958" class="label">[2958]</a> This is true of the Lex Lat. Bant. (p. 380), the Appuleian laws (p. 395), and -the Julian agrarian law of 59 (p. 440).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2959" href="#FNanchor_2959" class="label">[2959]</a> As by forbidding tribunician intercession; <i>Lex Mal.</i> 58; Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 12. -30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2960" href="#FNanchor_2960" class="label">[2960]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> iii. 23. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2961" href="#FNanchor_2961" class="label">[2961]</a> Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 652.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2962" href="#FNanchor_2962" class="label">[2962]</a> Livy iii. 57. 10; Cic. <i>Phil.</i> i. 10. 26; Tac. <i>Hist.</i> iv. 40; Suet. <i>Vesp.</i> 8; Serv. -<i>in Aen.</i> vi. 622. In earlier time wooden tables were used for laws as well as for -rogations; Dion. Hal. iii. 36. 4; iv. 43. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2963" href="#FNanchor_2963" class="label">[2963]</a> P. 438. Plebis cita and the senatus consulta pertaining thereto were originally -kept by the aediles of the plebs in the temple of Ceres; p. 278 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2964" href="#FNanchor_2964" class="label">[2964]</a> “Unde de piano recte legi possit”; Probus, in <i>Gramm. Lat.</i> iv. 273, for example, -the Forum; Dion. Hal. x. 57. 7. Plebiscites and senatus consulta of international -importance could be found in the temple of Faith on the Capitoline hill; Suet. -<i>Vesp.</i> 8; Obseq. 68. For other places, see Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 652 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2965" href="#FNanchor_2965" class="label">[2965]</a> Under the aedile for judicial business only; p. 325.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2966" href="#FNanchor_2966" class="label">[2966]</a> P. 276.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2967" href="#FNanchor_2967" class="label">[2967]</a> Cf. p. 304.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2968" href="#FNanchor_2968" class="label">[2968]</a> For judicial business only; p. 292.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2969" href="#FNanchor_2969" class="label">[2969]</a> P. 327.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2970" href="#FNanchor_2970" class="label">[2970]</a> P. 141. For instance, the dictator; p. 416, n. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2971" href="#FNanchor_2971" class="label">[2971]</a> Livy xxv. 3. 14; xxxiii. 25. 7; xxxiv. 1. 4; 53. 2; xliii. 16. 9; xlv. 36. 1; App. -<i>B. C.</i> i. 15. 64; Plut. <i>Ti. Gracch.</i> 17; <i>C. Gracch.</i> 13; <i>Aemil.</i> 31; Ascon. 77.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2972" href="#FNanchor_2972" class="label">[2972]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 17. 2; ix. 41. 4; x. 9. 3; Livy viii. 14. 12; Varro, <i>R. R.</i> i. 2. 9. -For legislation in the Forum, see <i>Lex Quinct. de Aq.</i> praescriptio.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2973" href="#FNanchor_2973" class="label">[2973]</a> Varro, <i>R. R.</i> iii. 2. 5; Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 9. 16; <i>Att.</i> i. 1. 1; iv. 3. 4; <i>Fam.</i> vii. 30. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2974" href="#FNanchor_2974" class="label">[2974]</a> Livy iii. 54. 15; xxvii. 21. 1; cf. Richter, <i>Top. v. Rom</i>, 48, 212; Platner, <i>Top. -and Mon. of Anc. Rome</i>, 343.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2975" href="#FNanchor_2975" class="label">[2975]</a> Livy iii. 20. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2976" href="#FNanchor_2976" class="label">[2976]</a> P. 297. Meetings distant from the city were soon afterward forbidden by law.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2977" href="#FNanchor_2977" class="label">[2977]</a> Vocare tribus in (or ad) suffragium (Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 20. 49; Livy iii. 71. 3; iv. 5. -2; vi. 38. 3; x. 9. 1; xxv. 3. 15), citare tribus ad suffragium ineundum (Livy vi. 35. -7), or mittere tribus in suffragium (Livy iii. 64. 5).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2978" href="#FNanchor_2978" class="label">[2978]</a> Livy xxv. 3. 16; <i>Lex Mal.</i> 53; Fest. 127. 1. These sources prove, against -Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 483, that the right to vote in a tribe drawn thus by lot was not -restricted to those who were virtually citizens awaiting enrolment. It is probable -that, at least in early time, not even residence was a requirement; cf. Mommsen, -<i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 232, n. 2, 396 f., 643 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2979" href="#FNanchor_2979" class="label">[2979]</a> In the opinion of Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 397, n. 4, 411, n. 7; <i>Abhdl. -sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.</i> ii (1857). 426, n. 107, the principium had nothing to do -with the order of voting. His argument is based chiefly on the fact that according -to the <i>Lex Mal.</i> 55—a constitution evidently based in large part on that of Rome—the -curiae voted simultaneously. Reference to the preliminary vote of a single -Roman tribe, however, is made by Plut. <i>Aemil.</i> 31; App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 12. 52. Furthermore -it is difficult to understand why so great importance should attach to the -principium on Mommsen’s supposition that it had merely to do with the order of -announcement after the simultaneous vote of all the tribes. His view is accepted by -Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 684, but rejected by Lange, <i>Kl. Schr.</i> -ii. 477 f.; Herzog, <i>Röm. Staatsverf.</i> 1184, and ignored by most other writers, including -Liebenam, inconsistently; ibid. 706.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2980" href="#FNanchor_2980" class="label">[2980]</a> “Sitellam deferre.” It was filled with water, the lots were thrown in, and the -drawing was effected by pouring out the water, which caused the pieces to fall one -by one. The process was supervised by the custodes; cf. Ascon. 70; Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> -ii. 9. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2981" href="#FNanchor_2981" class="label">[2981]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 59. i; App. <i>B. C.</i> iii. 30. 117.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2982" href="#FNanchor_2982" class="label">[2982]</a> Serv. <i>in Bucol.</i> i. 33; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> i. 53; Cic. <i>Mil.</i> 15. 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2983" href="#FNanchor_2983" class="label">[2983]</a> The marble building, known as the Saepta Julia, begun in 54 by Julius Caesar -(Cic. <i>Att.</i> iv. 16. 14), was finished by Agrippa in 27 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> A plan is given by Platner, -<i>Top. and Mon. of Anc. Rome</i>, 365, who describes it at length; cf. Richter, <i>Top. -v. Rom</i>, 230 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2984" href="#FNanchor_2984" class="label">[2984]</a> Cic. <i>Sest.</i> 51. 109; p. 129 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2985" href="#FNanchor_2985" class="label">[2985]</a> The act could take place during the deliberation, the placing of the urn, the -sortition, and the separation of the people in their voting groups; Ascon. 70; (Cic.) -<i>Herenn.</i> i. 12. 21; Cic. <i>N. D.</i> i. 38. 106. It was most convenient, however, for the -tribune to interpose his veto by forbidding the reading of the bill; Ascon. 57 f. (p. 430 -above); App. <i>B. C.</i> i. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2986" href="#FNanchor_2986" class="label">[2986]</a> P. 115.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2987" href="#FNanchor_2987" class="label">[2987]</a> Livy ix. 46. 2; Gell. vii (vi). 9. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2988" href="#FNanchor_2988" class="label">[2988]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 9; 64. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2989" href="#FNanchor_2989" class="label">[2989]</a> This is true of the comitia centuriata (Cic. <i>Div.</i> ii. 35. 75; <i>N. D.</i> ii. 4. 10), and -doubtless applies as well to other forms of assembly; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. -403, n. 4. The rogator must have kept a tally of the votes in rogations in some such -way as in elections, in which for each vote he placed a mark (punctum) after the -name of the candidate in whose favor it was given; Mommsen, ibid. 404.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2990" href="#FNanchor_2990" class="label">[2990]</a> P. 359, 390.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2991" href="#FNanchor_2991" class="label">[2991]</a> U. R. and presumably A.; Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 14. 5; Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 402, -n. 2. There were corresponding abbreviations for trials; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 692; cf. p. 178 f. above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2992" href="#FNanchor_2992" class="label">[2992]</a> Plut. <i>Cat. Min.</i> 46; Suet. <i>Caes.</i> 80. These names might also be abbreviated; -Cic. <i>Dom.</i> 43. 112.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2993" href="#FNanchor_2993" class="label">[2993]</a> Sisenna, Frag. 118 (Peter, <i>Reliq.</i> i. 293); (Cic.) <i>Herenn.</i> i. 12. 21; Plut. <i>Ti. -Gracch.</i> 11. The voting within the curiae was also by heads; Livy i. 43. 10; Dion. -Hal. iv. 20. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2994" href="#FNanchor_2994" class="label">[2994]</a> Cic. <i>Red. in Sen.</i> 11. 28; <i>Pis.</i> 15. 36; <i>Lex Mal.</i> 55 (Bruns, <i>Font. Iur.</i> 149; -Girard, <i>Textes</i>, 112). As they also counted the votes, they were termed diribitores. -In the last century of the republic they were drawn from the album iudicum (Pliny, -<i>N. H.</i> xxxiii. 2. 31), and hence included some of the most influential men in the -state; cf. Cic. <i>Leg.</i> iii. 3. 10; 15. 33 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2995" href="#FNanchor_2995" class="label">[2995]</a> Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 20. 49; <i>Pis.</i> 5. 11; 15. 36; Varro, <i>R. R.</i> iii. 5. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2996" href="#FNanchor_2996" class="label">[2996]</a> Cic. <i>Planc.</i> 14. 35. The order of announcement of the curial votes was likewise -determined by lot; <i>Lex Mal.</i> 57. Livy, ix. 38. 15, refers to the sortition for -the principium.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2997" href="#FNanchor_2997" class="label">[2997]</a> Varro, in Gell. x. 1. 6; Cic. <i>Pis.</i> 1. 2; <i>Mur.</i> 17. 35; Plut. <i>C. Gracch.</i> 3; <i>Caes.</i> -5; Suet. <i>Vesp.</i> 2. In the case of censors alone no declaration was made unless two -were elected; Livy ix. 34. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2998" href="#FNanchor_2998" class="label">[2998]</a> <i>Lex Mal.</i> 57; Cic. <i>Mur.</i> 1. 1; Gell. xii. 8. 6. In like manner in the comitia -curiata a majority of the curiae decided; Dion. Hal. ii. 14. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2999" href="#FNanchor_2999" class="label">[2999]</a> As in the vote to depose Trebellius from the tribunate in 67 (p. 432); cf. the -deposition of Octavius in 133; p. 367. The voting as well as the announcement -might be interrupted by an evil omen (p. 109, 111, 248), in which case the assembly -had to be adjourned. Sometimes the president arbitrarily adjourned the meeting; -Livy xlv. 36. 1-6, 10; Plut. <i>Aemil.</i> 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3000" href="#FNanchor_3000" class="label">[3000]</a> <i>Twelve Tables</i> i. 9: “Solis occasus suprema tempestas esto”; Documents in -Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 87, 92; <i>Declam. in Cat.</i> 19; cf. Livy x. 22. 7 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3001" href="#FNanchor_3001" class="label">[3001]</a> For the presidency of the tribunus celerum, see Livy i. 59. 7; cf. Humbert, in -Daremberg et Saglio, <i>Dict.</i> i. 1377. It is denied by Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, -<i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 682.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3002" href="#FNanchor_3002" class="label">[3002]</a> Livy ix. 38. 15; p. 112 above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3003" href="#FNanchor_3003" class="label">[3003]</a> P. 195 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3004" href="#FNanchor_3004" class="label">[3004]</a> Cic. <i>Rep.</i> ii. 13. 25; 17. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3005" href="#FNanchor_3005" class="label">[3005]</a> Cic. <i>Leg. Agr.</i> ii. 11. 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3006" href="#FNanchor_3006" class="label">[3006]</a> P. 155.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3007" href="#FNanchor_3007" class="label">[3007]</a> P. 154.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3008" href="#FNanchor_3008" class="label">[3008]</a> Livy v. 52. 15; Dio Cass. xli. 43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3009" href="#FNanchor_3009" class="label">[3009]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> v. 155; Livy, ibid.; cf. Fest. ep. 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3010" href="#FNanchor_3010" class="label">[3010]</a> P. 154.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3011" href="#FNanchor_3011" class="label">[3011]</a> Gell. xv. 27. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3012" href="#FNanchor_3012" class="label">[3012]</a> Dion. Hal. ii. 8. 4; p. 31 above; cf. Mommsen, <i>Röm. Staatsr.</i> iii. 386.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3013" href="#FNanchor_3013" class="label">[3013]</a> On the procedure, see Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, <i>Real-Encycl.</i> iv. 682-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3014" href="#FNanchor_3014" class="label">[3014]</a> P. 103, 140, 203, 244, 245. The censors convoked it for the census and the -lustrum only; p. 204.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3015" href="#FNanchor_3015" class="label">[3015]</a> He could not hold these comitia for elections; Livy xxii. 33. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3016" href="#FNanchor_3016" class="label">[3016]</a> See references in the next to the last note above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3017" href="#FNanchor_3017" class="label">[3017]</a> Livy v. 52. 15; Gell. xv. 27. 5; Cic. <i>Rab. Perd.</i> 4. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3018" href="#FNanchor_3018" class="label">[3018]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 88, 91; cf. Verg. <i>Georg.</i> ii. 539.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3019" href="#FNanchor_3019" class="label">[3019]</a> P. 203, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3020" href="#FNanchor_3020" class="label">[3020]</a> P. 150.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3021" href="#FNanchor_3021" class="label">[3021]</a> Livy xxvi. 22. 11; Juv. vi. 529; Serv. <i>in Bucol.</i> i. 33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3022" href="#FNanchor_3022" class="label">[3022]</a> 70 of the first class—1 prerogative + 18 equestrian.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3023" href="#FNanchor_3023" class="label">[3023]</a> Cic. <i>Att.</i> i. 14. 5; (Cic.) <i>Herenn.</i> i. 21; Fest. 334. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3024" href="#FNanchor_3024" class="label">[3024]</a> P. 359, 390, 467.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3025" href="#FNanchor_3025" class="label">[3025]</a> P. 211, 226 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3026" href="#FNanchor_3026" class="label">[3026]</a> Cic. <i>Fam.</i> vii. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3027" href="#FNanchor_3027" class="label">[3027]</a> In the comitia centuriata in addition to the prerogative there had to be at least -four, and possibly seven, successive votings before a majority could be reached. In -the tribal assembly there was but one in addition to the principium. After the -comitia curiata had come to be represented by thirty lictors the votes could be -taken in a few minutes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3028" href="#FNanchor_3028" class="label">[3028]</a> Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 29: “Comitiales dicti quod tum ut coiret populus constitutum -est ad suffragium ferendum nisi si quae feriae conceptae essent, propter quas non -liceret, (ut) Compitalia et Latinae”; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 14: “Comitiales sunt, -quibus cum populo agi licet, et fastis quidem lege agi potest, cum populo non potest, -comitialibus utrumque potest”; Verrius Flaccus, in <i>Fast. Praen.</i> ad Ian. 3 (<i>CIL.</i> i². -p. 231); Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> i. 53; Fest. ep. 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3029" href="#FNanchor_3029" class="label">[3029]</a> For the various local Italian calendars with Mommsen’s comment, see <i>CIL.</i> i². -p. 203 ff. Especially useful is the Diei notarum laterculus, ibid. p. 290 ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3030" href="#FNanchor_3030" class="label">[3030]</a> On the distinction between dies fasti and dies nefasti, see Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 29 f., -53; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 14; <i>Fast. Praen.</i> ad Ian. 2; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> i. 47; Fest. ep. 93; -Gaius iv. 29.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3031" href="#FNanchor_3031" class="label">[3031]</a> March 24 and May 24; p. 159, n. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3032" href="#FNanchor_3032" class="label">[3032]</a> June 15. For the meaning of this expression and the one given just above, see -Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 31 f.; Ovid, <i>Fast.</i> v. 727; vi. 225; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 289. -These three days were called fissi; Serv. <i>in Aen.</i> vi. 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3033" href="#FNanchor_3033" class="label">[3033]</a> Dies endotorcisi or intercisi; Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 31; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 3; Ovid, -<i>Fast.</i> i. 49; Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 290.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3034" href="#FNanchor_3034" class="label">[3034]</a> Cf. Varro, <i>L. L.</i> vi. 30; Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 14. In a wider sense comitial days -were fasti. Naturally judicial business could be transacted on those comitial days -on which the assembly did not actually meet, or after its adjournment if time -remained; p. 315. A Clodian law of 58 permitted comitial legislation on all dies -fasti; p. 445.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3035" href="#FNanchor_3035" class="label">[3035]</a> Mommsen, in <i>CIL.</i> i². p. 296; 109 according to Wissowa, <i>Relig. u. Kult. d. -Röm.</i> 368 f.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3036" href="#FNanchor_3036" class="label">[3036]</a> Mommsen, ibid. Wissowa, ibid., reckons 192 comitial days, which would give 43 -non-comitial fasti. The following were the dies comitiales according to Mommsen:</p> - -<ul> -<li>Jan. 3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 16-28, 31—in all xix.</li> -<li>Feb. 18-20, 22, 25, 28—vi.</li> -<li>Mar. 3-6, 9-12, 18, 20, 21, 25, 26, 28-31—xvii.</li> -<li>Apr. 3, 4, 24, 27-30—vii.</li> -<li>May, 3-6, 10, 12, 14, 17-20, 25-31—xviii.</li> -<li>June, 4, 16-28, 30—xvi.</li> -<li>July, 10-14, 17, 18, 20, 22, 26-31—xv.</li> -<li>Aug. 3, 4, 7, 8, 10-12, 15, 16, 18, 20, 24, 26, 28, 31—xv.</li> -<li>Sept. 4, 7-11, 16-22, 24-28, 30—xix.</li> -<li>Oct. 3-6, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 20-31—xxi.</li> -<li>Nov. 3, 4, 7-12, 15-28, 30—xxiii.</li> -<li>Dec. 4, 7-10, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24-28, 31 —xv.</li> -</ul> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3037" href="#FNanchor_3037" class="label">[3037]</a> Wissowa, ibid. 378.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3038" href="#FNanchor_3038" class="label">[3038]</a> Varro, in Macrob, <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 19; <i>L. L.</i> vi. 29.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3039" href="#FNanchor_3039" class="label">[3039]</a> Varro, <i>R. R.</i> ii. praef. 1; Serv. <i>in Georg.</i> i. 275.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3040" href="#FNanchor_3040" class="label">[3040]</a> That judicial business was done on those nundinae which were not marked -N(efasti) is clearly proved by the Twelve Tables, iii. 1-6 (Girard, <i>Textes</i>, p. 13), in -Gell. xx. i. 45 ff.; cf. especially § 47: “Trinis nundinis continuis ad praetorem in -comitium producebantur, quantaeque pecuniae iudicati essent, praedicabatur.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3041" href="#FNanchor_3041" class="label">[3041]</a> Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3: Ἐν δὲ ταύταις (ἀγοραῖς) συνιόντες ἐκ τῶν ἀγρῶν εἰς τὴν -πόλιν οἱ δημοτικοί τὰς τ’ ἀμείψεις ἐποιοῦντο τῶν ὠνίων κὰι τὰς δίκας παρ’ ἀλλήλων -ἐλάμβανον, τά τε κοινά, ὅσων ἦσαν κύριοι κατὰ τοὺς νόμους καὶ ὅσα ἡ βουλὴ ἐπιτρέψειεν -αὐτοῖς, ψῆφον ἀναλαμβάνοντες ἐπεκύρουν; Rutilius, in Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 34: “Romanos -instituisse nundinas, ut octo quidem diebus in agris rustici opus facerent, nono -autem die intermisso rure ad mercatum legesque accipiendas Romam venirent.” -The words of Dionysius and Rutilius apply to all voting assemblies, not simply to -those of the plebs.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3042" href="#FNanchor_3042" class="label">[3042]</a> Gran. Licinian. in Macrob. <i>Sat.</i> i. 16. 30 (quoted p. 315, n. 2).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3043" href="#FNanchor_3043" class="label">[3043]</a> Cf. Lange, <i>Röm. Alt.</i> ii. 518 f.</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_499"></a>[499]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="INDEX">INDEX</h2> - -</div> - -<p>Abbreviations: c. = consular, d. = dictatorial, -p. = pretorian, t. = tribunician. -The numbers in parentheses are dates -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span></p> - -<ul> - -<li class="ifrst">Abacti, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Abjuration of social rank, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Abrogation, of imperium, <a href="#Footnote_1971">324, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of tribunician power, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of pretorian power, <a href="#Footnote_2890">455, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Accensi velati, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Accensus, summons comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Accerani, receive citizenship, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Acclamation, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Acculeia (curia), <a href="#Footnote_73">11, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Accusation, fourth, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Acilius Glabrio, M’., trial of (189), <a href="#Page_319">319</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Adlectio of senators, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Adoptions, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">testamentary, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Adrogatio">Adrogatio, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of Clodius, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">formula of, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for transitio ad plebem, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Adscriptivi, <a href="#Footnote_470">80, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Adsidui, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Aediles">Aediles, election of, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of contio, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of comitia, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">jurisdiction of before Hortensius, <a href="#Page_290">290-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after Hortensius, <a href="#Page_325">325-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by standing courts, <a href="#Page_326">326 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aediles cereales, <a href="#Footnote_2886">454, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aediles, curule, and lex curiata, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instituted, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of comitia, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">jurisdiction before Hortensius, <a href="#Page_291">291 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after Hortensius, <a href="#Page_325">325-7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aediles, plebeian, instituted, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bailiffs of tribunes, <a href="#Footnote_1596">264, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sacrosancti, n. 7, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Valerian-Horatian law on, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to tribunes, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">jurisdiction, before Hortensius, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_290">290-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after Hortensius, <a href="#Page_325">325-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of comitia, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aemilius Lepidus, M., his imperium abrogated (136), <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aemilius Lepidus, M., consul (78), <a href="#Page_423">423</a>, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aemilius Paulus, L., trial of (218), <a href="#Page_318">318</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aemilius Scaurus, M., trial of, for neglect of duty (103), <a href="#Page_323">323</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for maiestas (91), <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aerarii, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aerarium, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aes equestre et hordearium, <a href="#Page_93">93 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aetates, in comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Africa, organized under lex Livia, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agrarian conditions of, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Ager">Ager, privatus, ownership of, <a href="#Page_48">48 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">registration in tribes, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">publicus, agitation for assignment of, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws for assignment of, see <a href="#Legislation_agrarian">Legislation, agrarian</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ager compascuus, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ager, effatus, etc., <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Agrarian laws, see <a href="#Legislation_agrarian">Legislation, agrarian</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Alba Longa, three tribes in, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Alban Mount, triumphs on, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2033">335, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aliens, treatment of, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under jurisdiction of senate, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of people, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">expulsions of, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">enrolment in colonies, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Italians">Italians</a>, <a href="#Latins">Latins</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Allies, unfair treatment of, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Iulia repetundarum, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Italians">Italians</a>, <a href="#Latins">Latins</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Ambitus">Ambitus, laws on, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_436">436 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a>, <a href="#Page_474">474</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aniensis iuniorum, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1345">227, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Annius Luscus, T., prosecution of (133), <a href="#Page_322">322</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Annius Milo, T., prosecution of, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Anquisitio, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Antias, Valerius, on Scipionic trial, <a href="#Footnote_1947">319, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Antiquo, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Antonius, L., tribune (45-44), <a href="#Page_455">455</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Antonius, M., misuses oblativa, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribune (49), <a href="#Page_453">453 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">consul (44), <a href="#Footnote_2885">454, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_457">457-9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Apparitores, <a href="#Footnote_2580">416, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Appeal">Appeal, to comitia curiata, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to centuriata, <a href="#Page_239">239 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to tributa, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_500"></a>[500]</span>limited by first milestone, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from military imperium, <a href="#Page_251">251 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from tribunes in capital cases, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">when most used, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right offered as reward, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Appian, on new tribes (90), <a href="#Page_57">57 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reëlection of tribunes, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">liability of jurors for bribery, <a href="#Footnote_2341">378, n. 8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Boria (?), <a href="#Page_385">385</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Livia iudiciaria, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Cornelia Pompeia (88), <a href="#Page_407">407</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of senators, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Appuleius_Decianus">Appuleius Decianus, C., tribune (98), <a href="#Page_323">323 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Appuleius_Saturninus">Appuleius Saturninus, L., weakens veto, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">interdicts Metellus, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">murdered, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribune (103, 100), <a href="#Page_393">393-6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ἀρχαιρεσία, <a href="#Footnote_2528">406, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Archives, for senatus consulta, <a href="#Page_278">278 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for statutes, <a href="#Page_437">437 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ardea, disputes with Aricia, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ardeates, concilium of, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aricia, disputes with Ardea, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Army, relation of to folk, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pre-Servian, <a href="#Page_10">10 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Servian, <a href="#Page_58">58 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">originally self-supporting, <a href="#Page_61">61 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">not identical with comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Graeco-Italic, <a href="#Page_69">69-71</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">primitive Roman, <a href="#Footnote_405">69, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">like Athenian, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">post-Servian, <a href="#Page_76">76-80</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supernumeraries in, <a href="#Page_80">80-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">early republican, <a href="#Page_83">83 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">political importance of, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Arpinates, receive suffrage, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Arrogation, see <a href="#Adrogatio">Adrogatio</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">As, sextantarian, <a href="#Footnote_388">67, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">declines in value, <a href="#Page_86">86 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of ounce weight (uncial), <a href="#Footnote_528">90, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">semiuncial, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Assembly, German, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Footnote_861">153, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Homeric Greek, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Footnote_861">153, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">European, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168-73</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Athenian, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Alamannic, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Irish, <a href="#Footnote_861">153, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Slavic, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Lacedaemonian, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Celtic, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Etruscan, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Italian, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Frankish, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Assembly, Roman, affected by omens, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">plebeian tribal, termed comitia, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126-30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">three organized forms of, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by senate in early republic, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">development of voting in, <a href="#Page_275">275 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">packing of, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Comitia">Comitia</a>, <a href="#Concilium">Concilium</a>, <a href="#Contio">Contio</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Asylum, in theory of patrician state, <a href="#Page_36">36 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">connection with tribunate, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ateste, law found at, <a href="#Footnote_2884">454, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Atilius Calatinus, M., trial of, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Atinius Labeo, C., tribune (131), <a href="#Footnote_1599">264, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Atius Labienus, T., tribune (63), <a href="#Page_435">435</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prosecutes Rabirius, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Attus Navius, <a href="#Footnote_586">101, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Footnote_608">105, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Auctoritas, see <a href="#Patrum_auctoritas">Patrum auctoritas</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Auguraculum, <a href="#Footnote_643">109, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Augural districts, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Auguria, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Augurs">Augurs, <a href="#Page_105">105-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number and character, <a href="#Page_105">105 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">functions, <a href="#Page_106">106-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">have nuntiatio, <a href="#Page_111">111 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attend comitia, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in contiones, <a href="#Footnote_821">146, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increased to fifteen, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Auspices">Auspices, <a href="#Page_100">100-18</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of Sodales Titii, <a href="#Footnote_11">2, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">private, <a href="#Page_100">100-3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">nuptial, <a href="#Footnote_581">100, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">public, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103-18</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">impetrativa, <a href="#Page_103">103-11</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">assemblies requiring, <a href="#Page_110">110 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">oblativa, <a href="#Page_111">111-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">spectio, <a href="#Page_112">112 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under Aelian and Fufian laws, <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">misuse of, <a href="#Page_117">117 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">essential to magistratus iustus, <a href="#Footnote_1114">187, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">borrowing of, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">violated by consul, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of first tribunician election, <a href="#Footnote_1585">263, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">support nobility, <a href="#Page_330">330 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Auspicium, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">deputed, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex for, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Auspices">Auspices</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Auxilium, tribunician, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aventine hill, <a href="#Footnote_11">2, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">outside the Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">so-called lex Icilia for assignment of, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1600">265, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272 f.</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bacchanalians, <a href="#Footnote_1542">254, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ballot, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">use of in quaestiones, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in all comitia, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">boxes, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Belot, on ratings, <a href="#Page_91">91-3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Berns, on comitia and concilium, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bibulus, spectio of, <a href="#Footnote_685">114, n. 9</a>, <a href="#Footnote_694">116, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bill, see <a href="#Rogatio">Rogatio</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Birds, auspices from, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bird-seer, <a href="#Footnote_606">105, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">βουλή, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bribery, in trials, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of magistrates, <a href="#Page_429">429 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">electoral, see <a href="#Ambitus">Ambitus</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="Caecilius_Metellus">Caecilius Metellus, L., tribune (213), <a href="#Page_318">318</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caecilius Metellus, Q., censor (131), <a href="#Footnote_1599">264, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caecilius Metellus, Q., consul (60), <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caecilius Metellus, Q., consul (57), <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caecilius Metellus Numidicus, Q., prosecution of (100), <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caedes, see <a href="#Murder">Murder</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caeles Vibenna, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caelestia (auspicia), impetrativa, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">oblativa, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de caelo servare, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of Bibulus, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caelian hill, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caerite franchise, <a href="#Footnote_226">38, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caerites, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caesetius Flavius, L., tribune (44), <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_501"></a>[501]</span>Calabra, curia, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Calare, <a href="#Page_153">153 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Calatores, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Calendar, <a href="#Page_470">470-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pontifical control of, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Calumniator, Calumny, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Camillus, see <a href="#Furius_Camillus">Furius Camillus</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Campanian land, vectigalia of, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2158">351, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Iulia, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>, <a href="#Page_440">440</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Campanians, punished for revolt, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">senatus consultum on, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Campus Martius, meeting place of centuries, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of tribes, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">president’s platform in, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elections in, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1150">194, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">inauguration in, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">execution in, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Candidacy, in absentia, <a href="#Page_436">436 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Ambitus">Ambitus</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cannae, effect of disaster at, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Capital punishment, under kings, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">voted by centuries, <a href="#Page_240">240 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in early republic by curiae and tribes, <a href="#Page_266">266-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abolished by lex Porcia, <a href="#Page_250">250 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">avoided by exile, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Appeal">Appeal</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Capite censi, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Capitoline hill, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">beyond Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspication on, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia tributa on, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curiata on, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Capua, plan to colonize, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2360">382, n. 9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Iunia on, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Carpenters, in comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Carthage, colonization of, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cassius, Sp., <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Catiline, <a href="#Page_437">437</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cato the Elder, see <a href="#Porcius">Porcius, M., the Elder</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cato the Younger, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cattle, standard of value, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caudium, effect of defeat at, <a href="#Page_302">302 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cavalry, see <a href="#Equites">Equites</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Celeres, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Censi, <a href="#Footnote_529">90, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Censoriae Tabulae, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Censors, make up tribes, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to aerarii, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instituted, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspices of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspicate lustral comitia, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preside over contio, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">inspect arms, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">centuriate sanction, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grant citizenship, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prosecution of, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reëlection forbidden, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by comitia, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supervise morals, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribunes interfere with, <a href="#Footnote_2158">351, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">assign seats to senators, <a href="#Page_356">356 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">let out taxes of Asia, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">stigma of, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2859">450, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Census, connection of with tribes, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">money valuation in, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instituted, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Footnote_400">68, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Greek, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">post-Servian, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">object of, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex municipalis, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Centuria procum (patricium), <a href="#Footnote_387">67, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Footnote_443">75, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of the tardy, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Centuriate organization, Fabius on, <a href="#Page_52">52 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Livy and Dionysius on, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Servian, <a href="#Page_72">72-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">post-Servian, <a href="#Page_76">76-80</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Comitia_centuriata">Comitia centuriata</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Centuries, <a href="#Page_66">66 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number of, in classes, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in the classis, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in post-Servian phalanx, <a href="#Page_76">76 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in fifth rating, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supernumerary, <a href="#Page_80">80-82</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205-9</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of juniors, <a href="#Page_82">82 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of seniors, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_216">216 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increased, <a href="#Page_219">219 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Comitia_centuriata">Comitia centuriata</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Centurions, in comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in jury service, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ceres, connection of with plebeian organization, <a href="#Footnote_1598">264, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">forfeiture of estates to, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">senatus consulta in temple of, <a href="#Page_278">278 f.</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2963">465, n. 2</a>.;</li> -<li class="isub1">Priestesses of granted citizenship, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chalkidae, an Attic gens, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chariot, in war, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Χειροτονία, <a href="#Footnote_2528">406, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chicken auspices, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Footnote_709">118, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cicero, on early Roman history, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">account of centuriate system, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1215">205, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1279">215, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">criticises Antony’s obnuntiation, <a href="#Footnote_664">111, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attitude toward auspices, <a href="#Footnote_709">118, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">usage relative to comitia and concilium, <a href="#Page_126">126-31</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">distinction between whole and part, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_466">466</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on curiate law, <a href="#Page_184">184 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on capital trials, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1622">268, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curule aedile, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on frumentations, <a href="#Footnote_2498">401, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supports Manilian rogation, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">consul (63), <a href="#Page_435">435-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">commends lex Iulia repetundarum, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cinna, see <a href="#Cornelius_Cinna">Cornelius Cinna</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Circus, Flaminius, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cistae (ballot boxes), <a href="#Page_389">389</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Citizenship">Citizenship, early idea of, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">liberality of Rome in granting, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of other states, <a href="#Footnote_261">44, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granted by king, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by censors, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by tribes, <a href="#Page_304">304 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by founder of colony, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to priestesses of Ceres, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to Latins and Italians, <a href="#Page_401">401 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">less freely, <a href="#Page_353">353 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">as reward, <a href="#Footnote_2435">393, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">value enhanced, <a href="#Page_354">354</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">usurpations of, <a href="#Page_354">354</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">optimo iure, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sine suffragio, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1844">304, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">City, relation of to country, <a href="#Page_55">55 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">City-state, origin of, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cives sine suffragio, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Classes">Classes, <a href="#Page_66">66 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relative size of, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">the five and their ratings, <a href="#Page_84">84-91</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Smith on origin, <a href="#Footnote_499">85, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">soldiers recruited from, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number of centuries in, after reform, <a href="#Page_216">216 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">parts of tribes, <a href="#Page_219">219 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">social, <a href="#Page_16">16 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Athenian, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in theatre, <a href="#Page_356">356 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_502"></a>[502]</span>Classici, <a href="#Footnote_424">72, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1282">216, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Classicum, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Classis, original meaning of, <a href="#Footnote_423">72, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and infra classem, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">like zeugitae, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">array in battle, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">changed meaning, <a href="#Page_84">84 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rating of, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fifth, <a href="#Page_88">88 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">first, <a href="#Page_89">89 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">procincta, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number of centuries in fifth, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Classes">Classes</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudia, trial of, for perduellio (246), <a href="#Page_326">326</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudia (tribus), <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius, augur, fined, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius, historian, on Claudine treaty, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius, App., decemvir, trial of, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius, App., consul (179), <a href="#Footnote_1139">192, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius, C., censor (169), trial of, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius, M., trial of, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius Caecus, App., <a href="#Page_307">307</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prosecution of, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">alters tribes, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">appraisements, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">influences censorship, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius Marcellus, C., consul (50), attitude of toward auspices, <a href="#Footnote_709">118, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius Marcellus, M., consul (215), and curiate law, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex for abrogating imperium of, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius Pulcher, App., consul (54), <a href="#Footnote_1150">194, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">author of work on augury, <a href="#Footnote_709">118, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">view of curiate law, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Claudius Pulcher, P., consul (249), trial of, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Clients, ancient view as to origin of, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rights, <a href="#Page_22">22 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Niebuhr on, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Meyer on, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in Claudian tribe, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in populus, tribes, and curiae, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1584">262, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">vote in comitia curiata, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in assemblies, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Mommsen on, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in war, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Footnote_460">78, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Clodius Pulcher, P., tribune (58), <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">transitio ad plebem, <a href="#Page_162">162 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prosecutes Milo, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Clustumina (tribus), <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Coinage, earliest copper, <a href="#Page_86">86 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Flaminian law on, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Clodian, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Papirian, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Coins, plated, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2473">398, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Collegia">Collegia, laws on, Clodia, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Licinia, <a href="#Page_447">447 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Caesar’s edict, <a href="#Footnote_2912">457, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Collegium (College), of accensi velati, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of fabri, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of tubicines and cornicines, <a href="#Page_206">206 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribunician, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of sacerdotes, <a href="#Page_391">391 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">connection of latter with tribes, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">political character, <a href="#Footnote_616">106, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">enlarged by Sulla, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supernumeraries in, <a href="#Footnote_2887">454, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Augurs">Augurs</a>, <a href="#Epulones">Epulones</a>, etc.</li> - -<li class="indx">Collina (tribus), <a href="#Page_50">50</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Colonia Genetiva Iulia, <a href="#Footnote_2880">453, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Colonies, founded by senate, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">triumviri for conducting, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws for founding, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">founder’s right to enroll aliens, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sempronian, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">regulations of in Thorian law, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">epoch in history of, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">founded by Caesar, <a href="#Page_453">453</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Comitia">Comitia, relation of to augural districts, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">effect of celestial omens on, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attended by augurs, <a href="#Page_112">112 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">meet at sunrise, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">distinguished from concilium, <a href="#Page_119">119-38</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">defined by Laelius, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Livy’s usage relative to, <a href="#Page_119">119-25</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sacerdotal usage, <a href="#Page_125">125 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sallust’s, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cicero’s, <a href="#Page_126">126-30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">literary and juristic, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">true distinctions, <a href="#Page_131">131-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">uses classified, <a href="#Page_132">132-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">developed, <a href="#Page_135">135-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">meaning of, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to concilium and contio, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">not summoned by promagistrate, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">formed from contio, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">connotes organization, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">iusta, <a href="#Footnote_1114">187, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in camp, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right to establish special courts, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">judicial procedure in, <a href="#Page_259">259 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by senate and magistrates, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">development of voting in, <a href="#Page_275">275 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gain power, <a href="#Page_315">315 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">permit triumphs, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">regulate festivals, <a href="#Page_340">340 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">influence of Flaminius on, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">part of in government, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lack initiative, <a href="#Page_345">345 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">most active under C. Gracchus, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">worn out, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under senatorial control, <a href="#Page_406">406-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">yield judicial function to courts, <a href="#Page_420">420 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">decline, <a href="#Page_450">450-61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by Sulla and Caesar, <a href="#Page_413">413 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_452">452</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>, <a href="#Page_477">477</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">length of sessions, <a href="#Page_470">470</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composition of, <a href="#Page_473">473</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">summary of history, <a href="#Page_473">473-7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Comitia_calata">Comitia calata, <a href="#Page_152">152-67</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspicated, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">wills made in, <a href="#Footnote_770">139, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">also termed contio, <a href="#Footnote_771">140, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">definition of, <a href="#Page_153">153 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">place of meeting, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">religious objects, <a href="#Page_154">154-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">centuriata, <a href="#Footnote_866">154, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">voting in, <a href="#Page_156">156 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">adrogatio in, <a href="#Page_160">160 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">testamentary adoptions in, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">transitio ad plebem in, <a href="#Page_162">162 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grant of patriciate in, <a href="#Page_164">164-6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Comitia_centuriata">Comitia centuriata, principle of, <a href="#Page_12">12 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">convoked by horn-blower, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">advance beyond curiata, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_473">473</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ascribed to Servius, <a href="#Page_66">66 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">described in Censoriae Tabulae, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">non-existent under kings, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">developed from army, <a href="#Page_68">68 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">distinguished from army, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to augural districts, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">place of meeting, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspicated, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attended by augurs, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">enact privilegia, <a href="#Page_127">127 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">recall Cicero, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lustral, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">no deliberation in, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">voting in, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">declare war, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230-2</a>, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curiate sanction, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pass lex de censoria potestate, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">confer imperium, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_503"></a>[503]</span>elect praetor in Spain, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">organization of, <a href="#Page_201">201-28</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">early republican, <a href="#Page_201">201-11</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supernumeraries in, <a href="#Page_205">205-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sex suffragia in, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">new equestrian centuries in, <a href="#Page_209">209 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">table of centuries, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reform of, <a href="#Page_211">211-28</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">essentials of, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">date, <a href="#Page_212">212 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gradual, <a href="#Page_214">214 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">five classes after, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribes, <a href="#Page_216">216 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Niebuhr on, <a href="#Page_217">217-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Huschke, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Pantagathus, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Mommsen, <a href="#Page_221">221-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Lange, <a href="#Page_224">224 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Klebs, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">voting after, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supernumeraries, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">functions, <a href="#Page_229">229-61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elective, <a href="#Page_229">229 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">legislative, <a href="#Page_230">230-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Twelve Tables on, <a href="#Page_233">233 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">freed from patrum auctoritas, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">yield to tribes, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">judicial, <a href="#Page_239">239-61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">appeal to, <a href="#Page_239">239-42</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribunician cases before, <a href="#Page_245">245-53</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by special courts, <a href="#Page_253">253-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">try Rabirius, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">procedure, <a href="#Page_259">259 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pass lex de Aventino, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">institute Decemvirate, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">divide jurisdiction with tribes, <a href="#Page_286">286 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lose regulation of magistracy, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Comitia_curiata">Comitia curiata, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168-200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">not identical with army, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">voting in by genera hominum, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">include clients and plebeians, <a href="#Page_24">24 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">convoked by lictor, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lack initiative, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspicated, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pass lex de imperio, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attended by augurs, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin, <a href="#Page_152">152 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168-73</a>, <a href="#Page_473">473</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited rights of, <a href="#Page_173">173 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">subject to patrum auctoritas, <a href="#Page_174">174 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on war and peace, <a href="#Page_174">174-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">legislation in, <a href="#Page_177">177-82</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">jurisdiction of, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elections, <a href="#Page_182">182 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_473">473</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex de imperio, <a href="#Page_184">184-96</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">become formality, <a href="#Page_196">196-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">early republican, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composition of, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">place of meeting, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Comitia sacerdotum, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Comitia_tributa">Comitia tributa, principle of, <a href="#Page_12">12 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">alleged trial of Coriolanus, <a href="#Footnote_311">56, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspication of, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attended by augurs, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Livy’s use of term, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sallust’s, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cicero’s, <a href="#Page_126">126-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">incompetent to pass privilegia, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of whole people, <a href="#Page_129">129 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curiate sanction, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">confer imperium, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under pretorian presidency, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ratify Cornelian laws, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gain at expense of centuries, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">legalize voluntary exile, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">procedure in, <a href="#Page_259">259 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270-2</a>, <a href="#Page_473">473 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pre-decemviral jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_267">267-9</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">patricians in, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elective, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">no legislation before Decemvirate, <a href="#Page_272">272-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">conditioned legislative power granted to, <a href="#Page_274">274-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">advantages over centuriata, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from 449 to 287 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, <a href="#Page_283">283-316</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">jurisdiction after Hortensius, <a href="#Page_317">317-29</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribunician, <a href="#Page_317">317-25</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">aedilician, <a href="#Page_325">325-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pontifical, <a href="#Page_327">327 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">era of repose in legislation, <a href="#Page_330">330-3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Flaminian, <a href="#Page_333">333-46</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Plutocratic, <a href="#Page_346">346-62</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from Gracchi to Sulla, <a href="#Page_363">363-411</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">subjected to senate by Sulla, <a href="#Page_413">413 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from Sulla to Octavianus, <a href="#Page_412">412-61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preferred by Caesar, <a href="#Page_452">452</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">decline of, <a href="#Page_450">450 ff.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Comitial days, <a href="#Page_470">470-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">vitiated by spectio, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by proclamation of holidays, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">senatorial sessions forbidden on, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Gabinia on, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Clodia on, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Comitiatus maximus, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Comitium, meeting-place of curiae, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of tribes, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspication in, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Commentarii Servi Tullii, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Commission, special, see <a href="#Quaestio_extraordinaria">Quaestio extraordinaria</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Commissioners, see <a href="#Duumviri">Duumviri</a>, <a href="#Triumviri">Triumviri</a>, etc.</li> - -<li class="indx">Compitum Fabricium, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Concilium">Concilium, distinguished from comitia, <a href="#Page_119">119-38</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">defined by Laelius, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Livy’s use of term, <a href="#Page_119">119-25</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Mommsen on, <a href="#Page_121">121-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Caesar’s usage, <a href="#Page_125">125 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sallust’s, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cicero’s, <a href="#Page_130">130 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">literary and juristic, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">true distinction, <a href="#Page_131">131-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">uses classified, <a href="#Page_132">132-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">developed, <a href="#Page_135">135-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to comitia and contio, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of nobles, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">populi, <a href="#Page_120">120-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">plebis at Capua, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Concordia ordinum, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Consobrini, intermarriage of, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Conspiracy, special court for trial of, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">judicial, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Furia on, <a href="#Footnote_2452">396, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Constitution, equilibrium of Roman, <a href="#Page_343">343-6</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Consuls, auspices of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">obnuntiate, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">watch sky, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">proclaim holidays, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">call to concilium, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to contio, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">intermediate between senate and comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">given absolute authority, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">depend on people, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">minimal age of, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of assemblies, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Consulta, see <a href="#Senatus_consulta">Senatus consulta</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Contio">Contio, <a href="#Page_139">139-51</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">interrupted by storm, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspicated, <a href="#Page_110">110 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="isub1">sacerdotal use of word, <a href="#Page_125">125 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to comitia and concilium, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">derivation of, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composition, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency, <a href="#Page_140">140 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribunician, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">witnessing, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preliminary to comitia, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">opening of, <a href="#Page_144">144 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">speaking in, <a href="#Page_145">145 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">women in, <a href="#Page_146">146 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_504"></a>[504]</span>change to comitia, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">earliest form of assembly, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_473">473</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">part of in elections, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">military, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">judicial, <a href="#Page_259">259 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">plebeian, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_425">425 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for opposing Manilian law, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">oath in, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Conubium, connected with auspices, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">between near kin, <a href="#Page_339">339 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">freedmen lack, <a href="#Page_354">354</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Conventio, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Footnote_771">140, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Contio">Contio</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Conway, on social classes, <a href="#Footnote_227">38, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Coöptation, of patricians, <a href="#Footnote_947">164, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of sacerdotes, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cornelian constitution, <a href="#Page_423">423-8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cornelius, C., tribune (67), <a href="#Page_429">429 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Cornelius_Cinna">Cornelius Cinna, L., consul (87), <a href="#Page_409">409</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">assigns new citizens to tribes, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">measures of vetoed by tribunes, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cornelius Dolabella, L., naval duumvir (180), fined by pontiff, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cornelius Merula, L., prosecution of (87), <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus, P., punishes soldiers, <a href="#Page_251">251 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dispensed from laws, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">modifies Sempronian agrarian law, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Cornelius">Cornelius Scipio Africanus, P., trial of (185), <a href="#Page_319">319 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">favors senators at theatre, <a href="#Page_356">356 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cornelius Scipio Asiagenus, L., trial of (185), <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Cornelius_Sulla">Cornelius Sulla Felix, L., treatment of new citizens, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">use of assemblies, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increases quaestiones, <a href="#Page_257">257 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reactionary, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">consular legislation of (88), <a href="#Page_405">405-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dictatorial (82-81), <a href="#Page_412">412-23</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limits comitia, <a href="#Page_413">413 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_477">477</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cornicines, <a href="#Footnote_473">81, n. 2-4</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Musicians">Musicians</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Corpus, Augustale, Iulianum, etc., <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cotta, L., opinion of on Cicero’s interdict, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Crier, see <a href="#Praeco">Praeco</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Crimes, treatment of, by Sulla, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419-21</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">early legislation on, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">standing courts on, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Julian laws on, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Crucifixion, punishment for perduellio, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Curatores, of tribes, <a href="#Footnote_1310">220, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">viarum, <a href="#Footnote_2657">424, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Curia Calabra, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Curiae, <a href="#Page_8">8-11</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">social composition of, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">new citizens admitted to, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation of to land, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Comitia_calata">Comitia calata</a>, <a href="#Comitia_curiata">curiata</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Curiales, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Curio, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">maximus, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cursus honorum, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Custodes tabellarum, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2980">466, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cyrene, tribes of, <a href="#Footnote_33">7, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Damnum, lex Aquilia on, <a href="#Page_332">332 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Debts, legislation on, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_408">408</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409 f.</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2763">437, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_452">452</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">De caelo servare, <a href="#Page_114">114 ff.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Decemviri">Decemviri agris adsignandis, under Servilian rogation, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under Livian law, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Decemviri legibus scribundis, presidency of contio, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">without appeal, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instituted, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Decemviri sacris faciundis, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increased to quindecemviri, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Decianus, see <a href="#Appuleius_Decianus">Appuleius Decianus</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Decius, censor (304), <a href="#Page_64">64</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Decius, tribune (120), <a href="#Page_256">256</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Decuriae (decades), of soldiers, <a href="#Page_11">11 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">(decuries) of jurors, <a href="#Page_427">427</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Decurions, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Decurionate, municipal, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Demagogism, encouraged by frumentations, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Democracy, incipient, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rise of prevented, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Δῆμος, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Δημοτικοί, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Denarius, value of, <a href="#Footnote_507">87, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Detestatio sacrorum, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Footnote_937">162, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Di penates, prosecution for neglecting, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">oath by, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dice, prohibited, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dictator, auspices of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">passes lex curiata, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of contio, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of comitia, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary monarch, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">optima lege, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instituted, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preferred tribes for legislation, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2580">416, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_452">452</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abolition of office, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">subjection to appeal, <a href="#Page_241">241 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presides over special court, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">appointed at command of senate, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rei publicae constituendae, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dies, comitiales, <a href="#Page_470">470-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">nefasti, <a href="#Page_470">470 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">endotorcisi, intercisi, <a href="#Footnote_3033">470, n. 9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fasti, <a href="#Page_471">471</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Diodorus, on plebeian tribunate, <a href="#Footnote_1644">272, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">admission of plebs to consulship, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sempronian law on military service, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dionysius, on early Roman history, <a href="#Footnote_137">25, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">centuriate system, <a href="#Footnote_383">66, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1183">201, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">first tribal meeting, <a href="#Footnote_1584">262, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">patricians in tribal assembly, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Diribitio, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Diribitores, <a href="#Footnote_2994">467, n. 10</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dispensations from law, <a href="#Page_307">307 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">senate versus people on, <a href="#Page_430">430 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_505"></a>[505]</span>from lex curiata, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Divination, forms of, <a href="#Page_108">108 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Auspices">Auspices</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Divisores, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Domitius Ahenobarbus, Cn., tribune (103), <a href="#Page_323">323</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Draco, law of on phratry, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Duoviri, see <a href="#Duumviri">Duumviri</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Duumviri">Duumviri navales, instituted (311), <a href="#Page_306">306 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Duumviri perduellioni iudicandae, <a href="#Page_243">243 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">give way to tribunes, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for trial of Rabirius, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Duumviri sacris faciundis, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dyarchy, established by Gabinian law (67), <a href="#Page_433">433</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Edicts, pretorian, <a href="#Page_431">431 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of Caesar, <a href="#Footnote_2912">457, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Effatus ager, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Egeria, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Election, annulment of on religious ground, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prevented by oblativa, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of king, <a href="#Page_182">182-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and curiate law, <a href="#Page_184">184-200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by centuries, <a href="#Page_229">229 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of plebeian officials, <a href="#Page_262">262 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by tribes, <a href="#Page_271">271 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ballot in, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">theory of popular control, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Ambitus">Ambitus</a>, <a href="#Magistrates">Magistrates</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Elicius, <a href="#Footnote_583">100, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Emancipation, in German assembly, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in transitio ad plebem, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ennius, granted citizenship, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Epidius Marullus, C., tribune (44), <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Epilepsy (morbus comitialis), <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Epulones">Epulones, instituted, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increased to seven, <a href="#Footnote_2582">416, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Equites">Equites, relation of to tribes, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">originally self-supporting, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">before Servius, <a href="#Page_73">73 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in Servian army, <a href="#Page_75">75 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in 214 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">census of, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">post-Servian, <a href="#Page_93">93-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">funds for, <a href="#Page_93">93 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">opened to plebeians, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">equo privato, <a href="#Page_94">94 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">equo publico, <a href="#Page_95">95 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_209">209 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prerogative, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">given seats at theatre, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">liable to law against bribery, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">made superior to senators, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">desert C. Gracchus, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">associate with senators in courts, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_427">427 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Esquilina (tribus), <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Eupyridae, Attic gens, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Exercitus urbanus, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Exile, voluntary, legalized by comitia tributa, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Extortion, see <a href="#Repetundae">Repetundae</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Fabius, Q., trial of (389), <a href="#Page_246">246</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fabius Buteo, censor (241), <a href="#Page_213">213</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fabius Gurges, Q., consul (292), resolution on imperium of, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fabius Maximus, Q., consul (215), and curiate law, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fabius Maximus Servilianus, Q., trial of, for murder, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fabius Pictor, sources of for early Rome, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">centuriate system, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fabius Pictor, Q., praetor (189), trial of, <a href="#Page_327">327 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fabius Rullianus, Q., alters tribes, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Fabri">Fabri (mechanics, sappers, workmen), <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Footnote_387">67, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">assigned to classes, <a href="#Page_205">205 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Family law, changes in, <a href="#Page_339">339 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fasti, read in comitia calata, <a href="#Page_154">154 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dies, <a href="#Page_471">471 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Clodian law on, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Faucia (curia), <a href="#Footnote_73">11, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ill-omened, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ferentarii, <a href="#Footnote_470">80, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Festivals, regulated by law, <a href="#Page_340">340 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fetialis, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Finance, legislation on, <a href="#Page_297">297 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335-7</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fines, appealed to tribes, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Flamen, curial, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Dialis, <a href="#Footnote_1205">203, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Flaminian, era, <a href="#Page_333">333-46</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Circus, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Meadow, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Flaminius, C., and curiate law, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">monetary law of, <a href="#Page_191">191 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">censor, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">era of, <a href="#Page_333">333-46</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agrarian law, <a href="#Page_334">334 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supports Claudian law, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">influences legislation, <a href="#Page_337">337 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">assigns libertini to city tribes, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">energizes comitia, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, <a href="#Page_475">475</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Flavius, M., trial of, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fordicidia, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Foreign affairs, administered by senate, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">then fell partly to comitia tributa, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on, <a href="#Page_349">349 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Forgery, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Foriensis (curia), <a href="#Page_11">11</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Formiani, Fundani, etc., receive suffrage, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Formulae, legal, <a href="#Page_464">464</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fornacalia, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Footnote_74">11, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Forum, assembly in, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2785">439, n. 15</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fowler, W. W., on lex Scantinia, <a href="#Footnote_2216">357, n. 13</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reëlection of tribune, <a href="#Footnote_2284">369, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sempronian lex iudiciaria, <a href="#Footnote_2316">374, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Freedmen, see <a href="#Libertini">Libertini</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fregellae, revolt of, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fröhlich, on Sulpicius, <a href="#Footnote_2522">405, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cornelian-Pompeian law, <a href="#Footnote_2528">406, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Cornelia de tribunicia potestate, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Frumentations">Frumentations, <a href="#Page_372">372 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abolished by Sulla, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">restored by Lepidus, <a href="#Footnote_2651">423, n. 8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">further legislation on, <a href="#Footnote_2656">424, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curtailed by Caesar, <a href="#Page_453">453</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_506"></a>[506]</span>under lex municipalis, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fulvius, Cn., praetor (212), trial of, <a href="#Page_249">249 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fundus populus factus, <a href="#Footnote_2501">401, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Furius, L., past consul, trial of, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Furius, P., tribune (98), <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Furius_Camillus">Furius Camillus, M., and equestrian fund, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dictator, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">trial of, <a href="#Page_244">244 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Furtum">Furtum (theft), <a href="#Footnote_2067">339, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prosecution for, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Hostilia, <a href="#Footnote_2050">337, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Plautia, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Peculatus">Peculatus</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Gabinius, A., tribune (67), <a href="#Page_429">429 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gabinius, Q., tribune (139), <a href="#Page_359">359</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gabinus ager, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gades, receives citizenship, <a href="#Page_454">454</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Galeria iuniorum, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Genera, identified with gentes, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gens, meaning family, lineage, <a href="#Page_30">30 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gentes, <a href="#Page_11">11-13</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">unconnected with curiate system, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">social composition of, <a href="#Page_28">28-31</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">defined by Scaevola, <a href="#Footnote_153">28, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">maiores et minores, <a href="#Page_35">35 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of patrician, <a href="#Footnote_224">37, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relatively late, <a href="#Footnote_263">48, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">common land of, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to rural tribes, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Footnote_304">55, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in war, <a href="#Footnote_460">78, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gentiles, Gentilitas, <a href="#Footnote_153">28, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gifts, leges Publicia and Cincia on, <a href="#Page_338">338 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Governors, provincial, of the Spains, <a href="#Page_346">346 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under Porcian laws, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sempronian, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Acilian, <a href="#Page_376">376 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Julian, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gracchi, see <a href="#Sempronius">Sempronius</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Grain, see <a href="#Frumentations">Frumentations</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Greenidge, on social classes, <a href="#Footnote_227">38, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Guilds, see <a href="#Collegia">Collegia</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hackel, on lex Iulia municipalis, <a href="#Footnote_2911">457, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Heredium, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Herennius, tribune (60), <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hernicans, receive civitas sine suffragio, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Herzog, on curiate law, <a href="#Footnote_1092">183, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sulpicius, <a href="#Footnote_2522">405, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ἑταιρεία, <a href="#Footnote_47">8, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Holidays, non-comitial, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Horatius, trial of for perduellio, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hornblowers, in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Horsemen, see <a href="#Equites">Equites</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hortensius, Q., dictator (287), <a href="#Page_313">313</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hosticus ager, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hostilius Tubulus, L., trial of (141), <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Huschke, on Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ratings, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reformed comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ihne, on trial of Opimius, <a href="#Page_256">256 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">popular interference with censors, <a href="#Footnote_2158">351, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">policy of Marius, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sulpicius, <a href="#Footnote_2522">405, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Imperium, true (iustum), <a href="#Page_102">102 f.</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1114">187, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">confirmed by curiate law, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granted by comitia, <a href="#Footnote_1116">188, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by senate, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">transition of without curiate law, <a href="#Page_196">196 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">promagisterial, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abrogated, <a href="#Footnote_1971">324, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by Porcian laws, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">regulated by Sulla, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Impetrativa, impetrita (auspicia), <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103-11</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation of to oblativa, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Inaugurare sacerdotes, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Inaugurations, in comitia calata, <a href="#Page_155">155 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Incertus ager, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Incest, prosecution for, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Index legis, <a href="#Page_462">462</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ingenuus, <a href="#Page_20">20 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">son of libertinus becomes, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Instauraticius dies, creation of by law, <a href="#Page_308">308 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Intercession, see <a href="#Veto">Veto</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Interdict, decreed by tribes, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Interregnum, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Interrex, appointment of, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auspices, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of contio, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right of public speech, <a href="#Footnote_819">145, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">nominates king, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lacks curiate sanction, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presides over curiae and centuries, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Italians">Italians, benefit by Sempronian agrarian law, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">revolt of, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">receive citizenship, <a href="#Page_401">401 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dissatisfied, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">equalized with Romans, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Iubere, in legislation, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Iudices">Iudices (jurors), originally from senate, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from knights under</li> -<li class="isub1">leges Sempronia and Acilia, <a href="#Page_374">374 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">qualifications of under lex Cornelia, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Aurelia, <a href="#Page_427">427</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Licinia and Pompeia, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Antonia, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">punished for bribery, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ius agendi cum populo, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ius gentium, violation of, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ius pontificum, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ius sententiae dicendae, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Iussus populi, <a href="#Footnote_1069">180, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Iustitium, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">defined, <a href="#Footnote_2520">404, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Iustum auspicium, imperium, <a href="#Page_102">102 f.</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Janiculum, garrison and flag on, <a href="#Footnote_1200">203, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">secession to, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Judicial process, in contio, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in comitia, <a href="#Page_259">259 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">choice as to assembly, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ballot in, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Jugurtha, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Julius Caesar, C., usage as to comitia and concilium, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">creates patricians, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">uses centuriate and tribal assemblies, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">threatened with prosecution, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supports Licinius Macer, <a href="#Page_426">426</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Manilian rogation, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_507"></a>[507]</span>consul (59), <a href="#Page_438">438-44</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">affected by Pompeian laws, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dictator (49-44), <a href="#Page_451">451-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">adds 10 days to year, <a href="#Page_471">471</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Julius Caesar, C., consul (64), usage as to contio, <a href="#Page_125">125 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Julius_Caesar_Octavianus">Julius Caesar Octavianus, creates patricians, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_460">460</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">triumvir, <a href="#Page_459">459 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Juniors, in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number of, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Junius, L., consul (249), trial of, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Junius Silanus, M., prosecution of (103), <a href="#Page_323">323</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Juno, Curis, <a href="#Footnote_46">8, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Moneta, <a href="#Footnote_11">2, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Junonia, colonization of, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Jupiter, auspices of, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">victim to, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">feast of, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">oath by, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Jurisdiction, of king, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_239">239-61</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tributa, <a href="#Page_264">264-9</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286-92</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317-29</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Jurors, see <a href="#Iudices">Iudices</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Juventus Thalna, M., tribal lex de bello indicendo of, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Kalumniator, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kaput legis, <a href="#Footnote_2948">463, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Κήρυκες, <a href="#Footnote_861">153, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">King, auspices of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presidency of contio, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of comitia calata, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curiata, <a href="#Page_173">173 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right to address people, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">as legislator, <a href="#Page_177">177 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">irresponsible, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">powers of, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election, <a href="#Page_182">182-4</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">declares war, <a href="#Page_175">175 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Klebs, on reformed comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Knights, see <a href="#Equites">Equites</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kornemann, on lex Scantinia, <a href="#Footnote_2216">357, n. 13</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Laelius Felix, defines comitia and concilium, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">not in accord with Livy, <a href="#Page_119">119-25</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">view of rejected, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">error explained, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Laelius Sapiens, C., prosecution of, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agrarian rogation of, <a href="#Page_360">360 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Laetorius Mergus, L. or M., trial of, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Land, see <a href="#Ager">Ager</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lange, on obnuntiatio, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">early legislation, <a href="#Footnote_1080">181, n. 9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">transitio imperii, <a href="#Footnote_1092">183, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1168">197, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia centuriata, <a href="#Footnote_1184">201, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reform of, <a href="#Page_224">224 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">validity of plebiscite, <a href="#Footnote_1685">278, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right of dedication, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Appuleia de maiestate, <a href="#Footnote_2444">394, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Antia, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">principium, <a href="#Footnote_2979">466, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lanuvium, curiae in, <a href="#Footnote_46">8, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Latins">Latins, rights of, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">benefit by Sempronian agrarian law, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">proposal to grant citizenship to, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">receive citizenship, <a href="#Page_401">401 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited suffrage, <a href="#Footnote_2978">466, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lator legis, <a href="#Footnote_2937">462, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Laurentum, <a href="#Footnote_11">2, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Footnote_13">3, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lauretum, <a href="#Footnote_11">2, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lavinium, Tities in, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Law, divine, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">human, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sovereignty of, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Legislation">Legislation</a>, <a href="#Lex">Lex</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Legion, instituted, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">early republican, <a href="#Page_75">75 ff.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Leges">Leges, composition and preservation of, <a href="#Page_462">462-5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">imperfectae, etc., <a href="#Page_463">463</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">centuriate, consular, etc., <a href="#Footnote_2950">n. 8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">provisions to secure validity of, <a href="#Page_464">464</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">annulment by senate, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Legislation">Legislation, regal, <a href="#Page_177">177-82</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">centuriate, <a href="#Page_230">230-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribal, pre-decemviral, <a href="#Page_269">269-74</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pre-Hortensian, <a href="#Page_292">292-316</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from Hortensius to Gracchi, <a href="#Page_330">330-362</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from Gracchi to Sulla, <a href="#Page_303">303-411</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">late republican, <a href="#Page_412">412-61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">freed from obnuntiatio, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">process of, <a href="#Page_178">178 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465-70</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">provided for by Twelve Tables, <a href="#Page_233">233 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_464">464</a>, <a href="#Page_474">474</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">senatorial, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">transferred to tribes, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to centuries, <a href="#Page_406">406-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ballot in, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fields of: administrative, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1" id="Legislation_agrarian">agrarian, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1603">265, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363-7</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385-7</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438-41</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">colonial, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_393">393 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_457">457 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">financial, <a href="#Page_310">310 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335-7</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">frumentarian, <a href="#Page_372">372 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2651">423, n. 8</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">judiciary, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374-6</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>, <a href="#Page_427">427 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">religious, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1798">295, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sumptuary, <a href="#Page_337">337 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2404">388, n. 9</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Legum dictio, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1062">179, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lengle, on lex Cornelia Pompeia (88), <a href="#Footnote_2530">407, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lentus, L., consul (156), trial of, <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Lex">Lex, meaning of word, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">data and rogata, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex alearia, (before 204), <a href="#Page_337">337</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ auspical, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ centuriata de potestate, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Coloniae Genetivae, <a href="#Footnote_2880">453, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Lex_curiata">⸺ curiata de imperio, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1069">180, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">formula of, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sanctioning, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Messala on, <a href="#Page_185">185 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dispensations from, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">subject to veto, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">confirms imperium, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">functions performed without, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lack of in 49 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">one annually, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">becomes formality, <a href="#Page_196">196 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">revived by optimates, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">strengthened by Sulla, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de potestate, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ lenonia, <a href="#Footnote_2057">338, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges regiae, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex sacrata, so-called Icilian, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on tribunes, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_508"></a>[508]</span>meaning of, <a href="#Page_264">264 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">mitigation of, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">renewed by Valerius and Horatius, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">list of leges s., <a href="#Footnote_1600">265, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on centuriate trials, <a href="#Footnote_1622">268, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ satura, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ de bello indicendo, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ de imperio, for triumphs, <a href="#Page_334">334 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Vespasiani, <a href="#Footnote_2956">464, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Lex_curiata">Lex curiata</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on driving nail, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ found at Ateste, <a href="#Footnote_2884">454, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting citizenship to priestesses of Ceres, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating dictatorship (501), <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ instituting tribuni militum consulari potestate (445), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating censors (443?), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ appointing prefect of market (440), <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1852">305, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on presenting crown to Jupiter (437), <a href="#Footnote_1798">295, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on garments of candidates (432), <a href="#Page_295">295</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ increasing quaestors (421), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating special murder court (414), <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ as to residence on Capitoline hill (384), <a href="#Page_295">295</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating praetorship (367), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating curule aedileship (367), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ for election of 6 military tribunes (362), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ prohibiting comitia away from city (357), <a href="#Page_297">297</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ preparing for war (356), <a href="#Footnote_1811">297, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting triumph (356), <a href="#Footnote_1811">297, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on interest and debts (347), <a href="#Page_298">298</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting citizenship to Privernates (329), <a href="#Page_304">304 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating promagistracy (t. 327), <a href="#Page_305">305</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ sending prefects to Capua (318), <a href="#Page_306">306</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on dedication of temples, etc. (304), <a href="#Page_309">309</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ dispensing Q. Fabius from law (t. 298), <a href="#Page_308">308</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating triumviri coloniis deducendis (296), <a href="#Page_311">311</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ prolonging imperium (t. 295), <a href="#Page_305">305</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting Etruria to Fabius (295), <a href="#Page_305">305 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on imperium of consul Q. Fabius (292), <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating special court (270), <a href="#Page_254">254</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ doubling number of quaestors (267), <a href="#Page_332">332</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ forbidding reëlection to censorship (265), <a href="#Page_332">332</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ instituting second praetor (242), <a href="#Page_332">332</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting privilege of riding (241), <a href="#Page_332">332</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ instituting 2 praetors (227), <a href="#Page_341">341 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting triumph (t. 223), <a href="#Page_334">334</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on intermarriage of kin (241-219), <a href="#Page_339">339 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on Sacred Spring (t. 217), <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ dispensing consulars from law (t. 217), <a href="#Page_343">343</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting citizenship to Campanian knights (215), <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ for election of pontifex maximus (before 212), <a href="#Page_341">341</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for election of chief curio (before 209), <a href="#Page_341">341</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ creating 3 administrative boards (t. 212), <a href="#Page_337">337</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on Campanian vectigalia (210), <a href="#Page_337">337</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting citizenship (t. 210), <a href="#Footnote_2172">353, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ for election of 24 military tribunes (207), <a href="#Page_342">342</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ dispensing C. Servilius from law (t. 203), <a href="#Footnote_2101">343, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ permitting oath by proxy (t. 200), <a href="#Footnote_2101">343, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on qualification of plebeian tribunes and aediles (Flaminian era), <a href="#Page_342">342 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ increasing praetors to 6 (198), <a href="#Page_346">346</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on triumphs (after 180), <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ forbidding reëlection of consul (151), <a href="#Page_348">348</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dispensation from, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repealed by Sulla, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges, dispensing Scipio Aemilianus from laws (t. 148, 135), <a href="#Page_360">360</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex, assigning seats to equites at theatre (t. 146?), <a href="#Page_357">357</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ abrogating proconsular imperium (136), <a href="#Page_360">360</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting Asia as province (t. 131), <a href="#Footnote_2351">381, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on qualifications of senators (t. about 129), <a href="#Page_369">369 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ permitting reëlection of tribune (t. before 123), <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ agraria, amending Sempronian law (t. not after 118), <a href="#Page_385">385</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ founding Narbo Martius, <a href="#Footnote_2377">386, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges, repealing Sempronian law on military service (about 115), <a href="#Page_388">388 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lex, on dedication of Capitoline temple (78), <a href="#Footnote_2083">341, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on vectigalia (75), <a href="#Page_424">424</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ appointing decemviri for regulating Asia (t. 67), <a href="#Page_433">433</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ dispensing Caesar from law (t. 52), <a href="#Page_449">449</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting citizenship to Gades (49), <a href="#Page_454">454</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges, recalling certain exiles (p. and t. 49), <a href="#Page_454">454</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex, granting Caesar triumph over Juba (48), <a href="#Footnote_2033">335, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges, conferring powers on Caesar (48-45), <a href="#Page_451">451 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_509"></a>[509]</span>Lex, for founding Colonia Genetiva (t. 44), <a href="#Footnote_2880">453, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex (?), for building temple to Isis (43), <a href="#Page_459">459</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex, honoring triumviri (43), <a href="#Page_459">459</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on birthday of Caesar (42), <a href="#Footnote_2913">457, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ granting lictors to Vestals (42), <a href="#Footnote_2930">459, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges, honoring Octavia, Octavianus, and Livia (t. 35), <a href="#Page_459">459 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Leges whose authors are given:</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Acilia de intercalatione (c. 191), <a href="#Page_358">358</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Acilia repetundarum (t. 122), <a href="#Page_375">375-8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Acilia Calpurnia de ambitu (c. 67), <a href="#Page_431">431</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amended by Cicero, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Acilia Minucia, on peace with Carthage (t. 201), <a href="#Footnote_2113">344, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Acilia Rubria, on worship of Jupiter (t. 122), <a href="#Footnote_2370">384, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aebutia, on legis actio, <a href="#Footnote_2067">339, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges Aebutia et Licinia, on qualifications of candidates (t. after 194), <a href="#Page_347">347 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Aelia, colonial (t. 194), <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges Aelia et Fufia (t. about 150), <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amended by lex Clodia, <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and curiate law, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to tribunician comitia, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Aemilia, on censorship (d. 443), <a href="#Page_237">237</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aemilia de libertinorum suffragiis (c. 115), <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sumptuaria, <a href="#Footnote_2404">n. 9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aemilia frumentaria (c. 78), <a href="#Footnote_2644">423, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2823">444, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aemilia, for naming Caesar dictator (p. 49), <a href="#Page_450">450</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Antia sumptuaria (t. 70?), <a href="#Page_428">428</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Antistia, on punishment of Satricans (t. 319), <a href="#Page_310">310</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">serves as precedent, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Antonia de Termessibus (t. 71), <a href="#Page_425">425</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Antonia, on children of proscribed (t. 49), <a href="#Page_453">453 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">colonial (c. 44), <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2880">453, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_457">457 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">iudiciaria, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">establishing appeal from quaestiones, <a href="#Page_458">458 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abolishing dictatorship, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">a l. sacrata, <a href="#Footnote_1600">265, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">leges honoring Caesar, <a href="#Page_452">452</a> n. 4;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex confirming acts of Caesar, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Antonia, on elections (t. 45), <a href="#Page_454">454 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agraria (t. 44), <a href="#Page_458">458</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Antonia Tullia de ambitu (c. 63), <a href="#Page_436">436 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Appuleia agraria (t. 100), <a href="#Page_395">395</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">colonial (t. 103, 100), <a href="#Page_393">393 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">frumentaria (t. 100), <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2823">444, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de maiestate, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de sponsu (103, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>?), <a href="#Footnote_1813">298, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2444">394, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">interdicting Metellus (t. 100), <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aquilia de damno (t. 287?), <a href="#Page_332">332 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aternia Tarpeia de multae dictione (c. 454), <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atia, on election of sacerdotes (t. 63), <a href="#Footnote_2585">416, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atia Ampia, honoring Pompey (t. 63), <a href="#Footnote_2737">435, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atilia, appointing special court (t. 210), <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atilia, on appointing tutors (242-186), <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atilia Furia, for surrendering Mancinus (c. 136), <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atilia Marcia, for electing 16 military tribunes (t. 311), <a href="#Page_306">306</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atinia, on stolen property (214?), <a href="#Footnote_2067">339, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atinia, for founding colonies (t. 197), <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atinia, on right of tribunes to senatorship (t. 122-102), <a href="#Page_391">391</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Atinia Marcia, on treaty with Macedon (t. 196), <a href="#Page_349">349</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aufidia, on importing wild beasts (t. 170), <a href="#Page_356">356</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aurelia, amending Cornelian law on tribunate (c. 75), <a href="#Page_423">423 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de iudiciis privatis, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aurelia iudiciaria (p. 70), <a href="#Page_427">427</a>, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Baebia, colonial (t. 194), <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Baebia, on praetors (c. 181), <a href="#Page_346">346</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Bantina, Latin, <a href="#Footnote_2288">370, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Boria (?) agraria (t. 118), <a href="#Page_385">385</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Caecilia, appointing special court (154), <a href="#Page_255">255</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Caecilia, abolishing vectigalia (p. 60), <a href="#Page_438">438</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repealed by Caesar, <a href="#Footnote_2912">457, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Caecilia, repealing lex Clodia on censorial stigma (c. 52), <a href="#Footnote_2859">450, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Caecilia Cornelia, recalling Cicero (c. 57), <a href="#Footnote_684">114, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on cura annonae, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Caecilia Didia, on rogations (c. 98), <a href="#Page_396">396 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amended, <a href="#Footnote_2765">438, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Caelia tabellaria (t. 107), <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Calidia, recalling Metellus (t. 98), <a href="#Footnote_2451">396, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Calpurnia, for recovery of property, <a href="#Footnote_2067">339, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Calpurnia repetundarum (t. 149), <a href="#Page_358">358</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Calpurnia, recalling Popillius (t. 120), <a href="#Page_388">388</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Calpurnia, granting citizenship (t. 89), <a href="#Footnote_317">57, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Calpurnia Acilia de ambitu (c. 67), <a href="#Page_431">431</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Canuleia, on conubium (t. 445), <a href="#Page_294">294</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Carvilia, legalizing voluntary exile (t. 212), <a href="#Page_249">249</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cassia tabellaria (t. 137), <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cassia, on qualifications of senators (t. 104), <a href="#Page_390">390 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cassia, for creating patricians (t. 45), <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_510"></a>[510]</span>⸺ Cassia Terentia frumentaria (c. 73), <a href="#Footnote_2656">424, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2823">444, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cincia, on gifts (t. 204), <a href="#Page_339">339</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Claudia, on senatorial qualifications and contracts (t. 219), <a href="#Page_335">335</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Claudia, for expulsion of Latins (c. 177), <a href="#Page_354">354</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Clodia, monetary (104?), <a href="#Page_392">392</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Clodia, frumentaria (t. 58), <a href="#Page_444">444 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de collegiis, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amended, <a href="#Page_447">447 f.</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2912">457, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on secretaries of quaestors, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on censorial stigma, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repealed, <a href="#Footnote_2859">450, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amending Aelian and Fufian laws, <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de provocatione, <a href="#Page_445">445 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">interdicting Cicero, <a href="#Footnote_687">115, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">leges on minor subjects, <a href="#Footnote_2835">446, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia, on gambling, <a href="#Footnote_2051">337, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia (?), outlawing Marius and others (88), <a href="#Page_405">405</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia, repealing Cornelian-Pompeian laws (Cinna, c. 87), <a href="#Page_409">409</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia (?), recalling exiles (c. or t. 87), <a href="#Page_409">409</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia, de tribunicia potestate (d. 82), <a href="#Page_236">236 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repealed, <a href="#Page_423">423 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">violated by Opimius, <a href="#Page_425">425 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de maiestate (81), <a href="#Page_415">415-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on praetors, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on quaestors, <a href="#Page_415">415 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de sacerdotibus, <a href="#Page_416">416 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de provinciis ordinandis, <a href="#Page_417">417 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">iudiciaria, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de adulteriis et pudicitia, alleged, <a href="#Footnote_2620">420, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2649">423, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de proscriptione, <a href="#Page_421">421</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de civitate Volaterranis adimenda, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on debts, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de sponsu (?), <a href="#Footnote_2642">422, n. 13</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instituting ludi Victoriae, <a href="#Page_422">422 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sumptuaria, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">leges, criminal, <a href="#Page_419">419-21</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on quaestio inter sicarios, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amended, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agrariae (82, 81), <a href="#Page_421">421 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex on return of Pompey (80), <a href="#Footnote_2033">335, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia, on collecting certain moneys (Lentulus, c. 72), <a href="#Page_424">424</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia, on edicts of praetors (t. 67), <a href="#Page_431">431 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on dispensations, <a href="#Page_430">430 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia Baebia de ambitu (c. 181), <a href="#Page_348">348</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia Caecilia, recalling Cicero (c. 57), <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de cura annonae, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia Fulvia de ambitu (c. 159), <a href="#Page_348">348</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia Gellia, on granting citizenship (c. 72), <a href="#Footnote_2657">424, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia Pompeia, on assemblies (c. 88), <a href="#Footnote_1683">277, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on rogations, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">colonial, <a href="#Page_408">408</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">unciaria, <a href="#Page_408">408</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Crepereia, on legis actio, <a href="#Footnote_2067">339, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Decia, on duumviri navales (t. 311), <a href="#Page_306">306</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Didia cibaria (p. or t. 143), <a href="#Page_356">356</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Domitia, on election of sacerdotes (t. 103), <a href="#Page_391">391 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repealed by Sulla, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">renewed, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Duillia, on appeal (t. 449), <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Duillia Menenia, on interest (t. 357), <a href="#Page_297">297</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Duronia, sumptuaria (t. before 97), <a href="#Footnote_2404">388, n. 9</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Fabia de plagiariis (c. 209 or 183?), <a href="#Page_357">357</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Fabia de numero sectatorum (t. 66), <a href="#Footnote_2711">431, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Falcidia testamentaria (t. 40), <a href="#Page_459">459</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Fannia cibaria (c. 161), <a href="#Page_356">356</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Flaminia, agraria (t. 232), <a href="#Page_334">334</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">monetary (c. 217), <a href="#Page_336">336</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Flavia, on punishing Tusculans (t. 323), <a href="#Page_310">310</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Fufia de religione (t. 61), <a href="#Footnote_2766">438, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Fufia, on voting in quaestiones (p. 59), <a href="#Page_443">443</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges Fufia et Aelia (t. about 150), <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Furia de sponsu, <a href="#Footnote_1813">298, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Furia testamentaria (203-170?), <a href="#Footnote_2163">352, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2950">463, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Furia (?), instituting prefects for Capua (318), <a href="#Footnote_1864">306, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Furia, on conspiracy (t. 99), <a href="#Footnote_2452">396, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Furia Atilia, surrendering Mancinus (c. 136), <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Furia Quinctia, arbitrating between Ardea and Aricia (c. 446), <a href="#Page_294">294 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Gabinia tabellaria (t. 139), <a href="#Page_359">359</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Gabina, on secret meetings (t. 186 or 139?), <a href="#Page_357">357</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Gabinia, on loans to provincials (t. 67), <a href="#Page_429">429</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on sessions of senate, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granting imperium to Pompey, <a href="#Page_432">432 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Genucia (t. 342), <a href="#Page_298">298 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">article of on consulship, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on reëlections, often violated, <a href="#Page_307">307 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dispensations from, <a href="#Page_307">307 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">renewed by Sulla, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Glitia testamentaria, <a href="#Footnote_2932">459, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Graccana, <a href="#Footnote_2361">383, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Helvia, abrogating tribunicia potestas (t. 44), <a href="#Page_455">455</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on wives of Caesar, <a href="#Page_452">452</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Hirtia, on partisans of Pompey (t. 48?), <a href="#Footnote_2862">451, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Horatia, honoring Gaia Taracia, <a href="#Footnote_827">146, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Hortensia (d. 287), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">epoch-making in social history, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">effect on comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for relief of debtors, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on plebi scita, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_475">475</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on tribunician jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_247">247 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_511"></a>[511]</span>on veto, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Hostilia, on prosecutions for theft, <a href="#Footnote_2332">377, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Icilia agraria, so called (456), <a href="#Page_238">238</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sacrata, <a href="#Footnote_1600">265, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Icilia, granting amnesty to seceders (t. 449), <a href="#Page_292">292</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granting triumph, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iulia, granting citizenship (c. 90), <a href="#Footnote_319">57, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iulia, on dedication of Capitoline temple (p. 62), <a href="#Footnote_2083">341, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agraria (c. 59), <a href="#Footnote_818">145, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438-41</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relieving publicans, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repetundarum, <a href="#Page_441">441 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dispensation from, <a href="#Page_447">447</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attempt to amend, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">confirming acts of Pompey, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on Ptolemy, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curiata, arrogating Clodius (pont. max.), <a href="#Page_443">443</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on debts (d. 49), <a href="#Page_452">452</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de bonorum cessione (?), <a href="#Footnote_2874">452, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on rents (47), <a href="#Page_452">452 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">creating 2 praetors, <a href="#Page_454">454</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">iudiciaria (46), <a href="#Page_455">455</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de maiestate, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de vi, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sumptuaria, <a href="#Page_455">455 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de provinciis, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">municipalis, <a href="#Page_456">456 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">colonial (45), <a href="#Page_453">453</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de Siculis, alleged (44), <a href="#Footnote_2885">454, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iulia, on rents (Octavianus, 41), <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on conubium of libertini (18), <a href="#Footnote_2183">354, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iulia Papiria de multarum aestimatione (c. 430), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iunia repetundarum (t. 126), <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for expelling aliens, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iunia, on military pay (c. 109), <a href="#Page_392">392</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iunia, colonial (t. 83), <a href="#Page_410">410</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iunia Licinia, on filing statutes (c. 62), <a href="#Page_437">437 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Licinia, on games (p. 208), <a href="#Footnote_2084">341, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Licinia, instituting epulones (t. 196), <a href="#Page_347">347</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Licinia sumptuaria (p. or t. before 97), <a href="#Footnote_2404">388, n. 9</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Licinia de sodaliciis (c. 55), <a href="#Page_447">447 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Leges Licinia et Aebutia, on qualifications of candidates (t. after 194), <a href="#Page_347">347 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Licinia Cassia, on appointment of tribuni militum (c. 171), <a href="#Footnote_2091">342, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Licinia Iunia, on filing statutes (c. 62), <a href="#Page_437">437 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Licinia Mucia, on aliens (c. 95), <a href="#Page_397">397</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Licinia Pompeia de tribunicia potestate (c. 70), <a href="#Page_426">426 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prolonging Caesar’s command (55), <a href="#Page_447">447</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges Licinia Sextia (t. 368, 367), <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">article of on consulship, <a href="#Page_237">237 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relieving debtors, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on pasturage, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">violations of, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limiting occupation of land, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amended, <a href="#Footnote_2024">334, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2243">363, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Licinnia de actione communi dividundo, <a href="#Footnote_2067">339, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Livia, on organization of Africa (t. 146), <a href="#Page_349">349</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Livia, colonial (t. 122), <a href="#Page_383">383 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on Latins, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Livia agraria, frumentaria, etc. (t. 91), <a href="#Page_397">397-400</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Lucretia, on Campanian vectigalia (t. 172), <a href="#Footnote_2158">351, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Maenia, on ludi Romani (c. 338), <a href="#Page_308">308 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Maenia, on patrum auctoritas (t. 287?), <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Maenia, on dowries (188?), <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Maenia Sextia de multae dictione (c. 452), <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Maevia, on Asiatic affairs (about 189), <a href="#Page_349">349</a>. n. 5.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Mamilia, on arbitri (c. 239?), <a href="#Footnote_2019">332, n. 9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Mamilia, appointing special court (t. 109), <a href="#Page_390">390</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Mamilia, Roscia, etc. (t. 55?), <a href="#Footnote_2795">441, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Manilia, on libertini (t. 67), <a href="#Page_433">433</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granting imperium to Pompey (66), <a href="#Page_433">433 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Manlia, on manumission of slaves (c. 357), <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Manlia, granting Numidia as province (t. 107), <a href="#Footnote_2351">381, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Marcia, on usurers (c. 352?), <a href="#Footnote_1813">298, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Marcia, appointing special court (t. 172), <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Marcia Atinia, on treaty with Macedon (t. 196), <a href="#Page_349">349</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Marcia Porcia, on triumphs (t. 62), <a href="#Page_438">438</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Maria, on pontes (t. 119), <a href="#Page_389">389</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Memmia de incestu (t. 111), <a href="#Footnote_2332">377, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2416">390, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Metilia, on master of horse (t. 217), <a href="#Page_342">342</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on fulling cloth, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Minicia, on children of mixed parentage, <a href="#Footnote_2177">354, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Minucia, instituting triumviri mensarii (t. 216), <a href="#Page_336">336 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Minucia, repealing Rubrian colonial law (t. 121), <a href="#Page_385">385</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Mucia, appointing special court (t. 141), <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Munatia, pardoning certain persons (c. 42), <a href="#Page_459">459</a>. n. 5.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Norbana, appointing special court (t. 104), <a href="#Page_390">390</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_512"></a>[512]</span>⸺ Octavia frumentaria (about 90), <a href="#Page_401">401</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Ogulnia, on sacerdotes (t. 300), <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Footnote_965">166, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Oppia, on luxury of women (t. 215), <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repealed, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Orchia cibaria (t. 181), <a href="#Page_356">356</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Ovinia, on senators (t. 339-312), <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Papia de Vestalium lectione (t. 65?), <a href="#Footnote_881">156, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">expelling aliens, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Papiria, on viatores of aediles, <a href="#Footnote_1755">290, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Papiria, granting citizenship (p. 332), <a href="#Page_304">304</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Papiria, on dedications (t. after 304), <a href="#Page_309">309</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Papiria, on triumviri capitales (t. after 242), <a href="#Page_332">332</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Papiria tabellaria (t. 131), <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Papiria, monetary (t. 89), <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pedia, appointing special court (c. 43), <a href="#Footnote_2913">457, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Peducaea, appointing special court (t. 113), <a href="#Page_390">390</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pesolania, on injury done by dogs, <a href="#Footnote_2019">332, n. 9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Petillia, appointing special court (t. 185), <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1947">319, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pinaria, on appointment of judge, <a href="#Footnote_2067">339, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pinaria annalis (p. 182?), <a href="#Footnote_2129">347, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pinaria Furia de intercalatione (c. 472), <a href="#Page_238">238</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Plaetoria, on urban praetor (after 227), <a href="#Footnote_2090">342, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Plaetoria, on cura of young men (before 192), <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Plaetoria, appointing duumviri aedi dedicandae (151?), <a href="#Footnote_2128">347, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Plautia iudiciaria (t. 89), <a href="#Footnote_2496">401, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_427">427</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">probably repealed, <a href="#Footnote_2543">409, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agraria, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Plautia de vi (t. 78-77), <a href="#Page_424">424</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Plautia, recalling exiles (t. 73?), <a href="#Page_424">424</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Plautia Papiria, granting citizenship (t. 89), <a href="#Footnote_322">57, n. 10</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2174">353, n. 9</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Poetelia de ambitu (t. 358), <a href="#Page_296">296 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Poetelia, on slavery for debt (c. or d. 326 or 313), <a href="#Page_310">310</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pompeia, granting citizenship (c. 89), <a href="#Page_402">402</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pompeia iudiciaria (c. 55), <a href="#Page_448">448</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de parricidio, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de ambitu (52), <a href="#Page_448">448</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de provinciis, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de iure magistratuum, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">excepting certain persons from law, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pompeia Licinia de tribunicia potestate (c. 70), <a href="#Page_426">426 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prolonging Caesar’s command (55), <a href="#Page_447">447</a>, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Poplicia, granting burial place, <a href="#Footnote_2097">342, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges Porciae de provocatione (198-184?), <a href="#Page_250">250-3</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Porcia de sumptu provinciali (c. 195), <a href="#Page_349">349</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on provincial governors (177?), <a href="#Page_349">349</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Porcia, on interest (c. 118?), <a href="#Page_392">392</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Porcia Marcia, on triumphs (t. 62), <a href="#Page_438">438</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Publicia, on gambling, <a href="#Footnote_2051">337, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Publicia, on gifts at saturnalia (t. 209), <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rogatio for abrogating proconsular imperium, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Publilia de sponsu, <a href="#Footnote_1813">298, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Publilia, so-called (471), <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">does not exclude patricians, <a href="#Footnote_1584">262, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">confused with L. Publilia Philonis, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Publilia (d. 339), <a href="#Page_299">299-302</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">article of on patrum auctoritas, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on plebiscita, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on consuls, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">excludes patricians, <a href="#Footnote_1584">262, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to Valerian-Horatian laws, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pupia, on sessions of senate (p. 71), <a href="#Page_424">424 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amended, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Quinctia de aquaeductibus (c. 9), <a href="#Page_462">462</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Quinctia Furia, arbitrating between Ardea and Aricia (c. 446), <a href="#Page_294">294 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Remmia de calumniatoribus (91?), <a href="#Page_400">400</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Roscia theatralis (t. 67), <a href="#Footnote_2205">357, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Roscia, granting citizenship to Transpadani (p. 49), <a href="#Page_454">454</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina, so-called, <a href="#Footnote_2884">454, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Rubria, for founding Junonia (t. 123), <a href="#Page_383">383</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Rufrena, honoring Caesar (42), <a href="#Footnote_2913">457, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Rutilia, on military tribunes (169), <a href="#Footnote_2141">349, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Saenia, for creating patricians (c. 30), <a href="#Footnote_952">164, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Page_460">460</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Saufeia agraria (t. 91), <a href="#Page_400">400</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Scribonia de usucapione servitutum (c. 76 or t. 50), <a href="#Footnote_2655">424, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2859">450, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Scantinia, on violation of ingenui, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sempronia, for dedication of temple (c. 215), <a href="#Footnote_2083">341, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sempronia, on loans (t. 193), <a href="#Page_351">351 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sempronia de imperio (t. 167), <a href="#Footnote_2033">335, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2141">349, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sempronia agraria (t. 133), <a href="#Page_363">363-7</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abrogating potestas of colleague, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sempronia de provocatione (t. 123), <a href="#Page_355">355 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">frumentaria, <a href="#Page_372">372 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agraria, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_513"></a>[513]</span>on taxation of Asia, <a href="#Page_380">380 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on consular provinces, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repealed, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on military service, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">colonial, <a href="#Page_382">382 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">viaria (?), <a href="#Page_373">373</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">iudiciaria (122), <a href="#Page_374">374-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on murder and poisoning, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Servilia repetundarum (t. 111?), <a href="#Page_393">393</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Servilia, on qualifications of iudices (c. 106), <a href="#Page_388">388</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sestia or Sextia, instituting Decemvirate (c. 452), <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Silia, on legis actio per condictionem, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>. n. 5.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Silia, on weights and measures (t. Flaminian era), <a href="#Page_337">337 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sulpicia, on various subjects (t. 88), <a href="#Page_404">404 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">article of on new citizens, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on transferring command to Marius, <a href="#Footnote_2351">381, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Terentia, on sons of libertini (t. 189), <a href="#Page_355">355</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Terentilia, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Thoria agraria (t. 111), <a href="#Page_386">386 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Titia, on gambling, <a href="#Footnote_2051">337, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Titia, on questorian provinces (267?), <a href="#Page_332">332</a>. n. 3.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Titia agraria (t. 99), <a href="#Page_396">396</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">criminal (99?), <a href="#Footnote_2455">396, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Titia, abrogating potestas of colleague (t. 43), <a href="#Footnote_2890">455, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Trebonia, on tribunician elections (t. 448 or 401), <a href="#Page_285">285 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Trebonia, granting provinces (t. 55), <a href="#Page_447">447</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Tullia, on free legations (c. 63), <a href="#Page_437">437</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Tullia Antonia de ambitu (c. 63), <a href="#Page_436">436 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">article of renewed, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria de provocatione (c. 509), <a href="#Page_232">232 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_473">473 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">a l. sacrata, <a href="#Footnote_1600">265, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granting building lot to proposer, <a href="#Footnote_1430">238, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria (d. 342), <a href="#Page_234">234 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abolishing debts, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">a l. sacrata, <a href="#Footnote_1600">265, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria de provocatione (300), <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation of to Porcian laws, <a href="#Page_252">252 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria, repealing Oppian law (t. 195), <a href="#Page_356">356</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria, granting suffragium (t. 188), <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria, granting citizenship to priestesses of Ceres (p. 98), <a href="#Footnote_2170">353, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria, on debts (c. 86), <a href="#Page_409">409 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repealed, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria, appointing Sulla dictator (interrex, 82), <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria Horatia (c. 449), <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274-80</a>, <a href="#Page_474">474</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de provocatione, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">a l. sacrata, <a href="#Footnote_1600">265, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">violated by rogatio Servilia, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on oath of plebs, <a href="#Footnote_1598">264, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bearing on tribunician jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on sanctity of plebeian officials, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on plebiscita, <a href="#Page_274">274-8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Valeria Marcia, instituting bank (c. 352), <a href="#Page_297">297 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Varia de maiestate (t. 90), <a href="#Page_400">400 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Vatinia iudiciaria (t. 59), <a href="#Page_442">442</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">colonial, <a href="#Footnote_2793">440, n. 8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granting provinces to Caesar, <a href="#Page_443">443 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">leges on foreign affairs, <a href="#Footnote_2813">443, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leges Vibiae, confirming acts of Caesar (c. 43), <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2913">457, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2915">458, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abolishing dictatorship, <a href="#Footnote_2927">459, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Villia annalis (t. 180), <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">renewed by Sulla, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Visellia de curatoribus Viarum (before 71), <a href="#Footnote_2657">424, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Voconia, on inheritance (t. 169), <a href="#Footnote_424">72, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Levy, obstruction of, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Liber and Libera, forfeiture of estates to, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Libertini">Libertini, class of clients, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">enrolment in tribes, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">deterioration of status, <a href="#Page_354">354 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Terentia on, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">l. Sulpicia on, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Licinius Crassus, M., consul (70), <a href="#Page_426">426 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">triumvir, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">second consulship (50), <a href="#Page_447">447 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Licinius Macer, tribune (73), <a href="#Page_426">426</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Licinius Stolo, C., trial of (357), <a href="#Page_291">291</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lictors, curial, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curiate sanction, <a href="#Footnote_1119">189, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">cast votes of curiae, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">magisterial, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granted to Vestals, <a href="#Footnote_2930">459, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Liticines, in comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lituus, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Livius Drusus, M., tribune (122), <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Livius Drusus, M., tribune (91), <a href="#Page_397">397-400</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Livius Salinator, M., trial of (218), <a href="#Page_317">317 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Livy, on early Roman history, <a href="#Footnote_137">25, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia and concilium, <a href="#Page_119">119-25</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">patricians in tribal assembly, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agrees with Fabius Pictor, <a href="#Footnote_1781">293, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Locupletes, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lucerenses, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Luceres, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in Ardea, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lucerus, in Ardea, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lucilius (Licinius?), hurled from Tarpeian Rock, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lucretius, C., praetor (171), prosecution of, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ludi, Romani, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Victoriae, <a href="#Page_422">422 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lusitanians, rogation on, <a href="#Page_349">349 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_514"></a>[514]</span>Lustrum, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lutatius Catulus, Q., prosecution of (87), <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lycurgus, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Magic, prosecution for, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Magistracy, bestowed by curiate law, <a href="#Page_185">185 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Magistrates">Magistrates, patrician, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">higher and lower, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">occupy templa, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">take auspices, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">have obnuntiatio, <a href="#Page_111">111 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">spectio, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preside over contio, <a href="#Page_140">140 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bound by laws, <a href="#Page_180">180 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">iusti, optimo iure, <a href="#Page_186">186-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and lex curiata, <a href="#Page_189">189 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">higher, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">act as accusers, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">controlled by dictator, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right to divide business, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to enrolment in senate, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">exempt from prosecution, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under law of extortion, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">regulated by Sulla, <a href="#Page_413">413-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by Pompey, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">swear to uphold laws, <a href="#Page_464">464</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">municipal, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Maiestas, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cornelian court of, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Claudia tried for, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Varia, <a href="#Page_400">400 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cornelia, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Iulia, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Majority rule, primitively unknown, <a href="#Footnote_989">170, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mancinus, law for surrendering, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mancipatio, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manilia, trial of for violence (183), <a href="#Page_326">326</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manilius, C., tribune (67-66), <a href="#Page_433">433 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Manlius, A., consul (178), threatened with prosecution, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manlius, past consul, trial of, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manlius, Cn., consul (357), holds comitia at Sutrium, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manlius, L., past dictator, trial of (362), <a href="#Page_288">288</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manlius Capitolinus, M., trial of, <a href="#Page_123">123 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manlius Volso, Cn., <a href="#Page_231">231</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mantua, three tribes in, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Marcius, L., propraetor in Spain, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Marcius Coriolanus, C., trial of (491), <a href="#Page_267">267</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mariana colonia, <a href="#Footnote_2440">394, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Marius, C., change in recruiting, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribune (119), <a href="#Page_389">389</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">combines with Saturninus, <a href="#Page_393">393-5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">given command against Mithridates, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Market days, see <a href="#Nundinae">Nundinae</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Master of horse, presides over contio, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Matienus, C., trial of for desertion, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Matrons, fined for stuprum, <a href="#Page_291">291 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">trial of for poisoning, <a href="#Page_253">253 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Meadow, Flaminian, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mechanics, see <a href="#Fabri">Fabri</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Messala, on curiate law, <a href="#Page_185">185 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Metellus, see <a href="#Caecilius_Metellus">Caecilius Metellus</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Meyer, E., on four city tribes, <a href="#Page_54">54-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of tribunate, <a href="#Footnote_304">55, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1583">262, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1644">272, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Licinian-Sextian laws, <a href="#Footnote_1805">296, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">chronology of Sempronian laws, <a href="#Footnote_2292">371, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cornelian-Pompeian law on assemblies, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Milo, tribune (57), <a href="#Page_115">115 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Minervia, founding of, <a href="#Footnote_2367">384, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Minos, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Minucius, L., trial of, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Minucius Augurinus, C., tribune (184), <a href="#Page_320">320</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mithridates, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mommsen, Th., on patrician state, <a href="#Page_33">33-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gens, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gentile ownership of land, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">urban tribes, <a href="#Page_51">51 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">classis, <a href="#Footnote_423">72, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">concilium populi, <a href="#Page_121">121-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grant of patriciate, <a href="#Footnote_961">166, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of citizenship, <a href="#Footnote_1076">181, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">early legislation, <a href="#Footnote_1076">n. 9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">transitio imperii, <a href="#Footnote_1168">197, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">exercise of comitia centuriata, <a href="#Footnote_1202">203, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">proletarian century, <a href="#Footnote_1235">207, n. 12</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reformed comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_221">221-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">validity of plebiscite, <a href="#Footnote_1681">277, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Licinian and Aebutian laws, <a href="#Footnote_2134">347, n. 8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">qualification of iudices, <a href="#Footnote_2320">375, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Thorian law, <a href="#Footnote_2376">385, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Appuleia de maiestate, <a href="#Footnote_2444">394, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Plautia iudiciaria, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sulpicius, <a href="#Footnote_2522">405, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">principium, <a href="#Footnote_2979">466, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Morals, laws on, <a href="#Page_337">337 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mucius Scaevola, P., tribune (141), <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mucius Scaevola, Q., formula of oath in arrogations, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mühl, on lex Appuleia de maiestate, <a href="#Footnote_2444">394, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Municipia, lex Iulia on, <a href="#Page_456">456 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Murder">Murder, trial of, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1493">246, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under questorian jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">court for, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Sempronia, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cornelia, <a href="#Page_419">419 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of tribune alleged, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Musicians">Musicians, in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Naevius, M., tribune (185), <a href="#Page_320">320</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Narbo Martius, founding of, <a href="#Footnote_2377">386, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nefas, Nefasti dies, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Neptunia, founding of, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Niebuhr, on early Roman history, <a href="#Page_25">25 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">patrician state, <a href="#Page_27">27-32</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gens and curia, <a href="#Page_11">11-13</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">social composition of gens, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Attic tribal system, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Footnote_350">61, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reformed comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_217">217-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">unsoundness of his method, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Niese, on origin of tribunate, <a href="#Footnote_1583">262, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Licinian-Sextian law, <a href="#Footnote_1805">296, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nigidius Figulus, P., on auspices, <a href="#Footnote_586">101, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nobility, origin of, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">develops into class, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">among various peoples, <a href="#Page_40">40-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">at Rome, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supported by tribunate, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_515"></a>[515]</span>plebeian, allies of patrician, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nobles, concilium of Etruscan, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of Gallic, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia of, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">represented in council, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right to vote, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Patricians">Patricians</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nola, loses citizenship, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Νόμοι ἐπ’ ἀνδρί, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Norbanus, C., trial of (95), <a href="#Footnote_2443">394, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Novae Curiae, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Numa, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Numantines, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Nundinae">Nundinae, comitia not held on, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">made fasti by Hortensian law, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_471">471</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nuntiatio, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Oath, in contio, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in arrogations, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">making tribunes sacred, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lack of in comitial trials, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to support law, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_440">440 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Oblativa (auspicia), <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">publica, <a href="#Page_111">111-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under Aelian and Fufian laws, <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Clodia, <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Obnuntiatio, by whom served, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">when served, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under Aelian and Fufian laws, <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Clodia, <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prevents election, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to what point allowable, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Octavianus, see <a href="#Julius_Caesar_Octavianus">Julius Caesar Octavianus</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Octavius, tribune (133), <a href="#Page_322">322</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">deposed, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Opimius, L., trial of (120), <a href="#Page_256">256</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">given absolute power, <a href="#Page_387">387 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Opimius, Q., trial of, <a href="#Footnote_2562">414, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribune (75), <a href="#Page_425">425 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Oppidum, <a href="#Page_6">6 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Oppius, Sp., decemvir, trial of, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Optima lege, optimo iure, <a href="#Page_186">186-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">cives, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">private land, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Optimates, prefer centuries, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">undo Gracchan reforms, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">policy of as to special courts, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">depend on religion, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">moderate rule of, <a href="#Page_396">396 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ordines, in comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ovation, comitial act on, <a href="#Page_334">334 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ovile, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Paederastia, prosecution for (227), <a href="#Page_325">325</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pagus, relation of to Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pais, on urban tribes, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Footnote_304">55, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of tribunate, <a href="#Footnote_1583">262, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">connection of Ceres with plebs, <a href="#Footnote_1598">264, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Genucian and Publilian laws, <a href="#Footnote_1817">299, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of pontiff, <a href="#Footnote_2085">341, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Palatine (tribus), <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Footnote_283">52, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Palatine hill, <a href="#Footnote_35">7, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pantagathus, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Papirius, L., trial of (326), <a href="#Page_247">247</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Papirius Carbo, C., trial of (119), <a href="#Page_257">257</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Parricidium, trial of, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Pompeia, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Iulia, <a href="#Footnote_2894">455, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pater, meaning of, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pater patratus, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Patrem ciere, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Patres, meaning senators, <a href="#Page_17">17 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">patricians, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in Mommsen’s theory, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">maiorum et minorum gentium, <a href="#Page_35">35 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Patrician magistrate, defined, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Patricians">Patricians, Patricii, origin of, <a href="#Page_16">16 ff.</a>, <a href="#Footnote_221">37, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Mommsen on, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">not conquerors, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right to auspices, <a href="#Page_101">101-3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and patrum auctoritas, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in curiate assembly, <a href="#Footnote_1584">262, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in tribal assembly, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in plebeian tribunate, <a href="#Page_285">285 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">affected by Publilian law (339), <a href="#Page_300">300 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">creation of, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164-6</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>, <a href="#Page_460">460</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Patriciate, relation of to senate, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granted to plebeians, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164-6</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>, <a href="#Page_460">460</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">closing of, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">acquired by adoption, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Patricio-plebeian tribal assembly, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">unnecessary term, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Patricius, meaning of, <a href="#Page_20">20 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Patrum_auctoritas">Patrum auctoritas, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and comitia curiata, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for curiate laws, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Publilian law on, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Hortensian law on, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Maenian law on, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pay, military, introduced, <a href="#Footnote_353">61, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by senate, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">how reckoned, <a href="#Footnote_528">90, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">since war with Hannibal, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Peculatus">Peculatus, trials for, <a href="#Page_317">317 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pecunia, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pellegrino, on asylum, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Perduellio, <a href="#Page_243">243 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sulla transfers to quaestio maiestatis, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">aedilician case of, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ballot in, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">trials for: Horatius, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Claudius, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Manlius, <a href="#Page_288">288 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Postumius, <a href="#Page_248">248 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Rabirius, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Peregrinus ager, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Petilii, Q., tribunes (185), <a href="#Page_319">319</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Petronia (amnis), <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Phalanx, Greek, adopted by Rome, <a href="#Page_61">61 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of, <a href="#Page_69">69 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">organization and equipment, <a href="#Page_72">72 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">split in legions, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">post-Servian changes, <a href="#Page_76">76-80</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">changed to manipular legion, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Phratry, <a href="#Footnote_47">8, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Phyle, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Phylobasileis, <a href="#Footnote_42">8, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Picene district, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Flaminian law on, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Plebeian assembly, termed comitia, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126-30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">question as to auspication, <a href="#Page_122">122 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Plebeian magistrates, occupy templa, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">do not auspicate assemblies, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preside over contio, <a href="#Page_140">140 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Aediles">Aediles</a>, <a href="#Tribuni_plebis">Tribuni plebis</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Plebi scitum, issued by plebeian assembly, <a href="#Footnote_712">120, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">originally binding on plebs only, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_516"></a>[516]</span>given conditioned validity, <a href="#Page_274">274-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Publilian law on, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">made unconditionally valid, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_463">463</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for individual plebi scita, see <a href="#Lex">Lex</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Plebs, distinguished from populus, <a href="#Footnote_3">1, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to clients, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">belong to populus, <a href="#Page_23">23 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to tribes and curiae, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to gentes, <a href="#Page_28">28-31</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">vote in comitia curiata, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Mommsen on, <a href="#Page_34">34-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">not the conquered, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in army, <a href="#Footnote_443">75, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right to auspices, <a href="#Page_101">101-3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">assembly of termed comitia, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">first secession of, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in contio, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">community of, <a href="#Page_264">264 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">misunderstanding with government, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">meaning of word in Valerian-Horatian law, <a href="#Page_275">275-7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Publilian law on, <a href="#Page_301">301 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">condition of in third Samnite war, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">leaders of ally with patricians, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in comitia under plebeian presidency, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pleminius, Q., trial of, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Πλῆθος, <a href="#Page_407">407 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Plutocracy, era of, <a href="#Page_346">346-62</a>, <a href="#Page_476">476</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">discontent with, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Poetelius Libo, C., consul (326), dictator (313), <a href="#Page_310">310</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Poisoning, special court for trial of, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1542">254, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Polybius, on Flaminian law, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on Roman constitution, <a href="#Page_343">343-6</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pomerium, limits urban tribes, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation of to augury, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to comitia curiata, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to comitia tributa, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pompeius Magnus, Cn., use of oblativa, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and curiate law, <a href="#Page_194">194 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">consul (70), <a href="#Page_426">426 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">given special commands, <a href="#Page_432">432-4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">cura annonae, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">second consulship (55), <a href="#Page_447">447-50</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">third (52), <a href="#Page_448">448</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pompeius Strabo, Cn., trial of, <a href="#Footnote_2496">401, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">consul (89), <a href="#Page_402">402</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pomptinus, praetor (63), <a href="#Page_192">192 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pontes, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Marian law on, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pontifex maximus, auspicium of, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elected by comitia, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">presides over contio, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia calata, <a href="#Page_153">153 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia tributa, <a href="#Footnote_862">153, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">over first tribunician elections, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and in 449 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">jurisdiction of, <a href="#Page_327">327 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">chooses Vestals, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pontifex minor, in comitia calata, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pontifices, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Footnote_620">106, n. 10</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">have charge of arrogations, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of certain adoptions, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">religious legislation of, <a href="#Page_238">238 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">opinion on Sacred Spring, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">control calendar, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increased</li> -<li class="isub1">to fifteen, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Popillius, M., trial of (172), <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Popillius Laenas, C., trial of (107), <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Popillius Laenas, P., presides over special court (132), <a href="#Page_255">255</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">interdicted, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">recalled, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Popillius Laenas, P., tribune (86), <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Population of Rome, in early republic, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Populus, derivation of word, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">definition, <a href="#Page_1">1 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">political divisions, <a href="#Page_1">1-15</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">social composition of, <a href="#Page_16">16-47</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">theory of a patrician, <a href="#Page_27">27 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">concilium of, <a href="#Page_120">120-5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sovereignty, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">yields judicial function to courts, <a href="#Page_420">420 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">electoral function to Caesar, <a href="#Page_454">454 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Porcius">Porcius Cato, M., the Elder, on Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">favors lex Voconia, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Villia, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex forbidding reëlections, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">author of law of appeal, <a href="#Page_250">250 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prosecutions of, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Porcius Laeca, P., praetor (195), <a href="#Page_251">251</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Porcius Licinus, consul (184), <a href="#Page_251">251</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Posteriores (equites), <a href="#Footnote_432">73, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Postliminium, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Postumius, L., trial of, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Postumius, M., trial of (423), <a href="#Page_288">288</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Postumius Pyrgensis, M., trial of, <a href="#Page_248">248 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Potestas, tribunicia, destroyed by Sulla, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">patria, political influence of, <a href="#Page_342">342 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex on, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Praeco">Praeco (crier), summons contio, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">invites to speak, <a href="#Footnote_833">147, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reads bill, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">declares result of vote, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Praescriptio legis, <a href="#Page_462">462</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Praetors, auspices of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">obnuntiate, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">adoptions before, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instituted, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grant auspices to tribune, <a href="#Page_245">245 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increased, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">urban, presides over election of boards, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Plaetoria on, <a href="#Footnote_2090">342, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fills album iudicum, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">minimal age of, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">edicts of, <a href="#Page_431">431 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Prefecture of market, created (440), <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1852">305, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Prerogative (praerogativa), <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_463">463</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">equestrian abolished, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in elections, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Presidency, of contio, <a href="#Page_140">140 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of comitia, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Principium, <a href="#Page_463">463</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in comitia curiata, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elections, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia tributa, <a href="#Page_466">466 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Priores (equites), <a href="#Footnote_432">73, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Privernates, receive citizenship, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Privilegia, enacted by centuries, <a href="#Page_127">127 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">violation of law on, <a href="#Page_289">289 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dispensations are, <a href="#Page_307">307 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Procedure, contional, <a href="#Page_143">143 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitial, <a href="#Page_465">465-70</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in trials, <a href="#Page_259">259 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_517"></a>[517]</span>Proceres, Proci, in centuriate system, <a href="#Footnote_387">67, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Footnote_443">75, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Proletarians, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Promagistracy, instituted, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Promagistrates, lack right to summon people, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and curiate law, <a href="#Page_192">192 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex repetundarum, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Cornelia, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Pompeia, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Propraetor, elected by army, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Provinces, assigned exceptionally by law, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2351">381, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432-4</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_447">447</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sempronian law on consular, <a href="#Page_381">381 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cornelian, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Julian, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">protected by Gabinian, <a href="#Page_429">429 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">from extortion, see <a href="#Repetundae">Repetundae</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Publicans, exactions of, <a href="#Page_380">380 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">law for relief of, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Publicius Bibulus, C., tribune (209), <a href="#Page_338">338</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Publilius Philo, consul and dictator (339), <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_299">299-302</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">censor(322), <a href="#Page_305">305</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Punctum, in counting votes, <a href="#Footnote_2989">467, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Punic war, first, effect of on politics, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pupinian tribe, <a href="#Footnote_333">59, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Quaestio, preliminary inquiry, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Quaestio_extraordinaria">Quaestio extraordinaria (314), <a href="#Footnote_1460">242, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for trial of Pleminius (204), <a href="#Page_250">250</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">affects centuriate jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">appointed by senate and people, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by senate alone, <a href="#Page_253">253 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by people, <a href="#Footnote_1546">255, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for trial of conspiracy, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Satricans, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">usurpers of citizenship, <a href="#Page_354">354</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Vestals, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bribery, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">vis, <a href="#Page_448">448 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">murderers of Caesar, <a href="#Footnote_2913">457, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composed of senators, <a href="#Page_374">374 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Sempronia, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">optimate policy as to, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quaestio perpetua, affects centuriate jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repetundarum, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number increased by Sulla, <a href="#Page_257">257 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">inter sicarios, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limits appeal, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composed of senators, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sempronian laws on, <a href="#Page_374">374-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of knights, <a href="#Page_374">374 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of senators and knights, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of three classes, <a href="#Page_427">427</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under Latin lex Bantina, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Appuleia de maiestate, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Livia, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Varia, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cornelia, <a href="#Page_419">419-21</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Licinia and Pompeia, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Iulia, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Antonia, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">appeal granted from, <a href="#Page_458">458 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Quaestors, auspicate comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">obnuntiate, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preside over contio, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curiate sanction, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increased, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_415">415 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">parricidii, <a href="#Page_244">244 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation of to tribunes, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elected by tribes, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">minimal age of, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quando rex comitiavit fas, <a href="#Footnote_909">159, n. 8</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quinctius, K., trial of (461), <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1622">268, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quinctius, L., tribune (74), <a href="#Page_426">426</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quinctius, T., past consular tribune, trial of, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quinctius Trogus, T., trial of, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quindecemviri sacris faciundis, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Decemviri">Decemviri</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quinqueviri, for repairing defences, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agris adsignandis under lex Saufeia, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Iulia, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quirina (tribus), <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quirinal hill, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Footnote_13">3, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rabirius, C., trial of, <a href="#Page_243">243 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ramnenii, in Ostia, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ramnenses, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ramnes, <a href="#Footnote_10">2, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in Ardea, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ramnii, in Capua, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rapta (curia), <a href="#Footnote_47">8, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Footnote_73">11, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ratings, ascribed to Servius, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in sextantarian as, <a href="#Footnote_388">67, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">array in battle, <a href="#Page_79">79 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of five classes, <a href="#Page_84">84-91</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Belot on, <a href="#Page_91">91-3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Regiones, connection of with tribes, <a href="#Footnote_274">51, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Religion, influences formation of nobility, <a href="#Page_39">39 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right to legislate on, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on, see <a href="#Legislation">Legislation</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Remus, an augur, <a href="#Footnote_608">105, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Renuntiatio, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Repetundae">Repetundae, court of, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex lunia, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Acilia, <a href="#Page_375">375-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Servilia, <a href="#Page_393">393</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cornelia, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Iulia, <a href="#Page_441">441 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">defined, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Revolution, period of, <a href="#Page_363">363-460</a>, <a href="#Page_476">476 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rex sacrorum, presides over contio, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia calata, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">forbidden to address populus, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ceremonies of in comitium, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">successor to king, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">a shadow, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rhegium insurgent garrison of, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Rogatio">Rogatio, meaning of, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composition and form of, <a href="#Page_462">462 ff.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ de imperio (t.) for triumph, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ colonizing Bolae (t. 415), <a href="#Footnote_1904">311, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ dispensing from law (298), <a href="#Footnote_1818">299, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ for abolition of debts (t. 287), <a href="#Page_312">312</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogationes of Cicero’s consulship (63), <a href="#Footnote_2763">437, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogatio, of 8 tribunes, recalling Cicero (58), <a href="#Footnote_2836">446, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ establishing consular tribunes (t. 53), <a href="#Footnote_2859">450, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogationes Aemiliae, repealing Cornelian laws (c. 78), <a href="#Page_423">423</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogatio Aufeia, on taxation of Asia (p. 123), <a href="#Footnote_2350">381, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Aufidia de ambitu (t. 61), <a href="#Footnote_2757">437, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Caecilia, lightening certain penalties (t. 63), <a href="#Footnote_2763">437, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_518"></a>[518]</span>⸺ Caecilia, dispensing Pompey from law (t. 62), <a href="#Footnote_2757">437, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogationes Caeliae, on debts and rents (p. 48), <a href="#Footnote_2876">452, n. 9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogatio Caninia, granting imperium to Pompey (t. 56), <a href="#Footnote_2837">446, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cassia agraria (c. 486), <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1603">265, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Clodia de suffragiis libertinorum (p. 52), <a href="#Footnote_2859">450, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia, renewing Sulpician lex (c. 87), <a href="#Page_409">409</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornelia de ambitu (t. 67), <a href="#Page_431">431</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogationes Corneliae (t. 47), <a href="#Footnote_2876">452, n. 9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogatio Fabricia, recalling Cicero (t. 57), <a href="#Footnote_2836">446, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Flavia, for punishing Tusculans, (323), <a href="#Page_310">310</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Flavia agraria (t. 60), <a href="#Page_438">438</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Fulvia, granting citizenship (c. 125), <a href="#Page_370">370</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Herennia, transferring Clodius to plebs (t. 60), <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Iunia, on usury (195?), <a href="#Footnote_2160">352, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Laelia agraria (p. 145), <a href="#Page_360">360 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Licinia, on election of sacerdotes, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Lucilia Coelia, for naming Pompey dictator (t. 53), <a href="#Footnote_2859">450, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Maelia, confiscating property of Ahala (436), <a href="#Page_289">289</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Marcia (123-122), referring to military tribunes, <a href="#Footnote_2356">382, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Marcia agraria (t. 104), <a href="#Page_392">392</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Messia, recalling Cicero (t. 58), <a href="#Footnote_2836">446, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Ninnia, recalling Cicero (t. 58), <a href="#Footnote_2836">446, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Papiria, permitting reëlection of tribunes (t. 131), <a href="#Page_369">369</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pinaria annalis (p. 182?), <a href="#Footnote_2129">347, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pompeia repetundarum (c. 55), <a href="#Footnote_2799">442, n. 2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sumptuaria, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Porcia, abrogating imperium (t. 56), <a href="#Footnote_2837">446, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Porcia Pompeia, recalling Metellus (t. 99), <a href="#Footnote_2451">396, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Pupia Valeria, appointing special court (c. 61), <a href="#Footnote_2766">438, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Rutilia, on censorial contracts (t. 169), <a href="#Footnote_2158">351, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Scribonia, on Lusitanians (t. 149), <a href="#Page_349">349</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogationes Scriboniae, on various subjects (t. 50), <a href="#Footnote_2859">450, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogatio Semproniade provocatione (t. 133), <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">iudiciaria, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on military service, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sempronia de abactis (t. 124), <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">granting citizenship to Latins and Italians (123-122), <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on voting in comitia centuriata (122), <a href="#Footnote_2368">384, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Servilia agraria, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1092">183, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">violates right of appeal, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bearing of on election of sacerdotes, <a href="#Footnote_2585">416, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogations, discussed in senate, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">judicial, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">no record of unpassed, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">apocryphal agrarian, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">restriction as to bringing, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Caecilia Didia on, <a href="#Page_396">396 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rogator legis, <a href="#Footnote_2937">462, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_463">463</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rogatores, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Roma, Etruscan origin of, <a href="#Footnote_34">7, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Romanus ager, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Romilia (tribus), <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Romulus, connection of with tribes, <a href="#Footnote_10">2, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">with army, <a href="#Footnote_405">69, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">with equites, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">an augur, <a href="#Footnote_608">105, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">as legislator, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Roscius, Otho, L., tribune (67), <a href="#Page_428">428 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rostra, a templum, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rubino, on testamentary comitia, <a href="#Page_157">157 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex curiata, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">vote by 30 lictors, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rubrica legis, <a href="#Footnote_2948">463, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rupilius, consul (132), condemned, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sabines, alleged connection of with Tities, <a href="#Page_2">2 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sacer homo, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sacerdotes, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">inauguration of, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia, for election of, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">their part in instituting comitia, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in trials, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in election of king, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Augurs">Augurs</a>, <a href="#Epulones">Epulones</a>, etc.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sacred Mount, lex sacrata passed on, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sacred Spring, lex on, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sacro sanctitas, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">religious and legal basis, <a href="#Page_265">265 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">protects plebeian assembly, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation of to tribunician jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_266">266 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">confirmed by lex Valeria Horatia, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Saepta, <a href="#Page_466">466</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Saeptum, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Salii, <a href="#Footnote_402">69, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Footnote_410">70, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sallust, on comitia and concilium, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sanctio, <a href="#Page_463">463</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of Latin lex Bantina, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sappers, see <a href="#Fabri">Fabri</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Satricans, special court for punishing, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Saturnalia, gifts at, <a href="#Page_338">338 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Saturninus, see <a href="#Appuleius_Saturninus">Appuleius Saturninus</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Savigny, on lex Iulia municipalis, <a href="#Footnote_2911">457, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Scaevola, on gens, <a href="#Footnote_153">28, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Scantinus Capitolinus, C., prosecution of, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schmidt, Joh., on origin of tribunate, <a href="#Footnote_1583">262, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schwegler, on patrician state, <a href="#Page_32">32 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scipios, trial of (185), <a href="#Page_319">319 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Cornelius">Cornelius</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Scolacium, founding of, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Scutum, in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Footnote_460">78, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Secession, first, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">second, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_519"></a>[519]</span>to Janiculum, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sectatores, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Seditions, tribunician, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Varian law on, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Sempronius">Sempronius Gracchus, C., legislation of, <a href="#Page_255">255 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371-85</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">defeat for third tribunate, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">energizes comitia, <a href="#Page_384">384 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sempronius Gracchus, Ti., censor (169), trial of, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tribune (184), <a href="#Page_320">320 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sempronius Gracchus, Ti., tribune (133), weakens veto, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_476">476</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prosecutes Annius Luscus, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">legislation of, <a href="#Page_363">363-6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">deposes colleague, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">new platform of, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">defeated for second tribunate, <a href="#Page_368">368 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx" id="Senate">Senate, represents primitive tribes, <a href="#Footnote_20">3, n. 8</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation of to patriciate, <a href="#Page_177">177 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">annuls comitial acts, <a href="#Page_106">106 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2913">457, n. 7</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia in, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">wisdom in, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">auctoritas of, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grants imperium, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and curiate law, <a href="#Page_197">197-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">declares war, <a href="#Page_230">230-2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">admits plebeians, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">appoints special courts, <a href="#Page_253">253-5</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">passes consultum ultimum, <a href="#Page_255">255 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grants citizenship, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">prolongs imperium, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">plants colonies, <a href="#Page_310">310 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">loses legal control of tribunician assembly, <a href="#Page_313">313 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">conciliates citizens, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">depends on people, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">class of criminals, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">controls tax contracts, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">deposes consul, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">regains control of assemblies, <a href="#Page_406">406-8</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">admission to through quaestorship, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>, <a href="#Page_418">418 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gains through Sulla, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">law on sessions of, <a href="#Page_424">424 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grants dispensations, <a href="#Page_430">430 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by Caesar, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">considers rogations, <a href="#Page_462">462</a>, <a href="#Page_463">463</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Senators, privati, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">mostly creditors, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">given seats at theatre, <a href="#Page_356">356 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">monopolize quaestiones, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">debarred from by Sempronian law, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex repetundarum, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">chosen indirectly by people, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">swear to uphold law, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_440">440</a>, <a href="#Page_464">464</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">associate with equites in courts, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_427">427 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elected by tribes, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">qualifications of under lex Ovinia, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Claudia, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sulpicia, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Senate">Senate</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Senatus_consulta">Senatus consultum, on treaties, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2964">465, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">declaring war, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">appointing special court, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">essential to legality of plebiscite, <a href="#Page_277">277 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for settling Latium, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Hortensian law on, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for founding colonies, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on usurpation of citizenship, <a href="#Page_354">354</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on importation of wild beasts, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on finance, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on trial of provincials, <a href="#Footnote_2657">424, n. 6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">amending lex Acilia Calpurnia, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">de collegiis, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">honoring Caesar, <a href="#Page_451">451</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ultimum, <a href="#Footnote_1142">192, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Seniors, in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number of, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Septemviri agris adsignandis, under lex Antonia, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sergia (tribus), <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sergius, M., quaestor, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Service, public, exempts from prosecution, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Servilius Ahala, C., trial of, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rogation on property of, <a href="#Page_289">289 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Servilius Caepio, Q., imperium of abrogated, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Servilius Glaucia, C., <a href="#Page_393">393</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Servilius Rullus, P., tribune (64-63), <a href="#Page_435">435</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Servius Tullius, distributes land, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">institutes new tribes, <a href="#Page_50">50 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">personality of, <a href="#Footnote_400">68, n. 7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increases equites, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and equestrian fund, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reference to in lex Cornelia Pompeia, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sesterce, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sheep, standard of value, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sibylline books, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sicilians, receive citizenship, <a href="#Footnote_2885">454, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sicinius, L., tribune (76), <a href="#Page_425">425</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Signa ex tripudiis, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sisenna, on creation of new tribes, <a href="#Page_57">57 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Slaves, manumission of, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grant of citizenship to, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Smiths, in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Social classes, ancient view of, <a href="#Page_16">16-25</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">conventional view, <a href="#Page_25">25-38</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comparative-sociological, <a href="#Page_38">38-47</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">universal, <a href="#Page_38">38 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">origin of in nature, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in army, <a href="#Page_75">75 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Social war, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sodales Titii, <a href="#Footnote_11">2, n. 6</a> f., <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sodalicii, lex on, <a href="#Page_447">447 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Soldiers, and appeal, <a href="#Page_251">251-3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on service of, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Solon, law of, on citizenship, <a href="#Footnote_261">44, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">connection with classes, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Soltau, on comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composition of tribunician assembly, <a href="#Footnote_1675">275, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Licinian-Sextian law, <a href="#Footnote_1805">296, n. 4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">validity of plebiscite, <a href="#Footnote_1826">300, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sovereignty, belongs first to king and council, <a href="#Page_171">171 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">not popular, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">popular develops, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of law, yielding to democracy, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">not real, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Speaking, public, prohibition of, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on merits of candidates, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right of, <a href="#Page_145">145 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">compulsion, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">time limited, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sparingly granted, <a href="#Page_173">173 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Spectio, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">belongs to magistrates only, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">when forbidden, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under Aelian and Fufian laws, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_520"></a>[520]</span>Statutes, see <a href="#Leges">Leges</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Stipendium, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Storm, interrupts comitia, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Stultorum feriae, <a href="#Footnote_55">9, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Stuprum, prosecutions for, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1992">327, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Submovere, <a href="#Footnote_857">150, n. 9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Suburana (tribus), <a href="#Page_50">50</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sucusana (tribus), <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Suffragia sex, <a href="#Footnote_443">75, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Suffragium, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bestowal of, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Citizenship">Citizenship</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sulla, see <a href="#Cornelius_Sulla">Cornelius Sulla</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sulpicius Rufus, P., tribune (88), <a href="#Page_403">403-5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sumptuary laws, <a href="#Page_337">337 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2404">388, n. 9</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>, <a href="#Page_455">455 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Supernumeraries, in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80-2</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sutrium, tribal assembly at, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Συσσίτια, <a href="#Footnote_47">8, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Tabulae iuniorum, <a href="#Footnote_481">82, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tarpeian Rock, hurling from, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1599">264, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tarquinius Priscus (Elder), relation of to equites, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tarquinius Superbus, relation of to centuriate system, <a href="#Footnote_1183">201, n. 3 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Taxes, in early Rome, <a href="#Page_61">61-4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tellus, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Temples, dedication of, <a href="#Page_340">340 f.</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2128">347, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Templum, <a href="#Page_107">107 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Terentius Varro Lucullus, M., trial of (66), <a href="#Page_324">324</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Testaments, in comitia calata, <a href="#Page_157">157-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws on, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2950">463, n. 8</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Testimony, false, prosecution for, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Theatres, regulation of, <a href="#Page_356">356 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Theft, see <a href="#Furtum">Furtum</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Θέμιστες, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Thunder, effect of, on comitia, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Thurii, tribes of, <a href="#Footnote_33">7, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Titia (curia), <a href="#Footnote_47">8, n. 6</a>, <a href="#Footnote_73">11, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Titienses, Tities, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Titus Tatius, <a href="#Page_2">2 f.</a>, <a href="#Footnote_23">4, n. 3</a>, <a href="#Footnote_310">56, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tolosa, gold found at, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Transitio ad plebem, <a href="#Page_162">162 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Transpadani, receive citizenship, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trasimene, political effect of disaster at, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Treaty, alleged between plebs and government, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Treaty-making, originally with magistrates and senate, <a href="#Page_174">174 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">with king, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ratification of acquired by tribes, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trebellius, L., tribune (67), <a href="#Page_432">432</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trebonius, L. and Cn., <a href="#Page_285">285</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tremellius, Cn., praetor (160), prosecution of, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tresviri (Triumviri) nocturni, trial of, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tresviri epulones, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2582">416, n. 3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tribes, the three primitive, <a href="#Page_2">2-8</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">and Greek phylae, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">military function of, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">social composition, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">admission of new citizens to, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tribes, the later, <a href="#Page_48">48-65</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">with gentile names, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">the thirty-five, <a href="#Page_48">48-65</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">urban, <a href="#Page_50">50 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rural, <a href="#Page_50">50 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">character, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary increase in Social War, <a href="#Page_57">57 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">altered in 312, 304 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, <a href="#Page_64">64 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">made up by censors, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">relation of to centuries, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217 ff.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">citizens assigned to, <a href="#Page_352">352 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">assembly of, see <a href="#Comitia_tributa">Comitia tributa</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tribuni aerarii, <a href="#Footnote_373">64, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in jury service, <a href="#Page_427">427 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">debarred from, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tribuni celerum, <a href="#Page_7">7 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preside over contio, <a href="#Footnote_781">141, n. 3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia curiata, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right of to address people, <a href="#Footnote_819">145, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tribuni militum, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">make levy, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Valerian law on, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">hold court-martial, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elected by people, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2141">349, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rarely appointed, <a href="#Footnote_2091">342, n. 2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tribuni militum consulari potestate, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Tribuni_plebis">Tribuni plebis, auspicium of, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">obnuntiate, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under Aelian and Fufian laws, <a href="#Page_116">116 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">election of, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preside over contio, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitia, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lack power of summoning, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">veto curiate law, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bring capital actions before centuries, <a href="#Page_245">245-53</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by Sulla, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instituted, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">object of, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">have no power over patricians, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sacro sancti, <a href="#Page_264">264-6</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">early methods of, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pre-decemviral jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_267">267-9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number increased, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">controlled by dictatorship, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Valerian-Horatian law on, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">later jurisdiction, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286-90</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317-25</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">agrarian agitation, <a href="#Page_310">310 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right to summon senate, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to prosecute unconditionally, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by courts, <a href="#Page_326">326 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reëlection of permitted, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">restored after Sulla, <a href="#Page_423">423-7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tribunus, related to tribe, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tributum, and tribes, <a href="#Page_63">63 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">disused, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">impeded by tribunes, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in third Samnite war, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trientabula, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trifu, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trinum nundinum, Trinundinum, <a href="#Page_259">259 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Triumph, deliberated on in contio, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">depends on curiate law, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">decreed by senate, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_293">293 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by people, <a href="#Footnote_1683">277, n. 4</a>, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comitial act necessary to, <a href="#Page_334">334 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on Alban Mount, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2033">335, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_521"></a>[521]</span>laws on, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>, <a href="#Page_451">451</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Triumvirate, so called first, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">second, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Triumviri">Triumviri</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Triumviri">Triumviri (tresviri) agris adsignandis, under Sempronian laws, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Triumviri capitales, <a href="#Footnote_1867">307, n. 1</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Triumviri coloniae deducendae, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Triumviri mensarii, <a href="#Page_336">336 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Triumviri rei publicae constituendae, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Triumviri, for repairing temples, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for dedicating, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trumpeters (tubicines, liticines), in centuriate system, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">summon accused, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tuba, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tubicines, <a href="#Footnote_473">81, n. 2</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">see <a href="#Musicians">Musicians</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tullus Hostilius, permits appeal, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Turma, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Twelve Tables, law of on inheritance, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ratified by laws, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">provide for legislation, <a href="#Page_233">233 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_464">464</a>, <a href="#Page_474">474</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composition of, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">guarantee right of appeal, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on privilegia, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">forbid conubium, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">criminal laws of, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">grant jurisdiction to tribes, <a href="#Page_474">474</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Urbs, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Urn, for drawing lots, <a href="#Footnote_2980">466, n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Usurers, fined, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">violate law, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">oppress provinces, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ut rogas, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Valerius Flaccus, L., prosecution of (98), <a href="#Page_324">324</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Valerius Publicola, P., consul (509), <a href="#Page_232">232</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">existence of questioned, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Valuation of property, change in from land to money, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Varius, Q., tribune (91-90), prosecutes Aemilius, <a href="#Footnote_1565">257, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Varro, on Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_53">53 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Vatinius, tribune (59), <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Vectigalia, law on Campanian, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Footnote_2158">351, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">order to farm, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in Italy, abolished, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">reimposed, <a href="#Footnote_2912">457, n. 6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Veliensis (curia), <a href="#Page_11">11</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Velina (tribus), <a href="#Page_334">334</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Velitia (curia), <a href="#Footnote_73">11, n. 7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Velleius, on admission of socii to tribes, <a href="#Page_57">57 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">colonization, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lex Livia iudiciaria, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vennonius, on Servian tribes, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Verres, trial of, <a href="#Page_427">427</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vestals, trial of, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">choice of, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx" id="Veto">Veto (intercession), tribunician, weakened, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">original lack of, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">established by Hortensian law, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">conservative, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">against senate, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">oath not to use, <a href="#Page_380">380 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">against certain consulta forbidden, <a href="#Page_381">381 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">overborne, <a href="#Page_393">393 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>, <a href="#Page_447">447</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limited by Sulla, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>, <a href="#Page_425">425 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to what point allowable, <a href="#Page_466">466 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">consular, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Veturius, C., condemned, <a href="#Footnote_1520">250, n. 8</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Viatores, <a href="#Footnote_1596">264, n. 5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of tribune, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">originally lacking, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of aedile, <a href="#Footnote_1755">n. 4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vicus Tuscus, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vigintiviri agris adsignandis, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vindicia, <a href="#Footnote_1492">246, n. 5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vis (violence), <a href="#Page_326">326</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under lex Plautia, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Pompeia, <a href="#Page_448">448 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Iulia, <a href="#Page_455">455</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vitio creatum esse, etc., <a href="#Footnote_621">107, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Volaterrani, lose citizenship, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Volscians, expelled, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Voting, origin of, <a href="#Page_156">156 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by heads, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">formula for, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">order of in comitia centuriata, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">after reform, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">by ballot, <a href="#Page_359">359 f.</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in quaestiones, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in comitia tributa, <a href="#Page_466">466 f.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Voturia (tribus), <a href="#Footnote_283">52, n. 1</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Voturia iuniorum, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vultures, auspices from, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">War, declarations of, belong originally to magistrates and senate, <a href="#Page_175">175-7</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">acquired by centuries, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">formula of, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Widows and orphans, tax on, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Women, debarred from assemblies, <a href="#Page_146">146 f.</a>, <a href="#Footnote_1985">326, n. 1</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">luxury of restrained, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">right of inheritance restricted, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>.</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Zaleucus, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -</ul> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<p class="center mt2 larger"><span class="smaller">HANDBOOKS OF</span><br /> -Archæology and Antiquities</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Edited by</i><br /> -<span class="smcap">PERCY GARDNER and F. W. KELSEY</span></p> - -<table> - <tr> - <td>FOWLER</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic.</b> - By <span class="smcap">W. Warde Fowler</span>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$1.25 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>FROTHINGHAM</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>The Monuments of Christian Rome.</b> From Constantine - to the Renaissance. By <span class="smcap">Arthur L. Frothingham</span>, - Ph.D.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$2.25 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>GARDNER, E. A.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>Greek Sculpture.</b> By <span class="smcap">Ernest A. - Gardner</span>. Two parts in one volume, with Appendix.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$2.50 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2">Appendix to the above, separately.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$0.35 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>GARDNER, P.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>Grammar of Greek Art.</b> By <span class="smcap">Percy - Gardner</span>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$1.75 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>GREENIDGE</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>A Handbook of Greek Constitutional History.</b> By - <span class="smcap">A. H. J. Greenidge</span>. With Map.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$1.25 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>Roman Public Life.</b> By <span class="smcap">A. - H. J. Greenidge</span>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$2.50 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>HILL</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>Greek and Roman Coins.</b> By <span class="smcap">George - F. Hill</span>, of the Coins Department, British Museum.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$2.25 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>LANCIANI</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>The Destruction of Ancient Rome.</b> A sketch of the - history of the monuments. By <span class="smcap">Rodolfo Lanciani</span>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$1.50 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>LOWRIE</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>Monuments of the Early Church.</b> By - <span class="smcap">W. Lowrie</span>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$1.25 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>MARQUAND</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2"><b>Greek Architecture.</b> By <span class="smcap">Allan - Marquand</span>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">$2.25 <i>net</i></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class="center">PUBLISHED BY<br /> -THE MACMILLAN COMPANY<br /> -Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York</p> - -<p class="center mt2 larger">BOOKS ON ROMAN SOCIETY</p> - -<p class="noindent mt2">By W. WARDE FOWLER</p> - -<p class="center larger">Social Life at Rome in the Age of Cicero</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Cloth, Illustrated, 8vo, $2.25 net</i></p> - -<p>A notable example of the kind of history that deals with men rather than -with institutions and events is “Social Life at Rome in the Age of Cicero,” -by the learned scholar and fascinating writer W. Warde Fowler. The book -was originally intended as a companion to Professor Tucker’s “Life in Ancient -Athens”; but it grew beyond the limits of that volume because of the wealth -of material Mr. Fowler felt himself compelled to utilize. As the author points -out in his preface, there is no book in the English language which supplies a -picture of life and manners, of education, morals, and religion, in the intensely -interesting period of the Roman Republic. The age of Cicero is one of the -most important periods of Roman history, and the Ciceronian correspondence, -of more than nine hundred contemporary letters, is the richest treasure-house -of social life that has survived from any period of classical antiquity.</p> - -<p class="noindent mt2">By SAMUEL DILL, M.A.</p> - -<p class="center">Hon. Litt.D., Dublin; Hon. LL.D., Edinburgh; Hon. Fellow and late Tutor -C.C.C., Oxford; Professor of Greek in Queens College, Belfast.</p> - -<p class="center larger">Roman Society, from Nero to Marcus Aurelius</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Second edition, Cloth, 8vo, $2.50 net</i></p> - -<p>“The most important contribution yet made in English to our knowledge -of the way in which all classes of Roman society, including the aristocracy, -the plebeians, the freedmen and the slaves, ordinarily lived in the relatively -happy age of the Antonines is presented in this admirable work, not one of -whose fifteen chapters is devoid of illumination and fascination.... It -should be distinctly understood that this work is the product of first-hand, -not second-hand, erudition and investigation.... This book is what it -purports to be, a social, not a political history.”—M. W. H. in <i>New York Sun</i>.</p> - -<p class="center larger">Roman Society, in the Last Century of the -Western Empire</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Second edition, Cloth, 8vo, $1.75 net</i></p> - -<p>“We want to emphasize the point that this volume is not a mere raking -over of dry bones, with nothing but an antiquarian interest for the reader of -to-day. It is more vital to the student of modern social, religious, and political -tendencies than a large share of the strictly modern sociological theses, -studies, and dissertations now issuing in such profusion from the workshops -of the doctor-making universities. And, aside from its inherent importance, -its thoughts are so lucidly and attractively expressed that no intelligent -reader, whether a Latinist or not, can fail to find it pleasant reading.”—<i>The -Evening Post</i>, New York.</p> - -<p class="center">PUBLISHED BY<br /> -THE MACMILLAN COMPANY<br /> -Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York</p> - -<p class="noindent mt2">PROF. MARTIN L. D’OOGE’S</p> - -<p class="center larger">The Acropolis of Athens</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Cloth, Illustrated, 8vo, $4.00 net</i></p> - -<p>“This handsome book embodies the results of a number of years of study -and of repeated visits to Athens, where in 1886-87 author was director of -the American School of Classical Studies. While some of the older problems -connected with the history of the Acropolis have been solved by the aid of -the discoveries completed in 1889, others have been raised which await further -light. A final satisfactory history of the Acropolis and its monuments may -never be written, but this work gives a summary of the most important contributions -to its history and states the results of the author’s study of the site -and of the ruins upon it.”</p> - -<p>His new book is published as a companion volume to Professor Seymour’s -“Life in the Homeric Age,” which proved so popular. It is designed both for -readers who have a general interest in Greek history and Greek art and for -students and visitors at Athens who desire to use a handbook upon the spot. -The history of the Acropolis is traced from the time of its earliest occupation -down to the present, and the volume is handsomely illustrated.</p> - -<p class="center mt2"><i>A COMPANION VOLUME</i></p> - -<p class="noindent">PROF. THOMAS DAY SEYMOUR’S</p> - -<p class="center larger">Life in the Homeric Age</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Decorated cloth, gilt top, 8vo, illustrated, $4.00 net</i></p> - -<p>A study of the inhabitants of Greece and the Levant at the period of the -Homeric Poems which furnishes a clear and fairly complete picture of -the life which was familiar to them. “From the poet’s language,” the author -says, “he has attempted to discover what was before the poet’s mind.... -Homer’s picture of the life of his age is of particular interest to the modern -reader since it is the earliest account extant of the culture from which our -own is a true lineal descendant.”</p> - -<p>“Absolutely free from speculation and controversy, the volume will surely -prove valuable to every student of Greek life and literature. It has the -further advantage of being the only work of its kind on the English book -market to-day.”—<i>New York Tribune.</i></p> - -<p class="center larger">Life in Ancient Athens</p> - -<p class="center">The Social and Public Life of a Classical Athenian from Day to Day</p> - -<p class="center">By T. G. TUCKER, Litt.D.</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Cloth, illustrated, 8vo, $1.25 net; by mail $1.40</i></p> - -<p>“There’s nothing dusty, fusty, musty, about this book.... Evidences of -a mastery of the subject abound everywhere.... When you get through -the book you will believe that Athens is just around the corner, and you will -know its people in nature and in habits better than you do the dwellers in -the apartment house next door.”—<i>The Cleveland Leader.</i></p> - -<p class="center">PUBLISHED BY<br /> -THE MACMILLAN COMPANY<br /> -Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York</p> - -<p class="titlepage larger"><span class="smaller">STANDARD WORKS OF REFERENCE<br /> -<span class="smaller">ON</span></span><br /> -Archæology, Antiquities, Etc.</p> - -<table> - <tr> - <td>SCHREIBER</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2">Atlas of Classical Antiquities. By <span class="smcap">Th. - Schreiber</span>. Edited by <span class="smcap">W. C. F. Anderson</span>. - Oblong quarto.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr"><b>$6.50</b></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>SEYFFERT</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2">A Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. By Dr. - <span class="smcap">Oscar Seyffert</span>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr"><i>Cloth, 8vo</i>, <b>$2.25</b></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>SEYFFERT and REICH</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="in2">A Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Abridged from - Dr. <span class="smcap">Oscar Seyffert’s</span> larger Dictionary - by Dr. Emil Reich.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr"><i>Cloth, 316 pages, 12mo</i>, <b>$1.00</b></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class="center mt2">A FULLY ILLUSTRATED DESCRIPTIVE BOOK</p> - -<p class="center larger">Ave Roma Immortalis!</p> - -<p class="center"><i>By</i> F. MARION CRAWFORD</p> - -<p class="center">In one volume, profusely illustrated</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Cloth, 8vo, $2.50 net</i></p> - -<p>“He is keenly appreciative of the wonderful picturesqueness, -romance, impressiveness, and fascination of the historical events which -he describes.”—<i>The Boston Herald.</i></p> - -<p>“It is the most—oh, far and away the most—interesting book I -ever read about Rome. It fascinated me.”—<span class="smcap">Dr. Weir Mitchell.</span></p> - -<p class="center">Published by<br /> -THE MACMILLAN COMPANY<br /> -Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York</p> - -<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ROMAN ASSEMBLIES FROM THEIR ORIGIN TO THE END OF THE REPUBLIC ***</div> -<div style='text-align:left'> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will -be renamed. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. -</div> - -<div style='margin-top:1em; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE</div> -<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE</div> -<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person -or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the -Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when -you share it without charge with others. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work -on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the -phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: -</div> - -<blockquote> - <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most - other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions - whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms - of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online - at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this eBook. - </div> -</blockquote> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg™ License. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format -other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain -Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -provided that: -</div> - -<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'> - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation.” - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ - works. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. - </div> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right -of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™ -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread -public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state -visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. -</div> - -</div> -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/68419-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/68419-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index cb18d22..0000000 --- a/old/68419-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/68419-h/images/macmillan.jpg b/old/68419-h/images/macmillan.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c491838..0000000 --- a/old/68419-h/images/macmillan.jpg +++ /dev/null |
