[265]IheringGeist des röm. Rechtsi. p. 169.[266]Dionys. iv. 22 ὁ δὲ Τύλλιος καὶ τοῖς ἐλευθερουμένοις τῶν θεραπόντων ... μετέχειν τῆς ἰσοπολιτείας ἐπέτρεψε ... καὶ πάντων ἀπέδωκε τῶν κοινῶν αὐτοῖς μετέχειν, ὧν τοῖς ἄλλοις δημοτικοῖς.[267]The change, however, was not supposed (except perhaps by TacitusAnn.iii. 26, see p. 58) to rest on arogatio. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 161) explains this tradition by noting that the alteration was a mere administrative act, which would fall within the competence of the king.[268]It is possible that these three tribes would have been to some extent local; but locality was an accident. Membership of them was transmitted by birth.[269]Dionysius (iv. 22) makes them at a later time members of thecuriae.[270]Dionys. iv. 14; Gell. xv. 27.[271]Cic.pro Flacco32, 80 “sintne ista praedia censui censendo, habeant jus civile, sint necne sint mancipi?... in qua tribu denique ista praedia censuisti?” Theager publicuswas not included in the tribes, nor were the Capitol and Aventine, because they were not private, but public property (Liv. vi. 20; Dionys. x. 31 and 32).[272]Liv. i. 43 “Quadrifariam urbe divisa, regionibusque et collibus, qui habitabantur, partes eas tribus appellavit”; Dionys. iv. 14 ὁ Τύλλιος, ἐπείδη τούς ἑπτὰλόφους ἐνὶ τείχει περιέλαβεν, εἰς τέτταρας μοίρας διελὼν τὴν πόλιν ... τετράφυλον ἐποίησε τὴν πόλιν εἶναι, τρίφυλον οὖσαν τέως.. So Festus p. 368 “urbanas tribus appellabant, in quas urbs erat dispertita a Ser. Tullio rege.” Cf. VarroL.L.v. 56. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 163) now holds that the tribes were “parts of the state-town limited by thepomerium.” Ostia, once thought to belong to Palatina, has been shown to belong to Voturia. But the reason for this may be the subsequent loss of theterritoriumof the city. See p. 68.[273]Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 168. Rome was at this time a great commercial state (cf. treaty with Carthage, 509B.C.). That such a primitive institution as gentile tenure could have existed at this time is inconceivable.[274]Dionys. iv. 15 διεῖλε δὲ καὶ τὴν χώραν ἅπασαν, ὡς μὲν Φάβιός φησιν, εἰς μοίρας ἕξ τε καὶ εἴκοσιν, ἃς καὶ αὐτὰς καλεῖ φυλάς. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 169) seems to lean to the view that those country districts, comprising land not in quiritarian ownership, werepagi.[275]Sucusana(orSuburana),Palatina,Esquilina, andCollina. See p. 3.[276]Cf. Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 125 “The four tribes are probably nothing more than the three Romulian increased through theterritoriumof the town on the Quirinal”; p. 164 “Servian Rome, probably a double town composed of the old city, Palatine and Esquiline, and the new town of the Colline.”[277]Districts like Ostia, which must have belonged to the Servian tribes, now formed parts of the new creations (see p. 67).[278]Servius is said for this reason to have prohibited transference of domicile or allotment. Dionys. iv. 14 (Servius) τοὺς ἀνθρῶπους ἔταξε τοὺς ἐν ἑκάστῃ μοίρᾳ τῶν τεττάρων οἰκοῦντας, ὥσπερ κωμήτας, μήτε μεταλαμβάνειν ἑτέραν οἴκησιν μήτ’ ἄλλοθι που συντελεῖν.[279]Momms.Staatsr.iii. pp. 182, 184.[280]Laelius Felix ap. Gell. xv. 27 “Cum ex generibus hominum suffragium feratur, ‘curiata’ comitia esse, cum ex censu et aetate ‘centuriata,’ cum ex regionibus et locis, ‘tributa.’”[281]Servius himself is credited with the introduction ofaes signatum—carefully adjusted copper weights stamped by authority. Plin.H.N.xviii. 3 “Servius rex ovum boumque effigie primus aes signavit.” Mommsen (Römisches Münzwesen) thinks that the stamp was a guarantee not of the weight but of the purity of the metal. In this case the metal must have been used as a medium of exchange; as a medium of barter the weight would be sufficient. Mommsen’s opinion is (op. cit. p. 175) that a regular copper coinage was not introduced at Rome until about the period of thedecemviri(450-430B.C.), and more recent numismatists pronounce even this date to be too early.[282]Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 247.[283]The existence of the guilds in regal times (Plut.Num.17) rather proves than disproves the competing manufacture by slaves.[284]Cic.pro Flacco32, 80. See p. 66.[285]For this difference of armour see Liv. i. 43; Dionys. iv. 16, 17. It survived into Polybius’ time (Polyb. vi. 23 ὁι δὲ ὑπὲρ τὰς μυρίας τιμώμενοι δραχμὰς ἀντὶ τοῦ καρδιοφύλακος σὺν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἁλυσιδωτοὺς περιτίθενται θώρακας).[286]Gellius 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”; Festus p. 113 “infra classem significantur qui minore summa quam centum et viginti milium aeris censi sunt.”Belot (Hist. d. Chev. Rom.i. 204, 205) thinks that the 125,000 asses mentioned here was the figure of the lowest census—the fifth class—at the time of thelex Voconia(169B.C.), mentioned in this connexion by Festus. The designation in asses was still kept, but theasmust now be multiplied by 10 (12,500 × 10 = 125,000 asses). Belot starts from his hypothesis that theasof the census is the old libralas. See the tables on the next page. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 249 n. 4), on the other hand, supposes that the law referred to the census of the first class, and that it was through an interpretation meant to limit its operation, when the value of money had altered, expressed in terms of thecentum milia aerisof libral asses. That it was so interpreted is shown by the fact that thecentum milia aerisof the Voconian law (Gaius ii. 274) becamecentum milia sestertium(Schol. to Cic.Verr.ii. 1, 41, 104, p. 188 Orell.), i.e. 25,000 denarii (Dio Cass. lvi. 10).[287]Plut. (Num.17) mentions τέκτονες and χαλκεῖς amongst thecollegia(Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 287 n. 1).[288]So too Polybius (vi. 23, cited p. 70).[289]Plin.H.N.xxxiii. 3 “Maximus census CXX assium fuit illo (Servio) rege, et ideo haec prima classis.” Festus p. 113 (cited p. 70).[290]Staatsrechtiii pp. 249, 250. Böckh (Metrologische Untersuchungenp. 444) also takes the view of the asses beingsextantarii. He makes the qualifications in terms of the libralasand theasof two ounces respectively: 20,000 = 100,000, 15,000 = 75,000, 10,000 = 50,000, 5000 = 25,000, 2000 = 10,000.[291]Histoire des Chevaliers Romains(Table at commencement of vol. i).[292]Festus p. 18 “accensi dicebantur qui in locum mortuorum militum subito subrogabantur, dicti ita, quia ad censum adiciebantur”; p. 369 “velati appellabantur vestiti et inermes qui exercitum sequebantur, quique in mortuorum militum loco substituebantur.” Cf. p. 14 “adscripticii veluti quidam scripti dicebantur, qui supplendis legionibus adscribebantur. Hos et accensos dicebant, quod ad legionum censum essent adscripti. Quidam velatos, quia vestiti inermes sequerentur exercitum.”[293]Liv. i. 43 “hoc minor census reliquam multitudinem habuit; inde una centuria facta est immunis militia”; Dionys. iv. 18 (the remaining citizens with a qualification under 12½ minae Servius placed in one λόχος) στρατείας τε ἀπέλυσε καὶ πάσης εἰσφορᾶς ἐποίησεν ἀτελεῖς. Cf. vii. 59 οὖτοι στρατειῶν τε ἧσαν ἐλεύθεροι τῶν ἐκ καταλόγου καὶ εἰσφορῶν τῶν κατὰ τιμήματα γενομένων ἀτελεῖς καὶ δι’ ἄμφω ταῦτ’ ἐν ταῖς ψηφοφορίαις ἀτιμότατοι. Cf. Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 40 “in quo etiam verbis ac nominibus ipsis fuit diligens; qui, cum locupletes assiduos appellasset ab asse dando, eos, qui aut non plus mille quingentos aeris aut omnino nihil in suum censum praeter caput attulissent, proletarios nominavit; ut ex iis quasi proles, id est quasi progenies civitatis, exspectari videretur. Illarum autem sex et nonaginta centuriarum in una centuria tum quidem plures censebantur, quam paene in prima classe tota.”[294]Ulpian inFragm. Vat.138 “ii qui in centuria accensorum velatorum sunt, habent immunitatem a tutelis et curis.”[295]The word is not technical enough to be used as an argument that theclassesincluded only landholders. The favourite ancient derivation was fromab asse dando(Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 40, see p. 72), whether for the payment of taxation or for the furnishing of military equipment.[296]Capite censi, if we trust Cicero (de Rep.ii. 22, 40, see p. 72), came to mean those below 1500 asses (the subsequent limit to the incidence of taxation). The limit of census for military service was also reduced to 4000 asses (Polyb. vi. 19), and finally to 375 (Gell. xvi. 10, 10), and those below this census continued to be calledcapite censi(Gell. l.c.; Sall.Jug.86).Aerarius, on the other hand, seems to have preserved its old meaning of those excluded from the centuries—Ps. Asc. inDivin.p. 103 “(Censores) prorsus cives sic notabant ... ut, qui plebeius (esset) ... aerarius fieret, ac per hoc non esset in albo centuriae suae, sed ad hoc [non] esset civis, tantummodo ut pro capite suo tributi nomine aera praeberet.”[297]p. 41.[298]It is not known when they ceased to be patrician; Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 254) thinks on the reform of the Servian constitution,circa220B.C.[299]Liv. i. 36.[300]Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 39.[301]Festus p. 221 “paribus equis, id est duobus, Romani utebantur in proelio, ut sudante altero transirent in siccum. Pararium aes appellabatur id, quod equitibus duplex pro binis equis dabatur.”[302]Liv. i. 43 “ita pedestri exercitu ornato distributoque equitum ex primoribus civitatis duodecim scripsit centurias. Sex item alias centurias ... sub isdem, quibus inauguratae erant, nominibus fecit: ad equos emendos dena millia aeris ex publico data [i.e., as Livy understands it, 10,000asses sextantarii= 1000 denarii], et, quibus equos alerent, viduae adtributae, quae bina milia aeris in annos singulos penderent” [2000 asses = 200 denarii]. Cf. Gaius iv. 27.[303]The number of the century was here fixed, and not, as in the case of theclassici, expansive.[304]Cf. Liv. i. 43 “neque eae tribus ad centuriarum distributionem numerumque quicquam pertinuere.” There is no evidence, e.g., that each tribe furnished a certain number of centuries.[305]Tributum, however, cannot be derived fromtribus(as by Varro quoted p. 40). The parallel wordsattribuere,contribuere,ultro tributa, etc., seem to show that it means something added to, conferred on, or collected for another.[306]p. 48.[307]As such it was in the Republic given for the censors. Cic.de Leg. Agr.ii. 11, 26 “majores de singulis magistratibus bis vos sententiam ferre voluerunt; nam cum centuriata lex censoribus ferebatur, cum curiata ceteris patriciis magistratibus, tum iterum de eisdem judicabatur.”[308]p. 43.[309]p. 63.[310]p. 60.[311]Liv. i. 48 “id ipsum tam mite ac tam moderatum imperium tamen, quia unius esset, deponere eum in animo habuisse quidam auctores sunt, ni scelus intestinum liberandae patriae consilia agitanti intervenisset.”[312]ib. 49.[313]Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 44.[314]Cic.de Rep.ii. 30, 52; Liv. ii. 1; App.B.C.ii. 119. It is sometimes represented as a law which made any one who aimed at royaltysacer(Liv. ii. 8). For the dual sanction of the oath and the law compare the means by which thesacrosanctitasof the tribunes was secured (p. 100).[315]It is strange that theinterregnum, which would have secured a continuity, is not mentioned in this case. The election of the first consuls was supposed to have been conducted by thepraefectus urbi, who almost certainly had not thejus rogandi(p. 61). Liv. i. 60 “duo consules inde comitiis centuriatis a praefecto urbis ex commentariis Servii Tullii creati sunt, L. Junius Brutus et L. Tarquinius Collatinus.”[316]For the titlepraetoressee Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 8 “regio imperio duo sunto iique a praeeundo judicando consulendo praetores judices consules appellamino”; for that ofjudices, VarroL.L.vi. 88, who quotes from thecommentarii consularesthe formula used in summoning thecomitia centuriata, “qui exercitum imperaturus erit, accenso dicito: ‘C. Calpurni, voca in licium omnes Quirites huc ad me.’ Accensus dicito sic ‘Omnes Quirites in licium visite huc ad judices.’ ‘C. Calpurni,’ consul dicito, ‘voca ad conventionem omnes Quirites huc ad me.’ Accensus dicito sic ‘Omnes Quirites ite ad conventionem huc ad judices.’”[317]See the section on the magistracy (p. 187).[318]This ratification indeed remained. Even though elections were conducted before the centuries, alexwas still passed by thecuriaeratifying this election (p. 49); and thepatrum auctoritaswas still required to sanction each fresh appointment.[319]If it existed before it could have been only in the priestly colleges, but these seem rather advising bodies to the king.[320]Fromcon-salio, i.e. people who leap or dance together, “partners” (in a dance). Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 77 n. 3; he comparespraesulandexul.[321]Liv. ii. 8 (509B.C.) “Latae deinde leges ... ante omnes de provocatione adversus magistratus ad populum”; Cic.de Rep.i. 40, 62 “Vides ... Tarquinio exacto, mira quadam exsultare populum insolentia libertatis; tum annui consules, tum demissi populo fasces, tum provocationes omnium rerum” (i.e. theprovocatiobecameuniversalinstead of being confined to certainspheres).[322]By this time the direct capital jurisdiction of the pontiffs had probably become extinct.[323]Liv. iii. 20 “neque provocationem esse longius ab urbe mille passuum, et tribunos si eo (lake Regillus) veniant, in alia turba Quiritium subjectos fore consulari imperio.” But the question between thepomeriumand the first milestone was in later times still a disputed one (Liv. xxiv. 9).[324]Cic. l.c.[325]p. 63.[326]Thequaestores parricidiiandaerariiare identified by Zonaras (vii. 13), following Dio. See p. 63. They were calledquaestores, οἵ πρῶτον μὲν τὰς θανασίμους δίκας ἔδίκαζον (whence their title), ὕστερον δὲ καὶ τὴν κοινῶν χρημάτων διοίκησιν ἔλαχον. So Varro (L.L.v. 81), “quaestores a quaerendo, qui conquirerent publicas pecunias et maleficia.” The identity of the two offices is denied by Pomponius inDig.1, 2, 2, 22 and 23.[327]Quaestores parricidiiwere mentioned in the Twelve Tables (Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 23).[328]Liv. i. 26.[329]They are mentioned in the trial of M. Volscius (459B.C.) for an ordinary criminal offence (Liv. iii. 24), but also in the public trials of Sp. Cassius in 485B.C.(Liv. ii. 41; Cic.de Rep.ii. 35, 60), and of Camillus in 396B.C.(Plin.H.N.xxxiv. 3, 13); but various accounts are given of the procedure in these two trials.[330]Plut.Public.12 ταμιεῖον μὲν ἀπέδειξε τὸν τοῦ Κρόνου ναόν ... ταμίας δὲ τῳ δήμῳ δύο τῶν νέων ἔδωκεν ἀποδεῖξαι. The first quaestors appointed were Publius Veturius and Marcus Minucius. Pomponius (p. 80) puts the creation of the financial quaestors after the first secession of the Plebs; Lydus (de Mag.i. 38) attributes them to the Licinian law of 367.[331]Tac.Ann.xi. 22 “Sed quaestores regibus etiam tum imperantibus instituti sunt, quod lex curiata ostendit ab L. Bruto repetita. Mansitque consulibus potestas deligendi, donec eum quoque honorem populus mandaret. Creatique primum Valerius Potitus et Aemilius Mamercus sexagesimo tertio anno post Tarquinios exactos, ut rem militarem comitarentur” (i.e. 447B.C.; hence Mommsen,Staatsr.ii. p. 529, thinks the change was due to the Valerio-Horatian laws of 449B.C.). Plutarch (see note 1) thinks they were elected from the first. The meaning of the passage of Tacitus seems to be that the king nominated his quaestors after his own election, and their appointment was then ratified by thelex curiata. Another explanation is that thelexrecited that the kings had appointed quaestors and empowered the consuls to do so. Cf. Ulpian inDig.1, 13.[332]Festus p. 246, cited p. 59.[333]Zonaras (vii. 9) makes Servius Tullius introduce Plebeians into the Senate.[334]Liv. ii. 1 “Deinde, quo plus virium in senatu frequentia etiam ordinis faceret, caedibus regis diminutum patrum numerum primoribus equestris gradus lectis ad trecentorum summam explevit: traditumque inde fertur, ut in senatum vocarentur qui patres quique conscripti essent: conscriptos videlicet in novum senatum appellabant lectos”; Festus p. 254 “‘Qui patres, qui conscripti’: vocati sunt in curiam, quo tempore regibus urbe expulsis P. Valerius consul propter inopiam patriciorum ex plebe adlegit in numerum senatorum C. et LX. et IIII. ut expleret numerum senatorum trecentorum” (for these numbers cf. Plut.Public.11 τοὺς δ’ ἐγγραφέντας ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ λέγουσιν ἑκατὸν καὶ ἑξήκοντα τέσσαρας γενέσθαι). Soadlecti, Festus p. 7 “adlectidicebantur apud Romanos, qui propter inopiam ex equestri ordine in senatorum sunt numero adsumpti: nam patres dicuntur qui sunt patricii generis, conscripti qui in senatu sunt scriptis adnotati.” Plutarch (Qu. Rom.58,Rom.13) makes the added members Plebeians. Tacitus (Ann.xi. 25) wrongly identifies these added members with theminores gentes. (Claudius creates PatriciansA.D.48—“paucis jam reliquis familiis, quas Romulus majorum et L. Brutus minorum gentium appellaverant.”)[335]Willems (Le Sénatii. 39 ff.) makespatres conscriptisimply equivalent to “assembled fathers.”[336]The first clear instance of a plebeian senator dates from the year 401. Liv. v. 12. P. Licinius Calvus, created military tribune with consular power, was “vir nullis ante honoribus usus, vetus tantum senator et aetate jam gravis.” Cf. Liv. iv. 15. Of Sp. Maelius (439B.C.) it is asked “quem senatorem concoquere civitas vix posset, regem ferret.”[337]p. 60.[338]Liv. ii. 18; Festus p. 198; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 18.[339]The title was, perhaps, originallypraetor. This would naturally have been the case if Mommsen’s theory is right that they were regarded as superior colleagues of the consuls (Staatsr.ii. p. 153). The earliest official title known to us ismagister populi, and it was the technical title in the augural books. Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 9 “isque ave sinistra dictus populi magister esto.” Cf.de Rep.i. 40, 63 “Gravioribus vero bellis etiam sine collega omne imperium nostri penes singulos esse voluerunt, quorum ipsum nomen vim suae potestatis indicat. Nam dictator quidem ab eo appellatur quia dicitur; sed in nostris libris vides eum, Laeli, magistrum populi appellari.” The later title,dictator, was perhaps adopted in deference to Republican sentiment; Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 145) conjectures, in imitation of the Latin dictator, a constitutional survival of the monarchy. The meaning of the word is wholly uncertain. Ancient guesses say (i.) fromdicitur(Cic.de Rep.l.c.); (ii) fromdicto audiens(VarroL.L.v. 81 “quoi dicto audientes omnes essent”); (iii.) fromdictare(Priscian viii. 14, 78), or (iv.) because they issued edicts (Dionys. v. 73).[340]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 19 “Et his dictatoribus magistri equitum injungebantur sic, quo modo regibus tribuni celerum: quod officium fere tale erat, quale hodie praefectorum praetorio, magistratus tamen habebantur legitimi.”[341]Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 9 “Ast quando duellum gravius, discordiae civium escunt, oenus, ne amplius sex menses, si senatus creverit, idem juris, quod duo consules, teneto”; Imp. ClaudiusOratioi. 28 “Quid nunc commemorem dictaturae hoc ipso consulari imperium valentius repertum apud majores nostros quo in asperioribus bellis aut in civili motu difficiliore uterentur?”[342]Cicero (de Rep.ii. 31, 53) gives as the tenor of the first Valerian law “ne quis magistratus civem Romanum adversus provocationem necaret neve verberaret.” Dionysius (v. 19) adds ζημιοῦν εἰς χρήματα to ἀποκτείνειν ἢ μαστιγοῦν, and Plutarch (Publ.11) seems to give it the same wide scope. He also thinks that Valerius fixed themulta suprema(l.c.), i.e. the largest fine the magistrate could impose without appeal. These statements may, however, be deductions from the laterprovocatio.[343]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2 (§ 3) “exactis deinde regibus ... omnes leges hae exoleverunt iterumque coepit populus Romanus incerto magis jure et consuetudine aliqua uti quam per latam legem, idque prope quinquaginta (MSS. “viginti”) annis passus est.” After the Twelve Tables (§ 6) “ex his legibus ... actiones compositae sunt, quibus inter se homines disceptarent: quas actiones ne populus prout vellet institueret, certas sollemnesque esse voluerunt ... Omnium tamen harum et interpretandi scientia et actiones apud collegium pontificum erant, ex quibus constituebatur, quis quoquo anno praeesset privatis.”[344]p. 64.[345]The later praetorian interdicts (de locis sacris,de mortuo inferendo) are really within the domain offasand must at one time have been enforced by the pontiffs.[346]p. 78.[347]MommsenStaatsr.iii. p. 93.[348]p. 35.[349]The privilege could not have been based on quiritarian ownership, since this tenure was precarious.[350]The contract ofnexumwas in fact a conditioned mancipation, like a testament, thenuncupatiobeing made by the vendor, who perhaps purchased with a single coin (nummo uno), as in the latermancipationes fiduciae causa(BrunsFontes).[351]Except as a penal measure ordained by the state. Thefurem manifestumaccording to Gellius (xx. 1), “in servitutem tradit” (lex); he is more correctly described asaddictusby Gaius (iii. 189). Theincensusmight be sold as a slave (Cic.pro. Caecin.34, 99). Later a free man who collusively allowed himself to be sold as a slave, in order to share the purchase money with the vendor, was adjudged a slave as a punishment for his fraud (Dig.40, 13, 3;Inst.1, 3, 4;Cod.7, 18, 1).[352]p. 24.[353]Gell. xx. 1 “Aeris confessi rebusque jure judicatis triginta dies justi sunto. Post deinde manus injectio esto, in jus ducito. Ni judicatum facit aut quis endo eo in jure vindicit, secum ducito, vincito aut nervo aut compedibus.... Si volet suo vivito. Ni suo vivit, qui eum vinctum habebit, libras farris endo dies dato. Si volet plus dato.” Theaddictuslike thenexusdid not become a slave, but still retained his position in his census and in his tribe (Quinctil.Decl.311).[354]In the case of a nexal contract there could not be more creditors than one. A man could not, by the nature of the case, mancipate himself to several people at once.[355]Liv. ii. 23 “Fremebant se, foris pro libertate et imperio dimicantes, domi a civibus captos et oppressos esse; tutioremque in bello quam in pace, et inter hostes quam inter cives, libertatem plebis esse.”[356]ib. 27.[357]Dionys. vi. 45.[358]Liv. ii. 28. The senators complain “nunc in mille curias contionesque (cum alia in Esquiliis, alia in Aventino fiant concilia) dispersam et dissipatam esse rem publicam.”[359]VarroL.L.v. 81 “tribuni plebei, quod ex tribunis militum primum tribuni plebei facti, qui plebem defenderent, in secessione Crustumerina.”[360]The principle of cooptation was said to have been recognised in thecarmen rogationisof the tribunate, and in this case it was held that Patricians were eligible. Liv. iii. 65 (449B.C.) “Novi tribuni plebis in cooptandis collegis patrum voluntatem foverunt. Duos etiam patricios consularesque, Sp. Tarpeium et A. Aternium, cooptavere.” But, with the disuse of this principle, the plebeian qualification was observed.[361]Cic. ap. Ascon.in Cornel.p. 76 “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 creati sunt,” (For the number two Ascon.in loc.quotes Tuditanus and Atticus.) Cicero apparently understands by this the mixed assembly of thecuriae; and so does Livy (ii. 56, on thelex Publiliatransferring the elections of the tribunes to the tribes), “quae patriciis omnem potestatem per clientium suffragia creandi, quos vellent, tribunos auferret.”[362]It must have been so restricted at first. Later (as we shall see in dealing with the intercession) theauxiliumwas extended to the whole people.[363]Cic.de Rep.ii. 33, 58 “contra consulare imperium tribuni plebis ... constituti.”[364]Gell. xiii. 12 “(tribunis) jus abnoctandi ademptum, quoniam, ut vim fieri vetarent, adsiduitate eorum et praesentium oculis opus erat.” Cf. iii. 2. Plut.Qu. Rom.81 ὅθεν οὐδ’ οἰκίας αὐτοῦ κλείεσθαι νενόμισται θύραν, ἀλλὰ καὶ νύκτωρ ἀνέῳγε καὶ μεθ’ ἡμέραν, ὤσπερ λιμὴν καὶ καταφυγὴ τοῖς δεομένοις.[365]For the increase to four see Diodor. xi. 68 (471B.C.in connexion with thelex Publilia); other accounts represent the original number as five (Ascon. l.c. p. 93, and Livy ii. 33; two elected, three coopted; cf. note on p. 93). The increase to ten is assigned by Livy and Dionysius to 457B.C.(Livy iii. 30; the tribunes allowed the levy “non sine pactione tamen ut ... decem deinde tribuni plebis crearentur. Expressit hoc necessitas patribus”; cf. Dionys. x. 30).[366]Liv. ii. 35 “contemptim primo Marcius audiebat minas tribunicias; auxilii, non poenae, jus datum illi potestati; plebisque, non patrum, tribunos esse.” Coriolanus was probably impeached before the Plebs as ahostis tribuniciae potestatisin consequence of his advice that the tribunate should be abrogated (Liv. ii. 34). See ReinCriminalrechtp. 484. Cf. Liv. ii. 56 (471B.C.; the tribune seizes somenobileswho would not yield to hisviator) “Consul Appius negare jus esse tribuno in quemquam, nisi in plebeium; non enim populi, sed plebis, eum magistratum esse.”[367]Dionys. vii. 17 δημάρχου γνώμην ἀγορεύοντος ἐν δήμῳ μηδεὶς λεγέτω μηδὲν ἐναντίον μηδὲ μεσολαβείτω τὸν λόγον. ἐὰν δὲ τις παρὰ ταῦτα ποιὴσῃ, διδότω τοῖς δημάρχοις ἐγγυητὰς αἰτηθεὶς εἰς ἔκτισιν ἧς ἂν ἐποθῶσιν αὐτῷ ζημίας. Any one who does not give securities (ἐγγυηταί) is to be punished with death καὶ τὰ χρήματ’ αὐτοῦ ἱερὰ ἔστω. τῶν δ’ ἀμφισβητούντων πρὸς ταύτας τὰς ζημίας αἱ κρίσεις ἔστωσαν ἐπὶ τοῦ δήμου. Cf. vi. 16, and Cic.pro Sest.37, 79 “Fretus sanctitate tribunatus, cum se non modo contra vim et ferrum, sed etiam contra verba atque interfationem legibus sacratis esse armatum putaret.”
[265]IheringGeist des röm. Rechtsi. p. 169.
[265]IheringGeist des röm. Rechtsi. p. 169.
[266]Dionys. iv. 22 ὁ δὲ Τύλλιος καὶ τοῖς ἐλευθερουμένοις τῶν θεραπόντων ... μετέχειν τῆς ἰσοπολιτείας ἐπέτρεψε ... καὶ πάντων ἀπέδωκε τῶν κοινῶν αὐτοῖς μετέχειν, ὧν τοῖς ἄλλοις δημοτικοῖς.
[266]Dionys. iv. 22 ὁ δὲ Τύλλιος καὶ τοῖς ἐλευθερουμένοις τῶν θεραπόντων ... μετέχειν τῆς ἰσοπολιτείας ἐπέτρεψε ... καὶ πάντων ἀπέδωκε τῶν κοινῶν αὐτοῖς μετέχειν, ὧν τοῖς ἄλλοις δημοτικοῖς.
[267]The change, however, was not supposed (except perhaps by TacitusAnn.iii. 26, see p. 58) to rest on arogatio. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 161) explains this tradition by noting that the alteration was a mere administrative act, which would fall within the competence of the king.
[267]The change, however, was not supposed (except perhaps by TacitusAnn.iii. 26, see p. 58) to rest on arogatio. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 161) explains this tradition by noting that the alteration was a mere administrative act, which would fall within the competence of the king.
[268]It is possible that these three tribes would have been to some extent local; but locality was an accident. Membership of them was transmitted by birth.
[268]It is possible that these three tribes would have been to some extent local; but locality was an accident. Membership of them was transmitted by birth.
[269]Dionysius (iv. 22) makes them at a later time members of thecuriae.
[269]Dionysius (iv. 22) makes them at a later time members of thecuriae.
[270]Dionys. iv. 14; Gell. xv. 27.
[270]Dionys. iv. 14; Gell. xv. 27.
[271]Cic.pro Flacco32, 80 “sintne ista praedia censui censendo, habeant jus civile, sint necne sint mancipi?... in qua tribu denique ista praedia censuisti?” Theager publicuswas not included in the tribes, nor were the Capitol and Aventine, because they were not private, but public property (Liv. vi. 20; Dionys. x. 31 and 32).
[271]Cic.pro Flacco32, 80 “sintne ista praedia censui censendo, habeant jus civile, sint necne sint mancipi?... in qua tribu denique ista praedia censuisti?” Theager publicuswas not included in the tribes, nor were the Capitol and Aventine, because they were not private, but public property (Liv. vi. 20; Dionys. x. 31 and 32).
[272]Liv. i. 43 “Quadrifariam urbe divisa, regionibusque et collibus, qui habitabantur, partes eas tribus appellavit”; Dionys. iv. 14 ὁ Τύλλιος, ἐπείδη τούς ἑπτὰλόφους ἐνὶ τείχει περιέλαβεν, εἰς τέτταρας μοίρας διελὼν τὴν πόλιν ... τετράφυλον ἐποίησε τὴν πόλιν εἶναι, τρίφυλον οὖσαν τέως.. So Festus p. 368 “urbanas tribus appellabant, in quas urbs erat dispertita a Ser. Tullio rege.” Cf. VarroL.L.v. 56. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 163) now holds that the tribes were “parts of the state-town limited by thepomerium.” Ostia, once thought to belong to Palatina, has been shown to belong to Voturia. But the reason for this may be the subsequent loss of theterritoriumof the city. See p. 68.
[272]Liv. i. 43 “Quadrifariam urbe divisa, regionibusque et collibus, qui habitabantur, partes eas tribus appellavit”; Dionys. iv. 14 ὁ Τύλλιος, ἐπείδη τούς ἑπτὰλόφους ἐνὶ τείχει περιέλαβεν, εἰς τέτταρας μοίρας διελὼν τὴν πόλιν ... τετράφυλον ἐποίησε τὴν πόλιν εἶναι, τρίφυλον οὖσαν τέως.. So Festus p. 368 “urbanas tribus appellabant, in quas urbs erat dispertita a Ser. Tullio rege.” Cf. VarroL.L.v. 56. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 163) now holds that the tribes were “parts of the state-town limited by thepomerium.” Ostia, once thought to belong to Palatina, has been shown to belong to Voturia. But the reason for this may be the subsequent loss of theterritoriumof the city. See p. 68.
[273]Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 168. Rome was at this time a great commercial state (cf. treaty with Carthage, 509B.C.). That such a primitive institution as gentile tenure could have existed at this time is inconceivable.
[273]Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 168. Rome was at this time a great commercial state (cf. treaty with Carthage, 509B.C.). That such a primitive institution as gentile tenure could have existed at this time is inconceivable.
[274]Dionys. iv. 15 διεῖλε δὲ καὶ τὴν χώραν ἅπασαν, ὡς μὲν Φάβιός φησιν, εἰς μοίρας ἕξ τε καὶ εἴκοσιν, ἃς καὶ αὐτὰς καλεῖ φυλάς. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 169) seems to lean to the view that those country districts, comprising land not in quiritarian ownership, werepagi.
[274]Dionys. iv. 15 διεῖλε δὲ καὶ τὴν χώραν ἅπασαν, ὡς μὲν Φάβιός φησιν, εἰς μοίρας ἕξ τε καὶ εἴκοσιν, ἃς καὶ αὐτὰς καλεῖ φυλάς. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 169) seems to lean to the view that those country districts, comprising land not in quiritarian ownership, werepagi.
[275]Sucusana(orSuburana),Palatina,Esquilina, andCollina. See p. 3.
[275]Sucusana(orSuburana),Palatina,Esquilina, andCollina. See p. 3.
[276]Cf. Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 125 “The four tribes are probably nothing more than the three Romulian increased through theterritoriumof the town on the Quirinal”; p. 164 “Servian Rome, probably a double town composed of the old city, Palatine and Esquiline, and the new town of the Colline.”
[276]Cf. Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 125 “The four tribes are probably nothing more than the three Romulian increased through theterritoriumof the town on the Quirinal”; p. 164 “Servian Rome, probably a double town composed of the old city, Palatine and Esquiline, and the new town of the Colline.”
[277]Districts like Ostia, which must have belonged to the Servian tribes, now formed parts of the new creations (see p. 67).
[277]Districts like Ostia, which must have belonged to the Servian tribes, now formed parts of the new creations (see p. 67).
[278]Servius is said for this reason to have prohibited transference of domicile or allotment. Dionys. iv. 14 (Servius) τοὺς ἀνθρῶπους ἔταξε τοὺς ἐν ἑκάστῃ μοίρᾳ τῶν τεττάρων οἰκοῦντας, ὥσπερ κωμήτας, μήτε μεταλαμβάνειν ἑτέραν οἴκησιν μήτ’ ἄλλοθι που συντελεῖν.
[278]Servius is said for this reason to have prohibited transference of domicile or allotment. Dionys. iv. 14 (Servius) τοὺς ἀνθρῶπους ἔταξε τοὺς ἐν ἑκάστῃ μοίρᾳ τῶν τεττάρων οἰκοῦντας, ὥσπερ κωμήτας, μήτε μεταλαμβάνειν ἑτέραν οἴκησιν μήτ’ ἄλλοθι που συντελεῖν.
[279]Momms.Staatsr.iii. pp. 182, 184.
[279]Momms.Staatsr.iii. pp. 182, 184.
[280]Laelius Felix ap. Gell. xv. 27 “Cum ex generibus hominum suffragium feratur, ‘curiata’ comitia esse, cum ex censu et aetate ‘centuriata,’ cum ex regionibus et locis, ‘tributa.’”
[280]Laelius Felix ap. Gell. xv. 27 “Cum ex generibus hominum suffragium feratur, ‘curiata’ comitia esse, cum ex censu et aetate ‘centuriata,’ cum ex regionibus et locis, ‘tributa.’”
[281]Servius himself is credited with the introduction ofaes signatum—carefully adjusted copper weights stamped by authority. Plin.H.N.xviii. 3 “Servius rex ovum boumque effigie primus aes signavit.” Mommsen (Römisches Münzwesen) thinks that the stamp was a guarantee not of the weight but of the purity of the metal. In this case the metal must have been used as a medium of exchange; as a medium of barter the weight would be sufficient. Mommsen’s opinion is (op. cit. p. 175) that a regular copper coinage was not introduced at Rome until about the period of thedecemviri(450-430B.C.), and more recent numismatists pronounce even this date to be too early.
[281]Servius himself is credited with the introduction ofaes signatum—carefully adjusted copper weights stamped by authority. Plin.H.N.xviii. 3 “Servius rex ovum boumque effigie primus aes signavit.” Mommsen (Römisches Münzwesen) thinks that the stamp was a guarantee not of the weight but of the purity of the metal. In this case the metal must have been used as a medium of exchange; as a medium of barter the weight would be sufficient. Mommsen’s opinion is (op. cit. p. 175) that a regular copper coinage was not introduced at Rome until about the period of thedecemviri(450-430B.C.), and more recent numismatists pronounce even this date to be too early.
[282]Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 247.
[282]Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 247.
[283]The existence of the guilds in regal times (Plut.Num.17) rather proves than disproves the competing manufacture by slaves.
[283]The existence of the guilds in regal times (Plut.Num.17) rather proves than disproves the competing manufacture by slaves.
[284]Cic.pro Flacco32, 80. See p. 66.
[284]Cic.pro Flacco32, 80. See p. 66.
[285]For this difference of armour see Liv. i. 43; Dionys. iv. 16, 17. It survived into Polybius’ time (Polyb. vi. 23 ὁι δὲ ὑπὲρ τὰς μυρίας τιμώμενοι δραχμὰς ἀντὶ τοῦ καρδιοφύλακος σὺν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἁλυσιδωτοὺς περιτίθενται θώρακας).
[285]For this difference of armour see Liv. i. 43; Dionys. iv. 16, 17. It survived into Polybius’ time (Polyb. vi. 23 ὁι δὲ ὑπὲρ τὰς μυρίας τιμώμενοι δραχμὰς ἀντὶ τοῦ καρδιοφύλακος σὺν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἁλυσιδωτοὺς περιτίθενται θώρακας).
[286]Gellius 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”; Festus p. 113 “infra classem significantur qui minore summa quam centum et viginti milium aeris censi sunt.”Belot (Hist. d. Chev. Rom.i. 204, 205) thinks that the 125,000 asses mentioned here was the figure of the lowest census—the fifth class—at the time of thelex Voconia(169B.C.), mentioned in this connexion by Festus. The designation in asses was still kept, but theasmust now be multiplied by 10 (12,500 × 10 = 125,000 asses). Belot starts from his hypothesis that theasof the census is the old libralas. See the tables on the next page. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 249 n. 4), on the other hand, supposes that the law referred to the census of the first class, and that it was through an interpretation meant to limit its operation, when the value of money had altered, expressed in terms of thecentum milia aerisof libral asses. That it was so interpreted is shown by the fact that thecentum milia aerisof the Voconian law (Gaius ii. 274) becamecentum milia sestertium(Schol. to Cic.Verr.ii. 1, 41, 104, p. 188 Orell.), i.e. 25,000 denarii (Dio Cass. lvi. 10).
[286]Gellius 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”; Festus p. 113 “infra classem significantur qui minore summa quam centum et viginti milium aeris censi sunt.”
Belot (Hist. d. Chev. Rom.i. 204, 205) thinks that the 125,000 asses mentioned here was the figure of the lowest census—the fifth class—at the time of thelex Voconia(169B.C.), mentioned in this connexion by Festus. The designation in asses was still kept, but theasmust now be multiplied by 10 (12,500 × 10 = 125,000 asses). Belot starts from his hypothesis that theasof the census is the old libralas. See the tables on the next page. Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 249 n. 4), on the other hand, supposes that the law referred to the census of the first class, and that it was through an interpretation meant to limit its operation, when the value of money had altered, expressed in terms of thecentum milia aerisof libral asses. That it was so interpreted is shown by the fact that thecentum milia aerisof the Voconian law (Gaius ii. 274) becamecentum milia sestertium(Schol. to Cic.Verr.ii. 1, 41, 104, p. 188 Orell.), i.e. 25,000 denarii (Dio Cass. lvi. 10).
[287]Plut. (Num.17) mentions τέκτονες and χαλκεῖς amongst thecollegia(Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 287 n. 1).
[287]Plut. (Num.17) mentions τέκτονες and χαλκεῖς amongst thecollegia(Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 287 n. 1).
[288]So too Polybius (vi. 23, cited p. 70).
[288]So too Polybius (vi. 23, cited p. 70).
[289]Plin.H.N.xxxiii. 3 “Maximus census CXX assium fuit illo (Servio) rege, et ideo haec prima classis.” Festus p. 113 (cited p. 70).
[289]Plin.H.N.xxxiii. 3 “Maximus census CXX assium fuit illo (Servio) rege, et ideo haec prima classis.” Festus p. 113 (cited p. 70).
[290]Staatsrechtiii pp. 249, 250. Böckh (Metrologische Untersuchungenp. 444) also takes the view of the asses beingsextantarii. He makes the qualifications in terms of the libralasand theasof two ounces respectively: 20,000 = 100,000, 15,000 = 75,000, 10,000 = 50,000, 5000 = 25,000, 2000 = 10,000.
[290]Staatsrechtiii pp. 249, 250. Böckh (Metrologische Untersuchungenp. 444) also takes the view of the asses beingsextantarii. He makes the qualifications in terms of the libralasand theasof two ounces respectively: 20,000 = 100,000, 15,000 = 75,000, 10,000 = 50,000, 5000 = 25,000, 2000 = 10,000.
[291]Histoire des Chevaliers Romains(Table at commencement of vol. i).
[291]Histoire des Chevaliers Romains(Table at commencement of vol. i).
[292]Festus p. 18 “accensi dicebantur qui in locum mortuorum militum subito subrogabantur, dicti ita, quia ad censum adiciebantur”; p. 369 “velati appellabantur vestiti et inermes qui exercitum sequebantur, quique in mortuorum militum loco substituebantur.” Cf. p. 14 “adscripticii veluti quidam scripti dicebantur, qui supplendis legionibus adscribebantur. Hos et accensos dicebant, quod ad legionum censum essent adscripti. Quidam velatos, quia vestiti inermes sequerentur exercitum.”
[292]Festus p. 18 “accensi dicebantur qui in locum mortuorum militum subito subrogabantur, dicti ita, quia ad censum adiciebantur”; p. 369 “velati appellabantur vestiti et inermes qui exercitum sequebantur, quique in mortuorum militum loco substituebantur.” Cf. p. 14 “adscripticii veluti quidam scripti dicebantur, qui supplendis legionibus adscribebantur. Hos et accensos dicebant, quod ad legionum censum essent adscripti. Quidam velatos, quia vestiti inermes sequerentur exercitum.”
[293]Liv. i. 43 “hoc minor census reliquam multitudinem habuit; inde una centuria facta est immunis militia”; Dionys. iv. 18 (the remaining citizens with a qualification under 12½ minae Servius placed in one λόχος) στρατείας τε ἀπέλυσε καὶ πάσης εἰσφορᾶς ἐποίησεν ἀτελεῖς. Cf. vii. 59 οὖτοι στρατειῶν τε ἧσαν ἐλεύθεροι τῶν ἐκ καταλόγου καὶ εἰσφορῶν τῶν κατὰ τιμήματα γενομένων ἀτελεῖς καὶ δι’ ἄμφω ταῦτ’ ἐν ταῖς ψηφοφορίαις ἀτιμότατοι. Cf. Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 40 “in quo etiam verbis ac nominibus ipsis fuit diligens; qui, cum locupletes assiduos appellasset ab asse dando, eos, qui aut non plus mille quingentos aeris aut omnino nihil in suum censum praeter caput attulissent, proletarios nominavit; ut ex iis quasi proles, id est quasi progenies civitatis, exspectari videretur. Illarum autem sex et nonaginta centuriarum in una centuria tum quidem plures censebantur, quam paene in prima classe tota.”
[293]Liv. i. 43 “hoc minor census reliquam multitudinem habuit; inde una centuria facta est immunis militia”; Dionys. iv. 18 (the remaining citizens with a qualification under 12½ minae Servius placed in one λόχος) στρατείας τε ἀπέλυσε καὶ πάσης εἰσφορᾶς ἐποίησεν ἀτελεῖς. Cf. vii. 59 οὖτοι στρατειῶν τε ἧσαν ἐλεύθεροι τῶν ἐκ καταλόγου καὶ εἰσφορῶν τῶν κατὰ τιμήματα γενομένων ἀτελεῖς καὶ δι’ ἄμφω ταῦτ’ ἐν ταῖς ψηφοφορίαις ἀτιμότατοι. Cf. Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 40 “in quo etiam verbis ac nominibus ipsis fuit diligens; qui, cum locupletes assiduos appellasset ab asse dando, eos, qui aut non plus mille quingentos aeris aut omnino nihil in suum censum praeter caput attulissent, proletarios nominavit; ut ex iis quasi proles, id est quasi progenies civitatis, exspectari videretur. Illarum autem sex et nonaginta centuriarum in una centuria tum quidem plures censebantur, quam paene in prima classe tota.”
[294]Ulpian inFragm. Vat.138 “ii qui in centuria accensorum velatorum sunt, habent immunitatem a tutelis et curis.”
[294]Ulpian inFragm. Vat.138 “ii qui in centuria accensorum velatorum sunt, habent immunitatem a tutelis et curis.”
[295]The word is not technical enough to be used as an argument that theclassesincluded only landholders. The favourite ancient derivation was fromab asse dando(Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 40, see p. 72), whether for the payment of taxation or for the furnishing of military equipment.
[295]The word is not technical enough to be used as an argument that theclassesincluded only landholders. The favourite ancient derivation was fromab asse dando(Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 40, see p. 72), whether for the payment of taxation or for the furnishing of military equipment.
[296]Capite censi, if we trust Cicero (de Rep.ii. 22, 40, see p. 72), came to mean those below 1500 asses (the subsequent limit to the incidence of taxation). The limit of census for military service was also reduced to 4000 asses (Polyb. vi. 19), and finally to 375 (Gell. xvi. 10, 10), and those below this census continued to be calledcapite censi(Gell. l.c.; Sall.Jug.86).Aerarius, on the other hand, seems to have preserved its old meaning of those excluded from the centuries—Ps. Asc. inDivin.p. 103 “(Censores) prorsus cives sic notabant ... ut, qui plebeius (esset) ... aerarius fieret, ac per hoc non esset in albo centuriae suae, sed ad hoc [non] esset civis, tantummodo ut pro capite suo tributi nomine aera praeberet.”
[296]Capite censi, if we trust Cicero (de Rep.ii. 22, 40, see p. 72), came to mean those below 1500 asses (the subsequent limit to the incidence of taxation). The limit of census for military service was also reduced to 4000 asses (Polyb. vi. 19), and finally to 375 (Gell. xvi. 10, 10), and those below this census continued to be calledcapite censi(Gell. l.c.; Sall.Jug.86).Aerarius, on the other hand, seems to have preserved its old meaning of those excluded from the centuries—Ps. Asc. inDivin.p. 103 “(Censores) prorsus cives sic notabant ... ut, qui plebeius (esset) ... aerarius fieret, ac per hoc non esset in albo centuriae suae, sed ad hoc [non] esset civis, tantummodo ut pro capite suo tributi nomine aera praeberet.”
[297]p. 41.
[297]p. 41.
[298]It is not known when they ceased to be patrician; Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 254) thinks on the reform of the Servian constitution,circa220B.C.
[298]It is not known when they ceased to be patrician; Mommsen (Staatsr.iii. p. 254) thinks on the reform of the Servian constitution,circa220B.C.
[299]Liv. i. 36.
[299]Liv. i. 36.
[300]Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 39.
[300]Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 39.
[301]Festus p. 221 “paribus equis, id est duobus, Romani utebantur in proelio, ut sudante altero transirent in siccum. Pararium aes appellabatur id, quod equitibus duplex pro binis equis dabatur.”
[301]Festus p. 221 “paribus equis, id est duobus, Romani utebantur in proelio, ut sudante altero transirent in siccum. Pararium aes appellabatur id, quod equitibus duplex pro binis equis dabatur.”
[302]Liv. i. 43 “ita pedestri exercitu ornato distributoque equitum ex primoribus civitatis duodecim scripsit centurias. Sex item alias centurias ... sub isdem, quibus inauguratae erant, nominibus fecit: ad equos emendos dena millia aeris ex publico data [i.e., as Livy understands it, 10,000asses sextantarii= 1000 denarii], et, quibus equos alerent, viduae adtributae, quae bina milia aeris in annos singulos penderent” [2000 asses = 200 denarii]. Cf. Gaius iv. 27.
[302]Liv. i. 43 “ita pedestri exercitu ornato distributoque equitum ex primoribus civitatis duodecim scripsit centurias. Sex item alias centurias ... sub isdem, quibus inauguratae erant, nominibus fecit: ad equos emendos dena millia aeris ex publico data [i.e., as Livy understands it, 10,000asses sextantarii= 1000 denarii], et, quibus equos alerent, viduae adtributae, quae bina milia aeris in annos singulos penderent” [2000 asses = 200 denarii]. Cf. Gaius iv. 27.
[303]The number of the century was here fixed, and not, as in the case of theclassici, expansive.
[303]The number of the century was here fixed, and not, as in the case of theclassici, expansive.
[304]Cf. Liv. i. 43 “neque eae tribus ad centuriarum distributionem numerumque quicquam pertinuere.” There is no evidence, e.g., that each tribe furnished a certain number of centuries.
[304]Cf. Liv. i. 43 “neque eae tribus ad centuriarum distributionem numerumque quicquam pertinuere.” There is no evidence, e.g., that each tribe furnished a certain number of centuries.
[305]Tributum, however, cannot be derived fromtribus(as by Varro quoted p. 40). The parallel wordsattribuere,contribuere,ultro tributa, etc., seem to show that it means something added to, conferred on, or collected for another.
[305]Tributum, however, cannot be derived fromtribus(as by Varro quoted p. 40). The parallel wordsattribuere,contribuere,ultro tributa, etc., seem to show that it means something added to, conferred on, or collected for another.
[306]p. 48.
[306]p. 48.
[307]As such it was in the Republic given for the censors. Cic.de Leg. Agr.ii. 11, 26 “majores de singulis magistratibus bis vos sententiam ferre voluerunt; nam cum centuriata lex censoribus ferebatur, cum curiata ceteris patriciis magistratibus, tum iterum de eisdem judicabatur.”
[307]As such it was in the Republic given for the censors. Cic.de Leg. Agr.ii. 11, 26 “majores de singulis magistratibus bis vos sententiam ferre voluerunt; nam cum centuriata lex censoribus ferebatur, cum curiata ceteris patriciis magistratibus, tum iterum de eisdem judicabatur.”
[308]p. 43.
[308]p. 43.
[309]p. 63.
[309]p. 63.
[310]p. 60.
[310]p. 60.
[311]Liv. i. 48 “id ipsum tam mite ac tam moderatum imperium tamen, quia unius esset, deponere eum in animo habuisse quidam auctores sunt, ni scelus intestinum liberandae patriae consilia agitanti intervenisset.”
[311]Liv. i. 48 “id ipsum tam mite ac tam moderatum imperium tamen, quia unius esset, deponere eum in animo habuisse quidam auctores sunt, ni scelus intestinum liberandae patriae consilia agitanti intervenisset.”
[312]ib. 49.
[312]ib. 49.
[313]Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 44.
[313]Cic.de Rep.ii. 22, 44.
[314]Cic.de Rep.ii. 30, 52; Liv. ii. 1; App.B.C.ii. 119. It is sometimes represented as a law which made any one who aimed at royaltysacer(Liv. ii. 8). For the dual sanction of the oath and the law compare the means by which thesacrosanctitasof the tribunes was secured (p. 100).
[314]Cic.de Rep.ii. 30, 52; Liv. ii. 1; App.B.C.ii. 119. It is sometimes represented as a law which made any one who aimed at royaltysacer(Liv. ii. 8). For the dual sanction of the oath and the law compare the means by which thesacrosanctitasof the tribunes was secured (p. 100).
[315]It is strange that theinterregnum, which would have secured a continuity, is not mentioned in this case. The election of the first consuls was supposed to have been conducted by thepraefectus urbi, who almost certainly had not thejus rogandi(p. 61). Liv. i. 60 “duo consules inde comitiis centuriatis a praefecto urbis ex commentariis Servii Tullii creati sunt, L. Junius Brutus et L. Tarquinius Collatinus.”
[315]It is strange that theinterregnum, which would have secured a continuity, is not mentioned in this case. The election of the first consuls was supposed to have been conducted by thepraefectus urbi, who almost certainly had not thejus rogandi(p. 61). Liv. i. 60 “duo consules inde comitiis centuriatis a praefecto urbis ex commentariis Servii Tullii creati sunt, L. Junius Brutus et L. Tarquinius Collatinus.”
[316]For the titlepraetoressee Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 8 “regio imperio duo sunto iique a praeeundo judicando consulendo praetores judices consules appellamino”; for that ofjudices, VarroL.L.vi. 88, who quotes from thecommentarii consularesthe formula used in summoning thecomitia centuriata, “qui exercitum imperaturus erit, accenso dicito: ‘C. Calpurni, voca in licium omnes Quirites huc ad me.’ Accensus dicito sic ‘Omnes Quirites in licium visite huc ad judices.’ ‘C. Calpurni,’ consul dicito, ‘voca ad conventionem omnes Quirites huc ad me.’ Accensus dicito sic ‘Omnes Quirites ite ad conventionem huc ad judices.’”
[316]For the titlepraetoressee Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 8 “regio imperio duo sunto iique a praeeundo judicando consulendo praetores judices consules appellamino”; for that ofjudices, VarroL.L.vi. 88, who quotes from thecommentarii consularesthe formula used in summoning thecomitia centuriata, “qui exercitum imperaturus erit, accenso dicito: ‘C. Calpurni, voca in licium omnes Quirites huc ad me.’ Accensus dicito sic ‘Omnes Quirites in licium visite huc ad judices.’ ‘C. Calpurni,’ consul dicito, ‘voca ad conventionem omnes Quirites huc ad me.’ Accensus dicito sic ‘Omnes Quirites ite ad conventionem huc ad judices.’”
[317]See the section on the magistracy (p. 187).
[317]See the section on the magistracy (p. 187).
[318]This ratification indeed remained. Even though elections were conducted before the centuries, alexwas still passed by thecuriaeratifying this election (p. 49); and thepatrum auctoritaswas still required to sanction each fresh appointment.
[318]This ratification indeed remained. Even though elections were conducted before the centuries, alexwas still passed by thecuriaeratifying this election (p. 49); and thepatrum auctoritaswas still required to sanction each fresh appointment.
[319]If it existed before it could have been only in the priestly colleges, but these seem rather advising bodies to the king.
[319]If it existed before it could have been only in the priestly colleges, but these seem rather advising bodies to the king.
[320]Fromcon-salio, i.e. people who leap or dance together, “partners” (in a dance). Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 77 n. 3; he comparespraesulandexul.
[320]Fromcon-salio, i.e. people who leap or dance together, “partners” (in a dance). Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 77 n. 3; he comparespraesulandexul.
[321]Liv. ii. 8 (509B.C.) “Latae deinde leges ... ante omnes de provocatione adversus magistratus ad populum”; Cic.de Rep.i. 40, 62 “Vides ... Tarquinio exacto, mira quadam exsultare populum insolentia libertatis; tum annui consules, tum demissi populo fasces, tum provocationes omnium rerum” (i.e. theprovocatiobecameuniversalinstead of being confined to certainspheres).
[321]Liv. ii. 8 (509B.C.) “Latae deinde leges ... ante omnes de provocatione adversus magistratus ad populum”; Cic.de Rep.i. 40, 62 “Vides ... Tarquinio exacto, mira quadam exsultare populum insolentia libertatis; tum annui consules, tum demissi populo fasces, tum provocationes omnium rerum” (i.e. theprovocatiobecameuniversalinstead of being confined to certainspheres).
[322]By this time the direct capital jurisdiction of the pontiffs had probably become extinct.
[322]By this time the direct capital jurisdiction of the pontiffs had probably become extinct.
[323]Liv. iii. 20 “neque provocationem esse longius ab urbe mille passuum, et tribunos si eo (lake Regillus) veniant, in alia turba Quiritium subjectos fore consulari imperio.” But the question between thepomeriumand the first milestone was in later times still a disputed one (Liv. xxiv. 9).
[323]Liv. iii. 20 “neque provocationem esse longius ab urbe mille passuum, et tribunos si eo (lake Regillus) veniant, in alia turba Quiritium subjectos fore consulari imperio.” But the question between thepomeriumand the first milestone was in later times still a disputed one (Liv. xxiv. 9).
[324]Cic. l.c.
[324]Cic. l.c.
[325]p. 63.
[325]p. 63.
[326]Thequaestores parricidiiandaerariiare identified by Zonaras (vii. 13), following Dio. See p. 63. They were calledquaestores, οἵ πρῶτον μὲν τὰς θανασίμους δίκας ἔδίκαζον (whence their title), ὕστερον δὲ καὶ τὴν κοινῶν χρημάτων διοίκησιν ἔλαχον. So Varro (L.L.v. 81), “quaestores a quaerendo, qui conquirerent publicas pecunias et maleficia.” The identity of the two offices is denied by Pomponius inDig.1, 2, 2, 22 and 23.
[326]Thequaestores parricidiiandaerariiare identified by Zonaras (vii. 13), following Dio. See p. 63. They were calledquaestores, οἵ πρῶτον μὲν τὰς θανασίμους δίκας ἔδίκαζον (whence their title), ὕστερον δὲ καὶ τὴν κοινῶν χρημάτων διοίκησιν ἔλαχον. So Varro (L.L.v. 81), “quaestores a quaerendo, qui conquirerent publicas pecunias et maleficia.” The identity of the two offices is denied by Pomponius inDig.1, 2, 2, 22 and 23.
[327]Quaestores parricidiiwere mentioned in the Twelve Tables (Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 23).
[327]Quaestores parricidiiwere mentioned in the Twelve Tables (Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 23).
[328]Liv. i. 26.
[328]Liv. i. 26.
[329]They are mentioned in the trial of M. Volscius (459B.C.) for an ordinary criminal offence (Liv. iii. 24), but also in the public trials of Sp. Cassius in 485B.C.(Liv. ii. 41; Cic.de Rep.ii. 35, 60), and of Camillus in 396B.C.(Plin.H.N.xxxiv. 3, 13); but various accounts are given of the procedure in these two trials.
[329]They are mentioned in the trial of M. Volscius (459B.C.) for an ordinary criminal offence (Liv. iii. 24), but also in the public trials of Sp. Cassius in 485B.C.(Liv. ii. 41; Cic.de Rep.ii. 35, 60), and of Camillus in 396B.C.(Plin.H.N.xxxiv. 3, 13); but various accounts are given of the procedure in these two trials.
[330]Plut.Public.12 ταμιεῖον μὲν ἀπέδειξε τὸν τοῦ Κρόνου ναόν ... ταμίας δὲ τῳ δήμῳ δύο τῶν νέων ἔδωκεν ἀποδεῖξαι. The first quaestors appointed were Publius Veturius and Marcus Minucius. Pomponius (p. 80) puts the creation of the financial quaestors after the first secession of the Plebs; Lydus (de Mag.i. 38) attributes them to the Licinian law of 367.
[330]Plut.Public.12 ταμιεῖον μὲν ἀπέδειξε τὸν τοῦ Κρόνου ναόν ... ταμίας δὲ τῳ δήμῳ δύο τῶν νέων ἔδωκεν ἀποδεῖξαι. The first quaestors appointed were Publius Veturius and Marcus Minucius. Pomponius (p. 80) puts the creation of the financial quaestors after the first secession of the Plebs; Lydus (de Mag.i. 38) attributes them to the Licinian law of 367.
[331]Tac.Ann.xi. 22 “Sed quaestores regibus etiam tum imperantibus instituti sunt, quod lex curiata ostendit ab L. Bruto repetita. Mansitque consulibus potestas deligendi, donec eum quoque honorem populus mandaret. Creatique primum Valerius Potitus et Aemilius Mamercus sexagesimo tertio anno post Tarquinios exactos, ut rem militarem comitarentur” (i.e. 447B.C.; hence Mommsen,Staatsr.ii. p. 529, thinks the change was due to the Valerio-Horatian laws of 449B.C.). Plutarch (see note 1) thinks they were elected from the first. The meaning of the passage of Tacitus seems to be that the king nominated his quaestors after his own election, and their appointment was then ratified by thelex curiata. Another explanation is that thelexrecited that the kings had appointed quaestors and empowered the consuls to do so. Cf. Ulpian inDig.1, 13.
[331]Tac.Ann.xi. 22 “Sed quaestores regibus etiam tum imperantibus instituti sunt, quod lex curiata ostendit ab L. Bruto repetita. Mansitque consulibus potestas deligendi, donec eum quoque honorem populus mandaret. Creatique primum Valerius Potitus et Aemilius Mamercus sexagesimo tertio anno post Tarquinios exactos, ut rem militarem comitarentur” (i.e. 447B.C.; hence Mommsen,Staatsr.ii. p. 529, thinks the change was due to the Valerio-Horatian laws of 449B.C.). Plutarch (see note 1) thinks they were elected from the first. The meaning of the passage of Tacitus seems to be that the king nominated his quaestors after his own election, and their appointment was then ratified by thelex curiata. Another explanation is that thelexrecited that the kings had appointed quaestors and empowered the consuls to do so. Cf. Ulpian inDig.1, 13.
[332]Festus p. 246, cited p. 59.
[332]Festus p. 246, cited p. 59.
[333]Zonaras (vii. 9) makes Servius Tullius introduce Plebeians into the Senate.
[333]Zonaras (vii. 9) makes Servius Tullius introduce Plebeians into the Senate.
[334]Liv. ii. 1 “Deinde, quo plus virium in senatu frequentia etiam ordinis faceret, caedibus regis diminutum patrum numerum primoribus equestris gradus lectis ad trecentorum summam explevit: traditumque inde fertur, ut in senatum vocarentur qui patres quique conscripti essent: conscriptos videlicet in novum senatum appellabant lectos”; Festus p. 254 “‘Qui patres, qui conscripti’: vocati sunt in curiam, quo tempore regibus urbe expulsis P. Valerius consul propter inopiam patriciorum ex plebe adlegit in numerum senatorum C. et LX. et IIII. ut expleret numerum senatorum trecentorum” (for these numbers cf. Plut.Public.11 τοὺς δ’ ἐγγραφέντας ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ λέγουσιν ἑκατὸν καὶ ἑξήκοντα τέσσαρας γενέσθαι). Soadlecti, Festus p. 7 “adlectidicebantur apud Romanos, qui propter inopiam ex equestri ordine in senatorum sunt numero adsumpti: nam patres dicuntur qui sunt patricii generis, conscripti qui in senatu sunt scriptis adnotati.” Plutarch (Qu. Rom.58,Rom.13) makes the added members Plebeians. Tacitus (Ann.xi. 25) wrongly identifies these added members with theminores gentes. (Claudius creates PatriciansA.D.48—“paucis jam reliquis familiis, quas Romulus majorum et L. Brutus minorum gentium appellaverant.”)
[334]Liv. ii. 1 “Deinde, quo plus virium in senatu frequentia etiam ordinis faceret, caedibus regis diminutum patrum numerum primoribus equestris gradus lectis ad trecentorum summam explevit: traditumque inde fertur, ut in senatum vocarentur qui patres quique conscripti essent: conscriptos videlicet in novum senatum appellabant lectos”; Festus p. 254 “‘Qui patres, qui conscripti’: vocati sunt in curiam, quo tempore regibus urbe expulsis P. Valerius consul propter inopiam patriciorum ex plebe adlegit in numerum senatorum C. et LX. et IIII. ut expleret numerum senatorum trecentorum” (for these numbers cf. Plut.Public.11 τοὺς δ’ ἐγγραφέντας ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ λέγουσιν ἑκατὸν καὶ ἑξήκοντα τέσσαρας γενέσθαι). Soadlecti, Festus p. 7 “adlectidicebantur apud Romanos, qui propter inopiam ex equestri ordine in senatorum sunt numero adsumpti: nam patres dicuntur qui sunt patricii generis, conscripti qui in senatu sunt scriptis adnotati.” Plutarch (Qu. Rom.58,Rom.13) makes the added members Plebeians. Tacitus (Ann.xi. 25) wrongly identifies these added members with theminores gentes. (Claudius creates PatriciansA.D.48—“paucis jam reliquis familiis, quas Romulus majorum et L. Brutus minorum gentium appellaverant.”)
[335]Willems (Le Sénatii. 39 ff.) makespatres conscriptisimply equivalent to “assembled fathers.”
[335]Willems (Le Sénatii. 39 ff.) makespatres conscriptisimply equivalent to “assembled fathers.”
[336]The first clear instance of a plebeian senator dates from the year 401. Liv. v. 12. P. Licinius Calvus, created military tribune with consular power, was “vir nullis ante honoribus usus, vetus tantum senator et aetate jam gravis.” Cf. Liv. iv. 15. Of Sp. Maelius (439B.C.) it is asked “quem senatorem concoquere civitas vix posset, regem ferret.”
[336]The first clear instance of a plebeian senator dates from the year 401. Liv. v. 12. P. Licinius Calvus, created military tribune with consular power, was “vir nullis ante honoribus usus, vetus tantum senator et aetate jam gravis.” Cf. Liv. iv. 15. Of Sp. Maelius (439B.C.) it is asked “quem senatorem concoquere civitas vix posset, regem ferret.”
[337]p. 60.
[337]p. 60.
[338]Liv. ii. 18; Festus p. 198; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 18.
[338]Liv. ii. 18; Festus p. 198; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 18.
[339]The title was, perhaps, originallypraetor. This would naturally have been the case if Mommsen’s theory is right that they were regarded as superior colleagues of the consuls (Staatsr.ii. p. 153). The earliest official title known to us ismagister populi, and it was the technical title in the augural books. Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 9 “isque ave sinistra dictus populi magister esto.” Cf.de Rep.i. 40, 63 “Gravioribus vero bellis etiam sine collega omne imperium nostri penes singulos esse voluerunt, quorum ipsum nomen vim suae potestatis indicat. Nam dictator quidem ab eo appellatur quia dicitur; sed in nostris libris vides eum, Laeli, magistrum populi appellari.” The later title,dictator, was perhaps adopted in deference to Republican sentiment; Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 145) conjectures, in imitation of the Latin dictator, a constitutional survival of the monarchy. The meaning of the word is wholly uncertain. Ancient guesses say (i.) fromdicitur(Cic.de Rep.l.c.); (ii) fromdicto audiens(VarroL.L.v. 81 “quoi dicto audientes omnes essent”); (iii.) fromdictare(Priscian viii. 14, 78), or (iv.) because they issued edicts (Dionys. v. 73).
[339]The title was, perhaps, originallypraetor. This would naturally have been the case if Mommsen’s theory is right that they were regarded as superior colleagues of the consuls (Staatsr.ii. p. 153). The earliest official title known to us ismagister populi, and it was the technical title in the augural books. Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 9 “isque ave sinistra dictus populi magister esto.” Cf.de Rep.i. 40, 63 “Gravioribus vero bellis etiam sine collega omne imperium nostri penes singulos esse voluerunt, quorum ipsum nomen vim suae potestatis indicat. Nam dictator quidem ab eo appellatur quia dicitur; sed in nostris libris vides eum, Laeli, magistrum populi appellari.” The later title,dictator, was perhaps adopted in deference to Republican sentiment; Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 145) conjectures, in imitation of the Latin dictator, a constitutional survival of the monarchy. The meaning of the word is wholly uncertain. Ancient guesses say (i.) fromdicitur(Cic.de Rep.l.c.); (ii) fromdicto audiens(VarroL.L.v. 81 “quoi dicto audientes omnes essent”); (iii.) fromdictare(Priscian viii. 14, 78), or (iv.) because they issued edicts (Dionys. v. 73).
[340]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 19 “Et his dictatoribus magistri equitum injungebantur sic, quo modo regibus tribuni celerum: quod officium fere tale erat, quale hodie praefectorum praetorio, magistratus tamen habebantur legitimi.”
[340]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 19 “Et his dictatoribus magistri equitum injungebantur sic, quo modo regibus tribuni celerum: quod officium fere tale erat, quale hodie praefectorum praetorio, magistratus tamen habebantur legitimi.”
[341]Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 9 “Ast quando duellum gravius, discordiae civium escunt, oenus, ne amplius sex menses, si senatus creverit, idem juris, quod duo consules, teneto”; Imp. ClaudiusOratioi. 28 “Quid nunc commemorem dictaturae hoc ipso consulari imperium valentius repertum apud majores nostros quo in asperioribus bellis aut in civili motu difficiliore uterentur?”
[341]Cic.de Leg.iii. 3, 9 “Ast quando duellum gravius, discordiae civium escunt, oenus, ne amplius sex menses, si senatus creverit, idem juris, quod duo consules, teneto”; Imp. ClaudiusOratioi. 28 “Quid nunc commemorem dictaturae hoc ipso consulari imperium valentius repertum apud majores nostros quo in asperioribus bellis aut in civili motu difficiliore uterentur?”
[342]Cicero (de Rep.ii. 31, 53) gives as the tenor of the first Valerian law “ne quis magistratus civem Romanum adversus provocationem necaret neve verberaret.” Dionysius (v. 19) adds ζημιοῦν εἰς χρήματα to ἀποκτείνειν ἢ μαστιγοῦν, and Plutarch (Publ.11) seems to give it the same wide scope. He also thinks that Valerius fixed themulta suprema(l.c.), i.e. the largest fine the magistrate could impose without appeal. These statements may, however, be deductions from the laterprovocatio.
[342]Cicero (de Rep.ii. 31, 53) gives as the tenor of the first Valerian law “ne quis magistratus civem Romanum adversus provocationem necaret neve verberaret.” Dionysius (v. 19) adds ζημιοῦν εἰς χρήματα to ἀποκτείνειν ἢ μαστιγοῦν, and Plutarch (Publ.11) seems to give it the same wide scope. He also thinks that Valerius fixed themulta suprema(l.c.), i.e. the largest fine the magistrate could impose without appeal. These statements may, however, be deductions from the laterprovocatio.
[343]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2 (§ 3) “exactis deinde regibus ... omnes leges hae exoleverunt iterumque coepit populus Romanus incerto magis jure et consuetudine aliqua uti quam per latam legem, idque prope quinquaginta (MSS. “viginti”) annis passus est.” After the Twelve Tables (§ 6) “ex his legibus ... actiones compositae sunt, quibus inter se homines disceptarent: quas actiones ne populus prout vellet institueret, certas sollemnesque esse voluerunt ... Omnium tamen harum et interpretandi scientia et actiones apud collegium pontificum erant, ex quibus constituebatur, quis quoquo anno praeesset privatis.”
[343]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2 (§ 3) “exactis deinde regibus ... omnes leges hae exoleverunt iterumque coepit populus Romanus incerto magis jure et consuetudine aliqua uti quam per latam legem, idque prope quinquaginta (MSS. “viginti”) annis passus est.” After the Twelve Tables (§ 6) “ex his legibus ... actiones compositae sunt, quibus inter se homines disceptarent: quas actiones ne populus prout vellet institueret, certas sollemnesque esse voluerunt ... Omnium tamen harum et interpretandi scientia et actiones apud collegium pontificum erant, ex quibus constituebatur, quis quoquo anno praeesset privatis.”
[344]p. 64.
[344]p. 64.
[345]The later praetorian interdicts (de locis sacris,de mortuo inferendo) are really within the domain offasand must at one time have been enforced by the pontiffs.
[345]The later praetorian interdicts (de locis sacris,de mortuo inferendo) are really within the domain offasand must at one time have been enforced by the pontiffs.
[346]p. 78.
[346]p. 78.
[347]MommsenStaatsr.iii. p. 93.
[347]MommsenStaatsr.iii. p. 93.
[348]p. 35.
[348]p. 35.
[349]The privilege could not have been based on quiritarian ownership, since this tenure was precarious.
[349]The privilege could not have been based on quiritarian ownership, since this tenure was precarious.
[350]The contract ofnexumwas in fact a conditioned mancipation, like a testament, thenuncupatiobeing made by the vendor, who perhaps purchased with a single coin (nummo uno), as in the latermancipationes fiduciae causa(BrunsFontes).
[350]The contract ofnexumwas in fact a conditioned mancipation, like a testament, thenuncupatiobeing made by the vendor, who perhaps purchased with a single coin (nummo uno), as in the latermancipationes fiduciae causa(BrunsFontes).
[351]Except as a penal measure ordained by the state. Thefurem manifestumaccording to Gellius (xx. 1), “in servitutem tradit” (lex); he is more correctly described asaddictusby Gaius (iii. 189). Theincensusmight be sold as a slave (Cic.pro. Caecin.34, 99). Later a free man who collusively allowed himself to be sold as a slave, in order to share the purchase money with the vendor, was adjudged a slave as a punishment for his fraud (Dig.40, 13, 3;Inst.1, 3, 4;Cod.7, 18, 1).
[351]Except as a penal measure ordained by the state. Thefurem manifestumaccording to Gellius (xx. 1), “in servitutem tradit” (lex); he is more correctly described asaddictusby Gaius (iii. 189). Theincensusmight be sold as a slave (Cic.pro. Caecin.34, 99). Later a free man who collusively allowed himself to be sold as a slave, in order to share the purchase money with the vendor, was adjudged a slave as a punishment for his fraud (Dig.40, 13, 3;Inst.1, 3, 4;Cod.7, 18, 1).
[352]p. 24.
[352]p. 24.
[353]Gell. xx. 1 “Aeris confessi rebusque jure judicatis triginta dies justi sunto. Post deinde manus injectio esto, in jus ducito. Ni judicatum facit aut quis endo eo in jure vindicit, secum ducito, vincito aut nervo aut compedibus.... Si volet suo vivito. Ni suo vivit, qui eum vinctum habebit, libras farris endo dies dato. Si volet plus dato.” Theaddictuslike thenexusdid not become a slave, but still retained his position in his census and in his tribe (Quinctil.Decl.311).
[353]Gell. xx. 1 “Aeris confessi rebusque jure judicatis triginta dies justi sunto. Post deinde manus injectio esto, in jus ducito. Ni judicatum facit aut quis endo eo in jure vindicit, secum ducito, vincito aut nervo aut compedibus.... Si volet suo vivito. Ni suo vivit, qui eum vinctum habebit, libras farris endo dies dato. Si volet plus dato.” Theaddictuslike thenexusdid not become a slave, but still retained his position in his census and in his tribe (Quinctil.Decl.311).
[354]In the case of a nexal contract there could not be more creditors than one. A man could not, by the nature of the case, mancipate himself to several people at once.
[354]In the case of a nexal contract there could not be more creditors than one. A man could not, by the nature of the case, mancipate himself to several people at once.
[355]Liv. ii. 23 “Fremebant se, foris pro libertate et imperio dimicantes, domi a civibus captos et oppressos esse; tutioremque in bello quam in pace, et inter hostes quam inter cives, libertatem plebis esse.”
[355]Liv. ii. 23 “Fremebant se, foris pro libertate et imperio dimicantes, domi a civibus captos et oppressos esse; tutioremque in bello quam in pace, et inter hostes quam inter cives, libertatem plebis esse.”
[356]ib. 27.
[356]ib. 27.
[357]Dionys. vi. 45.
[357]Dionys. vi. 45.
[358]Liv. ii. 28. The senators complain “nunc in mille curias contionesque (cum alia in Esquiliis, alia in Aventino fiant concilia) dispersam et dissipatam esse rem publicam.”
[358]Liv. ii. 28. The senators complain “nunc in mille curias contionesque (cum alia in Esquiliis, alia in Aventino fiant concilia) dispersam et dissipatam esse rem publicam.”
[359]VarroL.L.v. 81 “tribuni plebei, quod ex tribunis militum primum tribuni plebei facti, qui plebem defenderent, in secessione Crustumerina.”
[359]VarroL.L.v. 81 “tribuni plebei, quod ex tribunis militum primum tribuni plebei facti, qui plebem defenderent, in secessione Crustumerina.”
[360]The principle of cooptation was said to have been recognised in thecarmen rogationisof the tribunate, and in this case it was held that Patricians were eligible. Liv. iii. 65 (449B.C.) “Novi tribuni plebis in cooptandis collegis patrum voluntatem foverunt. Duos etiam patricios consularesque, Sp. Tarpeium et A. Aternium, cooptavere.” But, with the disuse of this principle, the plebeian qualification was observed.
[360]The principle of cooptation was said to have been recognised in thecarmen rogationisof the tribunate, and in this case it was held that Patricians were eligible. Liv. iii. 65 (449B.C.) “Novi tribuni plebis in cooptandis collegis patrum voluntatem foverunt. Duos etiam patricios consularesque, Sp. Tarpeium et A. Aternium, cooptavere.” But, with the disuse of this principle, the plebeian qualification was observed.
[361]Cic. ap. Ascon.in Cornel.p. 76 “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 creati sunt,” (For the number two Ascon.in loc.quotes Tuditanus and Atticus.) Cicero apparently understands by this the mixed assembly of thecuriae; and so does Livy (ii. 56, on thelex Publiliatransferring the elections of the tribunes to the tribes), “quae patriciis omnem potestatem per clientium suffragia creandi, quos vellent, tribunos auferret.”
[361]Cic. ap. Ascon.in Cornel.p. 76 “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 creati sunt,” (For the number two Ascon.in loc.quotes Tuditanus and Atticus.) Cicero apparently understands by this the mixed assembly of thecuriae; and so does Livy (ii. 56, on thelex Publiliatransferring the elections of the tribunes to the tribes), “quae patriciis omnem potestatem per clientium suffragia creandi, quos vellent, tribunos auferret.”
[362]It must have been so restricted at first. Later (as we shall see in dealing with the intercession) theauxiliumwas extended to the whole people.
[362]It must have been so restricted at first. Later (as we shall see in dealing with the intercession) theauxiliumwas extended to the whole people.
[363]Cic.de Rep.ii. 33, 58 “contra consulare imperium tribuni plebis ... constituti.”
[363]Cic.de Rep.ii. 33, 58 “contra consulare imperium tribuni plebis ... constituti.”
[364]Gell. xiii. 12 “(tribunis) jus abnoctandi ademptum, quoniam, ut vim fieri vetarent, adsiduitate eorum et praesentium oculis opus erat.” Cf. iii. 2. Plut.Qu. Rom.81 ὅθεν οὐδ’ οἰκίας αὐτοῦ κλείεσθαι νενόμισται θύραν, ἀλλὰ καὶ νύκτωρ ἀνέῳγε καὶ μεθ’ ἡμέραν, ὤσπερ λιμὴν καὶ καταφυγὴ τοῖς δεομένοις.
[364]Gell. xiii. 12 “(tribunis) jus abnoctandi ademptum, quoniam, ut vim fieri vetarent, adsiduitate eorum et praesentium oculis opus erat.” Cf. iii. 2. Plut.Qu. Rom.81 ὅθεν οὐδ’ οἰκίας αὐτοῦ κλείεσθαι νενόμισται θύραν, ἀλλὰ καὶ νύκτωρ ἀνέῳγε καὶ μεθ’ ἡμέραν, ὤσπερ λιμὴν καὶ καταφυγὴ τοῖς δεομένοις.
[365]For the increase to four see Diodor. xi. 68 (471B.C.in connexion with thelex Publilia); other accounts represent the original number as five (Ascon. l.c. p. 93, and Livy ii. 33; two elected, three coopted; cf. note on p. 93). The increase to ten is assigned by Livy and Dionysius to 457B.C.(Livy iii. 30; the tribunes allowed the levy “non sine pactione tamen ut ... decem deinde tribuni plebis crearentur. Expressit hoc necessitas patribus”; cf. Dionys. x. 30).
[365]For the increase to four see Diodor. xi. 68 (471B.C.in connexion with thelex Publilia); other accounts represent the original number as five (Ascon. l.c. p. 93, and Livy ii. 33; two elected, three coopted; cf. note on p. 93). The increase to ten is assigned by Livy and Dionysius to 457B.C.(Livy iii. 30; the tribunes allowed the levy “non sine pactione tamen ut ... decem deinde tribuni plebis crearentur. Expressit hoc necessitas patribus”; cf. Dionys. x. 30).
[366]Liv. ii. 35 “contemptim primo Marcius audiebat minas tribunicias; auxilii, non poenae, jus datum illi potestati; plebisque, non patrum, tribunos esse.” Coriolanus was probably impeached before the Plebs as ahostis tribuniciae potestatisin consequence of his advice that the tribunate should be abrogated (Liv. ii. 34). See ReinCriminalrechtp. 484. Cf. Liv. ii. 56 (471B.C.; the tribune seizes somenobileswho would not yield to hisviator) “Consul Appius negare jus esse tribuno in quemquam, nisi in plebeium; non enim populi, sed plebis, eum magistratum esse.”
[366]Liv. ii. 35 “contemptim primo Marcius audiebat minas tribunicias; auxilii, non poenae, jus datum illi potestati; plebisque, non patrum, tribunos esse.” Coriolanus was probably impeached before the Plebs as ahostis tribuniciae potestatisin consequence of his advice that the tribunate should be abrogated (Liv. ii. 34). See ReinCriminalrechtp. 484. Cf. Liv. ii. 56 (471B.C.; the tribune seizes somenobileswho would not yield to hisviator) “Consul Appius negare jus esse tribuno in quemquam, nisi in plebeium; non enim populi, sed plebis, eum magistratum esse.”
[367]Dionys. vii. 17 δημάρχου γνώμην ἀγορεύοντος ἐν δήμῳ μηδεὶς λεγέτω μηδὲν ἐναντίον μηδὲ μεσολαβείτω τὸν λόγον. ἐὰν δὲ τις παρὰ ταῦτα ποιὴσῃ, διδότω τοῖς δημάρχοις ἐγγυητὰς αἰτηθεὶς εἰς ἔκτισιν ἧς ἂν ἐποθῶσιν αὐτῷ ζημίας. Any one who does not give securities (ἐγγυηταί) is to be punished with death καὶ τὰ χρήματ’ αὐτοῦ ἱερὰ ἔστω. τῶν δ’ ἀμφισβητούντων πρὸς ταύτας τὰς ζημίας αἱ κρίσεις ἔστωσαν ἐπὶ τοῦ δήμου. Cf. vi. 16, and Cic.pro Sest.37, 79 “Fretus sanctitate tribunatus, cum se non modo contra vim et ferrum, sed etiam contra verba atque interfationem legibus sacratis esse armatum putaret.”
[367]Dionys. vii. 17 δημάρχου γνώμην ἀγορεύοντος ἐν δήμῳ μηδεὶς λεγέτω μηδὲν ἐναντίον μηδὲ μεσολαβείτω τὸν λόγον. ἐὰν δὲ τις παρὰ ταῦτα ποιὴσῃ, διδότω τοῖς δημάρχοις ἐγγυητὰς αἰτηθεὶς εἰς ἔκτισιν ἧς ἂν ἐποθῶσιν αὐτῷ ζημίας. Any one who does not give securities (ἐγγυηταί) is to be punished with death καὶ τὰ χρήματ’ αὐτοῦ ἱερὰ ἔστω. τῶν δ’ ἀμφισβητούντων πρὸς ταύτας τὰς ζημίας αἱ κρίσεις ἔστωσαν ἐπὶ τοῦ δήμου. Cf. vi. 16, and Cic.pro Sest.37, 79 “Fretus sanctitate tribunatus, cum se non modo contra vim et ferrum, sed etiam contra verba atque interfationem legibus sacratis esse armatum putaret.”