Chapter 29

[368]p. 66 note 5.[369]Dionys. x. 31, 32; see Mr. Strachan-Davidson in SmithDict. of Antiq.s.v.plebiscitum.[370]p. 39.[371]Dionys. vi. 90 ἄνδρας ἐκ τῶν δημοτικῶν δύο καθ’ ἕκαστον ἐνιαυτὸν ἀποδεικνύναι τοὺς ὑπηρετήσοντας τοῖς δημάρχοις ὅσων ἂν δέωνται καὶ δίκας, ἅς ἂν ἐπιτρέψωνται ἐκεῖνοι, κρινοῦντας ἱερῶν τε καὶ δημοσίων τόπων καὶ τῆς κατὰ τὴν ἀγορὰν ἐυετηρίας ἐπιμελησομένους: Gell. xvii. 21 “tribunos et aediles tum primum per seditionem sibi plebes creavit”; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 21 “Itemque ut essent qui aedibus praeessent, in quibus omnia scita sua plebs deferebat, duos ex plebe constituerunt, qui etiam aediles appellati sunt.”[372]Dionysius (l.c.) suggests that they originally bore another title. Pomponius (l.c.) derives the name from their office in the temple of Ceres; Varro from their care of the repair ofaedesboth sacred and private (VarroL.L.v. 81 “aedilis, qui aedes sacras et privatas procuraret”), a derivation which Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 480) favours. Their relation to the aediles of the Latin towns is wholly uncertain. Mommsen (ib. p. 474) holds strongly to the view that the Latin aedileship was borrowed from the Roman. For a different view cf. OhnesseitZtschr. der Savigny-stiftung1883, pp. 200 sq.[373]Plut.Coriol.18 (the tribune Sicinnius) προσέταξε τοῖς ἀγορανόμοις ἀναγαγόντας αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὴν ἄκραν εὐθὺς ὦσαι κατὰ τῆς ὑποκειμένης φάραγγος. So later in the trial of P. Scipio. Liv. xxix. 20; xxxviii. 52.[374]Liv. iii. 31 (456B.C.; the consuls sell booty taken from the Aequi) “itaque ergo, ut magistratu abiere ... dies dicta est, Romilio ab C. Calvio Cicerone, tribuno plebis, Veturio ab L. Alieno, aedile plebis.”[375]Yet Livy attributes both to the fifth century; they perform police-duties in the year 463 (Liv. iii. 6), and are entrusted with the care of the state religion in 428 (Liv. iv. 30).[376]Livy, however (iii. 55, cited note 2), represents thesacrosanctitasof the aediles as being based only on law.[377]Dionys. vi. 89. Thesacrosanctitasof the tribune is guaranteed νόμῳ τε καὶ ὅρκῳ. Cf. App.B.C.ii. 108 ἡ τῶν δημάρχων ἀρχὴ ἱερὰ καὶ ἄσυλος ἦν ἐκ νόμου καὶ ὅρκου παλαιοῦ. For these two grounds of inviolability see Liv. iii. 55 (restoration of tribunate in 449) “et cum religione inviolatos eos, tum lege etiam fecerunt, sanciendo ‘ut qui tribunis plebis, aedilibus, judicibus, decemviris nocuisset, ejus caput Jovi sacrum esset, familia ad aedem Cereris, Liberi Liberaeque venum iret.’ Hac lege juris interpretes negant quemquam sacrosanctum esse; sed eum, qui eorum cuiquam nocuerit, sacrum sanciri. Itaque aedilem prendi ducique a majoribus magistratibus: quod etsi non jure fiat (noceri enim ei, cui hac lege non liceat) tamen argumentum esse, non haberi pro sacro sanctoque aedilem: tribunos vetere jurejurando plebis, cum primum eam potestatem creavit, sacrosanctos esse” (cf. Liv. ii. 33 “sacratam legem latam” on the Mons Sacer).[378]Resistance to the will of amagistratus populiis notperduellioin later Roman law, but rathervis. But resistance to the tribune is alwaysmajestas.[379]Dionys. vii. 17. See p. 96.[380]Liv. ii 56 (Publilius Volero) “rogationem tulit ad populum, ut plebei magistratus tributis comitiis fierent” (followed by the words cited on p. 94).[381]This is Livy’s view (l.c.), “nec, quae una vis ad resistendum erat, ut intercederet aliquis ex collegio ... adduci posset.”[382]The ground of objection given by Livy (ii. 56, cited p. 94) rests on the belief that the tribunes had been formerly elected by thecomitia curiata.[383]Aemilia, [Camilia], Claudia, Cornelia, Fabia, [Galeria], Horatia, [Lemonia], Menenia, Papiria, [Pollia], [Pupinia], Romulia or Romilia, Sergia, [Voltinia], Voturia or Veturia (from Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 168; the names he encloses in brackets are those to which there are no extant patriciangentesto correspond).[384]Dionys. vii. 64.[385]Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 153.[386]See Appendix.[387]Livy (iii. 9) says, “ut vviri creentur legibus de imperio consulari scribendis.” Even if this expression is due to a misunderstanding of the title of the decemvirs, “consulari imperio legibus scribendis” (Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 702), it no doubt expresses a fact. For the nature and object of the decemvirate see Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 4 (of the appointment of the decemvirs) “datumque est eis jus eo anno in civitate summum, uti leges et corrigerent, si opus esset, et interpretarentur neque provocatio ab eis sicut a reliquis magistratibus fieret”; ib. (of the publication of the laws) “quas in tabulas eboreas perscriptas pro rostris composuerunt, ut possint leges apertius percipi.” Cf. Dionys. x. 1, 60.[388]Livy (iii. 11, 26, and 29) seems to speak of the law not being allowed to pass the Plebs; but then he does not recognise the two stages of legislation. See p. 97.[389]Liv. iii. 31.[390]ib. 33; cf. Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 714.[391]Liv. iii. 32 “postremo concessum patribus, modo ne lex Icilia de Aventino, aliaeque sacratae leges abrogarentur.” As to thesacratae leges, the aedileship would have gone with the tribunate; and there was nothing more to be protected by theleges sacratae.[392]Their title wasDecemviri consulari imperio legibus scribendis(Capitoline Fasti). Cf. Liv. iii. 32 (“placet creari xviros sine provocatione, et ne quis eo anno alius magistratus esset”) and Pompon. inDig.(cited p. 102).[393]Liv. iii. 34 “se ... omnibus, summis infimisque jura aequasse.”[394]Dionys. x. 58; Liv. iii. 35.[395]Liv. iii. 57. The accounts of the material of the “Tables” vary. Livy (l.c.) says “in aes incisas in publico proposuerunt”; Pomponius (inDig., cited p. 102) says “in tabulas eboreas perscriptas” (perhapsroboreasoraereas, Kipp,Quellenkunde des R.R.p. 8). It is possible that they were of wood.[396]Liv. iii. 34 “fons omnis publici privatique est juris”; Tac.Ann.iii. 27 “creatique decemviri et accitis quae usquam egregia compositae duodecim tabulae, finis aequi juris.”[397]Cic.de Leg.ii. 23, 59 “Discebamus enim pueri XII, ut carmen necessarium; quas jam nemo discit.”[398]Liv. iii. 34.[399]p. 19.[400]UlpianReg.ii. 4.[401]p. 10.[402]p. 91.[403]CatoR.R.praef.[404]Plin.H.N.xviii. 3, 12.[405]Cic.de Rep.iv. 12.[406]Gell. xx. 1.[407]Marcian inDig.48, 4, 3 “Lex duodecim tabularum jubet eum, qui hostem concitaverit quive civem hosti tradiderit, capite puniri.”[408]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 23. See p. 80.[409]Cic.de Rep.ii. 31, 54 “ab omni judicio poenaque provocari licere indicant XII Tabulae compluribus legibus.”[410]Cic.de Leg.iii. 4, 11.[411]Decl. in Catil.19.[412]This rule is said to have been taken from a law of Solon’s (Gaius inDig.47, 22, 4). Other traces of Greek influence are perhaps to be found in the sumptuary regulations, especially those about funerals, and perhaps in the prohibition of interment within the city. Gaius finds also a Solonian parallel to theactio finium regundorumordained by the law (Dig.10, 1, 13).[413]Liv. vii. 17 “in duodecim tabulis legem esse, ut quodcumque postremum populus jussisset, id jus ratumque esset.”[414]Liv. iii. 53.[415]ib. 54 “ibi extemplo, pontifice maximo comitia habente, tribunos plebis creaverunt.”[416]ib. “Confestim de consulibus creandis cum provocatione M. Duilius rogationem pertulit.” Such a resolution would not need confirmation by the people, as, after the fall of the decemvirs, aninterregnumwould naturally ensue; and this was a matter for the Senate. But Livy also represents the tribune as (in accordance with asenatus consultum) passing the act of amnesty, iii. 54 “Tribunatu inito, L. Icilius extemplo plebem rogavit, et plebs scivit, ne cui fraudi esset secessio ab decemviris facta.” In later Roman law amnesty resides with the Senate.[417]Liv. iii. 55 “ne quis ullum magistratum sine provocatione crearet, qui creasset, eum jus fasque esset occidi: neve ea caedes capitalis noxae haberetur.”[418]p. 79.[419]p. 79.[420]p. 99.[421]Liv. iii. 55 “omnium primum, cum velut in controverso jure esset, tenerenturne patres plebiscitis, legem centuriatis comitiis tulere ‘ut quod,’” etc. Cf. Dionys. xi. 45.[422]Mr. Strachan-Davidson in SmithDict. of Antiq.s.v.plebiscitum, andEnglish Historical ReviewNos. 2 and 19.[423]p. 97.[424]p. 107.[425]Types of such laws between 449 and 287B.C.are thelex Terentilia(462),Canuleia(445),Licinia(367),Ogulnia(300).[426]Liv. iii. 55 “M. Duilius deinde tribunus plebis plebem rogavit, plebesque scivit: ‘qui plebem sine tribunis reliquisset, quique magistratum sine provocatione creasset, tergo ac capita puniretur.’”[427]Liv. iv. 1 “de conubio patrum et plebis C. Canuleius tribunus plebis rogationem promulgavit.”[428]See p. 39 and cf. Liv. iv. 6; the consuls (in acontio) gave as the official reason “quod nemo plebeius auspicia haberet; ideoque decemviros conubium diremisse, ne incerta prole auspicia turbarentur.”[429]Liv. iv. 1 “et mentio, primo sensim inlata a tribunis, ut alterum ex plebe consulem liceret fieri, eo processit deinde, ut rogationem novem tribuni promulgarent, ‘ut populo potestas esset, seu de plebe, seu de patribus vellet, consules faciendi.’”[430]The situation at the beginning of the year thus is described by Livy (iv. 2), “eodem tempore et consules senatum in tribunum, et tribunus populum in consules incitabat.” At last (Liv. iv. 6) “victi tandem patres, ut de conubio ferretur, consensere.”[431]Liv. iv. 6.[432]ib. 35.[433]Claudius inTab. Lugd.“quid (commemorem) in pluris distributum consulare imperium tribunosque militum consulari imperio appellatos, qui seni et saepe octoni crearentur.”[434]Livy sometimes speaks of eight (v. 1, vi. 27); cf.Tab. Lugd.cited note 3. It is probable that this number includes the six tribunes and the two censors (Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 184); e.g. Livy gives eight for the year 403, the Fasti Capitol. for the same year (351A.U.C.C.I.L.i. p. 428) six and two censors.[435]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 25 “cum ... plebs contenderet cum patribus et vellet ex suo quoque corpora consules creare, et patres recusarent, factum est ut tribuni militum crearentur partim ex plebe, partim ex patribus consulari potestate.”[436]Liv. v. 12. This is maintained to be an error by Mommsen,Röm. Forsch.i. 66;Staatsr.ii. p. 188. He holds that in 445B.C.one L. Atilius Longus was a Plebeian, and that in 400, 399, 396 the Plebeians had a majority. Livy’s view is upheld by WillemsLe Sénati. 58-60.[437]If it be taken to prove that the preponderance of voting power in thecomitia centuriatawas still on the side of the Patricians, it would throw a valuable side-light on the relative economic position of the two orders.[438]Imperium(Tab. Lugd.quoted p. 112);potestas(Liv. iv. 6);jus(Tac.Ann.i. 1).[439]Liv. iv. 7 “et imperio et insignibus consularibus usos.”[440]ib. v. 13, 52.[441]“Proconsularis imago” (Liv. v. 2).[442]Zonar. vii. 19.[443]Liv. iv. 55 “pervincunt, ut senatus consultum fiat de tribunis militum creandis”; iv. 12 “cum ... obtinuisset, ut consulerentur patres, consulum an tribunorum placeret comitia haberi.” Dionysius (xi. 60) represents the people as being consulted too.[444]i.e. in accordance with the law, if there was one, establishing the office.[445]Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 191.[446]Liv. iv. 8 “ortum autem initium est rei, quod in populo, per multos annos incenso, neque differri census poterat, neque consulibus, cum tot populorum bella imminerent, operae erat id negotium agere.” Cf. Dionys. xi. 63.[447]Liv. l.c. “Idem hic annus censurae initium fuit, rei a parva origine ortae.”[448]Liv. iv. 24. Mommsen indeed thinks (Staatsr.ii. p. 349) that thislex Aemiliafirst made the censorship an independent magistracy with a fixed tenure. It was probably an independent magistracy before, but with no fixed tenure. Hence the belief that the censors originally held office for five years, the period of thelustrum(Liv. l.c., cf. ix. 34).[449]pp. 81, 102.[450]Liv. iv. 43 (discord between the Patres and the Plebs) “exorta est, coepta ab duplicando quaestorum numero ... praeter duos urbanos quaestores duo ut consulibus ad ministeria belli praesto essent.” The tribunes demanded “ut pars quaestorum ... ex plebe fieret.” The compromise arrived at was that “quattuor quaestores promiscue de plebe ac patribus libero suffragio populi fierent.”[451]ib. 54. The Plebs, indignant at the election of consuls in place of military tribunes, “eum dolorem quaestoriis comitiis simul ostendit, et ulta est, tunc primum plebeiis quaestoribus creatis: ita ut, in quattuor creandis, uni patricio K. Fabio Ambusto relinqueretur locus.” For the election at thecomitia tributasee p. 102.[452]p. 83 note 2.[453]Liv. iv. 25. Theprincipes plebis, in despair at the choice of the military tribunate always falling on Patricians, came to the conclusion that it was “ambitione artibusque” of the Patricians. Hence a tribunician measure “ne cui album in vestimentum addere petitionis liceret causa.” After great resistance “vicere tribuni ut legem perferrent.”[454]“Principes plebis” (Liv. l.c.).[455]ib. vi. 31 “conditiones impositae patribus, ne quis, quoad bellatum esset, tributum daret, aut jus de pecunia credita diceret.”[456]ib. 35 “omnium igitur simul rerum, quarum immodica cupido inter mortales est, agri, pecuniae, honorum, discrimine proposito, conterriti patres, etc.”[457]Liv. vi. 37 “Novam rogationem promulgant, ut pro duumviris sacris faciundis decemviri creentur; ita ut pars ex plebe, pars ex patribus fiat.”[458]ib. 38. His statements are inconsistent. He speaks of the college as being unanimous, and yet ofintercessiobeing used at the meeting.[459]Liv. vi. 42 “concessum ... a plebe nobilitati de praetore uno, qui jus in urbe diceret, ex patribus creando,” probably by a clause introduced into the Licinian rogations when they were submitted by the consul to the Populus (see p. 97). The true motive is given by Pomponius inDig.1, 2, 2, 27, “Cum consules avocarentur bellis finitimis neque esset, qui in urbe jus reddere posset, factum est ut praetor quoque crearetur, qui urbanus appellatus est, quod in urbe jus redderet.”[460]Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 204) doubts it, chiefly on the ground that no law is mentioned as opening the office to Plebeians thirty years later. Probably the same doubt hung over the praetorship as over the second place in the consulship, i.e. whether the Licinian law, by reserving one consulship to the Plebs, had left the other posts open to both orders or not.[461]Liv. vii. 1 “collegam consulibus atque iisdem auspiciis creatum.” Cf. Gell. xiii. 15.[462]An instance of the exercise of a consular veto over a judicial decision of a praetor in 77B.C.is preserved by Valerius Maximus (vii. 7, 6).[463]Liv. viii. 15 “eodem anno Q. Publilius Philo praetor primus de plebe, adversante Sulpicio consule, qui negabat rationem ejus se habiturum, est factus; senatu, cum in summis imperiis id non obtinuisset, minus in praetura intendente.”[464]p. 98.[465]Liv. vi. 42 “Factum senatus consultum, ut duo viros aediles ex patribus dictator populum rogaret.”[466]ib. vii. 1 (366B.C.) “verecundia inde imposita est senatui ex patribus jubendi aediles curules creari. primo, ut alternis annis ex plebe fierent, convenerat; [this was the rule in 213 (Polyb. x. 4)]. postea promiscuum fuit” [Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 482) thinks as late as the last century of the Republic].[467]ib. 17 “dictator C. Marcius Rutilus primus de plebe dictus”; he appointed a plebeian master of the horse.[468]ib. 22. The same C. Marcius Rutilus “professus censuram se petere” was elected.[469]ib. viii. 12 “ut alter utique ex plebe ... censor crearetur.”[470]ib.Ep.59 “Q. Pompeius et Q. Metellus, tunc primum utrique ex plebe facti, censores lustrum condiderunt.”[471]Liv. vii. 42. The law was proposed by the tribune L. Genucius. It was not, however, until the year 172B.C.that both consuls were plebeian (Liv. xlii. 9; Fast. Cap.C.I.L.i. 1 p. 25).[472]p. 52.[473]Livy (x. 6) marvels at the fact; he thinks that it must have been accidental (“morte duorum”), since the augural college should have consisted of three or of a multiple of three. Cicero (de Rep.ii. 9, 16) says that Romulus coopted (cooptavit) one from each of the three tribes; they were therefore four; that Numa added two (ib. ii. 14, 26). This makes six, which Livy (l.c.) thinks the normal number at the time of the passing of the Ogulnian law.[474]Liv. x. 6. These numbers remained unaltered until the time of Sulla (81B.C.), who raised the colleges of pontiffs and augurs to fifteen (Liv.Ep.89). A sixteenth was added to both colleges by Julius Caesar (Dio Cass. xlii. 51).[475]Liv. xxxiii. 42. The number was afterwards increased to seven, from which time the college was known as that of theVIIviri epulones.[476]MarquardtStaatsverw.iii. p. 333.[477]Liv. iii. 32 “augur (mortuus est) C. Horatius Pulvillus; in cujus locum C. Veturium eo cupidius, quia damnatus a plebe erat, augures legere.” Thepontifex maximuswas early an exception to this rule; see thecomitia sacerdotumin the section dealing with the people.[478]Cic.de Leg. Agr.ii. 7, 18; Vell. ii. 12.[479]Liv. viii. 12.[480]p. 109.[481]Mr. Strachan-Davidson conjectures that the law of Publilius Philo “may have struck out the intervening consultation of the Senate, and may have required the consul to bring the petition of the Plebs at once before the Populus” (SmithDict. of Antiq.s.v.plebiscitum, ii. p. 439).[482]p. 83.[483]The only evidence that they were is furnished by Livy’s account of alex Manliaof 357B.C.(WillemsDroit Publicp. 183). See Liv. vii. 16 (Manlius the consul) “legem, novo exemplo ad Sutrium in castris tributim de vicesima eorum, qui manumitterentur, tulit. Patres, quia ea lege haud parvum vectigal inopi aerario additum esset, auctores fuerunt.”[484]ib. viii. 12 “ut legum, quae comitiis centuriatis ferrentur, ante initum suffragium patres auctores fierent.”[485]Cic.Brut.14, 55. Cf. Liv. i. 17 “hodie ... in legibus magistratibusque rogandis usurpatur idem jus (thepatrum auctoritas), vi adempta.”[486]Laelius Felix ap. Gell. 15, 27 “(plebi scitis) ante patricii non tenebantur, donec Q. Hortensius dictator legem tulit, ut eo jure quod plebs statuisset, omnes quirites tenerentur”; Plin.H.N.xvi. 10, 37 “ut quod ea (plebs) jussisset, omnes quirites teneret.”[487]Gaius i. 3 “olim patricii dicebant plebi scitis se non teneri, quia sine auctoritate eorum facta essent; sed postea lex Hortensia lata est, qua cautum est, ut plebi scita universum populum tenerent, itaque eo modo legibus exaequata sunt”; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 8 “pro legibus placuit et ea (plebiscita) observari lege Hortensia: et ita factum est, ut inter plebis scita et legem species constituendi interesset, potestas autem eadem esset.”[488]Pompon. l.c.[489]Thelex Agrariaof 111B.C.(BrunsFontes) thus refers to alex Semproniaof 123B.C., “[ex] lege plebeive scito, quod C. Sempronius Ti. f. tr. pl. rogavit.” Cf.lex Rubria(ib.) “ex lege Rubria seive id pl. sc. est.”[490]Thus Cicero, exiled by aplebiscitum, was restored by alex centuriata. See the section on the people.[491]Of the many instances one of the most remarkable is to be found in Sall.Jug.84, “Marius ... cupientissima plebe consul factus, postquam ei provinciam Numidiam populus jussit.” Hereplebsshould bepopulusandpopulus,plebs.[492]“Legislative” is here used in the modern sense. At Rome a judicial and elective act of the people was equally alex.[493]At least in 304B.C.they had no right ofrelatiowith the Senate (Liv. ix. 46).[494]Gaius iv. 23.[495]VarroL.L.viii. 105 “Hoc (the condition ofnexum) C. Poetilio Libone Visolo dictatore (313B.C.) sublatum ne fieret; et omnes, qui bonam copiam jurarunt, ne essent nexi dissoluti.” Livy (viii. 28), who attributes the measure to 326B.C., makes it a universal release ofnexi: “jussique consoles ferre ad populum, ne quis, nisi qui noxam meruisset, donec poenam lueret, in compedibus aut in nervo teneretur: pecuniae creditae bona debitoris, non corpus obnoxium esset.”[496]Liv. ix. 46 “Cn. Flavius ... patre libertino ... civile jus, repositum in penetralibus pontificum, evulgavit, fastosque circa forum in albo proposuit, ut quando lege agi posset, sciretur”; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 7 “postea cum Appius Claudius composuisset (for “proposuisset”) et ad formam redegisset has actiones, Cn. Flavius scriba ejus libertini filius subreptum librum populo tradidit ... hic liber, qui actiones continet, appellator jus civile Flavianum.”[497]Pompon. l.c. §§ 37, 38. Gaius Scipio Nasica was given a house for consultations. The first professor, Ti. Coruncanius (“qui primus profiteri coepit,” circ. 280B.C.), was also the first plebeianpontifex maximus.[498]Polyb. vi. 53.[499]Cic.in Verr.v. 14, 36 “togam praetextam, sellam curulem, jus imaginis ad memoriam posteritatemque prodendae.”

[368]p. 66 note 5.

[369]Dionys. x. 31, 32; see Mr. Strachan-Davidson in SmithDict. of Antiq.s.v.plebiscitum.

[370]p. 39.

[371]Dionys. vi. 90 ἄνδρας ἐκ τῶν δημοτικῶν δύο καθ’ ἕκαστον ἐνιαυτὸν ἀποδεικνύναι τοὺς ὑπηρετήσοντας τοῖς δημάρχοις ὅσων ἂν δέωνται καὶ δίκας, ἅς ἂν ἐπιτρέψωνται ἐκεῖνοι, κρινοῦντας ἱερῶν τε καὶ δημοσίων τόπων καὶ τῆς κατὰ τὴν ἀγορὰν ἐυετηρίας ἐπιμελησομένους: Gell. xvii. 21 “tribunos et aediles tum primum per seditionem sibi plebes creavit”; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 21 “Itemque ut essent qui aedibus praeessent, in quibus omnia scita sua plebs deferebat, duos ex plebe constituerunt, qui etiam aediles appellati sunt.”

[372]Dionysius (l.c.) suggests that they originally bore another title. Pomponius (l.c.) derives the name from their office in the temple of Ceres; Varro from their care of the repair ofaedesboth sacred and private (VarroL.L.v. 81 “aedilis, qui aedes sacras et privatas procuraret”), a derivation which Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 480) favours. Their relation to the aediles of the Latin towns is wholly uncertain. Mommsen (ib. p. 474) holds strongly to the view that the Latin aedileship was borrowed from the Roman. For a different view cf. OhnesseitZtschr. der Savigny-stiftung1883, pp. 200 sq.

[373]Plut.Coriol.18 (the tribune Sicinnius) προσέταξε τοῖς ἀγορανόμοις ἀναγαγόντας αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὴν ἄκραν εὐθὺς ὦσαι κατὰ τῆς ὑποκειμένης φάραγγος. So later in the trial of P. Scipio. Liv. xxix. 20; xxxviii. 52.

[374]Liv. iii. 31 (456B.C.; the consuls sell booty taken from the Aequi) “itaque ergo, ut magistratu abiere ... dies dicta est, Romilio ab C. Calvio Cicerone, tribuno plebis, Veturio ab L. Alieno, aedile plebis.”

[375]Yet Livy attributes both to the fifth century; they perform police-duties in the year 463 (Liv. iii. 6), and are entrusted with the care of the state religion in 428 (Liv. iv. 30).

[376]Livy, however (iii. 55, cited note 2), represents thesacrosanctitasof the aediles as being based only on law.

[377]Dionys. vi. 89. Thesacrosanctitasof the tribune is guaranteed νόμῳ τε καὶ ὅρκῳ. Cf. App.B.C.ii. 108 ἡ τῶν δημάρχων ἀρχὴ ἱερὰ καὶ ἄσυλος ἦν ἐκ νόμου καὶ ὅρκου παλαιοῦ. For these two grounds of inviolability see Liv. iii. 55 (restoration of tribunate in 449) “et cum religione inviolatos eos, tum lege etiam fecerunt, sanciendo ‘ut qui tribunis plebis, aedilibus, judicibus, decemviris nocuisset, ejus caput Jovi sacrum esset, familia ad aedem Cereris, Liberi Liberaeque venum iret.’ Hac lege juris interpretes negant quemquam sacrosanctum esse; sed eum, qui eorum cuiquam nocuerit, sacrum sanciri. Itaque aedilem prendi ducique a majoribus magistratibus: quod etsi non jure fiat (noceri enim ei, cui hac lege non liceat) tamen argumentum esse, non haberi pro sacro sanctoque aedilem: tribunos vetere jurejurando plebis, cum primum eam potestatem creavit, sacrosanctos esse” (cf. Liv. ii. 33 “sacratam legem latam” on the Mons Sacer).

[378]Resistance to the will of amagistratus populiis notperduellioin later Roman law, but rathervis. But resistance to the tribune is alwaysmajestas.

[379]Dionys. vii. 17. See p. 96.

[380]Liv. ii 56 (Publilius Volero) “rogationem tulit ad populum, ut plebei magistratus tributis comitiis fierent” (followed by the words cited on p. 94).

[381]This is Livy’s view (l.c.), “nec, quae una vis ad resistendum erat, ut intercederet aliquis ex collegio ... adduci posset.”

[382]The ground of objection given by Livy (ii. 56, cited p. 94) rests on the belief that the tribunes had been formerly elected by thecomitia curiata.

[383]Aemilia, [Camilia], Claudia, Cornelia, Fabia, [Galeria], Horatia, [Lemonia], Menenia, Papiria, [Pollia], [Pupinia], Romulia or Romilia, Sergia, [Voltinia], Voturia or Veturia (from Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 168; the names he encloses in brackets are those to which there are no extant patriciangentesto correspond).

[384]Dionys. vii. 64.

[385]Momms.Staatsr.iii. p. 153.

[386]See Appendix.

[387]Livy (iii. 9) says, “ut vviri creentur legibus de imperio consulari scribendis.” Even if this expression is due to a misunderstanding of the title of the decemvirs, “consulari imperio legibus scribendis” (Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 702), it no doubt expresses a fact. For the nature and object of the decemvirate see Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 4 (of the appointment of the decemvirs) “datumque est eis jus eo anno in civitate summum, uti leges et corrigerent, si opus esset, et interpretarentur neque provocatio ab eis sicut a reliquis magistratibus fieret”; ib. (of the publication of the laws) “quas in tabulas eboreas perscriptas pro rostris composuerunt, ut possint leges apertius percipi.” Cf. Dionys. x. 1, 60.

[388]Livy (iii. 11, 26, and 29) seems to speak of the law not being allowed to pass the Plebs; but then he does not recognise the two stages of legislation. See p. 97.

[389]Liv. iii. 31.

[390]ib. 33; cf. Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 714.

[391]Liv. iii. 32 “postremo concessum patribus, modo ne lex Icilia de Aventino, aliaeque sacratae leges abrogarentur.” As to thesacratae leges, the aedileship would have gone with the tribunate; and there was nothing more to be protected by theleges sacratae.

[392]Their title wasDecemviri consulari imperio legibus scribendis(Capitoline Fasti). Cf. Liv. iii. 32 (“placet creari xviros sine provocatione, et ne quis eo anno alius magistratus esset”) and Pompon. inDig.(cited p. 102).

[393]Liv. iii. 34 “se ... omnibus, summis infimisque jura aequasse.”

[394]Dionys. x. 58; Liv. iii. 35.

[395]Liv. iii. 57. The accounts of the material of the “Tables” vary. Livy (l.c.) says “in aes incisas in publico proposuerunt”; Pomponius (inDig., cited p. 102) says “in tabulas eboreas perscriptas” (perhapsroboreasoraereas, Kipp,Quellenkunde des R.R.p. 8). It is possible that they were of wood.

[396]Liv. iii. 34 “fons omnis publici privatique est juris”; Tac.Ann.iii. 27 “creatique decemviri et accitis quae usquam egregia compositae duodecim tabulae, finis aequi juris.”

[397]Cic.de Leg.ii. 23, 59 “Discebamus enim pueri XII, ut carmen necessarium; quas jam nemo discit.”

[398]Liv. iii. 34.

[399]p. 19.

[400]UlpianReg.ii. 4.

[401]p. 10.

[402]p. 91.

[403]CatoR.R.praef.

[404]Plin.H.N.xviii. 3, 12.

[405]Cic.de Rep.iv. 12.

[406]Gell. xx. 1.

[407]Marcian inDig.48, 4, 3 “Lex duodecim tabularum jubet eum, qui hostem concitaverit quive civem hosti tradiderit, capite puniri.”

[408]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 23. See p. 80.

[409]Cic.de Rep.ii. 31, 54 “ab omni judicio poenaque provocari licere indicant XII Tabulae compluribus legibus.”

[410]Cic.de Leg.iii. 4, 11.

[411]Decl. in Catil.19.

[412]This rule is said to have been taken from a law of Solon’s (Gaius inDig.47, 22, 4). Other traces of Greek influence are perhaps to be found in the sumptuary regulations, especially those about funerals, and perhaps in the prohibition of interment within the city. Gaius finds also a Solonian parallel to theactio finium regundorumordained by the law (Dig.10, 1, 13).

[413]Liv. vii. 17 “in duodecim tabulis legem esse, ut quodcumque postremum populus jussisset, id jus ratumque esset.”

[414]Liv. iii. 53.

[415]ib. 54 “ibi extemplo, pontifice maximo comitia habente, tribunos plebis creaverunt.”

[416]ib. “Confestim de consulibus creandis cum provocatione M. Duilius rogationem pertulit.” Such a resolution would not need confirmation by the people, as, after the fall of the decemvirs, aninterregnumwould naturally ensue; and this was a matter for the Senate. But Livy also represents the tribune as (in accordance with asenatus consultum) passing the act of amnesty, iii. 54 “Tribunatu inito, L. Icilius extemplo plebem rogavit, et plebs scivit, ne cui fraudi esset secessio ab decemviris facta.” In later Roman law amnesty resides with the Senate.

[417]Liv. iii. 55 “ne quis ullum magistratum sine provocatione crearet, qui creasset, eum jus fasque esset occidi: neve ea caedes capitalis noxae haberetur.”

[418]p. 79.

[419]p. 79.

[420]p. 99.

[421]Liv. iii. 55 “omnium primum, cum velut in controverso jure esset, tenerenturne patres plebiscitis, legem centuriatis comitiis tulere ‘ut quod,’” etc. Cf. Dionys. xi. 45.

[422]Mr. Strachan-Davidson in SmithDict. of Antiq.s.v.plebiscitum, andEnglish Historical ReviewNos. 2 and 19.

[423]p. 97.

[424]p. 107.

[425]Types of such laws between 449 and 287B.C.are thelex Terentilia(462),Canuleia(445),Licinia(367),Ogulnia(300).

[426]Liv. iii. 55 “M. Duilius deinde tribunus plebis plebem rogavit, plebesque scivit: ‘qui plebem sine tribunis reliquisset, quique magistratum sine provocatione creasset, tergo ac capita puniretur.’”

[427]Liv. iv. 1 “de conubio patrum et plebis C. Canuleius tribunus plebis rogationem promulgavit.”

[428]See p. 39 and cf. Liv. iv. 6; the consuls (in acontio) gave as the official reason “quod nemo plebeius auspicia haberet; ideoque decemviros conubium diremisse, ne incerta prole auspicia turbarentur.”

[429]Liv. iv. 1 “et mentio, primo sensim inlata a tribunis, ut alterum ex plebe consulem liceret fieri, eo processit deinde, ut rogationem novem tribuni promulgarent, ‘ut populo potestas esset, seu de plebe, seu de patribus vellet, consules faciendi.’”

[430]The situation at the beginning of the year thus is described by Livy (iv. 2), “eodem tempore et consules senatum in tribunum, et tribunus populum in consules incitabat.” At last (Liv. iv. 6) “victi tandem patres, ut de conubio ferretur, consensere.”

[431]Liv. iv. 6.

[432]ib. 35.

[433]Claudius inTab. Lugd.“quid (commemorem) in pluris distributum consulare imperium tribunosque militum consulari imperio appellatos, qui seni et saepe octoni crearentur.”

[434]Livy sometimes speaks of eight (v. 1, vi. 27); cf.Tab. Lugd.cited note 3. It is probable that this number includes the six tribunes and the two censors (Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 184); e.g. Livy gives eight for the year 403, the Fasti Capitol. for the same year (351A.U.C.C.I.L.i. p. 428) six and two censors.

[435]Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 25 “cum ... plebs contenderet cum patribus et vellet ex suo quoque corpora consules creare, et patres recusarent, factum est ut tribuni militum crearentur partim ex plebe, partim ex patribus consulari potestate.”

[436]Liv. v. 12. This is maintained to be an error by Mommsen,Röm. Forsch.i. 66;Staatsr.ii. p. 188. He holds that in 445B.C.one L. Atilius Longus was a Plebeian, and that in 400, 399, 396 the Plebeians had a majority. Livy’s view is upheld by WillemsLe Sénati. 58-60.

[437]If it be taken to prove that the preponderance of voting power in thecomitia centuriatawas still on the side of the Patricians, it would throw a valuable side-light on the relative economic position of the two orders.

[438]Imperium(Tab. Lugd.quoted p. 112);potestas(Liv. iv. 6);jus(Tac.Ann.i. 1).

[439]Liv. iv. 7 “et imperio et insignibus consularibus usos.”

[440]ib. v. 13, 52.

[441]“Proconsularis imago” (Liv. v. 2).

[442]Zonar. vii. 19.

[443]Liv. iv. 55 “pervincunt, ut senatus consultum fiat de tribunis militum creandis”; iv. 12 “cum ... obtinuisset, ut consulerentur patres, consulum an tribunorum placeret comitia haberi.” Dionysius (xi. 60) represents the people as being consulted too.

[444]i.e. in accordance with the law, if there was one, establishing the office.

[445]Momms.Staatsr.ii. p. 191.

[446]Liv. iv. 8 “ortum autem initium est rei, quod in populo, per multos annos incenso, neque differri census poterat, neque consulibus, cum tot populorum bella imminerent, operae erat id negotium agere.” Cf. Dionys. xi. 63.

[447]Liv. l.c. “Idem hic annus censurae initium fuit, rei a parva origine ortae.”

[448]Liv. iv. 24. Mommsen indeed thinks (Staatsr.ii. p. 349) that thislex Aemiliafirst made the censorship an independent magistracy with a fixed tenure. It was probably an independent magistracy before, but with no fixed tenure. Hence the belief that the censors originally held office for five years, the period of thelustrum(Liv. l.c., cf. ix. 34).

[449]pp. 81, 102.

[450]Liv. iv. 43 (discord between the Patres and the Plebs) “exorta est, coepta ab duplicando quaestorum numero ... praeter duos urbanos quaestores duo ut consulibus ad ministeria belli praesto essent.” The tribunes demanded “ut pars quaestorum ... ex plebe fieret.” The compromise arrived at was that “quattuor quaestores promiscue de plebe ac patribus libero suffragio populi fierent.”

[451]ib. 54. The Plebs, indignant at the election of consuls in place of military tribunes, “eum dolorem quaestoriis comitiis simul ostendit, et ulta est, tunc primum plebeiis quaestoribus creatis: ita ut, in quattuor creandis, uni patricio K. Fabio Ambusto relinqueretur locus.” For the election at thecomitia tributasee p. 102.

[452]p. 83 note 2.

[453]Liv. iv. 25. Theprincipes plebis, in despair at the choice of the military tribunate always falling on Patricians, came to the conclusion that it was “ambitione artibusque” of the Patricians. Hence a tribunician measure “ne cui album in vestimentum addere petitionis liceret causa.” After great resistance “vicere tribuni ut legem perferrent.”

[454]“Principes plebis” (Liv. l.c.).

[455]ib. vi. 31 “conditiones impositae patribus, ne quis, quoad bellatum esset, tributum daret, aut jus de pecunia credita diceret.”

[456]ib. 35 “omnium igitur simul rerum, quarum immodica cupido inter mortales est, agri, pecuniae, honorum, discrimine proposito, conterriti patres, etc.”

[457]Liv. vi. 37 “Novam rogationem promulgant, ut pro duumviris sacris faciundis decemviri creentur; ita ut pars ex plebe, pars ex patribus fiat.”

[458]ib. 38. His statements are inconsistent. He speaks of the college as being unanimous, and yet ofintercessiobeing used at the meeting.

[459]Liv. vi. 42 “concessum ... a plebe nobilitati de praetore uno, qui jus in urbe diceret, ex patribus creando,” probably by a clause introduced into the Licinian rogations when they were submitted by the consul to the Populus (see p. 97). The true motive is given by Pomponius inDig.1, 2, 2, 27, “Cum consules avocarentur bellis finitimis neque esset, qui in urbe jus reddere posset, factum est ut praetor quoque crearetur, qui urbanus appellatus est, quod in urbe jus redderet.”

[460]Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 204) doubts it, chiefly on the ground that no law is mentioned as opening the office to Plebeians thirty years later. Probably the same doubt hung over the praetorship as over the second place in the consulship, i.e. whether the Licinian law, by reserving one consulship to the Plebs, had left the other posts open to both orders or not.

[461]Liv. vii. 1 “collegam consulibus atque iisdem auspiciis creatum.” Cf. Gell. xiii. 15.

[462]An instance of the exercise of a consular veto over a judicial decision of a praetor in 77B.C.is preserved by Valerius Maximus (vii. 7, 6).

[463]Liv. viii. 15 “eodem anno Q. Publilius Philo praetor primus de plebe, adversante Sulpicio consule, qui negabat rationem ejus se habiturum, est factus; senatu, cum in summis imperiis id non obtinuisset, minus in praetura intendente.”

[464]p. 98.

[465]Liv. vi. 42 “Factum senatus consultum, ut duo viros aediles ex patribus dictator populum rogaret.”

[466]ib. vii. 1 (366B.C.) “verecundia inde imposita est senatui ex patribus jubendi aediles curules creari. primo, ut alternis annis ex plebe fierent, convenerat; [this was the rule in 213 (Polyb. x. 4)]. postea promiscuum fuit” [Mommsen (Staatsr.ii. p. 482) thinks as late as the last century of the Republic].

[467]ib. 17 “dictator C. Marcius Rutilus primus de plebe dictus”; he appointed a plebeian master of the horse.

[468]ib. 22. The same C. Marcius Rutilus “professus censuram se petere” was elected.

[469]ib. viii. 12 “ut alter utique ex plebe ... censor crearetur.”

[470]ib.Ep.59 “Q. Pompeius et Q. Metellus, tunc primum utrique ex plebe facti, censores lustrum condiderunt.”

[471]Liv. vii. 42. The law was proposed by the tribune L. Genucius. It was not, however, until the year 172B.C.that both consuls were plebeian (Liv. xlii. 9; Fast. Cap.C.I.L.i. 1 p. 25).

[472]p. 52.

[473]Livy (x. 6) marvels at the fact; he thinks that it must have been accidental (“morte duorum”), since the augural college should have consisted of three or of a multiple of three. Cicero (de Rep.ii. 9, 16) says that Romulus coopted (cooptavit) one from each of the three tribes; they were therefore four; that Numa added two (ib. ii. 14, 26). This makes six, which Livy (l.c.) thinks the normal number at the time of the passing of the Ogulnian law.

[474]Liv. x. 6. These numbers remained unaltered until the time of Sulla (81B.C.), who raised the colleges of pontiffs and augurs to fifteen (Liv.Ep.89). A sixteenth was added to both colleges by Julius Caesar (Dio Cass. xlii. 51).

[475]Liv. xxxiii. 42. The number was afterwards increased to seven, from which time the college was known as that of theVIIviri epulones.

[476]MarquardtStaatsverw.iii. p. 333.

[477]Liv. iii. 32 “augur (mortuus est) C. Horatius Pulvillus; in cujus locum C. Veturium eo cupidius, quia damnatus a plebe erat, augures legere.” Thepontifex maximuswas early an exception to this rule; see thecomitia sacerdotumin the section dealing with the people.

[478]Cic.de Leg. Agr.ii. 7, 18; Vell. ii. 12.

[479]Liv. viii. 12.

[480]p. 109.

[481]Mr. Strachan-Davidson conjectures that the law of Publilius Philo “may have struck out the intervening consultation of the Senate, and may have required the consul to bring the petition of the Plebs at once before the Populus” (SmithDict. of Antiq.s.v.plebiscitum, ii. p. 439).

[482]p. 83.

[483]The only evidence that they were is furnished by Livy’s account of alex Manliaof 357B.C.(WillemsDroit Publicp. 183). See Liv. vii. 16 (Manlius the consul) “legem, novo exemplo ad Sutrium in castris tributim de vicesima eorum, qui manumitterentur, tulit. Patres, quia ea lege haud parvum vectigal inopi aerario additum esset, auctores fuerunt.”

[484]ib. viii. 12 “ut legum, quae comitiis centuriatis ferrentur, ante initum suffragium patres auctores fierent.”

[485]Cic.Brut.14, 55. Cf. Liv. i. 17 “hodie ... in legibus magistratibusque rogandis usurpatur idem jus (thepatrum auctoritas), vi adempta.”

[486]Laelius Felix ap. Gell. 15, 27 “(plebi scitis) ante patricii non tenebantur, donec Q. Hortensius dictator legem tulit, ut eo jure quod plebs statuisset, omnes quirites tenerentur”; Plin.H.N.xvi. 10, 37 “ut quod ea (plebs) jussisset, omnes quirites teneret.”

[487]Gaius i. 3 “olim patricii dicebant plebi scitis se non teneri, quia sine auctoritate eorum facta essent; sed postea lex Hortensia lata est, qua cautum est, ut plebi scita universum populum tenerent, itaque eo modo legibus exaequata sunt”; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 8 “pro legibus placuit et ea (plebiscita) observari lege Hortensia: et ita factum est, ut inter plebis scita et legem species constituendi interesset, potestas autem eadem esset.”

[488]Pompon. l.c.

[489]Thelex Agrariaof 111B.C.(BrunsFontes) thus refers to alex Semproniaof 123B.C., “[ex] lege plebeive scito, quod C. Sempronius Ti. f. tr. pl. rogavit.” Cf.lex Rubria(ib.) “ex lege Rubria seive id pl. sc. est.”

[490]Thus Cicero, exiled by aplebiscitum, was restored by alex centuriata. See the section on the people.

[491]Of the many instances one of the most remarkable is to be found in Sall.Jug.84, “Marius ... cupientissima plebe consul factus, postquam ei provinciam Numidiam populus jussit.” Hereplebsshould bepopulusandpopulus,plebs.

[492]“Legislative” is here used in the modern sense. At Rome a judicial and elective act of the people was equally alex.

[493]At least in 304B.C.they had no right ofrelatiowith the Senate (Liv. ix. 46).

[494]Gaius iv. 23.

[495]VarroL.L.viii. 105 “Hoc (the condition ofnexum) C. Poetilio Libone Visolo dictatore (313B.C.) sublatum ne fieret; et omnes, qui bonam copiam jurarunt, ne essent nexi dissoluti.” Livy (viii. 28), who attributes the measure to 326B.C., makes it a universal release ofnexi: “jussique consoles ferre ad populum, ne quis, nisi qui noxam meruisset, donec poenam lueret, in compedibus aut in nervo teneretur: pecuniae creditae bona debitoris, non corpus obnoxium esset.”

[496]Liv. ix. 46 “Cn. Flavius ... patre libertino ... civile jus, repositum in penetralibus pontificum, evulgavit, fastosque circa forum in albo proposuit, ut quando lege agi posset, sciretur”; Pompon. inDig.1, 2, 2, 7 “postea cum Appius Claudius composuisset (for “proposuisset”) et ad formam redegisset has actiones, Cn. Flavius scriba ejus libertini filius subreptum librum populo tradidit ... hic liber, qui actiones continet, appellator jus civile Flavianum.”

[497]Pompon. l.c. §§ 37, 38. Gaius Scipio Nasica was given a house for consultations. The first professor, Ti. Coruncanius (“qui primus profiteri coepit,” circ. 280B.C.), was also the first plebeianpontifex maximus.

[498]Polyb. vi. 53.

[499]Cic.in Verr.v. 14, 36 “togam praetextam, sellam curulem, jus imaginis ad memoriam posteritatemque prodendae.”

Back to Index Next