CHAPTER XI

ITALY AND THE PROVINCES UNDER THE PRINCIPATE

§ 1. _The Organisation of Italy_

The chief feature of the organisation of Italy during the early Principate was the completion of the efforts made during the later Republic at incorporating its towns with Rome. The unity aimed at was chiefly that of jurisdiction, but we have no evidence of the steps which Augustus took to perfect the system of judicial centralisation, which had been devised at the close of the Republic.[2067] At the same time this Emperor adopted a device which, though its full details and effects are unknown, seemed to foreshadow the later principle of a close administrative unification of Italy with the capital. He divided the peninsula, exclusive of the immediate territory of Rome, into eleven regions (_regiones_).[2068] The immediate purpose contemplated by this division is unknown; but it laid the basis for subsequent distributions of many branches of Italian administration. The public domains, taxes paid by Roman citizens such as the _vicesima hereditatum_, and the results of the census, were organised or calculated by regions.[2069] They were employed, therefore, for work which necessarily fell on the central government, and this organisation so far implied no infringement on the communal autonomy of the towns. Such infringement came as a necessary result of the influence of the personality of the Princeps, which finally dominated Italy as effectually as it controlled Rome. But its coming was very gradual· The final change may be illustrated by the disappearance of the municipal _comitia_, the limitation of local jurisdiction, the loss of an independent system of local finance, and the control ultimately assumed by the central government of the actual administration of many of the Italian states.

Of these changes, the downfall of the _comitia_ is perhaps less remarkable than their continuance for so long a period after the assemblies had ceased to be a reality at Rome. A Latin colony in the time of Domitian still elects its magistrates at a _comitia curiata_,[2070] and the transference of this principle to Spain shows its prevalence at the time in Italy. The paucity of inscriptions of the early Principate which speak of elections by the only alternative body, the local Senate, is remarkable, and there are clear indications of the survival of the principle of popular election until the time of Antoninus Pius.[2071] It doubtless retained its hold on Italy as late as it did on the western provinces; its disappearance from the whole municipal sphere was the result of a new system of creating magistrates, the characteristics of which will be traced when we are dealing with the provinces of this period.[2072] The elective power of the assemblies no doubt survived all their administrative functions. The tendency even of the early Principate was to confine these to the local Senates, which were accounted more responsible bodies, and were far better instruments of the central controlling power of Rome.

The limitation of the local courts of law cannot be fully illustrated, but it is to some extent connected with the establishment of high individual authorities for jurisdiction in Italy, which begins with Hadrian. That Emperor divided Italy into four great circuits, and placed each of them under a _consularis_.[2073] These magistrates were replaced under Marcus Aurelius by _juridici_[2074] of praetorian rank, whose purely civil jurisdiction was finally concerned with that portion of Italy which was separated from the _urbica dioecesis_, the sphere of the praetor’s competence.[2075] These officials are mentioned only in connexion with extraordinary jurisdiction concerned with trusts, the nomination of guardians,[2076] or questions of administrative law, such as a controversy concerning the qualification for the decurionate.[2077] But, as extraordinary jurisdiction was gaining the upper hand of the _jus ordinarium_, and as such administrative questions would at an earlier period have been settled by the municipalities themselves,[2078] the powers of the _juridici_ may be regarded as a very real limitation of those of the local magistrates and senates. We have already seen that all the higher criminal jurisdiction of these towns had disappeared. Within the limit of a hundred miles from Rome such cognisance belonged to the praefect of the city, outside this limit to the praefect of the guard.[2079]

The financial difficulties under which many of the Italian towns laboured, invited a further system of imperial control. This took the form of the institution of _curatores rei publicae_, of senatorial or equestrian rank, whose existence is traceable from the close of the first century A.D., and who were given by the Princeps as extraordinary commissioners to reinvigorate the financial life of poverty-stricken municipalities.[2080]

But an even more vigorous control was impending, which was to bring Italy nearer to the condition of a province. The extraordinary commissioners known as _correctores_ (διορθωταί), whom the Principate often gave to free cities or districts in the provinces,[2081] were finally transferred to Italy.[2082] When its municipalities were placed under this tutelage, there was little more than a formal difference between their condition and that of the subject towns, and nothing but a more regular system of administration and the imposition of direct taxation was wanted to change Italy into a province. Both these changes were effected under the rule of Diocletian. Italy was, it is true, not divided into _provinciae_, but its districts were placed under regularly-appointed _correctores_, and its lands supplied revenues to the imperial court and to Rome. This climax of centralisation was probably the inevitable result of the imperial system and the external circumstances of the time. To the Princeps Italian and provincial problems were the same; Italy was not always the country in which the Emperor established his permanent residence, and, as the onset of the barbarians threatened even the Italian frontier, there was no possible reason why Italy should not pay its quota to the general taxation. But economic and social evils may have contributed to the imperial encroachments on Italian administration. The weaknesses which led to imperial control may have been those which the Emperors sought to cure. These were poverty and depopulation, and how earnestly they were grappled with may be seen by a glance at the system of state support known as the _alimentarium_. The leading idea of this institution is the endowment of a state or district with a fund which should give partial support to children, and by this means encourage production and relieve the responsibilities of parents or guardians. Such charitable efforts had, at an early period, been made by individuals;[2083] and from the reign of Nerva the state, as represented by the Princeps, took up the enterprise. Nerva’s example was followed by Trajan,[2084] who extended and organised the system, and similar efforts were made by Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, and Severus Alexander.[2085] The form usually taken by the endowment was an advance by the Princeps of funds which were deposited on good landed security at moderate interest, 5 or 2½ per cent. From this interest a certain number of boys and girls were to be supported, by the gift either of a certain amount of corn or of a sum of money—twelve, sixteen, or twenty sesterces—per month. This support was guaranteed until the boys had attained their eighteenth and the girls their fourteenth year.[2086] The details of this organisation were supervised in each locality by a _quaestor alimentorum_, while the general control of the funds over a large district was usually entrusted to the curators of the roads[2087] which ran through that domain, who sometimes bore the title _praefectus_, sometimes that of _curator alimentorum_.[2088] This wise method of charitable relief, which inspired an interest in agriculture while it relieved poverty and encouraged the growth of population, continued in force until the close of the Principate, and the _praefecti_, who administered this department, can be traced till the time of Diocletian.[2089]

§ 2. _The Organisation of the Provinces_

The imperial problem of the later Republic—the task of finding a frontier—occupied the unceasing energy of the early Principes, and in this, as in similar cases in the history of the world, delimitation involved extension. Sometimes the views as to the proper boundary altered, and advance was at times succeeded by retrogression. Thus Augustus sought the Elbe only to fall back on the Rhine, and Trajan adopted against the great eastern power a heroic policy of annexation which did not commend itself to his successor. In one instance, too—that of Britain—a forward movement was made which can scarcely be explained as the search for a scientific frontier. But, on the whole, the slow and ordered progress was one that sought not territories, but boundaries, and the movement necessitated expansion, whether it took the form of the annexation of the wild districts to the south of the Danube, or the gradual absorption of the kingdoms and principalities which intervened between the old Asiatic provinces and the Euphrates or the African dominions and the sea. The Danube, the Rhine, and the German Ocean; the Euphrates and the Syrian Desert; the Ethiopian kingdoms, the Sahara, and the Atlantic, were the limits within which the Principate was to strive to make the best of the means left by the victorious Republic for the government of the world. The Republic had indeed laid a solid foundation for ordered rule, and although we are accustomed to think of the Roman Empire chiefly in connexion with the three peaceful centuries of the Principate, it should not be forgotten that the work of the latter was chiefly the introduction, not of original ideas, but of those slight but decisive modifications which are sufficient to change a clumsy into a workable machine. A more effective, although far from perfect, system of military defence, a greater division of authority amongst the organs of government, a more careful estimate of provincial burdens, a competent although perhaps over-rigid civil service,—these were the immediate gifts of the Principate to the world. The results were comfort and peace; but a comfort that was too often divested of even local patriotism, and a peace that was singularly devoid of intellectual ideals. A universal citizenship was also amongst the hidden treasures of the Empire, but it was a gift conferred in proportion to its valuelessness, and the Princeps whose edict was to make the world a city was a calculating spendthrift bent only on increasing the taxes of his subjects. But, since the golden mean of Empire had yet to be found, we cannot blame the Principate for doing too much that which the Republic did too little. Every reaction is violent, and in this instance at least over-government was intended to be in the interest of the subject. The subject acclaimed it, at least in its initial stages,[2090] although his descendant was to find it a burden in comparison with which the yoke of the Republican proconsul would have seemed a trifle.

Augustus with characteristic modesty and discretion reserved his strength for the most difficult of the provinces—those on the frontier which demanded military occupation and unusual vigilance in administration—and thus created the distinction between Caesar’s provinces and those which were public (_publicae_) and were entrusted to the care of the Senate and people.[2091] There were occasional interchanges of provinces between the co-rulers. Thus Achaea and Macedonia were relinquished by the Senate in A.D. 15, but restored to it in A.D. 44,[2092] and Marcus Aurelius took over or surrendered districts according to the necessities of war.[2093] But in the middle of the Principate the Senate possessed but eleven,[2094] the Princeps twenty-one under regular governors,[2095] nine administered by procurators,[2096] one, Egypt, ruled by an equestrian praefect.

As in the Republic, the only true provincial _civitates_ were those which were _stipendiariae_. The free or free and allied communities were still technically exempt from the governor’s control. But the free cities were lessened in number and restricted in privileges. The supposed abuse of its self-governing powers by a _foederata civitas_ might cause the treaty to be rescinded and the state to be brought under direct provincial rule;[2097] while, even when _libertas_ was retained, its merits might be suspected, and the state might be placed under the financial tutelage of _curatores_ (λογισταί) or the administrative care of _correctores_ (διορθωταί) appointed by the Princeps.[2098] It is also certain that _libertas_ no longer conferred immunity from taxation. We know that, of the cities of Asia which are described as tributary in the reign of Tiberius,[2099] two, Magnesia ad Sipylum and Apollonidea, were _liberae_,[2100] while Byzantium, which had been in alliance with Rome during the Republic, also paid tribute in the reign of Claudius.[2101] This change, which is specially noticeable in the East, has been with great probability attributed to Pompeius. While granting or renewing charters and privileges, he reserved to Rome the right to tax,[2102] and thus dissociated the ideas of _libertas_ and _immunitas_, which had hitherto been inseparable. The new principle was so fully accepted by the Principate that even the possession of Latin rights could not have exempted a state from taxation,[2103] and the immunity of cities became more of an exceptional political privilege. Sometimes it took the form of exemption only from a special tax, such as the freedom from the port dues of Illyricum claimed by the state Tyras in Moesia.[2104] Less frequently it was a freedom from all external burdens, such as that enjoyed, on account of its historical associations, by the town of Ilium.[2105] But the favourite means of granting immunity to a state was to confer the right known as the _jus Italicum_—a right which implied that the members of the city were, like the inhabitants of Italy, in quiritarian ownership of their soil, and, therefore, exempt from the land-tax. This right generally accompanied the honorary designation of the town as a _colonia_, although the title might be conferred without the right,[2106] or be accompanied by only a partial immunity.[2107] Many states in Lusitania, Gaul, Germany, Syria, and Phoenicia were made _coloniae_ and granted the _jus Italicum_.[2108]

The two great problems in taxation which confronted the early Principate were the formation of an estimate of the resources of the Empire, and the apportionment of burdens by reference to the capacities of the various countries. Both tasks were undertaken vigorously by Augustus. To both belong his budget of the resources of the Empire,[2109] the geographical works undertaken under the auspices of Agrippa,[2110] and the comprehensive assessments made in various provinces. The right of making such assessments belonged to the Princeps,[2111] and seems not to have been limited to his own provinces, although it is to these that our definite information chiefly refers. The first known census of the kind was that undertaken in the three Gauls in 27 B.C.,[2112] which we find renewed in the years 14, 17, and 61 A.D.[2113] There is a trace of an Augustan census in Spain,[2114] and a similar task was undertaken in Syria.[2115] When these great preliminary estimates were over, provision had to be made for a periodical revision of the assessment. This was done under imperial control and for each province separately. A special imperial decree was issued, and under it the commissioner (_censor_, _censitor_, _ad census accipiendos_)[2116] made a renewed estimate, with the assistance of delegates, in the shape of equestrian officers and procurators, for the special communities or districts in the provinces subject to the census. Originally the chief officials were of senatorial rank, but after the end of the second century equestrian procurators were generally entrusted with the census[2117]—a circumstance which is probably to be accounted for by the fact that in the course of years the duty of making out the returns had become more automatic and therefore simpler.[2118] It is not known whether there were fixed dates for the regular recurrence of the census in each province;[2119] but there were taxes, such as the _tributum capitis_ in Syria, paid only by people of an age that fitted them for labour,[2120] which would have demanded renewed registration at somewhat short intervals; and in Egypt there was a cycle of fourteen years for the payment at least of the poll-tax, which goes back to the time of Tiberius and perhaps of Augustus.[2121] The careful nature of the estimate of the land-tax is shown by the official form of the schedule of returns (_forma censualis_), which has been preserved. This specified the community and _pagus_ in which the farm was situated, the names of two neighbours, and the character of the land assessed.[2122]

The taxes were either imposts on the land (_tributum soli_) or on the person (_tributum capitis_). The land-tax was in most provinces paid either in money or grain, more usually in the former; but in certain minor districts it was delivered wholly, or almost wholly, in kind. Cyrene sent its famous silphium, the Sanni in Pontus wax, and the Frisii of Germany the skins of oxen.[2123] The personal tax might be one on professions, income, or movable property. It was rarely a poll-tax pure and simple, although this is found in Egypt[2124] as a relic of the Ptolemaic organisation; amongst the Jews, when the δίδραχμον had been diverted from the Jewish temple to that of Jupiter Capitolinus;[2125] in Britain,[2126] where it would have been difficult to collect any other personal tax from the mass of the people; and in the tiny island of Tenos,[2127] whose poverty probably forbade any other method of assessment. It may, however, have existed in many provinces by the side of other personal taxes as a burden imposed on those whose property fell below a certain rating.

The collection of the chief imperial taxes was now direct, since the system of _decumae_ with the accompanying tax-farmers (_decumani_) had been abolished.[2128] But there seem to have been different degrees of directness in the method. A distinction is drawn between the _stipendium_ of the public and the _tributum_ of Caesar’s provinces,[2129] and as this distinction can scarcely be one of a method of taxation, it must be one based on the method of collection. Perhaps in the public provinces the taxes were still collected by the states themselves and paid by them to the quaestor, while in the imperial provinces the procurator came into direct contact with the tax-payer. But much was still left to the efforts of private companies, and the abolition of the _decumani_ was perhaps the sole infringement made on the vast operations of the _publicani_. The extent to which the system of contracting out was still employed may be illustrated by the facts that “companies of Roman knights” are said still to have gathered in the _pecuniae vectigales_—by which the _portoria_ are chiefly meant—and other _publici fructus_—the revenues from mines, salt-works, quarries, and the like—during the reign of Tiberius,[2130] that in the reign of Nero severe measures had to be taken to repress the exactions of the _publicani_,[2131] and that these state middlemen have a title devoted to them in the _Digest_ of Justinian.[2132] Even a tax which fell to an imperial treasury, such as the _vicesima hereditatum_, was collected by contractors in the reign of Trajan.[2133] The contracts were no longer leased by a central authority in Rome, but by the official who controlled the department with which the tax was concerned. In most cases it was an imperial procurator who leased the tax, and perhaps to some extent supervised its collection.[2134] The direct taxes were paid to the quaestor in the public provinces, and in the imperial were collected by the procurators, of whose functions and operations we have already spoken.[2135] In connexion with the fiscus of each province there was a bureau (_tabularium_)[2136] in which the assessments were kept.

The method of government in the public provinces underwent considerable modifications, but suffered little formal alteration. The tenure of office was still annual, and the regulation that a five years’ interval must elapse between home and foreign command,[2137] which had been neglected by Caesar,[2138] was revived by Augustus,[2139] but considerations of fitness and another method of determining seniority considerably interfered with the application of the latter principle. Some qualified candidates were set aside by the Senate either on its own motion or by the advice of the Emperor,[2140] and the _jus liberorum_ admitted some to the _sortitio_ in preference to others.[2141] All the governors of public provinces were now called proconsuls, whether they had previously held the consulship or not,[2142] in order to distinguish them from the legates of Caesar’s provinces, who all bore the title _pro praetore_. The two greatest of the public provinces, Asia and Africa, were always given to _consulares_, while the other governments might be held by men of praetorian rank. A definite allowance (_salarium_) was now given to the governor,[2143] which must have removed some of his temptation to extortion. Each proconsul was attended by lictors and had the other _insignia_ of his rank. But the _proconsulare imperium_ was in many respects a mere shadow of its former self. Its possessor did not wear the sword or the military dress,[2144] to show that his command was not a military one, and in deference to the full _proconsulare imperium_ possessed by the Princeps. It was an exception to this rule that until the time of the Emperor Gaius the legion in Africa was under the command of the governor of that province;[2145] but even here, where the employment of active military power was needed, the appointment of the proconsul was thrown practically on the Princeps.[2146] The governor was also hampered by assessors[2147] more carefully selected than the _legati_ of Republican times. The _legati proconsulis pro praetore_, three of whom were assigned to the higher class of provinces, such as Asia and Africa, and one to the lower, such as Sicily and Baetica, although nominally selected by the proconsuls themselves, had to be approved by the Princeps; and the fact that they bear a title which suggests the _imperium_ shows, that although they were still delegates of the governor, their jurisdiction was more definite and independent in the dioceses assigned them than it had been in Republican times. Even the quaestor now bears the title _quaestor pro praetore_,[2148] and exercises, besides his financial functions, a definite judicial charge—the kind of jurisdiction which was in the hands of the curule aedile at Rome.[2149] We have already shown the possibilities of imperial interference with the administration and jurisdiction of proconsular governors through the presence of procurators in their provinces, and through the tendencies which led to the Emperor’s becoming a court of appeal for the whole provincial world.[2150]

In his own provinces Caesar was the only possessor of the _proconsulate imperium_.[2151] Hence his governors were merely legates (_legati Caesaris pro praetore_). They were not, however, regarded as mere delegates. They exercised an independent jurisdiction, which they could delegate to their subordinates—a proceeding of which the mere mandatary is incapable.[2152] Their military command was delegated, but some at least of them exercised the power of life and death over the soldiers in their province.[2153] All the legates wore the military dress and sword,[2154] since all governed provinces in which legions were quartered. But even their military discretion was to some extent limited by the fact that the legions now had their own regular commanders (_legati legionum_), while their civil authority was lessened by the circumstances that the financial affairs of the province were chiefly in the hands of a procurator responsible to the Princeps or to a bureau, and that in many provinces after the time of Hadrian and the Antonines we find a special legate appointed for jurisdiction (_legatus juridicus_),[2155] who, though inferior to the governor in rank, was a delegate not of him but of the Princeps.

One of the secrets of the better administration of Caesar’s provinces was the length of time during which one of these legates might be kept in a single province. Thus in Tiberius’ reign Sabinus governed Moesia for twenty and Silius Gaul for seven years,[2156] while somewhat later Galba was in Spain for eight.[2157] In every case the tenure of such commands depended on the Emperor’s discretion,[2158] and the holders drew fixed salaries from the imperial treasury.[2159] To the higher class of provinces, such as Syria, _consulares_ were sent; those of a lower class, such as Aquitania and Galatia, might be governed by men of praetorian rank.

The sphere of imperial rule included a class of dependencies which had not yet become, or were not thought worthy of being, organised as definite provinces and placed under senatorial legates. They were governed by personal agents of Caesar, who were in this case known as _procuratores Caesaris pro legato_.[2160] Some of these districts, such as the three Alpine provinces, were comparatively small: but others, such as the Mauretanias, Thrace, Judaea,[2161] were of considerable size, and the presence of mere procurators in such countries must be accounted for by the fact that they were not important military stations but defended by some great command in a neighbouring province. The procurator was, indeed, sometimes under the partial control of the neighbouring imperial legate; thus Judaea was in some way attached to the larger province of Syria, and Pilate was deposed from office by Vitellius its governor.[2162] But even in this case the procurator is the delegate, not of the governor, but of the Princeps. Thus, when St. Paul appealed against the jurisdiction of Festus, the appeal was made directly to Caesar.

Anomalous methods of government were adopted for the two greatest military and strategic positions in the Empire—Germany, which was divided into an upper and a lower province, and Egypt. The two strips of land west of the Rhine, which contained the garrisons not merely of the river frontier but of Gaul, were not placed under the ordinary provincial legates. The two consular _legati_, not of the separate legions, but of the armies, were themselves the governors of the districts; they bore the title _pro praetore_,[2163] and, except when the supreme command over Gaul and the Germanies was assumed by a colleague of the Emperor,[2164] were not under the control of any governor of the neighbouring Gallic provinces. Egypt, in a sense a private domain of the Princeps,[2165] and, as the key of land and sea, guarded even from the approach of a man of senatorial rank,[2166] was entrusted to an equestrian praefect (_praefectus Aegypti_), who exercised the reality without the name of the _imperium_,[2167] wielded all the powers of a governor,[2168] and had an army under his control.

The Romanisation of the provinces was still effected by the insensible channels which had been operative during the Republic—social intercourse, commerce, and the forms of the provincial edict. But more conscious efforts in the same direction were made in the Western world. The foundation of municipalities of an Italian type, the encouragement given to a Latin-speaking foreigner to find a career in the imperial service, the state support given to Roman systems of education—all tended to make portions of provinces, such as Gaul and Spain, centres of as pure a Latinity as could be found in Italy itself. Even when the full _civitas_ was not at once conceded, preparation for it was made by the grant of Latin rights which were now conferred on whole provinces, such as Sicily, the Maritime Alps, and Spain,[2169] and made the dwellers in these regions participants in all the private rights of Roman law. The general tendency was to elevate the West at the expense of the East, or rather perhaps to decline the struggle with Hellenic civilisation, and to rest content with Romanising the barbarism of the lands that encircled Italy. In spite of this, the greatest triumphs of the legal genius were to be found in the East; the gift for theory seemed to be still peculiarly a property of the Greek or Oriental mind, and it was Asia, Phoenicia, and Syria that produced the names of Gaius, Ulpian, and Papinian. Such men had the signal advantage of comparing and even practising two perfected systems; for until the beginning of the third century, Graeco-Oriental forms were the common law of the Eastern half of the Empire, and the edict of Caracalla, which by the grant of the _civitas_ implied the future currency of Roman forms, must have created something like a legal revolution in this part of Rome’s dominions.[2170]

The omnipresence of Roman law was a fitting consequence and symbol of the even, harmonious, uneventful working of provincial life, and of the uniform machinery which was eliminating national characteristics and reducing all provinces to the same level of excellence or decadence. But, in spite of the highly organised character of provincial administration, it was the city-state (_civitas_) that was still the unit, and the character of its public life remained at all times the test of the effectiveness of the Roman system.

Amidst the brilliant variety of the urban life of the Empire, some uniformity had been secured even during the days of the Republic by Rome’s leaning to aristocratic types of organisation. But a slight modification of existing forms of constitution was all that was needed to bring the local machinery into harmony with that of the central government, and there was no effort made to create a uniform type of administration or to regard the provincial state as a mere municipality adapted only to serve the purposes of the imperial system. The Principate ushers in this latter tendency, but at first it is very gradual. In its initial stages it manifests itself in the light of a paternal interest, whether on the part of governors or Emperors, in the affairs of local corporations, in minute regulations as to the responsibilities of magistrates, the use of public funds, and the care of public property.[2171] Perhaps for a time such measures were beneficial; certainly for nearly two centuries, in spite of the fact that there is here and there observable a tendency to shirk municipal office as a burden,[2172] the vitality of the towns, fostered by peace and the large revenues of commerce, was strong enough to resist the enervating effects of this interference, and hundreds of inscriptions show us a wealth, a splendour, a generosity in endowment, and a thirst for municipal fame, that seem a sufficient reward for the untiring exertions of an anxious government. But this government finally came to lean on what it had fostered. The same tendencies, still very imperfectly understood, which changed professions into corporations, trades into guilds, and made even military service a hereditary burden, fastened on the towns, and the government sought to find in them a class which would be solely responsible for local and imperial duties. This was found ultimately in the local Senate—the order of _decuriones_ or _curiales_—which had always formed the pivot of municipal administration controlled or created by Rome, but which now tended to become sharply severed from the other classes in the communities, and, while solely endowed with the privileges of office, held these privileges at a tenure which it would gladly have surrendered. The legal texts of our period do not yet show the crushed and broken aristocracy of a later date; but they reveal the beginning of the movement which was to lead men to regard membership of the Senate as certain ruin, and to flee from office as though it were the plague. In the first place, the local magistracy was ceasing to be a stepping-stone to the Senate. There is a tendency to recruit the order through an _adlectio_ of otherwise unqualified members,[2173] a tendency which reveals an anxiety to preserve the maximum numbers of the order. This admission is effected by the board itself, and prepares us for the practice of the later Empire by which the order recruits itself from all qualified persons who are bound to serve. In another way also the earlier relation of magistrate to senate was being reversed. The principle of the earlier law, in accordance with which the previous possession of office is a necessary qualification for the _curia_,[2174] has been changed for one in accordance with which none but a decurion can be a magistrate. A definite grade of municipal nobility has been evolved, an official caste has been created, and the decurions are sharply severed from the Plebs.[2175]

Each class has its burdens, and, though the severest of these were ultimately to fall on the _curiales_, the municipal law of the _Digest_ calls on all members of the communes to do their duties to their state and to the Empire. Each class has its appropriate duties; to the decurions belong the higher branches of administration, but every category of citizens has its _munera congruentia_.[2176] The legal writers divide the burdens of public life into two categories. The _munera personalia_ are those that demand the activity of the person; the _munera patrimonii_ those that are incumbent on wealth.[2177] To the former belong the functions of public officials such as those concerned with the finances of the state, with the inspection of the market, roads, buildings and aqueducts, with the maintenance of the peace or the representation of the interests of the city. But municipal duties by no means exhausted the category of such burdens. The state finally saddled the municipalities with the returns for the census and the raising of the revenue in corn or money, and made the collectors responsible for any deficit.[2178] The cost of the imperial transport and post had also become a municipal burden.[2179] These last obligations introduce us to the idea of the patrimonial burdens, which existed wherever by law or custom expense was incurred by the individual undertaking them. There were few in which such expenditure was not incurred, and the policy of the dying Principate was to lay heavy imposts on capital, which increased in proportion to the diminution in number of the wealthier classes. When exertion was met with this reward it tended to relax, and a decaying agriculture and an enfeebled commerce were the results of the oppression of the government. Whatever the primary cause of these evils was, whether military, social, or economic, they were doubtless aggravated by the relentless system of imperial administration, which marshalled citizens as though they were soldiers, treated all classes as the fitting instruments of official life, and regarded the subject as existing for the Empire rather than the Empire for the subject.

§ 3. _The Worship of the Emperor_

One result of the discipline which we have described was doubtless to create a strong, though not a warm, imperial sentiment. A gentler bond of union amongst the provinces and of attachment to the imperial house was to be found in the carefully cultivated world-religion which expressed itself in the form of Caesar-worship.

The cult of the Emperor, although stimulated and encouraged by the imperial government, was by no means a purely artificial product. Had it offended against Roman or Italian sentiment, it would have been strangled in its birth; and had it met with no genuine response from the subject nations, coercion[2180] and rewards would probably have given it merely a precarious and transitory existence. The worship assumed two forms, neither of which was a strain on the religious beliefs of the age. In its application to the living Emperor, it was merely a reverence permitted to his spiritual personality, that _numen_ or _genius_, the abstract duplicate of man, the ever-present guardian-angel to whom, as realised in the self, the Roman had often drunk or prayed. If to the mind of the barbarian the genius and the self were still more truly one, the conception of the new worship was simpler but by no means less strong. The reverence paid to the dead Caesar was a still more natural effort of grateful piety, not unwelcome to a cultured society which accepted Euhemeristic explanations of the gods, and indigenous at least amongst the Greek-speaking and oriental portions of the Empire. In the provinces, too, all the sordid aspects of imperial humanity were removed; to the provincial mind Caesar was a potent and unseen power, a distant incarnation of wisdom and order, a being whose sway was far wider than that of any local god, whose ordinances penetrated to the ends of the earth, and in whose hands the safety and happiness of the human race were set.[2181] The idealism which to-day makes of a king something more than a man, had, in a less fastidious religious environment, made of the Roman Emperor a god, and even in the more prosaic West, in countries such as Gaul or Spain or Britain, where Caesar-worship required a certain amount of cultivation, we must suppose an undercurrent of genuine belief.

The first step taken in the inauguration of the new worship was a happy one. It was a graceful act to honour a predecessor, who had been the ruler of the Roman world, and might be regarded as a martyr in its cause, and Octavian permitted the consecration of a temple to _divus Julius_,[2182] who was regarded, from a sentimental if not from a legal point of view, as the founder of the new dynasty. His own worship the Emperor prohibited in Italy, and he declined an altar in the _curia_.[2183] But in the year 20 B.C. a temple dedicated to him under the name of Augustus rose at Panium in Palestine,[2184] and in the next year the form of dedication to “Roma and Augustus,” which associated his _numen_ with that of the city, and whose modesty secured his consent,[2185] began to spread through the provinces. A temple with this rite sprang up at Pergamum,[2186] and in 12 B.C. a similar worship, which replaced that of the native sun-god Lug, was established for the Gallic nobles at Lugdunum.[2187] An attempt was also made to consolidate the infant organisation of the new province of Germany by establishing an altar at the Oppidum Ubiorum (Köln) as the centre of its religious life.[2188] Rome itself could not wholly be deprived of a cult that was becoming universal, and in 8 B.C. a recognition of the divinity of Augustus was permitted in the only form which he would allow during his lifetime. His _genius_ was associated with the household gods or _Lares_ in the worship of the _vici_ of the capital.[2189] The movement spread through Italy. The old _magistri vicorum_ become the _magistri Larum_, and soon gain the title _magistri Augustales_. They are found in every part of Italy, and beyond it in Sardinia, Narbonensis, Spain, Dacia, and even Egypt.[2190] On the death of the first Princeps his complete deification was accorded by the Senate,[2191] and the recognition was followed by the permission to erect temples in the provinces,[2192] while private as well as public initiative fostered the cult of _divus Augustus_. The precedent set in the cases of the first two emperors had firmly established the practice of posthumous deification, and its denial to a Princeps was almost equivalent to the condemnation of his reign.[2193] Although the merits of Claudius as a divinity might be questioned, and Vespasian, with sceptical tolerance, regarded his own deification as an inevitable consequence of his position,[2194] yet by the close of the second century the virtues of the Antonines had made the worship of the deified Emperor a more genuine cult than ever, and a man was regarded as impious who had not some image of Marcus Aurelius in his house.[2195] This worship of the Caesars had two lasting effects on the social and political life of the Roman, Italian, and provincial worlds.

(1) It established a priestly aristocracy. On the death and deification of Augustus a college of _Sodales Augustales_ was created for Rome, consisting of twenty-one nobles, and containing in its list members of the imperial house.[2196] _Flamines Augustales_ held the same dignified position in their provinces or in their native towns, and were drawn from the aristocracies of the states. The _Flamen_ of the worship of Roma and Augustus, that had its centre at Narbo, wore the _praetexta_, was attended by a lictor, had a front seat at games, and the right of taking part in the deliberations of the local Senate. His wife, the _Flaminica_, was clothed on festal days in white or purple, and, like the _Flaminica Dialis_ at Rome, might not be compelled to take an oath.[2197] The lower and middle classes were not forgotten in the distribution of these religious honours. From the _magistri Augustales_, whom we have already mentioned, developed an _ordo Augustalium_, which existed before the death of Augustus both in Italy and the provinces, and the cult with which it was associated was partly of spontaneous origin, partly cultivated by the imperial government, and may in some cases have been founded by the municipal towns themselves. The _Augustales_ were not priests, like the _Flamines_ and _Sacerdotes_, but merely an order with certain _insignia_—the _praetexta_, the _fasces_, the _tribunal_—which they displayed in the performance of their official duties, and they have been compared to magistrates without secular magisterial functions.[2198] The form which the organisation assumed was the appointment of _sexviri_ or _seviri_, probably by the senate of the municipal town; after the year of service they pass into the order of _Augustales_.[2199] The order was composed mainly of freedmen—of a class, that is, whose birth excluded them from the public offices of their states, but who, forming as they did a large portion of the trading population, contributed, perhaps more than any other, to the economic vitality of the towns. The worship of Augustus, by giving them _insignia_ and certain proud moments in which they appeared to dazzling effect before the public eye, compensated to some extent for the loss of privileges which the law withheld.

(2) Caesar-worship was the only force that gave a kind of representative life to the provinces. Great provincial diets (_concilia_, _communia_, κοινά) made their appearance both in the Eastern and Western world. Asia had already dedicated temples to kings, proconsuls, and to the city of Rome;[2200] and in the Hellenic world the national assemblies which survived the Roman conquest may have suggested, or may even at times have been continued in, these new amphictyonic gatherings. The favour shown by the imperial government to this proof of loyalty soon led the West to follow the example of the East, and the establishment of the worship of Roma and Augustus at Lugdunum, by creating a _concilium_ for the three Gauls, was the prototype of a similar organisation in other European provinces. Eventually every province of the Empire seems to have evolved a diet of some kind, and even Britain, the least organised of Roman dependencies, possessed at Colchester a temple to the deified Claudius.[2201] The high-priests of the cult (_sacerdotes provinciae_, ἀρχιερεῖς) were chosen annually from the most distinguished families, and delegates (_legati_, σύνεδροι) from the various districts or states, which made up the province, were despatched to the yearly meetings (_concilia_, κοινά). These delegates elected the high-priests and voted the sums required for the purposes of the cult. But they felt themselves to be representatives of the province; they voiced its nationality and represented its collective interests as no other power did, and it would have been impossible except by force to limit their utterances to purely religious questions. This compulsion the government did not attempt. It permitted, perhaps encouraged, these delegates to make representations about the condition of the province,[2202] and even to utter complaints about the conduct of Roman officials.[2203] It is a pity that the imperial government did not do even more to preserve the fast-waning sense of nationality; but the value of what it did is proved by the fact that these assemblies and the dignified orders which they created survived into the Christian Empire. Titles such as Asiarch, Syriarch, Phoenicarch, derived from the high-priesthood of Caesar’s cult, were respected by Constantine’s legislation,[2204] and survived like ghosts of the pagan past to haunt for a time the life of a new œcumenical church which, through a fuller faith and a higher allegiance, had effected its triumph over the old.

APPENDIX I

THE TWO ASSEMBLIES OF THE TRIBES

The existence of a _comitia tributa populi_, as distinct from the _concilium plebis tributim_, was first demonstrated by Mommsen (_Römische Forschungen, Die patricisch-plebejischen Tributcomitien der Republik_). The chief lines of evidence on which the proof of the existence of this parliament rests are as follows:—

(i.) We have a series of passages which prove the continued distinction of the Populus and the Plebs and of patrician and plebeian magistrates, and which show that these magistrates could only summon the bodies of which they were respectively the representatives. These passages are:—

Festus p. 293 “Scita plebei appellantur ea, quae plebs suo suffragio sine patribus jussit, plebeio magistratu rogante.”

ib. p. 330 “Scitum populi (est, quod eum magistra)tus patricius (rogavit populusque suis suf)fragis jussit.... Plebes autem est (populus universus) praeter patricios.”

ib. p. 233 “cum plebes sine patri(bus a suo magistratu rogatur) quod plebes scivit, plebi(scitum est: plebs enim cum) appellatur, patrum com(munio excluditur).”

(ii.) There are abundant evidences of the early existence of a _comitia_ of the tribes:—

(_a_) The law of the Twelve Tables (451 B.C.) ordained, with respect to jurisdiction, “de capite civis nisi per maximum comitiatum ... ne ferunto” (Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 4, 11). The mention of the “greatest _comitia_” clearly implies the existence of a lesser one with judicial powers; and as this is not likely to have been the _comitia curiata_ of the period, it can hardly be any other assembly than the _comitia_ of the tribes.

(_b_) The quaestors were first elected by the people in 447 B.C. (Tac. _Ann._ xi 22), and in later times their appointment was made by a _comitia_ of the tribes (Cic. _ad Fam._ vii 30).

(_c_) The first legislative act of the people gathered _tributim_ is attributed to the year 357 B.C. (Liv. vii. 16 (consul) “legem novo exemplo ad Sutrium in castris tributim de vicensima eorum, qui manu mitterentur, tulit”).

The _comitia tributa populi_ was probably created between 471 B.C., the date at which the Plebs began to meet _tributim_, and 451, the date at which the existence of such an assembly is hinted at in the Twelve Tables.

(iii.) In the developed Republic we find an assembly meeting by tribes—

(_a_) which is presided over by magistrates of the people, e.g. by the consuls Manlius (Liv. vii. 16) and T. Quinctius Crispinus (Frontinus _de Aquaed._ 129), by the dictator Caesar (Cic. _ad Fam._ vii. 30), and by P. Clodius as curule aedile (Cic. _pro Sest._ 44, 95; _ad Q. fr._ 2, 3);

(_b_) which elects magistrates of the people, e.g. the quaestors (Cic. _ad Fam._ vii. 30 “comitiis quaestoriis institutis ... ille (Caesar) ... qui comitiis tributis esset auspicatus”) and the curule aediles (Gell. vii. 9 “[Cn. Flavium] pro tribu aedilem curulem renuntiaverunt”);

(_c_) which legislates. This legislative power is shown by the _lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus_ of 9 B.C. (Frontinus _de Aquaed._ 129);

(_d_) and exercises judicial power. This judicial power is shown in the trial of Milo for _vis_ in 56 B.C. (Cic. _pro Sest._ 44, 95; _ad Q. fr._ 2, 3). The prosecutor was a curule aedile, and the trial took place in the Forum (“ejectus de rostris Clodius,” l.c. § 2).

Perhaps the most striking demonstration of the existence of this assembly is contained in the prescription to the _lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus_ (Frontinus l.c.), which runs as follows:—

“T. Quinctius Crispinus consul populum jure rogavit populusque jure scivit in foro pro rostris aedis divi Julii pr(idie) [k.] Julias. Tribus Sergia principium fuit, pro tribu Sex.... L. f. Virro [primus scivit].”

Here we find an assembly of the Populus, presided over by a magistrate of the people, meeting in the Forum and voting by tribes. It can, therefore, be none other than a _comitia tributa populi_.

Although the formal difference between this assembly and the _concilium plebis tributim_ was great—the one being summoned by magistrates of the people, the other by plebeian magistrates; the one electing to popular, the other to plebeian offices; the one passing _leges_, the other _plebiscita_—the material difference between the two bodies was small. This consisted in the exclusion of Patricians from plebeian gatherings. When the consul or praetor summoned the tribes, the members of the few patrician families could attend; when the tribune summoned the tribes, these members were bound to keep away.

APPENDIX II

A LIMITATION OF THE TRIBUNATE IN THE REIGN OF NERO

Tacitus in the _Annals_ (xiii. 28, 2), in describing certain limitations on the powers of tribunes and aediles which were introduced in the year 56 A.D., mentions one respecting the tribunate, the nature of which has never yet been explained. He expresses it in the words “prohibiti tribuni jus praetorum et consulum praeripere, aut vocare ex Italia cum quibus lege agi posset”—“the tribunes were forbidden to usurp the authority of praetors and consuls, or to summon out of Italy persons liable to legal proceedings.” It seems generally to be agreed that the _aut_ here is conjunctive, not disjunctive, i.e. that there is the closest connexion between “jus praetorum et consulum praeripere” and “vocare ex Italia,” and it seems that this must be the case; for Tacitus, vague as his references are in this chapter, could never have referred to anything so indeterminate as a “usurpation of the authority of praetors and consuls,” without some specification of the sphere or extent of this usurpation. I shall, therefore, assume that the second clause is explanatory of the first, and that the “summons from Italy” in some way defines the “usurpation”—although, as will be seen, this assumption is by no means necessary to my main argument, which will centre round the expression “vocare ex Italia.”

The remarks of commentators on this passage have been for the most part confined to expressions of bewilderment at the constitutional anomalies it displays. They make the inevitable comment that the tribune had properly no right of _vocatio_, although he sometimes exercised it (Varro ap. Gell. xiii. 12), and that, if even he possessed this right, it ought not to have been exercised outside the city walls. The only positive fact to be elicited from such statements is that the _vocatio_ here referred to is some kind of personal summons; who is summoned or for what purpose are questions which they seem to regard as incapable of an answer. The opinion of an eminent writer on Roman Law, who attempts to push his analysis deeper than this, exhibits only the desperate nature of the means which have to be applied to elicit a meaning from the passage. Karlowa (_Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 530) suggests that the tribunes had allowed accused persons to escape summonses in criminal trials which were to take place before the Senate—the initiation of such trials belonging properly only to the consuls and praetors. He does not seem to feel the obstacles that beset the path to this conclusion. He has to take _lege agere_ in the unusual sense of the legal fulfilment of a penal law; he does not show why Tacitus should have written “vocare ex Italia” in place of the more natural “vocare a senatu”; he fails to remember that the tribunician intercession in a criminal trial before the Senate was, even in the reign of Tiberius, becoming a power of pardon vested in the Princeps, and that its use by an ordinary tribune might bring death to the rash interceder (Tac. _Ann._ vi. 47; cf. xvi 26).

To discover the true sense of the passage we must seek for some sphere in which the tribunician veto continued unimpaired during the Principate; but, before doing this, we must ask whether the words used by Tacitus offer any suggestions of such a sphere. It is possible to translate the words “vocare ex Italia” as meaning “to summon from any part of Italy,” “to summon, i.e., from Rome and Italy”; but I venture to think that _ex Italia_ excludes the idea of Rome, and that the meaning of the words is “to summon from a municipal town of Italy to Rome.” On what grounds such a summons might be made is shown by the words “cum quibus lege agi posset.” The sphere of the summons is civil jurisdiction in the _municipia_ as divided between the Roman and the local authorities by statute on the settlement which gradually followed the close of the social war—a settlement known to us chiefly through the _lex Rubria_. The whole sentence, if literally though somewhat clumsily translated, would state that “the tribunes were prohibited from summoning litigants from an Italian town in cases where a civil action at law would have been possible in that town.”

On this hypothesis, the sphere of the tribune’s power referred to is the very familiar one of the veto on appeal in civil jurisdiction. How frequent the _appellatio_ to the tribunes in matters of civil jurisdiction was during the later Republic is shown by the fact that, out of the four private orations of Cicero, two—those for Quinctius and for Tullius—record the use of this appeal (Cic. _pro Quinct._ 7, 29; _pro Tullio_ 16, 38, 39); and that this appellate cognisance continued during the Principate is shown by the obvious interpretation of the well-known lines of Juvenal (vii. 228)—

Rara tamen merces quae cognitione tribuni Non egeat—

words which almost certainly mean “it is seldom that such _merces_ does not lead to a court of appeal.”

It may seem strange that the veto of these purely city magistrates should be thought of in connexion with municipal jurisdiction, until we remember the anomalous nature of the settlement made after the social war. By that settlement jurisdiction in Italy is a mere annexe to jurisdiction in Rome; technically it is jurisdiction in Rome, as is shown by Gaius (iv. 103-105), who recognises no interval between the jurisdiction of law _intra primum miliarium_ and the jurisdiction of the _imperium_ in the provinces. The praetor’s formula and the praetor’s writ run through the whole of Italy, although the praetor himself cannot quit Rome for more than ten days during his year of office (Cic. _Phil._ ii. 13, 31); and, if the appellate power of the tribune was to be preserved, it had to be regarded as coextensive with the _imperium_, of the magistrate whom he vetoed. The intercession of the tribune in municipal jurisdiction required no creation by law; it was still the veto of one city magistrate by another within the walls of Rome. If even the tribune’s ordinances and his _coercitio_ were valid without the walls, it could be explained in accordance with the prevailing fiction; but the supposition of such an extension is not absolutely necessary, as the following pictures of what probably took place in a conflict between the central and the local courts will show.

Suppose Aulus Agerius brings an action against Numerius Negidius in the town of Arpinum. The local magistrate decides to take the case. Numerius Negidius denies the competence of the court and appeals; to whom? In the first instance, probably to the colleague of the local magistrate, for the _lex Rubria_ (c. xx.) forbids the intercession only in the case where the local court is admittedly competent. This colleague pronounces the veto, the _judicium_ is quashed; all that the local magistrate can now do is to compel the parties to enter into a _vadimonium_ to appear before the praetor, and the case moves to Rome. But supposing, when it has got there, that the praetor decides that it was really within the competence of the municipal magistrate and issues an order that it shall go back? Now Numerius appeals to the tribune. The veto is issued and, if the case is to be tried at all, the praetor is bound to take it.

We can also imagine a case with the same preliminaries in which Numerius appeals to the colleague of the local magistrate against the competence of the local court, but in which this colleague declines to interfere. Is Numerius left stranded? Unquestionably there must have been in such a case a further appeal to Rome, whether to the praetor or perhaps, in this case, to his higher colleague the consul. But the praetor or consul now decides against Numerius. The appeal is made to the tribune, and the decree of the consul or praetor may be quashed. The case, if it is to be tried at all, must be tried at Rome.

In both these instances the tribune pronounces his veto within the city, and yet in both, if his decision is improper, his position is one of “vocare ex Italia cum quibus lege agi posset.” In both cases it is not a true use of magisterial _vocatio_, and thus one of the difficulties discovered by commentators in this passage is removed; it is simply an illustration of the positive effects of a negative power. Just as the tribune can by a persistent veto force the praetor to alter his formula (Cic. _Acad. Prior._ ii. 30, 97; _pro Tullio_ 16, 38), so by a persistent denial of the praetor’s orders to the local magistrate he can force the praetor to judge. We do not know the method by which the positive effect of the veto was in this case secured, but it is clear that some means must have been provided for having a municipal action tried at Rome when the municipal court had been declared incompetent.

But, apart from the procedure springing from these rigid rules of competence, there is some evidence of a discretionary power of what is called _Romam revocatio_, which was exercised and abused by magistrates towards the close of the Republic. The _Fragmentum Atestinum_ (perhaps a part of the _lex Rubria_) enacts (l. 16 sq.) with reference to municipal jurisdiction—“ejus rei pequn[_iaeve_] quo magis privato Romae revocatio sit ... _ex hac lege nihilum rogatur_,” i.e. this law does not permit (or imply) a _revocatio_ to Rome in the specified cases. We do not know what magistrate effected this _revocatio_. With respect to criminal jurisdiction in the provinces, it was the duty of the consuls (Cic. _in Verr._ i. 33, 84); and, if they exercised this power in civil jurisdiction as well, the _jus consulum praeripere_ of our passage may refer to tribunician interference with this consular prerogative. It may be worth noting that Plutarch (_Caes._ 4) associates the power with the tribunes; his narrative of this trial of P. Antonius is almost unquestionably wrong, but it may be taken to show that in his belief (i.e. in a belief current during the Principate) the tribunes had something to do with summoning cases to Rome.

Hitherto we have been dealing with the praetor and the _judicia ordinaria_. Is it possible that the tribune also interfered with the extraordinary jurisdiction created daring the Principate, and thus with the judicial powers of the consuls? The consular jurisdiction in _fideicommissa_ had been given to praetors by Claudius (_Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 32), but not the whole of it. Quintilian shows that in greater matters it still belonged to the former (_Inst. Or._ iii. 6, 70 “non debes apud praetorem petere fideicommissum sed apud consules, major enim praetoria cognitione summa est”). If the consuls tried the case when the _fideicommissum_ was very large and the praetors when it was smaller, it is not altogether impossible that the municipal magistrates might have tried local cases when the sum, which was the subject of the trust, was insignificant It is thus possible that questions of the competence of local and Roman magistrates may have cropped up in reference to this question; although I should prefer to explain the _jus consulum praeripere_ of Tacitus on the already mentioned hypotheses of some consular right of _vocatio_ or _revocatio_ in matters of ordinary jurisdiction.

Much must remain obscure; we cannot get at the details of the procedure. All that we can do is to show that there is evidence for the tribune’s interference with the rights of magistrates in matters of municipal jurisdiction, and to suggest methods of interference. Nor can we determine the precise limitations of his authority introduced by the change of A.D. 56. But it clearly took from the tribune the final decision as to when a civil case should be summoned from a municipal town to Rome. Either his _intercessio_ in this matter of municipal jurisdiction was abolished, or his veto was made purely suspensory. In this very chapter of Tacitus we find that the enforcement of the tribunician _multa_ is subjected to the decision of the consul. Similarly, with reference to the power which we have discussed, the urban praetor or the consul may have been declared absolutely competent to decide, after cognisance, when a case should be tried in the local courts and when it should be reserved for the tribunals at Rome.

FOOTNOTES

[1] _Pagus_ (connected etymologically with πήγνυμι, _pago_, _pango_) implies the idea of “foundation” or “settlement.”

[2] Cf. Liv. ii. 62 “Incendiis deinde non villarum modo, sed etiam vicorum, quibus frequenter habitabatur, Sabini exciti.”

[3] So Servius Tullius is said, according to one account, to have divided the territory of Rome into twenty-six _pagi_. _Pagus_ is δῆμος in Greek (Festus p. 72), but this proves little as to its origin; it is the _pagus_ as part of a state that is thus translated. The δῆμος or δᾶμος in Greece had often been (as in Elis) a self-existent community.

[4] Liv. ii. 16. Yet even here the _Claudia gens_ is represented as expelled from a _civitas_.

[5] The ancients derived Palatine from the _balare_ or _palare_ of cattle (Festus p. 220) or from the shepherd’s god Pales (Solinus i. 15). It is perhaps derived from the root _pa_ (_pasco_). See O. Gilbert _Geschichte u. Topographie der Stadt Rom in Altertum_ i. p. 17.

[6] Tac. _Ann._ xii. 24.

[7] This tendency is best exhibited in Richter’s map showing the extension of Rome (Baumeister _Denkmäler_ art. “Rom” Karte v.).

[8] Festus pp. 340, 341. See Gilbert _Topographie_ i. pp. 38, 162.

[9] Varro _L.L._ v. 45 ff.

[10] i.e. in the four city tribes—_Palatina_ (Palatine, Cermalus, Velia), _Esquilina_ (Oppius, Cispius, Fagutal), _Suburana_ or _Sucusana_ (Coelius, Subura), _Collina_ (Quirinalis, Viminalis—a region outside the old Septimontium). See Belot _Histoire des Chevaliers Romains_ i. p. 401.

[11] The Sabine origin of the Tities rested perhaps on the Sabine _sacra_ of the _sodales Titii_ (Tac. _Ann._ i. 54). Cf. the Thracian origin ascribed to the Eumolpidae at Athens on account of the character of their cult.

[12] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 8, 14 “populumque et suo et Tatii nomine et Lucumonis, qui Romuli socius in Sabino proelio occiderat, in tribus tris ... discripserat.”

[13] e.g. the manner in which the Ionic tribe-names were imposed at Athens after their primitive signification had been lost.

[14] Cf. Niese _Grundriss der röm. Gesch._ pp. 20 sq.

[15] Cincius ap. Festum p. 241 “Patricios Cincius ait in libro de comitiis eos appellari solitos, qui nunc ingenui vocentur.” Cf. Liv. x. 8 (300 B.C.; from the speech of Decius Mus) § 9 “Semper ista audita sunt eadem, penes vos auspicia esse, vos solos gentem habere, vos solos justum imperium et auspicium domi militiaeque”; § 10 “en unquam fando audistis, patricios primo esse factos non de coelo demissos sed qui patrem ciere possent, id est nihil ultra quam ingenuos?”

[16] Mr. Strachan-Davidson remarks (Smith _Dict. of Antiq._ ii. p. 354) that, on the evolution of the rights of the plebeians, these too should have been _patricii_, but that the word _patricius_ survived as a “token of an arrested development.”

[17] _Plebs_ is connected with the root which appears in _compleo_, _impleo_, πλῆυος.

[18] Liv. i. 28 “populum omnem Albanum Romam traducere in animo est, civitatem dare plebi, primores in patres legere.” Dionysius (ii. 35) represents the people of Caenina and Antemnae as being, after their subjection, enrolled εἰς φυλὰς καὶ φράτρας.

[19] Cf. Dionysius’ account of Romulus’ institution of clientship (ii. 9 παρακαταθήκας δὲ ἔδωκε τοῖς πατρικίοις τοὺς δημοτικούς, ἐπίτρεψας ἑκάστῳ ... ὃν αὐτὸς ἐβούλετο νέμειν προστάτην ... πατρωνείαν ὀνομάσας τὴν προστασίαν).

[20] The _jus commercii_ has been read into the relations of Rome with Carthage as depicted in Polybius’ second treaty [Polyb. iii. 24, 12 ἐν Σικελίᾳ, ἧς Καρχηδόνιοι ἐπάρχουσι, καὶ ἐν Καρχηδόνι πάντα καὶ ποιείτω καὶ πωλείτω (the Roman) ὅσα καὶ τῷ πολίτῃ (the Carthaginian) ἔξεστιν]. But jurisdiction here may have been the work of some international court, and the _jus commercii_, without the _jus exulandi_, would hardly have made a foreign immigrant a citizen of Rome.

[21] Cicero shows that there was a controversy whether _applicatio_ was consistent with _exilium_ (_de Orat._ i. 39, 177), “Quid? quod item in centumvirali judicio certatum esse accepimus, qui Romam in exilium venisset, cui Romae exulare jus esset, si se ad aliquem quasi patronum applicavisset intestatoque esset mortuus, nonne in ea causa jus applicationis, obscurum sane et ignotum, patefactum in judicio atque illustratum est a patrono?”

[22] Zonaras vii. 15. P. Clodius first tried this method; when it was opposed he resorted to the artifice of adoption. Courtly writers imagined a _transitio_ for the plebeian Octavii, Suet. _Aug._ 2 “Ea gens a Tarquinio Prisco rege inter minores gentes adlecta ... mox a Servio Tullio in patricias transducta, procedente tempore ad plebem se contulit.”

[23] Liv. ii. 16 (504 B.C.) “Attus Clausus (driven out from Regillum) magna clientium comitatus manu Romam transfugit. His civitas data agerque trans Anienem ... Appius inter patres (i.e. the Senate) lectus haud ita multo post in principum dignationem pervenit.” Cf. Suet. _Tib._ 1.

[24] Savigny _Recht des Besitzes_ (7th ed.) p. 202. On the general condition of the client see Ihering _Geist des röm. Rechts_ i. p. 237.

[25] Dionys. ii. 9, 10.

[26] ἐξηγεῖσθαι τὰ δίκαια ... δίκας λαγχάνειν ... τοῖς ἐγκαλοῦσιν ὑπέχειν (Dionys. ii. 10). If representation in the civil courts is meant, it must have resembled that of the _paterfamilias_, who sues in his own right, for procuratory was unknown in early Roman procedure (Just. _Inst._ iv. 10 “cum olim in usu fuisset alterius nomine agere non posse”).

[27] Verg. _Aen._ vi. 609 “fraus innexa clienti.” Cf. Servius ad loc.

[28] Gell. v. 13 “Conveniebat ... ex moribus populi Romani primum juxta parentes locum tenere pupillos debere, fidei tutelaeque nostrae creditos; secundum eos proximum locum clientes habere, qui sese itidem in fidem patrociniumque nostrum dediderunt.” The third place was filled by _hospites_, the fourth by _cognati_ and _adfines_.

[29] Liv. ii. 56.

[30] Suet. _Claud._ 24 “(Claudius) Appium Caecum censorem (312 B.C.) ... libertinorum filios in senatum allegisse docuit; ignarus temporibus Appii (312-280 B.C.) et deinceps aliquamdiu ‘libertinos’ dictos, non ipsos qui manu emitterentur, sed ingenuos ex his procreates.”

[31] Plut. _Mar._ 5.

[32] Festus p. 94 “gentilis dicitur ex eodem genere ortus et (?) is qui simili nomine appellatur.”

[33] p. 5.

[34] Cic. _Top._ 6, 29 “Gentiles sunt inter se, qui eodem nomine sunt; qui ab ingenuis oriundi sunt; quorum majorum nemo servitutem servivit; qui capite non sunt deminuti.”

[35] The test is illustrated by a controversy between the patrician Claudii and the plebeian Claudii Marcelli, Cic. _de Orat._ i. 39, 176 “Quid? qua de re inter Marcellos et Claudios patricios centumviri judicarunt, cum Marcelli ab liberti filio stirpe, Claudii patricii ejusdem hominis hereditatem gente ad se rediisse dicerent, nonne in ea causa fuit oratoribus de toto stirpis et gentilitatis jure dicendum.” Suetonius (_Tib._ 1) says of the clan of the Claudii Marcelli, as compared with their patrician namesakes, “nec potentia minor nec dignitate.”

[36] Liv. x. 8, quoted p. 5.

[37] p. 5.

[38] Cic. _in Verr._ i. 45, 115 “Minucius quidam mortuus est ante istum (Verrem) praetorem; ejus testamentum erat nullum. Lege hereditas ad gentem Minuciam veniebat”; _de Leg._ ii. 22, 55 “Jam tanta religio est sepulchrorum, ut extra sacra et gentem inferri fas negent esse; idque apud majores nostros A. Torquatus in gente Popilia judicavit.”

[39] The theory of the artificial origin of the _gens_ is based on the symmetrical figures given by tradition. The full numbers of the early _gentes_ are given as 300; these are symmetrically divided, ten into each of the thirty _curiae_, as the _curiae_ are divided into the three original tribes. Hence Niebuhr (_Hist. Rome_ i. p. 319) says, “The numerical scale of the _gentes_ is an irrefragable proof that they were not more ancient than the constitution, but corporations formed by a legislator in harmony with the rest of his scheme.”

[40] Niebuhr op. cit. p. 333; from Laelius Felix (ap. Gell. xv. 27) “Cum ex generibus hominum suffragium feratur, curiata comitia esse” (_genus_ because the assembly came to include Plebeians, some of whom had no _gentes_).

[41] Cic. _ad Fam._ ix. 21, 2.

[42] Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. p. 31.

[43] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 20, 35 “(L. Tarquinius) duplicavit illum pristinum patrum numerum; et antiquos patres majorum gentium appellavit, quos priores sententiam rogabat; a se ascitos minorum”; Liv. i. 35 “(Tarquinius) centum in patres legit; qui deinde minorum gentium sunt appellati.”

[44] p. 3.

[45] The _gentes minores_ are sometimes identified with the _gentes_ of the last admitted of these tribes, the _Luceres_ (Ortolan _Hist. of Roman Law_ i. § 33).

[46] Momms. _Hist. of Rome_ bk. i. ch. v.

[47] Liv. i. 30; Dionys. iii. 29.

[48] Dionys. ii. 46.

[49] Liv. iv. 4 “nobilitatem vestram per cooptationem in patres habetis”; Suet. _Tib._ 1 “gens Claudia in patricios cooptata.” So Servius and Numa are said to have been transferred by the Populus from the ranks of the δῆμος to those of the πατρίκιοι.

[50] As is implied in Suet. _Aug._ 2 (quoted p. 7).

[51] Dionys. v. 13.

[52] Liv. ii. 2 “Brutus ad populum tulit ut omnes Tarquiniae gentis exsules essent”; Varro ap. Non. p. 222 “omnes Tarquinios ejicerent, ne quam reditionis per gentilitatem spem haberent.”

[53] Suet _Tib._ 1 “Patricia gens Claudia ... orta est ex Regillis, oppido Sabinorum ... post reges exactos sexto fere anno, in patricias cooptata. Agrum insuper trans Anienem clientibus, locumque sibi ad sepulturam sub Capitolio, publice accepit.” Cf. Liv. ii. 16 (cited p. 7).

[54] Dionys. v. 40.

[55] ib. ii. 7.

[56] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 14, 26.

[57] Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. p. 23.

[58] Varro _R.R._ i. 10, 2; cf. Plin. _H.N._ xix. 4.

[59] Festus p. 53 “Centuriatus ager in ducena jugera definitus, quia Romulus centenis civibus ducena jugera tribuit.”

[60] It is possible, however, that _manus_ in such expressions is merely the symbol of power.

[61] “Si adgnatus nec escit gentiles familiam habento.”

[62] Suet. _Caes._ 1, of Caesar’s refusal to divorce Cornelia; as a consequence he was “uxoris dote, et gentiliciis haereditatibus multatus.”

[63] p. 10.

[64] “Si furiosus escit, ast ei custos nec escit, adgnatum gentiliumque in eo pecuniaque ejus potestas esto.”

[65] Cic. _pro Domo_ 13, 35.

[66] Suet. _Tib._ 1.

[67] Cic. _Phil._ i. 13, 32.

[68] Maine _Ancient Law_ pp. 6, 27.

[69] Cic. _pro Domo_ 13, 35 “Quas adoptiones (i.e. legal ones) ... hereditates nominis, pecuniae, sacrorum secutae sunt. Tu ... neque amissis sacris paternis in haec adoptiva venisti. Ita perturbatis sacris, contaminatis gentibus, et quam deseruisti et quam polluisti, etc.”; _de Leg._ ii. 19, 48 “haec jura pontificum auctoritate consecuta sunt, ut ne morte patris familias sacrorum memoria occideret, iis essent ea adjuncta, ad quos ejusdem morte pecunia venerit.” The transmission was thus a part of _jus pontificium_, not of _jus civile_. Cf. Serv. in _Aen._ ii. 156.

[70] Cf. the story of Verginia in Liv. x. 23 (296 B.C.) “Verginiam Auli filiam patriciam plebeio nuptam L. Volumnio consuli matronae, quod e patribus enupsisset, sacris arcuerant.” She then founds an altar to “Pudicitia plebeia,” in imitation of that to “Pudicitia patricia.”

[71] ἀνδρὶ κοινωνὸν ἁπάντων χρημάτων τε καὶ ἱερῶν (Dionys. ii. 25).

[72] Plut. _Qu. Rom._ 30 Διὰ τί τὴν νὺμφην εἰσάγοντες λέγειν κελεύουσιν· Ὃπου σὺ Γαΐος ἐγὼ Γαΐα;

[73] e.g. a testamentary adoption by a public act in the _comitia calata_.

[74] _Familia_ is etymologically a “household.” Cf. Sanskr. _dhâ_ “to settle,” _dhâman_ “settlement.”

[75] The original term was, perhaps, _manus_ signifying “power” (see p. 32), but this word came in course of time to be restricted to the control over the wife who had become a member of the _familia_.

[76] Plutarch (_Rom._ 22) quotes a law of Romulus allowing the divorce of the wife ἐπὶ φαρμακείᾳ τέκνων ἢ κλειδῶν ὑποβίλῃ καὶ μοιχευθεῖσαν.

[77] Dionys. ii. 15.

[78] This _jus noxae dationis_ first disappears finally in the law of Justinian (_Inst._ iv. 8, 7; _Dig._ 43, 29, 3, 4). Before its abolition a modification had been introduced by the rule that, when the child had acquired an equivalent for the damage he had caused (_quantum damni dedit_), the owner should be forced to manumit him.

[79] Even by Constantine the sale of new-born children (_sanguinolenti_) was permitted, but only _propter nimiam paupertatem_ (_Cod._ 4, 43, 2).

[80] “Pater si filium ter venum duuit, filius a patre liber esto.” It has been thought, however, that by the time of the Twelve Tables the sale had become merely fictitious.

[81] This _vindicatio filii_ was in later Roman law replaced by a writ issued by the praetor (_interdictum de liberis exhibendis_), the effects of which were like that of Habeas Corpus.

[82] Dionys. ii. 26, 27.

[83] Gell. v. 19, 9.

[84] Hadrian punished the killing of a son with deportation (_Dig._ 48, 8, 5); Constantine declared it _parricidium_.

[85] Instances are given in Voigt (_Zwölf Tafeln_ ii 94). M. Fabius Buteo (223-218 B.C.) put his son to death as a punishment for theft (Oros. iv. 13), and a certain Pontius Aufidianus his daughter for immorality (Val. Max. vi. 1, 3); there are also instances of banishment inflicted by the father, presumably under the threat of inflicting the death penalty if the children returned.

[86] We may cite two instances lying at the very extremes of Republican history, the semi-mythical one of L. Junius Brutus in 509 (Plut. _Popl._ 6, 7), and the historical one of A. Fulvius Nobilior, who in 63 B.C. put his son to death for partnership in the Catilinarian conspiracy (Sall. _Cat._ 39).

[87] Modern writers are inclined to reject the appeal made to the _sexus fragilitas_ by the Roman jurists, and to believe that the original motive lay in the desire to keep the property of the family together (cf. Czyhlarz _Inst._ p. 275); but, as this motive did not operate in the case of sons, it is difficult to see why it should have done so in the case of the wife or daughters, apart from a belief in the incapability of women to defend their own claims. For the motive underlying the _tutela mulierum_ see p. 31.

[88] p. 16.

[89] Ulp. _Reg._ 12, 2 “Lex xii. Tab. prodigum, cui bonis interdictum est, in curatione jubet esse agnatorum”; cf. Ulp. in _Dig._ 27, 10, 1 “Lege xii. Tab. prodigo interdicitur bonorum suorum administratio.” There can be no doubt of the antiquity of this interdiction of the “prodigus,” proceeding as it does from the theory that the property belongs to the family rather than to its head; but from what authority it proceeded in the earliest period of Roman history is uncertain.

[90] See the account in Val. Max. v. 8, 2 (p. 23) “adhibito propinquoram et amicoram consilio.”

[91] Val. Max. ii. 9, 2 “M. Val. Maximus et C. Junius Brutus Bubulcus censores ... L. Annium senatu moverunt, quod, quam virginem in matrimonium duxerat, repudiasset, nullo amicorum in consilio adhibito.” See Greenidge _Infamia in Roman Law_ p. 65.

[92] Dionys. ii. 26, 27.

[93] For the alleged lateness of divorce at Rome, even after the Twelve Tables had freely permitted it, see Gell. iv. 3 (_Infamia in Roman Law_ p. 65).

[94] _Dig._ i. 6, 9 (Pomponius) “filius familias in publicis causis loco patris familias habetur, veluti ut magistratum gerat, ut tutor detur.” Compare the story in Liv. xxiv. 44 (213 B.C.) “Pater filio legatus ad Suessulam in castra venit”—the consul went to meet him; and the old man on horseback passed eleven lictors—“ut consul animadvertere proximum lictorem jussit et is, ut descenderet ex equo, inclamavit, tum demum desiliens, ‘Experiri,’ inquit, ‘volui, fili, satin’ scires consulem te esse.” Cf. Gell. ii. 2.

[95] Festus s.v. _Duicensus_ (p. 66) “dicebatur cum altero, id est cum filio census.”

[96] Probably by a _mancipatio fiduciae causa_, one, i.e., by which he had formally transferred (_mancipavit_) his body on the condition that it was not to be seized for a certain time, and that the transfer should be dissolved (_solutio nexi_) if the debt were paid within this time.

[97] Ulpian Reg. 19, 1; Gaius ii. 15. _Res mancipi_ at a later period included lands in Italy (with their servitudes), slaves and _quadrupedes quae dorso collove domantur_. In the expression _familia pecuniaque_, “familia” probably denotes the slaves. Pierron (_Du sens des mots familia pecuniaque_) has shown the theory of Ihering and Cuq, that the former denotes _res mancipi_, the latter _res nec mancipi_, to be untenable.

[98] Plut. _Cato maj._ 3.

[99] Plut. _Cor._ 24.

[100] See the section on the censor.

[101] Paulus in _Dig._ 28, 2, 11 “in suis heredibus evidentius apparet continuationem dominii eo rem perducere, ut nulla videatur hereditas fuisse, quasi olim hi domini essent, qui etiam vivo patre quodammodo domini existimantur.” What the _filius familias_ acquires by the death of his father is merely _libera bonorum administratio_.

[102] Gell. i. 9 “Tamquam illud fuit anticum consortium, quod jure atque verbo Romano appellabatur ‘ercto non cito’”; Serv. in _Aen._ viii. 642 “‘citae’ divisae, ut est in jure ‘ercto non cito,’ id est patrimonis vel hereditate non divisa.”

[103] Gell. xv. 27 “Isdem comitiis, quae ‘calata’ appellari diximus, et sacrorum detestatio et testamenta fieri solebant. Tria enim genera testamentorum fuisse accepimus; unum, quod calatis comitiis in populi contione fieret, alterum in procinctu, cum viri ad proelium faciendum in aciem vocabantur, tertium per familiae emancipationem, cui aes et libra adhiberetur”; Gaius ii. 101 “aut calatis comitiis faciebant, quae comitia bis in anno testamentis faciendis destinata erant; aut in procinctu, id est, cum belli causa arma sumebant.” Cf. Ulpian (_Reg._ 20, 2) on the _testamentorum genera tria_.

[104] This testament is never associated with adrogation, although this took place before the same assembly.

[105] In Gell. (cited n. 1) it is associated with the _sacrorum detestatio_ (see p. 16), and perhaps this was its main object. The pontiffs and people had to be satisfied that the _sacra_ would be continued and the family not become extinct.

[106] See the passages of Gellius, Gaius, and Ulpian, cited n. 1, and compare Festus p. 225 “procincta classis dicebatur, cum exercitus cinctus erat Gabino cinctu confestim pugnaturus.” In the second century B.C. we find some kind of military testament, called by this name, made by Roman soldiers in Spain (Velleius ii. 5 “facientibus ... omnibus in procinctu testamenta, velut ad certam mortem eundum foret”).

[107] Gaius ii. 102 “Qui neque calatis comitiis, neque in procinctu testamentum fecerat, is, si subita morte urguebatur, amico familiam suam, id est, patrimonium suum mancipio dabat, eumque rogabat, quod cuique post mortem suam dari vellet.”

[108] Gaius ii. 104 “Familiam pecuniamque tuam endo mandatela tutela custodelaque mea, quo tu jure testamentum facere possis secundum legem publicam, hoc aere esto mihi empta.” For _familia pecuniaque_ see p. 24.

[109] The stipulation that it was a trust would still have taken the patrimony wholly from the testator during the remainder of his life. We hear nothing about the formal reservation of a life interest.

[110] “Cum nexum faciet mancipiumque, uti lingua nuncupassit ita jus esto.”

[111] Gaius ii. 104 “Haec ita, ut in his tabulis cerisque scripta sunt, ita do, ita lego, ita testor, itaque vos, quirites, testimonium mihi perhibetote.”

[112] Plut. _Comp. Lyc. c. Num._ 4 λέγεται γούν ποτε γυναικὸς εἰπούσης δίκην ἰδίαν ἐν ἀγορᾷ πέμψαι τὴν σύγκλητον εἰς θεοῦ, πυνθανομένην, τίνος ἅρα τῇ πόλει σημεῖον εἴη τὸ γεγενημένον.

[113] Such as the _lex Claudia_, which abolished the _legitima tutela agnatorum_ (Gaius i. 171).

[114] A trace of the old disability survives in the prohibition of advocacy to women; the praetors declined to grant them a formula on behalf of others. A certain Carfania (Gaia Afrania) “inverecunde postulans et magistratum inquietans” is said to have been the occasion of this rule (Ulp. in _Dig._ 3, 11, 5).

[115] This usage was preserved in the praetor’s edict; he spoke of “qui quaeve ... capite deminuti deminutaeve esse dicentur” (_Dig._ 4, 5, 2, 1), meaning what the later jurists call _cap. dem. minima_, i.e. loss of _familia_.

[116] See Eisele “Zur Natur u. Geschichte der capitis deminutio” in _Beiträge zur Römischen Rechtsgeschichte_ p. 160. He combats the counter view that _capitis dem._ meant an annihilation of personality. Mommsen (_Staatsr._ iii. 8) takes this latter view—a natural result of juristic refinement, but a conception that would have been quite unintelligible to a primitive community.

[117] Gaius i. 162 “Minima capitis deminutio est, cum et civitas et libertas retinetur, sed status hominis commutator; quod accidit in his qui adoptantur, item in his quae coemptionem faciunt, et in his qui mancipio dantur, quique ex mancipatione manumittuntur.”

[118] Liv. i. 32.

[119] Gell. i. 12, 14; x. 24, 3.

[120] Mommsen (_Staatsr._ iii. 3, n. 2) connects the word with _populari_. The _magister populi_ (i.e. the dictator) is master of the infantry host.

[121] Varro ap. Dionys. ii 48. Other views derived it from the Sabine town Cures (Varro _L.L._ v. 51; Strabo v. 3, 1) or connected it with _Curia_ (Lange _Röm. Alt._ i. p. 89; Belot _Hist. d. Chev. Rom._ i. p. 312).

[122] Suet. _Jul._ 70.

[123] Capito ap. Gell. i. 20 “Plebes ... in qua gentes civium patriciae non insunt: plebiscitum ... est ... lex, quam plebes, non populus, accipit.” Cf. Festus p. 233.

[124] According to the primitive conception private are dependent on public rights; see p. 31. But the growth of the Plebs, and alliances with other states, had effected many modifications in this conception.

[125] Nonius, s.v. _plebitas_, p. 101 “Hemina in annalibus, ‘Quicumque propter plebitatem agro publico ejecti sunt.’” Cf. Liv. iv. 48.

[126] p. 17.

[127] Cic. _de Leg._ ii. 13, 32 (on the question whether auspices were merely directed to the _utilitas_ of the state, or formed a true method of divination) “si enim deos esse concedimus ... et eosdem hominum consulere generi, et posse nobis signa rerum futurarum ostendere; non video cur esse divinationem negem.”

[128] Cic. _de Div._ ii. 33, 70 (the difficulty of answering for results may appeal to a _Marsus augur_ but not to a Roman) “non enim sumus ii nos augures, qui avium reliquorumve signorum observatione futura dicamus.” Cf. i. 58, 132 “Non habeo ... nauci Marsum augurem, non vicanos haruspices, non de circo astrologos, non Isiacos conjectores, non interpretes somniorum. Non enim sunt ii aut scientia aut arte divini.”

[129] See the treatment of the auspices in the section on the magistracy (p. 163).

[130] Strangely enough the Greek belief in oracular or prophetic power did not lead to the conception of a priesthood set apart from the people. But the Greek science of divination, though associated with oracles and prophecy, did not aim much higher than the Roman. Its object was generally to win approval for a contemplated course of action.

[131] Cic. _de Leg._ ii. 8, 21 “Quaeque augur injusta, nefasta, vitiosa, dira defixerit, inrita infectaque sunto; quique non paruerit, capital esto.”

[132] Serv. ad _Aen._ vi. 190 “auguria aut oblativa sunt, quae non poscuntur, aut impetrativa, quae optata veniunt.” For the categories of these two kinds of auspices see the discussion of the auspices in the section on the magistracy (p. 162).

[133] Liv. vi. 41 “Auspiciis hanc urbem conditam esse, auspiciis bello ac pace, domi militiaeque omnia geri, quis est qui ignoret?”

[134] This view is most fully expressed in the formalities of the _interregnum_. See the section which treats of this institution (p. 147).

[135] Cic. _de Div._ i. 16, 28 “Nihil fere quondam majoris rei, nisi auspicato, ne privatim quidem, gerebatur: quod etiam nunc nuptiarum auspices declarant, qui, re omissa, nomen tantum tenent.” In i. 17, 31 we have the story of Attus Navius taking auspices by _aves_ in a private matter. Cf. Liv. vi. 41.

[136] Cic. _de Div._ i. 16, 28 (see last note); Suet. _Claud._ 26; Tac. _Ann._ xi. 27.

[137] Liv. iv. 2 “Quas quantasque res C. Canuleium adgressum? Conluvionem gentium, perturbationem auspiciorum publicorum privatorumque adferre.” Yet this passage has only an indirect reference to the matrimonial _auspicia_. The argument is that intermarriage would cause the pure Patriciate to disappear, and with it the general right of taking _auspicia impetrativa_.

[138] Cic. _de Div._ ii. 36, 76 “a populo auspicia accepta habemus.” The relation of _auspicia habere_ to the _spectio_ is that the former denotes the abstract right of questioning the gods, the latter its exercise in a particular case (Momms. _Staatsr._ i. 89 n. 3). The specification by the magistrate of the signs which he wished to see was known as _legum dictio_ (Serv. ad _Aen._ iii. 89; cf. p. 43 n. 2).

[139] A similar confusion was at an earlier period introduced with reference to the givers of the auspices. They are said to be given by the people (Cic. _de Div._ ii. 36, 76; p. 39), but the great bulk of the people (i.e. the Plebs) did not possess them.

[140] p. 3.

[141] Dionys. iv. 14 (Servius Tullius) τὰς καταγραφὰς τῶν στρατιωτῶν καὶ τὰς εἰσπράξεις τῶν χρημάτων ... οὐκέτι κατὰ τὰς τρεῖς φυλὰς τὰς γενικάς, ὡς πρότερον, κ.τ.λ. Varro _L.L._ v. 181 “Tributum dictum a tribubus, quod ea pecunia, quae populo imperata erat, tributim a singulis pro portione census exigebatur.”

[142] From _legere_, Varro _L.L._ v. 87.

[143] Varro _L.L._ v. 89 “milites quod trium milium primo legio fiebat, ac singulae tribus Titiensium, Ramnium, Lucerum milia singula militum mittebant.”

[144] ib. 81 “tribuni militum quod terni tribus tribubus Ramnium, Lucerum, Titium olim ad exercitum mittebantur.” On the other hand, Servius (in _Aen._ v. 560) says that the _tribuni_ were so called because they presided over one-third of the whole force.

[145] p. 12.

[146] Liv. i. 36.

[147] e.g. Calabra, Foriensis, Veliensis. Other names (such as Titia) may be eponymous.

[148] Festus p. 62 “curionia sacra, quae in curiis fiebant”; p. 64 “curiales flamines curiarum sacerdotes.”

[149] ib. p. 49 (s.v. _curia_) “locus est, ubi publicas curas gerebant.”

[150] See note 1.

[151] Festus p. 126; Liv. xxvii. 8.

[152] Festus p. 55 “Celeres antiqui dixerunt, quos nunc equites dicimus ... qui primitus electi fuerunt ex singulis curiis deni, ideoque omnino trecenti fuere.”

[153] Liv. i. 26; Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 31, 54.

[154] Dionys. ii. 14.

[155] “Generale jussum” (Capito ap. Gell. x. 20).

[156] _Lex_ is probably connected etymologically with the German _legen_ (Gothic _lagjan_) as θεσμός with τίθημι.

[157] In business we have _leges locationis, venditionis_, in the structure of corporations a _lex collegii_. On the other hand, in the _legum dictio_ of augury, which is the statement of the mode of the answer of the gods to a request, in the _lex data_ given to individuals by a magistrate (e.g. the _leges censoriae_) or granted by Rome as a charter to a subject state, there seems to be the idea of a purely one-sided ordinance.

[158] Dionys. iii. 62; Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 17, 31.

[159] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22; Ulp. in _Dig._ i. 13.

[160] Varro _L.L._ v. 80 “Praetor dictus, qui praeiret jure et exercitu.” But the title is, perhaps, a purely military one (_prae-itor_, “the man who goes before the army”).

[161] Festus p. 198 “in magistro populi faciendo, qui vulgo Dictator appellatur.”

[162] Cic. _de Rep._ i. 26, 42. _Regnum_ denotes the position of the king as head of the state (ib. ii. 27), but not the regal power.

[163] _Lictor_ is probably derived from _licere_. For other attempts at derivation see Gell. xii. 8. They summon, not only to the assembly, but also to the courts, and are thus the chief mark of jurisdiction and coercive power (_coercitio_). The individual _curiae_ were probably summoned by the thirty _lictores curiatii_, who survive into the later Republic. See Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 392. For the number of lictors that accompanied the king see Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 17, 31; Liv. i. 8; Dionys. ii. 29; iii. 61, 62.

[164] Serv. in _Aen._ vii. 188, 612; xi. 334; Ov. _Fast._ ii. 503.

[165] Cic. _de Fin._ ii. 21, 69; Dionys. iii. 61.

[166] Festus p. 49 “currules magistrates appellati sunt, quia curru vehebantur.”

[167] Dionys. iv. 74.

[168] Festus p. 209 “Picta quae nunc toga dicitur purpurea ante vocitata est eaque erat sine pictura.” It was already _picta_ (διάχρυσος) in Polybius’ time (Polyb. vi. 53).

[169] Liv. i. 56.

[170] “Arvi et arbusta et pascui lati atque uberes” (Cic. _de Rep._ v. 2, 3). Cf. Liv. ii. 5.

[171] p. 8.

[172] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 12, 24 “Nostri illi etiam turn agrestes viderunt virtutem et sapientiam regalem, non progeniem quaeri oportere.” Cf. App. _B.C._ i. 98.

[173] Liv. i. 7 and 18.

[174] Liv. i. 17; Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 17, 31.

[175] The _interregnum_, though only an occasional office in the Republic, is represented as an invariable part of the procedure in the transmission of the kingly power (Liv. i. 47).

[176] Dionys. v. 1; Liv. xl. 42.

[177] Tac. _Ann._ i. 14 and 81; Dio Cass. liii. 21, 7; lviii. 20, 3.

[178] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 12, 23; Liv. i. 17; Dionys. ii. 57.

[179] [Cic.] _ad Brut._ i. 5, 4.

[180] Cf. Serv. in _Aen._ vi. 808 “Romulo mortuo cum ... Senatus ... regnasset per decurias.”

[181] Dionys. ii. 57 διακληρωσάμενοι.

[182] Dionys. ii. 57 τοῖς λαχοῦσι δέκα πρώτοις ἀπέδωκαν ἄρχειν τῆς πόλεως τὴν αὐτόκρατορ’ ἀρχήν: Liv. i. 17 “decem imperitabant, unus cum insignibus imperii et lictoribus erat.”

[183] In the accounts of this procedure an important element is probably omitted, i.e. that each individual _interrex_ nominated his successor. The first could not nominate the king, as he had not received the auspices in due form.

[184] Mommsen (_Staatsr._ i. pp. 213, 214) takes a different view, arguing that the king was in every case nominated, not by the _rex_, but by the _interrex_, on the legal ground that the appointment of a successor would have been one of those “actus legitimi qui non recipiunt diem vel condicionem” (such as _hereditatis aditio_, _tutoris datio_), and which “in totum vitiantur per temporis vel condicionis adjectionem” (Papin. in _Dig._ 50, 17, 77). But, even in the regal period, there may have been one condition which did not vitiate such acts, i.e. death (see p. 29).

[185] Liv. i. 17, 22, 32, 41, 47.

[186] Cic. _de Leg._ Agr. ii. 10, 26; ii. 11, 28; _ad Fam._ i. 9, 25.

[187] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 13, 25 “Numam ... qui ... quamquam populus curiatis eum comitiis regem esse jusserat, tamen ipse de suo imperio curiatam legem tulit.”

[188] Liv. i. 41 “Servius, praesidio firmo munitus, primus injussu populi, voluntate patrum regnavit.”

[189] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 17, 31 “Tullum Hostilium populus regem, interrege rogante, comitiis curiatis creavit, isque de imperio suo ... populum consuluit curiatim.”

[190] The last _injustus dominus_ of Rome ruled “neque populi jussu neque auctoribus patribus” (Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 24, 45; Liv. i. 49).

[191] Thus Romulus takes his own auspices on the Palatine (Liv. i. 6).

[192] p. 39.

[193] Liv. i. 18 “de se ... deos consuli jussit.”

[194] Labeo ap. Gell. xv. 27, 1; Liv. xl. 42, 8.

[195] Dionys. ii. 14; iv. 74; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 15.

[196] Festus p. 185; Labeo ap. Gell. xv. 27; Ov. _Fasti_ ii. 21.

[197] This is shown by his sacrifices on the Kalends and on the Nones (_sacra nonalia_) and his offering of a ram to Janus in the _regia_ on the _Agonalia_ (Jan. 9) (Festus p. 10; Varro _L.L._ vi. 12; Ov. _Fasti_ i. 317).

[198] Festus p. 113; Macrob. i. 15, 19.

[199] Liv. i. 20 “Numa Pontificem ... Numam Marcium M. f. ex patribus legit, eique sacra omnia exscripta exsignataque attribuit, quibus hostiis, quibus diebus, ad quae templa sacra fierent, atque unde in eos suraptus pecunia erogaretur. Cetera quoque omnia publica privataque sacra Pontificis scitis subjecit, ut esset, quo consultum plebes veniret: ne quid divini juris, negligendo patrios ritus, peregrinos que adsciscendo, turbaretur, etc.” But afterwards (in 449 B.C.) Livy (iii. 54) implies the existence of a college, without mentioning its institution. Cf. iv. 44.

[200] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 14, 26.

[201] Liv. x. 6.

[202] Bouché-Leclercq _Les Pontifes de l’ancienne Rome_ p. 9. That the king was pontiff is stated by Plutarch (_Numa_ 9), Servius (ad _Aen._ iii. 81), and Zosimus (iv. 36), but the evidence may be vitiated by the position of the Princeps as _pontifex maximus_.

[203] Liv. i. 20 (p. 51 n. 5); cf. Ambrosch _Studien_ p. 22.

[204] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 9, 16; _de Div._ i. 2, 3.

[205] Liv. i. 20 “Tum sacerdotibus creandis animum adjecit, quamquam ipse plurima sacra obibat, ea maxime quae nunc ad Dialem flaminem pertinent.”

[206] As, e.g., the nomination of Flamines belonged to the Latin dictator (Ascon. in _Milon._ p. 32).

[207] Gaius i. 130. The same was the case with the Vestal (Gell. i. 12).

[208] For the Flamen see Liv. xxxi. 50; Festus p. 104. For the Vestal, Gell. x. 15.

[209] Plut. _Numa_ 10.

[210] Liv. i. 20 (cited p. 51).

[211] _Supplicium_, from _sub-placo_, death as a sin-offering (Festus p. 308 “supplicia ... sacrificia a supplicando”); _castigatio_ (“castum agere”) purification through atonement. On the other hand _poena_, _multa_, _talio_ bear witness to a theory of compensation and private vengeance. See Rein _Criminalrecht_ p. 39.

[212] Liv. i. 26; Dionys. iii. 22; Festus pp. 297 and 307.

[213] Festus p. 222; Gell. iv. 3.

[214] Macrob. i. 16, 10 “prudentem expiare non posse.”

[215] Cic. _de Leg._ ii. 9, 22.

[216] Dionys. ii. 10; Serv. ad _Aen._ vi. 609.

[217] Festus p. 230.

[218] Dionys. ii. 74; Festus p. 368.

[219] Plin. _H.N._ xviii. 3, 12.

[220] Bouché-Leclercq _Les Pontifes_ p. 196. In the _lex sacrata_ which protected the tribunes we meet with this distinction (Liv. iii. 55).

[221] Festus p. 318 “At homo sacer is est, quem populus judicavit ob maleficium; neque fas est eum immolari, sed qui occidit, parricidi non damnatur.” This is the meaning of _sacer_ as employed in the _leges sacratae_ of the early Republic (Liv. ii. 8; iii. 55).

[222] The _sacramentum_ (literally “oath”) in the _actio sacramento_ is best explained as an atonement (_piaculum_) in the form of a money payment for the expiable, because involuntary, perjury of the litigant who has maintained a false claim. When the process was secularised, the _sacramentum_ came to be considered a simple wager. See Danz _Der sacrale Schutz_ pp. 151 ff.

[223] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 17, 31 “constituitque jus, quo bella indicerentur; quod per se justissime inventum sanxit fetiali religione, ut omne bellum, quod denuntiatum indictumque non esset, id injustum esse atque impium judicaretur.”

[224] Varro _L.L._ v. 86 “Fetiales ... fidei publicae inter populos praeerant; nam per hos fiebat ut justum conciperetur bellum et inde desitum, ut foedere fides pacis constitueretur. Ex his mittebantur, antequam conciperetur, qui res repeterent, etc.”

[225] Cic. _de Leg._ ii. 9, 21 “Foederum, pacis, belli, indutiarum ratorum fetiales judices nuntii sunto; bella disceptanto.” The word _fetialis_ is probably connected with _fateri_ (and Oscan _fatium_). Thus the “Fetiales” are speakers (_oratores_), cf. Festus p. 182. Dionysius (ii. 72) ascribes the creation of the Fetiales to Numa; Livy (i. 32) speaks as if they were due to Ancus Martius, but in another passage (i. 24) implies their earlier existence. Cicero attributes them to Tullus Hostilius (Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 17, 31). The ceremonies of the college are described in Dionys. ii. 72 and Liv. i. 32.

[226] Sometimes, the better to secure divine assistance, the enemy, his cities, and his lands were all devoted to the gods. For the incantation see Macrob. iii. 9, 10 “Dis pater Vejovis Manes, sive quo alio nomine fas est nominare ... uti vos eas urbes agrosque capita aetatesque eorum devotas consecratasque habeatis ollis legibus, quibus quandoque sunt maxime hostes devoti; eosque ego ... do devoveo.” The site of such cities was cursed, as in Republican times that of Fregellae, Carthage, and Corinth.

[227] Macrob. iii. 9, 7 “Si deus, si dea est, cui populus civitasque ... est in tutela, teque maxime, ille qui urbis hujus populique tutelam recepisti ... a vobis peto ut vos populum civitatemque ... deseratis ... proditique Romam ad me meosque veniatis, nostraque vobis loca templa sacra urbs acceptior probatiorque sit.”

[228] Cincius ap. Arnob. iii. 38 “solere Romanos religiones urbium superatarum partim privatim per familias spargere, partim publice consecrare.”

[229] e.g. the _evocatio_ at the siege of Veii, the _devotio_ on the fall of Carthage.

[230] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 15; Tac. _Ann._ iii. 26. See next citation.

[231] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 26 “nobis Romulus, ut libitum, imperitaverat: dein Numa religionibus et divino jure populum devinxit, repertaque quaedam a Tullo et Anco. Sed praecipuus Servius Tullius sanctor legum fuit, quis etiam reges obtemperarent.”

[232] Pomponius in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2 “et ita leges quasdam et ipse (Romulus) curiatas ad populum tulit; tulerunt et sequentes reges. Quae omnes conscriptæ extant in libro Sexti Papirii, qui fuit illis temporibus, quibus Superbus Demarati Corinthii filius, ex principalibus viris. Is liber, ut diximus, appellatur jus civile Papirianum, non quia Papirius de suo quicquam ibi adjecit, sed quod leges sine ordine latas in unum composuit.” This code was commented on by Granius Flaccus (Paul. in _Dig._ 50, 16, 144), a contemporary of Julius Caesar. C. Papirius is said to have been _pontifex maximus_ (Dionys. iii. 36), and Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 41) thinks that the _leges regiae_ were simply pontifical ordinances, specifying amongst other things such offences as we have mentioned as coming under _fas_ (p. 54).

[233] Sall. _Cat._ 6 “imperium legitimum, nomen imperii regium habebant.”

[234] “Regium consilium” (Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 8, 14). The function of the Senate was περὶ παντὸς ὃτου ἂν εἰσηγῆται βασιλεὺς διαγινὼσκειν (Dionys. ii. 14).

[235] Festus p. 246 “Praeteriti senatores quondam in opprobrio non erant, quod, ut reges sibi legebant sublegebantque, quos in consilio publico haberent, ita post exactos eos consules quoque et tribuni militum consulari potestate conjunctissimos sibi quosque patriciorum et deinde plebeiorum legebant.”

[236] p. 13.

[237] Liv. i. 8.

[238] ib. 17 and 35; ii. 1. On the nature of this increase see Willems _Le Sénat_ p. 21.

[239] p. 13.

[240] p. 12.

[241] Liv. i. 32.

[242] Dionys. ii. 14. One of the privileges of the people was περὶ πολέμου διαγινώσκειν ὃταν ὁ βασιλεύς ἐφῇ.

[243] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 9, 15 “Cum ipse (Romulus) nihil ex praeda domum suam reportaret, locupletare cives non destitit”; ii. 14, 26 “ac primum agros, quos bello Romulus ceperat, divisit viritim civibus.” Cf. Dionys. ii. 28 and 62.

[244] Liv. i. 49 “cognitiones capitalium rerum sine consiliis per se solus exercebat.”

[245] ib. 59; see p. 41.

[246] Tac. _Ann._ vi. 11 “namque antea, profectis domo regibus ac mox magistratibus, ne urbs sine imperio foret, in tempus deligebatur qui jus redderet ac subitis mederetur ... duratque simulacrum, quotiens ob ferias Latinas praeficitur qui consulare munus usurpet.” Cf. Liv. i. 59; Dionys. ii. 12.

[247] Yet Livy and Dionysius represent the _tribunus celerum_ as summoning the assembly (Liv. i. 59; Dionys. iv. 71).

[248] Dionys. ii. 14 (amongst the powers of the king were) τῶν τε ἀδικημάτων τὰ μέγιστα μὲν αὐτὸν δικάζειν, τὰ δ’ ἐλάττονα τοῖς βουλευταῖς ἐπιτρέπειν. It is difficult, however, to determine whether the reference is to civil wrongs or to crimes.

[249] ib. iv. 25 ἐκεῖνος (Servius Tullius) διελὼν ἀπὸ τῶν ἰδιωτικῶν (ἐγκλημάτων) τὰ δημόσια, τῶν μὲν εἰς τὸ κοινὸν φερόντων ἀδικημάτων αὐτὸς ἐποιεῖτο τὰς διαγνώσεις, τῶν δὲ ἰδιωτικῶν ἰδιώτας ἔταξεν εἶναι δικαστάς, ὅρους καὶ κανόνας αὐτοῖς τάξας, οὓς αὐτὸς ἔγραψε νόμους. The principle here described perhaps refers to delegation rather than to the distinction between _jus_ and _judicium_ in civil process.

[250] For derivations of _jus_ see Clark _Pract. Jurisprudence_ pp. 16-20; Bréal “Sur l’origine des mots designant le droit en Latin” in _Nouvelle Revue Historique de droit_ vol. vii. (1883) pp. 607 sq.

[251] Dionys. l.c.

[252] Liv. i 26.

[253] Zonaras vii. 13 (who attributes their institution to Publicola) identifies the _quaestores_ with the _quaestores parricidii_, οἷ πρῶτον μὲν τὰς θανασίμους δίκας ἐδίκαζον, ὄθεν καὶ τὴν προσηγορίαν ταύτην διὰ τὰς ἀνακρίσεις ἐσχήκασι καὶ διὰ τὴν τῆς ἀληθείας ἐκ τῶν ἀνακρίσεων ζήτησιν. Cf. Varro _L.L._ v. 81. Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii. pp. 523 sq.) thinks the financial quaestors as standing officials originated with the Republic; but he believes (p. 539) that they had their origin in the criminal _quaestores_ (a word which bears the same relation to _quaesitores_ as _sartor_ to _sarcitor_ or _quaero_ to _quaesivi_, p. 537). Cf. Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22 (p. 81); Ulpian in _Dig._ i. 13.

[254] Liv. l.c.

[255] Cic. _pro Mil._ 3, 7; _de Rep._ ii. 31, 54; Festus p. 297.

[256] Liv. i 26 “Si a duumviris provocarit provocatione certato ... auctore Tullo, ... ‘provoco’ inquit.”

[257] ib. viii. 33.

[258] Cf. Ihering _Geist des röm. Rechts_ i. pp. 257 ff.

[259] _Provocatio_ seems to mean a challenge, i.e. a challenge by an accused to a magistrate to appear before another tribunal, on the ground that he is not acting within his own right; cf. Gaius iv. 93 (of the _actio per sponsionem_) “Provocamus adversarium tali sponsione.”

[260] “In this conflict of competence the position of the king was far more favourable than that of the people, since the people could only be summoned by the king. Hence the share of the people in criminal jurisdiction was reduced to a minimum” (Ihering _Geist des röm. Rechts_ i. p. 258).

[261] “Judiciis regiis” (Cic. _de Rep._ v. 2, 3).

[262] p. 56.

[263] Savigny _System_, vi. p. 287; Bernhöft _Staat und Recht der Königszeit_ p. 230. The idea of its being an innovation has sometimes been associated with Dionysius’s description (iv. 25, see p. 62) of a change in jurisdiction introduced by Servius Tullius.

[264] Cic. _pro Cluent._ 43, 120 “Neminem voluerunt majores nostri non modo de existimatione cujusquam, sed ne pecuniaria quidem de re minima esse judicem, nisi qui inter adversarios convenisset.”

[265] Ihering _Geist des röm. Rechts_ i. 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 Tacitus _Ann._ iii. 26, see p. 58) to rest on a _rogatio_. 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 the _curiae_.

[270] Dionys. iv. 14; Gell. xv. 27.

[271] Cic. _pro Flacco_ 32, 80 “sintne ista praedia censui censendo, habeant jus civile, sint necne sint mancipi?... in qua tribu denique ista praedia censuisti?” The _ager publicus_ was 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. Varro _L.L._ v. 56. Mommsen (_Staatsr._ iii. p. 163) now holds that the tribes were “parts of the state-town limited by the _pomerium_.” 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 the _territorium_ of the city. See p. 68.

[273] Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. p. 168. Rome was at this time a great commercial state (cf. treaty with Carthage, 509 B.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, were _pagi_.

[275] _Sucusana_ (or _Suburana_), _Palatina_, _Esquilina_, and _Collina_. See p. 3.

[276] Cf. Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. p. 125 “The four tribes are probably nothing more than the three Romulian increased through the _territorium_ of 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 of _aes 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 the _decemviri_ (450-430 _B.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 Flacco_ 32, 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 the _lex Voconia_ (169 B.C.), mentioned in this connexion by Festus. The designation in asses was still kept, but the _as_ must now be multiplied by 10 (12,500 × 10 = 125,000 asses). Belot starts from his hypothesis that the _as_ of the census is the old libral _as_. 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 the _centum milia aeris_ of libral asses. That it was so interpreted is shown by the fact that the _centum milia aeris_ of the Voconian law (Gaius ii. 274) became _centum 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 the _collegia_ (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] _Staatsrecht_ iii pp. 249, 250. Böckh (_Metrologische Untersuchungen_ p. 444) also takes the view of the asses being _sextantarii_. He makes the qualifications in terms of the libral _as_ and the _as_ of 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 in _Fragm. 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 the _classes_ included only landholders. The favourite ancient derivation was from _ab 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 called _capite 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. in _Divin._ 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, _circa_ 220 B.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, 10,000 _asses 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 the _classici_, 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 from _tribus_ (as by Varro quoted p. 40). The parallel words _attribuere_, _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 royalty _sacer_ (Liv. ii. 8). For the dual sanction of the oath and the law compare the means by which the _sacrosanctitas_ of the tribunes was secured (p. 100).

[315] It is strange that the _interregnum_, 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 the _praefectus urbi_, who almost certainly had not the _jus 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 title _praetores_ see Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 8 “regio imperio duo sunto iique a praeeundo judicando consulendo praetores judices consules appellamino”; for that of _judices_, Varro _L.L._ vi. 88, who quotes from the _commentarii consulares_ the formula used in summoning the _comitia 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, a _lex_ was still passed by the _curiae_ ratifying this election (p. 49); and the _patrum auctoritas_ was 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] From _con-salio_, i.e. people who leap or dance together, “partners” (in a dance). Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 77 n. 3; he compares _praesul_ and _exul_.

[321] Liv. ii. 8 (509 B.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. the _provocatio_ became _universal_ instead of being confined to certain _spheres_).

[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 the _pomerium_ and the first milestone was in later times still a disputed one (Liv. xxiv. 9).

[324] Cic. l.c.

[325] p. 63.

[326] The _quaestores parricidii_ and _aerarii_ are identified by Zonaras (vii. 13), following Dio. See p. 63. They were called _quaestores_, 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 in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 22 and 23.

[327] _Quaestores parricidii_ were mentioned in the Twelve Tables (Pompon. in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 23).

[328] Liv. i. 26.

[329] They are mentioned in the trial of M. Volscius (459 B.C.) for an ordinary criminal offence (Liv. iii. 24), but also in the public trials of Sp. Cassius in 485 B.C. (Liv. ii. 41; Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 35, 60), and of Camillus in 396 B.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. 447 B.C.; hence Mommsen, _Staatsr._ ii. p. 529, thinks the change was due to the Valerio-Horatian laws of 449 B.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 the _lex curiata_. Another explanation is that the _lex_ recited that the kings had appointed quaestors and empowered the consuls to do so. Cf. Ulpian in _Dig._ 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). So _adlecti_, Festus p. 7 “_adlecti_ dicebantur 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 the _minores gentes_. (Claudius creates Patricians A.D. 48—“paucis jam reliquis familiis, quas Romulus majorum et L. Brutus minorum gentium appellaverant.”)

[335] Willems (_Le Sénat_ ii. 39 ff.) makes _patres conscripti_ simply 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 (439 B.C.) it is asked “quem senatorem concoquere civitas vix posset, regem ferret.”

[337] p. 60.

[338] Liv. ii. 18; Festus p. 198; Pompon. in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 18.

[339] The title was, perhaps, originally _praetor_. 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 is _magister 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.) from _dicitur_ (Cic. _de Rep._ l.c.); (ii) from _dicto audiens_ (Varro _L.L._ v. 81 “quoi dicto audientes omnes essent”); (iii.) from _dictare_ (Priscian viii. 14, 78), or (iv.) because they issued edicts (Dionys. v. 73).

[340] Pompon. in _Dig._ 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. Claudius _Oratio_ i. 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 the _multa suprema_ (l.c.), i.e. the largest fine the magistrate could impose without appeal. These statements may, however, be deductions from the later _provocatio_.

[343] Pompon. in _Dig._ 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 of _fas_ and must at one time have been enforced by the pontiffs.

[346] p. 78.

[347] Mommsen _Staatsr._ 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 of _nexum_ was in fact a conditioned mancipation, like a testament, the _nuncupatio_ being made by the vendor, who perhaps purchased with a single coin (_nummo uno_), as in the later _mancipationes fiduciae causa_ (Bruns _Fontes_).

[351] Except as a penal measure ordained by the state. The _furem manifestum_ according to Gellius (xx. 1), “in servitutem tradit” (lex); he is more correctly described as _addictus_ by Gaius (iii. 189). The _incensus_ might 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.” The _addictus_ like the _nexus_ did 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] Varro _L.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 the _carmen rogationis_ of the tribunate, and in this case it was held that Patricians were eligible. Liv. iii. 65 (449 B.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 the _curiae_; and so does Livy (ii. 56, on the _lex Publilia_ transferring 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) the _auxilium_ was 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 (471 B.C. in connexion with the _lex 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 457 B.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 a _hostis tribuniciae potestatis_ in consequence of his advice that the tribunate should be abrogated (Liv. ii. 34). See Rein _Criminalrecht_ p. 484. Cf. Liv. ii. 56 (471 B.C.; the tribune seizes some _nobiles_ who would not yield to his _viator_) “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.”

[368] p. 66 note 5.

[369] Dionys. x. 31, 32; see Mr. Strachan-Davidson in Smith _Dict. 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. in _Dig._ 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 of _aedes_ both sacred and private (Varro _L.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. Ohnesseit _Ztschr. der Savigny-stiftung_ 1883, 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 (456 B.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 the _sacrosanctitas_ of the aediles as being based only on law.

[377] Dionys. vi. 89. The _sacrosanctitas_ of 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 a _magistratus populi_ is not _perduellio_ in later Roman law, but rather _vis_. But resistance to the tribune is always _majestas_.

[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 the _comitia 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 patrician _gentes_ to 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. in _Dig._ 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 the _sacratae leges_, the aedileship would have gone with the tribunate; and there was nothing more to be protected by the _leges sacratae_.

[392] Their title was _Decemviri 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. in _Dig._ (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 (in _Dig._, cited p. 102) says “in tabulas eboreas perscriptas” (perhaps _roboreas_ or _aereas_, 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] Ulpian _Reg._ ii. 4.

[401] p. 10.

[402] p. 91.

[403] Cato _R.R._ praef.

[404] Plin. _H.N._ xviii. 3, 12.

[405] Cic. _de Rep._ iv. 12.

[406] Gell. xx. 1.

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

[408] Pompon. in _Dig._ 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 in _Dig._ 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 the _actio finium regundorum_ ordained 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, an _interregnum_ would naturally ensue; and this was a matter for the Senate. But Livy also represents the tribune as (in accordance with a _senatus 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 Smith _Dict. of Antiq._ s.v. _plebiscitum_, and _English Historical Review_ Nos. 2 and 19.

[423] p. 97.

[424] p. 107.

[425] Types of such laws between 449 and 287 B.C. are the _lex 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 a _contio_) 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 in _Tab. 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 (351 A.U.C. _C.I.L._ i. p. 428) six and two censors.

[435] Pompon. in _Dig._ 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 445 B.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 Willems _Le Sénat_ i. 58-60.

[437] If it be taken to prove that the preponderance of voting power in the _comitia centuriata_ was 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 this _lex Aemilia_ first 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 the _lustrum_ (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 the _comitia tributa_ see p. 102.

[452] p. 83 note 2.

[453] Liv. iv. 25. The _principes 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 of _intercessio_ being 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 in _Dig._ 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 77 B.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 (366 B.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 172 B.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 (81 B.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 the _VIIviri epulones_.

[476] Marquardt _Staatsverw._ 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.” The _pontifex maximus_ was early an exception to this rule; see the _comitia sacerdotum_ in 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” (Smith _Dict. 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 a _lex Manlia_ of 357 B.C. (Willems _Droit Public_ p. 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 (the _patrum 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. in _Dig._ 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] The _lex Agraria_ of 111 B.C. (Bruns _Fontes_) thus refers to a _lex Sempronia_ of 123 B.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 a _plebiscitum_, was restored by a _lex 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.” Here _plebs_ should be _populus_ and _populus_, _plebs_.

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

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

[494] Gaius iv. 23.

[495] Varro _L.L._ viii. 105 “Hoc (the condition of _nexum_) C. Poetilio Libone Visolo dictatore (313 B.C.) sublatum ne fieret; et omnes, qui bonam copiam jurarunt, ne essent nexi dissoluti.” Livy (viii. 28), who attributes the measure to 326 B.C., makes it a universal release of _nexi_: “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. in _Dig._ 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. 280 B.C.), was also the first plebeian _pontifex maximus_.

[498] Polyb. vi. 53.

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

[500] In other words, images of other than curule ancestors might be set up in the _atrium_.

[501] p. 22.

[502] Sallust. _Jug._ 95 (of Sulla) “gentis patriciae nobilis fuit, familia prope jam exstincta majorum ignavia.”

[503] Cic. _pro Mur._ 7. 16; Ascon. _in Scaurian_. p. 22.

[504] Dionys. vii. 71.

[505] Cf. Cic. _de Off._ ii. 17, 58 “Vitanda tamen suspicio est avaritiae. Mamerco, homini divitissimo, praetermissio aedilitatis consulatus repulsam attulit.”

[506] Liv. xxii. 34 (of the election of Varro, 217 B.C.) “Patres summa ope obstabant, ne se insectando sibi aequari adsuescerent homines.”

[507] Sallust. _Jug._ 63 “consulatum nobilitas inter se per manus tradebat; novus nemo tam clarus neque tam egregiis factis erat, quin indignus illo honore, et is quasi pollutus, haberetur.”

[508] Cic. _pro Domo_ 14, 38 “Ita populus Romanus brevi tempore, neque regem sacrorum, neque flamines, neque salios habebit, nec ex parte dimidia reliquos sacerdotes, neque auctores centuriatorum et curiatorum comitiorum: auspiciaque populi Romani, si magistratus patricii creati non sint, intereant necesse est, cum interrex nullus sit, quod et ipsum patricium esse et a patriciis prodi necesse est.” The passage is closely followed by Livy vi. 41, in the speech against the Licinio-Sextian laws, with which he credits Appius Claudius. We meet with other archaic survivals in connexion with the Senate—the distinction, e.g., between the “greater and lesser _gentes_” (p. 12) was never lost, and the chief of the Senate, the first member on the list, was always chosen from the _gentes majores_ (see p. 12).

[509] Ulpian _Reg._ v. 8 “conubio interveniente liberi semper patrem sequuntur; non interveniente conubio matris conditioni accedunt, excepto eo qui ex peregrino et cive Romana peregrinus nascitur, quoniam lex Mensia [“Minicia” has been read in the Veronese palimpsest of the parallel passage of Gaius i. 78, ed. Krueger and Studemund] ex alterutro peregrino natum deterioris parentis conditionem sequi jubet.”

[510] Or, in the Principate, an administrative act. See the section on the powers of the Princeps.

[511] p. 6.

[512] Beloch _Der Italische Bund_ pp. 101, 102.

[513] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 25; Beloch op. cit. p. 78. According to Beloch (l.c.) a comparison between the ante-imperial and post-imperial census is vitiated by the fact that the _aerarii_ were excluded from the former, included in the latter. See the section on the censor.

[514] _Lex Acilia Repetundarum_ 1. 76.

[515] Cic. _pro Balbo_ 10, 25 “quod iis ... liceat, si populus Romanus permiserit, ut ab senatu, ab imperatoribus nostris, civitate donentur.”

[516] Cic. _Brut._ 20, 79; _pro Balbo_ 21, 48.

[517] See the section dealing with the _comitia_.

[518] Suet. _Aug._ 40; Senec. _de Vit. Beat._ 24.

[519] It implied the _imperium_. At Rome these magistrates would be consul, praetor, dictator, or interrex; in the provinces the governors.

[520] Gaius iv. 16.

[521] “Praetor addicit libertatem.” See Cic. _ad Att._ vii. 2, 8.

[522] For the censor as such had no power to confer freedom (Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 374). Cicero (_de Orat._ i. 40, 183) mentions the juristic controversy whether the slave was free from the moment of the announcement or from the _lustrum_, which gave validity to the censorian ordinances. _Servi publici_ were manumitted by the magistrates, but whether by the consul only or by any magistrate is unknown (Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 321). The greatest instance of state emancipation is that of the _Volones_ in 214 B.C. (Liv. xxiv. 16).

[523] In the first case it is called _directa libertas_ (_Dig._ 40, 4, 35), in the second _libertas fidei commissa_ (Dig. 40, 4, 11).

[524] Theophilus (i. 5, 4) calls them φυσικοὶ τρόποι ἐλευθερίας.

[525] Suet. _Claud._ 24 (Claudius said that App. Caecus, censor in 312 B.C., had chosen the sons of _libertini_ for the Senate) “ignarus, temporibus Appii et deinceps aliquamdiu, ‘libertinos’ dictos, non ipsos, qui manu mitterentur, sed ingenuos ex his procreatos.”

[526] Justin. _Inst._ i. 4 “qui statim ut natus est liber est”; Cic. _de Nat. Deor._ iii. 18, 45 “in jure civili, qui est matre libera, liber est.” This is the sense in which Cincius (_ap. Fest._ p. 241) and Livy (x. 8) declare _patricius_ to have been originally equivalent to _ingenuus_. See p. 5.

[527] The _s(ine) p(atre) filii_ of Gaius (i. 64) and Plutarch (_Qu. Rom._ 103) was a conjecture of the jurists based on the abbreviated form of _sp(urii) filii_ (Momms. _Staatsr._ iii p. 72 n. 4). _Spurii filii_ was the official designation, while _liberi naturales_ denoted the natural relationship to the father (Meyer _Der römische Concubinat_).

[528] p. 35.

[529] p. 131.

[530] p. 45.

[531] p. 98.

[532] _Lex Coloniae Genetivae_ (a foundation of Caesar’s in 44 B.C. at Osuna in Spain) c. 98 “Quamcumque munitionem decuriones hujusce coloniae decreverint ... eam munitionem fieri liceto, dum ne amplius in annos singulos ... operas quinas ... decernant.”

[533] The other chief personal burdens are guardianship (_tutela_) and serving on juries; but the consideration of both belongs rather to civil and criminal than to public law.

[534] p. 69.

[535] p. 74.

[536] p. 73.

[537] Liv. xxxiii. 42 (196 B.C.) “Pecunia opus erat, quod ultimam pensionem pecuniae in bellum conlatae persolvi placuerat privatis.” Cf. v. 20 and Plin. _H.N._ xxxiv. 6.

[538] Cic. _de Off._ ii. 22, 76 “Paulus tantum in aerarium pecuniae invexit, ut unius imperatoris praeda finem attulerit tributorum”; Plutarch, _Paul._ 38.

[539] _Lex Acilia Repetundarum_ c. 79; amongst the rewards granted to a Latin who prosecuted successfully under this law are “militiae munerisque poplici in sua quojusque ceivitate vocatio immunitasque.”

[540] Cic. _pro Caec._ 34.

[541] Cic. l.c.; _de Orat._ i. 40.

[542] Cic. _pro Caec._ 34; Dionys. iv. 15

[543] p. 32.

[544] Eisele _Beiträge zur römischen Rechtsgeschichte_ p. 205.

[545] Gaius i. 159-162; Ulp. xi. 10-13.

[546] p. 31.

[547] For the form of _deditio_ see Liv. ix. 10; App. _de Reb. Hisp._ 83. The references are to the two great historic instances at the Caudine Forks (321) and Numantia (137).

[548] Liv. xxxviii. 42 (188 B.C.) “eo anno L. Minucius Myrtilus et L. Manlius, quod legatos Carthaginienses pulsasse dicebantur, jussu M. Claudii praetoris urbani per fetiales traditi sunt legatis, et Carthaginem avecti.”

[549] ib. v. 36; Suet. _Caes._ 24.

[550] p. 138.

[551] p. 91.

[552] Gaius i. 159.

[553] Cic. _pro Balbo_ 11, 28; _pro Caec._ 34, 100.

[554] p. 55.

[555] Ulp. _Reg._ xi. 13 “per quam, et civitate et libertate salva, status dumtaxat hominis mutatur.” Cf. Gaius i. 162.

[556] p. 32.

[557] i.e. by _adrogatio_, see p. 32.

[558] Justin. _Inst._ i. 12, 5 “postliminium fingit eum qui captus est semper in civitate fuisse”; Gaius i. 129 “hi qui ab hostibus capti sunt, si reversi fuerint, omnia pristina jura recipiunt.”

[559] p. 18.

[560] Cic. _pro Mur._ 12, 27 “mulieres omnes propter infirmitatem consilii majores in tutorum potestate esse voluerunt; hi invenerunt genera tutorum, quae potestate mulierum continerentur.”

[561] By the _jus postliminii_; see p. 140.

[562] Plaut. _Capt. Prol._ 34.

[563] Liv. x. 42, 46.

[564] Caesar _B.G._ iii. 16.

[565] Polyb. xxx. 15 (Paulus) πέντε δὲ καὶ δέκα μυριάδας ἀνθρώπων ἐξανδραποδίσασθαι.

[566] Strabo xiv. p. 668.

[567] Marquardt _Privatleben_ pp. 135 sq.

[568] Appian _B.C._ i. 8.

[569] Gaius in _Dig._ 50, 17, 133 “melior condicio nostra per servos fieri potest, deterior fieri non potest.”

[570] Gaius iv. 69-74; Justin. _Inst._ iv. 7.

[571] Cic. _Part. Orat._ 34, 118; _pro Cluent._ 63, etc. As, however, the master’s consent had to be obtained, the evidence and torture of slaves in the public courts were rare. In domestic jurisdiction the inquisition on slaves was held before a family _consilium_.

[572] Gaius iii. 210, 217, 222, 223.

[573] Cato _R.R._ 5; Dionys. vii. 69.

[574] Cic. _ad Fam._ iv. 12; Tac. _Ann._ xiv. 42.

[575] Liv. xliii. 16; Gell. xiii. 13. For _servi publici_ in the municipal towns see _Lex Coloniae Genetivae_ c. 62.

[576] _Actor publicus_, in Rome (Tac. _Ann._ ii 30); in the municipal towns (Plin. _Ep._ vii, 18, 2).

[577] _Libertinus_ describes the freedman’s political position, _libertus_ his relation to his master.

[578] Ulp. in _Dig._ 1, 16, 9, 3.

[579] Macer in _Dig._ 48. 2, 8; Paul. _Sent._ v. 15, 3.

[580] Ulp. in _Dig._ 2, 4, 4, 1 “Praetor ait ‘parentem, patronum, patronam, liberos parentes patroni patronae in jus sine permissu meo ne quis vocet.’”

[581] Gaius iii. 40-44.

[582] Ulp. in _Dig._ 38, 2, 1, 1. Mommsen (_Staatsr._ iii. p. 433) thinks that the author of the change was the famous P. Rutilius Rufus, consul 105 B.C.

[583] Suet. _Caes._ 48; Val. Max. 6, 1, 4. Willems (_Droit Public_ i. p. 125 n. 8) remarks that there is nothing to show that this power was exercised over _justi liberti_. The freedmen so punished may have been informally manumitted. For the relegation of a freedman by his _patronus_ see Tac. _Ann._ xiii 26.

[584] Cf. Plut. _Poplic._ 7. Plutarch, in this story of the imaginary freedman Vindicius, represents his class as having no voting rights at the beginning of the Republic. Appius Claudius (312 B.C.), he says, first gave them ἐξουσίαν ψήφου: but he does not state the assemblies in which this right was exercised.

[585] See the section on the censor (p. 223).

[586] Liv. ix. 46.

[587] ib.; Val. Max. ii. 2, 9. Nothing is said about their division into _classes_; according to the arrangement of the reformed _comitia centuriata_ (see the section on the _comitia_), this restriction to four tribes would have given them the command of only forty centuries.

[588] Liv. xlv. 15.

[589] _Auct. de Vir. Ill._ 72 (M. Aemilius Scaurus) “consul legem de sumptibus et libertinorum suffragiis tulit”; Willems _Droit Public Rom._ p. 123.

[590] Dio Cass. xxxvi. 25.

[591] Liv. _Ep._ 84.

[592] Exceptions due to the stress of times are mentioned for the years 296 (Liv. x. 21) and 217 (Liv. xxii. 11). Even in the social war they formed cohorts separate from the legions.

[593] First mentioned in 217 B.C. (Liv. xxii. 11).

[594] See the section on the magistracy (p. 184).

[595] e.g. the institution of the censor, praetor, curule aediles, and (although they are not a part of the developed constitution), the consular tribunes.

[596] p. 121.

[597] Cic. _ad Att._ ix. 9, 3 “in libris (i.e. the augural books) habemus non modo consules a praetore, sed ne praetores quidem creari jus esse.”

[598] p. 47.

[599] p. 47.

[600] See the section on the magistracy (p. 165).

[601] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 9 “ast quando consoles magisterve populi (i.e. dictator) nec escunt, auspicia patrum sunto, ollique ex se produnto qui comitiatu creare consules rite possint”; _ad Brut._ i. 5, 4 “dum unus erit patricius magistratus, auspicia ad patres redire non possunt.”

[602] In 43 B.C., on the deaths of Hirtius and Pansa, this communication could not be made in time. Hence the extraordinary measure of appointing two _privati_ with _consularis potestas_ to hold the election for the consulship (Dio Cass, xlvi. 45).

[603] The _senatus consultum_ containing this suggestion might be vetoed by one of the tribunes. Ascon, _in Milon._ p. 32 “dum ... Pompeius ... et T. Munatius tr. pl. referri ad senatum de patriciis convocandis qui interregem proderent non essent passi.”

[604] p. 47.

[605] Liv. v. 31, 8 “interrex creatur M. Furius Camillus.”

[606] The technical expression _prodere interregem_ refers in Republican times, not only to the appointment of the first interrex by election, but to the nomination of each of the other _interreges_ by his predecessor (Liv. vi. 41; v. 31).

[607] Liv. vi. 1; viii. 23.

[608] Cic. _pro Dom._ 14, 38, quoted p. 131.

[609] Willems _le Sénat_ ii. pp. 14, 16.

[610] p. 126.

[611] See Appendix on the _comitia tributa_.

[612] p. 89.

[613] The power of this body was much increased by the long wars waged in West and East; but its ascendency was assured before these wars began. See the section on the Senate.

[614] For an instance of its cumulative use see Cic. _in Verr._ act. i. 13, 37 “erit tunc consul Hortensius cum summo imperio et potestate”; for one of its disjunctive uses see _Dig._ 4, 6, 26, 2 “consulem praetorem ceterosque qui imperium potestatemve quam habent.”

[615] p. 79.

[616] Mommsen (_Staatsr._ i. p. 203) denies the right of the quaestor to issue edicts; but the absence of distinct mention of quaestorian edicts is no ground for denying him what appears to have been a common magisterial right.

[617] For the pro-magistrates see the sections on the consuls and the provinces.

[618] In the course of the Republic _imperium_ came to denote _par excellence_ command abroad, as was natural, since here alone the power was unshackled. Hence the phrase _cum imperio_ esse descriptive of a magistrate who can assert this latent power (Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 8, 8 “qui praetores fuerunt neque in provincia cum imperio fuerunt”) and the opposition between _magistratus_ and _imperium_. _Lex Tab. Bant._ 1. 16 “quibus quisque eorum mag(istratum) imperiumve inierit”; _Lex Acilia Rep._ 1. 8 “dum magi(stratum) aut imperium habebunt.”

[619] Liv. iii. 42; xxviii. 45.

[620] Polyb. vi. 19, 21. The tenor of the oath was (c. 21) ἧ μὴν πειθαρχήσειν καὶ ποιήσειν τὸ προσταττόμενον ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχόντων κατὰ δύναμιν.

[621] The soldier is said “jurare in verba consilium” (Liv. ii. 52).

[622] Liv. iii. 20.

[623] ib. viii. 34 “latrocinii modo caeca et fortuita pro sollemni et sacrata militia sit.”

[624] Dionys. xi. 43.

[625] p. 79.

[626] See the section on the _intercessio_.

[627] Liv. vii. 5.

[628] ib. xxvii. 36.

[629] _Lex Acilia_ 1. 2.

[630] They were called _Rufuli_ (Liv. vii. 5; Festus p. 260).

[631] Liv. xlii. 31 (171 B.C., commencement of war with Perseus) “consoles ex senatus consulto ad populum tulerunt, ne tribuni militum eo anno suffragiis crearentur, sed consulum praetorumque in iis faciendis judicium arbitriumque esset.” Cf. xliii. 12.

[632] Polyb. vi. 13.

[633] p. 117.

[634] See Greenidge, “The provocatio militiae and provincial jurisdiction” in _Classical Review_ x. p. 225.

[635] The fact that the delegates and sometimes the crimes were distinct in the two cases does not make the military jurisdiction of the _imperator_ differ from his ordinary criminal jurisdiction, as Mommsen seems to think (_Staatsr._ i. p. 123). For the proofs of unity in the conception of jurisdiction _militiae_ see the article cited in the last note.

[636] At the close of the Republic, however, custom dictated that the governor should send capital cases in which Romans were involved to Rome. See the section on the provinces.

[637] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 74 “Tiberius ... Blaeso tribuit, ut imperator a legionibus salutaretur, prisco ergo duces honore, qui bene gesta republica gaudio et impetu victoris exercitus conclamabantur.” The earliest instance recorded is that of the elder Scipio Africanus (Liv. xxvii. 19). At the close of the Republic the title might be conferred by the Senate. Cic. _Phil._ xiv. 4, 11 (to emphasise the fact that Antonius was a public enemy Servilius had proposed _supplicationes_) “Sed hoc primum faciam, ut imperatores appellem eos, quorum virtute ... periculis ... liberati sumus.” For who, he asks, has not been called _imperator_ within the last twenty years “aut minimis rebus gestis, aut plerumque nullis”? (cf. Cic. _ad Att._ v. 20, 3).

[638] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 40.

[639] For the consular tribune see p. 114.

[640] An important exception is recorded in Liv. vii. 11 (360 B.C.). Here the consul triumphs after the abdication of the dictator, and the honour is clearly a concession of the latter.

[641] Liv. xxviii. 9 (207 B.C.).

[642] In this case the lesser honour of an “ovation” was sometimes granted (Liv. xxvi. 21; xxviii. 9).

[643] Liv. xxxix. 29 (185 B.C.).

[644] Gell. v. 6; Val. Max. ii. 8, 7. In this case, too, the ovation was sometimes granted, e.g. in the slave-wars of 99 and 71 B.C. (Cic. _de Orat._ ii. 47, 195; Gell. v. 6). For this reason Caesar’s triumph in 46 was over Gaul, Egypt, Pontus and Africa; that of Augustus in 29 over Dalmatia and Egypt. In neither case was it held over the citizens whom they had crushed.

[645] Val. Max. ii. 8, 1.

[646] Liv. xxxiii. 23; xlii. 21.

[647] Mommsen thinks the use of it as well (_Staatsr._ i p. 132), e.g. that it was in consequence of the absence of the _provocatio_ that the _cives Romani Campani_ were executed in 271 (Val. Max. ii. 7, 15).

[648] e.g. L. Postumius Megellus in 294 B.C. (Liv. x. 37), App. Claudius in 143 B.C. (Suet. _Tib._ 2).

[649] “Senatus consulto jussuque populi” (Liv. iv. 20).

[650] Polyb. vi. 15 τοὺς ... θριάμβους ... οὐ δύνανται χειρίζειν ὡς πρέπει, ποτὲ δὲ τὸ παράπαν οὐδὲ συντελεῖν, ἐὰν μὴ τὸ συνέδριον συγκατάθηται καὶ δῷ τὴν εἰς ταῦτα δαπάνην.

[651] Liv. xxvi. 21. Cf. Liv. xlv. 35, where the Senate’s request to the tribune is made through a praetor. One cannot say in this case that the _imperium_ is conferred for the day, since the Plebs had no power to confer the _imperium_.

[652] ib. xxviii. 38; cf. xxxi. 20.

[653] e.g. the two triumphs of Pompeius in 80 and 71 B.C. See Cic. _pro Lege Man._ 21, 62 “quid tam incredibile, quam ut iterum eques Romanus ex senatus consulto triumpharet?”

[654] A shortened form of _conventio_. Cf. _S. C. de Bacchanalibus_ (Bruns _Fontes_) l. 23 “haice uti in conventionid exdeicatis.”

[655] Gell. xiii. 16 “cum populo agere est rogare quid populum, quod suffragiis suis aut jubeat aut vetet, contionem autem habere est verba facere ad populum sine ulla rogatione.”

[656] It was, e.g., the mode in which the people were summoned to witness public executions outside the Pomerium (Cic. _pro Rab._ 4, 11; Tac. _Ann._ ii. 23).

[657] _S. C. de Bacch._ quoted p. 158.

[658] Liv. xxxix. 15 “contione advocata cum sollemne carmen precationis, quod praefari priusquam populum adloquantur magistratus solent, peregisset, consul ita coepit.”

[659] Messala ap. Gell. xiii. 16 includes the _magistratus minores_. Mommsen, guided by the (in this case probably false) analogy of the _jus cum populo agendi_, would exclude the aediles and quaestors (_Staatsr._ i. p. 200).

[660] Gell. l.c.

[661] Cic. _ad Att._ iv. 1, 6 “habui contionem, omnes magistratus praeter unum praetorem et duos tribunos pl. dederunt”; i. 14, 1 “Pisonis consulis impulsu levissimus tribunus pl. Fufius in contionem producit Pompeium”; ii. 24, 3 “Caesar is qui olim, praetor cum esset, Q. Catulum ex inferiore loco jusserat dicere, Vettium in rostra produxit.”

[662] Sall. _Jug._ 34 “ubi Memmius (a tribune) dicendi finem fecit et Jugurtha respondere jussus est, C. Baebius tribunus plebis ... regem tacere jubet.”

[663] See note 1.

[664] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 4, 10 “cum populo patribusque agendi jus esto consuli praetori magistro populi equitumque eique quem patres produnt consulum rogandorum ergo.” For the question whether the praefect of the city had this right see p. 61; an argument for his possession of it in the Republic is his right of consulting the Senate.

[665] For the curule aediles see Cic. _in Verr._ i. 12, 36; Val. Max. viii. 1, 7.

[666] Liv. iii. 24; Dionys. viii. 77.

[667] Liv. xliii. 16 (169 B.C., P. Rutilius tr. pl.) “C. Claudio diem dixit ... et utrique censori perduellionem se judicare pronunciavit, diemque comitiis a C. Sulpicio praetore urbano petiit ... absoluto Claudio, tribunus plebis negavit se Gracchum morari.” Antias ap. Gell. vi. 9 “Licinius tribunus plebi perduellionem ei diem dixit et comitiis diem a M. Marcio praetore peposcit.”

[668] Whether the tribune presided over this assembly is uncertain. When the tribune in Livy (l.c.) breaks up such an assembly the act may simply refer to his retirement as a prosecutor (see last note).

[669] Liv. x. 23; xxv. 2; xxxiii. 42; Gell. x. 6.

[670] _De Leg._ iii. 4, 10, cited p. 160.

[671] Gell. xiv. 7 “(Varro ponit) per quos more majorum senatus haberi soleret eosque nominat ‘dictatorem, consules, praetores, tribunos plebi, interregem, praefectum urbi’ ... ‘deinde extraordinario jure tribunos quoque militares qui pro consulibus fuissent ... jus consulendi senatum habuisse.’”

[672] This right of the tribunes originated later than 304 B.C.; see p. 127.

[673] Liv. xxii. 30; xl. 52. Cf. Wilmanns n. 27 “L. Mummi. L. F. Cos. duct(u) auspicio imperioque ejus Achaia capt(a) Corinto deleto Romam redieit triumphans.”

[674] p. 39.

[675] Festus p. 261 “quinque genera signorum observant augures publici, ex coelo, ex avibus, ex tripudis, ex quadripedibus, ex diris.”

[676] _Silentium_ is defined negatively; see Cic. _de Div._ ii. 34, 71 “id enim silentium dicimus in auspiciis, quod omni vitio caret.” Cf. Festus p. 351.

[677] e.g. the fall of the cap from the head of the sacrificing priest (Val. Max. i. 1, 5). Cf. Festus p. 64.

[678] Val. Max. i. 1, 5 “occentusque soricis auditus Fabio Maximo dictaturam ... deponendi causam praebuit.”

[679] ib. 4, 2 (the omens that T. Gracchus encountered when seeking the tribunate).

[680] ib. 4, 7.

[681] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 11.

[682] Cic. _de Div._ ii. 34, 72 “Illi autem, qui in auspicium adhibetur, cum ita imperavit is, qui auspicatur ‘Dicito, si silentium esse videbitur’; nec suspicit nec circumspicit: statim respondet, ‘silentium esse videri.’”

[683] Plin. _H.N._ xxviii. 2, 11.

[684] Cic. _de Div._ ii. 35, 77.

[685] Liv. i. 36; Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 9.

[686] Cic. _de Div._ ii. 33, 71 “haec certe quibus utimur, sive tripudio sive de coelo, simulacra sunt auspiciorum, auspicia nullo modo.”

[687] Liv. xxiii. 31 (215 B.C., Marcellus) “cui ineunti consulatum cum tonuisset, vocati augures vitio creatum videri pronunciaverunt.”

[688] Cic. _de Div._ ii. 35, 74 “Fulmen sinistrum auspicium optimum habemus ad omnes res, praeterquam ad comitia.”

[689] ib. i. 15, 27 “nam nostri quidem magistratus auspiciis utuntur coactis. Necesse est enim, offa objecta, cadere frustum ex pulli ore, cum pascitur. (28) Quod autem scriptum habetis, tripudium fieri, si ex ea quid in solidum ceciderit: hoc quoque, quod dixi, coactum, tripudium solistimum dicitis.” Cf. ii. 34, 72; 35, 73. For their use in camp see Cic. _de Div._ i. 35, 77; Val. Max. i. 4, 3. In the last passage the incident connected with P. Claudius Pulcher (249 B.C.) is described.

[690] Messala ap. Gell. xiii. 15 “Patriciorum auspicia in duas sunt divisa potestates. Maxima sunt consulum, praetorum censorum.... Reliquorum magistratuum minora sunt auspicia.”

[691] Gell. iii. 2.

[692] “Oriens de nocte silentio” (Liv. viii. 23).

[693] That in the camp, by means of the sacred chickens, had naturally to be exempted from these formalities.

[694] Cic. _de Nat. Deor._ ii. 4, 11; these tents were called _minora templa_ (Festus p. 157).

[695] The manipulation of auspices at the end of the Republic had caused the skilled assistant to be neglected (Cic. _de Div._ ii. 34, 71 “apud majores nostros adhibebatur peritus, nunc quilibet”).

[696] Liv. ix. 39, etc.

[697] See the section dealing with the powers of the people. The _vitium_ effected the elections even of tribunes of the Plebs—but purely as a result of _auspicia oblativa_. See Liv. x. 47 (293 B.C.) “exacto jam anno novi tribuni plebis magistratum inierant: hisque ipsis, quia vitio creati erant, quinque post dies alii subfecti.”

[698] ib. v. 31, etc.

[699] Mommsen thinks that the auspices of the consuls might have alternated, like their fasces, from month to month (_Staatsr._ i. p. 95).

[700] Thus before Cannae Varro takes the field in spite of the ill-omens which the observation of his colleague Paulus had revealed (Liv. xxii. 42).

[701] Val. Max. ii. 8, 2.

[702] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 6 “magistratus nec oboedientem et noxium civem multa, vinculis, verberibus coerceto, ni par majorve potestas populusve prohibessit, ad quos provocatio esto.” A _lex Porcia_ prohibited the scourging of a Roman citizen by a _gravis poena_ (Liv. x. 9); but that technically it merely submitted the threat of such _coercitio_ to appeal is shown by the fact that the law is classed amongst those regulating the _provocatio_ (Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 31, 54).

[703] pp. 79, 109.

[704] Liv. x. 9 “cum eum qui provocasset virgis caedi securique necari vetuisset, si quis adversus ea fecisset, nihil ultra quam improbe factum adjecit.” The meaning of this sanction has been much disputed: it may mean “incapable of making a will,” on the analogy of “improbus (i.e. qui probare non potest) intestabilisque esto.” Mommsen (_Strafrecht_ p. 632) takes the expression to mean that the act of the magistrate would be regarded as “unjustified,” i.e. as an ordinary criminal offence.

[705] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 31, 54.

[706] p. 95.

[707] Dio Cass. liii. 17.

[708] Plin. _H.N._ vii 44; Liv. _Ep._ 59.

[709] Liv. ii 55; vii. 4.

[710] The _virgis caedi_ in the third _lex Valeria_ (note 2) probably refers to scourging as well as to death by the rod.

[711] Capito ap. Gell. iv. 10 “Caesar consul viatorem vocavit eumque (Catonem), cum finem non faceret (of speaking in the Senate) prendi loquentem et in carcerem duci jussit.” Cf. Suet. _Caes._ 17.

[712] The earliest recorded case is in Liv. _Ep._ xlviii. (Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 154). A typical instance belonging to the year 60 B.C. is described in Cic. _ad Att._ ii. 1, 8; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 50.

[713] It was thus that the imprisonment of M. Bibulus, consul in 59 (Cic. _in Vat._ 9, 21), and of M. Crassus, consul in 55 (Dio Cass. xxxix. 39), was prevented.

[714] The annals introduce bail as early as the trial of Kaeso Quinctius in 461 B.C. (Liv. iii. 13).

[715] Liv. xxv. 4 (212 B.C.).

[716] Mommsen (_Staatsr._ i. p. 143 n. 1) takes the view that the quaestor had no power of _coercitio_ through _multa_ and _pignus_. For an opposite opinion see Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 171 and Huschke _Multa_ p. 36.

[717] Dionys. x. 50 ἐπὶ τῆς λοχίτιδος ἐκκλησίας νόμον ἐκύρωσαν (the consuls Sp. Tarpeius and A. Aternius) ἵνα ταῖς ἀρχαῖς ἐξῇ πάσαις τοὺς ἀκοσμοῦντας ἤ παρανομοῦντας εἰς τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἐξουσίαν ζημιοῦν· τέως γὰρ οὐχ ἅπασιν ἐξῆν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ὑπάτοις μόνοις. Cf. Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 35, 60.

[718] Dionys. l.c.; Gell. xi. 1. Dionysius (probably by an error of the copyist) represents the fine as being two oxen or thirty sheep.

[719] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 35, 60 “levis aestimatio pecudum in multa lege C. Julii, P. Papirii consulum constituta est”; Liv. iv. 30 “legem de multarum aestimatione pergratam populo ... ipsi (the consuls Julius and Papirius) praeoccupaverunt ferre”; Gell. xi. 1 “in oves singulas aeris deni, in boves aeris centeni ... Suprema multa est ejus numeri, ... ultra quem multam dicere in dies singulos jus non est.” Gellius, however, attributes the pecuniary estimate to the _lex Aternia_.

[720] The view has been sometimes held that the _multa suprema_ was one beyond which the magistrate could not under any circumstances go. In this case there is no known limit at which the appeal became possible. That there was one, however, is shown by the _provocatio ab omni judicio_ allowed by the Twelve Tables (Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 31, 54. See p. 106).

[721] p. 246.

[722] _Lex Tab. Bant._ 1. 12 “Sei quis mag(istratus) multam inrogare volet [_quei volet, dum minoris_] partus familias taxsat, liceto.”

[723] e.g. in case of continued resistance to the veto. See Liv. xliii. 16 (169 B.C., P. Rutilius) “Ti Gracchi primum bona consecravit, quod in multa pignoribusque ejus, qui tribunum adpellasset, intercessioni non parendo, se in ordinem coegisset”; or for a supposed stigma inflicted by a censor on a tribune (Plin. _H.N._ vii. 44). Cicero, _pro Domo_ 47, 123, mentions the consecration of the goods of L. Metellus by C. Atinius (131 B.C., Plin. l.c.) as an instance of “furor tribuni plebis, ductus ex nonnullis perveterum temporum exemplis.” P. Clodius (58 B.C.) consecrated the goods of Cicero and of Gabinius the consul (ib. § 124).

[724] _Lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus_ (Bruns _Fontes_) l. 20 “tum is praetor ... multa pignoribus cogito coerceto.”

[725] Cic. _de Orat._ iii. 1, 4, “pignora caedere” or “concidere”; the destruction was performed as an example “in conspectu populi Romani.”

[726] _Auct. de Vir. Illustr._ 72, 6. Cf. the procedure of the consul Servilius against the revolutionary praetor Caelius Rufus in 48 B.C. Dio Cass. xlii. 23 τόν τε δίφρον αὑτοῦ συνέτριψεν.

[727] Varro ap. Gell. xiii. 12 “vocationem (habent), ut consoles et caeteri, qui habent imperium; prensionem, ut tribuni plebis et alii, qui habent viatorem; neque vocationem neque prensionem, ut quaestores et ceteri, qui neque lictorem habent neque viatorem. Qui vocationem habent, idem prendere, tenere, abducere possunt.”

[728] p. 94.

[729] See Varro ap. Gell. l.c.

[730] Aediles were used in the trial of Coriolanus (Dionys. vii. 26, see p. 98); Gracchus sent one of his _viatores_ to drag his colleague Octavius from the Rostra (Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 12). Cf. Liv. xxv. 4 (case of Postumius 212 B.C.) “tribuni ... ni vades daret ... prehendi a viatore ... jusserunt.”

[731] Varro, as an antiquarian, refused to obey such a summons on the ground of its illegality (Gell. xiii. 12.)

[732] Donatus _ad Ter. Ad._ iv. 2, 9 “qui malam rem nuntiat, obnuntiat, qui bonam adnuntiat; nam proprie obnuntiare dicuntur augures, qui aliquid mali ominis scaevumque viderint.” Cf. Cicero _Phil._ ii. 33, 83; _de Div._ i. 16, 29 (_dirarum obnuntiatio_).

[733] The plebeian magistrates sometimes watched for such signs, for purposes of obstruction, and were then improperly said _servare de coelo_ (Cic. _ad Att._ iv. 3, 3). The words are properly used only of the _spectio_. See Greenidge, “The Repeal of the Lex Aelia Fufia” in _Class. Rev._ vii. p. 158.

[734] p. 163.

[735] Cic. _pro Sest._ 36, 78; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. To discuss, as has been done, whether the patrician magistrates’ _obnuntiatio_ was valid against the tribunes is to raise rather an idle question. The _lex Aelia Fufia_ could not have artificially regulated religious belief, and the Plebs was as susceptible to _auspicia_ as the Populus (see p. 39).

[736] Gell. xiii. 15; _minor_ here simply means “inferior to the consul.”

[737] They regulated the precedence of the _comitia_ for elections and for laws (Cic. _ad Att._ i. 16, 13).

[738] Cic. _in Pis._ 4, 9; _de Prov. Con._ 19, 46; _in Vat._ 7, 18.

[739] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 32, 80 and 38, 99; _ad Att._ iv. 9, 1; 16, 7, etc. See _Class. Rev._ vii. p. 160.

[740] The exercise of the _coercitio_ might of course be vetoed, and in this case the prohibition was of no avail. See Liv. ix. 34 (n. 7).

[741] p. 159.

[742] Liv. xliii. 16 (169 B.C., P. Rutilius tr. pl.) “C. Claudio diem dixit, quod contionem ab se avocasset.”

[743] ib. xxvii. 5 (210 B.C.). The consul declined to question the people on the nomination of a dictator, “quod suae potestatis esset,” and forbade the praetor to do so.

[744] p. 172.

[745] Cf. the story in Suet. _Tib._ 2, “Etiam virgo vestalis fratrem (App. Claudius, consul 143 B.C.) injussu populi triumphantem, adscenso simul curru, usque in Capitolium prosecuta est, ne vetare aut intercedere fas cuiquam tribunorum esset.”

[746] Liv. ix. 33-34. P. Sempronius, tribune, attempted to compel App. Claudius, who was trying to prolong his censorship beyond eighteen months, to abdicate. He tried to imprison the censor but was resisted by the veto of three colleagues.

[747] _Auct. de vir. illustr._ 72, 6 (for the occasion see p. 171); the consul “ne quis ad eum (praetorem) in jus ire edixit.” Dio Cass. xlii. 23; amongst the other penalties imposed by Servilius Isauricus on Caelius Rufus (see p. 171) was the transference of his functions to another praetor, τά τε προσήκοντα τῇ ἀρχῇ αὐτοῦ ἄλλῳ τῳ τῶν στρατηγῶν προσέταξε.

[748] Cic. _in Verr._ iii. 58, 134 “quaestores, legates, praefectos, tribunos suos, multi missos fecerunt et de provincia decedere jusserunt, quod illorum culpa se minus commode audire arbitrarentur, aut quod peccare ipsos aliqua in re judicarent.”

[749] Liv. iii. 27; vii. 9.

[750] _C.I.L._ vi. n. 895.

[751] Liv. iii. 3; Cic. _Phil._ v. 12, 31.

[752] Liv. iii. 5; vi. 7; Cic. l.c.

[753] Mommsen conjectures that, on the occasion of every public funeral in the forum, a short _justitium_ was declared (_Staatsr._ i. p. 251 n. 4).

[754] Liv. x. 21.

[755] Cic. _de Har. Resp._ 26, 55 “justitium edici oportere, jurisdictionem intermitti, claudi aerarium, judicia tolli.” Cf. Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10; Cic. _pro Plancio_ 14, 33.

[756] Liv. vi 7.

[757] Cic. _Brut._ 89, 304 “exercebatur una lege judicium Varia, ceteris propter bellum intermissis.”

[758] p. 119.

[759] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10.

[760] “(Feriae) imperativae sunt, quas consules vel praetores pro arbitrio potestatis indicunt” (Macrob. _Saturn._ i. 16, 6).

[761] e.g. by Livy (x. 37).

[762] No instance of such a veto being exercised at Rome is known; but it is recognised in the municipal law of Salpensa (Bruns _Fontes_) c. 27.

[763] Or _decretum_. The formal difference is slight; by the end of the Republic _edictum_ is a general, _decretum_ a more special (and generally judicial) command.

[764] Liv. iv. 55.

[765] Caes. _Bell. Civ._ iii. 20 (Caelius Rufus) “tribunal suum juxta C. Treboni praetoris urbani sellam collocavit, et si quis appellavisset ... fore auxilio pollicebatur.” For the consequent necessity of the presence of the tribunes in Rome see p. 94.

[766] Thus Verres, who was _praetor urbanus_, had his decisions vetoed by Piso, who was probably _praetor peregrinus_, in cases where Verres had decided contrary to his own edict. Cic. _in Verr._ i. 46, 119; cf. Caes. l.c.

[767] Of the four private-law speeches of Cicero, two, those for Quinctius and Tullius, show the request for tribunician interference with the praetor’s jurisdiction. Cf. Cic. _Acad. Prior._ ii. 30, 97 “postulant ut excipiantur haec inexplicabilia. Tribunum aliquem censeo adeant (_al._ videant); a me istam exceptionem nunquam impetrabunt.”

[768] Liv. xxxiii. 42.

[769] The tribunes promise “cognituros se de quo appellati essent” (Liv. xlii. 32).

[770] Liv. xlii. 33.

[771] Ascon. _in Milon._ p. 47.

[772] p. 174.

[773] Liv. iv. 50; xxv. 2.

[774] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 12, 30.

[775] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10.

[776] Cic. _ad Att._ iv. 16, 6; Ascon. _in Cornel._ p. 58.

[777] Liv. xlv. 21 “cum ita traditum esset, ne quis prius intercedat legi, quam privatis suadendi dissuadendique legem potestas facta esset.”

[778] Momms. _Staatsr._ i p. 285.

[779] Liv. xxvii. 6.

[780] Cic. _pro Sest._ 31, 68.

[781] ib. 34, 74.

[782] Cic. _ad Fam._ x. 12, 3 and 4.

[783] Liv. xxx. 43. Consular intercession against the praetor was unnecessary, since the praetor did not usually summon the Senate while the consul was at Rome.

[784] Val. Max. ii. 2, 7 “Illud quoque memoria repetendum est, quod tribunis plebis intrare curiam non licebat, ante valvas autem positis subselliis decreta patrum attentissima cura examinabant, ut, si qua ex eis improbassent, rata esse non sinerent. Itaque veteribus senatus consultis C. litera subscribi solebat, eaque nota significabatur illa tribunos quoque censuisse.” In _S.C.C._ translated into Greek it appears as ἔδοξεν (_S.C.C. de Thisbaeis_, Bruns _Fontes_). In those given in Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 8, 6, the letters “i. n.” (sometimes interpreted “intercessit nemo”) are probably a corruption for _censuere_.

[785] Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 282 n. 7; combated by Willems _Le Sénat_ p. 200 n. 2.

[786] Liv. xxvi. 26; xxx. 40; cf. xlii. 10 “Popillius ... prae se ferens si quid decernerent, intercessurum, collegam deterruit.”

[787] Val. Max. ii. 2, 7.

[788] Cic. _ad Fam._ x. 12, 3.

[789] Liv. xxxvi. 40.

[790] Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 8, 6 “qui impedierit prohibuerit, eum senatum existimare contra rem publicam fecisse.”

[791] Cic. _de Prov. Con._ 8, 17; _pro Domo_ 9, 24. Intercession in jurisdiction and administration is sometimes forbidden in municipal laws: _Lex Rubria_ i. 50; _Lex Ursonensis_ c. 72 (Bruns _Fontes_).

[792] Varro ap. Gell. xiii. 13 “Qui potestatem neque vocationis populi viritim habent neque prensionis, eos magistratus a privato in jus quoque vocari est potestas.” The context shows that they were practically as exempt as the higher magistrates.

[793] Nothing is known of the early history of _peculatus_. The word itself, “the misappropriation of cattle,” which had been collected as fines, shows the antiquity of the offence described by Varro (_L.L._ v. 95) as _peculatus publicus_. For the early procedure see Mommsen _Strafrecht_ p. 768.

[794] In Polybius’ time bribery was a capital offence at Rome (Polyb. vi 56).

[795] Polyb. vi. 14. The people are often judges of money penalties, when the offence can be valued in money, καὶ μάλιστα τοὺς τὰς ἐπιφανεῖς ἐσχηκότας ἀρχάς, θανάτου δὲ κρίνει μόνος. Cf. c. 15. The greatest source of the power of the people is that ἀποτιθεμένους τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐν τούτῳ δεῖ τὰς εὐθύνας ὑπέχειν τῶν πεπραγμένων.

[796] Liv. xxiv. 43 (214 B.C., the tribune Metellus prosecutes the censors Furius and Atilius) “Sed novem tribunorum auxilio vetiti causam in magistratu dicere dimissique fuerant”; Suet. _Caes._ 23 (Caesar on leaving for Gaul) “a L. Antistio, tr. pl., postulatus, appellato demum collegio, obtinuit, cum reipublicae causa abesset, reus ne fieret.” In the case of the trial of the censors of 169 B.C. (Liv. xliii 16) the accused agree to be put on their trial during their tenure of office.

[797] Liv. xxix. 22 (204 B.C.). Pleminius and his colleagues were “producti ad populum ab tribunis.”

[798] ib. vi. 1 “Q. Fabio ... ab Cn. Marcio tribuno plebis dicta dies est, quod legatus in Gallos, ad quos missus erat orator, contra jus gentium pugnasset.”

[799] ib. _Ep._ 69 “L. Appuleius Saturninus ... Metello Numidico, eo quod in eam (the agrarian law) non juraverat, diem dixit.”

[800] ib. xxv. 3 (Postumius a _publicanus_, for shipwrecking and false reports of shipwreck).

[801] e.g. waging war without authorisation (Ascon. _in Cornelian_. p. 80, 104 B.C.), disgraceful flight imperilling the safety of others (Liv. xxvi. 2, 211 B.C.).

[802] Exceeding the legal duration of a magistracy, in this case the dictatorship (Cic. _de Off._ iii. 31, 112). The instance, though typical, is not historic.

[803] Liv. xliii. 7, 8 (170 B.C.).

[804] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22 “apud majores ... cunctis civium, si bonis artibus fiderent, licitum petere magistratus.”

[805] Festus p. 231 “plebeium magistratum neminem capere licet, nisi qui ex plebe est.” Cf. Suet. _Aug._ 10.

[806] This seems shown by Suet. _Claud._ 24 (see p. 135).

[807] Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 488. Exceptional elections of the sons of freedmen are found in 304 B.C. (Liv. ix. 46, Cn. Flavius (see p. 185) as aedile) and in the year 100 B.C. (App. B.C. i. 33).

[808] _Lex Julia Municipalis_ (Bruns _Fontes_) l. 92 “in castreis inve provincia.”

[809] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 2.

[810] There is also evidence for this as the minimum age at a period earlier than Cicero’s political career; see Cic. _in Verr._ ii. 49, 122.

[811] In Caesar’s municipal law (45 B.C.) the qualification for a municipal magistracy is either thirty years of age or a certain length of service—six years on foot or three on horseback (_L.J.M._ l. 89).

[812] Liv. ix. 46 (of the election of Cn. Flavius to the curule aedileship) “Invenio in quibusdam annalibus, cum adpareret aedilibus ... neque accipi nomen, quia scriptum faceret, tabulam posuisse et jurasse, se scriptum non facturum.”

[813] Cic. _de Off._ i. 42, 150; in later Roman law spoken of as _vilitas_; see Greenidge _Infamia in Roman Law_ pp. 12, 193.

[814] Cic. _pro Cluent._ 42, 119; Schol. Bob. in Cic. _pro Sulla_ 5, 17, p. 361 Orell.; Cic. _pro Rosc. Com._ 6, 16; Tertull. _de Spect._ 22; Ascon. _in orat. in Tog. Cand._ p. 115; _Lex Julia Munic._ l. 104; _Dig._ 48, 7, 1. All these passages are discussed in Greenidge _Infamia in Roman Law_ pp. 18-40 and 187.

[815] Liv. iii. 35 “Ars haec erat, ne semet ipse creare posset; quod praeter tribunos plebi (et id ipsum pessimo exemplo) nemo unquam fecisset.” The revolutionary period shows Cinna and Carbo nominating themselves consuls for two successive years (Liv. _Ep._ 83) and Caesar as dictator presiding over his own election to the consulship (Caes. B.C. iii. 1, 1).

[816] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 8, 21 “Licinia est lex atque altera Aebutia, quae non modo eum, qui tulerit de aliqua curatione ac potestate, sed etiam collegas ejus, cognatos, affines excipit, ne eis ea potestas curatiove mandetur.”

[817] Liv. vii. 42 “aliis plebiscitis cautum ne quis eundem magistratum intra decem annos caperet; neu duos magistratus uno anno gereret.” Cf. x. 13.

[818] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 9, 24 “ne in iis quidem magistratibus quorum certus ordo est.”

[819] Liv. xl. 44 “eo anno rogatio primum lata est ab L. Villio tr. pl., quot annos nati quemque magistratum peterent caperentque.” It probably accepted the age of twenty-eight for the quaestorship; the minimum age for the consulship in the time of Cicero was forty-three (_Phil._ v. 17, 48); that for the praetorship is quite unknown; thirty-five and forty have been conjectured.

[820] Cic. _ad Fam._ x. 25, 2 “non est annus hic tibi destinatus, ut, si aedilis fuisses, post biennium tuus annus esset” (i.e. for election to the praetorship). To be elected in the earliest year, when one is qualified by the interval, is to attain a magistracy “anno sibi destinato” (l.c.) or “suo anno” (Cic. _pro Mil._ 9, 24). Momms. _Staatsr._ i. pp. 527, 529. The principle of at least one year’s interval seems to have applied to the transition from plebeian to patrician magistracies in the form that candidature during the holding of any office was forbidden (Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 533).

[821] App. B.C. i. 100 καὶ στρατηγεῖν ἀπεῖπε πρὶν ταμιεῦσαι καὶ ὑπατεύειν πρὶν στρατηγῆσαι, καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν τὴν αὐτὴν αὖθις ἄρχειν ἐκώλυσε πρὶν ἒτη δέκα διαγενέσθαι.

[822] Cic. _ad Fam._ xvi. 12, 3 “se praesentem trinum nundinum petiturum”; Sallust, _Cat._ 18 “post paulo Catilina pecuniarum repetundarum reus prohibitus erat consulatum petere, quod intra legitimos dies profiteri nequiverit.” The interval was probably twenty-four days. See the section on the _comitia_.

[823] Plut. _Aem. Paul._ 3; _Sull._ 5.

[824] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 9, 24 (63 B.C.) “praesentem profiteri jubet, quod nulla alia in lege unquam fuit, ne in iis quidem magistratibus quorum certus ordo est”; Suet. _Caes._ 18 (60 B.C.) “cum edictis jam comitiis ratio ejus haberi non posset ... et ambienti ut legibus solveretur multi contradicerent, coactus est triumphum, ne consulatu excluderetur, dimittere.” Cf. Plut. _Caes._ 13.

[825] Dio Cass. xl. 56 (Pompeius) τὸν περὶ τῶν ἀρχαιρεσιῶν νόμον τὸν κελεύοντα τοὺς ἀρχήν τινα ἐπαγγέλλοντας ἐς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν πάντως ἁπαντᾷν, ὥστε μηδένα ἀπόντα αἱρεῖσθαι, παρημελημένον πῶς ἀνενεώσατο.

[826] Hence their association with _sequestres_—the agents in whose hands the candidate deposited money. Cic. _pro Planc._ 18, 19; Q. Cic. _de Pet. Cons._ 14, 57.

[827] _Lex Jul. Munic._ l. 132 “neve quis ejus rationem comitieis conciliove [habeto, neive quis quem, sei adversus ea comitieis conciliove] creatum est, renuntiato.” In 67 B.C. the consul Piso, questioned “Palicanum num suffragiis populi consulem creatum renuntiaturus esset,” answered “non renuntiabo” (Val. Max. iii. 8, 3).

[828] p. 47.

[829] Mommsen (_Staatsr._ i. p. 599) places this change in 222 B.C. Liv. xxxi. 5, etc.

[830] _Fasti Praenestini_ (_C.I.L._ i. p. 364) “[ann]us nov[us incipit], quia eo die mag[istratus] ineunt: quod coepit [p. R.] c. a. DCI.”

[831] Quaestors (Cic. _in Verr._ Act. i. 10, 30; _Lex de XX. quaest._ in Bruns _Fontes_ l. 15); tribunes (Dionys. vi 89).

[832] Dio Cass. xl. 66; Cic. _in Verr._ i. 41, 105; Liv. xxi. 63.

[833] The _execratio_ is given by Pliny (_Paneg._ 64), “explanavit verba quibus caput suum, domum suam, si sciens fefellisset, deorum (Jupiter and the Dii Penates) irae consecraret.”

[834] Cic. _ad Att._ ii. 18, 2 “habet ... Campana Lex (of the consul Caesar in 59 B.C.) execrationem in contione candidatorum.”

[835] Liv. xxxi. 50; if we may argue from municipal law (_Lex Salpens._ c. 26), omission to take it due to mere neglect was visited in the first instance by a fine.

[836] Liv. l.c.

[837] Cic. _ad Fam._ v. 2, 7; _pro Sulla_ 11, 34; _in Pison._ 3, 6; _pro Domo_ 35, 94. Cicero, at the close of 63, varied the oath by swearing that he had saved the state.

[838] p. 45.

[839] Liv. v. 41.

[840] The dagger is mentioned more frequently than the sword (_gladius_) as the distinctive sign of military power. Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 434 n. 1.

[841] Hence such phrases as _decedere via_, _descendere equo_, _adsurgere sella_, _caput aperire_. The senators were in the habit of rising from their seats when the consul entered the Curia (Cic. _in Pis._ 12, 26).

[842] A decree of the augurs in 426 B.C. declared the consular tribunes capable of this nomination (Liv. iv. 31).

[843] p. 165.

[844] Liv. viii. 12 “Aemilius, cujus tum fasces erant, collegam dictatorem dixit”; iv. 26 “Sors, ut dictatorem diceret (nam ne id quidem inter collegas convenerat) T. Quinctio evenit”; iv. 21 “Verginius, dum collegam consuleret, moratus, permittente eo, nocte dictatorem dixit.”

[845] Liv. iv. 17 “senatus ... dictatorem dici Mam. Aemilium jussit”; vii. 12 “dictatorem dici C. Sulpicium placuit. Consul ad id adcitus C. Plautius dixit.”

[846] ib. xxii. 57 (216 B.C.) “dictator ex auctoritate patrum dictus M. Junius.”

[847] ib. _Ep._ 19; Suet. _Tib._ 2 (the enforced abdication of Claudius Glicia, nominated by Claudius Pulcher). In Liv. iv. 26 the _coercitio_ of the tribune is represented as employed against the consuls who disobey.

[848] Mommsen in _C.I.L._ i. p. 557.

[849] Liv. xxvii 5 (210 B.C., on the proposal of the consul to nominate a dictator in Sicily) “patres extra Romanum agrum (eum autem in Italia terminari) negabant dictatorem dici posse.”

[850] ib. ix. 38-39.

[851] Polyb. iii. 87; but, as a rule, he was preceded by only twelve within the walls (Liv. _Ep._ 89 “Sulla, dictator factus, quod nemo umquam fecerat, cum fascibus viginti quatuor processit”).

[852] Liv. ii. 18 “Creato dictatore primum Romae, postquam praeferri secures viderunt, magnus plebem metus incessit.”

[853] p. 85.

[854] e.g. the dictator named by Livy (ix. 26) as “quaestionibus exercendis” (314) is mentioned in the _Fast. Capitol._ as “rei gerundae causa” (Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 157 n. 2); a dictator “seditionis sedandae et rei gerundae causa” is found in the _Fasti_ for 368.

[855] Liv. vii. 24 “qui aegris consulibus comitia haberet.” Cf. c. 26 (absence of consuls in the field) and ix. 7.

[856] ib. xxiii. 22. In 216 B.C. M. Fabius Buteo was appointed dictator “qui senatum legeret.”

[857] ib. viii. 40.

[858] ib. vii. 28 (for establishment of _feriae_ on the occasion of a _prodigium_); “dictator Latinarum feriarum causa” in _Fast. Cap._ (_C.I.L._ i. p. 434) for the year 257 B.C.

[859] The first instance was on the occasion of the great pestilence in 363 B.C. (Liv. vii. 3 “Lex vetusta est ... ut, qui praetor maximus sit, Idibus Septembribus clavum pangat”). Cf. Fest. p. 56.

[860] Cic. _de Off._ iii. 31, 112 (see p. 183); cf. Liv. vii. 3. L. Manlius, appointed “clavi figendi causa,” acted “perinde ac reipublicae gerendae ... gratia creatus esset,” and was forced to abdicate.

[861] p. 84.

[862] This is Mommsen’s interpretation (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 160 n. 4) of Liv. xxx. 39. C. Servilius Geminus had been appointed dictator _comitiorum causa_—“Saepe comitia indicta perfici tempestates prohibuerunt. Itaque, cum prid. Id. Mart. veteres magistratus abissent, novi subfecti non essent, respublica sine curulibus magistratibus erat.”

[863] Liv. iv. 41. The consul is here said “auspicio dictatoris res gerere.”

[864] ib. ii. 32 “quamquam per dictatorem dilectus habitus esset, tamen, quoniam in consulum verba jurassent, sacramento teneri militem rati.”

[865] This view has led to the exaggerated statement of Polybius (iii. 87) that, on the establishment of a dictator, παραχρῆμα διαλύεσθαι συμβαίνει πάσας τὰς ἀρχὰς ἐν τῇ Ῥώμῃ πλὴν τῶν δημάρχων: which has been copied by later Greek writers.

[866] This is clearly shown by the attitude of the dictator L. Papirius Cursor when pursuing his disobedient master of the horse (Liv. viii. 34). The dictator hopes that the veto will not be employed (“optare ne potestas tribunicia, inviolata ipsa, violet intercessione sua Romanum imperium”). Zonaras expresses the fact and not the law (vii. 13 οὔτ’ ἐγκαλέσαι τις αὐτῷ οὔτ’ ἐναντίον τι διαπράξασθαι ἴσχυεν οὐδὲ οἱ δήμαρχοι).

[867] Zonar. vii. 13 οὔτε ἐκ τῶν δημοσίων χρημάτων ἀναλῶσαι τι ἐξῆν αὐτῷ, εἰ μὴ ἐψηφίσθη.

[868] Liv. _Ep._ 19 (249 B.C.) “Atilius Calatinus primus dictator extra Italiam exercitum duxit”; Dio Cass. xxxvi. 17 (the dictatorship was limited to Italy) καὶ οὐκ ἂν εὑρεθείη δικτάτωρ οὐδεὶς ἄλλοσε, πλὴν ἑνὸς ἐς Σικελίαν, καὶ ταῦτα μηδὲν πράξαντος, αἱρεθείς.

[869] Festus p. 198 “optima lex in magistro populi faciendo, qui vulgo Dictator appellator, quam plenissimum posset jus ejus esse significabatur ... postquam vero provocatio ab eo magistratu ad populum data est, quae ante non erat, desitum est adici ‘ut optima lege,’ ut pote imminuto jure priorum magistrorum.”

[870] p. 168. It could not have been a consequence of the Valerio-Horatian laws of 449 B.C. (see p. 109).

[871] Liv. xxii. 8.

[872] Livy (xxii. 25) describes it as a _rogatio_ “de aequando magistri equitum et dictatoris jure.” Cf. c. 26 “de aequato imperio.”

[873] Liv. xxii. 57, M. Junius Pera.

[874] _Fast. Capitol._

[875] Sulla was nominated by an interrex (though his powers were conferred by law), Caesar by a praetor. Plutarch (_Marc._ 24) says that the praetor could nominate the dictator, a proceeding which is declared by Cicero to be wholly unconstitutional, _ad Att._ ix. 15, 2 (49 B.C.) “volet (Caesar) ... vel ut consules roget praetor vel dictatorem dicat, quorum neutrum jus est. Etsi si Sulla potuit efficere, ab interrege ut dictator diceretur, cur hic non possit?” The nomination of Caesar was regular in so far as a special _lex_ was passed which empowered the praetor to nominate (Caes. B.C. ii. 21; Dio Cass. xli. 36).

[876] An exception is found in 216 B.C. M. Fab. Buteo was appointed “dictator sine mag. eq. senatus legendi causa” (see p. 193).

[877] In the single case of the election of a dictator, the _magister equitum_ was also elected (Liv. xxii. 8).

[878] Dio Cass. xlii. 27; Antonius, as Caesar’s _magister equitum_, had six lictors.

[879] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 9 “equitatumque qui regat, habeto pari jure cum eo, quicumque erit juris disceptator.”

[880] Pompon. in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 19 “et his dictatoribus magistri equitum injungebantur sic, quo modo regibus tribuni celerum: ... magistratus tamen habebantur legitimi.”

[881] Liv. iv. 34 “jussoque magistro equitum abdicare se magistratu, ipse deinde abdicat.”

[882] Liv. ix. 38 “Papirius C. Junium Bubulcum magistrum equitum dixit: atque ei, legem curiatam de imperio ferenti, triste omen diem diffidit.”

[883] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 4, 10; see p. 160.

[884] Liv. viii. 32 sq.; cf. xxii. 27 “in ... civitate, in qua magistri equitum virgas ac secures dictatoris tremere atque horrere soliti sint.”

[885] ib. iv. 27 “relictoque (at Rome) L. Julio magistro equitum ad subita belli ministeria.”

[886] ib. ii. 18; Dio Cass. xlii. 21 (Caesar τὸν Ἀντώνιον, μηδ’ ἐστρατηγηκότα, ἵππαρχον προσελόμενος).

[887] Dionys. ii. 6 τῶν δὲ παρόντων τινὲς ὀρνιθοσκόπων μισθὸν ἐκ τοῦ δημοσίου φερόμενοι.

[888] Cic. _post Red. ad Quir._ 5, 11. The first meeting of the Senate was in early times held by the elder of the two consuls (ὁ πρεσβύτερος τῶν ὑπάτων Dionys. vi. 57).

[889] Cic. _pro Planc._ 25, 60 “honorum populi finis est consulatus.”

[890] App. _B.C._ ii. 19. In formal dating the names of the two chief praetors were added. See the _Senatus Consultum de Asclepiade_ (Bruns _Fontes_).

[891] Suet. _Tib._ 31; see p. 191.

[892] Liv. xliv. 17 (169 B.C.) “designatos extemplo sortiri placuit provincias.”

[893] ib. ii. 33 “consul alter Romae mansit, alter ad Volscum bellum missus”; cf. Dionys. vi. 91; Liv. ix. 42.

[894] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 31, 55.

[895] Festus p. 161 “majorem consulem L. Caesar putat dici, vel eum penes quem fasces sint, vel eum, qui prior factus sit.” The first explanation is doubtless the correct one.

[896] Suet. _Caes._ 20.

[897] Polyb. vi. 12 πασῶν εἰσι κύριοι τῶν δημοσίων πράξεων.

[898] Cicero furnishes an instance for the year 54 B.C., _ad Att._ iv. 15, 5 “Reatini me ad sua Τέμπη duxerunt, ut agerem causam contra Interamnates apud consulem et decem legatos, quod lacus Velinus ... in Nar defluit.”

[899] p. 167.

[900] Selection of a consul, Cic. _de Fin._ ii. 16, 54, in 141 B.C., “decreta a senatu est consuli quaestio”; of a praetor, Liv. xlii. 21, in 172 B.C., “C. Licinius praetor consuluit senatum quem quaerere ea rogatione vellet. Patres ipsum eum quaerere jusserunt.”

[901] Cic. _de Rep._ iii. 18, 28 (of the year 136 B.C.) “Consul ego quaesivi, cum vos mihi essetis in consilio, de Numantino foedere.” Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 112 n. 3) thinks that the _consilium_ was formed by the Fetiales (cf. Cic. _de Leg._ ii. 9, 21).

[902] For the question whether the _pomerium_ or the first milestone was the limit of the full _imperium_ see p. 79.

[903] For the rotation of the _imperium_ before Cannae (216 B.C.) see Polyb. iii. 110, Liv. xxii. 41.

[904] Liv. xxii. 27 “Ita (Fabius, after the appointment of Minucius as his colleague in 217 B.C.) obtinuit uti legiones, sicut consulibus mos esset, inter se dividerent.”

[905] ib. xxx. 1 (203 B.C.) “censuerunt patres, ut consules inter se compararent sortirenturve, uter Bruttios adversus Hannibalem, uter Etruriam ac Ligures provinciam haberet.”

[906] Italy and Macedonia (ib. xxxii. 8, xlii. 31, xliii. 12), Italy and Greece (xxxvii. 1).

[907] Italia and some foreign country are still consular _provinciae_ in 112 and 111 B.C. (Sall. _Jug._ 27, 43). When a consul was appointed to one of the old praetorian provinces, he did not supplant the praetor but commanded with and over him.

[908] Liv. xxx. 1 “ut consules inter se compararent sortirenturve.” Cf. ib. xxxii. 8, xxxvii. 1, and the other passages cited in note 3.

[909] ib. viii. 16; cf. Cic. _pro Domo_ 9, 24. In 205 B.C. Scipio was given Sicilia _extra sortem_ because his colleague was _pontifex maximus_ (Liv. xxviii. 38).

[910] Liv. xxi. 17 (218 B.C.) “nominatae jam antea consulibus provinciae erant; tum sortiri jussi.” Cf. ib. xxviii. 38.

[911] Sall. _Jug._ 27; Cic. _pro Domo_ 9, 24.

[912] Cic. _ad Att._ viii. 15, 3 “consules quibus more majorum concessum est vel omnes adire provincias.” Lucullus went as consul to Asia in 74 B.C.

[913] p. 153.

[914] That staunch conservative Q. Catulus was wont to reflect with pleasure “non saepe unum consulem improbum, duos vero nunquam, excepto illo Cinnano tempore, fuisse” (Cic. _post Red. in Sen._ 4, 9). By _improbi_ Catulus meant “radicals.”

[915] The consul was the “legitimus tutor” of the state (Cic. _post Red. ad Quir._ 5, 11) and “quasi parens bonus aut tutor fidelis” (_de Or._ iii. 1, 3).

[916] p. 120.

[917] Two praetors for Sicily and Sardinia (Liv. _Ep._ xx.), two more for the Spanish provinces (Liv. xxxii. 27). For the _lex Baebia_ see Liv. xl. 44. For the restoration of the number six see Vell. ii. 16. Pomponius says that four were added by Sulla (_Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 32), but eight are found in 47 B.C. (Dio Cass. xlii. 51).

[918] The praetor had a right to six lictors (στρατηγὸς ἑξαπέλεκυς, App. _Syr._ 15; cf. Polyb. iii. 40) and appears with the full number in the province (Cic. _in Verr._ v. 54, 142 “sex lictores circumsistunt”); but, in the exercise of his jurisdiction within the city, he employed, or was allowed, only two (Censorinus _de Die Nat._ 24, 3; cf. Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 34, 93).

[919] _Praetor urbanus_ (_S. C. de Bacch._ ll. 5, 8, 17, 21), _praetor qui inter cives jus dicet_ (_lex Agraria_ of 111 B.C.), _provincia_ or _sors urbana_ (Liv. xxiv. 9, xxv. 3, xxvii. 7, xxviii. 10, xxix. 13), jurisdictio urbana (ib. xxxii. 28, xlii. 31)—_praetor qui inter peregrinos jus dicet_ (_lex Acil._ ll. 12 and 89; _lex Jul. Munic._ ll. 8 and 12), _jurisdictio inter peregrinos_ (Liv. xl. 1), _provincia peregrina_ (ib. xxvii. 7, xxviii. 10). Both these praetors, as distinct from those in foreign command, are said to have _urbanae provinciae_ (ib. xliii. 11), _provincia urbana_ (xxxii. 1), _jurisdictio urbana_ (xxv. 41, xxx. 1).

[920] p. 197.

[921] App. _B. C._ ii. 112.

[922] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 13, 31.

[923] p. 174.

[924] Liv. xlii. 21.

[925] ib. xxvii. 5.

[926] ib. xliii. 14.

[927] ib. xlii. 21; see p. 199.

[928] e.g. in the _dilectus_ (ib. xxv. 22, xxxix. 20, xlii. 35).

[929] After Cannae the two urban praetors summoned the Senate (ib. xxii. 55). In 197 B.C., on the news of troubles in Spain, “decreverunt patres ut, comitiis praetorum perfectis, cui praetori provincia Hispania obvenisset, is primo quoque tempore de bello Hispaniae ad senatum referret” (ib. xxxiii. 21).

[930] The _provinciae_ assigned to the four praetors are _urbana_, _peregrina_, Sicilia, Sardinia (ib. xxviii. 10), to the six praetors the same with the addition of the two Spains (ib. xxxii. 28, xl. 1).

[931] ib. xxv. 3 (212 B.C.) “Et praetores provincias sortiti sunt; P. Cornelius Sulla urbanam et peregrinam, quae duorum ante sors fuerat.” Cf. ib. xxxvii. 50 (189 B.C.).

[932] ib. xxix. 13 (204 B.C.) “M. Marcio urbana, L. Scribonio Liboni peregrina et eidem Gallia.”

[933] ib. xxiv. 9 (215 B.C.) “comitiis praetorum perfectis, senatus consultum factum ut Q. Fulvio extra ordinem urbana provincia esset.”

[934] Gaius _Inst._ iv. 30 “per legem Aebutiam et duas Julias sublatae sunt istae legis actiones; effectumque est ut per concepta verba, id est, per formulas, litigaremus”; Gell. xvi. 10, 8 “cum ... omnis ... illa duodecim tabularum antiquitas nisi in legis actionibus centumviralium causarum lege Aebutia lata consopita sit.”

[935] Marcian in _Dig._ 1, 1, 8 “nam et ipsum jus honorarium viva vox est juris civilis.”

[936] Cic. _de Leg._ i. 5, 17 “Non ergo a praetoris edicto, ut plerique nunc, neque a XII Tabulis, ut superiores ... hauriendam juris disciplinam putas.” Cf. _de Leg._ ii. 23, 59 “discebamus enim pueri XII, ut carmen necessarium: quas jam nemo discit.”

[937] Papinian in _Dig._ 1, 1, 7, 1 “jus praetorium est, quod praetores introduxerunt adjuvandi vel supplendi vel corrigendi juris civilis gratia propter utilitatem publicam.”

[938] For the edict as the expression of customary law see Cic. _de Invent._ ii. 22, 67 “Consuetudine autem jus esse putatur id, quod voluntate omnium sine lege vetustas comprobarit.... Quo in genere et alia sunt multa et eorum multo maxima pars, quae praetores edicere consuerunt.”

[939] Cic. _in Verr._ i. 42, 109 “qui plurimum tribuunt edicto, praetoris edictum legem annuam dicunt esse.”

[940] Ascon. _in Cornel._ p. 58; Cic. _in Verr._ i. 44, 114. _Perpetuum_ means “continuous,” _tralaticium_ “transmitted.”

[941] Cic. _in Verr._ i. 46, 119. Cf. p. 178.

[942] Ascon. _in Cornel._ p. 58 “Aliam deinde legem Cornelius, ... tulit, ut praetores ex edictis suis perpetuis jus dicerent, quae res ... gratiam ambitiosis praetoribus, qui varie jus dicere assueverant, sustulit.” Cf. Dio Cass. xxxvi. 23.

[943] p. 202.

[944] Cic. _in Verr._ Act. i. 8, 21; _pro Mur._ 20, 42. The fullest account that we possess of the distribution of such functions amongst the members of the college refers to the year 66 B.C. (ib. _pro Cluent._ 53, 147; Ascon. _in Cornel._ p. 59).

[945] e.g. the _lex Cornelia de sicariis et veneficis_ took cognisance of murder, poisoning, and arson, that _de falsis_ of the forgery of documents and of wills as well as of coining.

[946] After the _sortitio_ for 62 B.C. the praetor Q. Metellus Celer was given the province of Cisalpine Gaul (Cic. _ad Fam._ v. 2, 3, and 4). During his praetorship (63 B.C.) he had been summoned to a command in northern Italy.

[947] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 7 “Suntoque aediles, curatores urbis, annonae ludorumque sollemnium: ollisque ad honoris amplioris gradum is primus ascensus esto.” Cf. _lex Jul. Munic._ l. 24.

[948] p. 122.

[949] Cic. _in Verr._ v. 14, 36.

[950] Livy (iii. 55), in stating the ineffectiveness of the _sacrosanctitas_ granted by law and not by oath, says “itaque aedilem prendi ducique a majoribus magistratibus, etc.” Cf. Gell. xiii. 13.

[951] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 7, cited p. 208.

[952] p. 98.

[953] Dio Cass. liv. 36.

[954] _Lex Jul. Munic._ ll. 20, 32-45, 29, 46.

[955] Suet. _Vesp._ 5; _lex Jul. Munic._ l. 68.

[956] Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 6, 4 (Caelius Rufus, curule aedile in 50 B.C., says) “nisi ego cum tabernariis et aquariis pugnarem, veternus civitatem occupasset.”

[957] ib. _in Verr._ v. 14, 36 “mihi sacrarum aedium procurationem, mihi totam urbem tuendam esse commissam.”

[958] Liv. xxv. 1 (on the spread of foreign superstitions in Rome in 213 B.C.) “incusati graviter ab senatu aediles triumvirique capitales, quod non prohiberent.” Cf. Cic. _de Har. Resp._ 13, 27.

[959] Macrob. _Sat._ ii. 6 “lapidatus a populo Vatinius cum gladiatorium munus ederet, obtinuerat ut aediles edicerent ne quis in arenam nisi pomum misisse vellet.”

[960] Seneca _Ep._ 86, 10 “hoc quoque nobilissimi aediles fungebantur officio intrandi ea loca quae populum receptabant exigendique munditias et utilem ac salubrem temperaturam.” Cf. Suet. _Claud._ 38; Tac. _Ann._ ii. 85.

[961] Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 28 (56 A.D.) “cohibita artius et aedilium potestas statutumque quantum curules, quantum plebei pignoris caperent vel poenae inrogarent.”

[962] _Dig._ 21, 1, 40-42 (from the edict of the curule aediles) “ne quis canem, verrem vel minorem aprum, lupum, ursum, pantheram, leonem ... qua vulgo iter fiet, ita habuisse velit, ut cuiquam nocere damnumve dare possit.”

[963] p. 208 n. 4.

[964] Liv. xxiii. 41; xxxi. 50; xxxiii. 42. Cic. _de Off._ ii. 17, 58 “ne M. quidem Sejo vitio datum est, quod in caritate asse modium populo dedit: magna enim se et inveterata invidia, nec turpi jactura, quando erat aedilis, nec maxima liberavit.”

[965] Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 6, 5 (from Caelius Rufus in 50 _B.C._) “alimentariam (legem), qua jubet aediles metiri, jactavit (Curio).”

[966] Liv. xxvi. 10 (211 B.C., when Hannibal was at the gates of Rome) “Fulvius Flaccus ... inter Esquilinam Collinamque portam posuit castra. Aediles plebis commeatum eo comportarunt.”

[967] For this there is no direct evidence, but the aediles complain about the transgression of sumptuary laws in Tac. _Ann._ iii. 52-55.

[968] Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 499. He takes “cum tabernariis pugnarem” (Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 6, 4, cited p. 209) in this sense.

[969] _Dig._ 21, 1, 1; Gell. iv. 2.

[970] Cic. _in Verr._ v. 14, 36.

[971] Liv. x. 47; xxvii. 6. They were shared by both colleagues (Suet. _Caes._ 10).

[972] Liv. xxiii. 30.

[973] Dio Cass. xliii. 48 (44 B.C.). Here by a decree of the Senate the Megalesia are celebrated by the plebeian aediles.

[974] When during the first Punic war Clodia uttered her ill-omened wish about the Roman people, “C. Fundanius et Ti. Sempronius, aediles plebei, multam dixerunt ei aeris gravis viginti quinque milia” (Gell. x. 6). Cf. Suet. _Tib._ 2.

[975] Cicero promises, as aedile, to prosecute those “qui aut deponere aut accipere aut recipere aut pollicere aut sequestres aut interpretes corrumpendi judicii solent esse” (_in Verr._ Act. i. 12, 36).

[976] An instance is furnished by Clodius’ prosecution of Milo in 56 B.C. (Cic. _pro Sest._ 44, 95; _ad Q. fr._ 2, 3). A prosecution by the aedile in defence of his own dignity or person is an outcome of his _coercitio_. An instance is furnished by Gell. iv. 14.

[977] Liv. viii. 22; xxv. 2.

[978] ib. xxxv. 41.

[979] ib. xxxviii. 35. Here the offence was _annona compressa_ by the corn-dealers.

[980] Condemnation “quia plus, quam quod lege finitum erat, agri possiderent” (ib. x. 13). Condemnation of _pecuarii_ (x. 47). Cf. xxxiii. 42.

[981] ib. xxxviii. 35; x. 23.

[982] p. 63.

[983] p. 80.

[984] p. 81.

[985] p. 117.

[986] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22 “post lege Sullae viginti creati supplendo senatui.”

[987] C. Gracchus served as quaestor for three years; one was spent in Rome and two in Sardinia (Plut. _C. Gracch._ 2).

[988] Cic. _in Verr._ Act. i. 4, 11 “quaestura primus gradus honoris.”

[989] ib. i. 13, 34 “quaestor ex senatus consulto provinciam sortitus es.”

[990] Liv. xxx. 33 “Laelium, cujus ... eo anno quaestoris extra sortem ex senatusconsulto opera utebatur” (Scipio in 202 B.C.); Cic. _ad Att._ vi. 6, 4 “Pompeius ... Q. Cassium sine sorte delegit, Caesar Antonium; ego sorte datum offenderem?”

[991] The first trace of a _quaestio de sicariis_ is in 142 B.C. (Cic. _de Fin._ ii. 16, 54).

[992] Polyb. xxiv. 9_a_, 1.

[993] Liv. iii. 69 “signa ... a quaestoribus ex aerario prompta delataque in campum.”

[994] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 20, 46.

[995] Liv. xxxix. 4. It was the duty of the quaestors to see that they were genuine. Cato the younger required the oath of the consuls that a certain decree had been passed (Plut. _Cat. Min._ 17).

[996] Cic. _Phil._ v. 5, 15.

[997] ib. _in Verr._ iii. 79, 183 “eorum hominum (the _scribae_ of the quaestors) fidei tabulae publicae periculaque magistratuum committuntur.”

[998] The security was given to the _aerarium_ (“subsignare apud aerarium” Cic. _pro Flacco_ 32, 80); hence the money was probably paid into that treasury.

[999] Liv. xxxviii. 58 “Hostilius et Furius damnati (for _peculatus_ in 187 B.C.) praedes eodem die quaestoribus urbanis dederunt.” In the _lex Acil. Rep._ (l. 57) it is said of the man convicted “q(uaestori) praedes facito det.”

[1000] Plaut. _Capt._ i. 2, 111; ii. 3, 453.

[1001] Hygin. _de Cond. Agr._ p. 115.

[1002] _Auct. ad Herenn._ i. 12, 21 “Cum L. Saturninus legem frumentariam de semissibus et trientibus laturus esset, Q. Caepio, qui per id temporis quaestor urbanus erat, docuit senatum aerarium pati non posse tantam largitionem.”

[1003] p. 117.

[1004] p. 213. If the quaestor was lacking through death or any other cause, the governor appointed one of his _legati_ as _pro quaestore_ (Cic. _in Verr._ i. 36, 90).

[1005] Cic. _pro Planc._ 11, 28 “morem ilium majorum qui praescribit in parentum loco quaestoribus suis praetores esse oportere.”

[1006] ib. _in Verr._ i. 15, 40 “Tu, cum quaestor ad exercitum missus sis, custos non solum pecuniae sed etiam consulis, particeps omnium rerum consiliorumque fueris.”

[1007] Lydus _de Mag._ i. 27 κρινάντων Ῥωμαίων πολεμεῖν τοῖς συμμαχήσασι Πύρρῳ τῷ Ἠπειρὼτῃ κατεσκευάσθη στόλος καὶ προεβλήθησαν οἱ καλοὺμενοι κλασσικοὶ (οἱονεὶ ναυάρχαι) τῷ ἀριθμῷ δυοκαίδεκα κυαίστωρες. Lydus may be right about the original number, although it has been sometimes thought a confused reminiscence of the raising of the number from four to eight.

[1008] Vell. ii. 94; cf. Cic. _pro Mur._ 8, 18 “tu illam (provinciam habuisti), cui, cum quaestores sortiuntur, etiam acclamari solet, Ostiensem non tam gratiosam et illustrem quam negotiosam et molestam.”

[1009] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 27. In 24 A.D. a rising near Brundisium was repressed by “Curtius Lupus quaestor, cui provincia vetere ex more calles evenerant.” Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 571), following Lipsius, would read Cales, the oldest Latin colony in Campania, and therefore supposes that this quaestor’s functions extended over the whole of South Italy. The woods and forests was the _provincia_ which the Senate destined for Caesar as proconsul (Suet. _Caes._ 19 “opera optimatibus data est ut provinciae futuris consulibus minimi negotii, id est, silvae callesque, decernerentur”).

[1010] Plut. _Sert._ 4.

[1011] The last to remain were the Gallic and Ostian, which, as Italian _provinciae_, were abolished by the Emperor Claudius in 44 A.D. (Suet. _Claud._ 24).

[1012] So Sertorius, as Gallic quaestor in the Marsic war, was instructed στρατιώτας ... καταλέγειν καὶ ὅπλα ποιεῖσθται (Plut. _Sert._ 4).

[1013] Cicero speaks of Vatinius, when holding this post, being sent to Puteoli on some other business (_in Vat._ 5, 12), but this does not show that he was holding an Italian quaestorship. See Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 573 n. 3.

[1014] Liv. iv. 8; see p. 115.

[1015] ib. vii. 22 (C. Marcius Rutilus); cf. x. 8.

[1016] ib. viii. 12 “ut alter utique ex plebe, cum eo [ventum sit] ut utrumque plebeium fieri liceret, censor crearetur.” Madvig and Mommsen would omit “ventum sit,” and so make the Publilian law open both places in the college to Plebeians.

[1017] ib. _Ep._ lix. “Q. Pompeius Q. Metellus tunc primum utrique ex plebe facti censores lustrum condiderunt.”

[1018] Messala ap. Gell. xiii. 15, 4.

[1019] 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.”

[1020] Messala ap. Gell. xiii. 15.

[1021] Polybius (vi. 53) says that the _imago_ of the censor at a funeral was clad in purple. As all the _insignia_ of the other magistrates that he mentions are those of their lifetime, this should be true of the censors. Perhaps the complete purple was worn for certain ceremonial purposes. Mommsen (_Staatsr._ i. pp. 411 and 446) thinks they were only buried in it.

[1022] ἁρχὴ ἀνυπεύθυνος (Dionys. xix. 16).

[1023] Liv. xxix. 37; Val. Max. vii. 2, 6.

[1024] Ascon. _in Pison._ p. 9.

[1025] Hence the helplessness of the tribune against censorial animadversion. Cf. Liv. xliv. 16 “multis equi adempti, inter quos P. Rutilio, qui tr. pl. eos violenter accusarat: tribu quoque is motus et aerarius factus.”

[1026] Cic. _ad Att._ iv. 9, 1.

[1027] For the later mode of regarding this limitation see Liv. iv. 24 “grave esse iisdem per tot annos magna parte vitae obnoxios vivere.” But, if the tenure was fixed by the _lex Aemilia_ (of the dictator Mamercus Aemilius, 434 B.C., Liv. l.c.), it originated before the censorship had become a dangerous power.

[1028] Liv. xxiii. 23 “nec censoriam vim uni permissam et eidem iterum.” The prohibition is attributed to a law of Marcius Rutilus Censorinus, censor 294 and 265 B.C. (Plut. _Cor._ 1; cf. Val. Max. iv. 1, 3); but it could not have been his work, at least as censor, for this official had not the _jus rogandi_. See Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 520.

[1029] It is Cicero’s business in the _pro Cluentio_ (43, 122) to represent this divergence of view as a weakness in the censorship; cf. Liv. xlii. 10 (173 B.C.) “concors et e re publica censura fuit ... neque ab altero notatum alter probavit.” But it was a necessary condition of the continuance of the office in a free state.

[1030] Liv. ix. 34 “cum ita comparatum a majoribus sit ut comitiis censoriis nisi duo confecerint legitima suffragia, non renuntiato altero comitia differantur.”

[1031] Tradition attributed the origin of this role to a religions scruple, “quia eo lustro (in which a _suffectus_ was appointed) Roma est capta: nec deinde unquam in demortui locum censor sufficitur” (Liv. v. 31).

[1032] Cicero mixes up the earlier and later functions in his pseudo-law, which expresses all the activities of the censors (_de Leg._ iii. 3, 7), “Censores populi aevitates, suboles, familias pecuniasque censento: urbis, tecta, templa, vias, aquas, aerarium, vectigalia tuento: populique partes in tribus discribunto: exin pecunias, aevitates, ordines partiunto: equitum peditumque prolem discribunto: caelibes esse prohibento: mores populi regunto: probrum in senatu ne relinquunto.”

[1033] Liv. ix. 30.

[1034] ib. xxiii. 22; see p. 193.

[1035] In the great _sublectio_ after Cannae (216 B.C.) the ex-curule magistrates not already on the list were chosen in the order of their tenure of power; then the ex-aediles, ex-tribunes of the _plebs_ and the _quaestorii_, lastly men of distinction who had held no magistracy (Liv. xxiii. 23).

[1036] Festus p. 246 “Ovinia tribunicia intervenit, qua sanctum est ut censores ex omni ordine optimum quemque jurati (_Cod._ curiati, _Mommsen_ curiatim) in senatum legerent.” If “ex omni ordine” means “from every grade of the magistracy,” the second interpretation is necessary.

[1037] The _oratio_ of Cato as censor against L. Quinctius Flaminius was delivered _post notam_ (Liv. xxxix. 42); but it suggests that the censors felt themselves bound at times to give reasons for their actions.

[1038] The phrases for rejection and omission are _movere_, _ejicere_, _praeterire_. The last applies both to existing and to expectant senators, and has reference to the public reading of the list (_recitatio_) (Cic. _pro Domo_ 32, 84 “praeteriit in recitando senatu”).

[1039] Liv. xli. 57 “retinuit quosdam Lepidus a collega praeteritos”; cf. Cic. _pro Cluent._ 43, 122.

[1040] For a type of _subscriptio_ see Ascon. _in or. in Tog. Cand._ p. 84 “Antonium Gellius et Lentulus censores ... senatu moverunt causasque subscripserunt, quod socios diripuerit, quod judicium recusarit, quod propter aeris alieni magnitudinem praedia manciparit bonaque sua in potestate non habeat.”

[1041] Usually the praetorship or quaestorship. Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 521 n. 3.

[1042] See the formula of summons in Varro (_L.L._ vi. 86), “omnes Quirites pedites armatos, privatosque curatores omnium tribuum, si quis pro se sive pro altero rationem dari volet, vocato in licium huc ad me.”

[1043] Mommsen believes in a special summons to the _capite censi_ (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 366).

[1044] Liv. xliii. 14.

[1045] Cato in 184 assessed articles of luxury at ten times their value (Liv. xxxix. 44; Plut. _Cat. Maj._ 18).

[1046] Liv. iv. 24 “Mamercum ... tribu moverunt octuplicatoque censu aerarium fecerunt”; Val. Max. ii. 9, 1 “Camillas et Postumius censores aera poenae nomine eos, qui ad senectutem caelibes pervenerant, in aerarium deferre jusserunt.”

[1047] See p. 69.

[1048] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 7 “familias pecuniasque censento”; _lex Jul. Munic._ l. 147 “rationem pecuniae ... accipito.” _Pecunia_ here applies to both _res mancipi_ and _nec mancipi_.

[1049] Cic. l.c. “aevitates suboles ... censento”; _lex Jul. Munic._ l. 145 “eorum ... nomina, praenomina, patres ... et quot annos quisque eorum habet ... accipito.”

[1050] p. 68.

[1051] Liv. ix. 46 “forensis factio App. Claudi censura vires nacta, qui ... humilibus per omnes tribus divisis forum et campum corrupit.” Cf. Diod. xx. 46 (App. Claudius) ἔδωκε τοῖς πολίταις ὅποι προαιροῖντο τιμήσασθαι. Mommsen imagines that it was in this year that the landless citizens _first_ found a place in the tribes (_Staatsr._ ii. 392 sq., 402 sq.).

[1052] Liv. l.c. “aliud integer populus ... aliud forensis factio tendebat.... Fabius simul concordiae causa, simul ne humilimorum in manu comitia essent, omnem forensem turbam excretam in quattuor tribus conjecit urbanasque eas appellavit.”

[1053] _Sexagenarius de ponte._ Cf. Cic. _pro Rosc. Amer._ 35, 100 “Habeo etiam dicere, quem contra morem majorum, minorem annis LX de ponte in Tiberim dejecerit”; Festus p. 334 “quo tempore primum per pontem coeperunt comitiis suffragium ferre, juniores conclamaverunt ut de ponte dejicerentur sexagenari, qui jam nullo publico munere fungerentur, ut ipsi potius sibi quam illi deligerent imperatorem.” If _pons_ could be taken literally, a curious parallel is furnished by early Slavonic procedure. “The vechés passed whole days in debating the same subjects, the only interruptions being free fights in the streets. At Novgorod these fights took place on the bridge across the Volchov, and the stronger party sometimes threw their adversaries into the river beneath” (Kovalevsky _Modern Customs and Ancient Laws of Russia_, p. 138).

[1054] p. 221.

[1055] “Eorum qui arma ferre possent” (Liv. i. 44), τῶν ἐχόντων τὴν στρατεύσιμον ἡλικίαν (Dionys. xi. 63), τῶν ἐν ταῖς ἡλικίαις (Polyb. ii 24).

[1056] Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 411.

[1057] p. 72.

[1058] Beloch _der Italische Bund_ p. 78.

[1059] p. 73.

[1060] The change is put by tradition at the time of the siege of Veii (403 B.C., Liv. v. 7 “quibus census equester erat, equi publici non erant adsignati ... senatum adeunt factaque dicendi potestate equis se suis stipendia facturos promittunt”). Livy here assumes a census as existing for the _equites equo publico_, but it is questionable whether it was not transferred from these new _equites_ (_equo privato_ as they are called by modern historians) to the old equestrian centuries.

[1061] Polyb. vi. πλουτίνδην αὐτῶν γεγενημένης ὑπὸ τοῦ τιμητοῦ τῆς ἐκλογῆς.

[1062] There is no direct authority for this particular _census_ earlier than the Principate. The fact that a _census_, approximating to or identical with the equestrian, was required for _judices_ under the Gracchan law, and the specification that these should not be senators or members of senatorial families, led to these judges being called “knights.” They were selected from a class practically identical with that of the _equites equo privato_.

[1063] Cic. _pro Cluent._ 48, 134.

[1064] Suet. _Claud._ 16.

[1065] Val. Max. ii. 9, 7.

[1066] Cic. _de Rep._ iv. 2, 2. So Pompeius, a consul who had never been a senator (70 B.C.), claims and obtains his discharge before he enters on his office (Plut. _Pomp._ 22).

[1067] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 2. See p. 184.

[1068] Liv. xxvii. 11 (209 B.C.) “(Censores) addiderunt acerbitati (the deprivation of the public horse) etiam tempus, ne praeterita stipendia procederent eis, quae equo publico meruerant, sed dena stipendia equis privatis facerent.”

[1069] Gell. iv. 12; Festus p. 108.

[1070] Cic. _pro Cluent._ 48, 134; Liv. xxix. 37. Removal from the ranks is described as a deprivation of the horse (_adimere equum_, Liv. xxiv. 18, xli. 2, 7).

[1071] A fragment of a censorian edict of 92 B.C. directed against the “Latini rhetores” has been preserved. It contains the words “Haec nova, quae praeter consuetudinem ac morem majorum fiunt, neque placent neque recta videntur” (Suet. _de Clar. Rhet._ 1; Gell. xv. 11, 2).

[1072] “Judex domesticus,” “domesticus magistratus” (Sen. _Controv._ ii. 3; _de Benef._ iii. 11).

[1073] Cic. _de Rep._ iv. 6, 16 “Nec vero mulieribus praefectus praeponatur, qui apud Graecos creari solet; sed sit censor qui viros doceat moderari uxoribus.”

[1074] Dionys. xx. 13.

[1075] p. 55.

[1076] Dionys. l.c.

[1077] Festus p. 344.

[1078] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 7 “coelibes esse prohibento.”

[1079] Val. Max. ii. 9, 1 “Camillus et Postumius censores aera poenae nomine eos, qui ad senectutem coelibes pervenerant, in aerarium deferre jusserunt.”

[1080] Liv. xxxix. 19.

[1081] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 28, 69.

[1082] Val. Max. ii. 9, 2 “M. Val. Maximus et C. Junius Brutus Bubulcus censores ... L. Annium senatu moverunt, quod, quam virginem in matrimonium duxerat, repudiasset, nullo amicorum in consilio adhibito.”

[1083] Plin. _H. N._ xviii. 3, 11.

[1084] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 14; Val. Max. ii. 9, 4. For excessive taxation imposed on articles of luxury see Liv. xxxix. 44; Plut. _Cat. Maj._ 18; and p. 221.

[1085] Cf. Gell. v. 13 “M. Cato in oratione, quam dixit apud censores in Lentulum, ita scripsit: ‘quod majores sanctius habuere defendi pupillos quam clientem non fallere.’”

[1086] Greenidge _Infamia in Roman Law_ p. 67.

[1087] Even amateur performances might call down the _nota_. See Suet. _Dom._ 8 (Domitian) “suscepta correctione morum ... quaestorium virum, quod gesticulandi saltandique studio teneretur, movit senatu.”

[1088] The _lex Julia Municipalis_ excludes them, like actors, from the municipal senate; the _lex Acilia repetundarum_ from the bench of _judices_.

[1089] Suet. _Aug._ 39 “notavitque aliquos quod, pecunias levioribus usuris mutuati, graviori foenore collocassent.”

[1090] Plut. _Cat. Maj._ 17; _C. Gracch._ 2.

[1091] Gell. xiv. 7 “opus etiam censorium fecisse existimatos, per quos eo tempore (i.e. at an unlawful time) senatus consultum factum esset.”

[1092] Cic. _de Div._ i. 16, 29 “Appius ... censor C. Ateium (tribune 55 B.C.) notavit, quod ementitum auspicia subscriberet.”

[1093] Val. Max. ii. 9, 5 “M. autem Antonius et L. Flaccus censores (97 B.C.) Duronium senatu moverunt, quod legem de coercendis conviviorum sumptibus latam tribunus plebi abrogaverat.”

[1094] Cic. _pro Cluent._ 42, 119; 43, 121; Suet. _Dom._ 8.

[1095] Liv. xxiv. 18; xxvii. 11 and 25.

[1096] In 204 B.C. the censor M. Livius disfranchised for the purposes of the _comitia centuriata_ (_aerarios reliquit_) thirty-four out of the thirty-five tribes “quod et innocentem se condemnassent et condemnatum consulem et censorem fecissent” (Liv. xxix. 37).

[1097] _Lex Jul Munic._ l. 120.

[1098] Cic. _de Off._ iii. 31, 111 “indicant (the sanctity of the oath in former times) notiones animadversionesque censorum, qui nulla de re diligentius quam de jure jurando judicabant.”

[1099] To this form of disqualification the name “mediate _infamia_” has been given by modern jurists.

[1100] Cic. _pro Cluent._ 42, 120 “quos autem ipsi L. Gellius et Cn. Lentulus duo censores ... furti et captarum pecuniarum nomine notaverunt, ii non modo in senatum redierunt. sed etiam illarum ipsarum rerum judiciis absoluti sunt.”

[1101] Liv. xxix. 37 (in 204 B.C., Claudius Nero) “M. Livium (his colleague), quia populi judicio esset damnatus, equum vendere jussit.”

[1102] It enacted “ut quem populus damnasset cuive imperium abrogasset in senatu ne esset” (Ascon. _in Cornelian._ p. 78).

[1103] Dio Cass. xxxvi. 21.

[1104] Liv. xlv. 15 “omnes iidem ab utroque et tribu remoti et aerarii facti”; xliv. 16 “tribu quoque is motus et aerarius factus”; xxvii. 11; xxix. 37 “aerarios reliquit.”

[1105] See Greenidge _Infamia in Roman Law_ pp. 106-110. Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii. pp. 402 ff.) makes the expressions _tribu movere_ and _in aerarios referre_ identical after 312 B.C. and interprets both as signifying the removal from a higher to a lower tribe.

[1106] Liv. i. 44; Dionys. iv. 22.

[1107] At each _lustrum vota_ were offered “quae in proximum lustrum suscipi mos est” (Suet. _Aug._ 97). Before the censorship of Scipio Aemilianus it had been the custom to pray “ut populi Romani res meliores amplioresque facerent”; after it, on his initiative, “ut eas perpetuo incolumes servent” (Val. Max. iv. 1, 10).

[1108] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 19, 50 and 51; 29, 81. The leases were sometimes of considerable duration (Hyginus p. 116 Lachm. “Ex hoste capti agri postquam divisi sunt per centurias ... qui superfuerunt agri vectigalibus subjecti sunt, alii per annos [quinos], alii per annos centenos pluresve: finito illo tempore iterum veneunt locanturque ita ut vectigalibus est consuetudo”).

[1109] e.g. a _lex censoria_ enjoined that not more than five thousand workmen should be employed in the gold mines of Vercellae by the contractor who worked them (Plin. _H.N._ xxxiii. 78).

[1110] The jurists inform us that this is the true sense of _publicanus_; the _conductores_ are only _publicanorum loco_ (_Dig._ 39, 4, 12, 13). In common parlance, however, both are _publicani_, and this usage is etymologically justifiable, since they are both concerned with a _publicum_, a word which denotes state revenue and state service (_Dig._ 39, 4, 1; Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 51; Liv. xxiii. 49, 1).

[1111] _Vectigal_ (ἀποφορά Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 8; cf. App. _B.C._ i. 7). In the case of pasture land it was called _scriptura_ (Festus p. 833).

[1112] _Lex agraria_ l. 85 “ex lege dicta, quam ... censores ... deixerunt, publicano dare oportuit.”

[1113] Cic. _in Verr._ ii. 26, 63; 60, 147; iii. 7, 18.

[1114] ib. iii. 6, 12 and 14.

[1115] Polyb. vi. 17. The Senate can συμπτώματος γενομένου κουφίσαι καὶ τὸ παράπαν ἀδυνάτου τινὸς συμβάντος ἀπολῦσαι τῆς ἐργωνίας. Cf. the section on the Senate’s control of property. In 169 and 59 B.C. we find the people releasing from an oppressive contract (Liv. xliii. 16; App. _B.C._ ii. 13).

[1116] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 7 “templa, vias, aquas ... tuento”; _ad Fam._ xiii. 11, 1 “sarta tecta (i.e. the repairs of walls and roofs) aedium sacrarum locorumque communium tueri.”

[1117] Cf. Liv. xxxix. 44 “ultro tributa infimis (pretiis) locaverunt.”

[1118] ib. xliv. 16 “ad opera publica facienda cum eis (censoribus) dimidium ex vectigalibus ejus anni attributum ex senatus consulto a quaestoribus esset”; xl. 46 “censoribus deinde postulantibus ut pecuniae summa sibi, qua in opera publica uterentur, attribueretur, vectigal annuum decretum est.”

[1119] _Lex Jul. Munic._ l. 73; Liv. xxxix. 44 (quoted n. 2).

[1120] Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 446) takes the phrase to mean something “voluntarily granted” by the Senate to the magistrate.

[1121] Liv. xxxix. 44. The later tendency, however, was for such public rights to be protected by the praetor’s interdicts.

[1122] ib. xl. 51 “complura sacella publica quae fuerant occupata a privatis publica sacraque ut essent paterentque populo curarunt.”

[1123] ib. xliii. 16 “censores ad pignora capienda miserunt multamque pro contione privato dixerunt.”

[1124] _Lex agraria_ ll. 35, 36.

[1125] ib.

[1126] p. 208.

[1127] p. 93.

[1128] p. 94.

[1129] pp. 95 ff.

[1130] p. 190.

[1131] p. 162.

[1132] p. 126.

[1133] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 7, 17 “toties legibus agrariis curatores constituti sunt triumviri quinqueviri decemviri.” Cf. ib. ii. 12, 31 “eodem jure ... quo habuerunt (pullarios) tresviri lege Sempronia.”

[1134] ib. ii. 7, 16 “jubet enim (the agrarian law of Rullus) tribunum plebis, qui eam legem tulerit, creare decemviros per tribus septemdecim, ut, quem novem tribus fecerint, is decemvir sit.”

[1135] pp. 174, 177.

[1136] The nature of the Sullan limitations is unknown. Caesar says “Sullam nudata omnibus rebus tribunicia potestate tamen intercessionem liberam reliquisse” (_B.C._ i. 7), and Cicero “Sullam probo, qui tribunis plebis sua lege injuriae faciendae potestatem ademerit, auxilii ferendi reliquerit” (_de Leg._ iii. 9, 22). He probably formulated cases in which it could not be employed. There are instances of the tribunician veto between 81 B.C. and 70 B.C., the date of the restoration of the tribune’s power. See Momms. _Staatsr._ ii p. 308 nn. 1 and 2.

[1137] p. 162.

[1138] p. 182.

[1139] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 6.

[1140] Festus p. 233; Dio Cass. liv. 26.

[1141] Liv. _Ep._ xi.

[1142] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 6; Sall. _Cat._ 55.

[1143] Val. Max. vi. 1, 10; Cic. _pro Cluent._ 13, 38.

[1144] Ascon. _in Milon._ p. 38.

[1145] Plaut. _Amph._ l. 1, 3.

[1146] Pompon. in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 30. The full official title which first appears in 44 B.C. is _a_(_uro_) _a_(_rgento_) _a_(_ere_) _f_(_lando_) _f_(_eriundo_). For this title and its variants see Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 602 n. 3.

[1147] Momms. _Staatsr._ ii p. 601.

[1148] Verbally the second title might, and perhaps should, refer to the _viae_ of Italy. But the office is probably an urban magistracy. See ib. p. 604.

[1149] Liv. iii. 55.

[1150] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 3, 6. For their jurisdiction in cases of freedom in the Ciceronian period see Cic. _pro Caec._ 39, 97; _pro Domo_ 29, 78.

[1151] Festus p. 233.

[1152] p. 207.

[1153] This was the case with C. Claudius Pulcher (_C.I.L._ i. p. 279), C. Junius (Cic. _pro Cluent._ 29, 79), and C. Julius Caesar (Suet. _Caes._ 11).

[1154] p. 189.

[1155] Cic. _pro Cluent._ 33, 91.

[1156] Mommsen inclines to think that the office followed as a matter of course on the aedileship (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 590).

[1157] p. 155.

[1158] Liv. ix. 30.

[1159] p. 234.

[1160] p. 43.

[1161] p. 102.

[1162] p. 126.

[1163] Cic. _pro Caec._ 33, 95; cf. _pro Domo_ 40, 106 “Quae tua fuit consecratio? Tuleram, inquit, ut mihi liceret. Quid? Non exceperas ut, si quid jus non esset rogari, ne esset rogatum?”

[1164] Valerius Probus gives the formula which emphasises this religious aspect of the saving clause. It was SI QUID SACRI SANCTI EST QUOD NON JURE SIT ROGATUM, EJUS HAC LEGE NIHIL ROGATUR.

[1165] See p. 107.

[1166] Cic. _pro Domo_ 20, 53 “quae (est) sententia Caeciliae legis et Didiae nisi haec, ne populo necesse sit in conjunctis rebus compluribus aut id quod nolit accipere aut id quod velit repudiare?” The principle had existed as early as the _lex Acilia Repetundarum_ of 122 (l. 72). See Mommsen _Staatsr._ iii. p. 336.

[1167] Liv. viii. 23.

[1168] ib. ix. 42. Compare, however, x. 22 (296 B.C.), where the _plebiscitum_ and the _senatus consultum_ are both mentioned in connexion with the prorogation of the command of L. Volumnius. For the recognition of the _imperium_ of the consul for a single day to enable him to triumph, see p. 158.

[1169] Liv. xxxviii. 54-60.

[1170] ib. xlii. 21 and 22.

[1171] Cic. _de Fin._ ii. 16, 54.

[1172] The _quaestio Mamilia_ of 110 B.C. (Sall. _Jug._ 40).

[1173] p. 14.

[1174] The _lex Plautia Papiria_ (Cic. _pro Arch._ 4, 7; see p. 311) was the work of two tribunes.

[1175] Cic. _pro Balbo_ 21, 48 “lege Appuleia ... qua lege Saturninus C. Mario tulerat, ut in singulas colonias ternos cives Romanos facere posset.”

[1176] ib. 8, 19 “lege quam L. Gellius Cn. Cornelius (coss. 72 B.C.) ex senatus sententia tulerunt ... videmus satis esse sanctum ut cives Romani sint ii, quos Cn. Pompeius de consilii sententia singillatim civitate donaverit.”

[1177] Val. Max. v. 2, 8 “(C. Marius) duas ... Camertium cohortes mira virtute vim Cimbrorum sustinentis in ipsa acie adversus condicionem foederis civitate donavit.”

[1178] Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. p. 135 n. 5.

[1179] Cic. _pro Caec._ 35, 101.

[1180] Liv. xxvi. 33 (speech of M. Atilius Regulus) “‘Per senatum agi de Campanis, qui cives Romani sunt, injussu populo non video posse. Idque et apud majores nostros in Satricanis factum est (319 B.C.) cum defecissent, ut M. Antistius tribunus plebis prius rogationem ferret scisceretque plebs uti senatui de Satricanis sententiae dicendae jus esset. Itaque censeo cum tribunis plebis agendum esse ut eorum unus pluresve rogationem ferant ad plebem qua nobis statuendi de Campanis jus fiat.’ L. Atilius tribunus plebis ex auctoritate senatus plebem in haec verba rogavit ... Plebes sic jussit, ‘Quod senatus juratus, maxima pars, censeat, qui adsidetis, id volumus jubemusque.’”

[1181] ib. xxxviii. 36 “edocti populi esse, non senatus, jus suffragii quibus velit impertiri, destiterunt incepto.”

[1182] p. 229.

[1183] Liv. xlv. 15 (169 B.C.; on the proposal of the censor Sempronius to disfranchise the freedmen, his colleague Claudius) “negabat ... suffragii lationem injussu populi censorem cuiquam homini, nedum ordini universo adimere posse: neque enim, si tribu movere posset, quod sit nihil aliud quam mutare jubere tribum, ideo omnibus quinque et triginta tribubus emovere posse, id est civitatem libertatemque eripere.”

[1184] In Liv. vii. 16 (357 B.C.) we find the account of the creation of the _vicesima manumissionis_ by the _comitia tributa populi_.

[1185] This change was effected by a _lex Aebutia_ (Gell. xvi. 10, 8; Gaius iv. 30).

[1186] p. 205.

[1187] The fullest _praescriptio_ which has been preserved is that of the _lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus_, a consular law of 9 B.C. (Frontinus _de aquaeductibus_ 129). It runs: “T. Quinctius Crispinus consul populum jure rogavit populusque jure scivit in foro pro rostris aedis divi Juli pr(idie) [k] Julias. Tribus Sergia principium fuit, pro tribu Sex.... L. f. Virro [primus scivit].”

[1188] Ulpian _Reg. praef._ 2 “Minus quam perfecta lex est, quae vetat aliquid fieri et, si factum sit, non rescindit, sed poenam injungit ei qui contra legem fecit.” The Licinio-Sextian agrarian law of 367 was apparently of this kind.

[1189] Macrob. _Comm. in Somn. Scip._ ii. 17, 13 “inter leges quoque illa imperfecta dicitur, in qua nulla deviantibus poena sancitur.”

[1190] Cic. _ad Att._ iii. 23, 2 “alteram caput est tralaticium de impunitate SI QUID CONTRA ALIAS LEGES EJUS LEGIS ERGO FACTUM SIT.”

[1191] Ulpian _op. cit._ 3 “Lex aut rogatur, id est, fertur; aut abrogatur, id est, prior lex tollitur; aut derogatur, id est, pars primae (legis) tollitur; aut subrogatur, id est, adjicitur aliquid primae legi; aut obrogatur, id est, mutatur aliquid ex prima lege.” Cf. the clause in a law cited by Cicero (_ad Att._ iii. 23, 3) “SI QUID IN HAC ROGATIONE SCRIPTUM EST, QUOD PER LEGES PLEBISVE SCITA PROMULGARE, ABROGARE, DEROGARE, OBROGARE SINE FRAUDE SUA NON LICEAT.”

[1192] Cic. l.c. 23, 2 “neque enim ulla (lex) est, quae non ipsa se saepiat difficultate abrogationis. Sed, cum lex abrogatur, illud ipsum abrogatur, quo modo eam abrogari [_non_] oporteat.”

[1193] p. 239.

[1194] See the section on the Senate.

[1195] Livy describes a controversy whether from this point of view an armistice (_indutiae_) rested on a level with a _pax_: (iv. 30) “cum Veientibus ... indutiae, ... non pax facta ... ante diem rebellaverant ... controversia inde fuit utrum populi jussu indiceretur bellum an satis esset senatus consultum. Pervicere tribuni ... ut Quinctius consul de bello ad populum ferret: omnes centuriae jussere.”

[1196] Polyb. vi. 14 ὑπὲρ εἰρήνης οὖτος (ὁ δῆμος) βουλεύεται καὶ πολέμου.

[1197] Mommsen _Staatsr._ iii. p. 343.

[1198] See the section on the Senate.

[1199] Polyb. i. 62 (agreement between Lutatius Catulus and the Carthaginians in 241 B.C.) ἐπὶ τοῖσδε φιλίαν εἶναι Καρχηδονίοις καὶ Ῥωμαίοις, ἐὰν καὶ τῷ δήμῳ τῶν Ῥωμαίων συνδοκῇ. The people rejected the treaty, but it was subsequently maintained that, but for this saving clause, it would have been binding (ib. iii. 29).

[1200] ib. vi. 14 καὶ μὴν περὶ συμμαχίας καὶ διαλύσεως καὶ συνθηκῶν οὖτος (ὁ δῆμος) ἐστιν ὁ βεβαιῶν ἒκαστα τούτων καὶ κύρια ποιῶν ἢ τοὐναντίον.

[1201] Liv. xxix. 12 (205 B.C., peace with Philip of Macedon) “jusserunt ... omnes tribus”; xxx. 43 (201 B.C., peace with Carthage) “De pace ... omnes tribus jusserunt”; xxxiii. 25 (196 B.C., peace with Philip of Macedon) “ea rogatio in Capitolio ad plebem lata est. Omnes quinque et triginta tribus, uti rogas jusserunt.”

[1202] So on the conclusion of the second Punic war (Liv. xxx. 43 “M’. Acilius et Q. Minucius tribuni plebis ad populum tulerunt ‘Vellent juberentne senatum decernere ut cum Carthaginiensibus pax fieret, et quem eam pacem dare quemque ex Africa exercitum deportare juberent’”).

[1203] See _lex Antonia de Termessibus_ (Bruns _Fontes_).

[1204] p. 47.

[1205] p. 187.

[1206] p. 63.

[1207] See below on the competence of the _concilium plebis_.

[1208] See Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 195; ii. p. 618.

[1209] See p. 161.

[1210] p. 169.

[1211] p. 211.

[1212] p. 161.

[1213] _Anquisitio_ (a variant of the _quaestio_ of the magistrate when he investigates on his own authority) perhaps means an “inquiry on both sides,” i.e. through accusation and defence (Lange _Röm. Alt._ ii. p. 470; cf. Festus p. 22 “anquirere est circum quaerere”).

[1214] Liv. ii. 52 (the tribunes) “cum capitis anquisissent, duo milia aeris damnato multam edixerunt”; xxvi. 3 (a pecuniary penalty having been proposed during the first two days) “tertio ... tanta ira accensa est ut capite anquirendum contio subclamaret.”

[1215] Cic. _pro Dom._ 17, 45 “cum tam moderata judicia populi sint a majoribus constituta ... ne inprodicta die quis accusetur, ut ter ante magistratus accuset intermissa die quam multam irroget aut judicet, quarta sit accusatio trinum nundinum prodicta die, quo die judicium sit futurum.” Cf. App. _B.C._ i. 74.

[1216] Cic. l.c. “si qua res illum diem aut auspiciis aut excusatione sustulit, tota causa judiciumque sublatum sit.”

[1217] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 27.

[1218] Cic. _pro Domo_ 82, 86 “at vero ... Kaeso ille Quinctius (cf. Liv. iii. 13) et M. Furius Camillus et M. Servilius Ahala (cf. Liv. iv. 16, 21) ... populi incitati vim iracundiamque subierunt; damnatique comitiis centuriatis cum in exilium profugissent, rursus ab eodem populo placato sunt in suam pristinam dignitatem restituti.”

[1219] Cic. _Brut._ 34, 128; _post Red. in Sen._ 15, 38.

[1220] App. _B.C._ i 31.

[1221] Cic. _pro Planc._ 28, 69; _post Red. in Sen._ 15, 38.

[1222] Cic. _ad Att._ iv. 1, 4.

[1223] _Auct. ad Herenn._ ii. 28, 45.

[1224] Caes. _B.C._ iii. 1 “praetoribus tribunisque plebis rogationes ad populum ferentibus ... in integrum restituit.” Cf. Suet. _Caes._ 41; Dio Cass, xliii. 27.

[1225] “de alea condemnatum” (Cic. _Phil._ ii. 23, 56), that is, probably, under the _lex Cornelia de falsis_ (Rein _Criminalrecht_ p. 833).

[1226] See p. 248.

[1227] Plut. _Mar._ 43; cf. Vell. ii. 21; App. _B.C._ i. 70.

[1228] App. _B.C._ iii. 95.

[1229] Vell. ii. 58; cf. Cic. _Phil._ i. 1, 1.

[1230] Dio Cass. xlix. 43.

[1231] pp. 166, 179.

[1232] p. 239.

[1233] When Varro says (_L.L._ vi. 30) “magistratus vitio creatus nihilo secius magistratus” he is reflecting the practical procedure—hardly the constitutional theory, unless the _dictum_ implies that repeal is impossible because unnecessary, and that there is no authority for determining the nullity of the election.

[1234] Cicero says, with respect to the law exiling him, that there was some point in its being held invalid as a _privilegium_, “sed multo est melius abrogari” (_ad Att._ iii. 15, 5).

[1235] Laelius Felix ap. Gell. xv. 27, 5 “Cum ex generibus hominum suffragium feratur, ‘curiata’ comitia esse, cum ex censu et aetate ‘centuriata,’ cum ex regionibus et locis, ‘tributa.’”

[1236] How easily one _comitia_ could melt into another is shown by the words of Cicero [_ad Fam._ vii. 30 (44 B.C.)] “Ille autem (Caesar), qui comitiis tributis esset auspicatus, centuriata habuit.”

[1237] See Appendix on the _comitia tributa_.

[1238] p. 49.

[1239] Messala ap. Gell. xiii. 15, 4 “Minoribus creatis magistratibus tributis comitiis magistratus, sed justus curiata datur lege.”

[1240] Dio Cass. xxxix. 19.

[1241] ib. xli. 43.

[1242] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 12, 30 “consuli, si legem curiatam non habet, attingere rem militarem non licet.”

[1243] Sulla’s law had said that the magistrate should retain _imperium_ until he re-entered the city, apparently without mentioning the _lex curiata_. App. Claudius, consul for 54 B.C., who had been prevented by the tribunician veto from getting his _lex curiata_ passed, presumed on this silence and said “legem curiatam consuli ferri opus esse, necesse non esse; se, quoniam ex senatus consulto provinciam haberet, lege Cornelia imperium habiturum quoad in urbem introisset” (Cic. _ad Fam._ i. 9, 25).

[1244] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 12, 31.

[1245] p. 26.

[1246] Gell. xv. 27, 1 “‘calata’ comitia esse, quae pro conlegio pontificum habentur aut regis aut flaminum inaugurandorum causa. Eorum autem alia esse ‘curiata,’ alia ‘centuriata’ ... Isdem comitiis, quae ‘calata’ appellari diximus, et sacrorum detestatio et testamenta fieri solebant.” It is not known what particular acts were reserved for the “comitia calata” assembled _centuriatim_; Mommsen thinks the inauguration of the Flamen Martialis outside the city (_Staatsr._ iii. p. 307).

[1247] p. 107.

[1248] pp. 107, 246.

[1249] p. 244.

[1250] Liv. i. 43 “Nec mirari oportet hunc ordinem, qui nunc est post expletas quinque et triginta tribus duplicate earum numero centuriis juniorum seniorumque, ad institutam ab Servio Tullio summam non convenire.” Cf. Dionys. iv. 21. The description of Cicero (_de Rep._ ii. 22, 39 and 40) probably refers to the Servian arrangement, although Mommsen (_Staatsr._ iii. p. 275) holds that it refers to the reformed _comitia_. The description given in the text is in essentials that of Pantagathus (died 1567) _ap. Ursinum in_ Liv. i. 43. For the different systems that have been adopted see Willems _Le Droit Public_ p. 97. Mommsen (l.c.) admits the 70 votes for the 70 centuries of the first class, but thinks that the 280 centuries of the other classes were so combined as to form but 100 votes; the total votes being 70 + 100 + 5 + 18 = 193, as before.

[1251] p. 73.

[1252] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33, 82 “Ecce Dolabellae comitiorum dies: sortitio praerogativae: quiescit. Renuntiatur, tacet. Prima classis vocatur: renuntiatur. Deinde, ita ut assolet, suffragia; tum secunda classis.”

[1253] Liv. xliii. 16 “cum ex duodecim centuriis equitum octo censorem condemnassent, multaeque aliae primae classis.” It would seem as though the _sex suffragia_ (p. 73) voted with or after the first class. Drakenborch would read _octodecim_ for _duodecim_, but this would seem to give too small a number of condemnatory votes amongst the _equites_.

[1254] Cic. _pro Planc._ 20, 49.

[1255] Hence such expressions as _Aniensis juniorum_, _Veturia juniorum_, _Galeria juniorum_ (Liv. xxiv. 7; xxvi. 22; xxvii. 6).

[1256] App. _B.C._ i. 59.

[1257] See Appendix on the _comitia tributa_.

[1258] p. 107.

[1259] Liv. xxv. 4 (212 B.C.) “Tribuni plebem rogaverunt plebesque ita scivit, ‘Si M. Postumius ante K. Maias non prodisset citatusque eo die non respondisset neque excusatus esset, videri eum in exilio esse, bonaque ejus venire, ipsi aqua et igni placere interdici”; ib. xxvi. 3 (211 B.C.) “Cn. Fulvius exulatum Tarquinios abiit. Id ei justum exilium esse scivit plebs.”

[1260] When Plutarch says (_C. Gracch._ 4) that C. Gracchus gave the right of trying such cases τῷ δήμῳ, this word may include the Plebs. Gracchus at least seems to have banished the ex-consul Popilius by means of a _plebiscitum_ (Cic. _pro Domo_ 31, 82 “ubi enim tuleras ut mihi aqua et igni interdiceretur? quod Gracchus de P. Popilio ... tulit”).

[1261] App. _B.C._ i. 59.

[1262] This conclusion has been drawn from the words of Cicero (_in Verr._ Act i. 13, 38) “judiciis ad senatorium ordinem translatis sublataque populi Romani in unum quemque vestrum potestate.”

[1263] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 7, 18 “Quod populus per religionem sacerdotia mandare non poterat, ut minor pars populi vocaretur.”

[1264] For this presidency by the youngest pontifex (the one, i.e., who stood the least chance of election) see Liv. xxv. 5 (212 B.C.). From Cic. _ad Brut._ i. 5, 4 it follows that the consuls had something to do with arranging the elections, but not that they were ever the presidents.

[1265] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 7, 18; Vell. ii. 12, 3.

[1266] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 37.

[1267] Macrob. _Sat._ i. 16, 29 “Julius Caesar XVI auspiciorum libro negat nundinis contionem advocari posse, id est cum populo agi ideoque nundinis Romanorum haberi comitia non posse.”

[1268] Varro _L.L._ v. 155 “comitium ab eo quod coibant eo comitiis curiatis et litium causa.”

[1269] Liv. vi. 20; Plin. _H.N._ xvi. 10, 37.

[1270] Liv. vii. 16.

[1271] The change to the Forum is perhaps post-Gracchan; see Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. p. 385. Cf. the prescription of the _lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus_ (p. 242).

[1272] Gell. xiii. 15, 1 “In edicto consulum, quo edicunt quis dies comitiis centuriatis futurus sit.” “Comitia edicere” (Liv. xxiii. 31) and “comitia indicere” (Liv. iv. 6) are employed as descriptive of this act.

[1273] Festus p. 224 “promulgari leges dicuntur cum primum in vulgus eduntur, quasi provulgari.”

[1274] Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. p. 370.

[1275] Schol. Bob. to Cic. _pro Sest._ 64, 135 (p. 310) “(lex) Licinia et Junia ... illud cavebat ne clam aerario legem ferri liceret.” For registration in the _aerarium_ at the time of promulgation cf. Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 4, 11. Clodius’ law exiling Cicero in 58 B.C. was amended (Cic. _ad Att._ iii. 2 “praesertim nondum rogatione correcta”), but whether before or after promulgation is not clear.

[1276] Dionysius, Plutarch, and Priscian explain _trinum nundinum_ as the third market-day, an interval of _trinarum nundinarum_, i.e. seventeen days; but Mommsen has made out a good case for its being three _nundina_, i.e. intervals of eight days (_Staatsr._ iii. p. 375).

[1277] p. 164.

[1278] p. 38.

[1279] Varro _L.L._ vi. 91 “comitiatum praeco populum vocet ad te, et eum de muris vocet praeco.”

[1280] The herald is not mentioned in connexion with the _concilium plebis_. The _comitia curiata_ were summoned by a _lictor curiatius_. See Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. p. 386.

[1281] Gell. xv. 27; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 27.

[1282] Varro _L.L._ vi. 92; Plut. _C. Gracch._ 3.

[1283] “Sollemne carmen precationis” (Liv. xxxix. 15).

[1284] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 4, 11 “qui agent ... rem populum docento”; Quintil. _Inst. Or._ ii. 4, 33 “Romanis pro contione suadere ac dissuadere moris fuit.”

[1285] Except perhaps at the _comitia centuriata_ (Momms. iii. p. 395), but this body had almost ceased to be a legislative assembly.

[1286] p. 247.

[1287] Originally _licium_, later _saepta_ or _ovile_.

[1288] Liv. ii. 56; cf. Asc. _in Cornel._ p. 70 “discedere, quod verbum ... significat ... [ut] in suam quisque tribum discedat, in qua est suffragium laturus.”

[1289] Hence the expression _ferre punctum_ (Cic. _pro Planc._ 22, 53).

[1290] Liv. v. 13; iii. 21.

[1291] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. cc. 15, 16.

[1292] Hence the discovery of a fraud at an election through tablets being μιᾷ χειρὶ γεγραμμέναις (Plut. _Cat. Min._ 46).

[1293] Cic. _cum Sen. Gr. eg._ 11, 28; _in Pis._ 15, 36.

[1294] Plin. _H.N._ xxxiii. 2, 31; Cic. _cum Sen. Gr. eg._ 7, 17.

[1295] p. 253.

[1296] The first curia or tribe is the _principium_. See the prescription of the _lex Quinctia_ (p. 242). Even after the ballot was introduced the name of the first voter in a division was specified (_primus scivit_, l.c.).

[1297] _Tribus_ or _centurias non explere_ is said of such candidates (Liv. iii. 64; xxxvii. 47). Cf. Liv. xxii. 35.

[1298] Cic. _in Pis._ 15, 36 “hoc certe video quod indicant tabulae publicae vos rogatores, vos diribitores, vos custodes fuisse tabularum.” It is the list of votes as certified by the guardians and tellers rather than the separate voting tablets that Cicero here speaks of. But the tablets themselves were kept for a time in _loculi_ (Varro _R.R._ iii. 5, 18).

[1299] Cic. _de Leg._ iii. 20, 46 “Legum custodiam nullam habemus. Itaque eae leges sunt quas apparisores nostri volunt; a librariis petimus.”

[1300] See the evidences collected by Mommsen (_Staatsr._ iii. pp. 418-419). It is from this practice that _figere_ and _refigere_ are used of the publication and annulling of laws.

[1301] p. 219.

[1302] Cic. _pro Sest._ 65, 137 “senatum reipublicae custodem, praesidem, propugnatorem collocaverunt (majores); hujus ordinis auctoritate uti magistratus et quasi ministros gravissimi consilii esse voluerunt.”

[1303] Festus p. 142 “mulleos genus calceorum aiunt esse, quibus reges Albanorum primi, deinde patricii sunt usi.”

[1304] Hence the distinction between the patrician and plebeian form of shoe (Mommsen _Staatsr._ iii. p. 891). In the time of Cato the elder this footgear was only worn by the plebeian senator “qui magistratum curulem cepisset” (Festus l.c.).

[1305] For an investiture of boys with the _latus clavus_ earlier than the rule of Augustus, see Suet. _Aug._ 94.

[1306] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22 “post lege Sullae viginti (quaestores) creati supplendo senatui.”

[1307] Gell. iv. 10, 8 “Erat ... jus senatori ut sententiam rogatus diceret ante quicquid vellet aliae rei et quoad vellet.” For this practice of _egredi relationem_ see Tac. _Ann._ ii. 33.

[1308] “Delenda est Carthago” (Florus ii. 15); cf. App. _Lib._ 69.

[1309] An attempt to violate this order was made in 56 B.C., “cum Lupus tribunus pl.... intendere coepit ante se oportere discessionem facere quam consules. Ejus orationi vehementer ab omnibus reclamatum est; erat enim et iniqua et nova” (Cic. _ad Fam._ i. 2, 2).

[1310] The consul Marcellus thus dismissed the Senate in 50 B.C. on its favouring the proposal that both Pompeius and Caesar should lay down their commands (App. _B.C._ ii. 30).

[1311] Gell. iv. 10, 8.

[1312] ib. l.c.; Suet. _Caes._ 20.

[1313] Gell. xiv. 7, 9 (from the _Commentarius_ of Varro) “singulos autem debere consuli gradatim incipique a consulari gradu. Ex quo gradu semper quidem antea primum rogari solitum qui princeps in senatum lectus esset; tum autem, cum haec scriberet, novum morem institutum refert per ambitionem gratiamque ut is primus rogaretur quem rogare vellet qui haberet senatum, dum is tamen ex gradu consulari esset.” For this _novus mos_ cf. Cic. _ad Att._ i. 13, 2 (61 B.C.) “Primum igitur scito primum me non esse rogatum sententiam praepositumque esse nobis pacificatorem Allobrogum” (C. Calpurnius Piso, a relative of the presiding consul).

[1314] Sall. _Cat._ 50 (in the debate on the Catilinarian conspirators) “D. Junius Silanus primus sententiam rogatus quod eo tempore consul designatus erat.”

[1315] Festus p. 210 “(Pedarius senator) ita appellator quia tacitus transeundo ad eum, cujus sententiam probat, quid sentiat indicat.” Cf. Gell. iii. 18. The explanation cited by Festus is true only so far as it expresses a usual circumstance of debate. The name _pedarius_ is probably derived from the absence of the curule chair (Gavius Bassus ap. Gell. l.c.).

[1316] Vell. ii. 35 “Hic tribunus plebis designatus ... paene inter ultimos interrogatus sententiam”; Cic. _ad Att._ xii. 21, 1 “Cur ergo in sententiam Catonis? Quia verbis luculentioribus et pluribus rem eandem (i.e. the opinion already expressed by _consulares_) comprehenderat.”

[1317] See p. 270 n. 2.

[1318] In a rough estimate of the house (61 B.C.) Cicero mentions 15 on one side of a question, “quite 400” on the other (_ad Att._ i. 14, 5). On Curio’s proposal in 50 B.C. that both Pompeius and Caesar should lay down their commands, 22 dissented, 370 approved (App. _B.C._ ii. 30). In the latter case there seems to have been no formal division (see p. 268 n. 2); and in both the small numbers may be the result of exact computation, the large either of a guess or of a deduction drawn from an already counted quorum.

[1319] “Verbo adsentiri” (Sall. _Cat._ 52); cf. Cic. _ad Fam._ v. 2, 9 “sedens iis adsensi.”

[1320] “In alienam sententiam pedibus ire” (Gell. iii. 18, 1).

[1321] The invitation to divide on the _sententia_ was couched in the form “Qui hoc censetis, illuc transite: qui alia omnia, in hanc partem” (Festus p. 261). Hence the colloquial phrase “ire in alia omnia” for negativing a proposal at the Senate (Cic. _ad Fam._ i. 2, 1).

[1322] Cic. _ad Att._ i. 14, 3 “totum hunc locum, quem ego ... soleo pingere, de flamma, de ferro—nosti illas ληκύθους.”

[1323] p. 179.

[1324] Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 8, 5 ff. In § 6 we find the formula “Si quis huic s. c. intercesserit, senatui placere auctoritatem perscribi.”

[1325] ib. l.c. § 6 “Pr. Kal. Octobres in aede Apollinis scrib. adfuerunt L. Domitius Cn. f. Fab. Ahenobarbus,” etc.

[1326] p. 148.

[1327] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10; App. _B.C._ i. 12.

[1328] Polyb. xxx. 4. For the motive of the veto see Liv. xlv. 21 “M. Juventius Thalna ... praetor novo maloque exemplo rem ingressus erat, quod, ante non consulto senatu, non consulibus certioribus factis, de sua unius sententia rogationem ferret vellent juberentne Rhodiis bellum indici, cum antea semper prius senatus de bello consultus esset, deinde ex auctoritate patrum ad populum latum.”

[1329] Suet. _Caes._ 16 (Caesar supported Metellus in carrying) “turbulentissimas leges adversus collegarum intercessionem ... donec ambo administratione reipublicae decreto patrum submoverentur.”

[1330] In this case the prohibition was effected through the coercive power of the consul springing from his _majus imperium_ (Dio Cass. xlii. 23).

[1331] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 30 “vetere senatus consulto quaestio in caput domini prohibebatur.”

[1332] Cic. _ad Att._ v. 21, 13 (50 B.C.) “cum senatus consultum modo factum sit ... in creditorum causa, ut centesimae perpetuo faenore ducerentur.”

[1333] Ascon. _in Cornel._ p. 58.

[1334] M. Brutus had gained from the Senate the validation of a bond (_syngrapha_), by which an exorbitant rate of interest was demanded from the government of Salamis in Cyprus. Bonds of this kind, through which obligations were incurred by provincials at Rome, had been rendered illegal by a _lex Gabinia_ of 67 B.C. (Cic. _ad Att._ v. 21, 12).

[1335] Cic. _pro Domo_ 16, 41 “judicavit senatus M. Drusi legibus, quae contra legem Caeciliam et Didiam latae essent, populum non teneri.” The account that the Livian laws were shelved as _contra auspicia_ (Ascon. _in Cornel._ p. 68 “Philippus cos.... obtinuit a senatu, ut leges ejus omnes uno s. c. tollerentur. Decretum est enim contra auspicia esse latas neque eis teneri populum”) may contain one of the grounds of their abrogation.

[1336] Cic. _ad Att._ iii. 15, 5 “Quod te cum Culleone scribis de privilegio locutum, est aliquid, sed multo est melius abrogari.”

[1337] p. 204.

[1338] Liv. xxv. 4; Sall. _Cat._ 50; Ascon. _in Milon._ p. 44. The Senate in this way sometimes interprets a criminal law and extends its incidence. See Cic. _de Har. Resp._ 8, 15 “decrevit senatus eos qui id fecissent (i.e. who had disturbed the rebuilding of Cicero’s house) lege de vi, quae est in eos qui universam rem publicam oppugnassent (i.e. vi publica) teneri.”

[1339] Cic. _ad Att._ i. 13, 3 “Credo enim te audisse, cum apud Caesarem pro populo fieret, venisse eo muliebri vestitu virum ... mentionem a Q. Cornificio in senatu factam ... postea rem ex senatus consulto ad pontifices relatam, idque ab iis nefas esse decretum; deinde ex senatus consulto consules rogationem promulgasse.”

[1340] Liv. viii. 18.

[1341] ib. xl. 43 (180 B.C.) “A. C. Maenio praetore (cui, provincia Sardinia cum evenisset, additum erat ut quaereret de veneficiis longius ab urbe decem millibus passuum) literae adlatae _se jam tria millia hominum damnasse_.”

[1342] Liv. xxxix. 41 (184 B.C.); cf. ix. 26 (314 B.C.) and the instance cited in the next note. In such instances of _quaestiones_ extended to Italy, it is not clear whether _socii_ as well as _cives_ were executed summarily by Roman magistrates.

[1343] ib. xxxix. 18. On this point see Zumpt _Criminalrecht der Römer_ i. 2 p. 212.

[1344] _C.I.L._ i. n. 196 (a letter from the consuls to some unknown magistrates of the _ager Teuranus_ in Brutii) l. 24 “eorum (i.e. the Senate) sententia ita fuit ‘sei ques esent, quei avorsum ead fecisent, quam suprad scriptum est, eeis rem caputalem faciendam censuere.’”

[1345] The consul was armed against C. Gracchus, the consuls in 63; the consuls, praetors, and tribunes in 100 B.C.; the interrex, proconsul, and all other magistrates with _imperium_ in 77 B.C.

[1346] The decree proposed to meet the threatened revolution of M. Lepidus in 77 B.C. ran as follows: “quoniam M. Lepidus exercitum privato consilio paratum cum pessimis et hostibus rei publicae contra hujus ordinis auctoritatem ad urbem ducit, uti Appius Claudius interrex cum Q. Catulo pro consule et ceteris, quibus imperium est, urbi praesidio sint operamque dent ne quid res publica detrimenti capiat” (from speech of Philippus in Sall. _Hist._ lib. i. frgt. 77, § 22). The historical instances of the employment of this power are against C. Gracchus and his adherents in 121 B.C., in the tumult of Saturninus (100), the first Sullan restoration (88), by the anti-Sullans (82), at the threatened revolution of M. Lepidus (77), in the Catilinarian conspiracy (63), during the disturbances raised by Q. Metellus (62), and those preceding the sole consulship of Pompeius (52), against Caesar (49), against Dolabella and M. Antonius (43).

[1347] Cf. Sall. _Cat._ 50 “consul ... convocato senatu refert quid de eis fieri placeat, qui in custodiam traditi erant. Sed eos paulo ante frequens senatus judivcaerat contra rem publicam fecisse.”

[1348] Although the _ultimum senatus consultum_ had not been passed against Ti. Gracchus, the condemnation of his adherents without appeal (Vell. ii. 7; Val. Max. iv. 7, 1) was the exercise of the jurisdiction of martial law. It was this jurisdiction which elicited the _plebiscitum_ of C. Gracchus.

[1349] Cic. _pro Rab._ 4, 12 “C. Gracchus legem tulit ne de capite civium Romanorum injussu vestro judicaretur.”

[1350] Schol. Ambros. p. 370 “Quia sententiam (wrongly for “legem”; see Zumpt _Criminalrecht_ i. 2 p. 73) tulerat Gracchus ne quis in civem Romanum capitalem sententiam diceret.” Cf. Cic. _pro Sest._ 28, 61 “Consule me, (Cato), cum esset designatus tribunus plebis, obtulit in discrimen vitam suam: dixit eam sententiam, cujus invidiam capitis periculo sibi praestandam videbat.” So Dio Cassius (xxxviii 14), in speaking of the first bill of Clodius against Cicero, says ἔφερε μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν βουλήν, ὅτι τοῖς τε ὑπάτοις τὴν φυλακὴν τῆς πόλεως ... προσετετάχει.

[1351] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 4 τὸν δὲ (νόμον εἰσέφερε) εἴ τις ἄρχων ἄκριτον ἐκκεκηρύχοι πολίτην, κατ’ αὐτοῦ διδόντα κρίσιν τῷ δήμῳ. δῆμος here may mean either _populus_ or _plebs_; but Gracchus, as tribune, put his own law into force against Popilius (Cic. _pro Domo_ 31, 82).

[1352] Cic. _in Cat._ iv. 5, 10 “At vero C. Caesar intelligit legem Semproniam esse de civibus Romanis constitutam; qui autem rei publicae sit hostis eum civem esse nullo modo posse.”

[1353] Cic. _in Pis._ 4, 9; _pro Sest._ 25, 55; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13.

[1354] Cic. _ad Q. fr._ ii. 3, 5 (56 B.C.) “senatus consultum factum est ut sodalitates decuriatique discederent lexque de iis ferretur ut, qui non discessissent, ea poena quae est de vi tenerentur.” The _sodalitates_ were clubs of the type of the Greek ἑταιρεῖαι, the _decuriati_ probably electioneering associations.

[1355] Cic. _ad Att._ i. 16, 12 (61 B.C.) “senatus consulta duo jam facta sunt odiosa ... unum, ut apud magistratus inquiri liceret, alterum, cujus domi divisores habitarent, adversus rem publicam.”

[1356] Liv. ix. 8-12; Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 7; Cic. _de Off._ iii. 30, 109; Sall. _Jug._ 39.

[1357] Sall. _Jug._ 39 “senatus ita, uti par fuerat, decernit suo atque populi injussu nullum potuisse foedus fieri.”

[1358] Polyb. vi. 14 ὑπὲρ εἰρήνης οὗτος (ὁ δῆμος) βουλεύεται καὶ πολέμου. καὶ μὴν περὶ συμμαχίας καὶ διαλύσεως καὶ συνθηκῶν οὑτός ἐστιν ὁ βεβαιῶν ἕκαστα τούτων καὶ κύρια ποιῶν ἢ τοὐναντίον.

[1359] The Gaditani approach the Senate for the renovation of a treaty made with a pro-magistrate in 78 B.C. Cicero questions its validity (_pro Balbo_ 15, 34) on the ground that the people was not consulted. The passage illustrates both the Senate’s exercise of this power and the continuance of a controversy as to its right.

[1360] Hence the institution of the _Graecostasis_. Varro (_L.L._ v. 165) describes it as “sub dextra hujus (the Rostra) a comitio locus substructus ubi nationum subsisterent legati, qui ad senatum essent missi; is Graecostasis appellatus a parte ut multa.”

[1361] So the Numantian envoys in 36 B.C. are received ἔξω τοῦ τείχους (Dio _fr._ 79). As a rule the appeal was made to the nearest _imperator_, and his representations might accord such legati a reception within the city. See Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. 2 p. 1150.

[1362] Liv. _Ep._ xlvi. “in commune lex lata est ne cui regi Romam venire liceret.” Cf. Polyb. xxx. 17.

[1363] Cic. _ad Q. fr._ ii. 13, 3 “Appius interpretatur ... quod Gabinia sanctum sit, etiam cogi ex Kal. Febr. usque ad Kal. Mart. legatis senatum quotidie dare.”

[1364] Polyb. xxii. 24; Liv. xlv. 17.

[1365] For the attempt made by the _lex Sempronia_ to obviate this power see p. 201.

[1366] Cic. _ad Fam._ v. 2, 3 (to Metellus Celer, proconsul of Cisalpine Gaul, 62 B.C.) “Nihil dico de sortitione vestra: tantum te suspicari volo nihil in ea re per collegam meum me insciente esse factum.” Cf. _ad Att._ i. 16, 8.

[1367] Liv. xlv. 13; Dittenberger n. 240. The Senate sometimes referred questions respecting the internal affairs of these states to Roman _patroni_, with whom they had entered into relations of clientship (Liv. ix. 20; Cic. _pro Sulla_ 21, 60).

[1368] _lex de Termessibus_ ii. 6 “Nei quis magistratus ... meilites ... introducito ... nisei senatus nominatim ... decreverit.”

[1369] Sall. _Jug._ 62 “Metellus propere cunctos senatorii ordinis ex hibernis accersi jubet: eorum et aliorum, quos idoneos ducebat, consilium habet.” Cf. c. 104 “Marius ... Sullam (the quaestor) ab Utica venire jubet, item L. Bellienum praetorem, praeterea omnes undique senatorii ordinis, quibuscum mandata Bocchi cognoscit.”

[1370] Cic. _ad Att._ ii. 16, 4 “Illud tamen, quod scribit (Q. Cicero, governor of Asia) animadvertas velim, de portorio circumvectionis; ait se de consilii sententia rem ad senatum rejecisse.”

[1371] Cic. _de Off._ ii. 22, 76 “tantum in aerarium pecuniae invexit (Paulus) ut unius imperatoris praeda finem attulerit tributorum.” Cf. Plut. _Paul._ 38.

[1372] Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. 2 pp. 1112-20.

[1373] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 14 οὐδὲν ἔφη τῇ συγκλήτῳ βουλεύεσθαι προσήκειν, ἀλλὰ τῳ δήμῳ γνώμην αὐτὸς προθήσειν.

[1374] p. 229.

[1375] The Senate invalidated the _locationes_ of the censors of 184 B.C. (Liv. xxxix. 44 “locationes cum senatus precibus et lacrimis publicanorum victus induci et de integro locari jussisset”). A vain appeal was made by the _publicani_ of Asia to remit their contracts in 60 B.C. (Cic. _ad Att._ i. 17, 9; cf. ii. 1, 8).

[1376] The business of draining the Pomptine marshes is entrusted to a consul (Liv. _Ep._ xlvi.), the building of an aqueduct to a praetor (Frontin. _de Aquaed._ 7).

[1377] Cic. _ad Att._ iii. 24.

[1378] This was necessary when the supplies were destined for the army. See Sall. _Jug._ 104 “(Rufus) qui quaestor stipendium in Africam portaverat.” Compare the section on provincial government.

[1379] The phrase for opening this credit is _attribuere_. See Liv. xliv. 16 “ad opera publica facienda cum eis (censoribus) dimidium ex vectigalibus ejus anni (169 B.C.) attributum ex senatus consulto a quaestoribus esset.”

[1380] p. 194.

[1381] Cic. _ad Fam._ i. 1 sq.

[1382] Cic. _ad Q. fr._ ii. 6, 4 and 5 (56 B.C.) “consul est egregius Lentulus ... Dies comitiales exemit omnes. Nam etiam Latinae instaurantur: nec tamen deerant supplicationes. Sic legibus perniciosissimis obsistitur.”

[1383] In the later Republic these periods of thanksgiving had reached the inordinate length of fifteen, twenty, and even fifty days (Caes. _Bell. Gall._ ii. 35; iv. 38; Cic. _Phil._ xiv. 11, 29). At this period the _supplicatio_ was considered the usual preliminary of a triumph; but Cato explains to Cicero that this was not always the case (_ad Fam._ xv. 5, 2 “Quodsi triumphi praerogativam putas supplicationem et idcirco casum potius quam te laudari mavis, neque supplicationem sequitur semper triumphus,” etc.).

[1384] Cic. _pro Domo_ 49, 127 “video ... esse legem veterem tribuniciam quae vetat injussu plebis aedes, terram, aram consecrari.” The _jussus plebis_ probably implies that of the _populus_ as well. See Momms. _Staatsr._ iii. 2 p. 1050.

[1385] The Senate alone is mentioned as decreeing the reception of the _Magna Mater_ in 205 B.C., and as ordaining the erection of her temple (Liv. xxix. 10 and 11; xxxvi. 36).

[1386] See p. 56.

[1387] Dionys. ii. 72; Liv. i. 32; cf. Plin. _H.N._ xxii. 2.

[1388] Polyb. iii. 25; Liv. i. 24. Yet the ceremonies they describe are different. In that related by Polybius the stone has a passive signification; the priest hurls it from him and prays, “May I only be cast out, if I break my oath, as this stone is now.” In that described by Livy, “the pig represents the perjurer, the flint-knife the instrument of divine vengeance” (Strachan-Davidson’s Polybius, _Proleg._ viii.), and Jupiter is here to strike the _people_ that fails in the compact. Possibly the two forms of ritual were used in different kinds of treaties; the first, perhaps, in commercial compacts, the second in agreements that closed a war.

[1389] Liv. iv. 17; Middleton _Ancient Rome_ i. p. 245.

[1390] Liv. v. 36.

[1391] See p. 283.

[1392] Liv. xxii. 61.

[1393] Varro _L.L._ v. 3 “multa verba aliud nunc ostendunt, aliud ante significabant, ut hostis: nam tum eo verbo dicebant peregrinum qui suis legibus uteretur, nunc dicunt eum quem tum dicebant perduellem.” Cf. Cic. _de Off._ i. 12, 37.

[1394] p. 284.

[1395] Polyb. iii. 22.

[1396] “Aeduos, fratres consanguineosque saepe numero a senatu appellatos” (Caes. _B.G._ i. 33).

[1397] Cf. p. 284 for this rule and for the exception to it made in 166 B.C.

[1398] In the first treaty with Carthage two kinds of legal satisfaction are given to Roman traders. In Libya and Sardinia the state guarantees the debt; in the Sicilian cities under the Carthaginian protectorate Romans and Carthaginians are on an equal footing (Polyb. iii. 22).

[1399] Hartmann (O. E.) _Der ordo judiciorum und die judicia extraordinaria der Römer_ Thl. i. pp. 229 ff.

[1400] Festus p. 274 “Reciperatio est, ut ait Gallus Aelius, cum inter populum et reges nationesque et civitates peregrinas lex convenit quomodo per reciperatores reddantur res reciperenturque resque privatas inter se persequantur.” See Keller _Civilprocess_ p. 36; Rudorff _Rechtsgeschichte_ ii. p. 34.

[1401] p. 207.

[1402] In the treaty supposed to be the work of Spurius Cassius and to date from 493 B.C. the following clause was found: τῶν τ’ ἰδιωτικῶν συμβολαίων αἱ κρίσεις ἐν ἡμέραις γιγνέσθωσαν δέκα, παρ’ οἷς ἂν γένηται τὸ συμβόλαιον (Dionys. vi. 95).

[1403] Dionys. iii. 34, 51.

[1404] ib. vi. 95; Festus p. 241.

[1405] Dionys. viii. 70, 74.

[1406] p. 295.

[1407] App. _B.C._ i. 23. Dionysius (viii. 72) speaks of the Latins and Hernicans exercising voting privileges (ψηφοφορία) in Rome in the year 486 B.C. But it is impossible that they could have been enrolled in the centuries, which was a Roman army list, and no assembly of the tribes had yet received state recognition.

[1408] Dionys. viii. 69, 72, 74.

[1409] Livy, by attributing _civitas_ to Tusculum (vi. 26) and calling the Tusculans _cives_ (vi. 36), seems to imply that they were full citizens. In this case the city could not have been from the first a _municipium_, the name it bears later (“municipium antiquissimum” Cic. _pro Planc._ 8, 19). Festus, however (p. 127), includes Tusculum amongst the states with _civitas sine suffragio_, i.e. amongst the true _municipia_, and we know that Livy (x. 1) uses _civitas_ for _civitas sine suffragio_. The Satricani are _cives Romani_ in 319 B.C. (Liv. ix. 16). Satricum had formerly belonged to the thirty Latin cities (Dionys. v. 61).

[1410] Liv. viii. 14 “Ceteris Latinis populis (i.e. other than those with whom special arrangements were made) conubia commerciaque et concilia inter se ademerunt.”

[1411] Liv. ix. 43 “Hernicorum tribus populis, Aletrinati, Verulano, Ferentinati, quia maluerunt quam civitatem, suae leges redditae; conubiumque inter ipsos, quod aliquamdiu soli Hernicorum habuerunt, permissum. Anagninis, quique arma Romanis intulerant, civitas sine suffragii latione data: concilia conubiaque adempta, et magistratibus, praeterquam sacrorum curatione, interdictum.”

[1412] p. 299.

[1413] Dionys. vii. 13; Plut. _Cor._ 13.

[1414] Hyginus p. 176 “cum signis et aquila et primis ordinibus ac tribunis deducebantur”; Tac. _Ann._ xiv. 27 “non enim, ut olim, universae legiones deducebantur cum tribunis et centurionibus et sui cujusque ordinis militibus.”

[1415] Varro _L.L._ v. 143; Serv. ad _Aen._ v. 755.

[1416] Liv. xxvii. 38 (207 B.C.) “colonos etiam maritimos, qui sacrosanctam vacationem dicebantur habere, dare milites cogebant”; xxxvi. 3 (191 B.C.) “contentio orta cum colonis maritimis ... nam, cum cogerentur in classem, tribunos plebei appellarunt.”

[1417] Cic. _pro Balbo_ 11, 28; _pro Caec._ 34, 100.

[1418] p. 203.

[1419] Festus p. 233 “Praefecturae eae appellabantur in Italia, in quibus et jus dicebatur et nundinae agebantur; et erat quaedam earum res publica, neque tamen magistratus suos habebant; in quas legibus praefecti mittebantur quodannis, qui jus dicerent. Quarum genera fuerunt duo: alterum, in quas solebant ire praefecti quattuor, [qui] viginti sex virum numero populi suffragio creati erant ... alterum, in quas ibant quos praetor urbanus quodannis in quaeque loca miserat legibus.” Amongst the _praefecturae_ which he enumerates are the Roman colonies of Volturnum, Liternum, Puteoli, and Saturnia.

[1420] Liv. viii. 14 “Campanis ... Fundanisque et Formianis ... civitas sine suffragio data. Cumanos Suessulanosque ejusdem juris conditionisque, cujus Capuam, esse placuit.” For Atella and Calatia see Festus pp. 131, 233.

[1421] Liv. x. 1.

[1422] ib. ix. 43, quoted p. 299.

[1423] Festus p. 131 “municipes erant qui ex aliis civitatibus Romam venissent, quibus non licebat magistratum capere sed tantum muneris partem, ut fuerunt Cumani, Acerrani, Atellani, qui et cives Romani erant et in legione merebant, sed dignitates non capiebant”; cf. p. 127 “participes ... fuerunt omnium rerum ad munus fungendum una cum Romanis civibus praeterquam de suffragio ferendo aut magistratu capiendo.” The words “qui ex aliis civitatibus Romam venissent” in the first definition do not describe the _municipes_ of historical times; they suggest a possible origin for the institution. These rights were first conditioned by domicile in Rome, but the condition was subsequently removed.

[1424] p. 235.

[1425] Festus p. 233, quoted p. 302.

[1426] Liv. viii. 14.

[1427] ib. xxiv. 19; xxvi. 6.

[1428] The language of Livy makes it doubtful whether he conceives the _foedus_ to have continued after the _civitas_ had been conferred. They are different stages of rights, but he may mean them to be cumulative. In xxxi. 31 we read “cum ... ipsos (Campanos) foedere primum, deinde conubio atque cognationibus, postremo civitate nobis conjunxissemus” (cf. xxiii. 5). The _civitas_ here is probably the full citizenship conferred on individual Capuans. They are spoken of as _socii_ in 216 B.C. (xxiii. 5), and though the word is sometimes loosely used, it harmonises in its literal sense with the great constitutional privileges of the town.

[1429] As at Arpinum (Cic. _ad Fam._ xiii. 11, 3).

[1430] Festus p. 127 “quorum civitas universa in civitatem Romanam venit.”

[1431] It did not possess any magistracy for secular purposes (Liv. ix. 43 “magistratibus, praeterquam sacrorum curatione, interdictum”).

[1432] “in ditionem” (Liv. xxxvii. 45), “in potestatem” (xxxix. 54).

[1433] “in fidem” (ib. viii. 2).

[1434] Polyb. xx. 9, 12 παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις ἰσοδυναμεῖ τό τε εἰς τὴν πίστιν αὑτὸν ἐγχειρίσαι καὶ τὸ τὴν ἐπιτροπὴν δοῦναι περὶ αὑτοῦ τῷ κρατοῦντι.

[1435] Gell. x. 3, 19.

[1436] _Dig._ 49, 15, 7, 1 “liber populus est is qui nullius alterius populi potestati est subjectus.”

[1437] _Lex Antonia de Termessibus_ i. 8.

[1438] Plin. _Ep. ad Traj._ 92 (93).

[1439] Cic. _in Verr._ iii. 6, 13; cf. App. _B.C._ i. 102 (ἐπὶ συνθήκαις ἔνορκοι).

[1440] _Dig._ 49, 15, 7, 1 “hoc adjicitur, ut intellegatur alterum populum superiorem esse, non ut intellegatur alterum non esse liberum.” Cf. Cic. _pro Balbo_ 16, 35 “Id habet hanc vim, ut sit ille in foedere inferior.”

[1441] _Dig._ l.c. “is foederatus est item sive aequo foedere in amicitiam venit sive foedere comprehensum est ut is populus alterius populi majestatem comiter conservaret.”

[1442] _Lex Agraria_ 1. 21 “socii nominisve Latini, quibus ex formula togatorum [milites in terra Italia inperare solent].”

[1443] Liv. xxii. 57; xxvii. 10 “milites ex formula paratos esse.”

[1444] The number of troops required was decreed every year by the Senate (Liv. xli. 5 etc.), the consuls fixing the amount which each state was to send in proportion to its fighting strength.

[1445] Cic. _pro Balbo_ 9, 24.

[1446] Cic. _pro Balbo_ 8, 21 “innumerabiles aliae leges de civili jure sunt latae; quas Latini voluerunt, adsciverunt.”

[1447] Liv. xxxv. 7 (193 B.C.) “M. Sempronius tribunus plebis ... plebem rogavit plebesque scivit ut cum sociis ac nomine Latino creditae pecuniae jus idem quod cum civibus Romanis esset.” The enactment was produced by the discovery that Roman creditors escaped the usury laws by using Italians as their agents.

[1448] Macrob. _Sat._ iii. 17, 6.

[1449] Cic. _pro Balbo_ 8, 20 “foederatos populos fieri fundos oportere ... non magis est proprium foederatorum quam omnium liberorum.” For the formula of acceptance (“fundi—i.e. auctores—facti sunt”) cf. Festus p. 89.

[1450] Cic. _pro Balbo_ 24, 54 “Latinis, id est foederatis.”

[1451] The distinction is expressed in the familiar _socii ac nominis Latini_ (Liv. xli. 8), _socii et Latium_ (Sall. _Hist._ i. 17), and perhaps in _socii Latini nominis_, if this last expression is to be regarded as an asyndeton.

[1452] These twelve colonies, with the dates of their foundations, are—Ariminum (268 B.C.), Beneventum (268), Firmum (264), Aesernia (263), Brundisium (244), Spoletium (241), Cremona and Placentia (218), Copia (193), Valentia (192), Bononia (189), Aquileia (181).

[1453] The later Latin colonists have of right no _conubium_ with Rome (Ulp. _Reg._ v. 4 “Conubium habent cives Romani cum civibus Romanis; cum Latinis autem et peregrinis ita si concessum sit”). The change may have come with this last outburst of Latin colonisation in Italy; but it may be as late as the extension of _latinitas_ to the provinces. For the right of _commercium_ possessed by these colonies see Cic. _pro Caec._ 35, 102 “jubet enim (Sulla Volaterranos) eodem jure esse quo fuerint Ariminenses, quos quis ignorat duodecim coloniarum fuisse et a civibus Romanis hereditates capere potuisse?”

[1454] Appian (_B.C._ i. 23), speaking of C. Gracchus’ proposal to extend the citizenship, suggests a Latin right ψῆφον ἐν ταῖς Ῥωμαίων χειροτονίαις φέρειν. Livy, with reference to the year 212 B.C., speaks of the _sortitio_ as to the tribe or tribes in which the Latins should vote (xxv. 3, in the trial of Postumius “sitella ... lata est ut sortirentur ubi Latini suffragium ferrent”).

[1455] Liv. xli. 8 “Lex sociis ac nominis Latini, qui stirpem ex sese domi relinquerent, dabat ut cives Romani fierent.”

[1456] This was the _latinitas_ given to Cisalpine Gaul in 89 B.C. by a law of the consul Cn. Pompeius Strabo. Ascon. _in Pison._ p. 3 “Pompeius enim non novis colonis eas (Transpadanas colonias) constituit, sed veteribus incolis manentibus jus dedit Latii, ut possent habere jus quod ceterae Latinae coloniae, id est ut gerendo magistratus civitatem Romanam adipiscerentur.” Consequently when Caesar refounded Comum in this district, in accordance with the _lex Vatinia_ (59 B.C.), the new _civitas_ possessed this right (App. _B.C._ ii. 26).

[1457] _Lex Acilia_ l. 77; Cic. _pro Balbo_ 24, 54. The probable dates of these laws are 122 and 111 B.C. respectively.

[1458] The allies before the social war reckon as their chief grievance “per omnes annos atque omnia bella duplici numero se militum equitumque fungi” (Vell. ii. 15).

[1459] Liv. xlii. 1 “(L. Postumius Albinus) ... literas Praeneste misit, ut sibi magistratus obviam exiret, locum publice pararet, ubi deverteretur, jumentaque, cum exiret inde, praesto essent. Ante hunc consulem nemo unquam sociis in ulla re oneri aut sumptui fuit ... Injuria consulis ... et silentium ... Praenestinorum jus, velut probato exemplo, magistratibus fecit graviorum in dies talis generis imperiorum.”

[1460] C. Gracchus ap. Gell. x. 3, 3.

[1461] App. _B.C._ i. 21 and 34. According to Valerius Maximus (ix. 5, 1) Flaccus proposed to give the _provocatio_ to those “qui civitatem mutare noluissent.”

[1462] App. _B.C._ i. 23. Plutarch makes it a simple proposal of citizenship for the allies (_C. Gracch._ 5). The geographical limits of these proposed extensions are unknown. Velleius (ii. 6) remarks vaguely, with respect to the Gracchan law, “dabat civitatem omnibus Italicis, extendebat eam paene usque Alpis.”

[1463] App. _B.C._ i. 35; he promised to reintroduce the law περὶ τῆς πολιτείας. Liv. _Ep._ lxxi. “socios et Italicos populos spe civitatis Romanae sollicitavit”; Vell. ii. 14 “Tum conversus Drusi animus ... ad dandam civitatem Italiae.”

[1464] Diod. xxxvii. 2.

[1465] Cf. the words of Pontius Telesinus, the Samnite leader in the later struggle at the Colline gate (Vell. ii. 27), “eruendam delendamque urbem ... nunquam de futuros raptores Italicae libertatis lupos, nisi silva, in quam refugere solerent, esset excisa.” This, however, is an expression of Samnite rather than of Italian feeling.

[1466] App. _B.C._ i. 49; Cic. _pro Balbo_ 8, 21.

[1467] Only one clause of this law is known—that by which the _civitas_ was granted to _incolae_ enrolled on the registers of federate communities; they were to have the citizenship, if they made profession to the praetor within sixty days (Cic. _pro Arch._ 4, 7). It is difficult to believe that this cumbrous rule applied to the citizens of the towns.

[1468] The gradual nature of the incorporation is attested by the expression of Velleius (ii. 16), “paulatim deinde recipiendo in civitatem, qui arma aut non ceperant aut deposuerant maturius, vires refectae sunt.”

[1469] Vell. ii. 20 “Itaque cum ita civitas Italiae data esset, ut in octo tribus contribuerentur novi cives, ne potentia eorum et multitudo veterum civium dignitatem frangeret plusque possent recepti in beneficium quam auctores beneficii, Cinna in omnibus tribubus eos se distributurum pollicitus est.” Appian (_B.C._ i. 49) seems to speak of the creation of ten new tribes (δεκατεύοντες ἀπέφηναν ἑτέρας ἐν αἷς ἐχειροτόνουν ἔσχατοι). The attempt to reconcile these accounts by supposing that they refer to different classes of allies or are the respective products of the two acts of legislation (Kubitschek _Imp. Rom. trib. descr._; Beloch _der Italische Bund_) receives some epigraphic support, but rests either on a correction of Appian’s text or on the assumption that his account refers to ten of the _old_ tribes.

[1470] Liv. _Ep._ 84 “Novis civibus senatus consulto suffragium datum est,” a careless phrase of the epitomiser or copyist for the distribution through the tribes (Drakenborch). Sulla, in spite of his rescission of the rights of certain rebel towns, did not disturb this arrangement.

[1471] Augustus formed the plan of giving to the senates (_decuriones_) of the twenty-eight colonies which he founded in Italy the right of voting for the magistrates at Rome. They were to send their votes under seal (Suet. _Aug._ 46).

[1472] Liv. xxxviii. 36.

[1473] Cicero says that his grandfather, in or just before the consulship of Scaurus (115 B.C.), “restitit M. Gratidio ... ferenti legem tabellariam” (_de Leg._ iii. 16, 36).

[1474] _C.I.L._ i. p. 163.

[1475] A fragment of a constitution of Tarentum, dating apparently from a time not long subsequent to the _lex Julia_ of 90 B.C., has been preserved (_Fragmentum Tarentinum_ in _L’Année Épigraphique_, 1896, pp. 30, 31). Arpinum was undergoing reorganisation in 46 B.C. (Cic. _ad Fam._ xiii. 11, 3).

[1476] Cic. _in Verr._ v. 13, 34 “unum illud, quod ita fuit illustre notumque omnibus, ut nemo tam rusticanus homo L. Lucullo et M. Cotta consulibus (74 B.C.) Romam ex ullo municipio vadimonii causa venerit quin sciret jura omnia praetoris urbani nutu ... Chelidonis ... gubernari.”

[1477] Ascon. _in Pison._ p. 8.

[1478] This is proved both by the attempt of Crassus, as censor in 65 B.C., to place the Transpadanes on the register of citizens (Dio Cass. xxxvii. 9), and by Cicero’s comment on Marcellus’ action in scourging a citizen of Novum Comum in 51 B.C. (Cic. _ad Att._ v. 11, 2 “Marcellus foede in Comensi: etsi ille magistratum non gesserit, erat tamen Transpadanus”).

[1479] Dio Cass. xli. 36.

[1480] Cic. _ad Att._ v. 2, 3 “eratque rumor de Transpadanis, eos jussos IIIIviros creare. Quod si ita est, magnos motus timeo.”

[1481] App. _B.C._ v. 3 τήν τε γὰρ Κελτικὴν τὴν ἐντὸς Ἄλπεων ἐδόκει Καίσαρος ἀξιοῦντος (i.e. Octavianus after Philippi) αὐτόνομον ἀφιέναι, γνώμῃ τοῦ προτέρου Καίσαρος. Cf. iii. 30 and Dio Cass. xlviii. 12.

[1482] The name given to the district in the law _Gallia Cisalpeina_, _Gallia cis Alpeis_ (cc. 22 and 23) suits both epochs equally well, for Caesar had not made it a part of Italy. The fact that the _praetor urbanus_ is the central authority in jurisdiction (cc. 21 and 22) suits the Augustan epoch better.

[1483] _Lex Rubria_ cc. 21 and 22. For the _vadimonium_ cf. Cic. _in Verr._ v. 13, 34 (quoted p. 313).

[1484] Generally _quattuorviri_, this board being usually divided into two magistrates with higher jurisdiction (_duumviri juri dicundo_) and two police officials (_duumviri aediles_). Sometimes we find _IIIIviri dicundo_, perhaps a designation for the joint board, or, where the magistrates with aedilician power alone are referred to, _IIIIviri aediles_ or _aedilicia potestate_. See Wilmanns _Index_ pp. 620-622.

[1485] _Lex Julia mun._ l. 84. Cf. Cic. _in Pis._ 22, 51 “neque enim regio ulla fuit, nec municipium neque praefectura aut colonia, ex qua non ad me publice venerint gratulatum.”

[1486] Wilmanns _Index_ p. 618.

[1487] Sicily, Sardinia, Hither and Further Spain, Illyricum, Macedonia and Achaea (separated by Caesar), Africa, Asia, Gallia Narbonensis, Gallia Cisalpina, Bithynia, Cyrene with Crete, Cilicia and Syria.

[1488] The number is given by Pliny (_H.N._ iii. 88). In Cicero’s time there was about this number. He speaks of the appointment of 130 censors (_in Verr._ ii. 55, 137), two for each state (ib. 53, 133).

[1489] Cassiodorus _Chron._ ad A.U.C. 670 “Asiam in XLIIII. regiones Sulla distribuit.”

[1490] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 44. This division may be the work of Augustus.

[1491] pp. 244, 283.

[1492] p. 245.

[1493] Except that ownership of the soil is not always, as in Italy, the ground of exemption from taxation. On the free city of Termessus in Pisidia “free possession” is alone conferred.

[1494] See the _lex Antonia de Termessibus_ (71 B.C.), especially the clause which confers autonomy “so far as is consistent with this charter” (i. l. 7 “eique legibus sueis ita utunto ... quod advorsus hanc legem non fiat”).

[1495] Cic. _de Prov. Cons._ 3, 6. For the weakening of this respect for αὐτονομία in the Ciceronian period and Caesar’s attempt to strengthen it by law (probably the _lex Julia repetundarum_ of 59 B.C.) see Cic. _in Verr._ iii 89, 207; _in Pis._ 16, 37 (“lege Caesaris justissima atque optima populi liberi plane et vere erant liberi”).

[1496] Festus p. 218.

[1497] Cic. _in Verr._ ii. 13, 32; 15, 37; 16, 39; 24, 59.

[1498] Liv. xlv. 17 and 32.

[1499] Plin. _ad Traj._ 79 (83), 1.

[1500] As Cicero did in his government of Cilicia. See _ad Att._ vi. 2, 4 “omnes (civitates), suis legibus et judiciis usae, αὐτονομίαν adeptae, revixerunt”; vi. 1, 15 “multaque sum secutus Scaevolae (governor of Asia _circa_ 98 B.C.); in iis illud, in quo sibi libertatem censent Graeci datam, ut Graeci inter se disceptent suis legibus ... Graeci vero exsultant quod peregrinis judicibus utuntur.”

[1501] This we may gather from Cicero’s account of the proceedings of the native magistrates in Cilicia (_ad Att._ vi. 2, 5 “Mira erant in civitatibus ipsorum furta Graecorum, quae magistratus sui fecerant: quaesivi ipse de iis, qui annis decem proximis magistratum gesserant; aperte fatebantur”).

[1502] On the conquest of Epirus in 167 B.C., although all the Illyrians were declared _liberi_, only some were pronounced “non solum liberi sed etiam immunes” (Liv. xlv. 26).

[1503] Cf. Tac. _Hist._ iv. 74 “nam neque quies gentium sine armis neque arma sine stipendiis neque stipendia sine tributis haberi queunt.”

[1504] Liv. xlv. 29.

[1505] Cic. _pro Leg. Man._ 6, 14 “ceterarum provinciarum vectigalia, Quirites, tanta sunt ut iis ad ipsas provincias tutandas vix contenti esse possimus, Asia vero tam opima est et fertile ut ... facile omnibus terris antecellat.”

[1506] Gaius ii. 7 “in eo (provinciali) solo dominium populi Romani est vel Caesaris, nos autem possessionem tantum vel usumfructum habere videmur.” The theory is perhaps as old as the Gracchan period. C. Gracchus’ association of the Asiatic taxes with the censor (cf. p. 231) must have done a good deal to develop it. It is no wonder that this theory led to the view that the provinces were “quasi quaedam praedia populi Romani” (Cic. _in Verr._ ii. 3, 7).

[1507] These expressions are known only from the literature of the Empire; it may be a mere accident that in Republican literature _tributum_ seems never to be used of imperial taxation. The form _stipendium_ is preferred. In Liv. xxiii. 32 we have the _tributum_ of Sardinia mentioned with reference to Republican times. The _venditio tributorum_ and the ὠναί of Cilicia (Cic. _ad Fam._ iii. 8, 5; _ad Att._ v. 16, 2) probably refer to local taxes improperly sold to _publicani_.

[1508] Liv. xliii. 2 “(Hispani) impetraverunt ne frumenti aestimationem magistratus Romanus haberet.”

[1509] p. 319.

[1510] Cic. _in Verr._ iii. 33, 77.

[1511] ib. ii. 13, 32; 26, 63, etc.

[1512] ib. iii. 6, 12 “inter Siciliam ceterasque provincias ... in agrorum vectigalium ratione hoc interest, quod ceteris aut impositum vectigal est certum ... aut censoria locatio constituta est, ut Asiae lege Sempronia.”

[1513] Cf. Cic. _ad Q. fr._ i. 1, 11, 33 “nomen autem publicani aspernari non possunt, qui pendere ipsi vectigal sine publicano non potuerint, quod iis aequaliter Sulla discripserat.” The reference is to Sulla’s temporary abolition of the Gracchan principle of collection.

[1514] App. _B.C._ v. 4; Dio Cass. xlii. 6.

[1515] Nothing seems to be known about the conditions of sale of the provincial _portoria_, e.g. whether those of Asia were put up at Rome like the _decumae_.

[1516] Cic. _in Verr._ iii. cc. 81-96, 188-222.

[1517] Cic. _in Verr._ iii. 70, 163. Cf. Liv. xxxvi. 2 “idem L. Oppio de alteris decumis exigendis in Sardinia imperatum.” Sometimes this enforced sale of corn (_frumentum imperatum_) was required from free cities such as Halaesa, Centuripae, and Messana in Sicily (Cic. _in Verr._ iii 73, 170; iv. 9, 20).

[1518] pp. 201, 202.

[1519] p. 201.

[1520] Sall. _Jug._ 27; Cic. _de Prov. Cons._ 2, 3; _pro Domo_ 9, 24.

[1521] Cic. _ad Fam._ i. 9, 25.

[1522] Cf. Cic. _de Prov. Cons._ 15, 87 (if the consul of 55 B.C. succeeds Caesar on March 1, 54 B.C.) “Fuerit toto in consulatu sine provincia, cui fuerit, antequam designatus est, decreta provincia? Sortietur, an non? Nam et non sortiri absurdum est, et quod sortitus sis non habere. Proficiscetur paludatus? Quo? Quo pervenire ante certam diem non licebit. Januario, Februario provinciam non habebit. Kalendis ei denique Martiis nascetur repente provincia.”

[1523] Cic. _ad Fam._ i. 9, 25; xii. 4, 2.

[1524] Cic. _in Verr._ i. 13, 34 “pecunia attributa, numerata est. Profectus est quaestor in provinciam (Verres). Venit exspectatus in Galliam ad exercitum consularem cum pecunia.”

[1525] _Rationes referre_ (Cic. _in Verr._ i. 13, 36). In accordance with a _lex Julia_ (perhaps _repetundarum_) of Caesar’s, the accounts had to be deposited at the _aerarium_, and two copies in two cities of the province (Cic. _ad Fam._ v. 20, 2; Plut. _Cato Min._ 38).

[1526] p. 215.

[1527] Cic. _in Verr._ iii. 58, 134 “Quaestores, legatos ... multi missos fecerunt et de provincia decedere jusserunt, quod illorum culpa se minus commode audire arbitrarentur aut quod peccare ipsos aliqua in re judicarent.”

[1528] The transition is marked in 169 B.C. (Liv. xliv. 18 “Senatus Cn. Servilio consuli negotium dedit, ut is in Macedoniam, quos L. Aemilio videretur, legaret”).

[1529] Cicero delegates even jurisdiction to one of his _comites_, Volusius (_ad Att._ v. 21, 6). Other members of his retinue were his son Marcus and his brother Quintus. These intimates of the governor were spoken of as _contubernales_, _cohors_ _amicorum_, even as _cohors praetoria_ (Cic. _ad Q. fr._ i. 1, 4, 12), although this title was properly applied to the governor’s military guard.

[1530] p. 319, note 2.

[1531] Cic. _in Verr._ ii. 13, 32 “Siculi hoc jure sunt ut, quod civis cum cive agat, domi certet suis legibus.”

[1532] ib. “quod Siculus cum Siculo non ejusdem civitatis (agat), ut de eo praetor judices ex P. Rupilii decreto ... sortiatur.”

[1533] It is possible, however, that the principle here adopted was that the _judex_ should be of the nationality of the defendant.

[1534] Cic. l.c. “quod privatus a populo petit aut populus a privato, senatus ex aliqua civitate, qui judicet, datur, cum alternae civitates rejectae sunt.”

[1535] ib. “quod civis Romanus a Siculo petit, Siculus judex datur, quod Siculus a civi Romano, civis Romanus datur.”

[1536] ib. “ceterarum rerum selecti judices ex conventu civium Romanorum proponi solent.”

[1537] Cic. _ad Att._ vi. 1, 15 “multaque sum secutus Scaevolae; in iis illud, in quo sibi libertatem censent Graeci datam, ut Graeci inter se disceptent suis legibus ... Graeci vero exsultant quod peregrinis judicibus utuntur”; _ad Att._ vi. 2, 4 “omnes (civitates), suis legibus et judiciis usae, αὐτονομίαν adeptae, revixerunt.”

[1538] “Edictum Siciliense” (Cic. _in Verr._ i. 45, 117).

[1539] Extreme changes might be made a ground of complaint by the departing governor. Thus Cicero writes from Cilicia (50 B.C.) “Appius enim ad me ex itinere bis terve ... literas miserat, quod quaedam a se constituta rescinderem” (_ad Att._ vi. 1, 2).

[1540] Cic. _ad Fam._ iii. 8, 4.

[1541] Thus Cicero, governor of Cilicia, followed in some respects the edict of Mucius Scaevola, the former governor of Asia (Cic. _ad Att._ vi. 1, 15).

[1542] Cic. _ad Att._ vi. 1, 15 “unum (genus) est provinciale, in quo est de rationibus civitatum, de aere alieno, de usura, de syngraphis; in eodem omnia de publicanis. Alterum, quod sine edicto satis commode transigi non potest, de hereditatum possessionibus, de bonis possidendis vendendis, magistris faciendis: quae ex edicto et postulari et fieri solent. Tertium, de reliquo jure dicundo ἄγραφον reliqui. Dixi me de eo genere mea decreta ad edicta urbana accommodaturum.”

[1543] Cic. _ad Fam._ iii. 8, 6.

[1544] Cic. _ad Att._ v. 21, 9.

[1545] Cic. _ad Att._ v. 20, 1; _ad Fam._ iii. 8, 4 and 5.

[1546] Suet. _Caes._ 7 “Quaestori (Caesari) ulterior Hispania obvenit; ubi cum, mandatu praetoris, jure dicundo conventus circumiret, etc.” Quaestorian jurisdiction was more frequent in Sicily than in other provinces, on account of the presence of the second quaestor at Lilybaeum.

[1547] Cic. _ad Fam._ xii. 30, 7 “Illud non nimium probo quod scribis ... te tuis etiam legatis lictores ademisse.”

[1548] Thus Verres quashes either a decision, or the execution of a decision, given by his quaestor (Cic. _Div. in Caec._ 17, 56 “Lilybaeum Verres venit postea: rem cognoscit: factum improbat: cogit quaestorem suum pecuniam ... adnumerare et reddere”).

[1549] Possibly certain kinds of criminal jurisdiction were guaranteed to cities by the _lex provinciae_. The Senate of Catina in Sicily tried a slave (Cic. _in Verr._ iv. 45, 100).

[1550] Cic. _in Verr._ i. 33, 84 (of an _émeute_ at Lampsacus) “Non te ad senatum causam deferre ... non eos homines, qui populum concitarant, consulum literis evocandos curare oportuit?”

[1551] The council was not, however, legally necessary. Cf. Cic. _in Verr._ ii. 30, 75 “Reus plorare ... ut cum consilio cognosceret.”

[1552] ib. ii. 29, 70; 30, 75.

[1553] ib. ii. 30, 75 “hominem innocentem de sententia scribae, medici haruspicisque condemnat.”

[1554] For the threat of capital punishment on a Roman citizen see Cic. _ad Q. fr._ i. 2, 5; for its apparent execution, Diod. xxxvii. 5, 2.

[1555] Cic. _in Verr._ v. 66, 170 “Facinus est vincire civem Romanum; scelus, verberare: prope parricidium, necare: quid dicam in crucem tollere?” Cf. _pro Rab._ 5, 17.

[1556] See p. 285.

[1557] Cic. _de Rep._ v. 6, 8 (_ad Att._ viii. 11, 1); v. 7, 9.

[1558] p. 224.

[1559] p. 314.

[1560] Caesar reduced the number of the recipients of the corn-dole from 320,000 to 150,000 (Suet. _Caes._ 41). In the Principate it stood at about 200,000. See Marquardt _Staatsverw_. ii. p. 118.

[1561] p. 312.

[1562] p. 311.

[1563] It is true, however, that the Princeps was often made by an army, not by _the_ army.

[1564] Dio Cass. xlii. 20. The dictatorship of 49 B.C. had been held only for eleven days and was probably conferred merely _comitiorum habendorum causa_. See p. 193.

[1565] Dio Cass. xliii. 14 and 33. It has been interpreted as a dictatorship _rei publicae constituendae causa_.

[1566] _C.I.L._ i. p. 452.

[1567] Plut. _Caes._ 61; _Ant._ 12; Cic. _Phil._ ii. 34, 85.

[1568] Cf. Cic. _ad Fam._ xi. 27, 8 “si Caesar rex fuerit ... quod mihi quidem videtur.”

[1569] Dio Cass. xliii. 44. Caesar probably used it after his name and not as a _praenomen_, as stated by Suetonius (_Caes._ 76). It became with him a kind of _cognomen_, and Augustus, who inherited it, changed its position in the order of his names.

[1570] Dio Cass. xliii. 14.

[1571] Cic. _ad Fam._ xii. 1, 1 “nam, ut adhuc quidem actum est, non regno, sed rege liberati videmur.”

[1572] _Monumentum Ancyranum_ i. 8-9 “Populus ... me ... trium virum rei publicae constituendae creavit.”

[1573] App. _B.C._ v. 95.

[1574] _Mon. Anc._ vi. 13-15 “In consulatu sexto et septimo, bella ubi civilia exstinxeram, per consensum universorum potitus rerum omnium, rem publicam ex mea potestate in senatus populique Romani arbitrium transtuli.”

[1575] Dio Cass. xlix. 15.

[1576] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 28 “sexto ... consulatu ... quae triumviratu jusserat abolevit.”

[1577] Cf. Tac. _Ann._ i. 2 “posito triumviri nomine.”

[1578] _Mon. Anc._ l.c.

[1579] ib. vi. 16 (after the words on p. 338 note 4) “Quo pro merito meo senatus consulto Aug. appellatus sum.”

[1580] Dio Cass. liii. 12. Augustus uses the expression _consulare imperium_ for his position at this time (_Mon. Anc._ ii. 5, 8). It resembled a proconsular command, but was held within the city. Compare the position of Pompeius in 52 B.C.

[1581] Strabo p. 840 ἡ πατρὶς ἐπέτρεψεν αὐτῷ τὴν προστασίαν τῆς ἡγεμονίας καὶ πολέμου καὶ εἰρήνης κατέστη κύριος διὰ βίου.

[1582] In the Calendar we find for January 13 (the day of the settlement) “quod rem publicam P. R. restituit” (_C.I.L._ i. p. 312). Cf. Ovid _Fasti_ i. l. 589 “redditaque est omnis populo provincia nostro”; Vell. ii. 89 “prisca illa et antiqua rei publicae forma revocata.”

[1583] Dio Cass. lii. 1 ἐκ δὲ τούτου μοναρχεῖσθαι αὖθις ἀρκιβῶς ἤρξαντο. In the _Cenotaphia Pisana_ (A.D. 2) ii. l. 12 Augustus is called “custos imperi Romani totiusque orbis terrarum praeses” (Wilmanns n. 883).

[1584] Dio Cass. liii. 32.

[1585] Dio Cass. liii. 32.

[1586] Dio Cass. liv. 10.

[1587] ib. liii 32.

[1588] _C.I.L._ vi. n. 930. It describes itself as a law and is generally known as the _lex de imperio Vespasiani_. But its wording bears more analogy to that of a _senatus consultum_. See Mommsen _Staatsrecht_ ii. p. 878.

[1589] _Vitae Macrini_ 7; _Alexandri_ 8; _Probi_ 12; _Maximi et Balbini_ 8.

[1590] “Dato imperio” (_Vita Veri_ 4), “accepit imperium” (_Vita Alexandri_ 1). It is possible, however, that these are references merely to the reception of the title _imperator_; cf. _Vita Juliani_ 3 “imperator est appellatus”; _Vita Probi_ 12 “nomen imperatorium.” For the view that there was always a _lex de imperio_ see Karlowa _Römische Rechtsgeschichte_ i. pp. 493 ff.

[1591] Gaius _Inst._ i. 5 (on the imperial _constitutio_) “nec unquam dubitatum est quin id legis vicem obtineat, cum ipse imperator per legem imperium accipiat”; Ulpian in _Dig._ 1, 4, 1 “Quod principi placuit, legis habet vigorem: utpote cum lege regia, quae de imperio ejus lata est, populus ei et in eum omne suum imperium et potestatem conferat.” The view that these passages are interpolations is possible but hazardous. A genuine expression of belief in the _lex regia_ appears in Justinian (_Cod._ i. 17, l. 7).

[1592] For the monopoly of the _sacramentum_ possessed by the Princeps compare the charge brought against Agrippina after her death (59 A.D.), “Adiciebat crimina ... quod consortium imperii juraturasque in feminae verba praetorias cohortes ... speravisset” (Tac. _Ann._ xiv. 11).

[1593] “Romae ruere in servitium consules, patres, eques” (Tac. _Ann._ i. 7).

[1594] Tac. _Hist._ i. 55 “Inferioris tamen Germaniae legiones sollemni Kalendarum Januariarum sacramento pro Galba adactae.” For the renewal of the oath on the anniversary of accession see Plin. _ad Traj._ 52.

[1595] Cf. Tac. _Hist._ iii. 58 (Vitellius) “vocari tribus jubet, dantes nomina sacramento adigit.”

[1596] _Lex de imp. Vesp._ 1 “foedusve cum quibus volet facere liceat.” These powers are summed up by Dio Cassius liii. 17 (as imperators the Emperors have the right) καταλόγους τε ποιεῖσθαι ... πολέμους τε ἀναιρεῖσθαι καὶ εἰρήνην σπένδεσθαι.

[1597] p. 283.

[1598] Dio Cass. lx. 23 (after Claudius’ conquest of Britain) ἐψηφίσθη τὰς συμβάσεις ἁπάσας, ὅσας ἂν ὁ Κλαύδιος ἢ καὶ οἱ ἀντιστράτηγοι αὐτοῦ πρός τινας ποιήσωνται, κυρίας, ὡς καὶ πρὸς τὴν βουλὴν τόν τε δῆμον εἶναι.

[1599] _Lex de imp. Vesp._ 15 “utique ei fines pomerii proferre promovere cum ex republica censebit esse, liceat ita, uti licuit Ti. Claudio Caesari Aug(usto) Germanico.” Cf. Tac. _Ann._ xii. 23.

[1600] p. 240.

[1601] Gaius _Inst._ i. 96.

[1602] Gell. xvi. 13, 5.

[1603] Gaius _Inst._ iii. 72 and 73.

[1604] This was effected, either indirectly by the gift of the gold ring (_jus aureorum anulorum_), or directly by the fiction of a _natalibus restitutio_. See _Dig._ 2, 4, 10, 3; 40, 11, 2; Plin. _ad Traj._ 72 and 73.

[1605] Dio Cass. xlix. 15; li. 19; liii. 32. See pp. 338, 340.

[1606] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 56 “id summi fastigii vocabulum Augustas repperit, ne regis aut dictatoris nomen adsumeret ac tamen appellatione aliqua cetera imperia praemineret.”

[1607] Dio Cass. xlix. 15 καὶ τὸ μήτε ἔργῳ μήτε λόγῳ τι ὑβρίζεσθαι· εἰ δὲ μή, τοῖς αὐτοῖς τὸν τοιοῦτό τι δράσαντα ἐνέχεσθαι οἶσπερ ἐπὶ τῷ δημάρχῳ ἐτέτακτο.

[1608] The _additional_ rights granted to the Emperor in connexion with the Senate (see p. 348) assume a right of intercourse with it.

[1609] Dio Cass. liii. 17 (the tribunician power) δίδωσί σφισι τά τε γιγνόμενα ὑφ’ ἑτέρου τινός, ἂν μὴ συνεπαινῶσι, παύειν.

[1610] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 70 “recipi Caesar (Tiberius) inter reos vetuit ... perstititque intercedere”; xiv. 48 “credebaturque haud perinde exitium Antistio quam imperatori gloriam quaeri ut condemnatum a senatu intercessione tribunicia morti eximeret” (Nero).

[1611] ἀμύνειν (Dio Cass. li. 19); cf. Tac. _Ann._ i. 2 (of Augustus) “ad tuendam plebem tribunicio jure contentum.”

[1612] p. 340.

[1613] The statement of Suetonius (_Aug._ 27 “Recepit et morum legumque regimen aeque perpetuum”) is not borne out by the _Monumentum Ancyranum_ or by Augustus’ titular designations.

[1614] Suet. _Aug._ 35; _Mon. Anc._ ii. 5 “consulari cum imperio lustrum solus feci.”

[1615] Dio Cass. lxvii. 4 τιμητὴς δὲ διὰ βίου πρῶτος δὴ καὶ μόνος καὶ ἰδιωτῶν καὶ αὐτοκρατόρων ἐχειροτονήθη.

[1616] ib. liii. 17 καὶ τοὺς μὲν καταλέγουσι καὶ ἐς τὴν ἱππάδα καὶ ἐς τὸ βουλευτικόν, τοὺς δὲ καὶ ἀπαλείφουσιν, ὅπῶς ἂν αὐτοῖς δόξῃ.

[1617] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 25 “Isdem diebus in numerum patriciorum adscivit Caesar (Claudius as censor) vetustissimum quemque e senatu aut quibus clari parentes fuerant ... exhaustis etiam quas (familias) dictator Caesar lege Cassia et princeps Augustus lege Saenia sublegere.” Cf. Suet. _Otho_ 1; and for Vespasian’s censorship _Vita Marci_ 1 “Annius Verus ... adscitus in patricios ... a Vespasiano et Tito censoribus.”

[1618] p. 14.

[1619] _Vita Juliani_ 3 “in patricias familias relatus”; _Macrini_ 7 “senatus ... Macrinum ... in patricios allegit novum hominem.” Cf. Dio Cass. lxxviii 17.

[1620] _Lex de imp. Vesp._ l. 3 “utique ei senatum habere, relationem facere, remittere, senatus consulta per relationem discessionemque facere liceat.” In l. 7 we find the right of the Princeps to summon the Senate _ex mandatu_.

[1621] _Jus tertiae relationis_ (_Vita Probi_ 12), _quartae_ (_Vita Pertinacis_ 5), _quintae_ (_Vita Marci_ 6, _Alexandri_ 1).

[1622] Tac. _Ann._ i. 14 “candidatos praeturae duodecim nominavit (Tiberius), numerum ab Augusto traditum, et hortante senatu ut augeret jure jurando obstrinxit se non excessurum.”

[1623] This practical effect seems sometimes to have been obviated by the Emperor’s selecting his candidates for nomination by lot (Dio Cass. lviii. 20). See Mr. Strachan-Davidson in Smith _Dict. of Antiq._ ii. p. 237.

[1624] _Lex de imp._ Vesp. l. 10 “utique quos magistratum potestatem imperium curationemve cujus rei petentes senatui populoque Romano commendaverit, quibusque suffragationem suam dederit promiserit, eorum comitis quibusque extra ordinem ratio habeatur.” Cf. Tac. _Ann._ i. 15 “sine repulsa et ambitu designandos.” For the precedent set by Caesar’s use of it see Suet. _Caes._ 41.

[1625] Tac. _Ann._ i. 15 “moderante Tiberio ne plures quam quattuor candidatos commendaret, sine repulsa et ambitu designandos.”

[1626] e.g. _praetor_, _tribunus_, _quaestor candidatus_ (Wilmanns _Index_ pp. 551 ff.).

[1627] Tac. _Ann._ i. 81 “plerumque eos tantum apud se professos disseruit, quorum nomina consulibus edidisset: posse et alios profiteri, si gratiae aut meritis confiderent.” It may have been a person so appointed who inaccurately describes himself as “per commendation(em) Ti. Caesaris Augusti ab senatu co(n)s(ul) dest(inatus)” (_Inscr. Reg. Neap._ n. 4762; _C.I.L._, ix. n. 2342).

[1628] _C.I.L._ xiv. n. 3608 “hunc ... Caesar Aug. Vespasianus iterum cos. fecit”; Plin. _Paneg._ 77 (of Trajan) “praestare consulibus ipsum qui consules facit.” Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 925) thinks that the change came with Nero.

[1629] _Lex de imp. Vesp._ l. 22 “utique quibus legibus plebeive scitis scriptum fuit, ne divus Aug(ustus), Tiberiusve Julius Caesar Aug(ustus), Tiberiusque Claudius Caesar Aug(ustus) Germanicus tenerentur, iis legibus plebisque scitis imp(erator) Caesar Vespasianus solutus sit.”

[1630] Tac. _Hist._ i. 15 (Galba to Piso on the latter’s adoption) “si te privatus lege curiata apud pontifices, ut moris est, adoptarem.”

[1631] Paulus in _Dig._ 40, 1, 14, 1.

[1632] Ulpian in _Dig._ 1, 3, 31.

[1633] Dio Cass. liii. 17 ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ἱερωσύναις ἱερῶσθαι.

[1634] _Lex de imp. Vesp._ l. 17 “utique quaecunque ex usu rei publicae majestateque divinarum ... rerum esse censebit, ei agere fecere jus potestasque sit.”

[1635] p. 254.

[1636] Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 31.

[1637] Dio Cass, liii. 17. In the decrees to Maximus and Balbinus the _pontificatus maximus_ is mentioned (_Vita_ 8), and it is possible that it was held by both these emperors conjointly.

[1638] Zosimus iv. 36.

[1639] Suet. _Dom._ 8 “Incesta Vestalium virginum ... varie ac severe coercuit: priora capitali supplicio; posteriora, more veteri.”

[1640] Ulpian in _Dig._ 11, 7, 8.

[1641] Dio Cass. liii. 17; Tac. _Hist._ i. 77 “Otho pontificatus auguratusque honoratis jam senibus cumulum dignitatis addidit”; Plin. _ad Traj._ 13 (8) “rogo dignitati, ad quam me provexit indulgentia tua, vel auguratum vel septemviratum, quia vacent, adicere digneris.”

[1642] Cic. _ad Att._ viii. 9, 4 “nihil malle Caesarem quam principe Pompeio sine metu vivere”; _ad Fam._ vi. 6, 5 “esset hic quidem (Caesar) clarus in toga et princeps.” Cf. Vell. ii. 124 “una tamen veluti luctatio civitatis fuit, pugnantis cum (Tiberio) Caesare senatus populique Romani, ut stationi paternae succederet, illius, ut potius aequalem civem quam eminentem liceret agere principem.”

[1643] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 53 (Tiberius says) “non aedilis aut praetoris aut consulis partes sustineo, majus aliquid et excelsius a principe postulatur.”

[1644] Dio Cass. lvii. 8 (see note 5); Ovid _Fasti_ ii. 142 “Tu (Romule) domini nomen, principis ille (Augustus) tenet.”

[1645] Suet. _Aug._ 53.

[1646] Dio Cass. lvii. 8 δεσπότης μὲν τῶν δούλων, αὐτοκράτωρ δὲ τῶν στρατιωτῶν, τῶν δὲ δὴ λοιπῶν πρόκριτός εἰμι. Cf. Tac. _Ann._ ii. 87.

[1647] See Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 760.

[1648] Caesar had been _imperator_ since his first salutation in Gaul; but the right to use the title as a _nomen_ seems first to have been granted him in 45 B.C. after the victory of Munda (Dio Cass. xliii. 44 ἐκείνῳ τότε πρώτῳ τε καὶ πρῶτον, ὥσπερ τι κύριον, προσέθεσαν). It does not seem, however, that he employed it as a _praenomen_, as is stated by Suetonius (_Caes._ 76). Cf. p. 337.

[1649] Dio Cass. l.c.

[1650] p. 156.

[1651] Dio Cass. liii. 16 Αὔγουστος ὡς καὶ πλεῖόν τι ἤ κατὰ ἀνθρώπους ὤν ἐπεκλήθη.

[1652] Karlowa _Rechtsgeschichte_ i. p. 508.

[1653] _Vita L. Veri_, 2.

[1654] Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1140.

[1655] App. _B.C._ ii. 7 οὐδὲ γὰρ τοίσδε καίπερ οὖσι βασιλεῦσιν εὐθὺς ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ἅμα ταῖς ἄλλαις ἐπωνυμίαις, ἀλλὰ σὺν χρόνῳ μόλις ἤδε ὡς ἐντελὴς ἐπὶ μεγίστοις δὴ μαρτυρία ψηφίζεται: _Vita Hadriani_ 6 “patris patriae nomen delatum sibi statim, et iterum postea, distulit quod hoc nomen Augustus sero meruisset.” It was declined altogether by Tiberius (Suet. _Tib._ 26 and 67) and was not borne by the transitory emperors Galba, Otho, and Vitellius. See Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 780.

[1656] See Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. pp. 782-786. As typical instances we may cite an inscription of Vespasian giving the _praenomen imperatoris_: “Imp. Caesar. Vespasianus Aug. pontif. max. tribunic. potest, vi. imp. xiiii. p.p., cos. vi. desig. vii. censor” (Wilmanns n. 855), and one of Caracalla showing the title _proconsul_: “M. Aurellius Antoninus Pius Felix Augustus ... pontif. max., trib. pot. xviii. imp. iiii. cos. iiii. p.p. procos.” (ib. n. 2868). _Pater patriae_ appears sometimes before, sometimes after _consul_.

[1657] Dio Cass. xlix. 15.

[1658] On Gordian’s revolt in Africa the laurelled _fasces_ were immediately assumed (Herodian vii. 6; _Vita Maximini_ 14).

[1659] Originally twelve, later twenty-four (Dio Cass. lxvii. 4).

[1660] Dio Cass. li. 19.

[1661] ib.

[1662] For the reverence to the statue of the deified Emperor see Suet. _Tib._ 58 “genus calumniae (sc. majestatis) eo processit ut haec quoque capitalia essent: circa Augusti simulacrum servum cecidisse, vestimenta mutasse, nummo vel annulo effigiem impressam latrinae aut lupanari intulisse.” For the right of _asylum_ attaching to the living Emperor’s image see Tac. _Ann._ iii. 36; Gaius _Inst._ i. 53.

[1663] Tertull. _Apol._ 28 “citius ... apud vos per omnes deos quam per unum genium Caesaris pejeratur.” In the official oath taken by the magistrates of Salpensa and Malaca the deified Caesars and the genius of the living Caesar come between Jupiter and the _di Penates_. (Bruns _Fontes_.)

[1664] On Seneca’s question with reference to Agrippina (59 A.D.) “an militi imperanda caedes esset,” the answer is “praetorianos toti Caesarum domui obstrictos ... nihil ... atrox ausuros.” Caligula specifically included the names of his sisters in the _sacramentum_ (Dio Cass. lix. 9)

[1665] Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 831.

[1666] _Mon. Ancyr._ iii. 5; Dio Cass. lix. 8.

[1667] The name _Augusta_ as assumed by Victorina in Gaul (A.D. 268) certainly meant that she claimed to be Empress.

[1668] Plin. _Paneg._ 84.

[1669] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 49-51.

[1670] Gibbon ch. iii.

[1671] Seneca _de Ben._ vi. 34, 2 “Apud nos primi omnium Gracchus et mox Livius Drusus instituerunt segregare turbam suam et alios in secretum recipere, alios cum pluribus, alios universos. Habuerunt itaque isti amicos primos, habuerunt secundos, numquam veros.”

[1672] Seneca _de Clem._ i. 10 “cohortem primae admissionis”; _Vita Alex._ 20 “moderationis tantae fuit ... ut amicos non solum primi aut secundi loci sed etiam inferioris aegrotantes viseret.”

[1673] Hence such titles as “comes divi Hadriani in oriente,” “comes Imp. Antonini Aug. et divi Veri bello Germanico” (Wilmanns nn. 1184, 637).

[1674] p. 147.

[1675] _Interregnum_ might be used metaphorically of the interval between the death of one Princeps and the accession of another. See _Vita Taciti_ 1.

[1676] Tac. _Ann._ i. 12 “dixit forte Tiberius se ut non toti rei publicae parem, ita quaecumque pars sibi mandaretur, ejus tutelam suscepturum.”

[1677] p. 343.

[1678] Henzen _Act. Fr. Arv._ p. 64. Hadrian, after his salutation by the soldiers, wrote to the Senate that he had been _praepropere_ addressed as _imperator_ (_Vita Hadriani_ 6). Pertinax, after his appointment had been accepted by the praetorian guards, laid down his power in the Senate and was elected again (Dio Cass. lxxiii. 1).

[1679] Suet. _Vesp._ 6.

[1680] _Vita Taciti_ 2 (after the murder of Aurelian) “exercitus, qui creare imperatorem raptim solebat, ad senatum literas misit ... petens ut ex ordine suo principem legerent. Verum senatus, sciens lectos a se principes militibus non placere, rem ad milites rettulit, dumque id saepius fit, sextus peractus est mensis.”

[1681] In 13 B.C. Agrippa received _tribunicia potestas_ for five years (Dio Cass. liv. 12). For Tiberius’ claims see Tac. _Ann._ i 3 “filius, collega imperii, consors tribuniciae potestatis adsumitur.”

[1682] Tac. _Ann._ i 14 (Tiberius on his accession, A.D. 14) “Germanico Caesari proconsulare imperium petivit”; iii 56 (A.D. 22) “Tiberius mittit literas ad senatum quis potestatem tribuniciam Druso petebat.” For Trajan see Plin. _Paneg._ 8 “ante pulvinar Jovis optimi maximi adoptio peracta est ... simul filius, simul Caesar, mox imperator et consors tribuniciae potestatis”; _Vita Pii_ 4 “adoptatus est (Pius) ... factusque est patri et in imperio proconsulari et in tribunicia potestate collega”; _Vita Marci_ 6 (Marcus before he came to the throne) “tribunicia potestate donatus est atque imperio extra urbem proconsulari.”

[1683] Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1158.

[1684] Vell. ii. 121 “cum ... senatus populusque Romanus postulante patre ejus, ut aequum ei jus in omnibus provinciis exercitibusque esset quam erat ipsi, decreto complexus esset.”

[1685] Agrippa twice declined a triumph offered him by Augustus (Dio Cass. liv. 11 and 24), and the Senate conferred the title of _Imperator_ only on the proposal of the Princeps (Tac. _Ann._ i. 58, Germanicus in A.D. 15, “exercitum reduxit nomenque imperatoris auctore Tiberio accepit”).

[1686] Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1154.

[1687] Suet. _Gaius_ 24 “(Gaius Drusillam) heredem quoque bonorum atque imperii aeger instituit.”

[1688] ib. 14. Compare Domitian’s contention after the death of Vespasian “relictum se participem imperii sed fraudem testamento adhibitam” (Suet. _Dom._ 2).

[1689] Tac. _Hist._ i. 15 (see p. 350); i. 17 (of the adoption of Piso by Galba) “consultatum inde pro rostris an in senatu an in castris adoptio nuncuparetur”; Suet. _Galba_ 17 “(Galba Pisonem) perduxit in castra ac pro contione adoptavit.” Nerva proclaims on the Capitol his adoption of Trajan (Dio Cass. lxviii. 8).

[1690] See p. 360, n. 2.

[1691] p. 354.

[1692] Plut. _Galba_ 7 (a messenger announces that) ὁ δῆμος καὶ ἠ σύγκλητος αὐτοκράτορα τὸν Γάλβαν ἀναγορεύσειεν: Herodian ii. 12 (the Senate) ψηφίζεται τὸν μὲν (Ἰουλιανὸν) ἀναιρεθῆναι, ἀποδειχθῆναι δὲ μόνον αὐτοκράτορα τὸν Σεουῆρον: _Vita_ _Maximini_ 15 “Ubi haec gesta sunt (i.e. after the recognition of the Gordians) senatus magis timens Maximinum aperte ac libere hostes appellat Maximinum et ejus filium.”

[1693] This was the case with Caligula, although the _damnatio_ was incomplete. See Suet. _Claud._ 11 “Gaii quoque etsi acta omnia rescidit, diem tamen necis, quamvis exordium principatus sui, vetuit inter festos referri.”

[1694] The deposed Nero was thus treated as a traitor (Suet. _Ner._ 49 “codicillos praeripuit legitque se hostem a senatu judicatum et quaeri ut puniatur more majorum”).

[1695] The _acta_ of Tiberius were not sworn to (Dio Cass. lix. 9), although his memory was not condemned. His reign appears amongst the legitimate precedents for the authority of Vespasian in the _lex de imperio_, those of Gaius, Nero, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius being omitted.

[1696] Dio Cass. lvii. 8 (Tiberius) ἐπὶ ταῖς τοῦ Αὐγούστου πράξεσι τούς τε ἄλλους πάντας ὥρκου καὶ αὐτὸς ὤμνυε.

[1697] Tiberius characteristically enough would not have his _acta_ sworn to during his lifetime (Tac. _Ann._ i. 72; Suet. _Tib._ 67), and some thought the motive was “ne mox majore dedecore impar tantis honoribus inveniretur” (Suet. l.c.). His objection to his own deification was interpreted by some as a sign “degeneris animi” (Tac. _Ann._ iv. 38).

[1698] Dio Cass. iii. 20. Here it is made the age for entrance into the Senate; but the completion of the twenty-fifth year is meant. Cf. Quintil. _Inst. Or._ xii. 6, 1 “quaestoria aetas.”

[1699] Dio Cass. l.c. Dispensations from these rules might be given by the Senate, in accordance with the _jus liberorum_ (“ut singuli anni per singulos liberos remittantur” _Dig._ 4, 4, 2), or to members of the imperial house (Tac. _Ann._ iii. 29 “Per idem tempus (A.D. 20) Neronem e liberis Germanici jam ingressum juventam (Tiberius) commendavit patribus, utque munere capessendi vigintiviratus solveretur et quinquennio maturius quam per leges quaesturam peteret ... postulavit”).

[1700] Dio Cass. liv. 26; cf. Tac. _Ann._ iii. 29, quoted in the last note.

[1701] In inscriptions of the early Principate the vigintivirate is sometimes not found in the list of _honores_. But it is more probable that it is omitted than that it was an alternative to the military tribunate. See Mommsen _Staatsr._ i. p. 544 n. 4.

[1702] Dio Cass. lii. 20.

[1703] Its use by Macrinus in the third century excited opposition (Dio Cass. lxxviii. 13). See Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 942.

[1704] Dio Cass. liv. 19 (of Tiberius in 16 B.C.) ἐστρατήγησε γάρ, καίπερ τὰς στρατηγικὰς τιμὰς ἔχων (Tiberius had received the _ornamenta praetoria_ in 19 B.C., see c. 10); c. 32 Drusus ἀγορανόμος ... καίπερ τὰς στρατηγικὰς τιμὰς ἔχων ἀπεδείχθη: cf. c. 22.

[1705] Suet. _Aug._ 35; Dio Cass. lviii. 12.

[1706] Mommsen _Staatsr._ i. p. 458.

[1707] The consular _insignia_ were granted to Nymphidius and to Crispinus under Nero (Tac. _Ann._ xv. 72; xvi. 17); the praetorian _insignia_ to Sejanus and to Macro under Tiberius (Dio Cass. lvii. 19; lviii. 12).

[1708] Quaestorian _insignia_ were granted to Laco under Tiberius (Dio Cass. lviii. 12).

[1709] Tac. _Ann._ xii. 21 “consularia insignia Ciloni (procurator of Pontus) ... decernuntur”; Suet. _Claud._ 24 “ornamenta consularia etiam procuratoribus ducenariis indulsit.”

[1710] As the praetorian _insignia_ to Pallas, the quaestorian to Narcissus (Tac. _Ann._ xii. 53; xi. 38). Cf. Suet. _Claud._ 28.

[1711] Suet. _Aug._ 35 (Augustus) “quosdam ad excusandi se verecundiam compulit: servavitque etiam excusatis insigne vestis et spectandi in orchestra epulandique publice jus.”

[1712] p. 156.

[1713] In an exceptional case, such as Junius Blaesus’ command in Africa, the proconsul might be saluted _imperator_ on the permission of the Princeps (Tac. _Ann._ iii. 74), and the first condition of a triumph be fulfilled. But this incident, dating from A.D. 22, was the last of its kind on record.

[1714] Suet. _Aug._ 38 “super triginta ducibus justos triumphos et aliquanto pluribus triumphalia ornamenta decernenda curavit”; Wilmanns n. 1145 l. 19 “senatus ... triumphalibus ornamentis honoravit auctore imp. Caesare Augusto Vespasiano”; _Index_ p. 609.

[1715] Dio Cass. lix. 9. The obligation to swear _in acta Caesaris_ had, with reference to the acts of the first Caesar, begun in 45 B.C. (App. _B.C._ ii. 106), and had been renewed during the triumvirate (Dio Cass. xlvii. 18), the formula running _se nihil contra acta Caesaris facturum_. For the obligation as continued in the Principate cf. p. 363.

[1716] Herodian (ii. 12), with reference to the downfall of Didius Julianus, speaks of the consuls οἷ τὰ τῆς Ῥώμης διοικεῖν εἰώθασιν ὁπηνίκα ἂν τὰ τῆς βασιλείας μετέωρα ᾗ.

[1717] Plut. _Galba 8._

[1718] Tac. _Hist._ iii. 68.

[1719] Plin. _Paneg._ 77 “comitia consulum obibat ipse (Trajanus); tantum ex renuntiatione eorum voluptatis quantum prius ex destinatione capiebat.... Adibat aliquis ut principem; respondebat se consulem esse.”

[1720] On the consuls was laid the burden of certain newly-established festivals such as those celebrating the _Natalia_ of Augustus and the victory of Actium (Dio Cass. lvi 46; lix. 20).

[1721] See Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii pp. 84-87. The climax was reached with twenty-five consulships in a single year (189 A.D.) under Commodus (Dio Cass. lxxii. 12; _Vita Commodi_ 6).

[1722] _Vita Alexandri_ 43.

[1723] Pompon. in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 32.

[1724] Marini _Atti Arvali_ p. 784.

[1725] Dio Cassius, lii. cc. 20, 21 (speech of Maecenas), may mean to imply their existence in his own time. Geib (_Criminalprocess_ pp. 392-397) assigns their disappearance to the end of the first century.

[1726] Pompon. in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 32 “divus Claudius duos praetores adjecit qui de fidei commisso jus dicerent, ex quibus unum divus Titus detraxit: et adjecit divus Nerva qui inter fiscum et privatos jus diceret.”

[1727] See last note.

[1728] _Vita Marci_ 10 “praetorem tutelarem primus fecit, cum ante tutores a consulibus poscerentur, ut diligentius de tutoribus tractaretur.”

[1729] See § 5.

[1730] On the condemnation of the history of Cremutius Cordus in A.D. 25 “libros per aediles cremandos censuere patres” (Tac. _Ann._ iv. 35).

[1731] Tac. _Ann._ iii 52-55 (A.D. 22).

[1732] We hear of Vespasian during the reign of Caligula ἀγορανομοῦντός τε ... καὶ τῆς τῶν στενωπῶν καθαρειότητος ἐπιμελουμένου (Dio Cass. lix. 12). Cf. Suet. _Vesp._ 5.

[1733] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 85 (A.D. 19) “Vistilia praetoria familia genita licentiam stupri apud aediles vulgaverat.”

[1734] ib. xiii. 28 (A.D. 56) “cohibita artius et aedilium potestas statutumque quantum curules, quantum plebei pignoris caperent vel poenae inrogarent.”

[1735] Gaius _Inst._ i. 6 (of the _jus edicendi_) “amplissimum jus est in edictis duorum praetorum ... item in edictis aedilium curulium.” Their edict was codified under Hadrian, and appears in _Dig._ 21, 1.

[1736] Karlowa (_Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 532) thus distributes them—two urban, four of the consuls, twelve for the public provinces, and two attached to the Emperor.

[1737] See § 5.

[1738] See chap. xi.

[1739] The practice first began in 38 B.C. (Dio Cass. xlviii. 43). Cf. Tac. _Ann._ xvi. 34 “Tum ad Thraseam in hortis agentem quaestor consulis missus.” They were selected by the consuls themselves (Plin. _Ep._ iv. 15, 8).

[1740] _Dig._ 1, 13, 1, 2 and 4 “sane non omnes quaestores provincias sortiebantur, verum excepti erant candidati principis ... qui ... epistulas ejus in senatu legunt.”

[1741] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22 (A.D. 47) “quaestura ... velut venundaretur.”

[1742] The obligation imposed in 47 was modified in 54 A.D. (Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22; xiii. 5), but was renewed under Domitian (Suet. _Dom._ 4).

[1743] _Vita Alexandri_ 43 “quaestores candidatos ex sua pecunia jussit munera populo dare ... arcarios vero instituit, qui de arca fisci ederent munera eademque parciora.”

[1744] The tribunate is to the younger Pliny “inanis umbra et sine honore nomen” (_Ep._ i 23).

[1745] Tac. _Ann._ i. 77 (A.D. 15, on the proposal of _jus virgarum in histriones_) “intercessit Haterius Agrippa tribunus plebei increpitusque est Asinii Galli oratione, silente Tiberio, qui ea simulacra libertatis senatui praebebat.”

[1746] Tac. _Hist._ iv. 9 (A.D. 69, on the praetors of the _aerarium_ announcing a deficit) “cum perrogarent sententias consules, Volcatius Tertullinus tribunus plebis intercessit, ne quid super tanta re principe absente statueretur.” This is the last recorded instance of the _intercessio_ (Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 309 n. 1).

[1747] Tac. _Ann._ vi. 47 [53] (in A.D. 37 a woman was accused of _majestas_) “qua damnata cum praemium accusatori decerneretur, Junius Otho tribunus plebei intercessit, unde ... mox Othoni exitium.” Rusticus Arulenus, a _flagrans juvenis_, offered to veto the decree of the Senate which condemned Thrasea Paetus in A.D. 66 (xvi. 26).

[1748] ib. xiii. 28 “inter Vibullium praetorem et plebei tribunum Antistium ortum certamen, quod immodestos fautores histrionum et a praetore in vincla ductos tribunos omitti jussisset.”

[1749] Tac. _Hist._ ii. 91 (Vitellius, when Emperor, attacked by Helvidius Priscus in the Senate) “commotus ... non tamen ultra quam tribunos plebis in auxilium spretae potestatis advocavit.”

[1750] In A.D. 56 they were forbidden “vocare ex Italia cum quibus lege agi posset” (Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 28). See Appendix.

[1751] Tac. l.c.

[1752] Juvenal vii. 228 “Rara tamen merces, quae cognitione tribuni Non egeat.” The words doubtless mean “which does not lead to the _appellatio_.” In such a case even the Republican tribunes took “cognisance” of the merits of the appeal. The explanation that the tribunes were now given some extraordinary jurisdiction in civil cases is unnecessary.

[1753] p. 365.

[1754] Dio Cass. liv. 26.

[1755] ib. lx. 11.

[1756] e.g. _Cod._ 6, 60, 1 (A.D. 319) “Imp. Constantinus A. consulibus, praetoribus tribunis plebis senatui salutem.”

[1757] Suet. _Aug._ 40 “Comitiorum quoque pristinum jus reduxit.”

[1758] p. 344.

[1759] Dio Cass. lvi. 40 (Augustus) ἐκ ... τοῦ δήμου τὸ δύσκριτον ἐν ταῖς διαγνώσεσιν ἐς τὴν τῶν δικαστηρίων ἀκρίβειαν μεταστήσας.

[1760] e.g. the Julian laws passed by Augustus in the _concilium plebis_, the _lex Junia Norbana_ of the reign of Tiberius, _plebiscita_ of Claudius. The last known _lex_ is an agrarian law of Nerva (_Dig._ 47, 21, 3, 1).

[1761] Dio Cass. liii. 21 (when the election was entrusted to the people, Augustus) ἐπεμελεῖτο ὅπως μήτ’ ἀνεπιτήδειοι μήτ’ ἐκ παρακελεύσεως ἤ καὶ δεκασμοῦ ἀποδεικνύωνται. Cf. Tac. _Ann._ i. 15 “potissima arbitrio principis, quaedam tamen studiis tribuum fiebant.”

[1762] Tac. _Ann._ i. 15. The change was, we are told by Velleius (ii. 124), in accordance with the instructions of Augustus.

[1763] p. 188.

[1764] Dio Cass. lviii. 20.

[1765] p. 349. In _C.I.L._ vi. 10213 we find a notice of “improbae comitiae in Aventino, ubi (Sej)anus cos. factus est.” We find Vitellius canvassing for his candidates in the circus (Tac. _Hist._ ii. 91 “comitia consulum cum candidatis civiliter celebrans omnem infimae plebis rumorem in theatro ut spectator, in circo ut fautor adfectavit”). On the other hand, we have _ab senatu destinatus_ in the inscription quoted on p. 349 n. 6. Dio Cassius (lix. 20), in speaking of the temporary restoration of popular elections by Caligula, mentions them in connexion with the consulship.

[1766] Dio Cass. xxxvii. 28.

[1767] p. 369.

[1768] p. 364.

[1769] p. 365.

[1770] p. 364. Hence the expression “nondum senatoria aetate” (Tac. _Ann._ xv. 28; _Hist._ iv. 42).

[1771] Dio Cass. liv. 17, 30; Tac. _Ann._ i. 75, ii. 37.

[1772] He declared “non lecturum se senatorem nisi civis Romani abnepotem” (Suet. _Claud._ 24).

[1773] _Vita Commodi_ 6 “ad cujus (Cleandri) nutum etiam libertini in senatum atque in patricios lecti sunt”; _Vita Elagabali_ 11 “Fecit libertos praesides, legatos, consules, duces.”

[1774] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 4 “simul novi homines e municipiis et coloniis atque etiam provinciis in senatum crebro adsumpti”; Suet. _Vesp._ 9 “Amplissimos ordines ... purgavit supplevitque, recenso senatu et equite ... honestissimo quoque Italicorum ac provincialium adlecto.”

[1775] Tac. _Ann._ xi 25; Prof. Pelham in _Classical Review_ ix. p. 441.

[1776] Plin. _Ep._ vi. 19.

[1777] _Vita Marci_ 11.

[1778] For the infliction of such a _nota_ by Domitian see Suet. _Dom._ 8, “quaestorium virum, quod gesticulandi saltandique studio teneretur, movit senatu.”

[1779] p. 347.

[1780] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 42 (Tiberius) “Apidium ... Merulam, quod in acta divi Augusti non juraverat, albo senatorio erasit.”

[1781] ib. iii. 17; vi. 48.

[1782] ib. iv. 31; xii. 59.

[1783] Dio Cass. lv. 3; Tac. _Ann._ iv. 42.

[1784] Dio Cass. liii. 1 (Augustus in 28 B.C. during the censorship of himself and Agrippa) ἐν αὐταῖς (ταῖς ἀπογραφαῖς) πρόκριτος τῆς γερουσίας ἐπεκλήθη: cf. lxxii. 5, where Pertinax πρόκριτος ... τῆς γερουσίας κατὰ τὸ ἀρχαῖον ἐπωνομάσθη: an expression which seems to show that it was not a constant designation of the Princeps at this period.

[1785] ib. liv. 13, 14.

[1786] ib. lv. 3; Suet. _Aug._ 35; Merkel ad Ovid. _Fast._ p. vi

[1787] _Lex de imp. Vesp._ l. 9 “ac si e lege senatus edictus esset habereturque.”

[1788] _Vita Gordianorum_, 11; _Vita Hadriani_, 7; Dio Cass. liv. 3.

[1789] For the summons by a praetor see Tac. _Hist._ iv. 39; by tribunes, Dio Cass. lvi. 47, lx. 16, lxxviii. 37; by tribunes and praetors, ib. lix. 24.

[1790] The doubt is raised by Piso’s address to Tiberius during a trial for _majestas_, “quo ... loco censebis, Caesar? Si primus, habebo quod sequar: si post omnes, vereor ne imprudens dissentiam” (Tac. _Ann._ i 74). Dio Cassius also says of Tiberius (lvii. 7) καὶ γὰρ αὐτὸς ψῆφον πολλάκις ἐδίδου. But neither writer may be using strictly technical language; and it is not certain that the Princeps could be _asked_ his opinion. On the other hand, when Caesar put the question, the other magistrates gave _sententiae_ (Tac. _Ann._ iii. 17). The question is not of much importance for the Principate as a whole, as in its later period the Emperor usually consulted the Senate by letter. See p. 369.

[1791] See Tac. _Ann._ i. 74, quoted in the last note.

[1792] p. 348.

[1793] p. 359.

[1794] p. 350.

[1795] The formula for the formation of a _collegium legitimum_ runs “quibus senatus c(oire) c(onvocari) c(ogi) permisit e lege Julia ex auctoritate Augusti” (_C.I.L._ vi n. 4416).

[1796] p. 372.

[1797] Dio Cass. lxviii. 29.

[1798] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 60; xii. 62.

[1799] ib. xiii 48.

[1800] “de legendo vel exauctorando milite, ac legionum et auxiliorum descriptione” (Suet. _Tib._ 30).

[1801] Tac. _Hist._ iv. 61; Dio Cass. lxviii. 9, 10. In 49 A.D. during the reign of Claudius we also read of a reception of Parthian envoys in the Senate (Tac. _Ann._ xii. 10).

[1802] p. 358.

[1803] p. 358.

[1804] p. 372.

[1805] p. 275.

[1806] Thus the _S. C. Velleianum_, which limited the obligations which women might incur, begins, “Quod Marcus Silanus et Velleus Tutor consules verba fecerunt ... quid de ea re fieri oportet, de ea re ita censuere” (_Dig_. 16, 1, 2, 1); cf. _Dig._ 36, 1, 1, 2 (_S. C. Trebellianum_), 14, 6, 1 (_S. C. Macedonianum_), and see Kipp _Quellenkunde des röm. Rechts_ p. 27.

[1807] The jurists refer to them by the names of their proposers; hence such designations as _Velleianum_, _Trebellianum_ (see last note). But such designations are not official. The _S. C. Macedonianum_ is called after the offender who had been the occasion of the decree.

[1808] Gaius i. 4 “Senatus consultum est, quod senatus jubet atque constituit: idque legis vicem obtinet, quamvis fuerit quaesitum.”

[1809] _Dig._ 1, 1, 7; 1, 3, 9.

[1810] _Lex de imp. Vesp._ 1. 17 “utique quaecunque ex usu rei publicae majestateque divinarum humanarum publicarum privatarumque rerum esse censebit, ei agere facere jus potestasque sit, ita uti divo Augusto ... fuit.”

[1811] Tac. _Ann._ i. 77 “divus Augustus immunes verberum histriones quondam responderat, neque fas Tiberio infringere dicta ejus.”

[1812] p. 363.

[1813] Paulus in _Dig._ 28. 2, 26 “Filius familias, si militet ... aut heres scribi aut exheredari debet, jam sublato edicto divi Augusti, quo cautum fuerat ne pater filium militem exheredet.”

[1814] It was sometimes used in a more general sense for _constitutio principis_, as when Papinian says “Jus ... civile est quod ex legibus, plebis scitis, senatus consultis, decretis principum, auctoritate prudentium venit” (_Dig._ 1, 1, 7).

[1815] _Dig._ 4, 2, 13 “Exstat enim decretum divi Marci in haec verba, etc.... Caesar dixit, etc.”

[1816] “Rescript” is properly an _answer_ to a letter, but it soon came to be used as exquivalent to _epistola_. See Kipp _op. cit._ p. 37.

[1817] Cf. _Dig._ 1, 16, 4, 5 “imperator noster Antoninus Augustus ad desideria Asianorum rescripsit” (on the mode in which the proconsul should arrive at the province of Asia).

[1818] Gaius i. 5 “Constitutio principis est, quod imperator decreto vel edicto vel epistola constituit; nec unquam dubitatum est quin id legis vicem obtineat.” Cf. Ulpian in _Dig._ 1, 4, 1, 1 “Quodcumque ... imperator per epistulam et subscriptionem statuit vel cognoscens decrevit ... vel edicto praecepit, legem esse constat. Haec sunt quas vulgo constitutiones appellamus.”

[1819] Thus the soldier’s testament was created by a series of mandates: “divus Julius Caesar concessit ... divus Titus dedit: post hoc Domitianus: postea divus Nerva plenissimam indulgentiam in milites contulit: eamque et Trajanus secutus est et exinde mandatis inseri coepit caput tale. Caput ex mandatis, etc.” (Ulpian in _Dig._ 29, 1, 1).

[1820] Gell. xii. 13, 1 “Cum Romae a consulibus judex extra ordinem datus pronuntiare ... jussus essem.”

[1821] Dio Cass. li. 19 (in 30 B.C. it was decreed) τὸν Καίσαρα τήν τε ἐξουσίαν τὴν τῶν δημάρχων διὰ βίου ἔχειν ... ἔκκλητόν τε δικάζειν. It is probable that the last words only describe the establishment of the Princeps as a high court of voluntary jurisdiction. See Greenidge in _Classical Review_ viii. p. 144.

[1822] p. 368.

[1823] Paulus in _Dig._ 5, 1, 58 “Judicium solvitur vetante eo qui judicare jusserat vel etiam eo qui majus imperium in eadem jurisdictione habet.” The veto in virtue of _par potestas_ is here omitted on account of its disappearance in the time of Paulus (_circa_ 200 A.D.). See Merkel _Gesch. der klassischen Appellation_ ii. p. 19.

[1824] Tac. _Ann._ i. 75 “judiciis adsidebat in cornu tribunalis, ne praetorem curuli depelleret; multaque eo coram adversus ambitum et potentium preces constituta”; Dio Cass. lvii. 7 ἐπεφοίτα δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ τῶν ἀρχόντων δικαστήρια, καὶ παρακαλούμενος ὑπ’ αὐτῶν καὶ ἀπαράκλητος, καὶ ... ἔλεγεν ὅσα ἐδόκει αὐτῷ, ὡς πάρεδρος. The civil courts are here meant, or at least included; but it is possible that Tiberius may often have appeared in them as a self-constituted adviser, not as an authority to be appealed to; cf. Suet. _Tib._ 33 “magistratibus pro tribunali cognoscentibus plerumque se offerebat consiliarium; adsidebatque juxtim vel exadversum in parte primori.” According to Suetonius (l.c.) he exercised a similar influence over the jurisdiction of the _quaestiones_.

[1825] p. 178.

[1826] p. 382.

[1827] Cic. _pro Tullio_ 16, 38 “quid attinuit te tam multis verbis a praetore postulare ut adderet in judicium ‘INJURIA,’ et, quia non impetrasses, tribunos plebis appellare et hic in judicio queri praetoris iniquitatem quod de injuria non addiderit?” So the tribunician veto might be employed to elicit an exception. Cic. _Acad. Prior._ ii. 30, 97 “Tribunum aliquem censeo adeant [_al._ videant]: a me istam exceptionem nunquam impetrabunt.”

[1828] Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 28 (A.D. 56). See Appendix.

[1829] Dio Cass. lix. 8 ὁ μὲν γὰρ Τιβέριος οὕτως αὐτὸν (Silanus) ἐτίμησεν, ὥστε μήτ’ ἔκκλητόν ποτε ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ δικάσαι ἐθελῆσαι, ἀλλ’ ἐκείνῳ πάντα αὖθις τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐγχειρίσαι. We do not know what position Silanus held. If, as is generally supposed, he was consul, the reference may be to appeals from jurisdiction in _fidei commissa_ delegated by the Princeps to the consul.

[1830] Suet. _Aug._ 33 “Appellationes quotannis urbanorum quidem litigatorum praetori delegabat urbano: at provincialium consularibus viris, quos singulos cujusque provinciae negotiis praeposuisset.” That the conjecture _praefecto delegabat urbis_ is untenable has been pointed out by Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii. p. 985 note 1).

[1831] For the delegation to praetors see p. 368; for that to consuls cf. Quint. _Inst. Or._ iii. 6, 70 “Non debes apud praetorem petere fidei commissum sed apud consules, major enim praetoria cognitione summa est.”

[1832] Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 4 “teneret antiqua munia senatus, consulum tribunalibus Italia et publicae provinciae adsisterent.”

[1833] Cic. _in Verr._ iii. 60, 138; _ad Fam._ xiii. 26, 3; _Fragmentum Atestinum_ (Bruns _Fontes_) l. 10.

[1834] When the Senate granted the _proconsulare imperium_ to Augustus in 23 B.C. ἐν τῷ ὑπηκόῳ τὸ πλεῖον τῶν ἑκασταχόθι ἀρχόντων ἰσχύειν ἐπέτρεψεν (Dio Cass. liii. 32). Cf. Ulpian in _Dig._ 1, 16, 8 [“(proconsul) majus imperium in ea provincia habet omnibus post principem”] and in 1, 18, 4. It is a passive rather than an active _majus imperium_ that is here contemplated. The whole scheme of the provincial dyarchy rested on the assumption that there should be no relations between the proconsul and the Princeps.

[1835] p. 368.

[1836] Ulpian in _Dig._ 49, 2, 1, 2 “sciendum est appellari a senatu non posse principem, idque oratione divi Hadriani effectum.” It was doubtless the original principle, confirmed and not created by Hadrian.

[1837] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 14, xvi. 8; Suet. _Aug._ 5.

[1838] There was no legal principle of the kind. According to Dio Cassius (liii. 17) the monarchical power extended so far ὥστε καὶ ἐντὸς τοῦ πωμηρίου καὶ τοὺς ἰππέας καὶ τοὺς βουλευτὰς θανατοῦ δύνασθαι, and a senator, like Calpurnius Piso in 20 A.D., might be brought before the Emperor (Tac. _Ann._ iii. 10). But Septimius Severus permitted a _senatus consultum_ to be passed that the Emperor should not be allowed to put a senator to death without the will of the Senate (Dio Cass. lxxiv. 2; _Vita Severi_ 7). The principle had been stated earlier by Hadrian (_Vita Hadriani_ 7 “juravit se nunquam senatorem nisi ex senatus sententia puniturum”).

[1839] Augustus in 29 B.C. brought Antiochus of Commagene, Tiberius in A.D. 17 Archelaus of Cappadocia before the Senate (Dio Cass. lii. 43, lvii. 17; Tac. _Ann._ ii. 42). In A.D. 19 Rhescuporis of Thrace was accused there (Tac. _Ann._ ii. 67).

[1840] Cases of extortion are to be found in Tac. _Ann._ iii. 66, xii. 59; _Hist._ iv. 45. In A.D. 23 we find the imperial _procurator_ (_patrimonii_) of Asia brought before the Senate for exceeding his powers (Tac. _Ann._ iv. 15).

[1841] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 13 (A.D. 23) “Carsidius Sacerdos, reus tamquam frumento hostem Tacfarinatem juvisset, absolvitur, ejusdemque criminis C. Gracchus.”

[1842] Amongst the prosecutions for treason against the Princeps which disfigure the reign of Tiberius we may mention those against Libo Drusus (Tac. _Ann._ ii. 27 ff.), against Cremutius Cordus (ib. iv. 34, 35), and against Sejanus (Dio Cass. lviii. 9, 10).

[1843] In A.D. 37 we find that a mother, who had caused her son to commit suicide, “accusata in senatu ... urbe ... in decem annos prohibita est” (Tac. _Ann._ vi. 49). In A.D. 61 we find interdiction from Italy pronounced against a man for a kind of _praevaricatio_, “quod reos, ne apud praefectum urbis arguerentur, ad praetorem detulisset” (ib. xiv. 41).

[1844] Quintil. _Inst. Or._ iii. 10, 1; vii. 2, 20. For instances see Tac. _Ann._ ii. 50, iv. 21; Plin. _Ep._ ii. 11, 3 ff. In the last passage we find the question of the legality of this procedure raised (“Respondit Fronto Catius deprecatusque est ne quid ultra repetundarum legem quaereretur.... Magna contentio, magni utrimque clamores, aliis cognitionem senatus lege conclusam, aliis liberam solutamque dicentibus”).

[1845] It is possible, however, that the Senate was held to continue the extraordinary criminal jurisdiction of the _comitia_. Tacitus certainly regards the _cognitio_ as belonging to the Senate (_Ann._ ii. 28 “Statim corripit reum, adit consules, cognitionem senatus poscit”).

[1846] Plin. _Ep._ vi. 31, 8 (in a case of a forgery of a will) “Heredes, cum Caesar (Trajanus) esset in Dacia, communiter epistula scripta, petierant ut susciperet cognitionem.”

[1847] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 79 “Marsus ... Vibius nuntiavit Pisoni Romam ad dicendam causam veniret. Ille eludens respondit adfuturum, ubi praetor, qui de veneficiis quaereret, reo atque accusatoribus diem prodixisset”; ib. iii 10 “petitum ... est a principe cognitionem exciperet; quod ne reus quidem abnuebat, studia populi et patrum metuens ... haud fallebat Tiberium moles cognitionis quaque ipse fama distraheretur. Igitur paucis familiarium adhibitis minas accusantium et hinc preces audit integramque causam ad senatum remittit.” “Remittit” does not imply that the Senate was bound to take the case. For the technically voluntary nature of its jurisdiction cf. ib. iv. 21, xiii. 10, where we find the expressions “receptus est reus,” “recepti sunt inter reos.”

[1848] Dio Cass. lii. 22, 33. A case of adultery of a centurion with a tribune’s wife comes before the Emperor. Trajan stated the ground on which he tried this case (Plin. _Ep._ vi. 31, 6 “Caesar et nomen centurionis et commemorationem disciplinae militaris sententiae adjecit, ne omnes ejusmodi causas revocare ad se videretur”).

[1849] An instance is mentioned by Pliny (_Ep._ vii. 6, 8 “mater, amisso filio ... libertos ejus eosdemque coheredes suos falsi et veneficii reos detulerat ad principem judicemque impetraverat Julium Servianum”).

[1850] See the section on the functionaries of the Princeps (p. 406 sq.).

[1851] Plin. _ad Traj._ 96, 4 “quia cives Romani erant, adnotavi in urbem remittendos.”

[1852] It is not properly an appeal but a denial of jurisdiction. But on what ground the jurisdiction of the procurator was denied is not clear. The Roman citizenship, in virtue of which St. Paul claimed exemption from scourging at Philippi and Jerusalem, is not mentioned here. See _Class. Rev._ x. p. 231.

[1853] Plin. _Ep._ ii. 11; Suet. _Galba_ 9.

[1854] For its attachment to procurators and to persons with extraordinary commands see the instances given by Mommsen (_Staatsr._ ii p. 270). So the praefectures of the guard, the _vigiles_ and the fleet, are _honores juris gladii_ (_Vita Alex._ 49). In the case of ordinary provincial governors it is, perhaps, safer to say that the _jus gladii_ is possessed by them, or permitted to them, rather than that it was attached to them by the Princeps (Ulp. in _Dig._ 1, 18, 6, 8 “qui universas provincias regunt, jus gladii habent et in metallum dandi potestas iis permissa est”).

[1855] Dio Cass. lii. 22, 33; _Dig._ 48, 19, 27, 1 and 2.

[1856] Even by Tiberius’ reign this procedure had become so formal that a rule was framed for its exercise. A definite interval was prescribed within which the Princeps might consider the request for the intercession (Tac. _Ann._ iii. 51 [A.D. 21] “factum senatus consultum, ne decreta patrum ante diem _decimum_ ad aerarium deferrentur idque vitae spatium damnatis prorogaretur”; cf. Dio Cass. lvii. 20; Suet. _Tib._ 75).

[1857] p. 385.

[1858] “Ob laetitiam aliquam vel honorem domus divinae vel ex aliqua causa, ex qua senatus censuit abolitionem reorum fieri” (Ulp. in _Dig._ 48, 16, 12; cf. 48, 3, 2, 1). Domitian by an edict declared that such _abolitiones_ did not extend to slaves who were in custody awaiting trial (_Dig._ 48, 16, 16; cf. 48, 3, 2, 1).

[1859] p. 249.

[1860] Ulp. in _Dig._ 3, 1, 1, 10 “De qua autem restitutione praetor loquitur? Utrum de ea quae a principe vel a senatu? Pomponius quaerit: et putat de ea restitutione sensum, quam princeps vel senatus indulsit.”

[1861] It is said of Claudius (Suet. _Claud._ 12) “neminem exulum nisi ex senatus auctoritate restituit”; and of Antoninus Pius (_Vita_ 6) “His quos Hadrianus damnaverat in senatu indulgentias petit, dicens etiam ipsum Hadrianum hoc fuisse facturum.”

[1862] Such acts are mentioned under Claudius (Dio Cass. lx. 4), Otho (Tac. _Hist._ i. 90; Plut. _Otho_ 1), Vitellius (Tac. _Hist._ ii. 92), Vespasian (Dio Cass. lxvi. 9), Nerva (Plin. _Ep._ iv. 9, 2), Antoninus Caracalla (_Vita_ 3), and Gordian (Herodian vii. 6, 4).

[1863] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 50 “(Tiberius) liberavit ... Appuleiam lege majestatis, adulterii graviorem poenam deprecatus.”

[1864] p. 390.

[1865] Gordian is spoken of as παλινδικίαν διδοὺς τοῦς ἀδίκως κατακριθεῖσι (Herodian vii. 6, 4).

[1866] Ulp. in _Dig._ 3, 1, 1, 10.

[1867] Suet. _Claud._ 14 “(Claudius) iis, qui apud privatos judices pius petendo formula excidissent, restituit actiones”; _Dom._ 8 “(Domitianus) ambitiosas centumvirorum sententias rescidit.”

[1868] This power was employed by Augustus (Suet. _Aug._ 32 “Diuturnorum reorum ... nomina abolevit”), Gaius (Suet. _Calig._ 15 “criminum ... si quae residua ex priore tempore manebant, omnium gratiam fecit”; cf. Dio Cass. lix. 6), Vespasian (Dio Cass. lxvi. 9), and Domitian (Suet. _Dom._ 9).

[1869] p. 388.

[1870] Cic. _in Vat._ 14, 33.

[1871] p. 390.

[1872] _Dig._ 48, 19, 9, 11 “referre ad principem debet, ut ex auctoritate ejus poena aut permutetur aut liberaretur.”

[1873] The capital punishment of decurions was prohibited by Hadrian (_Dig._ 48, 19, 15), and the earliest _mandata_, directing the procedure of governors in such cases, proceed from the _divi fratres_ (ib. 48, 19, 27, 1 and 2). The punishment of deportation had been confined to the Princeps and the praefects of the praetorian guard and the city by the time of Septimius Severus (ib. 48, 19, 2, 1 and 48, 22, 6, 1; cf. § 7).

[1874] Pliny often raises this question in his correspondence with Trajan (31 [40], 4; 56 [64], 3; 57 [65], 1). The passages seem to show (i.) that there was at the time no fixed rule defining the governor’s power of _restitutio_, at least in public provinces; (ii.) that _restitutio_ by a governor was felt to be permissible in certain cases.

[1875] A passage in Justinian’s _Code_ (9, 51, 1) shows us Antoninus (Caracalla) saying to a man, who had been deported to an island, “Restituo te in integrum provinciae tuae.”

[1876] Greenidge in _Classical Review_ viii. p. 437.

[1877] Cf. Tac. _Ann._ iii. 53 (quoted p. 352).

[1878] Dio Cass. xliii. 48; Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 557.

[1879] Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 29; Dio Cass. liii. 2; Suet. _Aug._ 36.

[1880] Tac. l.c.; Dio Cass. liii. 32.

[1881] Tac. l.c.; Dio Cass. lx. 24; Suet. _Claud._ 24. For the election by the Princeps see the inscription to Ti. Domitius Decidius “electo (Mommsen, “adlecto” Wilmanns) a T. Claudio Caesare ... qui primus quaestor per triennium citra ordinem praeesset aerario Saturni” (Wilmanns n. 1135).

[1882] Momms. _Staatsr._ ii. p. 559.

[1883] Tac. l.c.; Mommsen l.c.

[1884] Dio Cass. lxxi. 33 καὶ χρήματα ἐκ τοῦ δημοσίου ᾔτησε τὴν βουλήν.

[1885] For the meaning of the word—the great basket in which money was kept in the state treasuries—see Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 998 n. 1. At the beginning of the Principate there were, perhaps, fisci rather than a _fiscus_ (cf. Suet. _Aug._ 101), although there must always have been a central controlling department.

[1886] Tiberius in 23 B.C. says of Lucilius Capito, procurator of Asia, “non se jus nisi in servitia et pecunias familiares dedisse” (Tac. _Ann._ iv. 15). He was doubtless a “procurator patrimonii.” Cf. Tac. _Ann._ xii. 60 (“cum Claudius libertos, quos rei familiari praefecerat, sibique et legibus adaequaverit”); xiii. 1 “P. Celer eques Romanus et Helius libertus, rei familiari principis in Asia inpositi.”

[1887] Marquardt _Staatsverwaltung_ ii. p. 256.

[1888] _Vita Severi_ 12 “interfectis innumeris Abani partium viris ... omnium bona publicata sunt.... Tuncque primum privatarum rerum procuratio constituta est.” The ordinarily accepted view of the relations of these two departments to one another is that of Hirschfeld and Marquardt, viz. that the _patrimonium_ was the inalienable crown property, the _res privata_ the strictly personal property of the Princeps. Karlowa (_Rechtsgeschichte_ i. p. 505) takes an exactly oppositive view of their relations, based partly on the fact that extant inscriptions show the _procurator rationis privatae_ to have had a higher rank than the _procurator patrimonii_.

[1889] _Mon. Anc._ iii. 39 “HS milliens et septingentiens (170 million sesterces) ex patrimonio meo detuli.”

[1890] Dio Cass. lv. 25; Tac. _Ann._ i. 78.

[1891] Dio Cass. l.c.; cf. Tac. _Ann._ v. 8 (vi. 3).

[1892] p. 351.

[1893] Tac. _Ann._ ii 85.

[1894] ib. iii. 61.

[1895] ib. xi. 15.

[1896] _Vita Aurel._ 31.

[1897] Mommsen _Römisches Münzwesen_ pp. 742 ff. He shows that the transitory usurpation of the copper coinage by Nero was due to the same desire of making a profit as his reduction of the value of silver.

[1898] _Dig._ 2, 15, 8 “divus Marcus oratione in senatu recitata effecit ne, etc.” Cf. 24, 1, 23; 27, 9, 1.

[1899] Tacitus (_Ann._ vi. 2 [8]) remarks, with reference to proposals carried in the Senate in 32 A.D., “et bona Sejani ablata aerario ut in fiscum cogerentur, tanquam referret.”

[1900] Suet. _Aug._ 38 “Liberis senatorum, quo celerius rei publicae assuescerent, protinus ... latum clavum induere et curiae interesse permisit.”

[1901] Wilmanns _Index_ p. 602; cf. Suet. _Dom._ 10.

[1902] Augustus had given the post of _praefectus alae_ as well as that of _tribunus militum_ to senators’ sons (Suet. _Aug._ 38). Mommsen (_Staatsr._ i. p. 548) thinks that after Tiberius these _laticlavii_, as a rule, filled the office of tribune alone. They could scarcely have been given a real command when they first joined the standards.

[1903] The poet Ovid, who assumed the _latus clavus_ by right of birth, took the first steps towards a senatorial career by filling two posts in the vigintivirate, but he went no further and subsided into equestrian rank (Ovid _Trist._ iv. 10, 29; _Fasti_ iv. 383).

[1904] Suet. _Claud._ 24 “Senatoriam dignitatem recusantibus equestrem quoque ademit.”

[1905] Suet. _Claud._ 24 “Latum clavum (quamvis initio affirmasset non lecturum se senatorem nisi civis Romani abnepotem) etiam libertini filio tribuit, sed sub conditione si prius ab equite Romano adoptatus esset.” Claudius then appealed to the famous precedent set by his ancestor Appius Caecus.

[1906] _Dig._ 23, 2, 44.

[1907] ib. 1, 9, 8; 50, 1, 22, 5.

[1908] ib. 1, 9, §§ 5, 6, 7, 10.

[1909] Asc. _in or._ _in Tog._ _Cand._ p. 94.

[1910] Dio Cass. lxix. 16 ἐνομοθέτησε δὲ ... ἵνα μηδεὶς βουλευτὴς μητ’ αὐτὸς μήτε δι’ ἑτέρου τέλος τι μισθῶται.

[1911] Severus Alexander at first forbade the taking of interest, but subsequently allowed 6 per cent (_Vita_ 26). For investment by a senator at an earlier period cf. Plin. _Ep._ iii. 19, 8 “sum quidem prope totus in praediis, aliquid tamen fenero.”

[1912] _Dig._ 50, 1, 23 “municeps esse desinit senatoriam adeptus dignitatem, quantum ad munera; quantum vero ad honorem, retinere creditur originem.” Cf. ib. 1, 9, 11; 50, 1, 22, 5; _Cod._ 10, 40 [39], 8.

[1913] p. 387.

[1914] Friedländer _Sittengesch._ i. 3.

[1915] Dio Cass. lii. cc. 7, 15, 31; lxvii. 2.

[1916] See p. 413.

[1917] p. 364.

[1918] p. 374.

[1919] Suet. _Claud._ 25 “stipendiaque instituit (Claudius) et imaginariae militiae genus, quod vocatur ‘supra numerum,’ quo absentes et titulo tenus fungerentur.”

[1920] In A.D. 16 a proposal was made in the Senate “ut ... legionum legati, qui ante praeturam ea militia fungebantur, jam tum praetores destinarentur” (Tac. _Ann._ ii. 36).

[1921] Galba’s is a good instance of a distinguished senatorial career. He obtained office _ante legitimum tempus_; after the praetorship he governed Aquitania, after the consulship Upper Germany; he was then proconsul of Africa, and finally for eight years legate of Tarraconensis. See Suet. _Galba_ 6, 7, 8.

[1922] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 6 “(the state contracts) societatibus equitum Romanorum agitabantur.”

[1923] Dio Cass. liii. 30. On Antonius Musa, who had saved Augustus’ life, was conferred τὸ χρυσοῖς δακτυλίοις (ἀπελεύθερος γὰρ ἦν) χρῆσθαι: ib. xlviii. 45 (Augustus, on the reception of Menas the former freedman of Sex. Pompeius) δακτυλίοις τε χρυσοῖς ἐκόσμησε καὶ ἐς τὸ τῶν ἱππέων τέλος ἐσέγραψε. These words _may_ mean that Menas was made an _eques equo publico_ as well.

[1924] A rescript of Hadrian is quoted with reference to the _ingenuitas_ conferred by the gold ring (Ulp. in _Dig._ 40, 10, 6). For other references to this right see _Dig._ 38, 2, 3; Justin. _Nov._ 78.

[1925] The usurpation of the gold ring by freedmen, which was repressed by Claudius (Suet. _Claud._ 25) and Domitian, and the inspection in the theatre instituted by the latter (Martial v. 8) seem to refer to a civil class; at least there is no evidence that such people claimed to be _equites equo publico_. When Dio Cassius (lvi. 42) speaks of οἵ τε ἱππεῖς, οἵ τε ἐκ τοῦ τέλους καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι, it is not clear who “the others” are, but the passage shows that persons other than those in the corps were called “equites.”

[1926] Dionys. vi. 13.

[1927] The _seviri_ would seem to show that there were six _turmae_. See Hirschfeld _Verwaltungsgesch._ p. 243 n. 1.

[1928] Hence such expressions as _a divo Hadriano equo publico honoratus_ (Wilmanns 1825), _equo publico exornatus ab Impp. Severo et Antonino Augg._ (ib. 1595).

[1929] p. 347.

[1930] p. 225. It is probable that the revision of the knights described in Suet. _Claud._ 16, _Vesp._ 9 refers to the censorship of these emperors.

[1931] _a censibus equitum Romanorum_ (Wilmanns 1275), _a censibus a libellis Aug._ (ib. 1249 b), _a libellis et censibus_ (ib. 1257).

[1932] p. 225.

[1933] Suet. _Aug._ 38 “equitum turmas frequenter recognovit, post longam intercapedinem reducto more transvectionis.”

[1934] ib. 38 “mox reddendi equi gratiam fecit eis, qui majores annorum quinque et triginta retinere eum nollent.”

[1935] ib. 39 “Unum quemque equitum rationem vitae reddere coegit.”

[1936] Suet. _Calig._ 16 “palam adempto equo, quibus aut probri aliquid aut ignominiae inesset.”

[1937] Suet. _Aug._ 37, 39.

[1938] In those of Caligula (Suet. _Calig._ 16) and Nero (Dio Cass. lxiii. 13), and perhaps in those of Vitellius (Tac. _Hist._ ii. 62) and Severus Alexander (_Vita_ 15).

[1939] Zosimus ii. 29.

[1940] By the side of such titles as _equo publico judex selectus ex V decuriis_ (Wilmanns 2110) and _equum publicum habens adlectus in V decurias_ (ib. 2203) we find the title _quin. decur. judi(cum) (inter) quatringenarios_ (Henzen 6469), in which a purely monetary qualification is expressed.

[1941] Wilmanns nn. 1639, 2841, _Index_ p. 564; Mommsen _Staatsr._ iii. p. 565.

[1942] Wilmanns n. 2858; Mommsen ib. n. 3.

[1943] These might have been included in the _equites illustres_ whom Augustus forbade to set foot in Egypt (Tac. _Ann._ ii. 59 “vetitis nisi permissu ingredi senatoribus aut equitibus Romanis illustribus”), but the knights chiefly referred to here are doubtless distinguished permanent members of the order.

[1944] The variants used by Tacitus would apply to both of these classes. He uses _insignis_ (_Ann._ xi. 5) and speaks of _primores equitum_ (_Hist._ i. 4). Two ex-praefects of the praetorian guard are described as _equites Romani dignitate senatoria_ (_Ann._ xvi. 17). Cf. note 3.

[1945] For the promotions from one praefecture to another, see Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1042 n. 1.

[1946] p. 61.

[1947] p. 120.

[1948] Tac. _Ann._ vi. 11 [17] “duratque simulacrum, quotiens ob ferias Latinas praeficitur qui consulare munus usurpet.”

[1949] Suet. _Caes._ 76 “praefectos ... pro praetoribus constituit, qui absente se res urbanas administrarent”; Dio Cass. xliii. 28 πολιανόμοις τισίν ὀκτώ, ὤς τισι δοκεῖ, ἢ ἔξ, ὡς μᾶλλον πεπίστευται, ἐπιτρέψας.

[1950] Tac. _Ann._ vi. 11 [17].

[1951] Tac. l.c.; cf. Dio Cass. liv. 19.

[1952] In Tac. _Ann._ vi. 10 [16] it is said of L. Piso (died 32 A.D.) “praefectus urbi recens continuam potestatem et insolentia parendi graviorem mire temperavit.”

[1953] We find Maximus as praefect during Caligula’s presence in Rome in 39 A.D. (Dio Cass. lix. 13).

[1954] Tac. _Ann._ vi. 11 [17] “(Augustus) sumpsit e consularibus.”

[1955] _Vita Commodi_ 14 “praefectos urbi eadem facilitate mutavit”; _Vita Pii_ 8 “successorem viventi bono judici nulli dedit nisi Orfito praefecto urbi, sed petenti.” For the frequent life-long tenure of the office see Dio Cass. lii. 24.

[1956] Paulus in _Dig._ 5, 1, 12, 1 “(Judicem dare possunt) hi quibus id more concessum est propter vim imperii, sicut praefectus urbi ceterique Romae magistratus”; contrast Pompon. in _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 33 “nam praefectus annonae et vigilum non sunt magistratus, sed extra ordinem utilitatis causa constituti sunt.”

[1957] Messala Corvinus, praefect _circa_ 25 B.C. (Jerome in Euseb. _Chron._ a. 1991).

[1958] Seneca _Ep._ 83, 14 “L. Piso urbis custos ... officium ... suum, quo tutela urbis continebatur, diligentissime administravit.”

[1959] Suet. _Aug._ 49.

[1960] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 5.

[1961] _Dig._ 1, 12.

[1962] Tac. _Ann._ xiv. 41 (A.D. 61) “pari ignominia (interdiction from Italy) Valerius Ponticus adficitur, quod reos, ne apud praefectum urbis arguerentur, ad praetorem detulisset, interim specie legum, mox praevaricando ultionem elusurus.”

[1963] Dio Cass. lii. 21 καὶ τὰς δίκας, τάς τε παρὰ πάντων ὧν εἶπον ἀρχόντων ἐφεσίμους τε καὶ ἀναπομπίμους καὶ τὰς τοῦ θανάτου, τοῖς τε ἐν τῇ πόλει, πλὴν ὦν ἂν εἴπω, καὶ τοῖς ἔξω αὐτῆς μέχρι πεντήκοντα καὶ ἑπτακοσίων σταδίων οἰκοῦσι κρίνῃ: Ulp. in _Dig._ 1, 12, 1 “Omnia omnino crimina praefectura urbis sibi vindicavit [a praefectura urbis sibi vindicari, _Momms._], nec tantum ea, quae intra urbem admittuntur, verum ea quoque, quae extra urbem intra Italiam [intra c̅ lapidem, _Momms._, cf. 1, 12, 1, 4] epistula divi Severi ad Fabium Cilonem praefectum urbi missa declaratur.”

[1964] _Dig._ 1, 12, 3; 48, 19, 8, 5.

[1965] _Collatio_ 14, 3, 2; _Dig._ 1, 12, 1, 4. Cf. note 5.

[1966] Ulp. in _Dig._ 1, 12, 3 “Praefectus urbi, cum terminos urbis exierit, potestatem non habet: extra urbem potest jubere judicare.”

[1967] _Dig._ 1, 12, 1, 6 “Sed et ex interdictis quod vi aut clam aut interdicto unde vi audire [aut unde vi adiri, _Momms._] potest.”

[1968] Dio Cass. lii. 21 (quoted n. 5); _Cod._ 7, 62, 17 (Constantine, A.D. 322) “si apud utrumque praetorem, dum quaestio ventilatur, ab aliqua parte auxilium provocationis fuerit objectum, praefecturae urbis judicium sacrum appellator observet.”

[1969] Dio Cass. liii. 11.

[1970] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 5. Otho speaks of the corps as “Italiae alumni et Romana vere juventus” (Tac. _Hist._ i 84).

[1971] Suet. _Tit._ 6.

[1972] _Vita Severi_ 14.

[1973] Two are regarded as the normal number by Dio Cassius (lii. 24). Three are found under Commodus, Didius Julianus, and Severus Alexander. See Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 867.

[1974] _Collatio_ 14, 3, 2. The right was given by constitutions (“jam eo perventum est constitutionibus”). The citation is from Ulpian, and this jurisdiction had doubtless been attained before the time of Caracalla. Cf. _Vita Alex._ 21.

[1975] _Cod._ 9, 2, 6, 1 (Gordian, A.D. 243, with reference to appeal against a _praeses provinciae_ on the ground of condemnation in absence) “praefectos praetorio adire cura.”

[1976] ib. 4, 65, 4, 1 (Alexander, A.D. 222) “si majorem animadversionem exigere rem deprehenderit (praeses provinciae), ad Domitium Ulpianum praefectum praetorio et parentem meum reos remittere curabit”; cf. 8, 40 [41], 13.

[1977] _Dig._ 12, 1, 40 “Lecta est in auditorio Aemilii Papiniani praefecti praetorio juris consulti cautio hujusmodi”; cf. 22, 1, 3, 3.

[1978] p. 386.

[1979] _Dig._ 1, 11, 1, 1 (Arcadius in early part of fourth century A.D.) “praefectorum auctoritas ... in tantum meruit augeri ut appellari a praefectis praetorio non possit. Nam cum antea quaesitum fuisset an liceret ... et extarent exempla eorum qui provocaverint, postea publice sententia principali lecta appellandi facultas interdicta est;” _Cod._ 7, 62, 19 (Constantine, A.D. 331) “a praefectis autem praetorio provocare non sinimus.”

[1980] Cf. _Vita Marci_ 11 “habuit secum praefectos, quorum et auctoritate et periculo semper jura dictavit.”

[1981] See below on the _consilium_.

[1982] Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 549. A knight of the third century is appointed _in consilium praef. praet. item urb(i) ex sacra jussione_ (Henzen 6519). Cf. Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1122 n. 1.

[1983] _Cod._ 1, 26, 2 (Alexander, A.D. 235) “Formam a praefecto praetorio datam, etsi generalis sit, minime legibus vel constitutionibus contrariam, si nihil postea ex auctoritate mea innovatum est, servari aequum est.”

[1984] _Vita Alex._ 21.

[1985] ib. “Alexander autem idcirco senatores esse voluit praef. praet., ne quis non senator de Romano senatore judicaret.”

[1986] ib. “si quis imperatorum successorem praef. praet. dare vellet, laticlaviam eidem ... summitteret”; cf. _Vita Commodi_ 4; _Vita Hadriani_ 8 “cum Attianum ex praefecto praetorii ornamentis consularibus praeditum faceret senatorem.”

[1987] Cic. _ad Att._ iv. 1, 7; Dio Cass. xxxix. 9.

[1988] Dio Cass. xlvi. 39.

[1989] _Dig._ 1, 2, 2, 32.

[1990] Dio Cass. liv. 1; _Mon. Anc._ Gr. iii. 6.

[1991] Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1038 n. 1; Hirschfeld _Verwaltungsgesch._ p. 130 n. 1; Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 553.

[1992] Dio Cass. liv. 17; lv. 26.

[1993] _Praefecti frumenti dandi_ are found, apparently for the purpose of distribution, as late as the second century. They were generally ex-praetors and appointed _ex senatus consulto_, probably because the _aerarium_ bore or contributed to the cost. See Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 673; Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 553.

[1994] Dio Cass. lii. 24; Seneca _de Brev. Vitae_ 19, 1.

[1995] Hirschfeld in _Philologus_ 1870, pp. 79 ff.

[1996] Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i p. 556.

[1997] _Dig._ 48, 2, 13; cf. 48, 12, 1.

[1998] ib. 14, 5, 8; 14, 1, 1, 18.

[1999] ib. 14, 5, 8 “sententiam (praefecti annonae) conservavit imperator”; cf. Dio Cass. lii. 33.

[2000] p. 235.

[2001] Dio Cass. liv. 2.

[2002] Paulus in _Dig._ 1, 15, 1 and 3.

[2003] Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 558.

[2004] _Dig._ 1, 15; cf. 12, 4, 15; 47, 2, 57 [56], 1.

[2005] ib. 1, 15, 3 and 4; Cod. 1, 43, 1.

[2006] _Dig._ 19, 2, 56; 20, 2, 9. _Praefecti vigilum_ (one of whom is the jurist Herennius Modestinus) take part in a controversy which has come down to us known as the _lis fullonum_ (Bruns _Fontes_; _C.I.L._ vi. n. 266). The case has been discussed by Bethmann-Hollweg _Civilprozess_ ii. p. 767 n. 60 and Mommsen in _C.I.L._ l.c.; _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1058 n. 3.

[2007] Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 539.

[2008] Coins of 16 B.C. exist (Eckhel vi. 105) with the inscription “s. p. q. R. imp. Cae(sari), quod v(iae) m(unitae) s(unt) ex ea p(ecunia) q(uam) is ad a(erarium) de(tulit)”; cf. _Vita Pert._ 9 “aerarium in suum statum restituit. Ad opera publica certum sumptum constituit. Reformandis viis pecuniam contulit.”

[2009] Frontinus _de Aquaed._ 100 and 104.

[2010] Dio Cass. lvii. 14.

[2011] Tac. _Hist._ i. 58.

[2012] Cic. _pro Caec._ 20, 57.

[2013] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 6 “intra paucos libertos domus.”

[2014] Tac. _Hist._ i. 58 “Vitellius ministeria principatus per libertos agi solita in equites Romanos disponit.” In Otho’s reign we find a mention of Secundus the rhetor ἐπὶ τῶν ἐπιστολῶν γενόμενος (Plut. _Otho_ 9).

[2015] The evidence for Hadrian’s change is mainly epigraphic. See Hirschfeld _Verwaltungsgesch._ i. p. 32. Two instances of it are found in _Vita Hadr._ 22 “ab epistulis et a libellis primus equites Romanos habuit.”

[2016] Dio Cass. lii. 25.

[2017] Tac. _Agric._ 4 “Cn. Julius Agricola ... utrumque avum procuratorem Caesarum habuit, quae equestris nobilitas est.”

[2018] p. 405.

[2019] i.e. the posts of _praefectus cohortis_, _tribunus militum_, _praefectus alae_. See Suet. _Claud._ 25.

[2020] Hirschfeld _op. cit._ p. 248.

[2021] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 15. See p. 395.

[2022] Ulp. in _Dig._ 1, 19, 1, 1 “si venditionis vel donationis vel transactionis causa quid agat, nihil agit: non enim alienare ei rem Caesaris, sed diligenter gerere commissum est.”

[2023] _Dig._ 1, 19, 1.

[2024] Suet. _Claud._ 12 “ut ... rata essent, quae procuratores sui in judicando statuerent, precario exegit” (from the Senate). Tacitus exaggerates the nature of the change when he says that “Claudius libertos, quos rei familiari praefecerat, sibique et legibus adaequaverit” (_Ann._ xii. 60).

[2025] Cf. Ulp. in _Dig._ 1, 16, 9 (with reference to the duties of a proconsul) “sane si fiscalis pecuniaria causa sit, quae ad procuratorem principis respicit, melius fecerit, si abstineat.”

[2026] Henzen 6525.

[2027] Wilmanns 1259, 1262.

[2028] _Cod._ 3, 26, 7.

[2029] Suet. _Vesp._ 12; Henzen 6396.

[2030] _C.I.L._ v. n. 737.

[2031] Hirschfeld _Verwaltungsgesch._ i. p. 32.

[2032] ib. p. 35.

[2033] Cf. the title of _Dig._ 1, 19 “De officio procuratoris Caesaris vel rationalis.”

[2034] Hirschfeld, _op. cit._ p. 37; Liebenam _Beiträge zur Verwaltungsgesch._ p. 32.

[2035] Strabo iii. p. 167. The title _a copiis militaribus_ is found in inscriptions (Orelli 2922, 3505).

[2036] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 47. Here it is said of cities of Asia, “quantum aerario aut fisco pendebant, in quinquennium remisit (Caesar).” The _procurator Asiae_ of _Ann._ iv. 15 is probably a _procurator patrimonii_. See p. 395.

[2037] p. 395. For procurators _ad bona damnatorum_ see Wilmanns 1278, 1291. For a _procurator a caducis_, _C.I.L._ iii. n. 1622.

[2038] Wilmanns 1257, 1272, 1273, 1275, 1285.

[2039] p. 396.

[2040] Timesitheus, the father-in-law of Gordian, was _proc. tam patrimoni quam rat. privatar._ in one district, _proc. ration. privat._ in another (Wilmanns 1293).

[2041] Herodian vii. 1 (Maximin) τήν τε θεραπείαν πᾶσαν, ἣ συγγεγόνει τῷ Ἀλεξάνδρῳ τοσούτων ἐτῶν, τῆς βασιλείου αὐλῆς ἀπέπεμψε: cf. _Vita_ Pert. 12 “Sane nullum ex eis, quos Commodus rebus gerendis imposuerat, mutavit, exspectans urbis natalem, quod eum diem rerum principium volebat esse.”

[2042] Liebenam _op. cit._ p. 55.

[2043] _Vita Nigri_ 7 “cum unus ad memoriam, alter ad libellos paruisset, statim praefecti facti sunt (Paulus et Ulpianus).”

[2044] This may be illustrated by the careers of Burrus (_proc. Augustae_, _proc. Ti. Caesaris_, _proc. divi Claudii_, _praefecto praetori_, _C.I.L._ xii. 5842), of Vibianus Tertullus (_ab epistulis Graecis_, _proc. a rationibus_, _praefectus vigilum_, _C.I.L._ iii. 6574) and of Sex. Var. Marcellus (_proc. aquarum_, _proc. Brittaniae_, _proc. rationis privatae_, _vice-praefectus praetorio_, Orelli 946).

[2045] Tac. _Ann._ xv. 35 (under Nero, in A.D. 64, Torquatus Silanus was forced to death on various grounds) “quin eum inter libertos habere, quos ab epistulis et libellis et rationibus appellet, nomina summae curae et meditamenta”; cf. ib. xvi. 8 (A.D. 65) “Ipsum dehinc Silanum increpuit isdem quibus patruum ejus Torquatum, tanquam disponeret jam imperii curas praeficeretque rationibus et libellis et epistulis libertos.”

[2046] Dio Cass. lii. 33; Stat. _Silv._ v. 1, esp. 83-107; Justinus xliii. 5, 12; Suid. s.v. Διονύσιος.

[2047] Seneca _Cons. ad Polyb._ vi. 4 and 5.

[2048] _Vita Carini_ 16 “fastidium subscribendi tantum habuit ut inpurum quendam ... ad subscribendum poneret.” The Princeps himself may not have written more than his signature. See _Vita Commodi_ 13 “ipse Commodus in subscribendo tardus et neglegens, ita ut libellis una forma multis subscriberet.”

[2049] Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 545.

[2050] Dio Cass. _Ep._ lxxviii. 13.

[2051] Karlowa l.c.

[2052] _Vita Carini_ 8 “Julius Calpurnius, qui ad memoriam dictabat.” He attended the Princeps with the other secretaries; see _Vita Alex._ 31 “Postmeridianas horas subscriptioni et lectioni epistularum semper dedit, ita ut ab epistulis, a libellis et a memoria semper adsisterent.”

[2053] This _consilium_ must not be confused with the committee of the Senate which had been employed by Augustus and Tiberius, but was subsequently discontinued. This board, composed of some of the magistrates and a number of senators chosen by lot, had given a preliminary consideration to the business to be submitted to the Senate (Suet. _Aug._ 35; _Tib._ 55; Dio Cass. liii. 21). Something like it was devised by Mamaea in the reign of Severus Alexander (Dio Cass. lxxx. 1; Herodian vi. 1).

[2054] Dio Cass. lv. 27; lvii. 7.

[2055] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 10 “paucis familiarium adhibitis” (in the trial of Piso, A.D. 20). In Nero’s trial of Octavia in A.D. 62 his body of advisers (“amicos quos velut consilio adhibuerat princeps” Tac. _Ann._ xiv. 62) may have been regarded as a _consilium domesticum_.

[2056] _Vita Hadr._ 18 “cum judicaret, in consilio habuit non amicos suos aut comites solum, sed juris consultos ... quos tamen senatus omnes probasset.”

[2057] Hirschfeld _Verwaltungsgesch._ i. p. 215. Probably only the equestrian members of this board received salaries (Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 990).

[2058] Cf. _Vita Hadr._ 8 “erat ... tunc mos, ut, cum princeps causas agnosceret, et senatores et equites Romanos in consilium vocaret et sententiam ex omnium deliberatione proferret.”

[2059] e.g. “centenario consiliario Aug(usti) ... juris perito” (Wilmanns 1286).

[2060] p. 380.

[2061] _Vita Alex._ 16 “neque ullam constitutionem sacravit sine viginti jurisperitis et doctissimis ac sapientibus viris isdemque disertissimis non minus quinquaginta.”

[2062] In Maecenas’ supposed advice to Augustus, which in this, as in other respects, probably reflects the practice of the time of Dio Cassius, it is said of the _consilium_ ἄλλοι ἄλλοτε διαγινωσκέτωσαν (Dio Cass. lii. 33).

[2063] Suet. _Aug._ 33.

[2064] Suet. _Nero_ 15.

[2065] _Vita Alex._ 16 “ut iretur per sententias singulorum ac scriberetur quid quisque dixisset.”

[2066] p. 410.

[2067] p. 314.

[2068] Plin. _H.N._ iii. 46 “nunc ambitum ejus (Italiae) urbesque enumerabimus, qua in re praefari necessarium est auctorem nos divum Augustum secuturos, descriptionemque ab eo factam Italiae totius in regiones XI.”

[2069] See the references in Marquardt _Staatsverw._ i. p. 220.

[2070] _Lex Malacitana_ c. lii. ff.

[2071] Kuhn _Verfassung des römischen Reiches_ i. pp. 236, 237. In an inscription of Hadrian’s time we find in Ostia _II. vir ... in comitiis factus_ (_C.I.L._ xiv. 375). For this and other instances see Liebenam _Städteverwaltung_ p. 479.

[2072] p. 438.

[2073] _Vita Hadr._ 22 “quattuor consulares per omnem Italiam judices constituit.” Of Antoninus Pius, who was one of these, it is said “cum Italiam regeret” (_Vita Anton._ 3). Cf. App. _B.C._ i. 38.

[2074] _Vita M. Anton._ 11 “datis juridicis Italiae consuluit ad id exemplum, quo Hadrianus consulares viros reddere jura praeceperat.”

[2075] Ulpian in _Fragmenta Vaticana_ 205, 232, 241.

[2076] Ulp. l.c.; _Dig._ 40, 5, 41, 5.

[2077] Fronto _ad Amicos_ ii. 7.

[2078] Marquardt (_Staatsverw._ i. p. 227) remarks that such a question as the qualification of a decurion belongs under Caesar’s legislation (_lex Ursonensis_ c. 105) to the municipal courts.

[2079] pp. 408, 410.

[2080] Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1082, Liebenam _Städteverw._ p. 480, and in _Philologus_ lvi. 290 ff. How far this curatorship became a standing office is uncertain.

[2081] p. 428.

[2082] The first official _ad corrigendum statum Italiae_ belongs to the year 214 A.D., while the provincial _corrector_ goes back to the time of Trajan (Marquardt _Staatsverw._ i. pp. 228, 229).

[2083] See the inscription of Atina of the time of Augustus (Wilmanns 1120), “T. Helvio ... legato Caesaris Augusti, qui Atinatibus HS ... legavit, ut liberis eorum ex reditu, dum in aetatem pervenirent, frumentum et postea sestertia singula millia darentur.”

[2084] Victor _Epit._ 12; Dio Cass. lxviii. 5.

[2085] Marquardt _Staatsverw._ ii. pp. 143, 144. Pius, in honour of his wife Faustina, created a fund for _puellae Faustinianae_ (_Vita_ 8); Alexander, in honour of his mother, one for _pueri puellaeque Mammaeani_ (_Vita_ 57).

[2086] Our knowledge of this institution is derived chiefly from two metal tables, the _Tabula Veleias_ (of Veleia in Cisalpine Gaul) and the _Tabula Baebianorum_ (of the Ligures Baebiani near Beneventum). See E. Desjardins _De tabulis alimentariis_, Mommsen in _I.R.N._ 1354, Wilmanns 2844, 2845. On the institution see Marquardt _Staatsverw._ ii. pp. 141-147, Liebenam _Städteverw._ pp. 105, 360.

[2087] p. 413.

[2088] e.g. _curator viae Appiae, praefectus alimentorum_: _curator viarum et praefectus alimentorum Clodiae et coherentium_: _curator viae Aemiliae et alimentorum_ (Wilmanns 1189, 1215, 1211). See Marquardt, Liebenam ll.cc., and Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 1079. In districts not pierced by the great roads, procurators (_alimentorum, ad alimenta_) were employed.

[2089] Marquardt l.c. p. 147.

[2090] Tac. _Ann._ i. 2 “Neque provinciae ilium rerum statum abnuebant, suspecto senatus populique imperio ob certamina potentium et avaritiam magistratuum, invalido legum auxilio, quae vi, ambitu, postremo pecunia turbabantur.”

[2091] δῆμος καὶ γερουσία (Dio Cass. liii. 12). These provinces are “propriae populi Romani” as opposed to those “propriae Caesaris” (Gaius ii. 21).

[2092] Tac. _Ann._ i. 76; Dio Cass. lx. 24; Suet. _Claud._ 25.

[2093] _Vita Marci_ 22 “Provincias ex proconsularibus consulares (i.e. governed by consular _legati_) aut ex consularibus proconsulares aut praetorias pro belli necessitate fecit.”

[2094] Asia, Africa, Baetica, Narbonensis, Sardinia and Corsica, Sicilia, Macedonia, Achaea, Creta and Cyrene, Cyprus, Bithynia.

[2095] Tarraconensis, Germania superior, Germania inferior, Brittania, Pannonia sup., Pannonia inf., Moesia sup., Moesia inf., Dacia, Dalmatia, Cappadocia, Syria, Lusitania, Aquitania, Lugdunensis, Belgica, Galatia, Pamphylia and Lycia, Cilicia, Arabia, Numidia. See Marquardt _Staatsv._ i. p. 494.

[2096] Alpes Maritimae, Alpes Cottiae, Alpes Poeninae, Raetia, Noricum, Thracia, Epirus, Mauretania Tingitana, Mauretania Caesariensis. See Marquardt l.c.

[2097] Suet. _Aug._ 47, _Claud._ 25, _Vesp._ 8.

[2098] Mommsen _Staatsr._ ii. p. 858; Marquardt _Staatsverw._ i. p. 358. The earliest known commissioner dates from the time of Trajan. He was “missus in provinciam Achaiam ... ad ordinandum statum liberarum civitatum” (Plin. _Ep._ viii. 24).

[2099] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 47.

[2100] Strabo xiii. p. 621; Cic. _pro Flacco_ 29, 71.

[2101] Tac. _Ann._ xii. 63.

[2102] Mommsen _Staatsr._ iii. p. 684.

[2103] Mommsen points out (ib. p. 685) that, if it did, Spain after the time of Vespasian would have paid no taxes.

[2104] _C.I.L._ iii. n. 781.

[2105] _Dig._ 27, 1, 17; cf. Suet. _Claud._ 25.

[2106] _Dig._ 50, 15, 8, 5 “Divus Antoninus Antiochenses colonos fecit salvis tributis.”

[2107] ib. 7 “Divus Vespasianus Caesarienses colonos fecit non adjecto ut et juris Italici essent, sed tributum his remisit capitis; sed divus Titus etiam solum immune factum interpretatus est.”

[2108] _Dig._ l.c.

[2109] “Rationes imperii” (Suet. _Cal._ 16), λογισμοὺς τῶν δημοσίων χρημάτων (Dio Cass. lix. 9). Cf. Tac. _Ann._ i. 11.

[2110] Marquardt _Staatsverw._ ii. pp. 207-211.

[2111] Dio Cass. liii. 17.

[2112] Liv. _Ep._ 134; cf. Dio Cass, liii. 22.

[2113] Tac. _Ann._ i 31 and 33; ii. 6; xiv. 46.

[2114] Dio Cassius (liii. 22), after saying that Augustus made ἀπογραφαί in the Gallic provinces, adds κᾀντεῦθεν ἔς τε τὴν Ἰβηρίαν ἀφίκετο, καὶ κατεστήσατο καὶ ἐκείνην.

[2115] St. Luke ii. 2; Joseph. _Antiq._ xvii. 355.

[2116] See the inscriptions collected by Kubitschek in Pauly-Wissowa _Real-Encyclopädie_, s.v. _census_.

[2117] The _tres Galliae_ honour a procurator as “primus umquam eq(ues) R(omanus) a censibus accipiendis” (Wilmanns 1269). The inscription is attributed to the joint rule of Severus and Caracalla.

[2118] Kubitschek l.c.

[2119] The chief evidence that there was comes from the province of Dacia. In a document of sale from Alburnum Majus, dated May 6, 159 A.D. the purchaser of a house binds himself “[uti] ... pro ea domo tributa usque ad recensum dep[e]n[dat]” (Bruns _Fontes_).

[2120] _Dig._ 50, 15,3 “in Syriis a quattuordecim annis masculi, a duodecim feminae usaue ad sexagensimum quintum annum tributo capitis obligantur.”

[2121] Grenfell and Hunt _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_ ii. pp. 207 ff.

[2122] _Dig._ 50, 15, 4 “Forma censuali cavetur, ut agri sic in censum referantur. Nomen fundi cujusque: et in qua civitate et in quo pago sit: et quos duos vicinos proximos habeat. Et arvum ... vinea ... olivae ... pratum ... pascua ... silvae caeduae.”

[2123] Plin. _H.N._ xix. 40; xxi. 77; Tac. _Ann._ iv. 72.

[2124] Josephus _Bell. Jud._ ii. 16, 4; cf. Grenfell and Hunt l.c.

[2125] Josephus _Bell. Jud._ vii. 6, 6. The Jews seem, however, to have paid other personal taxes as well. See App. _Syr._ 50; Marquardt _Staatsverw._ ii. p. 202.

[2126] Boadicea is made to say that, besides the land-tax, τῶν σωμάτων αὐτῶν δασμὸν ἐτήσιον φέρομεν (Dio Cass. lxii. 3).

[2127] _C. I. Gr._ 2336.

[2128] p. 321.

[2129] Gaius ii. 21 “(_provincialia_ praedia) quorum alia stipendiaria, alia tributaria vocamus. Stipendiaria sunt ea, quae in iis provinciis sunt quae propriae populi Romani esse intelliguntur. Tributaria sunt ea, quae in his provinciis sunt quae propriae _Caesaris esse_ creduntur.”

[2130] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 6 “frumento et pecuniae vectigales, cetera publicorum fructuum, societatibus equitum Romanorum agitabantur.” Cf. “societates vectigalium” (xiii. 50).

[2131] ib. xiii. 50, 51.

[2132] _Dig._ 39, 4.

[2133] Plin. _Paneg._ 37.

[2134] _Procuratores_ and _publicani_ are found concerned with the same taxes in the same province, e.g. _procurator IIII. publicorum Africae_ (_C.I.L._ iii. 3925; Wilmanns 1242), _conductor IIII. p. Afr._ (_C.I.L._ vi. 8588).

[2135] p. 417.

[2136] _Tabularium censuale_ (_C.I.L._ ii. 4248). For the officials connected with it, called _tabularii_, see Wilmanns _Index_ p. 572.

[2137] p. 323.

[2138] Dio Cass. xlii. 20.

[2139] ib. liii. 14.

[2140] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 32. In A.D. 22 it was determined afresh that the Flamen Dialis might not leave Italy, “ita sors Asiae in eum qui consularium ... proximus erat conlata” (ib. iii. 71).

[2141] Dio Cass. liii. 13.

[2142] ib.

[2143] “Salarium proconsulare” (Tac. _Agric._ 42).

[2144] Dio Cass. l.c.

[2145] Tac. _Hist._ iv. 48.

[2146] Tac. _Ann._ iii. 35 (on the outbreak of the war with Tacfarinas in A.D. 21) “Tiberius ... M’. Lepidum et Junium Blaesum nominavit, ex quis pro consule Africae legeretur.”

[2147] πάρεδροι (Dio Cass. liii. 14).

[2148] Wilmanns _Index_ p. 553.

[2149] Gaius i. 6. On the changed position of these assistants of the proconsuls, see Bethmann-Hollweg _Civilprozess_ ii. p. 102; Greenidge in _Class. Rev._ ix. p. 258.

[2150] pp. 417, 385.

[2151] Except when a colleague was occasionally appointed. See p. 360.

[2152] _Dig._ 1, 21, 5.

[2153] Dio Cassius (lii. 22) attributes this power ἐς μόνον τὸν ὑπατευκότα ἄρχοντα, i.e. to a _legatus consularis_.

[2154] Dio Cass. liii. 13.

[2155] Wilmanns _Index_ p. 559.

[2156] Tac. _Ann._ i. 80; vi. 39; iv. 18.

[2157] Plut. _Galba_ 4.

[2158] Dio Cass. liii. 13; Tac. _Ann._ i. 80.

[2159] Dio Cass. liii. 23

[2160] Wilmanns 1267; _procurator vices agens legati_ (ib. 1622 _a_). The title _procurator et praeses_ was also applied to them. The _procurator vice praesidis_ was an ordinary procurator holding an _interim_ command for the regular governor of a province (Wilmanns _Index_ p. 568).

[2161] See p. 428; and cf. Tac. _Hist._ i. 11.

[2162] Josephus _Antiq. Jud._ xviii. 4, 2.

[2163] _Leg. pro pr. exercitus Germanici superioris, legato pro pr. Germaniae super(ioris) et exercitus in ea tendentis_ (Wilmanns 867, 1186). Cf. Tac. _Ann._ vi. 30 “Gaetulicus ea tempestate superioris Germaniae legiones curabat.”

[2164] Tac. _Ann._ i. 31.

[2165] Tac. _Hist._ i. 11 “Aegyptum copiasque, quibus coerceretur, jam inde a divo Augusto equites Romani obtinent loco regum: ita visum expedire provinciam aditu difficilem, annonae fecundam ... domi retinere.”

[2166] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 59 “Augustus ... vetitis nisi permissu ingredi senatoribus aut equitibus Romanis illustribus, seposuit Aegyptum, ne fame urgueret Italiam, quisquis eam provinciam claustraque terrae ac maris ... insedisset.”

[2167] Ulpian (in _Dig._ 1, 17, 1) speaks of his having an “imperium ... ad similitudinem proconsulis.”

[2168] Tac. _Ann._ xii. 60 “divus Augustus apud equestres, qui Aegypto praesiderent, lege agi decretaque eorum proinde haberi jusserat, ac si magistratus Romani constituissent.”

[2169] Cic. _ad Att._ xiv. 12, 1; Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 32; Plin. _H.N._ iii. 30.

[2170] See Mitteis _Reichsrecht und Volksrecht_.

[2171] Cf. Plin. _Epp. ad Traj._ 17 (28), 37 (46), 39 (48), 47 (56), 54 (62), 111 (112).

[2172] The _lex Malacitana_ (the charter of a Latin colony in Spain founded between 81 and 84 A.D.) contains (c. li.) elaborate provisions for forcing candidates to come forward for office (Bruns _Fontes_). Trajan in a letter to Pliny speaks of those “qui inviti fiunt decuriones” (Plin. _Ep. ad Traj._ 113 [114]).

[2173] See Marquardt _Staatsverw._ i. p. 190; Kuhn _Verfassung des römischen Reichs_ i. p. 238. Cf. Plin. _ad Traj._ 112 (113) “ii quos indulgentia tua quibusdam civitatibus super legitimum numerum adicere permisit.” Contrast with this the principle of admission to local senates recognised by the _lex Julia Munic._ l. 85 “nei quis eorum quem ... legito neve sublegito ... nisi in demortuei damnateive locum.”

[2174] _Lex Julia Munic._ l. 135 “II vir(atum) IIII vir(atum) aliamve quam potestatem, ex quo honore in eum ordinem perveniat.”

[2175] Paulus in _Dig._ 50, 2, 7, 2 “Is, qui non sit decurio, duumviratu vel aliis honoribus fungi non potest, quia decurionum honoribus plebeii fungi prohibentur.”

[2176] _Dig._ 50, 2, 1.

[2177] ib. 50, 4, 1, 3 “Illud tenendum est generaliter personale quidem munus esse, quod corporibus labore cum sollicitudine animi ac vigilantia sollemniter extitit, patrimonii vero, in quo sumptus maxime postulatur.” But the two ideas were often inseparable. Hence the recognition of _mixta munera_ by Arcadius (50, 4, 18). For a complete enumeration of _munera_ see Kuhn _Verfassung_ i. pp. 35 ff.

[2178] _Dig._ 50, 4, 1, 2; 50, 4, 18, 8, 16 and 26.

[2179] ib. 50, 4, 1, 1.

[2180] That coercion was sometimes employed is shown by Tacitus _Ann._ iv. 36 “objecta publice Cyzicenis incuria caerimoniarum divi Augusti, additis violentiae criminibus adversum cives Romanos. Et amisere libertatem.”

[2181] Cf. Plin. _Paneg._ 80 “velocissimi sideris more omnia invisere, omnia audire, et undecumque invocatum statim, velut numen, adesse et adsistere. Talia esse crediderim quae ipse mundi parens temperat nutu ... tantum caelo vacat, postquam te dedit, qui erga omne hominum genus vice sua fungereris.” Boissier (_La Religion Romaine_ i. pp. 206, 207) quotes a very similar passage from Bossuet, which concludes “qu’il faut obéir aux princes comme à la justice même; ils sont des dieux et participent en quelque façon à l’indépendance divine.”

[2182] Dio Cass. li. 22.

[2183] ib. liv. 25.

[2184] Joseph. _Antiq._ xv. 10, 3.

[2185] Suet. _Aug._ 52 “templa, quamvis sciret etiam proconsulibus decerni solere, in nulla tamen provincia nisi communi suo Romaeque nomine recepit.”

[2186] Eckhel _Doctrina Numorum_ ii. 466.

[2187] Dio Cass. liv. 32; Rhys _Hibbert Lectures_ pp. 409, 421, 424.

[2188] Tac. _Ann._ i. 57.

[2189] Egger _Examen critique des historiens du règne d’Auguste_ App. ii. pp. 360-375.

[2190] Mourlot _Histoire de l’Augustalité dans l’Empire Romain_ pp. 29-33.

[2191] Tac. _Ann._ i. 73.

[2192] Thus in 15 A.D. a temple was erected at Tarraco (Tac. _Ann._ i. 78).

[2193] p. 363.

[2194] Suet. _Vesp._ 23 “Prima quoque morbi accessione, ‘Vae,’ inquit, ‘puto, Deus fio.’”

[2195] _Vita Marci_ 18.

[2196] Tac. _Ann._ i. 54.

[2197] See the inscription of Narbonne in Rushforth _Latin Historical Inscriptions_ n. 35. In this case the _Flaminica_ was the wife of the _Flamen_, as at Rome; but this was usually not the case in the municipal towns. See Marquardt _Staatsverw._ i. p. 174.

[2198] Mommsen _Staatsr._ iii p. 455.

[2199] This was the usual type, but there were local variations, and the relation of _sevir_ to _Augustalis_ was not always the same. In Cisalpine Gaul we have _seviri et Augustales_, where the ex-sevir retains his title. In southern Italy _Augustalis_ is used for _sevir_. See Mourlot _op. cit._ pp. 69-72; Rushforth _op. cit._ p. 64.

[2200] For a “templum et monumentum” in honour of the governor see Cic. _ad Q. fr._ 1, 1, 9, 26. A temple to Roma was erected by Smyrna as early as 195 B.C. (Tac. _Ann._ iv. 56).

[2201] Tac. _Ann._ xiv. 31 “templum divo Claudio constitutum quasi arx aeternae dominationis aspiciebatur.”

[2202] Imperial rescripts to _concilia_ or κοινά are frequent See _Dig._ 47, 14, 1; 49, 1, 1; 48, 6, 5, 1. Cf. 1, 16, 4, 5.

[2203] Plin. _Ep._ iii. 4, 2. Where, as in this passage, the _legati_ of a province are represented as making a complaint, they doubtless represent the _concilium_. In A.D. 62 a _senatus consultum_ was passed “ne quis ad concilium sociorum referret agendas apud senatum pro praetoribus prove consulibus grates” (Tac. _Ann._ xv. 22).

[2204] _Cod._ 5, 27, 1 (A.D. 336).

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

(_The references are to the pages_)

References to subjects will also be found in the Index of Latin words.

Administrative functions, of people, 243; of magistrates, 153; of Senate and Princeps, 393; rescripts of Princeps, 379, 380

Adoption, 17, 32

Aediles, 208-212, 246, 365, 368; curule, 121, 153, 160, 246, 365; plebeian, 98

Allies of Rome, origin, 299; status, 305 foll.; federated, 311

Amalgamation of races, 3

Amnesty, a prerogative of the Senate, 249

Anti-senatorial party, 331 foll.

Appeal, 106, 109, 410; from the king, 64; from the consul, 79, 167; from the dictator, 194; against fines, 170; not applicable to tribunician coercion, 168; nor after decretum ultimum, 279 foll.; courts of appeal under Principate, 382, 390, 412

Army, 41, 68 foll., 154; auxiliaries, 307; controls appointment of Princeps, 359

Augurs, 37, 123

Augury, _see_ Auspices

Auspices, 36-40, 162-167, 172, 196, 257

Autonomy of Roman subject states, 325; inconsistent with imperium, 329; its dangers, 324

Ballot, 258

Banausia, 185, 400

Caesar, 141, 142, 198, 201, 235, 248, 249, 314, 315; nature of his dictatorships, 336 foll.; his other powers, 337; a title of the Princeps, 353, 354

Caesar-worship, 440

Capital punishment within the walls, _see_ Appeal; without the walls, _see_ Jurisdiction, military; Sempronian law, 281

Caput, 31, 33; _see_ Rights

Censorship, 114-116, 122, 153, 198, 216-233, 347, 374, 430

Census, 347, 430

Centuriate organisation, 70-78

Character, a qualification for public rights, 116, 183

Citizenship, 34, 35, 132-140, 184, 240, 310 foll.; how conferred, 133, 134, 240, 300, 303, 304; complete or partial, 300 foll.; exclusiveness of Roman, 301

City, growth of, 2, 3

Clan, 1, 9-17

Claudian gens, 1, 5, 14, 16

Clientship, 5, 7, 8, 45

Codification, 102

Coercion, a magisterial prerogative, 167-171; of tribunes, 95, 98; relation to jurisdiction, 167; how affected by the ultimum decretum, 279

Colleagueship, 47, 79, 114, 150, 194, 197, 218, 351

Colonisation of Latin league, 297, 300; a prerogative of Princeps, 345

Comitia, in monarchy, 43; in early Republic, 88; in later Republic, 238-260; in Principate, 371 foll.; municipal, 423

Commerce, its influence on Roman law, 293

Concilium of the Plebs, 96; to meet tributim, 101; its jurisdiction, 100, 107, 254; its continuity, 149

Conflict of powers, 172-181

Constitution, the Roman, 146, 147, 261, 262; effect of foreign wars on, 83, 92, 117, 141, 151, 182

Consuls, 78, 112, 153, 196-202; plebeian, 121; functions limited by quaestorship, 80; censorship, 114; praetorship, 121; appeal from, 79; under the Principate, 367

Cooptation of gentes, 13; in priestly colleges, 124; in Senate, 373

Corn-supply, 210, 411

Curators, 413 foll.

Curies, 40, 41, 42, 250

Custom, 22, 58, 269

Debt, 90-92, 106, 117, 127

Decemvirate, 30, 104-108

Declaration of war, 56, 290, 344, 372, 376

Delegation, 61, 80, 98, 323, 324, 327, 358, 377, 382, 384, 389, 406

Dictator, 84, 85, 91-195, 336 foll.

Dispensation from laws, 276

Divine right, 45, 77

Domitian law, 255

Economic condition of Italy, 90 foll., 332, 425; measures of relief under the Principate, 425

Edict, 153, 177, 178, 205; provincial, 326; Emperor’s, 342

Egypt, 435

Election, not primitive, 46; method of appointing Republican magistrates, 78; of appointing Princeps, 358, 376; a prerogative of the people, 245, 372; procedure, 186, 187, 349; control of Princeps over, 349

Empire, 316, 427; effect on Roman constitution, 147

Equites, 41, 73, 224, 402; revision of, 224, 402; formation of an equestrian order, 225, 404, 415; their policy, 334, 402; influence on the Revolution, 333

Exile, 139, 140

Family, 18-23, 140, 226; the imperial, 356

Federal Government, traces of, 295, 311, 336

Fetiales, 56, 60, 290

Finance, 213, 286; public finance, 229, 394 foll.; the Budget, 231, 287, 429; finance in allied cities, 307, 424; in provinces, 417, 429; the fiscus, 395, 416

Fines, 169, 246, 371

Flamens, 52, 53, 189

Fleet, 236

Foreign elements in early Rome, 3, 293; foreign influences, 4, 209

Foreign policy, controlled by the Senate, 60, 282, 376; by the Princeps, 372, 376

Forms of law, 56, 87, 128, 205

Franchise, 241; a gift of the Princeps, 345

Freedmen, 144-146; freedmen’s vote, 145; freedmen under the Principate, 414

Germany, administration of, 435

Gracchus, Gaius, 142, 184, 201, 254; Tiberius, 176, 248

Hereditary succession, 45, 362

Imprisonment, 168

Inauguration, 50

Infamia, 185; grounds of, 226-228; effects of, 229

Intercession, 176, 181, 217; not applicable to censors, 217; nor to judices, 177

International law, 56, 60, 139, 141, 244, 283, 289 foll.

Interregnum, 47, 48, 83, 147

Italy, organisation of, 285, 422 foll.; races of, 289

Jurisdiction, civil, 242; distinction of jus and judicium, 64, 204, 382; exercised by king and judex, 62; magistrate and judex, 121, 204, 205, 382; curule aediles and judex, 210, 211, 369; by personal cognisance of praetor, 382; and of Princeps, 382, 419; by procurators, 416; by consuls and Senate, 385; tribune’s intercession, 178, 371, 383, 384, and Appendix

Jurisdiction, criminal, 62, 167; exercised by king, 62; by duumviri, 63, 161; consuls, 86, 199; aediles, 211, 369; people, 86, 88, 372; quaestors, 63, 80, 211 foll.; praetors, 207; Senate and consuls, 386, 387; Princeps, 388; praefectus urbi, 408, 424; pr. annonae, 412; pr. vigilum, 413; pr. praetorio, 410, 424; in standing courts, 177, 183, 207, 213, 236, 372, 386, 390; by special commissions, 239, 278; tribune’s intercession, 178, 371

⸺ administrative, of consuls, 198; censors, 232

⸺ capital, 79, 107, 109, 161; of the people, 245; on appeal from consuls, praetors, quaestors, curule aediles, and tribunes, 246; of Plebs on appeal from tribunes, 100, 107, 161, 168, 246; and plebeian aediles, 246; procedure in judicia populi, 246

⸺ domestic, 2

⸺ international, 294 foll.

⸺ military, 63, 76, 79, 84, 85, 108, 151, 155, 279, 328, 389

⸺ municipal, 302, 304, 423

⸺ political, 182, 211

⸺ provincial, 155, 325, 435

Land, public, 89, 90, 117, 229, 286, 413; tenure, 8, 15, 65-69, 75, 310; connexion with Servian tribes, 67, 223; in Italy, 307; in provinces, 320, 430

Latin league, 295 foll.; status of Latins, 308

Law, religious, 23, 51-57; judge-made, 206; form of a, 242; influence of Roman law on the Empire, 437

Legates, 434 foll.

Legislation, procedure in, 256 foll.

Legislative powers, of Populus, 5, 42, 239, 377; limited by magisterial initiative, 43, 88; by veto, 86, 179; by encroachments of Princeps and Senate, 372, 377 foll.

⸺ of Plebs, 96-97, 109, 124, 126

Licinio-Sextian laws, 120, 130, 216

Lot, 47, 124, 148, 191, 198, 200, 204, 213, 285, 433

Magistracy, 84, 150, 152-191, 363 foll.; qualifications, 183; candidature, 187 foll.; minor magistracies, 234 foll., 364

Manumission, 133, 134

Marius, 134, 240, 249

Marriage, 17, 39, 111, 136; intermarriage with foreigners, 295

Martial law, 279

Master of the Horse, 196

Military service, 41, 68-74, 137, 138; conscription, 154; cavalry, 41, 73, 225; pensions, 396

Monarchy, 44, 45-65, 337

Municipal administration of Italy, 304, 305, 313 foll.; in the provinces, 437

Nobility, in later Republic, 129, 265; in Principate, 398 foll.

Nomination to office, 47, 78, 98, 191, 245, 360

Pardon, 391

Patria potestas, 18-23

Patricians, origin of, 5; possess caput, 31; predominance in early Republic, 86, 87; alliance with plebeian aristocracy, 129 foll.; created by Princeps, 347, 399; special powers of patrician senators, 265, 273, 275

Plebeians, origin of, 5, 6; generally excluded from clans, 10, 11; members of Populus, 66; gradual rise to power, 92 foll., 111, 120, 126, 127; plebeian law, 17, 28, 29, 104

Political misdemeanours, 181, 182, 227

Pomerium, extension of, 342, 345

Pontifex Maximus, in monarchy, 50, 51; conducts an election of tribunes, 108; in Principate, 350, 351, 397

Pontifical college, in monarchy, 50 foll.; exponents of fas, 54; of jus, 86; admission of Plebeians, 123; election to, 124, 254

Praefects, 394, 396, 401, 406

Praetors, 120, 153, 157, 202-208; under Principate, 364, 368; _see_ Edict

Priestly orders, 442

Primogeniture, 22, 130

Prisoners of war, 141

Procurators, 414

Prohibition, magisterial right of, 119, 173-176

Property, tenure of, 5, 8, 35; Servian classification, 69 foll.; registration by censor, 221-223; tenure by foreigners, 295

Provinces, 317 foll., 426 foll.; jurisdiction, 155, 325; revenues, 231, 286, 417, 429 foll.; formation, 284, 285; arrangements of Sulla, 201, 251, 322; of Gracchus, 180, 201, 322; of Pompeius, 323; of the Principate, 345, 401, 428

Public works, 209, 232, 413

Publilian law, 124, 125, 126, 216

Quaestors, delegates of king, 63; of consul for jurisdiction, 80, 161, 246; for finance, 81, 155, 178, 394, 432; in the field, 117, 141; functions, 212, 216; no vocatio or prensio, 181; appointment, 81, 102; qualifications, 184, 364, 373; under Principate, 369

Ramnes, 3, 40, 67, 73

Religious ideas, 36, 46, 51, 162, 440; their connexion with the clans, 16; international influence of, 56, 289, 291

Religious sanctions, 54, 99, 109

Representation, 312, 443

Rescission of sentences, 248

Responsibility of magistrates, 181, 217

Revenues, 229

Revolution, 332

Rights, 31, 33, 136, 138 foll., 240, 241; _see_ Caput and Citizenship

Romanisation of provinces, 436

Rotation in tenure of power, 198, 199

Scourging, 168

Senate, 147, 151, 261, 262; relation to king, 58 foll.; to consuls and other magistrates, 81 foll., 264, 267; to Princeps, 348, 359, 362, 376; powers, 59 foll., 83, 273, 276, 282 foll., 395, 397; control of legislation and elections, 125, 254, 273 foll., 377; procedure, 268 foll., 348; insignia, 265; revision, 219, 263, 347, 374; reform attempted by Sulla, 266, 335, 373; under the Principate, 373; conscripti, 82; senatorial order at Rome, 399, 411; in municipalities, 438.

Servian organisation, 65 foll., 138, 145

Servius Tullius, 58, 62, 138

Slavery, 24 foll., 105, 141 foll.; _see_ Manumission

Solon, 69, 127

Sulla, 146, 180, 183, 189, 197, 202, 204, 207, 213, 221, 234, 253, 254, 266

Taxation, Roman theory of, 319; direct, 320, 431; tithes, 321, 431; _see_ Tribute

Testaments, 26 foll., 106, 135, 136, 144, 251, 295

Tities, 3, 40, 67 (priores, posteriores, 73)

Treaties, 56, 60, 139, 244, 283, 291, 345, 372, 376; commercial, 293

Tribes, original, 3, 40, 41, 66, 67; Servian, 66 foll.; Republican, 101, 223, 252

Tribunate, consular, 112-114; military, 364, 373; of the Plebs, 93 foll., 108, 365; inviolability, 99, 345; power of prohibition, 119, 176; intercession, 178 foll., 346, 370; jurisdiction, 168, 169, 371; relation to the Senate, 161, 179, 371, 375; to the Plebs, 96, 124, 126, 346

Tribunician power possessed by Princeps, 338, 370

Tribute, from citizens, 41, 75, 137, 138, 222, 303; from subject states, 319 foll., 430

Triumph, 156-158

Triumvirate (43 B.C.), 338

Twelve Tables, 7, 16, 19, 26, 29, 87, 91, 92, 102, 104 foll., 111, 126, 161, 205, 241, 281

Valerio-Horatian laws, 108 foll., 124, 126, 236

Varian commission, 175, 248

Vestals, 52, 53

Voting: procedure, 258, 259; basis of division, 253; deprivation of right of, 241; freedmen’s vote, 146; rights of new citizens, 312

INDEX OF LATIN WORDS

(_The references are to the pages_)

Abductio in carcerem, 168; in vincula, 168

Abolitio, 392

Abolitiones publicae, 391

Absolve, 205

Accensi, 72, 73, 190, 253

Accusationes, 247

Acta, 363, 366, 374, 379, 381

## Actio, de in rem verso, 143;

de peculio, 143; quod jussu, 143; tributoria, 143

## Actionem dare, 206

Actor publicus, 144

Addictio, 128

Addictus, 91

Adlectio, 365, 373, 374, 399, 438

Adlectus, 82, 365

Adoptio, 17

Adrogatio, 17

Adrogatus, 32

Adscripticii, 72

Adsertor in libertatem, 134

Aedi dedicandae, 237

Aediles, 98; cereales, 411; curules, 122

Aedilicii, 265

Aedium sacrarum procuratio, 209

Aerarii, 73, 224, 228

Aerarium, 81, 155, 173, 194, 209, 213, 214, 231, 256, 259, 368, 369, 394, 395, 398, 413; militare, 396

Aes, 73; equestre, hordearium, 74, 137; aes et libram (per), 28, 90, 106

Ager, assignatus, 89; Campanus, 229; occupatorius, 230; privatus, 15; publicus, 15, 67, 69, 90, 304, 320; quaestorius, 89, 214; Romanus, 68, 101, 192

Agere cum patribus, 161; cum plebe, 96, 161; cum populo, 158, 160, 161, 246

Agnati, 10, 106

Agris dandis assignandis, 234, 237

Album senatorium, 374

Alieni juris, 33

Alimentarium, 425

Alter ego, 61, 409

Ambitio, 187

Ambitus, 118, 181

Amici, 292, 357

Amicitia, 292

Anquisitio, 246, 248

Antiquo, 258

Appellatio, 177, 346, 382, 384

Applicatio, 9

Aquarii, 209

Arator, 320

Arbiter, 2, 64

Arbor infelix, 63

Area Capitolii, 256

Arquites, 41

Artifices, 282

Arx, 1

As, 69, 137; libralis, 72; sextantarius, 69

Assidui, 73

Asylum, 53

Atrium, 129

Auctoritas, 46, 48, 125, 180, 272

Augures, 163

Augustales, 443

Auspex, 39

Auspicatio, 136, 257

Auspicato, 113

Auspicia, 36, 37, 38, 39, 50, 99, 136, 147, 148, 157, 162, 163, 217, 233; caduca, 163; coelestia, 164; ex tripudiis, 164; majora, minora, 147, 165; maxima, 165; privata, 39; publica, 39, 166

Auxilium, 92, 94, 96, 178, 194, 346, 370, 383

Aves internuntii Jovis, 164

Avocare contionem, 172

Beneficia, 380

Bona caduca, 417; damnatorum, 395, 417; fides, 227; vacantia, 395

Boni, 333

Caduca, 163, 417

Caesar dixit, 379

Calceus mulleus, 265

Calles, 215

Calumnia, 228

Candidatus, 187; Caesaris, 349

Capite censi, 73, 184, 221

Capitis deminutio, 32, 33, 138, 139, 140

Captus, 53

Caput, 31, 32, 33, 73, 86, 138, 139, 281

Carmen, 57

Castellum, 1

Casus belli, 306

Celeres, 41, 42

Censibus equitum Romanorum (a), 403

Censitor, 430

Censor, 115, 355, 430; perpetuus, 347

Censoria potestas, 217

Census, 4, 75, 135, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 223, 229, 263, 374

Census accipiendos (ad), 430

Centenarius, 418

Centesima rerum venalium, 396, 417

Centumviri, 13, 392

Centuriae, 41, 69, 70, 97; equitum, 74, 224; praerogativa, 253

Centuriatim, 89

Cerealia, 211

Certae precationes, 87

Certus ordo magistratuum, 186, 364

Cessio in jure, 135

Cista, 259

Civis, 34, 85, 133, 207, 281, 295, 299, 300, 301, 303; optimo, non optimo jure, 132, 133; sine suffragio, 300, 301, 302

Civitas, 6, 14, 133, 134, 139, 140, 273, 277, 300, 301, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 317, 428, 436, 437; foederata, 245, 299, 306, 317, 428; libera, 245, 306, 317, 428; libera et foederata, 306, 317; peregrina, 345; sine suffragio, 304

Civium capita, 133

Clarissimus, 400, 411

Classici, 73

Classis, 69, 70, 72, 74, 75, 137

Clavi fingendi causa, 193

Clavus annalis, 193

Clientela, 5, 45

Clientes, 9

Coemptio, 17

Coercitio, 95, 98, 154, 167, 170, 171, 173, 178, 181, 190, 191, 199, 210, 211, 246

Coetus nocturni, 107

Cogere, 206

Cognitio, 382, 388

Cognitionem suscipere, 388; a cognitionibus, 419

Cognomen, 353, 354

Cohortes urbanae, 408

Collega, 360; major, 193

Collegia, 4, 71, 107, 114, 178, 235, 255, 282

Colonia, 315, 429; civium Romanorum, 300; Latina, 296; maritima, 301

Coloniae deducendae causa, 237

Comites, 324, 357

Comitia, 43, 75, 76, 84, 87, 107, 108, 125, 127, 130, 149, 160, 164, 165, 172, 174, 182, 191, 198, 199, 240, 241, 245, 247, 248, 250, 254, 255, 257, 261, 273, 288, 315, 335, 338, 347, 366, 369, 371, 372, 373, 377, 381, 423; calata, 26, 27, 251; centuriata, 27, 88, 89, 97, 102, 103, 112, 115, 125, 145, 172, 195, 196, 216, 224, 244, 246, 248, 252, 259; curiata, 9, 12, 14, 26, 42, 46, 47, 48, 49, 60, 76, 88, 89, 250, 251, 423; tributa, 102, 115, 125, 145, 155, 161, 170, 208, 210, 224, 235, 236, 237, 238, 246, 249, 253, 304

Comitiales dies, 255

Comitiatus maximus, 107, 252

Commendatio, 348, 349, 350, 373

Commercium, 22, 33, 35, 295, 296, 304, 308, 310

Communia, 443

Commutatio, 32

Comparatio, 191, 198

Conceptivae, 255

Concilia, 93, 299, 315, 443, 444

Concilium plebis, 93, 94, 96, 97, 98, 100, 102, 103, 107, 109, 110, 115, 126, 127, 145, 149, 161, 170, 172, 210, 221, 224, 237, 246, 250, 253, 255

Concordia ordinum, 333

Condemna, 205

Conductor, 229

Confarreatio, 17, 39

Congruentia, 439

Conjurationes, 279

Consaepta, 258

Conscripti, 82, 83, 315

Consecratio bonorum, 170; capitis, 55

Consensus, 17, 226

Consiliarii, 410; Augusti, 420

Consilium, 48, 61, 85, 219, 285, 328, 357, 386, 388, 410, 419, 420, 421; domesticum, 22; publicum, 58, 61

Consors imperii, 353, 360

Consortes, 26

Constitutiones principum, 380, 421

Consul, 79, 355; major, 198

Consulare imperium, 94, 152

Consulares, 265, 269, 271, 365, 384, 423, 433, 435

Consularis potestas, 152

Consultatio, 380, 419

Consultum, 272

Contio, 158, 159, 191, 218, 246, 247, 255, 256, 257, 361; contionem dare, 160

Contra rem publicam, 277

Conubium, 33, 35, 39, 133, 295, 296, 304, 308

Conventio in manum, 32

Conventus, 327, 328

Cornicines, 71, 253

Corpus Romani juris, 105

Correctores, 424, 425, 428

Creatio, 78, 148

Cultus, 51, 53, 54, 209

Cura, 412, 413; alvei et riparum Tiberis, 413; annonae, 210, 368, 411; aquarum, 413; legum et morum, 347; morum, 219, 347; operum publicorum, 413; viarum, 413

Curatio, 401

Curatores, 411, 413, 428; alimentorum, 426; alvei et riparum Tiberis, 401; annonae, 237; aquarum, 401, 413; operum publicorum, 401, 413; rei publicae, 424; tribuum, 221; viarum, 237, 401, 413

Curia, 6, 15, 40, 41, 42, 43, 49, 59, 76, 88, 93, 97, 101, 102, 196, 222, 251, 255, 259, 315, 399, 438, 441

Curiales, 41, 42, 88, 438, 439

Curiatim, 89, 93

Curio, 42

Cursus honorum, 213, 364, 371

Curules, 270

Custodes, 259

Custos urbis, 407

Damnatio memoriae, 363

Damno, 258

Datio in mancipium, 32

Decemviri, 100, 108, 288; sacris faciundis, 119, 123; stlitibus judicandis, 236

Decretum, 379

Decuma, 231, 320, 321, 431

Decumani, 431, 432

Decuriae, 47

Decuriati, 282

Decurio, 315, 438

Dediticia civitas, 306

Deditio, 306

Deditus, 139

Deminutio capitis, 32, 33, 138

Designatus, 189

Detestatio sacrorum, 251

Devotio, 57

Dicere dictatorem, 191

Dico, 258

Dictator, 2, 44, 78, 84, 157, 191

Diem a praetore petere, 161; dixit, 161

Dies civilis, 165; fasti, 128, 176, 255; imperii, 359; legitimi, 187; nefasti, 255

Dilectus, 154, 300

Dirae, 163, 172

Diribitio, 259

Diribitores, 259

Discessio, 271

Disciplina, 38

Dispensator summarum, 416

Ditio, 306

Divisores, 188, 282

Divus, 441, 442

Domi, 79, 153, 166, 197

Dominica potestas, 18, 25

Dominium, 24, 26, 144, 352

Dominus, 25, 26, 142, 143, 144, 352, 414

Domus Caesaris, 356

Ducenarius, 418

Duci jubere, 314

Duo Augusti, 353

Duumviri juri dicundo, 313; navales, 236; perduellionis, 63, 80, 161, 246, 247; sacris faciundis, 119; viis purgandis, 235

Edictum, 177, 378; provinciale, 207; perpetuum, 326

Egregii, 405

Elogium, 129

Eminentissimus, 405

Empti, 29

Epistola, 379; ab epistulis, 414, 418, 419

Epulum Jovis, 124

Equestris militia, 405; nobilitas, 415

Equites, 73, 138, 196, 224, 253, 265, 333, 334, 335, 347, 356, 402; Romani equo publico, 74, 184, 402, 404

Equitum census, 225

Evocatio, 57

Execratio, 189, 243

Exercitus, 27, 68, 217

Exheredatio, 30

Exilium, 309

Extra ordinem, 204, 382; propiusve urbem, 235; sortem, 200

Fabri, 71, 253

Facio, 71, 253

Facultas agendi, 62

Familia, 10, 12, 15, 18, 21, 23, 24, 29, 32, 88, 91, 140, 143, 145

Fas, 23, 51, 52, 54, 56, 87, 239

Fasces, 44, 48, 80, 355, 443

Feriae, 87, 255, 288

Feriarum constituendarum causa, 193

Fetiales, 56, 245, 290

Fides, 45, 227, 306; publica, 56; Romana, 127; fidei commissa, 367, 382, 385; fidei commissarii, 368

Filia familias, 32

Filius familias, 30, 31

Fiscalis, 368

Fiscus, 368, 370, 395, 413, 417; castrensis, 417

Flamen Augustalis, 442; curialis, 42; Dialis, 189

Flamines, 51, 52, 131, 251, 443

Flaminica Augustalis, 442; Dialis, 442

Floralia, 211

Foedera, 60, 283, 299, 306, 317; aequum, iniquum foedus, 307

Forensis factio, 223

Forma censualis, 430

Formula, 56, 62, 205, 210, 211, 238, 242, 293, 294, 307, 382

Forum agere, 327

Frumentum aestimatum, 321; emptum, 321; in cellam, 321

Furiosus, 22

Furtum, 181

Genius, 355, 440, 441

Gens, 1, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 40, 41, 67, 101, 130, 222, 251, 294, 295; gentes majores, minores, 12, 41

Gentilis, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 41, 106

Gentilitas, 10, 17, 88

Gradus honorum, 186

Habere auspicia, 38

Haruspex, 196, 397

Heredium, 15, 30

Heres, 8, 15, 27, 29, 30

Honor, 138, 183, 305

Hordearium, 74, 137

Hostis, 6, 249, 279, 281, 290, 292

Ignobilis, 130

Illustris, 405

Imagines, 129

Imminuto jure, 193

Immunitas, 429

Imperator, 60, 154, 156, 283, 292, 331, 337, 344, 352, 353, 355, 359, 361

Imperium, 2, 44, 47, 49, 57, 76, 78, 79, 84, 99, 113, 120, 121, 122, 127, 136, 147, 152, 153, 156, 157, 158, 160, 162, 165, 167, 171, 189, 190, 192, 195, 196, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 211, 213, 215, 217, 239, 251, 252, 267, 278, 279, 301, 302, 316, 322, 327, 329, 337, 338, 339, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 347, 350, 353, 359, 360, 361, 366, 378, 383, 407, 433, 436

Impetrativa, 36, 162, 163, 233

Impolitia, 225

Improbe factum, 168

Improbi, 333

Incensi, 138, 139

Incivilis potestas, 407

Incola, 309, 311, 315

Infames, 185

Infamia, 221

Infra classem, 70

Ingenui, 5, 135, 136

Ingenuitas, 135, 136, 140, 345, 374, 402

In judicio, 204

In jure, 178, 204, 383

Injuria, 181

Insignia, 4, 43, 44, 45, 99, 113, 233, 265, 342, 355, 366, 402, 443

Intercessio, 156, 173, 176, 178, 274, 346, 370

Intercessionem remittere, 180

Interdictio (aquae et ignis), 55, 140, 249, 254

Interregnum, 47, 48, 59, 82, 83, 131, 147, 148, 149, 166, 187, 188, 275, 358

Interrex, 46, 47, 48, 108, 265, 273

Italici, 305, 308

Judex, 44, 65, 78, 106, 167, 177, 205, 210, 211, 212, 214, 227, 233, 236, 248, 325, 381, 382, 383, 386, 392, 404; extra ordinem datus, 382, 385; ordinarius, 382; peregrinus, 326; privatus, 64

Judicium, 64, 281, 382; dare, 206; legitimum, 302; ordinarium, 382, 383; populi, 181, 214, 245, 246, 247; publicum, 207

Juniores, 70, 154, 252, 253

Jupiter lapis, 291

Jurare, 206

Juridici, 423, 424

Jurisdictio, 302

Jurisperiti, 420, 421

Juris statio, 175

Juris sui, 137, 138, 140

Jus, 52, 56, 62, 64, 65, 86, 113, 136, 138, 239, 378, 382, 383, 386; agendi cum patribus, 161; agendi cum plebe, 96, 161; agendi cum populo, 160, 161, 246; auspiciorum, 36, 172; auxilii, 95; civile, 35, 139, 206, 242, 294, 295, 378, 380; commercii, 6, 298; consulendi senatus, 161; conubii, 7, 298; divinum, 350; edicendi, 153; exulandi, 6; gentium, 139, 141, 207, 294; gladii, 389; honorarium, 206; honorum petendorum, 183; imaginum, 129; Italicum, 307, 429; liberorum, 433; multae dictionis, 169; ordinarium, 424; poenae, 95; postliminii, 140; primae relationis, 342, 348; privatum, 64; publicum, 23, 62; referendi ad senatum, 161; rogandi, 58; vitae necisque, 20

Jusjurandum in leges, 366

Jussio principis, 351

Jussu populi, 134

Justitium, 175, 277; remittere, 175

Justum bellum, 157; piumque, 56

Justus magistratus, 251

Laesa majestas, 357

Lares, 441

Laticlavii, 265, 399

Latinitas, 297, 308

Latrocinia, 154

Latus clavus, 265, 373, 399, 400, 405

Lectio senatus, 217, 219, 263, 374

Legati, 183, 284, 318, 323, 324, 433, 435, 444; Caesaris pro praetore, 434; juridici, 434; legionum, 364, 434; proconsulis pro praetore, 433

Leges annales, 186, 350; de jure magistratuum, 329; de provinciis ordinandis, 329; frumentariae, 210, 335; regiae, 58; repetundarum, 329; Valeriae Horatiae, 108

Legibus solutus, 350

Legio, 41, 112, 138

Legis actio, 35, 57, 87, 128, 134, 205, 242, 295

Legitima militia, 154

Legitimum matrimonium, 35

Legitimus dies, 187

Lex, 43, 58, 62, 75, 96, 107, 109, 112, 124, 126, 134, 179, 189, 234, 238, 242, 245, 249, 251, 259, 325, 343, 372, 378; Aelia, 173; Aemilia (Mamerci), 115; Aemilia (Scauri), 145; Aemilia (provinciae Macedoniae), 318; annua, 206; Appuleia, 240; Aternia Tarpeia, 169; Baebia, 202; Caecilia Didia, 239, 277; Caelia, 258; Calpurnia de ambitu, 228; Cassia (104 B.C.), 228; Cassia (137 B.C. tabellaria), 258; censoria, 230; censui censendo, 221; centuriata, 75, 93, 217, 241; Cornelia de provinciis ordinandis, 201, 251; Cornelia de veneficis, 388; Cornelia Gellia, 134; Cornelia (67 B.C.), 206; curiata, 48, 49, 75, 89, 179, 192, 195, 199, 203, 216, 251; data, 245, 285, 306, 317, 380; de ambitu (5th century), 181; de imperio, 343; dicta, 230; Domitia, 124; duodecim tabularum, 104; Fannia, 308; Fufia, 173; Gabinia, 258; Hieronica, 231, 321; Hortensia, 126, 132, 162; imperfecta, 242; Julia (90 B.C.), 311; Julia (municipalis), 315; Julia Papiria, 169; Maenia, 125; Marcia, 127; Menenia Sextia, 169; Minicia, 133; minus quam perfecta, 242; Ogulnia, 51, 123; Ovinia, 219; Papiria, 258; perfecta, 242; Plautia Papiria, 311; Poetilia, 127; Pompeia (de jure magistratuum), 187; Pompeia (provinciae Bithyniae), 284, 318; provinciae, 244, 284, 286, 318; publica, 110; rogata, 245, 285; Rubria, 315; Rupilia, 284, 318; sacrata, 243; Sempronia, 180, 201, 322; Valeria (509 B.C.), 63, 79, 86, 109; Valeria (300 B.C.), 168, 194; Voconia, 242

Libellus, 380, 419; a libellis, 403, 414, 418, 419

Libero, 258

Libertas, 139, 140, 306, 307, 428, 429

Libertinus, 135, 144, 145, 146

Libertus, 144

Libram (per aes et), 28, 90, 106

Libripens, 29

Lictores, 44

Loci sacri, 87

Locupletes, 73

Ludi plebeii, 211; Romani, 211

Ludorum faciendorum causa, 193

Lustratio, 115, 229

Lustrum, 75, 218, 219, 221, 231

Magister equitum, 84, 196; Larum, 441; populi, 44, 78, 84

Magistratus populi, 147, 187, 245, 246; potestatesve, 315

Magistri Augustales, 441, 442; vicorum, 441

Majestas, 100, 212

Major potestas, 173, 175, 176, 179, 268, 275, 383

Majores magistratus, 217

Majus imperium, 383, 386

Mancipatio, 28

Mancipatus, 33, 294

Mancipium, 15, 19

Mandatum, 380, 381

Manumissio censu, 135; inter amicos, 135; justa, 134; per epistolam, mensam, 135; testamento, 135; vindicta, 134

Manus, 15, 32; injectio, 91, 127

Mater castrorum, 357; familias, 31

Matrimonium, 35

Meddix tuticus, 304, 305

Megalesia, 211

Memoria, 419

Mensores, 412

Miles, 41

Militia, 138

Militiae, 79, 153, 155, 158, 197, 199

Ministeria principatus, 414

Minores magistratus, 234

Missio, 404; in possessionem, 314

Moderator rei publicae, 333

Moenia, 232

Mons sacer, 92

Montani, 2

Montes, 2

Morbus comitialis, 163

Mos majorum, 22, 63

Multa, 169, 170, 210, 211, 232, 371; suprema, 169, 170, 210, 246

Munera, 45, 136, 138, 232, 303, 400, 404, 439

Municeps, 303, 304, 315

Municipium, 241, 303, 304, 305, 308, 315, 345

Munitio, 137

Naturalis obligatio, 143

Navicularii, 412

Nefas, 278

Nexum, 90

Nexus, 24, 91, 92, 127

Nobiles, 130

Nobilissimus Caesar, 354

Nobilitas, 129

Nomenclator, 183

Nominare provincias, 200

Nominatio, 349

Notae, 220

Novi cives, 312

Novus homo, 130, 335, 362

Noxae deditio, 8, 19

Numen, 440, 441

Nuncupatio, 29

Nundina, 257

Nundinae, 91, 255

Nuntiatio, 163

Obiter dicta, 378

Oblativa, 38, 162, 163, 166, 172, 173, 257

Obnuntiatio, 163, 172, 173, 174, 218

Obsequium, 144

Occupatio, 90

Opera publica, 219, 232, 413

Operae, 98, 137, 145

Optimates, 333

Optimo jure, 34

Oratio, 397

Oratores, 290

Ordinarii, 368

Ordines, 135

Ordo Augustalium, 443; equester, 224; sacerdotum, 51

Origo, 400

Ornamenta, 365

Pacata provincia, 157

Paelex, 55

Pagus, 1, 2, 5, 430

Pallium, 305

Paludamentum, 190, 355

Par potestas, 176, 179

Paret (non paret), 205

Parricidium, 213

Pascua, 230

Passus mille, 235

Pastor, 230

Pater, 21, 26, 30; familias, 10, 21, 23, 30, 45, 59, 115; patratus, 290, 292; patriae, 354

Pati quicquam agi, 180

Patres, 5, 10, 40, 46, 48, 59, 66, 77, 82, 111, 113, 120, 136, 147, 149

Patria potestas, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 35, 136, 140, 295

Patricii, 148

Patrimonium, 137, 361, 395, 396, 417, 439; privatum, 395, 417

Patronus, 7, 35, 144, 408

Patrum auctoritas, 46, 48, 59, 83, 97, 120, 125, 131, 275

Peculium, 8, 143, 144

Pecunia, 69, 222; attributa, 232; vectigalis, 432

Pecus, 69

Pedarii, 270

Pedites, 226

Penetralia, 128

Perduellio, 8, 99, 106, 181, 191, 258

Perduellis, 363

Peregrinus, 121, 133, 202, 204, 205, 207

Perfectissimi, 405

Perpetua (edicta), 153, 206

Personalia (munera), 439

Piaculum, 54, 87, 106

Pignoris capio, 170

Plebiscita, 94, 97, 109, 110, 118, 123, 124, 125, 126, 158, 159, 176, 179, 186, 217, 219, 234, 239, 245, 248, 249, 254, 255, 277, 308, 372

Plebs, 5, 109; urbana, 336

Poena, 242

Pomerium, 1, 3, 79, 109, 153, 165, 190, 199, 255, 300, 342, 345

Pons, 258, 259

Pontifex maximus, 47, 50, 51, 52, 54, 108, 251, 351, 354

Pontifices, 16

Populares, 332, 333

Populus, 1, 33, 34, 68, 109, 147, 302

Portitores, 321

Portoria, 230, 321, 432

Possessor, 229, 230, 233, 307

Postliminii (jus), 140

Potestas, 10, 17, 18, 25, 32, 33, 52, 113, 126, 140, 152, 165, 182, 189, 218, 251, 306

Praecones, 190

Praefecturae, 302, 304, 315; annonae, 412; morum, 337

Praefectus, 407, 426; Aegypti, 436; aerarii militaris, 396; aerarii Saturni, 394; annonae, 406, 411; juri dicundo, 302; praetorio, 390, 406, 409; urbi, 61, 161, 406, 413; vigilum, 406, 412

Praeteriti, 59

Praetexta, 129, 190, 196, 208, 355, 442, 443

Praetor, 2, 44, 78, 203; peregrinus, 204, 207, 368; urbanus, 204, 205, 207, 301, 313, 368, 384

Praetorii, 265, 269, 365

Praevaricatio, 228

Precario, 8, 45

Preces, 419

Prensio, 171, 181

Princeps, 123, 351; civitatis, 333; juventutis, 356; senatus, 12, 269, 375

Privatus, 181, 232, 233

Privilegia, 107, 239

Probatio equitum, 404

Procinctu, in, 27

Proconsul, 353, 355

Proconsulare imperium, 335, 340, 341, 343, 353, 360, 361, 433

Procuratio omnium rerum, 414; rationis privatae, 418

Procurator Caesaris pro legato, 435; castrensis, 417; fisci, 416; patrimonii, 417; patrimonii privati, 417; rationis summae rei, 416; rationum summarum, 416; summarum, 416

Procuratores, 414, 417, 434

Prodere interregem, 148

Prodigus, 22

Producere in contionem, 160

Professio, 187

Profiteri, 187

Proletarii, 72, 73, 224, 253

Pronuntiatio, 259

Pro praetore, 433, 435

Provincia, 178, 200, 202, 208, 213, 285, 316, 394, 401, 425; aquaria, 216; publica, 427

Provocatio, 42, 63, 64, 76, 86, 92, 95, 106, 108, 154, 156, 167, 170, 171, 194, 245, 247, 254, 328

Publicani, 183, 214, 229, 230, 231, 233, 320, 326, 432

Publici fructus, 432

Pugio, 190

Pullarii, 164

Puncta, 258

Quadrata (Roma), 2

Quaestio, 63, 177, 199, 208, 211, 214, 234, 248, 372, 387, 388; perpetua, 183, 207, 236, 249, 368, 386, 390, 392, 408; de sicariis, 213, 236

Quaestores aerarii, 80, 212; alimentorum, 426; Augusti, 369; candidati principis, 369, 370; classici, 215; parricidii, 63, 80, 106, 161, 211, 212; pro praetore, 433; urbani, 80, 213

Quaestorius, 365

Quarta accusatio, 247, 258

Quattuorviri viarum curandarum, 235; viis in urbe purgandis, 235; praefecti Capuam Cumas, 236

Quid censes, 260

Quirites, 33, 34, 35, 124

Rationales, 417

Rationibus (a), 414, 416, 417

Recitatio, 259

Recognitio equitum, 224, 225

Recuperatores, 205, 207, 210, 233, 293

Referre, 348

Reges socii, 318

Regimen morum, 116, 217, 219

Regina sacrorum, 51

Regiones, 422

Regnum, 76, 337, 338

Rei gerundae causa, 192, 193

Relatio, 267, 268, 348

Relationem facere, 348; remittere, 348

Renovatio auspiciorum, 166

Renuntiatio, 188, 189, 259, 351, 372, 373

Repetere auspicia, 166

Res, 24; censui censendo, 69, 70; judicata, 379; mancipi, 69, 137, 222; nec mancipi, 26; privata, 396, 417

Rescriptum, 379, 381

Restituere, 249

Restitutio in integrum, 140, 390, 391

Retractatio, 392

Rex, 44, 47, 52, 76, 337, 338; sacrorum, 44, 47, 50, 51, 131, 251

Rogatio, 97, 109, 111, 125, 174, 177, 179, 180, 204, 238, 247, 248, 256, 257, 277

Rogator, 185, 258, 259

Romam revocatio, 385

Sacer, 38, 55, 99, 109, 154

Sacerdos, 443; provinciae, 444

Sacra, 16, 17, 42, 54, 55, 226; privata, publica, 54

Sacramentum, 56, 154, 343, 361, 365; in leges, 189, 236

Sacrorum detestatio, 16, 17

Sacrosanctitas, 100, 109, 119, 182, 209, 346

Salarium, 433

Salii, 52, 131

Saltus, 230

Salutatio, 357

Saturam (lex lata per), 239

Scribae, 190

Selecti, 325

Sella curulis, 44, 129

Senatoria dignitas, 411

Senatui legendo, 193

Senatus, 34, 58, 315; auctoritas, 413; consensus, 413; consultum, 177, 179, 180, 209, 272, 275; consultumultimum, 281; de provinciis ordinandis, 287; per discessionem facere, 348; indictus, 375; legitimus, 375

Seniores, 70, 224, 252, 253

Sententia, 267, 270, 271

Septimontium, 2

Servare de caelo, 172

Servi publici, 144, 190

Servitus, 11

Sestertius, 72

Seviri, 403, 443

Sex centuriae, 74; suffragia, 74

Sexagenarii, 223, 418

Sex-et-vigintiviratus, 364

Sextantarii, 69, 72

Signa ex avibus, 163; ex quadrupedibus, 164

Silentium, 163, 165

Silva, 230

Socii, 299, 305, 307, 308, 311

Sodales Augustales, 442

Sodalicia, 107

Sodalitates, 188, 282

Solatium, 142

Soliti honores, 358

Solium, 44

Solum publicum, 413

Solvere, 206

Sortitio, 47, 191, 198, 200, 204, 285, 433

Spectio, 39, 50, 162, 172, 173

Splendidi, 405

Sponsio, 91, 291, 295

Spurii filii, 136

Status, 32, 303, 306, 308, 345

Stemma, 129, 130

Stimuli, 265

Stipendia, 138, 319, 320, 323, 431

Stipendiarius, 307, 318, 428

Stipulatio, 91

Stirps, 10, 11, 12

Sublectio, 220

Subscriptio, 419; censoria, 221

Subsellia tribunorum, 178

Suffectus, 188, 368

Suffragium, 305

Suis legibus uti, 306

Suovetaurilia, 229

Supplicatio, 288, 380

Susceptio (liberi), 19

Tabellae, 258, 421

Tabernaculum capere, 165

Tabulae, 104, 231; publicae, 214; seniorum, 223

Tabularium, 432

Templum, 165, 257

Testamentum, 26, 135

Tibicines, 71, 253

Titulus, 129

Toga picta, 45, 129; praetexta, 129, 355

Togati, 305, 307

Trabea, 44

Traditio, 294

Traduc equum, 226

Tralaticium, 153, 206

Transitio ad plebem, 7

Transvectio equitum, 403

Trecenarius, 418

Tribules, 68

Tribunal, 443

Tribuni celerum, 41, 196; laticlavii, 399; militum, 41; militum consulari potestate, 112

Tribunicia potestas, 152, 335, 337, 338, 340, 341, 343, 346, 347, 353, 354, 360, 361, 370, 383, 384, 390, 392

Tribunicius, 365

Tribus, 1, 13, 32, 40, 67, 101, 115, 222; tribu movere, 228, 241; urbanae, rusticae, 101, 223

Tributim, 101, 109

Tributum, 75, 76, 115, 137, 221, 222, 286, 303, 431; capitis, 320, 430, 431; soli, 320, 431

Trinum nundinum, 187

Tripudium solistimum, 164

Triumphalia, 366

Triumviri capitales, 235, 412; coloniae deducendae, 134; epulones, 124; monetales, 235; nocturni, 235

Tumultus, 175

Turmae, 403

Tutela, 16, 21, 23, 32, 33, 227, 382, 407

Tutelaris, 368

Ultro tributa, 232, 233

Unciarium fenus, 106

Universus populus, 34

Urbana jurisdictio, 203; provincia, 203

Urbica dioecesis, 423

Usus, 17, 105, 140

Uti rogas, 258

Vades, 169

Vadimonium, 169, 313, 315

Vectigal, 90, 230, 231, 320

Vectigales provinciae, 321

Velati, 72, 73

Velites, 41

Velitis jubeatis, 43, 257

Vende equum, 225

Verba facere, 269

Vestis triumphalis, 355

Viatores, 171, 355

Vice principis, 410

Vicesima hereditatum, 396, 417, 422, 432

Vicus, 1, 2

Vigiles, 412

Vigintisexviri, 235, 304

Vilicus summarum, 416

Vim fieri veto, 206

Vindex, 91

Vindicatio, 134

Vindicta, 134, 350

Vis, 212

Vitio creatus, 166, 250

Vitium, 165, 166

Vocatio, 171, 181

Vota, 57, 87, 355

INDEX OF AUTHORS CITED

I. LATIN AUTHORS

PAGE

ARNOBIUS

iii. 38 57

ASCONIUS

_in Cornelianam_ p. 58 179, 206, 207, 276 59 208 68 277 70 258 76 93, 94 78 228 80 183

_in Milonianam_ p. 32 52, 148 38 235 44 277 47 178

_in orationem in Toga Candida_ p. 84 221 94 400 115 185

_in Pisonianam_ p. 3 309, 314

_in Scaurianam_ p. 22 130

_Schol. in Divinationem_ p. 103 73

CAESAR

_Bellum Gallicum_ i. 33 293 ii. 36 288 iii. 16 141

_Bellum Civile_ i. 7 234 ii. 21 195 iii. 1 185, 248 20 178

CASSIODORUS

_Chronicon_ 317

CATO

_de Re Rustica_ 5 143

CENSORINUS

_de Die Natali_ 24, 3 203

CICERO

_Brutus_ 14, 55 125 20, 79 134 34, 128 248 89, 304 175

_Auct. ad Herennium_ i. 12, 21 214 ii. 28, 45 248

_de Inventione_ ii. 22, 67 206

_de Oratore_ i. 39, 176 11 39, 177 6 i. 40 138 40, 183 135 ii. 47, 195 157 iii. 1, 3 202 1, 4 171

_Oratoriae partitiones_ 34, 118 143

_Topica_ 6, 29 10

_pro Archia_ 4, 7 240, 311

_pro Balbo_ 8, 19 240 8, 20 308 8, 21 308, 311 9, 24 307 10, 25 134 11, 28 139, 301 15, 34 283 16, 35 307 21, 48 134, 240 24, 54 308, 309

_Divinatio in Caecilium_ 17, 56 327

_pro Caecina_ 20, 57 414 33, 95 239 34 138 34, 99 91 34, 100 139, 301 35, 101 240 35, 102 309 39, 97 236

_in Catilinam_ iv. 5, 10 281

_pro Cluentio_ 13, 38 235 29, 79 236 33, 91 236 42, 119 185, 228 42, 120 228 43, 120 64 43, 121 228 43, 122 218, 220 48, 134 225, 226 53, 147 208 63 143

_pro Domo_ 9, 24 180, 200, 201, 322 13, 35 16 14, 38 131 16, 41 277 17, 45 247 20, 53 239 29, 78 236 31, 82 254, 281 32, 84 220 32, 86 248 35, 94 189 40, 106 239 47, 123 170 47, 124 170 49, 127 288

_pro Flacco_ 29, 71 428 32, 80 66, 69, 214

_de Haruspicum Responsis_ 8, 15 277 13, 27 209 26, 55 175

_de Lege Agraria_ ii. 7, 8 124 7, 16 234 7, 17 234 7, 18 255 8, 21 185 9, 24 186, 187 ii. 10, 26 49 11, 26 75, 217 11, 28 49 12, 30 179, 251 12, 31 234, 251 19, 50 230 19, 51 230 29, 81 230 34, 93 203

_pro Lege Manilia_ 6, 14 320 21, 62 158

_pro Milone_ 3, 7 63 9, 24 186

_pro Murena_ 7, 16 130 8, 18 215 12, 27 141 20, 42 208

_Philippicae_ i. 13, 32 16 ii. 13, 31 203, 449 23, 56 249 28, 69 226 32, 80 173 33, 82 253 33, 83 172 34, 85 337 38, 99 173 v. 5, 15 214 12, 31 175 17, 48 186 xiv. 4, 11 156 11, 29 288

_in Pisonem_ 3, 6 189 4, 9 173, 282 12, 26 191 15, 36 259 16, 37 318 22, 51 315

_pro Plancio_ 8, 19 298 11, 28 215 14, 33 175 18, 19 188 20, 49 253 22, 53 258 25, 60 197 28, 69 248

_de Provinciis Consularibus_ 2, 3 322 3, 6 318 8, 17 180 15, 37 322 19, 46 173

_pro Quinctio_ 7, 29 448

_pro Rabirio_ 4, 11 159 4, 12 281 5, 17 328

_post Red. ad Quir._ 5, 11 197, 202

_post Red. in Sen. or cum sen. gratias egit_ 4, 9 201 7, 17 259 11, 28 259 15, 38 248

_pro Roscio Amer._ 35, 100 223

_pro Roscio Com._ 6, 16 185

_pro Sestio_ 25, 55 282 28, 61 281 31, 68 179 34, 74 179 36, 78 172 37, 79 96 44, 95 212, 446 64, 135 256 65, 137 263

_pro Sulla_ 11, 34 189 21, 60 285

_pro Tullio_ 16, 38 384, 448, 450 16, 39 448

_in Vatinium_ 5, 12 216 7, 18 173 9, 21 169 14, 33 392

_in Verrem_

## Actio i.—

4, 11 213 8, 21 208 10, 30 189 12, 36 212 13, 37 152 13, 38 254

## Actio ii.—

i. 12, 36 161 13, 34 213, 323 13, 36 323 15, 40 215 33, 84 328, 450 36, 90 215 41, 105 189 42, 109 206 44, 114 206 45, 115 11 45, 117 326 46, 119 178, 206 ii. 3, 7 320 13, 32 318, 321, 325 15, 37 318 16, 39 318 24, 59 318 26, 63 231, 321 29, 70 328 30, 75 328 49, 122 184 53, 133 317 55, 137 317 60, 147 231 iii. 6, 12 231, 321 6, 13 306 6, 14 231 7, 18 231 33, 77 321 58, 134 175, 324 60, 138 385 70, 163 322 73, 170 322 79, 183 214 cc. 81-96 321 89, 207 318 cc. 188-222 321 iv. 9, 20 322 45, 100 327 v. 13, 34 313, 315 14, 36 129, 208, 209, 211 54, 142 203 66, 170 328

_ad Familiares_ i. 1 288 2, 1 271 2, 2 268 9, 25 49, 251, 322 iii. 8, 4 326, 327 8, 5 320, 327 8, 6 327 iv. 12 143 v. 2, 3 208, 285 2, 4 208 2, 7 189 2, 9 271 20, 2 323 vi. 6, 5 352 vii. 30 250, 445, 446 viii. 6, 4 209, 211 6, 5 210 8, 5 272 8, 6 180, 272 8, 8 153 ix. 21, 2 12 x. 12, 3 179, 180 12, 4 179 25, 2 186 xi. 27, 8 337 xii. 1, 1 338 4, 2 322 30, 7 327 xiii. 11, 1 232 11, 3 305, 313 26, 3 385 xv. 5, 2 288 xvi. 12, 3 187

_ad Atticum_ i. 13, 2 269 13, 3 278 14, 1 160 14, 3 272 14, 5 271 16, 8 285 16, 12 282 16, 13 173 17, 9 287 ii. 1, 8 169, 287 ii. 16, 4 286 18, 2 189 24, 3 160 iii. 2 257 15, 5 250, 277 23, 2 243 23, 3 243 24 287 iv. 1, 4 248 1, 6 160 1, 7 411 3, 3 172 9, 1 173, 218 15, 5 199 16, 6 179 16, 7 173 v. 2, 3 314 11, 2 314 16, 2 320 20, 1 327 20, 3 156 21, 6 324 21, 9 327 21, 12 276 21, 13 275 vi. 1, 2 326 1, 15 319, 326, 327 2, 4 319, 326 2, 5 319 6, 4 213 vii. 2, 8 135 viii. 9, 4 352 11, 1 333 15, 3 201 ix. 9, 3 147 15, 2 195 xii. 21, 1 270 xiv. 12, 1 436

_ad Quintum fratrem_ i. 1, 4, 12 324 1, 9, 26 443 1, 11, 33 321 2, 5 328 ii. 3 212, 446 3, 5 282 6, 4 288 6, 5 288 13, 3 284

_ad Brutum_ i. 5, 4 148, 255

_Academia priora_ ii. 30, 97 178, 384, 450

_de Divinatione_ i. 2, 3 52 15, 27 164 16, 28 39 16, 29 172, 227 17, 31 39 58, 132 36 ii. 33, 70 36 33, 71 164 34, 71 163, 166 34, 72 163, 164 35, 73 164 35, 74 164 35, 77 163, 164 36, 76 39, 40

_de Finibus_ ii. 16, 54 199, 213, 240 21, 69 44

_de Legibus_ i. 5, 17 202 ii. 8, 21 37 9, 21 56, 199 9, 22 55 13, 32 36 19, 48 16 22, 55 11 23, 59 105, 205 iii. 3, 6 167, 234, 235 3, 7 208, 209, 219, 222, 226, 232 3, 8 78 3, 9 84, 85, 145, 164, 195 4, 10 160, 161, 195 4, 11 107, 256, 257, 445 9, 22 234 15 258 16 258 16, 36 313 20, 46 213, 259

_de Nat. Deor._ ii. 4, 11 165 iii. 18, 45 136

_de Officiis_ i. 12, 37 292 42, 150 185 ii. 17, 58 130, 210 22, 76 138, 286 iii. 30, 109 283 31, 111 228 31, 112 193

_de Republica_ i. 26, 42 44 40, 62 79 40, 63 84 ii. 8, 14 3, 58 9, 15 61 9, 16 52, 123 12, 23 47 12, 24 45 13, 25 49 14, 26 15, 51, 61, 123 17, 31 43, 44, 46, 49, 56, 57 20, 35 12 22, 39 74, 252 22, 40 72, 252 22, 44 76 24, 45 49 30, 52 77 31, 53 86 31, 54 42, 63, 106, 167, 168, 170 31, 55 198 33, 58 94 35, 60 81, 169, 170 iii. 18, 28 199 iv. 2, 2 225 6, 16 226 12 106 v. 2, 3 45, 64 6, 8 333 7, 9 333

Q. CICERO

_de Petitione Consulatus_ 14, 57 188

CODEX JUSTINIANUS 1, 17, 1, 7 343 1, 26, 2 411 1, 43, 1 413 3, 26, 7 416 4, 43, 2 19 4, 65, 4, 1 410 5, 27, 1 444 6, 60, 1 371 7, 18, 1 91 7, 62, 17 408 8, 40 (41), 13 410 9, 2, 6, 1 410 9, 51, 1 393 9, 62, 19 410 10, 40, 8 400

COLLATIO

_leg. Mos. et Rom._ 14, 3, 2 408, 410

DIGESTA 1, 1, 7 378, 379 1, 1, 8 205 1, 1, 71 205 1, 2, 2 58 1, 2, 2, 3 87 1, 2, 2, 4 102, 104 1, 2, 2, 6 87 1, 2, 2, 7 128 1, 2, 2, 8 126 1, 2, 2, 18 84 1, 2, 2, 19 84, 195 1, 2, 2, 21 97 1, 2, 2, 22 80 1, 2, 2, 23 80, 106 1, 2, 2, 25 113 1, 2, 2, 27 120 1, 2, 2, 30 235 1, 2, 2, 32 202, 368, 411, 450 1, 2, 2, 33 407 1, 2, 2, 37 128 1, 2, 2, 38 128 1, 3, 9 378 1, 3, 31 350 1, 4, 1 343, 380 1, 6, 9 23 1, 9, 5 400 1, 9, 6 400 1, 9, 7 400 1, 9, 8 400 1, 9, 10 400 1, 9, 11 400 1, 11, 1, 1 410 1, 12 408 1, 12, 1 408 1, 12, 1, 4 408 1, 12, 1, 6 408 1, 12, 3 408 1, 13 43, 63, 81 1, 13, 1, 2 369 1, 13, 1, 4 369 1, 15 413 1, 15, 1 412 1, 15, 3 412, 413 1, 15, 4 413 1, 16, 4, 5 379, 444 1, 16, 8 386 1, 16, 9 416 1, 16, 9, 3 144 1, 17, 1 436 1, 18, 4 386 1, 18, 6, 8 390 1, 19 415, 416, 417 1, 21, 5 434 2, 4, 4, 1 144 2, 4, 10, 3 345 2, 15, 8 397 3, 1, 1, 10 391, 392 3, 11, 5 32 4, 2, 13 379 4, 4, 2 364 4, 5, 2, 1 32 4, 6, 26, 2 152 5, 1, 12, 1 407 5, 1, 58 383 10, 1, 13 107 11, 7, 8 351 12, 1, 40 410 12, 4, 15 413 14, 1, 1, 18 412 14, 5, 8 412 14, 6, 1 378 16, 1, 2, 1 378 19, 2, 56 413 20, 2, 9 413 21, 1 369 21, 1, 1 211 21, 1, 40-42 210 22, 1, 3, 3 410 23, 2, 44 400 24, 1, 23 397 27, 1, 17 429 27, 9, 1 397 27, 10, 1 22 28, 2, 11 26 28, 2, 26 379 29, 1, 1 380 36, 1, 1, 2 378 38, 2, 1, 1 144 38, 2, 3 402 39, 4 432 39, 4, 1 230 39, 4, 12 230 39, 4, 13 230 40, 1, 14, 1 350 40, 4, 11 135 40, 4, 35 135 40, 5, 41, 5 424 40, 10, 6 402 40, 11, 2 345 40, 13, 3 91 43, 29, 3, 4 19 47, 2, 57 (56), 1 413 47, 14, 1 444 47, 21, 3, 1 372 47, 22, 4 107 48, 2, 8 144 48, 2, 13 412 48, 3, 2, 1 391 48, 4, 3 106 48, 6, 5, 1 444 48, 7, 1 185 48, 8, 5 20 48, 12, 1 412 48, 16, 12 391 48, 16, 16 391 48, 19, 2, 1 393 48, 19, 8, 5 408 48, 19, 9, 11 393 48, 19, 15 393 48, 19, 27, 1 390, 393 48, 19, 27, 2 390, 393 48, 22, 6, 1 393 49, 1, 1 444 49, 2, 1, 2 386 49, 15, 7, 1 306, 307 50, 1, 22, 5 400 50, 1, 23 400 50, 2, 1 439 50, 2, 7, 2 438 50, 4, 1, 1 439 50, 4, 1, 2 439 50, 4, 1, 3 439 50, 4, 18 439 50, 15, 3 430 50, 15, 4 431 50, 15, 8, 5 429 50, 15, 8, 7 429 50, 16, 144 58 50, 17, 77 48 60, 17, 133 142

DONATUS

_ad Terentii Adelphos_ iv. 2, 9 172

FESTUS (ed. Müller) p. 7. Adlecti 82 10. Agonium 51 14. Adscripticii 72 18. Accensi 72 22. Anquirere 246 49. Curia 42 49. Currules 44 53. Centuriatus 15 55. Celeres 42 56. Clavus annalis 193 62. Curionia sacra 42 64. Curiales flamines 42 64. Caduca auspicia 163 66. Duicensus 23 72. Δῆμοι 1 89. Fundus 308 94. Gentilis 10 104. Jurare 53 108. Impolitias 225 113. Inarculum 51 113. Infra classem 70, 71 126. Maximus curio 42 127. Municipium 298, 303, 305 131. Municeps 303 142. Mulleos 265 157. Minora templa 165 161. Majorem consulem 198 182. Oratores 56 185. Ordo sacerdotum 51 198. Optima lex 44, 84, 194 209. Picta 45 210. Pedarius 270 218. Postliminium 318 220. Palatium 2 221. Paribus equis 74 222. Pellices 55 224. Promulgari 256 225. Procincta classis 27 230. Plorare 55 231. Plebeium magistratum 184 233. Praefecturae 235, 236, 302, 304 233. Populi commune 445 241. Patricios 5, 136 241. Praetor ad portam 296 246. Praeteriti 59, 82, 220 254. Qui patres 82 260. Rufuli 155 261. Quinque genera 162 261. Qui hoc censetis 271 274. Reciperatio 294 293. Scita plebei 445 297. Sororium tigillum 55, 63 307. Sororium tigillum 55 308. Supplicia 54 318. Sacer 55 330. Scitum populi 445 333. Scriptuarius ager 230 334. Sexagenarios 223 340. Septimontium 2 341. Septimontium 2 344. Stata sacrificia 226 351. Sinistrum 163 368. Termino 55 368. Urbanas 67

FLORUS

ii. 15 267

FRAGMENTA VATICANA 205 423 232 423 241 423

FRONTINUS

_de Aquaeductibus_ 7 287 100 413 104 413 129 446

FRONTO

_ad Amicos_ ii. 7 424

GAIUS

_Institutiones_ i. 3 126 4 378 5 343, 380 6 369, 434 53 355 64 136 78 133 96 345 129 140 130 53 159-162 139 162 32, 140 171 31 ii. 15 24 21 427, 431 101 27 102 28 104 29, 30 274 71 iii. 7 320 40-44 144 72 345 73 345 189 91 210 143 217 143 222 143 223 143 iv. 16 134 23 127 27 74 30 205, 242 69-74 143 93 64 103-105 449

GELLIUS

i. 9 26 12 33, 53 12, 14 33 ii. 2 23 iii. 2 94, 165 18 270 18, 1 271 iv. 2 210 3 23, 55 10 169 10, 8 267, 268 12 225 14 212 v. 6 157 v. 13 8, 227 19, 9 20 vi. (vii.) 9 161 (vii.) 13 70 vii. 9 446 x. 3, 3 310 3, 19 306 6 161, 212 15 53 20 34, 42 24, 3 33 xi. 1 169, 170 xii. 13, 1 382 xiii. 12 94, 171, 447 13 144, 181, 209 15 121, 165, 173 15, 1 256 15, 4 216 16 159 xiv. 7 161, 227, 269 xv. 11, 2 226 27 12, 26, 50, 51, 66, 68, 126, 251, 257 27, 5 250 xvi. 10, 1 205 10, 8 242 10, 10 73 13, 5 345 xvii. 21 97 xx. 1 91, 106

HYGINUS

p. 115 214 176 300

JUSTINIANUS

_Institutiones_ i. 3, 14 91 4 136 12, 5 140 iv. 7 143 8, 7 19 10 8

_Novellae_ 78 402

JUSTINUS

xliii. 5, 12 419

JUVENALIS

vii. 228 371, 448

LIVIUS

i. 6 50 7 45 8 44, 59 17 46, 47, 48, 59, 125 18 45, 50 20 51, 52, 54 22 48 24 57, 291 26 42, 55, 63, 80 28 6 30 13 32 33, 48, 56, 57, 60, 291 35 12, 59 36 41, 73, 164 41 48, 49 43 66, 70, 72, 74, 252 44 224, 229 47 46, 48 48 76 49 49, 61, 76 56 45 59 61 60 77 ii. 1 59, 77, 82 2 14 5 45 8 55, 77, 79 16 1, 7, 14 18 84, 192, 196 23 92 27 92 28 93 32 193 33 94, 100, 197 34 95 35 95 41 80 52 154, 247 55 168 56 9, 94, 95, 101, 258 62 1 iii. 3 175 5 175 6 98 9 102 11 103 13 169, 248 20 79, 154 21 258 iii. 24 80, 161 27 175 29 103 30 94 31 98, 103 32 104, 124 34 104, 105 35 104, 185 42 154 53 108 54 51, 108 55 55, 99, 109, 110, 209, 235 57 104 64 259 65 93 69 213 iv. 1 111, 112 2 14, 39, 111 6 111, 112, 113, 256 7 113 8 115, 216 12 114 15 82 16 248 17 192, 291 20 158 21 191 24 116, 218, 222 25 118 26 191, 192 27 196 30 98, 170, 243 31 191 34 195 35 112 41 193 43 117 44 51 48 35 50 179 54 117 55 114, 175 v. 2 114 7 224 12 82, 113 13 113, 258 20 137 31 148, 166, 219 36 291 41 190 vi. 1 148, 183 7 175 vi. 20 66, 256 26 298 27 112 31 118 35 118 36 298 37 119 38 119 41 38, 39, 131, 148 42 120, 122 vii. 1 121, 122 3 193 4 168 5 155 9 175 11 157 12 192 16 125, 241, 256, 446 17 107, 122 22 122, 216 24 193 26 193 27 196 28 193 42 123, 186 viii. 2 306 12 122, 124, 125, 191, 216 14 298, 303, 304 15 121 16 200 18 278 22 212 23 148, 164, 239 28 128 32 196 33 63 34 154, 194 40 193 ix. 7 193 8-12 283 10 139 16 298 20 285 26 192, 279 30 219, 236 33-34 174 34 116, 218 38-39 192 39 166 42 197, 239 43 299, 303, 305 46 126, 128, 145, 184, 185, 223 x. 1 298, 303 6 51, 122 8 5, 11, 136, 216 9 5, 167, 168 10 5 13 186, 212 21 146, 175 22 239 23 17, 161, 212 37 157, 175 42 141 46 141 47 166, 211, 212 xxi. 17 201 63 189 xxii. 8 195 11 146 25 195 26 195 27 196, 200 30 162 34 131 35 259 41 199 42 167 55 204 57 192, 195, 307 61 292 xxiii. 5 305 22 193, 219 23 218, 220 30 211 31 164, 256 32 320 41 210 49 230 xxiv. 7 253 9 79, 203, 204 16 135 18 226, 228 19 304 43 182 44 23 xxv. 1 209 2 161, 179, 212 3 183, 203, 204, 309 4 169, 171, 254, 277 5 255 22 204 41 203 xxvi. 2 183 3 247, 254 6 304 10 210 21 157, 158 22 253 26 180 33 241 xxvii. 5 174, 192, 204 6 179, 211, 253 7 203 8 42 10 307 11 225, 228 19 156 25 228 36 155 38 301 xxviii. 9 157 10 203, 204 38 158, 200, 201 45 154 xxix. 10 288 11 288 12 244 13 203, 204 20 98 22 183 37 217, 226, 228 xxx. 1 200, 203 33 213 39 193 40 180 43 179, 244 xxxi. 5 188 20 158 31 304 50 53, 189, 210 xxxii. 1 203 8 200 27 202 28 203, 204 xxxiii. 21 204 23 157 25 244 42 124, 137, 161, 178, 210, 212 xxxv. 7 308 41 212 xxxvi. 2 322 3 301 36 288 40 180 xxxvii. 1 200 45 306 47 259 xxxvii. 50 204 xxxviii. 35 212 36 241, 313 42 139 52 98 54-60 240 58 214 xxxix. 15 159, 257 18 279 19 226 20 204 29 157 41 279 42 220 44 221, 227, 232, 287 54 306 xl. 1 203, 204 42 47, 50 43 278 44 186, 202 51 232 52 162 xli. 2 226 5 307 8 308, 309 57 220 xlii. 1 310 9 122 10 180, 218 21 157, 199, 204, 240 22 240 31 155, 200, 203 32 178 33 178 35 204 xliii. 2 320 7 183 8 183 11 203 12 155, 200 14 204, 221 16 144, 161, 170, 174, 182, 231, 232, 253 xliv. 16 217, 228, 232, 287 17 197 18 324 xlv. 13 285 15 145, 228, 241 17 284, 318 21 179, 274 26 319 29 319 32 318 35 158

_Epitome_ 11 235 19 192, 194 20 202 46 284, 287 48 169 49 216 59 122, 168 69 183 71 311 83 185 84 146, 312 89 123, 192 134 430

MACROBIUS

_Saturnalia_ i. 15, 19 51 16, 6 176 16, 10 55 16, 29 255 ii. 6 210 iii. 9, 7 57 9, 10 57 17, 6 308

_Commentaria in somnium Scipionis_ ii. 17, 13 242

MARTIALIS

v. 8 402

NONIUS 222 14 s.v. _plebitas_ 101 35

OROSIUS

iv. 13 20

OVIDIUS

_Fasti_ i. 317 51 589 339 ii. 21 51 142 352 503 44 iv. 383 399

_Tristia_ iv. 10, 29 399

PAULUS

_Sententiae_ v. 15, 3 144

PLAUTUS

_Capteivei_ i. 2, 111 214 ii. 3, 453 214

_Capteivei: Prologus_ 34 141

_Amphitruo_ i. 1, 3 235

PLINIUS

_Historia Naturalis_ iii. 30 436 46 422 88 317 vii. 44 168, 170 xvi. 10, 37 126, 256 xviii. 3 69 3, 11 227 3, 12 55, 106 xix. 4 15 40 431 xxi. 77 431 xxii. 2 291 xxviii. 2, 11 163 xxxiii. 2, 31 259 3 71 78 230 xxxiv. 3, 13 81 6 137

PLINIUS

_Epistolae_ i. 23 370 ii. 11 389 11, 3 ff. 387 iii. 4, 2 444 19, 8 400 iv. 9, 2 391 15, 8 369 vi. 19 374 31, 6 389 31, 8 388 vii. 6, 8 389 18, 2 144 viii. 24 428

_Epistolae ad Trajanum_ 13 (8) 351 17 (28) 437 31 (40), 4 393 37 (46) 437 39 (48) 437 47 (56) 437 52 344 54 (62) 437 56 (64), 3 393 57 (65), 1 393 72 345 73 345 79 (83), 1 318 92 (93) 306 96, 4 389 111 (112) 437 112 (113) 438 113 (114) 437

_Panegyricus_ 8 360 37 432 64 189 77 367 80 440 84 356

PRISCIANUS

viii. 14, 78 84

QUINCTILIANUS

_Declamationes_ 311 91

_Institutiones Oratoriae_ ii. 4, 33 257 iii. 6, 70 385, 450 10, 1 387 vii. 2, 20 387 xii. 6, 1 364

SALLUSTIUS

_Catilina_ 6 58 18 187 39 20 50 269, 277, 280 52 271 55 135

_Historiae_ i. frag. 77 308 i. frag. 77 § 22 280

_Jugurtha_ 27 200, 201, 322 34 160 39 283 40 240 43 200 62 285 63 130 84 126 86 73 95 130 104 286, 287

SCRIPTORES HISTORIAE AUGUSTAE

_Vita Alexandri_ 15 404 16 421 20 357 21 410, 411 26 400 31 419 43 368, 370 49 390 57 425

_Vita Ant. Caracallae_ 3 391

_Vita Antonini Pii_ 3 423 4 360 6 391 8 407, 425

_Vita Aurelani_ 31 397

_Vita Carini_ 8 419 16 419

_Vita Commodi_ 4 411 6 368, 374 13 419 14 407

_Vita Elagabali_ 11 374

_Vita Gordianorum_ 11 375

_Vita Hadriani_ 6 354, 359 7 375, 387 8 411, 420 18 420 22 414, 423

_Vita Marci_ or _Vita M. Antonini_ 6 360 10 368 11 374, 410, 423 18 442

_Vita Maximini_ 14 355 15 363

_Vita Nigri_ 7 418

_Vita Pertinacis_ 9 413 12 418

_Vita Severi_ 7 387 12 396 14 409

_Vita Taciti_ 1 358 2 359

_Vita L. Veri_ 2 354

SENECA

_de Beneficiis_ iii. 11 226 vi. 34, 2 357

_de Brevitate Vitae_ 19, 1 412

_de Clementia_ i. 10 357

_Consolatio ad Polybium_ vi. 4 419 5 419

_Controversiae_ ii. 3 226

_Epistulae_ 83, 14 407 86, 10 210

_de Vita Beata_ 24 134

SERVIUS

_ad Vergilii Aeniidem_ ii. 156 16 iii. 81 52 89 39 v. 560 41 755 300 vi. 190 38 609 8, 55 808 47 vii. 188-612 44 viii. 642 26 xi. 334 44

SOLINUS

i. 15 2

STATIUS

_Silvae_ v. 1 419

SUETONIUS

_Augustus_ 2 7, 14 5 386 10 184 27 347 32 392 33 384, 421 35 347, 365, 366, 375, 420 36 394 37 404 38 366, 399, 404 39 227, 404 40 134, 371 46 312 47 428 49 408 52 441 53 352 94 265 97 229 101 395

_Caesar_ 1 15 7 327 10 211 11 236 13 187 16 275 17 169 19 215 20 198, 268 23 183 24 139 41 248, 335, 349 48 145 76 337, 353, 407

_Caligula_ or _Gaius_ 14 361 15 392 16 404, 429 24 361

_de Claris Rhetoribus_ 1 226

_Claudius_ 11 363 12 391, 416 14 392 16 225, 403 24 9, 135, 184, 216, 366, 374, 394, 399, 400 25 401, 402, 415, 428, 429 26 39 28 366 38 210

_Domitianus_ 2 361 4 369 8 227, 228, 351, 374, 392 9 392 10 399

_Galba_ 6 401 7 401 8 401 9 389 17 361

_Julius_ 70 34

_Nerva_ 15 421 49 363

_Tiberius_ 1 7, 11, 14, 16 2 157, 174, 192, 212 26 355 27 355 30 376 31 197 33 383 55 420 58 355 67 363 75 390

_Titus_ 6 409

_Vespasianus_ 5 209, 369 6 359 8 428 9 374, 403 23 442

TACITUS

_Agricola_ 4 415 42 433

_Annales_ i. 1 113 2 339, 346, 427 3 360 7 344 11 429 12 358 i. 14 47, 349, 360 15 349, 372 17 361 31 430, 435 33 430 54 3, 442 57 441 58 360 72 363 73 442 74 375 75 374, 383 76 428 77 370, 379 78 396, 442 80 434 81 47, 349 ii. 6 430 23 159 27 ff. 387 28 388 30 144, 275 33 267 36 401 37 374 38 366 42 387 47 417, 428 50 387, 391 59 405, 436 67 387 79 388 85 210, 369, 397 87 352 iii. 4 374 10 387, 388, 420 14 386 17 374, 375 26 58, 66 27 105 28 338 29 364 32 433 35 433 36 355 44 317 49-51 357 51 390 52-55 210, 369 53 352, 394 56 346, 360 60 376 61 397 66 387 iii. 70 346 71 433 74 156, 366 iv. 5 408, 409 6 402, 414, 432 13 387 15 387, 395, 415 18 434 21 387, 388 27 215 31 374 34 387 35 369, 387 36 440 38 368 42 374, 375 56 443 72 431 v. 8 396 vi. 2 398 10 (16) 407 11 (17) 61, 406, 407 30 435 39 434 47 370, 448 48 374 49 387 xi. 5 405 15 397 22 43, 63, 81, 184, 213, 266, 369, 445 25 82, 133, 348, 374 27 39 xii. 10 376 21 366 23 345 24 2 53 366 59 374, 387 60 395, 416, 436 62 376 63 428 xiii. 1 395 4 385 5 369 10 388 26 145 28 210, 369, 370, 371, 384, 447 29 394 32 436 48 376 50 432 51 230, 432 xiv. 11 344 27 300 31 444 41 387, 408 42 143 46 430 62 420 xv. 22 444 28 373 35 418 72 366 xvi. 8 386, 418 17 366, 405 26 370, 448 34 369

_Historiae_ i. 4 405 11 435, 436 15 350, 361 55 344 58 414 77 351 84 409 90 391 ii. 62 404 91 370, 372 92 391 iii. 58 344 68 367 iv. 9 370 39 375 42 372 45 387 48 433 51 376 74 319

TERTULLIANUS

_Apologeticus_ 28 356

_de Spectaculis_ 22 185

ULPIANUS

_Regulae_ 2 242 2, 4 105 3 243 5, 4 309 5, 8 133 11, 10-13 139 11, 13 140 12, 2 22 19, 1 24 20, 2 27

VALERIUS MAXIMUS

i. 1, 5 163 4, 2 163 4, 3 164 4, 7 163 ii. 2, 7 179, 180 2, 9 145 7, 15 157 8, 1 157 8, 2 167 8, 7 157 9, 1 222, 226 9, 2 23, 227 9, 4 227 9, 5 227 9, 7 225 iii. 8, 3 188 iv. 1, 3 218 1, 10 229 7, 1 281 v. 2, 8 240 8, 2 22 vi. 1, 3 20 1, 4 145 1, 10 235 vii. 2, 6 217 7, 6 121 viii. 1, 7 161 ix. 5, 1 310

VARRO

_de Lingua Latina_ v. 3 292 45 ff. 3 51 33 56 67 80 44 81 41, 63, 80, 84, 93, 98 86 56 87 41 89 41 95 181 143 300 155 255, 284 181 40, 75 vi. 12 51 30 250 86 221 88 78 91 257 92 257 viii. 105 128

_de Re Rustica_ i. 10, 2 15 iii. 5, 18 259

VELLEIUS

ii. 5 27 6 310 7 281 12 124 13 255 14 311 15 310 16 202, 311 20 312 21 249 27 311 35 270 58 249 89 339 94 215 121 360 124 352, 372

VERGILIUS

_Aeneis_ vi. 609 8

VICTOR

_Epitome_ 12 425

DE VIRIS ILLUSTRIBUS

72 145, 171, 174

II. GREEK AUTHORS

APPIANUS

_Bella civilia_ i. 7 230 8 142 12 274 21 310 23 296, 309, 310 31 248 34 310 35 311 38 423 49 311, 312 59 253, 254 70 249 74 247 98 45 100 186 102 306 ii. 7 354 13 231 19 197 26 30 268, 271 106 366 112 203 119 77 iii. 30 314 95 249 v. 3 314 4 321 95 338

_Iberica_ 83 139

_Syriaca_ 15 203 50 431

_Libyca_ 69 267

DIO CASSIUS

xxxvi. 21 228 23 207 25 146 xxxvii. 9 314 27 247, 257 28 373 37 255 40 156 50 169 xxxviii. 13 172, 282 14 281 xxxix. 9 411 19 251 39 169 xl. 56 187 66 189 xli. 36 195, 314 43 251 xlii. 6 321 20 336, 432 21 196 23 171, 174, 275 51 123, 202 xliii. 14 337 16 353 27 248 28 407 33 337 44 337, 353 48 210, 394 xlvi. 39 411 45 148 xlvii. 4 355 18 367 xlviii. 12 314 43 369 45 402 xlix. 15 338, 346, 355 43 249 li. 19 346, 355, 382 22 441 lii. 1 339 7 401 15 401 20 364, 365 lii. 21 408 22 389, 390, 434 24 407, 412 25 414 31 401 33 389, 390, 412, 419, 421 43 387 liii. 1 375 2 394 11 409 12 339, 427 13 433, 434 14 432, 433 17 168, 345, 346, 347, 350, 351, 387, 429 21 372, 420 21, 7 47 22 430 23 435 30 402 32 340, 341, 342, 346, 386, 394 liv. 1 411 2 412 3 375 10 342, 365 11 360 12 360 13 375 14 375 17 374, 411 19 365, 407 22 365 24 360 25 441 26 235, 364, 371 30 374 32 365, 441 36 209 lv. 3 375 25 396 26 411 27 420 lvi. 10 71 40 372 42 402 46 367 47 375 lvii. 7 375, 383, 420 8 352, 363 14 413 17 387 lvii. 19 366 20 390 lviii. 9 387 10 387 12 365, 366 20 349, 372 20, 3 47 lix. 6 392 8 356, 384 9 356, 363, 366, 429 12 369 13 407 20 367, 372 24 375 lx. 4 391 11 371 16 375 23 345 24 394, 428 lxii. 3 431 lxiii. 13 404 lxvi. 9 391, 392 lxvii. 2 401 4 347 lxviii. 3 361 5 425 9 376 10 376 29 376 lxix. 16 400 lxxi. 33 395 lxxii. 12 368 lxxiii. 1 359 5 375 lxxiv. 2 387 lxxviii. 13 365, 419 17 348 37 375 lxxx. 1 420

_Frag._ 79 284

DIODORUS

xi. 68 94 xx. 46 223 xxxvii. 2 311 5, 2 328

DIONYSIUS

_Antiquitates Romanae_ ii. 6 196 7 15 ii. 9 6, 8 10 8, 55 12 61 14 42, 51, 58, 60, 62 15 18 25 17 26 20, 23 27 20, 23 28 61 29 44 46 13 48 33 57 47, 48 62 61 72 56, 57, 291 74 55 iii. 22 55 29 13 34 296 36 58 51 296 61 44 62 43, 44 iv. 14 40, 66, 68 15 67, 138 18 72 21 252 22 65, 66, 229 25 62, 64 71 61 74 45, 51 v. 1 47 13 14 19 86 40 15 61 298 73 84 vi. 13 403 16 96 45 92 89 99, 189 90 97 91 197 95 295, 296 vii. 13 300 17 96, 100 59 72 64 101 69 143 71 130 viii. 69 296 70 296 72 296 74 296 viii. 77 161 ix. 16 70 17 70 x. 1 102 30 94 31 66, 97 32 66, 97 50 169 58 104 60 102 xi. 43 154 45 109 60 114 63 115, 224 xix. 16 217 xx. 13 226

EUSEBIUS

_Chronicon_ a. 1991 407

HERODIANUS

ii. 12 362, 367 vi. 1 420 vii. 1 418 6 355 6, 4 391, 392

JOSEPHUS

_Antiquitates_ xv. 10, 3 441 xvii. 355 430 xviii. 4, 2 435

_Bellum Judaicum_ ii. 16, 4 431 vii. 6, 6 431

LYDUS

_de Magistratibus_ i. 27 215 38 81

PLUTARCHUS

_Antonius_ 12 337

_Caesar_ 4 450 13 187 61 337

_Cato major_ 3 25 17 227 18 221, 227

_Cato minor_ 17 214 38 323 46 258

_Coriolanus_ 1 218 13 300 18 98 24 25

_Galba_ 4 434 7 361 8 367

_C. Gracchus_ 2 185, 213, 225, 227 3 257 4 254, 281 5 310 11 163

_Ti. Gracchus_ 7 283 8 230 10 176, 179, 274 14 227, 286 15 51, 58

_Marius_ 5 9 24 195 43 249

_Numa_ 9 52 10 53 17 69, 71

_Comp. Lyc. cum Numa_ 4 31

_Otho_ 1 391 9 414

_Paulus_ 3 187 38 138, 286

_Pompeius_ 22 225

_Publicola_ 6 20 7 20, 145 11 82, 86 12 81

_Quaestiones Romanae_ 30 17 58 82 103 136

_Romulus_ 13 82 22 18

_Sertorius_ 4 215

_Sulla_ 5 187

POLYBIUS

i. 62 244 ii. 24 224 iii. 22 293 24, 12 6 25 291 29 244 87 192, 193 110 199 vi. 12 198 13 155 14 182, 244, 238 15 158, 182 17 231 19 73, 154 20 224 21 154 23 70, 71 53 45, 129, 217 56 182 x. 4 122 xx. 9, 12 306 xxii. 24 284 xxiv. 9_a_, 1 213 xxx. 4 274 15 141 17 248

STRABO

iii. p. 167 417 v. 3, 1 33 xiii. p. 621 428 xiv. 668 141 840 339

THEOPHILUS

i. 5, 4 135

ZONARUS

vii. 9 82 13 63, 80, 194 15 7

ZOSIMUS

ii. 29 404 iv. 36 351

III. INSCRIPTIONS

CENOTAPHIA PISANA

ii. l. 12 339

CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM GRAECARUM

2336 431

CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM LATINARUM

i. p. 25 123 163 313 279 236 312 339 364 189 428 112 434 193 452 337 557 192 no. 196 279 ii. 4248 432 iii. 781 429 1622 417 3925 432 6574 418 v. 737 416 vi. 266 413 895 175 930 342 4416 376 8588 432 10213 372 ix. 2342 350 xii. 5842 418 xiv. 375 423 3608 350

DITTENBERGER

_Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum_ no. 240 285

FRAGMENTUM ATESTINUM

l. 10 385 16 450

LEX ACILIA REPETUNDARUM

l. 12 203 72 239 77 309 89 203

LEX JULIA MUNICIPALIS

l. 8 203 12 203 20 209 24 208 29 209 32-45 209 46 209 68 209 73 232 84 315 85 438 89 184 92 184 104 185 120 228 132 188 135 438 145 222 147 222, 227

LEX MALACITANA

c. li. 437 lii. 423

LEX RUBRIA DE GALLIA CISPALPINA

c. 21 314, 315 22 314, 315 23 314

LEX SALPENSANA

c. xxvi. 189

LEX DE IMPERIO VESPASIANI

l. 1 344 3 348 7 348 9 375 10 349 15 345 17 350, 378 22 350

MONUMENTUM ANCYRANUM

(_Latina_) i. 8-9 338 ii. 5 339 8 339 iii. 5 356 39 396 vi. 13-15 338

(_Graeca_) iii. 6 411

ORELLI-HENZEN

_Inscriptionum Latinarum selectarum collectio_ 946 418 2922 417 3505 417 6396 416 6469 405 6519 410 6525 416

S. C. DE BACCHANALIBUS

l. 5 203 8 203 17 203 21 203 23 158

TABULA BANTINA

l. 12 170

TABULA LUGDUNENSIS

i. 28-35 85, 112, 113

WILMANNS

_Exempla Inscriptionum Latinarum_ no. 637 358 855 355 867 435 883 339 1120 425 1135 394 1145 l. 19 366 1184 358 1186 435 1189 426 1211 426 1215 426 1242 432 1249_b_ 403 1257 403, 417 1259 416 1262 416 1267 435 1269 430 1272 417 1273 417 1275 403, 417 1278 417 1285 417 1286 420 1291 417 1293 417 1595 403 1622_a_ 435 1639 405 1825 403 2110 404 2203 404 2841 405 2844 426 2845 426 2858 405 2868 355

_Printed by R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, Edinburgh_