241-260 of 278 Results  for:

Clear all

Article

Ernst Badian

Gaius Sempronius Gracchus, younger brother of Ti. *Sempronius Gracchus (3), served under his cousin and brother-in-law P. *Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus at *Numantia. A member of his brother's land commission, he supported the plans of M. *Fulvius Flaccus in 126 bce, then went to Sardinia as quaestor. Returning before his commander in 124, he was accused before the censors but acquitted, and elected tribune for 123 and again for 122, when he was joined by Flaccus, by then consularis and triumphalis. After laws meant to avenge his brother and secure himself against a similar fate, he embarked on a programme of reform, aided by friendly colleagues. The most important measures were: (1) a lex frumentaria assuring citizens of wheat, normally at a subsidized price;(2) laws providing for the resumption of land distribution and the foundation of colonies, including one on the ritually cursed site of *Carthage, which Gracchus himself, as commissioner, helped to establish;(3) laws regulating army service and providing for public works—all these to gain the support of the plebs and relieve poverty and exploitation;(4) a law to have the *decuma of the new province of Asia sold by the censors in Rome;(5) laws (probably two) regulating *repetundae trials, the second (passed by M'.

Article

Graham Burton

Under *Augustus and his successors far-reaching modifications of the social origins and the corporate and individual functions of senators occurred. Despite those changes the senatorial ordo remained the most important political and social body in the empire, its first estate.By the end of the civil wars the ranks of senators had increased to about 1,000. Augustus initiated a series of revisions of the senate of which the most important occurred in 28 bce and 18 bce. After the latter the size of the senate was fixed at 600, which remained its normal figure through the first two and a half centuries of the Principate. A new property qualification of one million sesterces was introduced, which served to differentiate more clearly the senatorial from the equestrian order (see equites). Sons of senators gained the automatic right to assume the latus *clavus at 17 years of age and to stand, later, for membership of the senate. Sons of senators normally served for one year as a military tribune, then held a post in the vigintivirate (.

Article

Arnaldo Momigliano and Tim Cornell

In the time of the *Gracchi (c.133–121 bce) the senate was a body of around 300 wealthy men of aristocratic birth, most of them ex-magistrates. Although the sources tend to assume that this state of affairs had always existed, in fact it was the product of historical development and change. Since in the early republic there were very few magistrates, and iteration of office was common, it follows that there was a time when either the majority of senators had never held a magistracy, or their number was considerably less than 300. Probably both conclusions are true for the 5th cent. This must cast doubt on the notion that the number 300 is connected with the three tribes and thirty curiae (see curia(1)); in fact there is no basis for this theory in the ancient sources, and tradition itself implicitly denies it in maintaining that *Romulus, who founded the tribes (see tribus) and curiae, chose 100 men to form the first senate.

Article

The emperor *Claudius pointed out in 48 ce (ILS212, trans. D. Braund, Augustus to Nero, no. 570) that newcomers had reigned in the regal period; the senate was never a closed body. Claudius' *patrician ancestors were immigrants into Rome of the monarchy (Ogilvie on Livy 2. 16. 4; see sabini). Before the *Social War (3) (91–88 bce) ‘new men’ (see novus homo) entered from regions already enjoying citizenship (Wiseman, New Men, 184–7): M. *Porcius Cato (1) (184 bce) from *Tusculum, C. *Marius (1) (consul for the first time 107) from *Arpinum. The enfranchisement due to the war and Sulla's enlargement of the senate to c.600, with membership through election to the quaestorship (now twenty per annum; see quaestor), widened the recruiting area, although ‘new men’ met prejudice, especially when trying for consulships. Caesar's supremacy left a senate swollen to 900 (Cass. Dio 43. 47. 3) by the admission of partisans. A few came from Spain and Gaul; for all the mockery (ibid. 76. 3; 80. 2) they were probably descended from Italian emigrants. Political expediency likewise raised numbers during the triumviral period (see triumviri) to more than 1,000, which *Augustus reduced to the Sullan level.

Article

Arnaldo Momigliano and Tim Cornell

Senatus consultum was the advice of the senate (see senatus) to the magistrates, and was expressed in the form of a resolution or decree. In Republican times it had no legal force, but in practice it was always obeyed and, except when vetoed, it acquired the force of law when implemented. During the empire senatus consulta were at first implemented by a clause in the praetor's edict; after Hadrian certain senatus consulta had immediate legal force. The senatus consultum was drafted after the session of the senate in the presence of the presiding magistrate and some witnesses, usually including the proposer. If necessary, it was translated into Greek. Many senatus consulta are preserved in Greek translations.A senatus consultum (commonly abbreviated SC, plural SCC) usually contained: (1) the name of the presiding magistrate;(2) a statement by the proposing magistrate, ending with the formula d(e) e(a) r(e) i(ta) c(ensuerunt) (‘concerning the matter in hand they [i.

Article

Benedikt Eckhardt

senatus consultum Iuventianum is the modern designation for a senate decree passed on March 14, 129ce, in reaction to a legal case decided by Hadrian. The name is derived from P. Iuventius Celsus, one of the consuls who brought in the motion and a legal expert thought to be responsible in large part for the senatus consultum’s content. Ulpianus (15 ad ed., D. 5.3.20.6–21) preserves the text and gives a lengthy commentary, including discussion of treatments by other jurists of the 2nd and early 3rd century. While both the unity of the text (6a–d) and the authenticity of individual parts have been doubted in earlier scholarship, recent discussions tend to accept Ulpian’s text as it stands.1The regulation concerns the question of how compensation was to be made if an inheritance had been falsely claimed and then sold by the illegitimate possessor. The senatus consultum Iuventianum introduces two distinctions, one moral and one temporal.

Article

Kimberley Czajkowski

The Senatus Consultum Orfitianum was a senatorial decree enacted under Marcus Aurelius in 178 ce that gave children priority over other heirs in inheriting from an intestate mother. Together with the sc Tertullianum, it is typically discussed in the context of the gradual shift from agnatic to cognatic ties in succession law.The Senatus Consultum Orfitianum is a senatorial decree enacted under Marcus Aurelius in 178ce that gave children priority over other heirs in inheriting from an intestate mother (Ulpian, Reg. 26.7). The jurists Gaius and Paul wrote monographs on the decree, and the lengthy comments of Ulpian in the twelfth book of ad Sabinum are also preserved in the Digest (D.38.17.1).1The senatus consultum (sc) should be understood in the broader context of Roman intestate succession. A dual system gradually developed whereby the praetor, in Papinius’ words, aimed to “support, supplement, and correct” the order of succession in the .

Article

Benedikt Eckhardt

Senatus consultum Pegasianum is the name used by Gaius (2.256, 258, 286a) and the Institutes of Justinian (2.23.6-7) for a decree by the senate on fideicommissa, passed in the consulate of L. Cornelius Pusio and the jurist Plotius Pegasus, most likely in 72 ce (but dated to the time of Hadrian in some earlier scholarly literature).1 Gaius does not preserve the text, but gives a substantial report about its content. Some references to the decree, but not to its original designation are also preserved in the Digest; due to Justinianic modifications, the relevant content is there attributed to the earlier senatus consultum Trebellianum.The senatus consultum Pegasianum was one of several attempts to solve problems created by Augustus’ decision to make fideicommissa actionable like legacies. In 41 bce, the lex Falcidia had limited the amount to which an inheritance could be reduced through legacies: Heirs were allowed to keep a quarter of the inheritance, no matter how many legacies the testator had made to others.

Article

Kimberley Czajkowski

The senatus consultum Tertullianum was a senatorial decree of the Hadrianic era that placed certain mothers in the line of succession to the estates of their intestate children, thereby improving their position. It is typically discussed alongside the sc Orfitianum in the context of the gradual shift from agnatic to cognatic ties in succession law.The senatus consultum Tertullianum was a senatorial decree of the Hadrianic era that placed certain mothers in the line of succession to the estates of their intestate children (see children in Roman law).1 Until this point, women who were married sine manu, and therefore did not move into the legal control of their husband, had no right of succession to their children’s estates under the ius civile. It should be noted, however, that in the praetorian order of intestate succession, which, in Papinius’ words, aimed to “support, supplement, and correct” the ius civile.

Article

Arnaldo Momigliano and Andrew Lintott

Senatus consultum ultimum ‘the ultimate decree of the *senate’, a modern term, deriving from Caes. BCiv. 1. 5, for what was in fact a declaration of emergency.This decree urged magistrates, usually the consul or consuls, to take measures to defend the respublica and see that it came to no harm (Cic.Phil. 5. 34; Sall.Cat. 29). It was interpreted as authorizing the magistrates to employ physical repression against (unspecified) public enemies without being bound by strict legality. Inevitably it was a matter of political controversy, since questions arose whether the circumstances merited this decree and what level of force and illegality was appropriate after it.The decree was first both passed and accepted by the consul in 121 bce, against C. *Sempronius Gracchus and M. *Fulvius Flaccus. It was later used against L. *Appuleius Saturninus and C. *Servilius Glaucia (100), M. *Aemilius Lepidus (2) (77), the Catilinarians (see sergius catilina, l.

Article

Barry Nicholas and Alan Rodger

Until late classical Roman law, the term servitutes (servitudes) was applied to restrictions on the ownership of land in favour of neighbouring land (e.g. a right of way from one plot over another to the highway, or a right that nothing be built on one plot so as to obstruct the light to a building on the other). The term expresses the idea that one plot serves the other. An owner would usually pay a price or give some other consideration to acquire such a right over the neighbouring land. In this way various amenities were arranged among neighbouring properties. Unlike a contractual right which could bind and entitle only the parties to the contract, once established servitudes bound and entitled whoever were the owners for the time being of the land in question. A distinction was made between rustic servitudes and urban servitudes according as they served a predominantly agricultural purpose or not (e.g. a right of way, as opposed to a right of light), though urban servitudes could be attached to land in the country. Rustic servitudes developed earlier and were res mancipi (see mancipatio).

Article

Greek social and legal status terminology was rich, complex, and confused. There was a multiplicity of Greek communities, often very different in character, which although typically small in scale were yet complex in organization. The consequent confusion was not clarified by the Greek equivalent of Roman jurisprudents and jurisconsults, since such persons did not exist. In all Greek societies at all periods the fundamental status division was between the free and the unfree. But whereas the former could be divided fairly simply into citizen and non-citizen, men and women, adults and children, the Greeks devised no fewer than a dozen words for various types and degrees of unfree people.Everywhere in the Greek world the normative type of the high status person was the citizen (politēs), free, adult, and male (see citizenship, greek). Qualifications for citizenship (politeia) varied from community to community, but in all birth—membership of a corporate descent-group—was assumed to be primary. Only in Sparta was this coupled with a test of achievement, successful passage through the compulsory state educational curriculum and consequent election to a common mess. Further distinctions between active and passive, or first-class and second-class, citizenship might be drawn on grounds of age, gender, wealth, or location. Democratic Athens thus pioneered the idea that to be a full active citizen it was enough for a man to be of legitimate Athenian birth and duly registered with the appropriate authorities to qualify for the exercise of full public and private citizen prerogatives (the most extensive then available anywhere). But even Athens insisted (after 451 bce) on double descent, from a citizen-status mother as well as father.

Article

R. Zimmermann

A formal *contract concluded orally in the form of question (made by the future creditor, stipulator: ‘Do you pledge that 100 will be given?’ (centum dari spondes?)), and answer (by the future debtor, promissor: ‘I pledge’ (spondeo)). Question and answer had to correspond (same verb!) and had to follow each other immediately (unitas actus). Stipulatio already existed at the time of the *Twelve Tables and it soon became the cornerstone of the Roman system of contractual obligations. Any agreement could be given legal effect by using this simple oral form. Use of the verb spondere (hence the term sponsio) was confined to Roman citizens; in classical law, other verbs (like promittere; cf. Gai.Inst. 3. 92) were permissible and were also open to foreigners.The scope of the contract of stipulation was immense. For a whole variety of purposes the Romans regularly, or even exclusively, used stipulations: in order to strengthen a loan and to promise interest; to stand surety; to replace an already existing obligation with a new one (novatio); to promise a dowry, a gift, or payment of a penalty; or to give specific guarantees (these are the manifold cautiones that we find both in private law and in the law of procedure).

Article

M. D. Reeve

Sunscriptions in ancient texts, usually retained after each book of a work copied from rolls into a codex, were the forerunners of titles. Detached from the text and therefore distinct from ‘seals’ (see sphragis) like those of *Thucydides (2) in bks. 2–4 or *Virgil in the Georgics, they might give author, work, book number, length in lines, or anything else that a scribe, corrector, or owner, wished to record. A *Herculaneum papyrus of *Epicurus, On nature 28, appends the date of composition; after Esther in the Codex Sinaiticus a corrector reports the subscription of a predecessor, Pamphilus († 309); and a subscription in V of *Aristophanes (1) names the authorities for the colometry (see metre, greek, § 2 on cōla) and the scholia. Latin manuscripts yield far more, though apparently only one in a secular text before the late 4th cent., and correctors heavily outnumber scribes. A restrained example, on Livy 5: Nicomachus Dexter v.

Article

Piero Treves and Barbara Levick

The procedure by which a substitute or suffect (suffectus) was appointed whenever a Roman magistrate (see magistracy, roman) resigned or died in office. It was employed to fill vacancies even of very short duration: in 45 bceC. *Caninius Rebilus was consul only for a few hours. Under the empire consuls ceased to hold office for a full year; those appointed after the original (‘ordinary’) pair were suffecti.

Article

Ernst Badian, Christopher Pelling, and Tony Honoré

Roman lawyer who prosecuted L. *Licinius Murena when defeated by him in the consular elections for 62 bce; in his speech Pro Murena* Cicero makes fun of Sulpicius' legal expertise. He was eventually consul in 51. After hesitation he half-heartedly joined *Pompey in 49; Caesar pardoned him, and in 46 he governed *Achaia. He died on an embassy to Antony (M. *Antonius (2)) in January 43, and was honoured with a public funeral. The Ninth Philippic is Cicero's eulogy. Known to lawyers as Servius, he was, next to Q. *Mucius Scaevola (2), the leading lawyer of the Roman republic and the first after Mucius to attain the consulship. The story that he left up to 180 books (libri) on legal subjects is not credible, but his views are recorded in nearly a hundred texts, mainly from Justinian's (see justinian's codification) Digest.

Article

Andrew Lintott

Fragments of a bronze tablet deriving from near *Bantia in *Lucania. One large group of fragments was discovered in the 18th cent. and a third piece in 1967. They are engraved on both sides, having on one side the Latin text of a Roman criminal statute, on the other an *Oscan text (though in Latin and written left to right) relating to a local constitution. The recently discovered fragment contains the end of both documents. A nail-hole underneath the Latin text but with the Oscan text written round it shows that the Oscan is the later of the two. See lex(2), under Lex Osca and Lex Latina.Lex Latina Tabulae Bantinae, the Roman criminal statute on the obverse of the tabula Bantina: it is earlier than its Oscan counterpart but from its content cannot antedate the late 2nd cent. bce. Identification is difficult as only the enforcement clauses and the oath prescribed at the end of the law are preserved. It is most commonly thought to be the lex Appuleia maiestatis (see appuleius saturninus, l.

Article

Eastland Stuart Staveley and Barbara Levick

A bronze tablet found (1947) in the Tiber valley near the site of ancient Heba (mod. Magliano). It bears part of the text of a rogatio (bill) conferring honours upon the dead *Germanicus (cf. Tac.Ann. 2. 73; 83; 3. 1–6). The earlier part of the same text (they overlap) was found (1982) on fragments of a bronze tablet from Siarum, near Seville, the *tabula Siarensis: both were copies of a document that authorities throughout the empire were encouraged to display. The rogatio takes the form of a senatorial decree incorporating an earlier decree passed on 16 December, ce 19; publication in this form suggests that its conversion into a *lex (Valeria Aurelia) by the incoming consuls was a formality. The text throws light on: the methods used to commemorate members of the imperial house; Germanicus' activities in Gaul and Germany and in the east; the role of the people in the mourning; the educational purpose of commemorations; the new electoral procedure introduced in ce 5 to honour C.

Article

Michael Crawford

The most recently discovered and the completest copy of the Flavian lex for the new municipia (see municipium) of *Baetica created after the wars of 68–9 ce; of ten tablets, we have 3, 5, 7–10, together with three small fragments; part of what was on 6 is preserved on one of the two substantial copies previously known, the lex Malacitana (the other is the lex Salpensana; see malaca). The definition of the citizen body and the regulation of its religious affairs are missing, but we have much of the material on magistrates, decurions, and elections and all of that on general administration and jurisdiction.

Article

R. Zimmermann

Theft (furtum), as its probable etymology suggests, was originally confined to cases involving a carrying away (ferre). But in the course of the republic, the notion was extended very considerably until it covered almost any species of dishonesty. However, as a result of the introduction and extension of other delictual remedies, a tendency to retrench gained ground. More particularly, handling (contrectatio) and the intention of making an unlawful gain (animus lucri faciendi causa) emerged as the two distinctive elements normally to be found in cases of theft. They also form the cornerstones of the famous definition contained in Justinian's Digest (47. 2. 1. 3); see justinian's codification. However, the notion of theft remained fairly broad: no intention permanently to deprive the owner was required (borrowing without consent (furtum usus), therefore, was covered by the definition); the owner himself could be liable for theft (e.g. by taking his property from a pledgee: furtum possessionis); embezzlement was included; and even certain cases of fraud were taken to constitute theft.