1-19 of 19 Results

  • Keywords: lex x
Clear all

Article

Peter Candy

The lex Cincia, most likely a plebiscite of 204 bce, was a law that placed restrictions on the giving and receiving of gifts. It contained both an absolute prohibition on gifts made to advocates for the pleading of cases and a general prohibition on gifts exceeding a certain (unknown) value. The general prohibition did not, however, apply to persons who enjoyed a specifically exempted relationship. The law was probably intended to curb the extortionary abuse of gift giving by social and economic elites who, after the devastation of the Second Punic War, were motivated to extract ever-more considerable gifts from their clients. The lex Cincia probably served an expressive function more than anything else, since it made no provision for voiding gifts and only provided for sanctions in limited circumstances.The lex Cincia was a law that placed restrictions on the giving and receiving of gifts. Both Cicero (De Or.

Article

Peter Candy

The lex Laetoria (or Plaetoria) was a law of the late 3rd or early 2nd century bce that gave special protection to minors. The law gave an action against persons who were alleged to have fraudulently induced a minor to enter into a transaction. The praetor built on this protection by allowing a defence to be raised on the basis of the law. By the late Republic, the praetor had also stated in his Edict that he would grant a remedy known as in integrum restitutio to minors who had been taken advantage of. The practice of minors using curators to reassure potential creditors that they were entering into transactions on sound advice was formalised by the emperor Marcus Aurelius. By the post-classical period, the rules concerning the protection of minors (cura minorum) became closely assimilated to those concerning guardianship (tutela).The lex Laetoria (or .

Article

The law of Augustus concerning the regulation of marriage (18 bce), a plebiscite often treated in conjunction with the consular law of Papius and Poppaeus (lex Papia Poppaea, 9 ce, together as lex Iulia et Papia), primarily obliges all Roman citizens to enter into marriage with the purpose of producing legitimate offspring. With this goal, the law probably contained set age limits at which point one was expected to have been married, an age likely reflective of the fertility age, and an extensive list of rewards and privileges for those producing (legitimate) offspring.The literary sources of the 1st and 2nd centuries ce emphasize the reward structure the law contained. For example, Tacitus, in Tac. Ann. 2.51 suggests the number of children was crucial for the election of a praetor. The general overviews of the laws enacted by Augustus in Suetonius, Augustus 34 and Cassius Dio, Historia Romana.

Article

Joris Geldhof

Liturgical theology studies the meaning of Christian worship. Although it is a relatively recent approach, it is solidly anchored in the Christian tradition. Its present shape, fame, and impact would not be what they are and its major representatives would not be able to do what they are doing without the lasting influence of the Liturgical Movement and some inspiring figures that helped shape its theological profile. Their ideas and writings were widely received beyond linguistic and denominational borders and continue to be influential in the early 21st century. More concretely, the key to comprehending what liturgical theologians do lies in their appeal to and usage of the liturgy, broadly understood as the Church’s ritual, prayer, and worship practices. Therefore, liturgical theology is not so much a subdiscipline corresponding with a specific object of research and requiring a set of specialized methods, but rather a way of theologizing pertaining to the entire scope and content of the Christian faith and religion. Liturgical theologians interpret the liturgy as the normative horizon for any theoretical theological reflection and take the liturgy not as the only but definitely as the primary source for theology. This operational principle is reflected in the age-old adage lex orandi, lex credendi, which in its earliest formulation implies that the “law of faith,” or belief content, is determined, or shaped, by the “law of prayer,” or liturgical praxis. Because liturgical theology is still a field in full development, it faces a lot of challenges for the future—both within the Church and in the academy—but at the same time entails a promising ecumenical potential.

Article

Kimberley Webb

The lex Ogulnia or, more precisely, the Ogulnian plebiscite (see plebiscitum), promulgated in 300bce by the tribunes Q. Ogulnius and Cn. Ogulnius,1 created additional vacancies within the pontifical and augural colleges (see collegium) that were exclusively reserved for plebeians. This increased the number of pontifices in office from four to eight and augures from four to nine. It has often been viewed in the context of the so-called Struggle of the Orders as one of the final measures that opened previously patrician roles to the plebeians, and the publication of the legis actiones and the religious calendar in 304bce by Cn. Flavius.2 Hölkeskamp, in what remains the seminal discussion of the plebiscite, proposed that this measure reflected the already established consensus between the patrician and plebeian orders.3Livy provides the only detailed account of the passing of the lex Ogulnia, with the exception of a cursory reference in .

Article

James R. Townshend

The only direct reference to the law is by Livy (40.44.1), when he briefly summarizes the legislative and electoral activities for the year 180bce. Livy reports that in that year (eo anno) a bill was proposed by the tribunus plebis L. Villius (Annalis) which established the ages at which one could seek and hold each magistracy: quot annos nati quemque magistratum peterent caperentque.1 That the bill was carried can be inferred from Livy’s further note that as a result (inde) the Villius family received the cognomen Annalis. Little more is known of Villius, though he was praetorperegrinus in 171bce (Livy 42.28.5 and 31.9).Livy does not state what motivated Villius’s proposal. Cicero asserts that those who used leges annales to set a minimum age for the consulship were afraid of the rashness of young men (adulescentiae temeritatem uerebantur, Cic. Phil. 5.47). Many have taken this at face value and attributed the same motive to Villius. There is good reason, however, for seeing the law as one of a number of measures at the beginning of the 2nd centurybce designed to constrain electoral competition.

Article

Jacob Giltaij

The lex Papia Poppaea was enacted in 9 ce by the suffect consuls, M. Papius Mutilus and Q. Poppaeus Secundus, probably on the initiative of the Emperor Augustus. The law complemented, supplemented, and enhanced the provisions of the lex Iulia de maritandis ordinibus (the law of Augustus concerning the regulation of marriage, enacted in 18 bce). The two laws, referred to jointly as the lex Iulia et Papia, had the primary effect of obliging all Roman citizens to marry and have (legitimate) heirs.There are several pre-Justinian sources in which the lex Papia Poppaea is treated separately from the lex Iulia de maritandis ordinibus. For example, in Gaius, Institutes 2.286a, the lex Papia Poppaea is said to have determined that those who did not have children (orbi) would lose half of their estates and legacies upon death. Moreover, Gaius indicated that the lex increased the rights of patrons in the case of the death of their freedmen, providing them with an equal share irrespective of whether the freedmen had left a will (.

Article

Saskia Roselaar

Provocatio was a method for appealing the decision of a Roman magistrate. Provocatio could occur after a normal trial had been conducted in front of a magistrate with imperium. After the final judgement, the defendant could call out “provoco.” The act of provocatio called upon the protection of the tribuni plebis, who transferred the power to adjudicate to the Roman people (iudicium populi). The people could then confirm or reject the magistrate’s sentence.

Not all judgements were subject to provocatio; it only applied to the power of coercitio of higher magistrates (consuls and praetors). Sentences meted by the quaestors were excluded. The judgements of the pontifex maximus were also excluded, although the fines he imposed could be appealed. In fact, provocatio is mentioned in the sources only for political crimes, such as perduellio. The idea that the iudicium populi was part of every trial, first suggested by Mommsen and still sometimes repeated, is therefore incorrect.

Article

James R. Townshend

Sometimes referred to in scholarship as the plebiscitum Claudianum, the lex Claudia prohibited senators and their sons from possessing seafaring ships capable of carrying more than 300 amphorae. The only source that discusses the law is Livy (21.63.3–4). Livy reports that the law was proposed by a tribunus plebis, Q. Claudius, about whom nothing more is known. According to Livy, the consul-elect C. Flaminius(1) was the only senator to support the bill. Despite the bitter opposition of the senate, the law was nevertheless enacted (res per summam contentionem acta). Livy remarks that Flaminius’s support for the law generated hostility among the senators but won him the favour of the plebs and then a second consulship, which he began in 217bce. Flaminius’s first consulship had been in 223bce (with its own controversy), and he had served as censor in 220–219. The periocha of Livy, Book 20 indicates that the details of his censorship were covered in that book, including the reorganization of the libertini across the four urban tribes and the construction of both the Circus Flaminius and Via Flaminia.

Article

The lex de Gallia Cisalpina is the usual modern title given to the fragment of a Roman statute on a bronze tablet found at the ancient town of Veleia in 1760, the surviving part of which deals with provisions for and restrictions on local jurisdiction in Cisalpine Gaul (CIL XI 1146; I2 592; FIRA I 19; Roman Statutes, no. 28).1 An additional small fragment found at Veleia (CIL XI 1144; I2 601, included in the Roman Statutes edition) is usually associated with it, and it remains a matter of debate whether the so-called fragmentum Atestinum (CIL I2 600; Roman Statutes, no. 16) represents a copy of a different part of the same law.2 The main tablet from Veleia is numbered IV and contains chapters 19–23 of the law. The law of the Veleia tablet is usually, though not entirely securely, associated with the otherwise unattested tribunician lex Rubria, which is twice mentioned in the sample formulae for local trials included in it (col.

Article

Jakob Fortunat Stagl

The lex Falcidia is a plebiscitum (41–40 bce) that restricts the testator’s capacity to charge his testament with legacies, namely sums of money or objects the heir must transfer to a third person (legatum).1 According to the lex Falcidia, legacies decreed by the deceased cannot exceed by more than three quarters the worth of the whole estate.2 In consequence, the heir must receive at least one fourth of the estate free from legacies, he must obtain so called “Falcidian quarter.”The Law of the Twelve Tables declared that the testator had total freedom to charge the testament with as many legacies as he wished.3 To the extent that testators availed themselves of this freedom, the heirs designated in the testaments declined from accepting the inheritance, having only obligations arising from it without any compensation. Since a testament without an heir could not exist in the Roman conception, such a testament was therefore void. As a further consequence, this entailed intestate succession and the nullity of all dispositions in the initial testament. To avoid these consequences, which were detrimental to all parties involved, the Romans started to legislate against this tendency to charge the heir with too many legacies. They considered legacies a luxury because the institution of an heir was necessary for social and religious reasons, whereas the bestowal of legacies was not. The first attempts at limiting legacies, the lex Furia (181–169bce), which prohibits the acceptance of legacies of more than 1000 asses, and the lex Voconia (bce), which stated that legacies of deceased from the highest census class could not exceed the sum bestowed upon the heirs, were awkward insofar as they made use of absolute limits to the testator’s freedom.

Article

Georgy Kantor

The lex Iulia municipalis was a law of uncertain content and scope concerning municipal institutions passed by Iulius Caesar or less likely Augustus. It is attested in a single inscription from Patavium, commemorating a certain Marcus Iunius Sabinus as quattuorvir aediliciae potestatis “in accordance with the lex Iulia municipalis” (CIL V 2864 = ILS 5406) and may have been a piece of legislation dealing specifically with Patavium or a general regulation dealing with municipal institutions in Italy, and possibly reorganising aedilician powers of local magistrates. It may be alluded to by Cicero, Fam. VI.18.1, mentioning a ban on heralds (praecones) taking municipal office.1Earlier scholarship frequently identified the lex Iulia municipalis with a collection of material from Roman statutes on a bronze tablet broken into two pieces found in 1732 in the territory of the city of Heraclea (CIL I2 593; Roman Statutes, no. 24).

Article

delict  

Maria Floriana Cursi

“Delict” (delictum) is, in Roman law, a private wrong, as opposed to a public wrong called “crime” (crimen). Notwithstanding its private nature, in the beginning the consequence of a delict was a penalty whose function was fundamentally punitive, because of the intentional conduct of the wrongdoer (dolus). However, at the end of the Republic, and simultaneously with the rise of the notion of negligence (culpa), an additional compensatory function was introduced.In classical Roman law, four types of private wrongs (delicta) existed: bodily injury and insult (iniuria), theft (furtum), damage to property (damnum iniuria datum), and theft committed by means of violence (rapina) (Gai. Inst. 3.182).The historical formation of this scheme is unclear. Private wrongs are certainly ancient, but the first evidence in the sources dates back only as far as the 5th century bce, in the Twelve Tables, which deal mostly with bodily injury and theft.

Article

Carlos Amunátegui Perelló

According to tradition, during its first two and a half centuries of existence, seven kings governed Rome. Each of these promulgated regulations, which were known as the “laws of the kings” (leges regiae “royal laws”). Reports of these laws are to be found in many traditional accounts about the early history of Rome (most importantly, Dion. Hal. 2.7-29; Plut. Rom. 9.3; Cic. De rep. 2.8.14; Liv. A.U.C. 1.8), in a chapter of Justinian’s Digest dedicated to the origins of law extracted from a work of the jurist Pomponius (D.1.2.2, Pomponius, libro singulari enchiridii), and some casual statements made by antiquarians, including Varro and Gellius.

The fact that many—but not all—of the laws were attributed to Romulus and Numa Pompilius, the two most unlikely of the seven kings the tradition offers, led scholars generally to discard them as simple myths, historical anticipations (for some of the laws’ contents were repeated in the Twelve Tables), or even as fabrications of Dionysius in a political pamphlet.

Article

Saskia Roselaar

The lex Poetelia Papiria was a law that abolished the contractual form of nexum (debt bondage). Livy 8.28 dates the law to 326bce, during the third consulship of Gaius Poetelius Libo Visolus and the first of L. Papirius Cursor, although Varro (Ling. 7.105) dates it to 313bce, during the dictatorship of Poetelius’s son. Dionysius of Halicarnassus (16.5) and Valerius Maximus (6.1.9) appear to favour a date after the Caudine Forks (321bce).Livy 8.28 says that the law was passed because of the cruelty and lust of a particular creditor. A young boy named Gaius Publilius was working as a labourer for Lucius Papirius (Valerius Maximus calls them T. Veturius and P. Plotius, respectively) to pay off his father’s debt. Papirius desired Publilius sexually because of his beauty and tried to seduce him. Publilius refused, and Papirius had him flogged. The wounded boy ran into the street, causing an outcry among the people. Eventually the Senate ordered the consuls to bring a measure before the people, and the lex Poetelia Papiria was passed.

Article

Ville Vuolanto

The lex Voconia is a plebiscitum, named after the people’s tribune Q. Voconius Saxa, who proposed the bill before the concilium plebis (see comitia) in 169bce. It provides that testators of the first census class (that is those with a minimum wealth of 100,000 asses) were not allowed to institute a woman as a testamentary heir. Furthermore, the law states that the value of a legacy or donatio mortis causa could not exceed the part of the inheritance left to the heir or heirs (Gai. Inst. 2.274 and 2.226; Dio Cass.56.10; Cic. Verr. 1.43). It seems likely that this latter provision was not as restrictive as the former and that it therefore applied to all levels of the society irrespective of their wealth.There is no persuasive evidence that the law originally would have included other provisions. While the 3rd-centuryPauli Sententiae (4.8.20) excludes female relatives more remote than sisters from intestate succession among the agnates and connects this exclusion to the lex Voconia, it cannot be determined whether this was one of these other provisions.

Article

Ville Vuolanto

The lex Oppia, decreed in 216 bce, regulated the use of wealth by the Roman women. There are different modern interpretative approaches to the law, dealing with its original contents and purpose (as a sumptuary law or as a wartime emergency measure), its abrogation in 195 bce with Cato the Elder’s speech and women’s demonstrations, and its uses in Livy and the debates in Rome in the late 1st century bce.The lex Oppia was a plebiscitum decreed after a proposal by the people’s tribune Gaius Oppius in 215bce; it was repealed in 195bce. According to Livy, it provided that no woman should have (habere) more than one half an ounce (semiuncia, c. 14 grams) of gold, wear luxuriously coloured (versicolor) clothing, or ride in a carriage (iunctum vehiculum) in Rome, in any town, or within a mile of the settlement in question, except in the performance of public religious rites (.

Article

Tommaso Beggio

The lex Agraria dating from 111 bce is an epigraphic law dealing with the distribution and privatisation of public land (ager publicus) in Italy and the provinces. In its first part, concerning public land in Italy, the law first describes five different categories of land declared to be private, before identifying other kinds of land that were and should remain public. In the second part, relating to land in Africa and Greece, the law establishes rules mainly regarding pasture land and the public sale of land, which then had to be declared private; nonetheless, this land was subject to the payment of the vectigal. Therefore, the lex Agraria can be considered as a law that consolidated some of the achievements of the Gracchan reforms that took a significant step towards the privatisation of ager publicus. However, the question remains open as to whether the lex Agraria could be associated with one of the three post-Gracchan laws cited by Appian (B Civ.

Article

Lorenzo Gagliardi

Lex Hortensia was a law submitted for comitia approval in 287bce by the plebeian dictator Q. Hortensius. The law established that plebiscites would be valid for the entire Roman population and would have the force of law.1 A small group of ancient sources agree on the description of the law’s contents.2Scholars are uncertain as to which assembly considered the proposal. Pliny the Elder places the approval in Aesculeto3: this is an unknown location, which is nonetheless considered to be outside the pomerium.4 If this opinion is correct, it can be assumed that the centuriate comitia voted on the law.The law was presented and voted upon during a period of political and economic conflict between the patricians and plebeians, and during the third secession of the latter (in this case, on the Janiculum5).6 It represented a fundamental step for plebeian progress. It can be said that the lex Hortensia marked the final moment in the Struggle of the Orders.