DOCSLIB.ORG

Masters and Freedmen: Junian Latins and the Struggle for Citizenship

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

MASTERS AND FREEDMEN: JUNIAN LATINS AND THE STRUGGLE FOR CITIZENSHIP Egbert Koops 1. Citizenship and Problems of Integration* Grants of citizenship have long been recognized as an important factor in the integration of the Roman empire.1 The state was continually seek- ing to replenish and increase its citizen body by offering membership as something of value. Citizenship provided status and entry into patronage networks as well as more tangible benefits. It gave the somewhat theoreti- cal right to vote, at least for men, and to pursue a career in the legions. But more importantly, it allowed access to the full extent of the Roman legal system. From access to the courts and the capacity to own land in Italy, to marry other citizens in recognized marriage, to pass citizenship on to children, to make wills and inherit, all the way to the right of appeal to the emperor – citizenship meant full participation in the empire. Nominally, any Roman citizen could take part in law, commerce and politics on an equal footing to any other citizen. And though citizenship alone did not ensure access to power, which also depended on birth, wealth, opportu- nity and ability, it was advantageous enough to be desirable. Ciuis Romanus sum is the famous expression that ought to, and in the- ory would ensure favorable treatment throughout the empire.2 Yet it did not detract from other identities. An example is offered by the apostle Paul. Born in Tarsus, on the southern coast of Turkey, in a Jewish commu- nity, he addressed a crowd in Jerusalem in Aramaic after asking permis- sion to do so in Greek.3 But when he was arrested, he claimed the status * Parts of this chapter, particularly par. 1-2 and 5, expand on a previous article: E. Koops, ‘Second-rate citizens: Junian Latins and the Constitutio Antoniniana’, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 19 (2012), 223–239. 1 See, inter alia, J.A. Crook, Law and life of Rome (New York 1967), 38–43; A.N. Sherwin- White, The Roman citizenship (Oxford 19732), 167 ff; C. Williamson, The laws of the Roman people (Michigan 2005), 227–229. For a sociological perspective, F. Gross, Citizenship and ethnicity (Westport 1999), 29–32. 2 Cic., 2 Verr. 5.147, 5.162 and 5.168. 3 Acts 22.23–29. B. Witherington, The acts of the apostles (Grand Rapids, Carlisle 1998), 680–683. Egbert Koops - 9789004256675 Downloaded from Brill.com10/01/2021 03:12:24AM via free access 106 egbert koops of a Roman citizen and impressed upon the local commander that he was born as one, while the commander had paid a large amount of money for the privilege. In a bronze tablet found at Banasa (Morocco),4 citizenship is bestowed on a tribal leader and his family at his express request. The emperor, Marcus Aurelius in this case, stresses that although such requests are not normally granted, a reward for the leader’s prominence and loy- alty may inspire others to emulate his example. Even so, the citizenship is awarded saluo iure gentis, without prejudice to tribal law.5 Whether or not such Roman citizens in the provinces felt themselves ‘Roman’ is an interesting question, but a moot point here. As members of their tribe, they may have been ruled by tribal law; but as Roman citizens, they were by necessity integrated into the machinery of empire. A modern analogy may be useful. In 1992, the Treaty on the European Union was signed at Maastricht, creating a single European polity that embraces the national citizens of many Western European countries. Arti- cle G sub C states: “Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union.”6 This phrasing led to such antagonism, including the rejection of the Maastricht Treaty by Denmark,7 that a further clause was added five years later: “Citizenship of the Union shall complement and not replace national citizenship.”8 All citizens of EU countries are also European citi- zens, which entitles them to work and travel freely, and to vote and stand for municipal or European office throughout the EU.9 They may feel them- selves German, French or Dutch, and remain so at law, but they exercise a 4 AE 1971, 534. W. Seston and M. Euzennat, ‘Un dossier de la chancellerie romaine: la Tabula Banasitana’, Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres (1971), 468–490; A.N. Sherwin-White, ‘The tabula of Banasa and the constitutio Antoniniana’, Journal of Roman Studies 63 (1973), 86–98. 5 Dual citizenship was well established by the reign of Claudius. A.N. Sherwin-White, ‘The Roman citizenship. A survey of its development into a world franchise’, ANRW I.2 (Berlin/New York 1972), 46–53; but also see D. Nörr, s.v. ‘Origo’, RE Supp. 10 (1965), 431–473. The Banasa grant was notably also made without prejudice to the tributes and vectigals due to the aerarium and the fiscus. 6 Art. G sub C of the Treaty of Maastricht, [1992] C 191/1. 7 The Edinburgh Agreement of December 1992 (C 348, 31 December 1992) granted Denmark an exception, following its rejection of the Maastricht treaty by referendum, to the effect that European citizenship in no way replaced national citizenship (section A). 8 Art. 2 sub 9 of the Treaty of Amsterdam, [1997] C 340/173. 9 Art. 20–22 of the consolidated Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 2008 C 115/47. On the ease of travel within the Roman empire, see Arist., Or. 26.100–101 (ed. Keil). Egbert Koops - 9789004256675 Downloaded from Brill.com10/01/2021 03:12:24AM via free access masters and freedmen 107 right inherent in their European citizenship when they wish to work in, or travel to, another EU country; a right, moreover, which no national state can provide. In the same way, a tribal leader in Mauretania was no less a Roman citizen were he to move to Rome, even saluo iure gentis. The Banasa tablet shows that citizenship grants were instruments in a policy that was designed to spread and consolidate Roman rule in the prov- inces. Veteran soldiers and members of the provincial elite were rewarded with citizenship for their services, which came at little cost, served as a badge of distinction, and drew them closer to Rome. The tribes of Latium as well as certain other allies had been granted this favor to ensure their loyalty during the Social War.10 But not all tribes and tribal leaders were treated equally: in 89 bc, the transpadani, non-Romans living between the southern Alps and the river Po, were invested with the so-called ius Latii,11 the right to acquire full Roman citizenship if they fulfilled an additional requirement, in this case a term as a magistrate at home.12 This type of intermediate citizenship was referred to as Latinitas,13 though it had little to do with the ancient tribes of Latium.14 Unlike Roman citizen- ship, which was vested primarily in individuals,15 the (coloniary) Latin status was granted to communities and became available to individuals by being a citizen of such a community. Some coloniae with Latin sta- tus expanded from veteran settlements, others already existed but were granted the status as an honorific once they had proven to be ‘Roman’ enough.16 Curiously, Vespasian even granted Latin status to the whole of Spain.17 10 G. Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (Milan 1912, repr. 1990), 338–341. On the unification of Italy by imposing the Roman model at the municipal level, see Sherwin- White 1972, op. cit. (n. 5), 33–40. 11 L. Pompeia de transpadanis (89 bc). Rotondi 1912, op. cit. (n. 10), 342. The transpa- dani were later granted citizenship by Julius Caesar: l. Roscia de Gallia cisalpina (49 bc), Rotondi, op. cit., 416; Sherwin-White 1972, op. cit. (n. 5), 40–45. 12 Under the ‘minor’ Latin right, magistrates could acquire citizenship; the ‘major’ Latin right, possibly introduced by Hadrian, gave the same option to decuriones. Gaius, Inst. 1.96. Cf. rubrica 21 of the Flavian municipal laws. 13 ‘Latinitas’: Cic., Att. 14.12. ‘Latio donati’: Plin., nat. 3.20.135. ‘Latium dedit’: HA, Hadr. 21.7. ‘Ius latii’: Gaius, Inst. 1.95. 14 Gaius, Inst. 1.79. 15 With the exception, perhaps, of the ius italicum, the right to be considered Italian soil, which was conferred by the emperors on some communities. Sherwin-White 1972, op. cit. (n. 5), 53. 16 Sherwin-White 19732, op. cit. (n. 1), 59–61, 114 f; 222 f. 17 ‘Latium tribuit’: Plin., nat. 3.3.30. Egbert Koops - 9789004256675 Downloaded from Brill.com10/01/2021 03:12:24AM via free access 108 egbert koops Latin status was, in essence, a second-class or intermediate form of citi- zenship. It offered many of the legal rights enjoyed by Roman citizens, but not all, and none of the more important political rights.18 In consequence, it was attractive enough, to some, to seek improvement of the Latin status, which was quite possible although it may have been costly. A main mode of gaining the franchise has already been mentioned: by taking on the (expensive) munus of a city councillor, inhabitants of Latin communities could become full citizens at the end of their term.19 Latins also became citizens by financing the all-important grain deliveries to Rome for a set period of time, through shipping or milling facilities.20 And after the great fire of 64 ad, Nero offered full citizenship to those willing to spend half their wealth, with a minimum of 100.000 sesterces, on construction work.21 Such grants tapped into the willingness Latins presumably showed to spend their wealth in exchange for civic recognition.22 Other avenues were open as well.
Recommended publications
  • Language Contact and Identity in Roman Britain

    Language Contact and Identity in Roman Britain

    Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 5-16-2016 12:00 AM Language Contact and Identity in Roman Britain Robert Jackson Woodcock The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Professor Alexander Meyer The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in Classics A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Master of Arts © Robert Jackson Woodcock 2016 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, and the Indo- European Linguistics and Philology Commons Recommended Citation Woodcock, Robert Jackson, "Language Contact and Identity in Roman Britain" (2016). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 3775. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/3775 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract Language is one of the most significant aspects of cultural identity. This thesis examines the evidence of languages in contact in Roman Britain in order to determine the role that language played in defining the identities of the inhabitants of this Roman province. All forms of documentary evidence from monumental stone epigraphy to ownership marks scratched onto pottery are analyzed for indications of bilingualism and language contact in Roman Britain. The language and subject matter of the Vindolanda writing tablets from a Roman army fort on the northern frontier are analyzed for indications of bilingual interactions between Roman soldiers and their native surroundings, as well as Celtic interference on the Latin that was written and spoken by the Roman army.
  • CILICIA: the FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCHES in ANATOLIA1 Mark Wilson

    CILICIA: the FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCHES in ANATOLIA1 Mark Wilson

    CILICIA: THE FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCHES IN ANATOLIA1 Mark Wilson Summary This article explores the origin of the Christian church in Anatolia. While individual believers undoubtedly entered Anatolia during the 30s after the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:9–10), the book of Acts suggests that it was not until the following decade that the first church was organized. For it was at Antioch, the capital of the Roman province of Syria, that the first Christians appeared (Acts 11:20–26). Yet two obscure references in Acts point to the organization of churches in Cilicia at an earlier date. Among the addressees of the letter drafted by the Jerusalem council were the churches in Cilicia (Acts 15:23). Later Paul visited these same churches at the beginning of his second ministry journey (Acts 15:41). Paul’s relationship to these churches points to this apostle as their founder. Since his home was the Cilician city of Tarsus, to which he returned after his conversion (Gal. 1:21; Acts 9:30), Paul was apparently active in church planting during his so-called ‘silent years’. The core of these churches undoubtedly consisted of Diaspora Jews who, like Paul’s family, lived in the region. Jews from Cilicia were members of a Synagogue of the Freedmen in Jerusalem, to which Paul was associated during his time in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9). Antiochus IV (175–164 BC) hellenized and urbanized Cilicia during his reign; the Romans around 39 BC added Cilicia Pedias to the province of Syria. Four cities along with Tarsus, located along or near the Pilgrim Road that transects Anatolia, constitute the most likely sites for the Cilician churches.
  • Hadrian and the Greek East

    Hadrian and the Greek East

    HADRIAN AND THE GREEK EAST: IMPERIAL POLICY AND COMMUNICATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Demetrios Kritsotakis, B.A, M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2008 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Fritz Graf, Adviser Professor Tom Hawkins ____________________________ Professor Anthony Kaldellis Adviser Greek and Latin Graduate Program Copyright by Demetrios Kritsotakis 2008 ABSTRACT The Roman Emperor Hadrian pursued a policy of unification of the vast Empire. After his accession, he abandoned the expansionist policy of his predecessor Trajan and focused on securing the frontiers of the empire and on maintaining its stability. Of the utmost importance was the further integration and participation in his program of the peoples of the Greek East, especially of the Greek mainland and Asia Minor. Hadrian now invited them to become active members of the empire. By his lengthy travels and benefactions to the people of the region and by the creation of the Panhellenion, Hadrian attempted to create a second center of the Empire. Rome, in the West, was the first center; now a second one, in the East, would draw together the Greek people on both sides of the Aegean Sea. Thus he could accelerate the unification of the empire by focusing on its two most important elements, Romans and Greeks. Hadrian channeled his intentions in a number of ways, including the use of specific iconographical types on the coinage of his reign and religious language and themes in his interactions with the Greeks. In both cases it becomes evident that the Greeks not only understood his messages, but they also reacted in a positive way.
  • Civis Romanus Sum Citizenship in Ancient Rome Was Valued Not Only

    Civis Romanus Sum Citizenship in Ancient Rome Was Valued Not Only

    Civis Romanus Sum Citizenship in Ancient Rome was valued not only for the rights and social status it provided, but also for the sense of patriotism and honor it instilled in the Roman people. The gravity of citizenship allowed the Roman Empire’s multitudinous regions to become vastly and impossibly connected by a sense of pride for one Italian city. Citizenship was a commodity valuable enough for soldiers such as Mucius Scaevola to give their right hands for, as well as for plebeians to secede and fight for with their lives. Citizens felt an unbreakable bond between themselves and their nation; they were dedicated to representing and defending Rome at any cost. It was this strong sense of identity that united so many people and created such a dominant empire. Roman citizenship was one of the most prized possessions a European inhabitant could have, bearing the magnitude of rights, ranking, honor, and a powerful sense of Roman identity. Although some Roman people were born into citizenship, the rest of the population yearned for such rights and status, and took whatever action they could to become true, legal members of Roman society. Citizenship included suffrage, the right to run for and occupy office, the right to not be tortured, crucified, or be sentenced to death unless found guilty of treason, the right to marry, to hold property, and to have a trial, as well as various “public” and “private” prerogatives. Romans born into a noble family inherited citizenship and social status; they made up the patrician class, while the lower plebeian class was made up of free non-citizens.
  • Three Main Groups of People Settled on Or Near the Italian Peninsula and Influenced Roman Civilization

    Three Main Groups of People Settled on Or Near the Italian Peninsula and Influenced Roman Civilization

    Three main groups of people settled on or near the Italian peninsula and influenced Roman civilization. The Latins settled west of the Apennine Mountains and south of the Tiber River around 1000 B.C.E. While there were many advantages to their location near the river, frequent flooding also created problems. The Latin’s’ settlements were small villages built on the “Seven Hills of Rome”. These settlements were known as Latium. The people were farmers and raised livestock. They spoke their own language which became known as Latin. Eventually groups of these people united and formed the city of Rome. Latin became its official language. The Etruscans About 400 years later, another group of people, the Etruscans, settled west of the Apennines just north of the Tiber River. Archaeologists believe that these people came from the eastern Mediterranean region known as Asia Minor (present day Turkey). By 600 B.C.E., the Etruscans ruled much of northern and central Italy, including the town of Rome. The Etruscans were excellent builders and engineers. Two important structures the Romans adapted from the Etruscans were the arch and the cuniculus. The Etruscan arch rested on two pillars that supported a half circle of wedge-shaped stones. The keystone, or center stone, held the other stones in place. A cuniculus was a long underground trench. Vertical shafts connected it to the ground above. Etruscans used these trenches to irrigate land, drain swamps, and to carry water to their cities. The Romans adapted both of these structures and in time became better engineers than the Etruscans.
  • Brutus, Cassius, Judas, and Cremutius Cordus: How

    Brutus, Cassius, Judas, and Cremutius Cordus: How

    BRUTUS, CASSIUS, JUDAS, AND CREMUTIUS CORDUS: HOW SHIFTING PRECEDENTS ALLOWED THE LEX MAIESTATIS TO GROUP WRITERS WITH TRAITORS by Hunter Myers A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Mississippi in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College. Oxford, Mississippi May 2018 Approved by ______________________________ Advisor: Professor Molly Pasco-Pranger ______________________________ Reader: Professor John Lobur ______________________________ Reader: Professor Steven Skultety © 2018 Hunter Ross Myers ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dr. Pasco-Pranger, For your wise advice and helpful guidance through the thesis process Dr. Lobur & Dr. Skultety, For your time reading my work My parents, Robin Myers and Tracy Myers For your calm nature and encouragement Sally-McDonnell Barksdale Honors College For an incredible undergraduate academic experience iii ABSTRACT In either 103 or 100 B.C., a concept known as Maiestas minuta populi Romani (diminution of the majesty of the Roman people) is invented by Saturninus to accompany charges of perduellio (treason). Just over a century later, this same law is used by Tiberius to criminalize behavior and speech that he found disrespectful. This thesis offers an answer to the question as to how the maiestas law evolved during the late republic and early empire to present the threat that it did to Tiberius’ political enemies. First, the application of Roman precedent in regards to judicial decisions will be examined, as it plays a guiding role in the transformation of the law. Next, I will discuss how the law was invented in the late republic, and increasingly used for autocratic purposes. The bulk of the thesis will focus on maiestas proceedings in Tacitus’ Annales, in which a total of ten men lose their lives.
  • “At the Sight of the City Utterly Perishing Amidst the Flames Scipio Burst Into

    “At the Sight of the City Utterly Perishing Amidst the Flames Scipio Burst Into

    Aurelii are one of the three major Human subgroups within western Eramus, and the founders of the mighty (some say “Eternal”) “At the sight of the city utterly perishing Aurelian Empire. They are a sturdy, amidst the flames Scipio burst into tears, conservative group, prone to religious fervor and stood long reflecting on the inevitable and philosophical revelry in equal measure. change which awaits cities, nations, and Adding to this a taste for conquest, and is it dynasties, one and all, as it does every one any wonder the Aurelii spread their of us men. This, he thought, had befallen influence, like a mighty eagle spreading its Ilium, once a powerful city, and the once wings, across the known world? mighty empires of the Assyrians, Medes, Persians, and that of Macedonia lately so splendid. And unintentionally or purposely he quoted---the words perhaps escaping him Aurelii stand a head shorter than most unconsciously--- other humans, but their tightly packed "The day shall be when holy Troy shall forms hold enough muscle for a man twice fall their height. Their physical endurance is And Priam, lord of spears, and Priam's legendary amongst human and elf alike. folk." Only the Brutum are said to be hardier, And on my asking him boldly (for I had and even then most would place money on been his tutor) what he meant by these the immovable Aurelian. words, he did not name Rome distinctly, but Skin color among the Aurelii is quite was evidently fearing for her, from this sight fluid, running from pale to various shades of the mutability of human affairs.
  • Ancient Rome

    Ancient Rome

    Ancient Rome Beginnings Founding • The Latins, an Indo-European-speaking Italic people from central Europe, crossed the Alps about 1500 B.C. and invaded Italy. • Attracted by the warm climate and fertile land, the Latins conquered the native peoples and settled in central Italy. • On the seven hills overlooking the Tiber River, they founded the city of Rome. • (According to Roman legend, the city was founded in 753 B.C. by two descendants of the gods – the twin brothers Romulus and Remus) Life Among the Early Latins The early Latins, a simple, hardy people, • worked chiefly at farming and cattle-raising; • maintained close family ties, with the father exercising absolute authority; • worshipped tribal gods (Jupiter, the chief god; Mars, god of war; Neptune, god of the sea; and Venus, goddess of love), and • defended Rome against frequent attacks Etruscan Territory • Etruscan architecture was created between about 700 BC and 200 BC, when the expanding civilization of ancient Rome finally absorbed Etruscan civilization. The Etruscans were considerable builders in stone, wood and other materials of temples, houses, tombs and city walls, as well as bridges and roads. The only structures remaining in quantity in anything like their original condition are tombs and walls, but through archaeology and other sources we have a good deal of information on what once existed. Etruscan Architecture Etruscan Funeral Urns From Etruscan Rule to Independence Rome was captured about 750 B.C. by its northern neighbors, the Etruscans. From these more advanced people, the Latins, or Romans, learned to • construct buildings, roads and city walls, • make metal weapons, and • Apply new military tactics; The Romans in 500 B.C.
  • Handout Name Yourself Like a Roman (CLAS 160)

    Handout Name Yourself Like a Roman (CLAS 160)

    NAME YOURSELF LIKE A ROMAN Choose Your Gender 0 Roman naming conventions differed for men and women, and the Romans didn’t conceive of other options or categories (at least for naming purposes!). For viri (men): Choose Your Praenomen (“first name”) 1 This is your personal name, just like modern American first names: Michael, Jonathan, Jason, etc. The Romans used a very limited number of first names and tended to be very conservative about them, reusing the same small number of names within families. In the Roman Republic, your major options are: Some of these names (Quintus, Sextus, • Appius • Manius • Servius Septimus, etc.) clearly originally referred • Aulus • Marcus • Sextus to birth order: Fifth, Sixth, Seventh. Others are related to important aspects of • Decimus • Numerius • Spurius Roman culture: the name Marcus probably • Gaius • Postumus • Statius comes from the god Mars and Tiberius from the river Tiber. Other are mysterious. • Gnaeus • Publius • Tiberius But over time, these names lost their • Lucius • Quintus • Titus original significance and became hereditary, with sons named after their • Mamercus • Septimus • Vibius father or another male relative. Choose Your Nomen (“family name”) 2 Your second name identifies you by gens: family or clan, much like our modern American last name. While praenomina vary between members of the same family, the nomen is consistent. Some famous nomina include Claudius, Cornelius, Fabius, Flavius, Julius, Junius, and Valerius. Side note: if an enslaved person was freed or a foreigner was granted citizenship, they were technically adopted into the family of their “patron,” and so received his nomen as well. De Boer 2020 OPTIONAL: Choose Your Cognomen (“nickname”) Many Romans had just a praenomen and a nomen, and it was customary and polite to address a 3 person by this combo (as in “hello, Marcus Tullius, how are you today?” “I am well, Gaius Julius, and you?”).
  • 3. Rome: Roman Citizenship Robert L

    3. Rome: Roman Citizenship Robert L

    Section I: Athens, Rome, and Jerusalem: Contemporary Civilization (Ideas and Institutions Background of Western Civilization of Western Man) 1958 3. Rome: Roman Citizenship Robert L. Bloom Gettysburg College Basil L. Crapster Gettysburg College Harold A. Dunkelberger Gettysburg College See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/contemporary_sec1 Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, and the Cultural History Commons Share feedback about the accessibility of this item. Bloom, Robert L. et al. "3. Rome: Roman Citizenship. Pt. I: Athens, Rome, and Jerusalem: Background of Western Civilization." Ideas and Institutions of Western Man (Gettysburg College, 1958), 59-61. This is the publisher's version of the work. This publication appears in Gettysburg College's institutional repository by permission of the copyright owner for personal use, not for redistribution. Cupola permanent link: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/ contemporary_sec1/10 This open access book chapter is brought to you by The uC pola: Scholarship at Gettysburg College. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of The uC pola. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 3. Rome: Roman Citizenship Abstract The Roman concept of citizenship represents both a measure of their capacity to govern and one of their key contributions to Western culture. In the Greek city-state, citizenship was something which could not be separated from the intimate and varied life of the polis. It enabled a man to live the good life because it entitled him to participate in all the activities which the polis sponsored.
  • The Military Reforms of Gaius Marius in Their Social, Economic, and Political Context by Michael C. Gambino August, 2015 Directo

    The Military Reforms of Gaius Marius in Their Social, Economic, and Political Context by Michael C. Gambino August, 2015 Directo

    The Military Reforms of Gaius Marius in their Social, Economic, and Political Context By Michael C. Gambino August, 2015 Director of Thesis: Dr. Frank Romer Major Department: History Abstract The goal of this thesis is, as the title affirms, to understand the military reforms of Gaius Marius in their broader societal context. In this thesis, after a brief introduction (Chap. I), Chap. II analyzes the Roman manipular army, its formation, policies, and armament. Chapter III examines Roman society, politics, and economics during the second century B.C.E., with emphasis on the concentration of power and wealth, the legislative programs of Ti. And C. Gracchus, and the Italian allies’ growing demand for citizenship. Chap. IV discusses Roman military expansion from the Second Punic War down to 100 B.C.E., focusing on Roman military and foreign policy blunders, missteps, and mistakes in Celtiberian Spain, along with Rome’s servile wars and the problem of the Cimbri and Teutones. Chap. V then contextualizes the life of Gaius Marius and his sense of military strategy, while Chap VI assesses Marius’s military reforms in his lifetime and their immediate aftermath in the time of Sulla. There are four appendices on the ancient literary sources (App. I), Marian consequences in the Late Republic (App. II), the significance of the legionary eagle standard as shown during the early principate (App. III), and a listing of the consular Caecilii Metelli in the second and early first centuries B.C.E. (App. IV). The Marian military reforms changed the army from a semi-professional citizen militia into a more professionalized army made up of extensively trained recruits who served for longer consecutive terms and were personally bound to their commanders.
  • The Praetor As a Promoter of Bonum Commune

    The Praetor As a Promoter of Bonum Commune

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Jagiellonian Univeristy Repository The praetor as a promoter of bonum commune Franciszek Longchamps de Bérier Abstract. – The common good is the reason why political authority exists, the reason why the state exists. This is clearly visible today, and it was also clearly visible to the Romans. The praetor’s work represented par excellance the actualization of the common good under specific conditions and for particular persons. The praetor was endowed with powers which ensured autonomy of action in Rome, limited only by the one-year-long term of office, or an objection by members of the magistracy. He was to act for the benefit of his fellow citizens as a group, and enhance their relationship with the civitas as well as among the citizens themselves. It was only in the latter sphere that he began to play an important role in the protection of private rights. The urban praetor combined all three spheres, which led to the emergence of ways for resolving and settling conflicts, thus improving conditions for the development of individuals within the State, understood as a community of citizens. The claim that the praetor promoted the common good that way – being both predestined and empowered to do so – results from an attempt at identifying the values behind legal solutions. It is not enough to establish what functions were performed by the magistrate and what tools he had at his disposal. It appears 217 that the quintessence of the mission the praetor was entrusted with was promotion of the common good – the way, naturally, it was understood by him and his fellow citizens understood it.