Historia 65, 2016/1, 66–72 Francisco Pina Polo Magistrates-elect and their potestas contionandi in the Late Roman Republic Abstract: he ancient sources mention speeches being delivered in the late Republic in contiones by both consuls-elect and tribunes of the plebs designate. It has usually been assumed that as magistrates-elect they did not have the right to summon a popular assembly. In this paper it is suggested that magistrates-designate – or at least some of them – had this privilege. his should be understood in the more general framework in which the designati played a political and institutional role during the late Republic. Keywords: contio, oratory, Roman Republic, magistrate-designate, consul, tribune of the plebs he ancient sources mention speeches being delivered in the late Republic in contiones by both consuls-elect and tribunes of the plebs designate. It has usually been assumed by scholars – myself included – that as magistrates-elect they did not have the right to summon a popular assembly. his would mean that a magistrate in oice, probably a tribune of the plebs, had convoked the contio and invited them to speak. his is the otherwise well-known legal procedure of producere in contionem or contionem dare, frequently atested in political practice throughout the Roman Republic, particularly during the irst century BC. his explanation is perfectly plausible. However, the name of the presumed magistrate convoking an assembly for the magistrates-designate is never given, which raises the question of whether magistrates-elect had potestas contionandi. Could they summon a contio by themselves in order to address the people? In this paper I will suggest that magistrates-designate – or at least some of them – had this privilege. his should be understood in the more general framework in which the designati played a political and institutional role during the late Republic, when they had the priority to speak in senatorial debates (see below). In the year 71, ater returning from Hispania, Pompey the Great was elected consul for the irst time.1 Since he refused to dismiss his army until Metellus Pius returned from Hispania to celebrate a joint triumph, Pompey was to remain out of the pomerium until the last day of the year, when he entered the city as a triumphator.2 While he was a consul-elect, he delivered a speech to the people in which he promised to restore 1 2 App. b.c. 1.121; Liv. per. 97. On the circumstances of the election see R. Seager, Pompey the Great, Oxford 2002, 36–37. he elections in the irst century BC usually took place in summer. hat means that the magistrates-elect enjoyed this condition several months before taking oice. For consuls see F. Pina Polo, he consul at Rome: he civil functions of the consuls in the Roman Republic, Cambridge 2011, 284–290. Th is m a t e ria l is u n d e r co p yrigh t . An y u se o u t sid e o f t h e n a rro w b o u n d a rie s o f co p yrigh t la w is ille ga l a n d m a y b e p ro se cu t e d . Th is a p p lie s in p a rt icu la r t o co p ie s, t ra n sla t io n s, m icro film in g a s w e ll a s st o ra ge a n d p ro ce ssin g in e le ct ro n ic syst e m s. © Fra n z St e in e r Ve rla g, St u t t ga rt 20 15 Magistrates-elect and their potestas contionandi in the Late Roman Republic 67 full tribunician powers and to reform the courts during his consulate. Cicero’s description leaves no room for doubt: Pompey’s irst contio took place “ad urbem” being a “consul designatus”.3 Nevertheless, he does not mention the name of the assembly’s convener. Who was he? he scholarship has accepted as probable that M. Lollius Palicanus was the tribune of the plebs who summoned the contio for Pompey.4 he hypothesis is based on a passage writen by a late grammarian, known as the Pseudo-Asconius, in his commentary to Cicero’s Verrinae. he text referred to Cic. Verr. 1.45 as follows: “Cum primum contionem ad urbem consul designatus. Ad urbem in urbe… Pompeius autem pro consule de Hispania Sertorio victo nuper venerat et statim habuerat contionem de restituenda tribunicia potestate, Palicano tr.pl.”5 As can be seen, the commentator does not state that Palicanus had convened the assembly for Pompey. He mentions him as a chronological reference: Pompey’s speech to the people was held, Palicanus being a tribune of the plebs. Why would the Pseudo-Asconius use Palicanus as a chronological remark? he answer is because he was well known to every reader of a commentary on the Verrinae. As a tribune of the plebs Palicanus had spoken in contione on behalf of Sthenius of Himera, one of the victims of Verres in Sicily.6 Apparently, Palicanus was also active during his tribunate, advocating the restoration of the powers of the tribunes of the plebs. hat connected directly with one of the issues Pompey addressed in his speech. Indeed, the Pseudo-Asconius had already mentioned Palicanus in his commentary among the tribunes who had struggled in the seventies for the tribunicia potestas, together with Sicinius and Quinctius.7 In short, by alluding to Palicanus the Pseudo-Asconius intended to establish a chronology for Pompey’s contio: the speech had been delivered, Pompey being a consul-elect, while Palicanus was still a tribune, that is before 10th December 71, the 3 4 5 6 7 Cic. Verr. 1.45: “Ipse denique Cn. Pompeius, cum primum contionem ad urbem consul designatus habuit, ubi (id quod maxime exspectari videbatur) ostendit se tribuniciam potestatem restituturum, factus est in eo strepitus, et grata contionis admurmuratio. Idem in eadem contione cum dixisset populatas vexatasque esse provincias; iudicia autem turpia ac lagitiosa ieri; ei rei se providere ac consulere velle; tum vero non strepitu, sed maximo clamore, suam populus Romanus signiicavit voluntatem.” Cf. Sall. hist. 4.44 M. Cf. F. Millar, he crowd in Rome in the late Republic, Ann Arbor 1998, 63–65; P. McGushin, Sallust. he Histories, vol.2, Oxford 2007, 158–159: “It was Lollius who, as tribune in 71, gave Pompeius the opportunity, as consul-elect, to address the people”; “Lollius’ participation in this meeting is indicated by Ps.-Ascon. 220 St.” I myself pointed out Palicanus as the probable convener in F. Pina Polo, Las contiones civiles y militares en Roma, Zaragoza 1989, 287 nº241. Recently I have reiterated the same hypothesis in F. Pina Polo, he political role of the consules designati at Rome, Historia 62, 2013, 443–444, in which I emphasised that Pompey as a consul designatus “had no potestas contionadi”. Ps.-Ascon. 220 Stangl. Cic. Verr. 2.2.100: “etiam in contione tribunum plebis de causa Stheni, M. Palicanum, esse questum.” Later on, Cicero alludes to a tribune who denounced Verres’ cruelty and even introduced into the assembly a citizen who had been logged: “Quam rem etiam tribunus plebis in contione egit, cum eum quem iste virgis ceciderat in conspectum populi Romani produxit.” Ps.-Ascon. 250 Stangl makes clear who this tribune was: “Tribunus plebis. M. Lollius Palicanus.” Ps.-Ascon. 189 Stangl: “Iudiciorum desiderio tribunicia potestas el. Primus Sicinius tr.pl. nec multo post Quintius et postremo Palicanus perfecerant ut tribuniciam potestatem populo darent consules Cn. Pompeius Magnus et M. Licinius Crassus.” Th is m a t e ria l is u n d e r co p yrigh t . An y u se o u t sid e o f t h e n a rro w b o u n d a rie s o f co p yrigh t la w is ille ga l a n d m a y b e p ro se cu t e d . Th is a p p lie s in p a rt icu la r t o co p ie s, t ra n sla t io n s, m icro film in g a s w e ll a s st o ra ge a n d p ro ce ssin g in e le ct ro n ic syst e m s. © Fra n z St e in e r Ve rla g, St u t t ga rt 20 15 68 Francisco Pina Polo day on which Palicanus ceased to be a tribune. Palicanus, and not another tribune of the plebs, was mentioned because he was by far the most popular and active tribune in 71. Actually, he is the only tribune for that year of whom some traces have been preserved in our sources.8 We can easily assume that Palicanus supported Pompey in the restoration of full tribunician powers. Very likely he was part of the audience that listened very atentively and approvingly to the speech of the consul-designate. But it is not necessary to suppose that he was the convener of the assembly. Nothing in our sources prevents us from thinking that Pompey himself could have summoned the people to a contio outside the pomerium. According to Cicero, the assembly raised high expectations, and Pompey increased his popularity by promising to resolve during his consulate problems that were present within Roman society. It was surely an intelligent political move on the part of Pompey before celebrating his triumph and before entering the irst magistracy to which he had been elected by the people. he other evidence for consuls-elect speaking in a contio occurs in the year 44. Cicero delivered his irst Philippica in the senate on 2nd September 44. In his speech he alluded to the Kalends of June as a turning point in the political situation, once Antonius had strengthened his position. Cicero depicted a political atmosphere without freedom to the extent that the consules designati, he states, were afraid to atend meetings of the senate. However, these same consuls-elect praised Caesar’s assassins in all their speeches and in contiones: “quos tamen ipsi consules in contionibus et in omni sermone laudabant”.9 hese are C. Vibius Pansa and A. Hirtius, who had been elected for the year 43. he speeches should have been delivered in the time between the consular elections and the irst Philippica, namely in July and/or August.10 Again we have some information about the orators who intervened in these assemblies – the plural in Cicero’s text suggests more than one contio – as well as about the topic, but there are no traces of the convener or conveners of the meetings. In the confused months that followed the assassination of Caesar, it was not unusual for a tribune of the plebs to give somebody the chance to address the people. L. Antonius and Ti. Cannutius summoned contiones, in May and the autumn of 44 respectively, in which the young Octavian had the opportunity to introduce himself as the legal and political heir of his adoptive father Caesar. M. Servilius, tribune in 43, gave the loor to Cicero on 20th December of 44: Cicero delivered before the people his fourth Philippica. On 4th January 43, it was the tribune P. Appuleius who summoned a contio for Cicero, who pronounced his sixth Philippica. In this labile political framework we must not discard the possibility that a tribune could have convoked an assembly for 8 See T. R.S. Broughton, he Magistrates of the Roman Republic, vol.2, 122. On Palicanus Cic. Brut. 223; Sall. hist. 4.43 M.; Quint. inst.orat. 4.2.1: “M. Lollius Palicanus, humili loco Picens, loquax magis quam facundus.” 9 Cic. Phil. 1.6: “Ecce enim Kalendis Iuniis, quibus ut adessemus, edixerat, mutata omnia: nihil per senatum, multa et magna per populum et absente populo et invito. Consules designati negabant se audere in senatum venire; patriae liberatores urbe carebant ea, cuius a cervicibus iugum servile deiecerant; quos tamen ipsi consules in contionibus et in omni sermone laudabant.” 10 Cf. Pina Polo, Contiones, 310 nº357. Th is m a t e ria l is u n d e r co p yrigh t . An y u se o u t sid e o f t h e n a rro w b o u n d a rie s o f co p yrigh t la w is ille ga l a n d m a y b e p ro se cu t e d . Th is a p p lie s in p a rt icu la r t o co p ie s, t ra n sla t io n s, m icro film in g a s w e ll a s st o ra ge a n d p ro ce ssin g in e le ct ro n ic syst e m s. © Fra n z St e in e r Ve rla g, St u t t ga rt 20 15 Magistrates-elect and their potestas contionandi in the Late Roman Republic 69 Vibius Pansa and/or Hirtius, although it is striking that no name is mentioned. However likewise we should not discard the possibility that the consuls-designate summoned the contiones in which they addressed the people either together or separately. One more speech of Vibius Pansa before the people is mentioned by Cicero in his twelth Philippica.11 Cicero refers to the speech held in the senate by Piso on the Kalends of August in the year 44, in which the eminent senator criticised Antonius.12 Pansa had praised Piso’s speech both in the senate and in contione. Cicero does not provide further information, so we know neither the circumstances nor the date. Pansa’s speech could certainly have been delivered during his consulship in 43. Nevertheless, the Ciceronian words suggest, in my opinion, a date closer to the Kalends of August 44, when a public reaction to Piso’s statements is more plausible than some months later. Consequently, Pansa delivered his speech before the people probably as consul-elect in the weeks following Piso’s intervention, very likely in August 44.13 We have two examples of tribunes-designate speaking in contiones. According to Sallust, the tribune-elect C. Memmius condemned in 112 before the people the suspicious activities of King Jugurtha.14 he exact words used by Sallust are: “C. Memmius tribunus plebis designatus… populum Romanum edocuisset…” he sentence implies, in my opinion, the celebration of at least one contio in which Memmius instructed the Roman people about what Jugurtha and his henchmen were doing. Where else could a tribune-elect inform the people? Once more we know the speaker, but our sources fail to mention the convener of the assembly. Again nothing prevents the speaker from having been the convener. As a tribune in 111, Memmius fought tirelessly until the war against Jugurtha was oicially declared. To this end he carried out a political campaign in contiones following the path that he had begun as tribune-designate.15 Plutarch describes the reluctance of Cato Uticensis to become tribune of the plebs. He changed his mind when he found out that Metellus Nepos – an enemy of the res publica in his opinion – was willing to stand as a candidate. Both Cato and Nepos were inally elected. Seeing that bribery was present in the consular elections, Cato reprimanded the people and inished his speech swearing to prosecute whoever was 11 12 13 14 15 Cic. Phil. 12.14: “Cum iis facta pax non erit pax, sed pactio servitutis. L. Pisonis, amplissimi viri, praeclara vox a te non solum in hoc ordine, Pansa, sed etiam in contione iure laudata est. Excessurum se ex Italia dixit, deos penatis et sedes patrias relicturum, si, quod di omen averterent, rem publicam oppressisset Antonius.” his speech had already been mentioned by Cicero in his irst Philippica: 1.10; 1.14–15. News of the speech reached Cicero at Leucopetra, when he was travelling to Greece. Piso’s atack against Antonius made him conceive hopes, so that he changed his mind and decided to return to Rome. Pina Polo, Contiones, 310–311, nº358. Sall. Iug. 27: “Ac ni C. Memmius tribunus plebis designatus, vir acer et infestus potentiae nobilitatis, populum Romanum edocuisset id agi, ut per paucos factiosos Iugurthae scelus condonaretur, profecto omnis invidia prolatandis consultationibus dilapsa foret: tanta vis gratiae atque pecuniae regis erat.” Sall. Iug. 30–31; 33–34 (Memmius brought King Jugurtha himself to a contio, and tried unsuccessfully to make him speak to the people). Cf. Pina Polo, Contiones, 280, nº201–202; D. Hiebel, Rôles institutionnel et politique de la contio sous la République romaine (287–49 av. J.-C.), Paris 2009, 432–433. Th is m a t e ria l is u n d e r co p yrigh t . An y u se o u t sid e o f t h e n a rro w b o u n d a rie s o f co p yrigh t la w is ille ga l a n d m a y b e p ro se cu t e d . Th is a p p lie s in p a rt icu la r t o co p ie s, t ra n sla t io n s, m icro film in g a s w e ll a s st o ra ge a n d p ro ce ssin g in e le ct ro n ic syst e m s. © Fra n z St e in e r Ve rla g, St u t t ga rt 20 15 70 Francisco Pina Polo guilty, with the exception of his brother-in-law Silanus.16 According to Plutarch’s report, there is no doubt that Cato delivered this speech to the people as tribune-elect, indeed shortly ater his election in year 63.17 Once again there is no hint of the convener of the assembly in our sources. Cato was particularly active as tribune-elect. He fulilled his promise and prosecuted – together with the defeated candidate Ser. Sulpicius Rufus – the consul-elect Murena in autumn, while he was still a tribune-designate and in the midst of the political storm caused by the Catilinarian conspiracy.18 As is well known, Murena was defended by the consul Cicero, as well as by Hortensius and Crassus, and was acquited. Cato spoke in the senate in the session of 5th December 63. His proposal to execute the Catilinarians was eventually passed. In this session he took advantage, as a tribune-designate, of his priority to speak ater consulars and senators of praetorian rank. Otherwise he would hardly have been able to take the loor, being only a quaestorius.19 As a result, before taking oice on 10th December 63, Cato was already able to strengthen his proile as a man of virtue and integrity.20 Such are the scarce sources that describe a magistrate-designate speaking to the people in a contio. In a recent article I have argued that, at least in the irst century BC, consuls-elect had a well-established institutional visibility that encouraged their collaboration with consuls in oice and facilitated continuity in the management of the res publica.21 Consules designati had the priority to speak irst in senatorial debates, perhaps a long-established privilege, as well as the prerogative to issue edicts. If this interpretation is correct, it is reasonable to assume that they also had the right to summon contiones and to speak before the people without needing the intervention of tribunes or magistrates in oice to convene an assembly for them. heir potestas contionandi should be understood as a privilege in the context of the political and institutional role they played: they had priority in the senate; they had the right to speak to the people. Praetors and tribunes of the plebs designate also had priority to speak in the senate, in the irst case before the praetors in oice and senators of praetorian rank, and in the second before the tribunes in oice and senators who had reached tribunician rank.22 16 Plut. Cat.min. 21.2–3. 17 Pina Polo, Contiones, 292, nº265 (Cato was tribunus plebis designatus, not sufectus!). Hiebel, Rôles institutionnel et politique de la contio, 443, wrongly calls him tribune of the plebs. 18 Broughton, he Magistrates of the Roman Republic, 2.174. 19 Previously he had made use of this same right in the senate, threatening to indict a candidate to the consulate, as he had also done in a contio: “Dixi in senatu me nomen consularis candidati delaturum.” (Cic. Mur. 62). 20 On the image of incorruptibility built by Cato see C. Rosillo-López, La corruption à la in de la République romaine (IIe–Ier s. av. J.-C.). Aspects politiques et inanciers, Stutgart 2010, 83–84; H. van der Blom, Oratory and Political Career in the late Roman Republic, Cambridge, forthcoming. 21 Pina Polo, Consules designati, esp. 451–452. 22 See h. Mommsen, Römisches Staatsrecht, Leipzig 1878–85, III 973–974; Chr. Meier, Res publica amissa. Eine Studie zu Verfassung und Geschichte der späten römischen Republik, Wiesbaden 1966, 258–259; h. Hantos, Res publica constituta. Die Verfassung des Dictators Sulla, Stutgart 1988, 152–153. Cf. Pina Polo, Consules designati, 420–421. Th is m a t e ria l is u n d e r co p yrigh t . An y u se o u t sid e o f t h e n a rro w b o u n d a rie s o f co p yrigh t la w is ille ga l a n d m a y b e p ro se cu t e d . Th is a p p lie s in p a rt icu la r t o co p ie s, t ra n sla t io n s, m icro film in g a s w e ll a s st o ra ge a n d p ro ce ssin g in e le ct ro n ic syst e m s. © Fra n z St e in e r Ve rla g, St u t t ga rt 20 15 Magistrates-elect and their potestas contionandi in the Late Roman Republic 71 his procedure was clearly in evidence in the senatorial debate about the Catilinarians on 5th December 63.23 It is therefore legitimate to wonder whether they could have potestas contionandi as well. We do not possess any evidence of praetors-elect speaking before the people. his is not remarkable, since praetors do not seem to have been very active in contiones. As a mater of fact we know of a limited number of speeches delivered by praetors to the people throughout the Republic in comparison to those of consuls and especially tribunes of the plebs. On the contrary, the cases of Memmius and Cato suggest that tribunes-designate might have had potestas contionandi. As we have seen, the sources never mention who had convoked the assembly in which the magistrates-designate spoke. In my opinion this was not necessary, since the convener and the speaker were one and the same person. here is no doubt that this argument ex silentio is admitedly not deinitive. However, it becomes stronger if we take into account that in most of the known cases – certainly not in all of them – in which a politician was introduced or brought forth to the speaker’s platform, the name of the convener, or at least his magistracy in oice, is mentioned.24 Nonetheless, the scarcity of known examples might indicate that magistrates- and tribunes-designate did not make habitual use of their potestas contionandi. According to our sources, it appears to be rather exceptional behaviour. In this regard, the political strategy followed by the designati who spoke to the people shows similarities. All of them conducted before and ater their election veritable political campaigns on subjects about which they were concerned or even obsessed. Memmius wanted to unmask King Jugurtha and his henchmen in Rome in order to justify a war against him. Pompey had reached the highest magistracy as a successful general but without fulilling the requirements of the cursus honorum. His famous contio as consul-elect was a means of showing his civil political leadership in response to popular claims, looking for a kind of legitimation for his consulate. Cato wanted to be seen as the champion of morality and the enemy of corruption. He no doubt strengthened his image with his speeches in the senate and to the people while he was a tribune-designate, as well as with the prosecution of Murena. Finally, in the explosive and bewildering political and social situation that followed the death of Caesar it was inevitable for the consuls-elect for the year 43 to proclaim their political preferences both in the senate and to the people, particularly if we bear in mind the absence from Rome of relevant magistrates and politicians. Consequently, in all these cases the speeches delivered in contiones served to keep the focus on the magistrates-designate from their election 23 he irst speaker was the consul-elect Silanus. hen a number of consulars intervened, followed by the praetor-designate Caesar. he tribune-elect Cato spoke ater the senators of praetorian rank. See App. b.c. 2.5–6; Sall. Cat. 50–52; Cic. At. 12.21.1. 24 See F. Pina Polo, Political alliances and rivalries in contiones in the late Roman Republic, in H. van der Blom, C. Gray and C. Steel (eds.), Institutions and Ideology in Republican Rome: Speech, Audience and Decision, Cambridge, forthcoming, in which all the examples of contionem dare and producere in contionem in political contiones are collected and discussed. We know the name or the oice (usually tribune of the plebs) of the convener in around 65% of the cases. In other 10% the convener can be supposed with a degree of certainty. Th is m a t e ria l is u n d e r co p yrigh t . An y u se o u t sid e o f t h e n a rro w b o u n d a rie s o f co p yrigh t la w is ille ga l a n d m a y b e p ro se cu t e d . Th is a p p lie s in p a rt icu la r t o co p ie s, t ra n sla t io n s, m icro film in g a s w e ll a s st o ra ge a n d p ro ce ssin g in e le ct ro n ic syst e m s. © Fra n z St e in e r Ve rla g, St u t t ga rt 20 15 72 Francisco Pina Polo until the time they took oice, the tribunes on 10th December and the consuls on 1st January, and constituted a very efective means of keeping alive within public opinion the political demands that they advocated. Francisco Pina Polo Departamento Ciencias de la Antigüedad, Universidad de Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain, franpina@unizar.es Th is m a t e ria l is u n d e r co p yrigh t . An y u se o u t sid e o f t h e n a rro w b o u n d a rie s o f co p yrigh t la w is ille ga l a n d m a y b e p ro se cu t e d . Th is a p p lie s in p a rt icu la r t o co p ie s, t ra n sla t io n s, m icro film in g a s w e ll a s st o ra ge a n d p ro ce ssin g in e le ct ro n ic syst e m s. © Fra n z St e in e r Ve rla g, St u t t ga rt 20 15