5. THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF COMITIAL LEGISLATION 5.1. INTRODUCTION The principal implication of the discussion in the preceding chapters is that many conmon and widely accepted views of republican legislation are either cornpietely unfounded or based on erroneous premises' Indeed, the main purpose of the present work is to demonstrate this, as it is fully realized that the next step in this inquiry involves many intricate ditllculties. Dealing with technical terminology and law titles in classical writers it was possible to cite indisputable, empirically established data. Considering the political and constitutional implications of the use of these terms the argumentation was not of course cogent in the same manner, but we were still able to work with reasonably reliable data. At this point, entering a discussion about the emergence of the politico-institutional situation tentatively outlined fbr the period 367-gg BC, we must admit a certain amount of tentative interpretation and conjecture to the argumentation. This is inevitable, as the nature of the evidence gives us no other choice. The development of the Early is constitutional extremely diftlcult to fäthorn, and therefbre any interpretation must remain more or less speculative. The sources fbr the period are not only unreliable, but often inconclusive as well. Nevertheless, it is my firm conviction that historical inquiries of this period must be based on these sources. That is, no comparative material, Republic no analogies, can substitute the testimony of the actual evidence.l As I have made clear earlier (chapter 1.4.3),I find a method of fbcusing on <structural factso in the annalistic tradition as the best general approach to the Early Republic. In other words, we should not rely too heavily on (anachronistic) details about individual events but, rather, try to grasp the general social and political conditions of the first centuries of the Republic. The development of legislative practice in the Roman Republic is, I think, best understood in the context of the Conflict of the Orders. Even if it is impossible to reconstruct the various stages of this struggle with any higher degree of confidence, there are certain data in the annalistic tradition that must pass as structurai facts. I accept an early political division of the Roman people into patricians and plebeians as authentic, if not original,2 and find no reason to doubt that the plebeian organization owed its origins to political and social discord. A consistent tradition represents it rCl'T J Cornell,'TheFailureofthePlebs',E.Gabba(acuracli), Triacorda.scrittiinonorediArnaldoMomigliano as l), Como 1983, 102. The evidence of the psri, inciicating (as it seems) many plebeians as consuls in the first decacles of the Republic, suggests that the plebs originally was no politically discriminatecl group. The prevailing vie,"v, which is sometimes challenged (see e.g. E. S. staveley, 'The Nature and Airns of the patriciate', rlistoria 32 (19g3), 24 57), is that the patricians only gradually succeecled in rnonopolizing political power. For 'the closing of the patriciate,, as this process has been called, see esp. P.-C. Ranouil, Recherches sur le patriciar, Paris 1975,45 ff. ancl Richarcl 1g7g, ff' There is a convenient summary of the whole problem in cornell 1gg5,252-256 and 44i f. (notes). 324 ff., 465 For a general discussion of the ;t'asti and their value as a source, see R. T. Riclley, 'Fastenkritik. A Stocktaking, , Athenaeum 5g (Biblioteca di Arhenaeum 2 (1980a), 264-298. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 115 a series a revolutionary organization that, under tribunician leadership, compelled the patricians to that gradually improved the situation of the plebs. Neither is there any valid reason of concessions to doubt that tribunician action at an early date, in addition to political obstruction, came to include legislative initiatives. Moreover, the surviving accounts leave little room fbr doubt that the main initially involved economic and social relorm and, at a later stage, political equality with the patricians and plebeian access to the state magistracies.3 These elements in the historical tradition are of crucial importance as we set out to make sense of the observations we have made' issues The core of the problem under consideration here is the decline of consular legislation - which believe was originally the usual form of republican law-making - and the ultimate, virtually in the ensuing discussion complete domination of the tribunes of the plebs. We must, therefbre I - start by considering the role of the consuls, or whatever of the legislation of the Early Republic -, the supreme magistrates of the Early Republic were originally called.a 1995 , 242 fl esp. 242-292 For a recent synopsis of the scholarly discussion of the conflict of the orders, see cornell to studies on a wide range addition in (1986), which Struggles Sociat course, is, of volume and32'l-344.The standard methodological including problem, of special topics - contains an important discussion of the nature of the Comparative and A Comprehensive Rome. considerations: K. RaaUaub, 'The Conflict of the Orders in Archaic 'From Protection in Id., out set is conveniently struggle patricio-plebeian Approach,, 1-51 (1986a). The outline of the for the As (1986b), 198-243' ibid. Orders" the of the Cont'lict in Stages and Defense to Oft'ense ancl Participation. Richard 1978' remain especially Richard, J.-C. of the contributions but iiterature, vast is a plebs, there origin ol the The Origin of a Social Dichotomy', fundamental; his later writings on the subject include 'Patricians and Plebeians' critico (1993)'2'7-41' Bilancio plöbe', norigines" la cle Sociat Srruggles (1986), 105-129 and 'R6flexions sur les For a few recent surveys, debate. to open is still a We may not fbrget that the earliest form of republican constitution .Les origines des magistratures romaines', Museum Helveticum 41 (1984), 15-30; F. Cuena, 'La see A. Giovannini, (1985), 313-345: A. Mastrocinqte,Lucio primera magistrarura republiiana', Bollettino dell'lstituto rti diritto romano 88 romana, Trento 1988' esp 182 ff ; repubblica della origini sulle e diritto religione storia, cli Ricerche Giunio Bruto. ,La costituzione della cittä-stato', Storia cli Romal (1988),356 tT.; D. Musti, 'Lotte sociali e storia F. De Martino. (1989b)' esp I12 ff'; G' Valditara' studi sul delle magistrarure" ibid., esp.372 ff.; A. Drumrnoncl, cAIt VII.2 Republik und ihre erste Magistratur', Kodai römischen der 'Die Entstehung magister populi, Milano 1989; R. Hirata, fiilhen römischen Republik', Historia 40 cler Probleme verwandte 'Militärtribunen und 2 (1991), 21,43;D. Sohlberg, repubblicane', (1991), esp.262-211anO e. Giovannini, 'I1 passaggio clalle istituzioni monarchiche alle istituzioni 3 Bilancio critico (1993), esp 89 fT. 5.2. NON-TRIBUNICIAN LEGISLATION IN THE EARLY REPUBLIC If our conclusion that curule magistrates normally did not legislate in the mid-republican period is correct, this is in sharp contrast to conditions attested not only in the last century BC, but also, it seems, in the Early Republic. That the consuls of the period 367-88 were primanly military commanclers cannot be seriously questioned' The record of their actions in surviving historical accounts is essentially a record of exploits in the battle fields. This is certainly not a mere ref.lection of the pref'erences of ancient hrstoriography, it is all clear that the supreme magistrates of this period (at any rate after the inception of the thircl century) spent most of their year in office campaigning away from Rome. As for the tribunes of the same period, no matter how we read the sources, it can be observed that they were the principal law-makers. Almost all irnportant legislation is associated with these plebeian officials. As a matter of fäct, fbcusing on internal affairs we have to conclude that it was not the consuls, but the tribunes, who were the leading magistrates of the pre-Sullan Republic.r It may be asserted that there were - at least in practice, for most of the year - two spheres of public life in this period' each one with a separate administration: on the one hancl a civii sphere under the tribunes and, on the other, a military sphere under consular control. According to Richard Mitchell, this reflects a dicirotomy that was an original feature of the administration of the Roman state.2 As far as the Middle Republic is concerned, we have seen that this kincl of model is not at variance with the testimony of the sources. However, I do not think that this kincl of interpretation is tenable fbr the Eariy Republic. It seems to me that the bifurcation of Roman public lif-e, which was hardly a real dichotomy, evolved only gradually. That we do not find evidence for curule magistrates putting laws before the people during the three centuries preceding Sulla does not, I think, indicate that they were not entitled to legislate, only that they usually did not. There can be no doubt that the consuls also had civil competence' True' the ease with which consuls and military tribunes (tribuni militum consulari poteslate) were able to substitute one another in the period 445-367 testifles to the predominantly military character of the consulship in the Early Republic,3 but the imperium domi which together with the imperium militiae defined the competence of the consuls,a must have ' cf' M Pani, La politica in Roma antica, Roma rg97, 161: ol-a magistratura politica per eccellenza a lloma ö il tribunato della plebe, . . " 2 Mitchell rejects the historicity of the conflict of the orclers as well as the existence of a political clistinction between patricians and plebeians; there was a clistinction, but it was religious and legal in nature. According to Mitchell, the plebeian organization was no revolutionary movement, but the original civil adrninistration of the'Roman smte, see Mitclrell 1990, esp l-30. cf. Icl., 'The Definition ot patres and ptibs. An End to the Struggle of the orclers, , social Srruggles (1986), 130-174. 3 For tlre supreme magistrates of this periocl, inclurling problems pertaining ro the fasti (and historiography), see J. Pinsent, Militarv Tribunes and Plebeian Cottsuls. The Fastifrom 441 V to iqz V,Wiesbaclen 1975. a The best discussion of these concepts in Rornan constitutional law is fbunci in A. Giovannini, Consulare imperium, Basel 1983a,7,30. rll MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES theory, were included the power to put matters before the people. That the consuls, at least in the Roman entitled to legislate in pre-Sullan Rome is also evident from Polybius' account of constitution.5 to have Moreover, it is all clear that some of the early republican laws were later considered very rarely been consular. Curiously enough, Latin authors writing on the Early Republic no doubt that they represent consuls as promulgatores or rogatores legum, but there can be for some of the legislation nonetheless believed that these magistrates were personally responsible of the period. At any rate, this must be true of statutes passed before the institution of the 10, and Flach 13 tribunate, which according to traditionhappened in494.6 Rotondi distinguishes preceding the most of them ascribed to the consul P. Valerius Poplicola - in the period laws, the context first secessio of the plebeians.T As for later legislation, sometimes it is evident fiom accounts, that historians believed that the consuls occasionally would legislate instance, in a Livianpassage themselves; indeed, on the same kind of matters as the tribunes. For resolve to propose pertaining to the year 430, the consuls L. Papirius Crassus and L. Iulius Iullus were planning to put such a law concerning the valuation of fines, having learned that the tribunes for 486, Sp' a law before the people.8 Neither is there any real doubt that one of the consuls the first rogatio agraria \n was believed to have proposed his agrarian bill in historical Cassius Vicellinus, - is also indirect, epigraphic evidence pillar inscribed with the text attesting that the consuls did legislate in the Early Republic. A bronze calendar of the year 472, of a consular law, prescribing the insertionof an intercalary month inthe which of course is was seen by Varro in the last century 8C.10 Whether authentic or not, Roman history in person.e We should note that there did not hesitate impossible to establish, it proves that the most erudite of the Roman antiquarians 5 See 6 chapter 2.2.1. plebei potestate et sacrosanctitate" (as For discussion and extensive bibliography on the .lex sacrata de tribunorum Flach narnes it), see Flach, GFRR,73-79. Rotondi, LPPR, 189-192; Flach, GFRR' 45-73' 8 Liv. 4.30.3: Legem cle multarum aestimatione pergratampopulo cum ab tribunis parari consules unius ex collegio 7 prodirioneexcepissenl,ipsipraeoccupaveruntferre.öt.ci.. rep.2.60:levisaestumatiopecuduminmultalegeC'lulii P. Papirii consulum constituta est. according to one e See esp. Liv.2.41.1-3 and Dion. Ha:^. anr. g.69-'79. However, it should be duly noted that - Sp' Cassium' qui (Val. Max 5'8'2): pleåis astibunus traclition-Sp. Cassiusproposedhis agrarianbill in the capacity Basile''Analisi tribunuspl.agrariamIegemprimuslulerat.ForananalysisofthetraditionontheCassianbill,seeM (1978), 277 -298 ' see 6 greca e romana Miscellanea 486 a.c.' clel agraria , cassia rogatio e valore della tradizion e sulli (19'15), 197-210; J. Gagö, '"Rogatio p12sgili3" La also F. D,lppolito, 'La legge airaria di Spurio Cassio', Labeo2l des projets agraires de Sp Cassius, querelle agromilitaire uutJul d.-golu., .n 416 av. J -C., et la probable signification di Spurio cassio" Legge e agraria rogatio 'Appunti sulla vers 486" Latomus 3S (1979), 838-861 and D. capanelli, f' 84 GFR'R' in Flach, societöl (1981),3-50. Full bibliography r0 The report is founcl in a passage of Macrobius (Sat. 1.13.21), quoted at p. 60. . 118 KAJ SANDBERG to attribute early legislation to the consuls. Lastly, it should be remembered that some of the early laws were referred to as leges consulares.tl Another circutnstance we should cite here is the fact that some of the early laws attributed to consuls according to tradition passed in the comitia centuriata. The centuriate assembry, which was a military body, could be convened by none but magistrates with imperium. The fact that classical writers associate certain early laws with the centuriate assembly therelbre proves that there were ancient laws the passage of which was traditionalry attributed to curule magistrates. However' the role of the centuriate assembly - which constitutes one of the most intricate problems in the constitutional history of the Early Republic will be discussed in the next chapter. It may be assumed that there is a kernel of truth in the traditions on early consular legislation. I do not think that these traditions are sound enough making it worth while to subject them to a more profound analysis, but it is reasonable to conclude that consuls did legislate on all kinds of matters in the Early Republic and not, as in the period 367-88, merely on matters concerning war and peace' However, it is unlikely that the early consular legislation was particularly important; the conservative patricians most probably regarded customary law and the mos maiorumas sets of standards that could not be changed. It has often been pointed out that primitive Rome regarded law as divine and god-giv a conception which left little scope for legislation by popular assemblies't'only when a magistrate found no precedents for a certain action was he anxious to obtain the consent of the citizen community in the form of a popular vote.13 L Valerius Poplicola Potitus and M. Horatius Barbatus in 44g. cic. rep. 2.54: Luciique valerii M' Horatii Barbatii "' consularis lex sanrit, ne qui magistratus sine provocatione crearetur:Liv. 3.55.4 f.: Aliam deinde consularem legem de provocalione ... non reslirLtunt modo, secl etiam in posterum muniunr sanciendo 'r The legislation of Potii et t::",: magistratum sine provocatione *earer,3.55.l3: i:::: .::rr,:ullum '- 5ce. ror rnsrance. BoLslbrd 1909. 230. Cl. lii t3 lbid., rig. l. Hae consutares teges fuere. 5.3. EXTRA POMERIUM AND ruTR,4 POMERIUM: THE TOPOGRAPHY OF COMITIAL LEGISLATION 5.3.1. The pomerium and the Competence of the Assemblies it was strictly determined in which particular assembly the should be elected.l It is equally clear that this was not just a matter of It is evident from our sources various magistrates that cornmon practice, but the close observance of an augural norm. The augur M. Valerius Messalla (cos. 53 Bc), in his work De auspicii.r, reported that the maiores magistratus should be elected comitiis centuriatis, and that the election of the minores magistratus should take place comitits tributis. The criteria for the distinction between the two categories of magistrates were the auspicia publica: Consuls, praetors and censors had maxima auspicia and were therefore considered the rest of the magistrates, who according to this terminology were maiores magistratus - designated lesser magislrales (minores magistrafas), had minora auspicia.2 can be observed that the distinction between maiores magistratus and minores magistratus to a significant extent coincides with another distinction - namely that between magistratus cum (the supreme executive and magistratus sine imperio. As every magistrate wrth imperium it imperio authority which included military command in war) was elected in the comitia centuriata and to relate magistrates with only civil competence were elected by the tribes, it is not unreasonable Such the competence of the electoral assemblies to a distinction between civil and military matters. The tribal an assumption is clearly corroborated by the very nature of the assemblies themselves. civil body which was normally convened by tribunes of the plebs, a military whose authority was confined to the city of Rome. The centuriate assembly, which had was organization, was originally identical with the citizen army. Still in the Late Republic it it was considered an army, something which is reflected in both language and in the way summoned. The comitia centuriata, known also as the exercitus (or the exercitus urbanus),3 (see pp. I22 f .). always convened in military array in the exercise ground in the Campus Martius assembly appears as a largely A basic distinction between the civil and the military, which clearly was an integral part of the world conception of the Romans, is reflected in the juxtapositions domi militiae and belli domique. It should immediately be observed that these concepts are no temporal adverbs (as in the English phrase ,in war and peace'), but locative forms. Jörg Ri.ipke translates them as "daheim und im .Kriegsrechtsgebiet',.4 Topographically this dichotomy was marked by the pomerium. This I Many of the ideas presented in this chapter were ltrst set out in Sandberg 1993' esp. 81 ff. sunt consulum, praetorum' Messalla ap. Gell. 13 .15 .4: Patriciorum auspicia in duas sunt divisa potestates. Maima 2 'minores', hi 'maiores' magislratus appellantur' censorum. ... Reliquorum magistratuum minora sunt auspicia. Ideo illi maiores centuriatis comitiis funt. For auspicia ...; ... datur magisftatus comitiis tributis Minoribus creatis magistratibus 1986,214'/-2150. Linderski general, see in 3 Gell. 15.27.5; Liv. 39.15.11; Macr. sar. 1.16.15; serv. Aen.8.i and Yarro ling. 6.93. aJ.Riipke, Domimilitiae.DiereligiöseKonstruktiondesKriegesinRom,stuttgartlgg0'29' Cf.Meyer1961'119: domi :.zuhause' - miLitiae : "im Kriegsdienst". I2O KAJ SANDBERG boundary, which demarcated augurally a city from its hinterland, was a iine that, on an auspicious day, had been traced by a plough harnessed to a bull and a cow.5 According to tradition, Romulus had perfbrmed such a ritual when he fbunded Rome,6 and it was observed also in historical times when Roman cities (coloniae) were fbundecl.? Indeed, Varro connects etymologically the Latin word for 'city', urbs, with the circuit (orbis) the furrow (fossa or sulcus) described around the city' As fbr the word pomerium itself , he derives it fiom post murum (postmoeriuLn), because this line ran aiong the earthen wall (murus) which appeared along the furrow.8 The pomerium, which did not necessarily coincide with the course of the city walls, was marked out with boundarystones, cippi .e The course of the pomerium, which originally enclosed only the Palatine hill (the Romulean urbs quadrala), was changed many times dunng its history, because magistrates who had enlarged the Roman territory by conquest were entitled to extend this sacred boundary of the city.ro Pomerial extensions are attributed to Servius Tullius, Sulla, Caesar and many of the Emperors until the late third century eo. The oldest surviving cippi of the Roman pomeriumdate fiom the Sullan extension. Boundary stones dating from the reigns of Claudius, Vespasian and Hadrian have also been found.11 5 For general discussions of the porneriurn, see A. von Blumenthal, RE XXI.2 (1952), coll. 1867-1g76 s.v. ,pomerium, M. Andreussi, Lexicon topographicum urbis Romae IV, Roma 1999, 96-105 s.v. 'Pomerium'. The religious and augural aspects are in lhe fbcus of the discussions in P. Catalano, 'Aspetti spaziali del sisrema giuridico,religioso ronrano. Mundus, templum, urbs, ager, Lalium, Italia', ANRW II 16.1 (1978), esp.479 ff., and G. Martorana, Intra pomeriunr, extra pomeriutn, Palermo 1978, esp. 3-38 and 119-136. On the anthropology of Roman spatial organization, including interesting considerations of parallels among other peoples, see J. Rykwert, The lrtea oJ'a Town. The Anthropology oJ urban Form in Rorne, Italy and the Ancienr world,princeton 1976. 6Tac. ann. 12.24.1. Indeed, the iact that the plough should be macle of bronze (Macr. Scl. 5.19) inclicates that we deal with a very ancient ritual, see Catalano 1978, 485. 7 Varro ling. 5.143. 8 Varro ling. 5.143: qui (scll. orbis) cluod erat post murum, posrtnoeriurn clictum. Varro's etymology has been accepted by many ntodern scholars, but it must be observed that there are many other ancient clefinitions and etymologies of the word pomeriul7?, see e.g. Liv. 1.44.4-5 Plut. Rorn. 11.2-,1; Gell. 13.l4.l; Fesr. ancl paul. Fest. pp. 294-295 s.v. 'posinririurn'. These are discussed in von Blumenthal 1952, esp. coll. 1870 f., Martorana lg:'8,39 ft. and R. Antaya, 'Tlre Etymology ot pomeriunt' , AJPh 101 (1980), 184-189. o Varro ling. 5.143 (a nurnber of such crppl survive, see below). Not only Rome and the Roman coloniae hacl been founded according to the ancient plough ritual, which still in the Empire was representecl on coins (see e.g. an as of Conrmodus, ao 180-192: Cohen 40 : R1C III, Commodus 570 : BMC(D 722). Yarro (littg. 5.143) srares rhar many of tlre old oities of Latium had been lounded Elrusco ritu giving Aricia and the cippi stancling around this city as an example. Thus it rvas believed that the ritual originatecl among the Etruscans, which is a notion that has been widely accepted by modern scholars, see e.g. Catalano 1918,482 ancl Martorana 1978,44 ff. Contra: J. Le Gall, ,e propos de la muraille Servienne et du pomerium', Etuctes cl'Archöotogie Classique 2 (1g5g),41-54 and Antaya 19g0, 1g4-1g9. '0 Gell. 13.14.3: Habebat ... ius proferencli pomerii, qui populunr Romanum agro de hostibus capto ctgyerat. Cf. Liv. 1.4'1.5; Dion. lfaI. ant. 4.13.2 f .; Sen. diaL. 10.13.8; Tac. ann. 12.23.2; Hist. Aug. Aurelian.21.10 and CIL VI 31537a, lines 7-9: auctis populi Romani finibus pomerium ampliavit terminavitque. trsullan cippi: clL I']838-839: /LS8208 : ILLRP 485. Claudian:ctLyI 31537a-c|,3702331024;NSc. 1912, 197 and19l3,68.Vespasianic:CILYI31538a,c(:1fS248);NSc. 1933,241. Haclrianic: CILVl3i539ac:12S311, NSc 1933,241. The evidence and the course of tbe pomerium are discussed in Platner Ashby, 392-396 s.v. and - 121 MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES The religious significance of the pomerium has always been duly appreciated' The pomerium well defined an area that should be kept free from the influence of the gods of the nether world as against burial as death.12 As is well known, there was already in the Twelve Tables a prohibition doctrine the and cremation in the city area, that is, within rhe pomeriurl.t3 Also in the augural pomerium was of central importance, as it constituted the line at which Ihe auspicia urbana between ended.la Moreover, on a cultic level the pomerium may be perceived as a boundary Roman and fbreign. Foreign deities were, as a rule, worshiped outside the sacred city that it boundary.l5 The importance of lhe pomerium can hardly be overstated; there is evidence than the city walls was perceived as a sharper boundary between the city and the rest of the world themselves.L6 The pomeriLtm was, above all, the boundary between the civil and the military worlds' The in the fact world outside this line was the domain of the war-god Mars, a notion which ts reflected also generally that all his sanctuaries, in the Republic, were situated outside rhe pomerium.L lt is the civil and recognized that the transition between the imperium domi andrhe imperium militiae, crossed the the military powels respectively of the supreme magistrates, took place when they deliberations between the Senate and a magistrate was oniy with the exercising a military command, were exclu<led from the area intra pomerium.ll arrangements under Augustus that all this began to change. As the imperium pomerium.ts All military activities, including constitutional city (who proconsulare maius did not lapse when the Emperor crossed the pomeriurn entering the city ceased to thus retained his command of troops inside Rome), this sacred boundary of the ,pomerium'; Richardson, Dictionary,293-296 s.v. 'Pomerium'and in Andreussi 1999, i0l ff. For a full inventory of veteris urbis Romae pertinentes I, Roma the relevant topographical sources, iee G. Lugli et al., Fontes ad topographiam t952. 125 12 13 ff . Martorana 1978,7L Tab. X.1 (Cic. |eg.2.58). The rule was subsequently transferrecl to the Roman coloniae, see Lex col' Gen" chh' lxxiii f. See also Beard et al. 1998, I, 180. ,o Gell. 13.14.1; Gran. Lic. 28.25; Varro ling. 5.143. Discussion in o. Karlowa, 'lntra pomoerium un extra pomoerium', Festgabe Grossherzog F. von Baden, Heidelberg 1896, 49-100' ove una divinitä poteva essere 15 Martorana 19ig,29:.il pomerio ... rappresenta il segno dialettico per eccellenza, Nel caso contrario, la pomeriuril. intra giustificazione permesso una avesse ,tori.u inclusa solo se la contingenru pomerium... rappresentano uno degli elementi collocazione si determinal tra pomerium. L'intra pomerium e l'extra potö annullare . . .' Cf. Beard et al' 1998, II' 93' dialettici pii evidenti di una religione che solo la rivoluzione cristiana ,6 Cic. nat. deor. 3.94: ... urbis muris, quos vos pontifices sanctos esse dicitis ttiligentiusque urbem religione quam ipsis moenibus cingitis. armigera dissensio' sed ab 1.7.1: Marlis vero divinitas cum sil extra moenia dedicata, non erit inler cives 156 fT' 1909, Botsfbrd 180. cf. I, 1998, al. et hostibus ea defensa belli periculo conservabit. Beard Recht, Frankfurt a' M' sein und Staat Sein Volk. r8 Mommsen, Staafirecht13,6l-75; U. von Ltibtow, Das römische curiate et Les auspices loi La I'nimperium,. sur Recherches 1955,319-324: Meyer 196l , lgg ff.; A. Magdelain, 7 ff' cf R' Develin' 1983a' Giovannini and 19'/8,71fT. Martorana tT.; 57 and d,investiture,Paris i968, esp.42 fT. ,Lex curiata and the competence of Magistrates" Mnemosyne 30 (1977b), esp. 57 ff 17 vitr. r22 KAJ SANDBERG exclude the military. This development is reflected in the fact that Mars in2BC, for the first time, received a temple within the pomerium.te That pomerium attected political lif-e is, thus, all clear. However, it seems that scholars have confined the political significance of this boundary to the magisterial element of the state machinery. Mommsen qualifies domi and militiae as different types of *Amtfiihrung, and speaks of .dig städtische und die militärische Amtsgewalt,.20 The thought that the pomerium may have been of some relevance also for the other elements in the political system has sometimes surfäced in the scholarly discussion, but it has only rarely been articulated or eiaborated.2l It will be argued here that the dichotomy domilmilitiae is reflected in basically all kinds of public action, that is, also in legislation and in the operation of the popular assemblies. In my opinion the competence of a popular assembly depended on its meeting place, or more accurately, as to whether the people was sunmoned inside or outside the pomeriurn. It was observed above that the area within this boundary was kept free from ali kinds of military activities. I believe that this principle can be reversed; an assembly which convened outside the pomeriurn could only decide upon matters pertaining to war, peace and foreign affairs, whereas civil matters were put befbre assemblies that were summoned intra pomerium. I contend that there were originally two distinct spheres fbr all legislative activity, a military sphere on the one hand and a civil one on the other. Geographically these spheres were separated fiom each other by lhe pomeriun. However, it is obvious that the use of the concepts 'military' and 'civil', in the modern sense, may be anachronistic, because the Roman way of categorizing matters may well have difl-ered from what is customary nowadays. I have suggested elsewhere that we should instead speak of intrapomerial, and'extrapomerial'matters,22 though such a distinction is indeed likely to coincide with a distinction between civil and military. The assemblies had indeed their specific meeting places on both sides of rhe pomerium. The comitia curiata were associated with the Comitium.23 And whereas the tribes usually met in the Forum, the meeting place of the centuriate assembly lay outside rhe pomerium. As a matter of fact, it could be convened only outside this boundary.2a The fact that the comitia centuriata could convene only extra pomeriurn is, I think, a clear indication that this assembly had no civil I, re Beard et al. 1998, 20 Mommsen, staatsrecht Ir, 61. 1 See 180. cf. von Ltibtow 1955,321, who speaks of "Amtsbereich,. e.g. M. Bonnefoncj-Couclry, Le sönat rte ta rlpubtique romaine de Ia guerre d'Hannihat it Auguste. pratiques döliböratives et prise de döcision, Rome 1989,31-160, providing a systematic survey of the meeting plaies of the Senate "å I'intdrieur dt potnerium" and "ä I'ext6rieur du pomerium,. 22 Sandberg 1993, 83. -- varro 2a ,/tl. ).1)). Laelius Felix ap. Gell. 15.27.5: Centuriata autern comitia intra pomerium.fleri nefas esse, quia exercitum extra urbem imperari oporteat, intra urbern imperari ius non sit. Propterea centurian in campo Martio haberi exercitumque imperari praesidii causa solitum, quoniampopulus essel in suJJragiis ferendis occupatus. Cf. Dio Cass. 37.2g.3. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 123 functions. Convening on the Campus Martius the people had not only entered the Martial domain, it also assembled under the presidency of a magistrate who - having crossed the sacred boundary militiae.I do not believe that a magistrate, in this situation, had the right to put any matter pertaining to civic life befbre the centuries. Intrapomerial matters were dealt with intra pomerium. The centre of political life in republican corresponding to the Rome was the Forum, where the Curia, the Comitium and the Rostra - was exercising his imperium Senate, the People and the magistrates respectively - - constitute an organic entity. This topographic feature recurs inthe coloniae whtch in many respects, not least politically, were mirror images of In each known case, in Alba Fucens (founded in 303) as well as in Paestum and Cosa (273), the Comitium is found immediately adjacent to the Curia in the Forum. If the centuriate Rome.25 assembly was the leading assembly of Rome into the third century BC, we would expect to find the meeting-places of the municipal assemblies of that period outside the city limits the example set by Rome.26 - in analogy with 5.3.2. The comitia centuriata: A Strictly Military Assembly? The view that the Roman people passed their laws in a tribal assembly and that the centuries were used pref'erably to decide upon matters of war and peace is not new.27 However, suggesting that the legislative competence of the cornitia centuriata was always restricted to extrapomerial matters and that all intrapomerial legislation always took place in assemblies that convened intra pomerium I call into question prevailing views of the role of the centuriate body in the early Republic.2s In modern scholarship the centuriate assembly is usually perceived as the chief popuiar as we have seen- it is generally recognized that it was only rarely assembly of Rome, even if employed in the latter part of the Republic. However, it is not always duly noted, that many commonly held views of its legislative role have not gone entirely unchallenged. There has, in fact, been a recurrent tendency among scholars to restrict or limit the legislative competence of the comitia centuriata. Alan Watson observed that the centuries normally did not legislate on private 25 cf. Gell. 26 Sandberg 1993, 83. 16.13.8 f. he seems, however, to postulate that there was a tribal assembly See for instance Millar 1984, esp. 16 and 18 f. of the whole people that could be summoned by curule magistrates. Cf. Bleicken 1975, 101 and 108. 28 Many of the views presented here were presented already in Sandberg 1993, 81-88. Mitchell has also presented similar ideas. He also suggests that there were basically two spheres in Roman political life, a military and a civil sphere that were separatecl fiorn each other by Ihe pomeriutn. Beyond this I find Mitchell's interpretation of Roman society 27 entirely unacceptable. He does not regard the plebeian political organization as a revolutionary movement, but as the original civil administration of Rome. The consuls he reduces to merely military administrators with no civil competence. For a summary of Mitchell's theory, see Mitchell 1990' 221-254. 124 KAJ SANDBERG law matters during the later Republic <except in very exceptional circumstances,.2e others, like Richard Mitchell, have proposed that the centuriate assembly lacked civil competence altogether.30 The indisputable fact that the centuriate assembly was not used for legislation during the classical Republic is normally explained as the result of a gradual development. According to this view, the functions of the comitia centuriata were transferred to a tribal assembly, because the procedure in a tribal assembly was faster. I believe that I have shown elsewhere that this cannot be true'3r The comitia centuriata is generally thought of as a very cumbersome assembly. It had 193 centurice, whereas the concilium plebislcomitia tributa had only 35 tribus. Therefbre it is taken for granted that voting was faster in a tribal assembly.32 we can, however, safely re;ect this in a tribal assembly. If we scrutinize the information available about the proceedings in the assemblies, we must rather argument as there is nothing to suggest that the vote was faster conclude that quite the opposite was the case. What is decisive is, not how many voting units there were, but how many individuals that actually gave their votes. Both assemblies had approximately the same number of potential voters, if all voting units are taken into account. However, in the comitia centuriata there was a mechanism that confined the actual voting to a small number of all those registered to vote. The centuriate assembly was constituted in the following manner, according to a timocratic system:33 l. U. III. IV. V. Equites Classis: Seniores et iuniores Classis: Seniores et iuniores Classis: Seniores et iuniores Classis: Seniores et iuniores Classis: Seniores et iuniores Fabri et cornicines Proletarii 2e Watson 1974,7 ff 40 + 40 = l0 + 10 : 10 + 10 : 10 + 10 : 15 + 15 : 18 centuriae 80 centuriae 20 centuriae 20 centuriae 20 centuriae 30 centuriae 4 centuriae 7 centuria . 30 Mitchell 1990, passim. see also paananen rgg3, g-73 and Sandberg lgg3,74-96. rrsandberg 1993,84f. te55,43;.Mever 1e61, 1e2 andrayror 1e66, 7. onev of vr Staverey,s eqverv/ r 11j::l f::,::::'.:-t:::':::..i??n:??n.:Br.i:5.-". or mid 5th. century theri was already a tribal assembly of the whole poputus :::::::::qi:._T'^1"-:,1':l::i ll"l ,*" magistrates is that it must have been easier to handlå ;;i;il;;;ii;#r";#;;:;;; f::"f1"1t' T93centuriae 9l^._i*l: (1955, llandpassim). EvenDevelin (1975a,322and317)considersthetribalassemblyuexpedirious, and thinks that "the tribal vote was much easierto conductthan the centuriate,. See also Ogilvie 1965, 3g1. 33Thefiguresarebasedoncic. rep.2.39-40;Liv.l.42-43;Dion.Hal. ant.4.16-2land7.5g.2-g.DiscussioninG.v. ::#:'"":11'j"^::,:!:^:?":',1::.::':i::': ?:.::!:b,::rrz23e'40" Arph8t (1e60), 136-156; E s 't.Let LuLq f lLrLUt Lu t 1 \r>oz), zvv-' r+: t. Lo uasclo, 'Ancora ' staverev, sui censi minimi delle cinqu tli::i..:,::"]"1:.":.A!!enae::n 76 (1.e.88)., 2'73-302 and G. di Gennaro, 'I comizi cenruriari di cic. De re p. 2.22.3e-40 Attribuzione, struttura, giudizio politico', AthenaeumTt (lgg0),545-564. see also ö"rr.rr rsöj, izg"ti MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 125 The 193 centuriae of the centuriate assembly were by no means uniform units, but varied greatly in size. The system was devised to ensure that the decisive influence in the assembly was in the hands of the wealthy few.3a The numerical distribution of the citizens among lhe centuriae of the different classes was, consequently, extremely warped. The poorest, the prolefarll, no doubt formed a very considerable part of the Roman citizens, that is, in absolute numbers'35 Nevertheless, in the comitia centuriata their influence was confined to one single centuria. Those registered tnthe prima classis, constituting 80 centuriae, only made a small fraction of the entire citizen body. According to Cicero, there was in each of the rest of the centuries nearly as many citizens as in the entire prima classis; if taken literally, this would mean that only about one percent of the citizens were registered in this class.36 All the same, together with the equites this small minority was in possession of absolute majority in the assembly, leaving only 95 centuriae according to a system that did to all the other citizens. As the voting was carried out by units - not take into account the number of voters within the various units - voting was unnecessary afler the last centuria of the prima classis, provided that the vote within this was unanimous- This was usually the case, wherefore voting was normally terminated after the prima classis'37 Thus only a very small number of all those formally entitled to vote actually cast their votes in the centuriate assembly. All this is, of course, well known to scholars. But the apparent consequences have not been the votings can not have lasted long in the comitia centuriata.Indeed, it can be inf-erred that they must have been much less time-consuming than in a tribal assembly, where all duly appreciated - the 35 tribus entered their votes.3S The common assumption that voting was fäster and less cumbersome in a tribal assembly must, accordingly, be rejected'3e We have now invalidated the standard argument used to explain the supposed transfer of the legislation from the comitia centuriata to a tribal assembly. We have not, of course' thereby )a Cic. rep. 2.39: Deinde equitum magno numero ex omni populi summa separato relicuum populum distribuit (sc\I. ut sffiagia non in Servius Tultius rex) in quinque classis senioresque a iunioribus divisit easque ita disparavit, est' ne plurimum publica tenendum re in semper cluod curavitque, essent, poteslate multitudinis, sed in locupletium valeant plurimi. Cf. Dion. Hal. ant.8.82.6 and 11.45 3' rs Cf. Dion. Hal. ari.7.59.6 (cf. 8.82.6): oi ö' anoptiraror töv tohtÖv our ö16trouq-röv ällov an&vtov övteg ... öva pövov ölovteg Ä61ov. quam 36 rep.2.40: illarum autem sex et nonaginta centuriarum in una centuria tum quidem plures censebantur cic. paene in prima classe tota. 3? Hall 1964, 284. This practice is explicitly attested in the sources, see Liv. l.43.ll equites enim vocabantur primi, incidebat- (fiebatl ut secundae octoginta inde primae classis centuriae peditumvocabantur; ibi si variaretpervenirent ' See also Dion. Hal. ant. 4 .20 '4: classis vocarertur, nec fere unquam infra ita descenderent ut ad infimos ei rö aitö lno,l.ernop6vcov, töv Qpovrloetav, årp&touv röv ördpov rcai t6loq ciXev i1 oJror tproi nleiouq övteg 7 .59.8. ibid. also yvöp1. See Liv. 3s Hall 1964, 284 ff. There are numerous instances where bills are accepted by explicitly ^ll tribus, see for instance 38.54.\2. and 6.21.5,29.12.16,29.13.7,30.27.4,30.40.10,30.43.3,33.25.7,34.8.3 3.63.11, 3e quod raro I thank Dr. Jyri Vaahtera fbr drawing my attention to the voting procedures in the assemblies. 126 KAJ SANDBERG entirely excluded the possibility that a transf-er nevertheless could have taken place. But why should we accept a theory like that if there is no evident reason fbr doing so? would it not be more reasonable to assume that the functions of the centuriate assembly were essentially the same in the Early Republic as in the pre-sullan patricio-plebeian Republic? This hypothesis is clearly corroborated by the constitutional developrnent in the Early Republic. we should note that, according to a unanimous traclition, the powers of the Senate and the consuls were almost unlimited during the eariy Republic whereas popular participation in public af1airs was much restricted'40 It may be reasonably assumed that the senate ancr the leading magistrates, eager to maintain their strong position, would not voluntarily have adopted a policy of transferring any of their power to the people' Nevertheless, a f-ew centuries later we flnd that the principle of popular sovereignty was already firmly established. This new situation was, of course, a consequence of the conflict of the orders. As this struggle, on the institutional level, was fbught between the tribunes and the institutions controllecl by the patricians it was no doubt rhe concilium plebis rhat, already in the frfth century, acquired the power that was gradually conceded to the people. It is hardly conceivable that the popular assemblies presided over by curule magistrates would have acquired any greater share of this power. They were not, at any rate, influential fbrces in the process that strengthened the role of the people. It was the tribal assembly uncler tribunician leadership that benefitecl from the concessions to which the Senate and the magistrates were fbrced.ar It is interesting to note that the view that the centuriate assembly was a regular legislative body in the Early Republic rests on evidence that is neither abundant nor, as we will see, unequivocal.a2 To some extent it depends on modern conjecture. For instance Rotondi habitually implicates the involvement of the centuries without being able to adduce supporting evidence.a3 The sources fbr the Early Republic mention altogether five laws passed by the comitia cenluriata.al The most famous example is, of course, the code of the Twelve Tables (the tex XII tabularum), which according to both Livy and Dionysius of Halicarnassus was ratified in this - - See e g cic' rep' 2.56: Tenuir igitur hoc in stcttu senatus rem publicam lemporibus ittis, ut in populo libero pauca per populurn, pleraque senatus auctorilate et instituto oc more gererentur, t0 atque uti consules polestotem haberent tempore dumtcLrat Qntutam, genere ipso ac iure regiam. cf. Livy 1:l r., Libertatis auten originem inde magis quia atmuum inryeriutn consularefac:tum est quam quocl deminutum quicquam sit ex regia potestale numeres. omnia iura ... prini cottsules tenuere. 1r cf. L. Arniranre, 'plebiscito e legge', scrini in onnre a2 ar See Paananen 1993,9-i3. cli A. Guarino IV, Napoli 1gg1,2027. See e.g. LPPPR, 226 (the.leges Publiliae philonis, of 339) and 235 (he /e.r Valeria de prorocetione of 300). Excluding, of course' leges cle bello indicenclo. My study of the sources is based on the evidence cited in Rotondi, L.PPR' 189 ff' For laws thatexpressisverbis (nsecundumfontes,)were ratifled in this assembly, paananen ra see 1993, l0- MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES assembly in 450.45 In addition to the Twelve Tables, there are only four statutes that 127 classical authors connect with this assembly: the lex Valeria de provocatione (509),46 a law assigning land on the Aventine to the plebeians (456),47 the olex Aternia Tarpeia de multa et sacramento> (454),48 and the "lex Valeria Horatia de plebiscitis, 1449).4e It is very important to note that this little group of statutes, as was observed already by Richard Mitchell, includes some of the most dubious laws of the whole Republic.5o As regards Ihe lex de provocatione, controversy surrounds its authenticity. The historical tradition knows altogether three leges de provocatione.Each one is connected with a member of the gens Valeria, which has raised suspicions about the credibility of the tradition. This is not the place to discuss the charges that have been made against the annalist Valerius Antias,5r it will suffice here to observe that the two oldest leges de provocatione is, including the centuriate law of 509 - - that are rejected as unhistorical by many scholars, who accept only the lex Valeria de provocatione of 300 as authentic.52 Also the nlex Valeria Horatia de plebiscitis" has been the object of much controversy. As two later laws, the olex Publilia Philonis, of 339 and the lex Hortensia of 281, seem to reduplicate this law, scholars have raised doubts about the reliability of the tradition concerning this law.53 Liv. 3.34.6: cefiuriatis comitiis decem tabularum leges perlatae sunt, 3.3'/ .4: duae tabulae legum ad prioris anni decem tabulas erant adiectae. nec quicquam iam supereral, si eae quoque leges cenluriatis comitiis perlatae essent, cur 15 eo magistralu rei publicae opus esset; Dion. Hal. ant. 70.57.6: bnerra töv örlprov rca.),6oavteq e ig rrlv Äolirrv örcrc.lr1oiav (scil. oi ö6rca &vöpeq) ... av6öoxav roig ,161o19 r&q r[rl$ouq. Also Zonaras (7.18) states that the law code was ratified by the people. a6 Cic. rep. 2.53 idemque (scil. P. Valerius Poplicola) . . . legem ad populum tulit eam, quae centuriatis comiriis prima latu est, ne quis magistratus civem Romanum adversus provocaionem necaret neve verberaret;Yal. Max. 4.1.1 : Legem etiam comitiis centuriatis tulit, ne quis magistratus civem Romanum adversus provocationem verberare aut necare vellel. For the other sources for this lex Valeria (which do not specify the identity of the legislating body), see Liv. 2.8,3.20; Dion. Hal. ant. 5.19.4,5.10.2; Plul. Popl. 1l and Dig. 1.2.2.4. Dion. Hal. ant. 10.32.4: öv t11 .l,o1irrör öxrcÄqoia ouval0eion tlnö röv rjndrtov ö v6poq örupdr0r1. aB Cic. rep.2.60: Gratamque etiam illam legem quarto circiter et quinquagesimo anno post primos consules de multa et sacramento Sp. Tarpeius et A. Aternius consules comitiis cenluriatis tulerunt; Dion. Hal. ant. 10.50.1: npörov påv oiv öni rrlq ÅoXitröog öroc,t.qoiaq vöpov örcriporoav, iva ... . Other sources: Plin. nat.7.10i, 18.11, 33.1; Gell. 47 1 1. 4e 1.2; Fest. pp. 268-270. Liv. 3.55.1 and Dion. Hal. ant. 11.45.1; see quotations at p. 133 note 3. 50 Mitchell 1990, 199: "When we closely examine leges proposed by various early magistrates and scrutinize the changes presumably carried throughthe comitia centuriata, we discover that they are more controversial than plebiscites. They includethequestionablelegesValeriae dealingwilhprovocatio,andtheValerian-Horatianlawsof 4498.C....." A number of scholars, referring to the alleged role of Valerius Antias in the formation of the historical tradition, doubt the historicity of just about every event involving members of the gens Valeria. This attitude to the tradition is criticized by T. J. Cornell, 'The Formation of the Historical Tradition of Early Rome', I. S. Moxon et al. (eds.), Pasl Perspectives. Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing, Cambridge 1986a,77 f. 52 See e.g. Flach, GFRR, 59-62 (with tull bibliography). See also ibid.,216-218. 53 For a few important discussions, see M. Elster, Studien zur Gesetzgebung derfriihen römischenRepubtik, Frankfurt a. M. Bern i976,75-119 and E. Ferenczy, Fromthe Patrician State to the Patricio-Plebeian State,Budapest1916, 55-61, 195 ff. See also Flach, GFRR, 213-215, which provides a tull bibliography (215). 5r 128 KAJ SANDBERG As for the statute assigning the Aventine district Lo the plebs, it would suffice merely to cite the well-known fact that there are conflicting traditions about the origin of this law - according to Livy, the grant of land was brought about by a tribunician tex lcilia de Aventino-,5a but it is also interesting to note that it has been convincingly shown that the details in the version provided by Dionysius of Halicarnassus are suspect. According to Dionysius, the measure was no plebiscite; the tribune L' Icilius did conceive it, but instead of proposing it to submitted J' cornell - it to the Senate and the consuls, who carried it in suggests that constitutional speculation accounts the plebeian assembly - the centuriate assembly.55 Timothy for this version, which he gives no credence' Dionysius was, according to this interpretation, puzzled by the traditions of a tribunician law regarding public land, which, one would think, could be disposed of oniy by a fbrmal law of the Roman people. Therefbre he, or perhaps his source, "sacrificed all historical plausibility on the altar of constitutional proprietyn.56 cornell makes the following important observation about Dionysius:57 It is characteristic of his picture of eariy Rome that everything should be accomplishecl by due legal process, and in particular the tribunes shoulcl behave properly by acknowledging the superiority of the senate and submittingall proposals forprior approval. The the ideology of the late republican ,optimates,. account reflects cornell is no doubt right in connecting Dionysius' account with antiquarian specuiation, and his explanation is certainly plausible. It might be added that the subject matter of the Icilian law may well have been perceived as extrapomerial, wherefore Dionysius (or some of the annalists he used as his source) assigned it to the centuries. It must be remembered that the Aventine, though it lay inside the circuit of the so-called Servian walls, was included within rhe pomeriuln only in the middle of the first century AD by the Emperor Claudius.5s At this point we need perhaps not go into the details, but we should note surrounds the "lex Aternia Tarpeia,, which may in fact be a plebiscite.se The attested legislation of the comitia centuriata is not only meagre that controversy also and dubious with regard to its veracity, it can also be observed that the historical tradition tends to make it coincide with exceptional circumstances. This is true already of the "lex Valeria de provocatione, of 509, which was passed in the immediate aftermath of the expulsion of the last king and the introduction of the 51 Liv.3.32.7; see also p. 67. Discussionand tuil bibliography in Flach, GFRII, 95 ff. Dion. IIal. ant. 10.31-32. 56 cornell 1995' 262' Also Paananen (1993, 15 f.) clisregarcls Dionysius' version, bur argues rhar the lex carried in the curiate assenrbly. 57 Cornell 1995,262. 55 58 5e Richardson, Dictir.tnary,47 s.v. ,Aventinus Mons,. Amirante 1984, 2028 f. ancl Paananen 1993,44. Discussionand bibliography in Flach, GrRR. 9g ff. See lcilia was MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 129 Republic. But the decemviral legislation is a case in point. It is all clear that the involvement of the centuries, if historical, cannot be cited to support the view that the centuriate assembly was employed fbr legislation under normal circumstances.60 The decemviral legislation is exceptional in many respects. First of all it must be remembered that the constitution that had evolved during the preceding decades was suspended as long as the decemviri legibus scribundis were in power. Not only the consuls, but also the leaders of the plebs had agreed to renounce their offlce. The decemvirs, who were invested with consular powers, were not even subject to appeal (provocatio), which was always looked upon as one of the cornerstones of the republican system. Furthermore, being essentially it is evident that the decemviral legislation cannot be compared with ordinary comitial statutes.6l a codification of customary law - Also the "lex Valeria Horatia de plebiscitis" of 449 appears as an exceptional act of legislation; it was passed immediately after the fall of the second decemvirate and a plebeian secessio. As we have already seen, the Valerio-Horatian laws represent one of the landmarks in the history of the Conflict of the Orders. It was also observed that, as we deal with a major patrician concession, the employment of an assembly comprising the patrician community is easy to account for. Whatever the credibility of the historical tradition, there is another possible reason for the fact that the historians indicated the comitia centuriata as the legislating body. Considering the specific historical context, it is likely that the Valerio-Horatian legislation was perceived as a peace treaty between the patricians and the rebellious plebeians. The centuriate assembly, i.e. the citizen army, simply ratified the concessions that the consuls had made in order to induce the plebeians to lay which involved the approval of the peace down their arms, The ratification of peace treaties - terms the commanders (i.e. the consuls) had decided for the enemy - always was one of the normal functions of the comitia centuriata.62 Though it is not attested in any source, the passage which bears close resemblance with one of the provisions of the Valerioof the lex Hortensia Horatian legislation - was no doubt ascribed to the centuriate assembly by the historical tradition. This is probably indicated by the fact that it was passed in the Aesculetum, a grove situated outside the city limits.63 In lieu of a substantial and reliable tradition attesting to the regular employment of the centuriate assembly for legislation in civil matters in the Early Republic, what is there to suggest that it had civil competence in this period? d' Cf. Warson 1974, 17: "We should not, I think, be too ready to find any significant pattern in that the very exceptional legislarion of both the decemviri and (presumably) Sulla was laid before the comitia centuriata." 6r Cf. Bleicken 1975,9I. See also A. Magdelain, La loi ä Rome. Histoire d'un concept, Paris 1978,69 and Paananen t993.12 f. 62 Sandberg 1993, 86. 63 Palmer (1969,37) argues that it was the comitia curiata lhaL ratified the Lex Horlensia. 130 KAJ SANDBERG The evidence of the Twelve Tables is often cited by those who believe in the early supremacy of the centuriate assembly. The reference to a comitiatus maximus, by cicero identified as the comitia centuriata,6a is often taken for a proof that the centuriate assembly was the chief assembly of the Roman state in the middle of the fifth century BC.65 However, it should be stressed that the implication of the use of the modifier mafimus is not known. Moreover, even if cicero's identification of the assembly were correct, which is by no means certain,66 nothing could be inferred about its legislative functions as the context clearly is juriscliction. Also a passage of Appian is commonly cited. As we have already seen, Appian credits Sulla and Q' Pompeius Rufus, the consuls of 88 sc, with a should be carried out by tribes, but by centuries in measure ordering that voting no longer accordance with the Servian constitution.6T Should we, facing this piece of evidence, concede that the centuriate assembly of the Early Republic had a broader sphere of activity than later? By no means. As I have argued elsewhere,68 it is likely that Appian's source for these events was coloured by the propaganda of Suila. It is a matter beyond all doubt that both of our principal sources on Sulla not only Appian, but also Plutarch (who included a biography of Sulla in his parallell lives) rely heavily on rhe memoirs of Sulla'6e unfbrtunately we lack detailed knowledge about this -propaganda, but it is certainly reasonable to assume that Sulla clid not want to appear as a radical refbrmer introducing something entirely new' The conservative leader of the optimates woulcl,rather emphasize that he restored an older, neglected constitution, thus giving his actions the justitication of ancestral practice. As is well known, "the Romans as a people were possessed by an especial veneration fbr authority, precedent and tradition, by a rooted distaste of change unless change could be shown to be in harmony with ancestral custom ... .,,70 ecic'leg 3'14:altera(scll. lexpraeclarissimarJerluodecimtabulis)clecapitecivisrogarinisi marimocomitiatuvetat: cic sesl 65: cum "' duodecimtabulis sanctutn esset ut ne cui privilegiuminrogari liceret neve de capite nisi comitiis centurialis rogari. Cf . Cic. tlorn.43, teg.3.ll, rep.2.61 and Sest.7i. "5 See, fbr instance, P. 1953, 25. cle Francisci, .per la storia dei ncomitia centuriata,,, Studi in onore tli V. Arangio_Rulz I, Torino 6 According to some scholars, it cannot be excluded that the comitiatus marimus should be identified as the curiate assembly' see H Siber, 'Die ältesten römischen volksversammlungen', zss 5i (1937),263 f . ancl Mitchell rgg0, I./6. See also A Guarino' 'La formazione clella oRespublica" romanal , Revue internationale des clroits tle t,antiquitö 1 (1948)' 109 lr' and E Gabba, 'Marimus comitiatus', Athenaeumi5 (1gg7),203-205 (cf. Icl., ,Assemblee ed esercito a Roma fia tv e Itl sec a C." Roma tra oligarchia e rlentocrazia,Napoli 1ggg,44 fT.). For a discussion of marimus as Lo praetor andcomitiatus, see A. Magdelain, 'Praeror mar'imus etcomitiatus mctrimus,, Iura20 (1969),25i- å#:uttttt "7 Tlre passage was quoted atp.37 note 8. For a f'ew brief surveys of moclern interpretations, see Gabba 1g5g, 171 and De Martino, storia 1rr,57 fr.; there is a discussion of the påssage also in Hölkeskamp l9gg, 295 f. 68 Sandberg 1993, 8i . 6e These were published by L. Licinius (RE 104) Lucullus. For a study of sulla's propaganda, see B. Propaganda. The Collapse of the Cinnan Republic,, AJph gZ (lnD:5g5_604. 70 R. Syme, The Rornan Revolution, Oxford 1939, 315. w. Frier, fT. ,Sulla,s MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES T:T It may be concluded that there is no valid reason to believe that the comitia centuriata ever had other functions than those attested in the Middle Republic, namely the election of magistrates with imperium,jurisdiction de capite clvls and legislation on matters concerning war and peace (e.g' the passage of leges de bello indicendo, leges de pace facienda and the ratification of foedera). 5.4. THE ASCENDANCY OF THE TRIBUNES OF THE PLEBS 5.4.1. Early Tribunician Legislation According to tradition, the first tribunes of the plebs were elected in 494 nc during the first secessio; the plebeians, oppressed by debt and weary ofpatrician license, left the city and occupied (or, according to another version of the story, the Aventine) where they organized themselves politically. The institutionof the tribunate was designed to counterbalance the ordinary the Mons sacer political system which was controlled by the patricians - Cicero states explicitly that the tribunes were instituled contra consulare imperium (rep. 2.58). The plebeian officials, which in addition to the tribunes (whose original number is variously given as two, fbur or five) included Iwo aediles, were elected in the concilium plebis, a distinct plebeian assembly which makes its appearance in Roman history in connection with these events. Though the plebeian organization was accepted by the patricians its recognition is represented as part of the deal that induced the plebs to come back to the city- the tribuniciapotestas was essentially based onalex sacrata, the plebeians to guarantee the sacrosanctitas (inviolability) of the tribunes. an oath swornby It is clear from the historical accounts that, in the early decades of the Republic, the legal positionof the tribunes was in fact controversial. However, protected by this oath, which obliged the plebeians to defend their Ieaders to the death, the tribunes were immensely powerful figures in the politics of the day. They gained the right, at least de facto, to impose fines, imprisonment, or even the death penalty, on to their authority. The tribunes are also represented as carrying laws in the plebeian assembly, but the validity of the earliest tribunician laws is contested.l anyone who should not submit The various powers that constituted the tribunicianpotestas developed from the ius auxilii; this was the right to defend the persons and property of the plebeians. In order to discharge their duties in this respect, the tribunes gained the extensive obstructive power which later was known as the ius intercessionis. By virtue of this power, the leaders ol the plebs were able to invalidate any act or decision made by the Senate, the popular assemblies or any state magistrate. Again, it seems that this right was not fbrmally recognized in the early decades of the Republic, but there can be little doubt that a tribunician veto, whatever its actual legal fbrce in this period, in practice could not have been ignored by the patricians. By the second half of the fifth century the tribunician intercessio was a formal part of the republican constitution. It is also generally recognized that many tribunician laws of this period were legally binding on the whole community; for instance, I See esp. Cic. rep.2.58; Dion. Hal. ant.6.89-90 and Liv. 2.32-33. For the institution olthe plebeian organization, and the concept ot lex sacrata, see G. Niccolini,'Le leges sacratae', Historia2 (1928),3-18; F. Altheim, Lex sacrata. Die Anfänge der plebeischen Organisation, Amsterdam 1940; C. Gioffredi, 'Il fondamento della .tribunicia potesras. lex sacrata e i procedinrenti normativi dell'ordine plebeo ("sacrosanctum sacramentum)' , SDHI 11 (1945), 37-64 and K. von Fritz,'Leges sacratae and plebei scita', Studies Presentedto D. M. Robinson II, Saint Louis 1953, 893-905. For the early tribunate, see Rocher 1984 and W. Eder, 'Zwischen Monarkie und Republik. Das Volkstribunat in der - - friihen römischen Republik' , Bilancio critico (1993), 97-127. There is a recent synopsis of the whole scholarly debate on the emergence of the plebeian political institutions in Cornell 1995,256-265. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 133 few scholars have doubted the historicity of the plebei scitum Canuleium of 445, which repealed the ban on intermarriage between patricians and plebeians.2 According to tradition, the plebeian organization was fully recognized after the fall of the second decemvirate, as part of the so-calied Valerio-Horatian settlement of 449. The legislation ascribed to the consuls L. Valerius Poplicola M. Horatius Barbatus included provisions confirming the sacrosanctitas of the tribunes and the legal validity of the decisions of the plebeian assembly.3 The validity of early plebiscita is a hotly contested issue in modern scholarship. As is well known, altogether three laws are associated with the constitutional refbrm that equated the decisions of the concilium ptebis with leges; in addition to the Valerio-Horatian law of 449 we hear of a law of the dictator Q. Publilius Philo, carried in 339, and the fämous lex Hortensia ot Potitus and 287. However, as has repeatedly been pointed out, the existence of three laws with similar content need not be a problem. It is likely that the earlier laws granted tribunician laws legal fbrce on certain conditions, but that the tribunes gained unrestricted freedom to legislate only with the lex Hortensia. At any rate, it is an indisputable fact that many tribunician measures of the fifth and fourth centuries were in fact laws.a Even many of the early plebiscita may in practice have gained the force of law. These may well have been considered illegal by the patricians, but it is hard to believe that they could have ignored them. A plebiscite was, after all, a fbrmal resolution of the vast majority of the Roman citizens. A plebiscitun supplemented with Ihe patrum auctoritas, the formal approval of the patrician senators, was no doubt binding on all Quirites even before the 2Cic.rep.Z.63;Liv.4.1 .\,4.6.3;Ampel.25.3;cf.Flor.epit. l.lT.Foradiscussionof thisearlyplebiscite'seee.g. S. Ton<io, 'presupposti ecl esiti dell'azione del trib. pl. Canuleio', Bilancio critico (1993),43-73. Full bibliography in Flach, GFRR, 231 . Liv. 3.55.1: Omnium primum, cum velut in controt)erso iure esset tenerefiurne patres plebi scitis, legem cenluriatis comitiis tulere (sctl. Lucius Valerius Potitus et Marcus Horatius Barbatus consules) ut quod tributim plebes iussisset populum teneret, qua lege tribuniciis rogationibus telum acerrimum datum est,3.55.6-7: ipsis quoque tribunis, ut sacrosancti virlerentur, cuius rei prope iam memoria aboleverat, relatis quibusdam ex magno intervallo caerimoniis renoyarunt, et cum religione inviolatus eos tum lege etiamfecerunt, sanciendo ut qui tribunis plebis aedilibus iudicibus 3 decemviris nocuisset, eius caput lovi sacrum esset, familia ad aedem Cereris Liberi Liberaeque venum lret; Dion. Hal. ant, 11 .45.I: v6poug örc,jpoloav !v öxrcl,r1oiarq Åoxitror, ... rai röv rceler]ovtct to.)q r)nö tou örlpou re06vtag öv raiq 'Popaiorq ö( ioou, rrlv ar)rqv öyovtug ötivaprv roiq öv taig .)'olirtorv $ul.errrcaiq örcrclr1oiarg v6pouq tinsor rceio0ar örcrclqoiarq re0rloopr6vorq. ... oi,tog ö v6poq Ll6Bil,e r&q &pQroBqrrloerq töv natpxiorv iiq önoroivro npöq ror)q ör1porrrcogq npörepov, ourc a(rouvreq roiq r)n' örceivcov reOeior v6;rotq ner0apXciv ouö' ölcoq td öv taig Qul.errraiq örcxlrloiarg ön6uporlpeva rcorv& trlq n6.leog ixn&.onc, ö6.7para vopi(ovteq, aÅ.),'autoig p6vorg örceivorq iöra. The vast lirerature on the Valerio-Horatian legislation is conveniently listed in Flach, GFI?R, 215,218,220. For a recent discussion, see Cels Saint-Hilaire 1995, 203 fT. 4 Hölkeskamp 19gg,290 ff. For rhe "Lex Publilia Philonis,, see Liv. 8.12.14-16 (quoted at p. 86 note 6); lor the /ex Hortensia (plin. nat. 16.37; Gell. 15.27.4: Gaius insl. 1.3 ancl Dig. 1.2.2.8), see pp. 77 f . For a few general Fritz discussions of the legal force of plebiscita, see esp. A. Guarino, 'L'exaequatio legibus dei plebiscita', Festschrift Maddox, ff.; G 1978b, esp.55 Develin 75-ll9 Elster 1976, 1955,3-31; Staveley 1951,458-465; SchutzI, Weimar ,The Bincling Plebiscite', Scriui in onore di A. Guarino I, Napoli 1984, 85-95, 85-95; Amirante 1984' 2025-2045: Grziwotz 1985, 171-182 and Hölkeskamp 1988' esp. 292 ff. 134 KAJ SANDBERG Hortensian law.5 How could it have been possible for the patricians to claim exemption trom Ail controversies concerning the validity of plebiscita can only have regarded plebiscita without lhe patrum auctoritas. This is, in fact, explicit in a famous passage of Gaius: olim patricii dicebant plebiscitis se non teneri, quae sine auctoritate eorum facta essent.6 It should be stressed rhat quae is indeed the reading of the trlss, even if many modern editors the assumption that plebiscites carried prior to the lex Hortensia were not measures they themselves had sanctioned? legally binding - pref'er quia.1 As soon as the tribunician right to legislate was recognized, whether fbrmally or de facto,lhe tribunes were bound to take the initiative in Roman legislation. As has often been pointed out by modern scholars, the mere idea of altering the existing order must have been alien to the patricians. This whole concept made its appearance only with the tribunician agitation during the Conflict of the Orders.s The codification of customary law, which was later known as the lex xtt tabularum (c. 450 BC), no doubt bore a strong imprint of the norms and values maintained by the patrician comrnunity. It is, accordingly, consistent with the general political situation that fbr change and refbrm would normally originate among the plebeians. Thus the political organization of the plebeians at an early date emerges as the dynamic element in Roman society. The plebeians, in their assembly, voted for change and the tribunes sought to enfbrce the provisions of their plebiscita on the rest of the community.e The tribunes had many fbrmidable weapons at their disposal to constrain the patricians to subsequent demands accept their proposals, or at least to compromise. By virtue of their izs intercessionis the tribunes were able to invalidate any act performed by other magistrates, inciuding their own colleagues; only a dictator was exempt from the tribunician veto. The tribunes could paralyze any political process and prevent legislation as well as elections, and the Senate from convening. Particularly in times of increasing external pressure, by preventing the levy (dilectas), the tribunes usually were able to prevail. The ultimate measure was, of course, rhe secessio, to which the plebeians resorted for the last time in287 BC. In other words, the patricians had to find ways to compromise with the plebeian leaders in order to avert even bigger misfbrtunes. 5 Monrnrsen, StaatsrecJ'Lt 1984, 88 iT. 6 7 III, 157 f.; Niccolini 1932, 22, 54; Develin 1975a, 320: Amirante 1984, 2031 and Maddox Gaius inst. 1.3. Develin 1975a,321 . The passage is discussed also in Amirante 1984, 2030 fT and Hölkeskamp 1988, 295. Amirante 1984,2026. See also Bleicken 1975,82 ff . e Bleicken 1975,82 ff. esp. 85 and 92. For a discussionabout "das normative Gesetz", which according to Bleicken originated in the activities of the tribunes, see ibid., 137-l'77. E MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 135 5.4.2. The Decline of Consular Legislation It was concluded in chapter 5.2 that the consuls did legislate on all kinds of matters in the Early the curule Republic, and not merely on extlapomerial matters. I have argued elsewhere that matters'ro magistrates employed the comitia curiata to obtain popular sanction on civil the comitia Admittedly, this is a mere assumption, but it is the only alternative to the view that view centuriata was used for routine legislation in the Early Republic; as we have seen, this of Rome, the should be rejected. In any case, its traditional meeting place in the very heart comitium in the Forum,lr suggests that the curiate assembly was chiefly concerned with the comitia curiata intrapomerial matters as we have described them. It is commonly held that as is well known view never developed into a politically significant popular assembly,12 but this Palmer's study of the has been challenged. One of the principal contentions of Robert E. A' - for the whole political early political organization of the Romans is that rhe curiae were the basis system of the Roman state well into the fourth century BC'13 where one of the main functions of the comitia It must be admitted that a passage of Livy - prima militaris curiata,no doubt the passage of the lex curiata de imperio, is referred to as a res that the curiate assembly of the Early Republic was facie mightappear inharmonious with the view too much primarily a civil body.ra However, it seems to me methodologically flawed to assign tbr certain' Not weight to a passage pertaining to an institution of which we know hardly anything that there only are all modern interpretations conjectural,l5 it is also most important to observe the lex curiata.'u This is was even in the late Republic uncertainty as to the precise nature of period had become a hardly surprising considering that this measufe, as we have seen, by that possibility that the mere formality performed by 30 lictors. We cannot, therefbre, exclude the was only erroneously curiate law, the original nature of which was forgotten or poorly understood, i.e' magistrates perceived as a res militaris.It did, after all, concern magistrates wtth imperium, that could act as military commanders. r0 Sandberg 1993, 88, 95 r1 Varro ling. 5.155. f. Cf Paananen 1993'72' for instance, Casavola 1990' 521' 12 See, 13 Palmer 1970. \1 Livy5.5Z.16:Comitiacuriata,quaeremmilitaremcontinent,Cf.Cic. leg'agr.2.30 consuli,silegemcuriatamnon habet, attingere rem militarem non licel in 15 For the lex curiata, see in particular Cic. leg. agr.2.26-31; modern discussions U' von Liibtow, 'Die lex curiata curiata" AJP| 88 (1967),257-278:' imperio,, zss 69 (1952), I54-l7l; J. J. Nicholls, 'The content of ,La place de la loi curiate clans I'histoire constitutionnelle de la fin de la RÖpublique Develin 19:,:/b,49-65: E. Hermon, romaine', KtDma 7 (1982), 297-307 and Giovannini 1983a' 44 lT' 266 f .; cf . Lintott 1999, 49' 16 See Cic. fam. 1.9.25 with commentary in Nicholls 1967, cle the Lex 136 KAJ SANDBERG The decline of consular legislation in the comitia curiata is likely to have begun at an early stage of the Conflict of the Orders. As soon as the plebiscita were recognized,by the patricians, it was only a matter of time before the curule magistrates would mostly refrain frorn legislating themselves. The ias intercessionls of the tribunes eventually made the legislative powers of the curule magistrates largely redundant, as these lacked the possibility to pass laws against the will of the tribunes. Moreover, the only kind of consular and praetorian bills that would pass wrthout tribunician opposition is likely to have been of the very kind that the tribunes rhemselves were putting before the plebs. As we have seen, it was the tribunes who took the inittative in Roman legisiation. Therefbre the sphere of activity of the consuls would, over time, largely confine itself to the military sphere, where it was not checked by tribunician interference. The eventuai, almost complete domination of the tribunes in Roman legislation is, in my opinion, nothing but a iogical and most natural consequence of the Conllict of the Orders. Another reason fbr the decline of consular legislation may be the curiate organization, which was not easily adaptable to a situation, where the number of citizens started to grow almost exponentially. The census figures for the latter part of the fburth and the earlier part of the third century illustrate a remarkable demographic development with few later parrallells.lT The creation of new territorial tribes was the most convenient means to organize conquest and new citizens: no fewer than 14 new tribus were created between 387 and 247 r'c.\8 Also the criteria fbr assigning new citizens to the centuriae were all clear, but the curiate organization, which was based on kinship, would not easily absorb new members.Le Rather soon a situation must have evolved, where a of the Roman citizens tbund themselves outside the curiate division. We must inf'er that, in the course of time, it was considered increasingly improper to bring measures to the considerable part c'omitia curiata, where so f'ew citizens could be involved. The natural alternative was the concilium plebis, an assembly that facto already had been used fbr legislation; it was just a matter of time befcrre the comitia curiata would be replaced by this assembly. de Whether or not patricians were allowed to participate in the votings of the plebeian assembly is a question of little importance (practice may have changed fiom time to time), but it seems clear that the tribes were not - under normal circumstances - summoned by curule magistrates for All republican census ligures are conveniently collected in P. A. Brunt, Italian Manpower 225 B.C.-A.D. /4, Oxfbr<l I97Ia, 13-14. For the figures of the 5th century, see L. H. Ward, 'Roman Population, Territory, Tribe, City, antJ Army Size from the Republic's Founding 1o the Veiefrtine War, 509 sc-400 sc', AJPh 11 1 (1990), 5-39. I' Sec Taylor 1900. 47-68. r7 re Cf. Palmer 1970, 195 note 1. Mitchell (1990, 235) argues that the curiae were able to incorporate the exrensive in Roman territory and i:itizenship, but concedes that they were not very efficient in this respect. He suggests that the thirty-five territorial tribes, which in his opinion replaced the curiae, were created only in 241 BC to make this increases incorporation more efllcient. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 137 to must be stressed that the patricians did not submit themselves law' The concession was made with the plebeian discretion by granting plebiscita the force of the patricians could always refuse to proviso that these should be subject to their approval. Thus patrurn auctoritas. They could also prevent sanction too radical tribunician bills with rhetr of the tribunes was an efficient being brought to the plebs at all; the ius intercessionis Iegislation.2o However, it proposals weapon that also could be turned against the plebeians' unnecessary by the lex Hortensia The fact that the patrum auctoritas eventually was made in the fourth century BC' By the beginning reflects the social changes the Roman society underwent old patrician gentes' had of the third century the leading plebeian families, together with the political power' The tribunes came from fbrmed a new upper class, the nobilitas, which controlled interests to guard as the old aristocracy'2r these leading plebeian families that had the same 5.4.3. The Changing Role of the Tribal Assembly in normal comitia centuriata was As has been shown earlier, the legislative activity of the matters took place in the confined to military aftairs. Legislation concerning civil circumstances tribal assembly' However' it would be a serious comitia curiataand, to an increasing extent, in the Its sphere of action gradually perceive the concilium plebis as an exclusively civil body' mistake to peace. came to include matters related to war and In an earlier attempt to explain the changing role innovative merely cited the revorutionary character of this body.22 The would alone sutfice to explain why the tribunes and dynamic character of the plebeian movement before the plebs '23 But it might be added here started to put matters concerning military affairs of tribunician interference with the that this whoie development was a natural consequence republ ican constitution. Republic' was It is amply attested that the tribal assembly, during the latter part of the of the tribal assembly, I repeatedlysummonedtoelectmilitarycommanders,torecallmilitarycommanders'andtoend which is frequently attested tbr the wars.ro Even a declaration of war is attested.25 A measure a curule magistrate convening an assembly tributim tor As we have seen at p. 108, the sole known instance of legislativepurposes,befbreSulla,sreforms,isfoundinapassageofLivyref.erringtotrulyexceptionalcircumstances. 21 For this development, see Ilölkeskarnp 1987' 140-170' 20 22 Sandberg 1993, 88. Bleicken 1975,82 ff.; Sandberg 1993, esp 93' '1 (202) 30 '4I '4 see e.g. Liv . 29 '13 (204 BC) ' 30 '27 '3-4 ' 2a For elections of military commanclers in the tribal assembly, are attested tribunes (l'Z;' no.ariines de imperio abrogando of (201), 3i.50.10 (200), 35.20.g (192); Cic. Phit' 11.18 sucha bill was approvedfor the hrst time only already in rhe late third century'(Liv.22.25.10,27.20-21 ,z's:p'Al,but 23 adHer'l'I4'24: in105sc,whenQ.ServiliuscaepiowasdeprivedofhiscommandatierhisdefeatatArausio(Auct For a complete list of rogationeslleges de imperio abrogando, Ctc, de orat' 2.19.7;Ascon. Corir. p. 78; Liv. per.67). seeRorondi, LppR,.l6-:'j.Astbrtribunicianlawsendingwars,r....g.Liv.3040'14,30.43'2f 33 .25 .6-1 : Pol. 18 .25 ( 195) ' (201 BC)andLiv' 138 KAJ SANDBERG tribal assembly was the extension of military commands, prorogatio irnperii.It is remarkable that Rome's rise to the leading power in the Mediterranean was possible without the evolution, within the armed forces, of a body of professional commanders. Military commands always vested inthe state magistrates, the magistratus cum imperio. As the Roman wars were waged increasingly far fiom the capital, it eventually became necessary to provide a means for the magistrates to retain their commands afier the expiration of their terms.26 According to Livy, this happened fbr the first tinre in 326 nc, during the Second Samnite War, when the imperium of the consul e. Publilius Philo was prorogued.2T The consul was on the verge of capturing the city of Neapolis when the time drew near fbr the consular elections. At Rome it was deemed not to be fbr the advantage of the res publica that the consul, who was on the verge of capturing the Campanian city, should be recalled. Therefbre the tribunes of the plebs were asked to secure a popular vote providing that Publilius, on the expiration of his consulship, should continue the campaign in place of a consul until ir was brought to a successful end.2E True, the prorogatio imperii eventually became a mere fbrmality, usualiy lefi to the discretion of the Senate, but it is very interesting to observe that it originally required tribunician participation. I believe the reason is to be found in the restrictions the tribunes had imposed on the tenure of imperiurn. A constant zeal ro protect Ihe plebs against the state magistrates is a conspicuous f-eature of tribunician legislation during the Conflict of the Orders. Apparently the annual and collegiate principles regulating office-holding were not perceived as sufficiently strong safeguards against magisterial license. In the fourth century BC we hear of tribunician measures which in various rvays limited the tenure of the chief magistracies; there were plebiscites which prohibited individuals fiom holding the same offlce more than once during a ten-year-period, or two oftices at the same time.2e However, when it was desirable that an able and popular politician should be elected to the consulship a second time, befbre ten years had lapsed, this was indeed possible provided that the plebs, on the motion of a tribune, had decided, ut tegibus solvitur; several 15 Liv. 6.21.5 (383 BC)'. ontnes tribus bellum iusserunt (.scrl. VeliternLs). This passage is nonnally regarcled with suspicion, see e.g. Rotondi, LPPR,216: oCerto anch'essa, corne le altre (scil. /eges rJe bello indicendo'., votata dai comizi centuriati, onde erra Livio ... . Forse Livio ö tratto in errore dalla posterbre composizione clei c. centuriati, irnperniata sulle tribir." However, in a very novel interpretation olthe historical traclition, L. Fascione suggests that the declaration of war belonged to the normal business of the tribes, see 'Bellutn indicere e tribii (509-351 a.C.),, Legge e societå I (1981a),225-254. Cf. Paananen 1993,71. 16 For two fundamental stuciies of the prorogatio imperii, see W. F. Jashemski, Origin and History of proconsular arul Propraetorian Imperiurn lo 27 BC, Chicago 1950 and H. Klofi, Prorogatiott uncl au[3erordentliclte Imperien 326-8] v. Clr., N{eisenheim am Glan 1977. There is an important ciiscussion also in Giovannini 1983a, 3j-44. Cf . Mommsen, Starilsrecht I, 636 6.15. 21 Liv. 8.26.7: prorogatio irnperii rron ante in utlo facta. rE Liv. 8.23.11-12'. actumcwntribunis est, ad populutn.ferrent ut, cumQ. Publilius Philo consulatuabisset, pro consule rem gereret quoad debellatwn cutn Graecis esset. 1e Liv . 7 .42.2 (312 BC)t plebi scitis cautum ne quis eundem magistrarurn intra (Jecem annos caperet neu rluos magistrarus uno antn gereret. See also Rotondi, LPPR, 224-225. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 139 tribunician leges de legibus solvendis are known.'o My interpretation is that it was only the concilium plebis, that is, the legislative body that had imposed this restriction on office holding, was entitled to grant dispensation from it. As for the prorogatio at least in practice which - - imperii, it in effect involved a violation of the plebiscite prohibiting the iteration of a magistracy within a ten-year-period. This, in my opinion, explains the frequent instances in Livy where the tribunes are asked to obtain prorogation in the tribal assembly.3r The fact that the tribunes began to put extrapomerial matters before the tribal assembly is thus compatible with the constitutional situation that had evolved as a result of their own legislative activity. We proceed by considering how an extended sphere of action may relate to the spatial notions we have seen were typical fbr the Romans. Did an assembly, which in its activity transgressed the limits between the civil and the military, need diff'erent meeting places? It is true that the tribunes were essentially urban officials,32 but their authority did extend outside the city boundary, as f'ar as the first mile stone. I contend that the tribunes summoned the plebs outside the pomerium when the matter so postulated, that is, if the matter was of extrapomerial nature. This kind of hypothesis would be nothing but a wild guess if there were no evidence that the concilium plebis could convene extra pomerium. Interestingly enough we do find such evidence, indeed, in contexts of legislation in extrapomerial matters. An area outside the pomeriuru which was associated with plebeian legislation, and other plebeian activities as well,33 is the prata Flaminia in the Campus Martius, where rhe circus Flaminius was built in the end of the third century sC. According to the annalistic tradition, the concilium plebis convened here as early as in 449, when - after the downfall of the decemvirs - the tribunes passed several important measures, including the law which restored the all clear, the historiographic sources collocate several other instances of legislation under tribunician presidency to this specific area. In the very same year the plebeian assembly granted the consuls L. Valerius Poplicola Potitus and M. Horatius consulship.3a That this was no isolated instance is Barbatus the triumph that the Senate had not been willing to grant them.35 Admittedly, both of these instances are recorded in the sources for the Early Republic, which are far from unproblematic. Ogilvie explained the location of these transactions as an aetion connected with the 30 Grants of dispensation are recorded for the years 298 ac App. Pun. ll2). (Liv. 10 13.9), 217 (Liv. 27 .6.7) and 147 (Liv. per. 50, For a more orthodox interpretation, see e.g. Casavola i989,34 fT. esp.36. Dion. Hal. anl. 8.87.6 f. )3 The circus Flaminius was the scene for the ludi plebeii, see Val. Max. 1.7.4. r4 Liv. 3.54.15: Ea omnia in pratis Flaminiis concilio plebis acta, quetn nunc circum Flaminium appellant. 3r 32 r5 l-iv.3.63.7-11: Dion. Hal. ant. 11.50. 140 KAJ SANDBERG ludi plebeii held in this area,36 but it is important to stress that there is evidence that the circus Flaminius was used as a meeting place for the concilium plebis also in later times. In 209 the plebeians were surlmoned here to deliberate whether M. claudius Marcellus should be deprived of his command in accordance with a proposition of the tribune C. publicius Bibulus.3T In 61 Pompey made his first public appearance after his long absence in the East at a contioheld in the Flaminian circus.38 It is true that both Marcellus and Pompey, retaining their commands, could not cross the pomeriutn, wherefore the meetings had to be organized outside this sacred boundary of the city'3e In fact, this could well explain why the historians placed the assembly granting the consuls valerius and Horatius their triumph in 449 in this location (see above). It is clear from Livy's account that the consuls, who could not lay down their command without losing their possibility to celebrate a triumph, were present in the contio which preceded the vote. Nevertheless, in all these instances we deal with extrapomerial matters put befbre tribal assemblies convening extra pomerium. There is also evidence that the plebs sometimes was summoned on the capitol to vote on extrapomerial matters. In 196 the tribunes Q. Marcius Ralla and C. Atinius Labeo passed a law in capitolio which ordained peace with the Macedonian king philippus v.ao There must be a reason why the tribal assembly convened here. Briscoe argued that the purpose may have .to been restrict attendance in the narrow space available.u4l Such an explanation creates more problems than it solves. why should we think that the tribunes wanted to restrict attendance in an assembly they had summoned to approve a bill that they had themselves proposed? It is interesting to note that there is another example of a tribal assembly voting on an extrapomerial matter on the capitol. rn 167 the tribune Ti. sempronius carried a law here that granted the victors fiom pydna (L' Aemilius Paullus, Cn. octavius and L. Anicius Gallus) a triumph: cum in Capitolio rogationem eam Ti. Sempronius tribunus plebis ferret.a2 There are many uncertainties as to the exact course of the republican pomerium, but it is usually held that the capitol was not included within this boundary before imperial times.a3 There can be no doubt that at least part of the hill was extra pomerium; as is well known, the Arx (the fortress of Rome) was situated on the Capitol. ogilvie 1965 497 : 'The choice of the fields as the location of these transactions is doubtless an Aetion connectecl with ' the ludi plebeii which were held in the circus ... .o 36 27.21 .l: Actum de imperio Marceili in circo Flaminio esr. Cf . plut, Marc. 2.7. cic. An. 1.14.1: FuJius in contionem producit Pompeium. Res agebatur in circo Flaminio. 3e See e.g. Taylor 1966, 21, 31 f. and I 19 note 14. 31 Liv. 38 o0 Liv' 33'25.7: Ea rogatio in Capitotio ad plebem lata est; omnes quinque et triginta tribus ,uti rogas,iusserunt. arBriscoe 1973,297. Liv. 45.35-39 esp. 35 f. (the quotation is raken from 45.36.1). See also plut. Aem.30.g: ... rö Kaner6l.rov.årcei y&p oi örlpaplor rrlv önc),qoiav öpre,t,,l.ov ri{erv. a3 Richardson, Dictionary,70 s.v. 'capitolinus Mons', 294 s.v. 'Pornerium'and 330 s.v. ,Regiones quattuor,. see also Mommsen, staatsrecht III, 378 f. and raylor 1966, 116 note 5. contra: Andreussi 1999, 101. 42 MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES It may be concluded that the sphere of action of the tribal I+T assembly, as a natural consequence of its own revolutionary activity, came to include extrapomerial matters. These matters were, it for the view seems, voted upon outside the pomeriuLz. This observation adduces additional support that the competence of a legislative assembly was related to its meeting place' 5.5. AN UNEASY MODEL OF'LEGISLATION? THE BALANCE OF POLITICAL POWER CONSIDERED When the curiate assembly ultimately f'ell into disuse, as a real popular assembly, all civil legislation was concentrated in the hands of the tribunes of the plebs. The curule magistrates would not themselves convene the tribes, i.e. the concilium plebis, fbr legislation. Therefore, as the centuriate assembly did not legislate in civil matters they depended on the tribunes to obtain popular decisions concerning such matters. This is, I agree, an interpretation of the constitutional situation that may be hard to accept fbr many scholars. It seems to be inconceivable to many students of the Republic that the Roman aristocracy could have been, in any way, dependent on the plebeian political organization. Loretana De Libero, criticizing the results of one of my earlier studies, makes the following assertion:r Die Frage nach der praktischen Durchfiihrbarkeit cler vorgelegten Uberlegungen, die den Patriziern keine Möglichkeit unabirängiger Gesetzesinitiativen vor dem Volk zugestehen und damit trotz auctoritas potrum eine gelährliche Abhängigkeit von den Volkstribunen kreieren, wird nicht gestellt. There is, in my opinion, no justification fbr this kind of position. It is, after all, a well-established fact that it was not the patricians, but the plebeians under the tribunes who eventually prevailed in the Conflict of the Orders. As is well known, the patricians were forced to accept many farreaching demands of the tribunes during this struggle, some of these already long before the consulship was opened to the plebeians. Entrusting the legislation to the tribunes might well have been but a small concession compared with the recognition of their obstructive powers. As we have seen, by virtue of the ius intercessionis the tribunes were able to paralyze the whole state machinery. And it sufllced that one single tribune, out of a college comprising ten members, would intercede. Is it not obvious that the Roman aristocracy de facto found itself dependent on the tribunes as soon as they were fbrced to accept their right of veto? No scholar has ever cast into doubt that the tribunician intercessio was a fbrmal element Therefbre, if the patricians - of the and the nobiles who inherited their position republican constitution. - were able to tolerate such a dependence on the plebeian political organization, why are scholars so reluctant to accept that they may as well have accepted the fact that legislation became a tribunician domain of political lif'e? It must be stressed that the of the views advanced in this study does not postulate a radical reconsideration of current notions of the political culture of the Republic. As Gelzer and his adherents observed, the structures of political power do notrest exclusively on fbrmal political acceptance institutions. Wealth, family-ties and other personal connections, not to mention patronage, may i L. de Libero, Ilistorische Zeitschrifi 261 (1995), 161 f MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 143 were certainly no indeed have been crucial factors in political life; and the tribunes of the plebs the technicalities outsiders in Roman society. Why is it so hard to conceive the aristocracy leaving of legislation to the tribunes, if it is clear that they nevertheless, by other means' were able to retain control of much of the political process? their Already during the Conflict of the Orders the patricians had many eflcient means at whenever that disposal to check tribunician initiatives. The grant of legal force to the plebiscita was made, we must remember, with the proviso that they should be subject to the happened of the formal approval of the patricians Qtatrum auctoritas); it was only in 281 that the decisions patricians piebeian assembly became unconditionally binding. It should also be observed that the tribune. The could easily prevent bills from being put befbre the plebs by turning to a co-operative for the Roman Republic are full of instances where tribunes are prevented by their own sources is a particularly colleagues from bringing measures to the people. The Licinio-sextian legislation As we have already seen, the laws of C. Licinius Stolo and L. Sextius Sextinus good example. were their f-ellow Lateranus were passed only after a ten-year-struggle, in which their adversaries in the tribunes. It is attested that the patricians usually had no difficulty in finding collaborators tribunician college.2 to As for the role of the curule magistrates, there is clearly an inclination among scholars counterpart to modern regard these magistrates, together with the Senate, as the ancient Roman much in This no doubt accounts for the widely accepted postulate that the consuls - goverrunents. legislation before the Sullan the manner of modern political leaders - played an active role in the have always refbrms. But is it possible that modern analogies distort the picture? Analogies we should make a more influenced modern interpretations of the past (and always will), but maybe We have already seen that conscious eftbrt to avoid viewing republican Rome with modern eyes' on the consulship as the key to Roman politics must be considered the modern emphasis problematic., It is all clear that the Roman publica, in respect of its structure and modes of were at the apex of operation, cannot be compared with modern states.a It is true that the consuls res an overwhelming, well defined hierarchy and that the Senate, advising the magistrates, exercised which in the continuous control in a wide range of central fields. However, this system was parallelled by the political beginning of the Republic came under patrician control a - moreover, a device that had been collegas acJversus tribunicias rogationes comparaterunt. This was, patribus Ap. claudius victam iterum Perturbatis 2.44.2: Liv. practiced mulris iam ante cerlaminibus (loc. cit). See also quando inventum sit suis ipsam perpetuum, in exemplo re, praesentia in tribuniciam potestatem dicere priore anno, melioris partis bono publico gratiam et sibi victoriam qui ex collega et clefururum umquam enim viribus dissolvi. Neque paratos fore' et unumvel adversus omnis velit quaesitam; et plures, si pluribus opus sit, tribunos atl awilium consulum tribuniciae potestatis per collegarum dissolvendae unam satis esse;cf. 4.4g.6: Ap. Ciaurlium ostendisse patribus viam 2 Liv. 6.35.6: intercessionem. I Millar 1995a,239. a For a discussionabout the nature of the Roman state, see Pani 1997,15-23. 144 KAJ SANDBERG organization of the plebeians. This was, we must remember, a completely independent entirety and always remained so. That is, it retained its full independence even after the end of the conflict of the orders. Though the process that eventually led to the full recognition of the plebeian institutions to a certain extent may be described in terms of an "in1sgration,,5 neither the Senate nor the curule magistrates had any formal authority over the tribunes or the organization that they were in charge of.6 The political process at Rome during the Republic did not articulate itself within a unitary political system, it is better perceived as the expression of a clash between two competing systems. However, the various elements in this process had to find ways to co-operate in order to avoid anarchy. There was, in other words, a strong interdependence between the Senate, the magistrates and the Ieaders of the plebeian organization. Now, what is this conclusion of the observations Polybius century 5 See, 6 not the very essence in the middle of the second BC?7 for instance, R. Develin, 'The Integration of (1986),327-3s2. 7 made about the Roman constitution if plebeians into the Political Order after 366 BC,, This is, as we have seen, explicitly attested also by polybius (6.12 2). Sandberg 2000, 139 f. Social Struggles 6. SUMMARY Though central to the operation of the state machinery, the popular assemblies of republican Rome were no independent actors in political life. Only a magistrate, whether a curule magistrate or a tribune of the plebs, was entitled to convoke and put matters before the people. The fbregoing chapters dealt with the fbrmal interaction between magistrates and assemblies in legislation; the aim was to establish the principles by which the various popular assemblies (comitia curiata, comitia centuriata, comitiatributa) normally were employed, and by whom they were summoned. This whole undertaking entailed a host of methodological problems, which were duly of the method is one of the focal points of this study. In my opinion scholars have often been too focused on problems pertaining to the general reliability of discussed. Indeed, the discussion the annalistic tradition, whereas another question of cenffal importance has been largely neglected: How should we use the data that can be considered reliable? The difficulties affronting the scholar have thus usually been seen as lying on the analytical level (how to isolate reliable information), whereas the synthesis (how to attain new knowledge) has been perceived as much less problematic. The methoclological discussion in modern studies, which remarkably rarely is instrumental for the actual inquiry, is in this study an integral part of the argumentation. One of the principal contentions of the chapter dealing with sources and method, is that current views of political routines in the Roman Republic are both deficient and incomplete, since they are fbunded on data that have been recovered without discretion fiom the most various contexts. It was argued that we, in our work with the primary sources, should pay more attention to the specific period of time political routines and other kinds of information ref'lect. The Roman Republic is, after all, a very long period of time, during which the constitution was subject to constant change due to natural evolution as well as deliberate revisions. Therefore the value of the It is, accordingly, not possible to make a on one's view of the value of the annalistic tradition- the sources does not depend exclusively on their reliability. delimitation at, fbr instance - depending year 390 BC (the date for the Gallic sack) or in the late third century BC (when the succession of Roman historians starts) and assume that all data documented after these years are useful fbr all kinds of problems. Historical inquiries should be based on a careful selection also of the data that are generally considered sound and reliable. suggested that modern views of the legislation of the Roman Republic have been heavily coloured by our knowledge of late republican conditions, about which we happen to know a great It was deal. The last decades of the Republic constitute one of the best documented periods in all Roman history. For this period there is a considerable amount of high quality sources. Indeed, some of the leading politicians of the era speak to us directly through their writings. We are in possession of Caesar's commentaril on the wars he waged as well as a good part of Cicero's extensive production. The speeches the latter delivered befbre the Senate and the Roman people give us unique insights into the political and judiciary matters of the day. Moreover, thanks to his 146 KAJ SANDBERG correspondence (nearly 900 letters survive) we are permitteil to fbllow the events at Rome on an almost daily basis during some of the most eventf'ul decades of the last century of the Republic. A scholar focusing on the politics of the period also has access to a number of original documents, such as law texts and' senatusconsulta, which in a few cases survive quite substantially. natural that the material elucidating the era of caesar and cicero has become the the Roman Repubiic' However, in my opinion, account this material studying the practice it is methodorogically It is only main avenue to questionable to take into of politics in pre-sullan Rome. It may weil lead us altogether astray, since political routines documented only in the last decades of the Republic do not necessarily reflect the pre_Sullan .constitution,,. The method used in this study will uncloubtedly raise a great deal of controversy, but it takes into account the well-known' yet almost completeiy neglected tact that the very structures of political life radically changed with the refbrms of sulla in the g0's sc. It consists of an effort to consider political routines exclusively in the light of data recovered in the sources fbr the preSullan period, disregarding altogether the evidence fbr the five last decades of the Republic (insofar as they disagree with the testimony of the former sources). The core of this study is an analysis of legislation in the period 367-gg BC. It was observed that laws attributed to curule magistrates by our sources are not only rare, but aiso exceptional in some way or another or dubious with regard to their historicity. It was also established that onry tribunes of the plebs are represenled as promulgatores ancl rogatores legumin our sources. curule magistrates' who are frequently connected with legislative procedure in the last decacles of the Republic' are attested only in connection with military affairs and matters concerning external relations' A subsequent examination of the use of the popular assemblies permittecl us to establish that there is no eviilence that the centuriate assembly was used for legislation, except fbr the passage of leges de bello inclicenclo; only the tribes - in normal circumstances sunmoned by the tribunes legislated on civil matters. Thereafier an ef-fort was made to relate these observations to the institutional and political development of the Roman Republic. It was suggested that there were basically two distinct spheres for all legislative activity, a military sphere on the one hand and a civil one on the other. Geographically these spheres were separated fiom each other by the pomerium, the sacred boundary of the city' The competence of the legislative assemblies, it was argued, depended on their meeting places, or rather, their relation to this boundary. An assembly which convened outside this line could only decide upon matters pertaining to war and peace, or external reiations, whereas civil matters were put before assemblies that were summoned intra pomerium. The fact that there is no evidence for civil laws passed in the centuriate assembly indicates that this assembly had only military competence; this hypothesis is clearly corroborated by the fact that it was a military organized body that oniy could convene outside the pomerium. The standard MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 147 explanation, that it had lost its civil functions to other assemblies, was rejected. An interpretatlon of the evidence suggested that military, or extrapomerial, matters were put before the centuriate assembly (or other assemblies summoned extra pomerium), whereas civil, or intrapomerial, affairs were decided upon by assemblies convening in the city' The oldest assembly used to vote on civil matters was the comitia curiata, which was concilium summoned by consuls and other curule magistrates. Also the plebeian assembly, lhe plebis - which is identical with the comitia tributa-, was summoned within the pomeriurTT to pass civil legislation. This assembly, which was convoked by the tribunes, soon gained the initiative in legislation. Indeecl, the emergence of legislation as a means to alter existing norms and institutions concilium plebis can be attributed to the plebeian assembly. During the Conflict of the orders lhe civil largely replaced the curiate assembly. When the curiate assembly had fallen into disuse all not legislation was concentrated in the hands of the tribunes. The curule magistrates would sumrnon the tribes for legislation, wherefore they befbre the reforms of Sulla themselves - - normally depended on the tribunes for all kinds of civil legislation. However, in certain circumstances curule magistrates would legislate themselves. During the At Conflict of the Orders major concessions ro the plebs were ratified in the centuriate assembly' had the possibility least dictators, but in certain circumstances perhaps also consuls, evidently also to issue leges datae. Even if there is no evidence connecting curule magistrates with legislative that some of procedure before the last decades of the Republic, it cannot be ruled out altogether fit in the context the laws associated with consuls after the Gracchi were comitial laws. This would Late the increasing tensions between the optimates and Ihe populares which distinguish the of magistrates Republic. During this political struggle legislation was a crucial weapon; if the curule the were affronted with a college of hostile tribunes, they had no other choice than summoning it is people themselves if they wished to enact a comitial law in a civil assembly. However, contended here that it was only with the reforms of Sulla that consuls and praetors were formally given the right to legislate before the tribes. APPENDIX I LIST OF ROMAN MAGISTRATES ATTESTED AS PROMULGATORES OR ROGATORES LEGUM Acilius Glabrio, M,. tr. pl. 201 Liv. 30.40.14. Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, Lex de Delo, lines I ff ., 37 ff . (Acilius Glabrio, M'. cos. 191) Macr. Sat. L13.21. Canuleius, C. tr. pI. 445 Liv. 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.6. Antonius M. f., C. tr. IrI. 68? L. cos. 5g Lex Ant. Term., praescr. Carvilius, L. tr. pI. ZIZ Liv . 25.4.9. Antonius, M. tr. pl. 49 Cic. Phi|.2.72. Carvilius, Sp. tr. Liv.25.4.9. Antonius, M. cos. 44 Cic. Phil. 1.26,2.109. Claudius Crassus Inregillensis Sabinus, Ap. Xvir leg. suib. 450 Antonius Merenda, T. Xvir leg. scrib. 450 Macr. Sat. I.I3.2I (: fi. 7 Peter, HRR). Tuditanus C. Sempronius Aquilius, ?. tr. pl. Inst. Iust. 4.3.I5. C. Sempronius 4, Sest.25. Cornelius, C. tr. pl. 67 Ascon. Corn. pp. 58, 59, j2. Atilius, L. tr. pl.210 Liv . 26.33.12. Cornelius, Cn. tr. pl. 68? Lex Ant. Term., praescr. Aufidius Lurco, M. tr. pI. 6l At. 1.16.13. Cornelius Dolabella, P. cos. 44 Cic. Phil. L26,2.109. Aurelius Cotta, L. pr. 70) Ps.-Ascon. p.296. Cic, Verr. 2.2.174, 2.2.t7 5, 2.5.177 Baebius (Tamphilus?), Lex agr. , line 43. Macr. Sat. I.l3.2I (: Tuditanus fr. 7 Peter, HRR). Clodius Pulcher, P. tr. pl. 58 Ascon. Mil. p. 46. Cic. dom.24,80, p. red. in sen. Dig.9.2.I). Cic. pl.2I2 M. tr. pl. . (194?) Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus, Cn. cos.72 Sall. ålsr. 4 fr. 1(ap. Gell. 18.4.4). Cornelius Lentulus Spinther, Cic. dom.70. p, Caecilius Rufus, L. tr. pl. 63 Cic. Sull. 62, 63. 450 Caecilius Rufus, L. pr. 57 Cic. p. red. in sen. 22. Tuditanus Caelius Rufus, M. pr. 48 Caes. ciy. 3.20.5, 3.21.1. Curiatius, P. tr. Liv.5.12.3. Calpurnius L. f ., L. tr. pI. Lex repet., line 74. Cf. line 81. Duillius, K. Xvir leg. scrib. 450 cos. 57 Cornelius Maluginensis, M. Xvir leg. scrtb. Macr. Sat. 1.I3.2I fr. 7 Peter, pl. (: C. HRR). 401 Sempronius MAGISTRATES AND (: C' Tuditanus fr. 7 Peter, HRR). Duillius, M. rr. pI. 449 Liv. 3.55.14. Maecilius, Sp. /r. pl. 416 Liv' 4'48'2, 4'48'1'5' Fabius Vibulanus, Q. Xvir teg. suib. 450 Macr. Sat. I.l3.2l (: C. Sempronius Tuditanus fi. 7 Peter, HRR) . Flaminius, C. tr. p\.232 Val. Max. 5.4.5. Fonteius Capito, C. pontifex Lex Fonteia, ftgg. (a) + (b), face (i), line Fundanius C. f., C. tr. pL 68? Lex Ant. Term., praescr. 67 Icilius, L. tr. pI. Liv . 3 .54.14. cos. Liv . 42 .21 .4 , e. tr. pI. L,Z 42.21 .5 . Messius, C. tr. pl. 57 Cic. p. red. in sen. 21. 3. Metilius, M. tr. pl. 416 Liv.4.4g.2,4.4g.I5. Metilius, M, tr. pL 40l Liv. 5.12.3. Liv.22.25.t0. ff' 59 Iunius D. f., M. tr. pI. Lex repet.,Itne74. Cf. line Marcius Scilla, Metilius, M. tr. pt. Zl7 449 Iulius Caesar, C. Suet. Iut. 20.1. Mamilius Limetanus, C. tr. pL l09 Sall' /ag' 40'1' Marcius Sermo, M. tr. pI. l7Z Liv.42.21.4,42.21.5. Flavius, L. tr. pl. 60 Cic. An. 1.18.6, fam. 13.4.2. Gabinius, A. cos. 58 Lex de Delo,ltnes 1 ff., lines 37 149 Sempronius L\v' 42'19'I' Macr. Sat. 1.13.2I Gabinius, A'. tr. pl. Cic. Manil. 52. ASSEMBLIES 81. Iuventius Thalna, Mr'. pr. 167 Liv.45.21.t-3. Licinius Nerva, ?. tr. pl. t77 Liv. 4L6.2. Licinius Stolo, C. tr. pI. 376-367 Colum. 1.3.11. Liv. 6.35.4, 6.37.12, 6.39.11, per. 6. Livius Drusus, M. tr. pl.9l Ampel. 19.6. Lucretius, M. tr. pl. 172 Minucius, M. tr. pt. Liv. 5.i,2.3. 40'1. Minucius Esquilinus Augurinus, L. Xvir teg. scrib. 450 Macr' Sal' 1"13'21 (: Sempronius Tuditanus fr' 7 Peter, HRR)' Minucius Thermus, Q. tr. Liv' 30'40'14' pl.20l Ogulnius, Cn' tr' pI' 300 Llv. 10.6.6. ogulnius Gallus, Q. tr. pL 300 Liv' 10'6'6' Oppius Cornicen, Sp' Xvlr leg' scrib' 450 Macr' Sat' I'13'2I Tuditanus (: C' fr. 7 Peter, HRR). Papirius, Q' tr' Cic' dom' 121' pL Papirius Turdus, C. tr. pL l77 Sempronius r50 KAJ SANDBERG Liv.41.6.2. Liv. per.58. Petillius, Q. tr. Liv. 38.54.2. pl. lg7 - Sempronius Tuditanus, M. tr. Liv . 35.1 .4 f pt. 193 . Petillius Spurinus, Liv. 38.54.2. e. tr. pl. lg7 Sergius Esquilinus, Tuditanus Poetelius, Q. Xvir leg. scrib. 450 Macr. Sat. 1.13.21 Tuditanus M. Xvir leg. scrib. Macr. Sat. 1.13.21 fr. 7 peter, (: C. Sempronius HRR). Pompeius Magnus, Cn. cos. (70), Ascon. Mil 36, pis. p. Ij. p SS, Sz fr. 7 peter, (: C. HRR). Servilius Rullus, p. tr. pl. 63 Cic. fam. 13.4.2, leg. agr.2.g3, 3.11, 3.15. Plin. nat. 8.210. Sextius Sextinus Lateranus, L. tr. pl. Porcius Cato, C. tr. pl. 56 Cic. ad Q. fr.2.3.L Liv. 6.35.4, 6.37.12, 6.39.11, per. (Porcius Cato, M. pr. c. IZI) Lex prov. praet., Cnidos Copy, col. Fest. p. 288. 367 f. Silius, P. tr. pl. Pupius Piso Frugi Calpurnianus, Cic. Att. 1.13.3. M. cos. 6l Quinctius Crispinus, T. cos. 9 Frontin. aq. I29. Rabuleius, M,. Xvir leg. scrib. 450 Macr. Sat. 1.13.21 Tuditanus 6. Silius, M. tr. pl. iii line 4 (: C. fr. 7 peter, HRR). Sempronius Fest. p. 288. Sulpicius Galba Maximus, Liv. 31.6.1 f. p. cos.200 Sulpicius Rufus, p. tr. pt. gg Liv. per. 77 . Terentilius Harsa, C. tr. Liv.3.9.5. pl. 462 Roscius, L. (tr. pl.) before 44143 Frg. Atest., lines 13 f. Liv. Rutilius, P. tr. pt. 169 Liv . 43.16.6. Valerius Messalla Niger, M. cas. 61 Cic. Art. 1.13.3. Scribonius Curio, C. tr. pl. S0 Caes. ciy. 2.25.4. Valerius Tappo, C. tr. Lw.38.36.7. pt. lgg Valerius Tappo, L. tr. Liv. 34.5.1. pl. l9S Scribonius Libo, L. tr. Liv. per.49. pl. (Valerius Laevinus, 149 Sempronius Gracchus, C. tr. pl. I2Z Fest. p. 218 (cf. Gelt. 9.14.16 and 10.3.2). Lex agr., Iines 6,22. Ps.-Sall. rep.2.8.1. Val. Max. 7.2.6. Sempronius Gracchus, Ti. tr. pl. 133 450 Sempronius 27 .5.16-17 M. cos. 210) . Varius Hybrida, Val. Max. 8.6.4. e. tr. p\.90 Vatinius, P. tr. pl. 59 Cic. Vatin.28. Schol. Bob. p. 120. 376_ MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES ANONYMOUS MAGISTRATES Dictator 367 sc Liv . 6.42.14. Omnes (paene) magistratus 57 ec: Cic. fam. 1.9.16, Pis. 35 (cf. Ascon. Pis. p. 11). (Praetor) 210 sc: Liv. 27 .5.16-17 . Praetores 57 sc: Cic. p. red. in sen. 22. Tribunus plebis 57 sc Cic. dom. 83. Tibuni plebis 445 sc: Liv . 4 .1 .2, 4 .1 .6 . 432: Liv . 4.25.13. 2ll: Liv. 26.2.6. 210: Liv. 27 .5.16-17 . 202: Liv. 30.21 .3. 201: Liv. 30.41.4, 3 1.50. 10. 58: Cic. p. red. in sen. 29. 57: Cic. Att. 3.23.1, p. red. in sen. 56: Cic. ad Q. fr. 2.5.3. 4, Sest. 69. 151 APPENDIX II II.{VENTORY OF NOMINATIM REFERENCES TO ROMAN STATUTES IN CLASSICAL SOLRCES Law designations preceded by an asterisk are not attested in the sources, but C. Iust. 7.2.5, i.11.1. Coll. Mos. 16.2.5. moclern reconstructions found in Rotondi, LppR. Dig. 26.8.9.1, 26.8.16 pr., 28.5.43 pr., 28.5.44 pr., 28.5.56 pr., 28.5.58 pr., 28.5.61 pr., 28.5.84 pr., 29.1.29.1, 36.1.76.1, 31.14.6 pr., 37.14.15 Lex Acilia Cic. Verr. 2.1.26. * Lex Acilia pr., 38.2.33.pr., 38.5. 1 1 pr., 38. 16.3.5, 38. 16.3.5, 40.2.12 pr., 40.2.15 pr., 40.2.16 pr., 40.2.16 pr., 40.4.21 pr., 40.4.32 pr., 40.5.34. t, 40.j . 1. t, 40.g r., 40.9.5.2, 40.9.8. 1, 40.9.16 pr., 40.9.27.pr., de intercalatione? * Lex (Acilia) 10.9.29.pr., 40.9.30 pr., 40.9.31 pr., 40.9.32.1, repetundarum 45.1.66 pr., 50. 16.70 pr., 50.16.216 pr. Lex Acilia de pecuniis repetundis Ps.-Ascon. p. 221. FIRA Cic. Verr. 1.1.5i. x Lex Acilia Minucia de pace cum Carthaginensibus facienda et de exercitu ex Africa deportando * Lex Acilia Rubria de cultu Iovis Capitolini Lex Aebutia Cic. leg. agr.2.2l. 9,3 8). tbis.1. Cic. Att.1.16.13 (bis), 2.9.1, har. resp.5g, pis. 9, 10, p. red. in sen. ll, prov. cons. 46, Sest.33, 5, 18 (bis), 23,37. Inst. Iust. i.20 pr. Lib. col. p.224. 11.4, Varin. p. ii line x Lex Aemilia de dictatore creando * de modo legum ferendarum P. Mich. VII 436, rexr on wood, line 6, rexr Lex Aemilia sumpruaria * Leges (Aemiliae) Macedoniae datae * Lex Ampia Atia de triumphalibus ornamentis Cn. Pompei Lex A(elia) S(entia) Lex Aelia Sentia de censura minuenda x Lex Aemilia de iibertinorum suffragiis 1. 119. wax, line 4. * Lex Aemilia * Lex Aemilia frumenraria x Lex Aelia de coloniis duabus latinis deducendis * Lex Aelia g.34.8, 9.34.9, 9.34.t6, 9.34.24. ORF M. Aemilius Lepidus porcina fr. 6 (ap. prisc. Lex Aelia Schol. Bob. Sentia de manumissionibus Liv. 9.33.4, 9.33.6, 9.33.8, 9.34.7, x Lex Aebutia de magistratibus extraordinariis RS 34 (Riccardi fragment), col. 15. Lex Aemilia Ge||.2.24.t2. (de formulis) Ascon. Pis. p.8 line r., i.13, 1.19, 1.27,1.29 (bis), 1.31, 1.31, 1.40, r.4j, t.66, t.68 (bis), 1.69, r.70, r.71, 1.80 (3), 1.139, 3.s,3.73 (3),3.74. InsI. Iust, 1.5.3, 1.6.1 (bis), 1.6.4, 1.6.7. P. Mich.III 169, i, line 3, ii, Iine 9 _ iii, tine 1. P. Wisc.II 50, tine 14. UIp. reg. 1.11, 1.14,7.4. * Lex Aelia Gaius insr. 4.30. Gell. 16.10.8. * Lex Aeburia III2, Gaius insr. 1.13 on Lex Antia GeL|.2.24.13. * Lex Antia sumptuaria MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES * Lex Antistia de Satricanis Lex Antonia Lex col. Gen., clii,line 153 Lex Aquilia Cic. Tull. 11, 41. 12. Leges Antoniae Cic. fam. 12.14.6. * Lex Antonia de actis Caesaris confirmandis * Lex Antonia agraria C. Iust. 3.35 r., 3.35.1, 3.35.2, 3.35.3, 3.35.4, 3.35.5,3.35.6. Coll. Mos. 2.4.1, 2.5.1, '/.3.1, 1.3.2, 7.3.3, 12.',t.t, 12.7.3, 12.1.4, 12.7.5, 12.1.5, 12.1.6, t2.7.6, 1,2.7.1 (bis), 12.'7.8,12.7.9 (bis), 12.1.10. D s. 4.3.7 .4, 4.3.'7 .5, 4. 3. 1 8. 5, 5 .3 .20.4, 5 .3.36.2 i * Lex Antonia de candidatis * Lex Antonia de coloniis deducendis * Lex Antonia de dictatura in perpetuum tollenda x Lex Antonia iudiciaria * Lex Antonia de mense Quintili * Lex Antonia de permutatione provinciarum * Lex (?) Antonia de pontifice maximo (bis),5.3.55 pr.,6.1.13 pr. (3),6.1.14 pr., 6.1.r7.1 (bis), 6.t.27.2, 1.t.r3.2 (bis), 7.1.13.3, 7 .l.t5.3, 7 .1.66 pr., 9. I.l.'t , 9.1.1.16 (bis), 9.2 r., 9.2.1 pr., 9.2.1.1, 9.2.2 pr., 9.2.3 pr., 9.2.5 pr., 9.2.5.1, 9.2.5.2, 9.2.7.2, 9.2.1.5, 9.2.1.1, 9.2.7.8 (bis), 9.2.7.11 pr., 9.2.9.2, 9.2.11.2, 9.2.tt.s, 9.2.11.6, 9.2.11.7, 9.2.rt.10 (bis), 9.2.12 pr., 9.2.13.2, 9.2.13.3, 9.2.18 pr., 9.2.23.1., 9.2.23 .9, 9 .2.21 .1, 9.2.21 .5, 9.2.27 .1 t, 9 .2.27 .3r , 9 .2.27 .r1 9 .2.2'7 .t4 9 .2.27 .t3 9.2.29.2, 9.2.27.32, 9.2.27.34, 9.2.28 , pr., , , .2.29 .3, 9.2.29 .7, 9.2.33 pr., 9.2.33.1, 9.2.36.r * Lex Antonia de proscriptorum liberis 9 * Lex pr., 9.2.40 pr., 9.2.41.pr.,9.2.42 pr., 9.2.43 pr. (bis), 9.2.44 pr., 9.2.45.r, 9.2.45.2, 9.2.45.4, 9.2.46 pr. (bis), 9.2.49.1 (bis), 9.2.51 pr. (4), (Antonia?) de provinciis consularibus * Lex Antonia de provocatione * Lex Antonia de quinto die ludorum Romanorum Caesari tribuendo * Lex Antonia de Termesibus Lex Ap(p)uleia C\c. Balb. 48, de orat. 2.10'7,2.201. Gaius lnsr. 3.122 (5). Vir. ill. 62.2. Leges Apuleiae Cic. leg. 2.14. * Lex Appuleia agraria * Lex * Appuleia de coloniis in Africam deducendis Lex Appuleia de coloniis in Siciliam Achaiam Macedoniam deducendis * Lex Appuleia frumentaria * Lex Appuleia de maiestate minuta * Lex Appuleia de quaestione extraordinaria instituenda * Lex Appuleia (b\s), 9.2.37 pr., 9 .2.37 .1 (bis), 9.2.38 pr., 9.2.39 9.2.51.t, 9.2.5r.2, 9.2.52.2, 9.2.53 pr., 9.2.52.4, 9.2.54 pr. (bis), 9.2.55 pr., 9.2.56 pr.,9.3.5.4, 9.4.2.1 (bis), 9.4.41 pr. (bis), 10.2.1'6.5, 10.3.10 pr., 10.3.10.1, 10.4.17 pr.,11.1.8 pr., 11.3.4 pr., rt.3.r4.7, 12.r.9.t, t2.2.28.6, 13.6.1,1 (bis), 13.6.r8.2, 11.2.52.16, 18.6.14 pr., 19.2.25.5, 19.2.30.2 (bis), 19.2,43 pr., 19.5.11 pr. (bis), 36.r.68.2, 36.r.72.r, 39.2.1.1., 40.12.r3 pr., 42.2.4 pr., 43.15.1.6, 43.24.13 pr., 44.7.24 pt.. 44.1.34 pr. (3), 44.7.34.2 (bis), 44.7.56 pr., 46.r.s6.3, 47.t.1.2, 47.1.2.3 (bis), 47.2.27.3, 47.2.32.1, 47.2.51 pr., 41.6.5 pr., 41.7.1 pr., 4'7.7.5,1, 47.7.11 pr., 41.8.2.10, 41.8.2.20, 47.9.3.7, 4'7.10.1 pr., 41.10.7.1, 47.10.25 pr., 48.1.4 pr., 48,5.6 pr., 48.15.3.1. Gaius lirsr. 3.210, 4.37 , 4.109 Inst. Iust. 3.21.'7, 4.3 r., 4.3 pr., 4.3.11, 4.3.12, 4.3.16, 4,4 pr ., 4.6.19, 4.6.23, 4.6.26, 4.8.4. Isid. orlg. 5.15.2. Paul. sent. 1.13a.6, 2.23a.1, 2.31.23. Lex Aquilia damni (iniuriae) de sponsu . Cic. Brut. l3I. t54 KAJ SANDBERG * Rogatio Aufidia de ambitu Coll. Mos. 2.4.1. Gaius irzsl. 4.9,4.76. Paul. sent.1.19.1. x Lex Aufidia de feris Africae Lex Aurelia Lex Aquilia de damno Ascon. Corn. Cic. Tu\|.9,42. Gaius irsr. 3.202. * Lex (Aquilia) provinciae Asiae data * Lex (Asinia Antistia?) de flaminicia diali Lex Aternia Gell. pr. i1.1, 11.i Lex Atilia Epist. Oct. de Sel., 'Arer.l"ior. : Frg. Sinait. 17 Bob. p.29), Phil. 1.20. Schol. Bob. pp.29,39. x Lex Aurelia (de ambitu?) pr.,Il.l.2. * Lex Aternia Tarpeia de multa * Lex Aria de sacerdotiis ii, Lex Aurelia iudiciaria et sacramento Iines 43 f.: --- v6por 45. senis denis a populo creandis , .3 .33 .pr 17 .7 pr , . , 50 17 .7 .1 .t6.215 pr Lex Aurelia de lege Aurelia de iudiciis privatis abroganda * Lex Aurelia de Iribunicia potestare (Baebia?) agraria * Lex Baebia de coloniis deducendis * Lex Baebia de praetoribus . Rogatio Caecilia C|c. Sull. 62. . * Rogatio Caecilia ut absens Pompeius consul fieret x Lex Caecilia de censura Crc. Verr. 2.1.109. Plebiscitum Atinium x Rogatio Caecilia de poena ambitus p. Sullae et p, Autronio Paeto remittenda Ateius Capito ap. Gell. 14.8.2. * Lex Atinia (o Acilia) de coloniis quinque deducendis * Lex Atinia de tribunis plebis in senatum * Lex Atinia de usucapione Lex Aufeia ORF C. Sempronius Gracchus de iudiciis privatis Lex Caecilia Val. Max. 6.9.10. Leges Atiniae Ps.-Ascon. p.248. x Rogatio Caecilia fr. 44 de provincia Asia de Cn. pompeio ex Asia revocando legendis * Lex Caecilia (de quaestione extraordinaria instituenda)? * Rogatio I 1.10.1). * Rogatio Aufeia * Lex Aurelia * Lex * Lex Atilia Marcia de tribunis militum 17 .7 pp.29,34. Lex Baebia Cato orat. fr. 131 (ap. Fest. p. 356). Liv.40.44.2 * Lex Atilia de dediticiis * Lex Atilia de tutore dando Gell. pr. Schol. Bob. * Gaius insl. 1.185, 1.195, 1.195b. Ulp. reg. 11.18 (bis). Lex Atinia Dig. 4l .3 .4 .6, 4l p.78. Cic. ad Q. fr 1.3.8., orat. deperd. frr. 7 fr. 53 (ap. Ascon. Corn. p. 18), 14 fr. 32 (ap. Schol. (ap. Gell. * Lex Caecilia de revocando Cicerone Caecilia (o Pomponia) de urbe augenda * Lex Caecilia de vectigalibus MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES * Leges (Caeciliae) * Rogatio municipales Cretae datae * Lex Lex Caecilia Didia Cic. Sesr. 135. p. Cassia de plebeis in patricios adlegendis Leges Cassiae tabellariae de suffragiis libere ferendis Ps.-Ascon. p.216. 106. x Lex Caecilia Didia de modo legum Lex Cicereia Gaius lnsl. 3.123 (bis). promulgandarum * Lex Cassia agraria * Lex Cassia de senatu Lex Caecilia et Didia Cic. Arr. 2.9.1, dom. 41, 53, Phil. 5.8. Schol. Bob. * Lex Cicereia Caelia tabellaria x Lex Calidia de Q. Caeciho Metello revocando Lex Cincia Lex Calpurnia Cic. Ascon. tog. cand. p. 88. Cic. Mur. 67, orat. deperd. frr. 7 fr. 24 (ap. Ascon. Corn. p. 69). Gaius insl. 4.19 (bis). Lex repet., l\rrc23: lege CalPulrnia. Schol. Bob. pp. 96 (bis), 97, 105, 146' Sisenna hist. fr. 120 Peter, HRrR. Calpurnia de ambitu Tac. ann. 11.5,13.42. Ulp. reg. praef. 1. Gaius lirsl. I.l5'7 de civitate sociorum * Lex Claudia de legis actione Schol. Bob. * Lex Plebei scitum Canuleium Ctc. rep. 2.63. p. 104. Claudia de praefectis * Lex Claudia Lex Cassia M. de aere alieno filiorum familiarum x Lex Claudia de sociis Canuleia de conubio patrum et plebis de exilio I.l7l. Lex Claudia de exilio Ciceronis de rege Alexandrino Ascon. Corn. p.78 (bis). Cic. amic. 41, leg. 3.35,3.31, orat. deperd. fr. 50 (ap. Ascon. Corn. p.78) (bis). Tac. ann. 11.25. , Rogatio Claudia de bonis Ptolomaei publicandis Schol. Bob. p.95. de rePetundis * Rogatio Caninia * Lex Carvilia 298, 310. Lex Claudia C. Iust. 5.30.3. x Lex Calpurnia de P. Popillio Laenate revocando * Lex Th. 8.t2.4.0. Dig. 1.3.29 pr. Fr g. Vat. 249 . 10, 259, 260 r ., 266 (bis), 293, 294, Cic. senect. 10. Liv . 34.4.9. Ascon. Corn. p. 69. Schol. Bob. p. 123 * Lex Calpurnia Att. 1.20.7. Lex Cincia de donis et muneribus Lex Calpurnia de ambitu * Lex Calpurnia * Lex Calpurnia c. de sponsu Rogatio Cincia Tac. ann. 15.20. Scita Calpurnia Tac. ann. 15.20. * Lex (Acilia) 155 frr. Postumii Pyrgensis 7 x Leges de tutela (Claudiae) de cooptando Leges censoriae Claudianae Plin. nat. 36.4. senatu Halesinorum KAJ SANDBERG 156 * Lex Claudia (Flaminia) de senatoribus Lex Clodia Cic. Arr. 3.23.3, 4.1,6.8, Plin. nat.33.46. Sesr. 69. Suet. Dom. 9.3. * Lex Clodia de capite civis Romani * Lex Clodia de censoria norione * Lex Clodia de collegiis x Lex Clodia de exilio Ciceronis x Lex Clodia frumentaria * Lex Clodia de iniuriis publicis * Lex Clodia de iure et tempore legum rogandarum * Rogatio (?) Clodia de libertinis * Lex Clodia de permutatione provinciarum * Lex Clodia de provinciis consularibus * Lex Clodia * Lex Clodia de rege Deiotaro et Brogitaro de rege Ptolemaeo et de insula Cypro publicanda * Lex Clodia de scribis quaesroriis * Lex Clodia de victoriato Leges Clodianae Mil.89. Schol. Bob. p.93. Cic. Rogatio Clodiana Schol. Bob. p.95. * Lex Cocceia agraria * Lex (?) Cocceia de eunuchis * Lex * Cocceia de nuptiis Rogatio Coelia de mercedibus habitationum annuis * Rogatio Coelia de novis tabulis * Rogatio Coelia de pecuniis creditis Lex Cornelia Apul. met. 8.24. Ps.-Ascon. p.250. Cic. Cluent. 55, 154, fam. 1.9.25, 3.6.3, 3.6.6, 3.10.6, leg. agr. 2.78, 3.12, Rab. Post. 9, Verr. 2.1.123, 2.1.155. CILX 113, line 4: rtrryir leg(e) Cor(nelia). AL X 114 : ILS 6469, line 3: rrrrvir teg(e) Cor(nelia). C. Iusr. 2.53.5, 4.21.2,6.58.8, 8.50.1.1, 8.50.9, 9 .1 .5, 9.22.8, 9.23.t, 9.23.3, 9 .23 .4, 9.23.5. Coll. Mos. 1.2.1, 7.3.3, 8.4.1, 8.7.1, 8.7.3, t2.5.t. Dig. 3.3.42.t, 4.3.9.2, 9.2.23.9, 11.5.3 pr., 28.1.r2 pr., 28.3.6.12, 28.6.28 pr. (3), 28.6.29 pr., 29.1.39 pr., 29.5.25 pr., 34.8. I pr., 35.2.1.1, 35.2.18 pr., 38.2.4.1, 38.16.1 pr., 40.1.8.2., 41.3.15 pr., 47.10.5.pr. (bis), 47.10.5.5, 41.10.5.6 (bis), a7. 10.5.7, 47.10.7.r, 41.11.6.1, 47 .13.2pr., 48.2.11.2, 48.5.33 pr., 48.8.3.5, 48.8.4.2 (bi$, 48.8.7 pr., 48.8.12 pr., 48.10.1 pr., 48.10.1.2, 48.10.1.5, 48.10.1.7, 48.10.2 pr., 48.10.6 pr., 48.10.9 pr., 48.10.9.3, 48.10.15 pr. (bis), 48.10.15.4, 48.10.t5.6, 48.10.16.1, 48.10.25 pr., pr., 15 pr., 10.33 48. 19. 49. 15. 10.1, .t5 .10 .4, 49 .15 .11 .I , 49 .15 .12.1 , 49 .15 .22 pr . , 49.15.22.1 (bis), 49.15.22.4, 49.17 .14.pr. Gaius irsr. 1.128, 3.124, 3.125. Hyginus Gromaticus, const. limit. p. 134. 48. 49 /GRR IV 1188 : TAM 5.2 856: ... rccrrd töv Kopvr1,tr"rov v6piov. ILS 6468, hne 4'. rrrrvir leg(e) Cor(nelia). Inst. Iust. 2.12.5, 4.4.8. OGIS 458: öv rQ Kopvr1.tr.ior v6por. Pa:ul. sent. 3.4a.8, 4.7 r., 4.7.2, 5.4.8, 5.25.7 . Schol. Bob. p.96. Sen. contr. 3.9 pr. Sen. dial. 7.3.8. Sherk, RDGE 65, D 82: öv tQ KpvrlÄi<,1v6pr<or. Suet. Aug. 33.2. Tac. ann. 14.40 Ulp. reg. 23.5. Leges Corneliae Cic. leg. agr. 3.6,3.8, Phil Isid. orig. 5. 15. 1 . Suet. /rzl. 1 1.1. * Lex (?) Cornelia agraria Verr. 2.2.77 . t57 MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES * Lex * Lex Cornelia de aleatoribus Cornelia de adulteriis et de pudicitia * Lex Cornelia de ambitu? * Rogatio * Lex Cornelia de ambitu Cornelia de civitate Volaterranis adimenda x Rogatio Cornelia ne quis legatis exterarum nationum pecuniam expensam ferret? Lex Cornelia nummaria Cic. Verr. 2.1.108. * Lex Cornelia de pecunia quam Sulla bonorum emptoribus remiserat exigenda Lex Cornelia de confirmandis eorum testamentis, * Lex Cornelia de peculatu'? qui in hostium potestate decessissent * Lex Cornelia de praetoribus octo creandis Dig. 28.3.15 pr. * Lex Cornelia * Lex Cornelia de exilio Marianorum de exulibus revocandis Lex Cornelia de falsis C. c. Dig. 48.10 r., 48.10.1.4. * Lex 4 .7 . .l , 5 .25 .11 . Cornelia frumentaria? * Rogatio Cornelia de idibus Martiis Lex Cornelia iniuriarum Dig. 41 .10.37.1. Lex Cornelia de iniuriis Dig. 47 .10.5.pr., 48.5.23.3. * Lex Cornelia iudiciaria * Lex Cornelia de iurisdictione x Lex Cornelia de legibus solvendo * Lex (?) Cornelia de ludis Victoriae instituendis * Lex Cornelia de magistratibus Lex Cornelia de maiestate Ascon. Corn. p. 59. Lex Cornelia maiestatis Ascon. Corn. p. 62. Cic. Pis. 50. * * Lex Cornelia de provinciis ordinandis * Lex Th. 9.19 r. Paul. sent . Cic. Rosc. 125. x Lex Cornelia de provincia SYria |ust.9.16r.,9.22r. Inst. IusL 4.18.1 Lex Cornelia de proscriptione Rogatio Cornelia de mercedibus habitationum (Cornelia) Puteolanis data * Lex Cornelia * Lex Cornelia de quaestoribus XX creandis de reditu Cn. PomPet * Lex Cornelia de repetundis * Lex Cornelia de sacerdotis * Leges (Corneliae) de senatu Agrigentinorum cooptando Lex Cornelia de sicariis C. lust. 9.1.11, 9.16.5, 9.16.6. Coll. Mos. 1.3.1, 4.9.1. C. Th.9.I4 r. Dig. 47.9.3.8, 48.5.39.8, 48.8.4 pr., 48.9.1 pr' Inst. Iust. 4.18.5, 4.18.6. Sen. apocol. 14.1 . Lex Cornelia de sicariis et veneficis Cott. Mos. 1.2.1., 1.8.1, 2.'7.1, 3.2.1, 7 '2.1, 8.4. 1 . Dig. 48.8r., 48.8.1 pr., 48.8.3 pr., 48.8'3.5. Paul. senl. 5.23 r. * Lex Cornelia de sponsu Lex Cornelia sumptuaria Macr. Scl. 3.17 .ll. annuis et de novis tabulis * Lex Cornelia * Lex Cornelia (municipalis Petelinis data?) Lex Cornelia testamentaria * Lex (Corneha) municipalis Cypro data de supplendo senatu et de censura? Ps.-Ascon. p.248. 158 KAJ SANDBERG Cic. Verr. 2.1.108. C. Iusr. 9.3i.1.1. Coll. Mos. 8.2. i, 8.5.1, 8.7.1. 9.20.5, 9.20.9, 9.31.1.2. Dig. 43.5.3.6,48.2.2 pr, 48.10.30 pr. Inst. Iust. 4.18.i. Paul. sent. 5.25 r., 5.25.1. 14.3.3,14.3.4. C. Th. 9.18.t, 9.20.1. Dig. 10.3.19.4, lt.4.1.2, 40.1.12 pr., 43.29.3.pr. (3), 4t .2.83.3, 48. 15.2pr., 48. 15. 3 pr., 48. I 5.3. 1, c. Th.9.20.r. * Lex Cornelia * Lex Cornelia * Lex Cornelia * Lex Cornelia de tribunicia potestate de vi? Baebia de ambitu Caecilia de revocando Cicerone x Lex Cornelia Caecilia de cura annonae Cn. Pompeio mandanda x Lex (Cornelia Fulvia) de ambitu C. Iust. 9.20 r., 9.20.1, 9.20.2, 9.20.3, g.20.4, Coll. Mos. 14.2.1 (bis), 14.3.1 (bis), 49.15.12.16 (lex Favia). Paul. sent.2.31.3t,5.6.14 (bis), 5.30b r., 5.30b.1. Lex Fabia de numero sectatorum Cic. Mur. 71. Lex Fabia de plagiariis Inst. |ust.4.18.10. * Lex Fabia Ogulnia? Lex Fabiana * Lex Cornelia Pompeia de comitiis centuriatis Paul. sent. 3.3 r. * Lex Cornelia Pompeia de tribunicia potestate * Rogatio Fabricia de revocando Cicerone x Lex Cornelia Pompeia unciaria Lex Falcidia Lex Crepereia C. Iust. 1.3.48 pr., 1.3.48.2 (bis), Gaius insr. 4.95. * Lex Crepereia de summa sponsionis * Lex Decia de duumviris navalibus x Lex Decia (?) de permutatione provinciarum Lex Didia sumptuaria Macr. Scl.3.1'1.6. Lex Domitia Cic. ad Brut. 13.3. * Lex Domitia de sacerdotis x Lex Duilia de consulibus restituendis * Lex Duilia de impunitate? * Lex Duilia de provocatione * Lex Duilia Menenia de unciario fenore * Lex Duronia de lege Licinia sumptuaria abroganda Lex Fabia Cic. Rab. perd. CIL XI 419 : ILS 6663, Iine 10: tegis Falc(idiae). 1.3.48.4, 1.3.48.6, 1.3.48.'t, l.li .2.6a, 3.28.31, 3.28.36.1 (bis), 3.28.36.La, 3.36.10, 3.36.21, 5.13.1.8, 6.21.12, 6.30.22.4, 6.30.22.14c, 6.37.t5.1, 6.39.3, 6.47.2 pr., 6.47.2.2, 6.49.6.1, 6.50 r., 6.50.1, 6.50.2, 6.50.3, 6.50.4, 6.50.5, 6.50.6, 6.50.7, 6.50.8, 6.50.10, 6.50. t 1 (bis), 6.50.12, 6.50.16, 6.50.1'7 , 6.50.18 (3), 6.50.18.1 (bis), 6.50.19, 8.3.1 pr. Dig. 2.8.8.4, 4.3.23 pr., 6.1.'76.1, 7.1.5 pr., 10.3.8.1,22.1.3 pr., 22.3.lj pr. (bis), 22.6.g.5 (3), 22.6.9.6, 23.2.7 pr., 29.1.17.4, 29.4.18.1, 29.6.2.2, 29.1 .2.4,30. t. 1 I pr., 30. 1.81.4, 30.r.g7 pr., 30.1.125 pr., 31.1.6pr., 31 .1.53.2,31.t,76.1. 31.1.87.4 (bis), 31. 1.88. 12, 33.1.21.1, 33.4.1.12. 33.4.7.2, 34.5.18.1, 34.9.23 pr., 35.1.43.3, 35.2.t.,35.2.1 pr. (bis), 35.2.1.1 (bis), 35.2.1.3. 35.2.1.6, 35.2.1.8, 35.2.1.11, 35.2.1.12 (bis), 35.2. 1. 15, 35 .2.3 pr., 35.2.3.2, 35.2.j pr., 35 .2.8 pr., 35.2.1i pr., 35.2.11.7, 35.2.12 pr., 35.2.13 pr., 35.2.14.1, 35.2.t5.6, 35.2.15.8, 35.2.18 pr., 35.2.24 8. 14.3.2, pr., 35.2.24.2, 35.2.25 pr., 35.2.26 pr. (bis), 35.2.2j 35.2.25.1, pr., 35.2.28 pr., 35.2.30 pr., 35.2.30.1 (bis), 3s.2.30.2 (bis), 35.2.30.4, MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 3s.2.30.5, 35.2.30.7, 35.2.30.8, 35.2.30.9, 35.2.31 pr. (bis), 35.2.32.2,35'2.32'4 (3)' 35.2.36.4, 35.2.40 pr., 35.2.45 pr., 35 2.45'1, 35.2.41.pr. (bis), 35.2.4'7.1, 35.2.49 pr. (5), 35.2.52.1, 35.2.53 pr., 35.2.54 pr', 35.2.55 pr.' 35.2.56 pr. (bis), 35.2.56.4, 35.2.56'5, 35'2.s7 pr., 35.2.58 pr.,35.2.59 pr.,35-2.60 pr. (3), 35.2.61pr. (3), 35.2.62 pt., 35.2.64 pt', 35'2.66 pr., 35.2.67.pr. (bis), 35.2.71 pt., 35.2'73.2' 35.2.15 pr., 35.2.77 pr. (bis), 35.2.78 pr. (bis), 35.2.80.pr. (bis), 35.2.81 pr. (bis), 35.2.81.2' 35.2.82pr. (bis), 35.2.83pr',35'2 84 pr., 35.2'86 pr. (bis), 35.2.87.pr., 35.2.87.1, 35.2.87 '2, 35.2.87.3, 35.2.81.4, 35.2.8',7.6, 35.2.87.7 (bis), 3s.2.8'7.8 (4), 3s.2.88 pr' (3), 3s.2.88'2, 35.2.88.3, 35.2.89.t, 35.2.90 pr. (bis), 35.2.91 pr., 35 .2.94 pr., 35 .2.95 . 1, 35.2.95.2, 35'2.96 pr., 35.3 r., 35.3.1.pr. (bis), 35.3'1 1, 35.3.1'6' 35.3.1.'7, 35.3.1.8, 35.3.1.9, 35.3.1.i1 (bis), 35.3.1.14 (bis), 35.3.3.1., 35.3.3.2 (bis)' 36.1.2 pr., 36. 1.3.1, 36.1.28.10, 36.r.28'16, 36.1.29 2, 36.i.30 pr., 36.1.46.1, 36.1'53 pr.' 36.1.65.11' 36.1.68 pr., 37.5.5 pr., 37.5.5.1, 38.2'26 pt., 40.5.22 pr., 43.3.r.5, 44.4.5.1, 46.3.105 pr'' 50.8.6 pr. (bis). Dio Cass. 48.33.5: o v6poq o Öct.hciöroq. Frg. Vat. 68 (bis), 281 (bis). Fronto ep. ad Ant . 2.1. Gaius irsl. 2.224,2.227 , 2,254. Gaius insr. epit. 2.6 r.,2.6.L Inst. Iust. 2.11.3, 2.22 r., 2 22 pr. (bis), 2.22.1, 2.22.2, 2.22.3. 2.23.5. 4.6.33. Isid. orig. 5.15.2. Nov. r.2, 1.1.2, 1.2 pt. (bis), 1.2.1 (b\s)' 1.2'2 (3),66 pr.,92 pr.1, 108.1, 119'11, 131 .l2pr. Paul. sent. 3.8 r., 3.8.1, 4.3.3, 4.5.5. P. Cairo Masp. I 67097v D, line 71. P. Cairo Masp. lll 67312r,line 93. P. Cairo Masp.II 67353v,lines 14, 35. tJIp . reg , 24 .32, 25 . 14 (bis) . * Lex Falcidia de legatis Lex Fannia Athen. 6.108: töv Q&viov ... v6Pov' Gell. 2.24 .3 , 2.24 .5 . Macr. Sa/. 3.17 .3, 3.17.5, 3. 17'6 (bis). ORF C. Titius 159 fr. 2 (ap. Macr. Sar.3.16.14). Sammonicus Serenus ap. Macr. Sat.3.l1 .4. x Lex Fannia cibaria Lex Fannia sumptuaria Ge|l. 20.1.23. * Lex Flaminia de agro Piceno et Gallico viritim dividendo Lex Flaminia minus solvendi Fest. p. 470: \ ... lege Fla)minia minus solvendi. Lex Flavia AE 1983 no. 188. line 3. * Rogatio Flavia agraria x Lex Flavia de consulatibus abrogandis? * Lex Flavia municipalis Malacae data * Lex Flavia municipalis Salpensae data Rogatio Flavia de Tusculanis Liv.8.37.8. Lex Fufia Ascon. Pis. p. 8. Cic. Att.1.16.13, 4.16.5,har. resp.58, Pis. 9, i0' p. red. in sen. ll, prov. cons. 46, Sest.33, Vatin. 5, 18 (bis), 23,31. PauL sent. 4.14.l. Schol. Bob. p. 119. * Lex Fufia iudiciaria * Lex Fufia de modo legum * Lex Fufia ferendarum de religione Lex Fufia Caninia C. Iust.7.3 r.,7.3.1. Dig. 35.1.37 pr., 50. 16.215 Pr. Gaius lnsr. 1 .42, L .46, I .139 , 2.228 , 2.239 Inst. Iust. 1.7 r.,1.1 Pr. Paul. sent. 4.14 r., 4.14.3, 4.14.4. P. Hamb. I 72, line 6. Ulp. reg. 1.24. * Lex Fufia Caninia de manumissionibus * Rogatio Fulvia de civitate sociis danda * Rogatio Fulvia de provocatione . KAJ SANDBERG r60 * Lex Gabinia Lex Furia Frg. Vat.301. Gaius jnsr. 2.225, 3. 121, 3. l2l, 3. lZla, 3. 122 (3), 4.109. Inst. Iust. 2.22 pr. * Lex Gellia Cornelia de civitate * Lex Genucia de feneratione Leges Furiae Cic. Verr.2.l.),09. Lex Glitia Dig. 5.2.4 pr. * Lex Furia de aedilibus curulibus? * Leges (Furiae) Campanis datae Leges Gracchanae Flor. 2 ind.,2.1 r.,2,4,2.5. Vell. Pat. 2.13.2. Lex Furia de sponsu Garus inst. 4.22. * Lex Helvia de magistratu C. Epidio Marullo et L. Lex Furia testamentaria Gaius lnsl. 4.23,4.24. Ulp. reg. praef . 2. Caesetio Flavo abrogando * * Lex Furia Atilia de C. Hostilio Mancino Numantinis dedendo Cic. ad Q.fr.213.3, amic. 41, Att.5.21.12 (bis), 6.2.1, Manil. 54, 58. Lex de Delo,line 16: lege Galblinia. ORf Q. Lutatius Catulus iun. fr. 6. Sall. ftisr. 5 fr. 13 (ap. Prisc. 18.4). Rogatio Herennia Caesare de P. Clodio ad plebem CIL 12 604 Hirtia. : * Lcx Hirtia Lex Horatia Gell. 7.7.2 (bis). * Lex Horatia de Taracia virgine Lex Hortensia de coitionibus? Dig. r.2.2.8. * Rogatio Gabinia de consulatu C. Calpurnio Pisoni abrogando L. Trebellio abrogando de provinciis consularibus (de bello Mithridatico) Gabinia de senatu legatis dando Lex Gabinia tabellaria de i, line 8: l---lrog(???S de Pompeianis de bello piratico Rogatio Gabinia de magistratu RS 26, col Liv.3.55.11. Rogatio Gabinia Schol. Bob. p.40. mandandis Cic. leg. 3.35. * Crc. Phil. 13.32 (bis). Lex Gabinia * Lex a C. ducendis Lex Hirtia Cic. Verr. 2.1.109. * Lex Gabinia Rogatio (?) Helvia de uxoribus traducendo Leges Fusiae * Lex Gellia et Cornelia Cic. Balb. 32. U|p. reg. 28.7. * Lex Gabinia * Lex Gabinia de versura Romae provincialibus non facienda magistratibus Gaius insr. 1.3. Inst. Iust. 1,2.4. Macr. Sat. 1.16.30. * Lex Hortensia de plebiscitis Lex Hostilia Inst. Iust.4.l0 pr. * Lex Hostilia de actione furti * Rogatio Icilia agraria Lex lcilia de Aventino Liv. 3.32.7 . vestali MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES x Lex Icilia de secessione Tac. ann. 2.50,4.42. Ulp . reg. 13 .1 , 14 .\ , 22.3 x Lex Icilia de tribunicia potestate * Lex Icilia Cic. Att. 2.18.2, har. resp. 48, prov. cons. 45. Dig.43.t6.1.2. Dio Cass. 38.7.6: töv v6pcov sötoO ... 'Iou,liov Apul. met. 6.22. Ascon. Scaur. p. 20. Bellum Africum 87 .3. önrl<a),oup6vcov. Gaius irzst. 4.30. Caes. civ. 1.14.4. Cic. Att. 5.10.2, 5.16.3, 5.21.5, 6.7.2, 15.11.4, Balb. 21, fam. 2.11.2, 5.20.2, Phil. 1'20, 3'38, 5.53, Pis. 90, Rab. Post. 8. CIL12 709 1l,S 8888, line 3. : 2193 : ILS 4966,line 6. C. Iust. 5.4.21 (lege Iulia vel Papia), 5.13.1.15c, 5.23.r, 6.6t.5.t, 1.7.t.4, 9.9.1, 9.9.4 pr., V 9.t2.8.1, 9. 13. 1.5, 9.46.6. Coll. Mos. 16.3.4. C. Th.4.20 r.,9.10.4. Dig. 4.2.8 pr., 4.8.9.2, 4.8.41 pr., 23.2.19 pr., 23.2.44 pr., 23.5.3.1, 23.5.13.1, 23.5.16 pr., 29.1.16 pr., 29.2.80 pr., 30.1.96.1, 3l.l'77,5, 40.9.15 pr., 41.3.33.2, 48.5.2 pt., 48.5.12.13' 48.5.26 pr., 48.5.30.6 (bis), 48.5.34'1, 48'5.37 pr., 48.1.1 pr., 48.10.14.2, 48.13.11.6, 48.19.32 pr. Epist. Oct. Sel., ii, line 44 v6ponl 'Iouli[cor. Frg. Sinait.5 (8): --- [v6pq^r] iulio er --- Frg. Vat. 214,216. Gaius lrusr. 1.145, 2.45, 2.63, 2.110, 2.Ill, 2'286' 3.78,4.r04. Gell. pr. 2.15, 2.15 pr., 2.15.4, 2.24.14, 4.4.3' 14.2.t. Grom. (De sepulchris) P. 212. Hyg. grom. limit. p. 169. Inst. Iust. 4.18.4. Lw.2.37, 6.38. Lex col. Gen., xcvii. Lib. col. pp. 210, 213, 220, 231, 233,259 (bis), 260 (3). Mart. ep. 6.7 .1, 6.22.3. Paul. sent. 2.26.3, 4.8.4, 5.26.2. PIin. epist. Schol. Bob. p. 139. Serv . Aen. 4.33 . Suet. /u/. 81.1, Aug. 4.2, Ner. 33.2. 6 .31 .6 . . Leges luliae de triumpho consulum Lex Iulia AL 161 Isid. or1g.5.15.1. PIin. pan. 42.1. Schol. Bob. pp.95, l2l. Tac. ann. 15.20. * Lex Iulia de absentibus? x Lex Iulia de actis Cn. Pompei confirmandis Lex lulia de adulter(i)is C. Iusr.9.9 r.,9.9.10. Coll. Mos. 4.2.2, 4.5.1, 4.12.L c. Th. 9.7 r. Dig. 1.21.1 pr., 3.2.2.3,22.5.18 pr.,23.2.43 13, 25.7.1.2, 28.1.20.6, 38.11.1.1, 48.2.3 pr., 48.5.2.2,48.5.6.pr., 48.5. pr., 48.5.20 pr., 16. 1, 48.5.26 48.5. 16.6, 48'5. 18 pr., 48.5.40 pr., 48.6.5.2, 48. 18.4.pr., 50. 16. 101. 1. Paul. sent. 2.21b.2, 2.26.1, 2.26.15. Lex Iulia de adulteriis co(h)ercendis C. Iust. 9 .9 .3 , 9 .9 .17 Coll. Mos. 4.2.1, 14.3.3. Dig. 4.4.31.1,48.5 r., 48.5.5 pr., 48.5.43 pr. . Inst. Iust. 4.18.4. Prob. litt. sing. 3.9: L.l.D.A.C. lex lulia de adulteriis cohercendis. * Lex Iulia agraria (AD 37-41) * Lex Iulia agraria Campana (?) Lex Iulia agraria de XXviris creandis SchoL. Bob. p. 139. * Lex Iulia de agris adsignandis et deducendis * Lex Iulia de agris Massiliensium? Lex Iulia de ambitu C. Iust. 9.26 r. C. Th. 9.26 r. coloniis 162 KAJ SANDBERG * Lex Lex Iulia ambitus C. Iusr. 9.26.1.1. Inst. Iust. 4.18.I i. Paul. sent.5.30a r. Lex Iulia de annona Dig. 48 .12 r . , 48 .12.2 Inst. lust.4.18.11. (?) Iulia de magistratibus * Lex Iulia de maiestate pr Lex Iulia maiestatis C. Iust. 9.8 r., 9.8.6.1. C. Th. 9.5 r. Dig. 48.4 r., 48.4.3.pr., 48.4.6 pr., 4g.4.11 pr, . (bis). * Lex (?) Iulia de censu agendo * Lex Iulia de cessione bonorum Inst. lust.4.18.3. Paul. sent. 5.29 r., 5.29.1. * Lex Iulia de civitate Gaditanorum * Lex Iulia de civitate Latinis (et sociis) Lex Iulia de maritandis ordinibus Apul. apol. 88. C. Iust. 6.3.7.1. * Lex Iulia de civitate Siculis danda Dig. 37 .14.6.4, 38. 1 1. 1. 1. Frg. Vat. 197. Gaius insl. 1.178. P. Mich. VII434,line 1: secundum legem lulialm quae de maritandis ordinibus latfa est. P. Ryl. Mlz, lines 1 f .: e lege lulia lquae de danda x Lex Iulia de collegiis * Rogatio Iulia de cura Capitolii restituendi Lex Iulia de dotali praedio Dig. 23.5.4 pr. x Lex Iulia de exulibus revocandis maritandis ordinibus lata est. Ulp. reg. 11.20. * Lex Iulia frumentaria x Lex Iulia de mercedibus habitationum annuis Lex Iulia fundi dotalis C. Iust. 5.13.1.15 Lex Iulia miscella C. Iust. 6.40 r., 6.40.2 pt., 6.40.2.2, 6.40.3 pr., Lex Iulia de fundo dotali 6.40 .3 .r , 6.40 .3 .2 Di7.23.5.1pr. * Lex Iulia de modo aedificiorum urbis? x Lex Iulia de insula Creta * Lex Iulia iudiciaria Italiam Dig. 48.r4.1.4. Lex Iulia municipalis CILV 2864 : ILS 5406. Gaius insl. 4.104. Sherk, RDGE 31, lines ll7 f .: v6p<or örrcaonrör. Lex Iulia de iudiciis privatis Lex lrn., cap. lxxxxi, lines 53 f. 'Iou.tr.i<or rör . Lex Iulia de modo credendi possidendique intra Lex Iulia peculatus C. Iust. 9.28.1. Dig. 48.13.1 pr., 48.13.4 pr., 48.13.10 pr. Inst. Iust.4.l8.9. Lex Iulia iudiciorum Paul. sent. 5.21 r. Di7.5.t.2.1. * Lex Iulia iudiciorum privarorum Lex Iulia peculatus et de sacrilegis Dig. 48.13 r. Lex Iulia iudiciorum publicorum x Lex Iulia de pecuniis mutuis Dig. 22.5.4 pr., 48.2.12.2. * Lex (?) Iulia de legationibus liberis Lex Iulia de pecuniis repetundis Cic. Pis. 50, Rab. Post. t2. Schol. Bob. p. 106. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES * Lex (?) Iulia de portoriis mercium peregrinarum * Lex Iulia de praetoribus decem creandis (: de 163 Lex lulia theatralis Plin. nat. 33.32. magistratibus) x Lex Iulia de tutela Lex lulia privatorum * Lex Iulia de vectigalibus Dig. 48.19.32.pr. * Lex Iulia de provinciis Lex lulia de vi C. Iust. 9.12.3, 9.31. 1. 1. * Lex Iulia de publicanis Lex Iulia publicorum Dig. 47.15.3.1, 48.2.3 pr., 48.19.32.pr. Lex Iulia de vi privata C. Iust. 9.12 r., 9.12.2, 9.1,2.4.1. Lex Iulia de pudicitia C. Iust. 9.9.8,9.9.9. * Lex Iulia de rege Alexandrino * Lex Iuiia de rege Deiotaro * Lex Iulia de re pecuaria Lex Iulia repetundarum C. Iust. 9.27 r. C. Th. 9.27 r. Dig. 1.9.2 pr., 1.16.10.1,22.5.13 pr., 48.11 r., 48.11.1.pr., 48.11.3 pr., 48.11.6.2, 50.5.3 pr. Inst. [usl 4.18.11. Paul. sent, 5 .28 r. Lex Iulia de repetundis Dig. 48 . ll .7 .pr 48. 13.5 pr. Inst. lust.4.18.11. Lex Iulia de sacerdotiis Cic. ad Brut, 13.3. * Lex Iulia de sacerdotiis * Lex (?) Iulia de senatu * Lex Iulia de servis indicibus Lex Iulia de stupro C. Iust.9.9 r, * Lex Iulia de suffragiis in iudiciis * Lex Iulia sumptuaria * Lex Iulia sumptuaria C. Th. 9.10 r. Coll. Mos.9.2.1. Dig. 47 .8.2.1 , 48 .2.12.4, 48.7 r . , 48 .7 .l .l pr. Paul. sent. 5.26 r., 5.26.3, , 48 .1 .4 5.26.4. Lex Iulia de vi publica C. Iust. 9.12 r. c. Th.9.t0 r. Coll. Mos.9.2.1. Dig. 47.12.8 pr. , 48.6 r., 48.6.1 pr., 48.6.7 pr., 48.6.8 pr. , 48.6. 12 pr . , 48 .7 .6 pr . Inst. Iust. 4. 18.8 (bis). Paul. sent. 5.26 r., 5.26.1. Lex lulia vis privatae C. Iust. 8.4.4,9.12.5. . Lex Iulia de residuis Dig. 48.13 r., 48.13.2 pr., c. Th.9.20.t. Dig. 1,21.1 pr., 22.5.3.5, 22.5.13 pr., 48.2.3.4. * Lex Iulia de vicesima hereditatum * Lex Iulia de viis urbis Romae tuendis et purgandis? Lex Iulia et Papia c. Th. 13.5.7.0. Dig. 1.3.28 pr., 1.3.31 pr., 1.5.25 pr., 1.6.10 pr., 1.7.45 pr.,1.7.46 pr., 1.9.5 pr., 1.9.6 pr., 1.9.7 pr., 1.16.14 pr., 4.4.2 pr., 4.6.35 pr., 4.6.36 pr., 4.6.37 pr., 4.6,38 pr., 7.7.5 pr., 8.1 .7 pr., 12.4.12 pr., 22.3.16 pr., 22.5.4 pr., 22.5 .5 pr., 22.6.5 pr., 22.6.6 pr., 23.1.16 pr., 23.1.17 pr., 23.2.21 pr., 23 .2.2'7 pr ., 23 .2.29 pr., 23 .2.30 pr., 23 .2.3 1 pr., 23.2.32 23.2.45 23.2.49 24.2.11 pr., 23.2.33 pr., 23.2.43 pr.,23.2.44 pr., pr., 23.2.46 pr., 23.2.47 pr., 23.2.48 pr., pr., 23.2.50 pr., 23.3.61pr., 24.1.25 pr., pr., 24.3 .63 pr., 24.3.64 pr., 25.3.8 pr., 25.7.1 pr., 25.7.2 pr., 26.5.4 pr., 21.1.18 pr., t64 KAJ SANDBERG 28.2.22 pr., 28.5.'72 pr., 28.5.73 pr., 28.5.7 4 28.6.5 pr., 28.6.6 pr., 29.2.53 pr., 29.2.68 29.2.79 pr., 29.2.81 pr.,29.2.82 pr.,29.2.83 29.3.10 pr., 29.3.1 I pr., 29.3. 12 pr., 29.7 .20 pr., pr., pr., pr., pr., 31.1.49 pr., 31.1.51 pr., 31.1.52pr., 3L1.53 pr., 31.1.54 pr., 31.1.55 pr., 31.1.56 pr., 31.1.57 pr., 31.1.58 pr., 31.1.59 pr., 31.1.60 pr., 31.1.61 pr.,32.1.87 pr., 32.1.88 pr.,32.1.89 pr., 32.L90 pr., 33.1.8 pr. , 33.2.21pr., 33.2.22 pr., 33.2.23 pr., 33.5.16 pr., 33.5.17 pr.,34.3.21pr., 34.3.29 pr.,34.4.6 pr.,34.5.23 pr., 34.8.4 pr., 34.9.9 pr.,34.9.10 pr., 35.1.59 pr., 35.1.60 pr., 35. 1.61 pr., 35. 1.62 pr., 35.1.63 pr., 35. 1.64 pr., 35.1.69 pr., 35.2.62 pr., 35 .2.63 pr., 35 .2.64 pr., 35.2.65 pr.,35.2.66 pr., 35.2.67 pr.,35.3.7 pr., 36.2.23 pr., 36.2.24 pr., 37.1.4 pr., 3'7.14.10 pr., 30.1.29 . , 37 .14 .14 pr . , 37 .14 .15 pr. , 37 .14 .16 .14.17 pr., 38. 1. 14 pr., 38. 1.35 pr., 38. 1.36 pr., 38. 1.37 pr., 38.2.37 pr., 38.2.38 pr., 38.2.39 pr., 38.2.40pr., 38.4.10 pr., 38.5.13 pr., 38.10.6 pr., 38.16.i3 pr., 38.16.14 pr., 39.6.35 pr., 37 .14 .11 pr pr., 37 39.6.36 pr., 39.6.37 pr., 39.6.38 pr. , 40. 1. 18 pr., 40.6.1pr., 40.7.31pr., 40.9.24 pr., 40.9.31 pr., 40.9.32 pr., 40.10.4 pr., 40.10.5 pr., 40.10.6 pr., 40.16.4 pr., 41.5.4 pr., 42.5.29 pr., 48.8.15 pr., 48.19 .29 pr . , 49 .14 .13 pr . , 49 .14.74 pr . , 49 .14 .15 pr., 49. 14. 16 pr., 49. 15.8 pr., 49.1 5. 9 pr., 49. 17 .3 pr., 50.15.7 pr., 50.16.128 pr., 50.16.129 pr., 50.16.130 pr., 50.16.131 pr., 50.16.132 pr., 50.16.133 pr., 50.16.134 pr.,50.16.135 pr., 50.16.136 pr., 50.16.137 pr., 50.16.138 pr., 50.16.139 pr., 50.16.140 pr., 50.16.141 pr., 50.16.142 pr.,50.16.143 pr., 50.16.144 pr., 50.16.145 pr., 50.16.146 pr.,50.16.147 pr., 50.16.148 pr., 50.16.149 pr., 50.16.150 pr., 50.16.151 pr., 50.16.152 pr., 50.16.153 pr., 50.17 .201 pr. , 50. 17 .208 pr. , 50. 17 .209 pr. Frg. Vat. 158. Ulp. reg. 16.2: contra legem luliam Papiamque. * Lex Iulia Lex lulia Titia CPL 200,line 3. P. Ory. lY 720,line 5. 'Io6Årov Tirrov. CPL 200,line 12; e lelge lulia e(t) Tiria. CPL 202 : SB III 6223, A. int., lines 3 f .: e lege Iulia et I Ti(ri)a, B. ext., lines 28 f. Gaius insl. 1.185, 1.195, 1.195b. Inst. Iust. 1.20 pr. P. Oxy.lY 720,lines 14 f .: e leg(e) Iul(ia) et lTitia P. Oxy.XII 1466,line 1: 1... e lege lulia et Titia ...], line 5: rcsr& v6pov 'Iorl.trlov r<[ai Tinov. PP 6 (1951),228 no. 13: ex lege lulia et Titia. Lex lunia C. Iust. 1 .6.1 .la, 1 .6 .1 .12a. Gaius insr. 1.22, 1.23, 1.167, 2.2'75,3.56 (bis), 3.57, 3.70 (bis). Inst. Iust. 3.7.4 (bis). Lex repet., line23. Ulp. reg. 1.10, 3.3, 11.16, 11.19,20.14,22.3, 22.r9. Lex lunia de feneratione Cato orat. 4 fr. 56 (ap. Fest. p. 268). * Lex Iunia de colonia * Lex Iunia militaris Capuam deducenda * Lex Iunia de peregrinis * Lex Iunia de repetundis * Lex Iunia de Tarquiniis exilio multandis * Lex Iunia Licinia de legum latione Lex lunia et Licinia Cic. Au. 2.9.1, 4.16.5, Phil. 5.8. Lex Iunia Norbana Inst. Iust. 1.5.3. * Lex Iunia (Norbana) de manumissionibus Lex lunia Petronia Dig. 40.1.24 pr. Lex lunia Vell(a)ea Dig. 26 .2.10 .2, 28 .3 .t3 Papiria de multarum aestimatione P. Ory.XXXIV 2710, lines 5 f.: xcrd v6pov Lex Iulia et Titia pr . Gaius irst. 2.134. Inst. Iust. 2.13.2. * Lex Iunia Vellaea I * Rogatio testamentaria Iuventia de bello Rhodiis indicendo MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES * Rogatio Laelia agraria Cic. Vatin.33. Schol. Bob. Lex Laetoria Lex Licin(n)ia .12 pr. Fest. p. 47. p.67). Gaius inst.4.11a. * Garus/rr. Aeg. et Oryrh. 4.17. fr.23 (ap. GeL|.2.24.9). Liv. 7.21.1, 7.21.3, 7.2r.4, 7.22.10, A. Manho imperio * Lex Licinia Sextia de aere alieno Laevius carm. 7.25.2, 10.1.2. x Lex Licinia Sextia de consule plebeio x Lex Licinia Sextia de decemviris sacris faciundis Macr. Srzl. 3.17 .7 , 3.17 .9. I fr. 20. * Lex Licinia Sextia de modo Schol. Bob. pp. t25, 136 (3), l3'7. Veil. Pat. 2.6.3. * Lex Licinia de actione communi * Lex Licinia de ambitu? Rogatio Licinia Papiria de abrogando GelI. 2.24.1 , 2.24.9. Sa]l. åisl. 106. Lex Licinia et Mucia de civibus redigundis Cic. orat. deperd. frr.7 fr 21 (ap. Ascon. Corn. Cic. dom. 51, fam. 8.2.\, leg. agr. 2.21. 4.1 p. Lex Licinia et Mucia Cic. Balb. 48,54, Brut. 63. See Lex Plaetoria. Dig. 165 agrorum Lex Livia dividundo * Lex Licinia de ludis apollinaribus * Lex Licinia de magistratibus extraordinariis Lex Licinia de quingentis iugeribus Liv. 34.4.9. Lex agr., line 71 ,line 8l : ex l(ege) Livia. Leges Liviae Ascon. Corn. p. 68. Cic. leg. 2.l4, leg. 2.31, orat. deperd. (ap. Ascon. Corn. p. 68). * Rogatio Livia Cic. Planc. 36. x Lex Livia de coloniis deducendis Lex Licinia de sumptu * Rogatio Gell. pr. ORF Favorinus fr. M. Duronius Max. 2.9.5). ORF fr. I r. (conjectural, * Lex Licinia de Illviris * see Val. Lex Licinia lunia Cic. Sesr. i35. Lex Licinia et Iunia x Lex Livia de agris Africanis (:de provincia Africa ordinanda) epulonibus creandis Lex Licinia Cassia de tribunis militum a populo non creandis frumentaria * Lex Livia iudiciaria * Lex Livia nummaria Lex Licinia sumptuaria GeL|.20.1.23. de coloniis duodecim deducendis (?) Livia lrumentaria * Lex Livia 1. 25 (?) Livia de civitate sociis danda Lex Licinia de sodaliciis 15.8, 15.8 pr. frr. 7 fr. * Rogatio Livia agraria * Lex Livia agraria * Rogatio * Rogatio Licinia de sacerdotiis {h} * Rogatio Livia * Rogatio de provocatione Latinis concedenda (?) Lucilia Caelia de Cn. dictatura x Lex Lucretia de agro Campano * Rogatio Maecilia Metilia agraria Pompei 166 * KAJ SANDBERG Rogatio Maelia de publicandis bonis C Servilii Ahalae * Lex Marcia de fenore Lex Maenia Rogatio Marcia de Liguribus Lw. 42.21.8, 42.22.1 (rogatio Marcia). Cic. Brut. 55. Macr. Sar. 1.11.5. Yarro Men. frr. 232,238. * Rogatio * * Lex Marcia militaris Maenia (Menenia?) agraria Lex Maenia de die insrauraticio * Lex Maenia * Lex Maenia de patrum auctoritate orat. fr. 228 (ap. Prisc. 12.11). Lex Mamilia Acc. Urb. contr. pp. 66,'74. Ctc. Brut. 128, leg. 1.55. Frontin. grom. pp. 11,37,43. Hyg. grom. limit. p. 169. 1.44. * Lex Maria (Marcia?) Porcia de triumphis * Lex Maria de suffragiis ferendis * Lex Memmia de Iugurtha Romam ducendo * Lex Menenia Sestia de multa et sacramento * Rogatio Messia de cura annonae Cn. Pompeio mandanda * Rogatio Messia de reditu Ciceronis lug,40.4. * Lex Mamilia Lex Maria Cic. leg. 3.38. x Lex Memmia de absentibus? Rogatio Mamilia Cic. Brut. 127. Frontin. contr. p. 5. Salr|. de pace cum Philippo facienda Lex Memmia Val. Max. 3.7.9. SaIl. Iug. 65.5. Schol. Bob. p. 107. Sic. Flacc. grom. p. * Rogatio Marcia de M. Popillio Laenate * Rogatio Marcia de tribunis militum? * Lex Marcia Atinia (de dote?) Lex M(a)evia Cato Gaius inst.4.23. de coniuratione Iugurthina Lex Mamilia Roscia Peducaea Alliena Fabia Lex Metilia Plin. nat. 35.191 . x Lex Metilia de aequando magistri equitum Grom. p. 263. dictatoris iure Lex Manilia * Lex Metilia de fullonibus Ctc. Mur. 41 , orat. \02. * Lex Manilia de imperio Cn. Pompei x Lex Manilia de libertinorum suffragiis * Lex Manilia de suffragiorum confusione? * Lex Manlia de beilo Iugurthino * Rogatio Manlia de libertinorum * Lex Manlia de vicesima * Rogatio Marcia agraria et Lex Minicia Gaius insr. 1.78 (bis), 1.79. Ulp. reg.5.8. * Lex Minicia de liberis Lex Minucia suffragiis manumissionum Lex Marcia adversus faeneratores ORF C. Sempronius Gracchus p.220). fr. 53 r. (ap. Fest. * Lex Minucia de colonia Carthaginem (:de lege Rubria abroganda) * Lex Minucia de triumviris mensariis deducenda MAGISTRATES AND * Leges Minuciae de legibus Semproniis abrogandis * Lex Mucia de L. Hostilia Tubulo * Lex Mummia municipalis Achaiae data * Lex Munatia de proscriptis restituendis ASSEMBLIES 167 Suet. Ner. 3.1 , Galb. 3.3. Vell' Pat' 2'69'5' * Lex Paedia de interfectoribus caesaris Lex Papia Cic. Arch. 10, Art. 4.18.4., Balb. 52 * Lex (Munatia?) de nomine Augusto Caesari C. \ust.5.4.27,5.4.28 pr.,5.4.28.3,5.4.28.4, 6.4.4 pr. (anö rou flaniou v6pou), 6.51.1.1, tribuendo? 6.51.1'lb, 6'51'1'1c (bis)' 8'57 '2' Lex Munatia Aemilia Coll' Mos' 16'3'4' Epist. oct. Sel., ii line i0: rcatd vl()pov c. Th. 2.21.2,2.2L2 interpr. (bis), 8. r'7.2.0. Mouv&ttov rccri Aipi.l,rov. Dig. 23.2.23 pr, * Rogatio Ninnia de revocando Cicerone Frg. Vat. 214.,218. Gaius insr' 2'206 (bis)' 2'207 '2'208'2'286a'3'42' * Lex Norbana de auri rolosani quaestione 3.44, 3.46, 3.4',7, 3.49, 3.50, 3.5r, 3.52. x Lex (?) Octavia de consulatu L. Cornelio Cinnae Gell. -..12.11,1.12.12 (bis). pau.,. sent.4.8.4. abrogando Suet' l/er' 10'1 * Lex Octavia f'rumentaria * Lex ogurniade auguribus er ponriricibus ollinia Gaius insl. 4.109. Lex oPPia Liv. 34.1.2,34.1.4,34.4.6 (lex Oppia ad coercenclam luxuriam muliebrem), 34-4.10, 34 .6 .15 , 34 .7 .ll , 34 .8.4 , per ' 34 . Val. Max.9.1.3. Vir. ill. 47.6. Leges Oppia e Tac. ann. 3.24. * Lex oppia sumptuaria Lex Orchia Cato orat. fr. 139. Fest. pp. 220,282. Macr. Sal. 3.1'l ,2,3.17 .3 (bis), 3.17.5. Schot. Bob. p. 107. * Lex orchia de coenis (Lex) Ovinia tribunicia Fest. p.290. * Lex Ovinia de senatus lectione * Lex Pacuvia de mense Sextili Lex Pa(e)dia Lex Vil. ffå^ tl )':'1' 18'1'2e'6' Lex Papia de civitate Romana Schol. Bob. p, 159, ibid. (lex papia). * Lex papia de peregrinis * Lex Papia de vestalium lectione Lex papia Poppaea Dio Cass. 56.10.3: ö re fld,nroq rai o flonnaioq v6pos. FIRA III 2' lines 14 f' Gaius insr. 1'145. Isid' orlg' 5'15'1' P. Mich. iII 169, i, lines 3 f.: lex ... et Papia PoPPaea, iii, line 1' P. Mich. VII 436, text on wood, lines 5 ff : ex lege ... let Papiael Poppaeae (sic!), text on wax, lines 4 f .: ex lege ... et Papiae Poppaeae' P. Vindob. Boswinkel 5, line 12: ... rat&' v6prov flånrov flanna-tov' Suet. C/a. 19.1, 23.1. Tac. ann. 3.25,3.28. tJlp. reg. 1.21,19.11,24'12,24.31,29.3,29.5' * Lex Papia Poppaea nuptialis Lex Papiria Cic' dom' 128' 130' KAJ SANDBERG 168 1933 : ILS 1923,line 2. ORF C. Sempronius Gracchus fr. 17. AL Vl Plin. nat. 33.46. Serv. Aen. 12.836. L(ex) P(apiria) d(e) a(ssis) p(ondere) * Lex Petronia (de adulterii iudicio) Lex Pinaria Gaius insr.4.15. * Rogatio Pinaria annalis RRC 33714: e l(ege) P(apiria). * Lex Pinaria RRC 338: l(ege) P(apiria) d(e) c(ssis) p(ondere). RRC 34013: e l(ege) P(apiria). * Lex For the interpretation of the legend, see M. H. Crawford, RRC II, 611 with note 1. * Lex Papiria de civitate Acerranorum * Lex (Papiria) de dedicatione templi araeve x Lex (?) Papiria de novorum civium libertinorumque sufiragiis x Lex Papiria semunciaria * Lex Papiria tabellaria x Rogatio Papiria de tribunis plebis reficiendis * Lex Papiria * Lex de iiiviris capitalibus Papiria de viatoribus aediliciis Rogatio Peducaea de incestu Cic. nat. deor. 3.74. * Lex Peducaea de incestu virginum Vestalium Lex Pesolania de cane Paril. sent. 1.15. Rogatio Petillia Liv. 38.55.1, 38.60.1,39.6.4 (lex Perillia). * Lex Petilia de pecunia regis Antiochi Lex Petronia AE 1978 no. 100, lines 4 f. CL IX 2666 a-b : ItS 6518, lines 5 f. C1Z X 858 : ILS 6359,Iine2: lege Petron(ia). CIL X 5405 : ILS 6125 (Fasti Interamnates), lines 7-15 (4): IIIIvir p(raefectus) l(ege) P(etronia). CIL X 5655, Iine 4: l(ege) P(etronia) C. Iust. 9.9.16.2. Dig. 48.8.11.2. * Lex Petronia de praefectis municipiorum * Lex Petronia de servis de legis actione (?) Pinaria Furia de mense intercalari Lex Plaetoria/Laetoria II378 : Mitteis, Chrest.60, lines 21 f.: ro0 BGU Äorr<,rpiou v6pou. BGU 11611 : Mitteis, Chrest. 3'70, Laetoriae. Cic. nat. deor. 3.'74, off. 3.61. CILI'? 804 : ILS 4019,line 3. CILI2 27ll : ILLRP 121, lines c. Th.8.12.2.0. Lex lrn., cap. lxxxiv, lines 11 1274, lines 13 P. Oxy. X I i,line 6: legis f. lege Laetoria. ro0 Äorrcopiou vol-rou. P. Ory. XYlt Aalt<,rpiou v6pou. P. Ory. LXM435 (+vII vopou Aar[r]<^lpiou. SHA Marc. Aur. 10.12 Tab. Heracl., lines 111 Yarro ling. 6.5. lege {P}Laetoria. * Lex Plaetoria de circumscriptione adolescentium * Lex Plaetoria (de dedicatione) * Lex Plaetoria de praetore urbano Lex Plautia/Plotia Cic. Arr. 1.18.6, Mil. 35, orar. 54 (ap. Ascon. Corn. p.79). Dig.4r.3.33.2. Gaius inst.2.45. ORF C. Licinius Macer Calvus fr. 25 (ap. Quint. insr. 9.3.56) (bis). Sall. Car. 31.4, Cic. 3. Schol. Bob. p.19. Rogatio Plautia Caes. orat. fr. 27 (ap. Gell. 13.3.5). Suet. * Lex ftrl. 5. Plautia agraria MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES * Lex * Rogatio Plautia iudiciaria * Lex Plautia * de reditu Lepidanorum 169 (?) Pompeia de repetundis Rogatio Pompeia sumptuaria Lex Plautia/Plotia de vi * Lex Pompeia de transpadanis Mil. p. 55. fam.8.8.1. * Lex Pompeia de vi Ascon. Cic, * Lex Plautia Papiria de civitate sociis danda * Rogatio Poetelia agraria * Lex Poetelia de arnbitu x Lex Poetelia Papiria de nexis Lex Pompeia Ascon. Mil. p. 54. Caes. ci v. 3. 1 .4. cic. An. 10.4.8, 13.49.1, Brur. 324, Phil. 1.20. Dig. 48.9.3 pr. Plin. nat. 3.138. Plin. epist. 10.19.1, 10.19.4, 10.80.1, 10.112.1, 10.114.1,10.115.1. Schol. Bob. pp. 62,70. * Lex Pompeia Licinia Caesaris * Lex Pompeia Licinia de tribunicia potestate Lex Porcia Cic. orat. deperd. frr. 7 fr.50 (ap. Ascon. Corn. p. 78), Rab. perd. 8, 12 (3), Verr. 2.5.163 (cf. Gell. 10.3.13, Quint. inst. 9.2.38). Lex Ant. Term., col. ii, line 16. Sall. Car. 51.22,51.40, Cic. 5. Lex Porcia (de provocatione) Liv. 10.9.4. Leges Porciae Cic. rep. 2.54. Rogatio Pompeia Schol. Bob. p.71. * Lex Porcia (fenebris?) * Lex Porcia frumentaria? * Rogatio Porcia de imperio Leges Pompeiae Dio Cass. 40.55.2: årc töv Ilopnqit^rv v6prov. abrogando * Lex * Leges Pompeia de ambitu * Lex (Pompeia) de civitate equitibus Hispanis * Rogatio Porcia danda * Lex Pompeia de iure magistratuum * Lex Pompeia iudiciaria * Lex * Lex Pompeia municipalis Bithyniae revocando * data Lex Pompeia de parricidiis Dig. a8.9 r.. 48.9.1 pr. Inst. Iust. 4.18.6. Paul. sent. 5.24 r.,5.24.1. quaestione extraordinaria Lex Publicia Dig. 11.5.3 pr. * Lex Publicia de aleatoribus * Lex Publicia de cereis abrogando Lex Publilia * Rogatio Publicia de imperio M. Claudio Marcello Pompeia de provinciis instituenda de Rogatio Porcia Pompeia de Q. Caecilio Metello * Lex de Cornelio Lentulo Porcia de sumptu provinciali Lex Pompeia parricidii Dig. 48.2.t2.4. Pompeia L. Porciae de provocatione (de tergo civium) instituenda * Lex de provincia C. Iulii quaestione extraordinaria Gaius insr. 3.121 , 4.22. * Lex Pubiilia de sponsu "t 170 KAJ SANDBERG * Lex Publilia Philonis de censore plebeio creando * Lex Publilia Philonis de patrum auctoritate Lex Rupilia Ctc. Verr. 2.2.32, 2.2.34, 2.2.37 (bis), 2.2.38, 2.2.39 (bis) , 2.2 .42 (3) , 2 .2.44, 2.2 .s9 , 2.3 .92. * Lex Publilia Philonis de plebiscitis * Lex Publilia Voleronis de plebeis magistratibus Leges Rupiliae Ps.-Ascon. p. 191. Lex Pupia Crc. Verr. 2.2.40. Crc. ad Q * Lex Rupilia de iure Siculorum fr.2.13.3,fam. 1.4.1. * Lex Pupia de senatu diebus comitialibus non habendo * Lex x Lex Pupia Valeria de incestu Clodii * Lex Rutilia Leges (Quinctiae) Thessalis datae Cic. Ro.rc. 55. Dig. 22.5.13 pr. de tribunis militum * Lex Saenia de plebeis in patricios Lex Roscia Cic. Att. 2.19.3, orat. deperd. frr. 7 Ascon. Corn. p.18), Phil. 2.44. Hor. epist. 1.1.62. AL P, p. fr. 53 (ap. 1509), line 199 elog. xxx : ILS 49 (cf. CIL X 4: Vvir a. d. a. lege Saufefila. Lex Scantinia Cic. fam. 8.12.3, 8.14.4. Suet. Doin. 8.3. Porph. epist. 7.7.62, epod. 4.15-16. Tac. ann. 15.32. x Lex Scantinia (o Scatinia) de nefanda Venere x Lex Roscia theatralis Lex Scribonia Lex Rubria Dig.41.3.4.28. x Rogatio Scribonia de agro Campano Lex agr., line 59 (cf. lines 55, 60, 61,79). Lex Gall. Cis., cap. xx, lines 29,38 f . Lex repet . , line 22: l(ege) Rubrfia. de colonia Carthaginem deducenda * Lex Rubria (de praefecto pro duoviro/de damno infecto) Lex Rubria Acilia SC. de Astypal., lines 11 [t6v te] 'P6pprov f.: rcordl I töv rcai töv 'Arci.tr.iov. Rufrena de Caesaris nomine * Rogatio (?) Scribonia alimenraria * Rogatio Scribonia de C. Memmio restituendo (?) * Rogatio (?) Scribonia de intercalando * Rogatio Scribonia de itineribus (?) * Rogatio v6pov Lex Rufrena AE 1982 no. 149, line 3. CIL12 797 : ILS 13,lines 3 f. AL IX 5136 : ILS 73a, line 3: tege fRufrena]. * Lex adlegendis Lex Saufeia (agraria) Remmia de calumniatoribus * Lex Rubria de locatione censoria Lex Saenia Tac. ann. 71 .25. Lex Remmia * Lex Rupilia de re lrumenraria * Rogatio Rutilia x Lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus * * Lex Rupilia de cooptando senatu Heracliotarum * Lex Scribonia de Lusitanis (?) Scribonia de regno Iubae publicando * Lex Scribonia * Rogatio de usucapione servitutum Scribonia viaria Lex Sempronia Ps.-Ascon. p. 218. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES Cic. Balb. 61, Cat.4.10 (bis), Cluenr. 154, dom. 24,fam. 1.7.10,leg. agr.2.31 (bis), prov. cons.3, Tusc. 3.48, Verr. 2.3.12. Grom. (De sepulchris) p. 271 f Hyg. grom. limit. p. 169. Lex agr., line 82. Lib. col. pp. 210, 216, 219, 228, 229, 230, 237, . 238, 255, 260. Liv. per. 58. Lex Sempronia de abactis Sempronia agraria altera * Lex Sempronia de provincia Asia * Lex Sempronia de provinciis * Rogatio Sempronia de provocatione Sempronia de sicariis et veneficiis? Sempronia de suffragiorum confusione Lex Sempronia de triumpho Cn. Octavii, L. Anicii Galli L. Aemilii Paulli, * Lex Sempronia viaria? ORF L. Licinius Crassus fr. 24 (ap. Prisc. 8.73). Quint. lnsl. 6.3.44. Val. Max. 8.1.8. Leges Serviliae Tac. ann. 12,60. x Lex Sempronia agraria * Rogatio (?) Sempronia de civitate sociis danda * Rogatio Servilia agraria * Lex Servilia iudicaria * Rogatio Sempronia de civitate sociis danda * Lex Servilia repetundarum x Lex Sempronia de capite civis Romani * consularibus Lex Servilia Cic. Balb.54 (bis), Brut. 161,296, Cluent. 140, de orat. 2.223, Rab. Post. 9, Scaur. 2. Rogationes Semproniae Tac. ann. 12.60. * Lex Sempronia de P. Popiliio Laenate * Cic. Phil. 1.18, Verr. 2.5.163 (cf. Quint. irsr. 9.2.38 and Gell. 10.3.13). Sempronia agraria Sempronia de pecunia regis Attali * Lex * Rogatio Leges Semproniae * Lex Sempronia de pecunia credita * Rogatio * Lex . Iug. 27 .3 . Schol. Bob. p. 133. Schol. Gron. pp.287,289 (bis). Sall * * Lex 171 Lex Sempronia de coloniis Tarentum et Capuam * deducendis Rogatio Sextia de agris dividendis et de colonia Bolam deducenda * Lex * Rogatio Sextia de reditu Ciceronis * Rogatio Sicinia de agro Pomptino * Rogatio Sicinia de parte civium Veios deducenda Sempronia de duoviris aedi dedicandae Lex Sempronia frumentaria Cic. Brut. 222. * Rogatio Sempronia iudiciaria * Rogatio Sempronia iudiciaria * Lex (:de * senatu) Sempronia iudiciaria * Lex Sempronia de magistratu M. abrogando * Rogatio * (?) Sempronia militaris Lex Senrpronia militaris * Lex Sempronia de novis portoriis Rogatio (?) Sioinia de tribunicia restituenda Lex Silia Octavio Gaius insr. 4.19 (bis). * Lex Silia de legis actione * Lex Silia de mensuris et ponderibus Lex Sulpicia Val. Max. 9.7.1. potestate r72 KAJ SANDBERG * Lex Titia de Illviris Rogatio Sulpicia Vir. ill. 67.4,75.8. x Lex Sulpicia de aere alieno senatorum * Lex Sulpicia de bello Mirhridarico decernendo C. Lex Trebonia Liv. Mario x Lex Sulpicia de novorum civium libertinorumque suffragiis * Lex reipublicae constituendae x Lex Titia de tutela 5.1 1. 1, 5. t|.2, 5.12.2. * Lex Trebonia de provinciis consularibus * Lex Trebonia de tribunorum plebis creatione * Lex Tullia de ambitu Sulpicia de revocandis vi eiectis x Lex Sulpicia rivalicia x Lex (?) Tullia de legationibus liberis * Lex Sulpicia Lex Valeria Cic. Font. l, leg. agr.3.6, 3.8. de triumpho C. pomptini Lex Tarpeia Schol. Gron. p. 314. Fest. p. 270. Plebiscitum Valerium Lex Terentia Cic. Verr. 2.3.173. * Lex Terentia Liv. 38.36.10. * Lex Valeria de aere alieno de libertinorum liberis Lex Terentia et Cassia frumentaria Cic. Verr. 2.3 .163 , 2.5 .52 (lex Terentia et Cassia) Lex Terentilia Rogatio Terentilia de quinqueviris legibus scribundis . x Lex Valeria de civitate Calliphanae de civitate cum suffragio Formianis et Arpinatibus danda * Lex Valeria de domo publica x Lex Valeria de multae dictione agraria Lex Valeria de proscriptione Lex Titia Cic. Rosc. 125. Cic. leg. 2.31, Mur. 18. Lex Valeria de provocatione Dig. 11.5.3 pr. Frg. Sinait. 20 : Liv. 10.9.3 (de provocatione lex), 54: Titiu v6pou. * Lex Valeria de quaestoribus Cic. leg. 2.14. * Lex Titia de agris * Lex Valeria de sacrando cum bonis capite eius qui regni occupandi consilium inisset dividundis * Lex Titia de aleatoribus * Lex Titia de magistratu p. * Lex Valeria de Sulla Servilio Cascae abrogando x Lex Titia de nefanda Venere? Lex Titia de provincia aquaria? (de provinciis quaestoriis) 10.9.5 (Valeria lex). Leges Titiae * Veliensi danda x Lex Vaieria militaris Lex Thoria Cic. de orat. 2.284. * Lex Thoria x Lex Valeria de candidatis * Lex Valeria Liv.3.10.5. * l l dictatore * Lex Valeria de vectigalibus? * Lex Valeria Fundania de lege Oppia sumptuaria abroganda * Lex Valeria Horatia de plebiscitis MAGISTRATES AND * Lex Valeria Horatia de provocatione * Lex (?) Valeria Horatia de senatus custodia C. Iust. consultorum * Lex Valeria Horatia de tribunicia potestate Lex vallia Gans inst.4.25. x Lex vallia de manus Lex Varia Ascon. Corn. p. Cic. Brur.2o5' 304, scaur' 3, Tusc' oRF Q. Servilius caepio fr. 6. 2'51' P''/9)' Lex Vatinia Suet. 1u1.22.1. Rogatio Vatinia Suet. 1u1.28.3. * Lex Vatinia 120. de Vettii iudicio Lex Vell(a)ea C, Iust. 3.28.34, 6.28.2. Dig. 28.2.29.5 (bis), 28.2.29.6 (bts), 28.2.29'7' 28 .2.29 .8, 28 .2 .29 .tt , 28 .3 .3 .1 , 28 .5 .6.1 , 28 .6 .2 pr. Postumia) de colonia Cales deducenda * Lex Vibia de actis Caesaris confirmandis x Lex Vibia de colonlis deducendis * Lex Vibia de dictatura * Lex Villia tollenda annalis Lex Visellia CIL 12 144 de libertinis Augustin' civ. 3'2I' Cato orat. 158. fin' fr. 2 55 (bis)' rep' 3'l'7, senect' 14' verr' 2.1.106,2.1.107,2.1.108, 2.1.109,2.1.110. Dio Cass. 56.10.2: nopd, röv Oöorcciverov v6pov. Leges Voconiae deducenda de toederibus (?) * Lex (?) (Veturia * Lex visellia InsI. Iust. 2.22 pr. Quint. decl. min. 264 r. Serv ' Aen' l '5'73 ' de provincia Schol. Bob. P. de cura viarum Corn. lt:' p 351 Gaius insr. 2.226, 2.21 4. Gell. 6. t3'3' ri.6.t' Caesaris Lex Vatinia de reiectione iudicum * Lex Vatinia ug. reg.3.5. * Lex Visellia Cic' de colonia Comum x Leges Vatiniae 21.1 pr.,9'21'1'1' 9'31'1'1' 1 C' .Th'.9'20 1.32b. Gaius insr. Ps.-Ascon. p. 248. Lex Varia de maiestate Cic. orat. deperd. Jir.1 fr.54 (ap. Ascon. * Lex Vatinia 9.21r',9 173 Lex voconia iniectione 73. ASSEMBLIES : ZS 5800, iine 3' Pbn' pan' 42'l ' Plebisscitum Voconium de coercendis mulierum hereditatibus Gell. 20.1.23 . * Lex Voconia de mulierum hereditatibus ABBREVIATIONS, SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AE L'Annöe Epigraphique, Paris 1888- AJPh ANRW BEFAR BGU BMC(D Broughton, MRR BrunsT CAH AL Colren CPL S/oria epigr. FIRA Flach, GFRR Diz. Girard IGRR ILLRP LS Inscr. Ital. Jacoby, FGrHist Legge e societd Legge e societd MEFR4 The Middle 19i0- . Urkuntlen, Berlin 1895- . I Bilancio critico su Roma arcaica fra monarchia e repubblica. Convegno in memoria di Ferdinando Castagnoli, Roma, 3-4 giugno I99I (Afii clei convegni Lincei 100), Roma 1993. H. Mattingly & R. A. G. Carson, Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum I-VI, London 1923-1962. T. R. S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic I-II, New York 195 l-1952; Supplementun, Atlanta 1986. C. G. Bruns * O. Gradenwirz, Fontes iuris Romani antiquil , Tiibingen 1909. I II R. Cavenaile (ed.), Corpus Papyrorum Latinarum, Wiesbaden 1958. F. De Martino, Storia della costituzione romana I-V, Napoli ; 1951-67 (seconda I I - Leiden 1923-1958. Journal of Roman Studies , F. Serrao (a cura di), Legge e societå nella repubblica romana I, Napoli 1981. F. Serrao (a cura di), Legge e societå nella repubblica romana II, Napoli 1988. Mölanges cl'archöotogie et d'histoire de I'Ecole frangaise de Rome. Republic C. Bruun (ed.), The Roman Middle Chrest. I edizione Napoli 1972-19'75). E. De Ruggiero et al., Dizionario epigrafico di antichitä romane, 1886-. S. Riccobono et a]r, Fontes iuris Romsni anteiustiniani I-III, Firenze 1940-1943. D. Flach, in Zusammenarbeit mit S. von der Lahr, Die Gesetze der fri)hen römischen Republik. Text und Kommenlar, Darmstadt 199,1. P. F. Girard, Les textes de droit romain, Paris 1937. R. Cagnat et al. (edd.), Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes I, IIIIV, Paris l90l-1927. A. Degrassi, Inscriptiones Latinae liberae rei publicae I2-II, Firenze 196511963. H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae selectoe I-V, Berlin 1892-1916. Inscripliones ltoLiae, Roma 193 1- . F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker I-II.I (11 voll.), Berlin Antiquitö. Republic. Politics, Religion, and Historiography, c. 400-133 ac (Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 23), Rome 2000. L. Mitteis a U. Wilcken, Grundziige und Chrestomathie der Papyrusurkunde 1IV, Leipzig Berlin 1912 (Neudr. Hildesheim 1963). Monrmsen, Staatsrecht Ttr. Mommsen, Römisches Staatsrecht I3-II3, III, Leipztg 1887-1888. Mitteis, r The Cambridge Ancient History Th. Mon.rmsen et al. (edd.), Corpus inscriptionum Lalinarum, Berlin 1863-. H. Cohen, Description historique des monnaies frappöes sous I'Empire romain communemut appellöes mödailles imperiales2 I-VIII, 1880-1892 (repr. Graz 1 95s). De Martino, "IRS I Bibliothique des Ecoles frangaises d'Athines er cle Rome Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, Griechische critico Bilancio . American Journal of PhiLology Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, Berlin I MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 175 H. Cancik t H. Schneider (Hrsg.), Der Neue Pauly. Enzyklopadie der Antike, Stuttgart 1996- l{P . NSc OCD3 Notizie degli scavi di antichitå S. Hornblower & A. Spawforth (eds .) , The Oxford Classical Dictionaryt' , Oxford OGIS ORF W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci inscriptiones selectae I-II, Leipzig 1903-05. P. Cairo Masp. J. Maspero (ed.), Catalogue gönöral des antiquitös ögyptiennes du Musöe du Caire. Papyrus grecs d'1poque byzantine I-III (Cat. vols.5l, 54,73), Le Caire HRR P. Hamb.I H. Peter, Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae I2-lI, Leipzig 191411906. P. M. Meyer (Hrsg.), Griechische Papyrusurkunden der Hamburger Staots- und Berlin l9I1-24. Universitötsbibliothek I, Leipzig S. B. Platner a Th. Ashby , A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, London 1996. E. Malcovati (ed.), Oratorum Romanorum fragmenta liberae rei publicae, Torino Peter, Plarner p. Mich. Ashby 1 953. 191 1-16. 1929 (repr. Rome 1965). C. C. Edgar et al. (eds.), Papyri in the University of Michigan Collection, Ann Arbor et al. 1931B. P. Grenfell et al. (eds.), The Oryrhynchus Papyri, London 1898. Oxy. PP P. Preisigke, . Wörterbuch Parola del Passato Wörterbuch der grichischen Papyrusurkunden mit EinschlulS der griechischen Inschriften, Aufschriften, Ostraka, Mumienschilcler, ustv. ctus Ågypren I-III, Berlin 1925-31; IV fasc. 1-5, Berlin etaI. 1944-93; Suppl. I, Amsterdam II, Wiesbaden 1991. A. S. Hunt etal., Catalogue of the Greek and Latin Papyri inthe Library, Manchester I-IV, Manchester 1911-52. p. Ryl. 1971;Suppl. John Ryland P. Vindob. Boswinkel E. Boswinkel (Hrsg.), Einige Wiener Papyri, Leiden 1942. Zutphen 1967-1977. P. J. Srjpesteijn (ed.), The Wisconsin Papyri I-II, Leiden P. Wisc. A. Pauly et al. (Hrsg.) , Real-Encyclopddie der classischen Ahertumswissenschaft, RE Stuttgart Mrinchen 1894-1980. H. Mauingly RIC Richardson, Rotondi, Dictionary tPPrR et a1., The Roman Imperial Coinage I-X, London 1923-),994. L. Richardson jr., A lttrew Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, Baltimore London 1992. -G. Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani, Milano 1912 (repr. Hildesheim 1990). RRC RS M. H. Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage I-II, Cambridge 1974. M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes I-II (Bulletin of the Institute of SB F. Preisigke et a\., Sammelbuch griechischer [Jrkunden aus Ågypten, StraBburg et al. 1915- (Wiesbaden 1958- ). SDHI SEG Sherk, ADGA Social Struggles Classical Studies, Supplement 64), London 1996. Studia et documenta historiae et iuris Supplementum epigraphicum Graecum, 1923- . R. K. Sherk, Roman Documents from the Greek East. Senatus consulta and epistulae to the Age of Augustus, Baltimore 1969. K. A. Raaflaub (ed.), Social Struggles in Archaic Rome. New Perspectives on the Los Angeles 1986. Conflict of the Orders, Berkeley - 176 KAJ SANDBERG SPQR Staat und Staatlichkeit u. Paananen et al., Senatus populusque Romanus. studies in Roman Repubtican Legislation (Acta Instituti Romani Fintandiae 13), Helsinki 1993. w. Eder (Hrsg.), staat und staatlichkeit in der fri)hen römischen Republik. Ahen eines symposiums 12.-15. Storia di Roma I A. Momigliano & A. Juli 1988, Freie (Jniversität Berlin, stuttgart 1990. Schiavone (a cura dl), storia di Roma r. Roma in ltatia, TAM Torino 1988. G. clemente et al. (a cura di), storia di Romarr. L'impero mediterraneo repubblica imperiale, Torino 1990. Tituli Asiae minoris, Wien 1901 ZPE Zeitschrift Storia di Roma ZSS ILI filr - l. . Papyrologie und Epigraphik Zeitschrift der savigny-stifiung fiir Rechtsgeschichte, Romanistische Abteilung La PRIMARY SOURCES A. Literary Sources Urb. contr. Ampel. Acc. App. civ. Pun, Apul. met. Ascon. Corn. Mil. Pis. Scaur. tog. cand. ps.-Ascon. Athen. Augustin. ciy. Caes. civ. orat. Cato orat. orig. Char. Cic. ad Brut. act e. fr. amic. Arch. Afi. Balb. Brut. Cat. Cluent. d.e orat. div. dom. fam. .fin. Accemius Urbicus De controversiis agrorum, ed. K. Lachmann 1848. L. Ampelius Liber memorialis, ed. E. ABmann 1935. Appianos Bella civilia, ed. E. Gabba 1970. Bellum punicum, ed. P. Viereck a A. G. Roos 1939' Apuleius Madaurensis Metamorphoses, edd. D. S. Robertson & P. Vallette 1940-1946. Q. Asconius Pediahus Q. Asconii Pediani orationum Ciceronis quinque enarratio, ed. 1907 A' C. Clark . Pro Cornelio Pro Milone In Pisonem Pro Scauro In toga candida Pseudasconii scholia Sangallensia Ciceronis orationum, ed. T. Stangl. Athenaeus Deipnosophistae, ed. G. Kaibel 1887-90. Augustinus De civitate Dei, edd. B. Dombart a A. Kalb 1981' C. Iulius Caesar Commentarii belli civilis, ed. A' Klotz 1950. Orationumfragmento, ed. E. Malcovati 1953 M. Porcius Cato Censorius QRn. Orationumfragmenta, ed' E. Malcovati 1953 QRn. Origines (fragmenta), ed' H, Peter 1914 (Peter, HRRI' p' 55-93)' Flavius Sosipater Charisius Ars grammatica, ed. H. Keil 1857. M. Tullius Cicero Epistutae ad Brutum, ed. D. R' Shackleton Bailey 1980 Epistulae ad Quintumfratrem, ed. D. R. Shackleton Bailey 1980. Laelius de amicitia, ed. C. F. W. Mueller 1890. Pro Archia, ed. A. C. Clark 1911. Epistulae ad Atticum, ed. D. R. Shackleton Bailey 1965-68. Pro'L. Cornelio Balbo, ed. W. Peterson 1911' Brutus, ed. E. Malcovati 1965. In Catilinam, ed. A. C. Clark 1905. Pro Cluentio, ed. A. C. Clark 1905' De oralore, ed. K' F. Kumaniecki 1969. De divinatione, ed. C F. W. Mueller 1890. De domo sua ad pontifices, ed. W. Peterson 19i1. Epistulae ad familiares, ed D. R' Shackleton Bailey 1977' De finibus bonorum et malorum, ed. T' Schiche 1915' t78 KAJ SANDBERG Flacc. Font, har. resp. inv. leg. leg. agr. Manil. Mil. Mur. nat. deor. off orat. orat. deperd. frr. Phil. Pis. Planc. prov. cons. Rab. perd. Rab. post. p. red. in sen. rep. Rosc. Scaur. senect. Sest. Sull. Tull. Tusc. Vatin. Verr. C. Iust. Coll. Mos. Colum. C. Th. Dig. Dio Cass. Hal. ant. Fest. Dion. Flor. Frg. Sinait. Pro L. Valerio Flacco, ed. A. C. Clark 1909. Pro Fonteio, A. C. Clark 1911. De haruspicum responso, ed. W. Peterson 1911. De inventione, ed. E. Stroebel 1915. De legibus, ed. G. de Plinval 1968. De lege agraria, ed. A. C. Clark 1909. Pro lege Manilia (de imperio Cn. Pompei), ed. A. C. Clark Pro Milone, ed. A. C. Clark i918. Pro L. Murena, ed. A. C. Clark 1905. De natura deorum, edd. O. Plasberg a W. Ax 1933. De fficiis, ed. C. Atzert 1932. Orator, ed. P. Reis 1932. 1905. Orationum deperditarum fragmenta, ed. F. Schoell 1918. In M. Antonium orationes Philippicae, ed. A. C. Clark In L. Calpurnium Pisonem, ed. A. C. Clark 1909. Pro Plancio, ed. A. C. Clark 1911. 1918. De provinciis consularibus, ed. W. Peterson i911. Pro Rabirio perduellionis reo, ed. A. C. Clark 1909. Pro Rabirio Postumo, ed. A. C. Clark 1909. Post reditum in senatu, ed. W. Peterson 1911. De re publica, ed. C. F. W. Mueller 1890. Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino, ed. A. C. Clark 1905. Pro M. Aemilio Scauro. ed. A. C. Clark 1911. Cato Maior de senectute, ed. K. Simbeck 1917. Pro P. Sestio, ed. W. Peterson 191i. Pro P. Cornelio Sulla, ed, A. C. Clark 1911. Pro M. Tullio, ed. A. C. Clark 1911. Disputationes Tusculanae, ed. M. Pohlenz 1918. In. P. Vatinium, ed. W. Peterson 1911. In C. Verrem, ed. W. Peterson 1917. Codex lustinianus, ed. P. Krueger 1877. Mosaicarum et Romanarum legum collatio, edd. E. Seckel t B. Kuebler 1927. L. Iunius Moderatus Columella Res rustica, ed. V. Lundström 1917. Codex Theodosianus, edd. Th. Mommsen a P. Krueger 1908. Digesta seu pandectae lustiniani Augusti, edd. Th. Mommsen a P. Krueger 1908. Dio Cassius Historiae Romanae, ed. U. P. Boissevain 1895-193 1. Dionysius of Halicarnassus Antiquitates Romanae, ed. C. Jacoby 1885-1905. Sex. Pompeius Festus Epitomae operis de yerborum significatu Verrii Flacci, ed. W. M. Lindsay 1913. Annius Florus Epitomae de T. Livio bellorum omnium annorum pcc, ed. E. Malcovati 1972. Fragmenta iuris Romani Sinaitica, edd. E. Seckel a B. Kuebler 1927. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 119 Iuris anteiustinianifragmenta Vaticana, edd. E. Seckel a B. Kuebler 1927. Vat. Sex. Iulius Frontinus Frontin. De aquaeductu urbis Romae commentarius, ed. C. Kunderewicz 1973. aq. grom. Excerpta e Frontini opere quodam gromatico, ed. K. Lachmann 1848. Fronto M. Cornelius Fronto Cirtensis Ad M. Antoninum Imperalorem epistulae, ed. M. P. J. van den Hout 1954. ep. ad Ant. Gaius Gaius Institutiones, edd. E. Seckel a B. Kuebler 1935. inst. Institutionum epitome, ed. J. Baviera 1940 (FIRA ll). inst. epit. InstitutionumfragmentaAegyptia et Oryrhynchitica, ed. J. Baviera 1940 (FIRA frr. Aeg. et Oryrh. Frg. Gell. Gell. hist. Gran. Lic. Grom. Hemina hist. Aug. Aurel. Hor. epist. Hyg. grom. limit. Inst. Iust. Isid. orig. Laevius czrm. Lib. col. Liv. Hist. per. Lucii. Lyd. mag. Macr. Sat. Mart. ep. Messalla II). A. Gellius Noctes Atticae, ed. P. K. Marshall 1968. Cn. Gellius Annaliumfragmenta, ed. H. Peter 1914 (Peter, HRR Granius Licinianus Operis historici fragmenta, ed. N. Criniti 1981. Scripta gromatica, ed. K. Lachmann 1848. L. Cassius Hemina historicus Annaliumfragmenta, ed. H. Peter 1914 (Peter, HAR Scriptores historiae Augustae Vita divi Aureliani, ed. E. Hohl 1965. Q. Horatius Flaccus Epistulae, ed. F. Klingner 1959. I, pp. 151-157). I, pp. 101-111). Hyginus gromaticus De limitibus constituendis, ed. K. Lachmann 1848. Inslitutiones lustiniani, ed. P. Kriiger 1899. Isidorus Etymologiarum sive originum libri, ed. W. M. Lindsay 1911. Laevius Carmina, ed. W. Morel 1927 . Liber coloniarum, ed. K. Lachmann 1848. T. Livius Ab urbe condita 1-5, ed. R. M. Ogilvie19"74;6-10, edd. R. S. Conway & C. F. Walters 1919;21-25, ed. T. A. Dorey 1971-1916;26-30, ed. P. G. Walsh 1982-1986; 31-45, ed. J. Briscoe 1986-1991. Operis Liviani integri periochae, ed. P. Jal 1984. C. Lucilius Carminum reliquiae, ed. F. Marx 1904-05. Joannes Lydus De magistratibus, ed. R. Wuensch. Macrobius Ambrosius Theodosius Saturnalia, ed. J. Willis 1963. M. Valerius Martialis Epigrammata, ed. W. Heraeus a J. Borovskij. M. Valerius Messalla Rufus augur 180 KAJ SANDBERG Paul. sent. Novellae, ed. R. Schoell & W. Kroll 1895. Pauli sententiae, edd. E. Seckel a B. Kuebler 1911. Paul. Fest. Pauius Diaconus I'lov. Excerpta ex libris Pompeii Festi de signfficatione yerborum, ed. Lindsay 1913. C. Plinius Secundus Naturalis historia, edd. L. Ian,lc C. Mayhoff 1892-1909. C. Plinius Caecilius Secundus Epistulae, ed. R. A. B. Mynors 1966. Panegyricus, ed. R. A. B. Mynors 1964. PIin. nqt. Piin. epist. pan. Plut. Piutarch Vita L. Aemilii Paulli, edd. C. Lindskog uK. Ziegler 1964. Vita M. Furii Camilli, edd. C. Lindskog a K. Ziegter 1960. Vita M. Tullii Ciceronis, edd. C. Lindskog uK. Ziegler 1964. Vita Q. Fabii Marimi, edd. C. Lindskog *.K. Ziegter 1962. Vita M. Claudii Marcelli, edd. C. Lindskog a K. Ziegier 196g. Vita Numae, edd. C. Lindskog xK. Ziegler 1973. Vita Poplicolae, edd. C. Lindskog n K. Ziegter 1960. Vita Romuli, edd. C. Lindskog aK. Ziegler 1960. Aem. Cam. Cic. Fab. Marc. lVum. Popl. Rom. Vita Ti. Sempronii Gracchi, edd. C. Lindskog a Ti.Gracch Po1. Polybios Porph. Historiae, ed. T. Buettner-Wobsr 1889-1905. Pomponius Poryhyrio Commentum in Horatium Flaccum, ed. epist. epod. Prob. litt, sing. M. Fabius Quintilianus decl. min. Sall. Cat. Cic. hist. Iug. Ps.-Sall. rep. Schol. Bob. Schol. Clun. Schol. Gron Sen. contr. A. Holder 1894. De litteris singularibus. Fragmenta, ed. J. Baviera 1940 (FIRA Quint. R. gest. div. K. Ziegler 1971. Epistulae Epodi Priscianus Caesariensis Institutiones grammaticae, ed. H. Keil 1855-59. M. Valerius Probus Prisc. inst. W. M Aug. II, 454-460). Declamationes minores, ed. M. Winterbottom 1984. Institutio oratoria, ed. M. Winterbottom 1970. Res gestae divi Augusti, eci. E. Malcovati 1962. C. Sallustius Crispus Catilinae coniuratio, ed. A. Kurfess 1957. In M. Tullium Ciceronem, ed. A. Kurfess 1970. Historiarum reliquiae, ed. B. Maurenbrecher lSgi-93. De bello lugurthino, ed. L. D. Reynolds 1991. Pseudo-Sallustius Epistulae ad Caesarem senem de re publica, ed. L. D. Reynolds 1991. Scholia in Ciceronis orationes Bobiensia, ed. p. Hildebrandt 1907. Scholia Cluniacensia et recentiora Ambrosiana ac Vaticana, ed. T. Stangl. Scholia Lugdunensia sive Gronoviana, ed. T. Stangl. L. Annaeus Seneca maior Controversiae, ed. M. Winterbottom 1974. 181 MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES L. Amaeus Sen. Apocolocyntosls, ed. P' T. Eden 1984' Dialogi, ed. L. D. ReYnolds 1977. apocol. dial. Maurus Servius Honoratus Serv. InVergilii Aeneidos libros commentgrii, ed' G. Thilo a H. Hagen 1881-1884. In Vergilii Georgicon libros commenlarii, ed' G' Thilo 1887' Aen. Georg. Servius auctus (Danieiis) Serv. auct. In Vergilii Aen. Aeneidos libros commentarii, ed. G. Thilo a H. Hagen 1881-1884. Siculus Flaccus Sic. Fiacc. Libergromaticusdecondicionibusagrorum,ed.K.LachmannlS48. 8rom. C. Suetonius Tranquillus De vita Caesarum, ed. M. Ihm Vita divi lulii Suet. Iul. 1908. Vita divi Augusti Vita divi Claudii Vita I'leronis Aug. Clau. l''ler. Vita Galbae Vita divi VesPasiani Vita Domitiani Galb. Vesp. Dom. P. Cornelius Tacitus Annales, ed. C. D. Fisher Tac. ann. 1906. Domitius UlPianus Liber singularis regularum, ed. Girard i913' ulp. reg. Valerius Maximus Facta et dicta memorabitia, ed. R' Combös 1995-97 ' M. Terentius Varro De lingua Latina, edd. G. Goetz u F' Schoell 1910' Val. Max. Varro ling. F' Biicheler 1963' G. Goetz 1929' ed' Res rusticae, Veileius Paterculus Historia Romana, ed. J. Hellegouarc'h 1982' Liber de viris illustribus urbis Romae, ed' F' Pichlmayr 1911' MenipPeae, ed. Men. rust. Vell. Seneca iunior Pat. Vir. ill. Vitr. Vitruvius Pollio De architectura, ed. F' Krohn 1912' Zonaras Zonar. Epitomae hisloriarum, L. Dindorf 1868-1875' B. Epigraphic Sources Inscriptions Cited Epist. Oct. Frg. Atesl. Sel. bY Name Epistulae Octaviani de Seleuco Nauarcha (Sherk, RDGE 58 : FIRA 55)' FragmentumAtestinum(CIL|2600:Bruns,17:Girardl.T:FIRAI20:RS 16). Frg. Ephes. Frg. Tarent. Lex agr. Fragmentum EPhesium (RS 35)' Fragmentum Tarentinum (CILf 2924 Lex agraria (CILI1585 : : Bruns7 11 : : Girarcl 8 : Girard 9 ÄS 8)' FIRA I8 : RS 2)' 182 KAJ SANDBERG : : Lex Ant. Term. LexAntoniadeTermessibus (CIL I'z589 Lex col. Gen. Lex coloniae Genetivae luliae s. (Jrsonensis (CILI'1 594 Lex Corn. : 1e). Girard 12: FIRAIIl : II Suppl. 5439 : quaest. : Delo Fonleia Lex Galt. Cis. RS 36 Lexde GalliaCisalpina(CILII 592,601 : lrn. Bant. : Bruns1 16: Girard 16: FIRAIIg RS 28). Lex lrnitana (1. Gonzälez, JRS 76 t19861, 147-243). Bruns7 9 Girard 6 FIRAI6 Lex Latinatabulae Bantinae (CIL|2 582 A.S 7). 1964 ItS 6089 FIRA I 24). Lex municipii Malacitani (AL Lex portorii Asiae (H. Engelmann c D. Knabbe , Das Zollgesetz der provinz Asia. Eine neue Inschrift aus Ephesos (Epigraphica Anatolica 14), Bom 1989. Lex Lex Lat. : : : il Malac. Lex port. As . Lex : Senatusconsultum de Astypalaeensibus RDGE 16). Heracl. Tabula Heracleensis (CIL( 5% : (IGXlI.31'73 : IGRR IV AJPU 75 (1954), 225-249 : RS 24). RS 37-38 (Tabula Hebana). CILIl,p. 199 elog. xxx: VI 1312 : CILI2 595: Bruns7 25a : RS 5. CILII 596: BrunsT 25b : RS 6. : : : CILI2 601 : RS CILI'z 602: RS 30. CIL 603 Bruns7 25c : ILS 49: Degrassi, Inscr. Ital. RS 9. 2i. RS 29. Brunsi 16 : Girard 16: FIRA I19: Ä^t28. : Bruns7 32 : RS 37. : CILI'1 604 RS 26. CILI2 605 : RS 20. CIL I1 606 : RS 27 CILI2 607 : ILS 11 : ILLRP ll8. CIL I'1 709 : V137045 : 1IS 8888 : ILLRP 5r5 : FIRA I ti CIL12 744 : YI t299 : 31590 : 1LS 5800 : ILLRP 465a. CILI2'797 : YL872 : ILS 73 : ILLRP 409. CILI2 804 : YI3'732: 31057 : ILS 4019 : ILLRP 281. 12 . . : 1028 Other Inscriptions AE 1978 no. 100. AE 1982 no. 149. AE 1983 no. 188. : : Lex de provinciis praetoriis (Girard l0 : FIRA I 9 : AS 12). Lex repetundarum (CIL 12 583 : Bruns7 10 : Girard 7 : FIRA I7 Lex municipii Salpensani (CL il 1963 : 1t.t 6088 : FIRA I 23). praet. Lex repet. Lex Salp. SC. de Asrypal. Lex prov. CIL 12 597 CIL12 598 CIL 12 599 1ZS 6087 : FIRA I 19 : RS 25). Lex Cornelia de xx quaestoribus (CILII 581 : Bruns7 12 : Girard 11 : FIRA r 10 Rs i4). Lex GabiniaCalpurniade insulaDelo (CIL 12 2500: Girard 15 : RS22). Lex de Lex Tab. R.t Bruns7 14 XIII.3, p.53 elog.74. RS 1). : Sherk, MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES CILI'1 838-839 : VI 3t6t4-3t6r5: CIL 12 2677 : RS 10. CIL12 2671 : RS 17. CIL12 2677b : RS 18. CILT2 2711 : ILLRP 121, CIL I'z 2925 (a) : RS 23. ItS 8208 : NSc t943,26-28 : 183 ILLRP 485 (cippi). crL t2 2925 (b) : RS li. CIL 11 2925a (a) : RS 3. CIL12 2925a (b) : Rs 4. CILV 2864 : ILS 5406. CIL Yl 1933 : ILS 1923. CLV|2193 : 4416 : ILS 4966. AL Vl 30951 : ILS 36t5, AL Yr 31537a-d (cippi) AL Vl31538a-c : ILS 248 (cippi). CIL Vl36809 : ILS 9250. AL Vl 37023-31024 (cippi). AL IX 2666 a-b : 1rS 6518. ALIX 5136 : ILS 73a. X 113. AL X 114 : ILS 6469. CIL X 858 : ILS 6359. CIL aLX CILX crL x 1509. 5405 565s. : ILS 6125 : Inscr. Ital. XilLl, p.267 (Fasti Interamnates). AL Xr 4r9 : ILS 6663. /GRR IV 1188 : TAM 5.2 856. rLS 6468. Sherk, RDGE 3L (Edictum Augusti et senatus consultum de pecuniis repetundis). Sherk, ÄDGE 65. RS 37-38 (Tabula Siarensis). ZPE 55 (1984), 55-100 : C. Papyri and Writing Tablets BGU II378 BGU 1I611 : : Mitteis, Chrest.60 (2nd century Mitteis, Chrest.370 (undated). CPL200 (AD 126-132). CPL 202 : SB 6223 FIRA III 2 (n (er 198). 62). P. Cairo Masp. I6709'/v (probably 6th century AD). P. Cairo Masp. III67353v (6th century eo), P. Cairo Masp.lLl67312r (e.n 567). P. Hamb.I72 (probably 2nd century AD). P. Mich.III 169 (eo 145). P. Mich. VII434 (early 2nd century AD). el). 184 KAJ SANDBERG i P. Mich. VII 436 (no 138). P. Ory. t-20 (n 247). P. Oxy.X 1274 (3rd century en). P. Oxy. XII1466 (to 245). P. Ory.XVII2111 (ao 135). P. Oxy. XXXIV 2710 (to 261). P. Ory. LXM435 (early 3rd century eo). PP 6 (1951),228 no. 13 (before m 79). P. Ryl M12 (early 2nd century el). P. Vindob. Boswinkel5 (eo 305). P. Wisc.II 50 (AD 165). D. Numismatic Evidence RRC 292n. RRC 337t4. RRC 338. RRC 340t3. RRC 4I3IL. RRC 437. Cohen 40 : NC III, 570 : BMC(D,722 (Commodus). i MODERN STUDIES Aalders, G. J. D., 1968, Die Theorie der Gemischten Verfassung im Altertzn, Amsterdam. Abbot, F. F. A.,1923, Roman Politics, Boston. 1963, A History and Description of Roman Political Institutionf, New York. Adcock, F. E., 7959, Roman Political ldeas and Practice, Ann Arbor. Alföldi, A., 7967,'Zur Struktur des Römerstaates im 5. Jahrhundert v.Chr.', Les origines de la röpublique romaine (Fondation Hardt, Entretiens sur I'antiquitd classique i3), Vandauvres Genöve, 225-290. -1972, Review of Palmer 19'10, Gnomon 44,787-799. Almar, K. P., 1990, Inscriptiones Latinae. Eine illustrierte Einfi,thrung in die lateinische Epigraphik, Odense. Altheim, F., 1940, Lex sacrata. Die Affinge der plebejischen Organisation (Albae vigiliae Amsterdam. 1), Amirante, L., 1983, 'Sulla provocatio ad populum fino al 300', Iura 34, I-21. 1984, 'Plebiscito e legge. Primi appunti per una storia', Sodalitas. Scritti in onore di Antonio Guarino IV, Napoli, 2025-2045. Ampolo, C., 1983, 'La storiografia su Roma arcaica e i documenti', E. Gabba (a cura di), Tria Corda. Scritti in onore di A. Momigliano (Bibliotheca di Athenaeum 1), Como, 9-26. 1988, 'La cittä riformata e I'organizzazione centuriata. Lo spazio, il tempo, il sacro nella nuova realtä urbana' , Storia di Roma I, 203-239. Andreussi, M., 1999, 'Pomerium', E. M. Steinby (a cura dt), Lexicon topographicum urbis Romae IV, Roma, 96-105. Antaya, R., 1980, 'The Etymology of pomerium', AJPh I0I, 184-189' Astin, A. E., 1964,'Leges Aelia et Fufia', Latomus 23,421-445. 1989, 'Roman Government and Politics, 200-134 BC', CAI( VilI Rome and the Mediterranean to 133 BC, Cambridge, 163-196. Badian, E., 1959, 'Caesar's cursus and the Intervals between Offices', JRS 49,8i-89. I962a,'From the Gracchi to Sulla', Historia 11, I97-233. I96Zb,'Waiting for Sulla', JRS 52, 47-6L 1966, 'The Early Histolians', T. A. Dorey (ed.), Latin Historians,London, 1-38. 1970, Lucius Sulla. The Deadly Reformer (7th Todd Memorial Lecture), Sydney. 1972, 'Tiberius Gracchus and the Beginning of the Roman Revolution' , ANRW I.1, 66873r. 1977 , 'The auctor of the lex Flavia' , Athenaeum 55, 233-238. 1990a, 'The Consuls, 179-49 BC' , Chiron 20, 37I-413. 1990b, 'Magistratur und Gesellschaft [Kommentarf', Staat und Staatlichkeit, 458-475. 1996,'Tribuni ptebis and res publica', J. Linderski (ed.), Imperium sine fine. T. Robert S. Broughton and the Roman Republic (Historia Einzelschriften 105), Stuttgart, I87-2I3. Basile, M., 1978, 'Analisi e valore della tradizione sulla rogatio Cassia agraria del 486 a.C.', Miscellanea greca e romana 6,271-298. Bauerle,E.A., lggO,ProcuringAnElection.AmbitusintheRomanRepublic, diss.AnnArbor. Bauman, R. A., 1973,'ThelexValeriadeprovocationeof 300BC', Historia22,34-47. 1980, 'The leges iudiciorum publicorum and their Interpretation in the Republic, Principate and Later Empire', ANRWII.I3, 103-233. Beard M. a Crawford, M. H., 1985, Rome inthe Late Republic. Problems and Interpretations, London. Beard, M. et ai., 1998, Religions of Rome L A History,II. A Sourcebook, Cambridge. 186 KAJ SANDBERG Bell, A. J.8.,1997, 'Cicero and the Spectacle of power', JRS gl,I_ZZ. Benner' H., 1987, Die Politik des p. Crodius purcher. (Jntersuchungen zur Denaturierung des clientelwesens in der ausgehenden römischen Repubtik, Stuttgart. Bergemann, C., 1992, Politik und Retigion im spätrepubtikanischin Rom (palingenesia 2g), Stuttgart. Berger, A., 1953, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman l"ttw, ph1\ad,elphia. von Beseler , G., 193'7 , 'Comitiatus maximus, , ZSS 5i , 356-357 Biilows, R', 1989, 'Legal Fiction and Political Reform at Rome in the Early Second Century BC.', Phoenix 43, ll2-I33. Binder, J., 1909, Die Plebs. Sturtien zur römischen Rechtsgeschichte, Leipzig (Neudr. Rom . 1 965). Biscardi, A.,1941,'Auctoritas patrum', Bollettino dell'lstituto di ctiritto romano 4g,403-521. Bleicken, J', 1955, Das Volkstribunat cler klassischen Republik. Sturtien zu seiner Ennticklung zwischen 287 und 133 v.Chr. (Zetemata 13), Mrinchen. 1959, 'Ursprung und Bedeutung des provocationsrechtes', zss 76, 321-377. 7972, Staatliche Ordnung und Freiheit in der römischen Republik, Kallmrinz. 1975, Lex publica. Gesetz und Recht in der römischen Repubtik, Berlin. 1981a, 'Die Nobilität der römischen republlk' , Gymnasium gg, 236-253. 1981b, 'Das römische Volkstribunat. Versuch einer Analyse seiner politischen Funktion in republikanischer Zeit', Chiron ll, 87-I0g. 1995, Die Verfassung der römischen RepubtikT, paderborn. von Blumenthal, A. , 1.952, 'Pomerium' , RE XXI.L coli. 1g67 _Ig16. Boddington, A., 7959,'The Original Nature of the Consular Tribunare', Historiag,356-364. Bonnefond, M., 1983, 'Espace, temps et iddologie. Le s6nat dans la citd romaine r6publicaine', Dialoghi di archeologia, ser. 3, I, 37-44. Bonnefond-Coudry, M., 1989, Le sönat de ta röpublique romaine de la guerre cl'Hannibal d Auguste. Pratiques döliböratives et prise de döcision (BEFAR 263), Rome. Botsford, G. w. , 7904, 'On the Distinction Between comitia and concilium', Transactions and Proceedings of the American philological Association 35, 21-32. 1909, The Roman Assemblies. From their Origin to the End of the Republic, New york. Brecht, C. H., 1939, 'Zlm römischen Komitialverf-ahren,, ZSS 59, 26I-314. Bremer, F. P., 1896-1901 , Iurisprudentiae antehadrianae quae supersunt I-Il, Leipzig. Bringmann, K., 1985, Die Agrarrefbrm des Tiberius Gracchus Legende unå wirkli.hk.it (Frankfurter Historische Vorträge 10), Stuttgart. 1986,'Das "Licinisch-Sextische" Ackergesetz und die gracchische Agrarreform', Symposionflir Alfred HeuJS (Frankfurter Althistorische Studien 12), Kallmrinz, 5t-66. Briquel, D., 1990, Review of Staat uncl Staatlichkeit, Revue des ötudes latines 68,220-221. Briscoe, J., 1973, A Commentary on Livy. Books XXXI-XXXIil, Oxford. 1985, Review of Keaveney 1982, JRS 75, 238-239. 1987, Review of Develin 1985, JRS i7, 195-196. 1988, Review of Broughton, MAR III (Supplement), ./R,S jg,26g_269. 1997, Review of Vishnia 1996, JRS 87 , 281. Broughton, T. R. s., 1972,'senate and Senators of the Roman Republic. The Prosopographical Approach', ANRW I.l, 250-265. I99I, Candidates Defeated in Roman Elections. Some Ancient Roman "Also-Rans". Philadelphia. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 187 Brunt, P. A., 1968, Review of Meier 1966, "/RS 58,229-232. 197Ia, Italian Manpower 22.5 Bc-to 14, Oxford (repr' Oxford 1987). I97Ib, Social Coffiicts in the Roman Republic, London' 1982, 'Nobilitas and novitas' , JRS 72, l-I7. 1983, Review of Perelli 1982, JRS 73,206-207. 1988, The Fall of the Roman Republik and Related Essays, Oxford' Bucher, G. S., 1995, 'The Annales maximi in the Light of Roman Methods of Keeping Records', American Journal of Ancient History 12,3-61. Burckhardt, L. A., 1988, Potitische Strategien der Optimaten in der spöten römischen Republik, Stuttgart. 1990, 'The Political Elite of the Roman Republic. Comments on Recent Discussion of the Concepts nobilitas and homo novLts' , Historia 39, 77 -99 Cagnat, R., 1914, Cours d'öpigraphie latinea, Paris (rist' Roma 1964). Calabi Limentani, L, lg9l, Epigrafia latind, Milano' Capanelli, D., 1981, 'Appunti sullarogatio agraria di Spurio Cassio', Legge e societå I, 3-50. Caison, S., 1988, 'Asconius in Cornelianam 78.7-69.I3 (Ciark) and Roman Legislative Procedure. A Textual Note', AJPU I09, 537-542. Cary, M. & Scullard, H. H., Ig75, A History of Rome down to the Reign of Constantind, London - Basingstoke. Casavola, F. P., 1989, 'Relazione introduttiva', F. P. Casavola et al., Roma tra oligarchia e democrazia: Classi sociali e formazione del diritto in epoca medio-repubblicana. Ani del convegno di diritto romano, Copanello 2B-31 maggio 1986, Napoli, 23-37. 1990, 'La legislazione comiziale e l'editto' , Storia di Roma II.1, 515-534. Cassola, F.,1962, I gruppi politici romani nel Iil secolo a.C', Trieste. 1988, 'Lo scontro frapatrizi e plebei e la formazione della nobilitas', Storia di RomaI, 451-481. Igg4,'II concetto di oligarchia negli studi sulla repubblica romana', F. Cassola, Scritti di storia antica, istituzioni e politica II, Napoli, 379-399. Catalano, P., 1974,'La divisione del potere in Roma', Studi in onore di Giuseppe Grosso, Torino,66l-691. 1978, 'Aspetti spaziali del sistema giuridico-religioso romano. Mundus, templum, urbs, ager, Latium, Italia' , ANRW II 16.1 , 440-553. Cels Saint-Hilaire, J.,lgg5, La Röpubtique cles tribus. Du droit de vote et de ses enient aux döbuts de ta Röpublique Romaine (495-300 av.J.-C.), Toulouse. Cerami, P., Ig87, Potere ed ordinamento nella esperienza costituzionale romanQ2, Torino. Chassignet, M., 1996, L'annalistique Romaine I. Les annales des pontifes et l'annalistique ancienne, Paris. cizek, E., 1990, Mentalitös et institutions politiques romaines,Paris. Clemente, G., 1981, 'Le leggi sul lusso e la societä romana fra III e il sec. a.C.', A. Giardina a A. Schiavone (a cura di), Societd romana e produzione schiavisticalll, Bati,l-I4. 1983, 'Il plebiscito Claudio e le classi dirigenti romane nell'etä dell'imperialismo romano', Ktema 8, 253-259. 1990a,'Basi sociali e assetti istituzionali nell'etä della conquisla' , Storia di Roma II.1, 3954. 1990b, 'La politica romana nell'etä dell'imperialismo', Storia di RomaII.I,235-266. Cloud, D., Ig7I, 'Parricidiumfromthe lex Numae to the lex Pompeia de parricidiis' , ZSS 88, 166. 188 KAJ SANDBERG 1988,'Lex lulia de vi', AthenaeumT6 (n.s. 66), 579-595. 1989, 'Lex lulia de vi rr' , Athenaeum j7 (n.s. 67), 427_465. 1994, 'The Constitution and Public Criminal Law' , CAI( IX. The Last Age of the Roman Republic, 146-43 BC, 491-530. Coarelli, F., 1983, Ilforo romano. periodo arcaico, Roma. 1985,Ilforo romano. Periodo repubblicano e augusteo, Roma. coli, u., 1955, 'Tribir e centurie dell'antica repubblica romana', 9DHI2r, lgl-222. Cornell, T' J., 1980, 'Alcune riflessioni sulla formazione della tradizione storiografica arcaica', Roma arcaica e le recenti scoperte archeologiclze, Milano, tg-4+. 1982, Review of Wiseman 19J9, JRS 72,203-206. su Roma 1983, 'The Failure of the Plebs', E. Gabba (a cura di), Tria corrJa. Scritti in onore 4i Arnaldo Momigliano (Biblioteca di Athenaeum r), como, 101-120. 1986a, 'The Formation of the Historical Tradition of Early Rome', L S. Moxon et al. (eds.), Past Perspectives. Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing. papers Presented at a conference in Leeds, 6.-8. Aprit 1983, cambridge, 67-g6. 1986b, 'The Value of the Literary Tradition Concernrng Archaic Rome', Social Struggles, 52-7 6. 1989, 'Rome and Latium to 390 sc.' , CAII VIL2. The Rise of Rome to 220 sc,243-30g. 1995, The Beginnings of Rome. Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the punic Wars (c. 1000-264 BC), London New york. 2000, 'The Lex Ovinia and -the Emancipation of the Senate', The Middle Republic,69-g9. Cornell, T. J. & Matthews, 1.,1982, Atlas of the RomanWortd, Oxford. Crake, J. E. A. , 1940,'The Annals of the pontifex maximLts', Classical Philology 35,375-3g6. Crawfbrd, M. H. , 1978, The Roman Repubtic, Hassocks. 1996, 'General Introduction', RS I, l-38. Crif-ö, G., 1986, 'A proposito della ristampa del Droit public romain di Mommsen', Studia et Documenta Historiae et luris 52, 485-49I. 1990, 'Normazione e libertä. Ii rapporto tra legislazione altorepubblicana ed identitä civica', Staat und Staatlichkeit, 344-367 york. Crook, J. A., \967, Law and Life of Rome, London - New 1986, Review of Giovannini 1983a, JRS 76,286-299. Cuena, F., 1985, 'La primera magistratura republicana', Bollettino dell'Istituto di dirino romano 88,313-345. Culham, P., 1989, 'Archives and Alternatives in Republican Rome', Classical phitotogy g4, 100. 115. D'Agostino, V., I9'76, Review of Bleicken I975, Rivista cli studi classici 24, 166-167. Dal Cason, F., 1985, 'La tradizione annalistica sulle pii antiche leggi agrarie. Riflessioni e proposte', Athenaeum 73 (n.s. 63), 174-184. Damon, C., 1997, 'Aesthetic Response and Technical Analysis in the Rhetorical Writings of Dionysius of Halicarnassus', Museum Helveticum 49, 33_59. Daube, D., 1956, Forms of Roman Legislation, Oxford. De Blois, L., 1987, The Roman Army and Politics in the First Century BC, Amsterdam. De Francisci, P., 1953,'Per Ia storia dei ogsrnilis centuriata,,, Studi in onore di Vincenzo Arangio-Ruiz I, Torino, I-32. Dell'Oro, A., 1950, 'Rogatio e riforma dei comizi centuriati alla luce dellatabula Hebana,, pp 5,132-150. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 189 Demandt, A., 1995, Antike Staatsformen, Berlin. De Martino,F.,1972,'lntorno all'origine della repubblica romana e delle magistrature', ANRW 1.1,2t1-249. 1988, 'La costituzione della cittä-stalo' , Storia di Roma I,345-365. Dench, 8., t997, Review of Cornell 1995, .rRS 87,269-271. Deniaux, Elizabeth, 1987, 'De l'ambitio ä I'ambitus. Les lieux de la propagande et de la corruption 6lectorale ä la fin de la R6publique', L'Urbs. Espace urbain et histoire (f' s. ap.J.C.). Actes du colloque international organisö par le Centre national de la recherche scientffique et t'Ecole franEaise de Rome, Rome, 8-12 mai 1985 (Collection de I'Ecole Paris, 279-304. frangaise de Rome 98), Rome poteri pubblici in Roma, Roma. De Ruggiero, E., 1900, Il consolato e i Develin, R., 1975a, 'Comitia tributa plebis' , Athenaeum 53, 302-337 1975b,'Prorogation of imperium before the Hannibalic War', Latomus 34 (1975),716. 722. 1977a,'Comitia tributa Again' , Athenaeum 55,425-426. I97'7b,'Lex curiata and the Competence of Magistrates', Mnemosyne 30, 49-65. I978a,'The lex agraria of 111 sc and Procedure in Legislative Assemblies', Antichton 12,45-50. I918b, 'Provocatio and Plebiscites. Early Roman Legislation and the Historical Tradition' , Mnemosyne 31,45-60. I978c,'Religion and Politics at Rome during the Third Century BC' , Journal of Religious History 10, 3-19. I978d,'scipio Aemilianus and the Consular Elections of 148 BC' , Latomus 37, 484-488. I978e,'The Third Century Reform of the comitia centuriata' , Athenaeum 56,346-376. l9l9a, Patterns of Office-Holding, 366-49 rc (Collection Latomus 161), Bruxelles. I979b,'The Voting Position of the equites after the Centuriate Reform', Rheinisches Museum fiir Philologie 122, 155-161. 1985, The Practice of Politics at Rome, 366-167 rc (Collection Latomus 188), Bruxelles. 1986, 'The Integration of Plebeians into the Political Order after 366 BC', Social Struggles , 327 -352. 1989, Review of Hölkeskamp 1987, Gnomon 61, 365-367. Di Gennaro, G., 1993, 'I comizi centuriati di Cic. de re p. II22,39-40. Attribuzione, struttura, giudizio politico', Athenaeum 81 (n.s. 7I),545-565. D'Ippolito, F., 1975,'La legge agraria di Spurio Cassio', Labeo 2I, I97-2I0. Di Lella, L.,1984, 'Il plebiscito Sempronio del 193 a.C. e la repressione delle usurae', AAN95, 26r-282. Di Porto, A., 1981, 'Il colpo di mano di Sutri e il .plebiscitum de populo non sevocando". A proposito della olex Manlia de vicensima manumissionum'', Legge e societdI,307-384. Doblhofer, G., 1990, Die Popularen der Jahre lll-99 vor Christus. Eine Studie zur Geschichte der spt)ten römischen Republik, Wien - Köln. Dorey, T. A. (ed.), 1966, Latin Historians, London. (ed.), 1971 , Litry, London. Drews, R., 1988, 'Pontiffs, Prodigies, and the Disappearance of the Annales marimi', Classical Philology 83, 289-299. Drexler, H., 1988, Politische Grundbegriffe der Römer, Darmstadt. Drummond, A.,1972, Review of Palmer 1970 and Palmer 1969,./RS 62, 176-178. 1978, Review of Pinsent I975, -rRS 68, 187-188. 190 KAJ SANDBERG 1989a, 'Rome in the Fifth Century rt3-r11. I. The Social and Economic Framework' , CAII VILZ, 1989b, 'Rome in the Fifth Century II. The Citizen Community', CAI? VII.2, I7Z-242. Dubuisson, M., 1990, 'Le vision polybienne de Rome', Purposes of History, 233-243. Ducos, M., 1978, L'influence grecque sur Ia Loi des Douze Tables, Paris. 1984, Les Romains et la loi. Recherches sur les rapports de la philosophie grecque et de la tradition romaine d la fin de la röpublique, Paris. Dutoit, E., 1960, 'Le vocabulaire de la vie politique chez Tite-Live', Collection Latomus 44,330338. Earl, D. C., 1967, The Moral and Political Tradition of Rome, London. Eckstein, A. M. , 1987, Senate and General. Individual Decision Making and Roman Foreign Relations, 264-194 BC, Berkeley Los Angeles. Eder, W. , 1.978, Review of Bleicken I975, Gnomon 50, 46I-479. 1986, 'The Political Signiticance of the Codification of Law in Archaic Societies. An Unconventional Hypothesis', Social Struggles, 262-300. i990, 'Der Btirger und sein Staat Der Staat und seine Brirger" Eine Einhihrung zum Thema Staat und Staat und Staatlichkeit in der fnihen römischen Republik', Staat und Staatlichkeit, 12-32. 1993,'Zwischen Monarkie und Republik. Das Volkstribunat in der frtihen römischen Republik', Bilancio critico, 97 -127 1991, 'Who Rules? Power and Participation in Athens and Rome', A. Molho et al. (eds.), City States in Classical Antiquity and Medieval ltaly, Stuttgart, 169-196. Elster, M., 1976, Studien zur Gesetzgebung der frilhen römischen Republik G e s e t ze s anhöufun g e n und -wi e de rho I un g e n, Frankfu rt Bern. - Asia. Ein neues Inschrift aus Engelmann, H. a Knibb€, D., 1989, 'Das Zollgesetz der provincia Ephesos', Epigraphica Anatolica 14, l-206. Epstein, D. F., 1987, Personal Enmity in Roman Politics, 218-43 BC, London. Evans, R. J., 1990, 'Consuls with a Delay between the Praetorship and the Consulship', Ancient History Bulletin 4,65-71. 1991, 'Candidates and Competition in Consular Elections at Rome between 218 and 49 BC', Acta classica 34, II1-136. Farrell, J., i986, 'The Distinctionbetween comitia and concilium', AthenaeumT4 (n.s. 64),407. i 439. , L., 1981a, 'Bellum indicere e tribir (509-357 a.C.)', Legge e societåI,225-254. 1981b, 'Alle origini della legislazione de ambitu', Legge e societdI,255-279. 1988, 'La legislazione di Genucio' , Legge e societd II, 1-31. Fascione, Ferenczy, F,., 1969,'Zur Verfassungsgeschichte der Fnihrepublik', R. Stiehl a H. E. Stier (Hrsg.), Beitröge zur alten Geschichte und deren Nachleben. Festschrift fur F. Altheim zum 6.10.1968I, Berlin, 136-150. 1970, 'Die "Grundgeselze" der römischen Republik', W. G. Becker a L. Schnorr von Carolsfeld (Hrsg.), Sein und Werden im Recht. Festgabe fiir Ulrich von Liibtow zum 70. Gebufi stag, Berlin, 267 -280. I976, From the Patrician State to the Patricio-Plebeian Srare, Budapest. Ferrary, J .-L., 197'7 , 'Recherches sur la l6gislation de Saturninus et de Glauci a' , MEFRA 89 , 619660. r l MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 191 1982, 'Le idee politiche a Roma nell'epoca repubblicanz', L. Firpo (a cura di), Storia delle idee politiche, economiche e sociali, Torino,723-795. 1983, 'Les origines de la loi de majest6 ä Rome', Acadömie des inscriptions et belleslettres. Comptes rendus des söances de I'annöe 1983, 556-572. 1984,'L' arch6ologie dt De re publica (2. 2, 4-37, 63): Cicdron entre Polybe et Platon', JRS 7 4, 87-98. 1985, 'La Lex Antonia de Termessibus', AthenaeumT3 (n's' 63), 419-457. 199I,'Lex Cornelia de sicariis et veneficis', Athenaeum 79 (n.s' 69), 417-434. M. I., 1983, Politics in the Ancient World, Cambridge. D., 1973,'Zur Strafgesetzgebung der gracchischen Zeit', ZSS 90,91-104. 1990, Römische Agrargeschichte (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft IIL9), Mtinchen. 1998, Rö mi s c h e Ge s chi cht s s chr eiburzg, Darmstadt. Flaig, E. , Igg4,'Repenser le politique dans la Rdpublique romaine', Actes de la Recherche en Sciences sociales 105, 13-25. 1995, 'Entscheidung und Konsens. Zu den Feldern der politischen Kommunikation zwischen Aristokratie und Plebs', M. Jehne (Hrsg.), Demokratie in Rom? Zur Rolle des Volkes in der Politik der römischen Republik (Historia Einzelschriften 96), Stuttgart, 77t27. Flower, H., 1996, Ancestor Masks and Aristocratic Power in Roman Culture, Oxford. Los Fornara, C. W., 1983, The Nature of History in Ancient Greece and Rome, Berkeley *r, ory' - Angeles. Forsdn, 8., 1991 , Lex Licinia Sextia de modo ogrorum- Fiction or Reality?, Helsinki. Forsythe, G.,lgg4,TheHistorianL. CalpurniusPisoFrugiandtheRomanAnnalisticTradition, Lanham New York. Fox, M.,Igg3, 'History and Rhetoric in Dionysius of Halicarnassus',,fRS 83, 3I-47. Fraccaro, P., Ig3L, 'La storia dell'antichissimo esercito romano e I'etä dell'ordinamento centuriato' , Ani del II Congresso nazionale di studi romani III, Roma, 9I-97 (: Opuscula II, Pavia 1957, 287-292). 1956,'Laprocedura del voto nei comizi tributi romani', P. Fraccaro, Opuscula II, Pavia, 235-2s4. 'Constitution and Citizenship. Peripatetic Influence on Cicero's Political Conceptions inlhe De re publica', W. W. Fortenbaugh- P. Steinmetz (eds.), Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos, London,77-100. Frezza, P., 1956, 'Preistoria e storia della "Lex publica"', Bollettino dell'Istituto di diritto romano Frede, D., 1989, 59160,55-82. Frier, B. W., 1971, 'Sulla's Propaganda. The Collapse of the Cinnan Republic', AJPh92,585' 604. 1979, Libri annales pofiirtcum maximorum. The Origins of the Annalistic Tradition (Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome 27), Rome. 1994, Review of LintotL 1992, "/RS 84, 2lI-212. 1999, Libri annales pontificum maximorum. The Origins of the Annalistic Traditiort (Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome 27), Ann Arbor, reprint with new introduction. Friezer, E., Ig5g, 'lnterregnum and patrum auctoritas', Mnemosyne 12,30I-329. von Fritz, K., 1950, 'The Reorganisation of the Roman Government in 366sc and the so-called Licinio-Sextian Laws', Historia 1,3-44 (: Schriften zur Sriechischen und römischen New York 1976, 329-373). Verfassungsgeschichte und Verfassungstheorie, Berlin - 192 KAJ SANDBERG 1953,'Leges sacratae and plebei scita', G. E. Mylonas (ed.), Stuclies Presented to David Moore Robinson on his seventieth Birthday II, Saint Louis, g93-905 (: schrffien zur griechischen und römischen Verfassungsgeschichte und Verfassungstheorie, Berlin - New York 1976, 374-387). 1954, The Theory of the Mixed Constirution in Antiquity. A Criticat Analysis of polybius' Gabba, Political ldeas, New York. 1958, Appiani bellorum civilium liber primus. Introduzione, testo critico e commento con traduzione e indici, Firenze. 1964, 'Studi su Dionigid'Alicarnasso IIL La propostadi legge agraria di Spurio Cassio', 8., 42,29-4I 1967, 'Considerazioni sulla tradizione letteraria sulle origini della repubblica', les Athenaeum origines de la röpublique romaine (Entretiens sur I'antiquitd classique 13), Vandceuvres Geneve, 135-174. 1972, 'Mario e Silla', ANRW I.I, i64-805. 1973, 'Le origini della guerra sociale e la vita politica romana dopo l'89 a.C.', E. Gabba, Esercito e societd nella tarda repubblica romana, Firenze, 193-345. 1982,'La "Storia di Roma arcaica" di Dionigi d'Alicarnasso', AI{RW II.30.1 ,799_916. 1987, 'Matimus comitiatus', Athenaeum J5 (n.s. 65), 203-205. 1989, 'Assemblee ed esercito a Roma fra tv e m sec. a.C.', F. P. Casavola etal., Roma tra oligarchia e democrazia: Classi sociali e formazione ctel diritto in epoca mecliorepubblicana. Atti del convegno di diritto romano, Copanello 28-31 maggio 1986, Napoli, 4r-54. 1990, 'Il tentativo dei Gracchi' , Storia di Roma lI.I, 67I-690. I99I, Dionysius and the History of Archaic Rome (Sather Classical Lectures 56), Berkeley Los Angeles. -1993, 'Problemi di metodo per la storia di Roma arcaica', Bilancio critico,13-24. 1997,'Democrazia a Roma', Athenaeum 85 (n.s. 75),266-27I. Gagö, J.,1970,'La nplebs" s1 ls "populus, et leurs encadrements respectifs dans la Rome de la premiöre moitid du V' siöcle av. J.-C.', Revue historique 243, 5-30. 1976, La chute des Tarquins et les döbuts de la röpublique romaine, Paris. 1978a, 'La Lex Aternia, I'estimation des amendes (multae) et le fonctionnement de la commission d6cemvirale de 451-449 av. J.-c. ' , Antiquitö classique 47 , 70-95. 1978b, 'La "rogatio Terentilia" et le problöme des cadres militaires pl6b6iens dans la premiöre moti6 du V' siöcle av. J.-C.', Revue historique 260, Zgg-311. 1979, '"Rogatio Maecilia". La querelle agro-militaire autour de Bolae, en 416 av. J.-C., et la probable signification des projets agraires de Sp. Cassius, vers 486', Latomus 38, 838-86 H., 1 . 1990, 'Recht und Verfassung [Kommentar]', Staat und Staatlichkeil,388-393. Gatti, G., 1906, 'Ara marmorea del .vicus Statae Matris,', Bullettino della Commissione archeologica comunale di Roma 34, \86-197. Gaudemet, J.,1965,'Le peuple et Ie gouvernement de la republique romaine', Labeo II, I4i- Galsterer, t92. M., 1912, Die Nobilität der römischen Repubtik, Leipzig (: Id., Kleine Schriften I, Wiesbaden 1962, 11 -135). 1969, The Roman NobiliQ, translated by R. Seager, Oxford (repr. Oxford 1975). di Gennaro, G., 1990, 'I comizi centuriati di Cic. De re p.2.22.39-40. Anribuzione, struttura, Gelzer, giudizio politico' , Athenaeum 71, 545-564. I MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 193 fondamento della otribunicia potestas> e i procedimenti normativi sacramentum)" \DHI II, 37-64. lex sacrata dell'ordine Giovannini, A., 1983a, Consulare imperium (Schweizerische Beiträge zur Altertumswissenschaft 16), Basel. 1983b, 'Volkstribunat und Volksgericht', Chiron 13, 545-566' 1984, 'Les origines des magistratures romaines', Museum Helveticum 41, 15-30. 1985, 'Auctoritas patrum', Museum Helveticum 42,28-36. 1990, 'Magistratur und Volk. Ein Beitrag zur Entstehungsgeschichte des Staatsrechts', Staat und Staatlichkeit, 406-436. 1992,'De Niebuhr ä Mommsen. Remarques sur la genöse du nDroit public,', Cahiers du Centre G. Glotz3, 167-176. Igg3, 'Il passaggio dalle istituzioni monarchiche alle istituzioni repubblicane', Bilancio Gioffredi, C., 1945,'Il plebeo ((sacrosanct critico,l5-96. , 1977, 'Ciceros Urteil tiber die Entstehung des Tribunates als Institution der römischen Verfassung (rep.2.57-59)', Bonner Festgabe Johannes Straub, Bonn, I79-200. 1992, 'Zv Diskussion um das imperium consulare militiae im 1. Jh. v.Chr.' , Cahiers du Centre G. Glotz 3, 213-220. Giuffrö, V., 1970, 'Ptebei gentes non habent', Labeo 16,329-334' Giuffrö, V. (a cura dr), 1977, Les lois des Romains. T öditionpar un Sroupe de romanistes des oTextes de droit Romain,, tome iI de Paul Fr6d6ric Girard et Fdlix Senn, Napoli. Gizewski, C., 1997,'Comitia', l/P III, coll. 94-97 ' Gonzfiez, J., 1986, 'The Lex lrnitana. A New Copy of the Flavian Municipal Law', JRS 76, Girardet, K. M. 147 -243. A. E., 1983, Iltustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy, Berkeley - Los Angeles. Gönling, K. W., 1840, Geschichte der römischen Staatsverfassung, Halle. Greenidge, A. H. J., 1901 , Roman Public Life, London. Grieve, L. J., 1985a, 'Livy 40.51.9 and the Centuriate Assembly', Classical Quarterly 35,417- Gordon, 429. 1985b, 'The Reform of the comitia centuriata', Historia34,278-309' 1987,'Proci patricii. A Question of Voting Order in the Centuriate Assembly', Historia 36,302-317. 1936,'nPotestas sacrosancta> dei tribuni della plebe', Studi in onore di Salvatore Riccobono II, Palermo, 1-9. Grosso, G., 1974, 'Sul tribunato della plebe', Labeo 20, 7-ll. Gruen, E. S., 1965, 'The lex Varia', "IRS 55, 59-73' 1,968, Roman Politics and the Criminal Courts, 149-78 aC, Cambridge, Mass' I974, The Last Generation of the Roman Republic, Berkeley - Los Angeles. 1991, 'The Exercise of Power in the Roman Republik', A. Molho et. al. (eds.), Ci4' states in classical Antiquity and Medieval ltaly, Stuttgart, 25I-267. Los Angeles 1995). 1995, Reprint of Gruen 1974 (with new introduction), Berkeley 1996, 'The Roman Oligarchy. Image and Perception', J. Linderski (ed.), Imperium sine fine. T. Robert S. Broughton and the Roman Republic, Stuttgart, 215-234. Grziwotz, H., 1985, Das Vefassungsverständnis der römischen Republik. Ein methodischer Versuch (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 3, 264), Frankfurt am Main - Bern. Guarino, A., 1948, 'La formazione della oRespublica, romana', Revue internationale des droits de l'anriquitö I, 95-112. 1.951,, 'L'exaequatio legibus dei plebiscita', Festschrifi Fritz Schulz I, Weimar, 458-465' Groh, V., 194 KAJ SANDBERG 1975, La rivoluzione della plebe, Napoli. 1979, La democrazia a Roma (Societä e dirino di Roma 4), Napoli. Gutberlet, D. Die erste Dekade des Livius ats euelle zur gracchischen und sullanischen Zeit, Hlld,esheim I 985. Hackl, U., 1982, Senat und Magistratur in Rom von der Mitte des 2. Jahrhunderts v.Chr. bis zur Diktatur Sullas (Regensburger historische Forschungen 9), Kallmtinz. Hahn, r., r976,'The Plebeians and clan Society', oikumeie r,4r-75. Hall, u. , \964,'voting Procedure in Roman Assemblies' , Historia 13,26i-306. 1990, 'Greeks and Romans and the Secret Ballot', E. M. Craik (ed.), Owls to Athens. Essays on classical subjects presented to sir K. Dover, oxford, lgl-lgg. 1998,'"Spscies libertatis". Voting Procedure in the Late Roman Republic', M. Austin et al. (eds.), Modus operandi. Essays in honour of Geoffrey Rickman (Bultetin of the Institute of Classical Studies, suppl. 7l), London, 15_30. Halperin' L-L', 7984, 'Tribunat de la plöbe et haute plöbe (493-218 av. J.-C.)', Revue historique de droit frangais et ötranger,4. s6r. 62, 16I_I}I. Hantos, T., 1988, Res publica constituta. Die verfassung des Dictators sulla (Hermes Einzelschriften 50), Stuttgart. Harris, W. V. , 1'990,'On Defining the Political Culture of the Roman Republic. Some Comments on Rosenstein, williamson, and North', classical phitotogy g5, )gg-29g. Hartmann, L. M., 1894,'Ambitus', REL2, coll. 1g00-1g03. Heikkilä, K.,1993,'Lex non iure rogata. Senate and the Annulment of Laws in the Late Roman Republic', SPQR, 117 -142. Hellegouarc'h, J., 1972, Le vocabulaire latin cles relations et des partis politiques sous la Röpublique2, Paris. Henderson, J., 1989, 'Livy and the Invention of History' , Writing of Ancient History, London, 64-95. A. Cameron (ed.), History as Text. The Hermon, F., 1982,'La place de la loi curiate dans I'histoire constitutionnelle de la fin de la Rdpublique romaine', Ktöma 7, 297-307. von Herzog,E.,l876,'Die lex sacrata und das sacrosanctuifi', Neue Jahrbricher fiir philologie und Paedagogik 113 (: ;u1t.5richer Ilir classische Philologie 22),139-150. 1884, Geschichte und system der römischen staatsverfassung r, Leipzig. HeuB, A., 1944,'Zur Entwicklung des Imperiums der römischen Oberbeami"nl, ZSS 64,57-I33. Hinard, F., 1985, Sylla, Paris. Hinrichs, F. T., 1970, 'Die lateinische Tafel von Bantia und die Lex de piratis' Hermes gg, 4i3, s02. Hirata, R., 1991, 'Die Entstehung der römischen Republik und ihre erste Magistratur,, Kodai Z, 2t_43. Hock, R. P., r99r-92, Review of Mitchell 1990, classical worlcl g5,73r. Hoffmann, W., 1951, 'Plebs', RE XXL1, coll. 13-103. Hölkeskamp, K.-J., 198j, Die Entstehung der Nobititöt. Studien zur sozialen und politischen Geschichte der römischen Repubtik im 4. Jhdt. v.chr., stuttgart. 1988a, 'Die Entstehung der Nobilität und der Funktionswandel des Volkstribunats. Die historische Bedeutung der lex Hortensia de plebiscitis', Archiv Kutturgeschichte 70, fiir 271-312. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 195 1988b, 'Das Plebiscitum Ogulnium de sacerdotibus' , Rheinisches Museum r3r, 5r-67. fitr Philologie 1990, 'Senat und Volkstribunat im fnihen 3. Jh. v.Chr .' , Staat und Staatlichkeit, 437 -457 1993, 'Conquest, Competition and Consensus. Roman Expansion in Italy and the Rise of . 42, 12-39. 1995,'Oratoris marima scaena. Reden vor dem Volk in der politischen Kultur der Republik', M. Jehne (Hrsg.), Demokratie in Rom? Zur Rolle des Volkes in der Politik der the Nobilitas', Historia römischen Republik (Historia Einzelschriften 96), Stuttgart, Il-49. 1996, 'Exempla und mos maiorum. Uberlegungen zum kollektiven Gedächtnis der Nobilität', H.-J. Gehrke & A. Möller (Hrsg.), Vergangenheit und Lebenswelt. Soziale Kommunikation, Traditionsbildung und historisches Bewut3tsein, TiJbingen, 301-337. Homo, L. P., 1929, Roman Political Institutions, London. Hopkins, K. & Burtotr, G., 1983, 'Political Succession in the Late Republic (249-50 BC)', K. Hopkins (ed.), Death and Renewal (Sociological Studies in Roman History 2), Cambridge, 31-119. Humbert, M., 1988, 'Le tribunatde laplöbe et le tribunal du peuple. Remarques sur I'histoirede la provocatio ad populum' , MEFRA 100, 431-503. Humbert, M a Laffi. U. / Crawford, M. H. / Gabba,E., 1996,'Discussione a proposito di Roman Statutes (edited by M. H. Crawford, London 1996)', Athenaeum 84 (n.s. 74), 604-606 1606-609 1609. Humm, M., 2000, 'spazio e tempo civici. Riforma delle tribi e riforma del calendario alla fine del quarto secolo a.C.', The Middle Republic,9l-119. Hurlet, F., 1993, La dictature de Sylla. Monarchie ou magistrature röpublicaine? Essai d'histoire constitutionnetle (Etudes de philologie, d'archdologie et d'histoire anciennes 30), Bruxelles Rome. Ihne, W., 1866, 'Uber die Entstehung und ältesten Befugnisse des römischen Volkstribunats', fiir Philologie 21, 16I-179. 1873, 'Die Entwicklung der römischen Tributcomitien', Rheinisches Museum fitr Rheinisches Museum Philologie 28, 353-379. Jahn, J. , 1972, Zur lteration der Magistraturen in der römischen Republik, Chiron2, 17l-174. Jashemski, W. F., 1950, Origin and History of Proconsular and Propraetorian Imperium to 27 rc, Chicago. Jehne, M., lgg2,'Il omagister populi, dall'etä regia alla prima repubblica', Labeo 38, 78-87. I995a, 'Die Beeinflussung von Entscheidungen durch Bestechung. Zur Funktion des Ambitus in der römischen Republik', M. Jehne (Hrsg.), Demokratie in Rom? Zur Rolle des Volkes in iler Potitik der römischen Republik (Historia Einzelschriften 96), Stuttgart, 5r-76. 1995b, 'Einflihrung . Zur Debatte um die Rolle des Volkes in der römischen Politik', M. Jehne (Hrsg.), Demokratie in Rom? Zur Rolle des Volkes in der Politik der römischen Republik (Historia Einzelschriften 96), Stuttgart, 1-9. Johnson, A. C. et al. (eds.) Ancient Roman Statutes. A Translation with Introduction, Commentary, Glossary, and Index, Austin 1961. Jolowicz, H. F., 1932, Historical Introduction to the Study of Roman Law, Cambridge. Jones, A. H. M., 1960, 'De tribunis plebis reficiendis', Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 6, 35-39. 1972, The Criminal Courts of the Roman Republic and Principate, Oxford. 196 KAJ SANDBERG Kahrstedt, U., l9l7lI9l8, 'Die Patrizier und die Tributkomitien', Rheinisches Museum fhr Philologie 72, 258-266. Karlowa, O. , 1 896, ' Intra pomoerium und extra pomoerium' , Festgabe Grossherzog Friedrich von Baden, Heidelberg, 49- 100. Kaser, M., 7949, Das altrömische ius, Göttingen. Kalz, B. R., 1975, 'The First Fruits of sulla's March" L'Antiquitö classique 44, I0o-I25. Keaveney, A., 1982, Sulla. The Last Republican, London Canberra. 1983a, 'Studies in the dominatio Sullae', Klio 65, -lg5-20g. 1983b, 'What Happened in 88?', Eirene 20, 53-86. Kienast, D., 1957, Review of Bleicken 1955, Gnomon 29, 103-10g. I975,'Die politische Emanzipation der Plebs und die Entwicklung des Heerwesens im friihen Rom', Bonner Jahrbilcher 175,83-IIZ. Kierdorf, W., 1980, 'Catos Origines und die Anfänge der römischen Geschichts-schreibung', Chiron 10,205-224. Klein, R. (Hrsg.), 1973, Das Staatsdenken der Römel, Darmstadt. 1975, Römischer Staat und Staatsgedankea, Z:jLrich- Stuttgart. Klingmiiller, F., 1909, 'Fenus', RE Vl.Z, coll. ZI87-2205. Kloft, H. , 1977, Prorogation und auJ3erordentliche Imperien 326-81 v. Chr. (Jntersuchungen zur Veffissung der römischen Republik (Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie 84), Meisenheim am Glan. Klotz, 4., 7964, Livius und seine Vorgönger, Amsterdam. Konrad, C. F., 1996, 'Notes on Roman Also-Rans', J. Linderski (ed.), Imperium sine fine. T. Robert S. Broughton and the Roman Republic (Historia Einzelschriften 105), Stuttgart, t03-43. Kornemann, E., 1900, 'Concilium', RE IV.1, coll. 801-830. Kubitschek, W., 1937, 'Tribus', RE Ylt.2, coll.2492-2518. Kribler, B., 1901, 'Decemvirr', RE IV.2, coll. 2256-2265. 1920, 'Sacrosanctum', RE It .2, coll. 1684-1688. 1949, 'Patres, patricii', RE XVIIL4, coll. 2222-2232. Kunkel, W., 1955, 'Bericht iiber neuere Arbeiten zur römischen Verfassungsgeschichtel', ZSS 72,288-325. 1964, Römische Rechtsgeschichte. Eine Einfiihrunga, Köln_ Graz. 1971, 'Gesetzesrecht und Gewohnheitsrecht in der Verfassung der römischen Republik', Romanitas 9,357-315. 1972, 'Magistratische Gewalt und Senatsherrschaft', ANRW I.2,3-22. Kunkel, W. a Wittmann, R.,1995, Staatsordnung und Staatspraxis der römischen RepubliklL Die Magistratur (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, Rechtsgeschichte des Altertums X.3.2.2), Mr,inchen. Labruna, L., I995a,'Qualche riflessione sulla recente storiografia giuridica relativa alla cd. "democrazia" dei romani', L. Labruna, Nemici non pii cittadini2, Napoli, 47-69. I995b,'Adversus plebem dictator', L. Labruna, Nemici non piil cittadiniz, Napoli,71- Laffi, rt4. u., 1986, 'La lex Rubria de Gallia cisalpina', Athenaeum 74 (n.s. 64), 5-44. 1990, 'Di nuovo sulla datazione delfragmentum Atestinum' , Athenaeum 78 (n.s. 68), 167r75. Lanciani, R., 1893-190I, Forma urbis Romae, Milano (repr. Roma 1990). MAGISTRATES AND Lange, L., 1875,'Die ASSEMBLIES 197 promulgatio trinundinum, die lex Caecilia Didia, und nochmals die lex Pupia' I876-79, Römische Altertiimer 13, II3, III2, Berlin' 1887, 'De sacrosanctae potestatis tribuniciae natura eiusque origine commentatio' , Kleine Scriften aus dem Gebiete der classischen Altertumswissenschaft II, Göningen, 545-590. Last, H. , 1945,'The. Servian Reforms', -rRS 35, 30-48' Le Gall, J., 1959, 'Ä propos de la muraille Servienne et du pomerium', Etudes d'Archöologie Classique 2, 4l-54. Lehmann, G. A., 1980, Potitische Reformvorschläge in der Krise der spöten römischen Republik. Cicero De Legibus iii und Sallusts Sendschreiben an Caesar, Meisenheim am Glan. Lengle, J ., 1937 , 'Tribunus', RE YIe'.2, coll. 2432-2492' Lepore, E., 1990, 'La crisi della "nobilitas". Fra reazione e riforma', Storiadi RomaIl.I,737758. Levi, M. A., 1983, 'Roma arcaica e il connubio fra plebei epatriz\', PP 38,24I-259. 1990, 'Sul patriziato romano' , PP 45, 43I-442. 1993, 'Introduzione al convegno su Roma arcaica', Bilancio critico,9-I2. Levick, B. M. , 1982,'Sulla's March on Rome in 88 sc" Historia 31, 503-508. de Libero, L., Igg2, Obstruktion. Potitische Praktiken im Senat und in der Volksversammlung der ausgehentlen römischen Republik (70-49 v.Chr.) (Hermes Einzelschriften 59), Stuttgart. 1995, Review of SPQR, Historische Zeitschrift 261, 160-162. Liebenam, W., 1900, 'Comitia', RE IV.1, coll. 679-715. Linderski, J., 1985, 'Buying the Vote. Electoral Corruption in the Late Republic', Ancient World r1,87-94. 1986a, 'The Augural Law', ANRW II' 16.3, 2146-2312. 1986b, 'Religious Aspects of the Conflict of the Orders. The Case of confarreatio' , Social Struggles, 244-261. 1990, 'The Auspices and the Struggle of the Orders', Staat und Staatlichkeit,34-48. 1993, 'Roman Religion in Livy', W. Schuller (Hrsg.), Livius. Aspekte seines Werkes (Xenia. Konstanzer Althistorische Vorträge und Forschungen 31), Konstanz, 53-70. 1995, Review of Bergemann 1992 and de Libero 1992, Classical Philology 90, 192-195. 1996, Review of Forsythe 1994, AJPh ll7 ,329-332. Linderski, J. a Kaminska-Linderski, A.,1973, 'A. Gabinius A. f. Capito and the FirstVoter in the Legislative comitia tributa', ZPE 12,247-252. Lintott, A. W. , 1965,'Trinundinum', Classical Quarterly 59,281-285. 1968, Violence in Republican Rome, Oxford. 1971,'The Tribunate of P. Sulpicius Rufus' , Classical Quarterly 21,442-453. 1972, 'Provocatio. From the Struggle of the Orders to the Principate', ANRW I.2, 226267. 1976, 'Notes on the Roman Law Inscribed at Delphi and Cnidos', ZPE 20, 65-82. 1978, 'The quaestiones de sicariis et veneficis and the Latin lex Bantina' , Hermes 106, 125-138. 1980, Review of P. F. Girard & H. Senn, Les lois des romains. T editionpar un Sroupe de romanistes des Textes de droit romain II (Paris - Napoli 1977), JR970,209. 1981 , 'The leges de repetundis and Associate Measures under the Republic' , ZSS 98, 162- 2r2. 1982, 'The Roman Judiciary Law from Tarentum', ZPE 45,127-138' 1985, Review of Hackl 1982, JRS 75,237-238. 198 KAJ SANDBERG 1987, 'Democracy in the Middle Republic' , ZSS 704,34-52. 1990, 'Electoral Bribery in the Roman Republic', .rRS 80, 1-16. 1992, Judicial Reform and Land Reform in the Roman Republic, Cambridge. 1993, Imperium Romanum. Politics and Administration, London New York. - CAII IX, lI5. I994a,'The Crisis of the Republic. Sources and Source-Problems', I994b,'Political History, f46-95 BC', CAII IX, 40-103. 1999, The Constitution of the Roman Republic, Oxford 1999. Lobrano, G., 1974,'Potestates, potestas, tribunicia potestas', Il problema del potere in Roma repubblicanc, Sassari, 41-150. I975, 'Plebei magistratus, patricii magistratus, magistratus populi Romani', SDHI 4I, 245-277. 1982, Il potere dei tribuni della plebe, Milano. Lo Cascio, E., 1988, 'Ancora sui censi minimi delle cinque classi "Serviane"', AthenaeumT6 (n.s. 66), 273-302. Loewenstein, K., 1973, The Governance of Rome, The Hague. von Lribtow , U ., 1952, 'Die lex curiata de imperio' , ZSS 69 , 154-1,7 L 1955, Das römische Volk. Sein Staat und sein Recht, Frankfurt am Main. Luce, T. J . , 1977 , Livy. The Composition of His History, Princeton. Lugli, G, et al., 1952-1969, Fontes ad topographiam veteris urbis Romae pertinentes I-YII, Roma. Luisi, N. D., 1993,'Sul problema delle tabelle di voto nelle votazioni legislative. Contributo all'interpretazione di Cic. ad. An. I.1.4.5', Index 2I, I-33. MacCormack, G., 1973,'The lex Poetelia', Labeo 19,306-317. Mackie, N., 1992, 'Popularis Ideology and Popular Politics at Rome in the First Century BC', Rheinisches Museum fiir Philologie 135, 49-73. McDermott, W. C. , 1.977, 'Lex de tribunicia potestate (70 BC)' , Classical Philology 72, 49-52. MacMullen, R., 1980, 'How Many Romans Voted?', Athenaeum 58, 454-457. Maddox, G., 1984, 'The Binding Plebiscite', Sodalitas. Scritti in onore di Antonio GuarinoI, Napoli. 85-95. Magdelain, A., 1968, Recherches sur l'"imperiumr. La loi curiate et les auspices d'investiture (Travaux et recherches de la facultd de droit et des sciences 6conomiques de Paris, sdr. Sciences historiques 12), Paris. 1969, 'Praetor maximus et comitiatus maximus' , Iura 20,257-286. 1976, 'Le pomerium archaique etle mundus', Revue des ötudes latines 54,7I-I09. I978, La loi å Rome. Histoire d'un concepl (Collection d'6tudes latines, s6r. scientif. 34), Paris. 1985, Review of Lobrano 1982, Latomus 44, 888-889. 1986, 'Le izs archaique', MEFRA 98,265-358. 1988,'Provocatio ad populum', Estudios en homenaje al Prof. Juan lglesias 407-423. Madrid, 1905, De Romanorum iuris publici sacrique vocabulis sollemnibus in Graecum sermonem conversis, Lipsiae. Malkin, I. aRubinson, W. Z. (eds.), 1995,Leaders andMasses inthe RomanWorld. Studiesin New York. Honor of Zvi Yavetz, Leiden Manfredini, A. D. , 1976,'Tre leggi nel quadro della crisi del v secolo', Labeo 22, 198-23L Mannino, y ., 1979, L'auctoritas patrum, Milano. Magie, D., I, MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 199 Mantovani, D . , 1996, Review of Flach, GFRR, Athenaeum 84 (n. s ' 7 4), 646-649 . Margadant, G. F., 1977,'El tribunadodelaplebe. Ungigantesindescendencia', Index7,169200. Marino, E. A., 1974, Aspetti della politica interna di Silla, Palermo. Marquardt, J., I 88 1 -85, Römi s che St aat svetwaltung 12 -III2, Leipz\g. Marshall, B. a Beness, J. L.,1987, 'Tribunician Agitationand Aristocratic Reaction 80-71 sC', Athenaeum 75 (n.s. 65), 361-378. Martin, J., 1970,'Die Provokation in der klassischen und späten Republik', Hermes 98,72-96' Martini, R., 1984-85,'Nugae comitiales I. Un giorno di elezione a Roma', Annali della Facoltd di Giurisprudenza (IJniversitä di Genova) 20, 214-22I. Martorana, G., 1978, Intra pomerium, extra pomerium (Quaderni dell'Istituto di scienze antropologiche e geografiche dell'Universitä di Palermo), Palermo. Maschke, R., 1906, Zur Theorie und Geschichte der römischen Agrargesetze, Ti.ibingen. Mason, H. J., 1970, 'The Roman Government in Greek Sources. The Effect of Literary Theory on the Translation of Official Titles' , Phoenix 24, 150-159. I974, Greek Terms for Roman Institutions. A Lexicon and Analysis (American Studies in Papyrology 13), Toronto. Mastrocinque, A., 1988, Lucio Giunio Bruto. Ricerche di storia, religione e diritto sulle origini della repubblica romana, Trento. Mattingly, H. 8., 1969, 'The Two Republican Laws of the Tabula Bembina', -/RS 59, I29-I43. Mazzarino,5.,lgTI-72, 'Sul tribunato della plebe nella storiografia romana', Helikon lll12,99119. publica amissa. Eine Studie zu Verfassung und Geschichte der späten römi s chen Rep ublik, Wiesbaden. Meijer, F. J., 1990, 'The Financial Aspects of the leges frumentariae of 123-58 sC' . Milnsterische Beitröge zur antiken Handelsgeschichte 9, 14-23. Meinhart, M. (ed.), 1983, 'Lex' , Vocabularium iurisprudentiae Romanae IIL2, Berlin - New York, coll. l5I7-1557. Meyer, Ed., 1895, 'Der Ursprung des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der vier Tribus', Hermes 30, I-24 (: Kleine Schriften I, Halle 1910, 353-379). Meyer, 8., 1961 , Römischer Staat und Staatsgedankå, Darmstadt' Meier, C., 1966, K., Res , The Calendar of the Roman Republic, Princeton' Millar, F., Ig77 , The Emperor in the Roman World (31 BC - AD 337), London. Michels, A. 1967 1984, 'The Political Character of the Classical Roman Republic,200-151 BC', J.RS 74,I- 19. 1986, 'Politics, Persuasion, and the People before the Social War (150-90 nc)', JRS76, 1-11. 1989, 'Political Power in Mid-Republican Rome. Curia or Comitium?' (review discussion of Social Struggles), JRS 79, 138-150' 1995a,'1.ire iast Century of the Republic. Whose History?' (review article on CAII 7X' The Last Age of the Roman Repubtic, I 46-43 rc, Cambridge 1994), "IÄS 85 , 236-243 1995b, 'Popular Politics at Rome in the Late Republic', Malkin a Rubinson 1995,91. 113. 1998, The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic (Jerome Lectures 22), Ann Arbor. 2OO KAJ SANDBERG Mitchell, R. 8., 1984, 'Historical Development in Livy,, D. F. Bright & E. S. Ramage (eds.), Classical Texts and Their Traditions. Studies in Honor of C. R. Trahman, Chico (Calif,), n9-199. 1986, 'The Definition of patres andplebs. An End to the Struggle of the Orders', Social Struggles , 130-17 4 1990, Patricians and Plebeians. The Origin of the Roman State,Ithaca - London. Momigliano, A., 1955, 'Ancient History and the Antiquarian', fPrimol Contributo alla storia degli studi classici, Roma, 6i -I03. 1965, 'Did Fabius Pictor Lie?' (review of Alföldi 1964), The New york Review of Books 5'3, 16 September f965, 19-22 (: Id., Essays in Ancient anrl Modern Historiography, Oxfbrd 1977,99-105). \969a, 'Osservazioni sulla distinzione fra patrizi e plebei', Quarto contributo alla storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico, Roma. I969b,'Praetor marimus e questioni affini', Quarto contributo alla storia degti stucli classici e del mondo antico, Roma, 403-417. 1980, 'Prolegomena a ogni futura metafisica sulla plebe romana' Sesto contributo alla storio degli studi classici e del mondo antico, Roma, 480-4g9. 1986,'TheRiseof theplebs intheArchaicAgeof Rome', Socialstruggles,lT5-Igi. Momigliano, A. & Cornell, T. J., L996,'Comitia', OCD3,372-313. Mommsen, Th., 1858, 'Sui modi usati da'romani nel conservare e pubblicare le leggi e senatus consulti', Annali dell'lnstituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica 30, I8I-2IZ 1: 1g., Gesammelte Schrifien III, Berlin 1907 , 290-313). 1864, 'Die patricisch-plebejischen Comitien der Republik nach Centurien, Curien und Tribus', Römische Forschungen I, Berlin 1964, 134-166. Moore, T. J., 1992, Review of Mitchell 1990, AJph II3, 463-465. Mouritsen, H., 2001 , Plebs and Politics in the Late Roman Republic, cambridge. Mrinzer, F ., 1920, Römische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamitien, Stuttgart. Musti, D., 1988, 'Lotte sociali e storia delle magistrature', Storia di RomaI,36i-395. Niccolini, G., 1928, 'Le leges sacratae', Historia2,3-18. 1932, Il tribunato della plebe, Milano. 1934, I fasti dei tribuni della plebe, Milano. Nicholls, J. J., 1956, 'The Reform of the comitia centuriata', AJph 7i,225-254. 7967, 'The Content of the lex curiata' , AJph 88,25i-279. Nicolai, R., 1993, Review of Gabba \991, Athenaeum 8I (n.s. 71), 679-6g3. Nicolet, C., 1974, 'Polybe et les institutions romaines' , Polybe. Neuf exposös suivis de discussions (Entretiens sur I'antiquitd classique 20), vandauvres Gendve, 209-265. - de la philosophie I976a, 'L'id6ologie du systöme centuriate et I'influence grecque', La filosofia Sreca e il diritto romano (Colloquio italo-francese, Roma, aprile 1973), Roma, III.\31. 1976b, Le mötier de citoyen dans Ia Rome röpublicaine, paris. 1980a, The world of the citizen in Republican Rome, Berkeley Los - \a lexAngeles. 1980b, 'Economie, soci6t6 et institutions au IIe siöcle av. J.-C. De Claudiaä,1'ager exceptus' , Annales 35, 871-894. 1983a, 'Polybe et la "constitution" de Rome. Aristocratie et ddmocratie', C. Nicolet (6d.), Demokratia et aristokratia;Å propos de Gaius Gracchus. Mots grecs et röalitös romaines, Paris,15-35. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 201 1983b,'La poldmique politique au n'siöcle avant J6sus-Christ', C. Nicolet (6d.), Demokratia et aristokratia:A propos de Gaius Gracchus. Mots grecs et röalitös romeines, Paris, 38-53. Nicolet, C. (6d.) 1980c, Insula sacra. La loi Gabinia-Calpurnia de Dölos, 58 av.J.-C. (Collection de l'Ecole Frangaise de Rome 45), Rome. 1888, 'Das sogenannte Licinisch-Sextische Ackergesetz', Hermes 23, 410-423. B., Niese, Nippel, W., 1980, Mischverfassungstheorie und Verfassungsrealität in Antike und fri)her Neuzeit, , Stuttgart. G., 1940, Il potere dei comizi e i suoi limiti, Milano. North, J., 1989a, 'Religion in Republican Rome', CAI-P VII'?, Nocera, 573-624. 1989b, 'The Roman Counter-Revolution' (review article on Brunt 1988), -rRS 79, 151156. 1990a, 'Democratic Politics in Republican Rome', Past a Present 126,3-2L 1990b, 'Politics and Aristocracy in the Roman Republic', Classical Philology 85,277' 287. Oakley, S. P., 1997 , A Commentary on Livy. Books VI-X I, Oxford. Ogilvie, R. M., 1958, 'Livy, Licinius Macer and the libri lintei', -IAS 48, 40-46. 1965, A Commentary on Livy. Books 1-5, Oxford. Ogilvie, R. M, & Drummond, A., 1989, 'The Sources for Early Roman History', CAI( VlI'z, r-29. d'Ors, A., 1986, La ley flavia municipal. Texto y comentario (Pontfficium institutum utriusque iuris: Studia et documenta 7), Roma. Paananen, IJ ., 1993, 'Legislation in the comitia centuriata' , SPQR, 9-73. Pabst, W., 1969, Quellenkritische Studien zur inneren römischen Geschichte der ölteren Zeit bei T. Livius und Dionys von Halikarnass, Diss. Innsbruck. Pais, 8., 1898-1899, Storia di Roma I-II, Torino. 1906, Ancient Legends of Roman History, London. 1909, 'Le leggi Pinaria Furia ed Acilia sull'intercalazione sono esistite?' , Studi storici per I'antichitd classica 2, 184-213. I9l3-I920, Storia critica di Roma durante i primi cinque secoli I-IY, Roma. Pallottino, M., 1979,'Lo sviluppo socio-istituzionale di Roma arcaica alla luce di nuovi documenti epigrafici', Studi romani 27, I-14. 1993,'Contributo delle scoperte archeologiche ed epigrafiche allo studio dei problemi socio-politici di Roma arcaica', Bilancio critico, 25-26. Palmer, R. E. A. , 1969, The King and the Comitium. A Study of Rome's Oldest Public Document (Historia Einzelschriften 1 1), Wiesbaden. 1970, The Archaic Community of the Romans, Cambridge. Panciera, S., 1987, 'Ancora tra epigrafia e topografia', L'Urbs. Espace urbain et histoire (1" siöcle av.J.-C. - ilf siåcle ap.J.-C.). Actes du,colloque international organisö par le Centre national de la recherche scientffique et l'Ecole franEaise de Rome, Rome, 8-12 mai /985 (Collection de I'Ecole frangaise de Rome 98), Rome, 61-86. 1.995,'La produzione epigrafica di Roma in etä repubblicana. Le officine lapidarie', H. Solin er at. (edd.), Acta colloquii epigraphici Latini, Helsingiae 3.-6- sept. 1991 habiti (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 104), Helsinki,319-337 (+ Appendice, 338342). Pani, M. , 1991, 'Gruppi di governo e clientele. Assemblee, elezioni', S. Settis (a cura di), Civiltd dei RomaniII. Il potere e I'esercito, Milano, 46-56. 202 KAJ SANDBERG 1996, 'Su Polibio e la politica a Roma fia pubblico e privato', C. Stella & A. Valvo (a cura di), Studi in onore di Albino Garzetti, Brescia, 299-3IL 1997, La politica in Roma antica. Cultura e prassi, Roma. Paterson, J., 1985, 'Politics in the Late Republic', T. P. Wiseman (ed.), Roman PoliticalLife, 90 BC-AD 69, Exeter, 2I-43 Pelling, C. B. R. , 1996,'Historiography, Roman', OCD3,7rc-7n. Peppe, L., 1990, 'La nozione di populus e le sue valenze. Con un'indagine sulla terminologia pubblicistica nelle fbrmule della evocatio e della devotio', Staat und Staattichkeit,3I2. J+J. Perelli, L.,1979,'Note sul tribunato della plebe nella riflessione ciceroniana', Quaderni di storia 10, 285-303. 1982, Il movimento popolare nell'ultimo secolo della repubblica,Torino, Phillips, J.8., 1982,'Current Research in Livy's First Decade. 1959-1979', ANRW II.30.2, 9981057. Piccaluga, G., 1974, Terminus. I segni di confine nella religione romana (Quaderni di Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni), Roma. Pina Polo, F., 1995, 'Procedures and Function of Civil and Military contiones in Rome', Klio 17 , 203-2t6. J., 1975, Military Tribunes and Plebeian Consuls. The Fasti from 444 V to 342 V (Historia Einzelschriften 24), Wiesbaden. Pisani Sartorio, G., 1993, 'Aesculetum', E. M. Steinby (a cura dr), Lexicon topographicumurbis Pinsent, Romae I, Roma. Pölönen, J., 1999,'Lex Voconia and Conflicting Ideologies of Succession. Privileging Agnatic Obligation over Cognatic Family Feeling', Arctos 33, lI1-131. Poma, G., 1984, Tra legislatori e tiranni. Problemi storici e storiografici sull'etd delle nt tuvole (Studi di storia 2), Bologna. 1990, 'Considerazioni sul processo di formazione della tradizione annalistica. Il caso della sedizione militare del342 a.C.', Staat und Staatlichkeit, 139-157. Raaflaub, K., 1986a, 'The Conflict of the Orders in Archaic Rome. A Comprehensive and Comparative Approach', Social Struggles, I-5L 1986b, 'From Protection and Defense to Offense and Participation. Stages in the Conflict of the Orders' , Social Struggles, f98-243. 1993, 'Politics and Society in Fifth-Century Rome', Bilancio critico,l2g-I57. Ranouil, P.-C., 1975, Recherches sur le patriciat, 509-366 av.J.Chr., Paris. Rawson, F,., 1971, 'Prodigy Lists and the Use of the annales marimi', Classical Quarterly 21, I 58- 1 69. 1916, 'The First Latin Annalists' , Latomus 35, 689-717. 1985, Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic, London. Richard, J.-C., 1978, Les origines de la plåbe romaine. Essai sur la formation du dualisme patricio-plöböien (BEFAR 232), Paris - Rome. 1979, 'Sur le pldbiscite ut liceret consules ambos plebeios creari (Tite-Live vil.42,2)', Historia 28, 65-75. 1986, 'Patricians and Plebeians. The Origin of a Social Dichotomy', Social Struggles, r05-r29. 1990, 'R6f'lexions sur le tribunat consulaire', MEFRA 102,167-799. 1993, 'Rdf'lexions sur les norigines" de la plöbe', Bilancio critico,2T-41. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 203 1995, 'Un nouvel inventaire des lois d'6poque protor6publicaine' (ä propos de Flach, GFRR), RgL73,22-28. Ridley, R. T., 1968, 'Notes on the Establishment of the Tribunate of the Plebs', Latomus 2J, 535-554. 1980a, 'Fastenkritik. A Stocktaking' , Athenaeum 58 (1980), 264-298' 1980b, 'Livy and the concilium plebis, Klio 62,337-354. 1983,' Falsi triumphi, plures consulatus', Latomus 42, 312-382. 1986a, 'The *Consular Tribunate". The Testimony of Livy', Klio 68 (1986), 444-4651986b, 'The Genesis of a Turning-Point. Gelzer's Nobilität', Historia35, 474-502. 1990,'Patavinitas among the Patricians? Livy and the Conflict of the Orders', Staat und Staatlichkeil, 103-138. 1992, Review of Mitchell 1990, Classical Review 42, 464-466. Rilinger, R., 1976, Der EinftuJ3 des Wahlteiters bei den römischen Konsulwahlen von 366 bis 50 v.Chr. (Vestigia 24), Miinchen. 1989, Review of Grziwotz 1985, Gnomon 6I,362-364. Robinson, O. F., L997 , The Sources of Roman Law, London - New York' Rocher, L. S., 1984, Et tribunado de la plebe en la Repubblica arcaia (494-287 a.C.), Zaragoza. Rodrigues-Ennes, L., 1983, 'La oprovocatio ad populum" como garantia fundamental del ciudadano romano frente al poder coercitivo del magistrado en la 6poca republicana', Studi in onore di Arnaldo Biscardi IV, Milano, 73-114. plebiscita' , Mededeelingen der concilium plebis, leges Roos, A. G., 1940, 'Comitia tributa reeks, deel 3. Afdeeling Nieuwe Wetenschappen, van Akademie Nederlandsche Letterkunde ,251-294. Rosenberg, A., 191I, (Jntersuchungen Zur römischen Zenturienverfassung, Berlin. 1913, 'studien zur Entstehung der Plebs', Hermes 48,359-377 ' Rosenstein, N., 1993, 'Competition and Crisis in Mid-Republican Rome', Phoenix 47 , 313-338. Rouland, N., 1979, Pouvoir politique et döpendance personelle dans l'Antiquitö romaine' Genåse et röle cles rapports de clientöle (Collection Latomus 166), Bruxelles. Rowe, G., 1997, Review of RS, JRS 87, 264-266. Rudolph, H., 1939, 'Das Imperium der römischen Magistrate', Neue Jahrbilcherfiir Antike und deutsche Bildung 2, 145-164. Rtipke, J., 1990, Domi militiae. Die religiöse Konstruktiondes Krieges in Rom, Stuttgart' Ryiwert, J ., 1976, The ldea of a Town. The Anthropology of Urban Form in Rome, Italy and the Ancient World, Princeton (repr. Cambridge, Mass' 1988)' (Atti Sacchetti, L., 1996, Prodigi e cronaca religiosa. Uno studio sulla storiografia latina arcaica della Accademia nazionale dei Lincei. Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche. Memorie, ser. 9, vol. 8, fasc. 2), Roma. Salmon, P., \996, Review of U. Paananen et al., SPQR (Helsinki 1993), Revue belge de Philologie et d'Histoire 74, 231' Sandberg, K., 1991 , Populus plebesque. En studie i romersk komitial legislation under republiken (unpublished tr,täster'i thesis), Department of History, Äbo Akademi University. 1993, 'The concilium ptebis as a Legislative Body during the Republic', SPQR,74-96. 1997, Curiae, centuriae och tribus. Komitial legislation i republikens Rom före Graccherna (unpublished thesis fbr the Licentiate Degree), Department of History, Abo Akademi UniversitY. 2000, 'Tribunician and Non-Tribunician Legislation in Mid-Republican Rome', The Middle Republic, I2I-140. 204 KAJ SANDBERG Santilli, A., 1981 ,'Le agitazioni agrarie dal424 alla presa di Veii', Legge e societdI,28l-306. savunen, L., 1993,'Debt Legislation in the Fourth century BC', speR, 143-159. Schiller, A., 1978, Roman Law. Mechanisms of Development, New york. Schneider, H.-C., 1977, Die Entstehung der römischen Militärdiktatur. Kriese und l{iedergang einer antiken Republik, KöLn. von Schwind, F., 1940, Zur frage der Pubtikation im römischen Recht mit Ausbticken in das altgriechische und ptolemöische Rechtsgebier (Mrinchener Beiträge zur Papyrusfbrschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte 31), Miinchen. Scullard, H. H., 1951, Roman Politics,220-150 rc, oxford (2nd ed. oxford lgl-3). 1980, A History of the Roman World, 753-146 rC, London New york. Seager, R., 1967, 'The lex Varia de maiestate' , Historia 16, 37-43. 1987, Review of Grziwotz 1985, JRS 77, 194. 1994, 'Sulla', CAI! IX, 165-207. Seager, R. (ed.), 1969, The Crisis of the Roman Republic, Cambridge. Sehlmeyer, M., 1998, 'Livius und seine annalistischen Quellen l1ir das fnihe Rom' (review article on Chassignet 1996; Forsythe 1994; Walt 1997 and Oakley 1997, Gymnasium 105, 553561. Serrao, F., IgJ4, Classi, partiti e legge nella Roma repubblicana, pisa. 1981a, 'Lotta di classe e legislazione popolare nel v e Iv secolo a.C', Legge e societdl, xiii-xxviii. 1981b, 'Lotte per la terra e per la casa a Roma dal 485 5 1- 180. al 441 a.C.', Legge e societdl, Shackleton Bailey, D. R., 1986,'Nobiles and novi Reconsidered', AJph r07,255-260. Sherk, R. K. , 1970, The Municipal Decrees of the Roman West (Arethusa Monographs 2), Buffalo. Sherwin-White, A. N., 1972, 'The Date of the lex repetundarumand its consequences', -IR,S62, 83-99. 1982, 'The lex repetundarumand the Political Ideas of Gaius Gracchus', -IR,S 72, IB-31. 1937, 'Die ältesten römischen Volksversammlungen', ZSS 5j,233-27L 1938, plebejischen Magistraturen Hortensia (Leipziger rechtswissenschaflliche Studien 100), Leipzig. l95la,'Plebiscita', RE XXI.1, coll. 54-i3. 1951b, 'Plebs', RE XXI.1, coll. 103-187. 1952, Römis ches Verfas sung s recht in ge s chichtlicher Entwicklung, Lahr Simon, C., 1988, 'Gelzer's "Nobilität der römischen Republik" als "Wendepunkt"', Historia3i, Siber, H., Die bis zur lex . 222-240. Smith, R. E., 1977,'The Use of Force in Passing Legislationin the Late Republic', Athenaeum 55, r50-r74. Sohlberg, D., 199I, 'Militärtribunen und verwandte Probleme der fnihen römischen Republik', Historia 40,257-274. Solazzi, S., 1953, 'Sulla "lex Atinia de rebus subreptis,', Archivio giurirtico I44,3-I4. Solin, H.,1999,'Epigrafia repubblicana. Bilancio, novitå, prospettive', Ani del XI. Congresso internazionale di epigrafia greca e latina (Roma, 18-24 settembre 1997), Roma, 379-404. Solomon, J. (ed.), 1993, Accessing Antiquity. The Computerization of Classical Studies, Tucson London. Soltau, W., 1880, Uber Entstehung und Zusammensetzung der altrömischen Volksversammlungen, Berlin. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 205 Livius' Geschichtswerk, seine Komposition und seine Quellen, Leipzig1909, Die Anfönge der römischen Geschichtsschreibung, Leipzig' 1912, 'Bot Diodors annalistische Quelle die Namen der ältesten Volkstribunen?', 1897, Philologus 7l, 267 -211 1917, 'Der Dezemvirat in Sage und Geschichte', ZSS 38, l-20' Staveley, E. S., 1953,'The Reform of the comitia centuriata', AJPh 74, I-33. 1954-55,'Provocatio during the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC', Historia3,412-428. 1955, 'Tribal Legislation before lhe lex Hortensia', Athenaeum 33,3-31 1956, 'The Constitution of the Roman Republic 1940-1954', Historia 5,'74-7221962, 'C\cero and the comitia centuriata', Historia II,299-314' 1969, 'The Role of the First Voter in Roman Legislative Assemblies', Historia 18, 513. 520. 1972, Greek and Roman voting and Elections, London - Ithaca. ,The Nature and Aims of the Patriciate" Historia32,24-51. 1983, ,Rome and Italy in the Early Third Century', CAtl V11.2,420-455. 1989, Archaic de Ste. Croix, G. E. M., 1981 ,The Class Struggle inthe Ancient GreekWorld. Fromthe Age to the Arab Conquests, London. (tept. Stella Maianca, F., 1901 , Il tribunato della plebe dalla lex Hortensia alla lex Cornelia Napoli 1982). Stockton, D., 1979, The Gracchi, Oxford. Sumner, G. V. , 1960, 'Cicero on the comitia centuriata. De re publica IL22.39-40' , AJPU 8I, r36-ts6. 1962, 'Aspects of the History of the comitia centuriata in the Middle and Late Republic', Athenaeum 40, 37 -83. 1963, 'Lex Aelia, Lex Fufia', AJPU 84,337-358' ,The Legion and the centuriate organization" JrRS 60,67-78. 1970, ,The piiacy Law from Delphi and the Law of the Cnidos inscription', Greek, 197g, Roman and Byzantine Studies 19, 2II-225. Syme, R., 1939, The Roman Revolution, Oxford. ,Oligarchy at Rome. A Paradigm for Political Science" R. Syme, Roman Papers 1991, Vl, Oxford, 323-337. Talbert, R. J. A. , 7984, The Senate of Imperial Rome, Princeton' Tatum, W. J., 1993, 'The lex Papiria de tledicationibus', Classical Philology 88, 319-328. tulo., L. R., 1949, Party Politics in the Age of Caesar, Berkeley' 1957, 'The Centuriate Assembly before and after the Reform' , AJPU 78,337-354' Tribes 1960, The Voting Districts of the Roman Republic. The Thirty-five Urban and Rural Rome. 20), (papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome 1962, 'Forerunners of the Gracchi' , JRS 52, 19-27. 1966, Roman Voting Assemblies. From the Hannibalic War to the Dictatorship of Caesar, Ann Arbor (rePr. Ann Arbor 1990). ;Das Bild vom Volkstribunat in Ciceros Schriftiiber die Gesetze', Chiron Thommen, L., 1988, 18, 35',7 -37 5 . 1989, Das Volkstribunat der späten römischen Repubtik (Historia Einzelschriften 59), Stuttgart. 1995, 'Les lieux de la plöbe et ses tribuns dans la Rome rdpublicaine' , Klio 77,358-370. Thomsen, R., 1980, King Servius TuIIius. A Historical Synthesis (Humanitas 5), Copenhagen. 206 KAJ SANDBERG Tibiletti, G., 1948, 'Il possesso dell'agerpublicus e le norme cle modo agrorumsino ai Gracchi, I', Athenaeum 26, 143-236. 1949,'Il funzionamento dei comizi centuriati alla luce della Tavola Hebana', Athenaeum , 210-245. 1949,'il possesso dell'ager publicus e le norme 21 Athenaeurn 27, cle moclo agrorum sino ai Gracchi, II,, 1959, 'The "Comitia" during the Decline of the Roman Republic', SDHI 25, g4-I2j. Tilli, G., 1981, 'La c.d. "lex valeria militaris'', Legge e societd I, 3g5-399. Timpe, D., 1972,'Fabius Pictor uncl die Anfänge der römischen Historiographie', ANRWI.2, 928-969. 1979, 'Erwagungen zur jtingeren Annalistik' , Antike und Abendland 25 , 97 -IIg . Toher,M., 1986,'TheTenthTableandtheConflictof theOrders',SocialStruggles,30I-326. Tomulescu, C. S., I975, 'La valeur juridique de I'Histoire de Tite-Live', fabei2I,295-321. Tondo, S., 1993, 'Presupposti ed esiti dell'azione del trib. pl. Canuleio', Bilancio crttico,43-j3. Torelli, M., 1988, 'Dalle aristocrazie gentilizie alla nascita della plebe', Storia di RomaI, Z4I- 261. Triebel, C. A. M., 1980, Ackergesetze und politische Reformen. Eine Studie zur römischen Innenpolitik, Diss. Bonn. Troiani, L., 1987,'Alcune considerazioni sul voto nell'antica Roma (a proposito di Cic. teg. III,10)', Athenaeum 75 (n.s. 65),493-499. von Ungern-Sternberg, J., 1986a, 'The Formation of the *Annalistic Tradition,. The Exampie of the Decemvirate', Social Struggles, 77 -I04. 1986b,'The End of the conflict of the orders', social struggles, 353-377. 1990, 'Die Wahrnehmung des nStändekampt'es" in der römischen Geschichtsschreibung,, Staat und Staatlichkeit, 92-102. 1 991 , 'Die politische und soziale Bedeutung der spätrepublikanischen leges frumentariae, , A. Giovannini (6d.), Nourrir la pl\be, Basel, 19-42. Urban, R., 1973, 'Zur Entstehung des volkstribunates', Historia22,761-764. Vaahtera, J., 1990, 'Pebbles, Points, or Ballots. The Emergence of the Individual Vote in Rome', Arctos 24, 16I-177. 7993a,'on the Religious Narure of the place of Assembly', speR, 97-116. 1993b, 'The Origin of Latin suffragium, , Glotta 71, 66-90. 1997, 'Dionysius of Halicarnassus on Roman Augurs', J. Vaahtera a R. Vainio (eds.), Utriusque linguae peritus. Studia in honorem Toivo Vitjamaa (Annales Universitatis Turkuensis ser. B. tom.219), Turku, Bl-92. Valditara, G., 1989, Studi sul magister populi. Dagli ausiliari mititari del rex ai primi magistrati repubblicanl (Universitä degli studi di Milano, Pubblicazioni dell'Istituto di diritto romano 24), Milano. Vancura, J.,7924,'Leges agrariae', Rä XII.1, coll. 1150-1195. Vanderbroeck, P. J.1., 1987, Popular Leadership and Collective Behaviour in the Late Roman Republik (ca. B0-50 rc), Amsterdam. venturini, c., 1981 ,',Ilplebiscitumde multaT. Menenio dicenda" Legge e societdl, 1g1-196. Viflas, A., 1983, Funciön del tribunado de la plebe. ;Reforma potitica o revoluciön social?, Madrid. Vishnia, R. F., 1996, State, Society ancl Popular Leaders in Mid-Republican Rome 241-167 nc, London New York. - MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 20'7 walbank, F., 1957, A Historical Commentary on Polyblas I, oxford. walsh, P. G., 196I, Lity. His Historical Aims and Methods, cambridge. 1966,'L\vy', T. A. Dorey (ed.), Latin Historians, London' 115-142' 1982,'Livy and His Aims of "Historia". An analysis of the Third Decade', ANRW rr.30.2,1058-1074. Walt, S. , Ig97, Der Historiker C. Licinius Macer. Einleitung, Fragmente, Kommentar, Stuttgart. Walter, U., 2000, Review of The Middle Republic, Historische Zeitschrift 27I,7I5-711. ward, L. H. , lgg0, 'Roman Population, Territory, Tribe, city, and Army Size from the Republic's Founding to the Veientine War, 509 sc-400 BC', AJPU 111, 5-39. Account of Warrior, V. M., 1990, 'A iechnical Meaning of clucere in Roman Elections? Livy's the Elections of the Consuls for 189 BC', Rheinisches Museumfiir Philologie I33,144r57. 1992,'Intercalation and the Action of M'. Acilius Glabrio (cos. I9I BC)', C. Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature ancl Roman History YI (ColLection Latomus 217), Bruxelles, II9-I44. watson, A., l9'74, Law Making in the Later Roman Republic, oxford. Weiss, E., 1936, Grundziige der römischen Rechtsgeschichte, Reichenberg' Werner, R., Der beginn der römischen Republik, Miinchen 1963' Gewalt und Wesenberg, G., lgfi, 'Zv Frage d.t Kontinuität zwischen königlicher Beamtengewalt in Rom', ZSS 70, 58-92' westbrook, R., 1988, 'The Nature and origins of the Twelve Tables" zss 105,74-121. Wieacker, F ., lg7'l , 'Sulla plebe antica' , Labeo 23, 59-69 ' !9g0, ,lus. Die Enistehung einer Rechtsordnung im archaischen Rom', U. Immenga (Hrsg.), Rechtswissenschaft und Rechtsentwicklung (Göttinger Rechtswissenschaftliche Studien 111), Göttingen, 33-52. I9g4,'Ius e lex tn Ro-u antica', Sodalitas. Scritti in onore di Antonio Guarino YlI, Napoli, 3105-3123 ' 19gg, Römische Rechtsgeschichte. Quellenkunde, Rechtsbildung, Jurisprudenz und (Handbuchs der Rechtsliteratur I. Einteitung; Quellenkuncte. Fri)hzeit und Republlk Mtinchen. 1), 1. IIL Altertums Altertumswissenschaft , Rechtsgeschichte des und die Wiedemann, T. E. J., 1988, Review of H. Grziwotz, Der moderne Verfassungsbegriff ,römische Verfassung' in der deutschen Forschung des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts (Frankturt 1986), -rRS 78, 267-268' Willems, P., i883, Le droit publique romaitf , Louvain' Louvain. 1g7g-g3, Le sönat ai n ripuahque romaine, sa composition et ses attributiorzs, Processes of Williamson, C., 1984, Law-tt'taiing in the Comitia of Republican Rome' The Diss' Plebisciles, and Laws Retrieving and Drafiing and Disseminating, Recording London. ,Monuments of Bronze. Roman Legal Documents on Bronze Tablets' , Classical 19g7, AntiquitY 6, 160-183. t9q0, .fhe Roman Aristocracy and Positive Law', Classical PhiloloSy 85, 266-276. Acta 1995, ,The Display of Law and Archival Practice in Rome', H. Solin et al., coloquii epigråph-ici Latini, Helsingiae 3.-6. sept. 1991 habiti (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 1 04), Helsinki, 239 -25I' Wiseman, T. P., 1971, New Men in the Roman Senate, 139 aC-AD 14, Oxfotd' 1979, Clio's Cosmetics. Three Studies in Greco-Roman Literature,Leicester' .The Credibility of the Roman Annalists' , Liverpool Classical Monthly 8,20-22' 19g3, 208 KAJ SANDBERG 1994, 'The Origins of Roman Historiography (The 1993 Ronald Syme Lecture)', T. p. Wiseman, Historiography and Imagination. Eight Essays on Roman Culture (Exeter Studies in History 33), Exeter, I-22, Il9-I24. 1996, 'What Do We Know about Early Rome?' (review article on Cornell 1995), Journal of Roman Archaeology 9, 310-315. Wittek, P., 1922, 'Die Zenturienordnung als Quelle zur älteren römischen Sozial- und Verfassungsgeschichte', Vierteljahrschrift flir Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte 16, I-3g. Wittmann, R., 1984, 'Res publica recuperata. Grundlagen und Zielsetzung der Alleinherrschaft des L. Cornelius Sulla', D. Nörr a D. Simon (Hrsg.), Gedöchtnisschrffifi)r W. Kunkel, Frankfurt am Main, 563-582. Yakobson, A. , 1992, ' Petitio et largitio. Popular Participation in the Centuriate Assembly of the Late Republic', "/ÄS 82,32-52. 1993, 'Dionysius of Halicarnassus on a Democratic Change in the Centuriate Assembly', Scripta Classica Israelica 72, 139-155. 1995, 'The Secret Ballot and Its Effects in the Late Roman Republic', Hermes I23,426442. 1997, 'Mid-Republican Rome and Popular Politics' (review article on Vishnia [1996]), Scripta Classica Israelica 16, 252-258. 1999, Elections and Electioneering in Rome. A Study in the Political System of the Late Republic (Historia Einzelschriften 128), Stuttgart. Zusi,L.,l975,'Patriziato e plebe. Rassegna degli studi 1966-1971', Critica storica lZ,I7i-230. INDEX NOMINUM M'. (rr. pt. 191), 50, 60 f., 148. Aciiius Glabrio, 201, pr. cos. 196, BaebiusTamphilus, M. (rr. pl.l94?, cos. 181),51, 90, 90 note 26, 148' Acilius Glabrio, M'. (lr. pl. 122?),70 Acilius Glabrio, M'. (pr.'/0, cos. 61),73. Aelius Catus, Sex. (cos. eo 4),82. Caecilius Metellus Celer, Q cos. 60), 55 note 40' Aemilia, Vestal Caecilius Metellus Delmaticus, Virgin,71. Aemilius Lepidus, M.(pr. c.43-36),81, 110 49, cos. 42, IIIvir r. note2',7. Aemilius Lepidus Porcina, 91. M. (cos' 137), 78 note 431 76. ,434,426), Aemilius Papus, L. (cos.225, cens.220), 100 15. Aemilius Paullus, 164), 140. L.(pr. l9l, AemiliusScaurus,M.(cos. Allius Tubero, Q., 33. Anicius Gallus, Antiochus III, L.(pr. 51. cos. 182,168, with cens. 115),78,93,94f. 168, cos. 160), Anrius, C. (tr. pt.63), 55 note 140. 40. M. f. (Hibrida), C. (tr. p\.68?, pr.66, cos. 63),54 f .,65 note 8, 148, Antonius, M. (rr. pl. 49, cos. 44,34), 57,63,19, Anronius i48. Antonius Merenda, T. (Xvir leg. scrib.450), 148. Appuleius Saturninus, L. (tr' pt. 103, 100), 72. Aquilius, . (rr. pl.), 5'/ , 15, 148. Aternius Varus Fontinalis, A. (cos. 454, tr. pl. 448?),76. Atilius, L. (tr. p1.210), 50, 148. Atilius Serranus, Sex. (cos. 136),92, 95 f . Atinius Labeo, C. (tr. pl. 196, pr.195), 140. Attalus III, 53. Aufeius, ? (pr. 123?),92. Aufidius Lurco, M. (rr. pl.6l),55, 148. Aurelius Cotta, L. Qtraet.70, cos.65), 61 ,19,gl nore 1, i48. Aurronius Paetus, P. (cos. desig.65),55. ? pl' 68?, pr' 63, L. (cos' ll9),71, Caecilius Metellus Nepos, Q. (cos' 98)' 78' 95' caeciliusRufus, 148' Caelius Rufus, Aemilius Mamercinus, Mam. (dict. note p. (tr' L.(tr. p\.63,pr.57),55,62,13, M' (rr' pl' 52, pr' 48),62, 148' Calpurnius Piso, C. (cos. 67), 81. Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, 109 note 22, 148' Calpurnius Piso Frugi, L' (cos' 58), 56,62' L' (tr' pl' 119, cos' 133), 53' 148' L. (cos' suff' 2),82' (tr.p|.445),41,67'148' Canuleius,C carvilius, L. (tr. pl.2l2),50,148. Carvilius, Sp. (rr. pl.2l2),50, 148. Caninius Gallus, Cassius Hemina, L'' 58' Cassius Longinus, C.(pr. 174, cos. lll),91,95f . Cassius Longinus, C. (cos. 73)' 81' L. (tr. pl. 104),11. Cassius Longinus Ravilla, L. (tr. pl. 137, cassius Longinus, cos' 127),70. Cassius Vicellinus, Sp. (cos. 502, 493, 486), 117 with note 9' Cincius, L' ' 29 Cincius Alimentus, L.' 69 note 36' cincius Alimentus, M. (rr. pl.204),69 with note 36' 4l-54), 120,128' Claudius Caecus, Ap' (cens',312, cos' 301'296)' Claudrus (Emperor 75 note 73. Claudius Crassus Inregillensis Sabinus' Ap' (Xvir leg' scrib' 450),47,148' Claudius Marcellus, M' (cos' 222'214,210,208), 140' Claudius Pulcher, Ap.(pr'89, cos' 79)' 54' 2IO claudius Pulcher, 95 f. KAJ SANDBERG c. (cos. t't7, cens. clodius Pulcher, P. (tr. 148. 169),52,90, pt.58), 54, 56, 61,73, Fabius pictor, e., Fabius Vibulanus, Fatcidius, 17 wirh nore 22,23. (Xvir teg. scrib. 450), 149. e. c. (or p.) (rr. pl.4t),74. Fannius Strabo, C. (cos. 161),7g,94. p|.67),55,148. Ftaminius, C. (tr. pt.232, pr.227, cos.223,217, Cornelius, Cn.(tr.pl.68?),54f.,148. cens.220),49,gg,100withnote15, 149. cornelius cethegus, P.(pr. 185, cos. 181), 90. Flavius, L. (rr. pt.60, pr.5g), 55, 149. cornelius Dolabella, Cn. (cos. 159),42 wirh nore Flavius, M. (rr. pt.327,323),69. 6,91. Fonreius Capito, C. (pontifex ca.39, cos. suff.33), Cornelius Dolabella, P. (tr. pl. 4i, cos. 44), 63, 63,10g note22, t49. 148. Fufius Geminus, C. (cos. suff.2), g2. Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus, Cn. (cos. 72), 61, Fulvius Flaccus, M. (cos. 125, rr. pl. 122),92,95 81,148. f. cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus, Cn. @r. 60, cos. Fulvius Flaccus, e. (cos. 23j,224,2r2,209, pr. 56), 56 f . 215, rtict. 2t0), 59. Cornelius Lentulus Spinther, P. (pr.60, cos. 57), Fulvius Nobilior, M.(pr. 793, cos.139),60. 56,62,110 note 21,148. Futvius Nobilior, M. (tr. pt. l7t, cos. 159), 42 Cornelius Maluginensis , M. (Xvir leg. scrib. 450), with note 6, 91. 148. Fundanius C. f., C. (rr. pt.6g?), 54 t., t4g. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus Africanus, P. (cos. Fundanius, M. (tr. pl. 195),50. 141, 134),33 f .,91. Furius Camilius, M. (diu. 396, 390, 3g9, 36g, Cornelius Scipio Africanus, P. (cos. 205, 194),51. 367),59, g5, 105. Cornelius Scipio Asiagenes, L. (pr. 193, cos. 190), Furius philus, L. (cos. 136),33, 92. Cornelius, C. (rr. 51. Cornelius Sulla Felix, L. (pr. 93, cos. 88, dict. 82- ff., 33, 35,36-40,54,61,69, 71, 80 f., 90, 94, t02, 103 note 28, 105, 108, 81, cos. 80), 21 f., 116, 120,129 note 60, 130, 146 Cornelius Sulla, P. (cos. desig.65), 55. 109 Curiatius, P. (tr. p|.401), 48, f. 148. A. (/r. pl. 139),70. Gabinius, A. (tr. pt. 67, cos. 58), 55 f ., 62, :3, 109 note 22, l4g. Gellius poplicola, L.(pr.94, cos.72),81. Gabinius, Hannibal, 49 t., gj. Horatius Barbarus, M. (cos. 449), 64,76, 11g nore . 11, 133, 139, 140. cos.98),78,95. Horrensius, e. @ict. Zg7),7j, gg,94. Domitius Ahenobarbus, Cn. (tr. pl. 104, cos.96), Hostilius (Dasianus), L. (tr. pl.6g),55 nore40. 71. Hostilius Mancinus, C. (cos. 137), 92. Decius Mus, P. (cos. 312, 308, 297 ,295), 8j Didius, T. (tr. pl. 103, Duillius, K. (Xvir leg, scrib.450), 148. Duillius, M. (tr. p|.470,449),47,149. Icilius, L. (tr. 295),8j. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, Q. (cos. 233, 228, 215,214,209, dict. 217), 49,89, 98. Iulius Caesar, C. (pr. 62, cos. 59, 4g, 46, 45,44, dict. 49_44),39,61,73, j9 wjthnote 9g, g1, g2, 120, 145, 146, t4g. Fabius Maximus Rullianus, Q. (cos. Fabius Pictor, C. (cos. 269), 43, SB. pl. 456, 455, 449), 47, 67, 128, 149. 2t1 MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES Iulius Caesar, note 16. L. (pr. 95, cos. 90),79,95, 101 suff. 43, cos. 33,31-23,5,2),'79 with note 98, 81, 82, 82 note 1i9, 83, 109, I2l. Iulius lullus, L. (cos. 430), II7. Iunius D. f., M. (rr. pl.before 123),53,149. Iunius Brurus, M. (rr. pl. 195, pr. 191, cos. 178), 90. Iunius Congus, M., 29. Iunius Silanus, D. (cos. 62),81. Iunius Silanus, L. (cos. AD 28), 84. Iunius Silanus, M. (cos. 109),93,95 f. Iunius Silanus Torquatus, M. (cos. AD 19), 83. Iuventius Thalna, M'. (rr. pl. 170, pr. 167), 59, l4g. Iulius Caesar Octavianus, C. (Augustus) (cos. Jugurtha, 53. LaeliusSapiens, C.(pr. l45,cos. i40),33,91. Licinia, Vestal Virgin, 71. Licinius Crassus, L. (tr. pl. 107, cos. 95),'78, 101 note 16. 95, Licinius Crassus, M. (cos. 70, 55), 40,64,81. Licinius Crassus, P.(pr. 176, cos. lll),91,95 f. Licinius Crassus Dives, P. (tr. pl. before 10312, pr. c. 100, cos. 97),72. Licinius Lucullus, note 69. L. (pr. 18, cos. 74),73, 130 62),81' l77),51,149. ?.(tr.pt. Licinius Murena, L. (pr. 65, cos. LiciniusNerva, Licinius Stolo, C. (tr. pl. 316-367, cos' 364 or 361),45,58,67 with note 18,143,149. Licinius Varus, P. (pr.208), 89, 95,99' Livius Drusus, M. (lr. pl.9l),53,68,149. Lucrerius, M. (tr. pl. 172),52,149. Lycurgus, 30. 416),48,149. 186),91. T.(pr. Maenius, Mamilius Limetanus, C. (tr. pt.109), 53, 68,149' Maecilius, Sp. (/r. pl. Manilius, C. (tr. pl.66),'74. Manlius Capitolinus Imperiosus, Cn. (cos. 359, 357), 85, 95 f., 108. Manlius Vulso, A. (cos. 178), 51. Marcia, Vestal Virgin,71. Marcius, Q. (rr' pl. 68),55 note 40' Marcius censorinus, cn.,92. L.(pr.62, cos.56), Marcius Ralla, Q. (tr. pl. 196), 140. Marcius Philippus, 56 f. Marcius Rutilus, C. (cos. 357 ,352,344,342, dict' 356), 85, 95 f. Marcius Scilla, Q. (tr. pl. 172),52,68, 149. Marcius Sermo, M. (rr. pl. 172),52,68,149. Marius, C. (tr. pI. ll9, pr. 115, cos. 107, 104100, 86), 27,36, 54, 69,71 f., 80. pl' 57)' 56' (lr. pl. 416)' 48,149 Metilius, M. Metilius, M. (tr. pl. a}D,48,149. Metilius, M. (Ir. p1.217),49, 100 rote 15, 149. Minucius, M. (tr. pI. 401),48,149' MinuciusEsquilinusAugurinus,L.(Xvirleg.scrib. Messius, C. (tr. 450), 149' Minucius Rufus, M. (cos. 221, dict. 217), 49 wrth note 16. Minucius Rufus, M. (tr. pl. l2l, cos. 110), 71. Minucius Thermus, Q. (lr. pl.20l, pr. 196, cos' 193), 50' 149. VI Eupator, 36' 54' 14' Mucius scaevola, Q. (cos. ll'7),33. Mithradates Mucius Scaevola, Q. Qr. 101 note 16. pl' 106, cos' 95),78' 95' MunatiusPlancus,L.(cos.42),81,110note27. Norbanus Balbus, L. (cos. AD 19), 83. Octavius, Cn. (pr. 168, cos. 165), 140. ogulnius, cn. (rr. pI.300),49,149. ogulnius Gallus, Q. (/r. pl. 300, cos. 269, dict. 251),43,49,88, 149. Oppius' C. (tr. pl.2l5)' 69' oppius cornicen, Sp. (Xvir leg. scrib.450),149. Orchius, C. (tr. pl. 182)' 69' KAJ SANDBERG 212 Papirius, Q. (rr. 149. pl.3rd or 2nd c.),57,99 Papirius Carbo, C. (tr. pl. l3I, cos. note 8, 120),3. L.(pr. Porcius Licinus, Postumius, M.. 193, cos. 184), 90. 50. Postumius Albinus Caudinus, Sp. (cos. 334,321), L. (cos. 436, 430), 117. 86. Papirius Crassus, L.(pr.330), 87, 95 f. Publicius Bibulus, C. (tr. p\.209),140. Papirius Cursor, L. (pr. 332?, cos. 326),81,95, Publilius Philo, Q. @r. 336, cos. 339,321,320, 99. 3t5, dict. 339),86,95, 133, 138. Papirius Turdus, C. (tr. pl. r'17),51,149. Pupius Piso Frugi Calpurnianus, M. (cos. 6i), 61, Papius, C. (rr. pl. 65), 66,14. 150. Papius Mutilus, M. (cos. AD 9), 66, 83. Pedius, Q (pr 48, cos. suff.43),81. Quinctius Crispinus, T. (cos. 9),63,109 note 22, Papirius Crassus, Peducaeus, Sex. (rr. pl. 113),71. Petillius, Q.(rr. pl. 187),51, 150. Petillius Spurinus, Q. 0r. pl. 187, 150. V, 140. pr. 150. 781, cos. 176), 51, Philippus Roscius, Roscius Plautius Proculus, C. (cos.358, mag. eq.356),85. M. (lr. p|.89),73. Poetelius Libo Visolus, C. (cos. 360,346,326, pl. 358),87,95,99. Plautius Silvanus, tr. 313),87,95. Poetelius Libo Visolus, Q. (Xvlr Leg. scrib. 450), 150. Poetelius Libo Visolus, C. (dict. Pompeius Magnus, Cn. (cos. 10,55,52),40,55, 62,64,13,14,79,81, 140, 150. Pompeius Rufus, Q. (cos. 88), 36, Pompeius Strabo, Cn. (cos. 16. 130. 89),79,95, 101 note Ponrponius Atticus, T . , 34. Popillius, C. (tr. pl. 68), 55 note 40. Popillius Laenas, M.(pr. 776, cos. 173),52. Poppaeus Secundus, Q. (cos. AD 9), 66, 83. Porcii tres, 89. Porcius Cato, C. (tr. p|.56), 56, 150. Porcius Cato, M. (pr. f98, cos. 795, cens. 184), 18, 50, 52,89 f, 91, 93. Porcius Cato, M. (pr. c. l2I, cos. 118), 59, 93, 150. Porcius Cato (Uticensis), M. (tr. pl. 62, pr. 54), 73. Porcius Cato Licinianus, M., 93. Porcius Laeca, P. (tr. M'. (Xvir leg. scrib.450), 150. L. (rr. pl. before 44143), 58, 150. Fabatus, L. (pr. 49),74 note 67. Otho, L. (tr. pl. 67, pr. 63),14. Rabuleius, pl. 199, pr. 195), 89, 90. Roscius pl. 122),'70. P. (tr. pl. 169), 52, 150. Rubrius, ?. (tr. Rutilius, L. (cos. suff. 30),82. Scribonius Curio, C. (tr. pI.50),57, 150. Scribonius Libo, L. (tr. pl. 149),52, 150. Sempronius, Ti. (tr. pl. 167), 140. Sempronius Gracchus, C. (tr. pl. 123-122),31,53, 68, 70, 11,78,91,92,93, 150. Sempronius Gracchus, Ti. (cos. 215,213),89,95, 97,98. Sempronius Gracchus, Ti. (pr. 180, cos. Ill , 163, Saenius, cens. 169),52. Sempronius Gracchus, Ti. (tr. pl. 133),36,3'7,53, 68, 91, 92,93,150. C.,29, 58. Sempronius Tuditanus, M. (lr. pl. 193, pr. 189, Sempronius Tuditanus, cos. 185),51, 150. Sentius Saturninus, C. (cos. n 4),82. M. (Xvir leg. scrib.450), i50. Servilius Caepio, Q. @r. 109, cos. 106), 69, 78, 94,137 note24. Sergius Esquilinus, Servilius Rullus, P. (tr. p1.63), 55, 150. Servius Tullius, 2,31, 120. MAGISTRATES AND ASSEMBLIES 213 Sextius Sextinus Lateranus, L. (tr. p\.376-361, Varius Severus Hibrida, Q. (rr. pI.90),54,68, 150. cos.366),48, 58, 67 with note 18, 143, 150. Vatinius, P. (tr. pl. 59, pr.55), 56, 73, 150' Silius, M. (tr. pl., date uncertain), 57, 150. Vellaeus Tutor, C. (cos. .to 28),84. Silius, P. (tr. pt., date uncertain),57, 150. Sulpicius Galba Maximus, P. (cos. 211,200),59, Veturius Calvinus, T' (cos.334,321),86 Visellius Varro, L. (cos. m 24), 83. 150. Voconius Saxa, Q. Qr. pl' 169)' 69 Sulpicius Galba, Ser. (pr. l5l),52. Sulpicius Rutus, P. (rr. p|.88), 36, 37,31 note 5, 54, 69, 150. Taracia, Gaia, Vestal Virgin, 76. Tarpeius Montanus Capitolinus, Sp. (cos. 454, tr. pl. 4a8?),76. Terentilius Harsa, C. (tr. pl. 462), 46, 67, 150. Terentius Varro Lucullus, M. (cos' 73), 81. Thorius, Sp. (/r. pl. lll?),11. Tigranes, 74. Titius, Sex. (tr. pl. 99),72. Trebonius Asper, L. (tr. Pl. 448), 67. Tullius Cicero, M. (pr. 66, cos. 63), 11, 19' 21, 28, 33 ff., 4',7, 54, 55 ff., 59, 6r f., 7r, 73, 76, 81. Tullius Cicero, Q. (pr. 62),34. Vaierius, M. (rr. pl. 68),55 note 40. Valerius Flaccus, C. (pr. c. 95, cos. 93),93, 95 f . Valerius Flaccus, L. (cos. 700, interrex 82), 38' 80. L. (cos. suff. 86),80. Valerius Laevinus, M. (pr. 22'7,215, cos. 210), Valerius Flaccus, 59. Valerius Maximus Corvus, M. (cos. 348,346,343, 335, 300, 299 lsuff.l, dicr. 342),77,86,94 ff Valerius Messalla, M. (cos. 53), 119' ' Valerius Messalla Niger, M. (cos' 61), 61. Valerius Poplicola, P. (cos. 509-507, 506?, 504?)' ll7 . Valerius Poplicola Potitus, 118 note 1i, 133, 139. L. (cos. 449), 64' pl. 188), 51, 68, 150. L. (tr. pl. 195, pr- 192), 50' 76' Valerius Tappo, C. (tr. Valerius Tappo, 150'