Roman Public LifeGreenidge, A. H. J. (Abel Hendy Jones)
History
Roman Public Life
Greenidge, A. H. J. (Abel Hendy Jones)
Constitutional history -- Rome; Rome -- Politics and government
The Principate was, in the theory of the constitution, an elective
office, and one based on the principle of occasional delegation.
It was necessary for the life of the state that there should be a
magistracy,[1674] but it was not necessary that there should be a
Princeps. Hence there was no institution such as the Republican
_interregnum_ to fill up the gap left by the vacancy of the throne,[1675]
and the fact that such gaps did occur in the history of the Principate
shows that the possibility of government by magistrates, senate, and
people was no mere fiction. The abstract idea of a Principate was indeed
perfectly realised at the death of the very first Princeps, in so far
as responsible men in the Roman world had a perfectly definite idea of
the precise powers that must be vested in an individual in order to save
that world from anarchy. Yet Tiberius can pretend to hesitate, not merely
about assuming the office, but about the nature of the office which he
assumes;[1676] and, although on the accession of his successor, Gaius
Caesar, the _soliti honores_ were conferred _en bloc_, yet the idea that
the creation of a Princeps was an act of special investiture always clung
to the office. It was obvious so far as the choice of the person was
concerned, but it even affected the powers conferred, and we have seen
that the grants made to Emperors of the second and third centuries were
in all probability different, both in form and in matter, from those made
to Emperors of the first.[1677]
The electing body was the Roman people, chiefly represented by the Senate
but still retaining in its own hands the formal ratification of most of
the powers conferred. But the powerlessness of this sovereign is of the
very essence of the history of the Principate. As a rule, all that it
can do is to recognise an _imperium_ already established by the army,
whether this establishment be due to the tacit consent of praetorians or
legionaries or to the active use of their swords. The crucial point in
the creation of an emperor is his salutation by his army as _imperator_.
Such a salutation did not mean that the general who accepted it was
Princeps; it meant only that he was a candidate for the Principate.
The act itself was one of revolution; its legality depended upon its
success. Did the legions in other provinces accept the candidature, the
Senate immediately fulfilled its formal task; did rival aspirants meet
in battle, it was always ready to welcome the survivor. To be truly
a Princeps was to receive the customary honours and offices from the
Senate, and Vitellius was acting in the true spirit of the constitution
when he adopted as the formal date of his accession (_dies imperii_) the
day on which his claims had been ratified by the fathers.[1678] Vespasian
was acting contrary to that spirit when he regarded as the beginning of
his the moment at which he had been saluted _imperator_ by the legions of
Egypt.[1679]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account