The Roman assemblies from their origin to the end of the RepublicBotsford, George Willis
History
The Roman assemblies from their origin to the end of the Republic
Botsford, George Willis
Constitutional law -- Rome; Rome -- Politics and government
An occasional attempt was made by a magistrate to usurp for the comitia
centuriata a share in the administration. The first which is worthy of
notice,[1430] even though it may be mythical, is the agrarian proposal
of Sp. Cassius, 486. According to the sources it was opposed by the
senate and the colleague of the mover. Far from enacting it into a law,
the author, on the expiration of his consulship, was himself accused
of attempting to usurp the royal power, and was, in one version of the
story, condemned to death by the assembly to which he had offered the
bill.[1431] The senate must have taken very seriously this first attempt
of a magistrate to transfer some of its administrative power to the
comitia. The law for the division of the Aventine Hill among the people,
456, was actually passed, most probably by the centuries.[1432] It was
forced upon the government by the plebeians, and did not serve as a
precedent for the future. The Valerian law of 342,[1433] which abolished
debts, was an extraordinary administrative measure similar in character,
but far more sweeping, to the clause for the relief of debtors in the
Licinian-Sextian plebiscite.
If then the centuriate assembly was excluded from the field of
administration, it must certainly in pre-decemviral times have had no
part in religious legislation. The law which regulated the intercalary
month inscribed on a bronze column by Pinarius and Furius, consuls in
472,[1434] and the ancient law composed in archaic letters, mentioned
in connection with the year 363,[1435] requiring the praetor maximus to
drive the nail on the ides of September, must accordingly have been acts,
not of the centuriate assembly, but of the pontifical college. By the
ratification of the Twelve Tables, composed chiefly of private laws and
of closely connected religious regulations, an example was set for the
invasion of both of these legal spheres by the centuriate assembly. But
the precedent remained unproductive; for at this time the tribal assembly
under plebeian or patrician magistrates was recognized as competent for
legislation, and naturally took to itself the function of enacting the
less weighty, for a time generally the non-constitutional, laws.[1436]
We are not to imagine the field of legislation clearly divided into
constitutional, private, religious, and other departments; aside from
the question of declaring an offensive war, which remained strictly the
province of the comitia centuriata, the distinction in legislation was
simply between the more and the less important; the dignified assembly of
centuries, organized on an aristocratic-timocratic basis, was entrusted
with the weightier business, whereas the simpler tribal assembly, which
was easier to summon and more expeditious in action, served well enough
for the despatch of lighter business. The question of the assembly to
be employed was largely one of inertia; it required a far greater force
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