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
In treating of the distinction between comitia and concilium scholars
have invariably begun with the juristic definition of Laelius Felix,[710]
quoted by Gellius,[711] “He who orders not the whole people but some part
of it to be present (in assembly) ought to proclaim not comitia but a
concilium;” they have limited themselves to illustrating this definition,
and to setting down as lax or inaccurate the many uses of the two words
which cannot be forced into line with it. The object of this discussion,
on the contrary, is to consider all the occurrences of these words in the
principal extant literature, especially prose, of the republic and of the
Augustan age—a period in which the assemblies were still in existence—for
the purpose of testing the definition of Laelius, and of establishing new
definitions by induction in case his should prove wrong.
It is convenient to begin with Livy, who though an imperial writer, and
under the stylistic influence of his age, probably adhered in the main to
the technical terminology of the republican annalists from whom he drew.
The first point which will be established is that in Livy’s usage the
difference between comitia and concilium is not a difference between the
whole people and a part of the people.[712]
The plebeian tribal assembly is termed comitia in Livy ii. 56. 1, 2;
ii. 58. 1; ii. 60. 4; iii. 13. 9 (“Verginio comitia habente conlegae
appellati dimisere concilium,” in which comitia and concilium in one
sentence are applied to the same assembly); iii. 17. 4 (the comitia for
passing the Terentilian law, which from Livy’s point of view was the
plebeian assembly);[713] iii. 24. 9; iii. 30. 6; iii. 51. 8 (comitia of
plebeian soldiers for electing military tribunes and tribunes of the
plebs); iii. 54. 9, 11: (plebeian comitia under the pontifex maximus);
iv. 44. 1; v. 10. 10; vi. 35. 10 (“Comitia praeter aedilium tribunorumque
plebi nulla sunt habita”); vi. 36. 9 (the comitia for voting on the
Licinian-Sextian laws); vi. 39. 5; xxv. 4. 6; xxxiv. 2. 11; xlv. 35. 7.
Other examples of comitia of a part of the people are Livy ii. 64. 1
(as the plebeians refused to participate in the consular election, the
patricians and clients held the comitia); xxvi. 2. 2 (comitia held by
the soldiers, and hence by only a part of the people, for the election
of a propraetor). Still more to the point are the comitia sacerdotum:
for electing a chief pontiff, Livy xxv. 5. 2; for electing an augur,
xxxix. 45. 8; for electing a chief curio, xxvii. 8. 1. Comitia sacerdotum
were composed of seventeen tribes, and hence of only a part of the
people.[714] Lastly is to be noted the fact that the plebeian assembly
met on a comitialis dies; Livy iii. 11. 3.
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