The social contract & discoursesRousseau, Jean-Jacques
Philosophy
The social contract & discourses
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques
Economics; Political science -- Early works to 1800; Social contract
Laws and the election of rulers were not the only questions submitted
to the judgment of the comitia: as the Roman people had taken on itself
the most important functions of government, it may be said that the lot
of Europe was regulated in its assemblies. The variety of their objects
gave rise to the various forms these took, according to the matters on
which they had to pronounce.
In order to judge of these various forms, it is enough to compare
them. Romulus, when he set up _curiæ_, had in view the checking of
the senate by the people, and of the people by the senate, while
maintaining his ascendancy over both alike. He therefore gave the
people, by means of this assembly, all the authority of numbers to
balance that of power and riches, which he left to the patricians.
But, after the spirit of monarchy, he left all the same a greater
advantage to the patricians in the influence of their clients on the
majority of votes. This excellent institution of patron and client
was a masterpiece of statesmanship and humanity without which the
patriciate, being flagrantly in contradiction to the republican
spirit, could not have survived. Rome alone has the honour of having
given to the world this great example, which never led to any abuse,
and yet has never been followed.
As the assemblies by _curiæ_ persisted under the kings till the time
of Servius, and the reign of the later Tarquin was not regarded as
legitimate, royal laws were called generally _leges curiatæ_.
Under the Republic, the _curiæ_ still confined to the four urban
tribes, and including only the populace of Rome, suited neither the
senate, which led the patricians, nor the tribunes, who, though
plebeians, were at the head of the well-to-do citizens. They therefore
fell into disrepute, and their degradation was such, that thirty
lictors used to assemble and do what the _Comitia Curiata_ should have
done.
The division by centuries was so favourable to the aristocracy that it
is hard to see at first how the senate ever failed to carry the day in
the comitia bearing their name, by which the consuls, the censors and
the other curule magistrates were elected. Indeed, of the hundred and
ninety-three centuries into which the six classes of the whole Roman
people were divided, the first class contained ninety-eight; and, as
voting went solely by centuries, this class alone had a majority over
all the rest. When all these centuries were in agreement, the rest of
the votes were not even taken; the decision of the smallest number
passed for that of the multitude, and it may be said that, in the
_Comitia Centuriata_, decisions were regulated far more by depth of
purses than by the number of votes.
But this extreme authority was modified in two ways. First, the
tribunes as a rule, and always a great number of plebeians, belonged
to the class of the rich, and so counterbalanced the influence of the
patricians in the first class.
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