An Inquiry on the Two Laws of the Plebeian Institutions in the early Roman Republic
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this article is to investigate the power and its developmental process of the tribuni plebis and the concilum plebis in the early Roman Republic. It is generally believed that 1) the tribuni plebis were elected in the concilium plebis 2) the plebeian assembly was organized on tribal formation 3) the plebeian tribunes introduced their bills only in their assembly, since the first secessio in 494 BCE. But there is no secure evidence to support these presumptions. The two laws, the lex Publilia and the lex Valeria Horatia would not only present a doubt about three unconvinced assumptions but also give a hint to the solution of such a problem. Through investigating into these two laws, four hypotheses could be formulated. 1) The tribuni plebis were elected in the comitia curiata and not in the plebeian assembly from the beginning. It is also not that they proposed their legislation only before their own assembly called the concilium plebis. 2) The concilum plebis was based on a curiate organization rather than on a tribal organization or was no more than open meetings not being divided into groups. 3) It is not until the Publilian Law of 471 BC that the plebeian institutions became officially recognized. In other worlds, the plebeian tribunes were elected in their own assembly and their number was increased to five. The plebeian assembly was based on a tribal organization. 4) As well as may have given a legal recognition to the plebeian institutions by securing the tribune’s sacrosanctity, the lex Valeria Horatia of 449 BCE may have induced the tribuni plebis to legislate in their own assembly by regulating that what the tribally assembled plebeians might order should be binding on the people. It is difficult to deny that my reconstruction about the power and function of the plebeian tribunes and assembly in the Early Republic may contain fictitious elements. But this trial worth while being made in that it reexamined the historical developmental process of the plebeian institutions.
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to investigate the power and its developmental process of the tribuni plebis and the concilum plebis in the early Roman Republic. It is generally believed that 1) the tribuni plebis were elected in the concilium plebis 2) the plebeian assembly was organized on tribal formation 3) the plebeian tribunes introduced their bills only in their assembly, since the first secessio in 494 BCE. But there is no secure evidence to support these presumptions. The two laws, the lex Publilia and the lex Valeria Horatia would not only present a doubt about three unconvinced assumptions but also give a hint to the solution of such a problem. Through investigating into these two laws, four hypotheses could be formulated. 1) The tribuni plebis were elected in the comitia curiata and not in the plebeian assembly from the beginning. It is also not that they proposed their legislation only before their own assembly called the concilium plebis. 2) The concilum plebis was based on a curiate organization rather than on a tribal organization or was no more than open meetings not being divided into groups. 3) It is not until the Publilian Law of 471 BC that the plebeian institutions became officially recognized. In other worlds, the plebeian tribunes were elected in their own assembly and their number was increased to five. The plebeian assembly was based on a tribal organization. 4) As well as may have given a legal recognition to the plebeian institutions by securing the tribune’s sacrosanctity, the lex Valeria Horatia of 449 BCE may have induced the tribuni plebis to legislate in their own assembly by regulating that what the tribally assembled plebeians might order should be binding on the people. It is difficult to deny that my reconstruction about the power and function of the plebeian tribunes and assembly in the Early Republic may contain fictitious elements. But this trial worth while being made in that it reexamined the historical developmental process of the plebeian institutions.
참고문헌 (31)
- Alfoeldi, A., "Early Rome and the Latins (Ann Arbor)", ~ (1965)
- Badian, E., "Tiberius Gracchus and the Roman Revolution’", ANRW I, 1, pp.668~731 (1972)
- Bleicken, J., "Das Volkstribunat der klassischen Republik: Studien zu seiner Entwicklung zwischen 287 und 133 v. Chr", Zetemata, 13 (1968)
- Broughton, T.R.S., "The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, vol. I" (1986), repr
- Cornell, T.J., "Rome and Latium to 390 BC’, ‘The Recovery of Rome", The Conquest of Italy, 7(2), pp.243~419 (1989)
- Cornell, T.J., "The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c.1000-264 BC)", ~ (1995)
- Develin, R., "Prorogation of imperium before the Hannibalic War", Latomus, 34, pp.716~722 (1975)
- Develin, R., "Comitia Tributa Again", Athenaeum, 55, pp.425~426 (1977)
- Develin, R., "Provocatio and Plebiscites: Early Roman Legislation and the Historical Tradition", Mnemosyne, 31, pp.45~60 (1978)
- Drummond, A., "Rome in the Fifth Century. I, The Social and Economic Framework; II, The Citizen Community", CAH, 7(2), pp.113~242 (1989)
- Eder, W., "The Political Significance of the Codification of Law in Archaic Societies: An Unconventional Hypothesis", pp.262~300 (1986), Raaflaub
- Farrell, J., "The Distinction between Comitia and Concilium", Athenaeum, 64, pp.407~438 (1986)
- Ferenczy, E., "From the Patrician State to the Patricio-Plebeian State" (1976)
- Forsythe, G., "A Critical History of Early Rome: From Prehistory to the First Punic War" (2005)
- Garnsey, P., "Famine and Food Supply in Graeco-Roman Antiquity" (1988)
- Hoelkeskamp, K.-J., "Die Entstehung der Nobilitaet: Studien zu sozialen und politischen Geschichte der roemischen Republik im 4. Jhdt. V. Chr" (1987)
- Lintott, A., "Provocatio from the struggle of the Orders to the Principate", ANRW, 1(2), pp.226~267 (1972)
- Ogilvie, R.M., "A Commentary on Livy, Books 1-5" (1965)
- Raaflaub, K., "The Conflict of the Orders in Archaic Rome: A Comprehensive and Comparative Approach", pp.1~51 (1986), Raaflaub
- Raaflaub, K., "Social Struggles in Archaic Rome" (1986)
- Rawson, E., "Cicero the Historian and Cicero the Antiquarian", JRS, 62, pp.33~45 (1972)
- Ridley, R.T., "Livy and the concilium plebis", Klio, 62, pp.337~354 (1980)
- Rotondi, G., "Leges Publicae Populi Romani" (1912)
- Russell, D.A., "Plutarch’s Life of Coriolanus", JRS, 53, pp.21~29 (1963)
- Salmon, E.T., "Historical Elements in the Story of Coriolanus", CQ, 24, pp.96~101 (1930)
- Scullard, H.H., "A History of the Roman World, 753-146 BC" (1980)
- Staveley, E.S., "Provocatio during the Fifth and Fourth Century B.C.", Historia, 3, pp.412~428 (1955)
- Staveley, E.S., "Tribal Legislation before the Lex Hortensia", Athenaeum, 33, pp.3~31 (1955)
- Von Ungern-Sternberg, J., "The End of the Conflict of the Orders", pp.353~377 (1986), Raaflaub
- Wiseman, T.P., "Clio’s Cosmetics: Three Studies in Greco-Roman Literature" (1979)
- 김경현, "평민의 철수(Secessio Plebis)와 호민관직의 설치", 서양고대사연구, 10, pp.57~75 (2002)