Secrets of RF Circuit Design 3rd ed Edition Joseph Carr
Secrets of RF Circuit Design 3rd ed Edition Joseph Carr
Secrets of RF Circuit Design 3rd ed Edition Joseph Carr
Secrets of RF Circuit Design 3rd ed Edition Joseph Carr
1. Visit ebookfinal.com to download the full version and
explore more ebooks or textbooks
Secrets of RF Circuit Design 3rd ed Edition Joseph
Carr
_____ Click the link below to download _____
https://ebookfinal.com/download/secrets-of-rf-circuit-
design-3rd-ed-edition-joseph-carr/
Explore and download more ebooks or textbook at ebookfinal.com
2. Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.
CMOS analog circuit design 3rd ed Edition Allen
https://ebookfinal.com/download/cmos-analog-circuit-design-3rd-ed-
edition-allen/
RF Circuit Design Techniques for MF UHF Applications 1st
Edition Abdullah Eroglu
https://ebookfinal.com/download/rf-circuit-design-techniques-for-mf-
uhf-applications-1st-edition-abdullah-eroglu/
Understanding Telephone Electronics 4th ed Edition Joseph
Carr
https://ebookfinal.com/download/understanding-telephone-
electronics-4th-ed-edition-joseph-carr/
Analog Circuit Design Structured Mixed Mode Design Multi
Bit Sigma Delta Converters Short Range RF Circuits 1st
Edition Michiel Steyaert (Editor)
https://ebookfinal.com/download/analog-circuit-design-structured-
mixed-mode-design-multi-bit-sigma-delta-converters-short-range-rf-
circuits-1st-edition-michiel-steyaert-editor/
3. Device Modeling for Analog and RF CMOS Circuit Design 1st
Edition Trond Ytterdal Yuhua Cheng Tor A. Fjeldly
https://ebookfinal.com/download/device-modeling-for-analog-and-rf-
cmos-circuit-design-1st-edition-trond-ytterdal-yuhua-cheng-tor-a-
fjeldly/
Radio frequency circuit design 2nd ed Edition W Alan
Davis
https://ebookfinal.com/download/radio-frequency-circuit-design-2nd-ed-
edition-w-alan-davis/
Experimental Methods in RF Design 1st ed., 2nd print
Edition Wes Hayward
https://ebookfinal.com/download/experimental-methods-in-rf-design-1st-
ed-2nd-print-edition-wes-hayward/
Introduction to Linear Circuit Analysis and Modelling From
DC to RF 1st Edition Luis Moura
https://ebookfinal.com/download/introduction-to-linear-circuit-
analysis-and-modelling-from-dc-to-rf-1st-edition-luis-moura/
User Design 1st Edition Alison A. Carr-Chellman
https://ebookfinal.com/download/user-design-1st-edition-alison-a-carr-
chellman/
5. Secrets of RF Circuit Design 3rd ed Edition Joseph Carr
Digital Instant Download
Author(s): Joseph Carr
ISBN(s): 9780071370677, 0071370676
Edition: 3rd ed
File Details: PDF, 5.81 MB
Year: 2001
Language: english
27. the establishment of a court which seems to have been standing
rather than special.[2444]
In his second tribunate, 100, supported by Marius, consul a sixth
time, and by Servilius, Appuleius proposed and carried a law for the
founding of settlements of the Marian veterans in Sicily, Corsica,
Achaia, and Macedonia.[2445] Marius was to be a commissioner for
conducting these colonies, and was to have the right to enroll as
citizens in each settlement a specified number of aliens.[2446] The
object of the latter clause was doubtless to provide for the Italian
veterans in his army. He proposed further that certain Transpadane
lands which the Cimbri had taken from the Gauls and which Marius
had recovered should be distributed among the citizens and the
Italians.[2447] Another proposal was for the monthly sale of a
specified number of modii of grain to every citizen resident of Rome
who desired it at five-sixths of an as to the modius—a merely
nominal price.[2448] It is not known whether the colonial, agrarian,
and frumentarian measures were separate enactments or articles of
one statute; or the colonial and agrarian provisions may alone have
been combined. However that may be, we are informed by
Appian[2449] that attached to the agrarian measure—whether to the
others also is nowhere stated—was an article which provided that if
the bill should become a law, the senators within five days should
swear to uphold it, or if any senator refused to take the oath, he
should be expelled from the senate and should be liable to a fine of
twenty talents, the Greek equivalent of about five hundred thousand
sesterces.[2450] The rural plebs, including many discharged soldiers
of Marius, swarmed into the comitia at the call of the tribune and
violently passed the law. Marius, who as a consul and a knight
disapproved of such illegality, set for the senators the example of
swearing to the law, “in so far as it was a law,” which left them a
loophole of escape from its provisions should they afterward so
determine. Metellus, who alone of the senators refused the oath,
was forced into exile and an interdict from fire and water was passed
against him by the tribes on the motion of Saturninus.[2451] Soon
afterward an election riot gave the senate a pretext for martial law.
28. Placed under custody, Saturninus and some fellow officials were
stoned to death by a mob. His measures were then annulled by the
senate on the ground that they had been violently passed;[2452]
nevertheless Mariana was founded by Marius in Corsica, apparently
under the colonial provision.[2453] The import of the agrarian law of
Sex. Titius, tribune of the plebs in 99, is unknown.[2454] It may have
been merely a reënactment of the Appuleian measure. At all events
before it could be put into force it was annulled by the senate on the
ground that it had been passed by violence and against the
intercession of colleagues.[2455]
The optimates, having again triumphed over the democracy,
adopted a policy of moderation. Their consuls of 98, Q. Caecilius
Metellus and T. Didius, attempted by a mild statute to check the most
flagrant abuses of tribunician legislation, (1) the combination of
various dissimilar provisions in one bill (lex satura) for the purpose of
drawing the votes of all parties, (2) the passing of bills through the
assembly by surprise. Their law accordingly, reviving usages once in
force but recently neglected, forbade such combinations[2456] and
ordered that the promulgation should precede the voting by at least a
trinum nundinum—an interval which included three market days.
[2457] Similarly in 95 their consuls, L. Licinius Crassus and Q. Mucius
Scaevola, aimed by an equally moderate law to check the usurpation
of the citizenship on the part of aliens. It forbade peregrini to perform
the functions of citizens, though it did not order the innocent among
them to leave Rome.[2458] It provided for the appointment of a
special commission to discover and punish usurpers of the
citizenship.[2459] Those found guilty were sent back to their
communities.[2460] Though the authors were eminent in justice and
cherished the best intentions, their law proved to be not merely
useless but most pernicious to the state,[2461] as it helped drive the
Italians to revolt.[2462]
The next attempt at reform proceeded from the inmost circle of the
aristocracy.[2463] M. Livius Drusus, tribune of the plebs in 91, was a
man of the highest nobility, wealthy, eloquent, and upright at heart,
29. the son of that Livius who had opposed C. Gracchus.[2464]
Regarding his aims and the quality of his statesmanship conflicting
opinions have been expressed by modern scholars. The sources
intimate that he wished primarily to strengthen the senate by
breaking away from its hide-bound conservatism and undertaking
various pressing reforms. His agrarian measure was conceived in
the Gracchan spirit but was more radical.[2465] Appian[2466] states
that it proposed the founding of colonies voted long ago but not yet
established. Reference must be to the twelve colonies planned by
his father.[2467] It probably abolished the statute of 111 and ordered
the division not only of the Campanian lands,[2468] but also of those
public domains which were held by the allied communities—in brief,
of all the public land remaining in Italy and Sicily;[2469] and it
established a board of ten for making the assignments.[2470]
Livy[2471] attributes to the author a frumentarian proposal, though we
are not informed of its character. The aim must have been to win the
support of the populace for his other measures.[2472]
He further proposed to mix with the silver coinage an eighth part of
copper,[2473] the proceeds of this gain to be applied perhaps to the
execution of his frumentarian project.[2474] There is much
controversy as to the intent of his judiciary reform. Appian[2475]
supposes that he wished to add three hundred knights to the senate
and to draw the jurors from that body thus enlarged. Velleius[2476] is
of the opinion that his aim was to transfer the iudicia to the senate;
whereas the epitomator of Livy[2477] directly states that he provided
for making up the iudicia of senators and knights in equal numbers.
We may partially reconcile these conflicting statements by supposing
that he planned to compose the jurors’ album of six hundred
senators and knights in equal numbers, by which expedient he
hoped to bring these two hostile orders back to their former harmony,
[2478] while serving the interests of the senate and ridding the state
of the corrupt and tyrannical rule of the knights.[2479] By a special
article of the rogation a quaestio, probably perpetua, was to be
appointed to inquire into the cases of bribery of jurors and to punish
30. the guilty.[2480] His most radical measure, introduced after opposition
to his other reforms began to develop,[2481] was for extending the
citizenship to the Latins[2482] and to all the Italians.[2483] This group
of proposals, designed for the benefit of all parties, proved distasteful
to all. The senators found a ground for complaint in the circumstance
that the knights would have equal power with them in the courts; the
knights were unwilling to surrender their judicial control or to grant
the franchise to the Italians; the wealthy Italians feared they might
lose the public lands which they still held. Only the poor among the
Romans and allies supported the proposal in the hope of profiting by
the distribution of lands.[2484] The agrarian, frumentarian, monetary,
and judiciary measures were combined in one statute, and passed
with violence[2485] and contrary to the omens.[2486] On these
grounds and furthermore because they violated the article of the
Caecilian-Didian statute forbidding the passing of a lex satura, they
were annulled by the senate.[2487] Although Drusus might have
interposed his veto against this decree, he preferred rather to
disregard it, most probably on the theory that the senatorial authority
did not avail against the sovereign will of the people.[2488] Aware that
his intercession would but postpone the annulment to another year,
he contented himself with informing his opponents that his measures
were absolutely necessary for the security of the state, and that
those who offended against them did it at their peril. He proceeded
to carry his statute into immediate effect.[2489] A plebiscite of
Saufeius, a colleague, established a commission of five in addition to
the ten provided for by the Livian statute; and Livius was elected a
member of both commissions.[2490] After his murder the Livian and
Saufeian statutes were both considered null and void.[2491]
The lex Remmia de calumniatoribus, which was enacted before
80, may belong to the year of the Livian attempt at reform, 91;[2492]
and in that case it would be most natural to regard it as a piece of
counter legislation to offset the proposal for establishing a court for
the trial of jurors accused of bribery. The complainant who was
proved malicious it rendered liable to trial and punishment with the
loss of citizenship and the branding of his forehead with the letter K
31. (for Kalumniator).[2493] This we may believe was the defiance offered
by the knights to those who were attempting to bring them to account
for their conduct as judges. Exulting in their victory over Drusus, they
expressed their antipathy to the Italian movement in a lex de
maiestate of Q. Varius, tribune of the plebs in 90. They stood round
the Rostra with drawn daggers and forced it through the comitia in
spite of tribunician intercession. It supplanted the Appuleian law on
the subject by a severe provision against those who encouraged the
Italians to demand the citizenship or in any way to conspire or to
revolt against the Roman people. It must have contained an article,
too, concerning seditions.[2494] The court which it established was to
sit on all ordinary dies fasti, undisturbed by iustitia,[2495] and was to
be a quaestio perpetua.[2496] Now that two attempts, the Appuleian
and the Livian, to substitute more popular measures for the
Sempronian frumentarian law had failed, the optimates found
themselves strong enough to supersede the Sempronian act by one
less popular. This was the Octavian law,[2497] the contents of which
are unknown, but which received the praise of Cicero for its
moderation.[2498]
The Social War, following close upon the murder of Livius Drusus,
compelled the Romans to grant the citizenship to the Italians. This
result was brought about by a succession of statutes. A law of the
consul L. Julius Caesar, 90, bestowed the citizenship upon the
Latins[2499] and on all the Italians who had not taken arms against
Rome[2500] and who were willing to accept the gift.[2501] The same
statute probably regulated the assignment of these new citizens to
the tribes.[2502] In the following year a law of L. Calpurnius Piso,
probably a tribune, granted the commanding general power,
apparently absolute, to bestow the right of the city upon the soldiers
under his orders.[2503] Another statute of 89, carried by M. Plautius
Silvanus and C. Papirius Carbo, tribunes of the plebs, granted the
citizenship to all members of allied communities who were domiciled
in Italy at the time the statute was passed and who within sixty days
should signify to the praetor at Rome their willingness to accept the
offer.[2504] The object of this measure was not only to expedite the
32. reconciliation, but also to make the work of the next censors
practicable. The citizenship thus granted involved the right of
suffrage, though in new tribes which voted after the others. Many
Italians, especially the Lucanians and the Samnites, took no notice
of the offer.[2505] In the same year Cn. Pompeius Strabo, a consul,
proposed and carried a law which seems to have empowered
himself at his discretion to invest with full citizenship those
Transpadani who already enjoyed the Latin rights, and to confer
upon the rest the ius Latii.[2506]
The question as to the composition of the courts, still left unsettled,
was taken up by M. Plautius Silvanus, the tribune referred to above.
His statute transferred the filling of the album from the urban praetor
to the tribes, which were to elect each fifteen members. The law
made the qualifications of the iudices independent of the social
classes. Under it accordingly senators and a few common plebeians
in addition to equites served as jurors, so that the equestrian control
of the courts was partially checked.[2507]
Mommsen[2508] supposes that these jurors were for the quaestio
de maiestate only. For this opinion he depends upon the assertion of
Cicero[2509] that the equites remained till Sulla’s legislation in
uninterrupted possession of the courts. The authority of Cicero,
however, would allow us to assume that while the equites lost the
legal monopoly they retained practical control. However that may be,
it is hardly possible that this reactionary measure survived the
proletarian uprising under Marius and Cinna. The lex agraria of the
same Plautius seems to have been intended for supplying the
veterans of the Social War with farms.[2510] The lex Papiria, which
introduced the semiuncial as, is doubtless to be assigned to C.
Papirius Carbo, the colleague of Plautius above mentioned. If so, the
object was to relieve slightly the financial embarrassment caused by
the war, and more particularly to bring the small coins of Rome into
correspondence with those of Italy.[2511]
IV. The Political Equalization of Italy
88-83
33. With many Italians still in revolt and the others smarting under the
inferior citizenship eked out to them, and with Mithridates threatening
the existence of the empire, Rome should have adopted a policy of
domestic conciliation. Under these circumstances Sulla, consul in
88, showed a lamentable want of tact in expressing the sentiment
that there could be no peace in Italy as long as a single Samnite
lived[2512]—a curiously antiquated frame of mind for a statesman of
his shrewdness. The cause of the new citizens was taken up by P.
Sulpicius Rufus, a patrician who had forsaken his rank to qualify
himself for the plebeian tribunate.[2513] A man of marvellous
eloquence, he had been an adherent of Drusus, though more
inclined to the equestrian interests. As tribune of the plebs, 88, he
seems to have tried to win the support of the senate and of the
equestrian order to his policy; but failing in the attempt, he looked for
aid to the commons and to a small band of knights who were faithful
to him. His rogation contained the following articles: (1) that the new
citizens and the libertini should be distributed among all the tribes,
[2514] with a view to completing the plan of Livius Drusus for the
political equalization of Italy; (2) that those who had been driven from
the state by violence should be recalled.[2515] This article was
probably for the benefit of those knights against whom the Varian law
had been turned.[2516] His rogation provided further, (3) that no one
who owed more than two thousand denarii should be a senator.[2517]
Money was scarce because of the war;[2518] and Sulpicius must
have felt that if the senators, most of whom were abundantly able,
should pay their debts, it would go far toward relieving the
stringency, and that if any were ejected because of failure to pay, an
opportunity would be afforded of promoting equites to the vacant
places. The consuls of the year, L. Cornelius Sulla and Q. Pompeius
Rufus, attempted to prevent a vote on these radical measures by
interposing a cessation of business for many days through the
proclamation of a festival.[2519] With his armed followers Sulpicius
forced the consuls to recall the proclamation, whereupon Sulla fled
for safety to his army at Nola. Sulpicius then added to his statute a
fourth article to the effect that the imperium of Sulla should be
abrogated and that the province of Asia, involving the conduct of the
34. war against Mithridates, should be given to Marius as proconsul,
[2520] although the latter was now but a private citizen. Doubtless
Sulpicius understood that there could be no guarantee for the
execution of his statute as long as Sulla remained in power, and
furthermore that the advancement of Marius would be a great gain
for the knights. The bill was passed by the comitia of tribes; but
Sulla, far from delivering up his command, marched his army into
Rome to settle the question in his own interest by the sword. On his
initiative Sulpicius, Marius, and ten of their associates were declared
public enemies by a decree of the senate ratified by a popular vote.
[2521] There is no need of assuming that the supporters of the tribune
turned against him; the optimates were as clever as their opponents
at packing assemblies. The absurdity of continuing the worn-out
comitial machinery as a factor of government is nowhere more
apparent than on this page of history, which records that the comitia
a few days after adopting the measures of Sulpicius, voted to outlaw
him and his friends. Marius fled; Sulpicius and several adherents
were killed. Thereupon the senate annulled the entire Sulpician
statute on the ground that it had been violently passed.[2522]
No statesman, however opposed to popular government, could
think of abolishing the comitia or even of putting an end to their
legislative function. But the democracy could be effectually checked
by reducing the legislative power of the assemblies to the harmless
function of ratifying decrees of the senate. This result Sulla and
Pompeius aimed to reach by renewing an ancient law[2523] that no
measure should ever again be brought before the people which had
not been previously considered and agreed to by the senate.[2524] A
closely related law of the same consuls ordered that “the voting
should not be by tribes but by centuries, as King Tullius had
ordained.”[2525] This statement has often been interpreted to signify
the restoration of the earlier form of comitia centuriata. But it seems
most improbable that, on the point of setting out for a long, distant
war, Sulla should think of restoring an organization which had been
obsolete for more than a century and a half, and which could have
been known to none but antiquarians. With his clear, practical
intelligence he could not have failed to see the insuperable difficulty
35. of restoring the ancient definitions of the classes in terms of iugera or
even on the later basis of the libral as.[2526] Furthermore no censors
were then at hand to undertake the work, and it was altogether
unlikely that during his absence any could be elected who would be
willing to apply themselves to the revitalization of the antique
mummy. Such a measure, too, as Meyer[2527] has pointed out, would
place the control of the assembly in the hands, not of the senate, but
of the knights, his mortal enemies. It is far more reasonable to
suppose that this act transferred the function of ratifying laws from
the tribal to the centuriate comitia, to restore the arrangement
supposed to have been introduced by Servius Tullius.[2528] If this
reasoning is correct, the act under consideration totally abolished the
legislative initiative of the tribunes.[2529] The other Cornelian-
Pompeian law mentioned by Appian must have applied, accordingly,
not to the tribunate but to the other magistracies.[2530] The current
interpretation, which involves the theory of a return to the original
centuriate system, requires further examination. Its chief basis is the
statement of Appian that no law should be brought before the
πλῆθος which had not been previously considered in the senate. It is
commonly assumed that he uses δῆμος to designate the whole
citizen body, and πλῆθος the exclusively plebeian assembly under
tribunician presidency. A study of his usage, however, proves that he
makes no such discrimination. Δῆμος is ordinarily the people in
general, especially as distinguished from the βουλή,[2531] parallel to
Livy’s common distinction between plebs and senatus. It is the
technical term for the plebs in their tribal comitia under tribunician
presidency.[2532] Rarely it signifies the state[2533] with reference to
the interest of the people. Πλῆθος, on the other hand, ordinarily
denotes the masses, multitude, rabble,[2534] including the crowd
gathered not only in a tribunician assembly[2535] but also in the
ἐκκλησία (here meaning contio) under the presidency of a patrician
magistrate.[2536] But πλῆθος is never technically or officially used to
denote any assembly either of the populus or of the plebs. In the
passage under discussion Appian’s statement of the Cornelian-
Pompeian law is εἰσηγοῦντό τε μηδὲν ἔτι ἀπροβούλευτον ἐς τὸν
36. δῆμον ἐσφέρεσθαι, in which he uses δῆμος according to his custom
to designate the popular assembly without specifying whether it is of
the populus or of the plebs. In commenting on it he substitutes
πλῆθος for δῆμος for the purpose, not of defining the assembly as
tribunician, but of contrasting the masses in the assembly with the
nobles in the senate: ἐσ τὸ πλῆθος is substantially equivalent to ἐν
τοῖς πένησι καὶ θρασυτάτοις used just below; Sulla wished nothing to
be submitted to the masses in the comitia centuriata before it had
been considered by the senate.
Appian[2537] attributes to Sulla for this early date an attempt to
increase the number of senators. “They (the consuls) enrolled three
hundred nobles in the senate, which had been reduced in numbers
and for that reason had come to be despised.” He does not state,
however, by what authority the consuls made this extraordinary
adlectio; and it is in fact improbable that the senate had so dwindled.
However that may be, the increase did not take permanent effect at
this time.[2538] Two other laws of these consuls are briefly
mentioned: (1) for planting colonies,[2539] of which nothing is known;
(2) a lex unciaria.[2540] The latter may have been a reduction of
existing debts by one-twelfth of the principle, or a lowering of the
maximal rate of interest to 8⅓ per cent;[2541] or it may have been a
general insolvency law, providing for the payment of debts in
instalments.[2542] The chief value of these measures, even if we
knew them in detail, would be to reveal the idea of their authors; for
they were all repealed in the following year on the initiative of the
consul L. Cornelius Cinna, probably by a comitial vote.[2543]
Cinna then proposed (1) a renewal of the Sulpician plebiscite for
the enrolment of the new citizens and the libertini among all the
tribes,[2544] (2) a recall of Marius and the other exiles.[2545] Before
these measures could be carried, the consul was driven from Rome
and deposed from office by an act of the senate on the motion of Cn.
Octavius, the other consul.[2546] This is the only certain instance of
the abrogation of the civil imperium known to the history of the
republic. Cinna returned at the head of an army; and after taking
forcible possession of the city, he carried his law concerning the
37. exiles through the assembly either on his own motion or that of a
tribune.[2547] As the senate, reversing its earlier action,[2548] had
already legalized the Sulpician provision concerning the distribution
of the libertini and the new citizens among the thirty-five tribes,[2549]
it was without reënactment carried into effect in 84.[2550] The
execution of this measure completed the political unification of Italy.
Meantime L. Valerius Flaccus, consul suffectus in 86, to relieve the
financial distress, passed a law which compelled creditors to satisfy
themselves with one-fourth of the amount due.[2551] In 83 M. Junius
Brutus, tribune of the plebs, proposed and carried, as a milder
measure of relief, a law for the colonization of Capua.[2552]
Schulze, C. F., Volksversammlungen der Römer, 110-26; Peter, C., Epochen der
Verfassungsgesch. der röm. Republik, 141-65; Geschichte Roms, bks. VI, VII. chs.
i-iv; Ihne, W., History of Rome, bk. VII. chs. ii-xix; Researches into the History of
the Roman Constitution, 161 ff.; Long, G., Decline of the Roman Republic, I. ch. x-
II. ch. xxiv; Lange, Röm. Altertümer, iii. 1-146, and see indices s. the various laws;
Die promulgatio trinum nundinum, die lex Caecilia Didia und nochmals die lex
Pupia, in Kleine Schriften, ii. 214-70; Mommsen, Th., History of Rome, bk. iv; Röm.
Staatsr. see index s. the various laws; Ueber das thorische Ackergesetz, in Ber.
sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. i (1849). 89-101; Neumann, C., Geschichte Roms, I.
chs. ii-v; Ferrero, Greatness and Decline of Rome, I. chs. ii-v; Greenidge, A. H. J.,
History of Rome, i; The Lex Sempronia and the Banishment of Cicero, in Class.
Rev. vii (1893). 347 f.; Greenidge and Clay, Sources for Roman History, 133-70
B.C.; Strachan-Davidson, J. L., ed. Appian, Civil Wars, bk. i, with notes; Weber, M.,
Röm. Agrargeschichte, 151 ff.; Dreyfus, Lois agr. sous la république Rom. 77-196;
Voigt, M., Ueber die staatsrechtliche Possessio und den Ager compascuus, in
Abhdl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. x (1880). 221-72; Ueber das röm. System der
Wege im alten Italien, in Ber. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. xxiv (1872). 29-90;
Babeion, E., Monnaies de la république Rom. i. 69-79; Billeter, G., Geschichte des
Zinsfusses im griechisch-röm. Altertum, 155 ff.; Fowler, W. W., Notes on Gaius
Gracchus, in Eng. Hist. Rev. xx (1905). 209-27, 417-33; Gaius Gracchus and the
Senate, in Class. Rev. x (1896). 278-80; Pöhlmann, R., Zur Geschichte der
Gracchen, in Sitzb. d. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss. 1907. 443-93; Oman, C., Seven
Roman Statesmen, i-iv; Huschke, Ph. E., Die lex Sempronia und ihr Verhältniss
zur lex Acilia repetundarum, in Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch. v. (1866). 46-84; Rudorff,
A. E., Ad legem Aciliam de pecuniis repentundis latam anno ab urbe condita 631
vel 632, in Philol. u. hist. Abhdl. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1861. 411-553;
Krüger-Brissaud, Hist. d. sources d. droit Rom. 94 f.; Hegewisch, D. H.,
Geschichte der gracchischen Unruhen; Ahren, E. A. J., Die drei Volkstribunen Ti.
38. Gracchus, M. Drusus, und P. Sulpicius; Nitzsch, K. W., Die Gracchen und ihre
nächsten Vorgänger, bks. iii, iv; Blasel, J., Die Motiven der Gesetzgebung des C.
Gracchus; Callegari, E., La legislazione di Caio Gracco; Meyer, E.,
Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Gracchen, in Festschriften ... der vereinigten
Friedrichs-Universität, etc. 1894. Philos. Fak. 79-109; controverted by Schwartz,
E., in Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen, clviii (1896). 792-811; Hesky, R.,
Anmerkungen zur lex Acilia repetundarum, in Wiener Studien, xxv (1903). 272-87;
Brassloff, S., Beiträge zur Erläuterung der lex Acilia repetundarum, ibid. xxvi. 106-
17; Hagge, Einige Bemerkungen über die lex Servilia repetundarum; Mühl, F. V.,
De L. Appuleio Saturnino tribuno plebis; Pappritz, R., Marius und Sulla; Vassis, S.,
Ζητληματα Ῥωμαϊκά, in Athena, xii (1900). 54-7 (on the Cornelian-Pompeian laws
of 88 concerning the assemblies); Lengle, J., Sullanische Verfassung; articles in
Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. i. 426-8: Adsignatio (Kubitschek); 256: (M’.) Acilius
Glabrio (Klebs); 584-8: M. Aemilius Scaurus (Klebs); 780-93 Ager (idem); ii. 261-9:
Appuleius (Klebs); 2848 f.: Bantia (Hülsen); iii. 1414-21: Calumnia (Hitzig); 1441 f.:
Campanus Ager (Kubitschek); iv. 195 f.: C. Coelius Caldus (Münzer); 510-88:
Coloniae (Kornemann); v. 407-10: T. Didius (Münzer); articles in Daremberg et
Saglio, Dict. i. 133-8: Ager Publicus (Humbert); 1301-21: Colonies Romains
(Lenormant); ii. 1346-8: Frumentariae leges (Humbert).
39. CHAPTER XVII
COMITIAL LEGISLATION
From Sulla to the End of the Republic, 82 to about 30
I. The Cornelian Reaction
82-70
In November, 82, after destroying his political enemies by war and
proscription, Sulla was ready to begin the work of restoring the
aristocratic constitution. As both consuls, Cn. Papirius Carbo and C.
Marius the younger,[2553] were dead, and as Sulla desired above all
things to give his legislation a constitutional basis, he advised the
senate to appoint an interrex. The choice fell on L. Valerius Flaccus,
princeps senatus, a moderate in politics. Thereupon Sulla withdrew
from Rome, leaving the civil authorities free in appearance to act at
their discretion. In reality he had determined to retain control of
affairs; and accordingly he wrote to Valerius advising the
appointment of a dictator, not for a fixed time but till the general
unrest should be quieted. He suggested himself as a suitable person
for the place. Valerius obediently proposed and carried a law through
the comitia centuriata, (1) which made Sulla dictator rei publicae
constituendae for an indefinite time with absolute power over the
lives and property of the citizens,[2554] (2) which legalized all his past
acts, both as consul and as proconsul,[2555] including his
arrangements in Asia as well as his proscriptions and confiscations.
[2556] He returned to the city, appointed Valerius his magister
equitum,[2557] and took to himself twenty-four lictors in addition to a
less formal guard of servants and friends.[2558] Without delay he
began the promulgation of laws, which undoubtedly he had long
been planning. They are here grouped according to subject, with an
occasional reference to their chronological relation.
First he applied himself to curbing the power of the tribunate, an
institution in which centred the strength of the democracy. A statute
40. for that purpose he must have felt compelled to draw up and pass
before the next tribunician election. Instead of renewing his earlier
law, however, for absolutely depriving the tribunes of initiative in
legislation,[2559] he enacted simply that the previous consent of the
senate should be necessary to bills brought by them before the
tribes.[2560] By another article of this law he limited the right of
tribunes to address the people in contiones.[2561] The range of their
intercession was also greatly limited.[2562] Their function of bringing
prosecutions before the people underwent restriction not only
through the laws affecting the quaestiones but also by special
enactment;[2563] for had they retained their unlimited right to
prosecute, they could at once have regained all their other power.
[2564] Little was left them but their original auxilii latio adversus
imperium.[2565] Finally the office was made unattractive to the
ambitious by the provision that those who held it were thereby
disqualified for other magistracies.[2566] By these measures the most
vital and powerful institution in the state was reduced to a shadow
without substance.[2567] The return to conditions preceding the
Hortensian legislation, in some respects even the Decemviral
legislation, was, as Fröhlich[2568] remarks, a backward step such as
finds few parallels in history.
About a year[2569] after limiting the power of the tribunes Sulla
proceeded to regulate the other offices through his lex de
magistratibus, 81. This statute, making use of the principle contained
in the lex Villia annalis,[2570] prescribed (1) that no one could be
consul before he had been praetor or praetor before he had been
quaestor,[2571] (2) that a space of two years should intervene
between the holding of consecutive offices.[2572] (3) The minimal
age of the quaestor it fixed at thirty-seven.[2573] The fortieth year
was therefore the age for the praetorship and the forty-third for the
office of consul. The aedileship, while bringing the holder a positive
advantage for his future career, was never an essential step to a
higher place. But in case this office was taken, the biennial interval
had to be observed.[2574] The quaestorship Sulla made the sole
41. avenue to the senate, so as to dispense with the revision of the list
by the censors.[2575] The statute of 151, forbidding reëlection to the
consulship,[2576] he repealed, and substituted for it the article of the
Genucian plebiscite of 442[2577] which fixed an interval of ten years
between the expiration of any office and reëlection to the same.[2578]
He increased the number of quaestors, at this time certainly more
than eight,[2579] to twenty, with the object not only of supplying an
administrative need but also of creating the required number of
senators.[2580] It was necessary also to raise the number of praetors
from six to eight in order to provide presidents for the new
quaestiones perpetuae.[2581]
The reforms above mentioned, together with the doubling of the
number of senators to be considered below, naturally led to the
enlargement of the chief sacerdotal colleges. The augurs and
pontiffs were increased from nine to fifteen and the decemviri sacris
faciundis were made quindecemviri.[2582] Another measure, which
seems to have been an article of the same act, repealed the
Domitian lex de sacerdotiis,[2583] and thus restored to these
colleges, and at the same time to the epulones, their right of filling
vacancies by coöptation,[2584] leaving to the people the function only
of electing the head of the pontifical college from among the
members.[2585] As the object of the first article was evidently to
provide places for some of the new magistrates and senators,[2586]
the coöptation doubtless immediately followed the enactment of the
law.
In increasing the number of praetors to eight[2587] Sulla provided
that during their year of office they were to remain in the city and
devote their whole time to the administration of justice. After the
expiration of their term they were to take upon themselves as
propraetors the command of provinces. In like manner the consuls
were to remain in Italy during their term, in the ordinary course of
events to give their entire attention to the affairs of peace; only after
they had retired from office were they expected as proconsuls to
govern provinces. In brief, Sulla by law established an absolute
42. distinction between the civil magistrate and the military
promagistrate.[2588] The lex de provinciis ordinandis[2589] recognized
the right of the senate to determine which provinces should be
consular and which pretorian in the way provided for by the
Sempronian law on this subject.[2590] The Cornelian statute did not,
however, any more than the Sempronian, forbid the assignment of a
province to a promagistrate by popular vote; and it recognized the
right of the senate to create promagistracies.[2591] But it established
the rule (1) that the two consuls should receive for a year of
promagisterial imperium the provinces declared to be consular; and
that they should either agree as to which each should take or cast
lots for them;[2592] (2) that the senate should annually assign the
eight retiring praetors to the remaining provinces, also for a year of
promagistracy.[2593] The same law directed that the promagistrate,
who had received the imperium in legal form, should retain it till his
return to the city and the celebration of his triumph,[2594] provided he
merited one. To avoid conflicts between retiring and incoming
governors it ordained that the former should leave the province
within thirty days after the latter had entered it.[2595] The law further
contained the definite regulation of the supplies and honors granted
the legati by the provincials.[2596] The tendency of Sulla’s legislation
thus far considered was to weaken the civil functionaries (1) by
restricting the tribunician initiative. (2) by increasing the number of
quaestors and praetors. (3) by depriving the higher civil magistrates
of the military imperium. The last-mentioned loss was in some
measure an advantage to the senate but in a far higher degree to the
promagistrates, who from this time began to overshadow the
republic.
The power taken from the tribunes necessarily went to the senate,
to restore to it the full control of legislation which it had possessed
before the enactment of the Hortensian statute. Under the reformed
constitution it was to be supreme. As it had dwindled during the
recent civil war and proscription,[2597] and as the performance of jury
service, which Sulla was restoring to its members, required a large
number of men, he added three hundred, mostly from the equestrian
43. rank, but including some centurions and other insignificant persons
who were likely to do his bidding.[2598] Appian[2599] states that these
new senators were elected by the tribes, possibly meaning the tribal
comitia.[2600] But as that process of selection would have required
an enormous length of time, it is far more probable that each tribe
had the privilege of choosing a definite number, perhaps nine, after
the precedent of the lex Plautia iudiciaria.[2601] This addition would
raise the number to about four hundred and fifty. As the normal
membership from Sulla to Caesar was about six hundred,[2602] we
may assume either that, independently of the extraordinary adlectio
by the tribes, he made the usual censorial enrolment of the recently
retired magistrates, or that he left it to time to fill up the senate to the
desired number by the annual admission of retired quaestors.[2603]
Henceforth it was to be recruited automatically by this process,
without any action on the part of the censors, who were thus
deprived of the only important function remaining to them.[2604]
Closely connected with the increase in membership is the lex
iudiciaria,[2605] which restored the quaestiones to the senators.[2606]
It was enacted near the end of 81, but prior to the increase in the
number of quaestors.[2607] Before this act the courts had remained
under the control of the knights in spite of the lex Plautia of 89, which
seems not to have continued long in force.[2608]
In the reorganization of the criminal courts (year 81) Sulla passed
criminal laws, in which he regulated the procedure of the existing
courts and created new quaestiones perpetuae.[2609] His reform
increased the number to seven, four of which were concerned
almost wholly with maladministration of office: (1) quaestio
repetundarum, extortion,[2610] (2) quaestio ambitus, bribery in
elections,[2611] (3) quaestio peculatus, misappropriation of public
funds[2612] and sacrilege,[2613] (4) quaestio maiestatis, injury to the
majesty of the Roman name, of which a private person as well as a
magistrate might be guilty.[2614] The three following were concerned
with common crimes: (5) quaestio inter sicarios et veneficos,
assassination, poisoning, and arson,[2615] (6) quaestio de falsis,
44. counterfeiting and falsification of testaments and other forgery,[2616]
(7) quaestio iniuriarum, acute personal violence, housebreaking, and
probably defamation of character.[2617] These laws concerning
quaestiones contained provisions for granting the accused the
privilege of deciding whether the vote should be oral or by ballot,
[2618] and they directed that the order of voting should be determined
by lot.[2619] The first of these two articles aimed to make the jurors
individually responsible, and the second to prevent influential men
from prejudicing the case by giving their opinions first.[2620]
While the praetor urbanus and praetor peregrinus still busied
themselves with civil jurisdiction, the six other praetors presided over
these courts; but as the number was insufficient, past aediles were
appointed to preside as iudices quaestionis. This arrangement was
especially necessary for the quaestio inter sicarios, overburdened as
it was with a variety of crimes.
As these courts were vested with the function of trying without
appeal all crimes, including those formerly brought before the
comitia, the result was that the people were practically, though not
constitutionally, deprived of their judicial power. The tendency of the
Cornelian legislation in this as in other respects was oligarchic.
Among the statutes passed in the winter or early spring of 81 we
must place the lex de proscriptione,[2621] which added certain
regulations to those of the Valerian law for the creation of the
Cornelian dictatorship,[2622] and which Sulla considered essential to
the execution of his policy and the maintenance of its results. The
Cornelian statute concerning proscription forbade the giving of relief
or aid to a proscribed person;[2623] it legalized the previous slayings
and confiscations of property,[2624] and provided also that the
estates not only of the proscribed but also of enemies who had fallen
in battle should be sold for the benefit of the treasury.[2625] It
excepted from the sale ten thousand of the youngest and strongest
slaves, who were given their freedom; and it debarred from the ius
honorum the sons, grandsons, and other descendants of the
proscribed,[2626] with a view to keeping from them the means of
45. vengeance; and lastly, it fixed the date for closing the proscriptions at
June 1, 81.[2627]
During the winter of 82-81 Sulla gave his attention not only to law-
making but also to the sale of confiscated property and to the
regulation of Italy. The latter work was carried out by the
administrative power of the dictator through the destruction of the
fortifications of rebellious communities, their punishment by fines and
extraordinary taxes, and the confiscation of some of their lands, to
be assigned to his discharged veterans.[2628] The Cornelian agrarian
laws,[2629] which brought about these confiscations and
assignments, seem to have been not acts of the comitia but
dictatorial orders.[2630] They must have been issued from time to
time as occasion demanded, probably through the entire year 81.
[2631] The legions were kept together till after the triumph (January
27, 28 of the year 81)[2632] and then disbanded, to be led off
gradually to their lands. Some of the municipia to which soldiers
were assigned, most obstinately Volaterrae and Nola, resisted their
admission by force of arms. To punish these rebels Sulla carried
through the comitia centuriata his lex de civitate Volaterranis
adimenda,[2633] which disfranchised not only Volaterrae but also
other rebellious municipia.[2634] Those who by this act were deprived
of the citizenship received the so-called Latin rights of Ariminum.
[2635]
Among the regulations for the improvement of the finances, which
he found in bad condition,[2636] was his abolition of the distributions
of grain.[2637] Whether it was effected by a lex frumentaria or a
dictatorial order cannot be determined.[2638] The levy of taxes on
Italian and transmarine communities[2639] could be brought about by
senatus consulta,[2640] as the people had nothing to do with such
matters. Credit had been shattered by the law of L. Valerius Flaccus
concerning debts, 86,[2641] which Sulla repealed by one of his own
on the same subject, 81.[2642]
46. In connection with the Circensian games which he celebrated in
the autumn of 81, and which in honor of Victoria were thereafter
repeated annually from October 26 to November 1,[2643] Sulla must
have passed a lex de ludis Victoriae instituendis.[2644] Lastly came
the sumptuary law, through which he attempted to regulate the
manners and morals of the citizens.[2645] It was the restoration, in a
revised form, of the lex Licinia of 104,[2646] which had been repealed
by M. Duronius in 97.[2647] The Cornelian statute permitted the
expenditure of no more than three hundred sesterces for meals on
the calends, nones, ides, ludi, and certain other holidays, and only
thirty for ordinary meals; and it fixed the prices of various luxuries.
[2648] Another article of the same statute limited funeral expenses.
[2649] The author’s object seems to have been to restore the morals
and manners as well as the constitution and laws of the good old
time before they were corrupted by the demagogues.
Sulla’s legislation was substantially complete on January 1, 80,
when he entered upon his second consulship with Q. Caecilius
Metellus Pius as colleague.[2650] Retiring into private life early in 79,
he left the constitution to its fate. No better comment on its value
could be offered than the history of its decline and overthrow in a
single decade. Opposition began to manifest itself from the time of
his abdication; and he was hardly in his grave when M. Aemilius
Lepidus, consul in 78, promulgated bills for the abolition of some of
the Cornelian statutes; but the opposition of his colleague, Q.
Lutatius Catulus, and of the senate prevented their ratification.[2651]
The right of retired tribunes to sue for other offices,[2652] however,
was restored by a statute of the consul C. Aurelius Cotta, 75.[2653]
Before coming to the restoration of the tribunician power it is
necessary to mention the statutes passed under the Cornelian
constitution. To 78 or 77 probably belongs the lex Plautia de vi,
generally regarded as tribunician, which established a quaestio
perpetua for the trial of persons charged with violence. It also
forbade the acquisition by long use of things stolen or violently
seized.[2654] As no censors were elected, an order of the people of
47. Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade
Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and
personal growth!
ebookfinal.com