State system of ancient Rome. Social structure of Ancient Rome

§ 13. Having become acquainted with the structure of the ancient Roman society, we can better understand the structure of the ancient Roman state. The scarcity of sources allows us to present only a brief outline of this device.

The most ancient state structure consisted of three bodies: the king, the Senate and the people's assembly.

§§ 14-16. Tsar*(39)

§ 14. Foundation of royal power. Was royal power in Rome elective or hereditary? Our sources do not give a clear and reliable answer to this question. The most likely conclusion from them (supported by the comparative history of law) is that in Ancient Rome, like other Indo-European peoples, the people maintained the belief that royal power should be hereditary. But in reality this principle was often violated by various reasons: the king died without offspring; a powerful usurper seized power by force or thanks to other influences (wealth, intelligence, support of influential families). In this case, the king's power was based on choice. But who had the right to choose and in what order, this was hardly determined at that time as precisely and in detail as the Roman writers tell: the history of other nations shows that even with a relatively higher degree of development of the people, the election of the head of state is not carried out in compliance with such detailed and the exact rules which were observed, according to the Roman writers, during the election of the Roman king. And from the story of the Roman writers themselves about the accession of individual kings to the throne, it is clear that these rules were almost never fully observed. It is most likely that although some of them were observed, they were not considered necessary, so that a king who ascended the throne without observing them was still considered a legitimate king.

The election of a king, according to the stories of Roman writers, consisted of the following four acts: interregnum, creatio regis, inauguratio and auctoritas patram or lex curiata de imperio * (40). After the death of the king, ten persons from among the senators were given the power to govern the state and take care of finding a candidate for king. These ten performed their duty in turns (5 days each). After the expiration of the term, new 10 senators were appointed, etc. until the election of a king. These 10 rulers were called interreges, and the time of their reign was interregnum*(41). Interreges were elected only from patricians.

By agreement with the Senate, the interkings elected a candidate for king, who was then selected in the curiat assembly (creatio regis) * (42).

After the election of the king, the third act was performed: auspices, in order to find out whether the gods approved of his choice. This act was called inauguratio * (43). The inauguration took place in the presence of the national assembly.

Finally, some Roman writers say that there was also a fourth act, which they call differently. Livy says that the elected king had to receive auctoritas patrum (1, 17. 22. 33), Dionysius - approval of the patricians (2, 60), Cicero - investment in power through a special resolution of the curiat assembly, the so-called lex curiata de imperio (Rep 2, 13. 17. 18. 20. 21). Whether this act existed during the election of the king and what it consisted of is impossible to find out due to the unsatisfactory sources.

§ 15. The power of the king. Royal power can be considered from two points of view: its content, or, in other words, the objects of the department to which it extended, and its strength.

The content of royal power is difficult to determine precisely. The reason for this lies not only in the scarcity of sources, but also in the very nature of state life in ancient Roman society. This life was just beginning; its elements therefore could not yet stand out and take a definite position towards each other. From the tradition preserved by Roman writers, we conclude that all aspects of state power, not being clearly distinguished by the popular consciousness, were in the hands of the king: he was the highest commander, administrator, judge, priest, etc. * (44)

The strength of royal power also cannot be determined precisely. To judge it, it is necessary to keep in mind the following well-known facts.

On the one hand, legend often speaks of the king’s death sentences, his unlimited orders as a commander, the conclusion of peace, the unaccountable disposal of the state treasury and public land, and the employment of citizens for generally useful work.

From these stories one could conclude that the king was an unlimited monarch. This is what some historians of our time do.

But on the other hand, we have evidence of a different kind. Firstly, it is known that the life of the ancient Romans was strongly influenced by their religious views. They tried to carefully coordinate all important acts of private and public life with religious precepts. There is no doubt that the king, as a son of his time, was also strictly guided by these instructions. This already contained a strong limitation of his arbitrariness. Secondly, tradition dates back to the very beginning of the Roman state the existence of a council of elders, a senate, Consilium regium, with which, according to custom, the king had to consult on all important matters. True, from the same legend it is clear that this was not absolutely necessary for the king. Tarquin the Proud, for example, ruled without a Senate. But this circumstance was, according to the same legend, one of the reasons for his overthrow. Thirdly, in the same way, in court cases, the king usually consulted with a special council. Finally, from the legend about the attempt of Tarquin the Ancient to carry out some political reforms, it is clear that these attempts failed due to the resistance of some patrician families.

From all the above facts, we can draw the following very probable conclusion about the strength of royal power: in Ancient Rome there were no institutions that were specifically granted certain aspects of supreme state power, or at least participation in them along with the king. Therefore, in some cases, the king had the opportunity to act solely according to his own will. But in general, religion, custom and clan alliances were so strong that in fact the king had to comply with public opinion, especially in the person of the Senate, the People's Assembly and some religious institutions.

Special mention should be made about the legislative power of the king. The legend about all kings says that they created new or changed old institutions, i.e., in other words, they issued laws (leges regiae), that under Tarquinius the Proud, a certain S. Papirius compiled a collection of them, which was called jus civile Papirianum *( 45). At the same time, it is sometimes said that these laws were approved by the people's assembly, but sometimes the matter is presented as if the king issued them single-handedly. Hence, in former times, it was concluded that the king could make laws by virtue of his own power, regardless of any other institution in the state. It is now generally accepted that the Roman king had no legislative power. The main argument in favor of this view lies in what has just been said about the factors limiting the royal power: any important reform concerning the private relations of citizens or the state system must inevitably affect religious and clan interests, which were so powerful that the king could not violate them without the consent of the influential classes of citizens. How to explain the undoubted existence of leges regiae will be discussed in the section on the sources of law.

The external distinctions of royal power were a purple mantle (later a toga trimmed with purple), a scepter with an eagle, an ivory chair and a golden diadem; The king walked and rode, accompanied by 12 lictors, who had bundles of rods and axes in their hands.

§ 16. Assistants to the king. Despite all the simplicity of government that we must assume in the ancient Roman state, the king could not cope with various matters alone. He had secular and spiritual assistants, to whom he entrusted the immediate management of well-known branches of management, while retaining general leadership. These assistants had no independent power; they depended on the king, although there is reason to think that some of the spiritual assistants already at that time became independent.

The more important secular assistants were the following.

Tribunus celerum - chief of the cavalry, a purely military position, without political significance.

Custos, or praefectus urbis (or urbi) - a person to whom the king entrusted the protection of the city and the management of current affairs during his absence from Rome.

Duoviri perduellionis. The word perduellio was used to describe crimes against an entire state. Trial for such crimes was entrusted to two citizens, whom the king himself appointed for each individual case. If their verdict was guilty, then the convicted person could file a complaint with the national assembly (provocatio).

Quaestores parricidii - officials who were supposed to carry out investigations into crimes that were common name parricidium. This word at first meant murder in general (and not parricide only), and subsequently - all crimes that, firstly, were investigated and punished according to the same rules as murder, and, secondly, were directed against individual citizens, and not the whole state. Quaestores were a permanent position to which citizens were appointed by the king (not the people).

Of the king’s spiritual assistants, we are interested in those who had influence on state life and on the education or application of law. These were the three colleges of fetials, augurs and pontiffs * (46).

The College of Fetiales (fetiales), consisting of 20 members, assisted the king (and subsequently the republican magistrates) in international relations; for example, they declared war, extradited to a foreign state Roman ambassadors who violated international customs, generals who, at their own peril, concluded an agreement with the enemy, which the Roman government refused to approve, etc. All these international relations, according to the beliefs of that time, were under the protection of the gods and therefore had to be accompanied by certain religious rituals. It was the responsibility of the fetials to perform these rituals. This board did not play a particularly important role either under the kings or during the republic.

College of Augurs. All the Italian peoples believed that Jupiter made his will known to them through certain symbolic signs, such as celestial phenomena, especially lightning, the cry and flight of birds, etc. The Romans especially developed the habit of discovering the will of God by these means, which was called auspicia. The questions that the Romans addressed to God were of a purely practical, so to speak, prosaic nature, i.e. not about the future in general, but about whether the deity favors taking a certain action in private or public life.

Every private person could question God when it came to private interests. In matters of national importance, only the king (and in a republic, magistrates) could do this. But both could not only question themselves, but also interpret the observed phenomena. However, a sincere (in ancient times) fear of misinterpreting the will of God and thus not achieving the practical purpose for which the whole act was undertaken, forced the Romans to seek the assistance of people who, for some reason, were revered as skillful interpreters. This explains quite naturally the formation of a special class of augurs. The homogeneity of their technical interests, the need for their constant assistance in public administration and the need to transmit their special knowledge to new generations should have early led to the organization of augurs in the form of a college.

The art of the augurs gradually grew into a complex system, the assimilation of which was possible only for those who gained access to the college. And since not a single important state act was undertaken without auspices, the augurs, on whom it depended to give any interpretation to the phenomena, should, under favorable conditions, gain great influence on political life, which indeed happened during the republic. It is known, for example, that at the beginning of the republic, when only patricians had access to the college, the augural art was often used to eliminate acts harmful to patrician interests. What was the degree of influence of augurs under the kings is not known for certain; Presumably we can say that it was less than in the republic.

Tradition dates the emergence of the college of pontiffs (pontifices) to the time of the kings. In the republic, this college played a primary role both in state life and in the formation of Roman law, which will be discussed later. In the present period, it is unlikely that the royal power allowed her to significantly develop her influence.

What was the original purpose of the pontiffs is not known for certain. Judging by their later activities, one can think that they were educated people of their time, possessing certain special knowledge, which they used initially for religious purposes, for example, they kept track of time (calendar), participated in the commission of certain legal acts (adoption, marriage ). In republican times, they were responsible for overseeing various functions in the field of religion, for example, the timely offering of sacrifices, the observance of established holidays, the correct expenditure of funds belonging to the religious department, etc.

The College chose from among itself the Supreme Pontif (Pontifex Maximus).

Senate

§ 17. Tradition unanimously testifies that from ancient times, next to the king, a special council called Senatus, patres took part in governing the state.

The legal position of the ancient Senate has already been outlined earlier regarding royal power: the king, according to custom, consulted with the Senate in all important matters; but the decision of this latter was not binding on the king. The king could decide matters without even consulting with the Senate. The Senate could not meet on its own without the king's call (except in the case of an interregnum).

The actual significance of the Senate, as already indicated above, was significantly greater than the legal one, i.e. the king in the vast majority of cases could not rule without the assistance of the Senate if he did not want to risk his very position. The reason for this importance of the Senate was that it relied on the power of the clans, which was spoken of earlier. It is precisely this reason that is indicated by the ancient composition of the Senate.

The question of who the ancient senate consisted of cannot be clarified in detail. But the basic principle, i.e. the direct connection between senators and childbirth can be considered reliable, as can be seen from the following considerations. Roman tradition, speaking about the number of senators, always puts it in accordance with the number of curiae and clans. The normal number of senators was considered 300*(47); it corresponds to 30 curiae, into which the Roman people were divided, and 300 clans, which were distributed among these curiae * (48). The Romans always imagine the accession of new clans in connection with the appointment of some members of these clans to senators * (49).

The very name of the Senate (from senex) shows that initially the senators were elderly or even old people, which is completely understandable: in the simple life in which the ancient Romans lived, wisdom was determined mainly by personal life experience, which increased over the years * (50) . Thus, we can say that the ancient Senate consisted of the oldest and therefore most influential members of the patrician families.

However, based on the data presented, one cannot go further, as some modern writers do, claiming that each clan had its own representative in the Senate. On the contrary, it can be said with greater certainty that the appointment of senators was made at the discretion of the king. This is indicated by the expression legere in patres, coming from ancient times, to elect senators, and some of the Roman writers directly say that this lectio was performed by kings. The right to elect senators, which at the beginning of the republic belonged to consuls* (51), also leads to the same conclusion. Of course, due to the strength of the clans, the kings had to take their compatriots from among influential relatives, but they could deviate from this rule. Thanks to this, they could subsequently introduce plebeians into the Senate.

As for the objects of the department of the ancient Senate, i.e. questions on which the king, according to custom, had to consult with the Senate, then nothing reliable can be said about this.

People's Assembly

§ 18. The third member of the most ancient state structure was the assembly of all the people, and, moreover, not in the form of a shapeless crowd, but distributed in the curia, which is why the assembly was called comitia curiata.

The subjects of the department of this collection and the degree of its influence on public administration during the tsarist period are very difficult to determine due to the extreme unsatisfactory nature of our sources. The answer to both questions will for the most part be only probable.

The subjects to be handled by the curiat assembly were partly religious, or at least in contact with religion, and partly secular. Of the religious ones, we will only mention inauguratio regis and the making of wills. It was already said above that the inauguration took place in the presence of the entire people. Twice a year the Romans could present their wills to the people's assembly, i.e. make arrangements in case of death if they wanted to change the usual order of inheritance * (52). In these and other similar cases, the people, apparently, were convened in a special way, namely through a nationwide announcement of the appointed meeting. This method of convening was denoted by the verb calare, and hence the meeting itself was called comitia calata * (53).

The participation of the people in the affairs subject to the conduct of the comitia calata was, apparently, purely passive: they listened to what was announced to them by the king, the priest or the citizen who made orders in the event of death * (54).

Of greater interest to us, but also more doubtful, are the secular subjects of the department. One of the ancient historians, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, claims that from the time of the first kings the curiat assembly was granted the election of magistrates, the approval of laws, the declaration of war and the conclusion of peace * (55). However, comparison with other information forces us to recognize this evidence as unreliable. Dionysius transferred to the curiat assembly those rights that during the republican period belonged to the centuriate assembly. It is more likely that the participation of the people's assembly in government under the kings was very limited, as will be clear from the following analysis of its departmental subjects.

1. Arrogatio, i.e. that type of adoption in which an independent citizen (paterfamilias) placed himself under the paternal authority of another citizen. If the adoptee had a family, the members of which were under his authority, then it and all its property passed under the authority of the adoptive parent, who accepted all these new household members into his family religion. IN ancient times this adoption probably took place when the last representative of a dying clan, not hoping to have his own offspring, wanted to maintain the existence of the clan by artificial means. In this case, the property, religious and personal interests of at least two, and sometimes many families were affected. Therefore, it is very likely that the resolution of adoption depended on the curiat meeting, in which all members of the clan took part * (56).

2. Cooptatio, i.e. acceptance of foreign clans among the patrician ones. This right of assembly for the tsarist period is not attested by sources; but it is probable for indirect reasons: the word "cooptatio" indicates acceptance by the birth itself; in the republic, jussus populi * (57) was required for this act; finally, the interests of the Roman clans were affected so strongly that these clans could hardly be excluded from participation in the cooptatio.

3. Creatio regis, i.e. election of a king at the suggestion of an interking. The degree of participation of the people in this act was small: they could only accept or reject the proposed candidate. Members of the national assembly did not have the right to nominate their candidate. This right to elect a king can be seen as the germ of the future right of the people to elect the officials of the republic (magistrates).

4. Lex de bello indicendo, i.e. the right to decide on the declaration of offensive war. However, this right was granted to the people by the king himself when he found it necessary * (58), therefore, it did not belong to him independently.

5. In the same way, the king himself, when he found it necessary, provided the national assembly with a criminal trial for crimes that fit the concept of perduellio * (59). We have already seen that the initial verdict was decided by a special commission appointed at the discretion of the king, and then, at the request of the convicted person, the matter was transferred to the final decision of the people's assembly. If the tsar himself had taken upon himself the decision of the verdict, then provocation to the people would have been impossible. Thus, the criminal court in the tsarist period did not constitute an independent right of the people. However, we can consider both last cases as the embryos of future independent rights of the people's assembly.

6. Finally, as regards the legislative power of the people, with the exception of the above passage of Dionysius, nothing in the sources indicates its existence in the first half of the royal period. On the contrary, Roman writers, talking about the first kings, the organizers of the Roman state, portray them as acting autocratically. Of course, we cannot recognize historically reliable events in these stories, but we can conclude from them that the legend does not preserve memories of the legislative activity of the people in the first centuries of its existence. This conclusion is also confirmed by more general considerations: the most ancient Roman institutions were created, like those of any young people, slowly and imperceptibly by custom, therefore, without the participation of a popular assembly, and then, until the kings tried to significantly change these institutions, i.e. As long as they did not affect the related interests of the entire people, there was not even a reason for the latter to strive to participate in the legislative power.

But when, starting with Tarquin the Ancient, the kings began major state reforms, they had, for the sake of the strength of these latter, to secure the consent of the interested people to the abolition of old and the introduction of new institutions. In this way, apparently, the legislative power of the people's assembly was born. It is also indicated by the word that was used when voting in the meeting to reject a new proposal: antique, i.e. antiqua probo. In any case, it is unlikely that in the second half of the tsarist period the legislative activity of the assembly was a normal, non-random phenomenon.

The external order of the meetings was as follows. They were convened by the king. The meeting could not take place against his will. All citizens were called upon by name, and to the comitia calata by means of a public announcement. The meeting place was the comitium. The king proposed a question (rogabat populum), to which the assembly could answer only “yes” or “no” (utirogas or antiquo). None of the members of the meeting had the right to modify the proposal or replace it with a new one. Votes were cast in curiae (curiatim). Each curia had one vote. Within each curia, voting was carried out universally (viritim), and the opinion of the majority was taken as the opinion of the curia, just as the opinion of the majority of the curia was taken as the opinion of the entire assembly.

From the analysis of the objects of the department of the curiat assembly, we could be convinced that the degree of its participation in public administration was insignificant. It turns out to be even smaller if we take into account the normal restrictions just mentioned, i.e. that the people could not form a legal assembly without the will of the king and did not have the initiative in proposing issues for resolution. For all these reasons, one cannot agree with the view of those scientists who recognize the supreme power (sovereignty) of the people's assembly of the tsarist period.

Army

§ 19. The most ancient Roman army represented in miniature the exact imprint of the entire people with its divisions. The legion (initially probably the only one) consisted of 3,000 foot soldiers (pedites). All ten curiae of each tribe had to supply 1000 people. The cavalry (equites, celeres) consisted of three hundred (centuriae). Each of the three tribes was to provide 100 horsemen. Clients also served in the military; but it is not known what their service was; in any case, they played a secondary role in the army. The main burden of military service lay on the patricians, which we should keep in mind for a better understanding of subsequent events.

Related information.

Political rise of Rome

The growth of Rome took place in three concentric circles, corresponding to three state forms.

In the internal structure of the Roman state, with the help of which a huge agglomeration of cities, regions and peoples was connected to the center, the Romans turned out to be remarkable architects who originally solved the problem of the transition from city to state. In its earliest period, the city of Rome (urbs) was also a state (civitas) - in other words, the Roman state had urban forms. If at this time the power of Rome extended over neighboring communities, then this happened either through the absorption of the community itself by Rome and the acceptance of its citizens among the Roman citizens, or through the destruction of a hostile city (Vey); Despite the conquests, Rome remained the only city on its territory. But very early on, necessity forced the Romans to bring to the conquered land or even to the conquered cities, in order to strengthen their power, colonies of Roman citizens who, while forming a military garrison there, remained citizens of Rome. As a precaution, Rome initially settled no more than 300 citizens in the colonies, so that the colony would not become dangerous to the metropolis. And since Rome at that time was a member of the Latin Union, common colonies of Roman and Latin citizens, called Latin colonies, were also brought into the conquered areas - for example, into the territory of Wei. The newly founded cities became, in turn, members of the Latin Union. B. 381 BC e. The Romans took a measure that was important in its consequences: having conquered the city of Tusculum, they assigned its citizens to the R. tribe, that is, they gave them the right to vote in the R. people's assembly, but at the same time left Tusculum its city autonomy. The inhabitants of Tusculum thus became citizens of two cities: politically they belonged to Rome, lived in its legions, cast a voice in the forum, but independently managed their local city affairs, electing, for example, local magistrates.

The city, which was at the same time both in connection with Rome and in political subordination to it, was called municipium. Thus, Rome found a convenient formula for incorporating cities that merged with it politically, but retained their autonomy, which was so important for local interests and prosperity. The Romans did not immediately grant all municipalities the rights of Roman citizenship: to the inhabitants of the Etruscan city of Caere, alien in language and customs, they first gave only citizenship without the right to vote (cives sine suffragio) and thereby created a new category of cities; citizens of such cities of “Ceritan law” were real municipes, that is, they bore duties without enjoying rights. There were, according to Polybius, 100,000 citizens of this kind before the Second Punic War, out of 173,000 full-fledged Roman citizens. Thanks to the municipalities, ager romanus, that is, “Roman land,” could grow, embracing numerous, well-populated and freely governed cities, spread throughout Italy and at the same time forming one political body with Rome, since their citizens were members of the tribes of the Roman people and only in the Roman forum could they show their participation in the Roman power of the people. Thus, Ager romanus, which at the beginning of the republic represented a space of 98,275 hectares, by the beginning of Lat. war tripled (309 thousand hectares); the dissolution of the Latin union and the transformation of many independent Latin cities into municipalities again doubled the size of the R. land (603 thousand); the unification of Italy, that is, the victory over the Samnites, Etruscans, and Gauls of central Italy; brought the space of Roman land to 2,700,000 hectares; the reorganization of Italy after the victory over Hannibal added another 1,000,000 hectares; the conquest of Northern Italian Gaul and colonization in it expanded Ager Romanas to 5,500,000 hectares, which is one third of the space of all of Italy (16 million hectares). Another cement that united the Roman power was the “treaty” (foedus), thanks to which the defeated city became a Roman ally. The formula of the treaty was different: if the treaty was concluded on the principle of equality (foedus aequum), then it provided the ally with complete autonomy. In fact, however, equality was accompanied by dependence on Rome: the allied city followed the policies of Rome, and not vice versa. There was even greater dependence when the contract included the formula majestalem populi romani comiter conservare, that is, the obligation to kindly preserve the greatness (supremacy) of the Roman people. Through such treaties, which assigned a special place to each of the allies, Rome bound the 135 free cities of Italy to itself as allies (socii). The middle between Rome and the allies is occupied by armor. colonies (socii ac nomen lalinum - in Livy). After the termination of the lat. union, the Romans began to withdraw colonies, the citizens of which, unlike the former Roman colonists, lost the right of Roman citizenship and became citizens of the seven old Latin colonies, but for that they enjoyed complete autonomy and retained the right to return to Rome and re-enroll in their tribe , if they left a family member in the colony to cultivate the plot they received. With such colonies with a large number of citizens (from 3 to 6 thousand; even 20,000 colonists were brought to Venusia), Rome Latinized the southern and northern. Italy. All Latin colonies, including the 7 old ones, were 35, covering an area of ​​830,000 hectares. and with 85,000 citizens called up for military service (in 225, when only 28 colonies were withdrawn). The entire territory of cities allied with Rome in Italy amounted to 10,500,000 hectares. - twice as much as the Roman one; As for military forces, the allies could send almost twice as many to help Rome (including the Latin colonies) (in 225 - 497,000, versus 273,000). Thus, after the conquest of Italy by Rome, this country was a federation of cities, under the supreme dominion of one reigning city; This - single state in the cohesion of its parts and in its subordination to a single authority, but in its structure it has a municipal character, that is, it consists exclusively of cities that are not only self-governing, but also have a managed territory. Upon Rome's entry into the third concentric circle, its sovereign. the structure had to change: Rome no longer fought with cities, but with kings; the result of his victories was the acquisition not of allies (socii), but of subjects (dediticii or stipendiarii - tax-payers). Only in exceptional cases did the Romans grant freedom by treaty to cities with which they had previously been on friendly terms; another similar category is represented by cities that were granted a privileged position (civitates liberae et immunes) on the basis not of a mutual treaty, but of a resolution of the Senate or a law. For the most part, the cities surrendered to the mercy of the Romans; according to the surrender formula (deditio), they were given back land and self-government, subject to various in-kind and monetary duties. Consequently, here too, an element of the state structure was an urban self-governing territory, under the supervision or authority of a regional Roman military commander who took the place of the king (for example, in Macedonia). But all this was possible until the Romans left the boundaries of Greek and Phoenician culture, with its urban life. The position of the provinces in areas that did not know urban culture was different. Here the Romans were the conductors of this culture, the great builders and organizers of cities, with the help of which they Romanized the barbarians. The organization of cities was carried out through the settlement of veterans, that is, soldiers who had served their time; other cities were formed from the camps of the Roman legions; local inhabitants were also sometimes organized into cities by the Romans. Gaul, the Danube regions and especially Africa were covered with a network of Roman colonies and municipalities; Numerous inscriptions testify to this civilizing mission of the Romans, which constitutes the best page in the history of Rome.

Patricians and plebeians

The expansion of the power of Rome, introducing more and more new elements into it, created two layers in the population - the dominant and the subordinate. Such dualism appears to us already in ancient, prehistoric Rome, manifesting itself in the antagonism between patricians and plebeians. The struggle between patricians and plebeians is a fact that dominates the history of the state structure, social life and legislation of ancient Rome, and therefore the question of their origin has always attracted the special attention of researchers. Antiquity already gave us two different answers to this question. Livy derives patricians from patres, that is, senators, and considers them descendants of the first hundred senators appointed by Romulus; Dionysius, familiar from the history of Greek cities with the role of noble families, suggests the existence of such families from time immemorial in Rome. From the testimony of Livy it is clear that in the era of Roman historiography a clear idea of ​​the character of the ancient patriciate had already been lost, but it was preserved to some extent by jurists, who (Gai) found the definition: plebs gentem non habet (plebeians do not have a clan, that is, a clan everyday life or building). Consequently, the main feature of patriciate is its tribal system. What it consisted of, we have only late and fragmentary news about this (for example, from Cicero), from which, however, it is clear that the main feature of the clan system in Rome, as in Greece, is the sacred connection between relatives, their belonging to a special religious cult, probably in connection with ancestor worship; This also includes the existence of a family grave on a plot belonging to the clan. All relatives bear one common name (nomen gentilicium), which is preserved even if the genus is divided into branches (Cornelii Rufi and Cornelii Scipiones). That the family had ancestral property in ancient times can be judged by later inheritance law; The existence of general gatherings among relatives, at which measures binding on all were taken, is evidenced by Cicero’s news that after the betrayal of one of the Manlii, this clan forbade calling him by his name any of the relatives. A reliable and important sign of patricianism is the existence of each kind of clients, that is, obedient people bearing the same family name; taking part in the ancestral cult and having the right to a place in the ancestral grave. Based on one single piece of information from Livy about the Claudii, one can think that the patricians allocated plots of land to their clients; there is no doubt that the patricians helped them at trial, hence the later special meaning of the word client, and that for their part the clients, by analogy with the vassals of the Middle Ages, provided financial assistance to the patron in certain cases determined by custom - they ransomed him from captivity and from unpaid debts Outside this close connection of patricians with clients stood the plebeians; as a result, there was no connubium between patricians and plebeians, that is, marriages between them were not considered legal. Whether there was a legal separation of another kind between them, as Niebuhr thought, is more difficult to say; for example, were marriages through confarreatio (the rite of communion of the bride and groom with spelled grains) a patrician form, and marriage through coemptio (a rite of imaginary purchase) a plebeian form? Professor Moscow Univ. Kryukov in the 40s (who wrote his study in German, under the name “Pellegrino”) even suggested a religious difference between patricians and plebeians. There was a time when the plebeians stood outside the political organization of the patricians, that is, they were not full R. citizens. Only by the law of Licinius and Sextius, in 367 BC. e., one of the consular seats was given to the plebeians. That plebeians were initially not allowed into the Senate can be concluded from the formula of the presiding magistrate’s address to the senators - patres conscripti, that is, actually patres et conscripti or “patricians and those included in the list.” The plebeians did not participate in the election of the interrex. Niebuhr deduced that the plebeians were not part of the ancient national assembly from the fact that the plebeians were not assigned to the curiae (Mommsen holds a different opinion). This is confirmed by the fact that, along with the national assembly in curiae (comitia curiata), another later appears - in military hundreds (comitia centuriala), in which citizens were distributed on the basis of property qualifications, and then a third, purely plebeian (comitia tributa), in tribes or volosts into which R. territory was divided.

Niebuhr also assumed that the plebeians stood outside the economic organization of ancient Rome, since they were deprived of the right to use public land - ager publicus (see below). Niebuhr’s theory about the origin of the plebeians is based on this complete separation and dualism of the patricians and plebeians: he saw in the patricians the indigenous inhabitants of ancient Rome, which formed on 7 hills from synoicism, that is, the voluntary merger of two communities that arose there, Latin and Sabine, and in the plebeians - the fruit of the first expansion of Rome, that is, the landowners of the communities neighboring Rome, who were annexed to it by force of arms or who voluntarily moved there. Be that as it may, the struggle of the plebeians with the patricians on political, legal and economic grounds constitutes inside story Rome; but since it had a strong impact on the history of the Russian magistracy and the national assembly, it is more convenient to consider it in connection with these issues. The critical moment of the struggle is the departure of the plebeians, dating back to 493, to the sacred mountain (mons sacer) in the vicinity of Rome, with the intention of settling there; The last link in the struggle is secession, the third, settled by the law of the dictator Hortensius in 287 BC. e. Its result is the political equality of the plebeians, expressed in the equation of the plebiscite with the law, that is, in the right of the plebeian people's assembly to issue decisions that have the force of a general law and are therefore binding on the patricians. Even earlier, the plebeians were granted the right to occupy all magistracies, as well as priestly positions (lex Ogulvia, 302 BC), except for some that had no political significance. In the field of civil relations, the equality of plebeians with patricians was ensured by the law of the tribune Canuleus, who established it back in 445 BC. e. connubium between both classes. The economic struggle in Rome early lost its purely class character, due to the emergence of a plebeian aristocracy, in solidarity with the patricians. The Law of Hortensius, concluding the struggle of the plebeians with the patricians, coincides with the end of the conquest of Italy by Rome, causing a new dualism, namely Roman citizens and allies.

This dualism was not at first associated with any strife: the allies did not seek closer rapprochement, being content with the benefits that the alliance with Rome provided them; Their merchants could now, under the protection of Rome, freely trade throughout the world, and their warriors could acquire land and booty in Rome’s wars. But this gradually changed. Under the autocracy of R., his power made itself felt more and more difficult by the allies, and when, from the time of the Gracchi, the era of distribution of lands and grain, and public entertainment (panem et circenses) began in R., the right of Roman citizenship became a bait for the allies. After the attempts of the Roman tribunes (C. Gracchus and Livius Drusus) to satisfy their desires were in vain, the allies took up arms in 88. Seeing the danger, the Romans hastened, by the law of Julius, to divide the allies and give citizenship to those of them who had not yet rebelled (Etruscans); but the Samnites and highlanders of southern Italy managed to arm themselves and, in a two-year bloody war, fought with Rome not for the right of citizenship, but for their independence. How deeply, however, the political idea of ​​Rome - a federation of cities, under the authority of a city common to all citizens - was rooted in the minds of the Italians, can be seen from the fact that the allies decided to create a new Rome in southern Italy and chose for this the town of Corfinium, renamed Italy: its the forum was to serve as a general forum, the senate as a general senate, and the consuls and praetors (according to the number of Romans) as general supreme magistrates. Rome was forced to call all its forces under the banner, put its best commanders, Marius and Sulla, at their head - and still end with a concession. The law of Plautius and Papirius granted Roman citizenship to all who laid down their arms within 60 days. The Italics - with the exception of some of the Samnites, who continued to resist until their extermination - became part of Rome, but from that time the fall of devastated Italy began. The dualism between the Romans and the Latins or allies in Italy disappeared (with the exception of the inhabitants of Transpadan Gaul, who received citizenship only from Julius Caesar in 49); but in the Roman state, as a result of the conquests, another dualism had already opened up. Roman Italy was surrounded by provinces, and the discord between the Romans and the provincials (peregrini) was much deeper than between the Romans and Latins. Nevertheless, this dualism began to gradually smooth out and faded away without the terrible shock that was the allied war. This happened because common state power was established over the Romans and Peregrines.

The process of rapprochement took place in two ways: emperors gave the right of citizenship to individuals or categories of persons (for example, Caesar gave citizenship to all doctors and teachers of science in Rome; by decrees of subsequent emperors, the right of citizenship was given as a privilege to encourage the construction of houses and ships, for marriages rich in children, etc. . p.), or citizenship was granted to entire cities and regions. (Fictitious) Latinity played an important role in this. When the Italic Latins merged with the Romans, the latter began to grant some cities in Gaul the right of former Latin colonies. Latinity thus became a transitional stage to Roman citizenship; in this sense, Vespasian granted Latin law to all of Spain. Finally, Caracalla gave all free people of the empire the right of Roman citizenship; in orbe romano qui sunt, cives romani effecti sunt. However, the political significance of this measure should not be exaggerated: when a province rose to the level of Rome, Italy turned into a province. Her privileges - freedom from land taxes and from military service - disappeared; The self-government of its cities was subordinated, as in the provinces, to the imperial bureaucracy. The supreme power of Roman citizens passed to the Roman emperor, the Roman citizen from master to subject, like a provincial. In the Roman Empire, only one dualism survived, but not exclusively Roman - between master and slave.

Formation of the Republic and Empire

Imperial power, which completes the political development of Rome, was not a foreign element to it; it is rooted in its original organization. Polybius, who became well acquainted with the structure of Rome in the house of Scipio, defined this structure as a government mixed from monarchy, aristocracy and democracy, meaning by this the interaction of the magistracy, the Senate and the people's assembly. All three of these elements go back in Rome to the prehistoric era, when it was ruled by kings. The royal period is not accessible to direct historical study, but royal power influenced Roman institutions so much that it can be studied in its reflection. Until later times, two positions remained in Rome that were in close connection with the royal power: rex sacrificulus, who in the republican era made those sacrifices that were the responsibility of the king, and interrex, elected by patrician senators from among them, when, due to an accidental disaster, the continuity of power was interrupted and there was no official under whose chairmanship the election of new chief magistrates could take place. In addition, royal power was preserved in the attributes and in the very character of the magistracy with which the kings were replaced. Consuls are nothing more than the holders of bifurcated and reduced royal power to within one year: regio imperio duo sunto, says Cicero in his essay on the state (De republica). The symbol of the “imperium” was the rods and axes of the lictors who passed from the king to the consul: this is the power to order, punish and execute. It is characteristic of a people who have achieved dominion over the world that, having expelled the king, they retained his power not as executive power, in the sense of the theorists of the 18th century, but as administrative, governing power, limiting it to short-termism and collegiality; soon the Romans even began, if necessary, to strengthen it by temporarily abolishing collegiality (dictatorship). Further history government organization Rome consists in limiting and fragmenting the magistracy and in developing, to its detriment, the power of the Senate and the People's Assembly.

Thus, from the very beginning of republican history, Valery Poplicola’s law de provocatione dates back to the law, which prohibited the magistrate from whipping and executing a citizen (outside of military service) in addition to provoking the convicted person to a national assembly. The main changes in the position and composition of the R. magistracy occurred under the influence of the struggle of the plebeians with the patricians. Here in the first place is the emergence of the plebeian tribunate (tribuni plebis) - at first there were 2 of them, at the end of 10 - attributed by tradition to the departure of the plebeians to the sacred mountain: this there was a special plebeian magistracy, along with the patrician one and in opposition to it. Class dualism was thus introduced into the magistracy itself. The R. tribunate played such an outstanding role in R. history and gained such worldwide fame that its name and concept penetrated into the ideas of civilized peoples even deeper than the consulate. In R. history, the tribunate is the most original political institution; its historical development marks the growth and triumph of the plebs, and then the development and fall of R. democracy. The initial position of the stands was modest and their role was insignificant. Their duty was to intercede (auxilium ferre) for individual plebeians against the severity or injustice of the patrician magistrates, at recruitment or at trial. The means given to them for this purpose was the right to suspend a consular order (veto), and to exercise or defend this right they were given not power (imperium) or material force, but only a defensive weapon - “immunity”, by analogy with other sacred , that is, persons and objects dedicated to the deity (sacrosanctitas). Relying on this strongest shield of the Romans, the tribunes soon went on the offensive, appropriating for themselves an increasingly broader role. From intercessors for individual plebeians, they became leaders and guardians of the interests of the entire class, accused and punished its enemies and carried out laws useful to it; Having become the head of the plebeian assemblies, they rose with them, and when the plebeians became identified with the R. people, the tribunes became the magistrates of the people. Once upon a time they sat modestly on their benches at the door of the Senate, listening to its debates; in the end they received the right to convene the Senate and carry out their policies in it. All attempts at reform are associated with their name; The development of demagoguery in Rome is also connected with it. Emerging from the opposition against the “imperium,” the tribunate became the foundation for the emperor, combining in itself the imperium of the consul and the potestas of the inviolable tribune. The plebeians, however, were not satisfied with the important advantages that the tribunate brought them, and sought participation in the imperium. An interesting but dark episode on this path is the Decemvirate (451 BC). In Livy, the purpose of the decemvirate is to define consular power by precise laws, and then another purpose is indicated - the compilation of written laws; Greek historians writing about Rome talk about equalizing the rights of patricians and plebeians (Dion Cassius) or granting them “general laws” (Dionysius). The historical result of the activity of the decemvirs is the compilation of laws of the 12th table. But since there were neither consuls nor tribunes under the decemvirs, and plebeians are mentioned in the second decemvirate, Niebuhr believed that the decemvirate was established as a permanent general government institution, which should have included both patricians and plebeians, with the abolition of others estate magistrates. In any case, after the decemvirate (445), an important change took place in the direction indicated by Niebuhr: the Senate was given the right to replace consuls with consular tribunes, that is, military tribunes (legion commanders) with consular power, of which there were more than 2 (3 and up to 6) and in number which could also be plebeians. In fact, however, plebeians began to get into the consular tribunes only from 400, then only until 395, and then in 379. At the same time, and for the same purpose, the number of quaestors was doubled (from 2 to 4), that is military treasurers. The introduction of consular tribunes served, in addition, as the reason for the creation of a new magistracy, elected every five years - censors, whose duty, separated from consular power, was to compile lists of citizens by property (qualification) and a list of senators. Since this duty gave the censors important moral authority, censorship, over time, became the most honorable magistracy. Finally, the law of Licinius and Sextius (387-367) restored the consulate as a permanent magistracy, giving the plebeians one of the consular seats. At the same time, the judicial function was separated from the consulate, granted to a special official - the praetor - and at first inaccessible to the plebeians. With the increase in the number of legal cases, the number of praetors was doubled; one of them (praetor urbanus) was in charge of the affairs of citizens, the other (peregrinus) - the affairs of the allies; with the advent of provinces, the number of praetors began to increase until it was determined by Sulla at 10, and the number of quaestors at 20. At the same time, the plebeians were given, like the patrician (curule) aediles, two positions of plebeian aediles. Within 30 years after acquiring the consulate, dictatorship (356), censorship (351), and finally praetorship (337) became available to the plebeians. Further development The revolution of magistracy was carried out under the influence not of class struggle, but of the world position occupied by Rome. As the number of provinces increased, the Romans found it inconvenient to correspondingly increase the number of praetors (who had the right to a seat in the Senate) and resorted to prorogation, that is, extending the power of consuls and praetors for a year, sending them to the provinces as proconsuls and propraetors. On provincial soil, the power of these officials became completely different. The proconsul not only takes the place of the king in the provinces in relation to the people “taxable” to Rome: he also loses the characteristic features of the Roman magistracy in relation to Roman citizens. In Rome the consul is limited by the authority of his comrade; provocation to the people and the veto of the tribune turned his military “imperium” into civil power. In the provinces, the power of the proconsul is singular, unlimited and indivisible. He is in one person a military commander, a ruler, a chief judge and, in a certain sense, a legislator, since he issues a praetor’s edict for the provinces, that is, he establishes the principles that he intends to follow in the administration of justice. Since he is entrusted with the protection of the province, and the Senate is far away, he can start an offensive war without the knowledge of the Senate; since, in order to maintain the army, he was given extensive powers to collect the necessary provisions and fodder from the provincials, the ruin of the province or its individual cities is in his hands. Extortions and gifts already permitted by law or custom (aurum coronarium - a golden wreath offered by cities) can enrich him; What can we say about those who are not allowed? However, no matter how great the authority and role of the R. magistracy were, the supreme power in the republican era belonged not to it, but to the Senate and the R. people: the formula S. P. Q. R. (Senatus populusque romanus) is a symbol of this power. Both of these institutions could not but benefit from the abolition of tsarist power. From an advisory assembly under kings, the Senate becomes governing; This is especially facilitated by the way it was compiled according to the Ovinian law (the time of publication of this law is unknown), due to which the former magistrates could not be bypassed when the censor compiled the list of senators. This prevented antagonism between the magistracy and the Senate. The consul and praetor knew that at the end of their term of office they would become members of the senate. This determined the class composition of the Senate: at first a purely patrician institution, it becomes, since the plebeians acquire the right to consulate and praetorship, the focus and organ of the new aristocracy - nobility, nobility, descended from persons who acquired nobility, that is, fame (nosco ), holding a curule position. Since the positions of magistrates were electoral, the Senate became, in a certain sense, a representative assembly: it consisted of the highest statesmen Rome, which owed its rise to the vote of the people's assembly. The way the Senate was composed also explains its political experience, its ability to govern, which the ambassador of King Pyrrhus aptly characterized when he said that the Senate seemed to him a meeting of kings. The R. Senate was an aristocratic corporation that accepted everything that moved to the top of political life; the political tradition of the past lived in it, supported by ancestral tradition, but constantly verified by personal experience and acquaintance with state practice. Legislature and the holder of the supreme power was the people's assembly. The Senate conclusion (senatus consultum) never had the force of law (lex), which belonged only to the resolution of the people's assembly (comitia - the meeting itself). Class dualism influenced the organization and history of the comitia even more than the Senate; This, as well as the conservatism of Rome, explains the significant fact that in Rome there were not one, but three national assemblies: two purely class and one general. The oldest of them - according to the curiae - was purely patrician and, together with the patricians, lost, over time, all real meaning: it atrophied, ceased to be a meeting of citizens and turned into an institution, the presence of officials - the curios, which was in charge only of clan affairs: arrogation (transition from generation to generation), approval of wills, etc. Until later times, it retained only one, albeit formal, but politically important function - the transfer of power to the magistrate elected in the comitia, through the lex curiata de imperio. Even during the civil war between Pompey and Caesar, the inability to comply with this formality entailed important political consequences. The second popular assembly in Rome, centuriate - in military hundreds - marks the characteristic warlike organization of Rome: the original identity of the people and the army. A centuriate national assembly is nothing more than an army lined up in hundreds to answer the commander’s question whether there should be war, or whether to elect such and such as commander for the next year? A place in the military ranks was determined by weapons, and weapons by property. According to property, Roman citizens were divided into 5 classes, not counting the horsemen, who formed a special category of 18 hundreds. The definition that has come down to us of both the property qualification for each class and the number of hundreds in each of them, the tradition dates back to the times of Servius Tullius, to whom the very establishment of the centuriate assembly is attributed, may have no more justification than the construction of the so-called Servian Wall. The determination of qualifications in money indicates a later era than the time of the kings, since even in the early republican era, court penalties were determined by the number of heads of large or small livestock. Later than the centuriate, a national assembly of tribes appeared; the exact time and reason for its emergence are unknown to us. This is a plebeian assembly led by tribunes, while the centuriate was led by a curule (patrician) magistrate, consul or praetor. In view of the later news of tributcomitia chaired by consuls and praetors, some modern scholars have come to the unlikely assumption that in addition to the well-known plebeian tributcomitia, there were also special tributcomitia with the participation of patricians. The relationship of the tribunal assembly to the centuriate reveals a remarkable political dualism, which penetrated into the government of Rome thanks to the special position of the plebeians in state system : the comitia centuriata represent the entire people, populus, the tributans - plebs. The plebs, gaining more and more importance, become the people in the political sense of the word, that is, they are equated with populus. This equation finds expression in the fact that the decree of the plebs, plebiscitum, receives, by the decree of the comitia centuriata, the meaning of a law obligatory for all citizens, ut quod tribatim plebs jussiset populum teneret (Lex Valeria Horatia, 449 BC) Principle this was confirmed by the law of Publilius (339 BC) - ut plebiscita omnes Quiriles tenerent, and by the law of Hortensius (284) - ut quod plebs jussisset omnes Qairites teneret. Whether these three laws are identical and why, in this case, triple legitimation was needed, or whether they are different in meaning, as Niebuhr wittily explained in one of his hypotheses, we do not know. In any case, in the historical era, the tribute comitia in legislative terms took a place along with the centuriate ones and differed from them only in the sphere of competence: the solution of military issues was naturally left to the assembly that was in charge of them from time immemorial and was under the leadership of magistrates with the “imperium”. In the judicial sphere, the advantage of the national assembly to which, according to the ancient law, the provocation was addressed, was also preserved: the law of the decemvirs formally retained the right to decide the issue of life or death of a citizen for the centuriate assembly, designating it with the expression maximus comitiatus. Electoral activity was more extensive in the centuriate assembly, but the tributcomitia elected tribunes, whose importance was increasingly increasing. Having become closer in meaning, these two national assemblies also became closer formally, as a result of the transformation that the centuriatcomitia underwent in the democratic sense, probably around 241 BC, that is, after the number of tribes reached its maximum - 35. This transformation represents a compromise between the principle of the comitia centuriata, that is, the distribution of citizens by property, and the principle of the tribute comitia, that is, the distribution of citizens by place of residence - and the first principle makes a significant concession to the second. The identity of the military system with the political system had already disappeared by that time; As a result, the provision of 80 centuries to the first class (so that with the addition of 18 centuries of horsemen, he had a majority of votes in the comitia - 98 to 95) lost its meaning in front of the more democratic spirit of the tributecomitia. In view of this, each of the five classes was given an equal number of centuries or votes, namely 35, corresponding to the number of Roman tribes, and each century was further divided into two - for citizens over and under 45 years of age. As for the question of the powers of the people's assembly, Rubino, in his remarkable study (), proved that the role of the people's assembly under the tsars was insignificant. The king assembled the comitia not so much in order to obtain legislation from them, but rather in order to enlist their support. After the abolition of tsarist power, the importance of the people's assembly increased: it more often had to apply its suffrage to business; the law of provocation made him the supreme judge over the life and death of citizens; finally, with the complication of politics. The legislative power of the comitia began to develop in life. In the latter respect, however, they were for a long time under the tutelage of the Senate, which was expressed in two institutions - patrum auctoritas and senatus auctoritas. The first dates back to the time of the patrician Senate and represents the right of the Senate to approve, approve, decisions of the national assembly (however, according to Niebuhr and his school, patrum auctoritas should be understood as the consent of the patricians, given by them in the assembly of curiae). Senatus auctoritas corresponds to the Greek expression probouleuma and denotes the right of the Senate to give preliminary consent to the submission of a draft law to the people's assembly by the magistrate, and therefore to refuse this consent. When the comitia freed themselves from these constraints, we do not know; on this issue, as well as regarding the significance of the institutions mentioned, there are many conflicting opinions in the scientific literature. In any case, the popular assembly in Rome, even when it became powerful and autocratic, retained its previous forms, which made it dependent on the magistrate who convened it. It never had the right to gather on its own initiative; it had neither legislative initiative nor freedom of debate; it only answered questions put to it by the presiding magistrate (rogation); the paperwork itself was surrounded by such religious formalities that easily gave rise to the recognition of the decision, with the help of the priestly college, as illegal. Private meetings of the people, concilia and cautiones, were of a freer nature, at which debates were allowed; but even these preparatory meetings, which did not decide anything, were convened by no other than the magistrate, and served as a means for him to set up and direct the people in the sense he desired. Finally, neither the centuriatcomitia, after their transformation in the democratic sense, nor even the tribunal comitia were democracies in the full sense of the word, since not individual votes of citizens were taken into account, but the number of centuries or tribes that spoke in one sense or another, and the vote of the elected by lot, the century or tribe (praerogativa) was almost always decisive. It is not for nothing that the fenced place on the Champ de Mars, where citizens were called upon to cast their votes, was called ovile (sheep pen). Due to the worldwide growth of Rome, the decisions and orders of the Roman comitia acquired more and more worldwide significance; but it was precisely during this era that the composition of the R. people's assembly changed significantly and its moral and state significance decreased, under the influence of a deep shock to the economic life of the R. people, in connection with its political growth.

Economy

The influence of the growth of Rome on its economic life. R. historians portrayed the first Romans as shepherds and vagabonds, but history from the very beginning knows the Romans only as settled peasants. The Roman, both patrician and plebeian, represents a type of peasant, tenacious and greedy for the land: the typical hero of ancient Rome is Cincinnatus, a dictator taken from the plough. Therefore, the land question represents the basis of Roman history: the Romans fight with their neighbors over land; they build more and more settlements on the acquired land; the forum is worried because of the earth; agrarian law is a sore point of republican Rome, the science of land surveyor (agrimeusor) is its national science. One of Niebuhr’s most important and other merits was clarification of the issue of ager pablicus and agrarian laws. If the socialists of the 18th century. (Babeuf) flaunted the name of Gracchus because they saw in the agrarian laws of the Romans a means of fighting against private land ownership. Only by clarifying the concept of the “social field” did the history of land relations and laws receive correct coverage. Niebuhr found the ager publicus in the Dithmarschen region (in Holstein), where the historian spent his childhood; later research indicated its existence almost everywhere. Ager publicus was the Roman name for public land, as opposed to privately owned land. The R. state used its land in three ways: it gave up plots of it at auction for pastures, or allocated small plots of it to citizens (initially 2 yugera - half a dessiatine) for private ownership (assignatio), or, finally, it allowed citizens to occupy separate plots (occupatio ), for unlimited use. Such loans could be inherited or sold, plantings and buildings could be made on them, but they did not become Quirite property and were legally distinguished from it by the term possessio. Thanks to allotments of public land, colonies were brought to pre-existing cities, the number of Roman citizens constantly grew, and Rome grew stronger; but land ownership was undermined in Rome from ancient times, as in Greece, by a dangerous disaster - debt. The debt law of the ancient Romans, like other peoples, was extremely severe; The creditor's security was the identity of the debtor and often his family. We can judge the enormous importance of debt obligations in ancient Rome not with the help of historians, who used them to depict dramatic scenes, but on the basis of the laws of the Twelve Tables, the most lengthy and archaic passages of which determine the fate of the insolvent debtor. According to the judge's verdict, the creditor takes him to his house; the law precisely determines the weight of the chain that can be put on him, the amount of food that must be given to him; sets a time limit for when it should be put on the forum, in case relatives or clients want to buy it out; finally, it gives the creditor the right to sell him into slavery, but not otherwise than beyond the Tiber, that is, into the country of the Etruscans, and not on Roman soil and not in the country of friendly Latins. Providing for the case of a dispute between several creditors, the law resolves it literally in the same harsh, symbolic formulas as Scandinavian law: the creditor who cuts off more or less the following part from the debtor’s body is released from liability (Si plus ve minus ve secuerit se ( sine) fraude esto). Debt obligations, however, were not always resolved by the indicated reprisal, but also led to the establishment of long-term relations between the creditor and the debtor (like bondage). These relations are little known to us, because they were already prohibited by the law of Petilius, in 326 BC. e. Debt continued, however, to weigh heavily on the Roman landowners, as is evident from the frequently mentioned measures against usurers for violating the growth laws; So, for a penalty, collected from moneylenders, it was built by the aedile Prince. Flavius, a bronze temple of Concordia in the forum, with the designation of the time of construction - “204 after the consecration of the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus” (the oldest mention of this era known to us). In addition to debts, small landowners suffered from slavery, which crowded out free labor. In ancient R., the number of slaves was apparently very limited, as can be concluded from the names of the slaves - Quintipar, Marcipar, that is, puer (small) of Quintus or Mark. But as Roman soldiers began to capture barbarian areas outside of Italy, slaves became cheaper and began to appear on the market more often, as a result of which large landowners stopped giving their small neighbor work on their land. Traditional history dates the law that determined the quantitative ratio of forced and free workers to 367 BC. e. Having multiplied in Rome, slaves not only began to take earnings from the Roman peasants, but, by entering the number of Roman citizens through the liberation of their masters, they significantly changed the composition and character of the Roman people. Already in 312 BC. e. The question of placing freedmen in all tribes or only in 4 city tribes concerns Rome. At the very time when Roman legions give Rome dominion over the world, in the heart of Rome the conquered slaves are gaining more and more influence on its fate. Nothing contributed more to the perversion of the Roman demos than the ease of emancipation and obtaining the right of Roman citizenship for slaves. Already the destroyer of Carthage, Scipio Aemilianus, considered himself entitled to contemptuously reproach the crowd at the forum for the fact that he had recently brought them to Rome in chains. But the Roman wars in an even more direct way undermined the core of the Roman people - the peasantry; Taking on ever larger proportions, moving away from Rome and becoming longer, the wars tore the soldier away from his land for a long time. Livy, in one of his dramatic stories, brings the centurion Sp to the stage. Ligustin, the owner of a plot of land of one juger, who spent 22 years in military service far from the inherited field. However, a certain balance between the decline from the war and the increase in the settled peasant population was maintained as long as the Romans had the opportunity to produce plots in Northern Italy. When, by the middle of the 2nd century, the supply of free public land was depleted, the landlessness of Roman citizens went even faster. By this time there was a change in Roman agriculture, which was fatal for small landowners. As a result of the expansion, under R.'s rule, of trade relations on the Mediterranean Sea, grain began to be brought to Italy in large numbers not only from Sicily, but from Numidia and Egypt; this competition killed agriculture in Italy and forced landowners to abandon arable land and raise livestock. We know about this change from the words of Cato, who was an excellent owner and answered the question, what is the most profitable way of farming? answered - bene pascere (good cattle breeding); and then? poor livestock husbandry; and then? arable farming (arare). First of all, the peasants who had to suffer were not able to find income from the landowners and did not have the opportunity, due to the insignificance of their plots, to switch to cattle breeding. They had to sell their plots - and in this we need to look for the source of those latifundia that Pliny said that they destroyed Italy. As the core of the Roman people - the agricultural class - thinned out, the trading activities of the Romans developed. Ancient Rome knew only bulky copper coins and only after the unification of Italy and the subjugation of the Greek trading cities in the south of the peninsula began to mint silver coins. The development of trade led to the accumulation of capital, which was reflected in a change in the meaning of the word equites. The most wealthy citizens who served on their own horses were previously called horsemen; in the second century, the word denotes a class of capitalists engaged in trade and farming in the provinces, in contrast to the Senate aristocracy, which the law of Claudius 219 AD. BC e. prohibited trading on his own behalf and keeping ships, with the exception of coastal ships for transporting the products of his own economy to the capital.

Culture

The influence of the growth of Roman rule on the culture and public spirit of the Romans. Simultaneously with the economic revolution in Rome, an even more important cultural and moral revolution was taking place. The rapid growth of Rome directly and without transitions brought the simplicity and rudeness of the Romans face to face with Hellenic education and the refined luxury of the East. In the field of religion, the Romans had long been influenced by the southern Italian Greeks; Now the deities of the East began to penetrate into Rome. Even before the second Punic War, the consul Aemilius Paulus had, by order of the Senate, to personally begin the destruction of the temples of Isis and Serapis, since no one dared to break down their doors. The Senate banned, under penalty of death, the secret cult of Bacchus, and for violating this prohibition, hundreds of people died at the hands of the executioner in Italy - especially many women who participated in the night bacchanalia. The new pantheon pushed into the background the primitive Roman gods that held ancient Roman piety. Together with the east gods and superstitions, a doctrine appeared in Rome that equally undermined faith in both old and new gods: the work of Euhemerus, who explained gods and heroes with flat rationalism, was one of the first books translated into Latin. At the same time, stage performances borrowed from the Greeks exposed the tricks of the gods, borrowed from naive myths, to ridicule. The family life of the Romans, based on unconditional paternal authority, underwent significant changes even earlier. Already the decemvirs found it possible to emancipate, that is, to independently install adult sons, through fictitious sale into slavery by the father. At the same time, a woman, whom ancient law always subjected to the guardianship (manus) of her father or husband, was given the opportunity to marry without personal and property subordination to her husband and his relatives, through the so-called trinoctium, that is, a three-day stay outside the home. The liberation of women in property terms indicates that the time of dowrylessness had passed for the Romans, when in a sufficient household one could find only one silver item - a salt shaker, from which they sprinkled salt on sacrifices to the gods. A few years later, after the conquest of Italy, one of Sulla’s ancestors, Cornelius Rufinus, who was a dictator and twice consul, was struck off the list of senators by the censor because he had silver dishes worth 10 pounds in his house. weight. An old saying condemned a housewife who bought at the market what she could get from her garden; Each household baked its own bread; there were no bakeries in the city. Only during the war with Syria did R.’s generals become acquainted, according to Livy’s story, with the art of cooking; 100 years later, Lucullus became world famous for his exquisitely luxurious dinners. The rapid enrichment of the Romans caused luxury, and luxury developed a passion for enrichment; on this basis, two national traits of the Romans - lust for power and greed - assumed monstrous proportions. Already in the second Punic War, Scipio's delegate, Pleminius, who commanded in southern Italy, so shamelessly plundered the allied cities and even their temples that the Senate was forced to send an entire commission to the south, which sent Pleminius, in chains, to Rome. The provincials could have been dealt with more unceremoniously: for example, the propraetor of Spain, Sulpicius Galba, surprised the peaceful tribe of Lusitanians who asked him for land, and sold 30,000 of them into slavery. Power gave wealth; therefore, all paths to power seemed viable. In Rome, a special category of laws appeared - leges de ambitu - designed to restrain the ambition of candidates for magistracy. The very history of these laws, with their increasing severity, indicates the growth of evil and the futility of the struggle against it. The most ancient of these laws are still marked by naivety of morals; the first law prohibited standing at the forum in a bleached (Candida) toga, as opposed to a regular one (hence the name of the candidate); then the law of Petilius in 358 prohibits visiting surrounding villages and towns in order to recruit votes, the law of Menius prohibits electoral clubs, the law of Bebius of 181 - agents (divisores) who distributed money among voters. But bribery is growing; in vain the Aurelian law of 70 threatens a candidate who resorted to bribery with deprivation of the right to be elected to office for 5 years. There was another, indirect way to bribe voters: organizing games for the people, which became more and more expensive, longer and more frequent.

- (lat. patricii, from pater father). 1. In ancient Rome, a person who belonged to the original Roman families that constituted the ruling class and held public lands in their hands; ant. plebeian. 2. In the Middle Ages in German cities, a face... ... Wikipedia

- - neglect of the ceremony; ignoring the rules of decency; liberty; excessive swagger, going beyond the boundaries of politeness, reaching the point of impudence; shamelessness; familiarity; obscenity; impudence. See also * Amikoshonstvo (from French... ... Wikipedia

D. as a poetic genus Origin D. Eastern D. Ancient D. Medieval D. D. Renaissance From Renaissance to Classicism Elizabethan D. Spanish D. Classical D. Bourgeois D. Ro ... Literary encyclopedia

ANCIENT GREECE- territory in the south of the Balkan Peninsula (see also the articles Antiquity, Greece). The history of D.G. covers the period from the beginning. II millennium BC to the beginning I millennium AD Geography and ethnography Phaistos disc. XVII century BC (Archaeological Museum in Heraklion, ... ... Orthodox Encyclopedia

Europe- (Europe) Europe is a densely populated, highly urbanized part of the world named after a mythological goddess, forming together with Asia the continent of Eurasia and having an area of ​​about 10.5 million km² (approximately 2% of the total area of ​​the Earth) and ... Investor Encyclopedia

State- (Country) The state is a special organization of society that ensures unity and integrity, guaranteeing the rights and freedoms of citizens. Origin of the state, characteristics of the state, form of government, form of government... ... Investor Encyclopedia

- (Latin Germania, from the Germans, German Deutschland, literally the country of the Germans, from Deutsche German and Land country) a state in Europe (with its capital in Berlin), which existed until the end of the Second World War 1939 45. I. Historical outline ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Democracy- (Democracy) The concept of democracy, the emergence and forms of democracy Information about the concept of democracy, the emergence and forms of democracy, the development and principles of democracy Contents The term “democracy” comes from Greek word… … Investor Encyclopedia

Kingdom of Belgium, state in the West. Europe. State of Belgium (French Belgique, Flemish Belgie) was proclaimed in 1830, named after the state formed in 27 BC. e. Rome. Prov. Belgica (Gallia Belgica), which was called after the Celts, the Belei tribe.… … Geographical encyclopedia

Contents Ancient Rome, foundation Ancient Rome, foundation Political structure Everyday life Political structure Everyday life Entertainment of the Romans Entertainment of the Romans Army of the Romans Army of the Romans Caesar Dictionary Dictionary Sources of information Sources of information

Ancient Rome Around the 10th century. BC e. The first Romans settled on the hills near the Tiber River. By 264 BC. e. they already controlled the entire territory of modern Italy, and by 220 they had created a huge empire. They were skilled engineers and built beautiful cities and magnificent roads. The Roman Empire controlled vast territories and lasted until 476. Around the 10th century. BC e. The first Romans settled on the hills near the Tiber River. By 264 BC. e. they already controlled the entire territory of modern Italy, and by 220 they had created a huge empire. They were skilled engineers and built beautiful cities and magnificent roads. The Roman Empire controlled vast territories and lasted until 476.

Founding of Rome The legendary date of the founding of Rome is 753 BC. However, settlements on the site of Rome existed long before this date. On the left bank of the Tiber, on the elevated hills, there were settlements that later united into one city. Quirinal ViminalCapitol Aventine Palatine Caelius Esquiline

Founding of Rome The ancient Romans lived in primitive houses made of willow twigs coated with clay. Nearby there was a garden and a vegetable garden, and outside the city there were fields and pastures. As a result of constant wars with neighboring cities, the Romans expanded their territory.

Founding of Rome The inhabitants of Rome were skilled artisans: blacksmiths, weavers, potters. Bread baking reached a huge scale - mills and bread ovens were scattered throughout Latinia. Several of the oldest mills are still in working order.

The royal period of Roman history (BC) Rome was ruled by seven kings: 1. Romulus 2. Numa Pompilius 3. Tullus Hostilius 4. Ancus Marcius 5. Tarquinius the Ancient 6. Servius Tullius 7. Taquinius the Proud

The Royal Period of Roman History During the reign of the kings, Rome turned into a real city. A market square - a forum - appeared in the city. On the steepest hill, the Capitol, a fortress was erected in which the main temples were located. To protect against enemies, the city was surrounded by strong walls. Rome from a bird's eye view

Roman Republic: 2 consuls 2 consuls In 509 BC. The last king was expelled from Rome. A republican system was established in Rome - i.e. the state was governed by elected officials. 1. Declared war and made peace; 2. Directed the daily policy of the state;

Dictator - leader of the people Dictatorship - an emergency position in Ancient Rome, introduced at critical moments for the state - during wars or civil unrest. This word comes from the Latin verb dictare (to repeat, to prescribe). At first, the dictator (“leader of the people”) was elected from the patricians, but in 356 BC. For the first time, a plebeian became dictator.

The highest power The Romans called the highest power in the state an empire. This term comes from the verb imperare - “to manage”, “to rule” and literally means “order”, “punishment”. Initially, the empire was controlled by the king. With the fall of royal power and the establishment of a republic, the Romans developed the idea that the supreme bearer of the empire was the Roman people themselves. It is curious that within the boundaries of their own household, any citizen of Rome had a “domestic empire,” that is, absolute power over all family members.

The ancient Roman people were divided into several social classes. Only men could obtain citizenship status. During the period of republican rule, citizens were divided into patricians (nobility) and plebeians (lower classes). Women took care of the home and family, but some noble ladies had a certain amount of power and influence. The fate of a Roman slave depended entirely on the will of the owner, but for faithful service the slave could be freed. Roman society was divided into several social classes. Only men could obtain citizenship status. During the period of republican rule, citizens were divided into patricians (nobility) and plebeians (lower classes). Women took care of the home and family, but some noble ladies had a certain amount of power and influence. The fate of a Roman slave depended entirely on the will of the owner, but for faithful service the slave could be freed.

Daily Life of the Romans Many Romans lived in cities. Large forums, which were used as markets, also hosted political meetings. In addition, the Romans often attended theater and racing. Since there was little space, the poor lived in apartments in tall and narrow buildings.

Roman Forum In the center of every Roman city there was a square called the "forum". At the great forum in Rome there was a basilica - the building in which the senate met. There were temples, shops and a market nearby. The forum contained statues and triumphal arches erected in honor of the glorious deeds of the emperor. This is where the Romans made appointments, listened to speakers, and made important public decisions.

In Rome, all power belonged to men. The man was the head of the family, had the right to attend meetings and participate in the management of the city. Women stayed at home and raised children. The boys went to school, and the girls stayed at home, learning to weave and spin, and run a household. All children were considered adults from the age of 14.

Trade in Ancient Rome The Romans understood the importance of trade. Thanks to her, the empire flourished. Craftsmen sold their products to merchants and townspeople. And food could be purchased at numerous markets, eateries and small shops. There were coins in use, the minting of which was controlled by the emperor himself. This money was used to pay the soldiers' salaries, and they were circulated throughout the empire, which simplified trade.

Roman baths Only wealthy citizens had home baths. Most Romans used public baths - thermal baths. After the dressing room, people passed through a series of rooms, each one hotter than the previous one. People sweated, all the dirt was “melted” from the body, and then scraped off with a metal or bone instrument called a “shearer”. The ablution was completed by immersion in a pool of cold water.

Roman aqueduct The Romans learned to deliver water to their cities through aqueducts - stone bridges with closed gutters that carried flowing water through deep valleys and gorges. Roman engineers had extensive experience in building arches and bridges, which allowed them to build powerful and elegant aqueducts. Some of them have survived to this day.

Roman Fashion Most Romans wore linen and wool. Many Roman women made it themselves: they spun wool and twisted flax, and wove it on a loom. Mostly Romans wore simple tunics. Roman citizens had the right to wear a toga - a loose robe that was worn over a tunic. Togas were almost always white, but could have a colored border, indicating the status of the owner. Only the Roman Emperor could wear a purple toga. Roman women wore loose dresses over their tunics. They were usually white, but were often decorated with designs or embroidery.

Circus Maximus One of the favorite entertainments of the ancient Romans was chariot racing. The largest venue for the competition was the Circus Maximus in Rome. It was roughly intended for spectators. During the race, 12 chariots had to complete seven laps. The chariot drivers, mostly slaves, were divided into four teams, each with a different color - white, blue, red and green.

Roman Colosseum In order to gain popularity among the people, emperors organized games and festivals for the Romans. In 72, Emperor Vespasian ordered the construction of a huge amphitheater - the Colosseum. Crowds of Romans came to watch gladiators fight with each other and with wild animals. And sometimes the central arena was flooded to depict a naval battle.

The Colosseum means “huge” in Roman. The Flavian Amphitheater was built under Emperor Vespasian. The amphitheater in ancient times was 500 meters in circumference and up to 50 meters in height. The stands of the Colosseum could accommodate up to 50 thousand spectators. In bad weather, a canvas roof was stretched under the arena using a special mechanism. The floor of the arena made it possible to see the underground chambers in which wild animals were kept. Hungry, furious animals were pushed up using lifting mechanisms.

The Colosseum was an almost completely mechanized building. Thanks to ingenious devices, islands “grew” out of the blue, with water splashing between them, and warships floated out of niches built under the spectator tiers. All the efforts of the technicians were aimed at amusing their compatriots with the bloody spectacle. Warriors of approximately equal strength were released into the arena and said the traditional greeting to the emperor: “Those who go to their death salute you, Caesar!” Not all gladiators met death in the arena. Some were freed from slavery and, becoming freedmen, opened their own schools of fighters. Among them was Spartak. Today, the Colosseum is considered the most majestic ancient structure.

There is no reliable information about the origin of Roman numerals. In Roman numbering, traces of the fivefold number system are clearly visible. In the language of the Romans there are no traces of the fivefold system. This means that these numbers were borrowed by the Romans from another people (most likely the Etruscans). This numbering prevailed in Italy until the 13th century, and in other countries of Western Europe until the 16th century. This is probably the most famous numbering, after Arabic. We encounter it quite often in Everyday life. These are chapter numbers in books, an indication of the century, numbers on a watch dial, etc. This numbering originated in ancient Rome. It was used for the additive alphabetic number system I - 1, V - 5, X - 10, L - 50, C - 100, D - 500, M Previously, the sign M was represented by the sign F, so 500 began to represent the sign D as "half" " F. The pairs L and C, X and V are constructed in the same way. Roman numbering

Numerical designations in Ancient Rome resembled the first method of Greek numbering. The Romans had special notations not only for the numbers 1, 10, 100 and 1000, but also for the numbers 5, 50 and 500. Roman numerals looked like this: 1 - I, 5 - V, 10 - X, 50 - L, C , D and M. Perhaps the sign V meant an open hand, and X - two such hands. But there is another explanation. When the count was in tens, then, having drawn 9 sticks, the tenth one was crossed out. And in order not to write too many sticks, they crossed out one stick and wrote ten like this: This is where the Roman numeral X came from. And the number 5 was made simply by cutting the digit for the number 10 in half. Roman numbering

An interesting system of fractions was in ancient Rome. It was based on dividing a unit of weight into 12 parts, which was called ass. The twelfth part of an ace was called an ounce. And the path, time and other quantities were compared with a visual thing - weight. For example, a Roman might say that he walked seven ounces of a path or read five ounces of a book. In this case, of course, it was not a question of weighing the path or the book. This meant that 7/12 of the journey had been completed or 5/12 of the book had been read. Due to the fact that in the duodecimal system there are no fractions with denominators of 10 or 100, the Romans found it difficult to divide by 10, 100, etc. When dividing 1001 asses by 100, one Roman mathematician first received 10 aces, then divided the ace into ounces, etc. d. But he didn’t get rid of the remainder. To avoid having to deal with such calculations, the Romans began to use percentages. Since the words “per hundred” sounded like “about a centum” in Latin, the hundredth part began to be called a percentage. Roman numbering

Roman conquests TIME Who did the Romans fight What was annexed Consequences of the VI-IV centuries. BC. Etruscans, Italic tribes (Samnites, Latins, etc.), Greeks from colonies in Italy Apennine Peninsula (Italy) Rome joins the struggle for dominance in the Mediterranean in the 3rd – 2nd centuries. BC. Carthage, Macedonia, Greece, Syria, northern Africa, Spain, Greece, Macedonia, Asia Minor, southern Gaul Rome became the largest power in the Mediterranean in the 1st century. BC. Celts of Gaul, Pontic and Egyptian kingdoms, Germans of Gaul, Egypt, Syria, Thrace, banks of the Rhine. The influence of Rome spread to all developed regions of Europe and the Middle East in the 1st – 2nd centuries. AD Parthians, Dacians, Celts of Britain, Germans and other “barbarians” of the land south of the Danube, Judea, Dacia, Britain, Armenia Rome moved to defend its borders along the Rhine, Danube and Euphrates. The Empire has eaten too much

The Roman states were often at odds. Every free citizen was a soldier and studied the art of war from childhood. The armies consisted of hoplite infantrymen led by strategoi (commanders). The troops entered the battlefield in dense units - phalanxes.

ORGANIZATION OF THE ARMY During the early Republic, any Roman between the ages of 17 and 46 who owned property could be drafted into the army. The service life was years. Upon entering the service, the recruit swore an oath of allegiance. Every day the warriors trained in swimming, running, jumping, throwing darts and fencing. Three times a month the army made forced marches of 30 km. The warriors walked at a fast pace at a speed of 6-8 km/hour. Legionnaires learned to build and dismantle a military camp. Those who were guilty were subjected to corporal punishment. The legion's food rations were reduced for disobedience. Decimation - execution by lot of every 10th warrior.

ORGANIZATION OF THE ARMY Rich citizens could purchase horses, and so they served in the cavalry. The poorer Romans fought on foot, united in detachments and armed with swords, spears, daggers and shields. The poorest citizens fought at the very beginning and end of the battle. Their weapons are stones and agricultural implements.

The Roman infantry was divided into several units. The basis of the army was the legion, usually consisting of five thousand soldiers. The legion was divided into 10 cohorts, approximately 500 people each, and the cohort consisted of six centuries. In a century there were from 80 to 100 legionnaires, commanded by a centurion. Legion centurioncenturion Legion centurioncenturion Roman legion The armament of the Roman legionnaire consisted of weapons for close combat - a pugio (dagger) and a gladius (short sword). At one time, legionnaires were armed with spears, but later this weapon was replaced by a pilum (javelin). Thrown by a skillful hand, the pilum could pierce a strong shield. During the siege, the legionnaires used ballistas and catapults - siege machines with which they threw stones, arrows, logs, etc.

Roman military camp Roman legionaries built camps according to a standard plan in the shape of a quadrangle. The camp consisted of a headquarters, stables and barracks, in which each century was assigned a specific place. The camp was surrounded by a high wall with watchtowers and strong gates. The legionnaires had marching camps that could be set up at a rest stop and then quickly assembled.

An army on a campaign Usually, during a campaign, the army was on the road for 7 hours a day, covering up to 30 km. The soldiers were forced to carry all their property and weapons on themselves. Scouts walked ahead, obliged to examine the area, collect information about the enemy, and choose a place for camp. Then came the vanguard, consisting of cavalry and light infantry; The main forces of the army moved behind him. They marched in one column, each legion was followed by its baggage train, and lightly armed troops formed the rearguard. If the enemy was close, the main forces of the army moved in order of battle, with the entire convoy following behind and part of the army serving as cover (rearguard). When retreating, the convoy was sent forward with a detachment of troops, and the rest followed them.

Legion in battle During the period of the Republic, the legion was built for battle in three lines along maniples. Each maniple was built in the shape of a square, with equal intervals between its neighbors along the line. Before the formation of the legion there were archers, slingers, and javelin throwers. The hastati were in the first line of the formation, the principles were in the second, and the triarii were in the third. The cavalry was located on the flanks. The legion quickly closed in on the enemy, showering them with spears. The outcome of the battle was usually decided by hand-to-hand combat. Hastatiprinciples of the triary From the 1st century. BC. the legion began to be built in larger cohorts, forming three lines in a checkerboard pattern.

Assault and siege of fortresses They took the fortress: with a sudden attack right from the road, they tried to break down the gates under the cover of shields. If an attack was impossible, they began a siege of a fortified point: surrounding it on all sides with troops. If this place was too fortified and abundantly supplied with provisions, then they took it by storm with the help of siege installations and battering machines. Assault (assault) Legion Ballista Siege Tower Ram

Ships of the Romans To make their ships faster, the Romans used both sails and oars. Some ships had several rows of rows. In order for the ship to move at maximum speed, the rowers were positioned so that they could row at the same time. A ship with two rows of oars was called a bireme, and a ship with three rows was called a trireme.

QUINQUEREMA (PENTERA) - warship of the Carthaginians and Romans During the first Punic War, the need arose to quickly build a navy. The Romans found a warship abandoned by the Carthaginians and built 100 replicas of it in 60 days. Soon their fleet numbered over 200 ships.

Gaius Julius Caesar was an outstanding statesman and politician, commander and writer. Forced to leave for Asia Minor under Sulla, he returned to Rome after the death of this emperor in 78 BC. e. and immediately became involved in the political struggle. After the end of his consulate, Caesar achieved appointment to the post of governor of Cisalpine and then Narbonese Gaul. During the Gallic campaigns. BC e. he conquered all of Transalpine Gaul from Belgica to Aquitaine. Caesar

Caesar made changes to the organization of the Roman army and to the methods of warfare. Each legion included siege engines: light ballistas, as well as onagers and catapults that threw heavy stones. Light auxiliary troops of archers and slingers began to play an important role. Cavalry from Roman citizens was replaced by mercenaries: Germans, Spaniards, Numidians. Caesar's troops moved very quickly, and this largely determined their successes. In battles, Caesar preferred to attack the enemy first. His legions marched towards the enemy at an even pace, which then turned into a run. First, spears were used, and then swords, the warriors tried to push back the enemy in hand-to-hand combat. The cavalry completed the defeat of the enemy. Caesar's army took fortified points by siege or assault. During a siege, field fortifications were erected around the enemy fortress: ramparts, ditches, wolf pits, redoubts, etc. Siege towers were widely used, and excavations under the wall were also carried out. Caesar was considered a great commander by A. Suvorov and Napoleon. His military art was studied in military academies until the 19th century

Dictionary Legion is a large unit of the Roman army (from 4.5 to 7 thousand people). Legionnaire - a warrior of the legion. Centuria - a detachment of one hundred (from the 1st century BC - 80) legionnaires Centurion - a junior officer of the Roman army, commander of a century or maniple Manipula - a detachment that includes 2-3 centuries. Until the 1st century. BC. The Roman army was built in 3 rows along the Cohort maniples - from the 1st century. BC. the main division of a legion of 6 (less often 10) centuries. The cohort was commanded by the military tribune Ballista - a throwing weapon in the form of a large horizontal bow, reinforced with a pair of vertical twisted cords. Threw arrows, stones, metal balls. Used on ships and during the siege of fortresses.

Dictionary Hastati (spearmen) are young warriors who fought in the first line of the legion. They started the battle by throwing spears at the enemy from a long distance, and then attacked with swords in their hands. The Principes are experienced warriors of the second line of the legion's formation. They entered the battle at the most decisive moment, deciding its outcome. Triarii - warriors of the third line of the legion formation, veterans. They entered into battle only in the most extreme cases. Concubernius is a group of warriors (8-10 people) living in one tent and cooking food together while resting in the camp. It was headed by a foreman (decurion). Legate - assistant consul, commander of the legion.

Romulus is credited with organizing the Roman community (from the Latin civitas). The population of the city at that time consisted of two main groups: Roman citizens proper, the so-called patricians, and non-citizens - plebeians. Plebeians were not part of the community of full citizens and constituted a free, but deprived of political rights, layer of the population, weighed down with various duties; however, they performed military service on an equal basis with the patricians. When conquering neighboring communities, the Romans took part of their land into the public fund, but plebeians were not allowed to use this land. Commercial and industrial wealth was concentrated mainly in the hands of the plebeians: the patricians, proud of their origin, considered any occupation other than agriculture, political activity and military service humiliating. Patricians were full citizens. They split into three tribes (tribes). Three tribes - Ramni, Titii and Luceri - made up the "Roman people". Each tribe consisted of 100 clans. Every 10 genera formed a curia. The curiae formed the general people's assembly of the Roman community - the comitia curiata. The People's Assembly accepted or rejected bills proposed to it, elected all senior officials, acted as the highest court of appeal in deciding the issue of the death penalty, declared war, jointly with the Senate elected the king, dealt with the most important judicial matters, etc. So, speaking about the origin of the Roman estates, we should take his “complex theory” as a basis:

patricians were truly native citizens. They represented a full-fledged "Roman people";

clients were in direct contact with the patricians, they received land and livestock from them, enjoyed their protection in court, etc. For this, they had to serve in the military detachments of their patrons, assist them with money, and perform various works;

the plebeians stood outside the clan organization of the patricians, i.e. did not belong to the “Roman people”, did not have access to communal land and were deprived of political rights.

The Roman patrician community was a primitive city-state with the typical features of a “military democracy.” Another organ of democracy was the council of elders - the Senate. Its members were called "fathers" (from the Latin patres - fathers). The competence of the Roman Senate included matters of direct administration, the development of bills, and the conclusion of peace. It consisted of the elders of all 300 clans, which is why it was called the senate (from the Latin senex - old, elder). The elders constituted the hereditary aristocracy of the Roman community, since it was an established custom that they were chosen from the same family of each clan. According to legend, Romulus created a senate of 100 senators, Tullus Hostilius added another 100, and Tarquinius the Ancient brought them to 300. Over time, the patricians turned into a closed group of nobility opposed to the broad mass of plebeians. The strengthening of the role of the plebeians in the economy, given their numerical superiority, led to a struggle between the plebeians and patricians, the first stage of this struggle ended with reforms of the social system attributed to King Servius Tulius. Along with the previous division of the population by gender, a new division of the population was introduced according to property and territorial characteristics. During the reform of "military democracy" all Roman citizens, both patricians and plebeians, were "valued" according to their existing property (land, livestock, equipment, etc.) and divided into 193 hundreds - centuries. That is, according to the reform, a division was made into 5 property categories or classes:

the first class included persons who had a fortune of no less than 100,000 asses (ass is a copper coin, originally weighing 1 pound, its value for the early period of Roman history has not been established);

in the second - 75,000 asses;

in the third - 50,000 asses;

in the fourth - 25,000 asses;

in the fifth - 12,500 asses.

Those who had very little wealth stood “below the class” and were called “proletarians” (Latin proletarii, from the word proles - offspring), i.e. people who only had children. Each category of the population exhibited a certain number of its representatives - wax units - centuries (literally - a hundred). Centuries now began to hold voting for the national assembly; each century had one vote. Proletarians, i.e. completely deprived of accountable property amounted to only one century. With a coordinated vote of the first two categories, the votes of the rest did not matter. Instead of the old clan tribes, division into territorial tribes was introduced. The reforms of the “military dictatorship” of Servius Tulia dealt a crushing blow to the outdated clan system and laid the foundation of the state, i.e. a society based on blood kinship was destroyed, and in its place a state structure based on property differences and territorial division was created. The position of soldiers in the ranks of the legion was also determined by their property status. The richest citizens of the first class served in the cavalry and were called horsemen. The remaining members of this class were required to have the full heavy armor of an infantryman and stand in the front ranks of the legion.

Citizens of other classes had light weapons and took places in the back rows. Class V warriors were lightly armed in the ranks, and the proletarians did not serve in the ranks at all. Servius Tullius allowed plebeians into the army, giving them some political rights through the organization of a new form of national assembly. Both classes took part in it. It was called the Centuriate Assembly. Centuria (hundred), being a military tactical unit, also became a voting unit. The most important functions of the old assemblies were transferred to the centuriate assemblies - declaration of war, election of officials, court, etc. At that time, these reforms were a progressive form of government. The fall of military democracy in Rome, as evidenced by scientists, occurred at the end of the 6th - beginning of the 5th centuries. BC. in the form of the violent overthrow of the last king and the transfer of his power to two elected officials. They could only be elected from among the patricians and were called consuls. Thus, the transition to a republic was accomplished.

In the course of the class struggle between patricians and plebeians, Rome turned into a polis republic, the main features of which, as in ancient Greece, were: special rights of the citizen, formal sovereignty of the people, exercised through the people's assembly, election of magistrates (officials), and civil militia. At the same time, Rome remained an aristocratic state, since political power was concentrated in the hands of the nobility. These are approximately 30-40 families and clans: from their number all the highest positions were replenished, and “upstarts” were very reluctantly allowed into their circle, to designate which in the Roman political lexicon there was a special concept “ new person» ( homo novus). True, formally the nobility did not have special rights, so its dominant position was determined not by law, but by the merits of the nobles or their ancestors to the state. This superiority was not determined by written law - ius, and by unwritten law - fas, i.e. tradition, custom, “mores of the ancestors” ( mores maiorum).

The end of the struggle between patricians and plebeians accelerated the formation of new classes: senatorial, equestrian and plebs, At the same time, the ancient division into patricians and plebeians has not gone away, but has simply lost its basic political meaning. The new class affiliation was not hereditary and clearly fixed: the son of an equestrian could become a senator if he took some curule position, and the son of a senator was not included in his father’s class if he refused a political career. The main principle of replenishment of the two upper classes was service, the presence of special merits to the state.

The senatorial class was considered the highest. Only former high magistrates could apply for a place in the Senate, but this necessary condition was insufficient: when included in the Senate list, merits were also taken into account - both personal and ancestors. Only members of the Senate belonged to the senatorial class; a sign of their privileged position was special clothing - a tunic with a wide purple longitudinal stripe ( tunica laticlavaf Toga with purple border (toga praetexta E was worn only by former superiors, or curule magistrates, who had the right to sit on the curule chair (Fig. 10.4).

Horsemen, like senators, were not born, but became. For this, the high property qualification, which in the 2nd century. BC e. amounted to 400 thousand sesterces 1: equestrian dignity was awarded by the state in the person of the censor, again the merits of the applicant were taken into account. The new rider received a “social horse” (equus publicus), which he had to look after carefully. Being for the most part, like the senators, landowners, the horsemen more actively participated in business life: they were engaged in trade and various financial transactions. During the war, they served in the cavalry or were officers in the legions, and in peacetime they could achieve honorary positions giving the right to a seat in the Senate: the senatorial class could only be reached through the equestrian class.

Rice. 10.4.

The composition of the last class (plebs) was very heterogeneous: the plebs were divided into urban (merchants, artisans, etc.) and rural (mainly medium and small landowners). A significant part of the first were the urban mob - the poor lumpen, whose slogan later became the famous "rapet et circenses"("Meal'n'Real").

In the course of the class struggle, the state structure of republican Rome was finally formed. Highest state

The body of the Roman Republic was considered to be the people's assembly, which existed in three forms: curiate, centuriate and tributary comitia. The most ancient - curiat, meetings of patricians in curiae, in fact, have long lost their political significance and met rarely; some researchers believe that during the era of the republic, plebeians began to take part in them. The curiat commissions adopted a special law - lex curiata de imperio, by which the respective magistrate was given his special powers - empires

Empires- the totality of powers first of the king, and then of the highest officials in Rome; the main content of the empire is military power and jurisdiction. In the Roman Republic, the same word denoted the territory over which the empire of the supreme magistrate extended; in the era of the emperors - the name of the Roman world power (Imperium will sink).

The comitia centuriata, which met outside the city limits, on the Campus Martius, elected senior magistrates (consuls, censors and praetors), declared war and approved peace treaties. In the middle of the 3rd century. BC e. a democratic reform was carried out that changed the distribution of centuries by class: each class received an equal number of centuries (70 each). Over time, the main type of national assembly became tribunal comitia, which arose from meetings of plebeians in tribes - territorial districts into which the state was divided (31 rural and four urban). From the 3rd century. BC e. Patricians also participated in the work of the tribute comitia, and from then on basic laws began to be adopted in them. A number of magistrates: curule aediles, quaestors, military tribunes - were elected in this type of national assembly; as for the tribunes of the people and the plebeian aediles, these officials were elected at purely plebeian assemblies by tribe ( concilium plebis). The importance of popular assemblies in the political life of Rome was limited by the fact that they did not have the right of legislative initiative: not a single bill could be proposed by the assembly itself; it must be introduced by a magistrate with such a right (consul, dictator, tribune); also, the comitia could not meet at their own discretion - only on the initiative of the magistrate.

Executive and judicial power in the state was exercised by magistrates - officials. All magistracies (except for the dictatorship) were elective, temporary (most for a period of one year) and collegial. The highest magistrates, supreme commanders and in fact heads of state were two consul, whose names the year was named. The highest magistrates inherited the insignia of royal power - 12 lictors with fasces, separate curule chairs in the Senate. Consuls convened the Senate and the People's Assembly, introduced bills, supervised elections and were considered the bearers of the highest empire.

Praetors- junior colleagues of consuls - were involved in judicial matters. At first there were two of them, but by the end of the republic, when provincial governors began to be appointed from former praetors, their number increased to 16.

The position was very authoritative censor. Two censors were elected every five years from among the former consuls for a term of 18 months. This frequency is explained by the fact that once every five years a census of citizens (census) took place and an audit of the list of senators and equestrians was carried out. The censors also exercised control over the morality of citizens: for bad behavior (excessiveness, drunkenness, ill-treatment of children, disrespect for parents), they could issue a reprimand, which was extremely shameful, or even exclude senators or equestrians from the list. Among the censors of the Early Republic, the most famous was Appius Claudius, nicknamed “The Blind” (he became blind in old age). Becoming in 312 BC. e. censor, he began the construction of the great road of antiquity, named after him Appian, which connected Rome with Capua. He also improved Rome's water supply by building the first of the Roman aqueducts, which brought drinking water from the Sabine hills. Appius Claudius was the first of the censors to begin revising the list of senators (previously this was done by consuls) and - an unheard of thing! -even included the sons of freedmen among the senators.

Exercise

Model Roman cursus honorum(lit., “running, path of honors”), placing in the correct sequence (from lowest to highest) the positions that representatives of the nobility held:

• 1) quaestor;
• 2) consul;
• 3) praetor;
• 4) censor;
• 5) aedile.

Plebeian magistrates were extremely important in Rome - people's tribunes. In addition to the right of assistance and the right of veto, they received the right to introduce bills, convene tribunal comitia and the Senate, and even arrest magistrates if they opposed them. The significant power of the tribunes was limited only by the fact that any of them could veto a colleague’s proposal, and also by the fact that the powers of the tribunes acted only within the pomerium - the city limits of Rome. Ambitious youth willingly joined the tribunes of the people, for whom this position often became the beginning of a political career.

Question to think about

Why do you think the Greek historian Polybius considered the Roman government to be the best? Give reasons for your answer.

Public order, the condition of city buildings, and the cleanliness of the streets were monitored aediles; They also took care of the delivery of food and were in charge of organizing public games, for which they spent considerable money from their own pockets. This paid off in that the generous aedile gained popularity, which contributed to his future career.

Quaestors were in charge of the state treasury (aerarium), which was located in the temple of Saturn; They were also in charge of the state archive. During the Late Republic, quaestors were often assistants to provincial governors or generals. The position of quaestor usually began the ascent up the ladder of magistracy; the most worthy and successful reached the top - the position of consul or censor.

In addition to the ordinary ones, there were also extraordinary, or extraordinary, magistrates in Rome: interrexes, decemvirs, triumvirs, military tribunes with consular power, etc. When the danger from an external enemy was especially great or internal unrest threatened civil strife, a special decision of the Senate was appointed dictator. The dictator's powers lasted no more than six months; he himself chose his assistant - the chief of the cavalry. The ancient dictatorship was created mainly with military purpose. In case of war, the consuls divided the army into two parts, or took turns commanding, such double command often led to mutual claims and misunderstanding and harmed the cause. The appointment of an extraordinary magistrate - a dictator - led to unity of command: consuls and praetors in war were obliged to obey him.

Dictator- an extraordinary magistrate in Republican Rome, elected for a term of no more than six months, usually for military command; in the Late Republic (Sulla, Caesar) - actually an authoritarian ruler.

Magistrates were divided into categories: curule magistrates(those who had the right to the curule seat (Fig. 10.5)) - consuls, dictator, praetors, censors and curule aediles; other positions were considered non-curular. Officials, endowed with empire, - magistrates cum imperio: consuls, praetors, dictator and other extraordinary magistrates (decemvirs, triumvirs). The highest magistrates were considered the curules, and also, from a certain point, the tribunes of the people.

The most important element of the Roman government was senate, whose power was based not so much on law as on authority ( auctoritas senatus). In the strict sense of written law, the senate was a purely advisory body; it could not make laws, but could only give advice and recommendations if the magistrate asked it to do so. However fas- unwritten law, custom (in Rome - the same sources of law as the law) - required seeking the sanction of the Senate for all cases without exception, which turned this body, in fact, into the government of the Roman Republic. The Senate approved laws (after 339 BC, only preliminary approval by the Senate of bills submitted to the comitia was required); could cancel under a plausible pretext a law adopted by the people's assembly (for example, due to a violation of procedure, unfavorable auspices 1, etc.). He was in charge of finances (budget, taxes), led foreign policy(acceptance and dispatch of embassies) and military actions (announcement of recruitment, distribution of troops between consuls, military budget, appointment of a triumph, etc.). From the 4th century BC e. The composition of the Senate, whose number remained the same - 300 people, began to be replenished from former magistrates, starting with quaestors. There was a certain voting procedure in the Senate: the princeps was the first to express his opinion and cast his vote. (princeps senatus), then curule senators (those who held curule positions in the past), finally others, but they rarely got their turn. The order of replenishment of the Senate determined its social composition: the nobility, in whose hands were all the highest magistrates, reigned in the Senate just as the Senate reigned in the life of the Roman state.

Rice. 10.5.

Princeps- in the Roman Republic, a senator whose name was first on the list of the Senate, the first to express an opinion during the discussion; in imperial times - one of the titles of the emperor, who was the prince of the Senate.

Workshop

The struggle between patricians and plebeians. Laws of the XII tables.

The seminar is devoted to the analysis of the “Laws of the XII Tables” - the oldest source on Roman law. The practical lesson involves reading and detailed analysis of the document, so before the lesson you need to read it carefully.

Tasks

Make a short summary (about 1 page) on the topic “the struggle between patricians and plebeians,” which will list the main demands of the plebeians, the stages of this confrontation, the adopted reforms and laws, and the results.

Write down and learn the meanings of such concepts as “patrician”, “plebeian”, “secession”, “patron”, “client”, “decemvirs”, “tribune of the people”, “plebiscite”.

Carefully read the text of the “Laws of the XX Tables” and determine which articles talk about the branches of Roman law (criminal, property, family, inheritance, debt, land), legal proceedings, and the structure of society. As you read the document, create a summary table. In this table you must enter the corresponding article numbers (some articles may relate to several positions at once).

Solve problems based on the articles of the “Laws of XX Tables”.

Note! When answering problems, links to specific articles are required.

• 1. The Roman Publius filed a complaint against his neighbor Mark. He claimed that Mark stole logs from him, from which he later built himself a house. What punishment does Mark face if he is found guilty?
• 2. A poor Roman turned to a wealthy friend with a request to lend him 500 asses for a period of one year. He lent him money on interest, with the condition that he should return 600 asses. A year later, the poor man did not repay the debt and, moreover, went to court, arguing that such a demand was illegal. How should this matter be resolved?
• 3. Two Romans, Gaius and Lucius, had been in conflict with each other for a long time. One night, Guy cut down seven fruit trees on Lucius' property. The next morning Lucius came to Gaius, started a fight and in the fight broke his opponent’s arm. What fines should both of them pay?

Socio-political structure of Republican Rome

The seminar takes place in the form of a colloquium.

Tasks

• 1. Make an outline of Polybius’s story about the Roman state system (Book VI).
• 2. Compare the Roman comitia (national assemblies) with each other. Try to answer the questions: who collected them? What issues were discussed? Was there freedom of speech at these meetings?
• 3. Compare the Roman popular assembly with the Athenian ecclesia. Which type of meeting seems more democratic to you? Give reasons for your answer.

Creative task

Make up a situational problem based on the articles of the “Laws of XX Tables” and propose a solution to it. Try to rely on several articles of the “Laws” at once - this will make the task more interesting and more difficult.

Variable task

Fill out the table “Roman magistrates”.