CHAPTER VIII

1 See Schulz, CRL, 593 fr and Zulueta, The Institutes of Gaius II, 2i6ff

2 Gellius, Nodes Aiticae XX, 1, 13

3 Gai. Inst. DI, 22off; D. 47. 10

4 Audor ad Herennium II, 19 and Gai.

5 Gaius, loc. cit.; but on â€?aggravated iniuria⁹ he tells us that the praetor in effect determined the amount.

6 Shown most cogently by E. Fraenkel in Gnomon (the periodical), 1925, 193 fr (reprinted in his collected Kleine Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie II, 407fr). See also Kelly, Roman Litigation, 21-3

7 D. 47.10.15. 3ff

8 D. 3. 3.42.1

9 D. 47.10. 5 pr.

10 By R. E. Smith in Cl. Qu., 1951,169ft— an important article, even if wrong (as I think) on this and some other points

11 D. 47. 10, frags. 5. 9-11 and 6; Pauli Sententiae V, 4,15

12 Suetonius, divus Augustus, 55

13 Pace Smith, art. cit.

14 Tacitus, Annals I, 72

15 Notwithstanding Cicero, ad fam. Ill, 11, 2

16 Audor ad Herennium II, 19

17 E. J. Kenney in Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 1962, 36

18 Horace, Satires II, i, 80-1. The reference is to the Twelve Tables, with their provisions about �magic and spells’; it should not be taken seriously as a statement of the rules of defamation in Horace’s day

19 Juvenal, Satires 1,169-71

20 D. 47. 10.18 pr. If, as some scholars think, the passage has suffered inter­polation and cannot be used, there is then no evidence at all for truth being a good defence

21 Though see Codex Theodosianus, 9. 34. 1

22 Cicero’s apologies for prosecuting Verres at the beginning and end of the divinatio in Caecilium (1 and 66ft) suggest this

23 Quintilian, Inst. Or. XI, 1, 57fr

24 For example, by Schulz, CRL, 595. Antony did not call Caesar’s assassins �honourable men* in order to escape an action for defamation. Cf. Cicero, pro Roscio comoedo, 18

25For the efforts of Augustus to give it reality, see Jones, Studies, Essay III

26 Sec Chapter ΙΠ, pp.

27 For call-up of provincials for local defence in Cicero’s day, see, for ex­ample, II in Verrem IV, 76. And for compulsory levy under the Principate, see Sherwin-White, Pliny, 601

28 There were always, to judge from the diplomata, a few cives in the auxiliary regiments, probably through special personal circumstances.

29 Pliny, Panegyricus, 37-40

30 Cassius Dio LXXVII, 9, 5

31 See Jones, Studies, Essay VI; F. Millar in J RS, 1963, 29ff; Brunt in J RS, 1966, 75fr

32 Gnomon of the Idiologos, passim; D. 49. 14; Pauli Sententiae V, 12; and the fragmentum de iure fisci, in Fontes II (pp. 627S)

33 D. 50. i. 23

34 D. $0.4.18. 30

35 Cicero, ad Att. V, 21, 7

36 See Econ. Survey II, nos. $66ff

37 P. Beatty Panop. I, edited by T. C. Skeat in Papyri from Panopolis in the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (1964)

38 D. 7. i. 27. 3

39 D. 19. 2, frags. 13.7 and 15. 2, respectively.

40 See H. G. Pflaum, Essai sur le Kursus publicus* sous le haut-empire romain (1940)

41 See SEG, vol. XVI, no. 754; Μ. McCrum and A. G. Woodhead, Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors, AD 68-96 (1961), nos. 457 and 466; Uannee epigraphique, i960, no. 334 (with Revue des ttudesgrecques, 1958, no. 341); 1964, no. 231

42 Econ. Survey II, nos. 368-9

43 See SEG, vol. XVI, no. 754

44 Thus Claudius: ILS, 214; Domitian: McCrum and Woodhead, no. 466

45 See Chapter IV, p. 116, with note 85

46 Fontes ΠΙ, no. 30 (part only)

47 Gellius has a list ofâ€?sumptuary* legislation: Nodes Atticae Π, 24

48 Though see W. Liebenam, Zur Geschichte und Organisation des römischen Vereinswesens (1890, reprinted 1964), 18-19

49 Jones, The Greek City, 213. The â€?Astynomic Law* of Pergamum is a good example: W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Seledae, no. 483; G. Klaffenbach, â€?Die Astynomeninschrift von Pergamon*, Abhandlungen der deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Klasse für Sprachen, Literatur und Kunst, Jahrgang 1953, no.

50 Fontes I, no. 13

51 Strabo 235 C; Suetonius, divus Augustus, 89

52 The lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus, with accompanying senatusconsulta: Frontinus, de aquaeductu, looff

53 Tacitus, Annals XV, 43

54 Martial VII, 61, reminiscent of the case of the Dublin grocer quoted by Megarry, Miscellany-at-Law, 363-5

55 See Schulz, Roman Legal Science, 247

56 D. 43, titles 6-11

57 D. 21. i. 40 and 42; see Lenel, Das Edictum Perpetuum, $66

58 Fontes I, nos. 18, § 4 and 21, § 75, respectively

59 Fontes I, no. 45; its date should perhaps be ad 45, see Degrassi, Fasti Consolari, 12-13

60 See (besides the references in the next note) D. 18. 1. 52 (with direct reference to the Hosidianum); 39. 2. 46 and 48

61 D. 30. 114. 9 and D. 30. 41, respectively. See also Fontes I, no. 80, and (already under Trajan) Pliny, Ep. X, 70,1

62 See J. W. Jones in Law Quarterly Review, 1929, jizff; L. Homo, Rome imperiale et Vurbanisme dans I’antiquite (1951), 363fF; Schulz, Principles, 161 (with references at note 3) and 163, note 2; Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, 343 (with references at note 2)

63 J. W. Jones, art. cit.

64 Livy, XL, 51, 7

65 Suetonius, divus Augustus, 56, 2

66 Cicero, ad Ait. TV, 16, 8

67 Frontinus, de aquaeductu, 125 (cf. 127)

68 Fontes I, no. 21, § 99

69 Cicero, de lege agraria II, 82

70 Res gestae divi Augusti, 16, i

71 D. 6. I. 15. 2; 21. 2. 11 pr.; Siculus Flaccus, de condicionibus agrorum, in K. Lachmann, ed., Gromatici Veteres (Schriften der römischen Feldmesser, vol. I), p. 160,11.25Ä*. On compulsory purchase see also U. von Liibtow, Das römische Volk. Sein Staat und sein Recht (1955)» 510, note 229

72 See Liebenam, Römisches Vereinswesen; J.-P. Waltzing, Etude historique sur les corporations professionelles chez les romains (1895/6); F. Μ. de Robcrtis, 11 diritto associative romano (1938); Sherwin-White, Pliny, 608-9

73 Waltzing, op.

74 Livy, XXXIX, 15, ix (given insufficient weight by de Robertis, op. cit.); Ch. Wirszubski, Libertas as a political idea at Rome during the late Republic and early Principale (1950), 18-19

75 See the references to sodales and collegia in the lex Acilia Repetundarum, Fontes I, no. 7, §§ 10, 20, 22, and to sodalitates in the Commentariolum Petitionis, 19 (following the letters ad Quintum fratrem in the Oxford Text of Cicero)

76 For both, Asconius, in Pisonianam, p. 7 of Clark’s Oxford Text

77 Cicero, ad Quintuni fratreni II, 3, 5

78 Cicero, pro Plancio, 36

79 Suetonius, divus Julius, 42, 3; divus Augustus, 32, 1; but see J. Linderski in ZSS, 1962, 322 ff, for an attempt to reconcile by distinguishing. Rouge, Recherches sur Đ“ organisation du commerce, 462-3 argues that there was no such statute (concerning commercial groups, at least)

80 Fontes I, no. 21, § 106. Josephus, Antiquitates XIV, 215 would settle the matter if he could be trusted

81 D. 3. 4. Ń– pr.; 47. 22. 3. Ń–

82 Fontes Ш, no. 38

83 Fontes III, no. 35. On the �burial clubs’ there is much of importance in Borner, Untersuchungen, pp. 406ff, 43 iff, and especially 46iff

84 D. 47.22.1; see Duff, Personality in Roman Private Law, noff

85 D. 3.4. Ń– pr.

86 Duff, op. cit., 148-9

87 Waltzing, op. cit., II, Ń–8Đ·!Đ“

88 Eg. ILS, 6987, and see Waltzing, I, I9off

89 Tacitus, Annals XIV, 17

90 See the edict quoted with translation in Econ. Survey IV, 847

91 Acta Apost. XIX, 23ff

92 Fontes III, no. 46

93 D. 48.12. 2 pr.

94 See, for example, the case of the bankers of Pergamum: Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, no. 484. Domitian imposed a prohibition on viti­culture, but did not persist in it; see Econ. Survey V, 141-2; and there was perliaps a prohibition on mining, see above, Chapter V, p. 161

95 The builders at Miletus consulted the oracle: Econ. Survey, IV, 837

96 For such as there is, see Rostovtzeff, SEHRE, 619, note 43 and 621, note 45.

97 D. 48. Ń–. 8; though see Brasiello, Repressione penale, 209; the second half of the sentence (in square brackets) is certainly not true

98 See Brasiello, op. cit., 45#*

99 Compare, as Brasiello says (op. cit., 49-52, especially 50, note 76), the way they are laid out in Pauli Sententiae

100 D. 48.1.7

Ń– Đľ Ń– See Brunt in Historia, 1961,189!?

101a D. 48. ii. 3ff

102 D. 48. 6. 3.1. See, however, D. 48, 8.1 pr

103 D. 48. 8, passim

104 D. 48. 6, passim

105 D. 47. 12. 8

106 D. 48.14. Ń– pr.

107 Pauli Sententiae IV, 7 and V, 25

108 Attributed to the policy of Nero by Suetonius, Nero, 17

109 D. 48.10.14 pr., 15 pr. and 22

no Collatio legum Mosaicarum et Romanarum VIII, 7,1, in Fontes II (p. 565) in D. 48.10. 25 and 33

112 D. 48.13.10

113 D. 2. I. 7

114 D. 48. 10, frags. 8 and 9; Pauli Sententiae V, 25, 1. See P. Grierson in R. A. G. Carson and C. H. V. Sutherland, eds., Essays in Roman Coinage presented to Harold Mattingly (1956), 240fr

115 D. 48.13. i

116 D. 47.11.6. i

117 D. 48. 10, frags, i, 1-3; 13 pr.; 19.1; 27. 2

118 D. 47, titles 13,14,16,18 and 11.11, respectively

119 D. 47. 20

120 D. 11. 5. 3

121 D. 11. 5. 2. i

122 D. 11. 5. 2 pr.

123 D. 11. 5. i. 4

124 Pace G. Crifd, Ricerche sull⁹ â€?exilium nel periodo repubblicano I, (1961), 312 (his summing up)

125 This is why there must be something wrong with D. 48. 1. 8. See the famous account of Claudius’jurisdiction in Suetonius, divus Claudius, 14-15

126 See de Robertis in ZSS, 1939, 219fr

127 D. 48.19.2. i

128 First attested, Pliny, Ep. X, 31, 2; 58, 3

129 D. 48.19. 28 pr.

130 Brasiello, op. cit., 416fr; Pliny, Ep. X, 31-2

131 See Th. Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht (1899), 918fr

132 Cicero, II in Verrem V, 161-4

133 Strabo, 273 C

134 See Suetonius, Caligula, 27

135 D. 48. 19. 15; see Mommsen, op. cit., 943

136 D. 48. 2.6

137 D. 48.19.28.2

138 D.

139 See A. Ehrhardt in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie, 2te Reihe, VI, 1775fr

140 See Buckland, Roman Law of Slavery, 87fr

141 D. 48.18. i pr.

142 D. 48. 18. 8 pr. and 9 pr., respectively

143 Buckland, op. cit., 94-5. Senatusconsulta: D. 29. 5 and Pauli Sententiae m,5

144 Codex lustinianus, 9,41,11 pr.

145 D. 48. 18. 10. i

146 Tacitus, Annals VI, 29,1

147 Valerius Maximus IX, 12, 7

148 D. 28. 3. 6. 7

149 D. 48. 21. 3 pr.

150 By F. De Visscher, in Bulletin de 1'academic royale de Belgique, Classe des lettres et des sciences morales et politiques, 1957,I76ff

151 D. 48. 2. 3 pr.

152 D. 48. 2. 8

153 D. 48. 4, frags. 7 pr.—2 and 8

154 See Μ. Lauria in Atti della reale Accademia di scienze tnorali e politiche di Napoli, vol. LVI, 1933, 304fr

155 Pliny, Ep. X, 96-7. This view runs counter to those expressed by Sherwin- White, RSNT, 17fr, and de Ste. Croix in Past and Present, 1963, 15; and is closer to that of Lauria in his paper quoted immediately above. Cf D. 1. 18. 13 pr on brigands and D. 48. 3. 6 on second-century rules for police prosecutions

156 Apuleius, Apologia, 2

157 Tacitus, Annals XV, 69, 1

158 Tacitus, Annals IV, 30, 4

159 For a few recent studies of major importance see: Sherwin-White in RSNT and in Pliny, Appendix V; J. Moreau, La persecution du christianisme dans I’empire rotnain (1956); de Ste. Croix in Past and Present, 1963, 6ff; W. H. C. Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church (1965)

160 For which see J. Beaujeu, L’incendie de Rome en 64 et les chrdtiens (Collection Latomus, vol. XLIX) (i960)

161 So de Ste. Croix, Past and Present, 1963, 8

161a Sherwin-White, Pliny, 781-2 gets thus far but then sheers off into error. �It lay in the governor’s discretion.. whether to accept charges, yes; how to punish, yes; but whether to punish, if Christianity was proved against a man or confessed by him, no. Pliny knew that under those circumstances he had to punish

162 See especially J. Vogt, â€?Zur Religiosität der Christenverfolger’, Sitzungs­berichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-his­torische Klasse, 1962,1, but also de Ste. Croix, Past and Present, 1963,27fr, and Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution, Chapter 4

163 See F. H. Cramer, Astrology in Roman Law and Politics (1954), Part II, section V

164 Symmachus, Relatio III, 8-10 (long after our period, of course)

165 Fontes I, no. 88. Cf the speech of the advocate of the Goharenians before Caracalla in L’annee dpigraphique, 1947, no. 182: �the whole case concerns the sanctity of religion..

166 Important, though concerned almost exclusively with political freedom, are: Wirszubski, Liberias as a political idea; Μ. Hammond in Harvard Classical Studies, 1963,93fr; J. Bieicken in Historische Zeitschrift,exev, 1962, iff. The remarks of Momigliano in J RS, 1942, on pp. 123-4, should be pondered

167 Jones, Later Roman Empire I, 470

168 Introductory items on this great theme arc: F. W. Maitland, English Law and the Renaissance (1901), and as a partial corrective, H. D. Hazeltine in Cambridge Legal Essays written in honour of and presented to Doctor Bond, Professor Buckland and Professor Kenny (1926), 139fr, especially 165-9; P. Vinogradoff, Roman Law in Mediaeval Europe (1904,2nd ed. by de Zulueta, 1929); P. Koschaker, Europa und das römische Recht (1947, reprinted 1958), and the studies in his memory, L⁹ Europa e il diritto romano, Studi in memoria di Paolo Koschaker (1954)

169 Koschaker, Europa und das römische Recht, 79-82 and 114-15

170 Jolowicz, quoted by de Ste. Croix, Past and Present, 1963,12

171 See A. H. Μ. Jones, â€?The Greeks under the Roman Empire’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, XVII, 1963, ifE

172 The most famous is the Roman Oration of Aristides, ed. J. H. Oliver in The Ruling Power (1953), 87iff

173 On this vast and complex subject only a few orientations can be given. The pioneer work was L. Mitteis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht in den östlichen Provinzen des römischen Kaiserreichs (1891, reprinted 1935)· For more recent studies see R. Taubenschlag’s Opera Minora I (1959), 42iff; F. Pringsheim in BIDR, i960, iff; F. De Visscher in Cahiers d’histoire mondiale (= fournal of World History = Cuadernos de Historia Mundial), II, no. 4,1955,788ff; von Lübtow, Das römische Volk. Sein Staat und sein Recht, 5i2ff; NĂ–rr, Imperium und Polis, passim

174 And on the stipulations, see Polay in Journal of Juristic Papyrology, 1965, 185fr

174a The point made by Arangio-Ruiz about the �military will’ in BIDR, 1906, i57ff; see Chapter IV, note 140a

175 This is the scheme set out by P61ay in ZSS, 1962, 54-5

176 The final quotation is D. 28. 4. 3 pr., and the date of the decision recorded in it is ad 166