Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T12:52:13.882Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Peculiar Restriction on Candidacy for Plebeian Office

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2015

R. Develin
R. Develin*
Affiliation:
University of Tasmania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It seems that not just anyone, however qualified by age and distinction, could sue for plebeian office. I have interpreted the lex Atinia (perhaps about the time of the Hannibalic War or shortly thereafter) as removing the prohibition on members of the senate becoming tribunes. That regulation, I would conjecture, had been operative since the early days of plebeian consulates, reflecting perhaps a tension between the popular office and the aristocratic council. But at the same time that this restriction was probably becoming out-moded or dysfunctional, another, more peculiar one was still alive and well.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 15 , 1981 , pp. 111 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for Classical Studies 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 ‘The Atinian Plebiscite, Tribunes, and the Senate’, CQ 28 (1978), 141–4.

2 Mommsen, Th.,Römisches Staatsrecht 3 (Leipzig 1887-88),Google Scholar 1.487 n.2. Cf. Rotondi, G. Leges publicae populi Romani (Milano 1922; repr. Darmstadt 1966), 264.Google Scholar

3 Münzer, F. Römisene Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien (Stuttgart 1920), 137–9;Google Scholar RE s.v. Servilius no. 59.

4 Aymard, A. ‘Liviana. A propos des Servilii Gemini’, REA 45 (1943), 199–224;CrossRefGoogle Scholar against Mommsen 205–8; against Münzer 209–10. Aymard does not accept all Münzer’s arguments: 202 n.4 and 208. For a review of those who have doubted Livy and those who have remained silent, see id. 204–205 n.4. Scullard, H.H. Roman Politics 220–150 B.C.2 (Oxford 1973), 276–7,Google Scholar adds nothing of value for this discussion.

5 The term ‘curale father’ is used as a convenient shorthand expression henceforth.

6 Develin, R. ‘C. Flaminius in 232 B.C.’, AC 45 (1976), 638–43 at 643 n.24.Google Scholar Also Aymard 218–9; de Sanctis, G. Storia dei romani 4. 12 (Firenze 1969), 524.Google Scholar

7 See Develin, R. Patterns in Office-Holding 366-49 B.C. (Coll. Lat. 161, Bruxelles 1979) (henceforth Patterns), 23–4; 26-7.Google Scholar

8 Patterns 77.

9 We have been taught to regard the senators and their scions as an order, not a class; see most recently, also on the lex Claudia, Nicolet, C. ‘Économie, société et institutions au IIe siècle av. J.-C: de la lex Claudia à l‘ager exceptus‘, Annales 35 (1980), 871–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Patterns 21–2; 24, 26–7.

11 On this see Develin, R. ‘Lex curiata and the Competence of Magistrates’, Mnemosyne 30(1977), 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Mommsen 1.18 and n.2.

13 Mommsen 1.402.

14 See Gellius, NA 13.15.4.

15 Livy 7.6.7–12; Develin, , Mnemosyne 1977, 62.Google Scholar

16 Onpostliminium see Aymard 206 n.3; Sherwin-White, A.N. The Roman Citizenship 2 (Oxford 1973), 34–34-5; 292-3.Google Scholar

17 Aymard 208; 215.

18 Aymard 213–4; 219.

19 T. Iuventius Thalna did not figure in the register in Patterns; he should have done so. On the principles there used, we see that his son, being praetor in 167, would be born by 207 and if the father was then 20, he would be born by 227, praetor at 33 and 55 in 172.

20 For sources see Broughton, T.R.S. The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, 2 vols and Suppl. (New York 1951–60) (henceforth MRR ) sub anno and 1.562 n.7 for the priesthood involved.Google Scholar

21 MRR 1.246 n.4.

22 Patterns 72 (no.98).

23 MRR 2.240.

24 Aymard 214 speaks of C. Livius Salinator, aed. cur. 204, as avoiding plebeian office, which is true, but such instances do not in themselves help our case.

25 See Patterns 23.

26 Patterns 89.

27 Patterns 23–4.

28 Patterns passim.