My starting point is a fundamental paradox that lies at the heart of the slow demise of the Roman Republic: why does the system collapse when, as many scholars have noted, there is nothing that suggests that there was ever an intention by anyone to overthrow the Republic? Understanding this paradox is key to identifying what Rome might have to say to us today. What changes in the final decades of the Roman Republic is a (...) declining view of the ability of political institutions to project the community into the future. This change is due to important alterations in the norms that provide the background context by which individuals working through institutions can get things done. The changes in these norms not only disable these institutions, making them seem less capable of projecting the community into the future, but also make possible alterations in the political framework that might have been inconceivable before. In particular, one sees the elevation of individuals who offer solutions by promising to bypass those ineffective and unresponsive institutions. (shrink)

In his discussion of Roman military institutions Polybius described how the desire for fame might inspire Roman soldiers to heroic feats of bravery, including single combat: τ δ μέγιστον, ο νέοι παρορμνται πρς τ πν πομένειν πρ τν κοινν πραγμάτων χάριν το τυχεν τς συνακολουθούσης τος γαθος τν νδρν εκλείας. πίστιν δ' χει τ λεγόμενον κ τούτων. πολλο μν γρ μονο-μάχησαν κουσίως ωμαίων πρ τς τν λων κρίσεως κτλ. Modern scholars, however, have taken little notice of this remark (...) and some have tried to belittle the importance of single combat at Rome. Thus G. Dumézil alleged that the Romans fought few single combats and that this was significant for their outlook upon war, while R. Bloch described the duels in the seventh book of Livy as ‘un mode de combat absolument étranger à la tradition romaine, mail auquel les Romains ont été contraints par les habitudes et par les défis des Celtes’. W. V. Harris is the only scholar to have understood the importance of monomachy in the Roman Republic, but even he has not assembled all the evidence necessary for an accurate assessment of the phenomenon. This essay is intended to provide a full treatment and thus to make some contribution in a limited but interesting area to our understanding of Roman attitudes to warfare. I have included a list and discussion of all instances of single combat from the Roman Republic which I have discovered and have argued that the custom continued from prehistoric times at least to 45 b.c. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Constructing Literature in the Roman Republic: Poetry and Its ReceptionJoseph FarrellSander M. Goldberg. Constructing Literature in the Roman Republic: Poetry and Its Reception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. xii + 249 pp. Cloth, $70.Just what forces in the earlier centuries of the Roman Republic gave shape to the literature of the late Republic and early Principate is an old question that (...) has received new interest in recent years. Sander Goldberg suggests that to put the question as I just have is to put things backwards. In this book he argues that it is not so much a matter of how earlier literature shaped later literature but rather of how scholars and readers in the late Republic converted the poetic remains of earlier centuries into "literature." For Goldberg, literature in the fullest sense did not exist at Rome before a sufficiently large and critically sophisticated reading public had emerged, and until the available texts had been collected, studied, and canonized; and this process, he believes, did not happen or at any rate was not complete until the time of Cicero and, especially, Varro. The latter, one of the heroes of Goldberg's story (and rightly so), was instrumental in (for instance) turning the scores of plays that traveled in his day under the name of Plautus into an authenticated oeuvre of the sort that defines literature: a corpus that can be owned, read and reread, studied, commented upon, argued over, and shared by a community of more or less like-minded, cultivated individuals. Literati, in fact.The idea is developed over a series of six chapters, plus an introduction and "Retrospective." The chapters are advertised as framing a continuous argument but also as capable of being read independently. They are arranged chronologically and bracketed thematically or imagistically by two arrivals: that of the Muse under the aegis of Rome's earliest poets and that of the one desired by Ovid, if not for himself back into Rome then for his works into the state-sponsored collection in the Palatine library. To my mind chapters 2 ("Constructing Literature") and 3 ("Comedy at Work") are the core of the book, as I have hinted [End Page 283] above and will explain further below; but subsequent chapters on tragedy (4, "Dido's Furies") and satire (5, "Enter Satire) offer novel commentaries on the history of these genres.In staking out his position, Goldberg distinguishes himself from two groups who already are rather at odds with one another. On the one hand there are those who think that Roman literature was indeed already literature from "the beginning"—i.e., from the time of Livius Andronicus. On the other are those who might agree with Goldberg that the Romans did not invent literature until the dying days of the Republic but who give credit (or blame) for this achievement mainly to a relatively small group of elite writers. So it will be fascinating to follow the reception of Goldberg's argument in both these camps. I, for my part, would not want to predict what effect the argument will have. Instead, I will mention what strike me as some of Goldberg's more salient points and will add a few comments by way of reaction.The decision to focus on readers strikes me as a positive contribution. Roman literary culture did not just happen, nor was it or could it have been created by writers alone. A public that wanted there to be a literature in Latin, one that was alive to ideas but also to the techniques that writers used to convey these ideas, was essential. Beyond this, scholars and teachers interested in the texts themselves and in showing readers what to do with them, scholars who were ambitious to create a culture of learning similar to the one that had for generations supported Greek literature, played an enormous role. Of course the writers are more visible to us, both as writers and as a peculiarly important audience for one another's work. But even in the smallest estimate of the literate population, there were many more readers than writers, and these numbers of readers are surely as important or more... (shrink)

This book examines how the Romans came to have a literature, how that literature reflected native and foreign impulses, and how it formed a legacy for subsequent generations have become central questions in the cultural history of the Republic. It examines the problem of Rome's literary development by shifting attention from Rome's writers to its readers. The literature we traditionally call 'early' is seen to be a product less of the mid-Republic, when poetic texts began to circulate, than (...) of the late Republic, when they were systematically collected, canonized, and put to new social and artistic uses. Imposing on texts the name and function of literature was often a retrospective activity. This book explores the development of this literary sensibility from the Romans' early interest in epic and drama, through the invention of satire and the eventual enshrining of books in the public collections important to Horace and Ovid. (shrink)

During the Communist regime, after Poland was officially proclaimed the People’s Republic of Poland, the aim of the Polish Communist government was to control all aspects of society. Communist ideals were enforced in books and other publications; censorship was introduced on all published materials. This paper aims to present the situation of media in People’s Poland, as well as to provide a background and description of Polish censorship. Additionally, this paper will exposit and examine the socio-political role of Tygodnik (...) Powszechny in Polish society. As TP is a Catholic weekly, an outline of the unique socio-political role of the Polish Roman Catholic Church in communist Poland will accompany the above analysis. This paper is based on the research conducted by the author in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree written and defended at the Central European University in Budapest in 2012. (shrink)

The role of Greek thought in the final days of the Roman republic is a topic that has garnered much attention in recent years. This volume of essays, commissioned specially from a distinguished international group of scholars, explores the role and influence of Greek philosophy, specifically Epicureanism, in the late republic. It focuses primarily (although not exclusively) on the works and views of Cicero, premier politician and Roman philosopher of the day, and Lucretius, foremost among the (...) representatives and supporters of Epicureanism at the time. Throughout the volume, the impact of such disparate reception on the part of these leading authors is explored in a way that illuminates the popularity as well as the controversy attached to the followers of Epicurus in Italy, ranging from ethical and political concerns to the understanding of scientific and celestial phenomena. (shrink)

Flower's book offers a new interpretation of Republican history based on rejecting the traditional notion of a single Roman Republic. Flower's alternative periodization speaks of several republics, with several transitional periods. This thesis puts emphasis on cleavage rather than on continuity implied, according to Flower, in the customary notion of "a single, monolithic republic".

Some of the best recent work on Roman priesthoods under the Republic has engaged with the issue of priestly authority and its role in defining the place of priesthoods vis-à-vis other centres of power, influence and knowledge. The aim of this paper is to make a contribution to this line of enquiry by focussing on the concept of priestlyauctoritas, which has seldom received close attention. The working hypothesis is that the study of priestlyauctoritasmay contribute to a broader understanding (...) of the place of priesthood in Republican Rome, and especially in the Late Republican period, from which most of the evidence derives. The link between religious authority and religious expertise requires special attention. (shrink)

Emergency powers are widely held to have contributed in important ways to the Roman Republic's demise and to the erection of the Principate. The debate waged during the late Republic over such powers is certainly one of the most prominent features in late Republican political thought and controversy, and it would be hard to overlook the fact that it was a debate over constitutional principle. Taking seriously the constitutional character of that debate, this article seeks to answer (...) the question of whether it makes sense to attribute to the Roman Republic something like the concept of a constitution in the first place. It is argued that on the level of political thought the term 'constitution' can indeed profitably and accurately be applied to a set of rules that were thought both to be more entrenched and to be more important than other rules. Thus it makes perfect sense to speak of a Roman Republican constitution, without scare quotes, at least in the realm of political thought. Furthermore it is suggested that it makes sense to speak of a Roman republican constitution in the realm of institutional reality as well since political and more specifically constitutional thought informed and influenced some of the republican institutions and their functioning to a considerable extent. (shrink)

In the Roman Republic, in the case of the death of both consuls or a situation which made it impossible to proceed with the election of their successors, the Senate would decide to establish an interregnum. For that the senators chose several persons of patrician dignity from among their midst, and awarded them the auspices and the signs of magisterial power. The interreges had the task of preparing for the elections of new consuls and hold the electoral assembly. (...) Although the interreges had been chosen by the Senate, rather than elected by the People, and were in power for a short period, they resembled extraordinary magistrates. The interrex was appointed by the senator with auspices; likewise, the magistrate was elected in accordance with the will of the gods. As well as the auspices and the attributes of magisterial power, the interreges were provided with anius agendi cum patribus et cum populoand could summon the People to the centuriate assembly. In an epistle to C. Trebatius Testa, written in January 53, Cicero ironically said that, with such a large number of interreges, an experienced lawyer could use them to prepare a defence in civil suits by asking each interrex for two adjournments to obtain legal assistance. Interreges, albeit as part of a jest, were seen here as holders of some civil jurisdiction. Referring to Asconius' clarification that a certain M. Lepidus was appointed interrex because he had been elected as a curule magistrate, Theodor Mommsen concluded that every interrex was regarded as magistrate. In fact, Asconius means here that Lepidus held a curule magistracy in addition to his being interrex. Nevertheless, the notion of extraordinary magistrate has been frequently applied to the interrex by modern scholars. When interreges periodically appeared at the head of the Republic as holders of auspices and of the signs of the highest power for five days, the Romans became accustomed to thinking that the interreges received supremacy for that period. (shrink)

A Companion to Greek Democracy and the Roman Republic offers a comparative approach to examining ancient Greek and Roman participatory communities. Explores various aspects of participatory communities through pairs of chapters—one Greek, one Roman—to highlight comparisons between cultures Examines the types of relationships that sustained participatory communities, the challenges they faced, and how they responded Sheds new light on participatory contexts using diverse methodological approaches Brings an international array of scholars into dialogue with each other.

This paper challenges older views that women's political power in the late Roman Republic was exercised mainly behind the scenes and had to be, because women could not have publicly acknowledged power. First, ancient historiography is used to recover a model of politics, according to which women's interventions gained urgency when made in public. Then, case studies explore how high-ranking women ( matronae ) used the annual rites for the Bona Dea to contribute to public life and intervene (...) in politics. Later accounts of the Catilinarian conspiracy of 63 b.c.e. positively recalled actions of Cicero's wife Terentia and her peers. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:...

This article seeks to explain how it was possible that, until the first century BC, the Roman dictatorship was never abused and turned against the constitution itself. The traditional explanation is that, contrary to its first century imitations, the dictatorship was subject to formal restrictions, such as the six months' tenure, which were strictly applied. By contrast, this article suggests that informal constraints on the dictator's powers, such as moral and religious norms, were as important as formal constraints. It (...) shows, more particularly, how the fides, or the requirement of trust, was essential for preventing an abuse of dictatorial powers. (shrink)

This is a comprehensive analysis of the idea of libertas and its conflicting uses in the political struggles of the late Roman Republic. By reconstructing Roman political thinking about liberty against the background of Classical and Hellenistic thought, it excavates two distinct intellectual traditions on the means allowing for the preservation and the loss of libertas. Considering the interplay of these traditions in the political debates of the first century BC, Dr Arena offers a significant reinterpretation of (...) the political struggles of the time as well as a radical reappraisal of the role played by the idea of liberty in the practice of politics. She argues that, as a result of its uses in rhetorical debates, libertas underwent a form of conceptual change at the end of the Republic and came to legitimise a new course of politics, which led progressively to the transformation of the whole political system. (shrink)

The originality of Foucault’s work lies in part in how he reverses the question of power, asking not how power is held and imposed, but how it is produced. In both his discussion of sovereignty and governmentality, though, Foucault skips over the res publica; a form of political organization that fits neither Foucault’s characterization of sovereignty nor the care of the self. I extend Foucault’s discussion to identify a ratio of government around the discipline of ownership by which the res (...) publica was made intelligible, its relations understood, and its logic organized. I end by suggesting some implications for neo-Roman interpretations of liberty as non-domination. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The Laws of the Roman People: Public Law in the Expansion and Decline of the Roman RepublicDaniel J. GargolaCallie Williamson. The Laws of the Roman People: Public Law in the Expansion and Decline of the Roman Republic. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005. xxviii + 506 pp. 39 tables. 4 maps. Cloth, $75.Laws enacted by citizen assemblies occupy a prominent place in (...) the history of the Roman Republic. In this large book, Williamson aims to examine the culture and practices of lawmaking and to link legislation to Roman expansion over Italy and to the creation of structures of accommodation of sufficient strength to allow the formation of a fairly integrated Italian world. Williamson has set a large task for herself, one that addresses many major themes in Roman history, and she has produced a wide-ranging and complicated argument that should be set out in detail.The book is divided into three broad parts, each made up of three substantial chapters. Part 1 is the core. In the first chapter, Williamson addresses change over time in the frequency of legislative assemblies, the relationship between frequency of lawmaking and periods of crisis, and the functions of public lawmaking. She finds that legislative activity was concentrated in times of crisis, but that the number of laws proposed or enacted in non-crisis years increased markedly from the third to the first centuries and that Roman officeholders proposed laws primarily in instances where the matter was controversial, suggesting that the primary function of lawmaking through popular assemblies was a legitimizing one in just those circumstances where the legitimacy of an action might be questioned.In general, these conclusions are possible and, in some cases, probable, [End Page 469] but they rest on foundations that are not as firm as one would like. Williamson's demonstration centers on a collection of laws and proposed laws from c. 350 to 44 B.C.E., which she has arranged chronologically in twenty-five-year segments that furnish the means to discern changes over time and that, in later chapters, provide the essential temporal structure to integrate lawmaking with a wide range of developments. In appendix B, intended to justify her approach, she acknowledges and dismisses two potential sources of error: the possible use of a statistically invalid sampling procedure and the possible bias introduced by the differing interests of the authors who provide the bulk of the evidence: Cicero, Livy, Cassius Dio, Appian, Plutarch, and Polybius. Yet there is another possibility that Williamson does not consider. Our sources certainly favor some periods over others. Thus, historical accounts become fuller for the Second Punic War and as they approach the first century, just the periods that supposedly exhibit clear signs of an increase in legislative activity. We may know of more laws or proposed laws in periods of war and political conflict than in times of peace, not only because more laws were put forward then but also because such times attracted more interest on the part of historians. Finally, substantial portions of the texts of Livy, Dio Cassius, and Polybius are lost, and the gaps cover much of the third and second centuries. The evidence, then, is extremely uneven over time.One way that Williamson uses the evidence is especially problematic. She notes that three methods of enacting programs or regulations existed simultaneously: magisterial edicts, senatorial decrees, and popular legislation. Since she finds that the kinds of matters addressed in legislation are indistinguishable from the range of issues addressed by the senate, she concludes that, to some extent, it was a matter of choice whether a magistrate went to the senate or to the people for authorization. Thus, when a proposal was moved forward by a law rather than by an edict or senatorial decree, she suggests that the measure was probably controversial and required the legitimizing function of a popular assembly. Unfortunately, our sources often fail to set out clearly just what procedures a magistrate followed. Sometimes, as Williamson notes, a senatorial decree and the proposal of legislation mark successive stages in the legislative process. And certain operations, such as the creation of provincial assignments or promagistracies, could be addressed... (shrink)

Summary This article reinterprets Dio’s view of the fall of the Republic by arguing that Dio viewed institutional political competition, rather than ambitious individuals, as the central destructive driving force in the Late Republic. Dio’s interpretation is hereby unique among ancient historiography. This interpretation has been skilfully interwoven in the general narrative and only by reading Book 39 as a whole, does the interpretation emerge. According to Dio, institutional competition became inherently destructive in the Late Republic and (...) Book 39 is absolutely fundamental in understanding this transformation and the consequent failure of the Roman δημοκρατία. (shrink)

This book tells an overlooked story in the history of the will, a contested idea in both politics and philosophy of mind. For it is Cicero, statesman and philosopher, who gives shape to the notion of will as it would become in Western thought and who invents the idea of 'the will of the people'. In a single word – voluntas – he brings Roman law in contact with Greek ideas, chief among them Plato's claim that a rational elite (...) must rule. When the republic falls to Caesarism, Cicero turns his political argument inward: will is a force to win the virtue in the soul that was lost on the battlefield, the marker of inner freedom in an unfree age. Though his vision of a free republic failed in his time, Cicero's ideal of rational elitism has shaped and fractured the modern world – and Ciceronian creativity may yet save it. (shrink)

This article seeks to explain how it was possible that, until the first century BC, the Roman dictatorship was never abused and turned against the constitution itself. The traditional explanation is that, contrary to its first century imitations, the dictatorship was subject to formal restrictions, such as the six months' tenure, which were strictly applied. By contrast, this article suggests that informal constraints on the dictator's powers, such as moral and religious norms, were as important as formal constraints. It (...) shows, more particularly, how the fides, or the requirement of trust, was essential for preventing an abuse of dictatorial powers. (shrink)

Auxiliaries are usually studied in the late Republic or the Imperial period. Despite this emphasis in modern research, auxiliaries were employed in substantial numbers during the third and second centuries BCE. Auxiliaries did make a crucial contribution to the Roman war effort in the Middle Republic, providing a substantial part of Rome’s military manpower. These troops were most often financed by the community providing them, allowing the Roman state to save a great deal of money if (...) similar numbers of Roman citizens had been deployed instead. This enabled the Roman state to significantly bolster its ability to project military power without having to implement additional financing mechanisms. Along with the use of auxiliaries, the suspension of tributum after the third Macedonian War seemed to have followed a policy of decreasing the burden of financing war for Roman assidui. (shrink)

In a previous article I argued that the promulgatio trinundinum, regularly necessary before a vote in a legislative assembly, an election, or a iudicium populi during the late Roman Republic, was not the declaration of an interval of time but a publication of the proposed business which had to be made over three market-days or nundinae. These market-days occurred continuously at eight-day intervals, and no fresh start was made at the beginning of a year or other period. So (...) the identification of nundinae near the time when a law or other piece of public business was being transacted should provide evidence for or against my view, and further, if this view is sound, suggest more precisely the dates on which certain events occurred. (shrink)