Chapter XIX: A Summary of Comitial History (4)

[565] There were four legions each with 4000 infantry and 300 horse at the opening of the First Punic War; Polyb. i. 16. 2. Four legions fought against Pyrrhus at Asculum, 279; Dion. Hal. xx. 1. This was the normal number for the Samnite wars; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 477.

[566] Two legions of juniors was the maximal limit of Rome’s military strength during the period of twenty-one tribes; cf. p. 77, 84. The incorporation of the Veientan territory, 387, could not at once have doubled this force.

[567] Livy xxv. 3. 1-7; cf. Gerathewohl, _Die Reiter und die Rittercent._ 54. The sources do not suggest that the number after reaching eighteen hundred remained unalterable. In Cic. _Rep._ ii. 20. 36 (“Deinde equitum ad hunc morem constituit, qui usque adhuc est retentus”) reference is not to number but to character; Gerathewohl, ibid. 8 f. Mommsen’s interpretation (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 259, n. 5) is therefore wrong.

[568] In 200 the seven legions contained twenty-one hundred equites or fewer; Gerathewohl, _Die Reiter und die Rittercent._ 56.

[569] _Orat._ lxiv: “Nunc ego arbitror oportere restitui (Mommsen’s emendation ‘institui’ is unnecessary), quin minus duobus milibus ac ducentis sit aerum equestrium.” Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 259, wrongly holds the opinion that the measure failed to pass.

[570] See citations collected by Gerathewohl, ibid. 56, n. 1.

[571] Dion. Hal. vi. 13. 4: Ἔστιν ὅτε shows that the number varied; cf. Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 171.

[572] Suet. _Aug._ 38.

[573] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 39; Livy i. 43. 8 f.; Dion. Hal. iv. 18. 1. High birth and great wealth are emphasized, but no definite rating of the class is given. Their treatment of the subject is compatible with the view that the knights were then patrician—a view however which these writers did not have clearly in mind. Livy’s statement (iii. 27. 1) that a certain patrician served in the infantry because of his poverty harmonizes well with the same view; for as the aes equestre and hordearium were not yet introduced, a poor patrician would be unable to own and keep a horse. Those scholars therefore seem to be wrong who, like Grathewohl, ibid. 67, following Rubino, in _Zeitschr. f. d. Altertumswiss._ iv (1846). 219, refer the equestrian census to Servius Tullius.

[574] P. 94. It is for about this time (403) that Livy, v. 7. 5, first refers definitely to an equestrian census.

[575] This fact is most clearly stated by Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 3, and is confirmed by Cic. _Rep._ ii. 22. 39.; cf. Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 3. 43; for further evidence, see Belot, _Rev. écon. et mon._ 5 ff.

[576] P. 92.

[577] Hor. _Ep._ I. i. 57; Pliny, _N. H._ xxxiii. 2. 32; Mart. iv. 67; v. 23, 25, 38; Pliny, _Ep._ 1. 19. 2; Juv. i. 105; v. 132; xiv. 326; Suet. _Caes._ 38.

[578] Serv. _in Aen._ iii. 89; vi. 190; xii. 259.

[579] Cic. _Div._ 16. 29 f.: “Dirae, sicut cetera auspicia, ut omina, ut signa, non causas adferunt, cur quid eveniat, sed nuntiant eventura, nisi provideris.” The last statement means only that a misfortune will happen, if an evil omen is unheeded. Cic. _Div._ ii. 33. 70: “Non enim sumus ii nos augures, qui ... futura dicamus;” cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 331; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 198.

[580] Serv. _in. Aen._ iii. 20: “Auspicari enim cuivis ... licet.”

[581] Cic. _Div._ i. 16. 28: “Nihil fere quondam maioris rei nisi auspicato ne privatim quidem gerebatur, quod etiam nunc nuptiarum auspices declarant, qui re omissa nomen tantum tenent;” 46. 104; Val. Max. ii. 1. 1. On the nuptial auspices, see De Marchi, _Cult. priv. di Rom._ i. 152-5.

[582] Romulus consulted the rest of the gods along with Jupiter; Dion. Hal. ii. 5. 1.

[583] The public auspices were Jupiter’s alone; Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 20. So were the auspical chickens; _Div._ ii. 34. 72; 35. 73; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 77, n. 2. In historical time the sign called for was Jupiter’s lightning; Cic. _Div._ ii. 18. 42; _Vatin._ 8. 20; _Phil._ v. 3. 7. The epithet Elicius, notwithstanding Varro, _L. L._ vi. 95; Livy i. 20. 7; 31. 8, does not find its explanation in the auspices; Aust, in Roscher, _Lex. Myth._ ii. 656 ff.; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm._ 106.

[584] P. 100, n. 3.

[585] In Gell. xvi. 4. 4.

[586] Cato, _De sacrilegio commisso_, in Fest. 234. 30. No one could imagine Attus Navius, the swineherd, to have been a patrician, and yet he was the most famous of private augurs; Cic. _Div._ i. 17. It is significant, too, that the great authority on private auspices, P. Nigidius Figulus, author of _Augurium privatum_ in several books (Gell. vii. 6. 10), was a plebeian.

[587] Livy iv. 2. 5 f.

[588] Livy iv. 6. 1 f.

[589] Livy vi. 41. 5 f.

[590] Cic. _Div._ ii. 36. 76: “Nos, nisi dum a populo auspicia accepta habemus, quam multum iis utimur?” i. 16. 28.

[591] Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 46, n. 2, has pointed out that the phrase auspicia publica occurs only in Livy iv. 2. 5, where he believes it to be used in a special sense. In the time of Cicero no one but an antiquarian ever thought of any other kind of auspices.

[592] Livy x. 8. 9.

[593] The usual view, represented by Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 89, n. 1, is that the plebeians did not possess this right originally but acquired it later; cf. also Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2581; Di Marchi, _Cult. priv. di. Rom._ i. 233. This hypothesis not only lacks support, but is also vitiated by the fact that at the time of the supposed equalization private auspices must have been declining, as Cicero found them extinct.

The treatment of private auspices here given is supplementary to the study of the social classes made in ch. ii.

[594] Messala, in Gell. xiii. 15. 4; Fest. 157. 21; Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 71 ff.; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 580.

[595] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 3. 9; Livy vi. 41. 6; viii. 23. 15 f.

[596] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 96 ff.

[597] Messala, _De auspiciis_, i, in Gell. xiii. 15. 4; Bouché-Leclerq, ibid. ii. 581.

[598] Messala, ibid.

[599] As when for instance the consul forbids the minor magistrate to “watch the sky” on an appointed comitial day; Gell. xiii. 15. 1: “In edicto consulum, quo edicunt, quis dies comitiis centuriatis futurus sit, scribitur ex vetere forma perpetua: ne quis magistratus minor de caelo servasse velit.”

[600] _Commentarium Anquisitionis_ of a quaestor, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91: “Auspicio operam des et in templo auspices, dum aut ad praetorem aut ad consulem mittas auspicium petitum.” This passage shows that the quaestor, though asking permission, himself holds the auspices.

[601] The first alternative is held by Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 89, whereas Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2584, is inclined to the latter.

[602] Gell. xiv. 7. 4, 8, quoting Varro.

[603] _Leg._ iii. 3. 10: “Omnes magistratus auspicium iudiciumque habento.” The previous paragraph is concerned with the tribunes, and in this citation the use of iudicium instead of imperium points to the tribunes. It is hardly possible that Cicero in his _Laws_ would give the tribunes a right they did not possess.

[604] In Gell. xiii. 15. 4. Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2583, seems therefore to be incorrect in excluding the tribunes from the right.

[605] In stating that the tribunes were given the right to take auspices for their assemblies, Zonaras, vii. 19, evidently confuses the oblativa with the impetrativa. It is an interesting fact that according to Cicero the first college of tribunes was elected under auspices in the comitia curiata; Frag. A. vii. 48: “Itaque auspiciato postero anno tr. pl. comitiis curiatis creati sunt.”

[606] Cic. _Div._ ii. 34. 71: “Hic apud maiores nostros adhibebatur peritus, nunc quilubet.” As in the time of Cicero auspices had come to be a mere pretence (p. 118), an attendant without skill or scruple would best serve the magistrate’s purpose. In Livy iv. 18. 6, the augurs see the omen for the dictator, but some other attendant might serve the purpose. Being a paid functionary, the bird-seer mentioned by Dion. Hal. ii. 6. 2 as assisting in an auspication could not have been a public augur; Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xviii. 406 ff.; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 456, n. 8. The magistrate requested assistance in the following form: “Q. Fabi, te mihi in auspicio esse volo;” and the reply was “Audivi;” Cic. _Div._ ii. 34. 71; cf. § 72. From this formula it appears that the person summoned did not hold, but assisted in, the auspices; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 338. The auspices are always said to belong not to the augurs, but to the magistrates; Cic. _Leg._ iii. 3. 10; Messala, in Gell. xiii. 15. 4. Instead of remaining with the augurs in the city the auspices followed a duly elected consul into the field; Livy xxii. 1. 6. Auspicari is strictly a function of the magistrate (cf. Varro, _Rer. hum._ xx, in Non. Marc. 92) though the word is sometimes applied to the observation made by augurs (Fest. ep. 18), whose function is properly termed augurium, augurare; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 200 f.; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2580 f.

[607] The derivation is unknown. Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2313 f., summarizes the principal theories. Probability seems to favor the view that it is a combination of the root of avis with a verbal noun meaning “to see” or the like; Walde, _Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 55.

[608] Attus Navius from his boyhood was renowned for his augural skill; Cic. _Div._ i. 17; Livy i. 36; Dion. Hal. iii. 70 f.; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 333. Romulus, too, is said to have been an excellent augur; Remus possessed similar skill (Cic. _Div._ i. 2. 3; 17. 30; 40. 89; Ennius, in Cic. _Div._ i. 48. 107), and in the opinion of Livy, i. 18. 6; iv. 4. 2, there was no augural college before Numa.

[609] Varro, _L. L._ v. 33; Cic. _Fam._ vi. 6. 7; _Senec._ 18. 64; Fest. 161. 20; _CIL._ vi. 503, 504, 511, 1233, 1449; x. 211; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2314.

[610] Cic. _Rep._ ii. 9. 16; 14. 26; Livy x. 6. 7; ep. lxxxix; Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsv._ iii. 398; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 334 f.; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 451; also his article in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2316 f. In adding a supernumerary (Dio Cass. xlii. 51. 4) Caesar set an example extensively followed by the principes; cf. Dio Cass. li. 20. 3; Wissowa, ibid. ii. 2317.

[611] As distinguished from magistrates they were privati; Cic. _Div._ i. 40. 89.

[612] Auctor Incertus (Huschke) p. 4: “Collegium augurum ordo hominum prudentum erat, qui prodigiis publicis praeerant;” cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 330.

[613] Cic. _Div._ ii. 34. 71 f.; cf. Livy xli. 18.

[614] Plut. _Q. R._ 99.

[615] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 20; _Phil._ xiii. 5. 12.

[616] They are never called flamines, and no flamen was attached to their office; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 451. The great sacerdotal colleges were more political than religious, and the college of augurs was the most thoroughly political of all; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 564.

[617] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 20; Dio Cass, xxxvii. 24 f.; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 199; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2325-30.

[618] Fest. 333. 9: “Spectio in auguralibus ponitur pro aspectione; (data est) et nuntiatio, qui omne ius auspiciorum habent, auguribus non spectio dumtaxat, quorum consilio rem gererent magistratus, ut possent impedire, nuntiando quaecumque vidissent; privatis spectio sine nuntiatione data est, ut ipsi auspicio rem gererent, non ut alios impedirent nuntiando.”—Valeton’s emendation, in _Mnemos._ xviii (1890). 455 f.

[619] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 21: “Quique agent rem duelli quique domi popularem, auspicium praemonento ollique obtemperanto;” cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 332.

[620] It generally happened that both the augural and pontifical colleges were filled by statesmen, so that Cicero could lay down the principle that the sacred and political offices were held by the same persons; _Div._ i. 40. 89; cf. Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2321.

[621] Livy iv. 7. 3; viii. 23. 14-17; xxiii. 31. 13; xlv. 12. 10; Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 83; _Leg._ ii. 12. 31; _N. D._ ii. 4. 11. A defect in the auspicia impetrativa was expressed by the formula “vitio tabernaculum captum esse” (Cic. _N. D._ ii. 4. 11; _Div._ i. 17. 33; Livy iv. 7. 3; Serv. _in Aen._ ii. 178), whereas the phrase “vitio creatum esse” or the like (Livy viii. 15. 6; 23. 14; xxiii. 31. 13; xlv. 12. 10; Plut. _Marcell._ 4) denoted a failure to take the auspices or to heed unfavorable omens; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2334. On the annulment of laws through augural decrees, see Cic. _Leg._ 8. 21; 12. 31; _Div._ ii. 35. 74. The decree was no more than an opinion, on which the senate acted; Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 88. n. 3; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 201.

[622] An example of such boldness was that of C. Flaminius; Livy xxi. 63; cf. Plut. _Marcell._ 4; Zon. vii. 20. For the case of Appius Claudius Pulcher, see Livy ep. xix; Polyb. i. 52.

[623] P. 112.

[624] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 21. Strictly it was the templum minus as distinguished from the templum magnum, a region of the sky; Varro, _L. L._ vii. 7; Fest. 157. 24; Serv. _in Aen._ i. 92.

[625] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86, 91. It was always rectangular, and was usually covered with a tent; Fest. 157. 24; Serv. _in Aen._ ii. 512; iv. 200; Nissen, _Templum_, 162 ff.; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 455; in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2337 ff.; Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xx (1892). 338-90; xxi. 62-91, 397-440; xxiii. 15-79; xxv. 93-144, 361-385; xxvi. 1-93; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 554 f.

[626] When wars were waged in the immediate vicinity of Rome the augurs could easily accompany the commander; cf. Livy iv. 18. 6; Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 21. But they certainly did not often go as far as Samnium; cf. Livy viii. 23. 16; ix. 38. 14. Though the augurs remained at Rome, the auspices followed the commander into the field; Livy xxii. 1. 6; p. 105, n. 1.

[627] Livy iii. 20. 6; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 201.

[628] Gell. xiii. 14. 1; Varro, _L. L._ v. 143; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 456, n. 1.

[629] Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2339.

[630] Serv. _in Aen._ vi. 197; Varro, _L. L._ vi. 53; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 456; also his article in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2339.

[631] Varro, _L. L._ v. 143; Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 21; _CIL._ vi. 1233; Wissowa, _Relig. u. Kult. d. Römer_, 456 and notes.

[632] Varro, _L. L._ v. 33.

[633] The elder Tiberius Gracchus vitiated the election of his successors in the consulship by forgetting to renew the auspices, when, after entering the city to preside over the senate, he recrossed the pomerium to hold the election in the Campus; Cic. _N. D._ ii. 4. 11; _Div._ i. 17. 33; cf. Tac. _Ann._ iii. 19.

[634] Fest. 250. 12; 157. 29; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i, 97, n. 1; Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xviii (1890). 209 f. The reason for the auspication on such occasions is differently stated by the authorities, but the interpretation given by Jordan-Hülsen, _Top. d. Stadt Rom_, 1. iii. 472 f., that this brook marked the boundary of the city auspices, seems preferable.

[635] Avispex, auspex, bird-seer; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2580.

[636] Livy i. 7. 1.

[637] Fest. ep. 64; Cic. _Div._ ii. 33. 71: “Haec certe quibus utimur, sive tripudio sive de caelo” (the auspicia tripudio being used in the military sphere, leaving only the auspicia de caelo for the city); cf. i. 16. 28; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 79, n. 1; Aust, _Relig. d. Römer_, 203; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2333.

[638] Dio Cass, xxxviii. 13. 3. Lightning from left to right especially in a clear sky was favorable; Dion. Hal. ii. 5. 2; Verg. _Aen._ ii. 692; vii. 141; ix. 628 (on the last, see Servius). A thunderclap was unfavorable to one entering office; xxiii. 31. 13; Plut. _Marcell._ 12; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 80, n. 2.

[639] Tac. _Hist._ i. 18.

[640] Cic. _Div._ ii. 18. 42.

[641] Cic. _Div._ ii. 35. 74; 18. 43; Dio Cass, xxxviii. 13. 3 f.

[642] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86: “Ubi noctu in templum censor auspicaverit atque de caelo nuntium erit, praeconi sic imperato ut viros vocet.”

[643] Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2585. The auguraculum was doubtless used only by the augurs, not as Mommsen (_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 103, n. 2) supposes, by the magistrates.

[644] Livy viii. 14. 12; Cic. _Vatin._ 10. 24: “In rostris, in illo inquam augurato templo ac loco.”

[645] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91; Val. Max. iv. 5. 3; Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 11; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2585 f.

[646] Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xxiii (1895). 28 ff.

[647] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86; Livy viii. 23. 15; x. 40. 2.

[648] The auspices had to be taken on the day the business was to be transacted, counting the day from midnight to midnight; Gell. iii. 2. 10; Consorinus xxiii. 4.

[649] Verrius, in Fest. 347. 17; Serv. _in Aen._ ix. 4; Statius, _Theb._ iii. 459. Romulus, however, stood upright; Dion. Hall. ii. 5. 1.

[650] P. 105.

[651] Silence was essential to perfect auspices; Fest. 348. 29; ep. 64; Livy viii. 23. 15; ix. 38. 14; x. 40. 2; Pliny, _N. H._ viii. 57. 223.

[652] Serv. _in Aen._ iii. 89; Livy i. 18. 9.

[653] Cf. Livy xli. 18. 14.

[654] Cf. Livy ix. 38. 15; 39. 1.

[655] Cf. p. 115, 118, n. 2.

[656] Livy v. 52. 15; ix. 38. 15 f.; 39. 1; Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 3; Cic. _Att._ ii. 7. 2; 12. 1; viii. 3. 3. Hoffmann, _Patric. u. pleb. Curien_, 29 ff., is of the opinion that the assembly which passed the lex curiata was not auspicated, his idea being that the lex curiata itself conferred the ius auspiciorum publicorum. There is no ground, however, for either of these suppositions.

[657] Cic. _N. D._ ii. 4. 11; Dion. Hal. vii. 59. 2. On the censorial auspication of the comitia centuriata for the lustrum, see Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 98, n. 6, supposes this to be the auspication of the censor’s entrance into office (cf. 81, n. 1), believing that assemblies which did not vote were unauspicated. But cf. p. 111, n. 1 below.

[658] Dio Cass. liv. 24. 1; Cic. _Fam._ vii. 30. 1; cf. Varro, _R. R._ iii. 2. 1.

[659] Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 3; 49. 5.

[660] This is shown by the _Commentarium Anquisitionis_ of M. Sergius, a quaestor, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91.

[661] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86 f.: “Ubi noctu in templum censor auspicaverit atque de caelo nuntium erit ... tum conventionem habet qui lustrum conditurus est.” Mommsen’s interpretation (_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 81, n. 2, 98, n. 6) which applies these auspices to the censor’s entrance upon his office seems forced. It is not necessary, however, to suppose that this magistrate had to renew the auspices for every day of the census-taking; Mommsen, ibid. i. 113, n. 4.

[662] The current view (cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 718; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 98; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 380; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1150) that no contio was auspicated appears therefore to require modification.

[663] Plut. _Pomp._ 52; _Cato Min._ 42.

[664] Ael. Don. in Terent. _Ad._ iv. 2. 8: “Qui malam rem nuntiat, obnuntiat, qui bonam, adnuntiat: nam proprie obnuntiare dicuntur augures, qui aliquid mali ominis scaevumque viderint.” In this late author (350 A.D.) obnuntiatio is ascribed to the augurs. When Cicero says to Antony (_Phil._ ii. 33. 83) “Augur auguri, consul consuli obnuntiasti,” he does it only to find fault with the proceeding; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 111, n. 2. These are the only instances known to us in which the distinction is not observed; Mommsen, ibid.; Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2335; Valeton, in _Mnemos._ xix (1891). 75 ff., 229 ff.; Bouché-Leclerq, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 582.

[665] Cato, _De sacr. comm._ in Fest. 234. 33: “Quod ego non sensi, nullum mihi vitium facit;” Pliny, _N. H._ xxviii. 2. 17; Serv. _in Aen._ xii. 259: “In oblativis auguriis in potestate videntis est, utrum id ad se pertinere velit, an refutet et abominetur;” cf. Cic. _Div._ ii. 36. 77; Wissowa, ibid. ii. 2335. An example of an evil omen privately reported is given by App. _B. C._ i. 30.

[666] Livy ix. 38. 16 with ch. 39. 1.

[667] Fest. 234. 27.

[668] P. 104; Cato, _De re mil._ in Fest. 214-7: “Magistratus nihil audent imperare, ne quid consul auspici peremat.”

[669] P. 114.

[670] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 32. 81: “Nos (augures) nuntiationem solum habemus, consules et reliqui magistratus etiam spectionem;” Varro, _Rer. hum._ xx, in Non. Marc. 92: “De caelo auspicari ius neminist praeter magistratum;” Fest. 333. 9 (quoted p. 106, n. 8). Madvig, _Röm. Staat._ i. 267, supposes that the augurs had both the spectio and the nuntiatio; but this view contradicts the clear statement of Cicero; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ 1. 109, n. 1. The fact is, as has been stated (p. 106), they had the spectio for their own functions only, and as assistants of the magistrates simply the nuntiatio.

[671] The formula used is “in auspicio esse;” Cic. _Att._ ii. 12. 1.

[672] Cic. _Leg._ ii. 8. 20 f.; iii. 4. 11; 19. 43; _N. D._ ii. 3. 8; _Div._ ii. 33. 71; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 339.

[673] P. 106 f.

[674] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 33. 83; _Div._ i. 40. 89: “Privati eodem sacerdotio praediti rem publicam religionum auctoritate rexerunt,” an exaggeration; _Leg._ ii. 12. 31; Livy i. 36. 6. In this capacity the augur did not look for omens with a view to reporting them, but merely announced those which came unexpectedly.

[675] _Phil._ ii. 33. 82 f.

[676] P. 115.

[677] Three were present at curiate assemblies; Cic. _Att._ iv. 17. 2; cf. ii. 7. 2.

[678] In this case the augur not only assisted with his special knowledge, but also acted as crier; Varro, _L. L._ vi. 95.

[679] Varro, _R. R._ iii. 2. 2; 7. 1.

[680] _Leg._ ii. 12. 31.

[681] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 32. 81.

[682] P. 104, 112.

[683] Gell. xiii. 15. 1; cf. Rubino, _Röm. Verf._ 79.

[684] Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 13: “Lurco tribunus pl. solutus est et Aelia et Fufia, ut legem de ambitu ferret;” _Sest._ 61. 129: “Decretum in curia ... ne quis de caelo servaret, ne quis moram ullam adferret” (that no one should watch the heavens or interpose any delay in the proceedings for the recall of Cicero). Both measures here referred to were so popular and the magistrates were so nearly unanimous in their support that the senate felt it could in these cases forestall the opposition of one or two opponents.

[685] In the famous case of Bibulus against Caesar, 59; Suet. _Caes._ 20; cf. Dio Cass. xxxviii. 4. 2 f.

[686] Proved by the fact that the watching of the sky by Bibulus should have annulled the arrogation of Clodius (Cic. _Dom._ 15. 39 f.; _Har. Resp._ 23. 48; _Att._ ii. 12. 2; 16. 2; _Prov. Cons._ 19. 45; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 113, n. 2), which was brought about by an act of the curiae under the presidency of the supreme pontiff. Any one competent to observe the heavens necessarily had the obnuntiatio.

[687] Cic. _Sest._ 36. 78. Probably obnuntiatio against tribunes is referred to by Cic. _Phil._ v. 3. 7 f. and by Ascon. 68 (the last is the abolition of the Livian laws of 91), but the obnuntiating magistrate is not known. In Cic. _Vatin._ 7. 17 (“Num quem post urbem conditam scias tribunum pl. egisse cum plebe, cum constaret servatum esse de caelo”) the principle is laid down that any one who has the right to obnuntiate may use this power against a tribune. The validity of the tribunician law for the interdiction of Cicero from fire and water was maintained on the ground that no one was then watching the sky; Cic. _Prov. Cons._ 19. 45.

[688] Cic. _Sest._ 37. 79; cf. 38. 83; _Phil._ ii. 38. 99; _Att._ iv. 3. 3 f.; 17. 4; _Q. Fr._ iii. 3. 2 (cf. Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 6; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 113, n. 3); Dio Cass, xxxix. 39; Plut. _Crass._ 16; App. _B. C._ ii. 18. 66 (cf. Cic. _Div._ i. 16. 29); iii. 7. 25.

[689] Cic. _Att._ iv. 9. 1.

[690] Cic. _Vatin._ 7. 16.

[691] Cic. _Dom._ 15. 39: “(Augures) negant fas esse agi cum populo, cum de caelo servatum sit.”

[692] Cic. _Att._ iv. 3. 3.

[693] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 32. 81.

[694] Cic. _Att._ iv. 3. 4. In like manner Bibulus, after obnuntiating in vain against Caesar’s agrarian law (p. 439), determined to remain at home and continually to watch the sky for the remainder of the year. This procedure invalidated all acts passed during that time by the assembly; Cic. _Dom._ 15. 39 f.; _Har. Resp._ 23. 48; _Prov. Cons._ 19. 45.

[695] This procedure too was followed by Bibulus; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 6. 1; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 82, n. 3.

[696] That they were two separate enactments, and not one complex statute by joint authors, is clearly indicated by Cic. _Har. Resp._ 27. 58: “Sustulit duas leges Aeliam et Fufiam;” _Sest._ 15. 33. Generally they are spoken of as separate laws, though Cicero occasionally, as _Vatin._ 5. 7, groups them in one. That they were plebiscites is held probable by Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 111, n. 4.

[697] When Cicero, _Vatin._ 9. 23, states that these laws survived the ferocity of the Gracchi, the audacity of Saturninus, etc., he places their origin in the times before the Gracchi; and when he speaks of their abolition, 58, he tells us that they had been in force about a hundred years (_Pis._ 5. 10).

[698] Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13.

[699] _Vatin._ 7. 18.

[700] Ibid. 9. 13.

[701] _Red. in Sen._ 5. 11; cf. _Har. Resp._ 27. 58; _Pis._ 4. 9: “Propugnacula murique tranquillitatis atque otii.” With other provisions of these statutes (cf. Cic. _Att._ i. 16. 13; Schol. Bob. 319 f.) the present discussion is not concerned. See further on these laws, p. 358 f. below.

[702] _Kleine Schriften_, i. 274 ff., 341; _Röm. Alt._ ii. 315, 477 f.

[703] _Att._ iv. 3. 4; 16. 5; _Phil._ ii. 32. 81.

[704] Cic. _Vatin._ 6. 15; 7. 18.

[705] Cic. _Red. in Sen._ 5. 11: “Legem tribunus pl. tulit, ne auspiciis obtemperaretur, ne obnuntiare concilio aut comitiis, ne intercedere liceret, ut lex Aelia et Fufia ne valeret;” _Har. Resp._ 27. 58; _Sest._ 15. 33; _Prov. Cons._ 19. 46; _Pis._ 4. 9; 5. 11; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. 5 f.; 14. 2; Ascon. 9; Schol. Bob. 319 f.

[706] Cic. _Att._ iv. 3. 4; 16. 5; _Phil._ ii. 32. 81; cf. Fröhlich, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 84; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 204 f.

[707] VIII. 23. 13 ff.

[708] Polyb. vi. 56. 6 ff.

[709] The former view was taken by Appius Claudius Pulcher, consul in 54 and author of a work _De disciplina augurali_ (Fest. 298. 26), and the latter by C. Claudius Marcellus, consul in 50, and by Cicero—all three being public augurs; Cic. _Div._ i. 47. 105; ii. 18. 42; 33. 70; 35. 75; Leg. ii. 13. 32 f.; _N. D._ i. 42. 118; in general _Div._ ii. At that time auspices were a mere pretence; the chicken omens were forced, and the celestial signs were not seen; Cic. _Div._ ii. 33 f., 71 f.; Dion. Hal. ii. 6. On the decline of augury and the auspices, see Wissowa, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ ii. 2315, 2333.

[710] Probably the jurist of that name who lived under Hadrian, and who is mentioned by Paulus, in _Dig._ v. 4. 3.

[711] XV. 27. 4: “Is qui non universum populum, sed partem aliquam adesse iubet, non comitia, sed concilium edicere debet.”

[712] For the purpose of the present discussion the plebeian assembly—that is, the assembly which convened under the tribunes of the plebs and which issued plebiscita—is assumed to be a gathering of only a part of the people. If it admitted patricians (p. 300), and if therefore there was no assembly comprised exclusively of plebeians, no argument would be needed to prove the error of the conventional distinction between comitia and concilium.

[713] In Livy iii. 16. 6, this meeting is called a concilium.

[714] P. 341.

[715] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 170, n. 8; _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 149, n. 3.

[716] _Mil._ 3. 7; cf. p. 122, n. 3 below.

[717] “Cum se in mediam contionem intulissent, abstinere suetus ante talibus conciliis.”

[718] His last citation on this point, Livy v. 47. 7 (“Vocatis ad concilium militibus”) has reference to the soldiers only—to a part of the people—and is therefore altogether unlike the others. For an explanation of it, see p. 135 f.

[719] A closely related question is whether concilium is ever restricted to the deliberative stage of a session preliminary to the division into voting units, with comitia limited in a corresponding manner to the final, voting stage of the session. A few passages, as examples (2) and (4), might be explained by such a conjecture, but others, as Livy iii. 13. 9 (“Virginio comitia habente conlegae appellati dimisere concilium”) prove the supposition impossible. Concilium denotes the assembly in its final as well as in its initial stage, voting as well as deliberating, whereas in ordinary political language contio is used to denote the merely listening or witnessing assembly, whether organized or unorganized, whether called to prepare the citizens for voting or for any other purpose.

[720] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 170, n. 8.

[721] Ibid. i. 195 f. It is true that the plebeian assembly came to be subject to the obnuntiatio (p. 117), but it would be absurd on this ground to suppose that Livy’s statement refers especially to gatherings of the kind.

[722] This statement admits that concilium here designates an assembly of the whole people; but Mommsen does not tell us why the word applies with greater propriety to the “patricio-plebeian” tribal assembly than to the centuriate assembly. For the true reason, see p. 137, n. 5.

[723] _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 149, n. 3.

[724] Undoubtedly the Caesar who was consul in 64 B.C.; Teuffel and Schwabe, _Rom. Lit._ i. 348. § 3; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, iii. 120, n. 6.

[725] “P. Lucullus et L. Annius, tribuni plebis, resistentibus collegis continuare magistratum nitebantur, quae dissensio totius anni comitia impediebat.”

[726] _De com. trib. et conc. pl. discr._ (1875); Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 149, n. 1; Kornemann, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 802. The correctness of my results is acknowledged in the _Thesaurus linguae latinae_, iv. 44 ff.

[727] “Tribunicii candidati compromiserunt HS quingenis in singulos apud M. Catonem depositis petere eius arbitratu, ut, qui contra fecisset, ab eo condemnaretur. Quae quidem comitia si gratuita fuerint, ut putantur, plus unus Cato potuerit quam omnes leges omnesque iudices.” The translation given above is Shuckburgh’s.

[728] “Permagni nostra interest te, si comitiis non potueris, at, declarato illo, esse Romae.”

[729] _Cf._ Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 482.

[730] “Venio ad comitia, sive magistratuum placet sive legum. Leges videmus saepe ferri multas. Omitto eas, quae feruntur ita, vix ut quini, et ii ex aliena tribu, qui suffragium ferant, reperiantur. De me, quem tyrannum atque ereptorem libertatis esse dicebat illa ruina rei publicae, dicit se legem tulisse. Quis est, qui se, cum contra me ferebatur, inisse suffragium confiteatur? cum autem de me eodem ex senatus consulto comitiis centuriatis ferebatur, quis est, qui non profiteatur se adfuisse et suffragium de salute mea tulisse? Utra igitur causa popularis debet videri, in qua omnes honestates civitatis, omnes aetates, omnes ordines una mente consentiunt, an in qua furiae concitatae tamquam ad funus rei publicae convolant?”

[731] “Ferri de singulis nisi centuriatis comitiis noluerunt. Descriptus enim populus censu, ordinibus, aetatibus plus adhibet ad suffragium consilii quam fuse in tribus convocatus. Quo verius in causa nostra vir magni ingenii summaque prudentia, L. Cotta, dicebat nihil omnino actum esse de nobis; praeter enim quam quod comitia ilia essent armis gesta servilibus, praeterea neque tributa capitis comitia rata esse posse neque ulla privilegii: quocirca nihil nobis opus esse lege, de quibus nihil omnino actum esset legibus. Sed visum est et vobis et clarissimis viris melius, de quo servi et latrones scivisse se aliquid dicerent, de hoc eodem cunctam Italiam quid sentiret, ostendere.”

[732] _Röm. Forsch._ i. 161, n. 53.

[733] See list of citations for electoral assemblies, p. 133.

[734] “Tribus locis significari maxime populi Romani iudicium ac voluntas potest, contione, comitiis, ludorum gladiatorumque consessu.”

[735] “Qui (optimates) non populi concessu, sed suis comitiis hoc sibi nomen adrogaverunt.”

[736] “Iubet enim tribunum plebis, qui eam legem tulerit, creare decemviros per tribus septemdecim, ut, quern novem tribus fecerint, is decemvir sit. Hic quaero, quam ob causam initium rerum ac legum suarum hinc duxerit, ut populus Romanus suffragio privaretur.... Etenim cum omnes potestates, imperia, curationes ab universo populo Romano proficisci convenit, tum eas profecto maxime, quae constituuntur ad populi fructum aliquem et commodum, in quo et universi deligant, quem populo Romano maxime consulturum putent, et unus quisque studio et suffragio suo viam sibi ad beneficium impetrandum munire possit. Hoc tribuno plebis potissimum venit in mentem, populum Romanum universum privare suffragiis, paucas tribus non certa condicione iuris, sed sortis beneficio fortuito ad usurpandam libertatem vocare;” cf. _Imp. Pomp._ 15. 44; 22. 64.

[737] _Sest._ 51. 109.

[738] P. 301 f.

[739] “Mihi quidem eae verae videntur opiniones, quae honestae, quae laudabiles, quae gloriosae, quae in senatu, quae ad populum, quae in omni coetu concilioque profitendae sint;” cf. _Leg._ iii. 19. 44, quoted p. 127.

[740] The writers not included in this discussion, as Nepos and the poets, contain nothing at variance with the results here reached. Gudeman’s article on Concilium in the _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 44-8, in most respects excellent, still retains the groundless distinction between republican and imperial usage.

[741] It will suffice here to mention the elder Cato; Livy xxxix. 40. 6: “Si ius consuleres, peritissumus;” Cic. _Senec._ 11. 38: “Ius augurium, pontificium, civile tracto.” On the subject in general, see Pais, _Stor. d. Rom._ I. i. 68 and notes.

[742] For citations of other authors, see Gudeman, in _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 45.

[743] All three passages are quoted, p. 130 f.

[744] The classification of comitial functions into elective, legislative, and judicial follows Cicero, _Div._ ii. 35. 74: “Ut comitiorum vel in iudiciis populi vel in iure legum vel in creandis magistratibus.” In this volume, accordingly, “legislative” refers not merely to law-making in the narrower sense, but also to the passing of resolutions on all affairs, domestic and foreign, including necessarily the lex de bello indicendo.

[745] For separate lists of the elective and the legislative and judicial comitia, see VI (below), where will be found sufficient illustrations of (_b_).

[746] Only one instance of concilium as an elective body has been found; _Lex Iulia Municipalis_, in _CIL._ i. 206. 132: the election of magistrates “comitieis conciliove.” The explanation is that the usage of some of the Italian municipia differed from the Roman, and the author of the law had to adapt his language to local custom. With this exception the inscriptions are in line with the literature.

[747] P. 124.

[748] Discussed on p. 123 f.

[749] P. 132.

[750] Ibid.

[751] Ibid.

[752] Fest. ep. 38: “Concilium dicitur a concalando, id est vocando.” It is accepted by Curtius, _Griech. Etym._ 139; Vaniček, _Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb._ 143; Walde, _Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 136. But Corssen, _Beitr. z. ital. Sprachk._ 41 f., rejects this etymology on the ground that it does not harmonize with all the meanings of the word and of its derivative “conciliare”; also Gudeman, in _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 44. Corssen, analyzing it into con-cil-iu-m, and connecting -cil- with a root kal-, “to cover,” supposes the original meaning to be simply “a joining together,” “a union,”—giving that signification which he considers primary. It is equally reasonable, however, to assume the development to be (1) “a calling together,” (2) “a meeting for consultation,” (3) “a natural union of individuals of any kind.” In the third sense it is applied perhaps figuratively to inanimate things, especially the union of atoms to form objects, by Lucretius i. 183, 484, 772, 1082; ii. 120; iii. 805; cf. Ovid, _Met._ i. 710.

[753] The meaning consultation, deliberation, clearly appears in Plaut. _Mil._ 597 ff.:

“Sinite me priu’ perspectare, ne uspiam insidiae sient
Concilium quod habere volumus. Nam opus est nunc tuto loco
Unde inimicus ne quis nostri spolia capiat consili.
Nam bene consultum inconsultumst, si id inimicis usuist,
Neque potest quin, si id inimicis usuist, opsit tibi;
Nam bene (consultum) consilium surrupitur saepissume.”

Also in 249, 1013: “Socium tuorum conciliorum et participem consiliorum”; Cic. _Rep._ 17. 28: “Doctissimorum hominum in concilio”; Caes. _B. C._ i. 19; Nep. _Epam._ 3. 5; Verg. _Aen._ ii. 89 (or consiliis); iii. 679; v. 75; xi. 234; Livy 1. 21. 3; see also II (_a_), p. 132, and Forcellini, _Lat. Lex._ ii. 347. It is never a chance crowd; _Diff._ ed. Beck, p. 47. 43: “Concilium est convocata multitudo, conventus ex diversis locis populum in unum contrahit, coetus fortuitu congregatur.” The ancients understood this to be the meaning of the word; Varro _L. L._ vi. 43: “A cogitatione concilium, inde consilium,” an unsuccessful though instructive guess; Fest. ep. 38: “Concilium dicitur a populo consensu;” Isid. _Etym._ vi. 16. 12: “Concilium a communi intentione ductum, quasi communicilium.” This interpretation is supported by several glosses; φιλοποιεία (_Corp. Gloss. Lat._ ii. 471. 49), συμβούλιον (ibid. ii. 107. 5), coenobulium, caenobulium (ibid. iv. 321. 27). Lastly our derivative “council” points in the same direction. The meaning “deliberative assembly” has been accepted by Gudeman, in _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 46, who has added citations from the whole range of Latin literature.

[754] Lodge, _Lex. Plaut._ i. 288; Gudeman, _Thes. ling. lat._ iv. 45.

[755] Cf. Gudeman, ibid. iv. 48.

[756] Cf. n. 1 and p. 132, II (_a_).

[757] P. 143.

[758] P. 132.

[759] The notion sometimes expressed that the word applies more appropriately to a body of representatives of the component states of a league is without foundation, though it is true that some foreign concilia are of this character.

[760] P. 133.

[761] Ibid.

[762] P. 134.

[763] Thus is explained a phenomenon for which Mommsen could find no adequate reason—that the so-called “patricio-plebeian” tribal assembly was more apt to be called concilium than were the comitia centuriata. The deliberative feature of the concilium also explains the close approach of the word to contio—another fact which Mommsen knew but did not understand.

[764] Cf. p. 131. Notwithstanding all the confidence reposed by the moderns in this utterance of Laelius, ‘debet’ suggests that he is proposing an ideal distinction rather than stating an actual usage.

[765] P. 286, 292, 301 f.

[766] Corssen, _Ausspr._ i. 51; ii. 683; Vaniček, _Griech.-lat. etym. Wörterb._ 184; Walde, _Lat. etym. Wörterb._ 140; cf. _SC de Bacch._ in _CIL._ i. 196. 23: “In conventionid”; Fest. ep. 113: “In conventione in contio”; _Commentaria Consularia_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 88; _Corp. Gloss. Lat._ v. 280. 13; vi. 270, s. v.

[767] _Sat._ i. 16. 29: “Contra Iulius Caesar XVI auspiciorum libro negat nundinis contionem advocari posse, id est cum populo agi, ideoque nundinis Romanorum haberi comitia non posse;” cf. p. 125 f.

[768] _Att._ iv. 3. 4: “Contio biduo nulla.”

[769] Cf. Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 3. 13: “Nundinis urbem revisitabant et ideo comitia nundinis habere non licebat, ne plebs avocaretur;” Fest. 173. 30-3.

[770] Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 1; _Lex Gen._ 81, in _CIL._ ii. Supplb. 5439: “In contione palam luci nundinis.” Another illustration is the statement of Gellius, xv. 27. 3, that wills were made in comitia calata, in a contio of the people. Mommsen’s assumption (_Röm. Staatsr._ i. 199 and n. 3) that no contio was held on a market day as a rule, to which there were exceptions, is altogether unsatisfactory. The passages cited refer to a law, not to a mere custom to be observed or not at the will of the magistrate. The contio which met on a market day must have been essentially different in nature from the contio which was forbidden for market days; cf. also Varro, _L. L._ vi. 93; Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 11.

[771] The calata comitia curiata is termed contio by Gell. xv. 27. 3: “Quod calatis comitiis in populi contione fieret.” Cicero, _Rab. Perd._ 4. 11 (cf. 5. 15) speaks of the witnessing comitia centuriata as contio, and the lustral centuriate assembly was similarly termed; _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 87: “Conventionem habet qui lustrum conditurus est.” A widespread idea (held by Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 379; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1149; Soltau, _Altröm. Volksversamml._ 37, and others) that all contiones were unorganized is therefore wrong.

[772] Fest. ep. 38.

[773] Cic. _Vatin._ i. 3; _Att._ xiv. 11. 1; 20. 3; xv. 2. 3; _Fam._ ix. 14. 7; x. 33. 2; Livy xxiv. 22. 1; Gell. xviii. 7. 6 f.; _Gloss. Corp. Lat._ ii. 114. 25; 269. 27; 575. 8.

[774] P. 150.

[775] Examples of military contiones are Caes. _B. G._ v. 48; vii. 52 f.; Livy i. 16. 1; ii. 59. 4 ff.; vii. 36. 9; viii. 7. 14; 31 f.; xxvi. 48. 13; xxx. 17. 9; xli. 10. 6; see also p. 202 f.

[776] Dion. Hal. iv. 37; v. 11. 2; Plut. _Popl._ 3; the candidate, too, for the regal office; Livy i. 35. 2.

[777] Cic. _Leg._ iii. 4. 10: “Cum populo ... agendi ius esto consuli, praetori, magistro populi equitumque eique, quem patres prodent consulum rogandorum ergo; tribunisque, quos sibi plebes creassit ... ad plebem, quod oesus erit, ferunto;” Varro, _L. L._ vi. 93: “Censor, consul, dictator, interrex potest (exercitum urbanum vocare).”

[778] Schol. Bob. 330; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ I. p. xix. This passage proves that a quaestor could call a contio in his own right; and the same holds probable for the aediles.

[779] It is necessary to include them in the general statement of Messala, in Gell. xiii. 16 (17). 1, that the lower magistrates had the right; cf. the note above.

[780] Fest. ep. 38: “Contio significat conventum, non tamen alium, quam eum, qui a magistratu vel a sacerdote publico per praeconem convocatur.” The sacerdos is the rex sacrorum as well as the supreme pontiff. It was necessary for the latter to hold judicial contiones; p. 259, 327. For the former, see Varro, _L. L._ vi. 28; Macrob. _Sat._ i. 15. 9-12; Serv. _in Aen._ viii. 654. Strictly the contiones of the rex sacrorum were calata comitia curiata; p. 155.

[781] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 193. For a contio of the Xviri leg. scrib. see Livy iii. 34. 1. On the duumviri for presiding at the election of consuls in 43, see Dio Cass. xlvi. 45. 3. In the opinion of the Romans the tribunus celerum, an officer under the kings, possessed the right; Livy i. 59. 7; Dion. Hal. iv. 71. 6; 75. 1; Serv. _in Aen._ viii. 646; Pomponius, in _Dig._ i. 2. 2. 3: “Exactis regibus lege tribunicia.” These authors suppose that L. Junius Brutus held an assembly in the capacity of tribunus celerum, whereas Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 25. 46, speaks of him as a private citizen.

[782] Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 193. But the promagistrate had a right to attend and to address a contio called for him outside the walls by a competent person; cf. Vell. i. 10. 4; p. 426 below.

[783] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 90.

[784] Livy xliii. 16. 5.

[785] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 93.

[786] For the quaestor, see _Com. Anq._ in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91 f. For the curule aediles, Cic. _Verr._ i. 12. 36; v. 67. 173; Livy x. 23. 11; 31. 9; 47. 4; xxxv. 10. 11; 41. 9; Val. Max. vi. 1. 7; viii. 1. damn. 7; Pliny, _N. H._ xviii. 6. 42. For the plebeian aediles, Livy x. 23. 13; xxv. 2. 9; xxxiii. 42. 10; Gell. x. 6. 3; p. 290, 325 below; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 196, n. 2 f.

[787] Messala, _De Auspiciis_, in Gell. xiii. 16 (15). 1.

[788] Messala, _De Auspiciis_, in Gell. xiii. 16 (15). 1.

[789] Dion. Hal. vii. 16. 4; 17. 5; 22. 2; x. 41; Cic. _Sest._ 37. 79; Livy iii. 11. 8; xxv. 3 f.; xliii. 16. 7-9; (Aur. Vict.) _Vir. Ill._ 65. 5; cf. Lange, _Röm. Alt._ i. 604, 826; p. 266 below.

[790] Cic. _Fam._ v. 2. 7: Q. Metellus Nepos forbade Cicero to address the people in contio on the occasion of his retiring from the consulship—a prohibition which Cicero declares was never before heard of. For another case, see Dio Cass. xxxviii. 12. 3; Lange, _Röm. Alt._ ii. 716; iii. 299 f.

[791] Lange’s supposition (_Röm. Alt._ ii. 716) that by the holding of a contio a tribune could prevent a patrician magistrate’s convoking comitia is not well founded. Livy, iv. 25. 1 (“Tribuni plebi adsiduiis contionibus prohibendo consularia comitia”), does not intend to express a constitutional principle; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 289; Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1150.

[792] Cic. _Rab. Perd._ 4. 11: “Tune, qui civibus Romanis in contione ipsa carnificem, qui vincla adhiberi putas oportere, qui in Campo Martio comitiis centuriatis auspicato in loco crucem ad civium supplicium defigi et constitui iubes, an ego, qui funestari contionem contagione carnificis veto ... qui castam contionem, sanctum Campum ... defendo servari oportere;” cf. 5. 15.

[793] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 32.

[794] Fest. 241. 29; Livy xxii. 57. 3; Suet. _Dom._ 8; Dio Cass. lxxix. 9. 3 f.; cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ ii. 56, n. 4.

[795] Cf. Livy xli. 15. 10; _Lex Gen._ 81, in _CIL._ ii. Supplb. 5439.

[796] Livy iii. 66. 2; v. 11. 15; 12. 1; xxxviii. 52. 4; 53. 6. On the judicial contio, see p. 259.

[797] Livy xliii. 16. 5.

[798] XIII. 16. 13.

[799] Cic. _Att._ ii. 21. 5; _Verr._ i. 15. 44; _Sest._ 12. 29; _Rep._ i. 4. 7; Nep. _Tim._ iv. 3; _Them._ i. 3; Livy ii. 2. 4; 24. 4-6; 27. 2; iii. 31. 2; 41. 5 ff.; 54. 6; 67 f.; iv. 15; xli. 10. 13.

[800] Livy x. 13, 21; (Cic.) _Herenn._ iv. 55. 68. A contio, described by Livy vi. 39-41, was held by the tribunes Licinius and Sextius in the ninth year of their tribunate, after the day of election for the following year had been set. This meeting however was as much for the consideration of the proposed laws as of their own candidacy, and hence could not be thought of as strictly pertaining to the election. Mommsen’s opinion (_Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 392, n. 1) that stories of the kind prove nothing does not accord with his own general attitude toward the sources for the earlier history of Rome.

[801] P. 470.

[802] Cic. _Sest._ 50. 107 f.; _Red. in Sen._ 10. 26; _Pis._ 15. 34.

[803] P. 259 f.

[804] Livy xxxix. 17. 4 f.; Plut. _Aem._ 30; Pseud. Sall. _Declam. in Cat._ 19; cf. the _Twelve Tables_, in _Censorin._ 24. 3.

[805] Livy xlii. 33. 2.

[806] Besides the Forum or Comitium (Dion. Hal. ix. 41. 4) it sometimes met in the Area Capitolina (Cic. Frag. A. vii. 49; Livy xxxiii. 25. 6; xxxiv. 1. 4), or in the Circus Flaminius (Livy xxvii. 21. 1; Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 1; _Sest._ 14. 33). In general, see Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ iv. 1151; Karlowa, _Röm. Rechtsgesch._ i. 380.

[807] Cic. _Flacc._ 7. 16 (contrasting the sitting contio of the Greeks); _Brut._ 84. 289; _Leg. Agr._ ii. 5. 13; _Acad. Pr._ 47. 144; _Tusc._ iii. 20. 48; _Orat._ 63. 213. But probably the contio in the Flaminian circus was seated; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 396, n. 3.

[808] P. 107, 110. Although the tribune of the plebs did not auspicate their assemblies, they like other magistrates occupied a templum during the meeting; Livy ii. 56. 10.

[809] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro _L. L._ vi. 86. For the summons by the consul, see the _Commentaria Consularia_, ibid. 88; and by the quaestor, _Commentarium Anquisitionis_ of M. Sergius, ibid. 91.

[810] Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86.

[811] _Censoriae Tabulae_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 87: “Praeco in templo primum vocat, postea de moeris item vocat;” cf. 90 f.; Livy xxxix. 32. 11; Cic. _Fam._ vii. 30. 1.

[812] Documents, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 86, 91.

[813] Livy xxv. 3. 17; Cic. _Sest._ 50. 107 f.

[814] Caesar, a praetor and friend of the presiding tribune, sat with him on the porch of the temple of Castor and Pollux—used on that occasion as the speaker’s platform; Plut. _Cat. Min._ 27; Cic. _Vatin._ 10. 24: “In rostris, in illo, inquam, augurato templo ac loco ... quo auctoritatis exquirendae causa ceteri tribuni pl. principes civitatis producere consuerunt.”

[815] Documents, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 88, 91; cf. 93.

[816] Livy xxxix. 15. 1: “Consules in rostra escenderunt, et contione advocata cum solemne carmen precationis, quod praefari, priusquam populus adloquantur, magistratus solent, peregisset consul, ita coepit: Nulli umquam contioni, quirites, tam non solum apta sed etiam necessaria haec sollemnis deorum comprecatio fuit.” The prayer was made at the opening of elective as well as of deliberative assemblies (Cic. _Mur._ 1; Plin. _Paneg._ 63) by plebeian as well as by patrician magistrates; (Cic.) _Herenn._ iv. 55. 68. Every speech addressed to the people began with a prayer; Serv. _in Aen._ xi. 301; Cic. _Caecil._ 13. 43; Gell. xiii. 23. 1; Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ iii. 390, n. 2.

[817] P. 430, 439.

[818] Caesar first brought his agrarian bill before the senate; and calling on the senators one after another by name to say whether they found any fault with it, he promised to amend it or to drop it altogether, if any clause proved unsatisfactory to any member. As the senators would not debate the merits of the proposal, but did all they could to delay its consideration, he offered the bill to the assembly without their consent; and for the remainder of his consulship he brought no more bills before the senate, but referred them directly to the people; Dio Cass, xxxviii. 2-4; cf. p. 148.

[819] Dion. Hal. v. 11. 2; Plut. _Popl._ 3. Besides the king it was supposed that the interrex and the tribunus celerum alone were competent; Dion. Hal. iv. 71. 6; 75. 1. The ancient writers seem to have been brought to this conception by a desire to contrast the despotism of the monarchy with the liberty of the republic. But according to Livy, i. 16. 5 ff., and Cicero, _Rep._ ii. 10. 20 (cf. Mommsen, _Röm. Staatsr._ i. 200, n. 6) Proculus Julius, a private person, made a speech in a contio of the regal period; and in judicial assemblies speaking by private persons was necessary; cf. Livy i. 26. For the general usage in the primitive European assembly, see p. 169.

[820] In presenting his agrarian bill to the people Caesar first called on his colleague, despite the fact that the latter was known to be opposed to the measure; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 4. 1.

[821] _Commentarium Anquisitionis_, in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91. Clodius, tribune of the plebs, brought forward the two consuls into the Flaminian circus, where they gave their sanction and formal approval of all the tribune had been saying against Cicero; Cic. _Sest._ 14. 33. On this occasion the consul Piso condemned Cicero’s consulship for its cruelty; Cic. _Pis._ 6. 14; _Red. in Sen._ 6. 13. In 44 Cannutius, a tribune of the plebs, introduced into a contio the consul Mark Antony, who spoke regarding the assassins of Caesar; Cic. _Fam._ xii. 3. 2. Earlier instances are Livy iii. 64. 6; iv. 6. 1 f. A tribune brought the augurs into a contio, to ask of them information concerning the auspices; Cic. _Dom._ 15. 40.

[822] Although the senators were invited to sit on the platform (_Comm. Anq._ in Varro, _L. L._ vi. 91), speaking by them was exceptional; in the assembly they were no more than eminent private persons; Dio Cass, xxxviii. 4. 4; cf. ch. 5.

[823] E.g. Cic. _Att._ iv. 1. 6: “Habui contionem. Omnes magistratus praesentes praeter unum praetorem et duos tribunos dederunt.” In a certain contio a tribune asked Scipio Aemilianus what he thought of the conduct of Ti. Gracchus; Val. Max. vi. 2. 3. At the suggestion of the consul Piso, Fufius, a tribune, brought Pompey upon the platform and asked his opinion as to the selection of jurors for a particular case; Cic. _Att._ i. 14. 1; cf. Ascon. 50. The tribune M. Servilius invited Cicero to speak in a contio in support of C. Cassius (Cic. _Fam._ xii. 7. 1), and it was in response to an invitation of another tribune, P. Appuleius (_Phil._ vi. 1), that he delivered the sixth _Philippic_. Other references to tribunician invitations are Cic. _Att._ xiv. 20. 5; Dio Cass. xlv. 6. 3.

[824] Ascon. 38.

[825] Sall. _Iug._ 33 f.