ADVANCEMENT IN RANK UNDER THE ROMAN REPUBLIC AS A REWARD FOR THE SOLDIER AND THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Citation preview

ADVANCEMENT IN RANK UNDER THE ROMAN REPUBLIC AS A REWARD FOR THE SOLDIER AND THE'PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

by Helen Elizabeth Russell

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Bryn Mawr College April 10, 1953

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

ADVANCEMENT IN RANK UNDER THE ROMAN REPUBLIC 1

[

j

AS A REWARD FOR THE SOLDIER AND THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Helen si 'Bnseell, Ph. O. Bryn Mawr foliage, 1950

The purpose of this study is to investigate the nature of rewards granted in Republican Bone to two types of public servants - the especially deserving military man. and the public prosecutor.

Perhaps the most Important aspect of

these awards, as this study tries to show, is the fact that they brought to their winners some advancement in rank. As a background to the practices of Republican Rome, a preliminary chapter is devoted to an examination of awards offered at Athens.

There, rewards to state

benefactors consisted mainly of exemptions from certain civic duties.

There is

some similarity to Roman practices in that both at Athens and at Rome the rewards indicate that in return for one service to the: state another service or function or office was to be considered as fulfilled.

Since Athenian political life did

not include the Roman conception of a cursus honorum and the differences^between the two political systems/are sufficiently great, the information about Greek practices is offered not as a precedent for Roman awards but rather to show that both states considered benefactors of this sort worthy of state awards. The awards offered to soldiers in Rome are discussed by both Pliny and Gellius, but it is a passage in Livy (23*23.5) which indicates that the corona civlca brought a political advantage to its holder.

To teat the practice suggested by livy, the

careers of the recipients of the corona civica were examined. Some are too remote or obscure to provide either verification or contradiction.

Two uinners of the

civic Crown, however, H. Aemllias Lepidus, consul of 187 B.C., and C. Julius Caesar, had careers which included inregularities which have been much discussed.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

4

For Eepidus, the point at liesue is his exact status (i.e., whether he was a senator or ..b&i) la 201 B.C*. when, before holding * eurule magistracy, he served on an cbh bassyin the company of two consulsres who sere also eae-eensors* For Caesar, there is the discrepancy between the usually accepted date of jiie birth and the date at which he held the eurule offices*. In the careers of both Eapidus and Caessr* the award of the civic crown with its accompanying advantages may be an explanation for the apparent irregularities. for information aboutthe public prosecutor, the rewards mentioned in various laws ware considered*

brdr a'period of tine, the rewards, known as oraemia leaia.

came to include citizenship fbrthe,non-oitixen, the right of voting in the tribe bf the accused, and the assimilation of the condemned man's rank*

Such towards

probably served as incentives for the numerous accusations and counter-accusations of the last years of the Republic* A consideration of the careers of the men involve^ in public prosecutions is revealing*

Cicero's prosecution of Verres,

besides being an opportunity to enhance his reputation as a lawyer, provided C^pero with Verres* praetorian rank* Other young men, not known to have held office but clearly present in the senate, may have attained this dlanitas through praania led* in prosecutions which they are known to have undertaken successfully* The study of advancement in rank as a rewards for the soldier and the public prosecutor sheds soqte light also on the common Imperial practice of bestowing ornaments of office on men who had never held office*

The increasingly frequent

grants of ornaments, even to questionable groups like hie delatores and favorite imperial freedmen, probably has as a precedent the sober Republican consideration that a man who had served the state with distinction in war or the lawcourts should have a reward which was not only worthy of his service but advantageous to him in political life*

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

INTRODUCTION

Bestowal of rewards upon citizens who have deserved well of the . < state is, Cicero says, the duty of a grateful people:

"populi grati

est praemiis adficere bene meritos de re publica cives" (Mil. 82)•

At

Rome two classes of men were considered to be especially deserving of rewards - the soldier and the public prosecutor.

Hippodamus of Miletus,

the famous architect of the fifth century,^ had already associated the soldier and the public prosecutor in proposing rewards for state bene­ factors, in his constitution for an ideal state:

he advocated honors

for those finding out something to the state's advantage and public support for the children of those who had died in war: exCQei Ttepl t u v

"e.Ti &£ vojiov

eipiaxovxwv t i t ^j -rcoXei aop,q>epov, o h u g

T O Y X O V w a t ttjj,T)Gf xal toig

naml

t uv

ev Tcp iroXepq) T e X e u T w v -

tgjv ex brnioatoo Y ^ ve243) • The privilege of axeXeia (Dem. 20, 75 ff.)»

was inherited by his son Ctesiphon

The inscriptions in honor of Conon and Chabrias

quoted by Demosthenes (24*180) make it clear that the rewards were given for military success:

"Kovuv

quo

xtjc vaup,axtas

"Xapptac aito xrjg ev

*poc iJCaxe&atjxowCoos". vaup,axiag".

Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

13 Timotheus, the son of Conon, shared part, at least, of his father's honors.

For his exploits against the LacedaaatDhians:in

375, Timotheus received the honor of a statue in the agora next to 7 that of his father. This honor was unique, according to Nepos; (Timo. 2,3):

"cuius laudis ut memoria maneret, Timotheo publics

statuam in foro posuerunt.

qui honos huic uni ante id tempus

contigit ut, cum patri populus statuam posuisset, filio quoque daret."

Whether Timotheus like his father received the privilege

of axeXeta

we do not: know.

Shortly afterwards, the general Iphicrates was honored by the Athenians for his defeat of the Lacedaemonians in 371/0 (Aesch. 3,243)• Iphicrates received a bronze statue, the privilege of aLTtjaiq

and

other unspecified awardss "XaXxr|£ etxovoc ooaf]S itap*&p,Tv * Iquxpdxei xal aiT^aeae ev itpu't&veuo xal 5wpeiwv xal xipuiv aXXuv, 23,136).

fct'ac eu6atp,wv e x e l v o c ’

The awards"Jxopeta xal xip,al a U a i "

cluded the privilege of

(Dem. 23,130j also might have in­

axeXe la which had been given to Conon and

Chabrias• The honors voted by the Athenians in Lemnos to Komeas who had been hipparch there were confirmed later by a decree at Athens 2 g (IG 2 672): " x a l e i v a t aoxwt xupCag ^AQqvTjatv Tag b u peac x a c 6e6ojxevas

xuv

; l v xe,T vrjawt x a x o i x o d v T w v " .

The honors werew a£xr)ai£ ev rcpuxaveCui xal npoebpta ev naai xoie ayScri Ttje TtoXewg-, eitei&av xac euGuvac &wi"

(11. 34-35).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

14 From the individual cases just cited, it is clear that the Athenians regarded military men as worthy of honors which amounted to advancement in political rank.

There was apparently no established

program for assigning aw»rds which might include cfiTTiaig, x p o e d p t a and aTe X e ta

in any combination.

Aeschines aaemstyto;.uba'Luni.que

in criticizing the practice of rewarding warriors (2,80): "xal Y®P rac

eixovag

tffTaTe, xal Tag Ttpoe&ptag xal Toug

xal xag ev •rcpoTavelcp a t T p a e t g e ^ P n villv a 7taYYeX e i X a c u v ,

btboTe,

oo Tolg

aTeooXoL aYa 9 o t rt.

Demosthenes

approved of the principle of rewards for benefactors and considered it one of the strong points of the Athenian state (20,154).

Recipi­

ents of these awards were considered to have pot only great honor but special influence in the state (Aesch. 3,196). were apparently not uncommon.

Such rewards

Aesbhines (3*1^9)noted that rewards

were more freqpent in his day than formerly.

According to Demosthenes

(20,141) an excessive number was available to those who had served well:

"TotfaoTai & 7teppoXal tuv bwpetuv atg a v x ’eu

notei itapeaxTl^nt". Although in the speech against Leptines

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

15 Demosthenes contended that actually very few men held the right of

axeXeia,

it must be remembered that here Demosthenes is arguing

against the annulment of that privilege and that it therefore serves his purpose to minimize the number of existing grants.

that Leptines had brought in a bill to abolish axeXeia

The fact

suggests

that the privilege was perhaps more common than Demosthenes implied. The earliest known benefactors rewarded by the state were Harmodius and Aristogeiton, the slayers of Hipparchus.. Their kin and descendants possessed immunity from contributions and liturgies (except for trierarchies), honorary seats at festivals and games, and free meals in the Prytaneion (Isaeus 5,47).

They were also

specifically exempted from the proposal of Leptines (Dem. 20,127 ff.). It is impossible to ascertain whether the third century law that I have previously cited had been formulated as early as the sixth

century, but a phrase in i t

xrjv eX eo$eptav e7ravop0u>aavxae"

is reminiscent of the service of Harmodius and Aristogeiton.

It is

also possible that the honors voted to them may have set the precedent for granting honors to state benefactors. Another early benefactor of the state who received special honor was Aristeides the Just, frequently associated with Themistocles, 9 Miltiades and Pericles as a national hero. The service for which Aristeides was rewarded was the fair and just assessment of the tribute of the subject states of Athens (Andoc. 4,11; Aesch. 1,25). '

The

reward granted to him brought honor to him but actually benefited his descendants:

his daughters were married from the prytaneion at

public expense with a dowry of 3000 drachmae for each one, his son

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

)

16

received a pension for life and his grand-daughter received public maintenance (Plut. Arist. 27).

The benefits for Aristeides'

children recall the terms of the law already cited: "eiup,£XetaQat auxwv xal eyyovcjv rrjv £ o u X t|V xal

tov

& % iov,

xal Q u y a x e p w v etg e y & o a i v tov &T)jxov xcpotxa

S i 6 ovat

be

oar|v av

PouXT)TaL."

A reward of

ItTeXeia was givsn by Athens to another benefactor,

Aristophon of Hazenia (Dem. 20,149).

Aristophon had probably per-

10 formed some service in connection with the expulsion of the Thirty. Paradoxically, almost fifty years later, Aristophon was appointed a Gfuv&ixoc:

for the law by which Leptines was attempting to nullify

all grants of axeXfi la except that belonging to the descendants of Harmodius and Aristogeiton (Dem. 20,146).

Aristophon was nearly

11 eighty years old at that time. Two other Athenian citizens whose names are not known were also rewarded for acting in the interest of the Athenian demos during the rule of the Thirty.

Two brothers, in defiance of Lysander's order,

brought corn into the city;

later the citizens voted them crowns and

the honor of being proclaimed in front of the statues of the eponymous heroes "uc pxydXuv dya0wv a t x i o i S v t b q " (Isoc. 18,61).

Although

neither of the honors brought any advancement in rank as it has been defined in this discussion, the reason for the rewards is interesting. Almost the same phrase appears in the third century inscription already mentioned (IG 2

832) in honor of Timosthenes: "tcoXXwv

xal |ieydXwv ayaQwv a i T i o c " .

Only the first part of the

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

17 inscription, giving tha law authorizing the honors, is intact.

The

fragmentary section probably gave details about Timosthenes1 services ahdttheee&tent; oftfchei award.

If Timosthenes received

the honors outlined in the law (cf. supra p.9), he received dlTTjatg

for himself as well as other benefits for his children

and descendants. Rewards for public service were also given aarly in the third century to Philippides, the son of Philomelos (Kirchner, 14361).

12

An inscription

records the grant: *etvai S/adxwi xai e»t-

Yovwv'del'xSi iirpeapuTOTwi criTricriG ev TtpuTaveCwi. xal xpoe5p£av ev icadx t o Ic dywotv o i g The privileges of crtTTjaiS and

noXic TiQijcriv"

(11.45 ff.).

7ipoe6pta were bestowed upon

Philippides and the eldest of his descendants in any generation. Philippides, who was archon basileus at the time of the decree in 293/2, had freely employed his enormous wealth (Dem. 21,208.215) in the interests of the statej

the many liturgies he performed were

recounted in the honorary decree; (11. 18 ff.). A few years later, 287/6, the Athenians passed a decree (IG 2,657) in honor of Philippides the poet, the son of Philokles (Kirchner 14356). The wording of the decree reveals ther.Athenians;1..!eagerness*,to be- r'e«? cognized as a people who extended to its benefactors public expressions of gratitude worthy of the services performed: *o«w£ ov odv ay^aQel auxei &e&ox9ai 'tet Ppu\iEt...eiracveaoi ©t\iw«x&r|v © i X o x X e o o g Ke^oXX^Gev apeTrfjc £ vexa

The rewards, as in the case of the other Philippides,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

18 were dtTrjoiG

and

xpoe&p£a to the poetv’And his eldest

descendant^ other honors bestowed were a golden crown, a bronze statue in the theater and public proclamation,of the decree at the great Dionysiac festival (11. 60-66). The lengthy' decrde included also the details of Phililppides' services, which were connected with festivals and politics.

He

had on one occasion provided the mast and the yardarms for the Panathenaic ship (11. 10-16) and had performed various other ser­ vices in connection with festivals and games (11. 39-50). political efforts were no less important.

His

After the battle of Ipsus

Philippides arranged for the burial of the fallen Athenians and the return of the prisoners-(11. 16-29).

Later he interested his friend

13 Lysimachus in the endeavors of the Athenians to regain the Piraeus and other strongholds (11. 31-36). The examples just discussed make it clear that, in addition to warriors, men who benefited the state outside of warfare were con­ sidered worth of special honors. honors included ation was never fixed.

As in the case of warriors, the

xpoebpiici and QTfeXe tctj

the combin­

The recipients ranged from the tyrannicides

Harmodius and Aristogeiton through the statesman Ahisteides and the two anonymous blockade runners to the two Philippi.dai, of whom one performed countless liturgies and the other used his friendship with a king to benefit the demos.

Some of the honorary inscriptions given

in IG 2 undoubtedly record similar rewards of q C x t \ ( 3 » npoebpCa and axeXeia for other state benefactors, but their fragmentary condition obscures details.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

19 What other kinds of services entitled a citizen to be recog­ nized as a benefactor or good counselor we can perhaps conjecture. Olympic victors were definitely considered worthy of honors in return for the distinction they brought their cities, although there was occasionally some outspoken opposition to rewards for athletes. We have seeA that Xenophanes, denied that athletes were advantageous (XP^^oO

to the city and that Solon felt that they shouidnnbthhave

first rank in honor.

The limitations imposed by Solon could not

have prevailed for long because Euripides commented bitterly on -the rewards which he saw athletes receiving (fg. 282 Nauck). Moreover, Plato uses the life of Olympic victors as a suitable paral­ lel for the very fartoB^'-ie^isteBeecdt :.theguardians.-df -,the iideJtl state; (Rep. 5,465 d): ".. .Crjaoocri xe. xov p a x a p i a x o v £iou ov ol 6\u|i7ttovTxai Cucrt p,axap luTepov*. Improving the revenues of the state was considered a worth-while service to the state.

Citizens should be encouraged by the prospect

of rewards to find new sources of revenue, according to Simonides of Ceos:

*e{ 5e tpavepov y &v ° ito» o x \ xal b npoaoboM Ttva

aXuxcov e^euptaxuv axet^tc aypoTto"

xy

itoXet 'cip.^ae'taiy ou&*a8'tr) av

(Xen. Hiero 9).

This proposal for rewards to

those helping the state financially is somewhat similar to the one already mentioned - rewards to those

vrjv auTeptav 0 e v T e e n

"Ttjv IbCav oocrCav etc

(cf. supra p. 9).

Aristotle also favored

rewards for this kind of service (Rhet. ad Alex. 1424 a).

Merchants

and shipowners whose merchandise and ships were of sufficient excel­ lence to earn the title of benefactor of the state for their owners

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

xot*

20 should be honored withhthe right of itpoebpia

ati'the theater,

according to a proposal of Xenophon (Ilopot 3,4).

The prospect of

honors would lure more merchants to Athens with a' consequent im­ provement in Athens'financial position. Honors for all officials who had served honorably in the offices were also suggested by Aristotle: "'t o o be axepbwg a p x e w Tipag elvai bet vevopoOeTTjpevas t o i g (Pol. 1309 a 11).

eftboxoiAOoaiv"

In this connection it is, interesting to note that

Komeas was to receive the honors voted by the Athenians, at Lemnos only if he passed the

eocpuvij:

*enei5&v Tag eoQuvag bwi"

(cf. p. 13). To this group of public benefactors considered worthy of state rewards we must add the public prosecutor.

Hippodamus, as we have •

seen, considered the service of the prosecutor as important as that of the soldier and equally deserving of reward.

The prosecutor as

the man responsible for enforcing the laws would also receive honor in Plato's ideal state (Laws 5,730 d). A man who merely abides by the laws benefits only himself.

But a man who brings a lawbreaker to

trial performs a service for the whole city and therefore deserves respect and honor:

"Tipios

brj xal

b

prjblv abixuv,

b

be ^*]b* eTtiTpeTOuv

Trots abixooaiv abixeiv TtXeov rj binXaaiag Tip,T]g aJjiog exeivoo* jifjvuwv

b

pev yap ivos,'&

bi

noXXuv av'ca^tos Ixeptov,

twv aXXuv tois apxbu^*-v abixiav;

auyxoXa&ov els bdvap.iv toic apxooaiv,

b

b

b& xal

^eyas avfjp ev

itoXet xal T:eXetoc» oStog avayopeoeaQw vixt]3) in b3 B.C.

the people awarded to the members of the triumvirate civic crowns: "u>G euepyeTaiG *a! d w T t j p a i ttjg itoXeuG Y e Y o v o