Public Lands and Agrarian Laws of the Roman Republic Part 2

[Footnote 9: Siculus Flaccus, _De Conditione Agrorum_, 2, 3: "Ut vero Romani omnium gentium pot.i.ti sunt, agros alios ex hoste captos in victorem populum part.i.ti sunt, alios verro agros vendiderunt, ut Sabinorum ager qui dicitur quaestorius."]

[Footnote 10: Cicero, in Verrem, II, Bk. 3, -- 6.]

[Footnote 11: Giraud, _Droit de propriete chez les romains_, 160.]

[Footnote 12: Ihne, I, 175.]

[Footnote 13: Muirhead, 92; Giraud, 165.]

[Footnote 14: Higin., _De Limit. Const. apud Goes. Rei Agr. Script._, pp.

159-160.]

[Footnote 15: Giraud, 164.]

[Footnote 16: Dionysius, II, 7.]

[Footnote 17: Aristotle, _Polit._, [Greek: Z. Keph. th. 7: Anagkaion toinun eis duo merae diaeraesthai taen choran kai ton men einai koinaen, taen de ton idioton.]]

[Footnote 18: Giraud, 163.]

[Footnote 19: Festus, p. 209, Lindemann; Cicero, ad Att. II, 15; Philipp.

V, 7; De Leg. Agr. I, 2, III, 3; De Off. II, 22; Livy, II, 61, IV, 51, 53, VI, 4, 15; Suet. Julius Caesar, 38; Octavius, 13, 32; Caesar, De Bell. Civ., I, 17; Orosius, V, 18.]

[Footnote 20: Aggenus Urbicus, p. 69, ed. Goes.]

[Footnote 21: Giraud, 185-187; Mommsen, I, 110; Ortolan, 227; Hunter, _Roman Law,_ 367.]

SEC. 4.--ROMAN COLONIES.

Probably in no other way does the Roman government so clearly reveal its nature and strength as in its method of colonization. No other nation, ancient or modern, has ever so completely controlled her colonies as did the Roman. Her civil law, indeed, reflected itself in both political and international relations. In Greece, as soon[l] as a boy had attained a certain age his name was inscribed upon the tribal rolls and henceforth he was free from the _potestas_ of his father and owed him only the marks of respect which nature demanded. So too, at a certain age, the colonies separated themselves from their mother city without losing their remembrance of a common origin. This was not so in Rome. The children[2]

were always under the _potestas_ of their parents. By a.n.a.logy therefore, the colonies ought to remain subject to their mother city. Greek colonies went forth into a strange land which had never been conquered by h.e.l.lenic arms or hitherto trod by Grecian foot. Roman[3] colonies were established by government upon land which had been previously conquered and which therefore belonged to the Roman domain. The Greek was fired with an ambition to obtain wealth and personal distinction, being wholly free to bend his efforts to personal ends. Not so the Roman. He sacrificed self for the good of the state. Instead of the allurements of wealth he received some six jugera of land, free from taxation it is true, but barely enough to reward the hardest labor with scanty subsistence. Instead of the hope of personal distinction, he in most cases sacrificed the most valuable of his rights, _jus suffragii et jus_[4] _honorum_ and suffered what was called _capitis diminutio_. He devoted himself, together with wife and family, to a life-long military service. In fact the Romans used colonization as a means to strengthen their hold upon[5] their conquests in Italy and to extend their dominion from one centre over a large extent of country. Roman colonies were not commercial. In this respect they differed from those of the Phoenicians and Greeks. Their object was essentially military[6]

and from this point of view they differed from the colonies of both the ancients and moderns. Their object was the establishment of Roman power.

The colonists marched out as a garrison into a conquered town and were exposed to dangers on all sides. Every colony acted as a fortress to protect the boundary and keep subjects to their allegiance to Rome. This establishment was not a matter of individual choice nor was it left to any freak of chance. A decree of the senate decided when and where a colony should be sent out, and the people in their a.s.semblies elected individual members for colonization.

From another point of view Roman colonies were similar to those of Greece, since their result was to remove from the centre to distant places the superabundant population, the dangerous,[7] unquiet, and turbulent.

But the difference in the location of the colonies was easy to distinguish.

In general the Phoenicians and the Greeks as well as modern people founded their colonies in unoccupied localities. Here they raised up new towns which were located in places favorable to maritime and commercial relations. The Romans, on the contrary, avoided establis.h.i.+ng colonies in new places. When they had taken possession of a city, they expelled from it a part of the inhabitants, whether to transfer them to Rome as at first, or a little later, when it became necessary to discourage the increase of Roman population, to more distant places. The population thus expelled was replaced with Roman and Latin citizens.[8] Thus a permanent garrison was located which a.s.sured the submission of the neighboring countries and arrested in its incipiency every attempt at revolt. In every respect these colonies remained under surveillance and in a dependence the most complete and absolute upon the mother city, Rome. Colonies never became the means of providing for the impoverished and degraded until the time of Gaius Gracchus. When new territory was conquered, there went the citizen soldier.

Thus these colonies mark the growth of Roman dominion as the circ.u.mscribed rings mark the annual growth of a tree. These colonies were of two kinds, Latin and Roman.

1. Latin colonies were those[9] which were composed of Latini and Hernici, or Romans enjoying the same rights as these, _i.e._ possessed of the Latin right rather than the Roman franchise. They were established inland as road fortresses and being located in the vicinity of mountain pa.s.ses or main thoroughfares acted as a guard to Rome, and held the enemy in check.

2. Roman, or Burgess, colonies[10] were those composed wholly of Roman citizens who kept their political rights and consequent close union with their native city. In some cases Latini were given the full franchise and permitted to join these colonies. In position as well as rights, these colonies were distinguished from the Latin, being with few exceptions situated upon the coast and thus acting as guards against foreign invasion.

_Table of Latin Colonies in Italy_.

------------------+----------------+-------+------------------------------- COLONIES. | LOCATION. | B.C. | AUTHORITIES.

------------------+----------------+-------+------------------------------- 1 Signia. | Latium. | ? | Livy, 1, 56; Dionys., 4, 63.

2 Cerceii. | " | ? | Id.

3 Suessa Pometia.| " | ? | Livy, 2, 16.

4 Cora. | " | ? | Livy, 2, 16.

5 Velitrae. | " | 494 | Livy, 2, 30, 31 ; Dionys., | | | 6, 42, 43.

6 Norba. | " | 492 | Livy, 2, 34; Dionys , 7, 13.

7 Antium. | " | 467 | " 3, 1; " 9, 59.

8 Ardea. | " | 442 | " 4, 11; Diodor., 12,34.

9 Satric.u.m. | " | 385 | " 6, 14.

10 Sutrum. | Etruria. | 383 | Vell., 1, 14.

11 Nepete. | " | 383 | Livy, 6, 21; Vell.

12 Setia. | Latium. | 382 | Vell., 1,14; Livy, 6, 30.

13 Cales. | Campania. | 334 | " 1,14; " 8,16.

14 Fregellae. | Latium. | 328 | Livy, 8, 22.

15 Luceria. | Apulia. | 314 | " Epit., 60.

16 Suessa. | | 313 | " 9, 28.

17 Pontiae. | Isle of Latium.| 313 | " 9, 28.

18 Saticula. | Samnium. | 313 | " 9, 22; Vell., 1, 14; | | | Festus, p. 340.

19 Interamna | | | Lirinas. | Latium. | 312 | Livy, 9, 28; Vell, 1, 14; | | | Diodor., 19, 105.

20 Sora. | " | 303 | Livy, 10, 1; Vell., 1, 14.

21 Alba. | " | 303 | " 10, 1; " 1, 14.

22 Narnia. | Umbria. | 299 | " 10, 10.

23 Ca.r.s.eola. | Latium. | 298 | " 10, 13.

24 Venusia. | Apulia. | 291 | Vell., 1, 14; Dionys. Ex., | | | 2335.

25 Hatria. | Picenum. | 289 | Livy, Epit., 11.

26 Cosa. | Campania. | 273 | " " 14; Vell., 1, 14.

27 Paestum. | Lucania. | 273 | Id. Id.

28 Ariminum. | | 268 | Vell., 1, 14; L. Epit., 15; | | | Eutrop., 2, 16.

29 Beneventum. | Samnium. | 268 | Vell., 1, 14; L. Epit., 15; | | | Eutrop., 2, 16.

30 Firmum. | Picenum. | 264 | Vell., 1, 14.

31 Aesernia. | Samnium. | 263 | " 1, 14; L. Epit., 16.

32 Brundisium. | Calabria. | 244 | " 1, 14; " 19.

33 Spoletium. | Umbria. | 241 | " 1, 14; " 20.

34 Cremona. | Gallia Cis. | 218 | Tacitus, _Hist_., 3,35.

35 Placentia. | " " | 218 | L. Epit., 20; Polyb., 3, 40; | | | V. 1, 14, 8.

36 Copia. | Lucania. | 193 | Livy, 34, 53.

37 Valentia. | Bruttii. | 192 | " 34, 40; 35,40.

38 Bononia. | Gallia Cis. | 189 | " 37, 57; Vell., 1, 15.

39 Aquileia. | Gallia Trans. | 181 | " 40, 34; " "