Voter Turnout in Consular Elections

Voter Turnout in Consular Elections

Darryl A Phillips

Over the past few decades a lively debate has centered on the political character of the

Roman Republic The long-standing view that Roman government was narrowly oligarchic and dominated by the nobility has been challenged in a number ofstudies that have shifted the focus away from the elite to the role ofthe populace in decision-making arguing that Roman

government was more democratic I In evaluating the nature ofRoman government one key factor is the political institutions of the late Republican period Central among these institutions are the voting assemblies As H Mouritsen recently rephrased the question at issue is whether the popular institutions of Rome really did allow the masses a say in the running ofthe state giving them an opportunity to pursue their own interests2 As the limited evidence for popular participation in voting assemblies has been used to support contradictory characterizations of Roman politics this evidence warrants reexamination to determine the extent ofour knowledge

3 Consular elections in the last two centuries ofthe Republic provide

a focused case study for investigating voter turnout and the role of the lower classes in assemblies

Scholars have come to a general agreement as to the structure ofthe com ilia centuriata the assembly that met each year to elect consuls and praetors From at least the mid third century BC the centuriate assembly consisted of 193 voting groups or centuries organized by property and to some extent tribal divisions

4 Much like the Electoral College used in

pre5idential elections in the United States the centuriate assembly was organized on the principle ofthe group or corporate vote The count of 193 voting centuries determined the election not a direct count ofthe popular vote Equites members ofthe frrst property class and artisans were grouped into 89 centuries including the centuria praerogativa which voted frrst and the sex suf[ragia six traditional voting centuries ofequites whose vote followed the first class (see TABLE 1) Citizens in the second through fifth property classes were divided between 100 centuries The exact distribution ofcenturies within these classes is unknown

I Gelzers pioneering study of the close ranks of Romes political elite influenced many later studies

including Taylors study ofparty politics in the late Republic (1949) and her work on Roman assemblies (966) See Burckhardt for a discussion ofthe lasting impact ofGelzers work For the democratic challenge to this view see especially the work ofF Millar (see bibliography) Brunt 382-443 Yakobson (1992) and ( 1999) For overviews ofscholarship on the topic see North Jehne and most recently Mouritsen 1-17

Mouritsen 8 3

Holkeskamp (especially 205-206) in his detailed review ofMillar (1998) urges a move away from labels such as democratic and a return to the evidence to develop a thick description ofpolitical culture

4 For a discussion ofthe reform and the debate over the structural details see Taylor (1957) Staveley( 1962)

Grieve On the earlier system traditionally ascribed to Servius Tullius see Cornell 173-197

AHB 181-2 (2004) 48-60

49 Voter Turnout in Consular Elections

Taylor suggests that Classes II-IV had 20 centuries each with the fifth class receiving 40 Mommsen favored an even distribution of centuries 5 Four unarmed centuries made up the balance

The structure and procedure of the comitia centuriata favored the wealthiest citizens in two significant ways The top property class included only a small fraction ofthe population yet received a disproportionate number ofvoting units Furthermore voting commenced with the wealthiest citizens and continued through the property classes in descending order As soon as a candidate received a simple majority of 97 votes he was elected to office In consular elections voting stopped and the assembly was dismissed when two candidates had reached 97 votes each To reach a decision the vote of the second class was necessary the lower property classes need not be polled As Cicero comments such a structure ensured that the masses did not have the greatest power (Cic Rep 239 ne plurimum valeant plurimi) Livy notes that the division into property classes was intended to exclude no one but gave real power to the elite (Livy 14310 gradus facti ut neque exclusus quisquam suffragio videretur et vis omnis penes primores civitatis esset)

L How many Romans voted in consular elections

Although we have information about the structure of the centuriate assembly the Romans have left no clear record ofthe total number ofvoters who participated in elections Anurnber of scholars have nevertheless attempted to reconstruct voter turnout LR Taylor estimates voter turnout for electoral meetings ofthe comitia tributa basing her estimate on the physical

size ofthe Saepta Julia the voting site in the Campus Martius6

The Saepta Julia completed during the principate of Augustus replaced the older Republican voting enclosure Taylor accepts that the Augustan-era Saepta reflects the space available for electoral assemblies in the 2nd and I st centuries BC a space approximately 260 x 825 meters

7 Divisions separated

voters into 35 voting tribes yielding a narrow lane of 260 x 25 meters for each tribe She estimates that 4 men could fit shoulder to shoulder across the 25 meters and that two such rows could fit in each meter of the depth of the line Thus the maximum number of voters from each tribe is 8 x 260 a figure that she rounds offto 2000 voters By multiplying 2000 by 35 (the number of tribes) Taylor arrives at her final estimate of 70000 She takes this figure to represent the maximum turnout for voting in electoral meetings of the comitia tributa Taylor does not attempt a similar reconstruction for consular elections in the comitia centuriata

5 Taylor (1957) 344 nl9 Mommsen Vol 3274

6 Taylor (1966) 52-54 Tribal assemblies eleltted quaestors curule aediles and other minor magistrates The

Saepta Julia has not been excavated and given the dense inhabitation ofthis area ofthe Campus Martius it likely never will be Taylor bases her reltonstruction ofthe Saepta (prepared by Lucos Cozza) on literary descriptions and the fragments ofthe Severan-era Forma Urbis See Gatti and Coarelli 155-175 for the most reltent discussion and bibliography

7 See Coarelli 155-158 for doubts about the correspondence between the Republican voting site and the later

Augustan structure

50 Darryl A Phillips

R MacMullen takes the same approach as Taylor but uses a slightly more modest plan for the Saepta Julia and allows more space for officials In his reconstruction around 1600 members ofeach tribe could vote This yields a maximum turnout ofapproximately 55000 MacMullen whittles away at this theoretical maximum commenting that the size ofthe tribes varied greatly He notes It would be safe to conjecture then that the total can never have surpassed 35-400008 MacMullen uses this reduced figure to draw conclusions about the nature of Roman government Estimating an adult male citizen population of 2000000 MacMullen posits that voter turnout was normally two percent or less This two percent is further reduced when MacMullen concludes his study by characterizing Roman government as a rather narrow oligarchy with an assembly ofperhaps one man out ofa hundred for the choosing of the major magistrates9 He does not draw a distinction between tribal and centuriate assemblies

The figures offered by MacMullen and Taylor for the capacity ofthe Saepta Julia (55000 and 70000) are close enough to one another to accept without further discussion though it must be acknowledged that we have no clear indication that this limit was ever met These figures however represent a maximum capacity for the Saepta Julia not a maximum turnout for all electoral assemblies held in the Saepta Such an estimate as Taylor alone makes clear only holds for meetings of the comitia tributa in which all tribes voted simultaneously The

voting procedure for the comitia centuriata called for successive voting byproperty classes 10

In elections for the major magistracies only a portion 0 f the voters would be inside the Saepta bull II

at anyone tune

Cicero (Phil 282) provides one account ofsuccessive voting in the centuriate assembly as he describes the election held in 44 BC

sortitio praerogativae renuntiatur prima classis vocatur renuntiatur deinde ita ut adsolet s~tJragia tum secunda class is

The f]fst voting century is selected by lot its vote is announced the f]fst class is called to vote its vote is announced then as customary the sex suffragia vote then the second class 12

8 MacMullen 454

9 MacMullen 457

10

On the practice ofsuccessive voting see Hall (1964) II

Yakobson (1999) 49 n78 briefly notes this point in his critique ofMacMullen Mouritsen 28-30 reduces MacMullens estimate as he suggests that all voters would have waited in an enclosed forecourt before casting their vote in the Saepta He conjectures that the forecourt could accommodate around 30000 voters In Mouritsens view sequestering voters in the forecourt was necessary in order to prevent those who had already voted from rejoining those waiting to be called However we lack firm evidence to support Mouritsens theory and this suggestion conflicts with clear evidence that candidates (all ofwhom belonged to the top class) interacted with citizens who had not yet cast their ballots (see below)

12 See Taylor (1966) 96 and 153 n28 for her restoration of the text


As the passage makes clear the procedure called for classes to vote in descending order beginning with the centuria praerogativa and continuing to the rest ofthe first class and then on down the ranks There was a pause after each property class had voted to tabulate and announce the results

13

Complementing Ciceros testimony Valerius Maximus offers vivid illustrations of the activities that could occur during the pause between the votes ofthe classes In the course of the praetorian elections for 174 BC one ofthe candidates Cicereius created a stir when he heard that he was receiving more votes than L Cornelius Scipio (the son ofthe elder Scipio Africanus)14 Cicereius stepped down from the tribunal took offhis white toga and started campaigning for his competitor (Val Max 453 ut vidit omnibus se centuriis Scipioni anteerri templo descendit abiectaque candida toga competitoris sui suJfragatorem agere coepit) Cicereius deference to the son of the great Roman leader won him fame but cost him the election The remaining classes entered the voting enclosure and ultimately elected Scipio In a later election Scipio Aemilianus reportedly campaigned for his nephew who was a candidate for the quaestorship while awaiting the outcome of the consular election (Val Max 8154 cum quaestoriis comitiis suJfragator Q F abii MaCimi ratris filii in campum descendisset consulem iterum reduxit) The practice of successive voting in consular elections resulted in many stops and starts and Romans made good use of this time IS Each class would vote ballots were tabulated and then the presiding magistrate would oversee the announcement ofthe returns Ifthe required number ofcandidates had not received the votes necessary for election the next group would be called into the voting enclosure and balloting would continue

Given that Romans practiced successive voting ofclasses within the comitia centuriata it is clear that the capacity of the Saepta Julia does not represent the maximum turnout for electoral meetings of the comitia centuriata Taking into account the five property classes that composed the assembly the voting enclosure could be filled five times during an election

16 lfwe are to judge solely from the physical size ofthe voting area the maximum

turnout might in fact be five times greater than the estimates posited heretofore Full attendance could have ranged from 250000 to 350000 Such a theoretical maximum however reveals little about actual practice and here our evidence fails us Though we hear oflarge crowds at some particular assemblies such statements should not be pressed to yield

13 Staveley (1972) 177-181 discusses the elaborate and time-consuming process used to annOlmce the returns

14 On the praenomen Lucius erroneously reported by Valerius Maximus as Gnaeus see Broughton (1951) 406

n2 IS

See also Varro Rust3 the dramatic setting for which is a pause for vote counting during the election of curule aediles

16 In addition the relatively small number ofvoters in the centuria praerogativa (one century ofjuniors ofthe

tirst class) voted before the other classes


general estimates 17 Reconstructions ofvoter-turnout based on the physical size ofthe voting enclosure are inconclusive and should not be used to support a characterization of Roman government

An analysis ofthe capacity ofthe Saepta Julia is not the only approach to estimating voter turnout in Rome C Nicolet calculates popular participation in a special election during Caesars dictatorship by looking at the time available for voting IS In a letter to Curius (Cic Fam 730) Cicero describes in unusual detail an assembly held on the last day ofDecember in 45 BC Caesar was presiding over a meeting of the comitia tributa called to elect quaestors when word reached him that the consul Q Fabius Maximus had died Caesar reorganized the assembled voters into centuries and they promptly elected C Caninius Rebilus to serve as suffect consul for the remainder of the day Cicero notes that the proceedings lasted from the second until the seventh hour Using this information Nicolet estimates that out of the five hours expended four were used for the balloting in the consular election He estimates that two voters from each tribe could vote each minute Multiply this by the 35 tribal divisions and we arrive at a total of70 votes cast each minute By then multiplying this figure by 240 minutes (the time that Nicolet suggests was available for balloting) he arrives at the figure 16800 voters Nicolet assumes that other normal elections might last for a full day with proportionally larger numbers participating As a theoretical maximum he accepts

Taylors figure of70000 19

Nicolets estimate is appealing but his conjecture should not be used to draw general conclusions Cicero leaves many of the details of this extraordinary election in doubt It is clear that the quaestorian elections were already underway when Caesar called for the election of a suffect consul (cum hora secunda comitiis quaestoriis institutis) but Cicero does not reveal whether the voting for quaestors continued was cancelled or re-scheduled This would significantly affect the amount oftime available for the consular election Indeed Cicero is not interested in communicating to Curius all ofthe details ofthe proceedings Instead he focuses on two points Caesars lack ofappropriate auspices to oversee the election ofa consul (ille (Caesar] autem qui comitiis tributis esset auspicatus centuriata habuit) and his regrettable disregard for Republican traditions (Haec tibi ridicula videntur Non enim ades quae si videres lacrimas non teneres) The lack of sufficient detail in Ciceros account makes Nicolets estimate highly speculative In addition we lack other accounts of the length of elections and the proceedings in 45 BC were far from normal Although there was only one position to be filled and we hear ofonly one candidate in the running this hastily executed

17 Cicero for example makes much of the level of attendance at the legislative meeting of the comitia

centuriata that recalled him from exile (ie Aft 414 Red Sen 28) Augustus reports that he was elected Ponti rex Maximus by the largest crowd ever assembled in Rome (RG to2) Despite such testimony fuctors such as levels of literacy may have limited the size of the electorate in ways that defY quantitative estimates (Hall (1998) 26-27) Romans themselves seem uninterested in commenting on levels ofturnout as the use ofvoting centuries in place of a direct count ofthe popular vote rendered the overall turnout irrelevant See Mouritsen 33-34

18 Nicolet 280-28129 I

19

Nicolet 290


election lasted several hours Regular elections which were scheduled weeks in advance and took place in the summer would have drawn larger crowds to Rome and thus significantly increased the duration ofthe proceedings In years when three or more candidates competed for two consulships it must have taken somewhat longer to mark the ballots and a great deal more time to tabulate the results

20 The time expended to elect Caninius in 45 Bc represents

an absolute minimum Other elections must have lasted many times longer perhaps even for several days

21

In sum estimates ofvoter-turnout in consular elections are inconclusive and reveal little about the nature of Roman government The voting enclosure could have accommodated hundreds ofthousands of voters in the course of an election but offers no clear measure of normal attendance Anecdotal evidence for the duration ofelections is similarly problematic

II Did members ofthe lower classes vote in consular elections

Given the plutocratic structure of the centuriate assembly it is unclear whether members of the lower classes were regularly called upon to vote Indeed if the top property classes agreed on two candidates voting would not continue to the lower classes Many scholars have suggested that wealthy Romans controlled consular elections and that the votes of the lower classes were seldom needed

22 Here however the scattered evidence for particular

elections permits a more nuanced assessment

To begin with there are a number ofoccasions for which we have firm evidence that the lower classes were called upon to vote in consular elections In the election for the consuls of 216 Bc for example Livy (2234-35) tells us that six candidates ran for office Five were defeated as only C Terentius Varro received a sufficient number ofvotes to win office In this case all 193 centuries would have been called before it was determined that only Varro had secured the 97 votes needed for election A second meeting was called to elect Varro s

20 Hall (1998) 28-29 discusses the difficulties involved in counting written ballots

21 Taylor (1966) 98 Staveley (1972) 186-191 offers very rough time estimates for consular elections ranging

from 6 12 to 14 12 hours not including the time spent by the voters in marking their ballots The procedural break after the vote ofeach property class would allow the balloting to be suspended until the next comitial day without fear of voter fraud Cicero (Pro Murena 35-36) may be referring to multi-day elections when he describes the vicissitudes of the populace in assembly noting that a day intervening or a night in-between often changes everything (Dies intermissus aut nox interposita saepe perturbat omnia) Cf Livy (40594-5 Praetorum inde triblls creatis comitia tempestas diremit Postero die reliqui tresacti) where praetorian elections are said to have stretched to a second day because of a storm The Roman calendar included 195 dies comitiales many in succession at the end of summer months (see Michels 34-35 and figures 3 and 4) These days could have conveniently accommodated multi-day elections

n For example Taylor (1949) 56 observed that for consular elections The vote that really counted here was

the first class the men who had property amounting to perhaps 50000 sesterces or more For a similar view see Taylor (1968) 90 MacMullen 457 who finds the voting process most inimical to a vital democracy and most recently Hall (1998) 26 who notes that richer people were voting first and in most cases deciding the issue Yakobson (1999) especially 48-54 counters this view by focusing on the political behavior ofthe Romans


colleague23

A similar situation arose in the election for the consuls of 189 Bc Only one of the four candidates was elected the other three had split the vote (Livy 37477 Fulvius

consulunus creatur cum celeri centurias non explessent)24 Once again the votes ofall the centuries would have been counted

In other cases our sources reveal that the outcome of the vote was particularly close indicating that voting continued beyond the second class After two unsuccessful bids for office Q Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus is said to have barely won the consulship of 143 BC (De Viris Ill 613 post duas repulsas consul aegre jactus) In the election for the consulship of 64 BC there were at least three (and probably four) candidates L Iulius Caesar and C Marcius Figulus were elected but L Turius is said to have lost by only a few centuries (Cic BnLt 237 itaque ei paucae centuriae ad consulatum dejuenmt)2s

By reconstructing the votes cast for each candidate in a close race we can see the effect of a narrow victory on the vote ofthe lower classes (TABLE 2) In the election for 64 BC L Caesar and Marcius Figulus each would have won election with 97 votes Turius is said to have lost by a few centuries thus we might assign to him some 90 votes In this scenario a total of284 votes would have been cast by the centuries before the assembly was dismissed (97+97+90) As each century voted for two candidates a total of 142 centuries would have voted This indicates that voting continued beyond the third property class into the fourth

class26

The effect of the close race for the consulship for 143 BC would have been similar

The election for the consuls of 63 Bc is our best documented and deserves special consideration We hear ofseven candidates (Ascon [Clark] 82) Cicero and Antonius who were successful and L Sergius Catilina L Cassius Longinus Q Cornificius C Licinius Sacerdos and P Sulpicius Galba who were defeated Asconius suggests that Cicero received the unanimous support ofthe first 97 centuries to have their vote announced (Ascon [Clark] 94 Cicero consul omnium consensu jactus est) For the second position Antonius is said to have defeated Catiline by only a very few votes (Ascon [Clark] 94 Antonius pauculis

23

Develin 153-157 Broughton (1991) provides a useful discussion ofeach candidate defeated in elections His compilation was the major reference source for the specific elections discussed below

24

Some confusion exists as to the procedure used to elect the second consul though we are clear that Cn Manlius Volso served as Fulvius colleague See Develin 167-168

25 Cicero (AIIII2) names Caesar and Turius along with a Thermus and Silanus as candidates Thermus is

likelyQ Minucius Thermus who was adopted by Marcius Figulus See Broughton (1991) 11-12 (and note 2 I) for a brief discussion of this identification and for the candidacy of D lunius Silanus

26

See TABLE 1 Cumulative Votes Staveley (1972) 185-186 suggests that voting may have routinely stopped after the first candidate was elected ifthere were only three candidates running for office and the remaining centuries continued to vote for two individuals (a point doubted by Taylor (1966) 98) Staveleys proposal however places more weight on the outcome ofthe eJection than the process ofvoting The assembly called to elect Caninius sutfect consul at the end of 45 BC clearly shows that procedures were not curtailed even when the outcome of the vote was not in doubt

Voter Turnout in Consular Elections 55

centllriis Catilinam superavit)27

Again by reconstructing the returns we can better understand the role ofthe lower classes (TABLE 3) Cicero received one of the votes ofeach of the first 97 centuries Ifwe assume that Antonius and Catiline split the second vote we might assign to Antonius 50 votes to Catilines 47 at the time when Cicero was declared elected After this point at least 47 more centuries would have been called before Antonius was elected (50+47=97) Thus a total ofat least 144 centuries would have voted before the election was completed (97+47= 144) By both Taylors and Mommsens reconstruction ofthe comitia centuriaa the vote would have continued through the fourth property class The scenario envisioned is quite conservative in that none of the other four candidates have been assigned the vote ofeven a single century Nevertheless in this election it is clear that the lower classes not only took part but also played the decisive role in the selection ofone of the two consuls

The consular elections for 143 64 and 63 BC are unusual in that we have specific testimony concerning the vote however the results that they indicate may not be unusual We have every indication that rigorously contested elections were the norm in Republican Rome

28

Despite our almost complete dependence on Livy for specific testimony about elections in the second century BC we know the names ofcandidates who lost their bids for the consulship in sixteen different elections

29 The specific evidence for individual elections is supplemented

by more general information about contests in other years The well-documented election for the consuls of 184 BC for instance saw five candidates lose to P Claudius Pulcher and L Porcius Licinus (Livy 39326-13) Ofthe seven candidates in the race only Claudius Pulcher had not suffered a prior defeat in a run for the conSUlship (Livy 39329 Claudius ex omnibus unus novus candidatus erat)30 The previous unsuccessful bids ofL Aemilius Paullus Cn Baebius Tamphilus and Q Fabius Labeo should be assigned to the late 190s or early 180s BC supplementing the more specific evidence for competitive elections in this period

3 I As a

general trend elections during the late third through first centuries probably became

27 Asconius [Clark] 83 reports that Catiline and Antonius had entered into an electoral pact (see Gelzer I 23t)

In this arrangement we should expect similar levels ofsupport for Catiline and Antonius thus supporting Asconius observation that only a slim margin separated Antonius from Catiline

28 See for example Evans (1990) and (1991)

29 Elections for 192 Bc saw M Acilius Glabrio P Cornelius Scipio Nasica C Laelius C Livius Salinator

and Cn Manlius Vulso defeated 191 BC L Cornelius Scipio and Cn Manlius Vulso 189 BC M Aemilius Lepidus M Valerius Messalla 188 Bc M Aemelius Lepidus 185 Bc Ser Sulpicius Galba Q Terentius Culleo 184 BC L Aemilius Paullus Cn Baebius Tamphilus Q Fabius Labeo Ser SUlpicius Galba Q Terentius Culleo 145 and 144 Bc Q Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus 141 BC C Laelius Sapiens 122 BC L Opimius 116 BC M Aemilius Scaurus liS BC P Rutilius Rufus 114 Bc C Caecilius Metellus Caprarius 106 105 and 104 Bc Q Lutatius Catulus For details see Broughton (1991) Evans (1991)

JO Evans (1991) 115

J I See Broughton (1991) Broughton also identifies three other candidates defeated in unknown years in the

second halfofthe 2nd century BC L Rupilius (132-129 BC) C Marcius Figulus (c 130 Bc) and C Billienus (104-101 BC)


increasingly competitive During this period the number ofpraetorships increased from two to eight and thus competition for the consulship would likely have increased proportionally as more candidates became eligible for the office]2

In contested elections we should not assume that margins ofvictory were overwhelming Indeed the evidence suggests that candidates were prepared tbr close races and those who suffered electoral defeat frequently won office in later attempts

3] Cicero remarks that

candidates were expected to be able to carry the votes oftheir own tribes (Cic Vat 36) and regularly assumed that their friends would win other tribes for them as well (Cic Plane 48 cf ComPet 18)34 Centuries ofthe first class were divided by tribe thus divisions in the vote of the first class must have been common The greater the number ofcandidates the greater was the division Because all candidates for the consulship were experienced and wealthy statesmen there is no reason to believe that citizens in the first class would have voted as a block Ciceros own electoral success was noteworthy precisely because unanimous support was unusual Voters ofthe top class were deciding between members oftheir own order and personal preferences and individual obligations would have determined who received their votes If the first class did not agree on two candidates the decisive role in elections would have passed to voters in the lower classes just as we saw in the election for 63 BC

Although no one would disagree with Livys observation that in the centuriate assembly the vote ofthe upper classes carried more weight the structure ofthe assembly did not deny the lower classes a role in the election ofconsuls Given the dearth ofspecific evidence about election results it is impossible to determine how many Romans participated in consular elections or how frequently the lower classes were called to vote Nevertheless efforts to describe the political character of the Roman Republic must acknowledge that the lower

3Sclasses did occasionally decide the election

Darryl A Phillips College ofCharleston

32 See Lintott especially 4-6 for evidence ofa rise in electoral bribery during this period

13 Broughton (1991) 1-2 notes that more than halfofknown candidates for the consulship who suffered defeat

later won election to office 34

Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S

Portions ofthis paper were presented at the annual meeting ofthe Classical Association ofthe Middle West and South in April of2000 and 2002 lowe thanks to Ami Intwala who assisted with the organization ofdata for this study and to the anonymous readers for their helpful comments


TABLE I

ORDER OF VOTE IN CENTURIATE ASSEMBLY (late 3rd - 181 c BC)

(Based on Taylor (1966) 84 with modifications)

ORDER OF VOTE NUMBER OF VOTES CUMULATIVE VOTES

CENTURIA PRAEROGATIVA (I century ofjuniors of the first class) 1 1

FIRST CLASS (69 centuries) + EQUITES (12 centuries) + ARTISANS (1 century)

82 83

SEX SUFFRAGIA (equites) 6 89

CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)

UNARMED CENTURIES (probably voting with fifth class)

i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2

Election for consuls of 64 BC

Candidates Votes (hypothetical) Results

L Iulius Caesar 91 Elected C Marcius Figulus 91 Elected L Turius 90 Defeated D Iunius Silanus ()

Total votes cast in election 284

Centuries voting 142 (2842 votes per century)

TABLE 3


Election results after 97 centuries have been counted


M Tullius Cicero 91 Elected Antonius 50 L Sergius Catilina 41 L Cassius Longinus Q Comificus C Licinius Sacerdos -- P Sulpicius Galba --



M Tullius Cicero 91 Elected Antonius 91 (50 + 41) Elected L Sergius Catilina 94 (41 + 41) Defeated L Cassius Longinus -- Defeated Q Comificus -- Defeated C Licinius Sacerdos -- Defeated P Sulpicius Galba -- Defeated


Bibliography

Broughton TRS 1951 The Magistrates of the Roman Republic Vol I New York

---------- 1991 Candidates Defeated in Roman Elections Some Ancient Roman A Isoshy

Rans Transactions of the American Philosophical Society vol 81 pt 4 Philadelphia

Brunt PA 1988 The Fall of the Roman Republic Oxford

Burckhardt LA 1990 The Political Elite of the Roman Republic Comments on Recent

Discussion of the Concepts Nobilitas and Homo Novus Historia 39 77-99

Clark AC ed 1907 Q Asconii Pediani Orationum Ciceronis Quinque Enarratio

Oxford

Coarelli F 1997 II Campo Marzio dalle origini alia fine della Repubblica Rome

Cornell TJ 1995 The Beginnings ofRome London and New York

Develin R 1985 The Practice ofPolitics at Rome 366-167 BC Collection Latomus 188

Brussels

Evans R1 1990 Consuls with a Delay Between the Praetorship and the Consulship ( 180shy

49 BC) AHB 43 65-71

---------- 1991 Candidates and Competition in Consular Elections at Rome Between 218

and 49 Be Acta Classica 34 111-136

Gatti E 1999 Saepta Julia In Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae Vol 4 Ed EM

Steinby Rome 228-229

Gelzer M 1912 (1969 English edition) Die Nobilitiit der romischen Republik (The Roman

Nobility R Seager trans) Oxford

Grieve LJ 1985 The Reform of the Comitia Centuriata Historia 34 278-309

Hall U 1964 Voting Procedure in Roman Assemblies Historia 13 267-306

---------- 1998 Species Libertatis Voting Procedure in the Late Roman Republic In

Modus Operandi Essays in HonourofGeofJrey Rickman Eds M Austin 1 Harries C Smith BICS Suppl 71 London 15-30

Holkeskarnp Karl-J The Roman Republic Government of the People by the People for

the People (Review ofFergus Millar The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic) Scripta Classica lsraellca 19 (2000) 203-223

Jehne M 1995 Zur Debatte urn die Rolle des Volkes in der romischen Politik In

Demokratie in Rom Die Rolle des Volkes in der Polilik der romischen Republic Ed M Jehne Historia Einzelschriften 96 Stuttgart 1-9

Lintott A 1990 Electoral Bribery in the Roman Republic JRS 80 1-16

MacMullen R 1980 How Many Romans Voted Athenaeum 58 454-457

Michels A 1967 The Calendar ofthe Roman Republic Princeton


Millar F 1984 The Political Character of the Classical Roman Republic 200-151 BC

JRS74 1-19

---------- 1986 Politics Persuasion and the People before the Social War (150-90 Bc)

JRS76 1-11

---------- 1989 Political Power in Mid-Republican Rome Curia or Cornitium JRS 79

138-150

---------- 1998 The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic Ann Arbor

Mommsen T 1887-88 Romisches Staatsrecht 3 vols Leipzig

Mouritsen H 200 I Plebs and Politics in the Late Roman Republic Cambridge

Nicolet C 1980 The World ~fthe Citizen in Republican Rome Trans PS Falla

Berkeley and Los Angel~s

North JA 1990 Democratic Politics in Republican Rome Past amp Present 126 3-21

Staveley ES 1962 Cicero and the Cornitia Centuriata Historia 11 299-314

---------- 1972 Greek and Roman Voting and Elections Ithaca

Taylor LR 1949 Party Politics in the Age oCaesar Berkeley

---------- 1957 The Centuriate Assembly before and after the Refonn AJP 78 337-354

---------- 1966 Roman Voting Assembliesfrom the Hannibalic War to the Dictatorship of

Caesar Ann Arbor

Yakobson A 1992 Petitio et Largitio Popular Participation in the Centuriate Assembly of

the Late Republic JRS 82 32-52

---------- 1999 Elections and Electioneering in Rome Historia Einzelschriften 128

Stuttgart

ANClilENT HliSTORY BUllIETliN

VOLUME EIGHTEEN NUMBERS ONE amp TWO 2004

Zeitschrift fur Alte Geschichte Revue dhistoire ancienne Rivista di storia antica Re~ista de historia antigua

Edited by Patrick Baker Pierre Briant Craig Cooper

Joseph Roisman PV Wheatley Ian Worthington

PUBLISHED WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE RESEARCH amp GRADUATE STUDIES OFFICE THE UNIVERSITY OF WINNIPEG

ISSN 0835-3638


Taylor suggests that Classes II-IV had 20 centuries each with the fifth class receiving 40 Mommsen favored an even distribution of centuries 5 Four unarmed centuries made up the balance

The structure and procedure of the comitia centuriata favored the wealthiest citizens in two significant ways The top property class included only a small fraction ofthe population yet received a disproportionate number ofvoting units Furthermore voting commenced with the wealthiest citizens and continued through the property classes in descending order As soon as a candidate received a simple majority of 97 votes he was elected to office In consular elections voting stopped and the assembly was dismissed when two candidates had reached 97 votes each To reach a decision the vote of the second class was necessary the lower property classes need not be polled As Cicero comments such a structure ensured that the masses did not have the greatest power (Cic Rep 239 ne plurimum valeant plurimi) Livy notes that the division into property classes was intended to exclude no one but gave real power to the elite (Livy 14310 gradus facti ut neque exclusus quisquam suffragio videretur et vis omnis penes primores civitatis esset)

L How many Romans voted in consular elections

Although we have information about the structure of the centuriate assembly the Romans have left no clear record ofthe total number ofvoters who participated in elections Anurnber of scholars have nevertheless attempted to reconstruct voter turnout LR Taylor estimates voter turnout for electoral meetings ofthe comitia tributa basing her estimate on the physical

size ofthe Saepta Julia the voting site in the Campus Martius6

The Saepta Julia completed during the principate of Augustus replaced the older Republican voting enclosure Taylor accepts that the Augustan-era Saepta reflects the space available for electoral assemblies in the 2nd and I st centuries BC a space approximately 260 x 825 meters

7 Divisions separated

voters into 35 voting tribes yielding a narrow lane of 260 x 25 meters for each tribe She estimates that 4 men could fit shoulder to shoulder across the 25 meters and that two such rows could fit in each meter of the depth of the line Thus the maximum number of voters from each tribe is 8 x 260 a figure that she rounds offto 2000 voters By multiplying 2000 by 35 (the number of tribes) Taylor arrives at her final estimate of 70000 She takes this figure to represent the maximum turnout for voting in electoral meetings of the comitia tributa Taylor does not attempt a similar reconstruction for consular elections in the comitia centuriata

5 Taylor (1957) 344 nl9 Mommsen Vol 3274

6 Taylor (1966) 52-54 Tribal assemblies eleltted quaestors curule aediles and other minor magistrates The

Saepta Julia has not been excavated and given the dense inhabitation ofthis area ofthe Campus Martius it likely never will be Taylor bases her reltonstruction ofthe Saepta (prepared by Lucos Cozza) on literary descriptions and the fragments ofthe Severan-era Forma Urbis See Gatti and Coarelli 155-175 for the most reltent discussion and bibliography

7 See Coarelli 155-158 for doubts about the correspondence between the Republican voting site and the later

Augustan structure






at anyone tune




8 MacMullen 454

9 MacMullen 457

10






13







n2 IS











18 Nicolet 280-28129 I

19

Nicolet 290





21













colleague23





class26



23


24




26






28




3 I As a







JO Evans (1991) 115














Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S



TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638






at anyone tune




8 MacMullen 454

9 MacMullen 457

10






13







n2 IS











18 Nicolet 280-28129 I

19

Nicolet 290





21













colleague23





class26



23


24




26






28




3 I As a







JO Evans (1991) 115














Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S



TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638



13







n2 IS











18 Nicolet 280-28129 I

19

Nicolet 290





21













colleague23





class26



23


24




26






28




3 I As a







JO Evans (1991) 115














Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S



TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638








18 Nicolet 280-28129 I

19

Nicolet 290





21













colleague23





class26



23


24




26






28




3 I As a







JO Evans (1991) 115














Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S



TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638





21













colleague23





class26



23


24




26






28




3 I As a







JO Evans (1991) 115














Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S



TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638


colleague23





class26



23


24




26






28




3 I As a







JO Evans (1991) 115














Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S



TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638





28




3 I As a







JO Evans (1991) 115














Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S



TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638












Taylor (1949) 62-64 3S



TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638


TABLE I






82 83


CLASS I 20 (25) 109 (1l4)

CLASS III 20 (25) 129 (139)

CLASS IV 20 (25) 149 (164)

CLASS V 40 (25) 189 (189)


i

4 193

II Mommsen 3274


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638


TABLE 2






TABLE 3









Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638


Bibliography








Oxford




Brussels


49 BC) AHB 43 65-71




















JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638



JRS74 1-19


JRS76 1-11


138-150












Caesar Ann Arbor




Stuttgart







ISSN 0835-3638







ISSN 0835-3638

Documents

Voter Turnout in Consular Elections