NULLA UNQUAM RES PUBLlCA MAlOR: THE RECREATION OF THE EARLY ROMAN REPUBLIC IN

AB URBE CONDITA Il-V

James Thomas Chlup

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts

Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia

April, 1998

O Copyright by James Thomas Chlup, MCMXCVlll

Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Sem-ces senrices bibliographiques

395 Weüingtm Street 395, rue Wellington OttawaON K I A W OitawaON KYAûN4 Canada Canada

The author has granted a non- exclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or sell copies of this thesis in microform, paper or electconic fommts.

The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts fkom it may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.

L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la forme de rnicrofiche/fïlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Chapter One: Livy and the Augustan Settlement 29 to 27 BC

Chapter Two: The Presentation of the Res Publica

Chapter Three: The Offices of the Res Publica 1. Senate 2. Consulship 3. Tribunate 4. Dictatorship 5. Military Tribunate 6. Decernvirate

Chapter Four: The Heroes and Villains of the Res Publica 1. Brutus 2. Coriolanus 3. Cincinnatus 4. Appius Claudius Decemvir 5. Camillus

Works Cited

ABSTRACT

Livy begins book two of Ab Urbe Condita with another preface: liberi iam hinc populi Romani res pace belloque gestas, annuos magistratus, imperiaque legum potentiora quam horninum peragarn (2.1.1 ). Once he dismissed the history of Rome as a monarchy in a single book, the historian is able to begin his preferred narrative: the history of Rome as a republic. From the outset of book two, Livy uniformly displays his strong republican belief on several levels: first, there is his treatment of the res publica as a political idea. Secondly, there is his treatment of the various offices of the republican constitution. Finally, there is his presentation of the major characters. On ail three levels, that which aids or defends the republic receives due praise while, on the other hand, that which seeks to disparage the constitution receives the appropriate denounciation. Livy, it - is evident, wants Ab Urbe Condita to be dominated by the concept of the res publica. Heretofore, even though scholars frequently refer to Livy's republicanism, there has never been a formal study of its presentation in the history. This thesis strives to rectify partially this deficiency with a focused constitutional reading of books two to five.

Whether this thesis will be worthy of the effort, I do not know. Irrespective of this fact, several people deserve thanks for their assistance in the production of this thesis.

First, I would like to thank Dr, Patrick Atherton who showed considerable enthusiasm for my topic frorn the beginning. I would also Iike to thank my supervisor, Dr. Peter Kussmaul, for his many insighfful comments and necessary corrections. Further, I would like to thank Dr. Patricia Calkin for agreeing to read rny thesis and her encouragement during rny tirne at Dalhousie University. Finally, I must thank Trish Macdonald, the department secretary. for al1 her help.

Secondly, I would like to express rny gratitude to my family and friends, especially those who encouraged my acadernic endeavours. A special thanks to Tad Samson, my best friend. who has provided me with so much support and undying loyalty.

INTRODUCTION

Livy beg ins h is h istory with an expression of selfdou bt: facturusne operae

pretium sim si a primordio urbis res populi Romani pemcn'psetfm nec satis scio

nec, si sciam, dicew ausim (Prae. 1 ). This doubt is personal, it is not a reflection

on the historical material: he considers himself inadequate to soch an important

task. About his subject matter. on the other hand, he is very assured. Rome, in

his view, is the foremost nation in the worfd. and any study of this majesty is

producüve in its own right: iuuabit tamen rerum gestanrm memonae principis

tenamm populi pro uirili parfe et ipsum consulisse (Pme. 3). It is such a fruithl

labour, Livy believes, that even if his work is overshadowed by others, he will be

happy that his work has been excelled by such efforts (Prae. 3).

The question, therefore, is what is it that makes Livy so proud of Rome.

The Praefatio affords the answer. First, the meditation of Rome's history will

show the reader how it became such a great nation, by the men, their attitudes

and their s kills: quae uifa, qui mores fuennt, per quos uiros quibusque arübus

domi militaeque et parfum et auctum impenum sit (Prae. 9). Secondly, Roman

history is a didactic guide as to what actions to take or not to take in support of

the nation: inde tibi tuaeque rei publicae quod imitere capias, inde foedum

inceptu foedum exifo quod uites (Prae. 10). The reason for this confidence is *

made clear in the next sentence where Livy declares his personal belief that aut

me amor negotii suscepti fallit, aut nulla unquam res publica nec maior nec

sanctior nec bonis exemplis ditior fuit (Prae. 1 1). It is Livy's use of the word res

publica that is vital.' In the literai sense. the historian makes an expression of his

confidence in the Roman nation, but it can also refer to the republican

constitution which first appears at the beginning of book t 'o . Livy rushes

through the history of eariy Rome, from the period before the foundation of the

city to the fondation of the republic, six hundred seventy-four years, in a single

book. Through his recreation of Rome's past, he presents a constitution of which

he and his fellow Romans can be proud. Therefore it is possible to offer a

constitutional reading of this (re)creation in Ab Urbe Condita Il-V.

There are four aspects of this constitutional reading. The first chapter

discusses the relationship between Livy. Augustus and the constitutional

settlement of 29 to 27 BC, a settlement which was contemporaneous with the

composition with these books. The reason for this historical discussion is this:

Livy wrote his account of the establishment and growth of the republic while

Augustus offered a settlement which, in the opinion of scholars, brought an end

to the republic. Therefore, a discussion of any possible effects that Augustus'

settlernent may have had on this republican glorification is needed.2 Then there

is the history itself. Chapters two. three and four discuss this republican

(re)creation on three levels: first, the representation of the res publica as a whole;

second, the portrayal of the particular offices that make up the republican

constituüon; finally, the presentation of the dominant heroes and villains of the

' It is interesting to note that Hans Hattenhauer. Europaische Rechtsaeschichte, Heidelberg. 1994. employs a variation of this sentence, nulla unquam res publica maior, as the subtitle for his exposition of early Roman legal history.

Gary Miles, Liw: Reconstructin~ Earlv Rome, lthaca NY, 1995, 6. defines the situation best: 'Livy's historiography at its most fundamental levels is infomed by and expresses

Roman republic: those early Romans who act for or against the res publica. On

al1 airee levels, Livy's history applauds what helps the constitution and it criticises

what attempts to hurt it. Therefore, these books of Livy's history offer what

critical theonsts might label a republican poetics, an authoritative guide as to

what constitutes "republican" or 'unrepublican", the good and evil in the

historian's constitutional worid.

When Livy wrote Ab Urbe Condita, it changed Latin historiography. It

marked the end of al1 histones of the republic by being an authoritative,

insurmountable republican exposition and it was the piece in a virtually

wntinuous narrative of Rome continued by Tacitus and then by Ammianus. It

sought to recreate the city's past, and in this recreation Livy was able to create

that which was worthy of his republican belief. His history became a monument

of Rome, a literary monument equal to those the histonan describes in his

recreation of the etemal, universal city.

an a&e engagement with the ideologies of his own agen.

CHAPTER ONE

LlVY AND THE AUGUSTAN SETTLEMENT 29-27 BC

Despite the classification of Livy as an Augustan writer, scholars

recognise the difficulty in any attempt to demonstrate the nature of the

personal and intellectual relationship between Livy and his ~mpero r . '

Uniike Vergil and Horace. Livy was not a member of Maecenast (and,

therefore, the Ernperor's) literary circle nor does the historian make

frequent references to hirnself, Augustus or contemporary orne.^ Livy,

further, does not directly react to the new Augustan government that

began in 29 BC and his constitutional settlement of 27 BC which, it is

interesting to note, marks the approxirnate beginning and ending of the

composition of the first pentad of Livy's history. But this does not mean

that it is not possible to know the historian's position.

The logical place to begin such a journey of ideological connection

is the only passage in Ab Urbe Condita where the historian reveals direct

- - -

1 Kraus and Woodman, Latin Historians, Oxford, 1997, 51, are two recent scholars to comment on this relationship. Kraus, in her section on Livy, acknowledges the ambiguous nature of the Livy-Augustus relationship. The most recent detailed scholarly study of the Augustus-Livy relationship may be found in Erich Burck, Das Geschichtswerk des Titus Livius, Heidelberg, 1992, 164-1 76.

Ronald Syrne, The Roman Revolution, Oxford, 1939, 465, feels that the intellect of these artists was not the direct province of the Emperor: 'their genius was not the creation of the Augustan Principate. They had all grown to rnanhood and to maturity in the period of the Revolution; and they al1 repaid Augustus more than he or the age could give themn.

interaction between himself and the Emperor. The historian and the

Emperor meet at 4.20.7:

hoc ego cum Augustum Caesarem, templorum omnium conditorem ac resfitutorem, ingressum aedem Feretri louis, quam uestutate dilapsam refecit, se ipsum in thorace iinteo scriptum legisse audissem, prope sacriiegium ratus sum Cosso spoliorum suorurn Caesarem, ipsius tempii auctorem, subtrahere testem (4.20.7).

Not only does Livy confess direct contact with the Ernperor. but he also

honours Augustus as a participant in the creation of the narrative when he

daims that the Princeps brings the testirnony that Cossus was a consul to

the historian's attention. The Emperor clearly emerges from this episode

in a positive light: to deny Cossus on the basis of the source of such

evidence, Livy says. would be sacrilegious. But the republican historian

goes no further; he successfully avoids displaying the forceful enthusiasrn

of Vergil or Horace. Although he appears to accept the EmperorJs

evidence, he does not retract his previous statement that Cossus was a

tribune. This reduced Augustan endorsement, therefore, saves any

enthusiasm by Livy for the constitutional settlement from dismissal as

mere Augustan propaganda.

As a preface to the Principate there was closure of the Temple of

Janus in January 29 BC. Augustus had yet to arrive in post-Actium Rome,

but the process of creating a positive image of Augustus had begun in

earnest. Rome was at peace and this was the personal achievement of

the Emperor. Livy encourages this opinion during his discussion of the

first closure of the temple by Numa when he refers to the latest closing.

Thus he creates a link behiveen past and present3

bis deinde post Numae regnum clausus fuit, semel T. Mani10 consule post Punicm primum perfecfum bellum, iterum, qood nostrae aetati di dederunt ut uideremus, post bellum Actiacum ab imperatore Caesare Augusto pace terra marique parta (1.19.3).

The historian's feelings are clear. Livy's account of the closure reveals

that he believes it to be an important moment in contemporary Roman

history and Livy's mention of Augustus gives the Princeps direct credit for

the act. Livy enters the narrative when identifies himself and the reader

as personal witnesses to the event, an identification that occurs on two

levels: nostrae aetati and uideremus. The employment of a sensory verb

such as uideremus is significant: he positions narrator and reader within

visual range of the temple as he attempts to share his enthusiasm with the

reader. The choice of nostrae aetati over the Praefatio's haec tempora,

further, elevates this closure even higher: it is an age, an unequalled

moment in Roman history, not a vague chronological ind i~ator .~ Finally,

3 Catherine Edwards, Writinn Rome, Cambridge, 1 996, 49, discusses this lin k when she mentions that Augustus, when rebuilding Rome's temples, did so in a particular way when he began by rebuilding those temples which had links to Rome's earliest history, the part of Rome's history that Livy was in the process of narrating. Thus, she highlights a strong connection between Augustus and Livy: as Augustus rebuilds a particular temple. Livy is in the process of narrating the first foundation of it. Christina Shuttleworth Kraus expresses the same opinion when she states that Livy's work is a parallel and. possibly, a rival, to Augustus' physical reconstruction of Rome (Christina Shuttleworth Kraus ed.. & Urbe Condita VI, Cambridge, 1994, 8).

Livy's reference to the present day in the Praefatio is clearly negative: donec ad haec tempora quibus nec uitia nostra nec remedia pati possomus peruentum est (Prae. 9). The present only contains vices which cannot be endured and rieither can their cures.

his reference to the gods not only suggests Livy's possible religious

beliefs: the impression that the effect of the closure on the historian was

so profound that he expresses the event as something higher than the

mortal world: a gift of the gods to the present generation of Romans. Livy

was clearly inspired by the c~osure.~ One must also consider why Livy

makes this contemporary reference. Emilio Gabba argues that links with

contemporary Rome. especially references to buildings. are employed to

validate a particular event or legendS6 In this case Livy uses Augustus' act

to strengthen the impact of Numa's closure. Also. Ronald Syme claims

that Livy did not want his early books disturbed with modern events;

therefore, those events that do appear the historian saw as necessary.'

Because of these two details one should not dismiss the positive tone that

the historian employs in his account of EmperorJs act from being

dismissed as Augustan propaganda.

Augustus, in the role of the apologist. refers to his first act as

Emperor in his final act of directing his image. the Res Gestae:

lanum Quirinum, quem claussum esse maiores nostri uoluerunt cum per toturn imperiurn populi Romani terra marique parta uictoriis pax,

John Buchan, Auaustus, London, 1937. 129. offers an interpretation of the effect of the victory of Actium (of which the closure of the Temple of Janus was the direct symbolic manifestation) when he states: 'Actium seems like the undrawing of a curtain and the letting in of daylight on the world". Although his biography of the Emperor is at tirnes melodramatic, the sentiment that he conveys does suggest the possible effect on Livy.

Emilio Gabba, "True History and False History in Classical Antiquitynl JRS 71 (1981). 61.

7 Ronald Syme, 'Livy and Augustusnl The Roman Papers, 7 vols., Oxford, 1979. 422.

c m , priusquem nascerer, a condita urbe bis omnino clausum fuisse prodatur memoriae, ter me principe senatus claudendum esse censuit (Res Gestae 7 3).

The Emperor's persona1 account is more pious than Livy's and it shows

his concern for his public image. He begins with a reference to the

Roman forefathers who, he says, desired the temple's closure (maiores

nostri uoluerunt); therefore he suggests that his labour merely fulfiis their

expressed will. The imperium that Livy gives to the Emperor appears in

this passage as the concession of the Roman people. Finally, Augustus

refrains from taking full credit for the closure: although he does close the

temple, it is done at the command of the senate (senatus ... censuit). This

final phrase cornes the closest ta defining Augustus' hypothetical

republicanism. While he personally executes this particular act. he does

so at the express wish of the senate, the highest authority in the res

publica.8 This was the first stage of Augustus' rise to power. The

propriety that this passage shows, irrespective of the fact that it may have

been a premeditated Augustan dramatisation, increases the laudatory

nature of Livy's account.

Now to Roman history. The administration had now established

appropriate public disposition for Augustus to return to Rome. The

Princeps entered the city in August 29 BC and he immediately began his

programme of Roman renewal on several levels. First he celebrated a

triple triumph, the largest public event since the funeral of Caesar. In the

8 Dio Cassius, too, gives the direct credit for the closure of the temple to the senate at 51.20.4

procession his collegues and the magistrates followed him instead of

preceding him: a reversal of convention that helped place Augustus at the

forefront of public a t ten t i~n .~ This is an adept precis of the new order as it

reveals the new Roman power: the Emperor and the magistrates as

constitutional partners. but the order of procession demonstrates where

the effective authority now existed. If the reader believes Livy when he

confesses his presence at the closure of the Temple of Janus, it is also

possible, in fact probable, that he was present at this larger, more public

event. Once Augustus was physically positioned in Rome he began an

extensive building - or rebuilding programme - that he undertook between

29 and 27 BC. The government initiated four major projects: the temple of

the divine Julius, the temple of Apollo on the Palatine, the Mausoleum of

Augustus and the first pantheon.'' After years of neglect during the civil

wars, this urban renewal must have created a positive reflection on the

Princeps. For Livy, who had recently arrived in Rome, the positive

impression rnust have been more powerful: first there was the awe of this

city, the capital of a world empire; secondly, this city experiencing growth.

This, then, is what leads Livy to label Augustus the establisher and

restorer of temples (4.20.7).

H. H. Scullard, From the Gracchi to Nero, London, 1982, 209.

10 M. Cary and H. H. Scullard, A Historv of Rome, London, 1992, 324.

But, most important. is the constitutional rebuilding that was in

progress as well." This republican refoundation was not an immediate

event that brought the full restoration of the constitution. but it was a

gradua1 intellectual restoration of confidence. Augustus returned to Rome

in August 29 BC as consul and, with his collegue Agrippa, he held the

consulship of 28 BC with both men present in the city for the full year.

Scholars place a substantial amount of emphasis on this fact as it marked

the first time in twenty years that the two consuls had remained in the city;

it was a very symbolic act that suggested the return of government

c ~ n t i n u i t ~ . ' ~ Without accepting the censorship, Augustus conducted the

first census since 86 BC and a necessary reorganisation of the senate.13

That Augustus did not hold the censorship is viewed as a political move to

avoid alienating the a r i s t o ~ r a c ~ . ' ~ To the public these acts show Augustus

actively rebuilding the Roman government, irrespective of the fact that this

reconstruction may have been tailored to suit his political interests.

Regardless, it appeared that the government was once again assuming a

coherent form after decades of neglect. A coherent form that was still

11 Dio Cassius summarises the events of this period at 53.1.7-53.2.5.

'' Scullard, 209 and Cary and Scullard, 317.

13 Syme, The Roman Revolution, 349, argues that the purge of the senate was necessary from Augustus' political point of view: there were some 300 members appointed by Antony and the Republic in 32 BC. The new senate was "a formidable collection of hard-faced men enriched by war and revolutionn (350) and "the senators knew the true purpose of Augustus' adoptions of Republican forms and phrasesn (351).

14 Scullard, 210.

markedly republican. Livy, as the other inhabitants of Rome, would have

noticed these acts.

After seventeen months in Rome, his reorganisation of the senate

and the census complete, he was ready to offer his constitutional

covenant on 13 January 27 B C . ' ~ To return to the Res Gestae: per

consensum uniuersorum potitus rerum omnium, rem publicam ex mea

potestate in senatus populique Romani arbitrium transtuli (34.1). Again

the Emperor's desire for a positive public image is evident. He begins by

professing that there was full public consent for his act and he then states

that the transfer of the res publica was from his power to that of the

senate and the people of Rome. The senate did have a strategic role in

the settlement, for it was at a meeting of the senate that Augustus

resigned and by resigning here he symbolically recognised the senate as

the highest authority in the state, one to which even he must answer?

Livy, coming from a town known for its pro-senate perspective, would

have noticed such an acknowledgment and approved of it, although

15 Dio Cassius 53.3.43.10 presents the speech that Augustus made with an appropriate republican tone. It is interesting to note that after the speech Dio states that sorne of the senators perceived Augustus' real purpose (53.1 1 A).

16 Buchan, 143. describes Augustus' supposed belief in the senate well: '[it] should reign Iike a constitutional rnonarch, and it should be permitted to govern up to the full limit of its capacity*. See also Lily Ross Taylor. who maintains that the reorganisation may be viewed as an action which formally brought the end to the civil war which, according to Taylor, was a war between Julius Caesar and the senate (Lily Ross Taylor, Partv Politics in the Aue of Caesar, Los Angeles, 1964, 162).

probably he would have kept such approval private.'' The resignation

itself was uncomplicated. Augustus relinquished al1 his powers and the

provinces under his jurisdiction to the state. As he had planned, the

senate requested that he not abandon the state that he had so recently

saved. He accepted a special ten-year commission that gave hirn

proconsular power with jurisdiction over Gaul. Spain and syria.18 The res

publica, the senate and the magistracies, were allowed to function as

before. The Emperor also continued to participate in the government

through his occupation of the consulship: 27 BC marked his seventh

consulship, his fifth consecutive term and he continued to act as consul

without interruption until 23 BC. The Augustan constitutional settlement,

therefore, did not restrict or end the Emperor's powers; it gave them a

formal, legal definition. Therefore, the settlement resulted in both the

solidification of the Emperor's position and the creation of a positive

public image: the Emperor achieved his res publica restituta.lg After his

" Patrick Walsh, Liw: His Historical Aims and Methods, London, 1996. 1, notes that Livy's home town was farnous for its strict moral code and its pro-senate sympathies.

l8 Scullard, 21 0-21 1 and Cary and Scullard, 31 8.

19 Scullard, 212 and Syme, The Roman Revolution, 314 where Syme defines the new official governrnent position on the constitutional settlement best. First he says that 'in name, semblance and in theory the sovereignty of the Senate and the People had been restored"; and, further: 'before the law, Augustus was ... a Roman magistrate, invested with special powers for a term of yearsn. Considering Syme's well known dislike of Augustus, the second comment is a considerable understatement.

settlement. Augustus left Rome untif 23 BC to allow his new state time to

settle and accommodate itself to its new position.2o

The Praefatio conveys Livy's desire to avoid contemporary events

and, as a result. he offers no direct response to the Augustan settlement.

Although the final nine books of Ab Urbe Condifa narrate the events of the

Augustan res publica to 9 BC, in these books there is a perceptible

absence of constitutional or, for that matter, any internai materiaL2'

Therefore, scholars search for a possible indirect response, an answer

that for many materialises in the form of ~arnillus." There are two main

reasons for this parallel. The first links conternporary history and the

narrative as the Augustan settlement and the cornpositon of the Camillan

- - - - -

20 Cary and Scullard, 31 9.

'' Syme, "Livy and Augustus", 452, states that Livy's narrative of 30-9 BC was written in a tone of positive acceptance and that it had benevolent colouring. He also calls the section of books 134-142 the res publica of Augustus. On the other hand, Mark Toher states that Livy appears to have avoided domestic affairs and focused on military conquests as he sought to avoid sensitive political issues. The periochae for books 134-142 seem to agree with Toher as Augustus is only mentioned on three occasions: book 134 (C. Caesar rebus compositis et omnibus prouinciis in certam forrnam redactis Augustus quoque cognominatus est); book 135 (bellum ... a Caesare aduersus Hispanos gestum refertur); and book 142 ([Drusus] laudatus est a Caesare Augusto). Althoug h it is possible to read the surnrnary for book 134 as a possible reference to the constitutional settlement of 27 BC, the vague nature of the passage does not yield any insight into the tone that Livy may have employed (Mark Toher. 'Augustus and the Evolution of Roman Historiography", From Rewblic to Empire, Kurt Raaflaub and Mark Toher eds.. Los Angeles, 1990, 152).

22 for more detailed discussions on the Augustus-Camillus parallel see Walsh, Liw: His Historical Aims and Methods, 16; Robert Ogilvie, A Commentarv on L iw 1-V, Oxford, 1965, 742-743; Erich Burck, Heidelberg, 1992, 170-176; and Gary Miles, 88-95.

episode in book five as approximately contemporaneous events? The

second claims that Camillus stands in equipoise between Romulus and

the Emperor. the founder and refounder of Rome, r e ~ ~ e c t i v e l ~ . ~ ~ One

might also recognise a military parallel between Camillus and Augustus.

Each saves Rome from the greatest threat so far: Camillus defeats the

Gauls and Augustus defeats Antony and Cleopatra. On the constitutional

side, each saves the republic through the occupation of a particular office

that enables the constitution to last: Camillus sentes as dictator while the

state recovers from the Gallic occupation, and Augustus occupies the

consulship after the defeat of Antony and Cleopatra until his constitutional

settlement has the chance to solidify. The oration that Camillus delivers

at 5.51-5.54 may be viewed in a constitutional context as a further parallel

between Augustus and Camillus. It is as dictator, with the senators as

moral support, that Camillus succeçsfully convinces the Romans to

refound Rome on religious terms. As consul, Augustus made a speech

before the senate that refounds the city in a constitutional sense. From

this comparison Augustus emerges as the more pious republican, for he

does not raise himself to the dictatorship; he remains within the ordinary

constitution. But it is at this point that cornparisons end. Christina Kraus

23 James Luce, 'Livy, Augustus and the Forum Augustum", From Re~ub l ic to Empire, Kurt Raaflaub and Mark Toher, eds., Los Angeles, 1990, 124 identifies 25 BC as the last probable date for the publication of books I-V.

24 Edwards, 4849 , where her calculation is as follows: Romulus founds Rome in 753 BC; Camillus argues successfully for Rome's refoundation in 390 BC; Augustus, finally, refounds Rome in 27 BC. Camillus' refoundation stands 365 years after Romulus and 365 years before Augustus.

15

notes that Livy does not make direct cornparisons between the Emperor

and any republican hero? But it is clear that Camillus and Augustus

share parallels on several levels. Livy's elevation of Camillus to the status

of a cult hero reflects favourably on the Princeps.

The Ernperor desired that the Roman people believe that he was a

republican and, through his settlement of 27 BC, he had restored the res

publica. It was during this organisation of opinion that Livy produced the

first pentad of Ab Urbe Condita. A recent arriva1 in Rome, Livy would

have been enthralled by the power of the capital of the world and the

rebuilding of it that was in progress, both the physical and the

constitutional city. Francesca Santoro L'hoir summarises Livy's

perspective well: "Livy himself had lived through the bloody years when

factionalism, carried to its ultimate absurdity, had rent the country

asunder; he had aiso witnessed the restoration of order and the

reconstruction of the State by the one man to whom he had every reason

to be gratefu1".26 Therefore, Livy's recreation of the res publica was not a

totally literary product. When Livy saw the Augustan republic function, it

reinforced his own republican principles and assisted his recreation of it in

Ab Urbe Condifa Il-V.

- - - -

Z5 Kraus, Ab Urbe Condita VI, 108, does admit that Camillus' triple triumph at 6.4.1 recalls Augustus' triumph of 29 BC.

Z6 Francesca Santoro L'hoir. 'Heroic Epithets and Recurrent Themes in Ab Urbe Condita", TAPA 120 (7 990). 241.

CHAPTER M O

THE PRESENTATlON OF THE RES PUBLICA

Livy summarises the transition from monarchy to republic in the final

chapter of book one of Ab Urbe Condita:

L. Tarquinius Superbus regnauit annos quinque et uiginti. Regnatum Romae ab condita urbe ad liberatam annos ducentos quadraginta quattor. Duo consuies inde comitiis centuriatis a praefecto urbis ex cammentariis Ser. Tuili creati sunt, L. lunius Brutus et L. Tarquinius Collatinus (1 -60.3).

This paragraph serves two purposes. It stresses the end of the monarchy

and the beginning of the republic and Livy carefully constructs this

passage of transformation with three sentences that bring into prominence

the transition of the government from monarchy to republic. As with the

previous monarchs he formally marks the end of the Tarquin's reign when

he states the number of years that he has ruled, regnauit annos quinque

et uiginti. Next, he closes his account of the monarchy in the same

fashion when he states the full duration of this constitutional structure, two

hundred forty-four years. Finally, the historian announces the election of

the consuls, the magistrates who immediately supersede the king. The

form of government has now changed. However, it is important to note

that at this point Livy does not state that the new government is the

republic. It is ironic that he explicitly names the discarded form of

government but not the new constitution. If Livy were an enthusiastic

republican, then one would expect the republic to be formally identified

(and, possibly, its virtues to be suggested in some way) as soon as it is

created. Instead, the election of the first consuls (duo consules) marks

the creation of the res publica: a particular office represents the

constitution as a whole. Further, the magnitude of this moment in

constitutional history is emphasised by the restatement of a variation of

the title of the narrative (ab condita urbe) which, scholars note. appears at

key moments in the narrative, usually at the start or, in this case. at the

end of a particular group of books when the history reaches a significant

period in Roman history'

Livy encourages this belief when he begins book two with a second

preface, an act that suggests that the start of the res publica marks a new

beginning in his history, the history of the res publica.2 The first sentence

indicates how the historian feels about the new constitution: liberi iam hinc

populi Romani res pace belloque gestas, annuos magistratus, imperiaque

legum potentiora quam hominum peragam (2.1.1). Liberfas is the first

word of the book and it ties the theme of liberty to the new consti t~t ion.~

Beyond this point, however, few scholars discuss the constitutional

' Kraus, Ab Urbe Condita VI, 83, refers to the preface at the start of book six, where the word order is the same as it is here: quae ab condita urbe (6.1.1).

David Levene, Reliaion in Liw, Leiden. 1993, 148, confesses that although the subject of his book is the use of religion in Ab Urbe Condita, Levene identifies the general structure of book two as dictated by republican themes: the establishment o f the republic to the death of Tarquin (2.1-2.21); the first patrician-plebeian conflicts and the creation of the tribunate (2.22.1 -2.33.5); the Coriolanus episode (2.33.6-2.40.14); and further conflicts of the orders and wars with neighbours (2.41 -2.65).

3 Robert Ogilvie, A Cemmentarv on Liw 1-V, Oxford, 1965. 233.

significance of this passage.

analyses this passage within

legal history: first, it provides

Hans Hattenhauer is an exception when he

the significantly wider context of European

a legal context to the republican idea;

secondly, it clearly defines the contrariety between monarchy and

republic.4 Further, Robert Ogilvie states that this first republican book of

Ab Urbe Condita presents a number of threats to Roman liberty from both

within and without the city; each episode illuminates the need of

immutable vigilance to sustain it. To have the res publica, Livy expounds,

is to be free. However, the res publica is not yet explicitly mentioned. As

at the end of book one, the historian employs synecdoche. The elective

offices - duo consules at the end of book one and, more generally the

general annui magistratus at the start of book two - portray the whole

const i tut i~n.~ The final phrase of this republican introduction, imperiaque

legum potentiora quam hominum, defines the legal justification of the

republic: the rule of law is greater than the rule of men, which monarchy

was. That the rule of men is improper is ernphasised in the second

sentence when Livy states that it was the arrogance (superbia), or the

unconstitutional demeanour, of the last king that made the new liberty

opportune at this time. In the third sentence, the appearance of

conditores ... urbis - another variation of the title - reconfirms this belief in a

4 Hattenhauer, 55.

5 J. L. Whiteley ed., Book II, London, 1963, 101, considers the expulsion of the kings the first part and the election of the consuls to be the second part in Rome's conversion to a republic.

new beginning in the narrative that coincides with the inauguration of the

new constitution. Finally, Ogilvie identifies the use of pastorum at 2.1.4

as significant. as it is echoed by Camillus twice in his oration at 5.53.9

and 5.54.2, because 'the first section o f the history of the Republic is

closed by the repetition of words from its beginningn.' Already, it appears,

the historian looks forward in his history, to a point when the res publica

has become firmly entrenched in Roman constitutional culture.

Irrespective of this new beginning, the monarchy is still present in

the early section of book two. To let the republic establish and entrench

itself without resistance is not possible. It must demonstrate its

superiority. Its eventual victory over the monarchy will make evident its

constitutional righteousness. In the first two chapters of book two, the

monarchy is mentioned repeatedly: the word rex appears twelve times,

regnum appears twice, and Livy uses the verb regnare nine tirnes.

Despite the constitution that the Romans believe to be the superior form

of government, there is still no mention of the res publica. At this point

the historian allows the theme of libertas to represent the new

constitution, and Livy mentions it nine times in the first two chapters as an

opposition to the monarchy.

The continued presence of the monarchy is reinforced in the second

chapter, where the republic undergoes the first test of its resolve. This

happens in the episode of the consul Collatinus, the fellow magistrate of

6 Ogilvie, 235.

Brutus; therefore, he shares with Brutus the credit for the creation of the

new constitution. Collatinus is presented as a potential threat to the state

as he shares the same name as the former royal fa mi^^.^ Even though

this shared name does not suggest a shared constitutional ideology, the

public express what they feel is genuine concern that this is a national

threat: non credere populum Romanurn solidam libertatem reciperatarn

esse; regium genus, regium nornen non solum in ciuitate sed etiam in

imperio esse; id officere, id obstare libertati (2.2.6). With the presence of

a member of the former royal family not only still in the city but also in a

position of power, the Roman people cannot enjoy the liberty which they

have recently won. It is a hindrance to liberty and, therefore, a threat to

the republic. It falls to the other consul, Brutus, to act on behalf of the

constitution and defeat this threat. He rnakes a direct appeal to Collatinus

to remove this fear by changing his name: 'hunc tu' inquit, Yua uoluntate,

L. Tarquini, remoue metum. meminimus, fatemuc eiecisfi reges; absolue

beneficium tuum, aufer hinc regium nomen' (2.2.7). Through the use of

direct speech, which Livy ernploys only in matters of considerable public

importance, he stresses the constitutional gravity of this situation. The

plenteousness of personal pronouns is thought to be indicative of the

"mounting passionsn of the ~ o m a n s . ~ The potential crisis is further

emphasised when Brutus addresses his fellow consul by his regal name

7 Ogilvie, 238, cites Collatinus as the first of five early threats against libedas.

8 Og ilvie, 240.

which emphasises that the rnonarchy is still present in Rome. Brutus has

already prepared the reader for this confrontation when he recites the

oath that Rome will never accept any king: ibi omnium pnmum ius

iurandurn populi recitat neminem regnare passuros nec esse Romae unde

periculum libertafi foret (2.2.5). It is Collatinus who can solve this

problem, as Brutus clearly states through the use of the two irnperatives

(remoue and aufer). Collatinus does not answer Brutus' plea. his actions

symbolise his regard for the republic: he abdicates his office, moves his

property to a neigbouring state and expires his life in exile (2.2.10). As an

immediate response to this withdrawal, in the two sentences that follow,

the res publica reasserts itself: Brutus ex senatus consulto ad populum

tulit ut omnes Tarquiniae gentis exsoles essent; collegam sibi comitiis

centuriatis creauit P. Valerium, quo adiutore reges eiecerat (2.2.1 1 ) . The

new constitution successfully passes its first test. They elect a consul to

replace another without any political agitation to Rome.

Now the republic must directly deal with the issue of the monarchy.

In this case the threat is a possible military assault. The threat from the

monarchy moves from an interna1 threat to an external one. Ambassadors

arrive from the royal family on the pretence of negotiating compensation

for lost property, and the senate debates the matter for several days

(2.3.5). lmmediately Livy establishes the unconstitutional behaviour and

the flawed constitutional logic of the monarchy through the representative

actions of the ambassadors. The historian admits that sympathies for the

king still exist in Rome, but he explains these sympathies as primitive

desires for selfish persona! gain that is only possible with a king: regem

hominem esse, a quo impetres, ubi ius, ubi iniuria opus sit; esse gratiae

locum, esse benficio (2.3.3). This is plainly an incompatible view of the

theme of libertas: where there is favour and benefit for one there is also

ill-favour and loss for another and under such conditions the whole nation

cannot be free. Again, the narrative contrasts the two constitutions: while

the senate debates the matter of compensation, the ambassadors work

towards exploiting the monarchist sympathies in the city: interirn legati alia

rnoliri; aperte bona repetentes clam reciperandi regni consilia struere; et

tamquam ad id quod agi uidebatur ambientes, nobiiiurn adulescentiurn

animas pertemptant (2.3.6). There is some irony in the fact that the

ambassadors, who are in Rome to resolve a political altercation, should

involve themselves with anti-government elements within the state. In

public they seek satisfaction through a system which, in private, they

endeavour to subvert.

The failure and exposure of the plot is not achieved by the efforts of

the Roman people, but by a household slave. Again, Livy employs irony

when he identifies a slave in the household of the Vitellii who, after

overhearing the plot, immediately places the matter before the consuls

(2.4.6). A slave, someone who has no formal rights under res publica.

follows the correct procedure when he reports the plot to the consuls, the

highest authority in the state and, therefore, the most capable people to

deal with the matter. After the Romans defeat the conspiracy, Livy notes

that the slave receives his freedom and is made a citizen of Rome; he has

acted to protect the nation and he is made a mernber of the nation

(2.5.9).' The ambassors, however, do not receive the punishment that

some feel they deserve: de Iegatis paululum addubitatum est; et

quamqoarn uisi sont cornmisisse ut hostium loco essent, ius tamen

gentium ualuit (2.4.7). Despite the initial desire for punishment, the ius

gentium, the law of nations, is maintained and the ambassadors are

allowed to leave Rome unmolested. Again, the res publica passes

another critical test as it does not exceed its authority and violate

international law.

The second year of the history of Rome as a republic, as a free

nation, begins at 2.9. However, the republican constitution must still

safeguard itself against the monarchy. This chapter begins with a

statement of the new consuls for the year, Publius Valerius and Titus

Lucretius. This is the second term for Valerius, thus he maintains

essential political continuity in this embryonic period. After this

introductory sentence the monarchy returns to the narrative when Livy

states that the exiled royal family has taken refuge with Porsinna, the king

of Clusium. Porsinna undertakes the task of attacking the Roman state on

two principles, both of which are in contradiction with each other:

-- -

Ogilvie, 241, labels this story as invention: 'the name is fictitious, the date and circumstances are apocryphal, belonging to the fantasy world of legal precedentsn. Its inclusion here, therefore, strictly serves to further Livy's glorification of the republic.

Porsenna cum regem esse Romae, tum Etruscae gentis regem, amplum

Tuscis ratus, Romam infesto excercitu uenit (2.9.4). First, he believes

that Rome should have a king because it would be safer for Etruria: he

fears that the republican ideas in Rome may spread to neighbouring cities

such as his own. Secondly, it would give honour to the Etruscans if the

king of Rome was of the same nation. In both cases, Prosinna shows the

archetypal ideological defectiveness of al1 monarchs: his concern is for his

own personal interests rather than Romans interests or, for that matter,

his own people. This is a further example that shows how Livy presents

an indirect attack on the monarchy, an attack that highlights the

superiority of the res publica. Porsinna makes two assaults upon the city:

the first is a direct assault that is repulsed due to the brave actions of

several heroes (2.10). Then he attempts to lay siege to the city, an act

which also fails (2.1 1.1-2.14.4). Porsinna's acceptance of rnilitary defeat

is also a constitutional defeat as he reconciles himself to the existence of

Roman republicanism. This ideological abdication comes shortly after an

attempt on his own Iife (2.12.7) and the appearance of the Roman

ambassadors, who restate the Roman fervor for the republic:

non in regno populum Romanum sed in libertate esse. ita induxisse in animum, hostibus potius quam portas regibus patefacere: ea esse uota omnium ut qui libertati erit in illa urbe finis, idem urbi sit. proinde s i saluam esse uellet Romam, ut patiatur liberam esse orare (2.15.3-2.15.4).

The Roman ambassadors do not seek to overthrow Porsinna's

government as the Tarquin family sought to do in Rome: they are above

such unconstitutional acts. They present themselves for the soie purpose

of affirming Roman constitutional determination. Livy appears to reward

the Romans for this resolve, as he mentions libertas three times and

regnum only once. In the battle of words, the res publica emerges as

victor. a reversal of the first two chapters of book two. They succeed and

Porsinna recongiseç Roman libertas.

The final constitutional event of this book occurs at 2.44. where

once again Rome engages Veii in war. With the rnonarchy no longer an

issue. and the Roman state growing stronger with each successive

conflict, those in Veii who wish the destruction of the Roman state move

from military strategy to constitutional strategy. They acknowledge that

the only hope for the defeat of Rome is through civil discord, a

constitutional crisis: in spem uentum erat discordia infestina dissolui rem

Romanam posse (2.44.7). The enemies of Rome have learned that in

order to defeat the physical city of Rome, they must also defeat the

intellectual city. To defeat any other nation only requires a physical

victory through military means; to defeat Rome one must first break the

constitutional city. To make Rome's victory more impressive, he must first

show the nation as weak and then show their reaffirrnation of their

republican faith which in turn will bring military victory. Therefore, it is a

double victory, military and constitutional. The possibility for Rome's

defeat is already present: duas ciuitates ex una facfas; suos cuique parti

magistratus, suas leges esse (2.44.9). The res pubiica appears to be

failing, with the patrician and plebeian magistrates rancorous with each

other. However, the weakness of the enemy makes such a defeat

improbable: the only assault that the enemy can produce against the

intellectual city materialises in the form of shouting insults at the consuls

in the hope that this would encourage a hasty assault upon them (2.45.3-

2.45.4). At this the Roman soldiers quickly put aside any mistrust of the

consuls they may have previously expressed and enter into battle with a

confidence that brings victory. Human emotions. although successiully

aroused, work to reinforce the res publics." Livy notes the mutual

success of both the patricians and plebeians in the battle: omnium il10 die,

qua piebis, qua patrum, eximia uirtus fuit (2.45.16). The historian shows

pro-republican constitutional resolve of the Romans to be insurrnountable.

Although Livy acknowledges an atmosphere of distrust between the

patrician and plebeian sides, the enemy is unable to exploit this and their

actions only achieve further concord between patrician and plebeian

groups.

Livy begins books three and four - the central books of the

republican group of the first pentad - with what may be identified as a

constitutional preface to the narrative: at the beginning of both books the

author names the new consuls for the first year of each book. 467 BC and

445 BC respectively. Book three is dominated by the decernvirate, an

office that temporarily replaces the proper constitution. Separate from the

10 Michele Ducos, "Les Passions, Les Hommes et L'Histoire dans L'Oeuvre Tite- ive', REL 65 (1 987). 139.

narrative of the decemvirate, the third book continues the glorification of

the republic." The first consequential episode of the book presents the

Romans engaged in another war with the Aequi. In the course of the

battle, the Romans stress the importance of victory; defeat in battle is to

suffer the defeat of the res publica. When the Romans learn that one of

the consuls is under siege from the enemy. an announcement that comes

frorn their allies the Hernici, the senators express grave fears and order

the other consul to see that he preserves the res publica from any

potential threat:

Hernici et male pugnatum et consolem exercitumque obsidet-i nuntiauerunt tantumque terrorem incussere patribus ut, quae forma senatus consulti ultimae semper necessitatis habita est, Postumio, alteri consulum, negotium daretur uideret ne quid res publica detrimenti caperet (3.4.9).

To have one who holds a political office under threat causes distress for

the senators, who consider the appointment of the remaining consul as

dictator in order to Save the republic. Livy makes this a constitutional

predicament - instead of only a military situation - through the repeated

evocation of the political offices, such as the senate who debate the

matter, their proposed response, and the consul, who executes their

instructions.

" John Briscoe, 'The First Decaden. Livy, T. A. Dorey ed., London 1971. 18n. in his cornparison of res internae (political or, in this case, constitutional rnaterial) and res externae (military material) in the first pentad, says that book three contains the greatest amount of domestic material (71 %). Book two, which introduces the res publica, comes last of the republican books of Il-V group with 43% of rnaterial devoted to res internae. Therefore, while book two introduces the republican constitution. book three lays further stress upon it, even though Livy does this through a condemnation of the decemvirate.

After the military threat to the constitution is removed, a crisis of

public health threatens the nation when a plague hits Rome and attacks

both men and animals, the full range of the corporeal world (3.6.2). Then

it moves against the incorporeal world, the res publica. At 3.6.8 Livy

records the death of one consul and this is followed by the illness and

death of the second consul. The pestilence appears to eiiminate the

consulship and then the tension heightens when it begins to deplete the

senate. However, the Romans confirm their tenacity and work to maintain -

the repubiic despite the reduced manpower: munus uigiliarum senatores,

gui per aetatem ac ualetudinem poterant, per se ipsi obibant; circumitio ac

cura aedilium plebi erat; ad eos somma rerum ac maiestas consularis

imperii uenerat (3.6.9). The duties lose their patrician or plebeian

exclusiveness when the senators perform the duty of watchmen, and are

supervised by the aediles. Further, Livy describes the aediles as gaining,

for a time, the majesty of consular power, a patrician office.12 This is a

remarkable event as the plebeian aediles are not mentioned as actual

magistrates of the republic.'3 Therefore, the non-magistrates act to

protect the constitution, and are accepted by the real magistrates. The

offices rernain intact and the republican constitution is maintained.

This effort is rewarded by the gods in the next chapter who, after

Rome's display of constitutional vigilance, corne to the aid of the state

l2 Ogilvie, 406.

13 see 6.1.1 for Livy's identification of the offices that, he feels, constitute the repu blic.

when the Volsci and Aequi launch a new attack. The attack is not

successful. As Livy notes, they have the spirit of plunderers rather than

soldiers (3.7.2). Again, Livy ties the military world to the constitutional

world: because the Romans make extraordinary efforts to keep the res

publica functioning, the divine world rewards them with a weakend enemy

and they are prevented from a possible defeat that could bring an end to

the republican constitution. The divine world, Livy suggests, rewards the

superior constitutional ideology.

Livy continues to speak of disease in the state at 3.20.8, although

the sense of the disease shifts from the physical to the metaphorical when

a plague among the Roman people becomes a constitutional infection. As

the political situation of the state is illness, only drastic remedies will cure

it: non ita ciuitatem aegram esse ut consuetis remediis sisti possit;

dictatore opus esse rei publicae, ut, qui se mouerit ad soliicitandum

stafum ciuitatis, sentiat sine prouocatione dictaturam esse (3.20.8).

Quinctius' constitutional evocation falls into three parts: first, the disease

exists within the physical city of Rome, the ciuitas, a disease for which the

population deçires a cure. Next, the historian mentions the intellectual

city, the republican constitution (res publica) and the cure for the

constitutional problem, the office of the dictator.I4 Then the two elements

are brought together: the word ciuitas appears with the participle

-

14 Ogilvie, 432, accuses Livy of exaggeration here, for the consuls would suffice as they were beyond tribunician veto. For effect, therefore, Livy invokes what he views as the higher office.

dictaturus; Livy joins the corporeal and incorporeal cities. The republican

constitution has now grown strong enough to be able to cure the physical

city.

The dominant episode of the third book of Ab Urbe Condita is the

temporary hiatus of the republican constitution through the creation of the

decemvirate. By this time, fifty-nine years since its foundation, the

libertas that this constitution has created has become firmly entrenched in

the collective Roman constitutional consciousness. The dominating mood

of these chapters, chapters in which the republic enters constitutional

hibernation, is suffocation. Despite the brief duration of this hibernation,

the narrative expands considerably as Livy devotes twenty-two chapters to

the two-year period. The nation quickly laments the loss of libertas:

deploratur in perpetuum libertas, nec uindex quisguam exsistit aut futurus

uidetur. nec ipsi solurn desponderant anirnos, sed contemni coepti erant a

finifimis populis qui imperium ibi esse ubi non esset libedas indignabantur

(3.38.2). In this passage the repetition of iibertas is ironic: Livy employs it

to highlight the absence of liberty. The previous sentence goes as far as

to suggest the reason for this loss of liberty. The decemvirs do not hold

the annual election of the magistrates and in response to this Livy

proclairns: id uero regnum haud dubie uideri (3.38.1). it is like monarchy.

The end of the decemvirate and the return of the republic to itç proper

place is marked by joy. The senators proclaim that prosperity and good

fortune have returned to the people and the republic: quod bonum faustum

felixque sit uobis reique publicae (3.54.8). The separate identification of

the republic ernphasises the constitutional zeal of the people, who

applaud the senators for the return of libertas.

Some scholars think that there is no significant narrative event in

the fourth book of Ab Urbe Condita; it acts as a link between the

decernvirate of the third book and the destruction of Veii and the Gallic

sack of Rome that constitutes book five." One of the constitutional

highlights of this book occurs ai 4.5. where the plebeians argue for an

increase in their rights. The centre of this argument is the right of

intermarriage with patricians, an act that, the plebeians argue, will make a

single, and therefore a stronger. state: unam hanc ciuitatem (4.5.5). The

plebeians express their argument in constitutional terms:

si coalescere, si iungi miscerique uobis priuatus necessitudinibus possunt, si spes, si aditus ad honores uiris strenuis et fortibus datur; si in consorfio, si in societate rei publicae esse, si, quod aequandae libertatis est, in uicem annuis magistratibus parere afque imperitare licet (4.5.5).

The concept of liberty as the product of the republic appears once more.

To be a mernber of the res publica, the plebeians believe, is to be free

and in order to achieve this rnembership, they feel they should be allowed

to hold the magistracies and exercise the powers of these offices. narnely

the consulship. As is frequently the case in the early books of Livy, the

-

15 John Briscoe, 2. Ogilvie agrees with Briscoe when he says that book four is a bridge between the decemvirate and Rome's wars against Veii and the Gauls (Ogilvie, 526). He contradicts himself later when, at the start of his commentary on book five, he states a different purpose for book four: '[it contains] pointed political lessons - the necessity for al1 parties in the state, governed as well as government, [to exercise] mutual consideration (moderatio)" (626).

speech of the plebeians appears in indirect discourse. As their desires

were not fulfilled at this tirne, the historian does not think their arguments

are important enough to be recorded in direct speech. The consul

completes this sense of constitutional exclusion when he declines their

petition in a short, direct address (4.6.2). Being a full member of the res

publica. Livy suggests, gives an individual a gift for oratory.

In the many wars that occur in book four the republic is tested many

times. in particular at 4.38 when Rome once again engages the Volscians.

The constitutional defeat cornes in the form of the consul Sempronius,

who is unable to secure a swift victory in battle. For a consul not to be

able to win in battle is to question the authority vested in his political

office. In the case of this consul the lack of confidence is clear: nihil nec

imperium nec maiestas ualebat (4.38.1). As the consul fails to coordinate

the Roman forces successfully. it falls to another to do sol a plebeian,

Tempanius, and he does so in direct speech (4.38.3). Prior to his address

to his troops. he calls on his men to Save the state, not the ciuitas, but the

republic: qui corn magna uoce exclamasset ut equites, qui saluam rem

publicam uellet esse, ex equis desilirent (4.38.2). In light of the desire

that the plebeians show for full membership in the republic at the start of

this book, membership that would include election to the consulship. it is

appropriate that it is a plebeian who endeavours to aide the state. In this

example he accomplishes the duty of the consul despite the fact that he

does not possess the majesty of the office. Tempanius' efforts to Save

the constitution bring him recognition as if he were a magistrate of the res

publica. In the confusion of the night battle, both the Roman and Volscian

forces withdraw as both believed that they had been defeated.

Tempanius, on the other hand, remains with his forces and it is not until

the morning that he determines the threat to be at an end when he

questions his soldiers (4.39.8). He also discovers that the Roman camp

has been abandoned and he begins his way back to Rome, unaware of

the fate of the consul (4.39.9). The humiliation of the consul in this

episode may seem to question the authority of the office and even the

constitution itself, but the efforts of a plebeian, who accomplishes the duty

of the offke with distinction in the eyes of Livy, restores the prestige of

the republic. In order for the republic to continue, it must draw its officers

from a wider circle of Romans. Should it do this, as it does in this

passage, it will prevail and become further entrenched in the Roman

identity.

The subsequent two constitutional episodes of the fourth book are

concerned with the divine world. The conflict between the orders

continues to the point where the tribunes maneuver to prevent the

patrician elements of the constitution from functioning. The consuls are

temporarily replaced by the interrex, and the tribunes block the actions of

this magistrate. Livy then records the election of Lucius Papirius

Mugillanus as interrex, who condzmns both the patricians and plebeians

for their poor constitutional effort. Both sides, he states, have forsaken

the republic: postremo L. Papirius Mugillanos proditus interrex, casfigando

nunc patres, nunc tribunos plebi, desertam omissamque ab hominibus rem

publicam, deorum prouidentia (4.43.9). The constitution, and therefore

Rome. has been neglected by the human world, but the gods provide the

necessary care. If the divine world provides such a protection for the

nation. the forrn of government that Rome chooses after the expulsion of

the kings must be the right one. He continues this theme later in his

address, where he states that deliverance from both a civil and foreign

war is not possible: quae si in unum conueniant, uix deorum opibus quin

obruatur Romana res resisti possit (4.43.1 1 ) . The gods may believe in the

republic, but even they cannot Save it if the current constitutional crisis is

allowed to continue. Mugillanus attempts to offer a solution: the

consulship and tribunate would be displaced by the rniltary tribunate until

the problem is resolved. The people agree and they elect the first military

tribunes immediately after his address (4.43.12-4.44.1). Livy's use of

indirect discourse in this debate is significant for it prevents either side in

the debate from standing above the other. The argument is unbiased and

the outcome is not a victory for one side over the other.

Book five is dominated by two, non-constitutional, episodes: the

final war with Veii and the sack of Rome by the Gauls. Despite this

emphasis, Livy manages to pursue his consitutional exposition. The book,

like the two previous ones, begins with the election of magistrates. This

election at Rome is contrasted with the political condition at Veii where the

public declares its weariness with the election process and chooses a

king: Veientes contra, taedio annuae arnbitionis quae interdum

discordiarum causa erat, regem creaoere (5.1.3). This lack of republican

resolve is contrasted by the number of military tribunes which Rome

elects, the largest number to date, an augmentation which emphasises

Rome's republican zeal; Livy proves the superiority of the Roman nation

through the ridicule of the alternative.'' Christina Kraus calls this episode

an example of the ethnographical mirror, where the actions of a foreign

people reflects on what happens at Rome. The decision by the Veians to

choose a form of government *as different from Rome's as possiblen is a

negative mirror; because of the poor defence of the Veians, the republican

convictions of the Romans are strengthened.17

Nonetheless, within the Roman state the tension between the

patricians and plebeians arises once more. Livy follows his customary

procedure and makes the plebeians voice their displeasure in indirect

speech, while the military tribune who responds does so in an cloquent.

direct address; thus the historian privileges the pro-constitutional oration.

In the speech that Appius Claudius delivers starting at 5.3.2, he expresses

l6 Ogilvie, 631, daims the number of military tribunes is a likely fabrication. Again, Livy shapes his history to illuminate the higher worth of those who espouse republicanism. R. 1. Ross ed., Livy, Book VI London, 1995, 48, notes that Livy last identifies a king at Veii at 4.7. He also notes that Livy does not state that Veii had what scholars estimate to be an oligarchic government in the interim; therefore, Livy makes their resumption of monarchy seern like a greater failure than it actually is.

" Christina Shuttleworth Kraus, "No Second Troy': Topoi and Refoundation in Livy, Book V*, TAPA 124 (1 994), 279.

gratitude at the timing for such a discussion, a tirne beneficial for the state

on account of its health: et cum laetor tandem longi errons uobis finem

factum esse, tum, guod secundis potissimum uestris rebus hic error est

sublatus, et uobis et propter uos rei publicae gratulor (5.3.3). The Roman

people are fortunate, he argues. that such a discussion has corne at a

time when the republic is in a state of good health. The republican

constitution has reached an important threshold. A man who represents

the constitution through his office declares that the res publica has now

developed to a point where it can endure critical self-analysis. In the

speech Appius encourages the plebeians to see their rnilitary service in a

constitutional perspective. as a service for the republic, a fact emphasised

by the use of res publica in three consective sentences (5.4.5, 5.4.6, and

5.4.7).

It is ai the conclusion of his defence of government policy that

Appius makes one of the most critical distinctions in the republican books

of the first pentad. The rnilitary tribune marks a clear differentiation

between the corporeal city and the res publica: adeo, quidquid tribunis

plebi loquitur, etsi prodendae patriae dissoluendaeque rei publicae est,

adsuestis, Quirites, audire et dulcedine potesfatis eius capti quaelibef sub

ea scelera latere sinifis (5.6.15). He distinguishes between the physical

city (patria) and the constitutional city (res publica): each is a separate

element. He reinforces his statement by the use of a separate gerundive

for each noun. Appius returns to the theme of libertas in the final

sentence of his speech: ea demum Romae libertas est, non senatum, non

magistratus, non leges, non mores maiorum, non institufa patrum, non

disciplinam uereri militiae (5.6.1 7) . Livy also stresses his belief in the

concept of the two cities through the context of the speech. The military

tribune answers a question of the nation, of the corporeal city, by

stressing the effect on the incorporeal city, the republic. To refuse military

service to defend the physical city of Rome is to reject the republican

constitution, the senate, the magistracies, and the laws.

Now that the historian has made this distinction between the two

cities, the people express their support for the superior, constitutional city.

The cal1 for soldiers after Appius finishes speaking is a cal1 for military

service on behalf of the republic: pedesfris ordinis aiunt nunc esse

operam rei publicae extra ordinem polliceri (5.7.7). This military carnpaign

has the intended result of defeating the city of Veii, a city that is

expressed only in corporeal, and therefore inferior, terms (orbe). Livy

makes clear whom he intends to be the victor. When the campaign

begins, the soldiers express their devotion to the constitution and those

who remain in the city do so as well by promising to protect both cities: qui

domi remanebant, quia tuentibus urbem opera quoque militari laborandum

seruiendumque rei publicae erat (5.10.5). Again, the appearance of both

cities reinforces the belief of the Roman people in the existence of the

constitution as an entity distinct from the physical city. Further, the use of

two gerunds for res publica while urbs has a single participle reveals

Livy's preference, and it suggests the inclination of the Romans.

Once the need for the presewation and the distinct existence of this

constitution has been established, Livy shows that it functions correctly.

At 5.31.9, after the defeat of Veii. an interrex is appointed when plague

attacks Rome that causes the censor tu die and both consuls to fall ill.

After two consecutive terms Lucius Valerius Potitus oversees the election

of military tribunes so that the state will have magistrates in case he too

should fall ill. The Romans affirm their conviction of the importance of the

constitutional offices; it can only exist if the hierarchical composition is

maintained. This need to maintain the structure of the res publica

appears again at 5.49 when the state asks Camillus - after he has

expelled the Gauls - to remain dictator so that the state may have an

executive officer in this time of uncertainty: eaque causa fuit non

abdicandae post triumphum dictaturae senatu, obsecrante ne rem

publicam in incerto relinqueret statu (5.49.9). As it is the senate who asks

Camillus to retain this special constitutional office beyond the normal

duration, he dismisses any concerns about whether such an action is

healthy for the constitution. As dictator Camillus argues for the

refoundation of the city of Rome; the incorporeal, intellectual city attempts

to Save the physical city. Camillus succeeds, and the pentad ends as the

Romans begin the process of refoundation. His success, the success of

the dictator, and the success of the nation as a whote, therefore, is the

success of the res publica.

CHAPTER THREE

THE OF FlCES OF THE RES PUBLICA

The republic is more than an incorporeal entity. a product of the Roman

intellect. It also has more tangible elements that can be seen by the

people: the offices that constitute the res publica and those who hold

these offices. The offices are the physical manifestations of the

constitution's authority and power, and tu ensure that the republic

functions effectively and Roman libertas is not threatened. these offices

must function correctly. Scholarship acknowledges the important role that

the offices play; Kraus and Woodman state that the annual election of

officiais is "the sufficient condition for the state's continuing existencen.'

Some of the offices. such as the censorship and the interrex, play a minor

role. It appears that Livy chooses to give prominence to those ofices that

are the most essential: the senate. the consulship. the tribunate, the

dictatorship and the military tribunate.* Also, Livy chooses to give a

substantial treatment of the quasi-republican decemvirate, an office that is

' Kraus and Woodman, 62.

In his 'prefacen at the start of book six Livy individually identifies the central offices of the first pentad: quae ab condita urbe Roma ad captam eandem Romani sub regibus primum, consulibus deinde ac dictatoribus decemuirisque ac tribunis consularibus gessere.. .exposui (6.1.1). Livy, looking backwards. views his history by the various constitutional offices that existed. It is interesting to note th& the senate is not mentioned here, perhaps because it was initiated under the monarchy. Livy wishes the kings to stand alone against the numerous descriptions of republican offices he mentions. The historian also shows his dislike of the tribunate through his omission of it here.

meant to replace temporarily the rightful constit~tion.~ The negative

portrayal of the decemvirate helps to reinforce the reader's faith in the

republic. Therefore, this unrepublican office, while it cannot be

disregarded in a study of the res publica, is placed at the end of such a

study to emphasise its inferiority.

1. Senate.

In his constitutional excursion, Polybius identifies what he considers as

the three main elements of the republican constitution: the consulship, the

senate, and the peop~e.~ The three elements - when they function in

unison - ensure the effective administration of the nation. Livy appears to

share Polybius' view of the importance of the individual elements of the

res publica. Of al1 the constitutional assemblies that embody the Roman

constitution, it is the senate that plays the largest and most positive role in

the republican books of the first pentad, a role that suggests that Livy

believes that this assembly is the ultimate form of republican expression.'

-- -

cf. Tacitus. Annales 1 .l .l . Livy's historiographical successor certainly feels that it is distinct from the republic when he mentions it separately in his rapid surnmary of pre-Augustan Roman history. Although he stresses the brief nature of the office. his choice of verb also suggests that the office was not strong enoug h to endure: decemuiralis potestas ultra biennium.. . ualuit.

Polybius, 6.13, 6.12, 6.14, where, it is interesting to note, Polybius chooses to place the consulship before the senate.

Emilio Gabba, 'The Historians and Augustusn, Caesar Auqustus: Seven Aspects, Fergus Millar and Erich Segal eds., Oxford, 1984, 79, maintains that Livy's reconstruction of the earty republic involved the historian's acceptance of the atistocratic ideology of the senatorial class. If true, this combined with the senatorial allegiance of Livy's native city could explain his presentation of the assem bly.

And. as Patrick Walsh argues, the first pentad delivers the political lesson

that senatorial government is ideal.' He agrees with the power that the

Senate exerted; although only an advisory body, Barry Nicholas states

that "in substance [it was] the most powerful element in the constit~tion".~

Livy's admiration of the senate becomes greater as the history advances:

in later books, almost al1 political discussions in Ab Urbe Condita are in

the form of descriptions of Senate meetings8 As the republic grows, so

does the predominance of the senate within it.

Though the senate is republican by nature, it was Romulus who

created it: centum creat senatores, siue quia is numerus satis erat, siue

quia soli centum erant qui creari patres possent (1.8.7) . As it is Romulus,

not another king, who creates the senate, the assembly is saved from

being desecrated by the monarchy: Romulus is more the founder of the

physical city of Rome than a king. The example of Tarquin Superbus

shows that kingship and the senate are incompatible:

hic enim regum primus traditum a prioribus morem de omnibus senatum consulendi soluit. domesticis consiliis rem publicam administra uit; bellum. pacem, foedra, socie ta tes per se ipse, cum quibus uoluit, iniussu populi ac senatus, fecit diremitque (1.49.7)

Showing Tarquin's disregard for the senate, and listing the activities from

which he excludes the senate, Livy suggests that its constitutional

' P. G. Walsh, "Livy and Augustus" PACA 4 (1961), 28.

Barry Nicholas, An Introduction to Roman Law, Oxford, 1962, 5.

Walsh, Liw: His Historical Aims and Methods, 165, notes that this is the case from book 21 onwards.

potential cannot be realised until a more representative form of

government is in place.g

It is with the creation of the republic at the end of book one that the

senate is able to participate fully in the state and it takes an active role in

the solidification of the new governrnent. In the second year of the

republic, Porsinna invades Rome on behalf of the exiled royal family and

the invasion causes a food shortage (2.9.6). The senate assumes control

of the food supply to prevent a surrender to monarchist forces for the sake

of peace. The senate, therefore. actively moves to protect the nation.

The move is successful and it ends the threat from the exiled royal family:

itaque haec indulgentia patrum asperis postmodum rebus in obsidione ac fame adeo concordem ciuitatem tenuit, ut regium nomen non summi magis quam infimi horrerent, nec quisquam unus malis artibus postea tam popularis esset quam tum bene imperando uniuersus senatus fuit (2.9.8).

Shortly afterwards the senate becomes an active force where it seeks to

end the question of a possible return of the monarchy. When Porsinna

sends ambassadors to Rome, the senate itself says that it will respond on

behalf of the state; therefore, the senate takes the initiative to shelter the

liberty of the state. This active republican role is demonstrated by the

senate's direct address to Porsinna: non in regno populum Romanum sed

in libertate esse (2.1 5.3) . Again, Livy employs the theme of liberty in

place o f the res publica: Rome is not under the kings, but in a state of

Polybius defines the main duties of the senate as follows: control of the treasury. public criminal investigations. dispatch of embassies to countries outside Italy, declarations of war (6.13). In these books of Ab Urbe Condita, however, it does considerably more.

liberty, a state of which the senate is the main constitutional

manifestation. The senate succeeds and Porsinna yields to Roman

reçoive and promises that no further menace will corne from him (2.15.5).

The historian concludes the episode with the statement that Rome

enjoyed an unbroken peace with Etruria for the remainder of Prosinna's

reign (2.15.7). Finally, the fact that it is a king who yields to the senate

stresses the authority of this office. Porsinna, a representative of the idea

of monarchy, acknowledges the legitirnacy of the constitutional form that

replaces it at Rome.

Again this constitutional authority appears when the senate offers

an opinion on the function of the office of consul. The plebeians, weary of

the new consuls and fearful of what possible actions they may take, hold

secret night meetings (2.28.1). When the consuls do not know how to

proceed, the senate directs the consuls:

eam rem consules rati, ut erat, perniciosam ad patres deferunt, sed deiatam consulere ordine non licuif; adeo tumultuose excepta est clamoribus undique et indignatione patrum, si guod imperio consulari exsequendurn esset, inuidiam eius consules ad senatum reicerent (2.28.2).

The frequent repetition of variations on the word consul, either as a noun

or as a verb, and the appearance of patres and senatus stresses the

importance of this constitutional episode. The employment of res publica

Nice in the following sentence further encourages the constitutional

nature of this episode. Although the senate shows disgust that it is

consulted on a matter which falls within the scope of the consulship, it

quickly answers the question of what shouid be done about the plebeians:

decemunt ut dilectum quam acernmum habeanf (2.28.5). The senate

provides both constitutional guidance and political direction. The consuls

then take immediate action and return to their duties (2.28.6). Livy places

the consuls in a disapproving light and elevates the senate: it is seen as

the supreme authority in the state, a constitutional body to be consulted

when other avenues fail.

The senate fulfiIs a similar role when the consuls and the tribunes

disagree at 3.20. The tribunes attempt to delay the departure of the

soldiers in defiance of the consuls' orders. 80th the consuls and the

tribunes bring their arguments to the senate, and the senate offers a

response which is followed by both parties. Here the senate acts as a

constitutional abitrator. It is interesting that the solution offered by the

senate gives victory to neither side as the tribunes cannot proceed with

their legislation nor can the consuls lead the army to war: tunc referente

consuie de tribunorum et plebis postulatis senatus consulta fiunt ut neque

tribuni legem eo anno ferrent neque consules ab urbe exercitum

educerent (3.21.2). The senate, therefore, emphasises the Livian theme

of this book, maderatio. Again, the result is the immediate obedience of

the consuls: consules fuere in patrum potestate (3.27.3). The resdt of

this remedy is that the state does not have to resort to the selection of a

dictator as Quinctius requests prior to the senatorial consultation (3.20.8).

However, the senate does not consider itself to be the highest

authority in the state. Livy believes it is one part of the constitution.

When the ambassadors from Ardea state that the restoration of their land

wiil ensure peace with Rome, the senate says that it cannot overrule the

previous resolution of the Roman people: ab senatu responsum est

iudicium populi rescindi ab senatu non posse, praeterguam guod nuilo nec

exemplo nec iure fieret, concordiae etiam ordinum causa (4.7.5)." The

fact that the ambassadors seek direct restitution from the senate indicates

how foreigners perceive the Roman constitution: it is the highest political

body, the institution which cornes closest to a guarantee of resolution.

After a brief interregnum, the newly elected consuls renew peace with the

Ardeates (4.7.10). The senate, it appears, yields to the consuls, the office

which has the proper authority in this matter.

2. Consulship.

One must now to turn to the first of Polybius' three elements of the

constitution, the consulship." The Romans display a high regard for the

consul as they elect him and they see him as the direct manifestation of

the res publica, in spite of the fact that the consuls are viewed as the

direct inheritors of royal power.12 When, on occasion, an occupant of the

office exercises it poorly, or for personal gain, the result is that the people

-

'O This agrees with Polybius' daim that the senate must consider the views of the Roman people (6.16).

At 6.I5.2-6.-iS.1 1 Polybius offers his definition of the consulship.

I2 Nicholas, 3.

seek to protect the constitution and they seek to remove the poor

administrator from office. The consulship functions effectively until 485

BC, where Livy describes the terrn of Spurius Cassius, a consul who

employs the office to build a personal political base. After the historian

notes a peace treaty with the Hernici in which they surrender the greater

part of their territory, there is a debate at Rome concerning what should

be done with the land. Cassius suggests that the spoils be divided

equally between their Latin allies and the plebs and then he expresses the

desire to add to this gift some of the private land owned by the patricians

(2.41.2). At this exhortation the senate expresses a serious concern.

They view it as a direct threat to their own interests and they are afraid of

the atternpt to create a personal following, a threat to liberty: id mulfos

quidem pafrum, ipsos possessores, pericolo rerum suarum terrebat; sed

et publica patribus sollicitude inerat largitione consuiem periculosas

libertati opes struere (2.41 -2). This passage shows the constitution

working effectively, as one of its elements, the senate. prevents the

inappropriate actions of the consul. As the senate expresses a concern

that the libertas of the state is possibly under threat. and this clearly

places Cassius in the wrong. The other consul, with the support of the

senate, openly resists Cassius' plan and he even goes so far as to declare

his colleguefs actions a potential route back to monarchy: saepe deinde et

Verginium consulem in contionibus uelut uaticinantem audiebat pestilens

collegae munus esse; agros illos seruitutem iis qui acceperint laturos;

regno uiam fieri (2.41 -5). Verginius even goes so far as to suggest that

Cassius is another Coriolanus, a clear enemy of the plebs and the Roman

people (2.41.6). Cassius' collegue then proceeds to offer a compromise

to prevent the plebs from feeling excluded from the state, a settlement

which Cassius attacks with a further offer, an offer which the plebs

immediately reject as an obvious attempt to purchase royal power: id uero

haud secos qoam praesentem mercedem regni aspernata plebes; adeo

propter suspicionern in animis hominum insitam regni (2.41 -9). This

rejection of the consul results in his instantaneous resignation and,

surprisingly, his execution (2.41.10). Because of such a degradation of

the consulship by deliberate unconstitutional behaviour. death is the oniy

appropriate punishment for the crime. It is interesting that Livy mentions

a second story about the decline of Cassius, that he was put on trial for

treason and convicted. In this example, a punishment which may be

viewed as too extreme is replaced by one which strictly adheres to the

Roman idea of justice. an alternative conclusion that suggests the republic

can defend itself by legal means. Despite the appearance of the two

conclusions to the story, Livy successfully employs this episode as an

example of how the res publica does not allow an individual to abuse the

privileges of his office. The consulship fulfils its purpose: instead of the

nation under the power of one official, each consul can oppose effectively

any dangerous plans of his collegue.

To rid the reader of this negative impression, the next episode

recreates the achievements of Caeso Fabius. one of the consuls for 481

BC. against Veii. lnstead of one enemy. on this occasion Rome faces two

wars, and the Veientes even are bold enough to sack Roman lands. Livy

notes that a different theatre of war is assigned to each consul and

Fabius, who must engage the Aequi, is exceptionally disliked by his troops

to the point that his own soldiers were a greater burden than the enemy

(2.43.6). The historian begins by dismissing the other consul's military

efforts so that the reader will give full attention to Fabius. Despite this

trouble frorn his own forces, Fabius excels and displays such good

generalship that even his cavalry alone could withstand the enemy. Livy

praises Fabius for his ability: unus ille uir, ipse consul, rem publicam

sustinuit, quam exercifus odio consulis, quantum in se fuit, prodebat

(2.43.6). The focus is clearly on Fabius: first Livy identifies the person

(unus ille uir), then he draws attention to the fact that he is a consul (ipse

consul). In both cases the noun does not stand alone; he strengthens it

with pronouns.'3 If he had been an ordinary citizen who strove for the

advancement of the state he would have been praised as a hero, but as

he is consul as well he is a constitutional hero. As Livy does not directly

l3 Francesca Santoro L'hoir, 230, identifies unus uir as a heroic epithet that Livy awards to outstanding individuals who triumph in most difficult circumstances: 'unus uir ...[ is] a soldier or a magistrate exercising his military authority. He. however. stands apart from al1 others, because, against al1 odds and despite al1 opposition unus oir singlehandedly saves the State. ORen unus uir is hindered by lack of support or even outright opposition from his own menn. Later in the same article (231) L'hoir identifies K. Fabius' actions in this passage as an example. It is also interesting to note that Livy, in his obituary of Camillus, presents a variation of this: uere uir unicus (7.1.9).

name Fabius in the passage he detaches any personal glory that the

character may gain from his efforts; he is rnerely "the consul". Instead,

this glory will go to the consulship and the res publica. Unable to lead his

troops because of their personal anirnosity against him, he returns to

Rome immediately and he resigns his office. Fabius displays

magnanimity in the extreme: he does not wish to cause any potential

danger to the res publica which would reçult from a direct attack on him

while he is consul.

Livy provides many other examples of those whom he feels are

ideal consuls. The narrative of 443 BC begins with the new consuls

assuming office: Macerinus and Capitolinus, both of whom have served as

consul before. This already suggests their suitability for the consulship as

their re-election rnay be viewed as an endorsement of their political

abilities. After the historian describes Macerinus' successful rnilitary

operations against the Volsci, he turns to Quinctius, the consul who

rernains in Rome. Here the two consuls work in unison: one leaves to

attend to military (foreign) matters, while the other remains to attend to

political (domestic) matterd4 Although it is not an easy task to match

Macerinus' irnpressive military actions with worthy political efforts, Livy

suggests that Quinctius does just that:

aequauit, quod haud facile est, Quinctiur consul togatus armati gloriam collegae, quia concordiae pacisque domesticae curam iura

l4 In fact, the contemporaneous actions of these two consuls represent an exact harmony within the general structure of AUC history. This episode brings res exfernae and res internae together, neither of which is inconsistent with, higherl less than the other.

infimis sommisque moderando ita tenuit ut eum et patres seuerum consulem et pkbs satis cornem crediderint. et aduersis hibunos auctoritate plura quam certamine tenuit; quinque consulatus eodem tenare gesti uitaque omnis consulanter acta uerendum paene ipsum magis quam honorem faciebant. eo tribunorum militarium nulla mentio his consolibus fuit (4.10.8-4.10.9).

The consul, as far as Livy may be the judge, conducts himself in a

demeanour that glorifies the office. First, he maintains Concord and peace

at home with an adept engagement of law (infimis summisque). Second,

the senate regards hirn as a strict consul, and the plebeians view him as

moderate: he appears to satisfy the political desires of each side. Finally,

he maintains his authority with the tribunes by means of his personal skill

rather than through direct confrontation. This satisfies the theme of this

book, maderatio. Despite the fact that Quinctius does not achieve glory in

the battlefield, he earns credit as the equal of his collegue

(aequauit.. . Quinctius consul.. . annati gloriam collegae). The appraisal

concludes when the historian declares that because of the political

acumen of these two men, the state did not have to seek the election of

military tribunes: it is able to function normally.

3. Tribunate.

A constitution with only the senate and the consulship, however, is

inadequate for it only directly includes the patrician order in the res

publica. Ta be a plebeian and to have libertas is not enough; one must be

able to participate in the constitution. The plebeians quickly lament their

lack of formal representation in the state and the historian narrates how

the state arrives at an impasse on several occasions. Early in the history

of the res publica Livy describes the first formal change in the constitution,

the creation of the strictly plebeian office of the tribunate.'= The historian,

who describes the creation and development of each office, avails himself

of the opportunity to offer a definition of the office: agi deinde de

concordia coepturn, concessumque in condiciones ut plebi sui magistratus

essen t sacrosanti, quibus auxilii latio aduersus consules esset, neue cui

patrem capere eum magistratum liceret (2.33.1). His definition is this: the

tribunes are to represent the plebeians and act as a source of aid against

the consuls and the senate? The office is sacrosant and no patrician

may occupy it. This explication of the office is immediately followed by

the election of the first two tribunes (2.33.2).

Once Livy has deçcribed the creation of the tribunate, Ab Urbe

Condita repeatedly describes conflicts which arise between the tribunes

and the consuls over matters of state. Mostly Livy portrays these conflicts

as negative actions by the tribunes for personal gain without any

forethought of the consequences. In the narrative of 462 BC the tribunes

make an attempt to secure further gains when both consuls are absent

from the city: is consulibus absentibus ra tus locum tribuniciis actionibus

l5 Ogilvie, 294, argues that "the tribunate was created not because the plebeians were politically weak but because they were politically strong, strong enough to institute a revolutionary and extra-constitutionat office designed to frustrate the due process of lawn. It appears that Ogilvie to some extent shares Livy's aristocratic views.

It is interesting to note that Polybius' definition of the Roman constitution does not include any mention of the tribunate.

daturn, per aliquot dies patrum superbiam ad plebem criminatus, maxime

in consulare imperiurn tamquam nimium nec tolerabile liberae ciuitati

inuehebatur (3.9.2). The tribunes declare the power of the consuls to be a

direct threat to the libertas. They even go so far as to declare that it is

merely monarchy in a different form. with two rulers instead of one and a

less hated name (3.9.3). This anti-consular feeling becomes fanatic when

it manifests itself in a proposal for a law to elect five men to rewrite the

statutes and remove the consulship. As the tribunes express a dislike for

the consulship, Livy must present them in a negative light. This desire is

exposed as an attempt to satisfy the tribune's own desires: non ipsos

libidinem ac licentiam soam pro lege habifuros (3.9.5). This potential

threat to the state is addressed directly by the senate, when the senators

Say that the actions of the tribunes are deleterious themselves, not the

consuls: non ilium consulare imperium sed tribuniciam potestatem inuisam

intolerandamque facere (3.9.10). At this point Livy makeç a clear

distinction between the two offices: the consulship is a powerful, majestic

office that exercises imperium while the tribunate is an office of brute,

irraional power. The senate daims that the tribunes are only making

themselves unpopular and the senators go so far as to remind them why

the tribunate was created. As a final argument the tribunes are told that

in a previous war the Aequi and the Volsci did not attack when it was clear

that the consuls had died (3.9.12). This is a powerful damnation. The

tribunes are seen to exploit a situation that not even the enemies of Rome

would dare.

It is appropriate that this negative portrayai reaches its culmination

in book five. Because of the special position of this book. i t is essential

that any problems with the tribunate be resolved. Once the Roman

constitution, and therefore the nation. has been consolidated it is possible

for the nation to begin its geographical expansion into ltaly in the second

pentad. At the start of book five, when the military commanders decide to

continue the campaign against Veii through the winter for the first time,

the tribunes protest. Livy makes it clear that they do not have any real

grievance. The tribunes. he declares, merely wish to agitate the state:

quod postquam tribunis plebis, iam diu nullam nouandi res causam

inuenientibus, Romam est allatum, in conditionem prosiliunt, sollicitant

plebis animos (5.2.2). The tribunes seek to arouse the commons not out

of a sense that the proposed winter siege is unjust, but that they have not

had an issue which could solidify plebeian political will. The impression

that the tribunes are not acting appropriately is ernphasised by their

voiced attacks which the historian places in unelegant, awkward indirect

speech. It is ironic that the tribunes mourn what they see as their lost

libertas. They cornplain that they have been perpetually removed from the

state, from the res publica: uenisse libertatem plebis; remotam in

perpetuum et ablegafam ab urbe ab re publica (5.2.4). The employment

of urbs and res publica in the tribunes' diatribe illuminates their

rnisrepresentation of the issue. What is a ternporary absence from the city

of Rome is falsely represented as a permanent removal from the

constitution. It fails to the military tribune Appius Claudius to dismiss this

attack on the state which Livy elevates above the arguments of the

tribunes through its appearance in a substantial elegant direct speech

(5.3.2-5.6.10). The debate ends when news cornes to the citizens that the

Roman army has suffered a major defeat at Veii. The citizens now enter

into battle with the full determination to succeed (5.7.1). The statement

that immediately follows the conclusion of Appius' speech dernonstrates

that, although the news has reached Rome, the military tribune was the

authoritative orator in the debate, and therefore his argument is the

correct one: par iam etaim in contionibus erat Appius tribunis plebis

(5.7.1).

But, now, to reconcile this discrepancy. To let such an impression

of the tribunate stand unanswered would appear as a defeat of Livy's

belief in the republic. Therefore, Livy makes a separation in this case

between what he sees as the intent of the tribunate, to bring the people

(the third element of Polybius' three-part constitution) into the constitution,

and the actual employment of the office. When the narrative discusses

the creation of this office it clearly shows that the reason is to aid concord,

to maintain civic order. Through the exclusion of the patricians from the

office, and its sacrosanctity, the place of the plebeians within the

constitution is ensured. As James Lipovsky notes, as the narrative

progresses Livy continues to stress the growing importance of the

plebeians for the survival of ~ 0 r n e . I ~ This means that the presentation of

this plebeian office must be positive. The behaviour of those who later

occupy the tribunate, however, clearly causes problems for the historian

as they act for mere personal gain. The solution which Livy employs is to

leave the individual tribunes nameless: they cannot emerge beyond the

office to become constitutional heroes.

4. Dictatorship.

There are two occasions in the first pentad of Ab Urbe Condita where Livy

shows that the republican consitution can adapt to ensure the survival of

libertas when the situation requires it. The most prominent of these

changes occurs when the res publica creates new offices that either

provide an emergency rnechanism when the existing constitutional

structure proves inadequate or are an attempt to further harmony between

patricians and plebeians. An example of the former is the creation of the

dictatorship, and the creation of the office of military tribune is an example

of the latter. In each case the office is created to ensure that the res

publica, and therefore Rome itself, can continue. It is seen as another

stage in the developrnent of this optimal constitution, and the office is a

wholly republican creation. The dictator's imrnediate appointment of a

rnagister equitum, Ogilvie notes, shows ' a wholly republican concern for

the principle without the disadvantages of collegiality". Therefore, the

l7 James Lipovsky. A Historioaraohical Studv of Livv VI-X, Salem NH, 1984, 31.

Romans benefit from the strength of an absolute office, but their concerns

about the rule of one man is so~ved.'~ Early in Livy's republican

constitutional history the dictatorship is created, when the Romans are

afraid of a threat from many neighbours (2.18.4). The considerable power

vested in the office is clear from the fear which the plebeians express, a

fear that encourages them to be more zealous to obey orders: creato

dictatore primum Romae, postqoam praeferri secures uiderunt, magnus

plebern metus incessit, ut intentiores essent ad dicto parendum (2.18.8).

By piacing the creation of the dictator and the instant obeindence of the

plebs in the sarne sentence Livy emphasises the irnmediate effect that the

office achieves. The dictatorship fulfils its desired function. This view is

further encouraged when the Sabines - the main threat that causes the

dictator to be appointed - express fear at the creation of the new office

and they immediately send ambassadors to request peace: Sabinis etiam

creatus Romae dictator, eo magis quod propter se creatum crediderant,

metum incussit. ltaque legatos de pace mittunt (2.1 8.9) . Again, through

the use of short, direct sentences Livy suggests that the office brings a

swift, categorical result.

5. Militarv Tribunate.

Book four of Livy's repubiican exposition aiso narrates the creation of the

military tribunate. The exact reason for the creation of this office is

Ogilvie, 281.

unclear, and Livy cites two reasons: first, the plebeians are angry at the

refusal of the patricians to allow intermarriage; second, after the first

election of military tribunes Livy states that another version records that

with the threat of invasion frorn four enemies, the Romans perceive two

consuls as inadequate. Regardless of the real reason, the solution is to

create a new office which combines the powers of the two offices: per

haec consilia eo deducta est res, ut tribonos militum consulari potestate

promisce ex patribus ac plebe creari sinerent, de consulibus creandis nihii

mutaretur; eoque contenti tribuni, contenta plebs fuit (4.6.8). At 4.7.1 the

historian marks the creation of the office: anno trecentesimo decimo quam

urbs Roma condita erat primum tribuni militum pro consulibus magistratum

ineunt, A. Sernpronius Atratinus, L. Atilius, T. Cluilius, quorum in

rnagistratu concordia domi pacem etiam foris praebuit (4.7.1). Just as he

identified the end of the monarchy (and the beginning of the republic) and

the creation of the decemvirate, Livy employs the familiar formula to

introduce a new critical moment in Rome's constitutional development.

First, the number of years since the founding of t h e city is mentioned.

Secondly, there is the employrnent of a variation of the title of Livy's

history. This suggests that the creation of this office is an event equal to

that of the creation of the republic itself. This view is encouraged when

Livy states that this office achieves both domestic and foreign peace.

This sudden placidity contrasts the scene which irnmediately proceeds it:

the conflict between the consuls and the tribunes is acute to the point

where, in the debate concerning interrnarriage, it is suggested that the

consuls ought to be armed (4.6.7). lrnmediateiy after a permissible

solution is proposed, it is approved and the potentiai crisis is immediately

dispelled. Once again Livy demonstrates that the res poblica can adapt to

rnake itself more representative and to ensure that it endures.

6. Decemvirate.

At the centre of book three, 3.33 to 3.54, Livy narrates the events of 451

to 449 BC where, the historian notes, the form of constitution changedg

The new constitution is that of the decemvirate. For Livy this change is of

great significance, as he suggests that it is a completely new form of

constitution, as the republic was distinct from the rnonarchy: anno

trecentensimo altero guam condita Roma erat iferurn rnutatur forma

ciuitatis, ab consulibus ad decemuiros, quemadmodum ab regibus ante ad

consules uenerat, translato imperio. minus insignis, quia non diuturna.

mufatio fuit (3.33.1). By stating the number of years from the foundation

of the city, Livy echoes his epitaph to the rnonarchy at the end of book

one, as if this were meant to be an epitaph for the res publica. Further,

the appearance of condita, part of the history's title, indicates the

possibility that Livy considers this to be a defining moment in the history

of the state and the history of the constitution. However, there are two

significant details which suggest that the historian does not consider this

l9 Levene, 162, states that even though the decemvirate occupies the centre of book three, it dominates the whole book: "[it] occupies the whole of the central

to be an important change as the creation of the res pubiica. Fint. the

employment of ciuitas, instead of res publica or urbs, suggests that this is

a political event, not a definitive historical or constitutional one. Next, in

the second sentence of this introduction Livy mentions the minor nature of

this change as it does not last for a long tirne. In the next sentence, the

historian gives the impression that this office is dangerous to the health of

the nation (3.32.2). lrnmediately Livy attempts to display the office as a

negative force within the state. The decemvirate has just begun. but

already the negative mood of this office is set.

Almost immediately the people regret creating the office, as the

decemvirs do not follow the consitutional traditions of the consuls, the

l office which they temporarily replace:

hominum, non causarum toti erant, ut apud qoos gratia uim aequi haberet. iudicia domi conflaban t pronuntiabant in foro. si guis collegam appellasset, ab eo ad quem uenerat ita discedebat ut paenitere t non prioris decreto stetisse. opinio etiam sine auctore exierat non in praesentis modo temporis eos iniuriam conspirasse, sed foedus clandestinum inter ipsos iure iurando ictum, ne comitia haberent perpetuoque decernviratu possessum semel obtinerent imperium (3.36.8-3.36.9).

In this single passage, the decemvirs are accused of many crimes. First,

they reject the senate and proper public consultation through secret

discussions. Secondly, those who disagree with the legal decisions

larnent the lack of appeal; their desire for justice is denied. Thirdly, by a

secret covenant the decemvirs rnutually agree to thwart any attempt to

elect the regular magistrates of the republic; they desire that the

section of the book (3.33-3.54), and its thernes dominate the remaindern.

deCernvirate be perpetual. These three accusations display Livy's belief

that this is an unconstitutional office and he rapidly establishes a mood of

public oppression.

In a later episode. Livy further entrenches this mood of oppression

of libertas by the decemvirate. Although originally commissioned for a

single year, the decemvirs have been in office for nearly two years, and

they show no desire to allow the constitution to function normally and to

elect new magistrates. The decemvirs appear in public in full display of

their power, and the result of this display is expressed clearly: id vero

regnum haud dubie uideri (3.38.1). The situation is that of monarchy and,

as Livy has made clear previously, the Roman people cannot be free

under the monarchy or any form of government that emulates it. Liberty is

clearly absent: deploratur in perpetuum libertas, nec uindex quisquam

exsistit aut futurus uidefur (3.38.2). Not only do the Romans grieve for

their loss of freedom, but the historian also laments the lack of sorneone

to advocate it. Livy, who offers his opinion with his observation uidetur,

links himself with the characters of his narrative as he shares their

constitutional melancholy. This domestic grief turns into foreign hatred as

the neighbouring states express their intolerance of such an office: nec

ipsi solurn desponderanf animos, sed contemni coepti eranf a finitimis

populis, qui imperium ibi esse ubi non esset libertas indignabantur

(3.38.2). Livy employs irony to stress Rome's enervating constitutional

situation. As the Romans display a loss of spirit and feel unable to act

upon their desire for freedom, it is Rome's foreign neighbours who show

intolerance of the situation. This is a change from the second book where

the inferior condition of the foreign states is used to highlight Roman

su periority.

Because of its unconstitutional nature. the decemvirate does not

last and the Romans restore the proper res publica at 3.54. The

decemvirs, especially Appius Claudius, finally acknowledge their

unpopularity and the potential fate that awaits them and the senate calls

for the election of the magistrates. The Roman people, naturally, express

joy when they regain liberty:

his senatus consultis perfectis dimisso senatu, decemuiri prodeunt in contionern abdicantque se magistratu, ingenti hominum laetitia. nuntiantur haec plebi. legatos quidquid in orbe hominum supererat prosequitur. huic multitudini laeta alia turba ex castris occurrit. congratulantur libertatem concordiamque ciuitati restitutarn. Legati pro contione: 'quod bonum faustum felixque sit uobis reique publicae' (3.54.6-3.54.8).

Liberty and concord are re-established, and with it cornes the return of the

res publica. The forma1 return of the constitution is rnarked by the

election of the tribunes at 3.55.1. The situation is different from that at

the end of book one where the election of consuls marks the institution of

the republic. In both cases Livy allows a particular office of the republic to

represent the constitution as a whole.

CHAPTER FOUR

THE HEROES AND VlLLAINS OF THE RES PUBLCCA

Pulchrum est bene facere rei publicae, efiam bene dicere haud absurdum est; uel Pace uel bel10 clarum fieri licet; et qui fecere et qui facta aliorum

scripsere rnulti laudantur. Sallust, De Coniurafione Catilinae 3.1

Sallust. in his preface of the De Coniuratione Catilinae. argues that to do

good works for the state, and to speak well for the state are comparable

activities and, he believes, both are splendid. Catiline does neither of

these things and therefore Sallust's vilification of him is appropriate. Livy,

regarded by rnany scholars as reacting to Sallust, employs his history in

the same manner.' In Ab Urbe Condita Il-VI the historian presents five

men who stand apart from the other characters: Brutus, Coriolanus,

Cincinnatus, Appius Claudius ~ e c e m v i ? and, Camillus. Those men who

work for the constitution receive due praise, and those who work against it

receive the appropriate condernnation. With the exception of Coriolanus

each character occupies a particular political office while he labours for or

against the res pubiica, but the size of the character'ç role appears to

1 Kraus and Woodman, 52, and Kraus, Ab Urbe Condita VI, comments most upon the Sallustian echoes in Livy.

2 Ann Vasaly, "Personality and Power: Livy's Depiction of the Appii Claudii in the First Pentad', TAPA 117 (.1987). 212, in her discussion of the presentation of the Claudia gens. distinguishes each Appius Claudius with an appropriate historical epithet, hence this Appius Claudius is called Decemvir.

place his office in a subordinate position.3 In the case of the heroes their

offices are not mentioned in order to draw attention to what Livy sees as a

glorification of the republic through personal achievement4 For the

villains, however, their disregard for the republic causes them to be

denied ordinary republican office, or they occupy a harmful office that

suits their disdain for the repubk5

1. 8rutus.

Brutus is the first hero of the res publica. He participates in the removal

of the monarchy and the creation of the republic! Because of his role as

the creator of Iibertas he is mentioned as one of Rome's con dit ore^.^ One

may view Brutus as a bridge between the old and the new - between the

abusive, unconstitutional world of book one and the proper, constitutional

3 Luce, "Livy, Augustus and the Forum Augustumn, 128-129, agrees with this when he claims that Livy viewed Roman history as the joint achievements of the leaders and the led, and that modern Rome was the product of a long line of leaders.

4 Taylor, 25, suggests that Livy's glorification of the republican heroes was a literary success, which for the Romans rivaled Vergil's catalogues of heroes in book six of the Aeneid.

5 Miles, 115, points out that the inclusion of villains does not contradict Livy's goal of glorification of Rome's past: "[it] does not lead him to envision the past as a utopian age in which the wisdom and virtue of the Roman people or their leaders were uniform. On the contrary, he states explicitly ... that the past offers examples to shun as well as to emulate. Both Roman villains and Roman heroes are conspicuous in the narrative; we see depravity as well as virtue among early Romansn. Miles acknowledges that Livy does shape his narrative to represent some characters as either heroes or villains.

8 cf. Tacitus, Annales 1.1.1 : libertatem et consulafum L, Brutus instituif.

Miles, 123. It is at 8.34.3 that Brutus is proclaimed a Roman founder: conditior Romanae liberta fis.

world of book two - and through his success the republican resolve

becomes undeniable.

He first appears before the fall of the monarchy at 1.56 when

Tarquin sends his sons and Brutus to Delphi to discover the rneaning of

an omen. They do this and, wishing to know who will next gain the

kingdom, the sons of Tarquin ask who will be the next king. The

response, that the first to kiss his mother will gain summum imperium, is

correctly interpreted only by Brutus, who then pretends to slip and kisses

the earth (1 .56.10-l.56.12).8 Therefore, this episode suggests that the

divine world approves of Brutus as a person. As it is Brutus who will

initiate the res publica, it suggests that the divine world approves of

Rome's impending constitutional change as well.

He begins his role as a hero of the republic in the Lucretia episode.

When Lucretia's husband returns home to learn of the rape. Brutus is

present (1.58.6). This crime, which at first appears as a private affair now

becomes a matter of public, constitutional law. Lucretia, humiliated by

what has happened to her, dernands that justice be served: sed date

dexteras fidemque haud inpune adultero fore. Sex. est Tarquinius qui

hosiis pro hospite priore nocte ui armatus mihi sibique, s i uos uiri esiis,

pestiferum hinc abstulit gaudium (1.58.7-1.58.8). With the use of the

imperative date, the desire for personal justice is actually a public

demand. Should she wish only for her own restitution, her appeal would

Levene, 143-144.

be to be husband alone, and a singluar irnperative would appear here.

Once the men pledge their services, she has performed the function Livy

designs for her, so she kills herself (1 -58.9-1 58.12).

It is at this point that Brutus emerges as a republican protagonist.

As the others grieve over the dead martyr, he takes the knife that Lucretia

used to kill herself and he proclaims what his mission is:

per hum.. . castissimum ante regiam iniuriam sanguinem iuro, uosque, di, testes facio me L. Tarquinium Superbum cum scelerata coniuge et omni liberorum stirpe ferro igni quacumque dehinc ui possim exsecuturum, nec illos nec alium quemquarn regnare Romaepassurum (1.59.1 ).

That Brutus is the first to swear this oath is significant. for it is the first

time that any character mentions the eviction of the kings. His choice of

passurum "going to suffern is significant, for it marks the first public

acknowledgement that the existence of monarchy is an affliction.

lmmediately after issuing this oath, the knife - an object of brutality that

symbolises the cruelty of the monarchs - is passed to the others present,

and each man in his turn repeats the same oath as Brutus: each follows

the constitutional example set by him (1.59.2). Once this oath is

complete, Brutus urges the immediate explusion of the monarch and,

again, the others follow him as the leader of their cause: Bmtum iam inde

ad expugnandum regnum uocantern sequuntur ducem (1 59.2). Then the

body is moved to the forum, where Brutus uses it to gain popular support

for his ad: pro se quisque scelus regium ac uim queruntur ( 1 -59.4). Then

he addresses the crowd directly and succeeds in moving the crowd to

constitutional action. The revolution now begins. At first the group seems

to be a band of terrorists (ubi eo uentum est, quacumque incedit armata

multitude pauorem ac tumultum facit), but Livy states that the appearance

of the chief men of state causes the commons to conclude that the

purpose of the movement must be rightful (1.59.6).

Now that the whole nation is together, Brutus makes another

speech in which he authoritatively charges the royal family with the death

of Lucretia and he denounces al1 that is wrong with the monarchy: addita

superbia ipsius regis miseriaeque et labores plebis in fossas cloacasque

exhauriendas demersae ( 1 -59.9). He succeeds in winning the support of

the public and the people announce the exile of the royal farnily and they

form a volunteer force to gain the support of the military (1 59.1 1-1 59.13).

Livy notes that Brutus, when he heads to Ardea, deliberately chooses a

route to avoid the king. When Tarquin reaches the city's main gate, the

Roman people do not allow hirn to enter. In this way, the people receive

credit for the expulsion of the king. Even the gates take constitutional

sides: it allows Brutus to leave (and, later, to re-enter) the city. but it

denies Tarquin access to it. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Romans

are replacing one ruler with another. Book one of Ab Urbe Condita ends

with the prominence of Brutus, as the historian declares him to be one of

the first consuls. The real history of Rome, the history of Rome as a

republic, can now begin.

In book two Brutus must undergo a change in role from an expeller

of monarchs to a defender of the new constitution he helped to create.

He excels in his role as a constitutional hero, and he demonstrates his

belief in the new government. Shortly after his assumption of the new

office, the consulship, the nation is faced with a potential crisis which he

personally undertakes to solve. When the people express their concern

that the other consul shares the same name as the former royal family,

Brutus addresses his fellow consul and appeals to him as a fellow

republican. As an individual who helped in the expulsion of the monarchy,

he urges his fellow consul to rid himself of his name and to make the

expulsion complete (2.2.7). Brutus, anxious to maintain the services of

Collatinus, offers remuneration for any loss that may corne from the

removal of the name Tarquinius. Again he succeeds in initiating a

movement among the public, as other leading men of the state repeat

Brutus' invocation (2.2.8). This results in the resignation of Collatinus,

and he is replaced by Publius Valerius as consul. Although he does not

participate in the election of Collatinus' successor, his appearance acts as

a constitutional bridge once more: here he is a stabilising link as the

consulship passes between Collatinus and Valerius. His presence helps

the peaceful transition of power on both occasions.

The ultimate test of Brutus' constitutional resolve cornes in the next

episode where Livy discusses the first plot of the exiled king to regain the

city. The historian records that the instigators of this plot were young

Roman nobles. among whom the sons of Brutus are early participants

(2.4.1).' As Livy mentions that the names of the other conspirators are

unknown, he is able to focus the reader's attention on Brutus' children.

Therefore, Brutus is caught in a potential collision between his duties as a

father and his duties as an officer of state; the first hero of the republic

must endure a test of his republican faith. When the plot is exposed and

the state moves to punish the traitors, Livy is sure to stress their

relationship to the consul: conspectius eo quod paenae capiendae

ministerium patri de liberis consulatus imposuit, et qui spectator erat

amouendus, eum ipsum fortuna exactorem supplicii dedit (2.5.5). H e is

both pater to the crirninals, and consul to the people and the engagement

of the two roles in such proximity stresses to the reader Brutus' impasse.

Livy affirms this conflict by stressing the irony of the situation, as the

public see it:

iilos eo potissimum anno patriam liberatam, pafrem liberatorem, consulatum ortum ex domo lunia, patres, plebem, quidquid deorum hominumgue Romanorum esset, induxisse in animum ut superbo quondam regi, tum infesto exsuli proderen t (2.5.7).

Despite any desire Brutus may have to Save his sons, he allows the death

sentence to proceed. However, Livy partially extricates the liberator from

this situation when he removes the consul from the order of execution: the

consuls ordered the act to be done, not Brutus himself (2.5.8). It is the

Walsh, Liw: His Historical Aims and Methods, 70, daims that Brutus' execution of his children for treason is the best example of disciplina in Livy. Therefore, it is through a constitutional test that the historian demonstrates the best example of such a laudable characteristic.

state who condemns the traitors, not their father. Therefore. the

execution is a constitutional matter, not a family matter. However, the

family link is allowed to appear once more, as the Romans see the

anguish on Brutus' face at the moment

state's repayment (2.5.9). It is through

of execution, the moment of the

such a personal sacrifice that

Brutus proves himself to be a constitutional hero of the highest order.

Aftet the failure of the plot, the exiled monarch uses more direct

means to regain control of the state. When the king learns what has

occurred at Rome he declares that open war is the only means left

available (2.6.1). When his forces enter Roman territory, he is confronted

by the forces of the consuls; therefore, Livy presents this battle as the

direct engagement between the two opposed constitutional ideologies.

Brutus plays an important role in the battle and he directly engages the

son of the king (2.6.7). Both men are killed, each at the hand of the other;

Brutus sacrifices his life to Save Rome from the return of the king. The

battle - quickly won by the Romans - shows that Brutus' death is not in

vain (2.6.1 0-2.7.3). Livy then concludes this episode with a brief comment

on Brutus' funeral which, he maintains, was conducted with al1 the

ostentation possible at the time (2.7.4). This funeral serves as an

appropriate tribute for the first republican hero of Ab Urbe Condita.

2. Coriolanus.

Book two of Livy's republican history also contains the first constitutional

miscreant in the form of Gnaeus Marius ~or io lanus. '~ As a villain,

Coriolanus acts for persona1 gain. This fact is made clear immediately

after his introduction where he takes a leading role in a war with the

Volsci. It is Coriolanus who gathers together a group of soldiers and

takes the offensive against the enemy, he gains a victory for the Romans

(2.33.9). Livy displays Coriolanus' unrepublican humour when he

mentions that this battle wins enough fame for the villain to overshadow

the fame of the consul completely. The glory which he receives is so

great that the effort of the other consul would have gone unrecognised if

his colleague had not recorded it in a bronze description (2.33.9). Despite

this indirect action against the consuls, one consul acts on behalf of the

other to see that the other consul receives proper acknoweldgement.

Coriolanus' formal actions against the res publica begin to occur in

the next chapter, where the senate debates the price of corn for that year.

Already there is the potential for constitutional perturbation, as the senate

is still angry about the recent loss of power due to the introduction of the

tribunate (2.34.7). Coriolanus goes one step further and is shown as an

10 Briscoe, 2. identifies the Coriolanus episode as the central story of book two. Ogilvie notes that this is the only time that Livy abandons the annalistic practice of stating the new magistrates for the new year (493 BC). As the magistrates appear in other histories that discuss this episode, such as Dionysus of Halicarnassus, Ogilvie assumes that Livy has chosen not to interrupt his narrative. Therefore. Livy indirectly suggests that this villain is able to prevent the functioning of normal republican procedure (Ogilvie, 314).

anti-republican, as an opponent of the tribunate: in primis, Marcius

Coriolanus, hostis tribuniciae potestatis (2.34.9). For the only tirne in the

Coriolanus story the historian permits the villain to indicate his intentions

in direct speech when he proclaims his dislike for the republic and its

offices (2.34.9). By attacking an office that is representative of the

republic, he attacks the whole constitution. The seriousness of this

incident is made clear as Livy. on one of the few occasions in Ab Urbe

Condifa, employs direct speech for himself and addresses the reader. He

expresses consternation at this anti-plebeian avowal: haud tam facile dictu

est faciendumne fuerit quam potuisse arbitror fieri ut condicionibus laxandi

annonam et tribuniciam potestatem et omnia inuitis iura imposifa patres

demerent sibi (2.34.12). It is not a surprise that the senate agrees with

Livy, but Coriolanus' opposition results in the plebeians coming close to

taking arms; the man who expresses his dislike for one of the offices of

the constitution has the effect of almost driving the plebeians into open

revolt (2.35.1). The anti-constitutional feeling quickly spreads from one

man to the general population.

The plebeians do not lower themselves to the same level as

Coriolanus. Instead, they adhere to the protocols of the res publica and

do not engage in open rebellion. Instead, they seek revenge on

Coriolanus in person, a man they denounce as their potential executioner:

eum sibi carnificem nouum exorium, qui aut mori aut seruire iubeat

(2.35.1). Livy's sense of constitutional irony appears again as the

plebeianls plan to seize upon him as he departs from the curia is

prevented by the tribunes: the constitutional office that he rejects saves

him (2.35.2). The tribunes adhere to legal form when they plan to put

Coriolanus on trial for treason. and they rernind hirn of their constitutional

function which he scorns (2.35.3). He displays bis conternpt for the

republic when he does not appear at his trial. He departs from Rome and

joins with the Volsci, and he declares his abhorrence of the Roman nation:

ita cum aiterurn uetus odium, alterum ira recens stimuiaret, consilia

conferunt de Romano bel10 (2.35.7). Once he is among the Voscians,

Livy notes that his host is a man known for his hostility to the Romans,

and with him Coriolanus begins to make plans for war against his own

nation (2.35.5).

When the war begins, Coriolanus and his Volscian host are chosen

as the generals for the war. This enemy of the republic now crosses the

final boundary by actively engaging in hostilities against his state. The

threat to the nation causes a vigourous public debate in Rome that

requires the senate to be called together (2.39.8). The senators make an

attempt to secure peace, but this fails (2.39.1 1-2.39.12). The salvation

cornes in the form of his mother, who appeals to him in direct speech. As

she appears as the ideal Roman matron, he is unable to respond directly

to her: he responds by removing his forces from Roman territory and

spending the rest of his life in exile (2.40.5-2.40.10)." Therefore, he ends

his assault on the Roman state.

3. Cincinnatus.

Book three, like the previous book. presents the reader with both a

republican hero, Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, and an enemy of the

republic, the decemvir Appius Claudius. Although his engagement in the

history is brief, the impression of Cincinnatus is powerful.'2 It is during

the events of 458 BC that Cincinnatus cornes to the aid of the state when

one of the consuls is unable to fulfil his duties as a military leader and the

state is in danger as a result (3.26.3). The people do not believe that tne

other consul is able to defend the state alone, so the Romans create a

dictator: Nautium consulem arcessunt. in quo cum parum praesidii

uideretur dictatoremque dici placeret qui rem perculsam restitueret, L.

Quinctius Cincinnatus concensu omnium dicitur (3.26.6). The Romans

select a dictator, one man, to replace the two consuls, two men. because

they feel that the consulship is not adequate to thwart the military threat.

This decision shows either confidence in the dictatorship, or it is a strong

" Walsh, Liw: His Historical Aims and Methods, 91, claims that Veturia, Coriolanus' mother, is portrayed as the ideal Roman matron. just as Lucretia is the ideal Roman spouse. Therefore, a symbol of what is best in Rome successfully aborts a potential threat to the city.

l2 Ogilvie, 436. claims that the interest that Livy shows in Cincinnatus is 'because Cincinnatus is a homo uere Romanos. the perfect foi1 to Appius Claudius the decemvir. Cincinnatus is reluctant to assume office, discharges it with exemplary devotion. and resigns it with speed. Claudius intrigues for power. misuses it, and has to be forced to abandon itn.

expression of the confidence that the nation has in Cincinnatus. Further.

Cincinnatus is appointed with the approval of the whole nation (consensu

omnium). In the case of this dictator. the historian does not mention

whom Cincinnatus chooses to act as his master of the horse; the historian

allows the dictator to dorninate the scene. Attention is concentrated on

the republican hero.

lmmediately after Cincinnatus' selection, Livy pauses and

comments on the hero and his actions that the narrative is about to

present: operae pretium est audire qui omnia prae diuitiis humana

spernunt neque honori rnagno locurn neque uirtuti putant esse, nisi ubi

effuse afluant opes (3.26.7).13 In the next sentence Livy goes further and

calls Cincinnatus spes unica imperii populi Romani. The scene that

follows shows the dictator in a positive light, as he is inforrned of his

election while attending to his farm, a traditional Roman duty (3.26.9).14

Through his attention to agricultural duties Cincinnatus is shown to be a

Roman of traditional, honest values, and therefore he is capable of saving

the state. The next day, he chooses his master of the horse irrespective

of the fact that the people are happy if he chooses to govern by himself

(3.27.1). He then moves swifty to rouse the people to prepare for war

13 This echoes the opening of the history where Livy expresses self-doubt as to his worthiness to write his history: facturusne operae pretium sim (Prae. 1 ) . White Livy expresses personal doubt, here he feels that the actions of Cincinnatus are operae pretium est.

l4 Walsh, Liw: His Historical Aims and Methods, 77, cites this scene as one of Livy's examples of simple living (frugalitas). Although not a constitutional trait, it adds to the positive impression that the reader receives.

through several, rapid decrees: he redirects everything in the state for the

war effort (3.27.6). As he leads his forces into battle, Cincinnatus does

not give a direct address. instead Livy reports his words in which he

reminds the soldiers of their purpose: to free a sieged consul (3.27.7). By

invoking the office of the consulship, he removes attention from his

position as a dictator and makes the mission constitutional in nature: it is

not to defeat an enemy of Rome, but to rescue an officer of the res

publica. Livy emphasises this modest behaviour of Cincinnatus again

when the soldiers voice their enthusiasm for the dictator's reported

speech in direct address. He proves to be an effective military

commander and he places the defeated Aequi under the yoke (3.28.1 1).

When he encounters the consul whose army he saves he blarnes him as a

failure and as unfaithful to the spirit of the office he occupies. a

denunciation that is more powerful as it is made in direct speech. As a

result the consul irnmediately resigns his office (3.29.2). Upon his return

to the city, the senate rewards hirn with a triumph (3.29.4). As the threat

to Rome is now gone, Cincinnatus resigns his office, after a period of

sixteen days: Quinctius sexto decimo die dictafura in sex menses accepta

se abdicauit (3.29.7). Livy deliberately includes the six month term limit

for the dictatorship in order to emphasise Cincinnatus' constitutional

piousness when he holds the office for less than ten percent of the total

duration of the office.

4. Appius Claudius Decemvir.

Unlike book two, where the actions of the constitutional hero Brutus

overshadow the crimes of CorÎolanus, in this book it is the villain who

overshadows the hero.15 However, this does not weaken the pro-

republican message of the first pentad, for the villain is punished for his

crimes. Appius Claudius, the villain of book three, first appears when the

people elect him as one of the decemvin (3.33.3). The historian places

Appius' name first to foreshadow the future leading role that this man will

have in the narrative. This prominence is realised later in the same

chapter: regimen totius magistratus penes Appium era t fauore plebis,

adeogue nouum sibi ingenium induerat ut plebicola repente omnisque

aurae popularis captator euaderet pro truci saeuoque insectatore plebis

(3.33.7). The historian suggests that Appius irnmediately takes the

unofficial leadership in this office, an office that is designed to be

collective. As a person who seeks personal power, Livy suggests that

Appius uses his office to secure a political base, not to work for the

benefit of the state.

When the formal election campaign for the decemvirs begins, Livy

remarks upon Appius' improper behaviour. The account of the decemvir's

behaviour reinforces the impression that he works for personal

amelioration:

'' Walsh, Liw: His Historical Aims and Methods, 89, notes that there is a constant degradation of the Claudii farnily in Ab Urbe Condita. This is true with the exception of Appius Claudius the military tribune of 403 BC. Vasaly agrees with this and says that Livy is presenting a family stereotype (Vasaly, 204).

demissa iam in discrimen dignitas ea aetate iisque honoribus actis stimulaba t Ap. Claudium. necscires utrum inter decemuiros an inter candidatos numerares. propior interdum petendo quam gerendo magistratui erat. crimina ri optima tes, extollere candidatorum leuissimum guemgue h umillimumqoe. ipse medius inter trib unicios, Duillios Iciliosquel in foro uolifare, per illos se plebi uenditare, donec collegae quoque, gui unice illi dediti fuerant ad id tempus, coniecere in eum oculos, mirantes quid sibi uellet: apparere nihil sinceri esse; profecto haud gratuitam in tanfa superbia comitatem fore; nimium in ordinem se ipsum cogere et uolgari cum priuatis non tam properantis abire magistratu quam uiam ad continuandurn rnagistratum puaerentis esse (3.35.3-3.35.6).

Through such an unrepublican scene, and the acknowledgement by his

colieagues that his intent is not good, the negative constitutional aims of

the villain are clear. His villainy is emphasised by the use of the word

superbia, an echo of the name of the last king of Rome. Livy defines

Appius' motivation as desire for high office: he has held office before and

he feels that he cannot survive without power, irrespective of the needs of

the res publica. His collegues, concerned for the welfare of the republic,

attempt to protect the constitution from damage when they nominate him

to preside at the election, in the belief that he cannot declare himself

elected (3.35.8). However, this is no deterrent to the villain, who displays

his zeal for power when he not only gets himself elected but he also

defeats two of his opponents. When Appius Claudius formally assumes

office, the historian makes his attitude towards the constitution evident:

inito igitur magistratus primum honoris diem denuntiatione ingentis terroris insignem fecere. nam curn ita priores decetnuiri seruassent ut unus fasces haberet et hoc insigne regium in orbem, suam cuiusque uicem, per omnes iret, subito omnes cum duodenis fascibus prodiere (3.36.3).

Livy says that the decemvirs take office on the same day of the year as

the traditional magistrates. It is ironic that an enemy of the republic Iike

Appius Claudius should begin his destructive activity on the day which so

many others began their service to the republic.

As a constitutional viliain, Appius Claudius must be defeated and

the supremacy of the republican constitution must reassert itself. The

narrative expands considerably at this point, as the historian devotes a

considerable amount of attention to the faIl of Appius. Perhaps Livy does

this to draw the reader's attention to the constitutional monstrosity.

Appius' defeat cornes when he begins to desire Verginia. When he is

unable to secure her, he resorts to personal seizure (3.44.6). His lust for

the girl becomes a parallel for his lust for power.'6 Ann Vasaly notes that

there is no example of this episode in earlier narratives, which suggests

the possibility that this is entirely a Livian invention. a parallel to the rape

of Lucretia in book one.17 Therefore, Livy allows his history to be directed

by the republic, for both events are catalysts for the restoration of liberlas

which can only exist when Rome is a republic. Appius' use of a client to

commit the crime is a crime in itself, for it brings the Roman patron-client

relationship into disrepute. lt is ironic that he employs a legal mechanisrn

to obtain her when he daims that he is retaking an escaped slave: his

16 Vasaly, 219. Ducos agrees with this sentiment that the two episodes are simiiar and provide the motivation for the removal of the unrepublican forces (Ducos, 137).

'' Vasaly, 21 7.

legal daim is based on a lie and he uses Roman law to secure his own

wishes. This lie becornes worse as Appius leads the girl to court, where

he believes that the law will uphold his illegal claim (3.44.8). The trial

incriminates the decemvir further, for Appius acts as judge and the

plantiff, Appius' client, offers false evidence. Livy goes as far as to

suggest that the trial has the qualifications of a comedy: notam iudici

fabulam petitor (3.44.9). The historian denies Appius any title to be a

master criminal. for that would suggest that he is a worthy enemy of the

republic. Instead his efforts are those of a delinquent.

Despite the arrival of Verginia's suitor, Appius manages to secure

the girl untii the arrival of her father to answer to the case. a father, Livy

notes, who is absent from the city on duties for the republic: corn

Verginium rei publicae causa dixissent abesse (3.44.1 1). The historian

contrasts the villain in Rome and the pious republican who is away from

the city. Appius impedes the proper legal process when he orders that

her father should not be permitted to leave for Rome and that he should

be physically detained if necessary (3.45.9). In this example the reader

çees that Appius does one thing in public, then seeks an alternate course

in private: his villainly lacks consistency. However, justice prevails and

Livy says that Verginius is already on his way to Rome (3.45.10). When

he addresses the court, Verginius describes the decemvir as like a beast

in his wants, not a man (3.47.7).18 He is no longer identified by his

intellectual disregard for the state, but for his disregard of the human

world as a whole. And as Appius is not hurnan. Verginius cannot rely on

legal means. He feels that the only way to Save his daughter is to kill her,

and in a vivid display he does so and he displays her blood as a testament

to Appius' destruction (3.48.5). The dead girl's suitor follows this with an

invocation of the tribunate, an office that formally protected citizens in

such a situation, but which was now oppressed. By making this

invocation, what was a persona1 grievance now becomes a public,

constitutional one. From this point the Roman people treat the affliction of

Verginius as a cal1 for the return of liberty, a return to the republic

(3.50.10). This scene is similar to the end of the monarchy at the end of

book one. A wrong suffered by a single individual at the hands of one

who represents an oppressive constitutional form becomes the catalyst for

public action to assert the freedorn of the people. When the plebeians

arm themselves, Appius concedes defeat and the decernvirate ends

(3.54.7).

The career of Appius Claudius concludes with his trial and it is

remarkably different from the previous trial in which he serves as a judge.

Verginius, as the accuser, speaks directly to Appius when he announces

the crime (3.56.3-3.56.4). Appius, despite his illegal behaviour in the

18 Vasaly, 218, says that Appius displays the traits of the typical tyrannus, one of which is beast-like qualities: "once in power he behaves more like an animal than a human being".

previous trial, is allowed to benefit from the law in this trial when he

requests an appeal (3.56.5). The historian presents his defence in

indirect speech, thereby placing it beneath the speech of Verginius.

Appius reminds the state of the services that the previous generations of

his family have done and his love of the plebeians: maiorum merita in rem

publicarn dorni militaeque comrnemorabat, suum infelix erga plebem

Romanam studium (3.56.9). His employment of rem publicam is ironic, for

it was his unconstitutional behaviour that leds to this trial, This defence

fails and even the appeal from another member of the Claudii, a man who

fled Rome due to Appius' tyranny, fails (3.58.1-3.58.5). As he awaits the

continuation of his trial. he realises that aquittal is impossible and he kills

himself (3.58.6). So ends the constitutional depravity that was Appius

Claudius decemvir.lg

5. Camillus.

It is not until book five that Ab Urbe Condita provides any further

constitutional heroes or villains, not until Camillus. It is appropriate that

the final major character of this pentad is a constitutional hero, for it

19 Miles, 115. notes that even the most heinous villains in Livy's history receive some, albeit very minor, credit for any effort they may have made to assist the growth of Rome. In the case of Appius Claudius Decemvir, he receives credit from one of his descendants as one of Rome's conditores for his contribution to Roman law (3.58.2). However, Livy is sure to keep this praise to a minimum so as not to overshadow the negative impression ha strives so diligently to create.

allows the pentad to begin and end in a positive, republican tone." He

first appears when Livy lists him as one of the elected military tribunes for

403 BC (5.1 0.1). Later, when the people elect him for a second time. Livy

notes that the people are impressed by the high quality of the candidates,

which indirectly suggests Camillus' appropriateness for high office

(5.14.5). In the next year he serves as the third of three interreges

(5.17.5) and, after Rome experiences a setback in the assault of Veii, he

is made dictator prior to his departure to the theatre of war (5.19.2).

Upon Camillus' arriva1 at the front, the Romans experience a marked

resuscitation of spirit that Livy directly attributes to hirn (5.19.3). By

mentionhg the three distinct constitutional offices that Camillus held in a

few years, Livy shows that Camillus has the political experience he will

need to Save the state. Camillus shows his dutiful attitude early in his

career when he hands over a greater part of the spoils from the war with

the Faliscans and Capenates to the state: he acts in the spirit of the

constitution (5.19.8). When a second victory seems likely, the dictator

refers the matter of the proper distribution of spoils to the senate. The

senate, not able to reach a consensus, leaves the matter with Camillus

who fears a constitutional crisis in case he makes the incorrect decision.

The matter, therefore, is returned to the senate (5.20.9). In both scenes

Camillus does not use the allocation of spoils for per: political gain.

20 Ogilvie, 670, defines the traditional Camillus best: "for was the prototype of the great statesman who despite the fellow-citizens and the turmoil of the tirnes remained loyal principle and eventually brought salvation and concord".

later ages Camillus ingratitude of his to Rome and to his

Camillus then avoids criticisrn through his immediate resignation of the

dictatorship (5.23.5-5.23.7).

Despite these services to the state. Camillus becomes the object of

dislike in the city. and one of the tribunes brings a charge against him on

account of the spoils of Veii. Livy indirectly suggests the unjust nature of

the charge. when he creates pity for Camillus by mentioning the death of

his youngest son (5.32.8). His clients Say that they are not able to acquit

him and he chooses exile instead of allowing his clients (who. Livy notes,

form a susbstantial part of the plebeian order) to pay the fine (5.32.9).

Therefore. a man who has the support of the Roman majority is driven

from the city he serves and which, later, he will Save. The episode

concludes with irony: expulso ciue quo manente, si quicquarn humanorum

certi est, capi Roma non potuerat, aduen tante fatali urbi clade legati ab

Clusinis ueniunt auxilium aduersus Gallos petentes (5.33.1 ). Livy

suggests that should the Romans not have driven out Camillus. then

Rome would not have been captured by the Gauls.

Camillus then disappears from the narrative and Rome is

overwhelmed by the Gallic assault. In response to her defeats, the

Romans elect Camillus dictator for the second tirne and recall hirn from

exile. Despite his knowledge of what is happening at Rome. he does not

leave until he receives authorisation from the senate (5.46.10-5.46.1 1 ).

Gary Miles notes that the historian goes 'out of his way to express his

convictionn that Camillus, regardless of how fervent he is to deliver Rome

85

from the Gauls, will not do so until the senate instructs him to do so.*'

Even in a predicament where the reader may excuse non-traditional

action, this hero holds firm to his republican belief to adhere to what the

senate requests. In an effort to acknowledge the wrong they have done

him, the whole nation elects Camillus dictator, he is not designated by a

military tribune, the usual procedure." Once the Romans reverse the

injustice of his exile, the fortunes of the Romans improve. The rapid

resolution of the Gallic conflict suggests that it is because Camillus, as

dictator, takes personal charge of the situation. He overturns the offer to

pay a ransom to the Gauls, declaring that the offer was illegal as it was

made without his consent: he exercises his constitutional authority as

dictator (5.49.2). This action is followed by the rapid defeat of the Gauls

(5.49.6), an act that earns him the praise of the crowd as the second

founder of Rome: dictator reciperata ex hostibus patria triumphans in

urbern redit, interque iocos militares, quos inconditos iaciunt, Romulus ac

parens patriae conditorque alter urbis haud uanis laudibus appella batur

(5.49.7).

Once he has saved the city from a foreign danger, he must Save it

from a domestic threat: he must persuade the Romans not to migrate to

Veii. Livy states that the tribunes favour the plan, but Camillus, still in

possession of the dictatorship, employs his superior constitutiona

*' Miles, 130.

T. J. Luce, "Design and Structure in Livy: 5.32-55", TAPA 102 (1971)

position

292.

to thwart this plan, a role that the senate encourages hirn to play: eaque

causa fuit non abdicandae post t-hum dictaturae, senatu obsecrante

ne rem publicam in incerto relinqueret statu (5.49.8). It is the historian's

choice of the word rem publicam in this instance. not orbs, ciuitas or patria

(as employed in the previous sentence) that makes this defence of the city

a constitutional issue and not a political or geographical issue. Through

the dictatorship, he successfully argues against the proposals of the

tribunes that the Romans ought to rebuild their city instead of migrating to

Veii. Despite the fact that he argues for the refoundation of the city on

religious grounds, his occupation of the dictatorship and the presence of

the senate makes this speech a constitutional one as well. It is

appropriate that this man, a man who held the military tribunate twice, the

dictatorship twice, and served as interrex twice should Save the city on

two occasions. His six terms of office combine to form an invincible

constitutional defence. Camillus succeeds and Rome is refounded. This

makes him the greatest republican hero in this first pentad. As Gary Miles

states: "in saving Rome from destruction by foreign enemies and in saving

the city and its traditional gods from abandonment by disaffected citizens,

he reaffirms principles that have already been established"." Camillus is

able to work within the existing constitutional framework of Rome, within

the res publica, as his occupation of the dictatorship demonstrates,

despite the prodigious task before him.

" Miles, 126. He also notes that Camillus 'respects traditions and subordinates hirnseff to established institutions" (1 29).

However, Camillus' role as a republican hero does not end with the

refoundation of Rome. He continues to play a central role in book six and,

therefore, any discussion of Camillus as a proponent of the res publica

rnust, if only as a postscript, include Livy's pro-republican presentation of

him in the second pentad. This is different from the pro-Roman efforts of

Camillus whom, after Livy's preface to the second pentad, the Roman

people ask not to resign his dictatorship until the end of the year (6.1.4).

Continually the reader sees Camillus working on behalf of the senate and

people of s orne.*^ He aids the nation when he serves as the second

interrex and it is he who holds the election of the military tribunes of 389

BC (6.1.8). First, Camillus sustains the state by serving as dictator;

Secondly, he personally restores the res publica by conducting the

election.

The central role that Camillus plays in the Roman government

reaches its peak in the narrative of 386 BC, when the people elect hirn

military tribune once more. It is the way in which Livy announces the

election that is significant: res a d Camillum tribunum militum consulari

potesta te rediit; collegae additi quinque, Ser. Cornelius Maluginensis Q.

Seruilius Fidenas sexturn L. Quinctius Cincinnatus L. Horatius Puluillus P.

Valerius (6.6.3). Even though he is one of six military tribunes, the

historian suggests that the whole Roman government passes to Camillus

(res ad Camillum ... rediit), that the state is his persona1 province. Livy

24 Mary Jaeger. Liw's Written Rome, Ann Arbor, 1997, 76.

does not name al1 six rnilitary tribunes at the same tirne: he names

Camillus first and then states that he has five (lesser) collegues.

It is at 6.6.6-6.6.7 that the hero achieves his greatest republican

moment. The senate acknowledges his public service and they declare

their enthusiasm to appoint him dictator again should any threat arise.

Further, although they are his equals, the other rnilitary tribunes do not

hesitate to subordinate themselves to him; therefore they do not rnake

Livy's elevation of him at 6.6.3 appear an unrepublican glorification. As

an epilogue to his republican efforts. the hero expresses his gratitude and

he offers the proper acknowledgement to the people, the senate and his

colleagues (6.6.8-6.6.9). When one considers his eloquent oration in

defence of the refoundation of Roman in book five, it is surprising that the

thanks he gives here appears in indirect speech. This makes the hero

appear suitably modest when he displays his awe of something higher

than he. This, then, is an appropriate place to end, with such a display of

republican piety from such a republican modeLZ5

as One should also consider Livy's laudatory epitaph to Camillus in book seven: maximeque eam pestilentiam insignem mors quam matura tam acerba M. Furi fecit. fuit enim uere uir unicus in omni forfuna, princeps pace belloque priusquarn exsolatum iret, clarior in exsilio, uel desiderio ciuitatis quae capta absentis implorauit opem uel felicitate qua restitutus in patriarn securn patriam ipsam restituit; par deinde per quinque et uiginti annos - tot enim posfea uixit - titulo tantae gloriae fuit dignusque habitus quem secundum a Romulo conditiorem urbis Romanae ferrent (7.1.8-7.7.1 0).

WORKS ClTED

1. Primarv Sourœs.

Dio Cassius. The Roman Histow Volume VI. E. Cary, ed. Cambridge MA, 1919.

Livy. Ab Urbe Condita 1-V Libri. Robert Maxwell Ogilvie, ed. 2nd. ed. Oxford, 1974.

Livy. Ab Urbe Condita VI-X Libri. Carol Walters and Robert Conway, eds. Oxford, 1919.

Livy. Volume XIV: Summaries. Fragments. General Index. A. C. Schlesinger and Russel Ger , eds. Cambridge MA, 1959.

Polybe. Histoires Livre VI. Raymond Weil and Claude Nicolet, eds. Paris, 1977.

Sallust. Catilina, luriurtha, Historiarum Fraqmenta Selecta, Appendix Sallustiana. L. D. Reynolds, ed. Oxford, 1991.

Tacitus. Annalium Libri. Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1994.

II. Texts and Commentaries.

Res Gestae Diui Aucrusti. P. A. Brunt and J. M. Moore, eds. Oxford, 1967.

Livy. Book Il. J. L. Whiteley, ed. London, 1963.

Livy. BookV. R. 1. Ross, ed. London, 1996.

Livy. Ab Urbe Condita VI. Christina Shuttleworth Kraus, ed. Cambridge, 1 994.

Ogilvie, Robert Maxwell. A Commentam on Liw 1-V. Oxford, 1965.

III. Secondarv Sourœs.

Barry, Nicholas. An Introduction to Roman Law. Oxford, 1962.

Briswe. John. "The First Decaden. Liw. T. A. Dorey, ed. London, 1971. 1-20.

Buchan, John. Auciustus. London, 1937.

Burck, Erich. Das Geschichtswerk des T h s Livius. Heidelberg, 1992.

Cary, M and Scullard, H. H. A Historv of Rome. London, 1992.

Ducos, Michele. "Les Passions, Les Hommes et L'Histoire dans L'Oeuvre de Tite-Live". REL 65 (1 987). 132-1 47.

Edwards, Catherine. Wntincl Rome. Cambridge, 1996.

Gabba, Emilio. The Historians and Augustus". Caesar Auqustus: Seven Aspects. Fergus Millar and Erich Segal, eds. Oxford, 1984. 61 -88.

Gabba. Emilio. "True History and False History in Classical Antiquity". JRS 71 (1981). 50-62.

Hattenhauer, Hans. Euro~iiische Rechtscieschichte. Heidelberg, 1994.

Jaeger, Mary. Liw's Written Rome. Ann Arbor, 1997.

Kraus, Christina Shuttleworth. "'No Second Troy': Topoi and the Refoundation in Livy, Book V". TAPA 124 (1 994). 267-289.

Kraus, C. S. and Woodman, A J. Latin Historians. Oxford, 1997.

Levene, David. Reliaion in Liw. teiden, 1993.

Lipovsky, James. A Historioaraphical Commentan, on Livy VI-X. Salem NH, 1984.

L'hoir, Francesca Santoro. 'Heroic Epithets and Recurrent Themes in Ab Urbe Condita". TA PA 1 20 (1 990). 221 -241.

Luce, T. J. "Design and Structure in Livy: 5.32-5.55". TAPA 102 (1 971). 265- 302.

Luce, T. J. Liw: The Corn~osiüon of His Histow. Princeton, 1977.

Luce, T. J. "Livy, Augustus, and the Forum Augusturnn. From Re~ublic to Empire. Kurt Raafiaub and Mark Toher, eds. Los Angeles, 1990. 123- 138.

Miles, Gary. Liw: Reconstnicüna Earlv Rome. lthaca NY, 1995.

Momigliano, A. 'Camillus and Concord". CQ 36 (1942). 1 1 1-1 20.

Scullard, H. H. From the Gracchi to Nero. London, 1982.

Syrne, Ronald. 'Livy and Augustus". Roman Papers. 7 vols. Oxford, 1979. 400-454.

Syme, Ronald. The Roman Revolution. Oxford, 1939.

Taylor, Lily Ross. Partv Politics in the Açre of Caesar. Los Angeles, 1964.

Toher, Mark. uAugustus and the Evolution of Roman Historiography". From Re~ublic to Empire. Kurt Raaflaub and Mark Toher, eds. Los Angeles, I W O . 1 39-1 54.

Valsaly, Ann. 'Penonality and Power: Livy's Depiction of the Appii Claudii in the First Pentadn. TAPA 1 17 (1 987). 203-226.

Walsh, P. G. 'Livy and Augustus". PACA 4 (1 961). 26-37.

Walsh, P. G. Liw: His Historical Aims and Methods. Cambridge, 1961.

Wirszubski, C. H. Liberfas as a Political ldea at Rome During the Late Republic and Earlv Empire. Cambridge, 1950.

IMAGE NALUATION TEST TARGET (QA-3)

APPLIED & IMAGE. lnc S 1653 Easî Main Street - . . - Rochester. NY 14609 USA -- ,--= Phone: 71 6,482-0300 --

,--- Fax: 716i28û-5989