The Making of Plebeian Secessions in Roman Historiography

The tribunate was urban and a civilian office, and the limitation of the tribunician power, which was of no use against the military imperium beyond the first milestone, attached its holders to the very soil of Rome (they were not allowed to leave the Urbs even for one whole day) Dion. Hal. 8.87.6; Gell. 3.2.11; 13.12.9; Macrob. Sat. 1.3.8; Richard J.-C. Les origines de la plиbe...P. 554-556..

The restriction was there precisely because the tribunate was intended to prevent possible offenses of the extra-urban and military consulship (praetorship) when the latter was made the city magistracy Livy 2.33.1: “utplebi sui magistratus essent sacrosancti quibus auxilii latio adversus consules esset”.. Although the ancient tradition included the issue of indebtedness in its account of the first secession to explain the origin of tribunician ius auxilii, this explanation makes no sense because the tribunes could not rescue a debtor from his fate, as it was made clear by the provisions in the Twelve Tables Forsythe G. A Critical History. P. 217-218..

The mons sacer was the destination of the secession, although Forsythe assumes that it was linked to the tribunate to explain the origin of tribunician sacrosanctity by the definition of the lex sacrata issued there Livy 3.55.10: “tribunos uetere iure iurando plebis, cum primum eam potestatem creauit, sacrosanctos

esse”.. According to Festus (p. 422 L), those laws were sacra- tae, which established that anyone who did anything against them is sacer to a particular god, along with his property and money For Ceres, see: Ridley R. T. Notes on the Establishment of the Tribunate of the Plebs // Latomus. 1968. Vol. 27. P. 535-554; Sordi M. Il santuario di Cerere, Libero, e Libera e il tribunato della plebe // Santuari e politica nel mondo antico / a cura di M. Sordi. Milano, 1983. P. 127-139; Cazanove O. de. Le sanctuaire de Cйrиs jusqu'а la deuxiиme sйcession de la plebe // Crise et transformation des sociйtйs archaпques de l'Italie antique au Ve siиcle av. J. C. Rome, 1990. P. 373-399; Cornell T J. The Beginnings. P. 263-265; Forsythe G. A Critical History. P. 173-176; Pellam G. Ceres, the Plebs, and Libertas in the Roman Republic // Historia: Zeitschrift fьr alte Geschichte. 2014. Bd. 63. S. 74-95; Meunier N. Le lac Rйgille, les Dioscures et Cйrиs // De la crise naquirent les cultes / йd. par M. Cavalieri, R. Lebrun, N. Meunier. Turnhout, 2015. P. 155-161.. The crime against tribunician sacrosanctity was punished by the confiscation of property in favour of Ceres, whose temple on the Aventine was the centre of the plebeian movement in the second century See: Livy 3.55.6-8; Dion. Hal. 6.89.2-3. Cf. Pellam G. Ceres, the Plebs. P. 77-79. -- The archaic nexum, suggesting that the violator's body was surrendered in lieu of the obligation, was abolished in 326, when handing over of property or labor instead was invented. Thus, the temple of Ceres became the recipient of the fines not earlier than this date..

For this reason, perhaps, Calpurnius Piso replaced the mons sacer with the Aventine as the objective of the secession of the plebs Livy 2.32.3; Sall. Jug. 31.17; Fest. P. 422-424 L. Cf. Guarino A. La rivoluzione. P. 190; Richard J.-C. Les origines. P. 547-549; Eder W Zwischen Monarchie. P. 107, 112; Forsythe G. A Critical History. P. 173-176. The idea was also influenced by the Gracchan movement, although Piso's source could be the account of the secession of 449.. Livy's description of a military custom of the Samnites, Aequi, Volsci, Ligures, and Latins shows that the lex sacrata related to the army, not to city officials (Livy 7.41.4; 9.39.5; 10.38.1-13; 36.38.1). The mons sacer and the Aventine Hill were situated outside the Roman pomerium, which originally limited the sphere of activity for the plebeian tribunes. The sacrosanctity of the tribunes was determined by the sacred territory of the early Urbs rather than the treaty between the struggling orders outside Rome Smith C. J. The Origins. P. 118-122.. social crises rome tribunate patrician plebeian

Ancient authors agree that the mons sacer was `three miles from the city across the river Anio' on the Nomentane road to the Sabine country Cic. Brut. 54; Rep. 2.58; Livy 2.32.2; 3.52.2-3; Dion. Hal. 6.45.2; 90.1; Ascon. in Piso 76; Val. Max. 8.9.1; Fest. p. 422 L.. However, there was nothing sacred for the Romans in the ager Crustuminus beyond the Anio. The lex sacrata they associated with the secession shows that the mount where the law was issued had a religious significance. Even if there were some sacred mounts in the Latium vetus for the Romans, as well as for other Latins, the sacred mount could only have been the Alban Mount (Monte Cavo), where the Feriae Latinae was annually celebrated in honor of Jupiter Latiaris Eder W Zwischen Monarchie... S. 107..

It is very possible that at some stage of Roman historiography, the source of information about the river Anio, which had to be crossed on the way to the sacred mount, was misunderstood. Besides the Anio River, a tributary of the Tiber, there was another Anio in Latium. It was the aqueduct Anio Vetus, which was constructed from the spoils of the Pyrrhic War between 272 and 269. The intake of the aqueduct from the River Anio was above the city Tibur at the twentieth milestone from Rome. From its source, the aqueduct descended along the river to Tibur where it left the Anio valley and sloped southwards towards the Alban Hills near Gallicano. From here it turned west again towards Rome.

The Anio Vetus crossed the via Latina near the seventh mile marker, south-east of Rome Mari Z. Anio Vetus // Lexicon Topographicum Vrbis Romae / ed by E. M. Steinby. Vol. I. Roma, 1993. P. 44-45.. The via Latina passed by the place of meetings of the Latin people in the Ferentina grove located near Castrimoenium (modern Marino) on the edge of Lake Albano.

Then, passing Mons Algidus, the road reached another Ferentinum, a town of the Hernici, about 45 miles south-east of Rome. The Hernici were a Sabine-speaking tribe, so the via Latina could be regarded as connecting Rome and `Sabine country. Roman historiography re-interpreted the obsolete relationship with the Hernici after the lowland Sabines were incorporated into the Roman citizenship between 290 and 266, and in the conception of Roman historians, the Nomentane road to the Sabines replaced the former Latin road. Thus, the sacred mount of the secession must be identified with the Alban Mount, while the `sacred mount' which had this name at the time of Dionysius (6.45.2) was false “popular” etymologizing Ogilvie R. M. A Commentary on Livy. Books 1-5. Oxford, 1965. P. 311; Forsythe G. A Critical History. P. 282-283. Contrary: Mignone L. M. Remembering a Geography of Resistance // Memoria Romana / ed. by K. Galinsky. Ann Arbor, 2014. P 144..

G. Dumйzil has shown that the “debt problem” as the reason for the secession relates to the archaic relationship between warriors and their leaders rather than to economic in- debtedness Dumйzil G. Mitra-Varuna. An Essay on Two Indo-European Representations of Sovereignty. New York, 1988. P. 95-111. For the archaic idea of obligation, see: Palmer L. R. The Concept of Social Obligation in Indo-European // Hommages а Max Niedermann. Bruxelles. 1956. P. 258-269.. The archaic obligation nexum had a much broader sense than indebtedness for money.

Cornell draws attention to the fact that an insolvent debtor must be sold trans Tiberim, that is, he was considered guilty within the territory of the Latium vetus, which was under the patronage of Jupiter Latiaris Cornell T J. The Beginnings. P. 281.. According to Livy (2.21.5; 27-28), the plebeian secession to the Sacred Mount began as a rebellion of the Roman army. J.-Cl. Richard emphasizes that it was the plebeian foot soldiers who seceded in 493 Richard J.-C. Les origines. P. 545.. Livy says that the soldiers swore an oath to the consuls and it “bound” them by a contract.

Dumйzil compared the “bound condition” of the soldiers with that of the members of a Mannerbund, who could not violate their oath to their chieftain and were in his absolute power. To violate the oath meant the same as to violate a contract of the soldiers with their general. After Tarquinius Superbus was banished, the Roman soldiers remained bound by their oath to him. This was the original reason for their “indebtedness” and their refusal to obey other commanders, Ap. Claudius and P. Servilius (coss. 495).

The situation was resolved after Tarquinius' death in 495. The military leaders of the next year, A. Verginius and T. Vetusius (coss. 494), could not handle the situation, and the Senate decided to appoint a dictator, Man. Valerius Poplicola. Assembled by the dictator, the Roman army departed to the Sacred Mount where the plebeian soldiers elected new commanders, concluding an agreement with them in the form of lex sacrata. The Senate approved of these commanders as Roman magistrates.

Dumezil's interpretation provides an explanation of why two and not ten tribunes were established on the Sacred Mount Cicero (Rep. 2.58-59) and Livy (2.33.3) refer to two tribunes, with three later being added as their colleagues or assistants, while Dionysius (6.69.3) and Asconius (Corn. p. 77 Clark) suggest that five tribunes were initially elected from each class of the centuriated system. On the number of tribunes, see: Lanfranchi Th. Les tribuns... P. 66-78.. The traditional version of Roman history identifies the beginning of the Republic with the establishment of the consulship, but early Roman historians could see the matter otherwise. An amalgamation of the various versions of Rome's earliest history cannot have started earlier than P. Mucius Scaevola published the Annales Maximi during his Great pontificate in 130-115.

The second -- century historians, perhaps, separated the end of the monarchy and the establishment of the consulship. One of the early versions told of a conspiracy of the magister populi and tribinus celerum against the rex sacrorum. The plot was then developed under the influence of Greek tragedies of the Atreides as the story of the Tarquin family, whose head Tarquinius Superbus (magister populi) and his son (tribinus celerum) intrigued against their relative Tarquinius Collatinus (rex sacrorum) who was then banished. Later the banishment of Collatinus was replaced by that of Superbus, and the main role was attributed to the future fist consul Junius Brutus, who was inserted into the Tarquin family as a nephew. In this case, the consulship could have been established several years after the coup d'etat A remnant of this version is Dionysius' first tribunes L. Junius Brutus (traditionally the first consul) and C. Sicinius Vellutus (6.70.1; 89.1-3; cf. Plut. Cor. 7). In Livy 2.32.1-2, the tribunes were C. Licinius and L. Albinus.. The establishment was modelled according to the annual investiture of the Roman consuls, e.g., the sacrifice to Jupiter Latiaris during the Feriae Latinae on the Alban Mount This way of writing was known to Roman historians who adapted the first auspices of the consul on the Capitoline Hill to the inauguration of ancient kings (Livy 1.18.6-10).. The ritual is allegedly a relic of the earliest phases of Latin religion, and possibly shows fluctuations in the relative power of Romans and Latins, but at the same time fits into certain patterns in relation to games and triumphs, which are replicated at Rome. In early times, during the alliance of the Romans and Latins, the chief magistrates of both nations met on the Alban Mount and conducted the necessary ceremonies. After the destruction of the Latin commonwealth, the chief magistrates of Rome conducted the celebration and offered the common sacrifice of an ox to Jupiter Latiaris in the name and on behalf of all who took part in the festival. The flesh of the victim was distributed among the participants, and multitudes from all Latium flocked to the Alban Mount for the occasion. The exodus of large masses of the Roman plebs from the city and their journey to the sacred mount looks like a secessio. During the Feriae Latinae the Roman citizens of all Latium swore to Jupiter to give their fidelity to the new consuls, and this rite was used by Roman historians as the basis for the story of the soldiers swearing to the first consuls instead of a new king. Since the festival on the Alban Mount legitimized the authority of the Roman consuls, one can suggest that the original story of the lex sacrata on the mons sacer was about the establishment of the consulship, not the tribunate. The new consuls elected were Post. Cominius Auruncus and Sp. Cassius Viscellinus (coss. 493), who is said to have concluded the first treaty with the Latins (Livy 2.33.3-4).

In addition to the two leaders, three their assistants were established (Livy 2.33.1-2; Dion. Hal. 6.89.1-3; Plut. Cor. 7). They are usually interpreted as plebeian aediles who entered office in the same year as the dedication of the temple of Ceres on the Aventine See: Cornell T J. The Beginnings... P. 263-265; Pellam G. Ceres, the Plebs... P 79-81. They were perhaps identified with aediles by Cato the Elder who argued that the plebeian aediles were sacrosanct like the tribunes (Fest. P 422 L s.v. sacrosanctum).. But the aediles were two in number, not three, as Zonaras (7.15) stresses, perhaps, following Diodorus (11.68.8), who mentions four, not five, plebeian officers under 471. It is also doubtful that the plebeian aediles had been created before the patricians received their own aedileship in 367 Livy 6.42.12-14. For the plebeian and patrician aedileship, see: BeckerM. Suntoque aediles curatores urbis. Stuttgart, 2017. S. 37-138.. So, if we date it by the existence of the temple of Ceres, the secession was designed on the model of an event which took place in the fourth century. Pomponius states that the plebeian magistrates were called tribunes because formerly the people were divided into three parts, and one tribune was taken from each part correspondingly. From five men elected on the Sacred Mount, three were tribunes and two were aediles (Dig. 1.2.2.20-21). Pomponius obviously followed Varro's statement that each of the three earliest tribes recruited 1,000 warriors to the Roman legion Varro LL 5.81: “Tribuniplebei, quod ex tribunis militum primum tribunifacti”; cf. also 5.89 and Zon.

7.15.. Many scholars accepted the idea that the first tribuni plebis were military tribunes who had assumed the leadership of the secession For the military character of the organization of the plebs in 494-493, see: Mommsen Th. Rцmisches Staatsrecht. Bd. II. Leipzig, 1887. S. 273; Altheim F Lex sacrata. Die Anfдnge der plebeischen Organisation. Amsterdam, 1940. S. 33-38; Mazzarino S. Sul tribunato della plebe nella storiografia romana // Helikon. 1971-1972. Vol. 11-12. P. 110-115; Richard J.-C. Les origines. P. 545-547; Mitchell R. E. Patricians and Plebeans. The Origin of the Roman State. Ithaca, 1990. P 139-142; Meunier N. Tribuni plebis ou tribuni militum? // Les Йtudes classiques, 2011. Vol. 79. P. 347-360.. From this perspective the secessio of armati can be described as a march of thepopulus organized as an army rather than a democratic movement. If the main officers elected on the Sacred Mount were two consuls, their three assistants were military tribunes. Although Livy accepted the idea of the creation of 20 tribes by the year 495, he listed only three military tribunes (consularipotestate) between 444 and 426. Livy's account shows that there was a version, according to which the Roman community had only three tribes between 494 and 426. In the post-Gracchan historiography, the original story of the first consuls was revised and the legislative act on the Alban Mount was represented as the secession of the plebeians to the mons sacer in Sabine, consuls were replaced by tribunes, the army -- by plebs, the fidelity of the soldiers by -- indebtedness of the plebeians, and the Sacred Mount -- by the Aventine Hill.

Varro (LL 5.81) defines the first withdrawal of the plebs as secessio Crustumerina For the tribus Crustumina, see: Rieger M. Tribus und Stadt: die Entstehung der rцmischen Wahlbezirke im urbanen und mediterranen Kontext (ca. 750-450 v. Chr.). Gцttingen, 2007. S. 376-379; Lanfranchi Th. Les tribuns. P 61-66, 284-293.. This name goes back to the town Crustumerium, which, according to the literary tradition, had been captured by the Romans many times since Romulus' era until it finally became Roman in 426. A Roman colony was already sent to the town by Romulus because of the fertility of the soil there, and many citizens of the town migrated to Rome (Livy 1.9-11; cf. Dion. Hal. 3.49.4-6). Livy also mentions that Crustumerium passed from the Latins to Rome before the first Latin War in 499, and modern scholars suggest that the tribus Crustumina was the 21^st Roman tribe, which Livy mentions after the Battle of Lake Regillum, under the year 49 5 See: Livy 2.19.2: Crustumeria capta and 2.21.7: “Romae tribus una et viginti factae”.. The lack of certainty that Crustumerium really belonged to the Romans until 426 allowed K. Beloch to assume that the tribus Crustumina was created between 426 and 406, when the last war against Veii began Beloch K. J. Rцmische Geschichte bis zum Beginn der punischen Kriege. Berlin; Leipzig, 1926. S. 175-176, 264-266, 300-301; RiegerM. Tribus und Stadt... S. 371-379.. The Roman community included 21 tribes from 495 (or 426, if we accept the emendation of Beloch) to 387 Livy 2.21.7; 6.5.8; Epit. 2; Dion. Hal. 7.64.6.. That means that the secessio Crustumerina can be dated to any time of this period, most probably between 426/406 and 387.

Livy (5.24.4-11; 49.8-55.2) refers to events which are very similar to the preparation of a secession under the year 395 and 387. After the Veientine War, the Romans decided to create a colony in Volscan territory, but unexpectedly agitation for resettlement in the much closer, recently conquered city of Veii started. It was proposed that some of the plebeians and a number of the senators should relocate in Veii so that the two cities would constitute one state with a common citizenship. The project was interrupted by the Gallic invasion, but after liberation from the Gauls the agitation resumed with renewed vigour, as Rome was destroyed, and Veii became even more attractive because its buildings were intact. With great difficulty and the help of the dictator M. Furius Camillus, the Senate managed to reverse the decision. The resettlement project was abandoned, but four new tribes of Roman citizens were created in the former Veientine territory. In this context, secessio Crustumerina can be regarded as the establishment of the new tribus Crustumina in the area beyond the Anio River, which had become a safe place for colonization. In Roman historiography the restoration of Rome in 387 after the Gallic invasion was considered a new foundation. It was logical to summarize the results of the previous development and to note that by this time Rome had 21 tribes. Later this number of tribes was associated with the period of the beginning of the Republic, not the period of restoration, and the colonisation on ager Crustuminus turned out to be a suitable place to relocate the first secession.

Thus, the first secession of the plebs seems to be a construction of the later annalistic historians, who remodelled the earlier account of the establishment of the consulship, under the influence of the concept of the struggle of the orders. The earlier version was originally shaped as the description of the custom of the Roman people's departure to the Alban Mount to celebrate the Feriae Latinae. The annual festival aimed to legitimize the Roman consuls as magistrates of all Latium. Perhaps, the custom was established after the dissolution of the Latin League in 340, when the majority of Latin communities received the Roman citizenship and were included in the Roman tribes. Annually on the sacred Alban Mount, these citizens of plebeian origin concluded a treaty with the consuls approving of their status of civil magistrates. The foedus Cassianum with the Latins in 493 was designed on the model of this annual treaty Cf. Ridley R. T. Notes on the establishment... P. 540-545, discusses the hypothesis of A. Dell'Oro of the arrangement between the patricians and the plebeians in 493 as a foedus between Rome and the Latins. Cf. Meunier N. Le lac Rйgille... P. 161-162.. It may have been dated after the Latin War of 496 by a historian who used a new treaty of Rome with Latin communities after the Latin War of 340-338 as an example and shifted the similar treaty to the beginning of the Republic. The family-name of Sp. Cassius Vicellinus, responsible for the foedus Cassianum, permits a suggestion that the historian was C. Cassius Hemina, the contemporary of the Cassii Longini family, which produced several consuls and tribunes of the plebs.

The Secessions of 449 and 342. The second secession was a reaction of the people to the usurpation of the second period of office by the second decemvirate in 449 Cic. Rep. 2.63; Sall. Jug. 31.17; Diod. 12.24; Livy 3.43-54; 3.67.11; 7.40.11; 9.34.4; Dion. Hal. 11.25-44; Sen. Brev. Vit. 13.8; Flor. 1.24; App. BCiv 1.1.2; Fest. p. 422 L; Dig. 1.2.2.20; 24.. The seizure of power was possible because the decemvirs were invested with an unlimited imperium (the tribunician inter- cessio was temporarily abolished). The cruelty and self-interest of the decemvirs converted their government into an oligarchy. Dionysius (11.2.1-3) describes their rule as typically oligarchic, apparently basing this on the rule of the 30 tyrants in Athens in 404-403. The decemvirs persecuted the best Romans, raising false accusations, and condemned some of them to death, while giving free rein to the youth that accompanied each decemvir.