| Summary: | Bibliography: pages 197-202. === This thesis examines the concept of violence during the transition from Republic to Principate. Many of the provisions against violence which evolved during the course of the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius were a direct response to the violence of the Late Republic. They were to a large extent, new and revolutionary, but were not caused by the violence of the Late Republic: rather they were developed as part of the new political scenario to stabilise Roman society and secure the princeps' position. A by-product of these measures was to provide a new context in which violence (particularly institutionalised state violence) could occur, be monitored and controlled. In chapter one I attempt to define violence and to extract the contemporary Roman attitude, without which any conclusions drawn would be inaccurate and unrealistic. I have used Roman legislation - especially the lex Julia de vi (c 18 BC) and have examined the works of Cicero for the frequency and function of vis, the Latin word which most closely corresponds to the English word "violence." I conclude that the Romans had a sophisticated understanding of the concept: i) anything that was not conducted through the due process of law was considered vis, ii) violence was tolerated only in exceptional circumstances, when state security was threatened. In chapter two I explore in greater detail the attempts by goverment to legislate against violence in particular the lex Julia de vi and the lex maiestatis. Although the latter was not employed initially to remove political rivals from the scene, its abuse during the reign of Tiberius became one of the great themes of the historians to illustrate the decline and moral bankruptcy of the Principate and to look nostalgically at the Republic. Chapter three examines how the structure of the Roman criminal system changed, the gradual disintegration of the legal principle of self-help, and the growth and exploitation of the cognitio procedure in Roman courts. The state intruded more into the lives of citizens and therefore exerted more control. The role of three new jurisdictions, imperial, senatorial and that of the urban prefect, in the context of the minimisation and control of violence, is also discussed. The fourth chapter deals with punishment and considers the theory that there was a trend to greater severity in this form of state violence. It examines, against the background of Roman penal aims, the evolution of the symbols and rituals which accompanied different types of punishment. Chapters five and six discuss collective violence, its manifestations and explain the absence of revolution by the plebs. The introduction of new forces into the city (something which was anathema in the Republic) is discussed in the context of policing and law and order. They had a significant impact in the limitation of violence. In the Early Principate violence manifested itself in new contexts and was controlled more effectively than in the Late Republic.
|
|---|
