 | This article focuses only onone specialized aspect of the subject. Please helpimprove this article by adding general information and discuss at thetalk page.(April 2015) |
Proscription (Latin:proscriptio) is, in current usage, a 'decree of condemnation to death or banishment' (Oxford English Dictionary) and can be used in a political context to refer to state-approved murder or banishment. The term originated inAncient Rome, where it included public identification and official condemnation of declaredenemies of the state and it often involved confiscation of property.[1]
Its usage has been significantly widened to describe governmental and political sanctions of varying severity on individuals and classes of people who have fallen into disfavor, from theen masse suppression of adherents of unorthodox ideologies to the suppression of political rivals or personal enemies. In addition to its recurrences during the various phases of theRoman Republic, it has become a standard term to label:
 | This sectionneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.(January 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Proscriptions (Latinproscriptio, pluralproscriptiones) initially meant public advertisements or notices signifying property or goods for sale.
During the dictatorial reign ofSulla, the word took on a more sinister meaning. In 82 or 81 BC, Sulla instituted the process of proscription in order to purge the state of those supporters of his populist rivals,Gaius Marius andhis son. He instituted a notice for the sale of confiscated property belonging to those declared public enemies of the state (some modern historians estimate about 520 people were proscribed as opposed to the ancient estimate of 4,700 people) and condemned to death those proscribed, calledproscripti in Latin.
There were multiple reasons why the ancient Roman government may have desired to proscribe or attribute multiple other forms of pain. One of the most prevalent reasons for punishment are treason crimes, also known aslex maiestatis. Treason crimes consisted of a very broad and large number of regulations, and such crimes had a negative effect on the government. This list includes, but is not limited to: assisting an enemy in any way,Crimen Laesae Majestasis, acts of subversion and usurpation, offense against the peace of the state, offenses against the administration of justice, and violating absolute duties. Overall, crimes in which the state, emperor, the state's tranquility, or offenses against the good of the people would be considered treason, and, therefore, would constitute proscription. Some of these regulations are understandable and comparable to safety laws today. Others, like violating absolute duties, could very easily be accidents or circumstantial crises that would deserve punishment regardless.
Punishments for treason were quite harsh and were meant to highlight the seriousness and shamefulness of the treason crimes committed. There were a variety of punishments for capital crimes, including death, loss of a freedman's status, loss of citizenship with a loss of family rights, and a loss of family rights only. Death was a very common punishment and was referred to assummum supplicium, or the "extreme penalty". The death sentence was often the punishment for all but the mildest forms of treason.Julius Caesar was an influential framer of the law ontreason. The Interdiction from Water and Fire was a civil excommunication resulting in ultimate exile, which included forfeiture of citizenship and forfeiture of property. Those who were condemned would be deported to an island. EmperorAugustus frequently utilized this method of exile, as he desired to keep banished men from banding together in large groups. Such punishment was given for only the mildest forms of treason, in comparison to the death penalty, which served for most other treason crimes. Augustus also created theprefect, whose powers included the ability to banish, deport, or send to the mines. The prefect also heard appeals.
An early instance of mass proscription took place in 82 BC, whenLucius Cornelius Sulla was appointeddictatorrei publicae constituendae ("Dictator for the Reconstitution of theRepublic"). Sulla proceeded to have the Senate draw up a list of those he considered enemies of the state and published the list in theRoman Forum. Any man whose name appeared on the list wasipso facto stripped of his citizenship and excluded from all protection under law;reward money was given to any informer who gave information leading to the death of a proscribed man, and any person who killed a proscribed man was entitled to keep part of his estate (the remainder went to the state). No person could inherit money or property from proscribed men. Many victims of proscription were decapitated and their heads were displayed on spears in theForum.
Sulla used proscription to restore the depletedRoman Treasury (Aerarium), which had been drained by costly civil and foreign wars in the preceding decade, and to eliminate enemies (both real and potential) of his reformed state and constitutions; theplutocratic knights of theOrdo Equester were particularly hard-hit. Giving the procedure a particularly sinister character in the public eye was the fact that many of the proscribed men, escorted from their homes at night by groups of men all named "Lucius Cornelius", never appeared again. (These men were all Sulla's freedmen.) This gave rise to a general fear of being taken from one's home at night as a consequence of any outwardly seditious behaviour.
Sulla's proscription was bureaucratically overseen, and the names of informers and those who profited from killing proscribed men were entered into the public record. Because Roman law could criminalise actsex post facto, many informers and profiteers were later prosecuted.
The proscription lists created by Sulla led to mass terror inRome. During this time, "the cities of Italy became theaters of execution." Citizens were terrified to find their names on the lists. Those whose names were listed were ultimately sentenced to death. The executions were brutal and consisted of beheading. Often, the heads were then put on display for the city to see. The bodies of the condemned were often mutilated and dragged before being thrown into theTiber River. Additionally, those who were condemned lost rights even after their brutal death. Those killed were denied the right to a funeral, and all of their possessions were auctioned off, often to the ones who killed them. Negative consequences arose for anyone that chose to assist those on the list, despite not being listed on the proscribed lists themselves. Anyone who was found guilty of assisting the condemned wascapitally punished.
Families were also punished as a result of being related to one of the proscribed. It was forbidden to mourn the death of a proscribed person. According toPlutarch, the greatest injustice of all the consequences was stripping the rights of their children and grandchildren. While those proscribed and their loved ones faced harsh consequences, the people who assisted the government by killing any person on the proscription list were actually rewarded.
The proscription of 43 BC was the second major proscription. It began with an agreement in November 43 between thetriumvirsOctavian Caesar,Marcus Antonius, andMarcus Lepidus after two long meetings. Their aim was to avengeJulius Caesar’s assassination, eliminate political enemies, and acquire their properties. The proscription was aimed at Julius Caesar’s conspirators, such asBrutus andCassius, and other individuals who had taken part in the civil war, including wealthy people, senators, knights, and republicans such asSextus Pompey andCicero. There were 2,000 names on the list in total, and a handsome reward of 2,500drachmae for bringing back the head of a free person on the list (a slave's head was worth 1,000 drachmae); the same rewards were given to anyone who gave information on where someone on the list was hiding. Anyone who tried to save people on the list was added to the list. The material belongings of the dead victims were to be confiscated. Some of the listed were stripped of their property but protected from death by their relatives in the Triumvirate (e.g.,Lucius Julius Caesar andLepidus' brotherPaullus). Most were killed, in some cases gruesomely.Cicero, his younger brotherQuintus Tullius Cicero (one ofJulius Caesar'slegates) andMarcus Favonius were all killed in the proscription.[8] Cicero's head and hands were famously cut off and fastened to theRostra.
Contemporary Roman historians provide conflicting reports as to which triumvir was most responsible for the proscriptions and killing. They agree that enacting the proscriptions was a means by all three factions to eliminate political enemies.[9]Marcus Velleius Paterculus asserted that Octavian tried to avoid proscribing officials whereas Lepidus and Antony were to blame for initiating them.Cassius Dio defended Octavian as trying to spare as many as possible, whereas Antony and Lepidus, being older and involved in politics longer, had many more enemies to deal with.[10]
This claim was rejected byAppian, who maintained that Octavian shared an equal interest with Lepidus and Antony in eradicating his enemies.[11] Suetonius said that Octavian was at first reluctant to proscribe officials, but eventually pursued his enemies with more vigor than the other triumvirs.[9]Plutarch described the proscriptions as a ruthless and cutthroat swapping of friends and family among Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian. For example, Octavian allowed the proscription of his ally Cicero, Antony the proscription of his maternal uncle Lucius Julius Caesar, and Lepidus his brother, although only Cicero would ultimately be killed as a result of these concessions.[10]
St Just [...] demanded the execution of victims in the same manner as the supply of armies. Proscription like victories were essential to the furtherance of his principles.