 |
|---|
| Periods |
|
| Constitution |
| Political institutions |
| Assemblies |
| Ordinary magistrates |
| Extraordinary magistrates |
| Public law |
| Senatus consultum ultimum |
| Titles and honours |
In theconstitution of ancient Rome, thelex curiata de imperio (pluralleges curiatae) was thelaw confirming the rights of highermagistrates to hold power, orimperium. In theory, it was passed by thecomitia curiata, which was also the source forleges curiatae pertaining toRoman adoption.[1]
In the lateRepublic, historians and political theorists thought that the necessity of such a law dated to theRegal period, whenkings afterRomulus had to submit to ratification by theRoman people. Like many other aspects ofRoman religion and law, thelex curiata was attributed[2] toNuma Pompilius, Rome's second king. This origin seems to have been reconstructed after the fact to explain why the law was required, at a time when the original intent of the ceremony conferringimperium was no longer understood.[3] The last two kings, however, were said to have ruled without such ratification,[4] which at any rate may have been more loosely acclamation.[5]
The law was passed in an assembly that during the late Republic existed in name only, thecomitia curiata, based on thecuriae. Thecuriae were supposed to have been the thirty political divisions created by Romulus and named after theSabine women, who were fromCures inSabine territory. These political units were replaced as early as 218 BC bylictors; the people no longer assembled, as eachcuria was represented by a lictor, and confirmation was virtually automatic, unless atribune chose to obstruct. Even then, an unconfirmed magistrate might forge ahead with the functions of his office regardless.[6] By the late Republic, a magistrate could simply dispense with this ratification in claiming hisimperium, or a legislator could include a provision in abill that rendered a curiate law redundant. Thecensors, by contrast, were confirmed by thecomitia centuriata. It therefore becomes unclear what purpose thelex curiata continued to serve:[7] "The origin, nature, and importance of thelex curiata de imperio have been extensively and inconclusively debated."[8]
It has sometimes been supposed that thelex curiata is what conferred the right to takeauspices, though scholars are not unanimous on this point.[9] H.S. Versnel, in his study of theRoman triumph, argued that thelex curiata de imperio was a prerequisite for a commander before he could be awarded a triumph.[10]Imperium, Versnel maintained, was not granted to a commander within a political framework, but was rather a quality within the man that manifests itself and is acknowledged ceremonially by alex curiata de imperio.[11] Thelex was not fundamental to the holding ofimperium orauspicium,[12] but was rather the act through which the people expressed their recognition of that authority.[13]
Even if thelex curiata became largely ceremonial, it retained enough force to be useful for political tactics when evoked.Tribunes could obstruct its passage; theconsuls of 54 BC lacked thelex, and their legitimacy togovern asproconsuls was questioned; during thecivil war, the consuls of 49 used their own lack of alex as an excuse for not holding elections for their successors.[14]