Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums

Elusive 3 times Consul


Caesar CXXXVII

Recommended Posts

PP , why are you ignoring the Lex Vilia of 180 and refer only to the lex Genucia of the 340' ?

 

Because the Lex Villia only established minimum ages for magistracies and confirmed a bi-annual separation between eligibility for minor magistracies.

 

Neither Livy or Cicero (in relating various references on the post Sullan version of the law) claim that the law impacted Consular election (other than minimum age). Develin in "Patterns in Office-Holding, 366-49 B.C." and Astin in "The Lex Annalis Before Sulla" also do not mention a 10 year Consular gap in relation to that law.

 

From Livy book XL, XLIV:

A law was passed for the first time this year fixing the age at which men could be candidates for or hold a magistracy. It was introduced by L. Vilius, a tribune of the plebs, and from this his family received the cognomen of Annalis.

 

Strange , the UNRV site mentions the 10 years gap in the Lex Vilia....................... "Lex Villia Annalis (180 BC) - first law to set minimum ages for curule magistrates, Aediles 36, Praetors 39, Consuls 42 and forced a period of two years between each magistracy. Required a ten year interval between two successive tenures of consulship. Rejected by C. Servilius in 202 BC and Marius in 107 BC."

 

Here - http://www.unrv.com/government/index-of-roman-laws.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PP , why are you ignoring the Lex Vilia of 180 and refer only to the lex Genucia of the 340' ?

 

Because the Lex Villia only established minimum ages for magistracies and confirmed a bi-annual separation between eligibility for minor magistracies.

 

Neither Livy or Cicero (in relating various references on the post Sullan version of the law) claim that the law impacted Consular election (other than minimum age). Develin in "Patterns in Office-Holding, 366-49 B.C." and Astin in "The Lex Annalis Before Sulla" also do not mention a 10 year Consular gap in relation to that law.

 

From Livy book XL, XLIV:

A law was passed for the first time this year fixing the age at which men could be candidates for or hold a magistracy. It was introduced by L. Vilius, a tribune of the plebs, and from this his family received the cognomen of Annalis.

 

Strange , the UNRV site mentions the 10 years gap in the Lex Vilia....................... "Lex Villia Annalis (180 BC) - first law to set minimum ages for curule magistrates, Aediles 36, Praetors 39, Consuls 42 and forced a period of two years between each magistracy. Required a ten year interval between two successive tenures of consulship. Rejected by C. Servilius in 202 BC and Marius in 107 BC."

 

Here - http://www.unrv.com/government/index-of-roman-laws.php

 

Completely my error... now corrected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely my error...

 

Not so sure , Livy said what he said (quoted above by you) , all the rest is interpretations . He even did not mentioned the hot debate about the law .

Now , 36 , 39 , 42 , 2 years and all that is our understanding and not reffered by Livy . It is very logical to include the 10 years gap in the law as the lex valeria of 300 included notions from the Lex Valeria of 450 var. and 509 var. It was a Roman custom to repeat notions from older laws in new laws that dealed with the same subject .

 

All in all , it is not so important... :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...