Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Speculative History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Speculative History Speculative History Forum - Alternate History, What If Questions, Pseudo History, and anything outside the boundaries of mainstream historical research


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:37 PM   #11

Tlacaelel's Avatar
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Tenochtitlán
Posts: 56

The law is the product of the conflict, not a mere proof to show around, the conquest of more legal equality between patricians and plebeians.

I reccomend you to read some articles about the context of the XII Tables, as far as we know those laws met with fierce resistence from the privileged class that was far more better without those laws than with them in te matters treated with plebeians.

The establishment of processes and legal procedures was quite new for the Romans in the sense that law was something in the sphere of the patricians priests.

And, well, you haven´t elucidated your point, only placing the remnants of what the XII Tables were.

I insist in my past question.
Tlacaelel is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 4th, 2012, 11:32 PM   #12

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 12,250

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tlacaelel View Post
The law is the product of the conflict, not a mere proof to show around, the conquest of more legal equality between patricians and plebeians.

I reccomend you to read some articles about the context of the XII Tables, as far as we know those laws met with fierce resistence from the privileged class that was far more better without those laws than with them in te matters treated with plebeians.
The 12TL is based on common law and was written down around 450. If these law met with fierce resistence, then there most be points in these law which must have given them a reason to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tlacaelel View Post
The establishment of processes and legal procedures was quite new for the Romans in the sense that law was something in the sphere of the patricians priests.
have you evidence for the statement, that only patrician priest were responsible for the law?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tlacaelel View Post
And, well, you haven´t elucidated your point, only placing the remnants of what the XII Tables were.
You claimed that the law had a social background. So I quoted the know parts, so that all who are intereted can have a look, if we find such troubling laws in the 12TL

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tlacaelel View Post
I insist in my past question.
I hope I have answered it now. So do I understand you correct, that you cannot show me parts of the law, where we can see the social conflict between patricii and plebeii?
beorna is offline  
Old December 5th, 2012, 06:27 AM   #13

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 12,250

Si in ius vocat, ito. Ni it, antestamino. Igitur em capito. if somebody calls somebody else to the court, he shall go. if he doesn't go, one should take withnesses. Then he shall be arrested.

Si calvitur pedemve struit, manum endo iacito. Si morbus aevitasve vitium escit, iumentum dato. Si nolet, arceram ne sternito. If somebody scrimshanks or prepares for his escape, he shall be arrested. If age and illness is the reason for his notattendance, the claimant shall give a mount. If the defendent doesn't want, the claimant has not to give a vehicle with a top.

Adsiduo vindex adsiduus esto. Proletario iam civi quis volet vindex esto. For a citizen with estate, a citizen with estate shall be bail. For a citizen without estate everybody can be, who wants.

Rem ubi pa****, orato. Ni pa****, in comitio aut in foro ante meridiem caussam coiciunto. Com peroranto ambo praesentes. Post meridiem praesenti litem addicito. Si ambo praesentes, solis occasus suprema tempestas esto. If they make a compromise agreement, they shall make it public. If they don't, they shall bring it in the morning to the comitia or to the Forum. They both shall tell their claim and both present. In the afternoon one of the citizens shall be judge. If both are present, sunset shall be the limit (the verdict shall be given).


Can you show me, where you see the social problems, especially the opposite between patricians and plebeians in tabula I? We can have then a look to the following tables.
beorna is offline  
Old December 5th, 2012, 02:36 PM   #14

Tlacaelel's Avatar
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Tenochtitlán
Posts: 56

The same guarantees are the product of this struggle! The plebeians demanded to be treated in a trial in which they could know the process and could make the litis contestatio with full knowledge of what would pass.

For example, the
Quote:
Si in ius vocat, ito. Ni it, antestamino. Igitur em capito.
is a fundamental principle of the Ius, the right to know when we are demanded and the right to be defeated in a trial.

The legal security that these laws provide is essential, because people could now know which were their rights and how processes should be done, ergo, creating something that we in Law call “legal certainty” (seguridad jurídica in Spanish) which is almost quintessential in the prevention of abuses and extra judiciary and illegal procedures which can affect detrimentally and unfairly one of the sides in the dispute.


And in the Archaic Law period of Roman Law, the divine law was known as the fas, I remit you if thee wish to read the book of "Roman Law: An Historical Introduction
Escrito by Hans Julius Wolff" or “Introducción Al Derecho Romano by Dr. Gumesindo Padilla Sahágun” in which both authors briefly explain the nature of the fas and how it was the domain or sphere almost exclusive to the priests. In fact, the first, the fas was so important in the Archaic Epoch of Roman Law that it was seemingly more important than the ius civile, which will only loose its hegemony when the Roman priest-jurists started to teach the Laws they knew to laic students.


The tables themselves do not create a problem between patricians and plebeians, but they are a "solution” in the light of giving legal security and certainty to avoid the excesses of the privileged class, by giving some minimum rights. Also, if we analyze the context of the XII Tables we can discover that they were the “general” backbone of the plebeian demands of that era.

Nevertheless, I´m looking forward to analyze the content of the following tables after we set the first one, your knowledge of Latin is obviously better than my Spanish-flawed understanding of it.
Tlacaelel is offline  
Old December 5th, 2012, 02:59 PM   #15

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 12,250

My question is, if the 12TL is related to social conflicts. It is correct, that now even plebeians could bring a patrician to court if they had withnesses. And of course "Adsiduo vindex adsiduus esto. Proletario iam civi quis volet vindex esto." made sure, that not somebody from clients of the adsiduus could be bail. The question remains, was this really a great problem for patricians? Indeed even patricians with smaller clientela took benefit of it, not only plebeians. This is the same for "Si morbus aevitasve vitium escit, iumentum dato. Si nolet, arceram ne sternito." It did not only help plebeians, but could help less rich patricians as well. And of course that it was now written down doesn't mean, that the common law before was different. So perhaps even before the 12TL plebeians could bring patricians to court. Well, cos it was not written down, we'll never know.
beorna is offline  
Old December 5th, 2012, 03:43 PM   #16

Recusant's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2009
From: Sector N
Posts: 1,824
Blog Entries: 1

A neutral translation of the Laws of the Twelve Tables to English (that is one not supplied by a participant in this thread) might prove useful; just in case, one can be found here. Very interesting thread!
Recusant is online now  
Old December 5th, 2012, 07:22 PM   #17

Tlacaelel's Avatar
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Tenochtitlán
Posts: 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by beorna View Post
My question is, if the 12TL is related to social conflicts. It is correct, that now even plebeians could bring a patrician to court if they had withnesses. And of course "Adsiduo vindex adsiduus esto. Proletario iam civi quis volet vindex esto." made sure, that not somebody from clients of the adsiduus could be bail. The question remains, was this really a great problem for patricians? Indeed even patricians with smaller clientela took benefit of it, not only plebeians. This is the same for "Si morbus aevitasve vitium escit, iumentum dato. Si nolet, arceram ne sternito." It did not only help plebeians, but could help less rich patricians as well. And of course that it was now written down doesn't mean, that the common law before was different. So perhaps even before the 12TL plebeians could bring patricians to court. Well, cos it was not written down, we'll never know.
I think I found our answer to your question. And, O Fortuna, it does have a somewhat reliable source. I highly reccommend reading the link, it is brief anyways.

Quote:
In court cases against such debtors, Appius Claudius, one of the Consuls for the 495 BCE term, would arbitrate severe sentences, forcing debtors into servitude to their creditors. The second Consul, Servilius, had promised the people that no Roman citizen could be placed in servitude that would prevent military service. When groups of plebeians approached Servilius to take a stronger stand, however, he would not go against the wishes of the Patrician Senate and Consul Claudius. Plebeians could not receive the desired protection from their government.
After discovering Servilius’ unwillingness to protect the plebeians from debt and slavery, plebeians took matters into their own hands. When debtors were brought to court, large groups of plebeians would rush to the courthouse and yell and make large amounts of noise so that they drowned out the Consul as he announced the sentence. Afterwards nobody would obey the sentencing so that the debtor would go free. During that time there were also acts of violence against creditors going on at the time.
When new Consuls were elected in March 494 BCE, they were unable to control the population. The Senate appointed a Dictator to enforce order. After a short war with a neighboring tribe, the Dictator stepped down because he was unable find a moderate way to deal with the struggle between the plebeians and Patricians.
Plebeians campaign at Sacred Mount for economic and political rights, Ancient Rome, 494 BCE | Global Nonviolent Action Database


Also, here is some information that can help clarify the panorama, which is somewhat supportive to my opinion that the patricians did not enjoyed a lot the written law, and I refer more specificly the rich, upper patricians which were the bases from which the conscripti and senators were drawn from.

Quote:
Ninety percent of the people living in ancient Rome did not belong to the wealthy patrician class. These were the plebeians, or working class of Rome, as well as soldiers and slaves.
Plebeians were workers, farmers, and shopkeepers. They could not hold important government offices or marry into the patrician class. Since they did not own land, they were not citizens and could not vote in the Senate until tribunes were elected to represent them in 494 B.C.E.
Having a legaloid equality with the other 90% is somewhat pesting when you had advantage against that percentage since you were born, in my humble opinion.

PS.: thanks Recusant for the input.
Tlacaelel is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 12:42 AM   #18

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 12,250

Quote:
Originally Posted by Recusant View Post
A neutral translation of the Laws of the Twelve Tables to English (that is one not supplied by a participant in this thread) might prove useful; just in case, one can be found here. Very interesting thread!
I suppose you don't have the intention, but "neutral" sounds a bit offending. Nevertheless, cos I have to translate from latin via german into english another translation can't be bad.

Allthough your translation link has again "Where a party is delivered up to several persons, on account of a debt, after he has been exposed in the Forum on three market days, they shall be permitted to divide their debtor into different parts, if they desire to do so; and if anyone of them should, by the division, obtain more or less than he is entitled to, he shall not be responsible.[1]" Will this nonsense ever go on
beorna is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:14 AM   #19

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 12,250

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tlacaelel View Post
I think I found our answer to your question. And, O Fortuna, it does have a somewhat reliable source. I highly reccommend reading the link, it is brief anyways.



Plebeians campaign at Sacred Mount for economic and political rights, Ancient Rome, 494 BCE | Global Nonviolent Action Database


Also, here is some information that can help clarify the panorama, which is somewhat supportive to my opinion that the patricians did not enjoyed a lot the written law, and I refer more specificly the rich, upper patricians which were the bases from which the conscripti and senators were drawn from.



Having a legaloid equality with the other 90% is somewhat pesting when you had advantage against that percentage since you were born, in my humble opinion.

PS.: thanks Recusant for the input.
For the Roman offices see posting 2
beorna is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 08:11 AM   #20

Recusant's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2009
From: Sector N
Posts: 1,824
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by beorna View Post
I suppose you don't have the intention, but "neutral" sounds a bit offending.
You are correct, it was not my intention to offend. In fact I respect you, and appreciate your contributions to this site; finding them generally to be well supported and thoughtful. I offered that link as a convenience for those interested in this thread, and should have been more careful in how I presented it. I'm sorry that I've offended you.
Recusant is online now  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Speculative History

Tags
rome gauls orders law xii


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Most often destroyed city AlexanderB General History 33 February 17th, 2014 08:33 AM
Olympic medal tables since 1896: superpowers Maia General History 193 August 29th, 2012 02:34 AM
Themes in Suetonius' "The Twelve Caesars" emknight History Help 5 December 6th, 2010 07:44 PM
12 Tables / Hammurabi's Code CJ74 Ancient History 0 October 29th, 2009 09:49 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.