RomanArmyTalk

(Split from this thread)

Was the ban on all weapons (Tarbicus' theory) or on appearing armed for war (my idea)? Magistrates had to give up their imperium inside the city except during a triumph, and some executions were held outside the pomerium.

I follow your idea, based upon Cicero's Pro Milo. There he talks about swords being permitted and the right of self-defense. He states it very clearly.

I'm on my phone at present but will post the relevant quote when I get back to my computer (if no one beats me to it).

Quote:I follow your idea, based upon Cicero's Pro Milo. There he talks about swords being permitted and the right of self-defense. He states it very clearly.

Perseus Project: Pro Milone (with search function). I searched for 'dagger', 'sword, 'weapon', and couldn't see anything referring to the pomerium. Maybe others could.

It's in Chapter 4 (HERE):

Quote:What is the meaning of our retinues, what of our swords? Surely it would never be permitted to us to have them if we might never use them...

The law very wisely, and in a manner silently, gives a man a right to defend himself, and does not merely forbid a man to be slain, but forbids any one to leave a weapon about him with the object of slaying a man; so that as the object and not the weapon itself, is made the subject of the inquiry, the man who had used a weapon with the object of defending himself would be decided not to have had his weapon about him with the object of killing a man.

This is a tricky bit of legalese from Cicero - in the second paragraph above, he's actually saying that there is no law allowing the carrying of arms, just a law preventing such with the 'object of slaying a man' - therefore, Cicero, says the unwritten law is that carrying a weapon in self defence is allowed...

Besides which, the case concerns the murder of Clodius, which happened on the Appian Way eight miles outside Rome, so this point may have no bearing on the pomerium and its laws.

However, despite many claims that weapons were not allowed inside the pomerium, I can't actually find any source that backs this up. The note about Caesar's assassins not being charged with blasphemy as they were outside the pomerium is found on the Wikipedia page on the subject, but no reference is given to support it.

There are quite a few references to people carrying weapons within the city from throughout Roman history, although most of these relate to periods of civil war or uprising, when such weapons were being used and were therefore worthy of notice. None of these references, as far as I can tell, specifically mention that that the bearing of arms itself was illegal or impious - again, it's what's done with them that matters!

Tacitus (Histories I.27) has Otho being met in the Forum (by the temple of Saturn) by a group of Praetorians who salute him 'with drawn swords'. A detachment of troops from Illyria were encamped in the Vipsanian Colonnade (on the Campus Martius, so perhaps outside the pomerium?) and 'drove Celsus away at the point of their spears'. A praetorian, Julius Atticus, waves a bloody sword in the palace and claims to hae killed Otho. "Who gave you orders, comrade?" says Galba - but doesn't comment on the man carrying a weapon. Later (I.40) Otho receives 'a report that the rabble was being armed' - from where, if there were no weapons in the city? His troops burst into the Forum 'terrifying men by their arms' - which suggests that openly displaying weapons was unusual.

During the murder of Galba (41-43), the soldiers supporting Otho are clearly carrying swords, which they seem to have brought with them from the Praetorian camp. One of Galba's own bodyguard, however, 'Sempronius Densus... a centurion of a praetorian cohort... drew his dagger (and) rushed to meet the armed men'. This implies that the togata praetorians protecting the emperor were indeed armed only with daggers.

Again, this scene occurs in a time of civil war, so perhaps does not represent the norm. There is no mention, though, of weapons being actually illegal or blasphemous - just unusual.

All I can find on the subject in secondary sources refers to a general's imperium being void within the pomerium, and therefore the sacramentum that a soldier swears to his commander, which permits him to kill, also lapsing. Soldiers within the pomerium became civilians, in other words. I wonder, though, about the position of the emperor himself - his own imperium was presumably intact within the city, and his own personal troops (ie the praetorians) remained soldiers and thus legally under arms. Would this extend also to the urban cohorts (who by definition operated within the city) and the vigiles (who surely had weapons of some kind - even catapults are mentioned - as part of their firefighting equipment)?

- Nathan

HI! I don't mean to totally interrupt and not know anything useful, but you're talking about things like rules that are impossible to have been set and kept. I'm sure just about everyone carried a concealed dagger around with them, Rome at that time was the pits and mugging was common.Yes, in areas such as the senate they would have been forbidden, surely, but also note, guards if present would have had weapons for protection etc... the senators themselves could have easily brought their weapons in hidden under their togas. Wasn't Caesar stabbed 50 or so times? That's a lot of daggers...!!! Then again, if guards had weapons they would have helped Caesar, unless they were against him too. If the guards were against Caesar, they could have supplied the Conspirators with the daggers easily! Or not bothered fighting against senators and thought best to let him die :-? Then I don't know the names of these specific guards but they carried long poles to act as barriers?

Lictors.

HAIL CASEAR, for he has given me some wisdom I'll add it to my small minute collection, on Roman politics... :roll: P.S I was reading this conference thing, and I know I'm obviously not in any position to attend, but how many people do you get together? Has there ever been a gathering of several hundred, a thousand, a legion perhaps? I think it would make all the news of the nation, lets say America, or...Britain, somewhere where these things would be popular, and organize many international groups to recreate history properly! Have a legion camped out there...just imagining it is dreamy :oops: hock:

I also think that this will get other people to become an reenactor! :-) should this be taken to the forum?

Something else occurs to me about Cicero and the Pro Milone. The speech we have today was not the same as the one given in the Forum, which was a botched affair due, says Asconius in his commentary, to the violent atmosphere of the trial. In particular relation to our subject, Pompeius had filled the Forum and the surrounding area with armed soldiers!

Quote:Pompeius stationed guards in the Forum and at every entrance point to the Forum; he himself took his seat in front of the Aerarium... surrounded by a chosen band of soldiers.

When Cicero began to speak, he was interrupted by the catcalls of the Clodian faction who were unable to be silenced, not even by fear of the soldiers standing around.

Asconius. On Cicero's Pro Milone

I spent a few hours today following up the ideas I suggested yesterday.

Concerning the “great number” of sicae and gladii found in the house of Cethegus (Cicero, In Catalinam 3.8 ), which Cethegus excused with the comment he had always admired good blades (In Catalinam 3.10 “Tum Cethegus, qui paulo ante aliquid tamen de gladiis ac sicis quae apud ipsum erant deprehensa respondisset dixissetque se semper bonorum ferramentorum studiosum fuisse”), apparently the republican pomerium excluded the Aventine (Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae 13.14.7). The house was clearly at Rome, but it could have been on the Aventine.

Mary Beard, John North, and Simon Price eds., Religions of Rome Vol. 1 (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1998) pp. 177-181 describes the position of the praetorian camp in terms of the traditional separation of military and civil authority (while noting that the emperors held both kinds of authority inside the city). It doesn't mention any law against bringing arms inside the city.

I don't know enough about gladiators to know where the early games were held. I thought that some were held in the Forum, and some at tombs outside the city?

I can find references to Gallic arms decorating a house in Rome, and a force of Cretan archers being used by Opimius to crush G. Gracchus (both Plutarch, Gaius Gracchus, 16-17), but not proof that the Cretans were present in Rome before Opimius was granted extraordinary powers. So like Nathan, I can't find a positive counterexample, just some things which make me suspicious of the idea.

Didn't Augustus (possibly still Octavian at the time) put up an additional ban about carrying at least daggers around the city, or perhaps just concealing them. This was a response to Caesar's death in the Forum

The only reference I can find in Roman law on the bearing of arms, or not (before the laws of Justinian, which reference the subject) is the lex sicarii et veneficis of Sulla (82BC), which might be the law Cicero is talking about in his speech. It prohibited "persons going about armed with the intention of killing or thieving". The fact that the law specifies intention does suggest that going about armed only for defence is ok. Again, though, the law is not specifically about the pomerium.

The rule on the pomerium seems to have been that it was illegal for soldiers to enter or assemble under arms: since soldiers were by definition citizens, any armed citizen could be accused of taking on the attributes of a soldier - this, perhaps, rather than a total ban on carrying arms at all, might be source of a modern extrapolation that weapons were forbidden inside the sacred limits...

I can't find any references to Augustan legislation on weapons - there must have been some reason, however, for the praetorian bodyguard apparently (see above) being armed only with daggers...

Gladiators, however, surely did fight within the pomerium - Caesar staged several days of combat in the Forum. But gladiators were not citizens, and so could not be classed as soldiers, which is perhaps the point. This would, of course, make arming one's slaves perfectly fine. :???:

Yes, Cicero's rhetoric should be used carefully, and it is possible he is only referring to a specific event that happened outside the pomerium. However, right before the posted quote he makes it clear he is interpreting a law enshrined in the Twelve Tables that permits an armed robber being killed in the daylight. The Twelve Tables does not differentiate where such an event occurs, and neither does Cicero, I believe.

Quote:Lictors.

Only those acting for dictators, who had the power of capital punishment within the pomerium. Dictators were an occasional extreme, not the norm by any measure.

Lictors under normal circumstances, acting for a consul, magister equitum or praetor, had to remove the axes from the fasces in order to enter the pomerium.

Quote:In particular relation to our subject, Pompeius had filled the Forum and the surrounding area with armed soldiers!

Does it mention edged weapons? Soldiers carried clubs when policing, so I could argue that was probably what they carried.

Quote:I don't know enough about gladiators to know where the early games were held. I thought that some were held in the Forum, and some at tombs outside the city?

The Forum (the cattle market) was outside of the pomerium at the time.

Quote:This was a response to Caesar's death in the Forum

Caesar was assassinated in Pompey's Theatre, nowhere near the Forum, well outside of the pomerium.