The nature of the ban on arms within Rome\'s pomeri

[Tarbicus]

Just to note: the pomerium did not follow the lines of the walls at all points.

[Tarbicus]

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. :???:

Good point, but as I asked in the other thread, didn't the gladitorial games have a religious ceremonial and sacrificial aspect to them?

Where I see the logic in a ban on (let's call them "martial") weapons was to protect the Senate, the seat of power, just as there was a ban on monarchs entering the pomerium (Cleopatra as an example). A dictator was temporarily given imperium within the pomerium, so the Senate takes second place (I assume they were subject to the lictors' axes). But what better way to enforce this protection of the Senate than to make it a blasphemy and risk angering the gods? An hypothesis, I know, but I see a logic and practicality to it, at least.

Pompey tried to fit Milo up by accusing him of having an hidden sword strapped to his thigh within the Senate, which Cicero used to denounce Pompey's motives when it turned out there was no sword, by the way.

I can find references to Gallic arms decorating a house in Rome,...

The nailing of spolia to homes as a display was an age old tradition. I don't see anything to cause anger from the heavens by demonstrating that the householder or ancestors are or were good and brave Romans.

[popularis]

I can only find a restriction on the wearing of military dress within the pomerium - except in times of crisis - not the carrying of all weapons. This was probably a religious taboo as much as a practical means of avoiding civil violence: see, for example, the taboo on the Flamen Dialis seeing a soldier in uniform.

Bear in mind that the senate met wherever the presiding magistrate called it to meet, and so a ban on weapons within the pomerium wouldn't have been a terribly effective way of ensuring the safety of senatorial meetings (picking an easily-defended temple was probably the best way of doing that, c.f. Cicero, in Cat. 1.1). In the 50sBC, with Pompeius unable to enter the pomerium for most of the decade, an awful lot of senatorial meetings happened outside it. The comitia centuriata, by definition, had to meet outside the pomerium - which means that the election of the most senior magistrates would not be protected either.

In addition, a lot of the pomerium rules regarding imperium and power were broken under Augustus. The tribunician power was used outside of the city, while Augustus did not have to lay aside his imperium when he entered it. It's likely that the wearing of military dress, at least by the imperial house, also went by the board. In addition, I can't imagine that Augustus' bodyguard wore togas - although perhaps as Germans they were immune from the taboo! In short, I think you could probably get away with wearing military uniform within the Trajanic pomerium (wasn't the discussion about Trajan's column?).

blue skies

Tom

[Sean Manning]

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.

What's your evidence that the forum Romanum was outside the pomerium in historical times? The lines of the republican pomerium are hard to define, because they weren't marked with large stones until the high empire, but even Roman tradition says that at an early date it was expanded from the Palatine to cover six of the seven hills. The whole point of the pomerium was to symbolically separate home (where citizens were political animals and wore the toga) and abroad (where citizens were military beings and wore armae). Thus the custom that the centuriate assembly was held outside the pomerium, and that the tribal assembly was held inside.

I can find references to Gallic arms decorating a house in Rome,...

The nailing of spolia to homes as a display was an age old tradition. I don't see anything to cause anger from the heavens by demonstrating that the householder or ancestors are or were good and brave Romans.

But they are still arms which had to be brought inside the city, and maybe stored before distribution.

[Nathan Ross]

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

The Games of Caesar (and so probably others before him) were held in the Forum Romanum. Excavations have revealed tunnels and lifts dating to the 1st C BC beneath the Forum similar to those later constructed beneath the Flavian Amphitheatre.

the taboo on the Flamen Dialis seeing a soldier in uniform.

Which begs the question of what Roman 'uniform' might be! Doesn't the actual quote, found in Aulus Gellius and elsewhere, refer to 'the centuriae in battle array' or somesuch? So it's an organised body of men that is prohibited, rather than just one man with a pilum.

It's likely that the wearing of military dress, at least by the imperial house, also went by the board. In addition, I can't imagine that Augustus' bodyguard wore togas - although perhaps as Germans they were immune from the taboo!

I once read an interesting essay called (I think) 'Crossing the Pomerium' about imperial portrait statuary in Rome - apparently Julius Caesar was the first man to have a loricata statue placed within the pomerium. Augustus etc followed - the idea being that the imperium of the dictator or emperor was allowed to stand even inside the city.

The German bodyguard would not be citizens, so perhaps my point above about their status follows here too - could be this was one of reasons that the early emperors were so keen on having non-citizen troops about them?

[Tarbicus]

But they are still arms which had to be brought inside the city, and maybe stored before distribution.

They were trophies won by individuals in single combat during battle, and proudly nailed above the doors of the victor's home for all to see. I doubt they were in any condition to be reused after the weather had done its business with them for a few years.

[Tarbicus]

I'll post this again from NovaRoma, which seems to have some interesting information on the pomerium.

[Tarbicus]

The Games of Caesar (and so probably others before him) were held in the Forum Romanum. Excavations have revealed tunnels and lifts dating to the 1st C BC beneath the Forum similar to those later constructed beneath the Flavian Amphitheatre.

I thought the original comment referred to the earlier funerary dedication by Decimus Iunius Brutus Scaeva to his father, where three pairs fought to the death.

[Nathan Ross]

I'll post this again from NovaRoma, which seems to have some interesting information on the pomerium.

That is interesting - nothing about weapons, sadly!

This is also good - Platner & Ashby - Pomerium

Again, nothing on a prohibition of weapons. The notes on the extension of the pomerium by Claudius, Vespasian and Trajan are a bit eyebrow-raising though - if the marked cippi were indeed found in situ, it would suggest that by the end of 1st century the pomerium had been extended almost to the future line of the Aurelianic wall - which would place most of the Campus Martius well within the limits, including the Vipsanian Colonnade where those armed Illyrian detachments were camping with their spears, as mentioned by Tacitus... hock:

[Tarbicus]

That is interesting - nothing about weapons, sadly!

You sure? :wink:

Certainly, at the age of the squared city on the Palatine hill, made by the Romulus’ plow and an earth wall! We already wrote about the foundation rite (Pomerium n°4 April 2005): the “sulcus primigenius” was consecrated with the words “ubi terra patrum, ibi patria” following the Etruscan rite, at the center of the new city the symbolic hole, the “mundus”, which had the meaning of an original world without contamination. For this reason inside the new born border it was forbidden to execute, to bury people or animals, to walk bearing weapons in the order of trying to not contaminate that place.

[Nathan Ross]

You sure? :wink:

Oh, so it does! hock:

They do not, though, give any reference for this statement, which is found in a great many places on the internet, as I'm sure we've all discovered, but still without support... :???:

[Nathan Ross]

This one might be a bit more tangible - Cicero again, lambasting the activities of Rome's favourite badass, Marc Antony (Philippics 5.6):

Is not this, too, to be marked with the deepest ignominy... that Marcus Antonius, (the first man who has ever done so since the foundation of the city) has openly taken armed men about with him in this city? ... I can recollect Cinna; I have seen Sulla; and lately Caesar. For these three men are the only ones since the city was delivered by Lucius Brutus, who have had more power than the entire republic. I can not assert that no man in their trains had weapons. This I do say, that they had not many, and that they concealed them. But this post was attended by an army of armed men. Classitius, Mustela, and Tiro, openly displaying their swords, led troops of fellows like themselves through the forum.

Again, this is specifically about a body of armed men - but the note about members of previous retinues carrying their weapons concealed does suggest that being openly armed was forbidden by custom if not by law.

We still don't know, however, where this law of custom come from, whether it was religious or civil, and how rigorously it was enforced.

[Epictetus]

I can't figure out where this idea came from. I've checked every reference I can think of and don't see anything useful. I've tried:

Varro LL 5.143
Gellius Attic Nights 13.14.1
Plutarch Romulus 11
Plutarch Roman Questions (various questions, nothing specifically about the pomerium)
Livy 1.44
Tacitus Annals 12.24

Where did this idea originate? It had to come from somewhere.

[Tarbicus]

I wish I could remember where I read it originally. Sorry folks. :roll:

Did G. Gracchus's supporters use styli for self defence within the pomerium?

Added: Were arms carried or armour worn during a triumphal march through the city, or were only the spoils on display?

[Sean Manning]

But they are still arms which had to be brought inside the city, and maybe stored before distribution.

They were trophies won by individuals in single combat during battle, and proudly nailed above the doors of the victor's home for all to see. I doubt they were in any condition to be reused after the weather had done its business with them for a few years.

There are actually several examples of rebels using dedicated arms (which were often put up under a roof, at least in the Greek world). The one in where the Gracchans armed themselves with spoils around Fulvius' house is one (Plutarch Gaius Gracchus 15.1 ... but he says they had been taken only 3 years before), another is where the Thebans who rebelled against the Spartans quickly took arms from the colonnades (Xenophon Hellenica 5.4.8 ... Edit:The automatic happy-face rendering turns all my citations into smilies).

The life of G. Gracchus explicitly mentions games in the Forum Romanum, because Gracchus had his workers tear down some private bleachers so everyone would have an equal chance to see (12.3-4). I'm not sure if the "large styluses" (μεγάλοις γραφείοις Plutarch GG 13.3-4), since Appian mentions a dagger (Bellum Civile 25), and that looks like a way to get around a statute or custom against carrying weapons for the purpose of assault ("see officer, its just a pen for ... writing ... things ... on really hard wax").

I've learned a lot from this thread; the boundary and nature of the pomerium might make a good subject for an article in a few years. So would laws and customs on carrying arms in the Greek and the Roman worlds.