古代ローマのmuniceps : 古代の学者が伝える定義の解釈を中心に
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
In the latter half of the fourth century B.C., Rome gained a victory in the so-called Latin War (340〜338 B.C.) and established her hegemony in Latium and Campania. It is well known that in doing so Rome enlarged the citizen body without having substantially changed her constitution as a city state, and it is said that this was made possible by changing the incorporated states into municipia. The terms "municipium" (pl. municipia) and "municipes" (the members of a municipium) were in common use to be used until the Empire, but the institution changed in the course of time and the Romans under the Empire seemed no longer to be able to understand the original meaning of these terms. Municipium and municeps (pl. municipes) caught the attention of the antiquarians and lawyers of the late Republic and the Empire, and a couple of definitions worked out by these students have come down to us, although there are very serious contradictions and confusions among them. The terms were also adopted by Roman historians, who wrote the history of early Rome, but we are unsure if they used them in their original meaning or in the meaning the terms had when the historians were writing history. Accordingly, the interpretation of these historical sources often depends on the subjective judgement of each scholar. The main historical sources for municeps and municipium of the fourth century B.C. are "De verborum significatu" of Pompeius Festus and its epitome by Paulus Diaconus. In this paper, I have tried to reexamine these sources and various attempts to interpret them by modern scholars in order to arrive at a better understanding of this important institution. In doing so however I was constrained to concentrate the argumentation on philological interpretations of the texts of Festus and Paulus, and on the problem of how much the understanding of the antiquarians and lawyers, from whom Festus got his information, had depended on old traditons. The results of these investigations are as follows : 1. Aelius Gallus, whom Festus used in the item of Municeps, informs us of the opinion of the lawyers who lived in the late Republic and under the Empire. Among them there was a common opinion that the state of a municeps originated from taking over munus and that this was the oldest meaning of the term. 2. Servius, whom Festus cites in the same item, seeks the origin of municipes in the people who became Romans by the grant of the civitas s. s. before the Social War (91-87 B.C.). 3. Of the three definitions which Paulus gives in the item of Municipium (which he derived from the lost item of Festus), the second and third concern the peoples who were incorporated in the Roman State by the grant of the full citizenship, the former before, and the latter after the Social War. It is, however, of no concern whether the former peoples were granted with civitas o. i. or civitas s. s. at the time of incorporation into the Roman State. 4. We should not assume any relationship between the first and the two other definitions in the item of Municipium. The first definition is rather related to the definition which lawyers such as Aelius Gallus and Ulpianus give as the original meaning of a municeps, and can be attributed to an understanding held in common by lawyers and antiquarians under the Empire. 5. We can assume that this understanding was won out of the etymological interpretation of the term municeps (munus capiens = one who undertakes munus) and probably also some hisorical information about the legal state of the Volsci and the Campanians who stayed in Rome after their communities had concluded treaties with Rome in the fourth century until they were incorporated in the Roman State after the Latin War. This legal state probably imitated the legal state which the old Latins staying in Rome enjoyed according to their old customary institution. It might also be possible that these Volsci and Campanians staying in Rome were already called municipes by the Romans in the sense that they undertook munus with them.
- 2007-02-20
著者
関連論文
- ローマによるカエレ併合とcivitas sine suffragio(投票権なき市民権)の起源
- Tabulae Caeritum考
- 吉村忠典著, 『古代ローマ帝国の研究』, 岩波書店, 二〇〇三・六刊, A5, 三二七頁, 七〇〇〇円
- 古代ローマの市民権とケーンスス(戸口調査)--所謂ius migrandiに考察の手掛かりを求めて
- 佐藤伊久男・松本宣郎共編著『歴史における宗教と国家-ローマ世界からヨーロッパ世界へ-』(キリスト教歴史双書4)
- 古代ローマのmuniceps : 古代の学者が伝える定義の解釈を中心に
- 古代ローマにおける戦争と宗教 (特集 古代ローマ軍事史研究の最前線)
- ラウィニウムとロ-マ共和政期の宗教 (1997年度〔西洋史研究会〕大会共通論題報告--古代ロ-マにおける宗教と社会)
- フランツ・キュモン著/小川英雄訳『古代ローマの来世観』, 平凡社, 一九九六・六刊, 四六, 二〇五頁, 三二〇〇円
- 共和政期ローマのイマーギネース・マヨールム : その法的権利に関する考察を中心に
- 書評 Gary D. Farney, Ethnic identity and aristocratic competition in Republican Rome: pp. 16 + 337, Cambridge UP 2007
- 書評 Beate Dignas, Economy of the Sacred in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor
- Mary Beard, John North, Simon Price, Religions of Rome., Vol.1, A History., Pp.xxiv+454, Vol.2, A Sourcebook., Pp.xiv+416, Cambridge UP, 1998.
- Cornelius Cossusの決闘伝説とLivius
- オスティア--古代ローマの港町 (世界史の研究(228))
- ローマ(古代)(ヨーロッパ)
- イマーギネース・マヨールム考
- ファビウス・ピクトルとローマにおける歴史記述の始まり
- ガイウス・グラックスの改革とイタリアの同盟者
- 書評 佐々木健「「ルーケリア碑文」に見る共和政中期ローマ世界における宗教法制の一断面(1)〜(2・完)」(『法学論叢』一六一巻五号〜一六三巻一号)
- カプア・ミントゥルナエ出土の「マギステル碑文」と共和政期ロ-マのコンピトゥム祭儀
- 「ベルヴェデ-レの祭壇」に関する覚え書き
- ロ-マ帝政成立期のガリア社会
- 基調講演 留学体験と私の歴史学研究 (特集 シンポジウム 留学体験と私の歴史研究)
- 紀元前六四年の元老院決議とコンピターリアの担い手たち
- ジョーゼフ・リクワート著 前川道郎・小野育雄訳『のイデア-ローマと古代世界の都市の形の人間学-』, みすず書房, 一九九一・三刊, A5, 三七八頁
- 所謂「アウグストゥスによるラレス祭儀の改革」とローマのウィーコマギステル
- 碑文史料から見たローマのウィーコマギステル
- ヨーロッパ : 古代 : ローマ(一九八三年の歴史学界 : 回顧と展望)
- ガリア社会の従者制度(研究ノ-ト)
- 退職記念 私の「史学入門」