by Horatius Piscinus on Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:39 pm
Salvete
The religious aspects of a comitia’s procedures
In 212 BCE the tribunes Spurius and Lucius Carvilius called the people to assemble as a concilium plebis in order to discuss the case of one M Postumius of Pyrgi, the tax farmer, on the matter of his corruption in supplying the Roman legions during the war. They proposed to fine Postumius 200,000 asses. A concilium plebis was comparable to a contio called by a consul. These were assemblies in which issues could be discussed, and proposals offered for debate. A concilium or contio could then be moved directly into a comitia, although it might be held another day instead. A comitia was where the assembly voted, rather than discussed issues. To transfer from a concilium or contio into a comitia involved placing the assembly into a ritual context.
“When the day came for his appeal, the people attended the assembly in such numbers that the open space on the Capitol was packed to capacity;…”
Prior to an assembly of the comitia centuriata, a consul had to establish a templum in which to conduct the voting. “Templa are ordained, it is said, by augures, they who announce by word what boundaries are set (Varro L.L. 6.53).” Establishing a templum was part of the procedure for taking auspices, and it was through the taking of auspices that a templum was pronounced. Consuls had received the power of auspicium in addition to imperium. That meant that they could take auspices on behalf of the Roman people, but only a public augur could sanctify (ecfari) the templum. The consul would be seated at the center of the selected place, inside a tabernaculum, facing south. The consul would be veiled, capite velato, in his role as the aspex. An augur, who would be off to the consul’s right, due west and facing east, assisted him, so that the auspex and augur were placed to form the cardo. They and other assistants were inside a rectangular space, marked by nine stations; each station dedicated to a different deity. Each station acted as a kind of altar, as the Gods would be invoked in turn, requiring that offerings be made to Them. Inside the pomerium there were permanent auguracula, one on the Arx and another on the collis Latiaris, which was the most southern spur of the Quirinal (Varro L.L. V.5.2). Other auguracula have been found in Roman colonies at Bantia, Banzi, and Cosa, with the permanent stations inscribed so that we can be certain of six of the deities invoked, and additional information indicates the others. For the comitia centuriata, meeting in the Campus Martius outside the pomerium, stones, or turf altars more likely, would have had to have been set up for this preliminary stage. Moving around the stations was similar to a lustratio, as a series of rites were performed invoking the Gods and offering Them sacrifices. These stations, oriented on cardinal points according to the stars, were used then to divide the celestial templum into parts, since the direction in which signs were observed determined whether they were favorable to the question. The auspex, guided by the augur, pronounced the boundaries of the templa he proposed to “erect.” Varro gives us one such formula that was used in the auguraculum located on the Arx, although there were other formulae used as well.
“Let the boundaries of my templa and the wild lands (tesca) be as I declare them with my words. That tree of whatever kind it is which I deem myself to have named, let it be the boundary of my templum and the wild land to the right. That tree, of whatever kind it is, insofar as I deem myself to have named it, let it be the boundary of my temple and the wild land on the left. Between these points I have established the templa and the wild lands by means of directing (conregione), viewing (conspicione), reflecting (cortumiones) as far as I have been most rightly aware of it within this limit.” (Varro L. L. 7.8)
There were other steps to the ritual of taking auspices. The whole procedure of establishing the stations beginning just after midnight, then the taking of auspices at dawn, followed by additional offerings made in thanks to the Gods for attending, and then the signs (auspicia imperitiva) called for during the rite would have to be confirmed by additional signs (auspicia oblativa). In addition, the consul would perform another rite, offering a propitiatory sacrifice prior to the comitia assembling, in case any ritual requirement was not made properly on the following day when the comitia was actually held. It was a long, drawn out process just to establish the place of an assembly.
Tribuni plebi did not have the power of auspicium. They did perform private auspicia prior to attending an assembly, as in the story of Tiberius Gracchus. Much of what we know about what a consul had to perform prior to an assembly comes to us from stories about the famed tribune’s father, consul Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, because of an error that was made in forming the templum used in an election. There were also plebeian augures. Tiberius Gracchus, both father and son, were plebeian public augures. Things had to be done differently for a comitia plebis, because a tribune, without auspicium, could not form a templum just anywhere. The comitia plebis met in an established templum, and probably it was then sanctified for the specific assembly by the plebeian public augures. What you find, as for the concilium plebis called in the case of Postumius above, or with the comitia plebis called by Tiberius Gracchus, is that plebeian assemblies met inside the temple precinct (templum) of the Capitolium, or in similar places, such as the Forum Romanorum. The Forum was itself a templum, although it was not consecrated in the same way as was the Capitolium. The plebeians began to hold their assemblies at the Capitolium, during the Middle Republic, because then the religious context there was much greater than in the Forum, and thus any plebiscita passed by a comitia plebis at the Capitolium had greater weight, because it was sanctioned by the highest God, Jupiter.
Location was only part of the religious context of any assembly of the Roman people. Assembly procedures were themselves conducted as a ritual, so that everything done by any comitia had a ritual context. The first ritual was the matter of transferring from the consilium plebis or a contio into a comitia.
“The other tribunes produced witnesses to watch the balloting (testibus datis tribuni), and cleared the crowd (populum summoverunt); then an urn was brought forth (sistellaque lata est) that they should determine by lots (ut sorti rentur) in which tribe any Latins present should vote (ubi Latini suffragium ferrent).” (Livy 25.3.14-17)
The sistella used for drawing lots were not just any urns. These were sacred articles, specially stored inside a temple. They had to be “brought forth” as with any ritual tools. They were unpacked, cleansed, ritually purified, before they were set up. In one particular case, the minority party in the Senate that opposed the initiatives of tribunus Tiberius Gracchus tried to prevent a vote being taken on his proposals by stealing the urns used for the adsortes. Without those special and sacred sistella, a comitia could not be called. Timing was another concern since comitia could only be assembled on certain days in accordance with the religious aspects of the civil calendar. Also the manner in which any assembly was called, was pronounced by ritualistic formulae. For a comitia called by a consul, the consul would declare Hoc agete! “Give your attention to this.” One of his lictores would then pronounce the formula for calling silentium. Hostis vinctus mulier virgo exesto; scilicet interesse prohibebatur. "Depart, foreigners, unmarried women, and all those who are known to be forbidden to be amongst us here. Depart.” The assembled would then act as witnesses to the setting up of the sistella while adopting the proper decorum (silentium) for any religious rite. It is at this point, with the sistella properly set up that the comitia began. Once begun only the officiating magistrate or tribune could disband a comitia. In the event that an inauspicious sign was observed, and accepted by the officiating official to be such an omen, then it might be required to call an end to the assembly. In the case of a comitia plebis there was only one sign that could bring it to a halt. That was the observance by the tribuni plebis of a thunderbolt in an inauspicious direction. Remember that the comitia plebis is assembled at the Capitolium, thus under the auspices of Jupiter, and only Jupiter could therefore send an omen that would end the comitia. “The only sign considered to vitiate a comitia is a lightning bolt (Cicero, De Divinatio 2.18.43).” If the lightning appeared on the left it was a favorable sign; if in the northeast it meant that Jupiter Himself gave full approval to anything decided by the comitia. If however the lightning appeared in the southwest it was unfavorable, indicating the approach of danger and possibly war, while if due west, and especially if in the northwest , then it indicated the disapproval of the Gods for the assembly to continue. Lightning in the southwest would almost certainly bring a call for a council of war, and it was considered religiosum, that is, forbidden, “where laws are carried before the people in violation of adverse auspices, or to propose laws in a council of war, or on a prohibited day (nefas) (GRF Aelius 18; Fest. p.278b.15).”
Voting procedures were then conducted in a ritual manner. A question had to be put to a comitia by a special formula. Velitis iubeatisne haec sic fieri? “Is it your will and pleasure that this be done so?” (Livy 22.10.2). In the case of Postumius’ prosecution, the question was worded in a traditional formula pronouncing exile. videri eum in exilio esse, bonaque eius venire ipsi aqua et igni placere interdici
“The question was put to the people, who returned a decision to the following effect: ‘If Postumius fails to appear before the kalends of May, and, being summoned on that day, does not reply and is not excused, then it shall be understood that he is an exile; his property shall be sold and he shall be refused water and fire’ (Livy 25.4.9-10).”
Voting in any comitia was done by separating the people into different voting groups. In the comitia centuriata they were divided into centuries. In the comitia tributa plebis they were instead organized into voting tribes. The order of voting was made by drawing lots, and this procedure was conducted as a ritual onto itself, with a series of formulae spoken, special individuals selected to draw the lots, and a special way to draw the lot. Drawing lots was a form of augury, and everything pertaining to it had to be conducted according to augural prescriptions. The voting order determined by the lots could itself be taken as an omen. In 310 BCE magister populi L. Papirius delayed voting in the comitia curiata because the lot for the first to vote fell to curia Faucia. This particular curia was notorious for having voted first in two previous elections. One that elected the consules responsible for the defeat of Rome by the Samnites at the Caudine Forks, the other time electing the consules defeated by the Gauls, which led to the sack of Rome in 390 BCE. Recalling these earlier votes, Papirius accepted the lot as an omen, and thus was able to halt the voting and disband the assembly he had called. Other magistrates and some priests might be so bold as to point out other omens, and the officiating magistrate or tribune might acknowledge it or not. Only the officiating officer, however, could call a halt to the proceedings at this point.
Assuming that everything was done properly, the officiating magistrate or tribune would then pronounce a prayer to begin voting.
Quod Senatus populusque Romanus de re publica deque…in animo haberet, ea res ut populo Romano sociisque ac nomini Latino bene ac feliciter eueniret. May whatever the Senate and the people of Rome shall resolve for the common good of the Republic, and with reference to (whatever the proposal), may this decision turn out well and happily for the people of Rome, for their allies, and for the Latins (Livy 31.5.4).”
There were of course variations on what was said. Comparing examples from Livy and Cicero, and again from inscriptions from the imperial eras, the basic formula for beginning and concluding assemblies of the Senate or any comitia was Quod bonum faustum felixque sit. Roman formulae were not, however, fixed as statements that must be read exactly. Rather, formulae refer to a manner of speaking. Just as modern historians have been quick to characterize Roman prayers as contractual, because their wording is couched in a kind of “legalese,” Roman legal procedures tended to employ ways of phrasing that used archaic expressions that were drawn from religious rituals. At one time there was no distinction between religious and civil proceedings, and the pontifices were said to have kept the formulae needed by magistrates to perform their duties. A praetor had to initiate a civil suit with the phrase do, dico, addico. The pontifices also defined the terms of a suit that could be brought before a praetor and how the law could apply in such suits, so that a praetor’s role in a court was primarily to recite pontifical formulae in the formal and public announcement of a suit. A praetor did not act as a judge or jury in our modern understanding. A praetor’s court had to take place in a templum, had to be conducted only at certain times defined by the religious aspects of the civil calendar, had to conform to any number of augural prescriptions, and further, whatever authority a praetor had went back to his election in a comitia with all of its ritualistic procedures and its religious context.
The prayer spoken by a consul at the beginning of a vote in comitia was used in the same way as the praecatio of a sacra publica. You can see in Cato’s lustratio invoking Mars that the praecatio was said twice, once before and once after the actual sacrifice (De Agricultura 141). Also the praecatio was said in two different ways, once in a negative statement and again in a positive statement. While defending Murena, Cicero refers to his procedure in conducting the election of Murena.
“On that day on which, after taking the auspices, I announced the election of Lucius Murena to the People’s Assembly, I prayed, gentlemen of the jury, to the Gods according to traditional usage of our ancestors that his election would bring every good fortune to me, my good name, my office, and to the people of Rome…
“But if that customary election prayer, consecrated by the auspices taken by a consul, has the force and religious power that the dignity of the state demands, I prayed too that the elections over which I presided should bring all good fortune and success to the elected candidates. (Cicero Pro Murena 1).”
Cicero had to have begun the voting with a prayer, and he states that the same customary election prayer was said again after the election. Implied, too, is that Cicero had to have made a sacrifice at both times. Sallustius wrote, “Prayers offered without sacrifices are only words, with sacrifices they are live words.” Prayer and sacrifice were indispensable of one another as we also find with Pliny. “Moreover, the slaughter of victims is thought to be ineffectual without prayer, and without a prayer the Gods are considered not to have been properly consulted (Pliny NH 28.10).” Whether a consul, a tribune, or a praetor, officiating over a comitia in a templum where the Gods were called as witnesses to any proceedings meant that they were at the same time conducting a religious ritual by an altar where oaths could be sworn and where the Gods could be called to lend their favor to any decisions made by the comitia. The reason for all of this is very clear. It was the Gods who decided through the auspices when and where a comitia could assemble, They who determined the voting order, They who placed Their sanction on the voting procedures by not sending disapproving omens, They who also guarded over any vow spoken, and therefore anything decided by a vote in a comitia was automatically assumed to be the “will of the Gods.”
“If what specifically makes temples sacrum is present, then the same can be said of laws and institutions put forward by the ancestors as sanctum, in order that they cannot be violated without punishment (GRF Aelius 18; Fest. p.278b.15).”
The religious context of any comitia and the ritual procedures by which it was conducted bestowed religious sanctity on all of its decisions. Once passed, a civil law was divine law, and only by following the same religious procedures could it be overruled. No senatus consultus and no magisterial edictum could come close, and not even any pronouncements of the pontifices had anything near the divine authority of the people of Rome when assembled in a comitia.
M Horatius Piscinus
Sapere aude!