Imperium, Promagistrats et triomphe au Ier siècle av. J.-C. : quelques affaires

M. Tarpin
{"title":"Imperium, Promagistrats et triomphe au Ier siècle av. J.-C. : quelques affaires","authors":"M. Tarpin","doi":"10.3406/ccgg.2015.1852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Imperium and auspicium seem to be the key elements of power of magistrates and promagistrates. They are nevertheless difficult to define and historians are discussing the meaning and the forms of acquisition of those specific skills. The first century BC, a politically troubled period, offers first hand documents that do not seem to have been modified by the imperial ideology. This paper examines some of the theoretical texts from this period and some famous political affairs, which involve the imperium and auspicium of influential people. We note that the theoretical texts should be treated with caution because they are intended to support causes whose legitimacy can be questionable. Political scandals on the other hand, involve not only relations of personal power and rhetoric but also specific issues of law and the statutes of the magistrates. Indeed, the political actual practice is probably less rigid than in the mommsenian theory. Each situation is the result of an interaction of laws, jurisprudence and formal procedures, many of which are unknown. The scandal caused by the affair of the province of Appius Claudius Pulcher (54 BC.) is not a question of abuse of authority but a subtle legal arrangement. The political and legal conflicts of the 49 year – often regarded as an actual example of Realpolitik – still betray the major role of the imperium and of the legal procedures necessary for the establishment of a legitimate power. As A. Magdelain noticed, we do not have any attestation of a law generally defining the imperium. The latter, granted to the upper magistrates and promagistrates, was specified by laws passed case by case and most likely voted by the assemblies Curiata.","PeriodicalId":170604,"journal":{"name":"Cahiers du Centre Gustave Glotz","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cahiers du Centre Gustave Glotz","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3406/ccgg.2015.1852","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Imperium and auspicium seem to be the key elements of power of magistrates and promagistrates. They are nevertheless difficult to define and historians are discussing the meaning and the forms of acquisition of those specific skills. The first century BC, a politically troubled period, offers first hand documents that do not seem to have been modified by the imperial ideology. This paper examines some of the theoretical texts from this period and some famous political affairs, which involve the imperium and auspicium of influential people. We note that the theoretical texts should be treated with caution because they are intended to support causes whose legitimacy can be questionable. Political scandals on the other hand, involve not only relations of personal power and rhetoric but also specific issues of law and the statutes of the magistrates. Indeed, the political actual practice is probably less rigid than in the mommsenian theory. Each situation is the result of an interaction of laws, jurisprudence and formal procedures, many of which are unknown. The scandal caused by the affair of the province of Appius Claudius Pulcher (54 BC.) is not a question of abuse of authority but a subtle legal arrangement. The political and legal conflicts of the 49 year – often regarded as an actual example of Realpolitik – still betray the major role of the imperium and of the legal procedures necessary for the establishment of a legitimate power. As A. Magdelain noticed, we do not have any attestation of a law generally defining the imperium. The latter, granted to the upper magistrates and promagistrates, was specified by laws passed case by case and most likely voted by the assemblies Curiata.
公元前一世纪的统治权、治安官和凯旋:一些业务
统治权和吉祥权似乎是地方长官和地方长官权力的关键要素。然而,它们很难定义,历史学家正在讨论这些特定技能的意义和获得形式。公元前一世纪是一个政治动荡的时期,提供了第一手的文件,这些文件似乎没有受到帝国意识形态的修改。本文考察了这一时期的一些理论文本和一些著名的政治事件,这些事件涉及到权贵的皇权和吉祥。我们注意到,应谨慎对待理论文本,因为它们旨在支持其合法性可能值得怀疑的原因。另一方面,政治丑闻不仅涉及个人权力和修辞关系,还涉及具体的法律问题和地方官员的法规。事实上,政治实践可能没有momsenian理论那么严格。每一种情况都是法律、判例和正式程序相互作用的结果,其中许多是未知的。阿皮乌斯·克劳狄乌斯·普尔彻行省(公元前54年)的丑闻不是滥用权力的问题,而是一种微妙的法律安排。这49年的政治和法律冲突- -通常被视为现实政治的实际例子- -仍然暴露了帝国和建立合法权力所必需的法律程序的主要作用。正如a . Magdelain注意到的,我们没有任何证据证明有法律一般地定义了统治权。后者,授予高级行政官和地方行政官,由逐个通过的法律规定,很可能由库里亚塔议会投票决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信