(i) De Tribunis Plebis Reficiendis; (ii) De Legibus Iunia et Acilia Repetundarum

IF 0.5 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS
A. H. Jones
{"title":"(i) De Tribunis Plebis Reficiendis; (ii) De Legibus Iunia et Acilia Repetundarum","authors":"A. H. Jones","doi":"10.1017/S0068673500002893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is evident that there was no law expressly forbidding the re-election of tribunes of the plebs. When Tiberius Gracchus raised the issue, his colleagues were in doubt, though the majority apparently held that his candidature was inadmissible (Appian, B.C. I, 14–15). Two years later Papirius Carbo proposed a bill ‘ut eundem tribunum plebi quotiens vellet creare liceret’, which was rejected by the plebs (Livy, Epit. LIX, Cic., de Amic. 95). This event would have confirmed the presumption against the reeligibility of tribunes, but of course made no change in the legal position. In fact Gaius Gracchus was re-elected in 123 (for 122) without any recorded protest.","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"6 1","pages":"35-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"1960-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0068673500002893","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Classical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068673500002893","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

It is evident that there was no law expressly forbidding the re-election of tribunes of the plebs. When Tiberius Gracchus raised the issue, his colleagues were in doubt, though the majority apparently held that his candidature was inadmissible (Appian, B.C. I, 14–15). Two years later Papirius Carbo proposed a bill ‘ut eundem tribunum plebi quotiens vellet creare liceret’, which was rejected by the plebs (Livy, Epit. LIX, Cic., de Amic. 95). This event would have confirmed the presumption against the reeligibility of tribunes, but of course made no change in the legal position. In fact Gaius Gracchus was re-elected in 123 (for 122) without any recorded protest.
(i) Reficiendis广场;(ii)Yunia和Acilia Repetundarum的法律
很明显,没有法律明文禁止平民保民官的连任。当提比略·格拉古提出这个问题时,他的同事们表示怀疑,尽管大多数人显然认为他的候选人资格是不被接受的(阿庇安,公元前1年,14-15)。两年后,帕皮里乌斯·卡波提出了一项议案,即“全民论坛”,但被民众拒绝(Livy, Epit)。LIX,中投公司。, de Amic. 95)。这一事件肯定了对保民官重新获得资格的推定,但当然没有改变法律地位。事实上,盖尤斯·格拉古在123年再次当选,没有任何抗议记录。
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
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
×
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