165 out of 410 days: Constitutional Details in Dio

When nothing else would cause them to heed him and they were unconcerned by the fact that the trial had been held in a manner contrary to custom, he ran up to the Janiculum before they took any vote at all, and pulled down the military flag, so that it was no longer lawful for them to reach a decision.

28 1 Now this matter of the flag is as follows. In ancient times there were many enemies dwelling near the city, and the Romans, fearing that while they were holding a centuriate assembly by centuries foes might occupy the Janiculum and attack the city, decided that not all should vote at once, but that some men under arms should by turns always guard that position. 2 So they guarded it as long as the assembly lasted, but when this was about to be adjourned, the flag was pulled down and the guards departed; for no further business could be transacted when the post was not guarded. 3 This practice was observed only in the case of the centuriate assemblies, for these were held outside the wall and all who bore arms were obliged to attend them. Even to this day it is done as a matter of form.

So on that occasion, when the signal was pulled down, the assembly was adjourned and Rabirius was saved. Labienus, indeed, had the right to bring suit again, but he did not do so. (Dio 37.27.3-28.4)

In the spirit of using the blog to dump little bits of information I might want later, here is a passage on the procedure of the centuriate assembly.  It provides a nice parallel to narratives of Bibulus “watching the skies” to annul Caesar’s legislation during their join consulship (59BC).  It illustrates ritualized militarism.  AND, it has a nice allusion to later practice.  Dio is writing in the high empire as a senator under the Severan emperors and he reports: “Even to this day it is done as a matter of form”.  It also makes me think about the function of the filibuster in the US legislative process.  Although, the context of the passage is actually a political trial in 63BC, not a legislative process.  The Senate can be used for certain trials under the US constitution as well.

As an aside, I enjoy how Dio transitions from a discussion of Rullus’ popular legislation to a reflection on what it means to prosecute the 36 year old crime of killing Saturninus thus explicitly connecting the two sets of tribunician legislation.

 

Saturn, Saturninus

reverse

When Saturninus that rascally tribune of the very end of second century was a moneyer he chose types that punned on his name.  A pun that is emphasized by the abbreviation of his cognomen. It’s a rather conservative type for a man we don’t generally think of for his conservatism.  Quadrigas had already been recently revived by L. Conelius Scipo Asiaticus [103 BC Mattingly].

Reverse of RRC 311/1d. 1896.7.44

and puns too were the fashion of the time.  Compare this bull (= taurus) used by L. Thorius Balbus.  Crawford thinks the bull might be a symbol of Juno on the obverse (see p. 719 n. 8 of vol 2 of RRC). Maybe it is both.  [102 BC Mattingly]

Reverse of RRC 316/1. 1937.158.34

Anyway, the interesting thing is the Saturn, Saturninus association. It makes the choice of Saturn for the obverse of the Piso Caepio coin seem a little odd in light of our literary sources:

Image

Here’s the Broughton, MRR entry for them under 100BC, Quaestors:

Image

We might also note the use of Saturn as an obverse in 103BC [Mattingly], the year of Saturninus’ first Tribunate, by L. Memmius Gallus:

Obverse of RRC 313/1b. 1937.158.31

Mattingly has Saturninus’ offices as follows:

104 – Quaestor in charge of Grain Supply from Ostia 

103 – First Tribunate

101 – Moneyership

100 – Second Tribunate

We usually think of moneyerships being held before these other offices, but the dates of the other offices are well fixed.  So perhaps Saturninus had his ‘out of order’.  Otherwise his coins would need to be slipped back into the series earlier that 104 and that is apparently hard to reconcile with all the rest of evidence.