Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It was a modification to the Valerian law in 449 BC which first allowed acts of the Plebeian Council to have the full force of law over both plebeians and patricians, but eventually the final law in the series was passed (the "Shortening Law"), which removed the last check that the patricians in the Senate had over this power.
A series of laws diminished the distinction between the two classes, including Lex Canuleia (445 BC; which allowed the marriage—ius connubii—between patricians and plebeians), Leges Liciniae Sextiae (367 BC; which made restrictions on possession of public lands—ager publicus—and also made sure that one of the consuls was plebeian), Lex ...
Plebeians were barred from marrying patricians in 450 BC but this law was annulled five years later in 445 BC by a tribune of the plebs. [2] [page needed] In 444 BC, the office of military tribune with consular powers was created. The plebeians who filled this office were then entitled to join the senate after their one-year term was completed.
Why was a law banning marriage between patricians and plebeians drawn up by a body composed by both patricians and plebeians (the majority of the members of the second decemvirate being plebeians)? [30] In 2005, historian Gary Forsythe dismissed the second decemvirate as unhistorical. He presents a number of arguments for his view.
Five years earlier, as part of the process of establishing the Twelve Tables of Roman law, the second decemvirate had placed severe restrictions on the plebeian order, including a prohibition on the intermarriage of patricians and plebeians. [5] [6] Gaius Canuleius, one of the tribunes of the plebs, proposed a rogatio repealing this
There was a radical reform in 367–6 BC, which abolished consular tribunes and "laid the foundation for a system of government led by two consuls, shared between patricians and plebeians" [15] over the religious objections of patricians, requiring at least one of the consuls to be a plebeian. [16]
Why was a law banning marriage between patricians and plebeians drawn up by a body composed by both patricians and plebeians (the majority of the members of the second decemvirate being plebeians)? [22] In 2005, historian Gary Forsythe dismissed the second decemvirate as unhistorical. He presents a number of arguments for his view.
Later historians speculated that Clodius changed the spelling of his nomen from "Claudius" to "Clodius" to distance himself from his patrician family and curry favor with the plebeians; however, there are no ancient sources that substantiate the idea that he changed his name, or that the two spellings signified patrician vs. plebeian status. [3]