Augustus, a question.

[Aurelianus]

I'm sorry if the answer to this is obvious, but, In his creation of the principate did Augustus abolish the Assemblies, or some of them?

I know he absorbed many offices, such as the Tribunes, and effectively took the powers of many others, like the Consuls who were relegated to merely leading the Senate, and were more often than not the Emperor, or an Imperial anyway.

Please help.

[Primus Pilus]

I'm sorry if the answer to this is obvious, but, In his creation of the principate did Augustus abolish the Assemblies, or some of them?

I know he absorbed many offices, such as the Tribunes, and effectively took the powers of many others, like the Consuls who were relegated to merely leading the Senate, and were more often than not the Emperor, or an Imperial anyway.

Please help.

 

The assemblies still held some theoretic legislative power under Augustus, but the election of senators and appointment of magistrates was transferred to imperial discretion between Augustus and Tiberius. For all intensive purposes (despite a temporary restoration under Caligula) the assemblies were irrelevant as anything other than a gauge of public sentiment after Tiberius.

 

The William Smith Dictionary lays it out quite well:

 

Under Augustus the comitia still sanctioned new laws and elected magistrates, but their whole proceedings were a mere farce, for they could not venture to elect any other persons than those recommended by the emperor (Suet. Aug. 40, &c.; Dion Cass. LIII.2, 21, lv.34, lvi.40). Tiberius deprived the people even of this shadow of their former power, and conferred the power of election upon the senate (Tacit. Ann. i.15, 81, ii.36, 51; Vell. Pat. ii.126). When the elections were made by the senate the result was announced to the people assembled as comitia centuriata or tributa (Dion Cass. LVIII.20). Legislation was taken away from the comitia entirely, and was completely in the hands of the senate and the emperor. Caligula placed the comitia again upon the same footing on which they had been in the time of Augustus (Dion Cass. LIX.9; Suet. Cal. 16); but the regulation was soon abandoned, and every thing was left as it had been arranged by Tiberius (Dion Cass. LIX.20). From this time the comitia may be said to have ceased to exist, as all the sovereign power formerly possessed by the people was conferred upon the emperor by the lex regia [Regia.] The people only assembled in the Campus Martius for the purpose of receiving information as to who had been elected or appointed as its magistrates, until at last even this announcement (renuntiatio) appears to have ceased.

[phil25]

I don't question a word that PP writes. An awesome display of knowledge if I may say so.

 

Yet my own estimation would be that Augustus did less abolishing and more ignoring.

 

Like the British House of Lords over the last 100 years, powers can migrate almost seamlessly from one institution to another. If the Assembles were not called, or were called only with only certain previously and rigorously prescribed functions, the result is pretty much the same.

 

As far as I am aware, the "powers" of the Consuuls, and the presteige of the office never dwindled. It was just that a "higher imperium" now existed in the republic - that of the princeps (literally the first man) who could not be ignored.

 

But note, Augustus and his successors never ceased to take office as a Consul at least from time to time.

 

And the Consuls still gave their name to the year. Big deal - you may say - but an attractive memorial. And families were still enobled when a member held the office even as suffect (secondary consul for part of the year).

 

Phil

[Primus Pilus]

I don't question a word that PP writes. An awesome display of knowledge if I may say so.

 

Yet my own estimation would be that Augustus did less abolishing and more ignoring.

 

Like the British House of Lords over the last 100 years, powers can migrate almost seamlessly from one institution to another. If the Assembles were not called, or were called only with only certain previously and rigorously prescribed functions, the result is pretty much the same.

 

As far as I am aware, the "powers" of the Consuuls, and the presteige of the office never dwindled. It was just that a "higher imperium" now existed in the republic - that of the princeps (literally the first man) who could not be ignored.

 

But note, Augustus and his successors never ceased to take office as a Consul at least from time to time.

 

And the Consuls still gave their name to the year. Big deal - you may say - but an attractive memorial. And families were still enobled when a member held the office even as suffect (secondary consul for part of the year).

 

Phil

 

Agreed, the magistracies maintained much of the same positional authority and respect as they always had. In most cases there was very little little change from the institutional standpoint, it was only that the institutions were under the overall authority of the princeps.

 

The notion that the princeps ignored more of the traditions than eliminated them is dead on. It falls right into place along with the general deception of the continued Republic. I suppose the key is that the citizenry held little if any sway over their own government except for the occasional mob induced forcible change. Their actual votes were meaningless whether they were allowed to assemble for sole purpose of tradition or not.

[Aurelianus]

Thanks very much PP and Phil! I didn't expect such a comprehensive answer, but very much apreciated!