The Government of the Republic

[Cassius Loginus]

In the UNRV government section there is few information how the Romans ruled themselves.

 

So:

 

1) who passed legislation and voted for it, the Senate and the Tribunes? , the Senate and the Consuls?

 

2)What was the relationship between the Senate, the Tribunes and the Consuls?

 

It is a bit confusing.

[M. Porcius Cato]

The constitution of the Roman republic changed over time, so I'll base my answers on what was true most of the time in most of the cases.

 

1) who passed legislation and voted for it, the Senate and the Tribunes? , the Senate and the Consuls?

Neither. Proposals (rogationes) were brought before the people, called to assembly by their tribunes. The people either voted for or against the bill. If "for", the proposal had the force of law; if not, not.

 

Who could bring a bill before the people? Typically, bills were brought before the people by the tribunes, who were acting with the advice of the senate, but the tribunes were not obliged to bring all proposals to the people if they thought the bill against the interest of the people.

 

Sometimes, tribunes brought bills without the formal consent of the senate (e.g., the Gracchi); sometimes, consuls brought bills over the veto of a tribune (e.g., Caesar). These exceptions to the common formula--idea raised in senate, endorsed by senate, not vetoed by tribune, brought by tribune to the legally-assembled people for vote--invariably caused a constitutional crisis.

 

2)What was the relationship between the Senate, the Tribunes and the Consuls?

 

The senate comprised the former magistrates of the Roman republic, all legally elected by the people. The tribunes' job was to serve as a check on the other magistrates, either in their capacity as magistrate or senator. The consuls were directed by the senate to take actions against foreign enemies and domestic insurrections. Ultimately, all power rested with the people, but this power was restricted to voting on bills and choosing magistrates, not micromanaging the state.

 

This is just a sketch of the constitution, and you'll find a much more comprehensive answer in Lintott's Constitution of the Roman Republic.

[Pompieus]

Marcus Porcius gives a good summary. Note that legislation was nearly always brought before the people organized in the Tribes (comitia tributa) rather than in the centuries. Probably because the tribal assembly was much easier to handle administratively, and sometimes because the wealthiest citizens had less control over the tribes than the centuries. Also note that there was no debate and no regular meetings of the assembly. It had to be called by a magistrate who placed a question before it. A magistrate could convene a meeting before the voting (contio) and invite people to speak, but once the people were divided into their tribes all they did was vote.

 

The senate too only met when convened by a magistrate (but meetings tended to be more regular than the assemblies) and was only supposed to discuss questions placed before it by the presiding magistrate. The senators were invited to speak in a strict heirarchical order - the most senior members (based on the magistacy they had held and their seniority) always had the first word unless they deferred to another member. The senate had enormous prestige as it consisted of all the ex magistrates (after Sulla anyway) and it controlled foriegn affairs, finance, military affairs and the magistrates were expected to consult it on any important issue as they handled day to day administration.

 

The courts (after 146) also played a role in the state - but that's another story.