Romans Friendly

[Primus Pilus]

Please don't quote me out of context. I wrote, "Legally, all of these peoples could be admitted as citizens, it is true. However, the only gateway to citizenship was slavery." The "these people" referred to Greeks, Phrygians, Mysians, Cappadocians, Asiatic Greeks, Syrians, Jews, Punica, Egyptians, Gauls, and Spaniards. Cicero is not a counter-example at all. All Italians south of the Po enjoyed dual-citizenship (see Cicero himself on this point) and were thus Romans.

 

It's important to note that this policy changes during the late republic times and Rome tend to grant citizenship to the local aristocrasy for services it has done for her (A good example for this is that Caesar granted Antipater citizenship for his aid during the Egyptian campain) and in the empire auxiliary soldiers were made citizens after they finished there service.

 

There is also the rare circumstance of individuals granting rights to colonies or foreign towns (not just Latin rights), but clearly this was politically motivated and was not the normal path. Sulla did it while dictator (see the Lex Cornelia de Civitate of 82) and the Lex Gellia et Cornelia de Civitate passed in 72 which made it legal for generals to confer citizenship for service to Rome.

[ASCLEPIADES]

the passage from foreign slave to free Roman--with all the rights attendant thereto--was often purchased by the slave himself, who then lived in perpetual obligation to his former master. It was a good system for Rome (until Augustus put the brakes on it),

Libertas is not the same as civitas, (peregrini had the first but not the second) and I am not aware of any primary source which stated that all freedmen became full Roman citizens previous to Augustus.

 

Even so, I think it's clear that only a small fraction of all the slaves were eventually freed.

Edited October 29, 2007 by ASCLEPIADES

[ASCLEPIADES]

Please don't quote me out of context. I wrote, "Legally, all of these peoples could be admitted as citizens, it is true. However, the only gateway to citizenship was slavery." The "these people" referred to Greeks, Phrygians, Mysians, Cappadocians, Asiatic Greeks, Syrians, Jews, Punica, Egyptians, Gauls, and Spaniards. Cicero is not a counter-example at all. All Italians south of the Po enjoyed dual-citizenship (see Cicero himself on this point) and were thus Romans.

 

It's important to note that this policy changes during the late republic times and Rome tend to grant citizenship to the local aristocrasy for services it has done for her (A good example for this is that Caesar granted Antipater citizenship for his aid during the Egyptian campain) and in the empire auxiliary soldiers were made citizens after they finished there service.

The first reference to auxilia that I was able to find was during I Punic War (check this related thread(post #20)).

[Ingsoc]

Please don't quote me out of context. I wrote, "Legally, all of these peoples could be admitted as citizens, it is true. However, the only gateway to citizenship was slavery." The "these people" referred to Greeks, Phrygians, Mysians, Cappadocians, Asiatic Greeks, Syrians, Jews, Punica, Egyptians, Gauls, and Spaniards. Cicero is not a counter-example at all. All Italians south of the Po enjoyed dual-citizenship (see Cicero himself on this point) and were thus Romans.

 

It's important to note that this policy changes during the late republic times and Rome tend to grant citizenship to the local aristocrasy for services it has done for her (A good example for this is that Caesar granted Antipater citizenship for his aid during the Egyptian campain) and in the empire auxiliary soldiers were made citizens after they finished there service.

The first reference to auxilia that I was able to find was during I Punic War (check this related thread(post #20)).

 

There are few diffrences, as I understand during the republican times auxilia were not granted citizenship at the end of their service, also if I'm not mistaken the auxilia of republican time was recruited from the allies of Rome who were, at least nominally, independence while imperial auxilia were recruited fron non-citizens living in the empire.

[ASCLEPIADES]

There are few diffrences, as I understand during the republican times auxilia were not granted citizenship at the end of their service, also if I'm not mistaken the auxilia of republican time was recruited from the allies of Rome who were, at least nominally, independence while imperial auxilia were recruited fron non-citizens living in the empire.

I think there were not many examples, but legio V Alaude (recruited at DCCI AUC / 53 BC from Gaul) and XXII Deioteriana (Galatian recruits at DCCVII AUC / 47 BC) seem like promoted auxilia to me (By definition, Legionaries had to been cives).

[M. Porcius Cato]

This is all off-topic, but since the original poster hasn't returned, I don't feel guilty straying.

 

Libertas is not the same as civitas, (peregrini had the first but not the second) and I am not aware of any primary source which stated that all freedmen became full Roman citizens previous to Augustus.

 

According to the entry on citizenship in the Oxford Classical Dictionary, "Roman citizenship came to possess two features which distinguished it from polis citizenship and which later surprised Greek observers: the automatic incorporation of freed slaves into the Roman citizen body; and the ease with which whole communities of outsiders could be admitted as citizens. By the time Rome faced the invasion of Hannibal in 218 BC, she had a long history of giving citizenship to Italian communities, either with the vote (optimo iure) or without the vote (sine suffragio). ... All citizens, after the abolition of the ban on conubium between patricians and plebeians, had conubium; they were also liable to tributum and military service. If they had the vote, they were also eligible to stand for magistracies. (Individuals were occasionally deprived of the vote as a punishment, becoming aerarii.)"

 

The entry doesn't specify whether the time frame being discussed includes the pre-Augustan era, but I can think of two ancient sources off the top of my head (maybe a bad omen!) that strongly suggests that the same policy existed prior to Augustus. The first is the source describing Scipio Aemilianus' speech, in which he castigated the crowd saying (iirc), "Silence! I brought you all here as slaves". The second is a letter from Phillip, in which he recommended the Roman policy of incorporating freedmen into the citizen body. Neither Scipio nor Phillip's comments make any sense unless freedmen were regularly (if not universally) admitted into citizenship.