Carthaginian influence on the Consulate

[Ingsoc]

We know that the government in Carthago was ruled by two Suffetes, in a similar collegian way as Consuls in Rome and sine we know that the first treaty between Carthago and Rome was made in the year that the republic was founded (Polybius, Histories, 3.22) hence there were a contact between Carthagians and Romans in the time of the monarchy.

 

Would it possible that the source of the Roman Republican system lays in Carthago?

[ASCLEPIADES]

We know that the government in Carthago was ruled by two Suffetes, in a similar collegian way as Consuls in Rome and sine we know that the first treaty between Carthago and Rome was made in the year that the republic was founded (Polybius, Histories, 3.22) hence there were a contact between Carthagians and Romans in the time of the monarchy.

 

Would it possible that the source of the Roman Republican system lays in Carthago?

Salve, I Excellent question, it has been implied previouly here at UNRV.

 

The expected answer from a lot of Romanophiles would be obvious.

From where I am, there's just not enough evidence to determine which was the first one.

 

On one hand, Aristotle at the IV century BC had a thorough knoeledege of the carthaginian constitution, while he said not a wordabout Rome.

On the other, we have virtually zero first hand information of any kind about Carthage, thanks to the Genocide of DCVIII AUC / 146 bc.

 

Melvadius expertise would be urgently required.

[Primus Pilus]

We know that the government in Carthago was ruled by two Suffetes, in a similar collegian way as Consuls in Rome and sine we know that the first treaty between Carthago and Rome was made in the year that the republic was founded (Polybius, Histories, 3.22) hence there were a contact between Carthagians and Romans in the time of the monarchy.

 

Would it possible that the source of the Roman Republican system lays in Carthago?

Salve, I Excellent question, it has been implied previouly here at UNRV.

 

The expected answer from a lot of Romanophiles would be obvious.

From where I am, there's just not enough evidence to determine which was the first one.

 

On one hand, Aristotle at the IV century BC had a thorough knoeledege of the carthaginian constitution, while he said not a wordabout Rome.

On the other, we have virtually zero first hand information of any kind about Carthage, thanks to the Genocide of DCVIII AUC / 146 bc.

 

Melvadius expertise would be urgently required.

 

There is an anecdotal story that I recall of Servius Tullius (roughly c. 550 BC) suggesting that he intended to establish the consular tradition at the end of his reign, but to be quite fair there is little if any source information above the legends.

 

Of course, since the consul was originally the office of praetor, it's difficult to determine exactly how long that dual praetors may have already been established in regal Rome. While this position may have lacked the governing authority of Republican consuls, the office of dual praetors was probably in existence long before and was evolved into a larger role upon the removal of the monarchy.

 

In any case, attempting to tie the Roman source material, largely based on legends, with the Carthaginian system is indeterminable. However, to answer the original question... Yes, the influence is a possibility, whether direct or via 3rd party, etc.

[ASCLEPIADES]

Prof. Jona Lendering has some nice material on:

 

The constitution of Carthage,

 

the sonsul-like suffetes and

 

where did the idea of dual leadership come from.

[Pompieus]

As Primus says there is so little evidence on the primitive institutions of the Romans (the first use of the word "consul" evidently dates from 298 BC and it's not even certain that there were originally two chief magistrates!) that anything is arguable. But one need not go as far as Africa - the traditions of the Latins, Oscans and Etruscans all show viable precedents.

[ASCLEPIADES]

But one need not go as far as Africa - the traditions of the Latins, Oscans and Etruscans all show viable precedents.

And on Greece, the Lacedemonian and Cretan constitutions, according to Aristotle's Politics.

 

BTW, suffetes is a close congnate of the Hebrew word used in the biblical book between Joshua and Samuel, commonly translated as "Judges".

[Minerva]

According to Livy Rome itself had a dual monarchy during Romulus' reign when the sabines joined the Roman community and their king Titus Tatius ruled jointly with Romlus until Tatius' death. Although much of Livy's regal period is clouded in legend isn't their a possibility that a dual rule had existed before the republic atleast temporaraly?

[ASCLEPIADES]

According to Livy Rome itself had a dual monarchy during Romulus' reign when the sabines joined the Roman community and their king Titus Tatius ruled jointly with Romlus until Tatius' death. Although much of Livy's regal period is clouded in legend isn't their a possibility that a dual rule had existed before the republic atleast temporaraly?

And even before, with the twins Romulus and Remus themselves.

[Ingsoc]

According to Livy Rome itself had a dual monarchy during Romulus' reign when the sabines joined the Roman community and their king Titus Tatius ruled jointly with Romlus until Tatius' death. Although much of Livy's regal period is clouded in legend isn't their a possibility that a dual rule had existed before the republic atleast temporaraly?

And even before, with the twins Romulus and Remus themselves.

 

Just remember than all the kings before Tullus Hostilius are considered to be legendary by modern historical research.

[ASCLEPIADES]

According to Livy Rome itself had a dual monarchy during Romulus' reign when the sabines joined the Roman community and their king Titus Tatius ruled jointly with Romlus until Tatius' death. Although much of Livy's regal period is clouded in legend isn't their a possibility that a dual rule had existed before the republic atleast temporaraly?

And even before, with the twins Romulus and Remus themselves.

 

Just remember than all the kings before Tullus Hostilius are considered to be legendary by modern historical research.

And quite possible after him too; the interesting fact would be the depiction of bicephalic executive power as part of those legends.

[Primus Pilus]

While in search of something else I found this relevant passage in Dionysius...

 

Book 4.76...

After Junius Brutus had delivered this opinion they all approved it, and straightway consulting about the persons who were to take over the magistracies, they decided that Spurius Lucretius, the father of the woman who had killed herself, will be appointed interrex, and that Lucius Junius Brutus and Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus should be nominated by him to exercise the power of the kings. 2 And they ordered that these magistrates should be called in their language consules; this, translated into the Greek language, may signify symbouloi ("counsellors") or probouloi ("pre-counsellors"), for the Romans call our symboulai ("counsels") consilia. But in the course of time they came to be called by the Greeks hypatoi ("supreme") from the greatness of their power, because they command all the citizens and have the highest rank; for the ancients called that which was outstanding and superlative hypaton.

 

While it may not be definitive, depending of course on Dionysius' source(s), it clearly suggests a direct relationship with the Greek rather than Carthaginian system. Dionysius, also being Greek, may have had his own suggestive interpretation here as well.

[ASCLEPIADES]

While in search of something else I found this relevant passage in Dionysius...

 

Book 4.76...

After Junius Brutus had delivered this opinion they all approved it, and straightway consulting about the persons who were to take over the magistracies, they decided that Spurius Lucretius, the father of the woman who had killed herself, will be appointed interrex, and that Lucius Junius Brutus and Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus should be nominated by him to exercise the power of the kings. 2 And they ordered that these magistrates should be called in their language consules; this, translated into the Greek language, may signify symbouloi ("counsellors") or probouloi ("pre-counsellors"), for the Romans call our symboulai ("counsels") consilia. But in the course of time they came to be called by the Greeks hypatoi ("supreme") from the greatness of their power, because they command all the citizens and have the highest rank; for the ancients called that which was outstanding and superlative hypaton.

 

While it may not be definitive, depending of course on Dionysius' source(s), it clearly suggests a direct relationship with the Greek rather than Carthaginian system. Dionysius, also being Greek, may have had his own suggestive interpretation here as well.

Well, from this specific quotation I would understand that Dionysius was not suggesting a Greek origin for the consular office, but discussing on the translation of the Latin word "consul" to Greek.

[Primus Pilus]

While in search of something else I found this relevant passage in Dionysius...

 

Book 4.76...

After Junius Brutus had delivered this opinion they all approved it, and straightway consulting about the persons who were to take over the magistracies, they decided that Spurius Lucretius, the father of the woman who had killed herself, will be appointed interrex, and that Lucius Junius Brutus and Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus should be nominated by him to exercise the power of the kings. 2 And they ordered that these magistrates should be called in their language consules; this, translated into the Greek language, may signify symbouloi ("counsellors") or probouloi ("pre-counsellors"), for the Romans call our symboulai ("counsels") consilia. But in the course of time they came to be called by the Greeks hypatoi ("supreme") from the greatness of their power, because they command all the citizens and have the highest rank; for the ancients called that which was outstanding and superlative hypaton.

 

While it may not be definitive, depending of course on Dionysius' source(s), it clearly suggests a direct relationship with the Greek rather than Carthaginian system. Dionysius, also being Greek, may have had his own suggestive interpretation here as well.

Well, from this specific quotation I would understand that Dionysius was not suggesting a Greek origin for the consular office, but discussing on the translation of the Latin word "consul" to Greek.

 

Agreed, I meant only to show the underlying possibility.

[Minerva]

Agreed, I meant only to show the underlying possibility.

 

Apart from Sparta was there any other Greek city with a dual monarchy or where the Supreme power was wielded by two equals? The Spartan system wouldn't have been that inspiring because the two kings didn't have much authority away from the battlefield. But was there another such possibility?

[ASCLEPIADES]

Apart from Sparta was there any other Greek city with a dual monarchy or where the Supreme power was wielded by two equals? The Spartan system wouldn't have been that inspiring because the two kings didn't have much authority away from the battlefield. But was there another such possibility?

Presumably in Crete, at least for some time.

This can be inferred from Aristotle of Stagira, Politica, Book II, sec 1272:

 

"The Cretan institutions resemble the Lacedaemonian. The Helots are the husbandmen of the one, the Perioeci of the other, and both Cretans and Lacedaemonians have common meals, which were anciently called by the Lacedaemonians not phiditia' but andria'; and the Cretans have the same word, the use of which proves that the common meals originally came from Crete. Further, the two constitutions are similar; for the office of the Ephors is the same as that of the Cretan Cosmi, the only difference being that whereas the Ephors are five, the Cosmi are ten in number. The elders, too, answer to the elders in Crete, who are termed by the Cretans the council. And the kingly office once existed in Crete, but was abolished"