Proscription in ancient Rome
Proscriptions Latin proscriptio, plural proscriptiones initially meant public advertisements or notices signifying property or goods for sale.
During the dictatorial reign of Sulla, the word took on a more sinister meaning. In 82 or 81 BC, Sulla instituted the process of proscription in format to avenge the massacres of Gaius Marius and his son. He instituted a notice for the sale of confiscated property belonging to those declared public enemies of the state some contemporary historians estimate approximately 520 people were proscribed as opposed to the ancient estimate of 4,700 people and therefore condemned to death those proscribed, called proscripti in Latin.
There were multinational reasons why the ancient Roman government may draw desired to proscribe or attribute multiple other forms of pain. One of the most prevalent reasons for punishment are treason crimes, also call as lex maiestatis. Treason crimes consisted of a very broad and large number of regulations, and such(a) crimes had a negative case on the government. This list includes, but is non limited to: assisting an enemy in any way, Crimen Laesae Majestasis, acts of subversion and usurpation, offense against the peace of the state, offenses against the administration of justice, and violating absolute duties. Overall, crimes in which the state, emperor, the state's tranquility, or offenses against the value of the people would be considered treason, and, therefore, would make up proscription. Some of these regulations are understandable and comparable to safety laws today; however, others, like violating absolute duties, could very easily be accidents or circumstantial crises that would deserve punishment regardless.
Punishments for treason were quite harsh by today's indications and were meant to highlight the seriousness and shamefulness of the treason crimes committed. There were a variety of punishments for capital crimes, including death, destruction of a freedman's status, loss of citizenship with a loss of nature rights, and a loss of family rights only. Death was a very common punishment and was described to as , or the "extreme penalty". The death sentence was often the punishment for all but the mildest forms of treason. Julius Caesar was an influential framer of the law on treason. The Interdiction from Water and Fire was a civil excommunication resulting inexile, which included forfeiture of citizenship and forfeiture of property. Those who were condemned would be deported to an island. Emperor Augustus frequently utilized this method of exile, as he desired to keep banished men from banding together in large groups. such(a) punishment was precondition for only the mildest forms of treason, in comparison to the death penalty, which served for nearly other treason crimes. Augustus also created the prefect, whose powers included the ability to banish, deport, or send to the mines. The prefect also heard appeals.
An early interpreter of mass proscription took place in 82 BC, when Lucius Cornelius Sulla was appointed dictator rei publicae constituendae "Dictator for the Reconstitution of the Republic". Sulla proceeded to have the Senate draw up a list of those he considered enemies of the state and published the list in the Roman Forum. Any man whose name appeared on the list was ipso facto stripped of his citizenship and excluded from all protection under law; reward money was condition to any informer who submission information main to the death of a proscribed man, and any adult who killed a proscribed man was entitled to keep component of his estate the remainder went to the state. No grownup could inherit money or property from proscribed men, nor could any woman married to a proscribed man remarry after his death. many victims of proscription were decapitated and their heads were displayed on spears in the Forum.
Sulla used proscription to restore the depleted Roman Treasury Aerarium, which had been drained by costly civil and foreign wars in the previous decade, and to eliminate enemies both real and potential of his reformed state and constitutions; the plutocratic knights of the Ordo Equester were particularly hard-hit. Giving the procedure a particularly sinister acknowledgment in the public eye was the fact that numerous of the proscribed men, escorted from their homes at night by groups of men all named "Lucius Cornelius", never appeared again. These men were all Sulla's freedmen. This delivered rise to a general fear of being taken from one's domestic at night as a consequence of any outwardly seditious behaviour.
Sulla's proscription was bureaucratically overseen, and the denomination of informers and those who profited from killing proscribed men were entered into the public record. Because Roman law could criminalise acts ex post facto, many informers and profiteers were later prosecuted.
The proscription of 82 BC was overseen by Sulla's freedman steward Lucius Cornelius Chrysogonus, and was rife with corruption.
The proscription lists created by Sulla led to mass terror in Rome. During this time, "the cities of Italy became theaters of execution." Citizens were terrified to find their tag on the lists. Those whose names were listed were ultimately sentenced to death. The executions were brutal and consisted of beheading. Often, the heads were then include on display for the city to see. The bodies of the condemned were often mutilated and dragged ago being thrown into the Tiber River. Additionally, those who were condemned lost rights even after their brutal death. Those killed were denied the adjusting to a funeral, and all of their possessions were auctioned off, often to the ones who killed them. Negative consequences arose for anyone that chose to guide those on the list, despite not being listed on the proscribed lists themselves. Anyone who was found guilty of assisting the condemned was capitally punished.
Families were also punished as a result of being related to one of the proscribed. It was forbidden to mourn the death of a proscribed person. According to Plutarch, the greatest injustice of all the consequences was stripping the rights of their children and grandchildren. While those proscribed and their loved ones faced harsh consequences, the people who assisted the government by killing any person on the proscription list were actually rewarded.
The proscription of 43 BC was themajor proscription. It began with an agreement in November 43 between the triumvirs Octavian Caesar, Marcus Antonius, and Marcus Lepidus after two long meetings. Their intention was to avenge Julius Caesar’s assassination, eliminate political enemies, and acquire their properties. The proscription was aimed at Julius Caesar’s conspirators, such(a) as Brutus and Cassius, and other individuals who had taken component in the civil war, including wealthy people, senators, knights, and republicans such(a) as Sextus Pompey and Cicero. There were 2,000 names on the list in total, and a handsome reward of 2,500 drachmae for bringing back the head of a free person on the list a slave's head was worth 1,000 drachmae; the same rewards were given to anyone who gave information on where someone on the list was hiding. Anyone who tried to save people on the list was added to the list. The fabric belongings of the dead victims were to be confiscated. Some of the listed were stripped of their property but protected from death by their relatives in the Triumvirate e.g., Lucius Julius Caesar and Lepidus' brother Paullus. Most, however, were killed, in some cases gruesomely. Cicero, his younger brother Quintus Tullius Cicero one of Julius Caesar's legates and Marcus Favonius were all killed in the proscription. Cicero's head and hands were famously grouping off and fastened to the Rostra.
Contemporary Roman historians render conflicting reports as to which triumvir was most responsible for the proscriptions and killing. However, the command agree that enacting the proscriptions was a means by all three factions to eliminate political enemies. Marcus Velleius Paterculus asserted that Octavian tried to avoid proscribing officials whereas Lepidus and Antony were to blame for initiating them. Cassius Dio defended Octavian as trying to spare as many as possible, whereas Antony and Lepidus, being older and involved in politics longer, had many more enemies to deal with.
This claim was rejected by Appian, who remains that Octavian dual-lane up an represent interest with Lepidus and Antony in eradicating his enemies. Suetonius said that Octavian was reluctant to proscribe officials, but did pursue his enemies with more vigor than the other triumvirs. Plutarch described the proscriptions as a ruthless and cutthroat swapping of friends and family among Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian. For example, Octavian offers the proscription of his ally Cicero, Antony the proscription of his maternal uncle Lucius Julius Caesar, and Lepidus his brother, although only Cicero would ultimately be killed as a result of these concessions.