Political Power in Mid-Republican Rome withtheholdingof individualpositionsconcernedwiththecommunity’s
relation to the divine order, and narrated a prolonged evolution whereby
plebeians, defined negativelyasnon-patricians, also gained access to some,
thoughnotall,ofthesepositions.Thestrictlyreligiousaspectofthepatri-
cian-plebeiandistinction—thequestionofwhocanbepermittedtotakethe
auspicesonbehalfofthecommunity—isrightlystressedbyR.E.Mitchell,
‘‘The Definition ofpatresandplebs: An End to the Struggle of the Orders’’
(Raaflaub et al., ff.), even if the idea that we should think ofpatresas
‘‘priests’’shouldbetakenmerelyasasalutarydevicetoprovokere-thinking.
Itiscertainlyimportantthatthisdistinctionofbirthwasinnowayreflected
in the structure of the popularassemblies, the centuriate assembly (comitia
centuriata) and the tribal assembly (comitia tributa), as they were in the his-
toricalperiod.Nothingwas,oris,certainabouttheearliesthistoryofthese
assembliesexceptthattheywentbacktobeforethehistoricalperiod;that
thetribes(tribus)hadreachedtheirultimatelimitofthirty-fivein,and
that the structure of the centuriate assembly reflected a stage in the early
historyoftheRomanarmy.
WhatImeantosuggestbytheseextensivepreliminariesis,firstly,thatthe
historyoftheearly-middleRepublic(say–..)isindeedinescapable,
for it was then that the institutions of Rome were either created or took
ontheirestablishedformandfunctions:forexample,thedualconsulate,the
praetorship (and later praetorships), the censorship, and the enrolment by
themoftheSenate,andsoforth.Itwasalsothenthattheretookplacethat
verysudden—andevenmoreimportant—expansionofRomandomination
overItaly,ofwhichthemostcrucialphasewasexactlycontemporarywith
Philip’svictoryatChaeroneaandthenwithAlexander’sconquestsandthe
warsoftheDiadochoi.Thisperiodcannot,therefore,helpbeingacentral
probleminRomanhistory.Butitisaparadoxicalandinsolubleproblemonly
if we insist, like the Roman annalists, on knowing too much. It is all the
moreunfortunatethatthosewhodealwithit,inspiteofritualexpressions
ofcaution,doinsistonknowingtoomuch.
Whatismore,likemanyoftheauthorswhoseworkappearsinthetwo
exceptionallyinteresting,learnedandstimulatingvolumesunderreview,we
tend to insist not only on knowing too much, but on knowing precisely
thosethingswhichtheancientsourcesthemselves,intheirbettermoments,
warnusthatwecannotknow.Thatistosaytheattributiontodatableindi-
viduals of particular actions and achievements, and the grouping of indi-
vidualsintosupposedlyreliablefamilytrees.Cicero,asiswellknown,said
itall(Brutus,Loebtrans.):