Political Character of the Classical Roman Republic stand trial before the tribe, and address the citizens in their own defence
(Pliny,NH,–;Peter,HRR,F.).
Was all this a charade managed from above—the election of over fifty
office-holdersayear,thedeclarationofwarandthevotingontreaties,the
passing of legislation, the trials of office-holders and private citizens? For
over half a century modern books have asserted and reasserted in varying
termsthepropositionthatthecitizenbodywaspowerless,largelybecause
itwasboundbyrelationsofdependence,sometimesallsubsumedunderthe
termclientela.^66 It can even be claimed that we are entitled to apply to an-
cientsocietiesthenowestablishedcommon-language(orsociological)use
oftermslike‘‘clientage’’and‘‘patronage’’withoutregardtothepresence,or
preciseuse,ofequivalenttermsinthesocietyinquestion.^67 Buttosaythat
istosaythatcuriosityabouttheexactnuancesofancientsocialandpoliti-
cal relationships is superfluous. Of course it does matter what words were
used,andwhatformsofrelationshipareactuallyattestedinanyparticular
period. It is of considerable significance that the major re-examination of
clientelabyN.Rouland,publishedin,concludesthattheinstitutionof
clientelawasindeclineinthesecondcentury..^68 Ifthereisclearevidence
forclientelaasadominantfactorinvotingbehaviour,eitherinlegislationor
inelections,itistimeforittobeproduced.Bycontrasttheimportanceof
measuresdirectedtotheacquisitionoffavouramongthepopulationatlarge,
andthesignificanceofthesubstanceofmajorpoliticalissues,andtheirrele-
vance to the interests of the population, are patent in our sources.^69 Once
again,aswiththesupposedfactions,orlateralconnections,whichallegedly
dominatedvotingintheSenate,itwouldhavetobeprovedthatthesesup-
posed vertical relations of obligation and attachment constituted a domi-
nantfactorinthebehaviourofvotersthroughoutabynowverylargecitizen
body. No such demonstration has ever been offered; until it is,we should
. ThesourceofthesepresumptionsisofcourseGelzer(n.),seeesp.pp.–(trans.
Seager,pp.–)andtheconclusion,pp.–(p.).Itisneedlesstocitealongseries
of examples of later adhesion to them. It may suffice to point to the presumptions still
present in thework of J. Bleicken,Staatliche Ordnung und Freiheit in der römischen Republik
(),–;Lex Publica(),–;Die Verfassung der römischen Republik^2 (),and,
inthemostsophisticatedandinterestingmoderntreatmentofRomanpolitics,Chr.Meier,
Res Publica Amissa^2 (),esp.ff.
. SoFinley(n.),–.
. N.Rouland,Pouvoir politique et dépendance personelle(),–.
. Forthispoint,seeBrunt(n.),and,withspecificreferencetothisperiod,Finley
(n.),–.