Condemnation to Hard Labour 125vationofthemorecruelandhumiliatingpenaltiesforlower-classconvicts,
which was alreadyan established principle at least by Hadrian’s reign.^6 To
placehardlabourpenaltiesintheircorrectcontext,itisonlynecessarythere-
foretorecallthemainfeaturesofthenexusofpresumptionswhichassociated
lowersocialclasswithliabilitytobeatings,tocruelformsofexecution,and
tohardlabourinvariousforms.
Asiswellknown,thesocialdividinglinewhichdeterminedliabilityto,or
exemptionfrom,thesepunishmentslayjustbelowthestatusofdecurio(town
councillor)orveteran.Howevervariableandtangentialthenumerousallu-
sionstothisprinciplefromthesecondcenturyandonwardsmaybe,wecan
beconfidentthatageneralprincipleofthischaracterwasgenerallyaccepted.
Thepresumptionoftheincompatibilitybetweendecurialstatus,implying
qualificationforlocaloffices,andexposuretofloggingisneatlyillustrated
inCallistratus’discussionofwhetheritwasacceptablefortraders,liableto
flogging by the local magistrates, to attain the decurionate or cityhonores
(magistracies);itwasinfactallowable,hesays,butinhonestum(degrading),
andonlyacceptableifmadeabsolutelynecessarybyalackofhonestiuiri(men
ofstanding)withadequatewealth(Dig.50,2,12).Exemptioncoulditselfbe
describedasanhonor:accordingtoArriusMenanderveteransandtheirsons
havethesamehonorasdecuriones,namelyexemptionfromcondemnationto
metallum,toopuspublicum(seebelow),tothebeasts,ortobeingbeatenwith
rods(fustes)(Dig.49,18,3).Thesonsofdecurionesweresimilarlyprotected,
andUlpianconcludesthatthisexemptionfrombeatingandcondemnation
tometallumappliedeventoasonborntoafatherwhohadthenbeenaplebeius
(apersonofbelowtowncouncillorrank),butwhosubsequentlygainedthe
honor decurionis(statusofadecurion).Anequallycomplexcaselawappliedif
afatherlosthisdecurialrankbybeingremovedfromtheordo(membership
ofthetowncouncil)orrelegated(Dig.50,2,2).Giventhecloseconnection
between social rank and immunity from degrading and painful intrusions
onthebody,thequestionnaturallyaroseastowhetherifabeatinghadbeen
administered,evenimproperly,rankwaslostwithit.So,forinstance,Gor-
dian III replied in 238 to a man named Iovinus: ‘‘Your uncle need fear no
disgracetohisstanding[existimationis infamiam]onthegroundsofhishaving
beenbeatenwithrods,ifthishadnotbeenprecededbyasentenceimposing
thestainofignominia[disgrace]’’(App. Leg. Rom.Wis.1,1).
- E.g.,Th. Mommsen,Römisches Strafrecht(1899), 897–98; U. Brasiello,La repressione
penale in diritto romano(1937), 189–90; P. D. A. Garnsey,Social Status and Legal Privilege in
the Roman Empire(1970);Garnsey,‘‘WhyPenalLawsBecomeHarsher:TheRomanCase,’’
Natural Law Forum13(1968):141.NotealsoP.A.Brunt,‘‘EvidenceGivenunderTorturein
thePrincipate,’’ZSS117(1980):256.