[Upd-discuss] [sheffield-anti-war-coalition] constitution two
Adam Moran
adam@webarchitects.co.uk
Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:17:28 +0100
25 Apr 2006 02:54:36 -0000 GERALD ALI wrote:
30/. Theoretically each curia should have been composed of
gentes derived by segmentation from one or more gentes, and the tribe by
natural growth through the formation of more than one curia, each
composed of gentes united by the bond of a common dialect. The hundred
gentes of the Ramnes were Latin gentes. In their organization into ten
curiae, each composed of ten gentes. Romulus undoubtedly respected the
bond of kin by placing related gentes in the same curia, as far as
possible, and then reached numerical symmetry by arbitrarily taking the
excess of gentes from one natural curia to supply the deficiency in
another. The hundred gentes of the tribe Tities were, in the main,
Sabine gentes. These were also arranged in ten curiae, and most likely
on the same principle. The third tribe, the Luceres, was formed later
from gradual accessions and conquests. It was heterogeneous in its
elements, containing, among others, a number of Etruscan gentes. They
were brought into the same numerical scale of ten curiae each composed
of ten gentes. Under this re-constitution, while the gens, the unit of
organization, remained pure and unchanged, the curia was raised above
its logical level, and made to include, in some cases, a foreign element
which did not belong to a strict natural phratry; and the tribe also was
raised above its natural level, and made to embrace foreign elements
that did not belong to a tribe as the tribe naturally grew. By this
legislative constraint the tribes, with their curiae and gentes, were
made severally equal, while the third tribe was in good part an
artificial creation under the pressure of circumstances. The linguistic
affiliations of the Etruscans are still a matter of discussion. There is
a presumption that their dialect was not wholly unintelligible to the
Latin tribes, otherwise they would not have been admitted into the Roman
social system; which at the time was purely gentile. The numerical
proportions thus secured, facilitated the governmental action of the
society as a whole.
31/. Niebuhr, who was the first to gain a true conception of
the institutions of the Romans in this period, who recognized the fact
that the people were sovereign that the so-called kings exercised a
delegated power, and that the senate was based on the principle of
representation, each gens having a senator; became at variance with the
facts before him in stating in connection with this graduated scale,
that 'such numerical proportions are an irrefragable proof that the
Roman houses [gentes][5] were not more ancient than the constitution;
but corporations formed by a legislator in harmony with the rest of his
scheme.'[6]
32/. Our knowledge of the previous constitution of Latin
society is mainly derived from the legislation ascribed to Romulus,
since it brings into view the anterior organization of the Latin tribes,
with such improvements and modifications as the wisdom of the age was
able to suggest; It is seen in the senate as a, council of chiefs, in
the, comitia curiata, as an assembly of the people by curiae, in the
office of a general military commander, and in the ascending series of
organizations. It is seen more especially in the presence of the gentes,
with their recognized rights, privileges and obligations. Moreover, the
government instituted by Romulus and perfected by his immediate
successors presents gentile society in the highest structural form it
ever attained in any portion of the human family. The time referred to
was immediately before the institution of political society by Servius
Tullius.
33/. But when the Grecian and Latin tribes first, came under
historical notice the assembly of the people to discuss and adopt or
reject public measures was a phenomenon quite as constant as that of a
council of chiefs. It was more perfectly systematized among the Romans
under the constitution of Romulus than among the Athenians in the time
of Solon. In the rise and progress of this institution may be traced the
growth and development of the democratic principle.
34/. Mr. Leonhard Schmitz, one of the ablest defenders of the
theory of kingly government among the Greeks and Romans, with great
candour remarks: "It is very difficult to determine the extent of the
king's powers, as the ancient writers naturally judged of the kingly
period by their own republican constitution; and frequently assigned to
the king, the 'senate, and the 'comitia of the 'curiae' the respective
powers and functions which were only true in reference to the consuls,
the senate and the 'comitia' of their own time." -.
35/. The creation of a new assembly of the people to take
the place of the old, discloses the radical character of the Servian
constitution. These classes would never have acquired vitality without a
newly constituted assembly, investing them with political powers. With
the increase of wealth and population, the duties and responsibilities
of this assembly were much increased. It was evidently the intention of
Servius Tullius that it should extinguish the comitia curiata, and with
it the power of the gentes
36/. As finally established under the Servian constitution,
the government was cast in the form in which it remained during the
existence of the republic; the consuls taking the place of the previous
military commanders. It was not based upon territory in the exclusive
sense of the Athenian government, or in the modern sense; ascending from
the township or ward, the unit of organization, to the county or
arrondissement, and from the latter to the state, each organized and
invested with governmental functions as constituents of a whole. The
central government overshadowed and atrophied the parts. It rested more
upon property than upon territory, this being made the commanding
element, as is shown by the lodgement of the controlling power of the
government in the highest property classes. It had, nevertheless, a
territorial basis as well, since it recognized and used territorial
subdivisions for citizenship, and for financial and military objects, in
which the citizen was dealt with through his territorial relations.
37/. It is plain, I think, that the people were circumvented
by the Servian constitution and had a government put upon them which the
majority would have rejected had they fully comprehended its probable
results. The evidence is conclusive of the antecedent democratical
principles of the gentes, which, however exclusive as against all
persons not in their communion, were carried out fully among themselves.
The evidence of this free spirit and of their free institutions is so
decisive that the proposition elsewhere stated, that gentilism is
incompatible with monarchy, seems to be incontrovertible.
38/. As a plan of government, the gentile organization was
unequal to the wants of civilized man; but it is something to, be said
in its remembrance that it developed from the germ the principal,
government institutions of modern civilized states. Among others, as
before stated, out of the ancient council of chiefs came the modern
senate; out of the ancient assembly of the people came the modern
representative assembly, the two together constituting the modern
legislature; out of the ancient general military commander cam the
modern chief magistrate, whether a feudal or constitutional king, an
emperor or a president, the latter being the natural and logical
results; and out of the ancient custos urbis, by a circuitous
derivation, came the Roman praetor and the modern judge. Equal rights
and privileges, personal freedom and the cardinal principles of
democracy were also inherited from the gentes. When property had become
created in masses, and its influence and power began to be felt in
society, slavery came in; an institution violative of all these
principles, but sustained by the selfish and delusive consideration that
the person made a slave was a stranger in blood and a captive enemy.
With property also came in gradually the principle of aristocracy,
striving for the creation of privileged classes. The element of
property, which has controlled society to a great event during the
comparatively short period of civilization, has given mankind despotism,
imperialism, monarchy, privileged classes, and finally representative
democracy. It has also made the career of the civilized nations
essentially a property-making career. But when the intelligence of
mankind rises to the height of the great question of the abstract rights
of property, - including the relations of property to the state, as well
as the rights of persons to property, - a modification of the present
order of things may be expected. The nature of the coming changes it may
be impossible to conceive; but it seems probable that democracy, once
universal in a rudimentary form and repressed in many civilized states,
is destined to become again universal and supreme.
39/. Descent in the female line presupposes the gens to
distinguish the lineage. With our present knowledge of the ancient and
modern prevalence of the gentile organization upon five continents,
including the Australian, and of the archaic constitution of the gens,
traces of descent in the female line might be expected to exist in
traditions, if not in usages coming down to historical times. It is not
supposable, therefore, that the Lycians, the Cretans, the Athenians and
the Locrians, if the evidence is sufficient to include the last two,
invented a usage as remarkable as descent in the female line.
40/. From the theory of its constitution, intermarriage would
be disallowed. With the change of descent to the male line, with the
rise of monogamy and an exclusive inheritance in the children, and with
the appearance of heiresses, the way was being gradually prepared for
free marriage regardless of gens, but with a prohibition limited to
certain degrees of near consanguinity. Marriages in the human family
began in the group, all the males and females of which, excluding the
children,, were joint husbands and wives; but the husbands and wives
were of different gentes; and it, ended in marriages between single
pairs, with an exclusive cohabitation.
41/. It will be noticed, further, that these systems are
natural growths with the progress of society from a lower into a higher
condition, the change in each case being marked by the appearance of
some institution affecting deeply the constitution of society. The
relationship of mother and child, of brother and sister; and of
grandfather and grandchild has been ascertainable in all ages with
entire certainty but, those of father and child, and of grandfather and
grandchild were not ascertainable with certainty until monogamy
controlled the highest assurance attainable.
42/. Whether the punaluan group of the Hawaiian type can
claim an equal antiquity with the Australian classes is questionable,
since the latter is more archaic than any other known constitution of
society. But the existence of a punaluan group of one or the other type
was essential to the birth of the gentes, as the latter were essential
to the production of the Turanian system of consanguinity. The three
institutions will be considered separately.
43/. Among the Hebrews, whist the patriarchal family in the
early period was common with the chiefs, the monogamian, into which the
patriarchal soon subsided, was common among the people. But with respect
to the constitution of the latter, and the relations of husband and wife
in the family, the details are scanty. Without seeking to multiply
illustrations, it is plain that the monogamian family had grown into the
farm in which it appeared, at the commencement of the historical period,
from a lower type; and that, during the classical period if, advanced
sensibly, though without attaining its highest form.
44/. It did not, however, become strong enough to change
essentially the democratic constitution of the early governments of
these tribes, although it attained a permanent existence Property and
office were the foundations upon which aristocracy planted itself.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
sheffield-anti-war-coalition-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.uk
If you find that you are receiving a lot of emails from this list, you
can use a filter to automatically organise them into a separate mail box
as they are received, there are instructions on how to do this at:
http://www.groupsense.co.nz/effective.html
---------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/sheffield-anti-war-coalition/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
sheffield-anti-war-coalition-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.uk
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms.html