Freedmen and slaves in the light of legal documents from first-century A.D. campania

Classical Quarterly

Volumn 52, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 555-565

  Lintott, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 56249111144     PISSN: 00098388     EISSN: 14716844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/cq/52.2.555     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. 2, 400-22;
2. J. Andreau, Les Affaires de Monsieur Iucundus, CEFR 19 (Rome, 1974).
3. Bruns (n. 1), 332-4; FIRA III.291-5.
4. V. Arango-Ruiz, 'Tabulae Herculanenses', PP 1 (1946), 379-85; 3 (1948), 165-84; 9 (1954), 54-74; 10 (1955), 448-77; 16 (1961) 66-73.
5. See also id., 'Nuove osservazioni sul processo di Giusta', PP 6 (1951) 116-23;
6. 'Testi e Documenti IV, Tavolette Ercolanensi (Il processo di Giusta)', BIDR 62 (1959), 223-45.
7. A number of the tablets not discussed in this piece have been re-edited by G. Camodeca, CErc 23 (1993), 109-19;
8. Ostraka 2 (1993), 197-209;
9. CErc 24 (1994), 137-46;
10. CCG 7 (1996), 167-78;
11. Atti XI Congr. ep. gr. lat. Roma 1997 (2 vols, Rome, 1999), 521-44;
12. Quaestiones Inris: Festschr. J. G Wolf, ed. U. Manthe and C. Krampe, Freib. Rechtsg. Abh. N.F. 36 (Berlin, 2000), 53-76.
13. J. G. Wolf, 'Aus dem neuen pompejanischen Urkundenfund: Der Seefrachtvertrag des Menelaos', Freiburger Unirersitätsblätter 65 (1979), 23-36, concerning TPSulp 78;
14. J. G. Wolf and J.A. Crook, Rechtsurkunden in Vulgärlatein aus den Jahren 37-9 n,.Chr., Abh. Heid. Ak. Wiss. Phil.-hist. Kl. (1989).
15. A convenient summary of early publications and bibliography can be found in L. Bove, Documenti processuali dalle Tabulae Pompeianae di Murecine (Naples, 1979)
16. but reference should now be made through the edition and numeration of G. Camodeca, Tabulae Pompeianae Sulpiciorum (TPSulp), Vetera, 12 (Rome, 1999),
17. see also id., L'Archivio Puteolano dei Sulpicii 1 (Naples, 1992).
18. For an important review of Camodeca's work, see G. Rowe, 'Trimalchio's world', SCI 20 (2001) 225-45, including an index to the Herculaneum tablets and a useful bibliography.
19. TPSulp 72, 74;
20. Camodeca (n. 5, 1999) 1.24;
21. TPSulp 48; Rowe (n. 5), 229, 233-4.
22. For the debate over the exact nature of the business of the Sulpicii, see Camodeca (n. 5, 1999) 1.24-5-believing the Sulpicii to be argentarii and not involved in productive investment; contra J. Andreau, 'Affaires financières à Pouzzoles', REL 72 (1994), 39-55 at 50ff.;
23. id., Banking and Business in the Roman World (Cambridge, 1999), 72-9;
24. Rowe (n. 5), 229-31 - holding them to be faeneratores making at least some commercial loans.
25. TPSulp 46, tab. ii, p. 4.
26. For Secundus and Privatus, see FIRA III, 418-20;
27. Bruns, 359-60. Niceros, the public slave of Puteoli (TPSulp 56), is also found probably acting in a private capacity.
28. Andreau (n. 8, 1994) 46-7; (1999) 74-5;
29. M. W. Frederiksen, Campania (London, 1984), 327-8.
30. On the function and legal status of institores, see especially J. J. Aubert, Business Managers in Ancient Rome: A Social and Economic Study of Institores 200 B.C.-A.D. 250 (Leiden, 1994), 1-111;
31. A. Kirschenbaum, Sons, Slaves and Freedmen in Roman Commerce (Jerusalem, 1987), 89-121.
32. Aubert (n. 11) 52-7, 76;
33. Kirschenbaum (n. 11), 95-6.
34. TPSulp 90-2;
35. Bruns (n. 1), 332-5;
36. FIRA III, 291-5.
37. ILS 3785 (CIL X 310, 311).
38. For a description of the building, see F. Coarelli, E. la Rocca, and A. de Vos, Guida Archeologica di Pompeii (Verona, 1976), 114-18.
39. Gai. Inst. 1.185;
40. Ulp. Tit. 11.27;
41. cf. Arangio-Ruiz (n. 3, 1951), 122. This section of TH is to be found in Arango-Ruiz (n. 3, 1948).
42. Arangio-Ruiz (n. 3, 1948), 128.
43. Arangio-Ruiz (n. 3, 1959), 236-7 for the restoration, nom[encla]tore.
44. Arangio-Ruiz (n. 3, 1951), 126.
45. Cic. Cael. 55,
46. FIRA III, no. 188, pp. 591-2;
47. cf. Cic. Flac. 21 for the sealing of evidence with the seals of the jurors under the lex Iulia de repetundis.
48. Cic. QRosc 43.
49. Arangio-Ruiz (n. 3, 1959), 236-7.
50. ' Unde solent spurii filii appellari, vel a graeca voce quasi sporade concepti (highly unlikely), vel quasi sine patre filii' (Gai. Inst. 1.64).
51. Dig. 3.1.3;
52. Ed. perp. pr. urb. 6.1.
53. Dig. 2.4.4.1;
54. Ed perp. 5.2;
55. Gai. Inst. 4.46.
56. Dig. 2.4.10.2, 4, 12; 2.4.16;
57. Gai. Inst. 4.183.
58. Gai. Inst. 1.78, 88-9.
59. Arangio-Ruiz, PP (1948), 151.
60. Pliny, Ep. 10.66
61. (on which see A. Lintott, Imperium Romanum [London, 1993], 151, 222-3);
62. Arangio-Ruiz, BIDR (1959), 226ff.;
63. A. J. Boyé, 'Pro Petronia Iusta', Mélanges Lévy-Bruhl (Paris, 1959), 29-48 at 29ff.
64. Arangio-Ruiz (n. 35).
65. TH 30;
66. J. A. Crook, Law and Life of Rome (London, 1967), 48.
67. AE 1978, 119(a), col. II;
68. for fragments discovered earlier, see CIL X 1403a-l, and on the album G. Guadagno, CErc 7 (1977), 114-23;
69. S. E. Ostrow, 'Augustales along the Bay of Naples', Historia 34 (1985), 64-101 at 76-8.
70. Calatorius is a common nomen at Herculaneum. In the album there are two ingenui including M. Calatorius Acratus (AE [1918], 119[b], col. I), four liberti, and one of uncertain status.
71. Arangio-Ruiz (n. 34), 131.
72. Gai. Inst. 1.28ff.;
73. J. F. Gardner, Women in Roman Law and Society (London, 1986), 138ff., 223ff.;
74. 2), 893-7.
75. Arangio-Ruiz (n. 34);
76. P. R. C. Weaver, 'Children of freedmen (and freedwomen)', in B. Rawson (ed.), Marriage, Divorce and Children in Ancient Rome (Oxford, 1991), 165-90 at 166ff. I cannot agree that Themis' husband was dead (Weaver, 168), since he appears as a witness in tablets TH 29 and 30: presumably Themis had a tutor for the lawsuit, because she had not been married cum manu and so was not in the power of her husband.
77. A. Maiuri, Ercolano. I nuovi scavi 1 (Rome, 1958), 222ff.
78. A. Wallace-Hadrill, Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum (Princeton, 1994), 122ff.,esp. 124-6.