[{"id":"LR-burrienus-existence","instrument":"burrienus","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Quinctio 30 expressly names the edict of P. Burrienus inside the condition of the sponsio; §60 reports the edictal ground concerning an absent person not defended as required. These attest a rule invoked in a real dispute, through the defendant’s advocate.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30","Pro P. Quinctio §60"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-255-258","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 255-258","locator":"Printed pp. 255-258","pdfPages":[275,278],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge reconstructs the sequence from an advocate’s incomplete narrative. It does not license treating Naevius’ claim to possess as a proved lawful execution. Compare the separate Dolabella record for the individual order."},{"id":"LR-burrienus-dating","instrument":"burrienus","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The secure bound is application before the hearing of 81 BCE. The narrated possession and later order are successive events, not dates of first promulgation. Neither passage supplies a consular year for creation of this clause.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30","Pro P. Quinctio §60"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-255-258","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 255-258","locator":"Printed pp. 255-258","pdfPages":[275,278],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge reconstructs the sequence from an advocate’s incomplete narrative. It does not license treating Naevius’ claim to possess as a proved lawful execution. Compare the separate Dolabella record for the individual order."},{"id":"LR-burrienus-operation","instrument":"burrienus","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"Naevius seeks security on the footing that goods have been possessed under the edict for thirty days. Cicero contests whether possession satisfied the edict at all. Default, adequate representation, possession and eventual sale must therefore be examined separately; the underlying partnership debt is not itself decided by this preliminary question.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30","Pro P. Quinctio §60"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-255-258","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 255-258","locator":"Printed pp. 255-258","pdfPages":[275,278],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge reconstructs the sequence from an advocate’s incomplete narrative. It does not license treating Naevius’ claim to possess as a proved lawful execution. Compare the separate Dolabella record for the individual order."},{"id":"LR-burrienus-transmission","instrument":"burrienus","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"No independent edict tablet is identified in this dossier. The operative condition survives inside Cicero’s account of Dolabella’s procedural order; §60 supplies another part of the edictal framework.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30","Pro P. Quinctio §60"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-255-258","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 255-258","locator":"Printed pp. 255-258","pdfPages":[275,278],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge reconstructs the sequence from an advocate’s incomplete narrative. It does not license treating Naevius’ claim to possess as a proved lawful execution. Compare the separate Dolabella record for the individual order."},{"id":"LR-burrienus-debate","instrument":"burrienus","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Greenidge reconstructs the sequence from an advocate’s incomplete narrative. It does not license treating Naevius’ claim to possess as a proved lawful execution. Compare the separate Dolabella record for the individual order.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30","Pro P. Quinctio §60"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-255-258","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 255-258","locator":"Printed pp. 255-258","pdfPages":[275,278],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge reconstructs the sequence from an advocate’s incomplete narrative. It does not license treating Naevius’ claim to possess as a proved lawful execution. Compare the separate Dolabella record for the individual order."},{"id":"LR-lucullus-existence","instrument":"lucullus","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Tullio 7–12 names M. Lucullus and explains his response to violent acts by armed or assembled slave households. The speech reports the formula’s terms and the reason for a more severe remedy than ordinary wrongful-damage litigation.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §7","Pro M. Tullio §12","Pro M. Tullio §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-206-210","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 206-210","locator":"Printed pp. 206-210","pdfPages":[226,230],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-551-556","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 551-556","locator":"Printed pp. 551-556","pdfPages":[571,576],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The relation to the Aquilian action and later robbery remedies requires historical reconstruction. A shared concern with violence is not identity of action, formula or penalty."},{"id":"LR-lucullus-dating","instrument":"lucullus","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"76 BCE is the conventional date of Lucullus’ praetorship and introduction of the remedy; the later Tullius hearing, conventionally 72 or 71, proves subsequent application. The speech’s retrospective narrative does not give an exact day of issue.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §7","Pro M. Tullio §12","Pro M. Tullio §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-206-210","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 206-210","locator":"Printed pp. 206-210","pdfPages":[226,230],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-551-556","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 551-556","locator":"Printed pp. 551-556","pdfPages":[571,576],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The relation to the Aquilian action and later robbery remedies requires historical reconstruction. A shared concern with violence is not identity of action, formula or penalty."},{"id":"LR-lucullus-operation","instrument":"lucullus","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The action makes damage inflicted with malicious intent by an armed or assembled household the decisive question and seeks a fourfold assessment. Cicero uses the special wording to narrow permissible defences. This is a private penal remedy; it is not the later public prosecution under the Plautian or Pompeian violence laws.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §7","Pro M. Tullio §12","Pro M. Tullio §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-206-210","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 206-210","locator":"Printed pp. 206-210","pdfPages":[226,230],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-551-556","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 551-556","locator":"Printed pp. 551-556","pdfPages":[571,576],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The relation to the Aquilian action and later robbery remedies requires historical reconstruction. A shared concern with violence is not identity of action, formula or penalty."},{"id":"LR-lucullus-transmission","instrument":"lucullus","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The edict is reconstructed from forensic quotations and commentary, not a surviving posted original. Preserve the wording quoted in the speech instead of presenting an expanded modern edict reconstruction as authentic text.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §7","Pro M. Tullio §12","Pro M. Tullio §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-206-210","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 206-210","locator":"Printed pp. 206-210","pdfPages":[226,230],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-551-556","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 551-556","locator":"Printed pp. 551-556","pdfPages":[571,576],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The relation to the Aquilian action and later robbery remedies requires historical reconstruction. A shared concern with violence is not identity of action, formula or penalty."},{"id":"LR-lucullus-debate","instrument":"lucullus","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The relation to the Aquilian action and later robbery remedies requires historical reconstruction. A shared concern with violence is not identity of action, formula or penalty.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §7","Pro M. Tullio §12","Pro M. Tullio §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-206-210","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 206-210","locator":"Printed pp. 206-210","pdfPages":[226,230],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-551-556","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 551-556","locator":"Printed pp. 551-556","pdfPages":[571,576],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The relation to the Aquilian action and later robbery remedies requires historical reconstruction. A shared concern with violence is not identity of action, formula or penalty."},{"id":"LR-armed-interdict-existence","instrument":"armed-interdict","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Caecina 23 reports the command associated with armed expulsion; §§31–35 make its wording the object of argument. This is direct evidence for the interdict used in the dispute, mediated by Cicero’s defence.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §23"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-210-227","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 210-227","locator":"Printed pp. 210-227","pdfPages":[230,247],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-556-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 556-568","locator":"Printed pp. 556-568","pdfPages":[576,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The breadth of the remedy, the role of previous possession and the procedural reconstruction are contested. Cicero’s purposive argument is a litigant’s interpretation, not a neutral judicial holding."},{"id":"LR-armed-interdict-dating","instrument":"armed-interdict","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The remedy existed before the Caecina hearing, usually placed around 69 BCE. That hearing cannot establish the first creation of the general interdict; the particular order was issued earlier in this dispute.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §23"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-210-227","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 210-227","locator":"Printed pp. 210-227","pdfPages":[230,247],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-556-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 556-568","locator":"Printed pp. 556-568","pdfPages":[576,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The breadth of the remedy, the role of previous possession and the procedural reconstruction are contested. Cicero’s purposive argument is a litigant’s interpretation, not a neutral judicial holding."},{"id":"LR-armed-interdict-operation","instrument":"armed-interdict","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The central dispute concerns whether preventing entry by armed force counts as the expulsion contemplated by the command. Cicero argues that a narrowly literal reading would reward intimidation. Restoration of possession and the wager enforcing the order must be distinguished from an adjudication of ownership.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §23"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-210-227","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 210-227","locator":"Printed pp. 210-227","pdfPages":[230,247],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-556-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 556-568","locator":"Printed pp. 556-568","pdfPages":[576,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The breadth of the remedy, the role of previous possession and the procedural reconstruction are contested. Cicero’s purposive argument is a litigant’s interpretation, not a neutral judicial holding."},{"id":"LR-armed-interdict-transmission","instrument":"armed-interdict","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The dossier preserves a Ciceronian witness to an interdict, not an independently surviving praetorian album. The later juristic taxonomy is useful comparison but cannot silently replace the Republican wording.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §23"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-210-227","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 210-227","locator":"Printed pp. 210-227","pdfPages":[230,247],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-556-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 556-568","locator":"Printed pp. 556-568","pdfPages":[576,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The breadth of the remedy, the role of previous possession and the procedural reconstruction are contested. Cicero’s purposive argument is a litigant’s interpretation, not a neutral judicial holding."},{"id":"LR-armed-interdict-debate","instrument":"armed-interdict","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The breadth of the remedy, the role of previous possession and the procedural reconstruction are contested. Cicero’s purposive argument is a litigant’s interpretation, not a neutral judicial holding.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §23"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-210-227","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 210-227","locator":"Printed pp. 210-227","pdfPages":[230,247],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-556-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 556-568","locator":"Printed pp. 556-568","pdfPages":[576,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The breadth of the remedy, the role of previous possession and the procedural reconstruction are contested. Cicero’s purposive argument is a litigant’s interpretation, not a neutral judicial holding."},{"id":"LR-aquilia-existence","instrument":"aquilia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Tullio 9 explicitly names the Aquilian law. Ulpian, Digest 9.2.1.1, expressly identifies it as a plebiscite proposed by the tribune Aquilius. Gaius 3.210 and 3.215–218 distinguishes its chapters.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §9","Pro Q. Roscio Comoedo §32","Ulpian, Ad edictum 18, preserved in Digest 9.2.1.1"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-241-242","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 241-242","locator":"Printed pp. 241-242","pdfPages":[256,257],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723-725","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723-725","locator":"Printed pp. 723-725","pdfPages":[176,178],"url":null},{"id":"G-543-544","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 543-544","locator":"Printed pp. 543-544","pdfPages":[563,564],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"In Roscio Comoedo, the Panurgus transaction is reconstructed as Aquilian litigation; this is different from Cicero expressly naming the law there. The edict in Tullio offers a distinct penal action."},{"id":"LR-aquilia-dating","instrument":"aquilia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"Do not turn the often repeated 287/286 BCE date into a certainty. Rotondi records competing chronologies and the problematic dependence on Theophilus; Crawford argues for an early third-century setting but separates this inference from the surviving juristic testimony.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §9","Pro Q. Roscio Comoedo §32","Ulpian, Ad edictum 18, preserved in Digest 9.2.1.1"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-241-242","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 241-242","locator":"Printed pp. 241-242","pdfPages":[256,257],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723-725","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723-725","locator":"Printed pp. 723-725","pdfPages":[176,178],"url":null},{"id":"G-543-544","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 543-544","locator":"Printed pp. 543-544","pdfPages":[563,564],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"In Roscio Comoedo, the Panurgus transaction is reconstructed as Aquilian litigation; this is different from Cicero expressly naming the law there. The edict in Tullio offers a distinct penal action."},{"id":"LR-aquilia-operation","instrument":"aquilia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"Chapter one concerns killing another’s slave or herd animal and a valuation over the previous year; chapter three concerns other damaging acts and a thirty-day valuation. Chapter two concerns fraudulent release by an adstipulator. Juristic interpretation and extensions of liability are part of its history, not automatically its original enactment.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §9","Pro Q. Roscio Comoedo §32","Ulpian, Ad edictum 18, preserved in Digest 9.2.1.1"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-241-242","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 241-242","locator":"Printed pp. 241-242","pdfPages":[256,257],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723-725","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723-725","locator":"Printed pp. 723-725","pdfPages":[176,178],"url":null},{"id":"G-543-544","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 543-544","locator":"Printed pp. 543-544","pdfPages":[563,564],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"In Roscio Comoedo, the Panurgus transaction is reconstructed as Aquilian litigation; this is different from Cicero expressly naming the law there. The edict in Tullio offers a distinct penal action."},{"id":"LR-aquilia-transmission","instrument":"aquilia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"No original inscribed text is used here. Digest 9.2 quotes and interprets clauses centuries later. Crawford’s reconstructed text, including disputed wording and tense, is explicitly conjectural; it must not be displayed as a verbatim ancient tablet.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §9","Pro Q. Roscio Comoedo §32","Ulpian, Ad edictum 18, preserved in Digest 9.2.1.1"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-241-242","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 241-242","locator":"Printed pp. 241-242","pdfPages":[256,257],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723-725","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723-725","locator":"Printed pp. 723-725","pdfPages":[176,178],"url":null},{"id":"G-543-544","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 543-544","locator":"Printed pp. 543-544","pdfPages":[563,564],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"In Roscio Comoedo, the Panurgus transaction is reconstructed as Aquilian litigation; this is different from Cicero expressly naming the law there. The edict in Tullio offers a distinct penal action."},{"id":"LR-aquilia-debate","instrument":"aquilia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"In Roscio Comoedo, the Panurgus transaction is reconstructed as Aquilian litigation; this is different from Cicero expressly naming the law there. The edict in Tullio offers a distinct penal action.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Tullio §9","Pro Q. Roscio Comoedo §32","Ulpian, Ad edictum 18, preserved in Digest 9.2.1.1"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-241-242","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 241-242","locator":"Printed pp. 241-242","pdfPages":[256,257],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723-725","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723-725","locator":"Printed pp. 723-725","pdfPages":[176,178],"url":null},{"id":"G-543-544","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 543-544","locator":"Printed pp. 543-544","pdfPages":[563,564],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"In Roscio Comoedo, the Panurgus transaction is reconstructed as Aquilian litigation; this is different from Cicero expressly naming the law there. The edict in Tullio offers a distinct penal action."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-sicariis-existence","instrument":"cornelia-sicariis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Cluentio 148–154 quotes and analyses portions of the Cornelian criminal statute. These are exceptionally important contemporary witnesses because the defence turns on which persons and conduct the clauses reach.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Cluentio §148","Pro A. Cluentio §154"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-357-358","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 357-358","locator":"Printed pp. 357-358","pdfPages":[372,373],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign the later Pompeian parricide statute to Roscius’ trial. Nor does an advocate’s exclusionary reading establish that the court accepted every part of it."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-sicariis-dating","instrument":"cornelia-sicariis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"81 BCE is the conventional date within Sulla’s criminal-law settlement. The Cluentius speech of 66 attests later use, not enactment. Roscius’ trial in 80 belongs to the reconstructed early Sullan court framework.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Cluentio §148","Pro A. Cluentio §154"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-357-358","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 357-358","locator":"Printed pp. 357-358","pdfPages":[372,373],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign the later Pompeian parricide statute to Roscius’ trial. Nor does an advocate’s exclusionary reading establish that the court accepted every part of it."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-sicariis-operation","instrument":"cornelia-sicariis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"Separate poisoning liability from the clause about procuring an unjust capital condemnation. Cicero’s argument about senatorial status addresses the scope of a particular clause, not a general immunity of equestrians from murder law. Later Digest 48.8 and Collatio testimony describes a much developed body of law.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Cluentio §148","Pro A. Cluentio §154"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-357-358","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 357-358","locator":"Printed pp. 357-358","pdfPages":[372,373],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign the later Pompeian parricide statute to Roscius’ trial. Nor does an advocate’s exclusionary reading establish that the court accepted every part of it."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-sicariis-transmission","instrument":"cornelia-sicariis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Contemporary forensic quotation is supplemented by imperial jurists; no complete Republican statute survives in this dossier. Later rules on punishment and newly assimilated offences must be dated to their own witnesses.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Cluentio §148","Pro A. Cluentio §154"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-357-358","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 357-358","locator":"Printed pp. 357-358","pdfPages":[372,373],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign the later Pompeian parricide statute to Roscius’ trial. Nor does an advocate’s exclusionary reading establish that the court accepted every part of it."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-sicariis-debate","instrument":"cornelia-sicariis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not assign the later Pompeian parricide statute to Roscius’ trial. Nor does an advocate’s exclusionary reading establish that the court accepted every part of it.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Cluentio §148","Pro A. Cluentio §154"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-357-358","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 357-358","locator":"Printed pp. 357-358","pdfPages":[372,373],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign the later Pompeian parricide statute to Roscius’ trial. Nor does an advocate’s exclusionary reading establish that the court accepted every part of it."},{"id":"LR-proscription-law-existence","instrument":"proscription-law","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Roscio Amerino 125 names alternatives, “Valerian or Cornelian,” and expressly says the speaker does not know which. The following argument addresses the categories whose property could be sold; §128 invokes a June deadline.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino §125"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-348-349","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 348-349","locator":"Printed pp. 348-349","pdfPages":[363,364],"url":null},{"id":"G-80-81","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 80-81","locator":"Printed pp. 80-81","pdfPages":[100,101],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi distinguishes the Valerian authorization of the dictatorship from Cornelian proscription arrangements and discusses whether the latter derived force from the former. This is an interpretive model, not a recovered complete statute."},{"id":"LR-proscription-law-dating","instrument":"proscription-law","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The relevant setting is the Sullan settlement of 82–81 BCE. The June limit reported in the speech belongs to the operation of the proscription arrangements, not necessarily the date of their enactment.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino §125"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-348-349","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 348-349","locator":"Printed pp. 348-349","pdfPages":[363,364],"url":null},{"id":"G-80-81","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 80-81","locator":"Printed pp. 80-81","pdfPages":[100,101],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi distinguishes the Valerian authorization of the dictatorship from Cornelian proscription arrangements and discusses whether the latter derived force from the former. This is an interpretive model, not a recovered complete statute."},{"id":"LR-proscription-law-operation","instrument":"proscription-law","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"Cicero contests whether the elder Roscius falls within the authorized category of confiscation and whether the sale was timely. These are objections to title and administrative action used within a murder defence; the speech does not become an independent action to annul the whole Sullan settlement.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino §125"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-348-349","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 348-349","locator":"Printed pp. 348-349","pdfPages":[363,364],"url":null},{"id":"G-80-81","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 80-81","locator":"Printed pp. 80-81","pdfPages":[100,101],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi distinguishes the Valerian authorization of the dictatorship from Cornelian proscription arrangements and discusses whether the latter derived force from the former. This is an interpretive model, not a recovered complete statute."},{"id":"LR-proscription-law-transmission","instrument":"proscription-law","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The strongest witness includes uncertainty in its own wording. Appian and Plutarch provide historical accounts of the dictatorship and proscriptions, but cannot erase the uncertainty in Cicero’s statutory identification.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino §125"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-348-349","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 348-349","locator":"Printed pp. 348-349","pdfPages":[363,364],"url":null},{"id":"G-80-81","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 80-81","locator":"Printed pp. 80-81","pdfPages":[100,101],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi distinguishes the Valerian authorization of the dictatorship from Cornelian proscription arrangements and discusses whether the latter derived force from the former. This is an interpretive model, not a recovered complete statute."},{"id":"LR-proscription-law-debate","instrument":"proscription-law","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Rotondi distinguishes the Valerian authorization of the dictatorship from Cornelian proscription arrangements and discusses whether the latter derived force from the former. This is an interpretive model, not a recovered complete statute.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino §125"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-348-349","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 348-349","locator":"Printed pp. 348-349","pdfPages":[363,364],"url":null},{"id":"G-80-81","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 80-81","locator":"Printed pp. 80-81","pdfPages":[100,101],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi distinguishes the Valerian authorization of the dictatorship from Cornelian proscription arrangements and discusses whether the latter derived force from the former. This is an interpretive model, not a recovered complete statute."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-repetundis-existence","instrument":"cornelia-repetundis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Rabirio Postumo 9 explicitly says that the recipient-recovery clause passed from the Servilian into the Cornelian and then the Julian law. The statute’s existence is thus stronger evidence than any reconstruction of its complete contents.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Avoid importing the whole of Julian or imperial repetundae law into the Sullan statute. Explicit continuity of one chapter is narrower than continuity of an entire code."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-repetundis-dating","instrument":"cornelia-repetundis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The conventional Sullan date is 81 BCE, but Rotondi marks that dating with a question. Its place between Servilian and Julian legislation is independently supported by Cicero’s sequence; a full enactment date is not.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Avoid importing the whole of Julian or imperial repetundae law into the Sullan statute. Explicit continuity of one chapter is narrower than continuity of an entire code."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-repetundis-operation","instrument":"cornelia-repetundis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The relevant provision reaches money that passed to someone other than the convicted official. Greenidge places Verres’ and Fonteius’ trials within the Cornelian regime. Their institutional setting and the preserved recipient clause are different kinds of evidence.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Avoid importing the whole of Julian or imperial repetundae law into the Sullan statute. Explicit continuity of one chapter is narrower than continuity of an entire code."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-repetundis-transmission","instrument":"cornelia-repetundis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Only fragments and references transmitted through literature are available here. The three-stage sequence in Rabirio Postumo does not show that every procedural or penal provision remained identical.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Avoid importing the whole of Julian or imperial repetundae law into the Sullan statute. Explicit continuity of one chapter is narrower than continuity of an entire code."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-repetundis-debate","instrument":"cornelia-repetundis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Avoid importing the whole of Julian or imperial repetundae law into the Sullan statute. Explicit continuity of one chapter is narrower than continuity of an entire code.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Avoid importing the whole of Julian or imperial repetundae law into the Sullan statute. Explicit continuity of one chapter is narrower than continuity of an entire code."},{"id":"LR-iulia-repetundis-existence","instrument":"iulia-repetundis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Rabirio Postumo 8–12 names the Julian law and quotes the words governing money that reached another recipient. Cicero’s contemporary correspondence and later Digest 48.11 provide further witnesses to the broad anti-extortion regime.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §8","Pro L. Flacco §13"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-389-391","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 389-391","locator":"Printed pp. 389-391","pdfPages":[404,406],"url":null},{"id":"G-485","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 485","locator":"Printed pp. 485","pdfPages":[505],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not equate every payment in a governor’s orbit with proved extortion, or every recipient with a principal defendant. Distinguish the quoted chapter from the advocate’s account of Gabinius’ conviction."},{"id":"LR-iulia-repetundis-dating","instrument":"iulia-repetundis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"59 BCE is Caesar’s consular enactment year. The Flaccus defence later that year calls a law recent and new without naming it at §13; its identification as Julian is Greenidge’s interpretation. Rabirio Postumo in 54 gives explicit naming.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §8","Pro L. Flacco §13"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-389-391","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 389-391","locator":"Printed pp. 389-391","pdfPages":[404,406],"url":null},{"id":"G-485","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 485","locator":"Printed pp. 485","pdfPages":[505],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not equate every payment in a governor’s orbit with proved extortion, or every recipient with a principal defendant. Distinguish the quoted chapter from the advocate’s account of Gabinius’ conviction."},{"id":"LR-iulia-repetundis-operation","instrument":"iulia-repetundis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The recipient proceeding depends on the prior official extortion case and assessment, but the defence disputes both the reach of the clause and what Postumus received. The law also belongs to the regulation of provincial office and gifts; those wider provisions need their own loci.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §8","Pro L. Flacco §13"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-389-391","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 389-391","locator":"Printed pp. 389-391","pdfPages":[404,406],"url":null},{"id":"G-485","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 485","locator":"Printed pp. 485","pdfPages":[505],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not equate every payment in a governor’s orbit with proved extortion, or every recipient with a principal defendant. Distinguish the quoted chapter from the advocate’s account of Gabinius’ conviction."},{"id":"LR-iulia-repetundis-transmission","instrument":"iulia-repetundis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"This is a statute reconstructed from multiple literary and juristic witnesses, not a surviving complete bronze. Late imperial texts under its title may preserve extensions and altered penalties.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §8","Pro L. Flacco §13"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-389-391","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 389-391","locator":"Printed pp. 389-391","pdfPages":[404,406],"url":null},{"id":"G-485","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 485","locator":"Printed pp. 485","pdfPages":[505],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not equate every payment in a governor’s orbit with proved extortion, or every recipient with a principal defendant. Distinguish the quoted chapter from the advocate’s account of Gabinius’ conviction."},{"id":"LR-iulia-repetundis-debate","instrument":"iulia-repetundis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not equate every payment in a governor’s orbit with proved extortion, or every recipient with a principal defendant. Distinguish the quoted chapter from the advocate’s account of Gabinius’ conviction.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §8","Pro L. Flacco §13"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-389-391","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 389-391","locator":"Printed pp. 389-391","pdfPages":[404,406],"url":null},{"id":"G-485","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 485","locator":"Printed pp. 485","pdfPages":[505],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-501-504","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 501-504","locator":"Printed pp. 501-504","pdfPages":[521,524],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not equate every payment in a governor’s orbit with proved extortion, or every recipient with a principal defendant. Distinguish the quoted chapter from the advocate’s account of Gabinius’ conviction."},{"id":"LR-servilia-repetundis-existence","instrument":"servilia-repetundis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Rabirio Postumo 9 attributes the inherited recipient clause to the Servilian law. Verrines II.1.26 contrasts its two-hearing arrangement with Acilian procedure. These identify particular procedural innovations, not the full statute.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9","In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-322","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 322","locator":"Printed pp. 322","pdfPages":[337],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"C1-209","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 209","locator":"Printed pp. 209","pdfPages":[236],"url":null},{"id":"G-493-496","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 493-496","locator":"Printed pp. 493-496","pdfPages":[513,516],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep Glaucia’s statute distinct from Caepio’s Servilian jury legislation. A shared gentilicium does not identify proposer, date, jury composition or operative clauses."},{"id":"LR-servilia-repetundis-dating","instrument":"servilia-repetundis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"Glaucia’s law is conventionally assigned to 104 or 101 BCE; the exact chronology is disputed. Rotondi’s older placement around 111 differs sharply and rests on assumptions about reuse of the Bembine bronze. It is recorded as an older reconstruction, not silently adopted.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9","In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-322","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 322","locator":"Printed pp. 322","pdfPages":[337],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"C1-209","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 209","locator":"Printed pp. 209","pdfPages":[236],"url":null},{"id":"G-493-496","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 493-496","locator":"Printed pp. 493-496","pdfPages":[513,516],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep Glaucia’s statute distinct from Caepio’s Servilian jury legislation. A shared gentilicium does not identify proposer, date, jury composition or operative clauses."},{"id":"LR-servilia-repetundis-operation","instrument":"servilia-repetundis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The important comparisons concern the selection of an accuser, a repeated hearing and reaching money transferred to another recipient. The two-stage hearing could be exploited for delay in Verres’ prosecution.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9","In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-322","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 322","locator":"Printed pp. 322","pdfPages":[337],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"C1-209","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 209","locator":"Printed pp. 209","pdfPages":[236],"url":null},{"id":"G-493-496","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 493-496","locator":"Printed pp. 493-496","pdfPages":[513,516],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep Glaucia’s statute distinct from Caepio’s Servilian jury legislation. A shared gentilicium does not identify proposer, date, jury composition or operative clauses."},{"id":"LR-servilia-repetundis-transmission","instrument":"servilia-repetundis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Crawford distinguishes the inscribed Gracchan repetundae law from innovations associated with Glaucia. The Tarentum fragment has been assigned to several different laws; its label cannot securely supply Glaucia’s complete text.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9","In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-322","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 322","locator":"Printed pp. 322","pdfPages":[337],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"C1-209","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 209","locator":"Printed pp. 209","pdfPages":[236],"url":null},{"id":"G-493-496","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 493-496","locator":"Printed pp. 493-496","pdfPages":[513,516],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep Glaucia’s statute distinct from Caepio’s Servilian jury legislation. A shared gentilicium does not identify proposer, date, jury composition or operative clauses."},{"id":"LR-servilia-repetundis-debate","instrument":"servilia-repetundis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Keep Glaucia’s statute distinct from Caepio’s Servilian jury legislation. A shared gentilicium does not identify proposer, date, jury composition or operative clauses.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Postumo §9","In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-322","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 322","locator":"Printed pp. 322","pdfPages":[337],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"C1-209","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 209","locator":"Printed pp. 209","pdfPages":[236],"url":null},{"id":"G-493-496","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 493-496","locator":"Printed pp. 493-496","pdfPages":[513,516],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep Glaucia’s statute distinct from Caepio’s Servilian jury legislation. A shared gentilicium does not identify proposer, date, jury composition or operative clauses."},{"id":"LR-acilia-repetundis-existence","instrument":"acilia-repetundis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Verrines II.1.26 expressly contrasts the Acilian law with the Servilian law. The bronze repetundae statute conventionally associated with it supplies a second, documentary evidence stream, whose precise statutory identification remains debated.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-312-313","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 312-313","locator":"Printed pp. 312-313","pdfPages":[327,328],"url":null},{"id":"C1-39-42","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 39-42","locator":"Printed pp. 39-42","pdfPages":[66,69],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"LP3","source":"LP3","label":"LEPOR, notice 3: Loi Acilia de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice3/"},{"id":"LP682","source":"LP682","label":"LEPOR, notice 682: Loi Sempronia (plutôt qu’Acilia) de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice682/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The existence of an inscribed extortion statute is secure; equating that object with the named Acilian law is a further identification. Crawford rejects its equation with Glaucia’s law, explaining the missing characteristic innovations."},{"id":"LR-acilia-repetundis-dating","instrument":"acilia-repetundis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The previous 123–122 BCE label conflated a conventional attribution with a secure date. LEPOR notice 3 favours a separate Acilian measure shortly before 111, succeeding a Sempronian law; notice 682 prefers Sempronian attribution for the bronze. Crawford dates the bronze to the Gracchan period but remains neutral about naming Acilius as proposer. The named Acilian law is securely earlier than Glaucia’s Servilian law; its exact year remains disputed.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-312-313","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 312-313","locator":"Printed pp. 312-313","pdfPages":[327,328],"url":null},{"id":"C1-39-42","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 39-42","locator":"Printed pp. 39-42","pdfPages":[66,69],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"LP3","source":"LP3","label":"LEPOR, notice 3: Loi Acilia de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice3/"},{"id":"LP682","source":"LP682","label":"LEPOR, notice 682: Loi Sempronia (plutôt qu’Acilia) de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice682/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The existence of an inscribed extortion statute is secure; equating that object with the named Acilian law is a further identification. Crawford rejects its equation with Glaucia’s law, explaining the missing characteristic innovations."},{"id":"LR-acilia-repetundis-operation","instrument":"acilia-repetundis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The bronze regulates patrons, selection of jurors, witnesses, voting, assessment, recovery and rewards. Its absence of a clear clause on presentation of the parties’ speeches matters: a detailed procedural reconstruction still has gaps.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-312-313","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 312-313","locator":"Printed pp. 312-313","pdfPages":[327,328],"url":null},{"id":"C1-39-42","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 39-42","locator":"Printed pp. 39-42","pdfPages":[66,69],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"LP3","source":"LP3","label":"LEPOR, notice 3: Loi Acilia de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice3/"},{"id":"LP682","source":"LP682","label":"LEPOR, notice 682: Loi Sempronia (plutôt qu’Acilia) de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice682/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The existence of an inscribed extortion statute is secure; equating that object with the named Acilian law is a further identification. Crawford rejects its equation with Glaucia’s law, explaining the missing characteristic innovations."},{"id":"LR-acilia-repetundis-transmission","instrument":"acilia-repetundis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Documentary control: Crawford, Roman Statutes I, law 1; CIL I² 583. The reverse carries the agrarian law of 111 BCE. Fragment survival, early copies and restoration all mediate the edition. Do not call every supplemented letter a surviving letter.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-312-313","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 312-313","locator":"Printed pp. 312-313","pdfPages":[327,328],"url":null},{"id":"C1-39-42","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 39-42","locator":"Printed pp. 39-42","pdfPages":[66,69],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"LP3","source":"LP3","label":"LEPOR, notice 3: Loi Acilia de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice3/"},{"id":"LP682","source":"LP682","label":"LEPOR, notice 682: Loi Sempronia (plutôt qu’Acilia) de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice682/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The existence of an inscribed extortion statute is secure; equating that object with the named Acilian law is a further identification. Crawford rejects its equation with Glaucia’s law, explaining the missing characteristic innovations."},{"id":"LR-acilia-repetundis-debate","instrument":"acilia-repetundis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The existence of an inscribed extortion statute is secure; equating that object with the named Acilian law is a further identification. Crawford rejects its equation with Glaucia’s law, explaining the missing characteristic innovations.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.26"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-312-313","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 312-313","locator":"Printed pp. 312-313","pdfPages":[327,328],"url":null},{"id":"C1-39-42","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 39-42","locator":"Printed pp. 39-42","pdfPages":[66,69],"url":null},{"id":"C1-51-52","source":"C1","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. I (1996), pp. 51-52","locator":"Printed pp. 51-52","pdfPages":[78,79],"url":null},{"id":"LP3","source":"LP3","label":"LEPOR, notice 3: Loi Acilia de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice3/"},{"id":"LP682","source":"LP682","label":"LEPOR, notice 682: Loi Sempronia (plutôt qu’Acilia) de repetundis","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice682/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The existence of an inscribed extortion statute is secure; equating that object with the named Acilian law is a further identification. Crawford rejects its equation with Glaucia’s law, explaining the missing characteristic innovations."},{"id":"LR-rupilia-existence","instrument":"rupilia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Verrines II.2.32 calls the arrangement a decretum of Rupilius made with ten commissioners and says the Sicilians call it the Rupilian law. §§37–44 test its operation in Heraclius’ inheritance dispute.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-489","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 489","locator":"Printed pp. 489","pdfPages":[504],"url":null},{"id":"DUB-104-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 104-108","locator":"Printed pp. 104-108","pdfPages":[110,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz shows why alleged injustice cannot always be reduced to a technically illegal appointment: Verres could correct formal selection while still exerting pressure. Preserve Cicero’s accusations separately from that procedural analysis."},{"id":"LR-rupilia-dating","instrument":"rupilia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The former atlas date 132 BCE needs qualification. Rotondi dates the settlement to 131; 132 is the consulship and commonly repeated dating. Display 132–131 BCE, with the disagreement explained, not as a two-year effective term.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-489","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 489","locator":"Printed pp. 489","pdfPages":[504],"url":null},{"id":"DUB-104-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 104-108","locator":"Printed pp. 104-108","pdfPages":[110,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz shows why alleged injustice cannot always be reduced to a technically illegal appointment: Verres could correct formal selection while still exerting pressure. Preserve Cicero’s accusations separately from that procedural analysis."},{"id":"LR-rupilia-operation","instrument":"rupilia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The rules distinguish disputes within one city, between Sicilians of different cities, between an individual and a community, and between Roman and Sicilian parties. The method of choosing judges varies with those categories.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-489","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 489","locator":"Printed pp. 489","pdfPages":[504],"url":null},{"id":"DUB-104-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 104-108","locator":"Printed pp. 104-108","pdfPages":[110,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz shows why alleged injustice cannot always be reduced to a technically illegal appointment: Verres could correct formal selection while still exerting pressure. Preserve Cicero’s accusations separately from that procedural analysis."},{"id":"LR-rupilia-transmission","instrument":"rupilia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"No self-contained provincial charter survives here. Cicero’s terminology itself warns against treating this as an ordinary Roman popular statute. The governor’s subsequent edict helps sustain local and inter-community rules in practice.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-489","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 489","locator":"Printed pp. 489","pdfPages":[504],"url":null},{"id":"DUB-104-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 104-108","locator":"Printed pp. 104-108","pdfPages":[110,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz shows why alleged injustice cannot always be reduced to a technically illegal appointment: Verres could correct formal selection while still exerting pressure. Preserve Cicero’s accusations separately from that procedural analysis."},{"id":"LR-rupilia-debate","instrument":"rupilia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Dubouloz shows why alleged injustice cannot always be reduced to a technically illegal appointment: Verres could correct formal selection while still exerting pressure. Preserve Cicero’s accusations separately from that procedural analysis.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-489","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 489","locator":"Printed pp. 489","pdfPages":[504],"url":null},{"id":"DUB-104-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 104-108","locator":"Printed pp. 104-108","pdfPages":[110,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz shows why alleged injustice cannot always be reduced to a technically illegal appointment: Verres could correct formal selection while still exerting pressure. Preserve Cicero’s accusations separately from that procedural analysis."},{"id":"LR-hieronica-existence","instrument":"hieronica","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Verrines II.3.12–15 describes the fiscal arrangement associated with Hiero and Roman retention of it; II.2.32 expressly connects disputes between cultivators and tithe contractors with the Hieronian grain law.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.3.15","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-107-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 107-108","locator":"Printed pp. 107-108","pdfPages":[113,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"BELL-117-120","source":"BELL","label":"Malcolm Bell III, “Apronius in the Agora: Sicilian Civil Architecture and the Lex Hieronica”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 117-120","locator":"Printed pp. 117-120","pdfPages":[122,125],"url":null},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Separate continuity of a named institution from unchanged wording or unchanged territorial coverage. Cicero’s idealized contrast between inherited order and Verres’ conduct serves the prosecution."},{"id":"LR-hieronica-dating","instrument":"hieronica","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The evidence supports a royal Sicilian background before Roman incorporation, followed by later Roman use. It does not date a single act of promulgation or prove that every Republican provision originated with Hiero II.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.3.15","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-107-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 107-108","locator":"Printed pp. 107-108","pdfPages":[113,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"BELL-117-120","source":"BELL","label":"Malcolm Bell III, “Apronius in the Agora: Sicilian Civil Architecture and the Lex Hieronica”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 117-120","locator":"Printed pp. 117-120","pdfPages":[122,125],"url":null},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Separate continuity of a named institution from unchanged wording or unchanged territorial coverage. Cicero’s idealized contrast between inherited order and Verres’ conduct serves the prosecution."},{"id":"LR-hieronica-operation","instrument":"hieronica","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The system connects tithe auctions, assessment, local cultivators, contractors and dispute resolution. Verres’ alleged abuses operate through changes to these relationships and the practical availability of remedies, not simply through a different nominal tax rate.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.3.15","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-107-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 107-108","locator":"Printed pp. 107-108","pdfPages":[113,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"BELL-117-120","source":"BELL","label":"Malcolm Bell III, “Apronius in the Agora: Sicilian Civil Architecture and the Lex Hieronica”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 117-120","locator":"Printed pp. 117-120","pdfPages":[122,125],"url":null},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Separate continuity of a named institution from unchanged wording or unchanged territorial coverage. Cicero’s idealized contrast between inherited order and Verres’ conduct serves the prosecution."},{"id":"LR-hieronica-transmission","instrument":"hieronica","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"No original royal code is reproduced. Bell investigates architectural and administrative traces at Morgantina as evidence for fiscal practices; archaeological association with the system is an inference, not an inscribed copy of the law.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.3.15","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-107-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 107-108","locator":"Printed pp. 107-108","pdfPages":[113,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"BELL-117-120","source":"BELL","label":"Malcolm Bell III, “Apronius in the Agora: Sicilian Civil Architecture and the Lex Hieronica”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 117-120","locator":"Printed pp. 117-120","pdfPages":[122,125],"url":null},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Separate continuity of a named institution from unchanged wording or unchanged territorial coverage. Cicero’s idealized contrast between inherited order and Verres’ conduct serves the prosecution."},{"id":"LR-hieronica-debate","instrument":"hieronica","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Separate continuity of a named institution from unchanged wording or unchanged territorial coverage. Cicero’s idealized contrast between inherited order and Verres’ conduct serves the prosecution.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.2.32","In C. Verrem §2.3.15","In C. Verrem §2.2.32"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-107-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 107-108","locator":"Printed pp. 107-108","pdfPages":[113,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"BELL-117-120","source":"BELL","label":"Malcolm Bell III, “Apronius in the Agora: Sicilian Civil Architecture and the Lex Hieronica”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 117-120","locator":"Printed pp. 117-120","pdfPages":[122,125],"url":null},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Separate continuity of a named institution from unchanged wording or unchanged territorial coverage. Cicero’s idealized contrast between inherited order and Verres’ conduct serves the prosecution."},{"id":"LR-verres-inheritance-existence","instrument":"verres-inheritance","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Verrines II.1.104–110 recounts the urban inheritance edict and its effect on Asellus’ daughter. Cicero contrasts Verres’ innovation with established law and the treatment of earlier wills.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.104"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s examples involving forgery and homicide illustrate prospectivity; they are not additional charges against Asellus’ daughter. Treat Verres’ administrative innovation separately from the statute he purportedly used."},{"id":"LR-verres-inheritance-dating","instrument":"verres-inheritance","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"74 BCE dates Verres’ urban praetorship, during which the challenged edict belongs. The accusation was published in 70. Neither date should be mistaken for the enactment of the older Voconian law.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.104"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s examples involving forgery and homicide illustrate prospectivity; they are not additional charges against Asellus’ daughter. Treat Verres’ administrative innovation separately from the statute he purportedly used."},{"id":"LR-verres-inheritance-operation","instrument":"verres-inheritance","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The dispute concerns access to an inheritance through praetorian handling of a will and the relevance of census status. Cicero attacks retrospective alteration of the consequences of acts already performed in reliance on existing rules.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.104"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s examples involving forgery and homicide illustrate prospectivity; they are not additional charges against Asellus’ daughter. Treat Verres’ administrative innovation separately from the statute he purportedly used."},{"id":"LR-verres-inheritance-transmission","instrument":"verres-inheritance","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The evidence is the prosecutor’s report of edictal wording and practice. No posted urban edict is separately available. The account must be read with the whole Asellus episode.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.104"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s examples involving forgery and homicide illustrate prospectivity; they are not additional charges against Asellus’ daughter. Treat Verres’ administrative innovation separately from the statute he purportedly used."},{"id":"LR-verres-inheritance-debate","instrument":"verres-inheritance","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Cicero’s examples involving forgery and homicide illustrate prospectivity; they are not additional charges against Asellus’ daughter. Treat Verres’ administrative innovation separately from the statute he purportedly used.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.104"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s examples involving forgery and homicide illustrate prospectivity; they are not additional charges against Asellus’ daughter. Treat Verres’ administrative innovation separately from the statute he purportedly used."},{"id":"LR-voconia-existence","instrument":"voconia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Verrines II.1.106–110 names the law in the Asellus inheritance dispute. Gaius 2.226 and 2.274 separately report restrictions on legacies and on instituting a woman as heir.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108","Gaius, Institutes 2.274"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP757","source":"LP757","label":"LEPOR, notice 757: Loi Voconia","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice757/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Verres’ treatment of an uncensused testator is central to Cicero’s criticism. Later fideicommissary practice is evidence of the statute’s reception, not a provision enacted in 169."},{"id":"LR-voconia-dating","instrument":"voconia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"169 BCE is the conventional year of the tribune Q. Voconius Saxa’s enactment, supported by the historical tradition collected by Rotondi. Its invocation by Cicero in 70 is evidence of later relevance.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108","Gaius, Institutes 2.274"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP757","source":"LP757","label":"LEPOR, notice 757: Loi Voconia","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice757/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Verres’ treatment of an uncensused testator is central to Cicero’s criticism. Later fideicommissary practice is evidence of the statute’s reception, not a provision enacted in 169."},{"id":"LR-voconia-operation","instrument":"voconia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The restriction depends on the testator’s assessed property status; it is not a ban on all female inheritance. Gaius also reports a restriction preventing a legatee from receiving more than heirs, and later mechanisms that could circumvent the restriction.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108","Gaius, Institutes 2.274"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP757","source":"LP757","label":"LEPOR, notice 757: Loi Voconia","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice757/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Verres’ treatment of an uncensused testator is central to Cicero’s criticism. Later fideicommissary practice is evidence of the statute’s reception, not a provision enacted in 169."},{"id":"LR-voconia-transmission","instrument":"voconia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The law is known through separate literary and juristic witnesses. Their monetary thresholds and formulations require care; the dossier does not present a synthesized modern wording as a complete statute.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108","Gaius, Institutes 2.274"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP757","source":"LP757","label":"LEPOR, notice 757: Loi Voconia","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice757/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Verres’ treatment of an uncensused testator is central to Cicero’s criticism. Later fideicommissary practice is evidence of the statute’s reception, not a provision enacted in 169."},{"id":"LR-voconia-debate","instrument":"voconia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Verres’ treatment of an uncensused testator is central to Cicero’s criticism. Later fideicommissary practice is evidence of the statute’s reception, not a provision enacted in 169.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108","Gaius, Institutes 2.274"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-283-284","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 283-284","locator":"Printed pp. 283-284","pdfPages":[298,299],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-99","locator":"Printed pp. 79-99","pdfPages":[99,119],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP757","source":"LP757","label":"LEPOR, notice 757: Loi Voconia","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice757/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Verres’ treatment of an uncensused testator is central to Cicero’s criticism. Later fideicommissary practice is evidence of the statute’s reception, not a provision enacted in 169."},{"id":"LR-verres-tithes-existence","instrument":"verres-tithes","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Verrines II.3.25 reports an edict compelling payment of what the tithe collector demanded. §35 quotes the offer of recuperatores if either party wished. These are distinct clauses within Cicero’s reconstruction of fiscal coercion.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.3.25","In C. Verrem §2.3.35"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-105-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 105-108","locator":"Printed pp. 105-108","pdfPages":[111,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz distinguishes a choice between local adjudication and the governor’s intervention from the older reconstruction of a choice between a single judge and recuperators. Apparent procedural options must be studied in their provincial setting."},{"id":"LR-verres-tithes-dating","instrument":"verres-tithes","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The edict belongs to Verres’ Sicilian governorship of 73–71 BCE. A specific issue day, annual republication and uninterrupted duration cannot be inferred from the governorship interval.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.3.25","In C. Verrem §2.3.35"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-105-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 105-108","locator":"Printed pp. 105-108","pdfPages":[111,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz distinguishes a choice between local adjudication and the governor’s intervention from the older reconstruction of a choice between a single judge and recuperators. Apparent procedural options must be studied in their provincial setting."},{"id":"LR-verres-tithes-operation","instrument":"verres-tithes","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"Nominal remedies against excessive collection coexist with a rule allowing immediate extraction. Cicero argues that farmers could not realistically recover through judges beholden to the governor. The imbalance concerns enforcement, forum and bargaining power.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.3.25","In C. Verrem §2.3.35"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-105-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 105-108","locator":"Printed pp. 105-108","pdfPages":[111,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz distinguishes a choice between local adjudication and the governor’s intervention from the older reconstruction of a choice between a single judge and recuperators. Apparent procedural options must be studied in their provincial setting."},{"id":"LR-verres-tithes-transmission","instrument":"verres-tithes","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"This is a forensic report of a provincial edict, not a law voted by the Roman people. The polemical label “Verrian law” does not alter that legal form.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.3.25","In C. Verrem §2.3.35"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-105-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 105-108","locator":"Printed pp. 105-108","pdfPages":[111,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz distinguishes a choice between local adjudication and the governor’s intervention from the older reconstruction of a choice between a single judge and recuperators. Apparent procedural options must be studied in their provincial setting."},{"id":"LR-verres-tithes-debate","instrument":"verres-tithes","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Dubouloz distinguishes a choice between local adjudication and the governor’s intervention from the older reconstruction of a choice between a single judge and recuperators. Apparent procedural options must be studied in their provincial setting.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.3.25","In C. Verrem §2.3.35"],"scholarship":[{"id":"DUB-105-108","source":"DUB","label":"Julien Dubouloz, “La juridiction du gouverneur provincial. Réflexions sur les Verrines comme sources pour l’histoire du droit”, in J. R. W. Prag (ed.), Sicilia nutrix plebis Romanae (2007), pp. 105-108","locator":"Printed pp. 105-108","pdfPages":[111,114],"url":"https://www.julien-dubouloz.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/19-londres-2004-article.pdf"},{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Dubouloz distinguishes a choice between local adjudication and the governor’s intervention from the older reconstruction of a choice between a single judge and recuperators. Apparent procedural options must be studied in their provincial setting."},{"id":"LR-plautia-vis-existence","instrument":"plautia-vis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Milone 35 expressly mentions proceedings against Clodius under a Plotian law. Sallust, Catiline 31.4, provides a separate explicit witness to Catiline being prosecuted under the Plautian law by L. Paulus.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §35","Pro M. Caelio §70","Sallust, Bellum Catilinae 31.4"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi regards a separate Lutatius law as less likely than a Plautian law promoted under Catulus’ influence. Other reconstructions separate them. The atlas retains two research records without claiming two independently proven enactments."},{"id":"LR-plautia-vis-dating","instrument":"plautia-vis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"An explicit historical attestation belongs to the Catilinarian crisis of 63 BCE. Earlier enactment dates, including 78, 70 and the mid-60s, depend on identifying related measures and proposers. Replace the former unqualified mid-60s terminus with the demonstrable 63 BCE witness.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §35","Pro M. Caelio §70","Sallust, Bellum Catilinae 31.4"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi regards a separate Lutatius law as less likely than a Plautian law promoted under Catulus’ influence. Other reconstructions separate them. The atlas retains two research records without claiming two independently proven enactments."},{"id":"LR-plautia-vis-operation","instrument":"plautia-vis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The statute provides a public prosecution for vis. The Clodius proceeding mentioned in Milone is an earlier case; Milo’s trial in 52 rests on Pompey’s special law. Caelius’ governing statute raises a distinct identification problem.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §35","Pro M. Caelio §70","Sallust, Bellum Catilinae 31.4"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi regards a separate Lutatius law as less likely than a Plautian law promoted under Catulus’ influence. Other reconstructions separate them. The atlas retains two research records without claiming two independently proven enactments."},{"id":"LR-plautia-vis-transmission","instrument":"plautia-vis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"No complete statute is recovered. The spelling Plautia/Plotia and the interpretation of Caelio 70 must be tracked; later references to property held by force do not reconstruct the whole criminal law.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §35","Pro M. Caelio §70","Sallust, Bellum Catilinae 31.4"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi regards a separate Lutatius law as less likely than a Plautian law promoted under Catulus’ influence. Other reconstructions separate them. The atlas retains two research records without claiming two independently proven enactments."},{"id":"LR-plautia-vis-debate","instrument":"plautia-vis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Rotondi regards a separate Lutatius law as less likely than a Plautian law promoted under Catulus’ influence. Other reconstructions separate them. The atlas retains two research records without claiming two independently proven enactments.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §35","Pro M. Caelio §70","Sallust, Bellum Catilinae 31.4"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi regards a separate Lutatius law as less likely than a Plautian law promoted under Catulus’ influence. Other reconstructions separate them. The atlas retains two research records without claiming two independently proven enactments."},{"id":"LR-lutatia-vis-existence","instrument":"lutatia-vis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Caelio 70 says that Q. Catulus carried the law amid armed civil dissension. It does not preserve an independently headed text called “Lex Lutatia”; that title expresses an identification from the proposer’s name.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Caelio §70"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge explicitly reviews the uncertain connection; Rotondi prefers a Plautian measure associated with Catulus over a separate Lutatius enactment. The record remains useful as a disputed identification rather than a confidently independent code."},{"id":"LR-lutatia-vis-dating","instrument":"lutatia-vis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"78 BCE is a common reconstruction connecting the allusion with Catulus and Lepidus, not a consular date written in the quoted passage. Alternative constructions of the relationship with the Plautian law remain possible.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Caelio §70"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge explicitly reviews the uncertain connection; Rotondi prefers a Plautian measure associated with Catulus over a separate Lutatius enactment. The record remains useful as a disputed identification rather than a confidently independent code."},{"id":"LR-lutatia-vis-operation","instrument":"lutatia-vis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"Cicero uses the law’s supposed emergency purpose to argue that Caelius’ alleged conduct does not belong within its intended scope. This is purposive forensic argument, not a complete enumeration of statutory offences.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Caelio §70"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge explicitly reviews the uncertain connection; Rotondi prefers a Plautian measure associated with Catulus over a separate Lutatius enactment. The record remains useful as a disputed identification rather than a confidently independent code."},{"id":"LR-lutatia-vis-transmission","instrument":"lutatia-vis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The decisive witness is a single Ciceronian locus. Repetition of that locus in many modern books does not create independent ancient corroboration.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Caelio §70"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge explicitly reviews the uncertain connection; Rotondi prefers a Plautian measure associated with Catulus over a separate Lutatius enactment. The record remains useful as a disputed identification rather than a confidently independent code."},{"id":"LR-lutatia-vis-debate","instrument":"lutatia-vis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Greenidge explicitly reviews the uncertain connection; Rotondi prefers a Plautian measure associated with Catulus over a separate Lutatius enactment. The record remains useful as a disputed identification rather than a confidently independent code.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Caelio §70"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-377-378","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 377-378","locator":"Printed pp. 377-378","pdfPages":[392,393],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge explicitly reviews the uncertain connection; Rotondi prefers a Plautian measure associated with Catulus over a separate Lutatius enactment. The record remains useful as a disputed identification rather than a confidently independent code."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-vis-existence","instrument":"pompeia-vis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Milone 15 describes the new inquiry concerning the Appian Way killing. Asconius 36–40 C supplies the special legislative and trial arrangements and distinguishes them from normal procedure.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §15"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-389-396","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 389-396","locator":"Printed pp. 389-396","pdfPages":[409,416],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-573-574","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 573-574","locator":"Printed pp. 573-574","pdfPages":[593,594],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The exceptional law does not itself prove Milo’s guilt. A general natural-law defence and a particular statutory question can coexist without being identical."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-vis-dating","instrument":"pompeia-vis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"52 BCE is fixed by Pompey’s sole consulship and the killing of Clodius. The special inquiry must be kept separate from Pompey’s jury-selection measure of 55; Asconius supplies the event sequence and trial regulations.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §15"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-389-396","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 389-396","locator":"Printed pp. 389-396","pdfPages":[409,416],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-573-574","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 573-574","locator":"Printed pp. 573-574","pdfPages":[593,594],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The exceptional law does not itself prove Milo’s guilt. A general natural-law defence and a particular statutory question can coexist without being identical."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-vis-operation","instrument":"pompeia-vis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The law accelerates the case, gives witnesses a prominent preliminary place and restricts the final speeches to two hours for prosecution and three for defence. The president and selected jury belong to this particular statutory framework.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §15"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-389-396","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 389-396","locator":"Printed pp. 389-396","pdfPages":[409,416],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-573-574","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 573-574","locator":"Printed pp. 573-574","pdfPages":[593,594],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The exceptional law does not itself prove Milo’s guilt. A general natural-law defence and a particular statutory question can coexist without being identical."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-vis-transmission","instrument":"pompeia-vis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Cicero’s surviving speech is a revised published text; Asconius is a later historical commentator. Neither is a complete original statute, but together they let us distinguish trial design from defence strategy.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §15"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-389-396","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 389-396","locator":"Printed pp. 389-396","pdfPages":[409,416],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-573-574","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 573-574","locator":"Printed pp. 573-574","pdfPages":[593,594],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The exceptional law does not itself prove Milo’s guilt. A general natural-law defence and a particular statutory question can coexist without being identical."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-vis-debate","instrument":"pompeia-vis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The exceptional law does not itself prove Milo’s guilt. A general natural-law defence and a particular statutory question can coexist without being identical.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §15"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-389-396","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 389-396","locator":"Printed pp. 389-396","pdfPages":[409,416],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-573-574","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 573-574","locator":"Printed pp. 573-574","pdfPages":[593,594],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The exceptional law does not itself prove Milo’s guilt. A general natural-law defence and a particular statutory question can coexist without being identical."},{"id":"LR-calpurnia-ambitu-existence","instrument":"calpurnia-ambitu","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Murena 46 names the Calpurnian law; §67 reports a senatorial interpretation of conduct contrary to it. Asconius’ discussion of Cornelius and Dio 36.38 set it in the legislative competition of 67.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §46","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Sulla’s earlier electoral conviction and later conspiracy prosecution are separate cases. The Calpurnian law should not be made the governing law of every later charge against a convicted candidate."},{"id":"LR-calpurnia-ambitu-dating","instrument":"calpurnia-ambitu","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"67 BCE is the consular date of C. Calpurnius Piso and M’. Acilius Glabrio. The alternative expanded title Acilia Calpurnia reflects that setting, not a second independently established statute.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §46","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Sulla’s earlier electoral conviction and later conspiracy prosecution are separate cases. The Calpurnian law should not be made the governing law of every later charge against a convicted candidate."},{"id":"LR-calpurnia-ambitu-operation","instrument":"calpurnia-ambitu","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The law strengthened electoral-corruption sanctions. Murena’s defence distinguishes ordinary personal support from paid attendance, organized distribution of seats and indiscriminate feasting. The Senate’s interpretation in 63 must be treated as a later measure.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §46","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Sulla’s earlier electoral conviction and later conspiracy prosecution are separate cases. The Calpurnian law should not be made the governing law of every later charge against a convicted candidate."},{"id":"LR-calpurnia-ambitu-transmission","instrument":"calpurnia-ambitu","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The original law does not survive complete. Penalties and legislative circumstances must be assembled from separate witnesses; Cicero’s §67 preserves the interpretive resolution more directly than the whole statute.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §46","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Sulla’s earlier electoral conviction and later conspiracy prosecution are separate cases. The Calpurnian law should not be made the governing law of every later charge against a convicted candidate."},{"id":"LR-calpurnia-ambitu-debate","instrument":"calpurnia-ambitu","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Sulla’s earlier electoral conviction and later conspiracy prosecution are separate cases. The Calpurnian law should not be made the governing law of every later charge against a convicted candidate.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §46","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Sulla’s earlier electoral conviction and later conspiracy prosecution are separate cases. The Calpurnian law should not be made the governing law of every later charge against a convicted candidate."},{"id":"LR-tullia-ambitu-existence","instrument":"tullia-ambitu","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Murena 3 and 47 make Cicero’s own consular legislation central to the defence; Vatinium 37 expressly states the restriction on gladiatorial shows within two years before candidature, with a testamentary exception.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §47","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-379","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 379","locator":"Printed pp. 379","pdfPages":[394],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP717","source":"LP717","label":"LEPOR, notice 717: Loi Tullia Antonia de ambitu","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice717/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A testamentary exception is not a general permission to buy popularity through shows. Nor does Cicero’s claim to defend within his own law establish acquittal as a general interpretation of every clause."},{"id":"LR-tullia-ambitu-dating","instrument":"tullia-ambitu","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"63 BCE is the enactment setting in Cicero’s consulship, preceding Murena’s trial. The ten-year exile provision is supported through later historical testimony, not a complete law quoted in Murena.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §47","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-379","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 379","locator":"Printed pp. 379","pdfPages":[394],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP717","source":"LP717","label":"LEPOR, notice 717: Loi Tullia Antonia de ambitu","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice717/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A testamentary exception is not a general permission to buy popularity through shows. Nor does Cicero’s claim to defend within his own law establish acquittal as a general interpretation of every clause."},{"id":"LR-tullia-ambitu-operation","instrument":"tullia-ambitu","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The defence faces the tension between Cicero’s authorship of a stricter law and his representation of a successful candidate. Restrictions on spectacles and penalties are distinct provisions. The reference to illness excuses has been interpreted as concerning defendants or jurors; LEPOR notice 717 favours defendants and does not treat the allocation as self-evident.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §47","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-379","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 379","locator":"Printed pp. 379","pdfPages":[394],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP717","source":"LP717","label":"LEPOR, notice 717: Loi Tullia Antonia de ambitu","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice717/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A testamentary exception is not a general permission to buy popularity through shows. Nor does Cicero’s claim to defend within his own law establish acquittal as a general interpretation of every clause."},{"id":"LR-tullia-ambitu-transmission","instrument":"tullia-ambitu","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Ciceronian speeches preserve clauses or argumentative references; Dio supplies a later narrative of penalties. Their evidential proximity is different.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §47","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-379","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 379","locator":"Printed pp. 379","pdfPages":[394],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP717","source":"LP717","label":"LEPOR, notice 717: Loi Tullia Antonia de ambitu","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice717/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A testamentary exception is not a general permission to buy popularity through shows. Nor does Cicero’s claim to defend within his own law establish acquittal as a general interpretation of every clause."},{"id":"LR-tullia-ambitu-debate","instrument":"tullia-ambitu","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"A testamentary exception is not a general permission to buy popularity through shows. Nor does Cicero’s claim to defend within his own law establish acquittal as a general interpretation of every clause.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §47","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-379","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 379","locator":"Printed pp. 379","pdfPages":[394],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"LP717","source":"LP717","label":"LEPOR, notice 717: Loi Tullia Antonia de ambitu","locator":"Sources and Commentaire","url":"https://telma.irht.cnrs.fr/outils/lepor/notice717/"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A testamentary exception is not a general permission to buy popularity through shows. Nor does Cicero’s claim to defend within his own law establish acquittal as a general interpretation of every clause."},{"id":"LR-licinia-sodaliciis-existence","instrument":"licinia-sodaliciis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Plancio 36–39 expressly discusses the Licinian law, its proposer Crassus and the special selection of judges from tribes. This is direct evidence for procedure as well as statutory identification.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Cn. Plancio §36"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-407","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 407","locator":"Printed pp. 407","pdfPages":[422],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep this law distinct from the Licinia Iunia on legislative procedure. Shared nomenclature and electoral background do not make their legal functions interchangeable."},{"id":"LR-licinia-sodaliciis-dating","instrument":"licinia-sodaliciis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"55 BCE places the measure in Crassus’ second consulship. Plancius’ trial in 54 is a later application. Neither date supplies an exact promulgation day.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Cn. Plancio §36"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-407","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 407","locator":"Printed pp. 407","pdfPages":[422],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep this law distinct from the Licinia Iunia on legislative procedure. Shared nomenclature and electoral background do not make their legal functions interchangeable."},{"id":"LR-licinia-sodaliciis-operation","instrument":"licinia-sodaliciis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The charge concerns organized electoral corruption through associations. The prosecutor nominates four tribes and the defendant rejects one, producing a distinctive disadvantage compared with ordinary jury challenge. Cicero asks whether the selected tribes correspond to the alleged electoral organization.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Cn. Plancio §36"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-407","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 407","locator":"Printed pp. 407","pdfPages":[422],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep this law distinct from the Licinia Iunia on legislative procedure. Shared nomenclature and electoral background do not make their legal functions interchangeable."},{"id":"LR-licinia-sodaliciis-transmission","instrument":"licinia-sodaliciis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The surviving speech explains the mechanism in advocacy, rather than transmitting the whole law. The label sodalicia should not be made equivalent to every voluntary association.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Cn. Plancio §36"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-407","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 407","locator":"Printed pp. 407","pdfPages":[422],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep this law distinct from the Licinia Iunia on legislative procedure. Shared nomenclature and electoral background do not make their legal functions interchangeable."},{"id":"LR-licinia-sodaliciis-debate","instrument":"licinia-sodaliciis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Keep this law distinct from the Licinia Iunia on legislative procedure. Shared nomenclature and electoral background do not make their legal functions interchangeable.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Cn. Plancio §36"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-407","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 407","locator":"Printed pp. 407","pdfPages":[422],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Keep this law distinct from the Licinia Iunia on legislative procedure. Shared nomenclature and electoral background do not make their legal functions interchangeable."},{"id":"LR-papia-existence","instrument":"papia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Archia 10 names the Papian law in discussing people who claimed civic privileges; Balbo 52 gives a specifically Papian prosecution involving Cassius. Dio 37.9.5 places expulsion of outsiders in Papius’ tribunate.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §10","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §52"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-376","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 376","locator":"Printed pp. 376","pdfPages":[391],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The register distinguishes an explicit law named in a precedent from a reconstructed governing framework for a present case. Do not confuse this Republican law with the Augustan Papia Poppaea."},{"id":"LR-papia-dating","instrument":"papia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"65 BCE is the conventional enactment year. The later Archias and Balbus speeches show use and comparison, not the grant of citizenship in that year.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §10","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §52"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-376","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 376","locator":"Printed pp. 376","pdfPages":[391],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The register distinguishes an explicit law named in a precedent from a reconstructed governing framework for a present case. Do not confuse this Republican law with the Augustan Papia Poppaea."},{"id":"LR-papia-operation","instrument":"papia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The instrument belongs to exclusion of non-citizens and scrutiny of asserted status. In Archias’ defence the positive entitlement rests on the Plautia Papiria, while the Papian framework concerns contesting that status.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §10","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §52"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-376","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 376","locator":"Printed pp. 376","pdfPages":[391],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The register distinguishes an explicit law named in a precedent from a reconstructed governing framework for a present case. Do not confuse this Republican law with the Augustan Papia Poppaea."},{"id":"LR-papia-transmission","instrument":"papia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Ancient references survive through speeches, commentary and historical narrative. They do not supply a complete procedural code or all exceptions to expulsion.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §10","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §52"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-376","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 376","locator":"Printed pp. 376","pdfPages":[391],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The register distinguishes an explicit law named in a precedent from a reconstructed governing framework for a present case. Do not confuse this Republican law with the Augustan Papia Poppaea."},{"id":"LR-papia-debate","instrument":"papia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The register distinguishes an explicit law named in a precedent from a reconstructed governing framework for a present case. Do not confuse this Republican law with the Augustan Papia Poppaea.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §10","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §52"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-376","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 376","locator":"Printed pp. 376","pdfPages":[391],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The register distinguishes an explicit law named in a precedent from a reconstructed governing framework for a present case. Do not confuse this Republican law with the Augustan Papia Poppaea."},{"id":"LR-plautia-papiria-existence","instrument":"plautia-papiria","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Archia 7 quotes the eligibility conditions associated with Silvanus and Carbo: enrolment in an allied community, domicile in Italy when the law was passed and declaration before a praetor within sixty days.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-340-341","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 340-341","locator":"Printed pp. 340-341","pdfPages":[355,356],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The statute should not be paraphrased as automatically enfranchising every resident of Italy without conditions. Rotondi’s old discussion contains proposer and procedural details that must be checked against Cicero’s actual wording."},{"id":"LR-plautia-papiria-dating","instrument":"plautia-papiria","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"89 BCE is the conventional Social War date. The declaration window is measured from enactment; it is not sixty days after Archias’ later trial. The speech’s account of compliance is evidence offered by the defence.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-340-341","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 340-341","locator":"Printed pp. 340-341","pdfPages":[355,356],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The statute should not be paraphrased as automatically enfranchising every resident of Italy without conditions. Rotondi’s old discussion contains proposer and procedural details that must be checked against Cicero’s actual wording."},{"id":"LR-plautia-papiria-operation","instrument":"plautia-papiria","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The legal case requires linking the person to each condition through community testimony, residence and the praetor’s records. Destruction of municipal records does not itself extinguish citizenship, but changes the evidential problem.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-340-341","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 340-341","locator":"Printed pp. 340-341","pdfPages":[355,356],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The statute should not be paraphrased as automatically enfranchising every resident of Italy without conditions. Rotondi’s old discussion contains proposer and procedural details that must be checked against Cicero’s actual wording."},{"id":"LR-plautia-papiria-transmission","instrument":"plautia-papiria","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The quoted conditional wording continues into the following section’s narrative. Preserve paragraph boundaries without representing them as a missing part of the law. The official original is not extant here.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-340-341","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 340-341","locator":"Printed pp. 340-341","pdfPages":[355,356],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The statute should not be paraphrased as automatically enfranchising every resident of Italy without conditions. Rotondi’s old discussion contains proposer and procedural details that must be checked against Cicero’s actual wording."},{"id":"LR-plautia-papiria-debate","instrument":"plautia-papiria","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The statute should not be paraphrased as automatically enfranchising every resident of Italy without conditions. Rotondi’s old discussion contains proposer and procedural details that must be checked against Cicero’s actual wording.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro Archia Poeta §7"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-340-341","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 340-341","locator":"Printed pp. 340-341","pdfPages":[355,356],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The statute should not be paraphrased as automatically enfranchising every resident of Italy without conditions. Rotondi’s old discussion contains proposer and procedural details that must be checked against Cicero’s actual wording."},{"id":"LR-gellia-cornelia-existence","instrument":"gellia-cornelia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Balbo 19 expressly names the law and gives the grant made with the advice of Pompey’s council; §32 tests statutory power against treaty restrictions. Cicero uses the statute as the positive authorization of Balbus’ citizenship.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-367","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 367","locator":"Printed pp. 367","pdfPages":[382],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The community’s becoming fundus for collective legislation is not automatically a requirement for an individual military grant. That distinction is argued in Balbo, not to be flattened into a universal rule without examining the treaty."},{"id":"LR-gellia-cornelia-dating","instrument":"gellia-cornelia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"72 BCE is the conventional consular date of L. Gellius Publicola and Cn. Cornelius Lentulus. Pompey’s grant and the trial of 56 are distinct events in the legal history.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-367","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 367","locator":"Printed pp. 367","pdfPages":[382],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The community’s becoming fundus for collective legislation is not automatically a requirement for an individual military grant. That distinction is argued in Balbo, not to be flattened into a universal rule without examining the treaty."},{"id":"LR-gellia-cornelia-operation","instrument":"gellia-cornelia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The question is whether a commander’s authorized individual grant could benefit a citizen of treaty-bound Gades. Cicero separates the statute’s enabling power, the council’s participation and the effect of treaty provisions.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-367","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 367","locator":"Printed pp. 367","pdfPages":[382],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The community’s becoming fundus for collective legislation is not automatically a requirement for an individual military grant. That distinction is argued in Balbo, not to be flattened into a universal rule without examining the treaty."},{"id":"LR-gellia-cornelia-transmission","instrument":"gellia-cornelia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The evidence is a named statute and reported grant inside forensic argument. Neither a complete original statute nor Balbus’ original grant document is reproduced.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-367","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 367","locator":"Printed pp. 367","pdfPages":[382],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The community’s becoming fundus for collective legislation is not automatically a requirement for an individual military grant. That distinction is argued in Balbo, not to be flattened into a universal rule without examining the treaty."},{"id":"LR-gellia-cornelia-debate","instrument":"gellia-cornelia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The community’s becoming fundus for collective legislation is not automatically a requirement for an individual military grant. That distinction is argued in Balbo, not to be flattened into a universal rule without examining the treaty.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19","Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §19"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-367","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 367","locator":"Printed pp. 367","pdfPages":[382],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The community’s becoming fundus for collective legislation is not automatically a requirement for an individual military grant. That distinction is argued in Balbo, not to be flattened into a universal rule without examining the treaty."},{"id":"LR-iulia-civitate-existence","instrument":"iulia-civitate","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Balbo 21 names the Julian law and discusses peoples becoming fundi. Cicero introduces it as a comparison for collective adoption, not as the immediate instrument granting Balbus citizenship.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §21"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-338-339","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 338-339","locator":"Printed pp. 338-339","pdfPages":[353,354],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not cite the Julian law as Balbus’ operative grant, or infer that all allied communities accepted it at the same moment. The relationship in the graph remains comparative."},{"id":"LR-iulia-civitate-dating","instrument":"iulia-civitate","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"90 BCE dates the citizenship law associated with L. Julius Caesar’s consulship during the Social War. It is not Caesar the dictator’s repetundae law of 59.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §21"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-338-339","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 338-339","locator":"Printed pp. 338-339","pdfPages":[353,354],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not cite the Julian law as Balbus’ operative grant, or infer that all allied communities accepted it at the same moment. The relationship in the graph remains comparative."},{"id":"LR-iulia-civitate-operation","instrument":"iulia-civitate","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The speech uses collective civic arrangements to explain why one must distinguish community-wide acceptance of a Roman law from an authorized benefit to an individual. Citizenship acquisition and the community’s internal legal order are related but separate.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §21"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-338-339","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 338-339","locator":"Printed pp. 338-339","pdfPages":[353,354],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not cite the Julian law as Balbus’ operative grant, or infer that all allied communities accepted it at the same moment. The relationship in the graph remains comparative."},{"id":"LR-iulia-civitate-transmission","instrument":"iulia-civitate","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The statute is reconstructed from literary testimony. The particular fundus argument in Balbo cannot supply every territorial or political condition of the original enfranchisement.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §21"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-338-339","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 338-339","locator":"Printed pp. 338-339","pdfPages":[353,354],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not cite the Julian law as Balbus’ operative grant, or infer that all allied communities accepted it at the same moment. The relationship in the graph remains comparative."},{"id":"LR-iulia-civitate-debate","instrument":"iulia-civitate","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not cite the Julian law as Balbus’ operative grant, or infer that all allied communities accepted it at the same moment. The relationship in the graph remains comparative.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §21"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-338-339","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 338-339","locator":"Printed pp. 338-339","pdfPages":[353,354],"url":null},{"id":"G-99-109","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 99-109","locator":"Printed pp. 99-109","pdfPages":[119,129],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not cite the Julian law as Balbus’ operative grant, or infer that all allied communities accepted it at the same moment. The relationship in the graph remains comparative."},{"id":"LR-licinia-mucia-existence","instrument":"licinia-mucia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Balbo 48 recalls the restrictive law and its severe application. Asconius 67–68 C explains the legislation of Crassus and Scaevola and its connection with resentment among Italian allies.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §48"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Asconius’ causal explanation for allied alienation is historical interpretation. It should not be turned into proof that this one statute alone caused the Social War."},{"id":"LR-licinia-mucia-dating","instrument":"licinia-mucia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"95 BCE is the joint consular year of L. Licinius Crassus and Q. Mucius Scaevola. The later Social War is historical consequence and context, not the law’s enactment event.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §48"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Asconius’ causal explanation for allied alienation is historical interpretation. It should not be turned into proof that this one statute alone caused the Social War."},{"id":"LR-licinia-mucia-operation","instrument":"licinia-mucia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The law addressed people asserting Roman citizenship without entitlement. Its use in Balbo is a historical comparison about the handling of status, rather than the positive source of Balbus’ enfranchisement.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §48"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Asconius’ causal explanation for allied alienation is historical interpretation. It should not be turned into proof that this one statute alone caused the Social War."},{"id":"LR-licinia-mucia-transmission","instrument":"licinia-mucia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Cicero’s reference and Asconius’ explanation are separate literary witnesses; no original census investigation dossier is available here.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §48"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Asconius’ causal explanation for allied alienation is historical interpretation. It should not be turned into proof that this one statute alone caused the Social War."},{"id":"LR-licinia-mucia-debate","instrument":"licinia-mucia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Asconius’ causal explanation for allied alienation is historical interpretation. It should not be turned into proof that this one statute alone caused the Social War.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Cornelio Balbo §48"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 425","locator":"Printed pp. 425","pdfPages":[445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Asconius’ causal explanation for allied alienation is historical interpretation. It should not be turned into proof that this one statute alone caused the Social War."},{"id":"LR-porciae-existence","instrument":"porciae","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Rabirio perduellionis 12 contrasts Porcian protection against rods with the Sempronian protection of citizens’ lives. Republic 2.54 explicitly speaks of three Porcian laws by three Porcii.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-268-269","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 268-269","locator":"Printed pp. 268-269","pdfPages":[283,284],"url":null},{"id":"G-307-326","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 307-326","locator":"Printed pp. 307-326","pdfPages":[327,346],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The reach of provocatio outside Rome and under military command is a separate historical question. The dossier does not derive a universal appeal procedure from the short forensic slogan."},{"id":"LR-porciae-dating","instrument":"porciae","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"Early second-century BCE is a cautious conventional placement. Rotondi’s discussion shows that the attribution and date of each of the three measures remain insecure; the plural should not be compressed into one precisely dated statute.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-268-269","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 268-269","locator":"Printed pp. 268-269","pdfPages":[283,284],"url":null},{"id":"G-307-326","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 307-326","locator":"Printed pp. 307-326","pdfPages":[327,346],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The reach of provocatio outside Rome and under military command is a separate historical question. The dossier does not derive a universal appeal procedure from the short forensic slogan."},{"id":"LR-porciae-operation","instrument":"porciae","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The evidence concerns bodily coercion and the safeguards of citizenship. In Rabirius, Cicero mobilizes those protections against an archaizing capital procedure; in the Verrines the issue is a governor’s treatment of citizens.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-268-269","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 268-269","locator":"Printed pp. 268-269","pdfPages":[283,284],"url":null},{"id":"G-307-326","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 307-326","locator":"Printed pp. 307-326","pdfPages":[327,346],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The reach of provocatio outside Rome and under military command is a separate historical question. The dossier does not derive a universal appeal procedure from the short forensic slogan."},{"id":"LR-porciae-transmission","instrument":"porciae","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The laws are known through retrospective literary testimony and allusions, with no complete original text. Family coinage may commemorate civic protection but does not automatically identify all three measures.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-268-269","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 268-269","locator":"Printed pp. 268-269","pdfPages":[283,284],"url":null},{"id":"G-307-326","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 307-326","locator":"Printed pp. 307-326","pdfPages":[327,346],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The reach of provocatio outside Rome and under military command is a separate historical question. The dossier does not derive a universal appeal procedure from the short forensic slogan."},{"id":"LR-porciae-debate","instrument":"porciae","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The reach of provocatio outside Rome and under military command is a separate historical question. The dossier does not derive a universal appeal procedure from the short forensic slogan.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-268-269","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 268-269","locator":"Printed pp. 268-269","pdfPages":[283,284],"url":null},{"id":"G-307-326","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 307-326","locator":"Printed pp. 307-326","pdfPages":[327,346],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The reach of provocatio outside Rome and under military command is a separate historical question. The dossier does not derive a universal appeal procedure from the short forensic slogan."},{"id":"LR-sempronia-capite-existence","instrument":"sempronia-capite","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Rabirio perduellionis 12 explicitly attributes to a Sempronian law protection against deciding a citizen’s caput without the people’s authorization. Plutarch, Gaius Gracchus 4, supplies historical context for the measure against unauthorized capital action.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-309-310","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 309-310","locator":"Printed pp. 309-310","pdfPages":[324,325],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-359","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-359","locator":"Printed pp. 344-359","pdfPages":[364,379],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat the later Clodian general measure of 58 as the same enactment. Nor should Cicero’s defence of his own actions in 63 automatically settle the law’s proper interpretation."},{"id":"LR-sempronia-capite-dating","instrument":"sempronia-capite","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"123 BCE is the conventional Gracchan enactment year. The prosecution of Popillius and later invocations in 70 and 63 are distinct episodes, not fresh enactments of the same measure.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-309-310","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 309-310","locator":"Printed pp. 309-310","pdfPages":[324,325],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-359","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-359","locator":"Printed pp. 344-359","pdfPages":[364,379],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat the later Clodian general measure of 58 as the same enactment. Nor should Cicero’s defence of his own actions in 63 automatically settle the law’s proper interpretation."},{"id":"LR-sempronia-capite-operation","instrument":"sempronia-capite","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The rule concerns competent authorization for a capital proceeding or deprivation of civic life. Its relationship to standing courts, emergency action and the people’s powers is argued, not resolved merely by quoting a prohibition.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-309-310","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 309-310","locator":"Printed pp. 309-310","pdfPages":[324,325],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-359","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-359","locator":"Printed pp. 344-359","pdfPages":[364,379],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat the later Clodian general measure of 58 as the same enactment. Nor should Cicero’s defence of his own actions in 63 automatically settle the law’s proper interpretation."},{"id":"LR-sempronia-capite-transmission","instrument":"sempronia-capite","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The dossier uses literary witnesses to the law and its interpretation, not an original tablet. The plural Sempronian laws elsewhere in Cicero may refer to a broader legislative tradition.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-309-310","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 309-310","locator":"Printed pp. 309-310","pdfPages":[324,325],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-359","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-359","locator":"Printed pp. 344-359","pdfPages":[364,379],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat the later Clodian general measure of 58 as the same enactment. Nor should Cicero’s defence of his own actions in 63 automatically settle the law’s proper interpretation."},{"id":"LR-sempronia-capite-debate","instrument":"sempronia-capite","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not treat the later Clodian general measure of 58 as the same enactment. Nor should Cicero’s defence of his own actions in 63 automatically settle the law’s proper interpretation.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro C. Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Ad Quirites §12"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-309-310","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 309-310","locator":"Printed pp. 309-310","pdfPages":[324,325],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-359","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-359","locator":"Printed pp. 344-359","pdfPages":[364,379],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat the later Clodian general measure of 58 as the same enactment. Nor should Cicero’s defence of his own actions in 63 automatically settle the law’s proper interpretation."},{"id":"LR-papiria-dedication-existence","instrument":"papiria-dedication","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Domo 127–128 names an old tribunician Papirian law forbidding consecration of a building, land or altar without the plebs’ authorization; §§136–137 report the pontiffs’ answer concerning Licinia’s dedication.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §128","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §136"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-234-235","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 234-235","locator":"Printed pp. 234-235","pdfPages":[249,250],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Livy 9.46.7 describes approval by Senate or a majority of tribunes, whereas Cicero stresses authorization of the plebs. Rotondi therefore doubts simple identity and allows a later supplementary measure."},{"id":"LR-papiria-dedication-dating","instrument":"papiria-dedication","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The law was already old when invoked in 57 BCE. The Licinia precedent is dated by its consuls to 123 BCE, but §136 does not name the Papirian statute: making that precedent a firm terminus for this specific law would be an inference. Its identification with Livy’s measure of 304 remains disputed.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §128","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §136"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-234-235","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 234-235","locator":"Printed pp. 234-235","pdfPages":[249,250],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Livy 9.46.7 describes approval by Senate or a majority of tribunes, whereas Cicero stresses authorization of the plebs. Rotondi therefore doubts simple identity and allows a later supplementary measure."},{"id":"LR-papiria-dedication-operation","instrument":"papiria-dedication","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The issue is competence to make a dedication binding on public and sacred law. The prior Licinia case provides a model for asking whether Clodius had adequate authority to consecrate Cicero’s site.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §128","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §136"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-234-235","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 234-235","locator":"Printed pp. 234-235","pdfPages":[249,250],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Livy 9.46.7 describes approval by Senate or a majority of tribunes, whereas Cicero stresses authorization of the plebs. Rotondi therefore doubts simple identity and allows a later supplementary measure."},{"id":"LR-papiria-dedication-transmission","instrument":"papiria-dedication","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Cicero transmits both a legal restriction and a report of pontifical decision-making. These are different documentary layers; neither is an independently surviving original enactment.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §128","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §136"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-234-235","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 234-235","locator":"Printed pp. 234-235","pdfPages":[249,250],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Livy 9.46.7 describes approval by Senate or a majority of tribunes, whereas Cicero stresses authorization of the plebs. Rotondi therefore doubts simple identity and allows a later supplementary measure."},{"id":"LR-papiria-dedication-debate","instrument":"papiria-dedication","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Livy 9.46.7 describes approval by Senate or a majority of tribunes, whereas Cicero stresses authorization of the plebs. Rotondi therefore doubts simple identity and allows a later supplementary measure.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §128","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §136"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-234-235","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 234-235","locator":"Printed pp. 234-235","pdfPages":[249,250],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Livy 9.46.7 describes approval by Senate or a majority of tribunes, whereas Cicero stresses authorization of the plebs. Rotondi therefore doubts simple identity and allows a later supplementary measure."},{"id":"LR-clodia-exile-existence","instrument":"clodia-exile","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Domo 47 criticizes the tense of the named measure against Cicero; §50 reports its charge concerning a false senatorial resolution. His letters and later historians show the practical effects of exile and confiscation.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §47"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-395-396","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 395-396","locator":"Printed pp. 395-396","pdfPages":[410,411],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-516-525","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 516-525","locator":"Printed pp. 516-525","pdfPages":[536,545],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge’s reconstruction of a time limit for appearance is criticized by Rotondi. This illustrates why the dossier records arguments rather than harmonizing all accounts into one invented procedure."},{"id":"LR-clodia-exile-dating","instrument":"clodia-exile","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"58 BCE is secure. Proposed exact March/April dates depend on reconstructing publication, voting and Cicero’s movements; Rotondi records internal scholarly disagreement. The atlas does not claim a verified exact day.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §47"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-395-396","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 395-396","locator":"Printed pp. 395-396","pdfPages":[410,411],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-516-525","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 516-525","locator":"Printed pp. 516-525","pdfPages":[536,545],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge’s reconstruction of a time limit for appearance is criticized by Rotondi. This illustrates why the dossier records arguments rather than harmonizing all accounts into one invented procedure."},{"id":"LR-clodia-exile-operation","instrument":"clodia-exile","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The measure singles out Cicero and supports interdiction, confiscation and restrictions on assistance or restoration. Cicero challenges it as an unlawful privilegium and denies that a properly authorized judgment preceded it.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §47"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-395-396","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 395-396","locator":"Printed pp. 395-396","pdfPages":[410,411],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-516-525","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 516-525","locator":"Printed pp. 516-525","pdfPages":[536,545],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge’s reconstruction of a time limit for appearance is criticized by Rotondi. This illustrates why the dossier records arguments rather than harmonizing all accounts into one invented procedure."},{"id":"LR-clodia-exile-transmission","instrument":"clodia-exile","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The text is preserved in hostile quotation and historical reports, not a complete plebiscite. The general measure concerning untried citizens is registered separately.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §47"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-395-396","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 395-396","locator":"Printed pp. 395-396","pdfPages":[410,411],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-516-525","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 516-525","locator":"Printed pp. 516-525","pdfPages":[536,545],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge’s reconstruction of a time limit for appearance is criticized by Rotondi. This illustrates why the dossier records arguments rather than harmonizing all accounts into one invented procedure."},{"id":"LR-clodia-exile-debate","instrument":"clodia-exile","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Greenidge’s reconstruction of a time limit for appearance is criticized by Rotondi. This illustrates why the dossier records arguments rather than harmonizing all accounts into one invented procedure.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §47"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-395-396","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 395-396","locator":"Printed pp. 395-396","pdfPages":[410,411],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-516-525","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 516-525","locator":"Printed pp. 516-525","pdfPages":[536,545],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Greenidge’s reconstruction of a time limit for appearance is criticized by Rotondi. This illustrates why the dossier records arguments rather than harmonizing all accounts into one invented procedure."},{"id":"LR-clodia-auspices-existence","instrument":"clodia-auspices","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Sestio 33 attacks the legislative changes of 58. Asconius 8 C explains a prohibition on observing the sky on days when business could be transacted with the people and relates it to the Aelian law.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Sestio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-397","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 397","locator":"Printed pp. 397","pdfPages":[412],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"“Abolition of auspices” is too broad. Rotondi’s expansive formulation about intercession should not displace the narrower practice described by Asconius; auspices, obnuntiatio and tribunician veto are distinguishable."},{"id":"LR-clodia-auspices-dating","instrument":"clodia-auspices","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"58 BCE belongs to Clodius’ tribunate under Piso and Gabinius. Vatinium’s conduct in 59 precedes that change; his later examination is not evidence that the Clodian measure already operated in his tribunate.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Sestio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-397","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 397","locator":"Printed pp. 397","pdfPages":[412],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"“Abolition of auspices” is too broad. Rotondi’s expansive formulation about intercession should not displace the narrower practice described by Asconius; auspices, obnuntiatio and tribunician veto are distinguishable."},{"id":"LR-clodia-auspices-operation","instrument":"clodia-auspices","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The practical issue is obstruction or validity of assemblies through announced celestial observation and adverse religious reports. Cicero portrays the change as demolition of constitutional safeguards.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Sestio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-397","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 397","locator":"Printed pp. 397","pdfPages":[412],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"“Abolition of auspices” is too broad. Rotondi’s expansive formulation about intercession should not displace the narrower practice described by Asconius; auspices, obnuntiatio and tribunician veto are distinguishable."},{"id":"LR-clodia-auspices-transmission","instrument":"clodia-auspices","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The record combines polemical Ciceronian characterization with Asconius’ later explanation. It does not preserve the complete statute or every exception.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Sestio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-397","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 397","locator":"Printed pp. 397","pdfPages":[412],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"“Abolition of auspices” is too broad. Rotondi’s expansive formulation about intercession should not displace the narrower practice described by Asconius; auspices, obnuntiatio and tribunician veto are distinguishable."},{"id":"LR-clodia-auspices-debate","instrument":"clodia-auspices","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"“Abolition of auspices” is too broad. Rotondi’s expansive formulation about intercession should not displace the narrower practice described by Asconius; auspices, obnuntiatio and tribunician veto are distinguishable.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Sestio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-397","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 397","locator":"Printed pp. 397","pdfPages":[412],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"“Abolition of auspices” is too broad. Rotondi’s expansive formulation about intercession should not displace the narrower practice described by Asconius; auspices, obnuntiatio and tribunician veto are distinguishable."},{"id":"LR-aelia-existence","instrument":"aelia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Vatinium 18 and 23 names the Aelian and Fufian laws; Asconius 8 C specifically associates the Aelian law with confirmation of obnuntiatio.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign every rule about elections, auspices and legislative timing to this law merely because Cicero often pairs its name with Fufia. The particular allocation remains partly reconstructed."},{"id":"LR-aelia-dating","instrument":"aelia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The original date and proposer are uncertain. Rotondi’s approximate 158 BCE comes from interpreting Cicero’s rounded century before the Clodian change, not an independently dated enactment record.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign every rule about elections, auspices and legislative timing to this law merely because Cicero often pairs its name with Fufia. The particular allocation remains partly reconstructed."},{"id":"LR-aelia-operation","instrument":"aelia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The law formed part of the procedural and religious constraints invoked against legislation. In Vatinium the question is his handling of constitutional obstacles in 59, before Clodius’ measure.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign every rule about elections, auspices and legislative timing to this law merely because Cicero often pairs its name with Fufia. The particular allocation remains partly reconstructed."},{"id":"LR-aelia-transmission","instrument":"aelia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Separate naming and occasional individual allusion support distinct laws, but do not supply a complete division of their clauses. The surviving evidence is literary.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign every rule about elections, auspices and legislative timing to this law merely because Cicero often pairs its name with Fufia. The particular allocation remains partly reconstructed."},{"id":"LR-aelia-debate","instrument":"aelia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not assign every rule about elections, auspices and legislative timing to this law merely because Cicero often pairs its name with Fufia. The particular allocation remains partly reconstructed.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not assign every rule about elections, auspices and legislative timing to this law merely because Cicero often pairs its name with Fufia. The particular allocation remains partly reconstructed."},{"id":"LR-fufia-existence","instrument":"fufia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Vatinium 18 attests the paired Aelian and Fufian framework; other Ciceronian references collected by Rotondi distinguish the Fufian name in legislative disputes.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not confuse this older Fufian law with Fufius Calenus’ later jury-voting law or the Fufia Caninia on manumission. These are different instruments."},{"id":"LR-fufia-dating","instrument":"fufia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"A second-century BCE date is approximate. The proposer and exact year are not secured by the passages in this dossier; the law cannot simply inherit every inferred detail of the Aelian measure.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not confuse this older Fufian law with Fufius Calenus’ later jury-voting law or the Fufia Caninia on manumission. These are different instruments."},{"id":"LR-fufia-operation","instrument":"fufia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The relevant role is procedural control of legislation and the possible consequences of violating such controls. Cicero invokes these safeguards rhetorically against Vatinius’ use of tribunician power.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not confuse this older Fufian law with Fufius Calenus’ later jury-voting law or the Fufia Caninia on manumission. These are different instruments."},{"id":"LR-fufia-transmission","instrument":"fufia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"No complete statute survives here. Reconstructions allocating an action or penalty specifically to Fufia depend on scattered literary references rather than a quoted complete chapter.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not confuse this older Fufian law with Fufius Calenus’ later jury-voting law or the Fufia Caninia on manumission. These are different instruments."},{"id":"LR-fufia-debate","instrument":"fufia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not confuse this older Fufian law with Fufius Calenus’ later jury-voting law or the Fufia Caninia on manumission. These are different instruments.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §18","In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §37"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-288-289","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 288-289","locator":"Printed pp. 288-289","pdfPages":[303,304],"url":null},{"id":"G-344-349","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 344-349","locator":"Printed pp. 344-349","pdfPages":[364,369],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not confuse this older Fufian law with Fufius Calenus’ later jury-voting law or the Fufia Caninia on manumission. These are different instruments."},{"id":"LR-caecilia-didia-existence","instrument":"caecilia-didia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Domo 41 invokes the law in an argument about publication before a vote; §53 explains the objection to bundling unlike proposals. Philippic 5.8 couples its name with the trinundinum requirement.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §53"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The rule against a rogatio per saturam is not a general modern single-subject doctrine with identical exceptions. The ancient political and voting mechanisms need to remain visible."},{"id":"LR-caecilia-didia-dating","instrument":"caecilia-didia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"98 BCE is the consular enactment year of Q. Caecilius Metellus Nepos and T. Didius. The later cases are evidence of continuing invocation, not proof of an unchanged effective term.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §53"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The rule against a rogatio per saturam is not a general modern single-subject doctrine with identical exceptions. The ancient political and voting mechanisms need to remain visible."},{"id":"LR-caecilia-didia-operation","instrument":"caecilia-didia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The two principal questions are sufficient public notice and freedom to accept or reject distinct proposals separately. Cicero applies those principles to Clodius’ adoption and legislation, but that application itself requires legal argument.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §53"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The rule against a rogatio per saturam is not a general modern single-subject doctrine with identical exceptions. The ancient political and voting mechanisms need to remain visible."},{"id":"LR-caecilia-didia-transmission","instrument":"caecilia-didia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The statute is known through citations and explanations. The exact conversion of trinum nundinum into modern elapsed days is not supplied as an uncontroversial number here.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §53"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The rule against a rogatio per saturam is not a general modern single-subject doctrine with identical exceptions. The ancient political and voting mechanisms need to remain visible."},{"id":"LR-caecilia-didia-debate","instrument":"caecilia-didia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The rule against a rogatio per saturam is not a general modern single-subject doctrine with identical exceptions. The ancient political and voting mechanisms need to remain visible.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §53"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-335","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 335","locator":"Printed pp. 335","pdfPages":[350],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The rule against a rogatio per saturam is not a general modern single-subject doctrine with identical exceptions. The ancient political and voting mechanisms need to remain visible."},{"id":"LR-licinia-iunia-existence","instrument":"licinia-iunia","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Vatinium 33 expressly refers to proceedings under the Licinia Iunia; Philippic 5.8 mentions the more recent Junia Licinia alongside Caecilia Didia. The reversed order of names does not create another law.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-383-384","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 383-384","locator":"Printed pp. 383-384","pdfPages":[398,399],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not present the deposit-before-vote interpretation as undisputed. Separate the charge under the law from proof that the charge was sustained."},{"id":"LR-licinia-iunia-dating","instrument":"licinia-iunia","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"62 BCE is the consular date of D. Junius Silanus and L. Licinius Murena. The interrogation of Vatinius in 56 concerns a prior accusation, not the law’s enactment.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-383-384","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 383-384","locator":"Printed pp. 383-384","pdfPages":[398,399],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not present the deposit-before-vote interpretation as undisputed. Separate the charge under the law from proof that the charge was sustained."},{"id":"LR-licinia-iunia-operation","instrument":"licinia-iunia","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The law belongs to authentication and publication of legislation. The familiar requirement to deposit a copy at the treasury, with witnesses, rests on wider testimony and scholarly reconstruction; the Vatinium passage alone proves neither its entire wording nor all procedural penalties.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-383-384","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 383-384","locator":"Printed pp. 383-384","pdfPages":[398,399],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not present the deposit-before-vote interpretation as undisputed. Separate the charge under the law from proof that the charge was sustained."},{"id":"LR-licinia-iunia-transmission","instrument":"licinia-iunia","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Scattered literary testimony supports a legislative safeguard and enforcement. Rotondi records disagreement over whether the deposit concerned the proposed text or the enacted law.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-383-384","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 383-384","locator":"Printed pp. 383-384","pdfPages":[398,399],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not present the deposit-before-vote interpretation as undisputed. Separate the charge under the law from proof that the charge was sustained."},{"id":"LR-licinia-iunia-debate","instrument":"licinia-iunia","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not present the deposit-before-vote interpretation as undisputed. Separate the charge under the law from proof that the charge was sustained.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio §33"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-383-384","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 383-384","locator":"Printed pp. 383-384","pdfPages":[398,399],"url":null}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not present the deposit-before-vote interpretation as undisputed. Separate the charge under the law from proof that the charge was sustained."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-edictis-existence","instrument":"cornelia-edictis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Asconius 59 C expressly reports that Cornelius carried a law requiring praetors to administer justice according to their standing edicts. Dio 36.40 supplies a parallel historical account.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371","locator":"Printed pp. 371","pdfPages":[386],"url":null},{"id":"G-82-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 82-99","locator":"Printed pp. 82-99","pdfPages":[102,119],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not identify this with the imperial codification conventionally associated with Hadrian and Julian. Rotondi already notes that the constraint should not be construed absolutely."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-edictis-dating","instrument":"cornelia-edictis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"67 BCE is the tribunate of C. Cornelius, distinct from Sulla’s legislation of 81. Verres’ earlier praetorships cannot be judged as violations of a statute that had not yet been enacted.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371","locator":"Printed pp. 371","pdfPages":[386],"url":null},{"id":"G-82-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 82-99","locator":"Printed pp. 82-99","pdfPages":[102,119],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not identify this with the imperial codification conventionally associated with Hadrian and Julian. Rotondi already notes that the constraint should not be construed absolutely."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-edictis-operation","instrument":"cornelia-edictis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The law constrains variation in the magistrate’s announced administration of justice and aims at favouritism. It does not abolish praetorian interpretation or transform every edict into a popular statute.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371","locator":"Printed pp. 371","pdfPages":[386],"url":null},{"id":"G-82-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 82-99","locator":"Printed pp. 82-99","pdfPages":[102,119],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not identify this with the imperial codification conventionally associated with Hadrian and Julian. Rotondi already notes that the constraint should not be construed absolutely."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-edictis-transmission","instrument":"cornelia-edictis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Asconius provides an ancient paraphrase incorporating a compact statement of the rule. The complete enactment is lost; the expression edicta perpetua here refers to standing edicts.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371","locator":"Printed pp. 371","pdfPages":[386],"url":null},{"id":"G-82-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 82-99","locator":"Printed pp. 82-99","pdfPages":[102,119],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not identify this with the imperial codification conventionally associated with Hadrian and Julian. Rotondi already notes that the constraint should not be construed absolutely."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-edictis-debate","instrument":"cornelia-edictis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not identify this with the imperial codification conventionally associated with Hadrian and Julian. Rotondi already notes that the constraint should not be construed absolutely.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371","locator":"Printed pp. 371","pdfPages":[386],"url":null},{"id":"G-82-99","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 82-99","locator":"Printed pp. 82-99","pdfPages":[102,119],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not identify this with the imperial codification conventionally associated with Hadrian and Julian. Rotondi already notes that the constraint should not be construed absolutely."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-maiestate-existence","instrument":"cornelia-maiestate","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Asconius 59–61 C expressly identifies the Cornelian maiestas prosecution of Cornelius, including the Cominii accusers and the interruption of the first proceeding.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59–61 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The imperial law of treason and offences against an emperor cannot be retrojected into this Republican dispute. A surviving account of an accusation does not itself prove the charged constitutional violation."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-maiestate-dating","instrument":"cornelia-maiestate","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"81 BCE is the conventional Sullan enactment date. The accusation in 66 and renewed trial in 65 are later applications; they must not be confused with the defendant’s own legislation in 67.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59–61 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The imperial law of treason and offences against an emperor cannot be retrojected into this Republican dispute. A surviving account of an accusation does not itself prove the charged constitutional violation."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-maiestate-operation","instrument":"cornelia-maiestate","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The accusation turns on Cornelius reading his proposal despite intercession. The defence contests whether the act violated tribunician power and public authority. Legislative reading, a colleague’s veto and completion of a vote are separate stages.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59–61 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The imperial law of treason and offences against an emperor cannot be retrojected into this Republican dispute. A surviving account of an accusation does not itself prove the charged constitutional violation."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-maiestate-transmission","instrument":"cornelia-maiestate","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The complete statute is not extant here. Asconius’ account and surviving quotations of the defence provide evidence for application, not every act originally covered by maiestas.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59–61 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The imperial law of treason and offences against an emperor cannot be retrojected into this Republican dispute. A surviving account of an accusation does not itself prove the charged constitutional violation."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-maiestate-debate","instrument":"cornelia-maiestate","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The imperial law of treason and offences against an emperor cannot be retrojected into this Republican dispute. A surviving account of an accusation does not itself prove the charged constitutional violation.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 59–61 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-360","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 360","locator":"Printed pp. 360","pdfPages":[375],"url":null},{"id":"G-423-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 423-424","locator":"Printed pp. 423-424","pdfPages":[443,444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The imperial law of treason and offences against an emperor cannot be retrojected into this Republican dispute. A surviving account of an accusation does not itself prove the charged constitutional violation."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-exemptions-existence","instrument":"cornelia-exemptions","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Asconius 58–59 C distinguishes Cornelius’ original proposal from the revised measure adopted: two hundred senators had to be present for a senatorial exemption, followed by reference to the people without obstructive intercession.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 58–59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-370-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 370-371","locator":"Printed pp. 370-371","pdfPages":[385,386],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Displaying only the initial demand for exclusive popular authority would misstate the resulting arrangement. Keep the quorum and later popular step attached to the revised version."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-exemptions-dating","instrument":"cornelia-exemptions","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"67 BCE is the relevant tribunician year. The initial proposal and the revised enactment are successive versions, not evidence for two identically worded operative laws.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 58–59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-370-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 370-371","locator":"Printed pp. 370-371","pdfPages":[385,386],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Displaying only the initial demand for exclusive popular authority would misstate the resulting arrangement. Keep the quorum and later popular step attached to the revised version."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-exemptions-operation","instrument":"cornelia-exemptions","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The measure regulates who can release a person from a law and how Senate and people participate. It concerns legal exemption, rather than general repeal or the cancellation of every law by the Senate.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 58–59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-370-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 370-371","locator":"Printed pp. 370-371","pdfPages":[385,386],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Displaying only the initial demand for exclusive popular authority would misstate the resulting arrangement. Keep the quorum and later popular step attached to the revised version."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-exemptions-transmission","instrument":"cornelia-exemptions","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The revised terms survive in Asconius’ historical explanation. His narrative of opposition and compromise is essential to determining which version was actually carried.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 58–59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-370-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 370-371","locator":"Printed pp. 370-371","pdfPages":[385,386],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Displaying only the initial demand for exclusive popular authority would misstate the resulting arrangement. Keep the quorum and later popular step attached to the revised version."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-exemptions-debate","instrument":"cornelia-exemptions","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Displaying only the initial demand for exclusive popular authority would misstate the resulting arrangement. Keep the quorum and later popular step attached to the revised version.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 58–59 Clark (1907)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-370-371","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 370-371","locator":"Printed pp. 370-371","pdfPages":[385,386],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Displaying only the initial demand for exclusive popular authority would misstate the resulting arrangement. Keep the quorum and later popular step attached to the revised version."},{"id":"LR-domitia-priesthoods-existence","instrument":"domitia-priesthoods","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Asconius 79–80 C preserves Cicero’s use of Domitius’ priestly legislation as a precedent. Agrarian Law 2.18 explains the smaller part of the people participating in priestly selection.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 79–80 Clark","De Lege Agraria §2.18"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-329","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 329","locator":"Printed pp. 329","pdfPages":[344],"url":null},{"id":"R-352","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352","locator":"Printed pp. 352","pdfPages":[367],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not say that the entire people directly replaced every form of priestly co-option. The smaller voting body and continued collegial acts matter to the juridical reconstruction."},{"id":"LR-domitia-priesthoods-dating","instrument":"domitia-priesthoods","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The atlas retains the usual 104 BCE date but now records Rotondi’s 103 dating and attempted reconciliation through a tribunician year beginning in December 104. This is a dating disagreement, not a securely documented enactment interval.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 79–80 Clark","De Lege Agraria §2.18"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-329","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 329","locator":"Printed pp. 329","pdfPages":[344],"url":null},{"id":"R-352","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352","locator":"Printed pp. 352","pdfPages":[367],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not say that the entire people directly replaced every form of priestly co-option. The smaller voting body and continued collegial acts matter to the juridical reconstruction."},{"id":"LR-domitia-priesthoods-operation","instrument":"domitia-priesthoods","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The measure gives a selected minority of tribes a part in choosing priests, alongside the colleges’ remaining role. Cicero invokes the precedent in Cornelius’ constitutional defence, not as the criminal charge.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 79–80 Clark","De Lege Agraria §2.18"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-329","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 329","locator":"Printed pp. 329","pdfPages":[344],"url":null},{"id":"R-352","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352","locator":"Printed pp. 352","pdfPages":[367],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not say that the entire people directly replaced every form of priestly co-option. The smaller voting body and continued collegial acts matter to the juridical reconstruction."},{"id":"LR-domitia-priesthoods-transmission","instrument":"domitia-priesthoods","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The law is known through literary testimony and its later repeal or restoration history. Neither a complete voting regulation nor all nomination requirements is preserved in the quoted fragment.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 79–80 Clark","De Lege Agraria §2.18"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-329","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 329","locator":"Printed pp. 329","pdfPages":[344],"url":null},{"id":"R-352","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352","locator":"Printed pp. 352","pdfPages":[367],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not say that the entire people directly replaced every form of priestly co-option. The smaller voting body and continued collegial acts matter to the juridical reconstruction."},{"id":"LR-domitia-priesthoods-debate","instrument":"domitia-priesthoods","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not say that the entire people directly replaced every form of priestly co-option. The smaller voting body and continued collegial acts matter to the juridical reconstruction.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 79–80 Clark","De Lege Agraria §2.18"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-329","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 329","locator":"Printed pp. 329","pdfPages":[344],"url":null},{"id":"R-352","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352","locator":"Printed pp. 352","pdfPages":[367],"url":null},{"id":"G-373-380","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 373-380","locator":"Printed pp. 373-380","pdfPages":[393,400],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not say that the entire people directly replaced every form of priestly co-option. The smaller voting body and continued collegial acts matter to the juridical reconstruction."},{"id":"LR-gabinia-pirates-existence","instrument":"gabinia-pirates","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Asconius 71–72 C preserves the Gabinian proposal and the response to Trebellius’ veto in the Cornelius commentary. Cicero’s Manilian speech and Plutarch, Pompey 25–26, give other accounts of the extraordinary command.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 71–72 Clark"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371-372","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371-372","locator":"Printed pp. 371-372","pdfPages":[386,387],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Different accounts give details of ships, troops and legates. Do not silently harmonize all figures into one verbatim grant, or confuse this law with an earlier Gabinian ballot law."},{"id":"LR-gabinia-pirates-dating","instrument":"gabinia-pirates","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"67 BCE is the tribunate of A. Gabinius and the anti-piracy command. The following year’s Manilian enlargement of Pompey’s responsibilities is a separate enactment.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 71–72 Clark"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371-372","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371-372","locator":"Printed pp. 371-372","pdfPages":[386,387],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Different accounts give details of ships, troops and legates. Do not silently harmonize all figures into one verbatim grant, or confuse this law with an earlier Gabinian ballot law."},{"id":"LR-gabinia-pirates-operation","instrument":"gabinia-pirates","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"In the Cornelius defence, the important relation is procedural precedent: an obstruction was met with a proposal to remove the obstructing tribune. Powers, geographical extent and resources of the command require their own witnesses.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 71–72 Clark"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371-372","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371-372","locator":"Printed pp. 371-372","pdfPages":[386,387],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Different accounts give details of ships, troops and legates. Do not silently harmonize all figures into one verbatim grant, or confuse this law with an earlier Gabinian ballot law."},{"id":"LR-gabinia-pirates-transmission","instrument":"gabinia-pirates","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The dossier contains literary descriptions and a fragment of Cicero transmitted by Asconius, not the original statute. The threat of removal should not be turned into a completed deposition.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 71–72 Clark"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371-372","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371-372","locator":"Printed pp. 371-372","pdfPages":[386,387],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Different accounts give details of ships, troops and legates. Do not silently harmonize all figures into one verbatim grant, or confuse this law with an earlier Gabinian ballot law."},{"id":"LR-gabinia-pirates-debate","instrument":"gabinia-pirates","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Different accounts give details of ships, troops and legates. Do not silently harmonize all figures into one verbatim grant, or confuse this law with an earlier Gabinian ballot law.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, pp. 71–72 Clark"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-371-372","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 371-372","locator":"Printed pp. 371-372","pdfPages":[386,387],"url":null},{"id":"G-79-82","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 79-82","locator":"Printed pp. 79-82","pdfPages":[99,102],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Different accounts give details of ships, troops and legates. Do not silently harmonize all figures into one verbatim grant, or confuse this law with an earlier Gabinian ballot law."},{"id":"LR-twelve-tables-existence","instrument":"twelve-tables","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Milone 9 explicitly invokes the Twelve Tables on killing a nocturnal thief and a daytime thief who defends himself with a weapon. Domo 43 invokes restrictions on privilegia and capital decisions.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §9","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §43"],"scholarship":[{"id":"C2-609-610","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 609-610","locator":"Printed pp. 609-610","pdfPages":[62,63],"url":null},{"id":"G-15-78","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 15-78","locator":"Printed pp. 15-78","pdfPages":[35,98],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A later witness may paraphrase rather than quote. Compare Gaius in Digest 9.2.4.1 and Gellius 11.18.6 for the theft rule; their additional conditions must not be silently inserted into Cicero’s words."},{"id":"LR-twelve-tables-dating","instrument":"twelve-tables","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"451–450 BCE is the traditional date of the decemviral legislation. Cicero’s first-century BCE witness and the much later manuscripts transmitting him are distinct dates in the chain of survival.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §9","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §43"],"scholarship":[{"id":"C2-609-610","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 609-610","locator":"Printed pp. 609-610","pdfPages":[62,63],"url":null},{"id":"G-15-78","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 15-78","locator":"Printed pp. 15-78","pdfPages":[35,98],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A later witness may paraphrase rather than quote. Compare Gaius in Digest 9.2.4.1 and Gellius 11.18.6 for the theft rule; their additional conditions must not be silently inserted into Cicero’s words."},{"id":"LR-twelve-tables-operation","instrument":"twelve-tables","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"In Milo’s defence the rule is an analogy for lawful killing; it does not prove the facts of self-defence on the Appian Way. In Domo the Tables authorize a constitutional objection to legislation against an individual.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §9","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §43"],"scholarship":[{"id":"C2-609-610","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 609-610","locator":"Printed pp. 609-610","pdfPages":[62,63],"url":null},{"id":"G-15-78","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 15-78","locator":"Printed pp. 15-78","pdfPages":[35,98],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A later witness may paraphrase rather than quote. Compare Gaius in Digest 9.2.4.1 and Gellius 11.18.6 for the theft rule; their additional conditions must not be silently inserted into Cicero’s words."},{"id":"LR-twelve-tables-transmission","instrument":"twelve-tables","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"No original Twelve Tables survive. Crawford, law 40, separates sources, reconstruction and commentary; even the ordering and numbering of reconstructed clauses can differ from Bruns and other editions.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §9","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §43"],"scholarship":[{"id":"C2-609-610","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 609-610","locator":"Printed pp. 609-610","pdfPages":[62,63],"url":null},{"id":"G-15-78","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 15-78","locator":"Printed pp. 15-78","pdfPages":[35,98],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A later witness may paraphrase rather than quote. Compare Gaius in Digest 9.2.4.1 and Gellius 11.18.6 for the theft rule; their additional conditions must not be silently inserted into Cicero’s words."},{"id":"LR-twelve-tables-debate","instrument":"twelve-tables","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"A later witness may paraphrase rather than quote. Compare Gaius in Digest 9.2.4.1 and Gellius 11.18.6 for the theft rule; their additional conditions must not be silently inserted into Cicero’s words.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro T. Annio Milone §9","De Domo Sua Ad Pontifices §43"],"scholarship":[{"id":"C2-609-610","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 609-610","locator":"Printed pp. 609-610","pdfPages":[62,63],"url":null},{"id":"G-15-78","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 15-78","locator":"Printed pp. 15-78","pdfPages":[35,98],"url":"greenidge.html"},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"A later witness may paraphrase rather than quote. Compare Gaius in Digest 9.2.4.1 and Gellius 11.18.6 for the theft rule; their additional conditions must not be silently inserted into Cicero’s words."},{"id":"LR-sullan-citizenship-existence","instrument":"sullan-citizenship","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Caecina 95–100 debates a Sullan measure affecting citizenship and the retention of rights involving property and inheritance. The statutory saving clause and Cicero’s constitutional objection are separate arguments.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §95"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-352-353","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352-353","locator":"Printed pp. 352-353","pdfPages":[367,368],"url":null},{"id":"G-566-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 566-568","locator":"Printed pp. 566-568","pdfPages":[586,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat Cicero’s general proposition as an uncontested description of every historical deprivation of citizenship. The Sullan punitive settlement and legal capacity of particular communities need separate proof."},{"id":"LR-sullan-citizenship-dating","instrument":"sullan-citizenship","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The Sullan settlement supplies the historical setting, conventionally around 81 BCE. Rotondi assigns a citizenship-deprivation law concerning Volaterrae to 81; the current evidence does not recover an official title or exact promulgation event.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §95"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-352-353","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352-353","locator":"Printed pp. 352-353","pdfPages":[367,368],"url":null},{"id":"G-566-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 566-568","locator":"Printed pp. 566-568","pdfPages":[586,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat Cicero’s general proposition as an uncontested description of every historical deprivation of citizenship. The Sullan punitive settlement and legal capacity of particular communities need separate proof."},{"id":"LR-sullan-citizenship-operation","instrument":"sullan-citizenship","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The defence argues both that citizenship cannot simply be taken away and that the relevant private-law capacity remains protected even on the opponent’s premise. These are alternative routes to standing or entitlement, not a single straightforward concession.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §95"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-352-353","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352-353","locator":"Printed pp. 352-353","pdfPages":[367,368],"url":null},{"id":"G-566-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 566-568","locator":"Printed pp. 566-568","pdfPages":[586,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat Cicero’s general proposition as an uncontested description of every historical deprivation of citizenship. The Sullan punitive settlement and legal capacity of particular communities need separate proof."},{"id":"LR-sullan-citizenship-transmission","instrument":"sullan-citizenship","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"A forensic report of a law and its interpretation survives; no original municipal status decree is reproduced. The modern descriptive title must remain visibly supplied.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §95"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-352-353","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352-353","locator":"Printed pp. 352-353","pdfPages":[367,368],"url":null},{"id":"G-566-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 566-568","locator":"Printed pp. 566-568","pdfPages":[586,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat Cicero’s general proposition as an uncontested description of every historical deprivation of citizenship. The Sullan punitive settlement and legal capacity of particular communities need separate proof."},{"id":"LR-sullan-citizenship-debate","instrument":"sullan-citizenship","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not treat Cicero’s general proposition as an uncontested description of every historical deprivation of citizenship. The Sullan punitive settlement and legal capacity of particular communities need separate proof.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro A. Caecina §95"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-352-353","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 352-353","locator":"Printed pp. 352-353","pdfPages":[367,368],"url":null},{"id":"G-566-568","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 566-568","locator":"Printed pp. 566-568","pdfPages":[586,588],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not treat Cicero’s general proposition as an uncontested description of every historical deprivation of citizenship. The Sullan punitive settlement and legal capacity of particular communities need separate proof."},{"id":"LR-flaccus-gold-existence","instrument":"flaccus-gold","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Flacco 67 expressly reports Flaccus’ edict forbidding export of gold from Asia and appeals to earlier senatorial policy. The surrounding passages concern money collected for Jerusalem and its handling.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Flacco §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s hostile characterization of Jewish participants is rhetoric, not evidence that they lacked rights or that their accusations were false. Keep the claimed public policy distinct from alleged private appropriation."},{"id":"LR-flaccus-gold-dating","instrument":"flaccus-gold","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The edict belongs to Flaccus’ Asian administration, conventionally 62–61 BCE; the defence of 59 is later testimony. A precise issue day and complete duration are not established.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Flacco §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s hostile characterization of Jewish participants is rhetoric, not evidence that they lacked rights or that their accusations were false. Keep the claimed public policy distinct from alleged private appropriation."},{"id":"LR-flaccus-gold-operation","instrument":"flaccus-gold","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The legal question includes the governor’s competence to prohibit export and whether the seized money was properly accounted for. Justifying an export restriction does not prove that every seizure or subsequent disposition was lawful.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Flacco §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s hostile characterization of Jewish participants is rhetoric, not evidence that they lacked rights or that their accusations were false. Keep the claimed public policy distinct from alleged private appropriation."},{"id":"LR-flaccus-gold-transmission","instrument":"flaccus-gold","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The edict and senatorial precedents are reported by the advocate; no independent posted edict or full accounts survive in this dossier.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Flacco §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s hostile characterization of Jewish participants is rhetoric, not evidence that they lacked rights or that their accusations were false. Keep the claimed public policy distinct from alleged private appropriation."},{"id":"LR-flaccus-gold-debate","instrument":"flaccus-gold","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Cicero’s hostile characterization of Jewish participants is rhetoric, not evidence that they lacked rights or that their accusations were false. Keep the claimed public policy distinct from alleged private appropriation.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Flacco §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-109-132","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 109-132","locator":"Printed pp. 109-132","pdfPages":[129,152],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero’s hostile characterization of Jewish participants is rhetoric, not evidence that they lacked rights or that their accusations were false. Keep the claimed public policy distinct from alleged private appropriation."},{"id":"LR-valeria-debt-existence","instrument":"valeria-debt","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Fonteio’s opening fragments refer to the accounting effects of the debt adjustment. Velleius 2.23.2 explicitly says that Valerius Flaccus ordered creditors to receive a quarter.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Fonteio §1","Pro M. Fonteio §2"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-347-348","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 347-348","locator":"Printed pp. 347-348","pdfPages":[362,363],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi notes that cessation of operation does not itself prove formal repeal by another Cornelian law. This Valerian debt measure is distinct from the Valerian authorization of Sulla."},{"id":"LR-valeria-debt-dating","instrument":"valeria-debt","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"86 BCE is the suffect consulship associated with the law. The later Fonteius prosecution discusses earlier public accounting; it does not date the measure to the trial.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Fonteio §1","Pro M. Fonteio §2"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-347-348","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 347-348","locator":"Printed pp. 347-348","pdfPages":[362,363],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi notes that cessation of operation does not itself prove formal repeal by another Cornelian law. This Valerian debt measure is distinct from the Valerian authorization of Sulla."},{"id":"LR-valeria-debt-operation","instrument":"valeria-debt","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The adjustment remits three quarters of the relevant debt burden in the historical account. The forensic issue is whether Fonteius’ treasury or accounting conduct can be impugned from records produced under this exceptional adjustment.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Fonteio §1","Pro M. Fonteio §2"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-347-348","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 347-348","locator":"Printed pp. 347-348","pdfPages":[362,363],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi notes that cessation of operation does not itself prove formal repeal by another Cornelian law. This Valerian debt measure is distinct from the Valerian authorization of Sulla."},{"id":"LR-valeria-debt-transmission","instrument":"valeria-debt","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The speech survives imperfectly at its beginning. A later historian supplies an explicit summary of the fraction; do not fill the missing forensic text with an invented statute.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Fonteio §1","Pro M. Fonteio §2"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-347-348","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 347-348","locator":"Printed pp. 347-348","pdfPages":[362,363],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi notes that cessation of operation does not itself prove formal repeal by another Cornelian law. This Valerian debt measure is distinct from the Valerian authorization of Sulla."},{"id":"LR-valeria-debt-debate","instrument":"valeria-debt","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Rotondi notes that cessation of operation does not itself prove formal repeal by another Cornelian law. This Valerian debt measure is distinct from the Valerian authorization of Sulla.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro M. Fonteio §1","Pro M. Fonteio §2"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-347-348","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 347-348","locator":"Printed pp. 347-348","pdfPages":[362,363],"url":null},{"id":"G-415-428","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 415-428","locator":"Printed pp. 415-428","pdfPages":[435,448],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Rotondi notes that cessation of operation does not itself prove formal repeal by another Cornelian law. This Valerian debt measure is distinct from the Valerian authorization of Sulla."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-falsis-existence","instrument":"cornelia-falsis","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Verrines II.1.108 cites the testamentary and monetary Cornelian law as an example of a statute operating prospectively. Later Digest 48.10 preserves a developed law of falsum.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-356-357","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 356-357","locator":"Printed pp. 356-357","pdfPages":[371,372],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723","locator":"Printed pp. 723","pdfPages":[176],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not back-project imperial extensions or penalties into the law of 81. Its traditional multiple descriptive names do not supply a surviving official title page."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-falsis-dating","instrument":"cornelia-falsis","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"81 BCE is the conventional Sullan enactment date. Verres’ urban edict in 74 and the published accusation in 70 are later contexts of comparison.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-356-357","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 356-357","locator":"Printed pp. 356-357","pdfPages":[371,372],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723","locator":"Printed pp. 723","pdfPages":[176],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not back-project imperial extensions or penalties into the law of 81. Its traditional multiple descriptive names do not supply a surviving official title page."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-falsis-operation","instrument":"cornelia-falsis","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"Cicero’s immediate point is temporal application, illustrated by forgery-related legislation. The statute is not the charge under which Verres is prosecuted, and the passage does not establish that Asellus forged a will.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-356-357","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 356-357","locator":"Printed pp. 356-357","pdfPages":[371,372],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723","locator":"Printed pp. 723","pdfPages":[176],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not back-project imperial extensions or penalties into the law of 81. Its traditional multiple descriptive names do not supply a surviving official title page."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-falsis-transmission","instrument":"cornelia-falsis","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Later juristic collections assemble many extensions beyond wills and coins. Crawford expressly declined to reconstruct this law as a text in Roman Statutes, contrasting its evidential position with the already conjectural Aquilian reconstruction.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-356-357","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 356-357","locator":"Printed pp. 356-357","pdfPages":[371,372],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723","locator":"Printed pp. 723","pdfPages":[176],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not back-project imperial extensions or penalties into the law of 81. Its traditional multiple descriptive names do not supply a surviving official title page."},{"id":"LR-cornelia-falsis-debate","instrument":"cornelia-falsis","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not back-project imperial extensions or penalties into the law of 81. Its traditional multiple descriptive names do not supply a surviving official title page.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["In C. Verrem §2.1.108"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-356-357","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 356-357","locator":"Printed pp. 356-357","pdfPages":[371,372],"url":null},{"id":"C2-723","source":"C2","label":"M. H. Crawford (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol. II (1996), pp. 723","locator":"Printed pp. 723","pdfPages":[176],"url":null},{"id":"G-424","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424","locator":"Printed pp. 424","pdfPages":[444],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not back-project imperial extensions or penalties into the law of 81. Its traditional multiple descriptive names do not supply a surviving official title page."},{"id":"LR-aurelia-iudiciaria-existence","instrument":"aurelia-iudiciaria","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Asconius 17 C explicitly credits the praetor L. Aurelius Cotta with distributing jury service among senators, equites and tribuni aerarii. Verrines II.2.174 describes the contemporary proposal for new jurors.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-369","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 369","locator":"Printed pp. 369","pdfPages":[384],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis discusses the uncertain identity of tribuni aerarii and their property qualification. The law’s existence and broad redistribution are firmer than every modern reconstruction of its social categories."},{"id":"LR-aurelia-iudiciaria-dating","instrument":"aurelia-iudiciaria","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"70 BCE is fixed by Cotta’s praetorship and the prosecution of Verres. The existing Verres jury must not be redrawn as already constituted under the three-order arrangement merely because reform was being debated.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-369","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 369","locator":"Printed pp. 369","pdfPages":[384],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis discusses the uncertain identity of tribuni aerarii and their property qualification. The law’s existence and broad redistribution are firmer than every modern reconstruction of its social categories."},{"id":"LR-aurelia-iudiciaria-operation","instrument":"aurelia-iudiciaria","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The reform ends exclusive senatorial control of the relevant public juries and establishes participation from three groups. Their social and census qualifications need to be distinguished from actual panel selection in a particular trial.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-369","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 369","locator":"Printed pp. 369","pdfPages":[384],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis discusses the uncertain identity of tribuni aerarii and their property qualification. The law’s existence and broad redistribution are firmer than every modern reconstruction of its social categories."},{"id":"LR-aurelia-iudiciaria-transmission","instrument":"aurelia-iudiciaria","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Asconius is more specific than abbreviated accounts in Livy’s epitome or Velleius that describe a transfer to equites or a division between two orders. Preserve that difference rather than counting the summaries as identical wording.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-369","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 369","locator":"Printed pp. 369","pdfPages":[384],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis discusses the uncertain identity of tribuni aerarii and their property qualification. The law’s existence and broad redistribution are firmer than every modern reconstruction of its social categories."},{"id":"LR-aurelia-iudiciaria-debate","instrument":"aurelia-iudiciaria","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Lewis discusses the uncertain identity of tribuni aerarii and their property qualification. The law’s existence and broad redistribution are firmer than every modern reconstruction of its social categories.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-369","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 369","locator":"Printed pp. 369","pdfPages":[384],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis discusses the uncertain identity of tribuni aerarii and their property qualification. The law’s existence and broad redistribution are firmer than every modern reconstruction of its social categories."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-iudiciaria-existence","instrument":"pompeia-iudiciaria","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Asconius 17 C expressly says Pompey promulgated the measure in his second consulship and retained selection from the three orders. Pisonem 94 is the contemporary passage being explained; Philippic 1.20 later names the Pompeian law.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","In L. Calpurnium Pisonem §94","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-35","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 35","locator":"Printed pp. 35","pdfPages":[61],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis, pp. 213–214, explicitly rejects treating Asconius as proof that Pompey raised the census threshold. Enforcement of existing qualification and limits on discretionary selection are alternatives. “Highest census” does not supply a new numerical threshold."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-iudiciaria-dating","instrument":"pompeia-iudiciaria","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"55 BCE is independently anchored by the second consulship and Asconius’ dating of In Pisonem. The verb promulgavit attests public proposal; Cicero’s lege iudiciaria lata and later reference provide the wider enactment context. No exact voting day is established.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","In L. Calpurnium Pisonem §94","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-35","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 35","locator":"Printed pp. 35","pdfPages":[61],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis, pp. 213–214, explicitly rejects treating Asconius as proof that Pompey raised the census threshold. Enforcement of existing qualification and limits on discretionary selection are alternatives. “Highest census” does not supply a new numerical threshold."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-iudiciaria-operation","instrument":"pompeia-iudiciaria","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The rule concerns selection from the highest assessed property category and centuries in a manner different from before. It retains the three-order framework rather than creating a new exclusive senatorial or equestrian jury.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","In L. Calpurnium Pisonem §94","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-35","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 35","locator":"Printed pp. 35","pdfPages":[61],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis, pp. 213–214, explicitly rejects treating Asconius as proof that Pompey raised the census threshold. Enforcement of existing qualification and limits on discretionary selection are alternatives. “Highest census” does not supply a new numerical threshold."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-iudiciaria-transmission","instrument":"pompeia-iudiciaria","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The original statute is not extant. Rotondi records an unproved attempt to identify Florentine jury fragments with it; those fragments must not be presented as a secure physical copy of this law.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","In L. Calpurnium Pisonem §94","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-35","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 35","locator":"Printed pp. 35","pdfPages":[61],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis, pp. 213–214, explicitly rejects treating Asconius as proof that Pompey raised the census threshold. Enforcement of existing qualification and limits on discretionary selection are alternatives. “Highest census” does not supply a new numerical threshold."},{"id":"LR-pompeia-iudiciaria-debate","instrument":"pompeia-iudiciaria","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Lewis, pp. 213–214, explicitly rejects treating Asconius as proof that Pompey raised the census threshold. Enforcement of existing qualification and limits on discretionary selection are alternatives. “Highest census” does not supply a new numerical threshold.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Asconius, In Pisonem, p. 17 Clark (1907)","In L. Calpurnium Pisonem §94","Asconius, In Pisonianam, 17 C (comment on Piso 94)"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-405","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 405","locator":"Printed pp. 405","pdfPages":[420],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-35","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 35","locator":"Printed pp. 35","pdfPages":[61],"url":null},{"id":"LEW-213-214","source":"LEW","label":"R. G. Lewis, Asconius: Commentaries on Speeches of Cicero (2006), pp. 213-214","locator":"Printed pp. 213-214","pdfPages":[239,240],"url":null},{"id":"G-433-456","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 433-456","locator":"Printed pp. 433-456","pdfPages":[453,476],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Lewis, pp. 213–214, explicitly rejects treating Asconius as proof that Pompey raised the census threshold. Enforcement of existing qualification and limits on discretionary selection are alternatives. “Highest census” does not supply a new numerical threshold."},{"id":"LR-clodia-capite-existence","instrument":"clodia-capite","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Dio 38.14.4 describes Clodius’ general measure against putting a citizen to death without trial. Velleius 2.45.1 likewise reports the rule’s general form and its practical direction against Cicero.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Cassius Dio, Roman History 38.14.4–6; English translation E. Cary (1914), pp. 226–229"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-394-395","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 394-395","locator":"Printed pp. 394-395","pdfPages":[409,410],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The general wording does not itself decide the controversy about the Senate’s emergency authorization in 63. That is the contested legal and political background."},{"id":"LR-clodia-capite-dating","instrument":"clodia-capite","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"58 BCE is the tribunician setting. Dio’s account of proposal and the later named measure should be kept in sequence; an exact promulgation or voting day is not secured here.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Cassius Dio, Roman History 38.14.4–6; English translation E. Cary (1914), pp. 226–229"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-394-395","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 394-395","locator":"Printed pp. 394-395","pdfPages":[409,410],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The general wording does not itself decide the controversy about the Senate’s emergency authorization in 63. That is the contested legal and political background."},{"id":"LR-clodia-capite-operation","instrument":"clodia-capite","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The legal trigger is alleged killing of a citizen without trial, with interdiction as the reported sanction. The political target is Cicero’s handling of the Catilinarians in 63, but the initial form did not simply name him.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Cassius Dio, Roman History 38.14.4–6; English translation E. Cary (1914), pp. 226–229"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-394-395","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 394-395","locator":"Printed pp. 394-395","pdfPages":[409,410],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The general wording does not itself decide the controversy about the Senate’s emergency authorization in 63. That is the contested legal and political background."},{"id":"LR-clodia-capite-transmission","instrument":"clodia-capite","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"The rule is mediated by later historical accounts and retrospective Ciceronian defence. No original plebiscite is reproduced. It is separate from both Gracchus’ earlier safeguard and the later named Clodian exile measure.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Cassius Dio, Roman History 38.14.4–6; English translation E. Cary (1914), pp. 226–229"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-394-395","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 394-395","locator":"Printed pp. 394-395","pdfPages":[409,410],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The general wording does not itself decide the controversy about the Senate’s emergency authorization in 63. That is the contested legal and political background."},{"id":"LR-clodia-capite-debate","instrument":"clodia-capite","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"The general wording does not itself decide the controversy about the Senate’s emergency authorization in 63. That is the contested legal and political background.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Cassius Dio, Roman History 38.14.4–6; English translation E. Cary (1914), pp. 226–229"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-394-395","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 394-395","locator":"Printed pp. 394-395","pdfPages":[409,410],"url":null},{"id":"G-359-366","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 359-366","locator":"Printed pp. 359-366","pdfPages":[379,386],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"The general wording does not itself decide the controversy about the Senate’s emergency authorization in 63. That is the contested legal and political background."},{"id":"LR-dolabella-sponsio-existence","instrument":"dolabella-sponsio","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Quinctio 30 reports Dolabella’s order requiring Quinctius to make a sponsio with Naevius on whether the property had been possessed for thirty days under Burrienus’ edict.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero calls it novel and criticizes it, but that characterization does not independently establish nullity. Keep the order’s existence, the advocate’s objection and Greenidge’s reconstruction distinct."},{"id":"LR-dolabella-sponsio-dating","instrument":"dolabella-sponsio","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"The order precedes the hearing of 81 BCE. It belongs to the sequence of this dispute, not the initial creation of the edict or a general act of legislation.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero calls it novel and criticizes it, but that characterization does not independently establish nullity. Keep the order’s existence, the advocate’s objection and Greenidge’s reconstruction distinct."},{"id":"LR-dolabella-sponsio-operation","instrument":"dolabella-sponsio","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The order makes the lawfulness of the edictal possession a preliminary issue with consequences for security and reputation. Quinctius’ advisers object to exposing his standing through this formulation and ask for a more symmetrical arrangement.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero calls it novel and criticizes it, but that characterization does not independently establish nullity. Keep the order’s existence, the advocate’s objection and Greenidge’s reconstruction distinct."},{"id":"LR-dolabella-sponsio-transmission","instrument":"dolabella-sponsio","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"Only Cicero’s report of the decree and reaction is available. This is an individual procedural decision, not a second general praetorian edict.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero calls it novel and criticizes it, but that characterization does not independently establish nullity. Keep the order’s existence, the advocate’s objection and Greenidge’s reconstruction distinct."},{"id":"LR-dolabella-sponsio-debate","instrument":"dolabella-sponsio","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Cicero calls it novel and criticizes it, but that characterization does not independently establish nullity. Keep the order’s existence, the advocate’s objection and Greenidge’s reconstruction distinct.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro P. Quinctio §30"],"scholarship":[{"id":"G-531-541","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 531-541","locator":"Printed pp. 531-541","pdfPages":[551,561],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Cicero calls it novel and criticizes it, but that characterization does not independently establish nullity. Keep the order’s existence, the advocate’s objection and Greenidge’s reconstruction distinct."},{"id":"LR-senate-ambitus-existence","instrument":"senate-ambitus","dimension":"existence","title":"Existence & identification","text":"Murena 67 reports the Senate’s resolution on Cicero’s motion and lists paid attendance, paid following, tribe-wide seating and indiscriminate meals as conduct contrary to the Calpurnian law if done.","evidenceStatus":"Ancient attestation / identification","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not label the resolution a new popular lex or read the enumeration as a factual finding of guilt against Murena. The distinction is the defence’s central procedural move."},{"id":"LR-senate-ambitus-dating","instrument":"senate-ambitus","dimension":"dating","title":"Dating argument","text":"63 BCE is the year of Cicero’s consulship and the Murena defence. The underlying Calpurnian statute dates to 67; the interpretive resolution is a later instrument.","evidenceStatus":"Chronological reconstruction; qualifications retained","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not label the resolution a new popular lex or read the enumeration as a factual finding of guilt against Murena. The distinction is the defence’s central procedural move."},{"id":"LR-senate-ambitus-operation","instrument":"senate-ambitus","dimension":"operation","title":"Legal & procedural operation","text":"The conditional “if these things were done” separates legal characterization from factual proof. Cicero can endorse the Senate’s rule while arguing that Murena’s activities do not meet it.","evidenceStatus":"Interpretation of ancient testimony","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not label the resolution a new popular lex or read the enumeration as a factual finding of guilt against Murena. The distinction is the defence’s central procedural move."},{"id":"LR-senate-ambitus-transmission","instrument":"senate-ambitus","dimension":"transmission","title":"Text & documentary survival","text":"A senatorial decision is embedded in a forensic account rather than preserved as an independently inscribed senatus consultum. The speech is nevertheless explicit about its nature and Cicero’s role.","evidenceStatus":"Transmission / documentary control","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not label the resolution a new popular lex or read the enumeration as a factual finding of guilt against Murena. The distinction is the defence’s central procedural move."},{"id":"LR-senate-ambitus-debate","instrument":"senate-ambitus","dimension":"debate","title":"Disputes & limits","text":"Do not label the resolution a new popular lex or read the enumeration as a factual finding of guilt against Murena. The distinction is the defence’s central procedural move.","evidenceStatus":"Uncertainty / competing reconstruction","ancientReadingSet":["Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67","Pro L. Murena §67"],"scholarship":[{"id":"R-374","source":"R","label":"Giovanni Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani (1912), pp. 374","locator":"Printed pp. 374","pdfPages":[389],"url":null},{"id":"G-424-425","source":"G","label":"A. H. J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time (1901), pp. 424-425","locator":"Printed pp. 424-425","pdfPages":[444,445],"url":"greenidge.html"}],"citationScope":"Exact loci named in the paragraph govern its claims; the attached reading set is instrument-level context, not independent corroboration of every statement.","limit":"Do not label the resolution a new popular lex or read the enumeration as a factual finding of guilt against Murena. The distinction is the defence’s central procedural move."}]