古代ローマのmuniceps : 古代の学者が伝える定義の解釈を中心に

抄録

In the latter half of the fourth century B.C., Rome gained a victory in the so-called Latin War (340〜338 B.C.) and established her hegemony in Latium and Campania. It is well known that in doing so Rome enlarged the citizen body without having substantially changed her constitution as a city state, and it is said that this was made possible by changing the incorporated states into municipia. The terms "municipium" (pl. municipia) and "municipes" (the members of a municipium) were in common use to be used until the Empire, but the institution changed in the course of time and the Romans under the Empire seemed no longer to be able to understand the original meaning of these terms. Municipium and municeps (pl. municipes) caught the attention of the antiquarians and lawyers of the late Republic and the Empire, and a couple of definitions worked out by these students have come down to us, although there are very serious contradictions and confusions among them. The terms were also adopted by Roman historians, who wrote the history of early Rome, but we are unsure if they used them in their original meaning or in the meaning the terms had when the historians were writing history. Accordingly, the interpretation of these historical sources often depends on the subjective judgement of each scholar. The main historical sources for municeps and municipium of the fourth century B.C. are "De verborum significatu" of Pompeius Festus and its epitome by Paulus Diaconus. In this paper, I have tried to reexamine these sources and various attempts to interpret them by modern scholars in order to arrive at a better understanding of this important institution. In doing so however I was constrained to concentrate the argumentation on philological interpretations of the texts of Festus and Paulus, and on the problem of how much the understanding of the antiquarians and lawyers, from whom Festus got his information, had depended on old traditons. The results of these investigations are as follows : 1. Aelius Gallus, whom Festus used in the item of Municeps, informs us of the opinion of the lawyers who lived in the late Republic and under the Empire. Among them there was a common opinion that the state of a municeps originated from taking over munus and that this was the oldest meaning of the term. 2. Servius, whom Festus cites in the same item, seeks the origin of municipes in the people who became Romans by the grant of the civitas s. s. before the Social War (91-87 B.C.). 3. Of the three definitions which Paulus gives in the item of Municipium (which he derived from the lost item of Festus), the second and third concern the peoples who were incorporated in the Roman State by the grant of the full citizenship, the former before, and the latter after the Social War. It is, however, of no concern whether the former peoples were granted with civitas o. i. or civitas s. s. at the time of incorporation into the Roman State. 4. We should not assume any relationship between the first and the two other definitions in the item of Municipium. The first definition is rather related to the definition which lawyers such as Aelius Gallus and Ulpianus give as the original meaning of a municeps, and can be attributed to an understanding held in common by lawyers and antiquarians under the Empire. 5. We can assume that this understanding was won out of the etymological interpretation of the term municeps (munus capiens = one who undertakes munus) and probably also some hisorical information about the legal state of the Volsci and the Campanians who stayed in Rome after their communities had concluded treaties with Rome in the fourth century until they were incorporated in the Roman State after the Latin War. This legal state probably imitated the legal state which the old Latins staying in Rome enjoyed according to their old customary institution. It might also be possible that

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)