viglietti () servilian triens reconsidered

PERUNATLANTEANTROPOLOGICODELLAMITOLOGIAGRECAEROMANA

IQUADERNIDELRAMODOROONLINENUMEROSPECIALE(2012),pp.177202

CRISTIANOVIGLIETTI

THESERVILIANTRIENSRECONSIDERED*

forNicolaParise

In ancient societies, greater valuewas attachedto conspicuous consumption than to increasedproduction,ortothepainfulacquisitionofmorewealth.

M.I.Finley(inHOPKINS1983a,p.xiv)

In the second volumeof Studi per Laura Breglia, published in 1987, French historianHubertZehnackergaveforthefirsttimesystematicconsideration1tothemeaningofafascinatingbutchallengingpassageofPlinytheEldersNaturalHistory:

Unumetiamnumaerismiraculumnonomittemus.Serviliafamiliainlustrisinfastistrientemaereum pascit auro, argento, consumentem utrumque.origo atque natura eius incompertamihi est. verba ipsa deea re Messallae senis ponam: Serviliorum familia habet trientemsacrum, cui summa cum curamagnificentiaque sacraquotannis faciunt.quem ferunt aliascrevisse,aliasdecrevisseviderietexeoauthonoremautdeminutionemfamiliaesignificare.(Plin.Nat.34.38.137)2Wemustnotneglect tomentiononeotherremarkable factrelated tocopper.TheServilianfamily,soillustriousinthelistsofmagistrates,nourisheswithgoldandsilveracoppertriens,which feedsonboth. Iwasnotabletoverify itsoriginandnature;but Iwillrelatetheverywordsof the storyas toldbyoldMessalla: The familyof theServilii is inpossessionofasacredtriens,towhichtheyoffersacrificeyearly,withthegreatestcareandveneration;theysay that the triens sometimes seems to increase and sometimes todecrease, and that thisindicatesthehonourordiminishingofthefamily.

Pliny thus concludes the first section of his thirtyfourth Book, dedicated to copper and itsalloys3, with an extraordinary and miraculous tale (miraculum)4 that for all its difficulty of

*Unlessotherwisestated,allthetranslationsaremine.IwishtoacknowledgeWilliamM.ShortforhishelpintheEnglishtranslationofthisarticle.1Cf.MOMMSEN1860,p.536;DEMARCHI1896,p.95;GRUEBER1910,vol.2,p.280n.1;GALLETDESANTERRELEBONNIEC1953,p.302;GEIGER1973,p.143;CRAWFORD1974,p.448n.1;nonewithdetailedargumentation.2ThefragmentofM.ValeriusMessallacorrespondstoDefamiliisRomanisfr.2Peter.3ThesecondpartofBook34isdevotedtoiron.4AlsoatPlin.Nat.18.46.166,thetransitionfromthesectiondedicatedtograinstothatdedicatedtoploughingismarkedbyamiraculousaccount(ostentum):thatofthegrainwhichgrewonthetrees intheyearRomedefeatedHannibal(201BC);cf.GALLETDESANTERRELEBONNIEC1953,p.301.

CRISTIANOVIGLIETTI 178


interpretation(incompertamihiest)neverthelessappearsworthrepeating(nonomittemus).Thestoryconcernsacoppertriensthatfeedson,consumes(consumentem)goldandsilverandisveneratedbytheServilii,afamilythathadprovidednumerousimportantmagistrates(inlustrisinfastis)totheRomanstate5.Unabletoauthenticatethemiraculuminquestion,PlinyreportsthewordsofMessallasenexthatis,ofMarcusValeriusMessalaRufus,consulin53BCandoffspringofoneof themost celebratedpatrician gentes, aswell as authorof the lostworkDe familiisRomanis.According toMessalla, the Serviliiwere inpossessionofa sacred (sacrum) triens towhicheveryyear (quotannis)cultactivitieswerepainstakinglydevoted. In thisculticcontextwherethetriensportentousfeedingongoldandsilverpresumablyoccurredthetrienswasthought to have given predictive signs (significare)6: in Messallas terms, the enlargement(crevisse)ofthetrienswasbelievedtosignifythefamilyshonos,whereasanyreductionofitssize(decrevisse)wasbelievedtopredictthefamiliasshrinkage(deminutio)aswell.ThemiraculumofthetrienswassomethingtheServiliispokeof(ferunt)asapresentrealityeveninMessallastime,asindicatedalsobyhisdescriptionusingverbsofthepresenttense7.Mostlikely,aswewillshowlater,thecultdidntexistanylongeratPlinystime,though.1.HUBERTZEHNACKERSTHEORYZehnackerdevelopedhistheoryoftheServiliantriensbasedonthispassagetheonlyevidencewepossessofithopingtoexplainmorepreciselywhattheLatinwordtriensreferstoinPlinystext.Theoretically, a triens made of aes (the latter term referring both to copper and to thevariousbronzealloysinwhichthismetalpredominates)cancorrespondtothreedifferentthings:1)1/3ofapound(c.109g)ofcopperbronze;2)1/3ofanas(as),understoodasapremonetaryunitofvaluecorrespondingtoaweightof 1/3ofapoundofcopperbronze, inuse fromthearchaicperioduntilthebeginningofthethirdcenturyBC8.Duringthistime,commercialtransactionswereconductedusingtheaesasageneralinstrumentofexchange,firstinroughform,thenintheformofingots[Figs.12]whosevaluewasdeterminedsolelyonthebasisofweight9;or3)1/3ofanas(as),understoodasacopperlenticularcoin,mintedatRomefromthebeginningofthethirdcenturyBCuntil8786or82BC.10Thevalueofalenticularcoinbeinglargelyindependentofitsweight, a triens could thus correspond, at different times, to coins of different weights anddimensions[Figs.34].

5The firstServilianconsulwas,accordingtothesources,ServiliusPriscusStructus,consulof495BC:BROUGHTON1968,p.13.ThelastwasQ.ServiliusSilanus,ofAD189:DEROHDENDESSAU1978,p.229n.429.Cf.ZEHNACKER1987,p.15.6Theprophecyof the trienswould thusbeaprsageprefiguratifdterminant,according to theclassificationofBAYET1936,p.2751.7ZEHNACKER1987,p.9.8Cf.Varr.L.5.36.171,andbelow,n.10.9SORDA1976,pp.65and7273;PARISE1987,p.90;VIGLIETTI2011,p.289.10CRAWFORD1974,p.136and367n.350b/2;MARTINI1988,p.82.Cf.GRUEBER1910,vol.1,p.8n.32,284n.2207,and288n.2237.TheterminuspostquemfortheintroductionofcopperlenticularcoinsatRomeis289285BC(onthebasisofLiv.Per. 11andPompon. inDig. 1.2.28):ZEHNACKER1973,pp.6667and222;VIGLIETTI2010,pp.209210;cf.CATALLI1990,pp.6775.

THESERVILIANTRIENSRECONSIDERED 179

IQUADERNIDELRAMODOROONLINE

Zehnackersettledonthethirdofthesepossibleinterpretations,takingtheServiliantrienstohavebeenalenticularcoin11.ThisinterpretationwasalsosuggestedbytheexpressiontrientemaereumwhichPlinyusestodescribethisobject.AccordingtoZehnacker,inancientsourcesthatrefer to copper used by weight, words denoting a quantity of metal (for example, sextans,quadrans,triensetc.)arealwaysusedinconjunctionwithaeris.IftheServiliantrienshadbeenamassofmetaloftheweightorvalueofatriens,Plinywouldthereforehaveusedtheexpressiontriensaerisandnottriensaereus12.HavingdeterminedthenatureoftheServiliantriens inthisway, Zehnacker then links the cult inwhich this copperobject is featured to the fact that inRomansociety,followingtheinstitutionofthecensusinthearchaicperiod,thestatusofacitizenand of his family was closely linked to a public appraisal of the wealth and prestige of theindividualpatres familiasthatwasexpressed intermsofthousandsofassesofcopperbronze13.Foracitizenswealthtobereducedbyfine,forexample,wouldalsohaveentailedariskofthatcitizen falling on the communitys social ladder,while, vice versa, increases ofwealth mightenablethatcitizentoclimbtoahighersocialrank14.

The miraculum of the Servilian triens can be explained within this conceptual andideological framework as constituting an analogue15 of the censors assessment of the familiaServiliainlustrisinfastis,reflectingitsfortunesovertime:Ifitincreasesinsize,thefortuneandsocialrankoftheServiliiwillincreases;ifitdecreases,theytoowilldecrease.Allthatcanbedoneistomakesacrificialofferings,inthehopeofnourishingitsprosperity17.Theworshipofacoinmadeofcopperandbyfeedingitgoldandsilverbecomesexplainable,thatis,inthelogicofasocietywherethevalueofafamilysprestigeandofwealthwasexpressed,throughthecensus,intermsofcopperasses.Thus,inconsecratingpreciousobjectstothetriens,theServiliihopedtorendertheverysymbolofthecensusmore favourabletothem.Thissocioculturaldynamicalsoexplainsthe factthatthesacredtrienswasveneratedannually.AlmostallofthemagistratesoftheRoman statewere electedon ayearlybasis, and theability toobtainpoliticaloffices (thehonores ofwhichMessalla speaks) represented a basicmarker guaranteeing the prestigeof afamilylikethatoftheServilii.

Zehnacker concluded byproposing a further explanationof the ideologyunderlying theServiliancultof thecopper triens.According tohim, thepractice shouldbeunderstoodasatraditionalistexaltationofthevirtuesofancientpremonetarycopper,foundationofthehierarchyofthecivicbody18.ThefamilyoftheServiliiwasanoldonethatcouldcountamongitsmembersnumerousconsulsfromthebeginningofthefifthtothemiddleofthefourthcenturyBCbutthatuptothemiddleofthethirdcenturyBChadgonethroughaphaseofrelativeobscurity19.Inthis context, the Servilii can be seen as revitalizing an ancient practice by establishing atraditionalist cultof a lenticular coin that, however, was certainly not treated as such20. Its

11Cf.n.1.12ZEHNACKER1987,p.10.13Liv.1.42.5/43.13;Dion.Hal.A.R.4.1622;NICOLET1980,pp.5056;PITTIA2007,pp.151152.14ZEHNACKER1987,p.12.15Onthecategoryofthedouble,seeVERNANT1983,pp.303320.17ZEHNACKER1987,p.14.18Ibid.,p.17.19Ibid.,p.16andn.20.20Ibid.,p.17.



worshipshouldbethereforebereadasacritique,onthepartoftheServilii,oftheintroductionofa lenticularmonetarysystem intoRomansociety fromGreece:Countertotheemergenceofamonetarysystemthatwaspurelyrationalandmathematic,theancienttriens...wouldremindtheServiliiof theuniqueroleofcopper in thecreationofRomessocialstructures,andof thereligiousandmagicoriginsofthecoin21.2.PROBLEMATIZINGZEHNACKERSTHEORY:WHATWASTHETRIENSANDWHEN?Theinterpretationofthetale,andcult,oftheServiliantriensthatIwouldliketodevelopisbasedon two fundamentalconvictions:First, thatZehnackersapproach isbasicallycorrect in takingthePlinianpassageseriously.ThestoryoftheServiliantriensisvaluableevidenceofatraditionbelongingtooneofthemostancientandimportantRomanfamilies,andcrediblyexpressesinsomemeasure at least the systemofvalues belonging to (aportionof)Roman society at adefinedhistoricmoment.BasedonZehnackersdiscussion,itisalsopossible,however,torereadthemiraculumfullyaccordingtotheconceptualcategoryofmyth.MatchingWalterBurkertsdefinitionofmyth, themiraculum is in factanaccount that isboth traditionalandas Iwillshowfullofhistoricallysituatedculturalmeanings22.Whatsmore,ithasthatspecialblendofambiguity,marvelandwonderthatJ.P.Vernant23claimedisabasiccharacteristicofeverymyth.Furthermore,thefactthattheServiliantrienswasgivenannualsacrificeanoccasiononwhichallthemembersofthisfamilycametogethercannotbeoverlooked24:themyth,therefore,hasarite inextricably associated with it, fully fitting the paradigm of the other gentilicial cultspertainingtothemostancientnobleRomanfamilies25.

Second,preciselybecausePlinysdescriptionof themiraculum isnota storiella26butanaccount thick with cultural meanings, its interpretation will require the integration of twohermeneutic instruments:philology,allowingustounderstandthemeaningoftheLatinwordsthatdescribe themythand rite inquestion,andculturalhistory27,helpingusunderstand thehistoricalandanthropologicalframeinwhichthemiraculumwasconceivedandelaborated.

Thechronologicalcontextofthestorycanbepreciselyidentifiedthankstothetriensitself.UnlikeZehnacker,MarioFiorentini(1988)andCarlaFayer(1994)suggestthattheServiliantriensshouldbeunderstoodasapieceofcopperweighingonethirdofanas28.Theirreasoningisthatifthetrienshadbeena lenticularcoin,theServiliancultwouldhavetobedatedtoarelativelyrecent period, contrary to what typically occurs for other ancient Roman families29.Hypothesizingthatthetrienswasaroughmassofmetalcorrespondingtotheweightandvalueof1/3 of an as (and thus belonging to a socalled premonetary phase of Roman society),

21ZEHNACKER1987,p.17.22BURKERT1993,p.17;cf.BETTINI2010,p.xxii.ThetermmiraculumisoftenusedinLatintodescribestoriesthatwecouldcallmyths,suchasthatoftheshewolfwhosuckledRomulusandRemus:Liv.1.4.7;cf.Hor.ArsP.144;Liv.1.45.4;Ov.Met.2.193;Flor.1.10.3;Min.Fel.Oct.10.3.23VERNANT1980,pp.130132and236239.24Ontherelationshipbetweenmythandritual,seeBURKERT1979,pp.5658.25DEMARCHI1896,pp.1565;FIORENTINI1988,pp.120127;FAYER1994,pp.8895;SMITH2006,pp.4446.26CORSO1988,p.255n.137.2.27BURKE2004.28FIORENTINI1988,p.123;cf.FAYER1994,p.93.NeitherscholarseemstoknowtheworkofZehnacker,however.29NumerousexamplesinFAYER1994,pp.8993;ontheServilii,cf.CAPOGROSSICOLOGNESI2009,p.52.



FiorentiniandFayerareabletorelatetheServilianculttothearchaicageofRome:inparticular,invirtueoftheaniconicityofthisroughmass,Fiorentini30tracesthebeginningofitsvenerationbacktothefirsttwocenturiesofthecityshistory,aperiodinwhichimagesofdivinitiesinbodilyformarenotthoughttohaveexistedatRome31andduringwhichtheServiliiweregrantedRomancitizenshipfollowingtheannexationoftheterritoryofAlbaLongaintheseventhcenturyBC32.

Since nothing excludes that the Servilii may have possessed other cults of which noevidence remains (either prior to or alongside that of the triens), the fact remains thatZehnackersargumentthatthetriens isacoin isnot, in itself,verystrong.Theadjectiveaereusappears incollocationwithcointerms inonlyeight instances inallofLatin literature33,and inoneof those instances the expression aerei nummi is clearly related to aphrase inwhich theworthof the instrumentofexchange isdescribedbyweightandnotby thekindofnumericalvalue imposed on lenticular money34. There are even some cases in which name of theinstrumentof exchange + aeris36 (sometimeswith aerisplacedbefore) indisputably refers tolenticularmoney,makingitdifficulttoacceptZehnackersargumentinitsentirety.Thisdoesnotpreventus,though,fromagreeingwithhisconclusionthattheServiliantriensisacoin,andforbothhistoricalandcontextualreasons.

Historically,theoriginalsourceofthemyth isValeriusMessallaRufus,wholivedinthefirstcenturyBC,whencoinsofthevalueofa trienswere regularlymintedby theRomanstate(moreprecisely,thecoinswereminteduntil8786or82BC,butwereincirculationwellafter)37.Thus, for the authorofDe familiisRomanis, and forhis sources, the expression aereus trienswithout anyother specificationmust havemeant copper coinof the valueof 1/3of an as.Contextually, inPlinysaccount theServilian triensalwaysremainsa triens, independentof itsgrowingorshrinkinginsize.Thismustbebecauseitisconceivedasalenticularcoin,whosevalueisdeterminedbythemarkofvalueplaceduponitbythemintingauthority.Becausethevalueofalenticularcoinisnotdeterminedfundamentallybyitsweightordimension,butbyitsstamp,thetrienscan increaseordecrease insizeandalways remaina triens38. If theServilian trienshadbeenahunkofcopperweighingatriens,anyincreaseordecreaseofsizewouldhavealsochangeditsvalue;butthisdoesnotoccurinourcase39.

30FIORENTINI1988,pp.123,126,and128129.31August.DeCiv.D.4.31;Plut.Vit.Num.8.14;Clem.Al.Strom.1.15.71.Cf.FAYER1994,p.93n.267.32FIORENTINI 1988,p. 127.Cf.Liv. 1.30.2;Dion.Hal.A.R.3.29.7;BADIAN 1984,pp.5859;CAPOGROSSICOLOGNESI2009,p.30.33Besidethepassageunderdiscussion,cf.Vitr.DeArch.3.1.7;Plin.Nat.34.49.165;Apul.Met.8.28,9.19;Gai.Inst.1.122;SHATrig.Tyr.31.3;Hist.Aug.Prob.4.5.34Gai.Inst.1.122,Atonetimeonlycopperinstrumentsofexchangewereused...aswecanunderstandfromtheLawoftheTwelveTables;theirpowerandauthorityrestednot innumber,but intheirweightoncethosewhogavemoneydidnotcount it,butweighed it(olimaereistantumnummisutebantur . . .sicutex legeXIItabularumintellegere possumus; eorumque nummorum vis et potestas non in numero erat, sed in pondere qui dabat olimpecuniamnonnumerabateam,sedappendebat).Ontheuseofnummustodenoteanypieceofmetalproducedformonetaryuses(nomatterwhat is itsshapeand intrinsicfeatures):PERUZZI1985,pp.272273andPERUZZI1989,p.184.36Gell.NA 5. 2. 2, aeris . . . sestertia trecenta duodecim; SHAHeliogab. 22. 3, folles aeris; SHAAurel. 9. 7, aerisdenarioscentum;SHATyr.Trig.15.8,aerissestertiumdecies;cf.1Sam.17:5,quinquemiliasiclorumaeris.37BronzecoinagewasagainstruckbyCaesarin4645BC;MARTINI1988,pp.2527;CATALLI2001,p.200.38TheRomansclearlydistinguishedbetweennumberedandweighedcoins:Paul.Fest.p.229.57L;cf.Cic.Deopt.gen.orat.1.13;Vol.Maec.44;VIGLIETTI2010,pp.210214.39Cf.FIORENTINI1988,p.123.



Everyindicationpoints,then,tothemythoftheServiliantrienshavingbeenelaboratedby theServiliiatadate later than the introductionof lenticularcoinage toRomenamely,atsomepointafterthebeginningofthethirdcenturyBCandbeforeitsbeingrecountedbyMessallaRufusatsomedatearound50BC.3.PLINYSTHEORY:COPPERVSGOLDANDSILVERIfZehnackerisrightinconsideringtheServiliantriensabronzecoin,Icannotacceptthatthefactof the Serviliiworshipping a coinwithprecisemetallic and economic characteristics has noimpact40ontheinterpretationofthehistoricalandculturalsenseoftheaccount.Rather,Itakethistobeadecisivefactorinitsinterpretation.

Tobegin tounderstand themyth,considerwhatmarketvalue the trienshad in the laterRepublicanperiod.Withagooddegreeofcertitudeitcanbeestablishedthatthevalueofatrienswas rathermodest (albeitnotvery low)between thesecondhalfof the thirdandmostof thesecond century BC the periodwhen, aswe shall see, the Servilian mythwasmost likelyelaboratedmoreor lessequivalenttothepriceofonetotwokilosofwheat,twomeasuresofsalt,somevegetables,oraboattripacrosstheVelabrum42.

The rather lowpurchasingpowerofa triens seems tomyeyes tohavemuch todowithPlinysmotiveforchoosingtoreporttheServilianmythinsoobviousandimportantaplaceinhiswork,attheendofthesectioninBook34dedicatedtoaes.Itisprobablynotexactlycorrecttosay,asZehnackerdoes,thatthesenseofthestoryoftheServiliantrienstotallyescapesPliny44.Plinydoesnotinfactdescribethestoryasobscurus45,butinsteadasincompertus,atermheusestoidentifyinformationthatisheisunsureofnotbecauseitistotallyinexplicable,butbecauseitis difficult to verify46. For the ancient author, however, the lack of an objective means ofverification(very likelybecausethecultdisappeared)doesnotprecludemakingan interpretivehypothesis, which in this case emerges quite clearly from the context. As we know, Plinyintroduces thatpartofBook 33ofhisNaturalisHistoria dedicated tometalswith a seriesofmoralisticconsiderationsthatdescribetheextractionofmetalsasanactofviolenceagainsttheearth,a signofmankindsunstoppablegreediness (avaritia)47 thatbegetsadesire forprecious

40ZEHNACKER1987,p.15.42AccordingtoPliny(Nat.18.4.17cf.VONREDEN2010,p.210)in250BCabushel(about6.4kg)ofwheatcostoneas.In203201BC(Liv.30.26.56,31.4.6),thepriceofgrainquadrupled,andthendroppedtotwoassesabushelbetween200and 196BC(Liv.31.50. 1,33.42.8).Livy(29.37.3)tellsusthat in204BCasextans(halfthevalueofatriens)boughtameasureof salt inRomeand inmostof Italy.Themeasure isprobably abushel (about 18.5kg),whichappears to be the standard quantity used for public doles (Plin. Nat. 31. 41. 89, referring to Ancus Marcius),commerce,anddonations (Plaut.Cas.538;SHAClaud. 14.3);cf. the idiomaticexpressionmultimodii salis simuledere(Cic.Amic.19.67).Cato(Agr.132.2;cf.Paul.Fest.p.287.1113L)informsusthat,inhistimes,foroneasacitizencouldpurchasegrains,fruit,andotheragriculturalproducts intendedforsacrificetoVesta(assariapecunia).Inthelate secondcenturyBC (orperhaps somewhatearlier;cf.Plaut.Capt.489,Curc.482484;GUIDOBALDI ANGELELLI1999,pp.103104),atravellercouldpurchaseatripbyboatacrosstheswampyzoneoftheVelabrumforaquadrans(1/4ofanas,alittlelessthanatriens;Lucil.fr.1272Marx).44ZEHNACKER1987,p.9.45Cf.Cic.Rep.2.18.33;Liv.6.1.12.46Cf.Plin.Nat.4.23.121,12.16.32.47Plin.Nat.33.1.13(and2.63.158);cf.NENCI1968,pp.57;CITRONIMARCHETTI1991,pp.151152,209215;VONREDEN2010,pp.189191;VIGLIETTI2011,pp.291294.



objectsandaberrantusesofmoney48.ButifPlinysmoralismisvehementlyagainstprofaneusesofgoldandsilver(definedasvitaescelera,vitaepestes,insaniae)49,hisattitudeismoremoderatevisvisaes,presentedatthebeginningofBook34:

proximedicanturaerismetalla,cuietinusuproximumestpretium,immoveroanteargentumacpaeneetiamanteaurumCorinthio,stipisquoqueauctoritas,utdiximus.hincaeramilitum,tribuniaerariietaerarium,obaerati,aerediruti.DocuimusquamdiupopulusRomanusaeretantumsignatoususesset:etaliarevetustasaequalemurbiauctoritatemeiusdeclarat,aregeNumacollegiotertioaerariumfabruminstituto.(Plin.Nat.34.1.1)Now we move on to an account of the ores of copper, which is next in practical value.Corinthianbronzeisactuallymorevaluablethansilverandperhapsevengold.Ihavealreadymentioned it in respect to themoney standard: this iswhywe speakof military stipends(aeramilitum), tribunesof the treasury (tribuni aerarii)and the treasury (aerarium),debt bondsmen (obaerati) and being docked of pay (aere diruti). I have also alreadymentionedforwhatlengthoftimetheRomanpeopleusedaesasmoney.Thereisanotherfactofsomeantiquitythatprovesitsauthoritativenesswasequaltothatofthecityitself,namelythatthethirdcollegeestablishedbyNumawasthatofthebronzeworkers.

Aes (excepting Corinthian aes), then, possessed in Plinys time a commercial value (and apurchasingpowerwhenmonetized)clearlyinferiortothatofgoldorsilver50.Nevertheless,itis,according to Plinys vision and classification, privileged among metals in virtue of twofundamentalfeatures:itsgreatpracticalutility(usus)anditsauthority(auctoritas)derivingfromtheantiquity(vetustas)ofitsuses,attestedalreadyinthetimeofthefirstkingsthatis,beforegreed,withthehelpofgoldandsilver,hadcontaminatedthespiritoftheRomanpeople.

Thus the Servilian trienswith its miraculousbehaviour seems toPliny tobeaperfectsynthesisand,inacertainsense,theproofofhistheory.Oneofthemostancient,authoritative,andvaluablefamiliesofRomeconsecratedgoldandsilvertoacoppercoinmadeofthismaterial,showingthatdespiteitsrelativelylowcommercialvaluetheServiliiinlustresinfasticonsidereditmorepreciousthanthosemetalsendowedwithgreatervalue.4.THESERVILIANTHEORY,I:AUGEREPATRIMONIUMNONESTNOBILITATISWemay perhaps understand better nowwhy Pliny recounted themiraculum of the Serviliantriens in so prominent a place. What remains to be seen iswhat reasons the Servilii of theRepublicanperiodmighthavehadforelaboratingthemythandtheriteconnectedtotheirtriens,andifsuchreasonscanbeidentifiedelsewhereinthebroaderculturalhistoryofRome,andalsoinwhatwaytheyrelatetoPlinysideas.

48Plin.Nat.33.2.4,33.4.8,33.13.42,33.14.48,33.31.95;NENCI1968,p.5.Cf.Plin.Nat.2.63.158,25.1.3;ZEHNACKER1983,p.119.49Cf.above,n.48.SimilartermsareusedbyOv.Met.1.141142;cf.Sen.QNat1.17.8,5.15.14(forwhomthesearchforpreciousmetalsisasignofluxuria);Serv.inVerg.A.1.448;CITRONIMARCHETTI1991,pp.161-163;VONREDEN2010,pp.189-190,196.50WithAugustusreformofthemonetarysystem,therelationshipbetweenmoneyedmetalswas:Au:Ag=1:12.25;Au:Cu=1:560;Ag:Cu=1:45;BALBIDECARO1993,p.229.



Before continuing,however, Iwould like to clarifymyown theoryofwhat the Serviliantriensrepresents.UnlikeZehnacker,Idonotbelievethatthiscoinisthesymbolofthecensorsassessmentasexpressed inasses(andespecially lebronzepatrimonialvaluedbyweight).Inmyopinion,thetriensmustbeunderstoodasasymbolofthefamiliaServiliainlustrisinfastisandofitshistory,values,aspirationsandfears.

To beginwith, if this hypothesis is correct, the Serviliimust have considered theirowneconomicvaluenotcoincidentally,thetermfamiliahasthisprecisemeaningaswell51tobemoderate, like the triens.Butnotonly this.The strictlymonetarydimensionof the familiaremainedconstantintime(thetriensdoesnoteverbecome,say,anasoradenarius,orasextans),whilepositiveornegativechangesundergonebytheServilii,indicatedbytheincreaseordecreaseofthecoinssize,wereapparentlydeterminedbyfactorsthatwerenotpredominantlyeconomic:namely,honoresanddeminutiones52.

Can thesemechanisms,seeminglyembedded in thebehavioural logicof the triens,haveanythingtodowiththementalityoftheServilii inlustres in fastisbetweenthemiddleand lateRepublicanperiods?

Considerwhatisperhapsthemostdelicateaspectofthequestion:therelationshipbetweentheServilii/triensandmaterialwealth,orbettertheaccumulation(ornot)ofsuchwealth.Romesextraordinarymilitaryvictoriesafterc.290BC53,andaboveallduringthesecondcenturyBC,hadmadethestate,andmanyprivatecitizens,conspicuouslyricherthantheyhadbeeninthepast54.How tobehave toward theastonishingplunderofmen,moneyand lands, flowing to thecity?OneanswertothisquestionisepitomizedbythewellknownfuneraldiscoursegivenbyQuintus,consulof205BC,inhonourofhisfatherLuciusCaecilusMetellus,consulof250and247BC,aswellasdictator,masterofthehorse,quindecemvirfortheassignationoflands,andbeneficiaryofafamouslyopulenttriumph in250BCfollowinghisvictoryovertheCarthaginianHasdrubalatAgrigentotheyearbefore55.

Amongthetenvirtuesmakinghisfatheroptimus56,Quintuslistedineighthplacethatheaccumulatedalotofmoneyhonestly(pecuniammagnambonomodoinvenire)(Plin.Nat.7.45.140). Caecilius Metellus accumulated money, and so enriched himself while increasing his

51ThissenseofthetermappearsalreadyintheLawoftheTwelveTables(5.4);cf.Gai.Inst.2.102;Pegas.inDig.36.1.15.78andpr.17;Ulp.inDig.37.1.3.2,50.16.195.1.Onthistheme,FAYER1994,p.81n.221;BRETONE1998,pp.2644;CORBINO2010,pp.177178.52Cf.GRUEN1984,p.292.53SpeakingofthevictoryovertheSabinesin290BC,FabiusPictor(fr.27Jacoby)statesTheRomansexperiencedwealth then for the first time ( ); GABBA 1988a. Rome garnerednumerousvictoriesthatbroughtbootyandplunder intothecity.Particularly importantarethetriumphsbetweentheyears194and187BC:GRUEN1984,pp.290294;ROSENSTEIN2010,p.375.54CLEMENTE1981,pp.78;GABBA1988a,pp. 1921.AccordingtoValeriusMaximus(4.3.8),LuciusAemiliusPaulustriumph in 167 BC restored the ancient and hereditary paupertas of our city (veterem atque hereditariam urbisnostrae paupertatem); in 157 BC, the Roman treasury held 17,000 pounds of gold, 22,000 pounds of silver andmoniesworthover6,000,000sesterces(Plin.Nat.33.17.5556);cf.CITRONIMARCHETTI1991,pp.185186.From264BC,gladiatorialgameswereheld inRome,which,however,onlybecameextraordinarilyexpensiveafter 174BC:ROSENSTEIN2010,p.375.55Polyb.1.20.12,1.3940;Cic.Rep.1.1.1;Diod.Sic.23.21;Liv.Per.19;Plin.Nat.8.6.16,18.4.17;Frontin.Str.2.5.4;Flor.1.18.27;Eutr.2.24.56Afterhavingpraisedhimasanextraordinary soldier (bellator),excellentorator (orator), courageous triumpher(imperator), author of great things (res), magistrate of the highest order (honos), possessor of vast intelligence(sapientia),andsenatorofthegreatestauthority(summus):Plin.Nat.7.45.139140;PANI1997,pp.4647.



familyspatrimony57.Hedidso,however,bonomodothatis,conformingtobonitas58,thesystemofvaluescommonlysharedbytheRomansthathadamongitscomponentsasenseofmeasureinrespecttomaterialdesires(aconceptexpressed inLatinbywordssuchasmodestia,moderatio,abstinentia,andinparticularparsimonia)59.

Not long afterQuintusMetellus funeraldiscourse,Marcus PorciusCatowould becomebothamodeloffrugalityandparsimonia,andanadvocateofthesocialacceptabilityofincreasingonespatrimony60.

ThemodelrepresentedbyMetellusandbyCato61isnotnecessarilytheonlywaytheRomanaristocracy of the later Republic answered the question, however, of how to manage onespatrimony.InthesecondBookofDeoratore,Cicerospeaksofdicacitas,thatis,ofthesarcasticusageofhumour in thecourtroomasastrategy forbestingonesadversary. In reportingsomeparticularly relevant examples of this rhetorical skill, Cicero refers to the case of the famousoratorLuciusLiciniusCrassus,whobetween 102and94BCdefendedGnaeusPlancusagainstMarcusJuniusBrutus,sonofthefamousoratorofthesamename.Onthesamedayasthetrialwasbeingheld, the funeralof Junia,ancestorof thechargedBrutusanddirectdescendentofLucius JuniusBrutus, firstconsulofRome,wasalso takingplace.Crassusmakes funofBrutusdicaciterasaknownsquandererofpatrimonies,imagininghimintheactofobservingthecoffinofhisdeadancestor:Whatwouldyouhavethisoldladytellyourfather?Whattoallthosewhosestatuesyouseecarriedby?Whattoyourotherancestors?WhattoLuciusBrutus,wholiberatedthispeople fromthetyrannyofkings?Whatshallshesayyouaredoing?Whatbusiness,whatglory,whatvirtueshallshesayyouarepursuing?Thatyouaretryingtoincreaseyourpatrimony?Butthisisnotsomethingfornoblestodo62.

Brutusisthedescendentofanancientandprestigiousfamily(whichwas,atthetimeofthetrial,alittlehardonitsluck)thathadprovidedtoRome,amongothers,itsfirstconsul,themanwhohadchasedoutthetyrantTarquiniusandestablishedtheRepublic.Noneofhisancestors57On themeaningofpecunia, cf.DILIBERTO 1984,pp.7279,8587;BRETONE 1998,pp.2646.On the relationshipbetween individualenrichment,thearrivalofslavestoRome,andmaritimecommercebetweenthethirdandfirstcenturiesBC,seeGABBA1981,pp.3143.58AccordingtoSallust(Cat.7.6),divitiae,tobeculturallyacceptable,mustbehonestae.TherelationshipbetweenbonitasandhonestasisevincedbyCic.Off.1.5.1517,3.6.28,Leg.1.18.4849;LOTITO1981,p.97;cf.CLEMENTE1990,p.53. Polybius (6. 56. 3) notes: To the degree the Romans consider gain by legal means to be honourable, theyconsider enriching onselfs by illicit means equally dishonourable ( , ). On thehonestasoftheServilii,cf.Cic.Rosc.Am.6.15.59GABBA1988a,p.25;ROSENSTEIN2010,p.374.Thecompatibilityoftheancientpracticeofparsimoniawithincreasingonespatrimony isstressedbyCicero(Off.2.24.87):Afamilyspatrimonyneedstobeprocuredbymeansthatareabsolutelycorrectandconservedwithcautionandparsimonia;withthesesamevirtues,onemustalsoincreaseit(resautem familiarisquaeridebet iis rebus,aquibusabest turpitudo,conservariautemdiligentiaetparsimonia,eisdemetiamrebusaugeri).AlmostthesamewordsatCic.Off.1.26.92.60OnCatosattitudes toward theaccumulationof riches:Plut.Cat.Mai.21.8;cf.Cat.Agr.Praef. 12,4;ANDREAU2004,pp.7379;ROSENSTEIN2008,pp.1011;ROSENSTEIN2010,p.374.OnCatosparsimoniaorfrugalitas:Cat.Orat.fr.93Cugusi;Val.Max.4.3.11;Gell.NA.13.24.12;Plut.Vit.Cat.Mai.4.6;cf.LENTANO1993,pp.1314;DONDINPAYRE2004, p. 57. For a later age,Col.Rust. 1.Praef.7 and 10.On thepartial originality ofCatos point of view on theaccumulationofrichesalsothroughcommercialmeans,seeGABBA1980,pp.92101.61GABBA1981,pp.2731;GABBA1985,p.71;GABBA1988a,pp.2526.62Cic.Deorat.2.55.225226,quidillamanumpatrinuntiarevistuo?quidillisomnibus,quorumimaginesducivides?quidmaioribustuis?quidL.Bruto,quihuncpopulumdominaturegio liberavit?quidteagere?cuirei,cuigloriae,cuivirtuti studere? patrimonione augendo? at id non est nobilitatis. Sed fac esse, nihil superest: libidines totumdissipaverunt.



noblespiritremainsforBrutus,howeverwhomCrassusrepresentsasafiguretotallyinadequatetotherankpertainingtohim,assomeonetotallyincapableofemulatingancestorswhocanonlybeashamedofhim. In lashinghisadversarywithrhetoricalquestions,LiciniusCrassusevincesthetwothingsthatshouldbeexpectedofBrutusasheadofalineage:thatis,obtaininggloryandpracticingvirtuousbehaviour (gloriae . . . virtuti studere)63.Theoratoralsoaddsa third item,increasingpatrimony(patrimonioaugendo),beforeimmediatelyreversinghimself:butthisisnotsomethingfornoblestodo(atidnonestnobilitatis).

LiciniusCrassusthusrevealsasecond,differentattitudethattheRomannobilitas64heldinrespecttothequestionofwealth:anindifferencetoeverydesireofaccumulatingmaterialriches(ofwhich the spendthrift Brutus represents, in somemeasure, theparadoxical and grotesqueaftermath).ThesamebehaviouralmodelisrecognizableinCicerosorationbeforetheSenatethatwouldbecomethefirstPhilippic,whereheaddressestheconsulsMarcusAntoniusnotpresentin thecourtroomandPubliusCorneliusDolabella (consulsuffectus in thatyearandCicerossoninlaw)regardingthree lawsproposedbyAntoniusthatwouldhavenotablycontributedtoan increase of his personal power. InCiceros opinion, those laws are unjust and represent aseriousdeviationfromgoodRepublicantradition,andhetriestoreconcileDolabellawiththesewords(Phil.1.1229):Ibelievethatyouboth,beingmenofhighbirthandgreatambition,havebeeneagertoacquirenotmoney(assomecredulouspeoplehavesuspected),somethingwhichhasalwaysbeendisparagedbymenofhonourand respect;norpowerandauthority,which ifacquired through violence the Roman people cannot possibly endure; but love of yourcountrymen,andglory65.

Againtherefrainthatnobileshominesshouldalwaysdisparagemoneymaking(pecuniam...quaesemper...contemptaest).Instead,theamplissimiandclarissimioughttoaspiretogoodwilltowardsothercitizensandglory(caritatemciviumetgloriam)thatis,tolookingoutforthecommunityswelfarebymeansofactioninthepublicsphere66.

Moderateaccumulationandindifferenceseem,then,torepresentthetwomodalitiesthroughwhich theRomanelitesof the later third to firstcenturyBC related to the themeofwealthand the increaseofpatrimony.Theyarequitedifferentmodalities,butbothmodalitieswhich, in reality, appear to be coherentwith the traditional habitus imposing on citizens anattitude of moderation in respect to material goods, as well as countering and limiting any

63Fortherelationshipbetweenthesetermsandtheguidingroleinmilitaryaffairsthatwasexpectedofaristocrats:ROSENSTEIN1990,pp.264265;ROSENSTEIN2010,pp.366367,370371.64TheServiliiarecallednobilissimibyCic.Rosc.Am.6.15.TheLatinwordnobilitas,whichetymologicallyindicatesrecognizability,designatesarelativelyvaguesocialreality.FromCic.Mur.7.158.17itwouldseemthatonlythosedescendingfromconsulscouldbecountedasnobiles,whileelsewherenobilisseemstorefertothedescendantsofsenators.Thequestionisdebated:cf.BRUNT1982,pp.117;MILLAR1984,pp.1011;FLOWER1996,pp.6170;ROSENSTEIN2010,p.377.TheServiliiarecallednobilissimibyCic.Rosc.Am.6.15.65credoenimvosnobilishominesmagnaquaedamspectantisnonpecuniam,utquidamnimiscredulisuspicantur,quaesemperabamplissimoquoqueclarissimoquecontemptaest,nonopesviolentasetpopuloRomanominime ferendampotentiam,sedcaritatemciviumetgloriamconcupivisse.66GRUEN1984,pp.306307:truenobilesdespisemoney;theirgoalisgloriaandtheaffectionoffellowcitizens;cf.GABBA1981,p.42.



inclinationnottowardenrichmentinandofitselfbuttowarditsdisplayinsociallyunacceptableformslackingasenseofmeasure67.

Wehave littleevidenceabout thehistoricalServiliisattitude towardsmoneyand riches,buttwoextantexamplesmayproveveryinteresting.ThepatricianCnaeusServiliusCaepio(cos141BC), as censor, in 125BC condemned the augurLepidusPorcina forhaving rented out ahouseattheexorbitantpriceof6,000sesterces(Vell.Pat.2.10.1)68thuscensuringPorcinasvitiumofgreediness.Later,PubliusServiliusVatiaIsauricus69wasusedbyCiceroasanadvocateof optimimores (in contrast toVerress cupiditas) because, following a victory, as consul, atOlympus inPamphylia in78BC,hekeptnoneofthespoils(which includedworksofartandotherpreciousobjects) forhimself,butconsignedtheentirehaultothearchiveoftheRomantreasury70.

These two examples of Servilian material sobriety seem perfectly consistent with theworkingof theServilian triens,whichdoesnoteverchange incommercialvalueand revealsitselftobeasymbolofindifferencevisvistheaccumulationofwealth.Andperhapsnotbychance. Looking closely at the advocates of moderate accumulation,we see that this is anideologyoffamiliesofquiterecentnobilitas.CaeciliusMetellus,aplebeian,wasonlythesecondinhisfamilytoreachtheconsulshipandthefirst,MetellusDenter,hadobtainedthispositiononly shortly before, in 284 BC.Cato, as iswell known,was a homo novus71. By contrast, theexamplesofindifferencetowardthe increaseofpatrimonyareadescendentofLucius JuniusBrutusandaCornelius, that is, twomembersof familieswhichhad fromancient timesbeendeeply involved ingoverningRome;this isparticularlytrueoftheCornelii. It isnotdifficulttoconjecture,thenandthebehaviourofthetriensseemsto justifythisclaimthattheServilii,whoaccordingtotraditionwereacceptedintothepatriciateandtheRomansenateintheRegalage,andwhoin495BCgavethecityofRomethefirstofalongseriesofconsuls72,developedanattitudetowardtheincreaseofpatrimonycomparabletothatoftheJuniiandCornelii.

Thisattitude,oncloserinspection,findsitsexplanationinthecensussystemitself,whichsortedthecitizensintheclassesandcenturiesnotonlyasLivy73stressesonthebasisoftheirwealth (fortuna), but also of their dignitas, an abstract noun signifying the greater or lesser

67Thesumptuary lawsofthethirdtosecondcenturiesBC,the lawsdemodoagrorum,theantiusury lawsand,tosomedegree,thelexClaudiaof218BCallseemtohavethesecharacteristics;cf.NICOLET1980,p.80;GABBA1981,pp.3135,3841;GABBA1988a,p.25;CLEMENTE1990,pp.814;GARGOLA1995,pp.144145;TCHERNIA2007,pp.267,271273;RICH2008,pp.563564;VIGLIETTI2011,pp.191207.Onthehistoricalrelativityofwhatwasconsideredindicativeofavaritiaandluxuria,orofmoderatioandparsimonia,seeROSENSTEIN2010,pp.375378;ZANDA2011,p.1(specificallyonluxuria).68ZANDA2011,pp.4445.69Althoughaplebeian,Vatiawasofpatriciandescent (agreatgrandsonofP.ServiliusGeminuscos252and248;BRUNT1982,p.16;BADIAN1984,pp.49and51),andlikelyanadvocateofthetraditionalmoresofthefamily,astheplebeian,butnoble,Servilii,were:Enn.Ann.frg.282284Skutsch;CASSOLA2000,p.18.70Cic.Verr.2.1.5657,2.3.210211.71BRUNT1982,pp.79.Inthislight,thebehaviourofcitizensofrecentnobilityhassomepointsofcontactwiththatofcommonciveswho,afterthethirdcenturyBC,aredescribedinthesourcesasdesirousofbeingenlistedinviewofthemonetarygainthatmightfollowamilitaryvictory:GRUEN1984,pp.289295;cf.GABBA1980,p.93;GABBA1985,p.76.72TheServiliiwerealsoprominentrepresentativesoftheoptimatesfaction(BADIAN1957,p.36;ROMAN1994,pp.386389).73Liv.1.42.4;cf.ANDREAU1998,pp.221,247248.



capacitytorealizewhatdecet74inotherwords,whatisprescribedwithinthebehaviouralcodeofRomansocietyatagivenperiod75.Andan individualsdignitaswasdeterminedbytwobasiccriteria:themagistracieshehasobtained(notbychancealsocalleddignitates)andtheprestigeof the family from which he descends (dignitas familiae, generis), which in turn is stronglyconditionedbythemagistraciesobtainedbyhisancestors76.

Inthecalculusofthecensus,then,fortunabecameamoredecisivefactorforreachingthefirstclass forcitizensbelonging toobscureor lesserknown families,sinceacitizencouldonlyappealtohisown individual(ratherthanfamilial)dignitas77.Forthosebelongingtofamiliesofgreatantiquityandtraditionitwasaverydifferentstory:IfonewasaCorneliusoraServilius,thestore of dignitas familiae78 was such that even with a paltry or, in any case, not increasingpatrimony one could participate in the first class of the census steadily over time, with thepossibilityofgainingimportantgovernmentalpositions79.Tosumup,forfamiliesliketheServilii,more thanmoneywas important toaccumulate familialvirtues through thepracticeofgoodcustoms(virtutesgenerismieismoribusaccumulavi),especiallywhenholdingmagistraciesaswecanreadon thesepulchral inscriptionofthepatricianGnaeusCorneliusScipioHispanus80,datingtoc.135BC(CILI2,15).

AndthisleadsusbacktowhatPliny,viaMessalla,says.5.THESERVILIANTHEORY,II:HONOSANDDEMINUTIOFromwhatwehaveseensofar,theServiliancultofthetriensdoesnotappeartohavemuchtodowiththe increaseordecrease insizeofthebronzepatrimonial,butwiththeaffirmationonthepartofthisfamilyofitsbasicindifferencetotheaccumulationofmaterialwealth.

74ERNOUTMEILLET19594,pp.166167.Cf.NICOLET1976,p.21;PANI1997,p.54.75MichelHumm(2010,p.314)definesdignitasasAdequatebehaviouraccordingtocircumstances,theconformingofactsorofactivitytothe...socialpositionorthe...rankofthecitizen.Cf.NICOLET1976,esp.pp.2026;NICOLET1980,p.318.76Dignitasreferringtothefamiliaofbelonging:Cic.Sull.77,Phil.10.25,13.7,Fam.5.1.1;Sen.Controv.10.Praef.16;Quint.Decl.269p.99.27R;Suet.Tib.1;Ulp.inDig.25.4.1.13;FERRARY1982;PANI1997,p.55.Fordignitasgeneris,cf.Cic.Mur.7.15.77PANI1997,p.55.TwofamouscasesofhominesnoviofthebeginningofthethirdcenturyBCwhodisparagewealthareMCuriusDentatus(consulin290,275,and274BC,suffectusin284BC)andC.FabriciusLuscinus(consulin282and278BC).Intheircases,however,toobtaingoods,moneyandpower,theywouldhavehadtobetrayRomebyaidingtheSabinesorPyrrhus.Acceptinggiftsfromtheenemy,theywouldhaveenrichedthemselvesinawaythatwasinhonestus.Forthisreason,theypreferredtoremainloyaltoRomelivinginastateofpaupertas:VIGOURT2001,p.126;cf.BERRENDONNER2001,pp.101105.CuriusDentatusevenrefused50acresofagerpublicusgiventohimbytheSenate,considering7 (or 14)adequatecompensation.Thesebehaviouralmodelsappearat stakeamongemergentfamilies, and thehominesnovi (butnot, it seems tome, among themost ancient aristocratic families), from themiddleofthethirdcenturyBConwards:GABBA1981,pp.2829;GABBA1988a,pp.2324.78 For example,P. ServiliusVatia Isauricus, exconsul (asholder of a triumph) and excensor (aswell as knownadherentofthe factionoftheoptimates)contributedto thecondemnationofacitizen(sometimeafter55BC)byrecalling that this citizen, riding on horseback, had not alightedwhen they happened tomeet. By this act, theaccusedhaddisrespectedServiliusamplitudoanddignitas:Val.Max.8.5.6.Cf.Plut.Vit.Pomp.14.5.79OnthepaupertasofoutstandingpersonageslikePublicola,CincinnatusandCamillus,seeVIGLIETTI2011,pp.161163, 16971.On L.Aemilius Paulus, cf. Polyb. 18.35.45.On the abundant presence of nonwealthy aristocrats inRomansocietyuptothethirdcenturyBC(andintothesecondandfirstcenturiesBC),seeGABBA1988a,pp.1920.80Thesepulchral inscriptionsoftheCorneliiScipioneswereoutsideofPortaCapenaontheViaAppia,alongsideofwhichstoodthoseoftheServilii(cf.Cic.Tusc. 1.7. 13);COARELLI 1972,p.39;FAYER 1994,p.95.OntheambiguousrelationshipbetweentheServiliiandScipionesattheendofthethirdcenturyBC,seeCASSOLA1962,pp.411416.



WhattheServiliiwereactuallyinterestedinseemstobeexplainedagainbythemythofthetriens,sincethatcoinhasneedofobtaininghonorestogrow(crescere)andalsoofavoidinganydeminutiofamiliaelestitshrink(decrescere).

Towhatdoesthetermhonosrefer?Aswehave justmentioned, inordertopreserve,andgrow, thedignitasofa family, itwascrucial toattain, thanks topopularelection,magistracies,andpossiblythemostimportantone,theconsulatewhichalloweditsholdersnametoappearinfastis.TheRomaneliteoftheRepublicanperiod,especiallyfromtheendofthefourthcenturyBConward81,was, in fact,notahereditaryelitebutan aristocracyofoffice82, strictly related tomagistracies called primarily honores83 , which were mostly appointed annually, like theServiliancultsrecurrence.

While honores conserved and increased the dignitas of a family (as well as its honos,understoodashonour,honourability)84,afamilythathadnotobtainedhonoresforanumberofgenerationsusuallythreeriskedseeing itsprestigegreatlydiminished85,and itsmembershavingtoworklikeahomonovus(aequeacnovohominilaborandumfuit)(Asc.fr.23cLewis=p.23Clark)86,asinAemiliusScaurus(cos115BC)case,orbeingdirectlylikenedtoahomonovus(Cic.Mur.7.16),ashappenedtoServiusSulpiciusRufus(cos51BC)87.

Inonecase,inthethirdcenturyBC,alsotheServiliansriskedtoseetheirhonourdiminishbecauseofalongdisappearanceoftheirmembersfromthelistoftheRomanconsuls.AccordingtoZehnacker88noServiliuswaselectedasaconsulbetween342(QuintusServiliusAhala)and253(Gnaeus Servilius Caepio) BC that is, for three generations.The French scholar decided tooverlook the figure of Gaius Servilius Tucca, cos 284 BC, since his name appears only ininaccuratesources89.Actually for thatyearwehaveno testimonyofLivy,and theepigraphicfastishowafracture.Nevertheless,alltheotherconsularlistsindicatethepresenceofaServilius,albeitwithvariantsastothecognomen90.Inanycase,eveniftheServilianconsulof284BCwasahistoricalfigure,andnecessarilyapatrician(hiscolleague,LuciusCaeciliusMetellusDenter,wasaplebeian),neverthelesstheServiliididnotattainthemostimportanthonosforsomesixtyyears(342to284BC),thatistwogenerations,averylongtimeforafamilyofsuchrankandantiquity.

Alongwiththelackofhonores,evenmoreformidablefortheServiliiwasthepossibilityofsufferingdeminutiofamiliae.ThisexpressionusedbyMessallaseemstohave,inthatcontext,noeconomicconnotationanddoesnotseemtoreferdirectlytoanyreductionofpatrimonydueto

81MILLAR1984,pp.12;FLOWER1996,p.63.82MILLAR1984,p.19.FLOWER1996,p.60;cf.HOPKINS1983b,p.3132;HLKESKAMP1987,pp.241258;NORTH1990,pp.280281;ROSENSTEIN1990,p.256;PANI1997,p.53.83MILLAR1984,p.10;cf.Plaut.Bacch.438.84Onthedifferentmeaningsofthewordhonor/s,seeLENDON1997,pp.273274;ROSENSTEIN2010,p.371.85THOMAS1986,pp.206209;BELTRAMI1998,pp.711.86Cf.HOPKINS1983b,pp.3739;MARSHALL1985,p.139;BELTRAMI1998,pp.810.87BRUNT1982,p.1415;HOPKINS1983b,p.39.88ZEHNACKER1987,p.16andn.20.89ZEHNACKER1987,p.15n.6.90ThecognomenTuccaisrestoredfromtheformsreadableintheChronographers:Tucco(intheablative,Chr.354),Tacio(intheablative;Fast.Hyd.);(inthegenitive;ChrPasc.);C.Servilius(Cassiod.);BROUGHTON1968:vol.1,187andn.1.



fines,asZehnacker91claims.Rather,thetermseemstorefertotheimportantRomanjuridicalandsocioculturalconceptofcapitisdeminutio.ThejuristGaius(Inst.1.159162)explains:

est autem capitisdeminutio prioris status permutatio. eaque tibusmodis accidit: nam autmaximaestcapitisdeminutio,autminor,quamquidammediamvocant,autminima.maximaest capitis deminutio, cum aliquis simul et civitatem et libertatem amittit; quae acciditincensis,quiexformacensualivenire iubentur . . . .minorsivemediaestcapitisdeminutio,cumcivitasamittitur, libertas retinerur;quodacciditeicuiaquaet igni interdictum fuerit.minima est capitis deminutio, cum et civitas et libertas retinetur, sed status hominiscommutatur;quodacciditinhisquiadoptantur,iteminhisquaecoemptionemfaciunt,etinhisquimancipiodanturquiqueexmancipationemanumittuntur;adeoquidem,utquotiensquisque mancipetur aut manumittatur, totiens capite deminuatur. nec solum maioribuscapitisdeminutionibusiusagnationiscorrumpitur,sedetiamminima.Bycapitisdeminutioismeantanalterationofonesformerstatus.Itoccursinthreeways:itiseitherofthehighestdegree,ofthelesserdegree(whichsomecalltheintermediatedegree),orof the lowest degree. It is of the highest degree when a man loses both citizenship andfreedom,ashappenstothosewhohaveintentionallyavoidedbeingregisteredinthecensorslists,andconsequently,bycensoriallaw,areorderedtobesoldasslaves....Thereislesserorintermediatecapitisdeminutiowhencitizenshipislost,butfreedomisretained;thishappenstothosewhoareinterdictedbyfireandwater.Thelowestdegreeoccurswhenbothcitizenshipandfreedomareretained,andonlythelegalstatusoftheindividualischanged.Thishappensinthecaseofthosewhoareadopted,ofwomenwhoundergocoemptio,andofthosewhoaregiven inmanicipium and latermanumitted; in fact, every time someone ismancipated ormanumitted,acapitisdeminutioisincurred.Therightofagnationisdestroyednotonlywiththehigherdegreesofcapitisdeminutiones,butalsowiththelowest.

Gaiusstates thatcapitisdeminutioentailsachangeof legalstatus for thecitizen92.Therewerethreepossibilities:capitisdeminutiomaximanotonlyguaranteedaRomans lossofcitizenship(aswellascapitisdeminutiomedia),butalsomadehimaslavetobesoldonthemarket93.Thelesssevere capitis deminutio minima conserved a citizens freedom, but altered his agnatic rights(which evidentlydisappeared even in casesofmore serious capitis deminutio)94. It should beclear,then,thatcapitisdeminutioneswouldrepresent,inmanycases,agraveharmtoafamilyofhighstatus95.Amemberofafamilyundergoingcapitisdeminutiomaximaasaconsequence,forexample, of being stricken from the census rolls (incensus) would have had to havedemonstratedhis totalseparation from thecommunityand lackofrespect towardsocial rulesand collective laws, perhaps irreparably damaging his familys prestige96. No differently, thememberof familysufferingcapitisdeminutiomediawouldhavehad tohavecommittedcrimes

91ZEHNACKER1987,p.12.92Cf.Cic.Top.4.18(andBoeth.adCic.Top.4.18);Gai.inDig.4.5.1;Paul.inDig.5.4.11;Paul.Fest.p.61.2528L;ALBANESE1979,pp.311313.93VOLTERRA1956,pp.301and306.94Ibid.,p.303;ALBANESE1979,pp.313and324330.95BRETONE1998,pp.179180.96VOLTERRA1956,pp.303and306.



againstthepublic interestsogrievousastonecessitatehisboth legalandritualexclusion fromthecommunitybymeansofaquaetigniinterdictio.

A highranking family such as the Servilii must have feared even capitis deminutionesminimae,whichwerelikelyfrequentoccurrences.Capitisdeminutiominimamodifiedthestatusofacitizen inrespecttohis family: for instance,anadoptionoramarriagecummanuthroughcoemptio transferred the filius or filia familias into the agnatic lineof the adopteror spouse,removingthemfromthefamilyoforigin.AsGaiusnotes,capitisdeminutiominimahadaneffectonkinshiprelationsevenincasesoftemporarysalethroughmancipatio,forinstancethesaleofafilius familias to some thirdpartybyacashstrappedpater familias,who,up to the third saleexclusive, would be able to reacquire his son by manumissio. The damage caused by themanicipatioof the filius familias,breaking the relationshipofadgnatiowithhis father for theentireperiod inwhichhewassubjecttothepowerofanotherpater97,wasparticularlygraveforkinshipgroupsorganized inthe formofagens98.MuciusScaevola,pontifexmaximus,claimed,accordingtoCicero(Top.6.29),thatmembersofagensarethosewhosharethesamenomen.Butthisisnotsufficient;theymustbebornfromfreeparents.Noristhisenough;theirancestorsmustneverhavebeenslaves.Andsomethingelseisrequired;theymustneverhaveundergoneacapitisdeminutio.This,perhaps,isadequate99.

Scaevolamakes clear that gentilesbelonged toa fairlyexclusive kinshiporganization, inwhichonlythosebearingthesamenomenwererecognizedprovidedtheywerealsodescendantsofRomancitizensoffullrights(ingenui),andthattheagnaticlinehadneverincludedslaves100.Butnoteventhiswasguaranteeenough.Onlythosewhoseancestorshadneversufferedanyformof capitis deminutio could be called gentiles. Such rigid criteria for the determination andpreservationofagensmeantthatnotallRomancitizensinfact,onlyaveryrestrictedminorityofRomancitizensbelongedtoagens.

Certainly,judgingfromthesources,duringthepartoftheRepublicanperiodwearedealingwith,allpatriciansbelongedtogentesand,togetherwiththem,themembersofafewplebeianfamilies101.ItisnotdifficulttoimaginethattheServiliiwhoparticipatedinthecultofthetrienswerethemembersofthepatriciangensServilia102.ThewordfamiliausedbyPliny,particularlyinlightofthespecificationinlustrisinfastis,appearsinfacttobeusedinthecaseoftheServilii,asfrequentlyoccurs,todenotethegens103whosedifferentbranchesjoinedtogetherinordertosharemythsandcommunalrites104.

97 Gai. Inst. 1. 15. 3, But the right of adgnatio is frequently destroyed with all types of capitis deminutio (sedadgnationisquidem iusomnibusmodis capitisdeminutioneplerumqueperimitur); cf.Liv.8.28;Val.Max.6. 1.9,FAYER1994,pp.2932and221222.98Incasesofcapitisdeminutiominima,itiscertainthatthelossofadgnatioincludedeventhatofgentilicialties:ALBANESE1979,p.313n.9;cf.FAYER1994,pp.2930.99gentiles sunt inter sequieodemnomine sunt.nonest satis.quiab ingenuisoriundi sunt.ne idquidem satisest.quorummaiorumnemoservitutemservivit.abestetiamnunc.quicapitenonsuntdeminuti.hocfortassesatisest.100Onthepassage,seeSMITH2006,pp.1517.Cf.Paul.Fest.p.83.2022L.Gentileswererecognized,moreover,onthebasisoftheircommondescentfromanancestor,oftenmythicordivine:Varr.L.8.2.4;FAYER1994,pp.7779;SMITH2006,pp.215.101BRUNT1982,pp.23;HOPKINS1983b,pp.5253;FALCONE1994,pp.613621;SMITH2006,pp.39,49,5163,331332.102Cf.alsoZEHNACKER1987,p.16.103Thegensisanaggregateofmanyfamiliae(Sall.Iug.95.3;Liv.9.29.10,38.58.3;Val.Max.1.1.17;Suet.Iul.6.1,Ner. 1. 1;Paul.Fest.p.83.2526L),butoftentheterm familia,whenreferringto lineagesofparticular importance,



With this inmind, it isclearwhy the gentiles Serviliiwouldhave judgedany deminutiofamiliaenegatively,andasadramaticcauseoftheirdecrease.First,inmanycasesandalwayswhenitismaximaormediademinutioistheresultofimproperbehaviouronthepartofsomememberofthegenstowardsthecollective,puttingtheprestigeofthefamilyatgraverisk.Second,ineach case, capitis deminutio corresponds literally toa lesseningbyoneheadof the totalnumberofmembersofthegensinotherwords,areductionofthoseabletoobtainmagistraciesandsotoincreasetheprestigeofthefamily,aswellasofthosewhosharecommonmaiores,rites,tombs,andgentilicialrights105.

Ifwe lookat thehistoryof thepatricianServilii,wecan find two famouscasesofcapitisdeminutio.

In c. 220 BC, Gaius Servilius Geminus, son of the patrician Publius (cos 252 and 248),performedatransitioadplebemperhapsthefirstinRomanhistory106consequentlysuffering,bymeansofanadrogatio(theadoptionofasuiiuriscitizen)acapitisdeminutiominima.Bythetransitio, Gaius, and his descendants, left the patrician branch of the Servilii, losing theirgentilicial rights and common cults, which were formally abandoned through the detestatiosacrorumheld inconnectionwith the transitio107.Nevertheless, the capitisdeminutiodidnotalter Gaius Geminus dignitas, and thus not his nobilitas, in any way108. With him, and hisdescendants, however, the most noble branch of the Servilii evidently suffered a dramaticreductionofthe family,and lostthepossibilityofaccumulatingtheprestige, for instance,ofGaiusGeminussons,whobecameconsulsin203and202BC109.

Evenmore remarkably, in 106105BC thepatricianQuintus ServiliusCaepio,oneof themostprominentmembersoftheoptimatesfactionandaformertriumphatorinLusitania110,wasinvolved in,orprotagonistof, twocontroversial,andpartiallyunclear,events first (106BC),whenhewasconsulandcommanderofthearmy,thedisappearanceofthegoldportionoftheToulouseplunder;then(105BC),whenhewasproconsul,theresoundingdefeatatthebattleofArausio after behaving disrespectfully towards the consul, a homo novus, Gnaeus Mallius

actuallydenotesthegens(Liv.1.7.12,9.29.9;Tac.Ann.6.5.1;Ulp.inDig.50.16.195.4);RADIN1914,p.238;BRUNT1982,p.2;FAYER1994,p.76n.203;HLKESKAMP2004,p.118.104Cf.Cic.Rosc.Am.6.15.105Cf.ALBANESE1979,pp.313n.9and321323.Onsacragentilicia(whicharealwayssacraprivata:Fest.p.284.2122L),seeFAYER1994,pp.8894;SMITH2006,pp.4446.Gentileswereexpectedtoalwaysrespecttheirsacragentilicia,orruntheriskofincurringcensorialpenalties:Dion.Hal.A.R.20.13.3;cf.Liv.5.46.23,5.52.4;Val.Max.1.1.11;Flor.1.7. 16;Appian.Celt.6;FAYER 1994,pp.9495. It isworth recalling that in casesofadrogatio, theadoptee,uponleavinghisformerkinshipgroup,hadtocompleteaprocessknownasdetestatiosacrorum,disavowingthesacraofhisancestors.Onsepulchragentiliciaandmores,seeSMITH2006,pp.19.Therightsofthegenspertaintoacquiringthepatrimoniesofindividualsofthesamenomenwhohavediedintestateandwithoutdirectheirsandcloseagnates(Tab.5.45;foranhistoricalexample,cf.Cic.Deor.1.39.176;SMITH2006,pp.5254),andtheprotectionofmentallyincapacitatedmembers (Tab. 5. 7a); FAYER 1994,pp. 8082 and 87;CORBINO 2010,pp. 178182.Gentileswere alsoexpectedtosupportthemselvesintheeventofjudicialproceedingsorpenaltiesofvariouskinds:Liv.3.58,5.32.8,6.20;Dion.Hal.A.R.13.5;Appian.Hann.28.106Onthecomplexproblem,andthenameofthepossibleadopter,seeFEIGVISHNIA1996,pp.287and294296.Onthe date of the transitio, Liv. 27. 21. 10, 30. 19. 9;BADIAN 1984,pp. 4950.MORA 1999,p. 113, considersGeminustransitioaretroprojectionoflaterevents.107Cf.aboven.105;FAYER1994,pp.295296n.16;SMITH2005,p.105.108Cf.Inst.Iust.1.16.5:SIIMETGROSS2010,p.229.109BADIAN1984,p.50;ontheproblemoftheServilianconsulsof203and202,cf.MORA1999,p.113.110Eutr.Brev.4.27.5;ROMAN1994,p.383.



Maximus111,whichcausedhimtoundergoatrial inRome inwhichhewaseventuallyexiled,losinghis citizenship andpersonalpatrimony, and to suffer a capitisdeminutiomedia112.Thepatrician familiaServiliasufferedademinutiodepriving itofaprominentmemberand,bythecondemnation,ofsomeofitsancientreputationandhonouralongwith,inthisspecificcase,apartoftheirproperty113.

In fact, after the transitio ad plebem of Servilius Geminus and the capitis deminutio ofQuintus,onlyaveryreducedbranchoftheCaepionesremainedtorepresentthepatriciangroupoftheServiliiaround100BC.114WhenValeriusMessallaRufuspickedupthestoryoftheServiliantriens,inthe50sBC,onlytwoCaepioneswereactuallyliving:i.)Quintus,alegateofPompey,acreditorofCicerosbrother,andtheprospective,butunsuccessful,husbandofCaesarsdaughterIulia,whodiedshortlyafter58BC; ii.)hisadoptive sonMarcus(fromthe familyof Iunii),themostfamousCaesaricide115.

Inthelightoftheseevents,thelogicthatstandsatthebaseofthemiraculousbehaviourofthetriensagainappearsfullycoherentwiththeexpectationsandfearsthatthemembersoftheshrinkingServiliangensofthelaterRepublicanperiodwouldhaveshared.6.THEMIRACULUMREVEALED?ItisnowpossibletodrawcertainnewconclusionsregardingthemeaningoftheServiliantrienswithinthehistorical,culturalandsocialcontextinwhichitsmythandritewereconceived.If,aseverythingsaid so far leadsus tobelieve, the triens symbolizes the familiaServilia inlustris infastisbetweenthelatethirdandthemidfirstcenturiesBC,thefundamentalmeaningsthatthetriensconveysarebasicallythree:

1. TheServiliiarenotoverly interested in increasingthepatrimonyofthemembersofthegens,whichinfactseemsnotverylarge116justasthetriens,acoinofmodestvalue,changesinsizeovertime,maintainingunaltereditseconomicvalue.Thesizeofthefamily,owingtothedignitasfamiliae,isnotinfactpredominantlyconditionedbystrictlyeconomicfactors.

2. Increasing thegens, like the triens, isdeterminedby itspublically recognizedhonos,which can be measured year by year on the basis of the election of its members to themagistracies(honores)oftheRomanstate.

111Poseid.fr.33Jacoby;BAUMAN1970,pp.3841;ROMAN1986;ROMAN1994,pp.382383and388389.112Timagenesfr.11Jacoby;cf.Liv.Per.67;Val.Max.6.9.13;Gell.NA.3.9.7;Strab.4.1.13;DioCass.27fr.90;Justin.32.3.9.911;Oros.5.15.25;BAUMAN1970,pp.3858;ROSENSTEIN1990,p.263;ROMAN1994,pp.383389;cf.CRIF1984,esp.p.493.113BAUMAN1970,p.44;ROMAN1994,p.388.114TheServiliiPrisciarenotattestedasholdersofmagistraciesafter369BC(Q.ServiliusQ.f.Q.n.PriscusFidenas:BROUGHTON1968,vol.1,p.111);theServiliiStructi,after368BC(Sp.ServiliusC.f.C.n.Structus:BROUGHTON1968,vol.1,pp.111112);andtheServiliiAhalae,after342BC(Q.ServiliusQ.f.Q.n.Ahala:BROUGHTON1968,vol.1,p.133).ForotherpatricianfamiliesthatshrunkordisappearedduringthemidandlateRepublic,seeCic.Brut.62;Suet.Aug.2.1;Zonar.7.15;HOPKINS1983b,pp.69119;NORTH1990,p.281;cf.Cic.Dom.34.OndifferentcalculationsofpatriciangentesexistingintheRepublicanperiod,seeRICHARD1986,pp.106108.115GEIGER1973,pp.150151.Theformer,sonoftheMarianpraetorof91BC,wasmorelikelythesourceofthestoryoftheServiliantriensforthephiloCaesarianMessalla(cf.SYME1986,pp.227229,329).ItisnotimpossiblethatMessalareceivedhismeagerand incomplete informationabout thecultof triens from theplebeianandphiloCaesarianP.ServilusVatiaIsauricus(cos48and41).116The laterRepublicanServiliiwere surelynotpoor (whichdoesnotmeanvery rich), ifaCaepio (very likelyQ.ServiliusCaepio)ismentionedin58BCasacreditorofQ.Cicero(Cic.Q.fr.1.3.7);GEIGER1973,p.151.



3. Any decreasingof the gens, like the triens, is ameasureof the capitis deminutionessuffered by its members, which reduce the familys prestige and, simultaneously, reduce thenumberofpotentialmagistrates,puttingatriskthelineagesultimatesurvivalanditschancesofinfluencingthepoliticalsceneinthefuture.

At furtherglance, there isanothermeaningof theServilian triens, recallingwhat struckPlinyabout itscultnamely,thatahumblecoinofcopperwasveneratedwithpreciousgiftsofgoldandsilver.Zehnackerand,later,Fiorentini117emphasizedthepropitiatorydimensionofthecult: in theirview,consecratinggoldandsilver to the trienswouldhave facilitated the familyspoliticalandeconomicsuccess.Yetadheringcloselytothetextandtotheargumentsdevelopedso farsuggestssomethingquitedifferent.Thetriens is in fact limitedtoanticipatingthe futureand not to influencing it per se. The Servilii consecrate precious metals to this coin not,fundamentally,becauseitpossessesakindofmagicpower,butbecause,asMessallastates,itisasacred (sacer)object for allmembersof the family118. Precisely because thismodest coinwasconsidered something sacred by the gentiles Servilii (and considered so only by them), theygranteditthesamereverence,andevenopulence,owedinRomansocietytoagodandotherwiseprohibited tomen respectfulofmoderate traditionalcustoms119.This reverentialandluxurytreatment includes thepossibilityof the coins receiving (feedingon, consuming)giftsofgold and silver, exactly as occurs in the case of ancient effigies of Roman gods, which weresometimesconstructedofmaterialsmorehumbleeventhancopper(suchasterracotta:Prop.4.1.5),buttowhichsacrificeandthesumptuarydestructionofricheswereneverthelessaddressed.AsthetrienswastheServilii,thesymbolofthesystemofvaluestheybelievedin,thatsmallpieceofstampedcopperwasforthemtrulymorepreciousthangoldorsilver.Fromthispointofview,PlinyhadunderstoodverywellthemeaningofthemythandritualoftheServiliantriens.CristianoViglietti

email:[email protected]

117ZEHNACKER1987,p.14;FIORENTINI1988,pp.121123.118Onthemeaningofsacer,seeFIORI1996,p.71;cf.ERNOUTMEILLET19594,p.587.119ZANDA2011,pp.1011.Onthewealthofthegods:Plaut.Men.218;Varr.L.5.17.92;Ov.Fast.1.223224(referringto gold); Mart. 8. 26. 6. It is worth noting that during the third and the early second centuries BC, whereasindividualsowningtoomanyobjectsinpreciousmetalswerepunished(forinstance,theformerconsulP.CorneliusRufinuswasbannedfromtheSenatein275BCforowningtenpoundsofsilvervessels:Ov.Fast.1.208;Plin.Nat.33.50.142;DONDINPAYRE2004,pp.4647),RomanmagistratesfrequentlyusedthemoneyacquiredfrompublicfinestopurchasegoldorsilverartefactstoadornRomantemples:Liv.10.23.1113,35.10.1112,38.35.56;GARGOLA1995,p.135.



REFERENCES

ALBANESE1979:B.Albanese,Lepersoneneldirittoprivatoromano,Palermo1979.ANDREAU1998:J.Andreau,Cens,valuationetmonnaiedanslAntiquitromaine,inM.Aglietta,A.Orlan(eds),Lamonnaiesouveraine,Paris1998,pp.213250.ANDREAU2004:J.Andreau,Surleschoixconomiquesdesnotablesromains,inANDREAUETAL.2004,pp.7185.ANDREAU CHANKOWSKI2007:J.Andreau,V.Chankowski(eds),Vocabulaireetexpressionde lconomiedanslemondeantique,Bordeaux2007.ANDREAU ET AL. 2004: J. Andreau, J. France and S. Pittia (eds), Mentalits et choix conomiques desRomains,Bordeaux2004.BADIAN 1957:E.Badian,CaepioandNorbanus.Noteson thedecade 10090BC [1957], in Id., Studies inGreekandRomanHistory,Oxford1964,pp.3470.BADIAN1984:E.Badian,ThehouseoftheServiliiGemini,PapersoftheBritishSchoolatRome52(1984),pp.4971.BALBIDECARO1993:S.BalbideCaro,Romaelamoneta,CiniselloBalsamo1993.BAUMAN 1970: R.A. Bauman, The Crimen Maiestatis in the Roman Republic and Augustan Principate,Johannesburg1970.BAYET1936:J.Bayet,Prsagesprefiguratifsdterminantsdanslantiquitgrcolatine,inMlangesFranzCumont,Bruxelles1936,pp.2751.BELTRAMI 1998: L. Beltrami, Il sangue degli antenati. Stirpe, adulterio e figli senza padre nella culturaromana,Bari1998.BERRENDONNER2001:C.Berrendonner,LaformationdelatraditionsurMCuriusDentatusetC.FabriciusLuscinus:unhommenouveaupeutiltreungrandhomme?,inCOUDRYSPTH2001,pp.97116.BETTINI2010:M.Bettini,Racconti romaniche sono liliu, inL.Ferro,M.Monteleone,Miti romani. Ilracconto,Turin2010,pp.vxxix.BRETONE1998:L.Bretone,Ifondamentideldirittoromano.Lecoseelanatura,RomeBari1998.BROUGHTON1968:T.R.S.Broughton,TheMagistratesoftheRomanRepublic[19511952],2Vols,Cleveland1968.BRUNT1982:P.A.Brunt,Nobilitasandnovitas,JournalofRomanStudies72(1982),pp.117.BURKE2004:P.Burke,WhatisCulturalHistory?,Cambridge2004.BURKERT1979:W.Burkert,StructureandHistoryinGreekMythologyandRitual,Berkeley1979.BURKERT 1993:W.Burkert,Mythos Begriff,Struktur,Funktion, inF.Graf (ed.),Mythos inmythenloserGesellschaft.DasParadigmaRoms,Stuttgart1993,pp.924.CAPOGROSSICOLOGNESI2009:L.CapogrossiColognesi,StoriadiRomatradirittoepotere,Bologna2009.



CASSOLA1962:F.Cassola,IgruppipoliticiromaninelIIIsecoloa.C.,Trieste1962.CASSOLA2000:F.Cassola,Problemidellatradizioneorale,Index28(2000),pp.134.CATALLI1990:F.Catalli,RinvenimentimonetaliinItaliacentrale,DialoghidiArcheologiaIII8.1(1990),pp.6775.CATALLI2001:F.Catalli,Monetazioneromanarepubblicana,Rome2001.CITRONIMARCHETTI1991:S.CitroniMarchetti,PlinioilVecchioelatradizionedelmoralismoromano,Pisa1991.CLEMENTE 1981:G.Clemente,Le leggisul lussoe lasocietromanatra IIIe IIsecoloa.C., inGIARDINA SCHIAVONE1981,pp.114.CLEMENTE1990:G.Clemente,Basisocialieassettiistituzionalinelletdellaconquista,inStoriadiRoma.Volumesecondo.LimperomediterraneoI,Turin1990,pp.3954.COARELLI1972:F.Coarelli,IlsepolcrodegliScipioni,DialoghidiArcheologia6.1(1972),pp.36106.CORBINO2010:A.Corbino,Statusfamiliae,inCORBINOETAL.2010,pp.175216.CORBINO ET AL. 2010:A.Corbino,M.Humbert,G.Negri (eds),Homo, caput, persona. La costruzionegiuridicadellidentitnellesperienzaromana,Pavia2010.CORSO1988:A.Corso,Librotrentaquattresimo.Bronzorameferroepiombo,inA.Corso,R.MugellesiandG.Rosati(eds),GaioPlinioSecondo.Storianaturale.V.Libri3337,Turin1988.COUDRYSPTH2001:M.Coudry,T.Spth(eds),LinventiondesgrandshommesdelaRomeantique,Paris2001.CRAWFORD1974:M.H.CRAWFORD,RomanRepublicanCoinage,Cambridge1974.CRIFO1984:G.Crif,Exilicacausa,quaeadversusexulemagitur.Problemidell'aquaetigniinterdictio,inDuchtimentdanslacit.Supplicescorporelsetpeinedemortdanslemondeantique,Rome1984,pp.453497.DEMARCHI1896:A.DeMarchi,IlcultoprivatodiRomaantica,Vol.1,Milan1986.DEROHDENDESSAU1978:P.DeRohden,H.Dessau,Prosopographia imperiiRomani.Saec.I.II.III.PZ[1898],Berlin1978.DILIBERTO1984:O.Diliberto,Studisulleoriginidellacurafuriosi,Naples1984.DONDINPAYRE2004:M.DondinPayre,Laprisededcisionconomiqueprivedaprslesbiographies,inANDREAUETAL.2004,pp.4570.ERNOUTMEILLET19594:A.Ernout,A.Meillet,Dictionnaireetymologiquedelalanguelatine,Paris19594.FALCONE 1994: G.Falcone,Livy 10.8.9: plebeiigentesnonhabent, StudiaetDocumentaHistoriaeetIuris60(1994),pp.613621.FAYER1994:C.Fayer,Lafamiliaromana,Rome1994.



FEIGVISHNIA 1996: F. FeigVishnia, The transitio ad plebem of C. Servilius Geminus, Zeitschrift frPapyrologieundEpigraphik114(1996),pp.289298.FERRARY1982:J.L.Ferrary,LeideepoliticheaRomanellepocarepubblicana,inL.Firpo(ed.),Storiadelleideepolitiche,economicheesociali,Vol.1,Turin1982,pp.723795.FIORENTINI1988:M.Fiorentini,Ricerchesuicultigentilizi,Rome1988.FIORI 1996: R. Fiori, Homo sacer. Dinamica politicocostituzionale di una sanzione giuridicoreligiosa.Naples1996.FLOWER1996:H.I.Flower,AncestorMasksandAristocraticPowerinRomanCulture,Oxford1996.GABBA1980:E.Gabba,RiflessionianticheemodernesulleattivitcommercialiaRomaneisecoliIIeIa.C.[1980],inGABBA1988b,pp.89105.GABBA1981:E.Gabba,RicchezzaeclassedirigenteaRomafraIIIeIsec.a.C.[1981],inGABBA1988b,pp.2744.GABBA1985:E.Gabba,Arricchimentoeascesasociale inPlautoe inTerenzio[1985], inGABBA1988b,pp.6982.GABBA1988a:E.Gabba,AlloraiRomaniconobberoperlaprimavoltaricchezza[1988],inGABBA1988b,pp.1926.GABBA1988b:E.Gabba,Delbuonusodellaricchezza.Saggidistoriaeconomicaesocialedelmondoantico,Milan1988.GALLETDESANTERRELEBONNIEC1953:H.GalletdeSanterre,H.LeBonniec(eds),PlinelAncien,Historienaturelle.LivreXXXIV,Paris1953.GARGOLA 1995:D.J.Gargola,Lands,Laws,&Gods:Magistrates&Ceremony in theRegulationofPublicLandsinRepublicanRome,ChapelHill1995.GEIGER1973:J.Geiger,ThelastServiliiCaepionesoftheRepublic,AncientSociety4(1973),pp.143156.GIARDINASCHIAVONE1981:A.Giardina,A.Schiavone(eds),Societromanaeproduzioneschiavistica.III.Modellietici,dirittoetrasformazionisociali,RomeBari1981.GRUEBER1910:H.AGrueber,CoinsoftheRomanRepublicintheBritishMuseum.3Vols,London1910.GRUEN1984:E.S.Gruen,TheHellenisticWorldandtheComingofRome.Vol.1,Berkeley1984.GUIDOBALDI ANGELELLI: F. Guidobaldi, C. Angelelli, Velabrum, in E.M. Steinby (ed.), LexicontopographicumurbisRomaeV(TZ),Rome1999,pp.102108.HLKESKAMP1987:K.J.Hlkeskamp,DieEntstehungderNobilitt.Stuttgart1987.HLKESKAMP2004:K.J.Hlkeskamp,UnderRoman roofs: family,house,andhousehold, inH.I.Flower(ed.),TheRomanRepublic,Cambridge2004,pp.113138.HOPKINS 1983a:K.Hopkins,Introduction, inP.Garnsey,K.Hopkins,C.r.Whittaker(eds),Trade intheAncientEconomy,Berkeley1983,pp.ixxxv.HOPKINS1983b:K.Hopkins,DeathandRenewal,Cambridge1983.



HUMM2010:M.Humm,Ilregimenmorumdeicensorieleidentitdeicittadini,inCORBINOETAL.2010,pp.283314.LENDON1997:J.E.Lendon,EmpireofHonour.TheArtofGovernmentintheRomanWorld,Oxford1997.LENTANO1993:M.Lentano,Parceacduriter.Catone,Plautoeunaformulafelice,Maia45.1(1993),pp.1116.LOTITO 1981:G.Lotito,Modelli etici ebase economicanelleopere filosofichediCicerone, inGIARDINA SCHIAVONE1981,pp.79126.MARSHALL1985:B.A.Marshall,AHistoricalCommentaryonAsconius,Columbia1985.MARTINI1988:R.Martini,Monetazionebronzearomanatardorepubblicana.I,Milan1988.MILLAR 1984:F.Millar,Thepolitical characterof the classicalRoman republic, The JournalofRomanStudies74(1984),pp.119.MOMMSEN1860:T.Mommsen,GeschichtedesrmischenMnzwesens,Berlin1860.MORA 1999: F. Mora, Fasti e schemi cronologici: la riorganizzazione annalistica del passato remotoromano,Stuttgart1999.NENCI1968:G.Nenci,Considerazionisullastoriadellamonetazioneromana inPlinio(Nat.Hist.,XXXIII4247),Athenaeum46.1/2(1968),pp.336.NICOLET 1976: C. Nicolet, Le cens snatorial sous la Rpublique et sous Auguste, Journal of RomanStudies 66(1976),pp.2038.NICOLET1980:C.Nicolet,TheWorldoftheCitizeninRepublicanRome[19792],Berkeley1980.NORTH 1990: J.North,Politicsandaristocracy intheRomanrepublic,ClassicalPhilology85.4(1990),pp.277287.PANI1997:M.Pani,LapoliticainRomaantica.Culturaeprassi,Rome1997.PARISE 1987:N.F.Parise,Formedellacircolazionemetallica fraEtruriaeLaziodallVIIIalVIsecoloa.C.,QuadernidiArcheologiaetruscoItalica15(1987),pp.8993.PERUZZI1985:E.Peruzzi,MoneyinEarlyRome,Florence1985.PERUZZI1989:E.PeruzziNummus,LaParoladelPassato266(1989),pp.184185.PITTIA2007:S.Pittia,Linvisiblehierarchiecensitaireromaine, inANDREAU CHANKOWSKI2007,pp. 145175.RADIN1914:M.Radin,Gens,familia,stirps,ClassicalPhilology9.3(1914),pp.235247.RICH2008:J.Rich,LexLicinia,LexSempronia.B.G.NiebuhrandtheRoman limitationof landholding inthe Roman republic, in L. de Ligt, S. Northwood (eds), People, Land, and Politics. DemographicDevelopmentsandtheTransformationofRomanItaly300BCAD14,LeidenBoston2008,pp.519572.RICHARD 1986: J.C.Richard, Patricians and plebeians: the origins of social dichotomy, inK.A.Raaflaub(ed.),SocialStrugglesinArchaicRome,Berkeley1986,pp.105109.



ROMAN 1986: Y.Roman,Aux origines dunmythe: lor de Toulouse, inMlanges offerts M.MichelLabrousse.Pallas,h.s.,1986,pp.221231.ROMAN1994:Y.Roman,Q.ServiliusCaepio,patronusSenatus,etlesluttespolitiquesromaineslafinduIIe sicle avant J.C., inY. LeBohec,LAfrique, laGaule, laReligion lpoque romaine.Mlanges lamemoiredeMarcelLeGlay,Bruxelles1994,pp.382389.ROSENSTEIN 1990:N. Rosenstein,War, failure and aristocratic competition, Classical Philology 85. 4(1990),pp.255265.ROSENSTEIN2008:N.Rosenstein,Aristocratsandagriculture inthemiddleand lateRepublic,JournalofRomanStudies98(2008),pp.126.ROSENSTEIN 2010: N. Rosenstein, Aristocratic values, in N. Rosenstein, R. MorsteinMarx (eds), ACompaniontotheRomanRepublic,Chichester2010,pp.365383.SIIMETGROSS 2010: H. SiimetGross, Die Ausdrcke status libertatis, civitatis und familiae. SavignysberechtigteKritikandenneuerenJuristen?,inCORBINOETAL.2010,pp.217249.SMITH 2005: C.J. Smith, The beginnings of urbanization in Rome, in R. Osborne, B. Cunliffe (eds),MediterraneanUrbanization.800600BC,Oxford2005,pp.91111.SMITH 2006: C.J. Smith, The Roman Clan. The Gens from Ancient Ideology to Modern Anthropology,Cambridge2006.SORDA 1976:S.Sorda, I ripostiglidibronziprotostoricidellItaliacentrale, inContributi introduttiviallostudio dellamonetazione etrusca.AttidelV convegnodel centro internazionaledi studinumismatici,Rome1976,pp.6174.SYME1986:R.Syme,TheAugustanAristocracy,Oxford1986.TCHERNIA2007:A.Tchernia,Leplebiscitumclaudianum,inANDREAUCHANKOWSKI2007,pp.253278.THOMAS1986:Y.Thomas,Rome,prescitoyensetcitdespres(IIesicleavantJ.C.IIsicleaprsJ.C.),inA.Burguire,C.KlapischZuber(eds),Histoiredelafamille,Vol.1,Paris1979,pp.195229.THURLOWVECCHI:B.K.Thurlow,I.G.Vecchi,ItalianCastCoinage,Dorchester1979.VERNANT1980:J.P.Vernant,MythandSocietyinAncientGreece[19762],Sussex1980.VERNANT1983:J.P.Vernant,MythandThoughtamongtheGreeks[19712],London1983.VIGLIETTI2010:C.Viglietti,Moneta,lamoneta,lamemoria,ScienzedellAntichit16(2010),pp.201218.VIGLIETTI2011:C.Viglietti,Illimitedelbisogno.AntropologiaeconomicadiRomaarcaica,Bologna2011.VIGOURT2001:A.Vigourt,MCuriusDentatusetC.FabriciusLuscinus: lesgrandshommesne sontpasexceptionnels,inCOUDRYSPTH2001,pp.117129.VOLTERRA 1956:E.Volterra,Sullincensus indiritto romano,Rendicontidella classediScienzemorali,storicheefilologichedellAccademiadeiLincei8.9.1112(1956),pp.298312.VONREDEN2010:S.VonReden,MoneyinClassicalAntiquity,Cambridge2010.



ZANDA2011:E.Zanda,FightingHydraLikeLuxury.SumptuaryRegulationintheRomanRepublic,London2011.ZEHNACKER1973:H.Zehnacker,Moneta.RecherchessurlaorganisationetlartdesmissionsmontairesdelaRpubliqueromaine(28931av.J.C.).Vol.1,Rome1973.ZEHNACKER1983:H.Zehnacker(ed.),PlinelAncien.Histoirenaturelle.LivreXXXIII,Paris1983.ZEHNACKER 1987: H. Zehnacker, Le triens des Servilii et le bronze patrimonial, in Bollettino diNumismatica 4(1987),Suppl.StudiperLauraBreglia.ParteII,pp.917.FIGURES

Fig.1

Copper/bronzeaesrude/rauduscula.FromTHURLOWVECCHI1979(pl.2).



Fig.2

Rome,endofthe4thcenturyBC.Bronze ingot: Eagle on fulmen/Pegasus, in ex. ROMANOM; theoreticalweight g 1,635;mm 165 x 95;CRAWFORD1974:n.4/1a(280242BC).FromTHURLOWVECCHI,1979(fig.AS13).



Fig.3

Rome,centraldecadesof the3rdcenturyBC.Bronzetriens,reducedlibralseries.rHeadofMinerva,inex.fourdots.vshipprow,inex.fourdots.Avg.weightg89.44;mm45.CRAWFORD 1974: 35/3a (225217BC);CATALLI 2001:n.31/3.FromCATALLI2001(fig.31/3).

Fig.4

Rome,c.91BC.Bronzetriens.Uncialseries.rHeadofMinerva,inex.fourdots.vshipprow,inex.fourdotsandROMA.Theoretical weight g 4.5; mm 21.CRAWFORD1974:n.338/3(c.91BC);CATALLI2001:n.468/2.FromCATALLI2001(fig.468/2).

viglietti () servilian triens reconsidered

Documents

verba ipsa deea

consumentem utrumque

quem ferunt aliascrevisse

messallae senis ponam

cui summa

according tomessalla

celebratedpatrician

storyas toldbyoldmessalla