TRĪBŬLA or TRĪBŬLUM (τριβόλος), a corn-drag, consisting of a thick
and ponderous wooden board, which was armed underneath with pieces
of iron or sharp flints, and drawn over the corn by a yoke of oxen,
either the driver or a heavy weight being placed upon it, for the
purpose of separating the grain and cutting the straw.
TRĬBŬLUS (τρίβολος), a caltrop, also called _murex_. When a place was
beset with troops, the one party endeavoured to impede the cavalry
of the other party, either by throwing before them caltrops, which
necessarily lay with one of their four sharp points turned upwards,
or by burying the caltrops with one point at the surface of the
ground.
TRĬBŪNAL, a raised platform, on which the praetor and judices sat in
the Basilica. [BASILICA.] There was a tribunal in the camp, which
was generally formed of turf, but sometimes, in a stationary camp,
of stone, from which the general addressed the soldiers, and where
the consul and tribunes of the soldiers administered justice. When
the general addressed the army from the tribunal the standards were
planted in front of it, and the army placed round it in order. The
address itself was called _Allocutio_.
TRĬBŪNUS, a tribune. This word seems originally to have indicated
an officer connected with a tribe (_tribus_), or who represented a
tribe for certain purposes; and this is indeed the character of the
officers who were designated by it in the earliest times of Rome,
and may be traced also in the later officers of this name.--(1)
TRIBUNES OF THE THREE ANCIENT TRIBES.--At the time when all the
Roman citizens were contained in the three tribes of the Ramnes,
Tities, and Luceres, each of them was headed by a tribune, and these
three tribunes represented their respective tribes in all civil,
religious, and military affairs; that is to say, they were in the
city the magistrates of the tribes, and performed the sacra on their
behalf, and in times of war they were their military commanders.
The _tribunus celerum_ was the commander of the _celeres_, the
king’s body-guard, and not the tribune of the tribe of the Ramnes,
as is supposed by some modern writers. In what manner the tribunus
celerum was appointed is uncertain, but it is probable that he was
elected by the tribes; for we find that when the imperium was to be
conferred upon the king, the comitia were held under the presidency
of the tribunus celerum; and in the absence of the king, to whom
this officer was next in rank, he convoked the comitia: it was in
an assembly of this kind that Brutus proposed to deprive Tarquinius
of the imperium. A law passed under the presidency of the tribunus
celerum was called a _lex tribunicia_, to distinguish it from one
passed under the presidency of the king. The tribunes of the three
ancient tribes ceased to be appointed when these tribes themselves
ceased to exist as political bodies, and when the patricians became
incorporated in the local tribes of Servius Tullius. [TRIBUS.]--(2)
TRIBUNES OF THE SERVIAN TRIBES (φύλαρχοι, τριττυάρχοι).--When Servius
Tullius divided the commonalty into thirty local tribes, we again
find a tribune at the head of these tribes. The duties of these
tribunes, who were without doubt the most distinguished persons
in their respective districts, appear to have consisted at first
in keeping a register of the inhabitants in each district, and of
their property, for purposes of taxation, and for levying the troops
for the armies. When subsequently the Roman people became exempted
from taxes, the main part of their business was taken from them,
but they still continued to exist. The _tribuni aerarii_, who occur
down to the end of the republic, were perhaps only the successors
of the tribunes of the tribes. When (B.C. 406) the custom of giving
pay (_stipendium_) to the soldiers was introduced, each of the
tribuni aerarii had to collect the tributum in his own tribe, and
with it to pay the soldiers; and in case they did not fulfil this
duty, the soldiers had the right of pignoris capio against them. In
later times their duties appear to have been confined to collecting
the tributum, which they made over to the military quaestors who
paid the soldiers. [QUAESTOR.] The Lex Aurelia, B.C. 70, called
the tribuni aerarii to the exercise of judicial functions, along
with the senators and equites, as these tribunes represented the
body of the most respectable citizens. But of this distinction they
were subsequently deprived by Julius Caesar.--(3) TRIBUNI PLEBIS
(δήμαρχοι, the office δημαρχία).--The ancient tribunes of the
plebeian tribes had undoubtedly the right of convoking the meetings
of their tribes, and of maintaining the privileges granted to them
by king Servius, and subsequently by the Valerian laws. But this
protection was very inadequate against the insatiable ambition and
usurpations of the patricians. When the plebeians, impoverished by
long wars, and cruelly oppressed by the patricians, at last seceded
in B.C. 494 to the Mons Sacer, the patricians were obliged to grant
to the plebeians the right of appointing tribunes (_tribuni plebis_)
with more efficient powers to protect their own order than those
which were possessed by the heads of the tribes. The purpose for
which they were appointed was only to afford protection against
any abuse on the part of the patrician magistrates; and that they
might be able to afford such protection their persons were declared
sacred and inviolable, and it was agreed that whoever invaded this
inviolability should be an outlaw, and that his property should be
forfeited to the temple of Ceres. A subsequent law enacted that no
one should oppose or interrupt a tribune while addressing the people,
and that whoever should act contrary to this ordinance should give
bail to the tribunes for the payment of whatever fine they should
affix to his offence in arraigning him before the commonalty; if
he refused to give bail, his life and property were forfeited. The
tribunes were thus enabled to afford protection to any one who
appealed to the assembly of the commonalty or required any other
assistance. They were essentially the representatives and the organs
of the plebeian order, and their sphere of action was the comitia
tributa. With the patricians and their comitia they had nothing to
do. The tribunes themselves, however, were not judges, and could
inflict no punishments, but could only propose the imposition of a
fine to the commonalty (_multam irrogare_). The tribunes were thus
in their origin only a protecting magistracy of the plebs, but in
the course of time their power increased to such a degree that it
surpassed that of all other magistrates, and the tribunes then became
a magistracy for the whole Roman people, in opposition to the senate
and the oligarchical party in general, although they had nothing
to do with the administration or the government. During the latter
period of the republic they became true tyrants, and may be compared
to the national convention of France during the first revolution. At
first the number of the tribunes was only two, but soon afterwards
they were increased to five, one being taken from each of the five
classes, and subsequently to ten, two being taken from each of the
five classes. This last number appears to have remained unaltered
down to the end of the empire. The tribunes entered upon their office
on the 10th of December, but were elected, at least in the time of
Cicero, on the 17th of July. It is almost superfluous to state that
none but plebeians were eligible to the office of tribune; hence
when, towards the end of the republic, patricians wished to obtain
the office, they were obliged first to renounce their own order and
to become plebeians; hence also under the empire it was thought that
the princeps should not be tribune because he was a patrician. But
the influence which belonged to this office was too great for the
emperors not to covet it. Hence Augustus was made tribune for life.
During the republic, however, the old regulation remained in force,
even after the tribunes had ceased to be the protectors of the plebs
alone. There is only one instance recorded in which patricians were
elected to the tribuneship, and this was probably the consequence
of an attempt to divide the tribuneship between the two orders.
Although nothing appears to be more natural than that the tribunes
should originally have been elected by that body of Roman citizens
which they represented, yet the subject is involved in considerable
obscurity. Some writers state that they were elected by the comitia
of the curies; others suppose that they were elected in the comitia
of the centuries; but whether they were elected in the latter or in
the comitia of the tribes, it is certain that at first the sanction
of the curies to the election was at all events necessary. But after
the time of the Lex Publilia (B.C. 472) the sanction of the curies is
not heard of, and the election of the tribunes was left entirely to
the comitia tributa, which were convoked and held for this purpose
by the old tribunes previous to the expiration of their office. One
of the old tribunes was appointed by lot to preside at the election.
As the meeting could not be prolonged after sunset, and the business
was to be completed in one day, it sometimes happened that it was
obliged to break up before the election was completed, and then those
who were elected filled up the legitimate number of the college by
cooptatio. But in order to prevent this irregularity, the tribune L.
Trebonius, in 448 B.C., got an ordinance passed, according to which
the college of the tribunes should never be completed by cooptatio,
but the elections should be continued on the second day, if they were
not completed on the first, till the number ten was made up. The
place where the election of the tribunes was held was originally and
lawfully the Forum, afterwards also the Campus Martius, and sometimes
the area of the Capitol.--We now proceed to trace the gradual growth
of the tribunitian power. Although its original character was merely
protection (_auxilium_ or βοήθεια) against patrician magistrates,
the plebeians appear early to have regarded their tribunes also as
mediators or arbitrators in matters among themselves. The whole power
possessed by the college of tribunes was designated by the name
_tribunicia potestas_, and extended at no time farther than one mile
beyond the gates of the city; at a greater distance than this they
came under the imperium of the magistrates, like every other citizen.
As they were the public guardians, it was necessary that every one
should have access to them and at any time; hence the doors of their
houses were open day and night for all who were in need of help and
protection, which they were empowered to afford against any one, even
against the highest magistrates. For the same reason a tribune was
not allowed to be absent from the city for a whole day, except during
the Feriae Latinae, when the whole people were assembled on the
Alban Mount. In B.C. 456 the tribunes, in opposition to the consuls,
assumed the right of convoking the senate, in order to lay before it
a rogation, and discuss the same; for until that time the consuls
alone had had the right of laying plebiscita before the senate for
approbation. Some years after, B.C. 452, the tribunes demanded of
the consuls to request the senate to make a senatusconsultum for the
appointment of persons to frame a new legislation; and during the
discussions on this subject the tribunes themselves were present in
the senate. The written legislation which the tribunes then wished
can only have related to their own order; but as such a legislation
would only have widened the breach between the two orders, they
afterwards gave way to the remonstrances of the patricians, and
the new legislation was to embrace both orders. From the second
decemvirate the tribuneship was suspended, but was restored after
the legislation was completed, and now assumed a different character
from the change that had taken place in the tribes. [TRIBUS.] The
tribunes now had the right to be present at the deliberations of
the senate; but they did not sit among the senators themselves,
but upon benches before the opened doors of the senate house. The
inviolability of the tribunes, which had before only rested upon a
contract between the two estates, was now sanctioned and confirmed by
a law of M. Horatius. As the tribes now also included the patricians
and their clients, the tribunes might naturally be asked to interpose
on behalf of any citizen, whether patrician or plebeian. Hence the
patrician ex-decemvir, Appius Claudius, implored the protection of
the tribunes. About this time the tribunes also acquired the right
of taking the auspices in the assemblies of the tribes. They also
assumed again the right, which they had exercised before the time
of the decemvirate, of bringing patricians who had violated the
rights of the plebeians before the comitia of the tribes. By the Lex
Valeria passed in the Comitia Centuriata (B.C. 449), it was enacted
that a plebiscitum, which had been voted by the tribes, should bind
the patricians as well. While the college thus gained outwardly new
strength every day, a change took place in its internal organisation,
which to some extent paralysed its powers. Before B.C. 394, every
thing had been decided in the college by a majority; but about this
time, we do not know how, a change was introduced, which made the
opposition (_intercessio_) of one tribune sufficient to render a
resolution of his colleagues void. This new regulation does not
appear in operation till 394 and 393 B.C.; the old one was still
applied in B.C. 421 and 415. From their right of appearing in the
senate, and of taking part in its discussions, and from their being
the representatives of the whole people, they gradually obtained
the right of intercession against any action which a magistrate
might undertake during the time of his office, and this even without
giving any reason for it. Thus we find a tribune preventing a consul
from convoking the senate, and preventing the proposal of new laws
or elections in the comitia; they interceded against the official
functions of the censors; and even against a command issued by the
praetor. In the same manner a tribune might place his veto upon an
ordinance of the senate; and he could thus either compel the senate
to submit the subject to a fresh consideration, or could raise the
session. In order to propose a measure to the senate they might
themselves convene a meeting, or when it had been convened by a
consul they might make their proposal even in opposition to the
consul, a right which no other magistrates had in the presence of the
consuls. The senate, on the other hand, had itself, in certain cases,
recourse to the tribunes. Thus, in B.C. 431 it requested the tribunes
to compel the consuls to appoint a dictator, in compliance with a
decree of the senate, and the tribunes compelled the consuls, by
threatening them with imprisonment, to appoint A. Postumius Tubertus
dictator. From this time forward we meet with several instances in
which the tribunes compelled the consuls to comply with the decrees
of the senate, _si non essent in auctoritate senatus_, and to execute
its commands. In their relation to the senate a change was introduced
by the _Plebiscitum Atinium_, which ordained that a tribune, by
virtue of his office, should be a senator. When this plebiscitum was
made is uncertain; but we know that in B.C. 170 it was not yet in
operation. It probably originated with C. Atinius, who was tribune in
B.C. 132. But as the quaestorship, at least in later times, was the
office which persons held previously to the tribuneship, and as the
quaestorship itself conferred upon a person the right of a senator,
the law of Atinius was in most cases superfluous.--In their relation
to other magistrates we may observe, that the right of intercessio
was not confined to stopping a magistrate in his proceedings, but
they might even command their viatores to seize a consul or a censor,
to imprison him, or to throw him from the Tarpeian rock. When the
tribunes brought an accusation against any one before the people,
they had the right of _prehensio_, but not the right of _vocatio_,
that is, they might command a person to be dragged by their viatores
before the comitia, but they could not summon him. They might, as in
earlier times, propose a fine to be inflicted upon the person accused
before the comitia, but in some cases they dropped this proposal
and treated the case as a capital one. The college of tribunes had
also the power of making edicts. In cases in which one member of
the college opposed a resolution of his colleagues nothing could be
done, and the measure was dropped; but this useful check was removed
by the example of Tiberius Gracchus, in which a precedent was given
for proposing to the people that a tribune obstinately persisting
in his veto should be deprived of his office. From the time of the
Hortensian law the power of the tribunes had been gradually rising
to such a height that at length it was superior to every other in
the state. They had acquired the right of proposing to the comitia
tributa or the senate measures on nearly all the important affairs of
the state, and it would be endless to enumerate the cases in which
their power was manifested. Their proposals were indeed usually made
ex auctoritate senatus, or had been communicated to and approved by
it; but cases in which the people itself had a direct interest, such
as a general legal regulation, granting of the franchise, a change in
the duties and powers of a magistrate, and others, might be brought
before the people, without their having been previously communicated
to the senate, though there are also instances of the contrary.
Subjects belonging to the administration could not be brought before
the tribes without the tribunes having previously received through
the consuls the auctoritas of the senate. This, however, was done
very frequently, and hence we have mention of a number of plebiscita
on matters of administration. It sometimes even occurs that the
tribunes brought the question concerning the conclusion of peace
before the tribes, and then compelled the senate to ratify the
resolution, as expressing the wish of the whole people. Sulla, in his
reform of the constitution on the early aristocratic principles, left
to the tribunes only the jus auxiliandi, and deprived them of the
right of making legislative or other proposals, either to the senate
or the comitia, without having previously obtained the sanction of
the senate. But this arrangement did not last, for Pompey restored to
them their former rights. During the latter period of the republic,
when the office of quaestor was in most cases held immediately
before that of tribune, the tribunes were generally elected from
among the senators, and this continued to be the case under the
empire. Sometimes, however, equites also obtained the office, and
thereby became members of the senate, where they were considered
of equal rank with the quaestors. Tribunes of the people continued
to exist down to the fifth century of our era, though their powers
became naturally much limited, especially in the reign of Nero. They
continued however to have the right of intercession against decrees
of the senate, and on behalf of injured individuals.--(4) TRIBUNI
MILITUM CUM CONSULARI POTESTATE. When in B.C. 445 the tribune C.
Canuleius brought forward the rogation that the consulship should not
be confined to either order, the patricians evaded the attempt by a
change in the constitution; the powers which had hitherto been united
in the consulship were now divided between two new magistrates,
viz. the _Tribuni militum cum consulari potestate_ and the censors.
Consequently, in B.C. 444, three military tribunes, with consular
power, were appointed, and to this office the plebeians were to
be equally eligible with the patricians. For the years following,
however, the people were to be at liberty, on the proposal of the
senate, to decide whether consuls were to be elected according to
the old custom, or consular tribunes. Henceforth, for many years,
sometimes consuls and sometimes consular tribunes were appointed,
and the number of the latter varied from three to four, until in
B.C. 405 it was increased to six, and as the censors were regarded
as their colleagues, we have sometimes mention of eight tribunes.
At last, however, in B.C. 367, the office of these tribunes was
abolished by the Licinian law, and the consulship was restored. These
consular tribunes were elected in the comitia of the centuries, and
undoubtedly with less solemn auspices than the consuls.--(5) TRIBUNI
MILITARES [EXERCITUS, p. 169.]
TRĬBUS (φῦλον, φυλή), a tribe. (1) GREEK. In the earliest times of
Greek history mention is made of people being divided into tribes
and clans. Homer speaks of such divisions in terms which seem to
imply that they were elements that entered into the composition of
every community. A person not included in any clan (ἀφρήτωρ), was
regarded as a vagrant or outlaw. These divisions were rather natural
than political, depending on family connection, and arising out of
those times, when each head of a family exercised a patriarchal sway
over its members. The bond was cemented by religious communion,
sacrifices and festivals, which all the family or clansmen attended,
and at which the chief usually presided.--Of the Dorian race
there were originally three tribes, traces of which are found in
all the countries which they colonised. Hence they are called by
Homer Δωριέες τριχάϊκες. These tribes were the _Hylleis_ (Ὑλλεῖς),
_Pamphyli_ (Πάμφυλοι), and _Dymanatae_ or _Dymanes_ (Δυμανάται or
Δυμᾶνες). The first derived their name from Hyllus, son of Hercules,
the two last from Pamphylus and Dymas, who are said to have fallen
in the last expedition when the Dorians took possession of the
Peloponnesus. The Hyllean tribe was perhaps the one of highest
dignity; but at Sparta there does not appear to have been much
distinction, for all the freemen there were by the constitution of
Lycurgus on a footing of equality. To these three tribes others
were added in different places, either when the Dorians were joined
by other foreign allies, or when some of the old inhabitants were
admitted to the rank of citizenship or equal privileges. Thus the
Cadmean Aegeids are said by Herodotus to have been a great tribe
at Sparta, descended (as he says) from Aegeus, grandson of Theras,
though others have thought they were incorporated with the three
Doric tribes. The subdivision of tribes into _phratriae_ (φρατρίαι)
or _patrae_ (πάτραι), _genē_ (γένη), _trittyes_ (τρίττυες), &c.
appears to have prevailed in various places. At Sparta each tribe
contained ten _obae_ (ὠβαί), a word denoting a local division
or district; each _obe_ contained ten _triacades_ (τριακάδες),
communities containing thirty families. But very little appears
to be known of these divisions, how far they were local, or how
far genealogical. After the time of Cleomenes the old system of
tribes was changed; new ones were created corresponding to the
different quarters of the town, and they seem to have been five in
number.--The first Attic tribes that we read of are said to have
existed in the reign, or soon after the reign, of Cecrops, and were
called _Cecropis_ (Κεκροπίς), _Autochthon_ (Αὐτόχθων), _Actaea_
(Ἀκταία), and _Paralia_ (Παραλία). In the reign of a subsequent king,
Cranaus, these names were changed to _Cranais_ (Κραναΐς), _Atthis_
(Ἀτθίς), _Mesogaea_ (Μεσόγαια), and _Diacris_ (Διακρίς). Afterwards
we find a new set of names; _Dias_ (Διάς), _Athenais_ (Ἀθηναΐς),
_Poseidonias_ (Ποσειδωνιάς), and _Hephaestias_ (Ἡφαιστιάς); evidently
derived from the deities who were worshipped in the country. Some
of those secondly mentioned, if not all of them, seem to have been
geographical divisions; and it is not improbable that, if not
independent communities, they were at least connected by a very
weak bond of union. But all these tribes were superseded by four
others, which were probably founded soon after the Ionic settlement
in Attica, and seem to have been adopted by other Ionic colonies out
of Greece. The names _Geleontes_ (Γελέοντες), _Hopletes_ (Ὅπλητες),
_Argades_ (Ἀργάδεις), _Aegicores_ (Αἰγικορεῖς), are said by Herodotus
to have been derived from the sons of Ion, son of Xuthus. Upon
this, however, many doubts have been thrown by modern writers. The
etymology of the last three names would seem to suggest, that the
tribes were so called from the occupations which their respective
members followed; the _Hopletes_ being the armed men, or warriors;
the _Argades_, labourers or husbandmen; the _Aegicores_, goatherds
or shepherds. But whatever be the truth with respect to the origin
of these tribes, one thing is certain, that before the time of
Theseus, whom historians agree in representing as the great founder
of the Attic commonwealth, the various people who inhabited the
country continued to be disunited and split into factions.--Theseus
in some measure changed the relations of the tribes to each
other, by introducing a gradation of ranks in each; dividing the
people into _Eupatridae_ (Εὐπατρίδαι), _Geomori_ (Γεωμόροι), and
_Demiurgi_ (Δημιουργοί), of whom the first were nobles, the second
agriculturists or yeomen, the third labourers and mechanics. At the
same time, in order to consolidate the national unity, he enlarged
the city of Athens, with which he incorporated several smaller towns,
made it the seat of government, encouraged the nobles to reside
there, and surrendered a part of the royal prerogative in their
favour. The tribes or phylae were divided, either in the age of
Theseus or soon after, each into three _phratriae_ (φρατρίαι, a term
equivalent to fraternities, and analogous in its political relation
to the Roman _curiae_), and each _phratria_ into thirty _gene_ (γένη,
equivalent to the Roman _Gentes_), the members of a _genos_ (γένος)
being called _gennetae_ (γεννῆται) or _homogalactes_ (ὁμογαλάκτες).
Each _genos_ was distinguished by a particular name of a patronymic
form, which was derived from some hero or mythic ancestor. These
divisions, though the names seem to import family connection, were
in fact artificial; which shows that some advance had now been made
towards the establishment of a closer political union. The members of
the _phratriae_ and _gene_ had their respective religious rites and
festivals, which were preserved long after these communities had lost
their political importance, and perhaps prevented them from being
altogether dissolved.--After the age of Theseus, the monarchy having
been first limited and afterwards abolished, the whole power of the
state fell into the hands of the _Eupatridae_ or nobles, who held all
civil offices, and had besides the management of religious affairs,
and the interpretation of the laws. Attica became agitated by feuds,
and we find the people, shortly before the legislation of Solon,
divided into three parties, _Pediaei_ (Πεδιαῖοι) or lowlanders,
_Diacrii_ (Διάκριοι) or highlanders, and _Parali_ (Πάραλοι) or people
of the sea-coast. The first two remind us of the ancient division of
tribes, _Mesogaea_ and _Diacris_; and the three parties appear in
some measure to represent the classes established by Theseus, the
first being the nobles, whose property lay in the champaign and most
fertile part of the country; the second, the smaller landowners and
shepherds; the third, the trading and mining class, who had by this
time risen in wealth and importance. To appease their discords, Solon
was applied to; and thereupon framed his celebrated constitution and
code of laws. Here we have only to notice that he retained the four
tribes as he found them, but abolished the existing distinctions of
_rank_, or at all events greatly diminished their importance, by
introducing his property qualification, or division of the people
into _Pentacosiomedimni_ (Πεντακοσιομέδιμνοι), _Hippeis_ (Ἱππεῖς),
_Zeugitae_ (Ζευγῖται), and _Thetes_ (Θῆτες). [CENSUS, GREEK.] The
enactments of Solon continued to be the _law_ at Athens, though in
great measure suspended by the tyranny, until the democratic reform
effected by Clisthenes. He abolished the old tribes, and created ten
new ones, according to a geographical division of Attica, and named
after ten of the ancient heroes: _Erechtheis_, _Aegeis_, _Pandionis_,
_Leontis_, _Acamantis_, _Oeneis_, _Cecropis_, _Hippothoontis_,
_Aeantis_, _Antiochis_. These tribes were divided each into ten
_demi_ (δῆμοι), the number of which was afterwards increased by
subdivision; but the arrangement was so made that several _demi_ not
contiguous or near to one another were joined to make up a tribe.
[DEMUS.] The object of this arrangement was, that by the breaking of
old associations a perfect and lasting revolution might be effected,
in the habits and feelings, as well as the political organisation of
the people. Solon allowed the ancient _phratriae_ to exist, but they
were deprived of all political importance. All foreigners admitted
to the citizenship were registered in a phyle and demus, but not in
a phratria or genos. The functions which had been discharged by the
old tribes were now mostly transferred to the _demi_. Among others,
we may notice that of the forty-eight _naucrariae_ into which the old
tribes had been divided for the purpose of taxation, but which now
became useless, the taxes being collected on a different system. The
reforms of Clisthenes were destined to be permanent. They continued
to be in force (with some few interruptions) until the downfall of
Athenian independence. The ten tribes were blended with the whole
machinery of the constitution. Of the senate of five hundred, fifty
were chosen from each tribe. The allotment of dicasts was according
to tribes; and the same system of election may be observed in most
of the principal offices of state, judicial and magisterial, civil
and military, &c. In B.C. 307, Demetrius Poliorcetes increased
the number of tribes to twelve by creating two new ones, namely,
_Antigonias_ and _Demetrias_, which afterwards received the names of
_Ptolemais_ and _Attalis_; and a thirteenth was subsequently added
by Hadrian, bearing his own name.--(2) ROMAN. The three ancient
Romulian tribes, the Ramnes, Tities, and Luceres, or the Ramnenses,
Titienses, and Lucerenses, to which the patricians alone belonged,
must be distinguished from the thirty plebeian tribes of Servius
Tullius, which were entirely local, four for the city, and twenty-six
for the country around Rome. The history and organisation of the
three ancient tribes are spoken of under PATRICII. They continued
of political importance almost down to the period of the decemviral
legislation; but after this time they no longer occur in the history
of Rome, except as an obsolete institution. The institution and
organisation of the thirty plebeian tribes, and their subsequent
reduction to twenty by the conquests of Porsena, are spoken of
under PLEBES. The four city tribes were called by the same names
as the regions which they occupied, viz. _Suburana_, _Esquilina_,
_Collina_, and _Palatina_. The names of the sixteen country tribes
which continued to belong to Rome after the conquest of Porsena,
are in their alphabetical order as follows: _Aemilia_, _Camilia_,
_Cornelia_, _Fabia_, _Galeria_, _Horatia_, _Lemonia_, _Menemia_,
_Papiria_, _Pollia_, _Popillia, upinia_, _Romilia_, _Sergia_,
_Veturia_, and _Voltinia_. As Rome gradually acquired possession of
more of the surrounding territory, the number of tribes also was
gradually increased. When Appius Claudius, with his numerous train
of clients, emigrated to Rome, lands were assigned to them in the
district where the Anio flows into the Tiber, and a new tribe, the
_tribus Claudia_, was formed. This tribe was subsequently enlarged,
and was then designated by the name _Crustumina_ or _Clustumina_.
This name is the first instance of a country tribe being named after
a place, for the sixteen older ones all derived their name from
persons or heroes. In B.C. 387, the number of tribes was increased to
twenty-five by the addition of four new ones, viz. the _Stellatina_,
_Tromentina_, _Sabatina_, and _Arniensis_. In B.C. 358 two more, the
_Pomptina_ and _Publilia_, were formed of Volscians. In B.C. 332, the
censors Q. Publilius Philo and Sp. Postumius increased the number of
tribes to twenty-nine, by the addition of the _Maecia_ and _Scaptia_.
In B.C. 318 the _Ufentina_ and _Falerina_ were added. In B.C. 299 two
others, the _Aniensis_ and _Terentina_, were added by the censors,
and at last in B.C. 241, the number of tribes was augmented to
thirty-five, by the addition of the _Quirina_ and _Velina_. Eight
new tribes were added upon the termination of the Social War, to
include the Socii, who then obtained the Roman franchise; but they
were afterwards incorporated among the old 35 tribes, which continued
to be the number of the tribes to the end of the republic. When the
tribes, in their assemblies, transacted any business, a certain order
(_ordo tribuum_) was observed, in which they were called upon to give
their votes. The first in the order of succession was the Suburana,
and the last the Arniensis. Any person belonging to a tribe had in
important documents to add to his own name that of his tribe, in the
ablative case. Whether the local tribes, as they were established by
the constitution of Servius Tullius, contained only the plebeians,
or included the patricians also, is a point on which the opinions of
modern scholars are divided: but it appears most probable that down
to the decemviral legislation the tribes and their assemblies were
entirely plebeian. From the time of the decemviral legislation, the
patricians and their clients were undoubtedly incorporated in the
tribes. Respecting the assemblies of the tribes, see COMITIA TRIBUTA.
TRĬBŪTUM, a tax which was partly applied to cover the expenses of
war, and partly those of the fortifications of the city. The usual
amount of the tax was one for every thousand of a man’s fortune,
though in the time of Cato it was raised to three in a thousand. The
tributum was not a property-tax in the strict sense of the word, for
the accounts respecting the plebeian debtors clearly imply, that the
debts were not deducted in the valuation of a person’s property,
so that he had to pay the tributum upon property which was not his
own, but which he owed, and for which he had consequently to pay the
interest as well. It was a direct tax upon objects without any regard
to their produce, like a land or house-tax, which indeed formed the
main part of it. That which seems to have made it most oppressive,
was its constant fluctuation. It was raised according to the regions
or tribes instituted by Servius Tullius, and by the tribunes of these
tribes, subsequently called tribuni aerarii. It was not, like the
other branches of the public revenue, let out to farm, but being
fixed in money it was raised by the tribunes, unless (as was the case
after the custom of giving pay to the soldiers was introduced) the
soldiers, like the knights, demanded it from the persons themselves
who were bound to pay it. [AES EQUESTRE and HORDEARIUM.] When this
tax was to be paid, what sum was to be raised, and what portion of
every thousand asses of the census, were matters upon which the
senate alone had to decide. But when it was decreed, the people
might refuse to pay it when they thought it too heavy, or unfairly
distributed, or hoped to gain some other advantage by the refusal. In
later times the senate sometimes left its regulation to the censors,
who often fixed it very arbitrarily. No citizen was exempt from it,
but we find that the priests, augurs, and pontiffs made attempts to
get rid of it: but this was only an abuse, which did not last. After
the war with Macedonia (B.C. 147), when the Roman treasury was filled
with the revenues accruing from conquests and from the provinces,
the Roman citizens became exempted from paying the tributum, and
this state of things lasted down to the consulship of Hirtius and
Pansa (43 B.C.), when the tributum was again levied, on account of
the exhausted state of the aerarium. After this time it was imposed
according to the discretion of the emperors. Respecting the tributum
paid by conquered countries and cities, see VECTIGALIA.
TRICLĪNĬUM, the dining-room of a Roman house, the position of
which, relatively to the other parts of the house, is seen in the
“house of the Tragic poet” (see p. 144). It was of an oblong shape,
and was twice as long as it was broad. The superintendence of
the dining-room in a great house was intrusted to a slave called
_tricliniarcha_, who, through other slaves, took care that everything
was kept and proceeded in proper order. A _triclinium_ generally
contained three couches, and as the usual number of persons occupying
each couch was three, the triclinium afforded accommodation for a
party of nine. Sometimes, however, as many as four lay on each of the
couches. Each man in order to feed himself lay flat upon his breast
or nearly so, and stretched out his hand towards the table; but
afterwards, when his hunger was satisfied, he turned upon his left
side, leaning on his elbow. To this Horace alludes in describing a
person sated with a particular dish, and turning in order to repose
upon his elbow. (_Sat._ ii. 4, 39.) We find the relative positions
of two persons who lay next to one another, commonly expressed by
the prepositions _super_ or _supra_, and _infra_. A passage of Livy
(xxxix. 43), in which he relates the cruel conduct of the consul L.
Quintius Flamininus, shows that _infra aliquem cubare_ was the same
as _in sinu alicujus cubare_, and consequently that each person was
considered as _below_ him to whose breast his own head approached. On
this principle we are enabled to explain the denominations both of
the three couches, and of the three places on each couch.
[Illustration:
lectus medius
+-------------+
| m s |
| i e u |
| m d m |
| u i m |
| s u u |
| s s |
+---------+-------------+---------+
l | | 6 5 4 | | l s
e i | summus |7 3| imus | e u
c m | | | | c m
t u | medius |8 2| medius | t m
u s | | | | u u
s | imus |9 1| summus | s s
+---------+ +---------+
]
Supposing the annexed arrangement to represent the plan of a
triclinium, it is evident that, as each guest reclined on his left
side, the countenances of all when in this position were directed,
first, from No. 1 towards No. 3, then from No. 4 towards No. 6, and
lastly, from No. 7 towards No. 9; that the guest No. 1 lay, in the
sense explained, _above_ No. 2, No. 3 _below_ No. 2, and so of the
rest; and that, going in the same direction, the couch to the right
hand was _above_ the others, and the couch to the left hand _below_
the others. It will be found, that in a passage in the eighth satire
of the second book of Horace, the guests are enumerated in the order
of their accubation--an order exhibited in the annexed diagram.
[Illustration:
____________
| |
| V M S |
| i a e |
| b e r |
| i c v |
| d e i |
| i n l |
| u a i |
| s s u |
| s |
___________|____________|___________
| | ______ | |
|Nomentanus | / \ | Varius |
|Nasidienus | ( Mensa. ) | Viscus |
| Porcius | \ / | Fundanius |
|___________| ¯¯¯¯¯¯ |___________|
]