¹ Livy 24.14–16.

² RE IIA² Sempronius 51 (F. Münzer); Broughton, T. R. S., The Magistrates of the Roman Republic (3 vols, 1951–1986), 1.260Google Scholar.

³ Livy 25.6.22 and 25.7.3. For the dramatic drop in the number of assidui qualified to serve in the legions during this period, see the figures adduced by M. H. Crawford, The Roman Republic (1982), 100–1.

⁴ Val. Max. 7.6.1; see also Livy 25.5 for the enrolment of youths under the age of seventeen.

⁵ Livy 22.11.8; see White, A. N. Sherwin, The Roman Citizenship (1973), 324–5Google Scholar, who notes, citing Livy's hint at 10.21.4, that the liberti were of more limited use as soldiers, ‘probably due to their age’. There is some debate about the difference between a libertus and a libertinus: cf. Treggiari, S., Roman Freedmen in the Late Republic (1969), 37 n. 5 and 68Google Scholar, and see, for the terminological problem, Saint-Hilaire, J. Cels, ‘Les libertini, des mots et des choses’, DHA 11 (1985), 331–79Google Scholar.

⁶ Val. Max. 7.6.1; Livy 23.14.3.

⁷ Livy 22.11.8; 23.35; 24.11.3, 14, 18.2; 25.24; 27.38; 28.36.14. Not only the troops needed replenishing. M. Aemilius, pr. 216 B.C., proposed the bestowal of citizenship on the Latins so as to increase the pool from which senators might be chosen — a measure that was flatly rejected (Livy 23.22. 1ff.). The lectio Senatus of 216 B.C. (Livy 23.23.1–6) needed to fill 177 vacancies, and the newly-chosen dictator, M. Fabius Buteo, bestowed senatorial status not only on curule magistrates who had not yet been elected to the Senate, but on the plebeian aediles, the tribunes of the plebs, quaestors, as well as on many who had never held proper magisterial office before, including those ‘who had spolia affixed to their houses or had received the corona civica’ — that is, ‘those who had distinguished themselved in war’: Willems, P., Le Sénat de la république romaine: sa composition et ses attributes (2 vols, 1885), 1.289;Google Scholar also Devlin, R., ‘The Atinian plebiscite, tribunes, and the Senate’, CQ 28 (1978), 141–4,CrossRefGoogle Scholar esp. 143.

⁸ A long-standing tradition: see Pliny, Ep. 10.29–30, for a discussion of the problem and the death penalty as its remedy; further, Wallon, H., Histoire de l'esclavage dans l'Antiquité (1847; 1988), 541–5 and 919.Google Scholar

⁹ Livy 22.57.11 and 59.12: slaves probably accounted for two of four legions under Gracchus' command (cf. Livy 25.6.10, servorum legionibus), since a Roman legion totalled roughly 4,000 men (Polybius 6.20, 32).

¹⁰ Val. Max. 7.6.1.

¹¹ So Isidorus, Etym. 9.3, who then contradicts himself with reference to Gracchus' army, at 9.38 (‘when … they didn't even have time to free their slaves first’).

¹² Livy 23.35.5–9, with Rouland, N., Les esclaves romains en temps de guerre. Collection Latomus 151 (1977), 49–51Google Scholar.

¹³ Livy 24.16.12–13.

¹⁴ Livy 24.16.18–19.

¹⁵ Tables spread ante omnium domus for the victory feast of Cincinnatus in 459 B.C.: Livy 3.29.5. Senatorial banquet on the Capitol at the triumph of Paullus in 167 B.C.: Livy 45.39.13. Public epula: Veyne, P., Bread and Circuses. Historical Sociology and Political Pluralism, trans. Pearce, B. (1990), 220–1Google Scholar; D'Arms, J., ‘Between public and private: the epulum publicum and Caesar's horti trans Tiberim’, in Cima, M. and La Rocca, E. (eds), Horti Romani (1998), 33–43Google Scholar; Compostella, C., ‘Banchetti pubblici e banchetti privati nell'iconografia funeraria romana del I secolo D.C’, MEFRA 104 ² (1992), 659–89;CrossRefGoogle ScholarLandolfi, L., Banchetto e società romana delle origini al I secolo a.C. (1990)Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Hölscher, T., ‘Römische Siegesdenkmäler der späten Republik’, in Tania. Festschrift R. Hampe (1980), 351–71Google Scholar, at 352 = ‘Monumenti di vittoria romani della tarda repubblica’, in Hölscher, , Monumenti, 52–74, at 53Google Scholar; Holliday, P. J., ‘Ad triumphum excolendum: the political significance of Roman historical painting’, The Oxford Art Journal (October, 1980), 3–8Google Scholar; Coarelli, F., ‘Cultura artistica e società’, in Storia di Roma (4 vols, 1990), 2.1, 159–85, esp. 171–7Google Scholar; Rouveret, A., ‘Les lieux de la mémoire publique: quelques remarques sur la fonction des tableaux dans la cité’, OPCUS 6–8 (1987–1989), 101–24Google Scholar.

¹⁷ The Aventine temple was, technically, Temple of Iuppiter Libertas: see LTUR III s.v. (M. Andreussi); on the historical character of the setting, cf. Gruen, E., Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome (1992), esp. 94Google Scholar.

¹⁸ As had the related painting of the attack on Carthage commissioned by L. Hostilius Mancinus, who, according to Pliny (HN 35.23), had stood in front of it, ‘describing it to anyone of the public looking on, by means of which he won the consulship at the next election’; see the analysis of Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, cat. nos 13 and 405. For a survey of the fourth-century background to this political phenomenon, see Holkeskamp, K.-J., Die Entstehung der Nobilität. Studien zur sozialen und politischen Geschichte der römischen Republik im 4. Jhdt. v. Chr. (1987), 204–40Google Scholar; Hölscher, T., ‘Romische Nobiles und hellenistische Herrscher’, in Akten des XIII. Internationalen Kongresses für klassische Archäologie, Berlin 1988 (1990), 73–84.Google Scholar

¹⁹ In this sense, Sempronius Gracchus acted with the authority of a consul: see Polybius 6.12 for the consular prerogative to punish troops; see also Livy 1.26–8, on the desertion of Mettius Fufetius’ Alban troops and their commander's brutal punishment (cf. the discussion of A. Feldherr, Spectacle and Society in Livy's History (1998), 155–63).

²⁰ RE, s.v. ‘Pileus’ (R. Kreis-von Schaewen).

²¹ This is their sole attestation; cf. RE, s.v. ‘Lana’, col. 598 for the woollen pileus (Kroll). Ogilvie, ad loc, compares the woollen filum worn by the fetials mentioned by Livy 1.32.6.

²² cf. Apuleius, Met. 4.7.5, where, at the robbers' banquet, they employed the lot to decide who would provide the service.

²³ The story is accepted by, inter alia, Bernstein, A. H., Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus: Tradition and Apostasy (1978), 25Google Scholar; so too, Nicolet, , World, 94f.Google Scholar; Gruen, op. cit. (n. 17), 94. Latte, K., Römische Religionsgeschichte (1960), 256Google Scholar, vaguely refers to the Temple of Liberty painting as ‘ein Bild der Libertas’ and, while this does seems to suggest a personification of the cult-goddess, it is not altogether unthinkable that Latte intended an allegory.

²⁴ So Strong, E., Art in Ancient Rome (1928; reprint 1970), vol. 1, 58;Google Scholar implicit in Zinserling, ‘Historiendar-stellungen’, 405, and also K.-W. Wehvei, Unfreie im antiken Kriegsdienst, III : Rom (1988), 9–10; contra Rodenwaldt, G., RM 36/37 (1921–1922), 81Google Scholar.

²⁵ Res Gestae 19.2, gives fecit; cf. Ziolkowski, A., The Temples of Mid-Republican Rome and their Historical and Topographical Context (1992), 85–6Google Scholar and M. Andreussi in LTUR III, 144, who both say that Augustus ‘restored’ it. The temple's Aventine site is noted by Festus 108 (Lindsay).

²⁶ Varro, Res Rust. 1.2.1 = Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, no. 2.

²⁷ Varro, De Ling. Lat. 7.57 = Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, no. 7.

²⁸ Pliny, HN 35. 19.

²⁹ Welwei, op. cit. (n. 24), 9 (‘eine fragwürdige Interpretation’); 10 (‘eine unverbindliche Auslegung des Gemäldes’); cf. 8 (‘die phantasievolle Ausschmückung des Berichtes’).

³⁰ de Sanctis, G., Storia dei Romani (1917), vol. 3, part II, 260,Google Scholar n. 118, ‘forse un riquadro del dipinto ov'erano altri volones recanti a Gracco le teste recise del nemici ha dato anche origine alia ridicola storiella che credendosi di non avere la libertà se non al prezzo, ciascuno, della testa d'un avversario, i volones avevano finito col sospendere ll combattimento brandendo nelle destre quelle teste invece delle spade’; followed by Welwei, op. cit. (n. 24), 9 (‘eine annalistische Erfindung’); similarly, Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, 405.

³¹ There is even less reason to dismiss it as an aspect of battle and of Roman historical imagery, as the appearance of similar scenes on Trajan's Column and the Great Trajanic Frieze make plain; Voisin, J.-L., ‘Les Romains, chasseurs de têtes’, in Du châtiment dans la cité (1984), 214–93Google Scholar, collects the evidence. For related imagery, cf. the description of the triumphal paintings carried in Caesar's African triumph of 46 B.C., which depicted the suicides of Scipio, Petreius, and Cato: Appian, BC 2.101.

³² For another single-scene painting, cf. that of M. Fulvius Flaccus in the Vortumnus Temple on the Aventine in 264 B.C. (attested at Festus 228L = Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, no. 3). On the myriad problems of accepting the reality of monuments attested by the annalistic tradition, see Wiseman, T. P., ‘Monuments and the Roman annalists’, in Moxon, I. S., Smart, J. D. and Woodman, A. J. (eds), Past Perspectives. Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing (1986), 87–100Google Scholar. Cf. recently, the scepticism of Feldherr, op. cit. (n. 19), 34: ‘It is possible that Livy did make use of the painting as a source for his account, but the text nowhere signals this dependence’.

³³ Welwei, op. cit. (n. 24), 10: ‘Dass hiermit der Anteil der volones an dem Erfolg des Sempronius und die “Belohnung” der Sklaven besonders detont wurden, is wenig wahrscheinlich. Eher ist anzunehmen, dass der Sieg bei Benevent als Befreiung der Bewohner der vom karthagischen Angriff bedrohten Stadt gefreiert sowie auch darüber hinaus die Leistung des Sempronius generell als bedeutender Beitrag zur Erhaltung der bürgerlichen Freiheit verstanden werden sollte’. Welwei cites Livy 30.23.1–2: the colonists of Cremona and Placentia, following the triumphal procession of Gaius Cornelius in 197 B.C., wore the cap of liberty, which, since they were already citizens, in this instance signalled their delivery from capitivity. There were other occasions on which the pileus was worn as a symbol of deliverance: in 201 B.C., the senator Q. Terentius Culleo wore it in the triumphal procession of Scipio, and again at Scipio's funeral, to acknowledge that he had been freed by Scipio from the Carthaginians (Livy 30.45.5 and 38.55.2); in 167 B.C., King Prusias of Bithynia wore the pileus and called himself the freedman of the populi romani (Livy 45.44.19, citing Polybius 30.18).

³⁴ See Aulus Gellius 16.13.8 on citizenship in the colonia, with Nicolet, World, 29.

³⁵ cf., however, Giuliano, A., ‘Rilievi con scene di banchetto a Pizzoli’, StMisc 10 (1963–1964), 37:Google Scholar ‘Quale fosse l'aspetto di questa tavola non possiamo sapere’; see now the comments of D'Arms, J., ‘Performing culture: Roman spectacle and the banquets of the powerful’, in Ancient Spectacle, 316, n. 19, who rightly labels such ‘agnosticism [as] … too extreme’Google Scholar.

³⁶ von Blanckenhagen, P. H., ‘Narration in Hellenistic and Roman art’, AJA 61 (1957), 81;CrossRefGoogle Scholar cf., idem in Augustan Villa, 44 and n. 88 (‘There is simply no way of producing a complete pictorial record of events within their settings other than a representation in bird's eye perspective’); rejected expressly by Giuliano, op. cit. (n. 35); Maj, B. M. Felletti, La tradizione italica nell'arte romana 1 (1977), 311–12Google Scholar. Note G. Becatti, Arte e gusto negli scrittori Latini (1951), 7–8, who suggests — surely incorrectly — that pictures of this period probably had little artistic merit.

³⁷ Cartographic form: T. Mikocki, La perspective dans l'art romain (1990), 90–3; Pfuhl, E., Malerei und Zeichnung der Griechen (1923), vol. 3, 888;Google Scholar Holliday, op. cit. (n. 16), 6; Dawson, C. M., Romano-Campanian Mythological Landscape Painting, Yale Classical Studies 9 (1944), 51–2;Google Scholar M. Torelli, Typology and Structure of Roman Historical Reliefs (1982), 120–2; Felletti Maj, op. cit. (n. 36), 62, speaks of a ‘gusto per la pittura cartografica [che] continuò’, but, at 310, allows only the painting of Sardinia in the Temple of Mater Matuta the distinction of having been rendered in ‘bird's eye view’.

³⁸ Varro, Res Rust. 1.2.1 = Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, no. 2.

³⁹ Livy 41, 28.8–10 = Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, no. 11.

⁴⁰ Pliny, HN 35.23 = Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, no. 13.

⁴¹ Von Blanckenhagen, Augustan Villa, 44: ‘Bird's eye view is not Greek. Combinations of people and settings in Hellenistic art, though not infrequent, conspicuously avoid bird's eye perspective; instead, they demonstrate various attempts at congruity in the fusion of the two elements.’ Contra, Wataghin-Cantino, G., ‘Veduta dall'alto e scena a volo d'uccello. Schemi compositivi dall'ellenismo alia tarda antichità’, RivIstNazArch 16 (1969), 30–107Google Scholar.

⁴² Von Blanckenhagen, Augustan Villa, 43: ‘each [object] appears in its own perspective, namely, that which is most informative and in which its shape and volume may be comprehended most easily’; 44: ‘it is only in pictures that are means to an end that inconsistency of scale and of perspective diminution will be accepted as a convention by a public acquainted with and used to a realistic rendering of persons and objects.’

⁴³ Sampaolo, V. in Donati, A. (ed.), Romana pictura: la pittura romana dalle origini all'età bizantina (1998), 306Google Scholar; Bergmann, B., ‘Introduction: the art of ancient spectacle’, in Ancient Spectacle, 15.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ La Rocca, E., ‘L'affresco con vedut a di città dal colle Oppio’, in Fentress, E. (ed.), Romanization and and Failures, JRA Suppl. 38 (2000), 57–71Google Scholar. Another example is provided by the famous Torlonia cityscape relief from Fucino, which, although it does contain a few very minor figures, attests the same tradition: see D. Facenna in Il tesoro del lago. L'archeologia del Fucino e la collezione Torlonia (2001), 34–40 (I owe this reference to one of this journal's anonymous readers).

⁴⁵ Wilpert, G., ‘Le pitture dell'ipogeo di Aurelio Felicissimo presso il Viale Manzoni in Roma’, Mem-PontAcc 1.2 (1924), 5–43,Google Scholar esp. 40ff. with fig. 9 and tav. 22; LTUR IV, s.v. ‘Sepulchrum: Aurelii’ (F. Bisconti); Wataghin-Cantino, op. cit. (n. 41), esp. 69f.

⁴⁶ Similarly D'Arms, op. cit. (n. 35), at n. 19.

⁴⁷ Bird's eye view of banquets: painting at the first-century Tomb of Vestorius Priscus, Pompei, with one triclinium (illustrated and discussed in Ghedini, F., ‘Raffigurazioni conviviali nei monumenti funerari romani’, RdA 14 (1990), 35–62,Google Scholar fig. 1); painting in the fourth-century A.D. Hypogaeum of Vibia, Rome, with one stibadium (illustrated and discussed in Dunbabin, K. M. D., ‘Triclinium and stibadium’, in Slater, W. J. (ed.), Dining in a Classical Context (1991), 121–48, fig. 29)Google Scholar; a fourth-century A.D. mosiac of an outdoor banquet, with one stibadium (Detroit Institute of the Arts: see Kondoleon, C., Antioch: The Lost City (2000), cat. 68)Google Scholar. More than one triclinium/stibadium: Mausoleum of Clodius Hermes at S. Sebastiano (Ghedini, fig. 7). Large group of figures seated at multiple tables: late fourth-century A.D. mosaic in Carthage (Dunbabin, K. M. D., Mosaics of the Greek and Roman World (1999), fig. 36).Google Scholar

⁴⁸ For common usage of the type, and its limitations with respect to the number of figures and the extent of the depicted space, cf., e.g., the cult of Isis painting from Herculaneum: illustrated in R. Ling, Roman Painting (1991), fig. 174.

⁴⁹ op. cit. (nn. 24 and 30); Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, 405, admitted the possibility, although his analysis (416–17) would seem to preclude it.

⁵⁰ Ling, op. cit. (n. 48): late third or early second century; Coarelli, F. in Roma medio republicano (1973)Google Scholar: first half of the third century; Hölscher, T., ‘Die Geschichtesauffassung in der römischen Repräsentationskunst’, JdI 95 (1980), 265–321,Google Scholar at 270, early third century; and most recently, Holkeskamp, K.-J., ‘Fides — deditio in fidem — dextra data et accepta: Recht, Religion, und Ritual in Rom’, in Bruun, C. (ed.), The Roman Middle Republic. Politics, Religion, and Historiography, c. 400–133 B.C., Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 33 (2000)Google Scholar, mid-third century.

⁵¹ Dunbabin, op. cit. (n. 47, Mosaics), 49–51; thorough discussion in Meyboom, P. G. P., The Nile Mosaic of Palestrina. Early Evidence of Egyptian Religion in Italy (1995)Google Scholar; cf. Steinmeyer-Schareika, A., Das Nilmosaik von Palestrina und eine ptolemäische Expedition nach Athiopien (1978)Google Scholar; Coarelli, F., ‘La pompé di Tolomeo Filadelfo e il mosaico nilotico di Palestrina’, Ktema 15 (1990), 225–51Google Scholar = Coarelli, F., REVIXIT ARS. Arte e ideologia a Roma. Dai modelli ellenistici alia tradizione repubblicana (1996), 102–37Google Scholar.

⁵² P1. VII illustrates a procession from the so-called Tomb of the Typhon at Tarquinia (second century B.C.): see M. Moltesen and C. Weber-Lehmann, Etruskische Grabmalerei (1992), 43–6 and fig. 1.37, and for the imagery and its context, Holliday, P. J., ‘Processional imagery in late Etruscan funerary art’, AJA 94 (1990), 73–93,CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 82; cf., inter alia, the similar procession from the Tomb of the Conference (late second or early first century B.C.), also at Tarquinia: see Ling, op. cit. (n. 48), fig. 5.

⁵³ An historiated third-century B.C. Latin cista in Rome's Villa Giulia, and its comparanda: see Kuttner, A., ‘A third century BC Latin census on a Praenestine cist’, RM 98 (1991) 141–61Google Scholar. Basilica Aemilia frieze: see D. Arya, ‘Il ratto delle Sabine e la guerra romano-sabina’, in A. Carandini and R. Cappelli (eds), Roma: Romulo, Remo e la fondazione della città (2000), 303–19; Albertson, F., ‘The Basilica Aemilia Frieze: religion and politics in late Republican Rome’, Latomus 49 (1990), 801–15;Google ScholarKranzle, P., ‘Der Fries der Basilica Aemilia’, Antike Plastik 23 (1994), 93–127Google Scholar. Louvre census relief: A. Kuttner, ‘Some new grounds for narrative: Marcus Antomus's base (the Ara Domitii Ahenobarbi) and Republican biographies’, in P. J. Holliday (ed.), Narrative and Event in Ancient Art (1993), 198–229.

⁵⁴ Giuliano, op. cit. (n. 35), 37, draws a vague parallel with the Gracchus painting; Ghedini, op. cit. (n. 47), 38–9, 44; Compostella, op. cit. (n. 15), 670–3; Dunbabin, op. cit. (n. 47, ‘Triclinium and stibadium’), 147 n. 102; D'Arms, op. cit. (n. 35), 312.

⁵⁵ One other relevant, but, to my knowledge, unique example should be mentioned that might correspond with Livy's vague description, although the absence of early comparanda would seem to discount its evidentiary value for the solution to our problem: a (mid?-) second-century A.D. relief now at Ince Blundell that shows a vintaging scene, with a group of figures and large wine vats disposed in perspective (see Rodenwaldt, G., ‘Römische Reliefs Vorstufen zur Spätantike’, JdI 55 (1940), 13–43,Google Scholar figs 13–14; M. Rostovtzeff, Social and Economic History of Rome (1926), 184; B. Ashmole, A Catalogue of the Ancient Marbles at Ince Blundell Hall (1929), 108–9).

⁵⁶ For the tradition, see Berlioz, J. and David, J.-M., ‘Rhétorique et historic L’exemplum et le modèle de comportement dans le discours antique et médiéval’, MEFRA 92 (1980), 15–31,CrossRefGoogle Scholar with extensive bibliography. Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, 416–17, notes ‘dass ein thema wie dieses [i.e., a genre scene] in dieser Zeit ungewöhnlich ist’.

⁵⁷ Hölkeskamp, K.-J., ‘Exempla und mos maiorum. Überlegungen zum kollektiven Gedächtnis der Nobilität’, in Gehrke, H.-J. and Möller, A. (eds), Vergangenheit und Lebenswelt. Soziale Kommunikation, Traditionsbildumg und historisches Bewuβitsein (1996), 301–38.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Polybius 6.54.2–3 (trans. Flower). Cf. Sallust, citing the opinions of Quintus Maximus and Publius Scipio concerning the wax masks of illustrious ancestors: ‘the memory of great deeds that kindles in the breasts of noble men this flame that cannot be quelled until they by their own prowess have equalled the fame and glory of their forefathers’ (BJ 4.5–6, trans. Rolfe).

⁵⁹ One might well ask where the pilei and the headbands came from, given the apparently spontaneous nature of the celebration: were they merely-added to the painted version of the scene to signal the libertas theme? If so, they would both clearly underscore the deliberate, confected nature of such an ‘historical’ subject, as well as reinforce the painting's calculated status as exemplum.

⁶⁰ Dunbabin, op. cit. (n. 47, ‘Triclinium and stibadium’); eadem, ‘Ut Graeco more biberetur: Greeks and Romans on the dining couch’, Nielsen, I. and Nielsen, H. S. (eds), Meals in a Social Context, Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity 1 (1998), 81–101Google Scholar; eadem, ‘Dining and convivial spaces in the Roman villa’, JRA 9 (1996), 66–80Google Scholar.

⁶¹ Livy 25.6.22, speaking of the volones' reward for service: ‘operae pretium habent libertatem civitatemque’; see C. Wirszubski, Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome during the Late Republic and Early Principate (1960), 3–5, on the relationship between civitas and libertas.

⁶² cf. the general discussion of the phenomenon of signalling social status in Kolb, F., ‘Zur Statussymbolik im antiken Rom’, Chiron 7 (1977), 239–59,Google Scholar and the broad treatment of R. Brilliant, Gesture and Rank in Roman Art. The Use of Gestures to Denote Status in Roman Sculpture and Coinage (1963).

⁶³ cf. Livy 7.6.3 for the pairing of arma virtusque; for the full panoply of Livy's usage, see Moore, T. J., Artistry and Ideology: Livy's Vocabulary of Virtue, Athenaeum Monografien: Alterumswissenschaft Bd. 192 (1989), 5–13Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ Inter alia: J. M. Denzter, Le motif du banquet couché dans le proche-Orient et le monde grec du VII au IV siècle avant J.C. (1982); J. M. C. Toynbee, Death and Burial in the Roman World (1971); Ghedini, op. cit. (n. 47).

⁶⁵ cf. Jaeger, M., Livy's Written Rome (1997), 106Google Scholar: ‘the distinction between ex-slave and freeborn soldier [is perceived] only through the filter of the officially recognized distinction between courage and cowardice’. This only grasps half the story, and thoroughly misses the point of the banquet scene and Gracchus' order to stand.

⁶⁶ RE IIA², Sempronius 50 (F. Münzer); Aulus Gellius 10.6.3, recording the elder Gracchus as plebeian aedile in 246 B.C.The Sempronii, however, had been patricians.

⁶⁷ Livy 2.28.1.

⁶⁸ Livy 3.31–2; Dion. Hal. 10.31–2.

⁶⁹ Secessio of 449 B.C.: Livy 3.50–4. This would eventually be echoed by C. Gracchus' retreat to the Aventine in 121 B.C.: see T. J. Cornell, ‘The value of the literary tradition concerning Archaic Rome’, in K. A. Raaflaub (ed.), Social Struggles in Archaic Rome: New Perspectives on the Conflict of the Orders (1986), 75, with sources.

⁷⁰ The basic study remains Merlin, A., L'Aventin dans l'antiquité (1906), esp. 69–91Google Scholar; followed by M. Andreussi in LTUR I (‘Aventinus, Mons’), 148.

⁷¹ cf. Pietilä-Castren, L., Magnificentia Publica. The Victory Monuments of the Roman Generals in the Era of the Punic Wars, Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 84 (1987)Google Scholar, who does not, however, discuss the Aventine temple; more broadly, Ziolkowski, op. cit. (n. 25); Orlin, E. M., Temples, Religion, and Politics in the Roman Republic (1997)Google Scholar.

⁷² Licinio-Sextian Rogationes: Livy 6.42, with the recent discussions of T. J. Cornell, The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (ca. 1000–264 BC) (1995)> 333–40, and R. Stewart, Public Office in Early Rome. Ritual Procedure and Political Practice (1998), both works with extensive bibliography.

⁷³ Lex Ogulnia: Livy 6.37.12 and 6.42.2, with Oakley's commentary; Livy 10.6–9. The general background is surveyed in the contributions to Raaflaub, op. cit. (n. 69).

⁷⁴ Ritual impropriety: Livy 23.31.7ff., with Linderski, J., ‘The auspices and the struggle of the orders’, in Eder, W. (ed.), Staat und Staatlichkeit in der frühen römischen Republik (1990)Google Scholar, now reprinted in Linderski, J., Roman Questions. Selected Papers (1995), 42–3Google Scholar. Political motivation: discussion and bibliography in Devlin, R., ‘Religion and politics at Rome during the third century BC’, JRH 10 (1978–1979), 3–19;CrossRefGoogle ScholarCrake, J. E. A., ‘Roman politics from 215 to 209 BC’, Phoenix 17 (1963), 123–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷⁵ Citizenship: see the discussion of P. A. Brunt, Italian Manpower, 225 B.C.–A.D. 14 (1971), 121–35, on the progressive decline in Italy after 200 B.C. of the ‘old Italian stocks’ concommitant with the rise in citizen population. Curule magistracies: to take merely the most significant example, in 227 B.C. the number of praetorships was increased to four (Livy Per. 20), and in 197 B.C. to six (Livy 32.27.6); the rise of the novi homines provides the more august parallel to the political problem posed by Gracchus' manumitted slaves: see T. P. Wiseman, New Men in the Roman Senate, 139 B.C.–A.D. 14 (1971). For an early first-century example of the sort of political manipulation that ensued, cf. the events of 89 B.C., attested by Festus 366 (Lindsay), Cic, Pro Archia 11, and the Fasti Antiates ( = A. Degrassi, Inscr. It. XIII.1, 164–6), when the lustrum was declared vitiosum, hence invalid, and the census vitiated, with the effect of delaying the grant of citizenship to the Italians voted the previous year: see the analyses of Wiseman, T. P., ‘The census in the first century B.C.’, JRS 59 (1969), 59–75,Google Scholar and Linderski, J., ‘The augural law’, ANRW II.16.3 (1986), 2184–9Google Scholar.

⁷⁶ Wirszubski, op. cit. (n. 61), esp. 15–16, on the connection between libertas and dignitas; cf. E. Levy, ‘Libertas und civitas’, ZRG 78 (1961), 142–72; A. von Stylow, Libertas und Liberalitas. Untersuchungen zur Innenpolitischen Propaganda der Römer (1972), esp. 9–12. The connection between these two concepts emerges clearly from Livy's discussion of patrician-plebeian relations in 445 B.C. (4.6, esp. at 11). See also, Val. Max. 8.14.5, on the standard practice of distinguishing among the soldiers in the award of ornamenta, and Scipio's refusal to award the aurea armilla, ‘on the ground that a military honour should not be degraded in the person of a man who had recently been a slave’; detailed commentary in Linderski, J., ‘Silver and gold of valor: the award of armillae and torques’, Latomus 60 (2001), 3–15Google Scholar. Finally, in the late Republic, it was the strategy of the senatorial class ‘to limit the political impact of libertas by reconciling it with the concept of dignitas’: see the recent discussion in H. Mouritsen, Plebs and Politics in the Late Roman Republic (2001), esp. 10–12.

⁷⁷ Livy 23.11.8 and 11.

⁷⁸ Aulus Gellius 10.3.19; cf. App., Han. 6.61; Festus 28 (Lindsay); cf. RE, s.v. ‘Bruttiani’ (Neumann). Cf. further, Cicero's account (Verr. 2.3.65) of Apronius' banquets, at which he would dine at his triclinium, having summoned homines honestissimos whom he would have stand as spectators (I owe this last reference to a lecture by John D'Arms).

⁷⁹ cf. similar conclusions in Zinserling, ‘Historiendarstellungen’, 416–17, although he fails to grasp the real nature of the imagery, as he regards the hilarity of the painted scene to have constituted a ‘distraction’ from political realities.

⁸⁰ Livy 25.6.21.

⁸¹ Livy 25.20.4.

⁸² See Tondo, S., ‘Il “Sacramentum Militiae” nel'rambiente culturale romano-italico’, Studia et domumenta historiae et iuris 29 (1963), 1–123;Google Scholar idem, ‘Sul sacramentum militiae’, SDHI 34 (1968), 376–96. Hahn, F. Hickson, ‘Vergilian transformation of an oath ritual: Aeneid 12.169–174, 213–215’, Vergilius 45 (1999), 22–38,Google Scholar is of little relevance to our problem.

⁸³ The Samnite's sacramentum (Livy 10.38.2) was very different from the coniuratio of the Romans, according to whom the Samnite's oath was a detestatio, an execration that brought the negative forces of religio upon them (see the discussion of Linderski, J., ‘Roman religion in Livy’, in Schuller, W. (ed.), Livius. Aspekte seines Werkes, XENIA 31 (1993), 53–70,Google Scholar at 61). Coniuratio: Livy 22.38.1–6; Frontinus, Strat. 4.1.4.

⁸⁴ Momigliano, A. in JRS 57 (1967), 253–4Google Scholar.

⁸⁵ Livy 22.38.3, with the commentary on the textual tradition in Hinard, F., ‘Sacramentum’, Athenaeum 81 (1993), 250–61,Google Scholar esp. at 252–3 and idem, ‘Aulu-Gelle et les serments militaires’, in Au miroir de la culture antique. Mélanges offerts au Président René Marache par ses collègues, ses étudiants et ses amis (1992), 287–301, at 292; cf. the account of the oath's formulation in Polybius 6.21, and the acknowledgement, at 6.33, that it was administered to slaves and freemen alike. Was the coniuratio the same basic pledge as iusiurandum?. So Nicolet, World, 102, and Hinard, ‘Sacramentum’, 252. Cf. Aulus Gellius, NA 16.4.2 (citing Cincius) for the iusiurandum compelled by the tribunes in 190 B.C., with Hinard, ‘Aulu-Gelle et les serments militaire’. For discussion of the broader implications of the coniuratio, see W. Hoben, Terminologische Studien zu den Sklavenerhebungen der römischen Republik (1978), esp. 6–17; J. Rüpke, Domi militiae. Die religiöse Konstruktion des Krieges in Rom (1990), esp. 70–84. Cf. further, Livy 22.53.10 for the oath sworn to Rome and the younger Scipio not to desert the populi romani; Diodorus 37.11, for the oath of the Italians to Drusus (91 B.C.), with L. R. Taylor, Party Politics in the Age of Caesar (1949; 1966), 46, with arguments for its authenticity.

⁸⁶ Livy 22.36.1ff., with Nicolet, World, 96–102.

⁸⁷ Livy 22.57.11.

⁸⁸ Crawford, RRC, 29, 1–2 (stater and half-stater), dated 225–214 B.C.; idem, ‘Foedus and sponsio’, PBSR 41 (1973), 6, acknowledging the correct dating to 216 B.C. by R. Thomsen, Early Roman Coinage (1961), II, 255–87, esp. 285; similarly, Bleicken, J., ‘Coniuratio: Die Schwurszene auf den Münzen und Gemmen der römischen Republik’, Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 13 (1963), 51–70;Google Scholar most recently, M. Krumme, Römische Sagen in der antiken Münzprägung (1995), 60–4, 160–3; Burnett, A., ‘The iconography of Roman coin types in the third century BC’, NumChron 146 (1986), 67–75,Google Scholar does not discuss these coins.

⁸⁹ Bleicken, op. cit. (n. 88), 60.

⁹⁰ Crawford, op. cit. (n. 88, ‘Foedus’), 5.

⁹¹ Livy 1.24, esp. 7–8; Livy notes at 1.24.4 that, one treaty differs from another in its terms, but the same procedure is always employed … nor has tradition preserved the memory of any more ancient compact' (trans. Foster). As the language of the passage makes plain, this was not a sacrifice. For detailed discussion of some of the finer points, see Magdelaine, A., ‘Quirinus et le droit’, MEFRA 96 (1984), 195–237Google Scholar = Jus Imperium Auctoritas. Études de droit romain (1990), 245.

⁹² RRC, 2.715.

⁹³ Crawford, RRC; Thomsen, op. cit. (n. 88), 285 (‘a Roman and an ally of a more barbaric character’); Istinsky, H. U., ‘Schwurszene und Coniuratio’, Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 14 (1964), 83–7,Google Scholar at 86.

⁹⁴ So too, Alföldi, A., ‘Hasta-summa imperii. The spear as embodiment of sovereignty in Rome’, AJA 63 (1959), 1–27,CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 20. The view of Istinsky, op. cit. (n. 93), 87, who sees the oath-scene as corresponding precisely to the Italic rite of 293 B.C. described at Livy 10.38.8, is to be rejected; it is hardly likely that the coins and gems would employ such a specific Italic scene, over and over again, as we shall see, in Republican contexts.

⁹⁵ Gems: Furtwängler, A., Die antiken Gemmen (3 vols, 1900), pl. 27,Google Scholar no. 34 (Berlin) and pl. 46, no. 2 (Vienna); Bleicken, op. cit. (n. 88), pl. 8, 17 (Geneva). Lanx: Svoboda, B., ‘The silver lanx as means of propaganda of a Roman family’, JRS 58 (1968), 124–5,Google Scholar with plates. Torelll's proposal that the Louvre census relief represents a related oath-scene is hardly convincing (op. cit. (n. 37), 10 and n. 20).

⁹⁶ As Aeneas and Latinus: Alfoldi, op. cit. (n. 94), 20–1 and idem, ‘Die Penaten, Aeneas, und Latinus’, RM 78 (1971), 1–52, esp. 16–22; Hölscher, T., ‘Mythen als Exempel der Geschichte’, in Graf, F. (ed.), Mythos in mythenloser Gesellschaft: Das Paradigma Roms, Colloquia Raurica 3 (1993), 67–87,Google Scholar at 75. As Romulus and Titus Tatius: Crawford, RRC, 2.715 n. 5.

⁹⁷ Crawford, RRC 20, 1, with Livy 10.23.n –12; T. P. Wiseman, Remus. A Roman Myth (1995), 72–6; C. Parisi Presicce, La lupa capitolina (2000), esp. 21.

⁹⁸ Vergil, Aen. 8.639–41.

⁹⁹ Servius ad loc; similarly discussed by Kuttner, A., Dynasty and Empire: The Case of the Boscoreale Cups (1995), 125Google Scholar, although this is not a scene of sacrifice (see above, n. 91); nor does Vergil's armati necessarily signify that both figures appeared ‘in armour’ — as the coins so clearly demonstrate. Cf. Alföldi's objection to the identification (op. cit. (n. 94), 20): ‘the bearded Titus Tatius with the young Romulus could in no case be pictured in such utterly different attire’.

¹⁰⁰ Festus 272 (Lindsay); cf. Coarelli, Il Foro Romano, 1.52. Dionysius, 2.46.3 also associates the story with the Via Sacra.

¹⁰¹ Costumes: central to the interpretation of Crawford, RRC, 2. 715, n. 5; cf. the doubts voiced by E. Rawson, ‘The antiquarian tradition: spoils and representations of foreign armour’, in W. Eder (ed.), Staat und Staatlichkeit in der frühen römischen Republik (1990), 158–73, at 172. Ritual action: these are not the fetial priests one might expect from an association with Livy 1.32.6, on which see A. Magdelaine, ‘L'acte juridique au cours de l'ancien droit romain’, BIDR (1988) = Jus Imperium Auctontas. Études de droit romain (1990), 717.

¹⁰² Crawford, RRC, rejects an association with the coniuratio of 216 B.C.; this holds solely for a specific iconographical interpretation of the oath-scene as an illustration of Livy.

¹⁰³ It should by now have become clear that the repeated attempts (so Svoboda, op. cit. (n. 95); Bleicken, op. cit. (n. 88)) to associate the image with a significant event in which one of the Veturii played an important role (owing to the 137 B.C. issue of T. Veturius; see next note) should similarly be rejected; Breglia, L., ‘L'oro del giuramento e i denari romani e italici del Ić sec.’, Numismatica 13 (1947), 67–79,Google Scholar nas been largely superseded. Cf. the recent discussion of Meadows, A. and Williams, J., ‘Moneta and the monuments: coinage and politics in Republican Rome’, JRS 91 (2001), 27–49,Google Scholar at 38.

¹⁰⁴ RRC 234, 1; for the myriad prosopographical problems related to the moneyer T. Veturius, see Badian, E., ‘Sulla's augurate’, Arethusa 1 (1968), 26–46,Google Scholar esp. 34–5.

¹⁰⁵ Crawford, op. cit. (n. 88, ‘Foedus’), 6–7.

¹⁰⁶ Bleicken, op. cit. (n. 88), no. 5, a–d; Felletti Maj, op. cit. (n. 36), 129–30, 159–60.

¹⁰⁷ The concept outlived the form of the Republican image: see Hamberg, P. G., Studies in Roman Imperial Art (1945), 27Google Scholar, for a Trajanic coin showing the emperor, in priestly garb, joining hands with his soldiers over a burning altar, signalled by the legend as FIDES; the interpretation derives from Strack, P. L., Untersuchungen zur römischen Reichsprägung des Zweiten Jahrhunderts (1931), I, 82Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁸ cf. Rawson, op. cit. (n. 101), 172: ‘It may be best to suppose that in all the coins the unarmed figure is the fetial, the priest who presided, or was supposed to have presided in the past, over the making of treaties; and that the coins simply evoke Rome's fides in the making and keeping of treaties’. Cf. Hölscher, op. cit. (n. 96), 75, who acknowledges how the oath-scene implies ‘the abstract Ideology of fides’; and Hölkeskamp, op. cit. (n. 50), who offers a detailed analysis of that ideology.

¹⁰⁹ Rodenwaldt, G., ‘Über den Stilwandel in der Antoninischen Kunst’, Abhandlungen der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 3 (1935), 1–27Google Scholar.

¹¹⁰ cf. Reinsberg, C., ‘Das Hochzeitopfer — eine Fiktion’. JdI 99 (1984), 291–317,Google Scholar at 315; eadem, ‘Der Balbinus-Sarkophag — Grablege eines Kaisers?’, Marburger Winckelmann-Programm (1985), 3–16; also, Rodenwaldt, op. cit. (n. 109), 6 (‘umfing sie mit einem Blick wie die Worte einer monumentalen Inschrift’); Kampen, N. B., ‘Biographical narration and Roman funerary art’, AJA 85 (1981), 47–58;CrossRefGoogle Scholar most recently, H. Wrede, Senatorische Sarkophage Roms (2001).

¹¹¹ Hölscher, T., ‘Die Anfänge römischer Repräsentationskunst’, RM 85 (1978), 349Google Scholar = ‘Gli inizi dell'arte di rappresentanza romana’, in Monumenti, 43; idem, ‘Die Bedeutung der Münzen für das Verständnis der politischen Repräsentationskunst der späten Republik’, in Actes du 9ème Congrés internationalde numismatique, Berne (1982), 269–82Google Scholar = ‘L'importanza delle monete per la comprensione dell'arte di rappresentanza politica della tarda repubblica romana’, in Monumenti, 75–89Google Scholar; and recently, idem, ‘Die Alten vor Augen. Politische Denkmäler und öffentliches Gedächtnis im republikanischen Rom’, in Melville, G. (ed.), Institutionalität und Symbolisierung. Verstetigungen kultureller Ordnungsmuster in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart (2001), 183–211, esp. 193Google Scholar, where Hölscher suggests that the mid-Republican display in the comitium of the statues of the wolf and twins, Attus Navius, and Horatius Cocles formed the correlative of the same programme of virtues — concordia, pietas, and virtus, respectively.

¹¹² For this tradition, see Hamberg, op. cit. (n. 107).