Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/27033| Title: | Pompeius, Cassius und Augustus. Bemerkungen zum imperium maius | English Title: | Pompeius, Cassius and Augustus. Notes on the imperium maius | Contributor(s): | Koehn, Clemens (author) |
Publication Date: | 2010 | Handle Link: | https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/27033 | Abstract: | Die Diskussion um die rechtliche Begründung des augusteischen Prinzipats ist in den letzten Jahren intensiv geführt worden. Die geradezu kanonisch gewordene Ansicht Theodor Mommsens, Rechtsgrundlage des Prinzipats sei die tribunicia potestas und das imperium proconsulare maius des Princeps gewesen, ist inzwischen wenn nicht aufgegeben, so doch zunehmend in Frage gestellt. Mommsens Deutung stützt sich bekanntlich auf Cassius Dio, der berichtet, im Jahr 23 v.Chr. habe der Senat an Augustus als Kompensation für die Niederlegung des seit 27 v.Chr. permanent bekleideten Konsulats das Privileg verliehen, die Kompetenzen eines Volkstribunen zu haben und gegenüber den Statthaltern im gesamten Reichsgebiet ein höheres Imperium zu besitzen. | Publication Type: | Journal Article | Source of Publication: | Chiron, v.40, p. 301-322 | Publisher: | Walter de Gruyter GmbH | Place of Publication: | Germany | ISSN: | 2510-5396 0069-3715 |
Fields of Research (FoR) 2008: | 210306 Classical Greek and Roman History 220204 History and Philosophy of Law and Justice 189999 Law and Legal Studies not elsewhere classified |
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2008: | 950504 Understanding Europe's Past 970121 Expanding Knowledge in History and Archaeology 970118 Expanding Knowledge in Law and Legal Studies |
Peer Reviewed: | Yes | HERDC Category Description: | C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal | English Abstract: | The paper analyses the concept of imperium maius in the late Republican and early Imperial period, essentially arguing that initially it was bound on the province where the holder of the imperium operated in person. The first case was Pompey’s command against the pirates in 67 BCE. The competences of the holder were superior to those of the magistrate being in command in the province in which Pompey was operating in person. That explains why Metellus was not obeying to his orders when refusing to cease fighting pirates on Crete. Pompey, campaigning at that time in Asia Minor, could not enforce his orders because his competences were not valid outside the province in which he was present himself. Only with Augustus’ powers in 23 BCE, this type of imperium became valid in all provinces at once without the holder of the imperium being present in person. |
|---|---|
| Appears in Collections: | Journal Article School of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format |
|---|
Page view(s)
1,492
checked on Jun 30, 2024
Download(s)
6
checked on Jun 30, 2024
Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.