latrones - Get a Free Blog

BANDITS IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE
34 R. MacMullen, ‘The Roman concept robber – pretender’, RIDA 10, 1963, 221–5.
35 Bellen, Sklavenflucht 143ff. and passim.
36 Hoben, Terminologische Studien; on this, see below pp. 58–9.
37 Herz, ‘Latrocinium und Viehdiebstahl’. Cf. also R. Rilinger, Humiliores – Honestiores.
Zu einer sozialen Dichotomie im Strafrecht der römischen Kaiserzeit, Munich 1988, 249ff.
(concerning abigeatus in connection with ‘imperial constitutions dealing with unusual
crimes’). Drexhage, ‘Einbruch, Diebstahl und Straßenraub’. Drexhage, ‘Eigentumsdelikte’;
cf. below pp. 25–31. P. Herz has also now published an article on piracy in the
imperial period: ‘Kampf den Piraten? Zur Deutung zweier kaiserzeitlicher Inschriften’,
ZPE 107, 1995, 195–200; see also below pp. 17–25.
38 Pekáry, Seditio; see also below pp. 17–25.
39 Sünskes Thompson, Aufstände.
40 Hobsbawm, Bandits. Cf. also E. Hobsbawm, Primitive Rebels. Studies in Archaic Forms
of Social Movements in the 19 th and 20 th Centuries, Manchester 1959, 1971 3 .
41 On the figure of Robin Hood (its historicity and what has been made of it in
literature) cf., for example, W.E. Simeone, ‘Robin Hood and some other outlaws’,
Journal of American Folklore 71, 1958, 27–33.
42 Cf. the exhibition catalogue cited in n. 2.
43 Cf. the works of R. Horsley, referred to on p. 92.
44 It seems to me that a typical product of this thinking is to be found in the chapter
on ‘L’esclave et la révolte’ in Dumont, Servus 161ff.; more realistic is Bradley, Slavery
and Rebellion. This is further examined in Ch. 3.
45 Shaw, ‘Bandits’. Shaw, ‘Der Bandit’. Shaw, ‘Tyrants, bandits and kings’.
46 A similar sketch is offered by L. Flam-Zuckermann, ‘À propos d’une inscription de
Suisse (CIL, XIII, 5010): étude du phénomène du brigandage dans l’Empire romain’,
Latomus 29, 1970, 451–73.
47 Shaw, in his treatment of selected latrones (e.g., Bulla Felix and Maternus, 44ff.; see
below Ch. 6), gives due thought to the question as to the historicity of each of these
and their probable elaboration at the hands of the sources (e.g., 46: ‘ . . . almost
completely dismissable as empirical fact’; 48: ‘But there are too many other purely
ideological elements in “the facts” to make the stories dependable in their entirety as
empirical facts’). However, in his general conclusions, cited here, such qualifications
remain, as it were, unremarked. What he says is again basically the same criticism
as the one which can be levelled against Hobsbawm’s social bandit, which is the
conceptual basis of his own ‘Bandits’.
48 A.J.L. van Hooff, ‘Latrones famosi’, Lampas 15, 1982, 171–94. Van Hooff, ‘Ancient
Robbers’.
49 Van Hooff, ‘Ancient Robbers’ 105, n. 7.
50 Ibid. 105.
1 REAL BANDITS
1 I. Opelt, Die lateinischen Schimpfwörter und verwandte sprachliche Erscheinungen. Eine
Typologie, Heidelberg 1965, 131.
2 For this see J.L. Breitenbach, Das Verbrechen des Raubes nach römischem Recht, Munich
1839. Th. Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht, Leipzig 1899, 629 n. 3; 660. M. Balzarini,
Ricerche in tema di danno violento e rapina nel diritto romano (Pubbl. della Facoltà di
Giurisprudenza dell’Univ. di Padova, 54), Padua 1969.
3 ‘An aggravated form of theft that involves violence or the threat of violence against
the victim in his presence.’ (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1998)
4 From the many relevant references I cite only Ulpian’s conclusion at Dig. 47.9.3.5:
Aliud autem esse rapi aliud amoveri aliquid, etiam sine vi possit, rapi autem sine vi non
170