« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
his new colonies, Augustus not only excluded them rigidly from all Roman and municipal magistracies, but even went so far as to take from them the franchise altogether.58
To one semi-magistracy, however, they had been eligible from of old under the republic-to the board of magistri which had administered for the freedmen, slaves, and ignoble rabble of Rome the cultus of the Lares of the compita. To the freedmen Augustus left this honor. It was the Kompetaliastae on Delos, it will be observed, who inaugurated there the cult of Roma and Fides. In Rome the magistri rendered a similar homage to the emperor who was their lord; for quite as much to make clear the real political status of the mob as to satisfy the plebeian clamor for a new god Augustus had an effigy of his own genius put between the figures of the twain Lares which were erected anew in the chapels at the street corners of the capital.
Freedmen might worship the princeps, not freemen; hence in the cities of Italic and Latin right everywhere the cult of Augustus was put in the hands of Augustales-freedmen chosen for the purpose by the municipal senates. Senators, knights, provincials, and freedmen—each class had its duties assigned and agents designated for their performance, in the case of the two former, collaborators with Augustus in the work of governing, in the case of the two latter, witnesses to the beneficence of the empire and spokesmen for the loyalty of the governed.5
The worship of Augustus was, accordingly, permissible from the start among the freedmen of Italy as well as among those abroad. To become a sevir Augustalis was, in fact, an honor highly esteemed by them, and only the most wealthy and distinguished freedmen attained to it. The same was the case with the provincial priesthood of Roma et Augustus. Those who held it were the
52 Mommsen, Staatsrecht, III. 420 ff.
"They were chosen K TOû dýμov (Dio, LV. 8, 6); e plebe (Suetonius, Aug., 30, 1). In one case ingenui appear among the magistri (CIL., VI. 975), otherwise they are liberti. Their ministri were slaves. See Heinen, p. 166, n. 3.
How sensitively Caesar-worship responded to governmental changes in Rome is apparent from what happened in the provinces under Tiberius. As is well known, he had the right to elect the magistrates taken from the comitia and given to the senate. Thereupon Roma was displaced by θεὸς Σύγκλητος or ἱερὰ Σύγκλητος (Hirschfeld, p. 842). As Tacitus (Ann., IV. 15; cf. 55-56) says: "Decrevere Asiae urbes templum Tiberio matrique eius ac senatui", and as he makes Tiberius say (ibid., IV. 37): "exemplum [Augusti] promptius secutus sum, quia cultui meo veneratio senatus adiungebatur". The impropriety of the situation presented in the western provinces was felt keenly by a stickler for formal correctness like Tiberius. Hence he declared (ibid., IV. 37): “omnes per provincias effigie numinum sacrari ambitiosum, superbum; et vanescet Augusti honor, si promiscis adulationibus vulgatur"; and he refused to permit his worship in the Occident (Hirschfeld, p. 842).
most eminent of the provincials: in the western provinces they were, in fact, men who through securing Roman citizenship had all but disqualified themselves for the office. The most distinguished persons in provincial society were none too good to testify to the gratitude and devotion of those whom they represented at the various arae Romae et Augusti.
The worship of Augustus in Italy could not be confined to freedmen any more than the recipients of the Roman citizenship could be excluded from the provincial cultus. It tended irresistibly to spread to other Italians. The Greeks for example in Cumae, Puteoli, Naples, and Pompeii, lapsed easily into the practice of their kinsmen beyond the sea, especially since that had been their own practice up to the extension of the citizenship to all Italy at the time of the Social War. Communities which owed their origin and laws to Augustus, as did the colonies he had founded in Italy, tended to assume toward him the dependent attitude proper to the foreign cities to whom his will and Roma's was continuously law.56 Besides, the worship of the ruler had become, as we have seen, a complex phenomenon in the days between Alexander and Augustus. Heroic honors tended by anticipation to be rendered to one who on death was, and had, to become divus. The divinity voted to Julius Caesar could not but put a halo upon the head of his With the idea of an incarnate god courtiers and court poets had at one time aimed to familiarize the Romans;57 but the princeps would have none of it. For when he exalted his house by emphasizing its descent from Venus he did nothing that any Greek or Roman nobleman might not do with perfect propriety. All nobles were, as Homer says, Storyeveis. On the other hand, that he like all men had an immortal, and hence divine, genius, he like all Romans believed implicitly, and for soldiers and other citizens to take oath by this, offer sacrifice to it, and erect temples, shrines, or altars for its worship, involved no political or religious impropriety.58 The genius of the princeps and imperator, like the juno of Livia, was, of course, different in power, if not in kind, from that of other Romans. An ara or templum Augusti was, however, everywhere objectionable and was probably sanctioned nowhere,
50 Hirschfeld, p. 838.
57 Horace, Odes, I. 2, 24 ff. (28/7 B.C.) See further, Heinen, p. 150, n. 3. See Otto in Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, Realencyclopädie d. class. Altertumswissenschaft, VII. 1, s. v. Genius: "Er ist ausserhalb des Menschen gedacht, darüber kann für die ältere Zeit gar kein Zweifel sein. Er ist deus, und zwar comes des Menschen, dem er zugehört und der unter seiner tutela lebt. Man betet zu ihm, man schwört bei ihm, man opfert ihm."
unless it be in the case of the freedmen.59 Nor is any stronger argument as to its inadmissibility to be found than in what is sometimes advanced as proof of its toleration-the erection at Rome of altars of Pax Augusta, Victoria Augusta, Fortuna Augusta, or Fortuna Redux Augusta. What is avoided by these terms is obvious. The emperor was a complex of divine qualities, but he was himself a man.60
WILLIAM SCOTT FERGUSON.
"The one comprehensive title for Octavian was, of course, Augustus = Zeßarrós. This was vague enough to cover the relation of the princeps, as the possessor of a divine genius and the son of the divus Julius, to the free-born Romans, yet full enough of latent connotation to reveal the god to freedmen and provincials. Under Tiberius the title Zeßarrh is applied by the Greeks to the senate also (Hirschfeld, p. 842, n. 41).
"How Augustus thought of his honors is revealed by the anecdote found in Quintilian (Inst. Or., VI. 3, 77): Augustus nuntiantibus Tarraconensibus palmam in ara eius enatam, ' apparet', inquit, quam saepe accendatis '".
THE FIRST LEVY OF PAPAL ANNATES
THE prominence accorded to annates in the discussions of the reform councils of the fifteenth century has caused them to occupy the interest of investigators from that time to the present, but the results of this activity have not been profitable in proportion to their great bulk. Earlier accounts, although some of them contain much trustworthy information, display more or less confusion,1 and not until the recent appearance of works by such scholars as Kirsch,2 Haller, Samaran and Mollat,* and Göller, based mainly on materials in the Vatican Archives inaccessible to their predecessors, has there been a fairly full and authoritative literature on the subject. Even these recent researches have added little to our knowledge of the first levy of papal annates. Although earlier writers held conflicting views, several pointed out that the imposition of annates in the British Isles by Clement V. marks their first use by the papacy, and, beyond confirming this conclusion, modern investigators have made small progress. To the narratives of English chroniclers and the
Among the best of the earlier accounts are Thomassin, Ancienne et Nouvelle Discipline de l'Église (Paris, 1725), III. 1019-1033; Phillips, Kirchenrecht, V. 567-580; Lingard, History of England (Philadelphia, 1827), IV. 122; Christophe, Histoire de la Papauté (Paris, 1853), II. 15-16. Many modern writers also display confusion, for example, König, Die Päpstliche Kammer (Vienna, 1894), pp. 31, 39-40; Rocquain, La Cour de Rome et l'Esprit de Réforme avant Luther (Paris, 1895), II. 370–371.
"Die Päpstlichen Kollektorien in Deutschland während des XIV. Jahrhunderts (Paderborn, 1894); Die Päpstlichen Annaten in Deutschland während des XIV. Jahrhunderts (Paderborn, 1903); "Die Verwaltung der Annaten ", Römische Quartalschrift, XVI. 125–151 (1902).
Papsttum und Kirchenreform (Berlin, 1903).
4 La Fiscalité Pontificale en France au XIVe Siècle (Paris, 1905). "Der Liber Taxarum der Päpstlichen Kammer ", Quellen und Forschungen aus Italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, VIII. 113-173, 305-343 (1905); Die Einnahmen der Apostolischen Kammer unter Johann XXII. (Paderborn, 1910).
6 The fathers of the council of Constance believed John XXII. to be the inventor of annates, and many writers have held the same opinion. Samaran and Mollat, p. 23. Others assign this honor to Boniface IX., for example, Gallesii de Annatis Sermo (Rome, 1564), cited by Göller, "Liber Taxarum", p. 114, n. 1; Phillips, Kirchenrecht, V. 574; Richter, Lehrbuch des Katholischen und Evangelischen Kirchenrechts (eighth ed. by Dove and Kahl, Leipzig, 1886), pp. 887-888.
For example, Fleury, Histoire Ecclésiastique (Paris, 1726), XIX. 109; Lingard, History of England, IV. 122; Christophe, Histoire de la Papauté, II. 15-16. Rishanger, p. 228; Flores Historiarum, III. 130; Hemingburgh (Eng. Hist.
exaggerated statements of the petition of Carlisle, Haller1 and Göller11 have added casual mention of the levy in papal documents, which establishes its authenticity beyond doubt, but still leaves its history and real significance in obscurity. The present article takes its departure from the discovery, in the episcopal registers at Salisbury, of the letters of Clement V. ordaining this payment of annates12 and from the reports13 and other documents issued by the Soc. ed.), II. 242; Murimuth, p. 173; Annales Londonienses, pp. 146-147. These and an inference drawn from the statement of the canonist, Johannes Andrea (cited by Phillips, Kirchenrecht, V. 570, n. 12), are the sources used by earlier writers.
The editions of the chronicles cited are those of the Rolls series unless otherwise stated.
Rotuli Parliamentorum, I. 219-223. This account of the proceedings at Carlisle has been utilized by Stubbs, Constitutional History (Oxford, 1896), II. 163, 612, III. 338-339; and Haller, pp. 382-388.
19 Haller (pp. 52, 388) found indirect reference to this levy in a bull of Clement V. (Regestum Clementis Papae V., 2266) and discovered in the Vatican Archives an account of one of the principal collectors of the tax. He places little emphasis on this account, however, and gives merely a statement of the sums collected at the date of the report.
"Göller (Einnahmen, pp. xiii, 86*-87*) considers it an important contribution to have confirmed the statements of English chroniclers by direct mention of this levy in a letter of John XXII. (Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum, I. 196) and in the report of Rigaud Asser, papal collector in England from 1317 to 1321 (Vatican Archives, Introitus et Exitus, 15, f. 46v.), although Haller had published, some years before, his discovery of the above-mentioned report.
12 There are two letters, one to the collectors and one to the English clergy. The two are practically identical mutatis mutandis. The first is printed below, pp. 62-64. The copies were found in the register of Simon of Ghent, bishop of Salisbury, and do not appear in the printed registers of Clement V. or in any other extant English episcopal registers with the possible exception of those of Lincoln and York. For the privilege of access to this register I am indebted to the late Bishop of Salisbury. I wish to express my thanks also to Reverend J. S. Johnston, secretary to the bishop, and especially to Mr. A. R. Malden, diocesan registrar, who accorded me every facility in my search and recently collated my copy with the original.
13 Three reports made by William Testa, one of the collectors of annates. The first and third are deposited in the Vatican Archives (Instrumenta Miscellanea, Cap. VIII., no. 10a; Cap. IX., no. 54) and the second is a transcript in the Public Record Office (Roman Transcripts, General Series, 59) of an original in the Vatican Archives. The first report was rendered June 13, 1308. The second may be placed between June 24 and September 29, 1310. It is not dated, but it mentions payment of the first installment for the second year of the triennial tenth then being levied on the English clergy. This was due June 24, 1310 (P. R. O., L. T. R. Enrolled Accounts, Subsidies and Aids, 3, m. 1 v.), and fixes the report after that date. It is also stated that the payment of papal tribute from the king had now ceased for twenty years. At Michaelmas, 1313, the king was twenty-four years in arrears (Kirsch, Die Finanzverwaltung des Kardinalkollegiums, Munster i. W., 1895, p. 35, n. 1), and this report, therefore, must have been written before Michaelmas, 1310, when the king would have been in arrears for twenty-one years. The third report covers the period from October 1, 1311, to October 1, 1312. The report used by Haller was the first of these three. These will be cited respectively as the first, second, and third reports of Testa.
AM. HIST. REV., VOL. XVIII.—4.