The Roman Senate during the Republic
Today let's talk about the Roman Senate.
How it operated, and some of its rules and procedures.
It's easy when talking about the Roman senate to think about modern legislatures, but a
lot of things make the two dissimilar.
For starters, membership in the senate was for life, and yet members were enrolled at
the beginning of their political careers.
Entry into the senate was not an end goal, but rather the first step.
This fact meant that there was a huge age range in the senate at any one time, from
young men in their early 30s to old men in their last senile years.
Speaking of senile old men, the word senile takes its root from the Latin word senex,
meaning old.
The word senator comes from the same root word.
The senators or old men in Rome were popularly imagined as being older men of experience
who would submit their seasoned advice to the younger men who were serving in elected
office for that year.
In practice, the older men were actually the ones writing the nation's laws.
While the senate may have been all powerful, individual senators were not.
Individuals who successfully gained lifetime membership to the senate did not automatically
gain very much power or influence.
The senate maintained a strictly hierarchical power structure, which curbed the ability
of untested men to exert political influence.
The serving Consuls had the opportunity to speak first, followed by the ex-Consuls, starting
with those who served last year, then two years ago, then three, and so on.
Next came the Praetors, followed by the ex-Praetors, in a similar descending order based upon year
served, and so on.
As you can see, serious discussion could easily be monopolized by all of the ex-Praetors and
ex-Consuls.
There just weren't enough hours in the day to hear from everybody.
The Romans understood this all too well, and had a slang term for senators who could never
get a chance to speak.
They called them Pedarii, meaning walkers.
Voting in the senate wasn't done with raised hands, or with yays or nays like we do today.
It was done by standing up and walking over to the person who's position you were supporting
when a final vote was called.
This was the only means of influence that Pedarii had.
We have a similar term today for these kinds of people: which is backbenchers.
Interestingly, the Romans easily could and should have used the same term.
Roman senators also sat in order of precedence, with their most important senators sitting
up front as shown here.
The Pedarii always sat in the back.
Plus, unlike our backbenchers, Roman Senators literally sat on benches.
But they went with the word Pedarii instead.
Whatever.
The Romans had a name for the highest ranking senator.
They called him the Princeps Senatus.
This literally just means that he was the first senator, since he was the first listed
on the official senate rolls.
He was always the ex-Consul with the most personal authority or influence among his
peers, and was usually a very old man.
But he wasn't just the first man listed on the senate rolls.
For long periods of Roman history, the Princeps Senatus had special privileges, such as the
right to convene and dismiss the senate, the right to propose legislation, and the right
to rule on points of order such as who would speak first when two senators of equal rank
both wanted the floor.
It was an extremely powerful and prestigious position.
Also, being the Princeps Senatus ranked a man higher than all other ex-Consuls.
This may have been his most important power, because it meant that if he wanted, he always
had the opportunity to comment on legislation first.
Sometimes, if a well respected Princeps Senatus spoke passionately and eloquently, he could
turn the entire chamber for or against a motion before the debate had even really begun.
Let's quickly run through this whole process from beginning to end.
To begin the process of passing a bill, the senate had to be called to meet.
Only specific people could do this.
Consuls, Praetors, Tribunes of the Plebs, and the Princeps Senatus.
Nobody else.
Let's say a Consul called on the senate to meet.
At the meeting he would read his proposal in front of the senate, make a few introductory
remarks in its favour, and then debate would commence.
Speaking order as always began with the Princeps Senatus.
Debate would progress with the Princeps Senatus acting as referee as needed.
After the Consul overseeing the meeting decided that debate was over, he would call for a
vote, and take an official count.
In this case, the proposal passes.
Next, the Consul would move onto the popular assembly.
A scheduled vote would take place a minimum of three market days later, to give people
time to think about the proposal.
The same Consul would preside over this assembly just like he did with the senate.
As before he would read the proposal, and give some introductory remarks.
Now, he was allowed to invite people of his choosing up to make speeches in support of
his proposal.
At the Consul's discretion, a vote would be called.
In this case, the proposal passes.
At this point the proposal officially has the force of law, and it is now up to the
Consuls and the Praetors to make sure it goes into effect.
As with the selection of the king during the days of the monarchy, the people's assembly
did not have the power to debate the bill, but only to vote yes or no.
The person convening the public assembly wielded immense power, since, unlike the debate in
the senate, he got to decide who spoke and what they spoke about.
The fact that the public was presented with just one side of the debate may explain why
public assemblies more or less operated as rubber stamps.
There is also some evidence that suggests that the votes to approve senate proposals
were actually very weakly attended, and that proponents of the bill could easily stuff
the crowd full of supporters and allies.
That's how the senate functioned on a day to day basis.
Next week we'll take a brief detour from senate procedure and talk about an fascinating Roman
public holiday.
Thanks for watching!