HKB

← back

Roman History, Books I-III

Titus Livius (Livy) · c. 30–17 CE; composed over more than forty years (extant Books I–III are within this span) primary

passage 153 of 212 · BOOK I > BOOK III (14/73)

↪ you wandered here via “Roman imprisonment practices” — the connecting lines are tinted below

in brief
A testimony from Marcus Volscius Fictor alleges Caeso killed his brother with a fist after a pestilence, nearly provoking the crowd; tribunes intervene, Caeso is imprisoned with bail conditions, then goes into exile among the Tuscans.

turned away from his entreaties, others, by the harshness of their answer, complaining that they and their friends had been ill-treated, made no secret of what their decision would be.

Independently of the general odium, one charge in particular bore heavily on the accused; that Marcus Volscius Fictor, who some years before had been tribune of the people, had come forward to bear testimony: that not long after the pestilence had raged in the city, he had fallen in with a party of young men rioting in the Subura;[20] that a scuffle had taken place: and that his elder brother, not yet perfectly recovered from his illness, had been knocked down by Cæso with a blow of his fist: that he had been carried home half dead in the arms of some bystanders, and that he was ready to declare that he had died from the blow: and that he had not been permitted by the consuls of former years to obtain redress for such an atrocious affair. In consequence of Volscius vociferating these charges, the people became so excited that Cæso was near being killed through the violence of the crowd. Verginius ordered him to be seized and dragged off to prison. The patricians opposed force to force. Titus Quinctius exclaimed that a person for whom a day of trial for a capital offence had been appointed, and whose trial was now close at hand, ought not to be outraged before he was condemned, and without a hearing. The tribune replied that he would not inflict punishment on him before he was condemned: that he would, however, keep him in prison until the day of trial, that the Roman people might have an opportunity of inflicting punishment on one who had killed a man.[21] The tribunes being appealed to, got themselves out of the difficulty in regard to their prerogative of rendering aid, by a resolution that adopted a middle course: they forbade his being thrown into confinement, and declared it to be their wish that the accused should be brought to trial, and that a sum of money should be promised to the people, in case he should not appear. How large a sum of money ought to be promised was a matter of doubt: the decision was accordingly referred to the senate. The accused was detained in public custody until the patricians should be consulted: it was decided that bail should be given: they bound each surety in the sum of three thousand asses; how many sureties should be given was left to the tribunes; they fixed the number at ten: on this number of sureties the prosecutor admitted the accused to bail.[22] He was the first who gave public sureties. Being discharged from the forum, he went the following night into exile among the Tuscans. When on the day of trial it was pleaded that he had withdrawn into voluntary exile, nevertheless, at a meeting of the comitia under the presidency of Verginius, his colleagues, when appealed to, dismissed the assembly: [23] the fine was rigorously exacted from his father, so that, having sold all his effects, he lived for a considerable time in an out-of-the-way cottage on the other side of the Tiber, as if in exile.

← previous passage read in the full work → next passage →

topics: crime and punishment · equity, mercy, and pardon · exile, wandering, and banishment

Roman History, Books I-III · Titus Livius (Livy) · 30 BCE–17