著者

島田 誠

出版者

公益財団法人 史学会

雑誌

史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.97, no.7, pp.1201-1220,1319-, 1988-07-20 (Released:2017-11-29)

---

From the late Republic to the early Empire there lived some people called provinciales in the Mediterranean World. And sometimes they were juxtaposed to Italici, who had originated from Italy or still dwelled in there. Most scholars think that they were peregrini (foreigners), who dwelled in the provinces. But a few scholars oppose them and assert that provinciales were the Roman citizens who resided in the provinces, and that Roman citizens who dwelled in Italy were called Italici. This paper is concerned with the following three problems : I.What was the status of provinciales? II.Were the Roman citizens who dwelled in Italy called Italici? And what is the nature of privilege called ius Italicum? III.Under what conditions could both provinciales and Italici exist? I.The author examines the usage of provinciales in the Latin literature and finds that some Roman citizens were called provinciales, but no foreigners were called provinciales. In turn the author scrutinizes the usage of the designations of foreigners, and concludes that in the Latin literature provinciales is carefully distinguished from the terms for the foreigners. This confirms that the term provinciales designates those Roman citizens who dwelled in the provinces. II.In the Latin literature, there are some Italici juxtaposed to provinciales, and they seem to be Roman citizens who dwelled in Italy. But under the Republic, some negotiatores doing business in provinces were also called Italici. So they might be thought of as men of Italian origin who resided in the provinces. The author investigates the designation of the Italian negotiatores in provinces using Latin inscriptions. He finds that they referred to themselves in two ways, 'Italici' and 'cives Romani (Roman citizens)'. Also he finds that the former designation was used before the 60's B.C. and the latter appeared after the 30's B.C. Hence, the author concludes that Italici from the late Republic were not men of Italian origin in provinces, but Roman citizens who dwelled in Italy. Next, the author attempts to reconsider the nature of ius Italicum. It usually is considered as (1)a communal privilege granted to communities whose status was identified with that of Italian municipalities, (2)communities, on which the privilege was conferred, which were regarded as the highest in the provinces, and which enjoyed autonomy, immunity, and the special right that their land could be held ex iure Quiritium by Roman citizens, (3)a privilege which was devised in the age of Augustus, in order to compensate the inhabitants of some communities for their loss of Italian status. However, the privilege appeared first in the middle of the 1st century A.D. And a Greek inscription records a Roman citizen woman as a person of Italian right without any mention of her community. Hence the author makes the following assumptions : i)The privilege granted to the groups of Roman citizens whose status was identified with that of those who dwelled in Italy ; ii)The privilege was devised in the middle of 1st century A.D., in order to reconcile the conflict between provinciales and Italici ; iii)From the 2nd century the discrimination between them became obsolete, so the ius Italicum began to be thought of as a communal privilege. III.Finally, the author considers the historical and social conditions on which both provinciales and Italici could exist. The distinction between them requires certain conditions ; i.e., that almost all inhabitants in Italy were Roman citizens but in provinces Roman citizens dwelled among foreigners. Under these conditions the idea that Roman citizens had to dwell in Italy became fixed, and Italici began to discriminate against provinciales. This discrimination soon disappeared, and in A.D.212 almost all the inhabitants of the Roman Empire became Roman citizens. After that, provinciales came to mean the inhabitants in provinces.