Senatus consultum Silanianum

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Senatus consultum Silanianum is a resolution passed by the Roman Senate in 10 AD and is considered one of the notorious investigative measures of the Augustus era . Rome saw a need to regulate public procedural law in cases where deaths had to be investigated. Therefore, the decision already ordered for the preliminary investigation that slaves could be tortured to clarify the (violent) death of their dominus . It was hoped that this would lead to a decisive gain in information. There are doubts in the research as to whether the measures were also applicable in the event of the patron's suicide . If the slaves resisted, they could be tortured to death, unless it was already proven that they had stood up for the protection of their master.

At the turn of the second century, the rules were tightened under Trajan , because he now included former slaves, so-called freedmen , under the scope of the resolution. With them, however, there was the restriction that only investigative measures could be initiated against them, but the sanctions apparatus (punishment) should not take effect. Even Hadrian relativized the senatus consultum again, because he interpreted it as a purely criminal action, so in all cases. As a result, he asked for evidence of a guilty charge against the violent subordinate. Up until the time of Justinian , additional or amending orders were made in order to adapt the identification measures to the circumstances.

The senate decision was discussed, also several times, among both contemporary and later jurists of the high and late classical periods. The resolution was not only discussed as a source of law in itself, because enforcing Senatus consulte was due to the yardstick of all orders, the lex (established law) in antiquity lively controversial ( legis vicem optinere ). The resolution was also discussed with regard to its regulatory profile. According to the “Index auctorum” of the Justinian digests , Iulius Paulus even dedicated a monograph to the consultation as a legal source ( Ad senatus consultum Silanianum ). The discussions of the lawyers can be read in the digests. Arrested there are the statements of the lawyers classic Ulpian and Gaius . Both make clear the severity of the sensitive subject of torture of those released in the will - already in Nero's time - in the discussion. Nero is said to have banned the opening of a will until the identification investigations were completed. In the meantime, he let the torture measures take place undisturbed, even when the consultation did not allow room for it. In order to be able to justify "uncovered" measures, Nero is said to have caused his measures to be supplemented by a justifying Senate decision, eventually known as "senatus consultum Neronianum". Nero could use it to treat freedmen like slaves. Trajan reverted to the original idea of ​​the resolution and defused sanctions against freedmen.

literature

  • Danilo Dalla: Senatus consultum Silanianum , (Volume 88 of Seminario giuridico della Università di Bologna), Giuffre Verlag, 1980.

Remarks

  1. ^ A b Joseph Georg Wolf : The Senatusconsultum Silanianum and the Senate speech of C. Cassius Longinus from the year 61 AD , (presented on Jan. 17, 1987), meeting reports of the Heidelberg Academy of Sciences , Philosophical-Historical Class; 1988.2; ISBN 978-3-533-04023-1 , p. 48 f.
  2. ^ Max Kaser : Roman private law. Short textbooks for legal studies. Munich 1960. From the 16th edition in 1992 continued by Rolf Knütel . 18th edition ISBN 3-406-53886-X , I § 67 I p. 283, note 3 and § 67 II 3, p. 285, note 25.
  3. ↑ a b c Wolfgang Ernst : Legal knowledge by judges' majorities. “Group choice” in European judicial traditions , Mohr Siebeck 2016, ISBN 978-3-16-154361-6 , pp. 37 ff (38).
  4. ↑ Friedrich Ebel, Georg Thielmann : Legal history: from Roman antiquity to modern times , 3rd revised edition, CF Müller Heidelberg 2003, ISBN 3-8114-1199-3 , p. 60.
  5. ↑ Digest , 29,5,10,1.
  6. ↑ Max Kaser: Roman legal sources and applied legal method. in: Research on Roman Law Volume 36. Verlag Böhlau, Vienna, Cologne, Graz, 1986. ISBN 3-205-05001-0 . P. 16 f.
  7. ↑ Digest 19,5,3,18 ff. Ulpian , 50 ed., 29,5,25,2. Gaius 17 ed. Prov.