Sumptuariae Leges
Laws intended to limit and control the expenditure of the individual citizen.
1. Greek
The sumptuary legislation of
Greece was contained
for the most part in the codes of the great lawgivers. A
rhetra of
Lycurgus is said to have forbidden the Spartans to have their houses made by any more
elaborate implements than the axe and the saw; simplicity of food and clothing was enjoined
on the male members of the population; iron money was originally the only coinage in use
(
Apophth. Lac. Lys. 3), and private possession of gold and silver was
forbidden even after these metals were employed for public purposes (
Plut. Lys. 17). By the laws of Zaleucus of Locri, we are told, the
citizens of that State were forbidden to drink undiluted wine, except on the order of a
physician, under pain of death (Athen. p. 429); while simplicity of dress and a limitation of
the number of personal attendants were also enjoined. The Solonian legislation at
Athens contained enactments against expensive feminine apparel and ornaments, particularly
those given in the dowry (
φερνή) of a bride, and against
expensive funerals; there were also laws in force at Athens which limited the number of
guests at entertainments (Athen. p. 245). Funeral regulations similar to those of Solon, we
are told by Plutarch, existed in his native town of Chaeronea (
Plut.
Sol. 21).
2. Roman
Roman sumptuary legislation was progressive; it did not originate
until a comparatively late period in the history of the State, and each law aimed at
eradicating some definite and growing evil. The inefficiency of these laws and the extreme
difficulty of enforcing them are amply attested (
Tac.
Ann. ii. 55;
Gell. ii.24.3; Tertull.
Apol. 6), but, even when recognized, were not sufficient to check
further attempts in this direction. The fact that most of these laws dealt with the same
subject--namely, the expenses of the table--and enjoined very similar restrictions, shows how
quickly each of them must have sunk into desuetude.
The earliest sumptuary regulations were those contained in the Twelve Tables limiting the
expenses of funerals (
De Leg. ii. 23). They were possibly copied from the
similar regulations of Solon.
The Lex Oppia, passed in B.C. 215, provided that no woman should
possess more than half an ounce of gold, or wear a dress of different colours, or ride in a
carriage in the city or within a mile of it except during public religious ceremonies. This
law, which was dictated by the necessities of the Second Punic War, was repealed twenty years
later, in B.C. 195 (
Livy, xxxiv. 1-8).
The Lex Orchia, passed three years after Cato 's censorship, and
therefore in B.C. 181, was the first law that restricted the expenses of the table. It
prescribed a limit to the number of guests that might be invited to entertainments. Cato is
said to have opposed its introduction.
Next followed the Lex Fannia, whose date is fixed by Pliny (
Pliny H. N. x. 71) as B.C. 161. It grew out of a
senatusconsultum, which enjoined that the
principes
civitatis should swear before the consuls that they would not exceed a certain limit
of expense in the banquets given at the Ludi Megalenses. Afterwards a consular law was
promulgated, which went further than the Lex Orchia, in that it prescribed the nature and
value of the eatables which were allowed to be consumed. It permitted the expenditure of 100
asses on the Ludi Romani, the Ludi Plebeii, and the Saturnalia, and of
thirty on some other festival occasions; but on all other days of the year it allowed only
ten
asses to be spent. It further forbade the serving of any fowl but a
single hen, and that not fattened. One of its clauses was of a protective character, since it
enjoined that only native wines should be consumed (
Gell. ii. 24;
Macrob. iii. 17;
Plin. H. N. x. 71; Tertull.
Apol. vi.).
The Lex Didia was passed eighteen years later, in B.C. 143. It
was practically a re-enactment of the Lex Fannia.
The Lex Licinia, of uncertain date, marks the next attempt at
sumptuary legislation. It allowed 100
asses to be spent on the table on
certain days, 200 on marriage feasts, and on certain other festivals (such as the Kalends,
Nones, and Nundinae) thirty
asses; it fixed a limit
to the amount of meat and fish that was to be consumed on ordinary days, and encouraged the
consumption of gardenproduce.
The general neglect of the preceding laws caused the Leges
Corneliae of the dictator Sulla to be passed in B.C. 81, restricting the expenses on
sepulchral monuments, and regulating the cost of funerals, which he himself violated on the
death of his wife Metella (
Sulla, 35). Another law restricted the luxury of
the table, allowing thirty sesterces to be spent on the Kalends, Ides, Nones, the
dies ludorum, and certain
feriae, and three on all
other days.
A Lex Aemilia, which probably belongs to B.C. 78, did not fix a
fresh limit to expenses, but laid down regulations as to the kinds and quantities of food.
The Lex Antia, which was subsequent to the last-named law but
cannot be dated precisely, besides limiting the expenditure on banquets, also limited the
class of persons with whom a magistrate might dine out during his time of office.
Next came the Leges Iuliae. The dictator Caesar enforced the
former sumptuary laws respecting entertainments, which had fallen into disuse (Dio Cass.
xliii. 25). They were not attended to during his absence, but during his presence in Rome the
enforcement of them was rigorous; guards were placed round the market to seize forbidden
luxuries, and sometimes dishes were taken from the tables of private individuals
(
Iul. 43). He also passed a law prohibiting the use of litters, of purple
garments, and of pearls, except in the case of persons of a certain rank or age, or on
certain days ( Suet. l. c.).
The emperor Augustus, in B.C. 22, passed laws regulating the expenses to be incurred on
ordinary and festal days (
Suet. Aug. 34). On
the former an expenditure of 200 sesterces was permitted, on the latter an expenditure of
300, and on marriage festivals of 1000 sesterces; an edict of Augustus or Tiberius allowed
expenses on various festivals to range from 300 to 2000 sesterces, the increase in the
permitted expenditure being allowed in the hope that this concession would secure obedience
to the law.
Tiberius, in spite of his distrust of the efficacy of sumptuary legislation (
Tac. Ann. iii. 53, 54), was forced into making
regulations to check the inordinate expenses on banquets (
Suet.
Tib. 34). To his reign also belongs a
senatusconsultum prohibiting the use of gold plate except in sacred rites, and
preventing men from wearing silk. Further sumptuary regulations checking the expenditure on
food were made by Nero; among later emperors Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius regulated the
expenses of gladiatorial shows; and the emperor Tacitus again prohibited men from wearing
silk, and forbade the wearing of gold-embroidered garments. It was during the later Republic
and the early Empire that luxury especially flourished, although the studied simplicity of
the courts of Augustus and Tiberius must have had some influence in restraining it. After
Galba, began a new era of moderation, an effect which Tacitus traces to the decline of
private fortunes, to the dangers attending the display of wealth, to the introduction of
novi homines into the Senate and into the best society of Rome, but
principally to the influence of Vespasian, a prince
antiquo cultu victuque
(
Tac. Ann. iii. 55). Other emperors
whose simplicity of life exercised an influence on the society of their times were Alexander
Severus and Aurelian.
See Platner,
De Legibus Sumptuariis Romanis (Leipzig, 1752);
and Baudrillart,
Histoire du Luxe Privé et Public, 4 vols.
(Paris, 1878-80).
