HONO´RES
HONO´RES The word may be used in a general sense for
any compliment or dignity conferred by a public body. We find it of the
thanksgivings decreed by the senate for Caesar's victories in Gaul,
“Caesar . . . singularibus ornatus et novis honoribus ac judiciis
senatus” (
Cic. Fam. 1.9,
14), and of the compliments showered on Cicero
in his provincial quaestorship, “excogitati quidam erant a Siculis
honores inauditi” (
pro Plancio, 26,
64). In a similar loose sense the word is occasionally used for a commission
in the army: e. g. Caesar (
B.C. 1.77) says that he restored
certain deserters “in tribunicium honorem.” But the more strict
and technical use of the term confines it to the actual magistracies,
whether of the Populus Romanus, of the Plebs, or of a municipium. The
position of a judex or a senator does not come within this category, nor
does the office of a priest (see Mommsen,
Staatsr. i.3 p. 8). From the words of Suetonius (
Suet. Cl. 14), “jus et consul et extra
honorem laboriosissime dixit,” we might infer that even the
principate, as not being one of the ordinary magistracies, was likewise
excluded. It is in this sense that we hear of the “jus honorum”
as a part of the qualities of a full citizen, which might be withheld when
the other rights were granted. Tacitus (
Tac. Ann.
11.23) tells us of certain Gauls who “civitatem Romanam jam
pridem assecuti, jus adipiscendorum in urbe honorum expetebant.”
The most interesting questions relating to
honores occur in connexion with the municipal institutions of the
later empire. The Digest contains a title (50, 4) “de muneribus et
honoribus,” in which the distinction between the
“honours” and the “burdens” of the community is
illustrated by numerous examples. We might expect to find adduced the
obvious contrast that an office is sued for voluntarily, and that the burden
is compulsorily imposed. It seems not unlikely that this distinction is
valid for the offices of the Roman Republic. The chief difficulty is in the
case of T. Manlius Torquatus, whom we find pleading with the people (
Liv. 26.22) not to elect him consul in a tone
which seems to imply that he could not absolutely refuse the office. It is
possible, however, to
[p. 1.970]take his words as merely
begging them to spare him the necessity of an arrogant rejection of the
people's wish. Mommsen (
Staatsr. i.3 p.
470) points out that there is no clear instance of a man being compelled to
hold a magistracy against his will; and in the frequent cases of abdication,
we never hear of leave to retire being asked. The duties, on the other hand,
of a priest (
Liv. 27.8) and of a judex (
Cic. pro Rab. Post. 7, 17)
were certainly imposed even against the will of the person; it does not
appear that the station of a senator could (apart from special agreements,
as in
Suet. Aug. 40) be declined by any man
who had held a qualifying office, and certainly a man once in the senate
required the “venia ordinis” (
Tac.
Ann. 1.75) before he could retire. This distinction, however,
between
honores and
munera will certainly not hold for the municipal magistracies,
which under the empire were not avoidable by the properly qualified persons.
Such persons might not even refuse to be put over the heads of their seniors
in the local senate, if they were better able to provide for the expenses of
magistracy: “Sciant igitur locupletiores,” says a rescript of
Caracalla and Geta (
Dig. 50,
4.6), “non debere se hoc praetextu legis uti, et de tempore
quo quisque in curiam allectus sit, inter eos demum quaerendum, qui pro
substantia sua capiant honoris dignitatem.” It is even laid down
(ib. § 12) that a “vacatio muneris publici” does not
excuse a man from serving a magistracy, “quia id ad honorem magis quam
ad munera pertinet.”
Of the two subdivisions of
munera, those
“quae patrimoniis injunguntur” (ib. § 6) are
easily distinguished from
honores. We find in
this category such services as transport by land and water, “rei
vehicularis, item navicularis” (ib. § 1). Under this
head, notwithstanding a contradiction between two authorities quoted in the
Digest (compare § 1 and § 14), we should probably place
that species of task work from which the word
munus seems to be etymologically derived, the “operae ad
munitiones,” or labour requisitioned for the repair of the walls
or streets of the town, since in the Lex Ursonensis (ch. 29) this burden
falls on all who own land within the limits of the colony, though they may
not be its burgesses. The “munera civilia personalia” (Dig. ib.
§ 1), such as the charge of acting as counsel for the corporation
in legal proceedings ( “defensio civitatis, id est ut Syndicus
fiat” ), the duty of registering the assessments ( “legatio ad
census accipiendos” ), and the superintendence of the provision
of corn, of water, or of horses for the public games, are assimilated on the
one hand to the “privata munera” of the guardian or trustee,
and on the other hand to the offices of the community. These “munera
personalia” require “sollicitudinem animi et
vigilantiam,” whereas the other category is of matters “in quo
sumptus maxime postulatur.” The duty of sitting in the local
senate is not mentioned among the
munera, but
it seems to be accurately distinguished from the
honores (see Mommsen's explanation,
Staatsr.
3.640, of the fragmentary passage of Gaius, 1.96), and it would probably
fall in the category of
munera, as that of
serving among the “decemprimi” or select men of the decuriones
is expressly said to do (Dig. ib. § 1). In the Roman senate in like
manner the duty of giving advice in answer to the magistrate's question is
spoken of by Tacitus (
Tac. Ann. 3.17) as a
munus. The “personalia munera”
most nearly approach the
honores in the case of
the “Irenarchae, qui disciplinae publicae et corrigendis moribus
praeficiuntur” (Dig. ib. § 18), and of the quaestors.
This latter post belongs to the “charges” or to the
“offices” according to the custom of the particular
community; it is undoubtedly a magistracy according to the Law of Salpensa
(ch. 26, 27), yet in the Digest (ib. § 18) we have “et
quaestura in aliqua civitate inter honores non habetur sed personale
munus est.”
The nearest approach to a definition of the two terms is that of Callistratus
(Dig. ib. § 14): “Honor municipalis est administratio
reipublicae cum dignitatis gradu, sive cum sumptu sive sine erogatione
contigens . . . . Publicum munus dicitur, quod in administranda
republica cum sumptu sine titulo dignitatis subimus.” This is,
roughly speaking, a continuation in the municipalities of the Roman practice
of ranking only actual magistracies among the
honores.
[
J.L.S.D]
