Book VII.
Chap. 13.We find indeed in historians very rigid sentences, passed in the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius against the lewdness of some Roman ladies: but by shewing us the spirit of these reigns, they at the same time shew us the spirit of those decisions.
The principal design of Augustus and Tiberius was to punish the dissoluteness of their relations. It was not their immorality they punished, but a particular crime of impiety or high treason[1] of their own invention, which served to promote a respect for majesty, and answered their private revenge.
The penalty of the Julian law was small[2]. The emperors insisted that in passing sentence the judges should increase the penalty of the law. This was the subject of the invectives of historians. They did not examine whether the women were deserving of punishment, but whether they had violated the law, in order to punish them.
One of the most tyrannical proceedings of Tiberius[3], was the abuse he made of the ancient laws. When he wanted to extend the punishment of a Roman lady beyond that inflicted by the Julian law, he revived the domestic tribunal[4].
- ↑ Culpam inter viros & faeminas vulgatam gravi nomine laefarum religionum appellando, elementiam majorum suasque ipse leges egrediebatur, Tacit. Annal. lib. 3.
- ↑ This law is given in the Digest; but without mentioning the penalty. It is supposed it was only relegatio, because that of incest was only depertatio. Leg. si quis viduam, ff. de quaest.
- ↑ Proprium id Tiberio suit scelera nuper reperta priscis verbis obtegere, Tacit.
- ↑ Adulterii graviorem paenam deprecatus, ut exemplo majorum propinquis suis ultra ducentesimum lapidem removeretur, suasit. Adultero Manlio Italiâ atque Africa interdictum est. Tacit. Annal. lib. 2.
