Crimen maiestatis

JUDr. Miroslav Frýdek, Ph.D.

Doctoral thesis

Abstract:

V nejstarším období římských dějin se jednání, které naplnilo skutkovou podstatu urážky majestátu národa římského, označovalo jako proditio -onis (f)] od slovesa prodo – zrazení, zrada, vyzrazení, patriae proditiones – zločiny zrady proti vlasti. Tuto skutkovou podstatu upravoval královský zákon, který je dochovaný např. u Dionysia: Dionysios 3,30: Král zřídil soud nad velezrádci (proditionis iudicia) a jejich spoluviníky a ty, kteří byli usvědčeni, dal usmrtit podle zákona o dezertérech a velezrádcích (legem de desertoribus et proditoribus). V období královské vlády v Římě se tento zločin označoval jako jednání proti královské svrchovanosti nebo také jako perduellio, -onis (f) nepřátelský čin proti státu – velezrada. V pozdější době (počínaje tzv. principátem) byl tento zákon označován jako urážka Veličenstva, zákon o urážce Veličenstva či soud na urážku Veličenstva. Zde již bylo užíváno termínu maiestatis jako označení Veličenstva, tedy osoby císaře. Zákony stíhající urážku majestátu, bez ohledu v jaké době vznikly, měly společné to, že byly velice široce koncipovány. Jednotlivé zákony de maiestate obsahovaly buďto velice široký výčet toho, co je považováno za urážku majestátu nebo jaké chování je možno subsumovat do jednání naplňující skutkovou podstatu urážky majestátu. Např. v době královské to bylo jednání narušující královskou svrchovanost. V době římské republiky šlo o jednání, které zahrnovalo od velezrady (perduellio) až po urážku představitelů státu, nejprve tribunů, později magistrátů a poté, pochopitelně za principátu císaře samotného i soch a obrazů, které ho zpodobňovaly, ale tyto obrazy a sochy musely být zasvěcené (consecratio).

Abstract:

The present thesis analyses an evolution of crimem maiestatis in Ancient Rome. It is focused on the analysis of facts of the case of crimem maiestatis related to particular evolution periods of Roman state (Kingdom, Republic, Principate, Dominate). The first part of the thesis describes a methodology that is used for a work with primary sources. There is also a brief summary of actual state of analysed issues. Hereinafter it contains detailed analysis of Roman penal law theory; terminology of Roman penal law, division, penology and theoretical aspects and grounds that enabled to establish an independent law branch from religious and customary rules. The main part of thesis is focused on laws, customs, comments of lawyers and cases from narrative sources (from work of historians) that described crimem maiestatis. Facts of the case related to crimem maiestatis developed constantly and reacted to political and social changes of Ancient Rome. That is why the author decided to divide the thesis according to Roman state system. This division is more convenient because the core of the thesis is a public law and that is why it is not satisfactory to divide the content according to evolutional periods of Roman law (archaic law, pre-classical, classical, post-classical and justinian-this division is convenient rather for theses describing private law). In the early period of Roman history, an action that fulfilled facts of the case crimem maiestatis was determined as proditio [-onis (f)] from verb prodo – betrayal, disclosure, patriae proditiones – crimes of treason against the homeland. It was an old royal law that is preserved for example by Dionysios of Hallicarnassos: Dionysios 3,30: For the trial of his friends and the accomplices of his treachery the king set up courts and put to death such of the accused as were found guilty, pursuant to the law respecting deserters and traitors. During the period of kingdom in Rome, this crime was called also perduellio, -onis - hostile act against the state – treason. A very famous case with Horatius is related to this crime. The case is analysed in the text by comparison of Livius and Dionysius of Hallicarnassus works. Crimen maiestatis in the period of Roman republic was regulated by 5 acts. Lex duodecim tabularum punished a person who outraged enemy against Rome or gave a citizen to the enemy. Lex de Appuleia maiestate minuta dictated to prosecute every officer that would reduce the dignity of the State by his behaviour. Lex Varia de maiestate enlarged facts of the case by the behaviour of person who made allies of the Roman people to raise their arms against Rome. Another law that enlarged facts of the case of crimen maiestatis was lex Cornelia maiestatis. It was focused on the administrators of provinces. They cannot participate in a war waged outside the area of their province; they also cannot cross the frontier of their province without previous agreement of Senate or comitia. This law established an investigative committee. Empire transformed crimen maiestatis into legal instrument of personal protection of an emperor and his family. Crimen maiestatis became not only an instrument of emperor personal protection, but also a legal tool how to eliminate an opposition. The aim of present thesis is a complex analysis of evolution of crimem maiestatis in historical context describing particular evolution periods of Roman state (Kingdom, Republic, Principate, Dominate). The thesis examined extensive social and political background that influenced issuing of new laws with new facts of the case of crimem maiestatis. According to the choice of working methods, the aim of the thesis is also an analysis of the effect of law on society and the effect of society on law in larger context. Concrete objectives of thesis: A. To collect legal and narrative texts with their translations regulated crimen maiestatis in one text, B. To describe and examine particular laws regulated crime and facts of t

Abstract:

he case of crimen maiestatis, C. To analyse changes in Roman state system and reflexion of these changes in particular laws prosecuting crimen maiestatis, D. To compare legal and narrative sources of law describing crimen maiestatis, E. To examine a possibility of prosecution for verbal offence versus a possibility of prosecution for an offence in early Principate.

Keywords

římské právo, crimen maiestatis, perduellio, proditio, Tacitus. Roman law, Tacitus

Language used: Czech

Date on which the thesis was submitted / produced: 5. 2. 2015

Thesis defence

• Date of defence: 16. 6. 2015
• Supervisor: doc. JUDr. Renata Veselá, Ph.D.
• Reader: prof. JUDr. Michal Skřejpek, DrSc., doc. JUDr. Matúš Nemec, PhD.

Masaryk University

Faculty of Law

Doctoral programme / field:
Theoretical Legal Sciences (4-years) / History of the Law and Roman Law