There are two basic models of citizenship in our study of western civilization: either the ‘republican’ model or the ‘liberal’ model. The republican model is that which we have been discussing for the last couple of weeks with the musings of Plato and Aristotle, and it includes the concept of self-rule, of the holding of civic offices, of the active participation in law writing that makes a person a citizen instead of a subject. The liberal model has its origins in the Roman era. When the Romans conquered a region, they enabled some of the conquered people to become Roman citizens.
The key difference between these two models is that, while the republican model is one of participation, the liberal view of citizenship is primarily a legal one. Being a Roman citizen conferred upon these people certain protections even though they were not participants in the creation of the laws of the state as in the republican model. Because these people were conquered, they may not have possessed any tie to the Romans who offered their benevolent protection. Let us be careful here to remember that citizenship was certainly not universal. Perhaps five or ten percent of the occupants of the Roman empire were citizens. But these inhabitants of the extended Roman empire were citizens, they were under the protection of Roman law, and that protection was absolutely real.
Let us examine one example of what it meant to be a Roman citizen. During the time that Saul (who became Paul after his conversion) was preaching the Gospel, the Roman empire was a system of provinces that were either ‘imperial’, meaning under the control of the emperor, or ‘senatorial’, meaning under the control of the Roman senate. In the imperial provinces, the military ruled a province under the control of a procurator who was generally a reserve military officer. This was the system in place when Paul was traveling in Judea. In contrast, the senatorial provinces were under civilian control, with a civilian proconsul as governor. That was the situation in places like Macedonia.
A proconsul would have complete control over decisions affecting his province, and would be responsible for the administration, justice, as well as the defense, of everyone living there. This ‘imperium’ law was virtually unlimited with minor exceptions (certain laws existed against extortion, treason, or anything that the emperor withheld at the time of the proconsul’s installation). This local ruler could be as harsh as he wanted as long as he did not run afoul of these limitations or take money from the ‘peregrinus’ (which were the local provincial subjects). Only the emperor himself, through a ‘maius imperium’ could overrule him. Of particular interest to Paul, the proconsul held jurisdiction over all capital punishment. This authority could not be delegated, and only the emperor himself, through an imperium, could over-rule a proconsul.
Rome proper, had an entire system of laws and courts. Major offenses, especially those against the state, were codified in the ‘leges publicia’. There was an entire set of laws and statutes that applied to government officials and higher social classes. Crimes of non-citizens were the jurisdiction of special magistrates. There were no specific codes to guide these magistrates and they operated with the direct authority of the emperor.
The rights of Roman citizens, as opposed to those of an ordinary inhabitant, included things like the ability to vote, to run for public office, and the right of appeal. There was no appeal process for non-citizens. For these citizens, responsibilities came with rights. The citizen was responsible for serving in the military, paying taxes, billeting troops, and many other minor civic functions. It was not easy to become a citizen of Rome for those not born into the proper situation. Romans would sometimes extend citizenship to those who helped them militarily, or as a favor to those who helped the emperor in a specific way, but the concept of birthright citizenship would have been foreign to them. Citizenship was something to be granted, or earned, by being worthy, and it was considered an honor and a responsibility.
Of particular interest to this discussion was Paul’s right of appeal and the limitations that were placed on the punishment of citizens of Rome. Paul and Silas are both beaten after they free slave girl in Acts 16. Paul protests this to the magistrate as a violation of his rights under Roman law. It was certainly within Roman law for both Paul and Silas to be brought before the magistrate for the offense of causing a disturbance. The issue was that no Roman citizen could be beaten (or even put in chains) without a trial, and given the right to an appeal. Later (Acts 21) the Roman military tribune Claudius Lysias, has Paul chained and beaten.
When he discovers that Paul is a citizen, he fears what will happen if word gets out that he mistreated a citizen. The same thing happens at Philippi. In that case the magistrate is the commander of a cohort. That is the modern equivalent of a battalion, and yet this tribune is frightened. That should give us some idea of the seriousness of violating the rights of a Roman citizen. It was not unheard of for a magistrate to be executed for the improper treatment of a citizen. In fact, Paul never apologizes for his actions, his entire defense was that his treatment was a violation of his rights as a citizen of Rome.
Unfortunately, this system begins to come apart later in the first century as the Roman empire begins its decline and emperors’ sadistic tendencies become harder to control. This decline was precisely the reason that Aristotle emphasized the importance of the ‘rule of law’, and broke with Plato over the latter’s belief that a philosophical monarchy was the best form of government.
From the prospective of our exploration of the thoughts that brought us western civilization as we know it, Paul’s experience is critically important because it shows that he could reasonably expect that the law would be followed consistently no matter where he was in the world. The magistrates held almost unlimited power in their jurisdictions, but that power did not extend to violating the rights of citizens of the Roman empire.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA