The (Misconstrued) Influence

of Greek Law on

Roman Jurisprudence



by James F. Albrecht

NYPD Captain (ret.)

Professor, St. John’s University (NYC)








Table of Contents                                                      Pages


1)    Introduction

·       Abstract                                                        2 - 3

·       Introduction                                                  4 - 5  

·       Customs and the Law                                     5 – 6

·       Religion and Written Law                                 6 – 8


2)    Near Eastern Legal Precedents

·       The Code of Hammurabi                                  9 – 11

·       Mosaic Law                                                   12 – 14


3)    Greek and Roman Law Codes

·       The Laws of Draco and Solon                           15 – 17

·       The Twelve Decemviral Tables of Rome               17 – 19

·       The Law Code of Gortyn in Crete                       20 – 21


4)    Evolution of Codes and Methods of Transfusion

·       The Evolution of Law and Jurisprudence           22 – 24

·       Possible Transfusion between

     Ancient Civilizations                                      24 – 26

·        The Benefits of Written Law                            26 - 27       

·       The Development of the Greek Laws                 28 – 31

·       The Development of the Roman Laws     31 – 35


5)    Roman Writers examine the Influence of Greek Law

·       The Classical Roman Historians                         36       

·       Roman History by Cicero                                  36 - 42

·       Roman History by Livy                                     42 - 44

·       Roman History by Dio                                      44 - 46


6)    Comparison of Greek Law and the Twelve Tables

·       Evidence of Greek Influence on Roman Law        47 - 52

·       Comparison of the Laws of Greece to

the Roman Twelve Tables                                  52 - 56


7)    Conclusion and Comment

·       Summary                                                         57 - 58

·       Conclusion                                                       58 - 59

·       Personal Insight and Analysis                             59 - 63


8)    Bibliography/References

·       Bibliography                                                      64 - 67




The (Misconstrued) Influence of Greek Law

on Roman Jurisprudence




James  F.  Albrecht







          There have been many legal codes discovered and justice practices revealed among ancient civilizations within southeastern Europe and the Middle East.  A number of legal documents have been uncovered either in original form or in later historical records that outlined intricate law codes that ruled normal life within the Persian, Jewish, Greek, and Roman empires through the start of the Common Era.  Anthropologist Robert Lowe in his work “Primitive Society” evaluated law, justice and punishment, and concluded that difficulties existed in determining if similarities in ancient legal codes resulted from diffusion, an innate sense of morality, or from passage through multiple generations from one common ancestral civilization. [1]   Both ancient and contemporary historians and anthropologists have debated this issue over the last two millennia. 

The goal of my thesis is to analyze the Greek Law Codes of Draco and Solon and the comprehensive law code discovered later in Gortyn and to make a comparison to the Roman Decemviral Tables (i.e., the Twelve Tables).  By additionally examining earlier significant law codes (i.e., the Code of Hammurabi and the Mosaic Law), and earlier aspects of Greek and Roman jurisprudence, I will explore differences and similarities between these documents and practices, and ultimately theorize whether the legal and justice procedures in ancient Greek and Roman civilizations resulted from one ancestral origin, from internal morality, or from contact between different societies.  Some historians  [2] have theorized that the complex nature of the Roman law documented in the Twelve Tables implied that this legislation relied heavily on input from the neighboring Greeks, who had previously made great strides in formulating legal and justice procedures.  Ultimately my position is that the Romans relied on their own traditional legal precedents and not transfusion from the Greeks to develop their famous law code that is regarded as one of the initial and more significant stages in the formation of the Roman Republic, and that has had an additional dramatic impact on justice and legal practices throughout Europe and the later western world.  Translated primary sources, secondary sources, and the law codes themselves will be evaluated to gain a sense of the extent of the similarities and differences between the legal guidelines in use by these two significant civilizations prior to the start of the Common Era.







As civilizations developed throughout the world, a common trend routinely occurred regardless of time and location.  Customs were devised by local leaders, memorized, preached and practiced by the populace, and they were in fact the first version of law.  When local communities expanded, and writing developed, the local customs were documented for all members of society and traditionally displayed for all to see; thus codes and their respective punishments were made clear to all.  A number of significant legal codes have been either recovered in their entirety or pieced together from historical literature or recovered artifacts. Six major versions of ancient legislation - the Code of Hammurabi in Babylon, the Mosaic Law of the Jews, the Law Codes of Draco and Solon in Greece, the Roman Twelve Tables, and the Greek Law Code of Gortyn - have been highlighted as the foundations for legal developments for future civilizations, and have been recognized as being highly influential on current justice practices.      

          Due to the close relationship in time in which the Greek and Roman law codes were promulgated, there has been speculation by both ancient  [3]  and contemporary  [4] historians that the later Roman law code was strongly influenced by the written legal statutes of the nearby Greeks.  By examining historical documents and by comparing the content of the Roman Twelve Tables with the Solonic law code of Athens and the similar and more comprehensive Law Code of Gortyn, stronger conclusions can be drawn to support either diffusion or independent development of justice practices within these two ancient societies.  



Customs and the Law


Civilizations developed as familial settlements had expanded to clans and eventually to groups of clans.  The need for cooperation and understanding resulted in the development of common practices for the good of the settlement. These tacit agreements were often long standing, and acknowledged community customs resulted.  These early customs, conveyed verbally or through action, served as local regulations and as precedents in decision making.  These societal covenants therefore served as the first laws. [5]   

Since punishments were often meted out in arbitrary fashion, both a code of conduct and delineated penalties became necessary.   It thus became the responsibility of the ruler or “sovereign” to correct the inconvenience and insufficiency of primitive society.  The “positive” laws addressed the most general interests of society, the clearest being the right of property.  Regulations were designed to secure for community residents the “peaceable enjoyment of his possessions.”  These different rules eventually gave rise to civil law.[6]

One of the intentions of political society is to “secure the tranquility of all its members.”  It therefore became necessary to take measures to suppress attempts to disturb the public peace.  History had revealed that the support of society depended entirely on “coercive power, which by exemplary punishments intimidates the wicked and balances the allurement of pleasure, and the strength of the passions.”  As a result the, penal laws evolved.  Punishments often took the form of retaliation and were often severe. [7]


Religion and Written Law


          Civilization arose 5,000 years ago in the Near East (in Egypt and Mesopotamia) and later in East Asia (China and India).  However, it was the invention of writing that enabled the earlier civilizations to preserve, organize and expand knowledge.  As these primary societies became larger, religion became a central force.  Law was not only an expression of custom and local morality, but was often considered a sacred commandment of the gods.  Rulers were either considered gods or agents of the gods.  Societal practices and norms relied on religion.  Rulers, religion, temples and the law were thus tightly intertwined. [8]  

          Before written codes of conduct, the earliest societies relied on religion, customs and magic to maintain order.  In the religious perspective, not only could the offending individual but the entire social group become subject to the wrath of the gods.  Responsibility was collective in nature, as was punishment.  It therefore was necessary for the society to punish the individual to “prevent supernatural forces from taking revenge on the tribal group.” [9] Society was then justified in treating moral non-conformists as delinquents, criminals or victims of mental illness.  It was law that allowed society to communicate the moral values to maintain the goals of that culture. [10] While custom emanated from the people, law was forced on the community by the decree of a master, a monarch, a ruler, or group of elders. [11]

          Preliterate societies allowed private disputes to be settled in a personal matter and revenge was the usual outcome.  Victims themselves initially determined the extent of the retribution, which was often not proportional to the original offense.  This “blood feud” would be better referred to as “blood revenge.”  In an effort to control the magnitude of vengeance, the responsibility for punishing the perpetrator was transferred to the societal group.  The introduction of writing then allowed substantive laws to pass from the oral tradition to the entire community. [12]

          A number of notable law codes were introduced before the Common Era (B.C.E.), most significantly the Code of Hammurabi in Babylon, the Mosaic Law of the Hebrews, the Draconian (and Solonic) Law Codes of the Greeks, the Twelve Tables of the Romans, and the Law Code of Gortyn in Crete within the Greek empire.  Interestingly, while the independent development of these historically relevant law codes has been emphasized, there is evidence of transfusion between most of these civilizations and therefore at least some support for the diffusion theory in legal and justice practices. 






































The Code of Hammurabi


One of the world’s first great civilizations was founded on the plains between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers approximately 4,000 years ago.  It was the development of writing in that region that permitted not only record keeping, but allowed royal authority to outline their edicts and law. [13]  

One of the most relevant and earliest written law codes was produced in Babylon in the 17th Century B.C.E.  Their ruler Hammurabi (1728 – 1686 B.C.), considered the greatest sovereign of his dynasty, organized the administrative system of the empire.  The chief monument of his reign was the code of laws, commonly called the “Code of Hammurabi” or the “Judgments of the Righteousness.” [14]  In typical Mesopotamia fashion, Hammurabi claimed that these laws rested on the authority of the gods.  Any violation would therefore contravene the divine order. [15]

The discovery of the Code of Hammurabi (1700 B.C.) was a significant archaeological find.  Uncovered by French archaeologists in 1901 at Susa, the extremely large black stone slab contained 4,000 lines of inscription.  At the uppermost edge of the slab was a depiction of Hammurabi facing the sun god.  Underneath was documented both civil and criminal law, which attempted to regulate essentially every aspect of the lives of Mesopotamians. [16]

The Code of Hammurabi contemplated the whole population as falling into three classes. The “Amelu” was a patrician who had aristocratic privileges. The “Muskinu” was a free person who may have been landless.  The “Ardu” was a slave. [17]   The significance of defining the social status of the offender and the victim was made clear in the outlined punishment.  Punishments were more severe if the perpetrator was from the lower classes. [18]

Although it is now recognized that the Code of Hammurabi was not the first documented law code in that region, it is suggested that Hammurabi may have “borrowed extensively from earlier rulers,” as archaeologists have uncovered law related clay tablets in Iraq that pre-dated those found in Susa by several hundred years. [19]  While this does lend support to the diffusion theory, it should be highlighted that the comprehensiveness of the Hammurabi slab is to date without comparison.  In addition, it is acknowledged that the Code of Hammurabi introduced the world to the concept of “lex talionis,” or an “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” which clearly resulted in a severe and literal view of accountability. [20] The death penalty was also commonly imposed for such infractions as theft, for poor architecture that led to death, for maternal incest, for adultery, for rape, for false accusation, and many other specific acts.  Exile and corporal punishment were also imposed, but probably the most interesting were those dealing with penal retaliation, such as the “cutting off the hand of a son who struck his father,” the loss of an eye that “pried into forbidden secrets,” and the loss “a surgeon’s hand that caused the loss of life or limb.” [21]  Most interestingly and somewhat surprising was the finding that the most common penalty was a fine, particularly if the offender was from the upper class. In addition, the concepts of culpability and suspicion were addressed, as penalties were less severe if the offense was conducted unintentionally, and the offender could often only be prosecuted if caught in the act or in possession of stolen goods.  The Code of Hammurabi was so complete that it outlined a method of appeal that would first be heard by a superior court and ultimately by the king himself. [22]  

Given the advanced nature of the Babylonian civilization, it would not be startling to find that nearby societies and people, and those with later contact or trade with them, would not be somewhat influenced by the governmental and justice practices of this noteworthy society.   




Mosaic Law


          The Hebrews originated in Mesopotamia and migrated to Canaan (later called Palestine).  Some Israelites who migrated to Egypt were enslaved and became forced laborers. In the thirteenth century B.C., one of their leaders, Moses, was acknowledged as a messenger of their God.  Central to the Hebrew religion was the belief that they were the chosen people of God. [23]  As documented in the Old Testament of the present day Bible and originally in the “Torah” (translated into English as “instruction”), this covenant or law provided authoritative guidance to the Hebrew people.  Mosaic Law was divided into three sections of instruction, i.e., moral, social and ceremonial.  The Judgments or Social Law governed the Hebrews in secular, social, political and economic life and is documented in the Bible in Exodus 21: 1-23: 13.  The Ordinances or Ceremonial Law is the religious portion of Mosaic Law which guided the Hebrews in their worship and spiritual relationship with God, and included the priesthood, tabernacle and sacrifices (documented in the Bible in Exodus 25 – Leviticus 31).  The moral or legal code of the Hebrews is found in the Ten Commandments of God found in the Bible in Exodus 20:1-17. [24]   In addition, prohibited conduct and the respective punishment are documented throughout the first five sections of the Old Testament, collectively known as the “Torah.”  [25]

          Under Hebrew law, the religious nature of crime was apparent as crime was equated to sin, since every criminal offense could be considered a crime against God.  Once again the concept of penal retaliation or “an eye for an eye” was outlined in the Biblical section Exodus.  The Torah also outlined the proper legal procedure for filing a formal complaint against an offender, which involved both the plaintiff and the defendant appearing before an authority figure, often an elder, at the main gate of the city.  Issues such as the number of witnesses, the level of culpability and self defense were taken into consideration, however, there was no distinction between social classes, and every person could be equally tried and punished. [26]  In addition, specific efforts were made to protect the poor, widows, orphans, migrants and slaves. [27]  The sentence of capital punishment was limited in comparison to the older Code of Hammurabi, and many property offenses were settled through the payment of fines or restitution.  [28]    

          It appears that many of the laws and punishments outlined in the Torah are similar to that of earlier regional practices, but the more humane repercussions and the applicability to all members of Hebrew society provided a higher degree of religious influence than the Code of Hammurabi.

          The predominant question that should therefore be examined is to what extent the Hebrews were influenced by their Persian, Egyptian, and Babylonian neighbors.  Both ancient and modern historians have practiced extreme caution in scrutinizing the divine instruction outlined in Exodus, and in proposing theories counter to these religious claims.  The diffusion theory in this case would clearly prove to be too controversial (to those of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths).    




































The Laws of Draco and Solon in Greece


          Prior to the introduction of writing in Greece, the law of Athens and the administration of justice remained in the hands of the oligarchy, with societal laws being passed down to the next generation orally.   The non-aristocrats eventually demanded that the societal regulations be recorded so that all classes could benefit from their enforcement.  In 621 B.C., Draco was asked to develop and document Athenian legislation to promote public order and deter the practice of blood feuds.  However, in this case, the law was not intended to carry out the will of a tyrannical ruler nor the direction of God, but rather to improve the lives of ordinary citizens and thus enhance the quality of life and maintain order for the polis’s citizenry.  With this goal in mind, Draco documented severe punishments, often death or enslavement, to deter disorder.   Although Draco is remembered in our age for his legislative ruthlessness, it should be noted that he did not create new laws, but merely documented the common practices and customs that had existed in unwritten fashion in Greece until that time. [29]

          The laws created by Draco were written on pillars of wood for religious matters and on bronze for other aspects of law.  However, no original fragments of Draco’s law have survived and we must rely on the writings of early Greek historians for insight into this important legislation. [30]  One archeological find did uncover a marble stele with Draco’s law on Homicide, but that fragment seems to be a later documentation of the original wood recording. [31]

          The legislation recorded by Draco did have a negative impact on the lower classes, and severe financial penalties often placed them in economic distress.  This feeling of inequality brought the city of Athens to the verge of civil war.  In 594 B.C., the newly elected chief magistrate of Athens, Solon, revised the Athenian law code.  Solon concluded that the wealthy landowners, through their greed, had disturbed community life.  Solon initiated a rational approach to the problems of society by deemphasizing the role of the gods in civil affairs and by holding that written law should be more in harmony with the priorities of the community. [32]  Given full power to institute his reforms, Solon immediately cancelled all debts and abolished slavery for debt. [33]  Solon’s contribution to the law of Athens included a disavowal of the concept of divine origin and he promoted an environment of democracy where the poor and middle class citizens were emphasized.  He additionally attempted to design a penal system in which the punishment would fit the crime. Under the legal reform of Solon, capital punishment was only permitted for murder and treason.  In addition, members of the jury were allowed to include the “average citizen.”  However, not everyone could plead their case before a jury court, as only free male citizens of Athens were allowed to address the court.  More interestingly, under the new Solonic legal regulations, plaintiffs and defendants represented themselves during the court proceedings. [34]


The Twelve Decemviral Tables of Rome


          In 509 B.C., the Romans were able to free themselves from the clutches of absolute power and attempted to develop a republican form of government.  With the development of writing and a democratic mindset, a written law code would significantly improve Roman society.  In the 5th Century B.C., an effort was made to further this endeavor.  What is known is that legal guidelines were eventually transcribed on twelve tables and were publicly displayed. What has come under suspicion is the origin of the content of these tables that have so remarkably affected later civilizations. 

          One perspective has been speculated by a number of ancient (and repeated by contemporary) historians.  One theory is that around 455 B.C., the consuls of Rome dispatched a commission of patricians to Greece to better grasp the Athenian Solonic Code.  After this alleged excursion and upon their return, a commission of ten men, the Decemviri, was established to outline a code of law that would be binding to both the patricians, the members of the upper class, and plebeians, the common people.  Ten tables were used to document the first new code of law, and after review and criticism, two additional tables were also added.  This code of law is the earliest surviving piece of literature stemming from the Romans.  The twelve tables of bronze were then displayed in the Roman Forum for all (literate) to view.  While the original twelve tables were likely destroyed when the Gauls sacked and burned Rome in the invasion of 387 B.C., their content has been revealed in fragmentary form through the writings of many of the classical historians. [35]

          While significant in legal history, the laws outlined on the Twelve Tables dealt mainly with private disputes between individuals.   The concept of “lex talionis” was also emphasized as it related to criminal matters, but this could often be avoided with payment of a fine.  As per the twelve tables, capital punishment was an appropriate penalty for murder, treason, nocturnal meetings, arson, judicial perjury, libel and slander, vandalism to a farm, and magical incantation.  While the sentence of death could, again, routinely be evaded by payment of a fine, [36]  the number of infractions that could result in the imposition of capital punishment clearly and dramatically exceeded the guidelines imposed by the Greeks.  It would therefore appear that the outlined aim of equalizing the social classes may not have been attained (as the lower classes were likely incapable of meeting the financial demands of the imposed restitution or penalty).

From another perspective, this legislation may have been intended not to be a comprehensive law code, but rather a compilation of laws that could be abused by unethical judges if the plaintiffs were not properly versed in the law. [37] However, to the common citizen, these laws did appear to neutralize the two competing social classes, the patricians and the plebeians, as far as justice administration was concerned, [38] and Roman Law would set the tone for future democratic legal practices throughout the western world for thousands of years to come, particularly those regions directly affected by the subsequent Roman conquests of Europe and the Middle East. [39]

While many classical and modern historians accept this explanation, there are other theories proposed for the derivation of the Roman Twelve tables.  The simplest of these elucidations would involve the simple documentation of the justice practices within the fledgling Roman republic, allowing for public display and understanding, and at least apparent equality between the patrician and plebian classes. The potential influence of the Greeks on Roman jurisprudence has also been theorized in other fashion, and these hypotheses will be examined in thorough detail later.





The Law Code of Gortyn in Crete


          Gortyn in Crete was first inhabited at the end of the Neolithic period (3000 B.C.E.), but flourished later during the Late Minoan period (1600 – 1100 B.C.E.).  The citizens of Gortyn developed a law code that regulated civil life.  In 450 B.C., these statutes were recorded in stone, which were later used as the exterior walls of a Roman theatre, the Odion, and were uncovered by an Italian archaeologist in the 1884.  This inscription, which is divided into twelve columns and written in Dorian Greek, is the largest document of Greek law in existence.  With little left of the original Greek law codes of Draco and Solon, the inscription discovered in Crete provides insight into the comprehensive nature of the Greek legal and justice practices.  While displayed over a century after Draco’s accomplishments, this glimpse into Greek governmental administration is significant to legal historians attempting to grasp the legal ideology of Greece.

It is likely that what remains may be only a small fraction of a great legal code, since what is addressed is not inclusive of all aspects of daily life. However, the code, as discovered, does deal with such matters as marriage and divorce, the sale of property, mortgages and loans, inheritance rights, adoption rules, the legal position of slaves, rape and adultery. [40]  What is notably absent is any reference to the common criminal acts of murder or theft, which had been clearly addressed in the other law codes discovered in other civilizations.   Given the thorough nature of the existing Law Code of Gortyn, it is difficult to fathom that a common crime such as theft would not be addressed in some fashion.  This would lead one to believe that the code, as uncovered by archaeologists, was not the complete law code of the Gortyn Minoan citizens. However, the thoroughness of the Law Code would indicate that this legislation was reflective in whole or in part of the legislation in place in Athens, and provides historians with one of the best perspectives of the famous legal guidelines transcribed by Solon. 
































The Evolution of Law and Jurisprudence


          When examining the evolution of ancient law codes, there appears to be a number of common trends.  Law codes seem to appear at the same time in the history of respective civilizations, which is clearly not to say that this occurred at the same time in chronological history, but rather at similar stages in the development of each particular society.  What started as customary practices in small clans, eventually evolved into community norms as the size of each settlement had increased.  Once these communities enlarged to the stage that not all members were known to each other, the customs of the tribe were left in the hands of the leader, elder or priest.  These norms and rules were passed from one generation to the next, but often led to arbitrary decision making on behalf of the group ruler.  As these societies grew to extremely large sizes, the imposition of rules and the punishments imposed were left in the hands of a select few, namely the privileged minority.  Differential social classes and treatment often resulted.   

          In order to ensure compliance, community leaders often invoked religion to enhance their authority.  By portraying themselves as gods or the chosen of the gods, as Hammurabi had conveyed, rulers were often able to institute customs and practices that at times were detrimental to society members or certain classes of the community.  As time transpired, there was a move away from divine influence toward democracy in some civilizations (e.g. Greeks and Romans).  With the invention of writing, the local directives of the ruler could be codified and displayed for all members of his empire.  Legal history thus evolved from customary to codified law.  Through time, legislation that benefited the ruler or the traditional gods was replaced by laws that benefited all members of that society and whose emphasis was on public order and democratic governance.  While these stages did not occur at the same rate, nor to the same extent in every civilization, some generalizations about the evolution of law can be said of most societies.  One can also conclude that perhaps, due to their proximity, neighboring empires borrowed many aspects of their customs and codified law from each other.  In addition, the theory that all laws were based on one ancient set of traditional customs clearly comes to mind.   A concrete conclusion can not be drawn for either proposal as some civilizations that had little or no contact with each other often developed similarly delineated legal and penal practices.  While the legal codes outlined above may have been influenced by continental and regional contact, similar civil, criminal and penal practices were also codified in distant regions.  One clear example that supports the theory of independent development involves the legislative clauses of the Chinese emperors that essentially mirrored the codified directives of the Middle Eastern civilizations.  The civil and criminal code of Li Kuei in the fourth century B.C.E. provided the basis for the Ta Ching Lu Li, the Chinese criminal and penal codes that have remained in force in its majority through 1912. [41]  Extremely comprehensive, this law was developed by the Chinese without known contact with their western neighbors, and apparently without any association with any of the advanced civilizations in the Middle East.  It would appear that both writing and codified criminal and penal practices are a stage in the evolution of all, or at least most, developing civilizations.      


Possible Transfusion between Ancient Civilizations


          The possibility of contact and transfusion between many of the advanced ancient civilizations is regarded as high. If not for cultural or scientific exchange, then commerce and war were the likely causes for societal interaction. One of the earliest exchanges dealing with recognized law codes that may have transpired is likely to have occurred between the Persians and the Jewish peoples.  The statutes and content of the Jewish law attributed to Moses are so comparable to the Law Code of Hammurabi, that some believe that transfusion was a likely factor, and that the law code documented in the Jewish Torah and Christian Old Testament had its foundations on passages from its Babylonian precursor.  The inference is that this exposure may have occurred during the Babylonian captivity and enslavement of the Jewish people. [42]  Of course, as practical as this explanation may be, it is controversial and clearly would be considered sacrilegious to the majority of the world’s religious clerics, advocates and believers (i.e., the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim ideologues). This would clearly counter the concept of divine intervention so strongly assumed by most of the earth’s inhabitants, both now and over time.  What is clear is that courage would be needed by a contemporary historian to comprehensively evaluate the theory of Babylonian-Jewish transfusion, and even more so to publish the findings if contradictory to common accepted beliefs.

          In addition, the routine and repeated interaction between the Greeks and Persians could lead one to deduce that similar transfusion occurred between these two advanced societies. There is one theory that the presence of Semitic settlements in Crete in the 8th Century BC would have allowed the Greeks in Crete to become familiarized with the concept of a written law code and the precepts outlined in the Mosaic code. [43]  However, since most of the research conducted on the development of democratic law has evaluated Greek literature and archaeological evidence, and very little effort has been made to support legal diffusion between the diverse peoples that intermingled with the Greeks, most believe that Greek jurisprudence was entirely an internal and independent development.  

As far as later transfusion goes, it is widely acknowledged that the Roman law has strongly influenced modern legal practices throughout Europe, North America and most of the contemporary democratic world.  The impact of the Roman Empire on those directly and indirectly affected is enormous, and the contribution of Roman justice is presumed to have even impacted Mohammedan (Islamic) law and the practices dictated in the Koran - another sacrilegious assumption, but one that could explain, at least in part, the utilization of many Roman legal practices in many of the Near East and Middle Eastern nations.[44]


The Benefits of Written Law


          There are clear benefits to documenting the regulatory practices within literate societies. By documenting and publicly displaying the law within that respective realm, the political struggle by the common people for relief from the perceived arbitrary power of the ruler or ruling class can be attained. [45]  While written law mainly documented customary practices that had been previously been conveyed verbally, there is no indication that written legislation was any fairer than the precedent. [46] However, the judicial process and subsequent verdicts were believed to be less capricious.  In addition, while there is much emphasis on the “democratic” and “republican” nature of the government processes, most of the political systems observed when these legal codes were in effect were aristocratic, and often tyrannical in practice.  What can be said with reasonable confidence is that the earliest public inscriptions visible in ancient civilizations involved the display of regional law. Therefore, more important than the documentation of these significant law codes was their display in public areas, so that they would be open for the understanding and utilization of all citizens.  The public dissemination of these laws also led to greater control over the lives of local inhabitants.  The enactment of openly displayed regulation was therefore an attempt to resolve and eliminate any vagueness, ambiguity, or conflict present in the customary practices and traditions of that society. [47]

          With the benefit of writing, law continued to be expanded to include later statutes, resolutions of the assemblies and council, revisions of the original legislation, [48] and interpretations by appellate officials involving evaluations of prior judgments and questions of judicial integrity and matters of legal review.

          The documentation of the Roman Twelve Tables and their public display in the forum for all to see rivaled Hammurabi’s earlier accomplishments, and the Roman code has been highly influential on modern legal and judicial practices.  As a result, custom could be recorded, and arbitrary and capricious enforcement and punishment could be constrained.


The Development of the Greek Laws


          In order to gauge the existence of formal justice procedures in Greece prior to the practice of widespread literacy, one must look at the works of both Homer and Hesiod, as they eventually documented life in early Greece, and as it was conveyed to them orally by their ancestors. The earliest and clearest evidence of a “formal, public legal procedure in preliterate Greece” is described within Homer’s Iliad, which is depicted on the Shield of Achilles. [49]   The scene portrays a crowd in the market place, which was observing a dispute between two parties involving a murder, where each conveyed their perspectives to an arbiter before a council of elders.  It would seem that both litigants had voluntarily submitted to this formal arena to obtain a resolution to the matter. [50]  This would appear to be a far cry from the archaic practice of dispute settlement that had been traditionally conveyed by the Greeks through oral transmission, namely that disputes between two parties would be settled by the gods.  Both Hesiod and Homer in other works had indicated that the gods, namely Zeus, would be the supreme arbiter, [51] and that punishment would be meted out by the gods, as there is “no other agency with power and authority to chastise the unjust.” [52]   In Hesiod’s work Theogony, a king relied on the assistance of a muse to assist in the public proclamation of one of his settlements to a dispute between two litigants.  This appears to reveal that citizens brought their disputes to a judge for analysis and clarification.   The legal procedures outlined by Hesiod and Homer reveal that justice practices and litigation had therefore become both public and formal. [53]  This apparent revision in legal practice in Greece occurred well before the development of formal legal policies were documented.

Homer’s Iliad was composed before 700 B.C., [54] clearly centuries before Draco’s official efforts.  In 621 B.C., after the rebellion of Cylon, Draco was tasked with the preparation of a formal law code to quell the violence and promote public order. [55]  While more information about this monumental responsibility has already been addressed, it should be emphasized that only one aspect of the Law Code of Draco, his legislation on homicide, has been discovered in part on a marble stele at an archaeological site in Athens. [56]  When the fragment was translated, it described elaborate procedural details and the necessary involvement of what can be construed as a traditional court to settle disputes involving homicide. [57]  Even more impressive was the consideration of issues such as intent, culpability, familial relationship, and other aggravating and mitigating factors to determine the accused’s guilt and punishment. [58] Draco’s legislation on homicide was quiet comprehensive and distinguished between voluntary and involuntary acts, and those resulting as the result of passion, and deaths that were accidental.   Punishments also varied respectively, as the death penalty was appropriate in intentional and premeditated homicides, but exile was designated in other cases.  It was now the responsibility of the state to institute justice and the blood vengeance was prohibited.  [59]

As outlined above, the extreme punishments delineated by the legislation proposed by Draco resulted in prompt revision of the formal legal code of Greece by Solon in 594 B.C.  One point is however apparent.  Solon made no effort to institute any changes to Draco’s law on homicide, and these stipulations remained in place into the new administration. [60]  One significant revision permitted the appeal of the original decision before the “heliaia,” a meeting of the assembly held exclusively for judicial purposes, [61] which was viewed as an effort to keep the judges in check.  So reasonable, fair and desirable were Solon’s laws considered that they endured almost in their entirety for five hundred years, despite rapidly changing conditions. [62]

          The remaining Greek legal tradition that will be highlighted involves the city of Sparta, which had exercised similar justice practices. Sparta relied on a council of elders to try all cases of homicide and “of high crimes and misdemeanors” against the state, and were the only authorities who could impose capital punishment. The decisions of this council were considered final. Sparta was unique in that any violation of the written law was considered an offence against the state, and no longer a personal or familial issue. [63]



The Development of the Roman Laws


          The history of Rome in this analysis of law and justice commences with the foundations of Rome in the 8th Century B.C.E. (considered within Roman legend to have occurred in 753 B.C.) and ends with the collapse of the empire in the 6th Century C.E. [64]  The birth of the Republic around 500 B.C.E. was precipitated by the aristocratic revolution and continued with the demand of the common people, the plebeians, to have the law codified to deter arbitrary and capricious enforcement and punishment.  Judgment of the law had been in the hands of the elitist class, the patricians, and the plebeians called for revision, which was eventually undertaken, an initial victory for the common class. [65]

          The plebeians had obtained enough political influence to call for the reform of the Roman legal practices. In 462 B.C.E., (as documented within one version of the event noted by classical historians) a proposal was put forth to enable a panel of five men to formally write down the laws that could be judged by the Roman consuls.  In defiance, the patricians repeatedly postponed these efforts until it was decided that ten officials, the “Decemviri” would be appointed to undertake this task. In 452 B.C.E., the Decemviri commenced this project and some speculate that a delegation of Decemviral members sought insight from the Greeks and traveled to Athens to review the Code of Solon.  Finally, in 451 B.C., the first ten of the Roman Tables were produced, later amended by two additional tables, all of which were displayed openly in the Roman forum to ensure public dissemination and compliance.  [66]  So significant was the codification of Roman law within the Twelve Tables that at least one historian concluded that the display of this legislation in the forum coincided with the true start of the Roman Republic.  [67]

          The Twelve Tables of Rome can now be examined more extensively than above.  The Decemviral Tables did not originally amount to equality for the plebeians, but this was promptly revised to allow the marriage of patricians and the common people.  This achievement has been considered one of the more noteworthy initial steps in the development of republican rule in Rome.  Another significant demand and accomplishment was the documentation of the customary law, the clear goal being the end of the arbitrary nature in which the patricians engaged in judicial resolutions.  However the Twelve Tables did not record all the customary laws and emphasized mainly civil, penal and procedural law. [68]

                    The Roman Twelve Tables specifically addressed the following:



·       Table  1: Appearance before a Magistrate

·       Table  2: Procedure for postponement and witnesses

·       Table  3: Debt and Debtors

·       Table  4: “Patria Potestas,” i.e., Powers of a Father

·       Table  5: Succession, Tutelage and Inheritance

·       Table  6: Ownership and Possession

·       Table  7: Lands and Buildings

·       Table  8: Crimes

·       Table  9: Judges, Public Juries, and Capital Punishment

·       Table 10: Funeral Procedures

·       Table 11: Marriage Restrictions between Patricians and  


·       Table 12: Prominence of Written Law over Customary



As one can see, the Twelve Tables emphasized court procedure, property rights, funerals, building codes, marriage restrictions, crime, and punishment. [69]  Interestingly, the specific crimes mentioned involved homicide, including intentional, accidental and paternal; libel; assault and injury; intentional or accidental damage; farming and livestock grazing on another’s land; “nocturnal trespass;” arson; burglary; theft; conspiracy to commit theft; usury; perjury; mystical incantations; nocturnal assembly; and bribery.  Capital punishment was acceptable in most cases, but could only be authorized by the court.    For theft and intentional injury, personal vengeance was permitted with impunity. [70]  It should be additionally highlighted that the prohibition on intermarriage between the two classes was intensely debated by the patricians and the plebeians and the law outlined on Table 11 was quickly revoked in 445 B.C.E. [71]

Another area of debate for the plebeians involved the interpretation of the public statutes.  The process for review after the display of the Roman Twelve Tables was conducted by the College of Pontiffs, which was comprised of only patricians.  In addition, the consuls, censors, and assemblies, who were tasked with the judicial review of matters coming to their attention involving legal matters within the Twelve Tables, were elitist patricians. [72]  Eventually this imbalance in plebeian involvement was rectified, but the intent of the Decemviri was evidently to retain the control of the “republic” in the hands of the upper class.

When one thinks of the concept of law, many envision government regulation and corresponding punishments. However, as has been noted in the Roman Twelve Tables and within the documented codes that have been analyzed above (i.e., the Code of Hammurabi, Mosaic Law, and both Greek and Roman Law), written law has emphasized routine matters that affected the daily life in ancient times, namely, family, property issues, marriage, land and burial regulation.  At the same time, homicide, theft and injury, which had traditionally been dealt with privately between the two parties and their families, moved to the jurisdiction of the court.
































The Classical Roman Historians


          Three classical Roman historians – Cicero and Livy in the first century B.C.E. and Dio in the second century C.E. – addressed the development of Roman law in their quintessential works.  What remains clear is that the lower plebian class, in their struggle for equality and end to arbitrary judicial adjudication, called for the development of a written law code that would bring an end to patrician domination and subjugation.  None of the three early Roman historians debate the formation of a panel of ten patricians, called the Decemviri, to address this endeavor. What does come into question is the basis and origins of the written Roman laws that later were called the “Twelve Tables.”   The preeminent question remains the issue of foreign (i.e., Greek) influence on the Decemviri and the written law of Rome. 



Roman History by Cicero


          One of the greatest classical Roman writers was Marcus Tullius Cicero. Born in 106 B.C. in Aprinum, a small town only sixty miles from Rome, where he later moved to continue his studies, he has since become an icon for those in the legal profession.  After practicing as an advocate in the Roman courts, he opted to further his studies and left Rome in 79 B.C. to travel to Athens and other regions of Asia Minor to attend lectures on philosophy and rhetoric.  After returning to Rome in 77 B.C., he was recognized as the leading figure in the Roman bar. In 77 B.C., he was selected to the position of Quaestor, later to the Curile Aedileship in 69 B.C., to Praetor in 66 B.C., and ultimately to the Consulate in 63 B.C.  [73]

          While recognized for his astounding legal, political and historical accomplishments, his life was not without controversy.  His actions in advocating a state of martial law following the treasonous conspiracy of Catiline and his cohorts, and in advocating a senatorial motion that refused appeal to the Comitia Centuriata for the conspirators, placed him in a position where he was viewed as having disregarded basic Roman rights.  Because of this conceived debacle, his preeminent political career came to a slow end, with only limited political participation for many years. He dedicated the majority of his time authoring numerous philosophical works.  He met his demise when he opted to lead the opposition party against Antonius after the assassination of Caesar in 44 B.C.  In 43 B.C., the new Roman administration sentenced him to death. [74] 

          Some of the works written by Cicero include: De Oratore, De Republica, On Moral Ends, Tusculan Disputations, Topica, and De Legibus, among many others.  His keen interest in the legal profession, politics, history, and philosophy provide a detailed perspective in the development of Roman legal and justice practices.  His education in Greece and his knowledge of the major Greek works should offer insight into the alleged Greek influence on Roman law.  When scrutinizing the extensive number of works by Cicero available, only the matters dealing with the development of Roman law will be examined.  

          Cicero finished his work De Oratore in 55 B.C., a work which he himself described as written “in the Aristotelian manner.”   [75]  Cicero noted the evolution of mankind from “its brutish existence in the wilderness” to the “establishment of social communities” with “laws, tribunals, and civic rights.” [76] The fist mention of the Decemviri appears in this work with the noting of the “Ten Commissioners – who wrote out the Twelve Tables and were necessarily men of practical wisdom….” [77]  In his introduction to the “institution of laws,” Cicero made mention of both Lycurgus and Solon as “eloquent” and clearly influential to the legal profession,  [78]  but no mention is made to any connection between Greek and Roman legislation. Cicero later continued that within the Twelve Tables are “described all the interests and the entire organization of the State.”  [79] 

          Surprisingly, Cicero was critical of foreign law and considered it to be inferior to the Roman practices.  He noted that the Roman “ancestors surpassed in practical wisdom the men of other nations” if comparisons are made to the laws of the foreigners:  “Lycurgus, Draco and Solon.”  Cicero considered the Greek legal works, aspired by many in the contemporary world, as “disordered,”  “absurd,” and promoted the “wisdom of our own folk against that of all others, the Greeks in particular.”  [80]  Cicero has clearly made an effort to distance the respected law codes of the Greeks from that composed by the Roman Decemviri, citing superiority for his reasoning.

          Cicero also made mention of the cultural influence of the “Pythagorean” Greeks on the Roman peninsula during “the days when a part of this land was Great Greece”  [81] or “Magna Graecia,” [82]  but no reference is made to the influence of these Greek colonies on Roman jurisprudence or other governmental practices.

          Another of Cicero’s accomplishments was his writings in the six books of his work De Republica or Commonwealth, which he completed around 50 B.C.  Within the third book of Commonwealth, Cicero addresses the issue of justice, which he considered “the true and eternal principle behind all law.” [83]  In Book II of Commonwealth, Cicero examined the documentation of the Roman law and the involvement of the Decemviri, who he reported “reduced the law to writing,”  [84]  and who would “possess supreme authority.”  [85]  The job of the Decemviri was to draw “up a legal code of Ten Tables, marked by the highest justice and wisdom,” and who would nominate “other Decemviri for the following years.”  [86]  Cicero noted that the original Decemviri remained in office for three years and refused to appoint successors. The Plebian class rebelled, as the “Decemviri wantonly overrode the authority of every magistracy, and ruled the people in a harsh and mercenary fashion.” [87] Cicero noted “that Rome was not a commonwealth when it was subject to the Decemviri,”  [88] an interesting allegation made by one who regarded Rome and the Roman Twelve Tables so highly. 

          A significant and relevant work was Cicero’s De Legibus, which emphasized his position that it was not “necessary to introduce strange or unused forms of government” into Roman administration.  He proposed a return to the “Roman constitution” and to “fair character of the law” with “impartial application.” [89]  It is injustice that results from the “corruption of custom.”  [90]  Law should therefore rely on customary and fair practices, and be free of external (i.e., foreign) influence.

Cicero wrote another significant work, Topica, in 48 B.C. [91]  Within this work, the content of the Twelve Tables are analyzed in further detail, although very little attention is paid to the development and documentation of the Roman laws.  Cicero evaluates the content of many of the specific codes and addresses the issue of intent, culpability and alternate punishments for instances where reduced liability would be appropriate,  [92]  a sign of deeper thinking on behalf of the Decemviri.

          In 45 B.C., Cicero completed his work On Moral Ends, considered his most theoretical examination of moral philosophy.  [93]  Other than highlighting aspects of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and its relevance on the advantages of Stoic and Aristotelian moral theory, no mention of its relevance or relation to Roman law was made.  Written at the end of Cicero’s life, this work was apparently not intended as a historical work, but rather as a philosophical engagement that would foster debate.  [94]

           Cicero again highlighted the inferiority of the Greeks in their influence on the Romans in his work Tusculan Disputations, which he penned while at one of his country residences in Tusculum.  These works highlighted the history, traditions and institutions of Rome. [95]  In rather general terms, Cicero opened this endeavor with a clear appreciation for Roman accomplishment by noting that “our Roman forebears showed greater wisdom than the Greeks,” and that Roman “ancestors certainly regulated public affairs with superior practices and laws.” [96] Cicero actually alludes to “Italian” influence on the Greeks in this work as he proclaimed that Plato traveled to “Italy” to better comprehend the Pythagorean doctrines. [97] Cicero, however, does assign “the glory of law-giving and the ordering of the community” to Lycurgus and Solon,  [98] (however, he later reports that the Law of Solon was influenced not only by the works of Lycurgus, but also by the “Laws of Moses,” [99]  a rather interesting conclusion.  Even more striking is the lack of any mention by Cicero of Draco in the development of Greek jurisprudence).

          In summary, Cicero dedicated many of his works to the analysis of the development of justice and law in Rome. Although many of the works are philosophical in nature, he did note some relevant historical events.  Cicero highlighted the role of the Decemviri in the development of the Twelve Tables, criticized the monopoly that the Decemviri exercised in defining justice, and made mention of the plebeian rebellion that eventually “equalized” the law.  Of utmost importance is the lack of mention of Greek influence, a Roman delegation to Greece, and his accent on the superiority of classical Roman legal practices over the Solonic Code of Athens. 


Roman History by Livy


          Titus Livius, or Livy as he is better known, was born in 59 B.C. in Padua. Livy wrote 142 works until his death in 17 A.D.  Livy received training in Greek and Latin literature and rhetoric, never held public office, [100] was a great admirer of Cicero, and an acquaintance of both Augustus and Claudius. Considered a great writer and well versed in Roman history, he claimed to have read all the Greek and Roman annals, although he did not travel far from Rome, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to Greece. [101]  

          Livy referred to his main historical work as Ab Urbe Condita or “From the Founding of the City.”  [102]  Book II addressed the “new liberty” of the Roman people in 509 B.C. and the relevance of the clashes between the patricians and the plebeians. [103]  Book III documented the formation of the Decemviri, or the “commissioners.”  In an effort to develop a suitable law code for both the nobility and the plebs, a delegation of three commissioners were sent “on a mission to Athens, with orders to copy the famous laws of Solon, and acquaint themselves with the institutions, customs, and laws of the other Greek states.” [104]  After a number of years, these commissioners “returned with the laws of Athens.”  [105]  In 451 B.C., the transfer of “supreme authority” in Rome moved “from consuls to Decemviri.” [106]  The three commissioners who ventured to Athens were also made Decemviri.  The original Ten Tables were displayed publicly, and after some scrutiny were amended to Twelve Tables.  [107] Livy noted that there was subsequent outcry from the plebeians who were dealt with by the Decemviri “arbitrarily and cruelly.”  [108]  The Decemviri were at odds with the Senate, the patricians and the plebs.  Only war in Rome drew attention from these taxing issues. [109]

          In summary, Livy, a reader and advocate of Cicero, swayed from the documented history of the time, and included the extended mission of three commissioners to Athens and other Greek states to accumulate the Law Code of Solon. With no direct mention of the inclusion of any Solonic legislation within the Twelve Tables, the delegation to Greece was addressed for the first time. While the role of the Decemviri in the documentation of the law on ten, and then ultimately twelve, tables was not contested, no prior mention had been made of an Athenian mission in the older and acknowledged historical works by Cicero or Diodorus.  [110]  One can only hypothesize that Livy may have speculated that the Roman Decemviri were influenced by the Law Code of Solon and other Greek legislators given Cicero’s repeated mention of and admiration for Solon and his legal accomplishments in many of Cicero’s works. 


Roman History by Dio


          The last historical work by a classical Roman historian which will be examined will be that by Cassius Dio Cocceianus, or Dio.  Dio was born in approximately 160 A.D., clearly over one century after the aforementioned classical Roman historians. Dio respected Livy and based much of his Roman History on his works, rather than that of Cicero, whom he reportedly despised.   After his arrival in Rome in 180 A.D., he became a member of the senate and later held the office of Septimius Severus.  His first work involved the biography of Severus and he later moved on to the eighty books of his major work Roman History.  [111]  One of the greatest criticisms of Dio was his lack of naming his sources, although he did make repeated references to Livy, Sallust and Arrian in many of his works.  [112]

          Following the formation of the Roman Republic, a major task was the development of a law code that would be considered acceptable to both the patricians and the plebeians, and “to establish the rights of citizenship on a fairer basis.”  In 454 B.C., the Romans “sent three men to Greece to observe the laws and the customs of the people there.”  In 451 B.C., upon “the return of the commission,” the Romans abolished all the magistracies” and chose “eight of the foremost men” and “empowered them to write the laws,” and these resulting Ten Tables were “exposed to view in the Forum.”   [113]  These magistrates “surrendered their office at the expiration of the year” in 450 B.C., and a second panel of ten reviewed the original ten tables and added two more, which brought dispute between the classes, which resulted in later revision to the Roman legal code.  [114]  

          It should be highlighted that Dio often noted the formative influence of the wider Greek culture within the Roman Empire.  [115]  Dio himself wrote in Greek, yet he “took as his own the political and national traditions of the Roman state, while retaining unimpaired the cultural outlook of the Greek world in which he was born,” and supported “a Roman empire ruled from Byzantium.” [116] 

          In summary, Dio was strongly affected by Greek influence, and thus there may have been limited hesitance in including the role of Athenian law and justice practices in those of the Roman republic.  No specifics were provided, but one could conclude that there was a certain pride in the Greek inspiration in Roman legal practices, which could explain his high regard for the Greeks in his historical writings.   His emphasis on Livy and his disregard for Cicero also contribute to the accent on the Roman mission to Greece and the alleged influence of the Solonic code on the Roman Twelve Tables.












Evidence of Greek Influence on Roman Law


          In 454 B.C.E., the Roman “Comitia Centuriata” selected a delegation of ten members to convert the legal customs of Rome to writing.  It has been proposed that this panel, called the “decemviri legibus scribendis” and mainly comprised of plebeians, sent a commission of five members to Greece to study the law of Solon.  It was not until 451 B.C.E., that the Decemviri presented their law code to the Comitia Centuriata, and after debate, amendments were made.  The laws that were to be recorded on ten tables were later supplemented by two additional tables.  They were then displayed in the forum nearest to the “comitium,” the site where justice was administered. [117]     While the general content of this version of events remains undisputed, the aspect dealing with the influence of the Greeks in this significant event remains in question.

          The potential influence of Greek practices on the Roman legislation of 450 B.C. has often been attributed to the alleged delegation of Roman commissioners to Athens to gain insight into the Solonic Law Code. The likelihood of this occurrence will be evaluated more comprehensively later.  There are, however, other hypotheses for the introduction of aspects of Greek legislation into codified Roman legal guidelines.  

Another version of the influence of the Greeks in the development of the Twelve Roman Tables has been explained by the assistance of a Greek immigrant Hermodorus provided to the Decemviri while scribing their law code in Rome. [118]  Pliny in his work Natural History first made mention of this possibility based on the viewing by Varro of a statue of Hermodorus in Rome.   Pliny speculated that Hermodorus had been banished with Heraclitus from Ephesus and had traveled to Rome with the “secrets of Ionian justice.”  [119]  This proposition has been refuted by modern historians who have revealed that Heraclitus and his colleague had been sent to Rome as delegates from Ephesus towards the close of the Mithradatic War in 80 B.C.  The event had been memorialized in a statue in Rome, which could have been viewed by Varro.  [120]  This speculation by Pliny was apparently incorrect as the events involving Hermodorus occurred centuries after the documentation of the Roman Twelve Tables.  Another likely explanation of the alleged influence of Ephesus on Rome could be rationalized by the traditional connection between the two states as symbolized by the cult of Diana.  Ogilvie explained that the temptation could have existed for historians to “antedate” this relationship.  [121]  One can, however, speculate that Pliny the Elder had been predisposed to the idea of Greek influence on Roman legislation.

An additional explanation of Greek collaboration in the preparation of the Twelve Tables implies that the designated mission did not travel to Athens, but rather to a Greek colony, Magna Graecia, in southern Italy, to gain insight into Greek legal practices. [122]   Given the closer proximity of “Great Greece” to Rome and its location on the Italian peninsula, one would believe that this should have provided the Roman patricians with a less costly opportunity (in time, effort and cost) to gain insight into Athenian governmental practices.   None of the major classical historians concretely underlined or described this possibility.  Noted contemporary historian Lobingier has, however, taken a supporting position for this theory, noting that the Greek influence on the development of the Twelve Tables has been called “undeniable…….unavoidable” and “an inevitable result of the prolonged influence of the civilization of Magna Graecia, to which Rome had been subject since the days of her infancy.” [123]

          The accounts that attributed the democratic attributes of the law to the Greeks clearly vary, but the mention of the Roman delegation to Athens remains the most commonly mentioned by classical Roman historians.  In the depiction by Livy, “three commissioners were sent from Rome to Athens and other Greek states for the purpose of inquiring into and collecting what was most useful in their legal systems.” [124]  Other significant Roman historians, including Livy, attributed the Greek influence to “deputies of Rome” who visited “Athens under the wise and splendid administration of Pericles” who supervised the transfusion of the laws of Solon into the Roman Twelve Tables. [125]

          However, one detail that may refute the travel of a prominent Roman mission to Athens is the lack of any mention of the reception or arrival of these Romans in any Athenian or Greek historical monument or document. [126]  Given that the Greeks have been recognized for their historical recordings, particularly those involving significant events and visits by “barbarian” delegations, the absence of any citation related to the event would shed more doubt on its occurrence. 

          In addition, the appeal of Greek culture to the Roman nobility has been evaluated by contemporary historians in an attempt to measure the strength of the general influence of Greece on Roman life and practices.  [127]  Rome attempted to maintain its own primacy while participating in the cultural arena of the Mediterranean, which has been described as both ambiguous and ambivalent.  [128]  It has been proposed that the Romans distinguished between Greek culture, considered a “desirable heritage,” and the Greek people themselves, who they labeled an “unworthy race.”  [129]  Further speculation explained the Roman desire to familiarize themselves with the culture of Greece as a means to advance the “success of Roman imperialism in the East.”  [130]  The Romans perhaps attempted to emulate Greek accomplishment as a means to overcome a “deep-seated sense of cultural inferiority on the part of the Romans.”  [131]  To improve this sense of inadequacy, some Romans had theorized that the Latin language itself had its origins in Greek. This speculation was supported by both Greek and Roman scholars.  [132] In addition, Cicero and other Roman historians highlighted the strong association between Greek academics and Roman patricians, [133]  who often “openly paraded their friendship with Greek scholars.”  [134] While Romans attempted to maintain their superiority by insisting on Latin as the official government language, even for visiting foreign delegations, they also recognized that knowledge of the Greek language by the nobility was a symbol of Rome’s own cultural ascendancy.  [135]  One can not therefore downplay the relevance of Greek culture on Roman routine.   The archaeological evidence also reveals a strong Hellenic influence on Rome during the fifth century B.C.E. [136]  These factors must be taken into consideration when examining the extent of Greek influence of Roman Decemviral legislation.

          In conclusion, the proposed influence of Greek legislation and practice on the Roman Twelve Tables has been portrayed differently by ancient, modern, and contemporary historians, however, the true impact can not be measured without closely and directly comparing and scrutinizing the content of the Greek (Solonic and Cretan) and the Decemviral law codes.    


Comparison of the Law of Greece to the Roman Twelve Tables


          The true influence of the Solonic Law on the scribing of the Twelve Tables of Rome can likely be most easily ascertained by comparing the two documents.  Both ancient and contemporary historians have identified only two or three aspects of the Roman law code that exhibit any similarity to that of the Greeks. 

          According to the Roman historian Gaius in his work Institutes, published in 161 C.E., which evaluated the laws of both Rome and Greece and is recognized as the structural basis for most modern civil codes, the provision of the code regulating building boundaries within the Twelve Tables was “in a way modeled after the law of Solon.”  [137]   However this similarity has been refuted by others who concluded that this provision of Solon does not deal with the “action for regulating boundaries,” but rather deals with spatial regulation.  Gaius also concluded that the statute within the Twelve Tables that delineated that members of Roman society could make their own laws was also inspired by Solonic Law.  An additional claim was made by Cicero, who claimed that the restrictions placed on “over-luxurious mourning” within the Roman Twelve Tables may have had derivations from Solon and the Greeks, [138] one of the scarce allusions to direct Greek influence on Roman law made by Cicero.

          Modern historians repeatedly countered these claims by their ancient counterparts, calling the influence of the Solonic laws “secondary at best.” [139]  Any similarities are considered to be “neither precise, nor striking.” [140]  Stronger sentiment has been conveyed in rejecting entirely the account “which ascribes the Tables, or any considerable portion of them, to Greek sources.” [141]  The strongest opinion, by Lobingier, has been emphatic that “in all the great lines of public and private jurisprudence, the legislators of Rome and Athens appear to be strangers or adverse to each other.”   [142]   Another perspective noted that attributing the content of the Roman Twelve Tables to the Solonic Code was inappropriate since, had a delegation traveled to Athens in 454 B.C., the Greeks and “Pericles would have given them something more up to date than the laws of Solon.”  [143]  

          Comparison of the Roman Twelve Tables to the Greek Law Code of Gortyn, which as highlighted earlier had been discovered in comprehensive, although not complete, form resulted in a similar conclusion in that they were found to be “almost wholly unlike in substance as well as arrangement” [144]  to the Roman Twelve Tables.    

          Another conclusion that can be drawn to elucidate any similarities between the statutes introduced within both civilizations provides support for Lowe’s theory of common ancestry among all civilizations.  Lobingier noted the additional theory that any similitude that can be drawn from the two stipulated legal systems can be “accounted for from the undoubted fact that both” peoples “derive from a common…..source rather than from any conscious borrowing by those who framed them.” [145]  This would provide credibility to Lowe’s assumption of one common ancestry amongst all civilizations, [146] or at least a mutual descent between these two societies.  However, no notable classical or contemporary historian addressing the Roman Twelve Tables has given this speculation any further support or acknowledgment.

          Ogilvie, who evaluated Livy’s version of events, noted that the objective of the Decemviri was not the “supersession of an old system” but rather “the codification and publication of existing laws,” which had been considered by the general public as being “arbitrary and tyrannical.” [147]  It was clearly this upheaval in the middle of the fifth century B.C.E. by the plebeians, who had demanded the codification and publication of the Roman laws, that resulted in the eventual display of the Twelve Tables in the forum,  [148] and culminated in a monumental step in the history of the Roman Republic.  Both Cicero and Diodorus, the earlier Roman historians, made no mention of Greek influence in this endeavor. Speculation only occurs later and may have been mere “adumbration” by later historians.  [149]

          If a comparison is made of some of the related statutes directly, some further insight can be made into the similarity between the Greek and Roman legal and justice practices.  While the Solonic Code reforms called for the “prohibition of selling debtors and their families into slavery for failure to pay creditors,”  [150] the Twelve Tables permitted the formal recovery of debt after waiting 30 days, and also allowed indebted slavery, as long as he or a family representative were sold “abroad, beyond the Tiber.”  [151]  Other differences can be noted between the Twelve Tables and the Law Code of Gortyn.  The Roman law permitted a plaintiff claiming debt to bind and shackle the defendant and bring him to court if the defendant refused to cooperate, [152]  while the Cretan Code directed the judge to institute punishment or a fine upon those who seized the defendants in cases involving debt.  [153] 

          In addition, the Code of Solon addressed the sale of an unmarried sister or daughter if she was “wanton,”  [154] while the Roman Twelve Tables deal only with the emancipation of a son after his sale into slavery three times.  [155]  The clearest differences between Athenian and Roman legislation deal with the imposition of capital punishment, which was permitted only for murder and treason under Greek law, but for a plethora of offences in Rome.  [156]

          Ultimately, direct comparison of the Twelve Tables of Rome with the Solonic Code produces only limited support for assimilation of the Greek legal works into the Roman statutes. Although many of the issues addressed by the law codes (i.e., property, theft, marriage, homicide, capital punishment, etc.) were similar, the actual legislation formulated by the Greeks and Romans resulted in distinctly different directives, statutes, and punishments.  In addition, the lack of sufficient similarities between the two significant works would provide further evidence against the existence of a Roman delegation to Athens or to other Greek states or colonies for assistance.   














          Six significant law codes were developed, documented, and displayed to the inhabitants of four advanced societies before the start of the Common Era.  The Babylonians, the Israelites, the Greeks, and finally the Romans have been recognized for this significant accomplishment and for their subsequent impact upon the western hemisphere. However, what should be noted is that similar developments occurred independently within China and other areas of the eastern and isolated regions of the western hemispheres.  While legal and judicial practices had been in place in each of these regions, the invention of a regional written script permitted custom to become common practice. Recognized as a more momentous event in history was the public dissemination resulting from the open display of these regulations.  By posting the law codes in public arenas, there was no reason that local legal practices would not be acknowledged by literate inhabitants or visitors.  The requirements within the “social contract” were now literally displayed in stone (or more often in wood).  Another notable achievement was the move away from religion-oriented rule to secular government.  And finally, the question of transfusion and exchange between these four civilizations remains just that, mere speculation.  However, diffusion has been often debated and eventually refuted due to its sacrilegious connotations, and more so contemporarily at the national level due to ethnic pride. 




          Based on the lack of concrete evidence to support the travel of a Roman mission to Greece to obtain insight into Hellenic legal practices prior to the preparation of the Twelve Tables; the contrasting allegations made by the classical Roman historians regarding the potential Greek influence in the preparation of the Roman law code (i.e., a Roman delegation to Athens, a Roman mission to spatially closer Magna Graecia on the Italian peninsula, or the influence of the Ephesian Hermodorus); the lack of any documentation in ancient Greek historical documents of the visit of a Roman delegation to Athens or any of the Greek states or colonies at that time; and the scarcity of similar content within the two major law codes, the Law Codes of Solon and Crete and the Twelve Tables; the conclusion that can be drawn is that the Roman law developed independently of input from the Greeks.  Paramount is that one must not disregard the cause for the formation of the Decemviri, i.e., the documentation of traditional Roman law in an effort to equalize (or at least increase) the standing of the majority plebeians in Roman society.  The Roman administration was attempting to quell discontent in the empire.  Any connection between the Romans and the Greeks in this regard, whether intentional or not, appears to be mere speculation.  This assumption, however, has been made by many ancient, modern and contemporary historians, but no available or uncovered ancient sources have been located to further this theory, other than its origins within Livy’s Ab Urbe Condita, often the basis for later historical works.  There is therefore enough support for the opposite hypothesis, namely that the Romans relied on their own customary legal traditions as the basis for the content of the Twelve Tables and were not influenced overwhelmingly by events in or documents from neighboring Greece.      



Personal Insight and Analysis


          In order to support my conclusion, I researched as many sources that I could locate (see Reference list below). At the start of my evaluation of the formulation of the Roman Decemviral Twelve Tables, my initial thesis was that Roman law was dramatically influenced by the highly regarded neighboring Greeks, a point considered and recorded by both classical and contemporary historians given the relevance of the Solonic Law code on subsequent societies.  As I undertook my analysis, it became apparent to me that the suspected direct impact of the Greeks on the development of the law code of Rome may have been mere speculation by later historians. The highly respected and well trained classical historian Cicero made no mention of a Roman mission to Athens or Magna Graecia on the Italian peninsula, although he does document his utmost respect for the Law Code of Solon (yet contradictorily promoted the superiority of Roman thinking over that of the Greeks).  Later historians, specifically Livy and Dio, however made mention of a Roman mission to Athens to study Greek justice practices and potentially influence the development of the Roman law code by the Decemviri.  One question undoubtedly comes to mind.  To what extent were the Romans impacted by their Greek teachings?

Another issue that I believe should be further addressed is the translation of Cicero’s works.  Did Livy merely misinterpret Cicero’s repeated mention of Solon and his law code and conclude that it implied the direct influence of that law code on Decemviral thinking?   Or perhaps, those in the Roman administration responsible for transcribing or translating Cicero’s work may have misinterpreted Cicero’s perspective?  Were there other sources available to classical historians that did not survive that may have documented the event in a conflicting fashion?   And there is the matter of those who translated Livy’s work from Latin to Greek, or from Greek to Latin, or those that merely copied the works.  Could they not have been persuaded to transcribe the work in a fashion that provided emphasis on Greek superiority and inspiration in Roman governmental practices?   Given the strong impact that Greek culture and teaching had on the Romans, this is a strong likelihood. 

    These issues have to be assessed in order to better understand the division in historical documentation between Cicero and Livy.  (I believe that Dio relied exclusively on Livy for the substance of his work due to Dio’s high regard for him and Dio’s lack of respect and appreciation for Cicero’s works.)  Did Livy rely on other historical sources that no longer exist, or was he relying on mere speculation?

          By directly comparing the two law codes, the Roman Twelve Tables and the Greek Solonic code, similarities are lacking.  I therefore came to the opposite conclusion that the Roman law was developed independent of dramatic influence from the Greeks.  My original position has therefore been entirely revised and contradicted.  Ultimately when one considers the goal of the Decemviri, i.e. the transcription of customary Roman justice and legal practices, there was little room for foreign intervention.  Was the inference of Greek influence merely speculation by later historians (like Livy), or a means of proposing Roman scholastic superiority in that the Romans of that day were knowledgeable of prominent Greek works on philosophy and law? Did the Romans at the start of the Common Era have an inferiority complex?  Perhaps the Roman academics and scholars felt it necessary to allude to Greek influence due to the respect that was bestowed upon Greek works and due also to their training in Greece or by Greek instructors.  It is clear that the respect paid by Romans to Greek thinking at that time can not be discounted, and it may have been routine to allude to the Greek works to highlight their academic prominence.

          One potential deficiency in my analysis was a result of my inability to read either ancient Greek or Latin, which prohibited me from examining the primary sources, i.e., the works of the ancient Greek and Roman historians, in their original languages.  I was compelled to rely on contemporary translations of these classics, which may have included some misinterpretations (given that the translations are often conducted by graduate students).   I therefore stand by my criticism of the translations of the works of the original Roman historians, by ancient, modern and contemporary scholars.  Additionally, at times, I relied upon quotes from modern historians to conduct part of my evaluation and to support my conclusion.  These works may have been somewhat biased as these authors may have attempted to support their own theories and agendas.  I clearly now comprehend the relevance in understanding the classical languages so that direct interpretation can be attempted. 

          Finally, this research project into the issue of jurisprudence and legal practices could be additionally expanded further by examining more thoroughly the influence of Persian and Babylonian Law on the Mosaic Code, and the impact of these Jewish practices and beliefs on later Greek jurisprudence (two hypotheses that have already been proposed by some historians).  Ultimately another interesting analysis would involve the examination of the credibility of the inferred relationship between Roman law and modern legal and justice practices.  It should be noted that the issue of independent (or divine) development of many law codes has been contested in almost every case by many scholars over time with the opposite conclusion that societal diffusion played a significant role.  Each of the quintessential law codes highlighted in this paper has at one time or another drawn the same conflicting conclusions as to their formulation.  As a result, as detailed as legal historical research is to date, there is room for more exploration and study (by fledgling graduate students like myself).




































Bibliography/ References



Annas, J. (2001) Cicero: On Moral Ends. Cambridge Texts on the History of Philosophy; Camridge, Cambridge University Press.


Arkenberg, J.S. (1998) The Law Code of Gortyn (Crete), c. 450 BCE, located at the Ancient History Sourcebook at:



Calhoun, G.M. (1973) The Growth of Criminal Law in Ancient Greece. Westport, CT, Greenwood Press.


Cary, E. (1961) Dio’s Roman History.  The Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.


Cornell, T.J. (1995) The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c. 1000 – 264 B.C.) New York, Routledge Publishers.


DeBurgh, W.G. (1961) The Legacy of the Ancient World. Baltimore, Penguin Books.


Diamond, A.S. (1973) The Evolution of Law and Order. Westport, Greenwood Press.


Douglas, A.E. (1985) Cicero: Tusculan Disputations I. Warminster, UK, Aris and Phillips Limited.


Foster, B.O. (1960) Livy in Fourteen Volumes: II Books III and IV.  The Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.


Foster, B.O. (1960) Livy in Fourteen Volumes: III Books V, VI and VII.  The Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.


Foster, B.O. (1976) Livy in Fourteen Volumes: I Books I and II.  The Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.


Gagarin, M. (1986) Early Greek Law. Berkeley, University of California Press.


Garner, R. (1987) Law and Society in Classical Athens. New York, St. Martin’s Press.


Gibbon, E. (1775) “The Idea of Roman Jurisprudence” in The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, located in the Ancient History Sourcebook at:



Girard, P.F. (1906) A Short History of Roman Law. Toronto, Canada Law Book Company.


Goguet, A.Y. (1761) The origins of laws, arts, and sciences and their progress among the most ancient nations. Reprinted in 1976 by Donaldson and Reid. New York, AMS Press. 


Gruen, E.S. (1992) Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome. Ithica, New York, Cornell University Press.


Harris, N. (2004) The History of Ancient Greece. New York, Barnes & Nobles.


Johns, C.H.W. (1910) “Babylonian Law – The Code of Hammurabi,” in The Encyclopedia Britannica. 11th Edition, located at:


Keathley, J.H. (2004) The Mosaic Law: Its Function and Purpose in the New Testament, located at:


Lobingier, C.S. (1987) The Evolution of the Roman Law: From before the Twelve Tables to the Corpus Juris. Littleton, Colorado, Rothman Publishers.


Lowe, R.H. (1961) Primitive Society. New York, Harper & Brothers Publishers.


Millar, F. (1964) A Study of Cassius Dio. Oxford, Clarendon Press.


Ogilvie, R.M. (1965) A Commentary on Livy: Books 1 – 5. Oxford, Clarendon Press.


Perry, M. (1993) Western Civilization: A Brief History, Volume 1: To 1789. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Publishers. 


Rackham, H. (1967) Cicero: De Oratore Books I, II.  The Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.


Rackham, H. (1967) Cicero: De Oratore Book III.  The Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.


Reinhard, T. (2003) Marcus Tullius Cicero: Topica. Oxford Classical Monographs; Oxford, Oxford University Press.


Roth, M. (2005) Crime and Punishment: A History of the Criminal Justice System. Belmont, California, Thomson Wadsworth Publishers.  


Sabine, G.H. and Smith, S.B. (1976) On the Commonwealth: Marcus Tullius Cicero. Indianapolis, Bobbs-Merrill Educational Publishing.


Saunders, T.J. (1991) Plato’s Penal Code: Tradition, Controversy, and Reform in Greek Penology. Oxford, Clarendon Press.


Sealey, R. (1987) The Athenian Republic: Democracy or the Rule of Law. University Park, PA, Pennsylvania State University Press.


Stroud, R. S. (1968) Drakon’s Law on Homicide. Berkeley, University of California Press. 


Wallace, A.F.C. (1973) “Schools and Revolutionary and Conservative Societies,” in Cultural Relevance and Educational Issues. Edited by Ianni and Storey. Little, Brown and Company, pp. 230-249.


Watson, A. (1995) The Spirit of Roman Law. Athens, University of Georgia Press.


Wormser, R. (1962) The Story of the Law and the Men who made it: From the Earliest Times to the Present. New York, Simon and Schuster.





















James F. Albrecht is a 20-year veteran of the NYPD who retired as the Commanding Officer of NYPD Transit Bureau District 20, responsible for the supervision and deployment of over 300 police officers tasked with the prevention of crime in the subway and rapid transit system in the borough of Queens, New York City. Captain Albrecht was a first responder and FEMA incident commander at the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the November 12, 2001 commercial airliner accident in Queens, NYC. Captain Albrecht was previously assigned as Commanding Officer of the Transit Borough Queens Task Force; the Executive Officer (deputy commander) of NYPD Police Service Area 2; the 90th Precinct, in the extremely diverse northern Brooklyn neighborhood of Williamsburg; and NYPD Transit Bureau District 20.  Captain Albrecht has extensive law enforcement experience in the NYPD, having served as a patrol officer, community policing beat officer, Police Academy criminal law instructor, firearms investigator, sergeant patrol supervisor, press information officer, community policing unit commander, supervisory research analyst for both the Police Commissioner and Chief of Personnel, lieutenant platoon commander, special operations lieutenant, lieutenant detective commander of internal civil rights violation investigations, and duty captain (designated critical and emergency incident commander). 


James Albrecht received two Bachelor’s Degrees in Biology and German Language and Culture from New York University in 1983; a Master’s Degree in Criminal Justice from the State University of New York at Albany in 1990; a Master’s Degree in Human Physiology from the City University of New York at Queens College in 1992; a Master’s Degree in History from the City University of New York at Queens College in 2006; and completed extensive Doctoral studies in Criminal Justice at both Sam Houston State University in Texas and John Jay College of Criminal Justice (CUNY). 


James Albrecht is presently a Professor and Graduate Coordinator of the Criminal Justice Leadership Masters Degree Program at St. John’s University in New York City; and has worked as an Adjunct Professor at both John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan and at Westchester Community College from 1993 through 1998.  James Albrecht received a prestigious Fulbright Fellowship in 1998 and worked as a Professor at the National Police College of Finland, and is considered an expert in Police Use of Force, Community/Zero Tolerance Policing initiatives, Police Response to Terrorism, Emergency Incident Management, Democratic Policing, and Law Enforcement Leadership practices.  Captain Albrecht has lectured at police facilities and universities in China, Taiwan, Russia, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Estonia, Finland, Italy, Turkey, Canada, and throughout the USA; and serves as a consultant to the United Nations, the US Department of Homeland Security, and the National Institute of Justice on terrorism and policing matters.


[1] Lowe, 1947

[2] Cornell, p. 272

[3] Foster, Book II, p. 107

[4] Cornell, p. 272

[5] Goguet, 1761

[6] ibid

[7] Goguet, 1761

[8] Perry, pp. 4 - 5

[9] Roth, p. 2

[10] Wallace, 1973

[11] Roth, p. 3

[12] ibid, p. 3 - 4

[13] ibid, p. 4

[14] DeBurgh, 1961

[15] Perry, pp. 15 - 16

[16] Roth, p. 5

[17] Johns, 1910

[18] ibid

[19] ibid

[20] Roth, p. 5

[21] John, 1910

[22] ibid

[23] Perry, pp. 27 - 28

[24] Keathley, 2004

[25] Roth, p. 6

[26] ibid, p. 6 -7

[27] Perry, p. 33

[28] Roth, p. 7 - 8

[29] ibid, p. 10

[30] ibid, p. 10

[31] Stroud, 1968

[32] Perry, p. 47

[33] Harris, 2004

[34] Roth, p. 11

[35] ibid, pp. 16 - 17

[36] Gibbon, 1775

[37] Roth, p. 13

[38] ibid, p. 13

[39] ibid, p. 18

[40] Arkenberg, 1998

[41] Diamond, 1973

[42] Wormser, 1962

[43] Gagarin, 1986

[44] Lobingier, 1987

[45] Girard, 1906

[46] Gagarin, 1986

[47] ibid

[48] Calhoun, 1973

[49] Sealey, 1987

[50] Gagarin, 1986

[51] Garner, 1987

[52] Calhoun, 1973

[53] Wormser, 1962

[54] Saunders, 1991

[55] Sealey, 1987

[56] Stroud, 1968

[57] Gagarin, 1986

[58] Stroud, 1968

[59] Roth, p. 10 - 11

[60] Calhoun, 1973 and Wormser, 1962

[61] Saunders, 1991

[62] Wormser, 1962

[63] Calhoun, 1973

[64] Girard, 1906

[65] Watson, 1995

[66] ibid

[67] Cornell, p. 100

[68] Girard, 1906

[69] Lobingier, 1987

[70] Girard, 1906

[71] ibid

[72] Watson, 1995

[73] Sabine et al, 1976, pp. 1-2

[74] Ibid, pp. 2 - 4

[75] Rackham, 1967, Volume I, p. ix

[76] ibid, p. 25

[77] ibid, p. 45

[78] ibid, p. 43

[79] ibid, p. 135

[80] Rackham, 1967, Volume I, p. 137

[81] ibid, p. 309

[82] Rackham, 1976 Volume II, pa. 111

[83] Sabine et al, p. 42

[84] ibid, p.183

[85] ibid, p. 187

[86] ibid, p. 188

[87] ibid, p. 189

[88] ibid, p. 225

[89] ibid, pp. 45 - 51

[90] ibid, p. 51

[91] Reinhard, p. 3

[92] Reinhard, p. 322

[93] Annas, p. ix

[94] ibid, pp. xiv - xv

[95] Douglas, p. 4

[96] ibid, p. 23

[97] Douglas, p. 41

[98] ibid, p. 81

[99] ibid, p. 125

[100] Foster, Book I,  p. ix - xi

[101] Ogilvie, pp. 1 - 5

[102] Foster, Book  I,  p. xv

[103] ibid, p. 219

[104] Foster, Book II, p. 107

[105] ibid, p. 107

[106] ibid, p. 109

[107] ibid, p. 113

[108] ibid, p. 121

[109] ibid, pp. 119 - 137

[110] Ogilvie, p. 449

[111] Cary, Book 1, pp. vii - xvii

[112] Millar, pp. 34 - 35

[113] Cary, p. 169

[114] ibid, p. 171

[115] Millar, p. 177

[116] ibid, p. 191

[117] Girard, 1906

[118] ibid

[119] Ogilvie, p. 449

[120] ibid, p. 450

[121] Ogilvie, p. 450

[122] Girard, 1906

[123] ibid

[124] Lobingier, 1987

[125] Lobingier, 1987

[126] ibid

[127] Gruen, p. 223

[128] ibid, p. 223

[129] ibid, p. 225

[130] ibid, p. 225

[131] ibid, p. 225

[132] ibid, p. 235

[133] ibid, p. 253

[134] ibid, p. 256

[135] ibid, p. 270

[136] Cornell, p. 275

[137] Watson, 1995

[138] ibid

[139] Girard, 1906

[140] Watson, 1995

[141] Lobingier, 1987

[142] ibid

[143] Cornell, p. 275

[144] Lobingier, 1987

[145] ibid

[146] Lowe, 1961

[147] Ogilvie, p. 449

[148] Cornell, p. 272

[149] ibid, p. 450

[150] Roth, p. 11

[151] Lobingier, 1987

[152] ibid

[153] Arkenberg, 1998

[154] Garner, 1987

[155] Lobingier, 1987

[156] Roth, p. 11