<論説>ポリュビオスとローマ共和政 : 『歴史』からみた共和政中期のローマ国政

Abstract

近年、ローマ共和政をめぐる議論が盛んである。クリエンテラを基盤としたノビレス貴族が排他的な貴族政を展開したという従来の通説にたいし、一般市民の制度的権利を重視すべきとの見解が提出され、統一的な理解はいまだ形成されていない状況である。本稿は、この問題を考えるために、共和政中期の同時代史料、ギリシア人歴史家ポリュビオスの『歴史』を分析した。議論は、まず、『歴史』第六巻の混合政体論の検討から進められる。これは、「共和政＝民主政」論の重要な根拠となるものであるが、考察の結果、混合政体中の民主政的要素の実態は上層のローマ市民であり、混合政体論は一般市民の政治的重要性を示唆するものではないことが明らかとなった。さらに、『歴史』全四〇巻を体系的に考察したうえで、ポリュビオスは前一六〇年代以降のローマ国政を混合政体からの没落と把握していること、そして、その国政変化に一般市民の政治的意義の増大を看取していることを指摘した。そして、以上の分析で明らかになったポリュビオスの認識を軸としながら、『歴史』以外の史料もあわせてローマ国政を具体的に検討し、前一六〇年代以降、一般布民の政治的重要性が国政において顕著になっていること、その政治的重要性は静態的な制度的権利ではなく、徴兵忌避などにみられる直接的な政治的圧力に基づいていることなどを、最終的に結論として提示した。

From the end of the Second Punic War to the Gracchi, the influence of the Roman Republic extended over an increasingly wide range of the Mediterranean Sea area. However, when we study the internal politics and society of the Republic, we find that the traditional interpretation that the Nobiles, by making use of the patron-client relationship between themselves and the ordinary citizens and then monopolizing the posts of the magistrates, had ruled the politics of the Republic exclusively is rendered suspect. This is a result of the fact that a new interpretation, originally proposed by F. Millar, has become influential. This view posits that the ordinary citizens of Rome played an important role in the system of the Republic, participating in the voting for the selection of magistrates and legislation. In order to consider this problem of the nature of politics in the Republic, especially in Mid-Republican Rome, the author has analyzed one fundamental primary source, Polybius' Histories. Polybius, who was born at Megalopolis in the Peloponnesus and lived throughout almost the entire second century B.C., wrote the Histories in forty volumes. His main theme was an examination of the causes of the rise of Rome, the most important factors for which were the constitution and politics of the Roman Republic. His description of these factors is found primarily in the sixth book as the theory of the mixed constitution. Some of the scholars who insist on the political significance of the ordinary citizens recognize and even praise Polybius because his view of the mixed constitution of the Republic seems to describe the citizens' political rights accurately. However, when we look at the section of the Histories on the mixed constitution, where the relationship between the aristocratic elements and the democratic elements are described. we find that the higher-ranking citizens, including the Equites, are described as the chief actors of the democratic elements. The author concludes that Polybius considered the higher-ranking citizens as the holders of democratic power in his mixed constitution of the Republic. As regards the political significance of the ordinary citizens, it is necessary to examine Polybius' description of the decline of the Roman Republic. There he refers to the political pressure of the ordinary citizens on the Nobiles. It appears that he thought that the decline of the Republic began from 160's B.C., and he notes specific incidents that demonstrate the political pressure of the ordinary citizens in the volumes dedicated to the years 168 B.C. to 145 B.C. It is important to recognize that Polybius perceived the emergence of the significance of citizens' political power after the 160's B.C. not in terms of constitutional rights but as practical pressure on the Nobiles. Finally, the author has addressed important aspects of the politics of Mid-Republican Rome by comparing the descriptions of Polybius with records of the same incidents in other sources from the viewpoint of the political significance of the ordinary citizens.