The debate on the People’s role in the republican political system was largely sparked by F. Millar’s attack, in a series of articles in the 1980s, on the traditional oligarchic interpretation which minimized the power of the People in the ‘‘senatorial Republic.’’ See Millar 1984, 1986, 1989 (now incorporated in Millar 2002b). See also Millar 1998, 2002a. Over time, Millar ‘‘radicalized’’ his thesis, now stressing not just the importance of the popular element (in line with Polybius’ theory of ‘‘mixed constitution’’), but its centrality in the republican system. His arguments have proved as controversial as they were stimulating. The ongoing debate has contributed greatly to our understanding of republican politics and society. Despite widely divergent views (on the general assessment of the republican system of government as well as on numerous specific issues), few will dismiss today the importance of Roman popular politics altogether; the purely oligarchic model is widely felt to be unsatisfactory. For some recent contributions to the debate (with extensive bibliographies) see Jehne 1995c, Yakobson 1999, Holkeskamp 2000a, Mouritsen 2001, Flaig 2003, Holkes-kamp 2004a, Morstein-Marx 2004. See also, e. g., Vanderbroeck 1987, Brunt 1988c, Astin 1989, Thommen 1989, Burckhardt 1990, North 1990b, Rosenstein 1990, Harris 1990b, Gruen 1991, Eder 1991, Mackie 1992, Jehne 1993, Rosenstein 1993, Purcell 1994, Gruen 1995: vii-xxi; Badian 1996c, Pina Polo 1996, Gabba 1997, Pani 1997, Lintott 1999a: 191-213. On the ballot laws specifically, see Harris 1989, Gruen 1991, Jehne 1993, Marshall 1997, Hall 1998, Salerno 1999, Yakobson 1999: 126-33. Worthy of note also is Dyck 2004, a new and important commentary on Cicero’s On the Laws.
World History
