A Smaller Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities

by William Smith

ISTHMĬA (ἴσθμια), the Isthmian games, one of the four great national festivals of the Greeks. This festival derived its name from the Corinthian isthmus, where it was held. Subsequent to the age of Theseus the Isthmia were celebrated in honour of Poseidon; and this innovation is ascribed to Theseus himself. The celebration of the Isthmia was conducted by the Corinthians, but Theseus had reserved for his Athenians some honourable distinctions: those Athenians who attended the Isthmia sailed across the Saronic gulf in a sacred vessel (θεωρίς), and an honorary place (προεδρία), as large as the sail of their vessel, was assigned to them during the celebration of the games. In times of war between the two states a sacred truce was concluded, and the Athenians were invited to attend at the solemnities. These games were celebrated regularly every other year, in the first and third years of each Olympiad. After the fall of Corinth, in 146 B.C., the Sicyonians were honoured with the privilege of conducting the Isthmian games; but when the town of Corinth was rebuilt by Julius Caesar, the right of conducting the solemnities was restored to the Corinthians. The season of the Isthmian solemnities was, like that of all the great national festivals, distinguished by general rejoicings and feasting. The contests and games of the Isthmia were the same as those at Olympia, and embraced all the varieties of athletic performances, such as wrestling, the pancratium, together with horse and chariot racing. Musical and poetical contests were likewise carried on, and in the latter women were also allowed to take part. The prize of a victor in the Isthmian games consisted at first of a garland of pine-leaves, and afterwards of a wreath of ivy. Simple as such a reward was, a victor in these games gained the greatest distinction and honour among his countrymen; and a victory not only rendered the individual who obtained it a subject of admiration, but shed lustre over his family, and the whole town or community to which he belonged. Hence Solon established by a law, that every Athenian who gained the victory at the Isthmian games should receive from the public treasury a reward of one hundred drachmae. His victory was generally celebrated in lofty odes, called Epinikia, or triumphal odes, of which we still possess some beautiful specimens among the poems of Pindar.

J

JĂCŬLUM. [[Hasta].]

JĀNŬA (θύρα), a door. Besides being applicable to the doors of apartments in the interior of a house, which were properly called ostia, this term more especially denoted the first entrance into the house, i.e. the front or street door, which was also called anticum, and in Greek θύρα αὔλειος, αὐλεία, αὔλιος, or αὐλία. The houses of the Romans commonly had a back door, called posticum, postica, or posticula, and in Greek παράθυρα, dim. παραθύριον. The door-way, when complete, consisted of four indispensable parts; the threshold, or sill (limen, βηλός, οὖδας); the lintel (jugumentum, limen superum); and the two jambs (postes, σταθμοί). The door itself was called foris or valva, and in Greek σανίς, κλισιάς, or θύρετρον. These words are commonly found in the plural, because the door-way of every building of the least importance contained two doors folding together. When foris is used in the singular, it denotes one of the folding doors only. The fastenings of the door (claustra, obices) commonly consisted of a bolt (pessulus; μάνδαλος, κατοχεύς, κλεῖθρον) placed at the base of each foris, so as to admit of being pushed into a socket made in the sill to receive it. By night, the front-door of the house was further secured by means of a wooden and sometimes an iron bar (sera, repagula, μοχλός) placed across it, and inserted into sockets on each side of the door-way. Hence it was necessary to remove the bar (τὸν μοχλὸν παράφερειν) in order to open the door (reserare). It was considered improper to enter a house without giving notice to its inmates. This notice the Spartans gave by shouting; the Athenians and all other nations by using the knocker, or more commonly by rapping with the knuckles or with a stick (κρούειν, κόπτειν). In the houses of the rich a porter (janitor, custos, θυρωρός) was always in attendance to open the door. He was commonly an eunuch or a slave, and was chained to his post. To assist him in guarding the entrance, a dog was universally kept near it, being also attached by a chain to the wall; and in reference to this practice, the warning cave canem, εὐλαβοῦ τὴν κύνα, was sometimes written near the door. The appropriate name for the portion of the house immediately behind the door (θυρών) denotes that it was a kind of apartment; it corresponded to the hall or lobby of our houses. Immediately adjoining it, and close to the front door, there was in many houses a small room for the porter.

JENTĀCŬLUM. [[Coena].]

JŪDEX, JŪDĬCĬUM. A Roman magistratus generally did not investigate the facts in dispute in such matters as were brought before him: he appointed a judex for that purpose, and gave him instructions. [[Actio].] Accordingly, the whole of civil procedure was expressed by the two phrases Jus and Judicium, of which the former comprehended all that took place before the magistratus (in jure), and the latter all that took place before the judex (in judicio). In many cases a single judex was appointed: in others, several were appointed, and they seem to have been sometimes called recuperatores, as opposed to the single judex. Under certain circumstances the judex was called arbiter: thus judex and arbiter are named together in the Twelve Tables. A judex when appointed was bound to discharge the functions of the office, unless he had some valid excuse (excusatio). There were certain seasons of the year when legal business was done at Rome, and at these times the services of the judices were required. These legal terms were regulated according to the seasons, so that there were periods of vacation. When the judex was appointed, the proceedings in jure or before the praetor were terminated. The parties appeared before the judex on the third day (comperendinatio), unless the praetor had deferred the judicium for some sufficient reason. The judex was generally aided by advisers (jurisconsulti) learned in the law, who were said in consilio adesse; but the judex alone was empowered to give judgment. The matter was first briefly stated to the judex (causae conjectio, collectio), and the advocates of each party supported his cause in a speech. Witnesses were produced on both sides, and examined orally: the witnesses on one side were also cross-examined by the other. After all the evidence was given and the advocates had finished, the judex gave sentence: if there were several judices, a majority decided. If the matter was one of difficulty, the hearing might be adjourned as often as was necessary (ampliatio); and if the judex could not come to a satisfactory conclusion, he might declare this upon oath, and so release himself from the difficulty. This was done by the form of words non liquere (N. L.). The sentence was pronounced orally, and was sometimes first written on a tablet. If the defendant did not make his appearance after being duly summoned, judgment might be given against him.—According to Cicero, all judicia had for their object, either the settlement of disputes between individuals (controversiae), or the punishment of crimes (maleficia). This refers to a division of judicia, which appears in the jurists, into judicia publica and judicia privata. The former, the judicia publica, succeeded to the judicia populi of the early republican period: the latter were so called because in them the populus acted as judices. Originally the kings presided in all criminal cases, and the consuls succeeded to their authority. But after the passing of the [Lex Valeria] (B.C. 507), which gave an appeal to the populus (that is, the comitia curiata) from the magistratus, the consul could not sit in judgment on the caput of a Roman citizen, but such cases were tried in the comitia, or persons were appointed to preside at such inquiries, who were accordingly called Quaesitores or Quaestores parricidii or rerum capitalium. In course of time, as such cases became of more frequent occurrence, such quaestiones were made perpetual, that is, particular magistrates were appointed for the purpose. It was eventually determined, that while the praetor urbanus and peregrinus should continue to exercise their usual jurisdictions, the other praetors should preside at public trials. In such trials any person might be an accuser (accusator). The praetor generally presided as quaesitor, assisted by a judex quaestionis, and a body of judices called his consilium. The judices were generally chosen by lot out of those who were qualified to act; but in some cases the accuser and the accused (reus) had the privilege of choosing (edere) a certain number of judices out of a large number, who were thence called Edititii. Both the accusator and the reus had the privilege of rejecting or challenging (rejicere) such judices as they did not like. In many cases a lex was passed for the purpose of regulating the mode of procedure.—The judices voted by ballot, at least generally, and a majority determined the acquittal or condemnation of the accused. Each judex was provided with three tablets (tabulae), on one of which was marked A, Absolvo; on a second C, Condemno; and on a third N. L., Non liquet. The judices voted by placing one of these tablets in the urns, which were then examined for the purpose of ascertaining the votes. It was the duty of the magistratus to pronounce the sentence of the judices; in the case of condemnation, to adjudge the legal penalty; of acquittal, to declare the accused acquitted; and of doubt, to declare that the matter must be further investigated (amplius cognoscendum).—A judicium populi, properly so called, was one in which the case was tried in the comitia curiata, but afterwards in the comitia centuriata and tributa. The accuser, who must be a magistratus, commenced by declaring in a contio that he would on a certain day accuse a certain person, whom he named, of some offence, which he also specified. This was expressed by the phrase diem dicere. If the offender held any high office, it was necessary to wait till his time of service had expired, before proceedings could be thus commenced against him. The accused was required to give security for his appearance on the day of trial; the security was called vades in a causa capitalis, and praedes when the penalty for the alleged offence was pecuniary. If such security was not given, the accused was kept in confinement. If nothing prevented the inquiry from taking place at the time fixed for it, the trial proceeded, and the accuser had to prove his case by evidence. The investigation of the facts was called anquisitio with reference to the proposed penalty: accordingly, the phrases pecunia, capite or capitis anquirere, are used. When the investigation was concluded, the magistratus promulgated a rogatio, which comprehended the charge and the punishment or fine. It was a rule of law that a fine should not be imposed together with another punishment in the same rogatio. The rogatio was made public during three nundinae, like any other lex, and proposed at the comitia for adoption or rejection. The accused sometimes withdrew into exile before the votes were taken; or he might make his defence. The offences which were the chief subject of judicia populi and publica were majestas, adulteria and stupra, parricidium, falsum, vis publica and privata, peculatus, repetundae, ambitus.—With the passing of special enactments for the punishment of particular offences, was introduced the practice of forming a body of judices for the trial of such offences as the enactments were directed against. The Album Judicum was the body out of which judices were to be chosen. It is not known what was the number of the body so constituted, but it has been conjectured that the number was 350, and that ten were chosen from each tribe, and thus the origin of the phrase Decuriae Judicum is explained. It is easy to conceive that the judicia populi, properly so called, would be less frequent, as special leges were framed for particular offences, the circumstances of which could be better investigated by a smaller body of judices than by the assembled people. The [Lex Servilia] (B.C. 104) enacted that the judices should not be under thirty nor above sixty years of age, that the accuser and accused should severally propose one hundred judices, and that each might reject fifty from the list of the other, so that one hundred would remain for the trial. Up to B.C. 122 the judices were always senators, but in this year the [Sempronia Lex] of C. Gracchus took the judicia from the senators and gave them to the equites. This state of things lasted nearly fifty years, till Sulla (B.C. 80) restored the judicia to the senate, and excluded the equites from the album judicum. A [Lex Aurelia] (B.C. 70) enacted that the judices should be chosen from the three classes—of senators, equites, and tribuni aerarii; and accordingly the judicia were then said to be divided between the senate and the equites. The tribuni aerarii were taken from the rest of the citizens, and were, or ought to have been, persons of some property. Thus the three decuriae of judices were formed; and it was either in consequence of the [Lex Aurelia] or the [Lex Fufia] that, instead of one urn for all the tablets, the decuriae had severally their balloting urn, so that the votes of the three classes were known. It is not known if the [Lex Aurelia] determined the number of judices in any given case. The [Lex Pompeia] de Vi and De Ambitu (B.C. 52) determined that eighty judices were to be selected by lot, out of whom the accuser and the accused might reject thirty. In the case of Clodius, in the matter of the Bona Dea, there were fifty-six judices. It is conjectured that the number fixed for a given case, by the [Lex Aurelia], was seventy judices. Augustus added to the existing three decuriae judicum a fourth decuria, called that of the Ducenarii, who had a lower pecuniary qualification, and only decided in smaller matters. Caligula added a fifth decuria, in order to diminish the labours of the judices.

JŪGĔRUM, a Roman measure of surface, 240 feet in length and 120 in breadth, containing therefore 28,800 square feet. It was the double of the Actus Quadratus, and from this circumstance, according to some writers, it derived its name. [[Actus].] The uncial division [[As]] was applied to the jugerum, its smallest part being the scrupulum of 10 feet square, = 100 square feet. Thus the jugerum contained 288 scrupula. The jugerum was the common measure of land among the Romans. Two jugera formed an heredium, a hundred heredia a centuria, and four centuriae a saltus. These divisions were derived from the original assignment of landed property, in which two jugera were given to each citizen as heritable property.

JŬGUM (ζυγός, ζυγόν), signified in general that which joined two things together, such as the transverse beam which united the upright posts of a loom, the cross-bar of a lyre, a scale-beam, &c., but it denoted more especially the yoke by which ploughs and carriages were drawn. The following woodcut shows two examples of the yoke: the upper one is provided with two collars, the lower one with excavations cut in the yoke, in order to give more ease and freedom to the animals. The latter figure shows the method of tying the yoke to the pole (temo, ῥυμός) by means of a leathern strap. The word jugum is often used to signify slavery, or the condition in which men are compelled, against their will, like oxen or horses, to labour for others. Hence, to express symbolically the subjugation of conquered nations, the Romans made their captives pass under a yoke (sub jugum mittere), which, however, was not made like the yoke used in drawing carriages or ploughs, but consisted of a spear supported transversely by two others placed upright.

Jugum, yoke.