User:Grandiose/sandbox1

Statutes
The initial basis of the Roman law was leges ("statutes"). Leges were the declarations of the comitia centuriata and the comitia tribuna, both legislative bodies in form. The first major development of the Roman law was, according to tradition, in 451 BC with the formulation of the "Twelve Tables", a series of leges that were publically displayed. The Twelve Tables were an important part of the development of the law – constituting a move towards transparency of law making and application – and in a continuous struggle between the Patrician and Plebeian orders in Rome. However, it is accepted that the Twelve Tables merely documented, rather than reformed the law's content. The application of leges fell in importance with the rise of the other sources of law, although they remained the basis for the law.

The third and last of Rome's truly legislative bodies was the concilium plebis. The concilium plebis passed plebiscita ("plebiscites"), although in 287 BC, the Patricians accepted the right of the concilium to pass law in the Lex Hortensia, and the concilium became the most important place to pass legislation, because of the role of the Tribunes who oversaw it. No assembly had the power to create law, it was merely voted upon. The application of leges to the public law should not be ignored, but the picture concerning the private law is insignificant. The comitiae and concilium were almost unique to the Republic, and were made obsolete in the first century AD. During the time they operated, only thirty statutes affecting the private law are known – although two, the lex Aquilia and the lex Aebutia, are indeed notable and should not be overlooked.

Senate
The Senate was not a legislative body, although its decisions – senatus consulta – are still worthy of consideration. Their advice was not easily ignored, and could be turned into law through a decision of a legislative body or magistrate. The Senate can therefore be considered the originator of most legislation. With the establishment of the Empire, many of the powers of the legislatures passed to the Senate, whose word therefore gained importance. During the Republic, the Senate was certainly a secondary and subservient part of the Roman legislative system.

By 110 AD, in the mid-Principate, senatus consulta were considered to have the force of law; in 161 AD Gaius notes that that there was no any debate about their status. Simultaneously, though, the nature of senatus consulta was changing: it was less and less original thought and more the word of the Emperor. The Senate during the Republic was, in private law, formally weak but practically important; during the Empire it was formally strong but practically weak. By 200 AD, any idea that it could differ from the opinion of the Emperor had vanished, and the consulta were merely termed oratio ("speeches") of the Emperor. Its power was never regained, although it formally existed in the East beyond the time of Justinian.

Emperor
The final agent of the ius civile was the Emperor himself, who declared constitutiones principis. The constitutiones took four main forms: edicta ("edicts"), mandata ("mandates"), decreta ("decisions"), and rescripta ("opinions").

The Emperor's edict was much like other magistrates' – it outlined the policy that would be taken by the Emperor. Since the scope of the Imperial seat was unlimited, and its holder reigned until death, imperial edicts had a very wide power, and affected many disparate areas. Some, including the constitutio Antoniniana, which gave Roman citizenship to most free peregrines, had a wide bearing on the private law. In this realm, mandata (advice to officials) were far more limited. Decreta were the decisions of the Emperor when he adjucated as a member of the judiciary. No judicial decision set precedent, but the decisions of the Emperor must surely have been decisive on particular issues, forming a definitive statement of what the law actually was, if not allowing a direct appeal to precedent. Rescripta were the opinions in the name of the Emperor in response to points of law submitted to the Imperial chancery. They did not usually create law, but rather clarified (sometimes basic) parts of it. The chancery was itself staffed a succession of leading jurists, directly attached to the Emperor. Their advice went as far as drafting legislation; as such, the decree of Diocletian making anonymous decrees of the Empire must have limited individual power. The role of the Emperor started with the foundation of the Empire and grew as the other institutions of lawmaking declined – the legislatures and the senate.

Praetor and other magistrates
Another source of law developed in the mid-Republic, the ius honororiam, the combined edicts of all magistrates with a legal jurisdiction. Foremost among these were the praetors: during this time, the position of the praetorship was expanded from merely enforcing the law to include the ability to innovate by granting new remedies. By 100 BC, the praetor began to openly change the ius civile through a yearly edict, granting entirely new remedies, although it seems likely that he was doing so before this outside the edict structure (the actio Serviana appears to have been created in 160 BC or so). The edicts merely created remedies, but in the Roman system driven by remedy rather than right, this was an important task. The edict covered only the year of office of the praetor in question, although some remedies were carried over from year to year in the edictum tralaticium. Those remedies that were to stay in force for the entire year were known as edictum perpetuum, but the praetor could also make remedies at will during the year, whether to respond to current events or cases in hand.

The effect of the Praetorian edict was profound. The strict, narrow, ius civile was not well suited to a growing republic and empire. Accordingly, there was a large gap in the law, which was primarily filled by the edicts of magistrates. Whilst the edicts of governors and the curule aedile adapted the mass of the law as necessary for the governance of the territories and of the grain supply, neither had such an effect on the private law as the praetors; in particular, the urban praetor's edict was the most powerful edict in relation to the private law of Roman citizens. Although an important part of the legal system during the late Republic, the edict became fixed in 129 AD; after this point, the Praetorian edicts were subsumed into a rigid form. The edict itself remained an important part of the law, but the praetor's ability to legislate was removed.

Interpretation
During the early days of the Republic, the religious pontiffs were responsible for the majority of interpretio – interpreting proper procedure and expanding the principles of the ius civile  to new situtations. This role was gradually subsumed by jurists during the mid-Republic, which itself morphed into a set of professional jurists during the late Republic and into the Empire. Their role in the originating of law was in advice and writings. This informal setting is in contrast to the power it was possible to hold during the Republic by advising judges, litigants, and the praetor combined, as well as contributing to the academic thought of the day. The ius respondi consisted of the respondi of a group of pre-eminent jurists, picked out by the Emperor. Their opinions cannot have been formally binding, but they acquired a certain authority from imperial recognition.

Jurists also guided the praetor. For example, the edict formuilated in 129 AD was guided by Julian. Therefore, as far as the interpretatio of the jurists was relevant to the ius civile, so it was to the Praetor's edict. During the Empire, the jurists became part of the imperial bureaucracy. The reforms of Diocletian helped bring about and end in the number of foremost jurists, lasting well into the dominate.