The ancient dangers of ‘proscription'
In the 1st century BC, a culture of corruption, bribery and political violence in a fight for power led by wealthy dynasts with private armies at their back resulted in civil wars and the complete collapse of Rome's traditional institutions. One feature of this collapse was to be particularly significant. In 88 bc the current strong man Lucius Cornelius Sulla decided to call any Roman who opposed him a hostis (cf. 'hostile'), a term up till then applied solely to foreigners or external enemies. Such a one would be stripped of his citizenship rights and could therefore be killed without trial.
That was disastrous enough, but in 83 BC Sulla escalated the anarchy by turning the proscriptio into a list put up in the forum condemning to death his personal enemies, with rewards for those who killed or assisted in killing them, and penalties for those who resisted them. Thousands were named – all aristocrats – including about a third of the Senate. It was also announced that their property was to be confiscated and sold at auction (this was applied even to the sons and grandsons of the proscribed) – all proceeds to Sulla. His daughter Cornelia bought a villa for 300,000ss and promptly sold it for more than two million.
All this had a dramatic effect on the configuration of the Roman elite. Many indeed claimed it was their property that had killed them – 'their great house, their gardens, their warm baths'. When the quietly inoffensive Quintus Aurelius saw his name on the list, he lamented that 'he was being prosecuted by his estate in Alba'.
Sulla's personal epitaph, put up in Latin on the Campus Martius, survives only in a paraphrased version composed in Greek: 'No friend outdid him in doing good, no enemy in doing evil.' Readers can decide for themselves to whom, past or present, this moving eulogy should be applied.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Obama judge rules Trump darling Alina Habba is illegally serving as president's top attorney in New Jersey
Top Donald Trump ally Alina Habba is serving as acting U.S. attorney for New Jersey illegally, a federal judge ruled on Thursday. The new twist in the legal drama surrounding Trump's former personal attorney comes weeks after Habba was dramatically ousted from her role as the temporary head of New Jersey's U.S. attorney office. In July, a panel of mostly Democrat-appointed judges refused to extend Habba's 120-day interim role, while she awaited Senate confirmation to the permanent position. They then ousted Habba and put in her place Desiree Leigh Grace. However, President Donald Trump intervened, withdrawing Habba's nomination from the permanent position and appointing her as first assistant U.S. attorney. That loophole allowed her to resume the office's top job in an acting capacity. But Judge Matthew Brann of the Middle District of Pennsylvania, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, ruled on Thursday that this maneuver was illegal. 'Faced with the question of whether Ms. Habba is lawfully performing the functions and duties of the office of the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, I conclude that she is not,' wrote Judge Brann, who was transferred the case challenging her authority. He added: 'And because she is not currently qualified to exercise the functions and duties of the office in an acting capacity, she must be disqualified from participating in any ongoing cases.' Habba defended Trump in New York civil cases before joining his 2024 campaign. She then took a short-lived role with the administration serving as Trump's Counselor to the President. After just a few months in Washington, D.C., the president appointed Habba as interim U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, sending her back to her home state where she first met Trump. Her permitted 120 days expired on July 25, 2025. Trump wasn't happy when Grace, who was at the time first assistant prosecutor to Habba, was voted by a panel of judges to assume the interim role. He immediately ousted Grace from her brand new role and put Habba back in the driver's seat. Habba's permanent confirmation has been held up in the Senate, in part, by both of New Jersey's Democratic senators opposing her nomination. Her continuing authority is being challenged in two criminal cases arguing her appointment is invalid because it violates federal law. Judge Brann agreed it was illegal, but the decision is expected to be appealed. Democrats have accused Habba of pursuing 'frivolous and politically motivated' prosecutions despite her relative inexperience as a prosecutor. This potentially is in reference to her role in charging Newark Mayor Ras Baraka with trespassing after he was arrested during a confrontation with border agents at a New Jersey migrant holding facility this summer. Additionally, in an April 2025 post on X, Habba said she would pursue charges against politicians who violate Trump's executive orders, which many interpreted as politically-motivated action.
South Wales Argus
a day ago
- South Wales Argus
Dimitri Batrouni says Newport's future should be seized
Our moment to once again show the country that Newport's best days lie ahead of it, not behind it. Newport has a glorious past. Something we should celebrate and remember fondly. From our Roman heritage, the Chartists, steelmaking, TJs and our music scene, to when the city centre was booming with big retail shops. But our world is continuing to change fast. During my first of year leadership, I noticed a common response to how Newport should adapt to this change. For some people, the answer is to go back to the past, to recreate a memory of when Newport was thriving. These memories are to be treasured and celebrated, but if we cling to the past, we will forfeit our present and future. We must act upon and seize on our potential now. The history of the city teaches us this over and over again. Newport has boomed when it led and leaned into previous industrial booms. These booms also meant a surge in the city's population. We are at that point again. Newport is the fastest-growing area in Wales. The 2021 census showed that Newport grew 9.5 per cent between 2011 and 2021, which was nearly double the growth of Cardiff; Wales only grew 1.5 per cent. And this pace of growth is not slowing. A recent report by external consultants estimated that Newport's population would grow 14.2 per cent by 2040, the fastest in the region. In particular, the growth in the under-15s is positive news for the city. Most areas are seeing an aging population. This sector population boom should mean Newport will increasingly become the growth engine for Wales and cement us as an economic powerhouse. However, a population boom is not enough to ensure our prosperity. We must embrace the future to fulfil that potential. We need to be supportive of wealth creators, completely re-engineer the city centre, empower local communities, rethink how a local authority operates as well as welcome and lead technological change, not be scared by it. Newport has always become wealthier based on industry. In the past, it was coal and steel. Now, it leads the way in advanced manufacturing. Nearly every modern electronic device probably has a bit of Newport in it, from a washing machine to a car. At Imperial Park, we have companies building the current and future technologies of the modern world. From AI infrastructure and cloud computing to microchips that make the world tick. We even have a company that builds the machine that builds the microchips, 98 per cent of which are exported. These are highly skilled, high-paying jobs for local people. To fully realise this potential will take persistence, tenaciousness and grit. Something the people of Newport have in spades. There will be ups and downs, setbacks and challenges, but the trajectory is upwards. I, we, the council, can't do this alone. We need the majority of Newportonians to realise the city's potential, support change and not be fearful of the future. There are, and will be, many loud voices, especially on social media, who only sell negativity, depression and blame. That is not a path to success for an individual or a city. Success is based on positivity and fearlessness. We can make this happen if we do not remain locked in by our past. Dimitri Batrouni is leader of Newport City Council.
Spectator
a day ago
- Spectator
Rachel Reeves's self-defeating attack on British racing
Few British traditions can claim as long a history as racing. The first races thought to have taken place in these islands were organised by Roman soldiers encamped in Yorkshire, pitting English horses against Arabian. By the 900s, King Athelstan was placing an export ban on English horses due to their superiority over their continental equivalents. The first recorded race meeting took place under Henry II in Smithfield as part of the annual Bartholomew Fair. Nearly 1,000 years later, racing remains the nation's second most popular spectator sport. Five million people attend more than 1,400 meets throughout the year. The industry is estimated to be worth more than £4 billion, contributing around £300 million to the Exchequer, and supports some 80,000 jobs. No activity better unites Benjamin Disraeli's 'two nations'. Royal Ascot, the Derby and the Grand National are cornerstones of the sporting calendar. Britain still produces many of the world's finest horses, jockeys and races. More than 600 million people across 140 countries tune in to the National each year; in this country alone, around 13 million people, a quarter of adults, bet on it. Britain's racing success is something to be proud of, which naturally means that Rachel Reeves has decided to go after it. The Treasury is proposing to increase the 15 per cent tax on bookmaker profits to 21 per cent – the same levy faced by online slot games and casinos. The British Horseracing Authority predicts the rate hike would cause a £330 million loss of revenue in its first five years, and put more than 2,500 jobs at risk in the first year alone. In response to the proposal, the BHA has called a strike for 10 September – the first in the industry's history. Rather than racing, jockeys, owners and trainers will decamp to Westminster to lobby MPs. The industrial action is expected to cost around £700,000. Many senior figures in the world of racing fear that increased costs for operators would mean less money available for promoting the sport. Worse odds would be offered to customers, making bookmakers less competitive compared with black market sites, which are now more easily accessible than ever thanks to the large increase in Virtual Private Network downloads by people trying to circumvent the Online Safety Act. Reduced turnover means reduced profits for bookmakers, 10 per cent of which are paid to a levy designed to support the sport through prize money, veterinary research and equine welfare. Even before the Treasury's planned hike, the recent introduction of more stringent affordability checks on online gambling means that turnover is down and fewer thoroughbreds are being bred. British racing is falling behind as owners, riders and horses decamp abroad to wealthier competitions. This leaves the long-term sustainability of British racing under threat. The Chancellor's latest attempt to find a few pennies down the back of the Treasury sofa would repeat the error of last year's inheritance tax raid on farmers and the imposition of VAT on private schools. It is a mean-spirited and self-defeating assault on a part of the country's history and way of life that the Labour party does not seek to understand. If racing unites the upper and lower classes, it is uniquely vulnerable to stigmatisation by the middle-class prudes found so dis-proportionately among our governing lanyard class. Of course, many Labour MPs are enthusiastic supporters of racing – 23 represent racecourse constituencies. But any attempt to squeeze the industry until the pips squeak is representative of a Treasury mentality that knows the cost of everything but the value of nothing. Taxing bookmaking at the same rate as online gambling draws a false equivalence between the two that ignores their fundamental differences. A punter at a race might enjoy six or seven bets in a day at most; an enthusiastic online gambler could place that number in a minute. Betting on racing requires research and skill (incidentally, The Spectator's own racing tipster, Penworthy, has had an excellent year). In contrast, online casinos are the gambling equivalent of Pac-Man, colourful distractions designed to be played on a loop. That is why online gambling and gaming make up the overwhelming majority of gambling addiction cases. In its zeal for protecting the vulnerable, the Gambling Commission, supported by the Treasury, could strangle the life out of the industry it regulates. In her quest to make her sums add up, Reeves may embark on another experiment which costs more than it raises. Reeves and the Treasury should recognise that next month's strike is an extraordinary protest from an industry facing an existential threat. Rather than breaking with the tradition of treating bookmaking differently to online gambling, the government should extend the industry support, through direct grants or a reformed betting levy. Yet with each day bringing rumours of the Treasury eyeing potential targets, the odds of the Chancellor putting the turf's future before her spreadsheets seem slim. Who would be willing to bet on it?
