Roman Law and the Legal World of the Romans

Roman Law and the Legal World of the Romans

refuse to grant actions against a more powerful person by a less powerful one. But despite all this, Roman law remained surprisingly egalitarian in certain theoretical respects. To sim plify the situation slightly, the factors just listed all affect what questions had to be answered in court, but should not affect a trial once under way. That is, although the praetor had to take all these features of status into account in preparing a formula, he could have done so in a way that concealed the status of the parties from the court. (The major exception, of course, is pro vided by cases in which someone’s status is precisely the issue in dispute.) That, at any rate, is how things were supposed to work in theory. But in practice things are not so neat even in modern systems that are much more self-consciously egalitar ian. Factors such as race and wealth seem to exert influence on the outcome of at least some trials today. We might, then, rea sonably ask whether Roman trials were actually as fair as they were meant to be.

Costs of Litigation

Successful litigation required expert help, to provide advo cacy and perhaps legal knowledge. Experts of both sorts were typically aristocrats, who often worked on a patronage basis. Would-be clients would have opportunities to take advantage of their social position in proportion to their closeness to that same elite. Additionally, and especially in cases where personal ties were weak, money might help get representation. Direct

78