How Could The Romans Prove They Were Citizens?

Roman military diploma granting citizenship | Author: MatthiasKabel / Creative Commons CC-BY-SA-2.5

When the Apostle Paul was being a pain in the arse in Jerusalem sometime in (probably) AD 59, the locals had enough of his weird ranting and dragged him off to the Romans for a good, old-fashioned 'questioning', hoping that they would question him to death. The local garrison, being Roman soldiers, were only too happy to oblige. After all, everyone knew that scumbag non-citizens like Paul had about the same level of rights as a slave did, and that the testimony of a slave could only be taken under the sort of torture that bored Roman soldiers excelled in (Tacitus, Annals, 14.60).

Paul was having none of it. He was a Jew, but he was also from Tarusus and being born in that city gave him a special privilege. Channelling JFK in Berlin a few thousand years later, he promptly informed them of some very important news - civis Romanus sum. "I am a Roman citizen".

Panic promptly ensued, and the commander called for.

"Hang on a minute, pal..." the commander didn't say, "... I'm a Roman citizen, and this shit cost me a lot of time and money! I had to serve 25 years in the auxiliaries to get this!"

"Ah!" Paul replied. "But I was born one!"

What then ensues is a lot of Life of Brian type running about in a blind panic because they were just about to question the hell out of a Roman citizen without any legal right to (Acts 22.25-29).

All of which begs an interesting question. If you were dragged before the local garrison for torturing, could you simply say 'civis Romanus sum' at them and watch as they struggled to deal with the fallout, or did you have to actually prove that you were a Roman citizen? If so, how?

Being a citizen offered membership of an exclusive society which granted freedom, the right to vote, the right to take part in some forms of public entertainment, such as the theatre and exemption from several forms of taxation, such as land tax (Jeffers, 1999). It also offered the full protection of the law against such things as having bored soldiers in Jerusalem flogging the living daylights out of you, protection in legal contracts, and the (full) right to marry and inherit property. It also usually protected you from being crucified.

There were several different types of citizenship, each of which granted various rights:

Roman citizens, known as cives Romani, were individuals who held full citizenship in ancient Rome. They were divided into two distinct categories: non optimo iure, who enjoyed rights related to property and marriage (ius commercii and ius connubii), and optimo iure, who possessed these rights along with the additional privileges of voting and holding public office (ius suffragii and ius honorum).

The term Latini initially referred to the Latin tribes of central Italy, who were incorporated into the Roman state following the Latin War (340–338 BCE). Over time, the designation expanded to include other non-Latin communities under Roman dominion. These groups were granted certain legal privileges, known as ius Latii or Latin Rights, which resembled some of the rights of Roman citizens. However, they were excluded from the right of intermarriage with Roman citizens (ius connubii).

The socii were members of allied states, or foederati, who retained specific legal rights within their own communities in exchange for providing military support to Rome. This arrangement allowed Rome to expand its military capabilities while maintaining a degree of autonomy for its allies.

The Social War (91–88 BCE) marked a turning point in Roman citizenship policy. The Lex Julia of 90 BCE extended full Roman citizenship to all Latini and Italian socii states that had remained loyal to Rome during the conflict. This legislation effectively eliminated the intermediate statuses of Latini and socii, integrating these groups into the Roman citizen body.

Provinciales were residents of Rome's provinces who lived under Roman authority but were granted only limited rights under the framework of international law (ius gentium). In contrast, freedmen (liberti) were former slaves who had been manumitted. While they did not automatically receive Roman citizenship upon gaining their freedom, their children were born as full Roman citizens, reflecting the gradual integration of freedmen into the civic structure of Rome.

In ancient Rome, there were no formal identification documents to verify an individual's citizenship. Instead, a person's status was largely determined by their social connections, reputation, and standing within the community. Citizenship was generally assumed if both parents were Roman citizens, as individuals were inherently embedded within a family (familia), tribe (tribus), and clan (gens). These affiliations provided a natural framework for establishing one's civic identity.

For members of the elite, participation in public life—such as holding political office or engaging in civic duties—served as an implicit confirmation of citizenship, since such roles were restricted to citizens. In cases where citizenship was uncertain, an individual's reputation and their network of social relationships often provided the necessary verification. In a society where literacy was not widespread, oral testimony and communal knowledge carried considerable authority, particularly in smaller, close-knit communities.

Language and appearance also played a significant role in signalling citizenship. Fluency in Latin, adherence to Roman cultural practices, and appropriate dress were key markers of Roman identity. The toga, a distinctive garment, was reserved exclusively for citizens and served as a powerful symbol of their status. Non-citizens, including foreigners, freedmen, slaves, and individuals engaged in disreputable professions such as acting, were legally prohibited from wearing it. Part of the right of a citizen was bodily autonomy - the right to determine what happened to one's own body, alive or dead - and actors, prostitutes, and gladiators (among others) were, by the nature of what they did, deemed to have given up that right.

These visible and cultural distinctions helped reinforce the boundaries of citizenship in a society where formal documentation was absent.

Roman names served as a crucial indicator of citizenship and social standing. A traditional Roman male name adhered to the tria nomina system, which consisted of three distinct components:

• Praenomen: A personal name used primarily within the family circle.

• Nomen: The clan name (nomen gentilicium), which identified the individual's broader lineage and membership in a specific gens (clan).

• Cognomen: Originally a nickname, this element evolved into an inherited family name.

Hence Gaius (praenomen) Julius (nomen) Caesar (cognomen). Although we commonly refer to him as 'Caesar', ancient sources usually refer to him as Gaius, and 'Caesar' was the term used for Augustus. Modern usage tends to stick with what we use more commonly to avoid confusion.

During the Roman Republic, cognomina often carried descriptive or even unflattering meanings, such as Crassus ("fat") or Superbus ("proud"). However, by the Imperial period, they tended to adopt more favourable connotations. In larger clans, the cognomen served to differentiate between various branches of the family, functioning much like a modern surname. In some cases, a fourth name, the agnomen, was added to provide further distinction. This additional name often reflected personal achievements, notable traits, or honours bestowed upon the individual.

The tria nomina system was legally protected and closely tied to citizenship. The Lex Visellia of AD 24 made it a criminal offence for non-citizens to adopt the tria nomina without authorization, treating such acts as a forgery. Provincial inhabitants typically bore one or two names, often including their own name and their father's. Slaves, by contrast, were generally known by a single name, either their birth name or one assigned by their master. Upon being freed (manumission), a former slave would adopt the praenomen and nomen of their former master while retaining or Romanizing their cognomen, thereby signalling their new status as a freedman (libertus) within Roman society (Jeffers, 1999).

The census (from the Latin censere, meaning "to assess") was a fundamental institution in ancient Rome, conducted every five years to register citizens and evaluate their property for taxation purposes. The censor, the magistrate responsible for overseeing the census, wielded significant authority, including the supervision of public morality, a role that gave rise to the modern concept of "censorship." The censor's decisions were considered absolute, and no other official had the power to override them.

Citizenship records were maintained through tribal lists, which required the head of each household (*paterfamilias*) to appear before the censors and declare the members of his household, including slaves, as well as the details and location of his property. These declarations were recorded in official documents known as the Tabulae Censoriae, which were stored in the public treasury.

In cases where proof of Roman citizenship was required, officials could verify an individual's status by checking their name against the most recent census records. Additionally, witnesses—often from the same tribe—could provide testimony to confirm a person's identity, as no visual or physical identification methods existed at the time.

The census also served as a mechanism to uncover instances of fraud, such as freedmen or foreigners falsely claiming citizenship. One common form of deception involved the improper wearing of the toga, a garment reserved exclusively for citizens. Any attempt to falsify or undermine this privilege was met with the most severe consequences, reflecting the gravity with which Roman society viewed the integrity of its civic institutions.

Birth registration was formalized during the reign of Emperor Augustus (27 BC–14 AD) as part of his broader social and legal reforms. The Lex Aelia Sentia (4 AD) and the Lex Papia Poppaea (9 AD) required Roman citizens to register the births of their children within 30 days before a Roman official, such as a magistrate or census officer (Gardner, 1993; Cambridge Ancient History, 1996). This registration was essential for establishing the child's legal rights, including citizenship and inheritance. Failure to register could result in the child being denied certain legal privileges, though it did not necessarily revoke citizenship itself (Saller, 1994).

Upon registration, the details of the birth were recorded in official registers. While there is no direct evidence of standardized birth certificates like wooden diptychs, Roman legal documents often included the names of witnesses and were written in Latin (Gardner, 1993). These records served as proof of citizenship and could be referenced throughout the individual's life.

For children born in the provinces, the father or an appointed agent was required to declare the birth before local officials. This declaration (professio) affirmed the child's Roman citizenship and was recorded in public archives (Cambridge Ancient History, 1996; Saller, 1994). Provincial governors and local magistrates oversaw these registrations, ensuring that the records were maintained in accordance with Roman law.

Auxiliaries serving in the Roman army were granted Roman citizenship upon completing their term of service, which typically lasted 25 years (Duncan-Jones, 1994; Holder, 1982). This reward was a significant incentive for non-citizen soldiers recruited into the auxiliary units (auxilia), and it became a formalized practice during the Imperial period. Upon discharge, veterans received a diploma civitatis, a certificate consisting of two bronze plates joined together. The outer side of the first plate summarized the holder's military service and the grant of Roman citizenship, while the outer side of the second plate often included the names of witnesses (Roxan, 1978). The text engraved on the outer surfaces was identically reproduced in greater detail on the inner sides, ensuring the document's authenticity. The plates were then sealed together, with the seals protected by metal strips to prevent tampering (Eck & Pangerl, 2005).

When a veteran retired in the provinces, he would present the sealed diploma at the local public record office (tabularium). An official would break the seals and verify that the internal inscriptions matched the external ones. Once confirmed, the veteran's name was registered in the list of resident Roman citizens, formally recognizing his new status (Roxan, 1994). This meticulous process underscored the value Rome placed on citizenship and the integrity of its documentation.

Similarly, freed slaves (liberti) underwent a formal process to document their transition to citizenship. Upon manumission, a freedman typically adopted the praenomen and nomen of his former master, signifying his new legal and social connection to the family. He retained his cognomen—the name he had used as a slave—unless he chose to adopt a more Latinized or Roman-sounding name (Weaver, 1972). The emancipation of freedmen was recorded in a formal document known as the tabella manumissionis, which served as legal proof of their new status (Gardner, 1993). Like veterans, freedmen possessed official documentation confirming their citizenship, which was essential for their integration into Roman society.

The diploma civitatis and tabella manumissionis highlight the Roman state's meticulous approach to documenting and regulating citizenship. These records not only affirmed an individual's legal standing but also reinforced the hierarchical and structured nature of Roman society, where citizenship was a highly valued and carefully guarded privilege.

To prove their citizenship abroad, Romans relied on various forms of documentation, such as census records (Tabulae Censoriae) or military diplomas (diploma civitatis) (Sherwin-White, 1973). Portable writing tablets (diptychs) were used for various purposes, but there is no specific evidence that citizenship records were routinely recorded on them for travel (Eck & Pangerl, 2005). If doubts arose about the validity of a person's claim, witnesses could be called upon to verify their identity (Gardner, 1993). However, securing witnesses in distant provinces could be challenging due to the difficulties of travel and communication in the ancient world (Lintott, 2008).

A notable example of the challenges faced by Roman citizens abroad is the case of Gavius in 70 BC. Verres, the corrupt governor of Sicily, questioned Gavius' claim to Roman citizenship after Gavius protested Verres' mistreatment of fellow Roman citizens (Cicero, In Verrem, 2.5.160–162). Gavius, a citizen from Compsa, asserted his status as a Roman, but he was unable to produce sufficient evidence or witnesses to convince Verres. Despite his protests, Gavius was crucified—a punishment forbidden for Roman citizens (Sherwin-White, 1973). This act was a grave violation of Roman law and became a key point in Cicero's prosecution of Verres (Lintott, 2008).

Verres was eventually put on trial for his actions, and the case of Gavius highlighted the vulnerability of Roman citizens without influential connections (Cicero, In Verrem, 2.5). While legal status as a Roman citizen was a significant protective factor, social standing and connections often played a decisive role in ensuring fair treatment (Gardner, 1993). Provincial governors and foreign authorities were generally cautious about mistreating Roman citizens, especially those of higher social standing, as it could lead to legal repercussions or political backlash (Lintott, 2008). Ultimately, it was not just official documentation but a citizen's social network and influence that offered the greatest protection in the Roman world (Sherwin-White, 1973).

At the end of the day, the sanctity of Roman citizenship was protected less by formal documents of identification and more by two methods. Firstly, the elite in society relied on their own infamy to identify themselves as citizens. Whilst it was possible for freedmen, for example, to become notable and wealthy, rich citizens relied on their heritage and 'name' to 'prove' that they were citizens. Someone with the tria nomina being dragged about in a litter by 30 slaves, wearing a toga and with gold jewellery dripping from him, was obviously a citizen. For the lesser in society, they could call on witnesses to reinforce their status for legal reasons - when before a magistrate, for example - and the rest of the time, unless a distracted sentry was trying to stretch you on a rack, it didn't really matter all that much.

The famous Edict of Caracalla, which 'made everyone a citizen' seems to have had very little effect on people, mostly because to the rich, it hardly made any difference because they already revelled in the benefits of citizenship and for everyone else, so what?

References and Further Reading

Cambridge Ancient History. (1996). The Augustan Empire, 43 B.C.–A.D. 69 (Vol. 10, 2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Cicero. In Verrem.

Duncan-Jones, R. (1994). Money and government in the Roman Empire. Cambridge University Press.

Eck, W., & Pangerl, A. (2005). Neue Diplome für die Auxiliartruppen der Provinzen Syria und Syria Palaestina. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 153, 181–200.

Gardner, J. F. (1993). Being a Roman citizen. Routledge.

Holder, P. A. (1982). The Roman army in Britain. Batsford.

Jeffers, J. S. (1999). The Greco-Roman world of the New Testament era: Exploring the background of early Christianity. InterVarsity Press.

Lintott, A. (2008). Cicero as evidence: A historian’s companion. Oxford University Press.

Roxan, M. M. (1978). Roman military diplomas 1954–1977. Institute of Archaeology.

Roxan, M. M. (1994). Roman military diplomas 1985–1993. Institute of Archaeology.

Saller, R. P. (1994). Patriarchy, property and death in the Roman family. Cambridge University Press.

Sherwin-White, A. N. (1973). The Roman citizenship (2nd ed.). Clarendon Press.

Tacitus. Annals.

Weaver, P. R. C. (1972). Familia Caesaris: A social study of the emperor’s freedmen and slaves. Cambridge University Press.

Acts 22:25-29. The Holy Bible, New International Version.

Thanks for reading! If you’re stuck for a gift for a lost loved one, or for someone you hate, or if you have a table with a wonky leg that would benefit from the support of 341 pages of Roman History, my new book “The Compendium of Roman History” is available on Amazon or direct from IngramSpark. Please check it out by clicking the link below!