ABSTRACT
The Roman courtroom was a strikingly fluid environment filled with noise and movement, and much of this atmosphere can be attributed to the activities of the audience. The various references describing the courtroom frequently mention the presence of an audience, which was an integral part of the environment. The public nature of cases not only fulfilled a legal tenet, but also served various cultural functions, ranging from social and political advancement to cheap thrills and entertainment. At one extreme, a courtroom provided a platform for up-and-coming statesmen. Here young men hoping to make a career for themselves would dare to undertake the accusation of their more powerful seniors, with the expectation that, if successful, they could increase their own reputation at the cost of the defeated party. The full effect of this increase in reputation could be achieved only if the case was followed by the public, some of whom made up the circle to which the youngster hoped to gain access. From another perspective, everyone has an interest in public events where they can watch someone endure an ordeal that they may at some point have to undergo themselves; the possibility of “that could be me” greatly piques human interest. Equally, there are still others, who – though they realise that such an event will never befall them – nonetheless enjoy watching a courtroom drama that carries important, if not catastrophic, ramifications for the parties involved. Those with little or no employment could find this an entertaining pastime, less bloody than the circus. Thus, in principle, we can assume that Roman cases, whether private or public in nature, had the potential to draw sizeable audiences. It is also fair to conclude that cases of great personages, or of sensationalist impact, had by far the greatest potential to draw the largest audiences, while cases of a mundane nature drew small audiences or none at all.
