Editing Roman censor (section)

===''Regimen morum''===
Keeping the public morals (''regimen morum'', or in the [[Roman Empire|Empire]] ''cura morum'' or ''praefectura morum'') was the second most <!-- I say second most, since conducting the census was the first most important duty, as I read up above. --> important branch of the censors' duties, and the one which caused their office to be one of the most revered and the most dreaded; hence they were also known as ''castigatores'' ("chastisers"). It naturally grew out of the right which they possessed of excluding persons from the lists of citizens; for, as has been well remarked, "they would, in the first place, be the sole judges of many questions of fact, such as whether a citizen had the qualifications required by law or custom for the rank which he claimed, or whether he had ever incurred any judicial sentence, which rendered him infamous: but from thence the transition was easy, according to Roman notions, to the decisions of questions of right; such as whether a citizen was really worthy of retaining his rank, whether he had not committed some act as justly degrading as those which incurred the sentence of the law." <!-- A source for this quote would be nice. -->

In this manner, the censors gradually assumed at least nominal complete superintendence over the whole public and private life of every citizen. They were constituted as the conservators of public morality; they were not simply to prevent crime or particular acts of immorality, but rather to maintain the traditional Roman character, ethics, and habits (''mos majorum'')—''regimen morum'' also encompassed this protection of traditional ways,<ref>Cicero ''de Legibus'' iii.3; Livy iv.8, xxiv.18, xl.46, xli.27, xlii.3; Suetonius ''Life of Augustus'' 27.</ref> which was called in the times of the Empire ''cura'' ("supervision") or ''praefectura'' ("command"). The punishment inflicted by the censors in the exercise of this branch of their duties was called ''nota'' ("mark, letter") or ''notatio'', or ''animadversio censoria'' ("censorial reproach"). In inflicting it, they were guided only by their conscientious convictions of duty; they had to take an oath that they would act biased by neither partiality nor favour; and, in addition to this, they were bound in every case to state in their lists, opposite the name of the guilty citizen, the cause of the punishment inflicted on him, ''subscriptio censoria''.<ref>Livy xxxix.42; Cicero ''[[pro Cluentio Oratio]]'' 42‑48; Gell. iv.20.</ref>

This part of the censors' office invested them with a peculiar kind of jurisdiction, which in many respects resembled the exercise of public opinion in modern times; for there are innumerable actions which, though acknowledged by everyone to be prejudicial and immoral, still do not come within the reach of the positive laws of a country; as often said, "immorality does not equal illegality". Even in cases of real crimes, the positive laws frequently punish only the particular offence, while in public opinion the offender, even after he has undergone punishment, is still incapacitated for certain honours and distinctions which are granted only to persons of unblemished character.

Hence, the Roman censors might brand a man with their "censorial mark" (''nota censoria'') in case he had been convicted of a crime in an ordinary court of justice, and had already suffered punishment for it. The consequence of such a ''nota'' was only ''[[ignominia]]'' and not ''[[infamia]]''.<ref>Cicero ''[[De re publica]]'' iv.6.</ref> ''Infamia'' and the censorial verdict was not a ''judicium'' or ''res judicata'',<ref>Cicero ''pro Cluentio Oratio'' 42.</ref> for its effects were not lasting, but might be removed by the following censors, or by a ''[[List of Roman laws|lex]]'' (roughly "law"). A censorial mark was moreover not valid unless both censors agreed. The ''ignominia'' was thus only a transitory reduction of status, which does not even appear to have deprived a magistrate of his office,<ref>(Livy xxiv.18.</ref> and certainly did not disqualify persons labouring under it for obtaining a magistracy, for being appointed as ''judices'' by the [[praetor]], or for serving in the [[Roman army]]. [[Mamercus Aemilius Mamercinus]] was thus, notwithstanding the reproach of the censors (''animadversio censoria''), made [[Roman dictator|dictator]].<ref>Livy iv.31.</ref>

A person might be branded with a censorial mark in a variety of cases, which it would be impossible to specify, as in a great many instances it depended upon the discretion of the censors and the view they took of a case; and sometimes even one set of censors would overlook an offence which was severely chastised by their successors.<ref>Cicero ''[[De senectute]]'' 12.</ref> But the offences which are recorded to have been punished by the censors are of a threefold nature.
{{Ordered list|list_style_type=decimal
| Such as occurred in the private life of individuals:
  {{Ordered list|list_style_type=lower-alpha
  | Living in celibacy at a time when a person ought to be married to provide the state with citizens.<ref>Valerius Maximus ii.9 §1.</ref> The obligation of marrying was frequently impressed upon the citizens by the censors, and the refusal to fulfil it was punished with a fine (''[[aes uxorium]]'').
  | The dissolution of matrimony or betrothment in an improper way, or for insufficient reasons.<ref>Valerius Maximus ii.9 §2.</ref>
  | Improper conduct towards one's wife or children, as well as harshness or too great indulgence towards children, and disobedience of the latter towards their parents.<ref>Plutarch ''Life of Cato the Elder'' 17; cf. Cicero ''de Re Publica'' iv.6; Dionys. xx.3.</ref>
  | Inordinate and luxurious mode of living, or an extravagant expenditure of money. A great many instances of this kind are recorded.<ref>Livy ''Periochae'' 14, xxxix.4; Plutarch ''Life of Cato the Elder'' 18; Gellius, iv.8; Valerius Maximus ii.9 §4.</ref> At a later time the ''[[Sumptuary laws|leges sumptuariae]]'' were made to check the growing love of luxuries.
  | Neglect and carelessness in cultivating one's fields.<ref>Auli Gellii iv.12; Pliny ''[[Natural History (Pliny)|Natural History]]'' xviii.3.</ref>
  | Cruelty towards slaves or clients.<ref>Dionysius xx.3.</ref>
  | The carrying on of a disreputable trade or occupation,<ref>Dionysius, l.c.</ref> such as acting in theatres.<ref>Livy vii.2.</ref>
  | Legacy-hunting, defrauding orphans, etc.
  }}
| Offences committed in public life, either in the capacity of a public officer or against magistrates, <br />
  {{Ordered list|list_style_type=lower-alpha
  | If a magistrate acted in a manner not befitting his dignity as an officer, if he was accessible to bribes, or forged auspices.<ref>Cicero ''[[de Senectute]]'' 12; Livy xxxix. 42; Valerius Maximus ii. 9. § 3; Plutarch ''Cato Major'' 17; Cicero ''[[De Divinatione]]'' i. 16.</ref>
  | Improper conduct towards a magistrate, or the attempt to limit his power or to abrogate a law which the censors thought necessary.<ref>Livy iv. 24; Cicero ''[[de Oratore]]'' ii. 64; Valerius Maximus ii. 9. § 5; Gellius, iv. 20.</ref>
  | Perjury.<ref>Cicero ''[[de Oratore]]'' i. 13; Livy xxiv. 18; Gellius vii. 18.</ref>
  | Neglect, disobedience, and cowardice of soldiers in the army.<ref>Valerius Maximus ii. 9. § 7; Livy. xxiv. 18, xxvii. 11.</ref>
  | The keeping of the ''[[equus publicus]]'' (a horse kept by patrician equestrian militia at public expense) in bad condition.
  }}
| A variety of actions or pursuits which were thought to be injurious to public morality, might be forbidden by an edict,<ref>Gellius, xv.11.</ref> and those who acted contrary to such edicts were branded with the ''nota'' and degraded. For an enumeration of the offences that might be punished by the censors with ''ignominia'', see [[Barthold Georg Niebuhr|Niebuhr]].<ref>''History of Rome'', vol. ii p399, &c.</ref>
}}

A person who had been branded with a ''nota censoria'', might, if he considered himself wronged, endeavour to prove his innocence to the censors,<ref>''causam agere apud censores'', Varro ''de re Rustica'' i.7.</ref> and if he did not succeed, he might try to gain the protection of one of the censors, that he might intercede on his behalf.

====Punishments====
The punishments inflicted by the censors generally differed according to the station which a man occupied, though sometimes a person of the highest rank might suffer all the punishments at once, by being degraded to the lowest class of citizens. The punishments are generally divided into four classes:

#''Motio'' ("removal") or ''ejectio e senatu'' ("ejection from the Senate"), or the exclusion of a man from the ranks of senators. This punishment might either be a simple exclusion from the list of senators, or the person might at the same time be excluded from the tribes and degraded to the rank of an ''[[Aerarii|aerarian]]''.<ref>Liv. xxiv.18.</ref> The latter course seems to have been seldom adopted; the ordinary mode of inflicting the punishment was simply this: the censors in their new lists omitted the names of such senators as they wished to exclude, and in reading these new lists in public, quietly omitted the names of those who were no longer to be senators. Hence the expression ''praeteriti senatores'' ("senators passed over") is equivalent to ''e senatu ejecti'' (those removed from the Senate).<ref>Livy xxxviii.28, xxvii.11, xxxiv.44; Festus, s.v. Praeteriti.</ref> In some cases, however, the censors did not acquiesce to this simple mode of proceeding, but addressed the senator whom they had noted, and publicly reprimanded him for his conduct.<ref>Livy xxiv.18.</ref> As in ordinary cases an ex-senator was not disqualified by his ''ignominia'' for holding any of the magistracies which opened the way to the Senate, he might at the next census again become a senator.<ref>Cicero ''pro Cluentio Oratio'' 42, Plutarch ''Life of Cicero'' 17.</ref>
#The ''ademptio equi'', or the taking away the publicly funded horse from an [[Equites|equestrian]]. This punishment might likewise be simple, or combined with the exclusion from the tribes and the degradation to the rank of an ''aerarian''.<ref>Livy xxiv.18, 43, xxvii.11, xxix.37, xliii.16.</ref>
#The ''motio e tribu'', or the exclusion of a person from his tribe. This punishment and the degradation to the rank of an ''aerarian'' were originally the same, but when in the course of time a distinction was made between the rural or rustic tribes and the urban tribes, the ''motio e tribu'' transferred a person from the rustic tribes to the less respectable city tribes, and if the further degradation to the rank of an ''aerarian'' was combined with the ''motio e tribu'', it was always expressly stated.<ref>Liv. xlv.15, Plin. H.N. xviii.3.</ref>
#The fourth punishment was called ''referre in aerarios''<ref>Livy xxiv.18; Cicero ''pro Cluentio Oratio'' 43.</ref> or ''facere aliquem aerarium'',<ref>Livy xliii.43.</ref> and might be inflicted on any person who was thought by the censors to deserve it. This degradation, properly speaking, included all the other punishments, for an equestrian could not be made an ''aerarius'' unless he was previously deprived of his horse, nor could a member of a rustic tribe be made an ''aerarius'' unless he was previously excluded from it.<ref>Livy iv.24, xxiv.18, &c.</ref>

It was this authority of the Roman censors which eventually developed into the modern meaning of "censor" and "[[censorship]]"—i.e., officials who review published material and forbid the publication of material judged to be contrary to "public morality" as the term is interpreted in a given political and social environment.