Page:Historical introduction to the private law of Rome (IA historicalintrod00muiriala).pdf/39

] first instance. Dionysius describes the relation between them as of the most sacred character, the duty the patron owed to his client coming next in order to that he owed to his children and his wards. He had to provide his vassal with all that was necessary for his sustenance and that of his wife and children; and, as private holdings increased in extent, it was not unusual for the patron or his to give a client during pleasure a plot of land to cultivate for himself. The patron had, moreover, to assist his client in his transactions with third parties, obtain redress for him for his injuries, and represent him before the tribunals when he became involved in litigation. The client, on the other hand, had to maintain his patron's interests by every means in his power. What Dionysius says of his contributing to endow his patron's daughters, and the like, obviously refers to an advanced period of the history of Rome, when it sometimes happened that the position of parties, so far as wealth was concerned, was reversed; for the relation was hereditary on both sides; and there may have been instances of families that had risen to good social position and ample fortune recognising at the distance of many generations that they were still clients of patrician houses in embarrassed circumstances, and rendering them assistance as in duty bound. But in the regal period the advantage must have been chiefly on the side of the client, who, without becoming a citizen, obtained directly the protection of the patron and his clan, and indirectly that of the state.

The plebs included all those freemen who, being neither patrician citizens nor clients, had settled in Rome as permanent residents, hoping to make a living within her bounds, and enjoy de facto at least the benefit of her institutions. The commencement of this body, as distinct from that of the