Page:Municipal Administration in the Roman Empire (1926, Abbot and Johnson, municipaladminis00abbo).pdf/20

 us:. Communities of this sort had their own charters, and elected magistrates took the place of the prefects heretofore sent out by Rome. Local pride probably played a part in bringing about this change, and a desire to retain as much as possible of the old institutions and customs of the place, and the feeling that residents could administer the affairs of a village better than non-residents. Whether Rome thought it a wise policy to yield to these pleas for self-government, or whether she followed the line of least resistance, it is hard to say.

At all events the way was open for the incorporation into the Roman state of communities possessing some measure of local autonomy. Such a political unit was called a civitas, whether it took the form of a city or not, whereas the term oppidum was used only of a city. The free use of the word civitas for Roman as well as for non-Roman communities begins in the second century of our era. Before that time it was usually applied to native communities only, while those of Roman origin were styled coloniae or municipia. It is convenient for us to make this early distinction in the present discussion.

Colonies were cities or villages made up of settlers sent out by Rome. They fell into two classes, coloniae civium Romanorum and coloniae Latinorum, according to the political rights of the settlers and the status of the colony. The founding of a colony was a sovereign act, and, therefore, under the early republic it was effected by a lex, while under the empire it was the prerogative of the emperor. Before the period of the revolution the establish-