In the Latin Settlement, which was supposedly initiated in 338 BC, Rome organised many of the incorporated communities into either the civitas or civitas sine suffragio. Livy, and those scholars who have accepted his explanation, claim that the use of these two types of citizenship was influenced by the political and military circumstances of each community’s incorporation. Such an argument posits that Rome judged each community on the basis of its past behaviour and ‘rewarded’ or ‘punished’ it accordingly, using these different forms of citizenship. However, Livy’s anachronistic and inconsistent approach to the Roman franchise undermines this explanation – at least in its simplest form. This paper highlights the inconsistencies in Livy’s account of the Latin Settlement and offers an alternative explanation for the differing grants of citizenship. It is argued that the pre-existing languages and cultures of the different communities need to be taken into account, as does the legal significance of the use of Latin at Rome. In sum, this paper argues that the decision to incorporate a community as a civitas or as a civitas sine suffragio was not straightforwardly based on the political or military circumstances of each community’s incorporation, but also (or rather) involved the recognition of cultural and linguistic differences in each community and the consequent practicalities of the inclusion of each in Rome’s legal and political apparatus.

中文翻译：

---

公民身份是奖励还是惩罚？将语言纳入拉丁定居点

在拉丁定居点，据说是在 338 年开始的公元前, 罗马将许多合并的社区组织成奇维塔要么公民权利. 李维和那些接受他解释的学者声称，这两种公民身份的使用受到每个社区合并的政治和军事环境的影响。这种论点假定罗马根据其过去的行为来评判每个社区，并使用这些不同形式的公民身份相应地“奖励”或“惩罚”它。然而，李维对罗马专营权的不合时宜和不一致的方法破坏了这种解释——至少以最简单的形式。本文强调了李维对拉丁定居点的描述中的不一致之处，并为不同的公民身份提供了另一种解释。有人认为，需要考虑到不同社区预先存在的语言和文化，就像在罗马使用拉丁语的法律意义一样。总之，本文认为将社区合并为奇维塔或作为公民权利不是直接基于每个社区成立的政治或军事环境，而是（或者更确切地说）涉及对每个社区的文化和语言差异的认识，以及随后将每个社区纳入罗马法律和政治机构的实用性。