No More Learning

it were, by destiny to comprehend the historical position
of Rome more clearly than the Romans of that day could themselves. From the place which he occupied, a Greek statesman and a Roman prisoner, esteemed and occasion
ally envied for his Hellenic culture by Scipio Aemilianus
and the first men of Rome generally, he saw the streams, which had so long flowed separately, meet together in the same channel and the history of the states of the Medi terranean resolve itself into the hegemony of Roman power
and Greek culture. Thus Polybius became the first Greek
of note, who embraced with serious conviction the compre hensive view of the Scipionic circle, and recognized the superiority of Hellenism in the sphere of intellect and of
the Roman character in the sphere of politics as facts,
which history had given her final decision, and to which people on both sides were entitled and bound to submit. In this spirit he acted as a practical statesman, and wrote his history. If in his youth he had done homage to the honourable but impracticable local patriotism of the Achaeans, during his later years, with a clear discernment of inevitable necessity, he advocated in the community to which he belonged the policy of the closest adherence to Rome. It was a policy in the highest degree judicious and beyond doubt well-intentioned, but it was far from being high-spirited or proud. Nor was Polybius able wholly to disengage himself from the vanity and paltriness of the Hellenic statesmanship of the time. He was hardly released from exile, when he proposed to the senate that
regarding
244
LITERATURE AND ART BOOK 1'
it should formally secure to the released their former rank in their several homes; whereupon Cato aptly remarked, that this looked to him as if Ulysses were to return to the cave of Polyphemus to request from the giant his hat and girdle. He often made use of his relations with the great men in Rome to benefit his countrymen; but the way in which he submitted to, and boasted of, the illustrious pro tection somewhat approaches fawning servility. His literary activity breathes throughout the same spirit as his practical action. It was the task of his life to write the history of the union of the Mediterranean states under the hegemony of Rome. From the first Punic war down to the destruction of Carthage and Corinth his work embraces the fortunes of all the civilized states—namely Greece, Macedonia, Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt, Carthage, and Italy—and exhibits in causal connection the mode in which they came under the Roman protectorate; in so far he describes it as his object to demonstrate the fitness and reasonableness of the Roman hegemony. In design as in execution, this history stands in clear and distinct contrast with the contemporary Roman as well as with the contemporary Greek historiography. In
Rome history still remained wholly at the stage of chronicle; there existed doubtless important historical materials, but what was called historical composition was restricted—with the exception of the very respectable but purely individual writings of Cato, which at any rate did not reach beyond the rudiments of research and narration—partly to nursery tales, partly to collections of notices. The Greeks had
certainly exhibited historical research and had written history; but the conceptions of nation and state had been so completely lost amidst the distracted times of the Diadochi, that none of the numerous historians succeeded in following the steps of the great Attic masters in spirit and in truth, or in treating from a general point of view the matter of world-wide interest in the history of the times.
can. x111 LITERATURE AND ART
:45
Their histories were either purely outward records, or they were pervaded by the verbiage and sophistries of Attic rhetoric and only too often by the venality and vulgarity, the sycophancy and the bitterness of the age. Among the Romans as among the Greeks there was nothing but histories of cities or of tribes. Polybius, a Peloponnesian, as has been justly remarked, and holding intellectually a position at least as far aloof from the Attics as from the Romans, first stepped beyond these miserable limits, treated the Roman materials with mature Hellenic criticism, and furnished a history, which was not indeed universal, but which was at any rate dissociated from the mere local states and laid hold of the Romano-Greek state in the course of formation. Never perhaps has any historian united within himself all the advantages of an author drawing from original
sources so completely as Polybius. The compass of his task is completely clear and present to him at every moment; and his eye is fixed throughout on the real historical connection of events. The legend, the anecdote, the mass of worthless chronicle-notices are thrown aside; the description of countries and peoples, the representation of political and mercantile relations—all the facts of so infinite importance, which escape the annalist because they do not admit of being nailed to a particular year—are put into possession of their long-suspended rights. In the procuring of historic materials Polybius shows a caution and per severance such as are not perhaps paralleled in antiquity; he avails himself of documents, gives comprehensive atten tion to the literature of different nations, makes the most extensive use of his favourable position for collecting the accounts of actors and eye-witnesses, and, in fine, method ically travels over the whole domain of the Mediterranean states and part of the coast of the Atlantic Ocean. 1 Truth
1 Such scientific travels were, however, nothing uncommon among the
346
LITERATURE AND ART BOOK IV
fulness is his nature. In all great matters he has no interest for one state or against another, for this man or against that, but is singly and solely interested in the essential connection of events, to present which in their true relation of causes and effects seems to him not merely the first but the sole task of the historian. Lastly, the narrative is a model of completeness, simplicity, and clearness. Still all these uncommon advantages by no means constitute a historian of the first rank. Polybius grasps his literary task, as he grasped his practical, with great understanding, but with the understanding alone. History, the struggle of necessity and liberty, is a moral problem; Polybius treats it as if it were a mechanical one. The whole alone has value for him, in nature as in the state; the particular event, the individual man, however wonderful they may
appear, are yet properly mere single elements, insignificant wheels in the highly artificial mechanism which is named the state. So far Polybius was certainly qualified as nc other was to narrate the history of the Roman people, which actually solved the marvellous problem of raising itself to unparalleled internal and external greatness without producing a single statesman of genius in the highest sense, and which resting on its simple foundations developed itself with wonderful almost mathematical consistency. But the element of moral freedom bears sway in the history of every people, and it was not neglected by Polybius in the history of Rome with impunity. His treatment of all questions, in which right, honour, religion are involved, is not merely shallow, but radically false. The same holds true wherever a genetic construction is required; the purely mechanical attempts at explanation, which Polybius substitutes, are
Greeks of this period. Thus in Plautus (Men. 248, comp. 235) one who has navigated the whole Mediterranean ssks—
Quin no: him domum Redimur, ru'sr' ri hirtorians rcripturi sun's’
CHAP. xm LITERATURE AND ART 24. 7
sometimes altogether desperate; there is hardly, for instance, a more foolish political speculation than that which derives the excellent constitution of Rome from a judicious mixture of monarchical, aristocratic, and demo cratic elements, and deduces the successes of Rome from the excellence of her constitution. His conception of relations is everywhere dreadfully jejune and destitute of imagination: his contemptuous and over-wise mode of treating religious matters is altogether offensive. The narrative, preserving throughout an intentional contrast to the usual Greek historiography with its artistic style, is doubtless correct and clear, but flat and languid, digressing with undue frequency into polemical discussions or into biographical, not seldom very self-suflicient, description of his own experiences. A controversial vein pervades the whole work; the author destined his treatise primarily for the Romans, and yet found among them only a very small circle that understood him ; he felt that he remained in the eyes of the Romans a foreigner, in the eyes of his country men a renegade, and that with his grand conception of his subject he belonged more to the future than to the present. Accordingly he was not exempt from a certain ill-humour and personal bitterness, which frequently appear after a quarrelsome and paltry fashion in his attacks upon the superficial or even venal Greek and the uncritical Roman historians, so that he degenerates from the tone of the historian to that of the reviewer. Polybius is not an attractive author; but as truth and truthfulness are of more value than all ornament and elegance, no other author of antiquity perhaps can be named to whom we are indebted for so much real instruction. His books are like the sun in the field of Roman history; at the point where they
begin the veil of mist which still envelops the Samnite and Pyrrhic wars is raised, and at the point where they end a new and, if possible, still more vexatious twilight begins.
146.
:48
LITERATURE AND ART noox iv
In singular contrast to this grand conception and
Roman
“mm! ” treatment of Roman history by a foreigner stands the
historical literature of native growth. At the beginning of this period we still find some chronicles written in Greek such as that already mentioned (iii. 204)
151. of Aulus Postumius (consul in 603), full of wretched
contemporary
and that of Gaius ‘Acilius (who closed it at an 142. advanced age about 612). Yet under the influence partly
of Catonian patriotism, partly of the more refined culture of the Scipionic circle, the Latin language gained so decided an ascendency in this field, that of the later historical works not more than one or two occur written in Greek;1 and not only so, but the older Greek chronicles were translated into Latin and were probably read mainly in these transla tions. Unhappily beyond the employment of the mother tongue there is hardly anything else deserving of commenda tion in the chronicles of this epoch composed in Latin, They were numerous and detailed enough—there are mentioned, for example, those of Lucius Cassius Hemina
188. (about 608), of Lucius Calpurnius Piso (consul in 621), of 129. Gaius Sempronius Tuditanus (consul in 625), of Gaius 122. Fannius (consul in 632). To these falls to be added the
digest of the oflicial annals of the city in eighty books, which 188. Publius Mucius Scaevola (consul in 621), a man esteemed
also as a jurist, prepared and published as pontiféx maximur, thereby closing the city-chronicle in so far as thenceforth the pontifical records, although not exactly discontinued, were no longer at any rate, amidst the increasing diligence of private chroniclers, taken account of in literature. All these annals, whether they gave themselves forth as private or as oflicial works, were substantially similar compilations of the extant
1' The only real exception, so far as we know, is the Greek history of Gnaeus Autidius, who flourished in Cicero's boyhood (Ture. v. 38, 112), 90. that is, about 660. The Greek memoirs of Publius Rutilius Rufus (consul 105. in 649) are hardly to be regarded as an exception, since their author wrote
them in exile at Smyrna,
rationalizing,
can. xm LITERATURE AND ART
249
historical and quasi-historical materials; and the value of their authorities as well as their formal value declined beyond doubt in the same proportion as their amplitude increased. Chronicle certainly nowhere presents truth without fiction,
and it would be very foolish to quarrel with Naevius and Pictor because they have not acted otherwise than Hecataeus and Saxo Grammaticus ; but the later attempts
to build houses out of such castles in the air put even
the most tried patience to a severe test. No blank in tradition presents so wide a chasm, but that this system of smooth and downright invention will fill it up with playful facility. The eclipses of the sun, the numbers of the census, family-registers, triumphs, are without hesitation carried back from the current year up to the year One; it stands duly recorded, in what year, month, and day king Romulus went
up to heaven, and how king Servius Tullius triumphed over
the Etruscans first on the 2 5th November 183, and again 571. on the 2 5th May 187. In entire harmony with such 567. details accordingly the vessel in which Aeneas had voyaged from Ilion to Latium was shown in the Roman docks, and even the identical sow, which had served as a guide to Aeneas, was preserved well pickled in the Roman temple
of Vesta. With the lying disposition of a poet these chroniclers of rank combine all the tiresome exactness of a notary, and treat their great subject throughout with the dulness which necessarily results from the elimination at once of all poetical and all historical elements. When we read, for instance, in Piso that Romulus avoided indulging in his cups when he had a sitting of the senate next day ; or that Tarpeia betrayed the Capitol to the Sabines out of patriotism, with a view to deprive the enemy of their shields; we cannot be surprised at the judgment of intelli
gent contemporaries as to all this sort of scribbling, “that it was not writing history, but telling stories to children. ”
Of far greater excellence were isolated works on the
:50
LITERATURE AND ART :00: IV
history of the recent past and of the present, particularly the
history of the Hannibalic war by Lucius Caelius Antipater 121. (about 633) and the history of his own time by Publius Sempronius Asellio, who was a little younger. These ex
hibited at least valuable materials and an earnest spirit of truth, in the case of Antipater also a lively, although strongly affected, style of narrative ; yet, judging from all testimonies and fragments, none of these books came up either in pithy form or in originality to the “Origines” of Cato, who unhappily created as little of a school in the field of history as in that of politics.
The subordinate, more individual and
species of historical literature—memoirs, letters, and speeches—were strongly represented also, at least as respects quantity. The first statesmen of Rome already recorded in person their experiences: such as Marcus
115. 105. Scaurus (consul in 639), Publius Rufus (consul in 649), 102. Quintus Catulus (consul in 652), and even the regent Sulla ; but none of these productions seem to have been
of importance for literature otherwise than by the substance of their contents. The collection of letters of Cornelia, the mother of the Gracchi, was remarkable partly for the classical purity of the language and the high spirit of the writer, partly as the first correspondence published in Rome, and as the first literary production of a Roman
The literature of speeches preserved at this period the stamp impressed on it by Cato; advocates’ pleadings were not yet looked on as literary productions, and such speeches as were published were political pamphlets. During the revolutionary commotions this pamphlet-litera ture increased in extent and importance, and among the mass of ephemeral productions there were some which, like the Philippics of Demosthenes and the fugitive pieces of Courier, acquired a permanent place in literature from the important position of their authors or from their . own
lady.
ephemeral,
crur. xru LITERATURE AND ART
:5!
weight. Such were the political speeches of Gaius Laelius and of Scipio Aemilianus, masterpieces of excellent Latin as of the noblest patriotism ; such were the gushing speeches of Gaius Titius, from whose pungent pictures of the place and the time—his description of the senatorial juryman has been given already r88)—the national comedy borrowed various points; such above all were the numer ous orations of Gaius Gracchus, whose fiery words pre served in faithful mirror the impassioned earnestness, the aristocratic bearing, and the tragic destiny of that lofty nature.
In scientific literature the collection of juristic opinions Scienou. by Marcus Brutus, which was published about the year
600, presents remarkable attempt to transplant to Rome 150.
the method usual among the Greeks of handling pro
fessional subjects means of dialogue, and to give to his treatise an artistic semi-dramatic form machinery of conversation in which the persons, time, and place were distinctly specified. But the later men of science, such as Stilo the philologist and Scaevola the jurist, laid aside this method, more poetical than practical, both in the sciences of general culture and in the special professional sciences. The increasing value of science as such, and the preponderance of material interest in at Rome, are clearly reflected in this rapid rejection of the fetters of artistic form. We have already spoken (p. 211 f) in detail of the sciences of general liberal culture, grammar or rather
philology, rhetoric and philosophy, in so far as these now became essential elements of the usual Roman training and thereby first began to be dissociated from the pro fessional sciences properly so called.
In the field of letters Latin philology flourished
ously, in close association with the philological treatment —long ago placed on sure basis—of Greek literature. It was already mentioned that about the beginning of this
vigor- Phflohg.
a
a
it
by a
a by
a
(p.
252
LITERATURE AND ART BOOK 1v
century the Latin epic poets found their diarkeuartae and revisers of their text 214); was also noticed, that not only did the Scipionic circle generally insist on correctness above everything else, but several also of the most noted poets, such as Accius and Lucilius, busied themselves with the regulation of orthography and of grammar. At the same period we find isolated attempts to develop archae ology from the historical side; although the dissertations of the unwieldy annalists of this age, such as those of Hemina “on the Censors" and of Tuditanus “on the Magistrates," can hardly have been better than their chronicles. Of more interest were the treatise on the Magistracies by Marcus Junius the friend of Gaius Gracchus, as the first attempt to make archaeological investigation serviceable for political objects,1 and the metrically composed Dz'darcalz'ae of the tragedian Accius, an essay towards literary history of the Latin drama. But those early attempts at scientific treatment of the mother-tongue still hear very much dz'lettante stamp, and strikingly remind us of our orthographic literature in the Bodmer-Klopstock period; and we may likewise without injustice assign but modest place to the antiquarian researches of this epoch.
The Roman, who established the investigation of the Latin language and antiquities in the spirit of the Alex andrian masters on scientific basis, was Lucius Aelius
100. Stilo about 50 216). He first went back to the oldest monuments of the language, and commented on the Salian litanies and the Twelve Tables. He devoted his special attention to the comedy of the sixth century, and first formed list of the pieces of Plautus which in his opinion were genuine. He sought, after the Greek fashion, to
The assertion, for instance, that the quaestors were nominated in the regal period by the burgesses, not by the king, as certainly erroneous II bears on its face the impress of a partisan character.
it
l
a
is
6
(p.
a
a
a
(p.
a a
it
CHAP. xm LITERATURE AND ART
253
determine historically the origin of every single pheno menon in the Roman life and dealings vand to ascertain in each case the “inventor,” and at the same time brought the whole annalistic tradition within the range of his research. The success, which he had among his con
is attested by the dedication to him of the most important poetical, and the most important historical, work of his time, the Satires of Lucilius and the Annals of Antipater; and this first Roman philologist influenced the studies of his nation for the future by transmitting his spirit of investigation both into words and into things to his disciple Varro.
The literary activity in the field of Latin rhetoric was, Rhetoric. as might be expected, of a more subordinate kind. There
was nothing here to be done but to write manuals and exercise-books after the model of the Greek compendia of Hermagoras and others ; and these accordingly the school
masters did not fail to supply, partly on account of the
temporaries,
need for them, partly on account of vanity and
Such a manual of rhetoric has been preserved to us, com posed under Sulla’s dictatorship by an unknown author, who according to the fashion then prevailing
simultaneously
216) taught Latin literature and Latin rhetoric, and wrote on both; treatise remarkable not merely for its terse, clear, and firm handling of the subject, but above all for its comparative independence in presence of Greek models. Although in method entirely dependent on the Greeks, the Roman yet distinctly and even abruptly rejects all “the useless matter which the Greeks had gathered together, solely in order that the science might appear more diflicult to learn. ” The bitterest censure bestowed
on the hair-splitting dialectics—that “loquacious science of inability to speak ”—whose finished master, for sheer fear of expressing himself ambiguously, at last no longer ventures to pronounce his own name. The Greek school
money.
is
a
(p.
Philo sophy.
Profey sional sciences.
Juris
terminology is throughout and intentionally avoided. Very earnestly the author points out the danger of many teachers, and inculcates the golden rule that the scholar ought above all to be induced by the teacher to help himself; with equal earnestness he recognizes the truth that the school is a secondary, and life the main, matter, and gives in his examples chosen with thorough independence an echo of those forensic speeches which during the last decades had excited notice in the Roman advocate-world. It deserves attention, that the opposition to the extravagances of Hellenism, which had formerly sought to prevent the rise of a native Latin rhetoric :17), continued to influence after arose, and thereby secured to Roman eloquence, as compared with the contemporary eloquence of the Greeks, theoretically and practically higher dignity and greater usefulness.
Philosophy, in fine, was not yet represented in literature, since neither did an inward need develop national Roman philosophy nor did outward circumstances call forth Latin philosophical authorship. It cannot even be shown with certainty that there were Latin translations of popular sum maries of philosophy belonging to this period; those who pursued philosophy read and disputed in Greek.
In the professional sciences there was but little activity. Well as the Romans understood how to farm and how to calculate, physical and mathematical research gained no hold among them. The consequences of neglecting theory appeared practically in the low state of medical knowledge and of portion of the military sciences. Of all the pro fessional sciences jurisprudence alone was flourishing. We cannot trace its internal development with chronological accuracy. On the whole ritual law fell more and more into the shade, and at the end of this period stood nearly in the same position as the canon law at the present day. The finer and more profound conception of law, on the
254
LITERATURE AND ART BOOK Iv
a
it
a
a
a
(p. a
it
CRAP. xm LITERATURE AND ART
355
other hand, which substitutes for outward criteria the motive springs of action within—such as the development of the ideas of offences arising from intention and from carelessness respectively, and of possession entitled to temporary protection—was not yet in existence at the time of the Twelve Tables, but was so in the age of Cicero, and probably owed its elaboration substantially to the present epoch. The reaction of political relations on the develop ment of law has been already indicated on several occasions; it was not always advantageous. By the institution of the tribunal of the Centumm'ri to deal with inheritance (p. 128), for instance, there was introduced in the law of property a college of jurymen, which, like the criminal authorities, instead of simply applying the law placed itself above it and with its so-called equity undermined the legal institutions; one consequence of which among others was the irrational principle, that any one, whom a relative had passed over in his testament, was at liberty to propose that the testa ment should be annulled by the court, and the court decided according to its discretion.
The development of juristic literature admits of being more distinctly recognized. It had hitherto been restricted
to collections of formularies and explanations of terms in
the laws; at this period there was first formed a literature
of opinions (reqfionra), which answers nearly to our modern collections of precedents. These opinions—which were delivered no longer merely by members of the pontifical college, but by every one who found persons to consult him,
at home or in the open market-place, and with which were already associated rational and polemical illustrations and the standing controversies peculiar to jurisprudence—began to
be noted down and to be promulgated in collections about
the beginning of the seventh century. This was done first
by the younger Cato about 600) and by Marcus Brutus 160. (nearly contemporary); and these collections were, as
it
(1'
95. 82.
would appear, arranged in the order of matters. 1 A strictly systematic treatment of the law of the land soon followed. Its founder was the pontzfex maxz'mur Quintus Mucius Scae vola (consul in 659, ‘r 672, (iii, 481, pp. 84, 205), in whose family jurisprudence was, like the supreme priesthood, hereditary. His eighteen books on the [ur Cir/17:, which embraced the positive materials of jurisprudence—legisla tive enactments, judicial precedents, and authorities—partly from the older collections, partly from oral tradition in as
great completeness as possible, formed the starting-point and the model of the detailed systems of Roman law; in like manner his compendious treatise of “Definitions” (5pm) became the basis of juristic summaries and particu larly of the books of Rules. Although this development of law proceeded of course in the main independently of Hellenism, yet an acquaintance with the philosophico practical scheme-making of the Greeks beyond doubt gave a general impulse to the more systematic treatment of juris prudence, as in fact the Greek influence is in the case of the last-mentioned treatise apparent in the very title. We have already remarked that in several more external matters Roman jurisprudence was influenced by the Stoa
202 f).
Art exhibits still less pleasing results. In architecture,
sculpture, and painting there was, no doubt, more and more general diffusion of dilettante interest, but the exercise of native art retrograded rather than advanced. It became more and more customary for those sojourning in Grecian lands personally to inspect the works of art; for which in particular the winter-quarters of Sulla’s army in Asia Minor in 67 0-671 formed an epoch. Connoisseur ship developed itself also in Italy. They had commenced
Cam’: book probably bore the title D: s'urir dircipline (Gell. xiii. 20), that of Brutus the title De iur: civili (Cie. pro Clueni. 5r, I4! D: Oraf. ii. 55. 223) that they were essentially collections of opinions. shown by Cicero (D: Oral. 33, 14a).
256
LITERATURE AND ART B001: rv
84-88.
ii.
;
is ;
1
(p.
a
a
can. :111 LITERATURE AND ART
551
with articles in silver and bronze; about the commence ment of this epoch they began to esteem not merely Greek statues, but also Greek pictures. The first picture publicly exhibited in Rome was the Bacchus of Aristides, which Lucius Mummius withdrew from the sale of the Corinthian spoil, because king Attalus offered as much as 6000 denarii (,52 60) for The buildings became more splendid; and
in particular transmarine, especially Hymettian, marble (Cipollino) came into use for that purpose—the Italian marble quarries were not yet in operation. A magnificent colonnade still admired in the time of the empire, which Quintus Metellus (consul in 611) the conqueror of Mace 1“. donia constructed in the Campus Martius, enclosed the
first marble temple which the capital had seen; was
soon followed by similar structures built on the Capitol
by Scipio Nasica (consul in 616), and near to the Circus 188.
by Gnaeus Octavius (consul in 626). The first private 128.
house adorned with marble columns was that of the orator
Lucius Crassus 663) on the Palatine 184). But 91.
where they could plunder or purchase, instead of creating
for themselves, they did so; was wretched indication
of the poverty of Roman architecture, that already began
to employ the columns of the old Greek temples; the
Roman Capitol, for instance, was embellished by Sulla
with those of the temple of Zeus at Athens. The works,
that were produced in Rome, proceeded from the hands of
foreigners; the few Roman artists of this period, who are
particularly mentioned, are without exception Italian or
transmarine Greeks who had migrated thither. Such was
the case with the architect Hermodorus from the Cyprian
Salamis, who among other works restored the Roman docks
and built for Quintus Metellus (consul in 611) the temple 148.
of Jupiter Stator in the basilica constructed
by him, and
for Decimus Brutus (consul in 616) the temple of Mars in 188.
the Flaminian circus; with the sculptor Pasiteles (about '01. . iv :17
a it
(p.
it
(1'
it
it.
258
LITERATURE AND ART I00! Iv
665) from Magna Graecia, who furnished images of the gods in ivory for Roman temples; and with the painter and philosopher Metrodorus of Athens, who was summoned to paint the pictures for the triumph of Lucius Paullus
167. (587). It is significant that the coins of this epoch exhibit in comparison with those of the previous period a greater
variety of types, but a retrogression rather than an improve ment in the cutting of the dies.
Finally, music and dancing passed over in like manner from Hellas to Rome, solely in order to be there applied to the enhancement of decorative luxury. Such foreign arts were certainly not new in Rome; the state had from olden time allowed Etruscan flute-players and dancers to appear at its festivals, and the freedmen and the lowest class of the Roman people had previously followed this trade. But it was a novelty that Greek dances and musical performances should form the regular accompaniment of a genteel banquet. Another novelty was a dancing-school, such as Scipio Aemilianus full of indignation describes in one of his speeches, in which upwards of five hundred boys and girls—the dregs of the people and the children of magistrates and of dignitaries mixed up together-—re ceived instruction from a ballet-master in far from decorous castanet-dances, in corresponding songs, and in the use of the proscribed Greek stringed instruments. It was a novelty too—not so much that a consular and pontgfex
183. maximur like Publius Scaevola (consul in 621) should catch the balls in the circus as nimbly as he solved the most complicated questions of law at home—as that young Romans of rank should display their jockey-arts before all the people at the festal games of Sulla. The government occasionally attempted to check such practices; as for
115. instance in 639, when all musical instruments, with the exception of the simple flute indigenous in Latium, were prohibited by the censors. But Rome was no Sparta; the
CHAP- xm LITERATURE AND ART
259
lax government by such prohibitions rather drew attention to the evils than attempted to remedy them by a sharp and consistent application of the laws.
in conclusion, we glance back at the picture as wh ale which the literature and art of Italy unfold to our view from the death of Ennius to the beginning of the Ciceronian age, we find in these respects as compared with the preceding epoch most decided decline of productive ness. The higher kinds of literature—such as tragedy, history—have died out or have been arrested in their development. The subordinate kinds—the trans lation and imitation of the intrigue-piece, the farce, the poetical and prose brochure—alone are successful; this last field of literature swept by the full hurricane of revolu tion we meet with the two men of greatest literary talent in
this epoch, Gaius Gracchus and Gaius Lucilius, who stand out amidst number of more or less mediocre writers just as in similar epoch of French literature Courier and Béranger stand out amidst multitude of pretentious nullities. In the plastic and delineative arts likewise the production, always weak, now utterly null. On the other hand the receptive enjoyment of art and literature flourished; as the Epigoni of this period in the political
field gathered in and used up the inheritance that fell to their fathers, we find them this field also as diligent frequenters of plays, as patrons of literature, as connoisseurs and still more as collectors in art. The most honourable aspect of this activity was its learned research, which put forth native intellectual energy, more especially in juris prudence and in linguistic and antiquarian investigation. The foundation of these sciences which properly falls within
the present epoch, and the first small beginnings of an imitation of the Alexandrian hothouse poetry, already herald the approaching epoch of Roman Alexandrinism. All the productions of the present epoch are smoother, more free
epos,
aa
a
is
in a
in
a
If,
a
260 LITERATURE AND ART BOOK W
from faults, more systematic than the creations of the sixth
The literati and the friends of literature of this period not altogether unjustly looked down on their pre decessors as bungling novices : but while they ridiculed or censured the defective labours of these novices, the very men who were the most gifted among them may have confessed to themselves that the season of the nation’s youth was past, and may have ever and anon perhaps felt in the still depths of the heart a secret longing to stray once more in the delightful paths of youthful error.
century.
BOOK FIFTH
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MILITARY MONARCHY
Wie er sich sieht so um und um,
Kehrt es ihm fast den Kopf herum,
Wie er wollt’ Worte zu allem finden?
Wie er möcht’ so viel Schwall verbinden? Wie er möcht’ immer muthig bleiben
So fort und wciter fort zu schreiben?
GOETHE.
CHAPTER I
unxcus minus AND qum'rus szn'romvs
WHEN Sulla died in the year 676, the oligarchy which he 78. ] The had restored ruled with absolute sway over the Roman Oppmmm‘ state; but, as it had been established by force, it still
needed force to maintain its ground against its numerous
secret and open foes. It was opposed not by any single
with objects clearly expressed and under leaders distinctly acknowledged, but by a mass of multifarious elements, ranging themselves doubtless under the general
name of the popular party, but in reality opposing the
Sullan organization of the commonwealth on very various grounds and with very different designs. There were the
men of positive law, who neither mingled in nor understood Iurists. politics, but who detested the arbitrary procedure of Sulla
in dealing with the lives and property of the burgesses.
Even during Sulla’s lifetime, when all other opposition was silent, the strict jurists resisted the regent; the Cornelian laws, for example, which deprived various Italian com munities of the Roman franchise, were treated in judicial decisions as null and void; and in like manner the courts held that, where a burgess had been made a prisoner of war and sold into slavery during the revolution, his franchise
was not forfeited. There was, further, the remnant of the Aristocrat!
party
old liberal minority in the senate, which 'in former times had laboured to effect a compromise with the reform party
'0
364
MARCUS LEPIDUS AND BOOK V
and the Italians, and was now in a similar spirit inclined
to modify the rigidly oligarchic constitution of Sulla by Democrats. concessions to the Populares. There were, moreover, the
Trans padanes.
89.
Freedmen.
Capitalists.
Roletarl nns of the spiral.
Populares strictly so called, the honestly credulous narrow minded radicals, who staked property and life for the current watchwords of the party-programme, only to dis cover with painful surprise after the victory that they had been fighting not for a reality, but for a phrase. Their special aim was to re-establish the tribunician power, which Sulla had not abolished but had divested of its most essential prerogatives, and which exercised over the multi tude a charm all the more mysterious, because the institution had no obvious practical use and was in fact an empty phantom-—the mere name of tribune of the people, more than a thousand years later, revolutionized Rome.
There were, above all, the numerous and important classes whom the Sullan restoration had left unsatisfied, or whose political or private interests it had directly injured. Among those who for such reasons belonged to the opposi- tion ranked the dense and prosperous population of the region between the Po and the Alps, which naturally re garded the bestowal of Latin rights in 66 5 (iii. 5I7, 527) as merely an instalment of the full Roman franchise, and so afforded a ready soil for agitation. To this category be longed also the freedmen, influential in numbers and wealth, and specially dangerous through their aggregation in the capital, who could not brook their having been reduced by the restoration to their earlier, practically useless, suffrage. In the same position stood, moreover, the great capitalists, who maintained a cautious silence, but still as before preserved their tenacity of resentment and their equal tenacity of power. The populace of the capital, which recognized true freedom in free bread-corn, was likewise discontented. Still deeper exasperation prevailed among the burgess-bodies affected by the Sullan confiscations—
CHAP- ! QUINTUS SERTORIUS 265
whether they, like those of Pompeii, lived on their property The dis curtailed by the Sullan colonists, within the same ring-wall possessed. with the latter, and at perpetual variance with them; or,
like the Arretines and Volaterrans, retained actual posses
sion of their territory, but had the Damocles’ sword of confiscation suspended over them by the Roman people; or, as was the case in Etruria especially, were reduced to be beggars in their former abodes, or robbers in the woods. Finally, the agitation extended to the whole family con nections and freedmen of those democratic chiefs who had lost their lives in consequence of the restoration, or who were wandering along the Mauretanian coasts, or sojourning at the court and in the army of Mithradates, in all the misery of emigrant exile; for, according to the strict family associations that governed the political feeling of this age, it was accounted a point of honour1 that those who were left behind should endeavour to procure for exiled relatives the privilege of returning to their native land, and, in the case of the dead, at least a removal of the stigma attaching to their memory and to their children, and a restitution to
the latter of their paternal estate. ‘ More especially the immediate children of the proscribed, whom the regent had reduced in point of law to political Pariahs 102), had thereby virtually received from the law itself summons to rise in rebellion against the existing order of things.
The proscribed and their adherents.
To all these sections of the opposition there was added Men d the whole body of men of ruined fortunes. All the rabble ruined
fortunfl high and ‘ow, whose means and substance had been spent
refined or in vulgar debauchery; the aristocratic lords, who had no tarther mark of quality than their debts; the Sullan troopers whom the regent’s fiat could transform into landholders but not into husbandmen, and who, after
It a significant trait, that a distinguished teacher of literature, the freedman Staberius Eros, allowed the children of the proscribed to attend his course gratuitously
1 is
in
a (p.
Men of ambition.
266 MARCUS LEPIDUS AND 1100! ! v
squandering the first inheritance of the proscribed, were longing to succeed to a second—all these waited only the unfolding of the banner which invited them to fight against the existing order of things, whatever else might be inscribed on it. Froma like necessity all the aspiring men of talent, in search of popularity, attached themselves to the opposi tion ; not only those to whom the strictly closed circle of the Optimates denied admission or at least opportunities for rapid promotion, and who therefore attempted to force their way into the phalanx and to break through the laws of oligarchic exclusiveness and seniority by means of popular favour, but also the more dangerous men, whose ambition aimed at something higher than helping to determine the destinies of the world within the sphere of collegiate intrigues. On the advocates’ platform in par ticular—the only field of legal opposition left open by Sulla—even in the regent’s lifetime such aspirants waged lively war against the restoration with the weapons of formal jurisprudence and combative oratory: for instance, the adroit speaker Marcus Tullius Cicero (born 3rd Janu
Power of the opposi tion.
Such was the sort of opposition with which the oligarchic
106. ary 648), son of a landholder of Arpinum, speedily made himself a name by the mingled caution and boldness of his opposition to the dictator. Such efforts were not of much importance, if the opponent desired nothing farther than by their means to procure for himself a curule chair, and then to sit in it in contentment for the rest of his life. No doubt, if this chair should not satisfy a popular man and Gaius Gracchus should find a successor, a struggle for life or death was inevitable; but for the present at least no name could be mentioned, the bearer of which had pro posed to himself any such lofty aim.
instituted by Sulla had to contend, when it had, earlier than Sulla himself probably expected, been thrown by his death on its own resources. The task wal
government
can. )
a'
QUINTUS SERTORIUS 267
in itself far from easy, and it was rendered more difficult by the other social and political evils of this age—especially by the extraordinary double difficulty of keeping the military chiefs in the provinces in subjection to the supreme civil magistracy, and of. dealing with the masses'of the Italian and extra-Italian populace accumulating in the capital, and
of the slaves living there to a great extent in d: fado freedom, without having troops at disposal. The senate was placed, as it were, in a fortress exposed and threatened on all sides, and serious conflicts could not fail to ensue. But the means of resistance organized by Sulla were con siderable and lasting; and, although the majority of the nation was manifestly disinclined to the government which Sulla had installed, and even animated by hostile feelings towards that government might very well maintain itself for long time in its stronghold against the distracted and confused mass of an opposition which was not agreed either as to end or means, and, having no head, was broken up
into hundred fragments. Only was necessary that should be determined to maintain its position, and should bring at least spark of that energy, which had built the fortress, to its defence; for in the case of garrison which will not defend itself, the greatest master of fortification constructs his walls and moats in vain.
The more everything ultimately depended on the
Want of leaders.
was not till this epoch that they became all-powerful, for was only now (first in 690) that their influence was H.
attested rather than checked legal measures ofrepression.
of the leading men on both sides, was the
more unfortunate that both, strictly speaking, lacked leaders. The politics of this period were thoroughly under Coterie the sway of the coterie-system in its worst form. This, system. indeed, was nothing new; close unions of families and
clubs were inseparable from an aristocratic organization of
the state, and had for centuries prevailed in Rome. But
personality
by
it it
it
a
it a
a a
it
it,
268 MARCUS LEI’IDUS AND BOOK 7
All persons of quality, those of popular leanings no less than the oligarchy proper, met in Hetaeriae ; the mass of the burgesses likewise, so far as they took any regular part in political events at all, formed according to their voting districts close unions with an almost military organization, which found their natural captains and agents in the presidents of the districts, “tribe-distributors”
(dz'vzkorer With these political clubs everything was bought
tn'buum).
and sold; the vote of the elector especially, but also the
votes of the senator and the judge, the fists too which pro duced the street riot, and the ringleaders who directed it— the associations of the upper and of the lower ranks were distinguished merely in the matter of tariff. The Hetaeria decided the elections, the Hetaeria decreed the impeach ments, the Hetaeria conducted the defence ; it secured the distinguished advocate, and in case of need it contracted for an acquittal with one of the speculators who pursued on a great scale lucrative dealings in judges’ votes. The
Hetaeria commanded by its compact bands the streets of the capital, and with the capital but too often the state. All these things were done in accordance with a certain rule, and, so to speak, publicly; the system of Hetaeriae was better organized and managed than any branch of state administration ; although there was, as is usual among civilized swindlers, a tacit understanding that there should be no direct mention of the nefarious proceedings, nobody made a secret of them, and advocates of repute were not ashamed to give open and intelligible hints of their relation to the Hetaeriae of their clients. If an individual was to be found here or there who kept aloof from such doings and yet did not forgo public life, he was assuredly, like Marcus Cato, a political Don Quixote. Parties and party— strife were superseded by the clubs and their rivalry;
was superseded by intrigue. A more than character, Publius Cethegus, formerly one of the
government equivocal
‘\;—'-\\
cruiP. l QUINTUS SERTORIUS 269
most zealous Marians, afterwards as a deserter received into favour by Sulla (p. 78), acted a most influential part in the political doings of this period-—unrivalled as a cunning tale-bearer and mediator between the sections of the senate, and as having a statesman’s acquaintance with the secrets of all cabals: at times the appointment to the most im portant posts of command was decided by a word from his mistress Praecia. Such a plight was only possible where none of the men taking part in politics rose above medio crity: any man of more than ordinary talent would have swept away this system of factions like cobwebs ; but there was in reality the saddest lack of men of political or military capacity.
Of the older generation the civil wars had left not a single man of repute except the old shrewd and eloquent Lucius Philippus (consul in 663), who, formerly of popular 91. leanings (iii. 38o), thereafter leader of the capitalist party against the senate (iii. 484), and closely associated with
the Marians (p. 70), and lastly passing over to the victorious oligarchy in sufficient time to earn thanks and commendation 78), had managed to escape between
the parties. Among the men of the following generation
the most notable chiefs of the pure aristocracy were Quintus Metellus Pius (consul 674), Sulla’s comrade in dangers
and victories; Quintus Lutatius Catulus, consul in the
year of Sulla’s death, 676, the son of the victor of Ver
cellae and two younger officers, the brothers Lucius and Marcus Lucullus, of whom the former had fought with distinction under Sulla in Asia, the latter in Italy; not to ‘mention Optimates like Quintus Hortensius (640-704), 114-50
who had importance only as pleader, or men like Decimus Junius Brutus (consul in 677), Mamercus Aemilius Lepidus 77
Livianus (consul in 67 and other such nullities, whose 77. best quality was euphonious aristocratic name. But even those four men rose little above the average calibre of the
Phflippul.
Metellus Catulus,
Luculll. 80.
78.
a
(p. in
7),
a
;
:70
MARCUS LEPIDUS AND BOOK v
Optimates of this age. Catulus was like his father a man of refined culture and an honest aristocrat, but of moderate talents and, in particular, no soldier. Metellus was not merely estimable in his personal character, but an able and experienced oflicer ; and it was not so much on account of his close relations as a kinsman and colleague with the regent as because of his recognized ability that he was sent
19. in 67 5, after resigning the consulship, to Spain, where the
Lusitanians and the Roman emigrants under
Sertorius were bestirring themselves afresh. The two Luculli were also capable officers—particularly the elder, who combined very respectable military talents with thorough literary culture and leanings to authorship, and appeared honourable also as a man. But, as statesmen, even these better aristocrats were not much less remiss and shortsighted than the average senators of the time. In presence of an outward foe the more eminent among them, doubtless,
proved themselves useful and brave; but no one of them evinced the desire or the skill to solve the problems of politics proper, and to guide the vessel of the state through the stormy sea of intrigues and factions as a true pilot. Their political wisdom was limited to a sincere belief in the oligarchy as the sole means of salvation, and to a cordial hatred and courageous execration of demagogism as well as of every individual authority which sought to emancipate itself. Their petty ambition was contented with little. The stories told of Metellus in Spain—that he not only allowed himself to be delighted with the far from harmonious lyre of the Spanish occasional poets, but even I wherever he went had himself received like a god with libations of wine and odours of incense, and at table had
his head crowned by descending Victories amidst theatrical thunder with the golden laurel of the conqueror—are no better attested than most historical anecdotes; but even such gossip reflects the degenerate ambition of the genera
Quintus
can. I QUINTUS SERTORIUS z7t
tions of Epigoni. Even the better men were content when they had gained not power and influence, but the consul ship and a triumph and a place of honour in the senate; and at the very time when with right ambition they would have just begun to be truly useful to their country and their party, they retired from the political stage to be lost in princely luxury. Men like Metellus and Lucius Lucullus were, even as generals, not more attentive to the enlarge
ment of the Roman dominion by fresh conquests of kings and peoples than to the enlargement of the endless game, poultry, and dessert lists of Roman gastronomy by new delicacies from Africa and Asia Minor, and they wasted the best part of their lives in more or less ingenious idle ness. The traditional aptitude and the individual self denial, on which all oligarchic government is based, were lost in the decayed and artificially restored Roman aristo cracy of this age; in its judgment universally the spirit of clique was accounted as patriotism, vanity as ambition, and narrow-mindedness as consistency. Had the Sullan con
stitution passed into the guardianship of men such as have sat in the Roman College of Cardinals or the Venetian Council of Ten, we cannot tell whether the opposition would have been able to shake it so soon; with such de fend rs every attack involved, at all events, a serious peril.
f the men, who were neither unconditional adherents Pompeius. nor open opponents of the Sullan constitution, no one
attracted more the eyes of the multitude than the young
Gnaeus Pompeius, who was at the time of Sulla’s death twenty-eight years of age,. (born 29th September 648). 106. The fact was a misfortune for the admired as well as for
the admirers; but it was natural. Sound in body and mind, a capable athlete, who even when a superior oflicer vied with his soldiers in leaping, running, and lifting, a
and skilled rider and fencer, a bold leader of volunteer bands, the youth had become imperator and
vigorous
MARCUS LEPIDUS AND 800! v triumphator at an age which excluded him from every
272
magistracy and from the senate, and had
acquired the
firstplace nextutowwg§pll‘awgln'flblic opinion; nay, had ob tained from the indulgent regent himself—half in recogni
tion, half in irony—the surname of the Great. Unhappily, his mental endowml'e“nt'smbymrresponded with these unprecedented successes. flelainwejthgavbmor an incapable man, but a man thoroughly ordinary, created by nature to be a good sergeant, called by circumstances to be a general and a statesman. An intelligent, brave and experienced, thoroughly excellent soldier, he was still, even in his military capacity, without traceaufmany higher gifts. It was characteristic of him as a general, as we as in other respects, to set to work with a caution bordering on timidity, and, if possible, to give the decisive
blow only when he had established. an
over his opponent. His culture was the average culture of the time; although entirely a soldier, he did not neglect, when he went to Rhodes, dutifully to admire, and to make presents to, the rhetoricians there. His integrity was that of a rich man who manages with discretion his considerable property inherited and acquired. He did not disdain to make money in the usual senatorial way, but hemgw cold and too rich to incur special risks, or draw down on himself conspicuous disgrace, on that account. The vice l0 much in vogue among his contemporaries, rather than any virtue of his own, procured for him the reputation comparatively, no doubt, well warranted—of integrity and disinterestedness. His honest countenance” became almost proverbial, and even after'hisnd'e'atlithemwgsfitggngd vas worthy and moral man he was in fact good neigh
bour, who did not join in the revolting schemes by which the grandees of that age extended the bounds of their domains through forced sales or measures still worse at the expense of their humbler neighbours, and in domestic
a
v‘‘ 5
a
can. I QUINTUS SERTORIUS :73
life he displayed attachment to his wife and children: it
redounds moreover to his credit that he was ’tliigfiiirsgfito
magmas www.
depart from the bgrbarous custom of ppuittiiig’to ‘death the
of the enemy,vafter they had been exhibited in triumph. But this did not prevent him
beloved wife at the command pf
because she belonged to an outlawed'family, nornfr'oin ordering with great composure
that men wligwhad stoodby him and helped him in times of‘di-fh“cfvu-it'ywshggld be. executed before his eyes at the nod
qf tlié'salns ‘Bests! (o 9s)= hcwasxwt 231. 161, thaqgb be was reproached with being so, but—what perhaps was
worser-hslwasicjiléafiljngoéd as ‘in evil, unimpassioned.
In the tumult of battle he facedwthmfieefirlgmymtlemalleisly; in civillife he was a shy man, whose cheek flushed on the
slightest occasion; he spoke in public not without embar
rassment, and generally was angular, stifl‘, and awkward
in intercourse. Wgt' b all his haughtxpbstinacy he
indeed persons ordinarily are, who make a display of their iiidéperidé’r'ic’él-'a pliant tool in the hands” of men who knew how tomanag'c him‘f'é'éfiééiany of his freedmen . and clientsfby‘whpgi hehad. no fear. . of being controlled. For nothing was he less Qualified than for a statesman. Uncer tain as rb'h'is'aiiiié,“ unskilfulmirihevchoice of his means, alike invlittle and greatmatters shortsighted and helpless, he was ‘$011: to ‘conceal his irresolution and indecision under; a solemnmsilence, ‘and, when he thought to play a subtle g'ahiefsimply to deceive himself with the belief that he was deceiving others. By his military position and his territorial connections he acquired almost without any action of his own am considerable party personally
tojiyl withsvzfiishgthsu :éitestthinss might have been
iccomplished J'wgbw\v1vtwliompeiuswwas in every respect incap able of leading and keeping together a party, and, if it still kept together, it did so—in like manner without his action
' VOL IV :18
hishlord and master Sulla,
devoted
274
MARCUS LEPIDUS AND BOOK v
—through the sheer force of circumstances. In this, as in other things, he reminds us of Marius; but Marius, with his nature of boorish roughness and sensuous passion, was still less intolerable than this most tiresome and most starched of all artificial great men. His political position was utterly perverse. He was a Sullan officenand under
obligation to stand up for the restoredconstitiitipmiiiyet again in opposition to Sulla personally as well asgtvo the
whole senatorial government. The genrfofwthg ,Bgmpgji,
which had only been named for spume sixtywygavrsu in the
consular lists, had by no means acquired full standingjn
the ‘53%;? the aristocracy; even the father of thislfgmpgius
had‘occupied a very invidious equivocal positioaatowards
the senate (iii. 546, p. 61), and he himself had onceggegn ihwtqhgnranks of the Cinnans 85)-—recollect' us which
were suppressed perhaps, but not forgotten. “The promi nent position which Pompeius acquired for himself under Sulla set him at inward variance with the aristocracy, quite as much as brought him into outward connection with itmeak-headed as he was, Pompeius was seized with giddiness on the height of glory which he had climbed with such dangerous rapidity and ease. Just as he would himself ridicule his dry prosaic nature by the parallel with the most poetical of all heroic figures, he began to compare himself with Alexander the Great, and to account himself man of unique standing, whom did not beseem to be merely one of the five hundred senators of Rome: In reality, no one was more fitted to take his place as member of an aristocratic government than Pompeius. His dignified outward appearance, his solemn formality, his personal bravery, his decorous private life, his want of all initiative might have gained for him, had he been born two hundred years earlier, an honourable place the side of Quintus Maximus and Publius Decius: this mediocrity, so characteristic of the genuine Optimate and the genuine
by
a
a
it
if
it
(p.
can). I QUINTUS SERTORIUS 275
Roman, contributed not a little to the elective aflinity which subsisted at all times between Pompeius and the mass of the burgesses and the senate. Even in his own age he would have had a clearly defined and respectable
position, had he contented himself with being the general of the senate, for which he was from the outset destined. With
this he was not content, and so he fell into the fatal plight of wishing to be something else than he could be. He was constantly aspiring to a special position in the state, and, when it offered itself, he could not make up his mind to occupy it; he was deeply indignant when persons and laws did not bend unconditionally before him, and yet he everywhere bore himself with no mere affectation of modesty as one of many peers, and trembled at the mere thought of undertaking anything unconstitutional. Thus constantly at fundamental variance with, and yet at the same time the obedient servant of, the oligarchy, constantly tormented by an ambition which was frightened at its own aims, his much-agitated life passed joylessly away in a per petual inward contradiction.
Marcus Crassus cannot, any more than Pompeius, be Crassus reckoned among the unconditional adherents of the oli
garchy. He is a personage highly characteristic of this epoch.
Like Pompeius, whose senior he was by a few years, he belonged to the circle of the high Roman aristocracy, had obtained the usual education befitting his rank, and had
like Pompeius fought with distinction under Sulla in the Italian war. Far inferior to many of his peers in mental gifts, literary culture, and military talent, he outstripped them by his boundless activity, and by the perseverance with which he strove to possess everything and to become all-important. Above all, he threw himself into specula tion. Purchases of estates during the revolution formed the foundation of his wealth ; but he disdained no branch of gain; he carried on the business of building in the
his colleagues
account.
He was far from nice in the matter of making On occasion of the Sullan proscriptions a forgery
MARCUS LEPIDUS AND I00! V
on a great scale and with prudence; he entered
376
Rome, in person or by his agents; he advanced money to
capital
into partnership
undertakings; he acted as banker both in and out of
with his freedmen in the most varied
in the senate, and undertook—as it might happen—to execute works or to bribe the tribunals on their
profit.
in the lists had been proved against him, for which reason
Sulla made no more use of him thenceforward in the affairs
he did not refuse to accept an inheritance, because the testamentary document which contained his name was notoriously forged; he made no objection, when his bailifl‘s by force or by fraud dislodged the petty holders
of state:
his own. He avoided open collisions, however, with criminal justice, and lived himself like a genuine moneyed man in homely and simple style. In this way Crassus rose in the course of a few years from
a man of ordinary senatorial fortune to be the master of wealth which not long before his death, after defraying
from lands which adjoined
enormous
extraordinary expenses, sesterces (£r,7oo,ooo).
still amounted to He had become the
170,000,000
richest of Romans and thereby, at the same time, a great
If, according to his expression, no one might call himself rich who could not maintain an army from his revenues, one who could do this was hardly any
longer a mere citizen. In reality the views of Crassus aimed at a higher object than the possession of the best
political power.
in Rome. He grudged no pains to
filled money-chest
extend his connections.
every burgess of the capital.
his assistance in court. Nature, indeed, had not done
much for him as an orator: his speaking was dry, his delivery monotonous, he had difficulty of hearing; but his tenacity of purpose, which no wearisomeness deterred and
He knew how to salute by name He refused to no suppliant
can. t QUINTUS SERTORIUS 277
no enjoyment distracted, overcame such obstacles. He never appeared unprepared, he never extemporized, and so he became a pleader at all times in request and at all times ready; to whom it was no derogation that a cause was rarely too bad for him, and that he knew how to influence the judges not merely by his oratory, but also by his connections and, on occasion, by his gold. Half the senate was in debt to him; his habit of advancing to “friends” money without interest revocable at pleasure rendered a number of influential men dependent on him, and the more so that, like a genuine man of business, he made no distinction among the parties, maintained connec tions on all hands, and readily lent to every one who was able to pay or otherwise useful. The most daring party leaders, who made their attacks recklessly in all directions, were careful not to quarrel with Crassus; he was compared to the bull of the herd, whom it was advisable for none to provoke. That such a man, so disposed and so situated, could not strive after humble aims is clear; and, in a very different way from Pompeius, Crassus knew exactly like a banker the objects and the means of political speculation. From the origin of Rome capital was a political power
there; the age was of such a sort, that everything seemed accessible to gold as to iron. If in the time of revolution a capitalist aristocracy might have thought of overthrowing the oligarchy of the gem’er, a man like Crassus might raise
his eyes higher than to the farm‘ and embroidered mantle of the triumphators. For the moment he was a Sullan and adherent of the senate; but he was too much of a financier to devote himself to a definite political party, or to pursue aught else than his personal advantage. Why should Crassus, the wealthiest and most intriguing man in Rome, and no penurious miser but a speculator on the greatest scale, not speculate also on the crown? Alone,
he could not attain this object; but he had
perhaps,
Leaders
of the democrats.
already carried out various great transactions in partner ship; it was not impossible that for this also a suitable partner might present himself. It is a trait characteristic of the time, that a mediocre orator and oflicer, a politician who took his activity for energy and his covetousness for ambition, one who at bottom had nothing but a colossal fortune and the mercantile talent of forming connections— that such a man, relying on the omnipotence of coteries and intrigues, could deem himself on a level with the first generals and statesmen of his day, and could contend with them for the highest prize which allures political ambition.
In the opposition proper, both among the liberal con servatives and among the Populares, the storms of revolu tion had made fearful havoc. Among the former, the only
278
MARCUS LEPIDUS AND BOOK v
124-78. surviving man of note was Gaius Cotta (630-0. 681), the 91. friend and ally of Drusus, and as such banished in 663 (iii. 503), and then by Sulla’s victory brought back to his native land 112) he was shrewd man and a capable advocate, but not called, either by the weight of his party
62.
or by that of his personal standing, to act more than a respectable secondary part. In the democratic party, among the rising youth, Gaius Julius Caesar, who was
102. twenty-four years of age (born I2 July 52 ? 1), drew
100. It usual to set down the year 54 as that of Caesar's birth, because according to Suetonius (Cacr. 88), Plutarch (Cuer. 69), and Anpian (5. 6‘. 44. ii. 149) he was at his death March 710) in his 56th year with which also the statement that he was 18 years old at the time of the Sullan
82. prescription (672; Vell.