When did the Roman power
decline?
Oliver Goldsmith
How was the comitium consecrated?
4. What was the first addition made to Rome?
5. What was the next addition?
6. Into what tribes were the Romans divided?
7. What were the hills added in later times to Rome?
8. Had the Romans any buildings north of the Tiber?
9. When did Rome become a magnificent city?
10. What was the extent of the city?
11. How was the city divided?
12. Which was the most remarkable of the seven hills?
13. What buildings were on the Capitoline hill?
14. What description is given of the forum?
15. Where was the senate-house and comitium?
16. What use was made of the Campus Martius?
17. What was the Pantheon?
18. Were the theatres and circii remarkable?
19. Had the Romans public baths?
20. How was the city supplied with water?
21. Were the cloacæ remarkable for their size?
22. Which was the chief Italian road?
23. What were the most remarkable places on the Appian road?
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Hence a gate was called _porta_, from _porta're_, to carry. The
reason of this part of the ceremony was, that the plough being deemed
holy, it was unlawful that any thing unclean should pollute the place
which it had touched; but it was obviously necessary that things clean
and unclean should pass through the gates of the city. It is
remarkable that all the ceremonies here mentioned were imitated from
the Tuscans.
[2] This, though apparently a mere conjecture, has been so fully
proved by Niebuhr, (vol. i. p. 251,) that it may safely be assumed as
an historical fact.
[3] See Chapter II. of the following history.
[4] All authors are agreed that the Coelian hill was named from
Coeles Viben'na, a Tuscan chief; but there is a great variety in the
date assigned to his settlement at Rome. Some make him cotemporary
with Rom'ulus, others with the elder Tarquin, or Servius Tullius. In
this uncertainty all that can be satisfactorily determined is, that at
some early period a Tuscan colony settled in Rome.
[5] Others say that they were named so in honour of Lu'ceres, king of
Ardea, according to which theory the third would have been a
Pelasgo-Tyrrhenian colony.
[6] We shall hereafter have occasion to remark, that the Lu'ceres were
subject to the other tribes.
[7] See History, Chapter IV.
[8] The Pincian and Vatican hills were added at a much later period
and these, with Janiculum, made the number ten.
[9] They were named as follow:
1. Porta Cape'na 2. Coelimon'tium 3. I'sis and Sera'pis 4. Via
Sa'cra 5. Esquili'na 6. Acta Se'mita 7. Vita Lata 8. Forum Roma'num 9.
Circus Flamin'ius 10. Pala'tium 11. Circus Max'imus 12. Pici'na
Pub'lica 13. Aventinus 14. Transtiberi'na.
The divisions made by Servius were named: the Suburan, which comprised
chiefly the Coelian mount; the Colline, which included the Viminal
and Quirinal hills; the Esquiline and Palatine, which evidently
coincided with the hills of the same name.
[10] Among the public buildings of ancient Rome, when in her zenith,
are numbered 420 temples, five regular theatres, two amphitheatres,
and seven circusses of vast extent; sixteen public baths, fourteen
aqueducts, from which a prodigious number of fountains were constantly
supplied; innumerable palaces and public halls, stately columns,
splendid porticos, and lofty obelisks.
[11] From _caput_, "a head. "
[12] State criminals were punished by being precipitated from the
Tarpeian rock; the soil has been since so much raised by the
accumulation of ruins, that a fall from it is no longer dangerous.
[13] In the reign of Numa, the Quirinal hill was deemed the citadel of
Rome; an additional confirmation of Niebuhr's theory, that Quirium was
a Sabine town, which, being early absorbed in Rome, was mistaken by
subsequent, writers for Cu'res.
[14] Basilicks were spacious halls for the administration of justice.
[15] It is called _Templum_ by Livy; but the word templum with the
Romans does not mean an edifice, but a consecrated inclosure. From its
position, we may conjecture that the forum was originally a place of
meeting common to the inhabitants of the Sabine town on the Quirinal,
and the Latin town on the Palatine hill.
[16] See Chap. XII. Sect. V. of the following History.
[17] See the following chapter.
* * * * *
CHAPTER IV.
THE ROMAN CONSTITUTION.
As once in virtue, so in vice extreme,
This universal fabric yielded loose,
Before ambition still; and thundering down,
At last beneath its ruins crush'd a world. --_Thomson_.
I. The most remarkable feature in the Roman constitution is the
division of the people into Patricians and Plebeians, and our first
inquiry must be the origin of this separation. It is clearly
impossible that such a distinction could have existed from the very
beginning, because no persons would have consented in a new community
to the investing of any class with peculiar privileges. We find that
all the Roman kings, after they had subdued a city, drafted a portion
of its inhabitants to Rome; and if they did not destroy the subjugated
place, garrisoned it with a Roman colony. The strangers thus brought
to Rome were not admitted to a participation of civic rights; they
were like the inhabitants of a corporate town who are excluded from
the elective franchise: by successive immigrations, the number of
persons thus disqualified became more numerous than that of the first
inhabitants or old freemen, and they naturally sought a share in the
government, as a means of protecting their persons and properties. On
the other hand, the men who possessed the exclusive power of
legislation, struggled hard to retain their hereditary privileges, and
when forced to make concessions, yielded as little as they
possibly could to the popular demands. Modern history furnishes us
with numerous instances of similar struggles between classes, and of a
separation in interests and feelings between inhabitants of the same
country, fully as strong as that between the patricians and plebeians
at Rome.
2. The first tribes were divided by Ro'mulus into thirty _cu'riæ,_ and
each cu'ria contained ten _gentes_ or associations. The individuals of
each gens were not in all cases, and probably not in the majority of
instances, connected by birth;[1] the attributes of the members of a
_gens_, according to Cicero, were, a common name and participation in
private religious rites; descent from free ancestors; the absence of
legal disqualification. 3. The members of these associations were
united by certain laws, which conferred peculiar privileges, called
jura gentium; of these the most remarkable were, the succession to the
property of every member who died without kin and intestate, and the
obligation imposed on all to assist their indigent fellows under any
extraordinary burthen. [2] 4. The head of each gens was regarded as a
kind of father, and possessed a paternal authority over the members;
the chieftancy was both elective and hereditary;[3] that is, the
individual was always selected from some particular family.
5. Besides the members of the gens, there were attached to it a number
of dependents called clients, who owed submission to the chief as
their patron, and received from him assistance and protection. The
clients were generally foreigners who came to settle at Rome, and not
possessing municipal rights, were forced to appear in the courts of
law, &c. by proxy. In process of time this relation assumed a feudal
form, and the clients were bound to the same duties as vassals[4] in
the middle ages.
6. The chiefs of the gentes composed the senate, and were called
"fathers," (patres. ) In the time of Romulus, the senate at first
consisted only of one hundred members, who of course represented the
Latin tribe Ramne'nses; the number was doubled after the union with
the Sabines, and the new members were chosen from the Titienses. The
Tuscan tribe of the Lu'ceres remained unrepresented in the senate
until the reign of the first Tarquin, when the legislative body
received another hundred[5] from that tribe. Tarquin the elder was,
according to history, a Tuscan Iticumo, and seems to have owed his
elevation principally to the efforts of his compatriots settled at
Rome. It is to this event we must refer, in a great degree, the number
of Tuscan ceremonies which are to be found in the political
institutions of the Romans.
7. The gentes were not only represented in the senate, but met also in
a public assembly called "comitia curiata. " In these comitia the kings
were elected and invested with royal authority. After the complete
change of the constitution in later ages, the "comitia curiata"[6]
rarely assembled, and their power was limited to religious matters;
but during the earlier period of the republic, they claimed and
frequently exercised the supreme powers of the state, and were named
emphatically, The People.
8. The power and prerogatives of the kings at Rome, were similar to
those of the Grecian sovereigns in the heroic ages. The monarch was
general of the army, a high priest,[7] and first magistrate of the
realm; he administered justice in person every ninth day, but an
appeal lay from his sentence, in criminal cases, to the general
assemblies of the people. The pontiffs and augurs, however, were
in some measure independent of the sovereign, and assumed the
uncontrolled direction of the religion of the state.
9. The entire constitution was remodelled by Ser'vius Tul'lius, and a
more liberal form of government introduced. His first and greatest
achievement was the formation of the plebeians into an organized order
of the state, invested with political rights. He divided them into
four cities and twenty-six rustic tribes, and thus made the number of
tribes the same as that of the curiæ. This was strictly a geographical
division, analagous to our parishes, and had no connection with
families, like that of the Jewish tribes.
10. Still more remarkable was the institution of the census, and the
distribution of the people into classes and centuries proportionate to
their wealth. The census was a periodical valuation of all the
property possessed by the citizens, and an enumeration of all the
subjects of the state: there were five classes, ranged according to
the estimated value of their possessions, and the taxes they
consequently paid. The first class contained eighty centuries out of
the hundred and seventy; the sixth class, in which those were included
who were too poor to be taxed, counted but for one. We shall,
hereafter have occasion to see that this arrangement was also used for
military purposes; it is only necessary to say here, that the sixth
class were deprived of the use of arms, and exempt from serving in
war.
11. The people voted in the comitia centuriata by centuries; that is,
the vote of each century was taken separately and counted only as one.
By this arrangement a just influence was secured to property; and the
clients of the patricians in the sixth class prevented from
out-numbering the free citizens.
12. Ser'vius Tul'lius undoubtedly intended that the comitia centuriata
should form the third estate of the realm, and during his reign they
probably held that rank; but when, by an aristocratic insurrection he
was slain in the senate-house, the power conceded to the people was
again usurped by the patricians, and the comitio centuriata did not
recover the right[8] of legislation before the laws[9] of the twelve
tables were established.
13. The law which made the debtor a slave to his creditor was repealed
by Ser'vius, and re-enacted by his successor; the patricians preserved
this abominable custom during several ages, and did not resign it
until the state had been brought to the very brink of ruin.
14. During the reign of Ser'vius, Rome was placed at the head of the
Latin confederacy, and acknowledged to be the metropolitan city. It
was deprived of this supremacy after the war with Porsen'na, but soon
recovered its former greatness.
15. The equestrian rank was an order in the Roman state from the very
beginning. It was at first confined to the nobility, and none but the
patricians had the privilege of serving on horseback. But in the later
ages, it became a political dignity, and persons were raised to the
equestrian rank by the amount of their possessions.
16. The next great change took place after the expulsion of the kings;
annual magistrates, called consuls, were elected in the comitia
centuriata, but none but patricians could hold this office. 17. The
liberties of the people were soon after extended and secured by
certain laws, traditionally attributed to Vale'rius Public'ola, of
which the most important was that which allowed[10] an appeal to a
general assembly of the people from the sentence of a magistrate. 18.
To deprive the plebeians of this privilege was the darling object of
the patricians, and it was for this purpose alone that they instituted
the dictatorship. From the sentence of this magistrate there was no
appeal to the tribes or centuries, but the patricians kept their own
privilege of being tried before the tribunal of the curiæ. 19. The
power of the state was now usurped by a factious oligarchy, whose
oppressions were more grievous than those of the worst tyrant; they at
last became so intolerable, that the commonalty had recourse to arms,
and fortified that part of the city which was exclusively inhabited by
the plebeians, while others formed a camp on the Sacred Mount at some
distance from Rome. A tumult of this kind was called a secession; it
threatened to terminate in a civil war, which would have been both
long and doubtful; for the patricians and their clients were probably
as numerous as the people. A reconciliation was effected, and the
plebeians placed under the protection of magistrates chosen from their
own body, called tribunes of the people.
20. The plebeians, having now authorised leaders, began to struggle
for an equalization of rights, and the patricians resisted them with
the most determined energy. In this protracted contest the popular
cause prevailed, though the patricians made use of the most violent
means to secure their usurped powers. The first triumph obtained by
the people was the right to summon patricians before the comitia
tributa, or assemblies of people in tribes; soon after they obtained
the privilege of electing their tribunes at these comitia, instead of
the centuria'ta; and finally, after a fierce opposition, the
patricians were forced to consent that the state should be governed by
a written code.
21. The laws of the twelve tables did not alter the legal relations
between the citizens; the struggle was renewed with greater violence
than ever after the expulsion of the decem'viri, but finally
terminated in the complete triumph of the people. The Roman
constitution became essentially democratical; the offices of the state
were open to all the citizens; and although the difference between the
patrician and plebeian families still subsisted, they soon ceased of
themselves to be political parties. From the time that equal rights
were granted to all the citizens, Rome advanced rapidly in wealth and
power; the subjugation of Italy was effected within the succeeding
century, and that was soon followed by foreign conquests.
22. In the early part of the struggle between the patricians and
plebeians, the magistracy, named the censorship, was instituted. The
censors were designed at first merely to preside over the taking of
the census, but they afterwards obtained the power of punishing, by a
deprivation of civil rights, those who were guilty of any flagrant
immorality. The patricians retained exclusive possession of the
censorship, long after the consulship had been opened to the
plebeians.
23. The senate,[11] which had been originally a patrician
council, was gradually opened to the plebeians; when the free
constitution was perfected, every person possessing a competent
fortune that had held a superior magistracy, was enrolled as a senator
at the census immediately succeeding the termination of his office.
_Questions for Examination_.
1. What is the most probable account given of the origin of the
distinction between the patricians and the plebeians at Rome?
2. How did Romulus subdivide the Roman tribes?
3. By what regulations were the gentes governed?
4. Who were the chiefs of the gentes?
5. What was the condition of the clients?
6. By whom were alterations made in the number and constitution of the
senate?
7. What assembly was peculiar to the patricians?
8. What were the powers of the Roman kings?
9. What great change was made in the Roman constitution by Servius
Tullius?
10. For what purpose was the census instituted?
11. How were votes taken in the comitia centuriata?
12. Were the designs of Servius frustrated?
13. What was the Roman law respecting debtors?
14.
When did the Roman power decline?
15. What changes were made in the constitution of the equestrian rank?
16. What change was made after the abolition of royalty?
17. How were the liberties of the people secured?
18. Why was the office of dictator appointed?
19. How did the plebeians obtain the protection of magistrates chosen
from their own order?
20. What additional triumphs were obtained by the plebeians?
21. What was the consequence of the establishment of freedom?
22. For what purpose was the censorship instituted?
23. What change took place in the constitution of the senate?
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The same remark may be applied to the Scottish clans and the
ancient Irish septs, which were very similar to the Roman _gentes_.
[2] When the plebeians endeavoured to procure the repeal of the laws
which prohibited the intermarriage of the patricians and plebeians,
the principal objection made by the former was, that these rights and
obligations of the gentes (jura gentium) would be thrown into
confusion.
[3] This was also the case with the Irish tanists, or chiefs of septs;
the people elected a tanist, but their choice was confined to the
members of the ruling family.
[4] See Historical Miscellany Part III. Chap. i.
[5] They were called "patres nunorum gentium," the senators of the
inferior gentes.
[6] The "comitia curiata," assembled in the comi'tium, the general
assemblies of the people were held in the forum. The patrician curiæ
were called, emphatically, the council of the people; (concilium
populi;) the third estate was called plebeian, (plebs. ) This
distinction between _populus_ and _plebs_ was disregarded after the
plebeians had established their claim to equal rights. The English
reader will easily understand the difference, if he considers that the
patricians were precisely similar to the members of a close
corporation, and the plebeians to the other inhabitants of a city. In
London, for example, the common council may represent the senate, the
livery answer for the populus, patricians, or comitia curiata, and the
general body of other inhabitants will correspond with the plebs.
[7] There were certain sacrifices which the Romans believed could only
be offered by a king; after the abolition of royalty, a priest, named
the petty sacrificing king, (rex sacrificulus,) was elected to perform
this duty.
[8] Perhaps it would be more accurate to say the _exclusive_ right of
legislation; for it appears that the comitia centuriata were sometimes
summoned to give their sanction to laws which had been previously
enacted by the curiæ.
[9] See Chap. XII.
[10] The Romans were previously acquainted with that great principle
of justice, the right of trial by a person's peers. In the earliest
ages the patricians had a right of appeal to the curiæ; the Valerian
laws extended the same right to the plebeians.
[11] The senators were called conscript fathers, (patres conscripti,)
either from their being enrolled on the censor's list, or more
probably from the addition made to their numbers after the expulsion
of the kings, in order to supply the places of those who had been
murdered by Tarquin. The new senators were at first called conscript,
and in the process of time the name was extended to the entire body.
* * * * *
CHAPTER V.
THE ROMAN TENURE OF LAND--COLONIAL GOVERNMENT.
Each rules his race, his neighbour not his care,
Heedless of others, to his own severe. --_Homer_.
[As this chapter is principally designed for advanced students, it has
not been thought necessary to add questions for examination. ]
The contests respecting agrarian laws occupy so large a space in Roman
history, and are so liable to be misunderstood, that it is necessary
to explain their origin at some length. According to an almost
universal custom, the right of conquest was supposed to involve the
property of the land. Thus the Normans who assisted William I. were
supposed to have obtained a right to the possessions of the Saxons;
and in a later age, the Irish princes, whose estates were not
confirmed by a direct grant from the English crown, were exposed to
forfeiture when legally summoned to prove their titles. The extensive
acquisitions made by the Romans, were either formed into extensive
national domains, or divided into small lots among the poorer classes.
The usufruct of the domains was monopolized by the patricians who
rented them from the state; the smaller lots were assigned to the
plebeians, subject to a tax called tribute, but not to rent. An
agrarian law was a proposal to make an assignment of portions of the
public lands to the people, and to limit the quantity of national land
that could be farmed by any particular patrician. [1] Such a law may
have been frequently impolitic, because it may have disturbed ancient
possessions, but it could never have been unjust; for the property of
the land was absolutely fixed in the state. The lands held by the
patricians, being divided into extensive tracts, were principally used
for pasturage; the small lots assigned to the plebeians were, of
necessity, devoted to agriculture. Hence arose the first great cause
of hostility between the two orders; the patricians were naturally
eager to extend their possessions in the public domains, which enabled
them to provide for their numerous clients, and in remote districts
they frequently wrested the estates from the free proprietors in their
neighbourhood; the plebeians, on the other hand, deemed that they
had the best right to the land purchased by their blood, and saw with
just indignation, the fruits of victory monopolized by a single order
in the state. The tribute paid by the plebeians increased this
hardship, for it was a land-tax levied on estates, and consequently
fell most heavily on the smaller proprietors; indeed, in many cases,
the possessors of the national domains paid nothing.
From all this it is evident that an agrarian law only removed tenants
who held from the state at will, and did not in any case interfere
with the sacred right of property; but it is also plain that such a
change must have been frequently inconvenient to the individual in
possession. It also appears, that had not agrarian laws been
introduced, the great body of the plebeians would have become the
clients of the patricians, and the form of government would have been
a complete oligarchy.
The chief means to which the Romans, even from the earliest ages, had
recourse for securing their conquests, and at the same time relieving
the poorer classes of citizens, was the establishment of colonies in
the conquered states. The new citizens formed a kind of garrison, and
were held together by a constitution formed on the model of the parent
state. From what has been said above, it is evident that a law for
sending out a colony was virtually an agrarian law, since lands were
invariably assigned to those who were thus induced to abandon their
homes.
The relations between Rome and the subject cities in Italy were very
various. Some, called _municipia_, were placed in full possession of
the rights of Roman citizens, but could not in all cases vote in the
comitia. The privileges of the colonies were more restricted, for they
were absolutely excluded from the Roman comitia and magistracies. The
federative[2] states enjoyed their own constitutions, but were bound
to supply the Romans with tribute and auxiliary forces. Finally, the
subject states were deprived of their internal constitutions, and were
governed by annual prefects chosen in Rome.
Before discussing the subject of the Roman constitution, we must
observe that it was, like our own, gradually formed by practice; there
was no single written code like those of Athens and Sparta, but
changes were made whenever they were required by circumstances; before
the plebeians obtained an equality of civil rights, the state neither
commanded respect abroad, nor enjoyed tranquillity at home. The
patricians sacrificed their own real advantages, as well as the
interests of their country, to maintain an ascendancy as injurious to
themselves, as it was unjust to the other citizens. But no sooner had
the agrarian laws established a more equitable distribution of
property, and other popular laws opened the magistracy to merit
without distinction of rank, than the city rose to empire with
unexampled rapidity.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The Licinian law provided that no one should rent at a time more
than 500 acres of public land.
[2] The league by which the Latin states were bound (jus Latii) was
more favourable than that granted to the other Italians (jus
Italicum. )
* * * * *
CHAPTER VI.
THE ROMAN RELIGION.
First to the gods 'tis fitting to prepare
The due libation, and the solemn prayer;
For all mankind alike require their grace,
All born to want; a miserable race. --_Homer_.
1. We have shown that the Romans were, most probably, a people
compounded of the Latins, the Sabines, and the Tuscans; and that the
first and last of these component parts were themselves formed from
Pelasgic and native tribes. The original deities[1] worshipped by the
Romans were derived from the joint traditions of all these tribes; but
the religious institutions and ceremonies were almost wholly borrowed
from the Tuscans. Unlike the Grecian mythology, with which, in later
ages, it was united, the Roman system of religion had all the gloom
and mystery of the eastern superstitions; their gods were objects of
fear rather than love, and were worshipped more to avert the
consequences of their anger than to conciliate their favour. A
consequence of this system was, the institution of human sacrifices,
which were not quite disused in Rome until a late period of the
republic.
2. The religious institutions of the Romans form an essential part of
their civil government; every public act, whether of legislation or
election, was connected with certain determined forms, and thus
received the sanction of a higher power. Every public assembly was
opened by the magistrate and augurs taking the auspices, or signs
by which they believed that the will of the gods could be determined;
and if any unfavourable omen was discovered, either then or at any
subsequent time, the assembly was at once dismissed. 3. The right of
taking auspices was long the peculiar privilege of the patricians, and
frequently afforded them pretexts for evading the demands of the
plebeians; when a popular law was to be proposed, it was easy to
discover some unfavourable omen which prohibited discussion; when it
was evident that the centuries were about to annul some patrician
privilege, the augurs readily saw or heard some signal of divine
wrath, which prevented the vote from being completed. It was on this
account that the plebeians would not consent to place the comitia
tributa under the sanction of the auspices.
4. The augurs were at first only three in number, but they were in
later ages increased to fifteen, and formed into a college. Nothing of
importance was transacted without their concurrence in the earlier
ages of the republic, but after the second punic war, their influence
was considerably diminished. [2] 5. They derived omens from five
sources: 1, from celestial phenomena, such as thunder, lightning,
comets, &c. ; 2, from the flight of birds; 3, from the feeding of the
sacred chickens; 4, from the appearance of a beast in any unusual
place; 5, from any accident that occurred unexpectedly.
6. The usual form of taking an augury was very solemn; the augur
ascended a tower, bearing in his hand a curved stick called a lituus.
He turned his face to the east, and marked out some distant objects as
the limits within which he would make his observations, and
divided mentally the enclosed space into four divisions. He next, with
covered head, offered sacrifices to the gods, and prayed that they
would vouchsafe some manifestation of their will. After these
preliminaries he made his observations in silence, and then announced
the result to the expecting people.
7. The Arusp'ices were a Tuscan order of priests, who attempted to
predict futurity by observing the beasts offered in sacrifice. They
formed their opinions most commonly from inspecting the entrails, but
there was no circumstance too trivial to escape their notice, and
which they did not believe in some degree portentous. The arusp'ices
were most commonly consulted by individuals; but their opinions, as
well as those of the augurs, were taken on all important affairs of
state. The arusp'ices seem not to have been appointed officially, nor
are they recognised as a regular order of priesthood.
8. The pontiffs and fla'mens, as the superior priests were designated,
enjoyed great privileges, and were generally men of rank. When the
republic was abolished, the emperors assumed the office of pontifex
maximus, or chief pontiff, deeming its powers too extensive to be
entrusted to a subject.
9. The institution of vestal virgins was older than the city itself,
and was regarded by the Romans as the most sacred part of their
religious system. In the time of Numa there were but four, but two
more were added by Tarquin; probably the addition made by Tarquin was
to give the tribe of the Lu'ceres a share in this important
priesthood. The duty of the vestal virgins was to keep the sacred fire
that burned on the altar of Vesta from being extinguished; and to
preserve a certain sacred pledge on which the very existence of Rome
was supposed to depend. What this pledge was we have no means of
discovering; some suppose that it was the Trojan Palla'dium, others,
with more probability, some traditional mystery brought by the
Pelas'gi from Samothrace.
10. The privileges conceded to the vestals were very great; they had
the most honourable seats at public games and festivals; they were
attended by a lictor with fasces like the magistrates; they were
provided with chariots when they required them; and they possessed the
power of pardoning any criminal whom they met on the way to execution,
if they declared that the meeting was accidental. The magistrates
were obliged to salute them as they passed, and the fasces of the
consul were lowered to do them reverence. To withhold from them marks
of respect subjected the offender to public odium; a personal insult
was capitally punished. They possessed the exclusive privilege of
being buried within the city; an honour which the Romans rarely
extended to others.
11. The vestals were bound by a vow of perpetual virginity, and a
violation of this oath was cruelly punished. The unfortunate offender
was buried alive in a vault constructed beneath the Fo'rum by the
elder Tarquin. The terror of such a dreadful fate had the desired
effect; there were only eighteen instances of incontinence among the
vestals, during the space of a thousand years.
12. The mixture of religion with civil polity, gave permanence and
stability to the Roman institutions; notwithstanding all the changes
and revolutions in the government the old forms were preserved; and
thus, though the city was taken by Porsenna, and burned by the Gauls,
the Roman constitution survived the ruin, and was again restored to
its pristine vigour.
13. The Romans always adopted the gods of the conquered nations, and,
consequently, when their empire became very extensive, the number of
deities was absurdly excessive, and the variety of religious worship
perfectly ridiculous. The rulers of the world wanted the taste and
ingenuity of the lively Greeks, who accommodated every religious
system to their own, and from some real or fancied resemblance,
identified the gods of Olym'pus with other nations. The Romans never
used this process of assimilation, and, consequently, introduced so
much confusion into their mythology, that philosophers rejected the
entire system. This circumstance greatly facilitated the progress of
Christianity, whose beautiful simplicity furnished a powerful contrast
to the confused and cumbrous mass of divinities, worshipped in the
time of the emperors.
_Questions for Examination_.
1. How did the religion of the Romans differ from that of the Greeks?
2. Was the Roman religion connected with the government?
3. How was the right of taking the Auspices abused?
4. Who were the augurs?
5. From what did the augurs take omens?
6. What were the forms used in taking the auspices?
7. Who were the aruspices?
8. What other priests had the Romans?
9. What was the duty of the vestal virgins?
10. Did the vestals enjoy great privileges?
11. How were the vestals punished for a breach of their vows?
12. Why was the Roman constitution very permanent?
13. Whence arose the confusion in the religious system of the Romans?
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The reader will find an exceedingly interesting account of the
deities peculiar to the Romans, in Mr. Keightley's very valuable work
on Mythology.
2:
The poet Ennius, who was of Grecian descent, ridiculed
very successfully the Roman superstitions; the following fragment,
translated by Dunlop, would, probably, have been punished as
blasphemous in the first ages of the republic:--
For no Marsian augur (whom fools view with awe,)
Nor diviner, nor star-gazer, care I a straw;
The Isis-taught quack, an expounder of dreams,
Is neither in science nor art what he seems;
Superstitious and shameless they prowl through our streets,
Some hungry, some crazy, but all of them cheats.
Impostors, who vaunt that to others they'll show
A path which themselves neither travel nor know:
Since they promise us wealth if we pay for their pains,
Let them take from that wealth and bestow what remains
* * * * *
CHAPTER VII.
THE ROMAN ARMY AND NAVY.
Is the soldier found
In the riot and waste which he spreads around?
The sharpness makes him--the dash, the tact,
The cunning to plan, and the spirit to act. --_Lord L. Gower_.
1. It has been frequently remarked by ancient writers that the
strength of a free state consists in its infantry; and, on the other
hand, that when the infantry in a state become more valuable than the
cavalry, the power of the aristocracy is diminished, and equal rights
can no longer be withheld from the people. The employment of mercenary
soldiers in modern times renders these observations no longer
applicable; but in the military states of antiquity, where the
citizens themselves served as soldiers, there are innumerable examples
of this mutual connection between political and military systems. It
is further illustrated in the history of the middle ages; for we can
unquestionably trace the origin of free institutions in Europe to the
time when the hardy infantry of the commons were first found able to
resist the charges of the brilliant chivalry of the nobles. 2. Rome
was, from the very commencement, a military state; as with the
Spartans, all their civil institutions had a direct reference to
warlike affairs; their public assemblies were marshalled like armies;
the order of their line of battle was regulated by the distinction of
classes in the state. It is, therefore, natural to conclude, that the
tactics of the Roman armies underwent important changes when the
revolutions mentioned in the preceding chapters were effected, though
we cannot trace the alterations with precision, because no historians
appeared until the military system of the Romans had been brought to
perfection.
3. The strength of the Tuscans consisted principally in their cavalry;
and if we judge from the importance attributed to the equestrian rank
in the earliest ages, we may suppose that the early Romans
esteemed this force equally valuable. It was to Ser'vius Tul'lius, the
great patron of the commonalty, that the Romans were indebted for the
formation of a body of infantry, which, after the lapse of centuries,
received so many improvements that it became invincible.
4. The ancient battle array of the Greeks was the phalanx; the troops
were drawn up in close column, the best armed being in front. The
improvements made in this system of tactics by Philip, are recorded in
Grecian history; they chiefly consisted in making the evolutions of
the entire body more manageable, and counteracting the difficulties
which attended the motions of this cumbrous mass.
5. The Romans originally used the phalanx; and the lines were formed
according to the classes determined by the centuries. Those who were
sufficiently wealthy to purchase a full suit of armour, formed the
front ranks; those who could only purchase a portion of the defensive
weapons, filled the centre; and the rear was formed by the poorer
classes, who scarcely required any armour, being protected by the
lines in front. From this explanation, it is easy to see why, in the
constitution of the centuries by Servius Tullius, the first class were
perfectly covered with mail, the second had helmets and breast-plates
but no protection for the body, the third, neither a coat of mail, nor
greaves. 6. The defects of this system are sufficiently obvious; an
unexpected attack on the flanks, the breaking of the line by rugged
and uneven ground, and a thousand similar accidents exposed the
unprotected portions of the army to destruction besides, a line with
files ten deep was necessarily slow in its movements and evolutions.
Another and not less important defect was, that the whole should act
together; and consequently, there were few opportunities for the
display of individual bravery.
7. It is not certainly known who was the great commander that
substituted the living body of the Roman legion for this inanimate
mass; but there is some reason to believe that this wondrous
improvement was effected by Camil'lus. Every legion was in itself an
army, combining the advantages of every variety of weapon, with the
absolute perfection of a military division.
8. The legion consisted of three lines or battalions; the _Hasta'ti_,
the _Prin'cipes_, and the _Tria'rii_; there were besides two classes,
which we may likewise call battalions, the _Rora'rii_, or _Velites_,
consisting of light armed troops, and the _Accen'si_, or
supernumeraries, who were ready to supply the place of those that fell.
Each of the two first battalions contained fifteen manip'uli, consisting
of sixty privates, commanded by two centurions, and having each a
separate standard (_vexil'lum_) borne by one of the privates called
Vexilla'rius; the manip'uli in the other battalions were fewer in
number, but contained a greater portion of men; so that, in round
numbers, nine hundred men may be allowed to each battalion, exclusive of
officers. If the officers and the troop of three hundred cavalry be
taken into account, we shall find that the legion, as originally
constituted, contained about five thousand men. The Romans, however, did
not always observe these exact proportions, and the number of soldiers
in a legion varied at different times of their history. [1]
9. A cohort was formed by taking a manipulus from each of the
battalions; more frequently two manipuli were taken, and the cohort
then contained six hundred men. The cavalry were divided into tur'mæ,
consisting each of thirty men.
10. A battle was usually commenced by the light troops, who skirmished
with missile weapons; the hasta'ti then advanced to the charge, and if
defeated, fell back on the prin'cipes; if the enemy proved still
superior, the two front lines retired to the ranks of the tria'rii,
which being composed of veteran troops, generally turned the scale.
But this order was not always observed; the number of divisions in the
legion made it extremely flexible, and the commander-in-chief could
always adapt the form of his line to circumstances.
11. The levies of troops were made in the Cam'pus Mar'tius, by the
tribunes appointed to command the legions. The tribes which were to
supply soldiers were determined by lot, and as each came forward, the
tribunes, in their turn, selected such as seemed best fitted for war.
Four legions was most commonly the number in an army. When the
selected individuals had been enrolled as soldiers, one was chosen
from each legion to take the military oath of obedience to the
generals; the other soldiers swore in succession, to observe the oath
taken by their foreman.
12.
4. What was the first addition made to Rome?
5. What was the next addition?
6. Into what tribes were the Romans divided?
7. What were the hills added in later times to Rome?
8. Had the Romans any buildings north of the Tiber?
9. When did Rome become a magnificent city?
10. What was the extent of the city?
11. How was the city divided?
12. Which was the most remarkable of the seven hills?
13. What buildings were on the Capitoline hill?
14. What description is given of the forum?
15. Where was the senate-house and comitium?
16. What use was made of the Campus Martius?
17. What was the Pantheon?
18. Were the theatres and circii remarkable?
19. Had the Romans public baths?
20. How was the city supplied with water?
21. Were the cloacæ remarkable for their size?
22. Which was the chief Italian road?
23. What were the most remarkable places on the Appian road?
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Hence a gate was called _porta_, from _porta're_, to carry. The
reason of this part of the ceremony was, that the plough being deemed
holy, it was unlawful that any thing unclean should pollute the place
which it had touched; but it was obviously necessary that things clean
and unclean should pass through the gates of the city. It is
remarkable that all the ceremonies here mentioned were imitated from
the Tuscans.
[2] This, though apparently a mere conjecture, has been so fully
proved by Niebuhr, (vol. i. p. 251,) that it may safely be assumed as
an historical fact.
[3] See Chapter II. of the following history.
[4] All authors are agreed that the Coelian hill was named from
Coeles Viben'na, a Tuscan chief; but there is a great variety in the
date assigned to his settlement at Rome. Some make him cotemporary
with Rom'ulus, others with the elder Tarquin, or Servius Tullius. In
this uncertainty all that can be satisfactorily determined is, that at
some early period a Tuscan colony settled in Rome.
[5] Others say that they were named so in honour of Lu'ceres, king of
Ardea, according to which theory the third would have been a
Pelasgo-Tyrrhenian colony.
[6] We shall hereafter have occasion to remark, that the Lu'ceres were
subject to the other tribes.
[7] See History, Chapter IV.
[8] The Pincian and Vatican hills were added at a much later period
and these, with Janiculum, made the number ten.
[9] They were named as follow:
1. Porta Cape'na 2. Coelimon'tium 3. I'sis and Sera'pis 4. Via
Sa'cra 5. Esquili'na 6. Acta Se'mita 7. Vita Lata 8. Forum Roma'num 9.
Circus Flamin'ius 10. Pala'tium 11. Circus Max'imus 12. Pici'na
Pub'lica 13. Aventinus 14. Transtiberi'na.
The divisions made by Servius were named: the Suburan, which comprised
chiefly the Coelian mount; the Colline, which included the Viminal
and Quirinal hills; the Esquiline and Palatine, which evidently
coincided with the hills of the same name.
[10] Among the public buildings of ancient Rome, when in her zenith,
are numbered 420 temples, five regular theatres, two amphitheatres,
and seven circusses of vast extent; sixteen public baths, fourteen
aqueducts, from which a prodigious number of fountains were constantly
supplied; innumerable palaces and public halls, stately columns,
splendid porticos, and lofty obelisks.
[11] From _caput_, "a head. "
[12] State criminals were punished by being precipitated from the
Tarpeian rock; the soil has been since so much raised by the
accumulation of ruins, that a fall from it is no longer dangerous.
[13] In the reign of Numa, the Quirinal hill was deemed the citadel of
Rome; an additional confirmation of Niebuhr's theory, that Quirium was
a Sabine town, which, being early absorbed in Rome, was mistaken by
subsequent, writers for Cu'res.
[14] Basilicks were spacious halls for the administration of justice.
[15] It is called _Templum_ by Livy; but the word templum with the
Romans does not mean an edifice, but a consecrated inclosure. From its
position, we may conjecture that the forum was originally a place of
meeting common to the inhabitants of the Sabine town on the Quirinal,
and the Latin town on the Palatine hill.
[16] See Chap. XII. Sect. V. of the following History.
[17] See the following chapter.
* * * * *
CHAPTER IV.
THE ROMAN CONSTITUTION.
As once in virtue, so in vice extreme,
This universal fabric yielded loose,
Before ambition still; and thundering down,
At last beneath its ruins crush'd a world. --_Thomson_.
I. The most remarkable feature in the Roman constitution is the
division of the people into Patricians and Plebeians, and our first
inquiry must be the origin of this separation. It is clearly
impossible that such a distinction could have existed from the very
beginning, because no persons would have consented in a new community
to the investing of any class with peculiar privileges. We find that
all the Roman kings, after they had subdued a city, drafted a portion
of its inhabitants to Rome; and if they did not destroy the subjugated
place, garrisoned it with a Roman colony. The strangers thus brought
to Rome were not admitted to a participation of civic rights; they
were like the inhabitants of a corporate town who are excluded from
the elective franchise: by successive immigrations, the number of
persons thus disqualified became more numerous than that of the first
inhabitants or old freemen, and they naturally sought a share in the
government, as a means of protecting their persons and properties. On
the other hand, the men who possessed the exclusive power of
legislation, struggled hard to retain their hereditary privileges, and
when forced to make concessions, yielded as little as they
possibly could to the popular demands. Modern history furnishes us
with numerous instances of similar struggles between classes, and of a
separation in interests and feelings between inhabitants of the same
country, fully as strong as that between the patricians and plebeians
at Rome.
2. The first tribes were divided by Ro'mulus into thirty _cu'riæ,_ and
each cu'ria contained ten _gentes_ or associations. The individuals of
each gens were not in all cases, and probably not in the majority of
instances, connected by birth;[1] the attributes of the members of a
_gens_, according to Cicero, were, a common name and participation in
private religious rites; descent from free ancestors; the absence of
legal disqualification. 3. The members of these associations were
united by certain laws, which conferred peculiar privileges, called
jura gentium; of these the most remarkable were, the succession to the
property of every member who died without kin and intestate, and the
obligation imposed on all to assist their indigent fellows under any
extraordinary burthen. [2] 4. The head of each gens was regarded as a
kind of father, and possessed a paternal authority over the members;
the chieftancy was both elective and hereditary;[3] that is, the
individual was always selected from some particular family.
5. Besides the members of the gens, there were attached to it a number
of dependents called clients, who owed submission to the chief as
their patron, and received from him assistance and protection. The
clients were generally foreigners who came to settle at Rome, and not
possessing municipal rights, were forced to appear in the courts of
law, &c. by proxy. In process of time this relation assumed a feudal
form, and the clients were bound to the same duties as vassals[4] in
the middle ages.
6. The chiefs of the gentes composed the senate, and were called
"fathers," (patres. ) In the time of Romulus, the senate at first
consisted only of one hundred members, who of course represented the
Latin tribe Ramne'nses; the number was doubled after the union with
the Sabines, and the new members were chosen from the Titienses. The
Tuscan tribe of the Lu'ceres remained unrepresented in the senate
until the reign of the first Tarquin, when the legislative body
received another hundred[5] from that tribe. Tarquin the elder was,
according to history, a Tuscan Iticumo, and seems to have owed his
elevation principally to the efforts of his compatriots settled at
Rome. It is to this event we must refer, in a great degree, the number
of Tuscan ceremonies which are to be found in the political
institutions of the Romans.
7. The gentes were not only represented in the senate, but met also in
a public assembly called "comitia curiata. " In these comitia the kings
were elected and invested with royal authority. After the complete
change of the constitution in later ages, the "comitia curiata"[6]
rarely assembled, and their power was limited to religious matters;
but during the earlier period of the republic, they claimed and
frequently exercised the supreme powers of the state, and were named
emphatically, The People.
8. The power and prerogatives of the kings at Rome, were similar to
those of the Grecian sovereigns in the heroic ages. The monarch was
general of the army, a high priest,[7] and first magistrate of the
realm; he administered justice in person every ninth day, but an
appeal lay from his sentence, in criminal cases, to the general
assemblies of the people. The pontiffs and augurs, however, were
in some measure independent of the sovereign, and assumed the
uncontrolled direction of the religion of the state.
9. The entire constitution was remodelled by Ser'vius Tul'lius, and a
more liberal form of government introduced. His first and greatest
achievement was the formation of the plebeians into an organized order
of the state, invested with political rights. He divided them into
four cities and twenty-six rustic tribes, and thus made the number of
tribes the same as that of the curiæ. This was strictly a geographical
division, analagous to our parishes, and had no connection with
families, like that of the Jewish tribes.
10. Still more remarkable was the institution of the census, and the
distribution of the people into classes and centuries proportionate to
their wealth. The census was a periodical valuation of all the
property possessed by the citizens, and an enumeration of all the
subjects of the state: there were five classes, ranged according to
the estimated value of their possessions, and the taxes they
consequently paid. The first class contained eighty centuries out of
the hundred and seventy; the sixth class, in which those were included
who were too poor to be taxed, counted but for one. We shall,
hereafter have occasion to see that this arrangement was also used for
military purposes; it is only necessary to say here, that the sixth
class were deprived of the use of arms, and exempt from serving in
war.
11. The people voted in the comitia centuriata by centuries; that is,
the vote of each century was taken separately and counted only as one.
By this arrangement a just influence was secured to property; and the
clients of the patricians in the sixth class prevented from
out-numbering the free citizens.
12. Ser'vius Tul'lius undoubtedly intended that the comitia centuriata
should form the third estate of the realm, and during his reign they
probably held that rank; but when, by an aristocratic insurrection he
was slain in the senate-house, the power conceded to the people was
again usurped by the patricians, and the comitio centuriata did not
recover the right[8] of legislation before the laws[9] of the twelve
tables were established.
13. The law which made the debtor a slave to his creditor was repealed
by Ser'vius, and re-enacted by his successor; the patricians preserved
this abominable custom during several ages, and did not resign it
until the state had been brought to the very brink of ruin.
14. During the reign of Ser'vius, Rome was placed at the head of the
Latin confederacy, and acknowledged to be the metropolitan city. It
was deprived of this supremacy after the war with Porsen'na, but soon
recovered its former greatness.
15. The equestrian rank was an order in the Roman state from the very
beginning. It was at first confined to the nobility, and none but the
patricians had the privilege of serving on horseback. But in the later
ages, it became a political dignity, and persons were raised to the
equestrian rank by the amount of their possessions.
16. The next great change took place after the expulsion of the kings;
annual magistrates, called consuls, were elected in the comitia
centuriata, but none but patricians could hold this office. 17. The
liberties of the people were soon after extended and secured by
certain laws, traditionally attributed to Vale'rius Public'ola, of
which the most important was that which allowed[10] an appeal to a
general assembly of the people from the sentence of a magistrate. 18.
To deprive the plebeians of this privilege was the darling object of
the patricians, and it was for this purpose alone that they instituted
the dictatorship. From the sentence of this magistrate there was no
appeal to the tribes or centuries, but the patricians kept their own
privilege of being tried before the tribunal of the curiæ. 19. The
power of the state was now usurped by a factious oligarchy, whose
oppressions were more grievous than those of the worst tyrant; they at
last became so intolerable, that the commonalty had recourse to arms,
and fortified that part of the city which was exclusively inhabited by
the plebeians, while others formed a camp on the Sacred Mount at some
distance from Rome. A tumult of this kind was called a secession; it
threatened to terminate in a civil war, which would have been both
long and doubtful; for the patricians and their clients were probably
as numerous as the people. A reconciliation was effected, and the
plebeians placed under the protection of magistrates chosen from their
own body, called tribunes of the people.
20. The plebeians, having now authorised leaders, began to struggle
for an equalization of rights, and the patricians resisted them with
the most determined energy. In this protracted contest the popular
cause prevailed, though the patricians made use of the most violent
means to secure their usurped powers. The first triumph obtained by
the people was the right to summon patricians before the comitia
tributa, or assemblies of people in tribes; soon after they obtained
the privilege of electing their tribunes at these comitia, instead of
the centuria'ta; and finally, after a fierce opposition, the
patricians were forced to consent that the state should be governed by
a written code.
21. The laws of the twelve tables did not alter the legal relations
between the citizens; the struggle was renewed with greater violence
than ever after the expulsion of the decem'viri, but finally
terminated in the complete triumph of the people. The Roman
constitution became essentially democratical; the offices of the state
were open to all the citizens; and although the difference between the
patrician and plebeian families still subsisted, they soon ceased of
themselves to be political parties. From the time that equal rights
were granted to all the citizens, Rome advanced rapidly in wealth and
power; the subjugation of Italy was effected within the succeeding
century, and that was soon followed by foreign conquests.
22. In the early part of the struggle between the patricians and
plebeians, the magistracy, named the censorship, was instituted. The
censors were designed at first merely to preside over the taking of
the census, but they afterwards obtained the power of punishing, by a
deprivation of civil rights, those who were guilty of any flagrant
immorality. The patricians retained exclusive possession of the
censorship, long after the consulship had been opened to the
plebeians.
23. The senate,[11] which had been originally a patrician
council, was gradually opened to the plebeians; when the free
constitution was perfected, every person possessing a competent
fortune that had held a superior magistracy, was enrolled as a senator
at the census immediately succeeding the termination of his office.
_Questions for Examination_.
1. What is the most probable account given of the origin of the
distinction between the patricians and the plebeians at Rome?
2. How did Romulus subdivide the Roman tribes?
3. By what regulations were the gentes governed?
4. Who were the chiefs of the gentes?
5. What was the condition of the clients?
6. By whom were alterations made in the number and constitution of the
senate?
7. What assembly was peculiar to the patricians?
8. What were the powers of the Roman kings?
9. What great change was made in the Roman constitution by Servius
Tullius?
10. For what purpose was the census instituted?
11. How were votes taken in the comitia centuriata?
12. Were the designs of Servius frustrated?
13. What was the Roman law respecting debtors?
14.
When did the Roman power decline?
15. What changes were made in the constitution of the equestrian rank?
16. What change was made after the abolition of royalty?
17. How were the liberties of the people secured?
18. Why was the office of dictator appointed?
19. How did the plebeians obtain the protection of magistrates chosen
from their own order?
20. What additional triumphs were obtained by the plebeians?
21. What was the consequence of the establishment of freedom?
22. For what purpose was the censorship instituted?
23. What change took place in the constitution of the senate?
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The same remark may be applied to the Scottish clans and the
ancient Irish septs, which were very similar to the Roman _gentes_.
[2] When the plebeians endeavoured to procure the repeal of the laws
which prohibited the intermarriage of the patricians and plebeians,
the principal objection made by the former was, that these rights and
obligations of the gentes (jura gentium) would be thrown into
confusion.
[3] This was also the case with the Irish tanists, or chiefs of septs;
the people elected a tanist, but their choice was confined to the
members of the ruling family.
[4] See Historical Miscellany Part III. Chap. i.
[5] They were called "patres nunorum gentium," the senators of the
inferior gentes.
[6] The "comitia curiata," assembled in the comi'tium, the general
assemblies of the people were held in the forum. The patrician curiæ
were called, emphatically, the council of the people; (concilium
populi;) the third estate was called plebeian, (plebs. ) This
distinction between _populus_ and _plebs_ was disregarded after the
plebeians had established their claim to equal rights. The English
reader will easily understand the difference, if he considers that the
patricians were precisely similar to the members of a close
corporation, and the plebeians to the other inhabitants of a city. In
London, for example, the common council may represent the senate, the
livery answer for the populus, patricians, or comitia curiata, and the
general body of other inhabitants will correspond with the plebs.
[7] There were certain sacrifices which the Romans believed could only
be offered by a king; after the abolition of royalty, a priest, named
the petty sacrificing king, (rex sacrificulus,) was elected to perform
this duty.
[8] Perhaps it would be more accurate to say the _exclusive_ right of
legislation; for it appears that the comitia centuriata were sometimes
summoned to give their sanction to laws which had been previously
enacted by the curiæ.
[9] See Chap. XII.
[10] The Romans were previously acquainted with that great principle
of justice, the right of trial by a person's peers. In the earliest
ages the patricians had a right of appeal to the curiæ; the Valerian
laws extended the same right to the plebeians.
[11] The senators were called conscript fathers, (patres conscripti,)
either from their being enrolled on the censor's list, or more
probably from the addition made to their numbers after the expulsion
of the kings, in order to supply the places of those who had been
murdered by Tarquin. The new senators were at first called conscript,
and in the process of time the name was extended to the entire body.
* * * * *
CHAPTER V.
THE ROMAN TENURE OF LAND--COLONIAL GOVERNMENT.
Each rules his race, his neighbour not his care,
Heedless of others, to his own severe. --_Homer_.
[As this chapter is principally designed for advanced students, it has
not been thought necessary to add questions for examination. ]
The contests respecting agrarian laws occupy so large a space in Roman
history, and are so liable to be misunderstood, that it is necessary
to explain their origin at some length. According to an almost
universal custom, the right of conquest was supposed to involve the
property of the land. Thus the Normans who assisted William I. were
supposed to have obtained a right to the possessions of the Saxons;
and in a later age, the Irish princes, whose estates were not
confirmed by a direct grant from the English crown, were exposed to
forfeiture when legally summoned to prove their titles. The extensive
acquisitions made by the Romans, were either formed into extensive
national domains, or divided into small lots among the poorer classes.
The usufruct of the domains was monopolized by the patricians who
rented them from the state; the smaller lots were assigned to the
plebeians, subject to a tax called tribute, but not to rent. An
agrarian law was a proposal to make an assignment of portions of the
public lands to the people, and to limit the quantity of national land
that could be farmed by any particular patrician. [1] Such a law may
have been frequently impolitic, because it may have disturbed ancient
possessions, but it could never have been unjust; for the property of
the land was absolutely fixed in the state. The lands held by the
patricians, being divided into extensive tracts, were principally used
for pasturage; the small lots assigned to the plebeians were, of
necessity, devoted to agriculture. Hence arose the first great cause
of hostility between the two orders; the patricians were naturally
eager to extend their possessions in the public domains, which enabled
them to provide for their numerous clients, and in remote districts
they frequently wrested the estates from the free proprietors in their
neighbourhood; the plebeians, on the other hand, deemed that they
had the best right to the land purchased by their blood, and saw with
just indignation, the fruits of victory monopolized by a single order
in the state. The tribute paid by the plebeians increased this
hardship, for it was a land-tax levied on estates, and consequently
fell most heavily on the smaller proprietors; indeed, in many cases,
the possessors of the national domains paid nothing.
From all this it is evident that an agrarian law only removed tenants
who held from the state at will, and did not in any case interfere
with the sacred right of property; but it is also plain that such a
change must have been frequently inconvenient to the individual in
possession. It also appears, that had not agrarian laws been
introduced, the great body of the plebeians would have become the
clients of the patricians, and the form of government would have been
a complete oligarchy.
The chief means to which the Romans, even from the earliest ages, had
recourse for securing their conquests, and at the same time relieving
the poorer classes of citizens, was the establishment of colonies in
the conquered states. The new citizens formed a kind of garrison, and
were held together by a constitution formed on the model of the parent
state. From what has been said above, it is evident that a law for
sending out a colony was virtually an agrarian law, since lands were
invariably assigned to those who were thus induced to abandon their
homes.
The relations between Rome and the subject cities in Italy were very
various. Some, called _municipia_, were placed in full possession of
the rights of Roman citizens, but could not in all cases vote in the
comitia. The privileges of the colonies were more restricted, for they
were absolutely excluded from the Roman comitia and magistracies. The
federative[2] states enjoyed their own constitutions, but were bound
to supply the Romans with tribute and auxiliary forces. Finally, the
subject states were deprived of their internal constitutions, and were
governed by annual prefects chosen in Rome.
Before discussing the subject of the Roman constitution, we must
observe that it was, like our own, gradually formed by practice; there
was no single written code like those of Athens and Sparta, but
changes were made whenever they were required by circumstances; before
the plebeians obtained an equality of civil rights, the state neither
commanded respect abroad, nor enjoyed tranquillity at home. The
patricians sacrificed their own real advantages, as well as the
interests of their country, to maintain an ascendancy as injurious to
themselves, as it was unjust to the other citizens. But no sooner had
the agrarian laws established a more equitable distribution of
property, and other popular laws opened the magistracy to merit
without distinction of rank, than the city rose to empire with
unexampled rapidity.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The Licinian law provided that no one should rent at a time more
than 500 acres of public land.
[2] The league by which the Latin states were bound (jus Latii) was
more favourable than that granted to the other Italians (jus
Italicum. )
* * * * *
CHAPTER VI.
THE ROMAN RELIGION.
First to the gods 'tis fitting to prepare
The due libation, and the solemn prayer;
For all mankind alike require their grace,
All born to want; a miserable race. --_Homer_.
1. We have shown that the Romans were, most probably, a people
compounded of the Latins, the Sabines, and the Tuscans; and that the
first and last of these component parts were themselves formed from
Pelasgic and native tribes. The original deities[1] worshipped by the
Romans were derived from the joint traditions of all these tribes; but
the religious institutions and ceremonies were almost wholly borrowed
from the Tuscans. Unlike the Grecian mythology, with which, in later
ages, it was united, the Roman system of religion had all the gloom
and mystery of the eastern superstitions; their gods were objects of
fear rather than love, and were worshipped more to avert the
consequences of their anger than to conciliate their favour. A
consequence of this system was, the institution of human sacrifices,
which were not quite disused in Rome until a late period of the
republic.
2. The religious institutions of the Romans form an essential part of
their civil government; every public act, whether of legislation or
election, was connected with certain determined forms, and thus
received the sanction of a higher power. Every public assembly was
opened by the magistrate and augurs taking the auspices, or signs
by which they believed that the will of the gods could be determined;
and if any unfavourable omen was discovered, either then or at any
subsequent time, the assembly was at once dismissed. 3. The right of
taking auspices was long the peculiar privilege of the patricians, and
frequently afforded them pretexts for evading the demands of the
plebeians; when a popular law was to be proposed, it was easy to
discover some unfavourable omen which prohibited discussion; when it
was evident that the centuries were about to annul some patrician
privilege, the augurs readily saw or heard some signal of divine
wrath, which prevented the vote from being completed. It was on this
account that the plebeians would not consent to place the comitia
tributa under the sanction of the auspices.
4. The augurs were at first only three in number, but they were in
later ages increased to fifteen, and formed into a college. Nothing of
importance was transacted without their concurrence in the earlier
ages of the republic, but after the second punic war, their influence
was considerably diminished. [2] 5. They derived omens from five
sources: 1, from celestial phenomena, such as thunder, lightning,
comets, &c. ; 2, from the flight of birds; 3, from the feeding of the
sacred chickens; 4, from the appearance of a beast in any unusual
place; 5, from any accident that occurred unexpectedly.
6. The usual form of taking an augury was very solemn; the augur
ascended a tower, bearing in his hand a curved stick called a lituus.
He turned his face to the east, and marked out some distant objects as
the limits within which he would make his observations, and
divided mentally the enclosed space into four divisions. He next, with
covered head, offered sacrifices to the gods, and prayed that they
would vouchsafe some manifestation of their will. After these
preliminaries he made his observations in silence, and then announced
the result to the expecting people.
7. The Arusp'ices were a Tuscan order of priests, who attempted to
predict futurity by observing the beasts offered in sacrifice. They
formed their opinions most commonly from inspecting the entrails, but
there was no circumstance too trivial to escape their notice, and
which they did not believe in some degree portentous. The arusp'ices
were most commonly consulted by individuals; but their opinions, as
well as those of the augurs, were taken on all important affairs of
state. The arusp'ices seem not to have been appointed officially, nor
are they recognised as a regular order of priesthood.
8. The pontiffs and fla'mens, as the superior priests were designated,
enjoyed great privileges, and were generally men of rank. When the
republic was abolished, the emperors assumed the office of pontifex
maximus, or chief pontiff, deeming its powers too extensive to be
entrusted to a subject.
9. The institution of vestal virgins was older than the city itself,
and was regarded by the Romans as the most sacred part of their
religious system. In the time of Numa there were but four, but two
more were added by Tarquin; probably the addition made by Tarquin was
to give the tribe of the Lu'ceres a share in this important
priesthood. The duty of the vestal virgins was to keep the sacred fire
that burned on the altar of Vesta from being extinguished; and to
preserve a certain sacred pledge on which the very existence of Rome
was supposed to depend. What this pledge was we have no means of
discovering; some suppose that it was the Trojan Palla'dium, others,
with more probability, some traditional mystery brought by the
Pelas'gi from Samothrace.
10. The privileges conceded to the vestals were very great; they had
the most honourable seats at public games and festivals; they were
attended by a lictor with fasces like the magistrates; they were
provided with chariots when they required them; and they possessed the
power of pardoning any criminal whom they met on the way to execution,
if they declared that the meeting was accidental. The magistrates
were obliged to salute them as they passed, and the fasces of the
consul were lowered to do them reverence. To withhold from them marks
of respect subjected the offender to public odium; a personal insult
was capitally punished. They possessed the exclusive privilege of
being buried within the city; an honour which the Romans rarely
extended to others.
11. The vestals were bound by a vow of perpetual virginity, and a
violation of this oath was cruelly punished. The unfortunate offender
was buried alive in a vault constructed beneath the Fo'rum by the
elder Tarquin. The terror of such a dreadful fate had the desired
effect; there were only eighteen instances of incontinence among the
vestals, during the space of a thousand years.
12. The mixture of religion with civil polity, gave permanence and
stability to the Roman institutions; notwithstanding all the changes
and revolutions in the government the old forms were preserved; and
thus, though the city was taken by Porsenna, and burned by the Gauls,
the Roman constitution survived the ruin, and was again restored to
its pristine vigour.
13. The Romans always adopted the gods of the conquered nations, and,
consequently, when their empire became very extensive, the number of
deities was absurdly excessive, and the variety of religious worship
perfectly ridiculous. The rulers of the world wanted the taste and
ingenuity of the lively Greeks, who accommodated every religious
system to their own, and from some real or fancied resemblance,
identified the gods of Olym'pus with other nations. The Romans never
used this process of assimilation, and, consequently, introduced so
much confusion into their mythology, that philosophers rejected the
entire system. This circumstance greatly facilitated the progress of
Christianity, whose beautiful simplicity furnished a powerful contrast
to the confused and cumbrous mass of divinities, worshipped in the
time of the emperors.
_Questions for Examination_.
1. How did the religion of the Romans differ from that of the Greeks?
2. Was the Roman religion connected with the government?
3. How was the right of taking the Auspices abused?
4. Who were the augurs?
5. From what did the augurs take omens?
6. What were the forms used in taking the auspices?
7. Who were the aruspices?
8. What other priests had the Romans?
9. What was the duty of the vestal virgins?
10. Did the vestals enjoy great privileges?
11. How were the vestals punished for a breach of their vows?
12. Why was the Roman constitution very permanent?
13. Whence arose the confusion in the religious system of the Romans?
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The reader will find an exceedingly interesting account of the
deities peculiar to the Romans, in Mr. Keightley's very valuable work
on Mythology.
2:
The poet Ennius, who was of Grecian descent, ridiculed
very successfully the Roman superstitions; the following fragment,
translated by Dunlop, would, probably, have been punished as
blasphemous in the first ages of the republic:--
For no Marsian augur (whom fools view with awe,)
Nor diviner, nor star-gazer, care I a straw;
The Isis-taught quack, an expounder of dreams,
Is neither in science nor art what he seems;
Superstitious and shameless they prowl through our streets,
Some hungry, some crazy, but all of them cheats.
Impostors, who vaunt that to others they'll show
A path which themselves neither travel nor know:
Since they promise us wealth if we pay for their pains,
Let them take from that wealth and bestow what remains
* * * * *
CHAPTER VII.
THE ROMAN ARMY AND NAVY.
Is the soldier found
In the riot and waste which he spreads around?
The sharpness makes him--the dash, the tact,
The cunning to plan, and the spirit to act. --_Lord L. Gower_.
1. It has been frequently remarked by ancient writers that the
strength of a free state consists in its infantry; and, on the other
hand, that when the infantry in a state become more valuable than the
cavalry, the power of the aristocracy is diminished, and equal rights
can no longer be withheld from the people. The employment of mercenary
soldiers in modern times renders these observations no longer
applicable; but in the military states of antiquity, where the
citizens themselves served as soldiers, there are innumerable examples
of this mutual connection between political and military systems. It
is further illustrated in the history of the middle ages; for we can
unquestionably trace the origin of free institutions in Europe to the
time when the hardy infantry of the commons were first found able to
resist the charges of the brilliant chivalry of the nobles. 2. Rome
was, from the very commencement, a military state; as with the
Spartans, all their civil institutions had a direct reference to
warlike affairs; their public assemblies were marshalled like armies;
the order of their line of battle was regulated by the distinction of
classes in the state. It is, therefore, natural to conclude, that the
tactics of the Roman armies underwent important changes when the
revolutions mentioned in the preceding chapters were effected, though
we cannot trace the alterations with precision, because no historians
appeared until the military system of the Romans had been brought to
perfection.
3. The strength of the Tuscans consisted principally in their cavalry;
and if we judge from the importance attributed to the equestrian rank
in the earliest ages, we may suppose that the early Romans
esteemed this force equally valuable. It was to Ser'vius Tul'lius, the
great patron of the commonalty, that the Romans were indebted for the
formation of a body of infantry, which, after the lapse of centuries,
received so many improvements that it became invincible.
4. The ancient battle array of the Greeks was the phalanx; the troops
were drawn up in close column, the best armed being in front. The
improvements made in this system of tactics by Philip, are recorded in
Grecian history; they chiefly consisted in making the evolutions of
the entire body more manageable, and counteracting the difficulties
which attended the motions of this cumbrous mass.
5. The Romans originally used the phalanx; and the lines were formed
according to the classes determined by the centuries. Those who were
sufficiently wealthy to purchase a full suit of armour, formed the
front ranks; those who could only purchase a portion of the defensive
weapons, filled the centre; and the rear was formed by the poorer
classes, who scarcely required any armour, being protected by the
lines in front. From this explanation, it is easy to see why, in the
constitution of the centuries by Servius Tullius, the first class were
perfectly covered with mail, the second had helmets and breast-plates
but no protection for the body, the third, neither a coat of mail, nor
greaves. 6. The defects of this system are sufficiently obvious; an
unexpected attack on the flanks, the breaking of the line by rugged
and uneven ground, and a thousand similar accidents exposed the
unprotected portions of the army to destruction besides, a line with
files ten deep was necessarily slow in its movements and evolutions.
Another and not less important defect was, that the whole should act
together; and consequently, there were few opportunities for the
display of individual bravery.
7. It is not certainly known who was the great commander that
substituted the living body of the Roman legion for this inanimate
mass; but there is some reason to believe that this wondrous
improvement was effected by Camil'lus. Every legion was in itself an
army, combining the advantages of every variety of weapon, with the
absolute perfection of a military division.
8. The legion consisted of three lines or battalions; the _Hasta'ti_,
the _Prin'cipes_, and the _Tria'rii_; there were besides two classes,
which we may likewise call battalions, the _Rora'rii_, or _Velites_,
consisting of light armed troops, and the _Accen'si_, or
supernumeraries, who were ready to supply the place of those that fell.
Each of the two first battalions contained fifteen manip'uli, consisting
of sixty privates, commanded by two centurions, and having each a
separate standard (_vexil'lum_) borne by one of the privates called
Vexilla'rius; the manip'uli in the other battalions were fewer in
number, but contained a greater portion of men; so that, in round
numbers, nine hundred men may be allowed to each battalion, exclusive of
officers. If the officers and the troop of three hundred cavalry be
taken into account, we shall find that the legion, as originally
constituted, contained about five thousand men. The Romans, however, did
not always observe these exact proportions, and the number of soldiers
in a legion varied at different times of their history. [1]
9. A cohort was formed by taking a manipulus from each of the
battalions; more frequently two manipuli were taken, and the cohort
then contained six hundred men. The cavalry were divided into tur'mæ,
consisting each of thirty men.
10. A battle was usually commenced by the light troops, who skirmished
with missile weapons; the hasta'ti then advanced to the charge, and if
defeated, fell back on the prin'cipes; if the enemy proved still
superior, the two front lines retired to the ranks of the tria'rii,
which being composed of veteran troops, generally turned the scale.
But this order was not always observed; the number of divisions in the
legion made it extremely flexible, and the commander-in-chief could
always adapt the form of his line to circumstances.
11. The levies of troops were made in the Cam'pus Mar'tius, by the
tribunes appointed to command the legions. The tribes which were to
supply soldiers were determined by lot, and as each came forward, the
tribunes, in their turn, selected such as seemed best fitted for war.
Four legions was most commonly the number in an army. When the
selected individuals had been enrolled as soldiers, one was chosen
from each legion to take the military oath of obedience to the
generals; the other soldiers swore in succession, to observe the oath
taken by their foreman.
12.
