No More Learning

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. Such was the sacredness of this obligation, that even in the midst
of the political contests by which the city was distracted, the
soldiers, though eager to secure the freedom of their country, would
not attempt to gain it by mutiny against their commanders. On this
account the senate frequently declared war, and ordered a levy as an
expedient to prevent the enactment of a popular law, and were of
course opposed by the tribunes of the people.

13. There was no part of the Roman discipline more admirable than
their form of encampment. No matter how fatigued the soldiers might be
by a long march, or how harassed by a tedious battle, the camp was
regularly measured out and fortified by a rampart and ditch, before
any one sought sleep or refreshment. Careful watch was kept during the
night, and frequent picquets sent out to guard against a surprise, and
to see that the sentinels were vigilant. As the arrangement in every
camp was the same, every soldier knew his exact position, and if an
alarm occurred, could easily find the rallying point of his division.
To this excellent system Polyb'ius attributes the superiority of the
Romans over the Greeks; for the latter scarcely ever fortified their
camp, but chose some place naturally strong, and did not keep their
ranks distinct.

14. The military age extended from the sixteenth to the forty-sixth
year; and under the old constitution no one could hold a civic office
who had not served ten campaigns. The horsemen were considered free
after serving through ten campaigns, but the foot had to remain during
twenty. Those who had served out their required time were free for the
rest of their lives, unless the city was attacked, when all under the
age of sixty were obliged to arm in its defence.

15. In the early ages, when wars were begun and ended in a few days,
the soldiers received no pay; but when the conquest of distant
countries became the object of Roman ambition, it became necessary to
provide for the pay and support of the army. This office was given to
the quæstors, who were generally chosen from the younger nobility, and
were thus prepared for the higher magistracies by acquiring a
practical acquaintance with finance.

16. The soldiers were subject to penalties of life and limb at the
discretion of the commander-in-chief, without the intervention of a
court-martial; but it deserves to be recorded that this power was
rarely abused. 17. There were several species of rewards to excite
emulation; the most honourable were, the civic crown of gold to
him who had saved the life of a citizen; the mural crown to him who
had first scaled the wall of a besieged town; a gilt spear to him who
had severely wounded an enemy; but he who had slain and spoiled his
foe, received, if a horseman, an ornamental trapping; if a foot
soldier, a goblet.

18. The lower classes of the centuries were excused from serving in
the army, except on dangerous emergencies; but they supplied sailors
to the navy. We learn, from a document preserved by Polyb'ius, that
the Romans were a naval power at a very early age. 19. This
interesting record is the copy of a treaty concluded with the
Carthaginians, in the year after the expulsion of the kings. It is not
mentioned by the Roman historians, because it decisively establishes a
fact which they studiously labour to conceal, that is, the weakness
and decline of the Roman power during the two centuries that followed
the abolition of royalty, when the power of the state was monopolized
by a vile aristocracy. In this treaty Rome negociates for the cities
of La'tium, as her dependencies, just as Carthage does for her subject
colonies. But in the course of the following century, Rome lost her
supremacy over the Latin cities, and being thus nearly excluded from
the coast, her navy was ruined.

20. At the commencement of the first Punic war, the Romans once more
began to prepare a fleet, and luckily obtained an excellent model in a
Carthaginian ship that had been driven ashore in a storm. 21. The
vessels used for war, were either long ships or banked galleys; the
former were not much used in the Punic wars, the latter being found
more convenient. The rowers of these sat on banks or benches, rising
one above the other, like stairs; and from the number of these
benches, the galleys derived their names; that which had three rows of
benches was called a _trireme_; that which had four, a _quadrireme_;
and that which had five, a _quinquireme_. Some vessels had turrets
erected in them for soldiers and warlike engines; others had sharp
prows covered with brass, for the purpose of dashing against and
sinking their enemies.

22. The naval tactics of the ancients were very simple; the ships
closed very early, and the battle became a contest between single
vessels.
It was on this account that the personal valour of the Romans
proved more than a match for the naval skill of the
Carthaginians, and enabled them to, add the empire of the sea to that
of the land.

23. Before concluding this chapter, we must notice the triumphal
processions granted to victorious commanders. Of these there are two
kinds; the lesser triumph, called an ovation,[2] and the greater,
called, emphatically, the triumph. In the former, the victorious
general entered the city on foot, wearing a crown of myrtle; in the
latter, he was borne in a chariot, and wore a crown of laurel. The
ovation was granted to such generals as had averted a threatened war,
or gained some great advantage without inflicting great loss on the
enemy. The triumph was allowed only to those who had gained some
signal victory, which decided the fate of a protracted war. The
following description, extracted from Plutarch, of the great triumph
granted to Paulus Æmilius, for his glorious termination of the
Macedonian war, will give the reader an adequate idea of the splendour
displayed by the Romans on these festive occasions.

The people erected scaffolds in the forum and circus, and all other
parts of the city where they could best behold the pomp. The
spectators were clad in white garments; all the temples were open, and
full of garlands and perfumes; and the ways cleared and cleansed by a
great many officers, who drove away such as thronged the passage, or
straggled up and down.

The triumph lasted three days; on the first, which was scarce long
enough for the sight, were to be seen the statues, pictures, and
images of an extraordinary size, which were taken from the enemy,
drawn upon seven hundred and fifty chariots. On the second was
carried, in a great many _wains_, the fairest and richest armour of
the Macedonians, both of brass and steel, all newly furbished and
glittering: which, although piled up with the greatest art and order,
yet seemed to be tumbled on heaps carelessly and by chance; helmets
were thrown on shields, coats of mail upon greaves; Cretan targets and
Thracian bucklers, and quivers of arrows, lay huddled among the
horses' bits; and through these appeared the points of naked swords,
intermixed with long spears. All these arms were tied together with
such a just liberty, that they knocked against one another as they
were drawn along, and made a harsh and terrible noise, so that
the very spoils of the conquered could not be beheld without dread.
After these wagons loaded with armour, there followed three thousand
men, who carried the silver that was coined, in seven hundred and
fifty vessels, each of which weighed three talents, and was carried by
four men. Others brought silver bowls, and goblets, and cups, all
disposed in such order as to make the best show, and all valuable, as
well for their magnitude as the thickness of their engraved work. On
the third day, early in the morning, first came the trumpeters, who
did not sound as they were wont in a procession or solemn entry, but
such a charge as the Romans use when they encourage their soldiers to
fight. Next followed young men, girt about with girdles curiously
wrought, who led to the sacrifice one hundred and twenty stalled oxen,
with their horns gilded, and their heads adorned with ribbons and
garlands, and with these were boys that carried dishes of silver and
gold. After these was brought the gold coin, which was divided into
vessels that weighed three talents each, similar to those that
contained the silver; they were in number fourscore, wanting three.
These were followed by those that brought the consecrated bowl which
Emil'ius caused to be made, that weighed ten talents, and was adorned
with precious stones. Then were exposed to view the cups of Antig'onus
and Seleu'cus, and such as were made after the fashion invented by
The'ricles, and all the gold plate that was used at Per'seus's table.
Next to these came Per'seus's chariot, in which his armour was placed,
and on that his diadem. After a little intermission the king's
children were led captives, and with them a train of nurses, masters,
and governors, who all wept, and stretched forth their hands to the
spectators, and taught the little infants to beg and intreat their
compassion. There were two sons and a daughter, who, by reason of
their tender age, were altogether insensible of the greatness of their
misery; which insensibility of their condition rendered it much more
deplorable, insomuch that Per'seus himself was scarce regarded as he
went along, whilst pity had fixed the eyes of the Romans upon the
infants, and many of them could not forbear tears; all beheld the
sight with a mixture of sorrow and joy until the children were past.
After his children and attendants came Per'seus himself, clad in
black, and wearing slippers after the fashion of his country; he
looked like one altogether astonished, and deprived of reason, through
the greatness of his misfortune. Next followed a great company
of his friends and familiars, whose countenances were disfigured with
grief, and who testified, to all that beheld them, by their tears and
their continual looking upon Per'seus, that it was his hard fortune
they so much lamented, and that they were regardless of their own.
After these were carried four hundred crowns of gold, sent from the
cities by their respective ambassadors to Emil'ius, as a reward due to
his valour. Then he himself came, seated on a chariot magnificently,
adorned, (a man worthy to be beheld even without these ensigns of
power) clad in a garland of purple interwoven with gold, and with a
laurel branch in his right hand. All the army in like manner, with
boughs of laurel in their hands, and divided into bands and companies,
followed the chariot of their commander; some singing odes according
to the usual custom, mingled with raillery; others songs of triumph
and the praises of Emil'ius's deeds, who was admired and accounted
happy by all men, yet unenvied by every one that was good.

_Questions for Examination_.

1. What political change has frequently resulted from improved
military tactics?

2. Was Rome a military state?

3. Why are we led to conclude that the Romans considered cavalry an
important force?

4. By whom was the phalanx instituted?

5. How was the phalanx formed?

6. What were the defects of the phalanx?

7. By whom was the legion substituted for the phalanx?

8. Of what troops was a legion composed?

9. What was a cohort?

10. What was the Roman form of battle?

11. In what manner was an army levied?

12. How was the sanctity of the military oath proved?

13. What advantages resulted from the Roman form of encampment?

14. How long was the citizens liable to be called upon as soldiers?

15. How was the army paid?

16. What power had the general?

17. On what occasion did the soldiers receive rewards?

18. How was the navy supplied with sailors?

19. What fact concealed by the Roman historians is established by
Polybius?

20. How did the Romans form a fleet?

21. What were the several kinds of ships?

22. What naval tactics did the Romans use?

23. How did an ovation differ from a triumph?

24. Can you give a general description of a triumph?

FOOTNOTES:

[1] This is virtually the same account as that given by Niebuhr, but
he excludes the accensi and cavalry from his computation, which brings
down the amount to 3600 soldiers.

[2] From _ovis_, a sheep, the animal on this occasion offered in
sacrifice; in the greater triumph the victim was a milk-white bull
hung over with garlands, and having his horns tipped with gold.

* * * * *




CHAPTER VIII.

ROMAN LAW--FINANCE.

Then equal laws were planted in the state,
To shield alike the humble and the great. --_Cooke_.

1. In the early stages of society, little difficulty is felt in
providing for the administration of justice, because the subjects of
controversy are plain and simple, such as any man of common sense may
determine; but as civilization advances, the relations between men
become more complicated, property assumes innumerable forms, and the
determination of questions resulting from these changes, becomes a
matter of no ordinary difficulty. In the first ages of the republic,
the consuls were the judges in civil and criminal matters, as the
kings had previously been;[1] but as the state increased, a new class
of magistrates, called prætors, was appointed to preside in the courts
of law. Until the age of the decemvirs, there was no written code to
regulate their decisions; and even after the laws of the twelve tables
had been established, there was no perfect system of law, for the
enactments in that code were brief, and only asserted a few leading
principles. 2. The Roman judges did not, however, decide altogether
according to their own caprice; they were bound to regard the
principles that had been established by the decisions of former
judges; and consequently, a system of law was formed similar to the
common law of England, founded on precedent and analogy. In the later
ages of the empire, the number of law-books and records became so
enormous, that it was no longer possible to determine the law with
accuracy, and the contradictory decisions made at different periods,
greatly increased the uncertainty. To remedy this evil, the emperor
Justinian caused the entire to be digested into a uniform system, and
his code still forms the basis of the civil law in Europe.

3. The trials in courts refer either to the affairs of the
state, or to the persons or properties of individuals, and are called
state, criminal, or civil trials. The two former are the most
important in regard to history.

4. The division of the Roman people into two nations, made the
classification of state offences very difficult. In general, the
council of the patricians judged any plebeian who was accused of
conspiring against their order; and the plebeians on the other hand,
brought a patrician accused of having violated their privileges before
their own tribunal. 5. Disobedience to the commands of the chief
magistrate was punished by fine and imprisonment, and from his
sentence there was no appeal; but if the consul wished to punish any
person by stripes or death, the condemned man had the right of
appealing to the general assembly of his peers. [2] 6. To prevent
usurpation, it was established that every person who exercised an
authority not conferred on him by the people, should be devoted as a
victim to the gods. [3] This, was at once a sentence of outlawry and
excommunication; the Criminal might be slain by any person-with
impunity, and all connection with him was shunned as pollution. 7. No
magistrate could legally be brought to trial during the continuance of
his office, but when his time was expired, he could be accused before
the general assembly of the people, if he had transgressed the legal
limits of his authority. The punishment in this case was banishment;
the form of the sentence declared that the criminal "should be
deprived of fire and water;" that is, the citizens, were prohibited
from supplying him with the ordinary necessaries of life.

8. In all criminal trials, and in all cases where damages were sought
to be recovered for wrongs or injuries, the prætor impanelled a jury,
but the number of which it was to consist seems to have been left
to his discretion. The jurors were called ju'dices, and the opinion of
the majority decided the verdict. Where the votes were equal, the
traverser or defendant escaped; and when half the jury assessed
damages at one amount, and half at another, the defendant paid only
the lesser sum. In disputes about property, the prætor seldom called
for the assistance of a jury.

9. The general form of all trials was the same; the prosecutor or
plaintiff made his complaint, and the defendant was compelled either
to find sufficient bail, or to go into prison until the day of trial.
On the appointed day, the plaintiff, or his advocate, stated his case,
and proceeded to establish it by evidence; the defendant replied; and
the jury then gave their verdict by ballot.

10. In cases tried before the general assembly of the people, it was
allowed to make use of artifices in order to conciliate the popular
favour. The accused and his friends put on mourning robes to excite
pity; they went into the most public places and took every opportunity
of showing their respect for popular power. When Cicero was accused by
Clo'dius for having illegally put to death the associates of Cataline,
the entire senatorian rank changed their robes to show the deep
interest they felt in his fate. At these great trials, the noblest
specimens of forensic eloquence were displayed by the advocates of the
accuser and the accused; but the decisions were usually more in
accordance with the spirit of party than strict justice.

11. The accused, however, might escape, if he could prevail on any of
the tribunes to interpose in his behalf, or the accuser to relinquish
his charge; if unfavourable omens appeared during the trial, it was
usually adjourned, or sometimes the accusation withdrawn; and up to
the very moment of the commencement of the trial, the criminal had the
option of escaping a heavier penalty by going into voluntary exile.

12. The punishments to which state criminals were sentenced, were
usually, in capital cases, precipitation from the Tarpeian rock,
beheading, or strangulation in prison; when life was spared, the
penalties were either exile or fine. Under the emperors severer
punishments were introduced, such as exposure to wild beasts, or
burning alive; and torture, which, under the republic, could not be
inflicted on free citizens, was exercised unsparingly.

13. The punishment of parricides was curious; the criminal having
been beaten with rods, was sown up in a sack together with a serpent,
an ape and a cock, and thrown either into the sea or a river, as if
even the inanimate carcase of such a wretch would pollute the earth.

14. Masters had an absolute, authority over their slaves, extending to
life or limb; and in the earlier ages patrons had similar power over
their clients. The condition of slaves in Rome was most miserable,
especially in the later ages; they were subject to the most
excruciating tortures, and when capitally punished, were generally
crucified. Except in this single particular, the Roman criminal code,
was very lenient and sparing of human life. This was chiefly owing to
the exertions of the plebeians, for the patricians always patronized a
more sanguinary policy; and could do so the more easily, as the
aristocracy retained their monopoly of the administration of justice
much longer than that of civil government.

15. The Roman system of finance was at first very simple, the public
revenue being derived from a land-tax on Quiritary property,[4] and
the tithes of the public lands; but after the conquest of Macedon, the
revenues from other sources were so abundant, that tribute was no
longer demanded from Roman citizens. These sources were:--

1. The tribute of the allies, which was a property tax, differing in
different places according to the terms of their league.

2. The tribute of the provinces, which was both a property and
poll-tax.

3. Revenue of the national domains leased out by the censors.

4. Revenue from the mines, especially from the Spanish silver-mines.

5. Duties on imports and exports. And,

6. A duty on enfranchised slaves.

The receipts were all paid into the national treasury, and the senate
had the uncontrolled direction of the general expenditure, as well as
the regulation of the amount of imposts. The officers employed to
manage the affairs of the revenue, were the quæstors, chosen annually,
and under them the scribes, who held their situations for life. Those
who farmed the public revenue were called-publicans, and were
generally persons of equestrian dignity; but in the remote provinces
they frequently sublet to other collectors, who were guilty of great
extortion. The latter are the publicans mentioned in the New
Testament.


_Questions for Examination_.

1. When did the Romans first appoint judges?

2. How were the decisions of the prætors regulated?

3. How are trials divided?

4. In what manner were offences against the classes of patricians and
plebeians tried?

5. How was disobedience to the chief magistrate punished?

6. What was the penalty for usurpation?

7. How was mal-administration punished?

8. When did the prætors impannel a jury?

9. What was the form of a trial?

10. Were there any other forms used, in trials before the people?

11. Had the criminal any chances of escape?

12. What were the usual punishments?

13. How was parricide punished?

14. In what respect alone was the criminal law of the Romans severe?

15. What were the sources of the Roman revenue?

16. To whom was the management of the finances entrusted?

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Niebuhr, however, is of opinion, that judicial officers were
elected by the "comitia curiata," from the earliest ages.

[2] This privilege was conceded to the plebeians by the Valerian law,
but must have been possessed by the patricians from the earliest
times; for Horatius, when condemned for the murder of his sister, in
the reign of Tullus Hostilius, escaped by appealing to the comitia
curiata. The Valerian law had no sanction, that is, no penalty was
annexed to its transgression; and during the two centuries of
patrician usurpation and tyranny, was frequently and flagrantly
violated. On this account the law, though never repealed, was
frequently re-enacted.

[3] The formula "to devote his head to the gods," used to express the
sentence of capital punishment, was derived from the human sacrifices
anciently used in Rome; probably, because criminals were usually
selected for these sanguinary offerings.

[4] The lands absolutely assigned to the plebeians free from rent,
were the most remarkable species of Quiritary property. It was so
called from the Quirites, who formed a constituent part of the Roman
people, and whose name was subsequently given to the entire.

* * * * *




CHAPTER IX.

THE PUBLIC AMUSEMENTS AND PRIVATE LIFE OF THE ROMANS.

Butchered to make a Roman holiday. --_Byron_.

The inferiority of the Romans to the Greeks in intellectual
acquirements, was no where more conspicuous than in their public
amusements. While the refined Grecians sought to gratify their taste
by music, the fine arts, and dramatic entertainments, the Romans
derived their chief pleasure from contemplating the brutal and bloody
fights of gladiators; or at best, such rich shows and processions as
gratify the uneducated vulgar. The games in the circus, with which the
Romans were so delighted, that they considered them of equal
importance, with the necessaries of life, consisted of athletic
exercises, such as boxing, racing, wrestling, and gladiatorial
combats. To these, chariot-racing was added under the emperors, and
exhibitions of combats between wild beasts, and, in numerous
instances, between men and beasts.

2. After the establishment of the naval power of Rome, naumachiæ, or
naval combats, were frequently exhibited in circi built for the
purpose. These were not always sham fights; the contests were, in many
instances, real engagements displaying all the horrors of a sanguinary
battle.

3. The custom of exhibiting shows of gladiators, originated in the
barbarous sacrifices of human beings, which prevailed in remote ages.