CHAPTER XV

HUMANITARIAN MEASURES OF AUGUSTUS—LIFE IN THE

IMPERIAL CITY—FIRST ATTEMPTS OF THE STATE TO CHECK

INFANTICIDE—TRAJAN AND THE VELEIA LOAN—STOIC SPIRIT IN

PLINY’S CHARITY.

Astonishing depravity marked the last days of the Republic, to the

point where it was even said that annual divorces were as much the

fashion in Rome as voluntary celibacy.[335] Seneca says there were

women who reckoned their years by their husbands. In the severe,

early period of the Republic, celibacy was considered censurable and

even guilty,[336] whereas later it was not only condoned but wittily

approved, to judge by the quips of the dramatist, Plautus, whose

cynical references to marriage and the burden of a wife read not unlike

our own scoffing and immoral dramatists of the eighteenth century.[337]

Civil wars and proscriptions had left great voids in Roman families;

more prolific foreigners, freedmen, and slaves began to dominate the

noisy city now beginning to earn her title of Mistress of the World.

The visitor to Pompeii today, noting the large and heavy paving blocks,

the narrow sidewalks, the deep ruts made in these solid streets by

the heavy wagons, the open shops, the indecent signs, sees Rome in

miniature. All this cosmopolitan disorder marked the greater town that

had not twenty thousand inhabitants but a million; the noise and the

congestion increased out of all proportion to its size because of the

character of its dwellers, for Rome had a large foreign population.

As in modern New York or London, it was in the foreign quarters that

were found the discomforts, the loud misunderstandings, and the noisy,

tragic fights for small things.

The stranger arriving in Rome had hardly entered its gates when he was

being jostled and shoved. The narrow streets were filled with pedlars

calling their wares of all kinds, from matches (_sulphurata_), in

exchange for broken glass where money was scarce, to a dish of boiled

peas for an _as_, or fine smoking sausages for those who had more

money. Idlers filled the streets at all hours, but especially at the

lunch hour (the sixth) when business ceased and those who patronized

the cafés (_tabernæ_) were hurrying to get to their accustomed

tables.[338]

[Illustration: THE FINDING OF ROMULUS AND REMUS]

Around billboards (_programmata_) announcing new plays or

exhibitions, crowds gathered while other groups watched acrobats, who

beat themselves for the comic effects produced; dancers, jugglers,

snake charmers, and performers of every kind and nation abounded.

Heavily loaded wagons rumbled noisily along while their drivers cursed

and lashed the tired beasts of burden, or the appearance of a tamed

bear threw an entire street into wild and joyous confusion. Or perhaps

a new troupe of gladiators entered town, to the complete cessation

of all business and pastimes.[339] Here and there in the streets,

money-changers and others set up tables in convenient places where they

were least apt to be driven away, and hawked loudly the bargains that

they offered. Money from all the world was then flowing Romeward, and

in nothing was this shown more than in expensive funerals, with their

hired and vociferous mourners, blocking the streets and putting an

end for the time being, to other business—and amusements.[340] Narrow

as were the streets, they were made more so by the _tabernæ_, built

up against the houses, this practice becoming so much of a nuisance

(as in modern times) that the Emperor Domitian caused a decree to be

issued against them, forcing the owners to remove the encroachments and

confine themselves to the area of the house.[341]

A drunken man taking the entire _via_ in his navigation—to the

amusement of the crowd; a member of the city guard hurrying some

offender to the court; or, reclining in his _lectica_, a noble, carried

by six uniformed slaves, his other numerous attendants clearing the way

for him—all these added to the noise and confusion—while through it all

children crowded the curb with their games.

Such was the Rome that Augustus found, its proud citizens masters of

the world, luxurious, sensual, disdainful of the very idea of duty,

idling days away while they scoffed at marriage. But the foreigners,

the freedmen, and the slaves married, and when the burden of a new

child was too much for the small income made by amusing or serving

some Roman citizen, the little newcomer was thrown into the Tiber or

left unmarked on a busy thoroughfare. One of the first undertakings of

Augustus was to try to remedy these evil conditions by laws and fiscal

measures, his principal endeavour being to put an end to the corruption

of morals and the exhaustion of the legitimate population.

From the day of the battle of Actium (B. C. 31) when the Roman

world practically lay at his feet, Octavius, or Augustus as he was

afterward called, while gratifying his ambition in adding to his

power, studiously and ostentatiously observed the forms of popular

government. In this he was paying heed to the fate of his uncle and

also conciliating the people, though with every ingratiating move he

increased his power.

One of the first laws he proposed was the _lex Julia_ (_de maritandis

ordinibus_) which was rejected by the _comitia tributa_, B. C. 18, but

was adopted in A.D. 4. To this was added as a supplement the _lex

Papia Poppæa_, the two being known as the _lex Julia et Papia_ or as

_novæ leges_, or simply _leges_, the latter reference indicating that

they were referred to as the laws _par excellence_. Not only marriage,

but everything connected with it was treated in these two laws, which

really constituted a code, the most extensive after the laws of the

Twelve Tables.

These laws made a great impression on Roman society. How completely

customs had swung to extremes since the days of Romulus is shown in

this _lex Papia_, as Gaius calls it. Instead of securing the father in

his right over the life of children, as the stern head of the house who

might decide at will whether he should let his offspring live, the law

now decreed that it was through the children that he gained a status in

the community. Persons who were not married and had no children were

unable to inherit; the unmarried person not being able to take any part

of what had been left to him, and the married person without children

(_orbus_) being able to take only one half.[342] Among the provisions

of the _lex Julia_, or the _leges_, were those entitling that candidate

for office who had the greatest number of children to preference. Of

the two consuls it was decreed that he should be the senior whose

children were the most numerous; a relief from all personal taxes and

burdens was granted to citizens who had three children if they lived

in Rome, four if they lived in Italy, and five if they lived in the

provinces.

With the establishment of the _caduca_, by which there was instituted

a punishment for sterility and a reward for legitimate procreation, it

can be seen that there would follow some diminution in the number of

children exposed, though according to Tacitus,[343] “marriages and the

rearing of children did not become more frequent, so powerful are the

attractions of the childless state.”

By giving the people, or the common treasury, the benefit of the

clause forfeiting the inheritance on account of sterility, the law was

recognizing the _populus_ as the common father, a legal concept that is

becoming more and more the attitude of the twentieth century, and was

then first trenchantly expressed.

Suppressed in part by the constitution of Caracalla as to the

privileges of paternity to the claim upon the _caduca_, and by

Constantine as to the penalties for celibacy, these laws were not

completely and textually abrogated until Justinian. They were the

beginning, however, of the new movement; out of the degeneration and

degradation of the waning days of the Republic there had come at

least this forward step, though the patricians complained that these

provisions gave rise to despised informers and opportunities for

tyrannical misuse of power.

The child now had some other than a future use; it had an immediate

value. Occasionally, in times past, strangers had picked up children

exposed by their parents and had reared them as slaves, or maimed and

blinded them for the profession of begging. Augustus set aside a reward

of two thousand sesterces (about $40.00) for the person who would

rear an orphan. This was the seed of a growing humanity, the first

intimation of an inclination to treat children with kindness, though

it contrasts with Augustus’s own personal conduct when his anger was

aroused. Both his daughter and granddaughter were so profligate that

he banished them; when his granddaughter Julia was delivered of a

child after sentence, he ordered that the child be “neither owned as a

relative nor brought up.”[344]

From the death of Augustus, 14 A.D., to the reign of Nerva, 96 A.D.,

the violent sway of the army and the tragic fate of successive emperors

cloud the history of Roman law and progress.

The Emperor Claudius distinguished himself by ordering that Claudia, a

child by his first wife, “who was in truth the daughter of his freedman

Boter, be thrown naked at her mother’s door.”[345]

There were no successors to the great jurists of the type of Capito

and Labeo, whose opinions in Augustan days were accepted by even the

emperor himself. With the coming of Nerva there was a great change in

the attitude toward children. Despite a short reign of two years and

a reputation for a weak will, it was to his initiative that the State

owed the movement to put an end to the practice of abandoning infants,

by having the government subsidize poor parents.

Apparently there was no other way of stopping this ruinous custom in a

degenerate day. It was useless to appeal to the rich to rear families,

and the poor who were still producing children were becoming poorer.

One of Nerva’s noteworthy acts to alleviate conditions was the founding

of colonies, and it was in accordance with the same general plan that,

a few months before he died, he ordered that assistance should be given

parents who found themselves without the means of bringing up their

offspring.

This order was issued in the year 97, and so successful was the

experiment under his successor, who accepted and enlarged the plan,

that in the year 100, five thousand children were receiving aid from

the State. Much credit is given to Trajan for following up the ideas

of Nerva, but it was to Nerva that Rome owed Trajan, one of the most

humane of her emperors.

Another evidence of the humanity of Nerva was the fact that he

prohibited the making of eunuchs, a practice that had met with the

disfavour of the Emperor Domitian years before, and a practice that

led the Pope Clement XIV., to decree, centuries later, that no more

_castrats_ should sing in churches. And these things he did when the

extravagance of his predecessors had made it necessary for him to sell

the imperial furniture and jewels in order to replenish the treasury.

One of his coins shows him seated in the _curule_ chair, dispensing

charity to a boy and girl, the mother standing near, with the legend

“Tutela Italia.”

One need only to read the gentle replies of the Emperor Trajan to the

younger Pliny, to see that, in that reign at least, there was a great

change and that the conception of duty in the modern sense was creeping

into a military world. Pliny himself, in a letter to Cannius, describes

how he settled five hundred thousand sesterces (about $20,000) on the

city of Como for the maintenance of children, “who were born of good

families”—an act as traceable to the growing protective tendency as to

Pliny’s patriotism and love of glory.

According to the tablet of Velia[346] to the Emperor Trajan, the landed

proprietors of the place received on mortgage at five per cent.,[347]

less than half the usual rate of that time, what would be about $50,000

of our money, the interest of which was to go to the maintenance of

three hundred poor children.

The means employed to help parents and prevent them from exposing

their children were skilfully contrived. Through the municipality,

Trajan lent money to certain proprietors to improve their land, and the

interest paid on this loan constituted a benevolent fund by which the

children were taken care of, or rather, by which their parents were

rewarded for not murdering them. From the table of Velia we learn also

that fifty-one proprietors of that section received on land twelve

times the value of the loan, or 1,116,000 sesterces ($52,820) the

annual interest of which, 55,800 sesterces ($2,650), constituted a fund

for the support of three hundred children, two hundred and sixty-four

boys and thirty-six girls. The boys received annually 192 sesterces,

and the girls 144 sesterces. Illegitimate children were given less,

the boys 144 sesterces, and the girls 120 sesterces, although in the

tablet there were only two illegitimate children, one boy and one girl.

The fact that the number of girls assisted was only one-tenth the

number of boys, goes to show, that this new institution was not due so

much to the fact that the sentiment of charity had infiltrated through

pagan society, as to the fact that pagan society was endeavouring to

repair the ravages of degenerate and pauperistic days, shown in the

diminution of the class of freedmen in Rome.[348]

Writing to Pliny at Bithynia, to which place he had been sent by Trajan

as imperial legate, the Emperor mildly answers an inquiry as to what

the law shall be in that province regarding deserted children. Trajan

rules that deserted children, who are found and brought up, shall be

allowed their freedom without being obliged to repay the money expended

for their maintenance.

“The question concerning such children who were exposed by their

parents,” says Trajan, “and afterward preserved by others, and educated

in a state of servitude, though born free, has been frequently

discussed; but I do not find in the constitutions of the princes,

my predecessors, any general regulation upon this head extending to

all the provinces. There are, indeed, some rescripts of Domitian to

Avidius Niguinus and Armenius Brocchus, which ought to be observed; but

Bithynia is not comprehended in the provinces therein mentioned. I am

of opinion, therefore, that the claims of those who assert their right

of freedom upon this principle, should be allowed, without compelling

them to purchase their liberty by repaying the money advanced for their

maintenance.”[349]

A new note this, for in order to encourage the saving of children who

had been exposed, the custom had been rigidly followed that the person

who saved a child was able to regard it as his slave, without regard to

what its condition had been previous to exposure.

As shown in the correspondence of Pliny and Trajan, there is much

truth, in the contention that the Emperor shows up better than the

philosopher and poet.

The noteworthy thing about this remarkable exchange of letters is that

a new spirit is revealed. It is a living, working philosophy that we

discover, practical results of that philosophy bringing a kindlier

treatment of slaves, a greater respect for women, a more thoughtful

regard for the education of the young, and a gentler assistance of the

helpless and distressed.

True, Cicero, a century and a half before had preached doctrines

that paved the way, and for generations earlier there had been such

a kindlier spirit in the air. But not until now do we find a man of

Pliny’s dominating prominence, or nearness to power, suggesting that he

will pay a third of the expenses of the cost of founding a university

in his own town. His reason, he says, is to save youths from going to

Milan for their education and thereby getting away from the proper home

influences.

Tracing the thin thread of child progress through these livid days we

are brought in touch with the little known but better side of Roman

life; for despite the general debauchery of the upper classes and

the unwholesome pictures of Juvenal, there is evidence that there

were Roman families untouched by the general immorality where women

of the type of Marcia or Helvia, addressed in the letters of Seneca,

presided over homes in which there was an atmosphere of virtue and

self-restraint, and where tales of deeds of the Romans of the earlier

days still had their charm and their influence.

The Child in Human Progress · 第 15 / 24 章