The Romans, as stated already, are believed to have been

originally near kindred to the Greeks. The same movement, it

is supposed, in the successive outswarmings of Aryan peoples,

deposited in one peninsula the Italian tribes, and in the next

peninsula, eastward, the tribes of the Hellenes. Among the

Italian tribes were Latins, Umbrians, Sabines, Samnites, etc.,

occupying the middle and much of the southern parts of the

peninsula, while a mysterious alien people, the Etruscans,

whose origin is not known, possessed the country north of them

between the Arno and the Tiber. In the extreme south were

remnants of a primitive race, the Iapygian, and Greek colonies

were scattered there around the coasts. From the Latins sprang

the Romans, at the beginning of their separate existence; but

there seems to have been a very early union of these Romans of

the primitive tradition with a Sabine community, whereby was

formed the Roman city-state of historical times. That union

came about through the settlement of the two communities,

Latin and Sabine, on two neighboring hills, near the mouth of

the river Tiber, on its southern bank. In the view of some

historians, it is the geographical position of those hills,

hardly less than the masterful temper and capacity of the race

seated on them, which determined the marvellous career of the

city founded on that site. Says Professor Freeman: "The whole

history of the world has been determined by the geological

fact that at a point a little below the junction of the Tiber

and the Anio the isolated hills stand nearer to one another

than most of the other hills of Latium. On a site marked out

above all other sites for dominion, the centre of Italy, the

centre of Europe, as Europe then was, a site at the junction

of three of the great nations of Italy, and which had the

great river as its highway to lands beyond the bounds of

Italy, stood two low hills, the hill which bore the name of

Latin Saturn, and the hill at the meaning of whose name of

Palatine scholars will perhaps guess for ever. These two

hills, occupied by men of two of the nations of Italy, stood

so near to one another that a strait choice indeed was laid on

those who dwelled on them. They must either join together on

terms closer than those which commonly united Italian leagues,

or they must live a life of border warfare more ceaseless,

more bitter, than the ordinary warfare of Italian enemies.

Legend, with all likelihood, tells us that warfare was tried;

history, with all certainty, tells us that the final choice

was union. The two hills were fenced with a single wall; the

men who dwelled on them changed from wholly separate

communities into tribes of a single city."

The followers of Romulus occupied the Palatine Mount, and the

Sabines were settled on the Quirinal. At subsequent times, the

Cœlian, the Capitoline, the Aventine, the Esquiline and the

Viminal hills were embraced in the circumvallation, and the

city on the seven hills thus acquired that name.

If modern students and thinkers, throwing light on the

puzzling legends and traditions of early Rome from many

sources, in language and archæology, have construed their

meaning lightly, then great importance attaches to those first

unions or incorporations of distinct settlements in the

forming of the original city-state. For it was the beginning

of a process which went on until the whole of Latium, and then

the whole of Italy, and, finally, the whole Mediterranean

world, were joined to the seven hills of Rome. "The whole

history of Rome is a history of incorporation"; and it is

reasonable to believe that the primal spring of Roman

greatness is found in that early adoption and persistent

practice of the policy of political absorption, which gave

conquest a character it had never borne before. At the same

time, this view of the creation of the Roman state contributes

to an understanding of its early constitutional history. It

supposes that the union of the first three tribes which

coalesced--those of the Palatine, the Quirinal and Capitoline

(both occupied by the Sabines) and the Cœlian hills--ended the

process of incorporation on equal terms. These formed the

original Roman people--the "fathers," the "patres," whose

descendants appear in later times as a distinct class or

order, the "patricians"--holding and struggling to maintain

exclusive political rights, and exclusive ownership of the

public domain, the "ager publicus," which became a subject of

bitter contention for four centuries. Around these heirs of

the "fathers" of Rome arose another class of Romans, brought

into the community by later incorporations, and not on equal

terms. If the first class were "fathers," these were children,

in a political sense, adopted into the Roman family, but without

a voice in general affairs, or a share in the public lands, or

eligibility to the higher offices of the state. These were the

"plebeians" or "plebs" of Rome, whose long struggle with the

patricians for political and agrarian rights is the more

interesting side of Roman history throughout nearly the whole

of the prosperous age of the republic.

{997}

At Rome, as at Athens, there was a period of early kingship,

the legends of which are as familiar to us all as the stories

of the Bible, but the real facts of which are almost totally

unknown. It is surmised that the later kings--the well known

Tarquins of the classical tale--were Etruscan princes (it is

certain that they were Etruscans), who had broken for a time

the independence of the Romans and extended their sovereignty

over them. It is suspected, too, that this period of Etruscan

domination was one in which Roman civilization made a great

advance, under the tuition of a more cultivated people. But if

Rome in its infancy did know a time of subjugation, the

endurance was not long. It ended, according to Roman

chronology, in the 245th year of the city, or 509 B.C., by the

expulsion of Tarquin the Proud, the last of the kings.

The Roman Republic.

The Republic was then founded; but it was an aristocratic and

not a democratic republic. The consuls, who replaced the

kings, were required to be patricians, and they were chosen by

the landholders of the state. The senate was patrician; all

the important powers of government were in patrician hands,

and the plebs suffered grievous oppression in consequence.

They were not of a tamely submissive race. They demanded

powers for their own protection, and by slow degrees they won

them--strong as the patricians were in their wealth and their

trained political skill.

Precisely as in Athens, the first great effort among the

common people was to obtain relief from crushing burdens of

debt, which had been laid upon them in precisely the same

way--by loss of harvests while in military service, and by the

hardness of the laws which creditors alone had framed. An army

of plebs, just home from war, marched out of the city and

refused to return until magistrates of their own choosing had

been conceded to them. The patricians could not afford to lose

the bone and sinew of their state, and they yielded the point

in demand (B. C. 494). This first "secession of the plebs"

brought about the first great democratic change in the Roman

constitution, by calling into existence a powerful

magistracy--the Tribunes of the Plebs--who henceforth stood

between the consuls and the common people, for the protection

of the latter.

From this first success the plebeian order went forward, step

by step, to the attainment of equal political rights in the

commonwealth, and equal participation in the lands which Roman

conquest was continually adding to the public domain. In 450

B. C., after ten years of struggle, they secured the

appointment of a commission which framed the famous Twelve

Tables of the Law, and so established a written and certain

code. Five years later, the caste exclusiveness of the

patricians was broken down by a law which permitted marriages

between the orders. In 367 B. C. the patrician monopoly of the

consular office was extinguished, by the notable Licinian

Laws, which also limited the extent of land that any citizen

might occupy, and forbade the exclusive employment of slave

labor on any estate. One by one, after that, other

magistracies were opened to the plebs; and in 287 B. C. by the

Lex Hortensia, the plebeian concilium, or assembly, was made

independent of the senate and its acts declared to be valid

and binding. The democratic commonwealth was now completely

formed.

Roman Conquest of Italy.

While these changes in the constitution of their Republic were

in progress, the Romans had been making great advances toward

supremacy in the peninsula. First they had been in league with

their Latin neighbors, for war with the Æquians, the

Volscians, and the Etruscans. The Volscian war extended over

forty years, and ended about 450 B. C. in the practical

disappearance of the Volscians from history. Of war with the

Æquians, nothing is heard after 458 B. C., when, as the tale

is told, Cincinnatus left his plow to lead the Romans against

them. The war with the Etruscans of the near city of Veii had

been more stubborn. Suspended by a truce between 474 and 438

B. C., it was then renewed, and ended in 396 B. C., when the

Etruscan city was taken and destroyed. At the same time the

power of the Etruscans was being shattered at sea by the

Greeks of Tarentum and Syracuse, while at home they were

attacked from the north by the barbarous Gauls or Celts.

These last named people, having crossed the Alps from Gaul and

Switzerland and occupied northern Italy, were now pressing

upon the more civilized nations to the south of the Po. The

Etruscans were first to suffer, and their despair became so

great that they appealed to Rome for help. The Romans gave

little aid to them in their extremity; but enough to provoke

the wrath of Brennus, the savage leader of the Gauls. He

quitted Etruria and marched to Rome, defeating an army which

opposed him on the Allia, pillaging and burning the city (B.

C. 390) and slaying the senators, who had refused to take

refuge, with other inhabitants, in the capitol. The defenders

of the capitol held it for seven months; Rome was rebuilt,

when the Gauls withdrew, and soon took up her war again with

the Etruscan cities. By the middle of the same century she was

mistress of southern Etruria, though her territories had been

ravaged twice again by renewed incursions of the Gauls. In a

few years more, when her allies of Latium complained of their

meager share of the fruits of these common wars, and demanded

Roman citizenship and equal rights, she fought them fiercely

and humbled them to submissiveness (B. C. 339-338), reducing

their cities to the status of provincial towns.

And now, having awed or subdued her rivals, her friends, and

her enemies, near at hand, the young Republic swung into the

career of rapid conquest which subdued to her will, within

three-fourths of a century, the whole of Italy below the mouth

of the Arno.

In 343 B. C. the Roman arms had been turned against the

Samnites at the south, and they had been driven from the

Campania. In 327 B. C. the same dangerous rivals were again

assailed, with less impunity. At the Caudine Forks, in 321 B.

C., the Samnites inflicted both disaster and shame upon their

indomitable foes; but the end of the war (B. C. 304) found

Rome advanced and Samnium fallen back. A third contest ended

the question of supremacy; but the Samnites (B. C. 290)

submitted to become allies and not subjects of the Roman

state.

In this last struggle the Samnites had summoned Gauls and

Etruscans to join them against the common enemy, and Rome had

overcome their united forces in a great fight at Sentinum.

This was in 295 B. C. Ten years later she annihilated the

Senonian Gauls, annexed their territory and planted a colony

at Sena on the coast. In two years more she had paralyzed the

Boian Gauls by a terrible chastisement, and had nothing more

to fear from the northward side of her realm. Then she turned

back to finish her work in the south.

{998}

War with Pyrrhus.

The Greek cities of the southern coast were harassed by

various marauding neighbors, and most of them solicited the

protection of Rome, which involved, of course, some surrender

of their independence. But one great city, Tarentum, the most

powerful of their number, refused these terms, and hazarded a

war with the terrible republic, expecting support from the

ambitious Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, on the Greek coast opposite

their own. Pyrrhus came readily at their call, with dreams of

an Italian kingdom more agreeable than his own. Assisted in

the undertaking by his royal kinsmen of Macedonia and Syria,

he brought an army of 25,000 men, with 20 elephants--which

Roman eyes had never seen before. In two bloody fights (B. C.

280-279), Pyrrhus was victorious; but the cost of victory was

so great that he dared not follow it up. He went over to

Sicily, instead, and waged war for three years (B. C. 278-276)

with the Carthaginians, who had subjugated most of the island.

The Epirot king brought timely aid to the Sicilian Greeks, and

drove their Punic enemies into the western border of the

island; but he claimed sovereignty over all that his arms

delivered, and was not successful in enforcing the claim. He

returned to Italy and found the Romans better prepared than

before to face his phalanx and his elephants. They routed him

at Beneventum, in the spring of 275 B. C. and he went back to

Epirus, with his dreams dispelled. Tarentum fell, and Southern

Italy was added to the dominion of Rome.

Punic Wars.

During her war with Pyrrhus, the Republic had formed an

alliance with Carthage, the powerful maritime Phœnician city

on the African coast. But friendship between these two cities

was impossible. The ambition of both was too boundless and too

fierce. They were necessarily competitors for supremacy in the

Mediterranean world, from the moment that a narrow strait

between Italy and Sicily was all that held them apart. Rome

challenged her rival to the duel in 264 B. C., when she sent

help to the Mamertines, a band of brigands who had seized the

Sicilian city of Messina, and who were being attacked by both

Carthaginians and Syracusan Greeks. The "First Punic War,"

then begun, lasted twenty-four years, and resulted in the

withdrawal of the Carthaginians from Sicily, and in their

payment of an enormous war indemnity to Rome. The latter

assumed a protectorate over the island, and the kingdom of

Hiero of Syracuse preserved its nominal independence for the

time; but Sicily, as a matter of fact, might already be looked

upon as the first of those provinces, beyond Italy, which Rome

bound to herself, one by one, until she had compassed the

Mediterranean with her dominion and gathered to it all the

islands of that sea.

The "Second Punic war," called sometimes the "Hannibalic war,"

was fought with a great Carthaginian, rather than with

Carthage herself. Hamilcar Barca had been the last and ablest

of the Punic generals in the contest for Sicily. Afterwards he

undertook the conquest of Spain, where his arms had such

success that he established a very considerable power, more

than half independent of the parent state. He nursed an

unquenchable hatred of Rome, and transmitted it to his son

Hannibal, who solemnly dedicated his life to warfare with the

Latin city. Hamilcar died, and in due time Hannibal found

himself prepared to make good his oath. He provoked a

declaration of war (B. C. 218) by attacking Saguntum, on the

eastern Spanish coast--a town which the Romans "protected."

The latter expected to encounter him in Spain; but before the

fleet bearing their legions to that country had reached

Massilia, he had already passed the Pyrenees and the Rhone,

with nearly 100,000 men, and was crossing the Alps, to assail

his astounded foes on their own soil. The terrific barrier was

surmounted with such suffering and loss that only 20,000 foot

and 6,000 horse, of the great army which left Spain, could be

mustered for the clearing of the last Alpine pass. With this

small following, by sheer energy, rapidity and precision of

movement--by force, in other words, of a military genius never

surpassed in the world--he defeated the armies of Rome again

and again, and so crushingly in the awful battle of Cannæ (B.

C. 216) that the proud republic was staggered, but never

despaired. For fifteen years the great Carthaginian held his

ground in southern Italy; but his expectation of being joined

by discontented subjects of Rome in the peninsula was very

slightly realized, and his own country gave him little

encouragement or help. His brother Hasdrubal, marching to his

relief in 207 B. C., was defeated on the river Metaurus and

slain. The arms of Rome had prospered meantime in Sicily and

in Spain, even while beaten at home, and her Punic rival had

been driven from both. In 204 B. C. the final field of battle

was shifted to Carthaginian territory by Scipio, of famous

memory, thereafter styled Africanus, because he "carried the

war into Africa." Hannibal abandoned Italy to confront him,

and at Zama, in the autumn of 202 B. C., the long contention

ended, and the career of Carthage as a Power in the ancient

world was forever closed. Existing by Roman sufferance for

another half century, she then gave her implacable conquerors

another pretext for war, and they ruthlessly destroyed her

(B.C. 146).

Roman Conquest of Greece.

In that same year of the destruction of Carthage, the conquest

of Greece was finished. The first war of the Romans on that

side of the Adriatic had taken place during the Second Punic

war, and had been caused by an alliance formed between

Hannibal and King Philip of Macedonia (B. C. 214). They

pursued it then no further than to frustrate Philip's designs

against themselves; but they formed alliances with the Greek

states oppressed or menaced by the Macedonian, and these drew

them into a second war, just as the century closed. On

Cynoscephalæ, Philip was overthrown (B. C. 197), his kingdom

reduced to vassalage, and the freedom of all Greece was

solemnly proclaimed by the Roman Consul Flaminius.

{999}

And now, for the first time, Rome came into conflict with an

Asiatic power. The throne of the Syrian monarchy, founded by

one of the generals of Alexander the Great, was occupied by a

king more ambitious than capable, who had acquired a large and

loosely jointed dominion in the East, and who bore the

sounding name of Antiochus the Great. This vainglorious King,

having a huge army and many elephants at his disposal, was

eager to try a passage at arms with the redoubtable men of

Rome. He was encouraged in his desire by the Ætolians in

Greece, who bore ill-will to Rome. Under this encouragement,

and having Hannibal--then a fugitive at his court--to give him

counsel, which he lacked intelligence to use, Antiochus

crossed the Ægean and invaded Greece (B. C. 192). The Romans

met him at the pass of Thermopylæ; drove him back to the

shores from which he came; pursued him thither; crushed and

humbled him on the field of Magnesia, and took the kingdoms

and cities of Asia Minor under their protection, as the allies

(soon to be subjects) of Rome.

Twenty years passed with little change in the outward

situation of affairs among the Greeks. But discontent with the

harshness and haughtiness of Roman "protection" changed from

sullenness to heat, and Perseus, son of Philip of Macedonia,

fanned it steadily, with the hope of bringing it to a flame.

Rome watched him with keen vigilance, and before his plans

were ripe her legions were upon him. He battled with them

obstinately for three years (B. C. 171-168); but his fate was

sealed at Pydna. He went as a prisoner to Rome; his kingdom

was broken into four small republics; the Achæan League was

stricken by the captivity of a thousand of its chief men; the

whole of Greece was humbled to submissiveness, though not yet

formally reduced to the state of a Roman province. That

followed some years later, when risings in Macedonia and

Achaia were punished by the extinction of the last semblance

of political independence in both (B. C. 148-146).

The Zenith of the Republic.

Rome now gripped the Mediterranean (the ocean of the then

civilized world) as with four fingers of a powerful hand: one

laid on Italy and all its islands, one on Macedonia and

Greece, one on Carthage, one on Spain, and the little finger

of her "protection" reaching over to the Lesser Asia. Little

more than half a century, since the day that Hannibal

threatened her own city gates, had sufficed to win this vast

dominion. But the losses of the Republic had been greater,

after all, than the gains; for the best energies of its

political constitution had been expended in the acquisition,

and the nobler qualities in its character had been touched

with the incurable taints of a licentious prosperity.

Beginning of Decline.

A century and a half had passed since the practical ending of

the struggle of plebeians with patricians for political and

agrarian rights. In theory and in form, the constitution

remained as democratic as it was made by the Licinian Laws of

367 B. C., and by the finishing touch of the Hortensian Law of

287 B. C. But in practical working it had reverted to the

aristocratic mode. A new aristocracy had risen out of the

plebeian ranks to reinforce the old patrician order. It was

composed of the families of men who had been raised to

distinction and ennobled by the holding of eminent offices,

and its spirit was no less jealous and exclusive than that of

the older high caste.

The Senate and the Mob.

Thus strengthened, the aristocracy had recovered its

ascendancy in Rome, and the Senate, which it controlled, had

become the supreme power in government. The amazing success of

the Republic during the last century just reviewed--its

successes in war, in diplomacy, and in all the sagacious

measures of policy by which its great dominion had been

won--are reasonably ascribed to this fact. For the Senate had

wielded the power of the state, in most emergencies, with

passionless deliberation and with unity and fixity of aim.

But it maintained its ascendancy by an increasing employment

of means which debased and corrupted all orders alike. The

people held powers which might paralyze the Senate at any

moment, if they chose to exercise them, through their

assemblies and their tribunes. They had seldom brought those

powers into play thus far, to interfere with the senatorial

government of the Republic, simply because they had been

bribed to abstain. The art of the politician in Rome, as

distinguished from the statesman, had already become

demagoguery. This could not well have been otherwise under the

peculiar constitution of the Roman citizenship. Of the

thirty-five tribes who made up the Roman people, legally

qualified to vote, only four were within the city. The

remaining thirty-one were "plebs urbana." There was no

delegated representation of this country populace--citizens

beyond the walls. To exercise their right of suffrage they

must be personally present at the meetings of the "comitia

tributa"--the tribal assemblies; and those of any tribe who

chanced to be in attendance at such a meeting might give a

vote which carried with it the weight of their whole tribe.

For questions were decided by the majority of tribal, not

individual, votes; and a very few members of a tribe might act

for and be the tribe, for all purposes of voting, on occasions

of the greatest possible importance. It is quite evident that

a democratic system of this nature gave wide opportunity for

corrupt "politics." There must have been, always, an

attraction for the baser sort among the rural plebs, drawing

them into the city, to enjoy the excitement of political

contests, and to partake of the flatteries and largesses which

began early to go with these. And circumstances had tended

strongly to increase this sinister sifting into Rome of the

most vagrant and least responsible of her citizens, to make

them practically the deputies and representatives of that

mighty sovereign which had risen in the world--the "Populus

Romanus." For there was no longer either thrift or dignity

possible in the pursuits of husbandry. The long Hannibalic War

had ruined the farming class in Italy by its ravages; but the

extensive conquests that followed it had been still more

ruinous to that class by several effects combined. Corn

supplies from the conquered provinces were poured into Rome at

cheapened prices; enormous fortunes, gathered in the same

provinces by officials, by farmers of taxes, by money-lenders,

and by traders, were largely invested in great estates,

absorbing the small farms of olden time; and, finally,

free-labor in agriculture was supplanted, more and more, by

the labor of slaves, which war and increasing wealth combined

to multiply in numbers. Thus the "plebs urbana" of Rome were a

depressed and, therefore, a degenerating class, and the same

circumstances that made them so impelled them towards the

city, to swell the mob which held its mighty sovereignty in

their hands.

{1000}

So far, a lavish amusement of this mob with free games, and

liberal bribes, had kept it generally submissive to the

senatorial government. But the more it was debased by such

methods, and its vagrancy encouraged, the more extravagant

gratuities of like kind it claimed. Hence a time could never

be far away when the aristocracy and the senate would lose

their control of the popular vote on which they had built

their governing power.

Agrarian Agitations.

History for ready reference, Volume 2, El Dorado to Greaves · 第 64 / 222 段