THE EMPIRE UNDER THE ANTONINES—CONCLUSION
The chief work of Rome in the world, as has often been said in this
little book, was the defence of Mediterranean civilisation against
external enemies. That work was of a double nature. It could not be done
simply by marking out and holding lines of frontier; it was also
necessary so to organise the Empire within its frontiers that the whole
should contribute to the common object, with men, money and public
spirit. The last two chapters will have shown that from the time of
Julius and Augustus Roman rulers fully recognised this twofold nature of
their task. Augustus in particular, while gradually settling the
frontiers on a system well thought out, and adapted to his means and
experience, also spent much time and pains on internal organisation. He
found the Empire a loose collection of subject territories, each
governed, well or ill as it might happen, by an officer almost
independent of the central authority; he left it, at the end of his long
life, in the way of becoming a well-compacted whole, in which every part
felt more or less the force of a just central government; a civilised
State “standing out in clear relief against the surrounding barbarism.”
In such an empire there must, of course, be differences of race and
language—differences, too, of habits, feelings, modes of thought; but
under just and wise rule such differences need be no hindrance to the
political unity of the whole. There is a book of this period, within the
reach of every one, which illustrates better than any other this unity
in diversity of the Roman Empire—I mean the Acts of the Apostles. It
should be studied carefully, with maps and such other helps as may be
available, down to the last chapter, where it leaves St. Paul at Rome,
living in his own hired house, in the centre of Mediterranean life and
government.
Under the immediate successors of Augustus, Tiberius, Claudius and Nero,
his policy was, on the whole, maintained with good faith and discretion;
and at the close of the first century A.D. Vespasian and his two sons,
Titus and Domitian, did little more than improve the working of the
machinery of his government. More and more, it is true, the constitution
became a real monarchy; the part played in it by the Senate of the free
State was getting steadily narrowed; but this was all in the interest of
efficiency, and, so far as we can see, it was necessary to the internal
development of the Empire. The Cæsars of the first century must have the
credit of ruling wisely, with the help of their advisers, on the
Augustan principles. True, the great literary genius of the age, the
historian Tacitus, by drawing brilliant and lurid portraits of some of
them, has diverted our attention from their work as agents of a great
system; but to tell their story as Tacitus has told it is neither
possible nor necessary here. I may pass them over and go on to the
second century and the age of the Antonines, which has rightly been
judged by historians to be the most brilliant and the happiest in all
Roman history.
That four men of what seems to us “right judgment in all things” should
succeed each other in power at this critical time, is one more example
of the wonderful good fortune of Rome. All were men of capacity and
education, hard workers and conscientious, and they seem to have
communicated their good qualities to their subordinates, for they never
wanted for loyal helpers. The Senate, indeed, was now of little avail
for actual work, and the greater part of the business had long been done
by Cæsar[17] and his own “servants,” freedmen for the most part, often
ambitious and unscrupulous Greeks; but in this period, as we shall see
directly, the civil service, as we may call it, was placed on a sound
and honourable basis. It would seem as if the ideas of duty and
discipline were once more to prevail throughout the Roman official
world.
The first of the four rulers, Ulpius Trajanus, known to us all as
Trajan, was not of Roman or even Italian birth, but came from the
province of further Spain: a fact which marks the growth of the idea
that every part of the Empire may now be turned to account for the
common good. Trajan was a soldier by breeding and disposition, and his
contribution to the work of this period was mainly a military one. The
frontier along the Danube, the last (as we have seen) to be settled, had
always been the weakest; and yet here henceforward was to be the most
dangerous point in the Empire’s line of defence. Along the whole length
of the lower Danube a great mass of barbarian tribes was already
pressing, pressed themselves from behind by others to north and east.
And here, to the north of the river, a great kingdom had been founded by
a king of the Dacian people, which corresponds roughly with the modern
Roumania. A glance at a map of the Empire will show that such a kingdom
would be a standing menace to Italy, to Greece, and even to the
peninsula of Asia Minor, and from the Roman point of view Trajan was
quite justified in his determination to conquer and annex it. He carried
out this policy in two successive wars, with consummate daring and
skill. Dacia became a Roman province, and lasted as such long enough
(about 200 years) to be an effectual help to imperial defence in this
quarter. The story of the two wars is told in the marvellous series of
sculptures forming a spiral round the column of Trajan, which stood and
still stands at Rome in the forum built by him and called by his name.
Towards the end of his life Trajan embarked on a new policy in the East,
and failed to carry it out. The shrewd Augustus, as we saw, had trusted
here to his prestige, knowing that war in this region was both perilous
and expensive. Since then both peril and expense had been incurred here
under Nero, and no definite results had been gained. Trajan, however,
provoked by a move of the Parthian king, made up his mind to seize
Armenia, the old bone of contention between Rome and Parthia, and not
only did this, but added by conquest two other provinces, Mesopotamia
and Assyria. Some historians have thought his judgment as good here as
it was on the Danube. The best way of deciding the question is to look
carefully at a map of the Empire and then to ask oneself whether these
territories were really needed for the protection of Mediterranean
civilisation. For myself I unhesitatingly answer in the negative; but
there is no need to dispute the point here, as Trajan died before he had
made his conquests secure. The Jews dispersed all over these regions,
urged by their implacable hatred of Rome, stirred up rebellion in
Trajan’s rear with alarming ferocity, and in the middle of this turmoil
he died on his way back to Rome. His successor Hadrian at once renounced
any attempt to keep the new provinces.
It would be unjust to the memory of a great man if we were to think of
Trajan as a soldier only. He was a strenuous man, unsparing of himself
in any part of his duty. He pursued a policy of public benefit in Italy,
striving, like Augustus, to encourage agriculture and population, and
carrying out a plan of his predecessor Nerva for providing a fund for
the education of poor children. This last institution became an
important one, and shows well how really benevolent—perhaps even to
excess—how anxious for the well-being of Italy, were the Cæsars of the
second century. Money was lent by the State to the Italian farmers in
need of it, and the interest, at five per cent., was appropriated to the
education of boys up to eighteen and girls up to fourteen years of age.
Trajan bestowed the same minute care on the provinces. In most of these
there was no trouble, but in one case, Bithynia, which had been under
Senatorial governors, he had to send out a special commissioner to
repair neglect and mischief. Luckily for us it happened that this
commissioner was Pliny the younger, nephew of the great encyclopædist of
the same name; and Pliny was so prominent a figure of the time that his
correspondence has been preserved. That part of it which contains his
letters to Trajan, and Trajan’s brief and pithy answers, is one of the
most precious treasures that have survived from ancient literature.
Pliny consults him on a variety of details, some of them almost
ludicrously petty, some of them of general importance, such as a famous
one about his policy towards the Christians; and the answers show us
Trajan as a shrewd and sensible man, fully aware that in such a unity as
the Roman Empire there must needs be diversity, and that governors must
learn to adapt themselves to such diversity without losing hold of the
principles of justice and equity. Before we leave this subject it may be
as well to mention that this constant interchange of letters between
persons more than a thousand miles apart need astonish no one. In the
interest of imperialism the public posts had been thoroughly organised
by Augustus; the roads were excellent, the shipping well seen to, and
travelling was at least as easy and rapid as it was in England less than
a century ago.
Trajan’s strong and rather rugged features, familiar to all students of
the Empire, are in striking contrast to those of his three successors.
He was clean shaven, but his next successor, Hadrian, introduced the
practice of wearing his beard, and this was adhered to. All the imperial
portraits of this age, as preserved on coins and sculptures, are
perfectly authentic, and the likenesses are consistent. In the British
Museum the reader may see the features of these great Cæsars as
faithfully reproduced as those of British statesmen in the National
Portrait Gallery.
Trajan was succeeded by his cousin Hadrian, beyond doubt one of the most
capable and efficient men who ever wielded great power. No one can study
his reign without feeling that it was better in this age, if an
efficient man could be found, that his hand alone should be on the helm.
Probably Hadrian was only one of many who might have done as well as he
did, for there was now a spirit abroad of intelligent industry directed
to the good of the State; yet it is almost certain that the Empire was
the better for not having the sovereignty put into commission. It has
been well said of Hadrian that he desired “to see himself all that was
to be seen, to know all that was to be known, to do all that was to be
done”; and subsequent events proved that this intelligent industry could
hardly have been carried all through the imperial work with equal
effect, had it been shared with others.
Hadrian accomplished his work by two long periods of travel, each
lasting some four years. Without any pomp or state he made himself
acquainted with all parts of the Empire and their needs, as no ruler had
done since Augustus and Agrippa shared such a task between them. The
more immediate object was to inspect the frontiers and secure them, and
as Hadrian was a trained soldier, with much experience under Trajan,
this was to him familiar work. But he was so full of curiosity, so
anxious to see all that the Empire had to show him, that while he
practised his indefatigable industry he could also gratify his
intelligence. In this he was more like Julius Cæsar than any other Roman
we know of, though in most traits of character he was very different
from that great man. It is not possible here to describe Hadrian’s
frontier work in detail, but a specimen of it shall be given which
should be interesting to British readers.
Britain had been invaded by Claudius in the previous century, and the
southern part of the island had been made into a Roman province. Since
then the frontier had been pushed farther north, and the frontier
strongholds were no longer Colchester and Gloucester, but Lincoln,
Chester and York. Hadrian spent several months here in the course of his
first journey, and his visit had a remarkable result which we can see
with our eyes at this moment. He must have noted two facts: first, the
unsettled and rebellious condition of the natives of Yorkshire and
Northumberland (Brigantes): and secondly, the narrow waist of the island
between the Solway Firth and the mouth of the Tyne. He must have
reasoned that if Roman forces could be permanently established on a
fortified line between the two seas, this line would serve as a check on
the Brigantes, and also as a base of operations for further advance
northwards.
Thus it is that “Hadrian’s wall” remains as the most striking of all
Roman works in our island. It is about seventy miles long, and consisted
eventually (for we cannot be sure that it was completed by Hadrian) of a
stone wall on the northern side, twenty feet high, an earthen rampart on
the southern side, and a military road between them. At intervals there
were fortified stations, seventeen in all, including the two which
connected the lines with the sea; of these two the eastern one, near
Newcastle, now famous for its collieries, is still known as _Wallsend_.
The wall enabled the Romans to advance northwards, and soon another
fortification was built on a smaller scale between the Forth and Clyde,
about which a large volume has just been published by Dr. G. Macdonald,
of Edinburgh. The conquest of the Highlands was never, indeed, carried
out; but Hadrian’s great work had an immense moral effect on the
population to the south of it, and Britain became very substantially
Romanised. Towns and country houses (_villæ_) sprang up in abundance
along or near the military roads. As I write these lines in North
Oxfordshire, I have the remains of several of these _villæ_ within easy
reach, and can visit, each in a day, at least four considerable Roman
towns, viz. Cirencester, Gloucester, Silchester (Calleva), and last, but
not least, Bath (Aquæ Sulis), where the Romans found and used, as they
always did in such spots, the magnificent hot springs, building noble
baths about them which may be seen to this day.
Hadrian’s care for the good working of the civil government was as great
as his zeal for frontier defence. Two forward steps were taken by him in
this department, both of which helped on that consolidation of the
Empire which was his constant aim.
First, he organised and dignified the Civil Service, on which the actual
good working of the whole system depended. Cæsar’s share in this work
had steadily been increasing while that of the Senate diminished; yet
Cæsar had so far done his part, as we saw just now, with the help only
of his own personal “servants,” who were mostly freedmen, _i.e._ slaves
by origin, and many of them Greeks. Hadrian now established a public
imperial civil service, of which the members must be Roman knights,
_i.e._ men of a certain consequence in regard to birth and property.
These new civil servants were excused all military service, and could
thus be trained to the work without interruption, during their earlier
years.
Secondly, we may date from Hadrian’s reign the beginning of the
consolidation of Roman law, and the rise of a school of great lawyers
such as the world has never known since. Apart from the defence of
Mediterranean civilisation, to which, indeed, its indirect contribution
was not small, this was the most valuable legacy of Rome to modern
Europe. Law had originally consisted mainly of the old legal rules of
the city-state of Rome, embodied in the Twelve tables, and a few
statutes; but, in course of time, through the need of interpreting
these, and adjusting them to the customs of other peoples in the Empire,
an immense body of what we may call _judge-made law_ had arisen in the
form of edicts or public notices of magistrates, issued both in Italy
and the provinces. As these customs were now well known, and as the
Empire had reached its limits, it was possible to close and consolidate
this huge body of official decisions and precedents; and this was done
under Hadrian’s direction. The other two sources of law were still to
grow largely before they could be welded into the great “Body of Law”
(_Corpus Juris_) compiled under the orders of Justinian in the sixth
century, which is still the chief European textbook of legal studies.
These two sources were the delivered opinions of wise lawyers on points
of law, and the decisions of the Cæsars in various forms, all of which
had the force of law.
The death of Hadrian in A.D. 138 brings us to the third of the great
Cæsars of this age, Titus Antoninus, a man who, at fifty-two, had
already done excellent work for the Empire. He is known to history as
Antoninus Pius, and this last name, given him apparently on his
accession, may be a reminiscence of Virgil’s epithet for his hero, and
may be due to the strong sense of duty which marked his whole life,
public and private. He seems, indeed, vividly to recall the ideal of the
Roman character as we traced it in the third chapter of this book; yet
he was not Italian by birth. His family belonged to Nismes in southern
Gaul, and that ancient city still honours him with a “Place Antonin,” in
which his statue stands. His features, as they appear on portrait busts,
entirely confirm the account of him left us by his nephew and successor.
Grave and wise, gentle yet firm, religious in the true old Roman sense,
pure in life, and simple in all his needs and pleasures, he ruled over a
peaceful and contented empire, devoting himself to the work of
humanising and softening the life and lot of his subjects.
Let us glance, for example, at his attitude towards slavery, which, when
we last noticed it, was threatening to become a deadly poison in the
Roman system. During the first century of the Empire, chiefly under the
influence of the Stoic philosophy, as later on under that of
Christianity, there had been growing up a feeling that a slave was,
after all, a human being, and had some claim to be treated as such under
the Roman law, beneficent in its dealings with all other human beings.
Antoninus followed out this new idea both in legislation and in his
private life, as did his successor also, who adored his memory. They
limited the right of a master over his slaves in several ways; ordaining
that if cruelty were proved against a master, he should be compelled to
sell the slave he had ill-treated. It is noteworthy, too, that the
philosopher in whom they most delighted, Epictetus, had himself
originally been a slave. There is no better way of realising the spirit
of humanity which actuated Antoninus and his successor than by making
some acquaintance with the moral philosophy of Epictetus, and the
_Meditations_ of Marcus Aurelius. The _Golden Sayings of Epictetus_, in
the Golden Treasury Series,[18] and Dr. Rendall’s translation of the
_Meditations_, will be of use to those who do not read Greek.
Hadrian had left the Empire well guarded, and it does not seem to have
occurred to Antoninus to see for himself that Hadrian’s vigilance was
maintained. This was the one weak point of his reign, and it cost his
successors dear. He only once left Italy, and his mind was never
occupied with wars or rumours of wars; he lived tranquilly, and died
peacefully, without trouble or anxiety. But we know that even before his
death clouds were beginning to gather on the northern frontier; and we
cannot but feel that the beautiful tranquillity of Antoninus’s life was
hardly compatible with the duty of an imperial guardian.
Marcus Aurelius, the author of the _Meditations_, succeeded his uncle
and adoptive father in A.D. 161. Though not the greatest of the four as
a ruler, he was the most remarkable as a man, and holds a higher place
than the others in the world’s esteem. We may find parallels in history
to Trajan, less easily, perhaps, to Hadrian and Antoninus; but there is
no monarch like Marcus, not even in the history of the Jews. It is,
indeed, astonishing that Rome, Rome of the hard practical temperament,
should have produced a ruler who was a philosopher and almost a saint,
and yet capable of government. It is the last striking manifestation of
the old Roman spirit of duty and discipline, now kindled into a real
ethical emotion by the teaching of the Stoics, far the most inspiring
creed then available for a man of action. Without any aid from
Christianity, which, indeed, he could not understand and occasionally
persecuted, Marcus learnt not only how to make his own life pure, but
how to live and work for the world of his day.
But saintliness on the throne, as in the case of St. Louis of France,
has its drawbacks in practical work. It is, perhaps, true that the mind
of Marcus was more active, and found greater satisfaction, in
questioning itself than in anxious inquiry into the state of the Empire.
He was not one of those of whom our poet says that they do Duty’s work
_and know it not_; and as a consequence his days were not serene and
bright. He had a tendency to be morbid, and, like all morbid men, he was
serious even to sadness. It has been well said of him that he is always
insisting on his faith in a universe in which, nevertheless, he can find
nothing but disappointment.
His sensitiveness about his duty sometimes warped his judgment and
blunted his discernment of character. At the outset he made a bad
blunder in dividing the imperial power with his brother by adoption,
Lucius Verus, who had little principle and much leaning to pleasure. To
him he committed the charge of a war with Parthia which became
inevitable, and though the Roman arms were successful, this was not due
to the skill or energy of either Marcus or Verus. Had a strong
scientific mind been in command, it might have been possible to avert or
mitigate a calamity which now fell on the Mediterranean world, and had a
share, perhaps a large one, in the decay and fall of the Empire. The
legions brought back with them from the East one of the most terrible
plagues known to history, which can only be compared for its effects
with the Black Death in the fourteenth century.
Not only in the East, but nearer home, Marcus had to meet formidable
foes who broke through the frontiers with which Hadrian had taken such
pains. Pushed forward by pressure from the rear, German tribes
unwillingly made their way into Roman territory, overran the new
province of Dacia, crossed the Danube, and even passed over the Alps
into Italy. Marcus’s difficulties were great, but he met them with
patience and courage. The pestilence had so greatly thinned the
population that both men and money were wanting for the war, and the
struggle to drive back the unwilling invaders was prolonged for thirteen
years. It was still going on when Marcus died of fever in camp at
Vienna. As he closed his eyes in his tent he must have felt that he had
spent himself in vain, and that evil days were in store for the Empire.
He left a worthless son, Commodus, who failed to understand the danger,
and let things go.
We need not follow the Empire in its downward course. We have seen what
the work of Rome in the world was to be, and how at last she
accomplished it in spite of constant peril and frequent disaster. From
Marcus Aurelius onwards the strain of self-defence was too great to
allow of progress in any social or political sense. The monarchy became
more absolute, the machinery of government more complicated; the masses
were over-taxed, and the middle classes ruined. Depopulation again set
in, and attempts to remedy it by settling barbarian invaders within the
frontiers had some bad results. In less than a century from the death of
Marcus the Empire had been divided into two halves of east and west,
with a new capital for the eastern half at Byzantium (Constantinople).
This, like all the changes of the later Empire, was meant strictly for
the purpose of resisting the invaders; but, none the less, they broke at
last through all barriers.
Yet this did not happen before the name and fame of Rome had made such
deep impression on their minds that they sought to deserve the
inheritance which had thus fallen to them; despising, indeed, the
degenerate provincials who struck no blow in their own defence, but full
of respect for the majestic power which had for so many centuries
confronted and instructed them.[19] They never swept away the
civilisation of the Mediterranean; from Julius onwards the Roman rulers
had done so much to defend it, had raised its prestige so high, had so
thoroughly organised its internal life, that uncivilised peoples neither
could nor would destroy it.
We still enjoy its best fruits—the art, science and literature of
Hellas, the genius of Rome for law—for “the just interference of the
State in the interests and passions of humanity.”[20] We may be apt at
the present day, when science has opened out for us so many new paths of
knowledge, and inspired us with such enthusiasm in pursuing them, to
forget the value of the inheritance which Rome preserved for us. But
this is merely a passing phase of feeling; it is really quite
inconsistent with the character of an age which recognises the doctrine
of evolution as its great discovery. It is natural to civilised man to
go back upon his past, and to be grateful for all profit he can gain
from the study of his own development. So we may be certain that the
claim of Greece and Rome to our eternal gratitude will never cease to be
asserted, and their right to teach us still what we could have learnt
nowhere else, will never be successfully disputed.
_November, 1911._
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The following books are suggested as among those most likely to be
useful to students who wish to pursue the subject further—
I. Large Histories. Mommsen: _History of Rome to the Death of Cæsar_,
with an additional volume entitled _The Provinces of the Roman Empire_;
the whole, in the English translation, is in seven volumes. Heitland:
_The Roman Republic_, in three volumes (a recent publication). Gibbon:
_The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_, edited by Prof. Bury.
II. Smaller histories in one volume. Pelham: _Outlines of Roman History_
(a masterly work). How and Leigh: _A History of Rome to the Death of
Cæsar_. Bury: _The Student’s Roman Empire_. There are many school
histories, but these are rather fuller and more interesting.
III. Books on special subjects of Roman life, etc. Greenidge: _Roman
Public Life_, in Macmillan’s Handbooks of Art and Archæology. Warde
Fowler: _Social Life at Rome in the Age of Cicero_. _Life of Cicero_, by
Strachan-Davidson, and _Life of Cæsar_, by Warde Fowler, both in
Putnam’s series of “Heroes of the Nations.” _Cæsar’s Conquest of Gaul_,
by T. Rice Holmes. Dill: _Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius_.
IV. Ancient authorities in translation. Plutarch’s _Roman Lives_ may be
read with advantage in any translation, _e.g._ that of Langhorne. The
most valuable lives are those of Cato the Elder, Æmilius Paullus, the
two Gracchi, Marius and Sulla, Pompey and Cæsar, Brutus and Antony.
There is a translation of the whole _Correspondence of Cicero with his
Friends_, by E. S. Shuckburgh, published by Bell & Sons.
FOOTNOTES
[1]The best known of these, and perhaps the most beautiful, is that
of Coriolanus, which has descended from Plutarch to Shakespeare, and
so become immortal.
[2]The Latin words which expressed these two mutual rights,
_commercium_ and _connubium_, are still in use in various forms in
the languages of modern Europe.
[3]The Latin word is _fauces_, i.e. jaws, etymologically the same
word as the _hause_ of our Lakeland, which means a narrow pass.
[4]Greenidge, _Roman Public Life_, p. 105.
[5]With the exception of the southern Samnites, who joined Hannibal
after Cannæ.
[6]This was Fabius Maximus, who has given his name to the familiar
phrase, “Fabian tactics.”
[7]Seeley’s _Life of Stein_, II. 422.
[8]Plutarch’s _Lives of Cato the Elder and Æmilius Paullus_, which
can be read in a translation, will give examples of this better type
of education.
[9]In Plutarch’s _Life_ of him, especially chaps, v. and vi., where
Plutarch is plainly reproducing the evidence of an eyewitness.
[10]He came of an old Roman patrician family.
[11]See below, p. 184.
[12]_Georgics_ I, 463 foll.
[13]See below, p. 206.
[14]From Mr. James Rhoades’s version.
[15]Sir A. H. Layard.
[16]Dill, _Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western Empire_,
1st edn., p. 163.
[17]This is the title by which the _princeps_ was usually known in
the Empire; see _e.g._ Matt. xxii. 17 foll., or Acts xxv. 10 foll.
[18]By Hastings Crossley: Macmillan & Co.
[19]Bryce, _Holy Roman Empire_.
[20]This is Mommsen’s definition of Law.
INDEX
A
Actium, battle of, 187
Agrippa, M. Vipsanius, 201
Alps, the, 98, 148, 171
Antoninus Pius, 243 foll.
Antony, Mark, 187
Apennines, the, 20
Armenia, 165, 234
Army, the Roman, 70 foll., 130, 207, 217
Augustus, 188, 192, 199 foll., 210
Auspices, 67
B
Brindisi, 49, 175
Britain, 170, 219 foll., 239 foll.
Byzantium, 249
C
Cæsar, Julius, 11, 168 foll., 173 foll.
Cæsar in Shakespeare, 179
Campania, 20, 41, 102, 104
Cannæ, battle of, 102
Carthage, 38, 86 foll., 212
Cato the Elder, 12 foll., 15, 18, 61, 63, 120, 126
Cato the younger, 173
Catullus, poet, 182
Caudine Forks, 44
Censors, 81 foll.
Census under Empire, 202
Cicero, M. Tullius, 183 foll.
Citizenship, 132 foll., 152, 178
Colonies, 40, 48, 101
Commercium, 32, 39
Consuls, 30, 45, 73 foll.
Corfinium, 153
D
Dictator, 75
E
Education, 61, 120, 235
Etruscans, 21 foll., 24 foll.
F
Familia, 57 foll.
Flaminius, C., 99 foll.
Fregellæ, 49
Frontiers, 166, 171, 200, 204 foll., 233 foll., 239
G
Gauls, 35, 86, 96 foll., 99, 168 foll.
Gilds under Empire, 223 foll.
Gracchus, Gaius, 141 foll.
Gracchus, Tiberius, 137 foll.
H
Hadrian, Emperor, 237 foll.
Hamilcar Barca, 93 foll.
Hannibal, 94 foll., 113
Hasdrubal, 106
I
Imperium, 66 foll., 73 foll., 128, 207
Inscriptions, 220
J
Jupiter, 28 foll.
L
Latins, 23, 31, 33 foll., 36, 38 foll., 134
Law, Roman, 31, 78, 158, 242, 250
Livy, historian, 38, 210
Lucretius, poet, 10, 180
Lucullus, L., 164
Lugdunum (Lyons), 204
M
Marcus Aurelius, 245 foll.
Marius, 147, 149 foll.
Massilia, 115
Messana, 89
Metaurus, battle of, 107
Mithradates, 162 foll.
N
Nismes, 218, 227, 243
Nobilitas, 80
P
Paterfamilias, 58 foll.
Patricians and plebeians, 77
Paul, St., 216, 230
Pharsalia, battle of, 175
Philip of Macedon, 101, 113 foll.
Pliny the younger, 236
Pompeius, Gn., 165 foll.
Pontifices, 68
Princeps, 197, 206
Provinces, 118, 203, 213, 217 foll.
Pyrrhus, 50 foll.
R
Regulus, 92
Respublica, 72, 197
S
Samnites, 23, 42 foll.
Scipio Africanus, 108
Senate, 30, 35, 47, 53, 63, 69, 103, 129, 144, 158, 197
Sicilian Greeks, 52, 86
Slavery, 57, 59, 125 foll., 141, 244
Spain, 94, 115
Sulla, L. Cornelius, 147, 155
T
Tacitus, historian, 12, 14, 231
Tarentum, 42, 50, 52
Tiber, river, 22, 24, 26
Tiberius, Emperor, 206
Tigranes of Armenia, 164 foll.
Trajan, Emperor, 232 foll.
Trasimene, battle of, 100
Tribunes of the people, 78, 139
U
Umbrians, 23
V
Veii, 34
Via Appia, 49
Via Flaminia, 48
Via Latina, 49
Virgil, 10, 13, 15, 188 foll., 198
Z
Zama, battle of, 109
Transcriber’s Notes
—Retained copyright information from the printed edition: this eBook is
public-domain in the country of publication.
—Silently corrected a few palpable typos.
—In the text versions only, text in italics is delimited by
_underscores_.