despairing people paved the way for their deliverance, was no more when
it became possible to carry out his design. Whether his successor
Hasdrubal forbore to make the attack because the proper moment seemed to
him not yet to have arrived, or whether, a statesman rather than a
general, he believed himself unequal to the conduct of the enterprise,
we are unable to determine. When, at the beginning of 219 B.C., he fell
by the hand of an assassin, the Carthaginian officers of the Spanish
army summoned to fill his place Hannibal, the eldest son of Hamilcar.
He was still a young man, born in 247 B.C., and now, therefore, in his
twenty-ninth year; but his life had already been fraught with varied
experience. His first recollections picture to him his father fighting
in a distant land and conquering on Ercte; he shared that unconquered
father’s fortunes and sympathized with his feelings on the peace of
Catulus, on the bitter return home, and throughout the horrors of the
Libyan war. While still a boy he had followed his father to the camp,
and he soon distinguished himself.
His light and firmly built frame made him an excellent runner and boxer
and a fearless rider; the privation of sleep did not affect him, and he
knew like a soldier how to enjoy or to want his food. Although his youth
had been spent in
[Illustration: HANNIBAL.]
the camp, he possessed such culture as was bestowed on the noble
Phœnicians of the time; in Greek, apparently after he had become a
general, he made such progress under the guidance of his intimate friend
Sasilus of Sparta as to be able to compose state papers in that
language.
As he grew up, he entered the army of his father to perform his first
feats of arms under the paternal eye, and to see him fall in battle by
his side. Thereafter he had commanded the cavalry under his sister’s
husband Hasdrubal and distinguished himself by brilliant personal
bravery as well as by his talents as a leader. The voice of his comrades
now summoned him--their tried and youthful leader--to the chief command,
and he could now execute the designs for which his father and his
brother-in-law had died.
He took possession of the inheritance, and was worthy of it. His
contemporaries tried to cast stains of all sorts on his character; the
Romans charged him with cruelty, the Carthaginians with covetousness;
and it is true that he hated as only Oriental natures know how to hate,
and that a general who never fell short of money and stores can hardly
have been other than covetous. Nevertheless, though anger and envy and
meanness have written his history, they have not been able to mar the
pure and noble image which it presents.
Laying aside wretched inventions which furnished their own refutation,
and some things which his lieutenants Hannibal Monomachus, and Mago the
Samnite, were guilty of doing in his name, nothing occurs in the
accounts regarding him which may not be justified in the circumstances
and by the international law of the times; and all agree in this--that
he combined in rare perfection discretion and enthusiasm, caution and
energy.
He was peculiarly marked by that inventive craftiness which forms one of
the leading traits of the Phœnician character--he was fond of taking
singular and unexpected routes; ambushes and strategems of all sorts
were familiar to him; and he studied the character of his antagonists
with unprecedented care. By an unrivaled system of espionage--he had
regular spies even in Rome--he kept himself informed of the projects of
the enemy; he himself was frequently seen wearing disguises and false
hair in order to procure information on some point or another.
Every page of history attests his genius as a general; and his gifts as
a statesman were, after the peace with Rome, no less conspicuously
displayed in his reform of the Carthaginian constitution and in the
unparalleled influence which as an exiled strength he exercised in the
cabinets of the Eastern powers. The power which he wielded over men is
shown by his incomparable control over an army of various nations and
many tongues--an army which never in the worst times mutinied against
him. He was a great man; wherever he went he riveted the eyes of all.
Hannibal’s cautious and masterly execution of his plan of crossing the
Alps into Italy, instead of transporting his army by sea, in its
details, at all events, deserves our admiration, and, to whatever causes
the result may have been due--whether it was due mainly to the favor of
fortune or mainly to the skill of the general--the grand idea of
Hamilcar, that of taking up the conflict with Rome in Italy, was now
realized. It was his genius that projected the expedition; and the
unerring tact of historical tradition has always dwelt on the last link
in the great chain of preparatory steps, the passage of the Alps, with a
greater admiration than on the battles of the Trasimene Lake and of the
plain of Cannæ.
Hannibal knew Rome better, perhaps, than the Romans knew it themselves.
It was clearly apparent that the Italian federation was in political
solidity and in military resources far superior to an adversary who
received only precarious and irregular support from home; and that the
Phœnician foot-soldier was, notwithstanding all the pains taken by
Hannibal, far inferior in point of tactics to the legionary, had been
completely proved by the defensive movements of Scipio. From these
convictions flowed two fundamental principles which determined
Hannibal’s whole method of operations in Italy, viz., that the war
should be carried on somewhat adventurously, with constant changes in
the plan and in the theatre of operations; and that its favorable issue
could only be looked for as the result of political and not of military
successes--of the gradual loosening and breaking up of the Italian
federation.
This aim was the aim dictated to him by right policy, because mighty
conqueror though he was in battle, he saw very clearly that on each
occasion he vanquished the generals but not the city, and that after
each new battle, the Romans remained as superior to the Carthaginians as
he was personally superior to the Roman commanders. That Hannibal, even
at the height of his fortune, never deceived himself on this point is a
fact more wonderful than his wonderful battles.
THE GRACCHI.
BY PLUTARCH.
[Tiberius Sempronius and Caius Sempronius, sons of Tiberius
Gracchus by Cornelia, daughter of Scipio Africanus, the conqueror
of Hannibal and Carthage. The first, born 168 B.C., died in 133;
the second, born about 159 B.C., died in 121. The brothers, though
on both sides of the highest patrician rank and descent, espoused
the democratic cause. Both rose to the rank of tribune. Tiberius
carried through an agrarian law dividing the surplus lands of the
republic among the poor, and was killed in a popular _emeute_.
Caius caused to be passed a poor-law giving monthly distributions
of corn. He also transferred the judicial power largely to the
equites or knights, and proposed to extend the Roman franchise to
all Italy. He committed suicide to save himself from assassination.
References: Arnold’s “History of Rome” and Mommsen’s “History of
Rome.”]
Cornelia, taking upon herself the care of the household and the
education of her children, approved herself so discreet a matron, so
affectionate a mother, and so constant and noble-spirited a woman, that
Tiberius seemed to all men to have done nothing unreasonable in choosing
to die for such a woman, who, when King Ptolemy himself proffered her
his crown and would have married her, refused it and chose rather to
live a widow. In this state she continued and lost all her children,
except one daughter, who was married to Scipio the younger, and two
sons, Tiberius and Caius.
These she brought up with such care, that though they were without
dispute in natural endowments and disposition the first among the Romans
of their day, yet they seemed to owe their virtues even more to their
education than to their birth. And, as in the statues and pictures made
of Castor and Pollux, though the brothers resemble one another, yet
there is a difference to be perceived in their countenances between the
one who delighted in the cestus, and the other that was famous in the
course; so between these two youths, though there was a strong general
likeness in their common love of fortitude and temperance, in their
liberality, their eloquence, and their greatness of mind, yet in their
actions and administrations of public affairs, a considerable variation
showed itself.
Tiberius, in the form and expression of his countenance and in his
gesture and motion, was gentle and composed; but Caius, earnest and
vehement. And so in their public speeches to the people, the one spoke
in a quiet, orderly manner, standing throughout on the same spot; the
other would walk about on the hustings and in the heat of his orations
pull his gown off his shoulders, and was the first of all the Romans to
use such gestures. Caius’s oratory was impetuous and passionate, making
everything tell to the utmost, whereas Tiberius was gentle and
persuasive, awakening emotions of pity. His diction was pure and
carefully correct, while that of Caius was rich and vehement.
So likewise in their way of living and at their tables; Tiberius was
frugal and plain, Caius, compared with others, temperate and even
austere, but contrasting with his brother in a fondness for new fashions
and varieties. The same difference that appeared in their diction was
observable also in their tempers. The one was mild and reasonable; the
other rough and passionate, and to that degree that often in the midst
of speaking he was so hurried away by his passion against his judgment
that his voice lost its tone and he began to pass into mere abusive
talking, spoiling his whole speech.
As a remedy to this excess he made use of an ingenious servant of his,
one Licinius, who stood constantly behind him with a sort of pitch-pipe,
or instrument to regulate the voice by, and whenever he perceived his
master’s tone alter and break with anger, he struck a soft note with his
pipe, on hearing which Caius immediately checked the vehemence of his
passion and his voice grew quieter, and he allowed himself to be
recalled to temper.
Such are the differences between the two brothers, but their valor in
war against their country’s enemies, their justice in the government of
its subjects, their care and industry in office, and their self-command
in all that regarded their pleasures, were equally remarkable in both.
Tiberius was the elder by nine years; owing to which their actions as
public men were divided by the difference of the times in which those of
the one and those of the other were performed. The power they would have
exercised, had they both flourished together, could scarcely have failed
to overcome all resistance.
Their greatest detractors and their worst enemies could not but allow
that they had a genius to virtue beyond all other Romans, which was
improved also by a generous education. Besides, the Gracchi, happening
to live when Rome had her greatest repute for honor and virtuous
actions, might justly have been ashamed if they had not also left to the
next generation the whole inheritance of the virtues of their
ancestors.
The integrity of the two Romans, and their superiority to money was
chiefly remarkable in this--that in office and the administration of
public affairs they kept themselves from the imputation of unjust gain.
The chief things in general which they aimed at were the settlement of
cities and mending the highways; and in particular the boldest design
which Tiberius is famed for is the recovery of the public land; and
Caius gained his greatest reputation by the addition, for the exercise
of judicial powers, of three hundred of the order of knights to the same
number of senators.
Tiberius was the first who attempted to scale the walls of Carthage,
which was no mean exploit. We may add the peace which he concluded with
the Numantines, by which he saved the lives of twenty thousand Romans,
who otherwise had certainly been cut off. And Caius, not only at home,
but in war in Sardinia, displayed distinguished courage. So that their
early actions were no small argument that afterward they might have
rivaled the best of the Roman commanders if they had not died so young.
Of the Gracchi, neither the one nor the other was the first to shed the
blood of his fellow-citizens; and Caius is reported to have avoided all
manner of resistance, even when his life was aimed at, showing himself
always valiant against a foreign enemy, but wholly inactive in a
sedition. This was the reason that he went from his own house unarmed,
and withdrew when the battle began, and in all respects showed himself
anxious rather not to do any harm to others than not suffer any himself.
Even the very flight of the Gracchi must not be looked on as an argument
of a mean spirit, but an honorable retreat from endangering others.
The greatest crime that can be laid to Tiberius’s charge was the
disposing of his fellow-tribune, and seeking afterward a second
tribuneship for himself. Tiberius and Caius by nature had an excessive
desire for glory and honors. Beyond this, their enemies could find
nothing to bring against them; but as soon as the contention began with
their adversaries, their heat and passions would so far prevail beyond
their natural temper that by them, as by ill-winds, they were driven
afterward to all their rash undertakings. What would be more just and
honorable than their first design, had not the power and faction of the
rich, by endeavoring to abrogate that law, engaged them both in those
fatal quarrels, the one for his own preservation, the other to avenge
his brother’s death who was murdered without law or justice.
CAIUS MARIUS.
BY JAMES ANTHONY FROUDE.
[An able Roman general and leader of the democratic faction, born
157 B.C., died 86. The military skill of Marius finished the
Jugurthine war and saved Rome from the Cimbri and Teutons. Though
of plebeian birth he married into an eminent patrician family, and
became thereby the uncle of Julius Cæsar, who attached himself to
the Marian party in the political wars which raged between the
popular and patrician factions, the latter being led by Sylla. The
worst stain on the memory of Marius is the massacre which he
permitted at the beginning of his last consulate. References:
Mommsen’s “History of Rome,” Froude’s “Life of Cæsar,” Plutarch’s
“Lives.”]
Marius was born at Arpinum, a Latin township, seventy miles from the
capital. His father was a small farmer, and he was himself bred to the
plow. He joined the army early, and soon attracted notice by the
punctual discharge of his duties. In a time of growing looseness, Marius
was strict himself in keeping discipline and in enforcing it as he rose
in the service. He was in Spain when Jugurtha[6] was there, and made
himself specially useful to Scipio;[7] he forced his way steadily upward
by his mere soldier-like qualities to the rank of military tribune.
Rome, too, had learned to know him, for he was chosen tribune of the
people the year after the murder of Caius Gracchus. Being a self-made
man, he naturally belonged to the popular party. While in office he gave
offense in some way to the men in power, and was called before the
senate to answer for himself. But he had the right on his side, it is
likely, for they found him stubborn and impertinent, and they could make
nothing of their charges against him.
He was not bidding, however, at this time for the support of the mob. He
had the integrity and sense to oppose the largesses of corn, and he
forfeited his popularity by trying to close the public granaries before
the practice had passed into a system. He seemed as if made of a block
of hard Roman oak, gnarled and knotted but sound in all its fibers. His
professional merit continued to recommend him. At the age of forty he
became prætor,[8] and was sent to Spain, where he left a mark again by
the successful severity by which he cleared the provinces of banditti.
He was a man neither given himself to talking nor much talked about in
the world; but he was sought for wherever work was to be done, and he
had made himself respected and valued; for after his return from the
peninsula he had married into one of the most distinguished of the
patrician families.
Marius by this marriage became a person of social consequence. His
father had been a client of the Metelli; and Cæcelius Metellus, who must
have known Marius by reputation and probably in person, invited him to
go as second in command in the African campaign.[9] The war dragged on,
and Marius, perhaps ambitious, perhaps impatient at the general’s want
of vigor, began to think he could make quicker work of it. There was
just irritation that a petty African prince could defy the whole power
of Rome for so many years; and though a democratic consul had been
unheard of for a century, the name of Marius began to be spoken of as a
possible candidate. Marius consented to stand. The patricians strained
their resources to defeat him, but he was chosen with enthusiasm.
A shudder of alarm ran, no doubt, through the senate house when the
determination of the people was known. A successful general could not be
disposed of as easily as oratorical tribunes. Fortunately Marius was not
a politician. He had no belief in democracy. He was a soldier and had a
soldier’s way of thinking on government and the methods of it. His first
step was a reformation in the army. Hitherto the Roman legions had been
no more than the citizens in arms, called for the moment from their
various occupations to return to them when the occasion for their
services was past. Marius had perceived that fewer men, better trained
and disciplined, could be made more effective and be more easily
handled. He had studied war as a science. He had perceived that the
present weakness need be no more than an accident, and that there was a
latent force in the Roman state which needed only organization to resume
its ascendancy.
“He enlisted,” it was said, “the worst of the citizens”--men, that is to
say, who had no occupation, and became soldiers by profession; and as
persons without property could not have furnished themselves at their
own cost, he must have carried out the scheme proposed by Gracchus, and
equipped them at the expense of the state. His discipline was of the
sternest. The experiment was new; and men of rank who had a taste for
war in earnest, and did not wish that the popular party should have the
whole benefit and credit of the improvements were willing to go with
him; among them a dissipated young patrician, called Lucius Sylla, whose
name was also destined to be memorable.
Marius had formed an army barely in time to save Italy from being
totally overwhelmed. A vast migratory wave of population had been set in
motion behind the Rhine and Danube. The hunting-grounds were too strait
for the numbers crowded into them, and two enormous hordes were rolling
westward and southward in search of some new abiding-place. The Teutons
came from the Baltic down across the Rhine into Luxemburg. The Cimbri
crossed the Danube near its sources into Illyria. Both Teutons and
Cimbri were Germans, and both were making for Gaul by different routes.
Each division consisted of hundreds of thousands. They traveled with
their wives and children, their wagons, as with the ancient Scythians
and with the modern South African Dutch, being their homes. Two years
had been consumed in these wanderings, and Marius was by this time ready
for them.
Marius was continued in office, and was a fourth time consul. He had
completed his military reforms, and the army was now a professional
service with regular pay. Trained corps of engineers were attached to
each legion. The campaigns of the Romans were henceforth to be conducted
with spade and pickaxe as well as with sword and javelin, and the
soldiers learned the use of tools as well as of arms. The Teutons were
destroyed on the twentieth of July, 102 B.C. In the year following the
same fate overtook their comrades. The victories of Marius mark a new
epoch in Roman history. The legions were no longer the levy of the
citizens in arms, who were themselves the state for which they fought.
The legionaries were citizens still. They had votes and they used them;
but they were professional soldiers with the modes of thought which
belong to soldiers, and besides the power of the hustings was now the
power of the sword.
The danger from the Germans was no sooner gone than political anarchy
broke loose again. Marius, the man of the people, was the savior of his
country. He was made a consul a fifth time, and then a sixth. An
indifferent politician, however, he stood aloof in the fierce faction
contest between the aristocrats and the popular party. At last he had
almost withdrawn from public life, as he had no heart for the quarrel,
and did not care to exert his power. For eight years both he and his
rival Sylla kept aloof from politics and were almost unheard of.
When Sylla came to the front, it was as leader of the aristocratic power
in the state. Sulpicius Rufus, once a champion of the senate and the
most brilliant orator in Rome, went over to the people, and as tribune
demanded the deposition of Sylla. The latter replied by leading his
legionaries to Rome. Sulpicius was killed; Marius, the savior of his
country, had to fly for his life, pursued by assassins, with a price set
upon his head.
While Sylla was absent in the East prosecuting that magnificent campaign
against Mithridates, King of Pontus, which stamped him the first soldier
of his time, the popular party again raised its head. Old Marius, who
had been hunted through marsh and forest, and had been hiding with
difficulty in Africa, came back at the news that Italy had risen again.
Marius and Cinna joined their forces, appeared together at the gates of
the capital, and Rome capitulated. There was a bloody score to be wiped
out. Marius bears the chief blame for the scenes which followed. A price
had been set on his head, his house had been destroyed, his property had
been confiscated, he, himself, had been chased like a wild beast, and he
had not deserved such treatment. He had saved Italy, when but for him it
would have been wasted by the swords of the Germans.
His power had afterward been absolute, but he had not abused it for
party purposes. The senate had no reason to complain of him. His crime
in their eyes had been his eminence. They had now shown themselves as
cruel as they were worthless; and if public justice was disposed to make
an end of them, he saw no cause to interfere. From retaliatory political
vengeance the transition was easy to plunder and wholesale murder; and
for many days the wretched city was made a prey to robbers and
cut-throats.
So ended the year 87, the darkest and bloodiest which the guilty city
had yet experienced. Marius and Cinna were chosen consuls for the
ensuing year and a witch’s prophecy was fulfilled that Marius should
hold a seventh consulate. But the glory had departed from him. His sun
was already setting, redly, among crimson clouds. He lived but a
fortnight after his inauguration, and died in his bed at the age of
seventy-one. “The mother of the Gracchi,” said Mirabeau, “cast the dust
of her murdered sons into the air, and out of it sprang Caius Marius.”
MITHRIDATES, KING OF PONTUS.[10]
BY THEODOR MOMMSEN.
[Surnamed “the Great,” born about 132 B.C., died in 63. This
powerful Eastern monarch, who greatly extended his frontiers beyond
his original kingdom, was one of the most formidable barriers to
Roman power in Asia. He organized a league and severely taxed the
military resources of the republic. Sulla spent four years in
compelling him to submit to an honorable peace. In the second
Mithridatic war he was successively defeated by Lucullus and
Pompey. He finally committed suicide by the hands of one of his
mercenaries. References: Mommsen’s “History of Rome,” Arnold’s
“History of Rome.”]