[_About 280 B. C._]
The embassy of Cineas to Rome was celebrated in antiquity and was a
favorite topic for rhetorical declamation. It is said that he took with
him beautiful presents for men and women, but offered them in vain.[A]
Rome, which in a later time the Numidian king Jugurtha declared to be
ready to sell itself if only a purchaser could be found, was still, as
is related, pure and virtuous. It was the time of Manius Curius, the
conqueror of the Samnites, who, sitting by his own hearth and eating
his simple peasant’s food, had proudly rejected the tempting presents
of the Samnites; it was the time when C. Cornelius Rufinus was cast out
of the senate by the censors because he had silver plate to the weight
of ten pounds in his use. And was not Fabricius, the first soldier and
statesman of his time, a pattern of simplicity and contentment, and
superior to all temptation? What a contrast to the mercenary Greeks,
whose greatest patriots and statesmen were publicly accused of bribery,
and were compelled to defend themselves against such charges before the
public tribunals! But Cineas was a shrewd, experienced negotiator. Where
one scheme failed, he tried another. He discovered the point where the
stout Romans were vulnerable. He flattered their pride. On the second day
after his arrival he knew the names of all the senators and knights, and
had something obliging to say to each. He visited the influential men in
their houses, to get them secretly to favor his propositions. At length,
when he appeared in the senate and made known his commission, when he
brought offers of peace and friendship from the powerful king of Epirus,
the redoubted warrior, the victor of Heraclea, the senate wavered in
its decision; the deliberations lasted many days, and it appeared that
the advice of those would prevail whose courage was damped and whose
confidence was small. At that critical moment, the blind Appius Claudius,
bowed down with age and infirmity, appeared, supported by his sons, in
the solemn assembly. He had for some years retired from public life, but
his haughty temper could not brook the idea that Rome should accept
laws from a foreign conqueror. The Claudian pride which animated him was
the genuine Roman pride, the first national virtue. He summoned all his
strength once more to raise his voice in that council which he had so
often swayed by his wisdom, and had subdued by his indomitable will. As
if from the grave, and as if inspired by the genius of a better time,
his words, echoing in the ears of the breathless assembly, scared away
all pusillanimous considerations and infused the spirit of resistance
which animated the men of Rome when, from the height of the capitol,
they beheld the Gaulish conquerors rioting in the ruins of their town.
The speech of Appius Claudius was a monument of a glorious time, the
contemplation of which warmed and inspired succeeding generations. It
is the first speech of the contents of which there has been preserved
a substantially correct report. Later generations believed they
possessed even the exact words, and Cicero speaks of it as of a literary
composition of acknowledged authenticity. This view is hardly tenable;
but it may be believed that the general purport and some of the arguments
of the speech were faithfully preserved in the Claudian family books, and
we can not deny ourselves the pleasure of listening to the faint echo
which introduces us for the first time into the immediate presence of the
most august assembly of the old world.
According to the tradition, Appius spoke something as follows: “Hitherto,
assembled fathers, I used to mourn that I was deprived of the light of
the eye; now, however, I should consider myself happy if, in addition
to that, I had lost the sense of hearing, that I might not hear the
disgraceful counsels which are here publicly proposed, to the shame of
the Roman name. How are you changed from your former estate! Whither
have your pride and your courage flown? You that boasted you would have
opposed the great Alexander himself if, in the period of your youth, he
had dared to invade Italy; that he would have lost in battle against
you the fame of the invincible, and would have found defeat or death in
Italy, to the glory of the Roman name—you now show that all this was
nothing but vain boasting; for you fear now the Chaonians and Molossians,
who have always been the spoil of the Macedonians, and you tremble
before Pyrrhus, who passed his life in the service of one of Alexander’s
satellites. Thus one single misfortune has made you forget what you once
were. And you are going to make him who is the author of your shame
your friend, together with those who brought him over to Italy. What
your fathers won by the sword, you will deliver up to the Lucanians
and the Bruttians. What is this but making yourselves servants of the
Macedonians? And some of you are not ashamed to call that peace which is
really slavery!”
When Appius had spoken, the negotiations with Cineas were broken off. He
was warned immediately to leave the town, and to inform his king that
there could be no idea of peace and friendship between him and the Roman
people until he had left the shores of Italy. That was the answer of a
people conquered, but not broken in spirit; a people prepared to stand up
for their honor and their greatness, even to the last man. The impression
which the Romans made on Cineas is described as very powerful. It is said
that he compared the town of Rome to a temple, and the senators to kings.
Indeed, the dignity, the calmness, and firmness of the Roman people could
not have failed to convince him that the Romans were barbarians of a
peculiar type; although in refinement and polish, in art and the higher
enjoyments of life below the Greeks, still as citizens and soldiers very
superior to them. The day of Heraclea was far from damping their courage.
A new army was formed in Rome, probably under Cineas’s own eyes, from
volunteers, who, full of enthusiasm, poured thither from all parts to
fill up the gaps.
* * * * *
Let Dr. Thomas Arnold be compared with Ihne, at this point of
the history, and a curiously instinctive contradiction appears.
Both historians refer, for their authority, to precisely the
same passages in two different works by Cicero; but whereas Ihne,
as our readers have seen, makes Cicero in them vouch for the
authenticity of Appius Claudius’s speech, Arnold, on the other
hand, makes him regard it as utterly unworthy of trust! But
Arnold adds a comment that our readers will like to see.
No Englishman can have read thus far without remembering the scene, in
all points so similar, which took place within our fathers’ memory in
our own House of Parliament. We recollect how the greatest of English
statesmen, bowed down by years and infirmity, like Appius, but roused,
like him, by the dread of approaching dishonor to the English name, was
led by his son and son-in-law into the House of Lords, and all the peers
with one impulse arose to receive him. We know the expiring words of that
mighty voice, when he protested against the dismemberment of this ancient
monarchy, and prayed that if England must fall, she might fall with
honor. The real speech of Lord Chatham against yielding to the coalition
of France and America, will give a far more lively image of what was said
by the blind Appius in the Roman senate, than any fictitious oration
which I could either copy from other writers or endeavor myself to
invent; and those who would wish to know how Appius spoke, should read
the dying words of the great orator of England.
[A] Plutarch, Pyrrh, 18. According to Zonaras, however (viii:3), the
attempts at corruption were not fruitless.