XXI. The further our memories carry us back through the series of past
times, we find this evil the greater; and from hence proceeds that ill
opinion, which in early ages was generally entertained of kings. The
Romans were struck with amazement, to find the Cappadocians, upon their
offering to make their country a free republic, instantly request,
that they would permit them to remain under kingly government; which
amazement, was occasioned by their considering in a rigorous or strict
sense, that mode of rule, as a mark or type of slavery. Cato said, this
animal which is called a king, is a great devourer of human flesh;
_Hoc animal rex carnivorum est._ And Flavius Vopiscus, tells us of a
Roman buffoon, who pleasantly and keenly remarked, that the effigies
of all the good kings that had ever been known in the world, might be
carved on a ring. Plato, in his Georgiac dialogue, represents kings
as appearing before Rhadamanthus in hell, loaded for the most part
with injustices, perjuries, and other wickedness. Aristotle, in his
third book on politics, recognizes as tyrannical, the exercise of the
regal power, by all, or nearly all, the Asiatic princes; and Livy says,
that the most sagacious and penetrating Hannibal, never confided in
the promises of kings: _fidei regum nihil sane confisus_; a legate of
the Rhodians also, according to the said Livy, observed, that kings
were always desirous of making slaves of their subjects. Thus we have
the greatest reason to conclude, that it was a common practice with
the princes of those times, to pay no regard to any law, whenever an
opportunity offered of augmenting their authority.