CHAPTER I.

THE CONQUESTS OF THE ROMANS.

Early History of Rome--Wars under the Kings--Their Results--Gradual

Subjection of Italy--Great Heroes of the Republic--Their Virtues and

Victories--Military Aggrandizement--The Carthaginian, Macedonian, and

Asiatic Wars--Their Consequences--Civil Wars of Marius and Sulla, of

Pompey and Caesar--The Conquests of the Barbarians--Extension of Roman

Dominion in the East--Conquests of the Emperors--The Military Forces of

the Empire--Military Science--The Roman Legion--The Military Genius of

the Romans

CHAPTER II.

THE MATERIAL GRANDEUR AND GLORY OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

The vast Extent of the Empire--Boundaries--Rivers and Mountains--The

Mediterranean and its Islands--The Provinces--Principal Cities--Great

Architectural Monuments--Roads--Commerce--Agriculture--Manufactures--

Wealth--Population--Unity of the Empire

CHAPTER III.

THE WONDERS OF ANCIENT ROME.

Original Settlement--The Seven Hills--Progress of the City--Principal

Architectural Monuments--A Description of the Temples, Bridges,

Aqueducts, Forums, Basilicas, Palaces, Amphitheatres, Theatres,

Circuses, Columns, Arches, Baths, Obelisks, Tombs--Miscellaneous

Antiquities--Streets--Gardens--Private Houses--Populous Quarters--

Famous Statues and Pictures--General Magnificence--Population

CHAPTER IV.

ART IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

The great Wonders of Ancient Architecture, Sculpture, and Painting--

Famous Artists of Antiquity--How far the Romans copied the Greeks--How

far they extended Art--Its Principles--Its Perfection--Causes of its

Decline--Permanence of its grand Creations

CHAPTER V.

THE ROMAN CONSTITUTION.

The Original Citizens--Comitia Calata--Comitia Curiata--Comitia

Centuriata--Comitia Tributa--The Plebs--Great Patrician Families--The

Aristocratic Structure of ancient Roman Society--The Dignity and Power

of the Senate--The Knights--The Growth of the Democracy--Contests

between Patricians and Plebeians--Rise of Tribunes--Popular Leaders--

Their Laws--The Great Officers of State--Provincial Governors--

Usurpations of fortunate Generals--The Revolution under Julius Caesar and

Augustus--Imperial Despotism--Preservation of the Forms of the

Republic, and utter Prostration of its Spirit

CHAPTER VI.

ROMAN JURISPRUDENCE.

Genius of the Romans for Government and Laws--Development of

Jurisprudence--Legislative Sources--Judicial Power--Courts of Law--The

Profession of Law--Great Lawyers and Jurists--Ancient Codes--Imperial

Codes--The Law of Persons--Rights of Citizens, of Foreigners, of Slaves--

Laws of Marriage, of Divorce, of Adoption--Paternal Power--

Guardianship--Laws relating to Real Rights--Law of Obligations--Laws of

Succession--Testaments and Legacies--Actions and Procedure in Civil

Suits--Criminal Law

CHAPTER VII.

ROMAN LITERATURE.

The Grecian Models--How far they contributed to Roman Creations--The

Development of the Latin Language--The Orators, Poets, Dramatists,

Satirists, Historians, and their chief Works--How far Literature was

cultivated--Schools--Libraries--Literary Legacies of the Romans

CHAPTER VIII.

GRECIAN PHILOSOPHY.

Its gradual Development from Thales to Aristotle--How far the Romans

adopted the Greek Philosophy--What Additions they made to it--How far it

modified Roman Thought and Life--Influence of Philosophy on

Christianity--Influence on modern Civilization

CHAPTER IX.

SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE AMONG THE ROMANS.

The Mathematical Genius of the Old Astronomers--Their Labors and

Discoveries--Extent of Astronomical Knowledge--The Alexandrian School--

The Science of Geometry and how far carried--Great Names--Medicine--

Geography--Other Physical Sciences and their limited Triumphs

CHAPTER X.

INTERNAL CONDITION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

The Vices and Miseries of Roman Society--Social Inequalities--

Disproportionate Fortunes--The Wealth and Corruption of Nobles--

Degradation of the People--Vast Extent of Slavery--The Condition of

Women--Demoralizing Games and Spectacles--Excessive Luxury and squalid

Misery--Money-making--Imperial Misrule--Universal Egotism and

Insensibility to grand Sentiments--Hopelessness of Reform--Preparation

for Ruin

CHAPTER XI.

THE FALL OF THE EMPIRE.

False Security of the Roman People--Their stupendous Delusions--The

Invasion of Barbarians--Their Characteristics--Their alternate Victory

and Defeat--Desolation of the Provinces--The Degeneracy of the Legions--

General Imbecility and Cowardice--Great public Misfortunes--General

Union of the Germanic Nations--Their Leaders--Noble but vain Efforts of

a Succession of warlike Emperors--The rising Tide of Barbarians--Their

irresistible Advance--The Siege and Sack of Rome--The Fall of Cities--

Miseries of all Classes--Universal Despair and Ruin--The Greatness of

the Catastrophe--Reflections on the Fall of Rome

CHAPTER XII.

THE REASONS WHY THE CONSERVATIVE INFLUENCES OF PAGAN CIVILIZATION DID

NOT ARREST THE RUIN OF THE ROMAN WORLD.

Necessary Corruption of all Institutions under Paganism--Glory succeeded

by Shame--The Army a worn-out Mechanism--The low Aims of Government--

Difficulties of the Emperors--Laws perverted or unenforced--The

Degeneracy of Art--The Frivolity of Literature--The imperfect Triumph

of Philosophy--Nothing Conservative in human Creations--Necessity of

Aid from foreign and Divine Sources

CHAPTER XIII.

WHY CHRISTIANITY DID NOT ARREST THE RUIN OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

The Victories of Christianity came too late--Small Number of Converts

when Christianity was a renovating Power--Their comparative Unimportance

in a political and social View for three Centuries--The Church

constructs a Polity for Itself rather than seeks to change established

Institutions--Rapid Corruption of Christianity when established, and

Adoption of Pagan Ideas and Influences--No Renovation of worn-out Races--

No Material on which Christianity could work--Not the Mission of the

Church to save Empires, but the Race--A diseased Body must die

CHAPTER XIV.

THE LEGACY OF THE EARLY CHURCH TO FUTURE GENERATIONS.

The great Ideas which the Fathers propounded--The Principle of Self-

sacrifice, seen especially in early Martyrdoms--The Idea of Benevolence

in connection with public and private Charities--Importance of public

Preaching--Pulpit Oratory--The Elaboration of Christian Doctrine--Its

Connection with Philosophy--Church Psalmody--The Principle of Christian

Equality--Its Effects on Slavery and the Elevation of the People--The

Social Equality of the Sexes--Superiority in the condition of the modern

over the ancient Woman--The Idea of Popular Education--The Unity of the

Church

INTRODUCTION.

I propose to describe the Greatness and the Misery of the old Roman

world; nor is there any thing in history more suggestive and

instructive.

A little city, founded by robbers on the banks of the Tiber, rises

gradually into importance, although the great cities of the East are

scarcely conscious of its existence. Its early struggles simply arrest

the attention, and excite the jealousy, of the neighboring nations. The

citizens of this little state are warriors, and, either for defense or

glory, they subdue one after another the cities of Latium and Etruria,

then the whole of Italy, and finally the old monarchies and empires of

the world. In two hundred and fifty years the citizens have become

nobles, and a great aristocracy is founded, which lasts eight hundred

years. Their aggressive policy and unbounded ambition involve the whole

world in war, which does not cease until all the nations known to the

Greeks acknowledge their sway. Everywhere Roman laws, language, and

institutions spread. A vast empire arises, larger than the Assyrian and

the Macedonian combined,--a universal empire,--a great wonder and

mystery, having all the grandeur of a providential event. It becomes too

great to be governed by an oligarchy of nobles. Civil wars create an

imperator, who, uniting in himself all the great offices of state, and

sustained by the conquering legions, rules from East to West and from

North to South, with absolute and undivided sovereignty. The Caesars

reach the summit of human greatness and power, and the city of Romulus

becomes the haughty mistress of the world. The emperor is worshiped as a

deity, and the proud metropolis calls herself eternal. An empire is

established by force of arms and by a uniform policy, such as this world

has not seen before or since.

Early Roman history is chiefly the detail of successful wars, aggressive

and uncompromising, in which we see a fierce and selfish patriotism, an

indomitable will, a hard unpitying temper, great practical sagacity,

patience, and perseverance, superiority to adverse fortune, faith in

national destinies, heroic sentiments, and grand ambition. We see a

nation of citizen soldiers, an iron race of conquerors, bent on

conquest, on glory, on self-exaltation, attaching but little value to

the individual man, but exalting the integrity and unity of the state.

We see no fitful policy, no abandonment to the enjoyment of the fruits

of victory, no rest, no repose, no love of art or literature, but an

unbounded passion for domination. The Romans toiled, and suffered, and

died,--never wearied, never discouraged, never satisfied, until their

mission was accomplished and the world lay bleeding and prostrate at

their feet.

In the latter days of the Republic, the Roman citizen, originally

contented with a few acres in the plains and valleys through which the

Tiber flowed, becomes a great landed proprietor, owning extensive

estates in the conquered territories, an aristocrat, a knight, a

senator, a noble, while his dependents disdained to labor and were fed

at the public expense. The state could afford to give them corn, oil,

and wine, for it was the owner of Egypt, of Greece, of Asia Minor, of

Syria, of Spain, of Gaul, of Africa,--a belt of territory around the

Mediterranean Sea one thousand miles in breadth, embracing the whole

temperate zone, from the Atlantic Ocean to the wilds of Scythia. The

Romans revel in the spoils of the nations they have conquered, adorn

their capital with the wonders of Grecian art, and abandon themselves to

pleasure and money-making. The Roman grandees divide among themselves

the lands and riches of the world, and this dwelling-place of princes

looms up the proud centre of mundane glory and power.

In the great success of the Romans, we notice not only their own heroic

qualities, but the hopeless degeneracy of the older nations and the

reckless turbulence of the western barbarians, both of whom needed

masters.

The conquered world must be governed. The Romans had a genius for

administration as well as for war. While war was reduced to a science,

government became an art. Seven hundred years of war and administration

gave experience and skill, and the wisdom thus learned became a legacy

to future civilizations.

It was well, both for enervated orientals and wild barbarians, to be

ruled by such iron masters. The nations at last enjoyed peace and

prosperity, and Christianity was born and spread. A new power silently

arose, which was destined to change government, and science, and all the

relations of social life, and lay a foundation for a new and more

glorious structure of society than what Paganism could possibly create.

We see the hand of Providence in all these mighty changes, and it is

equally august in overruling the glories and the shame of a vast empire

for the ultimate good of the human race.

If we more minutely examine the history of either Republican or Imperial

Rome, we read lessons of great significance. In the Republic we see a

constant war of classes and interests,--plebeians arrayed against

patricians; the poor opposed to the rich; the struggle between capital

and labor, between an aristocracy and democracy. Although the favored

classes on the whole retained ascendancy, yet the people constantly

gained privileges, and at last were enabled, by throwing their influence

into the hands of demagogues, to overturn the constitution. Julius

Caesar, the greatest name in ancient history, himself a patrician, by

courting the people triumphed over the aristocratical oligarchy and

introduced a new regime. His dictatorship was the consummation of the

victories of the people over nobles as signally as the submission of all

classes to fortunate and unscrupulous generals. We err, however, in

supposing that the Republic was ever a democracy, as we understand the

term, or as it was understood in Athens. Power was always in the hands

of senators, nobles, and rich men, as it still is in England, and was in

Venice. Popular liberty was a name, and democratic institutions were

feeble and shackled. The citizen-noble was free, not the proletarian.

The latter had the redress of laws, but only such as the former gave.

How exclusive must have been an aristocracy when the Claudian family

boasted that, for five hundred years, it had never received any one into

it by adoption, and when the Emperor Nero was the first who received its

privileges! It is with the senatorial families, who contrived to retain

all the great offices of the state, that everything interesting in the

history of Republican Rome is identified,--whether political quarrels,

or private feuds, or legislation, or the control of armies, or the

improvements of the city, or the government of provinces. It was they,

as senators, governors, consuls, generals, quaestors, who gave the people

baths, theatres, and temples. They headed factions as well as armies.

They were the state.

The main object to which the reigning classes gave their attention was

war,--the extension of the empire. "_Ubi castra, ibi respublica_."

Republican Rome was a camp, controlled by aristocratic generals.

Dominion and conquest were their great ideas, their aim, their ambition.

To these were sacrificed pleasure, gain, ease, luxury, learning, and

art. And when they had conquered they sought to rule, and they knew how

to rule. Aside from conquest and government there is nothing peculiarly

impressive in Roman history, except the struggles of political leaders

and the war of classes.

But in these there is wonderful fascination. The mythic period under

kings; the contests with Latins, Etruscans, Volscians, Samnites, and

Gauls; the legends of Porsenna, of Cincinnatus, of Coriolanus, of

Virginia; the heroism of Camillus, of Fabius, of Decius, of Scipio; the

great struggle with Pyrrhus and Hannibal; the wars with Carthage,

Macedonia, and Asia Minor; the rivalries between patrician and plebeian

families; the rise of tribunes; the Maenian, Hortensian, and Agrarian

laws; the noble efforts of the Gracchi; the censorship of Cato; the

civil wars of Marius and Sulla, and their exploits, followed by the

still greater conquests of Pompey and Julius; these, and other feats of

heroism and strength, are full of interest which can never be exhausted.

We ponder on them in youth; we return to them in old age.

And yet the real grandeur of Rome is associated with the emperors. With

their accession there is a change in the policy of the state from war to

peace. There is a greater desire to preserve than extend the limits of

the empire. The passion for war is succeeded by a passion for government

and laws. Labor and toil give place to leisure and enjoyment. Great

works of art appear, and these become historical,--the Pantheon, the

Forum Augusti, the Flavian Amphitheatre, the Column of Trajan, the Baths

of Caracalla, the Aqua Claudia, the golden house of Nero, the Mausoleum

of Hadrian, the Temple of Venus and Rome, the Arch of Septimus Severus.

The city is changed from brick to marble, and palaces and theatres and

temples become colossal. Painting and sculpture ornament every part of

the city. There are more marble busts than living men. Life becomes more

complicated and factitious. Enormous fortunes are accumulated. A liberal

patronage is extended to artists. Literature declines, but great

masterpieces of genius are still produced. Medicine, law, and science

flourish. A beautiful suburban life is seen on all the hills, while

gardens and villas are the object of perpetual panegyric. From all

corners of the earth strangers flock to see the wonders of the mighty

metropolis, more crowded than London, more magnificent than Paris, more

luxurious than New York. Fetes, shows, processions, gladiatorial

combats, chariot races, form the amusement of the vast populace. A

majestic centralized power controls all kingdoms, and races, and

peoples. The highest state of prosperity is reached that the ancient

world knew, and all bow down to Caesar and behold in him the

representative of divine providence, from whose will there is no appeal,

and from whose arm it is impossible to fly.

But _mene, mene, tekel, upharsin_, is written on the walls of the

banqueting chambers of the palace of the Caesars. The dream of

omnipotence is disturbed by the invasion of, Germanic barbarians. They

press toward the old seats of power and riches to improve their

condition. They are warlike, fierce, implacable. They fear not death,

and are urged onward by the lust of rapine and military zeal. The old

legions, which penetrated the Macedonian phalanx and withstood the

Gauls, cannot resist the shock of their undisciplined armies; for

martial glory has fled, and the people prefer their pleasures to the

empire. Great emperors are raised up, but they are unequal to the task

of preserving the crumbling empire. The people, enervated and

egotistical, are scattered like sheep or are made slaves. The proud

capitals of the world fall before the ruthless invaders. Desolation is

everywhere. The barbarians trample beneath their heavy feet the proud

trophies of ancient art and power. The glimmering life-sparks of the old

civilization disappear. The world is abandoned to fear, misery, and

despair, and there is no help, for retributive justice marches on with

impressive solemnity. Imperial despotism, disproportionate fortunes,

unequal divisions of society, the degradation of woman, slavery,

Epicurean pleasures, practical atheism, bring forth their wretched

fruits. The vices and miseries of society cannot be arrested. Glory is

succeeded by shame; all strength is in mechanism, and that wears out;

vitality passes away; the empire is weak from internal decay, and falls

easily into the hands of the new races. "Violence was only a secondary

cause of the ruin; the vices of self-interest were the primary causes. A

world, as fair and glorious as our own, crumbles away." Our admiration

is changed to sadness and awe. The majesty of man is rebuked by the

majesty of God.

Such a history is suggestive. Why was such an empire permitted to rise

over the bleeding surface of the world, and what was its influence on

the general destiny of the race? How far has its civilization perished,

and how far has it entered into new combinations? Was its strength

material, or moral, or intellectual? How far did literature, art,

science, laws, philosophy, prove conservative forces? Why did

Christianity fail to arrest so total an eclipse of the glory of man? Why

did a magnificent civilization prove so feeble a barrier against

corruption and decay? Why was the world to be involved in such universal

gloom and wretchedness as followed the great catastrophe? Could nothing

arrest the stupendous downfall?

And when we pass from the great facts of Roman history to the questions

which it suggests to a contemplative mind in reference to the state of

society among ourselves, on which history ought to shed light, what

enigmas remain to be solved. Does moral worth necessarily keep pace with

aesthetic culture, or intellectual triumphs, or material strength? Do the

boasted triumphs of civilization create those holy certitudes on which

happiness is based? Can vitality in states be preserved by mechanical

inventions? Does society expand from inherent laws of development, or

from influences altogether foreign to man? Is it the settled destiny of

nations to rise to a certain height in wisdom and power, and then pass

away in ignominy and gloom? Is there permanence in any human

institutions? Will society move round in perpetual circles, incapable of

progression and incapable of rest, or will it indefinitely improve? May

there not be the highest triumphs of art, literature, and science, where

the mainsprings of society are sensuality and egotism? Is the tendency

of society to democratic, or aristocratic, or despotic governments? Does

Christianity, in this dispensation, merely furnish witnesses of truth,

or will it achieve successive conquests over human degeneracy till the

race is emancipated and saved? Can it arrest the downward tendency of

society, when it is undermined by vices which blunt the conscience of

mankind, and which are sustained by all that is proud in rank, brilliant

in fashion, and powerful in wealth?

These are inquiries on which Roman history sheds light. If history is a

guide or oracle, they are full of impressive significance. Can we afford

to reject all the examples of the past in our sanguine hopes for the

future? Human nature is the same in any age, and human experiences point

to some great elemental truths, which the Bible confirms. _We_ may

be unmoved by them, but they remain in solemn dignity for all

generations; "and foremost of them," as Charles Kingsley has so well

said, "stands a law which man has been trying in all ages, as now, to

deny, or at least to ignore, and that is,--that as the fruit of

righteousness is wealth and peace, strength and honor, the fruit of

unrighteousness is poverty and anarchy, weakness and shame; for not upon

_mind_, but upon _morals_, is human welfare founded. Science

is indeed great; but she is not the greatest. She is an instrument, and

not a power. But her lawful mistress, the only one under whom she can

truly grow, and prosper, and prove her divine descent, is Virtue, the

likeness of Almighty God,--an ancient doctrine, yet one ever young, and

which no discoveries in science will ever abrogate."

Hence the great aim of history should be a dispassionate inquiry into

the genius of past civilizations, especially in a moral point of view.

Wherein were they weak or strong, vital or mechanical, permanent or

transient? We wish to know that we may compare them with our own, and

learn lessons of wisdom. The rise and fall of the Roman Empire is

especially rich in the facts which bear on our own development. Nor can

modern history be comprehended without a survey of the civilization

which has entered into our own, and forms the basis of many of our own

institutions. Rome perished, but not wholly her civilization. So far as

it was founded on the immutable principles of justice, or beauty, or

love, it will never die, but will remain a precious legacy to all

generations. So far as it was founded on pride, injustice, and

selfishness, it ignobly disappeared. _Men_ die, and their trophies

of pride are buried in the dust, but their truths live. All truth is

indestructible, and survives both names and marbles.

Roman history, so grand and so mournful, on the whole suggests cheering

views for humanity, since out of the ruins, amid the storms, aloft above

the conflagration, there came certain indestructible forces, which, when

united with Christianity, developed a new and more glorious condition of

humanity. Creation succeeded destruction. All that was valuable in art,

in science, in literature, in philosophy, in laws, has been preserved.

The useless alone has perished with the worn-out races themselves. The

light which scholars, and artists, and poets, and philosophers, and

lawgivers kindled, illuminated the path of the future guides of mankind.

And especially the great ideas which the persecuted Christians unfolded,

projected themselves into the shadows of mediaeval Europe, and gave a

new direction to human thought and life. New sentiments arose, more

poetic and majestic than ever existed in the ancient world, giving

radiance to homes, peace to families, elevation to woman, liberty to the

slave, compassion for the miserable, self-respect, to the man of toil,

exultation to the martyr, patience to the poor, and glorious hopes to

all; so that in rudeness, in poverty, in discomfort, in slavery, in

isolation, in obloquy, peace and happiness were born, and a new race,

with noble elements of character, arose in the majesty of renovated

strength to achieve still grander victories, and confer higher blessings

on mankind.

Thus the Roman Empire, whose fall was so inglorious, and whose

chastisement was so severe, was made by Providence to favor the ultimate

progress of society, since its civilization entered into new

combinations, and still remains one of the proudest monuments of human

genius.

It is this civilization, in its varied aspects, both good and evil,

lofty and degraded, which in the following chapters I seek to show. This

is the real point of interest in Roman history. Let us see what the

Romans really accomplished--the results of their great enterprises; the

systems they matured with so much thought; the institutions they

bequeathed to our times; yea, even those vices and follies which they

originally despised, and which, if allowed to become dominant,

_must_, according to all those laws of which we have cognizance,

ultimately overwhelm _any_ land in misery, shame, and ruin.

In presenting this civilization, I aim to generalize the most important

facts, leaving the reader to examine at his leisure recondite

authorities, in which, too often, the argument is obscured by minute

details, and art is buried in learning.

CHAPTER I.

THE CONQUESTS OF THE ROMANS.

One of the features of Roman greatness, which preeminently arrests

attention, is military genius and strength. The Romans surpassed all the

nations of antiquity in the brilliancy and solidity of their conquests.

They conquered the world, and held it in subjection. For many centuries

they stamped their iron heel on the necks of prostrate and suppliant

kings, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Caspian Sea. Nothing could impede,

except for a time, their irresistible progress from conquering to

conquer. They were warriors from the earliest period of their history,

and all their energies were concentrated upon conquest. Their aggressive

policy never changed so long as there was a field for its development.

They commenced as a band of robbers; they ended by becoming masters of

all the countries and kingdoms which tempted their cupidity or aroused

their ambition. Their empire was universal,--the only universal empire

which ever existed on this earth,--and it was won with the sword. It

was not a rapid conquest, but it was systematic and irresistible,

evincing great genius, perseverance, and fortitude.

[Sidenote: The Romans fight from a fixed purpose.]

The successive and fortunate conquests of the Romans were the

admiration, the envy, and the fear of all nations--so marvelous and

successful that they have the majesty of a providential event. They

cannot be called a mystery, since we see the persistent adaptation of

means to an end. But no other nation ever evinced this uniform military

policy, except for a limited period, or under the stimulus of a

temporary enthusiasm, such as characterized the Saracens and the

Germanic barbarians. The Romans fought when there was no apparent need

of fighting, when their empire already embraced most of the countries

known to the ancients. The Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Persians, and

the Greeks made magnificent conquests, but their empire was partial and

limited, and soon passed away. The Greeks evinced great military genius,

and the enterprises of Alexander have been regarded as a wonder. But the

Greeks did not fight, as the Romans did, from a fixed purpose to bring

all nations under their sway, and they yielded, in turn, to the Romans.

The Romans were never subdued, but all nations were subdued by them--

even superior races. They erected a universal monarchy, which fell to

pieces by its own weight, when the vices of self-interest had

accomplished their work. They became the prey of barbarians in a very

different sense from that which reduced the ancient empires. They did

not yield to any powerful, warlike neighbor, as the Persians yielded to

the Greeks, but to successive waves of unknown warriors who came in

quest of settlement, and then only when all Roman vigor had fled, and

the whole policy of the empire was changed--when it was the aim of

emperors to conserve old conquests, not make new ones.

[Sidenote: War was a passion with the Romans.]

With the Romans, for a thousand years, war was a passion; and, while it

lasted, it consumed all other passions. It animated statesmen, rulers,

generals, and citizens alike, ever burning, never at rest,--a passion

unscrupulous, resistless, all-pervading, all-absorbing, all-conquering.

Success in war gave consideration, dignity, honor beyond all other

successes. It always has called out popular admiration, and its glory

has ever been highly prized, and it always will be so, but it has not

monopolized all offices and dignities as among the Romans. The Greeks

thought of art, of literature, and of philosophy as well as of war, and

gave their crowns of glory for civic and artistic excellence as well as

for military success. The Greeks fought to preserve or extend their

civilization; the Romans, in order to rule. They had very little respect

for any thing beyond military genius. The successful warrior alone was

the founder of a great family. The Roman aristocracy, so proud, so rich,

so powerful, was based on the glory of battle-fields. Every citizen was

trained to arms, and senators and statesmen commanded armies. The whole

fabric of the State was built up on war, and for many centuries it was

the leading occupation of the people. How insignificant was a poet, or a

painter, or a philosopher by the side of a warrior! Rome was a city of

generals, and they preoccupied the public mind.

[Sidenote: Value placed by the Romans on military art.]

To a Roman, military art was the highest of all. It was constantly being

improved, until it reached absolute perfection, with the old weapons and

implements of war. To its perfection the whole genius of the people was

consecrated; it was to them what the fine arts were to the Greeks, what

priestly domination was to the Middle Ages, and what material inventions

to abridge human labor are to us. The Romans despised literature, art,

philosophy, commerce, agriculture, and even luxury, when they were

making their grand conquests; they only respected their fortunate

generals. Hence there was no great encouragement to genius or ambition

in any other field; but in this field, the horizon perpetually expanded.

Every new conquest prepared the way for successive conquests; ambition

here was untrammeled, energy was unbounded, visions of glory were most

dazzling, warlike schemes were most fertile, until the whole world lay

bleeding and prostrate.

[Sidenote: Lawfulness of war.]

Military genius, however, does not present man in the highest state of

wisdom or beauty. It is very attractive, but "there is a greater than

the warrior's excellence," at least to a contemplative or religious eye.

When men save nations, in fearful crises, by their military genius, as

Napoleon did France when surrounded with hostile armies, or Gustavus

Adolphus did Germany when it was struggling for religious rights, then

they render the greatest possible services, and receive no unmerited

honors. The heart of the world cherishes the fame of Miltiades, of

Charlemagne, of Henry IV., of Washington; for they were identified with

great causes. War is one of the occasional necessities of our world. No

nation can live, or is worthy to live, without military virtues. They

rescue nations on the verge of ruin, and establish great rights, without

which life is nothing. War, however much to be lamented as an evil, is

the last appeal and resource of nations, and settles what cannot be

settled without it; and it will probably continue so long as there are

blindness, ambition, and avarice among men. Nor, under certain

circumstances, of which nations can only be the proper judges, is it

inconsistent with the law of love. Hence, as it is a great necessity, it

will ever be valued as a great science. Civilization accepts it and

claims it. It calls into exercise great qualities, and these intoxicate

the people, who bow down to them as godlike.

[Sidenote: Those who are most successful in war.]

Still, military genius, however lauded and honored, is too often allied

with ambition and selfishness to secure the highest favor of

philosophers or Christians. It does not reveal the soul in its loftiest

aspirations. Men of a coarser type are often most successful,--men

insensible to pity and to reproach, whose greatest merit is in will,

nerve, energy, and power of making rapid combinations. We revere the

intellect of the Greeks more than that of the Romans, though they were

inferior to the latter in military success. We have more respect for

those qualities which add to the domain of truth than those which secure

power. A wise man elevates the Bacons, the Newtons, and the Shakespeares

above all the Marlboroughs and Wellingtons. Plato is surrounded with a

brighter halo than Themistocles, and Cicero than Marius.

[Sidenote: The general evils of war.]

War as a trade is unscrupulous, hard, rapacious, destructive. It foments

all the evil passions; it is allied with all the vices; it is

antagonistic to human welfare. It glories merely in strength; it

worships only success. It raises wicked men to power; it prostrates and

hides the good. It extinguishes what is most lovely, and spurns what is

most exalted. It makes a pandemonium of earth, and drags to its

triumphal car the venerated relics of ages. It is an awful crime, making

slaves of the helpless, and spreading consternation, misery, and death

wherever it goes--marking its progress with a trail of blood, and

filling the earth with imprecations and curses. It is the greatest

scourge which God uses to chastise enervated nations, and cannot be

contemplated with; any satisfaction except as the wrath, which is made

to praise the Sovereign Ruler who employs what means He chooses to

punish or exalt.

[Sidenote: Spirit of the Romans in their wars.]

Now the Romans, in a general sense, pursued war as a trade, to gratify a

thirst for power, to raise themselves on the ruins of ancient

monarchies, to enrich themselves with the spoils of the world, and to

govern it for selfish purposes. There were many Roman wars which were

exceptions, when an exalted patriotism was the animating principle; but

aggressive war was the policy and shame of Rome. Her citizens did not

generally fight to preserve liberties or rights or national existence,

but for self-aggrandizement. Incessant campaigns for a thousand years

brought out military science, courage, energy, and a grasping and

selfish patriotism. They gave power, skill to rule, executive talents;

and these qualities, eminently adapted to worldly greatness, made the

Romans universal masters, even if they do not make them interesting.

They developed great strength, resource, will, and even made them wise

in administration, possibly great civilizers, since centralized power is

better than anarchies; yet these traits do not make us love them, or

revere them. Providence doubtless ordered the universal monarchy, which

only universal war could establish, for the good of the world at that

time, for the advancement of civilization itself. Universal dominion

must be succeeded by universal peace, and in such a peace the higher

qualities and virtues and talents can only be manifested, so that the

Roman rule was not a calamity, but a very desirable despotism. Yet

despotism it was,--cold, remorseless, self-seeking. War made the Romans

practical, calculating, overbearing, proud, scornful, imperious.

[Sidenote: Success of the Romans in war.]

But war made them a great people, and made them eminent in certain great

qualities. Their success in war is tantamount to saying that in one

great field of genius, which civilization honors, they not merely

distinguished themselves, and gained a proud fame which will never die

out of the memory of man, but that they have had no equals in any age.

War enabled them to build up a vast empire, which empire gave a great

impulse to ancient civilization.

[Sidenote: Providence seen in the ascendency of great nations.]

There is something very singular and mysterious in the results of wars

which are caused and carried on by unprincipled and unscrupulous men.

They are made to end in substantial benefits to the human race. The

wrath of man, in other words, is made to praise God, showing that He is

the Sovereign ruler on this earth, and uses what instruments He pleases

to carry out his great and benevolent designs. However atrocious the

causes of wars, and execrable the spirit in which they are carried out,

they are ever made to subserve the benefit of future ages, and the great

cause of civilization in its vast connections. Men may be guilty, and

may be punished for their wickedness, and execrated through all time by

enlightened nations; still they are but tools of the higher power. I do

not say that God is the author of wars any more than He is of sin; but

wars are yet sent as a punishment to those whom they directly and

immediately affect, while they unbind the cords of slavery, and relax

the hold of tyrants. They are like storms in the natural world: they

create a healthier moral life, after the disasters are past. Those

ambitious men, who seek to add province to province and kingdom to

kingdom, and for whom no maledictions are too severe, since they shed

innocent blood, rarely succeed unless they quarrel with doomed nations

incapable of renovation. Thus Babylon fell before Cyrus when her day had

come, and she could do no more for civilization. Thus Persia, in her

turn, yielded to the Grecian heroes when she became enervated with the

luxuries of the conquered kingdoms. Thus Greece again succumbed to Rome

when she had degenerated into a land where every vice was rampant. The

passions which inflamed Cyrus, and Alexander, and Pompey were alike

imperious, and their policy was alike unscrupulous. They simply were

bent on conquest, and on establishing powerful empires, which conquests

doubtless resulted in the improvement of the condition of mankind. There

is also something hard and forbidding in the policy of successful

statesmen. We are shocked at their injustice, cruelty, and

rapaciousness; but they are often used by Providence to raise nations to

preeminence, when their ascendency is, on the whole, a benefit to the

world. There is nothing amiable or benign in the characters of such men

as Oxenstiern, Richelieu, or Bismarck, but who can doubt the wisdom of

their administration? It is seldom that any nation is allowed to have a

great ascendency over other nations unless the general influence of the

dominant State is favorable to civilization; and when this influence is

perverted the ascendency passes away. This is remarkably seen in the

history of the Persian, the Greek, and the Roman Empires, and still more

forcibly in the empire of the popes in the Middle Ages, and of the vast

influence of France and England during the last hundred years. This is

both a mystery and a fact. It is mysterious that bad men should be

allowed to succeed so often, but it is one of the sternest facts of

life, only to be explained on the principle that they are instruments in

the hands of the Great Moral Governor whose designs we are not able to

fathom, yet the wisdom of which is subsequently, though imperfectly,

made known. It was wicked in the sons of Jacob to sell Joseph to the

Ishmaelites; their craft and lies were successful: they deceived their

father and accomplished their purposes; yet his bondage was the means of

their preservation from the evils of famine. The rise and fall of

empires are to be explained on the same principles as the rise and fall

of families. A coarse, unscrupulous but enterprising man gets rich, but

his wealth is made to subserve interests far greater than that of his

children. Hospitals, colleges, and libraries are endowed as monasteries

were in the Middle Ages. If vice, selfishness, and pride were not

overruled, what would become of our world? The whole history of

civilization is the good which is made to spring out of evil. Men are

nothing in comparison with Omnipotence. What are human plans? Yet

enterprise and virtue and talent are rewarded. In the affairs of life we

see that goodness does not lose its recompense, and that vice is

punished; but beyond, what more impressively do we behold than this,

that the instruments of punishment are often the wicked themselves.

[Sidenote: The results of the crusades.]

[Sidenote: Their immediate consequences are disastrous; their ultimate,

beneficial.]

Among the worst wars in history--uncalled for, unscrupulous, fanatical--

were the Crusades. And when were wars more unfortunate, more

unsuccessful? Five millions of Crusaders perished miserably in those mad

expeditions stimulated by hatred of Mohammedanism. No trophies consoled

Europe for its enormous losses, extended over two hundred years. But

those wars developed the resources of Europe; they broke the power of

feudal barons; they promoted commerce and the arts of life; they led to

greater liberality of mind; they opened the horizon of knowledge; they

introduced learned men into rising universities; they centralized the

power of kings; they weakened the temporal jurisdiction of the popes;

they improved architecture, sculpture, and painting; they built free

cities; they gave a new stimulus to all the energies of the European

nations. Their benefits to civilization were not the legitimate result

of destructive passions. The natural penalty of folly and crime was paid

in hardship, sorrow, disease, captivity, disappointment, poverty, and

death. But out of the ashes a new creation arose, not what any of the

leaders of those movements ever contemplated--infinitely removed from

the thoughts of Bernard, Urban, Philip, and Richard, great men as they

were, far-sighted statesmen, who expected other results. The hand which

guided that warfare between Europe and Asia was the hand that led the

Israelites out of Egypt across the Red Sea. Moreover, _quem deus vult

perdere prius dementat_. What uprising more foolish, insane,

disastrous, than the great Southern rebellion! Its result was never

dreamed of for a moment by those Southern leaders. They hoped to see the

establishment of a great empire based on slavery; they saw the utter

destruction of slavery itself. The course by which they anticipated

dominion and riches ended in their temporal ruin. They were made the

destroyers of their own pet system, when it could not have been

destroyed in any other way. It was only by a great war that the fetters

of the slave could be removed, and God sent war so soon as it pleased

Him to bring the wicked bondage to an end. If any thing shows the hand

of God it is the wars of the nations. They are sent like the famine and

the pestilence. All human wisdom and power sink into insignificance when

they are put forth to stop these scourges of the Almighty. It is against

all reason that they ever come; yet they do come, and then crimes are

avenged; evil punishes evil, and succeeding generations are made to see

that the progress of the race is through sorrow and suffering. No great

empire is built up but with the will of God. No empire falls without

deserving the chastisement and the ruin. But God has promised to save

and to redeem, and the world moves on in accordance with natural laws,

and each successive century witnesses somehow or other a great advance

in the general condition of mankind. It is not the great rulers who plan

this improvement. It comes from Heaven. It comes in spite of human

degeneracy, which, if left to itself, would doubtless soon produce a

state of society like that which is attributed to the nations "before

the flood came and destroyed them all."

[Sidenote: Wars over-ruled for the good of nations.]

With this view of war--always aggressive with one party, always a

calamity to both; the greatest calamity known to the nations,

exhausting, bloody, cruel, sweeping every thing before it; a moral

conflagration, bringing every kind of suffering and sorrow in its train,

yet made to result as a retribution to worn-out and degenerate races,

and a means of vast development of resources among those peoples which

have life and energy,--we see the providence of God in the Roman

Conquests. The gradual growth of Rome as a warlike state is a most

impressive example of the agency of a great Moral Governor in breaking

up states that deserved to perish, and in building up a power such as

the world needed in order to facilitate both a magnificent civilization

and the peaceful spread of a new religion. The Greeks created art and

literature; the Romans, laws and government, by which society everywhere

was made more secure and tranquil, until the good which arose from the

evil was itself perverted.

[Sidenote: Growth of Rome under the kings.]

Under the kingly rule Rome becomes the most important and powerful of

the cities of Latium, and a foundation is laid of social, religious, and

political institutions which are destined to achieve a magnificent

triumph. The kings of Rome are all great men--wise and statesmanlike,

patrons of civilization among a rude and primitive people. No state for

more than two hundred years was ever ruled by more enlightened princes,

ambitious indeed, sometimes unscrupulous, but fortunate and successful.

The benefits derived from the conquests and ascendency of the city of

Romulus were seen in the union of several petty states, and the fusion

of their customs and manners. Before the foundation of the city, Italy

was of no account with the older empires. In less than two hundred and

fifty years a great Italian power grows up on the banks of the Tiber,

imbued to some extent with the civilization of Greece, which it receives

through Etruria and the Tarquins.

[Sidenote: Effect of the expulsion of the Tarquins.]

But the growth of Rome under the kings was too rapid for its moral

health. A series of disasters produced by the expulsion of the Tarquins,

during which the Roman state dwindles into a small territory on the left

bank of the Tiber, develops strength and martial virtue. It takes Rome

one hundred and fifty years to recover what it had lost. Moreover its

great prosperity has provoked envy, and all the small neighboring

nations are leagued against it. These must be subdued, or Italy will

remain divided and subdivided, with no central power.

The heroic period of Roman history begins really with the expulsion of

the kings; also the growth of aristocratical power. It is not under

kings nor democratic influences and institutions that Rome reaches

preeminence, but under an aristocracy. All that is most glorious in

Roman annals took place under the rule of the Patricians.

[Sidenote: Rome struggles for existence for 150 years.]

[Sidenote: Beautiful legends of the heroic period.]

[Sidenote: They indicate the existence of great virtues.]

[Sidenote: Petty wars with neighboring states develop patriotism.]

During the one hundred and fifty years--when the future mistress of the

world struggled for its existence with the cities and inhabitants of

Latium, Samnium, and Etruria, whose united territories scarcely extended

fifty miles from Rome, were developed the virtues of a martial

aristocracy. Our minds kindle with the contemplation of their courage,

fortitude, patience, hope, perseverance, energy, self-devotion,

patriotism, and religious faith. They deserved success. The long and

bitter struggle of one hundred and fifty years had more of the nature of

self-preservation than military ambition. The history of those petty

wars is interesting, because it is romantic. Beautiful legends of early

patriotism and heroism have been reproduced in all the histories from

Livy to our times, like those of the knights of King Arthur and the

paladins of Charlemagne in the popular literature of Europe. Poets have

made them the themes of their inspiration. Painters have chosen them as

favorite subjects of art. We love to ponder on the bitter exile of

Coriolanus, his treasonable revenge, and the noble patriotism of his

weeping and indignant mother, who saved her country but lost her son; on

Cincinnatus, taken from the plow and sent as general and dictator

against the Acquians; on the Fabian gens, defending Rome a whole year

from the attacks of the Veientines until they were all cut off, like the

Spartan band at Thermopylae; on Siccius Dentatus, the veteran captain of

one hundred and twenty battles, who was only slain by rolling a stone

from a high rock upon his head; on Cossos, slaying the king of Veii with

his own hand; on the siege of Veii, itself, a city as large as Rome,

lasting ten years, and only finally taken by draining the Alban lake; on

the pride and avarice of the banished Camillus, and his subsequent

rescue of Rome from the Gauls; on the sacred geese of the capitol, and

Manlius who slew its assailants; on the siege of the capitol for seven

months by these Celtic invaders, and the burning and sack of the city,

and its deliverance by the great Camillus. These legends are not

legitimate history, but they show the self-devotion and bravery, the

simplicity and virtue of those primitive ages, when luxury was unknown

and crime was severely punished. It was in those days of danger and

hardship that the foundation of the future military strength of the

empire was laid. We do not read of military science, of war as an art or

trade, or even of great military ambition, for the sphere of military

operations was narrow and obscure, but of preparation for victories,

under men of genius, in the time to come. That part of Roman history

bears the same relation to the age of Marius and Sulla, that the

conquests of the Puritans over the Indians, and the difficulties with

which they contended, do to the gigantic warfare of the North and South

in the late rebellion. The Puritans laid the foundation of the military

virtues of the Americans, in their colonial state, as the Patricians of

Rome did for one hundred and fifty years after the expulsion of the

kings. Those petty wars with Volscians and Acquians brought out the

Roman character, and are the germ of subsequent greatness. They took

place in the infancy of the republic, under the rule of Patricians, who

were not then great nobles, but brave and poor citizens, animated with

patriotic zeal and characterized, like the Puritans, for stern and lofty

virtues and religious faith,--superstitious and unenlightened, yet

elevated and grand,--qualities on which the strength of man is based. It

is not puerile to dwell with delight on the legends of that heroic age,

for the philosopher sees in those little struggles the germs of imperial

power. They were small and insignificant, like the battles of the

American Revolution, when measured with the marshaling of vast armies on

the plains of Pharsalia or Waterloo, but they were great in their

inherent heroism, and in their future results. Who shall say which is

greater to the eye of the Infinite--the battle of Leipsic, or the fight

on Bunker Hill? It is the cause, the principles involved, the spirit of

a contest, which give dignity and importance to the battle-field. Hence

all nations and ages have felt great interest in the early struggles of

Rome. They are full of poetry and philosophical importance. The Roman

historians themselves dwelt upon them with peculiar enthusiasm; and the

record of them lives in the school-books of all generations, and has not

been deemed unworthy of the critical genius of Niebuhr, of Arnold, or of

Mommsen.

[Sidenote: The complete independence of Rome.]

[Sidenote: The Gaulish Invasion.]

The result of this protracted warfare with petty cities and states for

one hundred and fifty years was the complete independence of the City of

the Seven Hills, the regaining of the conquests lost by the expulsion of

Tarquin, the conquest of Latium, the dissolution of the Latin League,

the possession of the Pontine district, and the extension of Roman power

to the valleys of the Apennines. The war with the Gauls was not a

systematic contest. It was a raid of these Celts across the Apennines,

and the temporary humiliation of the Roman capital. The Gauls burned and

sacked the city, but soon retreated, and Rome was never again invaded by

a foreign foe until the hordes of Alaric appeared. The disaster was soon

recovered, and the Romans made more united by the lesson.

With the retreat of the Gauls, B.C. 350, and the recovery of Latium,

B.C. 341 and four hundred and sixteen years from the foundation of the

city, the aggressive period of Roman warfare begins. By this time the

Plebeians made their power felt, and had obtained one of the two

consulships; but for a long time after, the Patricians, though shorn of

undivided sovereignty, still monopolized most of the great offices of

state--indeed were the controlling power, socially and politically. At

no period was Rome a democratic state; never had Plebeians the

ascendency. But now the plebeian influence begins to modify the old

constitution. All classes, after incessant warfare for a century and a

half, and exposed to innumerable feuds, united in enterprises of

conquest. Rome begins to appear on the stage of political history.

[Sidenote: War with the Samnites.]

[Sidenote: Decisive battle of Sentinum.]

The aggressive nature of Roman warfare commenced with Samnium. The

Samnites were a warlike and pastoral people who inhabited the rugged

mountain district between the valleys of the Vulturnus and the Calor,

but they were nevertheless barbarians, and the contest between them and

the Romans was for the sovereignty of Italy. I need not mention the

alleged causes, or the details of a sanguinary war. The alleged causes

were not the true ones, and the details are complicated and obscure. We

deal with results. The war began B.C. 326, and lasted, with short

intervals of peace, thirty-six years. The Roman heroes were M. Valerius

Corvus, L. Papirius Cursor, Q. Fabius Maximus, and P. Decius the

younger. All of these were great generals, and were consuls or

dictators. As in all great contests, lasting a whole generation, there

was alternate victory and defeat, disgraced by treachery and bad faith.

The Romans fought, assisted by Latins, Campanians, and Apulians. The

Samnites defended themselves in their mountain fastnesses with

inflexible obstinacy, and obtained no assistance from allies until

nearly worn out, when Umbrians, Etrurians, and Senonian Gauls came to

the rescue. About sixty thousand men fought on each side. The battle of

Sentinum determined the fate of Samnium and Italy, gained by Fabius and

Decius, and the Samnites laid down their arms and yielded to their

rivals. Their brave general, Pontius, was beheaded in the prison under

the capitol,--an act of inhumanity which sullied the laurels of Fabius.

The Roman power is now established over central and lower Italy, and

with the exception of a few Greek cities on the coast, Latium, Campania,

Apulia, and Samnium are added to the territories of the republic.

[Sidenote: Works of Appius Claudius.]

In the mean time the political inequality between Patricians and

Plebeians had been removed, and a plebeian nobility had grown up,

created by success in war and domestic factions. The great man in civil

history, during this war, was Appius Claudius the Censor, a proud and

inflexible Patrician. His, great works were the Appian road and

aqueduct. The road led to Capua through the Pontine marshes one hundred

and twenty miles, and was paved with blocks of basalt; the aqueduct

passed under ground, and was the first of those vast works which

supplied the city with water.

About ten years elapsed between the conquest of the Samnites and the

landing of Pyrrhus in Italy, B.C. 280, during which the Romans were

brought in contact with Magna Grecia and Syracuse.

[Sidenote: Tarentum invokes the aid of Phyrrus.]

The chief of the Greek-Italian cities was Tarentum, a very ancient

Lacedaemonian colony. It was admirably situated for commerce on the gulf

which bears its name, was very rich, and abounded in fearless sailors.

But like most commercial cities, it intrusted its defense to

mercenaries. It viewed with alarm the growing power of Rome, and unable

to meet her face to face, called in the aid of Pyrrhus, king of Epirus,

the greatest general of the age, which was followed by a general rising

of the Italian states, to shake off the Roman yoke.

[Sidenote: Expedition of Pyrrhus into Italy.]

[Sidenote: He is defeated at the battle of Beneventum.]

Pyrrhus was a soldier of fortune, and practiced war as an art, and

delighted in it like Alexander or Charles XII. He readily responded to

the overture of the Tarentine Ambassador, and sent over a general with

three thousand men to secure a footing, and soon followed with twenty

thousand foot, five thousand horse, and a number of elephants. Among his

troops were five thousand Macedonian soldiers, a phalanx such as the

Romans had never encountered. The Macedonians fought in masses; the

Romans in lines. The first encounter was disastrous to the Romans, whose

cavalry was frightened by the elephants. But Pyrrhus, contented with

victory, did not pursue his advantages, and advanced with easy marches

towards Rome with seventy thousand men. The battle of Heraclea, however,

had greatly weakened his forces; his allies proved treacherous; and he

was glad to offer terms of peace, which were promptly rejected by the

Senate. After spending nearly three years in Italy he retired to

Syracuse, but again tried his fortune against the Romans, and was

signally routed at the battle of Beneventum by Curius Dentatus. He

hastily left Italy to her fate, and the fall of Tarentum speedily

followed, which made the Romans masters of the whole peninsula. The

Macedonian phalanx, which had conquered Asia, yielded to the Roman

legion, and a new lesson was learned in the art of war.

[Sidenote: Results of the Fall of Tarentum.]

[Sidenote: The Romans complete masters of Italy.]

The Romans, by the fall of Tarentum, were now the undisputed masters of

Italy, and had made the first great step towards the conquest of the

world. The city of Romulus was now four hundred and eighty years old,

and the national domain extended from the Ciminian wood in Etruria to

the middle of the Campania. It was called the Ager Romanus, in which was

a population of two hundred and ninety-three thousand men capable of

bearing arms; and the citizens of the various conquered cities, who had

served certain magistracies in them, were enrolled among Roman citizens,

with all the rights to which the citizens of the capital were entitled,--

absolute authority over wife, children, and slaves, security from

capital punishment except by a vote of the people, or under military

authority in the camp, access to all the honors and employments of the

state, the right of suffrage, and the possession of Quirinal property.

They felt themselves to be allies of Rome, and henceforward lent

efficient aid in war. To all practical intents, they were Romans as

completely as the inhabitants of Marseilles are French. Tarentum,

Neapolis, Tibur, Praeneste, and other large cities, enjoyed peculiar

privileges; but armed garrisons were maintained in them, under the form

of colonies. The administration of them was organized after the model of

Rome. Military roads were constructed between all places of importance.

[Sidenote: The virtues of eminent Patricians.]

The same sterling virtues which characterized the absolute rule of the

Patricians still continued, and patriotism partook of the nature of

religious sentiment. Three Decii surrendered their lives for the Roman

army, and Manlius immolated his son to the genius of discipline; Runnus

is degraded from the Senate for possessing ten pounds of silver plate,

although twice consul and once dictator; Regulus, twice consul,

possessed no more than one little field in the barren district of

Papinice. Curius like Fabricius prepared his simple meal with his own

hand, and refused the gold of the Samnites, as Fabricius refused that of

Pyrrhus. The new masters of Italy deserved their empire. There was union

because there was now political equality. The "new men, like Fabricius

and Curius Dentatus, were not less numerous in the Senate than the old

Curial families. The aristocracy of blood was blended with the

aristocracy of merit. The consulship gave unity of command, the Senate

wisdom and the proper strength, preserving a happy equilibrium of

forces,--the combination of royalty, aristocracy, and democracy, which,

with military virtues and austere manners, made an irresistible force."

[Footnote: Durny, _Hist. des Romains_] This period, the fifth

century of the existence of the Roman state, was its heroic age.

[Sidenote: Rome prepares for aggressive and unjust war.]

But now military aggrandizement became the master-passion of the people,

and the uniform policy of the government. Military virtues still

remained, but the morals of state began to decline. Aggressive wars, for

conquest and power, henceforth, mark the progress of the Romans; and not

merely aggressive wars, but unjust and foreign wars. The step of the

Roman is now proud and defiant. Visions of unlimited conquest rise up

before his eye. He is cold, practical, imperious. The eagles of the

legions are the real objects of pride and reverence. Mars is the

presiding deity. Success is the only road to honor.

[Sidenote: Rivalry between Carthage and Rome.]

While Rome was completing the reduction of Italy, Carthage, a Tyrian

colony on the opposite coast of Africa, was extending her conquests in

the Islands of the Mediterranean. The Greek colonies of Sicily had

fallen under her sway. She was a rival whose power was formidable,

enriched by the commerce of the world, and proud in the number of her

allies. The city contained seven hundred thousand inhabitants, and the

walls measured twenty miles in circumference.

[Sidenote: Shall Rome or Carthage have the preeminence.]

[Sidenote: Carthage falls after a long and memorable struggle.]

[Sidenote: Territories acquired by the fall of Carthage.]

Between such ambitious and unscrupulous rivals, peace could not long be

maintained. To the eye of the philosopher the ascendency of Carthage or

of Rome over the countries which border on the Mediterranean was clearly

seen. Which were better? Shall the world be governed by a martial, law-

making, law-loving, heroic commonwealth, not yet seduced and corrupted

by luxury and wealth, or by a commercial, luxurious, selfish nation of

merchants, whose only desire is self-indulgence and folly. Providence

sides with Rome--although Rome cannot be commended, and is ruled by

ambitious and unscrupulous chieftains whose delight is power. If there

is to be one great empire more, before Christianity is proclaimed, which

shall absorb all other empires, now degenerate and corrupt, let that be

given to a people who know how to civilize after they have conquered.

Let the sword rather than gold rule the world--enlightened statesmen

rather than self-indulgent merchants. So Carthage falls, after three

memorable struggles, extending over more than a century, during which

she produced the greatest general of antiquity, next to Caesar and

Alexander. But not even Hannibal could restore the fortunes of his

country, after having inflicted a bitter humiliation on his enemies.

That city of merchants, like Tyre and Sidon, must drink of the cup of

divine chastisement. Another type of civilization than that furnished by

a "mistress of the sea," was needed for Europe, and another rule for

Asia and Africa. The Carthaginians taught the Romans, in their contest,

how to build ships of war and fight naval battles. As many as three

hundred thousand men were engaged in that memorable sea-fight of Ecnomus

which opened to Regulus the way to Africa. Three times did the Romans

lose their fleets by tempests, and yet they persevered in building new

ones. The fortitude of the Romans, in view of the brilliant successes of

Hannibal, can never be sufficiently admired. The defeat at Cannae was a

catastrophe, but the troops of Fabius, to whom was left the defense of

the city, were not discouraged, and with Scipio--religious, self-reliant,

and lofty--the tide of victory turned. By the first Punic war, which

lasted twenty-two years, Rome gained Sicily; by the second, which opened

twenty-three years after the first, and lasted seventeen years, she

gained Sardinia, a foothold in Spain and Gaul, and a preponderance

throughout the western regions of Europe and Africa; by the third, which

occurred fifty years after the second, and continued but four years, she

gained all the provinces of Africa ruled by Carthage, and a great part

of Spain. Nothing was allowed to remain of the African capital. The

departing troops left behind complete desolation. The captives were sold

as slaves, or put to death, and enough of spoil rewarded the victors to

adorn a triumph only surpassed by that of Paulus on his return from the

conquest of Greece.

[Sidenote: Condition of the Macedonian empire.]

[Sidenote: Principles and passions which led to the conquest of Greece.]

In the mean time, in the interval between the second and third Punic

wars, occurred the Macedonian wars, which prepared the way for conquests

in the East. The great Macedonian empire was split up into several

monarchies among the generals of Alexander and their successors. The

Ptolemies reigned in Egypt; the successors of Seleucus in Babylonia;

those of Antigonus in Syria and Asia Minor; those of Lysimachus in

Thrace; and of Cassander in Macedonia. It was the mission of Rome to

subdue these monarchies, or rather her good fortune, for she was

destined to conquer the world. The principles which animated these wars

cannot be defended on high moral grounds, any more than the conquest of

India by England, or of Algeria by France. They were based entirely upon

ambition--upon the passion for political aggrandizement. I confess I

have no sympathy with them. Roman liberties were not jeopardized, nor

were these monarchies dangerous rivals like Carthage. The subjugation of

Italy was in accordance with what we now call the Monroe doctrine--to

obtain the ascendency on her own soil; and even the conquest or of

Sicily was no worse than the conquest of Ireland, or what would be the

future absorption of Cuba and Jamaica within the limits of the United

States. The Emperor Napoleon would probably justify both the humiliation

of Carthage and the conquest of Greece and Asia and Egypt, and others

would echo his voice in defense of aggressive domination, on some plea

of pretended schemes of colonization, and the progress of civilization.

But I do not believe in overturning the immutable laws of moral

obligation for any questionable policy of expediency. I look upon the

great civil wars of the Romans, which followed these conquests, in which

so much blood was shed, and in which Marius and Sulla and Caesar and

Pompey exhausted the resources of the state, and made an imperial

_regime_ necessary, only as the visitation of God in rebuke of such

wicked ambition.

[Sidenote: Greece reaps the penalty of the unscrupulous wars of

Alexander.]

[Sidenote: Degeneracy of the Greeks.]

[Sidenote: Spoils of Greece fall into the hands of the Romans.]

[Sidenote: The triumph of Paulus.]

[Sidenote: Grecian provinces added to the empire.]

The conquest over the Macedonians, however, by the Romans, was not an

unmixed calamity, and was a righteous judgment on the Greeks. Nothing

could be more unscrupulous than the career of Alexander and his

generals. Again, the principle which had animated the Oriental kings

before him was indefensible. We could go back still further, and show

from the whole history of Asiatic conquests that their object was to

aggrandize ambitious conquerors. The Persians, at first, were a brave

and religious people, hardy and severe, and their conquest of older

monarchies resulted in a certain good. But they became corrupt by

prosperity and power, and fell a prey to the Greeks. The Greeks, at that

period, were the noblest race of the ancient world--immortal for genius

and art. But power dazzled them, and little remained of that glorious

spirit which was seen at Thermopylae and Marathon. The Greek ascendency

in Asia and Egypt was followed by the same luxury and extravagance and

effeminacy that resulted from the rule of Persia. The Greeks had done

great things, and contributed to the march of civilization, but they had

done their work, and their turn of humiliation must come. Their vast

empire fell into the hands of the Romans, and the change was beneficial

to humanity. They who had abused their trust were punished, and those

were exalted above them who were as yet uncorrupted by those vices which

are most fatal to nations. The great fruit of these wars were the

treasures of Greece, especially precious marbles, and other works of

art. The victory at Pydna, B.C. 168, which gave the final superiority to

the Roman legion over the Macedonian phalanx, was followed by the

triumph of Paulus himself--the grandest display ever seen at Rome. First

passed the spoils of Greece--statues and pictures--in two hundred and

fifty wagons; then the arms and accoutrements of the Macedonian

soldiers; then three thousand men, each carrying a vase of silver coin;

then victims for sacrifice, with youths and maidens with garlands; then

men bearing vases of gold and precious stones; then the royal chariot of

the conquered king laden with armor and trophies; then his wife and

children, and the fallen monarch on foot; then the triumphal car of the

victorious general, preceded by men bearing four hundred crowns of gold--

the gift of the Grecian cities--and followed by his two sons on

horseback, and the whole army in order. The sack of Corinth by Mummius

was the finale of Grecian humiliation, soon followed by the total

subjection of Macedonia, Greece, and Illyria, forming three provinces.

Nine provinces now composed the territories of Rome, while the kings of

Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt were vassals rather than allies, B.C. 133.

[Sidenote: Change of manners and morals at Rome.]

[Sidenote: Reforms of Cato the Censor.]

[Sidenote: Great degeneracy produced by the Grecian wars.]

The manners and habits of the imperial capital had undergone a gradual

change since the close of the second Punic War. During these fifty

years, the sack of so many Grecian cities, the fall of Carthage, and the

prestige of so many victories, had filled Rome with pride and luxury. In

vain did M. Portius Cato, the most remarkable man who adorned this

degenerate age, lift up his voice against increasing corruption. In vain

were his stringent measures as censor. In vain did he strike senators

from the list, and make an onslaught on the abuses of his day. In vain

were his eloquence, his simple manners, his rustic garb, and his

patriotic warnings. That hard, narrow, self-sufficient, arbitrary,

worldly-wise old statesman, whose many virtues redeemed his defects, and

whose splendid abilities were the glory of his countrymen, could not

restore the simplicities of former times. An age of "progress" had set

in, of Grecian arts and culture, of material wealth, of sumptuous

banquets, of splendid palaces, of rich temples, of theatrical shows, of

circus games, of female gallantries, of effeminated manners--all the

usual accompaniments of civilization, when it is most proud of its

triumphs; and there was no resisting its march--to the eye of many a

great improvement; to the eye of honest old Cato, the _descensus

averi_. Wealth had become a great power; senatorial families grew

immensely rich; the divisions of society widened; slavery was enormously

increased, while the rural population lost independence and influence.

Then took place the memorable struggles of Rome, not merely with foreign

enemies, but against herself. Factions and parties convulsed the city;

civil war wasted the national resources.

[Sidenote: Wars with the Cimbri and Teutones.]

[Sidenote: Success of Marius, who rolls back the tide of northern

emigration.]

It was in that period of civic strife, when factions and parties

struggled for ascendency--when the Gracchi were both reformers and

demagogues, patriots and disorganizes, heroes and martyrs--when

fortunate generals aimed at supreme power, and sought to overturn the

liberties of their country, that Rome was seriously threatened by the

barbarians. Both Celts and Teutones, from Gaul and Germany, formed a

general union for the invasion of Italy. They had successively defeated

five consular armies, in which one hundred and twenty thousand men were

slain. They rolled on like a devastating storm--some three hundred

thousand warriors from unconquered countries beyond the Alps. They were

met by Marius the hero of the African war, who had added Numidia, to the

empire--now old, fierce, and cruel, a plebeian who had arisen by force

of military genius--and the Gaulish hordes were annihilated on the Rhone

and the Po. The Romans at first viewed those half-naked warriors--so

full of strength and courage, so confident of victory, so reckless of

life, so impetuous and savage--with terror and awe. But their time had

not yet come. Numbers were of no avail against science, when science was

itself directed by genius and sustained by enthusiasm. The result of the

decisive battles of Aquae Sextiae and Vercellae was to roll back the tide

of northern immigration for three hundred years, and to prepare the way

for the conquests of Caesar in Gaul.

[Sidenote: The Social War.]

[Sidenote: Rise of Sulla.]

Then followed that great insurrection of the old states of Italy against

their imperious mistress--their last struggle for independence, called

the Social War, in which three hundred thousand of the young men of

Italy fell, and in which Sulla so much distinguished himself as to be

regarded as the rival of Marius, who had ruled Rome since the slaughter

of the Cimbrians and Teutones. Sulla, who had served under Marius in

Africa, dissolute like Antony, but cultivated like Caesar--a man full of

ambition and genius, and belonging to one of the oldest and proudest

patrician families, the Cornelian gens--was no mean rival of the old

tyrant and demagogue, and he was sent against Mithridates, the most

powerful of all the Oriental kings.

This Asiatic potentate had encouraged the insurgents in Italy, and was

also at war with the Romans. Marius viewed with envy and hatred the

preference shown to Sulla in the conduct of the Mithridatic War, and

succeeded, by his intrigues and influence with the people, in causing

Sulla to be superseded, and himself to be appointed in his place.

[Sidenote: Civil wars between Marius and Sulla.]

Hence that dreadful civil contest between these two generals, in which

Rome was alternately at the mercy of both, and in which the most

horrible butcheries took place that had ever befallen the city--a reign

of terror, a burst of savage passion, especially on the part of Marius,

who had lately abandoned himself to wine and riotous living. He died

B.C. 86, victor in the contest, in his seventh consulate, worn out by

labor and dissolute habits, nearly seventy years of age.

[Sidenote: Death of Marius.]

His opportune death relieved Rome of a tyrannical rule, and opened the

way for the splendid achievements of Sulla in the East. A great warrior

had arisen in a quarter least expected. In the mountainous region along

the north side of the Euxine, the kingdom of Pontus had grown from a

principality to a kingdom, and Mithridates, ruling over Cappadocia,

Papalagonia, and Phrygia, aspired for the sovereignty of the East. He

was an accomplished and enlightened prince, and could speak twenty-five-

languages, hardy, adventurous, and bold, like an ancient Persian. By

conquests and alliances he had made himself the most powerful sovereign

in Asia.

[Sidenote: Mithridates.]

Availing himself of the disturbance growing out of the Social War, he

fomented a rebellion of the provinces of Asia Minor, seized Bithynia,

and encouraged Athens to shake off the Roman yoke. Most of the Greek

communities joined the Athenian insurrection, and Asia rallied around

the man who hoped to cope successfully with Rome herself.

[Sidenote: Conquests of Sulla in Greece.]

At this juncture, Sulla was sent into Greece with fifty thousand men.

Athens fell before his conquering legions, B.C. 88, and the lieutenants

of Mithridates retreated before the Romans with one hundred thousand

foot and ten thousand horse, and one hundred armed chariots. On the

plains of Chaeronea, where Grecian liberties had been overthrown by

Philip of Macedon, two hundred and fifty years before, a desperate

conflict took place, and the Pontic army was signally defeated. Shortly

after, Sulla gained another great victory over the generals of the King

of Pontus, and compelled him to accept peace, the terms of which he

himself dictated, after exacting heavy contributions from the cities of

Greece and Asia Minor.

[Sidenote: Death of Sulla.]

The civil war between Sulla and the chiefs of the popular faction that

had been created by Marius, which ended in his complete ascendency in

Italy, stopped for a while the Roman conquests in the East. Sulla,

having undone the popular measures of the last half century, and reigned

supreme over all factions as dictator, died B.C. 78, after a most

successful career, and left his mantle to the most enterprising of his

lieutenants, Cnaeus Pompey, who was destined to complete the Mithridatic

war.

[Sidenote: Character of Sulla.]

If Sulla had not been so inordinately fond of pleasure and luxurious

self-indulgence, he might have seized the sceptre of universal dominion,

and have made himself undisputed master of the empire. He was a man of

extraordinary genius, fond of literature, and a great diplomatist. But

he was not preeminently ambitious like Caesar, and was diverted by the

fascinations of elegant leisure; nor was he naturally cruel, though his

passions, when aroused, were fierce and vindictive. He lived in an age

of exceeding corruption, when it was evident to contemplative minds that

Roman liberties could not be much longer preserved. He had, for a time,

restored the ascendency of the senatorial families, but faction was at

work among the unprincipled chiefs of the republic.

[Sidenote: Lucullus marches against Mithridates.]

On the death of the great dictator, Mithridates broke the peace he had

concluded, and marched into Bithynia, which had been left by will to the

Roman people by Nicomedes, with the hope of its reconquest. He had an

army of one hundred and twenty thousand foot and fifteen thousand horse.

Lucullus, with thirty thousand foot and one thousand horse, advanced

against him, and the vast forces of Mithridates were defeated, and the

king was driven into Armenia, and sought the aid of Tigranes, his son-

in-law, king of that powerful country. He, too, was subdued by the Roman

legions, and all the nations from the Halys to the Euphrates

acknowledged the dominion of Rome.

[Sidenote: Rising greatness of Pompey.]

Still, Mithridates was not subdued, and Pompey, who had annihilated the

Mediterranean pirates, was the only person fit to finish the Mithridatic

war. His successes had been more brilliant than even those of Sulla, or

Lucullus, or Metellus. He was made Dictator of the East, with greater

powers than had ever before been intrusted to a Roman general. He had

success equal to his fame; drove Mithridates across the Caucasus;

reduced Pontus, and took possession of Syria, which had been subject to

Tigranes. The defeated King of Pontus, who had sought to unite all the

barbarous tribes of Eastern Europe against Rome, destroyed himself.

Pompey, after seven years' continued successes, returned to Italy to

claim his triumph, having subdued the East, and added the old monarchy

of the Seleucidae to the dominion of Rome, B.C. 61.

[Sidenote: The early career of Julius Caesar.]

[Sidenote: His victories in Spain.]

[Sidenote: Caesar sent into Gaul.]

But while Pompey was pursuing his victories over the effeminate people

of Asia, a still more brilliant career in the West marked the rising

fortunes of Julius Caesar. I need not dwell on the steps by which he

arose to become the formidable rival of the conqueror of the East. He

bears the most august name of antiquity. A patrician by birth, a

demagogue in his principles, popular in his manners, unscrupulous in his

means, he successively passed through the various great offices of

state, which he discharged with prodigious talent. As leader of the old

popular party of Marius, he sought the humiliation of the Senate, while

his ambition led him to favor every enterprise which promised to advance

his own interests. Leaving the province of Spain, after his praetorship,

before Pompey's return to Italy, his great career of conquest commenced.

He first availed himself of some disturbances in Lusitania to declare

war against its gallant people, overran their country, and then turned

his arms against the Gallicians. In two years he had obtained spoils

more than sufficient to pay his enormous debts, the result of his

prodigality, by which, however, he won the hearts of the thoughtless

citizens, and paved the way for honor. Conqueror of Spain, and idol of

the people, he returned to Rome, B.C. 60, when Pompey was quarreling

with the Senate, formed an alliance with him and Crassus, and by their

aid was elected consul. His measures in that high office all tended to

secure his popularity with the people, and supported by Pompey and

Crassus, he triumphed over the Senate. He then secured the government of

Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum, with two legions, for the extraordinary

term of five years. The Senate added the province of Transalpine Gaul,

then threatened by the Allobrogians, Suevi, Helvetians, and other

barbaric tribes, with the intention of confining him to a dangerous and

uncertain field of warfare.

[Sidenote: His great military genius.]

[Sidenote: His difficulties in the conquest of Gaul.]

[Sidenote: Results of the Gaulish wars.]

[Sidenote: Gaul becomes Latinized.]

That field, however, established his military fame, and paved the way

for his subsequent usurpations. The conquests of Caesar in Western Europe

are unique in the history of war, and furnish no parallel. Other

conquests may have been equally brilliant and more imposing, but none

were ever more difficult and arduous, requiring greater perseverance,

energy, promptness, and fertility of resources. The splendid successes

of Lucullus and Pompey in Asia resembled those of Alexander. We see

military discipline and bravery triumphing over the force of multitudes,

and a few thousand men routing vast armies of enervated or undisciplined

mercenaries. Such were the conquests of the English in India. They make

a great impression, but the fortunes of an empire are decided by a

single battle. It was not so with the conflicts of Caesar in Gaul. He had

to fight with successive waves of barbarians, inured to danger,

adventurous and hardy, holding life in little estimation, willing to die

in battle, intrepid in soul, and bent on ultimate victory. He had to

fight in hostile territories, unacquainted with the face of the country,

at a great distance from the base of his supplies, exposed to perpetual

perils, and surrounded with unknown difficulties. And these were

appreciated by his warlike countrymen, who gave him the credit he

deserved. The ten years he spent in Gaul were the years of his truest

glory, and the most momentous in their consequences on the future

civilization of the world, since it was not worn-out monarchies he added

to the empire, but a new territory, inhabited by brave and simple races,

who were to learn the arts and laws and literature of Rome, and supply

the government with powerful aid in the decline of its strength. It was

the conquered barbarians who, henceforth, were to furnish Rome with

soldiers, and even scholars and statesmen and generals. Among them the

old civilization was to take root, among them new states were to arise

on which the Romans could impress their own remarkable characteristics.

It was the western provinces of the empire that alone were vital with

energy and strength, and which were destined to perpetuate the spirit of

Roman institutions. The eastern provinces never lost the impress of the

Greek mind and manners. They remained Greek even when subdued by the

imperial legions. Syria, Asia Minor, Egypt, were filled with Grecian

cities, and Asiatic customs were modified by Grecian civilization. The

West was purely Roman, and the Latin language, laws, and arts were

continued, in a modified form, through the whole period of the Middle

Ages. Even Christianity had a different influence in the West from what

it had in the East. In other words, the West was completely Latinized,

while the East remained Grecian. Though the East was governed by Roman

proconsuls, they could not change the Graeco-Asiatic character of its

institutions and manners; but the barbarians were willing to learn new

lessons from their Roman masters.

[Sidenote: Greatness of Caesar.]

It would require a volume to describe the various campaigns of Caesar in

Gaul, in which a million of people were destroyed. But I only aim to

show results. Most people are familiar with the marvelous generalship

and enterprises of the Roman conqueror--the conquest and reconquest of

the brave barbarians, most of whom were Celts; the uprising of Germanic

tribes as well, and their fearful slaughter near Coblentz; the bloody

battles, the fearful massacres, the unscrupulous cruelties which he

directed; the formidable insurrection organized by Vercingetorix; the

spirit he infused into his army; the incessant hardships of the

soldiers, crossing rivers, mountains, and valleys, marching with their

heavy burdens--fighting amid every disadvantage, until all the

countries north of the Alps and west of the Rhine acknowledged his sway--

all these things are narrated by Caesar himself with matchless force and

simplicity of language.

[Sidenote: Rivalry between Caesar and Pompey.]

Caesar now probably aspired to the sovereignty of the empire, as Napoleon

did after the conquest of Italy. But he had a great rival in Pompey, who

had remained chiefly at Rome, during his Gaulish campaigns, virtually

dictator, certainly the strongest citizen. And Pompey had also his

ambitious schemes. One was the conqueror of the East; the other of the

West. One leaned to the aristocratic party, the other to the popular.

Pompey was proud, pompous, and self-sufficient. Caesar was politic,

patient, and intriguing. Both had an inordinate ambition, and both were

unscrupulous. Pompey had more prestige, Caesar more genius. Pompey was a

greater tactician, Caesar a greater strategist. The Senate rallied around

the former, the people around the latter. Cicero distrusted both, and

flattered each by turns, but inclined to the side of Pompey, as

belonging to the aristocratic party.

[Sidenote: Battle of Pharsalia.]

[Sidenote: Death of Pompey.]

Between such ambitious rivals coalition for any length of time could not

continue. Dissensions arose between them, and then war. The contest was

decided at Pharsalia. On the 6th of June, B.C. 48, "Greek met Greek,"

yet with forces by no means great on either side. Pompey had only forty

thousand, and Caesar less, but they were veterans, and the victory was

complete. Pompey fled to Egypt, without evincing his former greatness,

paralyzed, broken, and without hope. There he miserably died, by the

assassin's dagger, at the age of sixty, and the way was now prepared for

the absolute rule of Caesar.

[Sidenote: Dictatorship of Caesar.]

But the party of Pompey rallied, connected with which were some of the

noblest names of Rome. The battle of Thapsus proved as disastrous to

Cato as Pharsalia did to Pompey. Caesar was uniformly victorious, not

merely over the party which had sustained Pompey, but in Asia, Africa,

and Spain, which were in revolt. His presence was everywhere required,

and wherever he appeared his presence was enough. He was now dictator

for ten years. He had overturned the constitution of his country. He was

virtually the supreme ruler of the world. In the brief period which

passed from his last triumphs to his death, he was occupied in

legislative labors, in settling military colonies, in restoring the

wasted population of Italy, in improving the city, in reforming the

calendar, and other internal improvements, evincing an enlarged and

liberal mind.

[Sidenote: Death of Caesar. His character.]

But the nobles hated him, and had cause, in spite of his abilities, his

affability, magnanimity, and forbearance. He had usurped unlimited

authority, and was too strong to be removed except by assassination. I

need not dwell on the conspiracy under the leadership of Brutus, and his

tragic end in the senate-house, where he fell, pierced by twenty-two

wounds, at the base of Pompey's statue, the greatest man in Roman

history--great as an orator, a writer, a general, and a statesman; a man

without vanity, devoted to business, unseduced by pleasure, unscrupulous

of means to effect an end; profligate, but not more so than his times;

ambitious of power, but to rule, when power was once secured, for the

benefit of his country, like many other despots immortal on a bloody

catalogue. After his passage of the Rubicon his career can only be

compared with that of Napoleon.

[Sidenote: Character of his later wars.]

But Roman territories were not much enlarged by Caesar after the conquest

of Celtic Europe. His later wars were either against rivals or to settle

distracted provinces. Nor were they increased in the civil wars which

succeeded his death, between the various aspirants for the imperial

power and those who made one more stand for the old constitution. At the

fatal battle of Philippi, when the hopes of Roman patriots vanished

forever, double the number of soldiers were engaged on both sides than

at Pharsalia, but fortune had left the senatorial party, of which Brutus

was the avenger and the victim.

[Sidenote: Civil wars after the death of Caesar.]

[Sidenote: Ascendency of Octavian.]

Civil war was carried on most vigorously after the death of Julius. But

it was now plainly a matter between rival generals and statesmen for

supreme command. The chief contest was between Octavian and Antony, the

former young, artful, self-controlled, and with transcendent abilities

as a statesman; the latter bold, impetuous, luxurious, and the ablest of

all Caesar's lieutenants as a general. Had he not yielded to the

fascinations of Cleopatra, he would probably have been the master of the

world. But the sea-fight of Actium, one of the great decisive battles of

history, gave the empire of the world to Octavian B.C. 31, and two years

after the victor celebrated three magnificent triumphs, after the

example of his uncle, for Dalmatia, Actium, and Egypt. The kingdom of

the Ptolemies passed under the rule of Caesar. The Temple of Janus was

shut, for the first time for more than two hundred years; and the

imperial power was peaceably established over the civilized world.

[Sidenote: Necessity for the empire.]

The friends of liberty may justly mourn over the fall of republican

Rome, and the centralization of all power in the hands of Augustus. But

it was a calamity which could not be averted, and was a revolution which

was in accordance with the necessities of the times. Fifty years' civil

war taught the Romans the hopelessness of the struggle to maintain their

old institutions so long as the people were corrupt, and fortunate

generals would sacrifice the public welfare to their ambition. Order was

better than anarchy, even though a despot reigned supreme. When men are

worse than governments, they must submit to the despotism of tyrants. It

is idle to dream of liberty with a substratum of folly and vice. The

strongest man will rule, but whether he rule wisely or unwisely, there

is no remedy. Providence gave the world to the Romans, after continual

and protracted wars for seven hundred years; and when the people who had

conquered the world by their energy, prudence, and perseverance, were no

longer capable of governing themselves, then the state fell into the

possession of a single man.

[Sidenote: Change in the imperial policy.]

Under the emperors, the whole policy of the government was changed. They

no longer thought of further aggrandizement, but of retaining the

conquests which were already made. And if they occasionally embarked in

new wars, those wars were of necessity rather than of ambition, were

defensive rather than aggressive. New provinces were from time to time

added, but in consequence of wars which were waged in defense of the

empire. The conquest of Britain and Judea was completed, and various

conflicts took place with the Germanic nations, who, in the reign of

Antoninus, formed a general union for the invasion of the Roman world.

These barbarians were the future aggressors on the peace of the empire,

until it fell into their hands. The empire of Augustus may be said to

have reached the utmost limits it ever permanently retained, extending

from the Rhine and the Danube to the Euphrates and Mount Atlas,

embracing a population variously estimated from one hundred to one

hundred and thirty millions.

[Sidenote: Perfection of military art.]

When Augustus became the sovereign ruler of this vast empire, military

art had reached the highest perfection it ever attained among any of the

nations of antiquity. It required centuries to perfect this science, if

science it may be called, and the Romans doubtless borrowed from the

people whom they subdued. They learned to resist the impetuous assaults

of semi-barbarous warriors, the elephants of the East, and the phalanx

of the Greeks. Military discipline was carried to the severest extent by

Marius, Pompey, and Caesar.

[Sidenote: The spirit of the Roman soldier.]

The Roman soldier was trained to march twenty miles a day, under a

burden of eighty pounds; yea, to swim rivers, to climb mountains, to

penetrate forests, and to encounter every kind of danger. He was taught

that his destiny was to die in battle. He expected death. He was ready

to die. Death was his duty, and his glory. He enlisted in the armies

with little hope of revisiting his home. He crossed seas and deserts and

forests with the idea of spending his life in the service of his

country. His pay was only a denarius daily, equal to about sixteen cents

of our money. Marriage was discouraged or forbidden. He belonged to the

state, and the state was exacting and hard. He was reduced to abject

obedience, yet he held in his hand the destinies of the empire. And

however insignificant was the legionary as a man, he gained importance

from the great body with which he was identified. He was the servant and

the master of the state. He had an intense _esprit de corps_. He

was bound up in the glory of his legion. Both religion and honor bound

him to his standards. The golden eagle which glittered in his front was

the object of his fondest devotion. Nor was it possible to escape the

penalty of cowardice or treachery, or disobedience. He could be

chastised with blows by his centurion; his general could doom him to

death. Never was the severity of military discipline relaxed. Military

exercises were incessant, in winter as in summer. In the midst of peace

the Roman troops were familiarized with the practice of war.

[Sidenote: Military genius of the Romans.]

[Sidenote: The perfection of military art.]

It was the spirit which animated the Roman legions, and the discipline

to which they were inured, which gave them their irresistible strength.

When we remember that they had not our fire-arms, we are surprised at

their efficiency, especially in taking strongly fortified cities.

Jerusalem was defended by a triple wall, and the most elaborate

fortifications, and twenty-four thousand soldiers, beside the aid

received from the citizens; and yet it fell in little more than four

months before an army of eighty thousand under Titus. How great the

science to reduce a place of such strength, in so short a time, without

the aid of other artillery than the ancient catapult and battering-ram!

Whether the military science of the Romans was superior or inferior to

our own, no one can question that it was carried to utmost perfection

before the invention of gunpowder. We are only superior in the

application of this great invention, especially in artillery. There can

be no doubt that a Roman army was superior to a feudal army in the

brightest days of chivalry. The world has produced no generals superior

to Caesar, Pompey, Sulla, and Marius. No armies ever won greater

victories over superior numbers than the Roman, and no armies of their

size, ever retained in submission so great an empire, and for so long a

time. At no period in the history of the empire were the armies so large

as those sustained by France in time of peace. Two hundred thousand

legionaries, and as many more auxiliaries, controlled diverse nations

and powerful monarchies. The single province of Syria once boasted of a

military force equal in the number of soldiers to that wielded by

Tiberius. Twenty-five legions made the conquest of the world, and

retained that conquest for five hundred years. The self-sustained energy

of Caesar in Gaul puts to the blush the efforts of all modern generals,

except Frederic II., Marlborough, Napoleon, Wellington, Grant, Sherman,

and a few other great geniuses which a warlike age developed; nor is

there a better text-book on the art of war than that furnished by Caesar

himself in his Commentaries. And the great victories of the Romans over

barbarians, over Gauls, over Carthaginians, over Greeks, over Syrians,

over Persians, were not the result of a short-lived enthusiasm, like

those of Attila and Tamerlane, but extended over a thousand years. The

Romans were essentially military in all their tastes and habits.

Luxurious senators and nobles showed the greatest courage and skill in

the most difficult campaigns. Antony, Caesar, Pompey, and Lucullus were,

at home, enervated and luxurious, but, at the head of the legions, were

capable of any privation and fatigue. The Roman legion was a most

perfect organization, a great mechanical force, and could sustain

furious attacks after vigor, patriotism, and public spirit had fled. For

three hundred years a vast empire was sustained by mechanism alone.

[Sidenote: The Roman Legion.]

[Sidenote: Its composition.]

[Sidenote: The infantry the strength of the legion.]

[Sidenote: Its armor.]

[Sidenote: Its weapons.]

[Sidenote: The cavalry.]

[Sidenote: Term of military service.]

The legion is coeval with the foundation of Rome, but the number of the

troops of which it was composed varied at different periods. It rarely

exceeded six thousand men. Gibbon estimates the number at six thousand

eight hundred and twenty-six men. For many centuries it was composed

exclusively of Roman citizens. Up to the year B.C. 107, no one was

permitted to serve among the regular troops except those who were

regarded as possessing a strong personal interest in the stability of

the republic. Marius admitted all orders of citizens; and after the

close of the Social War, B.C. 87, the whole free population of Italy was

allowed to serve in the regular army. Claudius incorporated with the

legion the vanquished Goths, and after him the barbarians filled up the

ranks, on account of the degeneracy of the times. But during the period

when the Romans were conquering the world every citizen was trained to

arms, and was liable to be called upon to serve in the armies. In the

early age of the republic, the legion was disbanded as soon as the

special service was performed, and was in all essential respects a

militia. For three centuries, we have no record of a Roman army

wintering in the field; but when Southern Italy became the seat of war,

and especially when Rome was menaced by foreign enemies, and still more

when a protracted foreign service became inevitable, the same soldiers

remained in activity for several years. Gradually the distinction

between the soldier and the civilian was entirely obliterated. The

distant wars of the republic, like the prolonged operations of Caesar in

Gaul, and the civil contests, made a standing army a necessity. During

the civil wars between Caesar and Pompey, the legions were forty in

number; under Augustus but twenty-five. Alexander Severus increased them

to thirty-two. This was the standing force of the empire, from one

hundred and fifty to two hundred and forty thousand men, and this was

stationed in the various provinces. The main dependence of the legion

was on the infantry, which wore heavy armor consisting of helmet,

breastplate, greaves on the legs, and buckler on the left arm four feet

in length and two and a half in width. The helmet was originally made of

leather or skin, strengthened and adorned by bronze or gold, and

surmounted by a crest which was often of horse-hair, and so made as to

give an imposing look The crest not only served for ornament but to

distinguish the different centurions. The breastplate or cuirass was

generally made of metal, and sometimes was highly ornamented. Chain-mail

was also used. The greaves were of bronze or brass, with a lining of

leather or felt, and reached above the knees. The shield, worn by the

heavy-armed infantry, was not round, like that of the Greeks, but oval

or oblong, adapted to the shape of the body, and was made of wood or

wicker-work. The weapons were a light spear, a pilum or javelin six feet

long, terminated by a steel point, and a sword with a double edge,

adapted to striking or pushing. The legion was drawn up eight deep, and

three feet intervened between rank and file, which disposition gave

great activity, and made it superior to the Macedonian phalanx, the

strength of which depended on sixteen ranks of long pikes wedged

together. The cavalry attached to each legion were three hundred men,

and they originally were selected from the leading men in the state.

They were mounted at the expense of the state, and formed a distinct

order. The cavalry was divided into ten squadrons; and to each legion

was attached a train of ten military engines of the largest size, and

fifty-five of the smaller,--all of which discharged stones and darts

with great effect. This train corresponded with our artillery. Besides

the armor and weapons of the legionaries they usually carried on their

marches provisions for two weeks, and three or four stakes used in

forming the palisade of the camp, beside various tools,--altogether a

burden of sixty or eighty pounds per man. The general period of service

for the infantry was twenty years, after which the soldier received a

discharge together with a bounty in money or land.

[Sidenote: Organization of the legion.]

[Sidenote: The Hastati.]

[Sidenote: The Principes and Velites.]

[Sidenote: The Triarii.]

[Sidenote: The Pilarii.]

[Sidenote: The Equites.]

The Roman legion, whether it was composed of four thousand men, as in

the early ages of the republic or six thousand, as in the time of

Augustus, of was divided into ten cohorts, and each cohort was composed

of Hastati, Principes, Triarii, and Velites. The soldiers of the first

line, called Hastati, consisted of youths in the bloom of manhood, and

were distributed into fifteen companies or maniples. Each company

contained sixty privates, two centurions, and a standard-bearer. Two

thirds were heavily armed, and bore the long shield, the remainder

carried only a spear and light javelins. The second line, the Principes,

was composed of men in the full vigor of life, divided also into fifteen

companies, all heavily armed, and distinguished by the splendor of their

equipments. The third body, the Triarii, was also composed of tried

veterans, in fifteen companies, the least trustworthy of which were

placed in the rear. These formed three lines. The Velites were light-

armed troops, employed on outpost duty, and mingled with the horsemen.

The Hastati were so called because they were armed with the hasta; the

Principes, for being placed so near to the front; the Triarii, from

having been arrayed behind the first two lines as a body of reserve,

armed with the pilum, thicker and stronger than the Grecian lance,--four

and a half feet long, of wood, with a barbed head of iron,--so that the

whole length of the weapon was six feet nine inches. It was used either

to throw or thrust with, and when it pierced the enemy's shield,

[Footnote: Liv. viii. 8.] the iron head was bent, and the spear, owing

to the twist in the iron, still held to the shield. [Footnote: Plut.

Mar. 25.] Each soldier carried two of these weapons. [Footnote: Polyb.

vi. 23.] The Principes were in the front ranks of the phalanx, clad in

complete defensive armor,--men in the vigor of strength. The Pilarii

were in the rear, who threw the heavy pilum over the heads of their

comrades, in order to break the enemy's line. In the time of the empire,

when the legion was modified, the infantry wore cuirasses and helmets,

and two swords; namely, a long one and a dagger. The select infantry

carried a long spear and a shield, the rest a pilum. Each man carried a

saw, a basket, a mattock, a hatchet, a leather strap, a hook, a chain,

and provisions for three days. The Equites wore helmets and cuirasses,

like the infantry, with a broad sword at the right side, and in their

hand a long pole. A buckler swung at the horse's flank. They were also

furnished with a quiver containing three or four javelins.

[Sidenote: The artillery.]

[Sidenote: The Testudo.]

[Sidenote: The Helepolis.]

[Sidenote: The Turris.]

[Sidenote: Scailing-ladders.]

The artillery were used both for hurling missiles in battle, and for the

attack of fortresses. The _tormentum_, which was an elastic

instrument, discharged stones and darts, and was continued until the

discovery of gunpowder. In besieging a city, the ram was employed for

destroying the lower part of a wall, and the balista, which discharged

stones, was used to overthrow the battlements. The balista would project

a stone weighing from fifty to three hundred pounds. The _aries_,

or battering-ram, consisted of a large beam made of the trunk of a tree,

frequently one hundred feet in length, to one end of which was fastened

a mace of iron or bronze, which resembled in form the head of a ram, and

was often suspended by ropes from a beam fixed transversely over it, so

that the soldiers were relieved from supporting its weight, and were

able to give it a rapid and forcible motion backward and forward. And

when this machine was further aided by placing a frame in which it was

suspended upon wheels, and constructing over it a roof, so as to form a

_testudo_, which protected the besieging party from the assaults of

the besieged, there was no tower so strong, no wall so thick, as to

resist a long-continued attack. Its great length enabled the soldiers to

work across the ditch, and as many as one hundred men were often

employed upon it. The Romans learned from the Greeks the art of building

this formidable engine, which was used with great effect by Alexander,

but with still greater by Vespasian in the siege of Jerusalem. It was

first used by the Romans in the siege of Syracuse. The _vinea_ was

a sort of roof under which the soldiers protected themselves when they

undermined walls. The _helepolis_, also used in the attack of

cities, was a square tower furnished with all the means of assault. This

also was a Greek invention, and that used by Demetrius at the siege of

Rhodes, B.C. 306, was one hundred and thirty-five feet high and sixty-

eight wide, divided into nine stories. Towers of this description were

used at the siege of Jerusalem, [Footnote: Josephus _B. J._, ii. 19.]

and were manned by two hundred men employed upon the catapults and rams.

The _turris_, a tower of the same class, was used both by Greeks and

Romans, and even by Asiatics. Mithridates used one at the siege of

Cyzicus one hundred and fifty feet in height. This most formidable

engine was generally made of beams of wood covered on three sides with

iron and sometimes with raw hides. They were higher than the walls and

all the other fortifications of a besieged place, divided into stories

pierced with windows. In and upon them were stationed archers and

slingers, and in the lower story was a battering-ram. They also carried

scaling-ladders, so that when the wall was cleared, these were placed

against the walls. They were placed upon wheels, and brought as near the

walls as possible. It was impossible to resist these powerful engines,

unless they were burned, or the ground undermined upon which they stood,

except by overturning them with stones or iron-shod beams hung from a

mast on the wall, or by increasing the height of the wall, or the

erection of temporary towers on the wall beside them.

[Sidenote: The advantages of defenders.]

[Sidenote: Ordinary way of capture.]

[Sidenote: Strength and advantage of fortresses.]

Thus there was no ancient fortification capable of withstanding a long

siege when the besieged city was, short of defenders or provisions. With

equal forces an attack was generally a failure, for the defenders had

always a great advantage. But when the number of defenders was reduced,

or when famine pressed, the skill and courage of the assailants would

ultimately triumph. Some ancient cities made a most obstinate

resistance, like Tarentum; Carthage, which stood a siege of four years;

Numantia in Spain, and Jerusalem. When cities were of immense size,

population, and resources, like Rome when besieged by Alaric, it was

easier to take them by cutting off all ingress and egress, so as to

produce famine. Tyre was only taken by Alexander by cutting off the

harbor. Babylon could not have been taken by Cyrus by assault, since the

walls were three hundred and thirty-seven feet high, according to

Herodotus, and the ditch too wide for the use of battering-rams. He

resorted to an expedient of which the blinded inhabitants of that doomed

city never dreamed, which rendered their impregnable fortifications

useless. Nor would the Romans have probably prevailed against Jerusalem

had not famine decimated and weakened the people. Fortified cities,

though scarcely ever impregnable, were yet more in use in ancient than

modern times, and greatly delayed the operations of advancing armies.

And it was probably the fortified camp of the Romans, which protected an

army against surprises and other misfortunes, which gave such efficacy

to the legions.

[Sidenote: The Tribunes.]

[Sidenote: The Centurions.]

[Sidenote: Gradation of ranks.]

The chief officers of the legion were the tribunes, and originally there

was one in each legion from the three tribes--the Ramnes, Luceres, and

Tities. In the time of Polybius the number in each legion was six. Their

authority extended equally over the whole legion; but, to prevent

confusion, it was the custom for these military tribunes to divide

themselves into three sections of two, and each pair undertook the

routine duties for two months out of six. They nominated the centurions,

and assigned to each the company to which he belonged. These tribunes,

at first, were chosen by the commander-in-chief,--by the kings and

consuls; but during the palmy days of the republic, when the patrician

power was preeminent, they were elected by the people, that is, the

citizens. Later they were named half by the Senate and half by the

consuls. No one was eligible to this great office who had not served ten

years in the infantry or five in the cavalry. They were distinguished by

their dress from the common soldier. Next in rank to the tribunes, who

corresponded to the rank of brigadiers and colonels in our times, were

the centurions, of whom there were sixty in each legion,--men who were

more remarkable for calmness and sagacity than for courage and daring

valor; men who would keep their posts at all hazards. It was their duty

to drill the soldiers, to inspect arms, clothing, and food, to visit the

sentinels, and regulate the conduct of the men. They had the power of

inflicting corporal punishment. They were chosen for merit solely, until

the later ages of the empire, when their posts were bought, as in the

English army. These centurions were of unequal rank,--those of the

Triarii before those of the Principes, and those of the Principes before

those of the Hastati. The first centurion of the first maniple of the

Triarii stood next in rank to the tribunes, and had a seat in the

military councils, and his office was very lucrative. To his charge was

intrusted the eagle of the legion. [Footnote: Liv. xxv. 5; Caes.

_B.C._, vi. 6.] As the centurion could rise from the ranks, and

rose by regular gradation through the different maniples of the Hastati,

Principes, and Triarii, there was great inducement held out to the

soldiers. In the Roman legion it would seem that there was a regular

gradation of rank although there were but few distinct offices. But the

gradation was not determined by length of service, but for merit alone,

of which the tribunes were the sole judges. Hence the tribune of a Roman

legion had more power than that of a modern colonel. As the tribunes

named the centurions, so the centurions appointed their lieutenants, who

were called sub-centurions.

[Sidenote: Change in the organization of the legions.]

There was a change in the constitution and disposition of the legion

after the time of Marius, until the fall of the republic. The legions

were thrown open to men of all grades; they were all armed and equipped

alike; the lines were reduced to two, with a space between each cohort,

of which there were five in each line; the young soldiers were placed in

the rear, and not the van; the distinction between Hastati, Principes,

and Triarii ceased; the Velites disappeared, their work being done by

the foreign mercenaries; the cavalry ceased to be part of the legion,

and became a distinct body; and the military was completely severed from

the rest of the state. Formerly no one could aspire to office who had

not completed ten years of military service, but in the time of Cicero a

man could pass through all the great dignities of the state with a very

limited experience of military life. Cicero himself served but one

campaign.

[Sidenote: Changes under the emperors.]

[Sidenote: Pay of soldiers.]

Under the emperors, there were still other changes. The regular army

consisted of legions and supplementa,--the latter being subdivided into

the imperial guards and the auxiliary troops. The auxiliaries (Socii)

consisted of troops from the states in alliance with Rome, or those

compelled to furnish subsidies. The infantry of the allies was generally

more numerous than that of the Romans, while the cavalry was three times

as numerous. All the auxiliaries were paid by the state; the infantry

received the same pay as the Roman infantry, but the cavalry only two

thirds of what was paid to the Roman cavalry. The common foot-soldier

received in the time of Polybius three and a half asses a day, equal to

about six farthings sterling money; the horseman three times as much.

The Praetorian cohorts received twice as much as the legionaries. Julius

Caesar allowed about six asses a day as the pay of the legionary, and

under Augustus the daily pay was raised to ten asses--little more than

four pence per day. Domitian raised the stipend still higher. The

soldier, however, was fed and clothed by the government.

[Sidenote: The Praetorian cohort.]

The Praetorian cohort was a select body of troops instituted by Augustus

to protect his person, and consisted of ten cohorts, each of one

thousand men, chosen from Italy. This number was increased by Vitellius

to sixteen thousand, and they were assembled by Tiberius in a permanent

camp, which was strongly fortified. They had peculiar privileges, and

when they had served sixteen years, received twenty thousand sesterces,

or more than one hundred pounds sterling. Each Praetorian had the rank of

a centurion in the regular army. Like the body-guard of Louis XIV., they

were all gentlemen, and formed gradually a great power, like the

janissaries at Constantinople, and frequently disposed of the purple

itself. It would thus appear that the centurion only received twice the

pay of the ordinary legionary. There was not therefore so much

difference in rank between a private and a captain as in our day. There

were no aristocratic distinctions in the ancient world so marked as in

the modern.

[Sidenote: The Roman camp.]

[Sidenote: The guardianship of the camp.]

[Sidenote: The breaking up of the camp.]

Our notice of the Roman legion would be incomplete without allusion to

the camp in which the soldier virtually lived. A Roman army never halted

for a single night without forming a regular intrenchment capable of

holding all the fighting men, the beasts of burden, and the baggage.

When the army could not retire, during the winter months, into some

city, it was compelled to live in the camp. It was arranged and

fortified according to a uniform plan, so that every company and

individual had a place assigned. We cannot tell when this practice of

intrenchment began; it was matured gradually, like all other things

pertaining to the art of war. The system was probably brought to

perfection during the wars with Hannibal. Skill in the choice of ground,

giving facilities for attack and defense, and for procuring water and

other necessities, was of great account with the generals. An area of

about five thousand square feet was allowed for a company of infantry,

and ten thousand feet for a troop of thirty dragoons. The form of a camp

was an exact square, the length of each side being two thousand and

seventeen feet. There was a space between the ramparts and the tents of

two hundred feet to facilitate the marching in and out of soldiers, and

to guard the cattle and booty. The principal street was one hundred feet

wide, and was called Principia. The defenses of the camp consisted of a

ditch, the earth from which was thrown inwards, and strong palisades of

wooden stakes upon the top of the earthwork so formed. The ditch was

sometimes fifteen feet deep, and the vallum or rampart ten feet in

height. When the army encamped for the first time the tribunes

administered an oath to each individual, including slaves, to the effect

that they would steal nothing out of the camp. Every morning at

daybreak, the centurions and the equites presented themselves before the

tents of the tribunes, and the tribunes in like manner presented

themselves to the praetorian, to learn the orders of the consuls, which

through the centurions were communicated to the soldiers. Four companies

took charge of the principal street, to see that it was properly cleaned

and watered. One company took charge of the tent of the tribune, a

strong guard attended to the horses, and another of fifty men stood

beside the tent of the general that he might be protected from open

danger and secret treachery. The velites mounted guard the whole night

and day along the whole extent of the vallum, and each gate was guarded

by ten men. The equites were intrusted with the duty of acting as

sentinels during the night, and most ingenious measures were adopted to

secure their watchfulness and fidelity. The watchword for the night was

given by the commander-in-chief. "On the first signal being given by the

trumpet, the tents were all struck and the baggage packed. At the second

signal, the baggage was placed upon the beasts of burden; and at the

third the whole army began to move. Then the herald, standing at the

right hand of the general, demands thrice if they are ready for war, to

which they all respond with loud and repeated cheers that they are

ready, and for the most part, being filled with martial ardor,

anticipate the question, 'and raise their right hands on high with a

shout.'" [Footnote: Smith, _Dict. of Ant._, art. _Castra_.]

[Sidenote: Line of March.]

Josephus gives an account of the line of march in which the army of

Vespasian entered Galilee. "1. The light-armed auxiliaries and bowmen,

advancing to reconnoiter. 2. A detachment of Roman heavy-armed troops,

horse and foot. 3. Ten men out of every century or company, carrying

their own equipments and the measures of the camp. 4. The baggage of

Vespasian and his legati guarded by a strong body of horse. 5. Vespasian

himself, attended by his horse-guard and a body of spearmen. 6. The

peculiar cavalry of the legion. 7. The artillery dragged by mules. 8.

The legati, tribunes, and praefects of cohorts, guarded by a body of

picked soldiers. 9. The standards, surrounding the eagle. 10. The

trumpeters. 11. The main body of the infantry, six abreast, accompanied

by a centurion, whose duty it was to see that the men kept their ranks.

12. The whole body of slaves attached to each legion, driving the mules

and beasts of burden loaded with the baggage. 13. Behind all the legions

followed the mercenaries. 14. The rear was brought up by a strong body

of cavalry and infantry." [Footnote: Josephus, _B. J._, iii.

6, Section 2.]

[Sidenote: Excitements of military life.]

[Sidenote: Smallness of the Roman armies.]

[Sidenote: How battles were decided.]

From what has come down to us of Roman military life, it appears to have

been full of excitement, toil, danger, and hardship. The pecuniary

rewards of the soldier were small. He was paid in glory. No profession

brought so much honor as the military. And from the undivided attention

of a great people to this profession, it was carried to all the

perfection which could be attained until the great invention of

gunpowder changed the art of war. It was not the number of men employed

in the armies which particularly arrests attention, but the spirit and

genius which animated them. The Romans loved war, but so reduced it to a

science that it required comparatively small armies to conquer the

world. Sulla defeated Mithridates with only thirty thousand men, while

his adversary marshaled against him over one hundred thousand; and Caesar

had only ten legions to effect the conquest of Gaul, and none of these

were of Italian origin. At the great decisive battle of Pharsalia, when

most of the available forces of the empire were employed, on one side or

the other, Pompey commanded a legionary army of forty-five thousand men;

and the cavalry amounted to seven thousand more, but among them were

included the flower of the Roman nobility. The auxiliary force has not

been computed, although it was probably numerous. Caesar had under him

only twenty-two thousand of legionaries and one thousand cavalry. But

every man in both armies was prepared to conquer or die. The forces were

posted on the open plain, and the battle was really a hand-to-hand

encounter, in which the soldiers, after hurling their lances, fought

with their swords chiefly. And when the cavalry of Pompey rushed upon

the legionaries of Caesar, no blows were wasted on the mailed panoply of

the mounted Romans, but were aimed at the face alone, as that alone was

unprotected. The battle was decided by the coolness, bravery, and

discipline of veterans, inspired by the genius of the greatest general

of antiquity. Less than one hundred thousand men, in all probability,

were engaged in one of the most memorable conflicts which the world has

seen.

[Sidenote: Gradual organization of military power.]

[Sidenote: Magnanimity of the early generals.]

Thus it was, by unparalleled heroism in war, and a uniform policy in

government, that Rome became the mistress of the world. The Roman

conquests have never been surpassed, for they were retained until the

empire fell. I wish that I could have dwelt on these conquests more in

detail, and presented more fully the brilliant achievements of

individuals. It took nearly two hundred years, after the expulsion of

the kings, to regain supremacy over the neighboring people, and another

century to conquer Italy. The Romans did not contend with regular armies

until they were brought in conflict with the king of Epirus and the

phalanx of the Greeks, "which improved their military tactics, and

introduced between the combatants those mutual regards of civilized

nations which teach men to honor their adversaries, to spare the

vanquished, and to lay aside wrath when the struggle is ended." In the

fifth century of her existence, the republic appears in peculiar

splendor. Military chieftains do not transcend their trusts; the

aristocracy are equally distinguished for exploits and virtues; the

magistrates maintain simplicity of manners and protect the rights of the

citizens; the citizens are self-sacrificing and ever ready to obey the

call to arms, laying aside great commands and retiring poor to private

stations. Marcus Valerius Corvus, after filling twenty-one curule

offices, returns to agricultural life; Marcus Curius Dentatus retains no

part of the rich spoils or the Sabines; Fabricius rejects the gold of

the Samnites and the presents of Pyrrhus. The most trustworthy are

elevated to places of dignity and power. Senators mingle in the ranks of

the legions, and eighty of them die on the field of Cannae. Discipline is

enforced to cruelty, and Manlius Torquatus punishes with death a

disobedient son. Soldiers who desert the field are decimated or branded

with dishonor. Faith is kept even with enemies, and Regulus returns a

voluntary prisoner to his deadly enemies.

[Sidenote: Results of different wars.]

After the consolidation of Roman power in Italy, it took one hundred and

fifty years more only to complete the conquest of the world--of Northern

Africa, Spain, Gaul, Illyria, Epirus, Greece, Macedonia, Asia Minor,

Pontus, Syria, Egypt, Bithynia, Cappadocia, Pergamus, and the islands of

the Mediterranean. The conquest of Carthage left Rome without a rival in

the Mediterranean, and promoted intercourse with the Greeks. The

Illyrian wars opened to the Romans the road to Greece and Asia, and

destroyed the pirates of the Adriatic. The invasion of Cisalpine Gaul,

now that part of Italy which is north of the Apennines, protected Italy

from the invasion of barbarians. The Macedonian War against Philip put

Greece under the protection of Rome, and that against Antiochus laid

Syria at her mercy; and when these kingdoms were reduced to provinces,

the way was opened to further conquests in the East, and the

Mediterranean became a Roman lake.

[Sidenote: Effect of Roman conquests on society.]

[Sidenote: Degeneracy of morals undermines military power.]

But these conquests introduce luxury, wealth, pride, and avarice, with

arts, refinements, and literature. These degrade while they elevate.

Civilization becomes the alternate triumph of good and evil influences,

and a doubtful boon. Successful war creates great generals, and founds

great families, increases slavery, and promotes inequalities. Demagogues

arise who seduce and deceive the people, and they enroll themselves

under the standards of their idols. Rome is governed by an oligarchy of

military chieftains, and has become more aristocratic and more

democratic at the same time. The people gain rights, only to yield to

the supremacy of demagogues. The Senate is humbled, but remains the

ascendant power, for generals compose it, and those who have held great

offices. Meanwhile the great generals struggle for supremacy. Civil wars

follow in the train of foreign conquests. Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Julius,

Antony, Augustus, sacrifice the state to their ambition. Good men

lament, and protest, and hide themselves. Cato, Cicero, Brutus, speak in

vain. Degenerate morals keep pace with civil contests. Rome revels in

the spoils of all kingdoms and countries, is intoxicated with power,

becomes cruel and tyrannical, and, after yielding up the lives of

citizens to fortunate generals, yields at last her liberties, and

imperial despotism begins its reign,--hard, immovable, resolute,--under

which genius is crushed, and life becomes epicurean, but under which

property and order are preserved. The regime is bad; but it is a change

for the better. War has produced its fruits. It has added empire, but

undermined prosperity; it has created a great military monarchy, but

destroyed liberty; it has brought wealth, but introduced inequalities;

it has filled the city with spoils, but sown the vices of self-interest.

The machinery is perfect, but life has fled. It is henceforth the labor

of emperors to keep together their vast possessions with this machinery,

which at last wears out, since there is neither genius to repair it nor

patriotism to work it. It lasts three hundred years, but is broken to

pieces by the Goths and Vandals.

* * * * *

The highest authority in relation to the construction of an army is

Polybius, who was contemporary with Scipio, at a period when Roman

discipline was most perfect. A fragment from his sixth book gives

considerable information. A chapter of Livy--the eighth--is also very

much prized. Salmasius and Lepsius have also written learned treatises.

Smith's Dictionary, which is full of details in every thing pertaining

to the weapons, the armor, the military engines, the rewards and

punishments of the soldiers, refers to Folard's _Commentaire_, to

_Memoires Militaires sur les Grecs et les Remains_, by Guischard,

and to the _Histoire des Campagnes d'Hannibal en Italie_, by

Vaudencourt. Tacitus, Sallust, Livy, Dion Cassius, Pliny, and Caesar

reveal incidentally much that we wish to know. Gibbon gives some

important facts in his first chapter. The subject of ancient machines is

treated by Folard's Commentary attached to his translation of Polybius.

Caesar's Commentaries give us, after all, the liveliest idea of the

military habits and tactics of the Romans. Josephus describes with great

vividness the siege of Jerusalem. The article on _Exercitus_, by

Prof. Ramsay, in Smith's Dictionary, is the fullest I have read

pertaining to the structure of a Roman army.

For the narrative of wars, the reader is referred to ordinary Roman

histories--to Livy and Caesar especially; to Niebuhr, Mommsen, Arnold,

and Liddell. See also Durny, _Hist. des Romains;_ Michelet,

_Hist. de Rom._ Napoleon's History of Caesar should be read,

admirable in style, and interesting in matter, although a sophistical

defense of usurpation.