Chapter 16

[227]Elateia was an important position in Phokis and near the river Kephisus. It was situated near the north-western extremity of the great Bœotian plain, and commanded the entrance into that plain from the mountainous country to the north-west. The Kephisus takes a south-east course past Elateia, Panopeus, Chæronea, and Orchomenus, and near Orchomenus it enters the Lake Kopais. Bœotia is a high table-land surrounded by mountains, and all the drainage of the plain of which those of Elateia and Orchomenus are part is received in the basin of the lake, which has no outlet.[228]This city was burnt by Xerxes in his invasion of Greece B.C. 480. (Herodotus, viii. 33.) Pausanias (x. 33) says that it was not rebuilt by the Bœotians and Athenians: in another passage (x. 3) he says it was destroyed by Philip after the close of the Sacred or Phokian war B.C. 346; and therefore it had been rebuilt by somebody.[229]The soldiers who had shields of brass.[230]This was Aulus Gabinius, who was sent by Sulla B.C. 81 with orders to L. Licinius Murena to put an end to the war with Mithridates. Ericius is not a Roman name: perhaps it should be Hirtius.[231]This is Juba II., king of Mauritania, who married Cleopatra, one of the children of Marcus Antonius by Cleopatra, queen of Egypt. Juba was a scholar and an author: he is often quoted, by Strabo, Plinius (Nat Hist.), and other writers.[232]"Our city" will explain why Plutarch has described the campaign in the plains of Bœotia at such length. Plutarch's battles are none of the best; and he has done well in making them generally short.[233]The cave of Trophonius was at Lebadeia in Bœotia. Pausanias (ix. 39) has given a full account of the singular ceremonies used on consulting the deity.[234]The word isὀμφῆς, literally "voice," which has caused a difficulty to the translators; but the reading is probably right.[235]This was Lucius Licinius Murena, who conducted the war against Mithridates in Asia B.C. 83 as Proprætor. He was the father of the Lucius Murena in whose defence we have an extant oration of Cicero.[236]The old story is well told by Ovidius (Metamorphoses,iii. 14, &c.)[237]A temple of the Muses.[238]Kaltwasser has followed the reading "Gallus" in his version, though, as he remarks in a note, this man is called Galba by Appian (Mithridat. War, 43), and he is coupled with Hortensius, just as in Plutarch.[239]This clumsy military contrivance must generally have been a failure. These chariots were useless in the battle between Cyrus and his brother Artaxerxes B.C. 401. (Xenophon,Anabasis, i. 8.) Appian (Mithridatic War, c. 42) mentions sixty of these chariots as being driven against the Romans, who opened their ranks to make way for them: the chariots were surrounded by the Roman soldiers in the rear and destroyed.[240]A Circus was a Roman racecourse. The chief circus was the Circus Maximus, which was used also for hunts of wild beasts. See the article "Circus" in Smith'sDictionary of Antiquities.[241]I have kept the Greek word (ὁπλίτης), which means a soldier who was equipped with defensive armour for close fighting.[242]The Saturnalia were a kind of Carnival at Rome in the month of December, when people indulged themselves in feasting and revelry, and the slaves had the license of doing for a time what they pleased, and acting as if they were freemen. The original "freedom of speech" may mean a little more than these words convey. The point of the centurion's remark, like many other jokes of antiquity, seems rather blunt. He simply meant to express surprise at seeing slaves in an army serving as soldiers—they whose only freedom, so far as he knew, was to have a little license once a year at the Saturnalia.[243]A town in Eubœa on the strait of the Euripus which separates the island of Eubœa from the mainland. The smallness of the Roman loss is incredible. Appian considerately add one to the number, and makes it fifteen (Mithridatic War, c. 42, &c.) Sulla was a braggart, though he was brave.[244]This stream is called Morius (c. 17). Pausanias, who made his tour through Greece in the first half of the second century of our æra, saw the trophies (ix. 40).[245]L. Valerius Flaccus was elected consul B.C. 86 in the place of C. Marius, who died at the beginning of the year.[246]The name given by the Greeks and Romans to that part of the Mediterranean which lay between Dyrrachium (Durazzo) and the opposite coast of Italy. Thucydides (i. 24) makes the Ionian Sea commence about Epidamnus (which was the old name of Dyrrachium), and probably he extended the name to all the Adriatic or modern Gulf of Venice.[247]A town in Phthiotis, a district which is included in Thessalia in the larger sense of that term. It was on the river Enipeus, a branch of the Peneus. (Strabo, p. 452.) Thucydides (iv. 78) means the same place, when he speaks of Meliteia in Achæa.[248]A mountain in Bœotia and a spring (Tilphussa) about fifty stadia from Haliartus. (Pausanias, ix. 33.) Haliartus is on the south side of the Lake Kopais.[249]Orchomenus, one of the oldest towns in Bœotia and in Greece, is situated near the point where the Kephisus enters the great Lake. Plutarch speaks again of the Melas in the Life of Pelopidas (c. 16). Pausanias (ix. 88) says that the Melas rises seven stadia from Orchomenus, and enters the lake Kephisus, otherwise called Kepais.[250]If we assume that it was exactly two hundred years, Plutarch wrote this passage about A.D. 114, in the reign of Trajanus. This battle was fought B.C. 86. Hadrianus became emperor A.D. 117. (See Preface, p. xiv.)[251]Cn. Papirius Carbo was the colleague of Cinna in the consulship B.C. 85 and 84.[252]A Deliac merchant This might be a merchant of Delium, the small town in Bœotia, on the Euripus, where Sulla and Archelaus met. But Delos, a small rocky island, one of the Cyclades, is probably meant Delos was at this time a great slave-market. (Strabo, p. 668.)[253]Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 50) says that Archelaus hid himself in a marsh, and afterwards made his escape to Chalkis. Sulla's arrogance is well characterized by his speech. The Cappadocians were considered a mean and servile people, and their character became proverbial.[254]The Roman Province of Asia. Compare Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 54, 55) as to the terms of the peace.[255]The death of Aristion is mentioned by Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 39); but he does not speak of the poisoning.[256]Mædike appears to be the right name. Thucydides (ii. 98) calls the people Mædi: they were a Thracian people. Compare Strabo (p. 316). Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 55) speaks of this expedition as directed aguinst the Sinti, who wore neighbours of the Mædi, and other nations which bordered on Macedonia, and annoyed it by their predatory incursions. Sulla thus kept his soldiers employed, which was the practice of all prudent Roman commanders, and enriched them with booty at the same time.[257]This is the old town called Krenides, or the Little Springs, which King Philippus, the father of Alexander the Great, restored and gave his name to. It was near Amphipolis on the river Strymon. (See Life of Brutus, c. 38.)[258]The Troad is the north-west angle of Asia Minor, which borders on the Hellespont and the Ægean Sea (the Archipelago). The name of the district, Troas in Greek, is from the old town of Troja. Strabo (lib. xiii.) gives a particular description of this tract.The narrative of this affair in Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 56, &c.) differs in some respects from that of Plutarch, and this may be observed of many other events in this war. Appian is perhaps the better authority for the bare historical facts; but so far as concerns the conduct and character of Sulla on this and other occasions, Plutarch has painted the man true to the life.Sulla left L. Lucullus behind him to collect the money. (See Life of Lucullus, c. 4.) The story of Fimbria in Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 69, 70) differs from that of Plutarch in some respects, but it is near enough to show that though these two writers apparently followed different authorities, Plutarch has given the facts substantially correct.When Sulla was within two stadia of Fimbria, he sent him orders to give up the army, which he was illegally commanding. Fimbria sent back an insulting message to the effect that Sulla also had no right to the command which he held. While Sulla was throwing up his intrenchments, and many of Fimbria's soldiers were openly leaving him, Fimbria summoned those who still remained to a meeting, and urged them to stay with him. Upon the soldiers saying that they would not fight against their fellow-citizens, Fimbria tore his dress, and began to intreat them severally. But the soldiers turned a deaf ear to him, and the desertions became still more numerous, on which Fimbria went round to the tents of the officers, and bribing some of them, he called another meeting, and commanded the soldiers to take the oath to him. As those who were hired by him called out that he ought to summon the men by name to take the oath, he called by the crier those who had received favours from him, and he called Nonius first who had been his partner in everything. Nonius refused to take the oath, and Fimbria drew his sword and threatened to kill him, but as there was a general shout, he became alarmed and desisted. However he induced a slave by money and the promise of his freedom to go to Sulla as a deserter, and to attempt his life. The man as he came near the act was alarmed, and this gave rise to suspicion, which led to his being seized, and he confessed. The army of Sulla, full of indignation and contempt, surrounded the camp of Fimbria, and abused him, calling him Athenion, which was the name of the fellow who put himself at the head of the rebel runaway slaves in Sicily, and was a king for a few days. Fimbria now despairing came to the rampart, and invited Sulla to a conference. But Sulla sent Rutilius; and this first of all annoyed Fimbria, as he was not honoured with a meeting, which is granted even to enemies. On his asking for pardon for any error that he might have committed, being still a young man, Rutilius promised that Sulla would allow him to pass safe to the coast, if he would sail away from Asia, of which Sulla was proconsul. Fimbria replied that he had better means than that, and going to Pergamum and entering the temple of Æsculapius, he pierced himself with his sword. As the wound was not mortal, he bade his slave plunge the sword into his body. The slave killed his master, and then killed himself on the body. Thus died Fimbria, who had done much mischief to Asia after Mithridates. Sulla allowed Fimbria's freedmen to bury their master; adding that he would not imitate Cinna and Marius, who had condemned many persons to death at Rome, and also refused to allow their bodies to be buried. The army of Fimbria now came over to Sulla, and was received by him and united with his own. Sulla also commissioned Curio to restore Nicomedes to Bithynia and Ariobarzanes to Cappadocia, and he wrote to the Senate about all these matters, pretending that he did not know that he had been declared an enemy.[259]Thyateira was a town in Lydia about 45 miles from Pergamum.[260]The original is simply "after being initiated;" but the Eleusinian mysteries are meant. The city of Eleusis was in Attica, and the sacred rites were those of Ceres and Proserpine (Demeter and Persephone). Those only who were duly initiated could partake in these ceremonies. An intruder ran the risk of being put to death. Livius (31, c. 14) tells a story of two Akarnanian youths who were not initiated, and during the time of the Initia, as he calls them, entered the temple of Ceres with the rest of the crowd, knowing nothing of the nature of the ceremonies. Their language and some questions that they put, betrayed them, and they were conducted to the superintendents of the temple; and though it was clear that they had erred entirely through ignorance, they were put to death as if they had committed an abominable crime. Toleration was no part of the religious system of Antiquity; that is, nothing was permitted which was opposed to any religious institution, though there was toleration for a great variety. Many illustrious persons were initiated in the Eleusinian mysteries, which were maintained until Christianity became the general religion of the Empire. Marcus Aurelius, when he visited Athens, was initiated. The ceremonial of the temple may be collected to a certain extent from the ancient writers, but no one has yet succeeded in divining what were the peculiar doctrines of this place.[261]Much has been written about this story, which cannot be literally true. The writings of Aristotle were not unknown to his immediate followers. If there is any truth in this story as told by Plutarch and Strabo (p. 608) it must refer to the original manuscripts of Aristotle. Part of the text of Plutarch is here manifestly corrupt. The subject has been examined by several writers. See art. "Aristotle,"Biog. Dict.of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, and Blakesley,Life of Aristotle, Cambridge 1839.[262]This is Strabo the Geographer, but the passage is not in the Geography, and probably was in an historical workὙπομνήατα ἱστορικά, Strabo, p. 13) which he wrote, and which is cited by Plutarch in his Life of Lucullus, c. 28.[263]These warm springs, which still exist, are on the west coast of Eubœa, opposite to the mainland. They were much resorted to in Plutarch's time, as appears from his Symposium (iv. Probl. 4). The place is named Galepsus in Wyttenbach's edition, but in a note the editor admits that the true name is Ædepsus. Demetrius Calatianus (quoted by Strabo, p. 60), who had recorded all the earthquakes in Greece, says that the hot springs at Thermopylæ and at Ædepsus once ceased to flow for three days owing to an earthquake, and those of Ædepsus, when they flowed again, broke out in a fresh place. The hot springs near Cape Therma in Eubœa are supposed to be those of Ædepsus. They are more copious than the springs of Thermopylæ on the opposite mainland, but of the same kind. "The water rushes down in a copious stream into the sea, the vapour from which is visible at a considerable distance." (Penny Cyclopædia, art. "Eubœa.")[264]Halæae should probably be written Halæ. It was near the Euripus, within Bœotia and on the borders of Phokia. (Pansaunias, ix. 24.)[265]The usual passage from Italy to Greece and Greece to Italy was between Brundisium and Dyrrachium. Compare Appian,Civil Wars, c. 79.[266]This phenomenon is mentioned by Strabo (p. 316), Dion Cassius (41, c. 45), and Ælian (Various History, 13, c. 16). I do not know if this spot has been examined by any modern traveller. It is a matter of some interest to ascertain how long a phenomenon of this kind has lasted. The pitch-springs of Zante (Zakynthus), which Herodotus visited and describes (iv. 195), still produce the native pitch. Strabo, who had not seen the Nymphæum, describes it thus after the account of Poseidonius: "In the territory of Apollonia is a place called the Nymphæum; it is a rock which sends forth fire, and at the base of it are springs of warm asphaltus, the asphaltic earth, as it appears, being in a state of combustion: and there is a mine of it near on a hill. Whatever is cut out, is filled up again in course of time, as the earth which is thrown into the excavations changes into asphaltus, as Poseidonius says." We cannot conclude from this confused description what the real nature of the phenomenon was. Probably the asphaltus or bitumen was occasionally set on fire by the neighbouring people. (See the art. "Asphaltum,"Penny Cyclopædia.)[267]The Cohors was the tenth part of a Roman Legion. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 82) says that on this occasion the opponents of Sulla made their cohorts contain 500 men each, so that a legion would contain 5000 men. According to this estimate there were 90,000 men under arms in Italy to oppose Sulla, who had five legions of Italian soldiers, six thousand cavalry and some men from Peloponnesus and Macedonia; in all forty thousand men. (Appian,Civil Wars, i. 79.) Appian says that he had 1,600 ships.[268]This passage is explained by the cut p. 287 in Smith'sDict. of Antiquities, art. "Corona."[269]Caius Junius Norbanus and L. Cornelius Scipio Asiaticus were now consuls B.C. 83.[270]Silvium is a town in Apulia on the Appian road, on the Apennines. As to the burning of the Capitol, see Appian,Civil Wars, i. 86.[271]Fidentia was in North Italy not far from Placentia (Piacenza): it is now Borgo San Donnino. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 92) speaks of this battle near Placentia, which Lucullus gained over some of Carbo's troops, not over Carbo himself, as is stated by some modern writers. Carbo was now in Central Italy.[272]Sulla, with Metellus Pius, who had joined him (Appian,Civil Wars, i. 80), met L. Scipio near Teanum in Campania. Sertorius was with Scipio. The circumstances are told by Appian (Civil Wars, i. 86) as usual with more minuteness and very clearly. The main story is correct in Plutarch.[273]Signia, now Segni, is in the Volscian mountains, 35 miles south-east of Rome. It was a Roman colony as old us the reign of Tarquinius Superbus, according to Livius (1, 55). This battle was fought B.C. 82, when Cn. Papinus Carbo was consul for the third time with the younger Marius. It appears that Sulla's progress towards Rome was not very rapid. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 87) places the battle at Sacriportus, the situation of which is unknown.[274]Cn. Cornelius Dolabella was consul B.C. 81. He was afterwards Proconsul of Macedonia, and had a triumph for his victories over the Thracians and other barbarian tribes. C. Julius Cæsar, when a young man (Cæsar, c. 4), prosecuted B.C. 77 Dolabella for mal-administration in his province. Dolabella was acquitted.[275]Præneste, now Palestrina. This strong town was about 20 miles E. by S. of Rome near the source of the Trerus, now the Sacco, a branch of the Liris, the modern Garigliano.[276]A Roman historian of the age of Augustus, who wrote Annals, of which there were twenty-two books.[277]These were Cn. Pompeius Magnus, who afterwards was the great opponent of C. Julius Cæsar; his Life is written by Plutarch: M. Licinius Crassus, called Dives or the Rich, whose Life is written by Plutarch; Quintus Metellus Pius, the son of Metellus Numidicus; and P. Servilius Vatia Isauricus, whom Sulla made consul B.C. 79, when he declined the office himself.[278]Carbo lost courage and ran away. He got safe to the African coast, whence, with many men of rank, he made his way to Sicily, and thence to the small island of Cossyra. Cn. Pompeius sent men to seize him, who caught Carbo and his company: Carbo's followers were immediately put to death pursuant to the orders of Pompeius. Carbo was brought to Pompeius, and placed at his feet in chains; and after Pompeius had insulted him who had thrice been consul by pronouncing an harangue over him, Carbo was put to death, and his head was sent to Sulla. (Appian,Civil Wars, i. 96.) The statement of Plutarch (Pompeius, c. 10) agrees with that of Appian. These and other acts of Pompeius should be remembered by those who are inclined to pity his fate. He was probably under a necessity to put Carbo to death pursuant to the orders of his muster Sulla, but the insult might have been spared.[279]It is uncertain who he was. See Drumann,Geschichte Roms, ii. Claudii No. 26.[280]See c. 33. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 93) gives a different account of this affair before the Colline gate, but agrees with Plutarch in stating that Sulla's right wing was successful and the left was defeated. He says that Telesinus fell in the battle.[281]Antemnæ was a few miles from Rome, near the junction of the Tiber and the Anio (Teverone).[282]Appian (Civil Wars, i. 93) briefly mentions this massacre. It took place in the Circus Flaminius, which was near the temple of Bellona.Plutarch here starts a question which suggests itself to all men who have had any experience. It is a common remark that a man who has been raised from a low degree to a high station, or has become rich from being poor, is no longer the same man. Nobody expects those whom he has known in the same station as himself to behave themselves in the same way when they are exalted above it. Nobody expects a man who has got power to be the same man that he was in an humble station. Any man who has lived a reasonable time in the world and had extensive conversation with it knows this to be true. But is the man changed, or are his latent qualities only made apparent by his changed circumstances? The truth seems to be that latent qualities are developed by opportunity. All men have the latent capacities of pride, arrogance, tyranny, and cruelty. Cruelty perhaps requires the most opportunities for its development; and these opportunities are power, fear, and opposition to his will. It has been well observed, that all men are capable of crime, but different circumstances are necessary to develop this capacity in different men. All have their price; and some may be bought cheap. He who is above the temptation of money may yield to other temptations. The possession of power is the greatest temptation of all, as it offers the greatest opportunities for the development of any latent disposition; and every man has a point or two in which he is open to the insidious attacks of opportunity. In matters political, the main thing is to know, from the indications that a man gives when he has not power, what he will be when he has power: in the ordinary intercourse of life, the main thing is to judge of the character of those with whom we deal by compulsion or choice, to know how far we can trust what they say, how far their future conduct may be predicted from present indications. But to show what these indications are, belongs, as Plutarch says, to another inquiry than the present. The general rule of old was Distrust, which the crafty Sicilian, as Cicero (Ad Attic.i. 19) calls Epicharmus, was always whispering in his ear. Epicharmus has well expressed his maxim in a single line:Νᾶφε καὶ μέμνας' ἀπιστεῖν: άρθρα ταῦτα τῶν φρενῶν.Wakeful be thou and distrustful: sinews these are to the mind.This is the rule for the timid, and for them a safe one. But he who is always suspicious must not expect to be trusted himself; and when the bold command, he must be content to obey.[283]This is not a Roman name. The nearest name to it is Aufidius. But it is conjectured that one Fufidius is meant here (see the note of Sintenis), and also in the Life of Sertorius (c. 26, 27). This is probably the Fufidius (Florus, iii. 21, where the name is written incorrectly Furfidius in some editions) who said, that "Some should be left alive that there might be persons to domineer over."[284]A Proscriptio was a notice set up in some public place. This Proscription of Sulla was the first instance of the kind, but it was repeated at a later time. The first list of the proscribed, according to Appian (Civil Wars, i, 55), contained forty senators and about sixteen hundred equites. Sulla prefaced his proscription by an address to the people, in which he promised to mend their condition. Paterculus (ii. 28) states that the proscription was to the following effect:—That the property of the proscribed should be sold, that their children should be deprived of all title to their property, and should be ineligible to public offices; and further, that the sons of Senators should bear the burdens incident to their order and lose all their rights. This will explain the word Infamy, which is used a little below. Infamia among the Romans was not a punishment, but it was a consequence of conviction for certain offences; and this consequence was a civil disability; the person who became Infamis lost his vote, and was ineligible to the great public offices. He also sustained some disabilities in his private rights. Sulla therefore put the children of the proscribed in the same condition as if they had been found guilty of certain offences.The consequence of these measures of Sulla was a great change of property all through Italy. Cities which had favoured the opposite faction were punished by the loss of their fortifications and heavy requisitions, such as the French army in the Revolutionary wars levied in Italy. Sulla settled the soldiers of twenty-three legions in the Italian towns as so many garrisons, and he gave them lands and houses by taking them from their owners. These were the men who stuck to Sulla while he lived, and attempted to maintain his acts after his death, for their title could only be defended by supporting his measures. These are "the men of Sulla," as Cicero sometimes calls them, whose lands were purchased by murder, and who, as he says (Contra Rullum, ii. 26), were in such odium that their title could not have stood a single attack of a true and courageous tribune.[285]Appian (Civil Wars, i. 94) states that Sulla made all the people in Præneste come out into the plain unarmed, that he picked out those who had served him, who were very few, and these he spared. The rest he divided into three bodies, Romans, Samnites, and Prænestines: he told the Romans that they deserved to die, but he pardoned them; the rest were massacred, with the exception of the women and young children.[286]L. Sergius Catilina, who formed a conspiracy in the consulship of M. Tullius Cicero B.C. 63. (Life of Cicero.)[287]Cn. Marius Gratidianus, the son of M. Gratidius of Arpinum. He was adopted by one of the Marii; by the brother of Caius Marius, as some conjecture.[288]A vessel of stone or metal placed at the entrance of a temple that those who entered might wash their hands in it, or perhaps merely dip in a finger.[289]Plutarch's expression is "he proclaimed himself Dictator," but this expression is not to be taken literally, nor is it to be supposed that Plutarch meant it to be taken literally. Sulla was appointed in proper form, though he did in fact usurp the power, and under the title of dictator was more than king. (Appian,Civil Wars, i. 98.) The terms of Sulla's election were that he should hold the office as long as he pleased; the disgrace of this compulsory election was veiled under the declaration that Sulla was appointed to draw up legislative measures and to settle affairs. Paterculus (ii. 28) mentions the 120 years as having elapsed since the time of a previous dictatorship, which was the year after Hannibal left Italy B.C. 202. As Sulla was elected Dictator in B.C. 81, Plutarch's statement is correct. (On the functions of the Dictator see Life of Cæsar, c. 37.)[290]Manius Acilius Glabrio, who was prætor B.C. 70 during the proceedings against Verres. He was the son of the M. Acilius Glabrio who got a law passed on mal-administration in offices (repetundæ), and the grandson of the Glabrio who defeated King Antiochus near Thermopylæ. (See c. 12.)[291]This murder is told more circumstantially by Appian (Civil Wars, i. 101), who has added something that Plutarch should not have omitted. After saying to the people that Lucretius had been put to death by his order, Sulla told them a tale: "The lice were very troublesome to a clown, as he was ploughing. Twice he stopped his ploughing and purged his jacket. But he was still bitten, and in order that he might not be hindered in his work, he burnt the jacket; and I advise those who have been twice humbled not to make fire necessary the third time."[292]Plinius (H.N.33, c. 5) speaks of this triumph: it lasted two days. In the first day Sulla exhibited in the procession 15,000 pounds weight of gold and 115,000 pounds of silver, the produce of his foreign victories: on the second, 13,000 pounds weight of gold and 6000 pounds of silver which the younger Marius had carried off to Præneste after the conflagration of the Capitol and from the robbery of the other Roman temples.[293]The term Felix appears on the coins of Sulla. Epaphroditus signifies a favourite of Aphrodite or Venus. (Eckhel,Doctrina Num. Vet.v. 190.) Eckhel infers from the guttus and lituus on one of Sulla's coins that he was an Augur.[294]Sulla abdicated the dictatorship B.C. 79 in the consulship of P. Servilius Vatia Isauricus and Appius Claudius Pulcher. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 103, &c.) speaks of the abdication. He made no attempt to secure to his family the power that he had acquired. It may be that he had no desire to perpetuate the power in his family; and it is certain that this could not have been accomplished. Sulla had only one son, and he was now a child. But it is certainly a striking trait in this man's character that he descended to a private station from the possession of unlimited power, and after, as Appian observes, having caused the death of more than one hundred thousand men in his Italian wars, besides ninety senators, fifteen consuls, and two thousand six hundred equites, not to mention those who were banished and whose property was confiscated, and the many Italian cities whose fortifications he had destroyed and whose lands and privileges he had taken away. Sulla's character was a compound of arrogance, self-confidence, and contempt of all mankind, which have seldom been united. But his ruling character was love of sensual pleasures. He was weary of his life of turmoil, and he returned to his property in the neighbourhood of Cumæ on the pleasant shore of Campania, where he spent his time on the sea, in fishing, and in sensual enjoyments. But he had nothing to fear; there were in Italy one hundred and twenty thousand men who had served under him, to whom he had given money and land; there was a great number of persons at Rome who had shared in his cruelties and the profits of them, and whose safely consisted in maintaining the safety of their leader. Besides this, he had manumitted above ten thousand vigorous men, once the slaves of masters who had been murdered by his orders, and made them Roman citizens under the name of Cornelii. These men were always in readiness to execute his orders. With these precautions, this blood-stained man retired to enjoy the sensual gratifications that he had indulged in from his youth upwards, glorying in his happy fortune and despising all mankind. No attempt to assassinate him is recorded, nor any apprehension of his on that score. He lived and died Sulla the Fortunate.[295]M. Æmilius Lepidus and Q. Lutatius Catulus were consuls B.C. 78, the year of Sulla's death. Lepidus attempted to overthrow Sulla's constitution after Sulla's death. He was driven from Rome by Q. Catulus and Cn. Pompeius Magnus, and died B.C. 77 in Sardinia. This Lepidus was the father of M. Lepidus the associate of Cæsar Octavianus and M. Antonius in the triumvirate. (See the Life of M. Antonius.)Catulus was the son of Lutatius Catulus who was once the colleague of C. Marius in the consulship. He has received great praise from Cicero. Sallustius calls him a defender of the aristocratical party, and C. Licinius Macer, as quoted by Sallustius in his History, says that he was more cruel than Sulla. We cannot trust Cicero's unqualified praise of this aristocrat nor the censure of Sallustius. What would Cicero's character be, if we had it from some one who belonged to the party of Catiline? and what is it as we know it from his own writings? Insincere, changing with the times, timid, revengeful, and, when he was under the influence of fear, cruel.[296]The Greek word (θέατρον) from which came the Roman Theatrum and our word Theatre, means a place for an exhibition or spectacle. The Roman word for dramatic representations is properly Scena. I do not know when the men and women had separate seats assigned to them in the theatres. A law of the tribune L. Roscius Otho B.C. 68 fixed the places in the theatres for the different classes, and it may have assigned separate seats to the women.[297]Valeria was the daughter of M. Valerius Messala. She could not be the sister of Hortensius, for in that case her name would be Hortensia. The sister of the orator Hortensius married a Valerius Messala.[298]Plutarch has translated the Roman word Imperator by the Greek Autocrator (Αὐτοκράτωρ), "one who has absolute power;" the title Autocrator under the Empire is the Greek equivalent of the Roman Imperator, but hardly an equivalent at this time. (See the Life of Cæsar.)[299]This was the Quintus Roscius whom Cicero has so often mentioned and in defence of whom he made a speech which is extant. The subject of the action against Roscius is not easy to state in a few words. (See the Argument of P. Manutius, and the Essay of Unterholzner in Savigny'sZeitschrift, &c. i. p. 248.) Roscius is called Comœdus in the title of Cicero's oration and by Plutarch, but he seems to have acted tragedy also, as we may collect from some passages in Cicero. The general name at Rome for an actor was histrio; but the histrio is also contrasted by Cicero (Pro Q. Roscio, c. 10) with the comœdus, as the inferior compared with the higher professor of the art. Yet Roscius is sometimes called a histrio. Roscius was a perfect master of his art, according to Cicero; and his name became proverbial among the Romans to express a perfect master of any art. (Cicero,De Oratore, i. 28.) Cicero was intimate with Roscius, and learned much from him that was useful to him as an orator. Roscius wrote a work in which he compared oratory and acting. His professional gains were immense; and he had a sharp eye after his own interest, as the speech of Cicero shows.

[228]This city was burnt by Xerxes in his invasion of Greece B.C. 480. (Herodotus, viii. 33.) Pausanias (x. 33) says that it was not rebuilt by the Bœotians and Athenians: in another passage (x. 3) he says it was destroyed by Philip after the close of the Sacred or Phokian war B.C. 346; and therefore it had been rebuilt by somebody.

[229]The soldiers who had shields of brass.

[230]This was Aulus Gabinius, who was sent by Sulla B.C. 81 with orders to L. Licinius Murena to put an end to the war with Mithridates. Ericius is not a Roman name: perhaps it should be Hirtius.

[231]This is Juba II., king of Mauritania, who married Cleopatra, one of the children of Marcus Antonius by Cleopatra, queen of Egypt. Juba was a scholar and an author: he is often quoted, by Strabo, Plinius (Nat Hist.), and other writers.

[232]"Our city" will explain why Plutarch has described the campaign in the plains of Bœotia at such length. Plutarch's battles are none of the best; and he has done well in making them generally short.

[233]The cave of Trophonius was at Lebadeia in Bœotia. Pausanias (ix. 39) has given a full account of the singular ceremonies used on consulting the deity.

[234]The word isὀμφῆς, literally "voice," which has caused a difficulty to the translators; but the reading is probably right.

[235]This was Lucius Licinius Murena, who conducted the war against Mithridates in Asia B.C. 83 as Proprætor. He was the father of the Lucius Murena in whose defence we have an extant oration of Cicero.

[236]The old story is well told by Ovidius (Metamorphoses,iii. 14, &c.)

[237]A temple of the Muses.

[238]Kaltwasser has followed the reading "Gallus" in his version, though, as he remarks in a note, this man is called Galba by Appian (Mithridat. War, 43), and he is coupled with Hortensius, just as in Plutarch.

[239]This clumsy military contrivance must generally have been a failure. These chariots were useless in the battle between Cyrus and his brother Artaxerxes B.C. 401. (Xenophon,Anabasis, i. 8.) Appian (Mithridatic War, c. 42) mentions sixty of these chariots as being driven against the Romans, who opened their ranks to make way for them: the chariots were surrounded by the Roman soldiers in the rear and destroyed.

[240]A Circus was a Roman racecourse. The chief circus was the Circus Maximus, which was used also for hunts of wild beasts. See the article "Circus" in Smith'sDictionary of Antiquities.

[241]I have kept the Greek word (ὁπλίτης), which means a soldier who was equipped with defensive armour for close fighting.

[242]The Saturnalia were a kind of Carnival at Rome in the month of December, when people indulged themselves in feasting and revelry, and the slaves had the license of doing for a time what they pleased, and acting as if they were freemen. The original "freedom of speech" may mean a little more than these words convey. The point of the centurion's remark, like many other jokes of antiquity, seems rather blunt. He simply meant to express surprise at seeing slaves in an army serving as soldiers—they whose only freedom, so far as he knew, was to have a little license once a year at the Saturnalia.

[243]A town in Eubœa on the strait of the Euripus which separates the island of Eubœa from the mainland. The smallness of the Roman loss is incredible. Appian considerately add one to the number, and makes it fifteen (Mithridatic War, c. 42, &c.) Sulla was a braggart, though he was brave.

[244]This stream is called Morius (c. 17). Pausanias, who made his tour through Greece in the first half of the second century of our æra, saw the trophies (ix. 40).

[245]L. Valerius Flaccus was elected consul B.C. 86 in the place of C. Marius, who died at the beginning of the year.

[246]The name given by the Greeks and Romans to that part of the Mediterranean which lay between Dyrrachium (Durazzo) and the opposite coast of Italy. Thucydides (i. 24) makes the Ionian Sea commence about Epidamnus (which was the old name of Dyrrachium), and probably he extended the name to all the Adriatic or modern Gulf of Venice.

[247]A town in Phthiotis, a district which is included in Thessalia in the larger sense of that term. It was on the river Enipeus, a branch of the Peneus. (Strabo, p. 452.) Thucydides (iv. 78) means the same place, when he speaks of Meliteia in Achæa.

[248]A mountain in Bœotia and a spring (Tilphussa) about fifty stadia from Haliartus. (Pausanias, ix. 33.) Haliartus is on the south side of the Lake Kopais.

[249]Orchomenus, one of the oldest towns in Bœotia and in Greece, is situated near the point where the Kephisus enters the great Lake. Plutarch speaks again of the Melas in the Life of Pelopidas (c. 16). Pausanias (ix. 88) says that the Melas rises seven stadia from Orchomenus, and enters the lake Kephisus, otherwise called Kepais.

[250]If we assume that it was exactly two hundred years, Plutarch wrote this passage about A.D. 114, in the reign of Trajanus. This battle was fought B.C. 86. Hadrianus became emperor A.D. 117. (See Preface, p. xiv.)

[251]Cn. Papirius Carbo was the colleague of Cinna in the consulship B.C. 85 and 84.

[252]A Deliac merchant This might be a merchant of Delium, the small town in Bœotia, on the Euripus, where Sulla and Archelaus met. But Delos, a small rocky island, one of the Cyclades, is probably meant Delos was at this time a great slave-market. (Strabo, p. 668.)

[253]Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 50) says that Archelaus hid himself in a marsh, and afterwards made his escape to Chalkis. Sulla's arrogance is well characterized by his speech. The Cappadocians were considered a mean and servile people, and their character became proverbial.

[254]The Roman Province of Asia. Compare Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 54, 55) as to the terms of the peace.

[255]The death of Aristion is mentioned by Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 39); but he does not speak of the poisoning.

[256]Mædike appears to be the right name. Thucydides (ii. 98) calls the people Mædi: they were a Thracian people. Compare Strabo (p. 316). Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 55) speaks of this expedition as directed aguinst the Sinti, who wore neighbours of the Mædi, and other nations which bordered on Macedonia, and annoyed it by their predatory incursions. Sulla thus kept his soldiers employed, which was the practice of all prudent Roman commanders, and enriched them with booty at the same time.

[257]This is the old town called Krenides, or the Little Springs, which King Philippus, the father of Alexander the Great, restored and gave his name to. It was near Amphipolis on the river Strymon. (See Life of Brutus, c. 38.)

[258]The Troad is the north-west angle of Asia Minor, which borders on the Hellespont and the Ægean Sea (the Archipelago). The name of the district, Troas in Greek, is from the old town of Troja. Strabo (lib. xiii.) gives a particular description of this tract.The narrative of this affair in Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 56, &c.) differs in some respects from that of Plutarch, and this may be observed of many other events in this war. Appian is perhaps the better authority for the bare historical facts; but so far as concerns the conduct and character of Sulla on this and other occasions, Plutarch has painted the man true to the life.Sulla left L. Lucullus behind him to collect the money. (See Life of Lucullus, c. 4.) The story of Fimbria in Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 69, 70) differs from that of Plutarch in some respects, but it is near enough to show that though these two writers apparently followed different authorities, Plutarch has given the facts substantially correct.When Sulla was within two stadia of Fimbria, he sent him orders to give up the army, which he was illegally commanding. Fimbria sent back an insulting message to the effect that Sulla also had no right to the command which he held. While Sulla was throwing up his intrenchments, and many of Fimbria's soldiers were openly leaving him, Fimbria summoned those who still remained to a meeting, and urged them to stay with him. Upon the soldiers saying that they would not fight against their fellow-citizens, Fimbria tore his dress, and began to intreat them severally. But the soldiers turned a deaf ear to him, and the desertions became still more numerous, on which Fimbria went round to the tents of the officers, and bribing some of them, he called another meeting, and commanded the soldiers to take the oath to him. As those who were hired by him called out that he ought to summon the men by name to take the oath, he called by the crier those who had received favours from him, and he called Nonius first who had been his partner in everything. Nonius refused to take the oath, and Fimbria drew his sword and threatened to kill him, but as there was a general shout, he became alarmed and desisted. However he induced a slave by money and the promise of his freedom to go to Sulla as a deserter, and to attempt his life. The man as he came near the act was alarmed, and this gave rise to suspicion, which led to his being seized, and he confessed. The army of Sulla, full of indignation and contempt, surrounded the camp of Fimbria, and abused him, calling him Athenion, which was the name of the fellow who put himself at the head of the rebel runaway slaves in Sicily, and was a king for a few days. Fimbria now despairing came to the rampart, and invited Sulla to a conference. But Sulla sent Rutilius; and this first of all annoyed Fimbria, as he was not honoured with a meeting, which is granted even to enemies. On his asking for pardon for any error that he might have committed, being still a young man, Rutilius promised that Sulla would allow him to pass safe to the coast, if he would sail away from Asia, of which Sulla was proconsul. Fimbria replied that he had better means than that, and going to Pergamum and entering the temple of Æsculapius, he pierced himself with his sword. As the wound was not mortal, he bade his slave plunge the sword into his body. The slave killed his master, and then killed himself on the body. Thus died Fimbria, who had done much mischief to Asia after Mithridates. Sulla allowed Fimbria's freedmen to bury their master; adding that he would not imitate Cinna and Marius, who had condemned many persons to death at Rome, and also refused to allow their bodies to be buried. The army of Fimbria now came over to Sulla, and was received by him and united with his own. Sulla also commissioned Curio to restore Nicomedes to Bithynia and Ariobarzanes to Cappadocia, and he wrote to the Senate about all these matters, pretending that he did not know that he had been declared an enemy.

The narrative of this affair in Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 56, &c.) differs in some respects from that of Plutarch, and this may be observed of many other events in this war. Appian is perhaps the better authority for the bare historical facts; but so far as concerns the conduct and character of Sulla on this and other occasions, Plutarch has painted the man true to the life.

Sulla left L. Lucullus behind him to collect the money. (See Life of Lucullus, c. 4.) The story of Fimbria in Appian (Mithridat. War, c. 69, 70) differs from that of Plutarch in some respects, but it is near enough to show that though these two writers apparently followed different authorities, Plutarch has given the facts substantially correct.

When Sulla was within two stadia of Fimbria, he sent him orders to give up the army, which he was illegally commanding. Fimbria sent back an insulting message to the effect that Sulla also had no right to the command which he held. While Sulla was throwing up his intrenchments, and many of Fimbria's soldiers were openly leaving him, Fimbria summoned those who still remained to a meeting, and urged them to stay with him. Upon the soldiers saying that they would not fight against their fellow-citizens, Fimbria tore his dress, and began to intreat them severally. But the soldiers turned a deaf ear to him, and the desertions became still more numerous, on which Fimbria went round to the tents of the officers, and bribing some of them, he called another meeting, and commanded the soldiers to take the oath to him. As those who were hired by him called out that he ought to summon the men by name to take the oath, he called by the crier those who had received favours from him, and he called Nonius first who had been his partner in everything. Nonius refused to take the oath, and Fimbria drew his sword and threatened to kill him, but as there was a general shout, he became alarmed and desisted. However he induced a slave by money and the promise of his freedom to go to Sulla as a deserter, and to attempt his life. The man as he came near the act was alarmed, and this gave rise to suspicion, which led to his being seized, and he confessed. The army of Sulla, full of indignation and contempt, surrounded the camp of Fimbria, and abused him, calling him Athenion, which was the name of the fellow who put himself at the head of the rebel runaway slaves in Sicily, and was a king for a few days. Fimbria now despairing came to the rampart, and invited Sulla to a conference. But Sulla sent Rutilius; and this first of all annoyed Fimbria, as he was not honoured with a meeting, which is granted even to enemies. On his asking for pardon for any error that he might have committed, being still a young man, Rutilius promised that Sulla would allow him to pass safe to the coast, if he would sail away from Asia, of which Sulla was proconsul. Fimbria replied that he had better means than that, and going to Pergamum and entering the temple of Æsculapius, he pierced himself with his sword. As the wound was not mortal, he bade his slave plunge the sword into his body. The slave killed his master, and then killed himself on the body. Thus died Fimbria, who had done much mischief to Asia after Mithridates. Sulla allowed Fimbria's freedmen to bury their master; adding that he would not imitate Cinna and Marius, who had condemned many persons to death at Rome, and also refused to allow their bodies to be buried. The army of Fimbria now came over to Sulla, and was received by him and united with his own. Sulla also commissioned Curio to restore Nicomedes to Bithynia and Ariobarzanes to Cappadocia, and he wrote to the Senate about all these matters, pretending that he did not know that he had been declared an enemy.

[259]Thyateira was a town in Lydia about 45 miles from Pergamum.

[260]The original is simply "after being initiated;" but the Eleusinian mysteries are meant. The city of Eleusis was in Attica, and the sacred rites were those of Ceres and Proserpine (Demeter and Persephone). Those only who were duly initiated could partake in these ceremonies. An intruder ran the risk of being put to death. Livius (31, c. 14) tells a story of two Akarnanian youths who were not initiated, and during the time of the Initia, as he calls them, entered the temple of Ceres with the rest of the crowd, knowing nothing of the nature of the ceremonies. Their language and some questions that they put, betrayed them, and they were conducted to the superintendents of the temple; and though it was clear that they had erred entirely through ignorance, they were put to death as if they had committed an abominable crime. Toleration was no part of the religious system of Antiquity; that is, nothing was permitted which was opposed to any religious institution, though there was toleration for a great variety. Many illustrious persons were initiated in the Eleusinian mysteries, which were maintained until Christianity became the general religion of the Empire. Marcus Aurelius, when he visited Athens, was initiated. The ceremonial of the temple may be collected to a certain extent from the ancient writers, but no one has yet succeeded in divining what were the peculiar doctrines of this place.

[261]Much has been written about this story, which cannot be literally true. The writings of Aristotle were not unknown to his immediate followers. If there is any truth in this story as told by Plutarch and Strabo (p. 608) it must refer to the original manuscripts of Aristotle. Part of the text of Plutarch is here manifestly corrupt. The subject has been examined by several writers. See art. "Aristotle,"Biog. Dict.of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, and Blakesley,Life of Aristotle, Cambridge 1839.

[262]This is Strabo the Geographer, but the passage is not in the Geography, and probably was in an historical workὙπομνήατα ἱστορικά, Strabo, p. 13) which he wrote, and which is cited by Plutarch in his Life of Lucullus, c. 28.

[263]These warm springs, which still exist, are on the west coast of Eubœa, opposite to the mainland. They were much resorted to in Plutarch's time, as appears from his Symposium (iv. Probl. 4). The place is named Galepsus in Wyttenbach's edition, but in a note the editor admits that the true name is Ædepsus. Demetrius Calatianus (quoted by Strabo, p. 60), who had recorded all the earthquakes in Greece, says that the hot springs at Thermopylæ and at Ædepsus once ceased to flow for three days owing to an earthquake, and those of Ædepsus, when they flowed again, broke out in a fresh place. The hot springs near Cape Therma in Eubœa are supposed to be those of Ædepsus. They are more copious than the springs of Thermopylæ on the opposite mainland, but of the same kind. "The water rushes down in a copious stream into the sea, the vapour from which is visible at a considerable distance." (Penny Cyclopædia, art. "Eubœa.")

[264]Halæae should probably be written Halæ. It was near the Euripus, within Bœotia and on the borders of Phokia. (Pansaunias, ix. 24.)

[265]The usual passage from Italy to Greece and Greece to Italy was between Brundisium and Dyrrachium. Compare Appian,Civil Wars, c. 79.

[266]This phenomenon is mentioned by Strabo (p. 316), Dion Cassius (41, c. 45), and Ælian (Various History, 13, c. 16). I do not know if this spot has been examined by any modern traveller. It is a matter of some interest to ascertain how long a phenomenon of this kind has lasted. The pitch-springs of Zante (Zakynthus), which Herodotus visited and describes (iv. 195), still produce the native pitch. Strabo, who had not seen the Nymphæum, describes it thus after the account of Poseidonius: "In the territory of Apollonia is a place called the Nymphæum; it is a rock which sends forth fire, and at the base of it are springs of warm asphaltus, the asphaltic earth, as it appears, being in a state of combustion: and there is a mine of it near on a hill. Whatever is cut out, is filled up again in course of time, as the earth which is thrown into the excavations changes into asphaltus, as Poseidonius says." We cannot conclude from this confused description what the real nature of the phenomenon was. Probably the asphaltus or bitumen was occasionally set on fire by the neighbouring people. (See the art. "Asphaltum,"Penny Cyclopædia.)

[267]The Cohors was the tenth part of a Roman Legion. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 82) says that on this occasion the opponents of Sulla made their cohorts contain 500 men each, so that a legion would contain 5000 men. According to this estimate there were 90,000 men under arms in Italy to oppose Sulla, who had five legions of Italian soldiers, six thousand cavalry and some men from Peloponnesus and Macedonia; in all forty thousand men. (Appian,Civil Wars, i. 79.) Appian says that he had 1,600 ships.

[268]This passage is explained by the cut p. 287 in Smith'sDict. of Antiquities, art. "Corona."

[269]Caius Junius Norbanus and L. Cornelius Scipio Asiaticus were now consuls B.C. 83.

[270]Silvium is a town in Apulia on the Appian road, on the Apennines. As to the burning of the Capitol, see Appian,Civil Wars, i. 86.

[271]Fidentia was in North Italy not far from Placentia (Piacenza): it is now Borgo San Donnino. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 92) speaks of this battle near Placentia, which Lucullus gained over some of Carbo's troops, not over Carbo himself, as is stated by some modern writers. Carbo was now in Central Italy.

[272]Sulla, with Metellus Pius, who had joined him (Appian,Civil Wars, i. 80), met L. Scipio near Teanum in Campania. Sertorius was with Scipio. The circumstances are told by Appian (Civil Wars, i. 86) as usual with more minuteness and very clearly. The main story is correct in Plutarch.

[273]Signia, now Segni, is in the Volscian mountains, 35 miles south-east of Rome. It was a Roman colony as old us the reign of Tarquinius Superbus, according to Livius (1, 55). This battle was fought B.C. 82, when Cn. Papinus Carbo was consul for the third time with the younger Marius. It appears that Sulla's progress towards Rome was not very rapid. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 87) places the battle at Sacriportus, the situation of which is unknown.

[274]Cn. Cornelius Dolabella was consul B.C. 81. He was afterwards Proconsul of Macedonia, and had a triumph for his victories over the Thracians and other barbarian tribes. C. Julius Cæsar, when a young man (Cæsar, c. 4), prosecuted B.C. 77 Dolabella for mal-administration in his province. Dolabella was acquitted.

[275]Præneste, now Palestrina. This strong town was about 20 miles E. by S. of Rome near the source of the Trerus, now the Sacco, a branch of the Liris, the modern Garigliano.

[276]A Roman historian of the age of Augustus, who wrote Annals, of which there were twenty-two books.

[277]These were Cn. Pompeius Magnus, who afterwards was the great opponent of C. Julius Cæsar; his Life is written by Plutarch: M. Licinius Crassus, called Dives or the Rich, whose Life is written by Plutarch; Quintus Metellus Pius, the son of Metellus Numidicus; and P. Servilius Vatia Isauricus, whom Sulla made consul B.C. 79, when he declined the office himself.

[278]Carbo lost courage and ran away. He got safe to the African coast, whence, with many men of rank, he made his way to Sicily, and thence to the small island of Cossyra. Cn. Pompeius sent men to seize him, who caught Carbo and his company: Carbo's followers were immediately put to death pursuant to the orders of Pompeius. Carbo was brought to Pompeius, and placed at his feet in chains; and after Pompeius had insulted him who had thrice been consul by pronouncing an harangue over him, Carbo was put to death, and his head was sent to Sulla. (Appian,Civil Wars, i. 96.) The statement of Plutarch (Pompeius, c. 10) agrees with that of Appian. These and other acts of Pompeius should be remembered by those who are inclined to pity his fate. He was probably under a necessity to put Carbo to death pursuant to the orders of his muster Sulla, but the insult might have been spared.

[279]It is uncertain who he was. See Drumann,Geschichte Roms, ii. Claudii No. 26.

[280]See c. 33. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 93) gives a different account of this affair before the Colline gate, but agrees with Plutarch in stating that Sulla's right wing was successful and the left was defeated. He says that Telesinus fell in the battle.

[281]Antemnæ was a few miles from Rome, near the junction of the Tiber and the Anio (Teverone).

[282]Appian (Civil Wars, i. 93) briefly mentions this massacre. It took place in the Circus Flaminius, which was near the temple of Bellona.Plutarch here starts a question which suggests itself to all men who have had any experience. It is a common remark that a man who has been raised from a low degree to a high station, or has become rich from being poor, is no longer the same man. Nobody expects those whom he has known in the same station as himself to behave themselves in the same way when they are exalted above it. Nobody expects a man who has got power to be the same man that he was in an humble station. Any man who has lived a reasonable time in the world and had extensive conversation with it knows this to be true. But is the man changed, or are his latent qualities only made apparent by his changed circumstances? The truth seems to be that latent qualities are developed by opportunity. All men have the latent capacities of pride, arrogance, tyranny, and cruelty. Cruelty perhaps requires the most opportunities for its development; and these opportunities are power, fear, and opposition to his will. It has been well observed, that all men are capable of crime, but different circumstances are necessary to develop this capacity in different men. All have their price; and some may be bought cheap. He who is above the temptation of money may yield to other temptations. The possession of power is the greatest temptation of all, as it offers the greatest opportunities for the development of any latent disposition; and every man has a point or two in which he is open to the insidious attacks of opportunity. In matters political, the main thing is to know, from the indications that a man gives when he has not power, what he will be when he has power: in the ordinary intercourse of life, the main thing is to judge of the character of those with whom we deal by compulsion or choice, to know how far we can trust what they say, how far their future conduct may be predicted from present indications. But to show what these indications are, belongs, as Plutarch says, to another inquiry than the present. The general rule of old was Distrust, which the crafty Sicilian, as Cicero (Ad Attic.i. 19) calls Epicharmus, was always whispering in his ear. Epicharmus has well expressed his maxim in a single line:Νᾶφε καὶ μέμνας' ἀπιστεῖν: άρθρα ταῦτα τῶν φρενῶν.Wakeful be thou and distrustful: sinews these are to the mind.This is the rule for the timid, and for them a safe one. But he who is always suspicious must not expect to be trusted himself; and when the bold command, he must be content to obey.

[282]Appian (Civil Wars, i. 93) briefly mentions this massacre. It took place in the Circus Flaminius, which was near the temple of Bellona.

Plutarch here starts a question which suggests itself to all men who have had any experience. It is a common remark that a man who has been raised from a low degree to a high station, or has become rich from being poor, is no longer the same man. Nobody expects those whom he has known in the same station as himself to behave themselves in the same way when they are exalted above it. Nobody expects a man who has got power to be the same man that he was in an humble station. Any man who has lived a reasonable time in the world and had extensive conversation with it knows this to be true. But is the man changed, or are his latent qualities only made apparent by his changed circumstances? The truth seems to be that latent qualities are developed by opportunity. All men have the latent capacities of pride, arrogance, tyranny, and cruelty. Cruelty perhaps requires the most opportunities for its development; and these opportunities are power, fear, and opposition to his will. It has been well observed, that all men are capable of crime, but different circumstances are necessary to develop this capacity in different men. All have their price; and some may be bought cheap. He who is above the temptation of money may yield to other temptations. The possession of power is the greatest temptation of all, as it offers the greatest opportunities for the development of any latent disposition; and every man has a point or two in which he is open to the insidious attacks of opportunity. In matters political, the main thing is to know, from the indications that a man gives when he has not power, what he will be when he has power: in the ordinary intercourse of life, the main thing is to judge of the character of those with whom we deal by compulsion or choice, to know how far we can trust what they say, how far their future conduct may be predicted from present indications. But to show what these indications are, belongs, as Plutarch says, to another inquiry than the present. The general rule of old was Distrust, which the crafty Sicilian, as Cicero (Ad Attic.i. 19) calls Epicharmus, was always whispering in his ear. Epicharmus has well expressed his maxim in a single line:

Νᾶφε καὶ μέμνας' ἀπιστεῖν: άρθρα ταῦτα τῶν φρενῶν.Wakeful be thou and distrustful: sinews these are to the mind.

Νᾶφε καὶ μέμνας' ἀπιστεῖν: άρθρα ταῦτα τῶν φρενῶν.

Wakeful be thou and distrustful: sinews these are to the mind.

This is the rule for the timid, and for them a safe one. But he who is always suspicious must not expect to be trusted himself; and when the bold command, he must be content to obey.

[283]This is not a Roman name. The nearest name to it is Aufidius. But it is conjectured that one Fufidius is meant here (see the note of Sintenis), and also in the Life of Sertorius (c. 26, 27). This is probably the Fufidius (Florus, iii. 21, where the name is written incorrectly Furfidius in some editions) who said, that "Some should be left alive that there might be persons to domineer over."

[284]A Proscriptio was a notice set up in some public place. This Proscription of Sulla was the first instance of the kind, but it was repeated at a later time. The first list of the proscribed, according to Appian (Civil Wars, i, 55), contained forty senators and about sixteen hundred equites. Sulla prefaced his proscription by an address to the people, in which he promised to mend their condition. Paterculus (ii. 28) states that the proscription was to the following effect:—That the property of the proscribed should be sold, that their children should be deprived of all title to their property, and should be ineligible to public offices; and further, that the sons of Senators should bear the burdens incident to their order and lose all their rights. This will explain the word Infamy, which is used a little below. Infamia among the Romans was not a punishment, but it was a consequence of conviction for certain offences; and this consequence was a civil disability; the person who became Infamis lost his vote, and was ineligible to the great public offices. He also sustained some disabilities in his private rights. Sulla therefore put the children of the proscribed in the same condition as if they had been found guilty of certain offences.The consequence of these measures of Sulla was a great change of property all through Italy. Cities which had favoured the opposite faction were punished by the loss of their fortifications and heavy requisitions, such as the French army in the Revolutionary wars levied in Italy. Sulla settled the soldiers of twenty-three legions in the Italian towns as so many garrisons, and he gave them lands and houses by taking them from their owners. These were the men who stuck to Sulla while he lived, and attempted to maintain his acts after his death, for their title could only be defended by supporting his measures. These are "the men of Sulla," as Cicero sometimes calls them, whose lands were purchased by murder, and who, as he says (Contra Rullum, ii. 26), were in such odium that their title could not have stood a single attack of a true and courageous tribune.

The consequence of these measures of Sulla was a great change of property all through Italy. Cities which had favoured the opposite faction were punished by the loss of their fortifications and heavy requisitions, such as the French army in the Revolutionary wars levied in Italy. Sulla settled the soldiers of twenty-three legions in the Italian towns as so many garrisons, and he gave them lands and houses by taking them from their owners. These were the men who stuck to Sulla while he lived, and attempted to maintain his acts after his death, for their title could only be defended by supporting his measures. These are "the men of Sulla," as Cicero sometimes calls them, whose lands were purchased by murder, and who, as he says (Contra Rullum, ii. 26), were in such odium that their title could not have stood a single attack of a true and courageous tribune.

[285]Appian (Civil Wars, i. 94) states that Sulla made all the people in Præneste come out into the plain unarmed, that he picked out those who had served him, who were very few, and these he spared. The rest he divided into three bodies, Romans, Samnites, and Prænestines: he told the Romans that they deserved to die, but he pardoned them; the rest were massacred, with the exception of the women and young children.

[286]L. Sergius Catilina, who formed a conspiracy in the consulship of M. Tullius Cicero B.C. 63. (Life of Cicero.)

[287]Cn. Marius Gratidianus, the son of M. Gratidius of Arpinum. He was adopted by one of the Marii; by the brother of Caius Marius, as some conjecture.

[288]A vessel of stone or metal placed at the entrance of a temple that those who entered might wash their hands in it, or perhaps merely dip in a finger.

[289]Plutarch's expression is "he proclaimed himself Dictator," but this expression is not to be taken literally, nor is it to be supposed that Plutarch meant it to be taken literally. Sulla was appointed in proper form, though he did in fact usurp the power, and under the title of dictator was more than king. (Appian,Civil Wars, i. 98.) The terms of Sulla's election were that he should hold the office as long as he pleased; the disgrace of this compulsory election was veiled under the declaration that Sulla was appointed to draw up legislative measures and to settle affairs. Paterculus (ii. 28) mentions the 120 years as having elapsed since the time of a previous dictatorship, which was the year after Hannibal left Italy B.C. 202. As Sulla was elected Dictator in B.C. 81, Plutarch's statement is correct. (On the functions of the Dictator see Life of Cæsar, c. 37.)

[290]Manius Acilius Glabrio, who was prætor B.C. 70 during the proceedings against Verres. He was the son of the M. Acilius Glabrio who got a law passed on mal-administration in offices (repetundæ), and the grandson of the Glabrio who defeated King Antiochus near Thermopylæ. (See c. 12.)

[291]This murder is told more circumstantially by Appian (Civil Wars, i. 101), who has added something that Plutarch should not have omitted. After saying to the people that Lucretius had been put to death by his order, Sulla told them a tale: "The lice were very troublesome to a clown, as he was ploughing. Twice he stopped his ploughing and purged his jacket. But he was still bitten, and in order that he might not be hindered in his work, he burnt the jacket; and I advise those who have been twice humbled not to make fire necessary the third time."

[292]Plinius (H.N.33, c. 5) speaks of this triumph: it lasted two days. In the first day Sulla exhibited in the procession 15,000 pounds weight of gold and 115,000 pounds of silver, the produce of his foreign victories: on the second, 13,000 pounds weight of gold and 6000 pounds of silver which the younger Marius had carried off to Præneste after the conflagration of the Capitol and from the robbery of the other Roman temples.

[293]The term Felix appears on the coins of Sulla. Epaphroditus signifies a favourite of Aphrodite or Venus. (Eckhel,Doctrina Num. Vet.v. 190.) Eckhel infers from the guttus and lituus on one of Sulla's coins that he was an Augur.

[294]Sulla abdicated the dictatorship B.C. 79 in the consulship of P. Servilius Vatia Isauricus and Appius Claudius Pulcher. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 103, &c.) speaks of the abdication. He made no attempt to secure to his family the power that he had acquired. It may be that he had no desire to perpetuate the power in his family; and it is certain that this could not have been accomplished. Sulla had only one son, and he was now a child. But it is certainly a striking trait in this man's character that he descended to a private station from the possession of unlimited power, and after, as Appian observes, having caused the death of more than one hundred thousand men in his Italian wars, besides ninety senators, fifteen consuls, and two thousand six hundred equites, not to mention those who were banished and whose property was confiscated, and the many Italian cities whose fortifications he had destroyed and whose lands and privileges he had taken away. Sulla's character was a compound of arrogance, self-confidence, and contempt of all mankind, which have seldom been united. But his ruling character was love of sensual pleasures. He was weary of his life of turmoil, and he returned to his property in the neighbourhood of Cumæ on the pleasant shore of Campania, where he spent his time on the sea, in fishing, and in sensual enjoyments. But he had nothing to fear; there were in Italy one hundred and twenty thousand men who had served under him, to whom he had given money and land; there was a great number of persons at Rome who had shared in his cruelties and the profits of them, and whose safely consisted in maintaining the safety of their leader. Besides this, he had manumitted above ten thousand vigorous men, once the slaves of masters who had been murdered by his orders, and made them Roman citizens under the name of Cornelii. These men were always in readiness to execute his orders. With these precautions, this blood-stained man retired to enjoy the sensual gratifications that he had indulged in from his youth upwards, glorying in his happy fortune and despising all mankind. No attempt to assassinate him is recorded, nor any apprehension of his on that score. He lived and died Sulla the Fortunate.

[295]M. Æmilius Lepidus and Q. Lutatius Catulus were consuls B.C. 78, the year of Sulla's death. Lepidus attempted to overthrow Sulla's constitution after Sulla's death. He was driven from Rome by Q. Catulus and Cn. Pompeius Magnus, and died B.C. 77 in Sardinia. This Lepidus was the father of M. Lepidus the associate of Cæsar Octavianus and M. Antonius in the triumvirate. (See the Life of M. Antonius.)Catulus was the son of Lutatius Catulus who was once the colleague of C. Marius in the consulship. He has received great praise from Cicero. Sallustius calls him a defender of the aristocratical party, and C. Licinius Macer, as quoted by Sallustius in his History, says that he was more cruel than Sulla. We cannot trust Cicero's unqualified praise of this aristocrat nor the censure of Sallustius. What would Cicero's character be, if we had it from some one who belonged to the party of Catiline? and what is it as we know it from his own writings? Insincere, changing with the times, timid, revengeful, and, when he was under the influence of fear, cruel.

Catulus was the son of Lutatius Catulus who was once the colleague of C. Marius in the consulship. He has received great praise from Cicero. Sallustius calls him a defender of the aristocratical party, and C. Licinius Macer, as quoted by Sallustius in his History, says that he was more cruel than Sulla. We cannot trust Cicero's unqualified praise of this aristocrat nor the censure of Sallustius. What would Cicero's character be, if we had it from some one who belonged to the party of Catiline? and what is it as we know it from his own writings? Insincere, changing with the times, timid, revengeful, and, when he was under the influence of fear, cruel.

[296]The Greek word (θέατρον) from which came the Roman Theatrum and our word Theatre, means a place for an exhibition or spectacle. The Roman word for dramatic representations is properly Scena. I do not know when the men and women had separate seats assigned to them in the theatres. A law of the tribune L. Roscius Otho B.C. 68 fixed the places in the theatres for the different classes, and it may have assigned separate seats to the women.

[297]Valeria was the daughter of M. Valerius Messala. She could not be the sister of Hortensius, for in that case her name would be Hortensia. The sister of the orator Hortensius married a Valerius Messala.

[298]Plutarch has translated the Roman word Imperator by the Greek Autocrator (Αὐτοκράτωρ), "one who has absolute power;" the title Autocrator under the Empire is the Greek equivalent of the Roman Imperator, but hardly an equivalent at this time. (See the Life of Cæsar.)

[299]This was the Quintus Roscius whom Cicero has so often mentioned and in defence of whom he made a speech which is extant. The subject of the action against Roscius is not easy to state in a few words. (See the Argument of P. Manutius, and the Essay of Unterholzner in Savigny'sZeitschrift, &c. i. p. 248.) Roscius is called Comœdus in the title of Cicero's oration and by Plutarch, but he seems to have acted tragedy also, as we may collect from some passages in Cicero. The general name at Rome for an actor was histrio; but the histrio is also contrasted by Cicero (Pro Q. Roscio, c. 10) with the comœdus, as the inferior compared with the higher professor of the art. Yet Roscius is sometimes called a histrio. Roscius was a perfect master of his art, according to Cicero; and his name became proverbial among the Romans to express a perfect master of any art. (Cicero,De Oratore, i. 28.) Cicero was intimate with Roscius, and learned much from him that was useful to him as an orator. Roscius wrote a work in which he compared oratory and acting. His professional gains were immense; and he had a sharp eye after his own interest, as the speech of Cicero shows.

Back to Index Next