The Coliseum(kol-e-see´-um), in the background, was dedicated by Titus,A. D.80, in a grand festival of 100 days, at which 5,000 beasts were slaughtered in the games. The successive tiers of seats, receding from the arena to the summit, gave room for 90,000 spectators. Gladiatorial contests continued until abolished by Honorius,A. D.405.
The Coliseum(kol-e-see´-um), in the background, was dedicated by Titus,A. D.80, in a grand festival of 100 days, at which 5,000 beasts were slaughtered in the games. The successive tiers of seats, receding from the arena to the summit, gave room for 90,000 spectators. Gladiatorial contests continued until abolished by Honorius,A. D.405.
ROME AT THE HEIGHT OFITS GRANDEUR
The luster of the Roman power and glory of the Roman name were now at their height. The eyes of all the world were now on Italy, the young republic of the West. Into Rome all talents, all riches, flowed. What a grand thing in those days to be a Roman citizen; so that, wherever one walked,—in Spain, in Africa, even in once proud Athens, he was followed, feasted, flattered! What a career was opened to those who wished for wealth or aspired to fame! But in the very sunburst of Rome’s glory, the germs of decay were ripening.
On the Romans themselves the effect of their foreign conquests were both good and bad; but perhaps the evil outweighed the good.
ERA OF GREAT PUBLICWORKS
The wealth poured into Rome by the conquest of Carthage, of Greece, and the East, and the considerable revenue derived from the permanent taxation of the provinces, enabled the Romans to carry out a great system of public works. Throughout Italy splendid military roads which remain to this day were built, the provinces were traversed by imperial highways, and fine stone bridges were thrown across the Tiber. In Rome splendid public buildings were erected, the city was sewered, the streets were paved (174 B. C.), two new aqueducts (the Marcian, built in 144 B. C., at a cost of ten million dollars) were constructed; and it may be noted that the Consul P. Scipio Nasica, in 159 B. C., set up in Rome a public clepsydra, or water clock, the citizens having for six centuries gone on without any accurate means of knowing the time by night as well as day.
INFLUENCE OF GREEK CULTUREON ROME
The effect on Rome of the conquest of Greece and the Hellenized East was very marked. Greek rhetoricians, scholars, tragedians, musicians and philosophers in large numbers took up their abode in Rome. The city swarmed with Greek schoolmasters. Greek tutors and philosophers, who, even if they were not slaves, were as a rule accounted as servants, were now permanent inmates in the palaces of Rome; people speculated in them, and there is a statement that the sum of two hundred thousand sesterces (ten thousand dollars) was paid for a Greek literary slave of the first class.
RISE OF NATIVE ROMANLITERATURE
The stimulus of Greek literary culture led to native production, and in the second century, B. C., we have the beginning of that Latin literature which we still read. Though the great period of Roman letters did not come till a century after this time (age of Augustus), yet there arose a number of writers of no ordinary power. Among these should be mentioned Ennius, the father of Roman poetry; Plautus, his contemporary, a man of rich poetic genius; the elder Cato, the first prose writer of note; and Terence, the most famous of the comic poets.
While the Romans were in some respects benefited by contact with the superior though decaying culture of Greece, they also learned a great deal that was debasing. They became effeminate, luxurious, and corrupt in morals; marriage was not respected; the old Roman faith waned, and it was said that two augurs could not meet in the street without laughing in each other’s face.
GROWTH OF POLITICAL ANDSOCIAL CORRUPTION
The political system of Rome now began to lead to a dreadful state of public corruption. The Roman government was devised for the rule of a city: all power was in the hands of the civic voters, and when there came to be great prizes, in the way of great offices at home and abroad, the voters began to find that their votes were worth something, and unblushing bribery and corruption became common.
The demands of the large planters and merchants led to a great extension of the slave-trade. All lands and all nations were laid under contribution for slaves, but the places where they were chiefly captured were Syria and the interior of Asia Minor. It is probable that at the period at which we have now arrived (middle of the second century B. C.) there were twelve million slaves against five million free inhabitants in the Italian peninsula,—a most lamentable state of things!
In addition to the slaves, Italy became filled up with a motley parasitic population from Asia and Africa and all the conquered lands,—and the result of this intermixture soon appeared in a marked degeneracy in the Roman race itself.
THE NEW ROMAN CONTRASTEDWITH THE OLD
The decay of old Roman virtue became at the same time apparent in the great increase of luxury. This displayed itself in houses, villas, pleasure gardens, fish ponds, dress, food and drink. Extravagant prices—as much as one hundred thousand sesterces (five thousand dollars)—were paid for an exquisite cook. Costly foreign delicacies and wines were affected, and the Romans in their banquets vied with one another in displaying their hosts of slaves ministering to luxury, their bands of musicians, their dancing girls, their purple hangings, their carpets glittering with gold or pictorially embroidered, and their rich silver plate.
In the midst of the system there were not wanting some noble patterns of the old Roman type, among whom should be named Cato, who kept up a constant protest all his life against the growing luxury of his countrymen, and died declaring that they were a degenerate race. Such men were, however, rare exceptions; and we shall hereafter see that the evil system already operative in the second century went on increasing, till finally, a century afterwards, it resulted in the total subversion of the republic.
The picture just given of the state of Roman society in the last half of the second century B. C. prepares us for the period of civil strife on which we now enter.
IV. EPOCH OF THE CIVIL WARS, 146-31 B. C.—The fourth period extends from the capture of Carthage and Corinth to the establishment of the Imperial Government by the battle of Actium, B. C. 31. During this whole time the Roman history is a continued tale of domestic disturbances. From the fall of Carthage to the battle of Actium, it presents but a melancholy picture, a blood-stained record of sedition, conspiracy, and civil war.
A number of causes had resulted in the growth of an aristocracy founded purely on wealth; the old division of society into patricians and plebeians had ceased, and there arose a still worse division into classes,—the rich and the poor.
THE GRACCHI ESPOUSE THECAUSE OF THE POOR
The cause of the poor against the rich was taken up by a noble young tribune of the people named Tiberius Gracchus. Tiberius and his afterwards distinguished younger brother Caius (the two being known in history as the Gracchi) were sons of a noble Roman matron, Cornelia, daughter of the great Scipio Africanus.
Tiberius Gracchus proposed a land-law (agrarian law), which would limit the amount of public land that could be held by any one individual and provided for the distribution of the rest in small homesteads. The aristocracy immediately raised a storm, and induced another tribune to veto the measure. Now, according to the Roman code, no proposal could become law unless all the tribunes were unanimous. Gracchus then secured a popular vote expelling his colleague from the tribuneship, and the land-law was passed by the people, 133 B. C. In the meantime, however, Gracchus’s year of office expired, and he came up for re-election. The nobles resolved to prevent this by violence.
MURDER OF THE TRIBUNE,TIBERIUS GRACCHUS
Gracchus, learning this, bade his friends arm themselves with staves; and when the people began to inquire the cause of this, he put his hand to his head, intimating that his life was in danger. Some of his enemies ran to the senate and reported that Tiberius openly demanded a crown. A body of the aristocrats with their clients and dependents then rushed among the unarmed crowd, and murdered Gracchus with three hundred of his adherents,—133 B. C.
Tiberius Gracchus was dead, but his work remained; that is to say, the measure which he had proposed was law, and the commissioners intrusted with the task of allotting the lands prosecuted their labors for two or three years. The nobles, however, obstructed the work as much as possible, so that between them and the champions of the people there was a continuous struggle.
THE STRUGGLES AND DEATH OF THEYOUNGER GRACCHUS
This struggle became still more fierce when Caius Gracchus, ten years after the death of his brother, claimed and obtained the tribuneship, and then took up that brother’s work. The agitation for the agrarian law was renewed, an enactment was made for a monthly distribution of corn to the city poor, and various other reforms were proposed by him. After holding the tribuneship for two years, however, he lost the office through the intrigues of his opponents. The nobles were determined to crush Gracchus; accordingly, at one of the public assemblies they attacked the partisans of the popular leader, and there ensued a bloody combat (121 B. C.) in which three thousand of his adherents were slain. Gracchus himself fled into a wood across the Tiber; but, being pursued, he chose to die by the hands of a faithful slave rather than fall into the power of his enemies.
RISE OF MARIUSAND SULLA
The ill-will between the nobles and the people continued just as bitter after the death of Gracchus; and matters finally shaped themselves in such a way that the nobles, or senatorial party, came to be represented by a leader named Sulla, and the democracy, or Commons, by another, called Marius. These men came to prominence in the course of two or three wars in which Rome was engaged for twenty-five or thirty years after the time of which we have been speaking; and finally they acquired such power as to bring on a civil strife that deluged Italy with blood.
The wars just referred to were: the Jugurthine war (111-106 B. C.), the war against the Cimbri (113-101 B. C.), and the Social war (90-89 B. C.), with the details of which we need not concern ourselves; but the fourth contest was of more moment, and needs notice here. This was the Mithridatic war.
BOLD DESIGN OF MITHRIDATESAGAINST ROME
Mithridates, king of Pontus, a bold and able soldier, formed the design of uniting the Asiatic states and Greece in a vast confederacy against the Roman dominion. He began by causing about eighty thousand Romans who dwelt in the cities of Asia Minor to be massacred in one day (88 B. C.). He then invaded Greece.
The command in this important war was eagerly sought by both Marius and Sulla. Sulla prevailed; he was elected consul and put in command. Marius, being chagrined at this, succeeded in having the popular party set aside Sulla. But the aristocratic general marched to Rome and compelled Marius to flee into Africa. Sulla then set out for Greece, all of which submitted to him, the army of Mithridates being defeated (86-84 B. C.)
HORRIBLE MASSACRES ATTEND THE STRUGGLEBETWEEN MARIUS AND SULLA
During the absence of Sulla, Marius returned to Italy. Entering Rome in 86 B. C., he filled the entire city with slaughter, and in particular he caused the murder of the leading senators that had supported his rival. Marius then caused himself to be proclaimed consul without going through an election; but a fortnight later he died.
Notwithstanding the death of Marius, the Marian party still continued in power. Sulla, hearing of their successes, hastily concluded a peace with Mithridates, and hurried to Italy (83 B. C.). After a severe struggle, Sulla utterly overthrew the Marians. The blood of[395]massacre then flowed a second time,—in a yet greater stream. Lists of proscribed persons, embracing all who belonged to the people’s party, were published every day, and the porch of Sulla’s house was full of heads.
Having put down all his enemies, Sulla caused himself to be proclaimed dictator for an unlimited time (81 B. C.). He then proceeded to re-organize the government wholly in the interest of the aristocratic party; but to the great surprise of every one he three years afterward resigned his power and retired to private life. Sulla died in 78 B. C.; he was honored with a magnificent funeral, and a monument with the following epitaph written by himself:
“I am Sulla the Fortunate, who in the course of my life have surpassed both friends and enemies; the former by the good, the latter by the evil, I have done them.”
RISE OF POMPEYTHE GREAT
After the death of Sulla, the most prominent figure among all the men of the aristocratic party was Cneius Pompey, who had distinguished himself as a lieutenant of Sulla, and afterwards won renown by his management of several important matters in which Rome was engaged—especially in the suppression of a formidable revolution in Spain under a very able leader named Sertorius (77-72 B. C.), and in stamping out a fire of revolt kindled by Spartacus, the leader of a band of gladiators, who, joined by a large force of discontented spirits, kept Italy in alarm for two or three years (73-71 B. C.). These exploits made Pompey a popular favorite, and in the year 70 B. C. he was rewarded by being made consul along with a rich senator named Crassus.
HIS MILITARY EXPLOITSIN THE EAST
At the expiration of his year of office he retired to private life, but was soon called upon to suppress a formidable combination of pirates who infested the Mediterranean Sea and had their headquarters in Cilicia (in Asia Minor). This task he accomplished in three months. These triumphs, aided by his political influence, enabled Pompey to procure the command in the war against Mithridates, who had renewed his scheme of conquering the Eastern Roman provinces. He was given powers such as never had been delegated to any Roman general. This war lasted for two years (66-64 B. C.), and was marked by a series of brilliant triumphs for Pompey. He utterly crushed Mithridates (who died by self-administered poison), as well as his son-in-law Tigranes, subdued Phœnicia, made Syria a Roman province, and took Jerusalem. Thus with the glory of having subjugated and settled the East he returned to Rome (62 B. C.), where a magnificent triumph awaited him.
FAMOUS STRUGGLES OF THEFOUR FACTIONS
Meanwhile there seem to have grown up, after the death of Sulla, four factions in Rome: the “oligarchical faction,” consisting of the small number of families the chiefs of which directed the senate, and in fact governed the republic; the “aristocratic faction,” comprising the mass of the senators anxious to obtain the power usurped by a few of their colleagues; the “Marian party,” including all those whose families had been prosecuted by Sulla, and who now began to rally, and aspire to power; the “military faction,” embracing a crowd of old officers of Sulla, who, having squandered the fortunes they had gained under him, were eager for some revolution that might give them the opportunity to improve their condition.
THE GREAT LEADERS OF THE FACTIONS—POMPEY,CICERO, CRASSUS, CAESAR AND CATILINE
At the head of the oligarchical faction was Pompey; but during his absence in Asia its representative was Marcus Tullius Cicero (born 106 B. C.), who had established his reputation as the first orator in Rome. He had risen through various offices to the prætorship, and at the time Pompey left for the East aspired to be consul. He did not himself belong to a noble family, but still he made himself the champion of the oligarchy. Though vain and boastful, he was a virtuous and patriotic man.
The leader of the aristocratic faction was Crassus, formerly the colleague of Pompey in the consulship, now his personal rival. He was a man of no great ability, but his position and his immense wealth made him influential. (After prodigious expenditures, he died worth ten million dollars.)
The leader of the third, or Marian party, was a man six years younger than Pompey or Cicero, who, distinguished in youth for his accomplishments and his extravagance, rose in the year 65 B. C. to the office of edile. This was Caius Julius Cæsar,—a man of pre-eminent ability, one of the greatest that ever lived. He was the nephew of Marius, and now stood forward as the leader of the Marian party. He was of an old patrician family, and took up the cause of the people to serve his own ends.
CONSPIRACY OFCATILINE
The leader of the military faction was Catiline, who had been one of the ablest and most ferocious of Sulla’s officers. He had a large following of debauched young patricians and ruined military men, who thought they would better their fortunes by making Catiline consul. Cicero was his rival, and, receiving the support of the senators, was elected. Enraged at his defeat, Catiline formed a conspiracy of which the murder of Cicero and the burning of Rome were parts. A woman betrayed the plot to Cicero, who denounced Catiline with such fiery eloquence that he had to flee from Rome. With a band of confederates he attempted to reach Gaul; but he was overtaken in Etruria and slain, 62 B. C.
THE FIRST TRIUMVIRATE: CAESAR,POMPEY AND CRASSUS
Cæsar and Pompey, now finding that they agreed in many of their views, resolved to unite their forces. To cement their union more closely, Cæsar gave his only daughter, Julia, in marriage to Pompey. For various reasons it was found desirable to admit Crassus to their political partnership, and thus was formed (60 B. C.) that famous coalition known in Roman history as the “First Triumvirate.”[396]The object of Cæsar and Pompey was to thwart the senatorial party in every way, and wield all the power themselves.
The formation of the triumvirate was followed by the election of Cæsar to the consulship (59 B. C.); and when his year of office expired he obtained for himself the government of Gaul for five years, and then for another five. This was probably the great object of Cæsar’s desires. No doubt he was already brooding over the design of making himself master of Rome; and for this purpose he would need an army.
During the years 58-50 B. C. Cæsar made eight campaigns in Gaul, forming the remarkable series of operations which he afterwards described with such pointed style in hisCommentaries.
The result of his eight years’ campaigning was that, in the spring of 50 B. C., Cæsar was able to take up his residence in Cisalpine Gaul, leaving the three hundred tribes beyond the Alps, which he had conquered by such bloody means, not only pacified, but even attached to himself personally. His army, which included many Gauls and Germans, was so devoted to him that it would have marched to the end of the world in his service.
DOWNFALL OF CRASSUS AND RIVALRYOF CAESAR AND POMPEY
During Cæsar’s campaigns in Gaul (where his government was prolonged for a second five-year term), Crassus disappeared from the triumvirate. After holding the consulship with Pompey, in 55 B. C., he went as proconsul to the province of Syria, in 54 B. C. His greed of wealth, and desire for the military fame which he envied in Cæsar and Pompey, brought him to ruin, by inducing him to attack the kingdom of Parthia,[5]where he was soon afterward murdered. So that the triumvirate became a duumvirate, or league of two men,—Cæsar and Pompey.
[5]Parthia had the rare distinction of being a country the prowess of whose warriors baffled the efforts of Rome for her subjection. The Parthian kingdom, southeast of the Caspian Sea, came into existence about 250 B. C., by revolt from the Seleucids, the monarchs of Syria, and became a powerful realm after the death of Alexander the Great. It included Parthia proper, Hyrcania, and afterwards (130 B. C.) Bactria, so that at last its dominions stretched from the Euphrates to the Indus, and from the river Oxus to the Indian Ocean. The Parthians adopted the Greek religion, manners, and customs, which had been introduced into that part of Asia by Alexander’s conquests.The renowned cavalry of Parthia seem to have been all-powerful only on their own soil, for their invasions of the Roman province of Syria in 39 and 38 B.C. were utterly defeated, while the invasion of Parthia by the great Roman general and triumvir, Mark Antony, in 36, was repulsed with loss of a great part of his army. In 20 B. C. the Parthian king Phraates restored, chiefly as a friendly concession, the standards and prisoners taken from Crassus and Antonius, and this is the event commemorated by the Roman poets of the day as equivalent to a submission by Parthia. Under the Roman emperors the Parthians sometimes courted and were sometimes at war with Rome, and were partially conquered for a time under Trajan. The Parthian kings encouraged Christianity. In A. D. 226 a revolt of the Persians put an end to the Parthian kingdom, revived the religion of Zoroaster, stopped the eastward progress of Christianity in Asia, and began modern history in Persia.
[5]Parthia had the rare distinction of being a country the prowess of whose warriors baffled the efforts of Rome for her subjection. The Parthian kingdom, southeast of the Caspian Sea, came into existence about 250 B. C., by revolt from the Seleucids, the monarchs of Syria, and became a powerful realm after the death of Alexander the Great. It included Parthia proper, Hyrcania, and afterwards (130 B. C.) Bactria, so that at last its dominions stretched from the Euphrates to the Indus, and from the river Oxus to the Indian Ocean. The Parthians adopted the Greek religion, manners, and customs, which had been introduced into that part of Asia by Alexander’s conquests.
The renowned cavalry of Parthia seem to have been all-powerful only on their own soil, for their invasions of the Roman province of Syria in 39 and 38 B.C. were utterly defeated, while the invasion of Parthia by the great Roman general and triumvir, Mark Antony, in 36, was repulsed with loss of a great part of his army. In 20 B. C. the Parthian king Phraates restored, chiefly as a friendly concession, the standards and prisoners taken from Crassus and Antonius, and this is the event commemorated by the Roman poets of the day as equivalent to a submission by Parthia. Under the Roman emperors the Parthians sometimes courted and were sometimes at war with Rome, and were partially conquered for a time under Trajan. The Parthian kings encouraged Christianity. In A. D. 226 a revolt of the Persians put an end to the Parthian kingdom, revived the religion of Zoroaster, stopped the eastward progress of Christianity in Asia, and began modern history in Persia.
Now between these two men there had for some time been a growing coldness. It was said that Cæsar was a man who could brook no equal, and Pompey a man who could suffer no superior. A feeling of rivalry having once arisen, naturally grew till Cæsar and Pompey became the bitterest enemies. Pompey went over to the aristocratic party to which he had originally belonged, and having been made sole consul for the year 52 B. C., he began to exert his great influence against Cæsar. In this he was supported by the nobles, who dreaded Cæsar’s immense power.
FINAL STRUGGLE BETWEENCAESAR AND POMPEY
As the period of Cæsar’s command would expire in the year 49 B. C., he had determined to obtain the consulship for the year 48 B. C., since otherwise he would become a private citizen. Accordingly he demanded, though absent, to be permitted to put himself in the lists for the consulate. But it was proposed, through the influence of Pompey, that Cæsar should lay down his command by the thirteenth of November, 50 B. C. This was an unreasonable demand; for his term of government over Gaul had another year to run, and if he had gone to Rome as a private citizen to sue for the consulship, there can be no doubt that his life would have been sacrificed. Cæsar, still anxious to keep the peace, offered, at the beginning of the year 49 B. C., to lay down his command if Pompey would do the same; but this the senate refused to accede to, and a motion was passed that Cæsar should disband his army by a certain day, and that if he did not do so, he should be regarded as an enemy of the state.
THE CROSSING OF THERUBICON
Cæsar promptly took his resolve: he would appeal to the arbitrament of arms. He had the enthusiastic devotion of his soldiers, the great mass of whom, being provincials or foreigners, cared very little for the country whose name they bore. Accordingly, in January, 49 B. C., he advanced from his headquarters at Ravenna to the little stream, the Rubicon, which separated his own province and command from Italy. The crossing of this river was in reality a declaration of war against the republic; and it is related that, upon arriving at the Rubicon, Cæsar long hesitated whether he should take this irrevocable step. After pondering many hours he at length exclaimed, “The die is cast!” and plunged into the river.
Pompey concluded not to attempt to defend Italy, but to retire upon the East, where he would gather a great army and then return to overwhelm the “usurper.” Accordingly he retreated to Greece.
CAESAR MASTER OF ITALY ANDDICTATOR OF ROME
In sixty days Cæsar made himself master of all Italy. Then marching to Rome he had himself appointed dictator and consul for the year 48 B. C. He showed masterly statesmanship, and soon brought the general current of opinion completely over to his side.
BATTLE OF PHARSALIA ANDDEATH OF POMPEY
Meantime, Pompey had gathered a powerful army in Thessaly, and thither Cæsar with his legions proceeded against him. The decisive battle between the two mighty rivals was fought at Pharsalia, in 48 B. C. It resulted in the utter defeat of Pompey; and as it left Cæsar the foremost man in the Roman world, it must be regarded as one of the great decisive battles of history.
Pompey, after his defeat, sought refuge in Egypt; but he was assassinated by the orders of Ptolemy, when seeking to land on the coast of that country. Cæsar, who followed in pursuit, did not hear of his death until his arrival in Alexandria, where messengers from Ptolemy brought him Pompey’s head. Cæsar, who was both a generous man and a compassionate foe, turned with horror from the spectacle, and with tears in his eyes gave orders that the head should be consumed with the costliest spices.
CAESAR, CLEOPATRA AND THECONQUEST OF THE EAST
At Alexandria Cæsar became enamored of Cleopatra, the young, beautiful, and fascinating queen of Egypt. He even mixed himself up with a quarrel that was going on between her and her younger brother Ptolemy, to whom, according to the custom of the country, she was married, and with whom she shared the throne. This intermeddling led Cæsar, who had but a small force with him, into conflict with the troops of the king. A fierce battle was fought in the city. Cæsar succeeded in firing the Egyptian fleet; but unfortunately the flames extended to the celebrated Library of the city of Alexandria, and the greater part of the magnificent collection of manuscripts was burnt. Cæsar was finally successful: Ptolemy was killed, and Cleopatra was made queen of Egypt. From Alexandria Cæsar marched into Pontus to attack Pharnaces, son of Mithridates, whom he subdued so quickly that he described the campaign in the most laconic dispatch ever penned:Veni, vidi, vici,—“I came, I saw, I conquered.”
CAESAR’S FINAL VICTORY ANDTRIUMPHANT RETURN TO ROME
Pompey’s forces that escaped from Pharsalia had established themselves in the Roman province of Africa. They were commanded by Scipio and Cato. Cæsar having settled matters in the East, now proceeded against this force, which he utterly destroyed at Thapsus, early in the year 46 B. C. Scipio and Cato killed themselves. One more rally the Pompeians made in Spain, but they were defeated by Cæsar in the decisive battle of Munda (March, 45 B. C).
Cæsar returned to Rome after the battle of Thapsus, the master of the Roman dominion. The republic went out when Cato fell upon his sword at Utica; the monarchy came in with the triumphal entry of Cæsar into Rome in the summer of 46 B. C. It is true Cæsar was not king (rex) in name, but he was so in substance. His position as chief of the state was this: he was invested with the dictatorship for ten years,—an arrangement changed soon afterwards to perpetual dictator,—and was hailed with the title of Imperator for life. The latter title, Imperator (meaning commander), was one which belonged under the republic to the victorious general; but it was a temporary title, always laid aside with the surrender of military command. Cæsar was allowed to use it in a special way and permanently, and in his case it had much the meaning of the term Emperor,—a word which is simply Imperator cut short.
FEELINGS OF THE ROMANSTOWARD CAESAR
There can be no doubt that the Romans were well satisfied to be under the rule of Cæsar. The republic was a mere name, for liberty had expired when the Gracchi were murdered, and subsequent dissensions were merely contests for power between different factions. Hence the Roman people, weary of revolution, were quite content to find peace under the just though absolute rule of one master.
It is important to recognize this as the real state of public feeling, because we shall now have to see that Cæsar fell a victim to assassination, and it might be thought that his overthrow was the people’s revolt from monarchical rule. But it was the act of a small knot of conspirators who, with the cry of “Liberty and the Republic” in their mouths, did away with the Imperator to serve their own ends.
THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST CAESARAND HIS ASSASSINATION
The chiefs of the conspiracy were Caius Cassius and Marcus Junius Brutus. Both had received great favors from Cæsar; but they thought they had not been honored enough, and they were intensely jealous of the dictator’s greatness. These were joined by other malcontents, and the plotters swelled their ranks by representing that Cæsar designed to assume the diadem and the title of king; so that the conspiracy finally included about sixty senators.
It is not certainly known whether or not Cæsar thought of taking the name of king. It is known, however, that the consul, Mark Antony, entered in the public acts, “that by the command of the people, he, as consul, had offered the name of king to Cæsar, perpetual dictator; and that Cæsar would not accept of it.”
The plot ripened into a determination to assassinate Cæsar, and the conspirators fixed on the Ides (i. e. 15th) of March as the time of putting the design into execution. Rumors of the plot got abroad, and Cæsar was strongly urged not to attend the senate. But he disregarded the warnings which were given him. As soon as Cæsar had taken his place, he was surrounded by the senatorial conspirators, one of whom, pretending to urge some request, seized his toga with both hands and pulled it violently over his arms. Then Casca, who was behind, drew a weapon and grazed his shoulder with an ill-directed stroke. Cæsar disengaged one hand and snatched at the hilt, exclaiming, “Cursed Casca, what means this?” “Help!” cried Casca, and at the same moment the conspirators aimed each his dagger at the victim. Cæsar for an instant defended himself; but when he perceived the steel flashing in the hand of Brutus (Marcus Junius), he exclaimed[398]“What! thou too, Brutus!” (Et tu Brute!) and drawing his robe over his face he made no further resistance. The assassins stabbed him through and through; and, pierced with twenty-three wounds, Cæsar fell dead at the foot of the statue of his great rival, Pompey.
Julius Cæsar was in his fifty-sixth year, when, on the fifteenth of March, B. C. 44, he was stricken down.
EFFECT OF CAESAR’S DEATH AND THEORATION OF ANTONY
It is said that “revolutions never go backwards.” Brutus and his fellow-conspirators struck down Cæsar in the name of liberty; but the blow that leveled the master of Rome did not bring back the republic,—it only insured the appearance of new claimants for supreme power, and consequently new civil wars.
On the occasion of Cæsar’s funeral the consul, Mark Antony, delivered an oration over the dictator’s body, and to such a height did the feeling of the Romans against the plotters rise, that Brutus and Cassius were obliged to escape forthwith from the city to avoid destruction.
The condition of affairs left Mark Antony in some respect the representative of Cæsarean principles; but a more direct claimant to the succession appeared in Cæsar’s great-nephew, Caius Octavius, then a youth nineteen years old. The dictator had adopted Octavius as his son; so his name became Caius Julius Cæsar Octavianus. Octavius had all the old soldiers on his side, and raised the standard of Cæsar’s vengeance.
TRIUMVIRATE OF ANTONY, OCTAVIUSAND LEPIDUS
At first Antony and Octavius were at strife; but finally they became reconciled, and associating with them Lepidus, the “master of the horse,” the three formed the Second Triumvirate (43 B. C.), and concerted a plan to divide among themselves the supreme authority. In order to do this it was necessary utterly to crush both their personal enemies and the forces of the republic.
To accomplish the first object, they began a system of proscription more ruthless and bloody than that of Marius and Sulla. It is recorded that three hundred senators, two thousand knights, and many thousands of citizens were sacrificed. The most illustrious of the victims was the famous orator Cicero, whose severe invectives against Antony had procured him the relentless hatred of the triumvir. The aged patriot, while escaping from Rome in a litter, was assassinated.
BATTLE OF PHILIPPI AND DIVISIONOF THE ROMAN WORLD
The second object was the destruction of the republican forces. Now Brutus and Cassius, finding their position in Italy to be desperate, had retired to the East, where in Thrace they gathered an army of about one hundred thousand men. Antony and Octavius pursued them with a still larger force, and the two armies met at Philippi. The republican army was totally defeated (November, 42 B. C.); both Brutus and Cassius killed themselves.
The victors now divided the Roman world among themselves,—Antony taking the East, Octavius the West, and Lepidus the province of Africa. But the Roman world was scarcely theirs before they began to quarrel over it. The feeble Lepidus never possessed much influence, and was soon robbed of his share. After this it was quite certain that a contest between Antony and Octavius could not long be delayed, and each began to intrigue against the other.
ANTONY’S TRAGIC ASSOCIATIONWITH CLEOPATRA
Antony made the headquarters of his half of the Roman dominion at Alexandria. Here he came under the fascinations of Cleopatra, and he lost all regard to his character or his interests in her company. He even went so far as to divorce his wife Octavia, the sister of Octavius, and, having married the voluptuous Egyptian queen, he bestowed Roman provinces on her.
This conduct was treasonable, and furnished Octavius with a decent pretext for declaring war. The young Cæsar had been gaining great popularity in Italy; he had consolidated his power and had his legions in fine training. The fleets and armies of the rivals assembled at the opposite sides of the Gulf of Ambracia. After considerable delay, Antony, instigated by Cleopatra, who was present with her Egyptian fleet, determined to decide the contest by a naval battle. The contest took place off the promontory of Actium (on the west coast of Greece), while the hostile armies, drawn up on the shore, were simple spectators. In the midst of the conflict Cleopatra tacked about, and with the Egyptian squadron of sixty sail drew out of the fight. Antony, regardless of his honor, followed after her, and the pair fled to Alexandria. Both the fleet and the force of Antony surrendered to Octavius, 31 B. C.
Some months afterwards Octavius advanced to besiege Alexandria. Antony attempted to defend it; but he was abandoned by his troops. Cleopatra retired to a monument she had erected, and caused a report to be spread of her death. Upon this news Antony attempted to commit suicide, and inflicted on himself a mortal wound: hearing, however, in the midst of his agonies, that Cleopatra still lived, he caused himself to be carried to her monument, and expired in her presence (30 B. C.).
DEATH OF CLEOPATRA BY SUICIDEAND FALL OF EGYPT
The end of Cleopatra was even more tragic. The Egyptian queen seems at first to have thought that she would be able to bewitch the young Cæsar; but having in vain essayed her arts on the cold, calculating Octavius, she, sooner than be led in chains to adorn the triumph of the victor, and glut the eyes of the populace of Rome with the sight of the daughter and last of the Ptolemies, preceding the chariot of the adopted son of him who had done homage to her charms, gave herself voluntary death by the bite of an asp, or the scratch of a poisoned needle. Egypt now became a Roman province in 30 B. C., and Rome’s dominion in the Mediterranean basin became formally, as it had long been virtually, complete.
The Roman Empire, replacing the Roman Republic, founded by Julius Cæsar, after the battle of Pharsalia, was consolidated by Octavianus in the following year.
V. PERIOD OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO CONSTANTINE, 31 B.C.-306 A.D.—Thefifthperiod begins with the establishment of the Imperial Government under Augustus Cæsar to the reign of Constantine, A.D. 306. As Christianity was introduced into the world in this period, and was opposed until the end of it by the Roman government, it is often designated as the period of Pagan Emperors.
The reign of Augustus, the name taken by the first Emperor Octavius, has become proverbial for an age flourishing in peace, literature, and the arts. It is distinguished, also, for the birth of Jesus Christ; as the next reign, that of Tiberius, is, for his crucifixion and death.—The four reigns succeeding, viz.: those of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero, are chiefly memorable for the tyranny of the Emperors, and the profligacy of their families and favorites.
On the death of Nero, A.D. 69, follows a year of dissension and bloodshed, in which Galba, Otho, and Vitellius successively gained the empire and lost their lives.—The Flavian family, Vespasian and his two sons, Titus and Domitian, next in order receive the supreme power. Titus is celebrated as the final conqueror of the Jews, whose obstinacy provoked him to destroy the city of Jerusalem. Domitian, the last emperor of the family, provokes his own assassination, A.D. 96.
Passing the reigns of the feeble Nerva, the martial Trajan, and the peaceful Hadrian, we arrive at a brilliant age in the imperial history, the age of Antonines, extending from A.D. 138 to 180, a space of about forty years. Literature and the arts of peace revived under their benign influence.
After the death of Marcus Aurelius, A.D. 180, there follows a whole century of disorder, profligacy, conspiracy and assassination. The army assumes the absolute disposal of the imperial crown, which is even sold at public auction to the highest bidder. Within the last fifty years of the time, nearly fifty emperors are successively proclaimed, and deposed or murdered.—In the year 284, Diocletian began to reign, and attempted a new system of administration.
Ten special persecutions of Christians are recorded and described, the first under Nero, A.D. 64, and the last under Diocletian, commencing A.D. 303, and continuing ten years, unto A.D. 313. But, notwithstanding these repeated efforts to hinder the progress of Christianity, it was spread during this period throughout the whole Roman Empire.
ROME IN THE AUGUSTANPERIOD
When Augustus Cæsar at the age of thirty-six became master of the Roman world, there was no open establishment of a monarchical government. On the contrary, most of the old republican forms were kept up; but they were mere forms. The Senate still sat, but it did little more than vote what Augustus wished; the people still met in their assemblies and elected consuls and magistrates, but only such persons were elected as had been proposed or recommended by the Emperor. Augustus, however, assumed nothing of the outward pomp of a monarch: he was satisfied with the substance of supreme rule.
THE THREE CIVILIZATIONS WITHINTHE EMPIRE
Within the circuit of the Roman dominion there were what we may call three civilizations: the Latin, the Greek, and the Oriental. Latin civilization took in the countries from the Atlantic Ocean to the Adriatic; Greek civilization, from the Adriatic to Mount Taurus; Oriental civilization, the lands beyond to the Euphrates.
The Latin.—The area of Latin civilization embraced the peninsula of Italy (its native seat) and all western Europe, where the Romans appeared not only as a conquering but also as a civilizing people. Thus in the three provinces of Spain (Hispania), in the four provinces of Transalpine Gaul (corresponding nearly with the modern France), as well as in the North African provinces, especially Carthage (which was restored by Cæsar as a Roman colony), the Latin language took firm root, and the manners and customs, and indeed the whole civilization, of those lands became Roman.
The Greek.—Greek civilization was spread over Greece and all those parts of Europe and Asia that had been Hellenized by Grecian colonists or by the Macedonian conquerors. In manners, customs, language, and culture these lands remained Greek, while politically they were Roman.
The Oriental.—Oriental civilization was diffused over the Eastern provinces, especially Egypt and Syria. These countries had, under the rule of Alexander’s successors, become to some degree Hellenized; but this influence was on the whole superficial. The peoples of those Oriental lands had never given up their own languages or religious ideas or ways of thinking. Now these peoples, it should be said, did not become Latinized either,—they did not adopt the language and civilization of Rome.
HOW ROME WAS GOVERNEDUNDER THE EMPIRE
Within the limits of the Roman Empire under Augustus there may have been in all one hundred millions of human beings. Not less than one-half were in a condition of slavery; and of the rest, only that small proportion who, under the envied name of Roman citizen (civis Romanus), inhabited Italy, enjoyed political independence, or had the smallest share in the government. The various lands and peoples were under Roman legates (half of these appointed by Augustus and the other half by the Senate), who held supreme military command. To the provinces were left, however, their independent municipal constitutions and officers. In Rome and Italy the public peace was preserved by the pretorian cohorts,—bodies of soldiers of tried valor, to whom Augustus gave double pay. Throughout the provinces the people were kept in check by the regular troops,—numbering three hundred and fifty thousand men.
THE CAPITAL CITY OF THEROMAN EMPIRE
Of this vast empire Rome was the metropolis, now a city of innumerable streets and buildings, and containing, it is calculated, a population of about two millions and a half. It was in this period that Rome became truly a splendid city. Augustus was able to boast that “he found the city brick and left it marble.”
Its Extent and Chief Buildings.—In the days of its greatest prosperity the circumference of Rome enclosed by walls was about twenty miles; but there were also very extensive suburbs. The walls were pierced by thirty gates. The most remarkable objects were the[400]Coliseum, the Capitol with its temples, the Senate-House, and the Forum.
The great circus, or Circus Maximus, a place reserved for public games, races and shows, was one of the most magnificent structures of Rome. It was capable of containing two hundred thousand spectators.
The Flavian Amphitheater, whose massive ruins are known as the Coliseum, could seat from eighty to one hundred thousand persons. In the arena were exhibited the fights of gladiators, in which the Romans took such savage delight, together with races, combats of wild beasts, etc. Theaters, public baths, etc., were erected by the emperors, who seemed anxious to compensate the people for their loss of liberty by the magnificence of their public shows and entertainments.
The Ancient Roman Forum.—In the valley between the Palatine and Capitoline hills was the Forum, or place of public assembly, and the great market. It was surrounded with temples, halls for the administration of justice (calledbasilicæ), and public offices; it was also adorned with statues erected in honor of eminent warriors and statesmen, and with various trophies from conquered nations.
Temple Of Janus.—In the Forum was the celebrated Temple of Janus, built entirely of bronze and dating back to the early kingly period. From some early circumstance the custom was established of closing the gates of this temple during peace; but so incessant were the wars of the Romans, that during eight centuries the gates of the Temple of Janus were closed only three times.
Campus Martius.—The elections of magistrates, reviews of troops, and the census or registration of citizens, were held in the Campus Martius, which was also the favorite exercise-ground of the young nobles. It was surrounded by several splendid edifices; ornamental trees and shrubs were planted in different parts, and porticoes erected under which the citizens might continue their exercise in rainy weather. Nearby was the celebrated Pantheon, or Temple of All the Gods (erected in the reign of Augustus), the most perfect and splendid monument of ancient Rome that has survived the ravages of time.
The Roman Aqueducts.—The Aqueducts were among the most remarkable Roman structures. Pure streams were sought at a great distance, and conveyed in these artificial channels, supported by arches, many of which were more than a hundred feet high. Under the emperors, not fewer than twenty of these stupendous and useful structures were raised; and they brought such an abundant supply of water to the metropolis, that rivers seemed to flow through the streets and sewers.
Compared with Athens.—Rome was inferior to Athens in architectural beauty, but it far surpassed the Grecian city in works of public utility. To enumerate all the notable edifices would be impossible here; but the “Eternal City” in the zenith of its glory contained four hundred and twenty temples, five regular theaters, two amphitheaters, and seven circuses of vast extent. There were sixteen public baths, built of marble, and furnished with every convenience that could be desired. From the aqueducts a prodigious number of fountains was supplied, many of which were remarkable for their architectural beauty. The palaces, public halls, columns, porticoes, and obelisks were without number, and to these must be added the triumphal arches erected by the later emperors.
AS A CENTER OFLITERATURE
As the peace of the Roman world was maintained by the strong hand of power, it was at this time that many of those arts that grow best during seasons of national order and prosperity made their greatest progress. Thus many of the best-known Latin writers lived at this time.
Augustus himself was a great patron of literary men and artists, and so was his minister, Caius Cilinius Mæcenas. They honored and rewarded eminent writers; and though we must not forget that many of the distinguished men whose writings add luster to the “Augustan Age” had grown up under the republic, still Augustus deserves credit for fostering letters. Nothing will make up for the loss of political freedom; but it is something that in Rome, when liberty was lost, literature at least flourished.
Among the distinguished writers of this age or the times immediately preceding it are the poets Virgil, Horace, Lucretina and Catullus; and the historian, Sallust.
THE BIRTH OF CHRIST ANDTHE CHRISTIAN ERA
Under the rule of Augustus the greatest event of the world’s spiritual history occurred in Bethlehem of Judæa—the birth of Jesus Christ. This really took place in the year 4 B.C., but the erroneous calculation has, for the sake of convenience, been allowed to stand, and the chronology passes from B.C. to A.D., when Augustus had held sway, according to the wrong reckoning, for twenty-seven years.
GREAT IMPORTANCE OF THE ROMANDEFEAT BY THE GERMANS
The great secular fact of Rome’s history under Augustus Cæsar was the destruction of the Roman general Varus and his legions in Germany by the celebrated Arminius,—the great national hero Herman,—in whose honor a colossal statue has been erected in the northwest of Germany, near the scene of his patriotic and momentous achievement. He was the chief of the Cherusci, a powerful tribe dwelling on both sides of the river Visurgis (Weser), and closely akin to the Angles and Saxons who conquered the island of Britain.
If Arminius had not done what he did against Rome, Germany might have been thoroughly subdued; the Latin language might have extinguished the Teutonic; the Teutonic tribes might have been overwhelmed; the Teutonic influence over modern Europe, and as an element of the English race, might never have been exerted, and Europe and the world would have had a widely different development from that which they have actually undergone.
LEGIONS OF VARUS VANQUISHED BYARMINIUS
Arminius, as chief of the Cherusci, headed a confederacy of German tribes to expel from[401]northern Germany the invaders and partial conquerors of the fatherland. The Roman governor, Quintilius Varus, and his officers and troops, had provoked the German outbreak by their licentious behavior, and the vengeance wreaked on the offenders was complete in itself, and effectual for the preservation of German freedom.
The German hero, when his plans were formed, tempted Varus and his three legions, by a revolt of the tribes near the Weser and the Ems, to march into the difficult country now called the Teutoburger Wald, a woody and hilly region near the sources of the Lippe and the Ems. When the Roman force was thoroughly entangled amidst the forests and hills, and had been further imperiled by the rashness of the incompetent tyrant Varus in the order of his march, then Arminius and the Germans fell on the hated foe; the Roman column was broken, and its cavalry fled, but was pursued and utterly destroyed.
Varus slew himself in despair. His infantry was overpowered and slain almost to the last man. All the efforts of Rome thereafter never secured her a permanent foothold on German soil. This great deliverance of Germany, so full of chagrin to Augustus and so momentous in European history, occurred in A.D. 9.
Death of Augustus.—Augustus died in 14 A.D.; so that, counting from his formal accession to title, 27 B.C., he ruled over the Roman dominion for forty-one years.
The following table gives a list of the Roman Emperors, with the dates of their reigns and other facts. Many of them were quite insignificant in personality and in their influence upon history. The greater rulers call for more extended notice in their proper historical place in theOutline of Universal History, as well as in the Dictionary of Biography.
THE EMPERORS OF ROME