in its original state, been formed out of oral accounts, preserved by tradition. What was the authenticity of these accounts, what portion of truth was imbedded in them, by whom and at what time they were collected, it would be vain for us now to inquire. In substance, the story was of indigenous growth; the only circumstances in it which appear to be borrowed from Greece, are the sitting of Coriolanus on the hearth of Tullus, (107) the sparing of the lands of the patricians, (108) and his supposed suicide. Dionysius describes the character of Coriolanus,(109) as if it had been as well ascertained as that of Themistocles; and represents his fame as being still fresh among the Romans in his own time.(110) It is however remarkable that he is scarcely ever mentioned in the whole circle of Latin literature: even the touching incident of the embassy of the women does not receive an allusion. Cicero speaks of him once in reference to his bearing arms against his country, and twice in reference to his supposed suicide.(11)

§ 24 Notwithstanding the retreat of Coriolanus, the Volscians and Equians lose no time in forming a joint expedition against Rome, and in invading its territory. A quarrel however arises between the two armies, and instead of attacking the Romans, they fall upon one another. After this action, they

(107) Compare Dion. Hal. viii. 1, with Thuc. i. 136, 137; Plut. Them. 24. The custom of suppliants sitting on the hearth was very ancient in Greece. See Odyssey, vii. 153, where Ulysses is described as placing himself in the ashes near the fire, in the palace of Antinous. The Greek custom is fully illustrated by Mr. Grote, vol. ii. p. 108.

(108) See Thuc. ii. 13; Grote, vol. vi. P. 171.

(109) viii. 61. The absence of mildness and graciousness, and a love of severe justice, are described as his characteristics.

(110) ἐτῶν δὲ μετὰ τὸ πάθος ὁμοῦ τι πεντακοσίων ἤδη διαγεγονότων εἰς τόνδε τὸν χρόνον, οὐ γέγονεν ἐξίτηλος ἡ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς μνήμη, ἀλλ ̓ ᾄδεται καὶ ὑμνεῖται πρὸς ἁπάντων, ὡς εὐσεβὴς καὶ δίκαιος ἀνήρ ; c. 62. The εὐσέβεια of Coriolanus is likewise mentioned as a reason for allowing the women to go to his camp; above, c. 43. The piety and justice of Coriolanus were celebrated on account of his yielding to the entreaties of his mother and wife, and sparing his country. Five hundred years is taken as a round number.

(111) Above, n. 75; De Amic. 11. In his sketch of the Roman history in the Republic, he omits Coriolanus: he passes from the first secession to the attempt of Sp. Cassius; ii. 34-5. This however may be accounted for by his confining himself to constitutional changes.

return home, but the Roman consuls, who had led out an army to meet them, take no advantage of their weakness. (112) In the next year, great military preparations are made by the new consuls, Aquillius and Sicinius. The former defeats the Hernicans, takes their camp, and ravages their country. The latter, according to Dionysius, gains a great victory over the Volscians, in which Attius Tullus falls: Livy however says that neither side has the advantage.(113) Under the next consuls, Virginius and Spurius Cassius, the lands of the Equians are ravaged, the Volscians sue for peace, are subjected to war-contributions, and become the subjects of the Romans. The Hernicans likewise submit to the terms imposed on them by Cassius. Such is the narrative of Dionysius. (114) Livy says nothing of the Equians and Volscians; of the Hernicans he reports that, a treaty was made with them, and that they were mulcted of two-thirds of their territory.(115) The accounts given by our two historians of the time immediately succeeding the campaign of Coriolanus, do not altogether agree; nor can either of them be easily reconciled with the previous events. It seems strange that at the very moment when Coriolanus is drawing off his Volscian army from Rome, another Volscian army should march with the Equians against Rome. Although the Romans are unable to face Coriolanus, the consuls take the field in order to meet the other joint army. In the following year, according to Dionysius, the Romans form three armies, one of which defeats the Hernicans, the other defeats the Volscians, and the third guards the suburban district and in the next year the Volscians appear as suppliants for peace, pay a tribute, and become Roman subjects. There is nothing but the single presence of Coriolanus to account for the abject depression of the Romans when he attacks them, and their allies and colonies; compared with their decisive supe

(112) Dion. Hal. viii. 63; Livy, ii. 40: Plut. Cor. 39.

Eo anno

(113) Dion. Hal. ib. 64-7, who says that Siccius had a triumph and Aquillius an ovation. Livy, ii. 40, calls the consul Sicinius, and says that the Volsci fell to his province, and the Hernici to Aquillius. Hernici devicti; cum Volscis æquo marte discessum est.' (115) ii. 41.

(114) ib. 68.

riority over the Volscians, as soon as he is withdrawn. (116) In these conflicts, moreover, the Latin towns are conceived as being on the side of the Romans: nothing is said of their reductionthe change in the disposition of Coriolanus, produced by his mother's entreaties, not only occasions the retreat of the army, but obliterates all the effects of his previous conquests. It will be mentioned presently that the Latins (whose towns had been reduced by Coriolanus) are treated in this year as the faithful allies of Rome.

§ 25 The consulship of Sp. Cassius is rendered famous by his proposal of the first agrarian law, by his alleged attempt at supreme power, and by his tragic end. According to Dionysius, his numerous honours, and his recent successes against the two powerful nations of the Volscians and Hernicans had elated his mind, and inspired him with the thought of making himself monarch. In order to conciliate the favour of the people, he meditates a proposal for a division of the public land; and he contemplates the inclusion of the Latins and Hernicans within the benefits of this measure, to which nations he stood in a peculiar relation; for in a former consulship he had made the treaty which conferred equal rights of citizenship on the Latins, and in this year he had granted the same terms to the Hernicans. After his triumph, he makes a speech to the people, recounting his exploits, and promising them some great boon. On the following day, he convenes the Senate, and opens to them his proposals: these are-First, to divide among the citizens all land conquered from the enemy, which was public only in name, but was in fact occupied, without a shadow of right, by patricians; secondly, that whereas the corn given to the state by Gelo, was sold to the people, instead of being distributed among them gratuitously, the purchasers should be reimbursed the

(116) Dionysius attempts to account for this sudden change as follows: μετέμαθον γὰρ Οὐολοῦσκοι πάντα τὰ πολέμια, ἐξ οὗ Μάρκιον ἔσχον ἡγεμόνα, καὶ εἰς τὰ ̔Ρωμαίων προσεχώρησαν ἔθη, c. 67. This is in the year imme diately succeeding the expedition of Coriolanus. Lower down, however, c. 84, he says that the Volscians resembled the Romans in military skill and discipline, since they had been under Coriolanus.

VOL II.

K

price of it out of the public treasury. It is implied, but not stated, that the Latins and Hernicans were included in the agrarian scheme of Cassius: so that it would have led to their practical admission to the benefits of the Roman commonwealth. The propositions of Cassius are violently opposed by his colleague, Virginius, and by the Senate. Each consul forms a party, and agitates the people in favour of his own views. The tribunes however, jealous of a popular measure which does not originate with themselves, oppose Cassius, on the ground that the Latins and Hernicans ought not to be included within the law, and that its benefits ought to be confined to their own countrymen. Cassius nevertheless succeeds in resisting the influence of the tribunes, and inclining the people to accept his proposition, when Rabuleius, one of the tribunes, comes forward at an assembly of the people, and undertakes to settle the question. He asks Cassius and Virginius whether the proposed law does not consist of two parts: the first, that there should be a division of the public land among individual citizens; the second, that the Latins and Hernicans should be among the recipients. They answer this interrogation in the affirmative. In answer to another question, Virginius declares that he is ready to assent to the division among their own citizens, but that he cannot agree to include the other nations. 'Let us then,' says Rabuleius, 'now adopt that part of the measure to which both consuls agree, and postpone that part as to which they differ.' The people approve of this advice, but Cassius is reluctant. He feigns illness for a time, and collects Latins and Hernicans into the town in order to be ready for the day of voting. Virginius however dismisses all who are not residents.(117)

The Senate take alarm at these factious proceedings, and meet in order to deliberate on the course to be pursued, and Appius Claudius is the first to deliver his opinion. He opposes the division among the people, and recommends that some Senators be appointed, whose duty it shall be to define the public

(117) Dion. Hal. viii. 68-72.

land, and to eject all persons who have gained encroachments upon it, either by force or fraud: when the boundaries have been laid down, and marked with pillars, to sell a portion of the land, especially where the title is in dispute,(118) and to let the rest for a term of five years: the money thus arising to be applied to the maintenance of the troops, and to the provision of military stores. At present (he said) the poor justly grudge the rich their usurpation of the public land; and it is natural that they should demand a division of the common property among all the citizens, rather than allow it to be monopolised by a few unscrupulous men. But if they see the present occupiers ejected, and the public land really applied to public objects, they will no longer cherish hostile feelings towards us, and will cease to wish for a division of the land; believing that a common enjoyment of the whole will be more profitable to them than a separate possession of a small portion. Let us show them that a poor man, receiving a small piece of ground, will not, on account of his poverty, be able to cultivate it, nor will he find any tenant for it, except a neighbour: but that large tracts of land, let by the state, affording ample facilities for cultivation, will produce large returns; and that it is better for them, when they go out to war, to receive food and pay from the public treasury, than to contribute war taxes out of narrow and reduced means.'(119) Appius is followed by A. Sempronius, who concurs in his views, but disapproves of the extension of the measure to the Latins and Hernicans, inasmuch as the land had been conquered before their admission to the rights of equal citizenship, and recommends that a portion of the public land should be divided among the poorer citizens, in addition to that which is let. (120) No further debate takes place, and these re

(118) The text is imperfect in this place, but the sale, as well as the letting of land, is clearly mentioned. Nothing is said of sale, either in the subsequent speech of Sempronius, or in the decree of the Senate. The sale, as well as the letting of the public land, is mentioned in Appian, B.C. 1.7; Plutarch, Tib. Gracch. 8. Compare Marquardt, vol. iii. part i.

P. 14.

(119) Ib. c. 73.

(120) Ib. c. 74-5.