« PreviousContinue »
Superbus, who established his supremacy over the Latin towns:(*) so that Antium and Laurentum would, according to the common story, have been subject at this time to Rome. The colonization of Circeii is moreover attributed to Tarquin II. :(9) but of Tarracina nothing is said during the regal period. It is first mentioned by Livy about a century later, with the remark that its original name was Anxur.(10) Substantially however the list of towns in the Carthaginian treaty agrees with the received accounts of the extent of the Roman power under Tarquin. During the war with Porsena, and in the subsequent war with the Latins, this power appears as curtailed; and Niebuhr accordingly considers that Rome, having attained to a high pitch of greatness under the kings, underwent a decline shortly after the expulsion of the Tarquins.(1) Such certainly is the result of the accounts handed down to us, assuming them to be historical.(1)
While the indignation of the people against Tarquin is at its height, the consuls cause them to take an oath that they will never appoint, or allow any one else to appoint, a king at Rome(13) A law is said to have been afterwards passed by
(8) iv. 49. Above, vol. i.
511. (9) Livy, i. 56 ; Dion. Hal. iv. 63. Above, vol. i. p. 515.
(10) Anxur fuit, quæ nunc Tarracina; Livy, iv. 59. If Livy's statement is correct, we must suppose that the name Anxur in the original text of the treaty was translated by Polybius into Tappákıva.
(11) · It (the treaty with Carthage] divulged the secret of the early greatness of Rome, and of her fall after the banishment of the Tarquins ; a secret which her children in later times were foolishly anxious to keep concealed, as if it had been an indelible blot on the honour of their ancestors ;' Hist, vol. i.
533. In this passage, Niebuhr assumes the existence of a knowledge of the history of Rome at this period, which is purely imaginary. If the later Romans did not know the truth about the events of 510 B.C., there was no occasion for any study to conceal it. Compare Schwegler, vol. i. p. 790—2.
(12) Livy contrasts the military power of Rome under the kings, and during the war with Porsena : ‘C. Mucius, adolescens nobilis, cui indignum videbatur populum Romanum servientem, quum sub regibus esset, nullo bello nec ab hostibus ullis obsessum esse ; liberum eundem populum ab iisdem Etruscis obsideri, quorum sæpe exercitus fuderit;' i. 12. Dionysius also says of the same war: Σαβίνων τινές καταγνόντες της πόλεως ασθένειαν εκ του Τυρρηνικού πταίσματος, ώς ουκέτι την αρχαίαν αξίωσιν αναληψομένης ; ν. 37.
(13) Dion. Hal. v. 1; Livy, ii. 1. Plutarch, Publ. 2. describes Valerius Publicola as taking the oath against the restoration of Tarquin.
Valerius, which made it a capital offence, with forfeiture of goods, to attempt to become king: (+) Every such endeavour continued, throughout the Roman history, to be regarded as a treasonable act: Cassius and Manlius were executed for this high misdemeanor, in the early period of the Republic; an apparent assumption of royalty was made the pretext for the murder of Tiberius Gracchus ;(15) and even the Cæsars could not acquire supreme power without deferring to the national dislike of the kingly title and insignia. The name of rex aroused in the breast of a Roman the same stimulating associations as that of rúpavvoç in the breast of a Greek.(16) It is however difficult to reconcile this state of feeling with the accredited historical account of the Roman kings, who are described as exercising a limited power, in combination with a senate and a popular assembly, and one of whom was regarded as the author of the liberties of the plebeians. Both Dionysius and Livy agree in representing the general course of the regal government as mild, popular, and beneficent, and in treating the violent despotism of Tarquin II. as an extraordinary and exceptional departure from its prevailing spirit. The probable explanation of this apparent inconsistency is, that the Romans in general had no distinct idea of the constitutional history of their kings; and that they understood the word in the sense which it bore in Greece in the post-Alexandrine age; when a king was universally conceived as possessing an absolute and unlimited power (7)
(14) Livy, ïi. 8.
(15) Plut. Tib. Gracch. 19. (16) Sallust gives the following account of Catiline : Hunc post do. minationem Lucii Sullæ libido maxima invaserat reipublicæ capiendæ ; neque id quibus modis assequeretur, dum sibi regnum pararet, quidquam pensi habebat;' Cat. 5. In this passage regnum is exactly equivalent to the Greek τυραννίς. Appian in like manner applies the term βασιλεία to the dictatorship of Sylla : he says that the Romans having been governed above 210 years by kings, and then 400 years by denocracy and annual consuls, returned under him to regal government ; Bell. Civ. i. 99. Livy represents Horatius Cocles as addressing the Etruscans, in the war of Porsena, in the following words : • Servitia regum superborum, suæ liber. tatis immemores, alienam oppugnatum venire,' ii. 10, where the subjects of king Porsena are considered as equivalent to the slaves of a deonórns or (ominus,
(17) See above, vol. i p. 106.
§ 3 The first events in the history of the consular government are connected with attempts to restore the ejected Tarquinian family. Tarquin removes to his paternal city of Tarquinii, and at his persuasion, envoys are sent to Rome to procure his restoration. Being admitted to the Senate, they first propose that Tarquin should be allowed to return, and resume his royal office under certain restrictions. This request is peremptorily refused by Brutus, and the ambassadors then content themselves with demanding the cession of Tarquin's property. The two consuls are divided in opinion: Brutus thinks it dangerous to restore, Collatinus thinks it unjust to withhold, the property. The Senate are unable to settle the question, and refer it to the people. The thirty curiæ vote upon it, and it is decided by a bare majority that the property shall be given up.(19) Having by this decision secured a pretext for delay, the envoys take means for gaining over some of the citizens to the cause of Tarquin; among whom were persons closely connected with the two consuls : namely, the two sons of Brutus, two Vitellii, his brothers-in-law, and two Aquilli, nephews of Collatinus. The conspirators meet in the house of the Aquillii, where their plans are overheard by a slave, named Vindicius, who secretly conveys information of the fact to Valerius. Acting on his own authority, Valerius collects a body of retainers, enters the house, seizes some treasonable letters written by the conspirators themselves, and addressed to Tarquin, and denounces the guilty persons before the consuls. Then follows the celebrated condemnation of the sons of Brutus by their father, and their immediate execution in his presence. When however Brutus proceeds to follow the same course with the Aquillii, their uncle Collatinus, the other consul, interposes his veto to save them. Brutus, upon this, denounces
(18) Dionysius says: αναλαβούσαι ψήφον αι φράτραι τριάκοντα ούσαι τον αριθμόν, ούτω μικράν εποιήσαντο την επί θάτερα ροπήν, ώστε μια ψήφω πλείους γενέσθαι των κατέχειν τα χρήματα βουλευομένων τας αποδιδόναι κελευούσας ; v. 6. The votes here alluded to must be the votes of the several curiæ, not the votes of the members within each curia. This being the case, the least majority must have been sixteen to fourteen, that is, a majority not of one but of two; a majority of one is only possible where the number of votes is uneven.
his colleague before the assembly of the people, accuses him of sympathy with the Tarquinian cause, and declares his intention of convening the centuries in order to put the deposition and banishment of Collatinus to the vote. Collatinus protests against this severe measure; whereupon Lucretius, his father-in-law, comes forward and suggests a compromise ; and Collatinus agrees to retire into voluntary exile at Lavinium, taking with him a gift of twenty talents from the public treasury, and five talents added by Brutus himself.(19) This, we are told, was stated by the Roman historians to have been the first occasion on which a private person, not a magistrate, was allowed to address the assembly of the people.(20) Brutus then convenes the centuries, (-1) and P. Valerius is chosen consul in the place of Collatinus.() The consuls, being now of one mind, proceed to put the remaining conspirators to death ; and to adopt three other measures. 1 They add certain plebeian members to the Senate, and complete its number to three hundred. 2 They confiscate the property, both in land and goods, of Tarquin, and divide it among the people. A reservation is however made of the plain between the city and river, called the field of Mars, which is dedicated to military exercises. Tarquin, notwithstanding the sanctity of this ground, had taken it into cultivation: the people were allowed to plunder it, but as the produce of the land was unholy, the corn and straw were thrown into
(19) Veturia, in her speech to Coriolanus at the Volscian camp, is represented by Dionysius as reminding him of the example of Collatinus, who though banished from Rome by the people, retired to Lavinium, and never bore any malice against his own countrymen ;
viii. 49. (20) και τυχών της εξουσίας ταύτης πρώτος, ώς φασιν οι Ρωμαίων συγγραφείς, ούπω τότε Ρωμαίοις όντος εν έθει δημηγορείν ιδιώτην εν εκκλησία και Dion. Hal. y. 11. with reference to Lucretius.
(21) Dionysius 8ays: καλέσας τον δήμον ευθύς εις το πεδιον, ένθα συνηθες ήν αυτούς τούς τε βασιλείς και τας άλλας αρχάς καθιστάναι, ν. 12. Livy expressly mentions the comitia of centuries : Collegam sibi comitiis centuriatis creavit P. Valerium ; ii. 2. Dionysius describes Brutus as threatening to put the banishment of Collatinus to the vote of the centuries ; xalévac avrika pála tous lóxovs; v. 10. The constitution of Servius had by this time been restored : compare iv. 75.
(22) Dionysius says of Valerius : φιλοσοφία τις αυτοδίδακτος εγένετο περί avrov; v. 12.' This idea seems to have been suggested by his Sabine origin.
the river, where they lodged, and formed the island opposite to Rome known by the name of Insula Tiberina. 3 An amnesty was given to all partisans of Tarquin who should return within twenty days: otherwise they were subject to the penalty of perpetual exile and forfeiture of goods.
Such is the account given by Dionysius, of the measures adopted by the Romans against the Tarquinian party upon the first establishment of the consular government. It is accompanied with speeches and minute details, such as might occur in the narrative of a contemporary writer.(3) The accounts of Livy and Plutarch are substantially similar; though they differ in several points. Thus Livy speaks of the decision to restore Tarquin's goods as having been made by the Senate, not by the people; and he represents the slave Vindicius as conveying the information to the consuls, not to Valerius. Moreover, he describes the expulsion of Collatinus as prior to the embassy from Tarquin, and as wholly unconnected with it: the exclusive reason assigned being his connexion with the Tarquiniau family.(24) Plutarch speaks of two distinct sets of ambassadors as inaking the two demands on the part of Tarquin. He like
(23) Dion. Hal. v. 1–13. In c. 4, the envoys from Tarquin are represented as addressing the Roman Senate in the following terms : avApórovs δ' όντας μηδέν υπέρ την ανθρωπίνην φύσιν φρονείν, μηδ' αθανάτους έχειν τας οργάς εν θνητοίς σώμασι. This latter antithesis is borrowed from some verses of Euripides, fragm. 790, ed. Wagner; afterwards condensed into the proverbial verse:
ábávarov ópynv ’n púlacoe Avytos üv; id. Trag. Incert. fragm. 14. Compare Porson ad Eurip. Med. 139. The same sentiment recurs in the speech of Veturia to Coriolanus: ει μη σύ, ώ Μάρκιε, άξιοις τας μεν των θεών οργάς θνητάς είναι, τάς δε των ανθρώπων αθανάτους ; viii. 50.
(24) ii. 2–5. The early historian Piso likewise represented Brutus as fearing Collatinus simply on account of his name. The following words are cited by Gellius, xv. 29, from the second book of his Annales : 'L. Tarquinium, collegam suum, quia Tarquinium nomen esset, metuere ; eumque orat uti suâ voluntate Romam contendat' (Krause, p. 150) ; where for • Romam contendat the sense seems to require 'Romam relinquat,' or some equivalent expression. The same reason is assigned by Cicero, Off. ii. 10, and Brut. c. 14. Compare Eutrop. i. 9. Sed Tarquinio Col. latino statim sublata dignitas est. Placuerat enim, ne quisquam in urbe maneret, qui Tarquinius vocaretur. Ergo accepto omni patrimonio suo, ex urbe migravit. Also Florus, i. 8; Tantumque libertatis novæ gaudium incesserat, ut vix mutati status fidem caperent, alterumque ex consulibus, tantum ob nomen et genus regium, fascibus abrogatis, urbe dimitterent. Zonaras, ii. 12, agrees with Dionysius as to the cause of the deposition of Collatinus.