trast of so much greatness with his wretched flight from Pharsalia, and his miserable death by the hand of an assassin on the coast of Africa, is one of the * Professus ante inter suos, ire se ad exercitum sine duce, et inde rever- surum ad ducem sine exerciiu. Suet. Ccesar, 34.
23J: GRANDEUR AND DECADENCE [baker.
sharpest which history presents. Like Hannibal and Napoleon, it was his fate to touch the extremes of fortune; but, unlike them, his fame has not proved to be wholly superior to the reverses by which his career was broken and ended.
3. The part which Cssar performed — in giving the final blow to a republic which, in fact, was al- ready virtually ruined as such before he had as- sumed the toga virilis — has probably fixed more attention than any other transaction in the secular history of mankind. Two leading phases of opinion may be discriminated. On the one hand, the sympa- thies of liberal minds have been attracted to the expiring republic; eloquence has exhausted itself in painting the crime of the usurper; and poetry has gone so far as all but to deify his assassins. On the other hand, the spirit of imperialism has selected Csesar as its supreme prototype and representative; it has distinguished his r61e as being eminently in the interest of order and public weal; and its most devoted advocates have wanted terms to express their admiration of one whom they have accepted as the world's foremost public man. The rational thinker — identifying himself with neither of these views — sees in the fall of the republic the mere completion of a social change which had taken its rise in general causes, and which had been rapidly tending to a revolutionary crisis for more than a generation. No special view, no one-sided or par- NOTE.] OF THE EOMANS. 235 tisan estimate,. is competent to embrace the true meaning and value of the revolution in which Caesar triumphed and the Roman Patriciate went down. We cannot, indeed, suppress our human sympathies in presence of so great and terrible a tragedy, and we ought not to do so if we could; but we can see that the wreck of fortunes, the ruin of great families, and the bitter humiliation with which this ruin was attended, were but results of an inevitable social explosion, which had been long preparing in the bosom of the state, and that the only open question was as to which of the two great factions should come out uppermost.
In this view, it is necessary to accept with care and qualification many of the finest things that have been said in relation to the subversion of the Roman republic. Macintosh, for instance, has some beau- tiful reflections upon the subject, which it appears to me should be so received. " The Roman Patri- ciate," he says, "trained in the conquest and gov- ernment of the civilized world, in spite of the tyrannical vices which sprung from that training, were raised by the greatness of their objects to an eleva- tion of genius and character unmatched by any other aristocracy, ere the period when, after preserving their power by a long course of wise compromise with the people, they were betrayed by the army and the populace into the hands of a single tyrant of their own order — ^the most accomplished of usurp- 236 GRANDEUR AND DECADENCE [bakek.
ers, and, if humanity and justice could for a mo- ment be silenced, one of the most illuBtrious of men. There is no scene in history so memorable as that in which Caesar mastered a nobility of which Lucul- lus and Hortensius, Sulpieius and Catulus, Pompey and Cicero, Brutus and Cato were members." ' It is certainly true that for many centuries the Eoman aristocracy displayed very great administra- tive ability, and it might be conceded that the scene of their overthrow was one of the most mem- orable in history; but I think it is not true that this revolution can be adequately expressed by the formula of a betrayal on the part of "the army and the populace." Too special and limited a view of the cause of the event is thus suggested. Stated in its just breadth, the real cause of the revolution was that the aristocracy, the populace, and the army had become corrupt together, and that the particular vir- tues which are essential to a republican government nowhere existed in sufficient force to longer uphold the old institutions. Under the influence of the great wealth which had been rapidly gathered into Eome after the second Punic war, in the form of spoils, tributes, and perquisites from powerful clients abroad, the whole tone of the Eoman character had undergone a profound change; and, instead of wealth being despised as a mark of social distiuction, or as a means of political advancement — as in the days of » Dissertation on the Progress of ElUcal Philosophy, sec. 2.
NOTE.] OP THE EOMANS. 237 Oincinnatus, Fabricius, and Curius Dentatus — the Ro- man wlio lived in the time of Pompey and Caesar placed a money value upon everything connected with the interests of the state. Offices, public du- ties, suffrages, had acquired a mercenary price. So desperately corrupt had the elections become that even Cato himself — who is generally regarded as having been the most virtuous citizen of his age — yielded to the delusion, on the occasion of a certain consular election, that the public good would be ad- vanced by bribing the voters." It is apparent, indeed, from the details of the history of the time, that the demagogues of the popular faction, with Caesar at their head, were the more open and indecent in their corrupt practices; but it is equally apparent that the aristocratic faction, under the lead of Pom- pey, had very generally lost the old patrician vir- tues.
The political character of all orders in the state being thus lowered, it was fatally necessary that the government should respond to the declension of the national character, and seek a new adjustment to the altered conditions of the national life. There were two ways in which it seemed possible that this might be accomplished, accordingly as the patrician or the popular faction might triumph. In the one case the government would become much more in- tensely aristocratic, and its popular functions would ' SvM. C<esar, 19.
238 GRANDEUK AND DECADENCE [bakeb.
be reduced to practical insignificance; in the other, the chief powers of the state would pass into the hands of a princely demagogue, compelled by the logic of his position to humble the patricians and to pander to the army and the populace. In either event there was no longer any reasonable hope for the old republic. The time for mutual concession had passed. The two ancient parties, which for five cen- turies had contended together with such loyal gallant- ry— corrupted at length by great empire in connection with low culture — had become the most depraved of factions, thoroughly unscrupulous in the choice of means, and filled with the bitterest mutual enmity. The spirit of compromise, by which their dissensions had been so often reconciled, had wholly disappeared in the blood which had been shed under Marius and Sylla. The contest between these chiefs was the fijst great armed struggle of the factions. In this opening conflict the popular faction had been badly worsted; and it was evidently the intention of SyUa to so cripple it that it could not rise again. In this, however, his will was completer than his ' deed. He left the state filled with the sons, rela- tions, and friends of men who had fallen by his military executions, or perished by his murderous proscriptions. The short period which intervened between his death and the renewal of the struggle was a hollow truce, a delusive calm, alarmed by conspiracies and disturbed by seditions. The general KOiE.] OF THE ROMANS. 239 temper of the Eoman mind was such that it was ' unavoidable that the contest should go on until the one or the other of the factions should be effectually crushed.
In looking at the two opposing prinGij>les, there appears to be small ground for rational choice. We are to choose between the rule of a corrupt aristoc- racy, inflated by success and inflamed by resentment, and the rule of a single tyrant equally corrupt, and relying for his support upon the populace and the military. In looking at the two leaders, the case is otherwise. Here we are to choose between a man who, had he succeeded, would all but certainly have imitated Sylla in drenching his country in the blood of his defeated fellow-citizens,' and one who, in spite of his amazing vices,' was much superior to Marius. It so fell out that the latter triumphed; and, under the bad conditions of the situation, it is difficult to see that humanity, justice, and liberty were worse off than they would have been had he failed and his rival succeeded.
Such, in the most comprehensive view of the question, appears to me to be the rai/ionale of that famous revolution by which the Eoman republic came to an end. General causes made it inevitable that it should fall; particular causes determined the manner and form of the catastrophe. The princi- 240 GRANDEUR AND DECADENCE [basee.
pled monarchist and the principled republican can equally acquiesce in the change; the one from the mistaken and superficial conviction that all popular governments are abnormal; the other from the knowl- edge that, although the republican type of govern- ment is demonstrably the highest and best, it can- not beneficially survive the loss of its precedent social conditions.
"We have the testimony of Tacitus that the great mass of the subjects of Kome— the numerous peoples ■who were distributed through the provinces— were not averse to the overthrow of the old regime, dis- gusted as they were with a government which was perturbed by "the dissensions of the great" and de- based by " the avarice of the magistrates "; a govern- ment in which "the laws were invalidated by force, ambition, and bribery." ° There is little in the sub- version of such a government — stiU holding though it did the name of a republic — to enlist the sympa- thies or to excite the regret of a rational friend of free institutions.
4. In view of the state of opinion among the Romans in relation to the killing of tyrants, it was, of course, natural that Caesar's life should be brought to a violent end; and in the remarks which Mon- tesquieu makes upon the subject, he assumes the ' Ncque provincice ilium rerum statum ahnuebant, suspeclo smcUns pop- ulique imperio o5 certamina potentium, et avaritiam magistratuum; in- valido legum auxilio, guce vi, amhitu, postremo pecunia iurbabantur. — An- nal, i, 2.
NOTE.] OP THE ROMiNS. 241 tone of an ancient rather than of a modern pMloso- pher.
The tyrant (fyrannos, tyranrmi) of the Greeks and Komans originally signified a lawful supreme ruler; but in the course of time — after the establish- ment of repubhcs by both peoples — the term came to be applied to usurpers of the sovereign power; and there was a strong.opinion to the effect that it was not only right, but eminently meritorious, to assassin- ate such intruders. Thus, among the Greeks, Har- modius and Aristogiton — the assassins of Hipparchus — ^received all but divine honors; and, shortly after the expulsion of the kings from Rome, a law was -.made which authorized every citizen of the republic to become at once judge and executioner, and to slay any one who might aspire to the regal power; and it seems that this law was still standing at the time of the killing of Csesar — more than four hun- dred and fifty years after its enactment. '° Cicero — who is commonly so just in his ethical principles, and who, in point of intellectual force and accomplishments, was probably the greatest and most luminous genius that adorned republican Kome — gives his full sanction to the doctrine of assassina- tion as apphed to tyrants. "What," he says, "can be more deeply criminal than to slay, not only a man, but a man who is furthermore an intimate ^^ Comp. lAvy, ii, 8; Plutarch, Life of FuUicola; and Gibbon's Rome, ch. xliv.
11 242 GRANDEUR AND DECADENCE [eakee.
friend? Does he, therefore, involve himself in crime who slays a tyrant — ^however intimate a friend he may be? Certainly the Roman people— who re- gard this as the most beautiful of all illustrious acts —do not so view it. Has utility, then, triumphed over virtue? On the contrary, utility has in truth followed virtue.""
The very wide difference between ancient and modern thought on the subject of tyrannicide is a fact of much significance. Eightly considered, it in- dicates a profound social and ethical progress. There is no instance in modern times in which a desirable reputation has been acquired by the assassination of a ruler. On the contrary, this class of assassins has very generally been consigned to the execration of history. In the present century, it is probable that no writer of character has gone further in extenua- tion of the assassination of a tyrant than Lamartine in his remarks upon Charlotte Corday — ^the least cul- pable, perhaps, of all the modern assassins: " In the face of murder, history dares not praise, and, in the face of heroism, dares not condemn her." The old admiration of the ancient assassins is also dying out. It would be hardly possible for another such rhapsody " Quod potest majus esse scelus, quam non modo hominem, sod etiam familiarem hominem occidere < Num. igiiur se astnnxit scelcre, si gui ii/rannum occidil, guamvis familiarem? Fopuh quidem Romano rwn videtur, qui ex omnibus prceclaris fac/is illud pulcherrimwm existimat, Vieit ercfo utUitas lumestatem I Immo vera honeslas utilitaiem secuta est. (De Officiis, iii, 4.)
NOTE.] OF THE KOMANS. 243 as that of Akenside upon Brutus" to be produced at the present day; and, if produced, it would have to come from some enthusiastic youth or closeted " mod- ern ancient." As liberty comes to be better under- stood, and as men grow to be more capable of it, sympathy with the doctrine of assassination of iy- rants diminishes. As civilization does its work, con- science more and more shrinks from a doctrine which, whilst professing to limit itself to the de- struction of the worst of men, authorizes treachery, falsehood, and stealth, as means for the accomplish- ment of murder, and places the Hves of such men as William the Silent, Henry lY of France, and our own Lincoln, at the disposal of such abnormal wretches as Baltasar Gerard, Erangois Eavaillac, and John "Wilkes Booth.
What is the definite reason for this great change of opinion on the subject of tyrannicide? I think it " Or is there in the abyss, Is there among the adamantine spheres Wheeling unshaken through the boundless void, Aught that with half such majesty can fill The human bosom, as when Brutus rose Refulgent from the stroke of Caesar's fate Amid the crowd of patriots; and, his arm Aloft extending like eternal Jove When guilt brings down the thunder, call'd aloud On Tully's name, and shook the crimson sword Of justice in his rapt, astonish'd eye. And bade the father of his country hail. For lo, the tyrant prostrate on the dust. And Rome again is free?
{Tlie Pleasures of tlie Imagination, Book II.)
344: GRANDEUR AND DECADENCE [bakee.
emperors before the blood of human victims ceased to flow, either as an offering to the gods or to the souls of the dead; and thus we have, in the case of the Romans, a striking illustration of the general law of history — that in all progressive societies the popu- lar religious ideas yield tardily to the advancing so- cial movement.
IV. I suspect that a neglected, but very impor- tant, cause of the final overthrow of the Roman power by the nations of the North may be found in the pro- gressive diffusion of the use of iron among these rude peoples, and in the consequent positive increase of their military force and efficiency.
The earliest periods of Greek and Roman history seem to abut upon an Age of Bronze. " It is stated," says Professor Worsaae, "by Homer, Hesiod, and other authors, that the Greeks in the most ancient time, before they had knowledge of iron, used bronze, which was also the case with the Romans." At later, though yet remote periods in their history, these leaders of ancient European civilization appear to have gradually acquired the use of iron. "Already in the time of Homer," says the same writer, "the Greeks had iron, although it was very scarce and expensive; the Romans seem to have had and used iron before the kings were expelled." Thence the use of iron appears to have spread slowly among the peoples of the North. Professor Worsaae con- tinues: "It was partly an effect of Greek and Ro- NoiE.] OF THE KOMAJfS. 345 man influence tliat the use of iron was known at a comparatively early period in the northern parts of Italy, in South Germany, and Gallia, the inhabitants of which countries were thereby enabled to contend so gallantly with the Komans. Polybius mentions, however, that the Gauls, who, about two hundred years before Christ, fought against the Eomans in the north of Italy, were obliged in their battles to straighten their swords by putting their feet upon them, because they bent when exposed to a heavy blow; a fact which shows that the Gauls did not then possess steel. The invention of making the iron hard is attributed to the Celts of ISToricum; in the time of Augustus, the Noric swords were famous in Eome.
" But, if the people in the neighborhood of Eome, and influenced by Eoman civilization, at the com- mencement of the Christian era, generally possessed weapons of iron, it does not follow that the people in the E"orth had also, at so early a time, plenty of that metal. Caesar says distinctly that, ia Britain, iron was only to be found at the coasts, and that in such small quantities that the inhabitants used im- ported bronze {'cere utantur irnportato''). It must also be remembered that he speaks of their using iron rings as money. A century after Christ, the Britons seem to have got a great deal more iron, but the Germans had still so little of it that they very rarely had swords, or large lance-heads, of that metal.
246 GRANDEUR AND DECADENCE [montesquiec.
Before Ms death, and while preparing for his ex- pedition against the Parthians, Csesar had named the magistrates for several years in advance, in order that he might leave behind him officers attached to his interests, and upon whom he could rely for the main- tenance of the tranquillity of his government during his absence. Thus it fell out that, after his death, the adherents of his party felt that they were sup- plied with resources for a long time.
As the senate had approved all the acts of Osesar without exception, and as the execution of these de- volved upon the consuls, Anthony — who was a con- sul— seized Caesar's book of accounts, gained his secre- tary, and caused to be written therein whatever he desired. Thus the dictator reigned more imperiously than during his hfe; for what he had never done Anthony did. Money which Csesar had never given, Anthony gave; and all men who cherished bad in- tentions towards the republic suddenly found a re- ward in the books of Caesar.
As an additional misfortune, Csesar had amassed and deposited in the temple of Opis immense sums for his Parthian expedition. Anthony, with his book, disposed of this treasure at his fancy.
The conspirators had at first resolved to throw the body of Csesar into the Tiber.' They would " This would not have been without precedent. After Tiberius Grac- chus was killed, Lucretius, an a;dile, who was afterwards called Vespillo, threw his body into the Tiber. (Aukeltos Victok, De Vir. lUust., ch. Ixiv.)
CHAP. XII.] OF THE ROMANS. 247 have met with no obstacle in the execution of that purpoBe; for, in the first moments of consternation which follow an unexpected action, it is easy to do all that men may dare. This purpose, however, was not carried into execution; and the following is what came of the omission to do so: The senate felt itself compelled to permit the celebration of the obsequies of Csesar; and, in fact, from the moment that this body had failed to de- clare him a tyrant, it could not refuse him the rites of sepulture. Now, it was a custom among the Ro- mans, much extolled by Polybius, to carry the images of their ancestors in their fimeral processions, and to pronounce afterwards a funeral oration for the dead. Anthony, who delivered the oration on this occa- sion, exhibited to the people the bloody robe of Csesar, read to them the will of the deceased — ^in which he had left them large legacies— and thus stirred up their passions to such a pitch that they set fire to the houses of the conspirators.
We have an opinion of Cicero — who ruled the senate throughout this affair' — that it would have been better to have acted with rigor, and to have exposed themselves to destruction, and that not one would have perished. But he excuses himself on the ground that when the senate assembled it was already too late; and no one will be astonished at this who knows the value of a moment in connec- ' Letta-s to Attims, Book XIV, Letter x.
248 GRANDEUR AND DECADENCE [montesquieu.
tion with affairs in wHch tlie people take so large a part.
There was yet another casualty. Whilst the games were being performed in honor of Caesar, a comet with a long train appeared during seven successive days. The people believed that his soul had been re- ceived into heaven.
It was very customary among the Greets and Asiatics to build temples to kings, and even to the proconsuls who had governed them.' They were per- mitted to do these things as affording the strongest evidence of their servitude which they could give; and the Eomans themselves— as regarded then- lares, or objects of private worship— might render divine honors to their ancestors;' but I do not find that, from Komulus to Caesar, any Eoman had been placed in the number of the public divinities.""
^ See thereon the Letters of Cicero to Atlicus, Book T, and the remark of the Abb6 de Mongault.
* " The Lares of the Romans appear to have been the manes of their ancestors. Small waxen images of them, clothed with a skin of a dog, were placed round the hearth in the hall. On festivals they were crowned with garlands, and sacrifices were offered to them. There were not only iMres (hmestici et familiares, but also compitales et viales, mUi- tares et marini" &c. Adam's Rom. Aid., Phila., 18'72, pp. 188, 189. The worship of the lares was not, therefore, wholly domestic and private. Those of the cross-roads and highways, and those of soldiers and mari- ners, partook in some degree of a public character. — Translator.
' Dion says that the Triumvirs — each of whom hoped some day to occupy the place of Ctesar — did all they could to increase the honors which were extended to him. Book XLVII.
" Montesquieu here has in view the fact — which he implies rather than states — that a place was given to Caesar among the gods. " He perished," says Suetonius, " in the fifty-sixth year of his age, and was CHAP. XII.] OF THE ROMANS. 249 The government of Macedon had fallen to the lot of Anthony. He desired that of the Gauls instead, from what motive it is easy to see. Decimns Brutus, who had the government of cisalpine Gaul, having refused to turn it over to him, Anthony resolved to expel him hy force. This gave rise to a civil war, in which the senate declared Anthony to be an enemy of his country.
As a means of ruining Anthony, who was his par- ticular enemy, Cicero resorted to the bad policy of elevating Octavius; and thus, instead of seeking to induce the people to forget Caesar, he placed him before their eyes.
Octavius conducted himself with Cicero as an able man. He flattered him, he praised him, he con- sulted him, and employed all thpse artifices which vanity never distrusts.
Nearly all affairs are marred by the fact that those who undertake them commonly seek to realize, in addition to the principal object, certain small, par- ticular successes which flatter their self-love, and thus render them content with their part.
I believe that, if Cato had reserved himself for placed in the number of the gods, not only by the form of a decree, but by the credence of the vulgar." {Periit sexto et guinquagesimo ceiatis anno: atque in deorrnn numei-um relaius est, non ore modo decerntium, sed etpersmsione miXgi. Suet. Caesar, 88.) Thus we see that the spirit of ex- cessive admiration of particular men — ascending in its extremes to actual worship, and which is so inconsistent with a republican government — after having been thrown off by the Roman people for many centuries, was resumed by them with the commencement of the empire. — Translator.
250 GEANDEUK AND DECADENCE [mohtesquieu.
the republic, lie would have given a totally different turn to things. Endowed as Cicero was with ad- mirable parts for a secondary role, he was incapable of the first. To a superb genius he united a soul which was often common. "With him, virtue was tlie accessory; with Cato, glory.' Cicero always saw him- self first; Cato as constantly forgot himself. The latter would have saved the republic for its own sake; the former in order to boast of his services.' I might continue the parallel by saying that whilst Cato foresaw, Cicero feared; that when Cato hoped, Cicero was confident; that the one always looked upon things with a cool head, the other through a hundred small passions.
Anthony was defeated at Mntina; and the two consuls, Hirtius and Pansa, there perished. The sen- ate, which believed that it held the upper hand in its own affairs, thought of humbling Octavius — who, for his part, ceased to act against Anthony, marched his army to Eome, and caused himself to be de- clared consul.
And thus it was that Cicero, who boasted that his robe had destroyed the armies of Anthony, gave to the republic an enemy yet more dangerous, for the reason that, whilst his name was dearer to ' J&ae quam videri bonus malehat; ilaque, quo minus glonam petehat, eo magis illam assequebatur. (Sallust, De Belh Catil., ch. liv.)
* With all his vanity, I think Cicero's patriotism was much deeper than is here implied. — Translator.
CHAP. XII.] OF THE EOMANS. 251 the people, his rights were apparently- more legiti- mate.'
After his defeat, Anthony had taken refuge in transalpine Gaul, where he had been received by Lep- idus. These two men united with Octavius; and the three gave, each to the others, the lives of their friends and their enemies."
Lepidus remained at Eome; the other two pro- ceeded in quest of Brutus and Cassius, and found them in a region of country in which the empire of the world was three times disputed by contending armies."
Brutus and Cassius killed themselves with inex- cusable precipitation; and we cannot read this pas- sage in their lives without a feeling of pity for the republic which was thus abandoned. The tragedy, which commenced in some 'sort by their deaths, was ended by the suicide of CatO.