A History of Rome to 565 A. D Part 3

In language, in religion, in political inst.i.tutions, they were characteristically Latin, and their history is inseparably connected with that of the Latins as a whole.

III. THE EARLY MONARCHY

*The tradition.* The traditional story of the founding of Rome is mainly the work of Greek writers of the third century B. C., who desired to find a link between the new world-power Rome and the older centers of civilization: while the account of the reign of the Seven Kings is a reconstruction on the part of Roman annalists and antiquarians, intended to explain the origins of Roman political and religious inst.i.tutions. And, in fact, owing to the absence of any even relatively contemporaneous records (a lack from which the Roman historians suffered as well as ourselves) it is impossible to attempt an historical account of the period of kingly rule. We can improve but little on the brief statement of Tacitus (i, 1 _Ann._)-"At first kings ruled the city Rome."

*The kings.h.i.+p.* The existence of the kings.h.i.+p itself is beyond dispute, owing to the strength of the Roman tradition on this point and the survival of the t.i.tle _rex_ or king in the priestly office of _rex sacrorum_. It seems certain, too, that the last of the Roman kings were Etruscans and belong to the period of Etruscan domination in Rome and Latium. As far as can be judged, the Roman monarchy was not purely hereditary but elective within the royal family, like that of the primitive Greek states, where the king was the head of one of a group of n.o.ble families, chosen by the n.o.bles and approved by the people as a whole. About the end of the sixth century the kings.h.i.+p was deprived of its political functions, and remained at Rome solely as a lifelong priestly office. It is possible that there had been a gradual decline of the royal authority before the growing power of the n.o.bles as had been the case at Athens, but it is very probable that the final step in this change coincided with the fall of an Etruscan dynasty and the pa.s.sing of the control of the state into the hands of the Latin n.o.bility (about 508 B. C.).

*Inst.i.tutions of the regal period.* The royal power was not absolute, for the exercise thereof was tempered by custom, by the lack of any elaborate machinery of government, and by the practical necessity for the king to avoid alienating the good will of the community. The views of the aristocracy were voiced in the Senate (_senatus_) or Council of Elders, which developed into a council of n.o.bles, a body whose functions were primarily advisory in character. From a very early date the Roman people were divided into thirty groups called _curiae_, and these _curiae_ served as the units in the organization of the oldest popular a.s.sembly-the _comitia curiata_. Members.h.i.+p in the _curiae_ was probably hereditary, and each _curia_ had its special cult, which was maintained long after the _curiae_ had lost their political importance. The primitive a.s.sembly of the _curiae_ was convoked at the pleasure of the king to hear matters of interest to the whole community. It did not have legislative power, but such important steps as the declaration of war or the appointment of a new _rex_ required its formal sanction.

*Expansion under the kings.* Under the kings Rome grew to be the chief city in Latium, having absorbed several smaller Latin communities in the immediate neighborhood, extended her territory on the left bank of the Tiber to the seacoast, where the seaport of Ostia was founded, and even conquered Alba Longa, the former religious center of the Latins. It is possible that by the end of the regal period Rome exercised a general suzerainty over the cities of the Latin plain. The period of Etruscan domination failed to alter the Latin character of the Roman people and left its traces chiefly in official paraphernalia, religious practices (such as the employment of _haruspices_), military organization, and in Etruscan influences in Roman art.

IV. EARLY ROMAN SOCIETY

*The Populus Roma.n.u.s.* The oldest name of the Romans was _Quirites_, a name which long survived in official phraseology, but which was superseded by the name _Romani_, derived from that of the city itself. The whole body of those who were eligible to render military service, to partic.i.p.ate in the public religious rites and to attend the meetings of the popular a.s.sembly, with their families, const.i.tuted the Roman state-the _populus Roma.n.u.s_.

*Patricians and Plebeians.* At the close of the regal period the _populus Roma.n.u.s_ comprised two distinct social and political cla.s.ses. These were the Patricians and the Plebeians. A very considerable element of the latter cla.s.s was formed by the Clients. These cla.s.s distinctions had grown up gradually under the economic and social influences of the early state; and, in antiquity, were not confined to Rome but appeared in many of the Greek communities also at a similar stage of their development.

The Patricians were the aristocracy. Their influence rested upon their wealth as great landholders, their superiority in military equipment and training, their clan organization, and the support of their clients. Their position in the community a.s.sured to them political control, and they had early monopolized the right to sit in the Senate. The members of the Senate were called collectively _patres_, whence the name _patricii_ (patricians) was given to all the members of their cla.s.s. The patricians formed a group of many _gentes_, or clans, each an a.s.sociation of households (_familiae_) who claimed descent from a common ancestor. Each member of a _gens_ bore the gentile name and had a right to partic.i.p.ate in its religious practices (_sacra_).

*Patrons and clients.* Apparently, the clients were tenants who tilled the estates of the patricians, to whom they stood for a long time in a condition of economic and political dependence. Each head of a patrician household was the patron of the clients who resided on his lands. The clients were obliged to follow their patrons to war and to the political arena, to render them respectful attention, and, on occasion, pecuniary support. The patron, in his turn, was obliged to protect the life and interests of his client. For either patron or client to fail in his obligations was held to be sacrilege. This relations.h.i.+p, called _patronatus_ on the side of the patron, _clientela_ on that of the client, was hereditary on both sides. The origin of this form of clientage is uncertain and it is impossible for us to form a very exact idea of position of the clients in the early Roman state, for the like-named inst.i.tution of the historic republican period is by no means the one that prevailed at the end of the monarchy. The older, serf-like, conditions had disappeared; the relations.h.i.+p was voluntarily a.s.sumed, and its obligations, now of a much less serious nature, depended for their observance solely upon the interest of both parties.

The patrician aristocracy formed a social caste, the product of a long period of social development, and this caste was enlarged in early times by the recognition of new _gentes_ as possessing the qualifications of the older clans (_patres maiorum_ and _minorum gentium_). But eventually it became a closed order, jealous of its prerogatives and refusing to intermarry with the non-patrician element.

*The Plebs.* This latter const.i.tuted the plebeians or _plebs_. They were free citizens-the less wealthy landholders, tradesmen, craftsmen, and laborers-who lacked the right to sit in the Senate and so had no direct share in the administration. Beyond question, however, they were included in the _curiae_ and had the right to vote in the _comitia curiata_. Nor is there any proof of a racial difference between plebeians and patricians.

It is not easy to determine to what degree the clients partic.i.p.ated in the political life of the community, yet, in the general use of the term, the plebs included the clients, who later, under the republic, shared in all the privileges won by the plebeians and who, consequently, must have had the status of plebeians in the eye of the state.

The sharp social and political distinction between n.o.bles and commons, between patricians and plebeians, is the outstanding feature of early Roman society, and affords the clue to the political development of the early republican period.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Roman Expansion in Italy to 265 B. C.]

CHAPTER V

THE EXPANSION OF ROME TO THE UNIFICATION OF THE ITALIAN PENINSULA: c.

509265 B. C.

I. TO THE CONQUEST OF VEII-392 B. C.

*The alliance of Rome and the Latin League, about 486 B. C.* At the close of the regal period Rome appears as the chief city in Latium, controlling a territory of some 350 sq. miles to the south of the Tiber. But the fall of the monarchy somewhat weakened the position of Rome, for it brought on hostilities with the Etruscan prince Lars Porsena of Clusium, which resulted in a defeat for Rome and the forced acceptance of humiliating conditions.

This defeat naturally broke down whatever suzerainty Rome may have exercised over Latium and necessitated a readjustment of the relations between Rome and the Latin cities. A treaty attributed by tradition to Spurius Ca.s.sius was finally concluded between Rome on the one hand and the Latin league on the other, which fixed the relations of the two parties for nearly one hundred and fifty years. By this agreement the Romans and the Latin league formed an offensive and defensive military alliance, each party contributing equal contingents for joint military enterprises and dividing the spoils of war, while the Latins at Rome and the Romans in the Latin cities enjoyed the private rights of citizens.h.i.+p. The small people called the Hernici, situated to the east of Latium, were early included in this alliance. This union was cemented largely through the common dangers which threatened the dwellers in the Latin plain from the Etruscans on the north and the highland Italian peoples to the east and south. For Rome it was of importance that the Latin cities interposed a barrier between the territory of Rome and her most aggressive foes, the Aequi and the Volsci.

*Wars with the Aequi and Volsci.* Of the details of these early wars we know practically nothing. However, archaeological evidence seems to show that about the beginning of the fifth century B. C. the Latins sought an outlet for their surplus population in the Volscian land to the south east. Here they founded the settlements of Signia, Norba and Satric.u.m. But this expansion came to a halt, and about the middle of the fifth century the Volsci still held their own as far north as the vicinity of Antium, while the Aequi were in occupation of the Latin plain as far west as Tusculum and Mt. Algidus. Towards the end of the century, however, under Roman leaders.h.i.+p the Latins resumed their expansion at the expense of both these peoples.

*Veii.* In addition to these frequent but not continuous wars, the Romans had to sustain a serious conflict with the powerful Etruscan city of Veii, situated about 12 miles to the north of Rome, across the Tiber. The causes of the struggle are uncertain, but war broke out in 402, shortly after the Romans had gained possession of Fidenae, a town which controlled a crossing of the Tiber above the city of Rome. According to tradition the Romans maintained a blockade of Veii for eleven years before it fell into their hands. It was in the course of this war that the Romans introduced the custom of paying their troops, a practice which enabled them to keep a force under arms throughout the entire year if necessary. Veii was destroyed, its population sold into slavery, and its territory incorporated in the public land of Rome. By this annexation the area of the Roman state was nearly doubled.

Recent excavations have shown that Veii was a place of importance from the tenth to the end of the fifth century B. C., that Etruscan influence became predominant there in the course of the eighth century, and that, at the time of its destruction, it was a flouris.h.i.+ng town, which, like Rome itself, was in contact with the Greek cultural influences then so powerful throughout the Italian peninsula.

II. THE GALLIC INVASION

*The Gauls in the Po Valley.* But scarcely had the Romans emerged victorious from the contest with Veii when a sudden disaster overtook them from an unexpected quarter. Towards the close of the fifth century various Celtic tribes crossed the Alpine pa.s.ses and swarmed down into the Po valley. These Gauls overcame and drove out the Etruscans, and occupied the land from the Ticinus and Lake Maggiore southeastwards to the Adriatic between the mouth of the Po and Ancona. This district was subsequently known as Gallia Cisalpina. The Gauls formed a group of eight tribes, which were often at enmity with one another. Each tribe was divided into many clans, and there was continual strife between the factions of the various chieftains. They were a barbarous people, living in rude villages and supporting themselves by cattle-raising and agriculture of a primitive sort. Drunkenness and love of strife were their characteristic vices: war and oratory their pa.s.sions. In stature they were very tall; their eyes were blue and their hair blond. Brave to recklessness, they rushed naked into battle, and the ferocity of their first a.s.sault inspired terror even in the ranks of veteran armies. Their weapons were long, two-edged swords of soft iron, which frequently bent and were easily blunted, and small wicker s.h.i.+elds. Their armies were undisciplined mobs, greedy for plunder, but disinclined to prolonged, strenuous effort, and utterly unskilled in siege operations. These weaknesses nullified the effects of their victories in the field and prevented their occupation of Italy south of the Apennines.

*The sack of Rome.* In 387 B. C., a horde of these marauders crossed the Apennines and besieged Clusium. Thence, angered, as was said, by the hostile actions of Roman amba.s.sadors, they marched directly upon Rome. The Romans marched out with all their forces and met the Gauls near the Allia, a small tributary of the Tiber above Fidenae. The fierce onset of the Gauls drove the Roman army in disorder from the field. Many were slain in the rout and the majority of the survivors were forced to take refuge within the ruined fortifications of Veii. Deprived of their help and lacking confidence in the weak and ill-planned walls, the citizen body evacuated Rome itself and fled to the neighboring towns. The Capitol, however, with its separate fortifications, was left with a small garrison.

The Gauls entered Rome and sacked the city, but failed to storm the citadel. Apparently they had no intention of settling in Latium and therefore, after a delay of seven months, upon information that the Veneti were attacking their new settlements in the Po valley, they accepted a ransom of 1000 pounds of gold (about $225,000) for the city and marched off home. The Romans at once reoccupied and rebuilt their city, and soon after provided it with more adequate defences in the new wall of stone later known as the Servian wall.

*Later Gallic invasions.* For some years the Gauls ceased their inroads, but in 368 another raid brought them as far as Alba in the land of the Aequi, and the Romans feared to attack the invaders. However, when a fresh horde appeared in 348 the Romans were prepared. They and their allies blocked the foe's path, and the Gauls retreated, fearing to risk a battle.

Rome thus became the successful champion of the Italian peoples, their bulwark against the barbarian invaders from the north. In 334 the Gauls and the Romans concluded peace and entered upon a period of friendly relations which lasted for the rest of the fourth century.

III. THE DISRUPTION OF THE LATIN LEAGUE AND THE ROMAN ALLIANCE WITH THE CAMPANIANS: 387334 B. C.

*Wars with the Aequi, Volsci, and Etruscans.* The disaster that overtook Rome created a profound impression throughout the civilized world and was noted by contemporary Greek writers. But the blow left no permanent traces, for only the city, not the state, had been destroyed. It is true that, encouraged by their enemy's defeat, the Aequi, Volsci and the Etruscan cities previously conquered by Rome took up arms, but each met defeat in turn. Rome retained and consolidated her conquests in southern Etruria. Part of the land was allotted to Romans for settlement and four tribal districts were organized there. On the remainder, two Latin colonies, Sutrium (383) and Nepete (372), were founded. The territory won from the Volsci was treated in like manner.

In 354 the Romans concluded an alliance with the Samnite peoples of the south central Apennines. Probably this agreement was reached in view of the common fear of Gallic invasions and because both parties were at war with the smaller peoples dwelling between Latium and Campania, so that a delimitation of their respective spheres of action was deemed advisable.

At any rate, it was in the course of the next few years that Rome completely subdued the Volsci and Aurunci, while the Samnites overran the land of the Sidicini.

*The Latin War, 338336 B. C.* Not long afterwards, the Latins, allied with the Campanians, were at war with Rome. Even before this, subsequent to the Gallic capture of Rome, the Romans had fought with individual Latin cities, but now practically all the cities of the Latin league were in arms against them. It is possible that both Latins and Campanians felt their independence threatened by the expansion and alliance of the Romans and the Samnites and that this was the underlying cause of hostilities.

However that may be, within two years the Latins had been completely subdued. The Latin league ceased to exist. The individual cities, except Tibur and Praeneste, lost their independence and were incorporated in the Roman state. These two cities preserved their autonomy and concluded new treaties with Rome.

*Alliance with the Campanians, about 334 B. C.* At about the same time, the majority of the cities of Campania, including Capua, concluded an alliance with Rome upon the conditions of the Roman alliance with the old Latin league. These cities retained their independence, and extended and received the rights of _commercium_ and _connubium_ with Rome. This meant that the citizen of one city could transact any business in another that was party to this agreement with the a.s.surance that his contract would be protected by the law of the second city, while if he married a woman of that city his children would be considered legitimate heirs to his property. By virtue of this close alliance, the military resources of Campania were arrayed on the side of Rome, and Rome and Campania presented a united front against their common foes. The Roman sphere of influence was thus extended as far south as the Bay of Naples.

After the Latin war, the territory previously won from the Volsci and Aurunci was largely occupied by settlements of Roman citizens or by Latin colonies, for even after the dissolution of the Latin league the Romans made use of this type of colony to secure their conquests, as well as to relieve the surplus population of Rome and Latium.

IV. WARS WITH THE SAMNITES, GAULS AND ETRUSCANS: 325280 B. C.

*The conflict of Rome and the Samnites in Campania.* The alliance of Rome and Campania brought the Romans into immediate contact with the Samnites and converted these former friends into enemies, since the Samnites regarded Campania as their legitimate field for expansion and refused to submit to its pa.s.sing under the aegis of Rome. However, they had been unable to prevent the union of Rome with Capua and other cities, for at the time they were engaged with another enemy, the Tarentines, who were a.s.sisted by Alexander, king of the Molossians (334331).

The Samnites formed a loose confederacy of kindred peoples, with no strong central authority. Therefore, although bold and skilful warriors, they were at a disadvantage in a long struggle where unity of control and continuity of policy became of decisive importance. Here Rome had the advantage, an advantage that was increased by the alliances Rome was able to form in the course of her wars against this enemy. For generations the excess population of the Samnite valleys had regularly overflowed into the lowland coast areas, and such migrations had given rise to the Lucanians, Bruttians, and a large part of the Campanians themselves. However, the danger of being submerged by fresh waves of Samnites caused the peoples whose territories bordered on Samnium to look to Rome for support, and so Rome found allies in the Central Italian peoples, and in the Apulians and the Lucanians.