The Republic and The Laws (Oxford World's Classics) (12 page)

[
A leaf has been lost here. According to St Augustine
(De Civitate Dei 3.
15), Scipio says that, unlike Romulus, Tullus Hostilius was not alleged to have been deified.]

LAELIUS
(?): … for since you have begun your account the state is not creeping, but flying, towards the best constitution.

SCIPIO
: After him Ancus Marcius, the son of Numa Pompilius’ daughter, was appointed king by the people, and he, too, had a law passed in the Assembly to ratify his position. Ancus defeated
the Latins in war and then admitted them to citizenship. He also extended the city to include the Aventine and Caelian hills. He shared out the land he had taken, handed over to the public all the forests he had taken on the coast, founded a city at the mouth of the Tiber and settled colonists there. After a reign of twenty-three years he died.

LAELIUS
: Yes, he too was an admirable king. But Roman history is indeed obscure if we have a record of that king’s mother but know nothing of his father.

SCIPIO
: That’s true; but, except in the case of kings, names at that period tended to be shrouded in darkness.

Nevertheless, now for the first time our state seems to have taken a step forward in culture by having, as it were, a foreign system of education grafted on to it. For it was no tiny stream that flowed into this city from Greece, but rather a rich flood of moral and artistic teaching. There was a Corinthian, we are told, called Demaratus who was easily the foremost citizen in prestige, influence, and wealth. Finding the tyranny of Cypselus at Corinth intolerable, he is supposed to have escaped with a large sum of money and made his way to Tarquinii, the most flourishing city in Etruria. Hearing that Cypselus’ dictatorship was taking root, this brave, freedom-loving man turned his back on his country for good. He was enrolled as a citizen of Tarquinii, and set up his hearth and home in that community. When his Tarquinian wife had borne him two sons, he trained them in all subjects in accordance with Greek practice … [A
leaf has been lost at this point. Scipio is now talking of Demaratus’ son, Lucumo] …
(Lucumo) easily obtained (Roman) citizenship. Owing to his agreeable personality and his intellectual stature he became a friend of King Ancus—so much so that he was regarded as a participant in all his decisions and almost a partner in the kingship. He possessed, moreover, the greatest charm and kindness, giving help, assistance, protection, and financial aid to every citizen who needed it. As a result, when Marcius died, the monarchy passed, by the unanimous vote of the people, to Lucius Tarquinius. (He had chosen this form as an adaptation of the Greek name, to show that he was conforming in every way to the customs of this country.) After having his position ratified by law, he first doubled the original number of the Senate, calling the older members ‘Fathers of the
greater families’ and those whom he had enrolled ‘Fathers of the lesser families’.
*
He would always invite the former to speak first.

Then he organized the knights
*
in the system which has survived to our own day. He could not change the names of the Tities, Ramnes, and Luceres, though he wanted to do so, because Attus Navius, a most venerable augur, refused to sanction it. (I notice, incidentally, that the Corinthians, too, at one time carefully distributed horses at public expense and charged childless men and unmarried women the cost of maintaining them.)
*
Anyhow, Lucius added new detachments of cavalry to the older ones, making twelve hundred
*
cavalrymen in all, and thus doubling their number. Subsequently he defeated the Aequi in battle, a large fierce tribe which represented a threat to Roman interests. He also drove off the Sabines from the city walls, scattered them with his cavalry, and gained a decisive victory. We are told in addition that Lucius was the first to hold the great games which are called ‘The Roman Games’;
*
that in the Sabine War, in the very heat of battle, he vowed a temple to Jupiter Optimus Maximus
*
on the Capitol; and that he died after reigning for thirty-eight years.

LAELIUS
: This provides further confirmation of Cato’s saying that our country’s constitution is not the work of one man or one period; for it is clear that as one king succeeds another more and more benefits and advantages are accruing. But of all the kings it was the next in line who, in my view, had the deepest understanding of constitutional matters.

SCIPIO
: That’s right. Tradition has it that Servius Tullius, who succeeded Tarquin, was the first to rule without being formally chosen by the people. His mother is supposed to have been a slave
*
from Tarquinii, his father one of the king’s clients. He was brought up among the servants and waited at the king’s table; but the brightness of the lad’s intelligence was already too clear to remain unnoticed—he was so capable in all his duties and in everything he said. And so Tarquin, whose children were then quite small, became so fond of Servius that the latter was commonly treated as his son. The king had him educated with the greatest care in all the accomplishments which he himself had learnt, to meet the most exacting standards of Greece.

When Tarquin was killed as the result of a conspiracy hatched by the sons of Ancus, Servius began to rule, as I said above,
without being duly elected by the people, but not without their consent and goodwill. This happened because of an official fabrication
*
to the effect that Tarquin, though suffering from a wound, was still alive. Servius, wearing the king’s regalia, made legal decisions, rescued debtors at his own expense, and by exercising considerable charm satisfied the people that he was administering the law on Tarquin’s instructions. He did not submit himself to the Senate, but after Tarquin’s burial he asked the people to endorse his position. He was pronounced king by acclamation, and had the decision legally ratified by the Assembly of Voting Districts. He began his reign with a war of revenge against Etruria; as a result… [A
leaf is missing. Scipio is now describing the constitutional reforms of King Servius, especially with regard to the Assembly of Centuries.]

… the eighteen richest (centuries of knights). Then, after marking off a large number of knights from the whole body of the people, he distributed the rest of the populace into five classes, distinguishing the older from the younger members in each. By distributing them in this way he contrived that the preponderance of the votes should be in the hands, not of the masses, but of the wealthy. He thus safeguarded a principle which should always be observed in politics, namely that the greatest power should not rest with the greatest number. If you weren’t familiar with that system of divisions I would explain it. As it is, you can see that it now works out as follows: if you take the equestrian centuries (including the original six
*
) together with the first class, and add in the century which is allocated to the carpenters
*
because of their usefulness to the city, the total is eighty-nine.
*
That leaves a hundred and four. And so, if only eight more centuries vote the same way, the influence of the people as a whole is done for, and the much greater numbers in the ninety-six remaining centuries
(have no say in the result. Thus Servius’ system ensured that the mass of the people
*
)
was neither excluded from the right to vote (for that would have been high-handed), nor given too much power, which would have been dangerous. In carrying out these measures Servius was careful even in the matter of names and titles. He called the rich
assidui
*
from
as
[a coin] and
do
[I give]. As for those who had no more than fifteen hundred sestertii or nothing at all to count towards their assessment except their heads, he
called them
proletarii
*
conveying the idea that they were expected to contribute children
[proles],
that is to say, the country’s next generation. At that time any one of those ninety-six centuries contained almost more members than there were in the whole of the first class. Thus, while no one was deprived of the right to vote, the greatest voting power lay in the hands of those who were most concerned that the state should be in the best possible order. Moreover, when the reservists, trumpeters, buglers, and ‘child-givers’ had been added in …
[Two leaves have been lost.]

… (A similar situation existed in Carthage, which is) sixty-five years older (than Rome); for it was founded in the thirty-ninth year before the first Olympiad. The famous Lycurgus, too, saw much the same point. Hence this fairness, this triple form of constitution, seems to me to have been shared by us with those countries. But I shall trace out in finer detail, if I can, the peculiar feature of our state. It is one of surpassing excellence, and it will prove to be of a kind which cannot be found in any other country. Those elements which I mentioned before were combined in early Rome, Sparta, and Carthage,
*
but quite without balance.
*
In whatever country a single man holds permanent authority, especially that of a king—even though there may also be a senate, as there was in Rome in the days of the kings, and in Sparta under Lycurgus’ system, and though there may also be a degree of popular power, as there was in the period of our kings—still, that royal title outweighs everything else, and a country of that kind is inevitably a monarchy in fact as well as in name. Now that form of constitution is most liable to change; for when it is upset by the incompetence of one man, there is nothing to stop it from falling headlong into utter ruin. Monarchy in itself is not only free from blame; it is, I am inclined to think, far preferable to the other two simple types of constitution (if I could bring myself to approve of any simple type), but only as long as it retains its proper form. The proper form requires that the security, the equal rights, and the peace of the community should be controlled by the permanent power, and the comprehensive justice and wisdom of a single man.

At the same time, a community that lives under a king is totally deprived of many advantages, in particular, freedom, which is not
a matter of having a just master, but of having none at all…
[A leaf has been lost here. Scipio is now speaking of Tarquinius Superbus, who represented the degeneration of monarchy
.]

… For some years (the people) put up with him, because, harsh and unjust as he was, that master enjoyed success in his undertakings. He conquered the whole of Latium and occupied Suessa Pometia, a prosperous and well-stocked town. After enriching himself with huge quantities of plunder in the form of gold and silver, he fulfilled his father’s vow by building on the Capitol. He founded colonies, and following the custom of his forefathers he sent splendid gifts to Apollo at Delphi, offering him, as it were, the first-fruits of his booty.

Soon now the cycle
*
will begin to turn. You should become familiar from the start with its natural movement and circuit; for it is the crowning achievement of political wisdom (and that is what my talk is all about) to divine the course of public affairs, with all its twists and turns. Then, when you know what direction things are taking, you can hold them back or else be ready to meet them.

Now this king I’m speaking of had, right from the start, an uneasy conscience; for he was stained with the blood of an excellent king. Terrified, as he was, of paying the ultimate penalty for his crime, he was determined to terrify others. Later on, buoyed up by his conquests and wealth, he allowed his insolence to run riot, being quite unable to control his own behaviour or the lusts of his family. Finally his elder son violated Lucretia (Tricipitinus’ daughter and wife of Collatinus); and that modest and noble woman punished herself for the outrage by taking her own life. Whereupon Lucius Brutus, a man of exceptional courage and ability, struck the cruel yoke of harsh servitude from the necks of his fellow-Romans. Though just a private citizen, Brutus took the whole country on his shoulders, and he became the first in this state to show that, when it comes to preserving the people’s freedom, no one is just a private citizen. Following his example and leadership, the country was roused by this new complaint on
the part of Lucretia’s father and relatives, as well as by the memory of Tarquin’s arrogance and the many injuries done by him and his sons in the past. As a result, the king himself, along with his sons and the entire Tarquin family, was sent into exile.

You see, then, don’t you, how a king turned into a despot, and how, by the wickedness of one man, that type of government swung from good to the worst possible. This latter type is represented by the kind of political master which the Greeks call a ‘tyrant’. By ‘king’ they mean one who, like a father, takes thought for his people and maintains his subjects in the best possible sort of life. That, as I said, is a good form of government, but one which is precarious and prone, as it were, to topple over into the most pernicious form. As soon as a king takes the first step towards a more unjust regime, he at once becomes a tyrant. And that is the foulest and most repellent creature imaginable, and the most abhorrent to god and man alike. Although he has the outward appearance of a man, he outdoes the wildest beasts in the utter savagery of his behaviour. How can anyone be properly called a man who renounces every legal tie, every civilized partnership with his own citizens and indeed with the entire human species? However, there will be another, more suitable, place to speak about such people when the theme itself obliges me to deal with men who have tried to seize despotic power
*
even when their country has already been liberated.

So there you have the initial emergence of a tyrant; for that is the Greek name for a wicked king. Our own countrymen have applied the word ‘king’ to all who have held absolute power over their people on a permanent basis. Hence Spurius Cassius, Marcus Manlius, and Spurius Maelius are said to have attempted to seize the kingship, and recently …
[One leaf has been lost, which doubtless contained a reference to Tiberius Gracchus. Scipio is now talking of the body of elders in Sparta.]

… (Lycurgus) called them ‘Elders’ in Sparta. That body was remarkably small in number—twenty-eight, in fact; yet he wanted them to hold the top advisory power while the king retained the top executive power. Our countrymen followed his example, taking over the same idea. What he called ‘the Elders’ they called ‘the body of elders’
[senatus].
(I mentioned that Romulus had already taken this step after choosing the Fathers.) Nevertheless,
the power, influence, and title of the king always remain preeminent. Suppose you grant a certain amount of power to the people, too, as Lycurgus and Romulus did; you will find that by giving them permission just to taste freedom you have not satisfied their hunger for it but only whetted their appetite. And, hanging over them all the time like a cloud will be the fear that, as usually happens, the king will turn out to be unjust. The fate of the people, then, is precarious when, as I said before, it depends on the goodwill and good character of a single man.

So the earliest example of the form, type, and emergence of tyranny is to be found, not in the state which Socrates described from his own imagination in Plato’s well-known dialogue, but here, in the state founded with heaven’s blessing by Romulus—I mean how Tarquin, without assuming any new powers but by abusing those which he had, completely wrecked a government of this monarchical kind. Let us contrast with him the other figure
*
— that of the good wise man who thoroughly understands what enhances the interests and prestige of the state, who is, as it were, a guardian and overseer of his country; for those titles are due to whoever directs and steers the community. Make sure you can recognize such a man, for he is the one who, by his good sense and devoted efforts, can preserve the country. As this concept has not been commonly used in our language up to now, and as that type of man will figure quite often in the remainder of my talk …
[Six leaves have gone.]