in the world ; and, according to Mr. Carlyle's theory, the
strongest ought to rule.

Much has been said about the rabble, the democ-
racy, their turbulence, corruption, and degradation,
their unfitness to rule, and all that sort of thing, which
I regard as irrelevant, so far as the usurpation of Caesar
is concerned ; since the struggle was not between them
and the nobles, but between a fortunate general and the
aristocracy who controlled the State. Csesar was not
the representative of the people or of their interests, as
Tiberius Gracchus was, but the representative of the
Army. He had no more sympathy with the people
than he had with the nobles: he probably despised
them both, as unfit to rule. He flattered the people
and bought them, but he did not love them. It was
his soldiers whom he loved, next to himself ; although,
as a wise and enlightened statesman, he wished to pro-
mote the great interests of the nation, so far as was
consistent with the enjoyment of imperial rule. This
friend of the people would give them spectacles and



IMPERIALISM. 91



shows, largesses of corn, money, even, and exten-
sion of the suffrage, but not political power. He was
popular with them, because he was generous and mer-
ciful, because his exploits won their admiration, and
his vast public works gave employment to them and
adorned their city.

It is unnecessary to dwell on the final contest of
Caesar with the nobles, with Pompey at their head,
since nothing is more familiar in history. Plainly he
was not here rendering public services, as he did in
Spain and Gaul, but taking care of his own interests.
I cannot see how a civil war was a service, unless it
were a service to destroy the aristocratic constitution
and substitute imperialism, which some think was
needed with the vast extension of the Empire, and for
the good administration of the provinces, robbed and
oppressed by the governors whom the Senate had sent
out to enrich the aristocracy. It may have been needed
for the better administration of justice, for the preserva-
tion of law and order, and a more efficient central
power. Absolutism may have proved a benefit to the
Empire, as it proved a benefit to France under Cardinal
Kichelieu, when he humiliated the nobles. If so, it
was only a choice of evils, for absolutism is tyranny,
and tyranny is not a blessing, except in a most de-
moralized state of society, which it is claimed was the
state of Rome at the time of the usurpation of Caesar.



92 JULIUS CAESAR.



It is certain that the whole united strength of the aris-
tocracy could not prevail over Caesar, although it had
Pompey for its defender, with his immense prestige and
experience as a general

After Caesar had crossed the Rubicon, and it was cer-
tain he would march to Rome and seize the reins of
government, the aristocracy fled precipitately to Pom-
pey's wing at Capua, fearing to find in Caesar another
Marius. Pompey did not show extraordinary ability in
the crisis. He had no courage and no purpose. He fled
to Brundusium, where ships were waiting to transport
his army to Durazzo. He was afraid to face his rival
in Italy. Caesar would have pursued, but had no navy.
He therefore went to Rome, which he had not seen for
ten years, took what money he wanted from the treas-
ury, and marched to Spain, where the larger part of
Pompey's army, under his lieutenants, were now ar-
rayed against him. These it was necessary first to sub-
due. But Caesar prevailed, and all Spain was soon at
his feet. His successes were brilliant ; and Gaul, Italy,
Sicily, and Sardinia were wholly his own, as well as
Spain, which was Pompey's province. He then rapidly
returned to Rome, was named Dictator, and as such
controlled the consular election, and was chosen Con-
sul. But Pompey held the East, and, with his ships,
controlled the Mediterranean, and was gathering forces
for the invasion of Italy. Caesar allowed himself but



IMPERIALISM. 93



eleven days in Eome. It was necessary to meet Pom-
pey before that general could return to Italy. It was
mid-winter, about a year after he had crossed the
Eubicon. He had with him only thirty thousand men,
but these were veterans. Pompey had nine full Eoman
legions, which lay at Durazzo, opposite to Brundusium,
besides auxiliaries and unlimited means; but he was
hampered by senatorial civilians, and his legions were
only used to Eastern warfare. He also controlled the
sea, so that it was next to impossible for Caesar to
embark without being defeated. Yet Caesar did cross
the sea amid overwhelming obstacles, and the result
was the battle of Pharsalia, deemed one of the deci-
sive battles of the world, although the forces of the
combatants were comparatively small. It was gained
by the defeat of Pompey's cavalry by a fourth line of
the best soldiers of Caesar, which was kept in reserve.
Pompey, on the defeat of his cavalry, upon whom he
had based his hopes, lost heart and fled. He fled to the
sea, uncertain, vacillating, and discouraged, and
sailed for Egypt, relying on the friendship of the young
king; but was murdered treacherously before he set
foot upon the land. His fate was most tragical His
fall was overwhelming.

This battle, in which the flower of the Eoman aristoc-
racy succumbed to the conqueror of Gaul, with vastly
inferior forces, did not end the desperate contest. Two



94 JULIUS CAESAR.

more bloody battles were fought one in Africa and one
in Spain before the supremacy of Caesar was secured.
The battle of Thapsus, between Utica and Carthage, at
which the Eoman nobles once more rallied under Cato
and Labienus, and the battle of Munda, in Spain, the
most bloody of all, gained by Caesar over the sons of
Pompey, settled the civil war and made Caesar supreme.
He became supreme only by the sacrifice of half of the
Koman nobility and the death of their principal lead-
ers, Pompey, Labienus, Lentulus, Ligarius, Metellus,
Scipio Afrarius, Cato, Petreius, and others. In one
sense it was the contest between Pompey and Caesai
for the empire of the world. Cicero said, "The success of
the one meant massacre, and that of the other slavery,"
for if Pompey had prevailed, the aristocracy would
have butchered their enemies with unrelenting ven-
geance; but Caesar hated unnecessary slaughter, and
sought only power. In another sense it was the strng-
gle between a single man with enlightened views and
vast designs and the Roman aristocracy, hostile to
reforms, and bent on greed and oppression. The suc-
cess of Caesar was favorable to the restoration of order
and law and progressive improvements ; the success of
the nobility would have entailed a still more grinding
oppression of the people, and possibly anarchy and
future conflicts between fortunate generals and the
aristocracy. Destiny or Providence gave the empire



IMPERIALISM. 95



of the world to a single man, although that man was
as unscrupulous as he was able.

Henceforth imperialism was the form of government
in Kome, which lasted about four hundred years. How
long an aristocratic government would have lasted is a
speculation. Caesar, in his elevation to unlimited power,
used his power beneficently. He pardoned his enemies,
gave security to property and life, restored the finances,
established order, and devoted himself to useful reforms.
He cut short the grant of corn to the citizen mob ; he
repaired the desolation which war had made ; he rebuilt
cities and temples; he even endeavored to check luxury
and extravagance and improve morals. He reformed
the courts of law, and collected libraries in every great
city. He put an end to the expensive tours of senators
in the provinces, where they had appeared as princes
exacting contributions. He formed a plan to drain the
Pontine Marshes. He reformed the calendar, making
the year to begin with the first day of January. He
built new public buildings, which the enlargement of
business required. He seemed to have at heart the
welfare of the State and of the people, by whom he
was adored. But he broke up the political ascendancy
of nobles, although he did not confiscate their property.
He weakened the Senate by increasing its numbers
to nine hundred, and by appointing senators himself
from his army and from the provinces, those who



96 JULIUS CAESAR.

would be subservient to him, who would vote what he
decreed.

Caesar's ruling passion was ambition, thirst of
power ; but he had no great animosities. He pardoned
his worst enemies, Brutus, Cassius, and Cicero, who
had been in arms against him ; nor did he reign as
a tyrant. His habits were simple and unostentatious.
He gave easy access to his person, was courteous in his
manners, and mingled with senators as a companion
rather than as a master. Like Charlemagne, he was
temperate in eating and drinking, and abhorred glut-
tony and drunkenness, the vices of the aristocracy
and of fortunate plebeians alike. He was indefatigable
in business, and paid attention to all petitions. He was
economical in his personal expenses, although he lav-
ished vast sums upon the people in the way of amus-
ing or bribing them. He dispensed with guards and
pomps, and was apparently reckless of his life : any-
thing was better to him than to live in perpetual fear
of conspirators and traitors. There never was a braver
man, and he was ever kind-hearted to those who did
not stand in his way. He was generous, magnani-
mous, and unsuspicious. He was the model of an abso-
lute prince, aside from laxity of morals. In regard
to women, of their virtue he made little account.
His favorite mistress was Servilia, sister of Cato and
mother of Brutus. Some have even supposed that



IMPERIALISM. 97



Brutus was Caesar's son, which accounts for his lenity
and forbearance and affection. He was the high-priest
of the Eoman worship, and yet he believed neither in
the gods nor in immortality. But he was always the
gentleman, natural, courteous, affable, without vanity
or arrogance or egotism. He was not a patriot in the
sense that Cicero and Cato were, or Trajan and Marcus
Aurelius, since his country was made subservient to his
own interests and aggrandizement. Yet he was a very
interesting man, and had fewer faults than Napoleon,
with equally grand designs.

But even he could not escape a retribution, in spite
of his exalted position and his great services. The
leaders of the aristocracy still hated him, and could not
be appeased for the overthrow of their power. They re-
solved to assassinate him, from vengeance rather than
fear. Cicero was not among the conspirators ; because
his discretion could not be relied upon, and they passed
him by But his heart was with them. " There are
many ways," said he, " in which a man may die." It
was not a wise thing to take his life ; since the Con-
stitution was already subverted, and somebody would
reign as imperator by means of the army, and his
death would necessarily lead to renewed civil wars and
new commotions and new calamities. But angry, em-
bittered, and passionate enemies do not listen to reason.
They will not accept the inevitable. There was no way



98 JULIUS CAESAR.

to get rid of Caesar but by assassination, and no one
wished him out of the way but the nobles. Hence it
was easy for them to form a conspiracy. It was easy
to stab him with senatorial daggers. Caesar was not
killed because he had personal enemies, nor because
he destroyed the liberties of Roman citizens, but be-
cause he had usurped the authority of the aristocracy.

Yet he died, perhaps at the right time, at the age
of fifty-six, after an undisputed reign of only three or
four years, about the length of that of CromwelL
He was already bending under the infirmities of a
premature old age. Epileptic fits had set in, and his
constitution was undermined by his unparalleled labors
and fatigues ; and then his restless mind was planning
a new expedition to Parthia, where he might have
ingloriously perished like Crassus. But such a man
could not die. His memory and deeds lived. He filled
a role in history, which could not be forgotten. He
inaugurated a successful revolution. He bequeathed
a policy to last as long as the Empire lasted ; and he
had rendered services of the greatest magnitude, by
which he is to be ultimately judged, as well as by his
character. It is impossible for us to settle whether
or not his services overbalanced the evils of the im-
perialism he established and of the civil wars by which
he reached supreme command. Whatever view we may
take of the comparative merits of an aristocracy or an



IMPERIALISM. 99



imperial despotism in a corrupt age, we cannot deny to
Caesar some transcendent services and a transcendent
fame. The whole matter is laid before us in the lan-
guage of Cicero to Caesar himself, in the Senate, when
he was at the height of his power; which shows that
the orator was not lacking in courage any more than
in foresight and moral wisdom :

" Your life, Caesar, is not that which is bounded by the
union of your soul and body. Your life is that which shall
continue fresh in the memory of ages to come, which pos-
terity will cherish and eternity itself keep guard over.
Much has been done by you which men will admire ; much
remains to be done which they can praise. They will read
with wonder of empires and provinces, of the Rhine, the
ocean, and the Nile, of battles without number, of amazing
victories, of countless monuments and triumphs ; but unless
the Commonwealth be wisely re-established in institutions
by you bestowed upon us, your name will travel widely over
the world, but will have no fixed habitation ; and those who
come after you will dispute about you as we have disputed.
Some will extol you to the skies ; others will find something
wanting, and the most important element of all. Remem-
ber the tribunal before which you are to stand. The ages
that are to be will try you, it may be with minds less preju-
diced than ours, uninfluenced either by the desire to please
you or by envy of your greatness."

Thus spoke Cicero with heroic frankness. The ages
have "disputed about" Ctesar, and will continue to dis-



100 JULIUS CAESAR.



pute about him, as they do about Cromwell and Napo-
leon ; but the man is nothing to us in comparison with
the ideas which he fought or which he supported, and
which have the same force to-day as they had nearly
two thousand years ago. He is the representative of
imperialism ; which few Americans will defend, unless
it becomes a necessity which every enlightened patriot
admits. The question is, whether it was or was not
a necessity at Home fifty years before Christ was born.
It is not easy to settle in regard to the benefit that Caesar
is supposed by some including Mr. Froude and the
late Emperor of the French to have rendered to the
cause of civilization by overturning the aristocratic Con-
stitution, and substituting, not the rule of the people,
but that of a single man. It is still one of the specu-
lations of history ; it is not one of its established facts,
although the opinions of enlightened historians seem
to lean to the necessity of the Caesarian imperialism,
in view of the misrule of the aristocracy and the abject
venality of the citizens who had votes to sell. But
it must be borne in mind that it was under the aristo-
cratic rule of senators and patricians that Rome went
on from conquering to conquer; that the governing
classes were at all times the most intelligent, experi-
enced, and efficient in the Commonwealth ; that their
very vices may have been exaggerated ; and that
the imperialism which crushed them, may also have



IMPERIALISM. 101



crushed out original genius, literature, patriotism, and
exalted sentiments, and even failed to have produced
greater personal security than existed under the aristo-
cratic Constitution at any period of its existence. All
these are disputed points of history. It may be that
Caesar, far from being a national benefactor by reorga-
nizing the forces of the Empire, sowed the seeds of
ruin by his imperial policy; and that, while he may
have given unity, peace, and law to the Empire, he
may have taken away its life. I do not assert this, or
even argue its probability. It may have been, and it
may not have been. It is an historical puzzle. There
are two sides to all great questions. But whether or
not we can settle with the light of modern knowledge
such a point as this, I look upon the defence of impe-
rialism in itself, in preference to constitutional govern-
ment with all its imperfections, as an outrage on the
whole progress of modern civilization, and on whatever
remains of dignity and intelligence among the people.



102 JULIUS CAESAR.



AUTHORITIES.

Cesar's Commentaries, Leges Juliac, Appian, Plutarch, Suetonius,
Dion Cassias, and Cicero's Letters to Atticus are the principal original
authorities. Napoleon III. wrote a dull Life of Caesar, but it is rich in
foot-notes, which it is probable he did not himself make, since nothing
is easier than the parade of learning. Rollin's Ancient History may he
read with other general histories. Merivale's History of the Empire is
able and instructive, but dry. Mr. Froude's sketch of Caesar is the most
interesting I have read, but advocates imperialism. Niebuhr's Lectures on
the History of Rome arc also a standard work, as well as Curtius's History
of Rome.



MARCUS AURELIUS.

THE GLORY OF ROME.
A. D. 121-180.



MARCUS AURELIUS.



THE GLORY OF ROME.

MAECUS AUEELIUS is immortal, not so much
for what he did as for what he was. His
services to the State were considerable, but not tran-
scendent. He was a great man, but not pre-eminently
a great emperor. He was a meditative sage rather than
a man of action; although he successfully fought the
Germanic barbarians, and repelled their fearful incur-
sions. He did not materially extend the limits of the
Empire, but he preserved and protected its provinces.
He reigned wisely and ably, but made mistakes. His
greatness was in his character ; his influence for good
was in his noble example. When we consider his cir-
cumstances and temptations, as the supreme master of
a vast Empire, and in a wicked and sensual age, he is
a greater moral phenomenon than Socrates or Epicte-
tus. He was one of the best men of Pagan antiquity.
History furnishes no example of an absolute monarch
so pure and spotless and lofty as he was, unless it be



106 MARCUS AURELIUS.

Alfred the Great or St. Louis. But the sphere of the Ko-
man emperor was far greater than that of the Mediaeval
kings. Marcus Aurelius ruled over one hundred aud
twenty millions of people, without check or hindrance
or Constitutional restraint. He could do what he
pleased with their persons and their property. Most
sovereigns, exalted to such lofty dignity and power,
have been either cruel, or vindictive, or self-indulgent,
or selfish, or proud, or hard, or ambitious, men who
have been stained by crimes, whatever may have been
their services to civilization. Most of them have yielded
to their great temptations. But Marcus Aurelius,
on the throne of the civilized world, was modest, vir-
tuous, affable, accessible, considerate, gentle, studious,
contemplative, stained by no vices, a model of human
virtue. Hence he is one of the favorite characters of
history. No Roman emperor was so revered and loved
as he, and of no one have so many monuments been
preserved. Everybody had his picture or statue in his
house. He was more than venerated in his day, and
his fame as a wise and good man has increased with
the flight of ages.

This illustrious emperor did not belong to the family
of the great Caesar. That family became extinct with
Nero, the sixth emperor. Like Trajan and Hadrian,
Marcus Aurelius derived his remote origin from Spain,
although he was born in Borne. HLs jn-eat-grandfather



THE GLORY OF ROME. 107

was a Spaniard, and yet attained the praetorian rank.
His grandfather reached the consulate. His father died
while praetor, and when he himself was a child. He
was adopted by his grandfather Annius Verus. But
his marvellous moral beauty, even as a child, attracted
the attention of the Emperor Hadrian, who bestowed
upon him the honor of the aequestrian rank, at the age
of six. At fifteen he was adopted by Antoninus Pius,
then, as we might say, " Crown Prince." Had he been
older, he would have been adopted by Hadrian him-
self. He thus, a mere youth, became the heir of the
Eoman world. His education was most excellent. From
Fronto, the greatest rhetorician of the day, he learned
rhetoric; from Herodes Atticus he acquired a knowl-
edge of the world ; from Diognotus he learned to
despise superstition ; from Apollonius, undeviating
steadiness of purpose ; from Sextus of Chseronea, tolera-
tion of human infirmities ; from Maximus, sweetness and
dignity ; from Alexander, allegiance to duty ; from Rus-
ticus, contempt of sophistry and display. This stoical
philosopher created in him a new intellectual life, and
opened to him a new world of thought. But the per-
son to whom he was most indebted was his adopted
father and father-in-law, the Emperor Antoninus Pius.
For him he seems to have had the greatest reverence.
" In him," said he, " I noticed mildness of manner with
firmness of resolution, contempt of vain-glory, industry



108 MARCUS AURELIUS.

in business, and accessibility of person. From him I
learned to acquiesce in every fortune, to exercise fore-
sight in public affairs, to rise superior to vulgar praises,
to serve mankind without ambition, to be sober and
steadfast, to be content with little, to be practical and
active, to be no dreamy bookworm, to be temperate,
modest in dress, and not to be led away by novelties."
What a picture of an emperor ! What a contrast to
such a man as Louis XIV !

We might draw a parallel between Marcus Aurelius
and David, when he was young and innocent. But the
person in history whom he most resembled was St. An-
selm. He was a St. Anselm on the throne. Philosophical
meditations seem to have been his delight and recre-
ation ; and yet he could issue from his retirement and
engage in active pursuits. He was an able general
as well as a meditative sage, heroic like David,
capable of enduring great fatigue, and willing to ex-
pose himself to great dangers.

While his fame rests on his " Meditations," as that
of David rests upon his Psalms, he yet rendered great
military services to the Empire. He put down a dan-
gerous revolt under Avidius Cassius in Asia, and did
not punish the rebellious provinces. Not one person
suffered death in consequence of this rebellion. Even
the papers of Cassius, who aimed to be emperor, were
burned, that a revelation of enemies might not be made.



THE GLORY OF ROME. 109

a signal instance of magnanimity. Cassius, it seems,
was assassinated by his own officers, which assassina-
tion Marcus Aurelius regretted, because it deprived him
of granting a free pardon to a very able but dangerous
man.

But the most signal service he rendered the Empire
was a successful resistance to the barbarians of Ger-
many, who had formed a general union for the invasion
of the Eoman world. They threatened the security of
the Empire, as the Teutons did in the time of Marius,
and the Gauls and Germans in the time of Julius Csesar.
It took him twenty years to subdue these fierce war-
riors. He made successive campaigns against them, as
Charlemagne did against the Saxons. It cost him the
best years of his life to conquer them, which he did
under difficulties as great as Julius surmounted in Gaul.
He was the savior and deliverer of his country, as much
as Marius or Scipio or Julius. The public dangers were
from the West and not the East. Yet he succeeded in
erecting a barrier against barbaric inundations, so that
for nearly two hundred years the Eomans were not
seriously molested. There still stands in " the Eternal
City" the column which commemorates his victories,
not so beautiful as that of Trajan, which furnished
the model for Napoleon's column in the Place VendQme,
but still greatly admired. Were he not better known
for his writings, he would be famous as one of the great



110 MARCUS AURELIUS.

military emperors, like Vespasian, Diocletian, and Coii-
stantine. Perhaps he did not add to the art of war ;
that was perfected by Julius Caesar. It was with the
mechanism of former generals that he withstood most
dangerous enemies, for in his day the legions were still
well disciplined and irresistible.

The only stains on the reign of this good and great
emperor for there were none on his character were