BOOK Extension of the ager publicus. his own auspices, had slain a hostile general in battle. Livy does not venture to decide whether, in consequence of this discovery, the dedication of the spoils ought to be placed in the year 428 B.C., in which indeed Cossus was consul, but, according to the annals, waged no war, or in the year 426 B.C. when he was consular tribune, and, as commander of the horse of the dictator Mamercus Æmilius, again fought victoriously against the Fidenates and Veientes. For us, who regard the stories of the two wars as versions of the same story, no controversy can arise about the time of taking the spoils or the dedication of them. We reject the story of the year 437 B.c. as quite untenable on the ground given above; we hold that Cossus, as consular tribune, dedicated the spoils, and that either he himself or one of his descendants put the inscription on the armour, adding to his other titles that of consul, which he enjoyed two years later. Thus the accidental notice of an authentic monument does not lead to a negative result upsetting the whole of the popular tradition and the annalistic account, but it supplies a criterion which we can make use of to separate what is erroneous from the common narrative, and to arrive at a degree of certainty which, considering the still prevailing obscurity in the history of Rome at the time in question, cannot be too highly prized. A consequence of the conquest and destruction of Fidena was the confiscation of its territory as public land (ager publicus) of the Roman people. This, after the acquisition of the land in dispute between Ardea and Aricia (442 B.C.), is the first extension of the territory in the immediate neighbourhood of the town. We shall see hereafter how this acquisition led to the renewal of the agitations for agrarian laws which now began to be for the first time of a serious and reformatory character, and increased in intensity after the extension of the Roman possessions by the fall of Veii, so that at last (366 B.C.) they led to the Licinian laws, by which the possessions of the patricians in the state lands were limited. CHAPTER XVI. THE CONQUEST OF VEII, 396 B.C. СНАР. THE war with Fidena was the prelude to a more serious contest, for which Rome now prepared herself, and which may be characterised as the first war of conquest which Greatness the republic undertook. The flourishing and populous of Veii. Etruscan town of Veii, which lay in the most southern portion of Etruria proper, if we can trust the annals, had been already frequently at war with Rome ;' and the fall of the heroic Fabii on the river Cremera, and the taking of the Janiculus by the Veientes, had been preserved in the memory of the people, as the most striking and important events in those wars. tion of the war. Nevertheless it appears that, on the whole, a peaceful Disinclinaintercourse prevailed between the Etruscans and the Veientines Romans. The former do not appear to have aimed at to go to extending their power southward, after having lost the possession of Campania and Latium, and when the strength of the nation was evidently decreasing. While Rome and Latium barely maintained the contest with the Equians and the Volscians, the Veientes remained quiet; and after the fall of Fidena they felt even less inclined than before to break the peace, as the invasion of Northern Italy by the Gauls at this time exposed the Etruscans to a new and unexpected danger, and no doubt deprived the southern towns of Etruria of the assistance of their countrymen and allies in the north. Yet Veii, although confined to her own resources, had no great reason to dread a war with Rome. Not less than eight times. See Schwegler, Röm. Gesch., iii. 203, Anm. 3. BOOK II. Internal condition of Veii. Traditions of the fall of Veii. According to the reports of ancient writers, confirmed by modern topographical researches, the extent of Veii was about equal to that of Rome. It stood on a rocky eminence bounded on three sides by precipitous ravines, and it contained a large population. The public and private buildings were of a solidity and grandeur unknown in Rome at that time. The industry and the peaceful arts of the Veientes had enriched and beautified the town.' Being the mistress of several smaller towns, and of a large territory, and moreover allied with the neighbouring cities of Capena, Falerii, Tarquinii, and Care, Veii was at the head of all Southern Etruria, and seemed able to preserve her independence without foreign help. We know next to nothing of the political and social institutions of Veii. According to the Roman annalists, the monarchical constitution continued in Veii, while in the other Etruscan towns it had given way to that of an aristocratic republic. Whether this continuance of the monarchy was injurious to the prosperity of Veii must be left undecided. Nor do we know what was the relation of the ruling class to the mass of the common people, and whether the latter, as is generally supposed,2 were oppressed and altogether deprived of political rights. If this was the case, it was certainly an element of weakness. Much has been said about the great influence of the priests over the Etruscan people, and of their almost Oriental fanaticism. That this would have contributed to rouse and intensify the energies of the nation in a war for political existence is proved by the vigour with which it inspired the Jews under the Maccabees, and during the last siege of Jerusalem. The conquest and destruction of Veii, shortly before the invasion of the Gauls, is an event as well attested as the fall of Carthage. But round this centre of historical truth a luxuriant crop of legends has grown up, in which Greek fancy is unmistakable. The elements of legend and 1 Müller, Etrusker, i. 369. Schwegler, Röm. Gesch., iii. 232. tradition are so mingled, that the attempt to separate them is baffled to a very considerable extent. We must therefore give up the hope of arriving at perfect historical truth, and confine ourselves to conjectures on those points which are enveloped in the legendary veil. CHAP. XVI. According to the annalistic accounts, the war with Veii Changes in began as early as 406 B.c. We cannot discover a sufficient Roman military cause of war; for the alleged participation of the Veientes organisain the revolt of Fidena and in the murder of the Roman tion. ambassadors was succeeded by a reconciliation and by several years of peace. The Romans, it seems, thought that the favourable moment had come for extending their territory towards the north, and they had no difficulty in assigning a special grievance. They saw, however, that, for a war with an enemy so formidable as Veii their old military organisation was not sufficient. It was only calculated for making short summer campaigns, during a few months or weeks, against the Equian and Volscian invaders. In order to subdue a large fortified town like Veii, it was necessary to have an army ready in the field all the year round. The old citizen-soldiers were fed and armed at their own expense, and exchanged their agricultural labour only for a short time for military service. It was necessary to replace them by a standing army of soldiers, who might remain in the field summer and winter, and who would be relieved from all domestic For this purpose the introduction of military pay was necessary. This reform was of the greatest importance, not only for the organisation of the army, and for the manner of carrying on war, but also for internal political life. If, as we may suppose, the Romans conceived this idea sooner than their neighbours (for they possessed a wonderful instinct for improvement in military matters), the consequent superiority of their army gave them a wellmerited preponderance over troops that were now comparatively undisciplined. Perhaps the Etruscans had already adopted the principle of giving pay to their troops, for they were far in advance of the Romans in wealth and cares. BOOK II. The Roman cavalry. order. refinement. But it is not likely that they had as much intuitive wisdom as the Romans for hitting upon the best method of applying the principle. For the Roman armies were not formed of mercenaries, such as were very frequent in antiquity, but they consisted of citizens, to whom their pay was only a lightening of their military service, not an inducement for devoting themselves to a soldier's life as to a profession. With the introduction of pay for the troops was connected another innovation in the military organisation of Rome, the importance of which appears to have been even greater in its bearing on internal political reforms than on that of the army. The Roman cavalry, up to this time, was not formed, like the infantry, on the principle of the census or property qualification. The ablebodied young men, fit for cavalry service, were organised, without regard to the amount of their property, in six patrician and twelve plebeian horse centuries, and received horses and their keep from the state. Their arms were light, such as men of small means could procure. They were therefore less fitted for close combat in battle than for the purpose of quickly overrunning a hostile territory, for reconnoitring and for pursuing the enemy. The numerous descriptions of battles won by the heroism of the horsemen are, like all the pictures of the battles of those times, imaginary, and cannot be relied upon. Beginning Now, after the introduction of military pay, when the of the equestrian service of the infantry had become less burdensome for the poorer class, the richer citizens were no longer so much in request as heavy armed foot soldiers, and were, therefore, more available for the cavalry. They accepted this change the more readily as the pay of the cavalry was three times as much as that of the infantry. There were a sufficient number who, we are told, offered themselves voluntarily, providing their own horses, and the state. thankfully accepted their offer. In this manner the old 1 Polybius, vi. 25. |