Chapter 14.—Of the Wickedness of the War Waged by the Romans Against the Albans, and of the Victories Won by the Lust of Power. But what happened after Numa’s reign, and under the other kings, when the Albans were provoked into war, with sad results not to themselves alone, but also to the Romans?  The long peace of Numa had become tedious; and with what endless slaughter and detriment of both states did the Roman and Alban armies bring it to an end!  For Alba, which had been founded by Ascanius, son of Æneas, and which was more properly the mother of Rome than Troy herself, was provoked to battle by Tullus Hostilius, king of Rome, and in the conflict both inflicted and received such damage, that at length both parties wearied of the struggle.  It was then devised that the war should be decided by the combat of three twin-brothers from each army:  from the Romans the three Horatii stood forward, from the Albans the three Curiatii.  Two of the Horatii were overcome and disposed of by the Curiatii; but by the remaining Horatius the three Curiatii were slain.  Thus Rome remained victorious, but with such a sacrifice that only one survivor returned to his home.  Whose was the loss on both sides?  Whose the grief, but of the offspring of Æneas, the descendants of Ascanius, the progeny of Venus, the grandsons of Jupiter?  For this, too, was a “worse than civil” war, in which the belligerent states were mother and daughter.  And to this combat of the three twin-brothers there was added another atrocious and horrible catastrophe.  For as the two nations had formerly been friendly (being related and neighbors), the sister of the Horatii had been betrothed to one of the Curiatii; and she, when she saw her brother wearing the spoils of her betrothed, burst into tears, and was slain by her own brother in his anger.  To me, this one girl seems to have been more humane than the whole Roman people.  I cannot think her to blame for lamenting the man to whom already she had plighted her troth, or, as perhaps she was doing, for grieving that her brother should have slain him to whom he had promised his sister.  For why do we praise the grief of Æneas (in Virgil 142 ) over the enemy cut down even by his own hand?  Why did Marcellus shed tears over the city of Syracuse, when he recollected, just before he destroyed, its magnificence and meridian glory, and thought upon the common lot of all things?  I demand, in the name of humanity, that if men are praised for tears shed over enemies conquered by themselves, a weak girl should not be counted criminal for bewailing her lover slaughtered by the hand of her brother.  While, then, that maiden was weeping for the death of her betrothed inflicted by her brother’s hand, Rome was rejoicing that such devastation had been wrought on her mother state, and that she had purchased a victory with such an expenditure of the common blood of herself and the Albans. Why allege to me the mere names and words of “glory” and “victory?”  Tear off the disguise of wild delusion, and look at the naked deeds:  weigh them naked, judge them naked.  Let the charge be brought against Alba, as Troy was charged with adultery.  There is no such charge, none like it found:  the war was kindled only in order that there “Might sound in languid ears the cry Of Tullus and of victory.” 143 This vice of restless ambition was the sole motive to that social and parricidal war,—a vice which Sallust brands in passing; for when he has spoken with brief but hearty commendation of those primitive times in which life was spent without covetousness, and every one was sufficiently satisfied with what he had, he goes on:  “But after Cyrus in Asia, and the Lacedemonians and Athenians in Greece, began to subdue cities and nations, and to account the lust of sovereignty a sufficient ground for war, and to reckon that the greatest glory consisted in the greatest empire;” 144 and so on, as I need not now quote.  This lust of sovereignty disturbs and consumes the human race with frightful ills.  By this lust Rome was overcome when she triumphed over Alba, and praising her own crime, called it glory.  For, as our Scriptures say, “the wicked boasteth of his heart’s desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the Lord abhorreth.” 145   Away, then, with these deceitful masks, these deluding whitewashes, that things may be truthfully seen and scrutinized.  Let no man tell me that this and the other was a “great” man, because he fought and conquered so and so.  Gladiators fight and conquer, and this barbarism has its meed of praise; but I think it were better to take the consequences of any sloth, than to seek the glory won by such arms.  And if two gladiators entered the arena to fight, one being father, the other his son, who would endure such a spectacle? who would not be revolted by it?  How, then, could that be a glorious war which a daughter-state waged against its mother?  Or did it constitute a difference, that the battlefield was not an arena, and that the wide plains were filled with the carcasses not of two gladiators, but of many of the flower of two nations; and that those contests were viewed not by the amphitheatre, but by the whole world, and furnished a profane spectacle both to those alive at the time, and to their posterity, so long as the fame of it is handed down? Yet those gods, guardians of the Roman empire, and, as it were, theatric spectators of such contests as these, were not satisfied until the sister of the Horatii was added by her brother’s sword as a third victim from the Roman side, so that Rome herself, though she won the day, should have as many deaths to mourn.  Afterwards, as a fruit of the victory, Alba was destroyed, though it was there the Trojan gods had formed a third asylum after Ilium had been sacked by the Greeks, and after they had left Lavinium, where Æneas had founded a kingdom in a land of banishment.  But probably Alba was destroyed because from it too the gods had migrated, in their usual fashion, as Virgil says: “Gone from each fane, each sacred shrine, Are those who made this realm divine.” 146 Gone, indeed, and from now their third asylum, that Rome might seem all the wiser in committing herself to them after they had deserted three other cities.  Alba, whose king Amulius had banished his brother, displeased them; Rome, whose king Romulus had slain his brother, pleased them.  But before Alba was destroyed, its population, they say, was amalgamated with the inhabitants of Rome so that the two cities were one.  Well, admitting it was so, yet the fact remains that the city of Ascanius, the third retreat of the Trojan gods, was destroyed by the daughter-city.  Besides, to effect this pitiful conglomerate of the war’s leavings, much blood was spilt on both sides.  And how shall I speak in detail of the same wars, so often renewed in subsequent reigns, though they seemed to have been finished by great victories; and of wars that time after time were brought to an end by great slaughters, and which yet time after time were renewed by the posterity of those who had made peace and struck treaties?  Of this calamitous history we have no small proof, in the fact that no subsequent king closed the gates of war; and therefore with all their tutelar gods, no one of them reigned in peace. 142     Æneid , x. 821, of Lausus:    “But when Anchises’ son surveyed    The fair, fair face so ghastly made,    He groaned, by tenderness unmanned,    And stretched the sympathizing hand,” etc. 143     Virgil, Æneid , vi. 813. 144     Sallust, Cat. Conj. ii. 145     Ps. x. 3 . 146     Æneid , ii. 351–2.