Chapter 10.—Whether It Was
Desirable that The Roman Empire Should Be Increased by Such a
Furious Succession of Wars, When It Might Have Been Quiet and Safe
by Following in the Peaceful Ways of Numa.
Do they reply that the Roman empire
could never have been so widely extended, nor so glorious, save by
constant and unintermitting wars? A fit argument, truly! Why
must a kingdom be distracted in order to be great? In this little
world of man’s body, is it not better to have a moderate stature,
and health with it, than to attain the huge dimensions of a giant
by unnatural torments, and when you attain it to find no rest, but
to be pained the more in proportion to the size of your members?
What evil would have resulted, or rather what good would not have
resulted, had those times continued which Sallust sketched, when he
says, “At first the kings (for that was the first title of empire
in the world) were divided in their sentiments: part cultivated
the mind, others the body: at that time the life of men was led
without coveteousness; every one was sufficiently satisfied with
his own!”
133
Was it
requisite, then, for Rome’s prosperity, that the state of things
which Virgil reprobates should succeed:
“At length stole on a baser
age
And war’s indomitable
rage,
And greedy lust of gain?”
134
But obviously the Romans have a
plausible defence for undertaking and carrying on such disastrous
wars,—to wit, that the pressure of their enemies forced them to
resist, so that they were compelled to fight, not by any greed of
human applause, but by the necessity of protecting life and
liberty. Well, let that pass. Here is Sallust’s account of
the matter: “For when their state, enriched with laws,
institutions, territory, seemed abundantly prosperous and
sufficiently powerful, according to the ordinary law of human
nature, opulence gave birth to envy. Accordingly, the neighboring
kings and states took arms and assaulted them. A few allies lent
assistance; the rest, struck with fear, kept aloof from dangers.
But the Romans, watchful at home and in war, were active, made
preparations, encouraged one another, marched to meet their
enemies,—protected by arms their liberty, country, parents.
Afterwards, when they had repelled the dangers by their bravery,
they carried help to their allies and friends, and procured
alliances more by conferring than by receiving favors.”
135
This was
to build up Rome’s greatness by honorable means. But, in
Numa’s reign, I would know whether the long peace was maintained
in spite of the incursions of wicked neighbors, or if these
incursions were discontinued that the peace might be maintained?
For if even then Rome was harassed by wars, and yet did not meet
force with force, the same means she then used to quiet her enemies
without conquering them in war, or terrifying them with the onset
of battle, she might have used always, and have reigned in peace
with the gates of Janus shut. And if this was not in her power,
then Rome enjoyed peace not at the will of her gods, but at the
will of her neighbors round about, and only so long as they cared
to provoke her with no war, unless perhaps these pitiful gods will
dare to sell to one man as their favor what lies not in their power
to bestow, but in the will of another man. These demons, indeed,
in so far as they are permitted, can terrify or incite the minds of
wicked men by their own peculiar wickedness. But if they always
had this power, and if no action were taken against their efforts
by a more secret and higher power, they would be supreme to give
peace or the victories of war, which almost always fall out through
some human emotion, and frequently in opposition to the will of the
gods, as is proved not only by lying legends, which scarcely hint
or signify any grain of truth, but even by Roman history
itself.
133
Sall.
Conj. Cat.
ii.
134
Æneid
, viii. 326–7.
135
Sall.
Cat. Conj.
vi.