A Smaller History of Rome: from the Earliest Times to the Establishment of the EmpireSmith, William
History
A Smaller History of Rome: from the Earliest Times to the Establishment of the Empire
Smith, William
Rome -- History
The strong national prejudices of Cato appear to have diminished in
force as he grew older and wiser. He applied himself in old age to the
study of Greek literature, with which in youth he had no acquaintance,
although he was not ignorant of the Greek language. Himself an historian
and orator, the excellences of Demosthenes and Thucydides made a deep
impression upon his kindred mind. But throughout life his conduct was
guided by prejudices against classes and nations whose influence he
deemed to be hostile to the simplicity of the old Roman character. When
Eumenes, king of Pergamus, visited Rome after the war with Antiochus,
and was received with honor by the Senate, and splendidly entertained by
the nobles, Cato was indignant at the respect paid to the monarch,
refused to go near him, and declared that "kings were naturally
carnivorous animals." He had an antipathy to physicians, because they
were mostly Greeks, and therefore unfit to be trusted with Roman lives.
He loudly cautioned his eldest son against them, and dispensed with
their attendance. When Athens sent three celebrated philosophers,
Carneades, Diogenes, and Critolaues, to Rome, in order to negotiate a
remission of the 500 talents which the Athenians had been awarded to pay
to the Oropians, Carneades excited great attention by his philosophical
conversation and lectures, in which he preached the pernicious doctrine
of an expediency distinct from justice, which he illustrated by the
example of Rome herself: "If Rome were stripped of all that she did not
justly gain, the Romans might go back to their huts." Cato, offended
with his principles, and jealous of the attention paid to the Greek,
gave advice which the Senate followed: "Let these deputies have an
answer, and a polite dismissal as soon as possible."
Cato was an unfeeling and cruel master. His conduct toward his slaves
was detestable. The law held them to be mere chattels, and he treated
them as such, without any regard to the rights of humanity. After supper
he often severely chastised them, thong in hand, for trifling acts of
negligence, and sometimes condemned them to death. When they were worn
out, or useless, he sold them, or turned them out of doors. He treated
the lower animals no better. His war-horse, which bore him through his
campaign in Spain, he sold before he left the country, that the state
might not be charged with the expenses of its transport. As years
advanced he sought gain with increasing eagerness, but never attempted
to profit by the misuse of his public functions. He accepted no bribes;
he reserved no booty to his own use; but he became a speculator, not
only in slaves, but in buildings, artificial waters, and
pleasure-grounds. In this, as in other points, he was a representative
of the old Romans, who were a money-getting and money-loving people.
[Footnote 53: See p. 117.(Third paragraph of Chapter XVII.--Transcriber)]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account