The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 05 : $b the Roman Republic
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 05 : $b the Roman Republic
World history
Fortunately for the future of Rome the bent towards a constantly
widening separation between the plebeians and the patricians received,
in the decemvir period, an entirely different turn. From that time the
plebeian leaders were chiefly occupied in winning for their constituents
their proper social and political position in the Roman state, with the
balance leaning strongly, up to the decisive battle for the hegemony on
the Apennine peninsula, to the side of the purely political questions
of dispute. The sympathy of modern observers is almost entirely with
the plebeians. The demands were moderate and the political views of the
energetic honourable Roman peasants were immeasurably higher than those
of the Greek democrats.[21]
In spite of all the heat and passion evinced on both sides, revolution
was the last thing the parties thought of up to the very time of the
Gracchi. Whereas in Hellas the triumphant party rarely receded from a
position once taken or abandoned any pretensions however lofty, the
Roman peasant assemblies contented themselves with claiming merely what,
according to our modern ideas, was their just due. Attacked as they
frequently were in their deepest interests, the only revenge dreamed
of by the plebeians was secession--the voluntary cutting of themselves
adrift from the patrician state; and their end at last attained, in good
qualities as in bad they manifested precisely the same robust qualities
that characterised their patrician adversaries. Their subsequent acts
fully justified their course, since in their public affairs they revealed
a vigour and capacity well-nigh inexhaustible.
But we must not judge the patrician class too harshly; revolting as
their laws against debtors appear to us, we are not justified in
attributing their adroitly maintained policy of resistance purely to the
arrogance and selfishness of a privileged class, nor their refusal to
admit plebeians to equal marriage laws and municipal offices entirely
to base hypocrisy. We must, moreover, take into account the natural
hesitation of an old, experienced governing body to give the leadership
in public affairs into the hands of new and untried elements; and the
plebeians themselves, far from despising the adversaries they so deeply
hated, never failed to recognise those sterling qualities by which in
peace and war they had achieved such signal service to the state, and
elevated them to the position of models for their own character and
conduct. And finally, at the decisive turning points in the evolution of
Rome’s ancient constitution, it was not before superior might that the
patricians lowered their banner and reached out the hand of friendship to
their foe; it was solely in obedience to their own patriotic perception
of what was best for the state and to the force of inner necessity.
[Sidenote: [510-452 B.C.]]
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