The Historians' History of the World 05

[112] [As Floruse says: “When Asia was subdued by the efforts of Pompey, Fortune conferred what remained to be done in Europe upon Cæsar.”]

[113] [And how great was the haughtiness of Ariovistus! When our ambassadors said to him, “Come to Cæsar,” “And who is Cæsar?” he retorted; “let him come to me, if he will. What is it to him what our Germany does? Do I meddle with the Romans?” In consequence of this reply, so great was the dread of the unknown people in the Roman camp, that wills were publicly made even in the principia. But the greater the vast bodies of the enemy were, the more were they exposed to swords and other weapons. The ardour of the Roman soldiers in the battle cannot be better shown than by the circumstance that when the barbarians, having raised their shields above their heads, protected themselves with a testudo, the Romans leaped upon their very bucklers, and then came down upon their throats with their swords.e

]

[114] [Floruse calls him “that prince so formidable for his stature, martial skill, and courage; his very name, Vercingetorix, being apparently intended to excite terror.”]

CHAPTER XXIII. CÆSAR AT WAR WITH POMPEY

[133-60 B.C.]

At this point the Roman historian Florus casts a backward look over the history of his people. Giving the point of view of the first century of the empire, it shows no little acumen and is well worth quoting.

“This,” he says, “is the third age of the Roman people, with reference to its transactions beyond the sea; an age in which, when they had once ventured beyond Italy, they carried their arms through the whole world. Of which age, the first hundred years were pure and pious, and, as I have called them, ‘golden’; free from vice and immorality, as there yet remained the sincere and harmless integrity of the pastoral life, and the imminent dread of a Carthaginian enemy supported the ancient discipline.[115]

“The succeeding hundred, reckoned from the fall of Carthage, Corinth, and Numantia, and from the inheritance bequeathed us by King Attalus in Asia, to the times of Cæsar and Pompey, and those of Augustus who succeeded them, and of whom we shall speak hereafter, were as lamentable and disgraceful for the domestic calamities, as they were honourable for the lustre of the warlike exploits that distinguished them. For, as it was glorious and praiseworthy to have acquired the rich and powerful provinces of Gaul, Thrace, Cilicia, and Cappadocia, as well as those of the Armenians and Britons, so it was disgraceful and lamentable at the same time, to have fought at home with our own citizens, with our allies, our slaves, and gladiators.

“I know not whether it would have been better for the Romans to have been content with Sicily and Africa, or even to have been without them, while still enjoying the dominion of Italy, than to grow to such greatness as to be ruined by their own strength. For what else produced those intestine distractions but excessive good fortune? It was the conquest of Syria that first corrupted us, and the succession afterwards in Asia, to the estate of the king of Pergamus. Such wealth and riches ruined the manners of the age, and overwhelmed the republic, which was sunk in its own vices as in a common sewer. For how did it happen that the Roman people demanded from the tribunes lands and subsistence, unless through the scarcity which they had by their luxury produced? Hence there arose the first and second sedition of the Gracchi, and a third, that of Apuleius Saturninus. From what cause did the equestrian order, being divided from the senate, domineer by virtue of the judiciary laws, if it was not from avarice, in order that the revenues of the state and trials of causes might be made a means of gain? Hence again it was that the privilege of citizenship was promised to the Latins, and hence were the arms of our allies raised against us. And what shall we say as to the wars with the slaves? How did they come upon us, but from the excessive number of slaves? Whence arose such armies of gladiators against their masters, if it was not that a profuse liberality, by granting shows to gain the favour of the populace, made that an art which was once but a punishment of enemies? And to touch upon more specious vices, did not the ambition for honours take its rise from the same excess of riches? Hence also proceeded the outrages of Marius, hence those of Sulla. The extravagant sumptuousness of banquets, too, and profuse largesses, were not they the effects of wealth, which must in time lead to want? This also stirred up Catiline against his country. Finally, whence did that insatiable desire of power and rule proceed, but from a superabundance of riches? This it was that armed Cæsar and Pompey with fatal weapons for the destruction of the state.”

THE WAR BETWEEN CÆSAR AND POMPEY