Chapter IV: Some Final Reflections

“The history of all institutions has a deep value and an abiding interest to all those who have the courage to work upon it. It presents in every branch a regularly developed series of causes and consequences, and abounds in examples of that continuity of life, the realization of which is necessary to give the reader a personal hold on the past and a right judgment of the present. For the roots of the present lie deep in the past; and nothing in the past is dead to the man who would learn how the present comes to be what it is.” So Stubbs wrote on finishing his history of the _English Constitution_ and on sending it out to the public. What he has said when thinking of the beginnings of constitutional government in England is true in a higher degree of the relations of modern political institutions to those of Rome. This is the case partly because we owe to Rome so much of our political philosophy and so much of our political system. It is true partly because our indebtedness to Rome in the field of politics has not been appreciated, and consequently we have failed to understand the origin and nature of many of our institutions. The failure to recognize the great debt which we owe to her was a natural oversight. The great gulf of the Middle Ages lies between Roman times and our own day. Until the trend of political thought and the development of society during that period came to be better understood, the close relation which medieval political theory and practice bore to that of the Romans and our dependence on the medieval were not seen. Until very recently students of modern political institutions rarely carried their investigations beyond the limits of their respective countries, or at the most they did not go back beyond the Renaissance. But as the Carlyles have said in their _History of Mediaeval Political Theory_: “From the lawyers of the second century to the theorists of the French Revolution, the history of political thought is continuous, changing in form, modified in content, but still the same in its fundamental conceptions.” Many writers on political science in ignorance or in disregard of this continuity tell us, for instance, that the representative principle was unknown in antiquity, or that the jury system was of English or Scandinavian origin. But fortunately a few scholars, like Bryce, who have an acquaintance with classical institutions, are gradually correcting these errors and helping us to see the way in which many of our modern political theories and institutions have come to us from Rome.

Our political indebtedness to the Romans takes two different forms. We have inherited many theories and institutions from them, and in the second place we have before us for our guidance their experience in dealing with difficult practical problems. As we have noticed in the preceding chapters, they have taught us to study actual governmental systems rather than to attempt the construction of Utopias. We owe to them the fruitful suggestion that the state may be compared to an organism. The conception of the brotherhood of man goes back to the early Empire, and out of this conception international law, and its counterpart, civil law, have developed. Roman writers recognized the three forms of government, monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, and pointed out the importance of dividing the functions of government between the legislative, executive and judicial branches. From them we have derived our accepted doctrine of popular sovereignty, and to them the theory of the divine right of kings may be traced. The Romans developed the distinction which is so vital in English common law between statutes and customs, officially recognized, and showed the great advantages inherent in a flexible constitution which is made up of these two elements. They have handed down to us the representative principle, the jury method of trial, civil law, a clear conception of the rights of a citizen, a jealous regard for law and tradition, a comprehensive system of political checks and balances, model systems of local government and civil service, and methods of governing, civilizing, and unifying alien peoples which have never been equalled.

It was this final contribution that Rome made to civilization of which Mommsen was thinking, toward the end of his long study of Roman history and institutions, when he wrote: “If an angel of the Lord were to strike the balance whether the domain ruled by Severus Antoninus was governed with the greater intelligence and the greater humanity at that time or in the present day, whether civilization and national prosperity generally have since that time advanced or retrograded, it is very doubtful whether the decision would prove to be in favor of the present.”

NOTES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

NOTES

[1] The arrangements which Rome made with the several cities of Sicily are outlined by Cicero in his oration _In Verrem_, III. 12-14.

[2] The traditional story of the Decemvirate and its codification of the _Laws of the Twelve Tables_ is told graphically by Livy, III. 32-54. Some of the extant fragments of these laws may be seen in F. D. Allen’s _Remnants of Early Latin_, Boston, 1899, pp. 84-92.

[3] On the activities of the censors, cf. Heitland, _The Roman Republic_, _passim_.

[4] On the government of the provinces under the Republic one may read Arnold-Shuckburgh, C. III.

[5] There is an interesting discussion of the motives and policy of C. Gracchus by W. W. Fowler in his _Roman Essays and Interpretations_, Oxford, 1920, pp. 99-110.

[6] A brilliant analysis of the political policies of Pompey and Caesar may be found in E. Meyer’s _Caesars Monarchie und das Principat des Pompejus_, Stuttgart, 1919.

[7] On the legal basis of the principate of Augustus, see Abbott, _Roman Political Institutions_, pp. 267-273.

[8] For the provinces under Augustus, see Arnold-Shuckburgh, chapter IV. For a list of them, cf. Sandys, pp. 401 ff.

[9] Five municipal charters are given in an English translation by E. G. Hardy in his _Six Roman Laws and Three Spanish Charters_, Oxford, 1911-12.

[10] The famous edict of Caracalla, to which reference is made in the _Code_ of Justinian and elsewhere, may now be seen in no. 40 of the _Griechische Papyri im Museum des Oberhessischen Geschichtsverein zu Giessen_, E. Kornemann and P. M. Meyer, Leipzig, 1910.

[11] For the bureaux of Hadrian and his successors, see Hirschfeld.

[12] The most convenient edition of the _Code_ of Justinian is to be found in the _Corpus Iuris Civilis_, 3 vols., ed. by Mommsen and others. Berlin, 1895.

[13] The Latin text of the constitution of Vespasian may be found in K. E. Bruns, _Fontes Iuris Romani Antiqui_, Leipzig, 1893,^7 no. 56.

[14] Cf. F. F. Abbott, on “The Referendum and the Recall Among the Ancient Romans,” in _The Sewanee Review_, XXIII. 84-94 (1915).

[15] For Professor Frank’s discussion of these wars, see chapters V, VI, and XIII. Cf., also, Livy, XXI. 4. 1.

[16] For the comparison of the Roman Senate and the Senate of the U. S. see the chapter on “The Story of Two Oligarchies.”

[17] For a fuller discussion of representative government among the Romans under the Republic, see Frank’s _Roman Imperialism_, pp. 45, 209, 299, 301.

[18] The oath of the Fascisti may be found in the _London Times_ of Jan. 2, 1923. The best literature at present on the movement is _Discorsi Politici_, Benito Mussolini (Milan; _Essercizio Tipografico del “Popolo d’Italia,”_ 1922). _Il Fascismo nella Vita Italiana_, Pietro Gorgolini. Preface by B. Mussolini (Turin; Anonima Libraria Italiana). _Fascismo Liberatore_, Cipriano Giachetti (Florence; Bemporad).

[19] For the praetor’s court see Abbott, _Roman Political Institutions_, pp. 105 ff.

[20] A striking illustration of the looseness of procedure in Roman courts is given by Cicero in a letter to Atticus (_ad Atticum_, I. 16. 3-6), translated by E. O. Winstedt, _Letters to Atticus_, 3 vols., New York, 1919, in _The Loeb Classical Library_. On the course of a trial in a Roman court, cf. A. H. J. Greenidge, _The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time_, Oxford, 1901, pp. 456-504.

[21] On taxation in the provinces, see Arnold-Shuckburgh, chapter VI. On the customs duties, see R. L. V. Cagnat, _Étude Historique sur les Impôts Indirects chez les Romains_, Paris, 1882.

[22] On Diocletian’s tax system, see Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, III. 1513 ff.; Daremberg-Saglio, V. 434 ff.

[23] “Rome’s First Coinage,” in _Classical Philology_, XIV. 314-327 (1919).

[24] On life in the provinces see Bouchier’s books cited in the Bibliography.

[25] The road-systems in the provinces may be seen in Murray’s _Small Classical Atlas_, or in H. S. Jones’ _Companion to Roman History_, Oxford, 1912, map 4.

[26] See Reid, pp. 279 ff.

[27] See Chapters I and II in the _Common People of Ancient Rome_.

[28] A detailed account of the method of founding Colonies and a list of them may be found in Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, IV. 510 ff.

[29] For an account of the Idaho Colony, see Albert Shaw, “From New York to Idaho,” in _The American Review of Reviews_, LXIV. 177-182 (1921).

[30] See the chapter on trade-guilds and corporations in Abbott’s _Common People of Ancient Rome_.

[30a] This statement does not apply to Asia Minor where we do know of industrial strikes in Roman times at Ephesus, Pergamum, Miletus, and Sardis. That of the bakers at Ephesus (Kern, _Die Inschriften von Magnesia_, no. 114, an inscription which we now know is from Ephesus) took place in the second century A.D. The other strikes are those of builders, one in the second century A.D. at Miletus on the Roman theatre (_Sitz. Berl. Ak._ 1904, p. 83); for Pergamum, cf. _Athen. Mitt._ XXIV, 1899, p. 199 (also second cent.); for Sardis _C.I.G._ 3647. An article by W. H. Buckler on _Labor Disputes in the Province of Asia_ which will soon appear in _Anatolian Studies in Honor of Sir W. M. Ramsay_, Manchester, 1923, discusses this question. [D. M. R.]

[31] On the failure of “big business” to determine the policy of the Roman state, see Frank’s _Roman Imperialism_. For a different view, cf. Ferrero.

[32] “Race Mixture In The Roman Empire,” in _The American Historical Review_, XXI. 689-708 (1916).

[33] Among the executives who have appealed directly to the voters may be mentioned Governor Hughes of New York State and Presidents Roosevelt and Wilson.

[34] Augustus mentions his gratuities to soldiers in chapter 17 of his _Res Gestae Divi Augusti_; translated into English, _The Deeds of Augustus_, by W. Fairley, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1898.

[35] On methods of calculating the population of the city of Rome, see J. Beloch’s _Bevölkerung der griechisch-römischen Welt_, Leipzig, 1886, chapter IX. sec. 2 and “Die Bevölkerung Italiens im Altertum,” in _Klio_, III. 471-490 (1903).

[36] On Diocletian’s edict see the chapter on “Diocletian’s Edict and the High Cost of Living” in Abbott’s _Common People of Ancient Rome_.

[37] See the _Theodosian Code_, (_Theodosiani Libri XVI_ ed. Th. Mommsen, Berlin, 1905), 10, 19, 1. 2. 8.

[38] On compulsion to work in the mines, see the _Theodosian Code_, 10, 19, 5. 6. 7. and 15.

[39] For Pliny’s inquiries see the _Epistulae ad Traianum_, 39; cf. 31 on work in the mines.

[40] For the influx into Italy and the West of men of Oriental extraction see T. Frank, in _The American Historical Review_, XXI. 689-708 (1916) and Frank’s _Economic History of Rome_, pp. 154 ff. _et passim_.

BIBLIOGRAPHY