212 ON THE NATIONAL CHARACTER OF THE ROMANS. 



state, they were pride and haughtiness personified ; whilst at the 

 same time they were accustomed to worship, in ahject and slavish 

 submission, monsters beneath humanity, which is no more than may 

 be justly said of too many of their emperors. 



Such was the degenerate character of Rome and her children. It 

 is a disgusting picture, but not without instruction : for it may tend 

 to render us grateful for the blessings we ourselves enjoy in a reli- 

 gion which has not only established private and social morality upon 

 a firmer and more consistent basis, but has even purified to some 

 considerable degree the international affairs of modern policy. 

 This still, it is to be regretted, admits of many arts and artifices, 

 which are not permitted to disgrace with impunity the walks of 

 common life. There are still unblushing persons who distinguish 

 between a public and a private conscience : but it is nevertheless 

 certain, in these more enlightened times, that, in the end, it will 

 destroy their influence and degrade their memory. 



To sum up the whole, we must confess that, in the earlier ages 

 of Rome, her sons had many virtues : that these were of a charac- 

 ter rather stern than amiable is equally certain : but it cannot be 

 denied that many distinguished qualities cast a glory on the Roman 

 name, which in spite of many blemishes will endure for ever. Cru- 

 elty, nevertheless, mingled with almost every transaction. How 

 few are their examples of clemency ! how many and dreadful their 

 acts of pitiless, cold-blooded, calculating barbarity ! 



Jugurtha, for example, was undoubtedly a monster of iniquity : 

 but he was punished by the Romans, not for his crimes — for at 

 these they had long connived— but merely for having resisted their 

 authority. Perseus was at once wicked and contemptible. Was 

 it, however, necessary, after plundering him of his wealth, and tri- 

 umphing over his misfortunes by making him a part of the spectacle 

 of their consul's triumphant entry, to starve the unhappy wretch to 

 death in his prison ? The fate of Tigranes, the once proud king of 

 Armenia, was even more pitiable still. Defeated in several battles 

 and sensible of the impossibility of offering any effectual resistance 

 to the Roman arms, he repaired to the camp of Pompey, and in the 

 most submissive manner laid his crown at the feet of his haughty 

 invader, surrendering up himself and his people to the pleasure of 

 the Romans. Pompey, it is true, received the king with an out- 

 ward appearance of favour : but after walking in the triumph of 

 that fortunate warrior, amidst a crowd of other captives of the high- 

 est rank, he was cast likewise into a dungeon, where we are told he 

 perished by famine. There is something so utterly disgraceful in 



