Solid organization of Rome. Regulus 139 



of imagination to see in this organization a reason for the prosperity 

 of Roman agriculture. Farms were no doubt laid waste on both sides 

 of the border, but the balance of the account was in the long run 

 favourable to Rome. Among the numerous legends that gathered 

 round the name of king Pyrrhus is a story 1 that in reply to some dis- 

 content on the part of his Italian allies, to whom his strategy seemed 

 over-cautious, he said 'the mere look of the country shews me the 

 great difference between you and the Romans. In the parts subject to 

 them are all manner of fruit-trees and vineyards: the land is cultivated 

 and the farm-establishments are costly : but the estates of my friends 

 are so laid waste that all signs of human occupation have disappeared.' 

 The saying may be not authentic or merely overdrawn in rhetorical 

 transmission. But it probably contains the outlines of a true picture 

 of the facts. It was the power of giving to her farmer-settlers a more 

 effective protection than her rivals could give to their own farmers that 

 enabled Rome to advance steadily and continuously. The organization 

 was simple enough: the sword was ready to guard the plough, and 

 the plough to occupy and hold the conquests of the sword. 



From the time of the first Punic war we have a remarkable story 

 relating to M Atilius Regulus, the man around whose name sp much 

 patriotic legend gathered. He appears as one of the good old farmer- 

 heroes. His farm 2 of seven iugera lay in an unhealthy part of the 

 country, and the soil was poor. His advice to agriculturists, not to buy 

 good land in an unhealthy district nor bad land in a healthy one, was 

 handed down as the opinion of a qualified judge. We are told 3 that 

 after his victory in Africa he desired to be relieved and return home; 

 but the Senate did not send out another commander, and so he had to 

 stay on. He wrote and complained of his detention. Among other 

 reasons he urged in particular his domestic anxiety. In the epitome 

 of Livy XVIII this appears as 'that his little farm had been abandoned 

 by the hired men.' In Valerius Maximus 4 we find a fuller account, thus 

 'that the steward in charge of his little farm (seven iugera in the Pit- 

 pinia) had died, and the hired man (mercennarium) had taken the 

 opportunity to decamp, taking with him the farm-stock : therefore he 

 asked them to relieve him of his command, for he feared his wife and 

 children would have nothing to live on now the farm was abandoned.' 

 On hearing this, the Senate ordered that provision should at once be 



1 Preserved in a fragment of Dion Cassius, fr 40 27. 



2 Columella I 4 2, Pliny A^xvm 27-8, cf Valer Max iv 4 4. 



3 Livy epil xvm. 



4 Valer Max iv 4 6. The version given in Seneca ad Helv 12 5 is much the same, 

 but ends characteristically fuitne tanti servum non habere, ut colonus eius populus Romanus 

 esset? Here colonus = tenant farmer. 



