Napoleon III - History of Julius Caesar Vol. 1 of 2

Titus Livius, 1. 43.

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, II. 14, and IV. 20.

“The appeal to the people existed even under the kings, as the books of the pontiffs show.” (Cicero, De Republica , II. 31.)

Plutarch, Numa , 17. – Pliny, Natural History , XXXIV. 1.

“Servius Tullius conformed no longer as aforetime to the ancient order of three tribes, distinguished by origin , but to the four new tribes which he had established by quarters .” (Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 14.)

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, III. 61. – Titus Livius, I. 35.

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 22.

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 19. “Servius Tullius, by these means, threw back upon the richest all the costs and dangers of war.” (Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 20.)

“If Numa was the legislator of the religious institutions, posterity proclaims Servius as the founder of the order which distinguishes in the Republic the difference of rank, dignity, and fortune. It was he who established the census , the most salutary of all institutions for a people destined to so much greatness. Fortunes, and not individuals, were called upon to support the burdens of the State. The census established the classes, the centuries, and that order which constitutes the ornament of Rome during peace and its strength daring war.” (Titus Livius, I. 42.)

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 16.

“When Servius Tullius had completed the taking of the census, he ordered all the citizens to assemble in arms in the greatest of the fields situated near the town, and, having arranged the horsemen in squadrons, the footmen in phalanx, and the light-armed men in respective orders, he submitted them to a lustration, by the immolation of a bull, a ram, and a he-goat. He ordered that the victims should be led thrice round about the army, after which he sacrificed to Mars, to whom this field was dedicated. From that epoch to the present time the Romans have continued to have the same ceremony performed, by the most holy of magistracies, at the completion of each census; it is what they call a lustrum . The total number of all the Romans enumerated, according to the writing of the tables of the census, gave 300 men less than 85,000.” (Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 22.)

“This good order of government (under Servius Tullius) was sustained among the Romans during several centuries, but in our days it has been changed, and, by force of circumstances, has given place to a more democratic system. It is not that the centuries have been abolished, but the voters were no longer called together with the ancient regularity, and their judgments have no longer the same equity, as I have observed in my frequent attendance at the comitia.” (Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 21.)

“The poorest citizens, in spite of their great number, were the last to give their vote, and made but one century.” (Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 21.)

Titus Livius, I. 43.

“From the age of seventeen years, they were called to be soldiers. Youth began with that age, and continued to the age of forty-six. At that date old age began.” (Aulus Gellius, X. 28. – Dionysius of Halicarnassus, IV. 16.)

Titus Livius speaks only of a hundred and ninety-two centuries; Dionysius of Halicarnassus reckons a hundred and ninety-three. “In the Roman plebs, the poorest citizens, those who reported to the census not more than fifteen hundred ases , were called proletarii ; those who were not worth more than three hundred and seventy-five ases , and who thus possessed hardly anything, were called capite censi . Now, the fortune and patrimony of the citizen being for the State a sort of guarantee, the pledge and foundation of his love for his country, the men of the two last classes were only enrolled in case of extreme danger. Yet the position of the proletarii was a little more honourable than that of the capite censi ; in times of difficulty, when there was want of young men, they were incorporated in the hastily-formed militia, and equipped at the cost of the State; their name contained no allusion to the mere poll-tax to which they were subjected; less humiliating, it reminded one only of their destination to give children to their country. The scantiness of their patrimony preventing them from contributing to the aid of the State, they at least contributed to the population of the city.” (Aulus Gellius, XVI. 10.)

“Tarquinius Priscus afterwards gave to the knights the organisation which they have preserved to the present time.” (Cicero, De Republica , II. 20.)

“It is said that the number of citizens inscribed under this title was 80,000. Fabius Pictor, the most ancient of our historians, adds that this number only includes the citizens in condition to bear arms.” (Titus Livius, I. 44.)

The different censuses of the people furnished by the ancient historians have been explained in different manners. Did the numbers given designate all the citizens, or only the heads of families, or those who had attained the age of puberty? In my opinion, these numbers in Livy, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, and Plutarch, applied to all the men in a condition to carry arms, that is, according to the organisation of Servius Tullius, to those from seventeen to sixty years old. This category formed, in fact, the true Roman citizens. Under seventeen, they were too young to count in the State; above sixty, they were too old.

We know that the aged sexagenarians were called depontani , because they were forbidden the bridges over which they must go to the place of voting. (Festus, under the word sexagenarius , p. 834. – Cicero, Pro S. Roscio Amerino , 35.)

80,000 men in condition to carry arms represent, according to the statistics of the present time, fifty-five hundredths of the male part of the population, say 145,000 men, and for the two sexes, supposing them equal in number, 290,000 souls. In fact, in France, in a hundred inhabitants, there are 35 who have not passed the age of seventeen, 55 aged from seventeen to sixty years, and 10 of more than sixty.

In support of the above calculation, Dionysius of Halicarnassus relates that in the year 247 of Rome a subscription was made in honour of Horatius Cocles: 300,000 persons, men and women, gave the value of what each might expend in one day for his food. (V. 25.)

As to the number of slaves, we find in another passage of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (IX. 25) that the women, children, slaves, merchants, and artisans amounted to a number triple of that of the citizens.

If, then, the number of citizens in condition to carry arms was 80,000, and the rest of the population equalled three times that number, we should have for the total 4 x 80,000 = 320,000 souls. And, subtracting from this number the 290,000 obtained above, there would remain 30,000 for the slaves and artisans.

Whatever proportion we admit between these two last classes, the result will be that the slaves were at that period not numerous.