|
|
This Book List Sectory 24
Page 01
War was now inevitable; but the incapacity of Sp. Postumius Albinus, who arrived to conduct it (B.C. 110), and still more that of his brother Aulus, whom he left to command in his absence, when called away to hold the elections at Rome, proved as favorable to Jugurtha as the corruption of their predecessors. Aulus, having penetrated into the heart of Numidia, suffered himself to be surprised in his camp; great part of his army was cut to pieces, and the rest only escaped a similar fate by the ignominy of passing under the yoke. But Jugurtha had little reason to rejoice in this success, great as it might at first appear; for the disgrace at once roused all the spirit of the Roman people; the treaty concluded by Aulus was instantly annulled, immense exertions made to raise troops, and one of the Consuls for the new year (B.C. 109), Q. Caecilius Metellus, hastened to Numidia to retrieve the honor of the Roman arms. But this did not satisfy the people. The scandalous conduct of so many of the Nobles had given fresh life to the popular party; and the Tribune C. Mamilius carried a bill for the appointment of three Commissioners to inquire into the conduct of all of those who had received bribes from Jugurtha. Scaurus, though one of the most guilty, managed to be put upon the Commission. But he dared not shield his confederates. Many men of the highest rank were condemned, among whom were Bestia, Albinus, and Opimius. The last named was the Opimius who acted with such ferocity toward Caius Gracchus and his party. He died in exile at Dyrrhachium some years afterward, in great poverty.
There is something in the Anglo-Saxon temperament which is on the whole unfavourable to movements and groups; the great figures of the Victorian time in art and literature have been solitary men, anarchical as regards tradition, strongly individualistic, working on their own lines without much regard for schools or conventions. The Anglo-Saxon is deferential, but not imitative; he has a fancy for doing things in his own way. Wordsworth, Keats, Shelley, Byron-were there ever four contemporary poets so little affected by one another's work? Think of the phrase in which Scott summed up his artistic creed, saying that he had succeeded, in so far as he had succeeded, by a "hurried frankness of composition," which was meant to please young and eager people. It is true that Wordsworth had a solemn majesty about his work, practised a sort of priestly function, never averse to entertaining ardent visitors by conducting them about his grounds, and showing them where certain poems had been engendered. But Wordsworth, as Fitz-Gerald truly said, was proud, not vain--proud like the high-hung cloud or the solitary peak. He felt his responsibility, and desired to be felt rather than to be applauded.
United at home, the Romans were now prepared to carry on their foreign wars with more vigor; and their conquests of the Samnites and Latins made them the virtual masters of Italy. But the years which immediately followed the Licinian laws were times of great suffering. A pestilence raged in Rome, which carried off many of the most distinguished men, and among others the aged Camillus (B.C. 362). The Tiber overflowed its banks, the city was shaken by earthquakes, and a yawning chasm opened in the forum. The soothsayers declared that the gulf could never be filled up except by throwing into it that which Rome held most valuable. The tale runs that, when every one was doubting what the gods could mean, a noble youth named M. Curtius came forward, and, declaring that Rome possessed nothing so valuable as her brave citizens, mounted his steed and leaped into the abyss in full armor, whereupon the earth closed over him. This event is assigned to the year 362 B.C.
|