Questions for Examination.
1. What political change has frequently resulted from improved military tactics?
2. Was Rome a military state?
3. Why are we led to conclude that the Romans considered cavalry an important force?
4. By whom was the phalanx instituted?
5. How was the phalanx formed?
6. What were the defects of the phalanx?
7. By whom was the legion substituted for the phalanx?
8. Of what troops was a legion composed?
9. What was a cohort?
10. What was the Roman form of battle?
11. In what manner was an army levied?
12. How was the sanctity of the military oath proved?
13. What advantages resulted from the Roman form of encampment?
14. How long was the citizens liable to be called upon as soldiers?
15. How was the army paid?
16. What power had the general?
17. On what occasion did the soldiers receive rewards?
18. How was the navy supplied with sailors?
19. What fact concealed by the Roman historians is established by Polybius?
20. How did the Romans form a fleet?
21. What were the several kinds of ships?
22. What naval tactics did the Romans use?
23. How did an ovation differ from a triumph?
24. Can you give a general description of a triumph?
CHAPTER VIII.
ROMAN LAW – FINANCE
Then equal laws were planted in the state, To shield alike the humble and the great. —Cooke.
1. In the early stages of society, little difficulty is felt in providing for the administration of justice, because the subjects of controversy are plain and simple, such as any man of common sense may determine; but as civilization advances, the relations between men become more complicated, property assumes innumerable forms, and the determination of questions resulting from these changes, becomes a matter of no ordinary difficulty. In the first ages of the republic, the consuls were the judges in civil and criminal matters, as the kings had previously been;43 but as the state increased, a new class of magistrates, called prætors, was appointed to preside in the courts of law. Until the age of the decemvirs, there was no written code to regulate their decisions; and even after the laws of the twelve tables had been established, there was no perfect system of law, for the enactments in that code were brief, and only asserted a few leading principles. 2. The Roman judges did not, however, decide altogether according to their own caprice; they were bound to regard the principles that had been established by the decisions of former judges; and consequently, a system of law was formed similar to the common law of England, founded on precedent and analogy. In the later ages of the empire, the number of law-books and records became so enormous, that it was no longer possible to determine the law with accuracy, and the contradictory decisions made at different periods, greatly increased the uncertainty. To remedy this evil, the emperor Justinian caused the entire to be digested into a uniform system, and his code still forms the basis of the civil law in Europe.
3. The trials in courts refer either to the affairs of the state, or to the persons or properties of individuals, and are called state, criminal, or civil trials. The two former are the most important in regard to history.
4. The division of the Roman people into two nations, made the classification of state offences very difficult. In general, the council of the patricians judged any plebeian who was accused of conspiring against their order; and the plebeians on the other hand, brought a patrician accused of having violated their privileges before their own tribunal. 5. Disobedience to the commands of the chief magistrate was punished by fine and imprisonment, and from his sentence there was no appeal; but if the consul wished to punish any person by stripes or death, the condemned man had the right of appealing to the general assembly of his peers.44 6. To prevent usurpation, it was established that every person who exercised an authority not conferred on him by the people, should be devoted as a victim to the gods.45 This, was at once a sentence of outlawry and excommunication; the Criminal might be slain by any person-with impunity, and all connection with him was shunned as pollution. 7. No magistrate could legally be brought to trial during the continuance of his office, but when his time was expired, he could be accused before the general assembly of the people, if he had transgressed the legal limits of his authority. The punishment in this case was banishment; the form of the sentence declared that the criminal "should be deprived of fire and water;" that is, the citizens, were prohibited from supplying