212
Chakacter and reign of Vespasian.
occur but few cases of extortion, things which were then of
every-day occurrence in the Roman empire. His moral con-
duct was as unblemished as one could expect in those times.
After the death of his legitimate wife, Flavia Domitilla, he
lived in a marriage of conscience with Caenis, a woman of low
birth, with whom however he was happy, and who seems to
have been a very estimable person. He was therefore what we
may call a man of very good moral conduct. Ho had, further,
a disgust for the gluttony and awfully vulgar extravagance,
which had become customary among the Romans in culinary
matters. The luxury of the wealthy was principally displayed
in sumptuous repasts, on which they spent prodigious sums
with a truly senseless prodigality. Vespasian himself had pre-
served his old simplicity; and during his reign he not only set
a good example in this respect, but endeavoured to check the
disgusting habits of the Romans by legal enactments, whereby,
as Tacitus justly observes6 he brought about a change in the
mode of living among the Romans, which deserves to be men-
tioned in history. That contemptible gluttony had commenced
at Rome during the latter period of the republic ; but after the
time of Vespasian it never rose again to such a height nor
became so general as it had been before, for he destroyed it in
its root, though Ammianus Marcellinus still records a few iso-
lated instances which occurred in his time among wealthy and
idle individuals.
Vespasian governed the empire with care and conscientious-
ness, and restored the finances. He showed no mistrust towards
the governors of provinces ; but at the same time protected the
subjects against them whenever it was necessary. Vespasian
was deficient in the feelings of a refined and educated man, and
this was his and Rome’s misfortune. He neglected altogether
the higher and intellectual pursuits, and had a downright
antipathy against persons of education, philosophers, and all
those who were anything beyond practical men of business.
Everything higher appeared to him superfluous and even as
something hostile. Helvidius Priscus was, both personally and
intellectually, one of the first men of Rome, and was distin-
guished as a Stoic philosopher7; but instead of recognising
6 Annal, iii. 55.
7 The Stoic philosophy at this time had turned into a kind of republicanism
which was incompatible with existing circumstances. It abandoned itself to a
petulance which produced very bad effects, and cannot be excused in any
way.—N.
EEIGN OE VESPASIAN.
213
the good side of Vespasian’s government, he abandoned
himself to an opposition against it, for which I cannot see
any sufficient reason, and which could produce none but
evil consequences. The misfortune was that this conduct ex-
cited in Vespasian a bitter hostility towards him, in consequence
of which he was put to death. The execution of Priscus is
little better than a murder, in which Vespasian shed the noblest
blood of the Eoman state. But in other cases he did not stain
his hands with blood; and where he had no such provocation,
he was in reality a mild ruler. He was of a grateful dispo-
sition, and behaved with mildness towards Licinius Mucianus,
many of whose actions he connived at. Antonius Primus was
put to death, but he deserved it; for he had called forth the
revolution which raised Vespasian to the throne, in the hope
of ruling over him, but afterwards, finding himself disappointed,
conspired against the emperor. Vespasian is charged by Sue-
tonius with avarice; but we cannot say whether the charge is
true. He is reported to have said that the state required for
its maintenance quadring enties millies6, that is, upwards of
280 millions sterling. But this statement seems to have been
written down by Suetonius without a thought, and shews how
unfit he was to be an historian. Even if we conceive the
Roman state to have been at that time as flourishing as, for
example, France or Italy is at the present day, it seems incon-
ceivable, how such a sum could have been raised, considering
the value which money then had. However the sum is alto-
gether an impossible one; nor can we see what it could have
been wanted for. The army consisted of only 400,000 men;
and although the pay of the soldiers was now treble what it
had been in earlier times, yet the sum above mentioned is far
greater than would be required to support such a force. It is
true, Vespasian spent much upon buildings, but building surely
is not one of the real wants of a state. Vespasian raised not
only structures which were absolutely necessary, but such as
by their splendour adorned the empire; and whatever histo-
rians may say of his avarice, his incomparable architectural
works, both at Rome and in the provinces, some of which,
such as the Colosseum, and the Temple of Peace, will last for
ever, cannot be reconciled with his alleged love of money.
Sueton. Vespas. 16.