Chaps. 40-46.

Chap. 40. (39.)—Slaves for Which a High Price Has Been Given.

The highest price ever given for a man born in slavery, so far as I am able to discover, was that paid for Daphnus, the grammarian, who was sold by Natius of Pisaurum [Now Pesaro.] to M. Scaurus, the first man in the state, for seven hundred thousand sesterces. [We have the same difficulty in ascertaining the sums here mentioned, as in all former cases. Holland estimates the sum given for Daphnus at 300,700 sesterces, vol. i. p. 175.—B.] In our day, no doubt, comic actors have fetched a higher price, but then they were purchasing their own freedom. In the time of our ancestors, Roscius, the actor, gained five hundred thousand sesterces annually. Perhaps, too, a person might in the present instance refer to the case of the army commissary [“Dispensator;” we have an explanation of this term, B. xxxiii. c. 13.—B.] in the Armenian war, which was of late years undertaken in favour of Tiridates; which officer, in our own time, received his manumission from Nero for the sum of thirteen million sesterces; [Holland estimates the sum paid for the enfranchisement of this man at 120,000 sesterces, vol. i. p. 175.—B.] but, in this case, the consideration was the profit to be derived from the war, [In his capacity, probably, of contractor for provisions and stores.] and it was not the value of the man that was paid for. And so, too, when Lutorius Priscus bought of Sejanus, the eunuch, Pæzon, for fifty million sesterces, [Holland estimates the price paid on this occasion at 3,500 sesterces, ubi supra, thus differing exceedingly from Ajasson’s estimate.—B.] the price was given, by Hercules! rather to gratify the passion of the purchaser, than in commendation of the beauty of the slave. Universal sorrow and consternation then reigning, the public were too much pre-occupied with it to put a stop to a bargain of so scandalous a nature. [“Quam quidam injuriam lucri fecit ille mercatus in luctu civitatis, quoniam arguere nulli vacabat.” We can see the meaning of this passage, but a literal translation of it, as it stands, is out of the question.]

Chap. 41. (40.)—Supreme Happiness.

Of all nations of the earth, the Romans have, without doubt, excelled every other in the display of valour. [“Virtus”—“manliness,” that being esteemed by the Romans the ideal of true virtue.] The human judgment cannot, however, possibly decide what man has enjoyed the highest degree of happiness, seeing that every one defines a state of prosperity in a way different from another, and entirely in conformity with his own notions. If we wish to form a true judgment and come to a decision, casting aside all the allurements and illusions of fortune, we are bound to say that no mortal is happy. Fortune has dealt well, and, indeed, indulgently, to him who feels that he has a right to say that he is not unhappy. For if there is nothing else, at all events, there is the fear lest fortune should fail at last; which fear itself, when it has once fastened upon us, our happiness is no longer unalloyed. And then, too, is it not the case that there is no mortal who is always wise? Would that there were many to be found, who could feel a conviction that this is false, and that it had not been enunciated by an oracle itself, as it were! Mortals, vain as they are, and ingenious in deceiving themselves, calculate in the same way as the Thracians, who, according to their experience of each day, deposit in an urn a black or a white pebble; at the close of their life, these pebbles are separated, and from the relative number of each kind, they form their conclusions. [It appears that a similar custom prevailed among the Scythians, according to Phylarchus, from whom Pliny probably took his account of it; Lemaire, vol. iii. p. 151.] But really, may not that very day that has been complimented with a white pebble, have contained in itself the germ of some misfortune? How many a man has got into trouble by the very power which has been bestowed upon him? How many have been brought to ruin and plunged into the deepest misery by their own blessings? or rather, by what have been looked upon too fondly as blessings, for the hour during which they were in the full enjoyment of them. But most true it is, that it is the day after, that is the judge of the day before; and after all, it is only the last day that is to set its stamp on the whole; the consequence is, that we can put our trust in none of them. And then, too, is it not the fact that the blessings of life would not be equal to its evils, even though they were equal in number? For what pleasure is there that can compensate for the slightest grief? Alas! what a vain and unreasonable task we impose upon ourselves! We trouble ourselves with counting the number of days, when it is their weight [As being fraught with an intensity of pain, which no number of days passed in pleasure can compensate.] that ought to be taken into consideration.

Chap. 42. (41.)—Rare Instances of Good Fortune Continuing in the Same Family.

During the whole course of ages, we find only one woman, and that, Lampido, the Lacedæmonian, who was the daughter of a king, the wife of a king, and the mother of a king. [She was the daughter of Leotychides, and the wife of Archidamas, and mother of Ægis. Ajasson expresses his surprise, that so diligent a collector of facts as Pliny, should have been acquainted with only one example of this kind.—B. “The following are additional instances collected by Ajasson:—1. Olympias, daughter of Neoptolemus, king of Epirus, wife of Philip II., king of Macedon, and mother of Alexander the Great, king of Macedon. 2. Roxana, daughter of king Darius Codomannus, and wife of Alexander the Great; her son by whom was proclaimed king by certain generals of Alexander, but was shortly after slain at Amphipolis. 3. Laodice the Younger, daughter of king Antiochus Soter, sister and wife of Antiochus Theös, and mother of king Seleucus Callinicus. 4. Berenice, daughter of king Ptolemy Philadelphus; married to her brother king Ptolemy Euergetes, and mother of Ptolemy Philopater, by whom she was put to death. 5. Cleopatra, daughter of Antiochus the Great, king of Syria: she became the wife of king Ptolemy Epiphanes, and was mother of king Ptolemy Philometor. 6. Cleopatra Cocce, daughter of Ptolemy Philometor, married her uncle, king Ptolemy Physcon, and became mother of kings Ptolemy Lathyrus and Alexander I. 7. Cleopatra, another daughter of Ptolemy Philometor, married first to Alexander Balas, the usurper of the throne of Scythia, then to king Demetrius Nicator, and then to Antiochus Venator. Her sons by Nicator were Seleucus V. and Antiochus Gryphus, both of whom became kings of Syria; and her son Cyzicenius by Antiochus Venator, likewise became king of Syria. 8. Selene or Cleopatra, daughter of king Ptolemy Physcon, was married, first, to king Ptolemy Lathyrus, secondly, to king Antiochus Gryphus, and thirdly, to king Antiochus Eusebes. She was mother of king Antiochus Asiaticus. In all, she had nine kings as her near relations or connections. 9. Stratonice, daughter of king Demetrius Poliorcetes, was married first to king Seleucus Nicator, and then to king Antiochus Soter, and was mother of king Antiochus Therös.] Berenice was the only woman who was daughter, sister, and mother of conquerors in the Olympian games. [Val. Maximus, B. viii. c. 15, gives nearly the same account of a person whom he calls Pherenice; from the resemblance of the names, it has been supposed, that they may both refer to the same individual.—B.] The family of the Curios [He alludes to the three persons, father, son, and grandson, known by the name of C. Scribonius Curio. The first was prætor B.C. 121, one of the most distinguished orators of his time. His son, who acquired some reputation as an orator, was tribune of the people B.C. 90, prætor B.C. 82, and consul in B.C. 76, with Cn. Octavius. He is represented as being possessed of great eloquence, and of extreme purity and brilliancy of diction, but to have had none of the other requisites of an orator. Like his son, he enjoyed the friendship of Cicero. The younger Curio was an orator of great talents, which, from want of industry, he left uncultivated. Cicero endeavoured to direct his talents into a proper channel, but all in vain, and he remained to the end a man of worthless and profligate character. He was married to Fulvia, who afterwards became the wife of Antony.] has been the only one to produce three orators in succession; that of the Fabii alone has given three chiefs of the senate in succession, Fabius Ambustus, his son Fabius Rullianus, and his grandson Quintus Fabius Gurges. [Hardouin observes, that M. Fabius Ambustus was three times consul, Quintus Fabius Rullianus five times, and Q. Fabius Gurges three times.—B.]

Chap. 43. (42.)—Remarkable Example of Vicissitudes.

As to examples of the vicissitudes of Fortune, they are innumerable. For what great pleasures has she ever given us, which have not taken their rise in misfortunes? And what extraordinary misfortunes have not taken their first rise in great pleasures? (43.) It was fortune that preserved the Senator, M. Fidustius, [We have a similar account of the fate of Fidustius in Dion Cassius, by whom he is named Filuscius.—B. He was at length slain by order of Antony.] who had been proscribed by Sylla, for a period of thirty-six years. And yet he was proscribed a second time; for he survived Sylla, even to the days of Antony, and, as it appears, was proscribed by him, for no other reason but because he had been proscribed before.

Chap. 44.—Remarkable Examples of Honours.

Fortune has determined that P. Ventidius alone should enjoy the honour of a triumph over the Parthians, and yet the same individual, when he was a child, she led in the triumphal procession of Cneius Pompeius, the conqueror of Asculum. [We have an account of the vicissitudes in the life of Ventidius Bassus in A. Gellius, B. xv. c. 4, and in Valerius Paterculus, B. ii. c. 65. We learn from these writers, that Ventidius was a native of Picenum, and that, when that city was taken by Cneius Pompeius, in the Social war, Ventidius, then an infant, was carried in his mother’s arms, before the car of the conqueror.—B.] Indeed, Masurius says, that he had been twice led in triumph; and according to Cicero, he used to let out mules for the bakers of the camp. [The passage of Cicero referred to, occurs in a letter to Plancus, Ep. ad Fam. B. x. Ep. 18, where, speaking of Ventidius, who had united himself to the party of Antony, he says, “And I look down upon the camp of the mule-driver, Ventidius.”] Most writers, indeed, admit that his younger days were passed in the greatest poverty, and that he wore the hob-nailed shoes [“Caliga.” A strong heavy sandal worn by the Roman soldiers and centurions; but not by the superior officers. The term “a caligâ,” therefore, had the same meaning as our expression, “from the ranks.” The Emperor Caligula received that surname when a boy, in consequence of wearing the caliga, and being inured to the life of a common soldier.] of the common soldier. Balbus Cornelius, also, the elder, was elected to the consulate; [In the year A.U.C. 704.] but he had previously been accused, and the judges had been charged to discuss the point whether he could or not lawfully be scourged with rods; he being the first foreigner, [He was a native of Gades, in Spain. A party of the Roman nobles induced an inhabitant of Gades to accuse him of having illegally assumed the privileges of a Roman citizen. The cause was tried B.C. 55, and he was supported by Pompey and Crassus, and defended by Cicero. One of the tests of the being a Roman citizen, was the immunity from being scourged, according to the provisions of the Porcian law. So St. Paul, who, as a citizen of Tarsus, enjoyed the rights of a Roman citizen, says to the centurion, Acts xxii. 25, “Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?”] —born even on the very shores of the ocean,—who obtained that honour, which our ancestors denied even to the people of Latium. [The accusation against Balbus appears to have been his illegal usurpation of the rights of a Roman citizen, being born a foreigner. Pliny has previously informed us, B. v. c. 5, that he was a native of Gades or Cadiz. He was elected consul A.U.C. 713.—B.] Among other remarkable instances, also, we have that of L. Fulvius, [L. Fulvius Curius, consul B.C. 322. In B.C. 313 he was master of the horse to the dictator, L. Æmilius.] the consul of the rebellious Tusculani, who, immediately upon his coming over to the Romans, obtained from them the same honour. He is the only individual who, in the same year in which he had been its enemy, enjoyed the honour of a triumph in Rome, and that too, over the people whose consul he had previously been.

Down to the present time, L. Sylla is the only man who has claimed to himself the surname of “Happy;” [“Felix.” Hardouin informs us, that he transmitted this surname to his descendants; among them was Felix, the governor of Judæa, before whom St. Paul was taken for judgment.—B.] a name which he derived, forsooth, from the bloodshed of the citizens and the oppression of his country! But what claim had he on which to found his title to this happiness? Was it the power which he had of proscribing and massacreing so many thousands of his fellow-citizens? Oh interpretation most disgraceful, and which must stamp him as “Unhappy” [“Infelix.”] to all future time! Were not the men who perished in those times, of the two, to be looked upon as the more fortunate—seeing that with them we sympathize, while there is no one who does not detest Sylla? And then, besides, was not the close of his life more horrible than the sufferings which had been experienced by any of those who had been proscribed by him? his very flesh eating into itself, and so engendering his own punishment. [According to Pliny, B. xi. c. 39, and Plutarch, Sylla was affected by what has been termed the “Morbus pediculosus” or “Lousy disease.” Plutarch, however, ascribes his death to the bursting of an internal abscess; and the same cause is assigned by Val. Maximus, B. ix. c. 3.—B. It was probably of a similar disease that Herod Agrippa died, whom we find mentioned in Acts xii. 23, as being eaten of worms.] And this, although he may have thought proper to gloss it over by that last dream of his, [Plutarch refers to a dream which Sylla had a short time before his death, but it does not seem to correspond to the one here alluded to.—B. “Plutarch relates that shortly before his death, Sylla dreamed that his son Cornelius, who died before his wife, Cecilia Metella, appeared to him, and summoned him away to join his mother. Appian also states that just before his death, Sylla beheld a spirit in a dream, which summoned him by name; upon which he called together his friends, made his will, and died soon after of a fever. Only two days before his death he finished the twenty-second book of his Memoirs, in which, foreseeing his end, he boasted of the prediction of the Chaldæans, that it was his fate to die after a happy life, and in the height of his prosperity.] in the very midst of which he may be said, in some measure, to have died; and in which, as he pretended, he was told that his glory alone had risen superior to all envy; though at the same time, he confessed that it was still wanting to his supreme happiness, that he had not dedicated the Capitol. [This is referred to by Tacitus, Hist. B. iii. c. 73.—B. Plutarch tells us that Catulus performed this ceremony of dedication.]

Chap. 45.—Ten Very Fortunate Circumstances Which Have Happened to the Same Person.

Q. Metellus, in the funeral oration which he made in praise of his father, L. Metellus, who had been pontiff, twice consul, [His consulships were A.U.C. 502 and 506.—B.] dictator, master of the horse, one of the quindecemvirs for dividing the lands, [Hardouin informs us, that a certain number of public officers, which varied from three to twenty, were appointed to divide the lands of the conquered people among the Roman colonists. Lemaire, vol. iii. p. 159.—B.] and the first who had elephants in his triumphal procession, [The commentators have endeavoured to prove, and not without some success, that Pliny is not correct in the remark, that the first elephants brought to Rome, were those which followed in the triumph of Metellus. He has himself informed us, B. viii. c. 6, that they were introduced by Curius Dentatus, in his triumph over Pyrrhus, some years before that of Metellus. The same fact is also stated by Florus, B. i. c. 18.—B.] the same having been taken in the first Punic war, has left it written to the effect that his father had attained the ten greatest and best things, in the search after which wise men have spent all their lives. For, as he states, he was anxious to become the first warrior, the best orator, the bravest general, that the most important of all business should be entrusted to his charge, that he should enjoy the very highest honours, that he should possess consummate wisdom, that he should be regarded as the most distinguished senator, that he should by honourable means acquire a large fortune, that he should leave behind him many children, and that he should be the most illustrious person in the state. To refute this assertion, would be tedious and indeed unnecessary, seeing that it is contradicted more than sufficiently by the single fact, that Metellus passed his old age, deprived of his sight, which he had lost in a fire, while rescuing the Palladium from the temple of Vesta; [Ovid, Fast. B. vi. l. 436, et seq., and Val. Maximus, B. i. c. 4, allude to this circumstance.—B.] a glorious action, no doubt, although the result was unhappy: on which account it is, that although he ought not to be called unfortunate, still he cannot be called fortunate. The Roman people, however, granted him a privilege which no one else had ever obtained since the foundation of the city, that of being conveyed to the senate-house in a chariot whenever he went to the senate: [This fact has been supposed by Hardouin to be controverted by the statement of Aulus Gellius, who says, B. iii. c. 18, that all the senators, who had passed the curule chair, were carried to the curia or senate-house, in a chariot. But, as Ajasson correctly observes, Aulus Gellius does not assert that the senators were carried at the public expense, which was the case with Metellus.—B.] a great distinction, no doubt, but bought at the price of his sight.

(44.) The son also, of the same Q. Metellus, who has given the above account of his father, is considered himself to have been one of the rarest instances of human felicity. [Val. Maximus, B. vii. c. 1, details the various fortunate circumstances which occurred to Q. Metellus; he makes no mention, however, of the violent attack made upon him by Labeo; indeed, he expressly states, that his good fortune continued to the last moments of his life.—B.] For, in addition to the very considerable honours which he obtained, and the surname which he acquired from the conquest of Macedonia, he was carried to the funeral pile by his four sons, [Val. Maximus, ubi supra, and Velleius Paterculus, B. i. c. 11, speak of the honours obtained by the four sons of Q. Metellus; they are also alluded to by Cicero in his 8th Philippic, sec. 4., and his Tusc. Quæst. B. i. c. 35.—B.] one of whom had been prætor, three of them consuls, two had obtained triumphs, and one had been censor; each of which honours falls to the lot of a very few only. And yet, in the very full-blown pride of his dignity, as he was returning from the Campus Martius at mid-day, when the Forum and the Capitol are deserted, he was seized by the tribune, Caius Atinius Labeo, [Dalechamps remarks, that we find in the ancient historians a similar account relative to M. Drusus, who, when tribune of the people, hurried off the consul Philippus with such violence to prison, that the blood started from his nostrils: also of P. Sempronius, the tribune of the people, who, had it not been for the opposition offered by his colleague, would have carried the censor Appius Claudius to prison.] surnamed Macerion, whom, during his censorship, he had ejected from the senate, and was dragged by him to the Tarpeian rock, for the purpose of being precipitated therefrom. The numerous band, however, who called him by the name of father, flew to his assistance, though tardily, and only just, as it were, at the very last moment, to attend his funeral obsequies, seeing that he could not lawfully offer resistance, or repel force by force in the sacred case of a tribune; [This attack of Labeo on Metellus is mentioned in the Epitome of Livy, B. lix. The tribunes of Rome were styled “sacrosancti,” and it was considered a capital crime to offer personal violence to them, under any circumstances. Hardouin remarks, that the tribune who came to the rescue of Metellus must have been a military tribune, who, in virtue of his office, had a right to claim the services of Metellus for the army.—B.] and he was just on the very point of perishing, the victim of his virtues and the strictness of his censorship, when he was saved by the intervention of another tribune,—only obtained with the greatest difficulty,—and so rescued from the very jaws of death. He afterwards had to subsist on the bounty of others, his property having been consecrated [Cicero, in his oration “Pro Domo suâ,” sec. 47, refers to the consecration of the property of Metellus, as a case analogous to that of his own house, which had been similarly consecrated by Clodius.—B. It seems to have been the custom, when a person had been capitally condemned, for the tribune of the people to consecrate his property, with certain formalities, to some god or goddess; after which it could not, under ordinary circumstances, be recovered, whether the sentence was revoked or not. Cicero had been capitally condemned through the instrumentality of Clodius, and obliged to fly from Rome.] by the very man whom he had degraded; and who, as if that had not satiated his vengeance, still farther wreaked his malice upon him, by throwing a rope around his neck, [It was a common expression among the Romans, for a person, “obtorto collo ad prætorem trahi,” “to be dragged to the prætor with his neck wrenched;” and we meet with it repeatedly in the writings of Plautus. It would appear that it was customary for the lictors or officers of justice to seize criminals in a peculiar manner, perhaps with a rope, and with the exercise of great violence, whatever their rank.] and twisting it with such extreme violence that the blood flowed from out of his ears. [According to the remark of Dalechamps, it appears to have been not unusual with the Roman magistrates, when resistance was offered to their order, to seize the party by the throat, as is here stated to have been done by Labeo.—B.] And for my part, too, I should look upon it as in the number of his misfortunes, to have been the enemy of the second Africanus; indeed, Macedonicus, in this instance, bears testimony against himself; for he said to his sons, “Go, my children, render the last duties to Scipio; you will never witness the funeral of a greater citizen than him;” and this speech he made to his sons, one of whom had already acquired the surname of Balearicus, and another of Diadematus, [There has been considerable difficulty in ascertaining the names which should be given to the sons of Metellus, as the MSS. differ, and there appears to be no means of coming to any accurate decision, by a reference to other authorities. The essential circumstance, however, is, that two of the sons had obtained the honour of a triumph, and had acquired appropriate surnames.—B. Metellus Diadematus has been much confounded with his cousin, Metellus Dalmaticus. Diadematus was so called, from his wearing, for a long time, a bandage round his forehead, in consequence of an ulcer. He was consul B.C. 117.] he himself at the time bearing that of Macedonicus.

Now, if we take into account the above injury alone, can any one justly pronounce that man happy, whose life was thus endangered by the caprice of an enemy, and that enemy, besides, not an Africanus? What victories over enemies could possibly be counterbalanced by such a price as this? What honours, what triumphs, did not Fortune cancel, in suffering a censor to be dragged through the middle of the city—indeed, that was his only resource for gaining time [By being dragged, and not proceeding willingly, in order to gain time for succour, and so save himself from being hurled from the Tarpeian rock.] —dragged to that Capitol, whither he himself, in his triumph, had forborne to drag in a similar manner even the very captives whom he had taken in his conquests? This crime, too, must be looked upon as all the greater, from its having so nearly deprived Macedonicus of the honours of his funeral, so great and so glorious, in which he was borne to the pile by his triumphant children, he himself thus triumphing, as it were, in his very obsequies. Most assuredly, there is no happiness that can be called unalloyed, when the terror of our life has been interrupted by any outrage, and much more by such an outrage as this. As for the rest, I really am at a loss whether we ought most to commend the manners of the age, [Which allowed the laws to take their course, even against an individual of the first consequence in the state.—B.] or to feel an increased degree of indignation, that, among so many members of the family of the Metelli, such wicked audacity as that of C. Atinius remained unpunished.

Chap. 46.—The Misfortunes of Augustus.

In the life of the now deified emperor Augustus even, whom the whole world would certainly agree to place in this class, [In the class of those who were considered peculiarly fortunate; “hâc censurâ,” literally, “in this assessment,” in allusion to the classification of the citizens of Rome, according to the estimate of their property.—B.] if we carefully examine it in all its features, we shall find remarkable vicissitudes of human fate. There was his rejection from the post of master of the horse, by his uncle, [In B.C. 45, when, being but about eighteen years of age, he had the presumption to ask his uncle for the office of “magister equitum;” upon which Julius Cæsar bestowed it on M. Lepidus, probably being of opinion that his nephew was not yet fit for the office.] and the preference which was given to Lepidus, and that, too, in opposition to his own requests; the hatred produced by the proscription; his alliance in the Triumvirate [In his triumvirate with Antony and Lepidus, he showed himself no less cruel than his colleague, Antony, notwithstanding the gloss which Pliny attempts to throw over his actions. Two thousand equites and three hundred senators are said to have been put to death during this proscription.] with some among the very worst of the citizens, and that, too, with an unequal share of influence, he himself being entirely borne down by the power of Antony; his illness [Augustus was detained at Dyrrhachium for some time before the battle of Philippi by illness, and had not recovered when the battle took place.] at the battle of Philippi; his flight, and his having to remain three days concealed in a marsh, [In the first engagement at Philippi, Brutus defeated the army of Augustus, while Cassius was defeated by Antony. Appian speaks also of his concealment in a marsh to the south of Philippi.] though suffering from sickness, and, according to the account of Agrippa and Mecænas, labouring under a dropsy; his shipwreck [In his war against Sextus Pompeius, his fleet was twice shattered by shipwreck off the coast of Sicily, and he suffered several defeats by sea.] on the coast of Sicily, where he was again under the necessity of concealing himself in a cave; his desperation, which caused him even to beg Proculeius [C. Proculeius, a member of the equestrian order, and a familiar friend of Augustus. It is of him that Horace speaks in the lines (II. Ode 2), “Vivet extento Proculeius ævo Notus in fratres animi paterni.” He was one of the Romans to whom Augustus thought of giving his daughter Julia in marriage. The mode of his death is mentioned in B. xxxvi. c. 59.] to put him to death, when he was hard-pressed by the enemy in a naval engagement; [This circumstance is stated more fully by Suetonius in his Life of Augustus; he tells, that “in crossing from Sicily to Italy to rejoin his forces, Augustus was unexpectedly attacked by Demochares and Apollophanes, two of Pompey’s captains, and only escaped in a small vessel with the greatest difficulty.”] his alarm about the rising at Perusia; [L. Antonius having raised an army at Præneste, took possession of the town of Perusia, which was blockaded by Augustus, and Antonius was at last obliged to surrender. During this siege Augustus encountered several dangers, and was once nearly killed while sacrificing beneath the walls, by a band of gladiators, who came upon him unawares.] his anxiety at the battle of Actium; [The victory was long doubtful, and it was only the sudden panic of Cleopatra, that finally ensured it to Augustus.] the extreme danger he was in from the falling of a tower during the Pannonian war; [The exact nature of the accident here alluded to, is discussed by Hardouin, Lemaire, vol. iii. p. 169; he concludes, from the account of Suetonius and of Dion Cassius, that it was owing to the fall of a gallery, which extended between two towers.—B.] seditions so numerous among his soldiers; so many attacks by dangerous diseases; [These are fully described by Suetonius, in his Life of Augustus, c. 80 and 81.] the suspicions which he entertained respecting the intentions of Marcellus; [M. Claudius Marcellus, the son of Octavia, sister of Augustus. He was adopted by Augustus. Tacitus seems to hint that he was greatly beloved by the Roman people, and it is not improbable that Augustus may have become suspicious or jealous of him; his decease took place in his twentieth year.] the disgraceful banishment, as it were, of Agrippa; [To Mitylene. This refers to the jealousy between Marcellus and his brother-in-law, M. Vipsanius Agrippa. Pliny probably uses the term “pudenda,” implying that Augustus showed neither firmness nor gratitude on this occasion; for anxious, at any cost, to prevent these differences, he sent Agrippa, against his will, as proconsul to Syria; immediately on which Agrippa left Rome, but stopped at Mitylene, and left the government of Syria to his legatus. Upon the death of Marcellus, Agrippa returned to Rome.] the many plots against his life; [Dion Cassius mentions three conspiracies, the first by Fabius Cæpio and Muræna, a second, of which he does not name the authors, and a third by Cornelius Cinna.] the deaths of his own children, [Said in allusion to the suspicious deaths of his grandchildren Lucius and Caius, the children of his daughter Julia by Agrippa. They were probably removed by the criminal acts of Livia; but some historians have hinted that Augustus was privy to their destruction, the object of which was to remove all obstacles that lay in the way of Tiberius to the throne.] of which he was accused, and his heavy sorrows, caused not merely by their loss; [Implying that he was conscience-stricken at his share in their death, as well as struck with sorrow and remorse.] the adultery [She was his only child; Scribonia was her mother. She was first married to her cousin Marcellus; on his death to L. Vipsanius Agrippa, and after his decease to Tiberius Nero, the son of Livia. Her profligacy was universally known, and Augustus did not scruple to enlarge upon it before the senate; but Pliny is the only writer who states that she contemplated an attempt on the life of his father; though Suetonius says that she became, at a late period of her reign, an object of interest to those who were disaffected. Julia was first banished to Pandataria, off the coast of Campania, and then to Rhegium, which she was never allowed to leave. Her death took place A.D. 14.] of his daughter, and the discovery of her parricidal designs; the insulting retreat of his son-in-law, Nero; [Tiberius Nero, afterwards emperor. Pliny here alludes to his retirement to Rhodes, where he remained seven years. Tacitus represents that his chief reason for leaving Rome was to escape the society of his wife Julia, who treated him with the utmost contempt, and whose licentious life was not unknown to him. During this retreat he devoted himself to the study of astrology. He left Rome without the consent of Augustus, who was equally unwilling to allow of his return.] another adultery, that of his grand-daughter; [Julia, one of the daughters of Julia and Agrippa, and the wife of L. Æmilius Paulus. She fully inherited the vices of her mother. For an adulterous intercourse with D. Silanus she was banished, by Augustus to Tremerus, off the coast of Apulia, where she survived twenty years, dependent on the bounty of the empress Livia. A child born after her disgrace, was, by order of Augustus, exposed as spurious. She is supposed by some to be the Corinna of Ovid’s amatory poems.] to which there were added numerous other evils, such as the want of money to pay his soldiers; the revolt of Illyria; [He probably alludes to the rising of some tribes in the provinces on the north-eastern coast of the Adriatic, in B.C. 35, who refused to pay their tribute. They were finally vanquished by Statilius Taurus, B.C. 33.] the necessity of levying the slaves; the sad deficiency of young men; [After the defeat of his general Varus, by Arminius, in Germany.] the pestilence that raged in the City; [This pestilence is also mentioned by Dion Cassius; it took place A.U.C. 732.—B.] the famine in Italy; the design which he had formed of putting an end to his life, and the fast of four days, which brought him within a hair’s breadth of death. And then, added to all this, the slaughter of Varus; [We have an account of the disastrous expedition of Varus in Florus, B. iv. c. 12.—B.] the base slanders [Suetonius speaks of calumnious pamphlets (libelli), that were circulated about, even in the senate-house, to his extreme disparagement.] whispered against his authority; the rejection of Posthumius Agrippa, after his adoption, [A posthumous son of M. Vipsanius Agrippa by Julia, the daughter of Augustus, by whom he was adopted together with Tiberius. He was afterwards banished to Planaria, off the coast of Corsica, on account of his savage and intractable character, though guilty of no crime. Augustus is said to have privately visited him there, which, coming to the ears of Livia, increased her enmity against this youth, and he was murdered by her orders or those of Tiberius.] and the regret to which Augustus was a prey after his banishment; [Tacitus, Ann. B. i. c. 3, says that he was banished by the artifices of Nero.—B.] the suspicions too respecting Fabius, to the effect that he had betrayed his secrets; and then, last of all, the machinations of his wife and of Tiberius, the thoughts of which occupied his last moments. In fine, this same god, [After his death his solemn apotheosis took place in the Campus Martius. In some of the coins which were struck even during his life-time, he was called “Divus,” or “the god.”] who was raised to heaven, I am at a loss to say whether deservedly or not, died, leaving the son of his own enemy his heir. [For Tiberius Nero, the father of Tiberius Cæsar, took the side of M. Antonius in the Civil War.—B.]