Two Romans

Dear H,

In City of God, Augustine tells a story about a general named Regulus.  This Roman went to war against Carthage and put up a pretty good fight; but eventually he lost a battle was surrounded by the enemy and captured. 

As their prisoner the Carthaginians cut him a deal.  They said they'd let him go, but only if he went straight to Rome and used his weight to negotiate a prisoner exchange. If he succeeded, he could go back to life with his family; and if he failed, Carthage made him promise he'd come back to them as a prisoner.

He went, but once he got to Rome he negotiated the wrong way.  Standing in front of his countrymen, he told them the deal was a scam, and begged his fellow Romans to refuse it — which they did.  Then, packing up his bags, he walked right out the gates, traveled back to the captors he’d pissed off, and ended up getting tortured to death.  He lost his life and his liberty but kept his dignity. So much for the legend of Regulus.

Livy tells us about another Roman general named Camillus, who went off to make war with the city-state of Falerii.

He found himself running a long siege — a big problem, since the Romans at this point were bad at running long-term wars.  Most of the troops were farmers and business owners and such, kind of a rag-tag militia; and the longer a war went on the less likely the Romans were to win it.  Each of them knew that his farm and business needed them back eventually; and beyond this the Romans didn't have enough supplies for the winter, since everybody had to bring enough for himself.  The Falerians knew this and were counting on it; so they dragged the siege out, and the Romans were starting to get worn down.  It was at this point that Camillus ran across a strange man.

This man was a high-end school teacher, and he'd been schooling Falerii's most important children.  He had a custom, well before the siege, of taking the kids for a walk outside the walls; a tradition he continued in the safer areas once the Romans were encamped.  At first the kids were scared to go out, for obvious reasons, but the Romans were still far enough away from the walls, so the teacher would walk them out a little further each day — a little bit here and a little bit there, like boiling a frog.  Eventually the kids got fearless, and he was able, after some time, to walk them right up to the Roman camp.  At which point the Romans surrounded them.

The Romans were confused.  Who was this guy? And who were all these kids?  The teacher said they were the children of the Falerian leaders, and he'd brought them here as a gift — presumably in exchange for his own freedom, and possibly a big payout. 

Camillus was disgusted.  Did anyone expect the Romans to win by taking their enemies' children?  And could anybody respect the Romans for getting the children through treachery?  If Romans were going to win it would have to be a fair fight.  Romans deserved to be in charge because Romans were the manliest — not the dirtiest.

So Camillus told the Romans what to do.  They stripped the traitor naked, tied his hands behind his back, and gave each of the kids sticks and weapons to beat him. When the kids drove him back to the city gates, the people of Falerii were totally confused — but when the kids were back inside they learned the situation thoroughly.  The Romans would only take Falerii in a fair fight.  They would sit outside cold and hungry until the people of Falerii would man up and face them.

This caused a huge public debate in Falerii.  First of all, what kind of people were they dealing with?  Is this something a bad people would do? Could Falerians even trust their own people to risk their lives on a point of honor? 

After a short debate they threw open their gates to the Romans — as friends.  Nobody wanted an enemy who was nobler and braver than his own people.  So they formed an alliance that day, and went on, together, to eventually conquer all of Italy — and eventually most of the known world.

When I tell people these stories they always ask me one question: are they true?  Like much of ancient history I can't tell one way or another, but the important thing is, this is what the old Romans used to teach their children. 

I'm told the Romans talked lots about virtue.  I've also been told this is a mistranslation.  We use the word virtue today to mean well-behaved, or wholesome — a kind of thing that fits into Pride and Prejudice, or Winnie the Pooh.  The word they used for virtue — coming from the root word vir, for “man” — is more accurately translated as valor*.  It means something closer to “I'm an honest man and I can kill you” — and apparently, “I can hold my head high even if you kill me.”

Yours,
-J

*Other connotations are excellence, manliness, character, courage, and worth.  Faith, hope, and love are nowhere to be found here.  These last three are impositions on the already sufficient prudence, justice, temperance, and courage.