Chapter II: The Internal Prosperity In The Age Of The Antonines.—Part II. 第二章安敦尼诸帝时代罗马帝国的国内繁荣——第二节

Chapter II: The Internal Prosperity In The Age Of The Antonines.—Part II.

第二章安敦尼诸帝时代罗马帝国的国内繁荣——第二节

Till the privileges of Romans had been progressively extended to all the inhabitants of the empire, an important distinction was preserved between Italy and the provinces. The former was esteemed the centre of public unity, and the firm basis of the constitution. Italy claimed the birth, or at least the residence, of the emperors and the senate. ²⁶ The estates of the Italians were exempt from taxes, their persons from the arbitrary jurisdiction of governors. Their municipal corporations, formed after the perfect model of the capital, ²⁶¹ were intrusted, under the immediate eye of the supreme power, with the execution of the laws. From the foot of the Alps to the extremity of Calabria, all the natives of Italy were born citizens of Rome. Their partial distinctions were obliterated, and they insensibly coalesced into one great nation, united by language, manners, and civil institutions, and equal to the weight of a powerful empire. The republic gloried in her generous policy, and was frequently rewarded by the merit and services of her adopted sons. Had she always confined the distinction of Romans to the ancient families within the walls of the city, that immortal name would have been deprived of some of its noblest ornaments. Virgil was a native of Mantua; Horace was inclined to doubt whether he should call himself an Apulian or a Lucanian; it was in Padua that an historian was found worthy to record the majestic series of Roman victories. The patriot family of the Catos emerged from Tusculum; and the little town of Arpinum claimed the double honor of producing Marius and Cicero, the former of whom deserved, after Romulus and Camillus, to be styled the Third Founder of Rome; and the latter, after saving his country from the designs of Catiline, enabled her to contend with Athens for the palm of eloquence. ²⁷

在罗马公民权尚未逐步推及帝国全体居民之前，意大利与各行省之间一直保有一道重要的分野。意大利被尊为天下一统的中枢，也是国家根本大法的稳固基石。皇帝与元老院皆诞生于意大利，或至少定居于此。²⁶ 意大利人的田产免于赋税，其人身也不受总督专断司法的处置。各城邦的自治机构一律仿照京城的完善样式而设，²⁶¹ 在最高权力的亲自督察之下，受命执掌法律的施行。自阿尔卑斯山麓直到卡拉布里亚的尽头，凡意大利本土所生者，皆生而为罗马公民。他们彼此间的畛域渐次泯灭，不知不觉融为一个伟大的民族——语言相通，习俗相同，政制划一，其分量足以撑起一个强盛的帝国。共和国以其宽宏的胸襟为荣，也屡屡因这些收纳而来的子弟建功立业而得到回报。倘若共和国始终把罗马人的荣衔局限于城墙之内那些古老的世家，那么这个不朽的名号便会失去几分最崇高的光彩。维吉尔生于曼图亚；贺拉斯自己也拿不准，该自称阿普利亚人还是卢卡尼亚人；而那位配得上记述罗马历次辉煌胜利的史家，则出在帕多瓦。刚正爱国的加图一族崛起于图斯库卢姆；阿尔皮努姆这座小城，则享有孕育马略与西塞罗的双重殊荣——前者继罗慕路斯与卡米卢斯之后，堪称罗马的第三位奠基者；后者则在使祖国免遭喀提林阴谋之害后，又令罗马得以与雅典一争辩才的桂冠。²⁷

The provinces of the empire (as they have been described in the preceding chapter) were destitute of any public force, or constitutional freedom. In Etruria, in Greece, ²⁸ and in Gaul, ²⁹ it was the first care of the senate to dissolve those dangerous confederacies, which taught mankind that, as the Roman arms prevailed by division, they might be resisted by union. Those princes, whom the ostentation of gratitude or generosity permitted for a while to hold a precarious sceptre, were dismissed from their thrones, as soon as they had performed their appointed task of fashioning to the yoke the vanquished nations. The free states and cities which had embraced the cause of Rome were rewarded with a nominal alliance, and insensibly sunk into real servitude. The public authority was everywhere exercised by the ministers of the senate and of the emperors, and that authority was absolute, and without control. ²⁹¹ But the same salutary maxims of government, which had secured the peace and obedience of Italy were extended to the most distant conquests. A nation of Romans was gradually formed in the provinces, by the double expedient of introducing colonies, and of admitting the most faithful and deserving of the provincials to the freedom of Rome.

帝国的各行省（前一章已有描述），既无任何自主的武力，也无宪政意义上的自由。在伊特鲁里亚、在希腊、²⁸ 在高卢，²⁹ 元老院首要的心事，便是拆散那些危险的邦联——正是这些邦联使世人懂得：罗马的兵威既然靠分而治之才得以取胜，那么联合起来便可与之抗衡。有些君王，靠着罗马故作感恩或慷慨的姿态，得以暂时保住摇摇欲坠的王权；可一旦他们完成了替罗马把战败民族驯服于轭下的既定使命，便立即被逐下王座。那些曾投向罗马、拥护其大业的自由邦国与城市，得到的酬报不过是一纸有名无实的同盟；它们不知不觉沉沦为真正的奴役之邦。各地的公共权力，一概操于元老院与皇帝的官吏之手，而这种权力是绝对的、不受任何制约的。²⁹¹ 然而，那套曾保障意大利安宁与顺服的良善治国之道，也同样推行到了最遥远的征服之地。行省之中，一个罗马人的民族渐次形成，所凭借的是两条并行之策：一是移民设立殖民地，二是把行省居民中最忠诚、最有功者接纳为罗马公民。

“Wheresoever the Roman conquers, he inhabits,” is a very just observation of Seneca, ³⁰ confirmed by history and experience. The natives of Italy, allured by pleasure or by interest, hastened to enjoy the advantages of victory; and we may remark, that, about forty years after the reduction of Asia, eighty thousand Romans were massacred in one day, by the cruel orders of Mithridates. ³¹ These voluntary exiles were engaged, for the most part, in the occupations of commerce, agriculture, and the farm of the revenue. But after the legions were rendered permanent by the emperors, the provinces were peopled by a race of soldiers; and the veterans, whether they received the reward of their service in land or in money, usually settled with their families in the country, where they had honorably spent their youth. Throughout the empire, but more particularly in the western parts, the most fertile districts, and the most convenient situations, were reserved for the establishment of colonies; some of which were of a civil, and others of a military nature. In their manners and internal policy, the colonies formed a perfect representation of their great parent; and they were soon endeared to the natives by the ties of friendship and alliance, they effectually diffused a reverence for the Roman name, and a desire, which was seldom disappointed, of sharing, in due time, its honors and advantages. ³² The municipal cities insensibly equalled the rank and splendor of the colonies; and in the reign of Hadrian, it was disputed which was the preferable condition, of those societies which had issued from, or those which had been received into, the bosom of Rome. ³³ The right of Latium, as it was called, ³³¹ conferred on the cities to which it had been granted, a more partial favor. The magistrates only, at the expiration of their office, assumed the quality of Roman citizens; but as those offices were annual, in a few years they circulated round the principal families. ³⁴ Those of the provincials who were permitted to bear arms in the legions; ³⁵ those who exercised any civil employment; all, in a word, who performed any public service, or displayed any personal talents, were rewarded with a present, whose value was continually diminished by the increasing liberality of the emperors. Yet even, in the age of the Antonines, when the freedom of the city had been bestowed on the greater number of their subjects, it was still accompanied with very solid advantages. The bulk of the people acquired, with that title, the benefit of the Roman laws, particularly in the interesting articles of marriage, testaments, and inheritances; and the road of fortune was open to those whose pretensions were seconded by favor or merit. The grandsons of the Gauls, who had besieged Julius Cæsar in Alesia, commanded legions, governed provinces, and were admitted into the senate of Rome. ³⁶ Their ambition, instead of disturbing the tranquillity of the state, was intimately connected with its safety and greatness.

“罗马人征服到哪里，就在哪里安家”——塞涅卡这句话说得极为中肯，³⁰ 历史与阅历都印证了它。意大利的本土居民，或受享乐之诱，或为利益所动，纷纷赶往新征服之地去坐享胜利的成果；这里不妨一提：亚细亚平定后约四十年，就有八万罗马人在米特拉达梯一声残暴的号令之下于一日之间惨遭屠戮。³¹ 这些自愿远走他乡的人，大多从事商贸、农耕以及包收赋税的营生。然而，自历代皇帝把军团设为常备之后，行省便住满了一代又一代的军人；老兵们无论所得的酬劳是土地还是钱财，通常都会携家带口，在他们曾光荣度过青春岁月的那片土地上安家落户。放眼整个帝国，尤其在西部各地，凡最肥沃的地段、最便利的处所，都留作设立殖民地之用；这些殖民地有的属于民政性质，有的则带有军事色彩。无论就风俗还是就内部治理而言，殖民地都俨然是它那伟大母邦的完整缩影；它们很快便凭借友谊与结盟的纽带赢得当地人的亲近，切实地传播了对罗马之名的敬仰，也激起了一种鲜少落空的渴望——盼望有朝一日也能分享罗马的荣誉与好处。³² 各自治市镇也在不知不觉间赶上了殖民地的地位与荣光；到哈德良在位时，人们竟争论起来：究竟是从罗马怀抱中孕育而出的城邦更为可取，还是被罗马揽入怀中的城邦更胜一筹。³³ 至于所谓的“拉丁权”，³³¹ 它赋予受惠城市的，则是一种较为有限的恩典。唯有卸任的官员，才在任满之际取得罗马公民的身份；但由于这些官职每年一换，不出几年，公民权便在各主要家族之间轮转周流。³⁴ 行省居民中，凡获准在军团中执戈从军者、³⁵ 凡担任过任何文职者，一言以蔽之，凡效力过公共事务或显露过个人才干者，都会得到一份赏赐；只是随着历代皇帝日益慷慨，这份赏赐的分量也就不断贬损。然而，即便到了安敦尼诸帝的时代，公民权已遍赐于大多数臣民，它所附带的实惠依旧十分厚重。芸芸众生凭着这个身份，得以享受罗马法律的庇护，尤其是在婚姻、遗嘱与继承这些切身条款上；而对于那些兼有恩宠或功绩为其撑腰的人，飞黄腾达之路也就此敞开。当年在阿莱西亚围攻尤利乌斯·恺撒的高卢人，其孙辈如今已能统率军团、治理行省，跻身罗马元老院之列。³⁶ 他们的雄心非但不曾扰乱国家的安宁，反倒与国家的安危和昌盛紧密相连。

So sensible were the Romans of the influence of language over national manners, that it was their most serious care to extend, with the progress of their arms, the use of the Latin tongue. ³⁷ The ancient dialects of Italy, the Sabine, the Etruscan, and the Venetian, sunk into oblivion; but in the provinces, the east was less docile than the west to the voice of its victorious preceptors. This obvious difference marked the two portions of the empire with a distinction of colors, which, though it was in some degree concealed during the meridian splendor of prosperity, became gradually more visible, as the shades of night descended upon the Roman world. The western countries were civilized by the same hands which subdued them. As soon as the barbarians were reconciled to obedience, their minds were open to any new impressions of knowledge and politeness. The language of Virgil and Cicero, though with some inevitable mixture of corruption, was so universally adopted in Africa, Spain, Gaul, Britain, and Pannonia, ³⁸ that the faint traces of the Punic or Celtic idioms were preserved only in the mountains, or among the peasants. ³⁹ Education and study insensibly inspired the natives of those countries with the sentiments of Romans; and Italy gave fashions, as well as laws, to her Latin provincials. They solicited with more ardor, and obtained with more facility, the freedom and honors of the state; supported the national dignity in letters ⁴⁰ and in arms; and at length, in the person of Trajan, produced an emperor whom the Scipios would not have disowned for their countryman. The situation of the Greeks was very different from that of the barbarians. The former had been long since civilized and corrupted. They had too much taste to relinquish their language, and too much vanity to adopt any foreign institutions. Still preserving the prejudices, after they had lost the virtues, of their ancestors, they affected to despise the unpolished manners of the Roman conquerors, whilst they were compelled to respect their superior wisdom and power. ⁴¹ Nor was the influence of the Grecian language and sentiments confined to the narrow limits of that once celebrated country. Their empire, by the progress of colonies and conquest, had been diffused from the Adriatic to the Euphrates and the Nile. Asia was covered with Greek cities, and the long reign of the Macedonian kings had introduced a silent revolution into Syria and Egypt. In their pompous courts, those princes united the elegance of Athens with the luxury of the East, and the example of the court was imitated, at an humble distance, by the higher ranks of their subjects. Such was the general division of the Roman empire into the Latin and Greek languages. To these we may add a third distinction for the body of the natives in Syria, and especially in Egypt, the use of their ancient dialects, by secluding them from the commerce of mankind, checked the improvements of those barbarians. ⁴² The slothful effeminacy of the former exposed them to the contempt, the sullen ferociousness of the latter excited the aversion, of the conquerors. ⁴³ Those nations had submitted to the Roman power, but they seldom desired or deserved the freedom of the city: and it was remarked, that more than two hundred and thirty years elapsed after the ruin of the Ptolemies, before an Egyptian was admitted into the senate of Rome. ⁴⁴

罗马人深知语言对一国风俗的潜移默化，因此他们最上心的一桩事，便是随着武力的推进推广拉丁语的使用。³⁷ 意大利那些古老的方言——萨宾语、伊特鲁里亚语、维内蒂语——都渐渐湮没无闻；然而在各行省，东方对这些得胜师长之声，却不像西方那样驯顺受教。这一显而易见的差异，给帝国的东西两半染上了两种不同的色调；当繁荣如日中天、光华灿烂之时，这道分野尚被遮掩几分，可随着夜色渐渐笼罩罗马世界，它便日益显露出来。教化西方各邦的，正是征服它们的那双手。蛮族一旦甘心归顺，心智便向种种知识与文雅的新熏陶敞开。维吉尔与西塞罗的语言，虽不免掺入若干讹变，却在非洲、西班牙、高卢、不列颠与潘诺尼亚被普遍采用，³⁸ 以致布匿语或凯尔特语的一星半点残迹，只在山间或乡民之中才得以留存。³⁹ 教育与研习不知不觉间使这些地方的居民萌生出罗马人的情感；意大利不但把法律、也把风尚一并授予她那些操拉丁语的行省子民。他们求取罗马的公民权与荣衔时更为热切，得来也更为容易；无论在文坛⁴⁰ 还是在疆场，他们都为民族的尊严撑起门面；终于，图拉真其人应运而出——这样一位皇帝，纵是西庇阿家族也不会耻于认他作同乡。希腊人的处境，则与蛮族大不相同。希腊人早已开化，也早已堕落。他们品味太高，舍不得抛弃自己的语言；又太过自负，不肯采纳任何外来的制度。他们既已丧失了先人的德行，却仍抱守着先人的偏见：一面不得不敬畏罗马征服者更胜一筹的智慧与威权，一面又故作姿态，鄙薄征服者那粗糙未琢的举止。⁴¹ 希腊的语言与思想，其影响也远不止于那个昔日声名显赫之邦的狭小疆界。随着殖民与征服的推进，希腊人的势力早已从亚得里亚海一直播散到幼发拉底河与尼罗河。亚细亚遍布着希腊城市，而马其顿诸王长久的统治，更在叙利亚与埃及悄然掀起了一场无声的变革。在他们那些奢华的宫廷里，这些君王把雅典的优雅与东方的豪奢熔于一炉；朝廷的风尚，臣民中的上层人物也远远地、谦卑地起而效仿。这便是罗马帝国大体上依拉丁语与希腊语所作的划分。除此之外，我们还可添上第三重区别：叙利亚、尤其是埃及的广大土著，仍沿用他们古老的方言，这就把他们隔绝于人类的往来交流之外，阻滞了这些蛮族的进步。⁴² 前者慵懒柔靡，招来征服者的轻蔑；后者阴郁凶悍，激起征服者的厌恶。⁴³ 这些民族虽已臣服于罗马的威权，却极少企望、也极少配得上罗马公民权：有人就注意到，自托勒密王朝覆灭之后，足足过了两百三十多年，才有一个埃及人被接纳进罗马元老院。⁴⁴

It is a just though trite observation, that victorious Rome was herself subdued by the arts of Greece. Those immortal writers who still command the admiration of modern Europe, soon became the favorite object of study and imitation in Italy and the western provinces. But the elegant amusements of the Romans were not suffered to interfere with their sound maxims of policy. Whilst they acknowledged the charms of the Greek, they asserted the dignity of the Latin tongue, and the exclusive use of the latter was inflexibly maintained in the administration of civil as well as military government. ⁴⁵ The two languages exercised at the same time their separate jurisdiction throughout the empire: the former, as the natural idiom of science; the latter, as the legal dialect of public transactions. Those who united letters with business were equally conversant with both; and it was almost impossible, in any province, to find a Roman subject, of a liberal education, who was at once a stranger to the Greek and to the Latin language.

有一句评断虽属老生常谈，却也公允：得胜的罗马，反被希腊的文艺所征服。那些至今仍令近代欧洲倾慕不已的不朽作家，很快便成了意大利与西部各行省争相研读、摹仿的对象。不过，罗马人绝不容这般高雅的消遣妨碍其审慎的治国方略。他们一面承认希腊语的魅力，一面又坚守拉丁语的尊严；在文武两政的治理中，都毫不通融地专用拉丁语。⁴⁵ 这两种语言同时在帝国境内各司其职：希腊语是学术天然的用语，拉丁语则是公务往来法定的言辞。凡兼通文墨与政务者，对两种语言都同样娴熟；因此在任何一个行省里，几乎都找不出一个受过良好教育、却对希腊语和拉丁语双双陌生的罗马臣民。

It was by such institutions that the nations of the empire insensibly melted away into the Roman name and people. But there still remained, in the centre of every province and of every family, an unhappy condition of men who endured the weight, without sharing the benefits, of society. In the free states of antiquity, the domestic slaves were exposed to the wanton rigor of despotism. The perfect settlement of the Roman empire was preceded by ages of violence and rapine. The slaves consisted, for the most part, of barbarian captives, ⁴⁵¹ taken in thousands by the chance of war, purchased at a vile price, ⁴⁶ accustomed to a life of independence, and impatient to break and to revenge their fetters. Against such internal enemies, whose desperate insurrections had more than once reduced the republic to the brink of destruction, ⁴⁷ the most severe ⁴⁷¹ regulations, ⁴⁸ and the most cruel treatment, seemed almost justified by the great law of self-preservation. But when the principal nations of Europe, Asia, and Africa were united under the laws of one sovereign, the source of foreign supplies flowed with much less abundance, and the Romans were reduced to the milder but more tedious method of propagation. ⁴⁸¹ In their numerous families, and particularly in their country estates, they encouraged the marriage of their slaves. ⁴⁸² The sentiments of nature, the habits of education, and the possession of a dependent species of property, contributed to alleviate the hardships of servitude. ⁴⁹ The existence of a slave became an object of greater value, and though his happiness still depended on the temper and circumstances of the master, the humanity of the latter, instead of being restrained by fear, was encouraged by the sense of his own interest. The progress of manners was accelerated by the virtue or policy of the emperors; and by the edicts of Hadrian and the Antonines, the protection of the laws was extended to the most abject part of mankind. The jurisdiction of life and death over the slaves, a power long exercised and often abused, was taken out of private hands, and reserved to the magistrates alone. The subterraneous prisons were abolished; and, upon a just complaint of intolerable treatment, the injured slave obtained either his deliverance, or a less cruel master. ⁵⁰

正是靠着这样一些制度，帝国境内各民族才不知不觉地融汇于罗马之名、消融为罗马之民。然而，在每一个行省、每一个家庭的中心，仍留着一群境遇不幸的人：他们承受着社会的重压，却分不到社会的半点好处。古代那些自由邦国里，家养的奴隶一任专制主人肆意的苛虐。罗马帝国那井然完备的秩序，是历经数百年暴力与劫掠才奠定的。奴隶大多是蛮族的俘虏，⁴⁵¹ 战乱之中动辄成千被掳，再以贱价售出；⁴⁶ 他们本过惯了自由自主的生活，此刻恨不得挣断锁链、一雪枷锁之辱。这些内部的仇敌，其铤而走险的暴动不止一次把共和国逼到覆亡的边缘；⁴⁷ 于是，凭着自保这条天大的道理，最严酷的⁴⁷¹ 法规⁴⁸ 与最残忍的对待，似乎也就近乎有了理由。然而，当欧洲、亚洲、非洲的主要民族都统一于一位君主的法令之下时，外来奴隶的来源便不再那么充沛，罗马人只好退而求其次，采用较为温和、却也更为迟缓的繁衍之法。⁴⁸¹ 在他们人丁众多的家中，尤其在乡间的田庄里，便开始鼓励奴隶婚配。⁴⁸² 天然的骨肉之情、日久养成的习惯，加之奴隶本身也算一种能生息繁衍的财产，凡此种种，都多少减轻了奴役的苦楚。⁴⁹ 一个奴隶的存活于是更有价值；尽管他的祸福依旧系于主人的脾性与境况，可主人的仁厚之心，如今不再受制于畏惧，反倒因顾念自身利害而受到鼓励。历代皇帝或出于德行、或出于权谋，加快了风气的转变；哈德良与安敦尼诸帝颁下诏令，把法律的庇护延及人类中最卑贱的一群。对奴隶操生杀之权——这一久已行使、又屡遭滥用的权力——如今从私人手中收回，专归官府执掌。地下的私牢一概废除；奴隶若因遭受无法忍受的虐待而据实控告，便可得到解脱，或另换一个不那么残忍的主人。⁵⁰

In general, this passage of Gibbon on slavery, is full, not only of blamable indifference, but of an exaggeration of impartiality which resembles dishonesty. He endeavors to extenuate all that is appalling in the condition and treatment of the slaves; he would make us consider those cruelties as possibly “justified by necessity.” He then describes, with minute accuracy, the slightest mitigations of their deplorable condition; he attributes to the virtue or the policy of the emperors the progressive amelioration in the lot of the slaves; and he passes over in silence the most influential cause, that which, after rendering the slaves less miserable, has contributed at length entirely to enfranchise them from their sufferings and their chains,—Christianity. It would be easy to accumulate the most frightful, the most agonizing details, of the manner in which the Romans treated their slaves; whole works have been devoted to the description. I content myself with referring to them. Some reflections of Robertson, taken from the discourse already quoted, will make us feel that Gibbon, in tracing the mitigation of the condition of the slaves, up to a period little later than that which witnessed the establishment of Christianity in the world, could not have avoided the acknowledgment of the influence of that beneficent cause, if he had not already determined not to speak of it.

总的说来，吉本这一段论奴隶制的文字，不仅充满了应受责备的冷漠，更透着一种近乎虚伪的、过分做作的“不偏不倚”。凡奴隶的处境与遭遇中一切骇人听闻之处，他都竭力加以淡化；他要我们把那些暴行看作或许“为势所迫、情有可原”。继而，他又极尽精细地描摹奴隶那可悲境况中每一丝微末的缓解；他把奴隶命运的逐步改善尽数归功于历代皇帝的德行或权谋；而对那个最有力的根源，他却缄口不提——正是这个根源，先使奴隶不再那样悲惨，终又促成他们彻底摆脱苦难、挣脱锁链，这便是基督教。要把罗马人对待奴隶的种种最骇人、最惨痛的细节罗列出来，本非难事；已有整部整部的著作专门描述此事，我只消提请读者参看便够了。罗伯逊在前引那篇论说中的一些感想，会让我们体会到：吉本既已把奴隶境况的改善一路追溯到基督教立足于世稍后的年代，那么，倘若他不是早已打定主意闭口不谈，便断然无法回避承认这一善因的影响。

“Upon establishing despotic government in the Roman empire, domestic tyranny rose, in a short time, to an astonishing height. In that rank soil, every vice, which power nourishes in the great, or oppression engenders in the mean, thrived and grew up apace. * It is not the authority of any single detached precept in the gospel, but the spirit and genius of the Christian religion, more powerful than any particular command, which hath abolished the practice of slavery throughout the world. The temper which Christianity inspired was mild and gentle; and the doctrines it taught added such dignity and lustre to human nature, as rescued it from the dishonorable servitude into which it was sunk.”

“自专制政体在罗马帝国确立之日起，家庭之内的暴虐不消多久便攀升到骇人的地步。在那片肥沃的恶土上，凡权力在贵人心中所滋养、凡压迫在贱民身上所催生的种种恶德，无不迅速滋长、恣意蔓延。……真正在普天之下废除奴隶之制的，并非福音书中某一条孤立诫命的权威，而是基督教那种比任何具体训令都更为有力的精神与气质。基督教所熏陶出的性情，是温和而仁厚的；它所宣讲的教义，为人性增添了这样的尊严与光辉，终把人性从它曾沉沦其中的那种可耻奴役里拯救出来。”

It is in vain, then, that Gibbon pretends to attribute solely to the desire of keeping up the number of slaves, the milder conduct which the Romans began to adopt in their favor at the time of the emperors. This cause had hitherto acted in an opposite direction; how came it on a sudden to have a different influence? “The masters,” he says, “encouraged the marriage of their slaves; * the sentiments of nature, the habits of education, contributed to alleviate the hardships of servitude.” The children of slaves were the property of their master, who could dispose of or alienate them like the rest of his property. Is it in such a situation, with such notions, that the sentiments of nature unfold themselves, or habits of education become mild and peaceful? We must not attribute to causes inadequate or altogether without force, effects which require to explain them a reference to more influential causes; and even if these slighter causes had in effect a manifest influence, we must not forget that they are themselves the effect of a primary, a higher, and more extensive cause, which, in giving to the mind and to the character a more disinterested and more humane bias, disposed men to second or themselves to advance, by their conduct, and by the change of manners, the happy results which it tended to produce.—G.

由此可见，吉本硬要把罗马人自帝国时代起对奴隶采取的较温和态度，单单归因于他们想维持奴隶数目的愿望，实属徒劳。这一动机在此之前一直是朝相反方向起作用的，怎么会突然产生出另一种影响来呢？他说：“主人们开始鼓励奴隶婚配；……天然的骨肉之情、日久养成的习惯，多少减轻了奴役的苦楚。”可是奴隶的子女乃是主人的财产，主人尽可以像处置其余财产那样把他们变卖或转让。试问，在这样的处境、这样的观念之下，天然的骨肉之情又如何舒展得开，日久养成的习惯又如何会变得温和安详？我们切不可把那些本需仰仗更有力的原因才能解释的结果，硬安到一些不足挂齿、甚而全无力量的原因头上；纵然这些次要的原因当真产生了显而易见的影响，我们也不该忘记：它们本身，也不过是某个更根本、更崇高、更广泛的原因所结出的果——正是这个原因，给人的心灵与品性注入了一种更无私、更仁慈的倾向，从而促使世人或从旁襄助、或身体力行，凭着自己的行为、凭着风气的转变，去推动它本就趋向促成的那些美好结果。—G.

I have retained the whole of M. Guizot’s note, though, in his zeal for the invaluable blessings of freedom and Christianity, he has done Gibbon injustice. The condition of the slaves was undoubtedly improved under the emperors. What a great authority has said, “The condition of a slave is better under an arbitrary than under a free government,” (Smith’s Wealth of Nations, iv. 7,) is, I believe, supported by the history of all ages and nations. The protecting edicts of Hadrian and the Antonines are historical facts, and can as little be attributed to the influence of Christianity, as the milder language of heathen writers, of Seneca, (particularly Ep. 47,) of Pliny, and of Plutarch. The latter influence of Christianity is admitted by Gibbon himself. The subject of Roman slavery has recently been investigated with great diligence in a very modest but valuable volume, by Wm. Blair, Esq., Edin. 1833. May we be permitted, while on the subject, to refer to the most splendid passage extant of Mr. Pitt’s eloquence, the description of the Roman slave-dealer. on the shores of Britain, condemning the island to irreclaimable barbarism, as a perpetual and prolific nursery of slaves? Speeches, vol. ii. p. 80.

我把基佐先生这条注释整个保留了下来，尽管他一腔热忱地推崇自由与基督教这两桩无价的福祉，却因此错怪了吉本。奴隶的境况在历代皇帝治下无疑有所改善。某位大权威说过：“奴隶在专断政体下的境遇，反倒胜过在自由政体之下。”（Smith’s Wealth of Nations, iv. 7）——我相信，古往今来各国的历史都能佐证此说。哈德良与安敦尼诸帝那些保护奴隶的诏令，乃是历史事实，其成因固然不能归于基督教的影响；同样，异教作家笔下渐趋温和的言辞——如塞涅卡（尤见其书信第 47 篇）、普林尼与普鲁塔克者——也一样不能归于基督教。至于基督教后来的影响，吉本本人是承认的。关于罗马奴隶制这一题目，近来有一部篇幅不大却极有价值的著作作了极为勤勉的考察，出自布莱尔先生（Wm. Blair, Esq.）之手，1833 年刊于爱丁堡。既然谈到这个话题，可否容我们提一提皮特先生现存辞令中最华彩的一段？他描绘了那个在不列颠海岸上做买卖的罗马奴隶贩子，如何把这座岛屿判作一处永不衰竭、源源产奴的温床，注定其永堕于不可救药的野蛮之中。见 Speeches, vol. ii. p. 80。

Gibbon, it should be added, was one of the first and most consistent opponents of the African slave-trade. (See Hist. ch. xxv. and Letters to Lor Sheffield, Misc. Works)—M.]

另需补充一句：吉本本人乃是最早、也最始终如一地反对非洲奴隶贸易的人物之一。（参见本书第二十五章，以及《致谢菲尔德勋爵书》，收于《杂著》）—M.]

Hope, the best comfort of our imperfect condition, was not denied to the Roman slave; and if he had any opportunity of rendering himself either useful or agreeable, he might very naturally expect that the diligence and fidelity of a few years would be rewarded with the inestimable gift of freedom. The benevolence of the master was so frequently prompted by the meaner suggestions of vanity and avarice, that the laws found it more necessary to restrain than to encourage a profuse and undistinguishing liberality, which might degenerate into a very dangerous abuse. ⁵¹ It was a maxim of ancient jurisprudence, that a slave had not any country of his own; he acquired with his liberty an admission into the political society of which his patron was a member. The consequences of this maxim would have prostituted the privileges of the Roman city to a mean and promiscuous multitude. Some seasonable exceptions were therefore provided; and the honorable distinction was confined to such slaves only as, for just causes, and with the approbation of the magistrate, should receive a solemn and legal manumission. Even these chosen freedmen obtained no more than the private rights of citizens, and were rigorously excluded from civil or military honors. Whatever might be the merit or fortune of their sons, they likewise were esteemed unworthy of a seat in the senate; nor were the traces of a servile origin allowed to be completely obliterated till the third or fourth generation. ⁵² Without destroying the distinction of ranks, a distant prospect of freedom and honors was presented, even to those whom pride and prejudice almost disdained to number among the human species.

希望，乃是我们这残缺不全的人世间最好的慰藉；这份慰藉，罗马的奴隶也并未被剥夺。他只要有机会让自己对主人有用或讨主人欢心，便大可指望：数年的勤勉与忠诚，终会换来自由这份无价的馈赠。只是主人的仁慈往往出于虚荣与贪婪之类不甚高尚的动机，以致法律认为：与其鼓励，倒不如约束这种挥霍无度、不加甄别的慷慨——因为它很可能堕落成一种极其危险的流弊。⁵¹ 古代法学有一条准则：奴隶没有自己的国族；他一旦获得自由，便随之被接纳进其恩主所属的那个政治共同体。这条准则若一味推行下去，罗马公民权的种种特权，便会被糟蹋在一群下贱而杂乱的乌合之众身上。于是人们适时设下了若干例外：这份尊荣的身份，只限于那些出于正当缘由、并经官府批准而正式合法获释的奴隶。即便是这些获选的被释奴，所得的也不过是公民的私权，至于文武方面的荣衔，则一概被严格摒之门外。他们的儿子无论多有功勋、多么显达，也照样被视作不配占元老院一席；而那奴隶出身的痕迹，非到第三、四代，是不准彻底抹去的。⁵² 如此一来，既不曾打破等级之别，却又让那些连高傲与偏见都几乎不屑归入人类之列的人，也能远远望见一线自由与荣誉的前景。

The number of subjects who acknowledged the laws of Rome, of citizens, of provincials, and of slaves, cannot now be fixed with such a degree of accuracy, as the importance of the object would deserve. We are informed, that when the Emperor Claudius exercised the office of censor, he took an account of six millions nine hundred and forty-five thousand Roman citizens, who, with the proportion of women and children, must have amounted to about twenty millions of souls. The multitude of subjects of an inferior rank was uncertain and fluctuating. But, after weighing with attention every circumstance which could influence the balance, it seems probable that there existed, in the time of Claudius, about twice as many provincials as there were citizens, of either sex, and of every age; and that the slaves were at least equal in number to the free inhabitants of the Roman world.⁶¹¹ The total amount of this imperfect calculation would rise to about one hundred and twenty millions of persons; a degree of population which possibly exceeds that of modern Europe, ⁶² and forms the most numerous society that has ever been united under the same system of government.

归顺罗马法律的臣民究竟有多少——公民、行省居民与奴隶各占几何——如今已无从考订，难以精确到与这一课题本身的分量相称的地步。据载，克劳狄乌斯皇帝行使监察官之职时，曾清点出罗马公民六百九十四万五千人；若再加上相应比例的妇孺，总数想必已在两千万上下。至于身份较低的各色臣民，其数目则游移不定、难以确知。不过，凡足以左右这一权衡的种种情形，若一一细加斟酌，则似乎可以推断：在克劳狄乌斯之世，无论男女、无论老幼，行省居民的人数约为公民的两倍；而奴隶的数目，至少与罗马世界的自由居民相当。⁶¹¹ 这样一番并不精确的估算，其总数将高达约一亿两千万人；如此的人口规模或许已超过近代欧洲，⁶² 也构成了有史以来共处同一政体之下、人数最为繁盛的社会。

Notes 注释

The senators were obliged to have one third of their own landed property in Italy. See Plin. l. vi. ep. 19. The qualification was reduced by Marcus to one fourth. Since the reign of Trajan, Italy had sunk nearer to the level of the provinces.

元老们必须把自己名下三分之一的地产置于意大利。参见 Plin. l. vi. ep. 19。马可皇帝将这一比例降至四分之一。自图拉真在位以来，意大利已日益跌落到与各行省相近的地步。

261

It may be doubted whether the municipal government of the cities was not the old Italian constitution rather than a transcript from that of Rome. The free government of the cities, observes Savigny, was the leading characteristic of Italy. Geschichte des Römischen Rechts, i. p. G.—M.

城市的自治政体究竟是意大利固有的旧制，抑或只是罗马体制的翻版，其实不无可疑。萨维尼指出，城市实行自治，正是意大利的首要特征。见 Geschichte des Römischen Rechts, i. p. G.—M.

The first part of the Verona Illustrata of the Marquis Maffei gives the clearest and most comprehensive view of the state of Italy under the Cæsars. * Note: Compare Denina, Revol. d’ Italia, l. ii. c. 6, p. 100, 4 to edit.

马费伊侯爵所著《维罗纳志》（Verona Illustrata）的第一部分，对诸恺撒治下意大利的状况，给出了最清晰、最全面的描绘。编者注：参较 Denina, Revol. d’Italia, l. ii. c. 6, p. 100, 4to edit.。

See Pausanias, l. vii. The Romans condescended to restore the names of those assemblies, when they could no longer be dangerous.

参见 Pausanias, l. vii。待到那些议事会再也构不成威胁时，罗马人便屈尊将其名号予以恢复。

They are frequently mentioned by Cæsar. The Abbé Dubos attempts, with very little success, to prove that the assemblies of Gaul were continued under the emperors. Histoire de l’Etablissement de la Monarchie Francoise, l. i. c. 4.

恺撒屡屡提及它们。杜博神父曾力图证明高卢的议事会在历代皇帝治下仍得延续，惜乎难以令人信服。见 Histoire de l’Etablissement de la Monarchie Francoise, l. i. c. 4。

291

This is, perhaps, rather overstated. Most cities retained the choice of their municipal officers: some retained valuable privileges; Athens, for instance, in form was still a confederate city. (Tac. Ann. ii. 53.) These privileges, indeed, depended entirely on the arbitrary will of the emperor, who revoked or restored them according to his caprice. See Walther Geschichte des Römischen Rechts, i. 324—an admirable summary of the Roman constitutional history.—M.

此说或许有些言过其实。多数城市仍保有推选自治官员之权；有些还保留着可贵的特权，譬如雅典，在形式上依旧是一座同盟城市。（Tac. Ann. ii. 53.）不过，这些特权其实全然取决于皇帝的专断意志，他全凭一时兴致或褫夺、或恢复。参见 Walther, Geschichte des Römischen Rechts, i. 324——此书对罗马宪政史作了极为出色的概述。—M.

Seneca in Consolat. ad Helviam, c. 6.

Memnon apud Photium, (c. 33,) [c. 224, p. 231, ed Bekker.] Valer. Maxim. ix. 2. Plutarch and Dion Cassius swell the massacre to 150,000 citizens; but I should esteem the smaller number to be more than sufficient.

Memnon apud Photium, (c. 33,) [c. 224, p. 231, ed. Bekker.] Valer. Maxim. ix. 2。普鲁塔克与狄奥·卡西乌斯把遇害者夸大到十五万人；但我以为，较小的那个数字已然绰绰有余。

Twenty-five colonies were settled in Spain, (see Plin. Hist. Nat. iii. 3, 4; iv. 35;) and nine in Britain, of which London, Colchester, Lincoln, Chester, Gloucester, and Bath still remain considerable cities. (See Richard of Cirencester, p. 36, and Whittaker’s History of Manchester, l. i. c. 3.)

西班牙设有二十五处殖民地（见 Plin. Hist. Nat. iii. 3, 4; iv. 35），不列颠设有九处，其中伦敦、科尔切斯特、林肯、切斯特、格洛斯特与巴斯至今仍是颇具规模的城市。（见 Richard of Cirencester, p. 36，及 Whittaker’s History of Manchester, l. i. c. 3。）

Aul. Gel. Noctes Atticæ, xvi 13. The Emperor Hadrian expressed his surprise, that the cities of Utica, Gades, and Italica, which already enjoyed the rights of Municipia, should solicit the title of colonies. Their example, however, became fashionable, and the empire was filled with honorary colonies. See Spanheim, de Usu Numismatum Dissertat. xiii.

Aul. Gel. Noctes Atticæ, xvi. 13。哈德良皇帝曾表示诧异：乌提卡、加德斯与伊塔利卡诸城既已享有 Municipia（自治市）之权，何以还要去乞求 colonies（殖民地）的名号。然而它们这一先例竟成风尚，帝国境内于是遍布着徒具虚名的荣誉殖民地。见 Spanheim, de Usu Numismatum Dissertat. xiii。

331

The right of Latium conferred an exemption from the government of the Roman præfect. Strabo states this distinctly, l. iv. p. 295, edit. Cæsar’s. See also Walther, p. 233.—M

拉丁权可使人免受罗马长官的管辖。斯特拉波对此说得明白，见 l. iv. p. 295, edit. Cæsar’s。另参 Walther, p. 233。—M

Spanheim, Orbis Roman. c. 8, p. 62.

Aristid. in Romæ Encomio. tom. i. p. 218, edit. Jebb.

Tacit. Annal. xi. 23, 24. Hist. iv. 74.

See Plin. Hist. Natur. iii. 5. Augustin. de Civitate Dei, xix 7 Lipsius de Pronunciatione Linguæ Latinæ, c. 3.

参见 Plin. Hist. Natur. iii. 5；Augustin. de Civitate Dei, xix. 7；Lipsius de Pronunciatione Linguæ Latinæ, c. 3。

Apuleius and Augustin will answer for Africa; Strabo for Spain and Gaul; Tacitus, in the life of Agricola, for Britain; and Velleius Paterculus, for Pannonia. To them we may add the language of the Inscriptions. * Note: Mr. Hallam contests this assertion as regards Britain. “Nor did the Romans ever establish their language—I know not whether they wished to do so—in this island, as we perceive by that stubborn British tongue which has survived two conquests.” In his note, Mr. Hallam examines the passage from Tacitus (Agric. xxi.) to which Gibbon refers. It merely asserts the progress of Latin studies among the higher orders. (Midd. Ages, iii. 314.) Probably it was a kind of court language, and that of public affairs and prevailed in the Roman colonies.—M.

论非洲，有阿普列尤斯与奥古斯丁可作佐证；论西班牙与高卢，有斯特拉波；论不列颠，有塔西佗的《阿古利可拉传》；论潘诺尼亚，则有维莱伊乌斯·帕特尔库鲁斯。此外，还可加上各处铭文所用的语言为证。编者注：就不列颠一节，哈勒姆先生对这一论断提出异议：“罗马人也从不曾在这座岛上确立起他们的语言——我不知道他们是否有此意愿——这一点，从那顽强的不列颠土语历经两度征服而犹存，便可看出。”哈勒姆先生在其注中考察了吉本所援引的塔西佗那段文字（Agric. xxi.），指出它至多不过表明拉丁文的研习在上层社会中有所推进而已。（Midd. Ages, iii. 314.）拉丁语在不列颠大概是一种宫廷及公务用语，并通行于罗马各殖民地。—M.

The Celtic was preserved in the mountains of Wales, Cornwall, and Armorica. We may observe, that Apuleius reproaches an African youth, who lived among the populace, with the use of the Punic; whilst he had almost forgot Greek, and neither could nor would speak Latin, (Apolog. p. 596.) The greater part of St. Austin’s congregations were strangers to the Punic.

凯尔特语在威尔士、康沃尔与阿摩里卡的山区得以保存。值得一提的是，阿普列尤斯曾指责一个混迹于平民之中的非洲青年操布匿语，说他几乎忘光了希腊语，对拉丁语则既不能说、也不肯说。（Apolog. p. 596.）圣奥古斯丁的会众，大半都不通布匿语。

Spain alone produced Columella, the Senecas, Lucan, Martial, and Quintilian.

单单西班牙一地，便孕育出科卢梅拉、塞涅卡父子、卢坎、马尔提亚利斯与昆体良。

There is not, I believe, from Dionysius to Libanus, a single Greek critic who mentions Virgil or Horace. They seem ignorant that the Romans had any good writers.

我相信，从狄奥尼修斯到利巴尼乌斯，没有哪一位希腊评论家提到过维吉尔或贺拉斯。他们似乎压根不知道罗马人有什么好作家。

The curious reader may see in Dupin, (Bibliotheque Ecclesiastique, tom. xix. p. 1, c. 8,) how much the use of the Syriac and Egyptian languages was still preserved.

好奇的读者可在迪潘（Bibliotheque Ecclesiastique, tom. xix. p. 1, c. 8）书中看到，叙利亚语与埃及语当时仍保留到何等程度。

See Juvenal, Sat. iii. and xv. Ammian. Marcellin. xxii. 16.

参见 Juvenal, Sat. iii. and xv。Ammian. Marcellin. xxii. 16。

Dion Cassius, l. lxxvii. p. 1275. The first instance happened under the reign of Septimius Severus.

Dion Cassius, l. lxxvii. p. 1275。头一例发生在塞普蒂米乌斯·塞维鲁在位期间。

See Valerius Maximus, l. ii. c. 2, n. 2. The emperor Claudius disfranchised an eminent Grecian for not understanding Latin. He was probably in some public office. Suetonius in Claud. c. 16. Note: Causes seem to have been pleaded, even in the senate, in both languages. Val. Max. loc. cit*. Dion. l. lvii. c. 15.—M

参见 Valerius Maximus, l. ii. c. 2, n. 2。克劳狄乌斯皇帝曾因一位显赫的希腊人不懂拉丁语而剥夺其公民权；此人大概担任着某种公职。见 Suetonius in Claud. c. 16。编者注：诉讼似乎连在元老院里也是两种语言并用的。Val. Max. loc. cit.。Dion. l. lvii. c. 15。—M

451

It was this which rendered the wars so sanguinary, and the battles so obstinate. The immortal Robertson, in an excellent discourse on the state of the world at the period of the establishment of Christianity, has traced a picture of the melancholy effects of slavery, in which we find all the depth of his views and the strength of his mind. I shall oppose successively some passages to the reflections of Gibbon. The reader will see, not without interest, the truths which Gibbon appears to have mistaken or voluntarily neglected, developed by one of the best of modern historians. It is important to call them to mind here, in order to establish the facts and their consequences with accuracy. I shall more than once have occasion to employ, for this purpose, the discourse of Robertson. “Captives taken in war were, in all probability, the first persons subjected to perpetual servitude; and, when the necessities or luxury of mankind increased the demand for slaves, every new war recruited their number, by reducing the vanquished to that wretched condition. Hence proceeded the fierce and desperate spirit with which wars were carried on among ancient nations. While chains and slavery were the certain lot of the conquered, battles were fought, and towns defended with a rage and obstinacy which nothing but horror at such a fate could have inspired; but, putting an end to the cruel institution of slavery, Christianity extended its mild influences to the practice of war, and that barbarous art, softened by its humane spirit, ceased to be so destructive. Secure, in every event, of personal liberty, the resistance of the vanquished became less obstinate, and the triumph of the victor less cruel. Thus humanity was introduced into the exercise of war, with which it appears to be almost incompatible; and it is to the merciful maxims of Christianity, much more than to any other cause, that we must ascribe the little ferocity and bloodshed which accompany modern victories.”—G.

正是这一点，使得当时的战争如此血腥、鏖战如此顽烈。不朽的罗伯逊在一篇论基督教立世之际天下大势的绝妙论说中，勾勒出一幅奴隶制带来种种可悲后果的图景，字里行间尽显其见识之深与心智之强。我将逐一援引其中若干段落，以与吉本的议论相对照。读者当会饶有兴味地看到：那些吉本似乎误解了、或有意忽略了的真相，如何经由一位近代最杰出的史家之手得以阐发。在此把它们重新提起，对于准确地厘定史实及其后果，实属要紧。为此，我将不止一次地引用罗伯逊的这篇论说。“战争中被掳的俘虏，十有八九是最早沦为终身奴役的人；及至人类的需求或奢欲抬高了对奴隶的需索，此后每一场新的战争，都会把战败者贬入这一悲惨境地，从而为奴隶的队伍添丁进口。古代各民族之间的战争之所以带着那样凶狠而不顾死活的气概，根源正在于此。既然锁链与奴役是败者注定的下场，那么人们打起仗来、守起城来，那股暴怒与顽强，唯有对如此命运的恐惧才激发得出；然而，基督教在终结奴隶这一残酷制度的同时，也把它温和的影响延及战争，使这门野蛮的技艺经其仁厚精神的浸润而不再那样具有毁灭性。既然无论胜败、人身自由都有了保障，败者的抵抗便不再那样死顽，胜者的凯旋也不再那样残忍。于是，人道竟被引入了战争这桩与它几乎水火不容的营生之中；近代的胜利之所以少了几分凶残与流血，我们必须把它主要归功于基督教那些仁慈的箴言，而非任何别的缘由。”—G.

In the camp of Lucullus, an ox sold for a drachma, and a slave for four drachmæ, or about three shillings. Plutarch. in Lucull. p. 580. * Note: Above 100,000 prisoners were taken in the Jewish war.—G. Hist. of Jews, iii. 71. According to a tradition preserved by S. Jerom, after the insurrection in the time of Hadrian, they were sold as cheap as horse. Ibid. 124. Compare Blair on Roman Slavery, p. 19.—M., and Dureau de la blalle, Economie Politique des Romains, l. i. c. 15. But I cannot think that this writer has made out his case as to the common price of an agricultural slave being from 2000 to 2500 francs, (80l. to 100l.) He has overlooked the passages which show the ordinary prices, (i. e. Hor. Sat. ii. vii. 45,) and argued from extraordinary and exceptional cases.—M. 1845.

在卢库鲁斯的营中，一头牛售价一德拉克马，一个奴隶售价四德拉克马，约合三先令。见 Plutarch. in Lucull. p. 580。编者注：犹太战争中被俘者在十万以上。—G. 见 Hist. of Jews, iii. 71。据圣哲罗姆所存的一则传说，哈德良时代那场暴动之后，犹太人被贱卖得如同马匹一般。同上, 124。参较 Blair on Roman Slavery, p. 19。—M.，并见 Dureau de la Malle, Economie Politique des Romains, l. i. c. 15。不过，此人认为一个农业奴隶的通常价格在两千至两千五百法郎（即八十至一百英镑）之间，我却不敢苟同。他把那些显示寻常价格的段落（如 Hor. Sat. ii. vii. 45）忽略了，专拿一些异乎寻常的特例来立论。—M. 1845.

Diodorus Siculus in Eclog. Hist. l. xxxiv. and xxxvi. Florus, iii. 19, 20.

参见 Diodorus Siculus in Eclog. Hist. l. xxxiv. and xxxvi；Florus, iii. 19, 20。

471

The following is the example: we shall see whether the word “severe” is here in its place. “At the time in which L. Domitius was prætor in Sicily, a slave killed a wild boar of extraordinary size. The prætor, struck by the dexterity and courage of the man, desired to see him. The poor wretch, highly gratified with the distinction, came to present himself before the prætor, in hopes, no doubt, of praise and reward; but Domitius, on learning that he had only a javelin to attack and kill the boar, ordered him to be instantly crucified, under the barbarous pretext that the law prohibited the use of this weapon, as of all others, to slaves.” Perhaps the cruelty of Domitius is less astonishing than the indifference with which the Roman orator relates this circumstance, which affects him so little that he thus expresses himself: “Durum hoc fortasse videatur, neque ego in ullam partem disputo.” “This may appear harsh, nor do I give any opinion on the subject.” And it is the same orator who exclaims in the same oration, “Facinus est cruciare civem Romanum; scelus verberare; prope parricidium necare: quid dicam in crucem tollere?” “It is a crime to imprison a Roman citizen; wickedness to scourge; next to parricide to put to death, what shall I call it to crucify?”

以下便是一例；我们且看“严酷”二字用在此处是否恰当。“卢基乌斯·多米提乌斯任西西里大法官时，有一个奴隶杀死了一头硕大异常的野猪。大法官为此人的敏捷与勇气所折服，想要见他一面。这可怜的家伙因受此青睐而喜出望外，便前来拜见大法官，心里无疑指望着几句褒奖、几分赏赐；不料多米提乌斯一听说他杀猪时只用了一支标枪，便下令即刻把他钉上十字架，理由竟野蛮到如此地步——法律禁止奴隶使用这种武器，一如禁用其他一切武器。”多米提乌斯之残忍，也许还不及那位罗马雄辩家叙述此事时的漠然更令人震惊：这件事丝毫没有触动他，他竟这样说道：“Durum hoc fortasse videatur, neque ego in ullam partem disputo.”（此事或许显得严酷，我于此不作任何评断。）而正是这同一位雄辩家，在同一篇演说中高声疾呼：“Facinus est cruciare civem Romanum; scelus verberare; prope parricidium necare: quid dicam in crucem tollere?”（囚禁一个罗马公民即是罪行，鞭笞是恶行，处死几近于弑亲，那么把他钉上十字架，我又该称之为什么呢？）

See a remarkable instance of severity in Cicero in Verrem, v. 3.

西塞罗《控维雷斯》（in Verrem, v. 3）中有一桩严酷的显例，可以参看。

481

An active slave-trade, which was carried on in many quarters, particularly the Euxine, the eastern provinces, the coast of Africa, and British must be taken into the account. Blair, 23—32.—M.

此外还须把当时活跃的奴隶贸易一并计入，此项贸易在许多地方进行，尤以黑海沿岸、东方各行省、非洲海岸与不列颠为盛。见 Blair, 23—32。—M.

482

The Romans, as well in the first ages of the republic as later, allowed to their slaves a kind of marriage, (contubernium: ) notwithstanding this, luxury made a greater number of slaves in demand. The increase in their population was not sufficient, and recourse was had to the purchase of slaves, which was made even in the provinces of the East subject to the Romans. It is, moreover, known that slavery is a state little favorable to population. (See Hume’s Essay, and Malthus on population, i. 334.—G.) The testimony of Appian (B.C. l. i. c. 7) is decisive in favor of the rapid multiplication of the agricultural slaves; it is confirmed by the numbers engaged in the servile wars. Compare also Blair, p. 119; likewise Columella l. viii.—M.

罗马人无论在共和早期还是后世，都允许奴隶缔结一种婚姻（contubernium，即同居之谊）；尽管如此，奢靡之风仍使得对奴隶的需求有增无减。奴隶人口的自然增殖不敷所需，于是只得诉诸买卖，甚至在臣属于罗马的东方各行省也大做此种交易。再者，众所周知，奴役状态本就不利于人口繁衍。（见 Hume’s Essay，及 Malthus on population, i. 334。—G.）阿庇安的记述（B.C. l. i. c. 7）则确凿地证明农业奴隶繁衍迅速；奴隶战争中卷入的人数之多，也印证了这一点。另参 Blair, p. 119；亦见 Columella l. viii。—M.

See in Gruter, and the other collectors, a great number of inscriptions addressed by slaves to their wives, children, fellow-servants, masters, &c. They are all most probably of the Imperial age.

在格鲁特及其他碑铭辑录者的著作中，可见大量由奴隶献给其妻子、儿女、同伴、主人等人的铭文。这些铭文十有八九都属于帝国时代。

See the Augustan History, and a Dissertation of M. de Burigny, in the xxxvth volume of the Academy of Inscriptions, upon the Roman slaves.

参见《奥古斯都史》，以及比里尼先生论罗马奴隶的一篇论文，载《铭文学院集刊》第三十五卷。

See another Dissertation of M. de Burigny, in the xxxviith volume, on the Roman freedmen.

另见比里尼先生论罗马被释奴的一篇论文，载（该学院集刊）第三十七卷。

Spanheim, Orbis Roman. l. i. c. 16, p. 124, &c.] It was once proposed to discriminate the slaves by a peculiar habit; but it was justly apprehended that there might be some danger in acquainting them with their own numbers. ⁵³ Without interpreting, in their utmost strictness, the liberal appellations of legions and myriads, ⁵⁴ we may venture to pronounce, that the proportion of slaves, who were valued as property, was more considerable than that of servants, who can be computed only as an expense. ⁵⁵ The youths of a promising genius were instructed in the arts and sciences, and their price was ascertained by the degree of their skill and talents. ⁵⁶ Almost every profession, either liberal ⁵⁷ or mechanical, might be found in the household of an opulent senator. The ministers of pomp and sensuality were multiplied beyond the conception of modern luxury. ⁵⁸ It was more for the interest of the merchant or manufacturer to purchase, than to hire his workmen; and in the country, slaves were employed as the cheapest and most laborious instruments of agriculture. To confirm the general observation, and to display the multitude of slaves, we might allege a variety of particular instances. It was discovered, on a very melancholy occasion, that four hundred slaves were maintained in a single palace of Rome. ⁵⁹ The same number of four hundred belonged to an estate which an African widow, of a very private condition, resigned to her son, whilst she reserved for herself a much larger share of her property. ⁶⁰ A freedman, under the name of Augustus, though his fortune had suffered great losses in the civil wars, left behind him three thousand six hundred yoke of oxen, two hundred and fifty thousand head of smaller cattle, and what was almost included in the description of cattle, four thousand one hundred and sixteen slaves. [^2.61

Spanheim, Orbis Roman. l. i. c. 16, p. 124, &c.] 曾有人提议用一种特别的服饰把奴隶标示出来，但人们不无道理地担忧：让奴隶得知自己人数之众，恐怕会招致危险。⁵³ “军团”“万众”这类夸张的称谓，即便不按最严格的字面去理解，⁵⁴ 我们也不妨断言：被当作财产估价的奴隶，其比例要大于那些只能算作开销的仆役。⁵⁵ 天资出众的少年会被教以文艺与百技，其身价则视其技艺与才具的高下而定。⁵⁶ 一个富有的元老家中，几乎凡百行业，无论是文雅的⁵⁷ 还是手艺的，都能找得到。⁵⁸ 供人炫耀排场、满足声色之欲的仆役，其数目之多，远非近代的奢华所能想象。对商人或工场主而言，与其雇工，不如买奴更为划算；在乡间，奴隶则被当作最廉价、最耐劳的农耕器具来役使。为印证这一泛泛之论、并显示奴隶数目之众，我们尽可举出种种具体的实例。有一桩极为惨痛的事件让人发觉：罗马城中单单一座宅邸，便养着四百名奴隶。⁵⁹ 一位身份颇为寻常的非洲寡妇，把一处田产让给儿子，这田产上同样附着四百名奴隶，而她为自己留下的那份产业还要大得多。⁶⁰ 有一个名叫奥古斯都的被释奴，尽管在内战中家财大损，身后仍留下三千六百轭耕牛、二十五万头小牲畜，以及几乎可以一并列入牲畜之列的四千一百一十六名奴隶。[^2.61

Seneca de Clementia, l. i. c. 24. The original is much stronger, “Quantum periculum immineret si servi nostri numerare nos cœpissent.”

Seneca de Clementia, l. i. c. 24。原文的措辞要强烈得多：“Quantum periculum immineret si servi nostri numerare nos cœpissent.”（倘若我们的奴隶开始清点起我们的人数来，那将是何等的危险！）

See Pliny (Hist. Natur. l. xxxiii.) and Athenæus (Deipnosophist. l. vi. p. 272.) The latter boldly asserts, that he knew very many Romans who possessed, not for use, but ostentation, ten and even twenty thousand slaves.

参见普林尼（Hist. Natur. l. xxxiii.）与阿特纳奥斯（Deipnosophist. l. vi. p. 272.）。后者大胆断言，他认识很多罗马人，蓄奴一万乃至两万，并非为了役使，只为炫耀。

In Paris there are not more than 43,000 domestics of every sort, and not a twelfth part of the inhabitants. Messange, Recherches sui la Population, p. 186.

巴黎各类家仆合计不过四万三千人，尚不及全城居民的十二分之一。见 Messange, Recherches sur la Population, p. 186。

A learned slave sold for many hundred pounds sterling: Atticus always bred and taught them himself. Cornel. Nepos in Vit. c. 13, [on the prices of slaves. Blair, 149.]—M.

一个有学识的奴隶可售至数百英镑；阿提库斯向来都是亲自养育、亲自教导他们。见 Cornel. Nepos in Vit. c. 13，〔论奴隶价格，参 Blair, 149〕。—M.

Many of the Roman physicians were slaves. See Dr. Middleton’s Dissertation and Defence.

罗马的医生有许多是奴隶。参见米德尔顿博士的《论说与辩护》。

Their ranks and offices are very copiously enumerated by Pignorius de Servis.

皮尼奥里乌斯在《论奴隶》（de Servis）中，对他们的等级与职司作了极为详尽的罗列。

Tacit. Annal. xiv. 43. They were all executed for not preventing their master’s murder. * Note: The remarkable speech of Cassius shows the proud feelings of the Roman aristocracy on this subject.—M

Tacit. Annal. xiv. 43。他们因未能阻止主人被害而尽遭处死。编者注：卡西乌斯那篇引人注目的演说，道出了罗马贵族在此事上那份骄矜之情。—M

Apuleius in Apolog. p. 548. edit. Delphin

Apuleius in Apolog. p. 548. edit. Delphin。

Plin. Hist. Natur. l. xxxiii. 47.

611

611] ( return)
[ According to Robertson, there were twice as many slaves as free citizens.—G. Mr. Blair (p. 15) estimates three slaves to one freeman, between the conquest of Greece, B.C. 146, and the reign of Alexander Severus, A. D. 222, 235. The proportion was probably larger in Italy than in the provinces.—M. On the other hand, Zumpt, in his Dissertation quoted below, (p. 86,) asserts it to be a gross error in Gibbon to reckon the number of slaves equal to that of the free population. The luxury and magnificence of the great, (he observes,) at the commencement of the empire, must not be taken as the groundwork of calculations for the whole Roman world. “The agricultural laborer, and the artisan, in Spain, Gaul, Britain, Syria, and Egypt, maintained himself, as in the present day, by his own labor and that of his household, without possessing a single slave.” The latter part of my note was intended to suggest this consideration. Yet so completely was slavery rooted in the social system, both in the east and the west, that in the great diffusion of wealth at this time, every one, I doubt not, who could afford a domestic slave, kept one; and generally, the number of slaves was in proportion to the wealth. I do not believe that the cultivation of the soil by slaves was confined to Italy; the holders of large estates in the provinces would probably, either from choice or necessity, adopt the same mode of cultivation. The latifundia, says Pliny, had ruined Italy, and had begun to ruin the provinces. Slaves were no doubt employed in agricultural labor to a great extent in Sicily, and were the estates of those six enormous landholders who were said to have possessed the whole province of Africa, cultivated altogether by free coloni? Whatever may have been the case in the rural districts, in the towns and cities the household duties were almost entirely discharged by slaves, and vast numbers belonged to the public establishments. I do not, however, differ so far from Zumpt, and from M. Dureau de la Malle, as to adopt the higher and bolder estimate of Robertson and Mr. Blair, rather than the more cautious suggestions of Gibbon. I would reduce rather than increase the proportion of the slave population. The very ingenious and elaborate calculations of the French writer, by which he deduces the amount of the population from the produce and consumption of corn in Italy, appear to me neither precise nor satisfactory bases for such complicated political arithmetic. I am least satisfied with his views as to the population of the city of Rome; but this point will be more fitly reserved for a note on the thirty-first chapter of Gibbon. The work, however, of M. Dureau de la Malle is very curious and full on some of the minuter points of Roman statistics.—M. 1845.

611]（返回）
〔据罗伯逊所言，奴隶的数目是自由公民的两倍。—G. 布莱尔先生（p. 15）则估计，在攻灭希腊（公元前 146 年）到亚历山大·塞维鲁在位（公元 222 至 235 年）之间，奴隶与自由人之比为三比一；意大利的这一比例大概高于各行省。—M. 另一方面，灿普特在下文所引的论文中（p. 86）断言，吉本把奴隶数目算作与自由人口相等，乃是一个大错。他指出，帝国之初权贵们的奢靡与豪华，不该被当作推算整个罗马世界的依据。“西班牙、高卢、不列颠、叙利亚与埃及的农夫和工匠，都像今日一样，靠自己和一家人的劳作过活，一个奴隶也不曾拥有。”我那条注的后半，本意正是要提示这一点。然而奴隶制在东方与西方都已如此深植于社会肌体，以致在当时财富广布之际，我确信凡是负担得起一名家奴的人，无不蓄养一名；而奴隶数目一般也与财富多寡成正比。我并不认为以奴隶耕种土地的做法仅限于意大利；各行省中拥有大片田产的人，多半也会出于自愿或迫于形势而采用同样的耕作方式。普林尼说，大庄园（latifundia）毁了意大利，如今又开始毁掉各行省。西西里的农活无疑大量役使奴隶；而那据说共同占有非洲全省的六大地主，其田产难道全是由自由的佃农（coloni）耕种的吗？无论乡间情形如何，在城镇里家务几乎全由奴隶操持，另有数目庞大的奴隶隶属于各公共机构。不过，我与灿普特及迪罗·德拉马勒先生的分歧倒不至于大到要去采信罗伯逊与布莱尔先生那种更高、更大胆的估计，而舍弃吉本较为审慎的推断；我倒宁可调低、而非调高奴隶人口的比例。这位法国作家极为精巧繁复的推算——他借意大利谷物的产出与消费来推定人口总数——在我看来，作为如此错综的政治算术的依据，既不够精确，也难以令人信服。我最不能苟同的，是他关于罗马城人口的看法；但这一点还是留待评注吉本第三十一章时再谈更为合宜。不过，迪罗·德拉马勒先生这部书，在罗马统计的若干细部上，确实颇为奇诡而翔实。—M. 1845.〕

Compute twenty millions in France, twenty-two in Germany, four in Hungary, ten in Italy with its islands, eight in Great Britain and Ireland, eight in Spain and Portugal, ten or twelve in the European Russia, six in Poland, six in Greece and Turkey, four in Sweden, three in Denmark and Norway, four in the Low Countries. The whole would amount to one hundred and five, or one hundred and seven millions. See Voltaire, de l’Histoire Generale. * Note: The present population of Europe is estimated at 227,700,000. Malts Bran, Geogr. Trans edit. 1832 See details in the different volumes Another authority, (Almanach de Gotha,) quoted in a recent English publication, gives the following details:—
France, 32,897,521 Germany, (including Hungary, Prussian and Austrian Poland,) 56,136,213 Italy, 20,548,616 Great Britain and Ireland, 24,062,947 Spain and Portugal, 13,953,959. 3,144,000 Russia, including Poland, 44,220,600 Cracow, 128,480 Turkey, (including Pachalic of Dschesair,) 9,545,300 Greece, 637,700 Ionian Islands, 208,100 Sweden and Norway, 3,914,963 Denmark, 2,012,998 Belgium, 3,533,538 Holland, 2,444,550 Switzerland, 985,000. Total, 219,344,116
Since the publication of my first annotated edition of Gibbon, the subject of the population of the Roman empire has been investigated by two writers of great industry and learning; Mons. Dureau de la Malle, in his Economie Politique des Romains, liv. ii. c. 1. to 8, and M. Zumpt, in a dissertation printed in the Transactions of the Berlin Academy, 1840. M. Dureau de la Malle confines his inquiry almost entirely to the city of Rome, and Roman Italy. Zumpt examines at greater length the axiom, which he supposes to have been assumed by Gibbon as unquestionable, “that Italy and the Roman world was never so populous as in the time of the Antonines.” Though this probably was Gibbon’s opinion, he has not stated it so peremptorily as asserted by Mr. Zumpt. It had before been expressly laid down by Hume, and his statement was controverted by Wallace and by Malthus. Gibbon says (p. 84) that there is no reason to believe the country (of Italy) less populous in the age of the Antonines, than in that of Romulus; and Zumpt acknowledges that we have no satisfactory knowledge of the state of Italy at that early age. Zumpt, in my opinion with some reason, takes the period just before the first Punic war, as that in which Roman Italy (all south of the Rubicon) was most populous. From that time, the numbers began to diminish, at first from the enormous waste of life out of the free population in the foreign, and afterwards in the civil wars; from the cultivation of the soil by slaves; towards the close of the republic, from the repugnance to marriage, which resisted alike the dread of legal punishment and the offer of legal immunity and privilege; and from the depravity of manners, which interfered with the procreation, the birth, and the rearing of children. The arguments and the authorities of Zumpt are equally conclusive as to the decline of population in Greece. Still the details, which he himself adduces as to the prosperity and populousness of Asia Minor, and the whole of the Roman East, with the advancement of the European provinces, especially Gaul, Spain, and Britain, in civilization, and therefore in populousness, (for I have no confidence in the vast numbers sometimes assigned to the barbarous inhabitants of these countries,) may, I think, fairly compensate for any deduction to be made from Gibbon’s general estimate on account of Greece and Italy. Gibbon himself acknowledges his own estimate to be vague and conjectural; and I may venture to recommend the dissertation of Zumpt as deserving respectful consideration.—M 1815.

试算如下：法国两千万，德国两千二百万，匈牙利四百万，意大利连同其岛屿一千万，大不列颠与爱尔兰八百万，西班牙与葡萄牙八百万，欧洲部分的俄罗斯一千万或一千二百万，波兰六百万，希腊与土耳其六百万，瑞典四百万，丹麦与挪威三百万，低地国家四百万。合计约一亿零五百万或一亿零七百万。见 Voltaire, de l’Histoire Generale。编者注：今日欧洲的人口估计为 227,700,000。见 Malte-Brun, Geogr. 英译本 1832 年版，各卷详载其目。另据近来一部英文出版物所引的另一权威（《哥达年鉴》），列出如下细目：—
法国 32,897,521；德国（含匈牙利、普鲁士与奥地利治下的波兰）56,136,213；意大利 20,548,616；大不列颠与爱尔兰 24,062,947；西班牙与葡萄牙 13,953,959。3,144,000；俄罗斯（含波兰）44,220,600；克拉科夫 128,480；土耳其（含杰扎伊尔帕夏辖区）9,545,300；希腊 637,700；伊奥尼亚群岛 208,100；瑞典与挪威 3,914,963；丹麦 2,012,998；比利时 3,533,538；荷兰 2,444,550；瑞士 985,000。总计 219,344,116。
自我那部首度加注的吉本版行世以来，罗马帝国的人口问题已有两位勤勉博学的学者加以研究：迪罗·德拉马勒先生，见其《罗马人的政治经济》第二卷第 1 至 8 章；以及灿普特先生，见其载于 1840 年《柏林学院会刊》的一篇论文。迪罗·德拉马勒先生的考察几乎全然限于罗马城与罗马治下的意大利。灿普特则更详尽地检视了一条他认为被吉本当作无可置疑而径直采纳的公理——“意大利乃至整个罗马世界，其人口之盛，从未有过安敦尼诸帝时代那样的时期”。此说虽大概确是吉本的看法，他却未曾如灿普特先生所称的那样斩钉截铁地陈述出来。此论在此之前早已由休谟明白提出，而华莱士与马尔萨斯都曾加以驳难。吉本说（p. 84），没有理由认为安敦尼诸帝时代的意大利乡野，其人口会少于罗慕路斯的时代；灿普特则承认，我们对那样久远年代意大利的状况其实一无确知。依我之见，灿普特把第一次布匿战争前夕定为罗马意大利（凡卢比孔河以南之地）人口最盛之时，不无道理。自那以后，人数便开始递减：起初是由于对外战争、继而是内战对自由人口造成的巨大损耗；由于以奴隶耕种土地；由于共和末世人们厌于婚娶——这种风气既不惧法律的惩处，也不为法律给予的豁免与优待所动；更由于世风败坏，妨碍了生育、分娩与养育子女。灿普特的论据与史料，就希腊人口的衰减而言同样确凿有力。不过，他本人所援引的有关小亚细亚以及整个罗马东方的繁荣与人烟稠密的种种细节，连同欧洲各行省——尤其是高卢、西班牙与不列颠——在文明、从而在人口上的进步（因为对于这些地方野蛮居民有时被赋予的庞大数字，我一概不敢轻信），在我看来，足以抵消因希腊与意大利而须从吉本总估计中扣除的部分。吉本本人也承认，他自己的估算含混而出于臆度；我倒不揣冒昧，愿把灿普特的这篇论文推荐给读者，值得郑重一读。—M 1815.

Chapter II: The Internal Prosperity In The Age Of The Antonines.—Part II. 第二章 安敦尼诸帝时代罗马帝国的国内繁荣——第二节