Kootut teokset | Samlade skrifter | Selected Works
Writing: The Causes of Emigration

The Causes of Emigration, § 6

Previous Section:

Next Section:

Font size: A A A A


Viewing Options:

§ 6

I referred just now to Romans. The very people! How did they rise to such a height of power and fame that they became a marvel to the whole world and then collapsed again into the ashes of their past? A people that thoroughly understood the correct uses and misuses of government, whose laws are still revered throughout Europe, who by their political revolutions and vicissitudes provide a mirror for all societies, in which a thoughtful person without any prophetic gifts can read their impending fall and recovery.

It was indubitably freedom that laid the first stone for the walls of Rome. Freedom filled it with people. Rome would never have existed had Amulius had his wish fulfilled of doing away with its founder and had tyranny not been forestalled by his death.1

But what would a city be without citizens and walls without a garrison? The founder18 therefore made Rome a sanctuary for all refugees, oppressed people and slaves. The freedom that he offered each of them was such a valuable and rare reward that there could be no lack of participants in such a noble enterprise, and that was the first step towards the power of the new city.

It was at first ruled by monarchs, though without having lost its freedom; the community was governed by the king, but in accordance with the wishes of the councillors and the people, so that historians regard it as a stain on the government of Lucius Tarquinius2 that he obeyed neither. He tormented the common people in the workshops of the smiths and with other labour appropriate to slaves, and his son Sextus Tarquinius,3 a prince brought up in effeminate company, was even more imprudent, causing the dynasty to lose both Crown and fatherland.

By his audacity, Lucius Junius Brutus,4 inspired by a spirit of freedom more noble than conceited, removed the yoke of autocracy, the harshness of which had already turned the people against it, strengthened the laws and stripped the vices of their excuses, so that the nobles of that period (the cronies of Sextus Tarquinius) bitterly complained about it: The king, they said, is a human being, from whom one can ask for justice or injustice, whichever one needs. There is scope there for mercy and kind deeds, anger and forgiveness. One can then distinguish between friend and foe. The laws, on the other hand, are19 a deaf and implacable thing, more propitious and favourable to a poor man than to a rich and powerful one, never offering any reduction or remission of a sentence as soon as one oversteps the mark, and it would be hazardous where human faults are so numerous to defend oneself by innocence alone,5 hoping by such weighty arguments to overturn freedom entirely; but Brutus made the consuls annual6 and protected freedom in every respect.

During the whole period of its freedom Rome was indeed involved in bloody wars abroad and discord internally; but I can certainly see no other reason than freedom for the fact that the Republic nonetheless continued for so long to expand and that it was indeed servitude that brought about its downfall.

Every year many thousands of Romans usually died on the battlefield, but freedom compensated for that deficit many times over. Encouragements for marriage through freedom to settle and work and the means to feed a wife and children achieved a deal internally, but immigration from outside probably contributed most.

Tullus Hostilius7 in his time already devised the scheme of receiving his enemies and giving them a place on the Aventine in which to build a house. May it not have been the victorious arms of the Romans that increasingly induced the surrounding nations to come over to their side on such favourable terms?20

Continual dissensions between the people and the council, the court of the former (tribunus plebis)8 and the consuls appeared to threaten the state with destruction, but remarkably enough it nevertheless continued to grow throughout all this. The people were then still aware of their power and strove for freedom. The council did indeed infringe it from time to time, but when it did so too blatantly, the common people champed at the bit and gave their riders a jolt; then the consuls had to moderate their behaviour. The group of ten men (decemviri) who were installed as rulers, on the model of Athenian laws, conducted themselves well the first year, so that the same individuals remained in power into the second year, but the third year the decemviri retained power without consulting the people at all. But as their power quickly exceeded its limits, the evil deed of the nefarious Appius soon brought that regime to an end.9

However, the Republic flourished, as I said, as long as the contest was between the council10 and the people, for the latter were then still able to curb tyranny, and the nation was relatively satisfied with itself, although the seeds of ruin were already growing in its midst.

But when a different contest developed, between the councillors11 themselves, matters took on a quite different complexion. Then the disputes were no longer about freedom but about which of them would have the honour of being its destroyer. The common people effectively lost their voice. The consuls, who were also commanders of the army,21 had already had time to acquire riches, which posed a threat to freedom. Caesar, Pompey, Antony, Sulla, Octavius and others12 competed among themselves to gain support among the soldiers, for power often accompanies armed force, and when it could not be gained otherwise, it was bought for large sums, and the soldier soon began to believe that his arbitrary will represented the freedom of society as a whole, but when the common people had to be consulted, they were also made accustomed to respond to gilded arguments. Although unprecedented encroachments were thus now made, the heart of the republic languished in bondage under the tyranny of greed, voluptuousness and arrogance, so that when it was at its most impressive in the eyes of other nations, little more than the shell remained, for Tacitus says that it was weakened by the mutual rivalry of the powerful and the greed of the government, therefore grew tired of the consuls and threw itself into the arms of autocracy.13

Under the Empire, vanity, effeminacy and voluptuousness corrupted the rulers of Rome. The army was the supreme power; its extravagance became limitless; emperors were elevated and overthrown at its might; but the rest of the people already toiled under intolerable burdens; and that state would never have lasted so long if the illusion that Romans were happier than all other people in the world had not been imbibed for so many generations with their mothers’ milk.22

It may thus be possible for a time to maintain by illusions a state that has previously flourished and developed a positive view of its happiness, but one that has long suffered oppression cannot be restored and made content with flattery and shadow-play.


  1. Rome would never have existed had Amulius ... by his death.: Refers to Amulius, who according to Roman mythology was the son of Procas and the unfriendly uncle of Romulus’s and Remus’s (the founders of Rome) mother. Amulius tried to drown his nephews, but they were famously saved by a she-wolf and eventually overthrew their great-uncle.
  2. Lucius Tarquinius Superbus (535–496 BC) was the seventh and last king of Rome until the revolt in 509 BC, which led to the establishment of the Republic. He was remembered as a despot.
  3. Sextus Tarquinius was the son of Lucius Tarquinius Superbus and is said to have instigated the revolt by raping the noblewoman Lucretia
  4. Lucius Junius Brutus was the leader of the revolt that led to the founding of the Roman Republic in 509 BC and served as one of its first consuls.
  5. The king is a human being ... by innocence alone: cited from Livy’s Ab urbe condita 2.3.
  6. made the consuls annual: The two consuls were the highest officials in the Roman Republic and were elected by the people for a one-year term.
  7. Tullus Hostilius was, according to the annalistic tradition, the third king of Rome. His traditional regnal dates are 673–641 BC, though it must be noted that the chronology of early Roman history is problematic.
  8. (tribunus plebis): In republican Rome, the tribunes of the plebs, ten inviolable officials who were charged with protecting the plebeians against the patricians, were elected annually in the plebeian assembly (concilium plebis). The tribunes, who had authority to intercede against any Roman magistrate, had to be plebeians themselves.
  9. Decemviri is Latin for “ten men”. In ancient Rome the designation is most often used in reference to the decemviri legibus scribundis, a board of ten charged with writing down the laws. Demands for the codification of the customary laws had long been raised by the tribunes in their struggle to improve the legal security of plebeian citizens. Two separate boards of decemviri were elected, for one year each, and during all of this time the regular government was suspended. The first board of decemviri ruled with moderation and prepared ten tables of law in 451 BC, and the second one completed the Law of the Twelve Tables (Lex Duodecim Tabularum), but when the decemviri refused to resign and their rule turned violent, an uprising broke out, in 449 BC, and the ordinary administration was restored. Chydenius makes a mistake here: in fact, only Appius Claudius Crassus was member of both boards, which was controversial, because re-election was against traditions. According to Livy (Ab urbe condita 3.44–58), Appius was attracted to the plebeian girl Verginia, daughter of Lucius Verginius, who as a consequence of a conflict had to murder her in order to preserve her innocence.
  10. the council: i.e. senate.
  11. the councillors: i.e. senators.
  12. Caesar, Pompey, Antony, Sulla, Octavius and others: this is a reference to the power struggles and the strong men of the last century BC.
  13. for Tacitus says that it was weakened ... into the arms of autocracy.: Chydenius is probably referring to Tacitus’s Annales 1.2.

Original documents

Original language

§. 6.

Jag nämde nyss Romare. Rät14 det folcket! Huru hafwa de stigit så högt i magt och anseende, at de för hela werlden blifwit et under, och åter fallit ned i sin förra aska? Et folck som förstod rätta regerings bruk- och missbruken i grund, hwars Lagar ännu wördas af hela Europa, som med sina regements wälfningar och öden blifwer en öppen spegel för alla samfund, der en eftertäncksam utan spådoms anda kan läsa deras förestående fall och upkomst.

Friheten war onekeligen den som lade första sten til Roms murar. Friheten fylde den med folck. Rom hade aldrig warit til, om Amullius efter önskan fåt dess grundläggare utur wägen15 och Tyranniet intet genom hans död blifwit hämmat.

Men hwad skulle en Stad wara utan Borgare, och murar utan besättning? Stiftaren18 gjorde derföre Rom til en Fristad för alla flyktingar, lidande och trälar. Friheten som han skänckte hwar och en af dem, war et så rikt och rart byte, at deltagare intet kunde tryta i så ädelt nöje, och detta war första steget til nya Stadens styrcka.

Den stod wäl i början under Konunga-wälde, men utan at hafwa förlorat sin Frihet: samfundet styrdes af Konungen, men efter Råds-Herrarnas och folckets behag; det lägges derföre som en skamfläck uppå L. Tarqvinii16 regemente, af Historie-skrifwarena, at han åtlydde ingendera. Han plågade menigheten i Smedernas Wärckstäder, och med annat trälagtigt arbete, och dess son Sextus Tarquinius17, en i wekligit sällskap upwuxen Prints, gick i obetäncksamhet än längre, som satte dem i mistning af både Krona och Fädernesland.

L. Junius Brutus18 upeldad mera af ädel än upbläst frihets-anda, afbröt genom sin tiltagsenhet Enwålds-oket, hwars hårdhet redan gjordt folcket ledsna derwid, gaf Lagarna eftertryck, och förtog lasterna sina undanflyckter, så at den tidsens ädlingar (Sexti Tarquinii stallbröder19) deröfwer föra en bitter klagan: Konungen, sade de, är ju en menniska, den man kan begära af, rätt- och orättwisa, hwilkendera man behöfwer. Der har nåd och wälgärningar, der wrede och tilgift rum. Då kan man skönja skilnad emellan wän och owän. Men Lagarna deremot ä19ro en döf och obewekelig ting, som är hälsosammare och bättre för en fattig än rik och mägtig, som aldrig har någon lindring ock eftergift, så snart man skrider öfwer skranckorna, och at det wore äfwentyrligt bland så många människliga fel at med oskuld allena förswara sig20, och wille med så wigtiga skäl häfwa hela friheten öfwer ända; men Brutus gjorde Borgmästare-regeringen årlig21, och på alla sidor skantsade för friheten22.

Under hela sin frihet war wäl Rom inweklad i blodiga krig utom, och misshälligheter inom sig: Men jag ser sannerligen ingen annan orsak än friheten, som så länge hölt republiken lika wäl i tiltagande, och at träldom war ock dess undergång.

I fält stupade mäst årligen många tusende Romare, men friheten ärsatte mång-dubbelt denna brist. Upmuntringar til giftermål medelst frihet at få bygga och bo, och utwäg at kunna föda hustru och barn gjorde något hemma, men inflyttningar utifrån torde hafwa gjordt det mästa.

Tullius Hostilius23 fant redan i sin tid på det greppet, at taga emot sina fiender och gifwa dem plats i Aventino24 at bygga på. Månn icke de Romares segrande wapn alt mer ock mer bragte de omliggande folckslag, at med så goda hwilkor komma på deras sida?20

Ständiga äntringar emellan folcket och Rådet, det förras domstol (Tribunus plebis25) och Borgmästarena, tycktes hota Staten med undergång, men det war märckeligit, at den under alt detta likwäl wäxte til. Folcket kände då ännu sin styrcka, och fägtade för friheten. Rådet gjorde wäl en ock annan gång inbrått deruti, men när det blef för groft, bet menigheten i betslet och skakade sina Ryttare: då fingo Borgmästarena låf at taga lagom för sig26. Tio manna-wäldet (Decemviri27) som efter Atheniensiska Lagar skulle regera, förde stafwen wäl28 det första året, derföre blef magten hos samma personer til det följande, men det tredje behöllo Decemviri sjelfwa folcket aldeles otilsport. Men som magten snart skenade öfwer sina gränsor, gjorde den swarta Appii29 stygga gjerning snart ända på detta regemente.

Dock gick det wäl med Republiken, sade jag, så länge täflan war emellan Rådet30 och folcket; ty de sednare woro då ännu i stånd at tygla Tyranniet, och nation war någorlunda nögder med sig sjelf, fast förderfwets frö då redan grodde i dess barm.

Men sedan en annan täflan upkom, emellan Råds-Herrarna31 inbördes, fingo sakerna helt annat utseende. Då twistades intet mera om friheten, utan hwilkendera af dem finge den hedern at wara dess förstörare. Menigheten miste i sjelfwa wärcket sin röst. Borgmästarena, som tillika woro anförare för Krigshären,21 hade redan hunnit samla sig rikedomar, som för friheten woro äfwentyrliga. Cæsar, Pompejus, Antonius, Sylla, Octavius32 med flera, winlade sig framför hwarandra at winna tycke hos Krigsfolket, ty magten följer ofta wapnen åt, och när det intet annars wille lyckas köptes det för stora pengar, och Soldaten begynte snart tro, sit sjelfswåld wara hela Samfundets frihet; men skulle ändteligen menigheten höras, wande man dem at äfwen lystra til förgylta skäl. Ehuru oärhörda inkräckningar nu altså gjordes, twinade hjertat af republiken bort i träldom under girighets, wällusts, och högmods tyranni, så at då den lyste som störst i andra folkslags ögon, war der föga mer än skalet qwar; ty Tacitus säger33, at den afmattades genom de mägtigas inbördes täflan och Regeringens girighet, ledsnade derföre wid Borgmästare Regementet, och kastade sig i Enwäldets armar.

Under Kejsaredömet förderfwade flättja34, weklighet och wällust Roms regenter. Krigsmagten war den aldra Högsta: dess öfwerdåd blef utan gränsor: Dess spets högde och fälde Kejsare: men det öfriga folcket trälade redan under odrägeliga bördor: och hade detta Rike aldrig stådt så länge, om intet den inbillningen at en Romare war lyckeligare än alla andra männi­skor i werlden, blifwit til så många leder inplantad med Moders-mjölken.22

Således går det wäl an, at genom inbillningar en tid uppehålla en Stat, som förr warit i flor och fattat god tancka om sin sällhet, men den som länge legat undertryckt, kan intet uphjelpas och förnöjas med smicker, och skuggwärck35.


  1. just
  2. grundläggare utur wägen: Enligt sägnerna om Roms grundläggning blev Amulius kung efter att han tagit makten från sin bror Numitor, vars dotter Rhea Silvia nyligen fött tvilling­sönerna Romulus och Remus. Amulius blev rädd att tvillingarna skulle hota hans ställning och försökte därför dränka dem. De blev emellertid räddade av en varghona och störtade slutligen Amulius från makten.
  3. L. Tarqvinii: Lucius Tarquinius Superbus var Roms sjunde och sista kung som störtades i samband med revolutionen 509 f.Kr., som ledde till republikens grundande. Hans styre har ofta beskrivits som tyranniskt.
  4. Sextus Tarquinius: Lucius Tarquinius Superbus son, som sägs ha våldtagit Lucretia, en gift romersk adelsdam. Händelsen ledde till en revolt och till att kungamakten avskaffades.
  5. L. Junius Brutus: Lucius Junius Brutus var ledare för den revolt som ledde till att republiken grundades; en av republikens första konsuler.
  6. kumpaner, följeslagare
  7. Konungen, sade de, är ju en menniska ... förswara sig: Citat ur Titus Livius bok Ab urbe condita 2.3.
  8. gjorde Borgmästare-regeringen årlig: Konsulerna var de högsta ämbetsmännen i den romerska republiken och valdes för en ettårsperiod.
  9. skantsade för friheten: anlade skansar (försvarsmurar) till skydd för friheten
  10. Tullius Hostilius: Roms tredje kung enligt den annalistiska traditionen
  11. Aventinen, en av Roms sju kullar. Något oklart vad Chydenius syftar på här. Enligt Livius erövrade Tullus Hostilius Alba Longa, som förstördes och vars befolkning flyttades till Rom. Chydenius beskrivning passar bättre in på Tullus Hostilius efterträdare Ancus Marcius, som efter att ha besegrat Politoriums latinare flyttade dem till Aventinen.
  12. Tribunus plebis: I den romerska republiken valde man varje år två, senare tio, folktribuner i plebejernas folkförsamling (consilium plebis). Deras uppgift var att försvara plebejernas ställning mot patricierna. Folktribunens ställning var okränkbar och han hade vetorätt mot oönskade beslut (intercessio) tagna av administrationen eller ämbetsmännen. Folktribunen skulle själv vara plebej.
  13. taga lagom för sig: agera måttfullt
  14. Benämningen på de två successiva tiomannakollegier som tillsattes efter plebejernas krav 451–450 f.Kr. och vilkas uppgift var att sammanställa en gemensam lagcodex för riket. Decemvirerna utnämnes för ett år i taget och under den här tiden var de de högsta ämbetsmännen i riket och ersatte således konsulstyret. Decemvirernas arbete resulterade i de tolv tavlornas lag (Lex Duodecim Tabularum). Det andra tiomannakollegiet vägrade emellertid att avgå när tiden var inne vilket ledde till en folkresning 449 f.Kr. och till att man återgick till det normala styret. Chydenius misstar sig här: det var bara Appius Claudius Crassus som var medlem i de båda decemvirerna. Det här ledde till konflikter eftersom man av hävd inte tillät återval. Livius berättar (Ab urbe condita 3.44–58) hur Appius åtrådde plebejflickan Verginia och hur hennes fader till slut blev tvungen att döda henne för att bevara hennes oskuld. Enligt Livius utlöste detta en folkresning.
  15. förde stafwen wäl: styrde värdigt
  16. den swarta Appii: Appius Claudius Crassus
  17. senaten
  18. senatorerna
  19. Cæsar, Pompejus, Antonius, Sylla, Octavius: några av de mest namnkunniga personerna som deltog i maktkampen i romarriket det sista århundradet f.Kr. ”Sylla” mer känd som Sulla.
  20. Tacitus säger: syftar sannolikt på Tacitus verk Annales 1:2.
  21. lättsinne
  22. illusioner

Finnish

§ 6

Mainitsin juuri roomalaiset. Voi sitä kansaa! Miten roomalaiset saattoivat nousta niin mahtaviksi ja arvossapidetyiksi, että koko maailma ihmetteli heitä, ja miten he sitten taas vaipuivat entiseen tomuun ja tuhkaan? Rooman kansa ymmärsi oikean hallitustavan käytön ja väärinkäytön täydellisesti, ja sen lakeja pidetään yhä kunniassa koko Euroopassa. Rooman kansan kokemat hallinnon mullistukset ja kohtalot tekevät siitä kaikille yhteiskunnille kuin avoimen peilin, josta harkitseva ihminen voi ilman ennustajan lahjaakin nähdä omaa yhteiskuntaansa odottavan nousun ja tuhon.

Vapaus laski epäilemättä ensimmäisen kiven Rooman muureihin. Vapaus täytti Rooman ihmisillä. Roomaa ei olisi koskaan ollut, jos Amuliuksen toive olisi toteutunut36 ja hän olisi saanut kaupungin perustajan raivatuksi tieltä ja jos hänen kuolemansa ei olisi ehkäissyt tyranniaa.

Mutta mitä kaupunki olisi ilman asukkaita ja muurit ilman vartijoita? Siksi perustajat18 tekivät Roomasta kaikkien pakolaisten, kärsivien ja orjien turvapaikan. Rooman jokaiselle antama vapaus oli niin arvokas ja harvinainen saalis, ettei osallistujia voinut puuttua sellaisesta jalosta ilosta. Tämä oli ensimmäinen askel uuden kaupungin vahvalle asemalle.

Rooma eli toki aluksi kuninkaanvallan alaisuudessa, mutta ei menettänyt vapauttaan. Yhteisöä hallitsivat kuninkaat, mutta neuvosherrojen ja kansan haluamalla tavalla. Niinpä historioitsijat pitävät Lucius Tarquiniuksen37 häpeänä, ettei hän hallitsijana noudattanut kummankaan tahtoa. Hän aiheutti rahvaalle piinaa sepänpajoissa ja muussa orjantyössä ja hänen poikansa Sextus Tarquinius38, mukavuudenhaluisessa ympäristössä kasvanut ruhtinas, meni harkitsemattomuudessa vielä pitemmälle ja sai roomalaiset menettämään sekä kruunun että isänmaan.

Lucius Junius Brutus39, jota elähdytti pikemminkin jalo kuin paisuteltu vapauden henki, sai yksinvallan ikeen murretuksi rohkeudellaan. Kansa oli silloin jo saanut tarpeekseen yksinvallan kovuudesta. Brutus korosti lakien merkitystä ja teki tyhjäksi verukkeet, joilla paheita oli harrastettu. Silloiset ylimykset (Sextus Tarquiniuksen kumppanit) valittivat asiaa näin katkerasti: Kuningas on ihminen, jolta voidaan vaatia joko oikeudenmukaisuutta tai epäoikeudenmukaisuutta aina tarpeen mukaan. Hänessä on tilaa armeliaisuudelle ja hyville teoille, vihalle ja anteeksiannolle. Silloin voi erottaa ystävän vihollisesta. Lait ovat sitä vastoin19 kuuroja ja heltymättömiä, edullisempia ja parempia köyhälle kuin rikkaalle ja mahtavalle. Niin pian kuin raja-aidat on ylitetty, lait eivät tarjoa mitään lievennyksiä ja myönnytyksiä. Kun ihmisessä on niin runsaasti virheitä, olisi uhkarohkeaa puolustautua pelkän viattomuuden avulla.40 He halusivat näin painavilla syillä lopettaa koko vapauden, mutta Brutus teki konsulien toimikaudesta vuoden mittaisen41 ja suojasi vapautta kaikin puolin.

Koko vapautensa ajan Rooma oli sekaantunut verisiin sotiin rajojensa ulkopuolella ja riitoihin niiden sisäpuolella. Olen kuitenkin sitä mieltä, että ainoastaan vapaus oli syynä tasavallan pitkäaikaiseen hyvään kasvuun, ja että orjuus aiheutti sen tuhon.

Taistelukentillä kaatui lähes joka vuosi monia tuhansia roomalaisia, mutta vapaus korvasi moninkertaisesti tämän menetyksen. Vapaus rakentaa ja asua rohkaisi avioliiton solmimiseen, ja kun lisäksi tarjoutui mahdollisuus elättää vaimoa ja lapsia, se vei asioita jonkin verran eteenpäin kotimaassa, mutta suurin osa kasvusta lienee ollut maahanmuuton ansiota.

Tullus Hostilius42 keksi jo aikoinaan sen keinon, että hän otti vastaan vihollisiaan ja antoi heille Aventinosta43 rakennusmaata. Mahtoivatkohan roomalaisten voittoisat aseet saada ympäröivät kansat näin hyvien ehtojen vallitessa tulemaan yhä suuremmassa määrin heidän puolelleen?20

Alituiset kamppailut kansan ja neuvoston, kansantuomioistuimen (tribunus plebis)44 ja konsulien välillä tuntuivat uhkaavan valtiota tuholla, mutta on huomionarvoista, että valtio tämän kestäessä kaikesta huolimatta kasvoi. Kansa tunsi silloin vielä voimansa ja kamppaili vapauden puolesta. Neuvosto yritti kerran jos toisenkin heikentää vapautta, mutta kun se alkoi olla liian raakaa, rahvas puri kuolaimia ja ravisti ratsastajat selästään. Silloin konsulit saivat luvan tyytyä kohtuuteen. Ateenan lainsäädännön esimerkin mukaisesti muodostettujen kymmenmiehisten lautakuntien (decemviri)45 vallankäytössä oli ensimmäisen vuoden ajan arvokkuutta. Siksi valta jäi samoille henkilöille seuraavaksi vuodeksi, mutta kolmantena vuonna decemvirit jättivät kansan mielipiteen kokonaan huomiotta. Kun valta pian ylitti rajansa, tekivät synkän Appius Claudiuksen rumat toimenpiteet pian lopun tästä hallinnosta.

Mutta sanoin, että tasavalta voi hyvin niin kauan kuin neuvosto46 ja kansa kilpailivat keskenään vallasta. Kansa näet pystyi silloin vielä suitsimaan tyrannian ja kansankunta oli jokseenkin tyytyväinen itseensä, vaikka rappion siemen jo itikin sen povessa.

Mutta asiat alkoivat näyttää aivan toisenlaisilta sen jälkeen kun syntyi toinen kamppailu, jota neuvosherrat47 kävivät keskenään. Silloin ei kiistelty enää vapaudesta, vaan siitä kuka heistä saisi kunnian tuhota sen. Rahvas menetti tosiasiassa äänensä. Konsulit, jotka samalla olivat sotajoukkojen komentajia,21 olivat jo ehtineet koota itselleen rikkauksia, jotka vaaransivat vapauden. Caesar, Pompeius, Antonius, Sulla, Octavius ja muut48 kamppailivat keskenään päästäkseen sotaväen suosioon, sillä valta seuraa usein aseita, ja ellei muu näyttänyt onnistuvan, valtaa ostettiin isolla rahalla. Sotilaat alkoivat pian uskoa, että heidän omavaltaisuutensa oli koko yhteiskunnan vapautta. Jos rahvasta vihdoin kuunneltiin, sekin totutettiin myötäilemään kaunisteltuja perusteluja. Vaikka nyt siis tehtiin ennenkuulumattomia valloituksia, samalla tasavallan sydän riutui ahneuden, nautinnonhalun ja kopeuden pakkovallan aiheuttamassa orjuudessa, niin että tasavallan loiston ollessa suurimmillaan muiden kansojen silmissä siitä oli lähes pelkät kuoret jäljellä. Tacitushan sanoo, että tasavallan voimat ehtyivät mahtimiesten keskinäisen kamppailun ja hallinnon ahneuden takia, ja siksi tasavalta kyllästyi konsulihallintoon ja heittäytyi yksinvallan syliin49.

Keisarivallan aikana kevytmielisyys, velttous ja nautinnonhimo turmelivat Rooman hallitsijat. Kaikkein ylimpänä oli armeija, sen julkeus oli rajatonta ja sen aseet nostivat keisareita valtaistuimelle ja syöksivät heitä siltä. Muu kansa raatoi jo sietämättömien taakkojen alla, eikä Rooman valtakunta olisi ikinä pysynyt pystyssä niin pitkään, elleivät niin monet yhteiskunnan jäsenet olisi imeneet jo äidinmaidossa sitä kuvitelmaa, että roomalaiset ovat maailman onnellisimpia ihmisiä.22

Käy kyllä päinsä, että valtiota, joka on ennen ollut kukoistava ja elätellyt kauniita ajatuksia onnellisuudestaan, pidetään jonkin aikaa pystyssä kuvitelmien varassa. Mutta niitä, joita on sorrettu pitkään, ei voi auttaa eikä tyydyttää imarteluilla eikä mielikuvituksen tuotteilla.


  1. jos Amuliuksen toive olisi toteutunut: Rooman perustamista koskevassa tarustossa esiintyvä Amulius pääsi kuninkaaksi syrjäyttämällä veljensä Numitorin, jonka tytär Rhea Silvia oli juuri synnyttänyt Romuluksen ja Remuksen. Pelätessään näiden uhkaavan asemaansa Amulius yritti hukuttaa kaksospojat, mutta naarassusi pelasti heidät. Lopulta Romulus ja Remus syrjäyttivät Amuliuksen.
  2. Lucius Tarquinius Superbus oli Rooman seitsemäs ja viimeinen kuningas, joka syrjäytettiin tasavallan perustamiseen johtaneessa kumouksessa vuonna 509 eKr. Hänen valtakauttaan on usein kuvattu tyranniaksi.
  3. Sextus Tarquinius, Lucius Tarquinius Superbuksen poika, raiskasi aatelissukuun kuuluneen Lucretian, minkä on kerrottu johtaneen kuningasvallan kumoamiseen.
  4. Lucius Junius Brutus oli Rooman tasavallan perustamiseen johtaneen vallankumouksen johtaja ja yksi tasavallan ensimmäisistä konsuleista.
  5. Kuningas on ihminen...: Lainaus Titus Liviuksen kirjasta Ab urbe condita 2.3. Suomennettu Chydeniuksen tekstin pohjalta.
  6. konsulien toimikaudesta vuoden mittaisen: Konsulit olivat Rooman tasavallan korkeimpia virkamiehiä, jotka valittiin aina vuodeksi kerrallaan.
  7. Tullus Hostilius oli annalistisen perinteen mukaan Rooman kolmas kuningas.
  8. Yksi niistä seitsemästä kukkulasta, joille Rooma perustettiin. On epäselvää, mihin Chydenius tässä viittaa. Liviuksen mukaan Tullus Hostilius valloitti Alba Longan, joka hävitettiin ja sen väestö siirrettiin Roomaan. Chydeniuksen esittämä kuvaus sopii paremmin Tullus Hostiliuksen seuraajaan Ancus Marciukseen, joka voitettuaan Politoriumin latinalaiset asutti heidät Aventinoon.
  9. Tasavaltaisessa Roomassa valittiin joka vuosi plebeijien kansankokouksessa (consilium plebis) kaksi, sittemmin kymmenen kansantribuunia, joiden tehtävänä oli puolustaa plebeijien asemaa patriiseja vastaan. Kansantribuunin asema oli loukkaamaton, ja hänellä oli veto-oikeus (intersessio) eri hallintoelimien ja virkamiesten tekemiin päätöksiin. Kansantribuunin tuli itse olla plebeiji.
  10. kymmenmiehisten lautakuntien: Tässä decemviri (lat. ”kymmenen miestä”) tarkoittaa plebeijien vaatimuksesta vuosina 451–450 eKr. asetettua kahta peräkkäistä lautakuntaa (decemviri legibus scribundis), joiden tehtävänä oli yhtenäisen lakikokoelman laatiminen valtakunnalle. Decemvirit asetettiin vuodeksi kerrallaan, ja tänä aikana ne olivat valtion korkeimmat viranomaiset, korvaten siten konsulihallinnon. Decemvirien työn tuloksena syntyivät Kahdentoista taulun lait (Lex Duodecim Tabularum). Toinen decemviri kieltäytyi kuitenkin eroamasta määräaikana, mikä johti 449 eKr. kansannousuun ja normaalin valtakoneiston palauttamiseen. Chydenius erehtyy: vain Appius Claudius Crassus oli jäsenenä molemmissa decem­vireissä. Tämä synnytti ristiriitoja, koska perinteisesti uudelleenvalintaa ei oltu suvaittu. Livius kertoo (Ab urbe condita 3.44–58), että Appius himoitsi plebeijityttö Verginiaa, jonka hänen isänsä joutui lopulta surmaamaan suojellakseen tyttärensä koskemattomuutta. Liviuksen mukaan tämä tapahtuma laukaisi kansannousun.
  11. senaatti
  12. senaattorit
  13. Caesar, Pompeius, Antonius, Sulla, Octavius ja muut: viittaa viimeisellä vuosisadalla eKr. käytyihin valtataisteluihin
  14. Chydenius viittaa luultavasti Tacituksen teokseen Annales 1:2.

English

§ 6

I referred just now to Romans. The very people! How did they rise to such a height of power and fame that they became a marvel to the whole world and then collapsed again into the ashes of their past? A people that thoroughly understood the correct uses and misuses of government, whose laws are still revered throughout Europe, who by their political revolutions and vicissitudes provide a mirror for all societies, in which a thoughtful person without any prophetic gifts can read their impending fall and recovery.

It was indubitably freedom that laid the first stone for the walls of Rome. Freedom filled it with people. Rome would never have existed had Amulius had his wish fulfilled of doing away with its founder and had tyranny not been forestalled by his death.50

But what would a city be without citizens and walls without a garrison? The founder18 therefore made Rome a sanctuary for all refugees, oppressed people and slaves. The freedom that he offered each of them was such a valuable and rare reward that there could be no lack of participants in such a noble enterprise, and that was the first step towards the power of the new city.

It was at first ruled by monarchs, though without having lost its freedom; the community was governed by the king, but in accordance with the wishes of the councillors and the people, so that historians regard it as a stain on the government of Lucius Tarquinius51 that he obeyed neither. He tormented the common people in the workshops of the smiths and with other labour appropriate to slaves, and his son Sextus Tarquinius,52 a prince brought up in effeminate company, was even more imprudent, causing the dynasty to lose both Crown and fatherland.

By his audacity, Lucius Junius Brutus,53 inspired by a spirit of freedom more noble than conceited, removed the yoke of autocracy, the harshness of which had already turned the people against it, strengthened the laws and stripped the vices of their excuses, so that the nobles of that period (the cronies of Sextus Tarquinius) bitterly complained about it: The king, they said, is a human being, from whom one can ask for justice or injustice, whichever one needs. There is scope there for mercy and kind deeds, anger and forgiveness. One can then distinguish between friend and foe. The laws, on the other hand, are19 a deaf and implacable thing, more propitious and favourable to a poor man than to a rich and powerful one, never offering any reduction or remission of a sentence as soon as one oversteps the mark, and it would be hazardous where human faults are so numerous to defend oneself by innocence alone,54 hoping by such weighty arguments to overturn freedom entirely; but Brutus made the consuls annual55 and protected freedom in every respect.

During the whole period of its freedom Rome was indeed involved in bloody wars abroad and discord internally; but I can certainly see no other reason than freedom for the fact that the Republic nonetheless continued for so long to expand and that it was indeed servitude that brought about its downfall.

Every year many thousands of Romans usually died on the battlefield, but freedom compensated for that deficit many times over. Encouragements for marriage through freedom to settle and work and the means to feed a wife and children achieved a deal internally, but immigration from outside probably contributed most.

Tullus Hostilius56 in his time already devised the scheme of receiving his enemies and giving them a place on the Aventine in which to build a house. May it not have been the victorious arms of the Romans that increasingly induced the surrounding nations to come over to their side on such favourable terms?20

Continual dissensions between the people and the council, the court of the former (tribunus plebis)57 and the consuls appeared to threaten the state with destruction, but remarkably enough it nevertheless continued to grow throughout all this. The people were then still aware of their power and strove for freedom. The council did indeed infringe it from time to time, but when it did so too blatantly, the common people champed at the bit and gave their riders a jolt; then the consuls had to moderate their behaviour. The group of ten men (decemviri) who were installed as rulers, on the model of Athenian laws, conducted themselves well the first year, so that the same individuals remained in power into the second year, but the third year the decemviri retained power without consulting the people at all. But as their power quickly exceeded its limits, the evil deed of the nefarious Appius soon brought that regime to an end.58

However, the Republic flourished, as I said, as long as the contest was between the council59 and the people, for the latter were then still able to curb tyranny, and the nation was relatively satisfied with itself, although the seeds of ruin were already growing in its midst.

But when a different contest developed, between the councillors60 themselves, matters took on a quite different complexion. Then the disputes were no longer about freedom but about which of them would have the honour of being its destroyer. The common people effectively lost their voice. The consuls, who were also commanders of the army,21 had already had time to acquire riches, which posed a threat to freedom. Caesar, Pompey, Antony, Sulla, Octavius and others61 competed among themselves to gain support among the soldiers, for power often accompanies armed force, and when it could not be gained otherwise, it was bought for large sums, and the soldier soon began to believe that his arbitrary will represented the freedom of society as a whole, but when the common people had to be consulted, they were also made accustomed to respond to gilded arguments. Although unprecedented encroachments were thus now made, the heart of the republic languished in bondage under the tyranny of greed, voluptuousness and arrogance, so that when it was at its most impressive in the eyes of other nations, little more than the shell remained, for Tacitus says that it was weakened by the mutual rivalry of the powerful and the greed of the government, therefore grew tired of the consuls and threw itself into the arms of autocracy.62

Under the Empire, vanity, effeminacy and voluptuousness corrupted the rulers of Rome. The army was the supreme power; its extravagance became limitless; emperors were elevated and overthrown at its might; but the rest of the people already toiled under intolerable burdens; and that state would never have lasted so long if the illusion that Romans were happier than all other people in the world had not been imbibed for so many generations with their mothers’ milk.22

It may thus be possible for a time to maintain by illusions a state that has previously flourished and developed a positive view of its happiness, but one that has long suffered oppression cannot be restored and made content with flattery and shadow-play.


  1. Rome would never have existed had Amulius ... by his death.: Refers to Amulius, who according to Roman mythology was the son of Procas and the unfriendly uncle of Romulus’s and Remus’s (the founders of Rome) mother. Amulius tried to drown his nephews, but they were famously saved by a she-wolf and eventually overthrew their great-uncle.
  2. Lucius Tarquinius Superbus (535–496 BC) was the seventh and last king of Rome until the revolt in 509 BC, which led to the establishment of the Republic. He was remembered as a despot.
  3. Sextus Tarquinius was the son of Lucius Tarquinius Superbus and is said to have instigated the revolt by raping the noblewoman Lucretia
  4. Lucius Junius Brutus was the leader of the revolt that led to the founding of the Roman Republic in 509 BC and served as one of its first consuls.
  5. The king is a human being ... by innocence alone: cited from Livy’s Ab urbe condita 2.3.
  6. made the consuls annual: The two consuls were the highest officials in the Roman Republic and were elected by the people for a one-year term.
  7. Tullus Hostilius was, according to the annalistic tradition, the third king of Rome. His traditional regnal dates are 673–641 BC, though it must be noted that the chronology of early Roman history is problematic.
  8. (tribunus plebis): In republican Rome, the tribunes of the plebs, ten inviolable officials who were charged with protecting the plebeians against the patricians, were elected annually in the plebeian assembly (concilium plebis). The tribunes, who had authority to intercede against any Roman magistrate, had to be plebeians themselves.
  9. Decemviri is Latin for “ten men”. In ancient Rome the designation is most often used in reference to the decemviri legibus scribundis, a board of ten charged with writing down the laws. Demands for the codification of the customary laws had long been raised by the tribunes in their struggle to improve the legal security of plebeian citizens. Two separate boards of decemviri were elected, for one year each, and during all of this time the regular government was suspended. The first board of decemviri ruled with moderation and prepared ten tables of law in 451 BC, and the second one completed the Law of the Twelve Tables (Lex Duodecim Tabularum), but when the decemviri refused to resign and their rule turned violent, an uprising broke out, in 449 BC, and the ordinary administration was restored. Chydenius makes a mistake here: in fact, only Appius Claudius Crassus was member of both boards, which was controversial, because re-election was against traditions. According to Livy (Ab urbe condita 3.44–58), Appius was attracted to the plebeian girl Verginia, daughter of Lucius Verginius, who as a consequence of a conflict had to murder her in order to preserve her innocence.
  10. the council: i.e. senate.
  11. the councillors: i.e. senators.
  12. Caesar, Pompey, Antony, Sulla, Octavius and others: this is a reference to the power struggles and the strong men of the last century BC.
  13. for Tacitus says that it was weakened ... into the arms of autocracy.: Chydenius is probably referring to Tacitus’s Annales 1.2.

Previous Section:

Next Section:

Places:

Names:

Biblical references:

Subjects: