f their country, remained pure as at first. Their business,
indeed, became more easy; for the terror of their name, their
inflexibility, and the superior means they had of bringing their powers
into action, all served to facilitate their conquests. But when they
conquered Carthage, and begun =sic= to taste the fruits of wealth,
their ground-work altered by degrees, and the superstructure became
less solid. {31}

Wealth, as we have already seen, was confined to Asia and Africa, and
of it the Carthaginians possessed a great share. It has long been the
opinion adopted by writers on those subjects that the Carthaginians, as
being a commercial and a trading nation, were quite an unequal match
for the Romans; that in Rome all was virtue, public spirit, and every
thing that was great and noble, while at Carthage all was venal, vile,
and selfish. A spirit of war and conquest reigned, say they, in one
place together with a spirit of glory, in the other a spirit of gain
presided over private actions and public counsels.

This is all very true, and very well said, with respect to the fact, but
with respect to the cause there is one of the greatest errors into which
a number of men of discernment and ability have ever fallen. {32}

The true state of the case is easily to be understood, if we only

---
{31} It will be seen, in the subsequent part of this inquiry, that, in the
present mode of warfare, the Romans would not have had equal
advantage.--Skill, and not personal strength, is now the great object,
and money to purchase arms and ammunition is the next.

{32} M. Montesquieu, notwithstanding his very superior knowledge,
accuracy, and acuteness, enlarges upon this subject; and never takes
any notice of the corrupt, mercenary, and degraded state into which
Rome fell when it became as rich as Carthage.
-=-

[end of page #32]

throw aside, for a moment, the favour for the brave warrior, and the
dislike to the selfish trader. The fact was, that Rome, in the days of its
vigour, when it was poor, attacked Carthage in the days of its wealth
and of its decline; but let us compare Carthage before its fall to Rome
in the time of the Gordians, of Maximus, or Gallus, and see which was
most vile, most venal, or most cowardly. This would at least be a fair
comparison; and nothing relative to the two cities is more certain, than
that Rome became far more degraded, in the character both of citizens
and soldiers, than ever Carthage was.