Having thus finished the lives of Lycurgus and Numa, we shall now,though the work be difficult, put together their points of differenceas they lie here before our view. Their points of likeness are obvious；their moderation, their religion, their capacity of government anddiscipline, their both deriving their laws and constitutions fromthe gods. Yet in their common glories there are circumstances of diversity；for first Numa accepted and Lycurgus resigned a kingdom； Numa receivedwithout desiring it, Lycurgus had it and gave it up； the one froma private person and a stranger was raised by others to be their king；the other from the condition of a prince voluntarily descended tothe state of privacy. It was glorious to acquire a throne by justice,yet more glorious to prefer justice before a throne； the same virtuewhich made the one appear worthy of regal power exalted the otherto the disregard of it. Lastly, as the musicians tune their harps,so the one let down the high-flown spirits of the people at Rome toa lower key, as the other screwed them up at Sparta to a higher note,when they were sunken low by dissoluteness and riot. The harder taskwas that of Lycurgus； for it was not so much his business to persuadehis citizens to put off their armour or ungird their swords, as tocast away their gold or silver, and abandon costly furniture and richtables； nor was it necessary to preach to them, that, laying asidetheir arms, they should observe the festivals, and sacrifice to thegods, but rather, that, giving up feasting and drinking, they shouldemploy their time in laborious and martial exercises； so that whilethe one effected all by persuasions and his people's love for him,the other, with danger and hazard of his person, scarcely in the endsucceeded. Numa's muse was a gentle and loving inspiration, fittinghim well to turn and soothe his people into peace and justice outof their violent and fiery tempers； whereas, if we must admit thetreatment of the Helots to be a part of Lycurgus's legislation, amost cruel and iniquitous proceeding, we must own that Numa was bya great deal the more humane and Greek-like legislator, granting evento actual slaves a licence to sit at meat with their masters at thefeast of Saturn, that they also might have some taste and relish ofthe sweets of liberty. For this custom, too, is ascribed to Numa,whose wish was, they conceive, to give a place in the enjoyment ofthe yearly fruits of the soil to those who had helped to produce them.Others will have it to be in remembrance of the age of Saturn, whenthere was no distinction between master and slave, but all lived asbrothers and as equals in a condition of equality.

    In general, it seems that both aimed at the same design and intent,which was to bring their people to moderation and frugality； but ofother virtues, the one set his affection most on fortitude, and theother on justice； unless we will attribute their different ways tothe different habits and temperaments which they had to work uponby their enactments； for Numa did not out of cowardice or fear affectpeace, but because he would not be guilty of injustice； nor did Lycurguspromote a spirit of war in his people that they might do injusticeto others, but that they might protect themselves by it.

    In bringing the habits they formed in their people to a just and happymean, mitigating them where they exceeded, and strengthening themwhere they were deficient, both were compelled to make great innovations.The frame of government which Numa formed was democratic and popularto the last extreme, goldsmiths and flute-players and shoemakers constitutinghis promiscuous, many-coloured commonalty. Lycurgus was rigid andaristocratical, banishing all the base and mechanic arts to the companyof servants and strangers, and allowing the true citizens no implementsbut the spear and shield, the trade of war only, and the service ofMars, and no other knowledge or study, but that of obedience to theircommanding officers, and victory over their enemies. Every sort ofmoney-making was forbid them as freemen； and to make them thoroughlyso and keep them so through their whole lives, every conceivable concernwith money was handed over, with the cooking and the waiting at table,to slaves and helots. But Numa made none of these distinctions； heonly suppressed military rapacity, allowing free scope to every othermeans of obtaining wealth； nor did he endeavour to do away with inequalityin this respect, but permitted riches to be amassed to any extent,and paid no attention to the gradual and continual augmentation andinflux of poverty； which it was his business at the outset, whilstthere was no great disparity in the estates of men, and whilst peoplestill lived much in one manner, to obviate, as Lycurgus did, and takemeasures of precaution against the mischiefs of avarice, mischiefsnot of small importance, but the real seed and first beginning ofall the great and extensive evils of after-times. The re-divisionof estates, Lycurgus is not, it seems to me, to be blamed for making,nor Numa for omitting； this equality was the basis and foundationof the one commonwealth； but at Rome, where the lands had been latelydivided, there was nothing to urge any re-division or any disturbanceof the first arrangement, which was probably still in existence.

    With respect to wives and children, and that community which both,with a sound policy, appointed, to prevent all jealousy, their methods,however were different. For when a Roman thought himself to have asufficient number of children, in case his neighbour who had noneshould come and request his wife of him, he had a lawful power togive her up to him who desired her, either for a certain time, orfor good. The Lacedaemonian husband, on the other hand, might allowthe use of his wife to any other that desired to have children byher, and yet still keep her in his house, the original marriage obligationstill subsisting as at first. Nay, many husbands, as we have said,would invite men whom they thought likely to procure them fine andgood-looking children into their houses. What is the difference, then,between the two customs？ Shall we say that the Lacedaemonian systemis one of an extreme and entire unconcern about their wives, and wouldcause most people endless disquiet and annoyance with pangs and jealousies？the Roman course wears an air of a more delicate acquiescence, drawsthe veil of a new contract over the change, and concedes the generalinsupportableness of mere community？ Numa's directions, too, for thecare of young women, are better adapted to the female sex and to propriety；Lycurgus's are altogether unreserved and unfeminine, and have givena great handle to the poets, who call them （Ibycus, for example） Phoenomerides,bare-thighed； and give them the character （as does Euripides） of beingwild after husbands-

    "These with the young men from the house go out, With thighs that show, and robes that fly about." For in fact theskirts of the frock worn by unmarried girls were not sewn togetherat the lower part, but used to fly back and show the whole thigh bareas they walked. The thing is most distinctly given by Sophocles-

    "-She, also, the young maid, Whose frock, no robe yet o'er it laid, Folding back, leaves her bare thigh free, Hermione." And so their women, it is said, were bold and masculine,overbearing to their husbands in the first place, absolute mistressesin their houses, giving their opinions about public matters freely,and speaking openly even on the most important subjects. But the matrons,under the government of Numa, still indeed received from their husbandsall that high respect and honour which had been paid them under Romulusas a sort of atonement for the violence done to them； nevertheless,great modesty was enjoined upon them； all busy intermeddling forbidden,sobriety insisted on, and silence made habitual. Wine they were notto touch at all, nor to speak, except in their husband's company,even on the most ordinary subjects. So that once when a woman hadthe confidence to plead her own cause in a court of judicature, thesenate, it is said, sent to inquire of the oracle what the prodigydid portend； and, indeed, their general good behaviour and submissivenessis justly proved by the record of those that were otherwise； for asthe Greek historians record in their annals the names of those whofirst unsheathed the sword of civil war, or murdered their brothers,or were parricides, or killed their mothers, so the Roman writersreport it as the first example, that Spurius Carvilius divorced hiswife, being a case that never before happened, in the space of twohundred and thirty years from the foundation of the city； and thatone Thalaea, the wife of Pinarius, had a quarrel （the first instanceof the kind） with her mother-in-law, Gegania, in the reign of TarquiniusSuperbus； so successful was the legislator in securing order and goodconduct in the marriage relation. Their respective regulations formarrying the young women are in accordance with those for their education.Lycurgus made them brides when they were of full age and inclinationfor it. Intercourse, where nature was thus consulted, would produce,he thought, love and tenderness, instead of the dislike and fear attendingan unnatural compulsion； and their bodies, also, would be better ableto bear the trials of breeding and of bearing children, in his judgmentthe one end of marriage.

    The Romans, on the other hand, gave their daughters in marriage asearly as twelve years old, or even under； thus the thought their bodiesalike and minds would be delivered to the future husband pure andundefiled. The way of Lycurgus seems the more natural with a viewto the birth of children； the other, looking to a life to be spenttogether, is more moral. However, the rules which Lycurgus drew upfor superintendence of children, their collection into companies,their discipline and association, as also his exact regulations fortheir meals, exercises, and sports, argue Numa no more than an ordinarylawgiver. Numa left the whole matter simply to be decided by the parent'swishes or necessities； he might, if he pleased, make his son a husbandmanor carpenter, coppersmith or musician； as if it were of no importancefor them to be directed and trained up from the beginning to one andthe same common end, or as though it would do for them to be likepassengers on shipboard, brought thither each for his own ends andby his own choice, uniting to act for the common good only in timeof danger upon occasion of their private fears, in general lookingsimply to their own interest.

    We may forbear, indeed, to blame common legislators, who may be deficientin power or knowledge. But when a wise man like Numa had receivedthe sovereignty over a new and docile people, was there anything thatwould better deserve his attention than the education of children,and the training up of the young, not to contrariety and discordanceof character, but to the unity of the common model of virtue, to whichfrom their cradle they should have been formed and moulded？ One benefitamong many that Lycurgus obtained by his course was the permanencewhich it secured to his laws. The obligation of oaths to preservethem would have availed but little, if he had not, by discipline andeducation, infused them into the children's characters, and imbuedtheir whole early life with a love of his government. The result wasthat the main points and fundamentals of his legislation continuedfor above five hundred years, like some deep and thoroughly ingrainedtincture, retaining their hold upon the nation. But Numa's whole designand aim, the continuance of peace and goodwill, on his death vanishedwith him； no sooner did he expire his last breath than the gates ofJanus's temple flew wide open, and, as if war had, indeed, been keptand caged up within those walls, it rushed forth to fill all Italywith blood and slaughter； and thus that best and justest fabric ofthings was of no long continuance, because it wanted that cement whichshould have kept all together, education. What, then, some may say,has not Rome been advanced and bettered by her wars？ A question thatwill need a long answer, if it is to be one to satisfy men who takethe better to consist in riches, luxury, and dominion, rather thanin security, gentleness, and that independence which is accompaniedby justice. However, it makes much for Lycurgus, that, after the Romanshad deserted the doctrine and discipline of Numa, their empire grewand their power increased so much； whereas so soon as the Lacedaemoniansfell from the institutions of Lycurgus, they sank from the highestto the lowest state, and, after forfeiting their supremacy over therest of Greece, were themselves in danger of absolute extirpation.Thus much, meantime, was peculiarly signal and almost divine in thecircumstances of Numa, that he was an alien, and yet courted to comeand accept a kingdom, the frame of which though he entirely altered,yet he performed it by mere persuasion, and ruled a city that as yethad scarce become one city, without recurring to arms or any violence（such as Lycurgus used, supporting himself by the aid of the noblercitizens against the commonalty）, but, by mere force of wisdom andjustice, established union and harmony amongst all.

    THE END