748 ROMA. The number of slaves kept as domestic servants must have been exceedingly large. Horace mentions (^Sat. i. 3. 12) that the singer Tigellius had some- times as many as 200 slaves; but when he was taken with a sudden fit of economy, he reduced them to the veiy modest number of 10. No doubt, however, he was a first-rate vocalist, and, like his brethren in modern times, a man of fortune. Til- lius the praetor, who was a stingy churl, when he ■went to Tibur, had 5 slaves at his heels to carry his cooking utensils and wine. (lb. i. 6. 107.) Horace himself, who of course was not so rich a man as Tigellius, when he sat down to his frugal supper of cakes and vegetables, was waited upon by 3 slaves ; and we may presume that these did not compose his entire household. {lb. v. 115.) In the reign of Nero, 400 slaves were maintained in the palace of Pedanius Secundus, who were all put to death, women and children included, because one of them had murdered his master. (Tac. Ann. si v. 42, seq.) The slaves no longer consisted of those bom and bred on the estates of their masters, but were hnported in multitudes from all the various nations under the wide-spread dominion of the Romans. (" Postquam vero nationes in familiis habemus, quibus diversi ritus, externa sacra, aut nulla sunt, colluviem istam non nisi metu coercneris." (/&. c. 44.) The case of Pedanius, however, was no doubt an extraordinary one. It cannot be imagined that the plebs urbana, who received the public rations, were capable of maintaining slaves; nor probably are many to be assigned to the aliens. But if we place the patrician and equestrian families at 15,000, and allow the moderate average nmnber of 30 slaves to each family, this would give a total number of 450,000. Some also must be allowed to the richer part of the plebs — to persons who, like Horace, were not patrician nor equestrian, yet could afford to keep a few slaves ; as well as to the aliens resident at Rome, so that we can hardly compute the number of domestic slaves at less than 500,000. To these must be added the public slaves at the disposal of the various municipal officers, also those employed in handicraft trades and manufactures, as journey- men carpenters, builders, masons, bakers, and the hke. It would not perhaps be too much to estimate these at 300,000, thus making the total slave popu- lation of Rome 800,000. This sum, added to that of the free inhabitants, would give a total of 2,045,000. The Notitla and Curiosum state the number of insulae at Rome at 46,602, and the number of donim at 1790, besides balnea, lupanaria, miU- tary and police stations, &c. If we had any means of ascertaining the average number of inhabitants in each insula, it would afford a valuable method of checking the preceding computation. But here again we are unfortunately reduced to uncertainty and conjecture. We may, however, pretty surely infer that each insula contained a large number of inmates. In the time of Augustus the yearly rent of the coenacula of an insula ordinarily produced 40,000 sesterces, or between 300i. and 400/. sterling. {Dig. 19. tit. 2. s. 30, ap. Gibbon, ch. 31, note 70.) Petronius (c. 95, 97), and Juvenal (Sat. iii. passim) describe the crowded state of tliese lodgings. If we take them at an average of four stories, each accom- modating 12 or 13 persons, this would give say 50 persons in each insula ; and even then the inmates,men, women and boys, would be paying an average yearly rent of about 11. per head. The inmates of each domus can hardly be set down at less, since the ROMA. family, with tutors and other liangers on, may per- haps be fairly estimated at 10, and the slaves in eacii domus at 40. We learn from Valerius Jhi.x- imus (iv. 4. § 8), that sixteen men of the cele- brated Gens Aelia lived in one small house wiili their families; but this seems to have been an exceptional case even in the early times, and cannot be adopted as a guide under the Empire, Now, taking the instdae actually inhabited at 40,000 — since some must have been to let, or under repair — and the inhabited dovms at 1500 = 41,500, and the number of inmates in each at 50, we should have a total population of 2,075,000, a sum not greatly at variance with the amount obtained by the pre- vious method. But the reader will have seen on what data the calculation proceeds, and must draw his own conclusions accordingly. (Cf. Bunsen, Beschreibung der Stadt Bom, i. p. 183, seq.; Bu- reau de la Malle, Econoniie politique des Romains i. p. 340. seq. ; Jlommsen, Die Romischen Trihus, p. 187, seq. ; Hijck, Romische Geschichte, i. pt. ii. p. 383, seq.; Zumpt, Ueber den Stand der Bevolke- rung im Alterthum, Berlin, 1841: Gibbon, Decline and Fall, vol.iv. p.87, seq., with the note of Smith.) PART II. TOPOGRAPHY. Having thus given an account of the rise and progress, the decline and fall of the Roman city, we shall now proceed to describe its topography. In treating this part of the subject we shall follov? those divisions which are marked out either by their political importance or by their natural fea- tures rather than be guided by the arbitrary bounds laid down in the Regions of Augustus. The lat- ter, however convenient for the municipal purposes which they were intended to serve, would be but ill calculated to group the various objects in that order in which they are most calculated to arrest the attention of the modern reader, and to fix them in his memory. We shall therefore, after describing the walls of Servius Tullius and those of Aurelian, proceed to the Capitol, one of the most striking objects of ancient Rome, and then to the Forum and its environs, the remaining hills and their valleys, with the various objects of interest which they pi-e- sent. I. Walls and Gates of SERaus Tullius. At the commencement of the Roman Empire the walls of Servius Tullius could no longer be traced. Instead of dreading the assaults of the surrounding petty nations of Italy, Rome had now extended her frontiers to the Euphrates and the Atlantic ; her an- cient bulwarks were become entirely useless, and the increase of her population had occasioned the build- ing of houses close to and even over their remains; so that m the time of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who came to Rome in the reign of Augustus, it was dilficult to discover their course (iv. 13). To at- tempt now to trace their exact outline would there- fore be a hopeless task. The remains of the agger of Servius are still, however, partly visible, and the situation of a few of the ancient gates is known with certainty, whilst that of others may be fixed with at least some approach to accuracy from notices of them contained in ancient authors. It is from these materials that we must endeavour to reconstnict the line of the Servian walls, by first determining the probable sites of the gates, and by then drawing the
