due the habits of discipline and self-sacrifice for the good of the State, and the ideas of self-respect and of duty correlated with wealth and station, which forced on all Romans such a vivid conception of the nature of citizenship, and enabled them to survive so many fierce struggles for existence.
An aristocratic class of this kind, in whose bringing up the self-regarding instincts were only so far encouraged as they might contribute to the common good of the youthful State, might co-exist with a monarchy, and probably did so for many generations. There was no natural antagonism between their interests and those of a kingly family which was only the first among many. But their ἀρετή, that combination of self-respect with devotion to the State which we have been describing, was the indirect result of two advantages which in themselves constituted no virtue — the pride of a noble descent, and the possession of wealth, especially in land. Birth and wealth alike may call for self-respect, for courage, and for public spirit, in those who possess them, and the call may be responded to; the noble may be and should be worthy of his ancestry, and the rich man worthy of his wealth; but in each of these advantages there is always a certain poison hidden, which is apt to deaden the force of its claim for virtue. An honest family pride may degenerate into mere exclusiveness, and wealth may too easily become an object for its own sake. Some such subtle process must have been at work in the aristocracies of the young City-State, gradually narrowing their ideas and in-
