though in his natural history he expatiates in praise of agriculture and gardening, medicine, painting and statuary, passes over merchandize with the simple observation that it was invented by the Phoenicians.  In the periplus of the Erythrean sea, and in the works of Ptolemy, &c. the names of many merchants and navigators occur; but they are all Greeks.  Even after the conquest of Egypt, which gave a more commercial character to the Roman manners, habits and mode of thinking than they previously possessed, no Roman was permitted to engage in the trade of that country.

Although, however, mercantile pursuits were thus underrated and despised by the warlike portion of the nation, as well as by the philosophers, yet they were followed by those who regarded gain as the principal object of life.  The wealth of merchants became proverbial:  immense numbers of them followed the armies, and fixed in the provinces subdued or allied,—­the Italici generis homines, who were agents, traders, and monopolizers, such as Jugurtha took in Zama, or the 100,000 Mithridates slaughtered in Asia Minor, or the merchants killed at Genabum (Orleans).

In the passage quoted from Cicero de Officiis, he expressly mentions the merchant who imports; but he does not once allude to exportation.  Indeed, the commerce of the Romans, in the most luxurious period of the empire, was entirely confined to importation, and may, with few exceptions, be designated as consisting in the expenditure of the immense revenue they derived from their conquests, and the immense fortunes of individuals, in the necessaries, comforts, and, above all, the luxuries of the countries which they had conquered.

By far the most extensive and important trade which the Romans carried on at all periods of their history, was the conveyance of corn and other provisions to the capital.  The contiguous territory at no time was sufficient to supply Rome with corn; and, long before the republic was destroyed, even Italy was inadequate to this purpose.  As the population encreased, and the former corn fields were converted into pleasure-grounds or pasture, the demand for corn was proportionally encreased, and the supply from the neighbourhood proportionally diminished.  But there was another circumstance which rendered a regular and full supply of corn an object of prime importance:  the influence of the patron depended on his largesses of corn to his clients; and the popularity, and even the reign of an emperor, was not secure, unless he could insure to the inhabitants this indispensable necessary of life.  There were several laws respecting the distribution of corn:  by one passed in the year of Rome 680, five bushels were to be given monthly to each of the poorer citizens, and money was to be advanced annually from the treasury, sufficient to purchase 800,000 bushels of wheat, of three different qualities and prices.  By the Sempronian law, this corn was to be sold to the poor inhabitants at