Plutarch's Romane Questions · Plutarch
79
_Wherefore was it lawfull at_ Rome, _when a noble personage who sometime had entred triumphant into the city, was dead, and his corps burnt (as the maner was) in a funerall fire, to take up the reliques of his bones, to carie the same into the city, and there to strew them, according as_ Pyrrho _the Lyparean hath left in writing_. WAS not this to honour the memorie of the dead? for the like honourable priviledge they had graunted unto other valiant warriors and brave captaines; namely, that not onely themselves, but also their posteritie descending lineally from them, might be enterred in their common market place of the city, as for example unto _Valerius_ and _Fabricius_: and it is said, that for to continue this prerogative in force, when any of their posteritie afterwards were departed this life, and their bodies brought into the market place accordingly, the maner was, to put a burning torch under them, and doe no more but presently to take it away againe; by which ceremonie, they reteined still the due honour without envie, and confirmed it onely to be lawfull if they would take the benefit thereof. _What is the cause that when they feasted at the common charges, any generall captaine who made his entrie into the citie with triumph, they never admitted the_ Consuls _to the feast; but that which more is, sent unto them before-hand messengers of purpose, requesting them not to come unto the supper_? WAS it for that they thought it meet and convenient to yeeld unto the triumpher, both the highest place to sit in, and the most costly cup to drinke out of, as also the honour to be attended upon with a traine home to his house after supper? which prerogatives no other might enjoy but the Consuls onely, if they had beene present in the place.
Text from Project Gutenberg, public domain in the United States.