Note 568 — LIFE OF BRUTUS.

Plutarch has handled the character of Brutus with partiality. He could not be ignorant of his love of money and of the oppressive manner in which he treated his unlucky creditors. Drumann (Junii, p. 20, &c.) has collected the evidence on this point. Though Brutus was an austere man and affected philosophy, his character is not free from the imputation of ingratitude to Cæsar, love of power, and avarice. He seems to have been one of those who deceive themselves into a belief of their own virtues, because they are free from other people’s vices. The promise of plunder to his soldiers is not excusable because Antonius and Cæsar did worse than he intended to do. Plutarch here alludes to many of the Italians being driven out of their lands, which were given to the soldiers who had fought on the side of Cæsar and Antonius at Philippi. The misery that was occasioned by this measure was one of the chief evils of the Civil Wars. The slaughter in war chiefly affected the soldiers themselves, and if both armies had been destroyed, the people would only have been the better for it. The misery that arose from the ejection of the hard-working husbandmen reached to their wives and children. But a country which had a large army on foot which is no longer wanted, must either pay them out of taxes and plunder, or have a revolution. Necessity was the excuse for Cæsar and Antonius, and the same necessity would have been the excuse of Brutus, if he had been victorious. Defeat saved him from this necessity.