Camillus
Plutarch
Plutarch. Plutarch's Lives, Vol. II. Perrin, Bernadotte, translator. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1914.
Whether it was due to the magnitude of his exploit in taking a city which could vie with Rome and endure a siege of ten years, or to the congratulations showered upon him, Camillus was lifted up to vanity, cherished thoughts far from becoming to a civil magistrate subject to the law, and celebrated a triumph with great pomp: he actually had four white horses harnessed to a chariot on which he mounted and drove through Rome, a thing which no commander had ever done before or afterwards did. For they thought such a car sacred and devoted to the king and father of the gods.
In this way he incurred the enmity of the citizens, who were not accustomed to wanton extravagance. They had also a second grievance against him in that he opposed himself to a law dividing the city. The tribunes introduced a measure dividing the people and the Senate into two parts, one to remain and dwell there, and the one on which the lot fell to remove into the city they had captured, on the ground that they would thus be more commodiously bestowed, and with two large and fair cities could better protect their territory as well as their prosperity in general.
Accordingly the people, which was now become numerous and poor, welcomed the measure with delight, and was for ever thronging tumultuously about the rostra with demands that it be put to vote. But the Senate and the most influential of the other citizens considered that the measure proposed by the tribunes meant not division but destruction for Rome, and in their aversion to it went to Camillus for aid and succour.
He, dreading the struggle, always contrived to keep the people busy with other matters, and so staved off the passage of the bill. For this reason, then, they were vexed with him. But the strongest and most apparent reason why the multitude hated him was based on the matter of the tenth of the spoil of Veii, and herein they had a plausible, though not a very just ground of complaint.